O’Mara Speaks With “In Session” TV…Does Our Money Come From Racists?…Can Our Client Get A Fair Trial? – (Videos)

In one breath,  “In Session” TV’s Jean Casarez defines the people’s viewpoint of George Zimmerman as,  “…the most hated man in America.”  Then she goes on to say, in an almost incredulous voice, “There are supporters of George Zimmerman.”  In the video below, she probes into the sources behind Zimmerman’s defense fund.

The next video is only 37 sec.   O’Mara says he finds it “disgusting” that, according to an Orlando Sentinel poll, the vast majority of people don’t think that his client can get a fair trial.

About these ads

About Ad rem

Millions of little gray cells wrapped in fur.
This entry was posted in 2nd Amendment, Mark O'Mara, media bias, Political correctness/cultural marxism, Racism, Trayvon Martin, Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

83 Responses to O’Mara Speaks With “In Session” TV…Does Our Money Come From Racists?…Can Our Client Get A Fair Trial? – (Videos)

  1. ytz4mee says:

    I found it disgusting that the media still want to focus on how GZ spent the funds raised.

    Why do they care? Because the funding far outstripped any of the lame shakedown attempts of the Scheme Team, and showed broad-based support for GZ. The Scheme Team only has the professionally and permanently aggrieved as their base of support.

    Instead of wasting the interview going over ground about the GZ Legal Defense Fund, why didn’t she find the time to ask Crump:

    - Why he repeatedly told the media that Witness #8 was a 16 year old minor, when it is now clear the Scheme Team knew all along that she was not a minor? You would think that the media would have more than a passing interest in finding out why he felt it was okay to dupe them and deflect from any questions about the DeeDee.

    - Why did he advise Tracy Martin to refuse to cooperate with the police and refuse to provide the PIN information so that the cell phone could be fully analyzed? Remember, all along, Crump has stated the family wil do “everything” to help with the investigation. Except facilitate accessing a key piece of information.

    -How much money has the Martin family raised through their website and various shakedown events at churches, etc? How has that money been spent? Who is funding their travel, clothing, makeovers?

  2. smoothcriminal says:

    Why is no one asking the Martins about racists donating money to them? its just a fact certain people view this as an ethnic duty to support the little black child killed by a white man. i have documented them on Facebook.com/pages/IAmGeorgeZimmerman in my photo section where trayvons biggest supporters post about “white devils” and “the jew zimmerman”….or where one person decided they dont like that a witness account matches georges claim so they post “the witness must be white”….its just a fact the martins have expressed their racism publicly with the comment “they killed my son, now they are killing his reputation” and stephen martins tweet about “put the bangers to a cracker”…it is blatantly obvious the biggest racists in the case are all the black people who flocked to support trayvon….from the pink hat lady and obama to will smith and russel simmons….for no reason other than trayvon is black.

    • smoothcriminal says:

      +1 not to mention the fact the martins are getting awards for their foundation that has collected money yet has not helped a single person in any way shape or form.

    • ytz4mee says:

      I was glad that MOM mentioned the racists in the Trayvon Martin camp.

    • Geosurface says:

      Black people in the western world today literally get a pass on everything.

      - They get a pass on being massive racists
      - They get a pass on being loud, uncouth, socially inept, overbearing
      - They get a pass on being wildly homophobic
      - They get a pass on being hugely misogynistic
      - They get a pass on being 12% of the population, and yet accounting for a majority of the violent crime. (It’s even worse because all 12% are obviously not engaged in it, you have to trim it down to mostly males 15-35 or so, which means it’s probably 4% of the US population committing a majority of the violent crime, astounding)

      There is no end to the number of people who will line up to make excuses for black America no matter how egregious the offense in question. It’s always whitey’s fault, it’s always history’s fault, it’s always culture’s fault.

      Despite the fact that some black people have pulled themselves out of bad situations and succeeded. Putting the lie to all that nonsense. I think if I were a successful, intelligent black person in the USA I’d be more upset than anyone else about what the majority of the black community is up to. I’d hate being lumped in with them.

      Ironically, without realizing it, all the people giving the black community a pass on everything, are actually being the biggest racists of all. The real reason they don’t expect anything of blacks, and make excuses for them at every turn… is that they don’t think they’re capable of any better. It’s the same racism of the past they claim to hate, but now it’s just dressed up in a different way.

      • jordan2222 says:

        Slaves to a new master.

        Intelligent, educated, successful blacks are never heard. It would make the others look even worse. When did you last see Thomas Sewell in MSM?

      • marie says:

        Yes, and they get a pass on their lack of impulse control. Did you see Bill O’Reilly’s interview of Bob Costas? Neither man has courage. If he did, he’d have broken down gun violence by race. Why did neither? Because they were afraid they’d be called racist.

      • Knuckledraggingwino says:

        If you crunch the numbers it isbasicly 1% of the population (black, males, 16-35 years old) committing about half the violent crime.

      • myopiafree says:

        HI Geo – Well – and accurately stated. “Racism” was a real problem – 100 years ago. That situation has vastly changed. But the NAACP must cling to this “image” of what it was like THEN, and beat on that issue to keep their RACIST organization ALIVE – by this method you describe.

        “Ironically, without realizing it, all the people giving the black community a pass on everything, are actually being the biggest racists of all. The real reason they don’t expect anything of blacks, and make excuses for them at every turn… is that they don’t think they’re capable of any better. It’s the same racism of the past they claim to hate, but now it’s just dressed up in a different way.”

        What about Koreans, Vietnamese, Chinese, Indians – they have almost all universally pulled themselves up by their “boot straps”. That is because we know they have great capabilities and great parents. In CA, the Japanese now out-compete the “Whites” and Blacks in college placement.

  3. smoothcriminal says:

    It doesn’t matter if he wore a hoodie.

    It doesn’t matter if he punched Zimmerman.

    It doesn’t matter why he was suspended from school.

    What matters is that he is unavailable for comment about those things, and always will be. What matters is that none of them changes the essential truth of what this is about.

    Though innocent of any crime, Trayvon Martin was gunned down by George Zimmerman. He was sacrificed for all our fears.
    what a load

    • rumpole2 says:

      I doubt he was “innocent of any crime” The evidence suggests (shows) he assaulted GZ… vicious assault/attempted murder are crimes… ya know?
      Fact is…. GZ was just on his way to the store when he was attacked….he did not even get the chance to but some iced tea (I am sure that is what he went to the store for) :D

    • ytz4mee says:

      For some one who claims to be reading/posting for 8 mths, I again find it remarkable that you “don’t know” …..

      • smoothcriminal says:

        yeah i just sit there making sure to click all links and remember all content. get your head out of your ass.
        ytz has ways of taking of herself that you can only dream of, but I am just agreeing with her statement that you’re in our living room. Got manners? –Admin

        • ytz4mee says:

          You are a visitor to our cocktail party, which does not give you permission to be rude.
          Care to apologize?

          • smoothcriminal says:

            for what? being attacked for passing on info? no thanks.

            • ytz4mee says:

              Reminder of the standing House rules here:
              It’s okay to disagree.
              It’s not okay to be disagreeable.
              Rude language and manners – not in my house.

              • jordan2222 says:


                May I ask what is going on here?

              • anwtex says:

                Call that dude a cab.

                • anwtex says:

                  omgosh! Not a cab for jordan2222. The cab remark was meant for ytz4mee re her 12:34 comment. hahahhaha
                  Seeeee my responses fall in the wrong slot sometimes. Sorry

                • Sharon says:

                  anwtex, your responses are right where they should be….what’s confusing you, I think, is that someone else’s comment appears between the person you’re replying to, and your reply. All that indicates is that someone else replied to them already….then when you reply, your comment is going to be #2 (or #3) in line below them, but on the same “margin” vertical line.

                  Take a look at how the comments just above my reply to you here… are aligned. First there is jordan2222′s reply to ytz…and your reply to ytz (the 2nd one to her) is directly below.

                  So your comments are not in the wrong place. What can happen is that if there are many replies to one comment, the physical separation can start to make it a little tricky to see where the connected replies are. That’s why you will often see someone giving a quote, and begin their comment with something like this:

                  Sharon said, “Take a look at how the comments just above my reply to you here…”

                  That way it’s easier for the reader to immediately see what the reply is connected to.

                  Does that help?

                  • anwtex says:

                    OMGosh! Thank You!!!!!!! Your explanation was so informative but you didn’t need to take your time to go into all that you simply could have said “so,deal with it”. :shock:

                    Thanks again big time!!!!!

                  • Sharon says:

                    Hey, we’re glad to help smooth the way for good conversation. :) I think I need to act like I’m going to bed now–catch y’all tomorrow!

        • I, personally, have no manners so I’ma just gonna come right out with this.

          You sound like a total dick.

    • justfactsplz says:

      Shut up Frances Robles.

  4. anwtex says:

    I’ve been all over the place looking for the full O’Mara / West interview and am coming up with nuttin’. Anyone know if it is available? tia

    • ytz4mee says:

      Not sure. The interview was broken up and spliced in between large blocks of ad time for the original broadcast today.

      • anwtex says:

        :( okie-dokie then. But thanks for getting back to me.
        However……………I will continue my search because I’m… um… a rather persistent type.
        If I find anything I’ll bring it back.

        • Ad rem says:

          I’ll keep pawing away for more as well….

          • anwtex says:

            OMGosh! Maybe there will be a prize!!!????? I’m on my way back into cyberspace varoommmm………………………

            • Ad rem says:

              Are you big on cat treats? (That’s usually my reward. ;-) )

              • rumpole2 says:

                What is it with you cats?
                My cat, LBC is p’ed off with me because I bought chocolate ice-cream instead of vanilla! :D

              • anwtex says:

                Kitties RULE!!!!!! Aside from that I’ll take anything as long as it is wrapped up with a big bow.
                So moving fwd——I don’t think this makes me a prize winner however it IS something:

                It’s the best I can do for today. It is a bit more of the Casares / O’Mara / West interview but it’s on Vinnies’s show……..just ignore him, as we know he has lost his mind.

                Also—a heads up— he interviews Clump at about the 7 min mark so I shut it down right before he ‘spoke’ because as I said Vinnie has gone whacko and was beginning to make my head hurt and Clump’s carp would send me overboard…..not the last thing I want to listen to before I go to sleep.

                So what you’ve got here is O’Mara talking about Tracy saying it was not Trayvon yelling. Something that we all know about but am so pleased it is out in the open finally…not that it will make a dent in those odd balls, but never the less, good for the masses to hear.
                O’mara also says witnesses change their stories after they talk to the State. Well again, a no thinker, but for the masses it is good. At least it is refreshing to her the truth spoken about this case….finally!
                The liars colors are really beginning to show. Yippie!

                “TRAYVON’S FATHER A LIAR SAYS COPS” (not my caps)

                • anwtex says:

                  Why, oh, why. Often times when I am replying to a particular comment my response lands below a different person’s comment? What in the world am I doing wrong…I click “reply” and the box I am writing in does have a “cancel reply” button right above it so I think I am in the right spot.How is the intended person going to be notified that there is a response….wellll I guess they won’t be. :sad:

                  • Sharon says:

                    Yes, they will ;) You’re fine! I left you a longer explanation of why it may “look wrong” to you on another spot….I’m sure you’ll see it.

                • Ad rem says:

                  “Anwtex”…..You are indeed a prize winner!!! (And, if I had anything better than 1/2 a bag of kibble, 2 squeaky toys, or an assorted collection of fur-balls, it would surely be yours.) ;-) Well, it looks like I’ll be staying up late so I can get this posted for the morning crowd.
                  Awesome video…..1,000% more meaty and insightful than the pap posted on HLN’s site.

                  • anwtex says:

                    ummmm, well, let’s see, just what color are those fur balls????

                    But, nah, “winner” I am not! That was simply another snippet. We need the whole thing. So you get prowling around tomorrow and I’ll saddle up my horse and we’ll hit the trail once again. I’m sure you will come back with the goods because, ya know, kitties rule.

                    I’m glad you enjoyed it anyway. Doesn’t that snippet make you just want more. Does me.

                  • Ad rem says:

                    Snippet….maybe. But it was loaded with all sorts of implications and teasers for what’s to come. Next time I’ll just set up the video cam and tape it off the TV….I’m tired of these hacks parceling it out to us in digestible and carefully edited segments. I wanna make a meal of it! ;-)

                • ejarra says:

                  Thanx for the InSessions interview.

                • Cupcake says:

                  Starting @ 6:05 — the host says to Crump “We wouldn’t be where we are now if Tracy and Sabrina didn’t find you and didn’t make some noise about that and that’s what a parent is, I believe, obligated to do WHEN THEIR CHILD IS SHOT AND KILLED FOR NO REASON”.

                  I’m speechless. He’s a host on In Session and what…he hasn’t seen or read ANY of the evidence in this case and is just repeating the “killed for no reason” talking point?

            • dmoseylou says:


              Slow down in the cloud curves!

            • dmoseylou says:


              Today’s prize

              • anwtex says:

                My truck!! Far out! I must have won??? Yippie! Nooooo j/k job not nearly completed.
                More work to do manana before AdRem and her felines beat me to it.

                Should have been the flotation devices tho as I was about to jump overboard with that Vinnie talking smack.


  5. OTOH, effen I were MOM I’d be a little leery of who I choose to interview with on the national stage. The MSM could take about 30 minutes of video of Mother Theresa and make her look like the Wicked Witch of the East. Don’t play into their hands.

  6. jordan2222 says:

    I still cannot find a vid of the In Session segments with MOM and West. Surely someone has it. No?

  7. jello333 says:

    Question to Sundance. I posted this question in one of the other threads, but since I’m still about 3 behind (and trying to catch up) I wanna make sure it doesn’t get missed. This is about your comment re. the Beasley firm, and how they’ve now got a huge interest in how the criminal part of this goes. So here’s my question:

    So if they’re looking not at just the outcome of George’s criminal case, but how that impacts the civil suits to follow, is it safe to assume that they care greatly about HOW George’s case ends? I don’t mean just that it ends in his exoneration… that’s a given. I mean that the ending won’t allow the prosecution or anyone else to say “he got off on a technicality”. Rather, that it’s clear to the world that it ended 1) because George was totally innocent, and 2) because the whole prosecution was a fraud from the start, and 3) some people need to be punished for that fraud.

    Do you think that’s the direction they’re trying to make this thing go?

    • sundance says:

      Most certainly. Whenever a player like Beasley steps up a few things have to be remembered.

      1.) They wouldn’t take the case if it was not a slam dunk.
      2.) It’s a contingency thing. Beasley is, in essence, making a huge *investment* in George – their investment will only pay if GZ wins civil award.
      3.) That said, the criminal trial – or fiasco – is actually a benefit for them. The same players will be deposed, and forceably so, because GZ has 6th amendment protections with which he can hammer accusers and out-liars, and they cannot hide or refuse.
      4.) Beasely is in control. They are now the approvers of all things GZ for the reasons you outline.

      I’ve been asking some legal minds who know the circles and from what I am told a rough guesstimate would be for Beasley to front (invest) around $500k for this case to GZ and MoM/West as a starter fund. With a willingness to go in for around $2 mill of their own capital….. knowing they’ll recoup it ten fold in award.

      • jello333 says:

        Thanks. But just to clarify one thing: Do you feel that Beasley will care about the PUBLIC PERCEPTION of WHY George gets exonerated? I mean, will they try to make sure people know it was because the whole case (not just the “racism” part) was a FRAUD (as opposed to “getting off on a technicality”). Sorry if you already answered that in your other reply, and I just misinterpreted it. (Oh wow… I just noticed the time! ;) )

        • Knuckledraggingwino says:

          Absolutely believe that Beasely has a vested interest in HOW the case ends. It is not enough for GZ to “get off on a technicality” or be acquitted for lack of evidence” r win a SYG hearing “based on the preponderance of the evidence. “. It is necessary from Beasely’s perspective that the case against GZ be totally refuted and exposed as malicious fraud. In fact this has been the standard for victory since GZ was charged because given the massive vilification campaign it was not possible for GZ to be acquitted by a jury much less win a SYG hearing unless the fraudulent prosecution was proven and exposed. This standard is also needed to avert Thug Riots.

          Now the question is: will President Obama have the grace to speak out about the fraudulent prosecution and the fraudulent evidence in order to avert Thug Riots or will Obama continue his effort to incite thug riots in an effort to give himself a pretext to suspend the Constitution as his pal Morsi has done in Egypt?

          This is why I view the initiation of thug riots as opening day of hunting season with no bag limit on Obama’s bastard sons.

      • jordan2222 says:

        SD and Jello:

        The financial investment and subsequent legal input by Beasley into the case means that not only Beasley but also West and O’Mara, are convinced that George will be found to be immune. We all know that outcomes are normally unpredictable and NO ONE can say with certainty how a case like this will end; i.e. UNLESS O’Mara has something MUCH GREATER in importance and relevance than what we have seen that will make the case a slam dunk.

        Although all of the evidence we have seen through today may be ample proof of George’s innocence to US, it still may not be enough to convince Nelson or, God forbid, a jury.

        Neither West nor MOM have displayed any unusual emotions about the most recent revelations,… So I believe that they are holding something that is truly devastating. I hate the word, “bombshell” but maybe there is a better term.

        I would not be surprised if more investigators are retained but they may also employ the spy strategy to infiltrate the bad guys. Both the State and the entire ‘Scheme Team have weaklings that can easily turn on a dime if presented the right offer. They may be weak but they are not all so stupid as to be blinded to the impending total destruction of Crump’s plan, especially if their promised big pay bonus has evaporated.

        I notice that the State has been silent and have yet to file a response to any of the recent motions. And what little we have seen from Crump appears to be that of a desperate man. He has openly confessed to crimes and is so damn stupid, he doesn’t even realize it.

        As Sharon has implied in the past, pay close attention to what is NOT being said.


        • jello333 says:

          Yep, you got it. Oh and yeah… WOLVERINES!

          Or as the Schemers and their supporters might exclaim…


    • myopiafree says:

      Hi Jello – Some commentary:
      “HOW George’s case ends? I don’t mean just that it ends in his exoneration… that’s a given. ”
      Free> Tragically it is not a “given”. It ain’t over until the Fat Lady (Corey) SINGS. No one can ever predict results of a jury trial. All concentration of force, must be to get “self-defense” and immunity for George – in my opinion.

      “I mean that the ending won’t allow the prosecution or anyone else to say “he got off on a technicality”.
      Free> They will ALWAYS SAY THAT. O’mara can ONLY be concerned with immunity for George – until after that ruling is made.
      Free> Because such a massive lie has been put into the “Public Mind” by Crump-Julison, and Media – it takes a long time to over-come that lie. That is not the responsibility of George, O’mara and Beasley. Only AFTER George is free on self-defense will these three people begin CIVIL action against NBC – leading to a jury trial. During the jury trial, all the lies of Crump, DeeDee, Julison, Bernie – will indeed come out. Much like the Duke students (Nifong), it took a long time to change public perception that a black woman had lied about being raped by these innocent students. I think that Bernie is in very serious trouble with “Witness tampering”, and blocking “Discovery” for O’mara.

      • jello333 says:

        Hi Myopiafree… no, I didn’t mean it that way when I said:

        “I don’t mean just that it ends in his exoneration… that’s a given.”

        It was my fault, since my train of thought was a bit convoluted. What I meant was a “given” was that Beasley (along with MOM and everyone else) was more concerned THAT George’s criminal risk is ended than HOW it is ended. THAT’s what I assume is beyond debate. But as for whether it WILL end well for George? Well, while not a “given” as in 100% certain (almost nothing in this world is 100%) I’m as confident as a person can be under the circumstances. ;)

  8. hooson1st says:

    Crump and DeeDee

    In the interview, at about 10:05 Crump states the following:

    “I’ve talked to this young lady (DeeDee) once in my life…and that is it”

    This is a very curious statement, considering that Gutman, for one, says that he spoke with DeeDee numerous times. A reporter speaks with the key witness numerous times, yet, the attorney who would benefit the most from her testimony speaks with her once – and contextually – not in person, but over a telephone?

    And if he did not talk with her further, would it not indicate, from a practical perspective, that he did not consider her proposed testimony to be worthwhile?

    • ejarra says:

      Yeah, and he never spoke to her on Apr 2nd either. As said by aussie, I say MUSHROOM FODDER!

    • Cupcake says:

      Exactly. There is no way Gutman would be talking to or interviewing Dee Dee all by his lonesome.

    • jello333 says:

      Wait, what? What about when she was interviewed by Bernie? Did he not explicitly say something to the Dee Dee like, “And you know Mr Crump who was here earlier” ? So… maybe Crump saying he’s only talked to her once is in effect admitting that there are TWO the Dee Dees?

  9. CMSIQ says:

    “…the most hated man in America.” Then she goes on to say, in an almost incredulous voice, “There are supporters of George Zimmerman.”


    Follow the message boards and comments. The majority opinion favors GZ. And NO, not because we’re racist, but because this case is a complete SHAM brought on by financial and political (real racist) goals.

  10. I’m beginning to understand why people sometimes post to blogs with nothing more than “following”.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s