Beyond Absurd – About Witness #8 (Dee Dee) Telephone Interview Trayvon Martin Family Attorney Benjamin Crump “I Did Not Ask Her Name or Address”….

Trayvon Banner

Each week when the participants in the prosecution of the State of Florida VS. George Zimmerman speak we are astounded that no-one in the legacy media finds enough courage to factually investigate this case.

Crump Presser

“her [Witness #8] testimony, her sworn testimony, connects the dots;  Completely connects the dots of this whole thing;  Her testimony completly destroys George Zimmerman”  – Benjamin Crump March 20th Press Conference

Specifically, the fraud that is the storyline around Witness #8 “Dee Dee” the supposed girlfriend of Trayvon Martin.

Visit NBCNews.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Natalie Jackson and Benjamin Crump

Natalie Jackson and Benjamin Crump

update  Initially she was sold to the media on March 20th as a 16-year-old girl, a minor, a sweetheart, who was devastated at the tragic loss of her 17-year-old “puppy love”.   A girl who was on the phone with Trayvon when he encountered George Zimmerman.  Benjamin Crump played an audio recording of her statement proving his claims.   The media ran with that story, and, for the most part, actually still does.

The prosecution then used her *tender age* as a shield of anonymity to protect her from the ruthless hounds of media interest.    (Watch Video)

The State of Florida argued before Judge Lester that her minor status meant she needed additional protections.  This, despite the fact she never once contacted law enforcement, never once called Trayvon’s Mom or Dad, and was essentially non-existent until Trayvon family attorney Benjamin Crump discovered her and presented her story to the world.    Indeed, even Trayvon’s Dad, Tracy Martin, and his Mom, Sybrina Fulton, supposedly had never heard of this “girlfriend”.

But yet she was on the phone with Trayvon for 400 minutes on the day he died?   She was devastated, so much so she was hospitalized and could not attend the funeral.   Yet, no-one in the family knew her?….. or so the story was sold.

ABC News was there exclusively as the 16-year-old girl told Crump about the last moments of the teenager’s life. Martin had been talking to his girlfriend all the way to the store where he bought Skittles and a tea. The phone was in his pocket and the earphone in his ear, Crump said.

Trayvon’s phone logs, also obtained exclusively by ABC News, show the conversation occurred five minutes before police first arrived on the scene. Crump said the girl’s identity was being withheld because “her parents are gravely concerned about her health and her safety.” Her parents asked that only an attorney be allowed to ask her questions(link)

However, incredulous as it may seem, as the actual case against George Zimmerman was presented in legal discovery, it is revealed the woman who talked to the State prosecution on April 2nd, who gave a sworn statement, and who framed the Probable Cause Affidavit for arrest, was not a minor at all.    She was, on April 2nd, according to them, eighteen years old.   C’mon, seriously?   This thing stinks worse than rotten eggs.

Sabrina Fulton - Tracy Martin - Benjamin

So did the Martin family just make up a story to hide her, or was there something more sinister about it.   Was the March 18, 19th Dee Dee who swore a story to Benjamin Crump, and ABC News’s Matt Gutman, the same person as the April 2nd Dee Dee who swore a statement to the State of Florida?

After the state initially used her minor status to hide her identity;  And after the state sought to hide her address when requested by the defense;  And after the numerous conflicting descriptives;  And after listening to her sworn statements;   And after listening to her recorded interview with Ben Crump……   We have asserted it was not.

The March 20th (16-year-old) DeeDee that Crump used to create his “media evidence”, was NOT the same (18-year-old) person who talked to the State of Florida on April 2nd.

But, anyone would say “no-way”, “c’ mon”, “obviously they’d get caught”….  right?

Not. So. Fast.

Yesterday, Martin Family attorney Benjamin Crump appeared in court for a hearing, only this time he was not alone.   Now he is represented by legal counsel, Bruce B Blackwell – Attorney At Law, from Orlando.

Crump lawyer

The Defense is still trying to get to the bottom of who exactly Dee Dee is, and the story of her that was presented by Ben Crump that obviously does not match the witness descriptives now given by the State of Florida;  Who, by the way, still refuse to provide the specifics of her identity – such as her address.

So yesterday, as the defense tries to unravel the enigma that is DeeDee, and get answers to this mysterious March 19th “telephonic interview”;  The one that framed the entire construct of the media narrative, Ben Crump shows up in court with an attorney, on the date of his scheduled deposition, to file a brief and avoid being deposed.

However, within the actual Supportive Motion for a Protective Order  (ie. he ain’t talking) presented to the court – the evidence of the false story that is Dee Dee is EVEN MORE painfully obvious.

Crump Scheme 1.1

In the motion to protect himself from deposition, attorney Benjamin Crump is claiming that on March 19th when he interviewed the bombshell witness #8, DEE DEE, he never asked her for her full name (surname) or address?   (page 6 – item #18)

HE NEVER ASKED HER FOR HER LAST NAME?

Seriously.

This is his angle to obfuscate and avoid the potential for liability form the fraudulent affirmation of a supposed witness?   “I didn’t ask her name or address”?   This is ridiculous.

Or is it?

It certainly looks like this is his approach at presenting “plausible deniability” for the fraudulent story.   If he didn’t know her name or address, then how can he be sure the person who showed up for the April 2nd statement with the State Prosecution is the same person?

Benjamin+Crump+Trayvon+Martin+Parents+React+OzNDh0TF_l7l

You should refresh on exactly what Benjamin Crump said about DeeDee on March 20th.   This is a portion of the CNN transcript:

[...] We took another step in this — what has been a daily journey for the past three and a half weeks. Mr. Martin, on Sunday evening, was working with his cell phone account, trying to figure out Trayvon’s password. And he looked on it, and he saw who the last person was that Trayvon Martin talked to while he was alive.

He called me late Sunday night and told me that he had called the young lady, and he told me, and I was just utterly shocked when he told me the time that they talked. They had talked all that day, about 400 minutes, starting that morning to the afternoon. Like many teenagers do, they talked on the phones. And all his family and friends knew Trayvon would have his ear plugs in his ear and he would have his phone on the side of his pocket. It was no different that day. His father and mother talked about, a lot of times, they would wake up and he’ll be on the phone talking to his friends.

Well, what George Zimmerman said to the police about him being suspicious and up to no good is completely contradicted by this phone log, showing, all day, he was just talking to his friends. And in fact, he was talking to this young lady when he went to the 7-11 and when he came back from the 7-11. I’m going to get into that in detail because her testimony, her testimony that is shown on these phone logs, connects the dots. Completely connects the dots of this whole thing.

Ladies and gentlemen, it’s really important to note, and you can follow along because we now have the 911 calls. And we have Zimmerman’s call to the phone, the police dispatcher. And you can follow audio, every account now. Never, in any account, other than George Zimmerman, this neighborhood association loose cannon, does anybody say that Trayvon Martin was up to no good, that he seemed high or anything and in fact. This young lady details it completely, the tone of the conversation and the nature of the conversation, and what was happening the last minutes of his life. I will ask you — her parents does (ph) not in any way want to reveal her identity. She is a minor. Her parents are very worried about her. She is traumatized over this. This was her really, really close personal friend. They were dating. And so it’s a situation where to know that you were the last person to talk to the young man who you thought was one of the most special people in the world to you, and know that he got killed moments after he was talking to you, is just riveting to this young lady.

In fact, she couldn’t even go to his wake she was so sick. Her mother had to take her to the hospital. She spent the night in the hospital. She is traumatized beyond anything you could imagine. And we all were teenagers, so we can imagine how that is when you think somebody’s really special, and you call it puppy love or whatever you want to call it. Then suddenly and tragically, this is taken away and you have, unfortunately, a first-hand account of it. So I will ask you again on behalf of the family and on behalf of the young lady’s family if you would please respect their privacy. She is a minor.

Now, details. That day Trayvon Martin, 17 years old, three weeks, weighed about 140 to 150 pounds soaking wet, as his mother says, and that’s with his shoes on, leaves to go to the store to get some snacks before the NBA all-star game is about to start. His little step-brother asked for him to bring some Skittles back and something to drink.

He is talking to the young lady, as he walks to the store. The phone records show — you get copies of these phone records, they will show you the times the calls were made and how long he was on the phone. And it is without any doubt that he’s on the phone the entire time during the day. especially when he is going to that store and coming back.

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

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

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

And you remember from the 911 tape, Zimmerman tells the police, oh, he’s coming at me, he’s looking at me, he’s checking me out. He had no idea who this man was who was following him. So he starts to run and then what do we know from Zimmerman’s 911 call that you heard the recording, Zimmerman gets out of his car and pursues him.

How do we know? One thing the dispatcher says, are you chasing him, and he says yes, and we hear him breathing hard. And they said we don’t need you to do that. And Zimmerman says OK. But as the dispatcher asks Zimmerman where can we — where will you be, where will you be in the truck, you remember his answer. He says just call me on my cell phone. He had no intention of getting back in his truck, doing what the police instructed him to do. He kept pursuing Trayvon Martin.

How do we know? Because this young lady connects the dots. She connects the dots. She completely blows Zimmerman’s absurd defense claim out of the water. She says that Trayvon says he’s going to try to lose him. He’s running trying to lose him. He tells her, I think I lost him. So, he’s walking and then she says that he says very simply, oh, he’s right behind me. He’s right behind me again.

And so she says “run.” He says, I’m not going to run. I’m going to walk fast. At that point, she says Trayvon — she hears Trayvon say, why are you following me. She hears the other boy say, what are you doing around here. And again, Trayvon says, why are you following me. And that’s when she says again he said, what are you doing around here. Trayvon is pushed. The reason she concludes, because his voice changes like something interrupted his speech. Then the other thing, she believes the earplug fell out of his ear. She can hear faint noises but no longer has the contact. She hears an altercation going and she says, then suddenly, somebody must have hit the phone and it went out because that’s the last she hears.  (full transcript here) 

But he never asked for her full name and/or address?

Oh, it gets better:  (page 7)

Crump Scheme 1.2

So he got permission from her, AND her family (yet, according to 4/2 sworn statement she was *NOT* a minor) and questioned her about legal representation, but did not ask for her last name or address?   Seriously?

Crump Scheme 1.3

An interview in a non-disclosed “South Florida” location, with  unnamed “certain other family members”, and consent from a witness and her parents that you did not ask the last name or address of?    Seriously?

Crump Scheme 1.4

#33  This one is insufferably creationary for plausible deniability of the FRAUD.

Benjamin Crump wants you, the defense and the court to believe that after the March 19th interview with “Dee Dee”, the devastated, minor child and puppy love of Trayvon Martin, he never spoke to her EVER AGAIN.

Benjamin+Crump+Bond+Hearing+Held+Trayvon+Martin+g5481yipDi6l

Well, if that is true, then how exactly did the State get in touch with her?   Perhaps we should go back to what Florida Attorney General, Pam Bondi, was saying on March 27th [one week after Ben Crump introduced Dee Dee]   Again, on CNN:

PAM BONDI, FLORIDA ATTORNEY GENERAL:  Well, Piers, first let me tell you.  I’ve spoken to Trayvon’s parents.  They are amazing, sweet, kind people.  My heart goes out to them.  I’m actually friends with their attorneys Ben Crump and Daryl Parks.  They’re wonderful lawyers who are representing them.

What my — I have no legal role as attorney general in the state of Florida.  That authority is left to the state attorneys.  But what I did do was I discussed with the governor the appointment of Angela Corey, a special prosecutor in Jacksonville who’s well removed from the case.  She’s absolutely excellent.  And the Florida Department of Law Enforcement are now involved in the case.

The reason, Piers, I can’t comment on “Stand Your Ground,” whether that applies here because there are too many unanswered questions.  And, you know, that’s why the family is rightfully upset. When you have an innocent 17-year-old boy walking home with Skittles and an iced tea and he’s killed, you have to have answers, not questions.  And that’s what we need in our state.

MORGAN:  Yes, I mean, look, I am encouraged by what you’re saying.  It’s good that a senior lawmaker in Florida is saying all this, but in the end, you know, I remain like many people absolutely bemused that somebody can shoot somebody in cold blood, an unarmed young teenager.

And so, I mean, I just think with your legal training and your legal background on what appears to be a very empathetic attitude towards this case, it might be quite powerful for the attorney general of Florida to say publicly, you know what?  This guy should be arrested.  He should be interviewed under caution and he should, if necessary, face charges.  But he should be at stage one of the legal process of being under arrest.

BONDI:  Well, what we’ve done is appoint a special prosecutor. And that’s what she’s doing.  Conducting a thorough investigation because we need to get Trayvon’s girlfriend to cooperate which I don’t know if was happening previously.  And they may have had good reason for that.  But she’s cooperating now.  And again, a thorough investigation is being done to ensure that justice is sought for that family.

But you can’t make an arrest until you interview all the witnesses, Piers.  Nor do you want that to happen because a speedy trial could run.  And — then that’s — we don’t want that to happen. And all I can tell you is we have a great prosecutor on the case.  We have great law enforcement agencies.  The Department of Justice is looking at this.  (Full Transcript)

On March 27th, when Pam Bondi made this media statement, the Martin Family and attorney Benjamin Crump were in Washington DC attending Congressional Hearings.

But four days earlier on Friday March 23rd, only 3 days after Crump delivered the story of Dee Dee, the media were reporting that Norm Wolfinger had subpoenaed her.   This was the exact same date that Angela Corey took over as the State Special prosecutor.

If Benjamin Crump did NOT know Dee Dee’s full name and address, and she had NOT talked to anyone else, then how exactly did Norm Wolfinger, the district attorney, send her a subpoena only 3 days after the phone interview?

And if “justice” was the quest of the Martin family, as Ben Crump repeated ad infinitum, and he was providing information to secure the arrest of George Zimmerman, which he outlines as the primary motivation in this motion to the court, is it really credible to claim that he never knew of her name and/or address?

……and once known, he never sought to talk to her again?   EVER?

Crump Scheme 1.5

So here’s the story they want you to believe.   Benjamin Crump “officially” introduces DeeDee on Tuesday March 20th,.   But, according to him, he does not know her last name or address.

Somehow two days later, on Thursday March 22nd Wolfinger subpoenaed  a person named DeeDee, without a last name or address, to attend a Grand Jury already scheduled to seat on April 10th.

[...]  Trayvon’s girlfriend has been told that the Florida State Attorney’s Office has prepared a subpoena for her to appear in front of the grand jury. She has hired a lawyer to advise her and make sure that her rights are protected.  Her attorney has told prosecutors that she is ready to appear and is looking forward to telling the grand jury what really happened on February 26,”  a source close to the situation tells RadarOnline.com

But wait, the next day, on Friday March 23rd District Attorney Wolfinger was replaced with State Special Prosecutor Angela Corey.

Yet, according to Pam Bondi on Tuesday March 27th DeeDee (no last name) was still refusing to be interviewed.

On Monday April 2nd someone who Ben Crump had never seen, or talked to after March 19th, presumably with a first and last name, became State Witness #8 of “oh you want that too” fame.

She, this former 16-year-old girl, now an 18-year-old woman, was interviewed in another undisclosed South Florida location, with undisclosed witnesses in participating in attendance.

She was interviewed by State Prosecutor Bernie DeLaRionda who, for confirmation, asked if the previous information about her phone and carrier was indeed correct:

BDLR: OK, and is that phone number under your name or under somebody else’s name?

Dee Dee: Now, it should be now under my name.

BDLR: And do you know what the provider is…is it T-Mobile? Or do you know?

Dee Dee: Yeah, T-Mobile…[mumbles]…I think.

Stanley McDaniel has the entire transcript outlined with informative perspective.    Suffice to say that given all of the, well, “revelations”, much about this is just brutally false.

This latest manuever by Benjamin Crump, …’I don’t know her full name or address, and I never talked to her again’, etc….  it just further outlines the absurd construct of this prosecution.

Tracy+Martin+Mary+Mary+attends+rally+held+F5_Be7oMhSjl

About these ads
This entry was posted in BGI - Black Grievance Industry, George Zimmerman Open Thread, Mark O'Mara, media bias, Trayvon Martin, Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

588 Responses to Beyond Absurd – About Witness #8 (Dee Dee) Telephone Interview Trayvon Martin Family Attorney Benjamin Crump “I Did Not Ask Her Name or Address”….

  1. boutis says:

    When I read parts of the “affidavit” I thought that Crump is now trying to pin the cooked up ear-witness on Tracy and Sabrina. The thinking is that they can get away with it because they were distraught and needed “justice”. He cannot because he is supposed to be a lawyer and an officer of the court. The time line is killing them. The witness appeared out of nowhere after they got the ongoing investigative SPD evidence aided and abetted by the city officials, civil rights personages and the media. There is a CYA operation going on now.

    • HughStone says:

      Yep, Crump is about to throw a few people under the bus. @NatJackEsq Was Crump lawyering up Trayvons’ present? The only thing this affidavit shows me is, that Crump knows the story is about to be exposed. He is gonna claim he didn’t know she and trayfamily were lying. They don’t see it. I wonder why TM parents weren’t in court yesterday?

    • howie says:

      Forget the notary and phone deposition of this mysterious person. Mom better drive down the turnpike and see this person, in person. I would.

      • selfdefenseadvocate says:

        How can MOM “drive down the turnpike and see this person, in person” if he does not know where she lives?

        • mung says:

          He can pick her up on the corner like the Scheme Team did.

          • jello333 says:

            The way things are going, he could just pick up some random late-teen girl and say, “Hey, wanna be a star?” Let her study a script for a few hours, and go for it. Once the recording starts, one of the first things she can say is “Yeah, I’m the girl on the other tapes. Crump and Bernie made it all up and told me what to say..” and then just take it from there. Go into court and present the tape as the real thing. Who’s gonna know? Under the circumstances, how could Crump or Bernie even argue it wasn’t the girl? ;)

        • John Galt says:

          She has to show up at some agreed location for her telephone deposition. A good investigator can take it from there.

          • That’s exactly what I’ve been thinking. Since the judge and state have cornered the defense, they have pushed them to have to do exactly what the state keeps telling the judge he doesn’t want to happen to this “poor defenseless (minor) girl”. They don’t want her “hounded” (investigated). Wherever the agreed location is, have a PI there to run the plate, take pictures, and investigate it from there. The only damper to that is, knowing this judge, the state can keep the location confidential from the defense. This whole case stinks to high heaven. I’ve never seen anything like it and I’ve followed a lot of cases. I thought EVERY defendant has a RIGHT to confront and cross-examine witnesses and I would think that includes Witness 8 and Crump. Crump “finding” this witness and interviewing her without an officer of the court or law enforcement present makes him a witness regardless who he is, attorney for family or not!

      • arkansasmimi says:

        WITH BDLR~ To see if is same DD. Great Article SD. Shaking my head. I dont now why I had this weird thought. What if it was TM half sister that Chump talk to?

        • John Galt says:

          Interesting thought. I find it hard to believe that TM talked to anybody for 400 minutes on 2/26.

          • Lyndy H says:

            It’s very easy for any teen to talk over 6.5 hrs a day to any one person. I can not see how diificult it is to find the person in question. They have Trayvon’s phone, phone records to track anyone who was on the phone with him on 2/26/12. All these articles are for the purpose of sales only. They leave out certain words, add a few more and you have everyone thinking the police, attorneys, investigators are all idiots cause they can’t find a person who was alledgedly on the phone with Trayvon for 400 mins (400/60= 6.66 hrs). Defense team is show boating, prosecution is close to the fine line before the judge slams the gavel on them, but so far, all within the law. They are not idiots as we are led to believe.

        • justfactsplz says:

          I have wondered that before too. Language skills are similar.

    • John Galt says:

      “When I read parts of the “affidavit” I thought that Crump is now trying to pin the cooked up ear-witness on Tracy and Sabrina.”

      Yes, and that is why the interview was conducted remotely by phone. To create a firewall between Crump and DD. We now have Crump, Tracy and Sybrina all denying substantive communications with DD prior to the Crump recorded interview. Does anybody believe that?

  2. myopiafree says:

    I wonder if Bernie has asked # 8 DeeDee, to confirm her name and address. Or does he not have that obligation??

    • jadsavageJad says:

      I can’t wait for them to get her on the stand and hear her say “A little bit drippin out” she cannot even form a sentence and say “It started to rain”

    • libby says:

      I was thinking of your moniker last night with regard to Bernie de la dunce….if bernie were to post here at the treehouse, would it be ok if his moniker was “completemyopia”?

  3. Angel says:

    This DD thing reminds me of the lines in “A Few Good men” when the characters were talking about Markinson. If Markinson doesn’t want to be found, he will not be found. I could be Markinson and you wouldn’t know it. Cruz who played Kaffee says, “Are you Markinson?

    Are any of us here DD? LOL

  4. Lou says:

    Sundance, great observation. that’s why it’s great to have multiple minds to figure out their lies. her name is DD, and we want to keep her as a mystery. she’s just a chile!!!oops

  5. Lou says:

    also, why would an earwitness hire a lawyer? I mean, I understand Serino, but why would DD need a lawyer?

    • howie says:

      Crooks need lawyers?

    • Jim Aiello says:

      I guess you didn’t notice Al (Tawanna Braley) Sharpton in the huddle? i’d bet the house Sharpton advised it.

    • John Galt says:

      “also, why would an earwitness hire a lawyer?”

      And who is this mystery lawyer?

      • LetJusticePrevail says:

        That is a question I have wanted an answer for. My money says that this lawyer has a link, however remote to the one-and-only Ben Crump, just like the attorney (Alicia Adamson) for witness 4. But without the identity of Wit 8, we will never find out WHO her attorney is!

        I am amazed at how easily the witnesses have been approached by the legal team representing the interests of the Martin family:

        Witness 18 interviewed by a PI hired by Natalie Jackson
        Witness 4 represented by an attorney who had worked for Ben Crump
        Witnesses 5 and 16 appearing in press releases with Ben Crump and the Martin clan
        Witness 8 shielded from investigators through the efforts of Tracy and Ben Crump

        WHEN does this become a concern to the authorities?

        • John Galt says:

          “WHEN does this become a concern to the authorities?”

          Perhaps after the defense calls this to the attention of the judge and the world in a well researched and documented motion.

          • howie says:

            I am thinking that this will be up to the ethics of the trial court judge for the near future. Bon’t let appearance or experience fool ya. It is up to her core feeling and courage. We saw what Lester was made of.

        • howie says:

          Never. It is in relation to the civil action. No biggie. The blending in to the criminal action is the root of the problem.

        • howie says:

          If this is not a frame up will eat you hat.

      • howie says:

        An ear witness needs corroboration, the way I see it. T-cong…I mean con. Can not corroborate her. Nobody can. She will not be admitted. Her corroberator is dead. Leaving the special prosecutor suing Harvard Law school. For satisfaction.

  6. howie says:

    How will the big shots weasel their way out of this one?

    • Sharon says:

      Whether or not they have to “weasel their way” of anything will be determined by whether or they have made “home scott free” list. We don’t know how many “officers of the court” are being instructed on their participation and who the chosen “home scott free” persons are. If these “big shots” are considered part of the group who gets to steal home free–they will never have to ruffle a single one of their feathers to weasel: they’ll just walk.

      • jordan2222 says:

        That’s a very scary statement, Sharon.. especially since it may be accurate. Exactly WHO is that group?

        • Sharon says:

          I don’t know. I’m just using farm girl reasoning here–more of the continuum theory: take “what is” now….extend it out in a straight line…and see what it suggests. Just another version of occams razor. Iif we keep going the direction we are going, will we eventually end up where we are headed? I’m sort of thinking we will.

          This is what will be there:

          1. a list of judges and officers of the court that’s about 12″ long, none of whom will be held accountable in public light for their involvement in a miscarriage of justice

          2. no further specific information about the tribe of DeeDees

          3. no further specific information about the status of one George Zimmerman. Based on “where we’re headed” he may end living exactly as he’s living now, indefinitely–always under threat of potential legal action but that legal action never actually concluded in any form (and please don’t say, “But they can’t do that…………”)

          Grace for today. Now. That’s all we have…. No one should be making their present sense of stability and confidence contingent on an assumption that *things will turn out a certain way. Grace for today…now….is all we have. And for those who don’t care for faith references in the middle of this kind of mess because you don’t “go there”–hey, good luck with that. :) Seriously.

          (*whether legal, national, personal, medical, legislative, international or BGI things….)

          BIG BTW: Investigating, thinking, exposing, searching, evaluating and critiquing in all areas of the mess that surrounds us are useful and necessary. But we had better keep a close check on our assumptions and our expectations. Subject the expectations to a reality check; thus, we will be in better condition to deal with a reality that may be quite the opposite of what our desire was.

      • howie says:

        When Gov. Scott and AG Bondi appointed a special prosecutor who has to sue Harvard Law School that should be a tell. Now to me that was the tipping point. Some dopey-dope from south Inglewood is suing Harvard Law School?

    • John Galt says:

      Tracy is the firebreak.

  7. Lou says:

    it’s almost ludicrous that a man would be locked up for life because of some mystery person. the fact that Crump lied about her age in the media means she needs to be deposed without the prosecution present.

    • howie says:

      This is really getting bizarre. Calling Area 51. The Outer Limits. Twilite Zone. SETI.

      • LetJusticePrevail says:

        SETI would not be interested in DeeDee. If they stumbled across a reflected transmission of her statement to BDLR coming from another star system, they would promptly point their detectors in a different direction.

    • John Galt says:

      “the fact that Crump lied about her age in the media”

      Interestingly, Crump doesn’t even mention her age in his affidavit.

      Paragraph 17: “young lady” I thought she was a minor child, no?

      Paragraph 19: Crump performed ethical advisement obligations a thru m, but did not ascertain W8′s age? Really? Why did he think he needed the consent of her parents? Why did he say “minor child” innumerable times in the media?

  8. Lou says:

    MOM needs to make a video of all the times Crump has gone to the media saying she was just a minor. after that, have that used as evidence of why Crump needs to be deposed, and why what he writes doesn’t mean it’s true.

  9. howie says:

    Was Mr. Bonaparte in DC on the 27th too?

  10. myopiafree says:

    Even Bernie must recognize that the PHONE WAS DEAD – and communication was impossible with TM. Therefore, the Crump-DeeDee story is completely made-up. So they want to send the innocent George Zimmerman to 20 years in prison because of this lie??

    • boricuafudd says:

      No, Myopiafree they want to send GZ to jail because he did not play possum in the face of an assault, and now they stand to collect millions in wrongful death suits. GZ is expendable, an example to be made of.

  11. recoverydotgod says:

    Why be asked to not use her name if they didn’t know it?

    March 20, 2012

    http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/video/neighborhood-watch-shooting-trayvon-martin-girlfriend-speaks-15959779

    @1:01 “…the young woman’s parents asked that we not use her name…”

    • howie says:

      How did they know who the parents are? This is insane. It makes no sense at all. Where was this enclosed room? At the funny farm? Guess they are counting on this affidavit to get them off the hook.

      • John Galt says:

        “How did they know who the parents are?”

        Parents, plural?

        BDLR: OK. Now uh…by the way, I neglected to ask you. Do you live with yourself, or a family member, your mother, or any other…

        Dee Dee: My mother.

        BDLR: I’m sorry…

        Dee Dee: My mother.

      • Sharon says:

        Guess they are counting on this affidavit to get them off the hook.

        If those in charge of supporting the BGI and making sure they don’t stumble want this affidavit to get them off the hook, it’s a done deal. Make it so, Spock.

        Judge Nelson is Spock. Who is Captain Kirk?

    • maggiemoowho says:

      Even Radar on Line said they had her name, but would not release it.

      • mung says:

        Since she is over 18 I think it is time to release the name!

        • ftsk420 says:

          Even though she is 18 I don’t think we will see her name anywhere. If the real DD isn’t the girl we think it is the state will hide her and say they didn’t want her harassed or intimidated.

          • mung says:

            She has to come out at some point.

            • Sharon says:

              In a system/nation where the rule of law was still the process adhered to, you would be right. We have not been a nation operating under the rule of law for some time.

              • howie says:

                Well long time ago they had the 6th amendment. Guess that don’t count no more. They used to have this thing called the 14th amendment too. But we have had fundamental change now.

                • Sharon says:

                  Criminal investigations that bear fruit are not based on assumptions that the criminals are not deliberately violating the law..

      • hooson1st says:

        If Radar on Line had a (her?) name, then MOM with a decent PI could get it.

        • John Galt says:

          Somebody posted that State released DD’s phone number, unredacted, in discovery. I think that should suffice for a PI to ID her.

          • hooson1st says:

            delta sierra

          • LetJusticePrevail says:

            There was a phone number released inadvertently as an ID# for data disk containing results for requests for information about Wit 8′s phone. That number was debated here long ago, and seems to match the number that was not completely redacted from the screen shots of Tracy’s phone log when it was shown on a news segment narrated by Matt Gutman. The phone number in the screen shot WAS obliterated, but not 100%. If you did not KNOW the number, you would NOT be able to discern what it was. BUT, when you compare it to the number from the data disk, it looks like a “probable” match.

            However, the number is associated with the *prepaid* Simply Mobile phone supposedly used by witness 8 and, as such, cannot be traced to a name or an address. It is just another “rabbit hole” that leads nowhere.

            • John Galt says:

              “However, the number is associated with the *prepaid* Simply Mobile phone supposedly used by witness 8 and, as such, cannot be traced to a name or an address. It is just another “rabbit hole” that leads nowhere.”

              But it can be traced to call details and call location data. I suspect that those don’t match DD, which is why Crump doesn’t want to know her address.

              • howie says:

                I think it started out as a Metro number in Miami.

                • boricuafudd says:

                  MetroPCS number IIRC, from the Miami area.

                  • howie says:

                    Yes in their block of numbers. I remember looking it up. It was originally one of theirs. Now, re: the judge. Remember, a trial court judge can rule any which way they want as long as they don’t care about being reversed on appeal. So, this is this judges last criminal case. She is heading for divorce court. So take that in to consideration. The rule is…there are no rules.

                  • boricuafudd says:

                    Very good point, she will be moving on, she looks out of her element for this case, anyhow.

              • justfactsplz says:

                Yes those things can be matched and were done early on. That is why I have maintained my statements that he was not on the phone with DeeDee.

                • waltherppk says:

                  My theory is the “heart” phone was being used for drug dealing rendezvous appointments not social conversations, and the trip to the 7-11 was to do a meet for a drug deal. The reason Tracy Martin would not cooperate with the cops about the phone is because he knew the phone call history was slam full of drug deal call history. He calls up one of the last callers and says let me give you a couple of thousand dollars for that anonymous phone, because it is needed for a scheme to burn the whitey who shot Trayvon. And after Tracy got his hands on the phone, it was off to the races with Benjamin Crump writing the script for the invented “earwitness” DeeDee……and the “earwitness” DeeDee scam was afoot.

                  • justfactsplz says:

                    That sounds plausable. They cannot prove DeeDee was talking to Trayvon and that is why the missing data.

              • waltherppk says:

                It is likely that the call history location data for the anonymous phone will not reconcile with the reported locations and movements in the associated time frame for the alleged earwitness DeeDee….showing that she did NOT have that anonymous phone on 2-26-2012 or in the days near to that afterwards. But suddenly after the “earwitness” DeeDee is announced being “found” by Benjamin Crump ….then the anonymous phone suddenly begins to have a history that associates with the location and movements of DeeDee. See how that works ?

                • justfactsplz says:

                  Yep, that would be what they did. Makes you want to scream. Witness tampering. There is not limit what these evil people will do to railroad George.

                  • waltherppk says:

                    The PING LOGS for ALL the phones involved will burn their evil scheming house down and the state knows it.
                    That is why the phone data is “missing”.

                  • justfactsplz says:

                    I know it is why it is missing. We have said all along we need the ping logs.

                  • waltherppk says:

                    Uh Huh Kind of like a broken record maybe the squeaking wheel will get the oil …..PING LOGS ….hmmm where are all those phones’ PING LOGS ???? Why wasn’t that covered by forensic evidence investigation BEFORE and included as an exhibit to the Probable Cause affidavit ???? Why weren’t the PING LOGS priority discovery disclosure as per BRADY COMPLIANCE within 20 days of the charging as is required by Florida Law ???? So many questions …..and NO ANSWERS from corrupt Florida nor Pam “no stone left unturned” Bondi. What is Florida HIDING ????

                  • justfactsplz says:

                    I think that what Florida is hiding is the fact that this goes farther up the ladder than Gov. Scott.

                  • waltherppk says:

                    Yeah it goes to “police acting stupidly” according to “No Limit Nigga” Sr. putting in a plug for the Black ?Grievance Industry from the Rose Garden as a “smiling Marxist” race baiting production. Dude is supposed to be so worried about how to save “one life” …maybe he should zoom out to a wide angle view and try to figure out how best to save an entire country just might be to give it a good letting alone, and let law enforcement do their jobs which does not include pandering to a racist and race baiting class warfare president wanting special treatment for blacks. What a clueless puke. It would save more than one life if he would shut his race baiting mouth. His rallying of “his people” has by itself caused more death by emboldening the blowback hatred of racist thugs.

                  • justfactsplz says:

                    You just said so well what many of us are thinking. He was involved and so was Holder. They turned a blind eye to the Black Panthers putting a bounty on George’s head because it was their people. I really think the powers that be are controlling what happens in this case. Judge Nelson is not going to stand up for what is right. That is so obvious after yesterday’s hearing. Obama use this case to further his agenda on gun control. Same with Sandy Hook.

                  • waltherppk says:

                    The “Black Grievance Industry” is Machiavellian EVIL in its propaganda and machinations and it is heading for a reckoning with a more direct philosophy that will be like Mr. Machiavelli… meet Mr. Von Clausewitz …the smart money is on Mr. Von Clausewitz.

                • John Galt says:

                  “then the anonymous phone suddenly begins to have a history that associates with the location and movements of DeeDee. See how that works ?”

                  Where was the phone: funeral / wake or hospital?

          • howie says:

            Maybe the best thing to do would be to allow the accused to confront the accuser. As the 6th and 14th amendments reccomend.

    • John Galt says:

      @1:01 “…the young woman’s parents asked that we not use her name…”

      Interesting choice of words: “young woman” I thought she was a “minor child” ? Crump can’t keep his story straight?

  12. ackbarsays says:

    I think that Sundance is making a mistake in this posting. Crump’s affadavit doesn’t say he never asked her name or address. It says that at the time of the interview, he didn’t KNOW her name and address. I would read that to mean that he didn’t know her name or address when he started the interview. I would think that he probably would have gotten that information from her during the interview or during his “preliminary inquiry” which was not recorded. (I’m not attributing truth to any of it, just saying that the line about not knowing her address is being blown out of proportion)

    • boricuafudd says:

      I would not call a reporter to be present to an interview a possible witness that could destroy my case or put my reputation online for someone that I have not vetted. Even if I did not care for my reputation, I would care for my livelihood and freedom.

    • partyof0 says:

      To clarify this…and it is a good point….Judge Nelson may “require another affidavit be submitted from Crump at his leisure” should some questions arise about statements in the original….which means the defense has to file within 48 hours, an affidavit with all the questions they have regarding this affidavit…so as to reiterate what the Judge had already stated that Crump need only answer specific & limited questions regarding the “phone recording”…..

      • Chip Bennett says:

        Judge Nelson may “require another affidavit be submitted from Crump at his leisure” should some questions arise about statements in the original….which means the defense has to file within 48 hours, an affidavit with all the questions they have regarding this affidavit…so as to reiterate what the Judge had already stated that Crump need only answer specific & limited questions regarding the “phone recording”…..

        Which itself still misses two other, more crucial points:

        1. The court already granted the defense the right to depose Crump, specifically
        2. Under Rule 3.220, the defense doesn’t need to have the court’s permission before deposing Crump, anyway

        • partyof0 says:

          I think I remember that after being given the affidavit by Crumps Lawyer…Judge Nelson shook her head in the affirmative about limiting the scope of “questions” Mr Crump would be allowed to/have to answer….maybe someone can check that to be sure but I thought she was in agreement with that lawyer….

          So Chip…can the Judge “Ungrant” the right…based on the affidavit…basically saying Mr Crump has answered the questions regarding the phone and recordings…based on her recollection of “what” she was TRYING to say when she made that statement….

          I know Crump inserted himself as a witness thru the media…BUT is not on the witness list…to get to him would require the trial to “happen”…right?

          • howie says:

            She ain’t ruled yet. Westlaw Next does not cover this bovine scatology. This judge got in here cause Lester went overboard. Let’s see where her center is first. I can’t tell yet. Maybe she might just take what she got. I reserve my opinion.

      • John Galt says:

        “defense has to file within 48 hours, an affidavit with all the questions they have regarding this affidavit”

        The procedure that you are talking about is called a deposition based on written questions or interrogatories. The problem with that procedure is that you are going to get carefully thought out scripted answers from team Crump – Blackwell. Another problem is that you can’t readily ask followup questions based on the answers.

        BTW, isn’t it interesting that Crump can remember all the things he discussed in the preliminary interview in great detail, paragraph 19, items a thru m, but can’t remember if Gutman recorded the interview?

        • boricuafudd says:

          He also forgot anything that was said after he concluded the interview.

        • jordan2222 says:

          Is this actually in the depo? I am having issues reading all of the pages.

          “defense has to file within 48 hours, an affidavit with all the questions they have regarding this affidavit”

          • partyof0 says:

            No….I write with a LOT of Sarcasm sometimes…just to let some steam off.

            This is what I heard the Judge “saying” to the defense and the prosecution lies there like a “pitted prune”….no….no….”potted plant”

        • howie says:

          I wann see what she says. I do not think the hearing was that bad legally. Do you? I don’t understand. Just because it should never got this far does not mean the judge can rule that. If that makes any sense. (and I doubt it does)

    • partyof0 says:

      Also…there needs to be a new legal term for Crump….”surrogate witness”

    • John Galt says:

      “I would think that he probably would have gotten that information from her during the interview or during his “preliminary inquiry” which was not recorded.”

      I direct your attention to paragraphs 18 and 31 of Crump’s affidavit.

      Paragraph 18: “At the time of the Interview, I did not know W8′s address or her surname.” Note that the preliminary inquiry preceded the Interview. Thus Crump did not ascertain W8′s name or address during the preliminary inquiry (unless he is lying).

      Paragraph 31 indicates that all substantive statements made by W8 are on the recording, and further states that Crump doesn’t remember anything not on the recording.***

      Unless W8′s name, age and address were redacted from Crump’s recording prior to publication, it appears that Crump did not obtain such information.

      *** Interesting that Crump remembers the unrecorded discussion set forth in great detail in Paragraph 19 a thru m, but remembers nothing else that was not recorded.

      • boutis says:

        I guess he doesn’t take or keep case notes. Or that is what he wants everyone to think.

        • John Galt says:

          I think it’s already in the fan. I suspect that phone records on the DD phone don’t match her address.

          • howie says:

            JG…I thinks it is now all in. No grey. A 100% scam or total innocence. Ya think? Not one card can be removed from the house they have built. If so it all comes crashing down.

          • boutis says:

            It is a catch 22 of his own making. He needed a media witness to the publicizing of his surprise witness who appeared suddenly after SPD deduced that there was no there there, no crime under Florida law, nothing to contradict GZ’s statements and the physical evidence. The media gull chosen was Matt Gutman who proceeded to disseminate the story with such keen insights “as she sounds honest to me” (based on what exactly is unknown) on air and via Twitter. The media witness was to lend credulity to the fantastic (mythical) story of the found young girl who ear-witnessed (“I heard some grass” ) a murder and was afraid of the police and telling anyone including her own mother. But by using the media as part of his scheme, he wiped out his client and work product privilege. It is astonishingly stupid.

            • libby says:

              I can see this leading to DD lading a show on the national geographic channel (I know I would watch it). I just love the “dog whisperer” show.
              Deedee the grass whisperer, wednesdays at 9 pm, set your dvr

          • arkansasmimi says:

            Wouldnt there have to be another way to verify phone to her? MY phone does not match MY address. I am on phone plan with my dtr. So it has HER name, yet it is with me Always.

        • hooson1st says:

          Crump’s focus is the civil case. At the time of initial contact with DeeDee (whoever) it was preliminary on his part. No notes is not a big deal at this time.

          • libby says:

            hate to disagree with you, but as dumb as we like to think crump is, i think he is as focused on the SYG as this one case (the syg law makes it hard to run his shakedown business-he might have to chase ambulances like other lawyers if this law sticks). he is also tryign to protect the bgi in other states. this case was as much about repealign syg and making sure syg doesnt become law in other states threatening the bgi in those other states, too

          • jello333 says:

            Yeah, for any of this to make any sense, we have to keep reminding ourselves of one fact: Neither Crump nor the State expected this to go on for more than a month or so. They expected George to quickly cave, and plead to a reduced charge. They expected very, very little in the way of discovery to take place. They never thought Dee Dee would have to show her face to a defense lawyer or in court.

            That’s it… simple.

    • howie says:

      Yougottabekiddingme.

    • sundance says:

      Crump’s affadavit asserts he never spoke to her again post interview, and never asked her name or address during the interview. Yet, somehow he gained parental permission, and following the interview both he and Matt Gutman (also present) described her as a 16-year-old “minor child”.

  13. dizzymissl says:

    I can picture the Scheme Team doing the evil laugh while composing this.

    • John Galt says:

      I have doubts about the timing. Crump was making noises about filing a motion concerning his deposition quite some time ago, and MOM was apparently communicating with Blackwell well in advance of the hearing. I think the last minute day of hearing filing was intended to block the depo without affording a meaningful opportunity to prepare an opposition.

      • Chip Bennett says:

        I think the last minute day of hearing filing was intended to block the depo without affording a meaningful opportunity to prepare an opposition.

        You mean, somewhat similar to the way BDLR dumped State’s thirteenth (?!?!?!???) supplemental discovery on the defense the morning of the hearing, thereby effectively preventing the defense from reviewing the supplement, and moving in court according to what was found, or not found, in the supplement – especially with respect to the handling of and data retrieved from Martin’s cell phone?

        • John Galt says:

          Just me, but if I was MOM, I would have screamed like a mashed cat.

          • Chip Bennett says:

            Just me, but if I was MOM, I would have screamed like a mashed cat.

            He (sort of) did, in his own way:

            “What we have here is… well… I don’t know what we have here…”

            I wish West had fielded that inquiry:

            “The State just dumped yet another discovery supplement on the defense this morning, before this hearing. I doubt your honor is someone who would receive even a 15-page document on the day of the hearing, take a short recess to review it, and pretend to understand everything that it contains. Thus, I have no clue what is contained in State’s latest discovery supplement. Perhaps if the defense had been given, say, 48 hours to review it, we could answer Your Honor’s questions about it.”

        • jordan2222 says:

          Yet Nelson acted as if the ‘late” discovery right in front of her nose was perfectly normal. Wow

      • libby says:

        Yup, blackwell says, “I told him I was gonna give him …”
        is that like, “I already gave him” (the judge seems to think the defense doesnt need any time to review anything)

    • hooson1st says:

      No reason for laughter, unless the facts of this case are different from what we have surmised.

  14. ejarra says:

    Something I haven’t seen mentioned here at CTH. Sybrina stated that DD1 had a black female friend with her (I believe it was when she went to DD1′s mother’s house). This shows that there where 2 girls involved with the original story.

    Also, since Sybrina was at DD1′s mother’s house, wouldn’t she know the address and her last name? Crump is supposed to HER lawyer and he doesn’t know or ask her? Was this mentioned in the affidavit, his talking with Sybrina about her? I didn’t see it. If not wouldn’t that be grounds to depose Crump?

    I’d like to see TM’s two self-professed CLOSEST FRIENDS (AB and AF) also deposed. Surely they would know much about DD1 and TM himself. If MOM doesn’t, he would be missing a backdoor in to DD1.

    Is DD1′s mother gong to be disposed? I want that, too.

    • debfrmhell says:

      IIRC, in an interview she said that the girls came to her house. Sometime in March thought the date was not specified. I remember that she said she and W8 took a walk outside and that W8 didn’t discuss with her any of the particulars of the conversation she had with Trayvon Martin that night. If I remember right it was Sybrina’s attempt to get her to go to LE with the information. I always assumed she got the contact information from Tracy Martin after he looked at his bill online.

    • John Galt says:

      “Sybrina stated that DD1 had a black female friend with her (I believe it was when she went to DD1′s mother’s house). This shows that there where 2 girls involved with the original story.”

      Casting call?

    • libby says:

      I wanna see em depose kit durant!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  15. mooney1el says:

    Speculation: I wonder if DeeDee could be “mentally handicapped” or “mentally challenged” to such a degree that she is a minor in mental capacity yet an adult in actual years? Would a person of this description have parental guardianship in the eyes of the law and thus she would need her parent’s consent to be interviewed by Chrump? In other words, can a person be over 18 but still be required to be treated as a minor? I realize that witness credibility would be challenged were that witness deemed “mentally handicapped”, but the Scheme Team may have been willing to take that chance to effect an arrest and subsequent trial.

  16. Knuckledraggingwino says:

    MoM and West desperately need to depose Prosecutor Norm Wolfinger and demand a copy of the subpoena that he had prepared to serve on Double Dee Dee #1 to ascertain what her identity was and how Wolfiger had learned of her identity if Crump had not known who she was. Unlike the other members of the persecutorial cabal in Florida, Wolfinger has honor and integrity.

    • Chip Bennett says:

      MoM and West desperately need to depose Prosecutor Norm Wolfinger and demand a copy of the subpoena that he had prepared to serve on Double Dee Dee…

      Somebody help me out here: Wolfinger actually filed the subpoena, right? And that subpoena is thus a court document? If so: why should the defense have to subpoena Wolfinger to get a copy of the Dee Dee subpoena? Shouldn’t he be able to get it from the State, or from the court?

    • John VI says:

      I was thinking this too, but unfortunately, it would be career suicide for wolfinger. He was already removed from this case for playing it straight. If he comes in now against the prosecution, he wont work again in florida. He may be able to dance around it a little by simply bearing witness to crumps perjury, but even thats dangerous, given Bondi’s assertion that parks and crump are close personal friends of his.

      Maybe he should run for Pams Job… That might give him cover. :)

      • John Galt says:

        “I was thinking this too, but unfortunately, it would be career suicide for wolfinger.”

        Wolfinger already retired after 27 years on the job.

        • justfactsplz says:

          Yes he did. He plays it straight and I think he would be eager to testify for the defense.

        • John VI says:

          I didnt know that. But how much of a difference could that make? This is like the third rail to anyone that gets involved. Considering the lengths they seem willing to go to put zimmermann in jail, I cant imagine anyone wanting to see that kind of malice directed thier way, retired or not.

          • jello333 says:

            Except for the fact that once this all comes tumbling down, a lot of people are gonna be seen as bad guys. And those few who stood up to them will be the good guys. One of them could be Wolfinger.

  17. Chip Bennett says:

    There is indeed a “black hole” surrounding DeeDee, and Benjamin Crump is the singularity.

    • John Galt says:

      Motion To Compel Deposition of Crump

      Defendant hereby moves to compel a forthwith deposition of Benjamin Crump. Defendant submits herewith in support of this motion Exhibit A – HTML Disk of CTH Articles.

      Conduct Yourself Accordingly,

      MOM / West

    • myopiafree says:

      Yes, DeeDee is below the “event horizon”, and Crump will make certain that she will never be “visible” ever again. (At least not to Omara and West – with the assistance of Nelson and Bernie.) But the real, “Black Hole” is that black cell-phone, where everything went in – and NOTHING CAME OUT!!

  18. scubachick75 says:

    They must be paying the Dee Dee’s to shut up and stay away. What a scam they have going. I bet Chump gets away with this. It’s all about who you know.

    • John VI says:

      They dont have to pay them. DD1, DD2, however many he needs, will happily come forward. Just look at the dogpound and leatherheads. There are people who will GLEEFULLY lie, cheat and steal in order to get Zimmermann put in prison. They believe that its the right thing to do.

      The BGI can produce witness after witness, and its not snitching as long as they’re lying ;)

  19. mung says:

    Why, if we now know that DeeDee is at least 18 years old at this point, does anyone who knows her true identity feel the need to keep it a secret? I say if anyone has any proof that they know who the 18 year old is, that they release it.

    Also this is all great that we are getting this information, but what do we do about it? How can we get someone in the MSM to do their own investigation? Who out there can we get to listen to us and start asking questions? There has to be someone somewhere in the MSM or government who is brave enough to ask the tough questions.

    • John VI says:

      Didnt the judge order the identity be held back? Irregardless of her age, that order hasnt been changed. Anyone that releases her name and address is in contempt of court until that order is vacated, correct?

    • maggiemoowho says:

      Even though she is 18 I think the court will protect her identity. There are other witnesses that have there ID protected as well. MOM/West should be told though, I think that it’s rediculous that they have not been given all her info. MOM/West have never released anything by “mistake” like the state has.

      • mung says:

        I am not saying the court or MOM should release it. I am saying several sources say they know her name and other information and had held that information because she was under 18. At this point those sources should reveal what they know. This person is being protected for no good reason and they need to be exposed.

      • howie says:

        Look. We don’t really know what is up. It will all be different when it is exposed. Just like the other stuff that came out. About the pre homicide actions. All the projections were wrong. But amazing how it comes out in the end. This is all pre-trial moves. It sure stinks to high heaven.

  20. yankeeintx says:

    Where is the transcript of DD2′s conversation with Bernie when she was flown to Jacksonville? Tracy and Sybrina must really be looking forward to their depositions, because they really just want justice. Bennie’s affadavit raises more questions than it answers. Sybrina better watch Cindy Anthony’s deposition by Morgan and Morgan, and prepare herself, because it is going to be brutal.

    Oh, and can someone ask “Pink Hat Princess” how she knew that TM was acting like a rabid dog?

  21. Sha says:

    I would like to know who is covering this liar’s a– because I haven’t seen one media outlet calling him out for what he is. If the defense or anyone in Georges family tell a lie even down to his 4th cousin it would be headline news.

  22. maggiemoowho says:

    Is it normal for someone to use the terms “to the best of my knowledge” and “appear to be true” in a legal document. I can understand using those terms if your being asked general questions, but if you claim to be the only one who handled something or someone, shouldn’t you have definite answers. It just seems that by using those terms a person is giving themself an “out” if their statement is proven false. Does that make sense, not sure I’m explaining it.

    • mung says:

      That is exactly what he is doing. If he doesn’t remember it isn’t a lie right?

    • John Galt says:

      “to the best of my knowledge” and “appear to be true” in a legal document”

      Beware of weasel words. Affidavits are supposed to be made based on the first hand knowledge of the affiant and are supposed to set forth facts, not weasel words and not a puff piece intended for the delight of Twitterers.

    • Floridianne says:

      No it is not normal. An affidavit is supposed to contain only facts that are supported by a sworn oath of truthfulness.

  23. eastern2western says:

    after reading the affidavit, I find it really hard for this document to be even sufficient for a deposition. my major problem with the affidavit is really its explaination for the missing 12 minutes. according to crump, he does not have a record of it because he was using the 12 minutes to basically exchanging informations with dd. despite him claiming none of the information is related to the details of the case, what is the proof that he did not tell her something secretive during those 12 minutes (like may be the 911 call)? At this point, I think crump screwed the whole case up by making the contact with witness 8 before the police officers. Yeah, I understand the paranoia with the police in the aa community, but not having a tertiary witness in a legal event is a major no no in any field. Oh god, this case has forever gotten complicated. Now, basically all of the martins will pull the exact same tricks and get themselves lawyers before they even open their mouths to the defense. Oh boy, Nelson still believe this trial is possible in june?

    • mung says:

      Hey if these are the rules of the game, why doesn’t a new witness come up that says they saw Trayvon casing houses then saw Trayvon throw the first punch. The rules of this game seem to be, make stuff up and no one will bother to see if it is real right? Oh wait, I forgot that this is only OK for the persecution to do.

    • John Galt says:

      “after reading the affidavit, I find it really hard for this document to be even sufficient for a deposition.”

      It is not. Rule 3.220 describes use of depositions in court proceedings, not use of affidavits.

    • rumpole2 says:

      Why is nobody asking “What happened to the Motion to subpoena Matt Guttmans recording”
      I do not understand why such an important thing was not mentioned at the Hearing… nor since.
      It is now even MORE important to get that recording?

      • jordan2222 says:

        Same question..

      • John Galt says:

        “Why is nobody asking “What happened to the Motion to subpoena Matt Guttmans recording”

        It went into the black hole.

      • woohoowee says:

        “boricuafudd says:
        February 6, 2013 at 2:03 pm
        “Correct me if I am wrong, but the hearing was terminated prematurely by the Judge, she called for a recess and then later informed the lawyers they were done for the day, asking MOM to filed a motion if the Affidavit by Crump was insufficient and that she would make time for that.”

        rumpole2 – you asked about the motion to subpoena Matt Gutman’s recording yesterday and I had responded that, though unlikely, perhaps the defense already has the recording. Having read boricuafudd’s post (copied) I think this may be a more likely answer to your question.

        • rumpole2 says:

          BUT……… it was THE motion.. filed early… well within Frau Nelson’s “Special filing time restrictions for Defence motions only”
          It must have been urgent enough for defence to file that motion… and IMO it is a critically important motion. Maybe with the Guttman tape the whole Scheme is exposed and we can stop this farce? I doubt that… but it is KEY as to how defence proceeds.
          Surly you cant just walk away from a hearing with a key motion not addressed… not even a date set for another hearing? To me this is nuts. If it was addressed behind closed doors… exactly how was it addressed? I don’t think it was.
          And what was Nelson’s RUSH to get away… she keeps stressing that she is “Setting the whole day aside” for these hearings… but she only works one-hour days? That is nuts too.
          This whole process is nuts :D

        • jello333 says:

          I’ve been saying this, or some variation (as in Gutman is “talking” with the defense) for like a couple months now. And people here just laugh at me! Nobody cares if they make me sad. :(

          • woohoowee says:

            No clue what Guttman/ABC are doing. Hadn’t much thought about it until rumpole2 brought up the point about the motion yesterday.

            Nobody’s laughing @ ya, jello; however, there is laughing *with* you! You post some gooduns to laugh along with :-)

            • howie says:

              Look it is clear. The state is hiding. The state is guilty.

              • justfactsplz says:

                The scheme team, the Martins, Dee Dees, and the state is guilty.

              • woohoowee says:

                “Look it is clear. The state is hiding. The state is guilty.”

                This. Yes. Governor Scott should have forced Holdup/Obama to go the Federal charges route if they wanted to try. He got out-politicked, but he would rather an innocent man’s life be ruined than do the right thing, even now. Of course, nobody should be in the BGI in the first place. NO politician (or anyone at all) should pander to any of this garbage! Take the money out and it goes away.

          • selfdefenseadvocate says:

            Aw, jjello, poor baby :( :lol:

          • rumpole2 says:

            With all due respect… you are dreaming
            IF there was behind the scenes discussions… the motion would not have been filed in the first place.
            Unless there is a subpoena the Guttman tape will never be produced. I am not sure it will be forthcoming even with a subpoena, but the subpoena will be a good first step.

            • jello333 says:

              Isn’t the subpoena for more than just the tape itself? (Notes, editing decisions, etc.) And if so, maybe Gutman doesn’t have all that himself. But even if that’s true, I’m not certain why ABC would agree to give up the tape, but not the other stuff. Maybe just because they’re a media outlet, there are certain things they’re EXPECTED to fight to keep secret, even though they know eventually they’ll have to give it up?

              And yeah, if you’re saying to yourself, “Man, he’s really stretching!”… you’re right! ;)

      • nettles18 says:

        Jeralyn at Talk Left posted that ABC news asked for more time to prepare as Matt Gutman was out of the country.

      • howie says:

        I think it was granted.

  24. mcfyre2012 says:

    All I see when I look at the Trayvon side of things is fraud…nothing more.

    • Sha says:

      +1 and a tragedy that came from a young man making a bad decision to attack some one instead of going to where he was staying. No one wins ……even when George is found not guilty he will have to live with the guilt of having to take a life to protect his own and TM will still be gone because he chose to use his fist instead of his head to settle something that he didn’t like. All the others in the mess will have made lots and lots of money off of these two young men because of lies and cover ups. There are cold blooded killers walking around free right now and they chose to go after a man who feels bad for having to take a life to save his own.

  25. Floridianne says:

    They need to subpoena that subpoena.

  26. Jim Aiello says:

    Two names come to mind for me. Al Sharpton and Tawanna Brawley

    • libby says:

      crystal gale magnum comes to mind (duke lacrosse rape liar who tried to kill one boyfriend and succeeded at killing another bf)

  27. WhiteFalcon1 says:

    Without her physical presence in that court room, under oath, her statement to anyone, anywhere, under any condition, is irrelevant! I’ve never known a stenographer not to question the full name and address of the person being questioned, so if they can’t do it, neither can the states or family’s attorneys
    If they refuse to allow the defense access to her or to dispose her, her prior statement is irrelevant!
    If they cannot dispose her and question her statement, nothing she said matters in the courtroom, period! EVERYONE has the absolute right to confront their accuser!
    This is already over except Zimmerman’s lawsuits against everyone else!

    • Floridianne says:

      Exactly. And a PC warrant for murder 2 was based on this witness? Mmmm Kkkkay.

    • John Galt says:

      “If they refuse to allow the defense access to her or to dispose her, her prior statement is irrelevant!”

      Perhaps the result desired by Crump and BDLR. I think W8 related evidence would nonetheless be potentially relevant to a defense showing of a pattern of witness tampering, obstruction of justice, and prosecutorial misconduct.

    • libby says:

      WhiteFalcon,
      in order to get dd to sound the same, they need the exact number of marbles in her mouth. so, who is gonna pay for the marbles she keeps on her mouth as she testilies? she cannot used ‘used’ marbles, they must be new diamond encrusted marbles that she keeps in her mouth as she testilies

    • jello333 says:

      That’s right, and the State knows it. And yet they have NO intention of allowing MOM/West to question or find out the truth about Dee Dee. So…. what’s that tell you? It tells me that the State KNOWS the case will eventually be dropped, but in the meantime they would like everyone to just forget about Dee Dee. Because the girl(s) is far more dangerous to the State than she is to the Defense.

  28. recoverydotgod says:

    So the “Preliminary Inquiry” and the “Interview” seem to be portrayed as two separate events. Times, Date and Location for both are an obvious question for the defense to ask as followup.

    O’Mara, West, and Crump on HLN
    December 2012

    @9:12 “…I’ve talked to this young lady once in my life, and that is it…”

    • John Galt says:

      Probably said that before he went through DD’s phone records with Blackwell.

    • nettles18 says:

      Also we know Benjamin Crump was present at the April 2nd interview with W8. He didn’t talk to her then either?

      • howie says:

        Now, in my opinion the fix is in. The judge is on her last criminal case. She has both Shellie and George. She can rule any way she wants without fear of reversal because she does not really care. At least that is what it seems to me. You could put the magna carta, original constitution, roe v wade, marbury v. madison, and the original declaration of independence on her desk and it would not matter a whit. She is going to the divorce court. She is outta here.
        A trial judge does not have to follow the law.
        I am not kidding. They do what they want. That is a fact. Regardless of anything else. That is the way it is. Believe it.

    • nettles18 says:

      I wonder if the State has any concerns with the affidavit. Do you think it’s possible they were all present at the April 2nd interview to positively I.D. the girl as the one who came forward on March 19th?

      • sundance says:

        But how could they I.D. Her.? According to Crump he never spoke to her again, he never asked her name or address in the interview. The “Martins” were all with him on that end of the phone. So how could they I.D. her 2 weeks later?

        • nettles18 says:

          In Sybrina’s statement (Page 37/284) she tells police W8 was in her apartment sometime in March (it’s unclear if this was before or after the March 19th interview) and Ms. Fulton encouraged the girl to go to police. She never discussed the specifics of that night (I find that extremely difficult to believe) and she drove her home afterward. So Sybrina knew where she lived. http://www.clickorlando.com/blob/view/-/15490330/data/1/-/kligxm/-/Zimmerman-documents.pdf

          • nettles18 says:

            I guess we are to believe she kept it from her own lawyer?

            • John Galt says:

              Objection – calls for a communication protected by the attorney-client privilege.

            • sundance says:

              How can Sybrina assert that the person she met was the same person on the telephone if no name or address were provided.

              Sybrina can only affirm the person who showed up on 4/2 is/was the same person she previously went to the house of. Unless there was some other “affirmative information” within the 3/19 interview.

              However, both Ben Crump and ABC Matt Gutman exited the interview claiming the person they interviewed was a 16-year-old “minor child”. Subsequently, if the person who showed up on 4/2/12 to the State Prosecutor/Investigator was an 18 year old, EVEN IF SHE IS THE SAME PERSON SYBRINA MET TWICE, then obviously there ARE TWO distinct people.

          • jello333 says:

            Sybrina never discussed with Dee Dee what she and Trayvon talked about on the evening of the 26th? Hmm… that reminds me of the discussion my neighbor and I had a couple days ago. During that whole discussion, we never once talked about the time that Barack Obama, the Pope, and myself had a long, private talk about world peace.

            Just never came up… not sure why.

          • howie says:

            Who care’s. She is the star witness. Get her!

        • howie says:

          Key: According to Crump.

    • yankeeintx says:

      Interesting that during the video, the scrolls at the bottom say “The murder trial is tentatively set to begin June 10, 2013″. I guess HLN didn’t think the date was etched in stone either.

  29. stevie g says:

    Well, Crump’s affidavit was obviously written by his attorney. Crump would have to be able to speak English first if we are to believe these are his words.

    Why not get George to re-enact his screams on the 911 tape? Then have an expert testify that they are the same. No judge could deny that was not self-defense. Case closed.

    • justfactsplz says:

      George did re-enact his screams for them. They even had him lay on his back and yell “help”.

      • hooson1st says:

        that would not be an exact reenactment, unless, they also had someone on top of him and punching him and knocking his head into the pavement….

      • jello333 says:

        And even though I like and admire George a lot, I gotta say one thing about him: He’s NOT much of an actor, is he? ;) Those “screams” on the reenactment sounded not even close to real. Not his fault of course… and the fact that he couldn’t even “fake it” is, to me, just another indication of how honest the guy is. Heh, remember in the voice stress analysis, when he was told to intentionally LIE about speeding? It took him a couple tries to get what he was supposed to do, almost like he couldn’t understand why they wanted him to lie.

        • justfactsplz says:

          He just sees the good in things and people. It would be hard to duplicate one’s voice when you are not in fear and under an adrenalin rush, IMO.

          • jello333 says:

            Yep, and that just goes to show how much stress and terror he actually WAS in while being attacked. When attempting to reenact the screams, I’m sure George FELT he was doing it similarly…. but of course the conditions are just not the same… not even close.

            • justfactsplz says:

              What bothers me, we were told that George did well on that test, that they were 99 percent sure it was him. Them when it comes out in discovery it says something totally different,.

          • jello333 says:

            “He just sees the good in things and people.” Yeah, without even knowing the guy, that’s pretty obvious. And I’m just really hoping that when this is all over, he will have retained at least a little of that. I know he’s never gonna be able to completely trust people again, but I hope this doesn’t change him completely. We ALL need to keep a little bit of naivete and innocence within us, I think. It’s really a shame when we lose that. My wife wants to write a letter to George and tell him some things. We’re about George’s mom and dad’s age, with two sons about the age of George and Bobby. And with some experiences we’ve had (though of course nothing like this), I think we might be able to raise his spirits at least a teeny bit.

            • justfactsplz says:

              If you send it to Omara, I am am sure he would give it to George. We are older than George’s parents and are children are older than George. But being a mother my heart has been breaking for him and his family. I hope that George will be have some sort of happy life when this is all over. No one deserves the agony he and Shellie have been through.

  30. partyof0 says:

    I just now thought of something…maybe it should be stated by Omara or West…TO that Judge…that they intend on calling Crump to the stand as a witness FOR the Defense….maybe that would throw some sh!t in the fan….

  31. stevie g says:

    In his affidavit, Crump claims that his clients, the Martins, claim that the voice on the 911 tape belongs to Trayvon. Yet that conflicts with what the father told the police.

    • mung says:

      He said later identified, that is because before they changed the story, he had said it wasn’t his son. See that isn’t a lie, previously said it wasn’t, then later said it was.

      • stevie g says:

        ok, right. now i get it, dad was truthful at first until he figured out he should lie. just my opinion of course.

        • mung says:

          At first he didn’t know this was going to be a money making adventure for him so he didn’t need to lie. Crump didn’t lie in the affidavit because he said later identified. He just left out the first identification.

    • libby says:

      The many many many many many many many many inconsitencies on the part of the martins/fultons means NOTHING.
      the one or two minor inconsistencies of george (that he gave while recuperating from a probable concussion and a broke nose while being pestered by police for days) are very critical.
      no matter how big the inconsistencies of the martins/fultons, just look away, the media and the bgi find their inconsistencies to be too embarrassing

  32. stevie g says:

    If Crump was not trying to hide something, he would have no reason to object to his deposition. He knows he did something wrong. Otherwise, why not just come forward and answer truthfully?

  33. stevie g says:

    Crump in his affidavit admits that his interview of W8 constitutes a waiver of any attorney-client or privileged information. Therefore, Crump should be ordered to give a full and complete deposition, with his down home lawyer present of course.

    • John Galt says:

      A/C privilege only covers confidential communications with clients and, in some instances, certain client reps or employees. The presence of non-clients Gutman and associate and W8 waives A/C privilege in connection with the DD interview.

      There is another potential privilege known as “attorney work product doctrine” that Crump will likely assert in an attempt to avoid answering questions on topics other than the W8 interview. He may encounter major obstacles in this effort, such as conflicts, waiver and perhaps even the crime-fraud exception.

  34. BertDilbert says:

    “BDLR: OK, and is that phone number under your name or under somebody else’s name?

    Dee Dee: Now, it should be now under my name.”

    LOL. So did Crump find a phone record and then transfer the phone to a witness?

    I would want that pre transferred phone record and see if W8 knows people that were called from that phone!

    • John Galt says:

      “I would want that pre transferred phone record and see if W8 knows people that were called from that phone!”

      Yes, I think they have some phone records, not sure exactly what, or whether they include historical location information. I was wondering if DD’s address has been kept top secret from the defense because it doesn’t match historical location information on the anonymous prepaid phone (or at least the sim card).

      • waltherppk says:

        Yeah that anonymous phone probably traced backed on 2-26-2012 to a user identified as Nigga Needa Plant and Mister Plant cannot presently be located.

        • mung says:

          Wait Trayvon’s girlfriend is a dude? That changes things :)

          • waltherppk says:

            No I’m saying DeeDee is later a recruited witness of convenience scamming having been the user / owner of the phone that actually earlier belonged to user / owner Mister Nigga Needa Plant on 2-26-2012 …..who would know ? It was a prepaid anonymous phone.

            • John Galt says:

              I think that the records provided for DD by the State were from 2/26 to 4/2

              Perhaps the shizzle has already impacted the rotary air impeller:

              mysimplemobile:

              Customer Proprietary Network Information, or “CPNI”, is a form of personal information that is generated in connection with the telecommunications services we provide to you. CPNI includes, for example, ***** call details, call location information, ***** and certain information about your rate plans and features. CPNI does not include your name, address, and phone number. Under federal law, you have a right, and we have a duty, to protect the confidentiality of CPNI and we have adopted policies and procedures designed to ensure compliance with those rules. We won’t intentionally disclose your CPNI to third-parties without your permission, except as allowed under FCC rules, applicable law, or explained in this policy. However, you may designate other “authorized users” (for example, a spouse) to access and manage your account information, including CPNI.

              Subpoenas for Simple Mobile go to [Updated 7 October 2011, thanks to Houston ticket attorney Robert Eutsler]:
              Email: LER@mysimplemobile.com
              Fax: 978-246-8183
              Mail: Simple Mobile LER
              PO BOX 147
              East Irvine CA 92650

            • mung says:

              Ah OK. So you are saying the reason that he was on the phone so long with that person is to arrange deals.

              • waltherppk says:

                You got it, and the three stooges may be in the call history for the “heart” phone found at the scene. IF there was a conversation between TM and “somebody” using an anonymous prepaid phone …..then that “anonymous” phone user could be anybody, even somebody recruited to “tell a story” about something that never happened that they never heard on a phone they did not even have at the time.
                The “star witness” DeeDee may be simply acting a part and role playing, following a script written by “mister do it for the benjamins” AKA Benjamin Crump.

              • waltherppk says:

                The entire reason for TM being at the 7-11 may have been to do a meet for a drug deal, and the “heart” phone history being accurately tracked and analyzed may ultimately reveal that no “DeeDee” was on the other end of the line. Complete phone history including ping logs for the anonymous “DeeDee phone” should be examined. Phone records of the three stooges at the 7-11 could also come into this investigation.

                • libby says:

                  Oh please,
                  drug deals could take place most anywhere, but the 7/11 was the closest place to get blunts and sizzurp supplies

                  • waltherppk says:

                    The small 7-11 purchases may have been incidental purchases to provide cover as being a customer having a reason to be at the 7-11. The real reason for being there may have been another transaction in the parking lot.

            • justfactsplz says:

              That is very possible that that is what they did. They thought they could get away with it.

              • waltherppk says:

                Yeah I guess every time we want to see ALL the phones PING LOGS …..we can expect the answer from Florida will be ……You want that too ????? Yeah …Duh…we kind of want “that” FIRST before things go any further down the primrose path where they have too long been already. It would take a regular Einstein not to “get it” about ALL the phones’ PING LOGS being IMPERATIVE and being KEY FORENSIC EVIDENCE otherwise known as Brady Material. What is it about Brady v Maryland that Florida does not understand ? From the looks of things …..just about EVERYTHING about Brady is what Florida does not understand.

                • justfactsplz says:

                  There is a reason the defense wants to know how long the prosecution knew some of these things. The defense has had the goods on the phones. They are building something bigger and setting the stage.

                  • waltherppk says:

                    Malicious Prosecution suit with the Beasely firm as co-counsel or main counsel …..many people can retire from the settlement that Florida will have to pay

                  • justfactsplz says:

                    That is what I think they are doing. But oh dear Lord, they need to get George free first.

                  • howie says:

                    Wanna bet BDLR ends up getting away from Corey and becomes a private defense atty.? Corey….She will have to pursue her lawsuit v. Harvard Law School. The fixer showed up in court the other day to begin trying to make this go away.

                  • justfactsplz says:

                    It needs to go away. Those who caused this mess should have to pay but they won’t.

                  • John Galt says:

                    State proceeds to immunity hearing w/o W8?

                  • justfactsplz says:

                    I don’t see how they could move forward with her. Without her they have no case, George wins immunity.

                  • jello333 says:

                    Yep. I’ve been saying this for a long time… the prosecution does not WANT to use Dee Dee. We’ll never see her deposed (IMO) let alone on the stand. I kinda think MOM/West proposing a date for the immunity hearing is like calling the State’s bluff. You watch… suddenly it’ll be the State saying, “Heh… we need more time.”

                  • justfactsplz says:

                    The state did not want a continuance on the trial so that is an indicator they surely are ready. But without DeeDee they cannot prove malice for their murder 2 charge. It will be interesting to know the discovery is that the state dumped on Omara yesterday. Where is their smoking gun we hear so much about?

                  • jello333 says:

                    Thank you. Yes… this has long ago ceased being about just the State trying to take down George… now it’s about the State trying to protect themselves.

                  • justfactsplz says:

                    Yes it is and West is all over it. The defense had their reasons for they way they handled things yesterday. They were looking at the bigger picture.

                • Sha says:

                  waltherppk : Glad to see Ya back LOL ! ….. Give them hell about those ping logs!!!!!!!!! …… :D

                • howie says:

                  They understand it. All Fl. SA’s understand it. They are trained to understand it. They absolutely understand it. I promise. Or they would never get the job.

      • mung says:

        Do prostitutes have addresses?

  35. eastern2western says:


    here is the interview between that stupid ass limey (pierce morgan) and robert zimmerman. I do not understand how he can still claim trayvon was just walking home with skittles and ice tea after seeing the two photos of face and skull injury.

  36. disgustedwithjulison says:

    As I have commented before, members of the bar will always cover for each other. While MOM and West will squeeze Crump and make him feel as uncomfortable as possible….in the end, there is “the code” that attorneys/judges operate under: you never let a fellow attorney be deposed or a witness.

    Crump has to cover in all of this because he is being squeezed about the phoney witness he provided. You can bank on it that he will never, ever, be deposed by MOM/West or have to sit on the witness stand again. It is against ‘the code’.

    ….and….attorneys wonder why their profession is hated so much.

    • eastern2western says:

      not completely sure because mike nifong lost his license because of his violations. lets hope the florida bar association will step in and investigate the misconduct in this case.

      • disgustedwithjulison says:

        E2W, the fact that Crump – a third, non-associated party to this criminal case – is already padding the record with intellectually dishonest affidavits tells me that ‘the code’ will be honored. Note the judge’s acceptance of the affidavit into the record.

        So many influential parties are invested in this case on the wrong side of the evidence that you will see all of them saved by “the code”. I don’t even see one of them getting deposed for any civil actions – they will raid the deep pocketed out of state corporations in civil cases and the courts will protect all of the actors in this debacle.

      • howie says:

        No bet there. Takes ten years once in the club.

      • justfactsplz says:

        Pam Bondi would probably have something to say about that.

      • libby says:

        nifong even spent as long as 24 entire hours in jail.ooooh, how did he stand it?

    • myopiafree says:

      You are correct – most of the time. But the issues is how much LYING Crump is allowed to do. How much WITNESS COACHING is he allowed to do. How much “meeting in a private home (with no “cross”) to make a false case – is he allowed to do? How much “witness tampering” is Bernie allowed to do? How much denial of a “dead phone” is Bernie allowed to get away with??

    • selfdefenseadvocate says:

      Don’t forget, it was Florida lawyers that brought down F. Lee Baily.

  37. hooson1st says:

    The Crump affidavit is a plus for MOM/West.

    They now have an official piece of paper w/Crump’s signature on it to use at the deposition and with which to test all the different Crump versions of matters that he has spread in the public arena.

    • nettles18 says:

      Crump is scheduled to be on Piers Morgan tonight. Keep talking Mr. Crump. Please!

      • hooson1st says:

        If Piers wants a ratings boost, he can start by asking Mr. Crump to explain his various versions.

        • nettles18 says:

          Not likely. Did you see Robert Zimmerman’s appearance on the show last night? Piers asked Robert to agree that if GZ hadn’t had a gun that night, TM would be celebrating his 18th birthday. The kid was just trying to get to his father’s house with a package of skittles and an iced tea. – Piers Morgan.

      • John Galt says:

        Piers Morgan is incapable of asking any pertinent questions. Crump will bad mouth SYG laws. Yawn.

    • howie says:

      The way I see’s it they are either totally innocent or totally guilty. There is no grey area at this point. Top to bottom. It is all in.

  38. beartruefaith says:

    I don’t understand why West’s suggestion to take a recess, review the affidavit, then reconvene to discuss questions and whether to depose Crump was tossed aside by judge Nelson? In the December 11 hearing, she committed to setting aside ALL DAY on Jan8, Feb 5th and March 5th (BDLR had a conflict for Jan 8).
    Did I miss something that indicated Nelson could not afford more than an hour of her time yesterday to this case? Especially right after denying the motion to continue?

    • howie says:

      Because it was her idea to make Crump a witness. On a limited scope. Now she has a kettle of fish to deal with. Hope that makes sense.

      • beartruefaith says:

        I hope the fish come back to bite her. She completely disregarded the prep and planning the defense did for this scheduled depo–after implying they can be ready by June if they work more efficiently.

    • hooson1st says:

      Judge Nelson is not going to allow either the prosecution or the defense to take control of the process.

      All we have witnessed so far is pre-trial sparring. A good lawyer will observe what kind of “game” the judge is calling and then use that gaming to strengthen his/her position.

      Each time that the Judge issues a ruling that seem unwarrantedly adverse to the defense, that ruling becomes another “exibit” in the eventuality that an appeal is necessary .

      • howie says:

        I think the best thing she could do is treat this like an everyday normal case. I was thinking about it. What in the world could throw this in her lap and how big are her ethics?

      • howie says:

        Can you imagine. Being just a circuit judge in the grind and the getting this thrown in your lap? Dealing day in and day out with guilty defendants. I think it will come down to her basic legal ethics and her courage.

    • nettles18 says:

      Yes, they had the day if they needed it. She will remind the defense of this when they tell her more time is needed to prepare for trial and she will say I scheduled the whole day and you only needed an hour.

      • boricuafudd says:

        Correct me if I am wrong, but the hearing was terminated prematurely by the Judge, she called for a recess and then later informed the lawyers they were done for the day, asking MOM to filed a motion if the Affidavit by Crump was insufficient and that she would make time for that.

        • myopiafree says:

          Hi Bori – She should have said, Adjournment!! I stuck around when she said, “Recess”. So now an entire day is lost.

        • beartruefaith says:

          Yeah, the impression I got was that she suddenly remembered she left the stove on and wanted out of there ASAP. She seemed annoyed with West for repeating his request. I don’t think I would’ve been as restrained as West was.

        • LetJusticePrevail says:

          That’a what I saw happening! She pretty much “shushed” the defense team and said that she had to review the affidavit, and research the appropriate legal precedents before she could make a ruling to allow or disallow the deposition of Ben Crump. ore likely, she had to call someone who HAS a clue, because it certainly ISN’T Judge Nelson.

          • howie says:

            She is very important. Believe it. She has nothing to lose. It is going to come down to her innermost character. Where she came from and what she believes in. This is her last criminal case.

          • boricuafudd says:

            I have to check but wasn’t Crump present when the Judge informed the parties about 48 hours prior to the hearing for any motions? Even, if that wasn’t the case the deposition of Crump was agreed to weeks in advance, if he had objections he had plenty of time to file a motion saying so.

            • jello333 says:

              I’m wondering… could MOM and West have been EXPECTING Crump to keep fighting the deposition, and are actually GLAD he’s doing that? Sorta to force him to show his true colors in front of the cameras, and to get something in writing?

              • boricuafudd says:

                You might be unto something, they did not fight the decision too hard, it may also have to do with this particular deposition was very narrow and targeted, they want a much broader depo. It is also IMO why Crump lawyered up, and requested a prohition.

            • rumpole2 says:

              That rule does not apply:

              Frau Nelson’s “Special 48 hour filing time restrictions for Defence motions only”

          • Sharon says:

            I don’t think the person she needed to call was someone who has a clue. It is her handler…and her question to them was, “Ok. Now what?”

        • arkansasmimi says:

          Could she have been scared when Chump attny showed up with affidavit? Tried to wiggle out. I still dont understand, she ws the one who said Chump COULD be deposed.

          • boricuafudd says:

            Perhaps scared is not the right word, but she did have a deer caught in the headlights look, when Mr. Blackwell came up to the podium. He is a Big Shot in the legal community and I’m sure she recognized him. He was even allowed to interrupt her as she was speaking, without any rebuke.

      • howie says:

        Now, Sometimes appearances can be deceiving. Sometimes what appears to be, is not. Sometimes citizens rise to the top. We have to see where she is. Another Lester? He failed the test. It will follow him forever. No matter what the outcome. He destroyed himself. Let us wait to see how the Janis Joplin look alike comports herself. Ya never know…til ya know.

  39. Eric says:

    e2w, it sounds like the guy from the video you posted got his speech impediment NOT from smoking on a cigar. I was about to throw my laptop through the window listening to that imbecile. :)

    • eastern2western says:

      dude’s name is trent sawyer and he had adapted the tradition of talking while in theater from his black male clients.

    • eastern2western says:

      the worst part is hearing the chit bag limey speaking really tough in front of robert zimmerman, but he did not raised his voice when scum bag like torree was yelling at him. what a chit bag limey who compares the zimmerman case to the kindergarden shooting.

  40. maggiemoowho says:

    Is it possible that Matt Gutman did the talking and asking and even coaching before the interview and therefore Crump could say he didn’t do this or ask that because he let Matt Gutman handle things. Matt does say he talked to DeDe a few times. Was Matt, Crumps goat because Crump would know what he could or could not do. I guess it really doesn’t have to be Matt it could be anyone who isn’t being questioned really.

    • maggiemoowho says:

      Ryan Julison even could be that person

    • sundance says:

      No, it is not possible. The rules for the interview as explained by Matt Gutman on ABC tv (next morning) and in the print version, were that no questions from the media were allowed. Only Crump was allowed to ask questions….

      I prolly should have put that in the post. It is important.

      • howie says:

        Honestly. I think it is now up to the character of Nelson. How deep she is committed to ethics and the law. How far she is willing to go. How much pressure she is willing to tolerate. Whether she will lift the blindfold and peek. Lester failed the test. She is the trial judge. She can do anything she wants. That….is the bottom line.

        • jordan2222 says:

          I do not see how it’s possible for her to let this circus continue IF she has read all of motions and discovery.

          NO ONE could be so stupid to not see that the evidence supports self defense and there is NO evidence whatsoever to support the charge against George.

          If she cannot see through the state’s case and their little games of withholding discovery, she is blind.

          How could she ignore the fact that the data from the cell phone on the date of the actual incident is “missing?”

          Truly absurd.

          • howie says:

            And there you have it. It is ethics. And learning of the rules. She has to go by the rules. Or not. It is up to her. She can do what she wants regardless. Most don’t want to be reversed.

          • woohoowee says:

            “If she cannot see through the state’s case and their little games of withholding discovery, she is blind.”

            This is stirring a faded memory. When the speculation was that Nelson would replace Lester, but before she was appointed, there was a tweet (? some type of statement) in which something to the effect of, “with Nelson presiding it will go to trial” was posted (not a Treeper making the statement, it was in a tweet posted or maybe a link to an article that contained the remarks).

            IIRC there were remarks in response to that post wondering how the person that made the remarks would know that. Perhaps from Nelson’s history? Don’t remember exactly.

            I need to find that thread and see who expressed the speculation regarding what Nelson would do. Thinking maybe it was a Florida attorney.

            Any search tips.

            • woohoowee says:

              Oop’s…Any search tips is a question :-)

              Any search tips?

            • Alexandra M. says:

              Well I remember Florida defense lawyer Richard Hornsby discussing this case about a month ago on Blogtalk radio. He mentioned that he has tried cases in front of Judge Nelson in the past……and that he fully predicts her to “punt” this to a jury.

      • John Galt says:

        MG also expressly stated that Crump was “prodding” W8.

      • maggiemoowho says:

        Thanks, I was tossing that thought around with my Hubby and thought I would ask. It was one of those things that sat in the back of my head and never asked.

  41. tara says:

    (Sorry if I’m repeating another post, I made a good faith effort to catch up on all 194 comments!)

    It’s not possible that an attorney, even an experienced one, would conduct and record an interview with an alleged minor — with her parents’ permission — and NOT learn of and record her last name and address. In what form then did he receive the permission? Verbally? From “Jane and John Doe” ? How did he verify that the people who consented to the interview were actually DeeDee’s parents ? How did he verify that the girl he was speaking to was the right girl ?

    Sloppy sloppy, Crump. Your carelessness will ruin you.

    • tara says:

      (I meant “even an INexperienced” attorney…)

    • eastern2western says:

      from what I understand, crump spoke to a person who he did not know, never met and did not had any idea about where she lives, but he was sure she was the one who heard the whole conversation before the conflict started. at this point, I think it could be him.

      • howie says:

        But not only that. Bdlr followed up with an interview that will be played in law school classes for 50 years to lighten up the day. How to not interview a witness. I bet it will be a study goal for prospective state attorney’s. The student’s will have a lot of fun with this one. How embarrassing.

  42. nettles18 says:

    Mr. O’Mara just said on In Session that paperwork for an immunity was filed today and the hearing should begin April 22nd. Yesterday $10,000 came in in donations and that will buy 1 expert. A shortage of funds is hampering getting experts. No decision on whether George will testify at the hearing has been made yet.

    • tara says:

      Thank you for the update. I will make another donation this evening.

    • justfactsplz says:

      They need a lot more donations just to cover the experts needed. It is going to be very difficult for the defense without needed funds. The prosecution banked on this, keeping George broke.

      • howie says:

        The bleeding. The main bleeding was Shellie. To those who dump on Omara,….I gotta say don’t. GZ is lucky to have him. Unlike other people sitting in the hoosegow. Ya oughta not dump on the defense at all. It is all ya got.

        • justfactsplz says:

          I am not dumping on them. I just know how badly more funds are needed for them to do their job. Their job in this case is not easy by a long shot and they are all George has, you are right about that.

          • howie says:

            Yep. And they are going against the grain. Big time. I had a few issues at the start but have figgered it out. These people are under the gun. Factually. From everyplace even here. Don’t screw with your friends. They are all ya got.

            • justfactsplz says:

              I too have had a few issues with them. From the beginning I staunchly supporter them when no one did. Then a couple of things bothered me but I am back on track now. I think they are doing an amazing job considering the mountain they are facing,

              • howie says:

                Well. I always say…any port in a storm…and this is a storm. I still hold hope for judge Nelson to think deep in herself and do the right thing.

                • justfactsplz says:

                  Oh how I hope you are right. Somebody needs to make a stand for what is right. It all just seems to be over her head.

      • mung says:

        Wonder if there are any experts out there willing to do this for free. That would speak volumes in court.

        • justfactsplz says:

          That is why I made the plea on yesterday’s thread, in case someone reads here who would be willing to dontate their services. This kind of railroading by mob mentality will continute in other cases down the road if it is not stopped. History tells us that.

          • howie says:

            I would for what it is worth.

            • justfactsplz says:

              You should contact Omara. I bet you could do a lot of work right from your home.

              • howie says:

                Hey I would do anything I could to work on this for free! It would be great experience. And in the fight. If I could do anything useful.

                • justfactsplz says:

                  I think volunteers could be very useful to the defense. They could handle a lot of the small stuff so Omara and West could concentrate on the big issues. Just look at all the research the Treepers have done. Imagine if it was a coordinated effort, you do this, while you do this and a lof of ground could be covered.

      • LetJusticePrevail says:

        Have there been any updates about the amount of money collected, since the one made 5 or 6 days ago? It looked promising, $5200 in 24 hours, but we have heard nothing since?

        • justfactsplz says:

          I believe another $10.000. came in which will help. I have no idea what it costs to pay private investigators or experts to testify. Then their is independent forensics and dna, I am sure that’s not cheap. That reminds me we need a full tox report also. The list goes on and on.

  43. eastern2western says:


    with the new voice alteration programs, dd could be just tracy martin talking through an ear phone similar to this thing.

  44. hooson1st says:

    I may have criticized BDLR unfairly yesterday

    I thought that he had slammed SPD unfairly for not examining evidence relating to the cell phone before dropping any charges on GZ.

    Now it is true that Tracy Martin and Crump were uncooperative with the police on the issue of the password to access the phone.

    But since the phone was in possession of SPD, couldn’t they have (or did they) go directly to the signal provider to get the data that Tracy eventually got in TM’s billing statement?

    • howie says:

      It might be that there were outside manipulators. It is a possibility.

    • John Galt says:

      “The police eventually subpoenaed Mr. Martin’s cellphone records, but did not receive them in a timely fashion.”

      http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/17/us/trayvon-martin-case-shadowed-by-police-missteps.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

    • justfactsplz says:

      SPD investigated everything they could about the phone. They knew the call did not happen and Wolfinger knew. That is why he supeoned her. The Grand Jury would have heard all this and charges would never have been brought.

      • waltherppk says:

        That could very well be true. O’Mara should file a Brady Demand for ALL the phones’ PING LOGS and all forensic analysis data to include Excel spreadsheets in their native digital format along with any written reports or summaries peratining to analysis and interpretation of those PING LOGS and associated user account records and billing records. When I say ALL phones, including the phone records of the phone Tracy Martin allegedly used to call the alleged earwitness DeeDee……all the dots need to be connected for ALL the phone records …..three stooges at the 7-11 too.

      • myopiafree says:

        BINGO!! Angela and Crump had a “love in”, and knew that they had to STOP THAT G.J. at all costs. Crump had to produce a “bombshell” (lying witness on a dead phone) so that they could PREVENT DeeDee 1 from going to the G.J. and ‘ratting out Crump’. But the still had to hide DeeDee 3, by going to Sybrina’s home, and preventing any “Cross” of DeeDee. This stinks to high heaven.

        • justfactsplz says:

          I have know for a long time the DeeDee narrative was false but I didn’t know there was more than one DeeDee until Sundance exposed it. It just gets more crazy as time goes on. With proof of two DeeDee’s shouldn’t charges be dropped?

    • boricuafudd says:

      I think your criticism was merited, the SPD did try to obtain information from the phone. After the phone was charged, they attempted to get in the phone, even called 911 to obtain the phone number. They talked to T Mobile and were told that they could override the password, with Tracy’s passcode, which Tracy refused to do. At that point they did subpoena the phone records. The FDLE took over before that was completed. Not on my home computer but all of this was in the 284 page dump from the prosecution.

      • boricuafudd says:

        Help, I’m being moderated.

      • hooson1st says:

        Thanks, for reminding about all that….BDLR was scurrilous in that shot at the SPD.

      • John McLachlan says:

        Was the phone with the pink heart shaped sticker, found at the scene the same phone as the one on the Martin family plan which was assigned to Trayvon Martin or are there two different phones?
        Or were two phones found at the scene?
        Unless the phone records which led to the discovery by Tracy Martin of W8 correspond to at least one phone recovered at the scene, then any statement made by W8 is automatically false.

        • boricuafudd says:

          The phone found at the scene has no data for the date in question. Hmmm. What would you think.

          • John McLachlan says:

            If W8 was indeed in contact with this phone, then W8′s phone record would include times and durations of the calls to and from this particular phone.

            Although there was no data on the phone, the phone company will still have record of calls to and from the phone.

        • justfactsplz says:

          I do not think the heart sticker phone found at the scene is the one on the Martin family plan. I don’t think that phone belonged to Trayon.

          • John McLachlan says:

            Was the phone assigned to Trayvon martin on the Martin family plan found at the scene, also?

            If it was not found at the scene, how could the police take custody of it, unless it was not in the possession of Trayvon Martin at the time of his death, but was given to the police by someone else, presumably a relative of Trayvon Martin.

            If this was the case, why would any phone calls or texts or video upon it have any relevance to the circumstances surrounding his death?

            If it was on the Martin family phone plan, it could have been used by any member of the Martin family, or by any acquaintance and retrospectively be declared to be Trayvon Martin’s phone, unless it was found to be in his physical possession at the time of his death.

            If Trayvon Martin’s family phone plan phone was not in his possession at the time of his death, why would it have any significance what its call records indicated?

            Regardless of the times of calls, no-one in contact with that phone could have been in contact with Trayvon Martin.

            If W8 was discovered by examination of phone records for a phone which was not in the possession of Trayvon Martin at the time of his death, then the state has knowingly based its probable cause upon false evidence, which suggests a malicious prosecution.

            The parties who solicited and who provided the false evidence may be regarded as engaging in a conspiracy to pervert the course of justice.

    • libby says:

      Prosecuters routinely throw the cops under the bus, dont they?

  45. TonysThoughts says:

    This case is too much work for Nelson. If she doesn’t want out yet she soon will. You can see it in her eyes, and the criticism she will/is getting just adds to it. If she doesn’t realize now and forgets things she says at previous hearings, she ironically forgets her file for the case, (previous hearings) , on multiple occasions and as she goes back and reviews she will realize what she has done. Either she was purposely chose for this case? Or, someone honestly thought she could handle it better then lester. She doesn’t belong, she has no clue as to how or what she is ruling on. She doesn’t even realize her own violations. I agree with you all, as the case has always been, “Something fishy is going on here.” She doesn’t have the mind capacity for a case of this caliber and it is making her look really bad to her peers that are “honest”.

    • justfactsplz says:

      It is too much for and yet she refused help when it was suggested.

    • howie says:

      Don’t give up the ship. I have learned that appearances can be deceiving. Ya never know. It does not take a rocket science lawyer in this case. Just one who will follow the rules. If it was me and I was the judge I would relish it. To be part of what will be a landmark. Let it play out. The lawyer’s almost seem bored by it. I would be jumping up and down!

    • libby says:

      I think adjudicating a parking ticket is too complicated for this jurist

      • janc1955 says:

        Libby — you CRACK ME UP! :D

        • libby says:

          If not for fellow treepers, this case would make me go INSANE (just trying to return the favor)…..I am sure I annoy some and though it may seem otherwise, this isnt my intent…..I have trouble sitting still whlie a man’s life is runied based upon the world’s largest race hoax

          • janc1955 says:

            We have similar senses of humor, I think. I get sarcastic in the extreme when I’m having trouble sitting still watching travesties like this one (not that there’s another one like it) unfold.

  46. recoverydotgod says:

    NANCY GRACE
    Aired April 2, 2012 – 20:00 ET

    http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/1204/02/ng.01.html

    -snip-

    GRACE: Hey, Daryl —

    PARKS: I don`t know why it`s taking so long.

    GRACE: Daryl Park, that leads me to another question. What about this girl that he`s talking to on the phone? Have police finally interviewed her?

    PARKS: Nancy, I could tell you it`s happening the early part of this week.

    GRACE: Well — put him back up. It is the early part of this week. It`s Monday night. Now what happened — five weeks since this happened and she has not been interviewed by police? Could you tell me why? Is it police or is it her? Why hasn`t she been interviewed?

    PARKS: Well, part of the problem is she`s a minor so it`s a very delicate situation.

    GRACE: So? What`s delicate?

    PARKS: They`re trying to protect —

    GRACE: Bring the parents in.

    PARKS: Well, one, she`s been traumatized. Number two, they`re trying to work out the process. Obviously the prosecutors and their investigators have to travel to South Florida to do it. So those things are happening as we speak.

    GRACE: I`m sorry. I`m sorry. I got New York screaming in my ear. Who has to work out what to get a witness statement? Last I looked you get in the car, you drive over to the house, you — hello, I`m the district attorney. I want to talk to your daughter about this case. And you sit down and you go, what did you hear on the phone that night?

    Now explain to me why that is so complicated, Daryl Parks?

    PARKS: Well, number one, this young lady was very traumatized from this event. She in fact had to go to the hospital immediately after his death because it was such a traumatic event for her. So I mean, you have to work through those issues and so that she could give the best possible testimony.

    I believe it`s going to happen the first part of this week and will be done.

    GRACE: Well, something stinks to me, and I don`t know, I`m not getting a clear answer from you about who — about what the issue is.

    -snip-

  47. jello333 says:

    The idiots at JQ and Leather Freddy’s place seriously believe that Crump and the State trying to hide info about Dee Dee, and trying to avoid depositions is a GOOD thing? It’s like, as long as they’re succeeding in their quest (so far at least, with the help of Nelson), then it’s GREAT… what a fun game… and WE’RE winning… YAY! These people actually think this is a GOOD sign for them? Wow…

    How can they not understand it’s just the opposite? Even Crump… he’s now in full COVER mode. “I didn’t meet the girl in person, never saw her, don’t know her last name. I have NO idea if she’s telling the truth or not. Don’t blame me!” Don’t the idiots understand how HUGE that is?

    • howie says:

      Fagettaboutem. They are irrelevant. Get some 6-12.

    • rumpole2 says:

      The Quest is NOT for “Justice” it never is.

      The Quest is for a guilty verdict in the first instance… of someone they truly HATE with a passion (despite not having a personal connection and without know all the facts – if any)

      The Quest for Guilty.. but it doesn’t stop there… they PRAY that the person will be brutalised, raped, and hopefully killed once incarcerated.

      They really do not get the “Justice” thing at all…. they don’t want to see all the facts and evidence if it detracts from a “Guilty” verdict. They are quite happy to see evidence (that they themselves are aware of) excluded on a technicality.. they just want the verdict and not the truth at all.

      Lynch Quest? Hate Quest?

  48. ottawa925 says:

    Apparently the dogpound has solicited a hired gun to bring down the treehouse.

    This reminds me of the scene in From Dusk Til Dawn with Quinten Tarintino answering George Clooney when George asks what the news reports say on TV. Tarintino says: They’re gonna apprehend us in 24 hours. ….. LOL

    • ftsk420 says:

      They should be careful what they wish for.

      • ottawa925 says:

        Well my answer would as shown here … “you have no power here … now begone before someone drops a treehouse on you”

        • ftsk420 says:

          I do think the Treehouse is gonna get flooded by trolls real soon.

          • ftsk420 says:

            ƐlʞɔƐH ‏@MilitantAnon
            @BigBoithedog @CrazyChick5150 @003Laura oh of course, they’re just keyboard toughguys & pussies in a face to face.
            Collapse Reply Retweet Favorite More

            ƐlʞɔƐH ‏@MilitantAnon
            @BigBoithedog @CrazyChick5150 @003Laura just think they’re fucking idiots & would quick to tell em straight to their bigot faces

            Laura ‏@003Laura
            @MilitantAnon @BigBoithedog @CrazyChick5150 That makes two of us my friend. But, Im afraid they wouldnt have the balls to b in your face lol

            Wow they really are on a roll huh. Since I know ƐlʞɔƐH ‏@MilitantAnon is stalking this site I will tell you that anything I say here I will say to your face or anyone else.

            • ottawa925 says:

              I just had a question on doxing, and if not doxing then kids pics. If memory serves me correctly … a certain person over at the dogpound had as avatar/gravatar .. whatever pic of 3 kids. In fact, this person has changed the photo several times to have the kids in the picture. If you capture a tweet and post, and the person’s tweet has their 3 kids in the picture for their avatar, is that doxing? They already have publically posted the pics … so I don’t get that part. Just trying to understand the depth of doxing. I mean if it was doxing, ppl could just automatically put kids in a pic to shield themselves from their tweets being exposed. you know .. hiding behind their kids. Yet the tweet with the kids shows up publically on twitter. Kinda crazy if you ask me. I’m surprised Crump hasn’t thought of that one. Change his pic to kids and then scream if ppl show his tweets. I hope what I’m asking is clear.

              • ftsk420 says:

                I see what your saying but I don’t know how that works. The way I feel is if you don’t want it out there don’t put it out there. I was told that twitter is like putting your info on a telephone pole anyone and everyone can see it. I feel if you leave it unprotected it’s fair game.

            • Chip Bennett says:

              “Waaaaah! Anon! Go get the scary Treehouse! They dox children!”

              Are these people willfully obtuse, or just stupid? Laura emailed an open letter to the Treehouse, that Sundance published, along with his response. Laura chose to post, publicly, a picture of her own children, and to use that picture as her Twitter avatar. That’s not doxing.

    • jello333 says:

      It’s not really Anonymous. I know it’s a VERY loosely-based organization, but just in general, no…. they are all about justice, and fighting for the underdog, especially when they’re up against the gov’t or others in positions of power. If Anonymous DID get involved in this case, it’d be on George’s side.

  49. nettles18 says:

    Congresswoman Wilson made the following statement:

    “Today, Trayvon Martin would have celebrated his 18th birthday. We all know the tragic circumstances surrounding his murder: Trayvon was racially profiled, chased, made to fight for his life, and ultimately murdered. Yet we as a nation have yet to take substantive action to stop such a heartbreaking incident from happening again.”

    Read more here: http://www.gzdefensefund.com/donate/index.php/updates-2/15-congresswoman-frederica-wilson-calls-george-zimmerman-a-racist-and-a-murderer

  50. myopiafree says:

    If you (or Crump) commit a massive fraud against the Florida Justice System, can the State of Florida charge you with a crime, and force you to pay $1,000,000 damages – even if you are a lawyer??

    • howie says:

      No. He is a lawyer. They are expected to be ethical and truthful in anything and everything they do in order to be in the BAR. They can not deviate. The Florida Supreme Court is in charge of the Florida Bar. To be admitted is a real heavy responsibility. One can not mess around with it. Do not think they take it lightly. They do not. It is different from other states. But they will not intervene.

    • waltherppk says:

      If Crump has to pay a million dollar Bar fine, it won’t be coming out his salary doing lawyering as a work release attorney. Maybe he can get a job as an English teacher.

    • eastern2western says:

      yes, it is completely possible. do you remember the casey anthony case? Now that woman is facing suits from state and private citizens because she told the police a mexican woman kidnaped her child and the agencies spent thousands of dollars on searching for her child. Now, all these agencies wasted their money are sueing anthony for their expenses.

  51. ed greene says:

    If I was the state of Florida I would worry that every defendant that was ever before Lester or Nelson or indicted by Angela could not get a fair trial according to do constitution. They way the have favored state is unbeliavable. Nelson made a ruling that 48 hour rule with she completely forget about in yesterdays hearing. BDLR and Corey know that something is rotten in Denmark with W8 Dee Dee . They can not be that dumb to believe W8 Crump are truthful. If they Bondi or Scott have any brains the know the gig is up. Watch how many appeals are going to come up after this fiasco from convicted defendants. You got to know when to hold em and when to foldem. If you watched the entire hearing yesterdady MOM said malpatrice 2013.

    • ottawa925 says:

      Actually, the more I think about that Affidavit .. I’m no legal eagle, but the Judge DID make a decision the day of the hearing. She STOPPED the deposition. She should have asked Crump’s attorney when Crump was served notice. If they wanted to have the Affidavit serve in lieu of dep, they should have brought it by Motion asap after Notice, . I don’t know if the notice of dep to Crump is available to view to get the dates, but to wait till the day of the hearing with the dep scheduled the same day is just a ploy, and by stopping the deposition, she did EXACTLy what they wanted. If she deems the Affidavit sufficient, Mom/West need to appeal that decision, and to mention how it was brought to the Judge and she basically stopped the dep from going forward as Notice and from what I gather … AGREED to.

    • leander22 says:

      They way the have favored state is unbeliavable. Nelson made a ruling that 48 hour rule with she completely forget about in yesterdays hearing.

      Do we know how long in advance Benjamin Crump was informed about his deposition?. I would help us a lot if O’Mara published them on the gz legal site date they are sent out. But he doesn’t do that. Maybe to not show that they are occasionally canceled and a new one has to be sent?

      In any case in his Jan. 30, 2013 motion to continue, it is still a “planned deposition” only:.

      Benjamin Crump: Only recently Mr. Crump has identified that he intends to file motions attendant to his planned deposition and defense counsel was recently contacted by counsel who may become involved in the case representing Mr. Crump and his firm. Therefore, it is anticipated that additional litigation will be necessary to address and resolve issues surrounding Mr. Crump’s deposition.

      Notice “planned”.

      We can compare the advance notice of the dates for other depositions e.g. for David Lee and W #18 on Jan 23, 2013.It is dated 21, Jan, 2013. Thus two days in advance. The deposition of of W#4 and W#15 are dated Jan 17, 2013 and supposed to take place on Jan 18, 2013 thus one day later.

      If we assume that a similarly short notice was used for Benjamin Crump, how should he have adhered to a 48 hour advance rule, apart from the fact why should he be bound by a rule that only concerns the parties, in other words defense and prosecution?

      Thus no, in this context Debra Nelson does not show she favors the prosecution, since Benjamin Crump is not part of the prosecution, legally. And apart from the above he is not bound by the rules for the parties involved.

      As far as I can tell, what you and defense really want to know can be only be by accessed by deposing w#8. When did the father contact her? What did he ask and tell her, and how many contacts did she have with Benjamin Crump? All this should show on her phone records. Where whatever she says can also be verified. Which may well be the reason why they sticked to phone contacts beyond the meeting with law authorities in Sybrina Fulton’s house.

  52. ejarra says:

    Crazy question from a crazy idea. The premise may happen though.

    What would happen if DD was found to be a fake created by Crump. That there was more than one DD and that it was found out that she appeared for the sole purpose of an arrest and that she never was on the phone. Now because of that, the charges get dropped and Georgie and MOM/West get back all the money due to them from the state. If the state says that they would not have made the arrest without DD’s testimony, could they then go after Crump, if DD1/2 turn states evidence against him, both criminally and civilly. Would he then have to pay the state for both the states and the defenses expenses?

  53. leander22 says:

    Two points:
    Can’t DeeDee have been both 17 on 2/26/2012 and 18 on 4/2/2012? My birthday is on 31 of March. In the year I turned 18 I would have been 17 on the first date and 18 on the seconds. You don’t need two different people. People do in fact age as time passes.

    Concerning how State could have contacted DeeDee without Crumps help? Well why not simple dial the number on Trayvon phone records as his father had done? Crump probably handed in both the recording and the phone record, and FBI passed on copies to the FDLE in Florida. Easy really.

    Concerning a lot of the other points. Why would Benjamin Crump need her address, if she did not want him to meet her at her home? But only agreed to answer the questions about what happened that night on the phone with a number of people she was informed about present. Sounds strange? Well, she may have her reasons to not give out her address a friend was just shot on his way home, you know? And why should you trust everybody? I am not sure I would trust you.

    • howie says:

      Get witness 8 and put her on the front page. The whole page. Show her. Expose her BS we want to know who the heck she is. Why she can’t Pee? Who the heck is she that is the cause of this. No mercy.

    • mung says:

      I don’t know go ask Freddy, I am sure he will give you some sort of lame reasons why this shell game is acceptable.

    • sundance says:

      No. You cannot be “16″ on March 19th 2012, and be “18″ on April 2nd 2012.

      Impossible.

      (3/21/12 Today Show w/ Crump, Sybrina, Tracy @1:40 “she is a 16 year old teenager”)

      http://video.today.msnbc.msn.com/today/46805798#46805798

      Watch the video above. Crump talked to her March 19th. On march 22nd Norm Wolfinger sent her a supoenea. On March 23rd Angela Corey took over. On March 27th she was refusing to talk to authorities. On April 2nd she did. On April 9th the Grand Jury was cancelled…. (inference, she would not appear). On April 11th GZ was arrested using her sworn statement in the probable cause affidavit.

      • Lou says:

        good find Sundance. MOM may need to use all these clips to make a point. actually, not that it matters, notice how George’s pic is lightened. I remember the first time I saw GZ live, and I was like dang, this guy is not white.

      • leander22 says:

        Sundance, Lou et al, I am aware that you cherish that you adore at the altar of media mis- or disinformation. The problem is this is no evidence, only hearsay. People misunderstand occasionally and occasionally assume something, which it may or may not be. They also quite frequently misunderstand each other.

        For me the whole confusion surrounding the age of Witness #8 is resolved by Benjamin Crump’s affidavit. Did he ask for her age or simply assumed a lot of things? Things easily triggered by the male female combination. Most people assume a friendship between a boy and a girl is necessarily romantic and that in this context and age the boy tends to be older than the girl. Simply since girls are “more developed” at that age.

        I have made this argument before somewhere else. When I was DeeDee’s age I had a lot of friends, male friends mainly, since I was interested and playing lead guitar with others on other instruments. At that time there were no females far and wide to be found that actually were interested in founding a beat band. They, with a few exceptions, were mainly interested in clothes and dating males. My choice of friends at that point in time had to do a lot with looking for people that had the same interests: the arts, not only music. Age did not matter much in this context. Since I never looked for a husband or romantic affairs at that point in time. Never mind that my father always suspected it. Is Benjamin Crump a father and has got a daughter? Does this daughter tend to have boyfriends slightly older? One two years? Does he notice the same pattern in his daughter, niece their friends? Is he himself one or two years older than his wife?

        I have always considered this a possibly easy to explain accident. Does he write he asks her for her age? Would he age matter to him? He doesn’t have seemed to have asked her any biographical or personal data apart from this:

        Briefly determined that Witness 8 had been close with Trayvon and that she had been upset upon learning of his death (and, in fact, had been unable to attend Trayvon’s wake because she had to go to hospital);

        I am aware you believe you have evidence that this is not true. Notice at that age I did not go to funerals either. I attended my first funeral with 23, when my favorite aunt had died. Only at that point I realized why I may not have done so before, I had a complete breakdown. It is something very, very final. If you don’t stand at a grave you can much better cut out this finality from your mind.

        What may be legally significant though, is that DeeDee was only 17 at the time she talked to Trayvon on the phone. What I would be interested in, is this. Let’s suppose George is not released or acquitted on the SYG hearing or the trial, would you still like to have a go at DeeDee? Since she is the main culprit for you? If so, they better protect her identity at any of these events. And I am not sure if they can.

        • leander22 says:

          Sorry I didn’t close the blockquote. I am a bad proofreader. Preview option would be fine.

        • jello333 says:

          “He doesn’t have seemed to have asked her any biographical or personal data apart from this:”

          SO HE SAYS. I think the disconnect here is that you think Crump may just be a little disorganized or incompetent, while most of the rest of us think he’s simply a LIAR and SCHEMER. I take almost nothing he said in that affidavit as true. Some of it very well might be true, but I’m not assuming that. Quite the opposite, in fact. I believe he’s more than willing to LIE if it can in any way help him.

      • leander22 says:

        On April 2nd she did. On April 9th the Grand Jury was cancelled…. (inference, she would not appear).

        Not necessarily, Sundance, do you have more precise information concerning the SYG hearing? I was late when the case drew my attention, and thus I may be wrong about early reports or events. My impression was that there was no planned SYG hearing since it was either not considered necessary or alternatively investigations were still ongoing.

        I’d really appreciate more precise information on that point.

    • hooson1st says:

      valid points. But, would an attorney rush off and publicize alleged information from a “witness”, he had never seen, knew nothing about, verified nothing about, and assiduously avoided knowing anything about.

      Like Sundance says, this smells.

      [youtube http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DODzeLZIGuA&w=560&h=315%5D

      • leander22 says:

        All he needed to know as an attorney, hooson1st, is that she was the last person that had contacted Trayvon by phone shortly before he was shot. That’s all he really needed to know. The publication was done as attorney for his client who feared the case would be closed down silently. He wanted to make sure she would be heard before that happened. That’s what he needed the publicity for. He also had to act according to his clients wishes in this context.

        He didn’t need to know more, neither did he need to verify anything. That would have been the task of FDLE where the case had ended at that point in time.

        • jello333 says:

          “The publication was done as attorney for his client who feared the case would be closed down silently. He wanted to make sure she would be heard before that happened.”

          Oh, but you forget one thing: Dee Dee most definitely WAS about to “be heard”. By a prosecutor (Wolfinger) and a Grand Jury. But for some odd reason, Crump, Tracy, Sybrina, and the rest wanted no part of that. In fact they did everything in their power to PREVENT that from happening… to PREVENT Dee Dee form “being heard.” Hmm… very curious.

    • libby says:

      “Can’t DeeDee have been both 17 on 2/26/2012 and 18 on 4/2/2012?”
      .
      Well, they said she was SIXTEEN, NOT SEVENTEEN.
      .
      and one cannot age two years in 11 months.
      .
      And to prove you are who you say you are, you must tell us your name and your address…there were no threats against the martin supporters, the threats of violence have been made agaisnt George, his family and anyoen who dared stand up for justice for all

  54. akathesob says:

    As a FloriDuh resident I personally feel George will never get his true day in a real court of his peers. This is one crooked good old boy state where all the players drool over Chicago Jesus every word.

    • howie says:

      You damn well got that right. I concur.

    • leander22 says:

      If I look at the Bush jun’s election, I certainly get the impression that is may well be a “crooked good old boy state” to a minor or larger extend. The question is how you define crookedness. Does it have colors, blue incidentally?

      Look Jeralyn Merrit as her blog name suggests is blue or a democrat, she is nevertheless firmly on George Zimmerman’s side. So maybe you shouldn’t worry too much and look for the better evidence beyond “Scheme Team”.

      Maybe there really is GPS data that perfectly well supports George Zimmerman’s story? Trayvon entered RTL at Taaffe’s house and at one point turned back and circled GZ’s car with his hand in his waistband. Then stayed at the T-section did not move for a time waiting for GZ to pass on his way back to his car. Imagine this data has the precision of let’s say 10 to 20 feet.

      Or alternatively that the time for the precise disconnection of DeeDee’s call can be uncovered by forensics with much more precision than the T-mobile connection data, which seems to add up and charge full minutes for every call instead of the precise connection time.

  55. JW says:

    Can someone answer a question. So, the prosecution claims Dee Dee was on the phone with Trayvon before he was shot. All they seem to have is a phone bill with a number from a phone that Dee Dee claims is her number. Shouldn’t the prosecution have proof that Dee Dee’s cell phone actually belongs to her, the phone was in her possession at the time she claims to have been on it and she was actually e one talking to Trayvon? It seems everyone is taking for granted that what is claimed about Dee Dee is true. Shouldn’t the prosecution be required to prove everything?

    • hooson1st says:

      yes, but we are not at trial yet.

      • JW says:

        True, but nothing in discovery so far? It doesn’t make sense.

        • boricuafudd says:

          Not at trial yet, but everything in the discovery has taken for granted that DD was indeed on the phone with TM at the time in question. Even though, they did not know who she was, if the phone was hers, and it was in her possession at the time of the call, which so far we nothing concrete that they actually took place, in the first place.

    • myopiafree says:

      Hi JW, Yes the STATE has the OBLIGATION to do this research. But they refuse to do it – or release it to the DEFENSE. We noted from the beginning that the CELL PHONE WAS in “Safe Mode”. Which mean that is was NOT OPERABLE in the last 30 minutes. TM could not have been talking or texting in that time-frame. Further, when we finally got the thumb-drive data, six months later, it SHOWED that the phone was not working in that last 30 minutes, because nothing was recorded in that flash memory. But let us presume that it WAS WORKING. Then the (separate) Towers would have heard the “pings” from that phone and recorded the phone number, the time and the location. The STATE has a direct obligation to GET THAT INFORMATION FOR THE DEFENSE – AND TO PROVE THE DEEDEE (FAKE) STORY. Then did not do that. We can only suspect the worst – and most of it has been borne out by the “obstruction of justice” conducted by Bernie and Angela Corey.

      • JW says:

        Thanks for the responses. I would think they would not only need to prove these things about Trayvon’s phone but Dee Dee’s phone as well. Since cell phones are not like landlines and can be taken virtually anywhere.

  56. HughStone says:

    “Trayvon was on top of George MMA style” : John the witness.
    Case closed.

    MMA fighter dies after ground and pound.

    Refree stopped the match in 41 seconds.

    Michael Kirkham

    30-year-old Michael Kirkham competed at Dash Entertainment/King MMA “Confrontation at the Convocation Center” in Aiken, South Carolina on June 26, 2010.[5] His opponent Carlos Iraburo had Kirkham on the canvas seconds into his pro debut,[6][7] Iraburo then landed a few strikes to the head of his grounded opponent leading to a referee stoppage forty-one seconds into the match. Kirkham soon lost consciousness and never recovered.[6] He was pronounced dead two days after the fight.[8] An autopsy report listed the cause of death as “subarachnoid hemorrhage of the brain”.[9]

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fatalities_in_mixed_martial_arts_contests

  57. tara says:

    I want to see the affidavit which states that DeeDee is 18. Surely they can black out her name, address, and other identifying info. I just want to see that “18″ so badly….

    Another great article, Sundance.

  58. waltherppk says:

    Maybe a lawyer can explain these words:
    (In Lieu of Deposition or, ALTERNATIVELY, in Support Of Motion For Protective Order)

    Does that mean this:
    (To Spare Mr. Crump from Having to Plead the Fifth, Please Excuse Him From Answering Any Questions)

    • jello333 says:

      I think it means Crump wants the judge to say the affidavit is good enough, and so he doesn’t have to do the deposition. But even if she DOESN’T rule that way, they want her to consider something else: That for some other reason (probably because he’s a lawyer or something), she’s still not gonna make him do the depo. (And they want her to take the affidavit into account when considering that, too.)

      • waltherppk says:

        But the judge doesn’t get to choose what questions O’Mara may want to ask Crump.
        Neither is the leave of the Court required for O’Mara to subpoena Crump as is O’Mara’s right under Florida Rules of Criminal Procedure. Crump is seeking special treatment to which he is not entitled under the law. What could happen is that Crump could demand that his deposition be taken in the presence of the judge so that objections to any questions could be ruled upon instanter by the judge during the course of the deposition of Crump, but I see no legal way the judge could simply quash a subpoena for Crump to give a deposition, since the judge has no crystal ball to tell her what may be the topics of inquiry by O’Mara.

  59. arkansasmimi says:

    Paragraph 34 (bottom of pg 11 top of page 12) to me says, that after talking to DD, Chump and Trayfam decided that the benifits of telling the world about DD were greater than the risks. Chump decided to give his Interview and tell everyone including media that he found DD, yet supposedly DD didnt want her ID known. Actually IMHO, he already has went against what “DD and her parents” wanted by going to the Media. (IF you believe Chump to start with)

    • jello333 says:

      Yeah, that’s part of one of Multiple Dee Dees theory. Crump had promised Dee Dee #1 that he’d only use her statement for the bare minimum necessary, and she’d never have to worry about the whole world hearing about her, let alone having to ever testify in court, etc. And so once it became obvious they weren’t gonna keep their promise, Dee Dee (and her Mom?) freaked, and told Crump to get lost.

      Oops! We’re gonna need another Dee Dee!

      • arkansasmimi says:

        Bet Chump is doing the Jello Jiggle :)

      • boricuafudd says:

        Do we know if a conversation even took place between the two of them? The State is does not seem interested in confirming that, and I would not trust a thing coming from the TM camp. Now there is no data for the date in question from the phone we are “assuming” belonged to TM. So, this circus keeps going and going and …

      • justfactsplz says:

        I think that is what happened, the first one backe out of it.

    • sundance says:

      So it was only when Tracy Martin was looking over his son’s phone bill about three weeks after Trayvon’s death that he noticed the call. He didn’t dial the number, according to Julison, the Crump spokesman, but turned the phone over to the lawyer, who contacted the girl. Crump, needless to say, did not inform the police. Instead he went to Matt Gutman of ABC. According to Julison, Gutman was chosen because he’d done some good — i.e., sympathetic — reporting, but the spokesman insisted there was no special reason to select him.

      Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/2012/04/dee-dee_trayvon_and_dj.html#ixzz2KC6LDZ00

  60. justfactsplz says:

    Also I remember reading on Radar online that Dee Dee was hospitialized the day after the wake,is that right? If so Crump could have met her at the wake. She was so distraught to find out she was the last one to talk to him. Crump told her that.

  61. eastern2western says:

    this case will forever be teach in law schools as the worst example of witness handling. Lets begin the lessons.
    1) when an attorney finds a critical witness, call the cops and let them handle it. Using race can not be a legal excuse to shield the witness from authorities.
    2) when conducting an interview with a witness, always have an officer of the court present. This could be a court reporter or an attorney. However, the best rule is still number one.
    3) when conducting an interview, always do a face to face interview. do not use telephone, skype, internet or what ever.
    4) what ever activities that are involve during, before or after the interview, it is always smart to have them documented by video recordings. Not some cheap ass audio recorder.
    5) If all else fails, do not bring a lawyer with you on the day of your deposition which will make you 10 times as guilty, especially when you are already a lawyer.
    6) the final resolution is burn your bridges and blame everything on your clients. Let me remember the politano interview, crump said it was tracy who found dd, tracy spoke to her first and tracy who arrange the interview. clearly, crump is setting the martins up as the cushions.

    • jello333 says:

      “crump said it was tracy who found dd, tracy spoke to her first and tracy who arrange the interview”

      Early on when Crump was first saying that, it seemed like he was just wanting to give Tracy the credit, to make him look like a hero in the public’s eyes. But now it’s clear that was NOT his reason. As you say, he might need to throw Tracy under the bus at some point in the near future.

      • boricuafudd says:

        Or consequently you might say that Crump suspected something and gave himself an out, right of the bat.

        “Your Honor, I have been misled!!” said Crump

        • jello333 says:

          The 1st Annual Florida State Under-the-Bus Tossing Contest

          First up, Tracy Martin. His toss… and there goes Dee Dee!

          Now Ben Crump….oh, Tracy is looking pretty uncomfortable under there!

          And the crowd goes wild with their chants of ‘Bernie! Bernie!’ Oh, nice toss… and yes, Crump is indeed crumpled!

          Oh, and here’s Little Angie Corey, looking lovely as usual. Look at Bernie’s arms flap as he goes under that bus!

          So it looks like Angie will be coming to the Winner’s Circle. Uh, but wait! Here comes Pam Bondi and Rick Scott…

  62. Rich Branson says:

    Sad day for America. You have the liars and schemers that make up the “scheme team”, and they have the “thugs of America” to threaten riot and back them up. The fix is in, and the list of conspirators is long, from Obama and Holder all the way down to ambulance chasing ghetto lawyer Crump. There’s so many signs that an intelligent person can see, that point to this being a matter of corruption at the highest levels, one of the innocuous signs I’ve noticed is the fact that Sanford Mayor Jeff Triplett and City Manager Norton Bonaparte took part in the Justice for Trayvon event the day of the last hearing. I mean to any sane person with two brain cells to rub together this would be a major tell. The mayor, attending a “Justice for Trayvon” rally, the day of a hearing? Really? Helllo!! McFly!!!! This is unbelievable. The amount of evidence now available all showing that this violent thug attacked a law abiding citizen who was trying to make his community safer and the Mayor is part of the charade??? I send out a hearty good luck to MOM and the defense team, because I think they are definitely gonna need it. Sad day for America when the thugs and the brainless libs rule the country.

  63. arkansasmimi says:

    ADMINS you have Mail… If you see this lol getting close to 600~

  64. jordan2222 says:

    Almost 600 comments. Holy cow.

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