Stay updated with breaking news from June nelson. Get real-time updates on events, politics, business, and more. Visit us for reliable news and exclusive interviews.
For the jury can be very helpful to help them visualize one side s version of the case. should the prosecution in this case respond with their own animation? maybe but it s probably too late for that. it takes a while to put something like that together. craig, what is the reasoning behind why they want to introduce what was in trayvon martin s system at the time, particularly, frankly, a depressant. does that help the defense? well, that s a good question, chuck. that s the question that s been kicked around a lot over the past 24 hours. you probably recall initially judge nelson decided that this toxicology report would not be allowed into evidence in terms of opening statements. she said she would revisit it later in the trial. yesterday we saw her revisiting the issue. also some of this was brought to light because of dr. bao. ....
Bodies during the actual shooting. so you could imagine how this might be a tad controversial. the defense again, the defense at one point said they were open to a number of edits. the animation, as we understand it, has actually been reduced to a number of stills for the most part. at some point the defense decided the edits would not be sufficient and they are asking june nelson to throw the entire thing out. the jury is not in the courtroom for any of this. this is the last hearing of the morning. after this particular hearing, the jury will be brought in and the defense will continue to call witnesses. witness number 13 is expected to be called at sometime this morning, john. lisa, go back, i guess i m stunned at this idea of animation, particularly when you ve got when the entire case is about circumstantial evidence. it s one person s version of events versus another. it s all in make ways circumstantial evidence or disputed testimony how an ....
You remember his testimony. in the course of his testimony he indicated in november he determined the amount of marijuana in trayvon martin s system would have little to no effect on his behavior that night in february of last year. then apparently two or three months ago dr. bao changed his mind, based on some books that he read and some research he poured over. then he decided that, well, okay maybe the marijuana did have some sort of an effect on his behavior that night. that s part of it. the other part of it is, of course, this idea that the defense has introduced that george zimmerman when he saw trayvon martin, he looked suspicious. but again, we should note that judge nelson has decided to allow it into evidence. we don t know yet whether that is going to be presented to the jury. chuck go ahead, lisa. if i can add to that, everything craig said is correct. i would add one of the things george zimmerman said on that ....
He owns the company that made the animation. initially the state had objections to the animation. for our viewers at home, this is an animation that depicts essentially what happened that night, the conflict itself, the altercation itself, the moments leading up to the altercation, but depicts those obviously if being presented by the defense, it s the defense s point of view of what happened. so there are a number of objections made by the state. the state initially indicated they would be okay with some ed edits. eventually they wanted the entire thing thrown out. that s what the attorneys are talking about now, the motion to throw out the animation. jury not in the room now. judge nelson started this hearing at 8:30. we thought the jury might be brought in by 9:00. that obviously isn t going to happen. one other piece of news yesterday, chuck. there was word this forensic report would be allowed in. this is, of course, the ....
Trial. so animations are common. it s modern technology. we are in the 21th century. whenever i try to use any kind of technology in the courtroom, the other side objects. it s usually up to the judge to decide whether or not it comes in or not. it has to be based on the evidence like anything else. this is expert witness pulling together all the evidence on the defense side and trying to recreate it via the animation and the prosecution s objection is, look, this includes facts and information that are either not in evidence or that are disputed, so it s misleading to the jury. do prosecutions do this? i would assume this this has become a tactic of defense lawyers, have prosecutors responded around the country? i don t feel like i ve seen that often on the prosecution side? sure. you see them a lot in car accident cases and dui cases, especially when exactly what happened and the physicality of the case is in dispute, an expert putting it all together ....