Alinoa
New Member
You can blame the Prosecution, for asking her to do that.
In their rebuttal - their LAST FINAL chance to make an impact - his first 2 minutes were spent asking the jury specifically to wonder 'what was in GZ's heart that night?'...
For the next 9 mins he pretty much continued to talk/ask "WHAT DID GEORGE ZIMMERMAN HAVE IN HIS HEART that night?!"
Begins at 2:00 - 11.00
[YOUTUBE]p2jLnUI0l4E[/YOUTUBE]
I think I, or you, could have done a better rebuttal opening. The Prosecution failed Trayvon, imo.
But here's the thing bliss. And I'm not trying to argue with you and please keep in mind that I've not slept so I don't know how coherent this will be.
First:
I agree with your statement that the prosecution failed Trayvon. But I don't think when you put it all together it was not an on purpose attempt to do so.
When you seep rate the facts from the emotions we have g with a past and who assigned himself watch man. He wanted to be a cop. Was taking mma and targeted Martin for no probably cause.
Just a kid walking through a neighborhood.
Now comes the more emotional aspect and upsetting conclusion
Why did Zimmerman target him. What was in his heart?
If that had been a white boy would his actions have been the same?
What was in his heart indeed.
The judge told them not to use emotion to render a verdict.
I don't think they did. Their virdict made no sense in the light of just the evidence.
And that's my take on it.