George Zimmerman Trial Live Streaming

[n david]

Testimony from a lady who was the Sanford PD citizen patrol/watch person. She and Defense stated several times that it was the HOA who contacted GZ to lead the NW program. I think this witness blew up on the Pros, though they had to know from pre-trial interview what her testimony would be. She was very favorable to GZ. The Pros questions tried to highlight the high number of emails and contact GZ had with her, but honestly, her testimony was helpful to me as to verifying that GZ was not some vigilante out to blast some kid.

Important note: she stated that the training instructed the NW Coordinator to follow - at a safe distance. Pros objected to any personal opinion of hers relating to whether or not she believed GZ was justified in following, but the Jury could tell from her testimony that she thought well of GZ.

The next witness was definitely not a GZ fan. It was the president of the HOA, who at the time of TM's death was recently put in that position. Just as you could tell the previous witness was favorable to GZ; you could sense this witness was the opposite. IMO, he didn't like GZ at all. I imagine the two have had issues previously.

He contradicted what the Defense has been saying all along and what the previous witness stated; that it was GZ, and not the HOA, who wanted to start the NW program. He said he didn't think it was needed; said the police patrolled the apt and were in control. And he told the Pros they were told NOT to follow at all...though he admitted later to the Defense that they could follow at a safe distance.

In fact, the Defense somewhat scored with this witness also. The wit described an encounter he and "some stucco guys" had with a guy who lived on the property, who was later arrested for burglary. He said the stucco guys saw the kid run out of a home, jump into a truck and speed away. The home was reported to have been burglarized. Later, the wit said, the stucco guys were across at Kohls (wit said Kohls, not sure if its the same as the department store or some other Coles? Kohls?) eating lunch and saw the guy walking by. They followed him, called 911 and led the officer to the home where the guy was arrested. While questioned by the Pros, the wit said he sent an email praising the stucco guys for helping nab the burglar. Under cross by O'mara, the wit was asked to tell the court the description of the burglar -- side note: wit had spoken with the guy previously before knowing he was the burglar. At first, he was visibly uncomfortable...."I don't remember." "Just a guy." When pressed, he stated it was a 17 or 18 year old black male. O'mara asked about the stucco guys following the suspected burglar...no different than what GZ did that night. Wit admitted, contrary to his previous statements when questioned by the Pros, that it was okay to follow at a safe distance....but they're not the police, they're supposed to let the police handle it.

Pros stood up to ask the wit to confirm he was told not to follow...wit said correct. O'mara then stood up to clarify because the wit said previously "at a safe distance," and the wit agreed it was said in the NW meeting that they could. Pros stood up again and stated, but you were told not to follow, correct? Wit again stated they weren't to follow.

Those multiple exchanges were confusing. On one hand, the wit told Pros that he was in the meeting with the Sanford PD NW lady and was told NOT to follow; then he turned around and said yes they could follow -- at a safe distance. Then flipped back to no, then yes, then no again.

KWSS1976 -- were you watching this? It had to be confusing for the Jury and when he stepped down, the issue wasn't settled, IMO. Either they were told they could or they were told they couldn't...it couldn't be both.

The Jury will have to process his testimony against the Sanford PD's liaison, and IMO his testimony seemed tainted by some kind of a beef or grudge. He didn't seem to like GZ on a personal level.

Thus far, the 911 op and the Sanford PD liaison have caused me to rethink my opinion of GZ. Both were favorable to GZ, even though Pros witnesses, both said following at a safe distance was ok - and the liaison had it in her training info. My issue has been with him following -- and ironically it seems the defense now is letting it slide that GZ may indeed have followed TM, but did so at a safe distance, in accordance with the training he was given by Sanford PD.

[KWSS1976]

Yea I think the witnesses are back firing on the Proscecution..

[n david]

Did you get the same feeling that O'mara and the Defense was somewhat acknowledging that GZ may have followed TM, but at a safe distance per his training? The questions from the Defense and focus toward the end of the HOA Pres especially seemed to show a subtle shift in the Defense position on GZ following TM.

The Sanford PD liaison definitely backfired or imploded on the Pros. She was pro-GZ all the way.

[n david]

I thought the Judge said if TM's parents were going to be at the trial, their lawyer wouldn't be allowed to be there. Either one or the other, not both. Yet, I just saw their lawyer sitting with them in the courtroom. Was there a change to the Judge's ruling? If not, why hasn't the Judge instructed the lawyer to leave?

[n david]

I got in on this one late...was out for lunch. Witness on the stand right now getting grilled by O'mara. Allegedly she's changed her testimony, or added details never previously mentioned which could be favorable to TM.

Her testimony today was that she heard movement from left to right; this was not previously mentioned in any of her interviews with the police investigators or lawyers.

This woman reminds me of Jodi Arias...selective memory. O'mara has transcripts of each interview which he's having her read over to see whether or not she actually mentioned this before or not. She thinks she did; O'mara says she didn't.

Per the transcript she did not. Pros raised an objection...sounded like he was asking if O'mara was trying to impeach her testimony.

[n david]

O'mara asked wit if she was part of FB page "Justice for Trayvon," if she "liked" the page. She said she was sympathetic to both TM and GZ. O'mara asked why, then, she didn't join the FB page for GZ. Her reply was that the opportunity to do so didn't present itself.

Now O'mara is re-crossing her about something the Pros said, which was she wasn't wanting to be in the spotlight, she was trying to stay out of it.

Oh wow. She's done. He asked if she signed a Change.org petition for "Prosecute the killer of our 17 year old son, Trayvon." At first she said no...then he brought a laptop over and showed her on her FB page where it says she did so.

Right before that, he got her to admit filming a spot for national news about the case.

Pros had no response...they wanted her off the stand asap.

That was a trainwreck. In fact, much of the day has been a wreck for the Pros. One witness confirmed that TM was acting suspiciously. Then this witness was proven to be a liar on the stand.

Not looking good for the Pros. The Jury definitely hasn't seen the burden of proof the Pros has to show. Not even close.

[crakjak]

GZ did not kill TM because he wanted to, he shot him because TM was beating the stuffing out of him. This is a political sideshow, created by Jesse and Al, plus the lib cable shows.

The last witness of the day was doing what she thought was right for TM, truth is not at the heart of liberalism, feel good drives its actions. Her lies, and truth as she wanted it to be, caught up with her and showed her be a pawn for this political driven circus!!

[Praxeas]

When I read anti GZ stuff here and in the news and so far of the PROs case, it seems to be all based on emotion.

When you get emotional facts no longer matters and a search for truth goes out the door

[J4Truth]

Originally Posted by Praxeas

When I read anti GZ stuff here and in the news and so far of the PROs case, it seems to be all based on emotion.

When you get emotional facts no longer matters and a search for truth goes out the door

Yeah after hearing a lot of simple facts in the case I was more on the self defense angle or at least reasonable doubt. And after reading some stuff from both sides, I'll admit there was some on the pro GZ side that came off kind of nutty and out in left field but for the most part there were people who was using laws, making sense and seemed vary rational.

On the anti GZ side I've heard some compelling arguments against a few inconsistencies in GZ statements and reenactment but nothing to really combat reasonable doubt and a lot more looked like conspiracy theories, wild accusations and jumping to crazy conclusions on the smallest of evidence.

[Jermyn Davidson]

The "following at a safe distance" is an attempt to head off the "harassment" charge that would make it impossible for a self-defense kind of legal defense.

Down here, the "water-cooler topic" is the insulting and low class joke of the defense atty.

Down here, the pros are looking good for their succinct presentation.

Down here, some are wondering why did the defense ever agree to getting the jury from Seminole county in the first place. Along with the stupidity of the defense atty, maybe they are aiming for a mistrial or maybe a new trial in the future if zim is convicted, based on the impossibility of an untainted jury from Seminole and bad legal representation.

These are the things I've thought and heard.

Oh and the other thing is that some are saying that it was after listening to the other calls that zim made that made them think that he was paranoid, or in other wise, not in a good mental state to be armed and pulling an unofficial neighborhood watch tour.


He was paranoid. He was armed. He followed and confronted a 17 year old that was guilty of nothing wrong. The 17 year old "beat the stuffing" out of him and so zim killed him.


The defense "zim's parents are grieving but they can't be here because of the security" was a play on the emotions. Heard that too.