George Zimmerman Trial Live Streaming

[Subdued]

Originally Posted by Pressing-On

Another person told me that the clerk from the 7-11 had testified. I don't recall that happening and asked for the trial day for confirmation. They just let me know they don't remember. But, possibly Monday or last week. lol

Did anyone catch that? I don't recall that at all.

Yes, he testified. But I don't recall gaining much information from that witness. It seemed non-informative to me - which makes sense since he was the State's witness. I seem to also remember that the clerk did not remember TM - I could be wrong on that, though. I'll try to find the video of his testimony for you.

[Subdued]

Originally Posted by Pressing-On

Here are his texts lined out in this article. I never have read that he and DeeDee had been arguing. That was a new one for me. Still trying to confirm.

Trying to work on a couple of paintings, so while petals are drying, I sit down and check out a little more. lol

BTW, notice that the texts pulled were from 2011. We might delete them from the phone, but they are still there.

Off topic, sort of - Someone told me today that Administrators on any Forum can read your private emails, he hosts several, and if they say they can't, they are lying. Yikes! LOL! This is what he said, "Well there is software out there that you can add to do it. It isn't VB approved, but still exists. So one has to assume any site that survives on data mining, and the sale of such information has it installed."

http://www.miamiherald.com/2013/05/2...yvon-text.html

Thanks for this link. Enjoy your painting!

[Subdued]

Here ya go, PO:

[Pressing-On]

Originally Posted by Subdued

Very fascinating, PO. I had forgotten that you worked in a law firm.

I get sucked into some of these televised/recorded trials (much to my family's dismay, lol). It's not so much the trials themselves, I don't think; but the process.

I've only been a juror once (I was chosen as foreperson) and I absolutely LOVED it! We found the accused "not guilty" even knowing that it was very possible that he did, in fact, commit a crime. Our decision was based solely on the laws and the instructions given to us by the judge.

We all knew that we could not go with our gut feelings and we even had to throw out [of our minds] a video surveillance tape we saw because it was not admitted into evidence but was for demonstrative purposes only.

I honestly have no idea if that man DESERVED to be punished. I just knew that, based on the packet of instructions we were given, we had to admit reasonable doubt and find him not guilty.

I loved being a juror! (Can that be a career? lol)

I think O'Mara is tremendous! He's smart and questions in a respectable manner. He seems to be able to turn any evidence (or opinion) to his side. He's doing his job perfectly. West is okay as well. I, personally, like the job he's doing and I usually don't mind the dryness of his way/manner of questioning. I love information, so it's good.

Re: Zimmerman's past... I don't know much about him. I didn't pay much attention to this case until day 2 or 3 of this trial; having only caught bits and pieces of info from his previous court hearings that were televised.

I watched one session of Jodi Arias, but that is all I could take. Ugh! Not interested in that at all.

I've been following this case since it became a headline. Mainly, because I was so ticked off at O's statement that Trayvon could be his son - KNOWING - he had jumped the gun on Professor Gates. And ticked that Al Sharpton jumped on the racial bandwagon.

So, I am thinking that he might have a beer summit with GZ after this is over.

The only experience I had was jury selection. The DA, while instructing us, was pretty well telling us the guy was guilty, and all we had to do was confirm that and we could move along. No wonder he has had so many death threats. lol

So, question - If you were on this jury --- The Judge is asking the Jury to strike the comments by Serino that he believed GZ was telling the truth. Do you think the horse is out of the gate, or will they be able to strike that?

[Subdued]

It was day one, I think:

http://legalinsurrection.com/2013/06...our-witnesses/

[KWSS1976]

Does anyone remember after TM bought his items and went back to the back of the store, the store clerk did to, I wonder if something dirty went down off camera..

[Pressing-On]

Originally Posted by Subdued

Here ya go, PO:

Thank you. I am going to listen, but my first instinct is that he is not going to put his life in jeopardy for anyone. Okay, I'll listen now.

[Pressing-On]

Did you notice the Prosecution questioned about the "Arizona drink product". Keeps referring to it as an Arizona drink product. LOL! He doesn't want to get into details on why he was purchasing this stuff. That would certainly open up a can of worms.

[Subdued]

Originally Posted by Pressing-On

I watched one session of Jodi Arias, but that is all I could take. Ugh! Not interested in that at all.

I've been following this case since it became a headline. Mainly, because I was so ticked off at O's statement that Trayvon could be his son - KNOWING - he had jumped the gun on Professor Gates. And ticked that Al Sharpton jumped on the racial bandwagon.

So, I am thinking that he might have a beer summit with GZ after this is over.

The only experience I had was jury selection. The DA, while instructing us, was pretty well telling us the guy was guilty, and all we had to do was confirm that and we could move along. No wonder he has had so many death threats. lol

So, question - If you were on this jury --- The Judge is asking the Jury to strike the comments by Serino that he believed GZ was telling the truth. Do you think the horse is out of the gate, or will they be able to strike that?

I would be able to strike it and not use it while making my decision.

Having said that, I attended a trial. One of my cousins was the accused. The jury spent only 20 minutes deliberating. They were instructed in the law(s) and given the packet of rules and laws they needed to follow. They were supposed to have taken that back to the jury room with them and reference it with each aspect of the case. There was absolutely no way they could have even read the packet in that 20 minutes, let alone USE it for every witness and for every piece of evidence! He was found guilty, by the way.

Also, look at the O.J. trial and those jurors! How long did they deliberate?? Not long. They did not follow the judge's instructions, clearly... BUT, they really don't have to.

So, it all depends. But with the jury I was a part of, we took it seriously and did the job asked of us. It was actually very easy to set aside my opinions, personal thoughts and emotions while basing my decision on rules and laws.

I've also discovered that attorneys and jurors view things very differently. I sat with my cousin and his attorney and the way SHE thought the trial was going (as an attorney) was WAY different that what I was seeing and hearing (trying to view it as I thought the jurors viewed it).

Oh, and I totally agree with what you said about the Arias trial, O & Sharpton.

[Subdued]

Originally Posted by Pressing-On

Did you notice the Prosecution questioned about the "Arizona drink product". Keeps referring to it as an Arizona drink product. LOL! He doesn't want to get into details on why he was purchasing this stuff. That would certainly open up a can of worms.

Interesting! No, I did not notice that. I'm going to go re-watch it now.