How is this not hearsay testimony?

"He was not incapacitated in any way"
"He walked under his own power"
"He did not go to a hospital; he only went to a clinic"

_________________
"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)

Well that is interesting and even worse than Kathi Belich listed.

Interesting quote from the article:

We took the documents to a local attorney. She says this could have major implications for the state. "Anyone whose had testimony by her, a conviction, has legal grounds to file a motion to get a trial. It's going to cost taxpayers greatly," said attorney Whitney Lonker.

MOM is tearing this woman apart, and turning her into yet another defense witness.

Reasonable doubt is an absolute slam-dunk after this witness.

Holy cow:

ME: "You could have an impact without visible signs"
MOM: "And so could have Zimmerman?"
ME: "Yes"

_________________
"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)

This wench keeps playing dumb. She's obviously a State ringer, and is painfully reluctant to allow O'Mara to score obvious points. And yet, he keeps scoring points like shooting fish in a barrel.

_________________
"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)

Idiot ME: "I'm not very good in physics... I don't know what the physics of the injury is."

_________________
"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)

What does she mean they aren't talking about knuckles? How else do you get punched.

George has lumpy head syndrome. Now I get it.

A witness who brings in her OWN versions of the evidence? That has got to be a legal precedent??

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

2:40 p.m.
She says each of the punctate marks could be caused by a fingernail scratch.

O’Mara asks her about the protrusion to Zimmerman’s nose. He shows the picture of Zimmerman in the back of the police car.

She says she does see swelling. She says it is a trauma injury.

She says swelling depends on the severity.

O’Mara asks where blood would go.

She says it would be coughed out, but O’Mara asks if it would be swallowed.

She says it would be coughed, but could be swallowed.

O’Mara shows the picture of the back of Zimmerman’s head.

She says she sees two lacerations. She mentions the measurements taken after they were cleaned.

O’Mara asks her about it being consistent with one contact with concrete. She confirms.

O’Mara identifies the point where the head could impact, calling it the crown.

“We know that are two injuries from the impact, that’s a given,” Dr. Rao says.

O’Mara asks if the point of one laceration only hit the cement, that injury could happen. He points out the same thing for the other laceration.

O’Mara asks a question about the side of the head being hit on concrete.

Guy objects as to facts of evidence.

O’Mara points to a point on the left of Zimmerman’s head. Dr. Rao says that is the shape of Zimmerman’s head.

She says there is no discoloration.

O’Mara shows a picture of the side of Zimmerman’s head.

She says she doesn’t see bruising, but there are small punctate wounds.

2:30 p.m.
O’Mara asks if Angela Corey appointed Rao to the case.

Rao says she sent a letter to the governor.

O’Mara asks about her position in another district. Rao says she did not seek re-appointment. O’Mara asks if that was because of issues in the department.

She says most of the time she is called by the state, but she can be called for work by the defense.

“Homicides are a very small percentage of our cases,” Rao says.

O’Mara asks if she works with the prosecutors. She says yes.

She says she was sent the autopsy report for Martin. O’Mara asks if she is there to talk about Martin, or just about Zimmerman. She says Zimmerman.

O’Mara asks about the example of being hit in the nose.

“You’re not suggesting that it was only one blow, correct?” O’Mara asks

She says no, but consistent with one blow.

O’Mara asks her to say it could be consistent with two blows.

“It could be yes,” she says.

“I’m just telling you what the injuries are and what it’s consistent with,” She adds.

O’Mara asks her about the cut on Martin’s hand. She says it was an abrasion consistent with his skin being rubbed.

She says Martin didn’t have any other injuries.

He asks if she knows for a fact if Martin came in contact with cement. She says he could have contact but it might not leave injuries.

2:23 p.m.
Guy asks her if the injuries on the back of his head are consistent to having his head repeatedly slammed. She says not because the injuries are so minor.

If it was repeated, she says she would expect laceration, a lot of injury that would need suturing.

Guy shows the picture showing the front of Zimmerman’s face taken at the police station.

She points out the abrasion on Zimmerman’s nose.

She says the injuries in that photo are not life-threatening.

She points out abrasions seen on his face. She says they are characterized as very small and could have come from a single punch.

She demonstrates how a punch would injure her nose and create injuries on her forehead.

She says she saw contusions on both sides of Zimmerman’s head. She points them out in the photo.

“There are very, very fine punctate abrasions that you need a close up photograph to see them,” she says.

She says they could have come from one impact against concrete.

Guy shows a picture of the other side of Zimmerman’s head.

She describes “small punctate abrasions” as very insignificant and they could have come from a single impact.

Guy asks her about the video of Zimmerman seen walking in the police station.

She says he was walking in his own power.

Guy finishes questioning.

O’Mara begins cross-examination.

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

Think there might have been more than one reason that the defense has had Zimmerman stand up every time he is asked to be identified by a witness?

I think the jury will be well-versed in any "anatomical anomalies" in his skull.

_________________
"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)

Naturally she has "Discovery" that MOM does not have

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

There are pictures of George in Bond hearings... with short hair.... and his head is not grossly mis-shaped

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

She is talking about force in one area different from the other.... isn't that borderline physics?

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

No. If this were a Traybot, she'd be saying that the lacerations were consistent with running into a holly bush.


Or that he was shaving the back of his head and could have used a little bathroom tissue to put on them, lol.

This woman is so obviously crooked.

_________________
"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)

Is she married to Reich?

Don't you know the Trayborgs are eating this crap up.

This woman is a bona fide medical expert? Seriously?

Florida: you're more duh than I thought.

_________________
"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)

She absolutely refuses to answer the question: "what is the maximum number of times the back of the head could have hit the concrete?"

The jury will see right through her.

_________________
"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)