Never Allow ANYTHING To Compromise Your Integrity – George Zimmerman Is Learning The Consequences, and It Wasn’t Even His Creation…..

Right is right, even if nobody does it.


Wrong is wrong, even if everybody does it.

George Zimmerman is suffering through the painful consequences from a lack of integrity.  However, the ironic and painful fact is this: it wasn’t his lack of integrity that has created the situation he is now dealing with, it was Mark O’Mara’s.

We watched last year in April and May as the hurricane of activity created some really horrible decisions on the part of many people in the Trayvon Martin shooting.

From Ryan Julison intentionally misleading the media in describing the case as racially driven–to Benjamin Crump intentionally fabricating *media* evidence surrounding witness #8 “DeeDee.”  But the integrity issues were not just on the opposition side.

Indeed the same unscrupulous behaviors were also in the camp of those defending George Zimmerman.   We tried to warn interested observers of the risk from Mark O’Mara falsifying information.   Unfortunately it fell on deaf ears.

We warned on July 6th 2012 HERE

Then again, we warned with specificity on July 18th 2012 HERE.

Now those chickens are coming home to roost.

If you have read those two prior posts, now 8 months old….. In hindsight the consequences are painfully obvious….  Unfortunately, it might be too late to do anything about it.   But let’s break it down from the aspect of who knows what took place.

When you consider the fact that Mark O’Mara lied about George Zimmerman’s financial affidavit, it is perhaps prudent to consider who actually has specific information that proves O’Mara was misleading the court (lying).   In short “who knows“?

        • George Zimmerman knows, because he told Mark O’Mara about the PayPal account.
        • George’s friend Scott knows, because George told Scott that he informed O’Mara. 
        • Robert Zimmerman Jr. knows because he challenged Mark O’Mara about it before and after George had his first bond revoked.  
        • George’s mom and dad know because both George and Robert Jr. told them the truth.   
        • Shellie knows because she too participated in the conversation(s) with O’Mara and the filling out of the financial affidavit. 
        • Angela Corey knows, and by extension Bernie De La Rionda knows, because they listed to the jailhouse tapes and presented the evidence that led to the bond revocation.   
        • Michael S Herring knows because he was Shellie Zimmerman’s first attorney when she stood accused of perjury – until he realized that O’Mara would need to be exposed to defend his client;  then he dropped Shellie ASAP.   
        • Kelly Simms knows because he came in after Michael Herring and is now defending Shellie Zimmerman against the accusations “she” lied to the court (thick irony there). 
        • And then there’s us….. and of course the man himself, Mark O’Mara.

Now let’s break it down by “relevance”, as in what impact does the knowledge each possesses have upon the case itself:

George Zimmerman – He’s stuck to O’Mara despite this issue and we can only assume that O’Mara must have had some great manipulative spin to make George ignore the risk this presented to his position as defense counsel, because it definitely compromised O’Mara and if found out by judge Lester it could have been explosive.   Regardless, GZ is now paying the consequences for sticking with the lie and not exposing his attorney as corrupt.

Scott (George’s Friend) – Not really anything he can do with the information.  After all, the State of Florida used him (video conversation) in their evidence at bond revocation.   So the world knows that Scott is aware of the issue – at least he heard it from George.

Robert Zimmerman Jr – While he might have been initially angry at O’Mara because the lie landed his brother, George, back in jail, apparently he was willing to let O’Mara try to make right by his mistake.

Robert and Gladys Zimmerman – I’m sure they were upset about it, they might have been even more upset because the O’Mara lie caused the issue that created them having to put their home up as collateral for bond.    But,  then again, if O’Mara isolates, or works at keeping George isolated, then what really can a loving mom/dad do in the face of it?   They are not independently wealthy, and the case has driven them from their home.  Few options.

Shellie - Well,  here is a person with a vested interest because she is being made the “fall gal” for this entire fiasco.   But exposing O’Mara’s lie might undercut her husband’s defense.   That’s a tough call right there.

Angela Corey and BDLR – Now, if you were them, what would you potentially do with the information that your opponent had violated the law and his professional duty.   Boy, that’s some pretty serious leverage – to plant concern in the heart of your opponent.   Might even be enough of a worry to stop your opposition from being aggressive in their approach to you.  Huh, funny that.

Michael S Herring – Heck, as soon as he found out, he bailed from the case.

Kelly Simms – (Current Shellie Attorney)  Well, maybe he can delay Shellie’s issues until her hubby can find solid footing.   Either that or eventually he’s going to have to present the facts surrounding the financial affidavit and how it was put together.   Lots of unknown variables in that consideration.

I honestly don’t have any idea what is going to happen with this case moving forward.  The horizon only appears to show GZ at trial which is, by itself, a complete farce. The chickens from that initial fraud (outlined above) are coming home to roost, and now GZ will potentially burn because of the fire that O’Mara started.

Mark O’Mara compromised himself, and by extension he has compromised his ability to defend his client.   Not only that, but his specific actions have put the very freedom of his client in doubt.

Hence, my only prediction is that O’Mara will need to keep his client further and further isolated to protect O’Mara himself from the consequences of his earlier lack of integrity.

About these ads
This entry was posted in George Zimmerman Open Thread, Mark O'Mara, Political correctness/cultural marxism, Predictions, Trayvon Martin, Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

463 Responses to Never Allow ANYTHING To Compromise Your Integrity – George Zimmerman Is Learning The Consequences, and It Wasn’t Even His Creation…..

  1. justfactsplz says:

    Sundance, how much do you think West knows about all of this? Is he able to move forward with this excess baggage?

    • sundance says:

      Dunno. I assume very little because he came in after the fact and O’Mara has shown a remarkable ability to keep people at varying distances and under his control.

      West might just think the potted plant routine is “his style”… dunno.

      West is a good man, and has keen insight, but he sucks at delivery of oral arguments. He did not do that well yesterday when challenged by the judge on “relevance”.

      I can only watch the hearing in bite size portions because my actual frustrations surface too quickly and I keep smashing bits of computer.

      Honestly JFP, wide open honestly – I’ve considered dropping the GZ discussion threads completely because George is screwed with O’Mara, and yet apparently he is oblivious to it. So it becomes a situation of “what’s the point”?

      I’m frustrated. Sorry for the keystrokes of frustration.

      • justfactsplz says:

        Totally understood. I want to scream, “wake up”!

      • Angel says:

        “I’ve considered dropping the GZ discussion threads completely because George is screwed with O’Mara, and yet apparently he is oblivious to it. So it becomes a situation of “what’s the point?”

        Sunlight. Sunlight. Sunlight.

        • sundance says:

          What was that in July of last year if not sunlight? :(

          • Angel says:

            “What was that in July of last year if not sunlight? :(”

            Sunlight for the ones who want it and can handle it. Its been my experience that many people can see the truth that sunlight exposes but for whatever reasons don’t want it, and the more one tries to shine the light of truth, the more they cling to what is dark. Naked truth causes people to have to make a choice regarding what they will do with it and truly believe not knowing the truth means they don’t have to make a choice about what to do with it., not realizing not choosing is still a choice. There are many people who are here on this blog because they kind of had an inkling there was much that was being kept in the dark regarding this case, and other events we should be aware of and was led here.. Well, truth can be given but it is ultimately what people decide to do with it:: They can use it or retreat back into darkness.

            You just keep shining it for the people who want to see because it is futile trying to shine the light of truth for those who refuse to see.. Those who see can see because of a knowing that is higher than the perceptions that we can come to believe is truth.

            I think that is all you can do and for what is worth, you have went well beyond what is required of you.

            That is all.

      • Lou says:

        I believe West did do well yesterday. the Judge was trying to stop him in his tracks and he gave a long discussion of why deposing Crump was necessary. he went about it in a roundabout way, but this was the only way to go. I don’t think he could have just said we believe Crump was lying. I like West a lot, although I don’t care for MOM’s style. I especially doidn’t like that he didn’t drop Trayvon’s school records. this is a war and the prosecution is hitting below the belt. anyway, I disagree that West didn’t do well yesterday. the Judge’s condescending attitude made you believe that. I think there is a point for MOM to stop the feeling sorry for the family crap. they knew who their son was. they lied to the public about who their son was. they couldn’t manage their son, couldn’t maintain a marraige, left him unattended when he ASSAULTED MOM’s client just because he felt like it. there was NO fighting back. MOM and others allow the media to keep saying that Trayvon was fighting back. you have to stop this talk in its tracks.

        • ejarra says:

          In hindsight, (isn’t hindsight great) the one area that West should have attacked was when she interrupted him and cited a Supreme Court case involving “opposing council”. That was when I said, “OH S**T! That has nothing to do with this. He’s NOT BLDR and this is NOT a CIVIL case. She has already decided not to grant this!” He needed to focus and argue that point and ask her directly if SHE decided that Crump’s position was that of “opposing council”. She made him focus on “relevancy” so as to not have him pursue that topic. Her judgment had little to do with “relevancy” and all to do with not deposing “opposing council”. West DID gave her multiple points of “relevancy” which she ignored because she concentrated on the case law involving “opposing council’; to a point, where in giving judgment, she forgot which case(s) she was citing.

          • Lou says:

            I would have asked her to define opposing counsel. I think opposing counsel usually relates to the defendant’s counsel, but in this case relates to the prosecution which is supposed to be the State of Florida. so, the state hires Benjamin Crump? this case is unlike any other. the state is in cahoots with Crump. how can they have the State defending him and a private NAACP attorney. this is unfair.

      • 22tula says:

        The following quotes reminds me of your tireless work Sundance.

        “When I tell any Truth it is not for the sake of Convincing those who do not know it but for the sake of defending those who Do.” – Sir William Blake
        Public address, Blake’s Notebook c. 1810

        “Nothing does reason more right, than the coolness of those that offer it: For Truth often suffers more by the heat of its defenders, than from the arguments of its opposers.” – William Penn

        I think it is a good idea to take a step back and drop the daily Zimmerman thread.
        You know that fear comes when the volcano suddenly goes silent. So, maybe have a once a week – “let it rip” Zimmerman Thread.

        Here’s a quote for Mark O’Mara.

        “Why are we so full of restraint? Why do we not give in all directions? Is it fear of losing ourselves? Until we do lose ourselves there is no hope of finding ourselves.” – Henry Miller

        • Angel says:

          “I think it is a good idea to take a step back and drop the daily Zimmerman thread.
          You know that fear comes when the volcano suddenly goes silent. So, maybe have a once a week – “let it rip” Zimmerman Thread. ”

          I agree with this as sometimes its best to keep people wondering about what you are doing instead telling them. However, to do it now after CTH was called out by BDLR at the hearing on 02/22/13, it would just be fodder for people to say it is being done out of a sense of wrong doing. But then again, I have never got the impression that the writers of this blog let what people think dictate what they do or don’t do.

          • 22tula says:

            I agree with You Angel. IMO this case has nothing to do with Truth & Justice. This is about Obama, and he can never be wrong. George Zimmerman is just one of the many victims of this regime. I made a mistake by not including all of the yellow belly sap suckers to the Henry Miller quote.

            “In matters of style, swim with the current; in matters of principle, stand like a rock.”
            – Thomas Jefferson

        • jello333 says:

          “I think it is a good idea to take a step back and drop the daily Zimmerman thread.”

          Umm… if we’re having a show of hands here, I’ll have to say… NO! I think that’s a terrible idea.

      • ytz4mee says:

        Honestly JFP, wide open honestly – I’ve considered dropping the GZ discussion threads completely because George is screwed with O’Mara, and yet apparently he is oblivious to it. So it becomes a situation of “what’s the point”?


        at this point, either you get it or you don’t.
        no more spilled ink is going to change that, nor is endlessly going round and round the briar patch chasing your own tail.

        • justfactsplz says:

          I do get it and you are right, you do or you don’t. I have had reservations about Omara for awhile. Once I started putting the pieces together it just clicked on like a light bulb. The Truth Has No Agenda.

    • jordan2222 says:

      Maybe I am wrong, but didn’t someone write a summary of everyone who know about the money and when.

  2. justfactsplz says:

    The track record doesn’t look too good here. Three out of four defense attorneys have basically thrown George under the bus.

    • Lou says:

      he needs a new attorney who will throw Trayvon’s school records out there. put the prosecution into a cleanup mode. show up to date pics of Trayvon anytime a media appearance is given. make the media sign a contract that they will get an interview ONLY if they show recent pics of Trayvon, and if they show younger pics they may be liable.

  3. jello333 says:

    Do you think MOM and West already have evidence in hand that shows (or at least could eventually lead to proof) that Bernie has knowingly allowed false evidence/witnesses to enter into this case? And if so, how would that “leverage” play against what you’ve said about the State’s “leverage” over MOM? Cancel each other out, or what?

    • justfactsplz says:

      I think they have enough to impeach Crump and Dee Dee but not enough on Bernie.

    • boricuafudd says:

      Jello, I feel that GZ is screwed, BDLR could introduce evidence at trial that MOM was conspiring with GZ in order to impeach both of them. I have been in juries and I know that one thing that juries hate is a lawyer that they feel is lying to them.

      I don’t know I guess I am just cranky right now, is been a long day for me. I’ll continue in the morning.

    • jordan2222 says:

      Tit for tat, huh? Let’s call it even and move on. LOL.

      • jello333 says:

        ;) Yeah, I was trying to put it subtly, but not sure I did a good job. Here, I’ll spell it out: Even if MOM did what has been suggested re. the bond money, etc. that is not even remotely close to as bad as what Crump, Bernie, and the others have done in this case. If MOM’s was a Class A misdemeanor, the State/SchemeTeam’s should be a Class 1 felony.

        • jordan2222 says:

          After what SD has said, I am wondering if Corey made some kind of deal with O’Mara.

          • Rick Madigan says:

            I’ve always thought they did, especially that call where GZ talks about O’Mara knowing about the $37K and declaring him indigent, while not revealing that info. That was huge. Corey might’ve said, “give us GZ, and we won’t do anything to ya.” They want this to go to trial, throw GZ in the tank for a few weeks, months, whatever, and everyone is happy. That’s how O’Mara has always made deals. Simply ask lawyers in Orlando, they know O’Mara is a showpiece, a bad penny dressed up like gold.

            Also, notice how O’Mara shows a weak willed passivity in motions, has no objections or legal arguments before Nelson. And when she hits the gavel, “DENIED,” he smiles and thanks her. Actually says “thank you.” Its beyond politeness. And when reporters ask him outside, he says he simply said okay to acknowledge her decision. Lots of little crap like that. His focus is completely out of bounds. I will write a little more on this later.

            • sundance says:

              B.I.N.G.O. !!!

              Also, the Corey/O’Mara agreement need not be spoken to be *understood*. The bottom line is O’Mara placed himself in a position of extreme compromise – the State could take him down at any minute…… His capacity to represent George Zimmerman was compromised.

              Also2, your descriptives of O’Mara’s known professional track record, and the opinion within the circle of peers, are spot on.

            • diwataman says:

              That was huge and it’s amazing how so many miss the signigance of it. You really think Corey heard that and said “meh, no biggie”. What’s also telling is it’s out in the public, reporters put it in O’Mara’s face, so where’s Bondi? Scott? the bar? etc.? I don’t even remember the Scheme Team taking advantage of it. Weird huh?

              • boricuafudd says:

                D-Man what makes you think the Scheme Team have not taken advantage of it. The thing is it could have been avoided if handled properly.
                What I would have done; called a press conference thank all the people that had donated and make my case that GZ was indigent, regardless of the donations. The familly at that point was in hiding nobody was working, the case was going to take a year or more, how was the family to live in the meantime. You get the picture.

                • Angel says:

                  “What I would have done; called a press conference thank all the people that had donated and make my case that GZ was indigent, regardless of the donations. The familly at that point was in hiding nobody was working, the case was going to take a year or more, how was the family to live in the meantime. You get the picture.”

                  Yeah, that would have been the right thing but its not the more expedient or self-serving way. I think I get it now too thanks to Rick Madigan. Your insight is on point.

                  Legal blackmail.

                  The only thing that I am wondering about is that Sundance said in post months ago, that looking at the picture of MOM giving Angela Corey look, that it could be inferred that the fix was in then. However, the bond hearing had not occurred then so what fix could it have been at that point in time unless “the look” was based on a another hidden reason.

                  • boricuafudd says:

                    IIRC that happened at the first bond hearing, which would mean that Corey would have the tapes of GZ, aleady. The look and smirk on Corey’s face might be an “I got you now”

                  • Rick Madigan says:

                    Actually Bori, Angel is right about the timing. If you remember the picture of her smiling up at him is at the arraignment, before his week in jail, so there were no calls yet.

                    But Sundance’s premonition and insight were very good in noticing that Cruella De Ville smile on her. It was a smile of “YES, this is going to be like taking candy from a baby.”

                    For one thing she probably guessed she’d catch him in a lie somewhere, because he has a reputation for lying, and lets face it, dishonesty is not a remedial condition in anyone. If they lied before, they will lie again.

                    Corey was thrilled to see O’Mara representing GZ! Lack of integrity compromises you. If O’Mara had a conscience he should walk away from this. I hope West reads this and finds a way to replace O’Mara with Uhrig or somebody.

                  • jordan2222 says:

                    Do you have any links about MOM’s dishonesty other than this case?

                  • jello333 says:

                    Exactly. That’s not the kind of thing that needs to be thrown around without proof. Especially the word “reputation”… it’s so easy to say that without giving specifics. I’m not defending MOM or condemning him, but I won’t just assume he “has a reputation for lying” without seeing proof.

                  • boricuafudd says:

                    Rick, thanks I was not sure. MOM does have a reputation of doing plea bargains for his clients. Which might also be a reason for Corey’s delight.

                  • jello333 says:

                    But a “reputation for lying” (beyond what some believe he did in this case)? I need some evidence of that before I condemn MOM on those grounds.

                  • boricuafudd says:

                    That is something that I am not in a position to speak about. BTW, do you feel that MOM is as compromised by the conversation recorded in jail. After all is that hearsay evidence, priviledge conversation bet attorney and client, that would in my opinion be more damaging to GZ than to MOM.

                  • jello333 says:

                    Here’s where I’m having a problem with imagining MOM pulling his punches in his defense of George, because of something being held over his head. I think we’re talking about the possibility that he lied, or encouraged George and Shellie to lie or whatever, about money in their defense fund. Right? And the reason we’re saying he might do that, is so all that money could be used for legal costs instead of going toward bond. If I’m not right about that, someone correct me. But if that IS what we’re talking about, I don’t quite get how that is so, so horrendous a violation that MOM would then be willing to sell his soul to avoid problems. Obviously I know very little about MOM beyond this case, and he may be a total freak who would sell his own grandmother down the river. But assuming he’s NOT that type, then I don’t get it. Even if he did something wrong regarding the bond hearing, I’m having trouble imagining him joining the conspiracy against George over something that probably thousands of defense lawyers do every day around this country. Oh well… maybe I’m just naive.

                  • boricuafudd says:

                    Well that is sort of my point, what was done if it was actually that, is not an uncommon thing, the court recourse is usually to revisit the terms of the bond or indigency status. Add to that that the Judge himself from the bench deferred any ruling on the Pay Pal account. So I am at lost as to how badly this would compromise MOM.

                  • jordan2222 says:

                    Jello: Select the tab at the top “about us.” On the right side of the page, you will see this:

                    Follow the Last Refuge blog.

                    This is how you can subscribe to new threads that are posted instead of getting ALL comments. If you want to subscribe to all comments on one thread, that will automatically happen after you check the box to “notify me of follow up comments via email.”

                  • jello333 says:

                    Cool, thanks Jordan. I usually just check the front page a couple times a day to see what’s new, but that’ll make it easier.

                  • jordan2222 says:

                    At the bottom of your emails, you should see “Modify your Subscription Options.” It’s a good idea of clean it up once in a while. Otherwise, the system will get clogged and you will stop receiving ALL new posts as happened to me recently.

            • justfactsplz says:

              Thank you for your insight. I look forward to your future posts.

            • jordan2222 says:

              If a deal was made, it will eventually be exposed as will all of the other criminal crap. I said a long time ago that Shellie can be the key to this case and I still believe that. In a sense, she has nothing to lose if they are going to hang George. She is holding some pretty good cards.

              Her loyalty is to her husband, not O’Mara. What do you think she would do if they convicted George? O’Mara has himself in a box. At the top of this thread is a list of those involved and what they know and how. Do you really believe they will protect MOM if George gets convicted?

              O’Mara screwed up and I bet he sweats it every day.

              • justfactsplz says:

                There is also a couple of people not on that list who know.

              • Rick Madigan says:

                This is assuming that a lawyer or lawmaker is willing to do it, and the defendant’s family is strong enough to want it, and that Shellie’s case doesn’t happen before George’s trial; the timeline scheduling will be telling.

                Code of honor from “Portrait of an Artist as a young man,” by James Joyce:
                “—Dedalus, don’t spy on us, sure you won’t?
                Wells’s face was there. He looked at it and saw that Wells was afraid
                —I didn’t mean to. Sure you won’t?

                His father had told him, whatever he did, never to peach on a fellow. He shook his head and answered no and felt good. “

              • Angel says:

                If this is a proven fact and it appears that it may be,then GZ is screwed and that is without the vaseline. GZ needs to really do some serious contemplating because the worse thing for is for this to get to trial and have your attorney impeached for lying. One thing I have learned about someone having something they can blackmail you with is that as long as they can do it they will so it never ends and one has no way of knowing if they will use it anyway no matter how much you give. This is bad.

                Maybe GZ is sticking with MOM because of some internalized guilt regarding MOM, thinking this wouldn’t be happening because of him. His religious upbringing certainly would influence him in that regard.

                • Rick Madigan says:

                  He’s a good Catholic boy, his guilt is his undoing. His friends and family need to use his guilt complex to intervene, and get him thinking of how his foolish decision is going to affect all of them. Is affecting all of them! Problem is George is so naïve and good, he cannot imagine the badness of others.

                  • Sharon says:

                    Guilt is a powerful motivator. Sometimes it’s false, and when used ase leverage in the hands of human beings it’s incredibly destructive. George has a strong religious heritage in which the theology of guilt is important. Boyohboy–intentionally using that as a way to pressure him raises issues of responsibility.. You describe the problem well, but using the very thing that has conspired against him already to put further pressure on him to somehow solve the problems and clean up the consequences created by this mess ?….to somehow require him to make these decisions with lots of inherent unknowns?….. that line of thought really is not comfortable, for me anyway. Once again, George must make more decisions under pressure because he feels guilty and someone tells him he should? :(

                  • jordan2222 says:

                    These are unusual circumstances and I hope decisions are made as a family.

                  • jello333 says:

                    Thanks, Sharon. And I imagine George would thank you too…

                  • Rick Madigan says:

                    You’re taking the word guilt too literally, its not really guilt, its simply changing the focus to help them see their responsibility is not simply to themselves but to their family. Someone in a situation like this is not thinking for themselves.

                    GZ may think all the civil lawsuits will take care of his family’s needs, but if he is suffering, no amount of money will make happiness for them. They need him to be happy too.

                    I remember when I used to go see my grandparents with gifts and moneys, and they’d say, “we have no need for these things, as much as we have need for you.”

                    No one’s suffering can make someone happy. And the Catholic sort of guilt comes with built in self sacrificing factors, which are evident in the George is deciding things. He throws himself on the fire to save others, without thinking of Shellie or his parents. He doesn’t stop to think there may be other ways to accomplish things.

                  • jordan2222 says:

                    Truly outstanding:

                    “we have no need for these things, as much as we have need for you.”

                  • Sharon says:

                    well, this is a pretty skinny thread to try to reference theological waters on…but if, as you say, George is a “good Catholic boy” then I don’t think I’m using the word “guilt” too seriously.

                    You say that George is throwing himself on the fire to save others. How do you know that?

                    I think it’s quite likely that his mind and emotions are pretty much in suspension and frozen in dread these days. I don’t know that, either, of course, but I think it’s just as likely as him consciously and “sacrificially” making choices about the status of his defense.

                    You say he’s so “naive”–and apparently that’s why things have gotten this bad. Well, if that’s the case, I sure don’t see how he can fix it since now, added to his naivete, there is the threat and the exhaustion and the uncertainty of the last 10 months specifically. In effect he’s being told to save himself–out of a mess that he created (by poor defense/legal decisions)?

                    I have a lot of compassion for what his present condition may be considering what the starting point was, in terms of events, his personality, his heritage, his naivete, his instincts from the beginning. It’s not too difficult to extrapolate what his present condition may be. Having exhausted all the hopes of what Judge Nelson “might do” or what MOM “might do”–and they disappointed–now it should be projected on George to fix it?

            • Rick Madigan says:

              This is for Sharon. I couldn’t respond upthread to you for some reason, but thank you for your response, and your compassion is shared, certainly. I don’t think that George himself can fix this, but he does need family or someone influential in his life to help him sort out how to proceed with his defense decisions.

              As for jumping into the fire to save others, he has always been heroic in standing up for others, for example, Sherman Ware, where he went above and beyond in calling out the authorities. He wasn’t thinking of saving himself from trouble then. Same thing with when he attacked the undercover cop, to help his friend. He wasn’t thinking of saving himself.

              And I really hate to quote Crump but George would have stayed in the car if he had been thinking about Shellie and family. What would become of them, if something happened to him? The situation was unsafe, being that he saw the guy was up to no good, and was reporting him, George should’ve gone on his way.

              But no, he was thinking of his neighbors, after all, that wasn’t his house the guy was looking into. Why care to walk over to the street to find the address, or to keep track of where the guy was headed; sure the operator asked, but he could’ve said, no man, I got family to think of. He didn’t say that. He doesn’t see the importance of his life to others.

              Look how his neighbors ran to safety and then called the cops. And George simply couldn’t understand why they didn’t jump into the fire with him. Today, too, he might be convinced he’s helping O’Mara achieve a big win or something, or maybe he’s afraid to break the relationship, who knows! But we know something’s not right.

              It would be better to use the word “focus” instead of guilt, which is nothing more than his operating condition. Shifting his focus to what is important is what his kin will need to do to get him thinking of himself. George alone can fix it, he’s the one person who can decide to change counsel.

              • Rick Madigan says:

                The last line should read, George needs help to see things right, so he can fix it by changing counsel.

              • jordan2222 says:

                Very insightful. Thanks for a great post.

              • jello333 says:

                I agree, from everything I’ve seen George is the kind of guy who worries much more about the well-being of others than he does about himself. He’s a really good guy. But I don’t agree with this: “The situation was unsafe, being that he saw the guy was up to no good, and was reporting him, George should’ve gone on his way.” If you’re talking about when he got out of his truck to try to watch where Trayvon went…. no. I think at that point there was nothing “unsafe” about it… at least not in George’s mind. He thought Trayvon was “long gone”, and so there should have been no chance of coming face-to-face with him again.

                • jordan2222 says:

                  IDK, Jello. I think Rick is correct on this issue. George could have avoided the incident but I do not know what he was thinking. Only he knows that but when I think about it objectively, I would have stayed in the vehicle until the cops showed up. He had to know there was some risk involved. Did he rule out Martin having something in his waistband?

                  Seriously, what would he have done if he had caught up with Martin and not the other way around? Did he have a plan to prevent Martin from “getting away” until the cops arrive? Think about it.

                  I know it’s easy for us justify what George did but I have to be intellectually honest about it and concede this did not have to happen.

                  The larger issue is what George should do NOW. He should NOT be thinking about “protecting” MOM. He needs to think about self preservation and to hell with everyone else. Prison is now more of a reality for him than is freedom UNLESS something really big happens at that next hearing.

                  You can count on Nelson being “armed and ready.” She has been given her marching orders.

                  Rick inspired me to look at this all differently than I had in the past so thanks, Rick for sharing your views.

                  • jello333 says:

                    I’m not really sure what you mean. Are you saying that when George got out of the truck, he intended on following Trayvon? I don’t mean just watching where he went, but literally walking wherever he thought Trayvon may have gone? And if not for Sean saying, “We don’t need you to do that”, that George would have turned right at the ‘T’ and continued down that sidewalk toward Brandi’s house? Nah… I don’t think there’s a chance of that. Maybe a few steps in that direction, who knows. But all the way down, like he’s going to the “back gate”. No way… not in my opinion.

                  • jordan2222 says:

                    I do not know, for sure, how far he walked nor do I know for sure what his intent was.

                    I know. at some point, he said he was trying to find an address but why did he initially get out of his truck, if not to locate Martin?

                    Would YOU have left your truck?

                  • jello333 says:

                    Trying to put myself in the same circumstances, and considering what George had just experienced with Trayvon — him walking around the truck in an apparently menacing fashion — I would have had no desire to meet up with him face-to-face. And so IF I got out of the truck, it would only be because I thought such a meetup would NOT happen. But once Trayvon “ran”, yeah, I would very likely have assumed he was gonna keep ON running. Therefore any fear I might have earlier had would have been gone by then. My purpose for getting out of the car would have been to try to get into a position (say at the top of the ‘T’) where I could LOOK in the direction he had run, so I could maybe have a better description for the cops once they arrived. I might also have walked across to RVC, in order to peer down THAT direction to see if he ran out the end of the houses, toward the back entrance. I’m not big on calling the cops on ANYONE. So I might not have called them to begin with. But if I did, once Trayvon acted in a threatening manner, my concern would have been that he was dangerous and might come back LATER and done something to someone. So yeah, at that point I would have been anxious to help the cops find him by pointing out where he had run. I would NOT, however, have ANY interest in running into this guy face-to-face. Absolutely not.

                  • jordan2222 says:

                    Armed or not, there is simply no way I would have left the safety of my vehicle, particularly after dark. In fact, I am not sure I would have stuck around to see if the cops found him UNLESS I was convinced he was a threat that night to someone who lived there. Maybe George believed that he was. IDK.

                    In that sense, I can understand the criticism of him doing that.

  4. Angel says:

    well, the good news here is that if MOM is confronted with this, he can avoid giving testimony by following Crump’s lead. How to avoid giving testimony under oath 101 is trending in Floriduh!

    Not to make light of GZ’s situation as it is disconcerting.

    But I still believe God has the ultimate check mate and other channels will come into play to dispence justice. The touch part is having the fortitude and patience to hold on.

  5. Angel says:

    correction: tough for touch!

  6. diwataman says:

    Both George and O’Mara and between a rock and a hard place on this one. Either O’Mara lied or his client lied to him. Then when O’Mara did his press conference he threw his client under the bus by saying “Whatchya talkin’ about Willis, I aint know about no money!” it made it clear either way where he stood. How George stayed with him after that is a mystery.

    • sundance says:

      Thank you for that video.

      Yes…. a mystery indeed. If I could get my hands on the second Bail Bondsman’s agreement, it might explain George being attached to maintaining O’Mara….. alas, impossible.

      • diwataman says:

        YW. I thought I posted it when back then on one of those posts, maybe it was an open thread around the time, did we have those then? Lol, no biggie, it’s here now. I thought I remembered discussion to that effect as well about the agreement. I would think George would have a pretty good case for breaking that contract. Wouldn’t he have a copy?

        • sundance says:

          Him have a copy? Yeah, probably… well, I guess he would. Dunno. Then again, is that just us trying to reconcile the irreconcilable? I mean, we are distant observers so we have the liberty of space between us and the effects of decisions.

          Maybe from GZ’s perspective MoM was/is his only hope. It’s easy for me to say I would have kicked my attorney in the teeth for lying, but that’s just me and I have a pesky habit of seeing the unintended consequences and way off angles n stuff.

          Tugboat might have viewed MoM as a life raft not knowing there was a hole in it.

          • LittleLaughter says:

            I’ve seen first hand how even a “excellent” defense attorney “works it.” Their first and most important priority is keeping those buddy boy relationships with the DA’s office and court officers in tact and “producing.” It is like this: ” Yeah, that charge you have against my client aint gonna fly, and I could get it thrown out, but I’ll get him to plead down and we”ll both have a win. Dont worry- the kid is sick of this whole mess and everytime I see his mother she is in tears. So I am sure I can convince them to take a plea for ya. ” Then, there’s that rare client who decides he isn’t going to admit guilt when there is none and he refuses said plea. Uh-Oh. Now the DA is pissed off at the arrogance of that client and the “excellent attorney” must now figure out a way to defend his client as he should, still getting a win for himself, and continuing to appease the DA who is now in pure pissed off mode and ready for a fight. Mr. Excellent needs that DA to remain in buddy status to help him out with his next case, who is a thug who is actually guilty. Gotta get that plea, so both sides have a win. The thug has a win. But the innocent client is the one who gets the screws. No clean end here.

      • jordan2222 says:

        I have searched every where. It’s’ the one in which you said you thought George had to retain O’Mara. Right?

    • Rick Madigan says:

      Could this video be posted on top also, for quick access while reading the article?

    • rooferx says:

      Correct me if I’m wrong, but didn’t MOM own up to this in court? Second bond hearing maybe???

      • diwataman says:

        Oh my no, he said the passport thing was his fault though.

        • rooferx says:

          Now that you say that and I think about it, I believe you are correct. Thanks.

        • Rick Madigan says:

          It was said by O’Mara on CNN, and Geraldo Rivera, Nejame praised O’Mara’s honesty!

          But it was never said in court, not before Lester when he threw him in jail and put the severe restrictions on him; not before Nelson, when she denied the motion to ease George’s restrictions based on Lester’s ruling on him being a risk of flight.

          • Rick Madigan says:

            The passport being in O’Mara’s briefcase for over a month, that is. He never admitted this in record, in court! Telling the media doesn’t count!

          • diwataman says:

            I don’t think so but if you have a link to O’Mara admitting he knew about the money I would love to see it. While you’re doing that I’ll look for the one where he throws George under the bus.

            • Rick Madigan says:

              Sorry no, Dman, I was agreeing with you about how he admitted to not filing the passport with the court, as he should have, because George had sent O’Mara that immediately. My point was that he admitted it to the media, but not in court, where it matters. So, it didn’t really count on record. After all Nelson doesn’t watch the news, or so she claims.

              O’Mara never admitted to knowing about the $37K! When asked by news teams, he simply said that he would have remembered such a huge amount. (I think you did a video on it, with his pearly teeth sparkling in a lying smile. I’d like to see that video again.)

            • jello333 says:

              Ok, here’s what I don’t get: Let’s say it’s all true about Corey having something to hold over MOM’s head. And because of that, he’s not able to fully defend George. If that’s the case, what incentive does George have to keep MOM as his attorney? In fact, it seems he would have a strong incentive to get rid of him. After all, I bet there are any number of good lawyers (many from out-of-state) willing to take up his cause. Even West might stay on. Now add Shellie to the mix. If the PayPal thing really was MOM’s fault, and Shellie’s lawyer is planning to eventually use that to help get Shellie off, then there’s another reason for getting MOM away from George. So Shellie and George would BOTH gain by finding a new lawyer. It’s just hard for me to believe that all of them combined — George, Shellie, Mom, Dad, Bobby, friends — ALL of them would think keeping MOM was a good idea, if he’s really being forced to play with an extreme handicap. ????

              • Rick Madigan says:

                Simply because the media says the family likes O’Mara doesn’t mean that they do. There are lots of ways to control and manipulate a person, especially when they are young and inexperienced. A lot of players and psychology happening behind the scene that most people don’t think about.

              • Chip Bennett says:

                If that’s the case, what incentive does George have to keep MOM as his attorney?
                …It’s just hard for me to believe that all of them combined — George, Shellie, Mom, Dad, Bobby, friends — ALL of them would think keeping MOM was a good idea, if he’s really being forced to play with an extreme handicap.

                That would assume that George Zimmerman has free, unfettered, and unfiltered access to advice from all of those people – and vice versa.

                • jello333 says:

                  Yeah you’re right… I am assuming that.

                • Rick Madigan says:

                  Uh Chip, that is excellent insight. Exactly that. Yes. There is a lot of powerful control that attorneys have over clients who are in trouble like this. Especially a lying attorney whose career depends on keeping his client isolated.

                  That reminds me, remember how happy and elated O’Mara was when judge denied GZ the freedom to leave Seminole county. Forget arguing for it properly, or objecting to the judge, nooooo, he jumped happily, folding his hands like a prayerful closing and said, “THANKYOU!” Am I remembering that correctly? Does anyone have that video?

                  Because if GZ could leave Seminole, move about Florida to see, visit friends at will, this could get outta control. No, O’Mara seemed too glad to keep him in his place.

                  Also, think of what “rz” said the other day about their finances. Interesting that O’Mara has not filed for Victim funds to help them out. Rather, it looks like he probably saw their donations site as a competing site for funds; funds he could not control. I am sure he’s worked into poor GZ’s mind that his family are working against him.

                  With an unscrupulous attorney like that George, never stood a chance!

                  • jordan2222 says:

                    I see his behavior as being timid rather than respectful…. maybe even a fraidy cat. I am comfortable saying he has no balls.

                    Is that word OK here in this context?

            • Rick Madigan says:

              Lazy and incompetent lawyer! George deserves so much better! George has got enough on his plate, then having to pay for the mistakes made by his lawyer. Mistakes which are not shouted out to the judge in court, and affect the ruling and bias against George!

            • rooferx says:

              Thanks. He mentions the money, but goes on to the passport quickly.
              I believe MOM was correct in his thinking that GZ would quickly be indigent, as we all know now……… Let’s hope that “the court” is this “curt” when recognizing the rest of the evidence.

  7. Angel says:

    How unsettling that MOM’s own words in seemingly to defens his client can be used against his client.

    • boricuafudd says:

      Yes, it is unsettling, but it was her and her minions who made this about SYG, not GZ he did not even know about it when the incident occurred. Besides as a lawyer she should know that regardless of whether a SYG law was available, you do not arrest and charge people without probable cause of a crime having been committed.

      This lame attempt at justification for their actions caused by the protests, the incitement that cause damage to people not affiliated with the case is on her. If this makes he sleep better good for her, if her puppets want to use the same excuse, I am happy for them. Hopefully, they will remember if or when they are on the other side.

      • jello333 says:

        RZ Jr said awhile back he’s gonna try to work toward having NatJack sanctioned, or worse. So… if you’re reading this, Bobby, if there’s anything I can do to help, PLEASE let me know. I’m serious.

    • jello333 says:

      No, those people are just idiots who have no reading/hearing comprehension. Neither MOM or West or any of us here have said that George “can’t use” SYG. We’ve said he does not NEED to used SYG. The big thing about SYG is that you don’t have to retreat or try to escape if you don’t want to. George absolutely had that right…. but he couldn’t USE that right, since he could NOT retreat/escape.

      Yeah… these people are just dumb. So they’re not using anyone’s words against George. They’re just using their own words against themselves as proof of just how stupid they are.

    • myopiafree says:

      Hi Angel – This is where Omara made his statement to the effect that the “Immunity” law was WORTHLESS. It is now obvoius, how Nelson will rule on that type of hearing. So yes, Geroges is indeed screwed with Omara’s actions. I also now believe that this will go to trial. But I also believe that George is “stuck” with Omara. I hope West can “save Geroge” – but the intense bias of Nelson may cause major problems for George.

    • Chip Bennett says:

      We & Protesters said all along that GZ actions weren’t protected by Stand UR Ground…

      That’s not what O’Mara said. In fact, it is the complete opposite of what O’Mara said.

      O’Mara said that his client doesn’t need SYG, because it is a simple, open-and-shut, use of deadly force in self-defense case. SYG is over-and-above what Zimmerman needs in order to defend himself.

      NatJack is perhaps one of the most intellectually dishonest people on the planet. Pay no attention to her Scheme Team screeching.

      • libby says:

        Pay no attention the nasty hag behind the curtain making threatening noises…

      • John Galt says:

        “NatJack is perhaps one of the most intellectually dishonest people on the planet.”

        I am inclined to agree, but I’m not sure she possesses sufficient legal knowledge and acumen to know the difference. She seems to base her tweets on attractive snippets copied from court filings.

        • Alexandra M. says:

          Agreed. NatJack is only capable of the odd re-tweet and her cut-n-paste “skillz”. Blech!!…….affirmative action in the flesh peeps!
          ~and I’ll be paying off student loans until I’m 60…. :(

        • brutalhonesty says:

          I disagree. for the statement to be true she would have to have an intellect. she does not.

          • boutis says:

            She “practices” on the periphery of what would be considered legal practice in Florida. She is a hanger on, a helper, a gopher. She “helps” other attorneys scare up business or cases with her contacts. She doesn’t actually represent anyone but herds them elsewhere.

    • brutalhonesty says:

      ok natalie jackson. Ill bite, all along your side says this isnt a syg case…..then explain the anti-syg rhetoric and the need for syg to change…… know…since it never even applied to the case.

      back to reality: they(crump jackson et al) made it about syg back in feb 2012……so why lie?

      • boutis says:

        The anti-gun movement was on the drawing board and part of that was vilifying anyone who exercises their right to self defense. Part of it was to confuse and confound the public about the castle doctrine and laws such as SYG to make it about gun owners being monsters who kill indiscriminately. The brain washed extreme left doesn’t even think that someone has the right to defend yourself because the poor misunderstood murderer, burglar or rapist is just a victim of society. Since we instinctively defend ourselves this plan is not going over very well with the public and it is recognized for what it is–stupid.

    • Yeah, natalie…….if GZ is protected by the SYG LAw then there’s no trial and no money. That’s why you’re all so desperate.

    • rooferx says:

      I think Natalie needs to see and recognize WHY “arrest was demanded”. Although I don’t think she can see it. Blinded.

      • jello333 says:

        (Note to self: Do not use the word “hate”, do not use the word “hate”!)

        The person I ha… very, very much dislike the most in this case sometimes shifts from one to the other. But quite a bit of the time, including right now, the person I h… I mean SERIOUSLY dislike is Natalie Jackson. Slime… yep.

  8. Angel says:

    “Hopefully, they will remember if or when they are on the other side.”

    Yep, be careful of what you deny someone else because what you deny is what you will one day be asking for.

    This case revealed, among other things, that many people do not have even a rudimentary understanding of probable cause and due process. Or maybe they do but it has no meaning unless it happens to them.

    • LittleLaughter says:

      Ahhh yes, But the problem here is who you know and who is on the “correct side.” If any one member of the scheme team were to find themselves in a similar situation, they know they need not fear. For the rules will not apply to them. Even if they were the ones who made the rules to begin with.

  9. art tart says:

    Since the public, imo, has little respect for criminal defense attorney’s anyway, would another attorney be better or have more integrity or would better rerpesent GZ? Maybe, maybe not. From the blogs I read of those criticizing the defense, it is George’s integrity that has irked his critics due to the changing stories he told of the events and the flat out lying about the Donation Fund. GZ is unfairly labeled a liar and a racist by the hater’s, I don’t know that another criminal defense attorney can change that perception or would be any better. GZ is responsible for his missteps in his lying about the donations and it makes some of the hater’s say “he LIES about everything.” That, imo, is not MOM’s fault, it’s GZ’s. I too don’t think there are many criminal defense attorney’s standing in line to defend GZ in this case pro bono, GZ could possibly get a public defender, but would he be any better off? imo, probably not. You get one public defender, you don’t get two as GZ has now.

    It seems the defense is going to be denied about anything they ask of Judge Nelson, that is another whole set of problems for the defense and imo, it doesn’t matter if it is MOM/West making reasonable/fair request or any other criminal defense attorney making request of Judge N, it appears the request are going to be denied. MOST of us feel the immunity hearing will result in a “denied verdict” from Judge Nelson. I feel disgusted at Crump/Handler’s manipulating this case, unfortuately, I don’t see that changing as it seems they have the support of Judge N. willing to give Crump protection, or preventing the Defense from just doing their job of investigating/searching for the truth. I pray GZ is aquitted of any wrongdoing, I truly feel he was unjustly charged but the bigger picture includes the misteps that are going to be argued in Court, things that many of us feel on this blog have little relevaance, have a lot of relavance to those wanting GZ convicted such as the lying about the Donation Fund.

    It all comes down to the 6 juror’s picked out of the 500 during voir dire.

    • sundance says:

      ……GZ is responsible for his missteps in his lying about the donations …..

      This is one of the most frustrating examples of issues in documenting an researching this case. DID YOU EVEN READ THE POST AND THE ATTACHMENTS?

      George did not lie. Mark O’Mara did.

      • boricuafudd says:

        technically he went along with the plan, at the very least he is an accomplice. Whether he was following the advice or not, he should have known better. That is GZ Achilles’ heel, he detractors try to paint him as this sort of mastermind, when in reality he is very naive and simple. He is the second son, trying to outdo his older brother, failing at it. Easily misled.

        When the events unfolded, I thought in my mind that the prosecution, was doing this for show, to appease the masses. Now, I understand that they intend to win, a loss at this junction will carry severe consequences, including that which they were trying to avoid. I had faith that the Law, would tamp down this craziness so that the correct outcome was arrived at. All those feelings are gone. I know that there are people who might read this and gloat, celebrate while you can. You might be the next expendable person, sacrifice in the name of political correctness, or the next person in need of assistance and there will be none. The risks are to high for them.

        • Angel says:

          “I had faith that the Law, would tamp down this craziness so that the correct outcome was arrived at. All those feelings are gone.”

          I thought this too in the beginning, but I don’t feel that way anymore. The state intends to win and GZ has to awaken to the fact, naivety notwithstanding, he is playing with the big boys now and makes choice that gives him a chance for an acquittal. He still has a say so in these legal proceedings, I guess.

    • Chip Bennett says:

      Zimmerman is guilty of nothing more than being entirely too trusting: first, of the SPD, and later, of his attorney.

      • Alexandra M. says:

        +1. Yes!! (In a nutshell)

      • canadacan says:

        That’s how I see it too Chip. Thank you for saying that Mister west Knocked it out of the park when he was speaking in court yesterday He had some good moments. Unfortunately he is up against Judge Royette Bean wearing her train engineers cap because she’s been working on the railroading of George Zimmerman.

    • John Galt says:

      “It seems the defense is going to be denied about anything they ask of Judge Nelson, that is another whole set of problems for the defense and imo, it doesn’t matter if it is MOM/West making reasonable/fair request or any other criminal defense attorney making request of Judge N, it appears the request are going to be denied.”


      “MOST of us feel the immunity hearing will result in a “denied verdict” from Judge Nelson.”

      Yes, this too, with perhaps no opportunity for pretrial appeal.

      “It all comes down to the 6 juror’s picked out of the 500 during voir dire.”

      I assume there’s going to be a couple of alternates, but yes, this too.

      Nelson’s potential effect on voire dire and jury selection?

  10. art tart says:

    sundance, that is not the perception of the hater’s, it remains to be seen if SZ will be convicted of perjury for lying about the fund.

    I did read your post and the attachments but I feel GZ was in control of his defense and the decisions made about the donation fund and is in control of his defense as it stands today.

    • diwataman says:

      Did you listen to the phone call posted above?

      • art tart says:

        diwataman, I still don’t see that this changes anything except the perception of MOM.. Do you think GZ should dump MOM/West and request a public defender, something he could have done anytime over the past 12 months if he were not satisfied with the direction of his defense? Would GZ be better off? imo, he probably would not be.

        • diwataman says:

          The point is George was not in control of his defense as you state. The defense should have made it known to him the legal ramifications for not declaring the money, which includes much more than bond revocation and/or perjury. George may or may not have been fully aware of those consequences, hence the need for a lawyer who is in control and understands these things to their fullest extent. What I feel as to who George should be represented by has no bearing on this, it is what it is.

          Look, in the end I’m sure George is getting it from a million different directions, I couldn’t imagine being in his position. It’s clear from his jail calls he gained a trust for O’Mara and so for better or worse he stuck with him. It’s clear that by what has transpired since then that George remains dedicated. So yes in that sense George is in control. But one must ask themselves given what has transpired; WHY?

  11. waltherppk says:

    The defense could have impeached the state’s entire case using one competent private investigator and the complete forensics data on the phones. Why all the energy and time and money being wasted on IRRELEVANT peripheral matters until AFTER the most relevant and material is examined and analyzed FIRST ? This case is like a bunch of blind leading the blind going off chasing rabbits through the bush ……instead of staying on the main trail and looking at the evidence of PRIMARY investigative interest FIRST….which is of course the forensics evidence regarding the phones. Frustrating ? Yes !!!! Unbelievable is what this fiasco is, like a bunch of junior varsity lawyer and policeman types that are absolutely over their heads in a big league game where they do not know what to do. Maybe go back to the start, since in this little game of hop scotch they all seemed to have missed square #1.

    • St. Benedict's Thistle says:

      Perhaps they are trying to have their cake and eat it, too. Perhaps they are looking for ways to save face for all concerned. The truth, of course, matters not one whit to their type. The life of an innocent man is simply the vehicle being used to advance careers, ideological agendas and so forth.

    • myopiafree says:

      Hi Walther – Both of us a frustrated by the total ignorance of that Heart phone. When it was reported that the “Heart” was in “Safe mode” – because of a dead battery – I truly doubted that TM was talking on that phone in the last 30 minutes!! In fact, when they checked, the “memory” was wiped for the last 30 minutes. This was beccausee 1) It was intentional or 2) The “Heart” shut itself off – because of that low battery. But, futher, any COMPETENT invesigator, (after charging the battery) could have found 1) The “Heart” number, then 2) The last recorded phone that the “Heart” phone was talking to. That is NORMAL police work. You just call the phone company, and explain you are the police, and you will get that information – as well as the “Ping Logs”. If the phone company stated that there were no “Ping logs” for that last 30 minutes – that would have proved DeeDee was lying. That would have endede the Bernie-Crump-DeeDee FARCE/FRAUD. Yes – this is indeed the “Keystone” cops at work.

      • debfrmhell says:

        Do you have a link to that report? I can’t find anything offical that says the phone went to its safe mode for a soft shutdown.

        • myopiafree says:

          Hi Deb – That information was BURIED in the first report where they could not get the “access code”, and then they sent to phone to California, and then to New Jersey. Tragically, the FULL REPORTS ARE HIDDEN TO THIS VERY DAY – THANKS TO THE DESIRE OF BERNIE TO KEEP IT THAT WAY. But the facts we do have is that the last 30 minutes were varioualy 1) Wiped clean or 2) Nothing was recorded in memory during that time. This is indeed a “blank” or “black hole” in Discovery. Also missing are the required Ping-Logs. Omara needs to INSIST THAT THEY BE GIVEN TO THE DEFENSE. This is the same problem of “hiding” the DNA evidence from defense in the Duke-Student/Nifong farce. The CRITICAL EVIDNCE is kept from DEFENSE at all costs.

          • debfrmhell says:

            I asked before elsewhere and never got a definitive answer. When a phone is losing power, it saves all the data beforehand. I think that was called a “soft” shut down. But what about a “hard” shutdown? For example if you drop it and the battery comes loose or if it gets wet. If it automatically does updates/backups at midnight or whenever, what happens to the information contained on it if it hasn’t been turned off or hibernated during the day?

      • justfactsplz says:

        There was enough evidence way back that the heart phone was not T.M.’s. Where is that evidence now? The defense should be all over this phone situation, all phones involved.

    • Chip Bennett says:

      The defense could have impeached the state’s entire case using one competent private investigator and the complete forensics data on the phones. Why all the energy and time and money being wasted on IRRELEVANT peripheral matters until AFTER the most relevant and material is examined and analyzed FIRST ?

      There remains the possibility that the defense already has the goods necessary for acquittal at trial, and has now been focusing on proving a malicious prosecution. That would explain the roadblocks being thrown up around the Crump inquiries.

      The defense already has the ping logs. I assume that they’ve done the necessary analysis, and are prepared to impeach Witness 8 fully at trial. These so-called peripheral matters are clearly aimed at bringing down the Scheme.

      • libby says:

        Exactly Chip,
        An acquittal would be bad enough, but proving malicious prosecution would be very upsetting to the bgi that worked so hard on this malicious prosecution (it might even smear the head white people hater in chief).

      • John Galt says:

        “The defense already has the ping logs. I assume that they’ve done the necessary analysis, and are prepared to impeach Witness 8 fully at trial.”

        Without knowledge of W8′s address, and any changes of address during the 2/26 to 4/2 time period for which the State obtained phone records, how could the defense have completed the necessary analysis of the ping logs associated with W8′s alleged phone?

        Yo, W8, evidence reflects that you resided over here by dis tower, but your phone was pinging dat tower across town, all da doo da day. Waz Up wit dat?

        • waltherppk says:

          What type of phone was used by W8 ? Is it the same type phone as the heart phone ?
          If it is the same model phone, then the GPS data for that phone would have certainly identified the “unconfirmed but presumed” address for W8 and nobody would be asking for it, except as a redundant sort of phone user identity confirmation or opportunity for the phone user to lie and provide a false address or false associated user identification, claiming to be the former user of a phone which was not being used by them but used by someone else at the earlier time. This is the kind of information which indeed is Brady material and discoverable information which the State is evidently suppressing and a judge whose head is conspicuously up her own rear end is enabling this fiasco.

          • John Galt says:

            AFAIK, they didn’t dump W8′s alleged phone, just got records from Simple Mobile.

            • waltherppk says:

              All I saw was a police report that the phone records were subpoenaed from 2-26-2012 forward……and that’s not “good enough”. The records for before 2-26-2012 would be needed to confirm by pattern of use if the “anonymous user account phone” is even likely to have been the phone in actual use by DeeDee on 2-26-2012, since otherwise anybody could have been using that phone. That could have been a drug dealers phone on 2-26-2012 which was a phone bought or procured by Crump or by Tracy Martin from its actual user of 2-26-2012 and the phone was “adopted” by the alleged “earwitness” DeeDee at some date after 2-26-2012. The alleged “earwitness” DeeDee may be an “actor” playing the role of “pretended witness” who was not even the user of the phone on 2-26-2012 but was recruited after the fact to offer perjured testimony as a paid service. Another possibility is that TM may have been her pimp or John or runner. There is no forensic analysis to show what may actually be or not be the relationship going to the credibility of that alleged “earwitness” and such circumstances could have bearing on the credibility or lack of credibility about such an alleged “earwitness’.

        • ejarra says:

          Did not, in the hearing prior to this on (02/05), Nelson tell MOM and BLDR to get together with W8 and obtain her address in a 3-way phone conversation? And wasn’t that supposed to done by that Fri. the 8th? If true, then can’t they start to begin to connect the dots?

          Or did I hear and understand it incorrectly?

          • sundance says:

            They called her. She refused to give her address. It was in the hearing yesterday.

            • rumpole2 says:

              So with that refusal…

              Why on earth did West and MOM not confront Nelson and say……

              “we tried it the dopey way of asking in a phone call (mimi depo) and she refused. so NOW Judge.. do you get it? Just tell Bernie to give us the address… NOW … in court this minute”

          • justfactsplz says:

            I thought that was what was said. Hope it was carried out.

          • MJW says:

            Not her address, her social media handles. During the call, she was asked her address, but refused to give it. In the hearing where the defense was given permission to ask about W8′s social media handles, they should have asked for permission to also get her address. O’Mara requested permission to inquire about other matters, and was denied, but they were further afield than her address.

        • myopiafree says:

          Wow John – “Waz Up wit dat”?? You are truly asking tough questions. You want that too?? (Eye Roll).

      • waltherppk says:

        @Chip The “possibility” of the defense already having the goods with regards to forensic evidence involving the phones is something we all hope is more like a CERTAINTY. There really could be no excuse for the Defense to not have such KEY EVIDENCE essential for most effectively impeaching the prosecution theory. However it is optimistic to “assume” any positive development in that regard has occurred and I would think the doubts which cause people to have pessimism about the COMPETENCY of the handling of the case originate with the fiasco involving the amount of the first bond and the subsequent bond revocation as evidence of not just less than stellar legal representation …..but less than professional legal representation. What happened with the first bond should have never occurred and does not generate confidence. A lot of time and resources was wasted doing “damage control” that should have been directed into an aggressive investigation and demands for production which were focused from the outset on the forensic evidence for the phones. It isn’t some kind of neurotic obsession for me to keep harping about the investigative focus needing to be on the GPS and ping log data for the phones. As is recognized by many other persons this would have been essential police investigation DUTY to investigate literally to begin that investigation of the phones on the same evening as the shooting ……not weeks and months LATER ……but beginning on 2-26-2012 and completed in short order as a matter of basic investigative DUTY by the police. For there later to be an attorney involved … Hal Uhrig who was himself a former cop …..and there still not to be available the complete forensics report on the phones by the time of a PC affidavit, and later a bond hearing occur with the forensic report on the phones still not being provided to the DEFENSE …….is just UNBELIEVABLE. What is going on here? Are all these supposedly “professional” people sleepwalking and only DREAMING they are doing their ordinary diligence DUTY and doing their jobs? My usual tone of polite constructive criticisms is over. I have run out of patience and am now just in plain language calling a bunch of duty shirkers, eff ‘ups and dumbasses what they are. SD is right in observing there appears to be a lot of chickens coming home to roost and there are a lot of people having to wear the hats (or dunce caps) they crapped in.

        • woohoowee says:

          “… not to be available the complete forensics report on the phones by the time of a PC affidavit, and later a bond hearing occur with the forensic report on the phones still not being provided to the DEFENSE …….is just UNBELIEVABLE. What is going on here?”

          I think the answer to your question would be – BGI/CRS (Holdup/Obama) and Governor Scott. I still believe that Governor Scott could have stopped all of this had he chosen to do the right thing.

        • jello333 says:

          “It isn’t some kind of neurotic obsession for me to keep harping about the investigative focus needing to be on the GPS and ping log data for the phones”

          I’m glad you said that, Walther. Because I’ve been meaning to tell you something. You know how I and some others like to joke with you about your constant demand for the ping logs… how we’ve sometimes called you the “Ping Nazi” ;) ? Well, I just wanted to tell you that despite those jokes, I think your constant call to attention to this matter is VERY important, and you deserve a lot of credit for sticking with it. I know I, and I’m assuming almost everyone else, have agreed with you from the start. But yeah, we often sit back and let you do the work. So when this is over, and it’s clear just how important the ping logs and stuff turned out to be, I for one am gonna be throwing a lot of credit your way for keeping the focus on this.

          • ejarra says:

            Ditto +1

          • waltherppk says:

            Ping Nazi ! :D Ha !!! Maybe Odessa Girl fanny packs a Walther PP? (Q) .40 S&W ….
            a little .380 “upgrade” good for boogie men of whatever thug needa slug variety

            • Flaladybug says:

              Walter….I am completely ignorant to the phone technology so I’ve been wanting to ask you for your expertise on something. The fact that the SA sent the phone to California because of an inability by ANYONE in the ENTIRE STATE OF FLORIDA seems odd to me. I did some research on Det. Kuhl at the OCSD and read an article where he explains how LE uses “spoofing” in investigations that can make the suspect they are trying to locate answer the phone by making a number they recognize appear on the caller ID. He said the technology can even be entered into the phone to appear to be coming from a completely different area. Do you know about this technology and could it be more than coincidence that it was sent to this particular specialist…..maybe to make the phone appear to have calls that we’re never made?? Also…the FedEx package that was supposedly carrying 1 phone weighed just over 2 pounds……is that normal?? Thanks so much for your time. ;)

              • Flaladybug says:

                Oops……should have read ” inability to get info”

              • jordan2222 says:

                Thanks, I am trying something now.

              • waltherppk says:

                Honestly I am not a phone expert. I do know that cracking into the phone local memory was a bonus for forensics but was definitely NOT the “mother lode” of forensics data available to police regarding the phones. The GPS and ping logs, the MAC addresses and SIM card and user account billing records was ALL information available from the service provider and kept as a log on the service providers network servers and was the valuable investigative information…..immediately accessible to law enforcement within minutes of the shooting. And yeah there are likely people in Florida that are phone hacker gurus who could delve into the phones themselves and glean even more. But the main interest information was easily and directly available to the cops on the evening of 2-26-2012. TM should have been a “John Doe” only for about fifteen minutes. And the rest of the phone related information could have been gotten very quickly also. There is a lot of “mystery” which could have been eliminated early through the phone forensics. So all of the delay and the piecemeal discovery is very suspicious. I strongly suspect the GPS data does not reconcile with the prosecution theory. But the State is too arrogant (and bears too much civil liability for hasty and sloppy work) to walk back and retreat from a prosecution after an arrest which was pursued prematurely because of political pressure. This is a case which should be nolle prossed but the State is planning a show trial for a man they know can’t be proven by the evidence to be guilty of a crime, at least not in a way that meets the legal standard for a righteous conviction, but the State is betting that the politics will make possible a conviction. So the evidence and any Immunity to which the accused may be entitled can just be damned, because the State run railroad has a schedule to keep and a desired destination.

                • jordan2222 says:

                  There is something seriously wrong with the cell phones, call records and ping logs. I have a hard time believing all of that info has been withheld and that Nelson knows it and is part of the plot to keep it from the defense. Maybe Bobby can explain that on one of his next appearances along with what that means.

                  This stinks to high heaven. When was all of that originally due to be turned over to the defense?

                  • waltherppk says:

                    Within 15 days of filing charges.

                  • jordan2222 says:

                    does not apply here.. weird..

                  • waltherppk says:

                    Technically there is a filing of a “Notice of Discovery” in response to the arrest and filing of charges, and the time of 15 days runs from the filing of that Notice, so it could vary slightly from a precise 15 days from the filing of charges. But most attorneys first filing is an immediate discovery demand in order to see what evidence exists upon which basis the State is asserting their evidence is sufficient to support a conviction.

                • Flaladybug says:

                  I get what your saying and COMPLETELY agree!! With the unethical and, in my opinion illegal, behavior the SA has been quite comfortable in displaying….I’m just wondering with the “spoofing technology” Det. Kuhl referred to, if the phone can be made to APPEAR as if those calls came in and the GPS matches?? I’m probably confused (SHOCKER) about the technical capabilities. I’ll figure out how to post the article I’m referring to and maybe someone could check it out. This may take a bit….LOL.

                  • waltherppk says:

                    Tampering with the phones themselves would be exposed easily because the history on the phone would not match the service provider call history logged on the service provider network servers.

                • Angel says:

                  “The GPS and ping logs, the MAC addresses and SIM card and user account billing records was ALL information available from the service provider and kept as a log on the service providers network servers and was the valuable investigative information…..immediately accessible to law enforcement within minutes of the shooting.”

                  This is what has been perplexing to me. With my working knowledge of networks, knowing that any data that travels over a network by the use of a device on that network is stored on servers, getting that info should have been a no-brainer. These smart phones are on a network.

                  Actually, this was always stressed by employers i have worked for that any data transmitted can be accessed because it travels over a network and they could see. I know of a couple of cases of teachers being busted for accessing inappropriate sites from the school laptops issued to us. I guess they didn’t get it.

      • stevie g. says:

        hope you’re right; West alluded to that when stating that Crump is not part of the proceedings YET.

        Crump surely knows he is in trouble, so he got an attorney.

      • waltherppk says:

        If the phone forensics impeach the prosecution theory then there should be no trial at all. At any trial the accused is at risk possibly facing a 6 person conviction committee who share the same prejudice as the judge who has already set a trial date as if denial of immunity was a foregone conclusion. Immunity was intended to even prevent an arrest in such a case where a preponderance of evidence shows self defense. Given the fact that a Grand Jury was not used like should have been done, then the State should have submitted substantial persuasive evidence showing probable cause consistent with the forensic evidence fully and timely disclosed as good grounds for having made an indictment by information. Such an indictment by Information served to circumvent the legislative intent of the Immunity provision contained in the self defense statute. Therefore, State should have justified such an expedient indictment by a full disclosure of persuasive forensic evidence showing that this was an open and shut case. The State claimed it has a strong case but has produced no evidence to support that claim and has suppressed evidence which would impeach that claim.

        • brutalhonesty says:

          Is there any evidence that the trial would not normally be set until after an immunity hearing? I dont know how fla is, but in stl mo….dockets are overcrowded so setting dates well in advance is almost normal….

  12. cassandra says:

    SD your right, you should have thought longer about re-posting this. What is your purpose?
    A lot of people stopped participating here because of the change in tone. I am not comfortable with your speculating (putting words into people mouths) about how the various principals feel about the mistakes made in not disclosing donations on the financial affidavit or who is responsible. I do not believe you have the absolute truth either. I think the comments in July 18th show you can let your passions lead.

    • sundance says:

      My purpose is the same today as it has always been – The Truth. Seeking truth is not an absolute, it is a quest…. However, the fact that Mark O’Mara specifically instructed George and Shellie Zimmerman on how to fill out the financial affidavit stands by itself.

      Who are “a lot of people”? What is the “change in tone”? I am the same person, doing the same thing, under the same set of guiding principles.

      Whose mouth am I putting words in? That one I would love to know.

      • cassandra says:

        “a lot of people” = those who stopped participating after disagreeing about this issue
        Whose mouth am I putting words in? = your breakdown of relevance

        I think these comments on Dman youtube are more accurate than a blanket condemnation that MOM is lying.

        jsJavaScript 7 months ago
        You’re over clocking this, its 24hrs after first appearance and that was the extent of the moneys at that time, remember 3 days prior there was only 8 thousand collected, for all intents and purposes that’s not even enough for a retainer in terms of a murder charge, at the time of conversation O’Mara didn’t misguide him, I’m sure of this, It’s arguable.

        HyrbidHermit 7 months ago
        In O’ Mara’s defense, transferring $37K is not the same as moving around over $100K, which they did at some later point. $37K is a very measly amount of money that can go by quickly for someone who won’t be able to work for a long time. I don’t think that it’s clear if O’Mara knew that Zimmerman had over $100K, which is a slightly different scenario.
        But it does look like this was just a very bad misunderstanding that could have been avoided w/ better communication.

        • sundance says:

          Who’s mouth am I putting words in? You never answered.

          • cassandra says:

            I did, sorry if I was too cryptic and it was missed. I think your suggestions as to how various family members feel or reacted to the circumstances is inappropriate. You do not know that they agree with your somewhat reckless conclusion that OMara is to blame and it was intentional.
            i.e. Robert and Gladys Zimmerman – I’m sure they were upset about it, they might have been even more upset because the O’Mara lie caused the issue that created them having to put their home up as collateral for bond.

      • stevie g says:

        only problem is your truth is based upon hearsay and speculation. if someone tells you to jump off a bridge, are you going to do it?

        I sincerely doubt MOM would ever counsel his client to lie. And even if he did, gz is a big boy and with a father for a judge, he would know not to do it.

        • sundance says:

          Where’s the hearsay and speculation? Be specific.

        • Rick Madigan says:

          George’s father is a magistrate, not a judge.

          Also terrible analogy about not jumping off the bridge!

          If gunmen are out to kill you, no one you can trust, president hates you, everyone calling you a racist baby killer, wouldn’t have to tell such a person to jump, he’d be volunteering to do it.

          But not George, he believes and trusts in the system and in this “Officer of the Court,” his counselor, the one person he can trust! The one person who lied and threw him under the bus, or jail, as was the case!

    • ytz4mee says:

      People come and go from blogs all the time. The Tree does not exist to serve the whims of those who choose to be the most vocal with their displeasure or “their” interpetations of what this blog should do, or not do.

      The internet’s a big place.

      • stellap says:

        I agree, ytz. It is a wonderful world, where anyone can start a blog and express their opinion. This is SD’s (and our) blog. We don’t make any money, regardless of traffic, as any donations go towards expenses. Politely disagree, but don’t think that threatening to leave causes any fear to us here.

        • Sharon says:

          Agree, htz and stellap…the oh-so-knowing-higher-criticism-tone is tiresome.

        • Flaladybug says:

          I know I’m still somewhat of an outsider and my opinion is irrelevant but i want to say, for the record, the intellectual debates on differing views and opinions are what has made the CTH such a large portion of my daily reading. The time and effort put into research and fact based stories is truly astounding and I, for one, am GREATLY APPRECIATIVE!! THANKS FOR YOUR TIRELESS WORK!!

      • Sharon says:

        Exactly, ytz. Thank you.

  13. Angel says:

    I think GZ’s problem ,looking back, is that he was really trusting of the justice system, believing it was fair and would square everything. His naivety blinded him to the fact that it just aint so for the most part; otherwise he may have made other choices including getting an attorney from the jump.

    If I was a betting person, I would bet he is second-guessing himself on many things right about now.

    • Unicron says:

      Yea, the thing is though the evidence in this case is so strongly in his favor, so conclusive in proving self-defense… that frankly GZ should have been able to make mistakes left and right (and he did) in the aftermath, and still been fine.

      In fact this was pretty much the case. Despite his completely unguarded posture toward SPD and giving them every single thing they asked for, repeated interviews, unprecedented reenactments, voice stress tests, etc etc etc… despite all that with no attorney present, in the end the SPD did come to the right conclusion. So did Norm Wolfinger. Not that what they were doing was perfect, but overall things were basically being handled the right way in the final result.

      Then the entire paradigm shifted and they brought in the B team, the team that would be willing to charge him and charge him hard, regardless of the facts and the law. None of us should be surprised after that moment that we see other examples of corruption including at the judge-level spanning multiple judges, in this case. The attractive female judge who was first assigned, Judge Reckseidler or whatever her name was… was probably ecstatic about finding an excuse to recuse herself. This case is a hot potato.

      This all really just boils down to the BGI issue. Whites are now so terrified of being seen as racist, and so afraid of riots, etc… they set aside the laws their forefathers put into place to appease the BGI. And this is how it is when they’re still 65% of the population or whatever, prepare for some truly sobering behavior at every level of society as those demographics shift more. I expect this nation to become one big Detroit. Corrupt to the very core, failing, lawless, destroyed.

      I think George being acquitted is very important for the future of this country if this country has any future. Because I think the ensuing riots are very important for our future. I think those who are working to try to either avoid, or reduce the severity of the riots… think they are doing something positive for America. Just the opposite. Those widescale riots may be the only thing that can wake the country up and trigger a re-calibration, without which the country is simply done.

      Hope I’m wrong!

      Meanwhile, I don’t think it’s productive to take shots at O’Mara. At all. O’Mara is flawed but the real problem isn’t him or any mistakes he may have made… it’s that the system has the fix in on GZ. All we can do is hope that through all of this, the right people who were privy to the right information will eventually get their story out, and that the super-corrupt system isn’t quite corrupt enough yet to do direct jury tampering…

      Just be hopeful. And pray for those riots after he’s acquitted.

      • St. Benedict's Thistle says:

        O’Mara is part of the system. If he would straighten up and fly right, it would cause a huge flux in the system. At that point something might change, although the backlash would be severe.

        When dealing with system-wide corruption, truth is the only antidote. Riots won’t do a thing except destroy lives and property.

      • myopiafree says:

        The frist two lawyers who VOLUNTEERED to take this case for Geroge – were REJECTED by George. I think THEY would have been very good. I have no idea why George did not accept their services – and chose Omara instead. But now, George has no choice but to stay with Omara – win or lose.

        • Macready says:

          Sonner was terrible.

          • canadacan says:

            In for a penny in for a pound

          • Angel says:

            “Sonner was terrible.”

            But Hal Uhrig was a no-holds barred type of lawyer. Some said his bluntness would turn people off but he got my attention because he was not apologetic in defense of GZ at the time and made no apologies for it.

            • Unicron says:

              What would’ve been a sight to see would’ve been Hal Uhrig and Don West as the team

              • Floridianne says:

                There you go.

              • Rick Madigan says:

                Love to see that? Ask him 407-831-1956. Uhrig came on completely pro bono, and he got what the case was without discovery records.

                Whereas O’Mara continues to wait for discovery while stuttering “maybe,” “perhaps, my client will be proven innocent when all the evidence is out.” No joke, he said that to News Team outside court on Feb 5th, 2013.

                And look at Uhrig, without discovery, no contract signed yet, a quick study, knows the law:

                • myopiafree says:

                  George “missed the boat”. This guy WOULD HAVE GOTTEN THE PHONE NUMBERS AND PING LOGS.

                  • waltherppk says:

                    Uhrig MOST DEFINITELY – MOST 100% CERTAINLY would have gotten the primary investigative interest Discovery involving the phones as a first order of business and I don’t believe any bond issue of any sort would have ever arisen either, nor much of the other nonsense which has followed. Uhrig is a former cop and has a private investigator on staff who works for him. There is a good reason lawyers employ investigators and forensic experts. An aggressive defense involves more than just learning whatever the state decides it will tell you.

                • jordan2222 says:

                  He is very strong, but it’s probably too late now.

        • justfactsplz says:

          They were good and I really liked Hal. The other one wanted a conract signed that gave him way to much financially. So George refused to sign them on.

          • waltherppk says:

            George sort of threw out the baby with the bath water there, and I’m not sure what was the connection to or involvement of Sonner, but Uhrig seemed to “get it” what this case was all about and did not mind taking on the BGI instigators. Also I think if Uhrig was threatened like O’Mara reported being threatened …..the people making the threats would have been the ones needing to be worried. Uhrig comes across as somebody who doesn’t mind breaking a few eggs to make an omelet.

          • And Sonner misrepresented himself publicly as George’s lawyer when in fact he had not been signed on as such.

      • Rick Madigan says:

        “Meanwhile, I don’t think it’s productive to take shots at O’Mara. At all. O’Mara is flawed but the real problem isn’t him or any mistakes he may have made… it’s that the system has the fix in on GZ.”

        The system has its fix in on GZ, no one denies that. But a good attorney who understands the law would have gotten George freed already.

        It is not simply productive, but essential to expose O’Mara because he’s not simply making mistakes, he’s using the flawed system, and George, to benefit himself. And while we are all crying and deeply saddened that the system is screwing GZ, the one who has the power to step in, and stop it, is standing there with folded arms, when he has all the power of our laws to help him save George.

        O’Mara is too lazy to find law and argue passionately and effectively to save George. He has been sitting on his carcass from the beginning asking for discovery, and crying about not getting it. He doesn’t argue, he doesn’t object, he doesn’t pay attention in court, he is too mighty to repeat himself, when Bernie brings up the same old debunked arguments again and again. O’Mara has no momentum, and no desire to save George.

        This thread is right on, that O’Mara’s ability to practice law in this case, has been compromised. We can simply guess at how that might be, based on the facts that are before us. But this discussion is highly necessary, because if we are right, then O’Mara is enjoying the fact that it looks like the system is denying George his rights, when it is O’Mara who is not doing his job.

        In which case, the riots you mention, will happen because of O’Mara, not simply because of the BGI!

        We have the best laws in this country! Hundreds of generations of US families have spent time discussing and considering laws and propositions to decide this or that law should be in place, we have voted for leaders and judges and elected those who would support the laws we have put in place to ensure that we continue to live in a free and just society!

        I have never in my life seen good laws thrown aside, so a clown like O’Mara can genuflect to medievalists asking for George’s head on a platter, and say, “I wanna take a moment to acknowledge Trayvon’s birthday… after all a tragedy did happen …”

        Lemme take a breath and get back to you with what the tragedy really is …

        • jordan2222 says:

          Well said.

        • jello333 says:

          I don’t totally disagree with you. Sometimes I’m perfectly happy with MOM, but at other times he has done some things in court and in press conferences that I don’t like. It’s just that I’m not convinced WHY he’s done what he’s sometimes done. But my question is regarding this: “the one who has the power to step in, and stop it, is standing there with folded arms, when he has all the power of our laws to help him save George.” I know what you think about what MOM has done up to this point. But do you feel there’s a chance that might change? As you say, “he has all the power of our laws” behind him, so do you not think there’s a chance he will USE that power in the coming days? I’m, of course, talking about filing motions with the DCA, and demanding a Richardson hearing… things like that. If — key word, IF — O’Mara does that, will you agree that something might be about to change?

        • Rick Madigan says:

          “Lemme take a breath and get back to you with what the tragedy really is …” I’m gonna leave that as a rhetorical about what the real tragedy is.

          But great work Sundance. Thank you for shining the sunlight.

          All the best to all you Treepers. Take care.

          To Sundance: It takes courage to stand up for truth, and passion. God has given you both for a time such as this! (Esther)

  14. ejarra says:

    I’ve a question that I didn’t want lost in yesterday’s thread. What if DD2 implicates Crump? Then what?


    M/W: Where did you get the idea that Trayvon took shelter under what you referred to a mail shed? Are you sure about that? Because that would mean that he would have need to walk in the opposite direction to Brandi’s condo to where he was seen by George.

    DD2: Huh? Well, that was what I was told.

    M/W: Who told you? Trayvon? That makes it sound like he was not wanting to go home. That he was walkng away from Brandi’s

    DD2: No, Mr. Crump wanted me to make sure I said that he was under the mail shed. So that it didn’t look like he was looking in houses.

    • John Galt says:

      M/W: Where did you get the idea that Trayvon took shelter under what you referred to a mail shed?

      DD2: I coulda heard Trayvon.

      M/W: Are you sure about that?

      DD2: You want that, too?

      M/W: I want the truth.

      DD2: Yeah, I heard Trayvon say dat. (looking at Crump)

      M/W: Because that would mean that he would have needed to walk in the opposite direction to Brandi’s condo to where he was seen by George.

      BDLR: Objection, argumentative. Counsel is attempting to testify rather than pose a question to the witness. Assumes facts not in evidence. Move to strike.

  15. Angel says:

    I think Mom’s error is playing by the play book of Crump and trying to make the criminal case a civil one albeit a RICO one. He needs to get refocused and get the evidence, all of it, and let it tell the story. Whatever Crump may or may have not done is not important now. What is important is that GZ deserves a fair trial and to be found not guilty if guilt cannot be proven beyond a reasonable doubt, the principle upon which our justice system is founded on and which, if followed, is the best in the world.
    Focus on what is relevant to do that MOM and West and from what has been presented so far, there is enough to impeach several witnesses that you have as well as the forensic evidence. For example, being an educated person with an ability to think, I know there is more to the story than TM going on an altruistic trip, in the rain, a mile away just to buy someone skittles and ice tea. This story alone sent my antenna up. On the other hand I can admit to there being some things with GZ statements that are questionable to me. Doesn’t mean he is innocent or guilty, just means TM’s story and GZ’s story need to be told and analyzed to arrive as close as we can to the truth upon which Justice is based on. Yeah, if the other stuff happened with manufacturing of a witness or tampering of a witness, it should be brought to light, but don’t lose sight of the most critical thing in this whole thing and that is your client. As they say in my profession, stay client-focused.
    With my limited perspective, I don’t know how all the pieces fit and what is necessary to vigorously defend GZ but I do know that he deserves to be vigorously defended first and foremost and the other stuff will just have to take a backseat. To the defense of GZ: Connect the dots! Get the facts of that night and let it tell the story. Everything is there to do so. Focus. Be passionate in the advocacy of your client. Do the right thing. Uphold the ideal of our justice system that a man is not guilty until he is proven guilty beyond all reasonable doubt. Yes, there have been setbacks but these are not insurmountable. Courage is the need of the hour for a man’s life hangs in the balance. If GZ is guilty, ok then, everyone will have to live with that. However, if he is not, then everyone has to live with that. I can live with either or because if the evidence shows that GZ did in fact “hunt TM down like a rapid dog” and shot him, yes, then yes, he needs to be accountable and punished accordingly. However, if the evidence shows that he, in fact, acted in self-defense, he should be found not guilty. A guilty verdict should not be inevitable to appease some who are ready to mobilize to possibly riot because of their predetermined notion of what justice is in this case. Are we going to allow the U.S. Constitution be held hostage to acts of terrorism?. We are supposed to better than this in America. You, as GZ’s voice can let GZ have his day and let Justice have its say based on the facts of this case, forgetting the media, other stakeholders. Let the evidence of that night speak and tell the story. It will tell us if we all get past our preconceived notions and listen. Bring it on and Let Justice Prevail for all.

    • Angel says:

      Post Script: As defense attorney’s job is not to heal race relations in the court of law. . GZ should not and cannot be a sacrifice to atone for the past racial injustices of this country for that won’t heal anything but just widen the divide. A defense attorney’ purpose is to give his client the best legal representation that he is capable of becoming a living, breathing instrument of what the U.S. Constitution stands for.

      • Sharon says:

        The posts re the CRS are instructive.

        As outlined in the information on this post, regardless of the level of George’s “complicity” (and if the client’s “complicity” is required/pressured due to the malfeasance or mistakesof his defense attorney, I have trouble seeing how that provides meaningful commentary on George)…but regardless, since MOM did things, publicly documented, that could be used against him in terms of career and job performance, that certainly gives him some nudge/reasons to not bring the wrath of the DOJ down on himself (or the attention of a professional peer group). Seems to me it would cause him to be instinctively cooperative.

        We can talk until the cows come home about about what a defense attorney’s job should be and what George should do. Until what is actually taking place within the courtroom changes direction (regardless of the reasons for the present direction) we could have a million-American march and nothing would change. Our agreement about what is wrong doesn’t change what is wrong.

        There are a bunch of individuals who do have both the authority and responsibility to do things–and look at what they are actually doing.

        Are we going to allow the U.S. Constitution be held hostage to acts of terrorism

        Congress is allowing obama to ignore the Constitution. The officers of the Florida courts are allowing the officers of the court to ignore the Constitusion. “We” are not allowing anything. The people in authority have the power to do what they want–and those in authority over them are not stopping them.

        Our representative government is in a state of failure and collapse. This is a symptom showing the disease that has taken over nationwide, assisted by regulatory agencies, corrupt government officials, corrupt governmental bodies, government-appointed boards, properly elected “representative” bodies (such as state legislatures).

        • Angel says:

          “Congress is allowing obama to ignore the Constitution. The officers of the Florida courts are allowing the officers of the court to ignore the Constitusion. “We” are not allowing anything. The people in authority have the power to do what they want–and those in authority over them are not stopping them.”

          Then there is little hope for GZ and little for us. “For the people by the people and of the people is just a distant memory and there is nothing left to do but lie down in defeat and let anarchy rule and wait for our turn, I guess.

          The corruption is nothing new really,and has been a facet of human life since time immemorial .I guess my point was that despite that, in well known legal cases, where the outcome seemed certain, , people still had the courage to stand on principle to defend his/her clients even though it seem for naught. MOM can still do that even if political forces are aligned to assure the outcome its wants. Now if other reasons such as self-preservation is preventing him from doing that, then that is a character flaw that may result in his client paying the price for it. Only MOM can introspectively examine his motives and make needed changes to lead to more effectively defending his client.

          I suppose its easy for me to say that on this side of the case but that is why courage is so needed. And yeah, that seems to be in short supply these days. Its easier to default to what is expedient and what yields returns that costs us very little.

          • Angel says:

            GZ needs an Atticus Finch! He is a fictional character but one of my heroes because even though he knew the odds of getting his client off, were slim to none, he did not let that deter him from giving the best that was within him to defend him and really that is all that is required of us.

          • Sharon says:

            Then there is little hope for GZ and little for us.

            More true than any of us understand, I’m thinking…although that’s not the whole story.

            “For the people by the people and of the people is just a distant memory

            More true than any of us understand, I’m thinking.

            and there is nothing left to do but lie down in defeat and let anarchy rule and wait for our turn, I guess

            Really? Good grief… I have never thought that being specific about the devastating extent of a problem for an individual or a nation equated not fighting and letting anarchy rule. That is a defeatist perspective.

            It is possible to simultaneously recognize the horrendous nightmare in which our Republic struggles to breathe today and not surrender! The Benghazi Three died fighting, having been cut off from their chain of command, having experienced radio silence–their calls unanswered. For them, it literally could not get any worse. I don’t believe that acknowledging how bad it really is means we can’t fight effectively.

            The fight in me is not dependent on minimizing the extent of the battle. I want to know the worst….as I fight on, I can calibrate and improve in response to conditions on the ground. Situational awareness matters.

            • Angel says:

              “and there is nothing left to do but lie down in defeat and let anarchy rule and wait for our turn, I guess

              “Really? Good grief… I have never thought that being specific about the devastating extent of a problem for an individual or a nation equated not fighting and letting anarchy rule. That is a defeatist perspective.”

              My statement was more a rhetorical musing more than being a defeatist. Trust that this gal doesn’t give up too easily on things. I was born fighting with the odds against me. But I wont bore you with those details :-)

          • jello333 says:

            “in well known legal cases, where the outcome seemed certain, people still had the courage to stand on principle to defend his/her clients even though it seem for naught.”

            Yep. As scary as the enemies arrayed against George appear to be in this case, there have been others even tougher, where justice has prevailed in the end. One of the biggest was the Chicago 8 trial. Considering what was thrown at those guys (and their lawyers), by every level of government, AND the prosecution, AND the judge, AND paid informants, etc, etc… in the end they prevailed. Even in that hostile political environment of the late 60s, early 70s, they prevailed.

        • cassandra says:

          My personal experience of the DOJ CRS was instructive. A group of parents of victims of black on white bias motivated violence worked with the DoJ CRS representatives in 2002 and 2005 in liberal bay area. I found them extremely helpful and prepared to assist us in exposing the group “thrill” violence perpetrated on our white sons. The obstructive came from the Mayor and school Superintendent.

      • arkansasmimi says:

        Well written Angel!

      • jello333 says:

        I think that’s an important thing for MOM and West to remember. While it’s true that historically there have been problems (decades ago VAST problems) with our justice system where blacks are concerned, this case isn’t about that. And to MOM’s credit, he has noted that several times. But if he and West are gonna talk about race, they should also expose the fact that whatever racism there is in THIS case, is mostly the opposite of what they’re used to. It’s people like Crump and NatJack, and Spike Lee, and Roseanne Barr, and their ilk, who are the racists, and who don’t care how many people they hurt or endanger with what they’re doing. I wouldn’t have a problem with MOM noting the historic problem with race as it pertains to the justice system, AS LONG AS HE ALSO pointed out that there is a certain segment of the population who THRIVES on race problems, and who tries to PROFIT off of them. Those are people like Crump and Sharpton, but it’s definitely not all black people. There are others, the Tim Wise followers, who are white, and for some reason have decided that racism is just fine as long as it’s against non-blacks.

        I guess what I’m trying to say is that if MOM is gonna talk about race and racism, he needs to talk about ALL forms of it. And if he can’t do that, he shouldn’t talk about it at all, because it could negatively impact his defense of George.

  16. Nettles18 says:

    Initially I deleted this comment, but for the sake of response and clarity I am restoring it so I can respond within the context of what is written – SD

    I agree, this post is ill-advised and will serve no purpose but to divide and in some cases, give people who would normally have donated to George’s donation fund a reason not to.

    When is the truth “ill advised”? It never is. Why should the truth be hidden from people who are making decisions on whether to contribute to Mark O’Mara or not. Shouldn’t everyone be able to make up their own minds with the best available information – absent of guise?

    I understand the agenda is truth, not necessarily to help George Zimmerman get out from under these charges. After reviewing the State’s case, I think these charges are brought from political influence and those who are sworn to uphold the laws of Florida are telling themselves that it’s ok to railroad this man because morally he shouldn’t have gotten out of the truck. I’m deeply saddened and angered that those in power would abuse the legal system in the way they have.

    The truth is not always easy to accept, but it still exists nonetheless. And Yes, you are entirely correct in the political railroading of this case.

    The family of Trayvon Martin knows Trayvon Martin and it’s become crystal clear they are working hard to hide who he was. When we fully understand who this troubled teen was, we understand why he came back to the T intersection and assaulted George Zimmerman. A mother knows her son’s voice, and for Sybrina Fulton to lie to get money is sickening to me. Tracy Martin abandoned his kid and left him unsupervised with a pocket full of money to do as he pleased after getting a major suspension from school. The lies they have told in an effort to profit off this tragedy leave it very hard for me to find empathy for them. Trayvon Martin lived until he was 17 years old but his parents have killed his reputation after the age of 14. We all know why.

    I 100% disagree with the negative comments made about Mr. O’Mara. Whether or not people knew about the Pay Pal account is absurd. The whole world knew about the account, it got lots of coverage. In one call, we hear that George did tell Mr. O’Mara that he knew about $37K had come in. Mr. O’Mara rightly so, told George that amount of money doesn’t change the fact that you are indigent. Your cost to defend yourself and the loss of your job for maybe the rest of your life is not going to be covered by $37K. He was right.

    There was 10 days of PayPal donations prior to the hearing. Mark O’Mara is the *professional* in the system. You may choose to grant him absolution for the mistake, but the mistake is his and exists squarely on his shoulders. The decision to notify the court of the defense fund was/is Mark O’Mara’s decision.

    Scott (Ken), is George Zimmerman’s brother-in-law and he is the person George left with the passwords when he was arrested. We heard their taped conversation that George had revealed some money was coming in but they both agreed to keep Mr. O’Mara in the dark about how that drive was going. That was a mistake that George paid for dearly.

    Totally incorrect. Mark O’Mara was NEVER kept in the dark. He knew everything about it. Period.

    Shellie Zimmerman did not mislead the court. I find every statement she gave can be argued to have been truthful. She told them that her brother-in-law (Scott/Ken) had the information on the account and the court chose willfully to not search for the information.

    The court was misled, but it was unknowingly misled by Mr. O’Mara’s statements, not Shellies’s.

    Make up your mind, was it O’Mara’s misleading or George and Shellie – you are arguing both directions.

    It was Shellie and George who brought the money to the light, without threat of being found, out and that tells me that they were surprised the bond hearing went the way it did too. Why the court didn’t get the information from the brother-in-law, only they know for sure. I suspect that they thought the way most of us did then; the media had so soiled Mr. Zimmerman’s reputation that no one would donate to him so it was a non-factor.

    You just said it was Mark O’Mara’s responsibility to notify the court – Now you are saying it was the brother-in-law who wasn’t there. Make up your mind. Who is supposed to be the professional in this situation?

    Regardless, Mr. O’Mara’s mistake in not handing in the passport, in my opinion, is what led to the June 1st bond revocation. From the State’s point of view, they learned the defendant had a second passport and became worried he may leave the country. To add to the argument they brought up the money part again. I suspect that if Mr. O’Mara had of remembered to hand in the passport on April 27th, the bond money issue would have not come up again. The State added it to their evidence to support revoking bond and it angered the judge to realize the Zimmermans did have an indication they were getting major support while at the same time were telling the judge he had no money.

    Yes, and Mark O’Mara took acceptance of the motion that morning and never corrected the court opinion as to why the passport was an issue. It was his issue, again another mistake and this one was just as damaging.

    Mistakes happen. It doesn’t make it a conspiracy. Mr. O’Mara got my full support when he went after getting Judge Lester off the case. I have seen no signs that he is not acting in George’s best interest.

    No sign he is not acting in George’s best interest? Seriously? Yet the defense fund, the passport, and his abject unwillingness to defend his client in the court of public opinion (via interviews)……. seriously?

    Some fancy themselves as having the ideas the defense should do this and do that and when they see the defense actually do it, it’s because they saw my post or they read my blog. Perhaps it’s done because the events demand it be done. The more people providing ideas and weighing the pros and cons the better an informed decision can be made. But to think that you, and you alone are influencing the successes the defense team has is well, ridiculous.

    This is just absurd. Never, not once have I proposed the defense follow this site, our research, or any other aspect of our discussion. Nor have we ever advanced they should or could. We have never contacted the defense, discussed anything with the defense, or even attempted to engage the defense – specifically because it was important to retain objective distance.

    To George Zimmerman’s family I encourage you to not post or comment on the case until after George is out from under this threat. I know that’s hard but this defense team is fighting so much already. Now it appears that a blogger that has been so much help in bringing facts to light is against the team too, or at the least against one of the lead counsel.

    Again, insufferably absurd. Why is the exposition of the truth now framed as damaging or being against? If the players were operating with altruistic intent then there is simply nothing to fear – right? A blogger, me, has never been for or against either party – ever. I’ve said before and I’ll say it again, if the facts reflected that George Zimmerman was guilty we would expose it with the same level of intensity.

    Since when is seeking the truth, being against anyone.

    We watched as the State sat quiet in court and Blackwell made arguments from a non-party who the judge considers opposing counsel. We read the response from FDLE when the defense motioned for bio information. The State’s work is being done by many. The defense has 3 lawyers and a small support team.

    I will continue to donate to George’s defense fund and for those of you who think George is being prosecuted for political reasons based on a foundation of lies I encourage you to do the same.

    I too hope many continue to support the defense fund. However, unless something structurally changes there is little hope on the horizon it will make a difference. Unless and until a change in defense approach takes place one should only expect more of the same.

    The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over, and yet expecting a different outcome.

    • John Galt says:

      “Mr. O’Mara rightly so, told George that amount of money doesn’t change the fact that you are indigent. Your cost to defend yourself and the loss of your job for maybe the rest of your life is not going to be covered by $37K. He was right.”

      I think the issue is putting the correct information before the court in connection with motion for bond and application for indigent status.

    • cassandra says:

      Brilliantly articulated, thanks and I share your perspective and concerns about the social impacts of this case.

    • stevie g. says:

      i think nettles has the better argument. and i think it is censorship to remove her post at first. but it was nice you put it back so you could respond.

      seems to me we should be moving forward; not going backwards.

      if you have information that can blow this case open, release it. stop playing around.

      if you want to do it anonymously, you are smart enuf to do that. think library.

      • sundance says:

        Perhaps Nettles does have the better argument – that is for the reader to determine. However, the “don’t talk the truth about O’Mara” aspect has already played out over the past 8 months – we have a historical track record – how’s that worked out?

        Removing a comment is not censorship. Posting here is a priviledge not a “right”; and every comment is subject to the admin team approving of content. Removing/editing a comment is no different than a church taking down a sign put upon it’s bulletin board saying ‘there is no God’….. considering otherwise is the mindset of a prog.

        Blowing the case open is not the objective – the truth is. But for some, many on both sides of the issue only want the doses of Truth that improve the standing of “their side”. In the judicial system that is a dangerous ideological angle to espouse, and stands on a divergent plane from justice.

  17. sundance says:

    Several people seem to be of the belief this was a post I previously mentioned writing about. That is not correct. This is just old news reflecting the consequences from Lies told in the past coming back to haunt O’Mara…..

    ….. However, it does explain his reluctance to file for indigent status and also explains why he is accepting of the shannanigans of the opposition. There is a cloud of worry over O’Mara that is influencing his decisionmaking and has been for quite a while.

    • JW says:

      I think you have done outstanding work here SD. This entire case against George is a farce. When the POTUS feels compelled to comment on a criminal case like this it has become more political than anything. It isn’t a criminal case it is a cause for “social justice”. Regardless of the outcome it is important to reveal the hypocrisy and point out just how far those with an agenda will go to see their “cause” succeed. I wonder about anyone involved in this case when things don’t make sense. Judge Nelson’s rulings seem like she is hiding something and indeed “something is afoot”. I think it is important to keep pointing it out.

    • John Galt says:

      “and also explains why he is accepting of the shannanigans of the opposition. There is a cloud of worry over O’Mara that is influencing his decision making and has been for quite a while.”

      Interesting concept. Don’t know what is SOP in Florida as far as discovery in criminal cases, but

      “formalistic approach” and “not in violation of the rule”

      page 2, paragraph 6

      seems a little soft to me in view of the numerous discovery problems enumerated within the motion. Five months of stonewalling requiring a motion to compel to get the color broken nose photo is not a rule violation?

    • justfactsplz says:

      You are doing a great job shining the light of the truth. Whether one likes what that truth is is irrelevant. The truth is the truth, plain and simple. I have to say I saw that one coming. for awhile.

    • jello333 says:

      “Several people seem to be of the belief this was a post I previously mentioned writing about. That is not correct.”

      Ah… I guess you can count me as one who thought that. Sorry. I’m wavering back and forth on this. If MOM did all that’s described here, then he messed up. And I guess it’s a legitimate question to ask whether or not what was done back in April/May (whether it’s MOM’s fault, or George’s fault, or Lester’s, or whoever) is still having a negative impact today. But the thing is, I don’t see what can be done about that now. If MOM really IS playing with one arm tied behind his back because of that, that’s of course important. But if he has been, and it’s because of some concern over the bond stuff… well, maybe this post will take away some of the extortion value of the info that the State would like to use. I really don’t know what to think.

      But as someone else (Nettles?) mentioned about when the motion was filed for Lester’s recusal. I remember that just before that, I was on the verge of joining the “Dump O’Mara!” team around here. I said something like, “If he doesn’t try to get Lester off this case, I agree that George needs a new lawyer.” Of course it wasn’t just MOM, he had help from West… but the fact is, they DID fight to get rid of Lester… and they succeeded. So I feel that that was sort of a promise that I made, that I would then support MOM, at least as long as he appeared to keep on working hard for George. And from what I’ve seen, he has. Most of the missteps since then have been caused not by MOM and West, but by the conspirators against George, as well as the totally incompetent, biased, LAZY Nelson.

      So in short, whatever may have happened with the PayPal/passport issues, nothing can be done about that now. As long as George is happy with his guys, and as long as they’re fighting hard for him — which I believe they are — I can support them. But as I said over the past few days, this is an important time right now. MOM and West MUST step up and “fight dirty” from here on out, if that’s what’s required. NO MORE MR. NICE GUY.

      • sundance says:

        That’s a fair assessment. However, how they handle the roadblock to the Ben Crump deposition is still a dangling particible…. it will not go away.

        Everyone essentially agreed this was/is a defining moment. Fair enough. But are those same people will to accept the definition now visible?

        • jello333 says:

          “… how they handle the roadblock to the Ben Crump deposition is still a dangling particible…. it will not go away.”

          Oh no, at least for me, no way is it going away. How they handle Crump, Dee Dee, and a few other things over the coming days (NOT weeks) is BIG in my mind. I’m pretty patient, but something needs to happen pretty quickly or yeah, I’ll have to admit something is seriously wrong.

  18. ejarra says:

    I remember this post because I was named one of the 12. Of those named, I only recognize two still posting, myself and raiikun.

    Coincidence? Perhaps.

    • sundance says:

      Thanks for the reminder – I had forgotten about that post…. We are now bearing witness to the outcome.

      And I’m glad you stuck around. ;)

    • John Galt says:

      WTF moments:

      Gilbreath: I’m not aware of any evidence contrary to Z’s contention that he was assaulted by Martin while Z was returning to his truck. Lester: The evidence is strong.

      Nelson: Lester’s order restricting “public access” justifies denial of witness addresses to defense counsel.

      Nelson: in spite of previously ordering Crump depo with regards to W8, begins to grant Blackwell’s oral motion to block Crump depo. Nelson was starting to allow only written interrogatories instead of a depo, before filing of any scrap of paper by Blackwell, before even mention of Crump’s affidavit, before Blackwell even finished making his oral motion, and without hearing from the defense.

      Nelson: Crump has no relevant information. Reads denial ruling drafted prior to hearing.

      It appears to me that the representation by defense counsel in connection with the foregoing was high quality, no punches pulled, yet had no effect on bizarre, predetermined judicial determinations.

      I had glimmers of hope, but MJW now has me convinced that a recent 5th DCA case may preclude pretrial appeal.

      So, does the State really need MOM to pull any punches with Nelson as referee?

      • boricuafudd says:

        Please understand that I am not trying to kick a horse while is down. The quote from Lester was after the fiasco with PayPal account. In the first hearing Lester was very neutral and somewhat pro-GZ allowing him to make an apology for the family and not allowing a full cross. He was also dismissive of the Legal Fund, understanding with the passport, etc.

        After the account incident, where his friend MOM, and GZ were playing hanky-panky with the account, and were caught by the prosecutor, his demeanor changed and become hostile. The Judge was embarrassed by his friend, on an important case, GZ is still feeling the repercussions.

    • Make that three, ejarra. I post very rarely for multiple reasons. Mostly I read the posts of others. I found a long time ago that I never learned anything new when I did the talking. I was under the handle CIGuy, but that changed when I created a wordpress account. Several others had/have blogs, as well. I see some of the people that were named in that post on other blog sites. It is not coincidental that you don’t see that many of those named here anymore. In fact, all you have to do is read the comments of the post you linked and it explains why they are no longer here.

  19. brutalhonesty says:

    I personally find it suspect that it appears every stream yesterday had major audio, buffering, or feed issues….that seemed to always cut out at key moments, maybe because west was laying too much damaging info about the martins, I dont know….it just seems everyone is destined to get alot of what happened yesterday from “the media” and its spun interpretation.
    Please contact the Treehouse by email, brutalhonesty. Thank you very much. –Admin
    ADD: Thank you for your contact, brutalhonesty. You have mail! –Admin

    • gzsupporter says:

      I agree. I think Chip said it too. Amazingly as soon as West was done the audio was crystal clear…

    • gzsupporter says:

      Admins…I must admit I was not into politics much before this case so the CTH was new to me. I came here to read about the GZ case. What I found was so much more. I am a conservative and find my opinion very much agrees with most, if not all of what I read here. I have supported the CTH monetarily in the past and will continue to do so. I had to create a new account as I lost my other login information.

      I have stated before that I feel hopeless and disgusted by the obvious railroading of GZ and would help any way I could. If you need me to do something please let me know.

      Keep up the GREAT work. You are all truly my heroes.

  20. Lee says:

    I hope Conservative Treehouse keeps this topic open until it is fully resolved. I realize there are many important issues that need attention – but, Zimmerman’s case effects everyone. It is a combination of political abuse of power, media raping of the truth, racist bullying, parental ignorance, social decline, and a de-evolving of our legal system. It is not popular to support Zimmerman because the media, the public figures, and Hollywood have already sold – hook, line, and sTinker – the more sensational soap opera – little black innocent black child – hunted down by a gun toting white Jewish degenerate and slaughtered in the dark of night. Many posters on this site have done EXCELLENT and dedicated work. Diwataman has presented real and supportable evidence in his video work. Several posters – too many to list – provided ensightful legal and social commentary. People are listening – the prosecution used this site in his presentation – of course he twisted and omitted the facts – but, it shows the word is getting out. Please don’t stop – I for one appreciate this site and ALL its participants. Thank you!

    • Angel says:


      Even negative attention is attention, isn’t it?

    • ytz4mee says:

      TCTH does not exist solely for the benefit of GZ case watchers. In fact, the Tree was around a long time before the GZ incident. It was decided to take it on as it is an egregrious example of injustice. However, IMO, the daily OT serve no purpose other than to allow the same group of people to chew on the same pieces of fat over and over again. It’s also an excessive amount of energy to moderate. Anyone who is interested in the full backstory is quite able to search the archived articles.

      • stellap says:

        Here here!!!

        • canadacan says:

          I can understand this maybe if we only did it once a week my biggest concern is also the troll try to keep getting In here

          • justfactsplz says:

            They do a great job here filtering a lot of the trolls out. The troll activity will increase as the case moves forward and many are under the gize of GZ supporters but really they are not.

      • ftsk420 says:

        I think this thread is a good thing and should be here everyday for people to post. It shows we aren’t going anywhere.

      • justfactsplz says:

        While it was the GZ case that brought me here because of the excellent investigative work, it is what the Tree stands for that keeps me here. It is my go to place for news about politics and much much more. There is no way to measure how much I have learned and continue to learn here. The archives are easy to navigate and I have used them to research things I have had questions on. This is Sundances site and he has the right to operate it any way he sees fit. If someone doesn’t like it they can leave IMO.

    • gzsupporter says:


  21. Angel says:

    “Fortunately Zimmerman’s new attorney, Mark O’Mara, appears to comprehend the broader implications and potential danger of the situation, and seems well qualified to negotiate a fair outcome for his client, and indeed for the rest of us. {snip}

    So what would a fair outcome look like? To my mind, the government offers Zimmerman a plea deal that has him back on the street within this decade, and he accepts it quietly. That seems like a conclusion most reasonable Americans could live with. {snip}

    If O’Mara were successful in brokering such a resolution, he should be viewed as nothing less than a savior. A protracted murder trial of George Zimmerman is the last thing this country needs right now. America can only dodge so many racial bullets, and a not-guilty verdict in this case could very easily turn the racial cold war into a very hot one.”

    From: http:/

    • John Galt says:

      I hope that the authorities take a lesson from the LA riots and prepare to control rioters and looters.

    • jello333 says:

      “So what would a fair outcome look like? To my mind, the government offers Zimmerman a plea deal that has him back on the street within this decade, and he accepts it quietly. That seems like a conclusion most reasonable Americans could live with.”

      Heh, yeah. Tell you what, Mansfield. I think an even MORE fair outcome would be for YOU to spend a few years in prison…. with NO writing utensils! That way, at least for awhile, the whole country would be safe from your ignorant, laughable “opinions”.

  22. Lou says:

    I think Todd is a lawyer in FL. Man, how I’d love to see him represent George.

    • ejarra says:

      I think he reads the CTH!

    • rumpole2 says:

      Thanks Lou.
      I posted the vid at RT as well.

      The Scheme Team LIES

      “Zimmerman got out of his truck after he was TOLD to not do that”

      As this vid points out, this lie continues to be reported as fact by MSM. Even on shows somewhat factual/balanced about the case, you get panel members professing to be “Legal Experts” who repeat this lie.. who believe this to be fact.

      Traybots repeat it often… it is part of their Mantra… some even include it in their signature line… seen every time they post.

      It is frustrating in regards this one important point…….. but much worse is that it is just one obvious indication of the whole Scheme Team False Narrative having been presented and Imprinted on the minds of otherwise rational people. Even professional people. This imprinting is NOT just seen in Rabid Traybot forum posters, twitter dogs, and the Scheme Team themselves… it has got in “like liquid gets into chalk”

      BDLR has repeated in in Court… I would not be surprised to hear Nelson repeat it.

  23. maggiemoowho says:

    I gave MOM the benifit of doubt at first, then the benifit ran out and I was just left with just plain doubt. This obserd coddeling of TM’s family and the need to use sympathy towards the guy who attacked his client is wrong. IMO, protecting their feelings is put ahead of George. The interview that MO gave BET ( I just went back to watch it again, posted here at the CTH) says everything to me. How do you defend someone if you look at his attacker as a tragic victim also. George is the victim and his attacker does not deserve sympathy, neither do the family who are willing to ruin an innocent mans life for their own gain and politics.

    • Lee says:

      I hope O’Mara is given your comment – his sympathy should only be with one person – his client! Anything else is malpractice – what happen to zealous representation.

      • Lou says:

        I agree 100% Lee. in an incident like this there has to be one evil person. the evil person is not George Zimmerman though. he has to get away from what happened before the incident and FOCUS on the beating of George Zimmerman by Trayvon Martin. the school records should also be brought up to show that Trayvon had a tendency to act violently. the 7/11 still of Trayvon must be shown at every interview. playing nice with Sybrina the liar isn’t going to work. she wants to portray Trayvon as a 12 year old. Tracy is a big fat liar also. expose and attack them verbally for their lies. stop playing nice with liars.

        • Lou says:

          sorry to say but you have to evoke anger into Sybrina. she knows she’s lying, and when you call her out, she will explode. this will show the world how she handles problems, and how she taught Trayvon to handle problems. the Miami Herald Interview was a perfect example. she lost a son yes, but this son had a violent sickening malicious side. he was a sick individual with a school record that was trying to be hidden.

        • justfactsplz says:


  24. stevie g. says:

    i would hope that MOM would respond to these allegations and put an end to these absurdities.

  25. jordan2222 says:

    Mods: A few days ago, I stopped getting notified via email when a new thread was posted. Any ideas?

    • ejarra says:

      I added my 2 cents along with nettles.

      • jello333 says:

        That article is much better than most, but it still has a lot of problems. Still…. compare that to what we were getting early on in this case, and are still often getting. Quite an improvement. But still a ways to go… keep pushin’!

    • brutalhonesty says:

      “Knowing what we know today, it seems clear that Trayvon was walking back the town house he was staying at from a 7-Eleven where he bought a fruit drink and Skittles.”
      at least they are admitting it wasnt tea

      • brutalhonesty says:

        “And Trayvon was not the thug that some, resorting to faked photographs, desperately tried to portray him as. ”
        i dont recall any fakes. I recall pics of a trayvon martin that wasnt THE trayvon martin….and I read somewhere supposedly someone tried to pass off pics of the rapper GAME as trayvon (insane but whatever)….and I recall real ones that were called fakes but werent (like trayvon showing off his grill with the same dartboard in the back as in stephens pics)

        I think she takes some liberties here. he was a thug. period. he was. if not he was a poseur. a wanna be. and Ill tell you what, wanna-be-thug is worse than wanna-be-cop no matter how they spin it.
        saggy pants, gold grill, watermelon and friend chicken, excessive use of the N-word in his speech patterns, disrespect for women, drug use and sales, and assaulting people. thats a thug last I checked.

        they seem to be conflating “the martins lied and presented him as a prepubescent angel” with “people showed who he really was using his own social media posts and pics”

        no one except the martins every tried to falsely portray who he was. I think its pretty much irrefutable at this point.

      • Angel says:

        “Knowing what we know today, it seems clear that Trayvon was walking back the town house he was staying at from a 7-Eleven where he bought a fruit drink and Skittles.”

        she doesn’t say who she knows this from. It is not clear to me that that is what TM was doing. I don’t know if he was or wasn’t but I know what makes sense enough to question it.

  26. jordan2222 says:

    Someone needs to hold a press conference and let the cat out of bag, exposing the entire scheme, with direct accusations of each of the players by name and specifically what they did.

    If Crump has been able to get away with that, then so should the defense.

    Bobby could turn this case upside down in a 30 minute show. There is enough evidence in discovery to prove that this has a scam from the start.

    What greater risks could there be than exists now?

    • John Galt says:

      “Someone needs to hold a press conference and let the cat out of bag, exposing the entire scheme”

      I’m wondering why that wasn’t done in connection with the motions to obtain W8′s address and Crump’s depo. Complete expose w/ exhibits. Maybe they want to let the cat rest and grow until trial so where it will emerge as a full grown man eating tiger?

  27. art tart says:

    I have read comments in which some think MOM has coddled Sybrina/Tracy, but I guess everyone looks at a situation from a different perspective. imo, MOM doesn’t want to appear unsympathetic towards the loss of the couple’s son regardless of the circumstances, a 17 yr. old is dead. There is nothing to be gained imo from disrespecting TM by MOM. The social media, school records, etc. speak for themselves and MOM won’t have to disrespect TM, they paint the picture of who TM was.

    Bill Sheaffer, legal analyst from WFTV had said that “GZ’s didn’t appear remorseful for TM dying.” That is not a positive statement to the public for someone accused of murder as in Fla., there is still the jury pool to be influenced, that despite perhaps someone claiming during voir dire they didn’t follow the case, could have watched the interview or other interviews on GZ.

    Bill Sheaffer’s statement:
    WFTV-Channel 9’s Bill Sheaffer predicted that “prosecutors will be prepared to cross examine Zimmerman about statements in the interview.” Sheaffer added that “Zimmerman’s lack of regret may hurt the shooter the most.” “One may conclude from those statements that there is no remorse on the part of Mr. Zimmerman,” Sheaffer said.

    No one has been treated more unfairly than GZ in the media and attacked by the Handler’s w/lies, but GZ is alive, TM is dead, and the verdict is out. It would seem imo the more appropriate time for any criticism would be after the verdict.

    • Lou says:

      would you try to save someones life after they pummeled you trying to kill you? these are the questions that must be asked. being nice will get you nowhere. a 17 year old tries to kill you and then you have to be remorseful????

      • Lou says:

        remorse is for people that have done something wrong deliberately. If you’re drunk and drive and you kill your passenger, you better be remorseful. if you beat up a Wal Mart greeter (happened recently in the news), you better show remorse. Getting attacked and defending yourself does not require remorse. George showed respect for the parents, but that was not required. it shows him to be a softie.

      • art tart says:

        Lou, I stated I looked at it differently than some, I don’t think anything can be gained by MOM disrespecting Sybrina/Tracy or TM, regardless of the circumstances a 17 yr. old died. TM was clearly wrong for assaulting GZ but the jury pool hasn’t been picked yet and why offend anyone if there is absolutely nothing to gain, I can’t see any positives. Crump/Handler’s imo are a different story, MOM/West should respond aggressively to their bull chit but even when they have, it hasn’t made much difference in the reporting of this story unfortunately.

        The parent’s are going to continue to bilk the media for all it’s worth, I don’t think anything can change that.

      • maggiemoowho says:

        I agree Lou, George should not feel any remorse towards his attacker or have any regret for saving his own life. I think it was a ridiculous statement made by BS.

    • maggiemoowho says:

      I have to respectfully disagree Art Tart. MOM was hired to defend George, not to sympathize with his attacker and attackers family. 17 or not, that 17 yr old made the choice to attack and beat a man. As for remorse and regret, George was attacked, he is the victim and does not have to show remorse and I sure hope he doesn’t regret making the decision to save his own life. Most victims do not have or show remorse for their attacker or regret for saving their own life.
      IMO, George is the only one that should matter to the defense, he is fighting for his life and future. George is the VICTIM in this case, not TM. The feelings of his TM’s family should not even be an issue. They sure in heck aren’t concerned with Georges or his family’s. People have to earn respect to get respect and TM and family have not earned respect.

      • boricuafudd says:

        I have expressed my issues my MOM when the issues first arose. I believe that MOM has been compromised the extent, IDK, GZ or his family must know that. Yet MOM is still the attorney of record. So I asked myself why, why would GZ compromise himself like this?
        I have never met GZ, all I know about him is from what he has said, what his friends have said about him and what I know of his actions. Now I go back to the question why would GZ accept MOM?
        So I ask myself, what king of person is MOM? What are his belief, his core? It is at this time that I think the reason for MOM still being retained as attorney. MOM is the lawyer that GZ wants to be. Soft spoken, knowledgeable of the law, not aggressive. MOM has the same political leanings, the same mannerism, way of speaking. The first lawyers were aggressive, harsh, abrasive. This cause a rift, a certain incompartibity and it showed. MOM with his passive ways was appealing to GZ.
        To me, that means tha t MOM is GZ’ s attorney because GZ wants him to be.

      • jello333 says:

        MOM has tried one tactic: Expressing sympathy for Trayon’s family, and continually calling the death a “tragedy”. He’s done this partly in hopes of easing tensions, especially racial tensions. If that had worked, I’d probably say it was a good tactic. But it hasn’t. It has had near ZERO positive impact.

        So I think it’s time to change tactics, and finally just go with the full truth of the matter. That being that as unfortunate as it is that a young man died, it was completely Trayon’s own fault, and even MORE unfortunate is what happened to George that night, and what has happened to him since. In addition, blame for both what led up to that night, as well as the aftermath, needs to be laid partly on Sybrina and Tracy. The time for sympathy expressed for those people is long past, considering their LIES and what they’ve tried to do to George and his family.

        • boricuafudd says:

          Jello, Zero positive impact, I think has been a disaster. It has made it appear that TM is blameless. It has provided cover for the family to go around the country, with trash cans collecting money, trying to gain more sympathy for the “tragedy”.
          Anytime, someone would mention the excessive travel and the trashcan, they were shouted down, as insensitive, racist for critiquing the family. It helped the “Narrative” take over the conversation. It’s been a disaster, it’s kept scrutiny of the shenanigans in the dark.

          • justfactsplz says:

            I agree, it has been a total disaster.

            • boricuafudd says:

              D-Man was asking why the Scheme Team had not taken advantage of MOM’s compromising position? I think they have, they have had free reign in the press. Think back to the time MOM said, my thinks he is innocent, or when he called the SYG law a ridiculous law. These statements all helped the Scheme Team and in the case of the SYG law, coincided with their push to have the law repealed.

              • justfactsplz says:

                Yes I remember those statements. I cringed every time he said he thought George was innocent. He was obviouisly playing to the other side, tamping things down. He lets too much slide. Bernie says in court the Black Panthers alledgedly threatened George. Omara says nothing. Come on, it was on national t.v. on the courthouse steps. No alledgedly about it.

                • boricuafudd says:

                  Speaking of Bernie, remember when GZ was asking for a modification, so that he would be able to leave Seminole county. I paraphrase ” the danger to GZ and the family is being overstated, GZ is in no danger.”
                  Bernie speaking at the last hearing, paraphrasing again,”we can’t give you W8 address, GZ’s life has been threatened, so has W8.”
                  MOM’s respond to this, “huh”

                  • justfactsplz says:

                    I know. George’s life if in far more danger than DeeDee’s. I have not heard of any threats to the Trayvonites, but lots of threats to George, family, and friends. Omara has had a lot of missed opportunities to speak out.

                  • boricuafudd says:

                    If I was MOM, I would refile a motion to modify the terms of release on Bond, and quote BDLR, just to watch him flap his arms.

        • Sharon says:

          MOM’s handlers have tactics. He has coping mechanisms.

        • Angel says:

          “Expressing sympathy for Trayon’s family, and continually calling the death a “tragedy”. He’s done this partly in hopes of easing tensions, especially racial tensions. If that had worked, I’d probably say it was a good tactic. But it hasn’t. It has had near ZERO positive impact. ”

          MOM seems to be coming around on that, Jello:

          “Following the hearing, defense attorney Mark O’Mara said Zimmerman has talked to him about the one-year anniversary of the shooting.
          “He is sorry but every time we say he’s sorry and traumatized by Trayvon’s death, they say we’re being insensitive to the Martin family,” O’Mara said. “It’s been a traumatic year for both parties. The anniversary will be a sign that this has been a long, long year with no resolution.”

          From the article @

      • art tart says:

        maggiemoowho, while I see and respect your point, each person has to look within themselves at their moral compass, as a Christian I would feel terribly for the family however misguided they are at times if I were in GZ’s shoes, I would be remorseful someone died at my hands. GZ lived, he had every right to protect himself from the further beat down from TM, and he did just that. It’s not Sybina/Tracy’s fault TM decided to assault GZ, it is their fault for providing no supervision for a 17 yr. old that had a history of trouble and bad decisions. Blame will decided by 6 juror’s, I don’t see how MOM/West disrespecting the parent’s of TM accomplish one thing but to cause MOM/West/GZ more unwanted criticism from legal analyst, and there are many. The deposition is the venue MOM/West can address and call out Sybrina and Tracy for any lies and they will be under oath, they will then have to testify to it in the trial.

        maggiemoowho, I see victim’s of horrendous crimes forgive their attackers all the time, it’s part of the healing process if you have ever participated in a program as a crime victim. Many victim’s that are hospitalized for months, not victims that walked away from killing someone choose to forgive their attacker’s and move on in their lives mentally healthy. To each his own, I agree with Bill Sheaffer’s opinion, more importantly, it’s the impression it leaves on the potential jury pool, not on blogger’s that have already made up their minds in the case. I personally think GZ should be acquitted, but I am not a candidate for the jury.

        • justfactsplz says:

          George felt very badly that he had to shoot Trayvon. It tore him up and he did feel bad for the family. His apology to them came from his heart.

          • jello333 says:

            Yeah, and when are Tracy and Sybrina (not to mention a bunch of other people) gonna apologize to George????

            • justfactsplz says:

              I know. All that they have caused. I don’t think people like this have a conscious. They say they are christians and yet their behavior is sickening.

              • ejarra says:

                Maybe it’s just me and the way I think, but I don’t understand why, from day one, Georgie didn’t ask for an apology from the parents. I would have said something like, “I’m sorry that you son died. I’m sorry that I was put in a position that in order to save my life, I needed to use my gun and shoot and take his. I’m sorry that a life was taken because I was put in a life or death situation; his life or mine. I’ve apologized for that. My question is, when will they apologize for their son’s brutal attack which could have killed me. When? I’m waiting.”

                I believe that if he were to say over and over and over and over again that he had NO CHOICE and that he believed HIS LIFE was in danger. If he said this via his lawyers, friends and family, public perception would be very different and much more sympathetic to him.

                Again, maybe it’s just me and the way I think.

                • justfactsplz says:

                  You bring up a very good point that I have not thought of. He should ask for an apology. It would go along way from the perception of murder. People need to here this.

                • jello333 says:

                  I’ve now seen enough of these people, that I truly believe this:

                  Let’s say George had not fired, and that he had, himself, wound up dead, or maybe in a coma, or brain-damaged. Let’s say Trayvon was eventually caught and brought to justice. While he was on trial, I do not for one second believe that Tracy or Sybrina, or anyone like Crump and their ilk, would have one good thing to say about George. They would NOT apologize for what Trayvon had done.

                  I’m sorry, but based on what I’ve seen of these people, I truly believe that.

        • Angel says:

          I agree that MOM shouldn’t attack the family as it would not bode well for GZ and his defense. OTOH, apologize once and move on as the apologies are not being received. I believe Crump said at the beginning of this thing when GZ was requesting a meeting to apologize prior to the first bond hearing that GZ could apologize from the witness seat in the courtroom (paraphrasing). An apology in the form of a trial is the only apology that they will be receptive too.

        • maggiemoowho says:

          You put a heavy burden of guilt into the feelings that you would have if you were George. Not sure what you mean by disrespecting TM and his Family, I don’t think anyone is suggesting that anyone be disrespectful. Forgiveness, I agree with you, forgiveness is a huge step needed in order to heal/move on. Forgiveness isn’t an issue. As for impression on a jury pool, this case should not need a jury pool. This case should have never seen the inside of a courtroom.

      • Angel says:

        “IMO, George is the only one that should matter to the defense, he is fighting for his life and future. George is the VICTIM in this case, not TM. The feelings of his TM’s family should not even be an issue. They sure in heck aren’t concerned with Georges or his family’s”

        Maggiemoowho: I read an article yesterday that clearly demonstrates that MOM trying to placate and convince others is clearly not working. All that happens is that what he says is just twisted around to make it seem like he is either talking nonsense and/or in consensus with their perspective.

        Johnathan Capehart’s response to MOM’s response on GZ’s legal site to his original article:

        Take note of Crump’s statement and the fact that MOM called Capehart to discuss his concerns.

        • maggiemoowho says:

          Angel thank you for posting that link, I didn’t know he responded back to MOM.
          No matter what MOM says, if it sounds like it might favor GZ or support the case, TM supporters will turn it around or choose not to understand. Crumps statement in that article caught my attention though, Crump said that they are glad to see that MOM finally agrees with them that this case is not a Stand Your Ground case. Then why are they going around the country collecting donations and fighting to have the SYG Law repealed.

          • Angel says:

            “No matter what MOM says, if it sounds like it might favor GZ or support the case, TM supporters will turn it around or choose not to understand.”

            That is why it is no point in MOM trying to fight that battle. Fighting those battles can lead to him losing the war.

            And Maggiemoowho, you are welcome.

        • John Galt says:

          Opposing lawyers agree that Capehart is wrong, yet Capehart remains confident he is right.

          “If the “Stand Your Ground” portion of the law was to be applied to the Zimmerman Case, even if George had an ability to retreat, he would not be required to do so before utilizing deadly force. In this particular case, George did not have an ability to retreat because he was on the ground with Trayvon Martin mounting him, striking blows, therefore the “Stand Your Ground” “benefit” given by the statute simply does not apply to the facts.

          Confused? This circuitous logic is what kept O’Mara and me on the phone for more than 40 minutes. Even though standing one’s ground has nothing to do with physically standing to defend oneself, O’Mara insists on making it part of his rationale for why SYG doesn’t apply.

          When I asked Benjamin Crump on Friday afternoon for his reaction to O’Mara’s assertion, I was surprised to hear that the lawyer for Trayvon’s parents agreed with the attorney for his killer.”

          Capehart’s errant conclusion:

          “Now the question is this here. Let’s don’t have a play on words and semantics and so forth. If he’s going to have a “stand your ground” hearing then call it a “stand your ground” hearing. Let’s don’t try to play on the public’s intelligence. It’s one of those things that you see where people want it both ways. And you can’t have it both ways. … If it’s not “stand your ground” then let’s go ahead and have the trial. Let’s go have the trial.”

          The immunity section of the statute 776.032 does not even reference a hearing, let alone a SYG hearing. The Peterson case in which the Florida Supreme Court ruled that the immunity determination pursuant to 776.032 should be made in connection with a pretrial evidentiary hearing does not refer to a “stand your ground” hearing:

          So it appears that Capehart stands alone against MOM, Crump, the statute and the Florida Supreme Court.

  28. recoverydotgod says:

    “The horizon only appears to show GZ at trial which is, by itself, a complete farce.”

    That’s a really great sentence! Almost musical…certainly artistic.

    [i.e. when you read it visually your eye removes "GZ at" leaving "show trial"...and that's just one example!]

  29. Springstreet says:

    To George … Alan Dershowitz was asked why he wasn’t defending you and he responded : no one has called. George! You need a real trail attorney, not a couple of good ole boys who smirk with the politically corrupt prosecution to maintain their local standing. Hire Dershowitz! Then ask yourself who was the other driver in the car you said pulled out as you saw a hooded figure at the cut-thru. That will corroborate your location and stomp on Crump’s front gate lies. THEN, ask yourself this: when you later described the teen had stone washed jeans … you meant BLUE JEANS … and at the cut-thru … right? That’s because the first (shorter) hooded teen was not the tan pants (taller) hooded TM who attacked you in the dark! Remember their different sneaker colors! And remember before Crump got involved, Tracey said Trayvon came in the back gate to get to Brandy’s porch … and that information could only have come from whom HE called first. Trayvon was DRIVEN! … and you know this because the prosecutors have shared no security footage showing Trayvon either walked to or walked back from the 7/11. Good God man … you’re innocent. Stop with this DD address nonsense: she was 7 years old in kindergarten and no smarter now. Release EVERY phone’s GPS and Ping Log records and show you and Travon never crossed paths. If there is no chase … there is no case.

    • Lou says:

      you’re kidding or a troll right?

      • Springstreet says:

        Lou, In a TV interview did Tracey Martin (before he met with Crump) point to and state that Trayvon came in the back gate? True or False? In GZ’s next day walk-thru, did he say he had to wait for another car as he was noticing a (not tall) hooded figure? True or False? In the police testimony, did they state that there was no relevant evidence in the roadside security camera footage? True or false? In TM’s cousin’s police testimony, did he state that he and TM DROVE to the 7/11 on the morning before the incident? True or False? In his police interview, did GZ add that the figure he saw under the streetlights was wearing stone washed jeans? True or false? Was TM’s cousin the first person Tracey called when his son never returned? True or false? Will a Tox Report show “Blunt” residue St Skittles fingers? If not, and TM didn’t stop in the woods, then where the Hell was TM for the missing hour … other than where Brandy said he was – on the porch? Troll?

    • justfactsplz says:

      Dershowitz no longer practices law according to his recent conversations with someone I know.

      • ottawa925 says:

        @JFP … his website states he does, but very few “each year” and are limited to appellate cases. IDK if SpringStreet is referring to the short reply I got from Dershowitz, but his answer was more in the vein of media. That’s how I took it because I asked why we haven’t seen him comment in the media. And he said: “I respond when I’m asked”.

        the website:

      • jello333 says:

        And the question posed to him about why he doesn’t give his opinion about the case was regarding the media, NOT the defense team. He was saying the media hasn’t asked him. As for the defense team, who knows?… maybe they HAVE been in contact.

        • justfactsplz says:


        • jordan2222 says:

          Is anyone surprised that the normal army of legal pundits have been largely silent about this case? Such was not the case during the CA charade.

          • art tart says:

            jordan2222, imo, there was so much more forensic evidence in the case, so many experts doing interviews, reports, friends doing depositions about KC, tens of thousands of pages of discovery, endless pictures, texts, computer information, etc. plus, Caylee was a profoundly sympathetic murder victim.

            imo, in GZ’s case, blogger’s are divided as to the circumstances, the evidence, and if GZ should be acquitted or convicted. Not many sites, analysts, or commentator’s thought KC was innocent of anything, ONLY KC’s defense team/experts/family did the media blitz continually speaking up for KC and many times were challenged by the Interviewer as the information just wasn’t believable. The public remains divided in this case.

          • ottawa925 says:

            Noticed it immediately. First, I want to say I have never seen as stupid a trial as this Jodi Arias trial. #1 the ONLY reason they show it day and night is because it’s all about SEX. It’s like reading the book 50 shades of grey in a courtroom. I found it boring and all this testimony about sex just awful. Here’s the deal on that case … she killed him out of rage … not self-defense. The way she killed him would demonstrate rage, so why they are spending time with having to know every detail of their sex life is beyond me. She could have walked away from that relationship anytime she wanted. But the coverage is unreal. There is no mystery here, it’s just about ratings and providing titilatting fare for the audience. It’s on BOTH In Sessions, and then Nancy Grace and so on and so forth.

            But as I have said before, ohhhh they will be running to cover Zimmerman closer to Immunity Hearing and certainly for trial. To bad they don’t realize part of the big story is what is happening right now. Media is full of idiots.

            • rumpole2 says:

              I agree totally on Jodi Arias case.
              I had no real interest in the case.. so asked why all the interest… I have been linked to some of the “sex” testimony… explicit stuff, but nothing to do with the killing that I can see??

              There is need for the MSM to report the truth about GZ case.. and counter some of the misinformation.. now…. at when the immunity hearing and trial happen… but they simply will not do that. The reporters we see in print and on TV are themselves misinformed.. so all they might do is add to the public’s misconceptions.

              • jordan2222 says:

                I doubt that anything they say will influence the outcome, but it would sure be nice to see ALL of the facts revealed in an honest manner.

                I said this in a previous post:

                Whether it was a suggestion or an order… whether it was vague or direct. Doesn’t matter. For a number of reasons. One of them being that no matter HOW we define what the dispatcher said and what authority he had, the fact is this: When the dispatcher said, “We don’t need you to do that”, George DID stop following.

                Sean (the dispatcher) will testify FOR the defense. He’ll say that he in effect ASKED George to get out of the truck… albeit inadvertently.

                “Just let us know if this guy does anything else.” (TWICE)

                “He’s running? Which way is he running?”

                How could George possibly answer those questions without George getting out of his truck. If

                It will interesting to see how they cover Crump now he has been proven to be such a liar.

          • janc1955 says:

            In terms of pundits, I find myself wishing Judge Jeanine Pirro (Fox) would grab hold of this with the same focus and ferocity she grabbed hold of both Benghazi and now, gun control and the outing of legal gun owners by that newspaper. I don’t know how long she hangs on once she sinks her teeth into something, but she’s quite eloquent when she does. I’m not sure any of it will do any good, but I’m seriously desperate for someone like Pirro to study up on this case and eloquently expose exactly what’s been happening to George Zimmerman, his wife and family for the past year.

            • jordan2222 says:

              She would be excellent at covering this case and exposing the corruption. She does that very well.

            • ottawa925 says:

              Sundance just posted her latest … see lead thread on Chicago. Boy, she really unloaded. Last time I saw her have a segment on the GZ she seemed rather tepid, but you have to remember … unless these media ppl come over and read the TreeHouse … they have no idea about all this stuff. We’ve got to get those ppl up to snuff especially on the Crump/BDLR/DD saga.

    • ottawa925 says:

      Street, can you tell us more about this “driving” business? How do you know? Is this a theory, or do you have legitimate info? George states first thing to NEN he sees a person walking about … key word “walking”. He also states TM approached his vehicle, walked around the vehicle. So where does this “vehicle” come in?

      • justfactsplz says:

        I have never heard there was a car involved. He was on foot when George spotted him.

      • Springstreet says:

        ottawa925, I just responded to “lou” above, but in a nutshell this is the “theory”: Teenagers don’t walk anywhere … much less in the rain during a nonexistent NBA half time. And, we already know TM was DRIVEN to the 7/11 in the morning (and he had no driver’s license or car). And, (so far) there is no witness or security camera footage identifying TM going to or from the 7/11. SO … where was he WALKING and why wasn’t his clothing soaked?
        Before Crump got to them, Tracey said TM came in the back gate and Brandy said TM was on the porch. Why not believe them? So, if TM was on the porch for the missing hour, who was the other hooded figure (that GZ never described as 6′-3″) walking or standing at the cut-thru … then walking around GZ’s truck? And remember, the next day GZ added that the first figure he saw had stone washed jeans, BUT when TM was seen at the 7/11 and when he died he had on TAN pants!
        I’d say someone should be looking at some traffic cameras that record cars (with TWO teenagers) going through yellow lights on the night of the incident.

        • ottawa925 says:

          Street, thank you for coming back to expand on what you think happened. You are giving me something to think about here. It’s kind of a curve ball, but nevertheless, you asked (Lou) some interesting questions that would lend some credence to what you are saying. Let’s keep an open mind on your theory. One thing for sure is I wish we could see more discovery.

  30. Sha says:

    Has anyone heard anything about Erin Burnett Out Front doing a report on the Zimmerman case on Monday Night on CN its suppose to be called Trayvon one year later…. The Zimmerman letters.

  31. ottawa925 says:

    I was just wondering … there may be ppl out there that know something. Could defense offer a reward for any information leading to the “acquittal” of GZ? We always hear for “leading to the arrest of”, or “leading to the conviction of”, but can defense ask the public for info leading to acquittal of?

    • diwataman says:

      That’s a good idea but why depend on the defense to do it? I’d rather ordinary people could gather together their own fund together and offer it for something groundbreaking that would end this entire farce and not just acquittal. Something like a taped conversation between Wolfinger and Scott/Bondi for him to either prosecute or move out of the way would be exciting.

  32. ed greene says:

    I sent an email to Alan asking why he doesnt do a Mitzvah(a good deed) and help with your case because he doesnt have to deal with these Prosecutors and Judges in future like West and MOM do . So he can take gloves off and as soon as Tracy, Sybrana , Dee Dee deposed he can fight the arrest affadavit that he said was a joke in April and now is a bigger joke. He never answered me. But someone replied to My Febuary 22 comment asking Alan to go on some shows and discuss the case and he said no one asked him. So I suggest call as Many CNN shows, Fox Shows and tell him to get Dershowitz on again. If asked he said he will go on Network TV to comment. I still havent gotten response to my email sent Late Friday if I get an email I will post response.
    Remember West and MOM have to make a living in Florida, Dershowitz does not.
    So he said didnt say anything about defending George in court but if asked by a network show to go on he might, No one asked to go on TV recently and comment on GZ.

  33. ottawa925 says:

    It’s a lil after 7:00 p. here in ChiTown, and after reading ALL the comments thus far I would say that I understand the frustration when SunDance calls it like he sees it, but I need for someone to do that. Nobody can accuse him of mincing words, that’s fer sure. I do respect and understand where posters are coming from in their reluctance to pound on MOM or West at this point. I think we are still united to see this through to the end.

    Sharon said best what we are up against … just at a lower level:

    “Congress is allowing obama to ignore the Constitution. The officers of the Florida courts are allowing the officers of the court to ignore the Constitusion. “We” are not allowing anything. The people in authority have the power to do what they want–and those in authority over them are not stopping them.”

    You know each year I task myself with trying to pick the winner of the Kentucky Derby. I watch videos of the prep races, I look at past performance … the odds, and sometimes I say to myself … why am I even knocking myself out this year cause NO HORSE is going to be able to beat THIS HORSE. And of course THIS HORSE has very low odds, and unless I bet tons of money on that horse there is no way I can make any money with him betting what I can afford. So I am always looking for the horse or horses that I think can beat that favorite. ALL the odds are against me. Everything is against me. But the one thing I have in my favor are all the variables that go into winning. Going in they all have one thing in common … NONE have ever gone the distance they will be asked to run. THAT is in my favor against the favorite. Like the quest to pick a winner in the Derby, this trial has many variables. We have the prosecution as the favorite, but what all of us keep forgetting is that it is THEIR BURDEN to show Murder2. All the defense needs to do is discredit each and every piece of evidence as it is presented and discredit/minimize any witness brought forth. I think it will be easy to do in front of a jury. This is not a preponderance of the evidence but what comes down to “reasonable doubt”. Prosecution will not be able to prove WITHOUT A DOUBT for Murder2. So even tho we may have all our personal feelings about each and every person connected to this case, we should keep our eye on the prize.

    Just a comment on West. Quite frankly when West looked off balance it is because I think he was shocked … not totally shocked because he knew that was the argument (on opposing counsel) made by Blackwell. But shocked that Nelson with no explanation accepted the definition of Crump as “opposing counsel”. The timing of these motions, responses and replies are throwing me. Blackwell filed his response, but there was no time left for defense to “reply”. West could have made the case as to what DEFINES opposing counsel and provided case law to support. Instead, there was no time for any kind of reply.

    • ottawa925 says:

      Further, and correct me if I am wrong, with regard to Immunity Hearing, prosecution will have to prove the GZ intended to shoot Trayvon. Right? Who is more of the burden on in this one … defense or prosecution?

      • ottawa925 says:

        ^ my comment is in error and that was from a reading of a news site … imagine that.

        The intent is attached to Murder2. And the burden is on defense at Immunity Hearing. Always double check … which I didn’t.

      • Sharon says:

        prosecution will have to prove the GZ intended to shoot Trayvon.

        Maybe. But there were things the Grand Jury needed to hear before charges were filed against George to begin with. There are many things that the prosecution ordinarily has to prove before charges are filed. Not only did they not have to prove those things before charges were filed in this case, but the evidence at hand within the Sanford Police Department indicated that the things that needed to be true in order to file charges–were not true. And the things that were true led the police officers on the scene to conclude there was no basis for charges. But charges were filed anyway. Without a Grand Jury.

        This is absolutely not intended to be a smart aleck remark–I wish it was: Yes, there probably are rules that say what the prosecution has to prove: that, however, does not mean the prosecution has to prove anything.

        It’s called crazy-making.

        • ottawa925 says:

          But it will be up to a jury … not Nelson like the Immunity Hearing. Anything in Nelson’s hands from here on out is KaPUT! Like another poster said … a jury seems to be able to sift through the BS very quickly, and have a sense of who is trying to pull what. If there is even ONE person on the jury that feels the trial is being conducted in an unfair manner, and the prosecution and judge are working away to hamstring the defense, they will pick up on it, and THAT whether prosecution/Nelson like it not WILL factor into a juror’s mind. Nobody likes to see the little guy get beat up by the big guys, cause they will picture themselves in GZ’s shoes and think … this could be me. The schemers have the upper hand right now, but once a jury comes into the picture the scheming will work against them.

    • lovemygirl says:

      As a fellow Chitowner, born in Lousiville who saw Secretariat when I was a toddler, I never research who will win the Derby, I just go by names and looks. I’ve won more often than not and have about two dozen Derby glasses. ;)

    • John Galt says:

      “The timing of these motions, responses and replies are throwing me. Blackwell filed his response, but there was no time left for defense to “reply”.”

      Nelson allowed Blackwell to proceed in a bassakwards manner to the major detriment of the defense. In usual practice, and in accordance with Rule 3.220, the party seeking to block a protective order files a motion for protective order and bears the burden of showing good cause why the deposition should not be taken. If it was handled properly, Blackwell would have had to submit his 18 page smoke screen first, and then the defense would have had an opportunity to respond.

      Recall what actually happened. Blackwell, without filing any papers, was permitted to make an oral motion and thereafter filed an affidavit in open court, depriving the defense of any opportunity to prepare a response, conduct legal research, or even read the affidavit. Nelson then accepted the affidavit and transferred the burden to the defense to show why the deposition should proceed, WITHOUT even having a written statement of Blackwell’s grounds for opposing the deposition. The defense was then forced to file a motion with a strange title: Motion Regarding Deposition of Benjamin Crump. Why so strange? Because ordinarily there would be a Motion For Protective Order filed by Blackwell and an Opposition or Response to Motion For Protective Order filed by the defense.

      What should have happened:

      Blackwell: Your honor, may I be heard?
      Nelson: Have you entered an appearance or filed a motion?
      Blackwell: No, but this is an urgent matter. I just received a notice of Mr Crump’s deposition and I wish to seek a protective order to preclude that deposition.
      Nelson: Do you have a copy of your motion ready to file today?
      Blackwell: No, I was going to make an oral motion.
      Nelson: I’m not going to allow you to make an oral motion. I will give you two days to file and serve a written motion making a showing of good cause as required by Rule 3.220 after which the defense will have two days to file and serve their response. The hearing on the matter will be at time, date. I am ordering that Mr. Crump’s deposition shall be postponed until further order of the Court.

      Nelson allowed Blackwell to screw the defense procedurally by shifting the 3.220 burden to show good cause from Blackwell to the defense.. A rather clever ploy by Blackwell.

  34. rumpole2 says:

    A general thought FWIW.

    I do see the wider picture.. the politics, the scheme team, the machinations of MOM and the Florida legal establishment etc.. all of that.
    But my focus still remains on GZ and this case.

    The big picture(s) stuff (IMO) is too hard to solve… this case will get lost if you got at it from that angle, but…… if you go after this case and win, then some of the wider stuff will be exposed.

    I’d like to think the whole House of Cards will fall if we can pull out the GZ case card…. but maybe not…. I will settle for just a win for George.

    • justfactsplz says:

      I too want more than anything for George to win his freedom. Along with that desire I believe the truth must be shone in the light regardless which side that truth is about. That is what this website stands for, Truth Has No Agenda. Go Wolverines!

  35. ejarra says:

    I found this on my twitter page:

  36. ottawa925 says:

    It’s the usual type of email format from these shows, but here is link to Hannity to request he have Alan Dershowitz on his show to discuss the case. Perhaps you could mention the areas you want them to talk about … like the ruling on the taking of the Deposition of Crump.

    Just DO IT !!!!

  37. sundance says:

    O’Maras position in an analogy:

    Husband (O’Mara) is having an affair. Mistress in his bedroom when wife (Corey) unexpectedly comes home. Bedroom door is slightly ajar and wife see’s hubby having sex with mistress. Hubby hears noise, looks up and thinks he sees wife walking away.

    Mistress runs out back door, hubby dresses and walks casually into kitchen where wife is making sandwich. Wife says nothing and acts surprised to see hubby home….. Hubby trying to figure out *if* he’s lucky and got away with it, or if he actually did see her in door and she is just acting casual.

    Wife never lets on, and hubby is left trying to figure out… his mind plays games.

    Later that night wife revisits a request for a trip hubby was previously opposed to due to finances. With the new worry/concern amid his mind hubby is trying to figure out if he should retain prior position, or if this might be some unspoken acquiescence to atone.

    Angela Corey / BDLR is the wife.
    Mark O’Mara is the hubby.
    George Zimmerman is the mistress who just got screwed.

  38. eastern2western says:

    dershowitz is completely right because the governor is willing to sacrifice zimmerman to avoida a la-style riot. Judging from the fact that judge nelson kept interrupting the defense while allowing blackwell and the prosecution to finish their speeches, she is given specific orders to convict zimmerman at all costs. with her recent judgments, it is obvious that she will not provide extra times for the defense to prepare for the trial while making the discovery process as difficult as possible( 2 weeks and a hearing for her to make the decision on crump is a perfect example which is extremely odd because it is obvious that crump has relevant information on the case). the only way for the defense to even have any chance of winning is directly taking this case to the federal courts because zimmerman is getting his civil rights violated (the right of have a fair trial). florida courts will not be sufficient because the governor has designed steps to sacrifice zimmerman to avoid possible riots. It is a sad day in american justice to watch a judge defending liar crump.

    • boricuafudd says:

      Let’s say we are only half right, that political pressure was exerted just to charge GZ, without the outcome being decided in order to avoid rioting. Nothing more.
      Think of the precedent is sets, their is a reason why governments do not bow to terrorist demands, because once you give in, they will continue to do it and escalate it.
      IMO that is where we are we allow the threat of urban terrorism dictate the rule of law and subverted. If this precedent is allowed, the consequences for our society will be severe.

      • eastern2western says:

        but this case is an obviouse example in here. crump is protected because he might file a civil suit against zimmerman in the future? then does this mean that he is allow to do practically anything in the name of might or future civil suits. nelson is proctecting him like a baby by practically preventing the defense to even speak at all while allowing blackwell and prosecution to do what ever they want. the only way to find true justic is the federal courts because zimmerman is getting his civil rights violated. the governor appointing a specil prosecutor to basically convict zimmerman and the prosecutor used her unlimited powers to accuse shellie zimmerman of perjury. this case is a mockary of the justice system.

        • boricuafudd says:

          That may very well be, where this is headed, but in the meantime the State will continue this circus.

          • eastern2western says:

            nelson is suppose to judge and not take sides. In the last hearing, we can pratically hear nelson telling the defense to shut the f up while blackwell is making his bs presentation. since when did a possible future law suit protects a lawyer from being depose? how is crump not a relavant witness when he was the first one who made the initial contact with the most critical witness of the case? god, zimmerman should had just kept lester instead because nelson had basically kept all of the decisions made by lester and putted more restrictions on the defense. there was absolutely no point of removing lester at all because we all know that nelson will basically punt this case to the jury and she will probably do what ever it takes to make the defense to lose the case.

            • boricuafudd says:

              The case is not lost, what has the prosecution have? Some inconsistencies in GZ’s account, DD’s account that also reinforces GZ own account. Their case is all smoke, their interpretation of events which they can’t prove, versus GZ’s account that they can’t disprove.

              • rumpole2 says:

                At trial there is the hurdle of 6 potentially dopey jurors who will still be convinced that “Zimmerman was told to not get out of his truck”
                If lawyers and commentators and TV anchor people have that imprinted as a FACT still… what chance is there a jury wont? And that is but one example of absolutely untrue information that is now “hard fact” for many people.

                • boricuafudd says:

                  The NEN call will play a large role, in any proceeding but I would play the part where GZ gets out and then where Sean stated we don’t have to do that. I will continue to that for as many times as it takes, make sure I include it in any closing statement, and highlighted there too.

                  • ejarra says:

                    That’s not the part I would play over and over. The section where, while Georgie is still in the car, Sean twice says, “Let me know if he does something else.” Since much of the state’s case is based on Georgie exiting the truck, the jury would need to understand that in order to follow what Sean asked of him, HE NEEDED to EXIT his vehicle. I’d repeat that section until it looked like they got it.

                    Also, the part where he couldn’t give an address because he didn’t know exactly where he was would need to be repeated.

                    And lastly, I’d have his work boots along side of a pair of Jordans sitting right on MOM’s table for the jury to see and reference then when it came to the running part.

                  • boricuafudd says:

                    Good point, maybe spiced all this statements together, just what Sean said. A media guide.

                  • jordan2222 says:

                    Sean (the dispatcher) will testify FOR the defense. He’ll say that he in effect ASKED George to get out of the truck… albeit inadvertently. “Just let us know if this guy does anything else.” (TWICE) “He’s running? Which way is he running?”

                    Whether it was a suggestion or an order… whether it was vague or direct. Doesn’t matter. For a number of reasons. One of them being that no matter HOW we define what the dispatcher said and what authority he had, the fact is this: When the dispatcher said, “We don’t need you to do that”, George DID stop following

                  • boricuafudd says:

                    Jordan, do you know this as a fact or just extrapolating this based on your opinion? BTW, I agree.

                  • jordan2222 says:

                    I do not understand your question. It IS a fact that Sean said those things.

                  • boricuafudd says:

                    What I meant is has Sean been listed as a witness for the defense?

                  • jordan2222 says:

                    IDK, but that’s a great question. I suppose they will wait to see how the deposition goes. If he “sees” what happened as I described it, then for sure, he should be a good defense witness.

                • rumpole2 says:

                  After seeing Nelson in action at several hearings.. yesterday being “the last straw” I can see that SHE struggles to grasp the facts and cut through the scheme team crap. If she can’t do it, I have no faith in humble “average Joes” being able to. Especially since Nelson will be the Ringmistress at the Trial Circus.

                  • boricuafudd says:

                    Since we are speculating about the ability of jurors, let me speculate a little too. I have aspirations to an appointment to the FL Supreme Court, last time I was a finalist who with a little more support from a politically influencial group could have gotten in, I have been given orders that if I can expedite the case, keep things tamped down, it would certainly help the next time.
                    That is the background, now here come the Defense trying to muck things up, by accusing the somewhat prominent in its community, lawyer for the family in some shenanigans, that while influential to the case, are peripheral and could explode the case again along racial lines. I could allow this to continue open the can of worms, and do exactly what I was asked not to do, agitate things. As an added benefit if I redirect things away from him I could count on him to gather support for me in future. This is exactly what I do.

                    How did I do so far?

                  • rumpole2 says:

                    based on Nelson’s audition so far… I would not hire her as a housekeeper.

              • jello333 says:

                Agreed. Sometimes with all these disgusting games by the prosecution and Scheme Team, and the… well I don’t know WHAT to call what Idiot Nelson is doing… but anyway, with all that, it’s easy to forget just how STRONG George’s case is. And how incredibly WEAK the State’s case is.

                • boricuafudd says:

                  Among the many interesting things in this case is that the roles have been reversed. The prosecution has so far stated that they planned to poke holes in GZ’s case. Lacking their own conclusive evidence, as they have admitted, they are left with trying to fault the Defense. If that by itself is does not lead to reasonable doubt, nothing will, unless due to jury nullification they convict.

        • justfactsplz says:

          It is a terribel travesty. Our Just A System is broken.

          • Flaladybug says:

            JFP….I knew about the Sherman Ware case in Sanford had MANY of the same players as well but I just found out the judge in the case was….JUDGE DEBRA NELSON!!! I would say I’m shocked but NOTHING about these people surprise me anymore. Do you think any of that fiasco is coming into play in George’s case….as in….old grudges or we let the SPD get by with that so YOU OWE US!!??

            • justfactsplz says:

              Oh my gosh. George really went to bat for Sherman Ware when no one else would. Could this be a conflict of interest? It could be a personal vindetta. I wish there was a way to get this judge off of this case.

              • Flaladybug says:

                That’s what I was thinking. Nat Jack was Ware’s atty, and several of the officers investigated are on George’s case including the lead investigator was reported to be the first one on the scene with George!!! WTH IS UP WITH OUR STATE???

                • justfactsplz says:

                  Corruption, that is what is up. Sometimes lately I think I would love to get out of this state. I knew Nat Jackson had worked with George on the Ware case. She knew who George was when this shooting of Trayvon took place. He was on her side and look how she belittles him today. I would like to see this case tried out of Seminole County without a Seminole County judge.But even that would do no good when the president and Holder are overseeing this case.This case should be a wake up call to all of America. It could happen to you.

                • diwataman says:

                  Just an FYI, Serino wasn’t part of the Ware thing. I forget now which of the officers were investigated that were also part of George’s case but from what I remember it was like two or three.

                  • jello333 says:

                    And Chief Lee neither, from what I remember.

                  • diwataman says:

                    Right, the Chief was Tooley at the time.

                  • brutalhonesty says:

                    I had always thought serino WAS there during sherman ware, and that was part of his issue wanting to get George so bad? I certainly came across it said like that. Was it perhaps a “leak” from the scheme team to deflect from them? Kinda like the “trayvon is checking car doors on the sams club and kohls tapes” was?(or appeared to be, since we have not seen the video yet to know what is or is not there)

                    sidenote: even though I dont believe thats what was on there….I do think its among the possibilities. I think he was on tape smoking a blunt,and the cars was a misdirect so they can say “the zimmbots lied, those treehouse racists” if it caught on and was discussed her substantially. But…what if…..since we dont know yet….what if….what if that is what it shows. that certainly would be an explanation to the missing time between 711 and bumping into george. that could turn a 15 minute walk into an hour. of course, so could smoking a blunt, or just a regular black and mild (i remember sneaking around to smoke cigs at that age….and like trays jewlery, it was never mine….I found it or was holding it for a friend)…and many other things.
                    in the end though, trayvon, not george, is the one with missing time, and that really is one of their major things they say about george. projecting. we dont know about 2 minutes of georges time other than he was attacked. trayvon though…..he is missing almost an hour from 711, and almost 5 minutes after he runs from george. I can not for the life of me (other than media bias) understand why they dont discuss his missing time, and worry about georges.

                  • Flaladybug says:

                    You’re correct Dman…I wasn’t clear in what I posted. What I read was that the lead Detective in the Ware case was the first on the scene after the shooting. Of course this was reported by ABC and OS so it DEFINITELY should be researched more to be certain.

                  • jordan2222 says:

                    From my older notes

                    More proof of Zimmerman’s “racism”:

                    “Do you know the individual that stepped up when no one else in the black community would?” “Do you know who spent tireless hours putting flyers on the cars of persons parked in the churches of the black community? Do you know who waited for the church‐goers to get out of church so that he could hand them fliers in an attempt to organize the black community against this horrible miscarriage of justice? Do you know who helped organize the City Hall meeting on January 8th, 2011 at Sanford City Hall??”

                    Zimmerman was one of “very few” in Sanford, Fla., who spoke out publicly to condemn the “beating of the black homeless man Sherman Ware on December 4, 2010 by the son of a Sanford police officer.”

                    The NAACP is well aware of his activism in supporting blacks here.

                    The 2 officers against whom he protested in his support for Ware were 2 of the officers who investigated him in this Martin case.

                    The officers whom Zimmerman targeted for accountability in the Sherman Ware incident were all cleared by the Seminole County Sheriff’s investigation, despite Zimmerman’s repeated accusations that police gave kid-glove treatment to a white officer’s son who beat a defenseless, homeless black man.
                    But 14 months later, at least two of the same officers investigated the shooting death of Trayvon Martin — and cleared Zimmerman — even though his voice was the loudest calling for their punishment in the Ware case.
                    One of those officers was Timothy Smith. According to a police incident report from the scene of the Feb. 26 shooting, Officer Smith handcuffed Zimmerman and transported him to the police station. Another was Sergeant Anthony Raimondo, who was on scene with Smith and other local officers.

                  • jello333 says:

                    I’m not sure anything about this case makes me more angry than this. The fact that these people KNOW George called for justice in the Ware case, and they KNOW that he volunteered to mentor two black kids, and they KNOW that one of the “bad” incidents people talk about in George’s past involved him defending a black friend…. and yet they still call him racist, hateful, selfish, etc.

                    These people are just simply VILE human beings.

                  • jordan2222 says:

                    Nat Jackson was the attorney and knows the entire truth about George. Go figure.

                  • ejarra says:

                    I say call her as a character witness FOR George let her try to lie her way out of it on the stand. Let her say I don’t remember. Show the proof that she should know and remember Georgie’s role in helping with the Sherman Ware case and let the public decide. Threaten to expose her and watch her writhe.

                  • jello333 says:

                    Oh… that’s a brilliant idea. Natty can lie, and risk being caught in that lie. Or she can tell the truth, while smoke pours out of her ears, as she describes how helpful George was in that case. ;)

  39. Stand your Groound law won’t be overturned…

    TALLAHASSEE – Florida’s “Stand Your Ground” law works and should not be overturned, but the standards for neighborhood watch groups should be looked at by the Legislature, a state task force concluded Friday.
    The 44-page report released by Republican Gov. Rick Scott’s office said people have a right to feel safe and secure in Florida and have a fundamental right to stand their ground and defend themselves from attack. Most of the recommendations had already been made public.

    The report, however, recommended that legislators look at neighborhood watch groups. The parents of Trayvon Martin, a teenager killed a year ago by neighborhood watch volunteer George Zimmerman, had asked the task force to change the 2005 law.

    Tracy Martin and Sybrina Fulton asked the task force last June to support a “Trayvon Martin amendment” to the law, which would make it harder for someone who starts a fight to use a self-defense argument under the law.

    “Just review and amend it,” Fulton said then. “I had to bury my son at 17. He was committing no crime. He was doing no wrong.”

    Sybrina is so desperate…………………………..bless her heart………………………..

  40. Angel says:

    “A man lives with integrity every day.

    In Maycomb County, Atticus was known as a man who was “the same in his house as he is on the public streets.” That was the standard he lived by. He did not have one set of morals for business and one for family, one for weekdays and one for weekends. He was incapable of doing anything that would broach the inviolable sanctity of his conscience. He made the honorable decision, even when that decision was unpopular.

    “This case, Tom Robinson’s case, is something that goes to the essence of a man’s conscience-Scout, I couldn’t go to church and worship God if I didn’t try to help that man.”

    “Atticus, you must be wrong…”

    “How’s that?”

    “Well, most folks seem to think they’re right and you’re wrong…”

    “They’re certainly entitled to think that, and they’re entitled to full respect for their opinions,” said Atticus, “but before I can live with other folks I’ve got to live with myself. The one thing that doesn’t abide by majority rule is a person’s conscience.”

    Atticus understood that a man’s integrity was his most important quality-the foundation upon which his honor and the trust of others was built. Stripped of integrity, a man becomes weak and impotent, no longer a force for good in his family or community”

    Help wanted: An Atticus Finch for GZ!

    • Angel says:

      “Simply because we were licked a hundred years before we started is no reason for us not to try to win.” Atticus Finch

      • Angel says:

        I am going to vouch for that one by Atticus Finch. From the moment I was born, the odds were so against me. I weighed a little over 3 pounds;lived in an incubator for about 6-weeks. Came home and from my earliest memories until I was thrown out of my home by my egg donor at age 18, I suffered unspeakable abuse from her and my stepfather. I had some rough patches trying to make sense of all that and still at times I do. However, I was determined to say rise above that believing that I was not defeated unless and until I conceded defeat. And because of that, I was able to work, put myself through school, be a better human being, a better parent to my children than I received from mine. I grew up very poor, and would have not made it except for the love of the one who I considered my mom in every way, my maternal grandmother, who died a little over a year ago. Life aint been no crystal stair for me but I kept climbing and will until the day I die because simply trying to win, even if we don’t, is to win

        There is a message and meaning that can come from the mess.

  41. thefirstab says:

    Angel, I don’t post very often but maybe you have seen me here. I wanted to respond to your post , and offer a giant fist-pump, high five, back slap, whatever… as some have said here befote-
    YES, THIS.
    My story of adversity is not the same, not even close but in overcoming that adversity or obstacles in our pathit is similar. We all have our own demons large or small, and how we deal with them says so much about our true character.
    Best of luck and Godspeed with your future successes!

  42. Godzilla says:

    This entire case has no legal basis for indictment or trial. The use of a grand jury is mandated by constitution……it is Not an option that a prosecutor chooses to ignore! Read Scalia findings from 1993. GZ needs a constitutional lawyer and GZ needs a lawyer who excels at writing Bar Complaints. Full scale nuclear war against the Nazi prosecutor. Right now..not after a trial. I Know. I have been there!

Leave a Reply

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

You are commenting using your 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