State’s witness Chris Serino seriously undermines prosecution charge
,.....................................................................
Zimmerman Trial Day 6 – Analysis & Video –
by Andrew Branca Monday, July 1, 2013
If you didn’t listen to the live streaming of the Zimmerman case, you missed the most astonishing cross-examination of a trial that has been hip-deep in astonishing cross-examinations. (Fortunately for you, we provide the video, below, if you need to catch up–it’s worth it.)
Chris Serino, Investigator, Sanford PD, Cross-Examination by O’Mara Chris Serino, Investigator, Sanford Police Department, Cross-Exam, Part 2
Chris Serino, Investigator, Sanford Police Department, Cross-Exam, Part 3
On the stand was Chris Serino, who was the lead investigator for the Sanford Police Department on the Trayyvon Martin shooting. Defense counsel Mark O’Mara led cross-examination with his usual consummate skill, obtaining responses from this witness–remember, the State’s witness–that all but completely guts the State’s charge in this case.
Among the key revelations so far:
Zimmerman was always completely cooperative, open, and straightforward with all the police investigators over many weeks of multiple interviews, both in person at the police station and phone. The sense given is that Zimmerman demonstrated endless patience.
O’Mara noted that Serino was leading an investigative team, gathering and sharing evidence ,that included all levels of the Sanford Police Department up to the Chief, and even members of the 18 Circuit State Prosector’s office. Asked if there was ANYTHING that Zimmerman had said that contradicted the wealth of evidence possessed by Serino, the Investigator answered, “No, sir.” No physical evidence, no witness evidence, no officer statements, nothing? “No, sir.”
In fact, noted O’Mara, the evidence Serino had all fit into a self-defense theory, and Serino agreed that it did, and that his information supported self-defense. Serino would note this in the normal course of an investigation because in addition to investigating crime it was also his charge to investigate defenses, including self-defense.
Serino offered to help Zimmerman obtain help, including psychological help, for the nighmares and anxiety that he cautioned often followed a event as traumatic as having to take a human life in self-defense.
He noted that, “In this particular case, Zimmerman could have been a victim, too.”
O’Mara asked if Serino was familiar with such symptoms from having observed them in fellow officers who had had to kill in self-defense, and the question brought a quick, if tardy, objection from State prosecutor Bernie de la Rionda.
O’Mara also asked about Zimmerman’s affect at the time of the incident. Serino agreed that Zimmerman had presented a “flat” affect but put it down to trauma. When asked if Serino has perceived Zimmerman to seem uncaring or cavalier for having had to shoot someone beating him up, Serino’s response was beaten out by a quick BDLR objection.
When asked by O’Mara about the severity of Zimmerman’s injuries, the Investigator replied that they did not seem to him, a career police officer who has seen far worse, as life threatening, but that one also had to take into account the mental trauma of the event of having survived a life-and-death situation. O’Mara noted, however, that in fact the extent of injuries don’t matter for purposes of self-defense, and Serino agreed. “In fact,” observed O’Mara,” we don’t need to see life-threatening injuires, not any injuries, dow we?” “No, sir,” answered Serino.
Serino noted that in this particular case he was under quite a lot of external pressure to move the case forward.
There were also external concerns about racial profiling that he was required to get clarified.
Serino agreed that at no time had Zimmerman ever expressed, ill-will, hatred, or spite toward Martin, and indeed had seemed shocked when informed that Martin had died, exclaiming, “He’s dead?”
In seeking this clarification Serino observed no evidence whatever of any anger or disdain by Zimmerman towards Martin. When asked by Serino if Zimmerman would have acted in the same manner if Martin had been white, Zimmerman said he would have. When asked by O’Mara if Serino believed him, Serino answered, “Yes.”
For a more comprehensive sense of just how much pressure was under, see:
Zimmerman Trial: Evidentiary Flashback: Investigator Serino Tells FBI He Was Pressured to Bring Charges At one point Serino was pressured to initiate a “challenge meeting” with Zimmerman, in which he would try to goad Zimmerman to making substantive changes to his testimony or to admit to a substantive omission from his prior testimony. The purpose of the “challenge meeting,” it was explained, is to try to break the suspects story and get to the truth. Indeed, the investigator might even pretend that some piece of incriminating evidence existed, or otherwise exaggerate evidence contrary to the suspect’s narrative, to try to find a chink in the suspect’s story.
The trouble, Serino recounted, is that he could really do an effective “challenge meeting” for the simple reason that “I just didn’t have much to challenge him WITH.” In this case, O’Mara asked, you didn’t have much to hit him with? “No sir,” answered Serino, “I did not.”
Nevertheless, the “challenge meeting” was held. In the absence of any real contrary evidence with which to challenge Serino, the Investigator pretended to have some ready to spring. They had discovered, he said, video footage of the events that evening. “And what did Zimmerman say when you told him that?” “He said, Thank God,” Serino answered.
The last O’Mara question of the day, the last words the jury heard to take with them into the evening recess, could only be characterized as catastrophic for the State’s theory of the case. Looking directly at the man who had been the chief investigator on the case, who had possessed access to ever bit of evidence of any sort, who had interviewed, and re-interviewed, and re-re-interviewed–applying increasing from each interview to the next–O’Mara asked him:
“Do YOU think George Zimmerman was telling you the truth?”
Serino succinct answer: “Yes.”
That ended today’s court session, but not Mark O’Mara’s cross-examination of Chris Serino, which will continue tomorrow morning at 9AM. Join again then for another day of all-day live video coverage of the trial, a rolling Tweeter feed of selected contributors, and both mid-day and end-of-day analysis and video of the day’s testimony.
–Andrew
Andrew F. Branca is an MA lawyer and author of the seminal book “The Law of Self Defense” which shows you how to successfully fight the 20-to-life legal battle everyone faces after defending themselves (2nd Edition shipping this week – save 30%, only $35 & free shipping, and pre-order TODAY!). Many thanks to Professor Jacobson for the invitation to guest-blog on the Zimmerman trial here on Legal Insurrection!
You can follow Andrew on Twitter on @LawSelfDefense, on Facebook, and at his blog, The Law of Self Defense.
0
1
5.00 / 5 51 / 52 / 53 / 54 / 55 / 5
2 votes, 5.00 avg. rating (97% score)
Reactions
No Reactions for this Post (Yet)
Comments
Log in to Reply
0
12
McCoy2k | July 1, 2013 at 7:19 pm
I’m wondering if this case is dismissed before a Jury has a chance to decide. That being said, Zimmerman better write a best seller, he’s going to need the money for bodyguards.
Not to mention a new social security number, among other things, perhaps even a name change.
Log in to Reply
0
6
EBL | July 1, 2013 at 7:50 pm
I pray this jury is honest and competent. If they are they should vote for acquittal about ten minutes after they select the foreperson.
Log in to Reply
0
5
myiq2xu | July 1, 2013 at 8:05 pm
The quickest verdicts take about 20 minutes. The jurors take a potty break, elect a foreman then hold a vote to see where they stand. If they all agree on a verdict there is nothing to discuss so they tell the bailiff to inform the court.
Log in to Reply
0
1
jack burton | July 1, 2013 at 8:41 pm
The only jury I was on took less time than for the bailiff to go out and get us a pot of coffee. We were agreed, signed the paperwork and sealed it in under five minutes. Then we had to sit around because everyone else went to lunch.
Log in to Reply
0
0
EBL | July 1, 2013 at 8:55 pm
Don’t they generally hold out for the lunch? Then again, the lunches in that court house probably suck and it is not like they haven’t tried them already.
Log in to Reply
0
4
MrE | July 1, 2013 at 8:24 pm
Let’s just hope the jury doesn’t use the same voting machines they used to elect Obama.
Log in to Reply
0
1
styro1 | July 1, 2013 at 8:45 pm
Imagine hanging chads in verdict cards.
Log in to Reply
0
7
EBL | July 1, 2013 at 7:57 pm
That is not incompetence by CNN, that is malice. They are told repeatedly not to release information like that.
Log in to Reply
0
4
Uncle Samuel | July 1, 2013 at 8:20 pm
The State/Prosecution let that information out without obscuring the SSN, etc.
The buck stops there.
Log in to Reply
0
0
EBL | July 1, 2013 at 8:56 pm
I am full of contempt at the system.
Log in to Reply
0
7
Observer | July 1, 2013 at 7:59 pm
It will be interesting to see how much this defense is costing Zimmerman. Of course, there is no way to measure the cost of his lost reputation, or the security he and his family have lost. He’ll have to spend the rest of his life hiding his identity, and/or constantly looking over his shoulder. But the hundreds of thousands, or even millions of dollars in legal fees he has been forced to incur, and the lost wages, etc., probably add up to a pretty staggering amount. I hope the public ultimately gets to see that cost, so people can know what these phony “show trials” really cost the individuals who are unfortunate enough to get caught up in these political games that Obama and his cohorts in the race-baiting industry love to play.
Log in to Reply
0
7
TrooperJohnSmith | July 1, 2013 at 8:24 pm
The release of confidential and personal information by the State and the State-Controlled Media should be worth something with 6 or 7 zeroes on the end.
Log in to Reply
0
0
traye | July 1, 2013 at 7:23 pm
Holy he’ll.
Log in to Reply
0
5
profshadow | July 1, 2013 at 7:26 pm
If this was a “regular case”…other than that this case wouldn’t have been brought to trial…would the judge have just dismissed this charges and gave the prosecution a serious chewing out?
Log in to Reply
0
3
bccobbs | July 1, 2013 at 7:29 pm
Considering the lead investigator thinks he’s innocent, how the hell (1) was this case brought to trial, (2) was this case brought to trial as murder 2??
Complete vindication for George Zimmerman today.
Great coverage, Andrew!
Log in to Reply
0
8
Milhouse | July 1, 2013 at 8:15 pm
It’s precisely because the Sandford police investigator concluded that there was no case, that the governor appointed a special prosecutor, who came to a different conclusion, for reasons that are pretty obvious and have nothing to do with the evidence.
Log in to Reply
0
6
rayc | July 1, 2013 at 7:31 pm
Andrew, is this exceptional lawyering or a softball case, or a little of both? Will they earn a elite reputation for this trial?
Log in to Reply
0
8
hoglaw | July 1, 2013 at 7:34 pm
I hear music, I see an obese woman, is she singing?
Log in to Reply
0
0
Solomon | July 1, 2013 at 7:42 pm
Yes, SIR!
Log in to Reply
0
0
EBL | July 1, 2013 at 9:01 pm
I hope we do not hear this: Kill the Cracker, kill the Cracker!
Log in to Reply
0
4
fogflyer | July 1, 2013 at 7:35 pm
Andrew, what about the info the jury heard from “The Challenge Interview” conducted by Serino and the female investigator.
Now, I wouldn’t say that it actually helped their case on legal grounds, but don’t you think is was harmful to the defense to have the jury hear two police officers say that Trayvon would have been justified in defending himself if he thought he was scared and thought he was being followed?
Hopefully, O’Mara will be able to get him to admit that the law is certainly not written that way.
The police also said this would never have happened if Zimmerman just identified himself as neighborhood watch or if he had just stayed in his car.
Of course, they also got to hear GZ say, “Thank God, I hope someone got the whole thing on videotape!” when Sorino bluffed that there might be a video of the event.
O’Mara does seem to be doing a very good job so far of explaining that this interview is just an investigative technique, but I still worry about how much this may have influenced the jury.
So, what do you think?
Will the jury be influenced by hearing police ask George in such an aggressive and accusing manner why he didn’t identify himself and why he didn’t just stay in his car?
Or will O’Mara’s cross effectively negate any prejudicial aspect of the video interview?
Looking forward to tomorrow!
Log in to Reply
0
2
Aridog | July 1, 2013 at 7:46 pm
Good point. I had to ask right here why the drawn out Serino episode. He struck me as an interrogator who talked too much. Others explained it to me as a sequence in case building. Makes sense. Dense as I am I got the message that O’Mara put out…that this is a technique for validation not a presumption of anything by itself. I suspect the jurors will get it also.
Log in to Reply
0
2
myiq2xu | July 1, 2013 at 8:01 pm
It is possible for two people to both be in reasonable fear of the other without either party being guilty of a crime.
A simple example is two undercover cops shooting at each other because they both thought they were being robbed by the other.
Log in to Reply
0
1
Goetz von Berlichingen | July 1, 2013 at 8:34 pm
You need to create a better and more detailed scenario for a real answer. The one you propose is lacking in many elements.
if you are trying to reconcile TM’s alleged behavior with what is known about the case, with the hope that it was all just a tragic misunderstanding, sorry.
At least in my opinion.
Here’s why, and this relates to the weakness of your scenario: The moment one of them commits a forcible felony, then he can no longer claim self-defense from actions arising therefrom.
Once TM assaulted GZ it was no longer a simple misunderstanding.
There is a line.
TM crossed it, as the evidence appears to indicate. Your scenario doesn’t have that because it is too sketchy.
There is always a line.
Log in to Reply
0
0
Cowboy Curtis | July 1, 2013 at 8:56 pm
Yes. But its only self defense if you are under attack. Someone punching you, or pulling a knife and saying “Give me your wallet!” is grounds to defend violently defend yourself. Being followed at a distance by stranger, yelled and cursed at, or watched suspiciously is not…even if its by a creepy ass cracker.
Unless Zimmerman physically attacked Martin, Martin had no right to lay a finger on him, and doing so was a crime.
Log in to Reply
0
1
Northern Sentinel | July 1, 2013 at 8:42 pm
If you feel threatened, rather than just annoyed,
by a person you perceive to be following you
and if safety was only steps away,
then what reasonable justification is there for choosing
to confront the follower instead of choosing safety?
Log in to Reply
0
6
Mary Sue | July 1, 2013 at 7:35 pm
The MSNBC version of the prosecution’s day today was a stark contrast to what I watched happen. Marcia Clark on the Rev Al Show was a sight to see. Evidently she has had so much botox her vision is distorted. Meanwhile Goldie Taylor – who regularly gives the most pro-prosecution spin- declared the prosecution case to have a long way to go after the court recessed for the day. You’d get whiplash watching the coverage, I swear.
Log in to Reply
0
2
Jazzizhep | July 1, 2013 at 7:50 pm
WOW, Goldie Taylor is on MSNBC? I don’t know who she is, but I have been seeing her tweets and they have been over the top. I thought she was just some super pro-TM tweeter. I remember the name b/c they were nauseating, and she is a part of the MSM, double WOW?
Log in to Reply
0
9
Granny55 | July 1, 2013 at 7:41 pm
And the MSM is still trying to convict him during the trial. Showing his DL ID and SSN# on CNN! See where the race whore’s are showing up en masse – Ashley Banfield for one. They have to “report” about the MSM narrative instead of the facts. This country is going to hell in a hand basket!!! Stay strong GZ. There are common sense people out here who believe in the truth and don’t follow the MSM narrative.
Log in to Reply
0
3
Uncle Samuel | July 1, 2013 at 7:48 pm
Maybe Putin will offer George asylum too.
Log in to Reply
0
1
fogflyer | July 1, 2013 at 7:50 pm
What was there purported reason for giving out this information???
Log in to Reply
0
8
Goetz von Berlichingen | July 1, 2013 at 7:42 pm
Thanks for watching MSNBC so we don’t have to, Mary Sue.
You are doing the Lord’s work.
Log in to Reply
0
11
Mogget | July 1, 2013 at 7:44 pm
De-lurking long enough to say “thanks!” This is the sort of analysis that ought to be provided by our esteemed professional journalists but never is.
Log in to Reply
0
2
Jazzizhep | July 1, 2013 at 7:45 pm
legal questions:
Can the defense call the county prosecutors who chose not to prosecute, or are these the same attorneys? And would they call an atty, specifically a prosecutor, to testify?
It seems like the introduction of the GZ interviews are a chance for the defendant to testify w/o being crossed, is this usual? Realizing the defense usual tries to keep these out b/c of substantive inconsistencies.
Branca tweeted:
Andrew Branca, LOSD @LawSelfDefense
#Zimmerman Trial: RECALL: Invest. Serino Tells FBI in March 2012 He’s Being Pressured to Bring Unwarranted Charges
How or under what circumstances would lead to this being introduced into evidence? I would like to see it introduced, but it doesn’t seem relevant.
Log in to Reply
0
1
Wolverine | July 1, 2013 at 8:36 pm
I guess MOM can flat out ask him tomorrow, BLDR will object, it will be sustained, but the jury can put 2 and 2 together.
Log in to Reply
0
1
Browndog | July 1, 2013 at 7:47 pm
Well, it seems that Nancy Grace is the last man standing, from what I can glean.
I wonder if today’s testimony cracks that harder than a rock predisposition to the “truth”.
Log in to Reply
0
0
Aridog | July 1, 2013 at 7:50 pm
You watching Nancy Grace? As someone else said here, that is God’s work…bless you for it so the rest don’t have to see her preen.  )
Log in to Reply
0
3
imfine | July 1, 2013 at 7:51 pm
I wonder if there is going to come a point where the judge will stop the trial and point out what a miscarriage of justice it is.
Log in to Reply
0
4
Ragspierre | July 1, 2013 at 7:52 pm
If I were BDLR, I’d be on the phone with O’Mara this night, asking if he’d convey to his client an offer to plea to a charge of illegally discharging a firearm…or any damn thing.
This is going into the crapper for the State.
Log in to Reply
0
3
Browndog | July 1, 2013 at 7:55 pm
All roads to salvation pass through Eric Holder…er..my bad. I meant Angela Corey, do they not?
Log in to Reply
0
5
Ragspierre | July 1, 2013 at 8:00 pm
Do you think she’d stand in the way now? I doubt she’s even taking BDLR’s calls at this point.
Log in to Reply
0
0
Jazzizhep | July 1, 2013 at 9:01 pm
LOL rags…is he even guilty of that  I’d take it tho
Log in to Reply
0
6
Rick Z | July 1, 2013 at 7:52 pm
.
If the Head be Split,
You Must Acquit !
Log in to Reply
0
1
Pauldd | July 1, 2013 at 7:54 pm
It hard to imagine how defense counsel could elicit testimony any more damaging than he already has. Part of me thinks he should just say no further questions. On the other hand this is so entertaing I hate to see this end.
Log in to Reply
0
3
Matt in FL | July 1, 2013 at 7:59 pm
I would love to see:
“State rests, your honor.”
MOM stands up.
“Defense rests, your honor.”
Won’t happen, but it’d be a pretty powerful point.
Log in to Reply
0
3
Browndog | July 1, 2013 at 8:03 pm
Aside from the human element, of a man’s freedom hangs in the balance, I’m certain with all the effort O’Mara has put into this case, the hounds of hell won’t keep him from showcasing his work.
I’ll defer to Rags on this point.
Log in to Reply
0
1
Annie | July 1, 2013 at 7:54 pm
If Zimmerman had not shot Martin, would Martin have faced assault and battery charges and an attempted murder charge for his attack of Zimmerman?
Log in to Reply
0
4
Browndog | July 1, 2013 at 7:59 pm
It would have remained localized–misdemeanor assault, not even have made the local news.
Benjamin Crump changed all that.
Log in to Reply
0
1
Goetz von Berlichingen | July 1, 2013 at 8:38 pm
Depends on whether anyone walked away from that fight.
Could have been murder.
Isn’t that kind of the point about self-defense? You just don’t know.
Log in to Reply
0
0
Canusee | July 1, 2013 at 8:45 pm
Recent trial where the victim did not have a gun to protect himself. (GZ was the victim; Just because the aggressor got killed does not mean that status gets upgraded to victim.)
chicagotribune.com
chicago.cbslocal.com
Chicago teen thug Malik Jones, 16 years old at the time, punched a 62 year old man in the jaw. The victim fell and his head hit concrete. He died the next day from the head injury (“blunt force trauma”).
It was part of a “Pick ‘Em Out and Knock ‘Em Out” game. Two other teens were present, one of them videotaped the incident and then posted it on a facebook page.
Anthony Malcolm told Chicago Police detectives he wasn’t certain his friend was going to clock the older man collecting soda cans in the West Rogers Park alley. Even after Malik Jones allegedly boasted on video “I think I’m gonna knock this mother f—– out.” Even after, Cook County prosecutors said, another pal also expressed his desire to attack the unsuspecting Delfino Mora, 62. [...] Mora, who was holding a red aluminum can when he was approached by the youths, apparently didn’t seem to understand Jones and looked toward Ayala, thinking he spoke Spanish, prosecutors said. “Got some money in your pocket?” the teen prosecutors identified as Jones asked the confused Mora. Then, that teen can be seen punching Mora once in the jaw. “Bitch,” Jones allegedly hissed as the 5-foot-5-inch Mora crashed hard on the pavement — a shocking scene that elicited gasps from the deceased man’s large family watching the trial. [...]
Log in to Reply
0
1
ConradCA | July 1, 2013 at 8:06 pm
Andrew you need to edit the following paragraph:
“When asked by O’Mara about the severity of Serino’s injuries, the Investigator replied that they did not seem to him, a career police officer who has seen far worse, as life threatening, but that one also had to take into account the mental trauma of the event of having survived a life-and-death situation. O’Mara noted, however, that in fact the extent of injuries don’t matter for purposes of self-defense, and Serino agreed. “In fact,” observed O’Mara,” we don’t need to see life-threatening injuires, not any injuries, dow we?” “No, sir,” answered Serino.”
Log in to Reply
0
7
turfmann | July 1, 2013 at 8:09 pm
In a just world, Zimmerman would walk free with a groveling apology from the State of Florida, and Zimmerman would sue all those responsible for this trial until they were left muttering to themselves, pushing shopping carts under the interstate and soiling their Depends.
They deserve nothing less.
Log in to Reply
0
3
myiq2xu | July 1, 2013 at 8:11 pm
I understand that CNN has to cut away to commercials occasionally – that’s how they pay their bills. But why do they keep interrupting testimony so their bloviating gasbags can talk?
Log in to Reply
0
4
TJP1982 | July 1, 2013 at 8:17 pm
Because they don’t like what the testimony says. Doesn’t put asses in the seats when you are utterly wrong. Gotta give it to Sunny Hostin. She is going down with the ship.
Log in to Reply
0
3
Matt in FL | July 1, 2013 at 8:17 pm
Because what they have to say is more important than what’s occurring in the court, of course.
Or because they’re fatuous, bloviating pricks.
Your choice.
Log in to Reply
0
0
Uncle Samuel | July 1, 2013 at 8:26 pm
They only get paid when the cover all the talking points.
Log in to Reply
0
0
MegK | July 1, 2013 at 8:20 pm
Question…I did not see all of Serino’s testimony today, but ABC News reported this…
“In his initial report in which he recommended manslaughter charges, Serino wrote that Martin’s death could have been avoided if Zimmerman, a former neighborhood watch captain, had not left his car after calling police to report a suspicious person on Feb. 26, 2012.”
Is this true? I thought I recalled hearing that Serino never actually recommended manslaughter charges. Anyone know for sure one way or the other?
Log in to Reply
0
3
TrooperJohnSmith | July 1, 2013 at 8:27 pm
Just remember that the alphabet-news networks have been schooled in real reporting by the likes of the Enquirer and enumerable blogs over the past few years.
The truth may not have an agenda, but a government-backed pack of lies and innuendo definitely do.
Log in to Reply
0
3
McGehee | July 1, 2013 at 8:43 pm
That’s an actionable insult to the National Enquirer!
Log in to Reply
0
1
Uncle Samuel | July 1, 2013 at 8:28 pm
That’s the total opposite of what Serino Said.
The MSM have their own narrative that is completely disconnected from reality.
Log in to Reply
0
0
cjharrispretzer | July 1, 2013 at 9:06 pm
I’m listening to a reporter named Rory O’Neill, who is reporting from the trial in FL, on KFI AM640 in Los Angeles and he is reporting that Serino is going to testify on Monday that he recommended a Manslaughter charge. I was going to ask if that was true, and now I see this post. WTH?
Log in to Reply
0
4
Browndog | July 1, 2013 at 8:25 pm
Remember also, that the Police Chief got ran out of town on a rail for not charging Zimmerman, and Angela Corey impugned the integrity of the Sanford Police Dept..
…yet the State calls the boys in blue (yea, and women) to testify–basically against their own police work, and their former chief.
Brilliant.
Log in to Reply
0
1
dms | July 1, 2013 at 8:27 pm
i believe gz version of what happened except for this:
i believe he was on nieghborhood watch, not going to the store. And also, i believe he got out of the truck to keep tabs on tm, not look for a street sign, however, no way was he looking for a confrontation. that’s just retarded. and of course, i could be wrong.
Log in to Reply
0
2
Humphreys Executor | July 1, 2013 at 8:45 pm
When you listen to Zimmerman’s call to the police, you hear how utterly helpless and confused he is in articulating where he is. It’s kind a strange for a neighborhood watch guy but it totally fits with the rest of his story. I know there are places in my home town I can easily find but I’d be darned if I could give directions on how to get there.
Log in to Reply
0
0
Aussie | July 1, 2013 at 8:56 pm
yes you are wrong. ZM was going to the store. Neighbourhood watch does not require patrols. It means looking out and being aware of the environment.
Log in to Reply
0
2
swimmerbhs | July 1, 2013 at 8:30 pm
Andrew, I have just recently stumbled on the blog by the way of mike danials blog. I am pro Zimmerman all the way and just wanted to say you are doing a fantastic job. I would also buy the book if it was on itunes or kindle or even pdf as i do have learning disabilities. but i wanted to ask your opinion at one of are many statutes. we have a statute for use of force by the aggressor. He was not committed a force able felony and he did not provoke the attack. Could he also use this;
776.041 Use of force by aggressor.—The justification described in the preceding sections of this chapter is not available to a person who:
(1) Is attempting to commit, committing, or escaping after the commission of, a forcible felony; or
(2) Initially provokes the use of force against himself or herself, unless:
(a) Such force is so great that the person reasonably believes that he or she is in imminent danger of death or great bodily harm and that he or she has exhausted every reasonable means to escape such danger other than the use of force which is likely to cause death or great bodily harm to the assailant; or
(b) In good faith, the person withdraws from physical contact with the assailant and indicates clearly to the assailant that he or she desires to withdraw and terminate the use of force, but the assailant continues or resumes the use of force.
Log in to Reply
0
1
Goetz von Berlichingen | July 1, 2013 at 8:43 pm
Swimmer, check the archives. He has addressed this many times in the past week. Lots of good discussion, too. Very informative.
Log in to Reply
0
1
swimmerbhs | July 1, 2013 at 8:54 pm
Can you point me to an article? as i was trying to look through and catch up with his stuff but he has alot of articles and a lot of comments to go through.
Log in to Reply
0
2
styro1 | July 1, 2013 at 8:31 pm
For those interested Jeralyn over at Talk Left has a great article about TM’s complete cell phone records just released by the court. It seems there’s a full minute between RJ hanging up phone and the fatal shot and some other tidbits thats come to light.
talkleft.com
Log in to Reply
0
2
Mrs. Leroy Goldberg | July 1, 2013 at 8:36 pm
The police chief who was run out of town is counting his blessings.
Florida is going to have to deal with an acquittal, look for the Rachel crowd and their social media to take action.
Why is the 911 call not being released in the case of the white guy on I4 who was shot and killed between Orlando and Tampa?
Log in to Reply
0
0
Mika-Samy | July 1, 2013 at 8:37 pm
I have a question for Andrew (or anyone else in this Forum who knows the answer) … media is still repeating that “the dispatcher told Z to not follow M and to stay in his truck.” I saw an article on this somewhere that I can’t find that Z replied “OK” to the dispatcher and was returning to his truck when Martin accosted him. Andrew do you know if this is true (or did anyone else see this)? If so, the media, INCLUDING BILL O’REILLY, needs to stop saying this!
Log in to Reply
0
2
Goetz von Berlichingen | July 1, 2013 at 8:48 pm
Read the transcripts of the NEN call. He was not told to stay. And he was not talking with anyone who had the power to compel him to do so had it been said.
Log in to Reply
0
2
Humphreys Executor | July 1, 2013 at 8:50 pm
As Churchill said: “A lie can get half way around the world before the truth can even get its boots on.”
Log in to Reply
0
1
dms | July 1, 2013 at 8:51 pm
that was confirmed in the call he made to dispatcher. you could tell then he was out of his truck
Log in to Reply
0
0
Goetz von Berlichingen | July 1, 2013 at 8:58 pm
what was confirmed? Please clarify your statement. I find it ambiguous.
thanks
GvB
Log in to Reply
0
0
Aussie | July 1, 2013 at 9:00 pm
Yes on the original call, the one that has not been tampered with, George did say ok. He was on his way to his truck when he was accosted by TM.
Log in to Reply
0
3
txantimedia | July 1, 2013 at 8:37 pm
Andrew, I sat in stunned disbelief through Serino’s testimony. I thought he would be antagonistic toward the defense based on his questioning of Zimmerman. I now think he’s extremely pissed about the way things have gone and eager to help the defense in any way he can.
I cannot WAIT for BDLR’s redirect. Spittle will be flying. It’s going to be glorious. Serino just destroyed whatever remnants were left of the State’s case.
Log in to Reply
0
3
Humphreys Executor | July 1, 2013 at 8:37 pm
Serino is like a detective out of central casting. I read the transcript of the 2/29 interview. He came after Zimmerman hard. I am amazed Zimmerman didn’t lawyer up. I know I would have.
Log in to Reply
0
2
KrazyCrackaEsq | July 1, 2013 at 8:45 pm
Don’t forget the gift that was given by Chris Serino when he said he heard about Zimmerman volunteering with black youths.
Log in to Reply
0
1
Goetz von Berlichingen | July 1, 2013 at 8:52 pm
When did Serino make his “lateral” move to patrol?
And why that happened.
I would not be surprised if this is some of the most satisfactory testimony he has ever given in his life.
Log in to Reply
0
0
Emil de Blatz | July 1, 2013 at 8:58 pm
OK, criminal defense is not my bailiwick. So, after the State rests, the defense moves for a directed verdict, right? How often is that granted? Methinks it is incredibly rare, but has a probability of around .25 at this point.
Log in to Reply
0
0
DizzyMissL | July 1, 2013 at 9:03 pm
If you want the backstory on Serino, including the FBI involvement, you can find it here:
theconservativetreehouse.com
Log in to Reply
0
0
styro1 | July 1, 2013 at 9:07 pm
Think BDLR will come charging out of his chair, arms swinging wildly and frothing at the mouth when it’s his turn on redirect of Serino tomorrow? The 2 Sanford Investigators killed the states case today. I can see why BDLR didn’t put Chris Serino, Doris Singleton, John Good and Jenna Lauer the witnesses who knew the most on the 1st couple of days. The jurors would have wondered why the defense was going first. The prosecution needs to bring this farce to an end or the judge needs to do her job and end this.
Leave a Comment
3.00 / 5 51 / 52 / 53 / 54 / 55 / 5
17 votes, 3.00 avg. rating (61% score)
Support this Blog
One Time Donation
(Any Amount)
 | Monthly Donation
|
Advertise here
blog advertising is good for you
The Latest from College Insurrection
Blogs I Read
HotAir
Facebook blocked Fox News commentator for NRA, Chick-fil-A references
24 minutes Ago
Conservatives4Palin
Andrew C. McCarthy | Shelby and the Left’s False Narrative
35 minutes Ago
Instapundit
NEWS YOU CAN USE: FYI, Happy Ending Massages Are Totally Legal In China….
1 hour Ago
JammieWearingFool
Dominican Cardinal Goes Full Baldwin on New U.S Ambassador
1 hour Ago
American Glob
$100 Million For Obama’s Africa Trip But No Cash For July 4 Fireworks At Military Bases
1 hour Ago
Weasel Zippers
Army Says Gitmo Detainees Won’t Be Force-Fed During Ramadan Fasting Hours…
1 hour Ago
Breitbart
Super Glue could fix Congress
1 hour Ago
Twitchy
In ‘full-on victim mode,’ Edward Snowden issues statement; No new photo, though
2 hours Ago
GayPatriot
Edward Snowden: Pro or con?
2 hours Ago
American Power
Egyptians React to Army's Ultimatum — the Brotherhood is Finished!
2 hours Ago
Blogs to Note
Linking Policy
I like to link to people who link to me. Being linked by me is like getting an Instalanche, only smaller.
Sultan Knish Beldar Saucy American in NZ Black & Right Marathon Pundit Ballotpedia Transterrestial Beat Barack Obama Weasel Times Wake Up America iOwnTheWorld Professor Bainbridge Bear Room Brawl Texans for Palin The Right of a Nation Senator Blutarsky Mark In Spokane Rantburg Valley of the Shadow Hey Jackass Kansas Progress One Big Dog Caroline Glick Radarsite The Coffee Shop IMAO An Israeli Soldier's Mother Likelihood of Success Stately McDaniel Mano Common Cents
Buy a Blogad!
blog advertising is good for you
Blog Store
Your purchases from Amazon.com help support this blog at no extra cost to you.
What They Are Saying About Me
- "Someone with credibility is saying these things and trying to do something. Thank you."
- "'Obtuse' is just about the nicest thing I could say about Jacobson. The problem with being too steeped in any profession is that you run the risk of no longer understanding the difference between reality and your profession's most obscure minutiae."
- "I just wanted to thank you for writing such a great article on your reasons why you voted for John McCain. I wish everyone would have read that article."
- "Jacobson is doing only what other McCain supporters are starting to do, produce these worthless pieces from some narrow perch in order to cover up their own racist bigotry"
- "Cornell and the country need more educators like yourself to keep the flag of reason flying."
- “I take it Jacobson teaches at the cow college part of Cornell, and not the elite section where Coulter attended.”
- "Thank you for speaking out... and I hope you avoid repercussions in 'The People's Republic of Ithaca.'"
- " My Favorite Law Professor"
- "I love Professor Jacobson at Legal Insurrection on any given day, but today I love him like I love Christmas."
- Bill Jacobson is the smartest, best looking and most loved law professor at all of Cornell and his blog is one of the finest out there.
Our Lawyer
Ron Coleman
 
Maintenance by Sound Strategies
© Copyright 2008-2013, Legal Insurrection, All Rights Reserved. |
