02-01 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.

“The sensationalized, fact-deficient coverage of this case has achieved the
desired results. The networks got their ratings. The politicians got their
talking points. And if it means innocent people get caught in the middle of the
racial enmity they’ve fomented, obviously it’s considered acceptable collateral
damage.
Congratulations, geniuses. Job well done. Jim Treacher, The DC Trawler

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.

383 Responses to 02-01 George Zimmerman Case – Open Discussion Thread

  1. arkansasmimi says:

    As we celebrate my oldest daughters 30th bday today, I will keep GZ and Shellie in my heartfelt prayers, that they will be as blessed as I have been and that today will bring them love and peace!

  2. rumpole2 says:

    Daily Daft Post From Justarse Quest

    You Can’t Fix Stupid 2.

    Same poster…. Nice try… still stupid.

    Today adopting the persona of a “Medical expert” :D

    Such an amazing wealth of expertise at JQ.
    LE, ballistics, legal matters, psychiatry and psychology, medicine, logic, mathematics, philosophy, music, audio analysis, video analysis, video re-enactments, etc and of course experts who specialise in the vocalisations of sulphur crested cockatoos.
    Amazingly none of this expertise has been gained via study and earned qualifications…. It seems to have come to them by osmosis during their daily lives via twitter, the internet and the Nancy Grace show.

    Random Topics

    http://randomtopics.org/viewtopic.php?f=48&t=584&p=20901#p20901

    • rumpole2 says:

      I just discovered a poet – John Cooper Clarke

      Perhaps he knows the people at JQ? :D

      Twat – John Cooper Clarke (NSFW)

    • lovemygirl says:

      Umm, sometimes I am amazed they do not even think about what comes out of their mouths. Cabbage Patch doll recreations are a scientific study in their minds? Heck, I had a nurse I used to converse with stating that she took a basket ball and tried to recreate George’s head slamming and concluded it was impossible therefore he was guilty. Not that all nurses are stupid but how does one attain a degree and remain that ignorant?

      • rumpole2 says:

        Beats me?
        Some of these cretins I have seen posting for 4 years… they get just about everything wrong in every case. We can all be wrong.. but a rational person LEARNS… “does not make the same mistake twice” as the saying goes.. these dopes simply never learn. They ARE in that sense “Educationally Challenged”
        So why CHOOSE to pass time commenting and “sleuthing cases” since they are hopeless at it?? Beats me.
        A great illustration is the JQ poll on whether Lester would be forced to recuse himself. Anybody with half a brain who was following the case, daily (as these cretins are) would KNOW the answer…. but 92% of JQ got it WRONG :D

        That was prior to several bannings. I would say close to 100% of the cretins now posting in the JQ Trayvon Zone Secret Sewer would get any serious question about the facts of this case WRONG!

        http://i901.photobucket.com/albums/ac218/Uther2/Working%20Uploads%202/JQFail3.jpg

        http://i901.photobucket.com/albums/ac218/Uther2/Working%20Uploads%202/TrayvonZoner-1.jpg

        • jello333 says:

          And even the “Yes” option used weasel words. “Yes, to preserve the trial” In other words, yeah they might remove him, but not because he did anything wrong, it would be just to keep MOM/West from dragging this out forever. Those people not only get the poll answers wrong… they even get the questions wrong.

      • ejarra says:

        Nuf sed:

      • jello333 says:

        I had told my wife a little about Trent, but I had never shown her any of his stuff. So last night I showed her one… his “shimmy” one. She was rolling!

        “And Trayvon is on top of George, looking all thuggish, beatin’ that head…”

    • howie says:

      Seems to me they need a Taxidermist. To perform the required operation.

    • libby says:

      My wife went to sleep on her computer tablet last night so she could get some of that learning through osmosis thing. I guess you could call me a cynic, but I am not sure I believe it

    • Chip Bennett says:

      As a special, Friday-edition Daily Daft response, we will compare and contrast opposing views regarding how long Martin remained conscious, and remained alive, after he was shot.

      In one corner we have JQ member DataVenia.

      In the other corner: Dr. William Anderson, a forensic specialist and former deputy medical examiner for Orange and Osceola counties, and Dr. William L. Manion, a board-certified anatomical, clinical and forensic pathologist and lawyer in Mount Holly, N.J. (hereafter referred to as Medical Experts).

      First, a summary statement of each viewpoint:

      DataVenia says:

      The killer claims Trayvon sat up after being shot and said something like “You got it” then fell over. George, the shimmy ‘expert’, then shimmied out from under Trayvon, stood up, holstered his gun, and then jumped on Trayvon’s back to ‘restrain’ him. It’s Zimmerman’s story that Trayvon was still moving, trying to sit up, and speaking after he’d jumped on him to pin him down. To quote:
      “It felt like he was hitting me with bricks, so, I remember, once I shot him, I holstered my firearm and I got on top of him and I held his hands up because he was still talking,” he said. “And I said, ‘Stay down. Don’t move.’ ”

      Is this account even remotely possible? Short Answer: No.

      Medical Experts say:

      George Zimmerman may have shot Trayvon Martin in the heart, but that didn’t kill him instantly. The 17-year-old survived for several minutes, according to two experts who reviewed Trayvon’s autopsy for the Orlando Sentinel. “You’re talking about minutes, at least, for him to survive,” said Dr. William Anderson, a forensic specialist and former deputy medical examiner for Orange and Osceola counties. “I think he would have been conscious … for a little time, anyway.”

      What killed the Miami Gardens teenager was massive internal bleeding, said Anderson and Dr. William L. Manion, a board-certified anatomical, clinical and forensic pathologist and lawyer in Mount Holly, N.J.

      Regarding how long Martin remained conscious after being shot:

      DataVenia says:

      Medically, we know Trayvon would have become unconscious within 4 to 10 seconds.

      Medical Experts say:

      The two doctors agreed that Trayvon remained conscious for a time. Anderson suggested the teenager may have been conscious for several minutes. Manion estimated it at just 20 to 30 seconds. “He certainly would have experienced pain,” Manion said.

      Regarding the bullet’s physical impact on Martin’s heart:

      DataVenia says:

      We know this for several reasons. First, there is no doubt, given about a third of his heart was instantly obliterated by the gunshot (as documented at autopsy)…

      What the autopsy actually says:

      At 7:17 p.m. on Feb. 26, the bullet that killed Trayvon entered his chest square-on, just to the left of his breastbone, according to his autopsy. It punched a hole in his right ventricle, the lower right chamber of the heart, and broke into three pieces. The bullet’s lead core — the bulkiest part — was found just behind his heart, still inside the pericardium, the sac that contains that organ. Two other fragments were found next to his right lung, which had been perforated and collapsed, the report said.

      Regarding whether Martin’s heart continued to pump blood after the shot:

      DataVenia says:

      …that he had no BP and no pulse from the time the bullet struck his heart. The heart stopped beating…

      Medical Experts say:

      Trayvon’s heart had kept pumping, both pathologists said, but with each contraction, blood was leaking or gushing into his chest, depending on the size of the bullet hole…

      The Miami Gardens teenager would have remained alive for a few minutes, both doctors agreed, as his wounded heart continued to pump.

      Regarding whether Martin’s heart would have delivered blood to organs after the shot:

      DataVenia says:

      …and the blood that would have been pumped out to vital organs, like the brain, instead drained out of the gaping hole into his lungs and thoracic cavity. So, we have a pulseless, BP-less person as a matter of FACT, not speculation, from the time of the gunshot onward.

      Medical Experts say:

      One piece of evidence that Trayvon did not die instantly, both doctors said, was the color of his fingernails. Shiping Bao, the associate medical examiner in Volusia County who performed the autopsy, wrote that Trayvon had “cyanotic nail beds.” That means they had turned blue, something that happens when there’s not enough oxygen in the blood. Because Trayvon’s heart was weakened by blood loss and dropping blood pressure, it could no longer pump blood to his lungs. That means vital organs, including the heart, were no longer receiving the oxygen-rich blood they needed.

      Regarding how quickly Martin would have lost consciousness after being shot:

      DataVenia says:

      Second, we know what happens with scientific certainty when the brain is deprived of a blood supply and therefore oxygen. It’s been tested on subjects who underwent experiments in which their brains were suddenly cut off from blood/oxygen via a cuff around their necks. These experiments were conducted back in the 1940s during WWII by Dr. Ralph Rossen at a state prison and later replicated elsewhere. The device used was called a KRA cuff. All the subjects (and there were several hundred of them totally) lost consciousness within 4 to 10 seconds max, with the time to loss of consciousness being 5-7 seconds in the majority of subjects. Trayvon’s loss of consciousness would likely have been closer to the first number (4 seconds) than the longest (10 seconds), since he’d been running, was in a state of panic, had just been in a fight for his life, and his organs would have been using oxygen at a higher rate than a person sitting quietly in a chair or lying on a bed in the moments just prior to the sudden blood/oxygen deprivation.

      Medical Experts say:

      The 17-year-old survived for several minutes, according to two experts who reviewed Trayvon’s autopsy for the Orlando Sentinel. “You’re talking about minutes, at least, for him to survive,” said Dr. William Anderson, a forensic specialist and former deputy medical examiner for Orange and Osceola counties. “I think he would have been conscious … for a little time, anyway.”

      • howie says:

        As our illustrious SOS Hillary says….”what difference does it make?’

      • John Galt says:

        Impressive, nice work.

      • tara says:

        A person doesn’t even need to be a trained medical professional to comprehend that death isn’t instantaneous. For a short time at least, a heart can continue to pump even when severely damaged, blood can continue to flow, and cells can continue to function. A person can remain conscious, can speak, can move.

        I’m remembering reported details of Princess Diana’s death. Responders have stated that she was moving around in the back seat and she mumbled some words even though she had suffered severe damage to a major artery and to the area around her heart.

      • rumpole2 says:

        As a special, Friday-edition Daily Daft response

        I love it Cip… regular Friday frolic perhaps? :D

        I have considered the odd “lengthy” post as Daily Daft…… just to give YOU something to chew on, but I am trying to balance the exposure of daftness with giving them more publicity than they deserve for their silly notions. Only a handful of people see what they write don in the secret sewer.

        A LOT of what they post is nasty hate about George or people here at CTH… it’s not worthy of Chip’s analysis. I can analyse that. It is the ramblings of deranged, hate filled, uninformed unintelligent cretins

    • eastern2western says:

      basically, it is the mike nifong response.

    • boutis says:

      Whining. He is still mad O’Mara goes on TV, has a web site, and will put rambling non-answer for the world to read.. He dictated this yesterday in a hurry to turn in by 5 PM. He answered nothing,

    • hooson1st says:

      Keep in mind that the State had dumped tons of documents on the defense. This all had to be gone through by the defense. The defense had to isolate (and guess about) those items which had not been provided and which are far more critical to the defense while not potentially overlooking items of significance among all the CD’s handed over.

    • From the response:

      “Defendant wants the State to do its job.”

      Uh, yea, that would be nice.

      • boutis says:

        Since there are laws, court rulings, and precedent requiring the prosecution to do this it seems to be news to BDLR. But Bernie is outraged I tellz ya.

        • wrongonred says:

          Yeah, BDLR is on the wrong side of the courtroom. He missed that whole lesson in his Online Law School that the Prosecution must be based on facts (evidence) and that those facts which the Prosecution finds are inculpatory (as well as exculpatory) must be turned over under Brady. You do not get to play hide the pickle, as if you were a defense lawyer who stumbled upon something inadvertently which is inculpatory which the Prosecution missed. They must be turned over. Especially the who thing about taking the phone out of evidence and sending it off. There must surely be an evidence log to preserve chain of evidence, which they obviously must possess and turn over. I am not certain how he could even dispute that. You cannot say “Well, you know we sent it to California, so just call all the agencies there, and find out which one.” It is not supposed to be a Hot/Cold Guessing Game. What a joke…..Guess BDLR is going to take the Nifong fall and get a cushy appointment from Scott for falling on the sword when this persecution gets dismissed.

      • John Galt says:

        “Defendant wants the State to do its job.”

        Defendant just wants the State to stop obstructing justice.

        • brutalhonesty says:

          they are saying the defense wants the state to do the defenses job. natalie tweeted that as well. funny they say the same talking points and we are to believe they are not the states surrogate lmfao…..

    • rumpole2 says:

      Here is a funny bit from Bernie’s response… page4

      “The State disagrees with some of the facts cited, the significance of such, and disputes the allegations made.”

      Ok Bernie… but this is supposed to be a formal, legal, State’s response, and not a post at JQ

      What facts exactly do you disagree with, and please outline in what way you dispute the allegations.

    • John Galt says:

      Interesting that BDLR does not contest the specific discovery stonewalling allegations made by the defense. No discussion of the missing 2/26 phone data.

      • HughStone says:

        Check this out “Your phone company is watching” (Data retention)

        “German Green politician Malte Spitz went to court to obtain the information that his cell phone operator, Deutsche Telekom, gathered (and kept) about his activity. The results astonished him. Over the course of six months, they had tracked his geographical location and what he was doing with his phone more than 35,000 times. Working with the German newspaper Die Zeit, an infographic was created that shows Spitz’s activity across an interactive timeline, combined DT’s geolocation data with information relating to his life as a politician, such as Twitter feeds, blog entries and website. By pushing the play button, viewers can set off on a detail-rich trip through six months of his life. And more, because he keeps asking the telecom company for his most recent data.”

        A nice article

        http://www.pcworld.com/article/235276/your_old_smartphones_data_can_come_back_to_haunt_you.html

    • rumpole2 says:

      GZLegal site has added
      FDLE’S MEMORANDUM OF LAW IN OPPOSITION TO THE DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SPECIFIC DISCOVERY FROM FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF LAW ENFORCEMENT

      http://184.172.211.159/~gzdocs/documents/0213/fdle_memo.pdf

      • John Galt says:

        Looks like they rolled out a canned brief they had on hand. At a minimum, I think they have to disclose a list of the prior convictions for any witness that can be used to impeach the witness testimony. Also, I think that anything that FDLE has that SAO is aware of is in the constructive possession of the State, so I’m not sure I buy the separate agency not served outrage. The case is State v. Zimmerman, which includes the FDLE.

        See State v. Coney

        http://www.leagle.com/xmlResult.aspx?xmldoc=1973822272So2d550_1653.xml&docbase=CSLWAR1-1950-1985

        • John Galt says:

          “We can find no authority within the criminal discovery rules that requires the state to disclose the criminal histories of all listed witnesses, including those who will not be called to testify. While Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.220(b)(4) requires the disclosure of material information within the state’s possession or control that tends to negate the guilt of the defendant (Brady material), this provision, as it relates to criminal history information, would only require the state to disclose certain convictions for witnesses intended to be called and whom are subject to impeachment pursuant to section 90.610, Florida Statutes, or to disclose pending criminal proceedings against such witnesses.”

          http://www.leagle.com/xmlResult.aspx?xmldoc=20011596803So2d793_11566.xml&docbase=CSLWAR2-1986-2006

        • howie says:

          I rather see State v. Corey.

        • ottawa925 says:

          John, I’ve just been reading the FDLE brief. This business of giving this information to “homicide defendant”. They are not giving it to the defendant, they are giving it to officers of the court that will treat it like anything else that needs protection. I’m assuming the State has the info. If the State has it, then why am I wrong in assuming the defense should have it as well. Beyond that, I wish FDLE would have been served so they couldn’t whine about it in their brief. And when they suggeted each witness should have a say … I almost spit out my coffee.

          Lastly, can someone confirm that defense did not directly respond to FDLE, and should they have? or does the Prosecutor’s Obligation to Disclose Information memorandum serve as defense’s response to FDLE? I’m a lil confused, cause I see no answer by defense to FDLE.

    • howie says:

      Letshopeoneoftheinternparalegalswrotethat.

      • jello333 says:

        Not even a paralegal. That is just amateurish. I’m serious… that would get a ‘C’, at the absolute MAX in a 1st-year legal research/writing class in even a low-level law school. For an experienced lawyer/prosecutor to write something like that? Well.. it’s just embarrassing is what it is.

    • boutis says:

      It appears to be another non-answer answer. Probably that he claims he got it last minute which is his problem.

    • rumpole2 says:

      That is BDLR’a best Response ever I wish all his submissions were up to that standard

      <b<BDLR
      http://i901.photobucket.com/albums/ac218/Uther2/Smileys/best20post20of20day_zps74214bca.gif

    • Lynn says:

      Pure laziness. My attorney would never have done this — not in a high profile case.

    • nettles18 says:

      It means O’Mara isn’t only fighting the State of Florida for information, they FDLE is joining the stonewalling team and will file the response so the State defers to them.

      http://184.172.211.159/~gzdocs/documents/0213/fdle_memo.pdf

      While at the FDLE offices on Jan. 9th, the defense became aware of some bios the dept. has. In it they contain a name, dob, physical description, photo, ssn, DL, Credit Report, Vechile descrip. w/tag numbers, employment info., phone numbers, contact info., and SSN numbers of known associates, arrest history, list of media sites to which witness belongs ► BDLR called the FDLE on Jan. 31st and made them aware of the defense’s motion for specific discovery filed on Jan. 30th from the FDLE. The FDLE has filed this response basically saying homicide defendants shouldn’t have such piviledged info. as they can harass or intimidate the witness b/c they are under so much pressure to get acquitted, even if that motivation isn’t there FDLE worries the little defense team is too overpowered to handle such sensitive information without it leaking and lastly they argue that they should be been advised of the motion so they could plan to be there. They are asking the Judge to deny the defense access to that file as letting the defense in would jeopardize future witnesses from talking to the authorities.

      • howie says:

        Let the reverse RICO investigation continue. And stock up on Popcorn.

      • John Galt says:

        “It means O’Mara isn’t only fighting the State of Florida for information, they FDLE is joining the stonewalling team and will file the response so the State defers to them.”

        That’s what BDLR likes to pretend. In actuality, anything known to SAO and in the possession of FDLE is in the constructive possession of BDLR. The case is State v. Zimmerman, where STATE includes both SAO and FDLE.

      • tara says:

        Help me out here … Did BDLR generate any official complaints? I only remember the odd yet entertaining entry on the GZ Legal Case site about doxing, and an attempt by the persecution to gag the defense.

  3. eastern2western says:

    It is basically de la rionda has his hand caught in the cookie jar and complains about the cookies being too big. Instead of admitting to his guilt, he blames it on the cookie makers for not making a smaller cookie.

  4. eastern2western says:

    it is like deja vu. basically, all they need to do is replace nifong with the name of either angela corey, crump, park or jackson because they will all be http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-3neLn81ceY

  5. jello333 says:

    Hey admins! Just to let you know, I’m not trying to hack the site. When I tried to log back in awhile ago, I got this message:”User jello333 Cannot Access the Dashboard Requested” Apparently it was trying to log me in as an admin or something. ;)

  6. lovemygirl says:

    Jeralyn has a nice discussion of the missing cell phone data.
    Age of the Tele-Rat: Trayvon Martin’s Missing Cell Phone Data
    http://www.talkleft.com/story/2013/2/1/23854/40798

    • myopiafree says:

      Hi Love – Thanks for the find:
      http://www.cellebrite.com/
      If that last day was intentionally deleted – that is the worst possible outcome for Bernie and Corey. They had control of that phone and “strange things happened to it”.

      • John Galt says:

        I think deleted data from flash memory might be recoverable if merely deleted. I believe they would have to write over it for permanent deletion. Perhaps this might be determinable forensically. Obviously O’Mara has that in mind when he speaks of the need for an “expert.”

      • tara says:

        I was thinking that ultimately prior days’ data would be overwritten by new days’ data, because of the small size of the internal memory. But it certainly wouldn’t make sense for the latest day’s data to be overwritten.

        Are we sure that the Feb 26 data was actually deleted? Or do we only know that it was omitted from the data O’Mara was provided? It reminds me of the gaps in the Crump-DeeDee interview, we don’t think that those gaps are gone, we just think they weren’t provided to O’Mara. Right?

        • John Galt says:

          Can’t tell at the moment. Hopefully that comes up in the hearing.

        • tara says:

          Hey John Galt, I see that you asked the same question in the prior GZ thread. Nobody has yet answered. It would be really amazing (and hilarious) if the persecution had the Feb 26 data but just refused to pass it on to the defense.

          • tara says:

            Ooh, and I see frmo yesterday’s thread that Nettles also talked about the missing Feb 26 phone data being similar to the gaps in the Crump-DeeDee interview. I knew I should have reviewed that thread but I saw that there were 500+ comments. :) It warms my heart that this case is still such a hot topic, my interest has never waned, and I’m happy to see that the same is true of others.

      • lovemygirl says:

        One of the things I find odd is it sounds like the phone was already locked due to multiple invalid password attempts when they powered it up. I wonder if Trayvon did have it in his hand when punching George and his fingers were pressing keys as he gripped it.

      • lovemygirl says:

        I also cannot fathom how the State can refuse to disclose the details on the CA trip the phone took. That might be the key to the missing data.

      • ottawa925 says:

        hello !!! destruction of evidence !!!!! they knew it showed that TM doubled back.

    • tara says:

      I enjoyed the comment about the Rose Mary Woods “stretch”. :) I’d forgotten all about that.

    • Hey, I just thought of something. The first thing a data recovery service would do is make a clone of the storage device. Its possible that the “California” company still has this cloned copy on their computers. Perhaps O’mara can subpoena it if Bernie will tell him what company it was.

    • lovemygirl says:

      I don’t know the qualifications of people commenting on the missing data but someone posted this:

      innocent explanation (none / 0) (#12)
      by Philly on Fri Feb 01, 2013 at 12:50:48 PM EST
      I don’t know the specifics for this model of phone, but flash is more brittle than RAM – there is a limit on how many times each block of flash can be overwritten before it “goes bad.”
      For this reason, it’s expected that embedded software will take care not to aggressively store data to flash. For low-priority logging data, I would expect it to be archived only periodically (perhaps once a day), or during a graceful shutdown of the device.

      • tara says:

        OK, I’m not a phone person, but I have fairly deep techincal knowledge of computers and their component parts. First, it would be way too coincidental that only Feb 26 data was attempted to store in the bad part of the memory. Also, without actuall proof I cannot believe that new data isn’t immediately stored into memory. I’ll do some research on that latter point …

        • tara says:

          I want to clarify “immediately” … I mean virtually immediately in the sense of human time. I doubt that any data is lost even if the phone crashes a second after, say, a text message is received. Anyone can prove me wrong here though. :)

          • tara says:

            I did do a lot of reading, some technical info I found and the paper John Galt linked to below (which is excellent, btw). Here’s what I know: the flash memory is likely the NAND type which is not super durable, so to ensure that all of it is used evenly the data is shifted around from time to time via the controller. When data is moved, the old space is cleared out and marked as unused. New data can be then written there. The data is likely written in pages, anywhere from 4-8k which is not a lot of data. Some people have complained that their phones put out messages indicating that the internal memory is nearly full, which tells me that routine memory managemagent doesn’t clear out old data, that data would only be cleared if explicitly deleted. Because the data is routinely shifted, a dump of the data wouldn’t result in orderly sequential data but the pages are identifiable. This last point is important I think, because IMO it makes it even more odd that a particular day’s data is missing, and only that data, not other days’ data. Well, I’m not going to pursue this trail of research any more. If anyone knows that what I’ve written is wrong, please do correct me. I’d rather have the correct info than be “right”, if you know what I mean. :)

            • jello333 says:

              Yeah, you’re right…. that could be important. Assuming of course we’re interpreting it correctly. So, I think it’s saying that the sequence of stored data wouldn’t necessarily be like this: All day Monday, all day Tuesday, all day Wednesday, etc. Rather, because of the way it’s moved around when stored, it could be: Tuesday 5pm-6pm, Saturday 1am-2am, Monday 10am-11am, Tuesday 4am-5am, etc, etc. Just stored in random “blocks” wherever it could find room. If that’s true, then yeah, the odds against one whole day’s worth of data — and ONLY that one day — going missing is astronomical. It would be PROOF it was intentional… unless I’m reading this wrong.

    • howie says:

      Well. If the information is exculpatory. And we think it is. The only way to with hold it is if is part of an ongoing investigation.

  7. art tart says:

    STATE: Don’t delay the trial.

    http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/local/trayvon-martin/os-george-zimmerman-defense-fund-20130201,0,7622671.story
    _______________________________________

    Video on SPIKE in donations at same link.

  8. eastern2western says:

    it is really odd that all media tend to concentrate on zimmerman running out of money, but ignoring the big elephant in the room, the prosecution is hiding evidence from the defense. HA, HA, bernie seems have no objection to the accusation.

    • libby says:

      The day George is exonerated, they will run a story about how he got a hangnail once

    • nettles18 says:

      The defense just posted to this to their website: In October, 2012, the defense filed the following DEFENDANT’S MEMORANDUM OF LAW IN SUPPORT OF ITS POSITION REGARDING THE PROSECUTOR’S OBLIGATION TO DISCLOSE INFORMATION. We feel that much of this memo is still relevant in regards to discovery issues currently at hand. http://184.172.211.159/~gzdocs/documents/discovery_matters/prosecutors_obligation.pdf

      Reminding the State of Florida it has a duty to disclose information.

      http://gzlegalcase.com/index.php/court-documents/87-defendant-s-memorandum-of-law-in-support-of-its-position-regarding-the-prosecutor-s-obligation-to-disclose-information

      • John Galt says:

        How is all that detailed legal analysis and case law relevant when Bernie has clearly indicated disagreement and outrage by flapping his arms and stuttering?

      • tara says:

        Are they documenting all of this very thoroughly to prepare for a possible appeal? To demonstrated that the case was grossly mishandled by the State?

        • hooson1st says:

          One of the things that MOM/West are doing is exactly this. In the event that this, in fact, goes to trial, and in the event that there is conviction by jury, all of this stuff will relate to the appeal.

          As for the extension, the judge has been handed a conundrum. If the judge does not grant an extension, then the MOM team will not be able to complete their investigation of the multiple threads of leads that are still viable to help GZ, and case will wind its further.

          To grant extension at this stage will iritiate BGI crowd.

          The judge may just punt at this meeting, and put off any decision on any trial delay, pending further “cooperation” between BDLR and MOM.

      • Chip Bennett says:

        So, let’s recap:

        The defense tells the court, “hey, we want to depose Witness.8. Remember when you compelled the State to disclose her identity so that we could carry out the deposition? Yeah, they still haven’t done that. And remember when you told us to go to FDLE to get the information ourselves? Yeah, they’re refusing to do that, too. So, we’d love to depose Witness 8, but we still have no way to verify who she is.”

        The FDLE response:

        In addition to not serving FDLE, it appears the defendant has alos refrained from serving the witnesses whose privacy the defendant seeks to invade. Both the State and FDLE previously advised the defense that every affected witness has a right to be heard before their social security numbers, driver’s license information, and other protected data is released to a homicide defendant. Although FDLE does not and cannot represent individual witnesses, the Department believes that such sensitive information should not be disclosed without affording each witness a chance to object.

        So, apparently, FDLE wants the defense to serve a subpoena on Witness 8, so that she can attend the hearing in order to object to the court compelling FDLE to disclose her identity – the same identity that the defense seeks to obtain in order to subpoena Witness 8 in order to depose her.

        This is the very definition of a run-around.

        • John Galt says:

          “So, apparently, FDLE wants the defense to serve a subpoena on Witness 8, so that she can attend the hearing in order to object to the court compelling FDLE to disclose her identity – the same identity that the defense seeks to obtain in order to subpoena Witness 8 in order to depose her.”

          BDLR offered and I think the court ordered the State to make W8 available for a deposition w/o subpoena in exchange for not identifying her as required by Rule 3.220. I’m not sure what the big deal is, but perhaps the defense is afraid that they won’t be permitted to continue the deposition after obtaining the social media info., address, etc. and conducting an investigation, although I think maybe the court said something about continuing the depo, can’t remember specifically. I would try to get the court to specifically order in writing that defense would be permitted to continue the depo. Two opportunities to grill W8, what could be nicer? She could never keep her story straight between two depositions.

          A related point, the defense seeks social media info for Trayvon and W8. I recall seeing posts indicating that one DD suspect frequently changed her Twitter handle, so that might present a problem in getting all pertinent Twitter info by subpoena.

        • boutis says:

          They do not want her deposed. This is their way of saying it. This case is imploding.

        • jello333 says:

          It’s crystal clear what the prosecution (and their buddies) are trying to do here. If it’s clear to us amateurs, then it’s clear to Judge Nelson. So if she continues what she’s done up till now — basically NOTHING, other than saying she trusts the prosecution to do the right thing — it’ll prove that she’s either incompetent where the law is concerned, extraordinarily lazy, or in on the fix like Lester (apparently) was. Regardless of which reason it may be, if this judge doesn’t BY NOW, AT LONG LAST see what’s going on, and takes action, it’s time for MOM and West to go over her head. I don’t mean to ask for a recusal. I mean to once again demand a special judge just to deal with pre-trial motions and discovery. I’m not sure who that would be addresses/appealed to, but something needs to be done. I think we’ll know a LOT more about Judge Nelson after the hearing on Tuesday. .

    • tara says:

      It’s really quite amazing that the media continues it’s spin. Are they embarassed to admit they were wrong?

      Even now, Orlando Sentintel continues to inject bias. Discussing O’Mara’s deposition of DeeDee: “For example, before he deposes her, he plans to review the Twitter and Facebook posts of a young Miami woman who says she was on the phone with Trayvon Martin, the unarmed black 17-year-old killed by Zimmerman when they came face to face.

      Killed when they came face to face? More like killed when they came fist to face and when face started breaking. They continue to describe the incident as if Trademark were gunned down (like or not like a rabid dog).

    • art tart says:

      BDLR’s response to MOM/West is insulting, does he think everyone is stupid but the State? He’s wrong again, he doesn’t even seem to be embarrassed when making such ludicrous excuses. I want to know about Crump/Tracy/DeeDee and exactly when the trio bonded over the interview/depo/tape. Why does Crump need an attorney for a deposition? For BDLR to say he has “provided more than he usually does,” or something to that effect, is why Fla. Prosecutors continue to lose cases, imo. Hopefully, this one is included.

      My head is going to explode if Judge N gives BDLR the benefit of the doubt again for the games the State continues to play at the expense of GZ.

  9. justfactsplz says:

    The state is pitching a hissy fit about Omara and the media. They were most tolerant of the scheme team and the Martins when they were all over the media discussing the case. Also I wanted to stress a point that Sharon made recently about threats. Everyone please be careful. There is a recent flood of these cyber threats, and not just on pro Trayvon sites. Some of the treats are specific to individuals and some refer to all whites. It is only going to get worse as more and more evidence is revealed that supports George. Everyone please keep your powder dry.

    • lovemygirl says:

      I’m backing off any further communication with loons.

      • justfactsplz says:

        Great idea. I have commented on Click Orlando since the beginning. Lately their has been a lot of “new” posters full of hateful rhetoric. There is no debating with these kind concerning their lies. I never hang around the sites mentioned here. Just hearing about them makes me ill. I think it is best to hang closely to the tree for now.

        • mung says:

          Sweet Little Redhead has lowered herself to just posting, “liar” and “Trayvon was defending himself” to every one of my posts. Totally ignoring the facts and just spewing her garbage. Wonder if she realizes it makes her look pretty sad for doing that. I am not going to bother responding since she didn’t actually post anything valid.

          • justfactsplz says:

            That is about the same content as her posts to me. She may be doing some of that posting under a different handle or having someone else do it for her. Actually, she has been laying low. I still feel she is Nat Jackson. Wish I knew for sure. I don’t know if you ever saw her comments to Keystone Light concerning her military career and where she was from or not. It all matched up with Nat Jackson’s bio.Just saying. She has been so vocal in the past about Trayvon talking to his girlfriend on the phone. You never see her mention it lately.

            • ftsk420 says:

              I don’t post at any of those sites but have you ever seen a post by anyone with the screen name blacksheep.

              • justfactsplz says:

                No, I have never seen that handle. I only post here, Click Orlando, and occasionally at Washington Post or My Fox Orlando. I don’t post at the pro Trayvon only sites. I trust Rumpole for keeping me updated on that ugliness.

    • libby says:

      The state didnt mind prosecuting in the court of public opinion, but defending yourself in the court of public opinion is intolerable

    • hooson1st says:

      Technically, whatever, TM’s parents and Crump and Co do has nothing to do with prosecution.

      • justfactsplz says:

        When Crump, a civil attorney injected himself into the criminal case, providing a witness and manipulates everytining concerning that witness, it does have something to do with the prosecution, techinical or not.

  10. John Galt says:

    Judge Lester SYG case. Arrest was May 5, 2010 and depositions are still being taken.

    SYG hearing was in August 2012 – more than two years after arrest.

    http://www.seminoleclerk.org/CriminalDocket/case_detail.jsp?CaseNo=592010CF001851A

  11. eastern2western says:

    The last time the defense had fought so hard to get was the bloody face photo. What ever the state is hanging on to must be way worst than the photo.

    • maggiemoowho says:

      I was wondering if the cases MOM referred to in the latest document had any relation to anything. Like on case he referred to was a coronor that new of an arrest record and another on a witness was payed off. I’m probably overthinking, but it’s a thought.

      • John Galt says:

        The main thrust of the document is that the SAO has an affirmative obligation to gather and provide to defense in discovery information in the possession of LEO agencies. It refutes the distinction that BDLR is attempting to make between information in the possession of FDLE and SAO.

        • maggiemoowho says:

          Thank you,
          What about Judge Nelson though, she seems to think MOM should just go find what he needs at these places and ask for it. I don’t think she is getting what MOM is saying. Will those case references help.

          • John Galt says:

            I think Judge Nelson did the defense a favor by allowing the defense to inspect FDLE files, rather than force the defense to rely on BDLR to filter and provide selected portions of those materials.

            Now we have reached another phase, where the State has apparently refused to provide specific materials in its possession, and we shall see how Judge Nelson rules.

            • maggiemoowho says:

              Oh, that’s good, I feel better now. :) thankyou

            • LetJusticePrevail says:

              JG: One question. Since the State has filed responses to the defense motions, and there is no time to file written responses to the state’s responses, to what extent will the defense be allowed to verbally address the state’s responses, during the actual hearing?

              • John Galt says:

                To whatever extent they feel like replying. That’s why they have hearings, instead of just ruling on the papers. The only thing they’re weak against is the FDLE brief on the bio files, and I’m not sure the case law would help much. BDLR’s response to the motion for continuation doesn’t require any reply, IMHO.

            • nettles18 says:

              We’ve already had a ruling for the “protected witnesses”. She told the defense the State doesn’t have to give them their addresses. If they want those, they will have to depose them. If she rules against the defense on this FDLE file, the next step is to schedule 5 minute depostions, have them come in and refuse to give information and go before the court again. There’s the tax dollars at work folks.

              • John Galt says:

                “If she rules against the defense on this FDLE file, the next step is to schedule 5 minute depostions”

                Why only 5 minutes? Why not depose them all day the first time and all day the second time?

                • howie says:

                  Well just to get the info to prepare for the real depo. Because the state is in hot water. Otherwise the state would be flooding Omara with evidence. If the state has the goods they are not scared to put it up pre-trial to make a deal and save money.

                  • John Galt says:

                    “Well just to get the info to prepare for the real depo.”

                    I can sympathize with Bernie. I wouldn’t want to be on the hook for making any representations about W8 based on Crumped information.

                • nettles18 says:

                  Mr. O’Mara’s argument is that he needs to do an investigation of the witnesses before he sits down with them in a deposition. If he has to get info. like what is your twitter account only at a deposition, then the 1st deposition will last 5 mintues to get that information he needs to investigate and once the investigation is complete redepose them.

                  On Page 2/38 in the Motion to Continue, Mr. O’Mara writes in 6 A) “It only leaves the option of setting five minute depositions of members of the Martin Family soley and specifically to gain that information so that subpoenas can be issued. Similarly, defense counsel will have to set a five minute deposition of Witness 8 to ascertain the same information from her.”
                  http://184.172.211.159/~gzdocs/documents/0113/defendants_motion_to_continue.pdf

              • jello333 says:

                “schedule 5 minute depositions”

                And that’s the exact term MOM/West used in their filing with the court. So if on Tuesday the judge again rules against them on this matter, they should say, right there in court, “Alright, tomorrow we will be issuing deposition subpoenas to every one of those people, informing them that it will be the first of at least two depositions they will have to give, the first one being only a few minutes long.” Say it, just like that. And then when they issue the notices the next day, JUST WATCH what Bernie does. He will fight even THAT. Which will prove once and for all (as if we needed any more proof) exactly what the foot-dragging and obstruction is all about.

    • justfactsplz says:

      It is absolutely crucial that the defense gets it’s hands on this evidence.

    • LetJusticePrevail says:

      I believe that the state is protecting/concealing the identity of witness 8 because SHE has something in her past that would destroy her credibility as a witness. Probably some brush with the authorities. They are delaying the release of her identity so that they can either “polish” her records, or keep the defense from having enough time to discover whatever it is they are hiding about her.

      • howie says:

        Righto you must be. But they are doing their best to keep it secret. There is only one reason to do that….it hurts. If it did not it would be on TV.

      • hooson1st says:

        they are just playing hardball

        • LetJusticePrevail says:

          Do you think they are stalling just because they *can*, and for no real purpose? Maybe as a distraction?

          • John Galt says:

            No, they are stalling to delay / prevent disclosure of adverse information: they stalled the color digital broken nose photo, they stalled Trayvon’s school records, they are stalling Trayvon’s social media info, they stalled Crump’s DD recording. See the pattern?

  12. diwataman says:

    Oh god, I just read all these recent releases, lolz, next week is going to be worse than I imagined, of course that depends on what the judge let’s in considering the timing of all these filings. But still, prepare yourself folks, the defense is not coming out at the end of this looking like the good guys. What a mess.

    • Vanya says:

      What has the Defense done that is so terrible? The State is withholding critical evidence.

    • JW says:

      I have a feeling the defense is bringing up all the State’s shenanigans to have it as a part of the record. I don’t think they expect alot from these filings but are building on something bigger. Just a guess though.

      • ottawa925 says:

        I think you are spot on. I think if GZ does go to trial, and is found guilty, the fodder for appeal is massive in this case.

      • maggiemoowho says:

        But will the Judge “get it” she seems to feel all officers of the court are playing fair. This worries me. :(

    • boutis says:

      I am not sure they care anymore. You can be loved or respected. They are going up against the criminal justice clique of Florida and they are not going to be loved anyway for taking this case. How much crap have been thrown at them already to back off and roll over. I am convinced the prosecution intended it to be an easy over charge with a guilty plea for reduced charges. I am starting to think W8 is getting cold feet and threatening to back out. I am not sure that her age, social media, etc being examined by the defense (and questioned by deposition and at trial) was part of the deal for her testimony. But conversely the prosecution and BGI could scream that she was scared and persecuted and backed out. But it is really too late for that with Beasley involvement and I do not think the scheme team has processed that.

      • tara says:

        Even when interviewed by the overly friendly and supportive BDLR DeeDee sounded incredibly reluctant to offer any info. I can only imagine how she’ll feel when she’s deposed, or if she has to testify in court. But if she is afraid, it has nothing to do with George’s defense team or any of his many supporters. We all WANT her to tell the truth ! We all encourage her to speak openly about her experience. The more truthful information, the better.

    • John Galt says:

      “But still, prepare yourself folks, the defense is not coming out at the end of this looking like the good guys.”

      I think defense wins everything except the FDLE biography files and perhaps the social media info, depending on what BDLR admits to having.

      • diwataman says:

        I’m not talking about what they win or not. I’m talking about other aspects such as the judges perception of the defense and the state as it pertains mainly to timely filings and who is playing funky with what. No doubt it’s clear she favors the prosecution in this regard and it will essentially be a replay of the last hearing x2, at least, again it will be worse and it was the defense who got the chastisement last time, not the prosecutor, regarding the filings. It was the defense last time who got chastised for not seeking the discovery not the prosecution.

        It will be worse and O’Mara is going to come out at the other end of that hearing looking like the one playing games. Bernie however will be Nelson’s little officer of the court who can do no wrong. How much this will effect her legal decision making I do not know, I’m just telling y’all how it is not how I think things may play out in the long run or or what grander game plan O’Mara may have.

        This judge is not getting the message.

        Again, I’m always willing to be wrong and we will see at the hearing.

        • nettles18 says:

          If the deadlines for filings come up the irony will be rich. It was the State in this case that filed a Motion on the morning of a schduled hearing, had it heard while the defendant wasn’t in the courtroom and got it ruled in the affirmative…bail revoked. June 1, 2012.

          If we sit and listen to the defense be scolded about deadlines and games, I’ll be pissed. Focus on getting the defense what they need to bring this case to trial. That’s the only goal and if she finds the State is getting in the way, she better let them have it or she can expect more games and delays in the future.

          • diwataman says:

            Well what else can I say, I hope you’re right? Don’t get you’re hopes up? :)

            • howie says:

              This is only one round in a 100 round fight.

            • jello333 says:

              We not gonna need to enter into another little friendly wager, are we? :)

              • diwataman says:

                I already tried to bet rumpole an e-cookie but he was a scaredy cat. It’s hard to structure the bet though. I’m betting Nelson will convey in some fashion two things. 1) It will ultimately be the defenses fault about timing of when motions are filed. 2) It will ultimately be the defenses fault about issues with discovery i.e. Bernie ‘my little officer of the court who can do no wrong’ de la Rionda will again be protected by the court.

                • rumpole2 says:

                  I iz no scaredy cat….. I iz vicious…. I iz always watching and ready to pounce.

                  The reason I turned down the bet on what Nelson might do is that I agree with you :D

                  Or at least I agree what you predict is likely….. I do hope you are wrong.

                • jello333 says:

                  Yeah, that’s what I figured you meant. And you could be right, though I doubt it. But if you ARE right, then wow… this judge… yeah, as I said in another comment, they may need to go over her head. I’m not sure it is an appealable matter, but if it is MOM and West need to ask (I presume) the district appeals court to appoint a special judge just to handle the pre-trial stuff, incl. discovery. Just like they asked Nelson to do at the start. She was like, “Oh no, I’m fine. I’m a 24/7 kinda girl, and I’ll work tirelessly on whatever motions you present. I know the law as well as any Supreme!”

                  Yeah… if Nelson is too lazy, incompetent, or biased to follow the strict rules of discovery and criminal procedure (iincl. punishing violators of those rules), then someone is gonna have to help her out.

        • howie says:

          Does not matter. The 5th DCA has 2 judges who get it. Out of 3.

          • jello333 says:

            Actually, I believe all 3 of them “get it”. I’m assuming you’re talking about how only 2 of them voted to throw Lester off the case. Well, the way I read the one guy’s dissent, sounded to me like his heart wasn’t really in it. He only voted the way he did because he knew the ruling was a foregone conclusion, and so he could afford to throw a bone to the GZ Haterz. So what I’m saying is, I think that if the ruling had had to be unanimous to be valid, the 3rd guy would have voted with the other 2. So if they have to rule on an appeal of the immunity hearing ruling or something, that guy might still dissent from the other 2, but it depends. Depends on whether they think it’ll look better to have a “unified front”… that way the public and MSM will have less to scream about, regarding a “controversial split decision”.

    • LetJusticePrevail says:

      yes, this won’t be the “10 minute” in-and-out that we once thought, not by a long shot. Will it be televised?

      • diwataman says:

        Well, that was when only one motion was filed, the ABC one and the state already said he can seek that but regardless, yes, now as it stands it may be longer. I think it depends on the timing all of these motions and replies were filed and what she allows in. It’s very late in the game. She may allow both some leeway to argue but given the history I think very little if at all and when that comes up I know what’s coming.

        I would think it will be televised yes. Rumpole has a listing of potential sites that may televise it, I would suggest looking early before the start of the hearing:
        http://randomtopics.org/viewtopic.php?f=48&t=620

    • howie says:

      In the end it will go to the truth of the matter. Do not despair. The state has a lot of firepower. The defense is always the good guy’s.

  13. brutalhonesty says:

    How can george compete when there are NOBLE and NAACP operatives all over this case, from the SPD, to the FDLE, to the MSM, FBI, DOJ……..every entity involved except the treehouse and omaras law firm has black members of black organizations……even tracy martin was in a black masonic thing….those are half his connections to people who helped promote this case right there. and there came the naacp from that….and from that noble….and from that the POTUS.

    • justfactsplz says:

      You are right that this goes all the way to the POTUS.

    • maggiemoowho says:

      Via the truth, it might take a while, but keep the faith, it will pay off. We all have to keep fighting and praying for George and his family. Remember this isn’t the first time these race baitors have done this. Many are evil, hateful people who are using a dead teen for their own agenda and could give a flying ratts bum about TM. Don’t give up hope.

    • howie says:

      The rules and precedents. In criminal law a lot of them have not yet been compromised. They are rarely used because most defendants are guilty. Judges have no say in the matter if they are pinned down. They get reversed when they try.

    • sundance says:

      Yes, and you forgot to list the CRS. The DOJ’s Community Relations Service people have been shuffling between Washington DC and Orlando/Miami quite frequently. I believe there will be 3 CRS members at the hearing on 2/5…. I’m not sure how many seats are reserved for them.

      Obviously with the PROFOUND legal cloak of anonimity provided to CRS members, it is difficult to track their actual comings, goings and influence – but while their footprints might be almost invisible, the impact is not small.

      I have been trying to find out if Judge Nelson is actually in specific communication with the CRS members assigned to the case, my senses say yes, but I am just not sure. All internal communication between the “legal system” per se’ and the CRS is a closely guarded federal confidence; However, I am of the opinion that Nelson is at least *briefed*, perhaps influenced, and even given recommendations about action.

      The strength of those potential recommendations is unknown. Meaning, she might be bound to take a course of action based on their advice, or it could just be something to keep in mind when she rules. The answer is deep inside the rabbit hole, and protected.

  14. partyof0 says:

    Anyone know what happens to Chumps money grab if this DOES go to trial….I know things REALLY go his way if it does go to trial but what happens if there is a reversal after a trial….I bet it’s hoped by the prosecution to go to trial and lose(where there obviously will be no appeal)….Chump gets to go for his big chunk-o-change then anyway…right…and the prosecution looks good by getting a guilty verdict via civil court?

    • partyof0 says:

      It’s just that I think that any Judge who got this “trial” has been “mandated” to make this
      sh!t go to trial

    • eastern2western says:

      judging from the evidence, I do not even think crump has any chance of winning a civil case.

      • partyof0 says:

        I agree with that but for some reason…well for obvious reasons…the State of Florida…says…”think about the big picture here…This GOES to trial to save lives in Florida.” All the Judges walk away being “Heroes/Legends” in their own minds…

    • partyof0 says:

      It took me a while…and I do mean a while…to find ANY interest in politics, because “Money” not love, makes the world go round…it drives absolutely everything in society….I’m calculating how money factors in to this….If this DOESN”T go to trial…there will definitely be riots…guaranteed…by a certain portion of the masses. So what does that do? Florida loses it “Tourist Attraction Factor”…and it definitely would…it’s probably losing a lot now from the crime…but there is still some stake in saving it before it completely crashes…all the gov’t big-wigs can collect their pensions and leave the rest of Florida to the Rats and Roaches…or the folks at JQ (same difference)…

    • jello333 says:

      You just need to realize how unlikely it is that this will ever get before a jury. First of all, look what’s going on with Crump and Dee Dee. Do you really think they will EVER allow Dee Dee to be deposed, let alone on a witness stand in court? I do NOT think MOM and West will get to question Dee Dee. And if that’s the case, then POOF. The defense can ask for an immediate dismissal, or in my opinion, it may be the prosecution to ask for the charges to be dropped. But let’s say it does get past that Dee Dee hurdle, and makes it to an immunity hearing. All George needs is 51% of the evidence in his favor — which is pretty much what “preponderance” means — and he wins. And if Nelson turns out to be even much worse than we fear, and rules against George, it’ll then be appealed to the district court. We’ve already seen what they did with Lester, and that was even without them seeing the mountains of evidence in George’s favor. So it’ll end right there. But if Corey spikes all their drinks, and the appellate judges ALSO rule against George, it then goes… to the Florida Supreme Court. And if even THEY get it wrong? Then, and ONLY then, will it go to a jury trial.

  15. Angel says:

    I sense things are really about to get uglier in this case. And for what? To keep a person who is supposed to be presumed innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt from having a fair trial? Some people are talking smack that presumption of innocence is just something that a juror must adhere too. But isn’t a jury made up of people which could include anyone one of us? I bet if the shoe was on the other foot many people would be singing a different tune about rights to a fair trial which includes a person’s 6th amendment right, something so many are willing to deny GZ in a heartbeat. Where is the empathy ;-(

    • Angel says:

      correction: please insert “on” before other :-)

    • Sharon says:

      “To keep a person who is supposed to be presumed innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt from having a fair trial?”

      Yes.

      Spare yourself the paralysis of analysis. Do not try to interpret obvious events as though the rule of law is what is driving outcomes.

  16. rumpole2 says:

    POLL ALERT

    Just for fun, taking a leaf out of the JQ play book I have decide to run a poll :D

    POLL: Will Crump show up in court for Hearing 2-5-13

    Please take a minute and respond to the poll
    http://randomtopics.org/viewtopic.php?f=48&t=741#p20959

    I am staking my reputation RT and CTH people doing better than JQ…

    Can we match or better 92% WRONG in a poll :D

    • partyof0 says:

      What about him showing up and NOT saying anything?

    • dmoseylou says:

      Will Crump & Co. show up before court for a “I hope you haven’t forgotten my son” Birthday presser? Yeppers! They simply can not control themselves—they are drawn to the media like moths to the flames. And like moths to the flames, they will soon be turned to ash. (In their case, dirty ash. :D )

      • rumpole2 says:

        It’s a simple yes-no poll… don’t go all JQish on me. :D
        Simply if he shows up INSIDE the court room… the gallery when the hearing is under way.

        • justfactsplz says:

          I did not give a yes or no answer in my comment on your site so I will do it here. Yes.

          • rumpole2 says:

            As I commented… I ticked “No”
            Because it would be silly for turkeys to gather where people are preparing stuffing.

            But with Crump who knows? A Turkey…. but not too smart?

        • dmoseylou says:

          I voted “No.” :D But, I do believe they will show up early to plug their big “celebration dinner” with JJ and AS and that other “rev” on 02/10—at ONLY $75.00/ person for TM’s favorite meal of chicken / hamburgers / oxtails; Purple Drank cocktails before and after dinner, with B & M Blunts in the courtyard after dinner for the smokers.

          • rumpole2 says:

            I am SURE they will be doing pressers and speeches etc.. maybe outside the court even….. but I am picking Turkey survival instinct will come into play, and he wont be in Court for the actual hearing.

      • brutalhonesty says:

        reposting:
        Just a reminder, February 5th is my birthday. More importantly, it is George’s next court date. Least importantly its some dead kids birthday, but who cares, hes not here, so no party, presents, cake. Just a bunch of racist money grubbing dredges to society exploiting a dead kid to line their pockets.

        Expect the Martins and Crump to hold a presser just before the hearing, to say the typical stuff they have said over and over since the beginning. They will use the propaganda technique of DEIFICATION:
        This is when an idea is made to appear holy, sacred, or very special and therefore above all law. Any alternative or opposite points of view are thereby given the appearance of treason or blasphemy.
        Examples: “God-given right to…”, “innocent [black] child”..”my son”…”dead child”…”wasnt committing any crimes”.

        Sybrina will make an emotional appeal again, as donations are drying up and crump going everywhere with her is getting expensive. “I hope you have not forgotten about my son”
        She and Crump will both slip in the name of whatever fraud they are running now, if it isnt still “change for trayvon”…in every other sentense.

        Expect the PR Firms paid trolls to be out hard pushing the propaganda leading up to, the morning of, and during the hearing. Then expect a lag in their talking points while the pr firm goes to damage control mode and evaluates the judges rulings.

        Once the Pr firm comes up with their talking points, Natalie and Ben and the martins, global grind, and certain media will all follow accordingly all at virtually the same time thanks to the networks they have developed on facebook and twitter, which I have outlined previously in other threads here and elsewhere(treehouse excluded). All the research is there for all to see, in public view, real time, as it happened. There is no disputing how I have thus far gotten from A to B.

        And finally, their side has already as outlined previously started a false rumor and attributed it to zimmerman supporters, that the videos entered/subpoena’d show trayvon checking car door handles…this is an attempt by the pr firm to discredit the treehouse and anyone else who repeated it. It began with the pr firm, was issued to the paid trolls, and they started claiming they heard it from somewhere. None of us saw it before they were talking about it, and we are on this like hawks. The intent of this misdirection is so when the videos in fact show him doing something else illegal, or not illegal..doesnt matter which…….they can claim “the racists assumed he was on camera looking at cars cuz hes black, they lied about trayvon because they are racists, thats slander and they are guilty of it and we caught them inventing evidence about a dead black child whos only crime was (nothing, smoking a blunt, getting a beer somehow, getting his weed ruined in the rain, stopping somewhere to roll a blunt, smoking a black and mild whatever it is).

        1:09am 1/27/2013
        Greg Miller from the Show Me State.

        • brutalhonesty says:

          and just to confirm so far there has been an uptick in their activity on twitter…and about his forthcoming birthday. even announced a “peace walk” for feb 26(or29)?…and are again asking for donations.

        • justfactsplz says:

          I for one have remembered that the 5th is your birthday. I hope you get an extra special present in this hearing for all of your hard work!

    • partyof0 says:

      Just saying he’ll show up and do what he does best….hmmmm…I wonder what that could be?

    • partyof0 says:

      Also…can’t even see the Judge chastizing the “well dressed gentlemanly squire hero/mentor figure” in court at all….but I would sure like to see it…VISA priceless…

    • nettles18 says:

      I predict the family will be there with lawyers from the firm that haven’t needed to hire their own counsel. It’s important to sell tickets for the upcoming fundraiser and the birthday is a not to be missed event. Mr. Crump’s lawyer may advise him to book an appointment elsewhere. The commercial can be had without need Mr. Crump to be there.

  17. ottawa925 says:

    This again is reminding me of the Casey Anthony case with the recent story that law enforcement made a mistake (mis-spelled) a search on computer for “fool proof suffocation”. They spelled suffocation wrong, and there were hits on her computer for that “correct” search. Baez admitted that they had a defense for that evidence. If he had a defense for that evidence, how did he know about it to have a defense? This is where I think the law gets fuzzy me or rather my criticism of same. For instance, why did MOM/West have to find out on their own that the phone memory had been erased by the CA firm doing the testing? Why isn’t the prosecution obligated to tell them that. I’ve worked with lawfirms not all but most of my life. I NEVER saw or heard an attorney say, give them everything except this. NEVER !!!! and I’ve worked for some pretty successful and savy ppl. They would just send all boxes to copy service of other side’s choice, and that was it. Of course they went through to determine if anything was privilege, communications between client and attorney, but beyond that, everything was provided. Or other side came to office and spent a day or two rumaging around and just picking what they need to save copying costs.

    This case has COVER UP written all over it. I am really upset that MOM/West had to come into this thing so late. They could have been there from the get go to make sure they were getting exactly what State was getting day by day. The State has had the upper hand WITH TIME from the get go. They’ve had time to fudgy, hide, and otherwise manipulate long before MOM/West came on the scene, and THAT should have been menntioned as well as far as this motion for continuance. This hide and seek business is tickin me off. Erasing a key piece of evidence and you’re not supposed to say anything about it? COME ON. Why didn’t MOM/West file something very specific to that happening and holding someone responsible for it? Why didn’t prosecution tell defense they were sending it to these ppl in CAL?

    Lastly, it has always bothered me that one side with unlimited resources can fk around with discovery to cause undue burden on the other side. You see this alot when a small lawfirm or sole practioner goes against a big firm. They will use discovery to drain all the money out. That to me is a flaw in the system. Nevertheless, it exists. But when one side is hiding and doing things behind the scenes that hides or destroys evidence. MOM/West should have filed something specific to evidence being destroyed IMO. This crap has got to stop and if this judge cannot see what is going on then put her in with the rest of the scheme team. She’s turning a blind eye. If she does not give prosecution what for after evidence being destroyed ….

    • partyof0 says:

      Don’t know if somehting can be brought up about the crap you mention above, in the next court appearance….but if it is and the Judge sits “like a potted plant” about it….YOU KNOW what the the stink/truth is then….

    • John Galt says:

      “MOM/West should have filed something specific to evidence being destroyed IMO.”

      Premature. They need to have information on the California analysis and have a supporting expert forensic examination and report before they file anything about evidence destruction with respect to the missing phone data. They have dangled the missing data from the critical day in front of the judge, who will no doubt be aware of the potential import.

      • hooson1st says:

        JG

        You are correct,

        plus a defense lawyer does not want to limit the scope of a particular question at this time because it may preclude getting more information than the lawyer was aware existed. By making a specific charge, the charge may not be true, but an alternate answer involving other material inculpatory activity by the prosecution on the same issue may be missed because the reply will only address the specific in the original charge.

      • myopiafree says:

        Hi John, I am not an expert on this electronics or “safe mode”, but I would bet that the “Cell Battery” would detect a “low” signal, and then shut itself off (except of a “very low power – to save the flash memory”) That would have occurred at a specific time, and you could find it by reviewing the “flash” memory records – and SIM card. That would take an expert, experienced electrical engineer. But that would finalize the fact that the “Heart” phone was not working in those last 40 minutes. Here is where the “Ping Tower Logs” are important. If they also reported NO CONTACT with that Cell – the Crump-DeeDee-Bernie’s story is a LIE. The sooner this truth comes out – the better – in my opinion. O’Mara should write a specific order to have this issue reported on.

    • partyof0 says:

      I know it has to do with something in my own past (not as significant in the main stream of this scenario)…but this case really makes my blood boil…..basically…simple “grade school crap magnified a million times” that filtered in to George’s adult life…unbelievable…and I’m not trying to trivialize TM’s death by that statement…

    • John Galt says:

      “For instance, why did MOM/West have to find out on their own that the phone memory had been erased by the CA firm doing the testing?”

      I don’t think they have found that out (yet). MOM found at that data for 2/26 was missing from the material provided to him after the Cellibrite analysis in NJ. AFAIK, there is no indication why it is missing. Possibilities include:

      1. It was omitted from the materials provided to MOM.
      2. It was erased from the phone memory, either accidentally or intentionally.
      3. It was never recorded in the phone memory.
      4. It was lost from the phone memory by some defect or glitch.

      • lovemygirl says:

        I just read one possibility I certainly never thought of. (From the crazies at Leatherhead).
        The corrupt police erased it before sending out for analysis because it had incriminating evidence against George.

        • ftsk420 says:

          Why hasn’t Crump said anything. He built everything on that phone and how Trayvon was on the phone with this girl all day for all that info to be gone and Crump not raise hell tells me it’s something he or someone else he knows did.

        • John Galt says:

          “The corrupt police erased it before sending out for analysis because it had incriminating evidence against George.”

          Should be easy to identify the culprit. Look for the cop with the PhD in flash memory technology.

      • howie says:

        Because the state is trying to convict a man. No matter what the evidence is. Like I said before. It is as if the cops found a body on the side of the road and arrested the next person to drive by. A drive by persecution.

      • ottawa925 says:

        John and party … I think you can understand my frustration (going to John’s comments now), that once again defense has to spend more $$$ to investigate. I know you share that frustration with me. But this business of having to spend money to investigate one piece of evidence after another is just ridiclous. Now, John, after what you have said, the defense has to spend MORE money to investigate … remember rumpole using the analogy of the Russian dolls … investigate the discovery that reveals something else that has to be investigated that reveals something else that has to be investigated.

        Why tell me then did the prosecution have no obligation to tell defense it was sending the phone to Cal? and the reason for it being sent there, and what prosecution requested of the Cal. in the way analysis? Why? My lawd you’ve got a telephone interview that only Crump with his ability to understand ebonics and mumbling, another (Gutman) possessing his own copy of that won’t cough up, and now this piece of evidence possibly being destroyed … what next !!!!!!!!

        • John Galt says:

          “Why tell me then did the prosecution have no obligation to tell defense it was sending the phone to Cal? and the reason for it being sent there, and what prosecution requested of the Cal. in the way analysis? Why?”

          I believe that they do have that obligation and that Judge Nelson will order them to provide that information.

          “(Gutman) possessing his own copy of that won’t cough up”

          I think Nelson will order ABC to cough up.

        • howie says:

          I thinks the Obama Virus has infiltrated the criminal justice system.

    • howie says:

      They are not invested in acquittal. Just plain lackadaisical.

    • howie says:

      They do it all the time. It is how it works. Plea bargain is the name…of the game.

      • Sounds like a movie teaser.

        I can hear the voice over guy…..”but there was one thing they didn’t count on……the TreeHouse”.

        Ok, so its a little self indulged.

        I’ve often wondered how many of the donors have visited the TreeHouse at least once. Perhaps we should all include a CTS in the comment section when we donate?

  18. lovemygirl says:

    RZJr tweeted a link to a Breitbart article on the Media
    EXCLUSIVE: ZIMMERMAN BROTHER: CAPUS’ RESIGNATION A ‘RELIEF’ (NBC News)
    http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Journalism/2013/02/01/Exclusive-Zimmerman-NBC-News-Capus

  19. tara says:

    Oh you guys, I’m sorry this isn’t GZ related but I’m compelled to write about it. I’m watching Chicago ABC local news right now and they just reported on a woman who gave birth to quadruplets without the aid of fertility drugs. I was looking at my computer screen and looked up to the TV just in time to see mother, at least two of the babies, plus two older children (maybe 12 years old?) who are twins, and what appeared to be a teenaged boy all sitting in a living room. I didn’t see a father. The reporter described the mother as living on the west side, which is mostly slummy. So my first thought is: she’s on welfare and she’s pumping out babies left and right, 7 so far by my count, and no father in sight. Stereotypical, but also statistically typical here. I searched on the internet for info and I found a report stating the name of the father. I looked him up and found a picture, I’m quite sure it’s the guy who I had initially ID’d as a teenage boy. If the right guy, and he does have a unique first name so I feel reasonably certain, he was born on Jan 6 1989 so is newly 23. Big responsibility for a 23 year old guy, you know ? Funny thing, the picture was a Cook County mug shot. A quick IDOC inmate search revealed that he had spent several years in prison for a robbery conviction, he was released on mandatory supervised release in July 2011. Illinois doesn’t allow conjugal visits so the quads can’t be his. And the twins probably aren’t either considering that he would have been like 11 or 12 when he fathered them. So of course I’m thinking: who is going to pay for these kids? Illinois taxpayers? Or is this couple self-supporting? The report stated that the mother is getting liberal assistance from several charities, so I doubt she’s in a good position to support even one child let alone 6. That means me, my husband, and all other Illinois taxpayers will have to support these black holes (no pun intended) of tax dollars. Thanks for letting me vent …

  20. eastern2western says:

    I just finished reading the defense’s rebuttal for de la rionda’s rebuttal and I even think de la rionda has no chance of going into hiding on tuesday. Unless the judge is dumb, blind and death, she will have no choice but vote in favor of the defense. Of course, she could be bias against zimmerman which is another ethical question. the possibility of crump ever showing for the hearing is nearly none because his handling of the recording is lingering pandora’s box. when it comes to the question of dd narrative, I believe the defense is already holding sufficient evidence to impeach her. Just basing on the fact that she was found and spoken to by tracy martin first is sufficient enough to impeach any of her testimonies from the actual trial. If I were the defense, I would use the numerous interviews that recorded tracy zimmerman who declared right in front of the camera that he would not rest until george zimmerman is convicted for the crime of murderring trayvon martin to establish ground for impeachment.

  21. eastern2western says:

    I remember one time I walked in to a restaurent with my prescription sun glasses on during a rainy day with a rain coat and the owner started given me weird looks like I was going to rob the place. If I apply the trayvon logic into the situation, then does it mean that I had the right to beat the crap out of the owner, take the money out of the cash register and drive off in my car just in the name of justice for trayvon?

    • brutalhonesty says:

      I deal with the same thing, my non-sun-glasses are missing the nose piece so I have to wear the sunglasses all the time until I have a chance to get it fixed.

    • Sharon says:

      Yes, it does. Let us know how it turns out.

    • ejarra says:

      Yes, if he calls a NEN and then follows you. You can assert SYG. This will allow you to break his nose, mount him, try to suffacate him, and smash his head on the tile floor until it bleeds. This is the new law. The law of Trayvon. You will never be convicted if witnessed by a 16, err.. 18… year old girl who is/will/might be your girl friend.

  22. ottawa925 says:

    There is a letter to BDLR dated 11/28/12, Exhibit F page 25, attached to the Motion for Continuance, first paragraph, line 8, “You may know this already. (At the October 19th hearing, he led the court and us to believe that he used his cell phone but in his March 20th press conference he held up a small digital recorder to the cameras.) and please save us all some time and find out whether anyone else present also made a recording. If so, that might be a better quality recording and more complete. Mr. Crump would know if Matt Gutman or others made a recording too.”

    ^ We all know Matt Gutman has recording because Matt Gutman said so. Or was he lying? If he was lying, why would he lie and say he has THE ONLY copy. Why didn’t West use Gutman’s tweet about same to get that going? If you relied on Crump, he would probably tell you Gutman was not there, except that Gutman says he was there … what a circle jerk. This defense team has to start exposing the lies.

    http://184.172.211.159/~gzdocs/documents/0113/defendants_motion_to_continue.pdf

    • ottawa925 says:

      I know we have the ABC subpoena (filed Jan. 2013), but this letter was written in Nov. 2012.

    • John Galt says:

      “This defense team has to start exposing the lies.”

      I think they’re on the trail, based on Crump’s non-cooperation and expressed desire to lawyer up and file motions prior to his deposition.

  23. John Galt says:

    Mystery solved! BDLR withheld the 2/26/12 phone data from MOM, so that MOM would publicly demand the data, which BDLR will then spring on MOM and the world at the televised 2/5/13 hearing, pulling off a brilliant coup, giving Trayvon’s family a wonderful birthday present, and completely annihilating the defense!!

    No, I haven’t lost my mind, just giving you Leatherman’s take:

    “We have no choice except to wait until the Tuesday court hearing, because neither BDLR nor the FDLE have responded in writing regarding O’Mara’s claim about the “missing” GPS phone data for 2/26.

    My best guess now, given MOM’s characterization of the data that was retrieved by CelleBrite, the New Jersey company that specializes in retrieving information from cell phones, as “an enormous amount of additional information” (i.e., additional to the information obtained by FDLE and a California LE agency), is that that information annihilates the defendant’s narrative of what happened.

    In other words, Game, Set, Match!

    Assuming I am right, that would be a rather brilliant strategic move by BDLR to put MOM in a position where he publicly demands to know something that BDLR will now reveal in open court on Tuesday, thoroughly demolishing the defense.

    The defense may need to have an ambulance standing by at the ready.”

    • justfactsplz says:

      Are you kidding me? This guy is undeserving of ever being a lawyer, past, present, or future. I read where one of the Trayvonites said that MOM was looking for away out of this case. They have been drinking Trayvon’s koolaide.

      • dmoseylou says:

        Trayvonites are waaaay beyond koolaide>>>it’s Purple Drank for them. :D

        • rumpole2 says:

          Yes but they are still drinking the Purple Drank as directed … mindless followers….
          And the PD they are drinking is poisoned… it is a false narrative offered that they are told to accept. They do not know that. They do not believe that when you tell them….prove it to them. Analogous to Jonestown…. their bodies will be littered around once the truth comes out.

        • justfactsplz says:

          Yep, purple drank was the “koolaide” I was referring to. That would explain why they are so mean and evil.

    • rooferx says:

      Entirely possible, but I’m no lawyer. I would like to know how a real lawyer feels about that….
      I believe the defense asked for info that the prosecution had from a certain date to a certain date. Why would the day in question be left out, seemingly on purpose?

    • rumpole2 says:

      I would not be surprised if Nelson say that MOM can get an idea of what was on TM’s phone by deposing DeeDee about her phone convo with him.

  24. myopiafree says:

    NiFong was sued in Civil Court.

    Can George sue Corey and Bernie for putting together a totally false charge, based on the statement of a liar (DeeDee) that Crump and Bernie coached? Bernie KNEW the phone was dead from the report that came from California. Knowing that the phone was DEAD, he STILL CONDUCTED AN INTERVIEW OF A PERSON HE KNEW WAS LYING. Perhaps when he gets sued, he will do what Nifong has done.

    • eastern2western says:

      george actually should sue the martins for defamation because they went on to national networks to claim there is no proof of zimmerman’s injuries while having the first hand access to the complete file(including the pictures too).

    • John Galt says:

      Do you have any evidence supporting those contentions?

      • myopiafree says:

        Hi John – Let us say it this way. It was to Bernie’s advantage to play ‘deaf, dumb and BLIND” to data from that battery-dead cell phone. Like Nifong before him, he chose to IGNORE the fact that the “Cell” was NOT WORKING. Further, the “Flash memory” was dumped by the California Company (easy to do). Like LiFong “holding” DMV proof in innocence, Bernie did the same thing about the Cell Phone. As far as proof for Bernie’s type of ethical blindness – that will have to come out (sadly) AFTER George is declared innocent. But there is no doubt that Geroge should and will go “after” Bernie for all the crimes he has committed against him. But far worse, is the credibility of the Florida Justice System.

    • myopiafree says:

      Correction: WordPress – screwed this up. I posted a NiFong commentary – not, “Nelly the Elephant”.

  25. arkansasmimi says:

    WOW~ Looks like its been a busy day at the TreeHouse! Watching all 4 of my grandbabies and now the 2 little are down and 7 and 3 yr old playing cars. Good time to catch up here! Or try :)

  26. jordan2222 says:

    What happens now with the cell phone data?

  27. maggiemoowho says:

    Fox Orlando just interviewed an attorney about GZ and he said that the Government(state) has to turn over any and all evidence no matter if it helps GZ or not. He also said that he thinks the judge will delay the trial to November.

  28. HughStone says:

    IMO, the reason that Feb 26 is not there, is because the 1st DeeDee WAS on the phone with TM. She stop cooperating during deposition time. Scheme Team planned to use DeeDee1s’ phone to give to DeeDee2,but realized they would get caught. So, DeeDee2 probably got her phone from a TM family member. It would have to be someone TM was calling the whole week. Delete the ebidence for the 26th and then say the phone numbers available for other days were hers.She would have to live in a real close vicinity to said family member. Maybe a cousin of TM or best friend.

    It’s possible.

    • LetJusticePrevail says:

      Yeah, but if they switched phones the call logs would not match the phone number that was already listed on the information listed on Tracy’s statement.

  29. dmoseylou says:

    I was looking for that interview and found this one from earlier this am. I had not seen it before, apology if it has previously been posted.

    After Zimmerman defense asks for donations, thousands pour in
    http://www.myfoxorlando.com/story/20933279/george-zimmerman-broke-defense-fund-raises-5200-in-24-hours-mark-omara

  30. justfactsplz says:

    In reading the FDLE response to Omara’s motion I noticed they referred to a witness as “she” concerning releasing private information. Are they referring to protecting DeeDee?

  31. ejarra says:

    1 hr ago: Where’s Tracy?

    • janc1955 says:

      Is Jahvaris an actual son of Tracy’s, or is he still borrowing the last name? Looks like Sybrina’s dress doesn’t entirely cover that hideous tattoo on her breast. I’m so over these people.

    • jello333 says:

      It’s REAL tempting to reply to that tweet. Bunch of stuff I could say…. but no, I’ll be nice.

    • HughStone says:

      Did you see that @attorneycrump tried to tweet Charlie Sheen? LOL!!!
      I like Charlie Sheen @charliesheen , but he’s a degenerate. Crump also sent traymom a tweet. I guess he tried to get her to tweet, but she didn’t. I find it VERY ODD that Sybrina is not burning up the twitter world. VERY ODD. If someone killed my son in cold blood because of his skin color. I would certainly cause huge ruckus all by myself, no help needed.

  32. justfactsplz says:

    Wonder how much that gown cost. She thinks she is in the big time now. Is she distancing herself from Tracey because the DeeDee thing is about to be exposed? Crump seems to have a thing for her IMO.

    • eastern2western says:

      god, this crap will be embarassing for naacp if the defense expose the real trayvon.

      • justfactsplz says:

        If they are even capable of being embarassed. I feel like the defense is definitely going go down that road to expose the real Trayvon and to expose the DeeDee narrative to be totally false. Just tonight pro Trayvon supporters are saying George attacked Trayvon because of Dee Dee’s “get off gett off. I want it all, all of the evil exposed. George deserves nothing less.

  33. hooson1st says:

    The defense is going to where the facts and evidence leads it.

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