Continuation: Discussion of the George Zimmerman case

[leftysergeant]

Maybe they figured that O'Mara had to get paid first before they put up any of their own money for bond. Shellie wrote O a check for like $120K and figured that counted as their being indigent.

 

[leftysergeant]

I highlighted the part you believe without evidence.

There's no evidence of whom assaulted whom first.

DeeDee's testimony comes down pretty heavily in favor of Z assaulting Martin. She states that ahe heard what sounded to her like the cell phone hitting the ground and Martin telling someone, "get off."

Not exactly the kind of thing he would be telling someone he was about to sucker punch, is it?

There is also the fact that none of the physical evicence is consistant with Martin's having bushwhacked Z on the cut-through. Z's large flashlight and Martin's cell phone are the two objects farthest south.

Per one witness, Z got up and moved to the T as though looking for something. The police later found his car keys and a very small flashlight, turned on at the T. We cannot discount the possibility that Z planted it there to create the illusion that the fight began there, since, by this time, he has realised that he just screwed the pooch.

And will somebody explain to me how, if you are lying on your back with your head to the north and shooting up at someone, the ejected cartridge lands to the south and east of where the body of the guy you shot is found?

 

[Cylinder]

DeeDee's testimony comes down pretty heavily in favor of Z assaulting Martin. She states that ahe heard what sounded to her like the cell phone hitting the ground and Martin telling someone, "get off."

Not exactly the kind of thing he would be telling someone he was about to sucker punch, is it?

DeeDee claims that the "Get off!" part occurred after "You cou’ hear that Trayvon bump…somebody bumped Trayvon, ’cause I could hear the grass."

She also claims that Zimmerman had chased a somewhat athletic Martin to the point of exhaustion at the same time we know that Zimmerman was calmly speaking to the SPD dispatch operator in the recorded conversation.

There is also the fact that none of the physical evicence is consistant with Martin's having bushwhacked Z on the cut-through. Z's large flashlight and Martin's cell phone are the two objects farthest south.

W11 - about 20 feet away from where the altercation started near the top of the T and with her doors and windows open - was not only able to describe the altercation starting there in the same manner it was described by Zimmerman, she was also able describe the 3 exchanges in the same manner described by Zimmerman and DeeDee. W13 - who lives in the cut-through building near the top of the T also describes the altercation as starting there. According to Zimmerman, his large flashlight was not working and Martin's cellphone was probably in his pocket as well since he was using headphones at the time.

Per one witness, Z got up and moved to the T as though looking for something. The police later found his car keys and a very small flashlight, turned on at the T. We cannot discount the possibility that Z planted it there to create the illusion that the fight began there, since, by this time, he has realised that he just screwed the pooch.

You can claim that he planted it, but you have real no evidence. W13 - the first flashlight man - was on the scene seconds after the shooting and didn't mention Zimmerman dropping his keys. Seconds after that - ~20 seconds according to W6 - Ofc. Smith was on the scene and holding Zimmerman at gunpoint. Smith stayed with the then cuffed Zimmerman until Ofc. Alaya arrived and made contact with Martin. Once again, at least two independant witnesses within around 50 feet claim the confrontation started near the top of the T - which matches Zimmerman's description.

And will somebody explain to me how, if you are lying on your back with your head to the north and shooting up at someone, the ejected cartridge lands to the south and east of where the body of the guy you shot is found?

The position of the body was after it was moved. According to CST Smith and Det. Ceisla, the casing was found either under or very near where the body was after it was moved by Ofc. Alaya and SFD Rescue. We also know that at least 8 people were walking around Martin's body in the nearly three hours he was in situ- 4 SPD officers, 2 SFD Recuse responders and 2 ME personnel.

Once again, we really don't need to speculate or rely on Zimmerman's description of the state of the altercation directly prior to the fatal shot since W6 stepped outside and witnessed that atercation seconds before the fatal shot. W6 saw Martin on top of Zimmerman with Martin's head and body lowered toward Zimmerman - just as Zimmerman describes - when he issued his warning. W6 went back inside, picked up the phone and dialed 911 as he was climbing the stairs. Before the 911 operator picked up and before he got to the top of the stairs Zimmerman shot Martin from close contact range. Other witnesses from the RVC side of the complex who saw W6 poke his head out also describe the same state of the altercation though one did not see Martin on top of Zimmerman and another describes a person with a white T-shirt on top. Both describe Zimmerman on the ground.

For me at least, it's probable that Zimmerman either had his weapon canted - ejecting toward the ground - or the ejected casing was deflected by impact with one of the actors. The sound of the gunfire altered many eyewitnesses. It was the time most of the people looked out the window. Everyone noticed Martin laying face-down and Zimmerman up or getting up - just as Zimmerman describes.

 

[Dancing David]

Here is why it matters. It matters because her attorney will most certainly bring it up in her defense. He will ask why she did that if it was her intention to deceive. He will point out that she could have lied and said "we raised $1700" but that instead she told them the person they could ask that would (ostensibly) have given them the full and proper amount.

Now again, I'm not saying I don't think she was misleading or lied. But I'm also looking at this from both angles including the ones her attorney's will almost certainly argue. And it seems like this angle may have some value, since people don't seem to want to answer it . I mean, it's not that hard to answer. What do you think her thought processes were that she gave them the name of the person that could give them the answer? Don't you think her attorney will argue that if it was her intent to deceive that she's have just lied about the amount and said "$1700" or something like that?

And don't tell me we it's a waste iof time theorizing about her thought process because this is 400 pages of theorizing about peoples thought processes . Why TM did this, why GZ did this, and so on.

None of which are exactly relevant to the perjury charge, is she knew the money was available, that is all that is needed if she then stated she knew of no other funds.

The rest is fluff and irrelevant , she either had knowledge of the money or she did not, she either made the statement or she did not. That is all the perjury charge requires.

The case is likely to be dismissed.

 

[Dancing David]

Even when that discussion (her affidavit) took place before she was aware that such an account exists?

I believe , perhaps incorrectly, that there should have then been an addendum to the affidavit and that the affidavit should not have been presented as it was.

Now that is why the case will likely be dismissed, it was the lawyer's responsibility to have done that and to not have entered her affidavit as testimony at the bond hearing without that addition. So the timing thing is still relevant, the affidavit was presented as being relevant to the indigent status of GZ at the bond hearing. The lawyer who presented it knew that the testimony should reflect the current status of the person seeking bond, and therefore the affidavit should have had an addendum to that fact.

So the issue is that the affidavit was presented as current and relevant by the legal team, which was false.

But the perjury charge will not go against the lawyer and the case will likely be dismissed. Unless she was questioned directly as to a change or current status of her and GZ's access to possible funds. If she was directly questioned at the bond hearing as to the truthfulness of the affidavit and then asked if there were funds currently/(newly) available to her husband, her or their status as a married couple: then she is again directly committing perjury.

 

[Newtons Bit]

If I'm not mistaken, Florida is a community property state. His assets are her assets.

If that's the case then she's in serious trouble.

eta: thinking about this a little further, I'm not sure this is relevant. What matters is what she believes are her assets, not what assets of his she has a legal right. She can easily argue (and probably successfully) that she didn't/doesn't believe the defense fund is her asset.

 

[Dan O.]

You can claim that he planted it, but you have real no evidence. W13 - the first flashlight man - was on the scene seconds after the shooting and didn't mention Zimmerman dropping his keys. Seconds after that - ~20 seconds according to W6 - Ofc. Smith was on the scene and holding Zimmerman at gunpoint. Smith stayed with the then cuffed Zimmerman until Ofc. Alaya arrived and made contact with Martin. Once again, at least two independant witnesses within around 50 feet claim the confrontation started near the top of the T - which matches Zimmerman's description.

Why does officer smith march Zimmerman back to the tee before Alaya arrived and not bother to mention that in his report?

 

[Cylinder]

Why does officer smith march Zimmerman back to the tee before Alaya arrived and not bother to mention that in his report?

From my understanding, Zimmerman was a bit closer to the T when Ofc. Smith arrived. Smith's narrative isn't inclusive - for instance, he fails to mention the photograph of the body. From the audio of the radio traffic, Smith is primarily concerned about being exposed - a lone officer with an armed shooter at gunpoint.

The idea that Zimmerman planted the illuminated keychain flashlight keychain at the T to complete his master deception is another iteration of Red Light/Green Light where Zimmerman is free to do those things that contradict his story only when other people - even those he isn't aware of - observing him.

 

[Dan O.]

eta: thinking about this a little further, I'm not sure this is relevant. What matters is what she believes are her assets, not what assets of his she has a legal right. She can easily argue (and probably successfully) that she didn't/doesn't believe the defense fund is her asset.

It will be fun watching you try to make that one stick.

In hearing, the purpose of which was explained was to assertain if the family had assets to put towards George's bond:

Q: you all have no money?
A: To my knowledge, that is correct.​

Earlier in a recorded phone conversation discussing the PayPal money and paying the bond:

"That's what it's for."​

 

[Dan O.]

The idea that Zimmerman planted the illuminated keychain flashlight keychain at the T to complete his master deception is another iteration of Red Light/Green Light where Zimmerman is free to do those things that contradict his story only when other people - even those he isn't aware of - observing him.

The flashlight was not illuminated. We have the photograph to prove that. The photographer says it was on but could have been misinterpreting her photograph as I had explained earlier. The only other direct report that said the light was on was an OCR error where the original said "on a keychain". A third reference was presented but this was only a summery of the other reports and may have incorporated the same error.

 

[Cylinder]

The only other direct report that said the light was on was an OCR error where the original said "on a keychain".

I have relied on Diana Smith's - the Crime Scene Tech who's job it is to document the evidence - description of the flashlight as well as Zimmerman's own claim that his large flashlight was broken.

At that time, I walked through the scene with the officer's and they pointed out items of evidence that were already located, it was still raining at this time. It was dark outside, raining off and on, and there was not much lighting up in the courtyard. There were a set of keys containing a small flashlight that was on, a cell phone, larger flashlight two plastic bags, first aid kit...

The flashlight doesn't seem to be illuminated in the photograph, but that was taken some time later, after periods of rain and is washed out somewhat by the photographer's flash. I guess the state of the flashlight is somewhat subject to interpretation.

ETA: With his flashlight off, why have his keys out if not to return directly to the truck? You'd probably be better off with the flashlight on and Zimmerman stalking Martin.

 

[Freddy]

And the evidence that the prosecution had the phone conversation transcripts prior to the first bond hearing is... ?

Perhaps the fault lies with the sheriff's department for not passing along obviously important information. At any rate, I wasn't alleging intentional misconduct or anything, just a screw-up that might hinder any perjury prosecution.

 

[Dan O.]

I have relied on Diana Smith's - the Crime Scene Tech who's job it is to document the evidence - description of the flashlight as well as Zimmerman's own claim that his large flashlight was broken.

If we had Diana's contemporaneous notes that stated the flashlight was on, I would accept that. But all we have is a later reconstruction that could easily have been biased by a quick review of photographs.

The flashlight doesn't seem to be illuminated in the photograph, but that was taken some time later, after periods of rain and is washed out somewhat by the photographer's flash. I guess the state of the flashlight is somewhat subject to interpretation.

We know exactly how much later that photograph was taken if anyone were interested.

ETA: With his flashlight off, why have his keys out if not to return directly to the truck? You'd probably be better off with the flashlight on and Zimmerman stalking Martin.

Unlike some, I don't base my interpretation of the evidence on what would support my theories.

 

[johnny karate]

Perhaps the fault lies with the sheriff's department for not passing along obviously important information. At any rate, I wasn't alleging intentional misconduct or anything, just a screw-up that might hinder any perjury prosecution.[/

Again, this assumes that law enforcement and/or the prosecution had reveiwed the jail house conversation logs prior to the first bond hearing.

I'd like to see evidence of this assumption.

As I said before, what is probable is that the prosecution reveiwed those logs after the first bond hearing out of suspicion that the Zimmermans perpetrated a deception. Upon finding out the Zimmermans did in fact deceive the court, they then presented their evidence in the second bond hearing.

This makes a lot more sense than the conspiracy theory that some are alleging (not you) in which the prosecution plotted to set some convoluted trap the endgame of which was to trick Shellie Zimmerman into a perjury charge and let the guy they are charging with murder walk on a lowered bond... for some reason.

 

[leftysergeant]

Z also claims that Martin was covering his mouth to keep him from screaming, but the only time the screaming stopped was immediately after he shot Martin.

I do not believe that it was Z screaming.

 

[TheL8Elvis]

The flashlight was not illuminated. We have the photograph to prove that. The photographer says it was on but could have been misinterpreting her photograph as I had explained earlier. The only other direct report that said the light was on was an OCR error where the original said "on a keychain". A third reference was presented but this was only a summery of the other reports and may have incorporated the same error.

Page 11:Officer Mead saw the flashlight "on" at the intersection

Hope that clears up whether "It's obvious as all get-out it was a 'flash light on a ring.'" or it was actually a flashlight that was "on".

It's reported in two different place by two different people as "on" but you still insist it wasn't.

 

[leftysergeant]

The medical reports indicate multiple injuries, so I have no idea what you're on about?

At no time did a doctor examine Z, and I would really like to know why the bags under his eyes were discolored but his nose was not.

I have seen people's faces get marked up like his in a basketball game. I am further puzzled as to how having your head smacked on concrete produces such crisply-incised wounds. They look more like what you would expect from the edge of a water valve box.

Or was it that his wife worked him over that night? I forget who was making which claim.

The punk does have a history of domestic violence.

 

[leftysergeant]

I have relied on Diana Smith's - the Crime Scene Tech who's job it is to document the evidence - description of the flashlight as well as Zimmerman's own claim that his large flashlight was broken.

Why did he have it with him 45 feet down the walkway? We have only his word that he was going back to the truck. We have only his word that he forgot what the name of the perimeter road was, which makes him look like he is making this **** up as he goes along, because about a minute earlier, he had named at described it to the NEN operator.

[

ETA: With his flashlight off, why have his keys out if not to return directly to the truck? You'd probably be better off with the flashlight on and Zimmerman stalking Martin.

Z had expressed concern that Martim might be close enough to hear him give his adress to the dispatcher. Wouldn't he want his hands free to draw his weapon in case he was jumped?

I still see no proof that the fight started where Z claims. How did they wind up 50 feet down the walk way? Martin would have been pushing him back toward the T if he decked him with one punch.

All the physical evidence points to the fight starting where Martin died.

 

[This is The End]

Zimmerman was calmly speaking to the SPD dispatch operator in the recorded conversation.

Is that seriously how you describe Z on the not911 call? Especially after he gets out of the truck...

 

[TheL8Elvis]

Yeah it doesn't make sense why someone would even try and suggest that how much money they have is not a material question at a bond hearing...

It's rather puzzling to me why someone would even say that.

It's.....dumb. I'm no expert on legal matters, but it's really a no brainer.

Good thing no one was suggesting that.

Johnny Karate kept claiming that the only component of perjury was lying - I was pointing out that according to the legal definition it was more than that.