George Zimmerman/Trayvon Martin Case -- General Discussion #7

Tamta shared:
Listen, this is the main point:

Please refrain from posting incorrect information.

Please reference court documents, investigative reports, discovery items, or other credible sources (not msm articles that do not specify either) when referring to police incompetence and dishonesty so we have the fair opportunity to see what you are talking about and the conversation continues without 'conflict'. Because it was Crump who initiated the criticisms of SPD when the investigation was not producing results that favored what the Martin's wanted, and there are significant questions around Crump's conduct, many people are not going to just going to blindly accept generalized sweeping statements of incompetence or dishonesty regarding the investigation by SPD without more facts. It is completely valid to have questions regarding Benjamin Crump.

If you want to say things like George rode to the police station with a gun in his holster, just post the investigative report that says that or reference the page no and which doc dump you are talking about.

If crucial witnesses were ignored list them, inquiring minds want to know.

It is just simply fair that is all.
It is not an added or unnecessary formality.

I am done.

Tamta - your comment reminded me in reading at Talk Left yesterday, an excellent blog owned by a Criminal Defense Attorney, I noticed that any post/comment that couldn't be validated by a link as fact gets deleted, any incorrect information is deleted as it is not tolerated, only accurate information on the case can be shared. Several attorney's weigh in opinions as comments on the case explaining the law.

I am reading Jerlyn's opinions and information on other blogs quoting Talk Left and Jeryln's opinions on the case as backed up by Legal Statutes. A real contribution on the case for those only interested in the facts imo.

Wild theories and accusations aren't allowed on that site, but it's a go to site for correct information.

art tart wrote:

Tamta shared:
Listen, this is the main point:

Please refrain from posting incorrect information.

Please reference court documents, investigative reports, discovery items, or other credible sources (not msm articles that do not specify either) when referring to police incompetence and dishonesty so we have the fair opportunity to see what you are talking about and the conversation continues without 'conflict'. Because it was Crump who initiated the criticisms of SPD when the investigation was not producing results that favored what the Martin's wanted, and there are significant questions around Crump's conduct, many people are not going to just going to blindly accept generalized sweeping statements of incompetence or dishonesty regarding the investigation by SPD without more facts. It is completely valid to have questions regarding Benjamin Crump.

If you want to say things like George rode to the police station with a gun in his holster, just post the investigative report that says that or reference the page no and which doc dump you are talking about.

If crucial witnesses were ignored list them, inquiring minds want to know.

It is just simply fair that is all.
It is not an added or unnecessary formality.

I am done.

Tamta - your comment reminded me in reading at Talk Left yesterday, an excellent blog owned by a Criminal Defense Attorney, I noticed that any post/comment that couldn't be validated by a link as fact gets deleted, any incorrect information is deleted as it is not tolerated, only accurate information on the case can be shared. Several attorney's weigh in opinions as comments on the case explaining the law.

I am reading Jerlyn's opinions and information on other blogs quoting Talk Left and Jeryln's opinions on the case as backed up by Legal Statutes. A real contribution on the case for those only interested in the facts imo.

Wild theories and accusations aren't allowed on that site, but it's a go to site for correct information.

I like Jeralyn and her site a lot.

Civil, fair, analytical and responsible-
and very informative.

Tamta wrote:

KimmyK wrote:BBM-Tamta, this will be my last response on this subject. I shouldn't have to explain myself to you, and it seems everytime I try, you misconstrue what my point is, so after this post, I'm done trying as you just don't seem to get anything I try to say, and totally miss the point I am trying to make.

1). I responded to Justanopinion about GZ's gun being removed at SPD.
See link...maybe try reading it...
http://184.172.211.159/~gzdocs/documents/1112/motion_to_take_additional_deposition.pdf
According to officer Tim Smith, he removed the gun from GZ at the SPD.
i.e. Sloppy police work IMO!

Also, could you please furnish a link where GZ's gun was removed at the scene?
B/C from the above link it apperars GZ's gun was removed by officer Smith at SPD.

The link above has a Memorandum from SAO dated 3/23/12 at 3:55pm.
Written by TC O'Steen on an interview with officer Tim Smith.

Smith took Zman to P/S interview room. Zman was uncuffed....given a bottled water and a kleenex.........
Zman had a gun/holster on right side inside waistband of his pants. Smith took possession of the gun. Smith cleared the gun and placed it in a gun box. Smith didn't see any body fluid like blood or sweat on the gun...
http://184.172.211.159/~gzdocs/documents/1112/motion_to_take_additional_deposition.pdf

2). I posted a link on the previous page regarding SPD's sloppy policework and apparently it was viewed by you as 'allegations.' Ok, fine, whatever, but if you research some of the cases in that article (Collison case), SPD seems to look the other way sometimes. IMO!!! See link...
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/04/09/trayvon-martin-cops-botched-investigation_n_1409277.html

3). Also, I may changes topics as much and as often as I so please, thank you.

4). I posted my review of Zman's C/P Application as another basis when IMO GZ lied, which IMO discounts his credibility as TM is DEAD and we can't hear his version of the events that happened on 2/26/12.

Listen, this is the main point:

Please refrain from posting incorrect information.

Please reference court documents, investigative reports, discovery items, or other credible sources (not msm articles that do not specify either) when referring to police incompetence and dishonesty so we have the fair opportunity to see what you are talking about and the conversation continues without 'conflict'. Because it was Crump who initiated the criticisms of SPD when the investigation was not producing results that favored what the Martin's wanted, and there are significant questions around Crump's conduct, many people are not going to just going to blindly accept generalized sweeping statements of incompetence or dishonesty regarding the investigation by SPD without more facts. It is completely valid to have questions regarding Benjamin Crump.

If you want to say things like George rode to the police station with a gun in his holster, just post the investigative report that says that or reference the page no and which doc dump you are talking about.

If crucial witnesses were ignored list them, inquiring minds want to know.


It is just simply fair that is all.
It is not an added or unnecessary formality.

I am done.

The link justanopinion first posted will confirm I was not the only one who SEEN the documents.
(Go back and read that post as well, it was like, say what???)

That link HAD Exhibits A & B which were LATER REMOVED from the above link:
Exhibit A-Memo from SAO** (an interview of officer Tim Smith BY TC O'Steen)
which officer Tim Smith stated that HE removed the gun from GZ at the police department.
Exhibit B-GZ's Voice Stress Analysis Results.
**Special Attorney's Office

The items were later removed AND only the motion to take additional deposition remained. http://184.172.211.159/~gzdocs/documents/1112/motion_to_take_additional_deposition.pdf

Perhaps MOM accidentally released the wrong documents this time??? IMO IMO IMO
Since the documents were later REMOVED, it only LOOKS like my OPINION or incorrect information
I am also done. Goodbye.

Tamta wrote:

KimmyK wrote:BBM-Tamta, this will be my last response on this subject. I shouldn't have to explain myself to you, and it seems everytime I try, you misconstrue what my point is, so after this post, I'm done trying as you just don't seem to get anything I try to say, and totally miss the point I am trying to make.

1). I responded to Justanopinion about GZ's gun being removed at SPD.
See link...maybe try reading it...
http://184.172.211.159/~gzdocs/documents/1112/motion_to_take_additional_deposition.pdf
According to officer Tim Smith, he removed the gun from GZ at the SPD.
i.e. Sloppy police work IMO!

Also, could you please furnish a link where GZ's gun was removed at the scene?
B/C from the above link it apperars GZ's gun was removed by officer Smith at SPD.

The link above has a Memorandum from SAO dated 3/23/12 at 3:55pm.
Written by TC O'Steen on an interview with officer Tim Smith.

Smith took Zman to P/S interview room. Zman was uncuffed....given a bottled water and a kleenex.........
Zman had a gun/holster on right side inside waistband of his pants. Smith took possession of the gun. Smith cleared the gun and placed it in a gun box. Smith didn't see any body fluid like blood or sweat on the gun...
http://184.172.211.159/~gzdocs/documents/1112/motion_to_take_additional_deposition.pdf

2). I posted a link on the previous page regarding SPD's sloppy policework and apparently it was viewed by you as 'allegations.' Ok, fine, whatever, but if you research some of the cases in that article (Collison case), SPD seems to look the other way sometimes. IMO!!! See link...
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/04/09/trayvon-martin-cops-botched-investigation_n_1409277.html

3). Also, I may changes topics as much and as often as I so please, thank you.

4). I posted my review of Zman's C/P Application as another basis when IMO GZ lied, which IMO discounts his credibility as TM is DEAD and we can't hear his version of the events that happened on 2/26/12.

Listen, this is the main point:

Please refrain from posting incorrect information.

Please reference court documents, investigative reports, discovery items, or other credible sources (not msm articles that do not specify either) when referring to police incompetence and dishonesty so we have the fair opportunity to see what you are talking about and the conversation continues without 'conflict'. Because it was Crump who initiated the criticisms of SPD when the investigation was not producing results that favored what the Martin's wanted, and there are significant questions around Crump's conduct, many people are not going to just going to blindly accept generalized sweeping statements of incompetence or dishonesty regarding the investigation by SPD without more facts. It is completely valid to have questions regarding Benjamin Crump.

If you want to say things like George rode to the police station with a gun in his holster, just post the investigative report that says that or reference the page no and which doc dump you are talking about.

If crucial witnesses were ignored list them, inquiring minds want to know.


It is just simply fair that is all.
It is not an added or unnecessary formality.

I am done.

We have always used here at RC the news media as a source of information, or as a point of reference. There are many cases that has been discussed and debated for years all over the web before discovery was released, one of those cases for example was the Casey Anthony criminal case, discovery was released one week before the trial, almost three years after she was arrested.

Take for instance the Sierra LaMar case where very little information has been released to the public by authorities; that case has been discussed and debated all over the web since she disappeared, and people have very strong opinions about the case, and the investigation, even though discovery has not yet been released and we don't know what evidence exist to support the arrest of Antolin Torres.

Unless there is a new rule that will prevent us from using news media information, we can always cite or post links to articles from the main stream media to support our arguments. This is a discussion forum, not a court of law. Web based forums won't exist if it wasn't for the news media.

Alessandra_Deux wrote:

Tamta wrote:


Listen, this is the main point:

Please refrain from posting incorrect information.

Please reference court documents, investigative reports, discovery items, or other credible sources (not msm articles that do not specify either) when referring to police incompetence and dishonesty so we have the faiUhopportunity to see what you are talking about and the conversation continues without 'conflict'. Because it was Crump who initiated the criticisms of SPD when the investigation was not producing results that favored what the Martin's wanted, and there are significant questions around Crump's conduct, many people are not going to just going to blindly accept generalized sweeping statements of incompetence or dishonesty regarding the investigation by SPD without more facts. It is completely valid to have questions regarding Benjamin Crump.

If you want to say things like George rode to the police station with a gun in his holster, just post the investigative report that says that or reference the page no and which doc dump you are talking about.

If crucial witnesses were ignored list them, inquiring minds want to know.


It is just simply fair that is all.
It is not an added or unnecessary formality.

I am done.

We have always used here at RC the news media as a source of information, or as a point of reference. There are many cases that has been discussed and debated for years all over the web before discovery was released, one of those cases for example was the Casey Anthony criminal case, discovery was released one week before the trial, almost three years after she was arrested.

Take for instance the Sierra LaMar case where very little information has been released to the public by authorities; that case has been discussed and debated all over the web since she disappeared, and people have very strong opinions about the case, and the investigation, even though discovery has not yet been released and we don't know what evidence exist to support the arrest of Antolin Torres.

Unless there is a new rule that will prevent us from using news media information, we can always cite or post links to articles from the main stream media to support our arguments. This is a discussion forum, not a court of law. Web based forums won't exist if it wasn't for the news media.

The point is making the maximum effort to be correct thus fair and responsible.

We all know the MSM sources other MSM articles and that paraphrasing instead of direct quotes from a source is common and leads to in correct information and mistaken understandings which do have prejudicial influences on pending cases.

Tamta wrote:

Alessandra_Deux wrote:

We have always used here at RC the news media as a source of information, or as a point of reference. There are many cases that has been discussed and debated for years all over the web before discovery was released, one of those cases for example was the Casey Anthony criminal case, discovery was released one week before the trial, almost three years after she was arrested.

Take for instance the Sierra LaMar case where very little information has been released to the public by authorities; that case has been discussed and debated all over the web since she disappeared, and people have very strong opinions about the case, and the investigation, even though discovery has not yet been released and we don't know what evidence exist to support the arrest of Antolin Torres.

Unless there is a new rule that will prevent us from using news media information, we can always cite or post links to articles from the main stream media to support our arguments. This is a discussion forum, not a court of law. Web based forums won't exist if it wasn't for the news media.

The point is making the maximum effort to be correct thus fair and responsible.

We all know the MSM sources other MSM articles and that paraphrasing instead of direct quotes from a source is common and leads to in correct information and mistaken understandings which do have prejudicial influences on pending cases.

I had questioned the document labelled as "Exhibit A and B" and added the link as I had also read in the document dump that the gun had been taken at the scene... for the life of me I cannot understand how the documentation of where the gun was confiscated can be justified. I was pleased that Alexandra had also read what I was linking and saw what I had. This case is a mess! JMHOO

Tamta wrote:

Alessandra_Deux wrote:

We have always used here at RC the news media as a source of information, or as a point of reference. There are many cases that has been discussed and debated for years all over the web before discovery was released, one of those cases for example was the Casey Anthony criminal case, discovery was released one week before the trial, almost three years after she was arrested.

Take for instance the Sierra LaMar case where very little information has been released to the public by authorities; that case has been discussed and debated all over the web since she disappeared, and people have very strong opinions about the case, and the investigation, even though discovery has not yet been released and we don't know what evidence exist to support the arrest of Antolin Torres.

Unless there is a new rule that will prevent us from using news media information, we can always cite or post links to articles from the main stream media to support our arguments. This is a discussion forum, not a court of law. Web based forums won't exist if it wasn't for the news media.

The point is making the maximum effort to be correct thus fair and responsible.

We all know the MSM sources other MSM articles and that paraphrasing instead of direct quotes from a source is common and leads to in correct information and mistaken understandings which do have prejudicial influences on pending cases.

I had questioned the document labelled as "Exhibit A and B" http://184.172.211.159/~gzdocs/documents/1112/motion_to_take_additional_deposition.pdf
(It is still at the end and is labelled exhibit B. State Attorney's Office. ..official court documentation and not an article by the Media) and added the link as I had also read in the document dump that the gun had been taken at the scene... for the life of me I cannot understand how the documentation of where the gun was confiscated can be justified. As it seems there are documents to support it taken at the police station and at the scene... it cannot be both places.. I was pleased that Alexandra had also read what I was linking and saw what I had. This case is a mess! JMHOO

KimmyK wrote:

DebFrmHell wrote:

Of course I do.

NYTIMES QUICK REFERENCE OF REPORTS

page 14 3rd, paragraph Ofc Smith states that he removed both the handgun and the holster after securing Zimmerman in cuffs.

page 16, Ofc. Raimondo met Smith and Zimmerman while still in between the buildings. Zimmerman had been secured and in cuffs. They had not gotten as far as the patrol car at that stage. Smith showed him the handgun. Smith had possession, not GZ.

The handgun and the holster are registered in evidence as TS-1 (Note that the initials correspond with Timothy Smith.


Do you have a link for what you are alleging? The above are in regards to the Motion to Take Additional Deposition. The only time that Smith is mentioned is that fact that Zimmerman stated "he was yelling for help and no one would help him."

Apparently Exhibit B has been removed from that link. I tried to pull it up from my history but no luck.
Exhibit B-was a copy of SAO's memorandum document dated 3/23/12 and was an interview of officer Smith by SAO Osteen.
Exhibit A-was the VSA test results of GZ and was also removed. I think those were attached on accident and then removed.

http://www.wagist.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/Twin-Lakes-Shooting-Initial-Report.pdf

Ricardo Ayala.

Zimmerman complied with all of my verbal requests and was secured in handcuffs. Located on the inside of Zimmerman's waistband I removed a black Kel-Tec PF9 semi auto handgun and holster.

Report made 2/27.

first part of the document as I could not capture the whole page in a screenshot

second in the shots... it is evident where they are the same... no hocus pocus

justanopinion wrote:

Tamta wrote:

The point is making the maximum effort to be correct thus fair and responsible.

We all know the MSM sources other MSM articles and that paraphrasing instead of direct quotes from a source is common and leads to in correct information and mistaken understandings which do have prejudicial influences on pending cases.

I had questioned the document labelled as "Exhibit A and B" http://184.172.211.159/~gzdocs/documents/1112/motion_to_take_additional_deposition.pdf
(It is still at the end and is labelled exhibit B. State Attorney's Office. ..official court documentation and not an article by the Media) and added the link as I had also read in the document dump that the gun had been taken at the scene... for the life of me I cannot understand how the documentation of where the gun was confiscated can be justified. As it seems there are documents to support it taken at the police station and at the scene... it cannot be both places.. I was pleased that Alexandra had also read what I was linking and saw what I had. This case is a mess! JMHOO

Compare to Ayala's report, responding officer. 2/27

3/23 statement that is at the end of this document was taken SA report almost a month later when the SA initiated their own, separate investigation. It does not appear to be a sworn affidavit just an interview summary.


http://www.wagist.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/Twin-Lakes-Shooting-Initial-Report.pdf

Ricardo Ayala.

Zimmerman complied with all of my verbal requests and was secured in handcuffs. Located on the inside of Zimmerman's waistband I removed a black Kel-Tec PF9 semi auto handgun and holster.

_____

RE: Smith. Was this interview recorded? Who else was in the room? What questions was he being asked and in what order?

justanopinion wrote:

second in the shots... it is evident where they are the same... no hocus pocus

Thank you Justanopinion!
I was just trying to link the memo from Talk Left site but you already posted a screen shot!
Thank you!!! Thank you!!! Thank you!!!

KimmyK wrote:

Tamta wrote:

I just reviewed your posts.

None of them contain any links or any references to credible sources with facts even slightly delineating to LE incompetence or dishonesty or Zimmerman's father trying to exploit whatever legal connections he has to assist his son. So not really sure what the point was in even including that in a post here at all.

Also, you cited incorrect information as fact- Zimmerman was relieved of his weapon at the scene. Why post that?

Furthermore, what is the point of replying to people who reply to your comments if instead of commenting on their reply to you, you pull something else out of the air that is not even related to your initial assertion?

Whatever Zimmerman said or did not say on the application has nothing to do with facts that speak or do not speak to his self defense claim.

BBM-Tamta, this will be my last response on this subject. I shouldn't have to explain myself to you, and it seems everytime I try, you misconstrue what my point is, so after this post, I'm done trying as you just don't seem to get anything I try to say, and totally miss the point I am trying to make.

1). I responded to Justanopinion about GZ's gun being removed at SPD.
See link...maybe try reading it...
http://184.172.211.159/~gzdocs/documents/1112/motion_to_take_additional_deposition.pdf
According to officer Tim Smith, he removed the gun from GZ at the SPD.
i.e. Sloppy police work IMO!

Also, could you please furnish a link where GZ's gun was removed at the scene?
B/C from the above link it apperars GZ's gun was removed by officer Smith at SPD.

The link above has a Memorandum from SAO dated 3/23/12 at 3:55pm.
Written by TC O'Steen on an interview with officer Tim Smith.

Smith took Zman to P/S interview room. Zman was uncuffed....given a bottled water and a kleenex.........
Zman had a gun/holster on right side inside waistband of his pants. Smith took possession of the gun. Smith cleared the gun and placed it in a gun box. Smith didn't see any body fluid like blood or sweat on the gun...
http://184.172.211.159/~gzdocs/documents/1112/motion_to_take_additional_deposition.pdf

2). I posted a link on the previous page regarding SPD's sloppy policework and apparently it was viewed by you as 'allegations.' Ok, fine, whatever, but if you research some of the cases in that article (Collison case), SPD seems to look the other way sometimes. IMO!!! See link...
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/04/09/trayvon-martin-cops-botched-investigation_n_1409277.html

3). Also, I may changes topics as much and as often as I so please, thank you.

4). I posted my review of Zman's C/P Application as another basis when IMO GZ lied, which IMO discounts his credibility as TM is DEAD and we can't hear his version of the events that happened on 2/26/12.

RE: Myth regarding Police knowledge and perceptions of Zimmerman's Criminal Record

Norton Bonaparte's Letter
Snipped.

Why was George Zimmerman labeled as “squeaky clean” when in fact he has a prior arrest history?

In one of the initial meetings with the father of the victim the investigator related to him the account that Mr. Zimmerman provided of the incident. At that time the investigator said that Mr. Zimmerman portrayed himself to be “squeaky clean”. We are aware of the background information regarding both individuals involved in this event. We believe Mr. Martin may have misconstrued this information.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/86330859/Zimmerman-Martin-Shooting

----------------

In reality, Zimmerman had been arrested in 2005 at a UCF-area bar and charged with resisting arrest without violence. He completed a pretrial-diversion program, meaning the case was officially dropped, and he wound up with no conviction on his record. It's not clear when, but police did check Zimmerman's criminal record and know about that arrest. It appears his arrests were closed and that may not come up in an initial police run but it would once the SA, FBI, or DOJ became involved and looking at the dates when public release was made of his past record, it fits in with Corey coming on. Zimmerman was interested in pursuing a career in criminal justice system and so having his record expunged would have been desirable and necessary. The links that I have that reference his arrests as sealed are not inert, and most likely for legal reasons have been scrubbed.

~~~~~

http://astonlaw.wordpress.com

RE: Sealing and expunging my criminal record

When a record is SEALED, the public will not have access to it through the government databases. This means most employers will not have access to the information. Keep in mind that city, county, state, and federal government and agencies have a legal right to access criminal history even if they are sealed.

When a record is EXPUNGED, agencies that would have had access to a sealed record will be able to know that information has been expunged from the record, and would only have access to those records with a court order.

@Tamta Again I am aware that there is a discrepancy in the documentation. I am questioning how the different perceptions by these officers is going to play out in court. Yes it was an interview with SA and Officer Ayla's is a sworn statement.

Are the notes from a LE note book (used many times to refresh an officer's memory) not accepted when giving testimony in court in the US? Just wondering? Or does it all have to be a sworn affidavit? Do they not refer to their notes prior to swearing an affidavit? Please clarify for me!

justanopinion wrote:@Tamta Again I am aware that there is a discrepancy in the documentation. I am questioning how the different perceptions by these officers is going to play out in court. Yes it was an interview with SA and Officer Ayla's is a sworn statement.

Are the notes from a LE note book (used many times to refresh an officer's memory) not accepted when giving testimony in court in the US? Just wondering? Or does it all have to be a sworn affidavit? Do they not refer to their notes prior to swearing an affidavit? Please clarify for me!

JMO, the 'differences' in SPD reports and SA reports makes many of us scratch our heads.
In regards to additional statements being admissible, I think that is up to the lawyers to argue.

Sworn statements lock witnesses and lawyers into what they can say and can not in court.
Witnesses are often interviewed several times. I do not know what happens once the report is filed and that particular officer would come up with additional information from the incident that they documented. I can ask.

According to a criminal attorney friend I talk with about this case who also follows it, they say generally LEO do not like to give sworn statements unless they absolutely have to and generally the Prosecution will not seek those early on, like the doc dates we are talking today, because they do not like to lock their witnesses into statements too far in advance.

Although if you review, Corey's affidavit for probable cause, she actually bases her charge on sworn affiants.

Sworn affiants formerly from Jacksonville, that is.

http://hosted.ap.org/specials/interactives/_documents/zimmerman-affidavit.pdf

I double posted again, sorry, but, getting use to the new puter.

justanopinion wrote:@Tamta Again I am aware that there is a discrepancy in the documentation. I am questioning how the different perceptions by these officers is going to play out in court. Yes it was an interview with SA and Officer Ayla's is a sworn statement.

Are the notes from a LE note book (used many times to refresh an officer's memory) not accepted when giving testimony in court in the US? Just wondering? Or does it all have to be a sworn affidavit? Do they not refer to their notes prior to swearing an affidavit? Please clarify for me!

justanopinion - whenever the deposition is taken by the State or Defense, that LOCKS the testimony in place, if there is any discrepancy as to the version testified to in court, the Defense or State will challenge it. Sometimes, if there is conflicting testimony, the attorney will have the person testifying READ their deposition aloud and challenge the differences. (were you lying then, or are you lying now!)

If the State subp.'s someone for a deposition, the State gives USE Immunity, or immunity for the deposition.. If the version changes in court then the State can bring charges and the use immunity is no good. This happened in KC's case.

I double checked on the USE IMMUNITY and it wouldn't pertain to the officier's statement it appears. USE Immunity is for those that have participated or have knowledge of information of the crime the State is pursuing.

example: KC Anthony's family. Lee/George/Cindy/ and I think both of their investigator's got USE IMMUNITY for their depositions with the State.

The ANT's fell under the umbrella of suspicion as to their knowledge or if they could have been accessories after the fact. To get use immunity, you first have to REFUSE to voluntarily go in for a deposition with the State, they ask you nicely the first time. IF you DO NOT cooperate and they have to subp. you to get you to comply, they can offer you USE immunity. In KC's case, if the family had told truthfully to the State any knowledge they had as to KC murdering Caylee and the family TOLD THE TRUTH during their testimony in the Criminal Trial, they would not have been charged.

Use immunity wouldn't apply to the officer but it's puzzling as to the discrepancy. Usually a weapon is taken and ballistics are checked on the gun/ammo, and they run test to see if the information matches any other crimes, I thought that was routine in most cases but IDK for sure.

Of course George Anthony had a discrepancy from his GRAND Jury Testimony and his State Deposition, he got caught lying.

In this case, if the officer had participated in the Original Grand Jury, his testimony would have been set in stone, it couldn't be changed when he had depositions with the State and Defense. BUT! Of course Corey dismantled the Grand Jury plans for a multitude of reasons, most of us know why.

GEORGE ZIMMERMAN Sues NBC Over 911 Tape --
I'M NOT A RACIST!

Trayvon Martin shooter George Zimmerman has filed a lawsuit against NBC over the way it edited his 911 call -- placed moments before Martin was shot -- claiming the network falsely made Zimmerman look like a "hostile racist!

In actuality, the full 911 tape reveals Zimmerman only referred to Martin as "black" when responding to a question from the dispatcher about Trayvon's race

Zimmerman accuses NBC of creating a "false and defamatory misimpression using the oldest form of yellow journalism: manipulating Zimmerman's own words, splicing together disparate parts of the recording to create the illusion of statements that Zimmerman never actually made."

Read more:
http://www.tmz.com/2012/12/06/george-zimmerman-trayvon-martin-911-lawsuit/#ixzz2EJWcLKCf

art tart wrote:GEORGE ZIMMERMAN Sues NBC Over 911 Tape --
I'M NOT A RACIST!

Trayvon Martin shooter George Zimmerman has filed a lawsuit against NBC over the way it edited his 911 call -- placed moments before Martin was shot -- claiming the network falsely made Zimmerman look like a "hostile racist!

Read more:
http://www.tmz.com/2012/12/06/george-zimmerman-trayvon-martin-911-lawsuit/#ixzz2EJWcLKCf

Great.

George Zimmerman SUES NBC!

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_NEIGHBORHOOD_WATCH_NBC_FLOL-?SITE=FLTAM&SECTION=STATE&TEMPLATE=

http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/local/trayvon-martin/os-george-zimmerman-sues-nbc-20121206,0,5534879.story

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/12/06/george-zimmerman-sues-nbc_n_2253095.html

http://nymag.com/daily/intel/2012/12/george-zimmerman-sues-nbc-over-edited-tape.html

http://www.cnn.com/2012/12/06/us/florida-zimmerman-nbc-lawsuit/

justanopinion wrote:

second in the shots... it is evident where they are the same... no hocus pocus

Oh, wow. In one of the other docs it was stated GZ had turned over his gun when the first officer got there. (Might be in GZ' statement.) According to that doc, GZ stated he stood, put his hands behind his head, back to officers, and told them he was armed, had a gun, or something to that effect. That doc states the gun was turned over to PD AT THAT TIME!

Contradiction.

Good explanation of use immunity.
I think of it this way:
IF you were to testify, it could/might implicate you.
This is to avoid future lawsuits in exchange for the testimony.

An officer USUALLY can not have use immunity for that which transpired while he was in the paid employment of another. However, IF the officer has committed wrong, that part MIGHT be exempt for the use immunity to be applied, or he may have charges reduced due to his willingness to assist in revealing his knowledge of an incident.

art tart wrote:George Zimmerman SUES NBC!

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_NEIGHBORHOOD_WATCH_NBC_FLOL-?SITE=FLTAM&SECTION=STATE&TEMPLATE=

http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/local/trayvon-martin/os-george-zimmerman-sues-nbc-20121206,0,5534879.story

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/12/06/george-zimmerman-sues-nbc_n_2253095.html

http://nymag.com/daily/intel/2012/12/george-zimmerman-sues-nbc-over-edited-tape.html

http://www.cnn.com/2012/12/06/us/florida-zimmerman-nbc-lawsuit/

A link citing the travels of the NBC edit.

http://www.talkleft.com/story/2012/5/4/02841/64439

The CNN Link said: (link posted upthread)

Zimmerman is seeking "damages in excess of the jurisdictional limit" in Seminole County Circuit Court in Florida, where the lawsuit is filed.

I wonder if this is because the story was played Nationally, on the TODAY Show, etc., other NBC shows played the audio as well, the edited tape was played by many of the NBC outlets. Just speculation, the damages are greater than the State of Fla., the damages are on a National level.

"He looks black."

That is not racist.
It is a description and appears to be correct.
It simply serves to eliminate those who do not appear to "look black."
"Looks" is an opinion of appearance, not a verified fact.

Frivolous lawsuit, IMO.

(Should we not be able to identify another person by stating, "I think it was a woman," or, "He looked old--- maybe 85 years. " " I think the person was gay. S/he was hanging all over another person of the same gender." "I think he was following me. He kept eying me and when I walked down different aisles, he was always there, making eye contact." )

Freckles wrote:"He looks black."

That is not racist.
It is a description and appears to be correct.
It simply serves to eliminate those who do not appear to "look black."
"Looks" is an opinion of appearance, not a verified fact.

Frivolous lawsuit, IMO.

(Should we not be able to identify another person by stating, "I think it was a woman," or, "He looked old--- maybe 85 years. " " I think the person was gay. S/he was hanging all over another person of the same gender." "I think he was following me. He kept eying me and when I walked down different aisles, he was always there, making eye contact." )

Freckles - imo, this is not a frivolous lawsuit, several have already been fired, NBC graveled and apologized nationally. Absolutely NO Natiional News Organization has the right to EDIT any tape and MISREPRESENT it's contents to their audience. I can't believe GZ can't sue Crump/Team for malicious outright lies, calling GZ a "racist murderer" is outrageous and prejudicial. It is NOT a fact, but more propaganda spewed by Team Crump.

Read the article from Talk Left and see that Al Sharpton conveniently too played it in addition to many others, those are the National News programs. imo, NBC is going to pay for LYING, misrepresenting, and intentionally misleading their audience. Even Nancy Grace has had to settle several large suits to make them go away for her MIS-TRUTHS on several cases.

Jorlyn has furnished the link to the PDF on the Suit. 3 others are being sued BESIDES NBC Nationally.

The PDF:
http://184.172.211.159/~gzdocs/documents/nbc/complaint.pdf

Jorlyn shared at her link at Talk Left:

On Thursday, December 6, 2012, George Zimmerman filed a legal complaint against NBCUniversal Media, LLC and three individuals who were employed by NBCUniversal Media, LLC, Inc. during the time relevant to the complaint: Ron Allen, Lilia Rodriguez Luciano, and Jeff Burnside. The 24-page complaint alleges “NBC News saw the death of Trayvon Martin not as a tragedy but as an opportunity to increase ratings, and so set about to create the myth that George Zimmerman was a racist and predatory villain.” The complaint, filed in Seminole County, demands a trial by jury, and demands damages sufficient to invoke the jurisdiction of the Circuit Court.

Tamata included the first article on the editing upthread.

A second link published today by Talk Left on the Law Suit:

http://www.talkleft.com/story/2012/12/6/171331/327

Website on the lawsuit:
http://www.gzvnbc.com/

I personally hope GZ wins big on the civil lawsuits. And every resident of FL should, also-- if only so they don't have to fund his defense in the criminal charges. NBC and the others were clearly in the wrong on this one-- even THEY think so. They should offer to settle for the maximum of their insurance policies-- spare the court battle.

I think it will be poetic justice for NBC and the others to have to pay for his legal expenses in the criminal charges via the payout from the civil cases.

JMO

art tart wrote:

Freckles wrote:"He looks black."

That is not racist.
It is a description and appears to be correct.
It simply serves to eliminate those who do not appear to "look black."
"Looks" is an opinion of appearance, not a verified fact.

Frivolous lawsuit, IMO.

(Should we not be able to identify another person by stating, "I think it was a woman," or, "He looked old--- maybe 85 years. " " I think the person was gay. S/he was hanging all over another person of the same gender." "I think he was following me. He kept eying me and when I walked down different aisles, he was always there, making eye contact." )

Freckles - imo, this is not a frivolous lawsuit, several have already been fired, NBC graveled and apologized nationally. Absolutely NO Natiional News Organization has the right to EDIT any tape and MISREPRESENT it's contents to their audience. I can't believe GZ can't sue Crump/Team for malicious outright lies, calling GZ a "racist murderer" is outrageous and prejudicial. It is NOT a fact, but more propaganda spewed by Team Crump.

Read the article from Talk Left and see that Al Sharpton conveniently too played it in addition to many others, those are the National News programs. imo, NBC is going to pay for LYING, misrepresenting, and intentionally misleading their audience. Even Nancy Grace has had to settle several large suits to make them go away for her MIS-TRUTHS on several cases.

Depending on how the rest of the discovery process goes, I am sure West and O'Mara will have some plans for Crump et al.

Freckles wrote:"He looks black."

That is not racist.
It is a description and appears to be correct.
It simply serves to eliminate those who do not appear to "look black."
"Looks" is an opinion of appearance, not a verified fact.

Frivolous lawsuit, IMO.

(Should we not be able to identify another person by stating, "I think it was a woman," or, "He looked old--- maybe 85 years. " " I think the person was gay. S/he was hanging all over another person of the same gender." "I think he was following me. He kept eying me and when I walked down different aisles, he was always there, making eye contact." )

BBM. Absolutely we should! That is the whole point of this lawsuit. GZ was responding to a direct question about the race of the individual. It was edited so that it appeared that he just offered up the race comment out of the blue, with no context.

I don't think it's frivolous at all. I hope he sues Ryan Julison, Ben Crump, Natalie Jackson, and Al Sharpton as well. He should. What they did to him is beyond disgusting, imo.

KZ wrote:I personally hope GZ wins big on the civil lawsuits. And every resident of FL should, also-- if only so they don't have to fund his defense in the criminal charges. NBC and the others were clearly in the wrong on this one-- even THEY think so. They should offer to settle for the maximum of their insurance policies-- spare the court battle.

I think it will be poetic justice for NBC and the others to have to pay for his legal expenses in the criminal charges via the payout from the civil cases.

JMO

Agree!

NBC mea culpa

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/trayvon-martin-edited-911-call-george-zimmerman-nbc-news-307399

I noticed on the PDF that a couple of the Attorney's are from Pa., I wonder if they are entertainment attorney's that can cut through the bull chit and move this case forward as MOM/West have their hands full.

Tamta-I can't imagine that there isn't a suit in the planning stages for Team Crump/Natalie Jackson. There are endless video footage and Media Blitz done by all. Maybe this will make Crump tone it down, but, lol, maybe not.

art tart wrote:I noticed on the PDF that a couple of the Attorney's are from Pa., I wonder if they are entertainment attorney's that can cut through the bull chit and move this case forward as MOM/West have their hands full.

Tamta-I can't imagine that there isn't a suit in the planning stages for Team Crump/Natalie Jackson. There are endless video footage and Media Blitz done by all. Maybe this will make Crump tone it down, but, lol, maybe not.

I remember when O'Mara first mentioned the possibility of a suit against NBC that another lawyer was cited.

As for Team Crump, well they have gotten terribly quiet as of late!
Busy figuring out how to address this motion to compel in his future..

Well! This is something I expected to happen sooner or later....I'm glad it's turned out to be sooner!

This is a "civil" case, so the new attorney's most like work with civil cases "and" media.

I could see this ending with a settlement.

George Zimmerman Personal Statement Regarding Suing NBC.

Snipped.


However, in the days and weeks following the shooting a story was promoted that I am a racist and a murderer. These untruths spread through the community, the government, and the nation, amplified by a media frenzy seeking ratings over truth. This was no more apparent than when NBC repeatedly edited the recording of a call I made, intentionally misrepresenting me as a racist. Unfortunately, their plan worked, truth suffered that day, and my family and I have suffered every day since. That is why I am filing a lawsuit against NBC. The details of the complaint can be found on a website created by my legal team: www.gzvnbc.com.

What happened that night was a tragedy: a tragedy that NBC exploited, creating an opportunity for profit. I am holding NBC accountable for its actions. If NBC had not spread lies and falsifications about me, this lawsuit would not exist. This lawsuit is a product of NBC's intentional distortion of facts. I do not know, because of my situation, how I will be able to provide for my wife and myself in the future, and so I expect NBC to be held responsible. The unjustified public persecution of me because of NBC's actions is wrong. It shouldn't have happened to me, and it shouldn't happen to anyone.



http://therealgeorgezimmerman.com/?mobile=0

Tamta wrote:George Zimmerman Personal Statement Regarding Suing NBC.

Snipped.


However, in the days and weeks following the shooting a story was promoted that I am a racist and a murderer. These untruths spread through the community, the government, and the nation, amplified by a media frenzy seeking ratings over truth. This was no more apparent than when NBC repeatedly edited the recording of a call I made, intentionally misrepresenting me as a racist. Unfortunately, their plan worked, truth suffered that day, and my family and I have suffered every day since. That is why I am filing a lawsuit against NBC. The details of the complaint can be found on a website created by my legal team: www.gzvnbc.com.

What happened that night was a tragedy: a tragedy that NBC exploited, creating an opportunity for profit. I am holding NBC accountable for its actions. If NBC had not spread lies and falsifications about me, this lawsuit would not exist. This lawsuit is a product of NBC's intentional distortion of facts. I do not know, because of my situation, how I will be able to provide for my wife and myself in the future, and so I expect NBC to be held responsible. The unjustified public persecution of me because of NBC's actions is wrong. It shouldn't have happened to me, and it shouldn't happen to anyone.



http://therealgeorgezimmerman.com/?mobile=0

I thought what happened that night was "God's plan".

Trayvon Martin's killer sues NBC over racist "myth"

MIAMI | Thu Dec 6, 2012 10:00pm EST

(Reuters) - A Florida man sued NBC on Thursday, saying the network intentionally edited and repeatedly aired a non-emergency phone call he made to police before shooting and killing unarmed black teenager Trayvon Martin "to create the myth" that he was a racist.

~Snipped~

But NBC denied any wrongdoing in a statement issued late on Thursday.

"We strongly disagree with accusations made in the complaint. There was no intent to portray Mr. Zimmerman unfairly. We intend to vigorously defend our position in court," the statement said.

~Snipped~

The network apologized to its viewers in a statement, and two NBC news staffers named as defendants in the lawsuit were fired.

But the complaint says the network never apologized to Zimmerman "for deliberately portraying him as a hostile racist who targeted Martin due to his race."

Read more:

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/12/07/us-usa-florida-shooting-lawsuit-idUSBRE8B51M320121207

Alessandra_Deux wrote:Trayvon Martin's killer sues NBC over racist "myth"

MIAMI | Thu Dec 6, 2012 10:00pm EST

(Reuters) - A Florida man sued NBC on Thursday, saying the network intentionally edited and repeatedly aired a non-emergency phone call he made to police before shooting and killing unarmed black teenager Trayvon Martin "to create the myth" that he was a racist.

~Snipped~

But NBC denied any wrongdoing in a statement issued late on Thursday.

"We strongly disagree with accusations made in the complaint. There was no intent to portray Mr. Zimmerman unfairly. We intend to vigorously defend our position in court," the statement said.

~Snipped~

The network apologized to its viewers in a statement, and two NBC news staffers named as defendants in the lawsuit were fired.

But the complaint says the network never apologized to Zimmerman "for deliberately portraying him as a hostile racist who targeted Martin due to his race."

Read more:

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/12/07/us-usa-florida-shooting-lawsuit-idUSBRE8B51M320121207

Standard attorney crafted response.

They chopped and rearranged an audio recording of a call-
On purpose.

I got a couple of things.

RE: the Gun. It was taken by T Smith. It was not returned to Zimmerman. If you look at the second page of his statement, he had that gun logged in by 3:39am, 2/27/2012 with the evidence number being TS-1. He stayed in the vicinity of Zimmerman all night.

RE: The lawsuit... LOL! If NBC did nothing wrong, why fire anyone? Why apologize to the public?

I hope he goes after MSNBC and Sharpton next.

http://www.mediaite.com/online/msnbc-primetime-makes-zero-mentions-of-trayvon-martin-case-after-pro-zimmerman-evidence-surfaces/

"In March and April, MSNBC’s primetime hosts ran with nearly wall-to-wall coverage of the killing of Florida teen Trayvon Martin. They regularly suggested that the lack of national interest in the case was worthy of outrage. Last week, when an avalanche of new evidence favorable to George Zimmerman came to light, MSNBC’s primetime lineup didn’t just bury the story, they didn’t mention Martin or Zimmerman once the week that news broke according to media monitoring service TV Eyes. "

Puzzler wrote:Well! This is something I expected to happen sooner or later....I'm glad it's turned out to be sooner!

This is a "civil" case, so the new attorney's most like work with civil cases "and" media.

I could see this ending with a settlement.

http://www.beasleyfirm.com/

$34 million libel verdict.
Largest settlement in PA history.

BTW, I DO think GZ has a bias.
His public page posted derogatory comments re others of other ethnic groups.

Do I think he demonstrated a racial bias the night TM was killed by him? No. IMO, GZ was wanting a physical altercation that night. With anyone. TM happened by.

Do I think his comment demonstrated a racial bias? No.
I had read the written reports/transcripts of the call and I knew his statement was DIRECTLY in relation to a question asked of him to describe the suspect, TM.

Despite my interest, I was disgusted with media for releasing the transcripts. IMO, the transcripts should have been in the hands of the prosecution at that time with sharing to defense upon proper court instruction.
Prosecution had a duty to inform the court and the defense they had the audio/documents and to make it available IF they intended to introduce it into court.

Media SHOULD be held accountable but not necessarily for these charges of " making GZ appear racist" but for interfering with an investigation and improper release of documents, thereby possibly poisoning a jury pool.

Both sides AND the media have used the media to potentially muddy a jury pool for now and for appeals.

Edited:
If you look back upon my earlier comments, you will see I do NOT see the death of TM and the arrest of GZ as belonging in the "racial" category. I find that to be almost irrelevant to the case and wish the focus would return to the actual evidence of the death of TM. None of us has the ability to read the mind or the intent of another so I think it is futile to keep barking up that tree. It is NOT what this case should be about,

IMO IMO IMO IMO

art tart wrote:I noticed on the PDF that a couple of the Attorney's are from Pa., I wonder if they are entertainment attorney's that can cut through the bull chit and move this case forward as MOM/West have their hands full.

Tamta-I can't imagine that there isn't a suit in the planning stages for Team Crump/Natalie Jackson. There are endless video footage and Media Blitz done by all. Maybe this will make Crump tone it down, but, lol, maybe not.

Now, wouldn't it be interesting if even one of the civil cases either settled in GZ's favor, or was concluded with a verdict in his favor, BEFORE his criminal trial commences? And not just financially interesting. Because, IMO, that would sure take the wind out of the sails of Angela Corey's trumped up second degree murder charges which are predicated on "malice". And if the civil suit was concluded, the results would be admissible, right? The jury would know that there was an orchestrated campaign to brand GZ a racist murderer.

AC based her charges of second degree on malice borne of racism and "racial profiling", IIRC.

The truth of this case, IMO, has been mangled beyond all recognition by the organized (and imo- evil) campaign to paint GZ as a hulking racist who hunted, profiled, and murdered an innocent little boy in cold blood. That bell can never be un-rung.

I have no love for GZ-- personally, I think he's not too bright, and should never have been carrying a loaded firearm. But what was done to him in the media campaign was wrong. Really, really wrong. It shouldn't happen in America, to anyone. And those that started it, and promoted it, should pay. IMO.

Accused murderer sues NBC for creating 'racial powderkeg'

DateDecember 7, 2012 - 4:07PM

George Zimmerman has taken NBC to court over the way they portrayed his shooting of Trayvon Martin. Photo: AP

It's been one of the most controversial police cases in America this year: the neighbourhood watch volunteer accused of murdering 17-year-old black youth Trayvon Martin.

And while he continues to await trial for murder, that hasn't stopped George Zimmerman from suing NBC for what he claims was unethical reporting of the night of the shooting, accusing them of making him out to sound like "racist and predatory villain" for the sake of ratings.

Zimmerman, a former neighborhood watch volunteer, is charged with second-degree murder for the February 26 killing of unarmed Miami Gardens teenager Trayvon Martin.

Read more:

http://www.smh.com.au/world/accused-murderer-sues-nbc-for-creating-racial-powderkeg-20121207-2b0ez.html

IMO, GZ carrying a gun does NOT bother me as much as, perhaps, the maturity--- responsibility for his actions--- bothers me.

I live in a state where gun carrying (with a conceal and carry permit) is allowed. My son ran errands for me today.
He was carrying. Even he feels GZ made decisions and choices that night he had NO right concluding an in stupidity, GZ took the life of another.

KZ wrote:

art tart wrote:I noticed on the PDF that a couple of the Attorney's are from Pa., I wonder if they are entertainment attorney's that can cut through the bull chit and move this case forward as MOM/West have their hands full.

Tamta-I can't imagine that there isn't a suit in the planning stages for Team Crump/Natalie Jackson. There are endless video footage and Media Blitz done by all. Maybe this will make Crump tone it down, but, lol, maybe not.

Now, wouldn't it be interesting if even one of the civil cases either settled in GZ's favor, or was concluded with a verdict in his favor, BEFORE his criminal trial commences? And not just financially interesting. Because, IMO, that would sure take the wind out of the sails of Angela Corey's trumped up second degree murder charges which are predicated on "malice". And if the civil suit was concluded, the results would be admissible, right? The jury would know that there was an orchestrated campaign to brand GZ a racist murderer.

AC based her charges of second degree on malice borne of racism and "racial profiling", IIRC.

The truth of this case, IMO, has been mangled beyond all recognition by the organized (and imo- evil) campaign to paint GZ as a hulking racist who hunted, profiled, and murdered an innocent little boy in cold blood. That bell can never be un-rung.

I have no love for GZ-- personally, I think he's not too bright, and should never have been carrying a loaded firearm. But what was done to him in the media campaign was wrong. Really, really wrong. It shouldn't happen in America, to anyone. And those that started it, and promoted it, should pay. IMO.

Yep KZ. This could get certain folks in hot or hotter water-
and this is going to settle.

They admitted wrongdoing, they fired people, and it is documented.

Beasley is a top notch firm and would not have taken it(they have the $$ to pay for their own litigation) if a very favorable conclusion was not likely.

I bet number talk has been going on for awhile and no agreement has been reached on damages so they filed the complaint to turn it up a notch for NBC.

The people behind this hoax have acted with such extreme disregard for the sake of personal gain, touting the banner of 'justice'.

The worst type of liars.

NBC Lied About George Zimmerman's Racist 911 Call


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A8Ebm0g1lxY&feature=player_embedded

-------------------------

"advancing a falsehood"

KZ wrote:

art tart wrote:I noticed on the PDF that a couple of the Attorney's are from Pa., I wonder if they are entertainment attorney's that can cut through the bull chit and move this case forward as MOM/West have their hands full.

Tamta-I can't imagine that there isn't a suit in the planning stages for Team Crump/Natalie Jackson. There are endless video footage and Media Blitz done by all. Maybe this will make Crump tone it down, but, lol, maybe not.

Now, wouldn't it be interesting if even one of the civil cases either settled in GZ's favor, or was concluded with a verdict in his favor, BEFORE his criminal trial commences? And not just financially interesting. Because, IMO, that would sure take the wind out of the sails of Angela Corey's trumped up second degree murder charges which are predicated on "malice". And if the civil suit was concluded, the results would be admissible, right? The jury would know that there was an orchestrated campaign to brand GZ a racist murderer.

AC based her charges of second degree on malice borne of racism and "racial profiling", IIRC.

The truth of this case, IMO, has been mangled beyond all recognition by the organized (and imo- evil) campaign to paint GZ as a hulking racist who hunted, profiled, and murdered an innocent little boy in cold blood. That bell can never be un-rung.

I have no love for GZ-- personally, I think he's not too bright, and should never have been carrying a loaded firearm. But what was done to him in the media campaign was wrong. Really, really wrong. It shouldn't happen in America, to anyone. And those that started it, and promoted it, should pay. IMO.

One of the lawyers at TL opined that the suit was filed because the number$$$ were too far apart to be quietly settled. The Beasley Firm is one of the best. Jeralyn said that they wouldn't have touched this without months of investigating.

NBC will settle (5.00 / 1) (#13)
by Jeralyn on Thu Dec 06, 2012 at 08:39:41 PM EST
they admitted they were wrong, they fired employees over it and it's factually documented in the transcripts -- all of which I've provided links for.

These cases rarely go to trial.



I think so too (5.00 / 1) (#14)
by bmaz on Thu Dec 06, 2012 at 10:12:13 PM EST
The reason the complaint was filed is that they are still too far apart on damages, so they are going to dance for a while.

NBC Universal, Inc. Law Department
30 Rockefeller Plaza, RM. 1087E New York , NY 10119

----------

NBC UNIVERSAL, INC. LAW DEPARTMENT
Speciality Certification
Contact Address
100 Universal City Plaza
Bldg 1320E 3C
Universal City, CA 91608

http://members.calbar.ca.gov/search/cert_detail.aspx?PID=13348&SpecCode=

---------

The NBC Universal Law Department
Litigation Group
2012 Summer Internship

http://myemail.constantcontact.com/NBC-Universal-Law-Department--2012-Summer-Internship-Opportunity--Litigation.html?soid=1101675884598&aid=8JSrKQeCjpU

---------

NBC Legal Department Calls On Romney Campaign To Pull Ad, Brokaw “Extremely Uncomfortable”

Brokaw: “I do not want my role as a journalist compromised for political gain by any campaign.”

Thanks to all who provided links today about the NBC lawsuit. I wasn't able to get to this issue until late and it was great to come to RC and have the links at one place.

Thanks!