George Zimmerman Trial Live Streaming

[KWSS1976]

So is the state in the instruction to the jury, going to be able to say its illegal to follow someone, did I hear that correctly???

[Pressing-On]

Originally Posted by KWSS1976

So is the state in the instruction to the jury, going to be able to say its illegal to follow someone, did I hear that correctly???

She said they can both address it in their closing arguments.

[Pressing-On]

They will be back in one hour to argue the child abuse in the Murder 3. She will allow it, because she already stated it is included in Murder 3.

[Pressing-On]

West wants "not guilty" option on the first page. Nelson says defense lawyers always do, but she is not going to do that.

[n david]

Originally Posted by Pressing-On

West wants "not guilty" option on the first page. Nelson says defense lawyers always do, but she is not going to do that.

She said it will all be on one page. I see West's issue with the multiple pages. If it's buried at the bottom of page 3, with all these other charges...the Jury could get overwhelmed seeing all the charges that they just choose one of the charges and forget about the "Not Guilty" choice.

Speaking of the long list of charges with the Not Guilty at the bottom, it sounds like the State's tactic is in fact to bury the Not Guilty option at the bottom of every charge -- PLUS they wanted to add the special findings after each charge.

The State's tactic would be to flood so many charges and findings that the appearance of the verdict form looks worse all written out than what was presented in trial or closing arguments.

[Pressing-On]

Originally Posted by n david

She said it will all be on one page. I see West's issue with the multiple pages. If it's buried at the bottom of page 3, with all these other charges...the Jury could get overwhelmed seeing all the charges that they just choose one of the charges and forget about the "Not Guilty" choice.

Speaking of the long list of charges with the Not Guilty at the bottom, it sounds like the State's tactic is in fact to bury the Not Guilty option at the bottom of every charge -- PLUS they wanted to add the special findings after each charge.

The State's tactic would be to flood so many charges and findings that the appearance of the verdict form looks worse all written out than what was presented in trial or closing arguments.

I am not sure I am looking at Hung Jury anymore. LOL!

[Pressing-On]

BTW, when did GZ have the opportunity to identify himself? Wasn't he in his vehicle observing TM, while it was raining, and only got out when he saw him running?

[n david]

Originally Posted by Pressing-On

I am not sure I am looking at Hung Jury anymore. LOL!

That's all I'm hoping for now...the past couple days have really dimmed my hopes of a not guilty verdict. I just don't see them getting past all the charges written. Because there's a huge difference, between hearing the charges and actually seeing them written out in legalese.

[n david]

Originally Posted by KWSS1976

So is the state in the instruction to the jury, going to be able to say its illegal to follow someone, did I hear that correctly???

The Defense wanted special instruction that stated it is not a crime for someone to follow someone they consider suspicious; because, as West argued, the State has been implying in its arguments (in spite of Serino's testimony and law enforcement) that it is against the law.

Judge refused to include that instruction.

West asked for a motion of limine, that the Judge rule the State cannot imply, suggest or otherwise mention that it is possibly illegal for GZ to have followed TM.

The Judge denied that motion, saying that the Defense will be able to state their case in the closing arguments.

Originally Posted by Pressing-On

They will be back in one hour to argue the child abuse in the Murder 3. She will allow it, because she already stated it is included in Murder 3.

She seemed to have reservations about allowing the Felony Murder and Child Abuse hail mary pass; though during the lunch break pow wow with whichever Justice Dept officials are minding her, she probably will come back and allow it.

[Pressing-On]

Originally Posted by n david

The Defense wanted special instruction that stated it is not a crime for someone to follow someone they consider suspicious; because, as West argued, the State has been implying in its arguments (in spite of Serino's testimony and law enforcement) that it is against the law.

Judge refused to include that instruction.

West asked for a motion of limine, that the Judge rule the State cannot imply, suggest or otherwise mention that it is possibly illegal for GZ to have followed TM.

The Judge denied that motion, saying that the Defense will be able to state their case in the closing arguments.

The only legality would be found in "stalking", which isn't the issue.

"A person who intentionally and repeatedly follows or harasses another person..."
http://definitions.uslegal.com/s/stalking/

She seemed to have reservations about allowing the Felony Murder and Child Abuse hail mary pass; though during the lunch break pow wow with whichever Justice Dept officials are minding her, she probably will come back and allow it.

She seemed to already state she would allow it. She stated, earlier, that the law permits state's child abuse argument under Murder 3.