We're not sure how many years she was in school, just that the 19 YO is not out of HS yet

2:23 p.m.
De la Rionda thanks the jurors for their service.

He says they were very attentive and thanks them.

He says he want to talk about how they arrive at a verdict.

He says they should do three things: rely on the testimony and physical evidence, rely on the law Judge Nelson will read to them, and rely on their “God-given common sense.”

He says they should come back with a verdict that speaks the truth and is just and it that he is guilty of murder in the second degree.

He asks if they believe it was just a struggle that got out of hand. “Perhaps, but who started this?” he asks.
“Who was the one who was armed?”

He shows a timeline on the screen and in an enlarged printout he is holding.

He explains the information on the timeline. He says the phone records don’t lie.

He says they spent a half a day one day and the next day hearing from one witness – Rachel Jeantel.

He calls her a human being and describes her as uneducated and unsophisticated.

He describes her language as colorful.

“Did she speak the truth?”

He says she was the person speaking to the victim.

De la Rionda says she could have embellished and lied about the language Martin said, but didn’t.

“Her use of colorful language doesn’t mean her testimony is less credible,” he says.

He shows the times for the phone calls
He says she spent hours on the witness stand in an attempt to discredit her.



De la Rionda says that because she can’t read cursive and is Haitian doesn’t mean she’s not credible.
“Isn’t is true this defendant assumed Trayvon Martin was a criminal?”

_________________
Do not go gentle into that good night.
___________ Rage, rage against the dying of the light

Hi, KF10! Nice to see you again!

Yes, it's awful, isn't it? Wow. I hope you're correct about no season 2. That would definitely be the right outcome. Well, a full acquittal and smacking the snot out of Corey, et al.

_________________
All posts are my own opinion and do not necessarily reflect the views of Random Topics. Differences are allowed here.

BBM - exactly right. And BDLR knows it. He wouldn't have been inviting TM™ anywhere himself.

_________________
All posts are my own opinion and do not necessarily reflect the views of Random Topics. Differences are allowed here.

Rumpole, I want to learn how to post Tweet correctly, too.

What is the "tweet button"?

_________________
Puzzler - that which puzzles or perplexes; anything that arouses curiosity or perplexes because it is unexplained, inexplicable or secret.

_________________
All posts are my own opinion and do not necessarily reflect the views of Random Topics. Differences are allowed here.

We all know George said he was following, but not in the way Bernie wants it to be.

And here comes the Felony Third Degree False Dilemma: "you gotta believe that Zimmerman was just out for a stroll, and his walk was interrupted by someone who attacked him out of the dark".

_________________
"That the attacker sustained a mortal wound is a matter that should have been considered by the deceased before he committed himself to the task he undertook." - 5th DCA, Stinson v. State (Fl)

I'm way late to the party, and just got done reading through 80 pages. I know 3rd murder's longer an issue, but to answer a question that was asked, in the 2013 case Spagnolo v. State, the 5th DCA said 3rd degree murder requires an underlying felony.

Baez tweeted that when Bernie asked if they thought George was innocent, one of the jurors nodded 'yes'.

'at that last moment he was able to just take out his gun...'

Which moment should he have taken it out Bernie?

Puzzler, under the comment box, click "Full Editor" to see those controls including the tweet button. Good luck!

_________________
All posts are my own opinion and do not necessarily reflect the views of Random Topics. Differences are allowed here.

Some role reversal here?

Bernie trying to imply that Zimmerman was the initial physical aggressor, but then says, "you can't just take that in a vacuum. Why did that happen in the first place?" Because he got his legs cut out from underneath him on being able to argue initial physical aggressor. He has to go back to the "he assumed and followed" as being responsible for Martin's death.

_________________
"That the attacker sustained a mortal wound is a matter that should have been considered by the deceased before he committed himself to the task he undertook." - 5th DCA, Stinson v. State (Fl)

I HOPE everybody can see that BDLR is opining about DOUBT..... could be this or that.

That is REASONABLE DOUBT.... so GZ not guilty.

_________________
Do not go gentle into that good night.
___________ Rage, rage against the dying of the light

_________________
Do not go gentle into that good night.
___________ Rage, rage against the dying of the light

Sure seems to be a LOT of latitude to allow BDLR completely to misrepresent the facts of the case in his closing argument.

_________________
"That the attacker sustained a mortal wound is a matter that should have been considered by the deceased before he committed himself to the task he undertook." - 5th DCA, Stinson v. State (Fl)

Hi, MJW! Always great to see you here and thanks for the cite.

_________________
All posts are my own opinion and do not necessarily reflect the views of Random Topics. Differences are allowed here.