Zimmerman will be acquitted - GoFuckYourself.com - Adult Webmaster Forum

X

Rochard

Jägermeister Test Pilot

Join Date: Dec 2001

Posts: 75733
Share

Post
#1141

07-12-2013, 06:18 AM

Originally posted by baddog

Like I said above, I did not sit and watch the entire closing argument; the original tape is online, post a link to the one that the Prosecution kept starting and stopping if it is not one I posted. Please.

I did: http://gfy.com/showpost.php?p=19713422&postcount=1112

Start at 17:20.

Zimmerman says "I walked towards him". So much for Martin "jumping out of the bushes" and then "surprising him".

Herschel Savage
Brooklyn, NY
Comment
Rochard

Jägermeister Test Pilot

Join Date: Dec 2001

Posts: 75733
Share

Post
#1142

07-12-2013, 06:25 AM

Originally posted by baddog

They are experts for cash; they will say what you want to hear.

This is something I don't understand about our legal system.

I remember watching the forensic ME, who discussed his qualifications for two hours. He was clearly over qualified and the longer he sat there on the stand the more money he was paid. He said he was charging some $200 an hour or something like that. And while I listened to him ramble on... I started to wonder how many other medical examiners they talked to before settling on him. The defense interviewed ten or twenty medical examiners with similar qualifications, and they picked the one that saw the things the way the defense wanted AND looked presentable in court. But wouldn't this be a biased opinion? He is an expert, but an expert on the payroll of the defense, and they most likely had to speak to a dozen candidates and it's possible that not all candidates agreed with the defense's version of what happened.

Doesn't this make everything this "expert" says suspect?

Why doesn't the court hire an expert, split the costs between both sides, and no one gets to speak to him (her) before they testify. This way we know this is an expert that has been hand selected and isn't working for either one side.

Herschel Savage
Brooklyn, NY
Comment
baddog

So Fucking Banned

Join Date: Apr 2001

Posts: 107089
Share

Post
#1143

07-12-2013, 07:36 AM

Originally posted by Rochard

I did: http://gfy.com/showpost.php?p=19713422&postcount=1112

Start at 17:20.

Zimmerman says "I walked towards him". So much for Martin "jumping out of the bushes" and then "surprising him".

Please read MY REQUEST again: the original tape is online, post a link to the one that the Prosecution kept starting and stopping if it is not one I posted. Please.

In other words, I do not want the stop and go version with the Prosecutor inserting his commentary. Post the original.
Comment
baddog

So Fucking Banned

Join Date: Apr 2001

Posts: 107089
Share

Post
#1144

07-12-2013, 07:41 AM

Originally posted by Rochard

Doesn't this make everything this "expert" says suspect?

Yes 5678
Comment
PornoMonster

Confirmed User

Join Date: Mar 2003

Posts: 2257
Share

Post
#1145

07-12-2013, 07:42 AM

Originally posted by Rochard

This is something I don't understand about our legal system.

I remember watching the forensic ME, who discussed his qualifications for two hours. He was clearly over qualified and the longer he sat there on the stand the more money he was paid. He said he was charging some $200 an hour or something like that. And while I listened to him ramble on... I started to wonder how many other medical examiners they talked to before settling on him. The defense interviewed ten or twenty medical examiners with similar qualifications, and they picked the one that saw the things the way the defense wanted AND looked presentable in court. But wouldn't this be a biased opinion? He is an expert, but an expert on the payroll of the defense, and they most likely had to speak to a dozen candidates and it's possible that not all candidates agreed with the defense's version of what happened.

Doesn't this make everything this "expert" says suspect?

Why doesn't the court hire an expert, split the costs between both sides, and no one gets to speak to him (her) before they testify. This way we know this is an expert that has been hand selected and isn't working for either one side.

I have Always wondered this myself.
An attorney friend told me the reason the court doesn't hire a third party is BOTH sides choose what expert they use, so it equals out... lol That each expert knows which side they are being paid by.

A third person would confuse the jury even more.

He had several other reasons, but I don't remember them this was back in 1994 ----

$6 a Month 4 Blade Razors, 4 Cartridges, Includes shipping!

Domains 4 Sale CashForVideos.com - Pussy.biz - FootPorn.com - SoloMovie.com - CollegeGirlCams.com - AmateurCamGirls.com - PR3 4 Letter Domain
Comment
TheSquealer

Mayor of Thneedville

Join Date: Oct 2004

Posts: 26172
Share

Post
#1146

07-12-2013, 07:48 AM

Originally posted by PornoMonster

I have Always wondered this myself.
An attorney friend told me the reason the court doesn't hire a third party is BOTH sides choose what expert they use, so it equals out... lol That each expert knows which side they are being paid by.

A third person would confuse the jury even more.

He had several other reasons, but I don't remember them this was back in 1994 ----

The court is impartial. The court does not appoint witnesses. That would not be impartiality.

Each side calls their own witnesses and each side has the opportunity to tear those witnesses apart. Thats about as fair as it can be.

.
Yes, fewer illegal immigrants working equates to more job opportunities for American citizens.

Rochard
Comment
Rochard

Jägermeister Test Pilot

Join Date: Dec 2001

Posts: 75733
Share

Post
#1147

07-12-2013, 07:48 AM

Originally posted by baddog

Please read MY REQUEST again: the original tape is online, post a link to the one that the Prosecution kept starting and stopping if it is not one I posted. Please.

In other words, I do not want the stop and go version with the Prosecutor inserting his commentary. Post the original.

I don't have original. I didn't know about the audio recording until the closing arguments. I spent enough time trying to track this down and locate exactly where the statement is; I am not about to do it again because you don't like the stop and go version.

Zimmerman has contradicted his version of the story - in one he "walked towards Martin" and in the other Martin "jumped out of the bushes and surprised him".

Herschel Savage
Brooklyn, NY
Comment
Rochard

Jägermeister Test Pilot

Join Date: Dec 2001

Posts: 75733
Share

Post
#1148

07-12-2013, 07:50 AM

Originally posted by PornoMonster

I have Always wondered this myself.
An attorney friend told me the reason the court doesn't hire a third party is BOTH sides choose what expert they use, so it equals out... lol That each expert knows which side they are being paid by.

A third person would confuse the jury even more.

He had several other reasons, but I don't remember them this was back in 1994 ----

But if you have two "expert witnesses" who claim the evidence say different things... They just confused everyone.

Herschel Savage
Brooklyn, NY
Comment
dyna mo

just a fucking jerk

Join Date: Dec 2008

Posts: 68184
Share

Post
#1149

07-12-2013, 07:52 AM

i was reading in an article, i think, about the woman who shot herself in the leg claiming someone stole her baby or something and the invesstigators these days seem to think a suspect is generally telling the truth if their story does change. apparently the thinking is that if the suspect has a rock solid recollection of what happened, that is pre-conceived.

i don't know, but that was the rationale.
Comment
Rochard

Jägermeister Test Pilot

Join Date: Dec 2001

Posts: 75733
Share

Post
#1150

07-12-2013, 07:53 AM

Originally posted by TheSquealer

The court is impartial. The court does not appoint witnesses. That would not be impartiality.

But that is exactly what I am saying - the so called experts being called in are not impartial at all. Instead, they are hand selected because they re-enforce what one side wants the jury to hear.

Why doesn't the court locate and hire an impartial expert? And both sides shouldn't be able to talk to him (her) until questioning at the trial. The expert needs to be impartial, not backing up one version or another.

Herschel Savage
Brooklyn, NY
Comment
dyna mo

just a fucking jerk

Join Date: Dec 2008

Posts: 68184
Share

Post
#1151

07-12-2013, 07:55 AM

Originally posted by Rochard

But that is exactly what I am saying - the so called experts being called in are not impartial at all. Instead, they are hand selected because they re-enforce what one side wants the jury to hear.

Why doesn't the court locate and hire an impartial expert? And both sides shouldn't be able to talk to him (her) until questioning at the trial. The expert needs to be impartial, not backing up one version or another.

they still tell the truth. it's up to the jurors to make their own determination.
Comment
baddog

So Fucking Banned

Join Date: Apr 2001

Posts: 107089
Share

Post
#1152

07-12-2013, 07:56 AM

Originally posted by Rochard

I don't have original. I didn't know about the audio recording until the closing arguments. I spent enough time trying to track this down and locate exactly where the statement is; I am not about to do it again because you don't like the stop and go version.

Zimmerman has contradicted his version of the story - in one he "walked towards Martin" and in the other Martin "jumped out of the bushes and surprised him".

I am asking for the unedited version, that's all . . . the actual evidence . . . the edited video you saw during closing argument is not evidence. Sorry.
Comment
tony286

lurker

Join Date: Aug 2002

Posts: 57021
Share

Post
#1153

07-12-2013, 08:00 AM

When all the bullshit is said and done a kid was killed.
http://gawker.com/this-courtesy-of-m...ium=socialflow
Comment
_Richard_

Too lazy to set a custom title

Join Date: Oct 2006

Posts: 30991
Share

Post
#1154

07-12-2013, 08:01 AM

Originally posted by tony286

When all the bullshit is said and done a kid was killed.
http://gawker.com/this-courtesy-of-m...ium=socialflow

saw that, what is up with this:

'Were I a slave to journalistic norms,'
Comment
Babaganoosh

♥♥♥ Likes Hugs ♥♥♥

Join Date: Nov 2001

Posts: 15841
Share

Post
#1155

07-12-2013, 08:03 AM

Originally posted by Rochard

But that is exactly what I am saying - the so called experts being called in are not impartial at all. Instead, they are hand selected because they re-enforce what one side wants the jury to hear.

Why doesn't the court locate and hire an impartial expert? And both sides shouldn't be able to talk to him (her) until questioning at the trial. The expert needs to be impartial, not backing up one version or another.

Please, for fuck's sake just shut up and let this thread die.

I like pie.
Comment

Previous 1 27 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 template Next

Working...