correct. where is the defense going with this? what they re trying to show is that george zimmerman may not have been the aggressor that night. this is going to come down to who was the aggressor, who started the fight. george zimmerman is saying i didn t do anything, i got on the phone, tried to notify the police, this is his defense. what they want to show is well, the victim in this case, trayvon, may have had something in his pants that would have led him to be the initial aggressor. i don t think it is going to get in. i think it is irrelevant. it is putting the victim on trial also. absolutely. a common tactic. that s right. here in georgia, it is called chandler evidence, you have to file a motion, ask the judge for permission, say there are things in the victim s past that make him violent or make him susceptible to being the initial aggressor, and the judge will make a decision on that prior to trial so that the jury doesn t get tainted if they say this is not ad
relevant? i don t, i don t think it is relevant. first of all, evidence like that would only go to if he had violence in his past. if he was convicted of some type of violence. the fact he sent a text message about weed, took a picture of a gun, people send me pictures all the time on my cell phone. if you saw some of the things my law partner sent me on the phone, you know what i mean, doesn t mean i am a violent person or convicted felon. i don t think it is coming in, i think it is irrelevant, it is victim bashing, and just an attempt at this point to prejudice the jury. but people sitting out there and actually watch law and order or used to are going to say i heard about this prior bad acts. right. and prior bad acts are not admissible. that s why if your state has something akin to the chandler rule, you can ask the judge permission ahead of time, but prior bad acts are not admissible for that very reason. people are going to say it shows propensity for something. rig