<p>I saw both Good and Mora. IMO Good was a far more convincing witness. I just did. And that was also the consensus of most commentators I saw. What the jurors think idk. I got the impression Good was closer and actually sort of matched what GZ said about someone coming outside then going back in to call cops. May not be true but that was the impression I got from viewing the testimony. Of course I’m sure everyone on here will come up with hundreds od reasons why Good was completely not credible.</p>
<p>BTW I an willing to go so far as to say that maybe both Mora and Good are equally credible. Maybe position changed during the fight. But I think from these witnesses along with the presumption of innocence it is reasonable to believe that tm was on top at least at some time.</p>
<p>Trayvon’s mom is a very good witness. I don’t know why they decided to cross her. I guess they have to.</p>
<p>Trayvon’s mother was superb on the stand.</p>
<p>Bovertine, I thought they were both credible. I think they both (Good and Mora) were telling the truth of what they saw that night. </p>
<p>While you saw one witness as more believable, and had your thoughts confirmed by the news you chose to watch, I saw two credible witnesses.</p>
<p>So you belive that Martin was on top during the time the two were on the ground, and had your opinion confirmed by the news you chose to watch.</p>
<p>I believe that they rolled around at least once, which makes the narrative of a onesided beating less believable.</p>
<p>The jury has not listened anyone else’s opinions.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Un, no. I believed Good more than Mora. Period. From the testimony. Before I saw any news analysis. Mora was a horrible witness, IMO, but I gave her the benefit of the doubt because I can believe both are reporting what they saw and it is possible that both are true.</p>
<p>And I don’t think the beating has to be one sided for GZ to be acquitted.</p>
<p>Interesting…the doctor who conducted the autopsy said TM could have been alive for 1-10 minutes after the shooting and that the abrasion to his hand could have happened hours before the encounter with GZ, during it, or even after he was shot.</p>
<p>Yes. He said he was alive but couldn’t move. Cross should be interesting unless this guy West is boring. Plus I assume the defense will need their own med expert.</p>
<p>I am not sure what he said about the point at which TM would be unable to move. He seems very careful with his words and making it clear which of his statements were based on fact and which were opinion.</p>
<p>Yeah he believes based on another case that he could not move which is important because of the position of his hands and also whether he could have spoken (I assume)</p>
<p>I thought they weren’t allowing testimony about whose voice it was screaming on the tapes?</p>
<p>^that pertained only to expert witnesses re: the screaming on the tapes</p>
<p>It will be neutralized when the defense’s family gets on the stand. Why?—because each side will hear what they want to hear in the tape.</p>
<p>Take emotion out of evaluating the case and listen to the facts presented. Use emotion here to vent, but it shouldn’t be used in analyzing evidence presented.</p>
<p>They should have done a “line-up” of voices screaming and have to pick the correct one to show they really could tell who it was.</p>
<p>The medical examiner stated the opinion that Martin could have lived 10 minutes. Also that he did not believe he could have moved. Whether this matters and what will come out in cross and on defense I don’t know. If he was alive but unable to move or speak it only goes to show that he felt pain for a while. </p>
<p>However, I am certain there are numerous posts on here that state unequivocally that Martin “died immediately.” I don’t know where people got this. I’m not going to look them up, I know they are there. At least according to the ME that’s not correct, and I don’t know who is going to challenge him on that. So,again, another reason to wait for actual testimony before declaring “facts.”</p>
<p>^Bovertine: I agree. However, be ready for backlash for stating an opinion that doesn’t jive with the majority on this thread. It’ll be interpreted as being pro-Zimmerman rather than pro-justice system.</p>
<p>Not to worry Nysmile, I’ve been effectively driven away. </p>
<p>Carry on with your “objectivity.” ;)</p>
<p>I’m used to backlash. But just in case I made sure to state that it’s not necessarily a critical fact just one that was misstated.</p>
<p>This fact was discussed and corrected several pages ago. What is the big deal? Mistakes happen all the time from almost everyone, it seems.</p>
<p>It would be nice that there is no misinformation but it is very difficult in this case because there are so many different sources. We should be diligent and make sure we say the right things, that sentiment, I agree with.</p>
<p>Which page? This was the first I ever heard that he didn’t die right away. Good that it got corrected. I think truth is important.</p>