Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

 Dreadclaw69 wrote:
From what the witness said it seems that there was some racism from one party.

He did supposedly call Z a cracker.


Edit: That might have been what you were referring to but I'm not sure.

According to the defense' star witness, 'cracker' is not a racial term.

But she has also lied about a few things, so that might not be entirely accurate a statement, either.

 Gentleman_Jellyfish wrote:
He did supposedly call Z a cracker.


Edit: That might have been what you were referring to but I'm not sure.

Yup, that's the direction I was going in

 sourclams wrote:
According to the defense' star witness, 'cracker' is not a racial term.

But she has also lied about a few things, so that might not be entirely accurate a statement, either.

as a cracker, I don't consider cracker a racial term...

To quote a comedian that used to do stand up in my college town, "Hey! You! You're a delicious baked good that goes well with peanut butter or cheese!"

 sourclams wrote:
According to the defense' star witness, 'cracker' is not a racial term.

But she has also lied about a few things, so that might not be entirely accurate a statement, either.

hey if its about how it makes the recipient feel then cracker is most definitely a racial term.

Federal Government views the term cracker as racist. Same as the term oreo being used as a figure of speech of a black and white couple as another example. Jury much older I believe so the term "cracker" going to relate as racist term.

I think the heavy reliance on slang and ebonics, her illiteracy, and her amorphous testimony if not willingness to lie outright are all going to resonate strongly with the jury.

But the fact that the defense is (rightly, in my opinion) working her so hard on the inconsistencies may be seen as bullying.

There's a long way to go yet.

 sourclams wrote:
I think the heavy reliance on slang and ebonics, her illiteracy, and her amorphous testimony if not willingness to lie outright are all going to resonate strongly with the jury.

Aren't there schools that don't teach cursive anymore? Not being able to read cursive isn't the same as being illiterate, which was what was described earlier as the problem.

 Seaward wrote:
But the fact that the defense is (rightly, in my opinion) working her so hard on the inconsistencies may be seen as bullying.

There's a long way to go yet.

That's what a good defense lawyer is supposed to do. She obviously has issues with communication and affixing events to a simple timeline. All the defense has to do is show that her perception of events is not what actually happened.

Long way to go? Pffftttt Defense just blew through Prosecution Star Witness. Actually 50/50. Defense crushing her and "self inflected". Lets not forget the letter she her friend wrote.

"Why wasn't 'creepy-ass cracker' in prior interviews?" asked West, one of the attorneys for Zimmerman, who is facing a charge of second-degree murder.

"Nobody asked me," replied Jeantel, who said she can't read cursive, which the letter is written in.

The letter, in which Martin's name is spelled wrong, describes how Jeantel was speaking by cellphone with the 17-year-old Martin as he cut through a subdivision on his way to the home where he was staying. Jeantel has said she had the letter written for Martin's parents to give her account, but that she never intended for it to be made public.

I debate with myself later to remove this quote later......WTH is the American education system coming to.....

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/us/2013/06/27/teen-friend-trayvon-martin-to-return-to-stand-in-zimmerman-trial/#ixzz2XRQOZ6OI

 Ahtman wrote:
Aren't there schools that don't teach cursive anymore? Not being able to read cursive isn't the same as being illiterate, which was what was described earlier as the problem.

There are. Cursive's a dying art.

Trouble is, she claimed she wrote the letter herself, and had to retract that on the stand when it turned out she couldn't read it due to not knowing cursive.

 Ahtman wrote:

 sourclams wrote:
I think the heavy reliance on slang and ebonics, her illiteracy, and her amorphous testimony if not willingness to lie outright are all going to resonate strongly with the jury.

Aren't there schools that don't teach cursive anymore? Not being able to read cursive isn't the same as being illiterate, which was what was described earlier as the problem.

Yes. My brainiac boy doesn't do cursive neither do any of his nerd friends (one going to MIT way to go dude!!!). I don't think thats the issue. The issue is that
1. IIRC but at first she said she wrote.
2. now she didn't write it, but doesn't know what it says even though its supposedly written at least by a person writing for her.
3. She signed it.

That impugns your character pretty badly. Why did someone else write it for her? Can she in fact write?

Seaward wrote:But the fact that the defense is (rightly, in my opinion) working her so hard on the inconsistencies may be seen as bullying.

There's a long way to go yet.

I think the inconsistency will stand out more. Definitely a major train wreck for the prosecutions case.

Ahtman wrote:Aren't there schools that don't teach cursive anymore? Not being able to read cursive isn't the same as being illiterate, which was what was described earlier as the problem.

To my knowledge, most schools no longer teach cursive. It's been replaced with course work in word processing since that's how most formal communication is now executed.

Seaward wrote:Trouble is, she claimed she wrote the letter herself, and had to retract that on the stand when it turned out she couldn't read it due to not knowing cursive.

Definitely looks bad on her, though being honest I sometimes struggle to read my own hand writing years after the fact. I can look back at old notebooks and unless I remember really well what I was on about I have struggled to actually read what I wrote (of course my hand writing is also dead down atrocious).

 LordofHats wrote:
Definitely looks bad on her, though being honest I sometimes struggle to read my own hand writing years after the fact. I can look back at old notebooks and unless I remember really well what I was on about I have struggled to actually read what I wrote (of course my hand writing is also dead down atrocious).

But she did say she can't read cursive, not just that she couldn't read that. And I doubt she's a type of Hemingway who can write in cursive but not read it.

Oh, that's a star witness.....glad this went to trial.

 LordofHats wrote:
I think the inconsistency will stand out more. Definitely a major train wreck for the prosecutions case.

It may well be. We'll see. I personally think that the inconsistencies aren't even as bad as the whole, "I know what happened because I heard Trayvon's earbuds falling on wet grass over the cellphone," thing, but mileage may vary.

Definitely looks bad on her, though being honest I sometimes struggle to read my own hand writing years after the fact. I can look back at old notebooks and unless I remember really well what I was on about I have struggled to actually read what I wrote (of course my hand writing is also dead down atrocious).

Sure, but if you're handed one of your old notebooks, you'd say, "My handwriting sucks, I can't read this," not, "I can't read cursive."

I tired to listen this morning while working, I just can't do it now. Its not pretty.

 Seaward wrote:

It may well be. We'll see. I personally think that the inconsistencies aren't even as bad as the whole, "I know what happened because I heard Trayvon's earbuds falling on wet grass over the cellphone," thing, but mileage may vary.

I think some of it is a mix of her nervousness, hindsight, and poor prep by the prosecution but the prosecutions entire handling of this witness is extremely bizarre since she first appeared. I don't think she's lying per se, but I think she's embellishing what she heard in an attempt to get back at Zimmerman.

"How does wet grass sound?"


hahahah

 Frazzled wrote:
"How does wet grass sound?"


hahahah

I'm mostly deaf... I have no idea.

But, over the cell phone? Is that possible?

 Frazzled wrote:
"How does wet grass sound?"


hahahah

I beat that's not the sound that the prosecution is making

Even if it is, does it really matter? No one is gonna think of the top of their head "I know what that sounds like" they think "wtf does that mean?" The second part is gonna matter a lot more than anything else... Unless people in Florida all know the sound of wet grass.

I know the sound of the Ice Cream truck and the Taco Truck.

I know the sounds of a sprinker and a baby crying.

I don't know what wet grass sounds like. Perhaps she should have just said the phone landed on something soft.

a taco truck? Those exist? Man I'd chase that down like a lion taking down a zebra.

 KalashnikovMarine wrote:
a taco truck? Those exist? Man I'd chase that down like a lion taking down a zebra.

I've never tried the one that comes around where I work, but I've heard it's delicious.

 Gentleman_Jellyfish wrote:

 KalashnikovMarine wrote:
a taco truck? Those exist? Man I'd chase that down like a lion taking down a zebra.

I've never tried the one that comes around where I work, but I've heard it's delicious.

Yep. Living in a new neighborhood in Houston, they drove around daily as houses were still being built during lunch time.

Some folks call them roach coaches as they have a reputation for never getting a health inspection and claims of people getting digestive problems from them.

I've had it a few times. Fair enough. Too many good Mexican restaurants here to justify eating from one.


But back on topic, I wish I could watch this at work. Or at least listen.

 KalashnikovMarine wrote:
a taco truck? Those exist? Man I'd chase that down like a lion taking down a zebra.

Taco roach coaches are awesome, but they are not for the weak.

Edit: Am I the only person who wants to start a new food line: "Crazy Ass Crackers, you'll just die over them"

 Frazzled wrote:
Edit: Am I the only person who wants to start a new food line: "Crazy Ass Crackers, you'll just die over them"

Go into it with Paula Dean, I hear she has some free time these days

 Dreadclaw69 wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:
Edit: Am I the only person who wants to start a new food line: "Crazy Ass Crackers, you'll just die over them"

Go into it with Paula Dean, I hear she has some free time these days

Needs more butter!