05-25-2013, 09:42 PM
(05-25-2013, 09:13 AM)HairOfTheDog Wrote:Could be your right. Doesn't seem right that one is in and the other is out(05-25-2013, 08:47 AM)SIXFOOTERsez Wrote:(05-25-2013, 08:13 AM)Cynical Ninja Wrote:I think thats based on the premise by the prosecution that T was an innocent law abiding boy scout that just happened to be black and wearing a hoodie, the defense alleges that in fact T was at least a wannabe thug like most young black kids here in the US.(05-25-2013, 07:41 AM)Adub Wrote: Kind of interesting that the previous judge said no to anything found on Zimmerman's phone. Zimmerman's cell phone info is exempt, not relevant.
So the defence can trawl through Trayvons phone looking for shit to fling at his character but the prosecution can't do the same with Zimmermans phone?
Anything that is on Z's phone as it applies to the case happened after the incident.
Sorry, Six, I don't understand your statement?
How would, for example only, past texts by Zimmerman expressing anger about strange teens in the neighborhood, pictures of him drunk and flipping the bird or caressing his gun, lamenting about his arrest for assaulting an officer after resisting, bitching about his ex's filing a restraining order against him for violence...be less relevant for the prosecution to challenge George's image than past text records are for the defense in challenging Trayvon's?
I can't see any reason why one would be considered more relevant than the other. The judge will likely not allow Trayvon's past cell records to be used, just like the previous judge didn't allow George's.
We'll likely find out on Tuesday.