07-12-2013, 04:43 PM
Evidence that wasn't presented...
Unless I missed it, the prosecution chose not to play Zimmerman's previous 911 calls for the jury, and the defense chose not to focus on Trayvon's marijuana use, even though both sides fought successfully for the right to get those points in front of a jury.
I know there are a lot of admissible witnesses and evidence that never get used at trial, but it surprised me that the previous 911 calls weren't played for the jury to bolster the state's contention that Zimmerman's state of mind was skewed and that caused him to profile, follow and kill Trayvon Martin. Maybe the prosecution decided it was too risky and would end up bolstering the defense's claim that George was just a concerned neighbor, since none of those calls resulted in a confrontation?
Regarding the THC, totally irrelevant anyway, IMO. I think the defense was smart not to bring it in - it could have backfired in cross and/or with a state's rebuttal witness and in the eyes of the jury. And, the state might have motioned to get George's meds introduced if the defense had gone in that direction?
Just speculating and curious if anyone else has ideas.
Unless I missed it, the prosecution chose not to play Zimmerman's previous 911 calls for the jury, and the defense chose not to focus on Trayvon's marijuana use, even though both sides fought successfully for the right to get those points in front of a jury.
I know there are a lot of admissible witnesses and evidence that never get used at trial, but it surprised me that the previous 911 calls weren't played for the jury to bolster the state's contention that Zimmerman's state of mind was skewed and that caused him to profile, follow and kill Trayvon Martin. Maybe the prosecution decided it was too risky and would end up bolstering the defense's claim that George was just a concerned neighbor, since none of those calls resulted in a confrontation?
Regarding the THC, totally irrelevant anyway, IMO. I think the defense was smart not to bring it in - it could have backfired in cross and/or with a state's rebuttal witness and in the eyes of the jury. And, the state might have motioned to get George's meds introduced if the defense had gone in that direction?
Just speculating and curious if anyone else has ideas.