Update #10 (Part 2) – The Trayvon Martin Shooting “DeeDee” Reveals The False “Truths”…

<— Continued from Update #10 (Part 1)

To paraphrase Winston Churchill:

Benjamin Crump created a riddle, wrapped in a mystery, inside an enigma; but perhaps there is a key. That key is TRUTH.

All We Need To Do Is Ask DeeDee

Imagine if you will, a constructed narrative, designed with an intentional and hurried specific purpose, and replete with a hidden agenda.

If your ordinary mind can take you into the land of Machiavellian construct then you are a far better-minded cynic than I.

It is only when you are deep within that manipulative place you can begin to understand how challenging it is to get inside this riddle. It is like a basketball made of individual rubber bands intertwined to form a specific shape.

As you take apart the rubber bands the new shape takes on an entirely divergent form, and you realize what you once saw from a distance is not a basketball after all. Daryl Parks and Benjamin Crump are master band weavers but what you are about to read will help you unlock the mystery.

I must take an authors liberty to thank many people here at the Last Refuge for providing literally hundreds of hours of painstaking research to carefully untangle the cyber enigma codes. And so we begin, again.

Only this time we begin the final analysis.

It is important prior to going any further in this thread that you have read Update #9 and Update #10 part 1 in their entirety. Trying to understand this thread post alone would be like trying to understand the US Constitution without first having read the Declaration of Independence. In addition the prior two segments contain over 200 sourced and referenced citations. In the interest of already cumbersome readability it would be impossible to duplicate all the citations into one digestible article.

From the outset of the Trayvon Martin shooting case two things have been consistent. First, the statements both recorded, written, and re-enacted by George Zimmerman; And Second, the Sanford Police account that after a two week investigation there was no cause for arrest. The constancy of these two points are factually irrefutable.

So what changed? Well, for one, the narrative and discoveries of the Trayvon contingent of attorneys and media specialists. And more importantly the climate that led to the change of prosecutorial determination officials amid relentless media and political pressure.

Despite these two substantive changes, one from an obviously, and expectedly, biased party in Team Trayvon; and the other from an optically worried political class, the facts or known truths have never changed from before March 5th. Those facts have remained constant.

Yet, George Zimmerman now sits in jail. So, if the facts of the case did not change since before he was cited with an affidavit for probable cause for arrest, then why is he now incarcerated?

Brutally short answer: Political fear, worry about riots and public reaction via racial animosity, and most worrisome of all “lies”; or in todays politically correct lingo “mistruths”.

Trayvon Martin was shot around 7:15pm on Sunday February 26th. His father, Tracy Martin, was notified shortly before 8am on Monday February 27th. He went to the police station and met with lead investigator for the Sanford Police Department, Detective Chris Serino on Tuesday February 28th, when he also heard the specifics of the Zimmerman account and listened to the 911 witness phone call. The now infamous phone call containing the background cries for help, which at that time he confirmed to police WERE NOT the voice sounds of Trayvon, his son. (Details available in Update 10 Part-1)

As a specific outcome from this debriefing, on the same date, February 28th, in the afternoon, Tracy Martin called his sister-in-law, Patricia Jones, herself an attorney, for help. She in turn contacted Tyrone Williams, another attorney, who knew how to contact Benjamin Crump from the law firm Parks and Crump. Parks and Crump both specialize in personal injury/wrongful death with an emphasis on civil rights cases.

Both Tyrone Williams and Patricia Jones reached out to Benjamin Crump who was in court in Tallahassee. The outcome from these contacts was Crump was put directly in contact with Tracy Martin to discuss the shooting on Wednesday February 29th.

On Wednesday February 29th Trayvons body was returned to Fort Lauderdale via funeral director Richard Kurtz. The viewing and visitation was held on Friday evening March 2nd, and a memorial service with interment the following day March 3rd. Through this timeline Trayvon’s mother, Sybrina Fuller age 46, had not left her North Miami home.

48 hours after being contacted by Tracy Martin, with no arrest of George Zimmerman yet made, Benjamin Crump decided to take the case. Crump enlisted the help of Sanford attorney Natalie Jackson, a former Naval Intelligence Officer, and Director of a Womans Trial Group on March 1st.

Together Jackson and Crump formulated a media strategy, and on Monday March 5th Jackson brought in Ryan Julison, a publicist who had worked with her on a number of high-profile cases. Julison pitched the story to a long list of media contacts.

Eventually, on Wednesday March 7th, Reuters published a story titled “Family of Florida Boy Killed by Neighborhood Watch Seeks Arrest.” The next day, March 8th, CBS News aired a segment on “This Morning,” and by 10 a.m. a crowd of reporters gathered at Natalie Jackson’s law office for a news conference with Ben Crump and Tracy Martin.

Benjamin Crump – Lead Attorney for Trayvon’s parents, and Natalie Jackson

The team was now assembled the firestorm media blitz was about to begin.

In the same timeframe George Zimmerman was being questioned and investigated by Sanford Police and investigators. In addition to a 6 hour unrepresented questioning session the night of Sunday February 26th, the police followed up with a crime scene re-enactment with Zimmerman on Monday February 27th. Then, at the conclusion of the re-enactment three detectives grilled Zimmerman, again unrepresented, at police headquarters in their most thorough and hostile questioning. They told Zimmerman they didn’t believe him, and tried unsuccessfully to poke holes in his story.

George Zimmerman’s statements, explanations, outlines and narrated construction of events did not change from the initial night of interrogation, through the on scene crime re-enactment, and again during the third round of questioning at Sanford Police headquarters. He continued to repeat the same consistent structure of the events that led up to the shooting. In summary Zimmerman accounted as follows:

As has been reported, Zimmerman told police officials that he lost sight of Martin and went around a townhouse to see where he was. Then he claimed Martin confronted him and punched him in the face, breaking his nose, and knocking him down.

According to a Daily Beast’s source, Zimmerman told police that when he was on the ground, Martin straddled him, striking him, and then tried to smother him.

Zimmerman claimed that he yelled for help, and that various neighbors who peered out to see the fight from their backyards didn’t get involved. Zimmerman told officers he was so paralyzed by fear that he initially forgot he had a gun, but he said that after Martin noticed his 9mm pistol, Zimmerman pulled it out of his belt holder and fired one round, a hollow-point—the round that killed Martin. (*Note – The autopsy report on Martin has not yet been released.)

Zimmerman told police that Martin’s last words after the shooting were, “Okay, you got it.” He said the phrase twice, then turned and fell face-down on the ground.

(Martin’s father told reporters last month that police had told him his son’s last words were, “You got me.” Benjamin Crump, the family’s lawyer, said he doesn’t believe either account.)

Zimmerman told police he didn’t realize that Martin was seriously injured, and that he lunged to get on top of him after the teenager fell to the ground. Moments later, a police officer from Sanford arrived, placed him in handcuffs and took his gun.

Following the 10am March 8th strategically structured press conference outside Natalie Jackson’s law office with Ben Crump and Tracy Martin, the media interest picked up exponentially. Ryan Julison, the publicist, who pitched the media narrative had done a masterful job of drawing in the attention.

Unfortunately it was from those initial story line pitches that several wrongful conclusions were drawn. Most importantly inaccurate of them was that George Zimmerman was white and the shooting was racially motivated.

But the Julison, Crump, Jackson, Martin, Fulton team et al needed to bait the media hook, so they were not aggressively correcting the factual inaccuracies that eventually worked their way into the Institutional Main Stream Legacy Media narrative.

Pandora’s racial box was open and there was no going back now. By March 23rd the race-baiting narrative reached a boil over point when President Obama took to the Rose Garden podium and publicly stated if he had a son he’d look like Trayvon Martin.

Four days after the Team Trayvon strategic press conference, on Monday March 12th, the Sanford police chief Bill Lee told reporters he lacked necessary probable cause to arrest Zimmerman. Bill Lee, the police chief, would also contend that under Florida’s “Stand Your Ground” law, and even under common Self-Defense laws, police could not arrest Zimmerman without evidence to contradict his story. And there was no contradictory evidence found from the initial beginning of the investigation on February 26th through March 12th.

Immediately Reverend Al Sharpton took up Trayvon Martin’s cause on his MSNBC show, and was soon followed by Jesse Jackson and NAACP President Ben Jealous.

The forces to pressure the Police Department, and the prosecutor’s office into an arrest were all assembled. The only thing that was lacking was justifiable evidence to do it.

There was a slight sense of necessary desperation on the part of Team Trayvon. They had coordinated the local and national NAACP, there were on-line petitions, Al Sharpton, Jesse Jackson, and Ben Jealous were all on board, but they needed heavier emotional artillery.

Enter Trayvon’s Mother, Sybrina Fulton. That Friday night March 16th Benjamin Crump arranged a meeting inside Sanford Mayor Jeff Triplett’s office. Triplett invited Trayvon Martin’s parents and their entire legal team into his office to listen to each of the recorded 911 calls along with the original nonemergency call from George Zimmerman.

No-one was there to represent George Zimmerman’s interests, only Tracy Martin, Sybrina Fulton, the legal team led by Parks and Crump, the media publicity team, and civil rights activists. Mayor Triplett played the calls on his computer.

“When we got to the cries for help, that was when Sybrina burst into tears,” recalled Natalie Jackson. “She said, ‘That’s Trayvon. That’s our son.’ She ran out of the room crying.” “The mayor himself started to cry,” Jackson said. “Everybody in the room was in tears.”

After playing the calls for Team Trayvon, Mayor Triplett overrode the prior decision of Police Chief Lee not to release the tapes, and instead publicly released the tapes to Martin, Fulton, Parks, Crump, Jackson, Julison et al for them to use in associated media coverage and releases.

Trayvon Martin’s parents. Tracy Martin (Dad) left and Sabrina Fulton (Mom) center. Attorneys Benjamin Crump and Natalie Jackson (background)

These tapes, along with the emotional visual of a heavily promoted grieving mom in Sybrina Fulton, were blood in the water for the now frenzied media. This was Friday March 16th. Tracy Martin and Sybrina Fulton along with their attorneys went from TV station to TV station giving interviews all weekend. The message was simplified, the calls for an arrest increased:

We only want an arrest, all we want is an arrest, we simply want an arrest

The financial motivation began to visibly peak just above the surface for those in tune to the previous efforts in the Martin Lee Anderson case also coordinated by Parks and Crump along with Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson. $7.2 Million Motivations.

But still the factual evidence of the case had not changed and their was still no actual reason, or evidence to proceed with an arrest.

More heavier artillery was needed. They needed more substance to continue the pressure. More research and strategy considerations would reveal a new strategic manuever.

So accordingly on Sunday night March 18th Tracy Martin decided to investigate his son Trayvon’s cell phone use. As reported by Benjamin Crump it was on this night that Tracy discovered Trayvon had been on the phone with a girlfriend. The girlfriend was previously unknown to them, did not attend the funeral services, and yet apparently was on the phone with Trayvon for 400 minutes on the day he was shot.

Benjamin Crump coordinated a press conference for Tuesday March 20th at 11:30am EST. The results of that press conference outlined the substantive narrative that would be used from that point forward. This is where the Skittles and Tea originated. This is where 14-year-old Chad Green originated. Again, here is an excerpt of that transcribed press conference: (emphasis mine, with dates added for importance)

We took another step in this — what has been a daily journey for the past three and a half weeks.

Mr. Martin, on Sunday evening [March 18th], was working with his cell phone account, trying to figure out Trayvon’s password. And he looked on it, and he saw who the last person was that Trayvon Martin talked to while he was alive.

He called me late Sunday night [March 18th] and told me that he had called the young lady, and he told me, and I was just utterly shocked when he told me the time that they talked. They had talked all that day, about 400 minutes, starting that morning to the afternoon. Like many teenagers do, they talked on the phones.

And all his family and friends knew Trayvon would have his ear plugs in his ear and he would have his phone on the side of his pocket. It was no different that day. His father and mother talked about, a lot of times, they would wake up and he’ll be on the phone talking to his friends.

Well, what George Zimmerman said to the police about him being suspicious and up to no good is completely contradicted by this phone log, showing, all day, he was just talking to his friends. And in fact, he was talking to this young lady when he went to the 7-11 and when he came back from the 7-11.

I’m going to get into that in detail because her testimony, her testimony that is shown on these phone logs, connects the dots. Completely connects the dots of this whole thing.

Ladies and gentlemen, it’s really important to note, and you can follow along because we now have the 911 calls. And we have Zimmerman’s call to the phone, the police dispatcher. And you can follow audio, every account now. Never, in any account, other than George Zimmerman, this neighborhood association loose cannon, does anybody say that Trayvon Martin was up to no good, that he seemed high or anything and in fact.

This young lady details it completely, the tone of the conversation and the nature of the conversation, and what was happening the last minutes of his life. I will ask you — her parents does (ph) not in any way want to reveal her identity. She is a minor. Her parents are very worried about her. She is traumatized over this. This was her really, really close personal friend. They were dating.

And so it’s a situation where to know that you were the last person to talk to the young man who you thought was one of the most special people in the world to you, and know that he got killed moments after he was talking to you, is just riveting to this young lady.

In fact, she couldn’t even go to his wake she was so sick. Her mother had to take her to the hospital. She spent the night in the hospital. She is was one of the most special people in the world to you. And we all were teenagers, so we can imagine how that is when you think somebody’s really special, and you call it puppy love or whatever you want to call it. Then suddenly and tragically, this is taken away and you have, unfortunately, a first-hand account of it.

So I will ask you again on behalf of the family and on behalf of the young lady’s family if you would please respect their privacy. She is a minor.

[...] Now, details. That day Trayvon Martin, 17 years old, three weeks, weighed about 140 to 150 pounds soaking wet, as his mother says, and that’s with his shoes on, leaves to go to the store to get some snacks before the NBA all-star game is about to start.

His little step-brother asked for him to bring some Skittles back and something to drink. He is talking to the young lady, as he walks to the store. The phone records show — you get copies of these phone records, they will show you the times the calls were made and how long he was on the phone. And it is without any doubt that he’s on the phone the entire time during the day. especially when he is going to that store and coming back.

You will see that he goes to the store talking to her. And then when he comes back he’s talking to her. This is what she relays. And I’ll share with you some of the audio. We’re going to turn this over to the Department of Justice and their investigation because the family does not trust the Sanford Police Department in anything to do with the investigation.

She relays how he went to the store. When he came out from the store, he said it was starting to rain, he was going to try to make it home before it rained. Then he tells her it starts raining hard. He runs into the apartment complex and runs to the first building he sees to try to get out of the rain. He was trying to get shelter. So he tries to get out of the rain.

And unbeknownst to him, he is being watched. He is a kid trying to get home from the store and get out of the rain. That’s it. Nothing else. So, he stands under that apartment building for a few minutes, the rain kind of dies down. He then goes, and he has his hoodie on because it’s raining and he goes back to walking. And he goes back to talking to her again. You’ll see the phone calls when it came in at 6:54. He then says, I think this dude is following me. And she talks about how he kind of slows down and he’s trying to look in the car like, I think this dude is following me. And she tells him, baby, be careful, just run home. She tells him that.

[...] This young lady connects the dots. She connects the dots. She completely blows Zimmerman’s absurd defense claim out of the water. She says that Trayvon says he’s going to try to lose him. He’s running trying to lose him. He tells her, I think I lost him. So, he’s walking and then she says that he says very simply, oh, he’s right behind me. He’s right behind me again. And so she says “run.” He says, I’m not going to run. I’m going to walk fast. At that point, she says Trayvon — she hears Trayvon say, why are you following me.

She hears the other boy say, what are you doing around here. And again, Trayvon says, why are you following me. And that’s when she says again he said, what are you doing around here. Trayvon is pushed. The reason she concludes, because his voice changes like something interrupted his speech.

Then the other thing, she believes the earplug fell out of his ear. She can hear faint noises but no longer has the contact. She hears an altercation going and she says, then suddenly, somebody must have hit the phone and it went out because that’s the last she hears.

[...] Arrest George Zimmerman for the killing of Trayvon Martin in cold blood today. Arrest this killer. He killed this child in cold blood. Right now, he is free as a jay bird, he’s allowed to go and come as he please while Trayvon Martin is in a grave.

Full Transcript Available HERE

Do you sense the urgency, weight, and importance that Crump is placing on this “girlfriend”? He identified her as “DeeDee”, describing the name as an alias, then proceeded to state she had sworn a testimonial, then a sworn statement.

Essentially Benjamin Crump based the entire construct of the Trayvon narrative of events squarely on the shoulders of “DeeDee“.

Before proceeding it is highly important that you pay attention to the dates and times associated with this Press Conference, and with the content outlined within the substance of the press conference. Tracy Martin “discovered the phone records” late Sunday evening the 18th, he called Crump “very late” that night. The press conference was Tuesday morning March 20th at 11:30am. There was only one day, Monday the 19th, between the discovery and the conference.

Monday, March 19th a school day.  Benjamin Crump would have needed to talk to, interview, and retrieve a testimonial from a 15-year-old girlfriend, described as was one of the most special people in the world to Trayvon.   She was in Fort Lauderdale, Crump was in Sanford, Florida.

She was filled with “puppy love” and “traumatized beyond anything anyone could imagine”. So devastated she had to be taken to the hospital and could not even attend the visitation or funeral. So special that Trayvon and DeeDee spent 400 minutes, or 6 hours and 40 minutes on the phone with her on one day, Sunday February 26th, the day he was shot.  His last day alive.

Their relationship was “so special” that after hearing the event unfold on the phone she did nothing. She never called Trayvon again, she never called Mom or Dad worried, she never spoke to anyone about it, nothing.   How is it possible they were so especially close that Tracy didn’t even know who she was.  No-one did.  Not Tracy, not Sybrina, not no-one.

She was so important to Trayvon yet she refused to cooperate, or talk to police, or give sworn statements to states attorneys or police, even when offered representation. From March 20th until sometime after April 4th, she refused to cooperate; then, when she did give a statement, she would only give it to Federal authorities. Does that part make sense to you?

Oh, it gets worse. But more on that in a moment. For now just understand how important to the narrative DeeDee actually is.

Fast Forward. Thursday March 22nd, yet there was still no cause for arrest, nothing of substantive verifiable evidence had changed. DeeDee still refusing to be interviewed by investigators, and the media interest was boiling.

Subsequently, on March 22nd driven by the relentless 24/7 media blitz of Family Attorney’s Parks and Crump, along with Al Sharpton, Jesse Jackson and the NAACP applying pressure, the Sanford city commission voted “no confidence” in Police Chief Lee by 3-2 margin.

The police the chief Bill Lee announced his temporary resignation of the case. Lee told a news conference that while he stood by the Sanford Police Department, he was stepping aside to remove any possibility of distraction caused by him.

“It is apparent that my involvement in this matter is overshadowing the process,” he said. “I do this in the hopes of restoring some semblance of calm to the city, which has been in turmoil for several weeks.”

Some news agencies even began to sell the story and report that Sanford’s lead investigator, Chris Serino, wanted Zimmerman charged with manslaughter that night but Wolfinger’s office put a stop to it.

The city of Sanford issued a statement saying that is completely not true.

Police did that night prepare an incident report that lists “manslaughter” as the possible crime being investigated, but in every case in which an officer prepares an incident report, he or she fills in that spot with some crime and statute number to allow the agency to properly report crime statistics to the FBI.

Three weeks ago, on Monday April 2nd, during an exclusive interview with the Sentinel, Police Chief Lee disclosed certain details of the investigation and during that session, attended by Detective Serino and others, Serino said his investigation turned up no reliable evidence that cast doubt on Zimmerman’s account – that he had acted in self-defense.

“The best evidence we have is the testimony of George Zimmerman, and he says the decedent was the primary aggressor in the whole event,” Serino told the Sentinel March 16. “Everything I have is adding up to what he says.””

So it would be prudent for the media and Trayvon supporters to stop with whole “The lead investigator wanted to charge him but it was shuffled under the rug” narrative. It really only further diminishes the search for truth in this case.

And yet Zimmerman was arrested and charged by Special Prosecutor Angela Corey with Second Degree Murder. They got their arrest. Or as Crump would say, they got to “first base”.

Getting to “Second Base” or “financial scoring position” requires them to get past the immunity hearing. If Zimmerman successfully argues the immunity hearing and the Judge finds self-defense was reasonably warranted, then the entire case is wiped out and Zimmerman will be released.

Throughout the horrible story of Trayvon Martin there have been two paralleling goals. From the Trayvon family they sought truth, and from the Trayvon Family Attorneys they sought justice. But not the type of justice you would assume.

Benjamin Crump esq was seeking monetary justice. Wrongful Death type financial justice.

Initially, I believe, Benjamin Crump was contacted because Tracy Martin and Sybrina Fulton just wanted honest answers. However, the motivation behind Parks and Crump, while it may contain some semblence of this objective, is more aptly framed around financial interests, and a broader, social/financial justice. This provides them prestige and influence under racially driven civil rights type auspices. Legal civil-rights credibility.

Tracy Martin, and Sybrina Fulton became, perhaps unwitting, tools toward the end goals of a much larger objective. Tracy and Sybrina stood to gain success in their original goal of knowlege, and then Crump added another benefit, while not initially considered, of financial reward.

Yet, the factual evidence stood in their way of both goals.

On one hand you see distraught parents forced to face the reality of a troubled teenage son, and simultaneously faced with guilt from complicit failure as parents to provide Tryavon the internal moral compass and value system to succeed. Defining him as a victim helped avoid confronting the mirror.

On the other hand you have a self-defense claim from Zimmerman which would not only wipe out any chance for Parks and Crump to achieve Financial Justice, but such an outcome would also place the guilt burden back upon an absentee Mother and Father in accepting the failure to develop a moral compass within their son.

Enter Florida’s immunity statute.

The law: Statute 776.032 Immunity from criminal prosecution and civil action for justifiable use of force.—

(1) A person who uses force as permitted in s. 776.012, s. 776.013, or s. 776.031 is justified in using such force and is immune from criminal prosecution and civil action for the use of such force, unless the person against whom force was used is a law enforcement officer, as defined in s. 943.10(14), who was acting in the performance of his or her official duties and the officer identified himself or herself in accordance with any applicable law or the person using force knew or reasonably should have known that the person was a law enforcement officer. As used in this subsection, the term “criminal prosecution” includes arresting, detaining in custody, and charging or prosecuting the defendant.

(2) A law enforcement agency may use standard procedures for investigating the use of force as described in subsection (1), but the agency may not arrest the person for using force unless it determines that there is probable cause that the force that was used was unlawful.

(3) The court shall award reasonable attorney’s fees, court costs, compensation for loss of income, and all expenses incurred by the defendant in defense of any civil action brought by a plaintiff if the court finds that the defendant is immune from prosecution as provided in subsection (1).

So under section “2″ an arrest implies “probable cause”, but the hurdle of immunity still needs to be overcome. Once the process of arrest is established they then need to get beyond the immunity hearing. Once past the immunity hearing a civil action is possible. For the purpose of “monetary justice” it only takes an arrest (first base), winning the immunity hearing (second base), and then on to trial; a subsequent conviction is not necessary.

Without an arrest that leads to trial, there is no implied probable cause, which could lead to Compensatory and punitive damages for wrongful death. They need an arrest and subsequent trial. They DO NOT need a conviction to achieve PAYDAY.

Remember this specific point as you contemplate the Crump strategy.

Again, the problem lay with factual evidence not leading to arrest. So media evidence was needed. Media evidence need not be real, it merely needs to appear to be real.

On Monday March 12th the absence of evidence was again noted by investigators. By Friday night March 16th the 911 calls became a media strategy to manufacture the framing for an arrest.

But, the investigators had already determined the 911 calls did not contradict Zimmerman, to the contrary when added to the eye-witness accounts they supported Zimmerman’s explanation of events.

Crump needed something else to change the arrest narrative in their direction.

That something became “DeeDee”, Trayvon’s “girlfriend” and she became an audio-witness. Again it is important to review the CNN Transcript from Crumps Press Conference disclosing DeeDee.

There is only ONE problem.  The framing is FAKE.

Yep, CONTRIVED – MANUFACTURED – PHOONY – FAKE !!!

Does “DeeDee” exist?  Yes, when you follow the twitter feed from Trayvon Martin it appears so, yet despite the scrubbing of one on-line social identity, after another,  several internet blogs, and researchers were able to trace profile steps.

Early on, quick action was taken by the media team hired by Parks and Crump to hide the on-line social identity of Trayvon Martin.  In addition, to help create the optical illusion of “angelic Trayvon” they filed motions to seal school records, police records, and more alarmingly the coroners report.

It appears the initial goal was to construct a media campaign, and a media image.  That required creating a specifically controlled media driven personality profile of Trayvon Martin.

However, multiple independent blog researchers quickly began to question the narrative being sold by the Institutional Legacy Media.   During that research a divergent picture, arguably the real picture, the honest picture, of Trayvon Martin began to unfold.  The Daily Caller used web caches to capture 150+ pages from the twitter feed of Trayvon, which included multiple twitter handles, and the picture is far less angelic.

Another site, Wagist, began exhaustive research of Trayvon Martin to reveal many more details.

*Note* If you visit those twitter feeds prepare to enter a world of unbridled vulgarity, profanity, and very, shall we say, “salty” language.

Within that archived twitter feed, and those details, “DeeDee” is defined by Trayvon’s social identity @NO_LIMIT_NIGGA, under the Twitter Handle @iAdoree_Dee.

However “@iAdoree_Dee” as an on-line identity, was painstakingly scrubbed.   The Social Media Twitter account deleted, and the on-line identity deleted/scrubbed in all manner of social networks.   Perhaps, for obvious reasons, once again the truth presents a risk to a discovered false narrative.

It is quite amazing how much people will broadcast of themselves, and their daily, even hourly, activity into the internet.  Personally I never understood the need for such public broadcasts; who cares?   But when it comes to issues like “who is he/she” the shere volume of what people intentionally broadcast about themselves into the internet becomes  a resource.  And then the shere size of U-Tube users comes in to play also.

There are mulltiple traces of the profile for “@iAdoree_Dee” all over the web, and all publicly visible.     Several blogs like Daily Caller etc have become proficient at using “caches” or retrival searches to find deleted public information.    Even when an identity is changed or deleted  using various search engines and cache pages they can be located.

One such cache is Topsy. http://topsy.com/s/%40iAdoree_Dee/link  Within the topsy search you are able to locate pictures associated within social media accounts.  “@iAdoree_Dee”. Once such search reveals:

*Note: Shairaaa_x3 is identified as the cousin of “DeeDee”,  aka: @iAdoree_Dee.

The identified @iAdoree_Dee had (actually still has) an Instagram account under the user id: “yourobsessionx3” Seen Here:

So “DeeDee” who was “@iAdoree_Dee”, or someone on her behalf, removed the on-line identity. However, because of multiple intertwined social networks we were able to discover who she transformed into.

The on-line identity for @iAdoree_Dee” was scrubbed and she became @x_FashionObsess” 

“DeeDee” twitters under the user handle “@x_FashionObsess”

Twitter picture from “@x_FashionObsess”

“DeeDee” who twittered by @iAdoree_Dee is  now twittering by the name @x_FashionObsess.

On-Line riddle solved “DeeDee” is currently @x_FashionObsess (who was formerly @iAdoree_Dee).

*I have a strong hunch all of the above links are soon to be scrubbed*

Why is this important? Well, now you know who DeeDee is. So now we can take a historic look at what activities were taking place in the life of DeeDee on and around the time frames that Benjamin Crump describes in his story. The great thing about 15 year old kids these days is they feel the need to tell everyone what they are doing all all times.

Additionally Face Book has become so, well, yesterday duh. It’s all about Twitter now. Twitter, Twitter, Twitter….. 24/7 Twittering. *Note to self, never let the kids do this.

Ben Crump describes Trayvon on the phone with DeeDee for 400 minutes on the day of the shooting 2/26/12. So lets look at DeeDee on that date:

Do you interpret her day to be filled with 6 hours and 40 minutes of conversation with Trayvon prior to 7:30pm start of NBA All Star Game? “Out and about with the family” etc. Highly, highly questionable. Impossible even.

But then what about the Feb 27th, the day after Trayvon was shot. Remember according to Ben Crump “DeeDee” was irreconcilably devastated:

Now lets take a close look at the notification that “DeeDee” @x_FashionObsess posted to her twitter account and subsequent social media sites that Trayvon was dead.

DeeDee was responding to the death of Trayvon as a really close friend.  A self described “best friend”.    Indeed they were very close and talked often, but they were not “dating”, and there was no “puppy love”.   They had previously dated but the relationship was now one of friendship, great friendship.   And she sweetly aknowleged Trayvon’s death with “RIP Bestfriend You Will Be Missed”.

Not devastated, not uncontrollable, and not manic with grief.   She was confronting the loss of a close personal and platonic friend.

Indeed after following the Trayvon Twitter friendships for several weeks we note that her actual boyfriend is this guy:  @_GetFreshDeion

His Twitter Account is R.I.P Daddy @_GetFreshDeion  

So let’s really begin to expose the manipulative lying of Benjamin Crump, again referencing how he introduced DeeDee and what he said of her whereabouts on the days of Trayvon’s funeral. As previously outlined Trayvon’s viewing was the evening of Friday March 2nd with a memorial service and interment the following day Saturday March 3rd.

According to Crump:

“In fact, she couldn’t even go to his wake she was so sick. Her mother had to take her to the hospital. She spent the night in the hospital. She is traumatized beyond anything you could imagine”. (press conference 3/20/12)

No, it does not appear DeeDee @x_FashionObsess went to the hospital on Friday March 2nd, or Saturday March 3rd. Benjamin Crump specifically and intentionally LIED on this one.

We’ll get to the motive behind the lies in a moment, but first we just wanted to point out another potential issue that might, just might, absolve Tracy Martin of an initial mistake.

Like you can see, DeeDee aka @x_FashionObsess is a prolific tweeter. In this string of twitter communication (thread) below you’ll note a long phone call with Trayvon on Friday 2/24 my hunch is possibly when he was heading to Sanford with his Dad. It is a long call because she tweets while on the phone.

The twitter sign for frustration is >_< (squinting eyes)…. so something in this call was not going well between DeeDee and Trayvon [@NO_LIMIT_NIGGA]. But I digress.

Perhaps this is the call 2/24 that Tracy Martin confused with the day Trayvon was shot 2/26, who knows? or another option is this might have led the way for some creative use of “phone records” on the dates before sharing with the media.

A couple of things are certain:

DeeDee @x_FashionObsess and Trayvon @NO_LIMIT_NIGGA did not talk for 400 minutes on 2/26 the day he was shot.

DeeDee @x_FashionObsess did not go to the hospital on 3/2 and 3/3 and that was NOT the reason for not attending the viewing or memorial.

DeeDee @x_FashionObsess and Trayvon @NO_LIMIT_NIGGA were not Boyfriend/Girlfriend. They were close, platonic best friends.

DeeDee @x_FashionObsess was not devastated, destroyed, or an emotional wreck. She was sad that her best friend was shot. She notified others, including her cousin who is also a prolific tweeter, but the cousin did not know immediately who Trayvon was.

DeeDee @x_FashionObsess did not miss school.

DeeDee @x_FashionObsess did not contact anyone fraught with worry, because apparently there was no reason to.

Did DeeDee actually hear anything that night?  Who knows.  However, the mere fact that Benjamin Crump can be proven to have falsely constructed more than 80% of his press conference in order to plant misleading misinformation in the media sure brings the entire narrative into question.

You can also go back to Sunday March 18th, the date that Tracy Martin supposedly “found” DeeDee via computer search of Trayvon’s phone records; and follow DeeDee through the time Tuesday morning 2/20 of Benjamin Crumps big press conference where he proclaimed the “sworn affidavit”. NOTHING THERE EITHER. Went to school 3/19 regular day… blah, blah, blah.

Curiosor and Curiosor…. Follow Benjamin Crump and Alice into the “Rabbit Holes”.

Summary

The constructed and manipulated evidence to support the claims of Benjamin Crump and consequently Tracy Martin and Sybrina Fulton appear highly manufactured. There wasn’t enough evidence there for the legal authorities to act, so they created a tempest in a teacup media storm replete with false information to create, non-legal “media evidence”.

Media evidence does not need to be “real”, it merely needs to appear real, so as to pressure officials into bending to the demands of public opinion.

I don’t know how else to describe it. It’s very similar to the Tawana Brawley case with Al Sharpton, only this time its Benjamin Crump playing the role of Reverend Al.

Perhaps one of the reasons, maybe the primary reason, the special prosecutor Angela Corey didn’t go to the Grand Jury was because she would have either had to introduce DeeDee’s testimony, or avoid it completely.   The probable cause affidavit does not outline anything that Benjamin Crump sold to the media during his March 20 press conference.  Nothing.

In addition, the lead prosecution investigator Dale Gilbreath testified under oath during the bond hearing they had found no evidence to dispute George Zimmerman’s account of how the confrontation with Trayvon Martin started.

O’Mara –  “Do you know who started the fight?”

Gilbreath – “Do I know? No”

O’Mara – “Do you have any evidence that supports who may have started the fight?”

Gilbreath – “No.”

O’Mara - “Do you have any evidence, any evidence at all, any witnesses, any statements, anything that would contradict Mr. Zimmerman’s assertion?

Gilbreath –  Err, no.  Well, do I know who punched first?  No.

If investigator Gilbreath held an affidavit from “DeeDee” containing the narrative of hearing the fight start, the physical confrontation, the words exchanged, and Trayvon falling to the ground, he would have stated it under direct questioning.

Therefore one can only reasonably conclude no such sworn statement outlining the confrontation itself, from DeeDee or anybody else, actually exists.

If State Prosecutor Corey included the Benjamin Crump narration, and the obvious manipulations, within the affidavit, DeeDee would have been forced to bear witness at trial and O’Mara would be able to deconstruct or pull the lies out.   Perhaps, that is why no Grand Jury was actually used.

I doubt with considerable, and reasonable, certainty they even intend to introduce her into any legal proceedings.

Corey and Crump wanted the media evidence from “DeeDee’s” narrative to exist to get the arrest and probable cause.   But they do not plan to use any “DeeDee”  legal evidence, because it doesn’t actually exist.

That is why the Probable Cause Affidavit is merely implying that “a witness” might have heard something from Trayvon about being followed or watched;  Again, go back and look at the affidavit. Here’s a part:

Neither Mark O’Mara, nor George Zimmerman is actually disputing that passage within the affidavit about Zimmerman following Trayvon, because Zimmerman openly admits he did follow him.   He followed him to keep an eye on him because he thought his behavior was suspicious.    This is not disputed.   He gave statements to that effect directly to Sanford Detectives repeatedly.   So the actual legal and prosecutorial value to that “witness” (DeeDee) statement contained within the affidavit is nil.    It’s a moot point.

If you witnessed the Bond Hearing Friday April 20th you saw how weak the prosecution case is.

It would appear Zimmerman was intentionally overcharged with 2nd Degree Murder, based on constructed, non-legally binding, media-evidence in an effort to get him to plead down to a lesser charge and avoid trial.

Either a plea, or a trial, provide the same “probable cause” and culpability benefit to Benjamin Crump in a civil wrongful death lawsuit against various interests.

One thing is certain, you will not see anyone named DeeDee anywhere near a court room, EVER.

Continue To Update #11

About these ads
This entry was posted in media bias, Predictions, Racism, Trayvon Martin, Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

481 Responses to Update #10 (Part 2) – The Trayvon Martin Shooting “DeeDee” Reveals The False “Truths”…

  1. John Galt says:

    1rd !!

  2. Auntie Lib says:

    If you assume that this gets to trial (and I hope to heaven that doesn’t happen!) and if the prosecution brings up a phone conversation, or mentions a friend who claimed to have heard Trayvon say GZ was following him or any kind of claim that could be tied to DeeDee, wouldn’t the defense then be able to cross examine her at a minimum?

    • ZurichMike says:

      You are correct. Cross-examination would be allowed. The prosecution may try to enter the records of the phone call or copies of the tweets into evidence, but they can be so hard to decipher — all those abbreviations and symbols — that you’d have to identify the person who texted them, have her explain what they meant — and that could be very, very dangerous for the prosecution. DeeDee sounds like she knew TM, but was more interested in her *real*boyfriend and the color of her nails than in mourning the loss of the Skittles Thug.

  3. tara says:

    This is brilliant!!!!! Well worth staying up late for!!!! You need to contact O’Mara, he needs to see this. This totally tears apart the “Dee Dee is a witness” BS. Too bad Chad isn’t a prolific social media user, you’d probably find out that he wasn’t in the complex that night and so his story is pure fabrication as well. Wow. Nice job, sundancecracker! I hope to see your findings in the media soon!!!

    • tara says:

      Oh my god, I’m looking at the tweets of Daisha’s boyfriend. On Apr 14 he wrote “Me & @x_FashionObsess Thinking What We Should Name Our Kids The Names Are So Cute!” She sure got over Trayvon fast! Already planning to have kids with another guy. (laughing)

      Seriously, Trayvon’s parents have been raped by their crappy attorneys and the black “leaders”. I feel bad for them. I really don’t think that this was their initial intention. They lost their son, They were grieving and they were taken advantage of. Very sad.

      • Tara, I could not agree more re: the parents. I was just sitting here thinking “Someday they are going to look back and wonder: ‘How did this happen? We just wanted to find out what happened to our son.'”.

        I too feel bad for them.

        • Annie says:

          Unfortunately they had the opportunity to step forward and tell the truth at any time along the way…there is no excuse to destroy and innocent man’s life because you can not face your terrible parenting skills! I am appalled.

          • tara says:

            I will cut them some slack because they were traumatized by the death of their son. And I’m guessing that they’ve experienced their share of discrimination and profiling, and so when the attorneys and black “leaders” insisted that this was a white vs. black hate crime, the parents were unable to resist the theory. They are victims of a very aggressive hijacking, the hijacking of their son’s death in an attempt to create a bigger issue. Sadly, it’s going to all fall apart and the parents will come out looking as crappy as the circus performers who guided them. I honestly feel sorry for them. If they had hooked up with someone like O’Mara who would stick to the facts and keep quiet while the case worked its way through the courts, they would have been properly served.

            • stellap says:

              And Jessie J is back in Chicago, whipping up hate against the Chi PD, re the death of a man in their custody (10 thousand man march):

              http://twitchy.com/2012/04/21/rev-jesse-jackson-leads-ten-thousand-man-march-in-chicago-for-darrin-hanna/

              • tara says:

                What??? I just posted at the bottom of the page, Jackson was just in Tulsa for another so-called “Trayvon-like” death. This is absurd. If only he would give a sh*t about the many hundreds of blacks who are killed by other blacks just in Chicago alone….

                • stellap says:

                  Just let that comment out of moderation! JJ is a busy guy these days.

                  • tara says:

                    I think that’s all he does. He travels around the country and stirs the pot. Or slashes and burns, more like.

                • tara says:

                  ROFL! I see there’s a rally planned for today, but after the big disappointment of the “million hoodie march” which drew only a thousand or so, they’ve named this rally “Ten Thousand Man March”. I live in Chicago and although I’ll admit that I haven’t been watching a lot of local news coverage, I’ve heard nothing about this rally.

          • kinthenorthwest says:

            I agree with you on this…
            There were so many many times the parents should have stepped forward to protest, to stop lying and etc.
            I lost any sympathy for the parents when the panthers put out the bounty and Trayvon’s parents said nothing. When the Panthers made it a dead or alive bounty I think I lost any feeling that I had for these people….

  4. WordPress is giving me fits. Several segments within the center of the post disappeared for some unknown reason and needed to be re-created. As of 1:05am all appears to be correct now.

  5. casparweinburger says:

    Good work. However, I am not convinced about the 400 hour stuff. Kids these days can tweet a gazillion tweets a minute. They can also tweet while on the phone.
    Also, an absence of evidence isn’t evidence of absence. It is true that she makes few mentions of TM death and seems to be unaffected, but everyone reacts differently to death. I remember when my best friend in school died. He was my roommate and drinking buddy. I kept up with work, with classes, with my friends, with sports. I acted normally. I didn’t cry at his death or his funeral. Then 3 weeks later I went to get a case of brew. Standing in the LCBO I asked myself what my bud wanted to drink — then I realised he was dead. I broke down like a little girl in the beer store and hurried out and home. The point is that we cannot really tell much from these tweets about DeeDee’s state of mind. She might be in shock.
    Otherwise, good for digging her up. It looks like the prosecution won’t be able to protect her identify. I wonder if the liberal media is going to put her name out there? It is also true now that she looks more like a friend than a lover. In any case, we just have to wait until the evidence is presented.

    • Caspar, go back and read your comment. and THINK. You cannot compare yourself to DeeDee. Crump has already told us her frame of mind within the narrative.

      Sure you might have acted the way you did, but if your Mom was telling people you were hospitalized in despair, so riddled with grief you are tramatized and sick. What would that make your mom?

      Think.

      You are presenting STRAWMEN. That’s liberal logic.

      • Sharon says:

        The first three (or seven) iterations of intentionally constructed false narratives are deceptively presented and easily accepted distortions that have, somehow, already “passed the test” of a gullible public, aren’t they?….but they are just the starting point of the real game. Unbelievable…this is such an education.

        • tara says:

          I want to know why so many people accepted the story without digging for facts like we all did.

        • Sharon, you said a mouthful. It is amazing how perfectly logical and rational people can find reason where no reason exists. Willing acceptance of irrational normalcy.

          I have a new term for the condition: “cognitive co-dependency”

          “Cognitive Co-Dependency” is when a normal rational person, internalizes irrational illogical presentations, and somehow reconciles them to fit their scripted indoctrination of logical analysis.

          • Sharon says:

            “….internalizes irrational illogical presentations,…” Yes.

          • tara says:

            This is not unlike the hype of Obama in 2008. I’m going to admit that prior to 2008 I had always voted for the democratic presidential candidate. But I was so turned off by Obama’s hope and change shtick and I was aghast because of the way he was idolized by his groupies … I couldn’t vote for him. I ended up voting for McCain even though I didn’t like Palin. I could not understand how otherwise rational and intelligent people were so enamored with Obama simply because (they say) he’s a charismatic speaker. I saw right through it all and I was wondering how the hell everyone else couldn’t.

          • ZurichMike says:

            Excellent. And this shows how frightful the and successful the Marxists have been at dumbing down the electorate, and removing traditional educational goals (ability to reason through logic, factual analysis, structured argumentation — and *standards*). The destruction of standards and inability to reason turns people to sheeple — the “cognitive co-dependents”. Perfectly stated, SD, I am going to cut and paste and save that nugget of wisdom. THANK YOU/

          • A Woman says:

            Do you mean “cognitive dissonance”?

      • casparweinburger says:

        Thanks for the response. However, there are two issues: how long she actually spoke with Trayvon the night of his death, and the issue of her state of mind after her death. The first issue will come out. At this point I cannot agree that her great amount of tweets disproves she spoke for 400 hours with him. Tweeting and telephoning do not cancel themselves out. Second, the issue is her state of mind. I agree that there is more support for the statement that Crump is a liar, but again, I do not think we can infer from someone’s tweets a state of mind. Sorry. And remember. I am on GZ side. I just don’t want Team Zimmer to make too much of this information. I am much more excited about the manner in which O’Hara bitch slapped the prosecution up and down, back and forth today. It was sweet.

        • ZurichMike says:

          Depending on the calling plan, a single tweet may be billed in one-minute increments. I doubt that she spoke on the phone for over 6 hours with him, long distance.

          • casparweinburger says:

            She might have a calling card, or she can use Skype on a smart phone.

            • Keali says:

              Most calling plans these days have unlimited cell to cell, and no one uses phonecards these days, at least not teens, coming from an actual teen. I however don’t think they were on the phone that long and even if they were, they wouldn’t have been talking. Twitter takes up a lot of time. Most of her tweets are RT’s which means she was surfin’ around or stalking people on there pretty much.

        • Aussie says:

          hmmm…. this breaks down when you read her tweets. If she really did speak to TM that night, then her reactions should have been very different. Someone tweeted the news of TM’s death, and her response was very cool. She gave no sign of having had a conversation with him, or of knowing that he thought himself in any kind of danger.

          The prosecution is relying on this alleged evidence, yet this witness, if you can call her a witness was way too cool the day after this incident.

          • tara says:

            I’m thinking that she really did speak to him but she doesn’t care much about him. He was apparently just one of many casual friends, nothing special. That would explain why she didn’t give a sh*t when that last phone call was cut off, it was just business as usual on her end. Apparently it wasn’t until March 18 when Tracy Martin called her that her thoughts were on Trayvon again. Well, aside from one brief post on her tumblr account, an image with the comment “just saw this on the news today”.

            I will be totally shocked if they call her as a witness. And yet I think the prosecution NEEDS to call her because I think she’s the only thing they’ve got. O’Mara will deal with her handily.

          • MsCD says:

            lol … is it quite possible that in all your digging this may not be the REAL DeeDee?

            • stellap says:

              Anything’s possible. There are a lot of people who want us to think we’re wrong, who want us to BELIEVE we’re wrong. Wonder why they’re trying so hard to make the case. Maybe you know?

        • Blam says:

          Yes, it was. The lead investigator was helpless.

        • A Woman says:

          You can tweet from a computer while calling via a phone and/or skype.

        • Aicha Wallaby says:

          Well, teenagers don’t usually talk for 400 minutes (not hours ;-) on the phone. They may text 400 times in 6 1/2 hours (at least it seems like it) Also, my phone’s battery lasts a good long time if I’m not talking on it, but after a couple hours talking on it, it runs the battery down quickly (plus, it gets so hot you need oven mitts to hold it).

          400 minutes in one day? I’m really, really skeptical of that claim.

      • Annie says:

        EXACTLY!!
        The problem is that in our current society they are attempting to question what we know to be true….Just as they have done to the Jackson/Sharpton followers! Thinking independently is not allowed!

    • tara says:

      Schock? You have to be kidding. She posts only a few tweets about Trayvon dying and then it’s back to normal tweeting about guys and other innocuous stuff. And during the period when Crump claims that she’s so distraught she had to be hospitalized we can clearly see that she’s NOT in any hospital and she’s NOT distraught. The prosecution’s key witness, and probably only witness, has just been shredded. Crump has been shredded too.

      • casparweinburger says:

        Thanks for the response. It is not uncommon for people to act in peculiar ways after a tragedy. I do not pretend to know how a 15 year old of Gen Twit reacts. Perhaps she thought it inappropriate to discuss TM death with people that didn’t know him. My point is that we cannot base much on these tweets. We are a drawing massive inferences on scant data without a context. Do we not remember how the liberal media made so much of the lack of marks in the police surveillance? Well, I just don’t want to be guilty of doing the opposite. I have no doubt that Crump is an a-hole, which will make GZ’s vindication so much the sweeter.

        • stellap says:

          Except that she appears to be doing other things when she is supposedly in the hospital prostrate with grief. You can see that she could hardly be in two places at the same time?

          • casparweinburger says:

            unless she doesn’t want people to know she is having a nervous breakdown in a hospital but trying to keep up appearances.

            • stellap says:

              Yet the very first thing she tweets about the next morning is that she’s going to get her hair done. Sorry, I think you are bending over backwards to “try to be fair”. Or else it’s something else – I’m not sure, but I’m watching your comments to try to figure it out.

              • casparweinburger says:

                As I said before, we need to wait to find out what she actually did that day. We need evidence. We need hospital records. We need her testimony, if possible. O’Mara will never rely on the tweets of a 15 year old girl to prove a case unless there is solid evidence like hospital records.
                And you can watch my comments all you want. Take your veiled threats somewhere else.

                • stellap says:

                  I’m not going anywhere, since I am an admin here. You are a visitor in my virtual living room, not vice versa. I’m not threatening you. Please. I watch everyone who is new here, and draw whatever conclusions I like. If you think there should be more evidence for or against what is posited here, why don’t you go out and find it. In the meantime, the rest of us will continue to find what we can.

            • Keali says:

              I highly doubt this…The way she tweets everything, from “morning twitter, night twitter, riding in the car, going to hang up” (HER EVERY MOVE) she definitely would have said she was there at the hospital, even if just for the attention.

            • Jay says:

              So Trayvon was buried on March 3 so which day was she in the hospital the 3 or the 2 the tweets show the 2 she was in school and on the 3 she says she in the house.

          • casparweinburger says:

            Yes, she ‘appears’ , which means nothing. What someone says they do and what they actually do are two different things.

        • Aussie says:

          again, your argument breaks down because the people that she tweeted knew TM. It is there amongst the tweets…. some of the others showed more emotion than she did.

          It is really odd the way that she made no mention of having a conversation with TM especially when he died as a result of a gun wound.

          • tara says:

            She was so traumatized that when someone said they were going to McDonald’s for a hamburger she jokingly requested one for herself too. Sure indications of trauma, tweets about hamburgers, boys, shoes, etc. It reminds me of Casey Anthony’s behavior after her daughter “drowned in the backyard pool” (eye roll)

            • casparweinburger says:

              I do not pretend to understand the mind of a 15 year old girl and how one might react to such news. A tweet is 5 seconds of time. Maybe she had been crying her eyes out moments before but for a brief second someelse’s message cheered her up. People do not have to grieve 24/7. They also have to eat and communicate with people. Again, these tweets leave me unconvinced. I will wait for the hospital records. We complained about the liberal media. We should hold ourselves to a higher bar. We are better than they are. I do not want to act like the Young Turks but rather like Bill O’Reilly in this matter, who is a paragon of restraint

          • casparweinburger says:

            they knew of him, but we do not know the extent of their relationship.

            I do not find it odd that she would not discuss that over twitter. People here are treating this like it is a smoking gun, but it doesn’t really prove anything. What we really need are hospital records of her stay. Until I have that, I am unconvinced. Sorry. We complained about the liberals and their mistreatment of the police surveillance and disregard of police testimony on the night of GZ’s injuries, so let us not loose our heads and act like they did. Let’s wait for the facts and irrefutable evidence.

            • stellap says:

              She has no problem talking about her real boyfriend! The only reason for looking at these tweets at all is to find out something about the girl who is the “smoking gun” to the prosecutor’s case. If they hadn’t put her there, we wouldn’t be looking. It’s as simple as that.

              • tara says:

                Exactly! She already has a boyfriend! Crump during his press conference repeatedly indicated that Trayvon was Daisha’s boyfriend. Crump wanted to paint this picture so that we would have more sympathy for their side. it wouldn’t have been nearly compelling if Crump had told the truth, that Trayvon was merely a friend, and not a very important one at that since she’s totally forgotten about him when the call was cut off just before his death. She said she knew there was a scuffle, but she didn’t bother to call him back to find out what happened, she just moved on with her life.

                I was re-reading the tweets and I was stunned when I noticed this on March 3, just one day after Trayvon’s wake, the one Daisha didn’t attend because she was “distraught” and in the “hospital”. Someone tweeted to Daisha “awwwe, today that kid funeral :-(” and Daisha re-tweeted it. But her very next tweet is “I wanna watch a scary movie…..” and there’s nothing about Trayvon. NOTHING.

                I want to remind anyone who still thinks that Daisha was distraught that she was tweeting this stuff less than a week after Trayvon’s death (she knew about his death the very next day after it happened) but it was a couple of weeks before anyone contacted her to find out what she knew. Crump said that Tracy Martin finally contacted her on Sunday March 18. Clearly Trayvon was not a matter of importance to this girl. I’m not criticizing her for it, I’m just saying that reality is not supporting Crump’s tear-jerker story.

            • Sharon says:

              I’m really trying to acknowledge your points of caution, casparw, but you are dismissing available facts….you are using some kind of process to dismiss specific information which does, in fact, deconstruct some distortions on the part of the prosecution’s media. I’m wondering if your process is something more and different than “a higher bar.” Perhaps you are feeling an instinctive “self-protective caution” about simply taking a stand for fear of what you may be accused of once you do. That I do understand, if that’s it.

              Normal Americans have been backpedaling in an effort to be nice for about 40 years, on all fronts. We have a couple of generations of folks now (myself included) who haven’t had much experience in aggressively fighting for what is true and deliberately exposing what is not. The field has been given over to liars for so long that now we feel a little bad pushing them into the dirt. Dunno. But I’ve gotten acquainted with Occam’s razor here, and the deceptions of the deceivers are so strong and omnipresent today that it is actually quite useful. That’s the way I live my private life–Occam’s razor all around. We’ve pretty much lost that in the public discourse about things that matter.

              This site is media of a sort–that wishes to speak true and it’s no different than media which wishes to speak false. We have no authority, judicial or otherwise, to impose consequences or spare punishment for either DeeDee or ZM. It’s a conversation in a Tree. That’s all.

              • casparweinburger says:

                Thanks for the thoughtful reply. I agree wholeheartedly that Crump is a snake oil salesman. I also agree that the prosecution has case thinner than rice paper. I also doubly agree that Team Skittles deserves not one iota of sympathy. I want O’Mara to rip of Corey’s neck like a rapid dog. I will relish every second of the debacle of blood.
                My point, which people seem to misunderstand, is we need to wait a bit to see how relevant this Deedee information is. In my opinion, in only reveals the thoughts of 15 year old girl. I do not understand 15 year old girls, so perhaps I am talking out my arse. That is all. I don’t want anyone to get too excited. We should get excited about stuff like O’Mara ripping apart Gilbreath on the stand.

            • Jay says:

              I have gone through hours of tweets from TM and Dee Dee to some of his friends, She strikes me as someone who didn’t care that much lets be honest if Tracy Martin didn’t look at those records chances are we would have no Dee Dee. She was so distraught but yet she contacted no one at all and from the looks of it had no intention to. The day of the wake she got her hair done.

          • John Galt says:

            +1000 Particularly when she tweeted multiple times about conversation with Trayvon on 2/24. Stream of consciousness tweeter but does not tweet about hearing confrontation, dropped call, and inability to reconnect at time of shooting?

            • tara says:

              Exactly. It’s her silence that speaks volumes. And again, no offense to her, it was Crump who said that Trayvon was her love, to my knowledge Daisha never said it.

        • Something you must also remember…the defense only needs REASONABLE doubt. The burden of proof is much higher for the prosecution. That’s why I don’t believe the prosecution wants to touch this.

      • ZurichMike says:

        And it would be easy to verify from doctor’s records whether she was treated at all. Maybe we should ask DeeDee’s manicurist if she noticed anything wrong with DeeDee when she had her nails done.

        • tara says:

          Maybe that was the “hospital” she went to. The nail clinic. >:)

        • stellap says:

          Or her hairdresser. That’s where she went the morning after the services for Trayvon.

          • Keali says:

            Although I’m not buying any of this, my step mother is a black woman and because she doesn’t like fooling with her “real” hair she does go get it done on the day of important events. She did when her mother passed.

            Like I said still don’t believe any of the BS we’re being fed about TM’s “innocence”.

            • stellap says:

              I understand what you’re saying, but this was the day AFTER the services for Trayvon.

              • Michell says:

                And according to the family attorney, she was so distraught and spent the night in the hospital and couldn’t even come to the services.

    • Aussie says:

      whilst I would agree that teens will react differently, unless you are a female you would not know how they would react, especially if the person is alleged to be very close.

      Here are some things to think about: at age 13 my family was shattered when my cousin Dorn was kidnapped, raped and murdered. Did it affect me? Yes, because it was a cousin where there had been some family closeness. It was horrible because it happened over an Easter break. My sister-in-law was about 13 or so when her mother died. Not really sure how it truly impacted her, but my father-in-law had a nightmare on his hands because of the way that the younger members of the family responded. In the third instance, when my sister died from cancer, my nieces were absolutely numbed and withdrew from society for quite a long time….. no need to go into detail about everything that happened. The youngest niece was roughly 13 years old.

      When looking at the above tweets I do not even see any signs of that kind or teenage mourning that I would expect upon hearing that a close friend had died. Girls do react differently from boys.

      • A Woman says:

        I witnessed the murder (gun shot to his back) of a close family friend when I was around that age. That night I was a mess. I even went into what my father called “convulsions”. I could not stop shaking. But by that evening, I was joking and laughing about the fact that the (neighbor’s) cats were all in my lap. From that day forward to today, I cannot remember ever crying over it. And for a time in my life, there, he cared for me more than my own father did.

        I have had “anger issues” throughout my life due in part to that night. Not everyone reacts the same way or similarly, male or female. Trauma just is one of those things one cannot credibly pigeon-hole.

        Crump may well have lied but do not assume you know how the girl felt due to her “tweets”.

  6. W says:

    Wow… Thanks for exposing the real truth. This is why lawyers can’t be trusted.

  7. Absolutely brilliant deconstruction. I hope the defense uses this enormous set of work. My only reaction is shock at how desperate the prosecution must be to resort to these theatrics. I expect some courtroom drama as some of this is presented, or else some furious backpedaling.

    • Sharon says:

      It makes me wonder what kind of deal the prosecution was offered by Al Sharpton “if they would just get on board and nail the white Hispanic”….and how hard will it be for them to disengage—

      • I don’t know what WILL happen, but there should be some careers ended over this. One thing for sure. Revrund Al and and Crump, et. al., will still be in business without interruption. Those guys never seem to reap what they sow.

        • Daryl Parks – is the 2012 version of Alton H Maddox
          Benjamin Crump – is the 2012 version of C. Vernon Mason
          Al Sharpton – is the 2012 version of Al Sharpton 1987

          The three constants in an otherwise ever changing universe.

  8. tara says:

    Two things I find odd:

    1) Daisha posts her first Travyon death tweet 5:44pm on Feb 27. Who told her that Trayvon was shot?

    2) On Feb 26 there is a gap in her tweets between 6:47pm and 8:07pm. After 8:07pm she resumes tweeting as usual, no indication that she’s concerned about someone, that she heard a scuffle, etc. At 8:47pm she announces that she’s going to McDonald’s to get a hamburger.

    Oh my god sundancecracker, you just totally ruined the prosecution’s only witness.

    • We’ll see how this goes. I’m pretty sure the entire case is gonna collapse in short order. IMHO He’ll win the Immunity hearing without question. I’m no longer worried about his defense, there is NO case against him. Again I repeat, nothing, not.one.thing, has changed regarding evidence against him since March 5th.

      Everything after March 5th is fabricated media evidence created only to make the illusion of evidence to drive sentiment and force public officials to an arrest. It’s all made up.

      At this point my attention is turning toward the Media, they sold this created false fiasco as reality. Now I’m interested to see how they “back away”…. That is gonna be the BIG STORY going forward. Although the media will never admit it.

      One slight correction. I do not think she did not tweet about going to McDonalds. I think she tweeted a response saying “<——– Meeeeee ", I made the same initial mistake when I first read it too.

      • tara says:

        They’re already backing away from the bloody-head Zimmerman photo. This should have been big news but there’s barely a peep about it. And likewise there will be barely a peep for every other hole punched in Crump’s fable.

        NICE WORK!! And even though I’ve said it several times, I will say it again, thank you for this great blog. I know you have put a tremendous effort into gathering evidence and organizing it so that we can all understand it. I know that is very difficult to do. I cannot tell you how much I appreciate your effort, and how much I appreciate this refuge.

        • Aussie says:

          talking about the bloody head photo… please go to andrew bolt’s blog and respond to the trolls… they really are idiots…

          Yes, believe it or not there was one who just had to say… he probably did it to himself. Another said it was not the same person in the photos… and so on it goes….

          And SD if you go to the hints and tips please leave your details for Andrew to come and look over here.

        • Jan Myers says:

          I so agree. Thank you, thank you for your research. I still am scared for Zimmerman. And what’s up with this special prosecutor the state brought in? Is she being played by Crumb and party? Surely she’s smarter than that to be in her position. (Sorry if you’ve already covered her. I just found your great blog!)

      • tara says:

        You’re right, she was just responding Meee as you said. I misread it. Thank you.

      • Jay says:

        I read that tweet 10 times it’s her saying she is going to Mc Donalds I’m 100% sure.

      • Michell says:

        I think the media will do what it always does and just quit talking about it and move on to the next story and pretend there never was a Trayvon.

    • John Galt says:

      “Who told her that Trayvon was shot?” And what did Dee Dee tell them when they told her that Trayvon was shot? O’Mara may subpoena her phone records and find interesting things.

      • tara says:

        That’s exactly what I want to know. According to her tweets she may have found out around 5:30pm Feb 27, the day after the shooting. But according to attorney Crump, Tracy Martin didn’t talk to her until March 18. Since the shooting was in Sanford and Daisha is in the Miami area, and also because she’s a teen and probably doesn’t watch or read news, I think it’s doubtful that she saw or heard it in any news story. Someone told her.

        • stellap says:

          Maybe her mom knows Trayvon’s mom, or one of her friends’ moms is friends with someone in his family. You know how bad news travels in any community. I imagine she found out through her parents, siblings, or a friend.

      • pbunting says:

        “DeeDee” likely found out when she went to school the next day on Monday, February 27th. Martin’s mother only needed to tell one person who had a connection to a student and the news would have spread like wildfire – likely was the topic of the day.

  9. Aussie says:

    In other words, the whole thing has been made up by Crump… but that begs a few questions. Why did Dee Dee then give an interview telling her story?

    • tara says:

      Not the whole thing. She had a phone call with Trayvon right before Trayvon was shot. But she was not Trayvon’s girlfriend and she was not distraught nor hospitalized. Those parts of the story were created by Crump. Why, I don’t know. Probably to garner more sympathy, this “innocent unarmed child” had a girlfriend who was allegedly traumatized by the shooting because she had talked to her love just moments before he died. And then she went out for a hamburger at McDonald’s.

      http://abcnews.go.com/US/trayvon-martin-arrest-now-abc-reveals-crucial-phone/story?id=15959017

      Nice try, Crump. Next time you want to create a fantasy out of little or nothing, make sure you wipe out all of the contradictory evidence first.

        • tara says:

          I’m pretty sure that in order to use Daisha’s statements at trial, she’ll have to take the stand. O’Mara will set everything straight quite easily IF he looks at sundancecracker’s info. The tweets are very damning.

          • You are exactly correct. As a defendant we all have a 5th amendment right to confront and challenge, in person, any witness that is used to prosecute us. If the prosecution cannot, or will not, present the person then nothing from them can be used against us.

            They will not use any statements, recordings, or affidavits from Daisha Brianne aka DeeDee. They only needed them planted in the media to try the case in the media. She has served her purpose.

          • MJW says:

            Yes, Daisha’s affidavit is inadmissible hearsay. The defense can use it to impeach any inconsistent testimony. There’s some question about how much she can say about what Martin said to her. What he said to her on the phone is hearsay, but I think likely admissible as a “spontaneous statement,” “excited utterance,” or “then-existing state of mind, emotion, or physical sensation.”

            • MJW says:

              What he said to her on the phone is hearsay

              Assuming, of course, Martin was actually talking to her during the encounter. Normally I’d assume that it must be a fact because it’s in the arrest affidavit; but the special prosecution team hasn’t exactly inspired confidence.

              • Bingo, see below. Why would you need to include a REPORTER on the only convo with her. Think about this deeply. Work the timeline on paper. Visit ABC story site, and watch the u-tube version below.

        • Aussie says:

          that is an older girl’s voice in the second half of that little piece. I am sure it is not the same voice all the way through. It starts with a younger voice, then the voice changes.

      • jar says:

        I’m fairly new as well and am loving your site/blog. Just throwing this in. Just because DeeDee said she wanted to go to McDonald’s doesn’t mean she actually went. Does she ever verify that she did go? She might have been told no by a parent, or the suggested outing fizzled out because friends changed their mind.

        • casparweinburger says:

          I do not see how going to get a hamburger makes means she cannot be suffering inside. We have all had people die. We still have to eat. The best remedy for grief is routine — getting out of bed and going to work and everything else like normal.
          Also, I think someone has said she didn’t really go, she only wanted one.
          We are really making way to much of these tweets.

          • stellap says:

            I think you’re finding something that isn’t there. Sorry.

            • casparweinburger says:

              You missed the point.

              • stellap says:

                Don’t think I missed a thing, really. You really believe that the tweets reproduced on this page are those of a grieving person – someone who is suffering inside? Please explain how you came to that conclusion? Even if you are correct, what possible harm is this discussion? Discretion certainly hasn’t stopped many others – including those people at ABC news – from judging that Zimmerman is guilty and should be in prison.

        • Jay says:

          There’s no verification she went but it also says she went to the movies with her family.

    • John Galt says:

      “Why did Dee Dee then give an interview telling her story?”
      Cuz it was all scripted by Crump?

      http://glpiggy.net/2012/04/02/trayvon-martins-girlfriend-met-with-benjamin-crump-only-10-days-ago/

      “Matt Gutman has responded to my emails and confirmed that he has:
      Logs of Trayvon Martin’s calls but no recordings
      One recording of DeeDee’s deposition by the family attorney (I assume he means Benjamin Crump)
      A phone interview conducted with the girlfriend on Wednesday.
      So what we have is another he said-she said game.
      But here’s the kicker and here’s what everyone has been asking about: Trayvon Martin’s girlfriend STILL has not met with Sanford Police. It is unclear whether she has met with state investigators. The girlfriend, DeeDee, only met with Martin family attorney Benjamin Crump less than two weeks ago. This was over three weeks after Trayvon Martin was shot and killed by George Zimmerman.
      I followed up with Gutman and asked if Sanford police attempted to contact the girl. He didn’t answer that question directly (he probably had no way of knowing if they did), but said that he believed that Crump went to the girlfriend. I don’t know what to read in to that. Perhaps DeeDee’s recollection of that phone conversation, three weeks removed, was pretty much as she says it was. But if Crump contacted her then I’m at least a tiny bit skeptical that he also had some sort of impact on her version of the conversation. Not saying that that happened – just that it becomes a possibility when the attorney approaches her rather than either the police approaching her or her approaching either the police or Crump.”

      Here is the ABC video of Dee Dee’s “interview”:

      @ :49 “ABC news was there exclusively as an attorney for Martin’s family PRODDED her late Monday about what she heard that night as she spoke to Martin on his cell phone.”
      @ 1:01 “The young woman’s parents asked we not use her name and that ONLY THE ATTORNEY QUESTION HER.”

      • John, you and I are following the same scent trail. But perhaps my binoculars are focused a little farther down the trail. Listen to the video and note the jump in voice. (see below). Then go back and look at the Affidavit for Probable cause. What you’ll note is that only the statement from the girls voice (the voice in the beginning) is used in the Affidavit.

        What does that mean.

        Based on my research it means Trayvon did indeed talk to DeeDee but only so far as to say someone was watching/following him, he was putting his hoodie up, and walking faster. That’s it. Thats all he said, that’s all she said – he said. That is her testimony in its entirety. The rest is manufactured media evidence, specifically scripted and played out by Crump. There was no audio-witness to a confrontation, pushing, questioning etc. etc. It didn’t happen.

        She called him, he said someone was looking at him suspiciously and following him, and then they hung up. No biggie from her end.

        That’s why she wasn’t worried when she didn’t hear back from him. That’s why there was no real concern from her. They were not boyfriend/girlfriend, they were not lovers, and their conversation was just two teenagers with one generally saying some dude is following me. That’s it.

        Who the other unknown womans voice is on that call is anyone’s guess, or it could be DeeDee’s mom relaying what she thought happened and convinced by Crump to record it. He called in Matt Gutman to witness, outlined the rules as you described, and then played Matt a story with “exclusive juicyness”. Gutman has plausible deniability, but was willfully complicit in selling the story.

        Simultaneously the only evidence actually verified by Crump and relayed to the Feds was the part about Trayvon saying he was being followed. Again, note that is the only part in the affidavit.

        Crump used the DeeDee narrative only to create media evidence; He had, and has, no plan to use DeeDee beyond that. He’ll hide her behind her age and a story about her parents wanting her to stay out of it.

        After following Crump since the Martin Lee Anderson case, following his NAACP activities, and watching him learn from Al Sharpton, combined with the constructed evidence I am already certain of, I can state without reservation THATS HOW HE ROLLS.

        • John Galt says:

          Sounds reasonable, although perhaps Crump crafted or influenced even more of Dee Dee’s “testimony” with a view to slipping into one or more hearsay exceptions: spontaneous statement, excited utterance, then existing mental, emotional or physical condition.

          “The witness advised that Martin was scared because he was being followed through the complex by an unknown male and didn’t know why.”

          So Trayvon WAS SCARED, even though he doubled back and assaulted Zimmerman instead of going home. How very convenient. I bet he said that excitedly, too.

          http://www.leg.state.fl.us/Statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&Search_String=&URL=0000-0099/0090/Sections/0090.803.html

        • Aussie says:

          SD, this has been really bothering me…. it is the statement about the hoodie.

          According to the female in the video, TM said that someone was following him and that he was going to put on his hoodie… this does not gel with other facts surrounding this story.

          Let’s go back to the original information about when Zimmerman spotted TM who was acting suspiciously. It was raining.

          Question: did TM put up his hoodie because it was raining? Or because he thought that someone was following him?

          Question: did someone else spot TM prior to GZ?

          When GZ gave the description to dispatch he stated that the person was wearing a hoodie. How long after GZ spotted TM did he contact the police?

          These are things that are striking me because there is a discrepancy about when TM began wearing the hoodie. Was it after GZ spotted him?

          I am still of the opinion that there was no conversation between TM and Daisha, and that Crump gave her the script.

  10. Aussie says:

    they really do not have anything… there are not any consistent phone records to support any of the claims relating to “Dee Dee”.

    Even though I am Australian, I do agree that anything coming from DeeDee is hearsay. She is not an eye witness. On top of that there is a very strong possibility that any statements that she has made have been coached.

  11. BlahBlahBlah says:

    Weird that Crump would scrub the “Daisha Mitchell / @iAdoree_Dee” account but not the other. I mean, sure, she’s a little girl and needs to have her life and all – but she was able to be tracked because of the two online identities she had crossing eachother. (and also makes you wonder why she had two anyways)

    Anyway, figured I would pass on the fact that she has another online account you might be interested in. This one:
    http://-loveedaishaa.tumblr.com/

    includes pictures such as:

    I scanned it a little bit, but looks like its mostly just nonsense. She did post a “where is the justice” image with Trayvon and Zimmerman plus the baiting-“facts” on March 21st, but otherwise I see notta… No track-back to Trayvon either that I noticed, but not surprised as if he had a Tumblr it was probably scrubbed anyway

    Also, here is her Twitpic page in case you didn’t spot it:
    http://twitpic.com/photos/x_FashionObsess?page=1

    • Go spend some time online with these peeps and you’ll realize they have more online user id’s than Elizabeth Taylor had husbands. They have multiple criss crossing twitter handles…. Why? It’s the hip thing to do I guess.

    • tara says:

      She has a better tribute to Whitney Houston than to her own “boyfriend”.

  12. GFCinthatorder says:

    SD, you have reverberantly displayed a superior insight and intelligence that has been amazing. Thank you!

  13. DaveB says:

    First time visitor to the site. Amazing piece of investigative journalism. It’s a shame that none of the major media outlets have the where-with-all or fortitude to do this kind of truth digging. I sure hope GZ’s lawyer see’s this somehow. Keep up the great work. Will bookmark this site for sure.

    • Sharon says:

      Welcome to the Tree, Dave. Find yourself a branch and make yourself at home…evenings around the campfire are good, too. Good peeps here. Sometimes bad peeps drop in, but we just stuff ‘em with ‘smores and send them back to their mommies.

  14. Some of you might have seen the ABC interview story with Benjamin Crump and DeeDee. The actual ABC video still exists on their website but it is difficult to use because of their banwidth restrictions. However, here is a better streaming U-Tube video with the same conversation, this one posted by YoungTurks, but that don’t matter.

    The reason you should listen to this audio/video is because of how it is manipulated. Listen closely to the account. You will hear “DeeDee’s” voice say:

    He said this man was watching him, so he put his hoodie on“. Then the video cuts to narration from ABC’s Matt Gutman. Then the audio from “deedee” continues. However, IT IS NOT THE SAME PERSON. The woman’s voice that picks up at the :33 second mark is NOT the same as the young lady in the beginning. Listen closely.

    I have held back on sharing this for over two weeks, since I first noticed it because I did not want to get hammered by accusations of being some kind of conspiracy whacko. But now that I am 100% certain of Crumps intentional falsehoods, I might just expose this like the stolen CCTV footage.

    There is something going on between ABC (Matt Gutman) and Benjamin Crump, (I might being digging into their crossing paths). Remember it was stolen ABC footage of the police station CCTV system that was “exclusive”, and manipulated to imply Zimmerman was not injured. It was ABC who released the first “911-audio”. It was ABC who “obtained exclusive” copies of the now disputed T-Mobile on-line phone records. ABC is in this up to their eyeballs, and it appears they are either colluding with Crump, or willingly overlooking issues to advance a story line.

    Something out there will connect Matt Gutman and Benjamin Crump. Perhaps the 2006 bootcamp case, I’m not sure but something lends Crump to give exclusivity to him and ABC.

    Y’all thoughts.

    • Aussie says:

      I am pleased to see that you have said the “now disputed T-Mobile account”. After seeing the pic that was used by the ABC relating to the mobile account, I remain convinced that what is there is manufactured.

      Can anyone remember where the idea that TM called 911 originated. I do remember in one of the threads that one of the trolls was going on about having two conversations going at the same time…. BUT…. on that picture the 911 call had the date of 3 March.

      If the 911 call on that sheet of paper is manufactured, then what else was manufactured. How did they cotton on to DeeDee again? Why is it that Tracy Martin said nothing about his son talking to someone on the phone as they drove from Miami to Sanford? This is also part of the narrative… and there is actual proof that DeeDee communicated with TM when he was on the way to Sanford. However, there is no real proof of a communication between either of them at the time in question.

      If DeeDee was true to form she would have tweeted something about what had gone down, yet you do not have any tweets indicating a conversation with TM around the relevant time. There are no tweets indicating that she knew that TM was in some kind of trouble. In fact after she is notified via tweets that TM is dead, she is almost nonplussed and she makes no mention of having seen or heard anything that previous evening when TM was shot.

      • minpin says:

        Aussie- Your last paragraph is where my mind keeps going. If it was true that she was on the phone with TM just before the shooting, there is no way she would be so completely disinterested. I believe the story went that his ear piece fell out, she heard the sounds of a struggle, and then the phone line went dead. I think that’s what I read. Even if she didn’t know that night that TM had been shot, but heard the news the next day, I would think she would have been all over her various messaging accounts telling her friends that she was on the phone with TM and heard the scuffle at least. I cannot grasp that anyone knowing they were talking to someone while the incident was happening, would just move along as though nothing ever happened. I too doubt that she was on the phone with TM, as has been reported by Crump.

        DeeDee darn well knows the media sensation that has come about from the TM incident. DeeDee also knows that if the Crump timeline was true, she would be making big bucks going on ABC in particular, giving many interviews, and raking in the dough. DeeDee knows she is at the heart of the Crump story, and that she is now being touted as the link to what happened as per Crump. She has become a media sensation, yet she goes about her life as though nothing ever happened. What about all of her friends that now surely know she is the DeeDee behind the Crump story. Why aren’t any of them messaging back and forth with her about the TM incident, even if they didn’t know TM. Not a peep. The whole thing doesn’t add up.

        • Aussie says:

          Minpin, I am of a similar mind with regards to this issue…. you have spelled it out quite well. Her lack of interest, and the fact that she mentioned nothing at all about any kind of commotion does not sound like someone who heard something.

          I can give an examples of things that have happened in my life, I witnessed a fire, but did not witness the start of the fire… long story… and in some ways it was a real hoot…especially that policeman hopping from pillar to pillar with his gun drawn and it was a siege that did not last very long… yes after all these years I remember that scene. I continue to talk about the incident as if it happened yesterday…. but it happened close to 20 years ago!! People in that workplace remembered another incident that happened outside the bank that was downstairs in our building – some armed robbers were killed by the police. Not long after that incident my husband almost got caught up in a siege…. another interesting story…. and yes I continue to remember that he had that experience.

          I find it strange that the girl who was supposed to have had a conversation where someone told her that he was scared, then said absolutely nothing about the conversation, not even a hint about the conversation, until 18 March when she talks to Crump. It does not add up at all.

    • DaveB says:

      Why are Trayvon’s T-Mobile phone records records “disputed”? I missed that one – couldn’t find anything on the web on this other than the ABC stuff.

      • Aussie says:

        First, did he make calls or were they text messages? Second, there is a picture of what is supposed to be a record of his calls with the times on them, but the real give away happens to be that the alleged 911 call by TM, which never happened, is dated 2 March, several days after he was dead!!

        • tara says:

          Really. If Trayvon’s phone was locked with a password and Crump says that Tracy Martin finally broke in on Sunday March 18, then who placed the call to 911 on March 2??? http://abcnews.go.com/images/US/ht_trayvon_martin_phone_call_dm_120320_main.jpg

          • tara says:

            According to what I’ve read, you CAN call 911 on a password-locked phone. That 911 call was placed on the day of Travyon’s wake. I’m guessing it was Tracy Martin attempting to access the phone. If so, 911 should have a record of that call. Why hasn’t anyone leaked that? Don’t most accuany or his attorneys. Would a phone company reset a password upon a parent’s request? Crump claims that Tracy Martin didn’t access the phone account until Sunday March 18. Something doesn’t seem right here. I realize that they don’t have to provide all of the details before the trial, but the timing seems very odd.

        • tara says:

          In his March 20 press conference, Crump says that Tracy Martin finally got in to Trayvon’s phone on Sunday March 18. So who placed that call on March 2? That was the day of the wake. Did Tracy Martin have the phone at that time? Are you able to call 911 on a password-locked phone? I’d love to see what’s farther up on that page.

          • tnwahm says:

            Isn’t the phone evidence? If it was found with the body, then isn’t it evidence? Shouldn’t the phone be in police custody?

        • BlahBlahBlah says:

          While I understand people being curious about the 9/11 call, if this is actually his phone record, I am more curious about what is missing…

          Why didn’t DeeDee call back that night to see what had happened?

          Why didn’t Brandi’s son call to see what was taking so long at 7-11?

          Why didn’t Tracey or Brandi call to see where he was that night after he didn’t come home? (they didn’t find out till the next morning, so…)

          I can understand the 9/11 call on the 2nd; that is quite possibly when they got the phone back from the evidence. Or maybe its just Police trying to get into the phone while it was still in evidence – either makes sense. But why did NO ONE call him between the “DeeDee” calls and that 9/11 dial? That makes no sense

          I would conclude this photo is either bunk or his killing was known almost instantly with it spreading to every single person who knew him. Which seems more likely?

          • tara says:

            I’m beginning to think that maybe she did try to call him back, but because he didn’t answer it’s just not showing in that snippet of phone log from ABC. I’m thinking only completed billable calls are showing there. I have more to say about this below.

    • Aussie says:

      SD that is another good call, and yes you are correct, it is two different voices. The second voice where the person claims that TM put his hoodie on after he discovered that he was being watched is a bit of a giveaway that this is fake. You will find that the narrative changes to match more closely what in fact really happened.

      In this recount of events the person deliberately sets out to claim that GZ hunted down the little thug. One is left with the impression that GZ already had the gun drawn …..which is not correct.

    • tara says:

      ABC was also the one who published the photo of GZ’s bloody head. What’s going on with ABC? WHy are they privvy to so much information? They could only acquire Trayvon’s phone records if the parents provided it, right? Or did Sanford police have it and someone there leaked it to ABC?

      • Oh, I’m certain ABC has an insider on the Sanford Police Dept. I don’t know if you were around when we first outlined the “stolen video” and how we knew it was an inside job. But in case you are interested in checking it out:

        …”Go look at it again. This footage is video of a video. Meaning that surveillance camera used in the police station does not move. Yet the video is moving and shadowing the police and Zimmerman.

        This is footage taken on an i-phone by someone recording the screen at a Closed Circuit TV (CCTV) panel monitor and feed. You can tell in a few segments of the video that show the exterior frame of the monitor being filmed.

        Again, CCTV surveillance video cameras like this do not move. They’re stationary fixed recording cameras. This is a video shot of a monitor showing the CCTV digital video playback.

        http://theconservativetreehouse.com/2012/03/29/reported-damning-zimmerman-video-actually-shows-more-support-for-zimmermans-case/

        • tara says:

          Oh my god why didn’t I notice that before??? The video is all shaky and you can see the borders of the monitor, plus the date/time coming into the frame now and then. True surveillance footage would have been steady with the date/time showing at all times. Un-freaking-believable. So Sanford police probably leaked the bloody-head photo.

          But I’m thinking that it was Team Skittles who provided the phone records to ABC and allowed them to call Daisha to hook up with her for the interview, because that timeline is just way too tight for it to have been prompted by Sanford police. Crump found out about Daisha late in the evening on Sunday March 18 and within 48 hours ABC has published the phone logs and interview. I guess Crump knew he had a sympathizer with ABC. But he must have been pissed about the bloody-head photo. Maybe that photo was leaked by someone else in Sanford police who was upset by the Team Skittles media takeover. And ABC, being a total ho, doesn’t care which side the evidence supports, they just want to be the first to show it.

          • LOL you crack me up. Occam’s Razor Tara….. It ain’t about leaks for the sake of leaks, it’s about $$$. All *cough* news outlets, especially the bigs have a slush fund to purchase intel and exclusives.

            ABC willing to pay $$$ for exclusives and some donut eater with Access and Opportunity who wanted a couple of extra $$$. So he/she sat at the monitor, whipped out their phone, recorded the footage and then sold it to an ABC person.

            Two news cycles later, because the footage was already out there, the Sanford PD public relations manager got approval to release an official digital copy of the footage. That official footage was when media peeps started saying a more “High Def” version is out which does show some injury, and some began to retract their initial statements.

            Of course, by that time the damaging “non-injury” narrative was already firmly planted.

            Same goes for the bloody head shot. Prolly just someone wanting a little extra $$$.

            • tara says:

              This case is like a fractal, the more I learn the more there is to learn and yet there are repeating patterns all over the place! It’s amazing. I’ve never seen anything like this before.

              • Sharon says:

                Oh, dear. I actually know what a fractal is (barely!) —and that is the perfect illustration!! You’re a great Tree person, tara! Glad you’re here.

      • ItsMichaelNotMike says:

        All the media pay BIG bucks for exclusive video and photographs. They do this for any number of reasons, but the bottom line is money.

        I have worked with the press many times on my cases. And I have given the exclusive to a certain broadcaster in return for guaranteed coverage, even at what time of the day a story will run.

        There’s a LOT to all this that we can’t cover in here, but I am sure you have heard about the astronomical sums media like the National Enquirer will pay, for example, “Michael Jackson dead at the morgue.” (A cell phone pic can get you $1 million).

        Fact is, the courts have said other than in very limited situations (such as courtrooms where the Judge has forbidden cameras, etc.) if one is in the right place at the right time the law cannot prohibit picture taking by citizens exercising their First Amendment rights. And if someone can sell the pics, let the market dictate the price, if any.

        Of course there’s limits, such as “upskirt” shots, locker room video, etc. are criminal acts, but something like this, public revelations are OK (however, an employer is free to mandate that employees are forbidden to use cameras or camcorders at work, such as the PD here.

        An employee does NOT have FA rights while working on premises, under a sundry of employment law theories. In other words, if the Chief found out who shot this video, he can fire that employee for violating Company policy.

        Another example: There were a couple California Superior Court Judges (one in southern California, the other northern) who went to porn sites in their chambers (offices). While doing so at home is perfectly legal, the two counties enforced these rules: 1) No employee shall use government-owned computers for personal business; and 2) no visiting porn sites at work.

        This simply illustrates what I’m saying, when at the workplace shooting a video of a monitor is legal under the law, but it may be “illegal” under the employer’s workplace rules. If busted the employee can’t say “Hey, I have First Amendment rights.

        Well this is more than you need to know. Sorry.

    • casparweinburger says:

      It sounds like the same woman to me.

      • stellap says:

        Of course it does – you are now the self-appointed naysayer on this thread. Makes me wonder a lot about you. You don’t agree with anything, yet you stick around for two days to post negative remarks for the benefit of the rest of us, I presume. You have a right to do that, of course, but why would you want to?

        • casparweinburger says:

          Calm down Stella. I find the conclusions drawn about Deedee’s tweets misplaced. So what? Do I have to agree with everything on this blog? What the hell is wrong with you?

          • stellap says:

            I haven’t changed my opinion of your remarks, and I will say whatever I please, thank you very much. There is absolutely nothing wrong with me. I was, and continue to be calm. Why would you want to stick around? Question is still open.

      • Sharon says:

        Ok. That’s it. stellap’s right. Shark-jumping on aisle 9, folks.

      • Aussie says:

        then you cannot distinguish the cadence in the two voices. There is definitely something different between those two voices. They are not the same female.

    • Scott says:

      sounds like the same person to me, but its a moot point, she cant know someone pushed TM, and would never be allowed as testimony.

  15. ZurichMike says:

    SD, have you sent your analysis to O’Mara? I would suggest printing it out and sending it to him. It’s really amazing. If there were a Pulitzer Prize for blog journalism, you’d be the winner! Thank you so much!

    • That is high praise coming from a man of your intellect, however unworthy I might be to receive it. I appreciate your compliment Mike because I value your opinion greatly. Thank you.

      No, I have not sent anywhere, nor do I plan to. As with all things written by me on this site I retain no propriety interest. It is merely intellectual exercise.

      • Aussie says:

        SD you are being modest regarding the efforts you have made over this case.

      • stellap says:

        You should send an email to O’Mara, with a link to this post. I know you want to help GZ, and that might actually help him.

        • Mr. Roach says:

          This is truly an epic post. The suggestion they just got DeeDee or whomever to fill in all the gaps in their case sounds spot on, right down to the hoodie business.

          • Aussie says:

            the hoodie business is really weird. I think that there is an inconsistency in the story as told by the female purporting to be DeeDee. It is the timing – did he put on the hoodie because of the rain? Or because he was spotted?

            • summer2 says:

              Hi everyone I’m new here and really appreciate this blog! I know I’m posting this comment on an older comment (hopefully someone will see it) and I also apologize if someone has already suggested this but could “put on my hoodie” mean “I’m about to go hood (violent) on this man”?

      • kinthenorthwest says:

        this needs to go O’Mara.
        Also you might want to sent it to someone like Hannity or any of media that is more pro-Zimmerman

  16. Joe Tchorz says:

    Solid work! Thanks for all the updates and background research. All major news outlets have lost creditibility with this case. In my discussions with my friends, who aren’t following this closely, they all don’t believe a word of the major news networks anymore……. How is this going to impact BO’s re-election (god forbid) campaign, since he clearly injected himself into the false narrative?

    Once again, really nice work.
    Joe

  17. cookbook says:

    This will all brought into a courtroom-WHEN ZIMMERMAN SUES for libel! The deep pockets are endless. Crump, his PR flacks, City of Sanford going along with the indictment, State of Florida special prosecutor, ALL of the media outlets are going to be a party. Can the DOJ be sued or will they have to pick individuals in that sea of scum? Who was Richard Jewell’s legal team.

    • Auntie Lib says:

      I’ve been thinking this for a while now. Team Skittles has stepped in this pile of sh!t so deep – and the Zimmerman family are not public figures, so the threshold for slander and liable suits. The media may find this to be one of the most expensive exercises in creative journalism ever.

      Awesome job SD! Thank you for all the hours and effort you’ve put into these posts.

  18. tara says:

    Because Corey used Daisha’s statements in the affadavit, then is Daisha forced to take the stand during the trial? Apparently Daisha’s statements in the affadavit came only from the sworn statement she delivered to Crump, I don’t think she was interviewed by Corey or her investigators.

    • No. She does not have to testify, and the prosecution does not need to use her. However, because she was on the affidavit, O’Mara is required to be given the same information they used to create it.

      O’Mara could also depose her, or list her as a witness for the defense and call her to testify as a defense witness. He could also list Benjamin Crump as a defense witness. Oh, wouldn’t that just be delicious. :D

      • marie says:

        Jeez, you’ve just got to get in touch with Zimmerman’s defense team. Don’t go about assuming that they have the resources to do what you assume. Just the idea that DeeDee has different handles needs to be given them. Fine, if they know that, but what if they don’t?

        BTW, great work. Please, just at least link this with an email and a catch phrase letting them know of DeeDee’s captured Tweets under different names.

        Just think…what if this trial proceeds and info you had could have stopped it? What if….?

    • Michell says:

      O’Mara has the right to depose her if they enter her sworn statement as evidence, if they make that difficult and he isn’t able to depose her then he can argue and probably will be granted the statement be thrown out or the judge will demand the prosecution make her available either for deposition and/or testimony on the stand. This statement is never going to be allowed into evidence imo without O’Mara speaking to her. I’m sure the prosecution will argue her age, safety, etc. but you can’t have it both ways.

      • John Galt says:

        Affidavits typically don’t get entered as direct evidence at evidentiary hearings because they are hearsay: Out of court statement by the declarant offered for the truth of the matter asserted and not within any exception to the hearsay rule. In Dee Dee’s case, the affidavit would be double hearsay, since she avers to what she heard Trayvon say. Unless there is something weird about procedural and evidentiary rules which apply to these particular proceedings in Florida, if they want to use Dee Dee, she will need to appear, testify, and be subject to cross-examination. I would expect O’Mara to pose a hearsay objection when they ask Dee Dee about what she heard Trayvon say over the phone. Or perhaps that objection might be made and briefed in a motion in limine prior to the hearing. Dunno exactly how they do things in Florida.

        • Michell says:

          I think they’d let her testify to what she heard and it not be hearsay, but if their plan is to enter her sworn statement without making her available to the defense then I think they’re going to lose that battle. I remember during the Casey Anthony trial, the only trial in Florida I have any info on the defense was wanting to enter a sworn statement from and expert who they said was not able to come to Florida, the judge wouldn’t allow it without the prosecution having an opportunity to depose them. Which only makes sense to me.

          • John Galt says:

            “I think they’d let her testify to what she heard and it not be hearsay”

            Only if they can establish that it falls within an exception to the hearsay rule. See 90.801 thru 90.805 and particularly 90.803

            http://www.leg.state.fl.us/Statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&Search_String=&URL=0000-0099/0090/Sections/0090.803.html

            • MJW says:

              I mentioned earlier that I see three potential hearsay exception under Florida’s rules of evidence that might allow DeeDee to testify about what Trayvon said: “spontaneous statement,” “excited utterance,” and “then existing mental, emotional or physical condition.” A “spontaneous statement” is very much like the federal rule’s “present sense impression,” with the important distinction that the Florida supreme court says a spontaneous statement, like an excited utterance, must be made while in an excited state in response to an unusual event.

              • Aussie says:

                First they have to prove that she did in fact hear the conversation. There is a good reason to doubt her story and that this is a construct from the Chump. If they have positive proof, such as her phone records, then maybe what she has to say will be admissible.

                • MJW says:

                  If the prosecution believes she has evidence in the case, they can call her as a witness. The defense will, of course, be able to cross-examine her and call witnesses to impeach her testimony. John Galt explains the procedure in his April 22, 11:23 AM comment.

                  I don’t believe any state could allow the affidavit to be admitted without DeeDee testifying, because it would violate the 6th Amendment. The Supreme Court has said that “testimonial hearsay” is never admissible. Testimonial hearsay consists of out-of-court statements made for the purpose of investigating or prosecuting a crime. I don’t think there’s been any case that considered an affidavit given to someone other than the police or prosecutors, but an affidavit given to a lawyer and used by the prosecution would surely qualify as testimonial hearsay.

                  • MJW says:

                    When I said “I don’t believe there’s been any case,” I was referring only to SCOTUS cases.

  19. tara says:

    Has her twitter account been wiped clean? I can’t see her tweets any more. I could see them last night. Crump at work again?

    • tara says:

      This timeline is awfully tight:

      (Per Crump’s March 20 press conference) Sunday March 18: Tracy Martin was able to unlock Travyon’s phone. He saw that Daisha was the last person who spoke to Trayvon, so he called her. Late that night he called Crump to let Crump know that he’d spoken to Daisha.

      Monday March 19: Daisha tweets at a far lower volume than usual, possibly indicating that this is the day she made her sworn statement to Crump and provided her interview to ABC.

      Sunday March 20: ABC published print and audio versions of their phone interview with
      Daisha

      They were sure quick to hook up with ABC! Clearly part of their strategy to leverage the media for their lynch mobbing of GZ. I wonder if Crump was upset that ABC also acquired and published the bloody-head photo of GZ.

      They were sure quick to provide information to ABC!

    • tara says:

      I’m wrong, her twitter account is still visible. She and her boyfriend are blissfully unaware of the growing crowd of people combing over their every tweet.

      • Sharon says:

        This twit-generation has no sense of personal boundaries or privacy to begin with–and as part of that massive missing piece in their lives, they also have no idea how obvious they are to normal people and how many people, either in person or digitally, are actually able to observe them and often know very clearly what they are doing.

  20. tara says:

    Sorry for another post, I’m obsessed! … I was reminded of the funeral director’s statements to the media (Team Skittles just looooves to conduct their own private trial of GZ through the media) that Trayvon’s body showed no signs of injury. And yet we know that GZ had a broken nose and cuts and bruises on the back of his head. So how can anyone claim that GZ was the aggressor? Isn’t it usually the VICTIM who has injuries? Am I missing something here?

    • casparweinburger says:

      GZ’s second original lawyer (the bald one) already debunked this claim. He said Trayvon didn’t have any injuries because he was doing the attacking. That meme died a quick death soon after. It is amazing how much bullshit Team GZ has had to beat back — it is like a game of Wack ‘o Mole with bullshit instead of moles.

      • tara says:

        I guess it’s the funeral director’s statements which caused everyone to scrutinize the police surveillance videos for injuries on GZ, and why Team Skittles so loudly proclaimed that none were present. Because it would have looked really really bad if TM had no injuries but GZ had them. Oh, wait, that’s what happened! >:-)

        • casparweinburger says:

          What is amazing is how Team Skittles, ABC, CNN, MSNBS, The Young Turks, Bill Maher and some others soon forgot about the police surveillance when the high resolution tape came out and showed clearly that he had been injured. They just keep trying to find something else to make GZ look guilty.

          • tara says:

            This is EXACTLY what happens! They all foam at the mouth and scream “This proves he’s guilty!” to every random bit of pseudo-evidence, but then when better evidence is produced which debunks the pseudo-evidence (or the rabid people’s misinterpration of it) then suddenly the are silent, and at the next opportunity latch on and repeate the same mistake. Will they ever learn?? Now, individuals in the general population will always behave stupidly at one time or another. But there’s no excused for the media to engage in this type of behavior, or for the black “leaders” to do it since they could easily instigate riots or worse.

    • ItsMichaelNotMike says:

      Yes, that is the non-sequiter (logic does not follow). One of the Martin’s attorneys last night is flip-flopping on this issue, since there’s now evidence of Trayvon Martin beating George Zimmerman.

      Before the narrative was “George Zimmerman stalked this child and shot him in cold blood.”

      Last night the lawyer said words to the effect: “We know there was a fight, but Trayvon Martin was defending himself, he was successfully doing that and George Zimmerman shot him.”

      • casparweinburger says:

        Actually, the original narrative was a WHITE fat, 250 pound vigilante hunted down a 14 year old 120 pound, BLACK cherub, only and because he was BLACK — did I mention he was BLACK?, who was munching on Skittles and drinking ice tea, and then shot him in the BACK, TWICE, as he tried to flee.

        Just think how far we have come. I have lost all respect for the media, except Bill O’Reilly, who has been urging restraint in this case.

  21. Bijou says:

    Fantastic job, Sundance! But this bothers me a great deal…
    “No, I have not sent anywhere, nor do I plan to. As with all things written by me on this site I retain no propriety(?) interest. It is merely intellectual exercise.”

    Sundance, I really feel you SHOULD send this to Mark O’Mara. He sounds very competent, but you’ve put so much time and effort into this, it would be a shame if it wasn’t put to good use. And the “downside” would be…what? There is none that I can see.
    And don’t be so dang modest! This is brilliant investigative work!
    You could even send it under an ‘alias’ if you don’t want to become an overnight blogging sensation. :)

  22. Reblogged this on danmillerinpanama and commented:
    Lots of interesting stuff here. If the case actually goes to trial, more will likely come out. If it does not go to trial and the charges against Mr. Zimmerman are dismissed, civil unrest seems highly likely.

  23. Truth Fan says:

    You know, in ancient Israel, if a witness brought forward a false testimony against an accused, and was discovered by the judges to have done so, that witness would then become liable to the penalty they intended the accused to suffer.
    If what you have discovered is true, it would be righteous justice if Crump and any of his cohort who conspired in creating such a false testimony, to receive the penalty they intend for GZ.

  24. James Crawford says:

    Just discovered your site here.

    Fantastic sleuthing.

    Your modesty is commendable but you have a moral obligation to share this with GM’s attorney.

    I think the networks just put their nuts in a Slander and Libel Suit vice and GZ is going to start turning the handle to squeeze at least seven figures out of them.

    • sybilj, at this moment it would take too long to respond to this inquiry. However, I am currently working on a post to address this specific point. In essence it is another tentacle within the web created by Crump and is a key point to bring out. If you want to understand the Broad Essence of what I mean, there is a video and comment about 1/2 way up the thread comment section with a general preview.

      By tomorrow I hope to have completed the deconstruction of the ABC/Crump connections. Too riddled and intertwined to explain quickly. Suffice to say take the ABC story with a grain of salt.

      • marie says:

        I suggest you send your completed post on ABC/Crump to Fox’s O’Reilly since the big blusterer as much as kissed ABC’s and Gutman’s collective arses the other night in an effort to show just how biased has been the coverage of the case by MSNBC/NBC, O’Reilly’s nemesis.

        While everyone, even libs, know how biased is MSNBC, O’Reilly made out ABC’s coverage as great, as fair. O’Reilly has been a piece of crap on this story, even going so far as to call for Zimmerman’s arrest so that “it can go to trial and the truth be found out through our legal system.”

        It never seemed to occur to the doofus that we don’t arrest people unless evidence points to their being guilty of a crime. He acted as if a person who is presumed guilty by a lynch mob or by a group wanting him to be guilty for any reason ought to be cuffed and put on trial. Idiot.

    • tnwahm says:

      Who has the phone? Shouldn’t it be in police evidence? If it is in police evidence, then who made a 911 call after his death?

      • tara says:

        My theory is that it was Tracy Martin. I believe that Tracy Martin was attempting to unlock Trayvon’s password-protected phone, and when he couldn’t determine the password he called 911. March 2 was the day of Trayvon’s wake, it’s possible at the wake he asked for help and someone suggested that he call 911. I have never done it, but I read that you can call 911 on a locked phone. Whoever called 911, there should be a record of the call. I’m wondering why that call wasn’t leaked.

        • tnwahm says:

          Maybe I’ve seen too many CSI’s, but if Trayvon was talking on his phone to DeeDee that night, then shouldn’t his phone be in police evidence or do they return the victims’ effects to the family? Why would Trayvon’s dad have the phone?

          • Jay says:

            I don’t think the officers thought it had anything to do with the case. Maybe if Zimmerman ran and they had no idea who killed TM they may have used his phone.

            • tnwahm says:

              But in all of the CSI’s and Law and Order’s that I have seen ~I admit it’s tv and I know it’s fiction~ one of the first things the police do in the investigation is “dump” the victim’s phone. In the case of Trayvon, he had no identification. Wouldn’t it seem logical that the police would at the very least use the victim’s phone to try and identify him?

              • tara says:

                I don’t have a password on my phone. If you have a password, can you see any information at all without entering the password?

          • The liberal media reported that the phone was missing. I thought that was strange. Something I read on Kos inferred that libs were suspicious because Trayvon was tagged as a “john Doe” and therefore racist cops hid or destroyed his phone because they would have easily been able to ID him that night using it. Of course, we all knew he had a cell phone because his girlfriend has said she was talking to him as the “stalking” and “attack” took place. I just found out reading the excellent review of the case here at the Treehouse that the police gave the cell phone to Tracy Martin before 3/5/12, and that Tracy Martin was able to establish contact with Trayvon’s girlfriend after the wake upon reviewing the last calls he made. So – was the girlfriend on the phone, presumably “Dee Dee” – is she the only source for why we “know” Trayvon was on the cell phone as this incident unfolded?

            • tnwahm says:

              I know that’s the story, but why would the police release evidence before the investigation is over or a trial? Just seems odd to me.

    • Jay says:

      The calls are blurry and hard to make out but what I could see is that atleast one is incoming and the times seem to be 12:47pm.

  25. Rivelino says:

    amazing work. congratulations.

  26. Pingback: Zimmerman: Key Witness “Dee Dee” Tweets a Lot! « MANSIZEDTARGET.COM

  27. tara says:

    I was reviewing some of the info in this blog entry:

    @ :49 “ABC news was there exclusively as an attorney for Martin’s family PRODDED her late Monday about what she heard that night as she spoke to Martin on his cell phone.”
    @ 1:01 “The young woman’s parents asked we not use her name and that ONLY THE ATTORNEY QUESTION HER.”

    It sounds to me like the interview with Daisha was done over the phone. I had assumed that it was the ABC affiliate interviewing her, but apparently it was Crump or one of his associates. So I’m assuming that the attorney and an ABC reporter were in the attorney’s office, because “ABC news was there”, and they were conducting the interview with Daisha over the phone. But didn’t Crump did say he’s got a sworn affadavit? Wouldn’t that need to be done in-person?

    It’s actually a good thing that Team Skittles was so eager to blast info all over the media. That gives them less chance to change their stories as they go along. Daisha already stated that it was Trayvon who approached George, she’ll never be able to take that back. It was Trayvon who said something to the effect of “Why are you following me?” and George responded with a question, and instead of answering the question Trayvon just repeated his question. Trayvon was a guest in that community, pretty ballsy of this kid to act like he’s on his own turf and question anyone else.

  28. Auntie Lib says:

    I need to share another thought about DeeDee that keeps playing in my head. I have two daughters and now a 15 year old granddaughter – so I speak from experience. Teenage females are inherently drama queens. I cannot for the life of me believe that this girl was really talking to or texting TM during the incident and she didn’t focus a whole spotlight on the role she played. Seriously – any of you who have been around a teenager who has been involved in any kind of trauma – no matter how peripherally – you know about the tears, the hugging, the waling and gnashing of teeth. There is none of this evident in the tweets. I could believe the initial story about the hysteria – not so much this stuff – if she really knew TM and had any kind of friendship with him I would expect a whole lot more drama.

    SD are you really sure that these tweets are from the same girl? Or more likely – was there ANY 15 year-old girl REALLY on the phone with TM??? My mom antennae are picking up something that doesn’t fit.

    I could be completely off-base though.

    • I totally understand where you are. There was nobody on the phone with TM at the time of contact with Zimmerman. Therefore no 15 year old to freak out.

      • Auntie Lib says:

        So if this part of Crump’s story was so much bullpuckey, the whole thing falls apart like a cheap suit… O’Mara should have a blast shredding TEAM Skittles into little teeny, tiny pieces.

    • marie says:

      Auntie Lib,

      You are not off base. The average teenaged girl would go off the deep end if a real friend of hers actually died. Some would head to social media and work out their grief there with lots of posts about the occurrence. Others would retreat in silence, to be consoled by those close to them, family. This girl whose tweets we have been reading did neither.

      She was NOT good friends with him; she was a casual friend at most. Her use of the term “best friend” is the kind of female hyperbole we could expect, however from a teenaged girl.

      Is there another possibility? I ask this because while I have followed this case more than the average person as I am retired and spend time on the web, I have not followed it as closely as it appears most people on this site have. So, could there be another girl? A different girl? Just asking….

      • Jay says:

        Years ago when my sister in law was 17 her best friend was hit and killed by a car. My sister in law really hasn’t been the same since this was close to 15 years ago. When it happened she literally locked her self in a room for 3 days only came out to attend the wake and funeral. That’s how I would have expected Dee Dee to act.

      • Aussie says:

        further up I made a remark about my niece who lost her mother to cancer when she was about 15 (or younger). Paris and Renee (her sister) both retreated to the point of being almost reclusive.

    • Lorac says:

      I have two daughters too and they definitely would have reacted with a lot more emotion than Dee Dee has. She doesn’t ever say she is upset or sad or bummed out or anything like that.

      • kinthenorthwest says:

        H3LL my daughter or granddaughters would be texting it all over the place twitter and FB if they were talking to a guy while he got murdered.

  29. Andybinga says:

    Excellent job! If Team Trayvon sees this I bet their stories will change one again.

  30. Mercyneal says:

    Please email it to O’Mara immediately if you have not done so already. You can contact him through his web page.

  31. Pingback: George Zimmerman’s Bond Hearing

  32. stellap says:

    Safe house for Zimmerman possibly will be out of state?

    http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-TV/2012/04/21/Zimmerman-To-Be-Freed-On-Bail

  33. bertasue says:

    I have one question: Was GZ read his Miranda rights when he was cooperating with the investigators on Feb. 26th and 27th?

    • It does not appear so. At least I have not read any account of it happening. Then again do you need a Miranda warning for questioning, or only when under arrest?

      • stellap says:

        They should have read him his Miranda rights if they questioned him at all. If he was making a voluntary statement, then that would be different. The point of Miranda is, after all, to let a person in custody know that anything they say can be used against them in a court of law.

        • tara says:

          I just read a good explanation and I agree with you, stellap. The reading of Miranda rights applies only to questioning, not necessarily arrest. (You could be arrested but not questioned.)

      • Jay says:

        Miranda rights funny I just had a situation like this last month. I contacted a lawyer about it and he told me the only time they are needed is if you are in a position to where you can’t leave and anything you say can be used against you. He technically wasn’t arrested the first night only detained. As long as the police didn’t grill him about other things other then the incident no Miranda rights are needed.

        • Jay says:

          I would like to add the fact that I was arrested finger printed pics taken and no Miranda rights.

          • Did they question before they fingerprinted. Miranda doesn’t have to be given if they are questioning but definitely if arresting. They can ask you questions until you are blue in the face. Just ask for a lawyer and they are supposed to stop. A lot of times they don’t but just be quite until one gets there.

      • bertasue says:

        Well in Arizona you do. In the case of Baby Gabriel, his mother, Elizabeth Johnson goes on trial in September for her child’s disappearance in Dec. 2009. The court just ruled that everything Elizabeth Johnson told investigators when the police “thought” they were dealing with a missing child case, is NOT ADMISSIBLE. Therefore, NO statements the mother made prior to having an attorney can be used as evidence against her.

  34. Barry Elledge says:

    I appreciate your detective work. Perhaps you can answer a question I’ve been wondering about: how good is the spatial resolution in locating cell phones by tower triangulation? The time-varying locations of both GZ and TM should be trackable from their phones. The distance from the home where TM was staying to the place where GZ’s truck was parked is on the order of 150-200 yards. If triangulation can resolve distances of 10 or 20 yards, then their separate paths should be determinable. That info could confirm or disprove GZ’s account of events from minute to minute.

    I assume the achievable resolution depends on how close the cell towers are to the crime scene. Alternatively, if their phones had GPS features, would they produce a saved record of their whereabouts minute by minute?

  35. RM Newt says:

    Can anyone shine a light on why John (or anyone else) didnt respond to George’s call for help? We need to get off of this 911 dependancy. In most cases they simply show up to clean up the mess and complete the investigation.

    • stellap says:

      He was probably afraid. At least he was willing enough to yell out the door/window, and then call 911.

    • Everyone thought Someone was going to do it, and Someone thought Everyone was on the way. However the only one to show up was No-one.

    • griz1234 says:

      Because no good deed goes unpunished.

      I personally have an acronym that you can use to remind yourself when and if you’re tempted to place yourself in the middle of a potentially dangerous situation:

      F.I.D.O.: F*ck It, Drive On.

      I’m sorry that society has reached the point where people that are trying to preserve order and save lives and property end up ruining their own lives… But I’m not willing to pay that price.

      For example, my local area has a volunteer neighborhood-watch sort of organization, where you’re provided some basic training and drive around in a marked car… reporting any suspicious activity but NOT acting upon it. Which is fine, you’re not a cop. BUT, even though the area allowed concealed carry with a permit.. You can’t carry a gun while volunteering.

      So, in return for serving the public by patrolling crappy neighborhoods in a MARKED car you get to give up your right to defend yourself if someone decides that they don’t care for the “rats” on patrol and come after you.

      Thanks, but I’ll keep my gun on me, and patrol my own house.

      • stellap says:

        Very well put.

        ADD: Look where it got George Zimmerman.

      • Sharon says:

        griz1234….welcome to the Tree. Find yourself a suitable branch…yer articulate, you are. ;) Welcome.

      • barnslayer says:

        One possible solution… no solo patrols. Your partner is also a witness. As far as becoming an unarmed target… no thanks, I work in NYC and know what that’s like.

        • griz1234 says:

          If I recall correctly, patrols are of 2 or more people.

          Of course, that just means that the body count can be higher when the cops finally show up to do the paperwork and watch the coroner clean up the mess.

          What’s even more ironic is that there’s nothing stopping me from noticing and reporting suspicious activity in my own neighborhood… and I don’t have to give up my 2nd Amendment rights in order to do so.

          • barnslayer says:

            I didn’t mean the buddy system would eliminate the physical threat. But it would have helped Zimmerman to have another set of eyes on the scene.

            • Zimmerman wasn’t on patrol at the time, though. He was running an errand to Target when he saw Treyvon.

              • PD’s right. Regarding buddy system, it could be beneficial, but it introduces other error traps, like group-think, “I thought he was doing it” failures to act, or friendly fire. Also, on principle, I’m against loading up NW groups with excess rules. I’m an adult Scout leader and work with church youth, and those activities are so bound up with ridiculous rules that it’s hard to do anything. Then, if anything bad does happen, they would hang you with the rules whether you did anything wrong or not.

        • griz1234 says:

          Of course, that “partner” would simply become “racist co-conspirator in the evil plot to deprive of his civil rights” in the mainstream media’s account of any untoward events.

          • griz1234 says:

            Ooops, I put some text inside angle braces, and it got stripped out as HTML. Please insert ” random Twan/Tray/Shan/Qua/Ron/Nique/Von/Derp/etc. syllables ” between “deprive” and “of”

    • Jay says:

      Fear simple as that. I would assume John didn’t want to become a victim him self.

    • casparweinburger says:

      a 6″3′ black guy beating the shit out of some small Hispanic. Yeah, I think I’ll just run in here and call the police.

      The one thing I cannot understand is why John looked at George screaming and told him to stop. I cannot figure that out. Maybe he meant for him to hold on?

      • RM Newt says:

        It appears the overwhelming response of not getting involved highlights the need for Self-reliance. In this case, don’t bring fists to a gunfight.

      • Aussie says:

        maybe what John really meant is that he was telling the person doing the beating to stop…. not the person calling for help.

  36. ItsMichaelNotMike says:

    I intended to make this a short comment before doing my chores, it has turned into a major article.

    Well I feel I need to get this on paper so the web crawlers pick it up and those curious about the case can read it. God knows Zimmerman needs our help.

    I will break this up into sections.

    Section 1
    __________

    I have a lot to say about this fantastic, well-written Part II, especially against that chump Crump, but I do have to get my chores done. So today I have to get done what’s on my list, plus the 20 things I failed to do yesterday. (Alas, yesterday I spent hours on this site and elsewhere too, trying to defend Zimmerman – I had about 10 HuffPo members’ and ABC News commenters panties all up in a bunch.)

    But hey, this is serious. Zimmerman sits in jail while the Crump conspirators are out looking at new cars and homes they want to buy with their “Martin money.” So there’s no rest for the weary on this.

    Anyway, IMO what matters most right now is George Zimmerman winning at the Stand Your Ground hearing (which is actually a “motion to dismiss”). While he has the burden of proof at the hearing, the level of proof Zimmerman must meet is “by a preponderance.” THIS IS VERY, VERY, VERY IMPORTANT TO UNDERSTAND!

    A little foundation for you all: Preponderance Explained (To the extent I can without making this a boring treatise):

    Here are various levels or burdens of proof in civil and criminal court cases.

    Preponderance of the Evidence – This is the LOWEST level of proof. If you have to prove your defense or claims by a preponderance that has been loosely defined as “51% of the evidence has to be on your side.” Most civil cases, where there are negligence or breach of contract claims made, for example, the burden of proof is “by a preponderance.”

    Clear and Convincing Evidence – This is the next evidentiary level of proof. While there’s no rule on what the percentage is, most lawyers and Judges estimate it is about 70% to 75%. Some Judges say it simply means “more than by a preponderance.” LOL. More serious civil cases, such intentional torts (fraud, conspiracy, defamation), wrongful death, or imposition of punitive damages usually require proof of such claims by clear and convincing evidence.

    Beyond a Reasonable Doubt – Many people mistakenly believe and even apply this standard as meaning “no doubt, absolutely certain, I am sure.” But as prosecutors always warn juries before they deliberate, “No one can be absolutely certain, just as you can’t be certain that the plane you are catching today will not crash. Beyond a reasonable doubt means to a certainty that you govern your daily affairs. Although you don’t know if the plane will crash, you take the flight with the understanding that there’s safety laws, the plane has been maintained, that lightening will not cause both engines to fail, or that the plane won’t fall to the ground while landing, due to wind shear.”

    Regardless of these standards, most jurors have revealed after rendering a verdict that they were “sure so and so did it, there was no doubt in my mind.” In other words, they deliberate with the feeling that they have to be “100% sure someone did it.”

    By a Preponderance Helps George

    On a motion to dismiss (stand your ground hearing) these standards actually help George Zimmerman. This is because the Judge will be deciding the motion to dismiss, not a jury. And at the Stand Your Ground hearing the Judge knows how, so to speak, to apply the appropriate evidentiary standard (here, by 51%, or a “preponderance”) required for George Zimmerman to meet his burden of proof on the motion to dismiss.

    Sidenote: If the Judge who decided the bail issue is the Judge on the motion to dismiss, I am loving life because that Judge has given signals he does NOT think much of the prosecutions (bogus, politically driven) 2nd degree murder charge.

    And IMO Zimmerman has a real shot (distasteful pun intended) at winning the motion to dismiss. I will talk about this later because I have to split, but just off the top of my head (another pun in poor taste) here’s why I am thinking this:

    Bottom line on the immunity defense: There’s lots of evidence that Martin was the aggressor (that meets the 51% threshold, IMO).

    A. Zimmerman’s testimony.

    B. Police testimony

    C. Eyewitnesses who saw a guy in red on the bottom, being beaten by a guy on top of him.

    D. Grass stains and moisture on Zimmerman’s jacket, indicting he was on his back.

    E. Injury to his nose that experts (and a Judge having common sense) will say can cause a person to fall to the ground, eyes to water, and become disoriented.

    F. Injury to the back of his head indicating being pounded on concrete.

    G. The lack of injury to Trayvon Martin, proving that Zimmerman never struck him. A lack of injury is consistent with someone being aggressor and “getting the jump on another.”

    Another Sidenote (sorry, but not really): To anyone who says that some of this stuff was fabricated, or that the police, witnesses and Zimmerman are lying, that goes to credibility. Unless you have admissible evidence that the police lied that night, including in their reports, that the investigation was part of a police and state prosecutor conspiracy, or for example, George put those cuts on his head (oh please, are you that deluded) all of your suspicions and assumptions are IRRELEVANT and INADMISSIBLE.

    At the end of the hearing what will be certain is that George Zimmerman has met his burden of proof to support a motion to dismiss, because any which way you look at the evidence, in its totality it is 51% and then some that Zimmerman is IMMUNE from prosecution for his actions.

    By the way, the Judge’s role at the SYG hearing is why, IMO, O’Mara asked the investigator if they had any evidence on who was the aggressor that night.

    O’Mara knew the answer would be “no” (and critically, the answer was “no” AFTER an SPD exhaustive investigation, and AFTER an exhaustive investigation by the Special Prosecutor), And don’t forget, the lead detective Chris Serino told the Orlando Sentinel in a mid-March exclusive interview that all evidence they found and the results of their investigation proved George Zimmerman’s version of events and that Trayvon Martin was the aggressor.

    Isn’t it interesting that five weeks later the chief special investigator takes the stand and swears under penalty of perjury that they have NO EVIDENCE to establish who was the aggressor that night. In other words, nothing has changed from what the Sanford Police determined two months ago!

    Yikes, I have to go. Sorry in advance for spelling and grammar errors. No time to proofread.

    (Cont. later)

    • Excellent, Michael.

    • marie says:

      Question: Before or during this hearing, will the judge have access to the other injuries we have been told GZ sustained? Why wouldn’t there be pics of what his face looked like the next day, after he’d been treated at the hospital. I doubt the hospital took photos, no reason to, but did someone? Okay, so would the judge have the hospital reports of his injuries?

      • ItsMichaelNotMike says:

        As I recall reading from the ABC News account of where that pic came from, it was someone who went on to the scene when George Zimmerman was there, as well as the deceased, but before the police arrived.

        This person had the intelligence to say to Zimmerman (I assume) “we better take some pictures of your injuries.” (I assume the picture taker will be testifying at both the motion to dismiss, and the trial if the motion is denied. This is because there has to be a “foundation” laid for the picture. O’Mara can’t simply enter it into evidence. It has to be established where the pic came from, such as who was the pic taker, what he used to take the pic, and that he in fact took the pics.)

        At that point we will find out what, if anything, the two discussed that night.

        Anyway, I assume that the pic taker took multiple pics of Zimmerman, not just the back of his head.

        I am also curious to know if ABC bought all the the pics or just one of the back of the head. If I was ABC I would negotiate a price for all pics, not just the one. After all, what good is an “exclusive” on one pic, if the “photographer” is allowed to sell other pics to media other than ABC.

        As far as the pics getting into evidence, they have to be formally “offered” by someone, most likely O’Mara. He will then have to put the pic taker on the stand who will lay a “foundation” for the pics (basically testifying that the pics are authentic). O’Mara will then “move to have Exhibits ____, ____, ____ admitted into evidence.”

        At that time (perhaps by a “motion in limine” before the hearing) the state can object (or move beforehand) to the pics being admitted. (I don’t see any grounds for them not coming in, unless the photographer splits to Europe or dies, for example. Then there’s a question of the pics “lacking foundation” and the Judge might not allow them to be admitted.

        But the Judge has the ultimate say on admissibility and there does not appear evidence that these pic(s) are fabricated, so even if the pic taker is not available to lay a foundation, the Judge would probably still let them in.

        If I was O’Mara, however, I would secure the pic taker’s affidavit immediately, so that in the document the pic taker can attest to how the pics came about. That way if he disappears before the hearing, the sworn statement can be substituted for his testimony.

        To be super safe if I was O’Mara I would set the guy’s deposition to take place immediately. He would give notice to the other side that the deposition is being taken and they can choose to show up, ask questions and challenge the pic taker in that setitng.

        If O’Mara did that (take the guy’s deposition) then the pics would be admitted if the only objection was that the pic taker vanished.

        Well that’s more than you wanted to know, but if O’Mara is reading this stuff, I’m just tickling his brain to remind him to take that guy’s depo. :)

        Oh, in regards to the Judge considering the pics, unless they are admitted he cannot take them into account. When making a decision on the motion to dismiss the Judge can only consider evidence that has been admitted (entered) into the case.

        • marie says:

          Thorough explanation, thank you. Knowing how broken noses and bruises from punches take awhile to swell and turn color, I’d imagine GZ looked worse the following day. He should have had a hospital employee take pics.

        • pbunting says:

          The photo of the back of Zimmerman’s head was taken on an iPhone. There is a time, date and location/GPS stamp imbedded in the photo to establish its authenticity.

          • ItsMichaelNotMike says:

            Yes, there is a “time stamp” and it was broadcasted that the pic had a geo tag, It was an iPhone 4S. I thought at the time, what a good ad for the iPhone, it took a pretty good night pic.

            Nevertheless, while the tag goes to establishing its authenticity, that information does NOT mean it gets admitted. The person who took the pic would still have to take the stand to attest that he took the pic.

            This is especially true in these days of evidence being easily fabricated. Tags, URLs, e-mails, documents, and pics are all easily forged, edited, or fabricated. Nowadays when electronic information becomes evidence someone has to take the stand to say it is original, authentic, unedited, and not altered.

            For example on this pic, I would question the pic taker if he edited the pic on his computer, such as contrast, brightness and especially saturation (to make the blood a deeper, bright red, for dramatic effect). Even phones come with basic editing functions for pics taken with the phone camera (my Samsung Galaxy S II even has rudimentary video editing functionality, where I can cut out sections of the video and splice bits and pieces together.

            I remember when Larry Ellison (Oracle) was sued for sexual harassment. The company settled the case during trial because the plaintiff produced at trial an incriminating e-mail. Turns out the e-mail was fake. So even Ellison’s team of experts and battery of lawyers were for a time fooled by the e-mail.

            Eventually she was arrested and went to jail. The ironic thing was when she was first arrested she was all set to pay bail. But Ellison’s lawyers successfully convinced the court to freeze the money she was going to use to get out on bail, saying that the money was in all likelihood the funds Oracle paid to settle the lawsuit.

            http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/1997/01/29/MN32281.DTL

            Anyway, cases like the Oracle matter are why electronic evidence, data, pics, recordings, video, etc. are not assumed authentic. The pic taker is going to have to testify about the Zimmerman pics.

    • casparweinburger says:

      Thanks for this. When I heard Preponderance of the Evidence, I thought it meant like 99% or some crazy high number. It is obvious that GZ meets that level. Team Skittles have nothing. I just hope this judge has the balls to throw it out, yet I have a feeling he won’t. Didn’t I just read that judges are elected there? In any case, he doesn’t strike me to be a pushover like Corey.

      • pbunting says:

        Judge Lester appeared to be in total control of that courtroom. He appeared just as confident, knowledgeable and seasoned as Mark O’Mara. The prosecution’s attorney was a mess. Zimmerman should feel lucky that the first judge was replaced. I don’t think she would have had the confidence or experience to handle a case of this type. I believe she would have been overly indulgent with the prosecution and too sympathetic with the Martins. I have no proof – just my gut impression. I never thought a judge would have the integrity and the courage to grant immunity – even if it was the right decision. After seeing Judge Lester in action, I do believe he would grant immunity (regardless of political pressure) if he believed it to be truly a case of self-defense. And I hope Zimmerman gets immunity so the Martins cannot go after him civilly – because they will if they can. So let the riots start. Bring in the national guard. Bring in the army tanks. The moral of this story is to not be intimidated by angry blacks and just stand your ground.

  37. tara says:

    I was scouring Daisha’s tweets on Feb 26, and I aligned them with the phone calls to the police. I want to note here that all of her tweets came from her phone. She refers to it as a “TL”, not sure what it is but it runs Android. Here’s a timeline:

    6:47:xx Daisha issues her own tweet
    6:50:xx or later Daisha retweets other people’s tweets
    7:01:xx or later Daisha retweets another person’s tweet
    7:04:xx Daisha calls Trayvon
    7:09:34 George calls the police
    7:11:59 dispatcher notes that Trayvon is running away
    7:12:xx Daisha calls Trayvon again
    7:13:12 dispatcher notes that George will meet the officers at the mailbox area
    7:13:41 George finishes his call to the police
    ??? Daisha’s call to Trayvon terminates
    7:17:11 the first witness calls the police
    7:17:36 the second witness calls the police
    7:20:21 the third witness calls the police
    7:59:xx or later Daisha retweets someone else’s tweet
    8:07:xx Daisha issues her own tweet

    I feel confident that she really did call Trayvon. But I’m not buying that Trayvon was her boyfriend, sundance has shredded that story.

    I find it interesting that Daisha didn’t resume tweeting for nearly 45 minutes after her last call to Trayvon was suddenly cut off. Did she try to call him back? Possibly, that brief excerpt of the phone log from ABC may not show the missed calls probably doesn’t show missed calls. Is it possible she continued to try to call him for at least some portion of the next 45 minutes? Or perhaps she called someone else? Or did she just go off and do something else and then resume tweeting at nearly 8pm? Regardless, she resumed tweeting as if nothing were bothering her. It’s possible that she’s used to being hung up on, maybe that’s how teenagers operate.

    Sorry for the very long post.

    • tara says:

      I also want to add that I did some reading about Trayvon’s schooling. He attended two different middle schools (Norland Middle and Highland Oaks Middle) and two different high schools (Carol City High and Krop Senior High). That couldn’t have been easy for him to switch schools like that. His mother has stated that she “had him transferred” to Krop, but knowing that he’d been suspended twice I wonder if they kicked him out of Carol City and that’s why he was attending Krop. And then he was suspended from Krop? I think Daisha goes to Carol City, if I remember her tweets correctly. Just some raw info.

      • stellap says:

        I think Daisha goes to a different school than those – she’s a cheerleader. Have to look it up.

        • Jay says:

          At one point this year maybe 2 months ago Dee Dee and Treyvon were in the same class. If you look at No Limit Nigga tweets he says she thinks she a boss cause she walked into class late to which Trayvon replies that he does it everyday. Also there is another tweet where I believe she says he left her in a bs class.

          • Aussie says:

            He changed schools. He was taken out of the school where Daisha is a pupil and was sent to the Michael Krop High School. This is the same one as the other girl, Dominque Clark.

            • kinthenorthwest says:

              This is another thing that bugs me why did Trayvon’s parents transfer him to another High School.
              It doesn’t seem like there was a family move of residence.
              Most parents will do almost anything not to move their children during High School.
              I will make a bet that Trayvon was in a lot of trouble in the previous school too….Was Trayvon kicked out of his previous High School??

    • John Galt says:

      “7:04:xx Daisha calls Trayvon
      7:09:34 George calls the police
      7:11:59 dispatcher notes that Trayvon is running away
      7:12:xx Daisha calls Trayvon again
      7:13:12 dispatcher notes that George will meet the officers at the mailbox area
      7:13:41 George finishes his call to the police
      ??? Daisha’s call to Trayvon terminates”

      7:04 call duration = 1 minute
      7:12 call duration = 4 minutes
      http://media.nbcbayarea.com/documents/call+log.pdf
      http://www.nbcmiami.com/news/Trayvon-Martin-Family-Attorney-Phone-Call-Contradicts-Shooters-Claim-143500676.html

      Tmobile rounding policy = “Most cellular providers round down the seconds at the start of a call. We see a phone call from DeeDee that began at 7:12pm, but it could have began anytime between 7:12:00 – 7:12:59.” IS THIS ACCURATE INFO RE ROUNDING?
      http://www.wagist.com/2012/dan-linehan/the-missing-230-and-deedees-testimony

      • Aussie says:

        only if the call is listed for the correct time zone… and it seems that this is questionable. We need to see DeeDee’s phone records to verify information. Otherwise anything from the Skittles camp is useless information.

    • casparweinburger says:

      That 45 minutes remark is a good point. If she heard a fight, I would expect her to try to call back worried. Maybe she tried his home phone. Do we have her phone records or just what has leaked out?

      • tara says:

        I’ve posted this in the later article but I’ll post it here too … It looks like Trayon’s phone received a text message at 8:08pm which is only 1 minute after Daisha returns to tweeting. I have little doubt that the text message to Trayvon’s phone was from Daisha, making one last attempt to contact him. I don’t doubt that she tried several times to call him after their phone call was terminated. When he never responded, she must have just assumed that he blew her off and not that something horrible happened. He’d probably blown her off before, that’s my guess.

        I have to think that Daisha put it all together the next day when she was informed that Trayvon was shot and killed. Then she knew that her terminated phone call wasn’t just because Trayvon was blowing her off. I have to think that she talked to her parents about it. Why they didn’t go to the police astounds me. If you had been talking to someone on the phone and you witnessed what you thought was a confrontation or fight and then you found out that person DIED, wouldn’t you contact the police???.

        • tara says:

          One more thing …… these people sure do act strangely. Tracy Martin isn’t alarmed that his son never returned home the night of Feb 26, and isn’t alarmed that there are police in the apartment complex. Tracy Martin doesn’t check his son’s phone calls until 3 weeks after his death. Daisha doesn’t contact the police about her phone call with Trayvon. What the hell??? Are they so used to violence and people disappearing that they don’t think it’s unusual?

          • kinthenorthwest says:

            The question of why was no one looking for Trayvon all night has bugged the crap out me since I found out….
            No 17 year old child of mine would be out all night
            Espcially NO 17 year old child of mine on suspension would be out all night H3LL if one of my kids were on suspension especially 3rd suspension they sould not be out of the house at all except for school and maybe church.
            Are these guys thinking that just because they failed in ??? they did to raise this kid then Zimmerman and others should pay the price…..

            I dont know how often parents are told wake up before it is too late…Looks like Trayvon’s parents woke up way too late.

            • Scott in Aspen says:

              don’t jump to conclusions…….we have not seen the home or cel phone logs of Mr. Martin…….

        • kinthenorthwest says:

          there is a tweet to Trayvon’s tweets that apparently is from a girlfriend (???) that says something about knowing or hoping you gave that guy a good beatdown…If you want I will see if I can find.

  38. ItsMichaelNotMike says:

    I’ll post my other 3000 words if anyone is interested, later tonight. :)

  39. John Galt says:

    John told Trayvon to stop beating Zimmerman. Trayvon did not comply. It is dark and John does not know (1) whether one or both combatants are armed or (2) who is the good guy? Maybe the guy on top is attempting to subdue an armed robber? Maybe the guy on top is an armed robber? Maybe two armed gang members are fighting each other? Maybe one of the combatants is a cop? So how should John respond w/o risking his life or subjecting himself to potential criminal liability?

    • barnslayer says:

      Very good points! I know there are “good Samaritan” laws. They protect those who give emergency medical assistance but I don’t know of similar laws in a criminal situation.

    • Sharon says:

      DS was LEO in a major city for 12+ years. He was the first officer answering a call from a freaked out homeowner, reporting an armed breakin in progress from someone who had threatened him. When DS got to the home, he went around back because the homeowner was not answering the door. He heard a fight in progress. There were security bars on all the windows. Looks in an open window (with security bars) which was back bedroom. One man is on top of another man on the floor, yelling and fighting. The man on top has a gun.. DS yells at the gunman to cease and desist. Because of the violence of their fight, they don’t even hear him. When DS sees the gun-holder place the gun against the temple of the bottom person, he yells again “Police Officer”…and whatever. No use. So he shoots and wounds the guy on top holding the gun, ready to fire.

      Guess what? Turns out the gunman was the homeowner. DS was sued personally and the city was sued as well, for $10,000,000 by the homeowner, claiming negligence. (DS never did say if he’d be making payments on that or what if they lost….) There was a jury trial which was traumatic and horrible. The “charges” were based on DS’ supposed faulty training and that, IOW, he didn’t know what he was doing and shot someone he shouldn’t have shot. (He was just supposed to know that the new victim when he arrived was the bad guy) City desperately wanted to settle as the trial progressed, but couldn’t without DS’ agreement. He refused, saying, “If you guys pay him one dime, the bottom line will be that I was wrong. I was not. And you know it.” So they progressed through the trial with his employers, the city, making it plain they would not defend him willingly, upset with him for not agreeing to settle. They did not settle. They won. The gunman (citizen-homeowner) didn’t get a dime. So this is sticky business for sure.

    • marie says:

      Agreed.

    • marie says:

      Can you imagine how John must feel? While many don’t know his name, they know where he lives.

      • tara says:

        I’m suprised that the Black Pussies haven’t put a bounty on John’s head. Suit up and boot up, Pussies! You have some more threatening to do! Uh, if John is white, that is.

  40. stellap says:

    Geraldo Rivera: MSNBC Anchors Don’t Care About Evidence – ‘They Are Cheerleading’ for Zimmerman Conviction

    Read more: http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sheppard/2012/04/21/geraldo-rivera-msnbc-anchors-dont-care-about-evidence-they-are-cheerl#ixzz1siNekhbJ

  41. conservalicious says:

    I am stunned and impressed at the amount of investagative work you have done on this blog. I will go along with the other commentors in urging you to share your information with O’Mara. Take care and be careful!

  42. stellap says:

    Just did a Bing search on “Daisha Brianne”, and this post comes up fifth. Google next!

  43. Jay says:

    When I first came here and posted Daisha Brianne was an unknown on the internet. I put the name out there in hopes someone on here would confirm what I had found which is exactly what happen. Now if you google her the name is everywhere. I think the jig is up for Dee Dee and it will only be a matter of time till she realizes she’s no longer hidden and I bet she will tell the truth or recant.

  44. conservalicious says:

    She comes up #1 for me..

  45. RM Newt says:

    Great dialog on this entire case and the ever-saddening outcome. Thx for running with the good Samaritan case with John. All very good points. Given the neighborhoods crime rate there is a lot of risk jumping into the middle of any argument. Sadly in this case, someone interrupting Treyvon during his fight club engagement of GeorgeZ would have been huge and may have saved Treyvon’s life, at least that night.

    The treatment of Zimmerman appears to be the travesty now. Is it standard protocol in FL to have a defendant chained while in the courtroom? Is George a threat to the people in the room or something? He couldn’t even raise his right hand to swear the oath.
    Couple other issues. Treyvon’s cell phone. Once the police arrived, I presume they took custody of Treyvon’s cell phone. So while he may not have had any ID on him at the time, all types of info is available on his cell phone including recent calls. If the phone was locked, with-out trying DeeDee or anyone else calling, would allow the police to answer the call and clear up the John Doe not to mention clear up the many other aspects and claims that are thrown around by Crump and Co. It will be interesting to learn more from the police reports and phone records when released.

    Final point, why would the police lie and fabricate an elaborate ruse to protect GeorgeZ nobody? In my experience this just doesn’t happen. The police don’t owe GZ anything and they were predisposed to err on the conservative side of the law and everything from the video of GZ cuffed and escorted by police indicate he was properly interrogated, evaluated, processed and so on. So it is not just GZ on trial, but everyone up the chain including what appears to be an overzealous prosecutor, the DOJ and US Attorney General. With so much at stake it would seem GZ has the full weight of the US DOJ, main stream media, and the arcane civil rights mafia to confront. Now that he’s arrested, if he is freed or found not guilty what does tomorrow look like?

    For some reason the LA riots post Rodney King come to mind. I think Sanford Florida is going to have a very hot summer.

    • Jay says:

      As far as the chains go I think it’s mandatory they do however put him in nice clothes so he doesn’t appear to much like a criminal.

    • Jan Myers says:

      Regarding police and phones: Our youngest daughter was killed on 6/26/10 by a man going 110 mph on a city street. The police looked all over for her next of kin, including waking a stranger up at 3 a.m. in her previous apartment, and finally a friend of hers who had been contacted by police posted a note to “Anyone in Rachel’s Family” on Rachel’s Facebook page and instructed us to call the police. While we were grateful we were finally found, I never understood why the police didn’t simply dial “2” on the unlocked cell phone in their possession and it would have called me, her mother.

      (BTW….the man is finally going to trial 6/18/12….almost two years after he killed her. He was not arrested for 70 days after her death, which made me crazy when they insisted GZ be arrested immediately. I was happy to wait to be sure the police had all their t’s crossed and i’s dotted when he was charged. But then neither our daughter or her killer are black.)

      Sorry for the long personal post. My frustrations with our court system get the better of me! ;-)

      • RM Newt says:

        Wow, very sorry to hear of your loss. Our prayers are with you and your family.
        I’ll ask some of my police buds. Cell phones sure have a lot of info in them and it seems a no brainer to use the info in an emergency.

        • tnwahm says:

          Please do because I can’t believe that the police wouldn’t have Trayvon’s cell phone if it was at the scene. I’m sure they would have to get a warrant for it, but I would think that getting a warrant for a victim’s cell phone would be a no brainer.

        • Phone-man says:

          Drive-by comment from someone who used to work in tech support for one of the larger cellphone companies: some phones have “self-destruct” security features—the various Blackberry phones for example—that wipe all user info if the phone is locked and too many attempts to unlock with an incorrect lock code are made. In the case of a Blackberry, there’s no way to recover that info from the phone, and it’s not backed-up where the phone company or Research In Motion (the company that runs the Blackberry network for email) can access it. Info may be stored on the owner’s computer, assuming the police knew where that can be found.

          Police are—or should be—aware of this and are going to be very cautious about attempting to unlock a phone or do anything until they have the chance to contact the phone company for assistance.

          • Sharon says:

            Good points….but it makes me wonder why folks seemed to be encouraged (by who?) to put ICE numbers on their cell phones clearly marked?

      • tnwahm says:

        Sorry about your loss. I can’t imagine losing a child. I have a friend whose 17 yr old daughter was shot last year.

        • kinthenorthwest says:

          July 4th 1990 my step-son was murdered. He was 20 and 1/2 years old.
          In High School, he skipped school a lot, did some drugs, drank and probalby some other things that we didn’t know or find about.
          At the time of the incident we felt that he was going totally straight, working 40 hours and going to church
          When the police came and told us, we told them everything the good, the bad and the ugly. We could have glossed over his high school history but we didnt.
          Since it was an area infested with 3 gangs, everyone was wondering if he had slipped off the straight path. It was due to all the gangs in that area that the police felt that it was the reason that the 50+ people who probably saw it go down did not come forward. The police knew there were many in the streets shooting off fireworks.
          Eventually t some truths came forward. He apparently was in the area because he was giving a fellow worker a ride home.. No drugs or alcohol was found in his system, even from some test that could tell if he had done any in the last several months.
          About a year later the gunmen were caught and the whole truth came forward. Someone who did not live in the are finally came forward with a description. He was beaten and gunned down because the murderers were trying to steal his car…

          I tell this story because this is why I am so angry with how the Martins have been handling Trayvon’s death. There is no reason for the lies and false hoods…Nothing will bring back their son, and its now too late to try and make up for what they should have maybe done earlier before that night.
          I am angry that the sacrificing of what is very much looking like an innocent man will also do nothing to bring back Trayvon or help to ease their conscious.
          Truth will set you free
          Humility is nothing but truth, and pride is nothing but lying. — Vincent de Paul

          • tnwahm says:

            Thank you for sharing your story. It’s sad that your stepson ended up being murdered for his good deed. You do bring a unique perspective to this whole incident.

            If anyone would have a right to be angry at the police, my friend should. her daughter was shot while her friend was “cleaning” another friend’s gun. According to comments by the girl’s father, his daughter didn’t like guns, so why was she cleaning another friends gun. The original media account was that it was a domestic incident. Both girls were 17. The one who did the shooting got 2 yrs for reckless homicide.

      • Aussie says:

        oh Jan, first thing, my condolences on your personal loss.

        Second, thanks for relating your personal story…. I have no similar experience but I understand the sentiment.

      • Sharon says:

        Oh, Jan, I am so sorry….I missed this post when you first put it up. I’m sorry for your great loss.

  46. You know what’s funny?

    Really funny?

    All these naysayers only have to just just ask her if she’s “DeeDee”. After all, her twitter contact information is in the thread.

    Kinda obvious huh?…. At least it was to me.

  47. marie says:

    Since the investigator who testified said he/they had no evidence to show who confronted whom, yet the prosecutor told reporters after court not to prejudge the prosecutor’s case, that they have a lot of evidence, doesn’t this make you think they have a witness who will testify to either having seen or heard the confrontation or the ensuing struggle?
    Now, no way at this point would I believe such a witness, for if someone did indeed hear or see a struggle or see George Zimmerman “chasing” TM, that witness, to be credible, would have had to have come forward long, long ago, but I do see this as a possibility. After all, what would keep someone from realizing after the race hustlers entered the picture, that it could bring a lot of security to their family-$$$$$$$$$?

    When does the prosecution have to name any witnesses?

    • pbunting says:

      The prosecutor knew his side just had its clock cleaned. He was doing damage control. He was giving the appearance that he had damning evidence up his sleeve. But the investigator admitted that the only “eyewitness” to chasing was a woman who saw unidentifiable figures passing by her rear window around the time of the event. If she can’t identify who was chasing whom or even if they were male or female, that testimony is crap. With all those people living there, there had to be more than just GZ and TM on the grounds. If you recall, that boy Austiin Brown was walking his dog at that time. And that’s just who we know about. They have no evidence of who chased whom – who confronted whom – or who hit who first. They have no case.

  48. John Galt says:

    The prosecutor apparently has to cough everything up within 15 days after defense counsel files and serves a notice of discovery per Florida rule of criminal procedure 3.220

  49. pablo4200 says:

    This is great work. Thank you, Citizen Journalist.

  50. pbunting says:

    If this is only halfway accurate, it is brilliant!
    This must be brought to Mark O’Mara’s attention immediately.
    http://www.MarkOmaraLaw.com
    BRAVO!

  51. Zombie says:

    Freaking awesome. This is what our media in this country should be like. Getting down to the bottom of things. Instead we’ve got idiots hell bent on lynching Zimmerman in the media.

  52. New Here-sorta-for commenting anyway but I just looked at those phone logs. I noticed it has to be a family plan or something because the times and lengths overlap. Or am I missing something?? How do we know that the 7:12 call actually went to Trayvons phone if it is a family plan??

  53. The detective stated on the stand that they had no evidence that showed who started the confrontation but did have a witness who saw 2 shadows go by their place of residence. nothing further as far as I know.

  54. Steven Cook says:

    WOW. If I ever needed a defense team, I’d want you guys hired as consultants. Great work.

  55. Old Tart says:

    A beautiful job of investigating! However, too much has already been invested in this by Trevon supporters to allow it to just fade away. Logic, reason, and justice be damned. If Z does not go to trial there WILL be violence, followed by Justice Dept. action. The administration has signaled which side it will take, first by the President’s message of empathy, and second by Holder’s words of support for Sharpton.
    The Executive Branch as now constituted operates like a criminal gang.

  56. Guess what I just noticed?? The phone logs state that “The date and time for all call correspond to Pacific Time (PSD/PDT). !!!!!!!

  57. CuriousOne says:

    Is the Crump/ABC connection the Crump supplied PR firm?

  58. It’s on the link posted by John Galt above that has the call logs PDF

  59. Aussie says:

    SD there are some things that are really bothering me concerning the testimony of the female who goes by the name DeeDee. It is the inconsistencies that are bothering me.

    I am going by GZ’s call to the police line. He was in his car. He was not following TM on foot. I repeat, he was in his car… during the conversation he states that the person is staring at him… and then approaches. He also identifies that the person is wearing a hoodie….

    Some questions: Was this before the alleged conversation with the female who has claimed that TM state he was being followed and that he was afraid?

    How can that be if GZ was in his car at that point in time?

    From the same transcript we learn that GZ gets out of his car and follows at a distance but loses sight of the youth in the hoodie. When told he does not have to follow he says “OK”.

    Using the test of a reasonable man (ok person if you insist), one would expect that when GZ said OK that he did in fact head towards where his vehicle was parked.

    This is critical because if there really is a woman witness who saw two shadows, one must ask “when”? Or rather “are you sure that you saw two people”? In other words the mind can play tricks and it might depend upon when this particular witness came forward as to whether or not her memory of the event is reliable.

    This leads back to whether or not TM doubled back and was hiding from sight until the point where he confronted GZ.

    Something else that really bothers me is the female’s claim that she heard Trayvon being pushed? How could she have heard anything?

    I remain of the opinion that her public statement is something that was manufactured to fit in with the Team Skittles version of events. There are simply too many inconsistencies in her version of what took place for her comments to be taken seriously. I would start with the fact that at the time it was raining, I would point out that TM was known for wearing a hoodie, and that since it was raining it was only natural that the hoodie was up… which really calls into question the statement of this particular female (who may or may not be DeeDee)

    • My question is where was the witness located when they saw the shadows (first home in line or any on the other side of the cutoff side walk) and I wonder why Z didn’t mention that T didn’t had put his hoodie up to the dispatcher as he seems to be particular in the details when talking to the dispatcher. Apparently T had it down when Z first saw him?

    • kinthenorthwest says:

      What bothers me is why did she not call a friend, the parents or even the police.

      • tara says:

        Or even tweet about it to seek advice from her friends. She does appear to be offline for 45 minutes after her phone call with Trayvon was terminated, and based on the call logs I’m thinking she did text Trayvon after 8pm. But it’s pretty obvious she just went on with her life. I’m thinking that Trayvon had a habit of just stopping calls for whatever personal reason, and not calling people back or returning their calls or texts. So she had no reason to think that anything too unusual was going on, he was just ignoring her in favor of something more interesting to him. I think that’s why she had such a casual attitude about him too. There are very subtle clues in her tweets, I think at one time the two might have tried to have a relationship, but she gave up because he was just not attentive enough. That’s my theory. It would explain why she didn’t care too much. If he jerked her around too many times, she’d have to move on.

      • Aussie says:

        absolutely a good reason to be bothered. He did not respond in the typical flight or fight way….

  60. cookbook says:

    Just throwing this out. You aren’t allowed to use a cell phone in a hospital. If you are visiting you have to go outside to use it. If you are a patient and need to make a call you have to use the landline in the room. If DeeDee was in the ER or inpatient she could not use her cell.

    • Brahms says:

      Not in my hospital. The ban on cell phones has not been enforced for some time – possibly in the ICU or telemetry – that’s about it.

      • stellap says:

        My friend was even using her cell phone when she was in the ICU last summer. She wasn’t supposed to, but she did!

        • barnslayer says:

          Right! Compliance is rarely 100% with cell phones. The only way to prevent usage is a Faraday cage to block the signal.

    • tara says:

      And even if somehow she were able to use it, she’s just not tweeting the kinds of tweets a person would while in the hospital, especially a “distraught” person.

      • garnette says:

        You mean like the ones about her watching Bad Teacher, which I doubt would be available on any TV in a hospital.

        • kinthenorthwest says:

          bad teacher remark sounds more like she watching her classroom teacher.

          • garnette says:

            It was on the 3rd around 1:30pm. The tweets continue about it being a funny movie and a couple of retweets about it including one about the language in the movie.

  61. M Simon says:

    http://classicalvalues.com/2012/04/in-the-zone/

    It discredits the whole DD thing.

  62. Pingback: Making money from a tragedy :-( - Democrats, Republicans, Libertarians, Conservatives, Liberals, Third Parties, Left-Wing, Right-Wing, Congress, President - City-Data Forum

  63. kinthenorthwest says:

    Amazing job sundancecracker This and your other investigative stories really put a light on what is going on with the parents
    I was so livid in the beginning that Stanford could let a child murderer like Zimmerman go.
    Then it turned out it was not this innocent young little boy shot on his porch.
    As more and more facts came forward and Trayvon’s parents seemed to get wrapped up in one lie after another I started losing any respect and compassion I had for them.
    When the Black Panthers got involved and not a word from the parents in protest that was what put me over the edge on them. To me that was worse part of this whole mess.
    By the time the real pictures started coming forward I knew that someone was trying cover-up for a not so innocent 17 year old and to set up an innocent man…(I was hoping it was not just to get the races riled).
    From the beginning of the new story by the girlfriend, I kept think why did she not call someone; the police or Trayvon’s parents.
    I still wonder why Trayvon was out all night and no one went looking for him…A 17 year old Trayvon out all night…Much less a 17 year old Trayvon who was on his 3rd suspension our all night …Most parents on here would not be going for that.

    • barnslayer says:

      Based on his past, we can only guess Martin was up to no good that night. After the fact his parents seem more interested in money and notoriety than their son’s death. Regardless, the race issue is only part of the grand scheme as envisioned by the liberals. Keep in mind this is the same president who was okay with endangering American lives on the Mexican border (Fast and Furious) to show American guns being used by Mexican drug criminals. Biden and others calling for more gun regulations in response to Martin’s death shows the liberal agenda… that being… to erase the 2nd Amendment.

      • texan59 says:

        No-huh. They only want justice!! With a topping of cash for the victim, and Al and 2-J. They would never want to pry my guns from my cold, dead fingers. Would they? :evil:

      • tara says:

        I have zero doubt that Martin was checking out the clubhouse to see if he could get in and take something. Zimmerman had every right to stop and watch, and when Martin took off running Zimmerman had every right to follow. And in Florida, he had every right to defend his own life by using his gun. If he goes to trial, I PRAY that there is at least one person who shares our views. Just one is all he needs.

      • raind says:

        Yes that’s the plan – to leave the ak47’s for the criminals….your sharp intellect boggles the mind.

      • ItsMichaelNotMike says:

        I have repeatedly played that Fox affiliate’s coverage the morning or afternoon the day after the shooting.

        1) Tracy Martin did NOT appear all that bereaved IMO.

        2) There was no reason for Martin to be there, he looked to me to be angling to get the media to talk to him (notice how he is hanging around the cameras).

        3) So it seems to me that Tracy Martin was immediately commencing on getting his 15 minutes of fame and capitalizing on the death of is son. I say this because people I have seen who have lost a family member don’t hang around where the media is covering the event.

        4) Granted, Tracy Martin may have wanted to get the media to ask the police questions because he did not want to accept the PD’s account of how his son died. But like I said, I don’t see the bereaved looking so straightforward. Tracy and his girlfriend don’t appear on camera to be all that shocked or broken up about what happened.

        5) I accept what some people are saying about Tracy Martin, he was not all that shocked because he knew he had failed as a parent and/or he could not control his son. (What I want to know, just what kind of talks did he have with Trayvon. “Don’t take any sheet from whitey; stand up for yourself; stand your ground; don’t be an Uncle Tom”).

        Trayvon’s tattoos are most telling. If Tracy Martin signed the required form for Trayvon to get tattoos covering his arms, what does that say about his parenting. What kind of parent consents to a 15-16-year-old to getting tattoos on his arms.

        If the tattoos were done without the father’s blessing, that does not indicate adequate supervision of his son.

        I suspect it is the former because my understanding is that Tracy Martin paid for Trayvon to get his “gold grill.” It appears to me that Tracy Martin was OK with his son looking like and going “gangsta.”

        • kinthenorthwest says:

          This event hits me close to home for as I said in another post I too lost a son.
          The actions of these people totally boggles me…These are not the actions of grieving people.

    • Aussie says:

      I think Tracy Martin answered your last question when he stated that the next morning, after calling the police, he expected them to turn up with his son in the back seat of a squad car.

  64. crossthread says:

    Dear The Last Refuge, blogger..(SunDance)?
    I’m in the US, and haven’t *yet* read through all your blogs in this case…
    I’ve noticed a few post about movements and Timelenes in relation to the 911 call & GZ’s location(s), AND TM…
    I’m postive that these were obtained, through GEO-Tracking/GPS, and good analisys…
    heres the link..
    http://www.wagist.com/2012/dan-linehan/evidence-that-trayvon-martin-doubled-back
    Look through some of the information on the aforementioned site, It may give you help…

  65. changisacomin says:

    Your research and insight are incredible! Thank you so much for being Breitbart! Let’s all get this out there!

  66. Pingback: Update #10 (Part 2) – The Trayvon Martin Shooting “DeeDee” Reveals The False “Truths”… | The Last Refuge | Infomag.nl

  67. Pingback: Police applicant reject, I mean neighborhood watch captain, jumps the gun? - Page 46 - NY Sports Day Forums

  68. barnslayer says:

    What’s with this “pingback” posting? It also shows up in the recent comments list. Just some clown thinking this is going to get them business?

  69. ol' jim hardy says:

    well let’s pray for an outcome more like “Oklahoma” than like “Billy Budd” .

  70. kinthenorthwest says:

    Just out of curiosity anyone know the occupation of Trayvon’s parents…
    Or do they not work…

    • Mom, Sybrina Fulton works for the Dade County Miami Housing Authority. Dad, Tracy Martin is an independent Truck Driver.

      • kinthenorthwest says:

        So mom works at least ….
        Dad????

        • stellap says:

          Dad is Tracy Martin, the truck driver.

          • kinthenorthwest says:

            Independent truck driver could be a person who is really working or just barely working thats what I meant …

            • stellap says:

              Until we hear otherwise, I think we assume he is working. No reason to insult the guy about something like that.

            • Joe Hughes says:

              Hey kinthenorthwest you got a problem with truck drivers? Few occupations sacrifice more and risk as much as truck drivers. While most occupations get compensated time and a half for working over 40 hours per week, Truck drivers are expected to put in up to 70 hours per week without extra compensation. In fact Truckers can face a prison sentence if they exceed 70 hours. if they injure somebody even if it’s completely the other persons fault.

              You think concealed carry has big responsibilities? Try learning and understanding and abiding by the Federal guidelines of operating a Commercial Class 8 vehicle let alone mastering the skills needed to safely and efficiently perform the job.
              I’m on my 27 year of doing just that. If it wasn’t for spell check it would take 27 years for all the educated folks on this board to decipher what I have posted.

              Great blog Sundance /stellap I’m hooked. Sorry for getting off topic.

              • kinthenorthwest says:

                No I know many really good truck dirvers….Independent and otherwise

                I guess you could say that I have something against what Trayvon’s parents are doing..
                Whatever the outcome of this mess, many many people are going to be hurt financially, emotionally and just maybe physically.
                They are not the only parents in this nation that have lost a child or loved one to volience.
                Maybe in the beginning these parents were just seeking some truths about why.
                Maybe the law firm they went to in order to get information was in it more for money and pushed Trayvon’s parents into making decisions that were not the best.
                However, there were several places where they should have spoke out against what some where doing in Trayvon’s behalf.
                Not speaking up against the Black Panthers was what lost compassion from many in this country and the world, especially me.

                Before any ask—Yes I have been there…Lost a son in 91…

      • kinthenorthwest says:

        One more question how old was the stepbrother that Trayvon was supposed to be getting Skittles for …We know its not the older one that is going to college cause Trayvon’s older brother/ step brother was at college.
        was it the one trayvon is holding in one of the pictures?????
        If so then it looks like trayvon was supposed to be babysitting cause Trayvon’s daddy was out to dinner with his girlfriend …
        If the step-brother that asked for SKittles was under lets say 8 or 9 then what the H3LL was trayvon doing leaving them alone.

        • Try reading the articles. I don’t mean to be rude to you, but do you know how frustrating it is to explain step, by step, and share information, only to have people ask questions that are CLEARLY answered in the very thread article you are commenting on.

          THAT is a hallmark trait of progressive liberal web sites, and evidence of the lazy intellectual capacity being accepted amid a sheeple electorate that needs to be spoon fed.
          :(

          Chad Green is 14.

  71. Jeffboy33z says:

    I have a couple questions Im hoping someone could answer… First, has anyone sent this evidence to anyone who is representing George Zimmerman? Second, can any charges be brought against Crump, Sharpton, Jackson etc.. for knowing providing publicly false and misleading information in attempt to vilify and a slander a possibly innocent man?

  72. Greg says:

    This was some amazing stuff. I imagine things are going to get a whole lot more freaky when the trial starts.
    You have to be a lot smarter than these idiot lawyers to conspire.
    Phone records and twitter feeds will bite you in @dabutt.

    But the rage in the black community will now not be appeased by facts and many people are going to get killed because of this.

  73. Greg says:

    Good god! the only thing worse than Internet talk and Ebonics is Ebonic-internet talk.

  74. griz1234 says:

    Check out the pingback from NY Sports Day Forum… Last couple of pages are pretty epic, considering it’s a den of Lib’tards.

  75. Honest Abbey says:

    I’m not so sure this DeeDee girl had a new boyfriend because I did read a tweet that said “RT if your (sic) single” and she retweeted it.

    Also, I don’t think this girl and Trayvon were necesssarily best friends just because she wrote “RIP bestfriend”. I think she may have used the term loosely, as do many people when a friend passes.
    I am more suspicious about her other name “Daisha MARTIN”. Martin? How quaint. Maybe she is really some long lost relative of Trayvon who Crump coaxed into giving a false statement. At this point, anything seems possible.

    I also noted that in Crump’s rendition of the [alledged] conversation between DeeDee and Trayvon, he [Crump] states that DeeDee said she heard the “other BOY” ask Trayvon what he was doing there. Other boy? Surely by the time she gave this statement she had to have known that Trayvon was shot by a 28 yr old MAN.

    • Susan says:

      @Honesty Abbey I noticed the last name also…strange isn’t it. I thought I may have mis-read it or it was a typo…

      • Honest Abbey says:

        Hi Susan – Yes, strange is putting it mildly. I believe this is more than just a coincidence. Had she not changed her name, then maybe I would think it’s just weird they have the same name, but changing it just puts ups another RED flag.

  76. jd says:

    So is it the Pulitzer which is given for stupendously amazing investigative journalism? Because you definitely deserve it!!

  77. stellap says:

    Just saw this on DeeDee’s twitter feed:

  78. Mr. Roach says:

    Maybe I’m confused. I realize he tweeted with DeeDee, and Dee Dee is this girl, but how do we know this is the girl who Crump is referring to. He’s 17. Didn’t he know a great many girls and talk to multiple girls simultaneously on twitter/text/facebook etc.

  79. Greg says:

    I hope this site http://www.therealgeorgezimmerman.com/ is the real deal because I just donated some money to George thru it.

  80. ItsMichaelNotMike says:

    Hey guys (and gals)…. it is 8:00 am here in San Francisco. As a sidenote, I updated my Gravatar profile so you can see who I am and whatnot. Note that the Colt in the pic is one of my most treasured items, a gun that belonged to a deceased Colonel whose daughter I dated. I digress, just explaining why the Colt Mark IV Series 70 is in there. I posted it for people who appreciate such things, it is not some kind of coded message to friends supporting Zimmerman.

    Back to the issues at hand, my posting some pics I have in my files, and that I have enlarged, brightened, or improved (although I appreciate ABC releasing the “enhanced” video showing George’s injuries, at times I have trouble using that word, it implies editing “NBC 911 audio tape style.”

    So here is “Tray” at I believe his high school in 2011-12 with a girl who looks like “Dee Dee”? You can decide.

    Also what this pic reveals is 1) Trayvon is a tall guy; 2) Gone is his youthful, cherubic, angelic, innocent look peddled by The Scheme Team.

    http://litigationuniverse.com/TrayvonUnidentifiedGirl2011-12.jpg

    Here is what I believe is a pic of Trayvon at his birthday party, a pic of him 9 days before he attacked and assaulted George Zimmerman. I have enlarged and edited the pic to show details of his facial features.

    http://litigationuniverse.com/Trayvon9DaysPriorAssauktOnGZLg.jpg

    http://litigationuniverse.com/Trayvon9DaysPriorAssaultOnGZ.jpg

    Point is, again, gone is the “child,” Trayvon looks every bit the young man he is, and actually older than 17. Imagine him at night, face covered with a hoodie, at 6′ 3″ and in good shape. Point: He did not look like a “child walking back from 7/11 with candy and tea beverage.
    _______________________

    Here is the pic of him with “Dee Dee?” Or if it is another girl, this establishes that “Dee Dee” was only a friend, as this is his GF?

    http://litigationuniverse.com/TrayvonUnidentifiedGirl2011-12.jpg

    • kinthenorthwest says:

      I keep asking why the need to for such old pictures….
      Those you are posting are ok current pictures of Trayvon…And if you found them, Im sure the parents coulld have found them..
      So why did the parents use such old pictures.
      Another question is the Trayvon hoodie picture. Well not really a question.
      Raveria makes a comment about the hoodie, and almost instantly a picture of Trayvon surfaces…I can help but think “Photo Shop”. Hey what are the odd of an original in a hoodie…

      • ItsMichaelNotMike says:

        In my AMATEUR opinion, having using Adobe Photoshop and other software since 1997, that hoodie pic is fabricated. I do not say this with reckless abandon.

        — I brightened the image and from what I can see, the pic of Trayvon was “pasted” or superimposed on to the hoodie.

        — IMO once brightness is adjusted I can see that Trayvon is wearing some type of ball cap or black wool stocking cap. I think it is a stocking cap.

        — Obviously, if he is wearing a cap of some sort there would be no logic to him wearing a hoodie over his head too.

        – Also on zooming what photo editors call “artifacts” (jagged edges) are evident all around Trayvon’s original pic that was superimposed on the hoodie.

        — The pic was distributed by the family to FL media when they were trying to get media attention. Since every indication is that the father, mother and friends of Trayvon were not computer savvy it is my opinion that the family’s PR people are the ones who produced this edited pic.

        — It could have been the lawyers, and given the amateurish job that was done, it could well have been one of The Scheme Team’s employees who produced the pic.

        While there is absolutely nothing wrong in editing, production and submission of heavily edited pics to the media or for PR shots, what would be dishonest is if the PR people fabricated the pic then gave it to the family with instructions to give it to the media as if it is “one of our family pics.”

        IMO this matter needs to be investigated to determine if it is evidence of a conspiracy to commit fraud or extort money from the government entities (which means the taxpayers) or others with deep wallets, including insurance companies.

        If anyone might be thinking “What’s wrong with a little PR,” think of it this way.

        If you were in a serious car accident that inflicted serious personal injury, the law does NOT allow you to increase the value of your claim by fabricating evidence (aka what The Scheme Team calls PR). You would be prosecuted for fraud if you and your lawyer did the following, for example:

        — Although you don’t snow ski and only tried it once in your life (where a lot of pics were taken of all the fun), one of the claims your lawyer submits to the defendant insurance company is that “She was an avid skier (see enclosed pic of Plaintiff on ski slopes) and her doctor says that she will never be able to ski again. (See doctor’s opinion and orders to patient prohibiting skiing).

        To additionally legitimize and evidence you were a big time skier, your attorney tells you to go to a thrift store or garage sale and buy used skis, poles, and clothing.

        When you are deposed opposing counsel requires you bring to the deposition any evidence that you were a skier. Your attorney, to add drama to the deposition, instructs you to bring the skis, poles and clothing to the deposition.

        – The insurance company believes your claim about being a big time skier who has lost the ability to enjoy that sport, due to the defendant’s negligence. The carrier adds an extras $100,000 to the settlement for “loss of enjoyment and life that skiing brings to you.”

        In the above scenario if found out the attorney and client would be prosecuted for insurance fraud, conspiracy, and the attorney would be disbarred.

        In my opinion* – the above is no different than what The Scheme Team are doing. In plain words they are shaking down whomever they perceive as capable of settling. (And based on the Sanford City Council’s and Mayor’s conduct, I suspect they are in cahoots with The Scheme Team to shake down Sanford taxpayers.

        I would usually say that the Federal Dept. of Justice needs to investigate the lawyers, MSNBC, NBC, Al Sharpton, the state and the Special Prosecutor (and now Sanford city government,) to see just how deep this conspiracy goes. But now this goes all the way to the White House, the POTUS giving his support to the parents.

        And now the POTUS has directed the Dept. of Justice to investigate Zimmerman, not the true conspirators.

        The only hope (and I do say hope because I have no control over who does what now, since the Fed has sided with the “extortionists”) is that Zimmerman and his lawyers file a civil suit against all these people (reserving the right to name the Dept. of Justice and the POTUS) for civil conspiracy.

        Who knows, maybe this will be the undoing of the President, that he stupidly sided with the conspirators, fraudsters and conspirators. He would have been OK if he had simply expressed sympathy to the family. But when he directed or gave his blessing to the Dept. of Justice to expend time and resources to going after Zimmerman, that’s going to far.

        Well I have really strayed off message.

        Bonus Comment: I will post some blow-ups of the pics so you can SEE what I am talking about in relation to the stocking cap and artifacts.

        • jd says:

          eh, if you’re making a graphic to be used at a rally, you are legally allowed to photoshop it all you want. When given to the press, it’s a clear case of manipulating the public, but unfortunately that too is legal.

  81. Douglas maok says:

    A question, does Zimmerman have an even halfway competant lawywer? If so, Diasha Brianne will indeed to called to testify. After that, others should also be called to testify, and then all of them can be prosecuted for giving false evidence and enangerment (causing death threats to be issued, etc). At the very least, very publically (as publically as possible) calling for her testimony and insisting on getting it should tear out all of the credibility of this whole case, enough to destroy the credibility of the legal team and prosecuter as well.

  82. ItsMichaelNotMike says:

    You all need to see this video, it has “John” in it and IMO this tape alone would exonerate George Zimmerman.

    Moreover, again IMO, this establishes that Special Prosecutor Corey had NO BASIS WHATSOEVER to charge Zimmerman, much less for 2nd degree murder.

    I am plastering this all over the Net. This needs to come out.

    http://www.litigationuniverse.com/TrayvonFoxNewsMorningAfterCoverageCRITICAL.wmv

    Disclaimer: If you have seen this in here already, sorry, I did not know it was covered.

  83. ItsMichaelNotMike says:

    Note: If your browser does not play WMV (Windows Media Video) directly on clicking links (e.g., Firefox), simply right click and save the link or target to your computer, in other words, download the file.

    Then open the file on your computer to play.

  84. JeannieD says:

    “Justice” always equals a payday whenever these “people” are involved

  85. Jeffboy33z says:

    Hopefully the questions will be asked to Trayon’s dad and girlfriend how they could return home and find Trayvon not there and Chad alone but not notice all the police cars and sirens just 70yds from the house? How would Chad who is 14 years old not hear the police sirens and ambulances arrive earlier? Its obvious Trayvon was home alone, not watching chad and there is no evidence Trayvon just went to 7-11 and attempted to go straight home.

    I really hope Crump, Sharpton and team skittles is brought up on fraud and conspiracy charges.

    • kinthenorthwest says:

      Sad part about this is that no matter what the outcome people are going to be hurt financially, emotionally and good possibility physically…

  86. Lorac says:

    WHO IS MOLLY PITCHER??? and who is MattGutman@ABC
    MollyPitcher ‏ @MollyPitcher3
    @MattGutmanABC ~ You made DeeDee famous, when does O’Mara get to cross examine this “ear-witness” ??? #trayvon #libel
    22 Apr MollyPitcher MollyPitcher ‏ @MollyPitcher3
    @x_FashionObsess Lots of ppl waiting to see DeeDee get cross examined. Lots of questions. Zimmerman can confront/challenge an accuser.
    22 Apr MollyPitcher MollyPitcher ‏ @MollyPitcher3
    @x_FashionObsess Deedee’s story put a man in jail. Ppl want to hear in person what she says she heard the night Trayvon was shot
    22 Apr MollyPitcher MollyPitcher ‏ @MollyPitcher3
    @x_FashionObsess So how does it feel to be famous? Google your name and it’s everywhere. Ppl waiting to see DeeDee in court

  87. pbunting says:

    Molly Pitcher is a historical figure who carried water to wounded soldiers in the Revolutionary War. I learned about her in the 7th grade and haven’t heard anyone reference her until now.

    Matt Guttman is the ABC News / Florida correspndent who has been covering the Martin/Zimmerman case. He always has exclusive evidence leaked to him – like the police station surveillance video and the photo of Zimmerman’s bloody head. He has a connection within the Sanford Police Dept who leaks information.

    • Lorac says:

      I know the historical figure. But this Molly Pitcher on twitter is tweeting Dee Dee and Matt Guttman. It goes on about her being famous and that she would have to go to court because she put GZ in jail. I just find it strange that this person only posted 4 tweets and all of them pretty much say see you in court Dee Dee. Is this to scare her or am I reading something into it?

      • pbunting says:

        Only 4 tweets on that account? Obviously it was created just to contact DeeDee. That Guttman tweet was just requesting info – nothing ominous. The other 3 tweets are letting DeeDee know she is not anonymous. That’s kind of creepy. No to mention illegal. Although the tweets don’t threaten – they just let her know that she’s been exposed.

        • John Galt says:

          I am Twitter ignorant. Do we know if Dee Dee even sees these tweets, or maybe they set up a filter so she only sees tweets from her select group of friends?

        • MJW says:

          Kind of creepy? Perhaps. Illegal? Not unless there’s a law I haven’t heard of that makes it illegal to let someone know they’re not anonymous.

  88. One thing I seriously don’t see is the financial payoff. Zimmerman does not posess the sort of ‘deep pockets’ Sharpton, Jackson, et al are used to fleecing.

    • Aussie says:

      the deep pockets are the City of Sandford, the Housing Association for the gated community.

      • John Galt says:

        and their respective insurance companies, along with the Justice For Trayvon Foundation fundraising income. http://justicetm.org/

        • Aussie says:

          I am wondering why they have set up a “defense” fund. It sounds suspicious.

        • jd says:

          Zimmerman wasn’t on watch patrol (he was running a personal errand), so I don’t see how the HomeOwner’s Assoc is liable. Sharpton is probably targeting the city, yet the same problem exists. Is the city really liable for a wrongful death? The other thing is, people can sue an individual all they want, and even get a judgement in court, but actually collecting that money is another story. All Zimmerman has to do is put all his assets in his wife’s name; and instead of being a regular employee, get his employer to sign a document stating that Zimmerman is “an independent consultant”. Corporations do that all the time to avoid liability, and to decrease their own tax burden. It would be impossible for anyone to garish his wages that way.

      • Well, I’ve certainly thought of that, hard to imagine an institution being held liable for the actions of a non-employee tho. But who knows, it’s a crazy system.

  89. Extremely fine article. I located your web page and wanted to mention that I have genuinely liked checking out your website.

  90. Lorac says:

    Questions. On the 911 call GZ says TM has on a dark hoodie like a grey hoodie. Now if TM was walking towards GZ, the only way he would have know he had on a hoodie was if the hoodie was up. Now he may have driven by him when he was near the club house and seen the hoodie up. However Dee Dee says that TM told her some man was watching him so he pulled his hoodie over his head. So was Dee Dee on the phone with TM before GZ called 911? I say it had to be because GZ said TM had on a hoodie. Later the 911 call GZ says TM has a button on his shirt. So did TM have on a zip up hoodie rather than a pullover hoodie. How would GZ see a button on a shirt so I have to assume that it was a zip up hoodie. Now there is no mention of the shirt color. If the shirt was white and if somehow TM hoodie got pulled down during the wrestling match or was open so the shirt was visible then the white T shirt that the one person said was on the top could have been TM. That witness might not have seen the dark hoodie but the shirt might have stuck out like a sore thumb so to speak and that is why the witness said the guy on top had on a white T shirt. Pure speculation on my part but it will be interesting to find out what TM had on under that hoodie.
    Also George states on the 911 call that TM is running. However Dee Dee states that she told TM to run and TM told her no he was just going to walk fast. That makes no sense to me cause TM did run according to the 911 call.

  91. MarkC says:

    from the beginning the media knew the one real witness supported zimmerman’s self defense claim

    http://www.myfoxtampabay.com/dpp/news/state/witness-martin-attacked-zimmerman-03232012

    and that martin’s father told police the screaming was not treyvon

    http://news.yahoo.com/video/orlandowesh-16122564/sanford-police-speak-out-in-trayvon-martin-case-28640523.html#crsl=%252Fvideo%252Forlandowesh-16122564%252Fsanford-police-speak-out-in-trayvon-martin-case-28640523.html

    but the media chose to fabricate a story

  92. Blank says:

    What all is admissible in court as far as this wealth of information both from tm and dd?

  93. jd says:

    Wait a minute. Was she on the phone with Treyvon, or was she tweeting? Because if she was only tweeting, then there was no way she could have “overheard” anything.

    • jd says:

      lol I have a cheap phone. Maybe those fancy black people can afford an expensive phone which can make voice calls and tweet at the same time, but I’ve never been that privileged.

      • Sharon says:

        …naw, neither have I.

        It is not just “fancy black people” who pull this kind of crap off on a daily basis. The only group saying this is about race is the black racialists–The Professionally Aggrieved Ones. I’d just as soon keep it that way.

    • kinthenorthwest says:

      BIg difference isnt there…
      But if she heard it going down, why wasn’t she tweeting or calling others…
      A friend brought up they might have been waiting to hear back from Trayvon to see if he got the better of the other person. Maybe they didnt want to snitch on Trayvon beating up on someone.
      Yet most teens would be at least gossiping to others; You know like “Hey Trayvon is giving someone a beatdown”
      And if after not hearing from Trayvon, why didnt this mysterious somone call someone like the police, parents or even friends.

  94. RightWingCanadian. says:

    Louis Farrackhan says the law of vengeance must be applied then they better start because the thousands of black youths in America are killed every year by their own “black brothers” So pathetic. I feel sorry for the parents and for their loss but his death was hi-jacked by these over zealous black leaders who continue to gripe and complain. Like c’mon man? The President of the US is black even though he’s half but he’s black and they still complain that they’re being held back by the man.

  95. Pingback: Z's First Court Appearance: He Lied Under Oath - Page 66

  96. ItsMichaelNotMike says:

    We all need to keep it sane on this Site. As I predicted, the web crawlers are picking up our words and this Site is becoming one of the places to obtain intelligent discourse about the issues, in defense of Zimmerman.

    E.g., I have searched certain terms in Google and this site was on the first page, at the top (“above the fold” as the saying goes).

    IMO the best way you can help Zimmerman is by donating and/or posting your conclusions in here.

  97. bill says:

    Im assuming that Trayvon was completely sober the night he was killed. I’m also assuming his parents have the toxicology tests taken during the autopsy since they would naturally want to know what happened to their boy..

  98. DiwataMan says:

    Doing some great work here. This guy says he was close to Trayvon and judging by his tweets I believe him. He also seems to be one of the first of Trayvon’s friends, that I can find, that found out about Trayvon being dead. Check this tweet he made on March 22, 4:20PM. He says “Tray must have of had 2 hoes, cause that girlfriend we know he went wit aint known he died until ah week after” Now I’m just speculating here but it may be that he heard about this DeeDee on TV and is surprised at the fact that they are calling her Trayvons girlfriend because he knows Trayvon’s girlfriend and he knows that isn’t her. We know this Daisha Brianne found out about Trayvon by 5:44 pm Feb. 27 so we know this can’t be Trayvon’s girlfriend.

    It’s unfortunate whoever broke the news on Trayvon’s twitter first didn’t take the time to investigate all the people he was tweeting with, we might have learned a lot more before they started closing their accounts.

    What’s funny about the tweet’s I’ve been going through is that if there was in fact a person who was so very concerned about the safety of Trayvon that night they didn’t seem concerned enough to tweet it to any of his friends because none of them seem to have known anything until the next day when it was going around that he was dead and that includes Daisha Brianne.

    By the way, scrolling down the twitter pages takes forever and I found Firefox to be the best to do it as IE and Chrome both slow down my computer so much so that I can barely scroll back up through the tweets. Twitter really needs to put a search thing in there so we can go right to the date.

    A close friend

    https://twitter.com/#!/TheSoleManSB/status/174225442289618944

    Daisha Brianne’s post

    A couple of other interesting posts about possible drug dealing

    http://twitter.com/#!/SelfMade_Kutta/status/174439881416785920

    Another close friend finds out the news 2:27 PM – 27 Feb

    Possibly a couple of other people of interest I haven’t looked into yet
    https://twitter.com/#!/CheerNinja_
    https://twitter.com/#!/_DisasterBeauty

  99. Pingback: Zimmerman has issues - Page 15 - XDTalk Forums - Your XD/XD(m) Information Source!

  100. Question: I have read repeatedly that Trayvon Martin was originally tagged as a “John Doe.” However, the police report written up that was released a couple of weeks ago shows the victim’s ID as Trayon Benjamin Martin. http://wesawthat.files.wordpress.com/2012/04/twin_lakes_shooting_initial_report.pdf Do you understand why this is so?

    • According to Tracy Martin himself via Reuters, Trayvon was initially found without any identification, nor did anyone know who he was, he was transported to the coroner as a John Doe and tagged accordingly. Feb 26th.

      The following day (Mon-27th) at around 8am, from pictures of Trayvon in the morgue provided by investigators, and from descriptions of clothing last know to be worn, Tracy Martin gave a positive ID of Trayvon. The following day (Tue-28th) Tracy met Detective Serino at SPD HQ and requested transport of Trayvon to Funeral home. Wed (29th) Funeral Director picked up body and Transported back to Ft. Lauderdale.

      The initial Police Report was more than likely amended with confirmation of identity.

  101. Pingback: Do you think George Zimmerman deserves to be charged with murder? - Page 85 - Grasscity.com Forums

  102. Pingback: Inside G.Zimmerman's REAL World - Page 35

  103. Pingback: Trayvons Girlfriend Speaks

  104. Pingback: The Trayvon Martin Case, Update 11: The Dee Dee Interview–Kaboom! « Stately McDaniel Manor

  105. Pingback: Broke Zimmerman Can't Pay His Debts. - Page 36 (politics)

  106. Pingback: Blogging and such «

Comments are closed.