Merged Continuation Part 2: Discussion of the George Zimmerman case

[KatieG]

This should keep the legal folks busy, on both sides.

State's Motion in Limine Regarding Trayvon Martin
http://www.flcourts18.org/PDF/Press_...n Martin.pdf

State's Motion Requesting Court to Order Defendant to Comply with Discovery Obligations
http://www.flcourts18.org/PDF/Press_...bligations.pdf

State's Motion to Limit Exclude Improper Opinion Evidence
http://www.flcourts18.org/PDF/Press_...20Evidence.pdf

State's Response to Defendant's Motion for Evidentiary Hearing
http://www.flcourts18.org/PDF/Press_... Hearing.pdf

State's Motion in Limine Regarding Opinion as to Appropriate Penalty or Disregard of law
http://www.flcourts18.org/PDF/Press_...20of Law.pdf

State's Motion in Limine Regarding Calling of Witnesses
http://www.flcourts18.org/PDF/Press_...0Witnesses.pdf

State's Motion in Limine Regarding Prior Criminal History
http://www.flcourts18.org/PDF/Press_... History.pdf

State's Motion for Protective Order Motion in Limine Regarding Toxicology
http://www.flcourts18.org/PDF/Press_...Toxicology.pdf

State's Redacted 16th Supplemental Discovery
http://www.flcourts18.org/PDF/Press_... 13 13.pdf


http://www.flcourts18.org/page.php?129

 

[johnny karate]

There is no conflation. Read past the title, and in the document you will see:

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

...
16. As sanctions for this discovery violation, pursuant to Fla. R. Crim. P. 3.220 (2)
the Defense requests that this Honorable Court enter an order requiring the State Attorney's
office to reimburse the Defense for all the time expended to seek out this information otherwise
readily available to the State Attorney's Office, and having to do so through additional letters,
conversations, inquiries, investigations, the filing of the motion for Subpoena Duces Tecum, and
other investigative efforts. An Affidavit of Attorney Fees will be presented at hearing.

No, it's definitely conflation.

"Sanctions" and "reimbursment" are not the same thing. Feel free to look up the definitions.

Furthermore, the thing for which the sanctions were meant to remedy - i.e. discovery violations - were determined to not exist.

That's kind of an important point.

The sanctions were to be a punitive measure for discovery violations. It says so right there in that bit you quoted.

But there were no discovery violations.

Therefore, there will be no sanctions for discovery violations.

If the judge determines at some future time that the prosecution is to provide the defense some kind of reimbursement, this reimbursement will not be sanctions for discovery violations because there were no discovery violations.

So we should probably stop pretending they are the same thing, because they most certainly are not.

Also, let me know how this is coming along:

Well, maybe you should. That way we can get an accurate measure of just how victorious the defense really was. Because winning motions that are unopposed by the prosecution isn't all that impressive.

Let me know if you'd rather not, and I'll be more than happy to tally things up.

I can jump in whenever you need me to.

 

[TheL8Elvis]

I didn't ask for evidence of a police cover up.

Many times, in the earlier threads, you asked why there was no police report mentioning the stolen jewelry, why wasn't TM charged, etc.

So now that there is evidence of a police cover up, I present it. It's very much related to the burglary.

I asked for evidence of a burglary.

That would be the women's jewelry and screwdriver found in TMs backpack. That's evidence of a burglary.

Conspiracy theories to hide the alleged burglary do not interest me.

Calling them conspiracy theories is dishonest. I presented you with affadavits from M-DSPD officers stating they were explicitly told to avoid criminal reports for students.

Additionally, he was telling his officers to use the Baker act to lower the criminal statistics...
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/06/19/baker-act-miami-dade-schools_n_1608599.html
The officer and others inside the department claimed Hurley is responsible for the increase, and instructed officers to Baker Act students instead of arresting them.

 

[Unabogie]

The screams were most likely Trayvon's.

http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news...immerman-trial-voice-20130514,0,2122283.story

In audio from a neighbor's 911 call the night of the shooting, someone can be heard crying for help. Then comes a gunshot, and the cries stop.

One team of analysts, Harry Hollien and James Harnsberger of Forensic Communication Associates, broke down the recording scream by scream. They concluded the 911-audio quality and voice samples were not good enough to definitively match either Trayvon or Zimmerman.

But they wrote there were near matches for several individual cries. Some of the first eight came close to matching Trayvon's voice, they wrote, while the 14th and 16th came close to matching Zimmerman's.

In a separate evaluation, analyst Alan Reich wrote that, while two voices are heard in the audio, he believed the cries came from "the younger of the two male speakers, Trayvon Martin."

According to Reich's analysis, the "resonant frequency" of the vowel in last scream — likely the word "stop" — is about 10 percent above "the adult male average" and therefore "highly appropriate" for a still-maturing teenager.

No wonder O'Mara is desperate to delay the trial and preclude experts from testifying.

 

[Unabogie]

Here's the direct link to the report so we can compare it to the Sentinel's reporting.

http://www.wesh.com/blob/view/-/201...ce-Communication-Associaites-voice-report.pdf

 

[johnny karate]

Many times, in the earlier threads, you asked why there was no police report mentioning the stolen jewelry, why wasn't TM charged, etc.

So now that there is evidence of a police cover up, I present it. It's very much related to the burglary.

The evidence that the police coverup is related to Martin's alleged burglary has yet to see the light of day, despite several requests from myself and others.

You are simply connecting dots, not providing evidence.

Furthermore - and to the point I have been making in this most recent iteration of this discussion - such speculation will not find its way into the trial, and is therefore completely irrelevant.

That would be the women's jewelry and screwdriver found in TMs backpack. That's evidence of a burglary.

And Trayvon Martin's dead body is evidence of murder.

Does that assessement sit well with you?

Or does due process as a standard of determining guilt only apply to Zimmerman?

Calling them conspiracy theories is dishonest. I presented you with affadavits from M-DSPD officers stating they were explicitly told to avoid criminal reports for students.

Additionally, he was telling his officers to use the Baker act to lower the criminal statistics...
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/06/19/baker-act-miami-dade-schools_n_1608599.html
The officer and others inside the department claimed Hurley is responsible for the increase, and instructed officers to Baker Act students instead of arresting them.

It's a conspiracy theory as relates to Martin, and you have yet to provide any evidence to the contrary.

Again, this is all just smoke and mirrors perpetrated by a biased and unreliable website.

The contents of Martin's backpack at some point prior to the night Zimmerman shot and killed him are no more relevant to this case than Zimmerman's predilection for sexually abusing his underage cousin.

And since the dubious source you have repeatedly championed seems a lot less concerned with rape than they do with burglary, it's quite obvious what they're agenda is.

 

[Cylinder]

The screams were most likely Trayvon's.

http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news...immerman-trial-voice-20130514,0,2122283.story



No wonder O'Mara is desperate to delay the trial and preclude experts from testifying.

That's not what the reports say. Reich's report is pseudoscience. This is a skeptic board.

 

[batvette]

"not evidence of a burglary"

You do realize possession of stolen property is a crime? This jewelry matches the description of jewelry reported stolen from a home which lies between Martin's school and his relative's home. If there was nothing unusual about Martin possessing women's diamond earrings, real silver wedding rings, other jewelry and a screwdriver in his duffel bag, why did police keep it? If they were legitimately his why didn't he and his parents march right down to the police station and retrieve it?
No there is only one conclusion for a reasonable person to make. The jewelry, expensive, real jewelry, was stolen property. The fact Martin also had a tool police determined was a burglary tool suggests he had something to do with it getting stolen. The reason he didn't get a burglary conviction for it was because of the very police scandal the CTH uncovered.

When denial of the obvious is so blatant, how is justice possible?

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.

Red Herring much? Especially since you just dismissed the Herald as engaged in "unsubstantiated speculation", which is gross misrepresentation- they based their claims on police reports.
If there is any unsubstantiated speculation it's that Martin was walking home minding his own business.
That has not been established as fact, we have an eyewitness who will testify he appeared to be on drugs and looking at houses.

But anyway, are you now saying you concede Martin is a burglar? Or has this just been a "how not to..." post?

 

[Dcdrac]

So an incident involving a backpack Zimmerman could not have not known about was a reason for Zimmerman to kill some one he had never met, and had no real grounds for believing was a trheat when he started the confrontation?

 

[johnny karate]

You do realize possession of stolen property is a crime? This jewelry matches the description of jewelry reported stolen from a home which lies between Martin's school and his relative's home. If there was nothing unusual about Martin possessing women's diamond earrings, real silver wedding rings, other jewelry and a screwdriver in his duffel bag, why did police keep it? If they were legitimately his why didn't he and his parents march right down to the police station and retrieve it?
No there is only one conclusion for a reasonable person to make. The jewelry, expensive, real jewelry, was stolen property. The fact Martin also had a tool police determined was a burglary tool suggests he had something to do with it getting stolen. The reason he didn't get a burglary conviction for it was because of the very police scandal the CTH uncovered.

When denial of the obvious is so blatant, how is justice possible?

Justice is possible through something that here in America is known as "due process".

It's what George Zimmerman is getting right now, and it's what Trayvon Martin did not get in regard to this alleged burglary.

In any way that is meaningful to this case and the pending trial, you don't get to assert Martin is a burglar anymore than I get to assert that Zimmerman is a rapist or a murderer.

Evidence certainly exists that Martin is a burglar, just like evidence exists that Zimmerman is a rapist and a murderer.

But by the same standard that renders Zimmerman innocent until proven guilty of rape and murder, Martin is also innocent until proven guilty of burglary.

Red Herring much? Especially since you just dismissed the Herald as engaged in "unsubstantiated speculation", which is gross misrepresentation- they based their claims on police reports.
If there is any unsubstantiated speculation it's that Martin was walking home minding his own business.
That has not been established as fact, we have an eyewitness who will testify he appeared to be on drugs and looking at houses.

But anyway, are you now saying you concede Martin is a burglar? Or has this just been a "how not to..." post?

You are the one implying that the jury pool would be potentially poisoned in favor of Zimmerman because of the likelihood they would have read a Miami Herald article about Martin being a burglar.

I merely pointed out that the Miami Herald also printed an article about Zimmerman's repeated sexual assault of his underage cousin.

Personally, I'm just fine with the jury drawing conclusions from what they've read in the Miami Herald.

Because as I said, people prefer a burglar over a rapist.

 

[johnny karate]

If there is any unsubstantiated speculation it's that Martin was walking home minding his own business.

No, in actuality, Martin's behavior that night is very much substantiated by witnesses, video, and phone records.

They all indicate he was walking home from store and talking to his friend on the phone.

There is no substantiating evidence he was doing anything more, or anything nefarious.

Zero.

None.

That has not been established as fact, we have an eyewitness who will testify he appeared to be on drugs and looking at houses.

And now we get to the part that actually is unsubstantiated, because - as everyone reading this knows - the "witness" to which you are referring is of course Zimmerman himself.

See, in order for something to be substantiated, it needs to be verified by an independent source.

There is no independent source to substantiate that Martin was behaving suspiciosly. Only the claim of the man who is now charged with is murder.

Therefore, the claim that Martin was behaving suspiciously is unsubstantiated.

 

[Dancing David]

You do realize possession of stolen property is a crime? This jewelry matches the description of jewelry reported stolen from a home which lies between Martin's school and his relative's home.

matches, how, exactly and by whom?

Hmmmmmm

 

[Mumbles]

Another note - Zimmerman's apparent reason for thinking Martin was "suspicious" was that Martin was walking in the rain, and looking around as he did so. Zimmerman did not describe Martin testing door handles, peeping into windows (as in, actively walking up to the window and peering around closed blinds, not merely looking into a window that's wide open as he walked past), stumbling, or anything else describing criminal intent or any impairment. Therefore, even his own police call appears to corroborate the claim that Martin was simply walking home from the store.

 

[Unabogie]

And now we get to the part that actually is unsubstantiated, because - as everyone reading this knows - the "witness" to which you are referring is of course Zimmerman himself.

See, in order for something to be substantiated, it needs to be verified by an independent source.

There is no independent source to substantiate that Martin was behaving suspiciosly. Only the claim of the man who is now charged with is murder.

Therefore, the claim that Martin was behaving suspiciously is unsubstantiated.

Furthermore, we can rule out this speculation that Martin looked like he was "on drugs" since they did a toxicology test and determined that he was most certainly NOT on drugs when George murdered him. That batvette persists in granting George's observations any credit even in light of his erroneous "suspicions" is a mystery.

But this ground is well trodden. We've already established quite clearly that when it comes to George's history of assaulting LEOs, assaulting his girlfriend, raping his cousin over the course of a decade, or bragging about getting away with crimes, the standard is quite high and that without going to court we must dismiss it all as the most heinous of character assassination. Indeed, we must even doubt the word of the police who arrested George after he attacked that cop, since cops lie.

But in the case of the mysterious jewelry, we must assume the worst about the murder victim, assign the utmost credibility to the police, and the highest monetary value to the found jewelry, and conclude that this makes the victim not only suspect, but certainly a master burglar (which somehow translates into him being ultra-violent and capable of handling a grown man who outweighed him by 50 pounds). We must discount the fact that the victim had NO jewelry on him and NO burglary tools and was wearing bright clothing at the time he was murdered and was talking on the phone with a girl at the same time as he was allegedly planning his attack.

And let us never forget that the word of the accused murdered must be taken as TRUTH since no defendant ever told self-serving lies before.

Did I about cover it?

 

[KatieG]

You do realize possession of stolen property is a crime? This jewelry matches the description of jewelry reported stolen from a home which lies between Martin's school and his relative's home. If there was nothing unusual about Martin possessing women's diamond earrings, real silver wedding rings, other jewelry and a screwdriver in his duffel bag, why did police keep it? If they were legitimately his why didn't he and his parents march right down to the police station and retrieve it?
No there is only one conclusion for a reasonable person to make. The jewelry, expensive, real jewelry, was stolen property. The fact Martin also had a tool police determined was a burglary tool suggests he had something to do with it getting stolen. The reason he didn't get a burglary conviction for it was because of the very police scandal the CTH uncovered.

snipped for brevity

The CTH uncovered the police scandal? I don't think they can claim credit for that. TM had a backpack with jewelry and a screwdriver. Where is the evidence that he was actually involved in a burglary. There is obviously more to this than is being told, but again, it has not one damn thing to do with GZ shooting and killing TM that night.

 

[TheL8Elvis]

The evidence that the police coverup is related to Martin's alleged burglary has yet to see the light of day, despite several requests from myself and others.

You are simply connecting dots, not providing evidence.

How would you know, since you admitted you didn't even read the affidavits I linked to ?

Furthermore - and to the point I have been making in this most recent iteration of this discussion - such speculation will not find its way into the trial, and is therefore completely irrelevant.

Then why did the judge ruled for MOM motion to inspect and photograph the stolen jewelry ?

And Trayvon Martin's dead body is evidence of murder.

Does that assessement sit well with you?

No, because it's not even close to an analogous situation.

Or does due process as a standard of determining guilt only apply to Zimmerman?

It's a legal process which doesn't preclude someone actually being guilty whether a particular process is followed or not.

It's a conspiracy theory as relates to Martin, and you have yet to provide any evidence to the contrary.

How would you know, since you admitted you didn't even read the affidavits I linked to ?

Again, this is all just smoke and mirrors perpetrated by a biased and unreliable website.

No matter where they come from, the facts are the facts.

The contents of Martin's backpack at some point prior to the night Zimmerman shot and killed him are no more relevant to this case than Zimmerman's predilection for sexually abusing his underage cousin.

You'll understand if I don't find your legal rulings compelling.

And since the dubious source you have repeatedly championed seems a lot less concerned with rape than they do with burglary, it's quite obvious what they're agenda is.

There is actual evidence for the burglary, unlike the alleged rape.

 

[TheL8Elvis]

The screams were most likely Trayvon's.

http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news...immerman-trial-voice-20130514,0,2122283.story

No wonder O'Mara is desperate to delay the trial and preclude experts from testifying.

Do you think this report is science or woo ?

If Science, can you please point out the actual science ?

All I see are some dudes opinion. And a bunch of claims that GZ said things no one else has "heard" him saying.

 

[Skeptic Tank]

The screams were most likely Trayvon's.

That seems like a pretty egregious misrepresentation.

In what I presume are the final screams before the gunshot (due to their assigned numbers) these particular PhDs felt that they were almost certainly from Zimmerman, and definitely NOT from Martin.

Frankly, I think the whole enterprise of trying to compare screams to speech is sort of pointless, but let's at least accurately represent what is said by those who try.

 

[Unabogie]

There is actual evidence for the burglary, unlike the alleged rape.

You don't consider the testimony of the rape victim to be evidence of rape?

 

[batvette]

No, in actuality, Martin's behavior that night is very much substantiated by witnesses, video, and phone records.

They all indicate he was walking home from store and talking to his friend on the phone.

What video shows him walking through the complex?
What EYEwitness exists that can testify he was not acting suspiciously?
How does a phone record prove anything other than he was on the phone?

And now we get to the part that actually is unsubstantiated, because - as everyone reading this knows - the "witness" to which you are referring is of course Zimmerman himself.

See, in order for something to be substantiated, it needs to be verified by an independent source.

There is no independent source to substantiate that Martin was behaving suspiciosly. Only the claim of the man who is now charged with is murder.

Therefore, the claim that Martin was behaving suspiciously is unsubstantiated.

At the time Zimmerman reported his behavior he was an independent witness. It wasn't made up afterwards after he was charged with murder. It's in the call record.

Thus the grounds for your argument are false and dismissed.