Trayvon Martin, Vigilante Justice

[quadraginta]

You should see the photos of the other guy.

We can't, they haven't released them.

Apparently we won't...it's the only item the media attorneys conceded. They argued that an in camera viewing would satisfy.

It isn't like they were conceding very much. They had to know they'd lose that battle.

There aren't very many explicitly codified exceptions to the FL Sunshine laws as far as court records are concerned. Ever since the 2001 Earnhardt Family Protection Act autopsy records have been one of them. Unless the family of the deceased agrees, those pictures are not going to be released to the public.

Even Casey Anthony's defense team didn't get to have copies of the photos of Caylee's in situ remains and autopsy until they guaranteed that there would be no disclosure or 'leaks'.

 

[Unabogie]

Zimmerman has the right to remain silent. Perhaps you were wondering why he wasn't being grilled at that hearing. That would be it. Could you provide a timestamp for the exact moment of his lie in the video?

In addition, could you provide a citation for your stating as a fact above that Z will testify at the next hearing?

Also, feel free to demonstrate he conspired with his wife to lie under oath. You did say it could "probably" be done.

The judge stated that in order to get a new bond, George will have to testify. Now, George has the right not to, but then he'll just stay in jail. Don't you think that the fact that they've scheduled a new bond hearing is enough to demonstrate that George will testify?

As to his wife, they have tapes of the two of them talking about all their piles of money, but using code words to try and disguise what they were talking about. Then she testifies falsely under oath and claims she doesn't have any money and has no knowledge of the money. She was at the damn credit union on the phone with him! She lied under oath!

George hasn't lied yet. But I am suggesting that when he does testify about the money issue, he will lie. He seems to have a problem with the truth and with thinking he's above authority. He also has a problem in that his wife could be charge with perjury for lying under oath about a material fact.

 

[crimresearch]

Again you put it well and very succinctly the man is a reckless loose cannon with a track record of hot headedness.

So we are still regurgitating the media fueled hype utterly debunked thousands of posts ago?

Channeling Nancy Grace? Trial by woo?

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

Right, but you didn't quite cover a mechanism of injury that accounted for mulitple injury sites. Is it your opinion that a single blow caused bruising to both sides of Zimmerman's forehead?

I'm not convinced there is a bruise there, nor am I sure the doctor who claimed GZ had a non displaced nasal fracture had good evidence of that. It was their family doctor. I'll be curious what evidence he based that on when the trial comes and we get a better picture of the injuries.

Also, the images taken by the police are valid. Pictures the next day could be of injuries GZ gave himself knowing his story was weak. We'll likely never know in that case.

But as for the nose fracture, it's cartilage, not bone and regular Xrays are not always done unless one is looking for other facial bone fractures:

The use of plain images and computed tomography (CT) scans for the diagnosis and management of nasal fractures has been controversial. Several small studies have shown that use of these modalities is neither cost-effective nor beneficial to the patient or physician. Nasal fractures are usually evident and can be elicited by means of careful history taking and physical examination. Rarely is the radiologic confirmation of these injuries needed.[14] However, some clinicians still use plain images and CT scans, and the radiologist must understand some of the diagnostic pitfalls to reduce the rate of erroneous readings.[15, 16]

Now, it may turn out that some measures were taken to document the injuries, but it is also possible the doctor, who like many witnesses for the defense, gave a diagnosis that most benefitted the patient, not necessarily one that was the most likely, and that beneficial diagnosis could have been based solely on GZ saying "ow" when his nose was touched.

 

[TheL8Elvis]

I think you could probably demonstrate he conspired with his wife to allow her to lie under oath. But don't forget there's now another bond hearing coming up in which George will testify. I think there's a good chance he'll lie then too, while attempting to explain away the conspiracy with his wife.

I think you would have to demonstrate they spoke about what the testimony would be. Clearly, the SA has recordings of all the conversations. Did they do that ? Or did they just talk about approximate amounts of money in non-code ?

Additionally, I am not a lawyer, but isn't there some exemption of spousal privilege, where you cannot be forced to testify against or about things you discuss with your spouse ?

 

[crimresearch]

We don't know what specifically he told the police. We certainly don't know that he claimed to get out only to find an address.

Yesterday, for GZs statments you said this:


Apply that to this scenario, and in a few weeks we will know.

If you want a scenario of what may have happened:
I believe GZ got out to follow TM and lost him. When the NEN operator asked him what address he was in front of, he didn't know, and that is still because he wasn't in front of a house with a street number. He kept walking for a bit to see if he could spot TM. He couldn't so he was walking back towards his truck and to find an address to tell the police when they called him, and that is when the altercation took place.

Side note: I wonder if the LEO originally sent tried to call GZ as discussed ?

Why would he slow his roll on 911 calls of shots fired, to make a phone call for an earlier non-emergency report of a suspicious person?

 

[LTC8K6]

Not just punched, but punched by a kid who supposedly was so powerful GZ feared for his life? Remember GZ's brother's ridiculous claims that GZ felt his life ebbing away or however he worded it?

I have no problem accepting that TM got at least one punch in. From there it's clear not only did GZ wrongly profile TM, wrongly followed him, stupidly approached him instead of waiting for the cops, and grossly over-reacted when he shot TM.

Serino must be an idiot then. He must have missed all of that clear stuff when he was talking to the media.

Heck, he must have forgot it when he only requested manslaughter charges, too.

You've clearly described a murder. Even I would agree that you've described a murder, and would have no problem with murder charges with your scenario.

 

[TheL8Elvis]

Why would he slow his roll on 911 calls of shots fired, to make a phone call for an earlier non-emergency report of a suspicious person?

I doubt he would for the exact reason you stated.

It was just a question that popped into my head...

 

[johnny karate]

What day did did the paypal account accepting donations get the first donation ?What day did he give his financial information to MO'M ? What was the balance on that day ?

What day did he and his wife discuss what her testimony in court should be ?

When you can answer those questions, you can start making a good case for conspiracy. Until then, it's just your opinion based on the prosecutions representation of the facts.

The case for conspiracy has already been made.

The conversation between Zimmerman and his wife proves she lied in court.

The fact that Zimmerman allowed his lawyer to submit material falsehoods in court documents indicating he was of indigent status proves Zimmerman willfully attempted to deceive the court.

Now, maybe Zimmerman and his wife independently decided to deceive the court, but how likely do you find that to be?

Strange how all of that isn't enough for you, and yet I seem to recall a screwdriver and jewelry found in a backpack was all you needed to decide that Martin was a burglar.

Strange indeed.

As for hair splitting - that's what the law is often about. Unless you have a reference to a FL statute about lying-by-proxy ??

Who's talking about legal standards? It's about credibility. Again, if this is allowed into the trial, the prosecution doesn't have to make this argument by any legal standard. All they have to do is present the information to the jury and let them draw their own conclusions on how credible and honest a person Zimmerman is.

I'll also ask you - if the exact amount of money in his PayPal account was so important, why didn't the prosecution tell the judge what they knew the day of the bond hearing ?

What makes you think the prosecution was aware of the money or Zimmerman's plot to deceive the court at the bond hearing?

 

[Unabogie]

I think you would have to demonstrate they spoke about what the testimony would be. Clearly, the SA has recordings of all the conversations. Did they do that ? Or did they just talk about approximate amounts of money in non-code ?

Additionally, I am not a lawyer, but isn't there some exemption of spousal privilege, where you cannot be forced to testify against or about things you discuss with your spouse ?

No, I'm not a lawyer either, but I agree that he wouldn't have to testify against his wife. But he knows she's in legal trouble now. So he has a MOTIVE to lie in order to clear things up so she gets away with her lie. It's this situation that I think will cause him to lie under oath. I don't think the truth will help him.

I have said many times, he has terrible judgement. He's not especially bright, and he seems to have alienated at least two, maybe three lawyers who were hired to help him. His first two lawyers quit. His new lawyer is posting online apologies about how George destroyed his own credibility.

Is this a guy who wouldn't try and spin this thing on the 29th? You may have more faith in George than is deserved.

 

[LTC8K6]

The belief that GZ was "pummeled" came from a witness anyway.

I never thought GZ was "pummeled" until I heard W6's statement.

Even then, I still think it was a very common single sucker punch knockdown, that we have all seen before. When you get punched hard in the nose, your knees buckle, and down you go like a sack of cement.

So, I am quite comfortable with TM throwing a single punch, and doing the rest of the damage to GZ while GZ was down, without throwing any more punches. The rest can be from holding and banging GZ's head, and attempting to shut GZ up.

W6's retraction of the "MMA style" certainty, changed nothing for me.

 

[TheL8Elvis]

Oh, come on. Either we can discuss what he reportedly said or not. We're sitting here discussing what we think his story is. I was talking about the double standard that prevades this thread when it comes to accepting George's "story". But of course that only works when his story sounds good. When we notice gaps in it, we're back to this.

Fine.

I was trying to not have a double standard. It is clear part of his story was 'circled the car' - because Det. Gilbreath testified that was part of his story. And I mostly take issue with the word 'only' - because if GZ said 'only' 3-5 times in his narrative to the police, I think that would make no sense, and they would have charged him earlier. So I conclude he likely didn't say 'only' to get an address, but that was part of what he did outside of the car.

I think that's close to the truth as well. Then he DID spot Trayvon and approached him. That's when Trayvon told DD "he's coming closer". Then that's when they had their verbal interaction.

Notice that the verbal interaction precludes being jumped from behind, right? Since George clearly saw him and they exchanged "angry" words. There's no possible way George got jumped from the bushes or whatever his story said.

Again - that is in no way what GZ story was. Both DeeDee and GZ agree GZ and TM met,and TM spoke first and they exchanged more words.

 

[GWCarver]

The judge stated that in order to get a new bond, George will have to testify. Now, George has the right not to, but then he'll just stay in jail. Don't you think that the fact that they've scheduled a new bond hearing is enough to demonstrate that George will testify?

As to his wife, they have tapes of the two of them talking about all their piles of money, but using code words to try and disguise what they were talking about. Then she testifies falsely under oath and claims she doesn't have any money and has no knowledge of the money. She was at the damn credit union on the phone with him! She lied under oath!

George hasn't lied yet. But I am suggesting that when he does testify about the money issue, he will lie. He seems to have a problem with the truth and with thinking he's above authority. He also has a problem in that his wife could be charge with perjury for lying under oath about a material fact.

I think the judge will reconsider demanding that Z give up his right to remain silent in order to pursue his right to request bail. (He can't do that per Jeralyn.) Z has the right to remain silent regardless of what the judge says, anyway. I don't expect him to testify at any time for the duration of this case, but clearly that is just my opinion. My anecdotal observations over time suggest that the only defendants who take the stand in murder cases are desperate or crazy. Z is neither.

 

[Unabogie]

I think the judge will reconsider demanding that Z give up his right to remain silent in order to pursue his right to request bail. (He can't do that per Jeralyn.) Z has the right to remain silent regardless of what the judge says, anyway. I don't expect him to testify at any time for the duration of this case, but clearly that is just my opinion. My anecdotal observations over time suggest that the only defendants who take the stand in murder cases are desperate or crazy. Z is neither.

The judge can't force him to testify, but he's under no obligation to let him out on bond either. If George won't explain himself, there's no need to force anything. Just deny bond and let George wait for trial in jail.

 

[johnny karate]

The judge can't force him to testify, but he's under no obligation to let him out on bond either. If George won't explain himself, there's no need to force anything. Just deny bond and let George wait for trial in jail.

And if Zimmerman opts to wait in jail rather than clear up this "misunderstanding" that would be a pretty good indication he has something to hide.

 

[Unabogie]

Again - that is in no way what GZ story was. Both DeeDee and GZ agree GZ and TM met,and TM spoke first and they exchanged more words.

This is the point of contention here. Maybe it was only people here in the thread, but I thought I remembered people saying that George was jumped from behind. He could not have been jumped from behind, right? Since they were clearly talking to each other and facing each other before anything broke out, right?

So if George at any time said he was jumped from behind, he was lying.

http://patdollard.com/2012/03/zimme...-by-trayvon-martin-corroborated-by-witnesses/

With a single punch, Trayvon Martin decked the Neighborhood Watch volunteer who eventually shot and killed the unarmed 17-year-old, then Trayvon climbed on top of George Zimmerman and slammed his head into the sidewalk, leaving him bloody and battered, law-enforcement authorities told the Orlando Sentinel.
That is the account Zimmerman gave police, and much of it has been corroborated by witnesses, authorities say. There have been no reports that a witness saw the initial punch Zimmerman told police about.
Zimmerman has not spoken publicly about what happened Feb. 26. But that night, and in later meetings, he described and re-enacted for police what he says took place.
In his version of events, Zimmerman had turned around and was walking back to his SUV when Trayvon approached him from behind, the two exchanged words and then Trayvon punched him in the nose, sending him to the ground, and began beating him.

Found this link, which doesn't support jumping from the bushes, but says Trayvon approached George "from behind". This is in stark contrast to DD, who says Trayvon was actively trying to evade George, who approached Trayvon and was "getting closer".

But I'll retract the part about bushes. I think that was just the speculation that went on here.

 

[LTC8K6]

The judge can't force him to testify, but he's under no obligation to let him out on bond either. If George won't explain himself, there's no need to force anything. Just deny bond and let George wait for trial in jail.

I think bond can only be denied for certain reasons. Not sure if GZ remaining silent for a few days would be one.

I think GZ will indeed testify, btw.

 

[GWCarver]

The judge can't force him to testify, but he's under no obligation to let him out on bond either. If George won't explain himself, there's no need to force anything. Just deny bond and let George wait for trial in jail.

George doesn't have to explain himself. It is his right. However, if the discussion is in camera, O'Mara may let him talk directly to the judge. I just don't know how that works.

Also, I'm wondering why you think the judge would deny Zimmerman bail - effectively sentencing him to what may be years in jail - for a matter that has nothing to do with whether or not he committed murder, is a risk to the public safety, or is a risk to flee.

 

[johnny karate]

Also, I'm wondering why you think the judge would deny Zimmerman bail - effectively sentencing him to what may be years in jail - for a matter that has nothing to do with whether or not he committed murder, is a risk to the public safety, or is a risk to flee.

Someone who attempts to hide a significant cache of cash from the court is absolutely a risk to flee.

Furthermore, I don't think the judge is required to meet any kind of legal standard regarding the risk to flee. It's entirely up to his discretion. And if he's decided that Zimmerman is untrustworthy - which he is - and therefore a flight-risk, that's all he would need to remand him.

 

[TheL8Elvis]

The case for conspiracy has already been made.

Oh, I missed it. Which post ?

The conversation between Zimmerman and his wife proves she lied in court.

It seems likely that she lied. I refer to my earlier post about the law and hair splitting. When asked 'how much is in the account' the answer 'I don't know' is truthful. Claims about not having an estimate would seem to be a lies. I still doubt she will be charged.

The fact that Zimmerman allowed his lawyer to submit material falsehoods in court documents indicating he was of indigent status proves Zimmerman willfully attempted to deceive the court.

That's why I asked when all that information was available, etc. If MO'M filled out paperwork, it may have been accurate at the time it was filled out, and GZ never spoke up to correct the false impression it was still accurate. I believe that is the story MO'M will be going with.

Now, maybe Zimmerman and his wife independently decided to deceive the court, but how likely do you find that to be?

Strange how all of that isn't enough for you, and yet I seem to recall a screwdriver and jewelry found in a backpack was all you needed to decide that Martin was a burglar.

Strange indeed.

I won't ask you to go dig through posts, but I don't recall accusing him of being a burglar. I claimed he was either a burglar or holding stolen goods for a friend.

Who's talking about legal standards?

I thought we were ?

It's about credibility. Again, if this is allowed into the trial, the prosecution doesn't have to make this argument by any legal standard. All they have to do is present the information to the jury and let them draw their own conclusions on how credible and honest a person Zimmerman is.

If it's just an issue of credibility, sure. I thought there was a legal question of if this would be admissible for those purposes, though. I could have misunderstood.

What makes you think the prosecution was aware of the money or Zimmerman's plot to deceive the court at the bond hearing?

Please stop with the histrionics. But the answer is the phone calls they recorded ? Those conversations took place before the initial bond hearing, so clearly the state knew ?