Get PJ Media on your Apple

Zimmerman: The Backwards Trial Resumes

Week One saw the prosecution playing defense.

by
Mike McDaniel

Bio

July 1, 2013 - 12:05 am

During her second day of testimony, her behavior was more restrained. Someone, perhaps her attorney, obviously convinced her to behave more appropriately. Even so, she still rolled her eyes, displayed aggressive body language, and resisted saying anything that did not adhere to the narrative.

West was able to elicit many stunning admissions. For example: the entire Scheme Team was present at Jeantel’s interview with de la Rionda, which was conducted in Sybrina Fulton’s living room with Fulton sitting next to Jeantel. This is a dumbfounding admission, as Fulton is Martin’s mother. No ethical prosecutor would conduct an interview himself; that’s what investigators are for, and one was present but asked not a single question. By conducting the interview, de la Rionda made himself a witness. No ethical prosecutor would allow private attorneys with a financial or political interest to have anything to do with a criminal case. No competent prosecutor would ever allow a victim’s relative to sit in on an interview, to say nothing of seating his most important witness next to the mother of the victim. All of these are incredible lapses of common sense, legal ethics, and professional protocol.

It’s hardly a surprise that Jeantel testified that her lie about being hospitalized was due to Fulton’s presence. West kindly gave her an out and suggested that it was de la Rionda’s fault, and so it was. Even so, Jeantel testified that her answers in that interview, and the telephone interview she did with Crump, were coached. This is also a significant problem for Crump — he filed an affidavit with the court stating otherwise. Due to Judge Nelson’s refusal to allow Crump to be deposed by the defense — a decision that was overturned on appeal — Crump has yet to be deposed, even though the trial is already underway. His deposition should be interesting to say the least, and will certainly not be to the prosecution’s benefit.

Jeantel was far from finished. She testified that after Martin spotted Zimmerman, he described him as a “creepy-ass cracker,” and shortly thereafter, several times, as a “n****.” This was astonishing for many reasons. Jeantel had never before — not in multiple interviews with law enforcement, not in her interview with Crump, not in her deposition — said those things. However, her manner of saying them was so garbled and hard to understand, that she and de la Rionda engaged in several minutes of dialogue with the court reporter as she struggled to get the testimony right. Jeantel also said that she thought Zimmerman might be a rapist, something else she had never before offered.

Some pundits and “narrative” supporters took Jeantel’s comments as gospel and suggested they meant Martin thought Zimmerman a homosexual rapist. Jeantel’s testimony was not for the faint of heart. In Narrative-think, this apparently would give Martin license to assault and brutally beat Zimmerman, despite the contrary politically correct implications of such comments and actions.

Jeantel shockingly testified that she did not consider “creepy-ass cracker” to be a racial statement. Jeantel also claimed that when Martin initiated the confrontation with Zimmerman — an example of her testimony fully supporting Zimmerman’s account — Martin asked, “What you followin’ me for?”  Zimmerman, according to Jeantel, replied: “What you doin‘ ‘round here?” West proved that during her statement with Crump, she claimed Zimmerman replied: “What are you talking about?” — though Jeantel did say “what you doin’ ‘round here?” in her interview with de la Rionda.

In a tragicomic, almost painful moment, West presented Jeantel with a handwritten letter she claimed to have written to Fulton that explained — very poorly — her part. This was another bit of evidence withheld from the defense for months. West asked her to read the letter, and she hesitated for an uncomfortably long time, finally admitting that she could not “read cursive.” West handled her kindly, but it was clear she not only did not write the letter — another lie — she couldn’t read it.

Jeantel also admitted she and Martin never dated, though she suggested otherwise in her interview with de la Rionda, and Crump suggested otherwise as well.

As in the de la Rionda interview, she heard “grass” over the cell phone, and was never able to explain that, other than to add that the grass she heard was wet. She was consistent in one matter: she never heard fighting words or a fight.

There were many other instances of mangled testimony, butchered syntax, self-contradiction, bad behavior, and absolute absurdity. The testimony of the prosecution’s star witness not only did not help the prosecution, it supported Zimmerman’s account in a great many significant ways, and not merely because Jeantel left the stand with no credibility whatsoever.

Jenna Lauer is a real estate agent who lived at the Retreat at Twin Lakes on February 26, 2012. She was also a member of the Home Owner’s Association board. The attack took place essentially in her back yard. Lauer was an ideal witness: intelligent, attractive, photogenic, articulate, honest, unbiased, and self-assured. Any attorney would be delighted to have her helping their case, and the defense surely was. Unfortunately for the prosecution, she was a prosecution witness.

De la Rionda spent much of the first week trying to downplay the fact that it was nearly pitch black and raining heavily throughout the attack. Those factors do not in any way help the “narrative” — quite the opposite. Lauer didn’t help, testifying that it had been raining heavily all day, and still was at 7:00 PM when the incident took place. Like Jeantel, she was an ear-witness, but was actually present. She didn’t actually see anything.

Lauer heard unintelligible voices that turned to scuffling, like people playing basketball on grass and concrete, both of which figured in the case. The scuffling gradually turned to “yelping,” and then desperate screams for help. It was Jeantel who called 911, allowing Zimmerman’s cries for help and the gunshot to be recorded. Lauer confirmed that only one person was calling for help.

Lauer testified that her neighbor, John Good, stepped outside, and she heard him saying something like “what the hell are you doing” but the screams for help continued. Her 911 call was played and the screams for help and gunshot were clearly audible, but no other voices could be heard.

In one comical moment at the expense of de la Rionda, he established that Lauer knew Zimmerman slightly, having seen him at several board meetings. De la Rionda asked if she could identify the screaming voice as his and she replied: “I couldn’t; I didn’t hear him yell like that in the meetings, so … ”. This was particularly ironic as de la Rionda tried mightily to get in the testimony of a voice analyst who claimed he could compare normal speech with frenzied screams. Actual scientists testified it was impossible, and that testimony was excluded.

On cross-examination, O’Mara elicited that whoever was yelling for help “sounded like they were desperate … they really needed help.” She said apart from Good, she heard no other voices. Neatly dispatching de la Rionda’s suggestion that because she didn’t hear Martin’s death threat to Zimmerman, he didn’t make one, Lauer testified that Good wasn’t audible on the 911 tape, either.

Lauer testified that the famous photo of Zimmerman with his flattened nose and blood streaming down his face taken at the scene was the result of Sanford police officer Wagner asking if she knew Zimmerman. She didn’t want to expose herself to possible danger, so he took the photo on his cellphone and brought it to her. She testified that because of his disfiguring injuries she couldn’t identify him as George Zimmerman that night.

Lauer did not allow de la Rionda to manipulate her. Her testimony fully supported Zimmerman’s account, leaving nothing for the prosecution.

Selma Mora was another impressive prosecution witness testifying for the defense. Mora is a native Colombian who is now a U.S. citizen, having lived in the U.S. for 12 years. On February 26, 2012, she lived to the southeast of Lauer, and her backyard also faced the attack. She had a Spanish interpreter, an issue to which some might take offense, but she explained that while she does speak English, for something this important she wanted to be precise and to make no mistakes.

Hearing “cries,” she heard the gunshot, but didn’t recognize it as a gunshot. Going outside, she saw two people. She said one was on the ground and the other on top of him in a position “like a rider.” She described his clothing as some sort of pattern “between black and red,” which accurately described Zimmerman’s black and red jacket.

As with Lauer, Mora’s account was completely consistent with Zimmerman’s account and not with the “narrative.” Like Lauer, Mora was entirely credible.

Comments are closed.

Top Rated Comments   
It's a Stalinist political show trial, plain + simple, which was Premier & General Secretary Obama's plan all along. Welcome to the U.S.S.A.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
None of the objective facts or assessments of witness credibility matter. The only thing that matters is whether the jury has the courage to acquit. They have to know that they'll be trashed and their addresses and contacts all published so that the gangstas, race hustlers, and poverty pimps can have open season on them. If they do anything other than find Zimmerman guilty, they're going to need police protection for a very long time.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
Upon viewing CNN's coverage as well as other commentators one thing is blatantly obvious. African-American commentators will speak no ill of Trayvon Martin or Rachel Jeantel and Zimmerman is guilty. It would take real courage for any of them to swim against the tide as certainly they would be ostracized by their peers and friends. Jessie Jackson said that all you need to know is that an armed (white) man killed an unarmed (black) boy. No need to dig further into the facts.
The politically correct prosecution is a disgrace and is tantamount to a good old southern lynching if left unchecked.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
All Comments   (52)
All Comments   (52)
Sort: Newest Oldest Top Rated
This is such a travesty of justice. I fear for Mr. Zimmerman. I believe he may be convicted for PC reasons, even though the evidence clearly exonerates him. Shame on you, Holder!!
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
The prosecution has absolutely no case, the initial investigators were quite correct to not charge zimmerman, because their was no evidence to dispute zimmermans self defense claim. But the race baiters, including obAMA, demanded a trial, to rev up the black vote for 2012, and if they didn't get one their gangbanger minions would riot, so they got one, with a grossly inflated 2nd degree murder charge, when even manslaughter is questionable. Of course once zimmerman is properly acquited, the ganbangers will riot anyway, and we have obama, the "racial healer", and the other dem race baiters, to thank for it.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
I would be curious to know if the prosecutions serial misbehavior would merit a bar complaint/ loss of of license?
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
The prosecutor in the Duke rape case was finally sanctioned for malpractice. This case is equally abusive, so I hope the same happens here eventually.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
If the Prosecution's case continues to unravel the defense should offer them a deal when the prosecution rests. If they agree to a directed verdict of acquittal the defense will agree not to go after Angela Corey for misconduct. Turn the tables on her: do you feel lucky because if you're not then you are the next Mike Nifong. There is enough evidence of misconduct ranging from overcharging, witness and evidence tampering to actual perjury to get her disbarred.

If there are riots then they are going to need a scapegoat and it's going be Corey. Had the state left well enough alone then things would have died down. Now, after all this publicity and raised expectations we are going into Rodney King territory. There is no federal bailout here. The FBI has cleared Zimmerman of racial animus and you can't charge him under federal law without it.



1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
Zimmerman is a dead man walking.... even if he is truly innocent (and it sure looks like it was a clean shooting) because President Barack Obama talks when he should keep his mouth shut when he weighed in on the shooting of Martin aand called it a "national tragedy" and also said: "If I had a son, he'd look like Trayvon", Zimmerman's goose is cooked no matter the verdict.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
If George Zimmerman looked like Trayvon Martin, Barack Obama would never have known of either one.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
I sure hope that the local police have plenty of tear gas and bean-bag ammo available for the post-verdict riots and looting.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
There will be a riot no matter what. If he is convicted their will be a conviction celebration riot. If he is acquited there will be a teed off hate the man riot. Since there will be a riot either way, the jurors might as well do what is right, and not convict.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
Tear gas and bean bags? Hardly. I hope they have lots of buckshot and body bags.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
Charges were brought and trumpeted far and wide to gin up the base for the 2012 election. Now watch any appeal be synchronized with 2014. The trial itself is an afterthought. What happens to GZ the politicos could care less.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
Exactly, this is a stalinist show trial. Fortunately this is still america, and we might have a real jury instead of the stalinist type, which gives zimmerman a chance.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
It's a fascinating trial with all the elements of a film but, sadly, I don't think the end result - acquittal or conviction - will do anything to bring together our country. Our present administration will continue to devilishly divide us in any way they can. There's always another-racially charged incident Obama can use to rip our civil society apart.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
Of course because President Peter Principle can do more than "lead from behind"( or, to the adults in the room, hide behind the "existing frame").
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
I am going to offer the opinion that the prosecution knows, literally knows, that Zimmerman shouldn't be convicted of murder 2, and is, in fact, taking the path of least resistance to establishing that fact by actively being inept. That way, if Zimmerman goes free, they can say truthfully that they prosecuted him and it all lands on the backs of the jurors. What makes this unethical is that it is by no means certain that the jury will actually do it's duty and find Zimmerman not guilty, nor is it certain that any other authority in the judicial system will have the guts to stand up to this fraud.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
The State may well "know" the prosecution is bogus, but that doesn't make their conduct ethical. Withholding evidence from the defense until days before trial, their attempt to hide the color photo of Zimmerman taken that night, the ridiculous coaching of Jaentel and the changing stories of several other witnesses all point to a railroad prosecution.

The most plausible explanation is they know GZ is innocent but fear mob violence so are making the effort to save lives and property. That would not only be cowardly, but also a violation of their oaths of office.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
I agree totally and have said as much on a number of blogs. They are unwilling participants in a kangaroo political court and are deliberately sabotaging it.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
I don't think so. They have withheld evidence and flirted with suborning perjury.

If they intend to be helpfully incompetent, they are taking great and unnecessary risks to do so.

I think the simpler explanation is that they are following orders and are genuinely evil AND incompetent.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
"...but perhaps that the subornation of perjury is involved." Really? Really! I'm shocked! Shocked I tell you! Prosecutors suborning perjury!!

I have had the experience of being prosecuted by prosecutors who knew I was not guilty and had NO evidence whatsoever, but once the die had been cast they did everything they could including suborning perjury and colluding with law enforcement officers who offered false testimony, to convict me. They failed.

Perhaps not all prosecutors are so ethics free and so contemptuous of their oath of office but most probably are.

I agree with you Mark the simpler and more plausible explanation is that they are genuinely evil AND incompetent.

The prosecutors in this case are taking their evil incompetence to a new and preposterous level.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
Even if Zimmerman is acquitted, his life has been ruined. He'll never be safe again. I just hope he gets awarded enough money from his civil suit against those deceitful networks that he can just disappear forever.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
1 2 3 Next View All