Home » Uncategorized » May 29, 2013

May 29, 2013

limine

May 30, 2013 is the deadline for short-order motions.  http://www.flcourts18.org/PDF/Press_Releases/Amended%20Scheduling%20Order.pdf A week ago we discussed possible motions in limine the defense should file such as:

  1. No young pictures of Trayvon
  2. Prevent State from mentioning waiver of SYG Immunity hearing
  3. All events which occurred prior to the actual physical confrontation should be excluded, as they do not have bearing on the elements of 2nd degree murder or self defense.
  4. No mention of ‘blogs’ that comment on the case or supposed ‘doxing’ or any theoretical relationship between such blogs and the defense, GZ and/or his family,
  5. No suggestion of GZ lying or attacking his credibility by referencing Shellie’s perjury charge
  6.  No reference to the jail calls or any suggestion that the ‘code’ was used with the intent to hide money from the court
  7. No mention of Neighborhood Watch Duties as GZ wasn’t patrolling that night
  8. No calling GZ a murderer since that hasn’t been proven.
  9. No mention of GZ’s prior encounters with LE
  10. MOTION IN LIMINE TO PROHIBIT PREJUDICIAL TERMINOLOGY – Seeks to prevent the state from using the term “profiled” since it has the capability to prejudice the jury without providing any evidence that it is illegal. In other words, even if Zimmerman did “profile” Trayvon, he didn’t commit a crime in doing so, and so it would be unfairly prejudicial to him for the state to use that term which carries an implication that the “profiler” is doing something wrong or illegal.
  11. MOTION IN LIMINE TO PREVENT PREJUDICIAL MISCHARACTERIZATION OF DISPATCHER COMMENT – prevents the state or any witness from saying that George Zimmerman was told or commanded not to follow Trayvon Martin or that he was told to get back in his truck, etc. – not only because it was not a “command” from the dispatcher, but also because following Trayvon Martin was not a crime. George was simply following the dispatcher’s earlier instruction (which actually was a command) to “just let me know if this guy does anything else.”
  12. MOTION IN LIMINE TO PROHIBIT WITNESS SPECULATION AS TO MOTIVATION – to keep  any witness and the state from offering any speculation that George Zimmerman was suspicious of Trayvon Martin because of his skin color or because of the hoodie that he was wearing. There is no evidence that suggests either of those is true, and it would be severely prejudicial to George for anyone to speculate in front of the jury that George was motivated by those factors.
  13. MOTION IN LIMINE TO LIMIT MISCHARACTERIZATIONS OF DEFENDANT’S ACTIONS – seeks to prohibit the state or any witness from using the terms “murdered,” “in cold blood,” “like a dog,” “hunted,” and other terms that do not reflect the facts of the case but are severely prejudicial against defendant.
  14. MOTION IN LIMINE TO PROHIBIT DISCUSSION OF PENDING LEGAL ACTIONS AGAINST THIRD PARTY – Seeks to prevent the state from discussing alleged crimes committed by third parties, since no such alleged crime could possibly have any bearing on the events that transpired inside the Retreat at Twin Lakes on February 26, 2012.
  15. No mention of GZ’s prescription drugs or theoretical side effects of those drugs.
  16. MOTION IN LIMINE TO REQUIRE CLEAR COMMUNICATIONS – Requires the state to ask clear and concise questions that can be answered with simple responses.  Limits the compound questions that the state has shown a propensity to ask during cross-examination of defense counsel.

What are your thoughts? What motions in limine would you recommend to the Defense to file?

Any predictions on when we’ll hear from the 5th DCA about deposing Mr. Crump?

Advertisements

270 thoughts on “May 29, 2013

  1. I was going back through my Constitutional Law textbook earlier this evening and ran across the SCOTUS case of Kyles v Whitley (1995)…

    The scope of the prosecutor’s disclosure obligation doesn’t begin and end with what the prosecutor personally knows, the obligation to disclose evidence favorable to the defense extends to “all evidence known to anyone assisting the prosecutor.” Emphasis ‘anyone.’

    That said, I seem to recall Angela Corey very specifically thanking Crump for his ongoing and daily ‘assistance’ with the case and, of course, Judge Nelson herself making him co-counsel of some undefined sort.

    Forget deposing Crump, file another discovery violation against the state. Whatever information or evidence Crump has needs to be turned over to the defense. There is no work product privilege when it comes to discovery.

  2. We need to send letters to every homeless shelter and advocacy group in Florida alerting them that the state has been sitting on video evidence of a homeless man being videotaped and beaten by Trayvon and his friends.

    Ask them to contact the media and their representatives and demand answers.

    • One last thought before hitting the hay…

      Does the bloody photo of TM’s cousin have anything to do with the beating of the homeless man?

      And if so, why hasn’t he been arrested and charged yet?

      In any event, it can’t be too hard to find out who Trayvon’s accomplices were, they’re caught red handed on video… surely Sybrina or Tracy (or even Krop administrators) would be able to identify their son’s friends. And since we learned in court today that the state has apparently had this evidence from TM’s phone since sometime last year, again, why have there been no charges or arrests in the matter?

      It’s bad enough that the state refused to charge Wit 8 its star witness with perjury, but to allow assaults on the homeless to go unpunished to preserve their case is just… well, depraved.

      Do BDLR and Corey even remember what justice is anymore…?

  3. So what happens if MOM wins his Richardson hearing, in terms of BDLR? A sanction? What does that mean? A monetary fine? Removal from case? Going to jail? Disbarment (sp?)? I can see how some of these may help future defendants, but is there any possible result of the Richardson hearing that might help George right now?

    • Any sanctions against the state would likely be no more than a verbal admonishment from the judge. The judge can impose sanctions ranging from nothing, through exclusion of evidence to dismissal of the case. Evidence exclusion cuts in the state’s favor, so that’s off the table, and dismissal of the charge is an extreme remedy that is generally overturned on appeal.

      If Bernardo is to be punished, it would be through a separate proceeding.

      The theoretically possible benefit to Zimmerman, assuming he still wants a continuance, is that the court will find procedural prejudice in the late turnover. Given Nelson’s statement from the bench yesterday, and bear in mind she is fully informed of the defense argument in its motion for sanctions, I do not see her reversing herself and finding that the late turnover has caused any procedural prejudice to the defense, given a June 10 trial date.

      • The defense still doesn’t know what else it hasn’t got. I wouldn’t be surprised if more discovery comes out.

        If I’m BDLR I’m ordering everyone to go through their stuff and give it to the defense. Pronto. He doesn’t want to get caught by others who knows there is more.

        • Yes, that is what a reasonable person would do. That is what a fair person would do. Instead, the state attorney’s office grills the whistleblower and puts him on administrative leave. Good thing he has a lawyer!

  4. I’m also wondering about the photos on TM’s phone of an underage female – there must be a piece of the story missing, because TM was underage and so were his friends. Are we to then assume “underage” means *really* young? Or perhaps, regardless of extent of “underage”, the female was not clothed? Or that the photo captured a sexual act? I guess I’m just not getting where exactly they’re going with mentioning this photo – there must be something more significant that they’re not mentioning, right..?

    And, I haven’t read all the tweets or texts, but I do recall way back when, when people screen captured the stuff before it was taken down (must have been tweets then I guess), that his words expressed a very crude and objectifying view of women. I’m hoping some of that is in discovery for the public to see. I haven’t seen it commented on in the press, however, when they mention drugs, guns, and fights.

      • Hi 1carol — oops, it’s that dyslexia acting up again — excuse me, “lorac1,”

        Saw mention of this somewhere: it’s supposed to be a pic a young girl sexting (sexy text) TM with a self-shot with her top pulled up, although there may be other more “troubling” images + more gun and drug pix. Of the alleged vid filmed by TM of 2 buddies of his beating a defenseless homeless man, if released to the public, I wonder if we’ll see the perpetrators’ faces (cousin Boobie/ Stephen?) and hear TM encouraging/ laughing on the soundtrack. That would be devastating to the State and cause a significant shift of support away from TM’s side, I would think.

        Trayvon had a YouTube account so I wouldn’t be surprised to know he posted that one and more there @YT before they were scrubbed by the Scheme Team.

      • Hi Aussie,

        I believe “underage” refers to the female involved. In some states it’s defined as under 14 years of age; IDK what the Florida law says, or how strict they are about what is prob’ly a misdemeanor. But the PR generated by even a “censored” release can only further damage the St. Skittles image of TM that the State, family and Scheme Team have tried to portray, causing more of a shift of support away from the Traybot cause, both locally and nationally.

      • I guess my instinct is to see “underage” as either “under 21” (can’t drink), or “under 18” (still a teen, not yet an adult). Anything more specific than that, and I have a chart to look at to see which groupings of two youth would be statuatory rape.

    • I think it just meant that there is a picture of a young girl on his phone. It could be a 5 year old cousin. The significance of it was that this laywer was telling the defense he knows that Trayvon has a picture of a girl on his phone, a hand holding a gun and some drug pictures and he knows the person who forwarded them to BDLR. He hasn’t seen them in discovery so he’s checking if they got turned over.

      Mr. O’Mara hasn’t seen them and finds an expert to mine the .bin file, who comes up with a picture of a girl, picture of a gun and a drug picture. Which corroborates what this person told him.

      If I heard right yesterday, Mr. White wouldn’t tell Mr. O’Mara who the person was who forwarded the data to BDLR but that he would answer that question in open court under oath for the first time. So that was the reason for putting White on the stand. It gave O’Mara the name of the person who sent the data to BDLR.

      If you are trying to tell Mr. O’Mara about a picture of a female on the phone, how would you describe it? I think that’s all it is. Until I hear more, I wouldn’t read much into it.

      • The witness did disclose the name of the person who saw or prepared the report and forwarded it to de la Rionda. When O’Mara asked when that report was forwarded, Bernardo objected on hearsay grounds. Nelson upheld the objection, and O’Mara offered to bring the person to court, even that afternoon if that was agreeable to the court. Within five minutes of being named, the person who forwarded the report to Bernardo was put on administrative leave.

        That person is the state attorney’s office’s information-technology director, Ben Kruidbos.

        • At 1:34:00 of the hearing, Mr. O”Mara asks Mr. White, “Who is your client”

          Mr. White gives the name of his client.

          at 1:34:53 after objections of hearsay by State and Judge, Mr. O’Mara said to the Judge, Mr White indicated he would only disclose his client to me in this hearing after I subpoened him to appear.

          • Interesting the Judge set the hearing for “February” 31st?? I haven’t listened to the whole recording, so I suspect it was corrected somewhere along the way later?

            Also, noticed a slight smirk on BDLR when MOM mentioned that the deleted phone items had been turned over to BDLR.

            This is a good example of prosecutorial hardball using the “rules” of evidence. You determine that TM’s background is irrelevant, therefore, whatever evidence pertains to that is not relevant and therefore not mandatory for disclosure. If the defense that type of information, let them find it their own way on their own dime.

          • regarding the hearsay objections:

            “and was he working for the state attorney’s office when this report was created?”

            White: “Yes, he was.”

            BDLR: Objection. Hearsay.

            Court: Sustained.

            A little late Bernie. Amazing that Nelson automatically sustains any objection from BDLR, even without thinking. This is not hearsay. It is within White’s knowledge and he is testifying.

            • MOM’s next question ensures no hearsay objection:

              “Are you aware who that report was given to?”

              White: Yes, Mr. DLR.

              The hearsay rule can almost always be avoided (there are millions of exception to hearsay) but using the witness’ awareness of the issue. The witnesses own impressions are not hearsay.

              • But it is so obvious that BDLR and the court are working together to keep all of this out of evidence. Amazing that this conspiracy exists. I have never seen such corruption!

            • As cboldt had mentioned somewhere on this thread, any sanctions or punishment against BDLR will not be imposed on BDLR by this judge. After the last defense motions for sancttions against the state, the judge said she would not rule on any sanctions until after the trial was completed. Nelson will do absolutely nothing to risk her precious trial calendar, even allowing a possible criminally negligent and/or corrupt prosecutor to keep pushing the train forward. Again, as cboldt pointed out, if charges are brought against BDLR and/or Corey, it will be from someone outside of the current characters on the trial playing field.

              I go back again to the document posted here by someone which claimed that BDLR tampered with witnesses in the past. He coerced false testimony from a witness under oath, and recorded. When the witness wanted to come clean and tell the truth, BDLR told him that if he didn’t say exactly what he said in the coerced deposition, he would charge him with perjury. BDLR also wanted to place the witness in a jail cell with another defendant he was charging with a crime, and wanted the witness to act as a snitch as to what that defendant said to him. BDLR is pure corruption and conspirator. He is evil and has no place in the legal justice system.

              At least 4 state attorney’s have left Cruella Corey’s employ just since the Martin/Zimmerman case landed on her desk. I’m sure they are aware of Corey and BDLR’s MO in winning convictions at any cost. I’m also sure that this isn’t their first rodeo with the Corey/BDLR team.They are also aware of Corey padding her and BDLR’s pension fund accounts. They know that if the chit hits the fan in the Zimmerman case, they too can be implicated if they had any hand in the discovery violations. Even if the reason for coming forward is not for the right reasons, and I have no idea why one guy has chosen to do so, it will go a long way in cleaning out the filth and stench of one area in Fla. legal system. If anything does come of the Wesley White testimony, I hope that the last domino to fall will be Pam Bondi. IMO, she is the one who laid the tracks, bought the high speed train, and hired the appropriate conductor to drive the train right into the courtroom, full speed ahead.

        • Do you have a link that confirms the five minutes? I missed it

          Within five minutes of being named, the person who forwarded the report to Bernardo was put on administrative leave.

  5. Very good Nettles. Hello btw. Came up for some air from my chaotic life now. I have been checking in as time allows. I hope things settle so I can reopen my blog when trial begins. Really miss you guys/gals.

    These questions are hard…lol. I am not sure I would file ANY Motion in limine. Why? Objections for relevancy SHOULD be placed on record right in front of the jury so they see how GZ has been railroaded by the state (& future appeals/lawsuits) My opinion on the loss of some things yesterday 1. Shows a very biased judge indeed 2. Is workable anyway with the right witness/ right questioning on stand 3. Opens a big door to sue the State after aquittal for overzealous prosecution. All in all I will not underestimate the jury…. there have been good juries on high profile cases these past few years, and GZ has a great legal team. Truth will prevail.

    • Danny! ♥ I have thought about you lots over the past several weeks. I trust you are coping?

      The idea to work collaborativley on suggestions for motions in limine came from a tweet Coreshift put out there.

      I had no troubles with the Judge’s rulings yesterday and did find them to be the right calls. Take out who the defendant and victim are for a moment and put in two other individuals in their place.

      A Judge should rule that until it is shown that evidence in discovery is relevant to prove your point or show why a witness lied, it should not be before a jury. What if the defendant is trying to trash a victim?

      The judge limited both sides in their opening statement to be just the facts of what occurred that night. I’m o.k. with that.

      I was very pleased to see just how strong the defense case is. No matter which way the state goes, the defense is going to be able to shoot it down.

      Not only is some of the discovery on the phone juicy details, it goes to the heart of the matter on why Trayvon did what he did. George Zimmerman although isn’t required to answer why Trayvon would attack him, I think the defense can now give the jury a pretty darn good reason that is supported by corroborating evidence.

      I was pleased with yesterday’s hearing. The defense is up against it in getting information in but their evidence is strong and will make it extremely difficult for the Judge to say it isn’t relevant.

      Angela Corey and her office is in hot water now thanks to the whistle-blower. My faith was somewhat restored that not everyone in the State’s dept. is corrupt. I saw glimmers of hope yesterday and I feel good about the days ahead.

      • Yes, I am coping while becoming very busy with my Mom. Had to move her with me. She had an occipital stroke on top of all the other stuff. Many Drs. appointments, visiting nurses etc. However, she is recovering well for now. Once they reintroduce the blood thinners in a few weeks that will be nail biting. Thank you for keeping me in your thoughts.

        I like collaboration 😉 Which seems to have covered every motion in limine that could be covered against prejudice. You both did a fantastic job!

        I stand with you on the hearing. I watched late last night and read the summaries. The prosecution was grand standing on those motions to make a feel good moment for the public support Crumpster is always after. State could have easily objected during trial. But really the defense was only blocked from mentioning things in opening, if there is a witness and it is relevant to testimony psh…. Nelson is gonna have a hard time lubing it up for the State.
        They should be very careful, the State that is….. This trial could be over lickity split if all they want is to stick to 5 minutes…..lol. They gots themselves in another pickle…..

        Geez, could the State make it any clearer they arrested an innocent man for 2nd degree murder by supressing the defense from mentioning how long it took to arrest George? The State is trying hard to supress there was no grand jury, and it took a special prosecutor to arrest him, after an initial investigation was completed with no arrest. I believe they are attempting to set up non appealable issues. They truly believe they got this in the bag.

        As for the DCA I hope we may hear something days before trial begins. Then the State is going to have a hissy fit when defense wants to add Crump as a witness, and motions to supress most of the questions during testimony will coma flyin, and lots of BDLR arm flapping! We wont hear from Crumpster until end of trial, which will be of great benefit after the star w8 testifies. You already know I think defense is winning the appeal. Does not mean State & Crump will not try to pull all the stops.

        Off to an appointment…..check in later.

      • Danny great to see you back, I am glad that things are settling down a bit and your Mom is doing better, looking forward for the Warrior to charge forward in the commentary.

        • Thanks bori. Hoping all does settle a bit more. I am exhausted…lol.
          I see you have been forging ahead doing what you do best. I will have to hop on over to your place in a bit.

        • Same here… 😀

          My mom is 85 and is in similar circumstances so I can relate to how difficult this is. One of my sisters tends to her 24/7 as well as another sister with Down’s Syndrome. Blessed, indeed. are all caregivers.

  6. Crump tweets link to Jonathon Capehart article “George Zimmerman’s relevant past” which falsely claims: “46 calls to the Sanford (Fla.) Police Department reporting suspicious activity involving black males.” Linked Daily Beast article claims calls included activity of women, stray dogs, and others. @attorneycrump: George Zimmerman’s relevant past http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-partisan/wp/2013/05/28/george-zimmermans-relevant-past/ NBC got themselves sued for something similar although this is just an opinion article. #RaceHoax

    • i really like that MOM is putting on his game face and appears more aggressive in his exchanges with racist media commentators. Last night, he chastised Crump on the PM show for knowing about all of the damaging information released on Trayvon, yet trying to paint a contrary and dishonest image with the media. MOM is no longer backing down when confronted by ridiculous charges and IMHO it is important to stand up to the ridiculous comments made by Crump, NatJack and now, Ryan Cameron. He especially stood up to a racist comment by Cameron yesterday when Ryan complained that no one could speak for Trayvon (because he was dead). In a very nice but firm way, MOM explained that while the defense has sympathy for the tragedy which occurred that night, his job is the seek justice for the defendant. Incredibly, he also had to explain to this moron that the state’s job is to speak for Trayvon.

      But as Dershowitz points out, the job here is not to seek justice for Trayvon, but justice period. So far, that is not happening since the state has engaged in unseemly conduct and unfair tactics like hiding evidence. Shame, shame shame….

      Also, it is very important to stand up to the biased coverage by HLN. Of course, they are stoking the racial flames and playing both sides in order to create a controversy. But is that really in the best interests of our society?

      • BDLR’s third failure to gag MOM may have emboldened MOM a bit. Also, MOM seems to be the kind of guy that likes to get all the facts and line up his ducks before making a move. With the trial still set for Jun 10th he’s out of time and so I think we’ll see him being more assertive.

      • Agree with these thoughts, Megan Kelly on Fox also fans the flames, and misrepresents facts, her guest attorneys yesterday think photos of drugs, guns and fighting is normal teenage behaviors. These people are exploiting us all.

    • Wish we could talk CTH castoff “ItsMichaelNotMike” to drop in here at Nettles, Inc. His post at stevie g.’s link above is a classic. Don’t miss it — it will lift your spirits, guaranteed!
      Thanks for being vigilant, stevie, it’s much appreciated.

  7. Don’t know if anyone saw my post last night that the DCA finally answered my email late yesterday afternoon.

    What do you know…the DCA replied to me today.

    Ackbarsays: Is there any information publicly available about when an opinion will be forthcoming regarding the Petition for Writ of Certiorari filed in the Zimmerman case on April 9th? Are you able to tell us whether this case is being decided by a 3 judge panel or if it’s being decided en banc?

    DCA: I cannot predict when a decision will be rendered. The case is currently under consideration by a three judge panel. We do post significant pleadings on our website.

  8. Can someone clarify something for me? This article says:

    Defense attorney Mark O’Mara said he was happy with the judge’s rulings, saying the only time he would use such evidence would be if the state tried to attack Zimmerman’s character.

    I thought the possibility of Martin’s past was only relevant in terms of impeachment/rebuttal for Martin’s character, how would it be relevant in terms of Zimmerman’s character?

  9. All of the Trayvon supporters make much of gz’s choice to leave his car. But McDaniel makes a great point that Trayvon made a choice a little bit later. He could have easily gone home, he was right there, but he didn’t. What is the implication of that? Surely he went back to confront gz.

  10. Regarding NatJack’s tweet:

    George Zimmerman’s Defense Team Releases Texts and Photos to Fit Their Racist Narrative.

    It amazes me that some minorities think they cannot possibly be racist. For them, the definition of racism goes only one way–white to black. However, racism also goes the other way as well. Compare MOM as a racist (something i have never seen) and NatJack as a racist, and who wins the racist award hands down?

    • I recall in court in October I think it was, Mr. O”Mara said he got some racists sending him mail.

      Natalie tweeted Frances Robles that she doesn’t get mail from racists. Insinuating her supporters weren’t racist and Mr. O’Mara’s were.

      I thought to myself, Natalie doesn’t get that some of the racists Mr. O’Mara is hearing from are TM supporters. All they needed to hear what the victim was black and the shooter was not to decide him guilty. That is racist.

      Natalie was hearing from GZ supporters yet her communication to Frances Robles was she got no mail from racists.

      I knew then, Natalie doesn’t get it. What she accuses white people of, is who she is. Someone who judges life through color.

  11. Just as TM documented fights or the beating of a homeless person, TM was either the videographer, participant, or ref, it seems some high school kids in Orlando may be participating just for the hell of it & documenting . I didn’t see the movie “Fight Club,” but it was a big hit I think for Brad Pitt.

    WFTV has gotten video of Orlando fights involving students (TM NOT INCLUDED.)

    “This behavior is dangerous, it’s reckless, someone could get hurt or seriously injured,” said Al Rollins of the Orange County Sheriff’s Office. The sheriff’s office said it has attempted to investigate the incidents, but have been unable to make much progress without the help of the community.

    http://www.wftv.com/news/news/local/video-shows-orange-co-students-fighting-after-scho/nX5wM/

  12. [Stop me if you’ve heard this one]

    Michael SF @ YouTube posted this text with his recent Traybot vid:

    Published on May 28, 2013
    After the May 28, 2013, hearing on the Zimmerman case attorneys Benjamin Crump, Parks, and Natalie Jackson appeared before the cameras outside the courthouse to make a canned statement. (The substance of which was no different that what they said in March 2012). What is interesting is what was NOT said and some other things they did.

    – Tracy Martin was noticeably absent. Where is Tracy Martin? Is he ducking the police? Is the Fulton/Martin united bereavement front collapsing?

    – The attorneys would NOT allow Sybrina Fulton to make a statement or answer questions. This was obviously because the ONLY questions the press would ask: “Is it true what Trayvon said in his text message, that you kicked him out of your house in late November 2011?” They would also ask her if she recognized the gun Trayvon Martin was holding in the cell phone pics. Was it hers? Does she recognize the backgrounds in the pics? Is it her house in the background?

    – Also notice that Fulton does NOT appear like a mother upset about totally false information being disseminated about Trayvon. She has the look of fright, not of what went on in the courtroom, but that the press would ask her questions. (When it looked like things were headed in her direction, that’s when Crump ushered everyone to flee.)

    Ouchhh . . . brutal!

    [pop-&-scratch audio for awhile] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jjHmBuDIoQc

    • Ahhh… they didn’t just not allow her to speak, Parks explained that she has now been advised by counsel to not speak.

      The parents, it would seem, are now invoking their right to remain silent after the release of the incriminating evidence retrieved from their son’s phone.

      Remember, the parents have claimed to have no knowledge of their son fighting… the texts between Trayvon and his parents, however, would seem to suggest they were well aware of his violent behaviors.

      That presser definitely had the air of criminal attorneys representing their client… not civil rights attorneys representing the grieving mother of an innocent child.

      No more trash can tours…

    • JB from SoCal – VIDEO: priceless. You can hear Natty Jack still talking after they walked away, I did see that part of the video in which Parks had to literally pull Natty Jack away by her arm from the reporters. (remember this week the smack down Natty Jack took on Twitter from Mike Iglarsh & Hornsby, both Legal Analyst calling her out for making “racist statement?”)

      I agree with your observations of Sybrina. It explains, imo, why the HOA settlement was rushed to get out in front of what Crump/Tracy/Sybrina knew would come to light, and more importantly, to the MEDIA. The created image of TM had already imploded with the MEDIA asking Sybrina/Tracy about the lies they spun of TM’s image & exposing the SCAM they perpetrated on the public to garner sympathy for such an angelic young man. NOW! the real image of TM, its easy to see WHY Tracy was uncooperative w/the pin number, Sybrina/Tracy knew what was up w/TM.

      Sybrina FINALLY shuts up, I agree, can’t answer the HARD questions RZ Jr. has challenged the MEDIA to ask Sybrina. WHAT about TM’s living arrangements? WHY did you kick him out? TM lived his whole life in an unstable environment it seems, with Tracy’s wife Alisha for 10 yrs., the uncle ex marine at the time of his death. TM saying on text or twitter, about possibly going to school in Sanford. Yet another possible move for TM.

      It seems TM got into the most trouble when he lived w/Sybrina INSTEAD of Alisha, of course TM was older & had entered high school at that time. Nettles would know, she is the Net-apedia of the TM case, a compliment Nettles, your knowledge & recall are always appreciated!

  13. I got a kick out of the expressions on the Crump gang faces as they watched RZ deliver his statement. They were aghast and outraged, “how dare he”.

  14. The biggest news yesterday imho BDLR. Exposed again in Court & this time by a “whistle blower,” Ben Kruidbos, Technology Director & peer within BDLR/Corey’s office, this is HUGE! This could EXPOSE Corey’s entire office, especially BDLR & the winning at any cost mentality even illegally at the expense of GZ. Seems that everything involving BDLR would need to be investigated as he can’t be trusted as has been shown time & again imo. WHAT else has BDLR hidden from the Defense? (Duke Lacrosse comes to mind.) The Governor/Bondi are going to want this SHUT down immediately, perhaps a confidential pay out to the whistle blower/attorney. (remember the blank CD’s turned over by BDLR, missing texts from DD, missing info on the night TM died, could it have been deleted from MOM’s information?)

    The good news is that Kathy Belich, investigative reporter for WFTV won’t let this go, WFTV is award winning for their investigative reporting & Belich has at her disposal, Bill Sheaffer, legal analyst to weigh in on what it means to the case.

    MOM said in his interview w/Kathy Belich/Bill Sheaffer: “if I said something to the Judge that turned out to be completely untrue by indisputable evidence, I might need Mr. Sheaffer.”

    Sheaffer said “BDLR may need an attorney, criminal contempt, including jail.” (para phrased)

    This interview on main page, “Zimmerman video:”
    (Nettles or Captain – I couldn’t isolate this to directly link to video, maybe you can) “WFTV Video Reports” http://www.wftv.com/

    Judge denies motion to delay Zimmerman trial: Defense accuses prosecutor of withholding evidence!

    “If the defense can prove the allegations, it may well give rise to a criminal contempt proceeding,” said Sheaffer.
    (article)
    http://www.wftv.com/news/news/attorneys-battle-court-over-evidence-zimmerman-tri/nX4Wz/

    • Ditto… it’s not just MOM calling shenanigans, anymore. The accusations are coming from within the State Attorney’s office itself.

      It’ll be interesting to see if this evidence just wasn’t turned over, or if it went poof and disappeared.

      Hopefully the IT guy kept backup copies… if for no other reason than to combat the inevitability of the SA’s office trying to dismiss it as just the unsubstantiated ramblings of a disgruntled employee.

    • Art- I agree that the biggest news yesterday was the exposure of BDLR withholding discovery from the defense. Shaffer said “if the defense can prove the allegations” but, if they have someone who worked in a very responsible position in Corey’s office willing to testify under oath, and if he has dated copies of the info. that was withheld, I don’t know what else the defense would have to prove. It would take someone directly connected with Corey’s office to know what info. was missing, and it appears Mr. White’s client is prepared to do just that. It will be interesting to see who, if anyone, will be willing to step up to the plate and file the criminal complaints against Corey and BDLR.

    • coreshift – I bet Natty Jack & her mother Francine/Francis (?) thought OJ’s jury was fair, the makeup of the jury was:
      Race: 9 Blacks, 1 Hispanic, 2 Whites

      Christopher Darden, who is Black & Asst. Prosecutor on the case w/Marcia Clark wrote a book in which he stated, “when I saw one of the jurors holding his fist up for black power, I knew despite the overwhelming DNA evidence that OJ would never be convicted.”

      • She does have me blocked (I suggested she get a malpractice lawyer a long time ago) so she doesn’t get my direct tweets. However, she would see them if she viewed the conversation.

  15. Art, I have gotten excited about some things on the case, but this does look different, and BDLR seems concerned. Notice how much time Guy got speaking, and the few times BDLR did speak he was very subdued.

    After the hearing I can distinctly hear MOM tell BDLR, my client is entitled to all the evidence and BDLR say but, but you know…

    The next few days will be interesting until the hearing on June 6th.

    • boricuafudd – I too am excited about BDLR/Corey being EXPOSED, WFTV has the resources to investigate & will! I like the possibilities Bill Sheaffer suggests & MOM stating: “indisputable evidence.” I bet Kathy Belich is digging deep today on the sudden departures of those that have exited their office.

      Maybe its time for BDLR to take the ADDITIONAL $ 100,000.00 Corey so generously funded his retirement fund with of taxpayer dollars & carry his a$$! At the very least imo, BDLR should recuse himself from GZ’s case, Guy can take the lead, there is NO NEED for GZ to be burdened by BDLR, or GZ supporters emailing BONDI about the corruption & demanding BDLR recuse himself. After all, Bondi like the Governor & Corey, are ALL elected by the taxpayers. The biggest problem as I see it, is when this is exposed in a case and disciplinary action is taken against a Prosecutor, ALL their previous convictions of defendants get challenged by those sitting in jail. (some guilty, maybe some not)

      Judge N will not be able to protect the self destructive, corrupt, POS BDLR now. LMAO, I bet Bondi/Governor & Corey pooped their panties while reading the papers/watching the news reports, listening to MOM answering Kathy Belich, Bill Sheffer’s interview legal opinion, & reading WFTV’s article watching the nut BDLR implode.)

      • I stand by what I said to Bori in our dialogue about this. The state has a chance to get out this now and minimize damage to our legal process. Bond, and Scott both face tough reelections. Not sure about Corey yet. An elected official can end this mess, and if they don’t well they deserve what they will get. They can stop it just as easily as they started it while they have the scapegoats to blame it on.

    • Bori: You have read what I have to say about this. That’s my story and I’m sticking with it. Let’s all demand an “arress.” That’s all we want is an arress. Where is the petition?

  16. http://www.fortmilltimes.com/2013/05/29/2722366/lawyer-zimmerman-prosecutor-withheld.html

    Lawyer: Zimmerman prosecutor withheld evidence
    By KYLE HIGHTOWER

    This version is more complete than the copy edited for most major papers uses Hightower’s piece, including quotes such as:

    Kruidbos was placed on leave shortly after White testified during a hearing in George Zimmerman’s second-degree murder case on Tuesday. White said Kruidbos was interviewed by state attorney investigators twice before the action was taken.

    White said he wasn’t surprised of possible evidence violations by Zimmerman prosecutor Bernie de la Rionda.

    “I was saddened by it, but I’m not surprised,” he said.

    White first learned about the evidence through Kruidbos more than a month ago, he said.

    • Criminal contempt of court? Heck, the state charged Shellie Zimmerman with perjury for alleged misleading statements. Must be nice to “be in high places.” RHIP (Rank has its privileges).

        • cboldt – WHY doesn’t MOM demand BDLR recuse himself, Guy/Corey could take over if they too weren’t involved!

          Maybe that comes next after the testimony of the whistle blower bitch slaps Judge N & she’s forced to take disciplinary action?

          • Art- The problem I see with Guy taking over for BDLR is that he comes from the same office as BDLR, and they both work for and answer to Cruella Corey. If BDLR goes down, I would find it hard to not see his master going down with him. This is Corey’s circus to run, and she runs it with a studded whip. If more whistleblowers come forward, mainly those that quit working for Corey, you can bet that the snowball will start at the top of the hill.

      • I wonder if the reason Nelson was so hard on the defense in the last hearing is because she knows she’s going to have to deal with BDLR’s naughtiness. Maybe her idea of being fair? Being critical of both?

        • I doubt it. I think she has a prosecutor’s mindset. Seems to have a reasonable grasp of the rules and all, but her application of them is not even handed or, in some cases, even practical.

          My remark about her not dealing justice to de la Rionda is based on the limits of her power sitting over this case. She can remove him from the case, kick him off, and that’s about as far as she can go. If there are going to be further penalties to the prosecutor, those penalties come in the self-regulating process of the Florida bar. The typical most harsh sanction is a year off. Bernardo is approaching retirement. They’ll give him a bonus and retire him before he faces any real legal ramification.

          • What has been revealed now by this lawyer is pretty conclusive proof that what Bernie has done is criminal. We will find out soon enough how deep it goes and how long it has been happening. This is not a simple discovery violation. I don’t have to tell what the charges will/should be. If Nelson does not take decisive action like remove him from the case, I think Floridians might finally rally and demand that he be arrested and investigated.

            • AFAIK, blatant, willful Brady violations aren’t criminal. Even malicious prosecution, which is mounting a prosecution out of literal malice against an innocent person, is not a crime. The most the innocent person can get is money damages.

              • True about Brady and that is both tragic and illogical but lying to a judge in court is a different matter. He lied to Nelson twice and when she saw he was not directly answering the first question, she asked him another follow up to box him in. He could have fessed but once again chose to lie, not be deceptive.

                That is criminal by anyone’s standards.

        • pinecone – BDLR needs to be reported to the Fla. Bar & that’s the least of it. I am just guessing, but any State Prosecutor it seems would have a conflict of interest. I would think a Federal Proseuctor would take over criminal charges, but cboldt could tell us for sure.

          • I think the only way de la Rionda and Corey face any federal court is in a private civil rights action. They have qualified immunity. I did look into the charge of Malicious Prosecution (a state charge), and one element it requires is a finding of malice on the part of the prosecutor, against the defendant. That might be hard to find, but Corey’s praying with Martin’s and shunning contact offered by defendant might be enough to support a finding of malice.

            • cboldt – Since Duke Lacrosse is always a reminder of the depth a Prosecutor might go, I was curious about his punishment which included: jail time, resigned as DA of Durham County, bankrupt, to name only a few. MANY other’s were involved and faced consequences also.

              Duke Lacrosse players/Coach/families SETTLED their FEDERAL Civil Suit, but, Duke University had a vested interest in settling, just as in Jerry Sandusky’s victims Civil Suit w/Penn State also named as being sued, Universities have deep pockets.

              GZ surely has a Civil Rights case against Natty Jack/Crump/Sybrina/Tracy. Maybe MOM & West plan to represent GZ themselves in that case.

              I was trying to figure out WHO might prosecute BDLR and it seems one article indicates maybe the DOJ!

              FROM article:
              Department of Justice charged one of its own prosecutors with obstruction of justice for allegedly failing to disclose exculpatory evidence.

              http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/jurisprudence/2007/04/prosecuting_the_prosecutor.html

        • Under the rules, there are two types of criminal contempts. One is direct, an act done in front of the judge. The judge may try that case summarily.

          An indirect criminal contempt is found on a separate trial. If the contempt charged involves disrespect to or criticism of a judge (not the case here), the judge shall disqualify himself or herself from presiding at the hearing.

          I’d have to dig into Fla. case law to get a sense of what acts qualify for criminal contempt. The definition is, I think, “an act calculated to obstruct, hinder, or defy a Court in the administration of justice.” Other (plain, or non-criminal) contempts may be found for mere embarrassment or insulting of the court. There is also a maximum penalty that a judge may administer. Finding and punishing contempt are inherent powers of the court.

        • Criminal contempt lies solely with the judge. If the judge isn’t offended, then it’s a complete non-issue. There is no requirement for a judge to notice or “find” contempt; and on the flip side, then can find you in contempt (but not criminal contempt) for rolling your eyes in court – that goes for spectators too.

          • cboldt- Maybe a few of us have been using the wrong legal language. Rather than criminal contempt charges against the prosecution team involved, perhaps malicious prosecution would be a more appropriate charge. I know that it is extremely rare for a judge to be removed from the court, but it has in fact happened in the past a time or two. This is Nelson’s last case in the criminal court division, as she was sent down to divorce court where she can’t work in favor of state prosecutors. Apparently that decision was made for a reason, and I doubt it is because there were so many openings and a shortage of divorce judges. I remember reading a website which rated her over the last number of years. Her overall ratings were not in the ditch, but some of the ratings came from fellow judges, and prosecutors. Of course those like Corey would rate her will 5 stars.

            • I wouldn’t say you are using the wrong legal language. Both criminal contempt and malicious prosecution are possible. They are two different widgets to use against assholes. Criminal contempt is for the judge to keep the court in good working order, and there are quite a few ways a good running court can be thrown out of order. Malicious prosecution is a civil remedy instituted by a defendant who believes the prosecution was malicious. Then there are “bar complaints” which can be filed by anybody, but are usually filed by clients who are pissed at their lawyers.

              Removing judges is indeed rare. I think the judges in Pennsylvania who were making dough off of diverting innocent kids to jail (kids for cash scandal) plead guilty to federal tax fraud. Not that I think the federal courts are uniformly honest either, it is fun to see them reaming their inferiors in the state system. And by “inferiors,” I only mean it in the brute force sense, not in a moral sense.

              • Bar complaints in Fla. in particular seem to be a lost cause. This isn’t Crumps first rodeo with shaking down the state for money because a jury decision didn’t go his way. I remember reading that when the staff from the institution in the Martin Anderson case were acquitted, he promised that that would never happen again, evne though Crist gave him a $5 million dollar payoff, really without credible reason. Why would you pay someone off because a jury decided against you? Did Crump decide after that trial outcome that he would rally his troops to riot and cause mayhem if the jury didn’t decide the way he wanted them to? IDK. It seems pretty obvious to me that with Crumps proclamations that this is the civil rights case of the century, he means business, or else. So, if Scott upped the ante, and agreed to hand him $10 million dollars, would he go away? would he take the money and then rally his troops to riot and burn it down? IDK

                I will borrow what an elderly black lady said she would do if Obama didn’t win re-election as the president. She said she would (warning profanity ahead) “cock punch Mitt Romney in the nutsack.” She said to the surprised reporter, “what, you never heard that expression before”? She went on to say that if Obama was not re-elected, then they should just burn it down. Crump also graduated from that school of thought.

                Sorry, bar complaints seem to be useless in Fla. I remember reading that they put weight on complaints from others in the legal profession in Fla., the rest no so much. I actually remember reading an article several months ago that there were complaints being filed against Crump by the bucketload. Never heard anything from the bar about that. I don’t believe you can even contact the Fla. bar to find out complaint information on lawyers if you are shopping for one.

                • pinecone – I agree w/your comment, one positive thing the Fla. Bar did for Baez was to DENY him a license to practice law for 8 yrs. due to moral character financial irresponsibility. During KC’s trial, there was at least 3 or 4 complaints against Baez, one from a SITTING Judge! You are correct, the shady barrister skated on all the complaints & once Baez was awarded his license after 8 yrs., the Fla. Bar didn’t seem to care what a scumbag his was. He filed bankruptcy again, had 2 homes in foreclosure during the trial.

                  Seems the Bar is quick to jerk the license of shady attorney’s for hiding personal assets if they claim bankruptsy & stealing from their clients as in a settlement awarded a client & the attorney was holding the funds.

                  The Bar claims they do investigate, LMAO, Attorneys investigating Attorneys, rarely does that work for the claimant!

    • cassandra – EXCELLENT article, thanks for sharing!

      I wish Judge Jeannine Pirro would EXPOSE this bull chit on her talking points, BDLR deserves to EXPOSED, MOM’s attempts have gone ignored by Judge N, she won’t be denying this or she may see another appeal.

      • no kidding, here we have SAO staff members putting their careers in jeopardy because they’re ethical and accountable for their actions. This case, as so much in my life in the last 15 years, is so UPSIDE DOWN, I think about running away to the mountains to escape the madness.

      • I email Judge Jeannine Pirro every week and have sent emails to countless others including Judge Andrew Napolitano and Hannity but also to lawyers who are not with Fox.

    • Looking closely at this article I cannot tell for sure if this statement is a direct quote from O’Mara. The quotation marks indicate that it as a continuation of the previous paragraph. If so, it’s a very strong statement.

      Thanks for the link

      “That inquiry, if in fact it continues and it certainly should, could lead to some very dire consequences for those who made presentations to the judge that were not accurate.”

  17. Nettles,
    We should take a page from the BGI playbook and inundate Gov Scott with emails asking about the malicious prosecution of GZ. Its quite simple to do and it appears that many emails are replied to. The Sunburst page (although it takes a couple of days) shows every email sent. I have gotten several “notification” emails but no response yet. SHOW THEM WE ARE PAYING ATTENTION!!!!!

    http://www.flgov.com/contact-gov-scott/email-the-governor/

    • Thanks. Maybe things have changed but I never received any replies but I will try again. Maybe we should all send the same message if someone has already composed a good one.

      Nettles, this is right up your alley.

      • My “canned” response from the idiots……….

        Thank you for contacting Governor Rick Scott’s Office and sharing your concerns about a Florida criminal case. The Governor asked that I respond on his behalf.

        Governor Scott supports a full and fair investigation into all of the circumstances surrounding Trayvon Martin’s death. For this reason, Governor Scott appointed the Honorable Angela Corey, State Attorney for the Fourth Judicial Circuit of Florida, Special Prosecutor in this matter and requested the Florida Department of Law Enforcement to provide any assistance necessary to fully investigate this matter.

        After an intensive investigation in the interest of pursuing justice for all victims in this case, on Wednesday, April 11, 2011, the Special Prosecutor filed an information charging George Zimmerman with murder in the second degree and a capias was issued for his arrest. This matter is now in the hands of the judicial system. As the process continues, it is critical that we be patient as the proceedings move forward in a fair and transparent manner.

        The Governor’s office does not administer the locally elected state attorney’s office. Although the Governor appointed the special prosecutor in this case, the Governor does not have authority over the prosecution of this case. The State Attorneys operate independently of the Governor’s Office.

        Those with concerns about the prosecution of a criminal case or who have a complaint about the decisions of the state attorney should contact the state attorney’s office directly. Contact information is provided below.

        The Honorable Angela B. Corey
        State Attorney’s Office 4th Judicial Circuit
        220 East Bay Street, 6th Floor
        Jacksonville, Florida 32202
        Email: acorey@coj.net

        Thank you again for taking the time to contact the Governor’s Office

        Sincerely,

        Warren Davis
        Office of Citizen Services
        Executive Office of the Governor

        • Humm. That is more than I got. I noticed this:

          As the process continues, it is critical that we be patient as the proceedings move forward in a fair and transparent manner.

          The Governor’s office does not administer the locally elected state attorney’s office. Although the Governor appointed the special prosecutor in this case, the Governor does not have authority over the prosecution of this case. The State Attorneys operate independently of the Governor’s Office.

          _____________________

          I assume you said that the proceedings ARE NOT moving forward in a fair and transparent manner.

          If the governor appointed Corey, he surely has the power to remove her. It’s all BS.

  18. FROM Johnathan Turley’s legal blog:

    As I mentioned before, some of these pictures in my view can be kept out of the trial. However, the defense has a legitimate right to evidence showing a prior disposition — just as the prosecution has that right. What is striking is that the prosecution wants to introduce a host of pre-statements and actions to paint Zimmerman as a racist or violent individual. However, they oppose such evidence related to Martin. Zimmerman’s defense is that Martin attacked him and he wants to show that Martin had problems before that night, including his mother demanding that he leave the house and live with his father.

    Nelson did not appear particularly concerned by the failure of the prosecution to turn over critical pieces of evidence to the defense — a common complaint over alleged prosecutorial misconduct.

    http://jonathanturley.org/2013/05/28/zimmerman-loses-key-evidentiary-battle/

    When MOM exposes BDLR by witnesses at the next hearing, Turley WILL do an article on the corruption. He does a lot of articles on Judicial & Political corruption.

    • In Nelson’s mind West is the one who should be sanctioned for the sequestration snafu. So do not believe his is off the hook. I am anxiously hoping someone outside of the court steps in to slap the sheet of BLDR and puts his ass behind bars;

      OUR new battle cry should be: All we want is an arress. of BLDR, man who has tried to destroy an innocent man’s life.

    • Benjamin Crump knew exactly what show to go on to lie through his teeth about the pictures. Roland Martin has been beating the black racist drum since Barack Obama was elected. Anyone who disagrees with any of Obama’s polices has been accused of being a racist by Roland Martin. He claims that those disagreeing are doing so only because of Obama’s skin color. Roland is at the top in shouting the racist accusation constantly. Crump saying the pictures were not from Martin’s phone is showing signs of desperation because he knows his narrative is crumpling all around him.

    • Notice the lady in the video clip asking Crump what he can do to stop the evidence about TM from being introduced into the trial. A memo needs to go out letting everyone who don’t have a clue that he is not the prosecutor in this case.

      hope everyone is well.

  19. We have learned that 5 weeks ago the defense received a tip that the prosecutor may have been given a report that contained pictures from Trayvon’s cell phone. The defense filed a motion to Compel Discovery on April 25th.

    The motion was heard and thankfully started just as the sound got corrected at the court on April 30th. At the 6:08 mark Mr. West gives his reasons for the request to the judge. At the 10:50 mark, Mr. West talks about a witness (who I think is W8) was deposed the prior Tuesday and shown reports from the phone records. She thought some texts were missing that she had sent. At 13:05 BDLR lies to the judge and tells her they have not received any additional reports or files about the phone. At the 14:00 mark, he tells her all the information, in all formats has been turned over to the defense. At 14:20 West wants to be clear for the record. BLDR confirms with the judge there was no more data generated from the January 2013 reports.

    • Isn’t that when Nelson asks BDLR if he has any additional information from anywhere? Didn’t BDLR first say that he had not received any additional information from Cellbrite?

      I wonder who will cross Wesley White’s client on June 6th. I can see it now. BDLR or Guy will try to trash the credibility of the whistleblower, up to and including lying. Lying comes naturally to BDLR as when he told the judge he had no other phone information, obviously not knowing the whistleblower had already blown the whistle.

      • Yes, it was at the 17:00 minute mark the Judge asks BDLR “or anybody else” and BDLR confirmed he rec’d no additional information from anybody else.

    • If you can find the part where BLDR responds to Nelson, it is worse than what you said. She asks him two questions. Bernie answers the first in a sneaky way to give himself wiggle room but Nelson sees his ploy and asks a second question to box him in. He lies and seals his fate. If you have that exchange, it would a good one to post since it will now become front and center.

      I immediately thought, “Holy cow. Nelson KNOWS the truth after all.”

      I think this helps to reveal that she does.

      This was a brilliantly laid trap by the defense. They knew about this at least 5 weeks ago and West kicked his butt this time.

      Remember when West was playing with BDDR about not deposing him YET? When will YET be here?

  20. Crimes of Mike Nifong: an update from April 2013
    http://www.occupyhln.org/duke-lacrosse-team/should-mike-nifong-still-be-in-prison/

    That he went public with a series of accusations that later turned out to be untrue
    That he exaggerated and intensified racial tensions
    That he unduly influenced the Durham police investigation
    That he tried to manipulate potential witnesses
    That he refused to hear exculpatory evidence prior to indictment
    That regulations on the conduct of an identification exercise were breached by failure to include “dummy” photographs
    That he had never spoken directly to the alleged victim about the accusations
    That he made misleadingly incomplete presentations of various aspects of the evidence in the case (including DNA results).

    CONSEQUENCES for Nifongs actions:

    Resigned as DA of Durham County
    DISBARRED
    Bankrupt
    10 year sentence

    A BLOGGER contributed:
    But, the Supreme Court decided last year (Rehberg v. Paulk, 9-0) that prosecutors are immune from civil suit for anything they do prior to trial–including lying. This extends the current legal mindset:

    “We do not see how the existence of a false police report, sitting in a drawer in a police station, by itself deprives a person of a right secured by the Constitution and laws.” (Pottawattamie vs. McGhee)

    Elena Kagan (then Solicitor General), wrote in 2009 in a brief, “Fabrication of evidence during an investigation does not, by itself, violate the Constitution”; and also, “A prosecutor … may receive absolute immunity from suit for acts violating the Constitution in order to advance important societal values.”

    That lady is now on the Court
    http://www.occupyhln.org/duke-lacrosse-team/should-mike-nifong-still-be-in-prison/
    _____________________________________________
    NOTE: Though they continue, the three lawsuits against the city were sharply narrowed by a ruling in December from the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals that said players couldn’t pursue federal civil-rights claims against Durham’s government.

    SETTLEMENT: This was a Federal Civil Suit against Duke University,
    Wednesday’s settlement ended all claims by the 38 players involved against Duke, the Duke University Health System and an array of campus officials that included President Richard Brodhead, Executive Vice President Tallman Trask, Provost Peter Land and Duke Health CEO Victor Dzau.
    http://www.heraldsun.com/news/x670458847/Duke-settles-federal-case-with-former-lacrosse-players

    ________________________________

    Colbt suggested Civil Rights Violations, but that might have to be pursued again Crump/Sybrina/Tracy by GZ for damages. Duke had a vested interest in settling this Civil case w/the players. BDLR could be forced to resign, at the minimum it seems.

    • It is my guess that this is the last case for BDLR, which likely was pre-planned when Corey agreed to pad his retirement account. She likely convinced him to go all in with whatever it took to get a conviction, no matter how crooked he had to be to get there. Perhaps that is why the whistleblower came forward. He may have had an indication that Corey took care of her collared and leashed dog in order to get what she desired the most. She also padded her own retirement account, possibl;t knowing that she would be done after her actions in the Zimmerman case. The trial will end and both BDLR and Corey will resign their positions, and then will go into private practice as some really tough hard azzed lawyers. It should be investigated that she padded only her and BDLR’s accounts, and no one else in her employ in her office. That is saying something.

    • This truly over the top:

      Elena Kagan (then Solicitor General), wrote in 2009 in a brief, “Fabrication of evidence during an investigation does not, by itself, violate the Constitution” and also, “A prosecutor … may receive absolute immunity from suit for acts violating the Constitution in order to advance important societal values.”

      Who decides what are important societal value?

      • I have not contributed to the GZ legal defense fund, which might surprise those who have perused my comments. I think – while completely legal to the best of my analysis – GZ’s decision to get out of the truck with a handgun was a serious moral failure. I also have substantive doubt regarding his claim of looking for an address; I think GZ wanted to be part of the action. I could be wrong, but that element of the story may be indeterminable. That TM got to him before he could get back to his truck after looking for an address seems too convenient from my perspective. Ethically, in my opinion – knowing the police were en route – his job was done after the NEN call. Ergo, I have no compassion for GZ regarding his actions on the night of the shooting, nor the impetus to donate any monies.

        Moving forward from that night to the events of the present day, do I think he is the victim of a political and racially-fueled prosecution? Clearly. Do I think he should strike down upon these rat-bastards with great vengeance and furious anger? Hell yes. So, as far as restitution from this seemingly illegal prosecution and the myriad libels and slanders by media and individuals, I’d gladly contribute. However, these cases – and I predict they will be numerous – will be (and already are) handled on a contingency bases by very willing and very capable law firms, and he will not need my funds for that.

        If anyone would like to present an argument, or arguments, that changes my conclusion regarding GZ’s moral sine qua non in the current legal case, I’ll gladly contribute $25,000 to his defense fund before the end of this week.

        • Holy Smokes! Man does he need that money. I’ll give it a go. But not tonight, too busy.

          I respect your opinion and I’m impressed with how you stated it. Thank you.

        • Letherman and BigBoi have you beat by a long shot analyst. At least they have been honest from the get go, and they haven’t offered a big money prize to change their minds. As off as they have been in their analysis, they have at least been honest about it from the get go. They have never offered a very large money prize for anyone who could convince them otherwise. I doubt that a $25,000 prize would even turn their eyes. So what does that make you?

          • You’re making a serious mistake by calling me dishonest. I simply don’t conflate the issues of morality and legality. I think that makes me intellectually honest, and perhaps calls into question your critical thinking skills…

              • I assess it to be about morality based upon the situation. Had GZ seen someone raping or beating another person, then I would agree with his actions, even if that included ‘tracking him down’. Not suggesting that GZ was ‘tracking him down’, just using an example of behavior that wouldn’t have bothered me under the aforementioned scenario.

                • “I assess it to be about morality based upon the situation. Had GZ seen someone raping or beating another person, then I would agree with his actions, even if that included ‘tracking him down’. Not suggesting that GZ was ‘tracking him down’, just using an example of behavior that wouldn’t have bothered me under the aforementioned scenario.”

                  Then what is it that you require convincing of? Either you believe GZ was wrong to exit his truck or you do not. Either you believe TM confronted GZ or you do not. I could plainly state that if GZ did not have a gun 1. He would be the dead one 2. The only one that would have been arrested that night would have been TM for felony battery.

                  • We don’t know – nor under oath does the state – who confronted whom. I continue to ask, if George were looking for a house number, why did the confrontation end up near the ‘T’, in the back of the units, i.e., not the location one would be to ascertain a house number? Please reference a map of the neighborhood / crime scene, if you feel I’m being obtuse.

          • Pretty sure Leatherman doesn’t have 25 grand to offer as a prize.

            Also pretty sure his willingness to consider having been mistaken on any of this issue is pretty close to non-existant as well.

            • Thanks, unitron. I concur with both your statements.

              And I don’t consider my offer a ‘prize’ by any stretch of the imagination (and recognize you didn’t first apply that term to my offer). I have the courage of my convictions (and the wallet to back it up) and would be glad to help his defense fund, if I thought he were free from any moral or legal lapses, re: the shooting.

              • analyst1961 – I have friends from another BLOG that think GZ should not been charged & was rail roaded, but they too don’t have any compassion for GZ or TM. They think both made mis-steps that led to TM’s death. Even Alan Derchowitz stated “GZ may be not guilty of murder, but he has a moral responsibility.” Mike Iglarsh stated the same in his BLOG I read last night, stating “GZ may go free, unfortunately.” He stated “he follows the evidence, the law, it was a senseless death & that GZ may walk.”

                But imo, the question is: Guilty or NOT Guilty, that’s what it will come down to no matter how anyone arrives at their opinion. imo, GZ is not guilty.

                As far as the Defense Fund, I have never been comfortable with the “living expenses” being clumped together with the much needed cost of a Defense & that is the sole reason I have chosen not to donate. People are homeless in our country, they figure it out, they bunk w/parent’s or relatives, there is no one to pay their living expenses, apartment, etc. Hornsby stated “it rubbed him the wrong way that GZ was begging for money BEFORE MOM/West came to his defense. Even KC, STILL the most HATED person in America was afforded a place to stay w/internet connection that was free, she stayed in a church basement. KC’s life was continually threatened & probably still is but she had security for only a short length of time, she didn’t have any money to pay them. The TM supporters are having a field day w/the new article about the needed funds, they continue to harp on what GZ/SZ spent monies on such as paying off their credit card debt, paying Sam’s off, student loans, car notes, cell phones, etc.

                This is a critical time for the Defense, MOM/West imo shouldn’t be expected to PAY what GZ needs for the Defense out of their pocket, they’ve worked for 15 months with no salary & the trial hasn’t even started. GZ might decide what’s most important, living in an apartment or having his life defended. Certainly his defense imo should be the most important thing to GZ at this time, maybe he needs to get creative about his living arrangements & figure it out instead f draining the defense. From the past information on the Defense Fund, it seems GZ/SZ need $ 5,000 per month for living expenses.

                • I believe there is a category for donations to legal expenses only. I agree with much of what you have said, and if I were to donate, I would check the ‘legal expenses only’ box.

                  • Analyst, have you ever been the victim of a violent crime? have you ever called in suspicious behavior by a stranger? have you ever watched someone in your neighborhood you thought was up to no good? Do you live in high crime area?

                    I suggest you listen to the other GZ calls to the police, they are all similar. It makes perfect sense to me that he got out of his car when the call taker asked if he could see which way the guy was going. Review the burglary and robbery crime data for the area since the TM shooting. Crime dynamics are area specific. I live in a high crime area, and friends across town do not, our worlds are light years apart.

                    Remember it was a hot prowl of one of a nearby neighbors which motivated GZ to start the neighborhood watch. The victim was so traumatized she moved her family out of the area.
                    Hot prowls are on the rise in our area, we have very high burglary rate per population, the increase in hot prowls has people concerned since there is a correlation with assaults and rapes.

                    The gun issue. I do not own a gun, and have never handled one, no interest. I have seen illegal guns on thugs many times in my neighborhood. I have seen an exposed gun in a waist band of drug dealer on bikes. I have seen guns fired at passing cars. The cops call our beat the gunbeat, they expect to find illegal guns during contacts.
                    California does not permit for CCW, but I understand that when visiting states that permit CCW people are carrying gun legally. Guns are everywhere, fact of life.

                    • Cassandra, I know how you feel. Having grown up in a high crime, drug infested area of Harlem, you develop a sense for things like this. I knew a lot of TM’s growing up, we a group that hung together as teen, we were 9 in total.

                      Of those 2 are dead, 3 are now in prison and 2 are on parole, unemployed and living of someone else. I was the only one that had left the city, if you don’t serving time in Ossining,NY. I am the only who is still married to the same person and has not been to prison.

                      I decided when my 1st boy was born that he was not going to end up like some on the people I knew and grew up with. I left the city, My wife, my son and I left everything we owned, etc what we could cram into my car and left.

                      The neighborhood we moved in to in Decatur, Ga, was not the greatest, I was the palest male in the complex, I was harassed constantly, for money, to see if I wanted to score something, and on occasion, people would run away as they saw me coming, I guess they thought I was LE. As soon as my 6 months lease was up we moved.

                      The new neighborhood was very different and we lived there until I bought a home a few years later. Towards the end though, something like what was happening in GZ’s community was occurring at our gated community. Slowly the area started changing, where I could leave my car doors open, that was not possible anymore, anything left on the back porch would disappear. The neighborhood was changing and I know the frustration of seeing a place you love, suddenly turn into a prison, where you had to look over your shoulder and only venture out in daylight.

                      The neighbors tried to keep things safe, we would call the cops whenever we saw anyone we did not know, we put up a fund to have security patrol at night, though most of the burglaries were done in daylight while everyone was at work. It was a losing battle the police told us to chain what we could, get better locks, install more lighting, walk in groups, in other words, bunker mentality. I grew up that way and i did not want my kids to grow up that way, I managed to raise the money and bought a house out in the country. I had a 1 and half commute every morning to work, but it was worth it.

                    • You seem wise and pragmatic, your wife and kids are lucky to have you.

                      I think many people are just not familiar enough with crime and youthful offenders to judge GZ. I could relate to everything GZ explained in the walk through video, the confusion after being hit in head or face and not realizing how far you stumbled, not understanding why a teenager could be so hateful as to hurt you much less try and kill you, the insanity of the PC world twisting the truth because it is easier than admit how violent some youth really are, the desire to help locate the suspicious behaving person so the cops can make contact.

                      Living in my home and hood is a love hate experience. When we retire we are moving for sure, and I often think how different life will be without the negativity and threat.

                    • I’ve replied to many of your questions previously. I am a gun owner (multiple), I live in a gated community and have been approached by a ‘non-resident’, et cetera.

                      In synopsis, had GZ witnessed a rape instead of merely a suspicious guy, my checkbook would have already been discharged.

        • I really appreciate your comments because it is something that many people have wrestled with. Did GZ getting out of the truck made him responsible for what happened, at least morally?

          My answer is this:
          It is almost 7pm it is a dark, cold and raining, I am driving to the store. I see a figure coming from an area where it is known that several burglars have used to access the complex.

          I drive past the figure, park and call the police, not the 911 number, but the NEN to have them check it out. As I sit waiting and while I am observing, the figure comes and checks me out, acts in a threatening suspicious manner. I am on the phone and I am reporting all of this. The figure runs and I lose eye contact with him.

          I drive closer only to see the figure cut trough the buildings out of sight. Now I have to make a decision, the dispatcher is asking me to tell what the other figure is doing, I say he ran.

          By the actions so far, I have a reason to believe this figure could be dangerous, but I don’t know. I get out to try to maintain contact, not to detain or apprehend just to observe and report, I am still on the phone.

          I get out of the truck, shit my flashlight is not working, the wind is blowing “shit its cold” I am ask am I following, Yes I say, “we don’t need to you to that”. Ok, I try to give directions to my location, but I am having problems communicating my location.

          Shit, I am in the dark, I don’t know this guy is, he might be hiding nearby, please send an officer. Have them call me, so I can tell him how to get where I am.

          I don’t remember if I got the address or not but I am walking back expecting the call, and them I am approach from behind…

          • By the actions so far, I have a reason to believe this figure could be dangerous, but I don’t know. I get out to try to maintain contact, not to detain or apprehend just to observe and report, I am still on the phone.

            I stand by my assessment that the NEN call should have been the end of this actions, i.e., he did not report an address back to the NEN call-taker, nor was he attacked while still on the phone to the same.

            Does that make sense? I appreciate your rebuttal and am remain open-minded about changing my analysis of what I perceive to be GZ’s moral failure. Thank you!

            • I think that is where we depart, you see Morally GZ was correct he does not know that the figure is guilty of anything, for that reason he did not take steps to protect himself. Morally he was unsure, he wanted the police to make the determination. But if the person is dangerous, and hurts someone minutes after you saw him, and just let him go. Where is the moral in that? Now, looking back we are able to make all kinds of judgements, we know things that GZ could not know. GZ could have taken better steps to prevent a confrontation. But, to say that GZ was morally wrong for not expecting that TM could be dangerous is morally wrong.

              • I just made a similar reply to unitron:

                Had GZ seen someone raping or beating another person, then I would agree with his actions, even if that included ‘tracking him down’. Not suggesting that GZ was ‘tracking him down’, just using an example of behavior that wouldn’t have bothered me under the aforementioned scenario.

                • That’s is what I am talking about you are basing your judgement on hindsight, something not available to GZ. Let’s say GZ finishes his call leaves or waits for the cops and the figure breaks into Condo and rapes someone. GZ does not have the luxury of hindsight, he only know what he sees, and what can be, but he is still only involved in observing.

                  I think that if GZ would have seen a crime like you mentioned he would have tried to intervene, as I hope you would if i was being attacked and you could help.

                  • I most certainly would have intervened on behalf of another person being raped or beaten. Without hesitation.

                    To say that his actions were morally acceptable based upon something that could have happened is a fool’s errand…

                    • Am I hearing you say that George GUESSED at what Trayvon might do?

                      I think you have identified what is holding you and others up in the moral judgment area.

                      Please try to identify with his experience at that community and his trained “mindset.” Most of us do not think like cops or even like paid night guards. It is their job to anticipate what might/could happen based on their experiences AND current observations in the “heat of the moment.”

                      I am not by any means agreeing that he was a wannabe cop in the negative sense that the term has been used by MSM and the schemers.

                      However George had traveled this road more than once in the past, so YES, he was trying to anticipate what Martin might do and if you were NW, you would learn how to do the same thing. Otherwise, I would NOT want you to be one that I counted on for protection where I live.

                      You absolutely must keep the subject under observation until the subject no longer poses a threat. That is what George was trying to do.

                      I know guys who would have ignored Sean and kept Martin within eyesight and they would honestly believe that was the right thing to do.

                      Remember that most of the NW groups do NOT have rules here in Florida.

              • Whose morals are we talking about? Trayon’s? George’s? Yours or mine?

                I guarantee you that mine are not the same as others. Maybe we should define morality before we become judgmental about someone’s morality. Who the hell even knows today what is right and what is wrong? Local community standards and morals may vary substantially even in the area or pornography. Have I made sense?

                • Crystal, some would say that in the AA community just the fact that GZ call the cops makes him morally reprehensible. He should have minded his own business, is another. So yes, it is a legit question and the answer would depend on who is answering.

                  • ‘…in the AA community just the fact that GZ call the cops makes him morally reprehensible.’

                    And that’s an incredible moral failure right there. Sickening. And I pray that it’s not only my opinion…

                    • GZ neighbors who spoke with press early on who also happen to be black spoke about the burglaries adding the offenders were primarily YBM. They also spoke highly about GZ and expressed gratitude for his efforts on crime reduction.

                      Do any of you participate in an active neighborhood watch program? People who attend these meeting do not play the race card, if someone tries, it doesn’t fly.

                • My decision about donating money is, of course, based upon my applied morals. Other people’s will certainly vary. Good point – ou certainly make sense…

            • It’s all Sean’s fault. LOL.

              Seriously though, I have heard that call enough to see clearly how and why George would have thought, at that moment in time, that he was following instructions. He never said that, AFAIK, in any of the interviews I heard, and he might not even realize but there is no doubt in my mind that he was responding to Sean. Call it power of suggestion or whatever you wish.

              George did NOT leave his vehicle with any other intention other than to be able to REPORT back to Sean and tell him where Martin was.

              I would not miss Sean’s testimony for all of the tea in China. IF he is honest, the Defense will get him to acknowledge doing almost exactly what I said in this post.

              We don’t hear much about him on the blogs, but IMO, he is a very important witness. I did read a couple articles about him long ago but it’s been crickets since then.

              • I made a comment above about his response to Sean and how I think it all tied-in (my opinion, of course). If there was proof that he was jumped on his way back to the truck, i.e., if he were still on the phone to Sean, then my opinion could very well be different. GZ could have used the ‘need’ for a house number as a ruse (I can be a bit cynical) and then simply gone after TM. I don’t know. Hence my conundrum. Thanks for the kind reply, Jordan.

                • I am having difficulty believing that George would say he was looking for a house number to mean anything else other than what he said.

                  I guess I cannot even imagine that this was a “ruse” by George and that he intended to do anything else other than to return to his vehicle. However, I would believe that he was not in a hurry to do that since he knew LE was on the way. He may have been indecisive insofar as where to meet them and debated mentally between staying put where he was and and had last seen Trayvon or to rush back to his vehicle. IOW, he considered “where” was he most likely to see LE first.

                  I am describing what might have been his “thought” processes but these were very quick, maybe even fleeting thoughts.. the kind that people experience when making a “snap decision.

                  Do you see my points?

                  • Analyst, I understand fully, and if GZ had been attack anywhere else, let say 100 ft down the T, I would be very worried. But the evidence points to a the incident beginning at or near the T, so it is not hard for me to see GZ indecisiveness. Remember that there is a back gate from which the police could come in, and that was at the other end of the T. That would have easier for him to direct the police, than where his truck was.

                    • If I’m missing the point, please let me know. Where, exactly, was his truck? Do we have any tangible proof other than ‘approximate location of George’s truck’ that I’ve seen on several maps. The removal of the truck (seeing as the NEN call-taker knew he was in a vehicle) remains problematic for me in more than one way.

                      Thank you very much for your kind comments. And, of course, for Nettles, too – we are fortunate to have this forum…

                  • I do see your points and they are quite possible. For each point, there is often a counter-point. Had GZ not said something about those punks always getting away, I might be less cynical about his motivations…

          • For what it’s worth: I own a home in a gated community (with 24/7 guards) and have encountered a suspicious ‘non-resident’ in front of the same. Asking me for money, no less. It was neither raining nor dark, but I was startled more than frightened (and displeased with our guards). I ‘persuaded’ him to depart the area, in spite of the fact that I didn’t have a gun (on me) and am not in any way a physically violent person. And because GZ’s query of ‘What are you doing around here?’ has been maligned as proof of racism, aggression, et cetera, I’ll offer that my first statements to this individual were ‘Are you outta your f*cking mind? What the f*ck are you doing in here?’ I did not deliver those lines in a calm or friendly manner.

            • i think that we somethings look at things and incidents and through our own rose colored lenses, and try to hard to give people the benefit of doubt.
              It is easy to try to blame GZ for the events and completely forget the actions of the other party, particularly when that party is a young punk. Except that that is precisely why need to be careful when assigning moral and ethical judgements as they have very little of both. Your actions could be completely innocent but through their eyes they are seen as something completely different.

              The are many things that we don’t know about that night, we don’t know that GZ in fact got his address, and just could not remember after the incident, That is why I am uncomfortable trying to say GZ should have done this or that. As those judgements could lead me to a completely erroneous conclusion.

              • To clarify, I am not blaming GZ, per se, and perhaps not at all. I’m only saying that there are enough unknowns and questionable decisions (in my opinion) by GZ, that I can’t as yet put my money behind his criminal defense. I tend to be a little rigid in those decisions. I did consider offering to underwrite his entire cost of defense in exchange for 10% of his civil damage awards, but that too would violate my principles, vis-a-vis the moral issue. It might have also been illegal or unethical, but I never called O’Mara…

                • You said: I did consider offering to underwrite his entire cost of defense in exchange for 10% of his civil damage awards.

                  I admire your belief that George will prevail, BUT George would have to “win” at least $5 million for you to recover your investment. That only includes costs and expenses and not a dime in attorneys fees. They have spent over $400,000 so far and need at least another $125,000 to have a decent defense at trial. I would also bet that they have cut a lot of corners and maybe even did not even get the experts that George should have retained.

                  If he had the BEST defense, you could probably double that amount. I recall notable lawyers saying George would need at least a million and MOM said that, too, long ago.

                  I am now curious to hear how much you think George will win and specifically which players are going to be paying him?

                  I am enjoying this dialogue even though I know your mind is made up and no one is going to influence you to change your mind, but I do wish you reconsider your decision about helping George because he needs the money and you obviously have it.

                  I am still wondering why the NRA or any other big “gun clubs” have not come to his aid. There are lots of groups that could help him… anonymously and it is troubling to me that they have been potted plants.

                  • My mind is not completely made up – I was sincere in my offer to reconsider not only facts I may have misconstrued or the evolution of my moral compass.

                    The ‘analyst’ in my moniker is part of economic analyst – and I had run the return-on-investment calculations much as you had: $500k for the defense. I would expect GZ to garner a windfall of 100x the cost of his defense; perhaps triple that amount, i.e., $50 – $150M.

                    Who pays? Who doesn’t? I would say he has targets of opportunity large and small. I’d hit the large media first and hardest. Very little negotiation, very big payout. I’d then take that money and destroy the smaller targets – the defenseless, ya know, kinda like GZ is right now. Great vengeance and furious anger. I’d shellac TM’s parents. I’d crucify a couple of the bloggers and their parent corporations. And I’d sue a few particularly disgusting, vile, and racist individual blog commenters into insolvency. Oh, and I’d enjoy every damned second of it, too.

                    And I’m not an attorney, but one of my friends who’s a plaintiff’s attorney – who has won billions of dollars in patent settlements – likes GZ’s chances. (an argument to authority, but…)

            • Just a simple question:

              Wouldn’t anyone who is walking around a gated community that is not recognized as someone who lives and belongs there, LOOK “suspicious?”

              I guess the definition of a gated community can vary.

              I do not live over there so I do not know their “customs” but don’t most people make their neighbors aware when an out of town guest comes to visit with them? I do that with my neighbors and I do not live in a gated community.

              • I know very few of my neighbors, so I’m not sure who lives there and who doesn’t. The person who I encountered was disheveled, wobbly, i.e., probably high on something, and asking for money, which made him suspicious.

                • Some neighborhoods are more friendly and sociable than others. I have always known my neighbors during my life. When I need to leave for a night or longer, I make sure my neighbors know and they do the same.

                  Maybe it is just a Southern thing.

              • Overnight guests are typically registered with the guard or office, certainly if they are staying in our clubhouse overnight. Guests are required to sign in and be accompanied by an owner to use the pool, tennis courts or clubhouse. All vehicles are checked at the gate and the guard records the name of the driver and the vehicle make and tag before they can enter.

          • I would like to add to your statement bori, if I may. Morally and legally are spectrum’s apart when it comes to justifiable use of deadly force. Morally GZ felt an obligation to protect his neighborhood. Legally, the question is whether or not GZ had the right to justifiable use of deadly force. analyst1961 surely could not convince me that people should not have a right to self defense. It is innate. It is innate as one could imagine that TM stood his ground as it appears this is analyst1961 view. The legal question is very simple did GZ use justifiable deadly force?

            Who feared for their life in this situation? It could not have been TM. TM has 70-80 ft to make it home and he didn’t even after he was no longer in view by GZ.
            Could GZ have stayed in his car? Sure, but morally he felt an obligation to his community from what it was he witnessed with his own eyes. Hindsight is 20-20. But it never is an indication that at the time all facts are known, and surely is not a basis to convict someone of 2nd degree murder when they used justifiable deadly force on someone who with all evidence indicating was not the individual who initiated the confrontation to the point it became physical. This is like claiming a women got raped because she was dressed provocatively!

            I feel what this person is doing is looking at who was armed and who was not. And the fairness in it. It’s a hard legal basis to prove GZ exited his vehicle just because he was armed. And morally, GZ did not know TM was unarmed as much as GZ knew TM was unarmed. To not believe GZ based on what he should of done after the fact is just not how morality nor our legal system works. This is pure emotionalism.

        • Analyst, since I know you read my blog post “Standing Up For George Zimmerman,” I’d like to know if I moved the needle at all? George could sure use that money. I address the issue of him getting out of the truck, which was done in reaction to the dispatcher telling him first to “let me know if he does anything else,” and second in immediate reaction to the dispatcher asking “which way did he run?”

          • By the way, it was a full 15 seconds after George exited his truck (which can clearly be heard on the call) before the dispatcher even asked him if he was following Trayvon.

          • I read your post and considered both of those comments from Sean. I guess I just keep telling myself that he could have done both – for a while at least – from his vehicle.

            And, at this risk of quibbling, it’s tough to reconcile ‘Ok, we don’t need you to do that.’ in re: ‘Are you following him?’, with the other two requests. I’ve pondered the whole topic quite a bit. Perhaps too much…

            Even in the time since I posted my initial comment about the donation until this moment, I’ve struggled with my values, biases, experiences, et cetera. Such a quandary.

            • Well, I’ll make a plea to you. If you are in a position to help financially and there is a part of you that is seriously considering that possibility, then I would simply ask that you put yourself in George’s shoes for a minute. Maybe you made a mistake in getting out of your truck, or maybe you were doing it in response to a clear direction and question from the police dispatcher. Either way, you were walking in your own neighborhood, in a place that you had every right to be. In fact, you perhaps had more right than anyone else to get out of your truck and observe the suspect from a distance – after all, you were the neighborhood watch captain. It wasn’t your intention that night to chase anyone down or to confront them, you simply wanted to see if you could figure out where they went so that you could relay that information to police when they arrived. Next thing you know, you’re getting punched in the nose, and then before you can react, your head is being slammed against the concrete. Eventually, after nobody responds to your cries for help and the assailant appears to notice your firearm, you believe that he is reaching for the gun. Fearing that you are about to lose consciousness and that the suspect might get your gun, you do the only thing you can – you pull the gun out and fire a single shot.

              In the aftermath of the shooting, you are accused of a myriad of motives that had NOTHING to do with why you pulled the trigger that night, or even with why you called the police in the first place. But those accusations lead to the loss of your job and any ability that you might have to find another one, and then you are arrested and charged with a very serious charge, and the State of Florida unleashes its machine of “justice” against you, with its unlimited resources. Not only that, but the attorneys for the State continually play games to prevent your attorney from gathering the evidence needed to defend you, and the attorneys for the deceased’s family continue to go on television, Twitter, and Facebook to accuse you of racism. You receive constant death threats.

              In the buildup to the trial, your defense attorneys are forced to spend thousands of dollars that they didn’t have in order to (among other things) depose prosecution “experts” who have concocted reports claiming that your screams are not your screams. The entire apparatus of the state justice system, including the judge, appear to be working against you. You can’t even get the judge to award monetary sanctions when there is a clear case of the prosecutors unnecessarily causing delays of video depositions that the knew were going to happen.

              In the face of all of that, your defense team is out of money.

              As I’ve asked before on these threads – please ask yourself this question – “Did George Zimmerman’s act of getting out of his truck, even if it was a mistake, mean that he deserved to die that night?” If the answer to that question is “no” then George had both a legal and MORAL right to defend himself from Trayvon Martin’s attack that night.

              Where’s the moral quandary?

              • That appears to be a hell of a persuasive argument, sir. Seriously well done. My eyes and brain are tired. I will re-read that in the morning, I promise. Thank you!

                  • Very funny, Jordan. This is certainly not about me and I wish I had been more prudent in framing my ‘offer’ last night. While it was, and remains, very sincere, I would prefer the focus to be elsewhere. Maybe that toothpaste can’t be put back in tube…

                    Still sincerely reviewing the case, my logic, my morals, et cetera. Thanks.

                    • Analyst, I want to thank you again, you have made me think of this case in different light. I know you have read some of my post in my blog, and I try to steer away from ethical and moral judgements, as they are always controversial and always confuses the issues

                      I always aim to keep things in perspective, and while I do express my opinion, I try not to be moralistic about it. Mainly I aim to inform and let people make up their own mind. I have always felt that moral judgements are best left to the individual since they alone know what their intentions were and how they felt about it.

                      We can only guess how our morals would allows us to act, it is very difficult to guess someone else’s morals at the time. But, having been force (lol) by you to look at the case from a moral point of view, I will write a post about it. Let me know what you think, when I finnish.

                    • We all learn from this kind of friendly bantering if and only if we are willing to consider other points of view.

                      I try to practice this:

                      “There is a principle which is a bar against all information, which cannot fail to keep a man in everlasting ignorance — that principle is contempt prior to investigation.”

              • Well said, I would add, that on several other occasions when the people ran they kept running, chances of you seeing them again were gone, so there is no need to be concern about it. I had always theorized that GZ walked across the other end of the T and expected to see TM running out the back gate. When that did not happened he got worried. Which is why it took him that long to walk back to his truck.

                • Bori that is exactly what the evidence shows. It is stated on the NEN tape twice. Once when GZ said he was running to the gate, and also n the NEN call when the operator asked for GZ’s address(this was after he began walking back and soon before the call ended) GZ states he did not want to give his address because he did not know “where this guy is.” TM should have made it home by then. TM: 1. either stayed in close proximity to the T near the altercation site which shows he was not in fear or shows he had ill intent or 2. Came back

                  • Danny- There is also another possibility. If TM was as PO’d as he was to beat on GZ, it is possible that he would have gone to GZ truck, had GZ open the window, sucker punched him in the face, drug him out of the car when he was dazed and confused, and beat him right there. If TM was impaired on drugs, and felt dissed, and though GZ was calling the police on him, there is no telling how far he may have gone.

    • O’Mara is going to keep the prosecution guessing right up until the very last moment. I am hopeful that with the release of the Trayvon texts, and other damning info against the prosecution that as many as possible will send at least a few bucks to the defense fund. Then again there are some that are actually posting in a manner to encourage those from trusting the O’Mara West team which has to be hurting the fund. That is reprehensible in my opinion.

  21. Not trying to make trouble but, there are still some authors of articles in favor of GZ that are referring readers to the CTH. When those readers get there they see very highly critical opinions of O’Mara, and even recently West. I am going to send some emails to the contact pages if I can find them asking them to not direct readers to critical defense team posts. Those posts have to be hurting the fund raising abilities. Why would anyone want to send donations to the defense fund when the lawyers representing GZ are accused of not really working for his defense, or who have been accused of being incompetent nincompops who can’t argue their way out of a bag. Yeah, even West.

    • Minpin there isn’t a whole lot that can be done about it. Everyone is entitled to their opinion and not everyone’s agenda is to help George Zimmerman get out from under this charge.

      I think its best to let people read and do what they want. Donating to help is a sacrifice and a personal choice. Each person has to arrive at their decision on their own.

      Just keep posting your reasons for what you chose and maybe others will follow suit. I’ve personally donated over $2,000 and I intend on donating more. I believe in this cause. I think we are witnesses to an abuse of power.

      The police did do their job. Wolfinger was doing his job in taking it to a Grand Jury. I think Crump convinced Bondi and the Governor to get Wolfinger to step aside and bring in a special prosecutor so W8 wouldn’t have to go before a Grand Jury.

      The governor found prosecutors who have been known to play fast and loose with evidence and he put them in charge. The governor just wanted to quiet down the people angered by the lies they were told. In doing so, he allowed these civil lawyers to tramp all over George’s civil rights. That cannot stand.

    • pinecone: Good luck. I tried for months to no avail over at CTH to predict the cause and event of the critical aspects they raise about the actions of the defense…. which is just a matter of opinion. I ended up on Diwataman’s blog and well ….. I guess I have to open my blog now so you can read the rest. Just be prepared for a full out attack. I had a post dedicated to lil ol me at CTH and a big issue started at Dmans blog after SD wanted to call MOM supporters back only to call them progs and liberals. Hence I created my own blog. I had to recently shut it down because I could not attend to it after some family medical issues. I was debating on opening it back up just this morning. I will, with hope that there is an understanding at times I may not be able to post as I did until things settle a bit more.

      In the end if you expect an Epiphany over at either of those blogs….. sorry to say….. it just ain’t happening. That’s like asking Trayvonites to see GZ as innocent! Still I do believe each of those blogs have their strengths it is just they jumped the shark and the results are very counter productive.

      Again good luck and prepare for some backlash, banning, or moles sent your way.

  22. I’ve received some feedback with problems being experienced by some in donating to the fund. One person sent a check last year and it didn’t get cashed until just now. In Canada, a check is stale-dated after 6 months, not sure how that would occur but it seems it has. Someone else is having trouble making a payment through pay-pal using a Gold Card American Express.

    If you have experienced any problems getting your donation to the defense fund, post it here or send me a private message and I’ll copy the feedback in an email to one of the support people to alert them.

    Please don’t give up and find a way to get this into them. I just tweeted a nightmare on twitter. What if the 5th DCA gives permission to depose Crump and he makes it too expensive to depose him? What if there is no money to get it done? Please help. Together we will answer George’s scream for help.

    Mail checks payable to “George Zimmerman Defense Fund”
    George Zimmerman Defense Fund
    P.O. Box 622793
    Oviedo, FL 32762-2793

    or use this link to make a pay-pal donation. Even $5 helps.
    http://www.gzdefensefund.com/donate/

    Here is the update the team posted today. The defense fund has less than $5,000 in it.
    http://www.gzdefensefund.com/donate/index.php/updates-2

    • That is a major problem I have Nettles. Why would Crump be able to charge the defense to depose him? Did DD charge the defense to depose her? Did the RTL witnesses chage the defense to depose them? Did the SPD charge the defense to depose them? I say no. If I am not mistaken, the expert witnesses can chage for a deposition because they may be giving up paid work hours to sit for a deposition. There are other categories of witnesses that have no right to charge for a deposition. I would be shocked if Crump charged the defense to depose him if that is what the DCA rules.

      • Didn’t I read that in one of the motions? Back in October I think. At first Crump was being very cooperative and then O’Mara wrote he started putting up roadblocks. The expense of the day to depose was going to be a hurdle. My memory may be off on that. I’ll see if I can find a motion tomorrow. I’m pressed for time tonight.

    • OK, here’s the deal. They seriously need to get some help. Finally my donation went through today but even then, it took several attempts and I was only using a MC.

      OK after a while I wait and try again. Invalid credit care number again and I just sit back and fume and watch/… and then, all of a sudden it goes thru w/o my doing anything whatsoever… Weird.

      What is the truth about paying a fee to depose crump?

      Zimmerman Legal Defense Fund TR

      Wayne, your donation is now complete

      Confirmation number: xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
      An email with your donation details has been sent to xxxxxxxxxx and you can print your donation receipt

  23. Minpin, I am going to disagree with you, let me tell you why. I think that GZ’s supporters are smarter than that. They can read through information and make their own inform decision. I still read and post on the CTH, I disagree with Admins from time to time and when I see something that I think is bogus, I ignore it. I am an individual thinker, I told SD months ago that the Zimmermans agenda, aside from getting GZ freed, and his did not coincide.

    I don’t think that censoring the good work of the CTH will help, any. People who contribute to the defense fund should do so willingly, informed and not because they feel induced in any other way than to see justice done. Thats my opinion. GZ has a very diverse group of supporters and they should feel free to visit the site if they so choose, and make up their minds as they want to.

    • We will have to respectfully agree to disagree Bori, and this is why. I think most of us were clicking on the Nettles site, the Dman site, and the CTH site to read comments as the trial was going on At one point, SD, whi is not an educated laweyer, claimed that both O’Mara and West mopre or less didn’t know how to argue thweir way out of a paper bag. I know that SD has had major difficulties with O’Mara, everything from soup to nuts but, how many people who are driven to that site know or understand that SD has a personal animosity against O’Mara? When anyone is sent over to the CTH lately, how many months of O’Mara negative posts have there been to dissuade those against the GZ legal team. I would love to believe that the most of the GZ supporters would be smarter but, how many people have bought lock stock and battle into the speculation that there are two DD’s. Have you noticed that since the texts were released, the topic has all but disappeared from the discussion over there? Have you seen anyone even attempting to say, hey maybe we were wrong? Have you seen anything about not being correct that DD was manufactured out of thin air by Crump? Finally, how many people that are driven to the CTH are going to be willing to go back into the great research that was done way way back when? I promise you not many will read more than that O’Mara is not working in GZ’s favor. That is destructive. It doesn’t matter who posts there or who dosen’t post there Bori, the site has discouraged donators because O’Mara is just too complicit with the BGI, and he doesn’t care about his client above his own personal ambitions.

      • Oh, and another thing Bori, GZ does have a very diverse community of supporters. When you go to the CTH, and read over and over about the damn dirty “progs” how can you expect to keep the GZ supporters corraled, so to speak? You can’t. When you focus your articles many times over about the black attacks on whites, how can you retain any audience that supports GZ. I am not meaning to get into political ideology, I am just trying to point out that SD has without doubt turned people off from supporting GZ, willingly or not.

        • For the record, I began to introduce my friends first and then everyone else I knew to CTH. My original purpose was George’s case and everyone was “wowed” out about the great research. Along the way, some of them became attached to the other issues made on separate threads. Some of those still follow SD’s “reporting” on Benghazi and now the other major issues of the day.

          Many of those people were regularly donating to George’s fund but that all changed when the “controversy” erupted and I did not know what to tell them to do about sending money any longer when they asked me because, at the time, I too became skeptical about MOM and what was going on.

          AFAIK, those people stopped altogether and there’s not much I can do. These are regular people with a life and following the case at CTH became too much for them.

          Once in while, someone will contact me about Benghazi and the hearings but George’s case is not a good subject any more.

      • Whether it was coincidental or not, donations dramatically slowed down when folks began to trash MOM. If you were to go back and track the donations, it is pretty clear that “something” caused them to almost abruptly end. I am not saying who or what caused that to happen but it’s a fact that they did and, quite frankly, they have never recovered from the way they were. George as doing sooo much better on his own and I still think that MAYBE he should have keep control.

        If ever there was a reason or good time to help George, that would be NOW!!!

        • jordan, boricua and minpin ~ Amazing job collaboratively and I’m right there with you. Agree that some treefolk did damage to the Fund by discouraging donors because of some petty beef. Bad call. Ringmaster can be brilliant at times, but . . . apparently “prog”/ “libtard”/ “Dem” hatred extends to GZ’s legal team as well. Isn’t that known as “fouling your own nest?”

          But ya gotta love how all — well, mostly all — of the good-hearted birds have flown away and found several different, beautiful. friendly, and well-accommodating trees to roost. We can even fly to each others trees and spend time there anytime we want, and feel right at home at all of them.

          So we shall not only survive, but along with the GZ Family, we will win and find even greater happiness together, some day very soon. Have you noticed how the news keeps getting better each and every day? Karma.

          Decided to put my $ where my mouth is and double up my monthly ‘tithe’ on Sat the First of The Month, AKA Retirees’ “payday.” Hope you can join me at the payment window; I for one sure won’t mind if it’s a long line to wait in. We love you George!

          • That was my issue with CTH & D-Man. I was very outspoken on my blog about the damage they did to the defense fund. I was just as outspoken to them personally about their anti-Mom stances. If supporters do not trust the defense team then people won’t support the defense. They misused their “fame” and notoriety. . Most of anti-MOM peeps position is that they would do things differently or that MOM was not aggressive enough. Matter of opinion from a bunch of non-attorneys. Besides the support fund is just as much a support venue for living expenses for the Zimmerman family and the principle of supporting an innocent man. Anti-Mom rhetoric is counter-productive and well…… the result of that stance has damaged the fund. I have not seen them promote donations to the fund since SD began his ANTI-MOM stance.

    • Hey Jack! Number 7 was my idea! LOL, I hear you and thank you for your point. I agree, no matter where the state goes, the evidence is there to counter it.

  24. I’m checking in/ refreshing every 5 minutes or so at GZ Legal while doing other stuff. Wondering if the Seminole County Clerk has a press Release page open 24/7. Early this morning before office hours is when I believe that today’s post was made, so they may be burning the candle at both ends over at the O’Mara-West office(s).

    Are you saying that there’s another source, e.g, the Court’s Facebook page ?), or more likely, those are Facebook friends you/re referring to?

    • Sorry for the confusion. On the discussion page on facebook that I regularly contribute to (it’s link is on the sidebar), one of the commentators there noticed the 4th Supplemental early this morning. I’ve been checking the legal site for the posting throughout the day but so far no luck.

    • There’s a good chance that Zimmerman’s 4th Supplemental is the beat-down video which I doubt we see because it probably has identifying information about potential witnesses that haven’t appeared in the media. That’s just my guess, though.

    • ETA: On second, thought, it’s probably more likely that the beat-down video was a redacted exhibit in Zimmerman’s 3rd Supp.

      (i.e. Two videos from Trayvon Martin’s phone (redacted))

    • Well of course Witness 8 didn’t hear any screaming (assuming the accuracy of her account for the sake of discussion), the phone went dead at the very beginning of the struggle.

      Once Zimmerman hung up with dispatcher Sean, there was nothing that would have recorded anything she might also have heard, and once there was anything else recording, she could no longer hear anything out of Sanford.

  25. Pingback: The $25,000 Challenge | DiwataMan

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 )

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