Zimmerman: Is Intimidation the Defense Strategy?

People like Pliaja are not interested in finding out what really happened during the encounter between George Zimmerman and Trayvon Martin on February 26th in Sanford, FL. They are only interested in promoting George Zimmerman’s demonstrably false claim of self-defense to assure that he wins his case. We know that they are marketing and selling his defense because they refuse to engage us in reasoned debate about the significance of the forensic evidence. Instead they repeat what George Zimmerman said as though it were inscribed in stone by some deity and cannot be questioned.

Indeed, as Crane and I have learned recently and y’all have witnessed, Zimmerman’s supporters have no discernible interest in determining the truth. Instead, they will go to extraordinary lengths to intentionally produce, publish and repeat a series of false, misleading and defamatory statements in order to discredit, demonize and destroy the professional reputation and good character of anyone who dares to question George Zimmerman’s story.

As dishonest and morally reprehensible as their campaign of disinformation against me has been, they have significantly lowered the bar reaching a deplorable new low by personally attacking Crane and my daughter.

We are not the only targets of their hatred. Look at what they have done to demonize Trayvon Martin and his family

With that as background, let us consider yesterday’s decision by the Court of Appeals granting the writ of prohibition effectively removing Judge Lester.

The Court concluded by a vote of 2-1:

“Florida Rule of Judicial Administration 2.330 requires arial judge to grant a motion to disqualify without determining the accuracy of the allegations in the motion, so long as the motion is “legally sufficient.” R.M.C., 77 So. 3d at 236. “A motion is legally sufficient if it alleges facts that would create in a reasonably prudent person a wellfounded fear of not receiving a fair and impartial trial.” Id. (citing MacKenzie v. Super Kids Bargain Store, Inc., 565 So. 2d 1332 (Fla. 1990)). Although many of the
allegations in Zimmerman’s motion, standing alone, do not meet the legal sufficiency test, and while this is admittedly a close call, upon careful review we find that the allegations, taken together, meet the threshold test of legal sufficiency. Accordingly, we
direct the trial judge to enter an order of disqualification which requests the chief circuit judge to appoint a successor judge.”

Notice that neither the majority opinion nor the dissenting opinion provided an explanation or justification for the conclusion that it reached.

470 Responses to Zimmerman: Is Intimidation the Defense Strategy?

  1. Oops… I should have added …you said…There was some German name mentioned that started with an “A” at least I think it was German. I’m supposed to be affiliated with it somehow, and I guess that is supposed to make me evil. Problem is I don’t know if it’s a person, a thing, or something to eat.

  2. Fred~~we are all ancestors of Adam. Did you know Eve fed him an apricot and not an apple.

    So men do not have adam’s apples. They are really adam’s apricots.

    Just funnin’ ya….

  3. EveryoneIsEntitledToTheirOpinion says:

    Dear Professor, don’t feel you have to respond to the ZBots slanderous statements against you and your family. You have a right to your privacy.. ZBots are misguided vessels and this student will just ignore their ridiculous comments to hurt others character.

    Keep up this great site… Peace….

  4. Hello, all.

    I have reviewed the tweets at the link provided by rnsome.

    They include some information that I can verify as true:

    My father’s name is Frederick D. Leatherman. After WWII, he married my mother, Phyllis Dellinger, and joined the State Department. He was a Foreign Service Officer. His first post was Karachi, India. I was born there as India was being partitioned to create Pakistan. His next post was Havana, Cuba. Then Managua, Nicaragua; Quito, Ecuador; and finally Washington, DC. He retired in the mid 70s and passed away in April 1999. My mother died a year later.

    In 1985, I was appointed by the United States District Court for the Western District of Washington in Seattle to represent an indigent defendant named Randolph George Duey, one of 10 defendants charged in a federal RICO indictment with committing a long list of crimes that included murder, racketeering, and armed robberies. All of the defendants were members of a white supremacist right wing terrorist group called the Order. All of the defendants were convicted after a 3-month jury trial.

    Information that I can verify as false:

    I am not and never have been a member of a white supremacist group. I do not believe in white supremacy and did not represent anyone else who was a member of a white supremacist group during my 30-year law career.

    I do not recall meeting or knowing anyone named Robert Zimmerman and I do not recall my father ever mentioning anyone by that name.

    My father was never stationed in Lima, Peru.

    I did not start my blog to embarrass, humiliate, and discredit Martin supporters. That is the most idiotic accusation that anyone has made and, believe me, it has had some serious competition.

    Information that I can neither confirm nor deny:

    I do not know if my father ever knew a man named Robert Zimmerman. He might have, assuming they served in the Foreign Service at the same time. However, there are a lot of Foreign Service Officers, so I don’t know.

    Unless the Republican Party and AARP are white supremacist organizations, which they appear to be to me, I have no knowledge that my father ever was a member of a white supremacist organization.

    The Leatherman name traces back to someplace in Bavaria. The first Leatherman to immigrate to North America settled somewhere in Maryland in the early 1700s.

    There was some German name mentioned that started with an “A”, at least I think it was German. I’m supposed to be affiliated with it somehow, and I guess that is supposed to make me evil. Problem is I don’t know if it’s a person, a thing, or something to eat. The person who made this stupid and ridiculous claim is lucky they aren’t here right now.

    Okay, I’m done with this stupid bullshit.

    • ajamazin says:

      Frederick,

      Small world!

      My paternal side of the family is from Bavaria and my brother and his Porsche Origin recently  visited family there.

      The family names begins with an “A” and a “V”. My early ancestors settled in Winston Salem,  North Carolina and South Carolina.

      ________________________________

    • Xena says:

      So let me get their straight. Somehow, all of this about who knew whom, their careers, and this blog, made George Michael “Adderall” Zimmerman stalk Trayvon Martin on 2/26/12 and kill him????

      • EveryoneIsEntitledToTheirOpinion says:

        Wow…

      • ajamazin says:

        Xena,

        I have no idea how Frederick Leatherman’s family was pulled into this fray, but make no mistake that some families tend their family trees meticulously.

        The Zimmerman family narrative has been falsified [this can be proven by Spanish ancestry sites ] and I want to know why.

        In many countries, a family’s pedigree determines their career and possibility for advancement.

      • Xena says:

        @ajamazin. “The Zimmerman family narrative has been falsified [this can be proven by Spanish ancestry sites ] and I want to know why.”

        What do you believe has been falsified, and why do you think it has been falsified? Curious minds want to know. 🙂

      • Malisha says:

        Xena, why can’t you see it?

        OK, I’ll explain it. Frederick Leatherman had an ancestor who was acquainted with an ancester of Robert Zimmerman, either Senior or Monseigneur or Supersizit, Pr.D., AAJD, ARNW. One of them was not like the other. Then they had some descendants. One of the descendants (of the one who was not like the other) had a bad hair day. Well, he had bad hair, and then he had a day. So functionally they were equivalent, or came to be so, on the evening of the 26th day of February in the Year of Our Lord 2012. In Florida, or so it is called, some time after having been misappropriated and then appropriated all over again. You still with me?

        So this descendant went and killed a “suspect” and the cops wanted to let him go but a bunch of other people’s descendants started to holler so they couldn’t let him go. And that’s how it all happened. :mrgreen:

      • @Malisha

        I’m weak from laughing. You’re too funny!

      • Xena says:

        @Malisha. ROFLMAO. I almost spit my coffee out when reading that. GIVE A WARNING — Do Not Drink While Reading This Comment.

    • hinkster4ever says:

      Professor, you and Crane have made a great place for us to come visit and discuss. There are hundreds of bloggers who have sites up wishing they had the great minds that comment here. Addressing this “stupid bullshit” is not necessary. Just read your students comments and get ready to give us our grades!

      I would pay attention to what grandpa always called the snake/snakes in the grass….those who post here with snide remarks to others and topics way off base…..running off good posters is not nice 🙂 Now back to the topic of bloody heads in the grass……..

      Namaste

  5. @Digger, you are forbidden from taking the title of bozo because I own it! Seriously, I think Fred and I should have tried to answer some things sooner. We were out a good part of the day, and also, I do not pay much attention to what is being said elsewhere, for real. So we take responsibility for not addressing some issues sooner. This should never be up to the readers.

  6. Patricia, would it be all right with you, if he makes your analysis here and upthread the topic at the next post? Many issues, very interesting.

    • Patricia says:

      Sure, Crane, but I would like it to include Part II that I just sent in.

      And OK to edit it down. Both parts = 3,700 words. (Because of the quotes, I started with over 8,000.)

      I would especially like The Professor to explain how witness testimony can be used, if you don’t use it all? etc.

      Even your favored witness will get something wrong in their first statement. Does that poison the well?

      Jurors love/hate witnesses. Such a tricky resource to use at trial!

  7. whonoze~~
    I pick your number three.
    3. Trayvon Martin was screaming in anguished fear of death because George Zimmerman was pointing a loaded gun at him at point blank range.

    I vision Trayvon on his knees in a praying position begging and screaming for help as Z had already told him he was going to die. There was an alterncation, possibly when Trayvon made an attempt to disarm Zimmerman. Trayvon’s fist did not connect with Z’s nose. I would be more apt to say it was the bullet casing pinging him on the snoot. This could cause a hairline fracture to Z’s nose. Z’s head was not pounded on the pavement a dozen times although it may have just grazed the edge of the sidewalk. Maybe Trayvon hit Z with the tin of iced tea, the only thing he had to defend himself. Z could have easily put the tea in Trayvon’s pocket when he turned the body face down. Trayvon did not cover Zimmerman’s nose and mouth. Zimmerman kept fabricating his stories to fit a SYG defense. In order to be a good liar, you must have a good memory. The truth is so much easier to remember and your account of the events will be the same each time you tell it.

    • What about the keychain flashlight? Why is it there, by itself, so far away from the body? Stumped at that. I have tried to come up with scenarios, but, was the light on? Which light was he using that night?

      On the smothering thing, I agree. No blood on the hands. The screams don’t match with someone who is smothered either. The abrupt stop of the scream, plus I think there may be some more expert analysis…I just think for a lot of reasons that TM was screaming for his life.

  8. Patricia says:

    To WhoNoze, Princess, Sandra, gbrbsb, The Professor and my fellow students –

    DUELING WITNESSES,
    DUELING WITNESSES?

    My quoting WITNESS #6 is not the same as saying he’s going to be a great witness. (“Were you lying then, or are you lying now?”) Or that they’ll call him.

    But the fact that he was willing to review his statements impressed me, and what he had to say answered this question that has long nagged me: “Where were the defensive wounds, on either Trayvon or Zimmerman?”

    As I heard it, WITNESS #6 isn’t throwing his 911 call into the trash can.

    He is saying (and I paraphrase wildly), “Look, it was dark out outside, and I may have interpreted the position of the top guy’s arms as delivering a beating, based on the stance I’ve seen on television, on MMA. Because on TV MMA, once you’re in that top position, you beat the crap out of your opponent. But in reality I didn’t see arm motion in the air, and it’s entirely possible that what I really saw was the top guy with his arms down, not necessarily because they just landed a punch, but it could be that he was in reality pressing down on the bottom guy’s arms to restrain him. Because I did see the bottom guy straining to get up.”

    We’ve asked on this site, “What the heck was George doing all the time he was wrestling with Trayvon, that Trayvon doesn’t have a mark on him?” In other words, couldn’t HE land a punch on the kid?

    Not if Trayvon had gotten control of Zimmerman’s arms – and when it comes to “reach,” the taller Trayvon would have had this singular advantage.

    In the interview, WITNESS #6 is asked about his knowledge of MMA. Only what he’s seen on TV. Ever wrestled? Never.

    Well, surely we all know by now that TV “wrestling” is scripted (they actually story-board the moves) to be visually brutal, as contrasted to Greco-Roman classic wrestling which relies on strength, leverage, etc. Further, the “man on top” position is favored, as it’s an easy camera angle. Gets very vivid shots.

    But it’s nobody was filming a TV contest that night. A life or death contest is what Trayvon must have felt he was in. If his only “weapon” was the ability to hold Zimmerman to the ground, that’s what he would use.

    But it would be more exhausting for Trayvon (who already spoke to DeeDee of his fatigue before the encounter) than for Zimmerman, and in the end the stockier, more muscular guy ultimately got the upper hand – and body.

    I noted also that de la Rionda scheduled the interview with WITNESS #6 to see if he recalled the sounds of punching or head-banging, and WITNESS #6 was firm in saying “No.”

    WITNESS #6 was the only witness who a stepped a foot outside during the confrontation (I think it was literally “a” foot onto his patio). He saw the grappling in two locations: grassy area, then moving over to the concrete. Much closer than anyone else.

    Later, from upstairs he observed Trayvon’s dead body in a solely grassy area.

    With the contact with concrete (or sprinkler head) so close to the final moments, it proves to me that the cuts to Zimmerman’s head were very late in the encounter (because
    (1) they bled in the direction consistent with Zimmerman leaning forward over Trayvon),
    (2) the blood outline was not washed off by any intermittent rain, and
    (3) the crisp blood outlines are consistent with Zimmerman NOT being under Trayvon at the time of the shot, because the coarse St. Augustine grass would have scrubbed off some or most of the blood and blurred the outlines, and also
    (4) the speed of coagulation for a young healthy male would be consistent with the scalp cuts (I’m tempted to call them “cutlets”) being just moments before the fatal shot.

    I bow to WhoNoze in all things related to sound technology. He is the master! Yes, there was a time gap when WITNESS #6 is inside, securing his door, trying to get up the stairs to observe what he senses could be a dangerous conflict outside – and, I think, his fianceé is on crutches trying to get up the same stairs – dialing 911 (in competition with others at that point, who knows if there was a delay in connecting?).

    So WITNESS #6 missed the shooting. And in that minute/seconds (WhoNoze is better equipped to ascertain the precise length of time; not my area of expertise) the wrestlers have moved onto grass, Zimmerman manages to mount Trayvon, pinning him to the ground unable to escape, snarl a few curses and shoot him through the heart.

    Frisk the body, flip it, frisk again, check out exit wound. Get up, wander a few seconds in consternation, back and forth to the body, with hand clasped to forehead (“How the fuck am I going to explain THIS?”).

    WITNESS #6 testified in interview as to how he saw the body originally placed (arms, legs). Other witnesses saw Zimmerman GET UP off the body.

    WITNESS #18 was upstairs the whole time. She testified how dark it was (“I didn’t see because it was too dark.” and how little she could see, But what astounded me was, at 4:17 into her 911 call she cried, heartfelt: “that young boy.”

    From her upstairs view, she could see that the victim was a youth!

    She was the first to discern that. (Other than the killer, of course.)

    She could also discern that the shooter was Hispanic, and stocky – again, remarkable in the night, although the arrival of flashlights may well have illuminated him.

    I am not writing my “term paper” on dueling witnesses.

    I report to you how WITNESS #6 put significant pieces of the puzzle together, and that they fit: (A) timing of the late sequence for the scalp cuts; (B) the restraint by Trayvon on Zimmerman’s arms that prevented swinging between the two and resulting lack of defensive hand injuries for both; (C) Zimmerman’s striving to rise from the restrained ground position (which he ultimately attained); and (D) How Trayvon’s body ended up in the all-grassy area.

    I am not a Medical Examiner. I have no clue if there would be signs of, say, a painfully-twisted elbow that would show up post-mortem. (I did see the video of the screaming detained youth in Vancouver.)

    Trayvon Martin was considered a John Doe. They had the confessed killer, the gun, and the fragmented hollow-point, which was the cause of death.

    His body was remarkably free of external trauma except for the fatal hole in his torso. What other “cause of death” would they look for?

    For the Murder 2 charge, would a twisted elbow matter?

    Zimmerman does state he had “wrist control” … whatever that meant.

    How both sides use the witness statements are up to them. Keep in mind that there are witness statements NOT YET RELEASED. More surprises coming down the track!

    I would always consider witness statements the least credible evidence.

    What O’Mara cannot dispute:

    (A) the photo of Zimmerman’s bloodied head that proves yes, he could EASILY escape, being in the dominant position over Trayvon Martin, but CHOSE INSTEAD to fire the Kel-Tec into Trayvon Martin’s torso, and

    (B) the trajectory of the 9mm hollow-point bullet that pierced Trayvon Martin’s heart and lungs.

    Professor, fellow students, that’s the end of my report for today.

    Thanks for reading.

    • Rachael says:

      Thanks for writing all that!

    • gbrbsb says:

      Patricia great story yet again. Are you a crime novelist? You should be because you really know how to put it together. I have many ideas, thoughts, theories etc. but am slow / long winded to write so by the time I get it down, corrected (I’m a real bad speller) and punctuated (I’m terrible at that as I tend to long sentences but they are difficult to control), the thread has moved… and that’s without counting the 6-9 hour time difference I have with most of you lot!

      • Patricia says:

        Thanks, gbrbsb

        No fiction – real life itself is is bizarre enough. Have written for decades; much is about life and death – dramatic enough that I don’t have to veer into fiction. Have Press Club and SPJ awards for investigative reporting, editorial, opinion and columns. Won a major award for a year’s coverage of the 2007 California wild fires. (Outrunning a wall of flame hones your writing skills.) I write on politics, war, terrorism, agriculture (I’m a farmer), land use planning, medicine, pharmaceuticals, and once, to be larky, covered an historic motorcycle exhibit (100 years of bikes) located half way between the US border and the Arctic Circle.

        I know zero about motorcycles – zip, nada, nothing. To me they were massive, powerful jewels, like Imperial Russia’s enameled Faberge Eggs, on steroids. The ancient ones, back almost to the Boer War, were in comparison leathery, rusted, tiny — like visiting a Veterans’ Home, talking to ancient, twisted warriors, the echoes of valiant battles about their frail shoulders. And so, fresh eyes on the subject won the top travel writing award that year for VROOM, VROOM, VROOM! (The Professor would love that one, but alas it’s locked within my old Mac.)

        I would urge you to write on any subject that interests you – 800 words every morning. Then that night, cut it to 400. Be brutal. Writing is not typing, Writing is cutting. A good writer is a fine tailor.

        Gbrbsb, I have always assumed you live in the UK. Hey – it’s the mother tongue! You already have the advantage. 800 words a day will make you a writer.

        We are all learning from this site. My two foci are:

        (1) The Professor is a truly thought-provoking writer with great craftsmanship, and

        (2) George Zimmerman is guilty of being the worst fiction writer in America. In the World!

        Thanks for your participation in this site, Gbrbsb, and for your generous comments. Much appreciated!

  9. Hello, everyone, while Fred works through comments on his screen in RSS, I will attempt to explain what I perceive to be a misunderstanding regarding some tweets about Fred.

    1. @rnsone upthread: I have looked at what I think are screen captures, and I am not convinced that you are referring to anyone at this blog, because the name spelling is different.

    2. Even if the name were the same, well, we all have a right to express things on twitter.

    3. Some of the things on the twitter feed about Fred are true. For example, he did defend a member of a White Supremacist group. He also was on the team of defenders for a notorious serial killer. He defended some individuals (2 former clients) who are currently on death row (not including the serial killer, ironically), and any number of other people with a variety of very serious felony charges. He defended, with a team, some individuals who were wrongfully accused of sex offenses. One of his former clients who was originally on death row is now off and will face a new trial.

    4. Fred’s father, Frederick Leatherman Sr., who died of Alzheimer’s disease in 1999, worked for the State Department. Therefore, due to his father’s work, Fred was born in Karachi, India. For a while, the family lived in Cuba, Nicaragua and Ecuador. Fred learned Spanish and English at the same time and is bilingual. It is entirely possible, given that Fred’s father, as a Foreign Service officer who traveled to, and lived in, many places, that, at some point in time, he encountered some family member of a Zimmerman SR (can’t remember which one the twitter feed said.). We have no idea of any connection, but acknowledge the possibility. He cannot confirm the names or origins of his distant ancestors.

    5. There appear to be some other assorted statements that are unrelated to his career and upbringing, and have to do with motive. The goal for this blog is in no way, shape or form to promote hate or ill-will among any group of people. Fred has intense interest in forensics, particularly, associated with felony charges, and that interest brought him to the case we have been discussing.

    6. That said, we hope the discussion can continue, and I think that everyone here realizes that, from time to time we will disagree with each other. Strong disagreement and debate are welcome, of course, but if we get personal, we lose our focus on the interesting issues and questions that arise in the legal case.

    7. If anyone has curiosity or questions about either of us personally, just ask. I think we are both pretty open, and if we feel that we cannot discuss something, we will say so.

    8. This thread is getting too long, so we hope to get a new one up- with that Fred might add something here. I really really hope, for real, that this answers some curiosity and clears some things up.

    That’s my .02! We had to go to an appointment today, so please be patient for a bit while he answers some things also.

    Also, I would like to thank people who referred me to those case sites. They are fascinating!

    • Patricia says:

      We are participating in a very unique forum. Frederick Zimmerman’s experience(s) are exactly what we need to lead us through the thickets. I don’t think ANY of your serious students have defected. If we lost a bozo or two, hallelujah!

      • Oh, thank you! Goodness, well, just trying to clear up some stuff here. If there ever was a connection, we have absolutely no knowledge of it. Fred’s father, for example, never lived in Lima, but whatever. Fred’s ancestors have nothing to do with the discussion at hand! LOL.

        Funny too. We live in a very small suburb of a very small town, and there are, believe it or not, two Fred Leathermans here. People have confused the two, called the other one, then contacted Fred, saying that Fred was a fraud, because he spoke to the REAL Fred, LOL!! You can’t make some of this stuff up. I write satire from time to time, and I can feel it brewing.

        Anyway, yes, back to the discussion and I hope the topic will be your analysis.

      • We live in a very small suburb of a very small town, and there are, believe it or not, two Fred Leathermans here. People have confused the two, called the other one, then contacted Fred, saying that Fred was a fraud, because he spoke to the REAL Fred, LOL!!

        @Crane

        I can understand that. My mother was from a small town and there was another lady there with the same first, middle and last name. They both visited the same doctors and used the same hospital. Staff at both places had to be very careful not to confuse the two. At times, even their mail got mixed up. Weird! lol

      • Digger says:

        I’m a bozo. HALLELUJAH! lol

  10. ajamazin says:

    Nelson grew up in Miami Beach, graduated from the University of South Florida with a degree in psychology and went to the South Texas College of Law in Houston.

    http://www.ktuu.com/os-george-zimmerman-new-judge-20120830,0,687506.story?page=2

  11. rachael says:

    For some reason, it won’t allow me to post if I have a link. What’s up?

  12. rachael says:

    Okay – now that I know that worked – This was supposed to be a response way up at top for SearchingMind – and since I am now having to re-do it, I don’t remember what I said, but it was about your lawyer not allowing you to commit perjury. I can’t remember exactly what my instructor said, but here is a link that comes about as close as to what I remember him saying:

    http://www.eiglarshlaw.com/lawyer-attorney-1113213.html

  13. rachael says:

    Testing – I just tried to post to something I previously said – twice! and it is not showing up – so this is just a test.

  14. EveryoneIsEntitledToTheirOpinion says:

    I pray that the Trayvonn Martin Family find justice for their child. Our legal system is so flawed it is shameful.

    Other countries mark of criminal justice system as real criminals play games according to political gain. Victim of crimes suffer with delay tactics in this country.

    How in God’s name did GZ end up with the same judge as his wife? Something is wrong with our justice system and GZ father (judge) is greatly assisting… Florida is corrupt… .just my opinion…

  15. whonoze says:

    The more I think about Patricia’s analysis, the more I find the idea that GZ had TM in some sort of painful ‘hold’ persuasive.

    We can ask: what would account for the KIND of screams heard on W11’s 911 call? There only seem to be 4 physically possible answers since there were only 2 people there:

    1. George Zimmerman was screaming in pain for reasons he is covering up with lies.
    2. George Zimmerman was screaming in pain for the reasons he told the police: Trayvon Martin was smashing his head into the ground and/or trying to smother him, and/or George was getting beaten in the face by Trayvon’s fists.
    3. Trayvon Martin was screaming in anguished fear of death because George Zimmerman was pointing a loaded gun at him at point blank range.
    4. Trayvon Martin was screaming in pain because George Zimmerman was hurting him physically.

    Due to GZ’s thorough mendacity we can’t totally discount #1, but there’s no evidence for it so we’ll leave it aside.

    #2 is essentially physically impossible by virtue of the nature of the sounds on the 911 call alone, not to mention GZ’s lack of serious injury.

    #3 is what I had been assuming, but in light of Patricia’s argument I’m thinking the particular tone of the anguish is not consistent with psychological terror. I’m not talking about the INTENSITY of the distress, but literally it’s tonal quality. Even in the height of abject fear, I think a person might utter more words, and clearer words than we hear on the recording. Not just “Help!” but “Don’t” “Please” “Don’t Shoot” etc. Instead it’s hard to make out any words at all. Audio forensics expert Alan Reich has argued that the words “I’m begging you” are audible within the screams. But the fact that they are not that clear suggests they were articulated through some physical distress. the majority of the screams are really more like howls, of the kind I might make when I drop a heavy tool on the infected ingrown toenail of my left foot (as I did the other day…)

    #4 not only matches the sounds themselves, but fits some conditions that seem to have been likely in the situation. In JohnW6’s 911 call, before IMHO he got ‘poisoned’ by suggestion, he describes the two men as ‘wrestling’, and all the witness statements taken together are more consistent with the men being quite close to one another on the ground, rather than some distance apart – even to the extent of one lying down and the other sitting up. The physical evidence from the autopsy and the examination of GZ suggests that this was not a struggle of blows at all, which leaves either not much struggle, or a struggle of holding and grabbing (i.e. wrestling) as possibilities. Zimmerman was able to obtain work as a bouncer. Barring the (plausible) possibility he lied his way into that gig without having any qualifications, bouncers generally have to know how to get a physical advantage on unruly patrons without permanently injuring them. Like, say, putting them in painful holds and asking them nicely to leave. I would also guess that Air Marshalls like GZ’s self-defense mentor Mark Osterman receive special training on how to gain physical control of unruly airplane passengers without permanently injuring them or causing potential harm to the flight or other passengers. Sounds like knowledge of ‘holds’ to me. It also just makes more sense that gung-ho vigilante that he may be, GZ would not go right to the gun, but would try physical restraint first. After all, it’s more manly and bad-ass c.f. Chuck Norriss.

    Of course, If GZ was inflicting physical pain on Trayvon Martin, there’s no self defense claim and he’s guilty of Murder 2, even if he did only draw his gun in response to something he interpreted at Trayvon reaching for it. I’m not denying the possibility he may have decided he needed to shoot TM to keep the boy from telling his side of the story. (I think that’s possible, but not really probable…) that would be Murder 1, of course, but it would be awfully hard for the State to prove, and they can get him put away for a very long time not just on Murder 2, but even on Manslaughter with the mandatory special circumstances under Florida law.

    So the question becomes, what additional evidence could support possibility #4, and do we think the State investigators will bother to go look for it. Are painful restraints part of Osterman’s skill set? Did he teach his moves to George? Did George have any other training in that area, formal or otherwise? (Martial arts courses?) Did George ever display abilities to put people in painful holds on any other occasion, either for real or even as a gag? What medical tests, if any, could reveal if someone had been restrained via a painful ‘hold’, and if such tests were not performed on Trayvon’s body at the autopsy, would his remains reveal any telltale traces if the body were exhumed for a more thorough investigation?

    • rachael says:

      Wow – thanks for this. I do hope the State investigators will look for something. I mean it seems pretty strange first of all that George having been a bouncer could not handle Trayvon if that were the case, but you are right, if he was the one holding him and hurting him, there goes his self defense. OMG!!! It makes so much sense. I do think that it could be a combination of both – hurting him and pointing a gun at him and godknows what he was saying to him at the time as well to elicit fear and pain.

    • Sandra E. Graham says:

      I agree. This is the closest scenario so far, IMO. and it may not be that difficult to find out. Can Osterman be trusted to give that information freely or anyone else in GZs circle of friends.

    • PYorck says:

      Until I read it here I never thought of a painful hold, but now I like that theory.a lot. My martial arts training was limited to some middle school Judo, but a good arm lock is an experience that you don’t forget easily. Assuming that Osterman really is an air marshal I am sure he has the necessary training.

    • Sandra E. Graham says:

      GZ probably said something like:

      Shut the f… up and
      You’re going to die tonight, motherf…….

    • Patricia says:

      WhoNoze, it has taken so long to get back to you personally. I am a slow methodical writer. My post last night created a LOT of on-line traffic, so it’s been hard to sprint ahead.

      What I wanted to ask you to do, is what you are now doing.

      As you noted, I did no analysis of what time would be available for cruel manhandling by Zimmerman.

      I was not the person to first consider that GZ was likely putting the pain on Trayvon, and I regret not recalling whose concept this was.

      But Trayvon screaming in both pain and fear is likely. Seems like GZ has relished causing pain in the past.

      You have the smarts, expertise and equipment. Can you analyse the 911-recorded scream and find our when the sound changed from help, help (reported by many), then the final scream? And tell us with all the technicalities that you do so well. Thanks!

      • logi says:

        oops I mean witness 11! He also has one about the loading gun sound VERY interesting better to watch it before the witness 11 video

  16. Snippets of interest….

    19 September 2012 at 09:00AM Shellie Zimmerman is ordered to appear in court to answer a perjury charge before Circuit Judge Debra S. Nelson – although that could change now, given that Judge Nelson has been assigned her husband GZ’s case.

    Source

    In the state of Florida it is not illegal if you do not report finding a corpse. However it is illegal if you tamper with the corpse or a crime scene.

  17. Snippets of interest….

    Zimmerman is charged with second degree murder for the killing of teenager Trayvon Martin. He is out on bail awaiting trial, and will next appear in court in October for a regularly scheduled docket hearing.

    Source

    The attorney/client privilege still remains even after the attorney no longer represents that client.

  18. Malisha says:

    Where is the mention of George Zimmerman having been attacked by someone in Virginia, in the past?

    Did I miss something?

    • Malisha~~I did hear that Zimmerman pushed an undercover cop during an incident in Virginia . To my knowledge, he was not attacked. Maybe I missed something too.

      • ajamazin says:

        “Manassa City Police Sgt. Eddie Rivera said one-time Manassas resident George Zimmerman was a victim of an assault in 2001, but he was never listed as an offender or suspect.”

        Regardless, of the facts, if Zimmerman was the perp then the victim made him do it!

        ________________________________

    • ajamazin says:

      Malisha,

      I have an excellent memory for weird and useless facts!!!

      Now where do I live…..

      ________________________________

    • ajamazin says:

      “Manassa City Police Sgt. Eddie Rivera said one-time Manassas resident George Zimmerman was a victim of an assault in 2001, but he was never listed as an offender or suspect.”

      • shannoninmiami says:

        zimmerman as a youth, was a victim of a “minor” assult. some kid could of blown a bubble and zimmerman could’ve gotten bubble gum in his hair. ( i got a pink slip on the school bus for my bubble!)

      • Malisha says:

        This wasn’t actually useless.

        To me, it is important because it adds to my theory of George as the person using massive projection to imagine he KNOWS what is in the other person’s mind. George adopted his position as a “victim” long before Trayvon bought skittles.

        • ajamazin says:

          The details of the incident remain unknown , apparently,

          It is stated that no info is available to determine if George was the victim or perp.

          In Florida, were he the juvenile [ >18 yrs old] perp, the record would be sealed.
          However, were he the victim, the name could be released.

        • ajamazin says:

          Malisha,

          George is employing a proven tactic, as I am sure you are aware.

          He has aligned himself with a popular “cause” to gain supporters – “attack dogs”.

          He elicits sympathy by identifying himself as the victim of unfair treatment and hateful attacks as a result of his work and actions to support the “cause”.

          He does this to secure the loyalty of his supporters – people who share the same weaknesses and character defects that he possesses.

          He then systematically creates “enemies” and loudly declares
          that these “enemies” pose an existential threat to not only him but the “cause”.

          He then coolly sets back and basques in his self righteous indignation, as he sends out his attack dogs to “seek and destroy”

          The demons are unleashed because he has been successful in creating the confusion that allows him to become the “cause”.

      • Sandra E. Graham says:

        …I want to take this opportunity to thank you , the masses…

        from:therealgeorgezimmerman.com

        • ajamazin says:

          Sandra,

          George was 17.

          George was a juvenile and protected by law.

          Of course, we will find no record of George charged with a crime, listed as an offender, or a suspect.

          NOTE: George was then quickly sent by his parents            to Florida.

          ________________________________

  19. “As long as I don’t see them doing anything, they’re on their own. But if I see them doing anything, that’s when I’m calling the law but I don’t follow them and chase them down,” Watkins told Action News.

    During a neighborhood crime prevention walk, Sheriff John Rutherford talked to Watkins about any issues or concerns in his neighborhood. Rutherford also reminded Watkins not to take the law into his hands

    Read more here…

    Sheriff wants Neighborhood Watch members to let his people handle crime

    • ajamazin says:

      Without question, Zimmerman failed to follow  the instructions/rules and chose to follow  his own impaired, faulty judgment.

      A society must have rules in place to prevent such disasters. People must follow them for the public good.

      No one can claim superiority.

      This is a sad reflection of our society.  

      ________________________________

    • TM says:

      Thank you for the Neighborhood Watch Program. It really tell us a lot, like Zimmerman overran the instructions and made his own way in authority AND still thinks he is going to keep doing the same through the course of his trial. It is going to have to be an unexpected turn in legality for me to believe he will be acquitted, yet, it does happen.

    • Vicky says:

      Even if GZ claims he was not acting in the capacity of a NHW patrol person that evening, the fact remains he received the training and was fully aware that LE does not want lay people taking on the responsibility of following, detaining or otherwise placing themselves or others at risk. He knew darn good and well, that getting out of his car and following Trayvon was in direct contradiction to the interest of public safety. His role as a “conserned citizen” ended with the call to the SPD, while within the safety of his truck.

      • princss6 says:

        I just can’t get my head around the thought pattern that you can follow and watch a kid. I think most adults understand how alarming it would be to a child to do that to a child. It really goes back to his objectifying Trayvon.

        • Lonnie Starr says:

          Even if we put the rules aside, GZ knows it is wrong to frighten anyone and he certainly knew TM was frightened by his actions. As a NW, he should have identified himself to explain that he meant no harm to TM. That is, unless he really did mean him harm.

  20. Okay, I will fool WordPress and post them separately…

    For those who wish to familarize themselves with the Neighborhood Watch, the following should be helpful. It will show you the things that Zimmerman did all wrong.

    NEIGHBORHOOD WATCH PROGRAM

  21. Fred~~my comment is in moderation. I have two links in the contents. Please let me out on parole… lol Thanks

  22. For those who wish to familarize themselves with the Neighborhood Watch, the following should be helpful. It will show you the things that Zimmerman did all wrong.

    NEIGHBORHOOD WATCH PROGRAM

    “As long as I don’t see them doing anything, they’re on their own. But if I see them doing anything, that’s when I’m calling the law but I don’t follow them and chase them down,” Watkins told Action News.

    During a neighborhood crime prevention walk, Sheriff John Rutherford talked to Watkins about any issues or concerns in his neighborhood. Rutherford also reminded Watkins not to take the law into his hands

    Read more here…

    Sheriff wants Neighborhood Watch members to let his people handle crime

  23. ajamazin says:

    Fred,

    We have previously spoke of Sunstein.
    Obama Information Czar Cass Sunstein Confronted on Cognitive
    Infiltration.

    The Joseph Goebbel’s approach to free speech.

    Filleted and Fried

    “If Joseph Goebbels was around, he’d be very proud of the Democrat Party, because they have an incredible propaganda machine,”

    Conspiracy theories are only dangerous because they are often true!

  24. Lonnie Starr says:

    Is there a distinction to be made about whether GZ had a right to be there?

    Of course, anyone who lived in the community had a right to be there. But the problem here is more than that.

    It’s whether GZ “had a right to be there for the purposes in operation at that time”.

    Normally, it would not be inadvisable for GZ to walk east on the walkway, or even to get out of his truck.

    But, when given the conditions and purposes that existed, GZ not only had no right to be where he was, to get out of his truck, or do anything that NW rules instructed him not to do, while performing NW tasks.

    Even a police officers right to enter your property depends upon the purpose he’s doing it for. Clearly GZ was not there for permissible purposes, like recreation or entertainment. Nor was he visiting anyone. The only reason he came to be in that place, was because a person he suspected had gone that way.

    • Rachael says:

      I’m kind of confused about the whole NW tasks things. To my knowledge there was no scheduled patrol and he claimed he was on his way to Target. But as the so-called “captain” of the NW, was he “on duty” all the time? I seem to remember his buddy Taaffe saying something about he was on patrol that night. He also claimed to not remember he had his gun on him (something I find quite odd for someone who is licensed to carry it and said they always have it on them except for when going to work). Was this because he knew he was not supposed to have it if he was on watch? Nor did he identify himself to Trayvon as being with the NW, though he did not identify himself in any manner that would make one feel comfortable about being followed and stopped by him.

      Was he acting as NW that night or not? Was his forgetting about the gun and not telling Trayvon he was with the NW and just checking things out because he knew he was in violation of the NW rules?

      I don’t know what any of this means, other than I’m confused.

      But Lonnie, I think your question is a little in a gray area. As a resident, he had every right to be there, but then, as a guest of a resident, so did Trayvon. I think GZ had every right to call the police about someone he thought was suspicious, whether his suspicions were reasonable or not. However, he had no right to follow him or question him after the police told him not to – that is their job, so that is what is gray to me.

      • Malisha says:

        I think it’s pretty obvious that Zimmerman accosted Martin.

        He gave every indication, in his NEN call, that he intended to do just that.

      • rachael says:

        @ Malisha – If your post is to me, I hope I didn’t give any indication that that was ever a question in my mind, because that is obvious. THAT part was NEVER a question in my mind.

      • As I just explained in a previous comment, whether GZ had a right to be where he was while armed with a firearm when he killed TM is not a relevant issue. The same is true regarding whether he was on duty or not.

    • Sandra E. Graham says:

      The Neighbourhood Watch was NEVER registered. So — was it even a NW Program in effect. There are pamphlets, there was a training session, GZ was a contact if someone could not get through to the NEN. But, the NW was never registered — no schedules, no list of volunteers.Under the eyes of the law – was he NW or not.

      • ajamazin says:

        George doesn’t know. He forgot.

        ________________________________

      • Sandra E. Graham says:

        That is correct. – He forgot to register and he forgot to contact the others in the complex who volunteered for NW duties. But, he did remember to canvas the neighbourhood with a clipboard writing out all kinds of details about the household. I wonder what the questions were:
        Dog – check
        Hours of work – check
        Scheduled holidays – check
        Alarm system – check
        Insurance coverage – check.

      • Sandra E. Graham says:

        I sure don’t know — maybe Joe Oliver can ask his good friend – GZs mother-in-law or GZs other friend Frank Taaffe.

        • Lonnie Starr says:

          It’s been quite a while since I read the NSA site, but if memory serves, I think they mention that NW programs can be set up by anyone, they don’t have to be registered, it’s just a nicety they hope for. They do say that most NW programs are set up and supervised by Police Departments, usually someone is assigned to the task of overseeing them. The NSA provides the materials needed to keep the NW both effective and within the bounds of lawfulness. It is their collected research and study that they are freely sharing to keep these programs from becoming another source of legal problems themselves.

          Community Affairs officers assigned to oversee NW programs, usually go to the NSA site and avail themselves of their information. After all, if something were to go horribly wrong, they’d expect they’d have questions to answer.

          In any event the RATL NW was set up and monitored by the SPD. We know from their own records (since moved elsewhere when they revamped their site) that GZ was required to attend a 14 hour course on NW and he did so. I sincerely doubt that if GZ had reported how his NW was being conducted, the community affairs officer would have approved of it. I think the CAO would have wanted to know who the membership was, who was on the notification trees, and who was doing what patrolling and how and when and where. But I don’t think that CAO was actively in pursuit of information, but rather passively waiting to accept it if and when it should be forthcoming.

          From the little I’ve been able to gather, GZ went the other way with any information, he kept no records, to schedules, no names etc., and only had a very informal organization working with him at their own pleasure. In short, it was a perfect situation for some ill intended ideologue to take over and pervert had they wanted to.

      • rachael says:

        @ ajamazin – here is one response – there are more on the page

        Best Answer – Chosen by Asker

        buying it from a dealer:
        it depends on the dose and how well you know the person. they can charge you a low price because you know they well or they can over charge you….ive heard of people buying $10 a pill! this is what it usually is:
        5mg- $1-3
        10mg-$2-3
        20mg- $ 3-5
        30mg-$4-7

        have a prescription and buying it at the pharmacy:
        it just depends on your insurance. some pay only $20 for a month supply, others $70 for a month.Also, theres a difference in price between the regular and xr, and different pharmacies can charge you more than the retail price. the prices below are the retails.
        adderall- 20 pills w/o insurance plan: $65.99
        adderall xr- 20 pills w/o insurance plan: $94.08

        Source(s):

        pharmacy tech

        http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20081117132737AAYWyPM

    • Whether George Zimmerman violated any laws when he went looking for TM while armed with a firearm are red herring issues.Ignore them.

      The prosecution must convince the jury beyond a reasonable doubt that GZ caused TM’s death while committing an imminently dangerous act and evincing a depraved mind indifferent to human life.

      Assume for the sake of argument that he had a right to be where he was when he killed TM (in the trespassing sense) and he could legally carry a concealed weapon while doing so, how do those two facts prove or disprove that he committed second degree murder?

      The answer is they don’t.

      George Zimmerman supporters have been yammering about this issue for months and it’s irrelevant.

    • Dennis says:

      On Zimmerman’s police call I could almost swear I hear him breathing really hard as if he is jogging or running. The testimony from Martin’s girlfriend and Zimmerman’s bogus claim for leaving his vehicle will show the jury that his motive for lying is the fact that Zimmerman was the aggressor and tried to detain Martin.

      O’Mara claims he wants to use standard self-defense now because he knows Zimmerman’s story is bogus. I believe he is basically admitting that Zimmerman was the aggressor. I think he will be focusing much attention at trial to the bogus claim of Zimmerman being beaten and had no option to retreat.

      • Lonnie Starr says:

        If GZ or O’Mara think that “going in the same direction” is going to work, they both need medical attention.

        It’s a clear case of “for the purpose of…” that controls how these events are to be viewed.

        1. “Looking for an address”: “For the purpose of?” “To tell the police where to meet me.” is the answer and it doesn’t work because, where he goes for the answer, is nowhere near where he even intends to be. Conclusion: He’s mounted a search for information he knows will be useless.

        2. “Going in the same direction as…” For a bogus purpose? Or, the alternative: to follow the person he has stated he has an interest in, because he suspects him of being a dangerous criminal? Why needlessly go in same direction of a person you believed to be possibly armed and dangerous? While you are armed yourself? After you’ve already stated that you did not abate the hostile atmosphere you created, because you believed it unwise? You have both training and a contemporaneous reminder from the police, that no further action is needed on your part, other than to meet with the officer already en route.

        It’s a high hurdle to jump over, this placing oneself in danger, after being told it is not necessary and knowing it is not what you are supposed to do. Let alone forgetting that you are armed yourself, when entering a potentially dangerous situation. That falls into the category “Thou doth protest too much!”

  25. ajamazin says:

    I recommend “Cognitive Infiltration” by David Ray Griffin.

    He was Cass Sunstein’s professor at Harvard and is his most effective critic.

    Or read:
    http://www.salon.com/2010/01/15/sunstein_2/

    Sunstein has stepped down but his plans for “social engineering”
    remain in place.

    • Sandra E. Graham says:

      By the time a trial takes place, if ever, remember Napoleon, one of the great self-promoters (GZ has a Napoleon complex personality, doesn’t he)………..history is just a series of lies agreed upon.

      • ajamazin says:

        Sandra E. Graham,  

        Word!

        Why do we hear nothing of his most recent myspace page – “dat niggy tb”?

        He was posting on it at the same time he was setting up the first “THEREALGEORGEZIMMERMAN” website.

        And sure, I believe that “TB” was short for TugBoat and not Trayvon Benjamin….

        ________________________________

      • Sandra E. Graham says:

        Here we go again. I am 10 steps behind you. I remember that guy. Now, I have to go back. You must have everything in files at the ready or your memory is better than GZs.

      • Sandra E. Graham says:

        Found it —- yah right – Tugboat because of his size.

  26. Malisha says:

    George has a muddled thought pattern (probably even a diagnosable “thought disorder” but maybe he has never been professionally evaluated) so I can’t really figure out what he thinks, but what he thought at any given time might not also inform what he thought an hour or two later or the following week. I think he “thinks” what he needs to “think” to keep his ego functioning.

    Clearly, what he thought about the crime he committed was that it should not have been a big deal. After all, he already EXPLAINED it to all these people who keep pestering him about it. Isn’t that ENOUGH ALREADY?

    But turning to the issue of defense strategy, I see it as two-fold:

    1. Get the public into a condition to accept a plea deal that would otherwise really cause massive indignation and rage at our “justice system”; and

    2. Force his client to plead out to something and accept some prison time, after which he can get out of prison using some kind of ruse that doesn’t have as much publicity as did the crime and the prosecution.

    As to number 2, I should tell a story from past experience.

    A guy named Michael Clott set up a series of frauds in the Washington, DC Metro area in the 1980s involving scamming Iranian immigrants who had brought big money out of the Shah’s Iran and who were here with scammable assets. He went to prison and then got out on parole.

    Immediately he set up a new scam targeting lower-to-middle-income African American families in PG County, MD, and got 45 of them to participate to the point where they lost their homes. The boom fell again and he was arrested and pled guilty. He then was sentenced and went to the federal penitentiary.

    The earliest he could have legally gotten back out on parole again was in 2008, and yet I found out in 2001 that he was long gone and that all his records as a federal prisoner had been — get this — ERASED and ERADICATED. The only records of him that remained were the conviction, the sentence itself, and ONE DOCUMENT that showed that a certain federal marshall had transported him from a Maryland prison to a different prison in the South. The folks who erased his records forgot to erase the transport from one prison to another in the shell game they took part in to “disappear” the felon so he could go to the Grand Caymans and assume his new identity and do his thing. Three big law firms were involved in the scams that he operated: Miles & Stockbridge from Baltimore, Ross & Hardies from Chicago, and even Williams & Connelly from DC! It was an astounding set of circumstances — without going into detail, let me just say that a made-for-TV movie could not have involved more improbable and ridiculous events.

    He pled.
    He was sentenced.
    He was freed.
    No talk about how it all happened after the second step (sentenced).

    So yes, I believe George will plead to something and this will all go away. Maybe he’ll take his web-page money (probably now being collected by someone Mark Osterman meets on his flights) and go live with Michael Clott in the Grand Caymans. And he will still pack heat.

    • ajamazin says:

      Malisha,

      How many times was it reported that Bin Laden was dead?

      ________________________________

    • Rachael says:

      George has bitten off more than he can chew. He has now become a judicial political pawn.

      • ajamazin says:

        Rachael,

        I think you have that confused.

        ________________________________

      • Sandra E. Graham says:

        George is not the pawn. From Day 1, he has played the system. And, you know what —– so far, he is winning!

      • rachael says:

        I don’t think he is now. I think now he has no chance of being granted immunity and he now has a judge who sentenced someone to 27 years for not taking a plea. He has himself wedged into a corner by his own manipulation. And I can’t say that I’m the least bit unhappy about it.

        He may have been “winning,” but I think his “luck” has run out. I have to get my thoughts together to explain it, because I think there is too much on both sides they don’t want to come out, so George has nowhere to go but to prison, but – I’ll think about how I want to say this.

    • princss6 says:

      “I think he “thinks” what he needs to “think” to keep his ego functioning.”

      Profound. I love your analysis. Thank you. I think this is evident in how often he changes what he says…he is ALWAYS searching for the right answer. Just reviewing his testimony…he first says he didn’t tell police he was sorry then he says he did and he just goes back and forth. Asking him the same question twice will likely yield a different response as many have noted. Going back up to digest the rest.

  27. ajamazin says:

    George has already told us that he choose to murder someone of no value.

    He reportedly said thought it would “all blow over” in a couple of days.

  28. Justkiddin* says:

    Professor I have been coming here for a couple of months to read and participate. In all of my years this is not something I have ever done. I think you and your wife are very intelligent caring people. I realize you cannot comment all day long, nor can I. With that said the young people that do contribute are very intelligent and make me wish I were 50 years younger so I could have maybe made a difference in people’s views. Living on a farm there is not prejudice, hate or discrimination. Although the cows always seemed to thing they were better than the pigs. 🙂
    I do hope before I go and meet my maker that people will soften their hearts to our children and remember they will learn what they see and hear. When I go to the community center and pack food for poor children I do not see just one color or one Nationality. I do not really understand how one group believes their children are more deserving of living or being treated fairly than another group.
    Not sure I have a point other than regret because I did not travel out and see what was going on under my nose. I do encourage the children at the center to love and respect each other. I also have oodles of respect for everyone that contributes here at your home. I wish my brain could still function and think like theirs do. You will all see eventually it starts to slip. It amazes me how well you all work together to figure out why Trayvon had to die. I believe he is looking down and very proud even though in life he did not know all of you he does now and he appreciates your heart. He probably appreciates the fact so many people care that his life was taken so soon. I also believe he appreciates the fact this group is not so willing to declare him a thug. No one wants to be judged.
    I am not trying to speak for him because I do not know him, but I do know children and all they want is love and acceptance. Thank you all for making me feel welcome here become I do not have the knowledge you have. Things were different in the 20s 30s and 40s than they are now. Be grateful for who you are and what you have because it will slip and then you will be me. A little old lady who has no clue what has been going on around her.

    • Zhickel says:

      Damned uppity cows 🙂

    • Just kiddin:

      .You have a lot of wisdom.

    • Rachael says:

      You are beautiful.

    • @Justkiddin

      Wonderful & wise.

    • GrannyStandingforTruth says:

      @JustKiddin, I can relate to everything you’re saying and agree with you. My people were raised on farms too. I lived there for awhile myself and at one time thought about moving there permanently because of the serene atmosphere. The people in the country are laid back, calm, and live a simple life. People in the country will give you the shirt off their back. Their good people. The food tastes better. They’re not in a rush to do anything like we are in the city because they take one day at a time. I loved the way that people passing by each other speak, wave, or blow the horn to greet each other, regardless of color. That’s something that does not happen in the city, but in rural areas it does. People are too skeptical and wary of each other in the city and in some cases with good cause depending on what part of the city you live. My family owns a thousand acres of land, with cows, pigs, chickens, horse, and all along with a few properties. Some is in Louisiana and the other is in Arkansas. Nevertheless, I chose to live close to my children and grandchildren. Besides which, the heat in the country was too hot for me and having to stay cooped up in the house during hot days would drive me stir-crazy.  I’m an adventurous person in a sense with many hobbies who likes to get out every once in a while, meet people and explore, so I changed my mind. 

  29. Rachael says:

    Here it is from a Russian perspective. Kinda interesting:

    http://english.ruvr.ru/2012_08_30/Will-Martin-Zimmerman-case-ever-end/

    • Zhickel says:

      That article is only interesting if used as an extreme example of ad hoc Anglo-Russian translation by algorithm.

      It starts off almost, but not quite right. The middle is confused and the closing paragraph is:

      “At first, the police that, as the journalists found out, were involved in the corruption and racism -related scandals refuse to bring the killer before justice, and then the court takes absurd decisions, ignoring the evident attempts of the defendant to delude the investigators. It is not clear though how the authorities plan to benefit from the prolongation of the trial. Should a non-guilty verdict be handed down to Zimmerman who is facing 30 years in prison at the minimum, irreparable damage will be done to the image of the U.S. system of justice. However, watching the conduct of the authorities, one is under the impression that they are ignoring elementary logic.”

      A bit zany eh?

      • Rachael says:

        Yes, it was the ad hoc Anglo-Russian translation by algorithm that I found interesting – perhaps almost humorous, but 20 years as a medical transcriptionist will do that.

        The zany last bit was interesting though because I agree with it. I’ll change my name to Zany.

      • princss6 says:

        @Rachael – it seemed to me that the “zany bits” were the bits not discussed in the American media, i.e. Sanford PD’s history of corruption and abuse.

    • EveryoneIsEntitledToTheirOpinion says:

      Excellent view by the Russian news…

  30. Pooh says:

    Judge Debra Nelson went to Thurgood Marshall Law School at Texas Southern University, which is a historically black university in Houston, Texas.

    http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/2012-08-30/news/os-george-zimmerman-new-judge-20120830_1_george-zimmerman-trayvon-martin-mark-o-mara

  31. Zhickel says:

    Fred, I haven’t had a chance to thoroughly read all comments to this post, so apologies in advance if what I say is a repeat of something previously posted.

    I’ve made a point of reading the blogs and posts of your detractors and a couple of things stand out like the proverbial dogs’ balls:

    1.They take Zimmerman’s statements as fact.
    2.They conveniently forget or ignore the fact that there were two people involved in this altercation and one cannot tell his side of the story. He is dead.

    To be so utterly convinced and adamant that George Zimmerman is telling the entire, unvarnished truth about the encounter, without entertaining the possibility of him lying drives me to conclude:

    a) They are lacking basic logic and reasoning skills
    b) Have an agenda to push

    I think the detractors fall roughly 50/50 into the above categories. Of the 50% who are furthering an agenda, I would say the agendas are split roughly two ways;

    i) Supporters of gun rights
    ii)Supporters of white supremacy

    When boiled down, these last two categories of people are the ones who want to silence you. To do so they resort to using examples of cases you have argued professionally to lock you into a position.

    This is a ridiculous position for them to take; for all of their professed knowledge and information they neglect the fact that you took an oath to perform your duties to the best of your ability. As a lawyer you had no choice but to give your clients the best defence you could. To do otherwise would have been an abrogation of your profession and duties.

    To attempt to hold past cases against you now is not only incredibly stupid, it demonstrates an utterly woeful knowledge of professional standards.

    If you need further assurance, just compare the activity and number of comments on the Harlequin thingy’s blog with your own.

    Best wishes.

    • Thanks for the information breakdown.

    • princss6 says:

      Hmmm – that dratted American History always interferes when we try to compartmentalize instead of draw circles ha! I would Venn Diagram your i) and your ii) and say that there is very little area on the circles on the right and left of those that are mutually exclusively supporters of gun rights OR white supremacist. Those two things are intertwined too closely to neatly dissect.

      • Kyma says:

        I agree a GZ Supporters Venn Diagram juxtaposing Gun Rights advocates and white supremacists would have extreme overlap in those those circles, I’d argue to the point of irrelevance in de-categorizing the two as exclusive.

        I wonder if we were to make one circle gun rights advocates & white supremacists, what the other circle of GZ supporters would be to compare against? Obviously, not all GZ supporters fit into those circles, but I can’t find another generalization in GZ support camp that merits an honest comparison…

        Makes you wonder how many Zimbots honestly want to know the truth of what happened and care for justice.

        To me, here’s the real comparison of all people following this case, and why were running into to bullies:

        Truth seekers/Rational thinkers vs Ulterior motives seekers.

        • princss6 says:

          We’ve grown very familiar with them over the years – The Rush Limbaugh constituency.

        • ajamazin says:

          I would like to add that Stand Your Ground is but one component of self defense.

          Zimmerman’s defense is protecting SYG by its attempt to disassociate and thereby preserve,  and is rewarded by donors who are supporters/members of  the NRA and ALEC.

          ________________________________

      • Xena says:

        @princss6 “… very little area on the circles on the right and left of those that are mutually exclusively supporters of gun rights OR white supremacist. Those two things are intertwined too closely to neatly dissect.”

        Sovereign citizenship. It’s roots are intertwined in white supremacist, and it has infiltrated, taking advantage of appealing to others regardless of race in its agenda to unseat the federal government. Many of GZ’s fans convey the theories and arguments of sovereign citizenship (some I suspect without knowing it), including;
        1. Only local LE had authority to arrest GZ. The State and federal governments have no jurisdiction.
        2. The court has no jurisdiction over GZ and should dismiss the case sue sponte.
        3. Common law allows citizens to take matters into their own hands.

        • ajamazin says:

          Are you suggesting a group of closely knit people are using the concept of Sovereign Citizenship to stage a coup of the US government?

          Is that why George is so smug?

          ________________________________

      • Xena says:

        @ajamazin “Are you suggesting a group of closely knit people are using the concept of Sovereign Citizenship to stage a coup of the US government?

        Is that why George is so smug?”

        This reply may very well go beyond answering your question, so please forgive me for being traumatized by my experience with them — not that I was ever a part of them — but I was approached, (very innocently), then recognized an underlying agenda, refused legal research and proofing docs for one of them, and then was targeted, threatened, and victimized by their efforts to, as they stated “wish I had never been born.”

        I cannot say why GZ is smug, but can say that all sovereign citizens I have personally met are disrespectful. Timothy McVeigh believed in SC, if that gives you an idea of being smug based on their strong belief that they are right.

        Sovereign citizenship beginnings are rooted in Posse Comitatus, which was founded by White Supremacists. Florida and Texas are states where the movement is gaining recruits, albeit unaware of where the theories and arguments derive.

        (quote” Resort to the posse comitatus figures often in the plots of Western movies, where the body of men recruited is frequently referred to as a posse. Based on this usage, the word posse has come to be used colloquially to refer to various teams, cliques, or gangs, often in pursuit of a crime suspect … sometimes without legal authority. (end of quote)

        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posse_comitatus_(common_law)

        Does that sound like GZ and his buddy Taaffe?

        Sovereign citizens often want to violate laws or come right up to the line without crossing it so they accomplish one of two things:
        1. Not receive consequences, which sets in their minds that the government lacks jurisdiction over citizens or
        2. Be arrested giving them standing in court to challenge the court’s jurisdiction over citizens.

        They have their arguments memorized. From a false hypothesis, they build their arguments so that it is time consuming tearing down each brick to get to the foundation.

        They will apologize so people will let down their guard, and then they betray that trust by doing more wrong, then mockingly call the person an “idiot” and revealing their apology was only to allow them opportunity to “get even.” They make up wrongs, just as they postured my refusal to provide them with research and clerical help as a wrong — “You’re either part of the solution or part of the problem” — repeated to me endlessly. They are relentless, continuing their fight until they get what they want, or you take their power from them.

        Their methods and logic of their arguments are the same as I’ve observed with most GZ fans. What they are doing to the Professor makes me disgusted. They prey on fear. One way of conquering that is to realize that no one listens to or believes them besides their own and others of their ilk. It may draw one or two others, but they are nothing more than someone to do the dirty work for them — gang initiation.

        In the 1980’s Posse Comitatus appealed to Midwest farmers unable to pay their debts. In the late 2000’s, they took advantage of vulnerable homeowners facing foreclosure in Florida.
        http://www.heraldtribune.com/article/20110730/ARTICLE/307309989

        On their theory that paying federal taxes is unconstitutional, they attracted people who had not filed income tax returns. Actor Wesley Snipes bought into the SC tax theories. He is now serving time in prison.
        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Reference_desk/Archives/Humanities/2011_May_18

        Also see:
        http://www.splcenter.org/get-informed/intelligence-report/browse-all-issues/2010/fall/sovereign-citizen-kane

        quote: “The “sovereign citizen” movement is a loosely organized collection of groups and individuals who have adopted a right-wing anarchist ideology originating in the theories of a group called the Posse Comitatus in the 1970s. Its adherents believe that virtually all existing government in the United States is illegitimate and they seek to “restore” an idealized, minimalist government that never actually existed. To this end, sovereign citizens wage war against the government and other forms of authority using “paper terrorism” harassment and intimidation tactics, and occasionally resorting to violence.” (end of quote)
        http://www.adl.org/learn/ext_us/SCM.asp?LEARN_Cat=Extremism&LEARN_SubCat=Extremism_in_America&xpicked=4&item=sov

        They are opportunists, using anything to draw others into believing their arguments. Thus, the case of GZ is nothing more than a spring board for them for recruitment purposes.

        • ajamazin says:

          Xena.

           “Are you suggesting a group of closely knit people are using the concept of  Sovereign Citizenship to stage a coup of the US government? ”

          If you are not, then I am. And it is my opinion.

           A conspiracy is nothing more than a plan involving 2 or more people to do something  unlawful or harmful. 

          Theories of conspiracy are used by investigators to solve crime.

          The RICO Act employs the concept of conspiracies.

          There is nothing inherently wrong with  conspiracy theories, but some would like TO LIMIT OUR RIGHT TO FREE SPEECH and make the discussion of conspiracy a  crime. [refer to Cass Sunstein]

          I will not be intimidated into silence and I doubt you will be.

          ________________________________

      • Sandra E. Graham says:

        ajamazin and Xena :

        Bravo – can you hear me clapping – Bravo

  32. GrannyStandingforTruth says:

    Wow, Patricia, that was an excellent post!

  33. Patricia says:

    To the Professor and our class —

    THE WITNESS,
    THE STRUGGLE,
    THE BLOOD,
    and THE GRASS

    Working as in investigative reporter a few years back, the cardinal rule before using any disclosure is that two sources must concur, to verify the information. I continue to follow that process during the Zimmerman investigation.

    There is a surprising amount of documentation – including transcripts, audiotapes, videos, forensic evidence including the weapon and fatal bullet – and a defendant who admits he filed the fatal shot.

    But we do not have a credible eyewitness to the gunshot.

    Only two people saw what happened: Zimmerman whose motivation is clear: to escape conviction for Murder 2, and Trayvon Martin, who cannot witness because he is dead.

    Mainstreamfair posted 8/29 “…the reason O’Mara changed his strategy. He wants to take the focus off Zimmerman being the aggressor. The evidence points to Z being the aggressor and it is very unlikely he would win a SYG. Mark is now going for self-defense immunity and wants to prove that Z was on the bottom of the altercation and used deadly force because he feared death or great bodily harm and could not RETREAT. I am not sure the latter will work but it is Z’s only hope of getting immunity and have the case thrown out. O’Mara is using every bit of ammo in his arsenal.”

    Mainstreamfair is CORRECT:

    Convincing the jury that Zimmerman is “the guy at the bottom of the heap” is their ONLY chance for Zimmerman to go free.

    Forensic evidence opposes this: the TRAJECTORY of the bullet, which would prove that if the weapon was fired while both men were on the ground (as Zimmerman claims), Zimmerman must have been ABOVE Trayvon for his arm to be in the position to fire and accomplish this trajectory.

    I expect the prosecution to have two men, in matching height and weight to GZ and TM. who will demonstrate for the jury BOTH positions: firing from above (which would work) and firing from below (which can’t work).

    REQUEST: Professor, please advise if this demonstration would NOT be permitted by the court.

    Of course, GZ is welcome to play himself in the both scenarios …

    I expect the Medical Examiner will report on the trajectory and have large diagrams up on the screen for the jurors’ reference.

    The Sanford PD re-creation videos should be shown, again with the performers proving it could not have happened the way Zimmerman claims.

    But O’Mara (or Zimmerman’s remaining attorney) will bring forth witness testimony before the shot, stating Trayvon Martin was “the guy on top” – as he was for the observed minute JUST BEFORE the shooting.

    How and WHEN was Zimmerman able to reverse this position and gain the dominant one?

    [Note that the testimony of TWO witnesses have not yet been made public: Witnesses #4 and #7. There are some bombshells yet to come!]

    Note also that I will direct you two sources to review, which reference diagrams drawn by witnesses, and to my knowledge those drawings have not been made public by the authorities – so, we continue to struggle.

    First, please go to the Axiom Amnesia Website for its sector that is entirely devoted to the Zimmerman prosecution. See site for WITNESS #6:

    http://trayvon.axiomamnesia.com/people/witnesses/witness-6-files-trayvon-martin-george-zimmerman-case/

    Listen to the recordings of WITNESS #6 with his 911 call (Call #4). and the follow-up interview by John Bachelor, Special Agent, FDLE, and Jim Post of the State Attorney’s Office, 18th Judicial, and the later interview by Bernie de la Rionda for the prosecution.

    Also, I am indebted to our co-student, “Brown,” for providing the following link, and to WillisNewton@BccList for assembling the large file (538 pages) with index, transcripts and previous court hearings, which Brown sent this past week:

    Click to access 12-3198_Appendix.pdf

    On pages 31-46 (29-44 in the index and printed at the bottom of the pages) is the 45-minute interview on 3/20/12 of WITNESS #6,, the ONLY known witness to step out and interface with the struggling Trayvon Martin and George Zimmerman on the night of the shooting – before the shot was fired.

    I believe that the jury will be impressed by WITNESS #6. He is credible, intelligent and forthcoming. He is careful in his depiction of what happened that fatal night.

    But what strikes me the most, however, is his report on the THREE final locations for the battle: grass, to concrete, to grass.
    The final, “to grass” is where Trayvon’s body lay.

    You will recall that this is the witness who originally described Trayvon Martin seated on George Zimmerman and pounding him “MMA style.”

    Now, in this long and reflective interview, he changes that view. States that all he knows of mixed martial arts is what he’s seen extensively on TV, and that he’s never been a wrestler himself.

    [Interjecting my own comment, I think we all know that TV wrestling and related video violence is scripted for maximum action from a VISUAL viewpoint, not for effective battle.]

    Away from the stress of the event he has had time to reflect on what happened, and ELIMINATE conclusions that he felt he could not have accurately made, due to the darkness of the night.

    Striking about this testimony is that he repeatedly emphasizes Zimmerman’s continued ATTEMPT TO RISE to the dominant position.

    This cinches it for me.

    We know Zimmerman had the weight-strength advantage, we know he went to the gym, and we know he had experience as a bouncer.

    None of the other witnesses have been able to describe any of the on-the-ground wrestling because WITNESS #6 was the only witness to go outside and call out to them (“Stop! What’s going on? I’m calling 911!”).

    WITNESS #6 also describes Trayvon Martin, while in the dominant position, with his arms down, in a restraining position holding Zimmerman’s arms at bay, and in the de la Rionda interview replied that he heard NO sounds of punching and banging.

    This explains why neither Trayvon’s or Zimmerman’s arms or hands were injured (save for a quarter-inch abrasion on Trayvon’s ring finger) and no Zimmerman blood was found on Trayvon’s hands or wristbands of his hoodie.

    This “wrestling match” was, in fact, a desperate holding pattern by Trayvon while WITNESS #6 observed him, with Zimmerman trying to get up into the dominant position.

    Note these quotes by WITNESS #6 about Zimmerman on the bottom:

    “… there was a guy on the bottom that seemed like he was pushing up …”

    “I can’t tell if he was making eye contact with me, or if he was just trying to get up from the bottom … But it does look like he was trying to get up, while they were both wrestling each other.”

    “I could see there was a another man, in a lighter colored shirt on the bottom, who looked like he was trying to get up at that point … “

    “I’m not sure if he was holding on to the guy on the top or if he was trying, ‘cause I only see one guy at first. Um, it looks like the other guy was trying to get up because, I mean, his back was raised off, uh, the ground at that point so it looked like he was trying to get up at that point but I don’t know if they [GZ’s hands] were on the other guy’s sweatshirt or if he was, you know, trying to actually push off of him … “

    So, WITNESS #6’s description of “just two guys out here wrestling” always stresses Zimmerman’s effort to gain the dominant position.

    What does he have to say about Trayvon Martin, whom he once described as meting out MMA-style punches?

    “I don’t know if they’re, you know punches that are bein’ thrown at him at this point or if he’s tryin’ to hold him down … I don’t know if he’s trying to hold him down or if those are actually, you know, punches … “

    “ … and that’s when I made the statement that that he was hitting him … It coulda been him just trying to forcefully hold the guy down … I can’t see that close to where they were actually at, but he was still on top with both hands, uh, either trying to hold the guy down or hitting him at that point … “

    “ I can’t truly see how close, you know, they were to each other, if he was hitting him or if he was trying to hold him down in that position until the cops got there … “

    “ … but like the first statement I made, I did say he was hitting him from the top. Or he could have been trying to hold him down, you know, I really truly can’t tell at that point … “

    “ … at that point whoever had the advantage was the guy wearing the black shirt [Martin]. There were no, um, punches at that point or any hands flail, you know, in the air. It was just more of looked like it as wrestling … “

    “ … thinking back on it, you know, it coulda just been him trying to hold him down, too and keep him secured. … “

    In the next recorded interview, Bernie de la Rionda asks him solely about two elements: did WITNESS #6 “hear any punching sound?” (socking his hand emphatically so WITNESS #6 knew what he was talking about), and “when they were on the concrete, did you hear any sounds of a head or body part being hit on the concrete?” [paraphrased] As you will hear in the recording, WITNESS #6 gave de la Rionda two definite “NO” answers.

    Also, you will hear in the prior recording John Bachelor asking, “At any time where they changes positions can you see anything in either one of them’s hands?” WITNESS #6 says “No.”

    The witness describes a traveling wrestling match from just outside his patio up to the concrete dogwalk, then he dashes back inside to call 911 (as he had yelled at them he was going to do), locks the door before heading upstairs, hears the shot (“like a rock”) looks out the upstairs window down at the fight scene while he’s talking to the 911 dispatcher and describes Trayvon Martin’s dead body sprawled out, fully in the grass below – away from the concrete dog walk.

    All of this backs up the forensic evidence, photos, testimony (except for Zimmerman’s testimony), etc.

    This was a grappling wrestling match with both on the ground. Witnesses reported Trayvon on top as did WITNESS #6 who was closest to them – but he had left the scene at the time of the shot. WITNESS #6 describes Zimmerman in a “white or red” shirt below Trayvon – other witnesses describe Zimmerman over the body in a “white” shirt. Under his jacket in police photos Zimmerman wears a light grey shirt. Not “dark.”

    Ever wonder why there were no hand injuries for either Trayvon or Zimmerman? Trayvon, with the longer reach, was effective in keeping Zimmerman’s arms pinned to the ground.

    This was Trayvon’s wisest move. He couldn’t take his own hands off Zimmerman’s arms (say to “smother” GZ, hold his hand over Zimmerman’s nose/mouth, to crack Zimmerman’s head against the concrete dogwalk like a cantaloupe or ANY of that Zimmerman-fantasy stuff) because Zimmerman would gain the use of those hands against Trayvon.

    Zimmerman’s “back of the head cuts” (2) obviously happened either scraping on the concrete or dragging across the sprinkler head installed contiguous with the dogwalk – JUST BEFORE they hit the last patch of grass where Zimmerman, in a last push, was able to gain the ascendancy — and Trayvon Martin was shot to death.

    How did Zimmerman do it? He had the strength and training. He likely freed one hand to get one of Trayvon’s arms in a painful lock (you hear the screaming), reversed their positions — and now straddled his victim.

    Zimmerman was on top. Proof is in the photo – the fresh-cut blood began to flow from the top of the back of Zimmerman’s head, forward across his cheek, to settle in the goatee on Zimmerman’s chin. Untouched by the wet grass on which he had struggled before.

    The “bleeding head” was the next-to-last incident. Not splashed by rain. Not wiped and smeared by the St. Augustine grass below. Crisp margins from quick coagulation.

    Zimmerman’s final sequence was drawing the Kel-Tec, shooting Trayvon Martin through the torso, then frisking him for the weapon he hoped to find, flipping him over, checking for the exit wound, then one last frisk for a holster and weapon on Trayvon where he, himself carried his gun.

    Trayvon Martin was unarmed.

    Zimmerman declared he had shot him, and, “It was self-defense.”

    Many of you believe that Zimmerman would have drawn his gun earlier. I can’t see that. It may be, that as a gun owner and a hunter, I know better than run over open ground (in the dark, yet) with a loaded gun. I think Osterman would have trained him well on that point.

    I think the first encounter between Zimmerman and Trayvon happened when the vigilante demanded “What are you doing around here?” grabbed at Trayvon’s shirts, Trayvon’s arms flew up instinctively and his elbow caught Zimmerman in the nose.

    Before that Zimmerman was not ready to draw a gun on the “suspect” and hold him for the cops — big trouble doing that.

    He expected to “exert his authority” without, unfortunately and stupidly, announcing just what his “authority” was.

    Trayvon wasn’t going to go along with this dangerous creep, and I expect when Zimmerman went down after getting his nose cracked, he grabbed at Trayvon and they started this grappling on the ground, with Trayvon getting control of Zimmerman’s arms, pinning them to the ground..

    The interviews of WITNESS #6 have filled in the pieces of the puzzle for me.

    I now have the validation on why both their hands were uninjured, and how the two small cuts on Zimmerman happened – on the concrete, or on the Rain Bird 1800-SAM Spray Head contiguous to the dogwalk – just before Zimmerman got the ascendancy and straddled Trayvon Martin in that final grassy space.

    Otherwise the blood would have smeared on the wet grass if Zimmerman were “the man underneath.”

    As Mainstreamfair posted 8/29 “… O’Mara changed his strategy … Mark is now going for self-defense immunity and wants to prove that Z was on the bottom of the altercation.”

    O’Mara will fail in that attempt.

    The bloody photo of Zimmerman’s head puts the lie to that claim.

    • kyma says:

      Excellent post. This really connects a lot of dots for me. I had not considered the rain and how that played into the blood on the back of his head. The grass would have been wet and smeared the blood. Establishes that at no time AFTER THE HEAD INJURY was GZ on the bottom while they struggled in the grass. Fast coagulation, blood dried downward on his head, no grass on the back of his head mixed with blood stains.

    • whonoze says:

      W18 was watching the struggle when the gun went off, and she’s a hell of a lot more credible than W6. She says GZ was on top.

      W6 was not on the phone with 911 when the shot went off, or any time near that. Over a minute passed between the shot and his 911 call.

      I’m not sure your hypothesis accounts for the length and intensity of the screams. Could GZ have put TM in a hold that would cause that much physical pain without leaving any traces that would show up in the autopsy?

      Hmm. It occurs to me that the SPD may not have played W11’s 911 call for W6. He says he heard a cry for help, and indeed GZ could have cried for help BEFORE the screaming (by TM) started. (And W6 saying ‘I’m calling 911’ isn’t on the recording either, so probably before, since other witnesses heard him say it). Odd they haven’t asked W6 to correlate what can be heard on that recording with what he saw and when he saw it, eh?

      • princss6 says:

        and she’s a hell of a lot more credible than W6.”

        Agreed

      • gbrbsb says:

        Something that niggles me is how W6 describes the “helps” he heard.

        He describes “help, help, help”, (short sharp calls in quick succession, which are not “screams” in the strict sense of the word, but they are the same as those GZ claims he did and the same as those he carried out for his voice test (“help me, help me, help me” etc.) which fit with what GZ was claiming, (i.e. “help me, I need your help”, while the “helps” on the 911 tape are nothing like that rather desperate drawn out wailing cries/screams which I have always thought could only emanate from deep physical pain such as an arm lock and not from a mere plea for someone to to and “help”… I know what I mean but not sure I explained it well enough!

        Unfortunately I lost track of a video I found on youtube months back of the police using an arm lock or similar to detain a suspect whose screams were so identical to those of the 911 tape it was really eerie.

        • ajamazin says:

          “Help, help, help……Take my gun”

          Get my gun and shoot him?

          ________________________________

        • W6 has zero credibility, AFAIAC, because he recanted a very detailed and dramatic description of an event (I.e., TM was throwing down blows MMA style) that did not happen.

          Since he was willing to do that, I would conclude that he is not a reliable witness and ignore everything else he said.

      • Sandra E. Graham says:

        do not trust W6.

    • Sandra E. Graham says:

      …he was pounding and pounding my head on the sidewalk – I thought my head was going to explode,
      …he had his hands covering my mouth and nose and I couldnèt breathe,
      …I yelled help, help, help and no one helped,
      …I told someone to help me, he is killing me
      …he was reaching for my gun and I had run out of time so I shot him.

      Reasonable fear (question mark)

      • Digger says:

        “So I shot him” just as non-chalant as if saying “I swatted a fly”
        I don’t think it is reasonable fear because he would demonstrated that Trayvon had both hands on his head, banging and also has both hands over his mouth and nose so that means Trayvon would have had four hands, five if he had another one reaching for the gun. Wow!

      • ajamazin says:

        Sandra,

        Who are we to judge what is “reasonable” fear for another person?

        Herein lies the problem!

        George was the “victim” of an “attack” of an undisclosed nature while still living in Virginia.

        Could this be his trump card?

        ________________________________

      • @Digger

        “So I shot him”

        I noticed that tone immediately. He doesn’t even blink. He says it with such ease.

      • Sandra E. Graham says:

        George had a reasonable fear about his ability to get a fair trial –
        New judge appointed.

        George had a reasonable fear that he could not stay in his home – in his state — and he was allowed to leave.

        Reasonable IS in the eye of the beholder and, yes, it appears some agree his fears ARE reasonable. The ones who mean a whole lot to him — the judicial system.

      • Sandra E. Graham says:

        George has alot of smugness, confidence, and is playing to the audience so well that, just like his co-worker – he had him doubting himself after he had made a complaint about George. People are focusing WAY too much on facts and not nearly enough time on TRUTH.

      • Sandra E. Graham says:

        Does the jury see the videos or do they just have the transcripts available IF entered into evidence. You are watching the reenactment —- will the jury. Words printed on a piece of paper do not show the emotion or lack thereof. Then I shot him. That could sound different in every jurors mind.

        Was it reasonable to shoot out of fear of great bodily harm. Not bodily harm – FEAR of great bodily harm.

      • @ajamazin

        What’s up with you? Don’t put words in my mouth. I am not inside Zimmerman’s head to know why he said it with such ease. But I do have ears and they work.

        • ajamazin says:

          SG2,

          “What’s up with you? Don’t put words in my mouth.”

          What words did I put in your mouth?

          And “What’s up with you?” is how we now preface a disagreement?
          ———————————————————————————–
          George was ” surprised” that his killing of Trayvon did not “blow over” in a couple of days.

          I think why all have an opinion why George might think that.

          Fred writes:

          “He thought Trayvon Martin was expendable, a statistic no one would miss or care about, if he died.”

          SG2 replies to me, not Fred –
          “The key word is “thought”.”

          However,

          SouthernGirl2 says:
          August 26, 2012 at 9:53 am

          “”He thought Trayvon Martin was expendable, a statistic no one would miss or care about, if he died.”

          “So did the Sanford Police.”

          and in response to:

          Deborah Garner-Moore says:
          August 26, 2012 at 1:09 pm

          “Race is definitely a factor…….”

          Southern Girl 2 responds:

          @Deborah!

          Speak on it!

          I will not ask you, what you asked me:

          “What’s up with you?

      • Rachael says:

        @ Digger says:

        August 31, 2012 at 9:28 am

        “So I shot him” just as non-chalant as if saying “I swatted a fly”

        It leaves me speechless.

      • gbrbsb says:

        Ajamazin, do we “know” GZ was a victim of a previous attack or are you just putting it out as an idea? I can’t remember hearing anything about one but it could have slipped past)

      • @ajamazin

        You bet I commented to Deborah to speak on it about race because YOU called her comment boring and repetitious. I see you very clearly. You cannot the pull the wool over my eyes. I’m too old a cat to be called a kitten.

        • ajamazin says:

          SG2,

          Please do not resort to lies and personal attacks.

          Here is the comment and I made no such reply.

          Deborah Garner-Moore says: August 26, 2012 at 1:09 pm “Race is definitely a factor. Does anyone believe that if this kid was white that the SPD would have not arrested GZ on the spot? Would the SPD have handled this entire case the way that they did? Would they have made an effort to investigate and locate the parents of a white kid by checking the cell phone for numbers, knocking on doors in the complex? When the parents made a call to the SPD Missing Perons Unit and the father described his son, did it ever occur to the SPD to check the morgue? How many teen black boys are in the local morgue in Sanford? The SPD did a piss poor job in this casse because they didn’t care about this black kid or the fact that he was shot. He could have sat in the morgue for six months if his parents did not demand to see him and ask for his body to be released. Lord help us all. I would rather reside in NYC with all of the craziness here.” Do not lie about me!

          ________________________________

        • ajamazin says:

          @Frederick Leatherman!

          Flagged the comment by Southern Girl for  lying about me and a personal attack.

          ________________________________

      • @ajamazin

        I know what I read. And I am through discussing it. ***mute***

      • @ajamazin

        No one is attacking you. They’re your own words and I responded to your comment with this “No one is making up racism and ignoring it is part of the problem”.

        Check it. What do I have to gain by lying on you?

        • ajamazin says:

          SG2,

          Twisting and turning to fit your agenda.

          Good luck convincing anyone I denied or ignored  racism.

          I have maintained the opinion from Day 1 that  Trayvon’s death was seized as a political assassination  to create racial tension due to the 2012 presidential race.

          It is now all about Obama and the fact that many in the US refuse to accept that a Black man is president.

          ________________________________

      • GrannyStandingforTruth says:

        Ajamazin, flag Southerngirl2 for what? Because you did make that statement tp Deborah on the “Why did Zimmerman Kill Trayvon” topic.

        ajamazin says:
        August 27, 2012 at 7:22 pm
        Boring and repetitious.

        ________________________________

        • ajamazin says:

          And that would somehow change my core values?

          Wrong comment by Deborah.

          I made that reply [and I stand by  it], only after too many boring and repetitious comments in the  same vein , in MY opinion, that added nothing.

          Charges of racism will soon lose its sting if overused.

          It is far too easy for some to be turned off  by trigger words.

          Why shout when a whisper can be more effective? 

          ________________________________

      • @ajamazin

        I don’t have to twist anything. You wrote the response “boring and repetitious” to Deborah’s comment that you posted below. I’m not trying to convince anyone here of anything. Own what you wrote. My only purpose here is to join in the discussion and stand in solidarity with the Martins as they seek justice for their son. What’s yours?

      • Sandra E. Graham says:

        ajamazin – There are some who do not go to other blogs, sites, YouTube, etc. to see how this case is a hot political issue. There is none so blind as those who will not see.

      • Sandra E. Graham says:

        ajamazin — it is that simple — sad, but true..

      • GrannyStandingforTruth says:

        Ajamazin, you are just a baby under me, my children are twenty something years older than you. Therefore, I don’t expect you to understand racism and how it deeply embedded in our country it is or how it effects every facet of life for people of color. You see, we’ve begged, marched, protested, whispered and tiptoed around racism before you were even conceived in your mother’s womb and it still hasn’t ended. Well, it’s like this, I’m a old woman now, but I’m tired of singing that song “We Shall Overcome One Day.” And believe me no one is more tired than me and people of color who experience racism every single day, so all I have to say to you is that when racist get tired of being racist, I’ll get tired of speaking out against it. Until then, I refused to be silent!

        I’m tired of being pacified with make believe justice and equality.

      • @Cielo

        How about everybody chill out and focus. These dang threads are hard to follow and misunderstandings are bound to happen.

        Yes ma’am.

      • EdgySF says:

        “And I tried to silence you?  Only a racist would believe that”

        Why so fiesty?

        The irony is that the GZ supporters promote the same argument.

        FYI, reverse racism cannot exist because only the powerful can oppress.

        The oppressed aren’t powerful by design.

      • logi says:

        I agree about witness 6.
        Ihttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gzPYD5sKx08&feature=channel&list=UL

        This makes CRAZY sense!

      • GrannyStandingforTruth says:

        ajamazin, I come here seeking truth, justice, and to have a MATURE, civil, intelligent conversation. Let me explain something to you. I am a woman that is plainspoken and that stands every inch of ground I walk on. Therefore, no one on here has to guess or wonder or get it secondhand, nor does anyone have to speak in my behalf and tell anyone what I think because I am very vocal in voicing my opinion or thoughts. I do not chew on my tongue for anyone not on the Internet or in person. And I believe what I stated was done with simple clarity for any MATURE adult to understand. BTW, I meant every single word I said. Furthermore, you are not qualified to define me. So, you can take that kiddie game and play it with someone else on this blog that will fall for it. However, I’m not the one! Now, I’m moving on, and you should do the same, that’s if you can, which I doubt because you haven’t arrived there yet.

      • GrannyStandingforTruth says:

        Ajamazin, see I told you that you wouldn’t be able to do it. You did not let me down. Btw, do you speak to your grandmother like that? Do you make snarky sly remarks to your grandmother when she’s firm with you? Do you call her special (retarded)? I know you didn’t think that you were talking over my head, but then again, I guess you did. I love it when people underestimate me, yes I do. 🙂 Thinking that they have a copyright on intelligence.

        I haven’t disrespected you or called you out of your name. So why do you choose to call me out of mine? Oh, but I guess denigrating remarks are a pattern with you towards your elders, AJA. So can we call a truce and move on, or do I need go into more detail about the games people play? Because I’m sure it would disappoint some unsuspecting folks on here.

    • EveryoneIsEntitledToTheirOpinion says:

      Excellent…

    • Sandra E. Graham says:

      Patricia – Great post but one3 question remains unanswered

      WHY would Zimmerman want to detain Martin.

      No one answers that burning question. As much as everyone wants to think of Zimmerman as a bozo, he is not. He knew Trayvon was not a thug and Trayvon would prove that when the police arrived.

      But, WHY would Zimmerman want to detain him —thug or not, Trayvon had done nothing.

      • You said,

        “He knew Trayvon was not a thug and Trayvon would prove that when the police arrived.”

        I do not agree with that statement.

      • Sandra E. Graham says:

        Why (question mark)

        • ajamazin says:

          Sandra,

          Here is your very own question mark

                                    ?

          Copy and paste it onto a notepad which you then save  as UTF 8.

          Here are some others you might like: ★ ❤ ™  ©  ® ▲-△-

          ________________________________

        • Patricia says:

          Sandra, don’t forget Zimmerman profiled Trayvon.

          Zimmerman is the kind of putz that would think “”I’m not a racist, but one young black burglar means all young blacks are burglars.”

          I’m thinking one of his “heroes” tipped him off that there was a lone black male on the street and that set Zimmerman off in hot pursuit.

          He seemed very concerned with exhibiting authority during the SPD interview. He so desired that respect!

          He though he could confront the young black male, and by exhibiting his “authority,” the YBM would stop dead in his tracks and “surrender” – then when the cops arrived he could then hand over the “suspect” and get kudos!

          Zimmerman was so wrapped up in himself that he couldn’t imagine that the LAST thing a YBM – a teen, at that – would want to do would be to “surrender” to some creepy. older. fat dude with a Fu Manch goatee who was likely a sexual predator … or worse.

          Would any of YOUR kids ever surrended to Zimmerman under those circumstances?

          Not MY kid!

      • Sandra E. Graham says:

        I spilled coffee on the keyboard a while back and the only key I can’t get going is the question mark. I have saved it thanks to you for caring! A question mark is sometimes necessary because I sometimes get in trouble for making a statement rather than posing a question Thanks again.

      • Sandra E. Graham says:

        masonblue did not agree with my statement and that is were the Why? should have been placed.

        From masonblue: You said,

        “He knew Trayvon was not a thug and Trayvon would prove that when the police arrived.”

        I do not agree with that statement.

      • rayvenwolf says:

        @Aja: And when would he have had time for that? Stalking generally requires a lack of a life and even better a job. GZ had at least one of those. Also if Trayvon was aware enough to spot GZ the night he was killed he would have noticed him before then.

      • rachael says:

        Yes, patricia, I agree.

      • ajamazin says:

        Sandra,

        “But, WHY would Zimmerman want to detain him —thug or not, Trayvon had done nothing.”

        Exactly!!!!

        • Lonnie Starr says:

          Unfortunately my handicap is: Why would GZ want to even pursue a teen he knew he had frightened, if not to identify himself and put the teen at ease? A rational view by GZ of his own NW responsibilities, should have been that he did not want to cause people to fear for their lives on his account.

          Being black, I’ve been approached many, many times, by security people of many stripes, who merely wanted to know why I was, in an area they believed I did not belong. Many times it was simply that I did not fit the stereo type of the people who were attending the function. Many times, even as a guest of one of the principles, I found myself being questioned. Sometimes a principle would intercept, sometimes not. A few times I even found myself removed from the function, until one of the people noticed I was missing. If security is “thickheaded” resistance is not just futile, but can lead to tragic/unacceptable results, so, to avoid that possibility, I’ve learned to go along and find other ways to remedy matters.

          But in the most important cases/places where this kind of thing happens, security, if not uniformed, will identify themselves almost immediately. Since they don’t want to be the source of trouble themselves.

          Zimmerman isn’t uniformed. I’m sure his NW training explained how his actions could be mistaken and what kinds of tragedies could, needlessly ensue because of it. GZ’s narrative indicates he has strong knowledge of what his NW responsibilities are according to the rules. Yet, he gives no thought at all, to abating the hostilities his own actions are creating. He knows, by time he’s on TTL, that he is causing TM great concern. He knows that he has witnessed the youth committing no crime!

          So then, why does he persist in treating the matter as though, TM is a known and dangerous criminal? Why doesn’t he know or realize that surveillance only “works” if he goes undetected?
          …And finally, if he thinks TM is too dangerous to be approached for any reason, why does he attempt a course that risks putting himself in proximity to him?

          • Patricia says:

            Lonnie, keep in mind this is “all about George.”

            He’s not keeping the word safe for humanity, he’s pissed because somebody carted off his bike and his BBQ that he left on his patio. Ergo, that somebody had to be “a black guy.”

            He lived in a racist-leaning town with a racist police chief. His whole life he had never gained the measure of respect that he had seen others given. He wanted that.

            He thought if he were a cop, he’d have “authority.” He couldn’t hack the academics. He thought he could grab a “suspect” and get instant recognition. He had NO CLUE that this kid was not “a suspect.” He was young and he was black.

            That was all GZ needed..

            George profiled.
            George sentenced.
            George executued.

          • ajamazin says:

            Lonnie Starr.

            It is insupportable that you should be forced to make concessions because of the ignorance of others.

            I believe that Zimmerman realized that he would face humiliation
            the moment that the police arrived and Trayvon spoke.

            He clearly knew the young man was no “thug”, and for that, Zimmerman had to silence Trayvon :

            And what did George do?

            He shot him and then sat on Trayvon’s back to squeeze
            the last breath of life from the young body.

      • ajamazin says:

        SANDRA,

        Trick question!

        And the oppressed becomes the oppressor.

        • Patricia says:

          To Sandra – I did reply to you re: “Why?” Please let me know if you did not get the post and I will try to dig it out. It’s been a busy day.

      • Malisha says:

        Sandra Graham, I think your problem in understanding George Z is that you are normal, think normally, suffer from no thought disorder or disorder of emotions, and therefore come to pretty sound, ordinary, non-paranoid conclusions about normal, ordinary circumstances that you perceive around you. So you use your own thinking process, which is a sound one, to try to evaluate George’s behavior, and you ask, “He knew Trayvon was not a thug …[so]…WHY would Zimmerman want to detain him …[since]…Trayvon had done nothing.”

        You are normal.
        This is a normal question.

        Problem is, George was a person with a badly distorted thinking process, and he did not think like you. He started from a conclusion he wanted to believe and worked backwards, forming conclusions about the data around him based on what he WANTED to think and based on what he WANTED to believe — NOT about Trayvon Martin, but about HIMSELF.

        Here’s how it probably went:

        I am a hero.

        I am a necessary part of this community, which needs to know that and needs to respect me and acknowledge my importance.

        Without me, this community will be in BIG TROUBLE.

        For instance, if I don’t do what the police are failing to do, that is, if I don’t apprehend bad guys when the police fail to apprehend bad guys, the community will be in BIG TROUBLE.

        I have to apprehend a bad guy. NOW.

        There’s one. [NOTE: He does not have to figure out why Trayvon is a bad guy; he needs to apprehend a bad guy and therefore, whoever shows up and fits into George’s already impaired thinking process IS A BAD GUY by definition.]

        Call NEN. Tell them about the bad guy. (brrrring brrrrrring hi, there have been break-ins, etc……)

        UH OH he’s getting away. Now I have to solve THAT problem and I have to apprehend the bad guy so he doesn’t get away.

        “Shit, he’s running.”

        “These assholes; they always get away…”

        Then he gives chase, then he catches up, then he tries to apprehend the bad guy. WHY? NOT because Trayvon was doing something — because George had a fantasy in his mind, and this actual human being who was a living, breathing person was not an actual human being or a living, breathing person to George; to George, he was simply an object in George’s very disturbed world of “object relations” — to George, he was just “bad guy” and needed to be apprehended by big hero George.

        😦

        • Patricia says:

          Malisha, Sandra –

          Malisha brings up a point that I have meant to comment on.

          So, THANK YOU Malisha!

          Basically we all see Zimm as a loser and putz (for good reason), looking for glory to lift him out of his putzhood state

          But I think he had a vastly ELEVATED consideration of himself. He just knew he had certain powers and could get away with things.

          What was FRUSTRATING to Zimm was that hardly ANYbody shared Zimm’s idea of himself as a “superior being.” I can think of two: the grandmother who raised him (the “Cristina” in the tattoo), and Shellie. Shellie verbally dotes on GZ (his sister also – add her to the list) because she knows GZ needs this. And he’s probably pretty truculent if she doesn’t keep feeding him this line of adulation.

          You know how ornery pigs can get if they’re not fed their slops …

          This frustration that the world out there just wasn’t “getting it” that George Michael Zimmerman was a superb human being, so intelligent (“What do those stupid college graders know?”) so respected, so powerful — lead him on this recent fatal scheme to FINALLY make all the dumkopfs in this world take notice of George Zimmerman and give him the respect to which HE IS ENTITLED.

          “Narcissism is the only ‘ism’ for me … ”
          (“Petulia” by John Haase, 1966)

      • Sandra E. Graham says:

        Malisha – Thank you for paying me the compliment of being normal. I understand exactly what you and many, many others are saying about George and his warped mind. That is all well and good. But —- at the end of the day — what do you believe was in Georges mind when he left the car. Was he thinking to kill Trayvon or to detain him. OK – as many have said, he didn’t want to kill him, he just wanted to hold him until the police arrived. WHAT!!!!! If he only left his vehicle to detain him, what would he have told the police when they arrived. Ah… here’s your suspect. No. He may be strange — but most of you are underestimating his intelligence. Even in his own strange mind, he would have had a story about why he was detaining him. Trouble is, Trayvon would too. He left his vehicle for one purpose and one purpose only. I thank you for your assessment of me, but, you missed my question entirely.

        What would GZ have said to the police if Trayvon was only detained and not murdered. I am not a nuclear physicist but I do have my wits about me.

        • Patricia says:

          Sandra,

          One of Zimmerman’s problems was that he was impulsive and didn’t think about the consequences of his actions. Remember his getting fired for bugging the HR department of his previous job, complaining about everybody? Remember cutting off his mother’s power – locking it off? Picking up and throwing that woman in his bouncer days? The guy just has no mature judgment. Age 28 is no kid. An 8-year old would we more reflective than Zimmerman. With GZ, it was what satisfied George’s interest and ego AT THAT MOMENT that counted.

          Zimmerman not a racist?
          He could NOT comprehend that Trayvon – due to his age, gender and race – was not a criminal.

          A goon.

          A punk.

          An asshole.

          What more does Geiorge Zimmerman need to tell you?

          His mind was made up.

      • Sandra E. Graham says:

        Patricia – I couldn’t agree more except I do not believe he left his vehicle to detain Trayvon or to let the police know where he went. He wouldn’t even tell the police where he went. They would have had an easier time finding Trayvon because he already told them he was headed toward the back entrance. If I were the police, that would be the entrance I would drive to and call GZ when I arrived at the rear entrance. Yeah – You’ll see my truck. Its the one with the keys in it.

        • Patricia says:

          Sandra, just checking because I don’t understand.

          Are you saying that GZ did not leave his truck to detain TM?

          I am certain GZ’s intent was to follow him and detain him on-site then proudly hand him over to SPD.

          Probably hoping to find him peeking in windows and GZ could claim TM was casing the joint.

          Remember GZ identified TM in writing his police report (sworn) as “the suspect.”

    • gbrbsb says:

      Great work Patricia! Three questions spring to mind that I have been ruminating about for some time:

      1. Do we know if GZ was examined (emergency or doctor/PA) for bruising/red marks on arms, shoulders, neck, etc.?

      2. Ditto Trayvon by pathologist

      3. Do we know if Trayvon’s arm and shoulder joints were inspected and tissue tested for signs of stress/damage? (I may be wrong but even if only in a hold for seconds I would think some muscle/cartilage stretching would show (bruising develops post-mortem) and I recall learning once how bodily fluids and/or chemicals rush to any site put under extreme stress and imo at least one of those 911 screams emanated from sheer excruciating physical pain… an armlock?!

      • princss6 says:

        Serino seems to suggest in one of the interviews that GZ’s “defensive wounds” amount to nothing. The pathologist and the funeral director seem to be indicating that Trayvon’s body was pristine except for the gunshot wound. I have no answer for question 3. I would guess since it was not noted, nothing superficial was noticed. Since nothing superficial was noted, no more specialized testing was done. I wonder as a general rule are bodies x-rayed. That may be an indication but it doesn’t appear to be the case.

      • Xena says:

        @gbrbsh. When Trayvon’s heart was torn to pieces by the hollow point, circulation stopped in his body, thereby eliminating the possibility of bruising. I also suspect that GZ had Trayvon in a cop-style restraining position and if not mistaken, GZ told Serino in the 2/29/12 interview that he had a wrist lock on Trayvon as GZ took his gun out of its holster. Since Trayvon’s phone was found so close to his body, I question whether GZ was actually “disarming” him of the phone as opposed to preventing him from reaching a holstered gun on his butt in the dark.

        The question is, how would this benefit the prosecution? It is my impression that they already have forensic evidence that proves GZ’s entire story of Trayvon opening a can of whip-arse on him is false.

      • gbrbsb says:

        @Xena. Makes sense no circulation/bruises but I really hope you are right about the prosecution having the evidence to refute GZ’s fight story BARD as I am not so sure and it really bugs me.

        About the phone, has it ever been clarified how Trayvon’s head set came to be in his pocket and if there were any of GZ’s fingerprints/dna on it or on on his phone.

    • hinkster4ever says:

      You hit it out of the ball park, Patricia! High fives!

    • mataharley says:

      Patricia: Convincing the jury that Zimmerman is “the guy at the bottom of the heap” is their ONLY chance for Zimmerman to go free.

      Forensic evidence opposes this: the TRAJECTORY of the bullet, which would prove that if the weapon was fired while both men were on the ground (as Zimmerman claims), Zimmerman must have been ABOVE Trayvon for his arm to be in the position to fire and accomplish this trajectory.

      Not entirely true INRE forensics. Weren’t we discussing objective and subjective above? :0) So allow me to play devil’s advocate to your subjective theories for a moment, because I believe you are placing impossible burden on the State, and thoroughly complicating what doesn’t need to be complicated. After that, I will give you another version that actually incorporates a lot of Zim’s accounts.

      Zim’s CVSA storyline states TM was “putting his full weight” on him, covering hands and mouth before going for his gun.

      This places TM in a position somewhat prone/parallel to Zim on the bottom…. leaning forward with his weight. If Zim was able to reach his gun, grab TM by his shirts and pull him down closer on to him to fire, the bullet can travel a straight trajectory.

      Of course the problem with this is Zim saying that he extended his arm out past his own hand (likely grabbing TM’s shirts) to fire. So while it’s possible for that trajectory, Zim undermines his own story for that moment in time. A jury, however, is likely to chalk that up to a person under duress, who doesn’t remember it correctly detailed.

      What is beyond question is that a struggle is not static, so a bit of rolling around to get the gun is not only likely, but necessary if he were on the bottom anyway. It’s also highly likely that who held the upper hand on the fight often switched between the two. But the bottom line is that the trajectory is entirely possible, under some circumstances, with TM mounted on Zim. And that’s all the defense needs to say.

      Now, is it “likely” may be another story for jurors. A jury is apt to at least believe pieces and snips of Zim’s stories, if not all. So this is what the State has to work with.

      Zim says he was on his back. He had wet grass on his back, documented by the LEOs. Obviously Zim had to be on his back at some point in the fight and this supports him telling the truth. Good luck to any prosecutor, attempting to prove at what point in the fight that happened.

      However the State might also have the jury consider that at some point in that fight, TM was aware of the weapon (as even Zim says), which is why he was yelling for help. In fact, it’s entirely possible that Zimmerman could have been restraining and pulling TM down to him by his shirts while on his back (as the trajectory supports) and thereby making it impossible for a screaming TM to get away.

      In other words, Zim is on his back (as he says), fires off that shot, but is still the aggressor with the upper hand in the fight at that moment. TM, who is being clutched by this guy who may (or may not) be waving a gun around, is struggling to get away and yelling for help.

      This fits with Zim’s stories, but with a twist… leaving out that “restraining” TM bit.

      So the State has room to muddy Zim’s claims as not being entirely true for the moment of the death, but even that will be difficult beyond all doubt.

      Patricia: Zimmerman’s “back of the head cuts” (2) obviously happened either scraping on the concrete or dragging across the sprinkler head installed contiguous with the dogwalk – JUST BEFORE they hit the last patch of grass where Zimmerman, in a last push, was able to gain the ascendancy — and Trayvon Martin was shot to death.

      The problem with the “scrape” theory is that the injuries are lacerations, which are jagged splits (as opposed to a straight cuts like a knife, razor or a sharp edge). Lacerations are generally caused by pressure/impact… i.e. hitting something.. and cracking/splitting the skin unevenly. While his injuries don’t support a serious head banging on concrete, they also don’t fit a “scrape” either by their jagged shape and depth.

      Again, INRE the blood, I will have to point out that it was off and on rain that evening thru the next morning. And altho FL pointed out that you can detect blood stains that are not visible chemically, that was not done (to our knowledge). Nor did the investigators specifically know where to apply such a chemical test at the crime scene. We are talking quite a distance from the tee to the body’s final resting site so I’m under the impression investigators sprayed the entire path down, looking for blood stains they didn’t know were there, or would be important.

      As for the blood flow indicating a bowed head, this also isn’t difficult to explain. Were he on his back, on wet grass, there wouldn’t be blood trails on his head, but perhaps smeared blood from the head moving side to side on the grass. Such a motion might actually act as a clean wipe instead of a smear on his head.

      After the gunshot, the head would continue to bleed as the capillaries are close to the surface in the skull. If Zim were mounted on TM… as he (and witnesses) state he was… the blood would then flow as the trails in the photo indicate.

      The blood flow is a non issue and proves nothing either way. But it does lend more credibility to Zim’s own post gunshot account, and it is easily explained.

      So far you’re doing a lot to help MOM here.

      Patricia: I think the first encounter between Zimmerman and Trayvon happened when the vigilante demanded “What are you doing around here?” grabbed at Trayvon’s shirts, Trayvon’s arms flew up instinctively and his elbow caught Zimmerman in the nose.

      …snip…

      Trayvon wasn’t going to go along with this dangerous creep, and I expect when Zimmerman went down after getting his nose cracked, he grabbed at Trayvon and they started this grappling on the ground, with Trayvon getting control of Zimmerman’s arms, pinning them to the ground..

      I seriously doubt there is much the State can do to recreate – with any certainty – how the fight went down after the encounter. Especially if they attempt to lay out a story that is completely contrary to everything Zim has stated. IMHO, it would be foolish for them to even try.

      Nor is it needed. As I said above, you’ll have to run under the assumption that the jurors will believe that Zim’s story has some truths to it as a foundation to his narrative.

      And what would be the purpsoe of nterjecting theories of Zim, grabbing TM’s shirts at the first encounter? As FL has pointed out from forensics, for the bullet holes to be perfectly aligned in the shirts, and lower than the entry wound, the only relevant grabbing had to be occurring at the moment he fired the gun.

      So why increase the State’s burden to prove that Zim grabbed TM’s shirts to detain him twice in this encounter? Unless, of course, you are trying to argue that it never happened at the tee but at the site of death.

      But then, what will you do with the evidence that doesn’t support that theory? From the tee to the body is a lot of distance for an entangled struggle/fight to travel in such a short time. Ergo, some sort of pursuit had to have happened to end up there, The debris path and the extended argument witnesses speak of support that pursuit

      Again, you are complicating what doesn’t need complicating, and is likely nigh on impossible to prove.

      Another unwise tactic is suggesting it was Zim who was being pinned. Once again, you are helping the defense. That would lend more credibility to the cries for help being Zimmerman. In your theory, Zim was the one being restrained by TM and didn’t have the upper hand.

      While we will never know, definitively, who was that voice, were I a jury member I would believe it is the cries of the one being restrained and losing the fight… not the one who was – for that moment at least – in control of it. Talk of Martin pinning Zim and you might as well start collecting a paycheck from MOM. Nor is there a drop of evidence of this. Are there bruises or marks on Zim’s wrists?

      All in all, the State only has so much to work with to place reasonable doubt into a jury’s minds. That that’s what they should stick to. Recreating impossible theories, such as details you offer up may prove entertaining, Patricia. But attempting to prove these, sans any witnesses, doesn’t seem to be the smartest way to go about prosecuting.

      Why the extra speculation and elaborate weaving of unprovable tales? I agree that Zim is culpable here, and even I don’t buy what you are selling, Patricia.

      The State need only prove three elements, beyond all doubt, to achieve a conviction:

      1: That Martin is dead by Zim’s hand (piece of cake)
      2: That Zim engaged in criminal acts that created the conditions that led to the death
      3: That he exhibited depraved mind in the process

      For me, this is a focus on the events that led up to the fight, and not the altercation itself. If those elements are adeptly presented, and supported by event times, Zim is positioned as the aggressor… not the one who had to exercise self defense. Who threw the first punch, or who was on top during a fight (where it’s likely that the upper hand may have changed back and forth in it’s duration), isn’t likely to matter one iota to a jury.

      Castle Doctrine has never designed to be a defense for a person who creates the dangerous situation by engaging in criminal activities (elements 2 and 3), but then kills because they start losing a fight that wouldn’t have occurred but for their own criminal actions.

      Yet this is what the Zim supporters argue. That because it wasn’t criminal for him to police his own neighborhood, he was justified in killing TM because he felt his life was in danger because he was losing the fight. They also state that it’s most likely that TM punched Zim first, and I don’t see that as impossible.

      Where they go wrong is that they ignore everything before the encounter as legit and unrelated, don’t believe that TM had a right to punch Zim, and therefore only focus on the punch to the death…. saying Martin is at fault because he drew first blood.

      And BTW, I’d like to deviate for a moment. I find some of the suggestions that Zim supporters only believe this because they are racist extremely offensive and highly unnecessary rhetoric. While that may be true for a few, for the majority I’ve read or spoken with, what it really boils down to is an unmitigated ignorance of Castle Doctrine and when it applies.

      There’s already enough emotions flying around on this case without inflaming it further by accusing the uninformed of being racist, just because they don’t understand that what led up to a death is relative to the death in a M2 charge.

      But off my protest soapbox and back to the “speculations Please allow me to explain how all this may have happened, and all incorporating a good portion of Zim’s stories.

      I figure the State will attempt to prove is that Zim relentlessly hunted TM to the point where he was threatened and in fear for his own life.. not necessarily with the intent to kill, but to get “the bad guy”. And that his decisions resulted in a death that he didn’t intend, but did happen.

      I think Martin responded to Zim’s “reach” for his gun/cell phone with a punch, and attempted to get away while Zim was decked to the ground. At that time, Zim would incurred all of his injuries… his nose, plus the lacerations to his head when he fell back at the tee sidewalk.

      I then think an angry Zim got to his feet, and chased Martin south on that path where the fight and death ended up. At that moment, Zim’s claim to self defense was blown out of the water..

      Oddly enough, all of that fits with a lot of Zim’s stories. The only real question is, when did that gun really come out of the holster. But that may also not be necessary at all.

      If the State can prove that Zim was the hunter/aggressor, and convince a jury that Martin was scared into punching Zim to the ground and running home, a jury won’t care who was on top or bottom at the moment of the gunshot.

      Lest we forget, from his own accounts, Zim was decked in the first moment, so obviously he had to get back to his feet and pursue a retreating Martin further south on the tee.

      But only time, the State’s presentation, and the jury’s final decision, will tell.

      One thing I’m reasonably sure of… such a small percentage of immunity hearings on record are granted. So Zim’s chance at walking away with a dismissal or grant of immunity are, to me, slim to none.

      • Patricia says:

        Mataharley,

        Respectfully, I do not concur that the on-ground wrestling went from the T to the deathsite. It was much shorter. GZ claims he was knocked down once. Period. I believe it was closer to the death scene.

        Please do not consider the narrative I posted to be a script for the prosecution. It was a class report on my analysis from witness testimony – that answered nagging questions.

        I hope you will agree that both my narrative and yours are tapestries far too convoluted to unfold for juries. But if there is not a plausible answer to questions that can arise, this is a strategy for disaster.

        The smothering claim will be refuted by lack of GZ DNA from GZ’s extremely bloody face on TM’s hands (nail scrapings) or jacket wristbands.

        How did GZ extricate his gun from under his right rear hip if TM was mounted on him?

        If TM was mounted on GZ, how much separation would GZ need from his belly to TM’s torso to include GZ’s fist, GZ’s Kel-Tek, and the separation between shirts and TM’s chest (“the air lock’?) plus GZ’s other hand holding the shirt taut, so that he could shoot PERPENDICULARLY into TM’s heart?

        Would TM oblige GZ by doing pshups for him? While screaming?

        Arguing simply that GZ’s pursuit of TM was unlawful is not enough. That could be rationalized by some jurors.

        O’Mara needs to prove that GZ was held captive by TM and sustained life-threatening injuries, GZ couldn’t escape, even
        by showing the gun and saying, “if you don’t let me go I will shoot you.”

        The dried blood pattern on the back of GZ’s head proves he was not under TM, lying on the grass, when he fired. The trajectory could not have been made by GZ shooting from his belly up into TM’s torso above.

        Respectfully submitted, and with thanks for your writing, and reading.

        • Lonnie Starr says:

          Yes, we must remember, as we see the constructions that others have spent the time making for us to peruse, while they are trying to make use of as much of the evidence we have, not only do we not have it all, but, much of what we have, will probably not be used.

          We are searching for the most effective presentation, not the one that actually happened, because the real truth is lost forever.

          We do know that GZ knows much about the details of what did happen. Trayvon Martin is not around, so only forensics etc., can tell his side of the story for him. We do know that TM also has a side of this story to tell, and his side has the least reason to want to be involved in these events, from start to finish. So that much we do know, because all TM wanted to do is go home with his snacks that night.

          So, it devolves to the analysis of GZ’s narrative(s) of that night, and whether what he says is true, self serving and/or false. The risks for GZ is that, if too much or many of his critical points are false and self serving, then that colors what truth he has to tell.
          Because truths can have more than one meaning. But, the most likely meanings it will have, are expected to be in line with, the actors apparent objectives.

      • Cielo says:

        Wow! Absolutely fascinating! You bring up a few points I wondered about- the fact that at least a sliver of the bs the Zimmerman supporters say has some merit but is misapplied. That makes sense to me. Thanks for the new perspective.

      • Patricia says:

        Mataharley –

        I do not concur that the fight started at the T and continued down to the death site. GZ stated he was decked ONCE. Not multiple times.

        I submitted my “class paper” as an analysis from witness statements that answered nagging questions (e.g., why no defensive wounds?).

        It is not a script for the prosecution.
        I believe that if nagging questions are not answered by reasonable probabilities being established, that is a strategy for disaster.

        The “TM hands on GZ’s bloody nose and mouth” story will be refuted by forensic evidence showing no GZ DNA in TM’s fingernail scrapings nor on his jacket cuffs.

        If your statement is that the blood pattern photographed on GZ’s head was blood that flowed AFTER the initial blood flow pattern was wiped clean by the wet St. Augustine grass under GZ’s head, while he was imprisoned on the ground under TM – I do not concur.

        Some smearing would show. The photo was taken immediately after the kill. The blood had collected in his beard. The pattern was crisp.

        Explain for the jury how GZ could extricate the Kel-Tec from his right rear hip inside his waistband holster, with TM sitting on top of him.

        Explain for the jury how GZ could find sufficient space between his belly and TM’s torso to accommodate his fist, the Kel-Tec, and the grabbed shirts creating the 2” – 4” airlock, so that GZ could shoot PERPENDICULARLY into TM’s heart.

        Would TM oblige him by doing pushups? While screaming?

        Explain for the jury why GZ, if he were able to extricate the Kel-Tek, could not simply have said to TM:

        “This gun is loaded. Get your fuckin’ body off me or I’ll blow your brains out, asshole!” Isn’t that what would “a real cop” would say?

        And wouldn’t that be just the motivation for TM to immediately spring up & haul ass?

        Where’s GZ’s great fear then?

        I am not denying that you are correct in saying GZ’s error here was breaking the law in pursuit of TM.

        But I don’t think that giving the jury a little ad hoc Legal Ed necessarily carries they day. Alas, some folks think that’s just theory.

        If GZ wants to claim the IMPOSSIBLE as his defense, then it’s up to the prosecution to give then a little show & tell so jurors’ native intelligence tell them, “Hey, that’s not possible! This guy is lying.”

        That, of course is why the investigation continues – by both sides.

        That is why we continue to explore, exchange, and study.

        Mataharley, that is why I thank you for writing.

        And for reading.

      • mataharley says:

        Patricia, so sorry this doesn’t show up under your response in the thread tree, but for some reason the “reply” on some of these subcomments don’t show up unless you subscribe to the follow up comments. I usually don’t.

        I agree that both our narratives are just blank canvases. But whatever canvas the State uses, they will have to begin with both the evidence and Zim’s own statements. They will need to prove first the M2 elements, then stir the pot that any of Zim’s stories of self defense are not plausible. But to stray too far from his own narrative isn’t going to be wise for the State’s strategy. As I said, I don’t see it being so complex.

        But let me bullet your response points:

        1: Site of fight and death

        I understand that you are arguing that nothing happened at the tee, but closer to TM’s body. However Zim says it started at the tee, people saw a pursuit of shadows and heard an argument, and the evidence debris supports a moving event that starts very close to the tee (the keychain) and ends with the body. So there’s little that supports your argument for a jury to seriously consider.

        On the flip side, Zimmerman has to explain why the body ended up so far south of where he says he was knocked to the ground initially at the tee. Are we to believe he was hauled to his feet by TM and dragged in a fight some 35-40 some odd feet?

        2: Smothering

        I would think that’s easily dismissed by Zim claiming he was the one screaming, which would be physically improbable, if not impossible, while having your mouth covered, being smothered or having your head banged against concrete. Sort of a no brainer for the jury there, don’t you think?

        3: Trajectory and body separation

        A perpendicular trajectory will be based upon how far forward a prone TM was compared to Zim’s arm/gun, and where on Zim’s body he was seated.. i.e the bullet entry wound would be lined up approximately with Zim’s elbow approx. Also the barrel was either butted up against TM’s body/clothing, or close to it. That will also narrow any angle of the bullet entry.

        As I said, all the defense has to do is show the trajectory is possible while the State has to prove it’s impossible. Don’t see that happening.

        4: Dried blood pattern

        Did that already. Zim repeatedly says that he mounted TM after he shot him, ergo his head would be bowed and looking down. He didn’t stop bleeding the moment he shot TM. The photos were taken after that. Simple explanation for the blood trails, and consistent with his story.

        5: The struggle and drawing the gun

        A fight is not static. Obviously for Zim to draw his gun from it’s right rear hip location requires either a roll to the left, or it being drawn before he is mounted. Again, all the defense has to prove is that, in a moving and non static fight, it’s possible for the person on the bottom to roll enough to the left in a fight to access the weapon.

        Personally I think that Zim was reaching for his gun when he got decked, and got it out after he got back to his feet. But again, there’s no way the State can prove that.

        Zim has his story and has to prove nothing. The State is going to have to prove that story isn’t possible, along with the M2 elements. The jury will, of course, start out with the presumption of innocence and the truth of his account.

        I’ve never seen this as a slam dunk case for either side. If logic were the only criteria for a jury to consider, Zim would end up behind bars. But “beyond reasonable doubt” and presumption of innocence is a pretty high bar for the State without a live victim to tell their side, or witnesses who saw the entire event.

        So all they can work with is Zim’s story, and whether the evidence supports that story. All of the above you mention can be seen as quite possible within his story.

        What isn’t possible is where he says he was knocked to the ground, supposedly fighting for his life, and reconciling that with where the body was found. Certainly the key chain and being in that area supports the fight starting at or near the tee, just as he says.

        However the only explanation for the body is that Zim got back up off the ground on his own power, and pursued Martin.

        • Patricia says:

          Mataharley,

          Freud used to say, “Sometimes a cigar is only a cigar.”

          I don’t see that the keychain/light has to be considered as part of the debris field. George could have just dropped it.

          I do not concur that all that blood could have freshly run over George’s head during the few seconds he did the once-over sitting on TM’s body after killing him. And dried that quickly. That timing (after the shot) can be computed by the many experts among us, from witness calls.

          While I do not concur, I believe there is not yet “The One Truth”.
          I am always open to new interpretations as long as there’s some logic to them. ( Will the Baptists get to Heaven before the Presbytrians? I don’t think so.)

          Ace in the hole will be forensics, and GZ’s over-the top performance. And good jury selection.

          Again, thanks, Mataharley.

      • mataharley says:

        And thank you, Cielo, for keeping an open mind. While it pains me to have to defend some of the Zim devotees, I’ve certainly gone to battle with many of them and taken a lot of personal insults for doing so. . I understand where they are coming from, even if they are incorrect in their self defense assumptions. But I also hate to see the extreme and unfair categorization from the other side as well. Gets to be quite frustrating.

        Also, I highly doubt there is an American out there that doesn’t believe in the 2nd Amendment, or our right to defend ourselves from harm. Then it comes down to the niggly details of when anyone considers themselves in harms way, and whether your defense is an unreasonable response or justified. At that point, the courts suss it out… just as our system is designed to do.

        In the end, I accept what the jury decides as final. The true travesty of justice would be Zimmerman, not being charged and held accountable in a court of law.

        • Cielo says:

          At the beginning I was willing to be content that GZ be arrested. After that I figured the legal system would do its due process. But after reading the careful analysis by you and everyone here, I want to see GZ in prison for a long time. The evidence, to me, is overwhelmingly against GZ. Thank you for your analysis.

      • mataharley says:

        You’re welcome for the counter thoughts, Patricia. And might I say you would make one heck of a new age Elmore Leonard? LOL

        Can I assume you’ve never had, or seen, a head injury? Guess I’ve been riding a m’cycle too long… Even the smallest cuts/wounds bleed profusely, and sometimes for quite long. Just the nature of where the capillaries are located so close to the surface. Scares the tar out of many since they think they’ll bleed to death.

        So yes, I see it as quite easy for the blood trails to have happened while he was straddling TM post the gunshot.

        I suppose I should also insert here that I thought the blood on the cell phone photo… still more fresh and moist, was actually quite minimal. Thus I got some seriously good belly laughs at the hand wringing of the media as to the blood trails. For most head wounds, that was nothing. And when you see the later PD shots after cleaning, you can see why… there were nothing.

        That’s why I believe that Zim incurred those when punched and falling backwards at the tee area. A single crack on the head when falling. That one single punch and fall could explain all his injuries, as well as the minimal cuts on TM’s hand.

        But he still had to get up again to end up at the site of death, yes?

        To me, most things that happened from his first sighting of Martin to the punch at the tee appears self evident by the call log times, and the distance he had to travel on foot after leaving his SUV. Just as the NEN call indicates, the cloth movement shows he made it pretty much to where he said (near the tree at the tee) on the reenactment video, and he stopped there for the duration of the call. No more cloth movement. That’s the sound you are hearing. Not heavy breathing. You hear the same sound on Serino’s mic on the police station interviews, for example.

        After his ended his call, he walked another 100′ approx to the RVC east, less urgently and looking around, and another 100′ back. That pretty much sucks up the missing time. Then the encounter and the Zim spin begins.

        Also clear is the ending. The two were on the ground, per the witnesses. Don’t see much that would support Zim being on top. If he’s straddling Martin say at his waist/hips, and being 40lbs heavier, why would he need to grab Martin’s shirts and pull them downward to place a barrel just below his nipple area?

        The only other explanation is that his weight was trapping both shirts… exactly aligned… when he was straddling him. But what are the chances that the inner and outer wear are actually pulled down exactly the same distance just by sitting on someone?

        Everything in between that? Murkey and pretty much hard to prove.

      • Sandra E. Graham says:

        I do not believe the event happened at the T at all. The ONLY evidence of that is the key and flashlight were found close to the T and GZ saying it did. I do not believe he parked where he said he did. I think he parked further south when he saw Trayvon turn into the cut-through to be able to cut him off at the pass. I think the whole thing moved from South to North and the keys were dropped there by George AFTER the shooting or by someone else he knew who had arrived at the scene. That key is telling us more truth than GZ is. The whole T business does not fit except in GZs mind.

      • mataharley says:

        Sandra Graham: I do not believe he parked where he said he did. I think he parked further south when he saw Trayvon turn into the cut-through to be able to cut him off at the pass. I think the whole thing moved from South to North and the keys were dropped there by George AFTER the shooting or by someone else he knew who had arrived at the scene.

        Since the first LEO responders were on the scene right after the shooting, Ms. Zim would not have moved the SUV before they arrived. We also know that one of them said he entered via the clubhouse route, so he would have seen the cars parked at the dog path’s intersection with Twin Trees Lane as well.

        So I would think that if the vehicle were not parked where he noted in the reenactment video, they would have brought that up in their interviews. Does anyone believe that the PD would not take account of all vehicles in the area as part of their investigation?

        Second, INRE the theory of a south to north fight. You do realize that must entail a south to north, then back to south fight for it to end at the body’s location, yes? The entire altercation was only about a minute long. Seems to be a lot of back and forth footage to cover while arguing, and wrestling, packed into a short amount of time.

        Then there’s the pesky detail that several of the witnesses (#11,12, 13 and 20) were those who lived close to the tee. This also supports GZ’s story that things began by the tee because so many saw/heard something out their windows close by, and not further south of their building.

        I’m also somewhat confused as to why some are insistent on inserting an accomplice in all this. Seriously, does Zim look like a guy willing to be the scapegoat for his buds when they could actually work in concert for self defense? Does anyone believe that the State, in possession of GZ’s call records, wouldn’t have already acted if they suspected a second party involved? Or having additional information about that night’s events because of a call from, or to, GZ right around that time?

        The State has charged M2, and many here are busy imagining it as premeditated M1. What is it (generic, not an individual) you think you know that the State, in possession of far more than the public has, doesn’t to think this was a planned event by more than one person?

        I also don’t know why anyone would want to discount the keys as part of that night’s events and come up with a conspiracy that he planted that as evidence. Considering the cops walked up to him within seconds after the shooting, just when was that supposed to happen?

        All this stuff wanders too far off the reservation of evidence and logic for me. I can’t say it enough… I don’t think it’s that complex, nor does it need to be.

        If I use GZ’s own version, what I would envision is GZ reaching for his gun (not cell), Martin punching him to the ground and running, GZ getting to his feet, and dropping his keys while, again, going for his gun during his pursuit. He doesn’t strike me as a man who would seek a fist fight first, chasing a guy who just hit him, when he is carrying his firearm.

        Again, nothing provable. But I can see the key chain as being expendable, and discarded, if GZ would rather have a firearm in his hand.

        My problem with Zim is the same as other responsible gun owners I know… that he is irresponsible and too quick on the trigger. Or, put another way, frankly he’s a cowardly wuss if he thinks his injuries were life threatening, and an embarrassment to responsible gun owners everywhere.

        They could have also dropped there if he were punched a little further south on the tee (tho he doesn’t want to admit getting off the dog path) and they fell out of his hands then. It does not change the physical fact that if GZ were punched to the ground anywhere even near where he says he was, he had to get to his feet on his own power, and move further south to continue the fight to Martin’s death site.

        That simple fact is, to me, the proof that Martin was attempting to break off the fight and retreat, and Zim continued to engage.

      • Sandra E. Graham says:

        mataharley
        Thank you for your response but,

        Yes, the police asked GZ several times,about where he was parked – are you sill at the clubhouse, etc..So, there is a question about where he was parked and when he was parked. It was only at the re-enactment when he chose to show them where he parked and his story falls apart. Mainly, because there are addresses all around him. If he saw Trayvon running south, it makes sense that he would head his car down at the South end and closer to the rear entrance of the compound. I didn’t imply they met at the south end but there is a walk through about half-way between the two ends. I can see GZ and Trayvon meeting at that spot and Trayvon running North to get away because GZ is blocking his way south. I can see Trayvon running North and GZ catching up pretty well where the fight ended. That whole walking back and forth and hiding business makes no sense. I think when Trayvon ran and turned South, he thought the whole GZ thing was behind him and continued his conversation with DeeDee until GZ popped out from between the houses.

        • Lonnie Starr says:

          I think DD says TM said: “he’s behind me again!” In which case GZ was probably behind him at that point.

          I think that TM emerged from his hiding place, after thinking it was over, but he comes out facing south, to keep a watchful eye on the east-west walkway up north, where GZ had disappeared over to RVC east.

          Remember the time lines. TM runs south, GZ exits his truck and slams the door, which can probably be heard for quite some distance. That sound would alert TM that GZ had left his truck and was now in pursuit on foot.

          With only seconds before GZ would enter the open space and have a clear view south, TM realized he’d never make it to his door before GZ would see him again. He also realized he’d also need time to get inside the house (keypad/Chad?), so going there wasn’t a good option. So he decided to hide. He’d watch the north walkway from his hiding place and see GZ go over and disappear onto RVC.

          Now comes the tricky part. “He’s behind me again!” if that is true, it cannot be GZ, because there just isn’t enough time for GZ to traverse the distances. Then TM must be mistaking someone else for GZ? But wait! What if GZ exits his truck, slams the door sending TM into hiding, but instead of crossing the east-west pathway, GZ goes up TTL?

          TM would be watching the east-west path up north, and see no sign of GZ emerging there. TM expect GZ to be coming along the route he’d seen TM take, when he doesn’t, TM takes that to mean he’s lost GZ, TM then emerges from his hiding place, still looking north, when GZ begins to approach TM from behind. Meaning that GZ has used a cut through further south of TM.

          This would be very frightening to TM, causing him to flee north.

          If so, then GZ wasn’t telling the truth of his whereabouts during the NEN call. In fact, if I recall, GZ does not mention where he is on that call at all. He later tells us a story about having crossed over to RVC, to explain a path back to his truck that doesn’t put him in violation of NW rules and police advice. When, all the while, GZ was really en route up TTL towards the cut through.

          That would leave the key and the flashlight unexplained at the tee, but at 40ft away, it’s a simple matter to just toss them there.

          Well, this scenario is easily falsified, if someone is more familiar with this segment please speak.

      • Sandra E. Graham says:

        mataharley –
        Yes, the SPD DID make note of vehicles in the area.Although the tapes do not give the location of those vehicles it does note that one of the two belongs to GZ and the other is UNIDENTIFied. How a licence plate number can be unidentified, I don’t know. But 2 vehicle plates were asked for. They may have made note, but that sure didn’t stop SZ from moving the vehicle.

        Lastly, there is a possibility that anyone else who may or may not be involved either before, after, or during the incident would not be charged or even mentioned because he SPD did a very poor job at the scene. There is much lacking in the reports — particularly Smiths. It seems there is not enough evidence to pursue the matter further and, so, the key remains as just something to be ignored when in fact, it stands out like a sore thumb.

        • ajamazin says:

          Sandra,

          In Florida, it is my understanding that certain  groups of people can choose to have their tags  unidentifiable.

          ________________________________

      • mataharley says:

        Sandra: It was only at the re-enactment when he chose to show them where he parked and his story falls apart. Mainly, because there are addresses all around him.

        GZ was far from eloquent on his NEN call when describing locations. But then he doesn’t appear to be as adept a wannabe LEO as he thinks.

        One (and not the only) of the big faux pas in GZ’s story is he won’t admit to “following” Martin as the quest, and uses the excuse of looking for addresses for his continued hunt. But I’d say that’s a point the State will easily decimate, since GZ admitted to both a co-worker and his air marshal pal that he exited the car specifically to follow Martin. The “just going the same direction” bit ain’t gonna fly with a jury. I think they will easily be convinced that GZ was following and hunting Martin, even if they aren’t sure of his ultimate intent upon finding him.

        But I believe his car was parked exactly where he said it was.

        That whole walking back and forth and hiding business makes no sense. I think when Trayvon ran and turned South, he thought the whole GZ thing was behind him and continued his conversation with DeeDee until GZ popped out from between the houses.

        According to one of GZ’s multiple accounts, when TM started “skipping” away he was close to the dog path intersection with TTL. GZ was following Martin and parked right there, perhaps 15-25′ away (caveat, that’s without going to Google Earth and getting an approx measure..) Within six seconds of Martin “skipping” away, GZ was exiting his car. Within 10 seconds, GZ was on the move.

        This puts him not far behind Martin, which is why Serino pointed out to GZ in the NEN call interview on the 29th that it was physically impossible for Martin to get home, undetected, by a pursuing GZ.

        I don’t know about anyone else, but if I have some loon following me, I’m not going to lead them home. Especially if there are no adults there, and only another younger minor. I’m going to hide and see what goes on.

        So I would guess that Martin rounded the dog path corner to the south path. Once around the corner, he hid in some of the bushes… the same bushes that GZ says Martin ambushed him from in the reenactment video.

        Remember that those bushes aren’t far from the tee, where GZ stopped to finish his NEN call. If Martin had stepped out, GZ would have seen him.

        Was he aware that GZ was standing not from from where he hid? We don’t know, but the Dee testimony does have Martin not on the move all the time, waiting it out.

        So what if he waits until he can see GZ, who finishes his call, then moves east, out of site, to RVC east? Martin pauses to be sure he’s gone, then emerges, thinking he lost GZ… only to find him returning from RVC east and again behind him, as he tells Dee.

        Hard to tell since the only other person who can tell us his exact path that night is dead. But one thing is certain. Martin was aware that GZ was following and hunting him, and did not feel he could make it to the condo without being seen. Otherwise he would have tried. Nor did he have any duty to further retreat. He’s already retreated by “skipping away”.

        This is where some of the Zim supporters think that TM laid in wait to ambush GZ, since they state he could have made it home. Can’t disagree with that. But what I remind them is he could not have made it home without a pursing GZ seeing him. If he had been following him all this time, Martin would have no reason to believe he would stop as he continued on to the condo. Hiding makes perfect sense to me if someone is afraid of being followed by a stranger.

        Also, could Martin have gotten into the back door of the house? Or did he have to go thru the front, entered off of RVC east? There was a young kid, home alone. Would those doors be locked? I don’t remember Martin having keys to Greene’s condo on his person, so it strikes me that any entry is going to require the kid opening the door for him, if they are locked. Dunno

        But I certainly see how all this could have transpired using GZ’s locations in his stories. None of the scenarios using those locations absolves GZ of his culpability and actions, or hinders the State’s case of M2.

        There are enough verifiable events that support GZ’s story, so the State must use and address them… i.e.:

        * He had to be on his back at some point in the fight because there was grass on his back.

        * He undeniably had injuries to nose and head, even if not life threatening.

        * There had to have been some sort of altercation at the tee because of the four witnesses that live in those first building units knew of it outside their windows or back doors.

        * Blood would run towards his face while he was bent over Martin after the shooting.

        What we don’t know is when, and how, the gun came out of the holster. But, why deviate so far from the evidence, and construct a different and unrelated story of the paths and events?

        Lastly, there is a possibility that anyone else who may or may not be involved either before, after, or during the incident would not be charged or even mentioned because the SPD did a very poor job at the scene.

        The investigation was turned over, and significantly expanded, by the State, Sandra. As I said, if they did not know or suspect there was another person in communication with GZ that evening or the hours after, the State would certainly know by now since they have possessed phone records for both Martin and GZ for some time.

        Obviously there would have to be some way for GZ to communicate with an accomplice, and there was no other communication devices (i.e. walkie talkies or ham radios) in GZ’s possession. His cell phone records would reveal all… incoming and outgoing calls.

        I cannot see how the State would not know exactly who GZ talked to before, during or after the event with phone records. I agree they do not know the details of the conversations, but they most certainly would have contacted any party who was in touch with GZ at these relevant times.

        An accomplice begs two things…

        1: That they are willing to let GZ take the heat on his own and GZ isn’t a snitch mentality (I have a hard time buying that…), and

        2: The investigators didn’t check alibis and whereabouts of anyone he spoke to during that time.

        Can’t see that happening.

        • Patricia says:

          To: Mataharley and Sandra

          Mataharley, exciting report you’ve just sent; have been away and just returned this evening. I am pleased you expanded the issue that TM would not lead GZ to the house occupied by only one younger kid.

          NOTE: Medical Examiner’s report DEFINITELY did not inventory ANY keys in Trayvon’s possession.

          If Trayvon left the house locked up, he would have had to be leaning on the doorbell or banging on the door to get in – leaving him vulnerable and exposed to the stalker. We know that the little “brother” he loved so much was playing on a video game and did not hear the gunshot. Trayvon could have expected that, or loud TV, might delay the door being opened. Even the normal time it takes the younger kid to get to the door, unlock it and open it would leave Trayvon terribly exposed to capture, violence or whatever the creepy older Fu Manchu guy had in mind. And as soon as the door was opened, Zimmerman could have burst in and violated them both.

          If the door was unlocked when Trayvon left for the store, Trayvon woud still fear leading Zimmerman to where he and the younger boy lived. If Fu Manchu really wanted to get them, could Trayvon get in, lock the door, and barricade it with a sofa, or what? That takes enormous time! Wouldf Fu Manchu break a glass sliding patio door? What defense was there for them? There would not be an adult home for hours and Trayvon likely knew none of his neighbors.

          The reports are that he was very protective of the younger boy. You know how truculent teens can be. But it was the younger boy who asked for Skittles and Trayvon willingly set out on foot on a dark, wet night to get them for the boy. I don’t immediately have the distance of the 7/11 but I think the round-trip would take 1-4 miles total. Not many teens would do that for a younger kid. They would say, “Wait ’til Dad gets home and then we’ll go for them.”

          I would like to have the class put together all the reasons Trayvon would fear revealing to his stalker where he was living, and why. And that this was the reason he was trying to hide out, even though he was close to home – a home he could probably not get into, leaving him in the glare of the porch light for Zimmerman to capture.

          And WE know that if Trayvon tried to get into the house in any way, that idiot Zimmerman would likely have shot him, and have accused him of breaking & entering!!!

          Mataharley, THANK YOU, THANK YOU for this line of inquiry. Blessings on Sandra – my kind of superb nit-picker! No detail too small for Sandra to worry about! You put the WIN in Winnepeg, babe!

      • Sandra E. Graham says:

        mataharley — Wow! Thank you for your lengthy reply to my commenting on your comments. I have no doubt in my mind that the evidence to be used by the the State will result in a conviction. However, the public is not privy to all documentation gathered. What has been released may or may not be used should there be a trial. If the movement of GZs vehicle is an issue at trial, I am sure the location of the vehicle will be revealed. Perhaps the identity of the owner of the 2nd vehicle will be revealed, if applicable. If the vehicle is not an issue for the purpose of trying GZ, the discussion will not take place. It is one thing to have a compilation of documents and another thing if any are to be used. What we are being shown right now are those documents that pertain to the case at hand. It does not tell the whole story.

      • Sandra E. Graham says:

        ajamazin — You HAVE got to be kidding me. What would be a good reason for allowing that. Just crazy…

      • Sandra E. Graham says:

        ajamazin — I know, I know.

  34. EveryoneIsEntitledToTheirOpinion says:

    Many woman around the world are desperate to have a spouse and/or not be alone in life they accept anything putting their children at risk….

    In the case of Jerry Sandusky, the mother knew her son didn’t want to go back and she put that child in Sandusky path. People are so desperate for father figures and it is sad our society is this way. Parents have to be watchful and stop denying things (men and women).

    I see it everyday and it is a sad condition our society is in. Shameful…

    That’s is my point…

    • princss6 says:

      I think in many cases, people are desperate. In the majority of cases people are in denial. This is why deconstructing the archetypes of all types becomes so important. I don’t trust my kid with anyone and that includes other kids as a general rule. CSA is far more prevalent than most will admit. But when you have these saintly archetypes built up around you like Sandusky did (believe me) and GZ is attempting to frame for himself, people can get away with CSA or murder (GZ would have got off without the public outcry and MOM is trying to use the media to further build this archetype around GZ). But I think if that mother fit a different bill, she would have been offered help instead of condemnation and certainly it would not have been fodder for the evening news.

      • EveryoneIsEntitledToTheirOpinion says:

        Excellently written…you clearly understood my point…. thank you…

      • Sandra E. Graham says:

        Patricia — there are a number of statements made by Zimmerman that he maintains and I have listed a few below. I posted them for you but the comment got tucked in there.

        Zimmermans lawyers will absolutely use the witness statements of a struggle back and forth, up and down. GZ always says …to be honest with you, I don’t know how I got on top of him.

        Zimmermans lawyers will attack the other witness statements but will maintain GZs statement as the focus …to be honest with you, I didn’t know how I got on top of him. Ok witness – colour of shirt on top or bottom – red, black, white, orange….. so it could have been a GZ on top, then a GZ on bottom…..throughout the struggle.

        Zimmermans lawyers will attack the police reports – Officer Smith did you write this, why did you write this. The scene – items have been moved – how long did it take for you to secure the scene. Did you allow people to walk about. Did you know there was a vehicle involved….. Serino – did you tell witnesses it was George screaming.

  35. Digger~~thank you, friend.

  36. Digger says:

    Mainstreamfari, You did absolutely nothing wrong by posting the video. I for one fully understood that it was showing the actions of a particular judge. Well taken here.

  37. logi says:

    Hi Professor,

    I have been out in the wilderness of news vines posting evidence in Trayvon’s defense. A comrade sent me information concerning a matter that I find extremely disturbing if it were to happen. Is it possible that O’mara could ask that all statements GZ made to police be inadmissable

    26) Statements while in police custody by reason of promise [2]

    A defendant’s statements are not voluntary if they are made in conjunction with an expressed or implied promises made by law enforcement officers, the 2nd DCA said. The state appealed an order suppressing statements made by Brian Kobielnik while he was in police custody on a charge of capital sexual battery. Kobielnik said his statements were not voluntarily made and he trial court correctly suppressed them, and the DCA agreed. “The trial court found that the officers made express and implied promises of help to Mr. Kobielnik, fabricated evidence to obtain a confession, and deluded him as to the severity of the charge he was facing. Based on these factual findings, which are supported by the record, the trial court properly found that Mr. Kobielnik’s statements were not voluntary,” the DCA said.

    [State vs. Kobielnik, 25 FLW D1846 (8/4/00)]

    • I have wondered about the same thing. Thing is, the Zimmerman cops, those ones where GZ ran his mouth for a while there…those cops were, you know, okay with what he did. There were no charges. No incentive for promises.

      Have to defer to Fred, but I am not sure that stuff can be suppressed. Many of the later statements were Mirandized. Interesting issue though. Will ask what he thinks.

    • Xena says:

      Just my opinion, but GZ admitted through surrogates, to the police, and on Hannity’s program, that he killed Trayvon Martin. No one forced that confession. Of course GZ didn’t want to be arrested so was more than happy to claim an affirmative defense with all the bells and whistles.

      If O’Mara objects to the admissability of GZ’s statements, I don’t think it would be to his benefit, because it is those statements where he defends his actions and explains how he acquired his injuries.

      Rule that GZ’s statements are inadmissable, and all that’s left is the 2nd degree murder charge with forensics proving that Trayvon was killed with GZ’s gun.

      MOM can object and the court can agree, but then what’s left in GZ’s defense? Oh — I know …

      The witness that said GZ told him “He was beating me up so I had to shoot him.”

      • logi says:

        Thanks guys that’s the latest on that side though. I thought the same about not promising anything. Xena, you have made a good point, what would they have? THANKS!

    • princss6 says:

      He signed the Moranda Waiver. Additionally, the guy who administered the CVSA video tells GZ this is a “homicide investigation” at the very beginning of the interview. I’m sure he will try. I’m not so sure it will work.

    • The prosecution has to lay a proper foundation before Zimmerman’s statements can be admitted into evidence. That means they have to show the statements were voluntarily provided after he was advised of his 5th Amendment right to remain silent and Sixth Amendment right to counsel and he waived those rights.

      I am not aware of any evidence or claims that Zimmerman’s statements were coerced with false promises.

      • aussie says:

        And false expectations based on wishful thinking don’t count. 😉

      • logi says:

        Thanks professor! and remember this quote–

        Haters gonna hate, that’s their job..so let them do their damn job!!! —KATT WILLIAMS

        Keep up the excellent work. This blog is a peaceful refuge to exchange information!

  38. KA says:

    I would have done anything to see the new judge be African American….male or female…not that I think the judge would be different than any other judge, but I DO think Zimmerman would have flipped OUT (and blamed O’Mara)…well worth the price of popcorn…

    Do you think he could claim “reasonable fear” then? HA!

    • KA~~it could be worse if 6 Mexicans make up the jury. lol

      • KA says:

        Most Hispanics do not support him as many also know what it is like to be profiled for appearance. His following is primarily conservative white.

    • EveryoneIsEntitledToTheirOpinion says:

      I was thinking the same thing. GZ would have flipped out completely!

      Just to refer to the previous posted video. I find the posting bias…Why didn’t mainstreamfair….refer to Jerry Sandusky…he is just as sick….if not worse; their parents did the same when there sons tried to tell them but the gifts continually put those young boys in this pyscho path. Lets be balanced….

      • hinkster4ever says:

        If you watched the Anthony case Judge Belvin Perry would be ideal. 🙂

      • Everyone~~I can assure you that I posted that video to show the actions of that particular judge. It had nothing to do with the defendant being black. This is how conflicts on a blog get started and I will not be a participant.

      • EveryoneIsEntitledToTheirOpinion says:

        mainstreamfair…you have no reply button..

        I was responding to KA who was spot on with a reply..

        No one asked you to participate in anything; so what are you talking about? Where is your mind? No one made reference to color. Bias does not equal = color. I’m speaking about all child molesters…including GZ, Jerry Sandusky, etc..

        That is my personal opinion about the video. That is why I love this site because Everyone is Entitled To Their Opinion and can respectfully agree or disagree….

        You are too sensitive…

    • princss6 says:

      Haha – it would have called his bluff on his “racism” for sure, lol. But I’m sure there would still be some after he immediately called for recusal of this Judge because he knew Attorney Crump or some other dogwhistle would claim GZ is soooo not racist.

    • Wow. That was amazing. That judge sure didn’t mince words there. Good heavens.

    • Malisha says:

      Woah, Mainstreamfair, this just pushed one of my buttons big-time. ONE BUTTON? Maybe a dozen of them.

      First of all, I understand where you’re coming from, but where have you been? For the last 30 years, more, I have been in the trenches with mothers who lose their children because they raise an objection to their children being molested, and when they are disbelieved about the molestation, they are accused of everything from lying to being crazy (most popular is “borderline personality disorder”) and they are stripped of custody, forced into involuntary servitude to finance the molesters’ ability to keep their children away from them, and even jailed for trying to protect their children, all done in court with judges who blame mothers for everything that ever happens wrong to a child, no matter where on the continuum of harm she came into the picture (shacking up with the abuser, marrying the abuser, divorcing the abuser, or trying to get the abuser disciplined, or trying to get the child away from the abuser, etc. etc. etc. etc.).

      I think I can see what happened in this case. Mom was out of control and probably a really inadequate mother. Five kids, poor taste (OMG look how she is dressed for court!) and obviously not in control of any situation, much less her alleged love live, which is obviously a hate life. Did she molest her kids? She’s not accused of it. But she’s GUILTY of someone else’s crime in molesting her kids, right? I think this is illegitimate molesting.

      Let me tell you about a case of a mother who “let” two of her daughters get molested by a man she dated, got abused by, and then let back into her life and home (and then married): THIS IS A TRUE STORY.

      Mary Hanke (deceased now, cancer — she could not avail herself of early treatment and surgery because she was “on the run” with her youngest daughter so she actually died from the court’s insane rulings) was a dressage judge in Kentucky. After either widowhood or divorce (I cannot remember which), she had two daughters (one 11 and the other over 18) and she got a boyfriend, Dan Hanke, who was “very good to my kids.” They got together; he abused her (physically and sexually) but they made up and they married and had a baby (Mary’s third daughter) together. Dad got more abusive, and then abused the middle daughter — who was not his biological child. A police officer believed the child (and probably would NOT have believed her if the molester was her OWN father — but he was her step-father) and a case and a divorce started. The father pled guilty to molesting the step-daughter in return for a diversion program (therapy) instead of jail. But he got unsupervised visitation with his younger daughter, because the judge said had had never been convicted of abusing HIS OWN CHILD.

      Next thing you know, the child complains she was molested on a visit. The mom went to court and got a tongue-lashing worse than the judge gave this lady in pink at the criminal trial of the man she shacked up with. He said there was no way this guy was going to molest the younger child after he had been told not to do so and had therapy. The therapist testified on his behalf that he wouldn’t do something like that again because he had “cried” in therapy!

      Custody battle ensued, dad wanted to get HIS CHILD away from this BAD MOTHER. Mom took the little girl and ran while the thing was pending because she had it on good authority that he was slated to win in the small corrupt county (Harford County, Maryland) where it had all been arranged. The judge had a very questionable picture up on the wall in chambers, by the way — a young teen-aged girl with her jeans unzipped, looking “come hither” at the camera — a charcoal drawing.

      This case actually happened.

      Masten Childers, then the Commissioner of Social Services for the Commonwealth of Kentucky, flew to Maryland and argued in open court to ask the judge to allow Kentucky to exert emergency jurisdiction over the child, who was being hidden somewhere in his state (remember, mom was a dressage judge before all this occurred) so yes, the judge gave up his grip on the situation and let Kentucky take over the case. So ultimately this child didn’t have to go back and live with the man who had pled guilty to orally penetrating and then beating her older sister and who had done something to her as well. HE ELOCUTED. HE ADMITTED WHAT HE HAD DONE and then he “cried” in therapy and almost walked away with sole custody of a little girl and all perfectly legal.

      Mary Hanke was yelled at in open court for trying to poison the mind of her little daughter against the child’s father, the OPPOSITE of what this judge decided to charge against this incompetent mother in her silly pink party dress. The woman is dumb, OK? She’s probably guilty of endangerment and she’s definitely guilty of neglect. There is a child protective services agency in her state and they should be getting into the picture to see to it that the children have a better chance of being protected and assisted in this crazy culture than their mother ever was, but all this “blame the mother” is — you know what? — BENEATH CONTEMPT.

      I say do something like this in open court when you have a society that supports a mother, FROM THE MOMENT OF CONCEPTION, to help her fill the needs of her children — and that means her needs as a human being as well so she can give what is needed to those children — and let her have resources sufficient so that she is not at the mercy of monsters like the man who really WAS on trial in this case.

      I mean, look at this temper tantrum the judge had; compare it to the negative commentary made by Lester in the Zimmerman case. Did this mom kill somebody? Did she molest a kid? Was her case even BEFORE this judge? Did he have a “pre-sentence report” on the mom prepared by the probation department in accordance with law?

      Don’t get me started.

      I read a book about Mary Hanke and other mothers like her. Check it out: Rosen, L, Hostage Child: Sex Abuse Allegations in Custody Disputes, Indiana University Press, Bloomington, Indiana, 1995. OK, this particular mother was not married to the man who molested her kids, so she couldn’t divorce him, and she obviously should not have let him into her home, and all that is true, but let’s look at how our society helps mothers protect their kids, shall we?

  39. The state has to take the charge of second-degree murder off the table and reduce it to manslaughter. The state also is the one to offer a plea I think.

    • bettykath says:

      Why do you think the charge of murder 2 should be dropped?

      • ajamazin says:

        This is a high stakes game andmainstreamfair:is saying professional gamblers don’t bet against the house.

        I might not agree, but the point is well taken.

        ________________________________

      • TruthBTold says:

        @Betty,

        I don’t think MSF was saying that they should take it off, but was responding to another poster’s question I believe.

  40. Fred~~looking at this from the prosecution’s perspective, do you think that they should lower the charge to manslaughter in lieu of second-degree murder if this case goes to trial? A jury would be more apt to bring back a verdict of guilty if the word ‘murder’ was not in the charge. The penalties for second-degree murder and manslaughter when a firearm is used are relatively alsmost the same. What do you think? TIA

    • Vicky says:

      MSW, I would assume that Manslaughter will be a lesser included in the jury instructions. My question, can the defense fight a lesser included charge to the jury and make it an all or nothing deliberation?

      • Vicky says:

        I did the MSW on purpose. LOL

      • Vicky~~if they get a change of venue and pick a jury in Pinellas County, the jury will not understand the instructions. May I call you Nurse Ratchett?

      • TruthBTold says:

        From my understanding Vicky, yeah manslaughter is a lesser included with this type of charge in Florida. I don’t think MOM can fight to have it removed or an all or nothing like you said.

      • hinkster4ever says:

        Looks like we lost most of the 373 posts from Zimmerman Update thread. Boar_d, the retired attorney, had given case law and a great insight into the case. It is gone now.

        It was a very enlightening post telling exactly why Gz is guilty of the greater charge. Basically what I came away understanding is the prosecution is going to prove that Gz had no right to kill Trayvon. Gz ,(he can’t say he was on NW duty….he never even identified himself to the 311 operator or Trayvon or LE as NW person)…got out of his truck and admitted he was following Trayvon, the suspect/suspicious looking/acting… as he profiled him….he had no right to do this.

        Trayvon said to Dee …a “creepy” guy was following him. Trayvon was scared enough of being followed by the creepy guy…he ran and the creepy guy ran after him. So, who was the agressor?

        Maybe Xena or some of you can remember how Boar_D phased it. But, it sure made darned good sense to me. I wish it had not disappeared. There were a lot of good posts in those 373 posts! Danged that nasty perverted troll! I was going to c&p what Boar_D wrote. It’s gone dangit.

      • hinkster4ever says:

        Boar_d did not exactly say his thoughts about guilt outright…..he just said if he was the prosecutor he would use that case law. I am the one saying Gz is guilty. Just to clarify.

      • Xena says:

        @hinkster4ever. “Maybe Xena or some of you can remember how Boar_D phased it.”

        I’m no spring chicken, ya know, which is why I paraphrase a lot and never clear out deleted notification emails until weekends. 🙂

        Is this what you were looking for?

        boar_d_laze says:
        August 27, 2012 at 9:41 am
        Hinkster, you wrote:

        “The SYG law or the “killed in self-defense” law states something to the effect that the person who claims this…..can do so if they feel their life is in danger, or suspect great bodily harm…IF….they have a right to be there at the time….right?

        If George Zimmerman did not live in any of the apartments/houses backed up to that walk-way…did he have a right to be there….in the pouring rain…..not just out to check his mail…or out as a fitness buff for a little walk in the park?”

        The direct answer to your question, is that Mr. Zimmerman had a right to be where he was. Hold that thought, though.

        There’s a reason the defense decided not to invoke “stand your ground” section 776.013 and instead to rely on “traditional self defense” section 776.012. An infinite number of lawyers speculate an infinite number of reasons, but so far the only one who counts — Mr. O’Mara — hasn’t been clear.

        One thing that is clear, is that the “duty to retreat” does not apply in Florida.

        My guess is that 776.012 is a better fit for Mr. Zimmerman because Mr. Zimmerman wants us to believe that he was on the move on the way back to his truck when the altercation began; and because he was not defending a physical place or position, he was not “standing [his] ground” or anyone else’s.

        As a practical matter of trial strategy, the defense wants to avoid the concept of “stand your ground” because the evidence from the Dee/Martin phone call shows that Martin waited in one place while Mr. Zimmerman approached him; and thus had the better claim to “SYG.”

        No matter what the defense wants us to believe, the prosecution will seek to put the case into the “use of force by aggressor” statute 776.041(2), by showing that Mr. Zimmerman “provoked” Mr. Martin’s use of force against Mr. Zimmerman.

        In short, the prosecution (me too!) would say that although Mr. Zimmerman had a right to be where he was, he did not have the right to do what he did.

      • princss6 says:

        Manslaughter would hold the same penalties as Murder 2 if not more (I believe the minimum is 30 years) because Trayvon was a minor.

    • I think the prosecution can prove Murder 2 pretty easily. If the jury can’t agree unanimously on a verdict of guilty, the instructions would direct them to consider the lesser included charge of manslaughter.

      Therefore, the prosecution doesn’t have much incentive to offer manslaughter.

  41. Vicky says:

    Lol Malisha, I loved #1 too!
    In your prediction, what do you see Zimmerman pleading to?
    The alledged circumstances surrounding this case violate so many Florida statutes, that if he does not win his motion to dismiss based upon his claim of self-defense, I wonder what agreement could be reached that would satisfy prosecutors, the judge, Trayvon’s family (if they are consulted) and the law. If GZ agreed to plead guilty to say, manslaughter, would the judge have the latitude to sentence off the grid, if the prosecution agrees to remain silent on the defense’s request for a lighter sentence?

    • Malisha says:

      Vicky, it’s not about what laws Zimmerman VIOLATED in terms of a plea deal, it’s about what laws the State can use to let him enter a plea without getting more prison time than he agrees to spend. So they’ll come up with some sort of “assault” or “harassment” or “spitting on the sidewalk after 6:00 pm” just as soon as O’Mara can convince people that there really IS a danger of Zimmerman walking free if the agreement is not taken. ALL OF THIS IS THEATER.

      Perhaps they already have the charge chosen and everyone’s agreed to it and George has sat down with Mark Osterman to memorize his speech as he claims to be agreeing to go to prison to help heal America. It will be a tear-jerker. It will drive up the stock the pharmaceutical companies have in anti-nausea medication.

      • cielo62 says:

        Malisha- I like your POV. I really do but: do you honestly think that there a sentence small enough that GZ will accept? We already see he is FOS with an inflated ego. He EXPECTS to go free, ride the talk show circuit, make a bundle of money and have ” good life” like he told Shellie on the jail recordings. Going to prison at all is NOT part of his game plan. In a way I’m glad. That way the court can impose Justice to the tune of 25 tears -life.

  42. JUN says:

    Lester’s 1 million dollar bond was far from bias. The simple fact of the matter is, Zimmerman, did indeed, lie on his bail application, and in sort, can be charged and easily convicted of contempt. To do this false presentation of testimony, Zimmerman organized the structuring of money, hiding his passport, spoke in code, and was heard talking about flying away. Zimmerman also makes a lot of questionable claims with a lot of reasonable doubt to his claims. Zimmerman did indeed manipulate the system and flaunt the system. Whats the point of law and order, if you, as a judge, cant call out the perp for what he did?

    • Sandra E. Graham says:

      What is worse, is that he is not punished for it either. Can’t Shelly say, hey if GZ is not charged why am I here. If potted palm is not charged, then Shelly should not have been either

      • TruthBTold says:

        @SEG,

        GZ didn’t testify though and committ perjury. I think his charge or whatever would be criminal contempt. They both have their own set of problems.

      • Sandra E. Graham says:

        I realize Shelly will likely get no jail time. However,if she is found guilty having worked with GZ to move money around, etc.. that is one thing. GZ is just as guilty as she is. In fact, she was following GZs directions. Yet, she was charged. GZ may not have committed perjury, per se. But he had counsel acting on his behalf. In other words, he has gotten away with lying to the court. Just add that to the list of other gifts GZ has been given — thus far.

        • TruthBTold says:

          Agreed. GZ should be held accountable for his participation in deceiving the court as well. No doubt about it.

      • princss6 says:

        @TBT – Didn’t BdlR – and I’m paraphrasing – ask GZ if it was true that his attorney was arguing that he was indigent – and GZ answered in the affirmative?

        I can go check the tape but he did imply in his testimony that he was broke.

        • TruthBTold says:

          @princss,

          Do you mean when GZ got on the stand to “apologize” to the TM’s parents? I don’t recall BDLR addressing that issue. He was more focused on the “apology” and when GZ is challenged how he claims not to remember.

          • princss6 says:

            Yes! I just reviewed a tape on youtube and you are correct. I don’t know where I got that from…maybe mixing up SZ and GZ’s testimony but I thought that question was asked of GZ…

      • KA says:

        He did commit a crime of the FL 903.035(3) when he knowingly provided false information (poverty, no assets) and also omitted material information for the judges decision. That is a 3rd degree felony. He was the one ultimately responsible for information given to determine bail, he knew what he was doing, he is responsible. The State maybe should have charged him.

      • ajamazin says:

        Strangely enough, BDLR did not even ask George about money or finances.

        You might say Bernie was not unlike a potted plant.

    • GrannyStandingforTruth says:

      @ JUN, I totally agree with both of your comments. Zimmerman being able to leave the state should also added to that dangerous precedent.

  43. JUN says:

    I read the appellate decision. It sounds as though the judges felt the complaints were not legally sufficient. The judges that granted the motion basically stated that Omara just complained too much about nothing that was legally sufficient, but they will grant it, if he stops whining about it. The dissenter even stated it was not legally sufficient. I dont believe this can be held as a precedent as the decision is by veto. On the other hand, they may have simply granted it for other reasons, to simply put Debra Nelson in. Either way, this case is very strange. If anything, Zimmerman’s claims sets a dangerous precedent that can free a lot of murderers, if they are injured while killing their victim.

  44. crazy1946 says:

    Seems to me that this would be a great time for the Prosecution to file the charges suggested by Judge Lester! That would get Zimmerman and MOM’s attention! Perhaps they might get the message that there is a price to pay for their actions. However good this would be, I don’t think it will ever happen!

  45. Sandra E. Graham says:

    I wrote this in the last post. But, I will do it again here. I have commented on YouTube videos as they came out after the shooting. I had not yet made p my mind because of the many discrepancies reported in the main stream media.Many comments were posted over 3 months ago. NOW — there seem to be people who are posting really nasty, horrible comments under anyone’s post who believe GZ is guilty. It appears there is a concerted attempt to indimidate. I am getting their comments posted and forwarded to my e-mail. In fact, I had one that told me I was being WATCHED by two people. Whatever that means – watched on the internet, watched from my home, who knows. It is not intimidating me. But, I am sure it may do so to some.

    • Rachael says:

      You have gt to be kidding!! Thats beyond crazy, it’s also illegal. I’ve had some hateful things said to me, but never threatened like that. What is WRONG with those people? I see that site yesterday is being hateful to Professor again too. What are they so afraid of? How can SO many people be SO vile and full of hate?

      • Sandra E. Graham says:

        Rachael — Re: YouTube Videos. As time goes on, fewer will be viewing them until the case comes to trial or there is major news. If your comment is flagged thumbs down enough, it is hidden leaving nothing but the garbage comments. This will give the new viewers the wrong impression about the video. False flagging is what it is called. At least that is what I have been told. Someone has to get a handle on this cyber-bullying crap. There is free speech and then there is hate speech!

    • Unbelievable. Creepy and bizarre. I mean, who does that? Some of these stalkers sure spend a lot of time, I cannot imagine what is going through their minds.

      • jayden marx says:

        There are pro-Zimmerman supporters on Click Orlando WKMG boards who post there 24-7. I suspected they are Zimmerman clan members. They intimidate and bully anyone who questions Zimmerman’s story with obscenities and crudeness. They spread ugly gossip and rumors about the Martin family and Trayvon’s friend he was talking to before he was shot and killed – this according to a frequent poster who claims to be a Zimmerman “insider”. Because they seem to have so much time on their hands I just expected them to be part of the Zimmerman clan who are in hiding and trying to keep facts about the case coming out.

  46. JMO….

    Judge Lester was not being impartial and O’Mara was well within his rights as a very astute attorney to call him on it. One thing that really stood out to me was when Judge Lester said the state had a strong case. I believe a jury should decide that not the sitting judge. One other thing, I felt the judge was acting in the capacity as counsel for the state re letting the state know that they could file contempt charges against Shellie Zimmerman as well as George. The state should have figured that out all by themselves.

    I do not believe that O’Mara will refile any of the motions that Judge Lester already has ruled on. A new judge seldom overturns the rulings of the previous judge.

    IMO, Judge Nelson is very familar with the Zimmerman case and that includes the deception re hiding money at the first bond hearing. Judges watch the news and they also read blogs. Judge Strickland did and that is a given. He recused himself because he had called a blogger up to his bench one day after a hearing. (this was all on camera) He told the blogger that he thought he was fair in covering the Anthony case. The defense filed a motion using that as a reason for asking the judge to step down.

    The defense in the Anthony case filed another motion and cited comments made on a few blogs and also some media outlets. Judge Strickland happened to be doing his homework and checking things out to see if the defense’s motion was factual. This is how he ended up finding the ‘fair blogger’s’ blog.

    Maybe we should *wave at the new judge….Hiya Deb….

    • Vicky says:

      MSF, judges are a very tight knit group. I will assure you that Lester has had many conversations about his rulings in this case with all ofnthe other judges in the district. They might always agree with each other’s rulings, but they almost certainly discuss them.
      I would love to be a mouse in the corner so I could find out the judges personal feelings about the SYG laws. It’s one thing to sit in the legislature and make laws. It’s quite another to be the one that has to apply them. I can’t imagine too many judges are thrilled with the responsibility law makers have thrown in their lap. Even if they do support the 2nd Ammendment.

    • princss6 says:

      I recall Judge Lester giving MOM similar advice regarding the statements GZ made during the investigation. IIRC, he told MOM that he would argue the statements were exculpatory. It is just interesting to note that the language around the ruling AND the ruling themselves seem to carry the same weight and in this case, the language seems to carry more weight. Shrug.

    • Malisha says:

      Mainstreamfair, I think Judge Lester’s observation that the prosecution had a strong case was not out of line when you consider that one of the reasons a defendant would stay and face the music, even if he COULD flee, is often given as, “The state’s case is weak and the defendant is not really afraid that he will be convicted, so he will not turn himself into a fugitive.” In fact, at the first bond hearing, O’Mara inappropriately started to litigate the case in main, and the prosecutor was unprepared for that, and the witnesses were not prepped to address the merits of the case itself. Remember O’Mara asking about the medical reports of Zimmerman’s injuries? That had nothing to do with the bond hearing; it had only to do with the strength of the state’s case against Zimmerman. So yes, the issue was important in a judge granting bail to a defendant who has been saying all along that he expects to get off. Especially in view of him hiding a second passport, the strength of the state’s case is significant in determining what to do about a request for bond with a defendant who has been hiding discoverable facts from the court. So I don’t agree that was out of line, within the context of what Judge Lester was doing at the second bond hearing.

  47. Malisha says:

    Well, I have read all the comments and I am very impressed but now I feel the urge coming on, to give my predictions.

    First, I see a tall, dark, handsome stranger. He is not involved in this case; forget him.

    Now, I see a new Judge, and maybe even two new judges (if Judge Nelson doesn’t do something O’Mara wants her to do on the way to an alleged trial).

    Then, I see a bunch of motions practice and some continuances.

    Then I see the Feds cut their deal with the Floridians and the Sanford Police Department quietly arrange who gets protected how.

    Then I see a few polls to assure O’Mara and West that it is safe for them to make their plea deal.

    Then I see them pleading George out when the public outrage is finally over, for lack of energy or, more probably, for some other big news event taking over the imagination of even the Zimmermanians and those of us who are insisting that this one can’t be swept under the rug.

    I see Wolfinger surviving and no charges being brought against either him or the criminals who worked with him on licensing Zimmerman to kill.

    I see the homeowners or residents in Twin Lakes who actually tried to put a muzzle on George before he killed trying to get public attention for what they THEN realize ACTUALLY HAPPENED when they complained that George was getting ready to kill somebody and the police acted in a complicit way to allow it.

    I see there being confidential settlements with the Fulton/Martin family that are basically paid by the homeowners’ insurance policies involved, and of course, rates go up for the rest of us as once again the taxpayers chip in to cover up the crimes of the authorities.

    I see George Zimmerman becoming even worse than he is, but dropping out of the public view; I see Shellie Zimmerman eventually realizing how her whole life is not worth a bucket of warm spit, but unable to admit it.

    In none of this do I see God’s plan, of course. But the plea deal, I saw that from the beginning and the change from Lester to Nelson won’t have any real effect on that, in my studied opinion.

    It’s all such a damn fraud.

    • Rachael says:

      Try as I might, I can’t forget the tall dark stranger 😉 lol

    • Xena says:

      I agree about the plea, but I see money and abandonment among the reasons. Shellie will write a book about being an abused, controlled wife. She’ll go on the talk-show circuit and will then be sued by papa zim who will then write a book blaming her for GZ getting a gun due to her fear of pit bull dogs.

      Frank Taaffe will become a spokesperson for AA. Joe Oliver will run for president. Mark Osterman will file for bankruptcy after investing all his money, unsuccessfully, in self-publishing. The Fultons/Martins will sue GZ’s landlord under his homeowner’s policy. While in prison, GZ will earn his GED. Oh — he has a HS diploma already. (snicker)

      • EdgySF says:

        Sarah Palin’s popularity ran its course.

        So will Z’s entourage.

      • Malisha says:

        Somehow I don’t see Shellie as ever emerging from her shell (pun intended). I believe she is a woman whose ego is 100% dependent upon her own perception of herself as being the selfless supporter of her man. I am very suspicious of her father, with no good reason, and no evidence — that’s just how I am, so I say it up front. Her emotional fragility is obvious to me in the halting, submissive telephone transcripts when George was in jail and in her actual looks. She believes that she is saving George from an onslaught of vicious, anti-white-Hispanic murderous abusers, and she is ennobling herself more and more the more she gives up her own autonomy to do it. George, meanwhile, has the perfect wife: complicit, worshipful, inarticulate, and “supportive.” The opposite of his mamma who, apparently, wore the pants in his family of origin.

        Unless some REAL prince charming rides up on a white steed to both sweep her off her feet and make her forget her god-given mission on earth (save George, protect George, immolate herself for George), I do not see her ever changing course, even if George is in prison and she is in a different prison. In fact, the more pressure on her, the more I think she will retreat into this fantasy world that makes her the central column of George’s own endangered ego.

        My bet is that Shellie is trying like the devil to get pregnant now.

  48. GrannyStandingforTruth says:

    I know one thing, every single person that commits a murder, from here on out should be allowed the same privileges that Zimmerman has been given. They too should be allowed to leave the state, be given a low bail, and change judges like they do clothes. If not, that falls under discrimination! The scales of justice are supposed to be equal and if the justice system can coddle Zimmerman, then they might as well coddle ALL of those on trial for murder.

    As for what is going on in the case of Zimmerman and the courts. Well, I’m hoping for the best, which will be justice for Trayvon, but I do not have my hopes up high. Because that is the South, the good old boy system did not die with Civil Rights, nor did bigotry and racism.

    • Rachael says:

      Yeah, he’s gonna be a tough act to follow.

    • I know one thing, every single person that commits a murder, from here on out should be allowed the same privileges that Zimmerman has been given. They too should be allowed to leave the state, be given a low bail, and change judges like they do clothes. If not, that falls under discrimination!

      I concur, Granny! I mean how many do you see charged with murder2 getting a second chance at bond after caught lying, request to leave the county-granted etc. What’s so special about him?

      • GrannyStandingforTruth says:

        SouthernGirl2:
        To tell you the truth, I do not know too many people that are out on bail after being charged with murder2. Nor do I know too many people charged with murder2 that get to do interviews on tv and plead their case before a trial takes place, get all of the bills paid by taxpayers, and get a high price lawyer to defend them instead of a public defender that claim that they are poverty-stricken. I wonder did they deliver steaks and lobsters to him during his brief stay in jail and give him silk sheets to sleep on, with maid and butler service. Smh!

  49. Justkiddin* says:

    I am curious about something. Why do people defend him? Zimmerman. He is a known liar, a known hot head and a girl friend abuser. Surely to God this can not all be because Trayvon is black.
    You know Professor and Crane it is sad you are being attacked and I do feel bad for you but it is disgusting that they are attacking your daughter. I do not care if your daughter is 2 or 32 it is wrong. I guess we should just consider the sources. They are cool with a guy killing a 17 year child that was unarmed. It is probably best it is you and not me though. At my age prison would be a blessing free everything (cable, room and board, hospital, security system lol) so I would have no problem protecting my child/children, grandchildren or great grandchildren from these nut jobs. SMH I do not understand.

    • whonoze says:

      “Surely to God this can not all be because Trayvon is black.”

      Of course not.

      It’s because he was black, male and wearing a hoodie.

      No. Scratch that.

      For realz, it’s all because Barack Obama is black.

      • ajamazin says:

        Word!

        ________________________________

      • Justkiddin* says:

        That’s to bad. Mr. Obama is still a human being. He deserves air also. It makes since though. I can remember many presidents over my life time and this is the only one I have felt sorry for. The other party has never tried to participate and help him in anyway. However they are quick to point out his failures. Funny his failures seem to belong to all of us.
        For the record I meant no ill will toward Trayvon, I just do not understand the hatred for a child. A child should be seen as just that a child not a color not a nationality. 17 to me is still a child. To be honest Until they can legally drink they are children. Adults are not limited to legal activities children are. jmo

      • GrannyStandingforTruth says:

        @Justkiddin:

        I totally agree with everything you said!

    • KA says:

      I think it has become a sports arena to many….kinda like living their high school glory days by hating the school “across the tracks”….

      It doesn’t matter to them who deserves the right to win, as long as it is “there team”…I have had some offer to place a “wage” on it…it is quite sick. I am always aghast at their insensitivity…

  50. OMG @Xena. I love that scholar site! I could spend hours there reading opinions. I love stuff like this, for example, where the court slams the prosecution for misconduct by saying:

    “(4) The final entry in this mail order catalogue of prosecutorial misconduct occurred in the penultimate paragraph of the argument:

    Not only do they have to get into these disguises and crawl down there and deal with people like this, but they have to deal with people like his lawyer and be attacked and slandered through the whole thing, and they have to do this in front of a jury.

    This tasteless personal reference to the defendant and to his attorney as well was perhaps the most offensive remark of all. See Carter v. State, 356 So.2d 67 (Fla. 1st DCA 1978); cf. Johnson v. State, 351 So.2d 10 (Fla. 1977).”

    LOL!

  51. How do I send a personal message to Prof or Mrs. Crane?

  52. whonoze says:

    The previous thread with all the comments in the ‘wrong’ places was kind of interesting to read in a William S. Burroughs ‘cut-up’ sort of way. Naked Lawnch.
    —–
    Did I ever tell you about the man who taught his asshole to talk? This ass talk had sort of a gut frequency. It hit you right down there like you gotta go. To start with it was like a novelty ventriliquist act. Like, “Oh I say, are you still down there, old thing?”
    “Nah I had to go relieve myself.”
    After a while the ass start talking on its own. He would go in without anything prepared and his ass would ad-lib and toss the gags back at him every time.
    Then it developed sort of teeth-like little raspy in-curving hooks and started eating. He thought this was cute at first, but the asshole would eat its way through his pants and start talking on the street, shouting out it wanted equal rights. It would get drunk, too, and have crying jags nobody loved it and it wanted to be kissed same as any other mouth.
    After that he began waking up in the morning with a transparent jelly like a tadpole’s tail all over his mouth. So finally his mouth sealed over, and nerve connections were blocked and infiltrated and atrophied so the brain couldn’t give orders any more. It was trapped in the skull, sealed off. For a while you could see the silent, helpless suffering of the brain behind the eyes, then finally the brain must have died, because the eyes went out, and there was no more feeling in them than a crab’s eyes on the end of a stalk.
    —-
    Funny how old Bill Lee was able to describe Pliaja so well back in 1959…

  53. EveryoneIsEntitledToTheirOpinion says:

    Professor Leatherman, can you give me your professional opinion? Sorry to repeat the question from before; I’m still unclear…

    In all the years of practicing law have you ever had a client or requested multiple judges like Mark O’Mara? Can an attorney assist with getting a favorable judge especially when their are so few available in the area? Please clarify my mind is wondering…am I far out there?

  54. mataharley says:

    Personally, I’m not bothered at the appellant’s granting of a disqualification. It’s certainly Zim’s right to leap frog from judge to judge, hoping to find one that isn’t well versed in law and unable to form personal opinions within their limitations… good luck with that. Nor did I see some extraordinary slap down of Lester there.. merely that it was a “close call” and it is in the interest of justice for the courts to come down on the side of the accused.

    What I find somewhat more baffling is why MOM would bother? If the attempt is to distance himself from Zim’s prior manipulation of the system and Ms. Zim’s outright lies, none will be invisible to a third judge picking up the file with all the historical briefs filed.

    It becomes even more ironic that the next bench official in the line up is Circuit Judge Debra S. Nelson… another touch cookie, according to Stuzman’s recent Sentinel article on the opinion. It just so happens that Judge Nelson is the same judge assigned to Shellie Zimmerman.

    http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/2012-08-29/news/os-george-zimmerman-appeals-ruling-lester-20120829_1_george-zimmerman-trayvon-martin-mark-o-mara

    Sometimes you just can’t make this stuff up….

    Needless to say, the Zimmerman’s combined antics are not going to magically disappear just because a different hand is pounding the gavel. Moronic to think it would.

    But on the other hand, in the event of a conviction and max sentence, the Zim faithful will have little to complain about because he’s pretty much been granted everything he wants… except a believable story, that is.

    • whonoze says:

      Coming next: motion to dismiss Judge Nelson for conflict of interest since she’s already been assigned Shellie’s case. I think Florida’s gonna run out of judges and they’ll have to get Judge Rheinhold, or at least that’s O’Mara’s strategy 🙂

    • hinkster4ever says:

      Nothing against Judge L…..but, the defense sure blew a chance at an appeal….And, this female judge will sure cringe when she hears a barely past the age of 16 y/o screaming for help. Speaking of maximum sentences…..as my grandma used to say….Omara and Georgie Poo cut off their noses to spite their face….just sayin

  55. whonoze says:

    I think the defense strategy is passive-aggresive. Dave has it pegged above IMHO: stall, delay, defuse, deflect, change the subject. The longer this drags on, the more other stuff gets thrown to the front of the news cycle queue, the more passion and interest begins to fade.

    I would guess nothing significant is going to happen in this case for the next three months, since the SAO is staffed by conservatives, conservatives want Obama to go down, Florida as always will be close, and they don’t want to alienate the gun nut base who form sure votes for Romney, but could go rogue if they see the State messing with their 2nd Amendment Saint George. So I look for Nelson to allow GZ to stay out on a fairly low bond, etc. etc.

    • hinkster4ever says:

      Good thinking…..I had not thought of the elections and it being Florida…..you are undoubtedly right…

  56. Fred~~thank you for the new post. When I read the 8 page rant that Judge Lester wrote I could not believe my eyes. My first thought was, “this judge must go.” I do not believe that O’Mara is trying intimidation to try and win this case nor is he judge shopping. He had no clue who he would get for a new judge. Judge Nelson, from what I am hearing can be as tough as Judge Lester or moreso. I want to see a fair trial take place and for Trayvon to get his due justice.

    Fred, you probably have defended many criminals who, according to all the evidence, in all likelihood were guilty. You cannot throw your client out to the wolves but instead use all the ammo in your arsenal ( strategy) to get your client off or have his charge or sentence reduced.

    I see a trial as a contest of the attorneys who make up the state vs the defense. It is not who is guilty or not guilty anymore.
    A defense attorney gets a bad rap when he/she is trying to defend an unpopular client such as Zimmerman. Because I tend to observe a case from my perch on a fence, I am not too popular when it comes to commenting about how I see things. It has been suggested that I am a racist, snarky, a devil’s advocate or just a stupid Canadian, and a French one at that. lol

    I always wanted to be a lawyer but due to circumstances beyond my control ended up being an accountant and income tax consultant. At least I got to see how much money some attorneys make. Since retirement, I have resorted to being an armchair detective in my golden years. I do have a qustion for you, if you would rather not answer, it is fine. Do you ask your client if they are guilty of the charge against them or do you prefer not knowing? TIA

    • Mike S says:

      On the ruling I think they ordered Lester to recuse himself strictly for political reasons – they don’t want anything looking even remotely unseemly to happen in a case of this magnitude. Of course as I said above that opens up people to cite this now as a precedent in other cases.

      On O’Mara….I can’t judge if he’s good or bad but it does strike me as odd how many negative admissions he makes about his client in court, and how many he allows Zimmerman to make.

      He admitted that Zimmerman was hiding money from the court. He admitted that it was a wrong thing to do. He’s admitted that there are inconsistencies in Zimmerman’s testimony during the second bond hearing. He let Zimmerman give the God’s plan answer on Hannity. Hell, he agreed to going on Hannity.

      I just don’t get it. Maybe there is some extraordinarily clever strategy going on here but it seems to me that he’s handing ammunition over to the state on a silver platter.

    • You said,

      “I do have a qustion for you, if you would rather not answer, it is fine. Do you ask your client if they are guilty of the charge against them or do you prefer not knowing?”

      I tell them that it does not matter to me because I will fight just as hard for a guilty client as an innocent client.

      • Two sides to a story says:

        As it should be, and as much as some people dislike OM and his tactics, he seems to be doing just what you did in your criminal law practice, Professor. It does make me wonder what OM;s personal feelings about GZ’s guilt or innocence are.

      • Thanks, Fred. It is known as good lawyering and the right thing to do.

        Here is an example I copied from a comment upthread, thus…On O’Mara….I can’t judge if he’s good or bad but it does strike me as odd how many negative admissions he makes about his client in court, and how many he allows Zimmerman to make.

        He admitted that Zimmerman was hiding money from the court. He admitted that it was a wrong thing to do. He’s admitted that there are inconsistencies in Zimmerman’s testimony during the second bond hearing.

        It seems that O’Mara did not have much choice other than tell the court of his client’s deception. The state had all the evidence to support their allegations against Zimmerman. I think Mark handled this quite well. I thought he would make his exit from being Z’s counsel since he was being deceived too. I think O’Mara sees this as one heck of a challenge, win or lose. I do not think he would let one stupid client jeopardize the career he has built up.

      • Rachael says:

        You are right, he had no choice. He can defend his client knowing that the client was guilty of the crime, but he cannot be party to a crime – what I mean is that if his client lies about something else, he does have a duty to let the court know, at least that is what my instructor told me.

      • SearchingMind says:

        @ Rachael,

        No Rach, no attorney has any duty to report the wrongdoings of his client to anyone. On the contrary, attorneys have a duty to remain silent on such matters unless their clients instructs them otherwise (attorney-client-privilege). BTW, I find all the comments here (including yours) quite educated, very informative and businesslike. I say little because before I finish typing my opinion you guys have already posted what I am thinking.

      • rachael says:

        Thanks searching mind. My instructor told me different. I know I’m explaining it wrong and I can’t remember the situation he was talking about, but it made perfect sense at the time – something like you might know your client is guilty and that is fine, but if your client goes on the stand and tells another lie and you know it or something like with the Zimmerman’s being destitute and you know they aren’t. . .well I’ll have to look at my notes, because it made sense at the time.

        Here is something that is about the closest I can come to what I’m trying to say.

        http://www.eiglarshlaw.com/lawyer-attorney-1113213.html

      • rachael says:

        @ SearchingMind –

        I had posted a response but somehow it got lost, and I don’t remember exactly what I wrote, but I was told that well – here is the closest I could find. In the meantime, I’ll look for my notes – but it is the reason why – oh, I can’t think today. Anyway this explains it about as best as i can find for the moment:

        http://www.eiglarshlaw.com/lawyer-attorney-1113213.html

        • Lonnie Starr says:

          I don’t know what browser you’re using but [F3] usually brings up a search in page box. Use that to find your own posts in the page. After typing your name/handle in the box, just keep taping the [F3] key. Here’s hoping this helps some.

      • Malisha says:

        SearchingMind, an attorney is obligated not to give out negative information against his client BUT is also obligated not to take part with the client in trying to defraud the Court. So O’Mara was in a tough situation. Although Judge Lester was obviously a straight arrow who had not read up on the news of George Zimmerman’s on-line presence, his web-site, or any of that, and although that left him without information everyone else in the country had about Zimmerman’s $200,000 when, at the first bond hearing, he seemed to be making a fool of himself by ordering such a low bond, it could not be said that O’Mara was ignorant of the real situation. O’Mara had to know that George had significant funds, and perhaps it took him a few days or couple of weeks to realize that he would look pretty damn complicit (and expose himself to ethics charges or worse) if George blew town with the money and the whole thing got investigated, but ultimately, he knew he just had to say something. He took a very delicate way out. That’s the kinda guy he is.

    • KA says:

      I agree that it does not seem like guilt or not guilty is very clear cut, however I disagree on the eight page order being biased.

      I was reading through some older information from April this week. People forget that when O’Mara brought the money and said it was a “lack of communication” (and that it was in the Paypal account which we now know is not true), Judge Lester gave Zimmerman the benefit of the doubt and asked to see his financial records. At the same time he denied a “gag” order from the prosecution. Up to that point all decisions seemed to favor Zimmerman, including this request.

      By June 1st, O’Mara did not file anything about the accounts. He did not follow up, he did not get back with the judges request. At that hearing the State came in with the information that he had requested from O’Mara. He overruled O’Mara’s objections to the short timeframe and proceeding with the ruling. This is a defendant that had been able to move out of state to a place he felt comfortable, he had a reduced bail due to the “Request for Reasonable Bail” that O’Mara filed based on being at poverty level, and then he grated a benefit of the doubt when the money came up and took O’Mara’s story as truthful.

      He listened to the jail tapes. He was clearly shaken at the context of the conversations he had heard before the hearing and was clearly upset. In reviewing additional tapes he realized the benefit of the doubt he gave on the passport was not true either and it was knowingly stored in a safety deposit box with the acknowledgement of GZ himself.

      In appears, everything he had ruled on were based on deceit. He also gave them another chance at bail, and they did not, again, do what the Judge specifically requested which was an explanation for the funds and why it was not accounted for in his bail application and motion. They did not provide that, again, at Zimmerman’s request because he did not want to be cross examined.

      This is not one part of deceit, this is multiple. I think he was justified in his Order to call it what it was.

    • CommonSenseForChange says:

      @mainstreamfair –
      Welcome to the club! (of doing something other than atty work)

      I, too posed a question to the professor on the other blog, but still would like to know how this works out from the professor’s or any other lawyer’s view that posts here.

      Reposting my questions…

      Q1:
      “A question for Professor Leatherman.. Now that Judge Lester will be replaced by a new judge and presumably, Zimmerman won’t be able to appeal a guilty verdict (once he’s found guilty), what is the likelihood that Zimmerman could still appeal on the ineffective counsel argument due to O’Mara’s *forgetfulness in turning over the passports and similar screw-ups?

      Just wondering if O’Mara is deliberately guaranteeing an appeal-if-I-don’t-win-your-case card.”

      Q2:
      “I am surprised. The way I see it, it has now become caselaw that a judge can be recused because her husband (or any spouse) was a paid consultant for CNN (I think it was CNN). I think the lady judge (Recksiedler) was accused for bias although the lady judge did not acknowledge a failure to be unbiased. This all reminds me of Clarence Thomas and his Tea-Party wife’s promotions and representations. If the actions of one’s spouse are considered a defacto bias, then why wasn’t Clarence Thomas removed from supreme court cases his wife was a paid representative for?”

      I thought Judge Lester’s comment were on point and sent a message to both Zimmerman, O’Mara and the general public that in order for the legal system to work, one must be truthful. I honestly don’t get this appellate ruling and I find it sends a message to judges to stifle their own freedom of fact-based speech. It’s a bite your tongue ruling (keep your opinions hidden ruling). Doesn’t seem right.

      Zimmerman received favorable rulings from Judge Lester even after the State won with arguments. How is that bias???

      How does Recksiedler’s husband’s job interfere with Recksiedler ruling fairly? And if this is precedence, why is the Supreme Court arguing differently? Even State vs. Fed and State’s rights ought to end up with mildly close opinions shouldn’t they?

      • TruthBTold says:

        CSFC wrote,

        “How does Recksiedler’s husband’s job interfere with Recksiedler ruling fairly?”

        I think, in this case, it’s a matter of just avoiding any appearance of impropriety.

      • Common Sense~~Recksiedler’s husband works at Mark NeJame’s law office. NeJame turned down the Zimmerman case as he had other committments. NeJame suggested to Z that he should call O’Mara. Recksiedler + Her Hubby= “possible pillow talk”.

      • CommonSenseForChange says:

        Ahh… Got it now. What are the sources for those connections? Hadn’t seen that before. Sources generally tatoo my brain once I read it myself. TYIA!

      • CommonSenseForChange says:

        Also.. pillow talk (Martha Stewart) and bias aren’t the same, right? If a judge is discussing a ruling prior to making such, it doesn’t lead to insider trading monetary gains. If a spouse .sells a segment prior to the ruling, I could see a correlation to Martha Stewart, but in this matter, it seems that the ruling went against the judge for what her spouse *may* potentially do. Neither the lady judge nor her husband had done anything wrong yet. I still don’t get this ruling.

      • Rachael says:

        Just makes it easier to avoid any possibility at all of inpropriety. It’s just safer, especially on a high-profile case.

      • You said,

        Q1:
        “A question for Professor Leatherman.. Now that Judge Lester will be replaced by a new judge and presumably, Zimmerman won’t be able to appeal a guilty verdict (once he’s found guilty), what is the likelihood that Zimmerman could still appeal on the ineffective counsel argument due to O’Mara’s *forgetfulness in turning over the passports and similar screw-ups?

        Just wondering if O’Mara is deliberately guaranteeing an appeal-if-I-don’t-win-your-case card.”

        My Answer:

        The decision by the Court of Appeals does not affect Zimmerman’s right to appeal or limit any arguments Zimmerman might raise in a state habeas petition.

        Appeals normally are not included in a fee agreement that covers the trial.

        Lawyers who represent a client at trial should not represent the client in a post trial habeas petition alleging ineffective assistance of counsel because of the inherent conflict of interest between the lawyer’s duty to zealously represent the client and the lawyer’s potential blindness regarding his errors and his natural inclination to defend himself.

        I doubt O’Mara would offer to do the appeal pro bono. Common sense and the need to make a living probably would prevent O’Mara from offering to do the appeal for free.

        You asked,

        “Q2:
        “I am surprised. The way I see it, it has now become caselaw that a judge can be recused because her husband (or any spouse) was a paid consultant for CNN (I think it was CNN). I think the lady judge (Recksiedler) was accused for bias although the lady judge did not acknowledge a failure to be unbiased. This all reminds me of Clarence Thomas and his Tea-Party wife’s promotions and representations. If the actions of one’s spouse are considered a defacto bias, then why wasn’t Clarence Thomas removed from supreme court cases his wife was a paid representative for?”

        I thought Judge Lester’s comment were on point and sent a message to both Zimmerman, O’Mara and the general public that in order for the legal system to work, one must be truthful. I honestly don’t get this appellate ruling and I find it sends a message to judges to stifle their own freedom of fact-based speech. It’s a bite your tongue ruling (keep your opinions hidden ruling). Doesn’t seem right.

        Zimmerman received favorable rulings from Judge Lester even after the State won with arguments. How is that bias???

        How does Recksiedler’s husband’s job interfere with Recksiedler ruling fairly? And if this is precedence, why is the Supreme Court arguing differently? Even State vs. Fed and State’s rights ought to end up with mildly close opinions shouldn’t they?”

        My Answer:

        Judge Recksiedler’s decision to recuse herself has no precedential value it is a trial court ruling that she invited and she recused herself after the motion was presented. There was no appeal. Trial court decisions are not binding precedent on other trial courts. There was no actual conflict of interest and probably no potential conflict. The basis for the recusal was to maintain the Court’s appearance of fairnesss.

        I do not believe that the defense established a sufficient legal basis to justify the Court of Appeals’s decision and the Court did not explain how it reached that conclusion.

        I agree that Judge Lester’s decision was supported by the evidence and statements by defense counsel.

        I don’t know why the Court reached that conclusion.

      • CommonSenseForChange says:

        @Professor Leatherman –

        Thank you for schooling me on those points. #2 makes sense I see where I went wrong in my thinking. On #1, I think I need to reword my question. Will try again later. Just wanted to say thanks for the clarification.

  57. TruthBTold says:

    First off, the recently banned poster went so far beyond the realm of decency and relevance to the issue at hand was both quite unfortunate and scary. Scary in that, there are individuals that are so obsessed with believing GZ’s accounts at any and all costs, that they go off the deep end in looking for information on people, only coming to the blog to “try and prove some point.” stir up mess, etc. I definitely understood and supported Crane’s reaction to the craziness being posted. I am glad that you banned that individual. That’s typically what it comes to with these people.

    “Although many of the allegations in Zimmerman’s motion, standing alone, do not meet the legal sufficiency test, and while this is admittedly a close call, upon careful review we find that the allegations, taken together, meet the threshold test of legal sufficiency.”

    I saw part of this response yesterday and the admittedly close call language is interesting. I found the quoted above a bit puzzling. I believe I saw some commentary (nothing in-depth) provided by the dissenting judge. I don’t really get the decision and was surprised by it.

    As far as the question posed, I don’t believe the GZ camp is promoting intimidation as a defense strategy. The works of these individuals are these individuals alone, I believe particularly, the attacks, crazy nonsensical talk, derailing conversations with foolery and games, etc. There are definitely some bizarre people, near and far, masked in different ways.

    • KA says:

      I have a hard time believing that GZ is being threatened currently (ie after arrest) when the worst of the worst I am seeing is from GZ supporters. I have not seen TM supporters hacking accounts, posting personal and kid information, doing an “expose” on another person on a blog, tracking down who witnesses are and doing background checks on them, hacking social media accounts and publishing the details.

      Whomever these supporters are, they are not amateurs.

      • EdgySF says:

        Good point.

        I think the intimidation tactics are backfiring for team GZ. Good, decent people are turned off by their antics. It’s not 1864 anymore.

    • TruthBTold~~IMO, the pro Zimmermans do not believe he is innocent. The problem is they will not accept the fact that he is guilty. They feel that if they can yell loud enough and long enough, their noise will drown out the truth.

      • Xena says:

        @mainstreamfair. (Applause)

      • TruthBTold says:

        @MSF,

        Ooooh good and interesting point. I am sure it is a mixed bag of kooks though. They are nutty for sure, to put it mildly.

      • Hey Mainstreamfair!

        I read a post where someone stated..Zimmerman supporters cannot see Zimmerman as guilty because they cannot see Trayvon as innocent. IMO..that’s the bottom line.

      • KA says:

        SG2 –

        Agree wholeheartedly…

      • Malisha says:

        Considering GZ innocent is not based on the idea that he actually did not do the act that is defined in Florida law as a crime — as the Crime of Second Degree Murder, in fact — but on the idea that it should NOT be considered a crime when the victim of that act is a person they don’t believe is entitled to the protection of laws. There’s the whole crux. The idiot bigots in Virginia who created that shooting-range cardboard target of Trayvon Martin said point blank: Of course we support George Zimmerman and believe he shot a thug…”

        They did not bother saying, “We believe Zimmerman when he says he was violently attacked so he had to shoot his attacker”

        They did not say, “We believe Zimmerman was forced to act in self-defense” —

        simply, he shot a “thug.”

        I was on a bus next to a woman (white, educated, well spoken, well dressed, young) who said the whole incident was simply: “A wannabe cop met a wannabe thug…”

        We had a four-hour bus trip. I gently introduced her to the following issues:

        Real thugs are not allowed to be killed by real cops unless the cops have no other alternative while trying to legally do their jobs after the real thugs gave them probable cause to interact.

        Real thugs cannot be killed even by the state, after a trial, unless they have committed a capital offense.

        Real cops go on trial for killing real thugs if, at the time of the “shoot,” the thugs were unarmed and the cops were not in uniform.

        And at the end of the trip, she completely understood the case and thanked me for bringing up what she called “the nuances.”

        People who “believe” George is “innocent” are not really saying he had to kill Trayvon to defend his own life, and they’re not really saying he did not do what Angela Corey says he did. They’re saying they think he should get a “walk” on this one because what he did really wasn’t so bad that they would not, themselves, have also done it.

        Imagine, 25% of Americans can imagine themselves acting like George Zimmerman that night!

        AAAAAAAAAAARGHHHHHH!! LET ME OUT OF HERE!!

    • hinkster4ever says:

      Professor & Crane, I sent you an email a while back that all this was coming.

      Maybe it went to spam. This crap went on with the Anthony case. Remember the blogger that the nice Judge called to a sidebar and complimented on being fair and unbiased….and then the blogger with such an ego had to go above board patting himself on the back in several articles…bragging….until he got the Judge recused?

      And the legal eagles who went at it back and forth in the case who were not even connected to the case? It was a 3 ring circus! Bloggers were being exposed by their real names and information……after accidently letting something slip….

      I hate that you have been subject to such vial things. But, you both have a loyal great group of minds following you, and it will grow. Don’t you two dare go off hanky panking around and leave us again! 🙂 We missed you both and worried about you! 🙂

    • ajamazin says:

      TBT,

      I am convinced the recently banned poster has 2 other personas.

    • gbrbsb says:

      Very scary indeed TBT, and let us not be beguiled into dismissing all of them as merely stupid because many are not which in my mind makes these especially all the more dangerous.

  58. Mike S says:

    I’ve seen a few people speculating on what this ruling to recuse Lester means for future cases in Florida. Will attorneys be citing this case as a reason to go judge-shopping until you hit the jackpot with a sympathetic judge? As others have mentioned the appellate justices don’t give a reason other than stating vaguely that no individual statements showed bias but somehow the whole was greater than the parts.

    I wonder if the appellate judges really though this through in terms of the precedent it creates.

    I understand exercising an abundance of caution in a Murder 2 case, and giving the defendant reasonable access to a fair trail, but getting two judges recused in short order seems to be stretching things.

    • EveryoneIsEntitledToTheirOpinion says:

      Florida is a corrupt state everything done is to open the door for a new motion or law. Politicians are in this case big time you can smell it.. NRA and ALEC… SYG creators….

      Amazing the Republican convention is going on the week of this strange ruling against justice for the TM family in my opinion.

      • ajamazin says:

        EveryoneIsEntitledToTheirOpinion,

        That is the truth, and the truth is seldom popular or readily accepted.

        But, it is still the truth.

        ________________________________

      • mataharley says:

        EveryoneIsEntitled, the NRA is notably silent on Zimmerman because he is an embarrassment to all responsible gun owners.

        Additionally, you have never heard 70-something granny, Marion Hammer (the architect of the FL SYG law), ever utter a word of support for Zimmerman. The reason for that is because Zimmerman is not an example of how SYG is supposed to work, and even MOM knows that.

        Lastly, would you have the RNC cancel their convention because of a nobody like Zimmerman, going thru his due process? Please… Zimmerman is already passe in the news cycle (much to MOM and Zim’s chagrin for donations…).

        This week is dominated by larger news… a nomination for one of the two future leaders of the free world come Nov, and a very damaging tropical storm/hurricane. While speculating about Zimmerman may be entertaining on the side, it’s hardly worth much in the larger scheme of things.

      • DSal says:

        EveryoneIsEntitled,

        The Governor of Florida appointed Angela Corey to prosecute this case on the advice of the Attorney General. All three hold elected offices. To say politicians are involved is a no-brainer.

    • ajamazin says:

      Nelson is the 4th judge!

      There has been 3 [three] recusals.

      ________________________________

    • Malisha says:

      Courts don’t really follow precedent, so it doesn’t matter what precedent this sets in Florida. Courts follow precedent when they WANT TO; when they choose not to, they simply say that it doesn’t apply or they say that the precedent stands for the opposite of what it really says or they ignore it altogether. And there’s not a thing you can do about any of that, anyway.

      I filed a federal habeas corpus once and the attorney general of Virginia cited Carafas versus LaValee for the OPPOSITE of what it stood for, but she won, without the federal judge offering any opinion as to why the case meant the opposite of what it said. Some clerk also threw a citation into a footnote that would have a federal judge hearing a criminal habeas corpus case use a 60-year-old state civil case involving water rights on transfer of unimproved land set a precedent for how to decide if a court in the Commonwealth of Virginia could consider whether a trial was fair or not in determining whether an order was constitutional.

      They make it all up. They answer to no one. Only Lester answered to someone for having said words George Zimmerman (and his repugnant supporters) didn’t want to hear. More power to him; I’m glad he said them before he got chased off the case; they had to be said.

      • princss6 says:

        Right, Malisha! Those words can never be taken back. GZ tried to swiftboat JL and while I don’t think it would work, he did get him off the case. Judging by how quiet, GZlegalcase is at the moment, I think they are having an “Oh, Shit!” moment. You hold a press conference/telethon to announce you handed in the writ but no press after you get the judge booted AND a new judge is assigned? Hmm…seems odd to me.

      • crazy1946 says:

        My suspicion is the motion was filed not in an actual attempt to get Judge Lester removed from the case, it was actually setting up a valid reason to have the case apealed! The reason they are so quiet is that they are now in shock, wondering what to do now that they were given what they asked for, but really didn’t want!

      • princss6 says:

        @crazy1946 – agreed. I don’t think they ever thought they would win. To your point, it would set up an appeal but also it would intimidate Judge Lester. GZ has a penchant for going over people’s head….

  59. ajamazin says:

    I have personally been the object of attacks.

    My email account is in shambles.
    Please recall that my email address has been posted on this site
    due to a glitch in Word Press.

    Out of an abundance of caution, I will do a wipe clean and restore of my pc , at the risk of losing valuable files and links.

    In addition, I am receiving hateful texts and calls on my android.

    No problem!
    I have weathered far worse.

    I am a 2 year veteran of the I/P threads and I am the subject of a hate filled Zionist blog:

    Yep, I am THAT infamous “20 year old punk face kid”
    [actually, I am now 22.]

    Consequently, I find the present attacks to be amateurish and ineffectual.

    This is my policy;

    Never explain and never complain.

    My standard response is:

    “Who the fuck are you and why do you think I owe you or anyone an explanation about anything?
    My comments speak for themselves.”

    The cause for which I advocate is too important to let myself be derailed.

    “Freedom is indivisible, and when one man is enslaved, all are not free.
    The Biggest Obstacles to Peace are the differences we permit to divide us, fear, ignorance, and man’s need to control.”

    ≈John F Kennedy

    Aja Mazin™

  60. KA says:

    I read that O’Mara now has 20 days to ask for new rulings for anything that was ordered by Judge Lester. I am sure they will start with bond.

    I guess there is a risk that things could actually get worse for him, but I am not holding out any hope. This order has really deflated some confidence I had in the judicial system.

    • Xena says:

      If I remember MOM’s belly-aching in his writ, it mainly pertained to Judge Lester releasing discovery material that he alleged the judge had previously decided should not be released, including the statement of W9 — the cousin alleging sexual abuse.

      Since the information has already been made public, it seems like a waste of time re-visiting that for new rulings. While conditions of bond might be re-visited, I do not think the bond amount can be “appealed” by way of requesting a new ruling by the trial court. But then, I could be wrong and it is Florida.

      • PYorck says:

        While conditions of bond might be re-visited, I do not think the bond amount can be “appealed” by way of requesting a new ruling by the trial court.

        The problem with the bond amount is that even if it is adjusted the bondsman will keep his fee. That makes it relatively pointless.

      • Rachael says:

        Good.

      • Malisha says:

        I think everything will be revisited, at least once, maybe twice, to keep jaws flapping until it’s time to rush this past the censors and make it go to bed.

  61. I am trying to find self-defense cases in Florida, and am having trouble at the Court of Appeals site. At any rate, has there been a case similar to this one in Florida? Has Judge Nelson presided over such a case?

    I will keep looking…

    • Xena says:

      http://www.scholar.google is a free site for case decisions. Once you get the citations, maybe they can be found on the Court’s site easier. Since self-defense statute in Florida changed with the passing of syg, there are only a few case decisions involving immunity that went to appeal. The first was Peterson v. State of Florida, April 2008. http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=4550408100917847020&q=%22Florida%22+%22stand+your+ground%22&hl=en&as_sdt=2,14

      There, the Florida Court of Appeals turned to a decision in the State of Colorado to determine requirements for denial of writ for immunity. The Appellate Court affirmed the trial court denying immunity.

      Looks like the second was Hair v. State of Florida, August 2009 where the court granted the petition for immunity.

      A case similar to GZ’s is John Orr. Immunity was denied in March 2012. Orr’s attorney said he would appeal. That in fact, GZ’s claims almost mirror those of John Orr; person came up from behind him; having head bashed on concrete; being straddled/pinned down and unable to remove himself; threatened that he was going to be killed. The State argued inconsistencies in Orr’s story, blood splatter, lack of debris in Orr’s clothing proving he was pinned on his back, and unnecessary use of excessive force. (He stabbed the person 75 times.)

      • Rachael says:

        Wow – that last one is really interesting. I really don’t think that GZ has a chance of immunity at this point. I could be wrong, because this is just my opinion, but it seems that this judge will understand the need for this to go to trial and be decided by a jury. There are just too many questions and that is, again IMO, the only thing that would be fair.

      • Wow. Thanks you for the site referral. I love reading cases, and our state is easy to navigate on the site, but Florida, not so easy. Thank you!

        75 times?

    • Xena says:

      @Rachael. Agreed! The standard for immunity hearings is preponderance of the evidence. I’ve read some of the case decisions that talk about immunity hearings being like hearings on Motions for Summary Judgment. If the non-filing party can show the court there is any dispute in the facts and/or evidence, the court denies immunity and the defendant can proceed to trial or appeal.

      Judge Lester was to file his decision in the Smithey case before the end of the month but as of last night, I was unable to find if he did. That’s a syg case where the defendant’s testimony was inconsistent with her statements to the police. She also faked injuries.

      What I’m looking for is what the trial court considers in denying or granting immunity.

      • Xena~~I did a search for the Smithey case too and came up empty handed. It will be interesting to see how Judge Lester rules on that one.

      • Xena says:

        @mainstreamfair. “Xena~~I did a search for the Smithey case too and came up empty handed. It will be interesting to see how Judge Lester rules on that one.”

        For sure! I want to know if he addresses the inconsistencies in her statements. That is a HUGE factor in GZ’s case.

    • mataharley says:

      Crane-Station, you may find this site helpful as a start.

      http://www.tampabay.com/stand-your-ground-law/data

      The Tampa Bay TImes started attempt to compile all SYG (not really applicable in this case tho) following the Zimmerman uproar. So far they’ve got 210 on their records, which has grown since I first bookmarked it.

      Out of these 210 (which includes all types of weapons, non fatalities as well as fatalities), only 39 have been granted immunity. Nine of been dismissed. The rest have gone to trial.

      The site offers a summary of the cases, but should also give you some names to search in legal databases you may have at your disposal.

    • Xena says:

      @Crane-Station. “Wow. Thanks you for the site referral. I love reading cases, and our state is easy to navigate on the site, but Florida, not so easy. Thank you!”

      No problem!!! I found that scholar.google is a good starting point. If I find appropriate cases, then I use Westlaw to “Shepardize.”

    • tupacstattoo says:

      There is a case she presided over in 2011, A SPD son. Walked away with a suspended sentence. Same scenario with shotty police work, etc, etc.

      • Thank you for your reply here. I have to be honest. Nothing surprises me in the courts in this country today. I know. I’ve seen a lot of mind-bending unbelievable stuff. I could spend days talking about it.

        I have long had a motto:

        Never assume anything.

        This is important to keep in mind, because when it comes to courts, What Should Happen and What Does Happen are probably more often than not, unrelated.

  62. KA says:

    One of my questions is this, seemingly, “toss up” judgement call on the part of the Appellate Court strike any fear in trial judges now? Will the new judge have to worry about being removed from the case if he lies in her court as well (which I am going to say has a high probability)? Will she, or other judges, in FL have to watch every single thing they say or write in their courtrooms for fear of such a low bar of “legal sufficiency”?

    I know most attorneys I was reading on are floored by the lack of explanation to their decision and especially the ruling in general. There is nothing specifically mentioned as to what contributed to that “collective bias” they considered shown by Judge Lester.

    This seems to set the legal standard for such an appeal to now lower standards in that this can now be used as precedence for dismissing unfavorable trial judges, as well a new strategic plan to a defense strategy when a client is reprimanding for clearly disrespectful behavior in court.

  63. EveryoneIsEntitledToTheirOpinion says:

    Professor, I would like to know if Mark O’Mara tried cases in front of this judge before. Was this the plan all along to continue to dismiss until getting a favorable judge. I’ve heard she is tuff but remember Robert Zimmerman (father) does have contacts and someone is pulling strings in my opinion.

    Professor what amazes me there was a case United States vs Charles Ng this man played the system for years filing multiple appeals.
    Professor why are defendants’ allowed to do this constantly postponing their trial? They are going to have to face their accuser eventually.

    I feel the fix is in…to release GZ. I’m not a lawyer but why do they all pull this game? If you are innocent face the accuser and prove you are innocent. Correct… How do you see things at this point?

    • Dave says:

      Zimmerman is facing a possible life sentence. Given the probability of a guilty verdict he might as well drag the process out as long as possible. Even his present “hermit-like” life has to beat the hell out of prison.

      Besides, who knows what might happen? Key witnesses might die. Memories fade. Evidence could be lost. Laws might be rewritten. Zimmerman himself might die. As long as the money is coming in, he has no reason to be in a hurry.

      • Zhickel says:

        Good points Dave.

        When Z first waived his right to a speedy trial I could understand the need for extra time to prepare the defence.

        When he was returned to jail I wondered if it would be in his interests to recant that decision and press for the trial process to be expediated. His complaints about the bail restrictions makes me wonder if he would now prefer a speedy trial.

      • martingale says:

        Zimmerman is still subject to the laws that were in place when he committed his crime.

        • Yes, but the maximum penalty for Murder 2 at the time the crime was committed was life in prison and it still is.

          Perhaps, you are confusing the maximum penalty with the minimum mandatory,which is 25 years.

  64. princss6 says:

    Yes, Professor, I noticed. I was expecting a rationale for their decision. Interesting.

    • Two sides to a story says:

      I was taken aback too. JL has bent over backwards trying to be fair to GZ. His statements in his findings were perhaps a bit over the top, but his actual judgements were fair, sound, and generous. However, little in this case has been normal.

      • princss6 says:

        I agree completely. I think moving forward since their decision seems to be so divergent from the precedent set before, understanding their legal reasoning would have been instructive. They never even addressed that the ruling were in favor of GZ.

  65. EveryoneIsEntitledToTheirOpinion says:

    In my opinion, George Zimmerman supporters are like robots with a written script… My concern is that something is going on behind the scenes. JL gave GZ everything he wanted going back to a $150,000 bail; GZ and wife lied that cause the increase. My concern GZ will walk because someone may be pulling strings.

    • PYorck says:

      In my opinion, George Zimmerman supporters are like robots with a written script…

      I think part of the reason is that there are so few of them. Sure, vague sympathy for GZ seems to be relatively common, but the number of people actively advocating appears to be pretty limited.

      My concern GZ will walk because someone may be pulling strings.

      I think there is an alternative explanation for most of what has been happened so far. O’Mara interprets his role as his client’s… uhm, let’s say mercenary. Whatever GZ wants, O’Mara attempts. GZ doesn’t like the judge? Try everything to get rid of him. GZ doesn’t like his bond conditions? Ditto. GZ wants to dig a hole for himself on TV? Sure, why not. GZ wants to almost but not quite testify without cross-examination? No idea too stupid!

      • Xena says:

        GZ has very few true supporters. The majority are mere opportunists using GZ’s case to express their hatred for Trayvon Martin. They have painted a stereotype and Trayvon, his parents, Rev. Sharpton, Pres. Obama, and anyone fairly discussing this case is molded to fit the stereotype; i.e., uneducated, inarticulate, unsuccessful, welfare recipients, etc.

        The demeaning they demonstrate speaks volumes about their character, or lack thereof.

        On GZ’s FB page for donations were a mere 247 likes. It gives me a chuckle when hearing O’Mara say that GZ is BROKE!!! But it is all “God’s plan” right?

      • Rachael says:

        Oh Xena, that is so true. Some of the horrible things I have seen written about Trayvon, his parents and African Americans in general have just made me sick. I had no idea there was this kind of hatred and – I want to say misconception, but I really have to say bigotry out there.

        Though there are some who just plain out don’t want it to turn into something that would result in talk of gun control.

        But I agree, as far as GZ himself, I don’t think they care much about him. He is just the vehicle they can use to move their hatred and gun agenda.

      • Xena says:

        @Rachael. “Oh Xena, that is so true. Some of the horrible things I have seen written about Trayvon, his parents and African Americans in general have just made me sick. I had no idea there was this kind of hatred and – I want to say misconception, but I really have to say bigotry out there.”

        Remember the FBI investigating to determine whether GZ is racist? And remember O’Mara posting on the website that he wanted things to calm down? And remember O’Mara telling Piers Morgan that when notes expressing racism are included with donations to GZ, that he sends the money back?

        IMHO, the FBI is still investigating because if GZ’s supporters believe that he committed a hate crime, and as long as he is not appealing to them to stop giving that impression, what then?

        Check out comments at http://news.yahoo.com/trayvon-martin-shooter-wins-appeal-judge-234119809.html

        Trayvon is called “Trayboon.” Blacks are called “porch monkeys.” There is a person whose handle is “The Klan” and posted ” /Vggers should all be shipped back to africa and start their wonderful civilization over there. The can hunt each other, eat each other, build huts and make spears.”

        Yahoo is not moderated. It’s like walking into a cesspool of anger and evil. GZ must be very proud of them.

      • Malisha says:

        I think O’Mara is smart, actually. I do not believe he actually thinks he can try this case — he will need George to testify if he hopes to get a verdict for self-defense and George cannot risk cross-examination. REMEMBER: Even in the second bond hearing, when O’Mara made that stunningly idiotic request to let his client testify WITHOUT BEING SUBJECTED TO CROSS-EXAMINATION, when it was only going to be about the MONEY, when the Judge wisely said, “no, if you put him up there they get to cross-examine him,” he couldn’t risk it.

        O’Mara wants to demoralize the prosecution, manipulate public opinion, and keep the “Poor George” choir working as long as possible before working out a plea deal. And the prosecution wants that just as much; a trial would bring out facts that neither the prosecution NOR the defense want to reach public view. Remember, also, that they BOTH opposed making the evidence available to the press and the public.

        If the press and the public learn that there were complaints around the neighborhood, to the police, that George was scaring people and running around like an unhinged madman with a gun in their backyards, and that the police, rather than deal appropriately with the problem, secretly promoted George’s psycho behavior, and when the public connects the dots, and when there is a real push for the Feds to do an honest evaluation of what the SPD did that was complicit in the death of Trayvon Martin, a lot more damage will be done than simply sending George away for a while as punishment for an unprovoked killing.

        O’Mara wants to settle this; Corey’s office wants to settle this too; the Feds want everyone to settle this; the apple cart has been upset too much already; nobody wants ALL THE TRUTH to come out.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s