George Zimmerman / Trayvon Martin Case #3

Page 3 of 20 Previous  1, 2, 3, 4 ... 11 ... 20  Next

View previous topic View next topic Go down

Re: George Zimmerman / Trayvon Martin Case #3

Post by Gizmo711 on Sun Jun 10, 2012 5:04 am

CherokeeNative wrote:Tamta - I am not trying to badger you, but I can't help but feel that you are not clear on what testifying under oath means. And how, although GZ has opted to shield himself behind his constitutional rights to remain silent, he is nevertheless obligated to not allow someone to testify to facts on his behalf that he knows to be anything but the truth and the whole truth. Half truths, omissions, and flat out lies must be relayed to his attorney who can inform the court. And believe me, had MOM known the truth, he would never have allowed GZ's family to commit a fraud upon the Court. He must stand before this Court long after GZ's case is over and he has a reputation to uphold for that reason. On the other hand, I do not know how you could think, if you do, that BDLR or the Court could have possibly known of the amounts that had been donated or that GZ and his wife had been spending those monies to pay their personal expenses and moving those funds about into their own personal accounts. When you testify under oath, you are obligated to speak the whole truth and nothing but the truth. If you do not understand the question, you are expected to ask for clarification. As a nursing student, I am going to go off on a ledge here and guess that she has at least an average I.Q. They asked her if she and/or GZ had any money to use towards bail - she stated no. She was asked what about the Paypal account and she again feigned ignorance. If there was any part of that line of questioning that she was unsure of, she was obligated to ask for clarification. And GZ was obligated to at a very minimum inform his attorney during the hearing that they had access to that sum of money. As BDLR stated, there is no other way to categorize it except that it was a blatant lie.




Also, the form that he has to fill out is very clear. Do you have any money in Banks, stocks etc. Do you own property etc. etc., When one goes in front of the judge, the judge has this form in front of him and will also ask these questions again. So if Zimmerman refused to answer any questions he still had to fill out the form.

Now he could have said "I don't know" or "I'm not sure", which is why the questions were asked during the hearing.

Either way one looks at it, Zimmemran used his attorney to lie, and his wife to lie, and he had them lie to the judge that will be handling his case. Now if that isn't bold, I don't know what is. It shows a total disrespect for the court, it shows how little he thinks of the law.

So now, not only does he have little regard for a human life, but he added to it by showing that he has little regard for our system as well. Zimmerman is self serving, he committed a serious crime and is charged with "murder two" and all he was able to concern himself with was to try and keep all that money from the court finding out.

He is used to people taking the fall for him (as stated in a "my space" page") and probably his daddy getting him off when ever he could. Zimmemran has shown violence in the past, has a record to prove it. Somehow he always managed to get off, and he feels that this time will be no different. So he was protecting the money (more than he ever thought he would see in a lifetime) so when this is all over, and the tax payers footed the bill, he will go on his merry way, laughing at everyone.

As for those pictures taken of Zimmerman, they describe him to a tee. The last one plainly shows that he removed mustach and beard and let his hair grow to try and change his appearance. Usually the perp grows a beard and mustach to conceal his identity, but seeing as how George already had these things, he reversed them. When he was given 48 hours to turn himself in, it was not long enough to grow these things back, he also couldn't run to a barber to get his head shaved again....just not enough time....

I don't think George will be given another bond, but if he does get one, it will be so high that he wont be able to make it without asking his attorney to throw in some of his retainer (good luck Georgie with that), and seeing as he also was so arrogant as to not even settle up with the bondsman, I doubt that any bondsman will trust him without full payment up front.

In other words...Zimmerman screwed himself this time... And I doubt that O'Mara is going to go out of his way to get Zimmerman a bond...He may try and make a case by saying that Georgie is not going to run etc., so the bond should remain the same. But I doubt that the Judge (after being made a fool of) is going to go along with that. Someone has to show Georgie that he is not in charge, and who better to show that, but the judge...........

winks

Gizmo711

Posts : 804
Join date : 2012-05-12

Back to top Go down

Re: George Zimmerman / Trayvon Martin Case #3

Post by Gizmo711 on Sun Jun 10, 2012 7:24 am

WeeBonnie wrote:Are you saying that somehow Shelly didn't know there was any relevance to the courts questions about the 200k she knew they had available and therefore it was okay for her to lie about? The court asked about ALL their assets and trusted Shelley because she took an oath. To say she didn't know if it was relevant is BS.
They asked her for a rough estimate, they knew only 2-3 was reported to the court, they had to know 200K was a very significant amount, and if they didn't know why it mattered- or if it could be used for bail, they could have asked.
Instead they pretended they knew nothing.
There's nothing honest and no good faith there.
If you read the transcripts they had access to it and both knew how much was there.
MOM is a pro- no one goes to a bond hearing without knowing exactly what it's all about. They knew it was a lie- and that's why they had Shelly do it. So GZ wouldn't be directly responsible. But he did conspire with his wife and he did know that money could be used for bond. There's no doubt about it.




Tamta wrote:

As I said above, if his own Defense attorney did not ask him specifically about the website funds and subsequently explain to him how that money would be specifically and directly relevant to the determination of bond amount, therefore I do not see how we can assume that GZ himself would have known otherwise or his wife for that fact. I do not believe that SZ was explained the relevance of this money to bond determination or anyone else in the Zimmerman family for that fact. MOM was not working for GZ that long before the hearing.

IIRC the website originally said that the donations would go towards defense and living expenses, correct me if I am wrong. Perhaps the family did not think that Bond would be considered Defense expenses, as they were trying to arrange bond without using that fund initially, even though MOM says $5000 went towards bond eventually, probably per his instructions not GZ's or the families insistence. What little I know about the tapes I do see a hesitancy on GZs part to commit to using those funds for the bond.

Also look here:

BDLR and SZ @ Bond Hearing

Q. Okay. Were you aware of the website that Mr. Zimmerman or somebody on his behalf created?
A. I'm aware of that website.
Q. And how much money is in that website right now? How much money as a result of that website was --
A. Currently, I do not know.
Q. Who would know that?
A. That would be my brother-in-law.

Q. And is he -- I know he's not in the same room as you, but is he available so we can speak to him, too, or the Court can inquire through the State or the Defense?
A. I'm sure that we could probably get him on the phone.
Q Okay. So he's not there now.

A. No, he is not, sir.
Q. Do you have any estimate as to how much money has already been obtained or collected?(website)
A. I do not.
Q. Okay. You haven't talked to your brother-in-law in terms of just bare amount of how much money?
A. No. No, I have not

BDLR
1. Asks SZ only about website not personal accounts
2. Obtains from SZ who in fact actually has the bottom line on the donations (thus funds available for bond) and decides to drop it and not follow through.

I think a case for Perjury against SZ is going to be fairly weak at this point, again I know this is not in line with most of the view points here.

I think no one addressed or understood the relevance of these funds to the bond determination nor the legal and ethical significance of the donations at that time, so I do not find arguments compelling which assert the State was blindsided and GZ was a full blown liar in the limited contexts and relevant facts strictly pertaining to the issue of Bond.

These funds present a unique situation and those situations can bewilder decent people and decent officers of the court, and can also present strategic opportunities in the judicial process as well.

http://media.cmgdigital.com/shared/news/documents/2012/06/01/BondHearingTranscript.pdf


The part where O'Mara asks about the brother seems suspiscious to me, it's almost like the bhrother was being used as the scape goat and conveniently was not there. I truly doubt that if O'Mara would have asked to reach the brother, Shellie would have said that she was unable to reach him. They wanted to keep this money out of the bond hearing, for obvious reasons.

Gizmo711

Posts : 804
Join date : 2012-05-12

Back to top Go down

Re: George Zimmerman / Trayvon Martin Case #3

Post by CherokeeNative on Sun Jun 10, 2012 10:04 am

KZ wrote:Interesting articles & case. Absolutely outrageous (imo) case successfully used SYG defense. Comparison to GZ case drawn in articles.

http://www.miamiherald.com/2012/03/27/2717572/miami-dade-issues-ruling-in-stand.html

"A bag of stolen car radios — swung during a confrontation — amounted to a lethal threat to a Little Havana man who chased down a thief and stabbed him to death, a Miami-Dade judge said in her written ruling Tuesday in dismissing the murder charge against the man."

http://www.tampabay.com/stand-your-ground-law/cases/case_133

"When Greyston Garcia discovered Pedro Roteta was stealing his car radio, he grabbed a knife, ran downstairs and chased Roteta down the street. After confronting Roteta, who reportedly had a closed pocketknife in his back pocket, Garcia fatally stabbed him. He said the man swung a heavy bag of car radios at his head. The incident was caught on camera. Garcia went home and fell asleep without calling 911, court records show. Garcia initially denied any involvement in the situation, but changed his story after police showed him videotape from a nearby store security camera. The officer who supervised the case asked,"How can it be stand your ground"?"

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/03/28/miami-judge-rules-in-stan_n_1385219.html

"Garcia went home instead of calling 911 after the confrontation in January and later hid the knife and sold two of the radios."(BBM)

It certainly is outrageous KZ - thanks for bringing that to our attention. It is just one of several cases that show proof positive that the SYG law needs to be repealed, modified, or at a minimum, that our higher courts need to make case precedent holding that this is misinterpreting the the intent of the SYG law. Even the creators of this law say that this is not what they intended when they drafted and pushed to have this bill enacted. If they do not repeal or modify the SYG law, there at least needs to be case authority for our state attorneys to rely upon when making that all important decision to charge a person with a crime, and for the lower courts to know how to instruct their juries. I cannot believe that the majority of the people understood that this would be the interpretation given this law when it came time to vote it into law. I, for one, would not have voted for it had I realized that it would mean that a complete stranger can follow and ultimately kill an unarmed teenage boy (or anyone) based upon his own preconceived paranoias and because he was losing a fight that he alone caused to come about. The problem is that if this case goes to trial, without a SYG motion being made, the prosecution cannot appeal the verdict. If the defense gets an acquittal in the case, the prosecutor cannot seek another criminal trial due to the laws prohibiting double jeopardy. The only way this can be considered by a higher court is for it to be dismissed through a SYG motion. This may be where the DOJ may come out of the wings and initiate its action against GZ, but don't hold your breath. It will depend on how strongly the political powers of the President's Office is wanting this issue to be resolved. If Obama wins the election, I believe a federal action will be initiated if GZ walks on the State Court action. If Romney wins, I can almost guarantee that it won't. Now, none of us know which way MOM leans politically and whether he is an NRA supporter - it is these very issues that concern me when it comes to the legal defense fund set up on GZ's behalf. If MOM is in support of the SYG law and/or in the back pocket of the NRA or other gun rights activists, he has surely thought this tactical issues through just as surely as a football coach plans his play book for the big game. In my eyes, this takes the case and all future SYG cases out of the hands of Lady Justice and throws it into the polictical arena - something that absolutely should not be happening. Our State Bar Associations need to impliment strict guidelines and rules preventing this form of conduct by members of the legal community - enforced by SCOTUS. If you have any doubt about this, think about how most of our laws have come about - they are for the most part, based on good moral character and what is socially correct. I don't believe that anyone, even the pro-Zimmerman groups, could honestly say that they felt what occurred to Trayvon was right - if you read the internet and browse the pro-Zimmerman blogs, you will see that most of his supporters could give a hoot about Zimmerman as a person, they are concerned about the cause of their right to carry and use their firearms when they alone decide it is right. I would venture to say that most of these supporters would hold a very different opinion if the case were closer to home, and it was one of their children that had been gunned down that night. This is exactly the type of situation where the People of the community, the state, and the nation need to make sure that this law prevents another person from walking away from a charge of murder that is morally correct based upon the totality of the facts. That we allow one group or faction to push a law like this through to enactment and then watch as our children and loved ones are gunned down and the killer is allowed to walk free because of it is completely unacceptable. JMHO




Last edited by CherokeeNative on Sun Jun 10, 2012 11:10 am; edited 3 times in total
avatar
CherokeeNative

Posts : 813
Join date : 2012-05-12
Location : PNW
Mood : Feeling beat up

Back to top Go down

Re: George Zimmerman / Trayvon Martin Case #3

Post by CherokeeNative on Sun Jun 10, 2012 10:43 am

Gizmo711 wrote:
WeeBonnie wrote:Are you saying that somehow Shelly didn't know there was any relevance to the courts questions about the 200k she knew they had available and therefore it was okay for her to lie about? The court asked about ALL their assets and trusted Shelley because she took an oath. To say she didn't know if it was relevant is BS.
They asked her for a rough estimate, they knew only 2-3 was reported to the court, they had to know 200K was a very significant amount, and if they didn't know why it mattered- or if it could be used for bail, they could have asked.
Instead they pretended they knew nothing.
There's nothing honest and no good faith there.
If you read the transcripts they had access to it and both knew how much was there.
MOM is a pro- no one goes to a bond hearing without knowing exactly what it's all about. They knew it was a lie- and that's why they had Shelly do it. So GZ wouldn't be directly responsible. But he did conspire with his wife and he did know that money could be used for bond. There's no doubt about it.




Tamta wrote:

As I said above, if his own Defense attorney did not ask him specifically about the website funds and subsequently explain to him how that money would be specifically and directly relevant to the determination of bond amount, therefore I do not see how we can assume that GZ himself would have known otherwise or his wife for that fact. I do not believe that SZ was explained the relevance of this money to bond determination or anyone else in the Zimmerman family for that fact. MOM was not working for GZ that long before the hearing.

IIRC the website originally said that the donations would go towards defense and living expenses, correct me if I am wrong. Perhaps the family did not think that Bond would be considered Defense expenses, as they were trying to arrange bond without using that fund initially, even though MOM says $5000 went towards bond eventually, probably per his instructions not GZ's or the families insistence. What little I know about the tapes I do see a hesitancy on GZs part to commit to using those funds for the bond.

Also look here:

BDLR and SZ @ Bond Hearing

Q. Okay. Were you aware of the website that Mr. Zimmerman or somebody on his behalf created?
A. I'm aware of that website.
Q. And how much money is in that website right now? How much money as a result of that website was --
A. Currently, I do not know.
Q. Who would know that?
A. That would be my brother-in-law.

Q. And is he -- I know he's not in the same room as you, but is he available so we can speak to him, too, or the Court can inquire through the State or the Defense?
A. I'm sure that we could probably get him on the phone.
Q Okay. So he's not there now.

A. No, he is not, sir.
Q. Do you have any estimate as to how much money has already been obtained or collected?(website)
A. I do not.
Q. Okay. You haven't talked to your brother-in-law in terms of just bare amount of how much money?
A. No. No, I have not

BDLR
1. Asks SZ only about website not personal accounts
2. Obtains from SZ who in fact actually has the bottom line on the donations (thus funds available for bond) and decides to drop it and not follow through.

I think a case for Perjury against SZ is going to be fairly weak at this point, again I know this is not in line with most of the view points here.

I think no one addressed or understood the relevance of these funds to the bond determination nor the legal and ethical significance of the donations at that time, so I do not find arguments compelling which assert the State was blindsided and GZ was a full blown liar in the limited contexts and relevant facts strictly pertaining to the issue of Bond.

These funds present a unique situation and those situations can bewilder decent people and decent officers of the court, and can also present strategic opportunities in the judicial process as well.

http://media.cmgdigital.com/shared/news/documents/2012/06/01/BondHearingTranscript.pdf


The part where O'Mara asks about the brother seems suspiscious to me, it's almost like the bhrother was being used as the scape goat and conveniently was not there. I truly doubt that if O'Mara would have asked to reach the brother, Shellie would have said that she was unable to reach him. They wanted to keep this money out of the bond hearing, for obvious reasons.

I agree Gizmo. IF there were any conspiracies going on, or tactical manuevering, it was on the part of GZ and the Zimmerman family - and to the extent that MOM did not want to get into the discussion of the donations - it had his stamp of approval. As soon as I heard Shellie say that the ONLY person who had knowledge of the Paypal account was conveniently the ONLY family member not present to testify, I called fowl in my mind. The jail recordings only served to back that suspicion up. I am not saying that MOM was aware that there was scheming going on between GZ and his family, but he was aware of the existence of the Paypal account and I believe he purposely did not want any family member available to testify who had knowledge of the amounts. Shellie and GZ just conveniently forgot to tell MOM the huge amounts that had been donated and that they were orchestrating how those funds were being handled.

What I almost find humorous is that someone would think that the prosecutor should not have allowed Shellie and GZ to deceive the Court. LOL How silly. The prosecutor is going to try to show GZ's true colors and he did - albeit, I don't believe at the bond hearing that BDLR knew they were blatantly lying - he certainly had no obligation to clarify Shellie's responses to the extent that she never gave any indication that she did not completely understand the line of questioning. Nor did MOM - he clearly believed his client's family understood what was being asked and if the onus was on anybody to have the brother present to testify or offer to get the brother on the phone to bolster their cause, it was MOM. In light of the fact that Shellie and GZ used the money to pay their personal obligations to the tune of $30k and the fact that they were moving monies from the PayPal account into their own personal accounts, all in advance of the bond hearing, I do not see how they can explain themselves out of the situation they find themselves in short of admitting they lied. It is of no matter why they lied - the issue is they lied. Period. Until they admit that, I do not believe they will serve themselves well by trying to convince the Judge that they were "afraid." Well, I've got news for them - anyone charged with Murder2 should be afraid - it's to be expected. I also firmly believe that GZ was "afraid" the night he killed Trayvon and realized that he had shot an unarmed teen and that fear put him in cover-up mode by attempting to spin the sequence of events in his favor of claiming self-defense. In fact, GZ hasn’t told the truth since the moment he shot and killed Trayvon Martin. It's become clear from court and public records that he has sometimes been less than truthful, which is exactly why he is back behind bars. After shooting Trayvon, he told Sanford police he didn't have a criminal history, turns out he did. Weeks later he told the Seminole County Sheriff's Office he had never been in a pretrial-diversion program, but he was. His wife Shelly said she didn’t know about the amount of funds that were donated to GZ, and she did. On the witness stand in April, GZ told Trayvon's family in an apology that he had thought their son was close to his age, while on the night of the shooting he described the 17-year-old to police as in his "late teens." If I were on the jury, knowing what I know about his propensity to lie and mold things in the best of light in his favor, and his prior aggressive conduct, and the admitted fact that he has committed acts that went unpunished because his homies chose to take the wrap for him, I would not be able to believe his story of what occurred with Trayvon that night and as a result I would have no problem voting for Murder2. None whatsoever.

ETA: I can't think of a worse situation that to find GZ's comments on My Space some three years from now and find it to brag about the Trayvon case like he did in his "onlytobekingagain" page at http://www.myspace.com/onlytobekingagain/blog were he states:

…I can hit my boy up to handle a lil somethin with my sister and he's at my house with his boys on bikes before i hang up with her! They do a year and dont ever open thier mouth to get my ass pinched. My cousins the cruzado's damn i love yall, shirley and frank DONT PLAY! I gotta be honest I miss that. I dont miss driving around scared to hit mexicans walkin on the side of the street, soft ass wanna be thugs messin with peoples cars when they aint around (what are you provin, that you can dent a car when no ones watchin) dont make you a man in my book. Workin 96 hours to get a decent pay check, gettin knifes pulled on you by every mexican you run into!

Good news???? Bout Damn time!!!!!!!

2 felonies dropped to 1 misdemeanor!!!!!!!!!!! The man knows he was wrong but still got this hump, Thanks to everyone friends and fam, G baby you know your my rock!


avatar
CherokeeNative

Posts : 813
Join date : 2012-05-12
Location : PNW
Mood : Feeling beat up

Back to top Go down

Re: George Zimmerman / Trayvon Martin Case #3

Post by snowbird on Sun Jun 10, 2012 11:38 am

Gizmo711 wrote:
CherokeeNative wrote:Tamta - I am not trying to badger you, but I can't help but feel that you are not clear on what testifying under oath means. And how, although GZ has opted to shield himself behind his constitutional rights to remain silent, he is nevertheless obligated to not allow someone to testify to facts on his behalf that he knows to be anything but the truth and the whole truth. Half truths, omissions, and flat out lies must be relayed to his attorney who can inform the court. And believe me, had MOM known the truth, he would never have allowed GZ's family to commit a fraud upon the Court. He must stand before this Court long after GZ's case is over and he has a reputation to uphold for that reason. On the other hand, I do not know how you could think, if you do, that BDLR or the Court could have possibly known of the amounts that had been donated or that GZ and his wife had been spending those monies to pay their personal expenses and moving those funds about into their own personal accounts. When you testify under oath, you are obligated to speak the whole truth and nothing but the truth. If you do not understand the question, you are expected to ask for clarification. As a nursing student, I am going to go off on a ledge here and guess that she has at least an average I.Q. They asked her if she and/or GZ had any money to use towards bail - she stated no. She was asked what about the Paypal account and she again feigned ignorance. If there was any part of that line of questioning that she was unsure of, she was obligated to ask for clarification. And GZ was obligated to at a very minimum inform his attorney during the hearing that they had access to that sum of money. As BDLR stated, there is no other way to categorize it except that it was a blatant lie.




Also, the form that he has to fill out is very clear. Do you have any money in Banks, stocks etc. Do you own property etc. etc., When one goes in front of the judge, the judge has this form in front of him and will also ask these questions again. So if Zimmerman refused to answer any questions he still had to fill out the form.

Now he could have said "I don't know" or "I'm not sure", which is why the questions were asked during the hearing.

Either way one looks at it, Zimmemran used his attorney to lie, and his wife to lie, and he had them lie to the judge that will be handling his case. Now if that isn't bold, I don't know what is. It shows a total disrespect for the court, it shows how little he thinks of the law.

So now, not only does he have little regard for a human life, but he added to it by showing that he has little regard for our system as well. Zimmerman is self serving, he committed a serious crime and is charged with "murder two" and all he was able to concern himself with was to try and keep all that money from the court finding out.

He is used to people taking the fall for him (as stated in a "my space" page") and probably his daddy getting him off when ever he could. Zimmemran has shown violence in the past, has a record to prove it. Somehow he always managed to get off, and he feels that this time will be no different. So he was protecting the money (more than he ever thought he would see in a lifetime) so when this is all over, and the tax payers footed the bill, he will go on his merry way, laughing at everyone.

As for those pictures taken of Zimmerman, they describe him to a tee. The last one plainly shows that he removed mustach and beard and let his hair grow to try and change his appearance. Usually the perp grows a beard and mustach to conceal his identity, but seeing as how George already had these things, he reversed them. When he was given 48 hours to turn himself in, it was not long enough to grow these things back, he also couldn't run to a barber to get his head shaved again....just not enough time....

I don't think George will be given another bond, but if he does get one, it will be so high that he wont be able to make it without asking his attorney to throw in some of his retainer (good luck Georgie with that), and seeing as he also was so arrogant as to not even settle up with the bondsman, I doubt that any bondsman will trust him without full payment up front.

In other words...Zimmerman screwed himself this time... And I doubt that O'Mara is going to go out of his way to get Zimmerman a bond...He may try and make a case by saying that Georgie is not going to run etc., so the bond should remain the same. But I doubt that the Judge (after being made a fool of) is going to go along with that. Someone has to show Georgie that he is not in charge, and who better to show that, but the judge...........

winks
Just wanted to say, that was a very good post that summed up events. I think his bond will be high because he lied to court and didn't bother to pay his first bail with the money he had in pay pal account witch was closed until 5 days after he was released from jail. He had the money in his account that he could have paid bond.
avatar
snowbird

Posts : 782
Join date : 2012-05-14
Location : louisiana
Mood : Happy

Back to top Go down

Re: George Zimmerman / Trayvon Martin Case #3

Post by tesstruhart on Sun Jun 10, 2012 12:56 pm

http://www.sun-sentinel.com/os-george-zimmerman-stand-your-ground-20120608,0,6967649.story

Just found this, I confess I haven't read today so if its already been posted, my apologies
avatar
tesstruhart

Posts : 1682
Join date : 2011-07-02
Location : this side of heaven

Back to top Go down

Re: George Zimmerman / Trayvon Martin Case #3

Post by Gizmo711 on Sun Jun 10, 2012 2:20 pm

tesstruhart wrote:http://www.sun-sentinel.com/os-george-zimmerman-stand-your-ground-20120608,0,6967649.story

Just found this, I confess I haven't read today so if its already been posted, my apologies


Yes, there are cases where the defendant will waive his rights to a jury trial and allow the judge to hear the case. However, I doubt it very much in this case. It has been said a few times that this case does not fall under the SYG law. One cannot persue someone and initiate the confrontation and than when losing the battle shoot the person (kill) and then claim SYG. If the 911 tapes didn't exist then Zimmerman may have stood a chance, but not with those 911 tapes. They are going to hang Zimmeman.

Also, when a judge hears a case and acts as the jury, it is at the accused requests. The judge cannot make that decision. I doubt very much that Zimmerman will make that request, especially after making such a fool out of Judge Lester with his lies.

For sure a jury of 12 will get this case.

Gizmo711

Posts : 804
Join date : 2012-05-12

Back to top Go down

Re: George Zimmerman / Trayvon Martin Case #3

Post by WeeBonnie on Sun Jun 10, 2012 2:20 pm

I read this- key points are: defense will wait they are ready for full trial to sched SYG hearing.
Judge will be Lester and while it is much like a mini trial, the judge will decide - and can decide in George's credibility.
Anything GZ says at the hearing can be used at the trial also.

tesstruhart wrote:http://www.sun-sentinel.com/os-george-zimmerman-stand-your-ground-20120608,0,6967649.story

Just found this, I confess I haven't read today so if its already been posted, my apologies

WeeBonnie

Posts : 675
Join date : 2012-05-24

Back to top Go down

Re: George Zimmerman / Trayvon Martin Case #3

Post by justanopinion on Sun Jun 10, 2012 2:32 pm

KZ wrote:Interesting articles & case. Absolutely outrageous (imo) case successfully used SYG defense. Comparison to GZ case drawn in articles.

http://www.miamiherald.com/2012/03/27/2717572/miami-dade-issues-ruling-in-stand.html

"A bag of stolen car radios — swung during a confrontation — amounted to a lethal threat to a Little Havana man who chased down a thief and stabbed him to death, a Miami-Dade judge said in her written ruling Tuesday in dismissing the murder charge against the man."

http://www.tampabay.com/stand-your-ground-law/cases/case_133

"When Greyston Garcia discovered Pedro Roteta was stealing his car radio, he grabbed a knife, ran downstairs and chased Roteta down the street. After confronting Roteta, who reportedly had a closed pocketknife in his back pocket, Garcia fatally stabbed him. He said the man swung a heavy bag of car radios at his head. The incident was caught on camera. Garcia went home and fell asleep without calling 911, court records show. Garcia initially denied any involvement in the situation, but changed his story after police showed him videotape from a nearby store security camera. The officer who supervised the case asked,"How can it be stand your ground"?"

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/03/28/miami-judge-rules-in-stan_n_1385219.html

"Garcia went home instead of calling 911 after the confrontation in January and later hid the knife and sold two of the radios."

(BBM)



KZ I think I am in shock! The bolded sections are so contradictory... the whole story is non-sensical itself but if you read the bolded sections only it is a head shaker! Laughing you are too good at making us think! But I like it!
avatar
justanopinion

Posts : 2342
Join date : 2011-11-18
Location : North of the Equator; South of the Pole
Mood : Angry

Back to top Go down

Re: George Zimmerman / Trayvon Martin Case #3

Post by KZ on Sun Jun 10, 2012 6:13 pm

This is an old article-- from 2010. SYG had been in effect 5 years at that point.

http://www.tampabay.com/news/publicsafety/crime/article1128317.ece

Reports of justifiable homicides tripled after the law went into effect, according to the Florida Department of Law Enforcement. Last year, twice a week, on average, someone's killing was considered warranted.

The self-defense law — known as "stand your ground" — has been invoked in at least 93 cases with 65 deaths, a St. Petersburg Times review found.

I agree with Cherokee Native's post above that the defense will not push for the SYG hearing till ready to go to trial-- and that the feds are watching this case at the state level to decide how to proceed. It will be more of a political prosecution, imo, if the feds decide to go ahead, because a cursory look at the cases prosecuted thus far under the Shepard/ Byrd act have been much more demonstrable in the racism aspects (carving epithets into the skin of a mentally disabled man, etc.) Thus far, there have been 5 (possibly 6) sentenced under Shepard Byrd:Frankie Maybee, 20; Sean Popejoy, 19; Myles Burton (supposed to be sentenced June 9); Paul Beebe, 27; William Hatch, 29; and Jesse Sanford, 25. The first 2 ran a carload of hispanic men off the road, Burton carved racial epithets into a windowsill at a college dormitory, and the last 3 attacked the disabled man. 3 of the 6 plead guilty.

If the feds choose to prosecute GZ under Shepard Byrd for a second bite of the apple, this will signal a change in the current trend of only very blatant and obvious racial crimes being prosecuted. It would be a risky move for the feds, depending on the political wind direction. I definitely believe there is close collaboration between the state and the feds on how the charges will be pursued, and have been carefully worded.
avatar
KZ
Moderator

Posts : 672
Join date : 2011-05-11
Location : Up North

Back to top Go down

Re: George Zimmerman / Trayvon Martin Case #3

Post by Tamta on Mon Jun 11, 2012 1:03 am

CherokeeNative wrote:
Tamta wrote:Snipped

"It is obvious that Zimmerman was not acting in good faith"


Respectfully, I am really not sure this is true and I know it goes against what many here think, but GZ did not lie on his intake form and he did not even testify at his bond hearing.

As I said above, if his own Defense attorney did not ask him specifically about the website funds and subsequently explain to him how that money would be specifically and directly relevant to the determination of bond amount, therefore I do not see how we can assume that GZ himself would have known otherwise or his wife for that fact. I do not believe that SZ was explained the relevance of this money to bond determination or anyone else in the Zimmerman family for that fact. MOM was not working for GZ that long before the hearing.

IIRC the website originally said that the donations would go towards defense and living expenses, correct me if I am wrong. Perhaps the family did not think that Bond would be considered Defense expenses, as they were trying to arrange bond without using that fund initially, even though MOM says $5000 went towards bond eventually, probably per his instructions not GZ's or the families insistence. What little I know about the tapes I do see a hesitancy on GZs part to commit to using those funds for the bond.

Also look here:

BDLR and SZ @ Bond Hearing

Q. Okay. Were you aware of the website that Mr. Zimmerman or somebody on his behalf created?
A. I'm aware of that website.
Q. And how much money is in that website right now? How much money as a result of that website was --
A. Currently, I do not know.
Q. Who would know that?
A. That would be my brother-in-law.

Q. And is he -- I know he's not in the same room as you, but is he available so we can speak to him, too, or the Court can inquire through the State or the Defense?
A. I'm sure that we could probably get him on the phone.
Q Okay. So he's not there now.

A. No, he is not, sir.
Q. Do you have any estimate as to how much money has already been obtained or collected?(website)
A. I do not.
Q. Okay. You haven't talked to your brother-in-law in terms of just bare amount of how much money?
A. No. No, I have not

BDLR
1. Asks SZ only about website not personal accounts
2. Obtains from SZ who in fact actually has the bottom line on the donations (thus funds available for bond) and decides to drop it and not follow through.

I think a case for Perjury against SZ is going to be fairly weak at this point, again I know this is not in line with most of the view points here.

I think no one addressed or understood the relevance of these funds to the bond determination nor the legal and ethical significance of the donations at that time, so I do not find arguments compelling which assert the State was blindsided and GZ was a full blown liar in the limited contexts and relevant facts strictly pertaining to the issue of Bond.

These funds present a unique situation and those situations can bewilder decent people and decent officers of the court, and can also present strategic opportunities in the judicial process as well.

http://media.cmgdigital.com/shared/news/documents/2012/06/01/BondHearingTranscript.pdf

Tamta - Respectfully - first, MOM did not specifically ask GZ any questions concerning the Paypal account because GZ was exercising his right to remain silent - which I am sure MOM was in agreement with. That was the specific reason for using his wife and family members to testify - so GZ would not be placed in a position to have to be grilled by the prosecutor. MOM allowed GZ to testify for the sole purpose of apologizing to the Martins - which severly limited the prosecutor from asking questions outside the scope of that testimony. Prior to the bond hearing, GZ and Shellie spent approximately $30,000 of the funds that were donated for their personal use; they moved the monies around from Paypal to their own accounts. If they can move the money around, spend it for their own personal expenses, how could they be confused about whether they could spend the money on bail? Moreover, the question posed to Shellie was what money they had available to them - since they paid bills with the money - they surely had to understand that this was money that was available to them. Wouldn't you agree?

Cherokee,

I agree with what you said.

I am attempting to review this from SZ angle.

Up front I have to admit that I do not know exactly where all of that $30,000 was spent and I am only recalling from memory that his site said he would ultimately be incharge of how that money was spent.

I speculate that MOM 'prepared' SZ before the Bond Hearing.
I am sure he informed her of what specifically he was going to ask her
and what the State may ask her and what some appropriate answers may be.
I am sure that he instructed her to say the bare minimum on cross examination, and not give any extra information away.
That was the appropriate thing to do.
I think she completed her assignment.

However, it still escapes me that MOM did not know or verify where the account money was going from paypal.
(He must have really thought that her BIL was in charge of it, even though the content of it was in her account.)
He could have given more effective counsel to her so that she was clear on the relevance of that money so she could represent that properly.

Clearly in the jailhouse tape SZ expresses that she feels like that money could and should be used for bond.

But in the tran for the bond hearing when she answers that she does not have assets that she can use to help pay for bond it's possible that she understood that fund to NOT be an asset in the way that we normally consider assets to be: property , stocks, hedge funds, retirement accounts, etc. Maybe MOM told her that. Who knows? But I bet she was saying what she was told to say. If I was in her shoes and I wanted to help my husband get out of jail, I would do just what the lawyer told me to do.

Personally, I felt like SZ could have and should have been coached better for the hearing. A lot of this would never have happened.
I think MOM is a great lawyer but he was very new to the GZ scene, they did not have much of a relationship at the time the Bond Hearing was underway, and I think this very important issue did not get addressed fully and at the right time. No

I am posting a link of Lester speaking about the funds after MOM announced them.
He is not even sure how they should be spent. Shocked

http://www.cnn.com/video/data/3.0/video/bestoftv/2012/04/27/bts-zimmerman-paypal-money.cnn/index.xml?
avatar
Tamta

Posts : 2065
Join date : 2012-05-11
Mood : Eyebrow

Back to top Go down

Re: George Zimmerman / Trayvon Martin Case #3

Post by Tamta on Mon Jun 11, 2012 1:06 am

Gizmo711 wrote:
WeeBonnie wrote:Are you saying that somehow Shelly didn't know there was any relevance to the courts questions about the 200k she knew they had available and therefore it was okay for her to lie about? The court asked about ALL their assets and trusted Shelley because she took an oath. To say she didn't know if it was relevant is BS.
They asked her for a rough estimate, they knew only 2-3 was reported to the court, they had to know 200K was a very significant amount, and if they didn't know why it mattered- or if it could be used for bail, they could have asked.
Instead they pretended they knew nothing.
There's nothing honest and no good faith there.
If you read the transcripts they had access to it and both knew how much was there.
MOM is a pro- no one goes to a bond hearing without knowing exactly what it's all about. They knew it was a lie- and that's why they had Shelly do it. So GZ wouldn't be directly responsible. But he did conspire with his wife and he did know that money could be used for bond. There's no doubt about it.




Tamta wrote:

As I said above, if his own Defense attorney did not ask him specifically about the website funds and subsequently explain to him how that money would be specifically and directly relevant to the determination of bond amount, therefore I do not see how we can assume that GZ himself would have known otherwise or his wife for that fact. I do not believe that SZ was explained the relevance of this money to bond determination or anyone else in the Zimmerman family for that fact. MOM was not working for GZ that long before the hearing.

IIRC the website originally said that the donations would go towards defense and living expenses, correct me if I am wrong. Perhaps the family did not think that Bond would be considered Defense expenses, as they were trying to arrange bond without using that fund initially, even though MOM says $5000 went towards bond eventually, probably per his instructions not GZ's or the families insistence. What little I know about the tapes I do see a hesitancy on GZs part to commit to using those funds for the bond.

Also look here:

BDLR and SZ @ Bond Hearing

Q. Okay. Were you aware of the website that Mr. Zimmerman or somebody on his behalf created?
A. I'm aware of that website.
Q. And how much money is in that website right now? How much money as a result of that website was --
A. Currently, I do not know.
Q. Who would know that?
A. That would be my brother-in-law.

Q. And is he -- I know he's not in the same room as you, but is he available so we can speak to him, too, or the Court can inquire through the State or the Defense?
A. I'm sure that we could probably get him on the phone.
Q Okay. So he's not there now.

A. No, he is not, sir.
Q. Do you have any estimate as to how much money has already been obtained or collected?(website)
A. I do not.
Q. Okay. You haven't talked to your brother-in-law in terms of just bare amount of how much money?
A. No. No, I have not

BDLR
1. Asks SZ only about website not personal accounts
2. Obtains from SZ who in fact actually has the bottom line on the donations (thus funds available for bond) and decides to drop it and not follow through.

I think a case for Perjury against SZ is going to be fairly weak at this point, again I know this is not in line with most of the view points here.

I think no one addressed or understood the relevance of these funds to the bond determination nor the legal and ethical significance of the donations at that time, so I do not find arguments compelling which assert the State was blindsided and GZ was a full blown liar in the limited contexts and relevant facts strictly pertaining to the issue of Bond.

These funds present a unique situation and those situations can bewilder decent people and decent officers of the court, and can also present strategic opportunities in the judicial process as well.

http://media.cmgdigital.com/shared/news/documents/2012/06/01/BondHearingTranscript.pdf


The part where O'Mara asks about the brother seems suspiscious to me, it's almost like the bhrother was being used as the scape goat and conveniently was not there. I truly doubt that if O'Mara would have asked to reach the brother, Shellie would have said that she was unable to reach him. They wanted to keep this money out of the bond hearing, for obvious reasons.

Hi Gizmo,

This excerpt that I snipped is BDLR questioning Shellie.

I should have bolded his name maybe.

avatar
Tamta

Posts : 2065
Join date : 2012-05-11
Mood : Eyebrow

Back to top Go down

Re: George Zimmerman / Trayvon Martin Case #3

Post by Tamta on Mon Jun 11, 2012 1:13 am

CherokeeNative wrote:
Gizmo711 wrote:
WeeBonnie wrote:Are you saying that somehow Shelly didn't know there was any relevance to the courts questions about the 200k she knew they had available and therefore it was okay for her to lie about? The court asked about ALL their assets and trusted Shelley because she took an oath. To say she didn't know if it was relevant is BS.
They asked her for a rough estimate, they knew only 2-3 was reported to the court, they had to know 200K was a very significant amount, and if they didn't know why it mattered- or if it could be used for bail, they could have asked.
Instead they pretended they knew nothing.
There's nothing honest and no good faith there.
If you read the transcripts they had access to it and both knew how much was there.
MOM is a pro- no one goes to a bond hearing without knowing exactly what it's all about. They knew it was a lie- and that's why they had Shelly do it. So GZ wouldn't be directly responsible. But he did conspire with his wife and he did know that money could be used for bond. There's no doubt about it.




Tamta wrote:

As I said above, if his own Defense attorney did not ask him specifically about the website funds and subsequently explain to him how that money would be specifically and directly relevant to the determination of bond amount, therefore I do not see how we can assume that GZ himself would have known otherwise or his wife for that fact. I do not believe that SZ was explained the relevance of this money to bond determination or anyone else in the Zimmerman family for that fact. MOM was not working for GZ that long before the hearing.

IIRC the website originally said that the donations would go towards defense and living expenses, correct me if I am wrong. Perhaps the family did not think that Bond would be considered Defense expenses, as they were trying to arrange bond without using that fund initially, even though MOM says $5000 went towards bond eventually, probably per his instructions not GZ's or the families insistence. What little I know about the tapes I do see a hesitancy on GZs part to commit to using those funds for the bond.

Also look here:

BDLR and SZ @ Bond Hearing

Q. Okay. Were you aware of the website that Mr. Zimmerman or somebody on his behalf created?
A. I'm aware of that website.
Q. And how much money is in that website right now? How much money as a result of that website was --
A. Currently, I do not know.
Q. Who would know that?
A. That would be my brother-in-law.

Q. And is he -- I know he's not in the same room as you, but is he available so we can speak to him, too, or the Court can inquire through the State or the Defense?
A. I'm sure that we could probably get him on the phone.
Q Okay. So he's not there now.

A. No, he is not, sir.
Q. Do you have any estimate as to how much money has already been obtained or collected?(website)
A. I do not.
Q. Okay. You haven't talked to your brother-in-law in terms of just bare amount of how much money?
A. No. No, I have not

BDLR
1. Asks SZ only about website not personal accounts
2. Obtains from SZ who in fact actually has the bottom line on the donations (thus funds available for bond) and decides to drop it and not follow through.

I think a case for Perjury against SZ is going to be fairly weak at this point, again I know this is not in line with most of the view points here.

I think no one addressed or understood the relevance of these funds to the bond determination nor the legal and ethical significance of the donations at that time, so I do not find arguments compelling which assert the State was blindsided and GZ was a full blown liar in the limited contexts and relevant facts strictly pertaining to the issue of Bond.

These funds present a unique situation and those situations can bewilder decent people and decent officers of the court, and can also present strategic opportunities in the judicial process as well.

http://media.cmgdigital.com/shared/news/documents/2012/06/01/BondHearingTranscript.pdf


The part where O'Mara asks about the brother seems suspiscious to me, it's almost like the bhrother was being used as the scape goat and conveniently was not there. I truly doubt that if O'Mara would have asked to reach the brother, Shellie would have said that she was unable to reach him. They wanted to keep this money out of the bond hearing, for obvious reasons.

I agree Gizmo. IF there were any conspiracies going on, or tactical manuevering, it was on the part of GZ and the Zimmerman family - and to the extent that MOM did not want to get into the discussion of the donations - it had his stamp of approval. As soon as I heard Shellie say that the ONLY person who had knowledge of the Paypal account was conveniently the ONLY family member not present to testify, I called fowl in my mind. The jail recordings only served to back that suspicion up. I am not saying that MOM was aware that there was scheming going on between GZ and his family, but he was aware of the existence of the Paypal account and I believe he purposely did not want any family member available to testify who had knowledge of the amounts. Shellie and GZ just conveniently forgot to tell MOM the huge amounts that had been donated and that they were orchestrating how those funds were being handled.

What I almost find humorous is that someone would think that the prosecutor should not have allowed Shellie and GZ to deceive the Court. LOL How silly. The prosecutor is going to try to show GZ's true colors and he did - albeit, I don't believe at the bond hearing that BDLR knew they were blatantly lying - he certainly had no obligation to clarify Shellie's responses to the extent that she never gave any indication that she did not completely understand the line of questioning. Nor did MOM - he clearly believed his client's family understood what was being asked and if the onus was on anybody to have the brother present to testify or offer to get the brother on the phone to bolster their cause, it was MOM. In light of the fact that Shellie and GZ used the money to pay their personal obligations to the tune of $30k and the fact that they were moving monies from the PayPal account into their own personal accounts, all in advance of the bond hearing, I do not see how they can explain themselves out of the situation they find themselves in short of admitting they lied. It is of no matter why they lied - the issue is they lied. Period. Until they admit that, I do not believe they will serve themselves well by trying to convince the Judge that they were "afraid." Well, I've got news for them - anyone charged with Murder2 should be afraid - it's to be expected. I also firmly believe that GZ was "afraid" the night he killed Trayvon and realized that he had shot an unarmed teen and that fear put him in cover-up mode by attempting to spin the sequence of events in his favor of claiming self-defense. In fact, GZ hasn’t told the truth since the moment he shot and killed Trayvon Martin. It's become clear from court and public records that he has sometimes been less than truthful, which is exactly why he is back behind bars. After shooting Trayvon, he told Sanford police he didn't have a criminal history, turns out he did. Weeks later he told the Seminole County Sheriff's Office he had never been in a pretrial-diversion program, but he was. His wife Shelly said she didn’t know about the amount of funds that were donated to GZ, and she did. On the witness stand in April, GZ told Trayvon's family in an apology that he had thought their son was close to his age, while on the night of the shooting he described the 17-year-old to police as in his "late teens." If I were on the jury, knowing what I know about his propensity to lie and mold things in the best of light in his favor, and his prior aggressive conduct, and the admitted fact that he has committed acts that went unpunished because his homies chose to take the wrap for him, I would not be able to believe his story of what occurred with Trayvon that night and as a result I would have no problem voting for Murder2. None whatsoever.

ETA: I can't think of a worse situation that to find GZ's comments on My Space some three years from now and find it to brag about the Trayvon case like he did in his "onlytobekingagain" page at http://www.myspace.com/onlytobekingagain/blog were he states:

…I can hit my boy up to handle a lil somethin with my sister and he's at my house with his boys on bikes before i hang up with her! They do a year and dont ever open thier mouth to get my ass pinched. My cousins the cruzado's damn i love yall, shirley and frank DONT PLAY! I gotta be honest I miss that. I dont miss driving around scared to hit mexicans walkin on the side of the street, soft ass wanna be thugs messin with peoples cars when they aint around (what are you provin, that you can dent a car when no ones watchin) dont make you a man in my book. Workin 96 hours to get a decent pay check, gettin knifes pulled on you by every mexican you run into!

Good news???? Bout Damn time!!!!!!!

2 felonies dropped to 1 misdemeanor!!!!!!!!!!! The man knows he was wrong but still got this hump, Thanks to everyone friends and fam, G baby you know your my rock!



BBM

The truth of the matter is, they do not have to.
That is what Counsel is for.
avatar
Tamta

Posts : 2065
Join date : 2012-05-11
Mood : Eyebrow

Back to top Go down

Re: George Zimmerman / Trayvon Martin Case #3

Post by Tamta on Mon Jun 11, 2012 1:14 am

snowbird wrote:
Gizmo711 wrote:
CherokeeNative wrote:Tamta - I am not trying to badger you, but I can't help but feel that you are not clear on what testifying under oath means. And how, although GZ has opted to shield himself behind his constitutional rights to remain silent, he is nevertheless obligated to not allow someone to testify to facts on his behalf that he knows to be anything but the truth and the whole truth. Half truths, omissions, and flat out lies must be relayed to his attorney who can inform the court. And believe me, had MOM known the truth, he would never have allowed GZ's family to commit a fraud upon the Court. He must stand before this Court long after GZ's case is over and he has a reputation to uphold for that reason. On the other hand, I do not know how you could think, if you do, that BDLR or the Court could have possibly known of the amounts that had been donated or that GZ and his wife had been spending those monies to pay their personal expenses and moving those funds about into their own personal accounts. When you testify under oath, you are obligated to speak the whole truth and nothing but the truth. If you do not understand the question, you are expected to ask for clarification. As a nursing student, I am going to go off on a ledge here and guess that she has at least an average I.Q. They asked her if she and/or GZ had any money to use towards bail - she stated no. She was asked what about the Paypal account and she again feigned ignorance. If there was any part of that line of questioning that she was unsure of, she was obligated to ask for clarification. And GZ was obligated to at a very minimum inform his attorney during the hearing that they had access to that sum of money. As BDLR stated, there is no other way to categorize it except that it was a blatant lie.




Also, the form that he has to fill out is very clear. Do you have any money in Banks, stocks etc. Do you own property etc. etc., When one goes in front of the judge, the judge has this form in front of him and will also ask these questions again. So if Zimmerman refused to answer any questions he still had to fill out the form.

Now he could have said "I don't know" or "I'm not sure", which is why the questions were asked during the hearing.

Either way one looks at it, Zimmemran used his attorney to lie, and his wife to lie, and he had them lie to the judge that will be handling his case. Now if that isn't bold, I don't know what is. It shows a total disrespect for the court, it shows how little he thinks of the law.

So now, not only does he have little regard for a human life, but he added to it by showing that he has little regard for our system as well. Zimmerman is self serving, he committed a serious crime and is charged with "murder two" and all he was able to concern himself with was to try and keep all that money from the court finding out.

He is used to people taking the fall for him (as stated in a "my space" page") and probably his daddy getting him off when ever he could. Zimmemran has shown violence in the past, has a record to prove it. Somehow he always managed to get off, and he feels that this time will be no different. So he was protecting the money (more than he ever thought he would see in a lifetime) so when this is all over, and the tax payers footed the bill, he will go on his merry way, laughing at everyone.

As for those pictures taken of Zimmerman, they describe him to a tee. The last one plainly shows that he removed mustach and beard and let his hair grow to try and change his appearance. Usually the perp grows a beard and mustach to conceal his identity, but seeing as how George already had these things, he reversed them. When he was given 48 hours to turn himself in, it was not long enough to grow these things back, he also couldn't run to a barber to get his head shaved again....just not enough time....

I don't think George will be given another bond, but if he does get one, it will be so high that he wont be able to make it without asking his attorney to throw in some of his retainer (good luck Georgie with that), and seeing as he also was so arrogant as to not even settle up with the bondsman, I doubt that any bondsman will trust him without full payment up front.

In other words...Zimmerman screwed himself this time... And I doubt that O'Mara is going to go out of his way to get Zimmerman a bond...He may try and make a case by saying that Georgie is not going to run etc., so the bond should remain the same. But I doubt that the Judge (after being made a fool of) is going to go along with that. Someone has to show Georgie that he is not in charge, and who better to show that, but the judge...........

winks
Just wanted to say, that was a very good post that summed up events. I think his bond will be high because he lied to court and didn't bother to pay his first bail with the money he had in pay pal account witch was closed until 5 days after he was released from jail. He had the money in his account that he could have paid bond.
avatar
Tamta

Posts : 2065
Join date : 2012-05-11
Mood : Eyebrow

Back to top Go down

Re: George Zimmerman / Trayvon Martin Case #3

Post by DebFrmHell on Mon Jun 11, 2012 2:31 am

serenaz1 wrote:
DebFrmHell wrote:Here are some of the links I have compiled and may make for easy reference:

{snipped}

Wow, thanks Deb!

Has anyone heard anything about these new docs filed by Corey?

http://www.seminoleclerk.org/CriminalDocket/case_detail.jsp?CaseNo=592012CF001083A

06/07/2012 LETT LETTER FROM ANGELA COREY-EXECUTIVE ORDER OF THE GOVERNOR
06/07/2012 LETT 3RD SUPPLEMENTAL DISIGNATION OF ASSISTANT STATE ATTORNEY

Okay. I did go ask a day or two ago and I thought my questions got lost in the shuffle but I found an answer tonight from one of the legal eagles that post around the board...

Corey's second supplemental designation was her apprising the court of persons on her investigative and prosecutorial staff, that she has designated responsible for some aspect of this case. I assume the 3rd supplemental designation is more of the same.

I'm guessing the "executive order" letter is just a cover letter, referencing her authority under her March appointment by the governor.

In regards to the SYG hearing...

The reality is that this is not only a mini-trial but it also a good time for the defense to lock in witness statements. If GZ gets bound over for trial by jury, the defense will have additional months to find expert testimony that negate testimony given by witnesses that is not favorable to Zimmerman.

MOM is a player.

He already has Gilbreath on record during the bond hearing stating that the Prosecution has no idea who threw the first punch.

He got him on the wording of the APC which I thought at the time to be nit-picky but it is the jist of the Second Degree murder charge.

He got him on record discussing a Witness's statement about how she caught a glimpse of two men chasing each other even though there was not one distinguishing feature that to tell who was chasing whom. Her story has since changed to what she may or may not have seen. She has admitted she didn't have her contacts in either.

The one thing they noticed is that the only real difference between Angela Corey's Capias vrs the Capias filed by Serino is the addition of two witnesses. Dee Dee and Sybrina Fulton.

The Legal Eagles are licking their "cyber chops" in anticipation of the SYG hearing. There is some debate as to whether if SYG can be proven, if Judge Lester will make the unpopular decision to give Zimmerman immunity from prosecution or if JL will turn it to a jury for their decision.







Last edited by DebFrmHell on Mon Jun 11, 2012 3:12 am; edited 1 time in total
avatar
DebFrmHell

Posts : 440
Join date : 2012-05-13
Location : Just This Side of Hell, Texas

Back to top Go down

Re: George Zimmerman / Trayvon Martin Case #3

Post by DebFrmHell on Mon Jun 11, 2012 2:33 am

I am all kinds of ready for the new Doc Dump!
avatar
DebFrmHell

Posts : 440
Join date : 2012-05-13
Location : Just This Side of Hell, Texas

Back to top Go down

Re: George Zimmerman / Trayvon Martin Case #3

Post by DebFrmHell on Mon Jun 11, 2012 2:36 am

Gizmo711 wrote:
tesstruhart wrote:http://www.sun-sentinel.com/os-george-zimmerman-stand-your-ground-20120608,0,6967649.story

Just found this, I confess I haven't read today so if its already been posted, my apologies


Yes, there are cases where the defendant will waive his rights to a jury trial and allow the judge to hear the case. However, I doubt it very much in this case. It has been said a few times that this case does not fall under the SYG law. One cannot persue someone and initiate the confrontation and than when losing the battle shoot the person (kill) and then claim SYG. If the 911 tapes didn't exist then Zimmerman may have stood a chance, but not with those 911 tapes. They are going to hang Zimmeman.

Also, when a judge hears a case and acts as the jury, it is at the accused requests. The judge cannot make that decision. I doubt very much that Zimmerman will make that request, especially after making such a fool out of Judge Lester with his lies.

For sure a jury of 12 will get this case.

I believe in Florida, their juries consist of six unless it is a death penalty case. It is then that the jury is increased to twelve.
avatar
DebFrmHell

Posts : 440
Join date : 2012-05-13
Location : Just This Side of Hell, Texas

Back to top Go down

Re: George Zimmerman / Trayvon Martin Case #3

Post by serenaz1 on Mon Jun 11, 2012 4:09 am

DebFrmHell wrote:

Okay. I did go ask a day or two ago and I thought my questions got lost in the shuffle but I found an answer tonight from one of the legal eagles that post around the board...

Corey's second supplemental designation was her apprising the court of persons on her investigative and prosecutorial staff, that she has designated responsible for some aspect of this case. I assume the 3rd supplemental designation is more of the same.

I'm guessing the "executive order" letter is just a cover letter, referencing her authority under her March appointment by the governor.

{snipped}


Thanks for the info! :)

avatar
serenaz1

Posts : 353
Join date : 2012-05-19

Back to top Go down

Re: George Zimmerman / Trayvon Martin Case #3

Post by Gizmo711 on Mon Jun 11, 2012 4:29 am

DebFrmHell wrote:
Gizmo711 wrote:
tesstruhart wrote:http://www.sun-sentinel.com/os-george-zimmerman-stand-your-ground-20120608,0,6967649.story

Just found this, I confess I haven't read today so if its already been posted, my apologies


Yes, there are cases where the defendant will waive his rights to a jury trial and allow the judge to hear the case. However, I doubt it very much in this case. It has been said a few times that this case does not fall under the SYG law. One cannot persue someone and initiate the confrontation and than when losing the battle shoot the person (kill) and then claim SYG. If the 911 tapes didn't exist then Zimmerman may have stood a chance, but not with those 911 tapes. They are going to hang Zimmeman.

Also, when a judge hears a case and acts as the jury, it is at the accused requests. The judge cannot make that decision. I doubt very much that Zimmerman will make that request, especially after making such a fool out of Judge Lester with his lies.

For sure a jury of 12 will get this case.

I believe in Florida, their juries consist of six unless it is a death penalty case. It is then that the jury is increased to twelve.


12 or 6 ....The point I was making is that it WILL go to trial. Sleep

Gizmo711

Posts : 804
Join date : 2012-05-12

Back to top Go down

Re: George Zimmerman / Trayvon Martin Case #3

Post by Gizmo711 on Mon Jun 11, 2012 4:35 am

We really don't need witnesses to testify who threw the first punch. No one witnessed the actual fight or saw who threw the first punch.

It's like most all other cases that go to trial. Circumstantial evidence...In this case it is (1) the 911 calls...(2) an unarmed teenager is dead by the hands of the person who was chasing him around a complex where the teenager had every right to be.

Who threw the punch is not even going to come into play, if it was, than there would be no trial and GZ would not be charged with second degree murder.

The two most crucial aspects of this case are the 911 calls and that police have a body..............

Gizmo711

Posts : 804
Join date : 2012-05-12

Back to top Go down

Re: George Zimmerman / Trayvon Martin Case #3

Post by marcena2 on Mon Jun 11, 2012 5:16 am

Gizmo711 wrote:

Who threw the punch is not even going to come into play, if it was, than there would be no trial and GZ would not be charged with second degree murder.

The two most crucial aspects of this case are the 911 calls and that police have a body..............

Respectfully disagree. Who laid hands on who first is critical. Even laying a hand on someone's forearm or a push of an index finger into chest is all it takes. Then the other has the right to defend. Dee Dee states she heard Tray say something to the effect of Get Off.
avatar
marcena2

Posts : 63
Join date : 2012-05-15

Back to top Go down

Re: George Zimmerman / Trayvon Martin Case #3

Post by Freckles on Mon Jun 11, 2012 5:26 am

DebFrmHell wrote:

clipped-
I believe in Florida, their juries consist of six unless it is a death penalty case. It is then that the jury is increased to twelve.

Makes it a whole lot easier and quicker for a smaller jury to reach decisions, I would suspect.
avatar
Freckles

Posts : 16456
Join date : 2012-05-13
Mood : Eyebrow

Back to top Go down

Re: George Zimmerman / Trayvon Martin Case #3

Post by ellejay on Mon Jun 11, 2012 8:02 am

Freckles wrote:
DebFrmHell wrote:

clipped-
I believe in Florida, their juries consist of six unless it is a death penalty case. It is then that the jury is increased to twelve.

Makes it a whole lot easier and quicker for a smaller jury to reach decisions, I would suspect.

--the recent adam kaufman murder trial had a jury of 12...also in florida.

http://www.nbcmiami.com/news/local/Jury-Deliberates-In-Aventura-Murder-Case-157238665.html
Adam Kaufman Not Guilty in Aventura Murder Case, Jury Concludes

--snipped--

The 12-member jury began its deliberations around 10 a.m.

A jury acquitted Aventura developer Adam Kaufman of second-degree murder in the death of his wife Tuesday.
avatar
ellejay

Posts : 843
Join date : 2012-05-15

Back to top Go down

Re: George Zimmerman / Trayvon Martin Case #3

Post by CherokeeNative on Mon Jun 11, 2012 10:30 am

Respectfully snipped.
DebFrmHell wrote:In regards to the SYG hearing...

The reality is that this is not only a mini-trial but it also a good time for the defense to lock in witness statements. If GZ gets bound over for trial by jury, the defense will have additional months to find expert testimony that negate testimony given by witnesses that is not favorable to Zimmerman.

MOM is a player.

He already has Gilbreath on record during the bond hearing stating that the Prosecution has no idea who threw the first punch.

He got him on the wording of the APC which I thought at the time to be nit-picky but it is the jist of the Second Degree murder charge.

He got him on record discussing a Witness's statement about how she caught a glimpse of two men chasing each other even though there was not one distinguishing feature that to tell who was chasing whom. Her story has since changed to what she may or may not have seen. She has admitted she didn't have her contacts in either.

The one thing they noticed is that the only real difference between Angela Corey's Capias vrs the Capias filed by Serino is the addition of two witnesses. Dee Dee and Sybrina Fulton.

The Legal Eagles are licking their "cyber chops" in anticipation of the SYG hearing. There is some debate as to whether if SYG can be proven, if Judge Lester will make the unpopular decision to give Zimmerman immunity from prosecution or if JL will turn it to a jury for their decision.

Yes, but I believe that you will find that it was the wording of the question - Gilbreath was not the only investigator working the case, so what he may or may not have personal knowledge of could be different than what other investigators have knowledge of. I also believe the "Legal Eagles" are just a tad biased since they are mostly defense attorneys who are speculating how they would defend this case based upon their interpretation of the law and case authority. Cool
avatar
CherokeeNative

Posts : 813
Join date : 2012-05-12
Location : PNW
Mood : Feeling beat up

Back to top Go down

Re: George Zimmerman / Trayvon Martin Case #3

Post by WeeBonnie on Mon Jun 11, 2012 11:43 am

Unless their were additional eyewitnesses that we have not heard from ( is that possible?) then the defense has nothing, because GZ cannot be credible. His story has other gaping holes and I don't know what jury would think that maybe he's finally telling the truth that he was attacked. When he is shown to fudge the other details. MOM has his work cut out for him.

CherokeeNative wrote:Respectfully snipped.
DebFrmHell wrote:In regards to the SYG hearing...

The reality is that this is not only a mini-trial but it also a good time for the defense to lock in witness statements. If GZ gets bound over for trial by jury, the defense will have additional months to find expert testimony that negate testimony given by witnesses that is not favorable to Zimmerman.

MOM is a player.

He already has Gilbreath on record during the bond hearing stating that the Prosecution has no idea who threw the first punch.

He got him on the wording of the APC which I thought at the time to be nit-picky but it is the jist of the Second Degree murder charge.

He got him on record discussing a Witness's statement about how she caught a glimpse of two men chasing each other even though there was not one distinguishing feature that to tell who was chasing whom. Her story has since changed to what she may or may not have seen. She has admitted she didn't have her contacts in either.

The one thing they noticed is that the only real difference between Angela Corey's Capias vrs the Capias filed by Serino is the addition of two witnesses. Dee Dee and Sybrina Fulton.

The Legal Eagles are licking their "cyber chops" in anticipation of the SYG hearing. There is some debate as to whether if SYG can be proven, if Judge Lester will make the unpopular decision to give Zimmerman immunity from prosecution or if JL will turn it to a jury for their decision.

Yes, but I believe that you will find that it was the wording of the question - Gilbreath was not the only investigator working the case, so what he may or may not have personal knowledge of could be different than what other investigators have knowledge of. I also believe the "Legal Eagles" are just a tad biased since they are mostly defense attorneys who are speculating how they would defend this case based upon their interpretation of the law and case authority. Cool

WeeBonnie

Posts : 675
Join date : 2012-05-24

Back to top Go down

Re: George Zimmerman / Trayvon Martin Case #3

Post by DebFrmHell on Mon Jun 11, 2012 1:57 pm

CherokeeNative wrote:Respectfully snipped.
DebFrmHell wrote:In regards to the SYG hearing...

The reality is that this is not only a mini-trial but it also a good time for the defense to lock in witness statements. If GZ gets bound over for trial by jury, the defense will have additional months to find expert testimony that negate testimony given by witnesses that is not favorable to Zimmerman.

MOM is a player.

He already has Gilbreath on record during the bond hearing stating that the Prosecution has no idea who threw the first punch.

He got him on the wording of the APC which I thought at the time to be nit-picky but it is the jist of the Second Degree murder charge.

He got him on record discussing a Witness's statement about how she caught a glimpse of two men chasing each other even though there was not one distinguishing feature that to tell who was chasing whom. Her story has since changed to what she may or may not have seen. She has admitted she didn't have her contacts in either.

The one thing they noticed is that the only real difference between Angela Corey's Capias vrs the Capias filed by Serino is the addition of two witnesses. Dee Dee and Sybrina Fulton.

The Legal Eagles are licking their "cyber chops" in anticipation of the SYG hearing. There is some debate as to whether if SYG can be proven, if Judge Lester will make the unpopular decision to give Zimmerman immunity from prosecution or if JL will turn it to a jury for their decision.

Yes, but I believe that you will find that it was the wording of the question - Gilbreath was not the only investigator working the case, so what he may or may not have personal knowledge of could be different than what other investigators have knowledge of. I also believe the "Legal Eagles" are just a tad biased since they are mostly defense attorneys who are speculating how they would defend this case based upon their interpretation of the law and case authority. Cool

Duly noted...but in their case they also cite statutes in support of their arguments. Two or three of them, along with the site owner, are very much on their game and seem to do this for "fun" since they are willing to research deep into Florida law cases. Three or four of the regulars are not lawyers but they are also very sharp.

I don't agree with your statement that they are a "tad biased" as much as they know that a person is innocent until proven guilty. That is how it should be. This case has been tried in the press since about the second or third week. George Zimmerman was convicted long before the first DocDump. Facts that have come out that support his claim and they cannot be ignored.

I am actually learning something about the mechanics of law and the Constitution. It has taught me to be more open-minded and to look at this in a variety of ways.

((I have also learned that I am glad I don't have to read statutes for a living...eternally grateful for that. I got to admit...they kind of make my eye glaze over half of the time. I would not make a good lawyer!))

As you well know, if I tried to reference an article by the NY Times, for example, I would have to do it with a bag over my DebFrmHell screen name. LOL! It isn't exactly a media-driven website.

And heck...they put up with my questions. What's not to love about that?

I find it pretty fascinating how they think having had all of my experiences with Defense lawyers being the defendant. In those cases, I didn't care about the details, I just wanted off. I paid out the wahzoooo for that privilege of ignorance. Blissful!

I can tell you one thing. I really don't trust lawyers but if I get in big trouble...call one of those sharks! Not Anne Bremner!

Very Happy
avatar
DebFrmHell

Posts : 440
Join date : 2012-05-13
Location : Just This Side of Hell, Texas

Back to top Go down

Re: George Zimmerman / Trayvon Martin Case #3

Post by DebFrmHell on Mon Jun 11, 2012 2:23 pm

WeeBonnie wrote:Unless their were additional eyewitnesses that we have not heard from ( is that possible?) then the defense has nothing, because GZ cannot be credible. His story has other gaping holes and I don't know what jury would think that maybe he's finally telling the truth that he was attacked. When he is shown to fudge the other details. MOM has his work cut out for him.

CherokeeNative wrote:Respectfully snipped.
DebFrmHell wrote:In regards to the SYG hearing...

The reality is that this is not only a mini-trial but it also a good time for the defense to lock in witness statements. If GZ gets bound over for trial by jury, the defense will have additional months to find expert testimony that negate testimony given by witnesses that is not favorable to Zimmerman.

MOM is a player.

He already has Gilbreath on record during the bond hearing stating that the Prosecution has no idea who threw the first punch.

He got him on the wording of the APC which I thought at the time to be nit-picky but it is the jist of the Second Degree murder charge.

He got him on record discussing a Witness's statement about how she caught a glimpse of two men chasing each other even though there was not one distinguishing feature that to tell who was chasing whom. Her story has since changed to what she may or may not have seen. She has admitted she didn't have her contacts in either.

The one thing they noticed is that the only real difference between Angela Corey's Capias vrs the Capias filed by Serino is the addition of two witnesses. Dee Dee and Sybrina Fulton.

The Legal Eagles are licking their "cyber chops" in anticipation of the SYG hearing. There is some debate as to whether if SYG can be proven, if Judge Lester will make the unpopular decision to give Zimmerman immunity from prosecution or if JL will turn it to a jury for their decision.

Yes, but I believe that you will find that it was the wording of the question - Gilbreath was not the only investigator working the case, so what he may or may not have personal knowledge of could be different than what other investigators have knowledge of. I also believe the "Legal Eagles" are just a tad biased since they are mostly defense attorneys who are speculating how they would defend this case based upon their interpretation of the law and case authority. Cool


I am doing this in purple since I have no clue where my quote will fall...

We have never heard George Zimmerman's exact words. We have no idea of the consistancies or inconsistancies in his statements that make the State's case. I doubt we are going to be reading them anytime soon, either. We have only heard from Proxy Spokepersons and leaks to the media.

The media is a bone of contention with me since I believe they have played me and I don't like nor appreciate it. I still think that part of their job is to give me the information in an honest way that I can formulate my own opinions. Getting led by the nose...not so much.

On more than one occasion, they have been directly responsible for mischaracterizations and have been rightfully called out on it. If you think that GZ is a huge racist, you will look for something that reinforces that belief. How about CNN and that gawdawful coons report? How about the editing magic at NBC? It took days or in some cases well over a week for the media to say... "Well, okay. We might have made a tiny error in reporting. My bad." But in the meantime, it is out there festering in the backs of people's mind. No apology from a news source will take that away.

It lowers the chance of a fair trial. IMO. Justice for Trayvon should not come as an injustice to George Zimmerman. There is a very delicate balance involved and being swayed by a media entity that is generating its own news is just wrong.

I find that appalling.
avatar
DebFrmHell

Posts : 440
Join date : 2012-05-13
Location : Just This Side of Hell, Texas

Back to top Go down

Re: George Zimmerman / Trayvon Martin Case #3

Post by CherokeeNative on Mon Jun 11, 2012 3:48 pm

DebFrmHell wrote:
WeeBonnie wrote:Unless their were additional eyewitnesses that we have not heard from ( is that possible?) then the defense has nothing, because GZ cannot be credible. His story has other gaping holes and I don't know what jury would think that maybe he's finally telling the truth that he was attacked. When he is shown to fudge the other details. MOM has his work cut out for him.

CherokeeNative wrote:Respectfully snipped.
DebFrmHell wrote:In regards to the SYG hearing...

The reality is that this is not only a mini-trial but it also a good time for the defense to lock in witness statements. If GZ gets bound over for trial by jury, the defense will have additional months to find expert testimony that negate testimony given by witnesses that is not favorable to Zimmerman.

MOM is a player.

He already has Gilbreath on record during the bond hearing stating that the Prosecution has no idea who threw the first punch.

He got him on the wording of the APC which I thought at the time to be nit-picky but it is the jist of the Second Degree murder charge.

He got him on record discussing a Witness's statement about how she caught a glimpse of two men chasing each other even though there was not one distinguishing feature that to tell who was chasing whom. Her story has since changed to what she may or may not have seen. She has admitted she didn't have her contacts in either.

The one thing they noticed is that the only real difference between Angela Corey's Capias vrs the Capias filed by Serino is the addition of two witnesses. Dee Dee and Sybrina Fulton.

The Legal Eagles are licking their "cyber chops" in anticipation of the SYG hearing. There is some debate as to whether if SYG can be proven, if Judge Lester will make the unpopular decision to give Zimmerman immunity from prosecution or if JL will turn it to a jury for their decision.

Yes, but I believe that you will find that it was the wording of the question - Gilbreath was not the only investigator working the case, so what he may or may not have personal knowledge of could be different than what other investigators have knowledge of. I also believe the "Legal Eagles" are just a tad biased since they are mostly defense attorneys who are speculating how they would defend this case based upon their interpretation of the law and case authority. Cool


I am doing this in purple since I have no clue where my quote will fall...

We have never heard George Zimmerman's exact words. We have no idea of the consistancies or inconsistancies in his statements that make the State's case. I doubt we are going to be reading them anytime soon, either. We have only heard from Proxy Spokepersons and leaks to the media.

The media is a bone of contention with me since I believe they have played me and I don't like nor appreciate it. I still think that part of their job is to give me the information in an honest way that I can formulate my own opinions. Getting led by the nose...not so much.

On more than one occasion, they have been directly responsible for mischaracterizations and have been rightfully called out on it. If you think that GZ is a huge racist, you will look for something that reinforces that belief. How about CNN and that gawdawful coons report? How about the editing magic at NBC? It took days or in some cases well over a week for the media to say... "Well, okay. We might have made a tiny error in reporting. My bad." But in the meantime, it is out there festering in the backs of people's mind. No apology from a news source will take that away.

It lowers the chance of a fair trial. IMO. Justice for Trayvon should not come as an injustice to George Zimmerman. There is a very delicate balance involved and being swayed by a media entity that is generating its own news is just wrong.

I find that appalling.

On the aspect of the media DebfrmHell, I am in complete agreement. Gone are the days of truth in reporting. Fox tries to get off with the crap they pull by saying they are an entertainment channel. ABC, well, that was one major F-up. And in all, they all are spinning the circumstances of events in the best way to get public interest and a rise out of us. We have a right to be angry about that. And, I truly want GZ to have a fair trial - I honestly do. As I stated up thread, most of our laws have come about based upon what is morally right and socially correct. I don't believe that anyone, even the pro-Zimmerman groups, could honestly say that they felt what occurred to Trayvon that night was right - it should not have happened -had GZ went to Target or if he had left the matter in the hands of LE once he made that non-911 call, Trayvon would be alive. GZ needs to be punished for that and it irritates me to no end that there are those who are trying to see that he walks away from this scott-free. I don't mind the argument of manslaughter - that is for our jury to decide - but to work towards seeing that this guy gets absolutely no punishment whatsoever is leading our society down the wrong path and many more will be will be gunned down if this case and others like it are allowed to dismissed because of a poorly drafted law. That the NRA and other activists groups are involved through the funneling of monies for the defense, is just as bad, in my mind, as the media distorting the true facts as they are known. There are men and women who, right now, are sitting in jail awaiting a trial where they are wrongfully accused - where the issue isn't whether they were overcharged but were in someway cupable as GZ is, but because they did not do what they are accused of having done - yet, these activists are not donating one penny towards their defense and the accused are having to resort to public defenders as a result. In my mind, that has tilted the scales of justice; it's tilted the scales of justice in GZ's case. I believe this is a truly ethical problem. On the other hand, are the chances of Judge Lester kicking the can to the jury rather than making a determination that could possibly ruin his chances of re-election in the future? You bet your sweet bippy he will - if he plans on being on the bench after this term. Then again, he may decide as the trier-of-fact at any SYG motion that GZ has demonstrated that he has no credibility, or since we don't know what all of the evidence is, that the prosecution has made their case. Either way, there will be those that will claim that Judge Lester kicked the can, when maybe he really didn't. But I am rambling....
avatar
CherokeeNative

Posts : 813
Join date : 2012-05-12
Location : PNW
Mood : Feeling beat up

Back to top Go down

Re: George Zimmerman / Trayvon Martin Case #3

Post by Gizmo711 on Mon Jun 11, 2012 3:57 pm

marcena2 wrote:
Gizmo711 wrote:

Who threw the punch is not even going to come into play, if it was, than there would be no trial and GZ would not be charged with second degree murder.

The two most crucial aspects of this case are the 911 calls and that police have a body..............

Respectfully disagree. Who laid hands on who first is critical. Even laying a hand on someone's forearm or a push of an index finger into chest is all it takes. Then the other has the right to defend. Dee Dee states she heard Tray say something to the effect of Get Off.

But there are no witnesses to who threw the first punch, this makes a big difference. We only have the word of the man who was profiling Trayvon, searching around the complex for him, and Trayvon ends up dead. Trayvon had no weapons on him, he only had a can of ice tea that was supposedly in his pocket when he was found dead. He also had a bag of skittles...A man with a 9mm gun standing over a dead teenager, a teenager that he had already called 911 about and claimed that he was acting suspiscious. And there is a need to know who threw the first punch? I don't think so, I don't think it will ever come into play at the trial. Sure Zimmerman will be saying that it was self defense, but self defense against what? Even if Zimmerman received the first blow to his nose, that still didn't warrent a shot to the chest.

A young man is dead at the age of seventeen all because someone nut job portrayed him as being suspiscious...Thos 911 tapes and the fact that Trayvon is dead at the hands of the man who was making those 911 calls is enough to convict. IMP....

Gizmo711

Posts : 804
Join date : 2012-05-12

Back to top Go down

Re: George Zimmerman / Trayvon Martin Case #3

Post by KZ on Mon Jun 11, 2012 4:00 pm

Deb from Hell and Cherokee Native, just want to say its been a pleasure reading your well thought out posts on my peek in here! I always enjoy reading what you both have to say. (too busy to comment more now.)

I might have more to say later this eve-- as you both know, I seldom run out of thoughts, opinions, or words!
avatar
KZ
Moderator

Posts : 672
Join date : 2011-05-11
Location : Up North

Back to top Go down

Re: George Zimmerman / Trayvon Martin Case #3

Post by Gizmo711 on Mon Jun 11, 2012 4:09 pm

I truly, truly doubt that Zimmerman would have been running from Trayvon, while he was carrying a loaded 9mm gun... We have to remember that only 6o seconds went by from the time Trayvon's call with his gf went dead and the time the police arrived and Trayvon was dead.

Zimmerman started this thing rolling and he ended it with a teenager dead and we are to believe that a jury will believe that the tables turned suddenly in midstream and Zimmerman became the victim? all within 60 seconds (one minute). Infact I believe it eas less than one minute, more like 45 seconds.

If Trayvon was going to attack Zimmerman I would think that he would have at least had the can of ice tea in his hands to use as a weapon, the only thing that he had at his disposal.

Let's also not forget about the screaming that was heard on the 911 tape, prior to the police arriving, that had to have taken more than a second or two. As soon as the shot is fire, instantainiously the screaming stopped.

One would assume that if it was Zimmerman screaming for help (against an unarmed teenager) that he would have continued to scream until someon came, even after he shot Trayvon. How can you be screaming so heartfelt for help and then stop short. Or did Zimmerman shoot Trayvon to stop him from screaming?

Gizmo711

Posts : 804
Join date : 2012-05-12

Back to top Go down

Re: George Zimmerman / Trayvon Martin Case #3

Post by Tamta on Mon Jun 11, 2012 4:19 pm

WeeBonnie wrote:Unless their were additional eyewitnesses that we have not heard from ( is that possible?) then the defense has nothing, because GZ cannot be credible. His story has other gaping holes and I don't know what jury would think that maybe he's finally telling the truth that he was attacked. When he is shown to fudge the other details. MOM has his work cut out for him.

CherokeeNative wrote:Respectfully snipped.
DebFrmHell wrote:In regards to the SYG hearing...

The reality is that this is not only a mini-trial but it also a good time for the defense to lock in witness statements. If GZ gets bound over for trial by jury, the defense will have additional months to find expert testimony that negate testimony given by witnesses that is not favorable to Zimmerman.

MOM is a player.

He already has Gilbreath on record during the bond hearing stating that the Prosecution has no idea who threw the first punch.

He got him on the wording of the APC which I thought at the time to be nit-picky but it is the jist of the Second Degree murder charge.

He got him on record discussing a Witness's statement about how she caught a glimpse of two men chasing each other even though there was not one distinguishing feature that to tell who was chasing whom. Her story has since changed to what she may or may not have seen. She has admitted she didn't have her contacts in either.

The one thing they noticed is that the only real difference between Angela Corey's Capias vrs the Capias filed by Serino is the addition of two witnesses. Dee Dee and Sybrina Fulton.

The Legal Eagles are licking their "cyber chops" in anticipation of the SYG hearing. There is some debate as to whether if SYG can be proven, if Judge Lester will make the unpopular decision to give Zimmerman immunity from prosecution or if JL will turn it to a jury for their decision.

Yes, but I believe that you will find that it was the wording of the question - Gilbreath was not the only investigator working the case, so what he may or may not have personal knowledge of could be different than what other investigators have knowledge of. I also believe the "Legal Eagles" are just a tad biased since they are mostly defense attorneys who are speculating how they would defend this case based upon their interpretation of the law and case authority. Cool

BBM

Maybe.
Maybe not.

I bet there will be many motions and many hearings on evidence and suppression of evidence in this case.

MOM is a very good lawyer and I am sure he will investigate, gather, and present evidence that will attempt to back up his client's version of events. I am sure that he has material to work with, out of what we are aware of now-or will be aware of, and from some that we may not hear of until this goes before the Court.
I am sure BDLR is going to have to work pretty hard for a conviction-
these lawyers are well matched.

There are a few cases that I spend time researching and discussing, and ALL of them constantly remind me about a critical aspect of the adversary trial system:

one side controls almost all of the gathering, protection, and release of evidence
and the public is often always the last to know.
With or without Sunshine Laws.

What we are in possession of as the public is in essence a constructed body of evidence that under the scrutiny of the trial will or will not evolve into facts.

I am in no way intimating that I think the State is manipulating or tampering with evidence, I have no reason to think that. I am only saying that there is often more in existence that could have bearing on cases than we the public will maybe ever know.
I know I can not say right now that I think everything is out there and on the table.
Aspects of the opinions and speculations that I currently hold could evolve.

I only know what I think right now.

I was not there.
I am also not aware of all of the variables that could serve to re-weigh evidence and
put it into a different light.


But I do know that GZ does not seem to have the media working in his favor....

avatar
Tamta

Posts : 2065
Join date : 2012-05-11
Mood : Eyebrow

Back to top Go down

Re: George Zimmerman / Trayvon Martin Case #3

Post by DebFrmHell on Mon Jun 11, 2012 5:14 pm

CherokeeNative wrote:
DebFrmHell wrote:
WeeBonnie wrote:Unless their were additional eyewitnesses that we have not heard from ( is that possible?) then the defense has nothing, because GZ cannot be credible. His story has other gaping holes and I don't know what jury would think that maybe he's finally telling the truth that he was attacked. When he is shown to fudge the other details. MOM has his work cut out for him.

CherokeeNative wrote:Respectfully snipped.
DebFrmHell wrote:In regards to the SYG hearing...

The reality is that this is not only a mini-trial but it also a good time for the defense to lock in witness statements. If GZ gets bound over for trial by jury, the defense will have additional months to find expert testimony that negate testimony given by witnesses that is not favorable to Zimmerman.

MOM is a player.

He already has Gilbreath on record during the bond hearing stating that the Prosecution has no idea who threw the first punch.

He got him on the wording of the APC which I thought at the time to be nit-picky but it is the jist of the Second Degree murder charge.

He got him on record discussing a Witness's statement about how she caught a glimpse of two men chasing each other even though there was not one distinguishing feature that to tell who was chasing whom. Her story has since changed to what she may or may not have seen. She has admitted she didn't have her contacts in either.

The one thing they noticed is that the only real difference between Angela Corey's Capias vrs the Capias filed by Serino is the addition of two witnesses. Dee Dee and Sybrina Fulton.

The Legal Eagles are licking their "cyber chops" in anticipation of the SYG hearing. There is some debate as to whether if SYG can be proven, if Judge Lester will make the unpopular decision to give Zimmerman immunity from prosecution or if JL will turn it to a jury for their decision.

Yes, but I believe that you will find that it was the wording of the question - Gilbreath was not the only investigator working the case, so what he may or may not have personal knowledge of could be different than what other investigators have knowledge of. I also believe the "Legal Eagles" are just a tad biased since they are mostly defense attorneys who are speculating how they would defend this case based upon their interpretation of the law and case authority. Cool


I am doing this in purple since I have no clue where my quote will fall...

We have never heard George Zimmerman's exact words. We have no idea of the consistancies or inconsistancies in his statements that make the State's case. I doubt we are going to be reading them anytime soon, either. We have only heard from Proxy Spokepersons and leaks to the media.

The media is a bone of contention with me since I believe they have played me and I don't like nor appreciate it. I still think that part of their job is to give me the information in an honest way that I can formulate my own opinions. Getting led by the nose...not so much.

On more than one occasion, they have been directly responsible for mischaracterizations and have been rightfully called out on it. If you think that GZ is a huge racist, you will look for something that reinforces that belief. How about CNN and that gawdawful coons report? How about the editing magic at NBC? It took days or in some cases well over a week for the media to say... "Well, okay. We might have made a tiny error in reporting. My bad." But in the meantime, it is out there festering in the backs of people's mind. No apology from a news source will take that away.

It lowers the chance of a fair trial. IMO. Justice for Trayvon should not come as an injustice to George Zimmerman. There is a very delicate balance involved and being swayed by a media entity that is generating its own news is just wrong.

I find that appalling.

On the aspect of the media DebfrmHell, I am in complete agreement. Gone are the days of truth in reporting. Fox tries to get off with the crap they pull by saying they are an entertainment channel. ABC, well, that was one major F-up. And in all, they all are spinning the circumstances of events in the best way to get public interest and a rise out of us. We have a right to be angry about that. And, I truly want GZ to have a fair trial - I honestly do. As I stated up thread, most of our laws have come about based upon what is morally right and socially correct. I don't believe that anyone, even the pro-Zimmerman groups, could honestly say that they felt what occurred to Trayvon that night was right - it should not have happened -had GZ went to Target or if he had left the matter in the hands of LE once he made that non-911 call, Trayvon would be alive. GZ needs to be punished for that and it irritates me to no end that there are those who are trying to see that he walks away from this scott-free. I don't mind the argument of manslaughter - that is for our jury to decide - but to work towards seeing that this guy gets absolutely no punishment whatsoever is leading our society down the wrong path and many more will be will be gunned down if this case and others like it are allowed to dismissed because of a poorly drafted law. That the NRA and other activists groups are involved through the funneling of monies for the defense, is just as bad, in my mind, as the media distorting the true facts as they are known. There are men and women who, right now, are sitting in jail awaiting a trial where they are wrongfully accused - where the issue isn't whether they were overcharged but were in someway cupable as GZ is, but because they did not do what they are accused of having done - yet, these activists are not donating one penny towards their defense and the accused are having to resort to public defenders as a result. In my mind, that has tilted the scales of justice; it's tilted the scales of justice in GZ's case. I believe this is a truly ethical problem. On the other hand, are the chances of Judge Lester kicking the can to the jury rather than making a determination that could possibly ruin his chances of re-election in the future? You bet your sweet bippy he will - if he plans on being on the bench after this term. Then again, he may decide as the trier-of-fact at any SYG motion that GZ has demonstrated that he has no credibility, or since we don't know what all of the evidence is, that the prosecution has made their case. Either way, there will be those that will claim that Judge Lester kicked the can, when maybe he really didn't. But I am rambling....

Ramble on my friend! This is my ramble back atcha!

Just for arguments sake, and you know I do that LOL!, you are willing to accept debate on manslaughter. Well, okay... but the fact remains is that manslaughter is not the charge. It is not even an option. The charge is Second Degree Murder. Manslaughter may not even come into play. We have no way of even knowing if it ever will. It would be in the jury instructions and we are probably a year away from that.

If it is put out there as a bargaining chip just to get jail time for GZ, then it stands to my own reasoning it is because the State cannot make their case of Murder Two.

There is also the matter of the Fulton/Martin family. I don't know that they would be that amendable to a lesser charge. Not that it would legally matter, the state is going to do what the state is going to do.

But we have seen the results of the wheels not going fast enough to suit their lawyer. There would much verbal discord if that were to be the case. IMO.

There is still the perception that the SPD did not investigate despite the fact that in the 183 pg Doc Dump, you can see dates that show otherwise. Reports were coming in up until they handed to that case over.

One of the two differences between SPD and the SAO is that Angela Corey added Sybrina Fulton to the witness list. It is safe to assume it is for her to identify that it is her child that is yelling for help.

They didn't add Tracy Martin, however. He originally said either no or he wasn't sure. Crump went into spin mode after that so I am not sure the exact order. I remember he called Chris Serino a lie-teller, basically.

Robert Zimmerman stated it was his son, also.

The voice analysis from the FBI could not determine who it was exactly due to the quality of the recording.

George Zimmerman was in the back of a patrol car, stating to paramedics that were treating him that he called for help and no one came. He was placed there, hand- cuffed, shortly after the shooting. This was overheard by Officer Meade, IIRC. Who knows if GZ overheard discussions amongst witnesses and LE so I tend to discount this a just a little.

The one thing we do know is that when John responded to the calls, he made no physical effort to separate the two of them. He told them to stop he was calling the police and went back inside to do so. That could be considered as getting no help.

So knowing all of these facts...

Where is the empathy of the jury going to lie? I will tell you. It will be with the sobbing mother of a shooting victim. It is how they work past that empathy that will be the question.

((I don't know anyone who does not feel for the Fulton/Martins. Personally, the grief of the father has effected me more so than his mother. There has not been one time that I have seen him interviewed that I don't want to hug him. You can't tell him it will be okay because it will never be okay.))

Then again, he (JL) may decide as the trier-of-fact at any SYG motion that GZ has demonstrated that he has no credibility


I think the issue at hand is the crediblilty of Shelly Zimmerman. GZ was the potted palm. Even Lester admitted that he had only read her statements at that stage (6/1/12). Zimmerman was never questioned under oath about those funds. He made the apology statement. He could only be questioned by de la Rionda about that. Not that de la Rionda didn't try...he did, MOM objected, he got overruled for being outside of the scope and that questioning line was discontinued.


You know I love ya, right? Have I told you yet that a paragraph is a girl's best friend? I am an old broad...and I could use the help!

Very Happy
avatar
DebFrmHell

Posts : 440
Join date : 2012-05-13
Location : Just This Side of Hell, Texas

Back to top Go down

Gone all bold purple again. It is the quoting thingie! LOL!

Post by DebFrmHell on Mon Jun 11, 2012 5:57 pm

Tamta wrote:
WeeBonnie wrote:Unless their were additional eyewitnesses that we have not heard from ( is that possible?) then the defense has nothing, because GZ cannot be credible. His story has other gaping holes and I don't know what jury would think that maybe he's finally telling the truth that he was attacked. When he is shown to fudge the other details. MOM has his work cut out for him.

CherokeeNative wrote:Respectfully snipped.
DebFrmHell wrote:In regards to the SYG hearing...

The reality is that this is not only a mini-trial but it also a good time for the defense to lock in witness statements. If GZ gets bound over for trial by jury, the defense will have additional months to find expert testimony that negate testimony given by witnesses that is not favorable to Zimmerman.

MOM is a player.

He already has Gilbreath on record during the bond hearing stating that the Prosecution has no idea who threw the first punch.

He got him on the wording of the APC which I thought at the time to be nit-picky but it is the jist of the Second Degree murder charge.

He got him on record discussing a Witness's statement about how she caught a glimpse of two men chasing each other even though there was not one distinguishing feature that to tell who was chasing whom. Her story has since changed to what she may or may not have seen. She has admitted she didn't have her contacts in either.

The one thing they noticed is that the only real difference between Angela Corey's Capias vrs the Capias filed by Serino is the addition of two witnesses. Dee Dee and Sybrina Fulton.

The Legal Eagles are licking their "cyber chops" in anticipation of the SYG hearing. There is some debate as to whether if SYG can be proven, if Judge Lester will make the unpopular decision to give Zimmerman immunity from prosecution or if JL will turn it to a jury for their decision.

Yes, but I believe that you will find that it was the wording of the question - Gilbreath was not the only investigator working the case, so what he may or may not have personal knowledge of could be different than what other investigators have knowledge of. I also believe the "Legal Eagles" are just a tad biased since they are mostly defense attorneys who are speculating how they would defend this case based upon their interpretation of the law and case authority. Cool

BBM

Maybe.
Maybe not.

I bet there will be many motions and many hearings on evidence and suppression of evidence in this case.

MOM is a very good lawyer and I am sure he will investigate, gather, and present evidence that will attempt to back up his client's version of events. I am sure that he has material to work with, out of what we are aware of now-or will be aware of, and from some that we may not hear of until this goes before the Court.
I am sure BDLR is going to have to work pretty hard for a conviction-
these lawyers are well matched.

There are a few cases that I spend time researching and discussing, and ALL of them constantly remind me about a critical aspect of the adversary trial system:

one side controls almost all of the gathering, protection, and release of evidence
and the public is often always the last to know.
With or without Sunshine Laws.

What we are in possession of as the public is in essence a constructed body of evidence that under the scrutiny of the trial will or will not evolve into facts.

I am in no way intimating that I think the State is manipulating or tampering with evidence, I have no reason to think that. I am only saying that there is often more in existence that could have bearing on cases than we the public will maybe ever know.
I know I can not say right now that I think everything is out there and on the table.
Aspects of the opinions and speculations that I currently hold could evolve.

I only know what I think right now.

I was not there.
I am also not aware of all of the variables that could serve to re-weigh evidence and
put it into a different light.


But I do know that GZ does not seem to have the media working in his favor....


Things I would count on for people MOM is going to depose... Robert Zimmerman, Jr. if there is still the issue of the funds floating about. And Dee Dee, though I think he would have to handle her gently. He cannot be percieved as "picking" on a minor.

I even think there is a possiblity of Tracy Martin to offset Sybrina and Jahvarius (sp)Fulton. I have no idea as to the input of Jahvarius be am assuming it goes to the identification of TM's voice.

Dear Witness 9, Joe Oliver, and Frank Taafe...it is going to suck to be you, IMO.
avatar
DebFrmHell

Posts : 440
Join date : 2012-05-13
Location : Just This Side of Hell, Texas

Back to top Go down

Re: George Zimmerman / Trayvon Martin Case #3

Post by WeeBonnie on Mon Jun 11, 2012 10:13 pm

I just want to say I've really enjoyed the endless rambles of Cher and the purple paragraphs from hell. Good sparring ladies!

I agree with the criticism of the media, but GZ did pick up a lot of sympathy for his wounds also. It's just that no matter how you slice it, he doesn't easily come off as a sympathetic figure. They've tried at times to demonize Trayvon with the weed smoking and his suspension- but it didnt fly. The few that want to believe his life was worthless still believe it. I think we've all seen them post comments on news articles.

Bottom line is, Trayvons bad hbits were just a heck of a lot more harmless than GZs little hobby. As much as I think it's been sensationalized the sentiment is similar to what any community would feel after such a senseless
Killing. It's a bit like that book Bonfire of the Vanities- GZ is stuck a bit worse off than he would have been maybe 20 or certainly 40 years ago.
People are fed up seeing black youth treated as disposable. So there's an unfortunate backlash. It's unfair, but if the evidence shows him guilty, I have no problem him paying the price.

That said Deb- I fully expect manslaughter to be an alternate charge or option given the jury. I'm not sure what you've heard about Trayvons parents that they wouldn't be satisfied with that. From what I have heard, all they asked for was a day in court.
I don't recall them being anything but a class act.

Am I the only one who wouldn't be shocked if they could live with a manslaughter plea if GZ admitted he made a grave error? I think so far they've been very fair, and just want to make sure things like this don't keep happening.



WeeBonnie

Posts : 675
Join date : 2012-05-24

Back to top Go down

Re: George Zimmerman / Trayvon Martin Case #3

Post by DebFrmHell on Tue Jun 12, 2012 12:17 am

WeeBonnie wrote:I just want to say I've really enjoyed the endless rambles of Cher and the purple paragraphs from hell. Good sparring ladies!

I agree with the criticism of the media, but GZ did pick up a lot of sympathy for his wounds also. It's just that no matter how you slice it, he doesn't easily come off as a sympathetic figure. They've tried at times to demonize Trayvon with the weed smoking and his suspension- but it didnt fly. The few that want to believe his life was worthless still believe it. I think we've all seen them post comments on news articles.

Bottom line is, Trayvons bad hbits were just a heck of a lot more harmless than GZs little hobby. As much as I think it's been sensationalized the sentiment is similar to what any community would feel after such a senseless
Killing. It's a bit like that book Bonfire of the Vanities- GZ is stuck a bit worse off than he would have been maybe 20 or certainly 40 years ago.
People are fed up seeing black youth treated as disposable. So there's an unfortunate backlash. It's unfair, but if the evidence shows him guilty, I have no problem him paying the price.

That said Deb- I fully expect manslaughter to be an alternate charge or option given the jury. I'm not sure what you've heard about Trayvons parents that they wouldn't be satisfied with that. From what I have heard, all they asked for was a day in court.
I don't recall them being anything but a class act.

Am I the only one who wouldn't be shocked if they could live with a manslaughter plea if GZ admitted he made a grave error? I think so far they've been very fair, and just want to make sure things like this don't keep happening.



GZ did pick up a lot of sympathy for his wounds

Only because evidence was starting to come out that backed his claim of self-defense. And I wouldn't call it sympathy so much as people were starting to see what wasn't being generated in the media in the prior weeks. Including endless streaming of the video of Zimmerman walking into the station along with remarks that he was unhurt. That colorized photo was leaked the day before the original bond hearing, IIRC. The 183 pg Doc Dump came shortly thereafter.

The few that want to believe Trayvon Martin's life (Added for clarity) was worthless still believe it.


The very same can be said for George Zimmerman.

I don't willingly demonize George Zimmerman anymore than I would consider demonizing Trayvon Martin. I have often said that both of these men, both the young and the elder, were not saints. They both had history. BUT if it requires putting one on a pedesdal supported by the back of the other it is wrong. IMO!

You are misreading what I have said regarding the Fulton/Martins. I know when my cousin was murdered the State of Texas kept his family apprised as to what charges were being considered and the charges that were eventually brought. They were allowed to share their opinions with the DAs office. It didn't change the charge that was brought, however.

The murder of my cousin was much more cut and dried than this. He was followed, by car, for approx 20 minutes as he drove home from a night out on 6th Street in Austin. After he got out of his car, he was beaten to death with a baseball bat by a man who thought he "put the moves" on his girlfriend while both were on a dance floor. Pleading down was never on the table for that defendant.

I think that since manslaugher is not an issue at this time, that we can argue for days on end about it...but for what reason, I have no clue. It is nowhere close to a trial to the point that no date has even been set. None of us has that Magic 8 Ball.

If and only if GZ was offered to plead down, he would have to be offered a deal along with it, IMO. That would mean (much?) less jail time. You think that Crump, acting as the family spokesperson, would sit back silently, I think otherwise. I say that because of the past actions by Mr. Crump regarding this case.

And never have I once said/implied that any person, young or old, black, white or periwinkle purple is disposable. In particular, that the Fulton/Martins are anything less than a class act. I take exception to that.






((As to Crump, and by association, his PR team combined with Sharpton who has a national media platform on MSNBC and Jackson to a lesser extent, I have a different take them. Way different discussion saved for another day. After the trial would be good for me.))



avatar
DebFrmHell

Posts : 440
Join date : 2012-05-13
Location : Just This Side of Hell, Texas

Back to top Go down

Re: George Zimmerman / Trayvon Martin Case #3

Post by CherokeeNative on Tue Jun 12, 2012 12:40 am

DebFrmHell wrote:
CherokeeNative wrote:
DebFrmHell wrote:
WeeBonnie wrote:Unless their were additional eyewitnesses that we have not heard from ( is that possible?) then the defense has nothing, because GZ cannot be credible. His story has other gaping holes and I don't know what jury would think that maybe he's finally telling the truth that he was attacked. When he is shown to fudge the other details. MOM has his work cut out for him.

CherokeeNative wrote:Respectfully snipped.
DebFrmHell wrote:In regards to the SYG hearing...

The reality is that this is not only a mini-trial but it also a good time for the defense to lock in witness statements. If GZ gets bound over for trial by jury, the defense will have additional months to find expert testimony that negate testimony given by witnesses that is not favorable to Zimmerman.

MOM is a player.

He already has Gilbreath on record during the bond hearing stating that the Prosecution has no idea who threw the first punch.

He got him on the wording of the APC which I thought at the time to be nit-picky but it is the jist of the Second Degree murder charge.

He got him on record discussing a Witness's statement about how she caught a glimpse of two men chasing each other even though there was not one distinguishing feature that to tell who was chasing whom. Her story has since changed to what she may or may not have seen. She has admitted she didn't have her contacts in either.

The one thing they noticed is that the only real difference between Angela Corey's Capias vrs the Capias filed by Serino is the addition of two witnesses. Dee Dee and Sybrina Fulton.

The Legal Eagles are licking their "cyber chops" in anticipation of the SYG hearing. There is some debate as to whether if SYG can be proven, if Judge Lester will make the unpopular decision to give Zimmerman immunity from prosecution or if JL will turn it to a jury for their decision.

Yes, but I believe that you will find that it was the wording of the question - Gilbreath was not the only investigator working the case, so what he may or may not have personal knowledge of could be different than what other investigators have knowledge of. I also believe the "Legal Eagles" are just a tad biased since they are mostly defense attorneys who are speculating how they would defend this case based upon their interpretation of the law and case authority. Cool


I am doing this in purple since I have no clue where my quote will fall...

We have never heard George Zimmerman's exact words. We have no idea of the consistancies or inconsistancies in his statements that make the State's case. I doubt we are going to be reading them anytime soon, either. We have only heard from Proxy Spokepersons and leaks to the media.

The media is a bone of contention with me since I believe they have played me and I don't like nor appreciate it. I still think that part of their job is to give me the information in an honest way that I can formulate my own opinions. Getting led by the nose...not so much.

On more than one occasion, they have been directly responsible for mischaracterizations and have been rightfully called out on it. If you think that GZ is a huge racist, you will look for something that reinforces that belief. How about CNN and that gawdawful coons report? How about the editing magic at NBC? It took days or in some cases well over a week for the media to say... "Well, okay. We might have made a tiny error in reporting. My bad." But in the meantime, it is out there festering in the backs of people's mind. No apology from a news source will take that away.

It lowers the chance of a fair trial. IMO. Justice for Trayvon should not come as an injustice to George Zimmerman. There is a very delicate balance involved and being swayed by a media entity that is generating its own news is just wrong.

I find that appalling.

On the aspect of the media DebfrmHell, I am in complete agreement. Gone are the days of truth in reporting. Fox tries to get off with the crap they pull by saying they are an entertainment channel. ABC, well, that was one major F-up. And in all, they all are spinning the circumstances of events in the best way to get public interest and a rise out of us. We have a right to be angry about that. And, I truly want GZ to have a fair trial - I honestly do. As I stated up thread, most of our laws have come about based upon what is morally right and socially correct. I don't believe that anyone, even the pro-Zimmerman groups, could honestly say that they felt what occurred to Trayvon that night was right - it should not have happened -had GZ went to Target or if he had left the matter in the hands of LE once he made that non-911 call, Trayvon would be alive. GZ needs to be punished for that and it irritates me to no end that there are those who are trying to see that he walks away from this scott-free. I don't mind the argument of manslaughter - that is for our jury to decide - but to work towards seeing that this guy gets absolutely no punishment whatsoever is leading our society down the wrong path and many more will be will be gunned down if this case and others like it are allowed to dismissed because of a poorly drafted law. That the NRA and other activists groups are involved through the funneling of monies for the defense, is just as bad, in my mind, as the media distorting the true facts as they are known. There are men and women who, right now, are sitting in jail awaiting a trial where they are wrongfully accused - where the issue isn't whether they were overcharged but were in someway cupable as GZ is, but because they did not do what they are accused of having done - yet, these activists are not donating one penny towards their defense and the accused are having to resort to public defenders as a result. In my mind, that has tilted the scales of justice; it's tilted the scales of justice in GZ's case. I believe this is a truly ethical problem. On the other hand, are the chances of Judge Lester kicking the can to the jury rather than making a determination that could possibly ruin his chances of re-election in the future? You bet your sweet bippy he will - if he plans on being on the bench after this term. Then again, he may decide as the trier-of-fact at any SYG motion that GZ has demonstrated that he has no credibility, or since we don't know what all of the evidence is, that the prosecution has made their case. Either way, there will be those that will claim that Judge Lester kicked the can, when maybe he really didn't. But I am rambling....

Ramble on my friend! This is my ramble back atcha!

Just for arguments sake, and you know I do that LOL!, you are willing to accept debate on manslaughter. Well, okay... but the fact remains is that manslaughter is not the charge. It is not even an option. The charge is Second Degree Murder. Manslaughter may not even come into play. We have no way of even knowing if it ever will. It would be in the jury instructions and we are probably a year away from that.

If it is put out there as a bargaining chip just to get jail time for GZ, then it stands to my own reasoning it is because the State cannot make their case of Murder Two.

There is also the matter of the Fulton/Martin family. I don't know that they would be that amendable to a lesser charge. Not that it would legally matter, the state is going to do what the state is going to do.

But we have seen the results of the wheels not going fast enough to suit their lawyer. There would much verbal discord if that were to be the case. IMO.

There is still the perception that the SPD did not investigate despite the fact that in the 183 pg Doc Dump, you can see dates that show otherwise. Reports were coming in up until they handed to that case over.

One of the two differences between SPD and the SAO is that Angela Corey added Sybrina Fulton to the witness list. It is safe to assume it is for her to identify that it is her child that is yelling for help.

They didn't add Tracy Martin, however. He originally said either no or he wasn't sure. Crump went into spin mode after that so I am not sure the exact order. I remember he called Chris Serino a lie-teller, basically.

Robert Zimmerman stated it was his son, also.

The voice analysis from the FBI could not determine who it was exactly due to the quality of the recording.

George Zimmerman was in the back of a patrol car, stating to paramedics that were treating him that he called for help and no one came. He was placed there, hand- cuffed, shortly after the shooting. This was overheard by Officer Meade, IIRC. Who knows if GZ overheard discussions amongst witnesses and LE so I tend to discount this a just a little.

The one thing we do know is that when John responded to the calls, he made no physical effort to separate the two of them. He told them to stop he was calling the police and went back inside to do so. That could be considered as getting no help.

So knowing all of these facts...

Where is the empathy of the jury going to lie? I will tell you. It will be with the sobbing mother of a shooting victim. It is how they work past that empathy that will be the question.

((I don't know anyone who does not feel for the Fulton/Martins. Personally, the grief of the father has effected me more so than his mother. There has not been one time that I have seen him interviewed that I don't want to hug him. You can't tell him it will be okay because it will never be okay.))

Then again, he (JL) may decide as the trier-of-fact at any SYG motion that GZ has demonstrated that he has no credibility


I think the issue at hand is the crediblilty of Shelly Zimmerman. GZ was the potted palm. Even Lester admitted that he had only read her statements at that stage (6/1/12). Zimmerman was never questioned under oath about those funds. He made the apology statement. He could only be questioned by de la Rionda about that. Not that de la Rionda didn't try...he did, MOM objected, he got overruled for being outside of the scope and that questioning line was discontinued.


You know I love ya, right? Have I told you yet that a paragraph is a girl's best friend? I am an old broad...and I could use the help! Very Happy

BBM - Of course I do - and Ditto to you too!! We old broads have to stick together, even though we agree to disagree. Besides, friendship means you can tell each other what's truly on your mind. Having said that, the manslaughter charge will be a lessor offense that the Jury will be given in a jury instruction - I can almost guarantee that. I don't believe the murder2 is a bargaining chip - I do believe that the prosecution would rather have manslaughter than a not-guilty verdict, so they will give the jury something to hang their hat on if they are the least bit stand offish at rendering a murder2 verdict.

I am not even going to get into what evidence and facts lean towards which side, the prosecution or the defense, because we would be here all day or week - and Gizmo, WeeBonnie, and others have been doing a great job of holding up that front. LOL I will admit, however, that both sides are going to have to work to obtain the verdict the each desire - and someone has to lose. I sure hope, after a fair trial, it is GZ who is on the losing end.

As for the SPD, I was one of the first to admit that they surprised me and that it appeared that indeed they had been investigating the case. I won't go so far as to say it was complete and all encompassing - and that may be because they are not properly equipped or funded. If there is a complete investigation, however, there will be answers to the many questions people are posing, including why certain testing wasn't performed, why a narcotics investigator was sent to the scene instead of a homicide investigator. If it is a competent PD and everything was on the up and up, they should welcome such an investigation. Nuff said by me.

As for GZ's credibility - nope, this is will I will have to part ways and disagree. Although he did not testify, he was deceitful by omission and by sitting there like a "potted plant." There was nothing preventing him from whispering into his attorney's ear and telling him what the correct information was - he didn't do that - and at one point during the hearing, you even see MOM bend over to discuss something with GZ, so the opportunity was there and available had he wanted to do the right thing. It is this type of knit-picking by the pro-GZ people, such as arguing over what the word "you" meant, and whether the questions were worded in such a way as to specifically entice an appropriate response from Shellie, etc. that is driving me bonkers. awe The pro-GZ group can put whatever window dressing they like on the facts, but the point is that the law imposes an obligation on the defendant. I don't have it in front of me, but there is case authority dealing with this exact type of situation where the defendant remained silent when he clearly knew the testimony was misleading or false. Our high courts have ruled that this is deceitful conduct on behalf of the defendant. If you need me to, I can find a couple for you.

Resist the urge to follow the dark side of the Force Deb. Jedi Master Yoda begs you. roflao It's never too late. roflao




avatar
CherokeeNative

Posts : 813
Join date : 2012-05-12
Location : PNW
Mood : Feeling beat up

Back to top Go down

Re: George Zimmerman / Trayvon Martin Case #3

Post by DebFrmHell on Tue Jun 12, 2012 1:48 am

Oooooh...paragraphs... I ((heart)) you!

Smootches. I got an appointment at 9am so my auntie is going to be here beforehand. I went to vacuum and the belt broke. The carpet looks like ((insert whatever expletive you deem appropriate and trust me. I have just ran through them all!)

My dark side is all over the carpet! tongue Reference picture of The Dog for proof!

Who does this at 1am? Me, that's who.
avatar
DebFrmHell

Posts : 440
Join date : 2012-05-13
Location : Just This Side of Hell, Texas

Back to top Go down

Re: George Zimmerman / Trayvon Martin Case #3

Post by Gizmo711 on Tue Jun 12, 2012 5:16 am

WeeBonnie wrote:I just want to say I've really enjoyed the endless rambles of Cher and the purple paragraphs from hell. Good sparring ladies!

I agree with the criticism of the media, but GZ did pick up a lot of sympathy for his wounds also. It's just that no matter how you slice it, he doesn't easily come off as a sympathetic figure. They've tried at times to demonize Trayvon with the weed smoking and his suspension- but it didnt fly. The few that want to believe his life was worthless still believe it. I think we've all seen them post comments on news articles.

Bottom line is, Trayvons bad hbits were just a heck of a lot more harmless than GZs little hobby. As much as I think it's been sensationalized the sentiment is similar to what any community would feel after such a senseless
Killing. It's a bit like that book Bonfire of the Vanities- GZ is stuck a bit worse off than he would have been maybe 20 or certainly 40 years ago.
People are fed up seeing black youth treated as disposable. So there's an unfortunate backlash. It's unfair, but if the evidence shows him guilty, I have no problem him paying the price.

That said Deb- I fully expect manslaughter to be an alternate charge or option given the jury. I'm not sure what you've heard about Trayvons parents that they wouldn't be satisfied with that. From what I have heard, all they asked for was a day in court.
I don't recall them being anything but a class act.

Am I the only one who wouldn't be shocked if they could live with a manslaughter plea if GZ admitted he made a grave error? I think so far they've been very fair, and just want to make sure things like this don't keep happening.


No you are NOT the only one, I totally agree with you, as do most citizens. Any parent would feel the same way . I would be beside myself with anger. I would want justice and all they are asking for is a day in court.

They lost a son, a young man lost his only brother. This should never have happened and it sure as hell should never happen again.

Gizmo711

Posts : 804
Join date : 2012-05-12

Back to top Go down

Re: George Zimmerman / Trayvon Martin Case #3

Post by Gizmo711 on Tue Jun 12, 2012 6:17 am

The more I go over the bond hearing the more I feel suspect of it. O'Mara had the whole ordeal staged, he knew just what he was going to ask all that were present, he also knew that the brother was not going to be there. The Zimmermans had to have prepared themselves for this phone hearing. They have to be paid in advance and they also had to have someone at their home to swear them in. This was well planned in advance.

Also, there is no lawyer out here that asks a question without knowing what the answer is going to be. We all found Shellie to be evasive and not forthcoming. We all found it odd that the one person who "supposedly" had access to the money from donations, would not be there at his brothers bond hearing. So why wouldn't Zimmermans lawyer find this odd?

The mere fact that right after Zimmerman is released, O;Mara makes a discovery of all this money, I find this to be very odd. As much as I do like O'Mara, I do believe that he was being a little deceitful at that bond hearing and than later (once Zimmerman was released) decided that he would come forth with his find of these donations. O'Mara knew that eventually they would be found out and he wasn't going to come across as the bad guy and ruin his reputation.

When you look at some of the questions that were asked of Shellie by O'Mara, one has to know that they were rehearsed to a point with O'Mara doing the questioning of Shellie prior to that hearing.

In coming clean after, O'Mara probably thought that the judge would just let it ride, but when the judge revoked the bond it stunned O'Mara (you could see it all over his face). I don't believe that O'Mara had anticipated that. He may have thought by coming clean so soon that the judge would just over look it.

If the judge would have given Zimmerman a large bond it would have cleaned out that account and then it would have been discovered taht they did have money, but with coming up up a large bond would have made the court suspiscious of granting Zimmerman an indigent status. So they were caught between a hard rock and a stone. So they chose to lie.

And I do believe that O'Mara was in on this lie.

The one thing that I do not believe is that O'Mara had Zimmermans valid passport in his desk for a month without turning it in. He may very well have covered for his client at that point as not to make it a reason to revoke Zimmermans bond (which ended up being revoked anyway).

Somethings just don't meet the smell test for all concerned on Zimmermans side.

Gizmo711

Posts : 804
Join date : 2012-05-12

Back to top Go down

Re: George Zimmerman / Trayvon Martin Case #3

Post by DebFrmHell on Tue Jun 12, 2012 6:21 am

@Serenaz
The Third Supplemental letter is now online.

It would appear that Richard W. Mantei may have taken the place of Bernie de la Rionda in the investigation, prosecution, and representation of the State of Florida in the case of State v Zimmerman.

Curiously, the notification is dated June 4th, 2012.

http://www.flcourts18.org/PDF/Press_Releases/third%20designation%20of%20ASA.pdf

And no, I didn't spot this without help...
avatar
DebFrmHell

Posts : 440
Join date : 2012-05-13
Location : Just This Side of Hell, Texas

Back to top Go down

Re: George Zimmerman / Trayvon Martin Case #3

Post by Freckles on Tue Jun 12, 2012 6:31 am

Gizmo said:
"
The mere fact that right after Zimmerman is released, O;Mara makes a discovery of all this money, I find this to be very odd. As much as I do like O'Mara, I do believe that he was being a little deceitful at that bond hearing and than later (once Zimmerman was released) decided that he would come forth with his find of these donations. O'Mara knew that eventually they would be found out and he wasn't going to come across as the bad guy and ruin his reputation. "

Yes. Without a doubt!
avatar
Freckles

Posts : 16456
Join date : 2012-05-13
Mood : Eyebrow

Back to top Go down

Re: George Zimmerman / Trayvon Martin Case #3

Post by CherokeeNative on Tue Jun 12, 2012 8:04 am

DebFrmHell wrote:@Serenaz
The Third Supplemental letter is now online.

It would appear that Richard W. Mantei may have taken the place of Bernie de la Rionda in the investigation, prosecution, and representation of the State of Florida in the case of State v Zimmerman.

Curiously, the notification is dated June 4th, 2012.

http://www.flcourts18.org/PDF/Press_Releases/third%20designation%20of%20ASA.pdf

And no, I didn't spot this without help...

I don't know Deb, but this looks that Mantei is replacing Wolfinger and this doesn't affect BDLR at all...do you see what I am saying?
avatar
CherokeeNative

Posts : 813
Join date : 2012-05-12
Location : PNW
Mood : Feeling beat up

Back to top Go down

Re: George Zimmerman / Trayvon Martin Case #3

Post by CherokeeNative on Tue Jun 12, 2012 8:19 am

Gizmo711 wrote:The more I go over the bond hearing the more I feel suspect of it. O'Mara had the whole ordeal staged, he knew just what he was going to ask all that were present, he also knew that the brother was not going to be there. The Zimmermans had to have prepared themselves for this phone hearing. They have to be paid in advance and they also had to have someone at their home to swear them in. This was well planned in advance.

Also, there is no lawyer out here that asks a question without knowing what the answer is going to be. We all found Shellie to be evasive and not forthcoming. We all found it odd that the one person who "supposedly" had access to the money from donations, would not be there at his brothers bond hearing. So why wouldn't Zimmermans lawyer find this odd?

The mere fact that right after Zimmerman is released, O;Mara makes a discovery of all this money, I find this to be very odd. As much as I do like O'Mara, I do believe that he was being a little deceitful at that bond hearing and than later (once Zimmerman was released) decided that he would come forth with his find of these donations. O'Mara knew that eventually they would be found out and he wasn't going to come across as the bad guy and ruin his reputation.

When you look at some of the questions that were asked of Shellie by O'Mara, one has to know that they were rehearsed to a point with O'Mara doing the questioning of Shellie prior to that hearing.

In coming clean after, O'Mara probably thought that the judge would just let it ride, but when the judge revoked the bond it stunned O'Mara (you could see it all over his face). I don't believe that O'Mara had anticipated that. He may have thought by coming clean so soon that the judge would just over look it.

If the judge would have given Zimmerman a large bond it would have cleaned out that account and then it would have been discovered taht they did have money, but with coming up up a large bond would have made the court suspiscious of granting Zimmerman an indigent status. So they were caught between a hard rock and a stone. So they chose to lie.

And I do believe that O'Mara was in on this lie.

The one thing that I do not believe is that O'Mara had Zimmermans valid passport in his desk for a month without turning it in. He may very well have covered for his client at that point as not to make it a reason to revoke Zimmermans bond (which ended up being revoked anyway).

Somethings just don't meet the smell test for all concerned on Zimmermans side.

Spot on Gizmo. MOM knew of the web site account asking for donations from Day One. He orchestrated the gathering of the family members with court reporter present for the telephone testimony. He most likely - I would throw myself on the sword if he didn't - spoke to all of them via speaker phone in advance of the hearing to give them a rendention of what the line of questioning would be and gave admonitions on how to respond briefly with "yes, no, or I don't know" answers. I believe he was fully aware that the family was going to claim that only brother had info regarding the account and he was purposely not included in the family group of testifiers for that reason. (Insert Paragraph here for Deb - Cool )

What I do not believe MOM knew was that the donations had compiled to such a substantial amount, because he would have known that this large of a sum would eventually attract attention - so he most likely believed it was in the 5-10k range. In fact, I will go so far as to say I bet he told his client to go ahead and use the money to pay off his debts because he most likely would not be able to work for some time given the threats, etc., which would mean that GZ was once again indigent. I don't believe MOM knew that GZ and Shellie were discussing the funds over the jail telehones - because you know he specifically told GZ not to talk about the case or any aspect of the case over those phones. This is MOM's saving grace in the eyes of GZ and Shellie - other than making this grave mistake, they were following MOM's instructions to the "T". MOM knew that BDLR could not ask GZ about the funds when GZ got up to give his apology under oath as it was outside the scope of testimony given.

And I agree - I do not believe that MOM had that passport as far in advance as he claims to...but there is no way to prove that, and there are those receipts that GZ mailed the paypal funds to MOM in to rely upon. Very Handy - that's why we legal beagles save every envelope and delivery receipt.

Deb- here I was trying to save space on the board by not using paragraphs....LOL
avatar
CherokeeNative

Posts : 813
Join date : 2012-05-12
Location : PNW
Mood : Feeling beat up

Back to top Go down

Re: George Zimmerman / Trayvon Martin Case #3

Post by WeeBonnie on Tue Jun 12, 2012 8:37 am

Don't strip any nuts Deb- unless it's here on this thread!
You two ladies are the American equivant of two Agatha Christie characters!
Love it!

DebFrmHell wrote:Oooooh...paragraphs... I ((heart)) you!

Smootches. I got an appointment at 9am so my auntie is going to be here beforehand. I went to vacuum and the belt broke. The carpet looks like ((insert whatever expletive you deem appropriate and trust me. I have just ran through them all!)

My dark side is all over the carpet! tongue Reference picture of The Dog for proof!

Who does this at 1am? Me, that's who.

WeeBonnie

Posts : 675
Join date : 2012-05-24

Back to top Go down

Re: George Zimmerman / Trayvon Martin Case #3

Post by CherokeeNative on Tue Jun 12, 2012 9:12 am

WeeBonnie wrote:Don't strip any nuts Deb- unless it's here on this thread!
You two ladies are the American equivant of two Agatha Christie characters!
Love it!

DebFrmHell wrote:Oooooh...paragraphs... I ((heart)) you!

Smootches. I got an appointment at 9am so my auntie is going to be here beforehand. I went to vacuum and the belt broke. The carpet looks like ((insert whatever expletive you deem appropriate and trust me. I have just ran through them all!)

My dark side is all over the carpet! tongue Reference picture of The Dog for proof!

Who does this at 1am? Me, that's who.

Thank you WeeBonnie - Deb and I see a lot of this case from different angles as far as the application of the law and what the evidence tends to prove. But, we agreed early on to not let those differences interfere with what is otherwise two people who really enjoy each other's posts and perspective. And while we all believe or support one side of the case or the other based upon our own life experiences and interpretation of the facts, it is always good to see what the "other side" is thinking to help you make a well rounded decision. As this case heats up, I hope that everyone can maintain that frame of mind with our fellow posters - and if newbies come onto the Board as they often do when the Trial gets near - that we all can refrain from becoming hostile with them if their views are differently than ours; and, in turn that we can ignore any hostility of those coming onto the Board to bait us into argument. I don't know about you all, but to hear rumors that this thread is "difficult" or to have it completely shut down because of discourse among just a couple posters really frustrates me. As we have reminisced the funnier points of our sharing the CA trial, and what funny characters some of our fellow posters were, we will one day look back at this case and do the same. (Putting soap box away now and going to work.)
avatar
CherokeeNative

Posts : 813
Join date : 2012-05-12
Location : PNW
Mood : Feeling beat up

Back to top Go down

Re: George Zimmerman / Trayvon Martin Case #3

Post by DebFrmHell on Tue Jun 12, 2012 9:53 am

CherokeeNative wrote:
DebFrmHell wrote:@Serenaz
The Third Supplemental letter is now online.

It would appear that Richard W. Mantei may have taken the place of Bernie de la Rionda in the investigation, prosecution, and representation of the State of Florida in the case of State v Zimmerman.

Curiously, the notification is dated June 4th, 2012.

http://www.flcourts18.org/PDF/Press_Releases/third%20designation%20of%20ASA.pdf

And no, I didn't spot this without help...

I don't know Deb, but this looks that Mantei is replacing Wolfinger and this doesn't affect BDLR at all...do you see what I am saying?

Would/Could an ASA replace a SA? I am not sure how it works. I know that Wolfinger recused himself from this case but as I read it not from any others.

Exhausted...and hey! I thought you were going to work! Get out there! Bring home the bacon! Crack the whip! Hoe that row! Out of analogies!
avatar
DebFrmHell

Posts : 440
Join date : 2012-05-13
Location : Just This Side of Hell, Texas

Back to top Go down

Re: George Zimmerman / Trayvon Martin Case #3

Post by Tamta on Tue Jun 12, 2012 11:35 am

Gizmo711 wrote:The more I go over the bond hearing the more I feel suspect of it. O'Mara had the whole ordeal staged, he knew just what he was going to ask all that were present, he also knew that the brother was not going to be there. The Zimmermans had to have prepared themselves for this phone hearing. They have to be paid in advance and they also had to have someone at their home to swear them in. This was well planned in advance.

Also, there is no lawyer out here that asks a question without knowing what the answer is going to be. We all found Shellie to be evasive and not forthcoming. We all found it odd that the one person who "supposedly" had access to the money from donations, would not be there at his brothers bond hearing. So why wouldn't Zimmermans lawyer find this odd?

The mere fact that right after Zimmerman is released, O;Mara makes a discovery of all this money, I find this to be very odd. As much as I do like O'Mara, I do believe that he was being a little deceitful at that bond hearing and than later (once Zimmerman was released) decided that he would come forth with his find of these donations. O'Mara knew that eventually they would be found out and he wasn't going to come across as the bad guy and ruin his reputation.

When you look at some of the questions that were asked of Shellie by O'Mara, one has to know that they were rehearsed to a point with O'Mara doing the questioning of Shellie prior to that hearing.

In coming clean after, O'Mara probably thought that the judge would just let it ride, but when the judge revoked the bond it stunned O'Mara (you could see it all over his face). I don't believe that O'Mara had anticipated that. He may have thought by coming clean so soon that the judge would just over look it.

If the judge would have given Zimmerman a large bond it would have cleaned out that account and then it would have been discovered taht they did have money, but with coming up up a large bond would have made the court suspiscious of granting Zimmerman an indigent status. So they were caught between a hard rock and a stone. So they chose to lie.

And I do believe that O'Mara was in on this lie.

The one thing that I do not believe is that O'Mara had Zimmermans valid passport in his desk for a month without turning it in. He may very well have covered for his client at that point as not to make it a reason to revoke Zimmermans bond (which ended up being revoked anyway).

Somethings just don't meet the smell test for all concerned on Zimmermans side.

BBM

Gizmo,

Very interesting points, my immediate reaction to the 'revelation' of the funds to the Court and the Revocation of Bond event was "For real?". Suspect

It still is-
And that also pertains to the Court and both lawyers.

In attempting to be fair minded to all sides in this issue, there may be more innocent answers as to why the knowledge of the exact location and amount of funds on 4/20 was not handled differently.
I can see a lawyer avoiding a specific topic because the details of which could be ethically compromising at a particular point and that asserting lack of knowledge could be strategic advantage later on.
And maybe that is some of what happened.

I am really looking forward to what will be said in the 6/29 hearing.

I have really tried to look at the issue of the funds and the bond hearing from all sides not just because my gut instinct was "I do not buy this" but also I do not think that anyone's credibility, particularly in a case with the enormity of consequences like a Murder 2 case has, should be determined based on their handling of financial matters. Nor conversely do I want to impose what my opinions are of the shooting onto this incident.
I think the evidence of the shooting will speak for itself.
The answers to GZ's credibility all lay there.

( As a side note in regard to GZSZ, I for one do not see them as either having the shrewdness ($ would not have been in one of their accounts if they were) nor opportunity to effectively conspire once GZ was arrested, and I doubt that they would have done it on the jailhouse phone, though I have only heard what was publicly released. I can however see GZSZ, after the experience that they had with the previous lawyers, not being 100% forthcoming from the get go with GZs new attorney, MOM. I imagine incarceration to be really awful, even if it is rightfully determined.)



avatar
Tamta

Posts : 2065
Join date : 2012-05-11
Mood : Eyebrow

Back to top Go down

Re: George Zimmerman / Trayvon Martin Case #3

Post by Stolat on Tue Jun 12, 2012 11:54 am

Gizmo711 wrote:The more I go over the bond hearing the more I feel suspect of it. O'Mara had the whole ordeal staged, he knew just what he was going to ask all that were present, he also knew that the brother was not going to be there. The Zimmermans had to have prepared themselves for this phone hearing. They have to be paid in advance and they also had to have someone at their home to swear them in. This was well planned in advance.

Also, there is no lawyer out here that asks a question without knowing what the answer is going to be. We all found Shellie to be evasive and not forthcoming. We all found it odd that the one person who "supposedly" had access to the money from donations, would not be there at his brothers bond hearing. So why wouldn't Zimmermans lawyer find this odd?

During the hearing itself I found it immediately odd and kept asking "where's the brother???...where's the brother??? " it was painfully obvious he was strategically absent, coupled with the question of WHO was involved with the site/funds. I do NOT believe in coinkidinks in crimes. MOM only showed himself to either be deceitful or falling *drastically* short of his typical quality of competence.

It is my suspicion that we here are not the first to think these things and if it struck us as obviously odd -- it very likely struck Lester the same way as well, hence his stern revocation. The message sent that day was intended for more than just GZ. The message sent to MOM was clear: get your act together, get your client pulled together, and don't pull this crap in my courtroom again.
avatar
Stolat

Posts : 801
Join date : 2012-05-12
Location : Oddly Somewhere Close To You

Back to top Go down

Re: George Zimmerman / Trayvon Martin Case #3

Post by Tamta on Tue Jun 12, 2012 12:10 pm

Stolat wrote:
Gizmo711 wrote:The more I go over the bond hearing the more I feel suspect of it. O'Mara had the whole ordeal staged, he knew just what he was going to ask all that were present, he also knew that the brother was not going to be there. The Zimmermans had to have prepared themselves for this phone hearing. They have to be paid in advance and they also had to have someone at their home to swear them in. This was well planned in advance.

Also, there is no lawyer out here that asks a question without knowing what the answer is going to be. We all found Shellie to be evasive and not forthcoming. We all found it odd that the one person who "supposedly" had access to the money from donations, would not be there at his brothers bond hearing. So why wouldn't Zimmermans lawyer find this odd?

During the hearing itself I found it immediately odd and kept asking "where's the brother???...where's the brother??? " it was painfully obvious he was strategically absent, coupled with the question of WHO was involved with the site/funds. I do NOT believe in coinkidinks in crimes. MOM only showed himself to either be deceitful or falling *drastically* short of his typical quality of competence.

It is my suspicion that we here are not the first to think these things and if it struck us as obviously odd -- it very likely struck Lester the same way as well, hence his stern revocation. The message sent that day was intended for more than just GZ. The message sent to MOM was clear: get your act together, get your client pulled together, and don't pull this crap in my courtroom again.

This is one thing that I am wondering:

GZ has a right to put on a good defense.
MOM deserves to be compensated for his work.
It is standard for Defense Attys when representing someone accused of this type of felony to request and receive legal fees in advance that they then put into a separate account called a 'trust' in order to not mix their money with their client's money.

MOM was had not been working on this case for very long prior to the bond hearing. I am wondering if he was intending to get through the Bond Hearing, because GZ being out on bond would be better for the overall strategy, and then figure out a way to address the transfer of these funds over to him in a way that would allow him to sidestep ethical scrutiny and the State saw the opportunity in SZ's answer regarding the absent BIL as having ultimate knowledge and authority and took note so as to follow up and explore if this could be something they could use to their advantage-which they did.

avatar
Tamta

Posts : 2065
Join date : 2012-05-11
Mood : Eyebrow

Back to top Go down

Re: George Zimmerman / Trayvon Martin Case #3

Post by Sponsored content


Sponsored content


Back to top Go down

Page 3 of 20 Previous  1, 2, 3, 4 ... 11 ... 20  Next

View previous topic View next topic Back to top

- Similar topics

 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum