01-11 George Zimmerman Case – Open Discussion Thread

Use this thread as an open thread just for Zimmerman Case stuff. A place to just dump, collect, or discuss general information about the Trayvon Martin VS George Zimmerman Case.

REMINDER – Please WATCH THE TONE and CONTENT of Commentary. Please be respectful, courteous and considerate of other readers and contributors. Please avoid hatespeak, angry rhetoric, vulgarity, personal attacks and condescension. If you wish to engage in vitriolic, racist, or bitter angry rhetoric, there are alternative sites on the internet more than welcoming to such considerations. But not here. Thank You.

About these ads
This entry was posted in George Zimmerman Open Thread, Trayvon Martin, Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

254 Responses to 01-11 George Zimmerman Case – Open Discussion Thread

  1. lovemygirl says:

    Ode to Trolls

  2. rumpole2 says:

    Troglodyte … near enough to troll :D

  3. lovemygirl says:

    Found this poem too

    A troll is constantly on the prowl for its favorite booty
    Stomping out any new idea with creative beauty

    Anywhere there is a sign of thinking and creativity
    Count on it becoming a Mecca for Troll negativity

    You see trolls only think in back and white
    And are blind to other peoples plight

    Most Trolls are too stupid to discern the facts
    So, they just repeat the words of political hacks

    Most trolls are rabid sinners
    When it comes to truths they all are spinners

    Trolls are always fearful of the truths light
    Expose some truths and they’ll want to fight

    Trolls feed on creating strife
    I wish they’d all just get a life

  4. dmoseylou says:

    “An instant hit in 1908, and still running strong after one hundred years. Albert Von Tilzer’s song quickly became a classic as America’s signature song for baseball.”

    • jordan2222 says:

      Nothing is bigger than baseball.

      • dmoseylou says:

        I was at 3 of the NY mets games in ’69, before the World Series began. NY was a magical place in the 60′s, esp for young people. I had moved from there in ’68, but returned for several weeks the following year. Baseball in Shea Stadium—one of my best memories, ever.

  5. rumpole2 says:

    Daily Daft Posts From Justarse Quest

    Today just a regular daft post.

    Teeto has obviously not let go of the silly notion that a “Holly Bush” caused Georges head wounds.

    In fact, in the T-Zone they do not abandon daft theories. They hold them in reserve and keep bringing them up, hoping they will make sense.

    Doing the same thing time and time again expecting a different result is…….. “Insanity”

    At one stage they were scouring crime scene photos looking to find a holly bush. I am sure they WILL find something.
    They did, after all, find multiple ghosts in the club house, Osterman at the bank, 4 accomplices riding along with George and…….. A COCKATOO!!

    Finding a holly bush should be a doddle!! :D

    Random Topics


    • justfactsplz says:

      Osterman at the bank was a real hoot. It looked nothing like him. I feel sorry for the man who had his picture plastered all over the internet.

  6. eastern2western says:

    most honest analysis of the photo

  7. art tart says:

    I am a daily lurker, I enjoy the comments shared here. I don’t know if this link has been shared, if so, I apologize. It was shared at another site I read at on a daily basis. It is in reference to the lawsuit with the security firm suing GZ/SZ/MOM etc., it’s the breakdown of the costs they feel they are owed.


  8. arkansasmimi says:

    If duplicate, sorry. Thought ole Nasty Nat wasnt gonna be talking aboutNatalie Jackson‏ the case bahahaha, she cant help but being one of the female dogs at the Dog Pound. Looks like she still keeps up with the TH
    Natalie Jackson‏@NatJackEsq
    @grandmaj2 @BigBoithedog LOL…Dear Eastern2western and Justfactplz, U 2 crack me up…LOL :-).
    12:01 AM – 10 Jan 13

    • mung says:

      I am sure she is an expert on crack.

      • hooson1st says:

        While I agree that some of her pronouncements are hard to fathom, and I think that she and Crump and Parks and the rest of the crew are wrong on this GZ case, I would not be flippant about the range of her capabilities.

        Crump and crew have carved out a specialty afforded by our legal system as it stands now. They have template in place which ferrets out possible legal cases that fit this narrow specialty.

        The template includes racial considerations as a legal filter and with the added benefit of garnering political support from a natural constituency.

        Remember that the legal profession, at its core, is an economic enterprise to which a veneer of a social good can be attached.

        While the term “economic enterprise” should not be viewed with opprobrium (as for instance – the same applies to the medical field), the pecuniary benefits should not be ignored either and cannot be ignored when you consider the court mandated “transfer of funds” in the tobacco litigation, the silicone implant litigation, the black farmer litigation, etc.

        Any litigation enterprise that targets “deep pockets” is more attractive when viewed in a risk/reward scenario. The penalties for frivolous lawsuits are still too miniscule and disparate to serve as an adequate counter-balance.

        Some time ago, I viewed one of those youtube videos of Natalie Jackson talking to a group, the url provided here at CTH. I thought she made a good presentation within the context of the issues she was covering.

        Some of her tweets do beg explanation, but I suspect a few more years of maturity could temper that inclination.

        I hope that one day, Natalie can think outside that legal template and recognize that GZ/TM tragedy was just that, a tragedy and that the narrative pushed by Mr. Crump as to the character of GZ was just plain wrong.

        The GZ/TM case, to them, appeared to fit this template. It does not.

        • John Galt says:

          “I hope that one day, Natalie can think outside that legal template and recognize that GZ/TM tragedy was just that, a tragedy and that the narrative pushed by Mr. Crump as to the character of GZ was just plain wrong.”

          I hope that one day, Scheme Team is brought to account for their conduct in disciplinary, criminal, and civil venues.

          • ottawa925 says:

            John, #1 I think that an attorney who is on the case to be tweeting and remarking is unethical. I would be very disappointed if I saw MOM or West tweeting. #1 it would tell me they don’t have enough work to do apparently, that they have time to tweet to tweeters. If they have tweeted and I don’t know about it, I’m disappointed. But you have this attorney … Nat … tweeting and as an attorney I, in my opinion, is totally inappropriate. If she wants to tweet with friends about her personal life that’s one thing, but to attach yourself to thedogpound shows how low class she is. I would NEVER, as an attorney, make ANY remarks to the public on tweeter on a case I am involved in. MOM has the case website where he occasionally releases a statement. But tweeting is another matter, it’s shoot from the hip banter that has no place in the day to day activities of an attorney on a case whether you are defense or prosecution. Doesn’t matter. That’s just my opinion. I would feel the same if Nat showed up here as herself and began to debate the subject. Or if MOM or West showed up as themselves on leatherman’s site. It’s totally inappropriate.

        • Sha says:

          hooson1st: Oh ! I have no doubt she is good at what she does… She would have never made it this far without being good at it . I don’t think anyone should under estimate there enemies . I have always felt that it is how far a person is willing to go to reach what ever goal they have that you need to be worried about.

          • ottawa925 says:

            I disagree Sha. I have seen with my own eyes ppl like this that make it to the top on very little. It’s the support structure underneath that places them there. I have had the experience to be amongst attorneys virtually my entire career, and I can tell you that you just don’t find law firms loaded with black attorneys. That’s why they create their own firms. You will be hard pressed to find top notch black attorneys, for instance, in the area of intellectual property, or commercial litigation. You will find them as part of the State and County, and if private they will be more involved with civil rights (discrimination – sexual harrassment), worker’s comp, municipal law (cause it’s rooted in politics), personal injury, wrongful death, but it’s rare up here in Chicago to see them as part of complex litigation involving holding more than one degree such as civil engineer, chemistry, etc. Every year lawfirms across the nation fire sub-standard attorneys. Sure there’s office politics involved, or if you cannot draw in the clients (the rain makers), but in general they give them a chance to prove themselves and if they don’t perform they are gone. Firms that hire black attorneys exclusively hire for many reasons, and “being good” isn’t necessarily one one of them. They may just be a good face for the firm, or the in case of Nat, another exclusive group … women, one who knows their way around the media. Although I see they threw one male in there.


            They are basically personal injury. Ambulance chasers. And from a reading on her she is more about MEDIA. Normally these law firm websites put forth cases or at least the most high profile cases that they have been successful with. I don’t see anything. That’s not to say they haven’t any. I’m just saying they don’t seem to demonstrate to someone looking for representation … hey, look … we won this case, and this case. You don’t have to name the case directly, but refer to what kind of case it was at least.

            Take the time to read the bio’s in the About section. The lone male has none.

            Let me make a comparison if I can. Here is a black lawfirm that has been successful over the years here in Chicago. I chose this one cause I’m familiar with it. This is the bio page of the founder:


            Now look above and click on “Our Success Record”.

            Now if this attorney prslaw was in FL, and you were researching for an attorney, which of these two firms would you choose. The one that wants to be your “Friend”, or the one that has a very successful track record of winning on the merits, instead of appearing on every radio and TV show known to mankind?

            Another interesting read on Nat from 2010:


            I must say, that if I truly wanted to convince the public I was an advocate for women, children, the poor and minorities, I wouldn’t be driving a Mercedes-Benz with plates that read “Law Diva”. What an insult to those she sooo much cares about. Just my opinion.

            I guess my original point was that she doesn’t have enough work to do if she can take time to tweet. IMO.

            From the above article: “Many of her clients are low-income, Jackson said. It has put her in a squeeze. She is battling a foreclosure suit filed by her mortgage company and another suit by her homeowners association that accuses her of failing to pay $14,000 in monthly maintenance fees.

            I’m a victim of the economy like everybody else,” Jackson said last week.

            We don’t make as much money as other people,” she said of her firm and its style. “We get the satisfaction of helping people.”

            Yet she rides around in a Mercedes. Her clients have no money, she has a firm with all the overhead, court fees, costs, a handful of attorneys, some doing pro bono … how exactly do they make money to drive a Mercedes and pay $14,000 a month in maintenance fees? I don’t see a lot of common sense going on here.

          • tara says:

            It doesn’t take much to be “good” when the public is willfully ignorant.

        • jello333 says:

          Natalie Jackson is not a kid. And by most accounts, she’s pretty intelligent (moreso than Crump). So I’m NOT willing to give her ANY benefit of the doubt. As far as I’m concerned, she has proven herself to be every bit as money-grubbing, every bit as racist, every bit as EVIL as her co-conspirators. She’s doing everything in her power to send an innocent, good man to prison for decades. She knows EXACTLY what she’s doing. So what *I* would like to see in her future is… a few years behind bars, and NO more years as a member of the Bar.

        • nameofthepen says:

          hooson1st – THIS was excellent.

          And you remind me of “Data” (the Star Trek android officer) more than anyone I know. Not that you are “inhuman”, but that I’ve never heard anything from you but logical, helpful contributions.

          I truly envy your ability to appear unprovoked (and unprovocative) at all times. :)

          • hooson1st says:


            I have to admit that ottawa925 did present some valid criticisms as to the tweeting business.
            Some of those tweets are audacious based on where I think this GZ case is situated. And, her license plate brings to mind the saying, “pride goeth before the fall”.

            But, all of us live and work within our own reality, which includes not only the reality of what we experience each day, but is viewed through our own perception of it.

            • nameofthepen says:

              hooson1st – I agree about ottawa925′s comments. I like his posts a lot anyway.

              And I think you worded this very well. Thanks for the reply. :)

      • justfactsplz says:

        I still hold to my belief on her identity at Click Orlando

    • justfactsplz says:

      You know you are on the right track when they take notice and come after you. Otherwise they wouldn’t bother.

    • LouDaJew says:

      so she mentioned e2w. he’s right on, and she hates that. why doesn’t she ask Sybrina if Trayvon was best friends with Kit Darrant?

  9. eastern2western says:

    am I hearing this right because I swear dd just said trayvon was the one who went back and confronted zimmerman. in the third part of the new recording, dd said first trayvon ran and lost the man. the next thing she said was trayvon told her that he was not going to run like that. then she said trayvon went back and met the man. am I the only one who is picking this up or am I hearing things?

    • John Galt says:

      1. This recording starts mid-stream, so possibly something was edited out at the beginning.

      My attempt at a transcript of the first 36 seconds:

      [beep] [someone in the background: Awright] DD: Trayvon run for it. And then the man, and then he say he lost the man, and then the man come, and then Trayvon say the man was following him. [:14] And then Trayvon ask Trayvon run. And Trayvon say he ain’t gonna run like that. He gonna walk fast from the back. And the man was just following him [unintelligible] like walking to him like fast [:26] like when Trayvon walking fast he was walking fast [unintelligible] like he getting close by him, he getting close by him. [:32] I say run and Trayvon say he’s not going to run. [:36]

      • mung says:

        Is it me or does this sound like a Raggae song? Put a Bob Marley sound in your head and read it.

      • tara says:

        I cannot read any transcript of DD1 or DD2 without laughing!

        eastern2western, it was DD2 who stated that Trademark told her he was “right by” Brandy’s apartment, so he certainly did backtrack. DD1 doesn’t offer that nugget, but one could conclude that it would be physically impossible for Trademark to first run, then “walk fast”, and not be any farther than the T in the sidewalk where he had passed minutes earlier. Only the Red Queen moves like that.

        • tara says:

          I’m obsessed with the location of the shooting. I think this is a HUGE problem for the prosecution and among the three best pieces of evidence for the defense, along with GZ’s injuries and eyewitness reports that Trademark was on top of and punching GZ. Crump made a big mistake considering DD’s information useful to them. She helps the defense! I guess that’s why he paraded her early, he hoped that his summary would be sufficient for the willfully ignorant public, that no one would actually pay attention (outside of a courtroom, that is) to what DD1 or DD2 actually said.

          • hooson1st says:

            While I would agree with your assessment of the value of DeeDee’s testimony, I read this a little differently. I do not believe that Mr. Crump was trying to deceive the public with the use of DeeDee. i think that he was operating from the viewpoint of tunnel vision, seeing what he wanted to see and being very careless with the presentation and use of DeeDee.

            • Stimpy says:

              The introduction of Ryan Julison into the mix kind of negates your position. This is more of a scripted and rehearsed presentation to reach certain thresholds along a pre-determined path. Also, his methods are outside of the norm wouldn’t you say? The DeeDee phone interview for example.

    • justice4z says:

      If this is how the persecution supplied the recording the whole thing is a farse. Why is the recording chopped up ? What possible reason exists for suppling it in this manner. How can it be verified the whole of the interview is included ? Does the state get to decide what information they are going to share ? Why no motion from the defense ?

      • John Galt says:

        “If this is how the persecution supplied the recording the whole thing is a farse.”

        Can’t argue with that.

        “Why is the recording chopped up ?”


        From the manual of Crump’s recorder posted by Diwataman, the recorder records in mp3 format on internal flash memory. Apparently the recorder lacks any connection for directly copying the mp3 files from the flash memory to another device, such as a computer. It is unknown to me whether the mp3 files can be directly copied by opening the recorder and removing the flash memory card. The defense posted that the State produced the recordings in wma format, which gives rise to the possibility that the recording was edited on a computer.

        Also, from the manual of Crump’s recorder, it includes features that could have been used in tampering with the recording: adding, overwriting, dividing.


        “What possible reason exists for suppling it in this manner.”

        Good question. I assume that DD said things that Crump didn’t want people to hear.

        “How can it be verified the whole of the interview is included ?”

        Subpoena ABC / Matt Gutman recording(s), depose Gutman and / or his assistant. Depose Crump. Obtain Crump’s recorder and have it forensically examined by an expert.

        “Does the state get to decide what information they are going to share ?”

        Apparently. IIRC, Judge Nelson ordered Crump to produce the recorder, but the State produced wma files instead.

        “Why no motion from the defense ?”

        I expect the defense will take whatever steps it deems appropriate in the near future.

        • Ad rem says:

          Thanks for your patience whilst I pulled you out of spam hellz….. ;-)

        • justice4z says:

          Thinking about it I may recall a discussion about technical difficulties necessitating a number of restarts

        • justice4z says:

          “I expect the defense will take whatever steps it deems appropriate in the near future.”

          This past Jan 8 would have been a good opportunity

        • justice4z says:

          “What possible reason exists for suppling it in this manner.”

          “Good question. I assume that DD said things that Crump didn’t want people to hear.”

          So it was Crump and not the state that supplied it in this manner ?

          How is Crump not in contempt of court then ?

        • justice4z says:

          “Apparently the recorder lacks any connection for directly copying the mp3 files from the flash memory to another device, such as a computer. It is unknown to me whether the mp3 files can be directly copied by opening the recorder and removing the flash memory ”

          One way to transfer the recording

          Recording on Other
          You can record the message of the IC
          recorder on other equipment.
          Before you start recording, we recommend
          you to make trial recording first.
          1 Connect the  (headphone) jack of the
          IC recorder to the audio input connector
          (stereo minijack) of other equipment
          using an audio connecting cable (not
          For details about the audio connecting
          cable, see “Specifications.”
          2 Press [ PLAY/STOP•ENTER] to start
          playback and at the same time set the
          connected equipment to the recording
          A message from the IC recorder will be
          recorded on the equipment connected.
          3 Press  (stop) on the IC recorder. Also
          stop the connected equipment at the
          same time.
          When you connect an audio connecting cable
          to the  (headphone) jack of the IC recorder
          for the specified period of time, the AVLS
          function is automatically turned on. The
          AVLS function limits the maximum volume
          to maintain a moderate volume level (for
          European model only).

  10. Justice4All says:

    Now my post was deleted????

    Sundance who the F do you have moderating this site?

    I am trying to help George Zimmerman and my posts are being deleted?

    • ytz4mee says:

      Watch the language and the tone.
      This is an all volunteer site. We do not dance to your tune nor to your timeline.
      Using an IP anonymizer will put you in permanent moderation – your technology choice.
      It has been well established I have a low threshold for this type of behavior.

      • Justice4All says:

        My source of income used to put food on my families table is dependent on my ability to access several sites that block US IP addresses which is why my IP would have appeared from a UK address therefore it is not my “choice” of technology it is a necessity. Believe it or not many people nowadays use a VPN for multiple reasons. I have not deleted the cache on my browser in months and it should be 100% transparent who I am, at least your software had no problem identifying me when I replied.

        With that said if this site actually cares about George Zimmerman for any reason other than the traffic he generates………….feel free to post my original post from today so that those who care may look deeper into my observation.

        • wrongonred says:

          I am on a VPN now…..no issues. There is a difference between a VPN and a Proxy Server which is blacklisted and anonymizes IP addresses. Let me perhaps suggest you turn FoxyProxy or whatever you are using off? Everything is configurable.

          • Justice4All says:

            I use a paid service called Hidemyass. Maybe you’ve heard of it?

            I am most definitely using a VPN and not a proxy and have never had any problems previously posting here while protecting my privacy until today. Quite frustrating when you take the time and thought to write a detailed post that may be able to help George only to find out that it is not posted.

            • howie says:

              I use a dilligaff atomizer.

            • jello333 says:

              But the thing is, before you get upset you should find out WHY your post isn’t showing up. Maybe it WAS deleted, but doubtful. More likely it was just a glitch, or you accidentally wound up trapped by the spam filter or something. It happens to everyone from time to time. Usually after a little while it shows up. The guys who run this place do the best they can to watch out for stuff like this…. and I’ve learned to just be patient…. and to appreciate how hard they work to keep things running smoothly. (Just pray they never decide to SMITE you like they did me once! ;) )

              • dmoseylou says:

                I did not know you were SMITED, or SMOTE, once before. I do remember when Puddy steam-rolled right over you one time! Was that the same as “SMITED?” :lol:

                • JB from SoCal says:

                  Are you sure you weren’t SMITTEN? Kitty’s ears perked up on that one — thought it said “kitten.”

                • jello333 says:

                  Yeah, I think it was a little after that. Like you said, first Puddy ran over me with a steamroller (though she proclaimed her innocence later). Then not long after that, I was just trying to show my undying reverence and loyalty to Sundance, and was informed that he was not that kind of ruler, and wouldn’t take kindly to my attitude. So when I wouldn’t back down, Sharon (I’m sure it was her) smote me…. or smited? Anyway, yeah… with a bolt of lightning, no less. :sad:

                  • Sharon says:


                    As Hillary said, “I don’t recall…..I can’t remember…..”

                    With a bolt of lightning??

                    Oh, dear.

    • Sharon says:

      What ytz said…. times–oh–about 750 or so.

  11. Dr. Bogus Pachysandra says:

    Here’s one for Crump! I hope,,,,,,,,,,

  12. eastern2western says:

    here is the most critical part in her testimony, but circumstantial evidence contradicts her.
    1) at first, she claims she heard some one pushed trayvon because of the drop of the head phone. However, the headphone was located and found in martin’s pocket.
    2) she claims that trayvon was talking to her via head phone, but the head phone was found separated from the phone.
    3) she claims that she heard trayvon yelled get off, get off, but she claimed that she only a little bite and she was sure was trayvon. what is so odd about her extra information is that no else any one yelling get off, get off. If she could hear it through a head phone, then the logical conclusion is that trayvon was yelling really loung. However, no neighbor had ever reported of hearing some one yelled get off, get off.
    4) dela rionda violated the most basic rule of his profession and that is putting words into witness’ mouth. she clearly said she heard trayvon pushed first, then change to some one pushed trayvon immediate, but de la rionda changed her words to some one pushing some one. it is very clear that dd is scripted. she almost wanted to tell the truth, but had to change into some thing that fits the script she must follow.

  13. eastern2western says:

    after listening to both recordings, I realized that what happened during the taping is not as important as what happened before the taping because none of the activities is documented. crump stated in many interviews that it was tracy who found dd and he spoke to her for hours in order to convince her to testify, but what was the content of their conversation?

  14. eastern2western says:

    another report I read also stated that there was another interview occured with dd and sabrina took her out side and spoke to her for a while. Is any of this secret conversations even recorded at all?

  15. howie says:

    Where’s Corey? Where’s Bonaparte? Where’s Guttman? Where’s Robles? Where’s what’s his name? Where’s Lester? Where’s all the Schemer’s? Hmnnnn.

    • jello333 says:

      And “Reverend” Al. Normally, he’s drawn to the limelight like a moth… he just can’t help himself. So if even that guy has been scared off the case, then it’s obvious this is gonna get REAL bad for the schemers.

      • jordan2222 says:

        Al ran off as soon as he realized that Crump had screwed up. He immediately began to distance himself from the case. Think about the last time you heard him say anything to support Crump. Do you remember? He knew the gig was up. Al is the master. Crump cannot nor will he ever be a Sharpton, primarily because he does not have the smarts. Some would say he be stuuuupid.

    • hooson1st says:

      These individuals will all weigh in when there are developments in the case. There are other doings going on in their lives besides this case.

  16. eastern2western says:

    I wish the next hearing will be about the impeachment of dd and o’mara will provide us with a transcript of dd’s depostion.

  17. Justice4All says:

    BDLR led DD through her interview as if he had heard her story before. I always assumed that he knew her story in advance because he had listened to the tape provided by crump.

    Clearly no one on the planet can make sense of the tape so how did BDLR know enough of DD’s story to lead her through the interview the way he did? Did he:
    A) Interview DD off the record before the official interview?
    B) Get the story entire from Crump prior to his interview with DD?

    Something stinks here as BDLR should not have done A or B prior to such an important interview.

    • John Galt says:

      “Something stinks here”

      The previous recorded DD “interviews” in March and April didn’t work out too well, so they apparently did not record (or are suppressing) her August 2-3 session.

    • art tart says:

      I can’t understand why this is not Obstruction of Justice, especially w/Crump/Handler’s.

      • jordan2222 says:

        No.. you do understand correctly that it is. So are a lot of things in this case primarily on the part of the State. So what? It is our own fault as citizens for letting the system become so corrupt. Have you seen even one public protest? Shame on us.

        • nameofthepen says:

          jordan2222 says: “It is our own fault as citizens for letting the system become so corrupt. Have you seen even one public protest?”

          + a zillion or so! I swear, we need to mobilize. And, I think about it a lot.

          I keep coming back to: If we could start a trend to a) make TV-watching something to be shunned, and, b) make regularly attending local City Council, PTA, etc., meetings with family and friends the “new cool thing to do”, we would begin to see real change.

          I’ve seen it work before. I was involved in just such a movement that, against all odds, foiled the attempt of a corrupt city council in cahoots with a greedy major developer to re-zone (destroy) a horse-friendly community not far from the heart of downtown Los Angeles.

          Not only was it fun…it was SO SATISFYING!! :D

  18. ottawa925 says:

    On Crumb’s Sony ICD – BX112 Voice Recorder.

    “romrumia 7 months ago
    How do i get audio into my computer ?? It does have a flash usb or something ?

    Reply · ..
    TOSParanormalCrew 7 months ago
    Hi! this particular recorder does nor have a usb jack. Instead, I use a two way microphone jack witch I can play back and record files onto my computer.”

  19. dmoseylou says:

    Has anyone seen the clip from the Hannity show of Robert Z, Jr. that was not shown on Jan 9? RZ tweeted that it would be available at a later date, but I have not found it. Just curious.

  20. eastern2western says:

    trayvonites are stupid for trying to prove zimmerman not having any injuries and never realize there is no injury requirment for zimmerman to use self defense. getting traped under trayvon and not being able to escape is sufficient enough to use one’s gun for self defense. However, I keep having to read about these stupid morons complaining about zimmerman’s injuries were not sufficient to use a gun.

    • jordan2222 says:

      Then stop reading them.

      • justfactsplz says:

        That was blunt. Having a bad day?

        • jordan2222 says:

          No , not at all and maybe it came off the wrong way but you know me well enough to know how I feel about cavorting with the enemy. I have always been quite vocal about it.

          There is an old saying: You may not need a haircut, but if you hang around the barber shop long enough, you might very well end up getting one. I see no point in getting all worked up for nothing unless you are a masochist.

          Keep your enemies close? I know our enemy very well. Benjamin Crump and the State have made sure of that. I sure don’t need someone else to tell me what they said.

          I meant no offense.

    • justfactsplz says:

      They do not understand self defense laws. I would like to see any of them take the beating George did and then ask them what they think about their injuries and if self defense was an appropriate action.

    • lovemygirl says:

      The one thing that caught my ear was they were going to determine if the 2 dead punks should be charge posthumously. If only FL had a statute like that!

  21. mung says:

    Bwahahahaha, I just had some lame troll on Click Orlando say I was pro gun control and wanted the same gun laws here as in Mexico. On the same day I mailed out me CWP paperwork. I don’t know how much less gun control I can be.

    I do think I figured out why wanna be gangsta’s hold their guns sideways. It’s really not because that is how they came out of the box. Someone showed them how to clear a jam by hitting the clip and then holding the gun sideways and racking the slide to eject the jam. Since they have crappy guns and crappy ammo, they figured they would save some steps and just keep the gun sideways the whole time.

  22. justfactsplz says:

    Something bothers me about the security law suit. Omara was the one responsible for seeing to it that the bills were paid. When the going got tough and they pushed for their money, all of a sudden it became George’s responsibility.

    • jordan2222 says:

      There was also a reference to the fact that after the trust was set up, O’Mara still retained control so he could NOT put off responsibility onto the trust. There is a thread here somewhere about that and how it MIGHT have violated bar rules and/or ethics. Sundaance went into detail about that as well as the terms of the bond agreement. I read the first bond agreement but never saw the second one for a million bucks but if recall, SD said or implied that George could not dismiss O’Mara.

      • ottawa925 says:

        I think this will all be explained when they file their response to the lawsuit .. ya think?

        • jordan2222 says:

          I don’t know because I don’t recall that we ever did get the exact terms of how the trust was set up. I do remember a discussion about it being a “first” of its kind.

          I have never seen an accounting of the money as MOM promised.

          He was supposed to keep the public updated but I bet you can’t find out how much money is in there now or how it’s been distributed.

          One other thing: Did Fox News pay for some of the security expenses? I think I saw that they paid about $500 or so for something.

      • justfactsplz says:

        Interesting. Somehow I missed seeing that thread.

      • dmoseylou says:

        Does MOM have legal access to these funds? Do all expenditures need to be approved by MOM or GZ before payments are rendered?

        The GZ Defense Fund Home Page:
        “The money donated here will be used for George Zimmerman’s ongoing living expenses, legal costs, and fees for this matter. The funds are being administered by a third-party administrator, [...]

    • John Galt says:

      “Something bothers me about the security law suit.”

      Just another boring collection action for a relatively small amount of money. Complaint does not reference any attorney’s fees provision, thus no incentive for protracted litigation. O’Mara postured as a defendant discourages discharge in bankruptcy. I predict early settlement for 1/3 to 2/3 of amount sought.

      • justfactsplz says:

        That clears things up a little bit, thanks. I had not noticed they were not asking for attorney’s fees. It just stood out to me that Omara was protecting himself and George was left with it.

  23. arkansasmimi says:

    Is GZ brother considering running for Congress? Just looked at twitter lol behind everywhere…

    • dmoseylou says:

      I seldom read twitter, but I looked at RZ’s earlier, trying to find a link to the Hannity clip of him with Shapiro that was not aired 01/09. I think he was trying to emphasis that people needed to get involved and stand up for their 2A right to bear arms. IE: If your Congressman does not oppose O’Gunbanner, elect ones that will stand up for your rights. Still can not find that clip…

  24. eastern2western says:

    I just spliced this video together to show crump’s confession and his big lie.

    • ottawa925 says:

      Again, his reply doesn’t fly and neither is that recording. AGAIN, O’Mara pointed out that the recording was stopped and started over and over, and Crumpy admitted as much. O’Mara said that the recorder should have been turned on and left on no matter what problems their were experiencing.

      First Crump says a lil slip when he says “when we’re trying to record this device” … that’s one.

      “We keep stopping trying to hear it then we go back and try to re-record and stuff” …. that’s TWO. He admits to stopping the recording and re-recording.

      “There are people who try to get this recorder right” … what people? … that’s THREE

      His statement here is an admission of tampering. Since he already did an improper interview because no representative of law enforcement was present, why since you have this NUMBER ONE IMPORTANT WITNESS didn’t he get on a plane and go visit her to get a clear, concise statement. What he got was gobbleygook. Who exactly was going to decifer what she was saying … him? oh lawd. Then when BDLR gets a hold of her he takes her down the path of primrose lane. But the tape/tapes are important to show the impropriety of both Crump and BDLR. What will be far more important is what W8 states in a deposition and on the witness stand, where there will be no “uh huhs” or “ah hums”. Even if she cannot articulate, she can answer Yes or No … THAT she can do. There will be no hand holding, and no walk down primrose lane. It’s a moment I wait for with great anticipation.

      • jordan2222 says:

        Who exactly was going to decifer what she was saying … him? oh lawd.

        Way too funny.

        Sorry but DeeDee does not even speak ebonics and Crump speaks Crumpese, another entirely different dialect or something. Oh, boy. Maybe the FBI has some experts who know these languages.

        • dmoseylou says:

          I lived on the island of Vanuatu in 1997. (Fairy Tale Beautiful) The native language there is a form of bastardized English. Moderately easy to learn, if you speak fluent English. This “language” that Chumpie and DD speak is not bastardized English /
          Ebonics; it is just…something…else…Low IQ…inarticulate…chaotic mumbo-jumbo. Do THEY know what each other is saying? Apparently so…Lucky them…B/C the rest of us sure as the sun rises in the East have no clue. I would willingly bet even the FBI has no clue.

          • jordan2222 says:

            Any deposition is likely to painful and terribly embarrassing in an attempt to make her enunciate her syllables and not use fragments. Otherwise we will only get more garbage.

    • justfactsplz says:

      When was that interview with Vinnie?

      • ottawa925 says:

        I believe it was in Dec. 2012 and it directly followed (as a response) to the HLN interview that O’Mara/West did with that Jean Casarus(sp?), where they talk about the problems they are having getting discovery from the state.

    • eastern2western says:

      here is my question and I hope will help me with this part. in the new evidence tape, crump ask the girl about what she told him before. I think I heared he said the other day, but it also sounds like today. If they had spoken before, which could have a huge implication in dd’s testimony because none of their secret conversation is documented. can any one tell me if he said today or the other day. the second part of the video when he asked dd to repeat what she tole him before. what were they talking about before because there seems to be a lot secret conversations went on behind the scenes.

    • John Galt says:

      Vinnie asks two questions:

      1. Was the recording edited prior to giving it to the FDLE ?

      2. In what form was the recording giving to the FDLE ?

      Crump answers neither question.

    • jordan2222 says:

      Excellent job. .Thank you .

    • eastern2western says:

      this first recording seems more like a performance they prepared in a hurry. according to the crump, tracy found her on his phone bill, tracy spoke to her for hours and they eventually had to convince the her mom for her to testify. However, none of us know what was exactly the content of their conversation. Unless crump has all of the events that happened before the interview taped and documented, he may have to prove what they were doing before the first interview does not involve any passing of information.

  25. arkansasmimi says:

    So the leatherheads think it would be ok for TM to sell pot. AND He would be innocent til proven guilty, but not GZ? Talking out of both sides of their mouths huh (they are talking about the security people converstations with MOM)
    Jun says:
    January 11, 2013 at 8:51 pm
    There’s no death sentence for marijuana usage or sale
    whether or not he sold weed, he still has rights to be presumed innocent until proven guilty, so…

    • libby says:

      next, they will say that pcp like cough syrup aint so bad.
      ooops, i forgot the reason they are so willing to talk about the weed (in any way) is so they can get people to forget about the pcp like high the cough syrup gave

  26. ottawa925 says:

    I listened to the tapes from the recent discovery and note that:

    #4 – Has nothing on it but a quick sound
    #5 – Begins with DD talking.
    My comment is: What was the question? (since #4 had nothing on it, and #3 had ended with Crump stating they were pretty much finished and he was putting her on hold)
    #6 – Crump wants to thank her and her mother … and talks about her inability to attend the wake
    #7 – She tells Crump she got sick and went to hospital.

    So the only thing remarkable to me just in order of what is transpiring is Tape 5. It begins with DD talking, however, we don’t know what was asked of her.

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