06-22-2013, 11:40 AM
(06-21-2013, 10:35 PM)Adub Wrote: I am going to watch opening and closing statements. Otherwise, I am going to try to ignore the trial.
I have read all of the discovery by the state. The state has good solid evidence that GZ is a big fat liar.
So, Nelson ruled on Friday that the state can refer to Zimmerman as a"wanna-be cop" and a "vigilante". (I thought she might ban both of those descriptions.)
Prosecutors can also state that George "confronted" Trayvon and that George "profiled" Trayvon. (No surprise there.)
However, prosecutors are to avoid stating that George "racially profiled" Travyon.
Nelson still hasn't ruled on whether the voice recognition technology and state expert witnesses will be allowed at trial. That decision is expected on Monday.
I think that jury composition could be a bigger issue for the state than do you, Adub, though I agree with you and F.U. that if the evidence is strong enough and clearly presented, it shouldn't matter.
If a lot of the evidence remains open to interpretation however, the jurors' life experiences/views could be a very big deal in deliberations. Imo, this jury composition makes it even more critical that the forensic witnesses and testimony be really tight, with definitive conclusions that remain solid under cross-examination.
With this particular jury, If I'm the prosecutor, I'm working my opening statement to revolve around the theme that Trayvon Martin was a "son" who was taken from him parents wrongly and prematurely. I'm also making sure that Trayvon's parents, Sebrina and Tracy, are well prepared for their testimony and not afraid to show raw emotion on the stand.
Monday opening statements will be very interesting...