The Zimmerman trial
My friend Don Kates emails that it is an unusual prosection
"a) the defendant is clearly innocent;
b) the prosecutors know it -- but for wholly political reasoms have been ordered to prosecute [or should I say persecute?] him;
c) the prosecutors are simply going thru the motions -- presenting witness after witness whose evidence confirmis that GZ was feloniously attacked and was simply defending himself;
When a prosecutor has to move to strike their own LEO's testimony, saying that he found Zimmerman credible, that tells you all you need to know.
And consider, so far as I know, they haven't called the Medical Examiner who did the autopsy (they did call one to opine that Zimmerman's injuries didn't prove his head was being banged on concrete). All the issues about who was on top should easily be settled by the ME. If Martin was on top the shot would have ranged upward through his body. If Zimmerman was on top, the bullet would probably have passed through at right angles.
d) the prosecution has NO witnesses who have facts to support the prosecution theory of the crime.
Don also points out: "ndicative of the media's endless cacophony of bias and inaccuracy is the result of a voice stress (lie detector) test of GZ: It showed "no deception." Now I have no idea what, if any, credibility should be given such testing. The truth that deserves emphasis here is this: the media
sued to force the police to reveal the test results but when it found that the confidential report had concluded "no deception," this apparently disappointing result was barely mentioned or ignored
Here's a reference to the test.