Today the Defense and Prosecution will be back in court to discuss the various motions filed by both the Defense and the Prosecution:
While there are many aspects to be determined, the key question before the court is will Martin family attorney, Benjamin Crump, be deposed and held to account?
Here are some *possible* Links to the Hearing:
- WFTV http://www.wftv.com/s/news/trayvonmartin/
- Click Orlando http://www.clickorlando.com/news/trayvo … index.html
- Orlando Sentinel (Fox 35 live stream) http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/loc … on-martin/
- WESH http://www.wesh.com/news/central-florid … index.html
- cfnews http://www.cfnews13.com/content/news/cf … artin.html
- MyfoxOrlando http://www.myfoxorlando.com/category/23 … von-martin
- CNN http://edition.cnn.com/US/
- TruTV/InSession link: http://www.superusvoxtv.com/index.php/speciality/tru-tv
Here are some considerations in advance.
Judge Nelson is going to have to decide if she will allow/instruct Martin family attorney Benjamin Crump, to be deposed. This is a defining moment in more ways than most can imagine.
Benjamin Crump manufactured and manipulated the evidence that led to George Zimmerman’s arrest. This is not disputed. The entire construct of his Witness #8 narrative was a fraud, a ruse, a guise. Dee Dee, as he called her, was not the same person on 3/19 that she was on 4/2. Again, this is NOT disputed.
Even the most vocal of opponents to George Zimmerman would have to concede in intellectual honesty, that Ben Crump lied about the persona he identified. It is physically impossible to be 16 years old on March 19th 2012, during his phone conversation, and to be 18 years old two weeks later on April 2nd when she gave her affidavit to the State of Florida.
The question becomes “why” did he lie? What motivation was there to fabricate a story around a persona? And why has both his team, Parks, Jackson and himself, worked feverishly to hide her identity and subsequently convinced the State of Florida to do the same.
What risk is inside the truth?
Ultimately if Judge Nelson rules against the defense, despite the law and legal precedent, being on the side of the defendant, then something far bigger is at stake. She will be denying the defendant the opportunity to question the man who created the witness against him. She will, in essence, be setting the stage for non-immunity because she would be establishing the framework of a trial by denying the defendant a right to confront his accuser and the person who constructed the only evidence that contradicts his claim of self-defense.
We know with specific detail who has been pre-briefing this consideration.
Simultaneously, if Nelson rules against the defense, then attention will IMMEDIATELY turn to how does O’Mara and West approach it AT THAT MOMENT. Because if they accept such a ruling they are, in essence, conceding that the justice of truth can be dispatched from the case.
Hopefully Nelson will rule that Ben Crump will be deposed, and if she has reservations, and if she is a solid legal mind, she will dissuade any concern by conducting the deposition in her courtroom during a closed session of the court so that she can rule on any objections immediately and listen to the questions and answers for fair application of discovery inquiry.
But that is a very large dose of hope.