Home » Uncategorized » May 8, 2013 – Open Thread

May 8, 2013 – Open Thread

Chat | Posted on by

GZ 2Anyone wanting to discuss the George Zimmerman case, you have come to the right spot. I’d appreciate you sharing information that could help move the case to the goal of acquittal.

Constructive criticism of the legal team is allowed and will be valued.  If your feedback is of things that should, could, would help the team to get the acquittal then feel free to share it.  If your feedback is to mock, ridicule, vent or post unfounded accusations, please do so somewhere else.

Racist comments will not be tolerated. Thanks to “Captain Long” for the photo.

If you’d like to share something privately, you can email me at nettles@bell.net

Thanks for participating.  Together, let’s stop the railroading of this citizen’s rights.

93 thoughts on “May 8, 2013 – Open Thread”

    • Waiting to see this in the Sentinel or any MSM.. .yeah right…

      He is multi talented.. wonder what he does for income?

      Thanks for the story.

    • I think the title should have been, “what I learned about the NAACP”, as it illustrated another case where the organization came in late to capitalize on the work that Crump and company had started. It is a shame that what used to be a venerable organization, has evolve into, just another group feeding off crumbs of past history of discrimination.

      • How true, my friend. I was a proud card-carrying NAACP member in the ’60s into the early ’70s, before they devolved into nothing more than a cog in the wheel of the BGI, now some 40 years later. Gracias pero no gracias.
        * * *
        [OT boricuafudd ~ At the “Thanks” thread, I had posted a nice YouTube tribute to our favorite little froggie of all time — the diminutive and elusive Coqui (your avatar/gravatar), whose nightly concerts have enthralled millions of PuertoRicans for many decades. Brings back memories for me, though I never got to actually see one “in person!” Hope you like it.]

  3. Bori- I am replying to your last post for me on the May 6 thread. You have linked articles covering “attorney’s” talking with witnesses rather than “prosecutors” talking to witnesses.

    I am not cedeing the point, but even if I did I am remembering BDLR went to the home of Sybrina Fulton to do his interview with DD. Sybrina Fulton was sitting rright next to DD. At least a few of the Martin family attorneys were present. Francine was there as well from what I’ve read. For BDLR’s meeting with DD in August, when she admitted she lied, there was no recording of what was said between the parties, no one has any list of who may have been present in that meeting. I have read that Francine accompanied DD to the August meeting.

    Going back to the McDaniel’s Kaboom article, where he asserts that it is improper for Prosecutors to talk to witnesses because of the appearance of impropriety, witness tampering, and witness coaching, throughout the interview transcript, he inserts exactly where BDLR is leading and coaching DD. Rather than just asking her to relate the phone conversation from beginning to end, he puts a leash on her and leads her down the path he wants her to take throughout the interview. The BDLR interview took place after she had contact with Crump, where she got her first lessons on how and what she was to say.

    The BDLR/DD interview should be listed in the Bar Journals as exactly what Prosecutors should not do, or as Mike McDaniel said is “bad.”

      • The “everyone does it and no one much cares” is not a valid not intelligent argument, no matter who wrote the opinion. It actually displays a most devious thought process and in a very unethical posture. I’m sure George and the entire Zimmerman family, as well as those of us seeing it displayed in the most obnoxious manner care that it is happening.

        • MInpin, the issue is not that nobody cares is that it is not illegal, our system depends on trust on our officials to an extent, that is why in Florida the State Supreme Court has determined that prosecutors can bring charges without a Judges affirmation. The reasoning is that since Prosecutors job is to provide justice, and their duty is to convict criminals, they don’t need the judge to act as an intermediary.

          Of course, we have seen the result of that in the GZ case, a very deficient Charging Affidavit was used to charge GZ. Anywhere else but in Florida, IMO, a Judge would have laugh them out of the court, after giving them a tongue lashing for wasting his time. In Florida, unless it is a capital case, in which case a Grand Jury hand down the indictment, that is allowed.

          I don’t like it, but that is the system, hopefully the other courts can reign in this travesty.

    • Minpin, you have to see the distinction between the investigative process before any charges are filed and post-investigative process after the charges are filed. Prosecutors avoid interviewing witnesses during the investigative process to avoid possibly becoming a witness themselves and to avoid the appearance of impropierty.

      After charges are filed, the scenario changes, the defense knows what witness is most likely to testify about, and in Florida they will get an opportunity to depose that witness. Not all states allow witness depositions. But, that does not mean that they are not allowed to talk to their witnesses or the other sides witnesses if they are willing.

      The article I linked to talks about attorneys, that means both prosecuting attorney or defense attorneys and while you may feel it is improper think about it for a second, how will the defense prepare if it is only allowed to talk to its witnesses when the prosecution says it can, and vice-versa.

      Does this lend itself to witness improper witness coaching and perhaps tampering, yes it could, and it has.

  4. Nettles- I am really enjoying the pictures of George, and the one of George and Robert Jr. Hopefully they will be returning to those happier days again soon.

  5. Sent to the e-mail address provided at the 18th Circuit’s webpage:

    In her April 30 Order, Judge Nelson indicated that a redacted copy of the Confidential Settlement Agreement filed by Mr. Crump was to be unsealed, and that Attorney O’Mara was to file a written order for the Court’s signature.

    What is the status of that activity?

    When Attorney O’Mara files the written order, and Judge Nelson signs and issues the order, will the clerk of the court be providing the redacted Confidential Settlement Agreement to the public via posting on the 18th Circuit’s web page that provides some of the filed papers in this case?

    Thank you in advance for your prompt response.

    • Finally something near and dear to Judge Nelson, the sitting chart. This is a sad spectacle, pathetic all these media outlets for a case that should have never gotten this far.

      • Usually, aren’t the sides reversed? Who is Marinade Dave? Why is the media all assigned to seats behind the defense. Who get the other “good” seats behind the state?

          • Didn’t he also make some inflammatory videos? I can’t see how a blogger gets preference to a seat.

          • Nettles – Marinade Dave has a small following, he tried to interject himself into KC’s case, he made videos at Caylee’s dump site & speculated a lot in the case, he attended her trial & sat where he would be in the view of National cameras, tried to speak to Judge Strickland r anyone else that would give him the time of day so he cold report it on his blog, tried to kiss up to Media promoting himself, he took a lot of flack & caused a blog war, some blogs BANNED his name or his site from being used on their site, he went “private” with his blog due to the flack/blow back. He lost most of his peeps, I don’t know if his site is open to the public now or not now. WITH legitimate reporters from established media outlets, I don’t understand WHY anyone cares what MD thinks except his followers at his blog. jmho. Hopefully, the usual Legal Analyst will offer commentary & report on the case from Orlando, imo, they were fair countering the BS on IN SESSION.

            With reporters like Kerry Sanders reporting & hopefully Kathy Belich will cover for WFTV & Bill Sheaffer offer commentary as they did in KC’s case, Marinade Dade is a small fish in a big pond & at last I read, he isn’t affiliated with any local media. It doesn’t surprise me he has weaseled his way into getting credentialing that affords him a seat at trial.

            In KC’s trial, it was so high profile, people showed up as early as 4:00-5:00 am to stand in line in hopes of getting one of the few seats available, LOL, there were even fights of some standing in line that were shown on National TV, the public demanded Justice for Caylee and didn’t get it. I wonder how many seats will be open to the public in GZ’s trial?

            • Art,

              Thanks for the information. I did not know his history at the CA trial. This is my first trial and it’ll likely be my last. I’m disgusted with what the State of Florida has done to George’s civil rights. The media is worse than I imagined and its just too frustrating. I’m an optimist by nature so I know eventually it will turn out the way it should. But when does those in power wake up. Why do they help these personal injury lawyers lie and hide information.

              The Trayvon Martin family demanded justice and worked at the same time to cover, hide and lie. To my utter astonishment, the State of Florida has provided cover. Then you look to the Judge to correct the hiding and games with discovery and I watch the Judge make excuses for the State. Absolutely disgusting. I hope the appeals court will be the grown up and put this case back on track. The Martin family wanted the truth. Depose Crump and help the entire truth come out.

              • I just read that the first KC judge was recused because he had several conversations with Dave and followed his blog. He also complimented Dave’s coverage

                You are so right about this case.. the most bizarre one sided ever for me.

            • The seating chart was posted here earlier. I do not see any seats for the pubic yet so IDK. The chart is still a bit confusing to me.. but I will wait for clarification

              Nettles should be there in place of Dave, IMO

        • Marinade Dave. Pro-Martin blogger, has been showing up in court and reporting on the case. This isn’t his first foray into legal reporting for money.

          After all, I still firmly believe his [Robert Zimmerman, Jr.] brother would never have exited his vehicle without a gun, and he did so despite it being the job of experienced law enforcement personnel.

          • So how does get in over other real news outlets? Why is he special?

            Any answer to my other questions ?

            • The court had a lottery (Marinade Dave reports, in the linked page), and he drew No. 14 out of 24. That makes him “special” but only to the extent of being No. 14.

              I had to be outside the courtroom door by 8:00 am [on April 30] in order to pick a seat. We were selected by lottery and I came up number 14 out of 24 media organizations.

              I don’t know why the media seats are all behind the defense, and (even though you didn’t ask this) I don’t know why the press pool cameras are all behind the state. I don’t know who will sit in the unassigned seats that are open to the public. So, to answer your question, do I have any answer to your other questions, my answer has to be “No, I don’t have any answer to your other questions.” I could make something up though, and there is a fair chance it would be humorous.

              • I thought the lottery only consisted of NEWS organizations,. as we see in all of the other seats.

            • He covered the Casey Anthony case on a regular basis, so he had something relevant to show whoever it is that screens applicants for the privilege of being labeled “press.” I don’t follow very many of the cases that the press finds interesting, but I did follow the Scooter Libby trial closely, and quite a few “bloggers” were granted press privilege in that case.

              If you really really want to know how he qualified, and what the criteria were, I believe that the application form is available at the court, and a few phone calls ought to be sufficient to figure out who the decider was/is.

            • I have never read his blog but didn’t he also make some videos? You are the resident video guru so you should know .

              Do you have an opinion of him?

            • captainlongschlongsilver – due to marinade’s conduct, the BLOG wars started & marinade LOST in the court of public opinion, he at one time had a big following on his blog but after his conduct, most left and he lost all credibility! I didn’t realize that he was the side kick of Leatherman, but it makes perfect sense, both bottom feeders imo.

          • cboldt – who would pay Marinade Dave? A blogger on disability that has a talent it seems in graphics/videos, but no reporting background (unless you consider KC’s case on the job training,) or legal background. Former PEEPS from his site formed a BLOG, I can’t remember the name, something like “the bald guy,” but OUTED him for a lot of his shenanigans. The Orlando Media didn’t give him the time of day. I’d believe MD would report for free, just to promote himself & agenda.

            • Okay, change it to “fame and fortune.” He’s going for the pennies that accrue to blog hits, when he has advertisements at the website; and perhaps getting people to high five him at his website is enough for his ego. He gets to sit with the press players, he’ll be on teevee, etc. This is a national stage, babeeee!

  7. Nettles,
    I have a quick question, I had listened to all the tapes provided by the BDLR and I can’t remember any substancial communication GZ had with a visitor about the incident. Now that the Custodian of Records of the Seminole County Jail has been subpoenad, I was wondering if anything besides the PayPal communications were discussed on the tapes.

    Was talking to Diana Tennis, she feels that the PayPal conversations will not be allowed, if that is so what could the Custodian testify about?

    • I haven’t got a clue why the Custodian of Records at the jail will be a witness. I am suspicious of the story and what it’s trying to do though. As I posted yesterday, this is not the first subpoena to be issued by the State. Frank Taaffe, posted a photo of the subpoena he received on April 24th. So who told the reporter the first one was to the Custodian of Records and why? I think it’s more games. The State of Florida is about the shatter public trust when they show the public what they brought charges on.

      • At the Orlando Sentinel, the headline (First George Zimmerman trial subpoena goes out) does not correspond with the body of the article (today the first trial subpoena was returned to the Seminole County Courthouse).

        I believe the press will continue to provide cover for the state of Florida and the prosecution. If for no reason other than to not backpedal, itself.

        • This has been edited from what was originally posted yesterday afternoon. It said the first subpoena went to him.

          Now it turns out, his subpoena was returned. The State’s records must have the record keeping custodian, Jeff Morales address wrong.

          • A “return” does not necessarily mean the subpoena was not delivered. A “return” is the process server’s notice to the court of the results of the delivery attempt, which can be a successful delivery.

            That the press got a reprt incorrect is not news. It is unusual for the press to paraphrase or summarize something accurately.

    • Besides, if there was anything else ‘incriminating’ in the jail calls I’d think BDLR would have already spread it around. He keeps reminding people of witness #9, as an example. But I doubt she will be allowed to testify about the naughty touching or anything much really.

    • If Shellie takes the stand, I would imagine Bernie would ‘want’ to introduce the PayPal issue to impeach her…

      …problem is, that matter has yet to be resolved. It would essentially involve having to conduct a trial within a trial and would confuse the issues between the two seperate cases. IANAL, but I would tend to think that the 5th would apply here and the state can’t compel her to testify about matters that could be used against her in her own pending (malicious) trial.

      Now Bernie might alternately ‘want’ to introduce the PayPal and passport issue to show an intent to flee, which he’ll argue should be taken as a presumption of guilt. I’m not sure he really wants to open that line of discussion, though. The defense would rightly counter with substantial evidence that the state has been violating GZ’s rights and that any reasonable person facing malicious prosecution and a likely unjust conviction would consider fleeing. All of Bernie’s tricks would be laid out on display for the jury’s consideration.

        • I’ve suspected that the strategy of not having Shellie’s trial before George’s trial is over was so that she can’t be forced to testify with the threat of being convicted in her trial for what she says in his trial.

          IOW, her charge will keep her off the stand in his trial.

        • Florida Statute 90.504 – Husband-wife privilege.

          In this case, no, Shellie cannot be compelled to testify as to communications which were intended to be made in confidence between the spouses while they were husband and wife. I do not believe that precludes introducing the contents of calls that were made pursuant to a wiretapping warrant. Those conversations may be (are, IMO) properly excluded for other reasons.

            • I really hope the Zimmerman family find the strength to walk into the courtroom and be with George every single day.

              I think Mr. Crump has been so successful, because there isn’t much push-back on his allegations.

              The Zimmermans helped the authorities ignore the threats against them by moving and living in hiding. Had they gone public and demanded these threats be dealt with, they might have had some success. Instead, they took on the burden and expense of the threats and thereby took pressure off the authorities that could have been applied to deal with it.

              The Zimmermans didn’t do anything wrong. In my opinion, they are a great family and need to stop hiding and cowering.

              Family can make so much difference, reminding the public about the human factors.

              Robert does a great job of it. The rest of his family is needed to help too.

              • I sort of wish they did not go into hiding. The state would have had no choice but to provide around the clock LE presence at THEIR expense. George could have hired a bodyguard to stay there and saved a bunch of money .

                • The state has no obligation to provide personal protection, unless the accused in in state custody – and even then, it is unusual for the state to lose a claim that it has provided inadequate protection to an inmate who is beat or otherwise abused by other inmates.

                  That said, the state would not want to allow a mob to deliver street justice to Zimmerman, where said street justice was delivered in a state-controlled facility, like a courthouse, on nationally televised reporting. So, the state might provide protection, but only to protect itself from embarrassment.

                  • Do not mean required protection. I mean they would have to be there to at least control the crowds as they did as Casey’s home. Their presence along with a body guard might have sufficed for protection. In the beginning, SPD would have probably wanted to do that.

              • Crump’s success isn’t due only to lack of push back, which I take as an agnostic presentation of his claims. The press has lent substantial credibility to his claims, in large part by amplification of falsehood via what looks like “multiple source” reporting.

                Completely off topic example is the press reporting that racial epithets were hurled by T.E.A. party protesters during the Obamacare pushback. That particular fiction originated with a couple of press members, but the lie was spread far and wide, and prominently. AP got caught fabricating “the crowd booed” at a West Allis, Wisconsin political rally by GWB, when Bush announced that Clinton was to undergo open-heart, and he (Clinton) should be in our prayers.

                No. It’s not just lack of push back. The press is an active participant in the charade. I consider the press to be one of the most dishonest institutions in the country.

      • O’Mara already rehearsed this argument in open court, with Lester. He calls the bail bondsmen and the officers in charge of monitoring the conditions for Zimmerman being free on bond.

        The duplicitous nature of Bernardo and the state will become clear (or not) as the defense refutes the state’s allegations point by point. If O’Mara is going to make a direct accusation of wrongful prosecution, he will reserve that for a civil case against the state and bar complaints against Corey and de la Rionda.

    • There should always be appropriate consequences for inappropriate angry behavior in sports… well …… and everything else too.

  9. I’d love to know what “plausible” reason BDLR will offer up to have Trevon screaming like a banshee for 40 seconds before the shot after he has already conceded that Trevon assaulted Zimmerman at the second bond hearing. Prepare yourself for the Cirque De Soliel of mental acrobatics by Bernie

    • I don’t know how he’ll even get to that point. Outside of his opening argument, any time Bernardo tries to connect a witness statement with an inculpatory action by Zimmerman, O’Mara will object that the question calls for speculation. Fact witnesses are not allowed to speculate or give opinions.

  10. It looks like now that the Jodi Arias trial is essentially over those that thrive on hate are now putting the focus on GZ. I’m hardly saying JA is innocent. I’m saying those that love to hate and use social media to influence (read as ‘usually pervert’) justice have nothing else high profile to satisfy their need. Social justice my ass. It’s a lynching.

  11. I’m not sure if it only Fla., or if prosecutors nationwide are rated depending on their number of convictions, but I vaguely remember reading something about Angela Corey being rated high because her number of convictions. Does anyone not believe that BDLR is doing what he is doing, just to get a conviction? Shouldn’t this open everyone’s eyes to the rating system on prosecutors, especially in Fla.? Prosecutors ratings and promotions based on conviction rates rather than on justice for all?

    For anyone interested, here is an old article at TalkLeft, applauding the greatest case of prosecutorial misconduct, which is worth the read. The circumstances surrounding the case are much different than the GZ trial but, just read the judges decision, and a defense attorney blown away by the judges discretion where he says that it is up to the judge to keep everything fair between the prosecution and the defense at trial.

    http://www.talkleft.com/story/2009/12/21/14641/580/misconduct/One-of-the-Best-Prosecutorial-Misconduct-Rulings-You-ll-Ever-Read

    • There is something seriously wrong with this:

      Prosecutors ratings and promotions based on conviction rates rather than on justice for all?

    • There are worse criminal cases that I have read about resulting in the death penalty or life w/o parole. LO)S of them, actually.

    • Minpin, this case is extraordinary, we know this was political not about justice. Most prosecutors are good people and abide by the law. That there are some unscrupulous prosecutors is to be expected as they are human, and we all have our failings. I have read of some cases where prosecutors have stepped over the line not out of personal gain, but because they truly believe they had the right person.

      In a way it is easier for defense attorneys as they have to defend their client whether they are guilty or not. So it is easier for them the same ethical issues don’t apply. Though, my friend says that he will not defend anyone he feels is guilty.

      The bottom line is that a prosecutor who can’t win cases and letting criminals walked is bad enough, we certainly don’t need those that try to convict the innocent, no matter the reason.

      • “That there are some unscrupulous prosecutors is to be expected as they are human, and we all have our failings.”

        Bori we will have to agree to disagree, seriously. I am not so willing to just forgive unscrupulous behavoir by prosecutors to normal human failings. That is precisely why we are seeing the complete failure we have in the criminal justice system. If you are willing to forgive errant, unethical, and corrupt prosecutors because they are “human” and we all have our “failings” I’m convinced that we are on opposite planets on the issue. Yes, everyone has human failings, and no one is perfect, however, those chosen or elected as prosecutors, who have a hell of a lot of power over the freedom and/or life of defendants, must be held to a much higher standard than those that have normal human failings. They have no place in the legal system, period. Aren’t “prosecutors” supposed to be held to a much much higher standard, and the human failings issue should be weeded out before they reach that level? Bori, you are scarring me.

        • If you want to get more steamed, read up on the corruption among the judiciary. Sometimes classical, overt corruption (the Pennsylvania prison kickback scheme); other times, intellectual dishonesty, such as claiming a case stands for the opposite of what it actually stands for (I have the federal courts chronic lie about the Presser case in mind).

          • I’m somewhat familiar with the PA prison scandal. Someone was incarcerating PA juviniles for kickbacks per incarceration. Thankfully the scheme was exposed.

        • You misunderstand me, that I recognize that humans have failings, does not mean that I excuse it. I am just being pragmatic about it, because I can’t stop GZ’s prosecution but what I can do is trying to prevent the next one. That is why I write letters to the Governor, to State’s Attorney, to the Mayor and so on, and I try to get people to see what happened to GZ could happen to them.

          I just don’t do it for GZ, I do the same for other subjects that I feel we are not living up to the standards the country was founded on. For instance, I was talking via twitter and later e-mail, with John Mitchell he is a columnist for the Philadelphia Inquirer, we started talking about Benghazi, I told him that I was disappointed that he was so willing to excuse what happened and to in essence blame Bush, because to him what he did was worse. I asked shouldn’t we expect better, to which we agreed and decided to wait until after the testimony and then talk.

          If it seems I am laid back, it is because I am a passive-aggressive, I try to maintain an even keel, because I don’t want to become another loudmouth like most trayvonites, who bark loudly but have no concept of law, of right or wrong, it is all emotional with them. So don’t mistake my pragmatism for lack of advocacy, it just me trying to exert some control over what is clearly an injustice.

          Friends?

          • Yes of course we are friends Bori, we just disagree on some issues.

            Pragmatism isn’t all it’s crackedp up to be. Either you believe this, or you believe that. It’s that simple. You either want truth, or you are willing to accept lies for a certain purpose. Either you are lawful, or your reject laws or certain ones at least. To me, being pragmatic gives nothing but excuses to both sides. There is nothing logical, reasonable, realistic or legaly defensable for the case against George Zimmerman. IMO, when one claims pragmatism as their philosophical position, it actually goes against the grain of law, and a person’s due procees, and civil rights as a citizen of the US. You can’t explain away what is happening to GZ as simply pragmatic differences. Either GZ is innocent, and defended himself in a life or death situation, or he didn’t. Can you find any area of what GZ did to be less than self defense? I can’t. I consider the philosophy of “either you are with us, or against us” some very profound, albeit simple words to be the rule, for me at least.

          • BTW Bori- Not wanting to be a loudmouth like the Travonites is exactly why those supporting GZ have been hard to find. Perhaps if more were loudmouths for GZ the railroading would not have been able to take root. I’m particularly talking about the media. Thank God for blogs like this one who is not shy about supporting GZ and the travesty that has happened to him. Can you imagine if there were as many vocally supportive for GZ as there are Crumped up ones screaming that GZ is an evil POS?

            • Minpin, I really do enjoy your passion, but don’t mistake my being pragmatic on this aspect as something more than that. I realized long ago, that this was going the distance, not because GZ is guilty but because both sides seem to want it to.

              I don’t know if you remember but I was the one who told SD at the CTH that the family was determined to send this to a trial, that they identify with the same people who are trying to put him in prison. The family is determined to exonerate GZ, but not just in criminal court but in th court of public opinion, that would not be accomplished by an Immunity Hearing.

              When I say I am pragmatic in this, is not that this is my philosophy if that was the case I would not have invested hundreds of hours on the case and other causes that I hold dear, like the media manipulation and lack of ethics, the influence of the BGI in our society to the detriment of the very people they claim to help, etc. What I mean is that I understand that this case will be going to trial, BDLR is going to lie, flap his arms, and do whatever he can to get GZ convicted, even if he knows that it will be overturned on appeals.

              That is what I am pragmatic about, when I say loudmouth, I did not mean an advocate for your cause, I was trying to find a civil way to describe the TM supporters who are ignorant and just hateful, just because they are terrible people inside. They resent that GZ was able to defend himself, that he has supporters, that what he did was not illegal, that he illlustrates that segment of the population, who has been coodled are acting less like citizens and more like animals, they resent GZ because he makes them act out that way.

              That was what I meant when I said loudmouth, and I totally agree with you, if more people had not cower at the thought someone would call them racist or other names in the beginning we would not be here now.

Leave a reply to jordan2222 Cancel reply