As I expected, Defense is driving a truck through the gaps. Highlighting the requirement that, if jury makes assumptions about evidence, they must make them in favor of defendant.
Good use of photos and physical evidence.
The crux of it for me:
Quote:
8:47 a.m. ET: O'Mara tells jurors they can't fill the gaps or connect the dots for the prosecutors.
"Assumptions presume a lack of evidence," O'Mara said.
8:49 a.m. ET: "Do not give anybody the benefit of the doubt except for George Zimmerman," O'Mara said.
8:51 a.m. ET: “You’ve heard from him, time and time and time again, you’ve heard from him, telling you what happened that night,” said O'Mara, who also asked jurors to not presume why Zimmerman didn't testify.
...
8:57 a.m. ET: "How many ‘coulda- beens’ have you heard from the state in this case? How many ‘what ifs’ have you heard from the state in this case? They don’t get to ask you that. No, no, no," O'Mara said. He also says prosecutors are supposed to show "what I have proven to you."
|
At the same time, IMO, the narrative seems less emotionally compelling than that of prosecutor's and much less aggressive in attacking the evidence - it's almost like he is apologizing for telling them that the prosecution is wrong. So far, not the best work from them.