Tuesday night review of the Dunn trial

Tuesday, February 11, 2014

Good afternoon:

Final arguments begin tomorrow at 10 am EDT and will last most of the day.

Both sides rested their cases today.

Judge Russell Healey began the day by granting the State’s motion for an order prohibiting the defense from presenting expert testimony regarding acute stress disorder to explain why Michael Dunn did not call 911 to report the shooting. He said it would not be relevant or helpful for the jury to decide whether he killed Jordan Davis in self-defense.

Michael Dunn testified and it was a disaster.

The State rebutted his testimony with his fiancee Rhonda Raurer, who denied that he ever told her that the boys in the vehicle had a weapon. She also contradicted his claim that he initiated contact with law enforcement after the shooting by calling a neighbor who is a federal law enforcement official.

The State also played a 45-minute video of detectives Musser and Oliver interviewing Dunn to show that they did not pressure him into giving them a statement.

What did y’all think of today’s dramatic testimony and what do you think the jury will decide?

______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

We desperately need donations to keep going. Please donate today.

94 Responses to Tuesday night review of the Dunn trial

  1. YQ says:

    I just can’t understand how in the world that there are still people who excuse Dunn’s behavior. Who are these people that see it within reason to believe that the patrons of the SUV were armed, that Jordan Davis showed 4 inches of a barrel of a shotgun through a tinted window??? That’s hard to believe. Would it not be just as much of a risk of death for Davis to show his gun without firing? After all, you wouldn’t show it unless you were going to use it… and that leads me to a part of Dunn’s testimony where he says he shows them that he was strapped with the Taurus 9mm. When he showed them that he had a gun “also”, did he not think that he could have been shot immediately? In this situation is it believable for anyone with a gun at the ready (who is already threatening the guy) to wait for the guy to go into his glove compartment, get the gun and basically initiate the gun play.

    All of this is telling to me: Dunn knew that those kids didn’t have a gun. The wordplay upset him in the face of his girlfriend (or fiance) and he thought he saw his chance to do something that he could get away with. No mention of the gun until he was already booked, to not even Rhonda whom he had spent the night with at a hotel eating pizzas and celebrating his act of defiance against the “evil thugs”. This guy is absolutely guilty. 100%.

  2. ay2z says:

    Dunn has been sworn in by Judge HEaley for his participation in jury instructions up to page 26 at least.

    They need to add permanent disability, a comma needs to come out, comma makes a difference that will cause reversible error if left in!!

    There is a case (Judge quoted section) that will allow reversible error.

    !st paragraph on pg 28, ….. is at issue for the comma.

    (subject in the line is use of deadly force etc…) Sorry didn’t get the whole sentence.

    ————————————-
    another point being discussed for tweeking.

    Use of deadly force…. Judge worries about the word ‘ONLY’, the way it reads, “Jordan attempted to attempt murder” (Corey thinks this is confusing, Judge tends to agree but Stollo wants it in and says there’s a dozen issues in the way the instructions are as they have it, are already confusing for the jury.)

    Judge says we can olook at it a couple ways, the legal way, or the way in daily sense. So jurors can read it in different ways, including ‘try and kill him’ rather than legal ‘attempted murder’ but really didn’t want to kill him.

    Judge says ‘almost need laypeople on jury instruction committee, to assist and get some perspective for jurors, to seek simpler way to say it, covers the law but simpler way to say it”.

    Corey says if they risk making it simpler, they risk reversible error

    Judge says to all listening including us listening, the judge says even if they all agree the instructions are good, proper, there is no guarantee that the jurors will interpret in the intended way.

    Judge says recently, case in their district, that instructions were not read correctly by jury and (missed details) something about reversed or reversible.

    Justifiable use of Deadly Force —

    “He reasonably believes” is standard instructions, so Stollo wants it left as plural, not as “He reasonably believed” (past tense).

    • ay2z says:

      Judge thinks they need an English major to help out.

      Now it gets complicated and I can’t follow– something to be added ‘permanent disability, permanent disfigurement, and something about ‘deadly weapon’.

      What is, Corry asks, def of ‘deadly weapon’, she doesn’t think that jury can decide a stick or Jordan’s fist is deadly weapon, she wants a definition. Without a definition, Corey worries about what the jury decides is a deadly weapon on their own when they go back, not about what the lawyer can ‘argue’ in closing. Jury goes back and decides a fist is technically or legally a deadly weapon.

  3. ay2z says:

    Vorey just mentioned something for when ‘copies’ (plural) sent back to jury.

    Hope they don’t do the one copy for one lead juror this time.

    They are now going to go back to tweek section on ‘justifiable use of deadly force’ issue, mostly for editing that makes things read smoothly with the changes they made beforehand.

  4. ay2z says:

    now they are nit picking, ustifying text and characters, they decided to “just center em”

    I hope one state lawyer does all the closing for consistency and to adapt to what the defense is going to throw at the jury as evidence that isn’t evidence (in lieu of the failed expert on excuses for not calling police if they are going to downplay the ‘no rush to call police’ idea).

  5. ay2z says:

    Crane, found it! 😉

  6. ay2z says:

    Court has started 9 30 for lawyers and judge to tweek last minute jury instructions.

    Taking out expert witnesses, lawyer talking to jury, and others.

  7. fauxmccoy says:

    so court time is 10 AM tomorrow? i assume the jury instruction portion will begin at 8 EST? does anyone know differently? dang, this is hard for this californian to be alert at that hour.

  8. dianetrotter says:

    Ironic … Fox doesn’t appear to be covering this. They gave so much time to Zimmerman.

    • Malisha says:

      I think Fox paying little attention to this trial may mean that Dunn is going to be convicted. They had advance notice that Fogen was going to walk (as did Jose Baez), so they played it and played it.

  9. Two sides to a story says:

    And . . . if that isn’t enough – here’s a clip from a new, unaired (I think) interview with Fogen on Unavsion. The reporter asks him how it felt to kill someone and he says “Sad. Very sad.” At least he doesn’t do the “duper’s” grin this time – but, oh wait, it’s just a clip, so who knows!

  10. Two sides to a story says:

    And meanwhile, back at the ranch . . . new fight for Fogen, only he’s strangely silent about it so far.

    http://www.phillymag.com/news/2014/02/11/george-zimmerman-fight-march-15/

  11. Michael Dunn Full Police Interview

    • Pat deadder says:

      Crane I just watched the police interview am wondering where is his leg brace.

      • The leg brace that Dunn wore in court was attached by courthouse security officers to limit and control his ability to move in the courtroom. It’s less restrictive and less obvious than leg irons. They attach it in the jail before they take him to court and remove it when they return him to jail.

        He does not normally wear a leg brace and was not wearing one at the Brevard County Sheriff’s Office when JSO detectives Musser and Oliver interrogated him.

        The goal is to balance the need for courthouse security during a trial against a defendant’s right to dignity, to appear normal when the jury is present by wearing civilian clothing and not to be presented as a wild animal chained to keep it from attacking anyone within striking range, including the jurors.

        • Eric says:

          Prof. do you think there will be more letters and jail house calls today?

          • No.

            Both sides have rested their cases, which means both sides have finished presenting their evidence.

            All that remains to be done before the jury gets the case is to settle on a set of jury instructions and for the lawyers to present their final arguments to the jury.

        • Pat deadder says:

          Thank you Professor for answering such a silly question.Hope you’re feeling better.i wouldn’t make a good juror as I thought he wore a brace on his leg because of his motorbike accident when he was young.A little dense but I enjoy the humor here as we’ll as the expertise.

        • J4TMinATL says:

          Interesting

      • Yes, thank you, and Fred explains that in a comment. We believe the leg brace is a movement-restricting device that courthouse security would decide on.

  12. Okay folks, the YouTubes are coming in, better quality now.

    Michael Dunn Trial. Day 5. Part 3. Michael Dunn Takes Stand

  13. Sophia33 says:

    Why is Taffee on HLN? I SOOOOOOO wish I had another news station that was talking about this. I don’t get MSNBC.

  14. lurker says:

    I think that the prosecution tendancy in this case, and in Zimmerman, is to really softpedal the racial motivation. It’s a gamble. You never know what the thinking or experiencesof any individual juror are. It’s a real hot potato. A lot of folks who may not harbor any particular racial animosity may still be uncomfortable with any discussions of race–preferring to believe that all that stuff is behind us. I think Dunn’s racial beliefs are plain enough for any jurors willing to see.

    • Liza says:

      I concur. Thug is the new N-word, just like Richard Sherman said. A black male is a thug to Dunn because he is a black male. Definitely a racial slur.

    • fauxmccoy says:

      lurker, i tend to agree. as a pigment challenged native californian, i have had many opportunities while visiting with my mother’s family in georgia. i find it difficult because i see so much casual racism that not one person in an all white room of 30 or more people seem to notice. if confronted, they would all claim that they were not racist …. and this is family.

      if the prosecution were to really push this agenda, it would challenge jury members on topics that they are not willing to confront and risk alienating them.

      converting the bigot/racist to a worldview of tolerance is a difficult task, i’ve seen it done successfully only a handful of times. yes, i would love to see the end of such ugliness, but i accept the reality that people will believe what they wish. what is critical to me is that the institutional racism in our justice system comes to a screeching halt.

      while i feel quite comfortable saying that dunn and zimmerman are racists and bigots; that is not the crime for which they were charged. what is critical to me is that they are convicted for the crimes they were charged. the more that this happens, the more we will progress as a society so that such crimes will not be tolerated.

  15. Tee says:

    I knew that Zimmerman would get off not because the defense did a wonderful job, but because Bernie was horrible. I kept saying throughout the trial I wouldn’t let him prosecute the person who ran over my bike. Dunn is going to jail he might as get ready to become one of those thugs he like to talk about. I hate it for him, he’s going to need all 6′ 4″ to keep them black thugs off his ass, can you say”protective custody”.

  16. ay2z says:

    “a real, NOT SPECULATIVE nor IMAGINED doubt”

    The big doubt for the jury, is the defendant’s claim of seeing a gun and all of the ‘testimony by Thunderpuppy’ and his witnesses to point out dumbster locations and speculations.

    That rests on how credible they see the defendant, how objective they are in the face of race and bias, to see though the stories and lies and multiple impeachables.

    All these friends of Dunn, and not a single simple friend who is not attached to work and not first a friend of his parents. They had their uses, but a real social,, long time friendship, was never demonstrated. Not hard to wonder why.

    • lurker says:

      And none were black, were they?

      • ay2z says:

        You know, I held my breath when, after the parents aviation community friends etc, were filed in, the next person to be called was Dorrian (Darrian, sp?) Ates. I didn’t remember his name, saw a black male with dreads, friendly smile and thought wow, where did they find this person to fit in with the ‘friends’. Amazed that they didn’t find a black person from work, or anywhere– unless the obvious.

        That aviation community of skeetshooters and breakfast goers and beachfront livers, might just have some association rules. The question for the common law wife of one of the community, was shocked by the state Q about any young black teenagers at their events. Priceless!

        • ay2z says:

          (of course Mr. Ates was a clerk at the Gate station and not associated as a collegue or parent’s friend to call Michael’s own. My apologies to Mr. Ates for the temporary bewilderment)

    • crazy1946 says:

      ay2z: Did you neglect to say that even his own parents did not testify as to what a wonderful and loving son he was? People with overly aggressive personalities seldom have real (close) friends… It is even worse when that person is not only aggressive but a loser as well…

      • ay2z says:

        I surely did! neglect that! Thank you. Maybe someone is cut from the same cloth, or maybe someone knows too much about someone’s drinking habits that might even be a bone fide alcoholic in serious trouble, maybe even to the point of paranoia.

    • Two sides to a story says:

      Was there anyone black at the son’s wedding? I don’t recall seeing anyone in the few pictures that were shown.

  17. J4TMinATL says:

    Jury is getting another 30 pages of instructions with the lesser included charges.

    If convicted of a crime, manslaughter. I’m have serious doubts on a unanimous verdict.

    • J4TMinATL says:

      Also Rhonda wasn’t there in the moment even though she called him out on lies and behavior after the incidence. Not sure if it’s a enough. Only takes one juror to believe he was in fear. And there will be more than one.

      I don’t believe the prosecution nailed anything today (John Guy) as Prof said. I think he failed miserably. Just because they brought Rhonda back in doesn’t make their performance worthy of any praise. And John didn’t get the letters in.

      • Trained Observer says:

        She was with him until just before the moment, heard the shots, and was with him non-stop immediately therafter until he was hauled off.

        It is true that the jury can dumb a conviction down to manslaughter … I don’t believe Dunn was overcharged, but the jury can still put him away for a long, long time without a murder 1 conviction. The fool Fogen jury didn’t get that.

      • Malisha says:

        I was disappointed they did not do more rebuttal on the “character” issue of his being peaceful and “nice.” That was a fertile field they left unplowed.

    • Two sides to a story says:

      I guess I misunderstood lesser charges. I was listening as I worked and I thought they dumped many if not most of the lesser charges. Oops – I remember now, they were mincing words over two types of manslaughter. For some reason I was thinking they’d dumped all manslaughter and were going all or nothing on murder.

      • Trained Observer says:

        No my point is that a jury can opt to convict on a lesser charge when charged with murder one. It’s not a matter of all or nothing.
        But some juries are not bright enough to get that. j

  18. neveragain says:

    Again…thank God for Rhonda’s testimony…is she and Dunn presently living together???.i’m telling u …Dunn was starting to convince me…

  19. neveragain says:

    After looking at the police/detective intorrogation for the first time I understood y Dunn said it was a combative one….they conered him on so many ocasions….for some reason he was able to give alot of explanation to every question asked of him in cross examination on the stand, but the detectives had him speechless and his excuse is that they wete being combative

    • Lynn says:

      You agree that it was combative because he was speechless in the police interrogation yet gave alot of explanation in cross???

      Maybe because he was trying to make up lies on the fly during the police interrogations and he had a year to come up with his coached bu!!sh!t during the cross.

      On CNN this morning, even O’Mara says he sounded coached. He said no one says “imminent” and repeating “waking nightmare” 3 times was very coached.

  20. neveragain says:

    If it had not been for Rhonda’s testimony, I think Dunn would have convinced the jury that he shot in self defence….this is frightening

  21. neveragain says:

    If a guilty verdict is reached it will be because of Rhonda’s testimont…….Zimmerman accoynt of what hapoened just made no sense….but I was actually starting to believe dunn…..rhonda showed him to be a liar over and over….and if he could lie about these things which he had no reason to lie about….such as saying that Rhonda was the one who suggested that he leave the gun in the glove box, he certainlty will have no problem lying about seeing an object that looked like a gun

    • neveragain says:

      But it was shown to the jury that Zimmerman lied about alot of details that he had no reason to lie about….and his story of what took place that night don’t add up….his story is beyond ridiculous, and a jury still found him not guilty…..maybe it will be a hung case in dumms trial….

  22. CNN shooting details brief review:

  23. MICHAEL DUNN MURDER TRIAL DAY 5 02/11/2014 MORNING

    Not great quality. It takes a while to upload these, I assume. I will post better quality as they come up:

  24. Tee says:

    I think that the jury make-up will play a better part in the verdict this time around. There was not one black person on the Zimmerman jury, that means not a soul could see that craziness through the eyes of a young black person. I believe that it will be hard for that jury to come back with a not guilty verdict, he’s going to jail, and his fiancé is the person that will help send him there. I am proud of that lady, she could have lied like the Zimmermans’ but she was honest even when she knew that it would hurt the man she love. Rhonda maybe a crying fool but she has a heart and soul that didn’t allow her to lie totally for a murderer. Truth be told she probably thankful that he’s going to jail, that way she doesn’t have to be with him, probably thanking her lucky stars because it could have been her.

    • Good points Tee, at first she made me angry because I saw the crying and thought that would be accompanied by some made-up story. It was refreshing to see her not change her story.

    • bettykath says:

      Just b/c there are a couple of Black women on the jury, it doesn’t mean that they necessarily empathize with the young men. Based on my interactions with young professional Blacks, some of them will deny their Blackness in the belief it will help them get ahead, or at least help in not holding them back. It’s really an individual thing, as with all groups.

      • roderick2012 says:

        True and none of the three black females have children.

        The problem we have is no one knows who’s on the main jury and who the alternates are.

        Juror 12 bothers me most because he seems as if he could be this case’s Juror B37.

        I just hope he isn’t the foreman.

      • Trained Observer says:

        I do think, however, that a mix of 12 rather than just six women will make for more diverse input during deliberations. All 12 will be well aware of the derision heaped upon the Fogen jury because, in part, they failed to understand the jury instructions and all of their options.

    • concernedczen says:

      I’m guessing she didn’t lie because she didn’t want to be charged with something

      • Two sides to a story says:

        No doubt the jailhouse letters are embarassing too!

      • roderick2012 says:

        ..or it was her passive-aggressive way of breaking up with him.

        I can’t understand why she stayed with this loser after the shooting unless she was afraid he would physically harm her.

        • fauxmccoy says:

          oooh, very interesting. we saw his letters to her while in jail, but did not get to see anything she wrote. your scenario would be the ultimate ‘how i broke up with my creepy ass boyfriend.

          honestly, i do hope that prison life for him puts her on a different path. any woman deserves better.

  25. Jurors. There will be 12 this time because the charge is murder One. Four alternates.

    7 white female single Southside no children retail

    10 female black OrangePark single nursing student

    12 male white Westside married 11 children retired military/ROTC teacher

    18 female white Arlington single no children home health staffer

    23 male white Riverside/Ortega married children-yes DOD contractor

    36 female white Southside married son Account manager

    46 female Asian Southside married no children software programmer

    55 female black Riverside single no children Occupational Therapist

    62 male white Arlington children yes welder

    64 male white Southside married no children software developer

    67 male white/Hispanic Argyle married sons civil service contractor

    70 female white Springfield married daughters Operation rep at bank

    73 female white Southside divorced 3 sons sales

    82 female Asian Baymeadows married daughter 2 sons doctor

    83 female black Arlington single no children telecom specialist

    87 male white Westside married daughter, son retired salesman

    http://www.firstcoastnews.com/story/news/local/michael-dunn-trial/2014/02/05/jury-seated-michael-dunn-trial/5236223/

    • Two sides to a story says:

      I learned the hard way from the Fogen trial (and I watched every minute of jury selection) that making predictions about who would convict and who wouldn’t made a total fool of me. So I abstain!

      Those of you who watched Done’s selection MIGHT have a better idea. There was no equivalent to Rhonda Rouer’s testimony in Fogen’s trial, though. Had Shellie spilled her guts, we might have seen a different outcome.

  26. Two sides to a story says:

    I can only cross my fingers and wait.

    Done – I mean Dunn – with his girlfriend’s help – blew himself up today, but is the jury normal and reasonable or product of a Jim Crowish attitude that still lingers around various parts of the South? Or is that they might be dumb enough to buy Done’s self-defense sob story?

    We shall see.

    Also, it’s my understanding that the prosecution and defense agreed that there are no lesser charges yesterday – did I get that right?

    It’s my understanding that this trial is all or nothing – murder and attempted murder or self-defense.

    • Two sides to a story says:

      I realized I was getting my wires crossed on lesser charges – and commented downthread. I recall now that they were mincing words over two types of manslaughter to get down to one. Always kind of eerie when judges preside over this stuff in conversational tones like they’re discussing the weather.

  27. bettykath says:

    The evidence is in. Let’s hear the closing arguments.

    On another blog, it was explained that the reason the prosecution put on all of fogen’s statements, videos, etc. was b/c of Liar John. He claimed that the prosecution was required to him on. Apparently they weren’t allowed to impeach their own witness, so Liar John’s account was not challenged and became a key point in the defense. Is it true that the prosecution was required to put Liar John on the stand and couldn’t impeach him with his conflicting statements?

    • neveragain says:

      They put up his videos at the begining of the trial because they did not want him to take the stand….if they did not show the videos..Zimmerman would have had no choice but to take the stand to say why he shot in self defence….and john should NT have been the state’s witness….the defence would have definitely made him their witness….the Zimmerman trial was about protecting the SPD….

      • bettykath says:

        I’m not looking for speculations about prosecution motive. I’m looking for the rules of witnesses/evidence. Was the prosecution required to put Liar John on the stand? If so, why was Jon who also was an eye and ear witness not called as a witness as well?

        • concernedczen says:

          of course the prosecution was not required to put John on the stand. They did not put a lot of neighbor witnesses who saw various things.

  28. racerrodig says:

    It’s pretty obvious that in any other state, he’ll be convicted. That being said, his testimony was a major train wreck. A slow, deliberate ruination. Then they called the love of his life, handed her the lid to his coffin. a handful of nails and a hammer.

    Away she banged with a very careful and measured lid installation. It’s almost as if she was granted immunity for her testimony but I’m sure we’d know that if it’s not actually the law in fact.

    Musser and Oliver’s interview, which we knew a year ago, were death blows. It’s a shame they didn’t show the end of Part II where Duhnnn says..I just told you I was scared to death and you’re treating this like a murder.

    I belief if the jury heard that, a guilty verdict would be reached in record time.

    Then he went down the “I didn’t want any trouble” road. Really ??
    Define trouble. Oh, he said he had new puppy, which as we all know is the driving factor here.

    He never had an answer to the most basic problem of opening fire yet nobody fired that stick, er, shotgun at him. What, when he pulled his Taurus out, one of the kids said “Ixnay the gun” Sure….

    His shotgun / stick malarkey was dissected repeatedly by the detectives. About the 3rd or 4th time Duhhnnn said to the effect “I assumed….in my mind” to which det. Oliver said there you go with that assumption again and stated even in police training we’re taught to take cover and yet you jumped right into the line of fire….that’s a problem, Duuhhnnn had no new rebuttal.

    “In my mind” Michael Duuhhnnn

    “I don’t know” Jeff Spicoli

    Famous quotes……same meaning here.

    I can’t fathom him getting off.

  29. Rachael says:

    One thing I’m REALLY glad of is that the judge did not allow expert testimony regarding acute stress disorder to explain why Michael Dunn did not call 911 to report the shooting. That would set a VERY bad precedent. It is already bad enough that someone can shoot someone because they “felt” they were in fear for their life (if the person they are shooting is black because we all know they are dangerous thugs). But now if you can shoot someone, knock a kid over on a bicycle with your car (especially if you are drunk), run over a dog, any number of things and not have to report it right away because you are suffering from an “acute stress disorder” by doing so…OMG I am so glad it was not allowed.

    • I agree.

      Acute stress disorder would become an excuse for fleeing the scene of a crime and eating pizzas.

      • concernedczen says:

        If it was judge Nelson, she would have allowed it in. She allowed a guy with an associates degree to pretend to be an expert in physics, psychology, etc. She allowed a lying old man to pretend to be an expert in voice recognition based on his serving as a medic in the army.

      • ay2z says:

        But on the bright side, there IS readily available treatment. A solo sized rum and coke to chase the pizza.

      • Malisha says:

        Now wait a minute, Professor: Acute Stress Disorder IS an excuse for eating pizzas. It’s just not an excuse for killing and fleeing the scene of the crime! But eating pizzas — yes — definitely, and I am a qualified expert to testify to THAT! 😀

  30. crazy1946 says:

    IMO there is an 60/40 chance of conviction of 1st degree murder, there is a 80/20 chance of a conviction of a lesser charge. Then again this trial is taking place in Florida, the home of the racist loving jury’s!

    • CessnaDriver says:

      I don’t have any real hope with a FL jury selected by a republican judge and prosecutor. They will use the same excuse: they didn’t put on a full case because the jury was sequestered, yada yada.

      • crazy1946 says:

        CessnaDriver, while I tend to agree with you somewhat, I am trying my best to keep politics out of this discussion. I don’t think any party has full ownership of racist ideals. Hate is hate regardless of the color of skin, religion or lack there of, political membership or physical location. I simply feel Florida has an overabundance of people with racism living with in their minds…

        • Drew says:

          Republicans and right-wingers thrive on racist, dog-whistle nonsense and policies that demonize the poor (and often, minorities).

          To say otherwise is being willfully naive.

          • crazy1946 says:

            Drew, While you may be somewhat correct, IMO this is not the time nor the place to have a political discussion about which party is the most racist. Perhaps at some point in the future the Professor might open a discussion on that subject, but until then I would respectfully suggest we not go there…

        • a2nite says:

          I disagree because race & politics are in almost everything. The Rethug party enacted SYG laws. White men have always been able to kill us & get away with murder. The evil racist radical Rethug party caters to white supremacy & victimhood ever since evil rotten Ronnie began his campaign for POTUS. Since his election race relations have gotten worse as has the economy. This is on purpose go keep us divided while greedy rotten rich rob & pillage. Most of the problems here are caused by & solved by politics. This trial is a manifestation of a fundamental lack of respect for human rights in America, IMO.

          • crazy1946 says:

            a2nite, I apologize for not responding earlier, but I have been out almost all day and did not have an opportunity to… Every point you make is valid and I find no disagreement, with any of your points except that this is the time and place to have an argument on your points. The problem is simple, we have no point of disagreement and we would have to invite someone else to represent the opposing view point, and there are few on this blog that would be able to effectively argue that viewpoint. Perhaps at a later date some one will come on board to encourage debate… Let’s just hope the jury is free of racial bias in this case, it seems that the prosecution has done a pretty good job, unlike in the TM trial….

      • kllypyn says:

        .They should always put on a full case whether the jury is sequestered or not. this is not a civil case. A teenage boy is dead because of this man. Is the why they failed to mention there most damaging evidence in the Zimmerman trail. Is that why they let the defense get away with putting the victim on trial?

      • Good point, CessnaDriver.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: