Merged Continuation Part 2: Discussion of the George Zimmerman case

[Unabogie]

I think when Unabogie said "the judge denied the motion to impose sanctions for discovery violations and pretty much everything else", the "pretty much everything else" part referred to sanctions, not motions.

And in case you forgot, the judge din't impose any sanctions.



How about the judge saying this:


Whether or not we can characterize what happened as a "shishkabobbing" is purely subjective, but what is not subjective is the judge agreeing with the prosecution.

As for all those motions the defense won that you chalk up as a victory for them, how many of them were opposed by the prosecution?

No, I was referring to the treatment West got on the stand by De La Rionda.

I've never seen a defense call its own counsel as a witness and then do so poorly. West was evasive and ineffective, especially judging by the fact that Nelson declined to sanction the state for these alleged "discovery violations". BDLR has some impressive chops up there and IMO he's going to really hammer these guys at trial. They seem way over their heads. In addition, this provided a nice preview of how George will fare on the stand under BDLR's style of cross examination and I don't think he'll risk it.

This is another reason why I think it was a disaster for the defense, because it just made George less likely to testify in his own defense, even though testifying is vital to his fate.

So they have no experts, they're out of money, the judge isn't buying their sob story, taking the stand looks like suicide, and the defense lawyers look out of their league.

All in all, it was a bad day to be an accused murderer in Florida.

 

[TheL8Elvis]

I think when Unabogie said "the judge denied the motion to impose sanctions for discovery violations and pretty much everything else", the "pretty much everything else" part referred to sanctions, not motions.

That statement is simply wrong on the face of it.

Although the Judge decided there were no discovery violations, she:
a) gave MOM the opportunity to submit redaction on BDLRs response if he chose
b) left open the possibility of sanctions

http://www.flcourts18.org/PDF/Press_Releases/Minutes from April 30 Docket Sounding.pdf
COURT RESERVES RULING AS TO MONETARY REIMBURSEMENT, IF ANY, AS TO PAYMENT OF ATTORNEY FEES AND AFTER CONCLUSION OF THE TRIAL AT A DATE TO BE SET BY THE COURT
and
COURT RESERVES RULING AT CONCLUSION OF THE TRIAL AT A DATE TO BE BY THE COURT.

So aside from sanctions, which he spelled out specifically, I don't see what the " "pretty much everything else" part could even refer to ?

And in case you forgot, the judge din't impose any sanctions.

YET.

How about the judge saying this:
The court does not make any finding that there was a discovery violation.

How about it ? That's not evidence of what was claimed.

Whether or not we can characterize what happened as a "shishkabobbing" is purely subjective, but what is not subjective is the judge agreeing with the prosecution.

That there were no discovery violations. Basically because MOM and West cured them themselves prior to the trial, not necessarily because the prosecution didn't to anything wrong.Clearly, leaving open the possibility of monetary sanctions is an indication the prosecution wasn't following the spirit or the letter of the law.You don't mean to say you believe BDLR simply 'forgot' to mention lie about the hospital until the last possible moment, do you ?

As for all those motions the defense won that you chalk up as a victory for them, how many of them were opposed by the prosecution?

I didn't count.

 

[TheL8Elvis]

I don't have one, and I don't need one. I have no interest in Tracy Martin's tattoos, since they have no relevance to why Zimmerman decided his son was "suspicious", why Zimmerman chased his son down the street, or why Zimmerman shot his son. And frankly, I would have had little interest in any of that either, were it not for a police chief waving the matter off.

The simple point is, CTH has gone to extreme lengths to portray the Martins as some sort of criminal syndicate, and has hilariously posted strong evidence against their own claims when doing so. When you make a mistake that big, and then don't retract it, then it demolishes your credibility. Kinda like how their hero Andrew Breitbart posted an edited clip of Shirley Sherrod speaking before a local NAACP group, and continuously lied about the contents of the edited clip he showed.

Just to make sure I understand ... you are arguing that that Tracy Martin could not have been associated with the crips in his youth, and that tattoo he covered up could have nothing to do with the crips, because there are pictures of Tracy Martin on facebook wearing a red shirt ? And therefor the CTH has no credibility ?

 

[TheL8Elvis]

Because it was never determined that Martin committed or was involved in a burglary. No charges were filed and he was never given the opportunity to defend himself against those charges.

Because the police admitted they covered it up. Intentionally.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/135564937/Sergeant-William-Tagle-Internal-Affairs-Investigative-Report

http://www.scribd.com/doc/135684004/Steven-N-Hadley-Sr-affidavit-and-investigation

http://www.scribd.com/doc/135692728/Affidavit-From-Commander-Deanna-Fox-Williams

http://www.scribd.com/doc/136164820/sergeant-Lourdes-Hodges-Sworn-Statement-Affidavit

http://www.scribd.com/doc/136392330/Sworn-affidavit-of-Detective-Gylamar-Ochoa-MDSPD

http://www.scribd.com/doc/136642019/Sergeant-Bradley-Rosh-MDSPD-Sworn-Affidavit

That's how it works in America. You don't get to assert someone is a burglar just because you want to. It has to be proven.

And in Martin's case, it never was.

Because the police admitted they covered it up. Intentionally.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/135564937/Sergeant-William-Tagle-Internal-Affairs-Investigative-Report

http://www.scribd.com/doc/135684004/Steven-N-Hadley-Sr-affidavit-and-investigation

http://www.scribd.com/doc/135692728/Affidavit-From-Commander-Deanna-Fox-Williams

http://www.scribd.com/doc/136164820/sergeant-Lourdes-Hodges-Sworn-Statement-Affidavit

http://www.scribd.com/doc/136392330/Sworn-affidavit-of-Detective-Gylamar-Ochoa-MDSPD

http://www.scribd.com/doc/136642019/Sergeant-Bradley-Rosh-MDSPD-Sworn-Affidavit

Really? Then please post the evidence that the jewelry found in Martin's possession was in fact the same jewelry reported stolen from a recent burglary.

I believe it will come out in the trial, if not before.

That's likely why they were granted a motion for photographing and inspecting it ...
http://www.scribd.com/doc/138989725/4-30-Order-to-Inspect-and-Photograph-Evidence

Unless you have an alternate theory ?

 

[johnny karate]

That statement is simply wrong on the face of it.

Although the Judge decided there were no discovery violations, she:
a) gave MOM the opportunity to submit redaction on BDLRs response if he chose
b) left open the possibility of sanctions

http://www.flcourts18.org/PDF/Press_Releases/Minutes from April 30 Docket Sounding.pdf
COURT RESERVES RULING AS TO MONETARY REIMBURSEMENT, IF ANY, AS TO PAYMENT OF ATTORNEY FEES AND AFTER CONCLUSION OF THE TRIAL AT A DATE TO BE SET BY THE COURT
and
COURT RESERVES RULING AT CONCLUSION OF THE TRIAL AT A DATE TO BE BY THE COURT.

So aside from sanctions, which he spelled out specifically, I don't see what the " "pretty much everything else" part could even refer to ?

The last part I'll leave to Unabogie to explain.

As to the rest I'm not sure what argument you think you're making.

The judge ruled there were no discovery violations. The judge ordered no sanctions.

The defense lost.

YET.

Reimbursement =/= sanctions.

No discovery violations.

No sanctions.

How about it ? That's not evidence of what was claimed.

Unabogie was specifically referring to the exchange that lead to the judge ruling in favor of the prosectuion.

You apparently object to the term "shishkabobbing", as is your prerogative, but the fact remains the defense lost.

No discovery violations.

No sanctions.

That there were no discovery violations. Basically because MOM and West cured them themselves prior to the trial, not necessarily because the prosecution didn't to anything wrong.Clearly, leaving open the possibility of monetary sanctions is an indication the prosecution wasn't following the spirit or the letter of the law.You don't mean to say you believe BDLR simply 'forgot' to mention lie about the hospital until the last possible moment, do you ?

What I think is that the judge ruled there were no discovery violations, since that is in fact, what actually occurred.

Any claims to the contrary - or insinuations that the prosecution is somehow behaving unethically or illegally - are of course unfounded and contradicted by reality.

I didn't count.

Maybe you should.

That way we can get an accurate measure of exactly how victorious the defense was.

Because on the one motion I am aware the prosecution opposed, the defense lost.

Let's see what you can come up with to tip the scales.

 

[KatieG]

Just to make sure I understand ... you are arguing that that Tracy Martin could not have been associated with the crips in his youth, and that tattoo he covered up could have nothing to do with the crips, because there are pictures of Tracy Martin on facebook wearing a red shirt ? And therefor the CTH has no credibility ?

What is the relevance to why GZ shot TM on Feb 26, 2012? Who cares what tattoos Tracy Martin had on his neck?

 

[KatieG]

The motion doesn't even reference the NEN call. The motion doesn't seek to exclude any part of any call. The lack of agreement of expert opinion isn't what is being questioned - it's (among other things) the methodology used to form any expert opinion concerning voice identification.

I fully understand the legalese being used here. I know what MO'M is trying to do and, while it's what I'd expect from a defense atty trying to do the best for his client, it comes off as a little silly, IMOO. YMMV

 

[Cylinder]

Motion to Allow Jury to Inspect the Incident Scene During Trial

The prelude to the incident is documented by Mri Zimmerman ’ s non-emergency call, in which very specific locations are noted at specific time markers in the recorded phone call. The incident itself was documented by a witness’ 911 call, which recorded the final 42 seconds leading up to the gunshot and the gunshot itself, which allowed investigators to determine the exact time and place of the incident.

...

Edited by LashL: 

Snipped for compliance with Rule 4. Please, do not copy and paste lengthy tracts of text; instead, cite a short passage along with a link to the source.

 

[batvette]

It hasn't just been "suggested", it's been established by all corroborative evidence.

How?

Trayvon Martin was simply talking to his friend on the phone while walking home from the store.

This is from testimony from the girlfriend on the phone, who would have no way of knowing if Martin was also looking for an opportunity to burglarize a home while he was on the phone.

Other then the word of the man who is now charged with his murder, there is no evidence that he was engaged in any nefarioous behavior of any type.

At the time he described this behavior he wasn't charged with his murder. In 47 calls to the police in over a year prior, there isn't one single example of him making up supposed behavior of someone as an excuse to call police on them. Are you claiming he just started that on that night?

You'll have to prove he was lying and I don't think you can do that. Moreover the time line should show Martin did not walk directly home from the 7/11 in a timely manner.

It can't be established that Martin had engaged in burglary because there is no evidence that he did.

If you'd read that article you'd find they were covering up crime rate stats by black males by not reporting crimes.

I can assure you, the musings of a right wing website biased against Martin will not be admissible in a court of law.

Is the Miami Herald a right wing website?



http://www.miamiherald.com/2012/03/26/v-fullstory/2714778/thousands-expected-at-trayvon.html

Edited by LashL: 

Moderated thread.

The Miami Herald ran this story last year.

The officer said he found Trayvon the next day and went through his book bag in search of the graffiti marker.

Instead the officer reported he found women’s jewelry and a screwdriver that he described as a “burglary tool,” according to a Miami-Dade Schools Police report obtained by The Miami Herald. Word of the incident came as the family’s lawyer acknowledged that the boy was suspended in February for getting caught with an empty bag with traces of marijuana, which he called “irrelevant” and an attempt to demonize a victim.

Trayvon’s backpack contained 12 pieces of jewelry, in addition to a watch and a large flathead screwdriver, according to the report, which described silver wedding bands and earrings with diamonds.

Trayvon was asked if the jewelry belonged to his family or a girlfriend.

“Martin replied it’s not mine. A friend gave it to me,” he responded, according to the report. Trayvon declined to name the friend.

Trayvon was not disciplined because of the discovery, but was instead suspended for graffiti, according to the report. School police impounded the jewelry and sent photos of the items to detectives at Miami-Dade police for further investigation.

Now I suppose your own bias will lead you to believe the story that a
"friend" he could not name "gave" him a dozen pieces of real jewelry including silver wedding bands and diamond earrings, or that police are too stupid to recognize a burglary tool when they see one.

Since the jury pool will come from the Miami area, where the Miami Herald is widely distributed, I doubt the jury will share ...

Edited by LashL: 

Moderated thread.

 

[Cylinder]

Defendant's Motion for Anonymous Jury

1. The Defense requests that policies and procedures be established to assure that all court personnel, including but not limited to the Seminole County Sheriffs Office, the Clerk of the Circuit Court, Clerk’s Administration Officials, the State Attomey’s Office, the defense team and all media outlets given access, assure that all information regarding the potential jurors, including their names, addresses, places of employment, spouses’ names, previous employment, previous residential addresses and all other demographic information be maintained confidential.

2. The Clerk of Court shall hold confidential and under seal the names, addresses, places of employment, spouses’ names, previous employment, previous residential addresses and all other demographic information of all persons summoned as a juror in this case.

...

Edited by LashL: 

Snipped for compliance with Rule 4. Please, do not copy and paste lengthy tracts of text; instead, cite a short passage and a link to the source.

 

[Cylinder]

State's Motion Requesting Court to Compel Shellie Zimmerman to Testify at Deposition

The state is arguing that Mrs. Zimmerman should be required to answer questions at deposition regarding non-priviledged information.

 

[johnny karate]

Because the police admitted they covered it up. Intentionally.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/135564937/Sergeant-William-Tagle-Internal-Affairs-Investigative-Report

http://www.scribd.com/doc/135684004/Steven-N-Hadley-Sr-affidavit-and-investigation

http://www.scribd.com/doc/135692728/Affidavit-From-Commander-Deanna-Fox-Williams

http://www.scribd.com/doc/136164820/sergeant-Lourdes-Hodges-Sworn-Statement-Affidavit

http://www.scribd.com/doc/136392330/Sworn-affidavit-of-Detective-Gylamar-Ochoa-MDSPD

http://www.scribd.com/doc/136642019/Sergeant-Bradley-Rosh-MDSPD-Sworn-Affidavit

Because the police admitted they covered it up. Intentionally.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/135564937/Sergeant-William-Tagle-Internal-Affairs-Investigative-Report

http://www.scribd.com/doc/135684004/Steven-N-Hadley-Sr-affidavit-and-investigation

http://www.scribd.com/doc/135692728/Affidavit-From-Commander-Deanna-Fox-Williams

http://www.scribd.com/doc/136164820/sergeant-Lourdes-Hodges-Sworn-Statement-Affidavit

http://www.scribd.com/doc/136392330/Sworn-affidavit-of-Detective-Gylamar-Ochoa-MDSPD

http://www.scribd.com/doc/136642019/Sergeant-Bradley-Rosh-MDSPD-Sworn-Affidavit

As much as I'd like to spend my time combing through the dozen or so links you provided in lieu of actual evidence, I think I'll pass.

Please post the actual evidence that proves Martin was involved in a burglary.

I believe it will come out in the trial, if not before.

That's likely why they were granted a motion for photographing and inspecting it ...
http://www.scribd.com/doc/138989725/4-30-Order-to-Inspect-and-Photograph-Evidence

Unless you have an alternate theory ?

Instead of me guessing at the legal strategy of a desperate defense team running out of time and options, why don't you explain exactly how unsubstantiated speculation that Martin might have been involved in a burglary at some point will find its way into the trial, and how exactly it will be shown to be relevant to Zimmerman's decision to shoot and kill him?

Short of that, I'm not really much interested in the sideshow of the defense motions. It's clear that O'Mara is throwing whatever crap he can against the wall to see what sticks so he can either stall the trial or find grounds for a potential appeal. You know, like the whole "discovery violations" ruse that just blew up in his face.

 

[johnny karate]

How?

This is from testimony from the girlfriend on the phone, who would have no way of knowing if Martin was also looking for an opportunity to burglarize a home while he was on the phone.

There is no evidence that Martin was looking for an opportunity to burglarize a home the night Zimmerman killed him.

Zero.

None.

At the time he described this behavior he wasn't charged with his murder. In 47 calls to the police in over a year prior, there isn't one single example of him making up supposed behavior of someone as an excuse to call police on them. Are you claiming he just started that on that night?

You'll have to prove he was lying and I don't think you can do that. Moreover the time line should show Martin did not walk directly home from the 7/11 in a timely manner.

There is no evidence that Martin was looking for an opportunity to burglarize a home the night Zimmerman killed him.

Zero.

None.

If you'd read that article you'd find they were covering up crime rate stats by black males by not reporting crimes.

Is the Miami Herald a right wing website?

http://www.miamiherald.com/2012/03/26/v-fullstory/2714778/thousands-expected-at-trayvon.html

The Miami Herald ran this story last year.

A Miami Herald article is not evidence of burglary.

Now I suppose your own bias will lead you to believe the story that a
"friend" he could not name "gave" him a dozen pieces of real jewelry including silver wedding bands and diamond earrings, or that police are too stupid to recognize a burglary tool when they see one.

You see, that's the great part. I don't have to offer some alternative theory or even meet you halfway. It's up to you to offer evidence of your claim that goes beyond mere speculation and actually rises to the level of something that will be relevant to and admissible in this trial.

Since the jury pool will come from the Miami area, where the Miami Herald is widely distributed, I doubt the jury will share ...

The jury will weigh the evidence presented in the trial.

That Miami Herald article - nor any of the speculation related to it - will not be among it.

And speaking of the Miami Herald, here's a nice little piece detailing Zimmerman's repeated sexual assault of his cousin:
http://www.miamiherald.com/2012/07/16/2897557/zimmerman-defense-attorney-will.html

So if I'm George Zimmerman, I think I'd be hoping the members of the jury don't read the Miami Herald. People tend to prefer burglars over rapists.

 

[KatieG]

Just to make sure I understand ... you are arguing that that Tracy Martin could not have been associated with the crips in his youth, and that tattoo he covered up could have nothing to do with the crips, because there are pictures of Tracy Martin on facebook wearing a red shirt ? And therefor the CTH has no credibility ?

No, there are many reasons the CTH has no credibility. That they continue to trash Tracy Martin is just one of the many.

 

[TheL8Elvis]

I fully understand the legalese being used here. I know what MO'M is trying to do and, while it's what I'd expect from a defense atty trying to do the best for his client, it comes off as a little silly, IMOO. YMMV

Why do you think it's silly to try to exclude "voice experts" unless they can show they are using actual science ?

And what exactly did you mean when you kept talking about the "whole tape" , then ? Because there was never any talk of using less than the whole tape, it certainly makes it look like you believed MOM wanted to exclude part of the NEN call ...

The non 911 call is evidence. I agree that the judge is not likely to allow only what MO'M wants as opposed to the whole tape. Since experts can't agree whose voice is screaming, the court will have to leave it to the jury to decide. But the whole tape will be admitted.

 

[TheL8Elvis]

It hasn't just been "suggested", it's been established by all corroborative evidence.

Trayvon Martin was simply talking to his friend on the phone while walking home from the store.

Other then the word of the man who is now charged with his murder, there is no evidence that he was engaged in any nefarioous behavior of any type.



It can't be established that Martin had engaged in burglary because there is no evidence that he did.

I can assure you, the musings of a right wing website biased against Martin will not be admissible in a court of law.


You'll probably be waiting a while then, because replies of "There's no confirmed evidence that Martin engaged in burglary either the night in question or ever, and this issue will not find it's way anywhere near the court room" will do just fine.

The musings of a right wing website biased against Martin admitted in a court of law as exhibit C




http://www.gzdocs.com/documents/0513/mot_for_anonymous_jury.pdf

 

[KatieG]

Why do you think it's silly to try to exclude "voice experts" unless they can show they are using actual science ?

And what exactly did you mean when you kept talking about the "whole tape" , then ? Because there was never any talk of using less than the whole tape, it certainly makes it look like you believed MOM wanted to exclude part of the NEN call ...

I don't agree with the use of voice experts because the technology isn't perfected yet. I think the jury can figure out for themselves whose voice is screaming on the tape.

 

[TheL8Elvis]

As much as I'd like to spend my time combing through the dozen or so links you provided in lieu of actual evidence, I think I'll pass.

I provided links to actual evidence, affidavits of M-DSPD admitting they covered up the crime when they found the jewelry found in TMs possession.

I'm sorry I am not more surprised that you just hand wave it away and claim it is not actual evidence without even reading it.

Please post the actual evidence that proves Martin was involved in a burglary.

As I said, I believe it will come out in the trial, if not before. I don't have a copy of the police report that may match the jewelry found on TM. I am going off the large amounts of circumstantial evidence we have.

Instead of me guessing at the legal strategy of a desperate defense team running out of time and options, why don't you explain exactly how unsubstantiated speculation that Martin might have been involved in a burglary at some point will find its way into the trial, and how exactly it will be shown to be relevant to Zimmerman's decision to shoot and kill him?

Someone claims TM was not a potential burglar, and was wrongly profiled, proof of his being in possession of stolen goods will be used to contradict that claim.

Again, why else did the Judge granted a motion for photographing and inspecting it the stolen jewelry if it is irrelevant, and will never find its way to trial ?

Short of that, I'm not really much interested in the sideshow of the defense motions. It's clear that O'Mara is throwing whatever crap he can against the wall to see what sticks so he can either stall the trial or find grounds for a potential appeal. You know, like the whole "discovery violations" ruse that just blew up in his face.

Really ? You think MOM motion was a ruse ? And even though Judge Nelson may still sanction BDLR, that means it "blew up in his face" ?

 

[Rare Truth]

The musings of a right wing website biased against Martin admitted in a court of law as exhibit C


[qimg]http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/imagehosting/thum_50044518d1047f2be7.jpg[/qimg]

http://www.gzdocs.com/documents/0513/mot_for_anonymous_jury.pdf

It's been admitted and allowed into the case as evidence?

Really? I didn't know the trial had commenced already.

 

[johnny karate]

The musings of a right wing website biased against Martin admitted in a court of law as exhibit C


[URL]http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/imagehosting/thum_50044518d1047f2be7.jpg[/URL]

http://www.gzdocs.com/documents/0513/mot_for_anonymous_jury.pdf

I'm not sure I follow.

Can you point out the "musing" that has since been admitted into evidence?