George Zimmerman/Trayvon Martin Case -- General Discussion #8

KimmyK stated:
I haven't convicted GZ totally yet...

KimmyK- imo, you have argued every single thing that validates GZ or his attorney's even when you have been furnished evidence/links to the contrary repeatedly.

If you read the ENTIRE MOTION to Compel Crump..............it states in the document that the first copy given to the Defense from the State had DeeDee's age edited, the second copy I assume did not.

So................if BDLR didn't EDIT OUT HER AGE, who do you think did? Angela Corey? It is Angela Corey and BDLR that didn't want the Defense to know DeeDee's age, they wanted them to think she was 16.

The audio the Defense has received is 1/2 the length of the audio Crump made.

All of this information is contained in the MOTION and the link listed at least 6 different times. It seems some aren't bothering to read the very things they are arguing about.

justanopinion wrote:

Tamta wrote:

The entire call is represented accurately.
The call spans from page 9-12.

For the sake of the complaint, they bring particular attention to f---- punks.
There is nothing left to say on this.

These are top notch lawyers.
They are not going to screw up a Complaint.

I am afraid that I have to say that there was some Media frenzy especially surrounding the editing around the F***ing______ (punks) or whatever was whispered. It did cause an absolute outrage for some people. I still have difficulty with listening to the tape and not hearing the alternate words. Although, I do understand that the FBI has had audiophiles examine the wording and determined it was not racist. George may have some recourse. and it pains me to say that as I do have a distinct slant to what I truly believe happened that night!

Well since the FBI reports conclude no evidence of racism, the State isn't asserting a racial slur, the affidavit accuses him of incorrectly profiling, I don't see any reason for efforts being made to seek a determination on what he was actually saying, if it wasn't punks.

Trying to determine who was screaming for help will be more relevant.

Puzzler wrote:A colored picture of injuries that was taken immediately after the incident was held back and a grainy white and black picture was given to the defense instead.

An audio tape of a witness interview that is somewhat garbled is given to the defense, when there is a clear tape out there.

There is a problem with the State providing evidence to the defense timely.

A color picture showing that was taken by police, showing GZ's injuries, recently released to the defense, is not the fault of the defense.

That the picture is evidence that GZ did suffer a broken nose does not mean the defense altered the photo. That photo was provided by the State - any alteration came from that end. It's most likely that the color photo is what it is...the alteration came at the time a gainy black and white photo was presented to the defense to begin with. Obvious that the State didn't just provide a color file to the defense; to provide a black and white grainy copy, the State had to put a little effort into that IMO.

Puzzler - you are correct in your comment/assessment. I, for the life of me, can't understand why those that have already convicted GZ think arguing every single positive thing in GZ's defense or information blatantly exposing the State for their behavior or simply put, lack there of, in expending cooperation so MOM/West can prepare their defense of GZ and be ready on the proposed timeline. It doesn't change anything imo.

There are many that don't think GZ deserves a fair trial as reflected in their comments, one of our most basic rights as American Citizens. Denying simple facts doesn't advance the conviction of GZ imo.

art tart wrote:

Puzzler wrote:A colored picture of injuries that was taken immediately after the incident was held back and a grainy white and black picture was given to the defense instead.

An audio tape of a witness interview that is somewhat garbled is given to the defense, when there is a clear tape out there.

There is a problem with the State providing evidence to the defense timely.

A color picture showing that was taken by police, showing GZ's injuries, recently released to the defense, is not the fault of the defense.

That the picture is evidence that GZ did suffer a broken nose does not mean the defense altered the photo. That photo was provided by the State - any alteration came from that end. It's most likely that the color photo is what it is...the alteration came at the time a gainy black and white photo was presented to the defense to begin with. Obvious that the State didn't just provide a color file to the defense; to provide a black and white grainy copy, the State had to put a little effort into that IMO.

Puzzler - you are correct in your comment/assessment. I, for the life of me, can't understand why those that have already convicted GZ think arguing every single positive thing in GZ's defense or information blatantly exposing the State for their behavior or simply put, lack there of, in expending cooperation so MOM/West can prepare their defense of GZ and be ready on the proposed timeline.

There are many that don't think GZ deserves a fair trial as reflected in their comments, one of our most basic rights as American Citizens. Denying simple facts doesn't advance the conviction of GZ imo.

"There are many that don't think GZ deserves a fair trial as reflected in their comments, one of our most basic rights as American Citizens. Denying simple facts doesn't advance the conviction of GZ imo."

However denying facts gives one the out to dismiss and deny those conclusions based on those facts.

DebFrmHell wrote:And oldie but goodie from Alan D.
Dershowitz went further and said that Cory helped to create the hysteria.

She was appointed to stop race riots. That was her job. And as she put it, to do justice to Trayvon Martin. Not to do justice to George Zimmerman, not to do justice period. Just to do justice to the alleged victim in this case. She has a terrible reputation in Florida for always over-charging, and she was picked specifically for that… No jury – except one frightened that the New Black Panthers might kill them if they vote for an acquittal or that they might cause race riots – no fair jury would find anyone guiltily here of second degree murder.

Via Media-ite
www.twitlonger.com/show/k9skq9

ETA: Looks like he was right all along.

DebFrmHell = I too agree, Alan D was right all along, it is just as he said. I have never seen a case where the State aligns themselves with an Attorney for a family that makes endless MEDIA appearances calling the defendant a "racist murderer," or "stalked and murdered Trayvon." Angela Corey's star witness met with Crump, ABC, Sabrina/Tracy and who knows who else was included BEFORE ever being interviewed by LE/State/Defense. I can't see where that's remotely ethical.

Despite those that have convicted GZ before his trial, Alan D reminds everyone, GZ is entitled to JUSTICE too.

Tamta wrote:

art tart wrote:

Puzzler - you are correct in your comment/assessment. I, for the life of me, can't understand why those that have already convicted GZ think arguing every single positive thing in GZ's defense or information blatantly exposing the State for their behavior or simply put, lack there of, in expending cooperation so MOM/West can prepare their defense of GZ and be ready on the proposed timeline.

There are many that don't think GZ deserves a fair trial as reflected in their comments, one of our most basic rights as American Citizens. Denying simple facts doesn't advance the conviction of GZ imo.

"There are many that don't think GZ deserves a fair trial as reflected in their comments, one of our most basic rights as American Citizens. Denying simple facts doesn't advance the conviction of GZ imo."

However denying facts gives one the out to dismiss and deny those conclusions based on those facts.

Funny how on GZ's case LE cannot be questioned for any impropriety, but on other cases on this site, some seem to suggest LE is conspiring to convict innocent people. JMO JMO JMO

KimmyK wrote:

Tamta wrote:

"There are many that don't think GZ deserves a fair trial as reflected in their comments, one of our most basic rights as American Citizens. Denying simple facts doesn't advance the conviction of GZ imo."

However denying facts gives one the out to dismiss and deny those conclusions based on those facts.

Funny how on GZ's case LE cannot be questioned for any impropriety, but on other cases on this site, some seem to suggest LE is conspiring to convict innocent people. JMO JMO JMO

No one, not even the Martins, complained about LE, until it was clear that Zimmerman was not going to be arrested and charged in the shooting, as in they weren't going to get 'their' arrest.

Crump's attempts at bullying SPD with his invented allegations of incompetence and dishonesty because his terms are not being met, are not evidence to support opinions of police misconduct.

Another shining example of how the Martin family handlers and the media have negatively influenced this case.

In the beginning, LE wasn't going to arrest GZ.
No evidence in the public as to why or why not make an arrest.
Then...the threats, the marches, the reward for capture flyers.
Then...an arrest was made.
Then...slowly...the evidence starts coming out.
Then...the defense begins it's discovery and more evidence comes out.
Now...it's much more clear as to why GZ was not going to be arrested in the beginning.
Comments of doctoring photos, withholding evidence, DA talking to witnesses before they are deposed and witnesses changing their story after talking with the DA, etc.
All those bad comments show up against not the man on trial...but the State.
All this before even mentioning what the family handlers and the media has done.

There's something wrong here and, as always, the truth comes out...which it is now doing...drip...drip...drip!

Puzzler wrote:In the beginning, LE wasn't going to arrest GZ.
No evidence in the public as to why or why not make an arrest.
Then...the threats, the marches, the reward for capture flyers.
Then...an arrest was made.
Then...slowly...the evidence starts coming out.
Then...the defense begins it's discovery and more evidence comes out.
Now...it's much more clear as to why GZ was not going to be arrested in the beginning.
Comments of doctoring photos, withholding evidence, DA talking to witnesses before they are deposed and witnesses changing their story after talking with the DA, etc.
All those bad comments show up against not the man on trial...but the State.
All this before even mentioning what the family handlers and the media has done.

There's something wrong here and, as always, the truth comes out...which it is now doing...drip...drip...drip!

You could kill a days work watching you tube clips of crump and Parks saying to the extent: "if we don't get an arrest by -----, we will -----"

Honestly.
If that's not inflammatory or intimidation then I don't know what is.

art tart wrote:

DebFrmHell wrote:And oldie but goodie from Alan D.
Dershowitz went further and said that Cory helped to create the hysteria.



Via Media-ite
www.twitlonger.com/show/k9skq9

ETA: Looks like he was right all along.

DebFrmHell = I too agree, Alan D was right all along, it is just as he said. I have never seen a case where the State aligns themselves with an Attorney for a family that makes endless MEDIA appearances calling the defendant a "racist murderer," or "stalked and murdered Trayvon." Angela Corey's star witness met with Crump, ABC, Sabrina/Tracy and who knows who else was included BEFORE ever being interviewed by LE/State/Defense. I can't see where that's remotely ethical.

Despite those that have convicted GZ before his trial, Alan D reminds everyone, GZ is entitled to JUSTICE too.

It is not unusual for a lawyer who is hired by the family of a victim to conduct a parallel investigation or to interview potential witnesses, a lawyer can do that, it is not illegal or unethical, and law enforcement doesn't have to be present when they interview a witness. In most instances, a lawyer who represents the interests of the victim's family acts as a liaison between the family and the prosecution.

Puzzler wrote:In the beginning, LE wasn't going to arrest GZ.
No evidence in the public as to why or why not make an arrest.
Then...the threats, the marches, the reward for capture flyers.
Then...an arrest was made.
Then...slowly...the evidence starts coming out.
Then...the defense begins it's discovery and more evidence comes out.
Now...it's much more clear as to why GZ was not going to be arrested in the beginning.
Comments of doctoring photos, withholding evidence, DA talking to witnesses before they are deposed and witnesses changing their story after talking with the DA, etc.
All those bad comments show up against not the man on trial...but the State.
All this before even mentioning what the family handlers and the media has done.

There's something wrong here and, as always, the truth comes out...which it is now doing...drip...drip...drip!

Puzzler - excellent comment putting the chain of events since the beginning in order and it brings us to where we are today.

It wouldn't surprise me in the least if DeeDee claimed Crump was representing her in her Deposition with the Defense. I would think that would be a clear conflict of interest since MOM/West want to compare DeeDee's actual deposition with her interview given to Crump IF the Defense can ever get the audio recording in its totality, unedited.

Alessandra_Deux wrote:

art tart wrote:

DebFrmHell = I too agree, Alan D was right all along, it is just as he said. I have never seen a case where the State aligns themselves with an Attorney for a family that makes endless MEDIA appearances calling the defendant a "racist murderer," or "stalked and murdered Trayvon." Angela Corey's star witness met with Crump, ABC, Sabrina/Tracy and who knows who else was included BEFORE ever being interviewed by LE/State/Defense. I can't see where that's remotely ethical.

Despite those that have convicted GZ before his trial, Alan D reminds everyone, GZ is entitled to JUSTICE too.

It is not unusual for a lawyer who is hired by the family of a victim to conduct a parallel investigation or to interview potential witnesses, a lawyer can do that, it is not illegal or unethical, and law enforcement doesn't have to be present when they interview a witness. In most instances, a lawyer who represents the interests of the victim's family acts as a liaison between the family and the prosecution.

If a third party attorney engages in unethical conduct while collecting evidence that representing counsel for that case then uses, and the circumstances exist that indicate that representing counsel knew of issues regarding integrity of said evidence, then ethical and legal issues arise for both of those parties irregardless of the constitutional rights of the third party.

Both Motions to Compel of the defense are attempting to determine and elucidate the accurate content of evidence shared and also additional circumstances surrounding the cooperation of the State and the Martin family attorneys, and most likely they will seek a determination on those conclusions.


So Alan D. is clearly not off base if you review the facts set forth in both of the MTCs.

I think you just choose to not accept the facts outlined in the pleadings because of your presumption that Zimmerman is guilty of murder.

Alessandra - I disagree. Name another investigation that this has happened, an attorney promotes his own agenda, threatens racial violence, conducts interviews waving an audio tape claiming to "blow the defense out of the water" and to have a 16 year old STAR Witness ALL BEFORE LE/State/Defense have had the opportunity to interview her. THEN! Crump gives ABC exclusive rights to ATTEND the interview and promote it on ABC. (ABC interview stinks, imo, this is all going to be exposed, probably the amount of monies paid to Crump Team for ABC to promote the agenda)

FRAUD: for Crump to CONTINUE to claim DeeDee is a minor, 16 yrs. old when in fact he knows she is 18.

Name ANOTHER CASE that this level of dishonesty has been shown. Families have every right to have an attorney and absolutely no one disputes that right but most attorney's don't INTERJECT themselves into the investigation and hold news conferences presenting their views, the defense has to file a MOTION to COMPEL this attorney that has INTERJECTED himself into the investigation to get a clean copy of the interview.

Name other cases.......... the same as this case........ that the attorney has conducted himself with questionable motives such as Crump. Everyone already KNOWS families are entitled to an attorney.

art tart wrote:Alessandra - I disagree. Name another investigation that this has happened, an attorney promotes his own agenda, threatens racial violence, conducts interviews waving an audio tape claiming to "blow the defense out of the water" and to have a 16 year old STAR Witness ALL BEFORE LE/State/Defense have had the opportunity to interview her. THEN! Crump gives ABC exclusive rights to ATTEND the interview and promote it on ABC. (ABC interview stinks, imo, this is all going to be exposed, probably the amount of monies paid to Crump Team for ABC to promote the agenda)

FRAUD: for Crump to CONTINUE to claim DeeDee is a minor, 16 yrs. old when in fact he knows she is 18.

Name ANOTHER CASE that this level of dishonesty has been shown. Families have every right to have an attorney and absolutely no one disputes that right but most attorney's don't INTERJECT themselves into the investigation and hold news conferences presenting their views, the defense has to file a MOTION to COMPEL this attorney that has INTERJECTED himself into the investigation to get a clean copy of the interview.

Name other cases.......... the same as this case........ that the attorney has conducted himself with questionable motives such as Crump. Everyone already KNOWS families are entitled to an attorney.

I can't name another case because I don't find Crump's conduct questionable.

I can elaborate about cases that are very similar to the one that we are discussing here; cases where there has been public outrage about the manner in which the police has handled the case.

Alessandra_Deux wrote:

art tart wrote:Alessandra - I disagree. Name another investigation that this has happened, an attorney promotes his own agenda, threatens racial violence, conducts interviews waving an audio tape claiming to "blow the defense out of the water" and to have a 16 year old STAR Witness ALL BEFORE LE/State/Defense have had the opportunity to interview her. THEN! Crump gives ABC exclusive rights to ATTEND the interview and promote it on ABC. (ABC interview stinks, imo, this is all going to be exposed, probably the amount of monies paid to Crump Team for ABC to promote the agenda)

FRAUD: for Crump to CONTINUE to claim DeeDee is a minor, 16 yrs. old when in fact he knows she is 18.

Name ANOTHER CASE that this level of dishonesty has been shown. Families have every right to have an attorney and absolutely no one disputes that right but most attorney's don't INTERJECT themselves into the investigation and hold news conferences presenting their views, the defense has to file a MOTION to COMPEL this attorney that has INTERJECTED himself into the investigation to get a clean copy of the interview.

Name other cases.......... the same as this case........ that the attorney has conducted himself with questionable motives such as Crump. Everyone already KNOWS families are entitled to an attorney.

I can't name another case because I don't find Crump's conduct questionable.

I can elaborate about cases that are very similar to the one that we are discussing here; cases where there has been public outrage about the manner in which the police has handled the case.

There you have it, Alessandra, there isn't another case that Attorney's have acted so dishonestly promoting their own agendas, stopping short of threatening racial division or riots, misrepresenting facts, and accusations, and calling a defendant a racist murderer. Everyone on this thread understands you have fully supported the Crump Team in-spite of the manipulation of Trayvon's parent's, the racial comments spewed against GZ. That is your right and is your opinion, we all get it but don't MISREPRESENT the facts in this case about Crump's behavior. Crumps behavior is not typical for attorney's representing families. But come to think of it, another case of this outrageous & prejudice behavior did occur and encompassed some of the same participants.

Are you familiar with the Duke LaCrosse Case? The same bull chit went on in that case, Sharpton, Jesse Jackson, the girls families attorney's, NG, all made the MEDIA Blitz and convicted the players in the Court of Public Opinion! Guess what! The girl LIED.........................Manipulation by many of the same participant's in the Duke LaCrosse case are now participating in the Trayvon Martin Case. That is a case that attorney's misrepresented facts that represented the families that brought the accusations against the player's have raised their heads in this case. Looks like Jesse Jackson & Al Sharpton would have learned but they are forever seeking any opportunity to promote themselves and their agendas, or maybe they are learning since both have shut their flapping gums about the case.

Just a snip from the Duke LaCrosse Case exposing behaviors of some attorney's and the lead prosecutor involved.

The Duke lacrosse case is a common name given to a criminal investigation into a 2006 false accusation of rape made against three members of the men's lacrosse team at Duke University in Durham, North Carolina.The fallout from the case's resolution led to, among other things, the disbarment of lead prosecutor Mike Nifong.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duke_lacrosse_case

There are other cases in which Sharpton and Jesse Jackson participated in that had the defendant convicted in the Court of Public Opinion, then the facts came to light.

This case brought to NG, yet again, HARPING night after night about the GUILT of the players. She too is sued frequently and loses in Civil Suits.

imo, Handlers getting involved and misrepresenting information in cases are eventually exposed. In this case, a prosecutor was disbarred.

I firmly believe that Crump is going to be exposed for his misrepresentations, but I am to content to sit back & watch it happen. imho.

**Jaw hits floor**

Mike Nifong is the perfect example of misconduct.

I am going to work.

DebFrmHell wrote:**Jaw hits floor**

Mike Nifong is the perfect example of misconduct.

I am going to work.

DebFrmHell - it has been a long time since I reviewed that case, BUT, the accuser f the Duke LaCrosse players was charged for child abuse and for MURDER of her live in boyfriend. Mike Nifong deserved to be disgraced and exposed as were many that participated in this RUSH to Judgement.

In this case, the accuser actually ended up in a murder trial and millions of dollars were paid out to the player's, their families, and Coach. In this case, all were threatened with violence.

Is anyone aware of a link to the MOTIONS Hearing tomorrow in the case? I don't have cable at this time, in between provider's, but I would like to see some of the arguments by the State and Defense.

If there isn't one available, would anyone watching PLEASE share information w/us as to developments? TIA.
________________________________________________________________
I found this:

Where to watch Tuesday’s hearing in the George Zimmerman case?

Central Florida News 13 plans to carry the entire hearing, which starts at 9 a.m.

It will be streamed on the websites of WESH-Channel 2, WKMG-Channel 6 and WFTV-Channel 9.

Zimmerman is charged with second-degree murder in the shooting death of Trayvon Martin in February.

http://blogs.orlandosentinel.com/entertainment_tv_tvblog/

In a blistering response to a recent filing by George Zimmerman's defense team, prosecutor Bernie de la Rionda accuses the second-degree murder defendant of attempting "to co-opt the mantle of victimhood for himself."

De la Rionda goes on to explain that prosectors have arranged for the recording device to be turned over to the Florida Department of Law Enforcement, as the defense requested.

Zimmerman's defense team, in a reply to the state's filing, indicated that it would withdraw its motion if the state can show the device has been turned over to FDLE.

Nelson previously ruled Crump should bring the recording to his deposition by the defense, but defense attorney Donald West later argued in his motion that the Zimmerman team needed it sooner, before Crump's and other depositions.

http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/local/trayvon-martin/os-george-zimmerman-crump-state-response-20121210,0,7660340.story

The problem is, BDLR didn't do anything UNTIL the MOTION was filed causing him apparently embarrassment. That's too bad. How hard is it for BDLR to return an email? 9 months later, the Defense is still trying to get a decent audio from BDLR to use BEFORE they conduct the depositions of everyone in the room. It's time for BDLR to put up or shut up, has the tape been turned over and if so, WHEN???????? Today, yesterday, last friday? After re-reading the article, BDLR "the State has MADE ARRANGEMENTS to have it turned over, in other words, he is being FORCED to turn it over. Good Grief, it only took 9 months, endless pleas, emails and requests from the Defense to the State.

imo, this type of pressure by the Defense is going to have to be applied to get needed information from the State OR the STATE could just do as they have been ask without the "gamesmanship" they are accused of. imo. I hope the Defense rides BDLR if that's what it takes to get the needed information. It seems BDLR doesn't like to be called out for "playing hide and seek with the evidence."

art tart wrote:In a blistering response to a recent filing by George Zimmerman's defense team, prosecutor Bernie de la Rionda accuses the second-degree murder defendant of attempting "to co-opt the mantle of victimhood for himself."

De la Rionda goes on to explain that prosectors have arranged for the recording device to be turned over to the Florida Department of Law Enforcement, as the defense requested.

Zimmerman's defense team, in a reply to the state's filing, indicated that it would withdraw its motion if the state can show the device has been turned over to FDLE.

Nelson previously ruled Crump should bring the recording to his deposition by the defense, but defense attorney Donald West later argued in his motion that the Zimmerman team needed it sooner, before Crump's and other depositions.

http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/local/trayvon-martin/os-george-zimmerman-crump-state-response-20121210,0,7660340.story

The problem is, BDLR didn't do anything UNTIL the MOTION was filed causing him apparently embarrassment. That's to bad. How hard is it for BDLR to return an email? 9 months later, the Defense is still trying to get a decent audio from BDLR to use BEFORE they conduct the interviews of everyone in the room. It's time for BDLR to put up or shut up, has the tape been turned over and if so, WHEN???????? Today, yesterday, last friday? imo, this type of pressure by the Defense is going to have to be applied to get needed information from the State OR the STATE could just do as they have been ask without the "gamesmanship" they are accused of. imo.

I hope the Defense rides BDLR if that's what it takes to get the needed information. It seems BDLR doesn't like to be called out for "playing hide and seek with the evidence."

Clearly sandbagging.

Original recording?
Gutman is next.

Tamta wrote:

art tart wrote:In a blistering response to a recent filing by George Zimmerman's defense team, prosecutor Bernie de la Rionda accuses the second-degree murder defendant of attempting "to co-opt the mantle of victimhood for himself."

De la Rionda goes on to explain that prosectors have arranged for the recording device to be turned over to the Florida Department of Law Enforcement, as the defense requested.

Zimmerman's defense team, in a reply to the state's filing, indicated that it would withdraw its motion if the state can show the device has been turned over to FDLE.

Nelson previously ruled Crump should bring the recording to his deposition by the defense, but defense attorney Donald West later argued in his motion that the Zimmerman team needed it sooner, before Crump's and other depositions.

http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/local/trayvon-martin/os-george-zimmerman-crump-state-response-20121210,0,7660340.story

The problem is, BDLR didn't do anything UNTIL the MOTION was filed causing him apparently embarrassment. That's to bad. How hard is it for BDLR to return an email? 9 months later, the Defense is still trying to get a decent audio from BDLR to use BEFORE they conduct the interviews of everyone in the room. It's time for BDLR to put up or shut up, has the tape been turned over and if so, WHEN???????? Today, yesterday, last friday? imo, this type of pressure by the Defense is going to have to be applied to get needed information from the State OR the STATE could just do as they have been ask without the "gamesmanship" they are accused of. imo.

I hope the Defense rides BDLR if that's what it takes to get the needed information. It seems BDLR doesn't like to be called out for "playing hide and seek with the evidence."

Clearly sandbagging.

Original recording?
Gutman is next.

LMAO, BDLR doesn't like being called out, imo, bet he got his butt chewed by somebody. Inexcusable....... The thing is, Crump NOR BDLR would cooperate. imo, NOTHING was done before West filed the MOTION to Compel 3rd party. I guess BDLR is going to get to answer that tomorrow, providing the date and to whom the recording was surrendered. Was it the ORIGINAL that has been requested?

I am surprised BDLR mouthed off, the Prosecutor's in KC's case didn't speak to the MEDIA about the case, they said they weren't allowed. If Angela Corey was brazen enough to threaten Harvard and Alan Derchowitz to try to CONTROL statements, just speculating, she probably told BDLR to address the MEDIA. LOL. and say what exactly? DUH! I finally complied because I have no choice???? LOL!

art tart wrote:

Tamta wrote:

Clearly sandbagging.

Original recording?
Gutman is next.

LMAO, BDLR doesn't like being called out, imo, bet he got his butt chewed by somebody. Inexcusable....... The thing is, Crump NOR BDLR would cooperate. imo, NOTHING was done before West filed the MOTION to Compel 3rd party. I guess BDLR is going to get to answer that tomorrow, providing to date and to whom.

I am surprised BDLR mouthed off, the Prosecutor's in KC's case didn't speak to the MEDIA about the case.

So far I like Nelson and I see her making a real effort at being objective and neutral, even if she did come across as a little naive to how West was trying to frame the defense issues in regard to relief needed to investigate Witness 8 prior to deposition.

I am very curious to see what her response is to all of this tomorrow.

I am tired of the BDLR shruggy-gumby-stupid-act.
I wish he would act like a serious lawyer.

Tamta shared:
So far I like Nelson and I see her making a real effort at being objective and neutral, even if she did come across as a little naive to how West was trying to frame the defense issues in regard to relief needed to investigate Witness 8 prior to deposition.

I am very curious to see what her response is to all of this tomorrow.

I am tired of the BDLR shruggy-gumby-stupid-act.
I wish he would act like a serious lawyer.

Tamta - imo, BDLR is out lawyered in this case and MOM/West aren't going to play games. 9 months is a ridiculous amount of time to try to get evidence in a murder trial. West is on record as to the measures they took in trying to get this information.

It seems imo, if BDLR would act like a professional and do his job, he wouldn't embarrass himself.

Is Judge N going to address BDLR releasing the "confidential names" in his last screw up?

art tart wrote:

Tamta shared:
So far I like Nelson and I see her making a real effort at being objective and neutral, even if she did come across as a little naive to how West was trying to frame the defense issues in regard to relief needed to investigate Witness 8 prior to deposition.

I am very curious to see what her response is to all of this tomorrow.

I am tired of the BDLR shruggy-gumby-stupid-act.
I wish he would act like a serious lawyer.

Tamta - imo, BDLR is out lawyered in this case and MOM/West aren't going to play games. 9 months is a ridiculous amount of time to try to get evidence in a murder trial. West is on record as to the measures they took in trying to get this information.

It seems imo, if BDLR would act like a professional and do his job, he wouldn't embarrass himself.

Is Judge N going to address BDLR releasing the "confidential names" in his last screw up?

I have yet to see any leaks be addressed in this case.

BDLR needs to cut the histrionics-
and he has a nasty habit of leading witnesses and simply just answering for them.

The DEFENSE Responds to State's Response on MOTIONS!

Additional paperwork filed for hearing by the Defense.


MOTION for Additional Deposition:

http://184.172.211.159/~gzdocs/documents/1212/zimmerman_reply_to_resp_to_motion_for_deposition.pdf


MOTION to Compel/3rd party

http://184.172.211.159/~gzdocs/documents/1212/zimmerman_reply_to_states_response_to_motion_to_compel.pdf

I can tell by SA responses that things are starting to get to Bernie a little....

Like this maybe??

_____________________
COC: Can I make a statement?

MOM: Sure

COC: Your last question. I think, before we took a break, conversations between Bernie and myself, and we did have a conversation a couple of weeks ago that I forgot about untii just now.

MOM: Okay.

COC: Where I made him aware of a conversation that I had had with one of my investigators, Bill Irwin.

MOM: Okay.

COC: And Bill Irwin had been the investigator who did the voice stress analysis on Mr. Ziiminerman, I believe.

Mr. Irwin came to me about three weeks ago, give or take, and said that he had overheard a conversation between Investigator Serino and Tracy Martin on the night -- on the Monday night following the shooting. That conversation occurred at Serino's desk where -- and it occurred during which Serino was letting Tracy Martin listen to the 911 tape of the shooting.

And Bill Irwin said that he overheard the conversation that Tracy Martin was asked by Investigator Serino, "Is that your son screaming on the tape?" And Mr. Martin said, "No."

That, I thought as the investigative commander, had been run to its logical end months ago. I didn't know -- apparently nobody knew that Bill Irwin was in the room at that time.

I had -- originaly when it came up -- I asked Serino who was in the room and he had originaly said that two investigators, Sergeant Ciesla and Investigator Villaluna, who were both in the room.

When we spoke to them, they were not in the room. They said that they had left at various points in time, but never heard that conversation.

Bill Irwin -- I just never -- I didn't ask because I wasn't aware that he was in the room until about three weeks, maybe four weeks ago.

MOM: Okay.

COC: So, I made Bernie aware of it and that was one of the conversations we've had recently.

MOM: Okay. Great. I appreciate you clearing that up.

COC: Okay.



http://184.172.211.159/~gzdocs/documents/1212/motion_to_modify_conditions_of_release.pdf

Political committee formed by Trayvon's family gets slow start

Long term, he said, he and Trayvon's parents, Tracy Martin and Sybrina Fulton, hope to make donations to candidates in Florida and other states who oppose stand your ground-like laws or work to amend them.

http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/local/breakingnews/os-trayvon-political-committee-20121210,0,1201521.story

No wonder this got off to a slow start, it's not a popular cause as has been shown. Why would anyone want to DONATE to this cause when anyone can DONATE directly to the candidate/politician of their choice that supports their view INSTEAD of someone that is the choice of Sabrina/Tracy/Crump? jmo.

Crump made millions in a Civil Suit, imo, he could totally fund this cause for Sabrina and Tracy if he wanted to. .

STATE'S RESPONSE TO DEFENDANT'S
MOTION TO TAKE ADDITIONAL DEPOSITIONS

http://184.172.211.159/~gzdocs/documents/1212/states_response_to_motion_for_additional_deposition.pdf

art tart wrote:In a blistering response to a recent filing by George Zimmerman's defense team, prosecutor Bernie de la Rionda accuses the second-degree murder defendant of attempting "to co-opt the mantle of victimhood for himself."

De la Rionda goes on to explain that prosectors have arranged for the recording device to be turned over to the Florida Department of Law Enforcement, as the defense requested.

Zimmerman's defense team, in a reply to the state's filing, indicated that it would withdraw its motion if the state can show the device has been turned over to FDLE.

Nelson previously ruled Crump should bring the recording to his deposition by the defense, but defense attorney Donald West later argued in his motion that the Zimmerman team needed it sooner, before Crump's and other depositions.

http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/local/trayvon-martin/os-george-zimmerman-crump-state-response-20121210,0,7660340.story

The problem is, BDLR didn't do anything UNTIL the MOTION was filed causing him apparently embarrassment. That's too bad. How hard is it for BDLR to return an email? 9 months later, the Defense is still trying to get a decent audio from BDLR to use BEFORE they conduct the depositions of everyone in the room. It's time for BDLR to put up or shut up, has the tape been turned over and if so, WHEN???????? Today, yesterday, last friday? After re-reading the article, BDLR "the State has MADE ARRANGEMENTS to have it turned over, in other words, he is being FORCED to turn it over. Good Grief, it only took 9 months, endless pleas, emails and requests from the Defense to the State.

imo, this type of pressure by the Defense is going to have to be applied to get needed information from the State OR the STATE could just do as they have been ask without the "gamesmanship" they are accused of. imo. I hope the Defense rides BDLR if that's what it takes to get the needed information. It seems BDLR doesn't like to be called out for "playing hide and seek with the evidence."

It's becoming clearer and clearer to me that this is a case of dirty, malicious prosecution. They can't win on the evidence they have, so they fabricate and obstruct to appear to be "politically correct."

I am not at all proud of the prosecutor's office in this case. This is just shameful. Prosecutors should never have to stoop to this level to try to win a case. Not in the America I served for.

Both parties have "twisted" details to fit the scenario which affords them an "advantage" over the other party.

Both sides have enlisted "outside" parties to trumpet their horn for them.

Both sides have worked diligently to try to sway the courts and potential jury.

Both sides have used and attempted to use the medias to carry forth messages benefiting their personal agendas.

I was surprised when Tracey Martin stated he did not recognized his son's voice; I was dismayed when he changed the story after getting community activists involved.

I was surprised when RZ stated he recognized his son's voice ONLY as it fit HIS agenda at the time.

GZ appeared to have activated his agenda before that of TM; however, while GZ was using the media and fb, etc., TM's parties took to the street with threats of mass civil disobedience.

I was disgusted when the president, Obama, decided to inject his opinions/ comments into this case. It only served to put LE on notice, further incite the community, and attempt to sway potential jurors.

It has become a media frenzy and a legal can of worms.

I am sitting on the sidelines watching as the attempts to unravel this mess proceeds EVEN as the parties are busy tangling up new worms.

Puzzler wrote:In the beginning, LE wasn't going to arrest GZ.
No evidence in the public as to why or why not make an arrest.
Then...the threats, the marches, the reward for capture flyers.
Then...an arrest was made.
Then...slowly...the evidence starts coming out.
Then...the defense begins it's discovery and more evidence comes out.
Now...it's much more clear as to why GZ was not going to be arrested in the beginning.
Comments of doctoring photos, withholding evidence, DA talking to witnesses before they are deposed and witnesses changing their story after talking with the DA, etc.
All those bad comments show up against not the man on trial...but the State.
All this before even mentioning what the family handlers and the media has done.

There's something wrong here and, as always, the truth comes out...which it is now doing...drip...drip...drip!

Where is the LIKE button for this post??

Just like the Charles Dyer case-- this prosecution reeks to high heaven. Charles Dyer is a thoroughly unlikable defendant, and yet, I am convinced he was innocent of the child molestation charges he was recently convicted of.

George Zimmerman is not a particularly "likable" or sympathetic defendant either. I happen to think he is mostly an idiot in his actions. But being an idiot is not at all the same thing as being a cold blooded, racist child murderer. And yet, I am convinced that the over-reaching charges against him, and the well-orchestrated media campaign, are definitely malicious, and contrived for "another" political purpose. He is an available scape goat, imo.

I am disgusted at the actions of the prosecution in this case, who are supposed to be on the side of justice, truth, and honesty.

KZ wrote:

art tart wrote:In a blistering response to a recent filing by George Zimmerman's defense team, prosecutor Bernie de la Rionda accuses the second-degree murder defendant of attempting "to co-opt the mantle of victimhood for himself."

De la Rionda goes on to explain that prosectors have arranged for the recording device to be turned over to the Florida Department of Law Enforcement, as the defense requested.

Zimmerman's defense team, in a reply to the state's filing, indicated that it would withdraw its motion if the state can show the device has been turned over to FDLE.

Nelson previously ruled Crump should bring the recording to his deposition by the defense, but defense attorney Donald West later argued in his motion that the Zimmerman team needed it sooner, before Crump's and other depositions.

http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/local/trayvon-martin/os-george-zimmerman-crump-state-response-20121210,0,7660340.story

The problem is, BDLR didn't do anything UNTIL the MOTION was filed causing him apparently embarrassment. That's too bad. How hard is it for BDLR to return an email? 9 months later, the Defense is still trying to get a decent audio from BDLR to use BEFORE they conduct the depositions of everyone in the room. It's time for BDLR to put up or shut up, has the tape been turned over and if so, WHEN???????? Today, yesterday, last friday? After re-reading the article, BDLR "the State has MADE ARRANGEMENTS to have it turned over, in other words, he is being FORCED to turn it over. Good Grief, it only took 9 months, endless pleas, emails and requests from the Defense to the State.

imo, this type of pressure by the Defense is going to have to be applied to get needed information from the State OR the STATE could just do as they have been ask without the "gamesmanship" they are accused of. imo. I hope the Defense rides BDLR if that's what it takes to get the needed information. It seems BDLR doesn't like to be called out for "playing hide and seek with the evidence."

It's becoming clearer and clearer to me that this is a case of dirty, malicious prosecution. They can't win on the evidence they have, so they fabricate and obstruct to appear to be "politically correct."

I am not at all proud of the prosecutor's office in this case. This is just shameful. Prosecutors should never have to stoop to this level to try to win a case. Not in the America I served for.

So BDLR sitting for almost a month (on the record but I am sure longer) on information important to the defense (that it seems like at least one other (Serino) should have known), and then divulging that information at an casual moment, like a deposition break, (which is by the way, the last possible moment before someone else aprises the defense of it and the State's prior knowledge of it), and then claiming that the very fact that he was the source of the information to the defense does not make him 'correct' and beyond reproach?

Sarcasm.

I love how he says that Tracy was not able to identify the scream.
Interesting spin on how Tracy was not able to identify the scream as belonging to his son.
(Item 4)

I can really see why Serino lawyered up.

De La Rionda has not violated discovery rules as it has been alleged. The discovery statutes provide for mandatory sanctions for certain discovery violations; if De La Rionda would have done the things that he has been accused of doing, the judge would have already imposed disciplinary sanctions against him.

It is very obvious that Zimmerman's lawyers are trying to create the perception that they are being "sandbagged" by the prosecution to influence public opinion in favor of their client. This is a clear sign that the prosecution has a strong case, that there is indisputable evidence that disproves Zimmerman's self defense claims. Zimmerman's versions of the events are plagued with serious inconsistencies and contradictions, his interviews with the Sanford Police might be the strongest evidence the prosecution has against him.

State responds to George Zimmerman motions

Motions to be argued at Tuesday's hearing

Published On: Dec 10 2012 05:19:50 PM EST | Updated On: Dec 10 2012 05:23:48 PM EST

~Snipped~

According to the documents, Assistant State Attorney Bernie de la Rionda writes that the defense's motions are designed to defend Zimmerman's reputation and not to seek evidence, as they were filed.

De la Rionda also said the Martin family attorneys, Benjamin Crump, Natalie Jackson, Ben Parks, are working for Trayvon Martin’s family, not the State Attorney.

“No matter how often, how viciously, or how vociferously Defense Council tries to attack Mr. Crump and make him a feature of this case, he is not the issue," De la Rionda writes in the motion.

~Snipped~

De la Rionda writes that in O'Mara's motions, there are statements that are "incorrect, incomplete and misleading."

Read more:

http://www.clickorlando.com/news/State-responds-to-George-Zimmerman-motions/-/1637132/17721884/-/g3qyna/-/index.html

The hearing on the motions is scheduled for Tuesday at 9 a.m. (ET) Local 6 will be streaming the hearing live on ClickOrlando.com.

WATCH LIVE: Local 6 News
WKMG-TV streams newscasts on ClickOrlando.com

http://www.clickorlando.com/news/WATCH-LIVE-Local-6-News/-/1637132/4231796/-/iyw9c5/-/index.html

Alessandra_Deux wrote:De La Rionda has not violated discovery rules as it has been alleged. The discovery statutes provide for mandatory sanctions for certain discovery violations; if De La Rionda would have done the things that he has been accused of doing, the judge would have already imposed disciplinary sanctions against him.

It is very obvious that Zimmerman's lawyers are trying to create the perception that they are being "sandbagged" by the prosecution to influence public opinion in favor of their client. This is a clear sign that the prosecution has a strong case, that there is indisputable evidence that disproves Zimmerman's self defense claims. Zimmerman's versions of the events are plagued with serious inconsistencies and contradictions, his interviews with the Sanford Police might be the strongest evidence the prosecution has against him.

I find this post completely erroneous.

The defense is trying to obtain relief in getting the integrity of information that it is entitled to have in a timely manner. No one is seeking the court to make that finding and take 'disciplinary' action, and no pleadings have been filed asking the court to do so, so why would the judge have done so already?

In the pleadings, the defense vigorously strives to ask the court to see the circumstances of their discovery issues from their perspective and grant them relief, so yes, they sort of have to put forth facts and happenings that assist the court in perceiving their issues as they are experiencing them. MOM and West did not invent the Sunshine Laws. To insinuate that the pleadings are for the benefit of public perception is way off base.

And no, the 'sandbagging', whether you agree with it or not, is not a sign that the State's case is strong, it is a sign that they are exploiting the rules of best evidence and withholding information that may not present their theory in the strongest light in regard to the public perception.

There is indisputable evidence proving Murder 2?
You are clearly making that up.

Finally, if Zimmerman's numerous statements to LE were a problem for his claims, MOM would have had them suppressed and he never would have allowed Zimmerman to go on Hannity. It is clear that Zimmerman's lawyers intend that he testify at his immunity hearing, and trial, if there is one.

Judge Nelson has 8 MOTIONS brought by the Defense for her consideration on 12-12-12:



Defendant's Motion to Take Additional Deposition

Defendant's Motion to Compel Production of Evidence from Third-Party

Defendant's Motion to Compel Additional Discovery

Defendant's Motion to Compel Regarding Voice Identification

Defendant's Motion to Modify Conditions of Release

Defendant's Motion for Clarification of Order Setting Bail

Defendant's Amended Demand for Specific Discovery from Federal Bureau of Investigation

Defendant's Amended Demand for Specific Discovery from Dep

http://www.gzlegalcase.com/

To read each Motion, just click the Motion and the PDF is attached at the link.

Request to modify George Zimmerman's bond conditions among new motions in Trayvon Martin case

" Defence attorneys are asking a judge to end the 24-hour GPS monitoring of George Zimmerman while he is out on bond in the fatal shooting of Florida teenager Trayvon Martin."

http://news.yahoo.com/request-modify-george-zimmermans-bond-conditions-among-motions-081338225.html

Deleted by poster.

Freckles wrote:Personally, I would like to know WHY he wants the monitoring to end?
It was a choice:
Stay in jail until trial OR be monitored.
Simple.
Perhaps he forgot the choice he made?
He WAS given that option!

Freckles - this is the PDF for the MOTION on the monitoring. It states GZ no longer has family in the area, it would be easier for GZ to meet with his attorney's, and moving location's for his safety. At this time, I think he has to get permission from the Court to do so. Actually, the reasoning is encompassed in the whole PDF w/MOM giving some background information on the case.

Reason #15 page 8 of the Motion sums up the some of the reasons for the request BUT the entire MOTION is interesting w/MOM stating the weight of the States case, or lack there of. You are correct in stating GZ had a choice, but as the evidence has come out, the weight of the State's case is not as strong as the Defense infers.

I have been reading over the MOTIONS, this may be the weakest request from MOM/West of the MOTIONS, it may not be granted. IDK. The other MOTIONS encompass evidence or information the Defense needs to move their case forward, some exculpatory information that is needed that hasn't been turned over, they are requesting a ton of evidence from the FBI and the DOJ. Seems if the Defense lost on an issue, this might be it as it appears more for convenience whereas most of the other MOTIONS are about needed evidence. imho.

http://184.172.211.159/~gzdocs/documents/1212/motion_to_modify_conditions_of_release.pdf

GZ Wants Monitoring Device Removed:

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/12/11/us-usa-florida-shooting-idUSBRE8BA0IS20121211

Personally, I don't mind if he still has the ankle monitor but I do believe that he should be able to move out of Seminole County. IMO only, Lester was doing his best to try and drain that fund in anyway he could from the million dollar bail to expenditures on security.


I suspect that this morning will be very contentious but I am wondering about how much Nelson will rule on immediately and what she will rule on later in the week or Monday. I read that they have allotted three hours for today but am not sure if that is true or not.

Mark O'Mara and George Zimmerman are already at the courthouse. They got there about 8-8:15ish. I will be watching on FOX35 live feed.

This is the link.
http://www.myfoxorlando.com/category/237506/watch-live-newscasts

DebFrmHell wrote:Personally, I don't mind if he still has the ankle monitor but I do believe that he should be able to move out of Seminole County. IMO only, Lester was doing his best to try and drain that fund in anyway he could from the million dollar bail to expenditures on security.


I suspect that this morning will be very contentious but I am wondering about how much Nelson will rule on immediately and what she will rule on later in the week or Monday. I read that they have allotted three hours for today but am not sure if that is true or not.

Mark O'Mara and George Zimmerman are already at the courthouse. They got there about 8-8:15ish. I will be watching on FOX35 live feed.

This is the link.
http://www.myfoxorlando.com/category/237506/watch-live-newscasts

DebFrmHell- thanks, I'll use that link. I agree with your point on Lester, I think the problem is that now GZ has to make a request to the Court, instead of getting permission elsewhere besides a proceeding or hearing.

DebFrmHell - my screen is blank. DO I have to establish an account or am I doing something wrong? TIA!

I am electronically challenged.............

NEVER MIND - I'm up and running, I had to log into face book.

Diane Tennis, analyst on FOX Orlando, said BDLR said this morning: "there might have been more than one person yelling during the confrontation." wtf

imo, BDLR has admitted Tracy Martin said "it was NOT Trayvon on the tape yelling for help." SO! Since there is more than one person that has heard TM say this, is BDLR promoting something new? imo, probably. The STATE imo, is stuck w/Tracy's comment on claiming it wasn't Trayvon.

Live Stream 12/12 Hearing


http://m.clickorlando.com/news/WATCH-LIVE-Hearing-in-George-Zimmerman-case/-/16721250/17729824/-/bge47kz/-/index.html

GZ lied about his passport.
If he is free he needs to be monitored.
He has relatives in another country.

Tamta wrote:

Live Stream 12/12 Hearing


http://m.clickorlando.com/news/WATCH-LIVE-Hearing-in-George-Zimmerman-case/-/16721250/17729824/-/bge47kz/-/index.html

Thanks!
It works!

State addressing court:
--- lied @ ability to raise money;
--- lied about a second passport which he instructed his wife to get from a lock box;
---defendant and wife lied to court, asking bond revoked; court raised the bond and restricted movement due to credibility;
---defendant asked to travel to Orange Country, possibly move to Orange County;
---court said okay but notify us first'
---defendant said he is scared, its unsafe, but he enters the court from the from door?
---is this being done to bias a jury?
---Two judges have determined probable case; defense states they have other witnesses, info, but neglect to inform the court the witness spoke to state and the statements were DIFFERENT than what defense is now maintaining;
---is this for the pending civil law suit?

State:
--- where is the evidence GZ DID have a broken nose? States he "may" have a broken nose. No x-rays for evidence.
--- racist comments: Witnesses 9 stated GZ did make racist comments and his own fb states he doesn't like Mexicans;
--- Capt O'Conner heard prosecutor state he did not want it to go to grand jury because it would go to trial;
---Court needs to be attending to what has changed; shouldn't the court be aware of where GZ if there are actual threats? Is that true? If so, why enter court through the front door? Why give all these autographs? Why all the security issues? If there are security issues, why allow defendant to wander about the state?

1. Nelson not considering due to late filing:
State’s Response to:take additional depo, compel production from third party, and State’s 10th supplemental

2. More than 1 scream on NEN put forth by State (?)

3. State does not have to submit list to defense on others who witnessed Tracy listening to NEN call. (Defense has to discover themselves.)

4. Seems like West was referring to more specific information..Nelson not picking that up.