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

Tamta wrote:

Alessandra_Deux wrote:

No, if there is evidence that shows that he was on the phone with Dee Dee when Zimmerman confronted him, it doesn't matter whether or not he was using his headphones.

The point is that the police did a sloppy job, they failed to establish a very important fact related to the case. There are conflicting reports as to whether Trayvon's headphones were found on the ground next to his body, or in one of his pockets.

Well the first responding officers were trying to save a life, so they were not looking at details like a pair of headphones.
It is a high anxiety ordeal even for trained professionals.
It is a little ludicrous to blame them for sloppy behavior at that moment.

He was face down and they had to turn him over.
They could have fallen out.

The fact is, of these reports is earlier, and one is later.

I disagree with you about it being a crucial fact of a self defense case.
The fact that his phone battery was not operating at the crime scene seems more important.

The differing accounts come into existence on 17 May doc dump.

Went back to catch up a bit...
BBM-
IIRC, it was raining that night. Trayvons phone probably laid in the wet grass for a while, which tends to make most phones go DEAD. Besides, haven't they verified from phone records (probably the T-mobile bill), the phone call with DeeDee ended about 7:16??
Does anyone know how long it was before the everything from the crime scene was removed?
If it was an hour or so, probably the reason the phone was dead, but then again, JMO.

art tart wrote:

KimmyK wrote:
IMO, if you read over at TL, it shows very much how the investigation was INADEQUATE, IMO
Trayvon's clothes were still damp a month later, i.e., probably stored wet!
Which then compromised any trace DNA in the case!
Let alone how they handled the/any trace evidence as well.

Kimmy - I can't make sense out of your comment, what are you responding too or talking about? Have you now jumped to "inadequate investigation?" Are you changing the subject?

Is your comment actually a comment to stand on it's own and not at all related to Art Tart or DebFrmHell but related to TL? Are you stating another opinion about trace evidence, without STATING "imo?"

I was making a comment regarding TL.
I read over there that Trayvon's clothes were still damp a month later, which means were most likely stored WET. Sorry, I was unaware I wasn't able to make a comment if it changed the subject.
If you read my post I put IMO TWICE!
Several of those discussing the issue at TL didn't add IMO either!

art tart wrote:Trayvon Martin: Typical teen or troublemaker?

In the weeks after Trayvon’s shooting death in Sanford in late February, the nation — indeed, the world — heard details of a young life cut short. Whether he was a typical teen or troublemaker, an aggressor or a victim, often depended on who was speaking about Trayvon. Yet in the quiet months since neighborhood watch captain George Zimmerman was charged in the killing, a clearer picture of the African-American teen is coming into focus.

http://www.floridatoday.com/article/20121217/NEWS01/312170006/Trayvon-Martin-Typical-teen-troublemaker-?nclick_check=1

Bumping article in response to above. Sorry, if it is OFF TOPIC! Was just catching up.

http://politic365.com/2012/12/14/would-usa-today-ask-this-question-if-trayvon-martin-was-white/#.UMtLn3HH8OY.twitter

Wishing everyone A Very Merry Christmas and an Happy New Year, since I probably won't be on for a bit.

Best to you and yours, Kimmy.
May your holidays find you with peace.

KimmyK wrote:

Tamta wrote:



Well the first responding officers were trying to save a life, so they were not looking at details like a pair of headphones.
It is a high anxiety ordeal even for trained professionals.
It is a little ludicrous to blame them for sloppy behavior at that moment.

He was face down and they had to turn him over.
They could have fallen out.

The fact is, of these reports is earlier, and one is later.

I disagree with you about it being a crucial fact of a self defense case.
The fact that his phone battery was not operating at the crime scene seems more important.

The differing accounts come into existence on 17 May doc dump.

Went back to catch up a bit...
BBM-
IIRC, it was raining that night. Trayvons phone probably laid in the wet grass for a while, which tends to make most phones go DEAD. Besides, haven't they verified from phone records (probably the T-mobile bill), the phone call with DeeDee ended about 7:16??
Does anyone know how long it was before the everything from the crime scene was removed?
If it was an hour or so, probably the reason the phone was dead, but then again, JMO.

Investigators tried to check the phone at the scene and could not.
The battery was not working.
See 183 p doc again.

A charger was obtained for the phone a couple of days after the shooting.
The phone worked after the battery was charged.
Therefore, the battery was dead, the phone was not damaged.

It remains possible that the phone battery died just before Trayvon met Zimmerman.

DeeDee says the call is cut off.

She 'believes' it was cut off because Trayvon had fallen down in the fight.
That is her opinion, not first hand knowledge.
She does not know.

No narrative by Jackson or Crump says that DeeDee and Travyon were talking at the exact minute that Trayvon and Zimmerman met.
They say the two were talking 'before'.
Remember they are lawyers.
'Before' can mean a few things.
Listen to their narratives very closely.

We have not heard yet about the complete phone records of Tracy Martin.

No one on the defense, is going to stop at 'maybe the phone got wet',
considering the importance and controversy around DeeDee, DeeDee's statements and how those statements were obtained.

Alessandra_Deux wrote:

Freckles wrote:
PD must be psychic. This is getting ridiculous. The prosecution keeps shooting its self in its own foot.

The conflicting information was written in the reports that were provided to the State by the Sanford Police Department.

This apparent 'conflicting' information is not an example of the failure to collect key forensic evidence or an example of investigators contaminating forensic evidence.

This is clearly not an example of police misconduct destroying evidence.

There is no reason to infer or assert that the scene of the shooting was not adequately documented.

Thus far, the forensic evidence supports the fight and shooting at close contact to stop a threat.

A button on a shirt, a plastic bag or headphones disconnected from a phone on the ground or in a pocket, are not going to amount to anything but unprovable micro-arguments.

State Theorists love to pretend that Zimmerman's face was not completely messed up, his back was not grassy and wet, no one saw him under Trayvon, Trayvon said to any witness who saw him during the fight- 'please call police' and Trayvon get off of Zimmerman when a witness made contact with the two them.

Removed by poster.

Freckles wrote:The more "speculation", the weaker the chain of evidence, the inability of the prosecution to prove its case. That is what I am looking at. In particular, IF it can not be proven Dee Dee was talking with TM at that critical time, it could shake a timeline. It WOULD shake her testimony.( Dee Dee is on thin ice already due to the screwing around with her age. And I don't know of ANY 18 year olds who try to be younger than they really are. That was bad and the fact SHE did not correct it? Implicates her. )
IMO

Freckles - Alan Derchowitz coined the phrase, "a case is as strong as it's weakest link" in Claus Von Bulow's appeal for good reason, in which he won. imo, the "Star witness" is the weakest link in the State's case even though Corey has put so much weight on it and Crump has promoted it. It is the facts that have to stand alone, her opinion is not evidence nor a fact.

Freckles - in Casey's trial, Judge Perry had to remind Baez over and over, "a trial is a search for the truth." Many don't want a search for the truth imo, but, they have already convicted GZ, they are going to be surprised to see MOM object to every bit of speculation and opinion as not factual UNLESS they understand the difference, the Court will not allow DeeDee's opinions.

The timeline of DeeDee's interview w/Crump, interview w/Gutman, how many visits to Sabrina's home including the BDLR depo, the reason DeeDee had to be hunted down and brought in, etc. MOM is going to ask DeeDee all this information in a deposition, he too will explore who promoted the lies about her age and why she didn't step forward.

I appreciate the fact that you are viewing the information objectively, there are no winners in this case, but a search for the truth imo, is what is important.

Why everyone can't view the information objectively is amazing to me, I haven't convicted anyone, imo, the evidence leads, not opinions or theories, where the evidence leads.

Removed by me.

Freckles wrote:art tart--
I do not approve of the transactions that night; I do not believe GZ should be exonerated; I DO believe GZ was "following" TM with evil intent; I do NOT believe it was racial; HOWEVER I get really PO'D when people start messing with the legal system, subverting it for their own purposes AFTER taking oaths. Honesty, integrity is what it SHOULD be about. At least, it keeps my blood pressure ticking!

I also get upset with the media and politicians.

Freckles, I agree with most of your comment. I don't know if GZ should be exonerated or not since all the evidence isn't in, MOM/West haven't gotten some of the evidence nor done important depositions in the case. It's been difficult for them to even get the correct age of DeeDee. I don't think GZ is evil nor do I think he had evil intent, I haven't seen any evidence that suggest GZ was evil or ever was. I agree with you and so does the FBI, it isn't a racially motivated case despite many that continue to spin that aspect. I too loathe those in the MEDIA spinning information and misrepresenting facts, LOL, so does MOM/The Beasley Firm.

I will have to wait until all the evidence, depositions, etc., are in before I could have an opinion as to GZ's fate but at this time, I don't think he should be convicted of 2nd degree murder as do most legal analyst, and I question if the State can prove manslaughter. IF GZ carried an illegal fire arm and didn't have permit, if he beat the chit out of Trayvon, if he didn't have injuries on his face that support witness testimony that he was on bottom, I would feel differently BUT he had a permit for his gun and Trayvon was not beaten. imo, I think there is just too much outstanding information, mostly by the Defense Team SINCE they have NOT had the opportunity to do depositions on important witnesses.

Judge Perry says "there is no trial by ambush in FLa." My best bet is that ALL information is going to come to light, and although the social media, etc., is not going to be released, if ANY of it is relevant as to whom the person Trayvon was, it is going to be used in trial by the Defense, it too will come out.

art tart wrote:

I will have to wait until all the evidence, depositions, etc., are in before I could have an opinion as to GZ's fate but at this time, I don't think he should be convicted of 2nd degree murder as do most legal analyst, and I question if the State can prove their case.[/b] IF GZ carried an illegal fire arm and didn't have permit, if he beat the chit out of Trayvon, if he didn't have injuries on his face that support witness testimony that he was on bottom, I would feel differently BUT he had a permit for his gun and Trayvon was not beaten. imo, I think there is just too much outstanding information, mostly by the Defense Team SINCE they have NOT had the opportunity to do depositions on important witnesses.

Snipped, and blue bold by me.

I completely agree, ArtTart. As time goes on, I think it will become increasingly difficult for the state to prove 2nd degree malice. Especially given the evidence that GZ sustained injuries to both the front and back of his head, and witnesses saw TM astride GZ hitting him. I think it's also significant that GZ had called for police to come BEFORE the confrontation, and apparently witnesses say he was still asking bystanders to call 911. However, I don't think the SYG hearing will conclude in GZ's favor-- I think Judge Nelson will punt the case to a jury trial.

As more evidence has come out, it appears more and more that the 2 were "apart" for a significant amount of time, and then there was a second "meeting/ confrontation". The first "meeting" wasn't really a confrontation (not physical, and no words were exchanged), which seems to be a key point also. Bar brawls, for example-- if a brawl starts inside, then moves to the parking lot and one pulls out a gun and kills the other, typically 2nd degree charges apply. But seeing someone and calling police NEN is not the same as engaging in a fist fight. GZ knew police were on the way, and would arrive imminently. No, I don't think GZ should have got out of the truck or followed TM. That was just sheer stupidity, and could have gotten him killed. But I just don't agree that that level of interaction (getting out of his truck and following), while on the phone with police, rises to the level of malice needed to prove 2nd degree murder.

It appears to me from all I've read that TM did in fact "get away" from GZ initially (far away, relative to a fist fight, and out of sight), but decided to double back and inflict a surprise physical attack on the strange guy he thought was following him. That isn't someone who was fearful, imo. To me, that is someone who was pissed off and confident he could "handle" the follower (ie, teach him a lesson with a beatdown). Add to the evidence that TM was seen on top of GZ, and even more it appears to me that TM was the aggressor in the second "meeting".

Several months ago I felt GZ should be convicted of manslaughter. But as more evidence has come out, I'm not convinced manslaughter is correct. More and more I'm starting to think he should be found not guilty, or have charges dismissed.

Edited to add: I also think the strong factual evidence of the media campaign against him, the NBC editing of the NEN call, the deception with the pictures, Dee Dee's age, the racial epithet that wasn't, and the nefarious actions of the "handlers" and various other groups hell bent on framing him as a racist is going to be a huge basket of evidence at trial. And it will not make the state's case look better or stronger, imo.

But who knows? Cases are won and lost in jury selection. Depends on how voir dire goes.

I think the whole situation is a terrible tragedy. But I do think TM was the aggressor in the second meeting. And sadly, that lead to him getting shot. I do think that if TM had never doubled back and attacked GZ, TM would still be alive. I don't believe GZ would have "hunted him down and shot him", as many have opined. He shot him because TM was beating the crap out of him, and I think he was sincerely afraid for his life at that point.

No matter how it all turns out, one life is lost, and the other is ruined. I don't think GZ could ever rebuild his life to any degree of comfort, even if he is found NG. He will always be a target for potential murder-- whether in prison, or in civilian life.

I want to make it clear I am no GZ fan. I think he's an idiot, frankly. I don't think he handled the situation well at all from the beginning. But I don't think he committed murder of any kind.

KZ an excellent comment touching on many important facts. I too am no GZ fan, I am a strong supporter of our rights to a fair trial and the presumption of innocent until proven guilty.

I loathe the smear campaign lodged against GZ by the Handler's, imo, it has backfired to some degree as many have taken the time to review the actual evidence and separate the misrepresentation of facts by the Media and the Handler's. Promoting the racial element even after the FBI has said it wasn't a racially motivated attack, angered many as we have seen this tactic used over and over.

imo, in the beginning of the case, UNTIL some of the evidence was released, I didn't realize what we know now, all of which are factors that don't support the story that the Handler's put forth of GZ being a "racist murderer" and stalking Trayvon and murdering him. Those are damaging statements and almost impossible for the Defense to overcome for those uninformed about the case and base their opinions solely on Media.

There is so much evidence to be garnered from the Defense depositions yet to be done, imo, Corey may have rushed to bring charges to quell racial tensions, but some of that evidence is unraveling, example: DeeDee.

I too agree this case may be won or lost in voir dire. imo, the jury consultant made all the difference in KC's case, one thing Baez did right, his consultant helped pick the right jury that despite all the evidence and lies, believed Baez.

KZ wrote:

art tart wrote:

I will have to wait until all the evidence, depositions, etc., are in before I could have an opinion as to GZ's fate but at this time, I don't think he should be convicted of 2nd degree murder as do most legal analyst, and I question if the State can prove their case.[/b] IF GZ carried an illegal fire arm and didn't have permit, if he beat the chit out of Trayvon, if he didn't have injuries on his face that support witness testimony that he was on bottom, I would feel differently BUT he had a permit for his gun and Trayvon was not beaten. imo, I think there is just too much outstanding information, mostly by the Defense Team SINCE they have NOT had the opportunity to do depositions on important witnesses.

Snipped, and blue bold by me.

I completely agree, ArtTart. As time goes on, I think it will become increasingly difficult for the state to prove 2nd degree malice. Especially given the evidence that GZ sustained injuries to both the front and back of his head, and witnesses saw TM astride GZ hitting him. I think it's also significant that GZ had called for police to come BEFORE the confrontation, and apparently witnesses say he was still asking bystanders to call 911. However, I don't think the SYG hearing will conclude in GZ's favor-- I think Judge Nelson will punt the case to a jury trial.

As more evidence has come out, it appears more and more that the 2 were "apart" for a significant amount of time, and then there was a second "meeting/ confrontation". The first "meeting" wasn't really a confrontation (not physical, and no words were exchanged), which seems to be a key point also. Bar brawls, for example-- if a brawl starts inside, then moves to the parking lot and one pulls out a gun and kills the other, typically 2nd degree charges apply. But seeing someone and calling police NEN is not the same as engaging in a fist fight. GZ knew police were on the way, and would arrive imminently. No, I don't think GZ should have got out of the truck or followed TM. That was just sheer stupidity, and could have gotten him killed. But I just don't agree that that level of interaction (getting out of his truck and following), while on the phone with police, rises to the level of malice needed to prove 2nd degree murder.

It appears to me from all I've read that TM did in fact "get away" from GZ initially (far away, relative to a fist fight, and out of sight), but decided to double back and inflict a surprise physical attack on the strange guy he thought was following him. That isn't someone who was fearful, imo. To me, that is someone who was pissed off and confident he could "handle" the follower (ie, teach him a lesson with a beatdown). Add to the evidence that TM was seen on top of GZ, and even more it appears to me that TM was the aggressor in the second "meeting".

Several months ago I felt GZ should be convicted of manslaughter. But as more evidence has come out, I'm not convinced manslaughter is correct. More and more I'm starting to think he should be found not guilty, or have charges dismissed.

Edited to add: I also think the strong factual evidence of the media campaign against him, the NBC editing of the NEN call, the deception with the pictures, Dee Dee's age, the racial epithet that wasn't, and the nefarious actions of the "handlers" and various other groups hell bent on framing him as a racist is going to be a huge basket of evidence at trial. And it will not make the state's case look better or stronger, imo.

But who knows? Cases are won and lost in jury selection. Depends on how voir dire goes.

I think the whole situation is a terrible tragedy. But I do think TM was the aggressor in the second meeting. And sadly, that lead to him getting shot. I do think that if TM had never doubled back and attacked GZ, TM would still be alive. I don't believe GZ would have "hunted him down and shot him", as many have opined. He shot him because TM was beating the crap out of him, and I think he was sincerely afraid for his life at that point.

No matter how it all turns out, one life is lost, and the other is ruined. I don't think GZ could ever rebuild his life to any degree of comfort, even if he is found NG. He will always be a target for potential murder-- whether in prison, or in civilian life.

I want to make it clear I am no GZ fan. I think he's an idiot, frankly. I don't think he handled the situation well at all from the beginning. But I don't think he committed murder of any kind.

KZ

No, I don't think GZ should have got out of the truck or followed TM. That was just sheer stupidity, and could have gotten him killed. But I just don't agree that that level of interaction (getting out of his truck and following), while on the phone with police, rises to the level of malice needed to prove 2nd degree murder.

Zimmerman may be guilty of reckless endangerment to himself-
which is not a crime....

art tart wrote:Trayvon Martin: Typical teen or troublemaker?

In the weeks after Trayvon’s shooting death in Sanford in late February, the nation — indeed, the world — heard details of a young life cut short. Whether he was a typical teen or troublemaker, an aggressor or a victim, often depended on who was speaking about Trayvon. Yet in the quiet months since neighborhood watch captain George Zimmerman was charged in the killing, a clearer picture of the African-American teen is coming into focus.

http://www.floridatoday.com/article/20121217/NEWS01/312170006/Trayvon-Martin-Typical-teen-troublemaker-?nclick_check=1

His last suspension, for having marijuana residue in a bag, led his father to take the teen from Miami to his home in Sanford for a few days as punishment.

Maybe I'm missing something, but I am absolutely dumbfounded how anyone could view this as "punishment?" Seriously?? An out of town trip, largely unsupervised long stretches of time, allowed to leave the apartment when he wanted to, TV (sports championship) and video game privileges, and not even "missed" when he didn't return to the apartment all night, because his father thought he went to the "movies"-- THIS is punishment for a drug-related school suspension? Punishment? Seriously?? Holy cow. Not in any universe I can imagine.

And IIRC, the apartment is not Tracy Martin's-- it's Brandi's. And I haven't read a single thing that says they were officially living together.

Just more media inaccuracies/ spin. Spin, spin, spin. Makes my head spin.

You never let a serious crisis go to waste. And what I mean by that it's an opportunity to do things you think you could not do before. - Rahm Emanuel

Mr. Emanuel is currently the newest mayor of Chicago and prior to his current position Emanuel worked in President Obama's administration. In my opinion, many politicians live by this theory. I believe this was used in the death of TM by many of the popular civil rights leaders. Blatantly false information was provided by the media. Unfortunately, crisis after crisis the media hasn't or doesn't care to learn. Sadly, the media is ramping up false allegations in the tragic Newton shooting. Reporters are falsely reporting the shooter used a fully automatic weapon. The shooter used a semi automatic, not a full. When will the media and politicians stop using these horrific tragedies to further their own selfish agenda?

JMO-

Lash wrote:You never let a serious crisis go to waste. And what I mean by that it's an opportunity to do things you think you could not do before. - Rahm Emanuel

Mr. Emanuel is currently the newest mayor of Chicago and prior to his current position Emanuel worked in President Obama's administration. In my opinion, many politicians live by this theory. I believe this was used in the death of TM by many of the popular civil rights leaders. Blatantly false information was provided by the media. Unfortunately, crisis after crisis the media hasn't or doesn't care to learn. Sadly, the media is ramping up false allegations in the tragic Newton shooting. Reporters are falsely reporting the shooter used a fully automatic weapon. The shooter used a semi automatic, not a full. When will the media and politicians stop using these horrific tragedies to further their own selfish agenda?

JMO-

Lash, a true analogy in Trayvon's death imo. This was a tragic death, but for some, an opportunity for profiting, of promoting agendas and themselves, spinning lies, and intimidation are not enough.

I don't know how to get the politicians and activists out of tragedies. I just read an article on Pam Bondi, whom I like, Attorney General in Fla. has written an APPEAL and joined Prosecutor's to force a reporter to reveal a source because if that doesn't happen, the State's case may unravel! WTF? I too am bothered by the over reaching of Prosecutor's.

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

imo, Pam Bondi may well lose this argument, and the State's case may unravel, the Prosecutor's should have had enough evidence before they brought charges. MORE sloppy State Prosecutor's from Fla. imo.

Removed by poster.

Removed by poster.

Freckles wrote:KZ--
The father and TM may have viewed this as punishment. Perhaps, TM had more freedom in his own home and had plans; Dad dais, "Nope! You are going out of town with me! You aren't spending time with your friends and I am not leaving home alone. You can come along and be useful, get to know Brandi's son, etc.."

For a teen, used to more freedom, that WOULD be punishment. Just seen riding in a car with a parent can be anguish!

I think the reason young Martin was sent to Sanford was primarily to get him away from the influences down in Miami Gardens. They got him into an area where he really didn't know anyone.

Not necessarily a punishment since they did some activities involving one the All Star Game venues in Orlando.
_____________________________________________________

On another note this is an article from WSJ's Shelby Steele.
Shelby Steele: The Exploitation of Trayvon Martin
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702303302504577323691134926300.html

Mr. Steele call this early on. The article is from 4/06/12.

This is the last sentence in that article and it fills me with sadness for as far as we have come there are people who are determined to continually drag us back.

...The tragedy surrounding Trayvon's death is not in the possibility that it might have something to do with white racism; the tragedy is in the lustfulness with which so many black leaders, in conjunction with the media, have leapt to exploit his demise for their own power.

About Shelby Steele:

Shelby Steele (born January 1, 1946) is an American author, columnist, documentary film maker, and a Robert J. and Marion E. Oster Senior Fellow at Stanford University's Hoover Institution, specialising in the study of race relations, multiculturalism and affirmative action. In 1990, he received the National Book Critics Circle Award in the general nonfiction category for his book The Content of Our Character.[1]

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

He is a little too conservative, FOR ME, but he is no slouch in the "Big Brain Dept."

Freckles and Just an Opinion, I have to say that I admire that you both are willing to look at two sides. I think I am guilty of not trying to do this more often.

Freckles said:

They tried to hold off but the city threatened to riot and bring in more cities for more riots. Then the President jumped in. Heck, he isn't even an American Black but he decided to make this his cause!

What was bad, IMO, was when the State decided to meet in private and "pray" with TM's family. That looked real bad since the State has a duty to impartially collect the evidence prior to trial. Big no-no.

Freckles - and this is when Alan Derchowitz jumped in after Corey stated it was her job to seek Justice for the family. Alan Derchowitz stated: "it is Corey's job to seek Justice for Trayvon Martin and George Zimmerman, not just Trayvon. The search for the truth is Justice in a trial. But Angela Corey didnt attend Derchowitz's class at Harvard Law School but she was brazen enough to call and threaten Derchowitz and Harvard, I notice she has kept her mouth shut as of late..

Some predict Pam Bondi may become in this case.

Lash

When will the media and politicians stop using these horrific tragedies to further their own selfish agenda?

Shelby Steele

the tragedy is in the lustfulness with which so many black leaders, in conjunction with the media, have leapt to exploit his demise for their own power.

I am glad that Lash and Deb have both shared these comments. They are incredibly relevant to this case and recent events, and for me personally, speak to the content of my own annoyance and moral disgust with the use of both of these tragedies.

There is a Jewish Law referred to as Shiluach HaKen. It is translated to literally mean, 'sending away the mother bird'.
If we wish to catch a bird, we separate the mother from her nest so as not to take advantage of her instinct to stay and protect her clutch thus making her an easy target. If we were to attempt to capture her with her eggs, we would be mis-using a fundamental instinct given to us: compassion.

Taking advantage of others compassion is forbidden, as is abusing or capitalizing on the instincts and emotions of other people.

When we are made aware of beautiful, noble emotions in others, we should never attempt to take advantage of them.

To me it seems very plain that in both of the cases that Lash has mentioned, this is what has been happening.

KZ shared:
Maybe I'm missing something, but I am absolutely dumbfounded how anyone could view this as "punishment?" Seriously?? An out of town trip, largely unsupervised long stretches of time, allowed to leave the apartment when he wanted to, TV (sports championship) and video game privileges, and not even "missed" when he didn't return to the apartment all night, because his father thought he went to the "movies"-- THIS is punishment for a drug-related school suspension? Punishment? Seriously?? Holy cow. Not in any universe I can imagine.

And IIRC, the apartment is not Tracy Martin's-- it's Brandi's. And I haven't read a single thing that says they were officially living together.

Just more media inaccuracies/ spin. Spin, spin, spin. Makes my head spin.

KZ - at first I thought that maybe Tracy thought since Sabrina worked, Trayvon was going to be unsupervised during the day and he would take him to Sanford to be with him but as it turned out, Trayvon didn't appear to be supervised there either, although he was not seeing his friends.

Too, Tracy was still married to Trayvons step-mother when he was staying with Brandi. She seems to have been squeezed out completely, instead, leaving Trayvon at Brandi's.

imo, this isn't a punishment, TAKING Trayvon's cell phone would have been a punishment, but he apparently was having a good time in Sanford until the tragedy.

art tart wrote:

KZ shared:
Maybe I'm missing something, but I am absolutely dumbfounded how anyone could view this as "punishment?" Seriously?? An out of town trip, largely unsupervised long stretches of time, allowed to leave the apartment when he wanted to, TV (sports championship) and video game privileges, and not even "missed" when he didn't return to the apartment all night, because his father thought he went to the "movies"-- THIS is punishment for a drug-related school suspension? Punishment? Seriously?? Holy cow. Not in any universe I can imagine.

And IIRC, the apartment is not Tracy Martin's-- it's Brandi's. And I haven't read a single thing that says they were officially living together.

Just more media inaccuracies/ spin. Spin, spin, spin. Makes my head spin.

KZ - at first I thought that maybe Tracy thought since Sabrina worked, Trayvon was going to be unsupervised during the day and he would take him to Sanford to be with him but as it turned out, Trayvon didn't appear to be supervised there either, although he was not seeing his friends.

Too, Tracy was still married to Trayvons step-mother when he was staying with Brandi. She seems to have been squeezed out completely, instead, leaving Trayvon at Brandi's.

imo, this isn't a punishment, TAKING Trayvon's cell phone would have been a punishment, but he apparently was having a good time in Sanford until the tragedy.

I personally think that Trayvon was taken to Sanford because Tracy and Sybrina were going to split up the ten days of him being at home, Tracy had plans already to go to the mason conference with Brandy and he did not want to sacrifice attending that weekend long event.

I think an added benefit was that Trayvon was physically removed from his social circle, but I think it was really for Tracy Martin's convenience. I am sure Sybrina was not able to miss a week of work at that point, or wanted to save the vacations days for another time.

art tart wrote:KZ an excellent comment touching on many important facts. I too am no GZ fan, I am a strong supporter of our rights to a fair trial and the presumption of innocent until proven guilty.

I loathe the smear campaign lodged against GZ by the Handler's, imo, it has backfired to some degree as many have taken the time to review the actual evidence and separate the misrepresentation of facts by the Media and the Handler's. Promoting the racial element even after the FBI has said it wasn't a racially motivated attack, angered many as we have seen this tactic used over and over.

imo, in the beginning of the case, UNTIL some of the evidence was released, I didn't realize what we know now, all of which are factors that don't support the story that the Handler's put forth of GZ being a "racist murderer" and stalking Trayvon and murdering him. Those are damaging statements and almost impossible for the Defense to overcome for those uninformed about the case and base their opinions solely on Media.

There is so much evidence to be garnered from the Defense depositions yet to be done, imo, Corey may have rushed to bring charges to quell racial tensions, but some of that evidence is unraveling, example: DeeDee.

I too agree this case may be won or lost in voir dire. imo, the jury consultant made all the difference in KC's case, one thing Baez did right, his consultant helped pick the right jury that despite all the evidence and lies, believed Baez.

Art Tart

this case may be won or lost in voir dire

Not if Don West has a say.

Intuitive.
Sharp.
Unrelenting.

And he is bored to death with BDLR.

He could unabashedly draw out jury selection for weeks.

Tamta wrote:

art tart wrote:KZ an excellent comment touching on many important facts. I too am no GZ fan, I am a strong supporter of our rights to a fair trial and the presumption of innocent until proven guilty.

I loathe the smear campaign lodged against GZ by the Handler's, imo, it has backfired to some degree as many have taken the time to review the actual evidence and separate the misrepresentation of facts by the Media and the Handler's. Promoting the racial element even after the FBI has said it wasn't a racially motivated attack, angered many as we have seen this tactic used over and over.

imo, in the beginning of the case, UNTIL some of the evidence was released, I didn't realize what we know now, all of which are factors that don't support the story that the Handler's put forth of GZ being a "racist murderer" and stalking Trayvon and murdering him. Those are damaging statements and almost impossible for the Defense to overcome for those uninformed about the case and base their opinions solely on Media.

There is so much evidence to be garnered from the Defense depositions yet to be done, imo, Corey may have rushed to bring charges to quell racial tensions, but some of that evidence is unraveling, example: DeeDee.

I too agree this case may be won or lost in voir dire. imo, the jury consultant made all the difference in KC's case, one thing Baez did right, his consultant helped pick the right jury that despite all the evidence and lies, believed Baez.

Art Tart

this case may be won or lost in voir dire

Not if Don West has a say.

Intuitive.
Sharp.
Unrelenting.

And he is bored to death with BDLR.

He could unabashedly draw out jury selection for weeks.

Tamta = I hope you are right, but Judge Perry didn't allow vior dire to drag out and set a schedule as to the amount of days he expected it to conclude and that was a capitol case. I don't know what Judge N will do. In KC's case, I thought that Judge P was rigid about some things, since I guess the Defense can't be denied due process, it could be an appeal issue if the Defense felt rushed I guess. But since KC's defense had a jury consultant, it may have moved more quickly. I'd be surprised too if MOM/West didn't have a jury consultant.

art tart wrote:

Tamta wrote:



Not if Don West has a say.

Intuitive.
Sharp.
Unrelenting.

And he is bored to death with BDLR.

He could unabashedly draw out jury selection for weeks.

Tamta = I hope you are right, but Judge Perry didn't allow vior dire to drag out and set a schedule as to the amount of days he expected it to conclude and that was a capitol case. I don't know what Judge N will do. In KC's case, I thought that Judge P was rigid about some things, since I guess the Defense can't be denied due process, it could be an appeal issue if the Defense felt rushed I guess. But since KC's defense had a jury consultant, it may have moved more quickly. I'd be surprised too if MOM/West didn't have a jury consultant.

I am sure they will!

DebFrmHell wrote:Freckles and Just an Opinion, I have to say that I admire that you both are willing to look at two sides. I think I am guilty of not trying to do this more often.

We are each trying to examine the facts and those come too slowly and then, in a rush, they are bundled up and dropped on us.

I try to make some sense of it.

Removed by poster.

DebFrmHell shared:

From her link, "Shelby Steele: The Exploitation of Trayvon Martin"

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702303302504577323691134926300.html

From Link:

When the Cambridge cop or the Duke lacrosse players or the men accused of raping Tawana Brawley tried to defend themselves, they were already so stained by poetic truth as to never be entirely redeemed. No matter the facts—whether Trayvon Martin was his victim or his assailant—George Zimmerman will also never be entirely redeemed.

DebFrmHell - an excellent article, I guess Steele has said what many of us have tried to articulate.

OFF TOPIC: Jesse Jackson's son has resigned from the Senate and is the target of an FBI Investigation into embezzling monies from donations. He has been diagnosed as being bipolar. I read an article about how upset JJ was that his son had resigned from the Senate and the negative reporting on the scandal in the media, but not that JJ, Jr. had embezzled monies, his wife too is involved in the financial scandal. Seems JJ would learn to quit pointing fingers as many fingers are pointing back to the financial assets of the Rainbow Coalition, JJ, his son, the ex Senator.

art tart wrote:

Freckles said:

They tried to hold off but the city threatened to riot and bring in more cities for more riots. Then the President jumped in. Heck, he isn't even an American Black but he decided to make this his cause!

What was bad, IMO, was when the State decided to meet in private and "pray" with TM's family. That looked real bad since the State has a duty to impartially collect the evidence prior to trial. Big no-no.

Freckles - and this is when Alan Derchowitz jumped in after Corey stated it was her job to seek Justice for the family. Alan Derchowitz stated: "it is Corey's job to seek Justice for Trayvon Martin and George Zimmerman, not just Trayvon. The search for the truth is Justice in a trial. But Angela Corey didnt attend Derchowitz's class at Harvard Law School but she was brazen enough to call and threaten Derchowitz and Harvard, I notice she has kept her mouth shut as of late..

Some predict Pam Bondi may become in this case.

Why Alan Dershowitz Is Completely Wrong About the Zimmerman Case

Posted on April 29, 2012 by Susan Simpson

Prof. Alan Dershowitz has gotten a lot of media attention lately for his claims that Special Prosecutor Angela Corey ought to be criminally prosecuted for her actions so far in the prosecution of George Zimmerman. Specifically, Dershowitz believes that the Affidavit of Probable Cause that was filed in support of the State’s Motion for Pretrial Detention on April 12, 2012, was “a crime.” In the Fox News interview where he made the comments, Dershowitz went so far as to suggest that Special Prosecutor Angela Corey ought to be hiring a lawyer to defend herself from potential criminal charges.

But Dershowitz’s claims are, to put it simply, completely wrong. His overblown accusations of criminal conduct on behalf of the prosecutors are not supported by the law, and there is absolutely no basis under which anyone could be charged with wrongdoing due to the specific acts that Dershowitz complains of. Dershowitz does not even attempt to identify any specific statutes or rules which may have been violated by the prosecutors. Instead, rather than providing any actual explanations, his accusations of criminal conduct are based on nothing more than a few empty declarations to the effect that “this is the justice system” and “the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.”

Which sounds nice and everything, but making broad statements about principles is not the same as actually providing support for a specific claim. It is more along the lines of a cheap rhetorical trick than a legal argument.

Read more:

http://viewfromll2.com/2012/04/

WHY Alan Derchowitz was RIGHT about Angela Corey imo!

Just as Alan Derchowitz said, Angela Corey had colored photos of GZ's injuries that she held back. ONCE she finally released them, the State theorists claimed they were doctored.

Angela Corey has charged GZ w/2nd degree murder which Alan Derchowitz said was "overcharging," most Legal Analyst agree w/Alan Derchowitz, the case is overcharged.

Can AC prove 2nd degree murder? imo, if she's counting on DeeDee as the star witness, she's got a problem.


just a note: Angela Corey has been accused of misconduct MANY times before Alan Derchowitz accused her of it and has a reputation for her vindictiveness. Google her name. It's a good read. Obviously Alan Derchowitz knew that about Angela Corey.

In his article last week, Dershowitz said Corey’s “40-minute rant” during a call she placed to the school trying to get him disbarred was the “epitome of unprofessionalism.” In an interview with the Times-Union, he also was critical of Corey for what he called a history of threats and attacks toward those who speak out against her.


http://jacksonville.com/opinion/blog/422234/charles-broward/2012-06-11/harvard-law-professor-alan-dershowitz-now-challenges

The threats of Angela Corey that Alan Derchowitz refers to are well documented. She can add Alan Derchowitz to those she TRIED to intimate and threaten, she made a complete fool of herself. imo.

Alessandra_Deux wrote:

art tart wrote:

Freckles - and this is when Alan Derchowitz jumped in after Corey stated it was her job to seek Justice for the family. Alan Derchowitz stated: "it is Corey's job to seek Justice for Trayvon Martin and George Zimmerman, not just Trayvon. The search for the truth is Justice in a trial. But Angela Corey didnt attend Derchowitz's class at Harvard Law School but she was brazen enough to call and threaten Derchowitz and Harvard, I notice she has kept her mouth shut as of late..

Some predict Pam Bondi may become in this case.

Why Alan Dershowitz Is Completely Wrong About the Zimmerman Case

Posted on April 29, 2012 by Susan Simpson

Prof. Alan Dershowitz has gotten a lot of media attention lately for his claims that Special Prosecutor Angela Corey ought to be criminally prosecuted for her actions so far in the prosecution of George Zimmerman. Specifically, Dershowitz believes that the Affidavit of Probable Cause that was filed in support of the State’s Motion for Pretrial Detention on April 12, 2012, was “a crime.” In the Fox News interview where he made the comments, Dershowitz went so far as to suggest that Special Prosecutor Angela Corey ought to be hiring a lawyer to defend herself from potential criminal charges.

But Dershowitz’s claims are, to put it simply, completely wrong. His overblown accusations of criminal conduct on behalf of the prosecutors are not supported by the law, and there is absolutely no basis under which anyone could be charged with wrongdoing due to the specific acts that Dershowitz complains of. Dershowitz does not even attempt to identify any specific statutes or rules which may have been violated by the prosecutors. Instead, rather than providing any actual explanations, his accusations of criminal conduct are based on nothing more than a few empty declarations to the effect that “this is the justice system” and “the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.”

Which sounds nice and everything, but making broad statements about principles is not the same as actually providing support for a specific claim. It is more along the lines of a cheap rhetorical trick than a legal argument.

Read more:

http://viewfromll2.com/2012/04/

Susan Simpson makes a fair amount of leaps of her own on her blog.

She is also not a criminal attorney but should understand at least the fourth, fifth, and sixth amendments of the U.S. Constitution would be what what Dershowitz would be referring to.

That is kind of a no brainer, Susan.

I am afraid she is guilty of her own criticisms.

art tart wrote:WHY Alan Derchowitz was RIGHT about Angela Corey imo!

Just as Alan Derchowitz said, Angela Corey had colored photos of GZ's injuries that she held back. ONCE she finally released them, the State theorists claimed they were doctored.

Angela Corey has charged GZ w/2nd degree murder which Alan Derchowitz said was "overcharging," most Legal Analyst agree w/Alan Derchowitz, the case is overcharged.

Can AC prove 2nd degree murder? imo, if she's counting on DeeDee as the star witness, she's got a problem.


just a note: Angela Corey has been accused of misconduct MANY times before Alan Derchowitz accused her of it and has a reputation for her vindictiveness. Google her name. It's a good read. Obviously Alan Derchowitz knew that about Angela Corey.

In his article last week, Dershowitz said Corey’s “40-minute rant” during a call she placed to the school trying to get him disbarred was the “epitome of unprofessionalism.” In an interview with the Times-Union, he also was critical of Corey for what he called a history of threats and attacks toward those who speak out against her.


http://jacksonville.com/opinion/blog/422234/charles-broward/2012-06-11/harvard-law-professor-alan-dershowitz-now-challenges

The threats of Angela Corey that Alan Derchowitz refers to are well documented. She can add Alan Derchowitz to those she TRIED to intimate and threaten, she made a complete fool of herself. imo.

When was a complaint filed for misconduct against Angela Corey? I would like to see the documents that support your claim.

Sanford panel asked to help heal relations between community, cops

By Martin E. Comas, Orlando Sentinel

8:45 p.m. EST, December 18, 2012
SANFORD — A group of nearly two dozen Sanford residents was asked Tuesday night to come up with ideas to build better relations between citizens and the police department in the wake of the Trayvon Martin shooting.

Over the next six months, the Police Community Relations Blue Ribbon Panel will be asked to take a look at the Police Department's policies and procedures regarding community relations and suggest how those can be improved.

The panel, including businessmen, lawyers, pastors and a former mayor, also will be responsible for coming up with strategies to strengthen community policing and crime-prevention efforts.

"Give us what you think we need to improve the relations between the community and the Sanford Police Department," City Manager Norton Bonaparte told the 11 panelists who attended the introductory meeting. "I don't think that the trust is there [between the community and the Police Department]. So how do we rebuild that trust?...You have the opportunity to re-shape the Sanford community for years to come."

Read more:

http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/local/breakingnews/os-sanford-police-community-panel-20121218,0,811588.story

Alessandra_Deux wrote:

art tart wrote:WHY Alan Derchowitz was RIGHT about Angela Corey imo!

Just as Alan Derchowitz said, Angela Corey had colored photos of GZ's injuries that she held back. ONCE she finally released them, the State theorists claimed they were doctored.

Angela Corey has charged GZ w/2nd degree murder which Alan Derchowitz said was "overcharging," most Legal Analyst agree w/Alan Derchowitz, the case is overcharged.

Can AC prove 2nd degree murder? imo, if she's counting on DeeDee as the star witness, she's got a problem.


just a note: ]Angela Corey has been accused of misconduct MANY times before Alan Derchowitz accused her of it and has a reputation for her vindictiveness. Google her name. It's a good read. Obviously Alan Derchowitz knew that about Angela Corey.

In his article last week, Dershowitz said Corey’s “40-minute rant” during a call she placed to the school trying to get him disbarred was the “epitome of unprofessionalism.” In an interview with the Times-Union, he also was critical of Corey for what he called a history of threats and attacks toward those who speak out against her.


http://jacksonville.com/opinion/blog/422234/charles-broward/2012-06-11/harvard-law-professor-alan-dershowitz-now-challenges

The threats of Angela Corey that Alan Derchowitz refers to are well documented. She can add Alan Derchowitz to those she TRIED to intimate and threaten, she made a complete fool of herself. imo.

When was a complaint filed for misconduct against Angela Corey? I would like to see the documents that support your claim.

Alessandra - I'd like to know where you read a COMPLAINT had been filed for misconduct? You continue to CHANGE the words of the commenter! I never claimed a COMPLAINT had been filed against Angela Corey though it wouldn't surprise me in the least.

I said ACCUSED, it's well documented, GOOGLE HER NAME and read for yourself. Angela Corey is no stranger to criticism for her threats and intimidation, there are endless articles.

art tart wrote:

Alessandra_Deux wrote:


When was a complaint filed for misconduct against Angela Corey? I would like to see the documents that support your claim.

Alessandra - I'd like to know where you read a COMPLAINT had been filed for misconduct? You continue to CHANGE the words of the commenter! I never claimed a COMPLAINT had been filed against Angela Corey though it wouldn't surprise me in the least.

I said ACCUSED, it's well documented, GOOGLE HER NAME and read for yourself. Angela Corey is no stranger to criticism for her threats and intimidation, there are endless articles.

"Accused of misconduct" and "criticized for her decisions" are two entirely different issues.

A letter of complaint sent DIRECTLY to Angela Corey.

http://trayvon.axiomamnesia.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/freedom-watch-complaint-letter-to-angela-corey.pdf

In 2006, Corey was fired by Harry Shorstein, former state attorney for Florida's 4th Judicial Circuit. He said the firing stemmed from a complaint by a law school intern that Corey was abusive toward women. Corey responded with letters criticizing the intern's professor and dean, Shorstein said. "I said that was unprofessional, you must apologize. She refused."

http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/nation/story/2012-04-11/corey-florida-prosecutor-trayvon-martin/54189310/1

Notice the pattern of Corey to threaten and intimidate?.

There was a complaint filed against Corey in 2006, but it is "forbidden" and can't be accessed through google. Corey was under suspicion for campaign finance irregularities.

The complaint from 2006 is in reference to this article:


Formal Complaint To Be Filed Against Zimmerman Prosecutor, Angela Corey

http://beforeitsnews.com/opinion-conservative/2012/04/formal-complaint-to-be-filed-against-zimmerman-prosecutor-angela-corey-2068644.html

Did George Zimmerman’s Prosecutor Sanitize Her Financial Disclosures?
I’ve confirmed that, when approached for disclosure of financial documents regarding Corey’s campaign, her campaign Treasurer, Marshall Gunn‘s response appears to indicate the campaign is not in possession of said records.
(how convenient!)
http://gawker.com/5904420/did-george-zimmermans-prosecutor-sanitize-her-financial-disclosures

CRITICISM of Angela Corey:

Critics have pointed out Corey repeatedly threatens to sue critics of her behavior, often while in the middle of a case being criticized.[34] This behavior could be a violation of standards set forth by the American Bar Association and the Florida Bar Association.[35] In addition, Corey has mischaracterized trial evidence in her public remarks in order to counter criticism. After Marissa Alexander (case details above) was sentenced to 20 years, Ms. Corey told one news outlet, “I understand domestic situations are volatile, and they’re complicated. But the bottom line is she fired a loaded weapon directly at a man and his two sons and we cannot allow that as a way to solve domestic disputes.”[36] In reality, there was no evidence to suggest that Ms. Alexander shot directly at the children or intended to hurt or harm the children.

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

There too are 2 petitions against Corey. One in regards to charging a 12 yr. old boy as an adult.

Angela Corey was sued for a wrongful termination, the list goes on and on and on.................. I've read enough about Angela Corey, there is a common thread that runs through her cases imo, that of intimidation for any criticism. It seems she has run unopposed and that's why she has kept her job. If you are interested, google Angela Corey and read numerous articles.

art tart wrote:A letter of complaint sent DIRECTLY to Angela Corey.

http://trayvon.axiomamnesia.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/freedom-watch-complaint-letter-to-angela-corey.pdf

In 2006, Corey was fired by Harry Shorstein, former state attorney for Florida's 4th Judicial Circuit. He said the firing stemmed from a complaint by a law school intern that Corey was abusive toward women. Corey responded with letters criticizing the intern's professor and dean, Shorstein said. "I said that was unprofessional, you must apologize. She refused."

http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/nation/story/2012-04-11/corey-florida-prosecutor-trayvon-martin/54189310/1

Notice the pattern of Corey to threaten and intimidate?.

There was a complaint filed against Corey in 2006, but it is "forbidden" and can't be accessed through google. Corey was under suspicion for campaign finance irregularities.

The complaint from 2006 is in reference to this article:


Formal Complaint To Be Filed Against Zimmerman Prosecutor, Angela Corey

http://beforeitsnews.com/opinion-conservative/2012/04/formal-complaint-to-be-filed-against-zimmerman-prosecutor-angela-corey-2068644.html

Did George Zimmerman’s Prosecutor Sanitize Her Financial Disclosures?
I’ve confirmed that, when approached for disclosure of financial documents regarding Corey’s campaign, her campaign Treasurer, Marshall Gunn‘s response appears to indicate the campaign is not in possession of said records.
(how convenient!)
http://gawker.com/5904420/did-george-zimmermans-prosecutor-sanitize-her-financial-disclosures

CRITICISM of Angela Corey:

Critics have pointed out Corey repeatedly threatens to sue critics of her behavior, often while in the middle of a case being criticized.[34] This behavior could be a violation of standards set forth by the American Bar Association and the Florida Bar Association.[35] In addition, Corey has mischaracterized trial evidence in her public remarks in order to counter criticism. After Marissa Alexander (case details above) was sentenced to 20 years, Ms. Corey told one news outlet, “I understand domestic situations are volatile, and they’re complicated. But the bottom line is she fired a loaded weapon directly at a man and his two sons and we cannot allow that as a way to solve domestic disputes.”[36] In reality, there was no evidence to suggest that Ms. Alexander shot directly at the children or intended to hurt or harm the children.

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

There too is a petition against Corey. (available through Google, I could post links all night)

Angela Corey was sued for a wrongful termination, the list goes on and on and on.................. I've read enough about Angela Corey, there is a common thread that runs through her cases imo, that of intimidation for any criticism. It seems she has run unopposed and that's why she has kept her job. If you are interested, google Angela Corey and read numerous articles.

Shorstein dismisses longtime assistant

"The 52-year-old lawyer has been blunt about her intentions to challenge Shorstein for his job in the 2008 election, but said Thursday she couldn't speculate if that figured into his decision to fire her."

http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/nation/story/2012-04-11/corey-florida-prosecutor-trayvon-martin/54189310/1

-----------

"Corey made the decision to run for the office of State Attorney in 2006. After her candidacy became known, her working relationship with Shorstein became difficult. He terminated her employment in November 2006. Afterwards, she was hired by John Tanner, State Attorney for the Seventh Judicial Circuit, to perform the same job functions she did in Jacksonville, working homicide cases in St. Johns County.

The following day, Shorstein called a news conference and announced that he would retire at the end of his current term and not run for re-election in 2008. In the following election, Shorstein supported his chief assistant, Jay Plotkin. On August 26, 2008, Corey defeated Plotkin with more than 64% of the votes cast."

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

Alessandra_Deux wrote:

art tart wrote:

Freckles - and this is when Alan Derchowitz jumped in after Corey stated it was her job to seek Justice for the family. Alan Derchowitz stated: "it is Corey's job to seek Justice for Trayvon Martin and George Zimmerman, not just Trayvon. The search for the truth is Justice in a trial. But Angela Corey didnt attend Derchowitz's class at Harvard Law School but she was brazen enough to call and threaten Derchowitz and Harvard, I notice she has kept her mouth shut as of late..

Some predict Pam Bondi may become in this case.

Why Alan Dershowitz Is Completely Wrong About the Zimmerman Case

Posted on April 29, 2012 by Susan Simpson

Prof. Alan Dershowitz has gotten a lot of media attention lately for his claims that Special Prosecutor Angela Corey ought to be criminally prosecuted for her actions so far in the prosecution of George Zimmerman. Specifically, Dershowitz believes that the Affidavit of Probable Cause that was filed in support of the State’s Motion for Pretrial Detention on April 12, 2012, was “a crime.” In the Fox News interview where he made the comments, Dershowitz went so far as to suggest that Special Prosecutor Angela Corey ought to be hiring a lawyer to defend herself from potential criminal charges.

But Dershowitz’s claims are, to put it simply, completely wrong. His overblown accusations of criminal conduct on behalf of the prosecutors are not supported by the law, and there is absolutely no basis under which anyone could be charged with wrongdoing due to the specific acts that Dershowitz complains of. Dershowitz does not even attempt to identify any specific statutes or rules which may have been violated by the prosecutors. Instead, rather than providing any actual explanations, his accusations of criminal conduct are based on nothing more than a few empty declarations to the effect that “this is the justice system” and “the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.”

Which sounds nice and everything, but making broad statements about principles is not the same as actually providing support for a specific claim. It is more along the lines of a cheap rhetorical trick than a legal argument.

Read more:

http://viewfromll2.com/2012/04/

1. The prosecution does not appear to have seen the photo until eight days after the affidavit was submitted to the court. The Affidavit of Probable Cause was submitted to the court on April 12th, and was executed the day before on April 11th. The ABC News photograph of Zimmerman’s head was not released until the day of Zimmerman’s bond hearing, on April 20th. The photograph was taken on a cellphone by a friend or neighbor of Zimmerman’s, and there is nothing suggesting that the photo was released to investigators before it was given to ABC News.

Nothing to suggest but this:
On 3/20 (Crosby and Veaudry/ FDLE & SAO) and 3/26(BDLR and O'Steen/ SAO), W13 who took the photo, was interviewed by SAO. Much earlier than what she is saying as approx 4/12/12-4/20/12.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/93646122/Redacted-witness-and-evidence-list-filed-by-the-state-in-George-Zimmerman-case Page 5 of 8

If you like I will find the link for the SW for his computer. It is in the first doc dump, IIRC. Maybe Susan should have waited to see the DocDump before challenging Dershowitz's statement. The black/white/fax/copy or whatever that was sent in that dump. It is only 6-7 months later that we are seeing what they were seeing when they looked at the digital from W13's computer back in March.

Out of law school for 2-3 yrs...so Dershowitz is wrong. Smart girl though, too bad she was the one who was not quite correct on this.


Susan Simpson

Ms. Simpson is an associate in the firm’s litigation practice group. She received her J.D., cum laude, in 2009 from the George Washington University Law School, and her undergraduate degree from Agnes Scott College.

Bar Admissions:
Virginia, 2009

Education:
George Washington University Law School, Washington, District of Columbia, 2009 J.D.
Agnes Scott College, Decatur, Georgia, 2006 B.A.

http://www.generalcounsellaw.com/biographies/susan-simpson/

ETA: I quit after her first bullet. It was too off base to consider reading more...

DebFrmHell wrote:

Alessandra_Deux wrote:


Why Alan Dershowitz Is Completely Wrong About the Zimmerman Case

Posted on April 29, 2012 by Susan Simpson

Prof. Alan Dershowitz has gotten a lot of media attention lately for his claims that Special Prosecutor Angela Corey ought to be criminally prosecuted for her actions so far in the prosecution of George Zimmerman. Specifically, Dershowitz believes that the Affidavit of Probable Cause that was filed in support of the State’s Motion for Pretrial Detention on April 12, 2012, was “a crime.” In the Fox News interview where he made the comments, Dershowitz went so far as to suggest that Special Prosecutor Angela Corey ought to be hiring a lawyer to defend herself from potential criminal charges.

But Dershowitz’s claims are, to put it simply, completely wrong. His overblown accusations of criminal conduct on behalf of the prosecutors are not supported by the law, and there is absolutely no basis under which anyone could be charged with wrongdoing due to the specific acts that Dershowitz complains of. Dershowitz does not even attempt to identify any specific statutes or rules which may have been violated by the prosecutors. Instead, rather than providing any actual explanations, his accusations of criminal conduct are based on nothing more than a few empty declarations to the effect that “this is the justice system” and “the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.”

Which sounds nice and everything, but making broad statements about principles is not the same as actually providing support for a specific claim. It is more along the lines of a cheap rhetorical trick than a legal argument.

Read more:

http://viewfromll2.com/2012/04/

1. The prosecution does not appear to have seen the photo until eight days after the affidavit was submitted to the court. The Affidavit of Probable Cause was submitted to the court on April 12th, and was executed the day before on April 11th. The ABC News photograph of Zimmerman’s head was not released until the day of Zimmerman’s bond hearing, on April 20th. The photograph was taken on a cellphone by a friend or neighbor of Zimmerman’s, and there is nothing suggesting that the photo was released to investigators before it was given to ABC News.

Nothing to suggest but this:
On 3/20 (Crosby and Veaudry/ FDLE & SAO) and 3/26(BDLR and O'Steen/ SAO), W13 who took the photo, was interviewed by SAO. Much earlier than what she is saying as approx 4/12/12-4/20/12.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/93646122/Redacted-witness-and-evidence-list-filed-by-the-state-in-George-Zimmerman-case Page 5 of 8

If you like I will find the link for the SW for his computer. It is in the first doc dump, IIRC. Maybe Susan should have waited to see the DocDump before challenging Dershowitz's statement. The black/white/fax/copy or whatever that was sent in that dump. It is only 6-7 months later that we are seeing what they were seeing when they looked at the digital from W13's computer back in March.

Out of law school for 2-3 yrs...so Dershowitz is wrong. Smart girl though, too bad she was the one who was not quite correct on this.


Susan Simpson

Ms. Simpson is an associate in the firm’s litigation practice group. She received her J.D., cum laude, in 2009 from the George Washington University Law School, and her undergraduate degree from Agnes Scott College.

Bar Admissions:
Virginia, 2009

Education:
George Washington University Law School, Washington, District of Columbia, 2009 J.D.
Agnes Scott College, Decatur, Georgia, 2006 B.A.

http://www.generalcounsellaw.com/biographies/susan-simpson/

ETA: I quit after her first bullet. It was too off base to consider reading more...

But they had already seen Zimmerman's medical records from the Altamonte Springs clinic.

DebFrmHell wrote:

Alessandra_Deux wrote:


Why Alan Dershowitz Is Completely Wrong About the Zimmerman Case

Posted on April 29, 2012 by Susan Simpson

Prof. Alan Dershowitz has gotten a lot of media attention lately for his claims that Special Prosecutor Angela Corey ought to be criminally prosecuted for her actions so far in the prosecution of George Zimmerman. Specifically, Dershowitz believes that the Affidavit of Probable Cause that was filed in support of the State’s Motion for Pretrial Detention on April 12, 2012, was “a crime.” In the Fox News interview where he made the comments, Dershowitz went so far as to suggest that Special Prosecutor Angela Corey ought to be hiring a lawyer to defend herself from potential criminal charges.

But Dershowitz’s claims are, to put it simply, completely wrong. His overblown accusations of criminal conduct on behalf of the prosecutors are not supported by the law, and there is absolutely no basis under which anyone could be charged with wrongdoing due to the specific acts that Dershowitz complains of. Dershowitz does not even attempt to identify any specific statutes or rules which may have been violated by the prosecutors. Instead, rather than providing any actual explanations, his accusations of criminal conduct are based on nothing more than a few empty declarations to the effect that “this is the justice system” and “the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.”

Which sounds nice and everything, but making broad statements about principles is not the same as actually providing support for a specific claim. It is more along the lines of a cheap rhetorical trick than a legal argument.

Read more:

http://viewfromll2.com/2012/04/

1. The prosecution does not appear to have seen the photo until eight days after the affidavit was submitted to the court. The Affidavit of Probable Cause was submitted to the court on April 12th, and was executed the day before on April 11th. The ABC News photograph of Zimmerman’s head was not released until the day of Zimmerman’s bond hearing, on April 20th. The photograph was taken on a cellphone by a friend or neighbor of Zimmerman’s, and there is nothing suggesting that the photo was released to investigators before it was given to ABC News.

Nothing to suggest but this:
On 3/20 (Crosby and Veaudry/ FDLE & SAO) and 3/26(BDLR and O'Steen/ SAO), W13 who took the photo, was interviewed by SAO. Much earlier than what she is saying as approx 4/12/12-4/20/12.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/93646122/Redacted-witness-and-evidence-list-filed-by-the-state-in-George-Zimmerman-case Page 5 of 8

If you like I will find the link for the SW for his computer. It is in the first doc dump, IIRC. Maybe Susan should have waited to see the DocDump before challenging Dershowitz's statement. The black/white/fax/copy or whatever that was sent in that dump. It is only 6-7 months later that we are seeing what they were seeing when they looked at the digital from W13's computer back in March.

Out of law school for 2-3 yrs...so Dershowitz is wrong. Smart girl though, too bad she was the one who was not quite correct on this.

Susan Simpson

Ms. Simpson is an associate in the firm’s litigation practice group. She received her J.D., cum laude, in 2009 from the George Washington University Law School, and her undergraduate degree from Agnes Scott College.

Bar Admissions:
Virginia, 2009

Education:
George Washington University Law School, Washington, District of Columbia, 2009 J.D.
Agnes Scott College, Decatur, Georgia, 2006 B.A.

http://www.generalcounsellaw.com/biographies/susan-simpson/

ETA: I quit after her first bullet. It was too off base to consider reading more...

DebFrmHell - thanks for sharing this information.

More criticism of Angela Corey from an Attorney that has a BLOG.

An unsolicited memo to State Attorney Angela Corey: You are a public official, and people have the right to express an opinion about how you are doing your job.

When those opinions are negative, throwing a hissy fit and making threats do not reflect well. With Corey, there's a pattern of that.

http://jacksonville.com/opinion/blog/400601/ron-littlepage/2012-06-08/ron-littlepage-angela-coreys-hissy-fits-threats

imo, an interesting opinion piece by Mark NeJame. Most have probably already read it.

Did politics drive prosecution in Trayvon Martin case?

http://www.cnn.com/2012/06/19/opinion/nejame-angela-corey/index.html

It's the same criticism, over and over and over.

In addition to Angela Corey calling Harvard and threatening Alan Derchowitz and Harvard with a Law Suit, she RANTED for 40 minutes.

Alessandra_Deux wrote:
But they had already seen Zimmerman's medical records from the Altamonte Springs clinic.

I'm not sure what you're getting at here, Alessandra. Were you alluding to GZ's injuries not being life threatening? That the clinic did something noteworthy, or didn't do something they should have done, like an xray?

Many (many!) opine that GZ "didn't" have a nasal cartilage fracture, and that this wasn't "documented" in an xray, therefore it didn't exist. As if a nasal fracture did, or did not justify claims of self defense (which makes exactly no sense to me! A concussion is far more worrisome than broken nasal cartilage.)

I've looked at the Altamonte Springs records released so far-- and I think they did a fine job, btw. He certainly didn't have life threatening injuries. His care was appropriate, imo. (I feel sorry for the PA whose name will be dragged thru the mud on this.) What seems to be focused on a lot in commentary is that he didn't have any "xrays documenting his broken nose." Very, very seldom are any radiographs taken for broken cartilage-- almost never. Xrays are not indicated or recommended, even though posters and legal types seem to harp on this. He almost certainly had broken nasal cartilage-- the treatment was the same with or without an xray-- which may not have even documented anything. Xrays are typically done if orbital fractures or comminuted facial fractures need to be ruled out, which wasn't the case from his history and presentation.

The PA recommended he see ENT-- but he didn't. That doesn't change anything-- many patients don't follow up with recommendations. ENT wouldn't have done anything differently either, most likely. Any surgery for deviated septum would have been months down the road, if at all.

I have seen his Altamonte Springs medical records commented on before, and I'm always baffled at what seems to be the implication of those commenting on his records.

I think the sense for many is that they believe SYG only applies if you are very clearly about to die-- that only if you are, for example, beaten to the point of losing consciousness are you justified in shooting in self defense. But that isn't how the statute is written, if I understand all of the legal language and ramifications.

Clearly he was injured, and with almost complete certainty, the deceased caused those injuries in the setting and timeframe where the deceased initiated the physical encounter. GZ's actions as a shooter, immediately before, and after, the horrible incident, are those of a tremendously scared person, imo, who feared great bodily harm or loss of his life.

IMO, GZ was incredibly stupid for getting out of the truck and risking a potential confrontation, once police were on the way. But I still don't think that what he did as a shooter legally carrying his weapon, rises to the level of legal murder, given the actions of TM. TM had a choice to fight or not fight. And I believe, from the evidence, that he initiated the physical aggression when he did not "need" to do so. He was safe, he got away from the creepy GZ-- but still went back and felt the desire to physically confront GZ. That confrontation, IMO, is far more relevant to the whole situation than GZ eyeing him and calling the police.

GZ wasn't legally required to lay there and be beaten until dead or unconsciousness, was he? Isn't that the crux of the SYG controversy, when not in your home "castle?"

KZ wrote:

Alessandra_Deux wrote:
But they had already seen Zimmerman's medical records from the Altamonte Springs clinic.

I'm not sure what you're getting at here, Alessandra. Were you alluding to GZ's injuries not being life threatening? That the clinic did something noteworthy, or didn't do something they should have done, like an xray?

Many (many!) opine that GZ "didn't" have a nasal cartilage fracture, and that this wasn't "documented" in an xray, therefore it didn't exist. As if a nasal fracture did, or did not justify claims of self defense (which makes exactly no sense to me! A concussion is far more worrisome than broken nasal cartilage.)

I've looked at the Altamonte Springs records released so far-- and I think they did a fine job, btw. He certainly didn't have life threatening injuries. His care was appropriate, imo. (I feel sorry for the PA whose name will be dragged thru the mud on this.) What seems to be focused on a lot in commentary is that he didn't have any "xrays documenting his broken nose." Very, very seldom are any radiographs taken for broken cartilage-- almost never. Xrays are not indicated or recommended, even though posters and legal types seem to harp on this. He almost certainly had broken nasal cartilage-- the treatment was the same with or without an xray-- which may not have even documented anything. Xrays are typically done if orbital fractures or comminuted facial fractures need to be ruled out, which wasn't the case from his history and presentation.

The PA recommended he see ENT-- but he didn't. That doesn't change anything-- many patients don't follow up with recommendations. ENT wouldn't have done anything differently either, most likely. Any surgery for deviated septum would have been months down the road, if at all.

I have seen his Altamonte Springs medical records commented on before, and I'm always baffled at what seems to be the implication of those commenting on his records.

I think the sense for many is that they believe SYG only applies if you are very clearly about to die-- that only if you are, for example, beaten to the point of losing consciousness are you justified in shooting in self defense. But that isn't how the statute is written, if I understand all of the legal language and ramifications.

Clearly he was injured, and with almost complete certainty, the deceased caused those injuries in the setting and timeframe where the deceased initiated the physical encounter. GZ's actions as a shooter, immediately before, and after, the horrible incident, are those of a tremendously scared person, imo, who feared great bodily harm or loss of his life.

IMO, GZ was incredibly stupid for getting out of the truck and risking a potential confrontation, once police were on the way. But I still don't think that what he did as a shooter legally carrying his weapon, rises to the level of legal murder, given the actions of TM. TM had a choice to fight or not fight. And I believe, from the evidence, that he initiated the physical aggression when he did not "need" to do so. He was safe, he got away from the creepy GZ-- but still went back and felt the desire to physically confront GZ. That confrontation, IMO, is far more relevant to the whole situation than GZ eyeing him and calling the police.

GZ wasn't legally required to lay there and be beaten until dead or unconsciousness, was he? Isn't that the crux of the SYG controversy, when not in your home "castle?"

I was referring to Zimmerman's injuries not being life threatening. That's all.

Alessandra_Deux wrote:

KZ wrote:

I'm not sure what you're getting at here, Alessandra. Were you alluding to GZ's injuries not being life threatening? That the clinic did something noteworthy, or didn't do something they should have done, like an xray?

Many (many!) opine that GZ "didn't" have a nasal cartilage fracture, and that this wasn't "documented" in an xray, therefore it didn't exist. As if a nasal fracture did, or did not justify claims of self defense (which makes exactly no sense to me! A concussion is far more worrisome than broken nasal cartilage.)

I've looked at the Altamonte Springs records released so far-- and I think they did a fine job, btw. He certainly didn't have life threatening injuries. His care was appropriate, imo. (I feel sorry for the PA whose name will be dragged thru the mud on this.) What seems to be focused on a lot in commentary is that he didn't have any "xrays documenting his broken nose." Very, very seldom are any radiographs taken for broken cartilage-- almost never. Xrays are not indicated or recommended, even though posters and legal types seem to harp on this. He almost certainly had broken nasal cartilage-- the treatment was the same with or without an xray-- which may not have even documented anything. Xrays are typically done if orbital fractures or comminuted facial fractures need to be ruled out, which wasn't the case from his history and presentation.

The PA recommended he see ENT-- but he didn't. That doesn't change anything-- many patients don't follow up with recommendations. ENT wouldn't have done anything differently either, most likely. Any surgery for deviated septum would have been months down the road, if at all.

I have seen his Altamonte Springs medical records commented on before, and I'm always baffled at what seems to be the implication of those commenting on his records.

I think the sense for many is that they believe SYG only applies if you are very clearly about to die-- that only if you are, for example, beaten to the point of losing consciousness are you justified in shooting in self defense. But that isn't how the statute is written, if I understand all of the legal language and ramifications.

Clearly he was injured, and with almost complete certainty, the deceased caused those injuries in the setting and timeframe where the deceased initiated the physical encounter. GZ's actions as a shooter, immediately before, and after, the horrible incident, are those of a tremendously scared person, imo, who feared great bodily harm or loss of his life.

IMO, GZ was incredibly stupid for getting out of the truck and risking a potential confrontation, once police were on the way. But I still don't think that what he did as a shooter legally carrying his weapon, rises to the level of legal murder, given the actions of TM. TM had a choice to fight or not fight. And I believe, from the evidence, that he initiated the physical aggression when he did not "need" to do so. He was safe, he got away from the creepy GZ-- but still went back and felt the desire to physically confront GZ. That confrontation, IMO, is far more relevant to the whole situation than GZ eyeing him and calling the police.

GZ wasn't legally required to lay there and be beaten until dead or unconsciousness, was he? Isn't that the crux of the SYG controversy, when not in your home "castle?"

I was referring to Zimmerman's injuries not being life threatening. That's all.

You do not have to wait until you are dead to use deadly force.

art tart wrote:More criticism of Angela Corey from an Attorney that has a BLOG.

An unsolicited memo to State Attorney Angela Corey: You are a public official, and people have the right to express an opinion about how you are doing your job.

When those opinions are negative, throwing a hissy fit and making threats do not reflect well. With Corey, there's a pattern of that.

http://jacksonville.com/opinion/blog/400601/ron-littlepage/2012-06-08/ron-littlepage-angela-coreys-hissy-fits-threats

imo, an interesting opinion piece by Mark NeJame. Most have probably already read it.

Did politics drive prosecution in Trayvon Martin case?

http://www.cnn.com/2012/06/19/opinion/nejame-angela-corey/index.html

It's the same criticism, over and over and over.

In addition to Angela Corey calling Harvard and threatening Alan Derchowitz and Harvard with a Law Suit, she RANTED for 40 minutes.

NeJame

Regardless of the outcome, Corey is protected by prosecutorial immunity for her actions, right or wrong. [More..]

NeJame

Corey is a public official and public person.

Not quite accurate , it seems and NeJame may not be aware of the Morse vs Spitzer decision.

Probable cause, may protect officials who fabricated evidence from liability under the Fourth Amendment, since the prosecution isn't entirely baseless. But that protection doesn't extend to violations of the constitutional right to a fair trial.

Chief Judge Carol Amon of federal district court, Brooklyn

Even where no Fourth Amendment violation occurred because there was probable cause to act (thereby rendering a malicious prosecution claim unavailable), an independent constitutional claim for the denial of the right to a fair trial can proceed ... based on allegations that a police officer fabricated evidence, if that fabrication caused a deprivation of the plaintiff's liberty... [More..] The court harmonizes [Ricciuti and Jocks] to stand for the principle that a government official who falsifies evidence against an accused may be subject to liability ... for violating the accused's Fifth, Sixth and Fourteenth Amendment right to a fair trial, and the existence of probable cause is irrelevant to the resolution of this claim.

Amon also addresses the issue of when a prosecutor ceases to be an investigator and becomes an advocate shielded by prosecutorial immunity. Probable cause is because it's a reasonable dividing line: Once prosecutors determine there's probable cause to arrest or indict, they become advocates, not investigators. In this case, the dentist alleged that the deputy AG -- who had overseen the case for years before it reached a grand jury -- was involved in fabricating patient records to present to the grand jury. The judge said that because the AG was involved in amassing evidence before there was probable cause to arrest, the dentist's unfair trial claim can move forward.



http://law.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/new-york/nyedce/1:2007cv04793/275139/80


http://www.cnn.com/2012/06/19/opinion/nejame-angela-corey/index.html

http://www.courthousenews.com/2012/08/07/dentist12.pdf

Tamta -

NeJame opined:
A grand jury could have appropriately considered the case. That's what grand juries do.
Was there a fear that the grand jury might consider the evidence and not indict? Sure looks like it. If that's true, then the question is whether a fair and impartial review of the evidence actually occurred. Or were the charges that Corey brought a foregone conclusion from the onset?

I read this statement over and over all over the internet. imo, it appears Corey disallowing the Grand Jury accomplished exactly what Scott wanted and Corey made sure charges were brought. The problem is, she now has to prove them, and the evidence doesn't imo, support her theory of events, especially for 2nd degree murder.

in conclusion NeJame shared:

Were the charges brought against Zimmerman in Martin's death decided purely on the basis of the evidence and facts, or were political considerations in play, such as Scott's and Corey's efforts to appeal to the African-American community?

I hope Dershowitz and others keep their scrutiny, questions and concerns forthcoming and don't relent. Our democracy and the Constitution require it.

I'm glad NeJame wants Derchwitz and the public to continue the pressure to hold everyone in the case accountable. I hope all of the Political aspects are exposed, of course I expect the Handler's to continue the spin forever regardless of the results.

Freckles wrote:

DebFrmHell wrote:Freckles and Just an Opinion, I have to say that I admire that you both are willing to look at two sides. I think I am guilty of not trying to do this more often.

We are each trying to examine the facts and those come too slowly and then, in a rush, they are bundled up and dropped on us.

I try to make some sense of it.

I am not a fan of GZ but I don't want to wear blinders... Initially I was appalled by what was being brandished about hearing only the media fluff and misrepresentations. Then as time passed and the facts started to become known I had to recognize that I was having an emotional response. I would far rather step back and respond to the truth (if I can find it) or at least dig to find and understand what is really happening. I don't know that we will ever know the truth but I would at least like to be able to justify why he is found guilty or not guilty as the case may be from my understanding of the facts.. JMO

Just---
Truth be told, I am sickened by all the parties involved.
Lies, cheats, deception; media ploys, court jesters all.