Home » Uncategorized » Online Ethics

Online Ethics

OnlineEthics

Online Ethics

We’ve been having a discussion with Sundance about posting anonymously while outing others. He denies posting under fake identities but there is no doubt some do. I argue it is intellectually dishonest. Sundance is getting some honest feedback about online conduct and I’d like to stay out of it. I’ve had my say the last few days. But what about the rest of us? I get people wanting to post anonymously online, most especially when feedback can be threats to one’s life. Is there anyone who will tell me why they think it’s fair to post under a bunch of fake identities to make their point?

Advertisements

245 thoughts on “Online Ethics

    • Who was it that injected politics into the Zimmerman/Martin case? Why that would have been Barack Obama of course. His post trial statements only made it worse when he talked about him possibly being TM 35 years before, leaving out the fact that he grew up in a very different atmosphere than Trayvon did. His typical white grandmother paid for him to go to the most expensive private schools in Hawaii. Trayvon was in a school system that decided that their black male stats had to be changed. Scott and Bondi supported that effort.

      • I suggest that politics intruded far earlier at the time that the case was taken out of the hands of the local authorities.

      • Barry’s statements ultimate led to the deaths of Chris Lane and that elderly gentleman… and most likely to the 99 year old woman who was bashed to death in her own home.

        • Are you suggesting that had the President not made those statements, these other tragedies would not have taken place?

          • I am suggesting that the statements made by Barry inflamed the situation. In particular I am suggesting if the situation had not been inflamed in the first place then at least one of those teenagers would not have been out polar bear hunting.

            It is all about personal responsibility. I should add that I hold Eric Holder equally to blame.

          • I think that despite Eric Holder’s proclamation that whites don’t have the courage to discuss race, it is actually he and the president who don’t have that courage. They want to maintain the narrative that it’s still 1950, and they want to buy the votes and adoration of blacks.

            If they had the courage to discuss race, they’d be out in front, talking to blacks (and lower class whites) that drugs, crime, early parenthood, not focusing on school are all a barrier to future success. IMO, given that they’re both black, this message should be a big ongoing priority for them. I think they should have also reached out to the race baiters, and tried to get them to partner in positive messaging for blacks. Not creating and feeding grievances, butr pointing out all the blacs who have succeeded, and howthey did that.

            • I remember in 1976, there were all those public service commercials, educating about and celebrating the founding of our country. I could see Obama doing a whole lot of those, all with the theme that assimilating, and following the pro-social path to success in America, would be a way to make their race proud. And being very clear that crime and drugs and gangs and dropping out of school (or staying in it but not applying themselves and making the teachers have to teach even the bright kids at the level of the lowest common demoninator) is not the way to be a good American.

              So, IMO, there are a whole lot of things that Obama could have done, and that he only each time took a pro-black stance without learning the facts tells me that he Eric Holder’s coward. And yes, I think the fact that there were so many things he could have said but didn’t, led to all this black on white violence we are seeing.

  1. Spike Lee and Roseanne Barr used their own names to dox GZ’s parents’ home. I guess I don’t think the hypocrisy of using an internet handle to out someone else is anywhere as important as the doxing itself – ie, whether you use your real name or not, revealing someone else’s personal info isn’t too cool.

    In terms of internet handles in general – I think they are integral to the success of (the blog part of) the internet itself. Many topics, and unfortunately many careers, are politicized. Think of someone who works in a church who posts on the internet that she feels abortion should be legal. Or anyone in a “lefty” type job who posted anything against the BGI narrative.

    If a rule emerged that people must use their real names, a lot of people couldn’t post. Despite the first amendment, people get in trouble for their off-work private thoughts. Even in this case, we’ve seen them lose their jobs because they expressed their personal thoughts on the internet, under their own names. And of course, again despite the first amendment, there are people who will be violent towards you because of your thoughts.

    Finally, who is going to verify that the “real looking” name someone is using is actually their real name? I could post as Annie Dickinson, but that doesn’t mean I’m using my real name.

    My personal belief is that while some use the anonymity of the internet for bad ends, most use it as a way to enjoy their freedom of expression, in safety.

    • I’m not sure. If Shellie has a sister, he could be married to her. Or it could be he’s married to one of George’s sisters. (Gracie or Dawn).

      He is the brother-in-law of Shellie’s that Shellie referred to in the first bond hearing. He helped GZ set-up the donation account on April 8th and according to Adam Magill, forensic accountant, the first deposit to the account happened on April 9th.

      His online presence was Ken and that’s the name they used in George’s jail house calls. His real name is Scott.

      Ken would transfer the donations from the Pay Pal account into GZ’s account at the Credit Union. George for reasons we still don’t know, wanted to give Shellie access to his account and have the donations transferred out of his account and held in safety deposit boxes and his wife and his sister’s accounts.

      In all, they transferred $130K out of GZ’s account by April 20th. For reasons I don’t know, reminder to transfer the money by Ken was suppose to occur each day and GZ was asking Shellie to set up a reminder to call Ken each day.

      The records show that GZ started paying bills online with the donations on April 9th. Ken made 4 transfers on April 12th and on April 16th Shellie got access to transfer money from GZ account to hers. She then paid the rest of the bills George worried about.

      On April 27th, the Judge gave benefit of doubt to the Zimmerman that they may not have had up to the minute information about the donations but the Judge asked for an accounting of the donations account when it got announced it was now at $204K.

      On May 18th, O’Mara hand-delivered a letter to the court to comply with that request and attached was the bank statements of GZ and SZ. They clearly showed that the couple was transferring out of GZ account into SZ account in the days prior to the hearing.
      May 18, 2013
      O’Mara notifies the court that the Zimmerman has access to $130K at the time of the bond hearing
      http://www.flcourts18.org/PDF/Press_Releases/Notice_of_Filing_7_13_12.pdf

      That filing wasn’t made public until Judge Lester filed it in the court document in July 2013 (after GZ had been granted his 2nd bond).

      It was this filing I think that led to the revocation motion from the state on June 1st. I thought the missing 2nd passport did it but the timing of providing the bank statements seems to indicate the state and the judge got angered with the knowledge they did know about this money on April 20th.

      It also is evidence that Shellie didn’t have access to the Pay Pal account. So she was accurate that the person who had the best known information about what had been donated was to talk to Ken. She saw only the money that Ken transferred out and into GZ account and if there was a balance in the Pay Pal account because of the limitation of only being able to transfer online under $10K, she would not have had knowledge of what was in the donation account.

          • I am suspecting it was Dawn because of Ken and a “John” got a house in his name. And well you know the State GZ and SZ left to amd came from before the bond was revoked….that is where Ken & Dawn live….and I think that was done by a friend of Dawn and Kens’ while Ken was taking care of everything.

            • That’s why I wondered if the sister wasn’t Gracie. Dawn and Ken don’t live in Florida. The sister on the phone with Shellie at the Credit Union was in Florida.

              I thought when Shellie talked about a US citizen that the sister trying to open an account was from out of state but was allowed b/c she was a US citizen. I was unsure though. She sounded older than Gracie though. Gracie was in court but I’m not sure Dawn ever was.

              • Dawn went to Fl. to be with Shellie. Shellie never went up. She said that during the first bond. She had not seen GZ but was in contact with him every day. GZ was with Ken.

                • When they gave their testimony over the phone, IIRC Dad Zimmerman said they gathered in the Osterman home.

                  Once bail got set, Dad Zimmerman took someone outside to talk about what was available in the fund. He must have been asking Dawn. In the book though he doesn’t name her. He talks of Gracie but not Dawn. Yet I thought when he said he took his daughter aside, he was talking about Dawn not Gracie.

                  When I read it, I noted he didn’t ask Shellie. He had just heard her testify she didn’t know.

                  In the next 36 hours, GZ’s dad and Grandma tried to get mortgages out on their homes. Dawn didn’t tell her dad what she knew.

                  I recall Dad Zimmerman describing the confusion and frustration of that time to get the resources to get GZ out of jail.

                  Why didn’t George and Shellie use the donation money right off the bat? I know it wasn’t to flee. They had the chance if they wanted it. No, the bond hearing didn’t go the way they expected and they corrected the misinformation once George got out and got a handle on what he had.

  2. I am surprised that Sundance’s Blog doesn’t list his education, job experience, College attended, degrees acquired for his bloggers convenience & bloggers could decide if Sundance knows what he’s talking about or if he is just a random, anonymous owner of a BLOG writing articles & asking his bloggers, to, just trust him? WHY should they? What is his experience?

    Valhall was a rocket scientist, she owned the Hinky Meter & was an excellent scientist & was well published, ALL of her Colleges attended, etc. were posted for all to read as well as her published articles. Valhall too conversed with leading/Nationally known DNA experts & posted their information as well as her explanations on DNA/evidence on KC’s case. Valhall hid from no one!

    Trisha, the owner of “webslueth” which, imo, is a good blog is held to higher standards. Attorneys, CPA’s, medical examiners, etc. comment on her blog & Trisha HOST a radio program as well, Trisha as the owner is NOT HIDING from her bloggers! NO SHADY BULL CHIT allowed, MANY professional blogs would challenge Sundance when he claims, trust me, his comment MIGHT even be deleted if he didn’t state “imo,” beause UNLESS it can be verified with a link, no one can truly be sure if it is true or not.

    No one ever murdered: OJ Simpson who lived a free life though imo, he walked away from 2 murders. OJ moved to FLa. to purchase a home that the Goldman’s could not get through their Judgement as Fla. protects those that file bankruptcy or defendants that have Civil Judgements against a homeowner, a home is safely protected in the State of Fla. No one murdered OJ as he lived a free life playing golf everyday, smiling for his fans, he did interviews & was available to the public YET he got many death threats.

    Sharpton & J Jackson have not been murdered, nor David Duke, former Grand Dragon of the KKK when it existed, David Duke even ran for public office in La., my state, & made tons of speaking engagements to the public in parking lots just as many other Politicians do without any protection. Were ANY of these leaders threatened? I would think so & more than once. Did it stop their agenda? NO! The Black Panther members as well as members of the KKK have gotten death threats & have made them, but yet they move freely in our society & no one has bothered to harm them despite their vile rhetoric. ALL of the above mentioned have a free life, there is no reason Sundance doesn’t as he claimed “he’s been threatened. MOM/West, etc. have gotten death threats as did KC’s Defense Team, it’s part of the job when defending those in high profile cases, the Attorney’s know the risk when taking the case.

    Sundance HIDING his credentials & identity is an excuse imo because he doesn’t want to be challenged, he claims to have been threatened. It’s not likely that anyone would bother with Sundance, why would they? He’s a little fish in a BIG pond of BLOGS where professionals have their Identities posted to BRING CREDIBILITY to their opinion from their Bloggers, their proud of their profession & what they have to share.

    There are so many available BLOGS on this case as well as others & no one is hiding but Sundance. Was he lying then or is he lying now? imo, nobody cares.

    • Speaking of deleting comments, I was looking up what exactly did Sundance out about W9, I found this link. http://theconservativetreehouse.com/2012/07/16/witness-9-christina-meza-aka-christina-johnson-daughter-of-mike-luis-miguel-meza-who-is-the-brother-to-gladys-georges-mom-update-with-pictures/

      Perhaps there is a link later in the blog, but it appears when Sundance decided to sprinkle his sunlight on George’s cousin, he didn’t have the “family source” information. He doesn’t say what her tattoo is on that thread. He said he was sourcing tattoo shops to find out. So it appears the family didn’t ask him to take their family member down a peg.

      Also when you read the comments on that thread, someone notes over 300 comments were deleted. Why did he delete so many? http://theconservativetreehouse.com/2012/07/16/witness-9-christina-meza-aka-christina-johnson-daughter-of-mike-luis-miguel-meza-who-is-the-brother-to-gladys-georges-mom-update-with-pictures/#comment-164511

      For a family that was in hiding at the time, Sundance exposed the family run business and social media sites of this mother of 2.

      • From the first link:

        Note: Tattoo on top of right wrist, (name?) if male name, potentially indicitive of attachment emotional psychology, (ie. borderline)…. checking local tattoo artists around area now to identify artwork.

        I’m embarassed for him. Often times he throws out terms, and it shows how little he actually knows about what he is saying.

        • “Borderline” was a possible mindset/psychology based on W9’s prior behavior (think fatal attraction) with George Zimmerman. I did and was, at the time, in contact with tattoo parlors to see if I could locate a Lake Mary artist who would remember the work. However, Robert Jr. called me back with the exact tattoo id,.. so that was, as I previously explained, how the tattoo came to be known.

          (There is A LOT more about this person that was NEVER written. She is quite a dubious character…)

          Because I had previously said I was trying to locate Tattoo Parlors, and knowing what I just wrote below, you can see it was better to just let that seem to be the way to have found it.

          • I’m familiar with psychiatric diagnoses. I just never heard of tattoos being part of a differential diagnosis.
            ———————
            A person with this borderline personality disorder will often exhibit impulsive behaviors and have a majority of the following symptoms:

            •Frantic efforts to avoid real or imagined abandonment
            •A pattern of unstable and intense interpersonal relationships characterized by alternating between extremes of idealization and devaluation
            •Identity disturbance, such as a significant and persistent unstable self-image or sense of self
            •Impulsivity in at least two areas that are potentially self-damaging (e.g., spending, sex, substance abuse, reckless driving, binge eating)
            •Recurrent suicidal behavior, gestures, or threats, or self-mutilating behavior
            •Emotional instability due to significant reactivity of mood (e.g., intense episodic dysphoria, irritability, or anxiety usually lasting a few hours and only rarely more than a few days)
            •Chronic feelings of emptiness
            •Inappropriate, intense anger or difficulty controlling anger (e.g., frequent displays of temper, constant anger, recurrent physical fights)
            •Transient, stress-related paranoid thoughts or severe dissociative symptoms
            As with all personality disorders, the person must be at least 18 years old before they can be diagnosed with it.

      • Again, you are wrong on just about all points. You really need to do some research on what exactly doxing is and isn’t.

        An entire thread was deleted because people were writing comments with specific information about w9 (address etc) with, perhaps, vitriolic intent – that could be considered doxing…. this was despite repeated warnings not to do so. Putting a name to a witness is not doxing. Putting a name, address, and directions to a physical location – with supportive commentary to do *harm* (the legal application of the term) to an individual IS doxing.

        You also fail to put the ongoing events into the context of what you are talking about.

        Joy-Ann Reid and Frances Robles were working together to push the scheme team narrative. They were not reporting per se’, they were specifically taking action to advocate. BIG DIFFERENCE. Likewise they both considered our research a RISK to their objectives – Those objectives were to support Natalie Jackson, Ben Crump, Daryl Parks and Ryan Julison. It was, and yet remained, a political ideological mission for them…. still remains that way today.

        For more on this read the following post – and read the comments where the conversation about what was taking place was outlined.

        http://theconservativetreehouse.com/2012/07/17/thegrio-com-nbc-website-gets-it-wrong-again-they-are-having-difficulty-managing-mischief-around-ms-johnson-and-the-biased-media-slips-keep-showing/

        Note the comment from D-Man who noted an odd capacity for Robles to know information about GZ and his family that would have been impossible without help.

        http://theconservativetreehouse.com/2012/07/17/thegrio-com-nbc-website-gets-it-wrong-again-they-are-having-difficulty-managing-mischief-around-ms-johnson-and-the-biased-media-slips-keep-showing/#comment-164569

        What he suspected, but could not prove, was: that help, was from W9 giving the BGI-media information to destroy GZ because she had/has a massive chip on her shoulder. [GZ spurned her affections] She hated him – still does.

        For Christina this was personal, and she took the opportunity to attack george by finding media people who also wanted him destroyed, and aligning herself with them. Giving them information.

        So you had W9 giving information specifically framed to hurt George Zimmerman to the entire BLACK media monolith (the legacy BGI) Goldie Taylor, Joy-Ann Reid, Russell Simmons, Frances Robles et al…. Who then colluded to PUSH it into the mainstream media narrative to assist their ideological cohorts, the scheme team.

        The Zimmerman AND Meza families knew what she was doing. They were disgusted and powerless. [The immediate GZ and Meza family not friends] Hence their reach out contact to CTH for assistance in whatever small way we could push back against THE BGI-Media machine…..

        This is why Joy-Ann Reid and Frances Robles created the goal to dox me personally, and when the threats and attacks began – real threats, and actual violence against my family and children. This is also the time when Natalie Jackson, having talked to the entire crew, created the Doth Protest Too Much blog – which they all participated in under various user id’s.

        Does that help the understanding a bit better?

        • Perhaps.

          Where in my comment do I use the word “Dox”?

          Am I to understand that you posted this thread at the Zimmerman family request? If so, why did you need to source tattoo shop? Why didn’t the family give it to you?

          • Yes – but not that one, (the one that was deleted). The thread one you are discussing was the replacement for it. As to the tattoo initially they didn’t know what it said.

            So I was off, on my own, trying to figure it out – knowing it was probably the best tool for a shot across her bow. I actually thought it might be George’s name… based on what her family and GZ’s had claimed about her obsession with George.

            RZjr called me back, I think he was with her dad, and told me what it said – as I replied to Lorac above..

          • With this information I have shared with you. You might want to go back and look at this earlier thread from CTH where I outlined exactly what the process is that they use. Also note who were the *primary* media folks pushing the W9 story.

            http://theconservativetreehouse.com/2012/07/31/140-characters-of-self-important-non-secure-narcisism-leads-to-libel/

            That was part of what was happening at the time. But not ONLY what was happening:

            Now, this next aspect is part speculation on my part……. after I found out the website used to write the grio piece was actually created by Joy-Ann Reid (and possibly Robles) I sent a certified letter to the Miami Herald outlining what I believed was taking place, and my consideration for hiring an attorney to approach them.

            I never heard back from them.

            About a month later, I sent them another copy of the same certified letter and cc’d copies to all the attorney’s that I could identify having represented, or worked on behalf of, the Herald in the past 12 months.

            Soon thereafter Robles left the Miami Herald. Simultaneously Joy-Ann Reid no longer had any attribution with them (except in name/resume’ only). Actually, come to think about it, I think Reid is no longer a staff member affiliate of the Miami Herald…. I do not know if that was connected, but my hunch says yes.

            Can you imagine the embarrassment, not to mention liability, to the Herald group if it became known their reporters were creating websites, in journolist type collusion, with like-minded colleagues, so they could report on the content of that website as a “source”. ? Think about it.

            Remember the journ-o-list fiasco? This would have been even worse. The sad part is almost all of them were doing it for race-based reasons.

            • SD. You are over reaching. Why does it always have to be a bigger scheme with you? A cease and desist letter to the webmaster to have the content removed would have been the step if you want the content removed. After that you could have went to the host and had it removed. I am sure it is against TOS to place PII. No threat of suing needed, nor a dime spent. It is criminal.

                • K. I get it. They refused to removed the article. But you did then attempt to get the Herald involved stating their journalists were creating websites to create sources, after Joy posted the article no? I have not assumed anything. I was clearly stating you had an option after sending a cease and desist and instead of taking legal action for them to remove it you created a bigger scheme by claiming a newspaper was liable expecting it to be removed. Obviously that did not work out as planned.
                  You are doing the same thing with Lee now. Stating as if he and Ryan are working together in order to “cover the light.”
                  You are calling out Briebart.com because Lee is on staff. You do understand that Andrew pulled Lee from liberal media to get inside the Pigford deal? Was Andrew working to “cover the light”? Because of his association with Lee?
                  Although I agree with you about Ryan what you are saying about Lee and Ryans relationship is premature and irresponsible.

                • Especially when you sound just like the libs. that tried to shut up Andrew by attacking Lee. You really are a piece of work. Lee was right though when he said you are a coward. I would love to see if you take him up on his half hr. seg. and speak directly to both he and Ryan.

        • Sundance –

          Have you been able to identify the i.d.’s used by Natalie et al to participated in the Doth Protest Too Much blog?

        • Sundance,
          I think you are missing the point. Whether it was doxxing of Christina or not, at the blessing of her family or not, she was identified as W–9 for a reason. Attorneys on both sides filed motions with a court to have the identity of witnesses or potential witnesses kept confidential due to privacy and saftey. Those motions were granted. It was done to afford GZ a fair trial.
          If the information was given to you in confidence and you ran with it I am unsure. Obviously you or others who thought it was a bright idea to identify a witness had second thoughts because posts were removed. This was not the only time you identified peoples PII because you wanted to ridicule them. May not be doxxing, but it sure seems like harassment, and could have potentially been witness tampering. Those are not thingsbto down play. Whether someone is a liar or against your POV is neither here nor there.

          You had Nettles remove a link here that identified your real name claiming it could put you in danger. This was just your name. No photos of you were placed. No mention of your children or family, no other PII was given and YOU felt threatened. Isnt that the pot calling the kettle black?

        • I did too, awaiting moderation, I think some of the comments don’t get posted. I commented on other stories and never got past moderation. They were nothing more than facts, so I don’t see any reason for them to be omitted. Anyway…just more Trayzombies posting there. It’s impossible trying to talk logic (and facts) with the illogical.

          • I’m commenting using Disqus. It didn’t go to moderation.

            I’ve been called racist 3 times on that article so far and a GOP nut.

            If its not race then its politics. Why can’t we just focus on behaviors and facts?

            I noted in that blog radio program where Lee S. called out Sundance, his first question to Ryan Julison was to ask where do you stand politically? Who cares?

            Do you need to know this information about everyone so you can put your stereo-types onto them when weighing his answers?

            Forget right/left, black/white, male/female straight/gay. Deal with each case or situation individually and question your assumptions. These commenters on the article think I’m GOP because I support George. There are a lot of democrats and liberals who support George. I’ve spent many a months talking with them. I am one. He truly has a diverse set of supporters.

            • The media is focused on dumbing down America with shock jock tactics. Ignore them, most people do. It is embarrassing though, and does not bode well for our future.

            • Nettles, you are so correct: “Forget right/left, black/white, male/female straight/gay. Deal with each case or situation individually and question your assumptions.” I have been absolutely dumbfounded that so many people commenting on the Zimmerman case actually seem to know none of the facts. I’m losing my faith in the human race as an intelligent form of life. 😦

          • That particular Mika-Joe segment is so full of misleading assertions that one does not know where to start.

            C’mon, Mika, who doesn’t try to smile when posing for a picture?

            It would be nice to get clarification from the MOM office on Shawn Vincent’s statement. Was this a statement drafted by the office and put out in reaction the Zimmerman factory visit? Or was it an elicited statement put out “in response” to a press inquiry? Was it a written response, or was the original in the form of telephone/aural answer to a reporter’s question? Was Vincent quoted correctly? Who was responsible for the “through the heart” bit? Did Vincent say other things that were left out of the quote that did make it into the media?

            But at the end of this Mika-Joe segment, that one legal commentator makes his point that GZ is “not innocent”, just that GZ is “not guilty” implying that GZ is not innocent.

            This simply underscores the importance of the point O’Mara made in his closing argument that this was a case where the jury should have been given the third option of voting for “innocent”.

            • I didn’t need to inquire. Someone else already asked him and Shawn confirmed he said it. He was asked if he actually said the shot through the heart statement and he confirmed he did.

              • Tks….would you say that those words were Shawn’s words as opposed to, for example, a text he was given on behalf anyone else? Was it in a written statement form, or an elicited response to a media inquiry for comment? Did he say anything else in any response?

                • My conversations with Shawn are I’m verbose and he’s a man of very little words.

                  Shawn or one of the support people to me:
                  “Thank You. We’ll consider it”
                  “Thanks”
                  “Thank you. I’ll pass it along”
                  “Do you think that deserves a response?”
                  “I’ll inquire and let you know”

                  I didn’t know Shawn’s name until I read it in the paper one day in October or November I think it was. I then said Hi Shawn when I wrote and only once or twice did the return email get signed Shawn.

                  Until yesterday, I hadn’t emailed the defense since June 2013. I tweeted congratulations to them after the verdict.

                  In spite of the picture Sundance tried to paint of my massive knowledge of the defense, it’s folk lore. All made up in his head.

                  Now to answer your inquiry. When asked Shawn did you really say this? And the article was provided his response was “I did.” That’s the Shawn I know and love, man of little words.

                  I agree that statement about shot through the heart is inflammatory but when questioned Shawn didn’t say yes I did but…. So we can take that it’s accurate as he hasn’t come out saying he was misquoted or that his statement was taken out of context.

                  I agree with the critics and the Zimmerman family that sometimes responses such as these are very weak in defense of a client. If I were the client, I’d be telling the lawyers to keep their disappointment with me out of the press and between just us. From everything I know, GZ liked his defense and the defense genuinely likes GZ.

  3. Speaking of ethics. If you can get past the “we hate sundance” mantra you might find the Lee Stranahan situation interesting.

    As I replied yesterday – the backdrop is here on your site:

    https://annettekblog.wordpress.com/2013/08/23/august-23-2013-post-discussion/comment-page-1/#comment-15256

    It appears, and I am waiting for Stranahan to confirm (we have exchanged numerous late night emails and he is now in the “oh shit” mindset) that Lee Stranaham might have been set up by Ryan Julison.

    By all impressions it appears Julison reached out to Stranahan to initiate the fiasco.

    Sometime around 9:32am Sunday 8/25 Lee began to tweet his intention to take to his blog-talk radio in defense of Julison and against CTH.

    Unfortunately, he lied and told his 4pm audience he tried to contact CTH for response prior to broadcast. As you can see from the above link, that is untrue. His accusations about my threatening Ryan Julison are also untrue. Other than a rather innocuous email at 12:32pm he gave no indication to me, or anyone else, that he had any intent on such a confrontation.

    It appears the only way one would know his intentions were if they were following his twitter feed – as he was quite prolific in his Sunday intents on behalf of Julison.

    He is experiencing some blowback, and it’s quite possible this could get much worse. Much worse.

    • I don’t know who Lee is. I was emailed the link to his radio blog just after 5pm. I posted it and started listening and posted my reactions.

      In light of our conversations here the last few days, posting anonymously while pulling others into the light just appears in bad taste to me.

      Having said that, I was very surprised to hear that you wrote a personal wish for Ryan Julison’s injury or death. You can be pompous and ego driven but making threats against someone, that didn’t jive with the Sundance I knew.

      Having listened to it again, no he is saying the site approved a comment that was threatening and the fact is no they didn’t.

      In checking out Lee S. allegations today, he is attributing those threats Sundance was posted by other commenters on that thread. In the comment, there is a admin. comment saying the comment says more about the commenter than Ryan Julison.

      Sundance, you may in the future want to not allow those comments to be visible on your site. Surely at the minimum threats against others is a no go to be visible. Whether you ban the commenter or not, at least take it off. Anyone who makes threats should not be given a vehicle to have it read.

      I do smell a set-up with this. Ryan Julison does deserve responsibility about the narrative he took to the press.

      Lee is not being honest. In the radio blog he hopes Sundance or Ryan call in and low and behold Ryan calls in. Sundance shared the email he got and he certainly wasn’t invited to be on.

      Julison now wants to minimize his role in the false facts that got to the media. If I can help at all to ferret out truth on that matter, let me know.

      • Thank you. Despite our differences, I think a larger understanding is afoot…. which is part of the reason for my attendance.

        I just returned here to share a preview “scoop” with you.

        As I previously said, I was trying to identify who contacted whom? Julison or Stranahan?

        About 5 minutes ago, Lee just admitted via email that Ryan Julison called him for help yesterday morning shortly after Stranahan woke up. They then confirmed with each other for the show around noon.

        So there you go….. it was, as it appeared to be, a set up.

        I think from reading Stranahan’s emails he now knows he was the set-up man, but worse he realizes the exposure of this Sunday set of events will damage his credibility. I have requested an apology – His pride is keeping him from providing one.

        Between Stranaha’s twitter feed, and his blog-radio show, against the backdrop of what you factually know about Ryan Julison, and combined with an email exchange which you can imagine, you can probably see the outline of a devastating expose’ on Lee Stranahan.

        I have not yet decided whether to expose it.

        Perhaps, I will, once more, for the 3rd time, request a public apology – and give him one more opportunity to save face.

        Not sure.

          • This might be an awesome opportunity to really learn from Julison how these facts are initiated in the media and learn lessons so the media gets a better product in future.

            Lee and Julison are friends. Lee could use his influence on Julison to pressure for some truths. He could help us expose Ms. Jackson’s lies. What was he told, by whom and when.

        • In a blog radio attack about reporting the truth, Lee told his listeners he got alerted to the blog thread because he gets alerts on Pigford when now it appears he got alerted to the fact because Julison asked a favor of him.

          Lee is manipulating his listeners. Lying to them while ranting about the dishonesty of someone else. You can’t get much lower.

          • Here is his latest response to my request for an apology:

            ———————————–
            Re: What is that article on Pigford / Trayvon connection
            From: Lee StranahanAdd to Contacts
            Sent: Mon, Aug 26, 2013 at 4:31 pm
            To: thelastrefuge@reagan.com
            Cc:

            To quote my friend, “Apologize…FOR WHAT?”

            Where did I say you asked to participate, specifically?

            Where did I say you threatened Julison?

            Your credibility is at issue, not mine.

            ———————————–

            I’m a little angry. I should probably pray a bit and think about what to do….

        • Out of everyone I am usually the most annoyed with you most days Sundance. But that was not cool what Lee did. He should have researched and waited to broadcast until you were available.

          • @DW, this is but one example. This is every day, in every thing, from all sides. This is the new normal when it comes to journalism. From the left and from the right. The GZ case was but one brutally representative image of it.

            If you could ever understand it – you would, perhaps, be less critical of those of us who fight back against it. Much of what you believe is because you are deceived….. and I include amid that thought – your hateful opinion of me.

            Until you have been “in their crosshairs”, it is easy to criticize.

            • Sundance –

              When you say that Danny is deceived, does that deception include his reading the CTH postings as to what contacts you did or did not have with GZ and members of the family, and etc over these past months?

              i can understand why you did what you did?

              Can you understand why others, who were not privy, and are still not privy to the whole back story, would exercise normal scrutiny to assertions made upon a basis that did not add up as presented?

              • After reading the last couple of threads here, I do feel a bit of deception, even if I might understand some things. To say my eyes have been opened is more of an understatement…My question, I guess is why is Sundance not saying this on his blog at the Treehouse about his backdrop? Maybe I have misspoke and will need to ask for a link if so. Since I had my knee hurt and surgery and such, I have taken a break from computer, tho I do read and try to stay caught up, poss I missed it…

                Nettles, again Thank You for continuing your blog… Hugs … back to reading

                • It seems he came at first because he felt some links might cause his family danger. Makes sense. But then, like you, I wondered why he was having the conversation here. Certainly, now that he feels it’s time to tell more of the backstory, you’d think he’d want to tell it at his blog, to his readers. Why now, why here…..? Curious, eh?”

                  • If I wrote about this at CTH – a journalist might pick up the story and run with it. The Washington Times Joseph Cotti did that with several articles, including to the extent of calling Angela Corey for opinion on the FOIA submissions to her office.

                    😦

                    I tried in the “ask Sundance” thread about a week after trial – and quickly realized there was just no way to do it….

                    that’s why.

                    • I am confused, isn’t that what telling the TRUTH is about? I mean if you wouldn’t want people to know…why tell it to begin with.. Truly I am confused lol

                    • i can understand why you did what you did?

                      Can you understand why others, who were not privy, and are still not privy to the whole back story, would exercise normal scrutiny to assertions made upon a basis that did not add up as presented?

                    • Well, I do not think you tried very hard in the ask SD thread. You diverted questions to the bottom many times when someone else interrupted. Again, attempting to control the narrative and your POV. That is not truth. Many questions even though you have attempted to give answers to still just lead to more questions Sundance.
                      Who gives a $h!t who will “run” with it? Did you not just have a post about “fear” and accuse me of being afraid for allowing things to get personal? See with you it is about controlling the POV which is the same thing you accuse the Scheme Team of, and MSM. It is not about truth. Like I said before it is about YOU. You really should read my “Pot meet Kettle” post.

            • SD, first of all I hate no–one. Hate is a very strong word. Life is way too short to spend it on hating anyone or anything! True, I dislike your delievery and most of all I dislike your attitude when you are dealing with people who do not see eye to eye with you. I dislike your patronizing nature. I dislike how you believe you are never wrong. But hate you? No. If you care to know how I feel about you and why…..read my blog.
              How so am I decieved? You are a Conservative and I called you out. Lee is a conservative and I was intellectually honest and agreed with you that what he done was not cool. He should have researched and allowed you opportunity to defend yourself on the show. However, I now see he has given you that opportunity. So are you going to take it? If not, quit bellyaching! It is annoying!

  4. UPDATE: THIS IS FAKE POST. SORRY FOR THE CONFUSION. – ANNETTE (Nettles18)

    Is this for Real. George Zimmerman will be on Al Sharpton tonight?

    Al Sharpton Asks George Zimmerman, ‘Do You Want to Shoot Me?’

    In a bewildering turn of events that has rocked the world of cable news, George Zimmerman agreed to an interview with Reverend Al Sharpton on MSNBC. The following transcript of the no-holds-barred interview which airs tonight on Sharpton’s show, PoliticsNation, was leaked by an anonymous source inside MSNBC:”
    http://www.thedailyrash.com/al-sharptons-interview-with-george-zimmerman

      • This is where I feel lost all the time. I don’t know the sources well.

        I was suspicious because it wasn’t a NBC link.

        When I got involved in this case, I’d read say at the Daily caller something and post it and some would say that’s a (insert political point of view here) or if I quote the Huffington Post or the Conservative Treehouse I would get all kinds of feedback. Some sources are more trusted than others for some.

        I was reflecting today on why so many think mostly the right side of politics in the states support George.

        How does self defense get politicized?

        Is it really that humans thinks that differently from other political parties or is it that because the source of the news in the Conservative Treehouse, I won’t read there. So what you end up is one side who’ll open their mind to the facts and another side who won’t even read them.

        There really wasn’t a whole lot of sources providing the facts in the case. There was lots of the Crump narrative though in the early days.

        • IMO – it’s in the parties’ best interest to “raise” everyone thinking that x side believes a,b,c, and y side believes x,y,z. In reality, I’ve read that each wing has 20% of the population, so that leaves 60% who are in the middle, perhaps leaning one way or the other. I think there are a good number on each side who share some beliefs with the other side. For ex, during Hillary’s run, the media would say that the right was attacking her – but it was her own party that was sabotaging and attacking her (the republicans were after her for 20 years previously, but they weren’t guilty that time). During George’s trial, I would frequently see the media pitting it as the right was for George, and the left was for the kid. I don’t believe it was anywhere near that clear cut. The party powers that be (and the media, which are all slanted depending on whom their corporate owner is) try to present the sides that neatly. But I don’t buy it. Just as the BGI needs to keep blacks and whites divided, so too do the media and the parties need to keep us divided. But as I said, I think the “rules” (about which side cares about which issues) are artificial. I believe in voting by issue now. If the right agrees with me on X issue, I’ll vote for the candidate on the right who is pushing that issue. And vice versa.

          In short, I think TPTB benefit from keeping us thinking we have to only claim allegiance to one side. I don’t think their aim reflect reality, however, because I think most of us have beliefs that cross over into both parties’ territories. I also think that if we voted that way, they’d finally have to address issues, rather than just make empty promises. They wouldn’t have party line votes at election time, so to get reelected they’d actually have to have made changes.

          Anyway, that’s my theory lol

      • Here’s what I should have done before posting that. Posted on their site it says

        “The Daily Rash is satire! Merely a parody of the life that we watch around us daily. We spoof the famous and not so famous people who fill our lives with beauty and who bring us so much joy. Any similarities between our stories and real life are coincidental. Nothing here is very true.Mark Donahue is the guy in charge. After years of laughing alone he decided to share what nobody else thinks is funny with the entire world. And yes, he is still laughing alone. Probably in a damp room with little ventilation.”

  5. Someone asks me for directions on how to create a picture or Gravatar in their posting. You have to open a WordPress account (it’s free) and then you can upload a picture that gets used. Here’s more information on it.

    http://en.gravatar.com/support/what-is-gravatar/

    I didn’t know much about it. The treehouse used to let me post using my email address and then in October I think, I was getting a message I had to have a wordpress account. So I created one and uploaded my photo for the gravatar. When I post on news sites it posts my picture as well. It’s kinda cool. If anyone can offer those interested in creating their own gravatar, please share your wisdom and knowledge.

  6. An old friend (not really), Kate Robinson, from the legal team’s facebook days regularly reads here. She has tried to post here but she’s way too disruptive. She posts as Two Sides to every Story or something like that on Fred Leatherman’s blog.

    She has found the conversation between Sundance and us very interesting and tells the Leatherman blog lots of dirt is exposed. She posted this on August 22nd. http://frederickleatherman.com/2013/08/22/the-moral-responsibility-of-democracy/#comment-221413

    Just so you know Kate, there’s been 2 clicks on your link. They aren’t interested in federal charges against George Zimmerman I guess.

    I hope you get the money you want to move to Britain. Take Care Kate……and take off….or not.

    • Just above that post acemayo wants the “mentored” kids doxed.

      And a little ways above that, apparently biznesschic1959@yahoo.com is now banned for daring to not be in complete agreement with the lord of the lounge about government surveillence, and a little further down he says to someone else, “Absolutely, we do not have to agree on everything to get along and I can understand and accept that a reasonable person might disagree with me on this and other subjects.”

      I haz whiplash

  7. Time to start Paying George Zimmerman for this railroad!

    O’Mara: George Zimmerman will ask state to cover $200K-$300K of his legal bills
    Because he was acquitted, state law allows him to recoup thousands.

    “Because Zimmerman was acquitted, state law requires Florida to pay all his legal costs, minus the biggest one: the fee that goes to his lawyers. That includes the cost of expert witnesses, travel, depositions, photocopies, even that animated 3-D video that defense attorneys showed jurors during closing argument that depicts Trayvon punching Zimmerman.

    http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/local/trayvon-martin/os-george-zimmerman-we-pay-his-bills-20130826,0,7750164.story

    • Puuuuullllleeeeeeze tell me this means the state has to pay George’s bond deposit. Lester up it to 1 million dollars and the state gets the bill. Now that’s Justice!

      Judge Lester, if you ever, ever use bond again as a punishment for a defendant think about George Zimmerman. The evidence shows and the jury decided that potted palm in your courtroom was innocent. Yes innocent Judge Lester! A defendant is presumed innocent until found guilty by a jury. So George Zimmerman is still innocent. You put this innocent man in solitary confinement for all told, a month and a half. You suggested the charges that his wife now must defend (hopefully when she is found not guilty, the state pays her back too), and took the donation money so this innocent man had an even bigger hill to climb to prove his defense. Judge Lester, I don’t like you. Your judgement stinks.

      • Jordan tips off SD on what is going on at other blogs. He did at Dmans with Rick and he does here and does at my blog.

  8. Regarding the SD/Lee controversy and the outing of DD, I would have to agree with Sundance that there appears to be 2 DD’s. I have said this several times now, and if it can be proven, it blows this whole case and false narrative open. Why is no one interested in this? If MOM had proof of this, wouldn’t he be getting a LOT more money from everyone?

    I have no idea why no one in the media has picked up on this. It is apparent that the voice being interviewed by Guttman and BDLR is NOT the same voice as the DD testifying in court. Maybe those at the CTH have not been able to deduce the differences because, after all, they all sound alike. (sarc) But it does not take an Alan Reich to see the differences in Rachel Jeantel’s voice with the initial voice present by Crumpie and interviewed by the Bald Headed Dude.

    This to me seems like a more productive path to “shining the light.” I wonder why no one is picking up on it?

    • I am not really the most adept person to create videos and media presentations, but I would really like to see a side by side comparison of the two voices. Has anyone done this? Diwataman–where are you when we need you? Capitan–you seem skilled enuf to do it! Any takers?

      • I believe he has. HIs website had a comparison of w8 interviews. Look for a title similar to that on his blog and you will find it.

        I believe in the concept of 2 deedee’s but I think the reason people avoid it is it’s hard to prove and it sounds like a conspiracy along the lines of ‘lizard people’ and people might fear it. The only reason I believe it is because of Ben Crump – I think he is evil enough, I hear 2 different voices and Rachel knows NOTHING.

        Not just that, it makes sense. Trayvon is a teenage boy. Listen, at that age, you are not talking to Rachel alone for 800 minutes a day. She talked about 3 way calls, mentioned ‘france’ in one of her interviews and accidentally said ‘she’ in place her ‘me/i’ in one of her other tv interviews. It would be the kind of thing Crump would do and to me is why Rachel was coached to say “I did the interview in my closet”. C’mon man, who the hell does that? Sometimes the trick is to rewind time and ask yourself “What would lead to such actions, as crazy as it may seem?” I trust Trayvon talking to somebody cuter, Crump, the liar, lying to us, Rachel the lair lying to us, and a 16 year old, at the time, being told “You shut up and play dumb and make it all go away. Crump, you got your interview. Leave us out of this” and then crump realized “Oh, crap, I need to show something to get this grand jury to go away” (As SD pointed out to his credit)

        Here’s the issue, though:

        One girl on instagram calls herself deedee. She had the age and profile for Crump’s narrative but nothing about her posts show any hints that fit (possibly she felt no need to discuss such things)

        One girl SD talked about (named Francessca on Twitter with a handle similiar to that) DID have tweets more in tune with what a first deedee would say. Maybe the instagram deedee, who knew Trayvon, is a coincidence. She is most certainly not ‘deedee #1’ that SD pointed out. It may be that ‘deedee’ is a nickname among Haitians (I read this) and it’s just a coincidence that one of them calls themselves that. He also may have saw that friend online and used that as a name to divert people.

        Look – no matter what, the father LIED about the missing person call “I saw him last night at 8:30″
        Rachel lied god knows how many times
        The parents lied about Trayvon being driven to sanford (Bus)
        The father lied about the cousin ‘being with tray, probably” when the kid left earlier that day
        They called Juvie before missing person report

        To see such blatant disregard for authority and be so averse to the truth and even question if it is 1% possible that they invented another girlfriend/witness is heartbreaking. Not because it is true but because it’s perfectly fitting for them and we shouldn’t give them the benefit of the doubt.

        They wanted George to prove his innocence. I want them to prove Rachel, she of the “It is now” ownership of this magic phone, was the actual human being on the phone with him. The grass whisperer who never knew there was a 711 trip, a 5 minute wait after his purchase and a 39 minute walk home.

        That’s her chance to win justice for her ‘boyfriend/puppy love/bestest friend” and all she could produce is ‘uh, mail thingy’ and ‘creepy ass cracker”

        C’mon now. And on top of that, he was all into talking to her. I think StevoB said it best, Tray’s friend, before he deleted his tweet. I think she catfished him and Trayvon never saw her and realized he was talking to her. No way he would. Sorry, it doesn’t happen.

        It just doesn’t. She is an actor. So is ben. I want them to prove me wrong.

        • That Vinnie Politan (SP?) video, 33+ minutes into it, that big hair covering her right ear. I still wonder if she was adjusting an ear piece. Each interview she is slow to respond, awkward and covering her right ear. I know, it sounds silly and I said it before but – would it surprise you? Oh, she’s such a mess. And such an actor. Just find her old tweets. It’s almost evil what she is doing. Evil finds evil and partners with it. I just am so bummed that we will likely never know the truth. All we have is people who want to exploit trayvon and not one person on his side wants to be honest about it. And they may all get away with it.

          Pathetic.

        • “The parents lied about Trayvon being driven to sanford (Bus)”

          Interestingly, both statements could be true when you factor in the “You ain’t tell me you swung on a bus driver” tweet…

          It’s entirely possible that Trayvon was put on a bus on Tuesday, assaulted the driver and was kicked off, and his father then had to arrange to take him to meet Brandy halfway on Wednesday.

          • Trayvon’s texts indicate he made it safely to Sanford on Tuesday, Feb. 21st. He texts his mom when Brandy picked him up at the bus terminal.

            I have found some evidence that he got kicked off a bus on Feb. 20th and someone in his family had to come pick him up. Perhaps it was this incident that got his butt sent out of Miami.

            • Despite his texts to Sybrina on Tuesday about being on the bus at six in the morning and later about waiting to be picked up…

              Sybrina told investigators that she last saw Trayvon on Wednesday.

              Tracy also told investigators that he drove Trayvon half way to Sanford to meet Brandy on Wednesday.

              Granted, I don’t think either one of them knew or much cared about his whereabouts from day to day and it’s possible they were simply confused about what day they actually dumped him off on someone else to take care of, but I don’t see why they would lie about ~how~ Trayvon got to Sanford…?

      • In preparing a written transcript of Crump’s recordings of his call with W8 and then hearing her in court, I was of the opinion it was the same girl.

        I agree the recordings sound like a different voice at times but some things were exactly the same in both instances. One was when Rachel is asked about time she never says o’clock..it was 6 something, 7 something. She is consistent in both interviews.

        Having said that, I think there is evidence that Rachel was not on the phone with Trayvon that night. Someone else was. Rachel’s slip about “she was talking….” in the Vinnie Politan interview on Nancy Grace is the exact same slip she made with Crump on March 19th’s interview. Trayvon bump….somebody bumped Trayvon.

        I haven’t seen this possibility posted anywhere but it’s possible Rachel and whoever was actually on the phone made the switch themselves before the March 19th interview. The person who was really on the phone with him did not want to come forward and refused. Rachel agreed to step in.

        If Crump and Co. did actually hand-pick Rachel for the job in lieu of whoever really was on the phone then they chose very badly.

        I think Rachel pulled a switch on Crump and the parents and they had no choice in the matter.

        • Here is how I see it. We must perform a cognitive reset and remove all logic/proper behavior patterns we expect in adults.

          *if* and only *if* there was such a scam, we must assume that there is a script. With a script is coaching. So what I personally look for, and by no means am I implying this is the sure fire method to handle this type of research, is comments that are likely away from coaching opportunities. That is where Rachel bombs big time.

          If I hired somebody to replace a witness, what would I do? I’d have them stick to the narrative and one BEFORE evidence came out. I would actually have no choice. But I would want to cover my tracks “Why do they sound different?” “She’s in a closet”

          What’s funny is I would want to cover many more tracks such as, you know, having her be able to read a letter she sent to the grieving mom, getting her to properly remember when she first met Trayvon “I knew him since kindergarten/I knew him since 2nd grade”

          She is so unprepared when she is giving tv interviews her only answers about who he was is “Um, he had a heart. That’s a person. He had a family”. It’s insane (An interview with some guy on Huffington Post. last name Hill, I believe?)

          If that 16 year old girl said “I’m done, go away” or her family did, we must remember the purpose of a Rachel is not necessarily to kill it on tv interviews post trial or testify at trial. Just get an arrest. It was sloppy work. I don’t think they wanted her to testify and it was clear she didn’t.

          If she were really that girl, and the story wasn’t a lie, she’d have sprinted to that stand. Instead, she was dragged in. And didn’t even know what mail thingy was. She was an echo, an avatar, from the past – repeating pre april 2012 evidence. That was the problem. That is the point. She was in over her head and it showed – big time / 2 cents.

          • To me, she is like Chad. At best, she was part of a 3 way and the other girl bailed. Just as Chad was there with Tray and may have wanted skittles, the story, if you look at the phone call logs, shows a panic’d frenzy of calls and oddly enough starting to really take place 5+ minutes after the shooting.

            Considering the mom said “He is on the porch and this man shoots him, are you serious” and even Rachel says “I thought he was near the girlfriend’s house and the dad was there” (which is odd for many reasons as Trayvon would never tell a teen a parent is there – he’d be bragging he’s all alone without parents which is WHY he went to the 711 in the first place but that’s for another time)

            I think the truth is somewhere in between our perspectives. I originally thought Rachel wasn’t on the phone. Others think another girl wasn’t. The slip ups and StevoB’s deleted catfish tweet and some common sense, as well as admitting 3 way talk and saying “it is now” re: the phone – I think 2 girls were witnesses and one bailed. They were stuck with the boobie prize.

            Ok, I am thinking too much. Time for sleep. Nettles, ty for the time. I do appreciate it. If anything it’s nice to just flesh this out and get it out of the head.

            • Wouldn’t it be awesome if some branch of law enforcement wanted to launch a quiet investigation into what the special prosecutor chose not to look at? Is it possible to get enough suspicion going that a fraud took place and innocent people lost their jobs. Taking known lies to the public and lying to police has got to be against the law. We sit here watching Crump and Co. get away with it. It’s infuriating.

              • In order to get an investigation going, you have to present fairly good evidence of fraud. If there was a switch somewhere between the Crump DD, Gutman DD, BDLR DD, and the trial DD, I think that it would have been detected by MOM/West.

        • If there is another person who really was on the phone with Trayvon we may one day know it. How is that girl going to feel seeing the gifts of an education and perks that have come to Rachel while they get nothing.

    • Since Gutman did several interviews with her (I’m assuming some in person), maybe the fastest route would be in an upcoming civil suit for him to be deposed and for him to be asked a direct question – photo of DD – is this whom you interviewed?

      • Is it legal for him to sit like a potted palm while he watches a different girl testify in court? That ABC news didn’t sound an alarm bell puts the likelihood that they have no evidence that the March 19th interview wasn’t done with Rachel Jeantel.

        • Well, supposedly he did further interviews with her. Logically, you make sense. But they did seem to somehow lose all that interview tape (except the 5 minutes that Tara found – which in itself makes me wonder if someone on the inside was trying to anonymously save some proof, hoping someone would find it). And it has seemed all along that no one has wanted to untangle all the backstory of the few minutes George and Martin met. Having said that, I have no idea how many DDs there may be. But now that George has been acquitted, and most of the danger is gone, it feels like a mystery novel, and I want all the ends tied up lol

            • I have that issue on mobile so I try my best to find the comment in the thread. Also, if I write a post in mobile I have limited wp abilities that make me look like I can not spell. Arggg. Mobile on WP is not good for me anyways. Lol

        • Interview 1 was not in person. Were the others not the same way? They may have set it up to avoid liability. Also i saw earlier gutman and juliso. worked together on the death/hazing of a marching band member/student at a university. Crazy.

          • Not sure hooson. I got the impression there was an audio dude there during the meeting with Sybrina. The tapes are better quality and the missing mins. and content add up. I listened to all tapes. They all sound like the same person. Who Crump initially contacted or who was indeed on the phone all those hrs. that day wil remain a mystery I am sure.

    • I’m very late to the party. I’m always playing catch up since I don’t read the blogs everyday. But I believe the three interviews we’ve heard are the same person, Rachel Jeantel. Now, that does not mean that there weren’t two DD’s. I don’t know for sure if there were two DD’s, but that scenario is totally possible. It’s just that I believe Rachel Jeantel is the only person we’ve ever heard on these interviews. Granted, the voice in the first audio (interview with Crump) sounds different but there are very reasonable explanations for that.

      1) Rachel was giving her version of events and was told to speak loudly and clearly.

      2) Rachel felt more comfortable speaking to Crump (and others listening who were “on her side”) over the phone than she did in the other interview and on the witness stand.

      3) Rachel was able to speak for longer periods of time during her phone interview with Crump than with her other interview and testimony.

      4) Different recording devices can have an effect on the quality and/or sound of one’s voice. Not necessarily a major difference but a range of difference.

      Here is the link to Rachel’s interview with Marc Lamont Hill. There are times in that interview that she sounds exactly like the person on the phone interview with Crump. It’s when she raises her voice and talks in phrases and sentences rather than just throwing out single words, and when she says, “YES!” or “NO!”. In the depositions and post trial interviews, the majority of the time she’s having to weigh her words carefully but she sometimes forgets and speaks quite frankly and differently than she did in the depositions and on the stand and raises her voice and speaks more quickly.

      http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/07/17/rachel-jeantel-on-trayvon-martin_n_3611885.html

      If you don’t care to listen to the entire video, forward to the following marks 7:40; 11:49; 12:37; 13:50; 18:58; 19:35 and 21:15.

  9. At the risk of getting my head ripped off, who is Andrew Briebart? I’ve looked him up but still don’t get people’s fascination with him. He died young. He tried to be a journalist without training? What did he do that got a segment of society to remember him so?

    • Andrew Breitbart went after the truth. He was very much against the media lying and covering up stories. He was the first to go after the Pigford settlements in a big way. I don’t remember the exact numbers but in the past the government supposedly refused loans to black farmers and discriminated against them through the Dept. of Agriculture. At the time of the discrimination, it is known that there were only x number of black famers, but the Dept, started doling out something like $50,000. checks to a whole lot more who claimed to be black farmers than even existed at that time. There was a tremendous amount of abuse and fraud associated with the payments. For example, if you had a plant growing in a pot on your porch, you were qualified for the payments. There were a few lawyers who profited greatly by filing claims for many, but took much of the payments that were paid to the so-called farmers. Then the Dept. of Agri. decided they were going to earmark more millions for so-called discriminated woman and hispanics farmers. It went something like that. It was a total fraud.

      Remember when SD posted the letter sent out by Ryan Julison, who was looking for people to file pigford claims on behalf of. Apparently Julison sought out the claimants, sent them to his lawyer buddy, and collected “finder’s fees” so to speak for everyone he brought in. It was a very lucrative job, and one that cheated the complicit government out of tax dollars. Julison sent that letter out at about the same time he was undertaking his architect role in the false Trayvon narrative.

      Breitbart didn’t just report the stories. He did the legwork and the research to find the facts and the players involved before he wrote his stories. That truly was what journalism should be, but rather, we now have news readers who read from a teleprompter what they are supposed to be saying. Perfect example, a woman on one of the networks somewhere was reading the news and actually read, on air, the names of the Asian pilots and air crew as Wi Too Lo, Holy Fuk, and Bing Bang Ow. That truly is what our media has been reduced to. These same media outlets are all on the same page, and they own the majority of the media.

    • Hi, Nettles. This isn’t the BEST (visual) video, and there are many videos to view where you can watch and listen to Breitbart himself, but in this one, Breitbart states that he doesn’t really go after politicians. What he goes after is the far left liberal media and hollywood. Naturally, he will get caught up in politics through discussion, but he goes after the REPORTING, the REPORTERs and who they work for. You literally could spend hours listening to him. Some think the Obama Admin. had him bumped off, yet it is reported he was walking when he collapsed. IMO it probably was a heart attack. I was surprised to read his father-in-law was Orsen Bean … remember him? Well, anyway here is a short video:

  10. He was a very enigmatic and charismatic individual who had good horse sense on how a liberally-oriented media and the Hollywood crowd functions. He used this knowledge and some of their tactics to “cut to the chase” as it were in pushing back, via the freedom of the internet, on a lot of the media palaver washing over conservative views.

    • Thank you Hoosan, you said it much better than I did. He did research on what he was reporting on. He was the first to out Anthony Weiner. He knew of his sexting with young woman, and forced Weiner to admit that he sent out pictures of his Weiner to some young girl, while he was married to a pregnant Huma Abedin. I can only imagine what Andrew would be saying now about the Weiner.

      • I can only imagine what Andrew would be saying about SD. Lol. Andrew spoke truth and provided the path on getting there. He was not a conspiracy guru. Nor did he prematurely raise suspision about who he was investigating. It takes patience something SD lacks.

    • Hooson you are increasing my vocabulary by leaps and bounds. I’m going to use my new word “palaver” in an employee feedback form today. Thanks!

      So is this what Sundance attempts to accomplish at the treehouse? He wants to be an Andrew Briebart? I noticed in their masthead art, the artist wrote “I am Andrew Briebart” so the “I am Trayvon Martin” slogan is a copy-cat.

      Well I am Annette Kelly. 🙂

      • Yes, I think that was SD’s goal. At first he did fantastic work on going after the Scheme Team narrative, the players, the connections etc. It was fantastic. Then as Danny had said he jumped the shark when he started going after O’Mara, writing opinion, speculation, and claiming things about O’Mara he had no way of proving. Even if the Zimmerman family members were telling him things behind the scene, he took their side of the story, or even multiple sides of the story, and ran with it. Andrew Breitbart would have gone directly to O’Mara and asked very direct questions, and got answers right from the horse’s mouth so to speak.

    • But these azzholes have nothing to say about the increased violence being committed by young black thugs. By their silence they are in essence putting their stamp of approval on the thugs actions. Today I read a stro about 3 young black females, 14, 15 and 16 beating the crap out of a 32 yeral old white woman in Pittsburgh. They threw a bottle at her car and when she got out of the car, they attacked her, beat her up badly, and left her laying on the road. They ran but were caught and arrested. Witnesses said they heard them shouting racial slurs at the woman while beating her. She is thankfully recovering in the hospital.

      • They have a lot to say on black and black crime. It still leads to be being victimized though. IE; Discrimination in the work place, Discrimination in the justice system, Discrimination in education etc. Only if they were not discriminated against would there not be black on black crime. That is their theory.

    • I wish someone could explain how over one million people signed a petition based on lies? Do these people even know what their signing? What’s wrong with these people? Can’t they think for themselves? The facts are readily available which disprove what the NAACP is claiming. Mr. Jealous to this day is lying about facts of the case. On Saturday during an interview on HLN, he said George got out of his car after being told not to. Anyone who followed the trial knows this is a myth. Did Mr.Jealous not do his homework? Or is he an out and out liar? Or perhaps, incompetent? (Rhetorical questions)…

      I will give them this, they can rally like no one else. It’s like the black leaders are pied pipers, tell them anything and they follow en mass.

  11. Via orlandosentinel.com.
    George Zimmerman’s attorney will hold a news conference this afternoon to answer questions about his client’s desire to have the state of Florida cover his legal expenses after his acquittal in the shooting death of 17-year-old Trayvon Martin.

    • Thank you!

      I asked the radio station, Seaview Radio, if I can post a copy of the interview Mr. O’Mara did with Bob Harvey on Sunday night. (see tweet on first post of this thread).

      I got a response that I can have a copy for personal use and the promotions director is going to ask Mr. Harvey for permission to post it on this blog.

      I caught only the last 5 or 10 minutes of the interview live.

      I’ll post it if I get permission.

    • Maybe some venturesome reporter will ask for clarification on the Shawn Vincent statement concerning GZ’s visit to the gun factory.

  12. I did want to again Thank Nettles for allowing these discussions. IMO she has been the Mother Hen for many. There have been many times she gently redirected my attention when I took things personally, or felt overwhelmed and frustrated. She truly has the capacity to act fairly and allow everyone their POV despite her own opinions. I believe even Sundance would have a hard time denying that.
    With that begin said, Nettie, many appreciate you putting your private life aside because of your dedication of truth. Your blog has allowed me & others the ability to discuss things we otherwise may not had opportunity to discuss. It is refreshing to have such a place were the majority of the time it remains very respectful and the honest truth is sought.

      • I say that with the best intentions, hoping he may clear a few thing from the air. I will not hold my breath however and hold nothing against GZ for it either.

      • Don’t do to Robert Jr. what Sundance did to Mr. O’Mara.

        Robert may have been asked a question and he answered it. Nothing more, nothing less.

        Robert Jr. has been an awesome public defender of his brother and his family name.

        As I stated, I think George’s immediate family got and understood the need to be out of the strategy of the defense but some of the other family members didn’t. I haven’t seen anything that changes my mind on that.

        • Net, No, would never do such a thing ever. RZjr. lost me back at the tweet with the TM baby killer comparison. That is when I realized he drank CTH koolaide. For me he has yet distanced himself from that and I would like to know if he does get paid for his media apparences and what he does with the money. If it is true what SD has said about some family members and they were misrepresented then they need to speak up for themselves not GZ.

          • It is a seperate issue that should not be colluded as who GZ is but important none the less being there were recent allegations and clear support from Sr. & Jr. who publicly have supported CTH. Sorry Nettles, those just are the facts and it does need to be cleared. I have no clue any more if RGjr. has a motive GZ never had. In fact we only ever went by what Jr. & Sr. has said and now we come to find some of it was through CTH. And the allegation is they supported the CTH. I am unsure yet if the motivation was for GZ or that of other things and why.

            • Didn’t Robert Sr. give a thank you shout out right after the acquittal verdict when he made some public statements? I thought that was a very unusual statement to make, especially since SD did do a whole lot of O’Mara bashing. If it wasn’t for O’Mara and the whole legal team George could be sitting in prison for a very long time about now. I have a big problem with any of the Zimmerman’s who were talking behind the scenes with SD, obviously for quite some time, while SD was doing his best to trash O’Mara. They were all possible witnesses and if potential witnesses were talking with a blogger behind the scenes that would be a breach of trust at least.

              • I think it would be well to put ourselves in the shoes of the Zimmermans, and Martin and Fulton and ask ourselves what we would have done if suddenly exposed to the entire world in a tragedy that no one sought, in the midst of a big political power struggle, with little money, with death threats coming left and right, with websites of all stripes second guessing actions, with misinformation spread by the media like manure.

                This does not mean that discussion, debate and emotion should not be allowed

                Let it all hang out.

                But let it also be factored in, as well, the human frailties and differing backgrounds that complete and complicate this mosaic.

            • Robert Jr. was trying to get a classical singing career off the ground when the shooting happened I think. He also is interested in culinary cooking.

              I’m not sure what Robert Jr.’s job was at the time. Yes due to threats he too had to abandon his life. I hope he has found a way to make a living.

              Sundance surprised me when he said the family offered him money to keep going. One could infer they are doing alright financially and I just can’t reconcile that with them all being displaced.

            • Look nobody goes on TV all this time without getting paid when living in hiding. There are either perks or payment. There is nothing new RZjr. can advocate for. He did not talk much about gun rights in a whole nor the 2nd amendment. Remember we had mass shootings and he did not speak! He did not talk much about self defense in a whole. He had every opportunity to do that all this time considering the networks he went on. We heard him speak about family, support for his family / brother. We saw him support the CTH on twitter and obviously behind the scences. He even interjected his personal preference during a media conference we never heard of while when the defense rested awaiting a verdict. Is that the advocating for civil rights you speak of Cassandra? What was the purpose? Like I said my questions are valid. I would never pull an SD and I am offended.

              • Danny –

                For the major networks it depends on the show. Usually, if they fly you to NYC or DC, they will pay travel expenses and, if necessary, put you up at a hotel.

                If they are doing a remote with you, they might limo you to the local studio for the taping or the live interview.

                Someone as close to GZ as RZjr probably does not get paid beyond expenses.

                When given the opportunity, it is always preferable to make yourself available to appear live at the studio venue as opposed to having to deal with the problems of responding via video remote.

                  • Your honor, I object, that is a compound question.

                    The answer to the second question is – Nope, you know darn well that Dr. Phil wouldn’t have anyone on his staff that has posted at CTH.

                    The answer to the first question is the same as for any opinions expressed, they are based on my overall views and my personal experiences play a large part in my views.

                    • Over-ruled. or Sustained. I’m embarrassed to admit, I still don’t know what those two things mean. I always had to wait to see if the witness answered the question to tell me.

                      Why can’t I get those two definitions to stick in my head?

                    • When the judge says “overruled”, the complaining counsel loses.

                      When the judge says “sustained” the complainee’s objection is allowed to stand, and the opposing counsel has to either rephrase the question, or drop it altogether.

                  • Lol. Mr. Producer knows all the stops. Please tell me RZjr. got more perks then Taffe? Least I will feel better bought being bought out for free traveling.

                    • I don’t recall much of Mr. Taffe. I didn’t watch HLN which is where I think he appeared a lot, and from what I recollect of the screenshots, it seemed as though he was on remote from Sanford or somewhere nearby.

                      As for RZjr, he would be a class A guest, so he would get better treatment. I suppose at some point RZjr can elaborate on that.

                    • Well, hooson lets hope RZjr. can. Did not think or the rest of spokesmens like Taffe would get A-1from Assey Face and their likeness.

              • He even interjected his personal preference during a media conference we never heard of while when the defense rested awaiting a verdict. Is that the advocating for civil rights you speak of Cassandra? What was the purpose?

                I’m assuming you’re referring to Jr’s outing himself? I seem to recall him prefacing his admission by stating that rumors had started. It seemed to me that he was taking the power away from the rumor mongers by coming out – with the express purpose being that GZ’s case remain the focus.

                • I’m not sure that what the subject was. The media coverage where Robert said he was gay was before the trial started, not when they were waiting for a verdict.

                  The fact that Robert is gay was in discovery so I was surprised it was news to some. George’s ex said that George was very supportive of Robert when he told the family he was gay.

                  Robert confirmed that in the news conference. I don’t agree he was interjecting anything of the sort. He was using a personal example of how supportive and kind George was. Something that was needed to get out.

            • The biggest question I have with RZJr. is why he would tweet out messages about the great work O’Mara and the legal team had done after court hearings, yet was talking to SD behind the scenes who was anti O’Mara. There seems to be some kind of disconnect there.

              Nettles, have you heard anything back from Robert Jr.? Why would it be taking so long to answer some simple questions like were you talking with SD all along, if you in fact asked that?

              I honestly believe the family was likely split on O’Mara, but, who was against, and why.

              • Anyone in the family’s position is likely loathe to criticize those who are helping them, especially publicly. In these stressful situations, emotions run, differing views of what should be done clash. It is still too early for a tit-for-tat post-mortem to be done on this question in this case.

                There is still much litigation lying ahead. The Shelly trial, the Beasley effort, the sanctions matter, the money compensation issue. Those are more important than a dissection of differences.

                To help the Zimmerman family at this juncture, let them speak out when they are prepared to.

                • I get criticizing the lawyer if you felt he cut you off from information but it’s a whole other level to be emailing strangers with an agenda to ruin the lawyer’s reputation while the guy is the mouth-piece for your family member!

                  That’s retarded….SIR.

                  The consequences to George could have been dire.

                  Sundance has made way too many accusations without ever once asking for the other side’s perspective and questioning the motives of those providing so called insider information.

                  On top of all that, he appears to have fancied himself a puppeteer in deciding who will be the inner side and the outside of supporters. Contributors there should be rightly pissed.

                  While the family may have largely got their feedback about the support from reading those at the treeshouse, there were loads of sites supporting George who weren’t playing games or spinning plates.

                  I worried that some might get a skewed look at what people thought when the treehouse was shutting down so many voices and perspectives.

                  It does appear there was an agenda to provide a refuge for the family to be protected from reading supportive things about the lawyer that was helping their family member.

                  Again, that’s retarded…..SIR.

  13. I’m just guessing here, but this sounds like Mr. O’Mara is still George’s lawyer. 😉

    • I thought he still was lol. I posted on wrong thread thingy about sanctions hearing. Wonder if that means will ask as in send motion for it in 4 to 6 wks or that asking it to be in 4 to 6 wks. I think things are gonna be getting interesting for the States Attny Office in a bunch of ways really soon lol

  14. Here’s a good example of how Dad Zimmerman was not so closely tied to Sundance as he (Sundance) tries to tell us now. This post was in March 2013 from Dad Zimmerman and Sundance was suspicious it wasn’t real. It was real. If you scroll a couple of comments up, Sundance is telling the readers that Dad Zimmerman is silent b/c of the control freak (my words, not his).

    http://theconservativetreehouse.com/2013/03/25/moving-forward-on-the-zimmerman-case-research-understanding-objectivity/#comment-354921

    • ~http://theconservativetreehouse.com/2013/07/14/from-robert-zimmerman-georges-dad/
      ~http://theconservativetreehouse.com/2012/12/24/a-christmas-message-from-robert-zimmerman-sr/
      ~Sr. mentions CTH in his online book and numerous refrences only treepers use.
      http://theconservativetreehouse.com/2013/06/15/a-father-a-good-man-a-book-review-robert-zimmerman-senior/
      ~ You are aware of Jrs. Twitter mantra “Truth has no agenda.” Linking to multiple CTH posts and website
      ~ Public accounts in where SD got his info including here. & Here http://theconservativetreehouse.com/2013/08/21/shellie-zimmerman-hearing-deferred-with-the-full-backstory/
      That is just a start.

      • Nettles, It is so apparent in Srs. online book it is SDs koolaide through and through. Everything. Do I believe SD was in close as of contact as he says with who he believes he was? No. But Sr. obviously was infatuatied with the website. Obviously! Osterman yes. Taffe I am sure, Taffe talked and talked and Talked. He was Assey Faces (Nancy Graces) bitch! I would just watch to see how whipped he was. But I believe you forgot someone. I will not name them here. Rick I believe is the guy who MOM put on the stand to try to remove Tracy Martin first day of trial.

        • I agree. I think both Roberts are fans of Sundance’s. While I liked Sundance, it’s wearing off a bit for me. I don’t believe Sundance has been honest with his readers and that sucks. I don’t care what the reasons you think you have to lie to people who are trying to help the same cause.

          I apologized to Robert Jr. about the position I was putting him in by asking him to clarify Sundance’s thoughts here most especially when Shellie is in danger of prosecution.

          I never tried to ask the family anything prior to a few days ago. I knew what a awful position I would be putting them in and I didn’t want to do it.

          I encouraged Robert to ignore my request for answers if it at all jeopardized Shellie. As I never heard from him again, I trust Kelly Sims wouldn’t have been too eager for the family to be commenting about it either.

          As Sundance smeared O’Mara now will he do the same to Mr. Sims for controlling the family?

          BTW, Mr. Sims, any chance you’d start a website to keep us up to date on Shellie’s case? 😉

          • “As Sundance smeared O’Mara now will he do the same to Mr. Sims for controlling the family?”

            Bingo. It is my opinion that anyone who doesn’t come out calling O’Mara a liar, and testifying that he didn’t lie about the paypal account will without doubt come under Sundance’s rath. Anyone with any legal case coming up that even remotely touches back to the Zimmerman case would do well, and be well advised to stay as far away from Sundance as the earth is to the sun. I’ve no doubt they already know that.

          • For clarity.

            1. I never initiated contacted with anyone. Ever. Not even once. they called, email, or text’d me.

            2. Simms is not trying to control anyone – That was/is O’Mara’s forte’.

            3. It would be interesting if Simms called O’Mara to the stand. (He could)

            4. I never smeared O’Mara. Though he is the worst form of lawyer. I Just said the guy was untrustworthy, and provided specific examples therein…. then said he was the wrong guy for the job.

            5. Don’t forget – they had NO OTHER options. I keep reading y’all with the: “GZ stayed with MoM, ergo GZ must approve of MoM”. Then connect that to…… “GZ must support all that MoM does”…. which leads you to….. “Mom is doing what GZ wants”. The foundation of this is structurally flawed from the point of origin.

        • Rick I believe is the guy who MOM put on the stand to try to remove Tracy Martin first day of trial.

          Danny, I don’t know what you mean. Can you elaborate?

          • On June 24th after the Judge took George’s family out of the courtroom, the defense tried to get Tracy removed for calling one of the Zimmerman’s friends a M..F. At 1:07:30 of this video, Tim Tucholski took the stand to explain what Tracy said to him. It was actually said 2 weeks earlier and the Judge saw no problem with it and allowed Tracy to remain in the courtroom.

            Danny thinks this friend could be Rick Madigan.

            I don’t think Rick Madigan is related to the Zimmerman family or friends at all. But you all know who I think Rick Madigan is.

  15. Who Should Pay GZ’s legal fees?

    But he conceded that the state agency responsible for those costs, the Judicial Administrative Commission, would likely dispute many of the submitted bills and would end up paying $50,000 or less.

    O’Mara called that unfair and suggested that Special Prosecutor Angela Corey should have to pay the total cost plus Zimmerman’s lawyers’ bills because she filed charges against an innocent man.

    The money would come from the Judicial Administrative Commission, the state agency that pays the non-lawyer legal expenses of indigent defendants.

    O’Mara said he would ask the judge to certify the costs he submits. He then expects the commission, which is commonly referred to as JAC, to challenge many.

    http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/local/trayvon-martin/os-george-zimmerman-legal-bills-update-20130827,0,1848356.story

    • Hummm. I have some research to do on this one. How does he suppose Corey will pay being she is an elected official and acted under color of law? And what happens then with the defense fund? Being that GZ filed it under Consumer affairs and a third party holds and distributes the funds? Maybe that is where reasonable living expenses comes in, but, that could lead to donators being forced to be identified at least in court. I have research. It will all be public if he is asking the FDLE to repay debt. Unless he sues her by claiming she acted not under her legal protections as Special Prosecutor. Interesting.

      • Well, Corey apparently had access to all kinds of state money to pad her pension and Bernie’s, so maybe O’Mara wants her to go back to that well.

        • Well that “pad” was legal. And they obviously they dipped when the tree was ripe. Lol. So yeah take the fruit before it rots.

        • Actually the more important issue is that Corey had access to the entire state treasury to bring a malicious prosecution against an innocent Fla. citizen. There was no bottom to the taxpayer dollar fund for her actions against George. She had access to any state and federal agency she wanted to get involved, and they don’t work for free, such as the FDLE. Bondi and Scott handed her a blank check, and she didn’t spare one tiny little expense. She lost, and so to did Scott and Bondi. From what I understand, her pension padding was in fact legal although unethical. Would anyone include ethical and Corey’s name in the same sentence?

      • Danny, from CNN link:

        O’Mara estimated the fees he would ordinarily have charged run approximately $1 million — fees that don’t include the amount that would have been charged by co-counsel Don West, nor others on the team that put together the successful defense.

        “I haven’t gotten one penny in fees,” O’Mara said. “I do have an agreement with George that if he comes into money, I would get paid.”

        Despite being currently unemployed, Zimmerman could potentially get income through other sources such as writing a book, or any money resulting from a defamation lawsuit against NBC News for airing an inaccurate editing of Zimmerman’s call to non-emergency dispatchers the night Trayvon Martin was shot and killed on February 26, 2012.

        In all, O’Mara estimated the total cost of defending George Zimmerman to be around $2 million.

        http://www.cnn.com/2013/08/26/justice/george-zimmerman-court-costs/

        Since the cost of the voice analysis alone was $ 100,000.00, the 3-D animation that was prepared could only be used in part BUT the entire amount for the guy’s services had to be paid. Had MOM/West not spent the monies on the voice analysis gentleman to DEBUNK Reich/White, Judge Nelson would have allowed in their testimony. This was a very expensive defense, the Defense Fund was spent, the problem is, they still have outstanding bills & the attorney’s/others in the office haven’t been paid, the cost of freedom is great in our fine country.

        MOM isn’t asking for monies of those that worked for the Defense that got paid it appears, he is asking for other fees. The “JAC” are a major pain in the butt, they challenge everything before the Judge , and sadly in this case, it will be Judge N. I’d be surprised if another Judge was assigned to hear this. Chief Judge Perry presided over the JAC versus Baez/KC on her “indigencey status” invoices. Some they flat out refused to pay or rejected & Baez had to pay himself.

        WFTV said “this is common practice when the Defendant is acquitted.”

        http://www.wftv.com/news/news/local/zimmerman-may-be-asking-state-pay-300k-legal-fees/nZdKm/

        • Any money the state forks over — if his motion is successful — would be on top of the estimated $902,000 that public agencies already have spent on Zimmerman’s five-week second-degree murder trial that ended July 13.
          (from OS article)

          OUTRAGEOUS the State of Fla. pursued this case & over charged because of arrogance/stupidity, jmho. In one interview MOM said, “I think the State Prosecutors were used to getting away with this behavior to public defenders & less experienced attorney’s, but NOT to seasoned attorney’s. (paraphrased, from an interview.) No matter what is recovered, it is ANOTHER black eye on the corruption/decisions A Corey makes in her office & keeps her in the news negatively.

          Corey has already stated, “her office never over charges & they brought charges they thought they could prove.” Dershowitz called Corey out immediately on her charging document, he was right on everything from the start. Corey stated the above AFTER the State lost the case.

          • The key to O’Mara’s statement for me is that Corey’s office was used to going up against state defenders. I have no facts to back up my comment, but, BDLR said that this was only the second time he lost a murder case. Is there any doubt that BDLR and Corey thought George would not have the funds to get competent council. Isn’t that why Corey et all went so hard and heavy against George’s paypal account? Isn’t that why Lester upped George’s bail in order to rape his defense account? Isn’t that why Crump and the Scheme Team were aghast that so many were willing to send donations to George to fight the Crump BGI? Yeah, the Corey never figured that George would have competent and experienced council, and that it would be a slam dunk for her yet again. Isn’t Corey known to have sent so very many black defendants to prison because they didn’t have the money to pay for attorney’s to put up any fight against her? Isn’t that why Corey did what she did in railroading GZ because she was hated in the black and hispanic community and she needed to be re-elected?

  16. This is the way I feel and yall can correct me if I am wrong. We all can say what we would do if we were in GZs position. It helps use decided to own a gun. We can be religious, we can learn alternatives, and be as safe as we can, when we know what we carry is potientially lethal. But is is no joke. You can never take back a bullet fired from the chamber, and you have seconds to decide you vs. them.
    No one here or in the Zimmerman family will or could relive what happened to GZ. Not Corey, Sundance, RZsr., Rzjr., Shellie, you or I. No one can speak for GZ. And if he feels like doing so publicly one day maybe he will. Until then I believe everything is all in our own perception.

    • Unfortunately I would have to agree with that. If O’Mara thinks he is going to go to Nelson to approve a motion to try to collect monies from the state, he is without question barking up the same wrong tree as he was met with throughout all of the hearings, and the trial itself, with Nelson presiding. If O’Mara was willing to file a malicious prosecution case, George could be awarded the millions he is due. Because of the malicious prosecutors he will never have a normal and free to move about life, and, he will never ever be able to apply for a normal job and be hired. He would be seen as too much of a liability any any future employer even if they wanted to hire him.

      Get off the chit can O’Mara and do the right thing for your client. He more than deserves at ;east the same millions that the state paid Crump when he lost the Martin Lee Anderson case.

      • This is why we need to know *if* there were 2 dd’s or what happened in Jax/etc/etc because only with a full honest picture can one understand how to recoup what is owed to them and assess the damage they caused this man.

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