In article , says...

On 7/26/2012 7:17 AM, wrote:
On Wed, 25 Jul 2012 18:10:20 -0400, BAR wrote:

In article ,
says...

On Wed, 25 Jul 2012 08:17:00 -0400, iBoaterer wrote:

In article ,
says...

You've not seen all of the physical evidence yet. No one has.


We have seen most, if not all of it. Florida is a sunshine state and
when it was "discovered" by the defense, it was public information. If
the prosecution is withholding evidence, Zimmerman walks and Corey
probably gets disbarred.

But what you don't understand is that lots of evidence isn't
"discovered" until trial.

That is not true at all, you have been watching too much TV.

The prosecution will not start a trial thinking they will get
something in direct testimony that they don't already have.
For the most part, they will shoot their whole wad at the grand jury.

In this case, they will need everything they can come up with to
survive the immunity hearing where this whole witch hunt may end.

I thought iBoater was a lawyer?

I never even believed Plume was a lawyer


Engineer... or draftsman maybe..

Neither, stupid.

On 7/26/2012 9:17 AM, JustWait wrote:
On 7/26/2012 7:17 AM, wrote:
On Wed, 25 Jul 2012 18:10:20 -0400, BAR wrote:

In article ,
says...

On Wed, 25 Jul 2012 08:17:00 -0400, iBoaterer wrote:

In article ,
says...

You've not seen all of the physical evidence yet. No one has.


We have seen most, if not all of it. Florida is a sunshine state and
when it was "discovered" by the defense, it was public
information. If
the prosecution is withholding evidence, Zimmerman walks and Corey
probably gets disbarred.

But what you don't understand is that lots of evidence isn't
"discovered" until trial.

That is not true at all, you have been watching too much TV.

The prosecution will not start a trial thinking they will get
something in direct testimony that they don't already have.
For the most part, they will shoot their whole wad at the grand jury.

In this case, they will need everything they can come up with to
survive the immunity hearing where this whole witch hunt may end.

I thought iBoater was a lawyer?

I never even believed Plume was a lawyer


Engineer... or draftsman maybe..

Even the dumbest of law clerks is more lawyer-esque than He/She/It.

On 7/26/2012 9:49 AM, Meyer wrote:
On 7/26/2012 9:17 AM, JustWait wrote:
On 7/26/2012 7:17 AM, wrote:
On Wed, 25 Jul 2012 18:10:20 -0400, BAR wrote:

In article ,
says...

On Wed, 25 Jul 2012 08:17:00 -0400, iBoaterer wrote:

In article ,
says...

You've not seen all of the physical evidence yet. No one has.


We have seen most, if not all of it. Florida is a sunshine state and
when it was "discovered" by the defense, it was public
information. If
the prosecution is withholding evidence, Zimmerman walks and Corey
probably gets disbarred.

But what you don't understand is that lots of evidence isn't
"discovered" until trial.

That is not true at all, you have been watching too much TV.

The prosecution will not start a trial thinking they will get
something in direct testimony that they don't already have.
For the most part, they will shoot their whole wad at the grand jury.

In this case, they will need everything they can come up with to
survive the immunity hearing where this whole witch hunt may end.

I thought iBoater was a lawyer?

I never even believed Plume was a lawyer


Engineer... or draftsman maybe..

Even the dumbest of law clerks is more lawyer-esque than He/She/It.

Doesn't take much to run AutoCad all day while surfing the net...

On Thursday, July 26, 2012 8:38:46 AM UTC-4, iBoaterer wrote:


Of course, notice I said the witnesses that said the HEARD Zimmerman
screaming.....

That's still direct testimony of what they heard. It's not hearsay. If a person testified that someone else had told them they heard the screams, that's hearsay, if trying to prove the screaming actually happened.

On 7/26/12 9:52 AM, JustWait wrote:

Even the dumbest of law clerks is more lawyer-esque than He/She/It.

A mound of cat poop in a litter box is smarter than you are.

On 7/26/2012 9:40 AM, iBoaterer wrote:
In article m,
says...

On 7/26/2012 8:38 AM, iBoaterer wrote:
In article ,
says...

On Wed, 25 Jul 2012 14:26:14 -0400, iBoaterer wrote:

In article ,
says...

On Wed, 25 Jul 2012 08:17:00 -0400, iBoaterer wrote:

In article ,
says...

You've not seen all of the physical evidence yet. No one has.


We have seen most, if not all of it. Florida is a sunshine state and
when it was "discovered" by the defense, it was public information. If
the prosecution is withholding evidence, Zimmerman walks and Corey
probably gets disbarred.

But what you don't understand is that lots of evidence isn't
"discovered" until trial.

That is not true at all, you have been watching too much TV.

The prosecution will not start a trial thinking they will get
something in direct testimony that they don't already have.
For the most part, they will shoot their whole wad at the grand jury.

In this case, they will need everything they can come up with to
survive the immunity hearing where this whole witch hunt may end.

Really? Are you serious that no evidence can be brought in after the
trial has begun? Really??

It is unusual

Bull****!

cite ;-)

Sure thing!

http://www.law.northwestern.edu/journals/jihr/v8/n1/4/

http://www.benchmarkinstitute.org/t_...ntroducing.htm

http://www.houston-opinions.com/law-...w-trial-newly-
discovered-evidence.html

Your cites seem to backup Greg's claim
Sorry dude.

In article ,
says...

On Thursday, July 26, 2012 8:38:46 AM UTC-4, iBoaterer wrote:


Of course, notice I said the witnesses that said the HEARD Zimmerman
screaming.....

That's still direct testimony of what they heard. It's not hearsay. If a person testified that someone else had told them they heard the screams, that's hearsay, if trying to prove the screaming actually happened.

Oh, so if someone states that they heard something, it's not hearsay?
Good! So the girlfriend's interview answers aren't hearsay! That's what
I've been saying all along.

In article om,
says...

On 7/26/2012 9:40 AM, iBoaterer wrote:
In article m,
says...

On 7/26/2012 8:38 AM, iBoaterer wrote:
In article ,
says...

On Wed, 25 Jul 2012 14:26:14 -0400, iBoaterer wrote:

In article ,
says...

On Wed, 25 Jul 2012 08:17:00 -0400, iBoaterer wrote:

In article ,
says...

You've not seen all of the physical evidence yet. No one has.


We have seen most, if not all of it. Florida is a sunshine state and
when it was "discovered" by the defense, it was public information. If
the prosecution is withholding evidence, Zimmerman walks and Corey
probably gets disbarred.

But what you don't understand is that lots of evidence isn't
"discovered" until trial.

That is not true at all, you have been watching too much TV.

The prosecution will not start a trial thinking they will get
something in direct testimony that they don't already have.
For the most part, they will shoot their whole wad at the grand jury.

In this case, they will need everything they can come up with to
survive the immunity hearing where this whole witch hunt may end.

Really? Are you serious that no evidence can be brought in after the
trial has begun? Really??

It is unusual

Bull****!

cite ;-)

Sure thing!

http://www.law.northwestern.edu/journals/jihr/v8/n1/4/

http://www.benchmarkinstitute.org/t_...ntroducing.htm

http://www.houston-opinions.com/law-...w-trial-newly-
discovered-evidence.html

Your cites seem to backup Greg's claim
Sorry dude.

Absolutely not! Apparently you can't read!

"Exhibits are anything other than testimony that can be perceived by the
senses and presented at the trial or hearing. Exhibits include:
? Real evidence ? tangible objects such as clothes, weapons, tools

? Demonstrative evidence ? evidence that represents or illustrates the
real thing such as photos, videos, diagrams, maps, charts

? Records ? government or business writings, hospital records, police
reports, payment records

? Writings ? evidence other than records that are in writing such as
letters, receipts, contracts, promissory notes"

In article , says...

On 7/26/2012 9:49 AM, Meyer wrote:
On 7/26/2012 9:17 AM, JustWait wrote:
On 7/26/2012 7:17 AM, wrote:
On Wed, 25 Jul 2012 18:10:20 -0400, BAR wrote:

In article ,
says...

On Wed, 25 Jul 2012 08:17:00 -0400, iBoaterer wrote:

In article ,
says...

You've not seen all of the physical evidence yet. No one has.


We have seen most, if not all of it. Florida is a sunshine state and
when it was "discovered" by the defense, it was public
information. If
the prosecution is withholding evidence, Zimmerman walks and Corey
probably gets disbarred.

But what you don't understand is that lots of evidence isn't
"discovered" until trial.

That is not true at all, you have been watching too much TV.

The prosecution will not start a trial thinking they will get
something in direct testimony that they don't already have.
For the most part, they will shoot their whole wad at the grand jury.

In this case, they will need everything they can come up with to
survive the immunity hearing where this whole witch hunt may end.

I thought iBoater was a lawyer?

I never even believed Plume was a lawyer


Engineer... or draftsman maybe..

Even the dumbest of law clerks is more lawyer-esque than He/She/It.

Doesn't take much to run AutoCad all day while surfing the net...

WTF are you talking about, you babbling fool?

In article ,
says...

On Thu, 26 Jul 2012 08:38:56 -0400, iBoaterer wrote:

In article ,
says...

On Wed, 25 Jul 2012 14:26:14 -0400, iBoaterer wrote:

In article ,
says...

On Wed, 25 Jul 2012 08:17:00 -0400, iBoaterer wrote:

In article ,
says...

You've not seen all of the physical evidence yet. No one has.


We have seen most, if not all of it. Florida is a sunshine state and
when it was "discovered" by the defense, it was public information. If
the prosecution is withholding evidence, Zimmerman walks and Corey
probably gets disbarred.

But what you don't understand is that lots of evidence isn't
"discovered" until trial.

That is not true at all, you have been watching too much TV.

The prosecution will not start a trial thinking they will get
something in direct testimony that they don't already have.
For the most part, they will shoot their whole wad at the grand jury.

In this case, they will need everything they can come up with to
survive the immunity hearing where this whole witch hunt may end.

Really? Are you serious that no evidence can be brought in after the
trial has begun? Really??

It is unusual

Bull****!

In this case, they will shoot their whole wad at the immunity hearing
or the trial will be over before it starts.

In the trial, if the defense can demonstrate that the prosecution
wtthheld evidence, they will get a mistrial and quite possibly have
jeopardy attached.

Exhibits are anything other than testimony that can be perceived by the
senses and presented at the trial or hearing. Exhibits include:
? Real evidence ? tangible objects such as clothes, weapons, tools

? Demonstrative evidence ? evidence that represents or illustrates the
real thing such as photos, videos, diagrams, maps, charts

? Records ? government or business writings, hospital records, police
reports, payment records

? Writings ? evidence other than records that are in writing such as
letters, receipts, contracts, promissory notes