Continuation: Discussion of the George Zimmerman case

[TheL8Elvis]

What was exculpatory?

I assume the information that witness 8 lied about the hospital during the deposition, and lied about her age to crump. And the defense redacted her age in the deposition they gave to MOM.

In my non-lawyer understanding, if there is a possibility something is exculpatory, you turn it over to defense.

I don't see how lies about why witness 8 missed the funeral for the last person she spoke with, with whom she was dating according to her interview, and lies about her age could be anything other than potentially exculpatory.

 

[Cylinder]

What was exculpatory?

The fact that W8 admitted her earlier statements were perjured. If you mean why it is exculpatory, it's impeachment evidence and evidence of truth of a matter asserted concerning the nature of the phone call between W8 and Martin.

 

[TheL8Elvis]

I think it's relevant considering the only thing backing up the assertion that George is not also a racist, especially in light of his mySpace rants against Mexicans and his long, sordid history of calling the police on any black child who crossed his path, was his family assuring us that he wasn't. And that not only is George not a racist, but no one in his family is as well.

Except for Chris Serino, the FBI, and everyone they interviewed - besides all of that, it's the "only" thing.

Frank Taffe told us this before he let out his "plant corn, you get corn" vomit.

And back to the Frank Taaffee well.
How many times must we do this:

After all, would you think differently of the case if you knew that George hated black people? Would you still find his story as plausible, or would you wonder if he was lying since he's harboring a hateful and irrational prejudice against an entire group of people? Well the only assurances we have on that are those from the people who know him. But what if he hung out with nothing but other racists?

It wouldn't change the evidence, but yes, if that were the case I don't doubt it would color my thinking on his motives and other things.

Like Frank Taffe? Like his brother?

Give Frank Taaffe a rest, would you ?

I have no idea what GZ relationship with his brother was before this. Whether his brother is a racist or not it certainly that certainly doesn't make GZ a racist.
You are going to have to do better than " I think RZjr is a racist, therefor his brother must be too". By your logic, doesn't that make GZ gay as well ?

But let's go back and see from RZJ had to say about George not too long ago?
http://wavenewspapers.com/article_307c894c-067f-11e2-8ba5-0019bb30f31a.html

Well, now they do have control, and yep. They're racists.

Yup, a tweet from RZjr makes the whole family racist.

 

[Unabogie]

During that deposition, Witness 8 testified under oath that she had advised Mr. de la Rionda in the above referenced August interview that she was an adult, and had not, in fact, gone to the hospital; that she had lied about going to the hospital when she advised Mr. Crump of that statement, and that she had also lied to Mr. de la Rionda when she told him in the April2, 2012 sworn interview that she had gone to the hospital.

You understand that whether you believe him or not, as an officer of the court, his word will be accepted, as being a member of the bar has already earned him the right to be believed with his peers and the court system.

I don't think you understand how this works. The defense can file a motion, but the state can respond, and the judge will decide who is right. You don't see a need to wait for the state's response since you already know what you think about everything that helps George, so you already decided you believe them. I'm not under any obligation to agree with you.

Now, if the state chooses to not contest this, then I'd view that as a defacto admission that the complaint had merit, much in the same way I view the defense blowing off their immunity hearing as a sure sign they don't like their chances at immunity. The difference is that I apply the same standard to both sides, while you have wildly different standards depending upon which side the standard needs to be used.

You're requirement that MOM needs to earn your right to be believed regarding what he files a court document is absurd.

Really? It's absurd for me to be skeptical of whatever a defense lawyer says until I hear from the other side? I bet you never doubted anything Johnny Cochran said, like, ever, right?

No, It doesn't follow. That's why I asked you if you also believed he was lying.

I was pretty clear that the opposite of "I'm not ready to believe him without corroboration" is not "I know he's lying". That's logic 101 here.

Maybe it's because you are mis-understanding it.

That's been happening a lot. Maybe it's my fault and you're being perfectly clear, or maybe you're straining to fit a logical square into a circle. Either way, it wouldn't hurt to try and make ourselves clearer.

 

[TheL8Elvis]

I don't think you understand how this works. The defense can file a motion, but the state can respond, and the judge will decide who is right. You don't see a need to wait for the state's response since you already know what you think about everything that helps George, so you already decided you believe them. I'm not under any obligation to agree with you.

I understand how this works. I understand that the judge will rule that what was withheld is exculpatory. You, for some odd reason, don't think the judge will rule that way.
Why not ? Unless you think the state is going to respond and say "that didn't happen" - what are they going to say that will sway you ?

Now, if the state chooses to not contest this, then I'd view that as a defacto admission that the complaint had merit, much in the same way I view the defense blowing off their immunity hearing as a sure sign they don't like their chances at immunity. The difference is that I apply the same standard to both sides, while you have wildly different standards depending upon which side the standard needs to be used.

Uhm, ok. You might want to go back and re-read some of your posts and see if someone else reading your posts would believe that...

Really? It's absurd for me to be skeptical of whatever a defense lawyer says until I hear from the other side? I bet you never doubted anything Johnny Cochran said, like, ever, right?

And you never doubted anything a police officer ever said, right ?

I was pretty clear that the opposite of "I'm not ready to believe him without corroboration" is not "I know he's lying". That's logic 101 here.

I don't see any reason to "withhold judgement" an attorneys factual statements filed in a legal motion until they are "corroborated".

That's been happening a lot. Maybe it's my fault and you're being perfectly clear, or maybe you're straining to fit a logical square into a circle. Either way, it wouldn't hurt to try and make ourselves clearer.

Start by reviewing your claim that I "uncritically accept anything George or his minions say as concrete fact." because it's simply not true. You can now know it's not true, because I am telling you.

 

[12AX7]

Yup, a tweet from RZjr makes the whole family racist.

Why not? Trayvon's seperated dad having a girlfriend "mistress" makes Trayvon a delinquent hoodlum, druggie, gangbanger and potential burglar.

I must say it is fun watching the Zimmerman Supporters clutching at anything that makes their hero guy look better.

 

[Noztradamus]

IOW, even if GZ was the initial aggressor, fear of great bodily harm and the inability to escape because TM was on top of him still allow him to invoke traditional self-defense.
~~~

Yes he can invoke it.

GLENDOWER. I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
HOTSPUR. Why, so can I, or so can any man; But will they come when you do call for them?

 

[TheL8Elvis]

Why not? Trayvon's seperated dad having a girlfriend "mistress" makes Trayvon a delinquent hoodlum, druggie, gangbanger and potential burglar.

Tracy Martin was separated ? Evidence ? ( I predict none shall be forthcoming ... let's watch and see )

As for that "making " TM anything ... well I see you aren't actually quoting anything I said. Reason being I never said that.

Why do you feel the need to resort to such dishonesty ?

I must say it is fun watching the Zimmerman Supporters clutching at anything that makes their hero guy look better.

You have an ... interesting ... idea of what constitutes fun.

 

[phonebook]

You're requirement that MOM needs to earn your right to be believed regarding what he files a court document is absurd.

Really? It's absurd for me to be skeptical of whatever a defense lawyer says until I hear from the other side? I bet you never doubted anything Johnny Cochran said, like, ever, right?

So a "filed court document" is the equivalent of "whatever a defense lawyer says"?

 

[phonebook]

The First Aggressor Rule is a rather simple common law rule that says “a defendant who provokes an encounter as a result of which he finds it necessary to use deadly force to defend himself, is guilty of an unlawful homicide and cannot claim that he acted in self-defense.” Wharton’s Criminal Law, Sec. 136 Provocation by Defendant. See also Wallace v. United States, 162 US 466 (1896).

Florida has codified the First Aggressor Rule into Florida Statute 776.041(2) (Use of force by aggressor), which states: “The justification [to use self-defense] is not available to a person who initially provokes the use of force against himself or herself.”

Yeah... I think you should have extended your research just a wee bit further.

You might wanna start here: http://blog.richardhornsby.com/2012/04/who-was-the-first-aggressor/

Thanks for providing those searchable key words btw, made it a lot easier to find the above link.

 

[Cylinder]

Yeah... I think you should have extended your research just a wee bit further.

You might wanna start here: http://blog.richardhornsby.com/2012/04/who-was-the-first-aggressor/

Thanks for providing those searchable key words btw, made it a lot easier to find the above link.

Yea, CherokeeNative's cite has some creative edits. Florida's aggressor statute states:

776.041 Use of force by aggressor. — The justification described in the preceding sections of this chapter is not available to a person who:

(1) Is attempting to commit, committing, or escaping after the commission of, a forcible felony; or

(2) Initially provokes the use of force against himself or herself, unless:

(a) Such force is so great that the person reasonably believes that he or she is in imminent danger of death or great bodily harm and that he or she has exhausted every reasonable means to escape such danger other than the use of force which is likely to cause death or great bodily harm to the assailant; or

(b) In good faith, the person withdraws from physical contact with the assailant and indicates clearly to the assailant that he or she desires to withdraw and terminate the use of force, but the assailant continues or resumes the use of force.

We've done this many, many times over the course of the last year here, but I suppose it's time to start pointing out things like this again for benefit for newer participants.

 

[phonebook]

A child, a young teenager, is not held to the same accountability as an adult.

Might wanna clarify that for Angela Corey:

12-year-old Cristian Fernandez charged as adult in 2-year-old brother's murder

And he wasn't even a teenager yet.

 

[phonebook]

We as mothers, parents, grandparents, school officials, law enforcement, teach our children that when a stranger follows you, someone tries to come near you, touches you, chases you, you fight, you scream, you kick, you scream some more and you fight some more. You do whatever it takes to keep this person from harming or abducting you.

Agreed, and this is especially true for those children who are particularly helpless like Trayvon obviously was. These nuts like Zimmerman always go after the easy targets, the ones they know won't put up a fight. My only question is why Zimmerman felt the need to resort to his gun to finish Trayvon off, when it was obvious Trayvon was already so close to death, what, with that abrasion on his left fourth finger and all.

The prosecution will want the jurors to relate to this case as if it were their own child and believe this is what Trayvon most likely did once Zimmerman attempted to detain him.

I couldn't possibly agree more with the above underlined portion. In fact, without becoming emotionally involved in this case to the point you view the victim as your own son, the bias required to see Zimmerman as some calculating, manipulative, cold-blooded killer would be unobtainable.

He had no idea who this creepy guy was - he could have been a pedophile (which is still questionable), he could have been a gang member, he could have been a stupid dumb paranoid delusional wanna-be cop dude that had a gun attached to his butt for balls....

And Zimmerman had no idea who this "real suspicious guy" was either. I guess after a sufficient number of additional birthdays, beyond someone's 17th birthday, there's some sorta biological process that takes place that allows one to instantly distinguish between what is and isn't genuinely suspicious behavior.

 

[phonebook]

This is the same logic that says that "sir, we don't need you to do that" wasn't specific enough for a reasonable person to understand that he wasn't supposed to try and catch the "suspect" by himself.

Who has implied the above? Especially in regards to the underlined.

 

[phonebook]

It's really that simple. A person is justified in committing a battery when necessary to defend against another’s imminent use of unlawful force. Pitts v. State, 989 So. 2d 27, 30 (Fla. 2d DCA 2008). Here, if the prosecution has no evidence to dispute that Trayvon threw the first blow, they can certainly establish that Trayvon's actions of punching Zimmerman and wrestling him to the ground were justified and did not constitute a forcible felony or unlawful force. Zimmerman will be convicted of Murder 2, no doubt about it.

What was GZ's imminent use of unlawful force, and what will be presented as proof of this?

Trayvon OWNS Florida's Stand Your Ground and the Use of Force laws.

A person who is not engaged in an unlawful activity and who is attacked in any other place where he or she has a right to be has no duty to retreat and has the right to stand his or her ground and meet force with force, including deadly force if he or she reasonably believes it is necessary to do so to prevent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another or to prevent the commission of a forcible felony.

How are Zimmerman's injuries compared to Trayvon's injuries he received, leading up to the shot, in any way a "meet force with force" kinda situation?

 

[This is The End]

DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR SANCTIONS AGAINST STATE ATTORNEY'S OFFICE FOR DISCOVERY VIOLATIONS

This motion concerns the state's failure to disclose W8's perjured testimony as it came to their attention as required by Brady.

Wow, that is so sad. It is literally the most minor overlooked thing imaginable. No one kept anything from them, it was nothing! I seriously doubt the judge is going to see anything to this either.

 

[Dan O.]

And there was George Zimmerman, trying to be the neighborhood enforcer, running after the black kid that was just walking home from the store. Was he at the tee when he first confronts Trayvon Martin in that loud authoritive voice:"What are you doing here (punk)". But is there a fight here? There is no sign of a fight at the tee. The keychain was dropped a few paces to the south but George claims he was carrying the other flashlight at this time.

George is entering from the tee on the north. Trayvon had run between the houses to the south. This encounter begins with George to the north and Trayvon to the south. And then they move about 50 feet to the south. That would be Trayvon retreating towards home and George in pursuit. Deedee hears this encounter on the phone. She says she hears the headset drop and hears Trayvon saying "get off, get off". Is George trying to tackle Trayvon from behind?

This is about 50 feet south of the tee. We find the cell phone and the flashlight here at the southern most extent of the debris field. George says he was reaching for his cell phone. He could have done that back at the tee while Trayvon was running away. But George doesn't want this "*******" to get away. Trayvon throws off his attacker and with one swift punch smashes George's nose and lays him out.

Trayvon then strattles George and pins him to the ground preventing any further attacks upon himself. George is laying there on his back, he's just taken a punch to the face, his nose is probably broken, he has most likely hit the back of his head when he fell to the ground. George is going to have one he'll of a pounding head. In fact, in a semi-conscious state, George may even think that his face is continuing to be pounded and may feel like the back of his head is continuing to be slammed into the ground. With the blood and swelling he may also be having difficulty breathing and may feel like he is being suffocated.

George tells us how he was laying. His Head was on the sidewalk and his feet were on the grass. He felt his head was being smashed on the hard sidewalk and struggled to slide off. His feet would be pointing to the condos to the west. Trayvon was strattling George so Trayvon would be facing east.

Someone is screaming for help. We hear that on the 911 calls. Both George and Trayvon would want help.

We have a neighbor that says he responded to the cries for help. He steps out on his patio and sees the two on the ground and says something like "what's going on, I'm calling the police" he then turns and goes back inside to make the call. George would be able to see the neighbor leave. This neighbor came from an apartment that would be behind Trayvon's back. So while trayvon can hear the neighbor, he cannot see the neighbor leave.

Like in the school yard, when the teacher comes out the fight is over. Trayvon would release George's arms and be backing up to get off. George however can see the neighbor leave and would know that he was alone. On the 911 tape we hear one last cry for help and then the fatal shot that hits point blank into Trayvon's chest puncturing Trayvon's heart and a lung.

 

[TheL8Elvis]

Wow, that is so sad. It is literally the most minor overlooked thing imaginable. No one kept anything from them, it was nothing! I seriously doubt the judge is going to see anything to this either.

I think the way you are using the words "no one" "anything" and "nothing" are at odds with reality.

This is significant because Mr. de la Rionda knew this information well before even the first email referenced above as Exhibit "E" was sent, and before the second correspondence listed above as Exhibit "F", yet continually failed to inform undersigned counsel. It was in that context that the State failed to inform undersigned counsel of this significant and exculpatory information until such time as the evening before the Subpoena Duces Tecum motion was to be heard by this Court.

 

[Amazer]

I think the way you are using the words "no one" "anything" and "nothing" are at odds with reality.

This is significant because Mr. de la Rionda knew this information well before even the first email referenced above as Exhibit "E" was sent, and before the second correspondence listed above as Exhibit "F", yet continually failed to inform undersigned counsel. It was in that context that the State failed to inform undersigned counsel of this significant and exculpatory information until such time as the evening before the Subpoena Duces Tecum motion was to be heard by this Court.

Remind me again why it's such a big deal that W8 wasn't honest about visiting the hospital and her age? How is relevant to what transpired between GZ and TM?

 

[Dan O.]

Remind me again why it's such a big deal that W8 wasn't honest about visiting the hospital and her age? How is relevant to what transpired between GZ and TM?

Elvis already said himself that it was probably not relavent. But that was before his MOM made a big deal about it. Now Elvis has to back peddle and pretend that he always thought it was relavent. Such is the life of being a follower.