General Discussion

wercal

(1,370 posts)

81. Hell, I've seen objections during jury selection

Wed Jun 26, 2013, 04:07 PM

Jun 2013

But you're right, I just don't understand.

And there was that little bit about the week long period where the defense and the prosecution and the judge hashed out exactly what was and wasn't allowed in opening arguments.

But I guess this just slipped through the cracks.

Cannot edit, recommend, or reply in locked discussions

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

212 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

This message was self-deleted by its author [View all] ZRT2209 Jun 2013 OP

The photos are haunting wercal Jun 2013 #1

If Martin had been repeatedly bashing Zimmerman's head against the pavement, winter is coming Jun 2013 #3

Are you sayimg they didn't have a fight? wercal Jun 2013 #5

I'm saying the altercation couldn't have lasted very long after Zimmerman started bleeding. n/t winter is coming Jun 2013 #6

Not the kind of fight that would have warranted the big guy using a gun against a teen. n/t pnwmom Jun 2013 #133

Umm, it wasn't DNA that killed Trayvon...it was a bullet! kelliekat44 Jun 2013 #178

GZ DNA on TM and vise versa ErikwithaK Jun 2013 #211

Or under Trayvon's fingernails. pacalo Jun 2013 #7

DNA testing is an amplification technique... targetpractice Jun 2013 #4

Cells, not molecules. N/T GreenStormCloud Jun 2013 #18

No, it's molecules that are amplified by PCR. DNA molecules are contained within the nuclei of cells piedmont Jun 2013 #109

And it is cells, not bare DNA, that are left behind. GreenStormCloud Jun 2013 #161

No one said anything about bare DNA. piedmont Jun 2013 #164

actually, dna is molecules and you amplify the molecules of dna magical thyme Jun 2013 #113

But you don't shed bare DNA, you shed CELLS. N/T GreenStormCloud Jun 2013 #162

I wrote "you need to FIND cells," but really you are finding the dna inside the cells magical thyme Jun 2013 #172

If I remember the autopsy report correctly, the blood under zimmy's nose came, not from a hit niyad Jun 2013 #8

I don't know anything about that wercal Jun 2013 #10

because, according to zimmy, that violent little punk (also known as the person he was stalking) niyad Jun 2013 #11

None of that explains wercal Jun 2013 #13

seriously? I just explained why, and you STILL don't understand it? wow. niyad Jun 2013 #15

No I still don't understand wercal Jun 2013 #16

it was explained, cannot help if you do not understand. niyad Jun 2013 #21

I don't understand either. Zimmerman's not dead. Why would the autopsy mention him? nolabear Jun 2013 #24

He is asking hooptie Jun 2013 #25

well, no it wasn't explained. NM_Birder Jun 2013 #26

Not explained one bit wercal Jun 2013 #28

I think poster is referring to the DNA report. JaneyVee Jun 2013 #44

Because in homicides, the Medical Examiner/Coroner is also collecting forensic evidence. Melinda Jun 2013 #58

yeah, why would an autopsy on the deceased, talk about the murderer? It wouldn't. graham4anything Jun 2013 #55

Autopsy JDPriestly Jun 2013 #140

I am wondering auntsue Jun 2013 #160

There's zimmerman blood on zimmermans gun, he hit himself with his own gun uponit7771 Jun 2013 #29

Yup Politicalboi Jun 2013 #53

The cut on his knuckle could have come from his hand hitting the sidewalk Zoeisright Jun 2013 #14

Ok I'll bite...how did Zimmermqn's nose get bloodied? wercal Jun 2013 #17

His own gun did that Politicalboi Jun 2013 #54

So Zimmerman was crouching down, his nose at the level of Martin's chest? wercal Jun 2013 #59

what part of "no DNA" are you failing to comprehend? noiretextatique Jun 2013 #77

Said poster was just pretending opening arguments Rex Jun 2013 #79

indeed...we need a better quality of troll noiretextatique Jun 2013 #90

Now it is about what was hashed out before the case went to court. Rex Jun 2013 #92

good...not only as asshole noiretextatique Jun 2013 #187

Ah - a CSI Expert wercal Jun 2013 #93

lack of DNA on his hands raises questions about other parts of Zimmerman's story magical thyme Jun 2013 #129

according to this person noiretextatique Jun 2013 #188

I think you are incorrect -- in opening statement prosecution raised doubt specifically about Voice for Peace Jun 2013 #150

Zimmerman says he was on his back when he shot Martin magical thyme Jun 2013 #126

There was no "cut" on TM's knuckle, there was a "small abrasion" on his left ring finger.... uponit7771 Jun 2013 #30

Well....how did Zimmerman's nose get bloodied? wercal Jun 2013 #33

I bloodied my own nose once on the door frame getting out of the car too quickly LanternWaste Jun 2013 #38

I see - A car door hit him in the face wercal Jun 2013 #47

what part of no DNA found on martin's hands are you failing to grasp? noiretextatique Jun 2013 #94

no, any reasonable person does NOT necessarily agree with your point of view. Voice for Peace Jun 2013 #151

The same question can be asked about his own gun!!! Achoms razor comes into effect now... uponit7771 Jun 2013 #42

Occam's Razor? wercal Jun 2013 #45

Maybe he smacked his nose on TM's body or on the ground as they were wrestling around. uppityperson Jun 2013 #65

I am going to repeat this again wercal Jun 2013 #67

You mean the defense let the prosecution make their opening statement? Rex Jun 2013 #69

Without making an objection - yes wercal Jun 2013 #71

LOL! *Chrickets* Rex Jun 2013 #72

See post 74 wercal Jun 2013 #83

No problem, you got caught making stuff up. Rex Jun 2013 #89

Making stuff up? wercal Jun 2013 #100

Link to "everybody...has accepted this as fact" and no, Opening Statement is not "fact" uppityperson Jun 2013 #105

Ok not everybody wercal Jun 2013 #116

try again -- you presume too much wisdom Voice for Peace Jun 2013 #152

"74. I do not think you understand the difference between opening statements and during testimony"? uppityperson Jun 2013 #95

I do not think you understand the difference between opening statements and during testimony. eom uppityperson Jun 2013 #74

Hell, I've seen objections during jury selection wercal Jun 2013 #81

Yes, there are objections during jury selection as that is different also. Opening statement time uppityperson Jun 2013 #82

I've never read about an objection to the opening statement Rex Jun 2013 #86

Did you read the paper last week? wercal Jun 2013 #102

Opening statements are subjective. Not everything is excluded. They are NOT presentations of uppityperson Jun 2013 #107

Do you want me to keep repeating the same thing? wercal Jun 2013 #112

Read this about Opening Statements. Done with you. uppityperson Jun 2013 #114

So you actually put in bold wercal Jun 2013 #119

Because allegations about Martin's past are irrelevant JDPriestly Jun 2013 #143

Didn't the lawyers spend a week arguing with each other wercal Jun 2013 #96

Or maybe they were sure there is no proof that happened so let the defense claim whatever uppityperson Jun 2013 #98

I think they understand, just don't want to admit to it. Rex Jun 2013 #104

I don't think you understand what lying in court is all about wercal Jun 2013 #115

During the evidence and witness part, yes, they do. During opening statement? Nope. uppityperson Jun 2013 #117

I urge you to take some classes in human communications. Voice for Peace Jun 2013 #154

Zimmerman has said so many things that are not Voice for Peace Jun 2013 #153

I am going to repeat this again. That does not prove how a 17 yr old got an abrasion on his finger. uppityperson Jun 2013 #70

The defense let the prosecutor making their opening statement. Rex Jun 2013 #73

Opening statements are subjective, are telling jurors what they hope to persuade them of. uppityperson Jun 2013 #75

*Crickets* Rex Jun 2013 #76

You must be right wercal Jun 2013 #84

And you know exactly what they hashed out, again with the ambiguous posting. Rex Jun 2013 #91

Well I know with great certainty wercal Jun 2013 #99

They did and yes, they allow subjective stuff in opening statements. It is the ONE time during a uppityperson Jun 2013 #97

Why didn't the defense bring up Martin's twitter feed that mentioned drug use? wercal Jun 2013 #106

Because SOME things were excluded but not ALL things were excluded. uppityperson Jun 2013 #110

why object when it's easy to get the jury to question Zims truthfulness? Voice for Peace Jun 2013 #155

They were arguing very basic considerations like relevancy. JDPriestly Jun 2013 #145

Since you don't appear to have gotten an answer that satisfies you, let me try. last1standing Jun 2013 #130

Thank you for writing all that to him and good luck. uppityperson Jun 2013 #147

thank you!! Voice for Peace Jun 2013 #156

I left DU for four years because I was tire of getting sucked in. last1standing Jun 2013 #170

That "fact" may or may not be in quesition. JDPriestly Jun 2013 #141

in the Prosecution's opening, they said the cut was on his left hand, but he was right-handed. Voice for Peace Jun 2013 #103

If I was being accosted by some one who was in pursuit of me I wouldn't hesitate lumpy Jun 2013 #165

It's not obvious at all that Martin hit Zimmerman yardwork Jun 2013 #23

Well the simplest conclusion is usually the correct conclusion wercal Jun 2013 #32

Except that the cut was on Martin's LEFT hand, and he was RIGHT handed ... Myrina Jun 2013 #35

Have you ever boxed? wercal Jun 2013 #51

Was Trayvon a boxer? Politicalboi Jun 2013 #56

You tell me, after watching this clip wercal Jun 2013 #64

give it up...you'd do better here noiretextatique Jun 2013 #122

We don't know the verbal exchange betreen Z and M unfortunately, if any. lumpy Jun 2013 #167

Uh, no. I haven't. Myrina Jun 2013 #61

No not at all wercal Jun 2013 #66

"believed to be Martin" I object to your facts Voice for Peace Jun 2013 #174

Go ahead and object wercal Jun 2013 #175

I'm pretty sure that 'evidence' was disallowed Voice for Peace Jun 2013 #176

Doesn't matter one bit if it was disallowed wercal Jun 2013 #177

no, the thread has been about how sketchy Zimmerman's claims are, on account of the ACTUAL evidence. Voice for Peace Jun 2013 #179

Oh really wercal Jun 2013 #181

what is your agenda? Voice for Peace Jun 2013 #186

You do understand that the burden of proof is not on Zimmerman, right? wercal Jun 2013 #189

Defender of the Zimmy DainBramaged Jun 2013 #190

I guess the poor guy needs somebody who loves him... it's not looking good for him in the courtroom. Voice for Peace Jun 2013 #194

and you have proved that Trayvon punched George's noze, if only people would open their eyes!!!! Voice for Peace Jun 2013 #192

No I haven't proven it... wercal Jun 2013 #198

so you think Zimmerman shot him in self-defense Voice for Peace Jun 2013 #200

It really doesn't matter what I think wercal Jun 2013 #202

ok I got a grip and we see things differently. Voice for Peace Jun 2013 #206

You are arguing with the Defender of the Zimmy DainBramaged Jun 2013 #191

I know.. I have allowed myself to get sucked into this fruitless loop. Voice for Peace Jun 2013 #193

We figured this one out yesterday DainBramaged Jun 2013 #195

aha... thanks for the insight Voice for Peace Jun 2013 #196

You have no understanding of SYG laws wercal Jun 2013 #199

(sigh) DainBramaged Jun 2013 #201

Cute picture wercal Jun 2013 #203

I have no interest in satisfying your banal desire to prove us Liburals wrong on a single point DainBramaged Jun 2013 #204

So now that you're wrong about SYG... wercal Jun 2013 #205

Martin did NOT...NOT have a cut on his hand. He had a "small abrasion" on his LEFT ring finger uponit7771 Jun 2013 #41

Ok - an abraision is actually more indicative of a punch than a cut wercal Jun 2013 #50

but if the abrasion was from a punch wouldn't Zimmerman's DNA be in that abrasion? liberal_at_heart Jun 2013 #52

When did the police look for DNA? wercal Jun 2013 #57

the medical examiner tested martin's hands for DNA noiretextatique Jun 2013 #123

And you are trying to defend Zimmerman why? DainBramaged Jun 2013 #43

Beep Beep Strawman Alert wercal Jun 2013 #48

Wow how lawyeriffic of you..... DainBramaged Jun 2013 #49

I've started to wonder that same thing ... Myrina Jun 2013 #62

Yeah, but it's fun discussing nuk nuks with him.... DainBramaged Jun 2013 #63

the same reason why others are defending zimmerman noiretextatique Jun 2013 #124

my understanding is a small cut on his ring or little finger on his non-dominant hand Voice for Peace Jun 2013 #101

Stand up wercal Jun 2013 #111

doesn't sound as feasible to me but maybe you're right and I guess we'll never know Voice for Peace Jun 2013 #120

Just go to youtube and watch a boxing match wercal Jun 2013 #121

was Trayvon a trained boxer? Voice for Peace Jun 2013 #128

I've posted a fight video elsewhere on this thread wercal Jun 2013 #134

No. However, Zimmerman WAS trained in MMA (mixed martial arts)fighting techniques uppityperson Jun 2013 #148

complete fantasy, per usual noiretextatique Jun 2013 #125

Its how every boxer on the planet boxes wercal Jun 2013 #132

Glad you are starting to recognize that. eom uppityperson Jun 2013 #149

This was hardly a boxing match. Does it really matter, in this case, whether lumpy Jun 2013 #168

was trayvon martin a boxer? noiretextatique Jun 2013 #182

Are u a fighter? bravenak Jun 2013 #158

Yes I used to box wercal Jun 2013 #166

I no longer have to worry about fighting. bravenak Jun 2013 #169

Zimmerman claimed that Martin smothered him with his hand magical thyme Jun 2013 #118

Zimmerman is going to have a big problem with that statement wercal Jun 2013 #131

IIRC, none of Martin's dna was found on Zimmerman's gun magical thyme Jun 2013 #135

Your last sentence was brought up by the prosecution during opening arguments wercal Jun 2013 #136

I don't think it matters that Martin was on top... magical thyme Jun 2013 #138

I thought about getting NSA data before wercal Jun 2013 #139

I was beaned by an icicle 2 years ago magical thyme Jun 2013 #144

another of your ridiculous claims noiretextatique Jun 2013 #207

I've only got bits and pieces of the trial today wercal Jun 2013 #208

Wow, that's quite an article.. pipoman Jun 2013 #2

police officer says martin was FACE DOWN with his hands underneath him--there is NO WAY he could niyad Jun 2013 #9

His position at death says nothing about what he was doing a few seconds before. N/T GreenStormCloud Jun 2013 #19

riggght--so a few seconds before, he was on top of zimmy, pummeling him, and zimmy manages to flip niyad Jun 2013 #20

flip him over??? GreenStormCloud Jun 2013 #22

The bullet entrance wound NM_Birder Jun 2013 #27

WORSE!! Z shoots TM then claims he doesn't know how TM got on his face!! In the Video statement uponit7771 Jun 2013 #31

Didn't TM say something along the line of "you got me" according to Zimmy? vague recollection uppityperson Jun 2013 #68

That was an excellent article. Thank you. nt msanthrope Jun 2013 #12

Are there really Zimmerman defenders in this thread? DainBramaged Jun 2013 #34

It Appears So n/t HangOnKids Jun 2013 #36

That tells you they aren't from around here....... DainBramaged Jun 2013 #37

Their playground is like a giant litter box HangOnKids Jun 2013 #39

I'm so stealing your line! displacedtexan Jun 2013 #197

Good way to tell if DU is fud ran....wingers stay away from this little bit of evidence thuogh uponit7771 Jun 2013 #40

yes...alll with low post counts noiretextatique Jun 2013 #78

They are so obvious......why do they think they will change the trial outcome posting here? DainBramaged Jun 2013 #108

we sure as hell do noiretextatique Jun 2013 #127

They usually start in RBKA nut land and land here to ry and play smart DainBramaged Jun 2013 #137

that is very interesting. How do you get in a physical struggle with someone, get bloodied and liberal_at_heart Jun 2013 #46

because: zimmerman lied noiretextatique Jun 2013 #80

YEP. Rex Jun 2013 #60

Did he just try to object to his own question?! uponit7771 Jun 2013 #85

the defense attorney doesn't seem very bright eom noiretextatique Jun 2013 #88

i think zimmerman is going to be convicted noiretextatique Jun 2013 #87

Yes, and Rachel Jeantel come across as a credible, JimDandy Jun 2013 #142

I surely hope you're right, but I have a bad feeling about it burnodo Jun 2013 #185

What is the story in so far as Martin's DNA on Zimmerman? JDPriestly Jun 2013 #146

This is the part I need explained too...from that evidence alone it seems Z should take a plea uponit7771 Jun 2013 #159

i may be wrong, but i am not sure if he was tested noiretextatique Jun 2013 #183

Including his hands? So Trevon couldn't have smashed his head into the sidewalk? Motown_Johnny Jun 2013 #157

correct. which mean zimmerman is a liar noiretextatique Jun 2013 #184

Not sure what that means, since they clearly got into a tussle. There should be DNA on BOTH of them. Honeycombe8 Jun 2013 #163

Zimmerman has a cold, brooding demeanor AgingAmerican Jun 2013 #171

this proves he wasn't even there Enrique Jun 2013 #173

LOL!!! nt kelliekat44 Jun 2013 #180

You're wrong ErikwithaK Jun 2013 #209

Interesting, let me copy/paste the relevant bits for others uppityperson Jun 2013 #210

I am reposting that as its own post as I haven't seen it before. Thanks. uppityperson Jun 2013 #212