Omar and Sibilj have provided some good food for thought regarding Mark O’Mara.   But before presenting their articulate comments for expansion I need to clarify a few things.
Some of you might see me use the term “prog” in many of my posts and comments.  Let me identify what I mean and position the backdrop for future understanding.  Truth has no agenda – People Do.
There is a keen, albeit difficult to grasp at times, distinction between advocacy and ideology.
I am open, wide open, to being an advocate for Mark O’Mara, but honesty, intellectual honesty, demands a substantive reason.  I have outlined twenty specific instances when my capacity to grant benefit of doubt, toward altruistic intention, has been stretched.
Simultaneously, by conviction, I must also be open to being more favorable to Trayvon Martin’s family position if presented with substantive, factual, and valid reasoning.

However, a typical leftist prog is done with their thought process or mindset.   Their mind is made up, and George Zimmerman is guilty no matter what.   Even if indisputable evidence is presented in front of them, they will find some way to dismiss it or avoid changing their position.
A true conservative patriot is principle driven;  they accept the right thing is often the hard thing;  by itself that central tenet demands one be open to logical factual considerations, or changes in opinion, based on newly known fact-based realities.   Perhaps this skill set is best described as “Cognitive Honesty”.
I’ll bet you can, if you have not already, visit a pro-Trayvon leftist/prog site with a known provable fact that supports George Zimmerman and still find it summarily dismissed.
Conversely, I would hope if a pro-Trayvon supporter were to visit us and provide a known provable fact against George Zimmerman we would accept it and re-evaluate our position.   See the difference?
That is why the  “O’Mara walks on water” meme bothers me considerably while I watch it carried here by many.   There is more than enough actual fact based, in your face evidence, to support an opinion of his inability, or ineptitude, than his ability or excellence.   Yet, surprisingly many people here are attached to such a mantra without intellectual honesty.   That concerns me, because it can lead to an echo-chamber if not kept in check.
In addition, I don’t care where the truth lands.   It is not part of my consideration at all.   I don’t look at it like a guilt or innocence question.   I look at it like a “what is the truth” question.
That is one of the specific reasons I have refused any contact requests for discussion.  My goal is to share the unfiltered truth as we can identify it.   Regardless of who looks like what, or how it shakes out for them?
That is why when something doesn’t sniff right, just doesn’t add up, we have to dig deeper.  Otherwise we only end up finding things we think are evidence because they  support  our pre-conception.   Meanwhile there might be an important bit overlooked because we have already found the evidence that fits our reference and we stop looking.   I am horribly anal about not doing that, and I know it annoys the crap out of people.   But “Truth” as we can earnestly find it, is the conclusion or goal we seek.
This is tough, because there is always a risk you will find something you don’t like, and there is nothing worse than finding out a person on your team is actually working for the other side.   But George Zimmerman ain’t gonna win his freedom if he is surrounded with hidden agenda’s and unexposed ulterior motives.
It is really that simple.
Now on to the better stuff.   First an exceptional consideration from Omar:

[…] Let’s suppose for a moment that you are a staunch conservative who works for a PR firm.  You get an assignment to create a campaign supporting Obama.  You see the potential that this has to boost your career, and being a “businessman” (you know, kinda like an attorney is a businessman), you take the assignment. 

But your media appearances and writings are drab and demonstrate to the masses that your heart doesn’t believe a single word you say about Obama being a brilliant mind with a heart of gold, a self-sacrificing individual who battles evil all in the name of aiding the cause of American Patriotism.  You’re saying one thing (less than half-heartedly), but your body language, your phrasing of ideas, your wording, indicate to the observer that you don’t believe a single word you’re saying because it goes against everything that you have, to this point in your life, ever stood for.  Your actions, demeanor and body language demonstrate that you took this job for the money, but you’re hoping you don’t get kicked out of your conservative group of friends….you’re hoping they don’t stop inviting you to their conservative get-together.  When interviewed by the media, you say something along the lines of, “yeah, I know Barak and Michelle are liars and they should apologize to the American people for the fraudulent actions they have engaged in, but I still believe he’s an honest guy who believes he can help the country out.”

Now….I KNOW that no true conservative would ever take that assignment even if it meant losing his or her job…..but, just pretend for a minute.

That is how I see O’mara’s representation of GZ.  If your attorney doesn’t feel passionately about your innocence, then he is going to be less inclined to FIGHT for it.  Oh sure, he’ll do his best to make sure you get a decent plea deal, but he’s not gonna waste too much energy on it.

Of course, that’s my opinion.  INAL.  But I am a human being with a certain level of cognitive ability.  I have seen other attorneys do media interviews dealing with their clients or their cases.  And those other attorneys I’ve seen either staunchly, boldly and endlessly proclaim their client’s innocence OR, if they feel they do not have enough evidence to make a determination, they challenge the weakness of the state’s case OR they say, “you know I can’t make a comment about that at this time.”

If I were in GZ’s shoes, I’d want someone who BELIEVED in me….who would fight passionately for me….even if it meant saying “no comment” to every question leveled by the media.  My gosh….what we’ve heard from O’mara when appearing in front of a camera is a bland oration which leads the hearer to feel that O’mara himself doesn’t really believe that GZ shot once in self-defense.

Crump said ONLY one thing I agree with.  We have to fight this battle in the jury of the public first.  The jurors ARE the public.  You would think that O’mara would at least bring a fly swatter with him to swat down the fabrications that Team Skittles spout.  But no….he brings….well, I’m not sure what he brings to tell the truth.

And Sibilj provides these thoughts:

I have more questions than answers regarding this local courthouse crowd, though from here it looks like the fix is in. 

Judge #1, #2 and NeJame all punt, placing it in the hands Lester and O’Mara.

Judge  #1′s husband is a partner of NeJame.  Judge #2 is a close buddy and godfather to kid of MOM.  Lester’s daughter interned for NeJame.  NeJame recommended MOM.  In his heavy-handed order, Lester praises MOM.  MOM has plea bargained with Lester’s wife.  Lester’s wife’s office was responsible for charging Zimmerman with two felonies in 2005.

Who backed his judgeship in 1996 against S. Kirby Moncrief, entering “the race at the last-minute after telling peers he would not run,” and why? What are Lester’s business holdings that made his, and his wife’s, investments “solid” at the age of 43?

Who is his 1996 and 2002 campaign manager, one his late father (Sr.) had a judgement against years earlier?? Who are Lester’s former defense clients, (cocaine dealer, strip club, etc, are on record)? What cases and pleas did his wife handle? NeJame has owns/owned nightclubs (Tabu, Zuma Beach) and sued prior management?

NeJame hired as analyst and writer by CNN 4/09/12, (punting to MOM), was married to former WESH anchor Wendy Chioji, walked out on a WESH presser in 2010. 

Is/was  the Courthouse Crowd threatened by a Scheme Team take down/takeover??!

Like I said, more questions than answers.  “Investigative journalism” is dead.  That’s why we are here.

Now, just to reaffirm, I like Mark O’Mara.   But that is not the issue I am intellectually challenged to grapple.   If likability would free Zimmerman I’d say put Mitch Daniels or Tim Tebow in charge, but that’s just me.
In my opinion, based  on what he is facing, George Zimmerman doesn’t need an affable chap for a lawyer.  He needs a fire-breathing dragon slayer of an attorney who is all ate up with it, stays in the office past midnight and demands his team to be flawless in execution of his strategy.   He needs a bull by the horns guy who commands attention as soon as he walks into the room.  More Chris Christie than Tim Pawlenty if you get what I’m saying.
Again, this is  all just my opinion, and nothing would please me more than to see O’Mara grow a strong spine, steel his resolve, become a staunch advocate, and distance himself from the wishy-washy self-interested hometown crew of “what’s in it for me” thinkers.
Alas, I just ain’t gettin’ that vibe.   Factually, if you distance yourself, and only look at the effort and outcome equation, O’Mara is failing miserably.
Sorry, but it’s true.
The question then becomes WHY?
So, if we want to help George Zimmerman we need to identify why.   Are the facts lining up to support inability, which can be corrected with support and a change in approach.   OR, is this something more, well, intentional in nature connected to the relationship issue that Omar outlined above.    Which is it?
So, we begin with the end in mind.   Use research to look at history, associations, ideology, prior outcomes, beliefs, and if we can identify if current behavior is based on past performance then what is the Mark O’Mara intent here?

• Mon 4/9  Angela Corey cancels Grand Jury
• Tue 4/10 Zimmerman’s previous two lawyers quit.   and George Zimmerman personally creates GZ.Com to begin collecting money for his defense et al.
• Wed 4/11 Mark O’Mara officially joins as George Zimmerman’s lead defense attorney.  This is the same day George is arrested.
  
• Thr 4/12  George Zimmerman’s first court appearance in front of Judge Recksiedler with Mark O’Mara as counsel.
• Fri 4/13 Judge Recksiedler announces conflict of interest and requests attorney consideration / opinion for recusal.
• Tue 4/17 Mark O’Mara requests recusal.
• Wed 4/18 Judge Reckseidler official notification of recusal.   Judge Lester takes over.
• Fri 4/20  George Zimmerman first bond hearing with Mark O’Mara.  (ABC exclusive head injury photograph released)
• Sun 4/22 Mark O’Mara appears on Geraldo show with Benjamin Crump.
• PART ONE
  
• PART TWO
  
• Mon 4/23 George Zimmerman released on $150,000 bond
• Tue 4/24  Mark O’Mara takes down GZ.Com website and takes over finances
• Thr 4/26  Mark O’Mara tells Anderson Cooper on CNN there is over $200,000 in defense funds as a result of the previous site.
• Fri 4/27  Mark O’Mara formally tells Judge Lester about the money

CNN Historical Transcripts Link HERE 

GZ Defense Website – “In the next hours and days the defense team will be working to get George released on bail and on effective strategies for moving forward. Much of our decision-making will be based upon the funds available for mounting a defense. In the days surrounding Mr. Zimmerman’s initial arrest, supporters surprised everyone with the strength of their donations.
For those who have given in the past, for those who have thought about giving, for those who feel Mr. Zimmerman was justified in his actions, for those who feel they would do the same if they were in Mr. Zimmerman’s shoes, for those that think Mr. Zimmerman has been treated unfairly by the media, for those who feel Mr. Zimmerman has been falsely accused as a racist, for those who feel this case is an affront to their constitutional rights — now is the time to show your support.”