4:21 p.m.
He describes his law enforcement background. He says he was born and raised in Sanford.

He calls he was involved in the case as the chief of police.

O’Mara asks about the decision made to play the 911 call recording for the Martin family and the point forward.

Lee confirms he was aware the decision was made.

O’Mara asks about best practices for handling audio line-ups.

Lee says just like a photo line-up it would be shown individually so their decision is not influenced.

He says he understand the recording was played at the mayor’s office and law enforcement was not present.

Lee says he offered to be present, but it wasn’t accepted and he was excluded from the room.

De la Rionda begins cross examination.

Lee says he asked the city manager if could be present, but it was declined.

He says he was not in the mayor’s office when it was played.

De la Rionda asks more about line-ups.

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

Jury gone..... 6 matters to deal with

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

Weasel first doing Richardson on Donnelley's testimony

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

2 down: State motions to strike hearsay testimony of Serino and Singleton. State withdrew motions, upon testimony of Tracy Martin.

(Again: how can a hearsay objection be made via motion to strike, after the testimony has been given? Shouldn't it be untimely at that point?)

_________________
"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)

Ha Ha..... they spent "several hours together taking a depo yesterday" .... CRUMP!!!!

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

How do you spell chutzpah Weasel?


State complaining about not being forthcoming with discovery

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

Either Nelson is very stealthily leading the State to define some procedural prejudice, or else she is setting foundation to deny the State's claim of a discovery violation.

_________________
"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 may have issues that her ruling must also apply the same in other matters ...Crump...?

Procedural prejudice.

4:32 p.m.
Judge Nelson says six different matters are going to be taken up.

State has motion to strike Donnelly’s testimony. The state requests a Richardson hearing.

Another is regarding an animation and toxicology.

State has motion’s to strike Serino and Singleton’s testimony. Since Martin testified, the state no longer motion’s for that strike.

The state’s argument is the defense had prior knowledge Donnelly would identify Zimmerman’s voice on the 911 tape, but at his deposition he did not indicate he listened to the tape or had an opinion.

Mantei says there was an opportunity to communicate the information. He says they spent several hours together yesterday for a deposition.

Mantei says some people have said Donnelly was in the courtroom sometime last week, too.

Mantei says he has cases that show the prejudice.

Judge Nelson asks what the state would have done differently with the knowledge.

Mantei cites a case for the sort of things that could have been done with knowledge of the new information.

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

WOW!!!!!!!!


Nelson denies the weasel

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

DENIED! Who's the imposter in the judge's seat?

Then Nelson sees how it could apply the opposite direction ...CYA.

test Tracy for THC right now!!

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

4:45 p.m.
O’Mara argues that it has to be material.

He says the state had an opportunity to play him the tape in the deposition, but they decided not to.

O’Mara says he finds it incredible to ask about this witness’s information when the court has been addressing other issues with the state.

He asks the state to show what they could’ve accomplished.

He calls the state’s cross examination of Donnelly quite good.

He says striking his testimony would be extreme.

Mantei responds saying there are two types of violations willful and inadvertent.

Mantei says it is a matter that would have reopened the deposition instead of trying to do it on the fly.

He says it created an impression before the jury.

Judge Nelson says she has the transcript from the deposition. She says the state had the opportunity to ask about his background.

She says she finds that defense should have and did not provide the information, but the state has not shown the prejudice to strike the testimony.

The next issue is the toxicology report.

4:38 p.m.
Mantei says if the information was communicated, they could have more thoroughly investigated the witnesses background rather than do it before the jury.

He says the foundation for his background could have been more fully explored.

They could have investigated if he was in court for the proceedings for the reason the decision to listen was on his own, Mantei says.

He says it was something Donnelly knew would assist the defense.

Judge Nelson asks if Donnelly had never listened to the tape and he listened to it in court, what would be the difference.

Mantei says that would be a risky scenario.

Judge Nelson confirms it would be for the defense. She says if he’s played the tape for the first time in the courtroom, what would change.

She asks if that would have happened what the state would have done differently.

She says the issue is he now listened to the tape, identified Zimmerman and the defense knew it, but what would the state have done differently.

Mantei cites a case.

He says in open court the opportunity would have come for the state to question him about instantly knowing who the voice was.

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

I feel in my bones that west is gonna win......

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

We're gonna win... we're gonna win

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

Nelson is allowing the Tox expert and Tox report!

*faints*

_________________
"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)

4:53 p.m.
West says the issue at this time is the amount of THC found in Martin’s toxicology.

Judge Nelson asks for a copy of it.

The state has a motion in limiting.

John Guy argues for the state that because the defendant didn’t know Martin and didn’t know his state and the minimal levels is unduly prejudicial.

He says the probative value is near zero and the prejudicial value is much greater.

Judge Nelson says she previously ruled it wouldn’t be in opening statements and they are now looking at the time of trial.

West argues the issue is specific to self-defense and the focus of the case. He says the knowledge of a positive level of THC and Dr. Bao changed his testimony.

He says Zimmerman said in his non-emergency call that Martin looked like he was on drugs. He says Martin looked like he was swaying in the 7-Eleven video and he was carrying a lighter.

He says they will have testimony from an expert that the level of THC is sufficient for some level of impairment and because of that and Zimmerman’s observations it is relevant and probative for the jury.

He says it supports the claim of self-defense because Martin’s behavior is also at issue and the level of his toxicology and how it impacted his behavior.

West says the state’s motion there was no knowledge Martin ingested it recently. He says Dr. Bao testified it would have been relatively recent.

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