Zimmerman: Standard Objections on Direct and Cross Examination at Trial

Time for a change of pace.

In today’s post, I am going to provide you with a description of direct and cross examination during the prosecutor’s case in chief together with a list of the standard objections that you are likely to hear during the trial. I will cover the defense case in tomorrow’s post.

After opening statements, the prosecution will present its case in chief and rest when it’s done. To survive a defense motion to dismiss after it rests, the prosecution must have presented legally sufficient evidence to support its case.

The legal test for legally sufficient, or substantial evidence as it is called, requires the trial court to assume for purposes of the motion that all of the evidence presented by the prosecution is true.

The trial court must then decide whether that evidence would disprove each element of self-defense and establish each element of M2.

If the answer is yes, the trial court will deny the motion to dismiss.

If the answer is no, it will grant it.

These motions are rarely ever granted. They are routinely made without argument in order to preserve the argument for an appeal. Therefore, do not be surprised by such a defense motion or expect it to be granted.

The prosecution will present its case through the testimony of its witnesses. After a witness is sworn, the prosecutor will question the witness until finished. This is called direct examination.

With rare exceptions, the prosecutor will not be permitted to ask a leading question. A leading question seeks a yes or no answer. For example, the prosecutor might ask, “You saw the defendant straddling Trayvon, didn’t you?

Notice that, in effect, the prosecutor is testifying and the witness is agreeing or disagreeing as the case may be.

If this happens, the defense attorney will object on the ground that the prosecutor is leading the witness. The judge should sustain or grant objections to leading questions on direct examination.

Notice that I qualified the rule when I said, “With rare exceptions, the prosecutor will not be permitted to ask a leading question.” The rare exceptions are set-up questions. For example,

“Mr. Slade, I direct your attention to Sunday evening, February 26th, 2012, between the hours of 7 and 8 pm. You were at home at RATL during that period, weren’t you?

After the witness says, “Yes,” the prosecutor asks another leading question to set the scene.

“Did there come a time when you heard loud voices outside your home?”

After the witness answers “Yes,” the prosecutor switches to a non-leading question like this,

“Please tell the ladies and gentlemen of the jury what you heard.”

The witness then begins narrating his answer.

You may hear the defense attorney object stating,

“I object to the narrative form of the testimony.”

The judge should sustain the objection and ask the prosecutor to pose specific questions

Direct examination usually elicits answers to questions like, who, what, where, and when.

The goal of direct examination is to set the table with leading questions to focus the attention of the witness on a subject, event or document and have them tell their story in their own words with an occasional nudge to keep the testimony focused and on track.

You may hear an occasional objection to the relevancy of a question. Relevance is determined by the matters at issue in a case. The big issue in the case is whether the prosecution can disprove the elements of self-defense and prove the elements of murder 2.

Evidence is relevant if it tends to prove or disprove an element or issue in the case.

Relevant evidence is admissible subject to certain exceptions such as uncharged misconduct, character evidence, prior criminal convictions, and hearsay. I have covered those subjects in previous articles.

When the prosecution completes the direct examination of the witness, the defense attorney has an opportunity to cross examine the witness.

The major difference between direct and cross examination is that leading questions are permissible. In fact, they are not only permissible, they are the preferred way to cross examine a witness.

The ideal cross examination limits the witness to yes or no answers. The defense lawyer knows exactly what information he or she wants to elicit from the witness and if the answer is contrary to the expected answer, the lawyer is ready to impeach the witness to get the expected answer.

The usual way this is accomplished is to confront the witness with a prior inconsistent statement. Here is an example.

Q: Mr. Slade, you testified on direct that the traffic light was red when my client entered the intersection, didn’t you?

A: Yes, I did.

Q: Do you recall when I took your deposition in the prosecutor’s office on June 16th of this year?

A: Yes.

Q: You were under oath, weren’t you?

A: Yes.

Q: The prosecutor was present right?

A: Yes.

Q: Do you recall me asking the following question and you giving the following answer?

Q: You did not actually notice what color the light was when my client entered the intersection, did you?

You answered my question, Yes, didn’t you?

A: Yes.

A skilled cross examiner never asks the witness to explain his answer. Instead, he moves on to the next subject or ends the cross.

A skilled cross examiner never asks a question, if he does not know the answer and he never permits a witness to lapse into a narrative or retell their story.

The scope of cross examination is determined by the subject matter covered on direct. If the defense attorney asks a question regarding subject matter not covered on direct, you will probably hear the prosecutor object that the question exceeds the scope. The judge will sustain those objections.

The prosecutor may question the witness on redirect after the defense attorney is done. You might expect the prosecutor to attempt to rehabilitate his witness in the example just provided. Should he attempt to do so, he will have to do it by asking non-leading questions.

The scope of redirect is determined by the subject matter covered on cross.

Redirect can lead to recross and so on until both parties are finished with the witness.

Tomorrow, we will take a look at the defense case.

101 Responses to Zimmerman: Standard Objections on Direct and Cross Examination at Trial

  1. Lonnie Starr says:

    @LLMPapa: Did you find my take on the swale/FT cut through persuasive? Or do you see other issues that need to be addressed? This has been a “sticking point” since the early days on the Bcclist. I’d like to see everyone on the same page if possible. Thanks.

  2. PYorck says:

    Osterman has said various things that contradict GZ’s statements or that would box him in.

    Let’s say the prosecution calls him and questions him about those things. What happens if he starts backpedaling? He can claim that he embellished things to spice up the book, that he isn’t quite sure what exactly GZ told him or that parts are his own inferences.

    What would be the (perceived) result for the prosecution? Neutral, because they are where they would have been without calling him, or negative, because they called a witness and failed to get anything useful out of him?

    • I don’t believe they will put Osterman on the stand because he will be hostile and unpredictable. They don’t need him to prove their case. Just because he is on the witness list and the book is on the exhibit list does not mean they will call him or place the book in evidence.

  3. TruthBTold says:


  4. Xena says:

    I just watched the defense opening statement in Florida v. Goodman. My first impression is that defense attorney Roy Black was testifying for his client. When he started talking about what a good person Goodman is, the prosecutor went into action with objections, mostly based on argumentative. It got so bad that the counselors had to approach the bench.

    I couldn’t help but think that if MOM is going to give the jury GZ’s story from the beginning, that he will effectively confirm that GZ wrongfully profiled Trayvon, pursued him based on that profile, and ultimately killed him.

  5. katieunc says:

    Link below is Robert Zimmerman. I wonder if this letter was typed up by the MO group. How insincere. Professor I. Would love to have your take on all of the people speaking on behalf of GZ. Obviously this lastest comment by Robert Zimmerman must have been approved by MO.


    • cielo62 says:

      Did you notice that RZs “apology” is prefaced by legal CYA? How pathetic.

    • Malisha says:

      GZ’s brother wrote that letter in Zimmerspeak. I think a comprehensible “simultaneous translation” of this Zimmerspeak should read:

      “Don’t try to use this against us, but frankly, we’re so wonderful that we prayed for the little thug anyway since he did die and all; so get over it.”

      Remember what Osama Bin Laden’s brother said after 911? “We believe that all innocent life is precious!” That’s “innocent life” that was precious, and of course, Bin Laden would be the one to decide who, among the dead of 9/11, was “innocent” — and maybe none was! A “qualified immunity apology,” the kind designed to APPEAR to say “sorry” but that really say: GET OVER IT. I DID WHAT I HAD A RIGHT TO DO. Little qualifiers, equivocal statements, self-serving and self-righteous drivel, blah blah blah, they mean:

      “I had every right to kill someone I think did not deserve to live.”

      How very Zimmermanesque.

    • Lonnie Starr says:

      To which the reply should be: “Tell that to the conservative treehouse!”

      And to Osterman: “Why did you assist taking away the truck that could have helped prove GZ innocent? Is it possible you didn’t think that it would? Well, now you can’t answer that question can you? Because you destroyed the proof of the matter yourself, despite your LEO credentials.”

      Now GZ can’t take the stand because, if he says “I don’t remember” too many times, or states he has memory problems of some kind, then he opens the door for his bail hearing mess to flood in. So, in light of the facts we’ve learned so far about this case, I’d like to present my rendition of the defenses opening statement to wit:

      Ladies and Gentlemen of the Jury, my name is Mark O’mara, I’ll be defending George Michael Zimmerman, who you see sitting there at the counsel table. On the night of Feb. 26 th, it was a dark and rainy night, I intend to prove that it was both raining and dark! Thank you.
      —-There, let the SP try to use that!

      • SouthernGirl2 says:

        Ladies and Gentlemen of the Jury, my name is Mark O’mara, I’ll be defending George Michael Zimmerman, who you see sitting there at the counsel table. On the night of Feb. 26 th, it was a dark and rainy night, I intend to prove that it was both raining and dark! Thank you.

        bwa ha ha ha ha

      • Patricia says:

        Lonnie –

        I’m curious. How would the truck establish GZ’s innocence?

        • Lonnie Starr says:

          You said “Lonnie – I’m curious. How would the truck establish GZ’s innocence?”

          Answer: No one can be sure that it would. IMO, it probably wouldn’t. But, MO’s defense would be either, it didn’t matter, or that it would only have proved GZ innocent. Whereas that’s a questionable position, since evidence destroyed/removed always carries with it a hint of incrimination. Especially when done by someone who knows better than to do it AND has a decidedly prejudiced opinion as well. Thus, what I posed was merely a position I expected MO to take.

      • jun says:

        They have video footage of Z’s car position before he got out. Its about 210 feet from the T I believe

        and yes, Osterman did commit evidence tampering & obstruction but he is going to be throwing Z under the bus to be scott free

    • jm says:

      “Our family values compel us to seek peace and reconciliation within ourselves and to extend these virtues to others…..

      “Moving forward, I pray they find the peace of the Holy Spirit and that it illuminates their hearts.”

      The Audacity of the Zimmerman family is disgusting. This stupid twit wants to extend his family’s virtues to others????? Moving forward, (away from the murder by George Zimmerman of their beloved son) Robert Jr prays the Holy Spirit illuminates the Martin’s hearts? Illuminates what? That the Martin’s son caused his own death because he was a thug according to lying George? That’s a peaceful and illuminating thought for the Martin family. In heaven’s name, I pray the Zimmerman family goes away. They are all sleazy hustlers. I believe this latest PR stunt is to raise money for living expenses and defense and not at all an apology.

      • Xena says:

        I believe this latest PR stunt is to raise money for living expenses and defense and not at all an apology.

        The timing. Distraction. It came just after the discovery release that Trayvon’s DNA is not on the gun, and Osterman saying that GZ told him Trayvon grabbed the gun. Not even GZ’s fans have been able to comment after that information was released. Junior’s purported condolences is to give them a pro-GZ to talk about.

      • Patricia says:

        Yes, JM – as was asked of Senator McCarthy should be asked of the Zimmerman Klan:

        “Have you no shame??????”

      • logi says:

        The family of GZ will be giving an interview on the Bob Carroll radio show on 640am Los Angeles at 12 noon tomorrow.

        • jm says:

          The family of GZ needs to slither back to their hiding place rock along with George and ShelLIE.

          Honestly the more these idiot Zimmerman’s talk the more I want GZ in prison.

    • Xena says:

      I had planned on resting from posting to my blog for several weeks, but Junior’s purported condolences really got under my skin.


      • Patricia says:

        Xena, I also read your link. Powerful and DECENT – these people have NO sense of decency. No respect. They are slugs!

        • jm says:

          I agree Patricia. The Zimmermans have no shame, no decency. I would classify them as slithering snakes coming out from under rocks to get another 15 minutes of fame and contributions.

          I didn’t think I could dislike the Zimmerman family any more than after the Hannity interview and the websites set up by Robert and Gladys to ask for money, but this inconsiderate statement (it is by no means an apology) by the smug and condescending Robert Jurior just put me over the top as far as disliking them and wishing and praying even more George Zimmerman goes to prison for life.

      • Xena says:

        @Patricia and JM. When I read the purported condolences, it reminded me what Witness 9 said; I paraphrase, “They only like Black people who act like them.” Removing race from it, I get the impression that the Zimmerman’s believe they are perfect — they don’t like White people who don’t act like them!! They convey that they are arrogant and have a complete disregard for the rights, beliefs, and feelings of others. Shame on them.

        • jm says:

          “I get the impression that the Zimmerman’s believe they are perfect — they don’t like White people who don’t act like them!! They convey that they are arrogant and have a complete disregard for the rights, beliefs, and feelings of others.”

          The Zimmerman family is no doubt arrogant but their arrogance just proves how delusional the whole family is. They actually sicken me. After Robert Jr was sent to do PR and backhanded the Martin’s with his statement/pseudo-apology, I can only say my contempt for them grew 100%.

          PS: Does anyone know anything about Robert Jr’s background? What does he do for a living? Is it documented he was estranged from his GZ as reported by Osterman? What’s in it for Junior to come out in defense of George?

      • Xena says:

        PS: Does anyone know anything about Robert Jr’s background? What does he do for a living? Is it documented he was estranged from his GZ as reported by Osterman? What’s in it for Junior to come out in defense of George?

        A paralegal friend in GA told me that Robert Jr. is a licensed attorney in Orlando who concentrates in bankruptcy. When I tried to verify the information, I found numerous lawyers with that same name — need Junior’s middle initial to verify.

        I believe Osterman about GZ being estranged from his family. IMO, based on what I’ve been able to ferret out, it occurred after the cousin disclosed the sex abuse.

      • logi says:

        Beautiful article Xena.

      • Xena says:

        Thank you Logi and Professor. That means a lot to me because I was seeing red as I wrote it.

  6. Lonnie Starr says:

    following this thread.

  7. katieunc says:

    Can anyone tell me how far Trayvon’s body was found in relation to where GZ said he was punched and knocked to the ground?

  8. Fed-up taxpayer says:

    Dear Prof. Leatherman,
    Is it possible Trayvon’s elbow or shoulder was dislocated, or arm broken? I know this isn’t the right thread, but I don’t know if you’d see the question. Is something like that an injury a ME would see or look for?

    Thank you.

    • I do not know the answer off the top of my head, but it’s standard operating procedure in all autopsies to check th entire body for injuries and they usually X-Ray the body looking for fractures.

      Check out the autopsy report at page 125.

      • logi says:

        Professor A few new found friends on a news vine work together to gather evedence in defense of Trayvon. I compiled all the different versions of the gun draw that george gave. The end is a team member referring to me as” icur”
        I know it is lengthly but I don’t know how else to post it to you. Here it goes.

        1) Zimmerman: And I was trying to get his hand, he was suffocating me, so I was trying to get his hands off of my face.

        Erwin: Mmhmm.

        Zimmerman: So, when I felt his hand, he let go of my mouth, so I wasn’t trying to do anything again, with my right hand. So I grabbed my gun. I don’t know if he did at the same time, or, what the case was, but, I got to it first.

        Serino interview version:


        Compact.Compact? And you were able to overpower him as far as holding his wrist, you gained wrist…we
call it wrist control…you gained wrist control on him basically, and you were able to basically liberate both hands..
Zimmerman : Yes, sir.

        THis is the reenactment video version:

        (he points behind him towards John’s townhouse) opened the door and I said help me, help me and they said I’ll call 911, I said no, help me, I need help and I don’t know what they did but that’s when my jacket moved up and I had my firearm on my right side hip (Note that his hand is more towards his back, not his side) My jacket moved up and he saw it…I feel like he saw it, he looked at it and he said, You’re gonna die tonight Mother F*cker. And he reached for it, but he reached..like.I felt his arm going down to my side and I grabbed it (it is here he describes smooshing Trayvons hand to his chest with his upper arm while simultaneously grabbing his pistol from his hip inside the waistband holster) and I just grabbed my firearm and I shot him. one time

        And finally the Mark O version:

        According to the book authored by George Zimmerman’s friend Mark Osterman, Trayvon Martin grabbed his killer’s gun and uttered a profanity-laced threat just before Zimmerman clutched Trayvon’s wrist, broke his grip on the semiautomatic firearm and shot him once in the chest,

        OMG!!!! Icur!!!! ICUR!!!!! See it? See it?? See It??? Serino is bad to the bone!!! he and that girl detective tore all the fur off of George; they got George to admit that he did not need to fear for his safety or shoot the kid to save himself from injury or death -and they got George to confess it twice!!!! Not once!!! But twice!!!! On two different days!!! It’s how detectives work, they do not let you know what you have just given them. They just get it and leave, and you think you got away with something. He he he he!! They got George!!! He is TOAST!!! Here’s why!!! Beyond a reasonable person’s reasonable doubt. Let me highlight your quotes to emphasize what Serino was after and got George to confess to: Not having to shoot Trayvon:This is the missing “element of confession” that was rumoured by the Orlando Sentinel before the evidence was released months ago:
        2)… And you were able to overpower him as far as holding his wrist, you gained wrist…we
call it wrist control…you gained wrist control on him basically, and you were able to basically liberate both hands…
        The idiot!!!! has just admitted he gained control of Trayvon, had him in a wrist lock, and subdued, before!!!! He Pulled the gun!!!! George has just admitted he had Trayvon in a locvk, subdued all without the gun even being drawn!!!!!! Does George agree with this? Let’s see:
        Zimmerman : Yes, sir.

        • You and your friends did good work.

          Yes, I noticed that admission about having gained wrist control over Trayvon.

          That statement destroys his claim of self-defense because when he gained control over TM, he was no longer in imminent danger of death or serious bodily injury.

          We can tell that Zimmerman lies all the time because he can never keep his stories straight. They keep changing.

          He has reached the point where he has to claim that his brain is so badly damaged that he has no intact and reliable memory of the incident, but that isn’t likely to work because, so far as we know, he never went to see a specialist to document the existence of a brain condition or injury that impaired his memory.

          O’Mara can argue that GZ’s conflicting statements prove that he has a memory disorder, but the more likely explanation is that he’s a bad liar.

          If O’Mara chooses to go this route, he probably has to provide notice to the prosecution well before trial of a mental or diminished capacity defense. The prosecution would then arrange to have their own expert examine him and poof goes the defense.

          He is his own worst enemy and I continue to be amazed that anyone believes anything he says.

          • Lonnie Starr says:

            Unfortunately for any mental impairment claim GZ might want to make, he’s functioned pretty darned rationally, without any complaint, in the aftermath of the shooting. From obtaining permission to return to work, to his hiding out and concern for personal safety. To a lack of complaint and support from MO, who sheltered him then gave public interviews that make no mention of mental impairment. To his own wife being manipulated and/or involved in a scheme to defraud the court. A scheme that involved using code to boot. Where he demonstrates over several days, just how good a memory he has, when it comes to hiding money and paying off bills.

            GZ has royally screwed himself good.

          • You said,

            “To his own wife being manipulated and/or involved in a scheme to defraud the court. A scheme that involved using code to boot. Where he demonstrates over several days, just how good a memory he has, when it comes to hiding money and paying off bills.”

            You have provided a wonderful example regarding why that scheme, which is uncharged misconduct at this time, would become relevant and admissible evidence under Rule 404(b) to prove that GZ’s brain and memory works well enough to recall information and concoct and carryout a scheme to conceal assets from the court.

            Evidence of that effort would become relevant, if GZ were to assert limited intellectual functioning and recall due to some brain defect or injury.

            Parenthetically, I want to be clear that ADHD is not such a condition.

          • Lonnie Starr says:

            …And so, dear readers, as the sun sets, yet another door slams in the face of the defense, due to the uncontrollable works of GMZ.
            “A man so stupid it hurts”.

        • I tipped my hat to you in my article today titled, George Michael Zimmerman and the Thirteen Commandments of Criminal Defense

          Thanks again for bringing it to my attention.

      • logi says:

        Thank You for all of your work Professor. : ))

  9. When I hear about that Hannity interview GZ has got some nerve. MOM never should’ve allowed that interview. What a liar…GZ is…

    • katieunc says:

      Amen to that! And if he cannot possible make himself look any worse, he can always count on his BFF’S to pick up where he left off. Look at the people he surrounded himself with……. Osterman……Taaffe. I. Have heard that Osterman’s book is now entered as evidence. I wonder if MO has any control over GZ and his friends.

      • Lonnie Starr says:

        I’ll bet MO isn’t happy about his book being entered as evidence. He isn’t selling enough copies to buy a good breakfast at IHOP’s , but if he’s impeached on the stand, it’s good-bye career. What a revoltin’ development, eh? [Life of Riley] lol.

      • jun says:

        Perhaps Taffe and Osterman have a conscience. Plus they lose nothing with their statements. Killing a kid walking home with Skittles aint exactly up everyone’s walkway

        • Lonnie Starr says:

          They are the new “Three Stooges” MO, GZ and FT! Way to go guys.

        • You said,

          “Perhaps Taffe and Osterman have a conscience.”

          Objection, Your Honor. Assumes facts not in evidence.

          I cannot shake the suspicion that those two guys are concerned that they might have some potential exposure to criminal prosecution because at various times together and individually with GZ they may have discussed how best to handle situations that GZ might encounter while patrolling the neighborhood.

          I am not suggesting there was a plan to kill or injure anyone, but I can understand why they might be worried about getting dragged into this mess. The topic, assuming no discussion about killing anyone, is perilously close to violating the conspiracy laws.

          I don’t believe Osterman insisted on GZ and SZ moving in with him and his wife immediately after the shooting to protect them from reprisal be Black gangsters. I suspect he was concerned about what GZ would tell the cops and he wanted to influence GZ to keep him out of the case.

          Taafee may have similar concerns.

          I do not know if they have any potential exposure or if they are worried about getting charged. If they have any concerns, they should each confer with a lawyer to discuss that subject.

          Attempting to influence GZ is a bad idea.

      • katieunc says:

        I am sure MO has his hands full. He did release a statement that Osterman’s book was “ill timed”. As for Osterman, he has been in law enforcement and had to know the consequences that might come with that. I think he wanted his 15 minutes of fame.

      • jun says:

        There’s that too. Osterman did want to capitalize on the incident.

        • fauxmccoy says:

          if osterman was hoping to capitalize on that, well … i guess the joke’s on him.

          • Lonnie Starr says:

            Some how I don’t think that 200k+ really came from individual donors, but instead from some NRA group that already had a “bundling” operation in place, that could be used to make it seem like small separate donations. Were there any logs?

            Osterman should have realized that his book would hardly be helpful to the NRA or even the “outhouse’ers” because they already have enough conflicts on their hands to ignore.

            In any event, if MO had made money, my guess is he’d leave! Not stick around to possibly be called as a witness. Now all he wants is for GZ to plead out.

        • cielo62 says:

          Maybe OM thought he’d make so much money from his book (like the initial money train for GZ) that he would be able to retire and quit his job. After all, eating stale airline peanuts get old.

      • jun says:

        It sure did backfire on Osterman. Perhaps Zimmerman’s hundreds of black friends will help him out lol

      • jun says:

        I learned from team Z, that they over-exaggerate everything. For example, some people will say “I have a black friend” to try and prove they arent racist against blacks. Team Z will say “Z has hundreds of black friends & mentors numerous black youth”. Z looks like he fell through a bush but instead they push a tale where Trayvon is a 150 lb Black Superman/Bruce Lee who uses cliche and unreal 80’s psycho gangsta talk that beat him close to death.

      • Tee says:

        I think it’s already goodbye career

      • jun says:


        Considering Taffe’s first media statements of “Trayvon should have answered George properly, otherwise it wouldnt have happened” does illustrate that connection. Osterman and Taffe may have tipped GZ to assist in his stalking of TM. Conspiracy for vigilantism and racial profiling would be their connection

      • jun says:


        Comedy is all about timing

      • Xena says:

        There was something Osterman said on Fox about a reporter exposing his identity. That gives me the impression that he was called on the carpet at work — might have been placed on leave. Then he decided to write the book. Osterman might just be unemployed.

        • Lonnie Starr says:

          He probably is if they’ve read that he assisted in the removal of GZ’s truck and/or did not advise against it, or report to the police of evidence there at the scene. Meaning he can no longer be trusted to perform the duties of a LEO.

  10. Two sides to a story says:

    I should think there will be a flurry of objections on both sides considering the controversial nature of this case and the high stakes involved. With all the info above in mind, it would be interesting to review the first and second bond hearings again to note how the prosecution and defense handled their cases.

  11. Xena says:

    Thanks Professor! If I understand correctly, after the prosecution presents its witnesses, and after the defense cross-examines, the prosecution can redirect. Does the defense get opportunity to question those same witnesses again after the prosecution has completed redirect?

    • CherokeeNative says:

      Hi Xena – I am not the professor, but yes, they will continue to cross-examination, redirect – back and forth – until both sides are satisfied they have asked all they intend to ask (within the scope of the other’s questioning) and then the witness will be dismissed or held over by the subpeona subject to being recalled.

  12. Fed-up taxpayer says:

    ‘A librarian from Miami-Dade County wrote to Lee, stating she knew Martin casually as a patron of the library where she worked.

    “Trayvon came to my library and was a quiet kid who never presented a problem,” she wrote. “He was a nice, quiet kid who was decidedly not a trouble maker – a special quality in the rough and tumble environment of Miami-Dade County.”

    Read more: The Sanford Herald – Emails to former chief Lee show nation’s reaction to Martin’s death’

    It’s hearsay, but we’re not under examination.

  13. Ok, I am not expert on uploading and downloading photo’s, or making a blog. But, I uploaded some photo’s in rebuttal to all of you who think GZ was standing up and shot Trayvon. Could be. BUT, as the evidence will show if you look at each of my photo’s and my description…or in some case questions….I will leave you with food for thought IMO….some good questions from the prosecution and the defense might be formed….Click on my name and see if it brings you to it. Comment here your thoughts, I may never find the thing again! 🙂 Gotta go bbl

    • Mike says:

      I think that there’s a strong possibility that George’s flashlight hit his nose after seeing the photos and DNA evidence.

    • Patricia says:

      Hinkster, that’s remarkably good work! Excellent assemblage with comments. I was reminded again of that dastardly aggressive bare, spiky tree – by all the tiny frontal and side scratches.

      Strange that the back would bleed again at the station. He may have clened up his head with paper towels and removed the clots, starting the bleeding over, Didn’t look like this coming into the station garage/receiving area.

      Also, this was an hour or two after the “assault.” Why no swelling or redness around that supposedly “broken” nose? I’m not looking for a black eye this early, but there should be some puffiness.

      36 hours later in the video re-enactment on-site @ RATL, there’s no swelling or puffiness or black eyes either.

      From your experience, when do black eyes from a broken nose become visible?

      Thanks, Hinkster, for putting this together for us. Consider adding those shots of the banker beaten up by LAPD – with comments?

      • Lonnie Starr says:

        Also, those butterfly bandages should be concealing a whole lot of black and blue scalp. After all, not every blow to a concrete slab would break skin.

      • Fed-up taxpayer says:

        I thought I saw him lean/rub his head onto the wall just after getting out of police cruiser.

      • jm says:

        Didn’t the physician assistant who examined him the following day say he had black eyes? Wonder when the black eyes were discovered since they didn’t appear in the reenactment video and also Zimmerman seemed pretty nimble during the reenactment for a guy who was allegedly beat till he feared for his life. Didn’t seem psychologically bothered after having killed another person either.

  14. aussie says:

    Which is exactly why GZ cannot take the stand.

    “Q: Do you recall the police asking the following question and you giving the following answer?” 3 times on every single statement he’s made????

    and cut him short if he tries to go into a long story why “followed” and “didn’t follow” mean the same thing; why sucker-punched onto his back and fly-swatting 47 feet is the same thing.

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 )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google 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 )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: