Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
Latest activity
Classifieds
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Log in
Register
What's New?
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Navigation
Install the app
Install
More Options
Advertise with us
Contact Us
Close Menu
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Forums
The Water Cooler
General Discussion
zimmerman granted bail
Search titles only
By:
Reply to Thread
This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Message
<blockquote data-quote="RidgeHunter" data-source="post: 1775559" data-attributes="member: 4319"><p>My point was I can easily see how many people in the general public could see an tacit admission of guilt there. Of course it doesn't convey guilt, but a trial is not a math equation full of facts and numbers. Things like how he appears to the 12 people staring at him while he talks can and will make a difference. My paraphrase was a hyperbolic device of what I think his apology might sound like to the average Wal-mart shopper, IE a jury member. Again, why mention he "didn't know he was young and unarmed"? - in an <em>apology</em>? Does Zimmerman think he was wrong to shoot him because of those two conditions?</p><p></p><p>I don't think it's a stretch that many people hearing that could have those questions in their minds. </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>What? The 911 call I'm referencing was pre-shooting. The call Zimmerman made to report Martin acting suspicious, before they made contact and before the shooting. 1:09 in this video.</p><p></p><p>[media=youtube]jL72w4xiTVU[/media]</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Indirect answers, and sticking to the same answer when it was clear that prosecutor was wanting him contradict the records with his answers as many times as he could. That's what a prosecutor does. Get him to say something, and emphasize it as much as he can. Repeat it as much as he can. Then later stand there and try to prove why what he said could not have happened or did not happen. </p><p></p><p>Get him to repeat something multiple times. Get more detailed. Then imply that you have evidence to the contrary. He can either stick to his answer, or feeling that the prosecutor has him pegged, pull out the "I can't recall." after giving multiple affirmative answers. Either way, they make defendants contradict themselves and seem unsure. They want to make him dance, and he was no Fred Astaire in that clip. </p><p></p><p>If that "agitated state" had him stumbling at all, he's in for a surprise at trial.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="RidgeHunter, post: 1775559, member: 4319"] My point was I can easily see how many people in the general public could see an tacit admission of guilt there. Of course it doesn't convey guilt, but a trial is not a math equation full of facts and numbers. Things like how he appears to the 12 people staring at him while he talks can and will make a difference. My paraphrase was a hyperbolic device of what I think his apology might sound like to the average Wal-mart shopper, IE a jury member. Again, why mention he "didn't know he was young and unarmed"? - in an [I]apology[/I]? Does Zimmerman think he was wrong to shoot him because of those two conditions? I don't think it's a stretch that many people hearing that could have those questions in their minds. What? The 911 call I'm referencing was pre-shooting. The call Zimmerman made to report Martin acting suspicious, before they made contact and before the shooting. 1:09 in this video. [media=youtube]jL72w4xiTVU[/media] Indirect answers, and sticking to the same answer when it was clear that prosecutor was wanting him contradict the records with his answers as many times as he could. That's what a prosecutor does. Get him to say something, and emphasize it as much as he can. Repeat it as much as he can. Then later stand there and try to prove why what he said could not have happened or did not happen. Get him to repeat something multiple times. Get more detailed. Then imply that you have evidence to the contrary. He can either stick to his answer, or feeling that the prosecutor has him pegged, pull out the "I can't recall." after giving multiple affirmative answers. Either way, they make defendants contradict themselves and seem unsure. They want to make him dance, and he was no Fred Astaire in that clip. If that "agitated state" had him stumbling at all, he's in for a surprise at trial. [/QUOTE]
Insert Quotes…
Verification
Post Reply
Forums
The Water Cooler
General Discussion
zimmerman granted bail
Search titles only
By:
Top
Bottom