Home » Uncategorized » May 15, 2013 – Open Thread

May 15, 2013 – Open Thread


The Sanford Police were accused, without evidence, of doing a lack-luster investigation of the shooting on February 26, 2012.  Chief Bill Lee, was telling the family of deceased teenager, Trayvon Martin and the media that the shooter, George Zimmerman, immediately claimed self-defense and while an ongoing investigation was in full-force, the police had not made an arrest yet because they could not refute the self-defense claim.

Yesterday we learned the State of Florida is still investigating the case and trying to refute the self-defense claim.  They did decide to make an arrest on April 11, 2012 (note the police didn’t arrest) and prosecute a 2nd degree murder charge.  Although, the deadline for adding witnesses has passed, the State notified the Defense in their 16th Discovery they commissioned reports from “experts” to identify the screaming caught on tape and may be using these experts and reports at trial in June.


Attempted Speaker Identification
The report is dated March 20th and was prepared by James Harnsberger, PH.D, and Harry Hollien, PH.D. They note that the 911 call had “minimum-to-marginal material for identification purposes”, but they did pick out 6 of the screams for comparison purposes. It was revealed that the State does have samples of Trayvon’s voice. It was taken from video off his cell phone. I question why the Defense was forced to subpoena the family for voice samples. That the experts didn’t use samples provided by the family, leaves me to believe the family/friends didn’t/wouldn’t provide the samples. The experts admit to cherry-picking examples of Trayvon’s voice that could be similar to a high stress situation. On Page 4/17 we learn “For Martin, several of his high frequency laughs, exclamations, and mocking utterances were employed.” The result was inconclusive. They think there is a pretty good chance the first 2 screams are from Trayvon and they are pretty sure the screams before the shot are George Zimmerman. They wanted to do more to get a more reliable result but did not receive the support for it.


Alan R. Reich

In reading this man’s report, I thought I was reading the supporters for Trayvon Martin that I talk to online.  It was bizarre.  Mr. Reich hears things in the tapes that no one else has.  “For example, approximately one second after the start of CALL3, Mr. Zimmerman makes a seemingly religious proclamation, “These shall be.” His speech is characterized by the low pitch and exaggerated pitch contour reminiscent of an evangelical preacher or carnival barker.”  It appears that Mr. Reich also had be given a sample of Trayvon’s voice to compare.

He did however, already arrive at the decision it was Trayvon’s voice one year ago when the Washington Post hired him for an opinion.  He didn’t even need a sample of Trayvon’s voice to do it.  See his opinion here.  http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/trayvon-martin-case-911-call-two-experts-reach-two-much-different-conclusions/2012/05/19/gIQAtuapbU_story.html

I read a number of reporters who were talking to Mr. O’Mara yesterday and tweeted that this addition of experts to the list may be grounds to convince the Judge for that much needed continuance.  We may see a motion for that in the days to come.

We await the higher court’s decision on deposing Mr. Crump.  If you haven’t submitted a vote, please do so and let us know your prediction.

For newcomers, please know that racist remarks will be removed.  If you are presenting yourself as a George Zimmerman supporter, please keep in mind this man is in a fight for his life.  Conduct yourself in a way that won’t bring heartache and/or embarrassment to the Zimmerman family.

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

For those who can, please use the link at the top of the page to make a donation to the defense fund.  Thank you for helping.


150 thoughts on “May 15, 2013 – Open Thread

    • Robert still has his sense of humor. Great sign.

      • I truly don’t know if I could maintain my composure as he has. Modarres is just angry because the world is opening its eyes to the extent that they are willing to go to convict an innocent man, out of revenge and for profit. The Scheme is falling apart, the prosecution is getting desperate, and they lost control of the Narrative.

            • I guess you noticed today that the blogs are “competing/conflicting” with each other over the DeeDee story.

              One of them is Keyser Doze?

              IDK.. I am only watching.. .

              • I think that was yesterday, but regardless I think she will be immaterial, what will decide the case is whether the jury will see GZ getting out of his truck as provocation or not. The voice analysis if allowed may have a bearing, but the if the jury think GZ that he provoked the fight, everything else will be ignored.

                    • No, but what the law means is what the court says it means. Gibbs considered the specific question of whether in a case where the meaning of “provoke” could be interpreted by the jury to mean something other than “force or the threat of force,” the defendant is entitled to a jury instruction restricting the meaning to the use or threat of force. The court held that it was. I believe if BDLR tries to suggest that getting out of the truck was provocation, the defense can object and demand such a jury instruction.

                    • I understand, but my point goes more to what we can expect from the current Judge to do, and I agree that the law should be explained properly.

                    • You are correct, the statute (776.41) just has the word “provokes.” What happens when a word, like “provoke,” has such a wide range of interpretation, is that shysters will interpret in a way that creates an unworkable legal rule. The judges in the cited case have a point. If merely failing to acknowledge a greeting is an act of provocation for purposing of justifying the use of force, then, well, you can picture the result. Big people would be swinging, and small people who got hit would be out of luck with getting any relief from the law.

                      Great case MJW, thank you for the cite and link.

                    • That is my point, we are thinking about the proper application of the law, but so far I have seen no indication of that, and in instances where the law is ambiguous it always seems to go to the prosecution. BTW, thanks MJW for the citation, I had not seen it before.

                    • Add that to my list of what I find wrong with our system of justice. Unless the legal definition is clear, it can be interpreted to mean whatever a judge wants it to mean. I once heard William Buckley give a lecture about using “the king’s” English so as to be plainly understood by the listener. You may recall that his First language was Spanish and French was his Second.

                      To summarize, he said English is lacking many words found in other languages and it is difficult to find and use a suitable substitute. If you ever heard him interject a foreign word into the middle of a sentence, that is why he did it.

                      Buckley insisted on being precise when he spoke or wrote. Maybe he should have been retained by those who wrote the laws.

                  • The “facts” of this case are unsettling for 2013.

                    The facts of this case are a sad and disturbing reminder of the tragic consequences that racial conflict can lead to. Appellant, a 40-year old black woman, saw an elderly white man and woman sitting on a bench outside an apartment building and said to them, “Good morning. How are you?” When the couple did not respond, she asked why they did not return her greeting. The woman, Julia Osmun, said to appellant, “Get away from here you dirty nigger, you don’t belong here.” Appellant responded with a racial slur and an obscene “mooning” gesture and the two women wound up in a physical altercation. According to appellant and her witness, Sheldon Solomon, Osmun got up from the bench, approached appellant, and started swinging at her. In response, appellant stepped back and pushed Osmun. Osmun staggered back and then fell down on some shrubbery. Solomon and the man who had been sitting next to Osmun helped her back up on the bench, where she remained for a few minutes until a friend drove up and carried her to Manor Care. Within a half hour, Osmun died of heart failure.

                    • Gibbs reasonably didn’t want her racial slur response and mooning to be taken as provocation; and as a matter of law, those actions are NOT provocation.

          • I think Shayan is looking to gain attention through Robert. I saw a pretty nasty tweet to Shayan from a GZ supporter. He completely ignored the insult and tweeted back to the supporter to use his last name in addressing him.

            That tells me he is just looking to get his name out there for potential business. His law firm is in his last name. If people address him by his first name, he loses what he’s trying to get.

            Every time Robert retweets me, I get a new follower or two. So I think Shayan is looking to get a response from Robert which leads to new followers for him.

            This man should be completely ignored.

  1. Off topic but for those who feel Omara is not aggressive enough with the BGI and issues of race lets not forget who is most likely the bread and butter of Omara’s criminal practice. While he should be doing his utmost to defend George he also doesn’t want to alienate his primary customer base. In the end he is a businessman.

    • I call BS on that. MOM has one job and one job only. To defend GZ. Attacking the ‘BGI’ or other special interest groups would only increase the political pressure and harm his client. He’s been reducing that pressure. e.g. The case isn’t about race, and it’s not about SYG (gun rights).

      There’s no shortage of criminals that need a good defense attorney. Those with money are going to pick the one that wins cases.

    • I would say the first report though inconclusive and by their own description unscientific, at least seemed serious, but it was not enough. The second one, which was just finished on May 9th, that one clearly showed desperation on the prosecution’s part.

      He does not even explain how he identified TM voice, he spent a lot of time listening to GZ tape. As the expert said he started at the end, if his assumption was that TM was the one who was screaming, then his results are actually backwards to what he reported.

    • Not only filed objection but told the court omara was calling up the wrong argument, should have been a vior dire. pretty bold of bernie The unprofessionalism left and right of this case, from the state and “surrogates” needs to be identified and called out by the court.

  2. Reich even goes so far at to claim he can hear three distinct separate voices all overlapping simultaneously: For example, approximately one second after the start of CALL3, Mi*. Zimmerman makes a seemingly religious proclamation, “These shall be.” His speech is characterized by the low pitch and exaggerated pitch contour reminiscent of an evangelical preacher or carnival barker. The statement is challenging for the untrained listener to detect as it occurs simultaneously with Trayvon Martin’s loud, high-pitched, distressed, and tremulous “I’m begging you.” and the 911 Dispatcher’s “Nine-one-one.” Many of Mr. Zimmerman’s “side-bar” utterances are subject to such multiple-talker masking effects and to low signal levels.

    • Can you imagine O’Mara, on cross asking Mr. Reich to please explain to the jury how he completed his examinations to come to his conclusions? It would sound something like this-

      “The moderate fidelity 911 recordings presumably were the stereo output of a 24-hour, digital-audio recording system. The sampling rate of the 911 recording was only 8,000 samples/sec., compared to the 44,100 samples/sec. associated with audio quality. The frequency bandwith of CALL1 and CALL 3 thus was estimated to be only 40 Hz to 4,000 Hz compared to an audio CD bandwith of 10 Hz to 22,050 Hz.” Blah blah blah

      His report would be a part of the evidence submitted to the jury for examination during deliberations. How much time would any juror spend trying to figure out if his conclusions were arrived at with technical/scientific accuracy? None, zero, zip, nada. The report was written in a purposeful manner to help the prosecution confuse the jurors, as the only thing most will understand, and focus on will be the inflammatory language such as “carnival barker”, and ” I’m begging you” etc. wording. I agree with Jerylyn at TalkLeft, it is laugh out loud funny, but it was written and designed for a more sinister purpose.

      • “The moderate fidelity 911 recordings presumably were the stereo output of a 24-hour, digital-audio recording system. The sampling rate of the 911 recording was only 8,000 samples/sec., compared to the 44,100 samples/sec. associated with audio quality. The frequency bandwith of CALL1 and CALL 3 thus was estimated to be only 40 Hz to 4,000 Hz compared to an audio CD bandwith of 10 Hz to 22,050 Hz.”

        Now that part of the report I could understand and follow with no problem.

      • “Sometimes I SEE things that are not there.”

        So do I. It’s caused by “floaters” and the brain attempting to pattern match.

        Very annoying.

        • I remember having several floaters…. I called them bugs… but I think all but one of them died. And he/she/it sleeps most of the time so it not always annoying like it once was. I was one of the first to have the original RK and had perfect 20/20 until I turned 50 and then all hell broke loose. I could not count the surgeries I had over the years.

  3. A friend made a good point earlier…..How does BDLR think Reich would prove to a jury that he hears things none of the states other experts hear ( H&H, Owens, Primeau) as well as the FBI audio experts. I realize this will not stop psychopaths like cabbage patch trent and llmpapa from fully embracing it but hopefully the jury would contain sane rational people.

    • “…she was informed by Crump and Jackson that the DNA evidence in the case had been “lost”. ”

      Before or after they told her that Witness 8 was a 16 year old who had to be hospitalized?

  4. Just a thought but with Obama and Holder under such intense media scrutiny right now regarding Bengahzi, the IRS, and the AP, it could be a really opportune time for the defense to drop a juicy little nugget regarding Obama’s adopted son Trevon as well.

  5. I’m sure everyone thought of this, but W6 spoke briefly to GZ/TM while W11 was talking to 911. Some of what he said may have been captured on the 911 call and may be misidentified as being from GZ or TM. I wonder if the experts were informed of the possibility of his voice being on the recording before doing their analysis.

  6. I OCRd Reich’s report just because there are so many hilarious things to quote.

  7. Nettles: Are you ok with my making a fairly short post about what I observed in criminal traffic court this morning. Yes, many traffic violations are criminal in Florida and are tried in a special court .

      • In my part of Florida, those who are charged with “criminal” traffic violations first have an arraignment which is held in a separate court. Many traffic violations are criminal and can result in serious consequences including being locked up for a long time. The most common criminal violations are driving without a valid license in your possession and improper license tag.

        I was in court this morning to watch one of these arraignments. There were only 4 people there who spoke English but 20 Hispanics were also there. They were directed to the front seats and they all sat together.

        I was stunned to see that ALL of them went before the judge FIRST while dear old Americans had to wait while sitting in the rear of the court room.

        Ready for this? Not ONE single Hispanic had a driver’s license NOR were they able to tell the judge that they had NOW obtained one. They also said that they could NOT get one so each time I was anxious to hear their reasons for not being able to get one because this particular judge often dismisses the charge if you do that.

        Guess what? The judge never asked that question so I spoke to an attorney about it who was there and he said judges are not allowed to ask that question. WTH?

        Holy crap. Deduce whatever you wish about these Spanish speaking criminals being illegals or not. Yes, what they did makes them criminals.

        Then I wondered how they got to court and how they were going to go home……. AND, where would they get the money for their heavy fines?

        Thanks for letting me post this. My next venture will be to attend a criminal trial like the one George is facing IF I can get it. My older press pass no longer works even though it has no expiration date on it. 9/11 changed those passes and almost everything else, it seems. However, at one time, that photo ID card got me into lots of places including a couple of concerts. Sure would love to have one now. I would consider going to a few days of George’s trial if there is one. I heard, though not confirmed that they will have at least one media room?

        Nettles. do you know anything about that?

        The Brampton Guardian was once one of my clients but that was long ago and I do not know anyone there now. However, I was thinking that they might be able to get you some special privileges and even into that media room, if it’s true. They may also be very interested in you, your knowledge of this case along with your writing skills. In fact, I would even suggest that you ask them to pay for your expenses and, in return, you will send daily articles and/or updates on the case.

        It’s worth a try. They just might be thrilled to be able to publish a first hand account every day. If you are going to do that, then let me know first and I will tell you what else you can say to them that will increase circulation on those days you report. Most assuredly they would be DEEPLY interest in that.

        My primary area of expertise is/was increasing circulation. My company was known as the “Subscriber Retention Experts” in the industry. So I know more than a little bit about newspapers.

        • I don’t want to be a reporter. I plan on attending the trial only if GZ supporters’ voices are needed. I won’t let the media get away with what they did in March/April last year when so many were afraid to speak out.

          We have the discovery now and I’m more confident than ever, George Zimmerman is being railroaded and it’s long overdue that politicians, media, lawyers and the courts realize, people won’t stand for “business as usual”. The internet has made the world a smaller place. It’s easier to shine a light on things that used to stay undercover. If you want to have a long and successful career, you better start being a good role model, tell the truth and live transparently. Otherwise you will be exposed.

          • I hear you but I remain unconvinced that the corruption will end by exposing it on the internet. MSM contributed to it and I think they are going to have do an about face to really accomplish any substantial improvement any time soon. It is why I advocate peaceful assembly by the people. When the media starts to see crowds of 10,000 or more on a regular basis, they will cover it and ask questions as they did with OWS assemblies. When the reason for these new crowd gatherings is revealed or even mocked by the other side, a large part of America might even hear it logically for the very first time. That might get some action.

            I was only suggesting contact with your paper, to perhaps get you a better position at the trial and, damn, wouldn’t everyone here be thrilled to read YOUR comments about what is happening.

    • I would guess that O’Mara was hinting that (he thinks) the DCA will allow him to depose Crump, and we’ve all read the speculation about where that deposition may lead. I can’t think of any other witness or affiliate, except maybe he plans to depose de la Rionda, that would suggest a need for a continuance.

        • I think he’s had time to flesh that out, but if not, if he’s just finding out who the three stooges are, I don’t see a vehicular excursion as more important background to what happened inside RTL than “the experts disagree over who is heard screaming.”

          Maybe O’Mara is just playing a game getting inside Bernardo’s head, and our speculation is just collateral damage 😉

          • I wondered that too. It’s working. BDLR has been off-balance since waiving the pre-trial hearing. The report he made public of Friday from Mr. Reich is bizarre and reeks of desperation. He’s had it since March. Why release it now?

            • Reich’s report is dated May 9, and was given to defense on May 10. H&H report was done in March.

              Bernardo seems immune to facts, not much removed from the typical anti-Zimmerman commentator following any given OS story. Objectively, releasing two expert reports that reach mutually exclusive conclusions, and they are both his own experts, is an admission that the connection between evidence and conclusion isn’t agreed to by a method that is scientifically reliable. He’s shooting himself in the foot, but seems to not know it.

              • If your goal was to raise reasonable doubt the two reports would definitely contribute to that. Not to mention the inadequacy of the second report. Sometimes I wonder if BDLR is trying to sabotage his own prosecution.

                • When I went back to double-check the date of the report, it does say May 9th and says it is a partial report of an ongoing examination. So it would appear after getting the first one back that was inconclusive it occurred to BDLR to get an opinion from someone already on the record as saying he hears Trayvon’s voice. May 10th was the deadline to submit motions.

                  • I saw that but did you notice that it says the reports were first provided 4/12/2012 and 4/15/2012, a year ago. The latests are dated 4/20/213 and 5/9/2013. are these the new findings?

                    • Each of the “H”‘s in H&H must have prepared reports in 2012, and what we see on May 1, 2013 is a combined report authored by both of them.

                      Reich was named as W54, so defense was aware of the expert, but perhaps had no report other that what they read in the WaPo.

                      The material that O’Mara posted yesterday is probably the latest. Bernardo mentioned that O’Mara hadn’t deposed the experts.

                • I have speculated on this issue on the CTH some time back. A part of me suspects that this may be the case on the part of both the judge AND BDLR. They both must know that this case stinks to high heaven, yet they have no choice but to continue the prosecution in order to appease the BGI. They can’t just step up and do the right thing and say “our case sucks, so we’re dropping it” because that would not satisfy the Traybots. So what to do? Easy – go over the top in your rulings against the defense and your actions in delaying and denying discovery to the defense – all actions that are almost certain to result in successful appeals.

                  I can’t prove it, but it has felt that way to me for some time. BDLR didn’t get where he is by being stupid, nor did the judge. They must be smart enough to see the truth here.

                    • That is a possibility, but I honestly believe it’s more likely that they know what a dead fish of a case this is and they’re just going through the motions. Bernie sure seems at times to be sabotaging himself.

                    • I have been going back and forth on the issue, sometimes I feel like they are going through the motions, other times I think they are delusional and just don’t want to lose badly.

                      I’d like to think that if BDLR is sabotaging himself is out some integrity, because so far I have seen very little of that.

              • It’s interesting to note then Mr. O’Mara filed his motion (May 3rd) to question audio experts before the State had Mr. Reich’s “report”. Here’s an article posted today on lawyers.com

                “Zimmerman attorney Mark O’Mara on May 3 asked the court to hold an evidentiary hearing over whether the testimony of voice recognition experts the state intends to call should be admitted once the trial starts. In his motion, O’Mara questioned whether the experts’ methods are reliable and generally accepted in the scientific community – the standard for expert testimony admissibility in Florida. ”

                The reporter goes on to say at issue is two conflicting experts opinions but that couldn’t have been Mr. O’Mara’s concern on May 3rd. It appears, Mr. O’Mara does have an expert who says it was George yelling for help. “O’Mara, whose expert says Zimmerman is the one screaming for help, has reportedly criticized Reich’s report and said that he may ask to delay the trial in order to find another expert to counter Reich.”


        • There has been some other speculation that I don’t quite grok in detail, that Martin was out and about with an accomplice or similar. Mismatch in clothing ID and other anomolies being the fuel. If that’s the case, then maybe the defense found out who was with Martin, and maybe that person saw what happened and got out of Dodge. THAT would be a bombshell, as it totally blows up the “innocent Martin” backdrop. Anyway, it’s a different driver from the three stooges, I think, so thought I’d toss that speculation into the mix.

          • Perhaps, if the defence has obtained cell-tower ping logs, they were able to ascertain that Martin’s phone appeared to move in close proximity to another phone, carried by someone else, who could be identified and then interviewed.

        • I would guess that O’Mara was hinting that (he thinks) the DCA will allow him to depose Crump …

          How would O’Mara get that hint?

          Not that he got a hint, but that he was hinting something to the reporter by suggesting there might be something more, where the something more would take some time to investigatate. I was speculating that his hint was based on some degree of confidence that the DCA would rule in a way that cuts in his favor. I don’t see any other open issues in discovery, besides deposing Crump and a need to obtain an expert to rebut Reich.

    • Nettles ~ I hope the evidence referred to in the Video is MORE evidence that CAN’T be disallowed by Judge N. I hope this is ADDITIONAL new evidence.

      I am convinced MOM/West have damning evidence from school records, possibly more fight videos, pictures, etc., BUT that evidence will depend on Judge N allowing it to come in. I have found Judge N rude, , difficult, her own agenda/timeline, interrupting the Defense in mid sentence, making excuses for BDLR, PROTECTING Crump. I have lost my confidence in Judge N.

      Judge Perry reminded Baez repeatedly, “A trial is a search for the truth.” The State doesn’t want the truth, they want a conviction..

    • WFTV video no longer seems to work (chrome, firefox, ie8). Text version doesn’t mention O’Mara saying anything about the defense having something intriguing:


      Was it deliberately removed/ revised?

      Nettles, can you remember or paraphrase what was hinted, or does you post cover that pretty much as it stands?
      Thank you for all you do, and thanks to all the fabulous posters here.

      PS ~ Here’s hoping that our good buddy Jordan can somehow get his press credentials made valid again; that would be nothing short of awesome!

      • Wha’ happen?

        Nettles: I posted the above as a reply to your 3:20 PM post of the WFTV video. [scratching head]

        • You did it right. You are the 3rd person to reply to it. All the other posts in between are comments to the first 2 replies.

          I got a notification that you commented on my post.

      • If Jordan can get his press credentials validated, why wouldn’t Jordan attend the trial and report what was going on in the court room? Jordan was the former credentialed reporter, why not cover the GZ trial. I believe that Nettles said that she has no desire to attend the trial as a reporter. Jordan, don’t you live in Fla.?

        • Where on earth did you hear this?
          “Jordan was the former credentialed reporter.”

          As I have explained in the past, my area of expertise was subscriber retention. I was Sales and Marketing Director for a large Florida metro for 10 years but left and started an international company that had hundreds of newspaper clients. I worked closely with many different managing editors as well as advertising and circulation directors. I was NEVER a reporter. Geesh. My writing style should tell you that.

          Please refer to another post I made on this thread.

          Yes… I would love to attend some of the trial but no one else wants to go and I could easily need assistance.

      • I am 66 and most of my friends in the business are now retired or deceased. There are only a few left who are active.

        The larger issue is that they changed the rules after 9/11 out of concern that a press pass would allow the bad guys easy access to public events including professional sporting events. I have not seen a real pass press since 9/11. Mine was simple.. name, photo and name of the newspaper that authorized it. I bet today Homeland Security can monitor, track and follow press pass holders.

        Hell, I could not get one single major metro paper to assign a reporter to cover the case even part time and NO ONE would dare write an editorial about it. IOW, whatever power I ever had is now non existent but I tried like hell. My best chance was probably the Boston Herald, my flagship account at one time but they abruptly stopped communication with me. However I still send an occasional email to one of my best friends there so I have not abandoned the idea.

        Even I were active and had power, NO ONE wants to cover this and tell the truth or they would do so without anyone nudging them.

        Scary, isn’t it that the case is avoided even by the respected ones if any are left?

  8. As the Zimmerman news gets more and more into the news, beware of fake donation accounts.

  9. Joy is not gonna be good, but we know jr can hold his own very well. She says ridiculous things. I watch her on the view sometimes, and at least there is a balance of opinions sometimes. Watched her once on her show, and oh lord she just doesnt get it. When she has an opinion, doesnt matter if she is wrong, she is a pitbull at it. I do have the utmost confidence rjr can handle it. He always does.

  10. I enjoy reading at Johnathan Turley’s Blog when I have time, I had overlooked this article on DD in March 2013. Turley has an impressive bio, a National Legal Analyst & Scholar if anyone is interesting in reading. He too wrote 2 other articles on GZ, the lawsuit against NBC & one on the colored photos the State released.

    “Key Witness In Zimmerman Accused Of Lying Under Oath”

    The lie, if proven, will add to the difficulty in the case. I have previously expressed my view that the prosecutors have yielded to public pressure in over-charging the case. Prosecutors will be in a tough position if a key witness made up her hospitalization under oath.


    • My biggest worry for George is that there will most certainly be lesser charges listed for the jury, such as manslaughter, which still can carry a prison sentence. Not only is the defense trying to fight second degree murder charges, but they are fighting against the lesser charges as well. The defense’s job is monumental in their quest to free George of all charges, and wanting him to be set free on the self defense grounds.

      O’Mara was actually very smart in not utilizing the SYG laws. The courts have been all over the map with their decisions on the law. It has never been defined to the point that any attorney can use it with any certainty. O’Mara is utilizing the old fashioned self defense laws, that have been on the books for a very long time. The self-defenst laws are much more defined, with rules and applications than the still questionable SYG laws. O’Mara/West knew that the SYG laws put George more at risk than self-defense laws. Kudos to O’Mara/West for not getting sucked into something still not well defined in Fla.

      Gov. Scott appointed a committee to look at the SYG laws, because of the Zimmerman/Martin case, and from what I understand there wasn’t any consensus to change much of anything, including not requiring the Fla. legislature to put a much bigger and better definition on the law they passed.

      • That is why I didn’t understand the original hype, as I could find the law was rarely used, IIRC the law was invoked under 167 times in the 7 years, there had been only 110 Immunity SYG hearings in that time period. It just did not make any sense what the hoopla was about.

        • Bori- What is most astounding to me is that the Fla. legislature, who passed the law under Jeb Bush, a lawyer, has never gone back and even attempted to define their original intent with the law. It has been such an open book with every different judge, in every different jurisdiction has had free reign to interpret the law as they see fit. Remember Jeb Bush defending himself, said that the law wasn’t intended to allow people to just shoot people in the back of the head, and then claim self-defense? He had no idea at all what the evidence was in the Zimmerman/Martin case. And even after the Scott appointed committee, they never addressed the fact that the law is left wide open to a judges interpretation.

          This is what I believe this case is exposing. The judiciary and the Gov. and the Atty Gen. will make the rules up as they go, and there is nothing that can stop them, as the laws were meant to be interpretd by anyone who wants to interpret them. The law is right headed but, if you don’t set down the parameters, it can be played with, manipulated, and made to mean whatever any judge wants it to mean.

      • pinecone – I think I read at TL that in Fla., manslaughter is always included as a lesser charge. My fear is what if the jury thinks GZ deserves some type of punishment & goes w/manslaughter.

        I too have seen a case on 48 hrs. in which a 16 yr. old murdered an abusive father & the sister helped cover it up. He was charged, the jury convicted the 16 yr. old but of a lesser charge. The lesser charge carried a mandatory sentence of many years in prison.. The jury was interviewed after the Judge sentenced the 16 yr. old & some jurors were visibly upset, they never intended for the 16 yr. to spend most of his life in prison. The Prosecutors stated “it is the responsibility of a juror to assign guilt or not guilty. It’s not the responsibility of the jury to determine how long a sentence a defendant serves.”

        I think that’s one of the things BDLR wants kept from the jury.

        Dan Abrams Explains Zimmerman’s 2nd Degree Murder Charge: You’re Talking About ‘Level Of Intent, Depraved Mind’


        • Since the prosecution wasn’t successful in getting GZ to accept a plead deal, they will do everything they can to get him on a lesser charge, and insure that he serves time in prison, for defending himself, and killing the budding astronaught. As I said, I am very worried about the lesser charges that can still bring GZ a prison sentence. That is why the unsightly defamation of TM is crucial.

        • Art, it gets worse, in Florida due to TM being a minor at the time a manslaughter conviction carries the same sentence as a 2nd degree murder. IOW any conviction the sentence will be for the next higher charge.

          • However, if the jury finds that Zimmerman acted in self-defense, that makes him not guilty of the 2nd degree murder charge and all lesser included offenses.

          • bori, thanks for the information, I didn’t consider TM’s age but it makes sense. Our biggest fear, still praying & hoping for GZ/family.

        • We might be better off if we never hear from Allred and Abrams. I remember his disgusting, angry outburst after Kuwait declined to try our form of government. He was incredulous that they could be so ungrateful after we rescued them. Clearly he knew nothing about that part of the world.

          • jordan2222 – I don’t mind Dan Abrams so much , ultra liberal, he crams it right back down Nancy Grace’s throat during debates leaving her head to spin & bobble. LOL.

            25 years ago Gloria Alred did a lot for women causes. As she aged, I have no respect for the media/money whore. During the Tiger Wood scandal, she demanded ridiculous apologies/money from Tiger Wood. Gloria represented Rachel Uchitel against Tiger & the scandal hit the fan, Rachel received 10 million in hush money from Tiger, THEN promptly goes on “Celebrity re-hab” & broke her “confidentiality agreement.” She was sued by Tiger’s attorneys & had to PAY the MONEY BACK!

            “Confidentiality agreements” are nothing to laugh at, especially in the 10 million dollar range.

            • Interesting observations, but frankly I stopped watching all three of them long ago. Maybe Abrams matured. I did not know this:

              She was sued by Tiger’s attorneys & had to PAY the MONEY BACK!

              I LOVE it.

  11. Reich was also interviewed by several newspapers back in 1996 in the Olympic Centennial Park bombing incident where the bomber had placed a 911 call.

    “According to Alan R. Reich, a University of Washington professor of speech and hearing sciences who regularly testifies as an expert witness in criminal cases, the FBI will typically attempt to compare a taped passage with other passages that have as many words as possible in common.” …. LA Times

    “The FBI source said tapes of Jewell’s many interviews with television reporters and with FBI interrogators are not enough to make a definitive voice comparison. The investigators need Jewell to say the same 11 words as the 911 caller “There’s a bomb in Centennial Olympic Park. You have 30 minutes. … “To make a viable comparison, they need him to repeat it several times. Forensic acoustics expert Alan Reich of Seattle, who is not working on the case, said a sketchy, preliminary voiceprint comparison can be made between the 911 caller and Jewell’s taped interviews.” … NY Daily News

    Flash forward to the Zimmerman case, and Reich is claiming to be able to do exactly what he said was impossible to do in the Richard Jewell case…

    MOM and West will have a field day impeaching this ‘expert’ witness with his own words if he takes the stand 🙂

Leave a Reply

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

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ 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 )


Connecting to %s