Zimmerman: Why No Amount of Lawyers, Guns and Money Will Save Him

The role of the lawyers during a criminal trial, whether prosecution or defense, is to present evidence through witness testimony via direct and cross examination, raise appropriate motions and objections at appropriate times, argue what facts have been proven or not proven to the jury, and argue to the judge which legal rules should be applied to resolve disputed issues that come up from time to time.

Lawyers are advocates, not witnesses. Juries are instructed in every criminal case that statements by lawyers are not evidence and may not be considered as evidence.

There are only two exceptions to this rule:

(1) By implication: When a lawyer asks a leading question and the witness agrees or disagrees, the jury may consider the answer as evidence that incorporates the lawyer’s statement in the question asked. As is true of any evidence admitted during trial, the jury gets to decide whether to believe or disbelieve the witness who agreed or disagreed with the statement and how much weight to give to the answer.

(2) By stipulation or agreement: When opposing counsel agree that the jury may consider a particular fact as undisputed. The stipulation then becomes part of the evidence the jury may consider.

Mark O’Mara will tell the jury during his opening statement that the evidence will show that Zimmerman killed Martin in self-defense. During summation, he can argue what facts have been proven or disproven in support of his argument that the prosecution failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Zimmerman did not kill Martin in self-defense. The jury may not consider anything he says as evidence and the same is true for anything the prosecutor says.

Zimmerman’s statements to police and various other witnesses before trial may or may not be admissible at trial according to the rules of evidence.

Subject to the Rule of Completion, the prosecution may introduce any statement he made under the Admission by a Party Opponent Rule. The Rule of Completeness permits the defense to clarify the meaning or intent of any statement offered by the prosecution by completing the statement.

For example, let’s assume a defendant said during a long custodial interrogation at the station house, “Sure I did it. I’ll admit it if it makes you happy and you let me go even though I would be lying if I said that.”

If the prosecution elicited the statement, “Sure I did it,” the defense would be permitted on cross examination to elicit the rest of the statement, “I’ll admit it if it makes you happy and you let me go even though I would be lying if I said that.” The purpose of the rule is to prevent the prosecutor from abusing the Admission by a Party Opponent Rule by introducing bits and pieces of statements that misrepresent what was said.

Statements admitted under the Admission by a Party Opponent Rule are defined as not hearsay by the rules of evidence. Hearsay, of course is a statement, other than one made by the declarant while testifying at the trial or hearing, offered into evidence to prove the truth of the matter asserted.

The declarant is the person who made the statement and, but for the Admission by a Party Opponent Rule, a defendant’s statement would be inadmissible hearsay.

In fact, it is inadmissible hearsay, if the defense offers the defendant’s statement to prove the truth of the matter asserted. In the example above, the defendant’s statement comes in under the Rule of Completion because the prosecutor opened the door by using the admission rule to create a false impression that the defendant had confessed. If the prosecutor had not done that, the statement would be inadmissible hearsay, if the defense offered it to prove the defendant did not commit the crime.

The vast majority of Zimmerman’s statements to police and others before trial are inadmissible hearsay, if offered by the defense to prove the truth of the matter asserted in the statement.

I believe we can reasonably assume that the prosecution will not offer Zimmerman’s exculpatory statements during its case, so the jury will not have heard any evidence of self-defense when the prosecution rests its case.

Because of the hearsay rule, O’Mara cannot get any of Zimmerman’s exculpatory statements admitted to prove the truth of the matters asserted during the defense case, unless they would be admissible pursuant to one of the exceptions to the hearsay rule.

In another post, for example, I mentioned that Martin’s statements to Dee Dee expressing fear and describing what the creepy man was doing would be admissible to prove the truth of the matters he asserted because they are statements expressing an excited utterance and a present sense impression. Those are two exceptions to the hearsay rule.

Zimmerman’s exculpatory statements are not admissible pursuant to those exceptions because he had an opportunity and a motive to be deceptive after he killed Martin.

O’Mara probably will attempt to admit Zimmerman’s statements to the Physician’s Assistant at the family clinic where he sought treatment and permission to return to work. He will argue that Zimmerman’s statements are admissible as statements for purposes of medical diagnosis or treatment, an exception to the hearsay rule.

Unfortunately for Zimmerman, his claim of self-defense was neither relevant nor necessary for medical diagnosis or treatment. Therefore, those statements are not admissible under this exception to the hearsay rule.

In fact, Zimmerman probably will not even get a self-defense instruction, unless he testifies, because there will not be sufficient evidence to support giving a self-defense instruction. O’Mara cannot create a sufficient evidentiary foundation to support instructing the jury on self-defense by what he says during his opening statement because his statements are not evidence.

Therefore, Zimmerman has to testify. If he testifies, the prosecution gets to cross examine him. That means the prosecutor can confront him with every statement he made before trial that is inconsistent with or in conflict with a statement he made on direct examination.

During its rebuttal case after the defense rests, the prosecution can introduce any evidence it has that rebuts evidence presented by the defense during its case. This would include presenting forensic or other evidence that rebuts something Zimmerman said and it also includes evidence of bad character, if the defense opened the door by presenting evidence of good character during its case.

In conclusion, Zimmerman is between the proverbial rock and a hard place because he is unlikely to get a self-defense instruction unless he testifies, but if he testifies, his credibility likely will be destroyed by all of his inconsistent and conflicting statements to police and others.

Damned if he testifies and damned if he does not, George Michael Zimmerman is in such a hell of a jam that no amount lawyers, guns and money will save him from a lengthy prison sentence.

800 Responses to Zimmerman: Why No Amount of Lawyers, Guns and Money Will Save Him

  1. Jamekia Bell says:

    Mr. Leatherman I enjoyed coming on your page. You post the truth and that’s the reason why the GZ supporter disliked you so much.

  2. changsterdj says:

    Reblogged this on changsterdj and commented:
    Things that make you go hmmm

  3. Xena says:

    ” In his order Tuesday, Lester wrote that Smithey “failed to demonstrate that she justifiably acted in self-defense.”

    Smithey now faces trial for 2nd degree murder.


    • Lonnie Starr says:

      Zimmerman had better thank his lucky stars, that he had not been allowed to flee to another country. This case has sparked “international outrage”, thus fleeing to a land without Constitutional protections and few, if any real rights, he’d be in a rather poor position, if some politician decided he could make hay of an arrest of GZ.

  4. Malisha says:

    Wait a minute, wait a minute — That would mean that any African American in this country right now who has any WHITE ancestors cannot possibly be prejudiced against whites, right? ANYBODY? So if a Black American says he is appalled that slave-owners routinely raped female slaves, that’s not an indication that he harbors any animus toward whites, right? HA HA HA HA!! There probably ARE no African Americans whose families have been here longer than two generations who are capable, under this definition, of prejudice against whites!! :mrgreen:

    • whonoze says:

      **insert tongue in cheek**

      I can’t despise the Germans ’cause my grandad was a kraut.
      Great great gramma was a Hugenout so dissing Frogs is out.
      I love all of my cousins, who are classified as black.
      (And B. works intel for the pentagon, so you don’t talk behind his back.)
      My family’s such a melting pot, it’s hard for me to hate
      If it weren’t for spics and wops, I guess I’d have to be a saint.

      **end parody**

      • cielo62 says:

        LOL! Yeah, just think! Being SO INTEGRATED with humanity that you CAN’T hate! Alas, even with all the melting, there are still some lumps that refuse to join the pudding.

  5. MichelleO says:


    What do here think about the Zimmerman’s saying that GZ is not prejudiced because he has black members in his family? Do they not know that both his cousin and ex-fiancee have stated the the mother was very biased against brown and black people? GZ and the mother got into an argument because he brought his latina girlfriend to her house, which resulted in him disconnecting the electricity, locked the box, and then taking the key to the box with him.

    His cousin says that the mother was virulently racist, and talked openly and proudly about her racism. She even called herself a racist when discussing why she was against Barack Obama in the office where both she and GZ worked. She was so openly racist in her discussion, that the cousin protected a black co-worker there by pushing her into a back room (break room?), as to protect her from the hate speech being spoken by GZ’s mother.

    I think everyone realizes that there is such a thing as self-hatred. It is a known and well-documented psychological problem that affects people from all walks of life. A person can hate themselves because they feel they don’t measure up to societal norms or parental expectations.

    • Rachael says:

      I think saying he can’t be racist because his grandfather was black is a crock-o-sheyit. What does that have to do with anything?

    • Malisha says:

      I think a little dose of self-hatred would be good for George AND Gladys right now.

      • MichelleO says:

        ONE would hope that they are deeply analyzing how they raised their children, and how making racism a family value has gone all wrong for them. Something tells me that they are not into deep self-reflection, and that they are probably blaming everyone else for their problems.

    • elcy says:

      I think that, although the prosecution didn’t charge that Zimmerman was racist, they could easily disprove O’Mara’s claim that he couldn’t be. After all, Zimmerman has a Hispanic mother, too, and that didn’t stop him from making derogatory remarks about Mexicans on his old MySpace page.

      • MichelleO says:

        AND it didn’t stop her from teaching her children that marrying “white” was the only acceptable mating ideal for her. There are many Latinos who are against marrying black and brown people. They believe that marrying “white” helps to improve the race and societal standing. They do not realize that this is destructive and backwards thinking is self-hatred, and pass it on to their children.

    • Jun says:

      its probably a fake photograph of a black person.

  6. In Zimmermmans twisted mind he feels one of his favorite rap artists ‘stabbed him in the back ”


    He relates to the song I Need A Doctor. You can listen to it on You tube. Just do a search there.

    Love your videos. Maybe you can do one on the song Zimmerman relates to.

    • MichelleO says:

      “Diddy isn’t the only hip-hop head Zimmerman felt he had a connection to. In another conversation, his sister compares Dr. Dre’s song, “I Need a Doctor,” to her brother’s current situation, to which he replies, “I’m so like Dr. Dre in the video.”

      THIS IS a bunch of bullshit. They know that the jailhouse telephone lines are bugged, and they already know that they have messed up by talking about moving money and hiding passports. They also know that, although the rallies are multicultural; that the movement is mostly populated by people of color. They know that Sharpton and Jackson have been at the forefront of this movement, and that many believe that the boy was profiled and executed because of his ancestry.

      I have no doubt that any of them listened to rap or even liked it. But talking as though any of these rappers had a personal relationship with them is absolutely bogus. This conversation is meant to demonstrate that they are both hip and not prejudiced against blacks in particular. It is all a very transparent ploy.

    • Malisha says:

      !!! I had not heard that stupid stuff about Diddy’s “stab in the back” until just now and I must admit that it is so dumb as to be disorienting. George and Shellie actually feel so “superior” that their “admiring” a Black performer should be enough currency to force that performer to feel a personal debt of gratitude to them! HUH? HELLO HELLO!! I guess it goes:

      We are naturally superior
      If we pay “like it” dues to any African Americans, then…
      They OWE us for liking them and…
      They better always accept OUR version of the world because…
      We LIKED them. That’s worth a LOT!

      I mean, I am just STUNNED with the stupidity of it. Even from THEM!

  7. Malisha says:

    JM, I write fast. I hear myself speak the words (subvocalized) and I type them as if I’m taking dictation. Sometimes I don’t even re-read to correct typos and then I get embarrassed later, reading it for errors and thinking, “ouch, too late to correct it.”

    I used to be a legal secretary. Before computers — so I type fast, remember what I hear, and try to use good grammar. No spell checks or grammar suggestions back then. :mrgreen:

    • jm says:

      Amazing Malisha. Wish I had your talent and skill to express myself. .

    • bettykath says:

      Malisha, I envy your ability for a one time write. Everything I write takes multiple drafts. It’s not unusual for me to write a bunch and edit it, write some more and edit it and then, when I think I’m done, it’s cut and paste and cut and paste ad nauseum until I’m satisfied. Then another time through to make sure the tenses are right and the spelling is close. Love the red line warning and the “right” click for spelling.

  8. Fed-up taxpayer says:

    I hope the jury is full of doting parents whose worst nightmare this case is, AND I hope that the Martin/Fultons do not break under the pressure of bullying and slander.

    I hope corruption in law enforcement is exposed and extirpated

  9. Malisha says:

    Yes. GZ supporters often make fun of him being “tired” since he was an athlete, —

    This should be a crime. This kid did not register to be a contender in a fight to the death with a gun-toting criminally-motivated crazy. He did not have to justify his actions to anyone; he had no expectation of being required to prevent his own murder. And if he was tired, that was his perfect right under the 14th amendment; and if he tried to defend himself but failed, that was his perfect right under the entire Constitution and his human life!

    Nobody has a right to require any different actions on Trayvon’s part, post-mortem, than he took. He needs no excuse for whatever HE did!

    George is the one who needs to explain himself and HE CAN’T.

    • Lonnie Starr says:

      Like I said, if anyone wants to see what GZ’s motivation for shooting would be, just look at the mess he would have been found in, if TM had survived and the police had found them both there.

      GZ covered with blood, TM elated with having been rescued and GZ taking a pat down and having his weapon discovered. Witnesses talking about arguments and running. Witnesses talking about screams for help. GZ would not stand a chance. The screams were recorded on 911 tapes and TM would be alive to claim his screams with his own voice. The news media came out that night too, they’d have asked questions of them both. The story that would emerge would paint GZ as a real and present danger to the neighborhood and the NW program. Police and everyone else would back away from him, he’d have to move away in the shame. Worse yet, there’s the prospect that he and the HOA would be sued.

      GZ shooting off his mouth, would cost the city and the HOA a bundle, by making it impossible to win they’d have to settle. The name Zimmerman would evoke disgust for a long time in the area.

      • Malisha says:

        RIGHT, AND he might never get a job again AND Shellie might come to her senses and divorce him.

      • MichelleO says:

        ” Police and everyone else would back away from him, he’d have to move away in the shame.”

        I WISH what you are saying was true. The fact that the SPD did not secure the crime scene, allowed Smellie to drive away with his vehicle, and permitted him to wash up at the police station, tells you that this story still wouldn’t have wound up with the happy ending you are telling.

        Both would have been taken in; but only ONE would have been properly checked for drug and alcohol usage. Only ONE person would have been believed (SPD is both lazy & dirty) even though there would have been the same holes in his story; and he would have still been allowed to describe his victim in criminal terms—insisting upon describing him as the “suspect.”

        It would have taken some time, as the SPD continued to drag their feet and to paint the young African American victim as some sort of hooligan—-but I believe only through attaining legal help, would Trayvon finally be freed and his name cleared.

    • Bill Taylor says:

      he truth is Martins was NOT an athlete he did play club football years before but was not on any team at the time of his death he did NOT play high school football…he was a very skinny kid with no record of ever being in even ONE fight in his life.

  10. Operacarla says:

    Dear Professor,

    Thank you for providing your expertise on this site! Something is bothering me about the Trayvon Martin case…in the Hannity interview at about the 16:15 minute George states that Investigators told him that Trayvon at this point knew that George was in contact with the police(?!)


    In Mark Osterman’s book Mark writes: “ that Zimmerman was told a Florida Department of Law Enforcement comparison confirmed, “by a 90 to 95% match,” the voice — captured on a 911 call during the altercation — was Zimmerman’s”
    Are these imaginary Police officers in George’s delusional mind or a part of something larger?
    Thanks again for all of your information.

  11. Malisha says:

    About Trayvon being out of breath or tired as a result of his walking or running, there’s another whole area of unknowns to be factored in IF we’re trying to figure out what Trayvon did and why (which is, strictly speaking, not necessary to any proof of the crime): here’s a kid who has no history of training for direct confrontation with an armed assailant. He has no history of martial arts or weapons training; he doesn’t hunt; he was not headed for a military career; he did not live in an inner city neighborhood where “everybody’s armed” or anything like that. He was a normal high school kid with a normal kind of background and to be followed (as he said he was, to DeeDee) and then confronted by an armed (I believe George had his weapon out well in advance of the actual shot being fired) and dangerous (obviously and undeniably) man probably disorganized his mind in a flash. The only reaction I can really predictably imagine is that “deer in the headlights” response that usually makes a person forget how to SPEAK, much less how to design a perfect escape like they do routinely on TV at a moment’s notice.

    Trayvon could have been a little winded and a little chilled, but the additional worry (“Who’s this creepy guy and what does he want from me?”) and the sudden shock of confrontation could have totally knocked the “planning instinct” out of him minutes before his untimely death. Remember, GEORGE had a chance to plan what he was doing; Trayvon did NOT.

    • TM says:


    • elcy says:

      Exactly, Malisha. What DeeDee heard in Trayvon”s voice probably was a mixture of fear, confusion and fatigue. Furthermore, some folks seem to have forgotten that Trayvon had already walked to and from the 7-11 store in the chill and rain before the chase in the gated community even began.

      • Two sides to a story says:

        Yes. GZ supporters often make fun of him being “tired” since he was an athlete, but the truth is, kids his age don’t always have a lot of physical stamina – or maybe they lack the mental stamina to regulate the physical stamina – they move in bursts of energy with lots of downtime in between these bursts of energy.

      • ks says:

        @ Two sides…

        I call that the “young buck” theory which is a racialist meme that suggests that all young AA boys are blessed with supernatural physical abilities. The hardcore racists called it “chimping out”.

        The amount of “debate” that went on about TM being a “football player” even though there’s no indication that he ever played HS football (or anything above youth football) and what that supposedly meant in his struggle with the GZ was ridiculous. Even after it came out that TM was just 5-11 and 158 lbs, the craziness still persisted.

      • MichelleO says:

        @KS: I call that the “young buck” theory which is a racialist meme that suggests that all young AA boys are blessed with supernatural physical abilities. The hardcore racists called it “chimping out”.

        THIS reminds me of a very sad story that took place a few years ago. I knew of this very nice and professional black family that lived in the neighborhood. They were Catholics and sent their son to a Catholic school in which he was the only black child there. This lady was driven to change the style of his haircut so that the teachers there could see that he was just a regular little boy and not a thug they were trying to present him as. That really broke my heart, because this was such a bright and well-mannered boy; but the school kept calling her for all kinds of things that had nothing to do with his work; but him as a person. I couldn’t believe that a Catholic institution would do such a thing or try to drive a family out of their faith or the school. But I saw this happen up close and personal. This lady turned away from her religious community after that. You don’t know what people have to suffer through until you see it with your own eyes.

    • whonoze says:

      Great posts above (the ‘no one could be a misogynist’ line was brilliant’) but I think here you’re infantalizing Trayvon.

      Any adolescent male who plays tackle football has a certain minimum level of physical fitness and mental toughness. We know he’d done a little playful boxing under adult supervision, and he probably was headed for the Air Force to get training in the aviation work that interested him.

      Given the amount of ground he likely covered, a typical 17 year old would have been a little winded, enough to be audible, but hardly so gassed he could not have run again.

      When GZ showed up behind TM again, he seems to have been more annoyed than scared. He tells DeeDee in effect: ‘This is my Dad’s neighborhood, I shouldn’t have to run here, so I’m not going to.’ He let’s GZ catch up to him (again, pretty much ANY 17 year old in decent shape could keep GZ from catching him), looks him in the eye man-to-man and says, “Why are you following me?”

      I grew up in a lilly-white but non-WASPy suburb of Minneapolis – very middle-America regular folk – and I would guess maybe 80% of the young men would have reacted to that situation this way.

      Another way of saying it: if you act like a scaredy cat or a deer in headlights with one stocky fart following you on your own turf, how you gonna make it through the halls of your high school from home room to phy ed class?

      • Malisha says:

        But Trayvon had no PROBLEMS with being bullied or getting into fights in his high school or in phys ed class. He WAS scared to death of Zimmerman — the sound of those screams shows that. I think it is probable that Zimmerman had his gun out very early in the encounter and was both interrogating Trayvon and terrorizing him. I’m not “infantalizing” him because none of us knows how we would react in a situation like that. We also have no clear idea of (a) what Zimmerman’s demeanor was at the time; remember, a co-worker who worked those “private parties” with him described him as a Jekyl/Hyde who could be damn scary; (b) whether Taaffe or Osterman was out there in a white shirt HELPING George subdue “the suspect” and bring him in; and/or (c) what george actually said and actually did.

        We don’t know much about Trayvon Martin; we don’t know much about what happened that night. But I don’t think it’s much of a stretch to think that Martin lost his bearings at some point between “Why are you following me for? [sic]” and “ow ow.”

    • Xena says:

      Trayvon (thinking). This car looks like it’s following me. I’ll get out of the rain — see if it keeps going. No. I really think he’s waiting on me to make a move. Does he think he knows me? Do I know him? Does he think I’m out looking to score drugs? Well, maybe he just pulled over to use his phone.

      Okay. He’s facing that way so I’ll walk in the other direction. Fool just made a u-turn. I should run. Yeah. I’ll run where he can’t drive.

      Man, it’s dark out here. I hope I didn’t run the wrong way. Naw, I can see the street ahead. Whew. I can take a breath now. Just have to get to the front of the house.

      What? Now I see him again. Is he looking for an address? Was he lost before? I’ll start walking. No. He’s still coming in my direction. Why are you following me?

      • whonoze says:

        Actually, we don’t know why the screams sound the way they do. Trayvon COULD have been scared to death That’s what I thought when I heard them. But other folks hear physical pain, not mental anguish. Listening to the recording many times, hearing the envelopes of the screams (they start loud and trail, rather than build up) and the timing between them, I’m now leaning to the pain hypothesis, especially since GZ says he ‘lost wrist control’ which means if he HAD wrist control, he would have been subjecting TM to some very painful ninja grip no doubt taught him by Air Marshall Osterman who absolutely has to know how to do stuff like that since you don’t go shooting guns on airplanes.

        It makes a lot more sense to me that GZ was sadistically applying pain to TM in an attempt to get the kid to holler uncle and submit, which TM refused to do out of a mixture of fear, defiance, instinct for self preservation, panic… than to imagine TM went all to jelly when GZ pulled a gun. Again, I’m not trying to say definitively he didn’t or wouldn’t have, just that it seems less probable. I mean I’m a total wuss myself, and I’m sure if someone pointed a gun at me I’d pee in my pants, but I’d probably be trying to talk the gun holder down, however stutteringly….

        I mean, it’s murder 2 either way. I think the speculation that GZ had his gun drawn before the confrontation is kind of silly. Trayvon obviously looked back to see Z following him, and he turned to ask why he was being followed. If GZ has gun in hand, TM doesn’t do that, he runs like hell. (And again, he doesn’t have to be Usain Bolt to get away from GZ. I was the slowest kid in my high school gym class, but i could have outrun GZ…) So the gun came out sometime after the wrestling began. W18, the most thorough and credible eyewitness, describes GZ and TM as ‘wrestling’ right up until the gunshot.

        So my best guess is that as TM refused to comply while being placed in GZs wrist lock, GZ became both angrier and more paniced himself. When TM finally broke his hand free, it may have just accidentally grazed GZ’s side in the general direction of the holster. In a split second about a half-dozen thoughts go through GZ’s mind – basically every thing any of us have speculated: I can’t let the asshole get away, what if he gets the gun and turns it on me, what is he gonna tell the cops… He doesn’t really have time to answer any of these questions, because his brain is a cocked pistol of gun-nut NRA fantasies with a hair trigger, so just feeling the questions fires the learned neural response to just pull the weapon and shoot to kill.

        • Lonnie Starr says:

          I don’t know why, but I get the impression that GZ just pulled the gun, aimed and fired. No warning, no display! People don’t scream and holler at gunpoint. They scream and holler in pain.

          I think the fact that the screams go right up to the shot, means TM never even saw the gun.

        • Patricia says:

          @ WhoNoze

          I wish I could give proper credit to the student who originally offered this insight, and I apologize for not being able to do so, but consider this: Trayvon’s long, drawn-out “No-o-o-o-o” is not “NO” — it’s “KNOW.”

          Trayvon’s “Why you following me for?” gets a rough response from Zimmerman: “What are you doing here?” then DeeDee hears Trayvon saying “Get off, get off!” and then the connection is lost.

          I can see Zimmerman grabbing the front of Trayvon’s shirt as he makes his demand; they are thrown off balance and fall. Maybe Trayvon reached out, punched out to Zimmerman, trying to keep Z’s hands off him – this is a “creepy” older guy to Trayvon, remember.

          They struggle on the ground, and Zimmerman, still stupidly and aggressively self-righteous in his wanna-be cop/NW role, keeps demanding to know why Trayvon is “here.” (Neighbors heard a stronger, more demading voice, and a weaker one.)

          Trayvon tries to answer: “I’m staying here.”

          Zimmerman demands, “Where?”

          Trayvon answers, “With Brandi.”

          Zimmerman has no clue who “Brandi” is, asks “Who’s Brandi?”

          Trayvon replies, “Mrs. Green.”

          Despite his claims that he knows all the RATL residents, that’s far from true. “Mrs. Green” is a stranger to him. Zimmerman is getting more pissed.

          Zimmerman demands, “What’s the address?” (Z would have “addresses” in his mind after the NEN311 call just minutes earlier.)

          Trayvon answers, “I don’t know.”

          Zimmerman, deciding the kid, as a potential burglar, is lying to him, applies the wristlock and the excruciating pain, demands, TELL ME!” He wants the confession so he can turn over the suspect when the cops arrive – shortly.

          “I don’t KN-O-O-O-W!!!” screams Trayvon.

          It is NOT that TRayvon was being defiant. He’s trapped in a situation for which he is NOT prepared. Now excruciating pain is applied because he CANNOT supply the answer.

          (WhoNoze, could you estimate the time for the above verbal exchange? There would be no pauses.)

          Note – the next-to-last on-the-ground position they were in (per W#6), with Trayvon on top trying to keep Zimmerman’s hands off him, is an ideal position for Zimmerman, with any kind of training, and with their hands slick from the wet grass (and sweat, from the tension) to suddenly shift his hand to get a painful wristlock on Trayvon.

          Then there’s the final rollover: Zimmerman mounts Trayvon, grabs his shirts for control, draws the Kel-Tec, moves his right fist away from direct center of Trayvon’s chest, taunts Trayvon with the muzzle of the gun in his face, snarls “Tonight you die, mother-fucker,” takes aim … then fires.

          The final “No-o-o-o-o” is when Trayvon sees the barrel of the gun.

          He doesn’t want Zimmerman to shoot him.

          Zimmerman does.

          • Lonnie Starr says:

            The idea of pain came from someone here who either had knowledge or read something. I read a martial arts site (which I posted to my blog) where they make good sense. They say that when someone catches someone they’ve been chasing, they usually grapple and fall to the ground. They then roll around a bit as one tries to gain the superior position on top.

            As far as their analysis of the screaming, it’s pain. They say that yelling/screaming and fighting are two different things. One who is fighting concentrates on that, to the exclusion of everything else.
            One only starts screaming or yelling when they’ve ceased fighting.

            You don’t yell or scream at gunpoint! Because you don’t want to further disturb your attacker. So that makes sense to me. There would be no point in screaming at gunpoint, unless you had a death wish. So, because the screams continue until the shot, that kinda means that TM never saw the gun at all. It’s a small gun that’s easy to conceal, it’s just barely larger than GZ’s hand. Drawn from a holster that’s at waist level, it would be hard to see with the loose clothing around. GZ could easily draw it, pull on TM’s clothing and take the shot, without TM even knowing what GZ was doing. Because he doesn’t see the fatal threat, TM continues to cry out for help. GZ pulls the trigger and cuts the calls short.

            Look in the “Dueling Videos” post which should be up top, you’ll see the karate demo video, click on the read more.

          • Patricia says:

            @Lonnie and WhoNoze –

            None of what I write will relate to the verdict – as we see it – because Zimmerman had Trayvon under control, aimed and shot him. But we are always trying to “connect the dots” and understand what happened.

            Either Trayvon’s last cries were caused by pain or fear.

            Pain would be exerted by Zimmerman’s hand, or possibly Zimmerman’s knee(s) kneeling on Trayvon’s arms.

            When Zimmerman decided to draw his gun, his left (dominant) hand clutched Trayvon’s shirts to control him, and his right hand reached for the gun, aimed and fired. So there were no HANDS available to cause pain. But there could be that knee pressure.

            Zimmerman quoted Trayvon as threatening him with death. What we have seen with Zimmerman are “mirror image lies.”

            I am sure that Zimmerman DID place his hands on Trayvon’s mouth to shut him up early on in the scramble. I need to ask WhoNoze if there was a break in the screaming on the 911 call (although parts are redacted when names and addresses are disclosed – so we are at a loss for those moments.)

            I see absolutely no circumstance under which Trayvon could threaten Zimmerman with death, and the phrasing, “Tonight you’re gonna die, mother-fucker!” does not fit his personality.

            Therefore, it’s cllear to me that this was what Zimmerman said as his final words to Trayvon. He finally had control over Travon, it had been a lot of trouble for GZ to get get control, he was a mess, and he was pissed at Trayvon because Zimmerman blamed it all on “the suspect.”

            There have been comments that the tone of the screams changed – that there was “NO” or “I don’t KNOW” earlier before the shot – but that the final scream had a different pitch – of desperate fear. I need WhoNoze’s comment on that.

            I do acknowledge that the Kel-Tek is small, and the night was dark. But Zimmerman has shown a sadistic streak in his past, and saying “You’re gonna die tonight, etc.” would be when he shoved the barrel in front of Trayvon’s face, before moving it down to is torso.

            I am giving strong consideration to your theory, Lonnie, that, in the face of a gun, you’d remain silent, for fear of precipitating the shot. But Trayvon had been screaming for 40 seconds, so I’m thinking that the screams could quite possibly escalate.

            So — to help my mind sort through this, WhoNoze — were there two variants of screams over the 40 seconds? Was the last scream more desperate than earlier? Did you hear breaks in the screams? What words were audible?

            Lonnie, is there some application for “You’re gonna die tonight, etc.” uttered by Zimmerman, other than after he drew his gun? Zimmerman didn’t invent these B-movie klunkers without having some basis of fact. I’m trying to see where this fits in. Trayvon would NOT say that. Who said it (well, Zimmerman) and when did he say it?

            The only way I see Zimmerman being able to apply physical pain right at the end (after he drew his gun, thus both hands were occupied) would be Zimmerman’s knee(s) on Travon’s arm(s). Trayvon’s lung capacity and diaphragm would remain unimpeded. Zimmerman thus would not have grass stains on one or both knees of his levis.

            Trayvon did cease screaming when the shot was fired.

            Looking to both of you for help, and any student who wants to chime in. Thanks!

          • Lonnie Starr says:

            From what I know from experience in seeing fights where people are put in painful holds or injured and scream or yell. They tend to keep yelling and screaming for some time, even after being released.

            Assuming TM knew what a gun was and had an idea of what it could do, it would be positively terrifying to see one appear in the hands of his attacker. Even in pain he’d stop screaming immediately, since the gun presents a much bigger, life and death, problem that holds and threats of injury do not.

            “You’re going to die tonight”, seems to be GZ thinking out loud.
            Where, it seems to me that, up til now he’s been temporizing with questions, while thinking of what his own position will really be when the police arrive to see he’s captured “this thug”. GZ, is hearing the nuances in TM’s childlike voice, his fearful manner, and immediately assesses that he’ll appear to be just a harmless kid to the police, if he’s questioned. If he also actually does live somewhere nearby, the GZ realizes his story is not going to sell.
            He arrives at this conclusion in little more than an instant, and the decision pops into his mind and he verbalizes it, “You’re gonna die tonight”. Sometime after he pulls the trigger, he realizes he may have verbalized this idea and so, to protect himself from a possible witness observation, he attributes it to TM.

            Witnesses had been coming out and going back in, so GZ would realize he didn’t have much time at all on his hands, but this act, he decided needed to be done, had to be done very quickly, or not at all. So, he pulls the gun and takes it straight from his waist band, around to aim and shoot, while pulling his other hand out of the way, probably because it’s over TM’s heart, where he intends a “sure kill shot” needs to be placed. TM keeps screaming because he never sees the gun. The statement, absent the gun, seems just so much just another vicious threat to TM.

            Needless to say I’m just speculating here, using, or rather attempting to use my own impressions. Obviously there’s no way to know what or how much, if any of it, will be confirmed or refuted. I just think that speculations give a framework to work around temporarily. Sometimes within such speculative frameworks a lead may emerge.

  12. Malisha says:

    Mark O’Mara also appoints himself (although obviously there is conflict here) as the social commentator on what the George Zimmerman case is about. First of all, he can comment on what the George Zimmerman case (is his client guilty or not guilty) is about; but he cannot comment on what the Trayvon Martin case (why wasn’t Trayvon Martin’s killer arrested when he killed the unarmed kid?) is about.

    Anyway, with magnificent white-man hubris, O’Mara says:
    “George Zimmerman’s lawyer: Plight of young black men isn’t the issue”

    Not for you it isn’t, Mark. But for young black men, their families, and the society in which they live and TRY TO KEEP LIVING, it surely is. It is SURELY the case that the plight of young black men is the issue if, when they are stalked by armed angry mentally unstable white men with dominance/submission issues, they are not allowed to defend themselves because self-defense, for them, is equivalent to being identified as a thug whom any angry, mentally unstable white man with dominance/submission issues then acquires the automatic RIGHT TO KILL.

    So either shut up about social philosophy or study the opposing briefs. WADR.

    • TM says:

      Malisha, you put the written word to many of my thoughts and I appreciate reading these comments

      • Malisha says:

        TM — thanks a million, what a wonderful compliment! I am a writer and when it appears that I can “get over” it thrills me. 🙂

        • jm says:

          You are a great writer, making logical points and with humor. Do you spend a lot of time creating your posts or is it a natural talent and wit that comes easily?

    • jm says:

      It sounds as though MOM is desperate and grasping at straws.. Maybe O’Mara should keep his mouth shut in general rather than say things that make him look stupid and/or foolish.

    • Two sides to a story says:

      I agree and also admire your articulate nature, Malisha! You express yourself beautifully.

      We can expect MO to try to isolate the GZ case from other issues such as “the plight of young black men” and gun violence / gun control (it’s his job as a defense attorney to do so, although that is usually done in court and not pre-trial in the media), but the truth is, these two issues are both inextricably linked.

  13. Malisha says:

    Today’s STUPID PRIZE goes to the idea that George Zimmerman “cannot be a racist because his great great grandfather was Black.”

    Under this theory, Hitler could not be an anti-semite and

    get this:


    • SearchingMind says:

      Good point, Melisha. Unconfirmed historic record has it that Adolf H.’s grand mom/dad was jewish. Yet Adolf H. is responsible for the worst crime against humanity ever known to man: the industrial extermination of the Jews, otherwise known as the Holocaust.

      • Malisha says:

        Even if Hitler had no Jewish ancester, he actually seems to have BELIEVED that his “blood was tainted” by some Jew before he was born. Although it is obviously one of those paranoid obsessive delusions that folks like Hitler come by from time to time, the point is simply that the FACT of biological ANCESTRY or intrafamilial genetics has no effect on the H.Q. (a phrase I coined, the “Hatred Quotient”) of any particular hostile human being.

    • jm says:

      “To prove his point, O’Mara pointed out that Zimmerman’s great-grandfather is black, so Zimmerman has to be a non-racist.”

      Seriously, has MOM lost his mind with that logic? Is he in over his head with the Zimmerman case?

      • Lonnie Starr says:

        This is the result of MOM hanging out with the “low information crowd” too long, in hopes of reigniting their charity. He’s attempting to use a reverse of white racist views that any black blood equals a black person. His logic is getting seriously screwed up by his efforts to make connections with them. In trying to make it appear he has joined them in some logical way, he’s adopting their mode of “logical thinking” which isn’t logical at all.

        That’s bad news for GZ, since MOM will, undoubtedly find this creeping into his methodology at trial.

        How foolish to say that GZ should not be viewed as a racist at all, because there’s no evidence to support it. What does he think the NEN and 911 calls GZ made over time, show? See all those White, Hispanics and Asian kids he didn’t know, who he’s reported for wandering around for reasons he could not figure out?
        Were they included in his remark “They always get away?”

        Didn’t GZ say that he knew TM was unarmed? So, why did GZ chase him with that gun he always carries? “Going in the same direction” as someone you’ve been following, is a distinction without a difference! Most especially when you have no good reason for going in the same direction they did.

        We know GZ’s story about getting an address, but since there was an address right there in front of him, near his truck, there was no reason for him to make the useless trip over to RVC! That is, except to continue to follow TM. The rest of the evidence shows us that, that is exactly what you wanted to do, despite your refusal to tell the truth about it. GZ you are toast!

        • jm says:

          “This is the result of MOM hanging out with the “low information crowd” too long, in hopes of reigniting their charity. He’s attempting to use a reverse of white racist views that any black blood equals a black person. His logic is getting seriously screwed up by his efforts to make connections with them. In trying to make it appear he has joined them in some logical way, he’s adopting their mode of “logical thinking” which isn’t logical at all.”

          So is MOM driven by greed, hoping for more defense money contributions? Wouldn’t MOM be better off not giving statements at all rather than sound as illogical and “confused” as GZ?

          I really don’t like O’Mara and I now question whose idea it really was to have GZ appear on Hannity. It was obviously a horrible decision. MOM says it was Zimmerman who wanted to do the interview, but did O’Mara go along with it, hoping to get more defense donations from the interview? Maybe I am biased but listening and watching Zimmerman, I drew the conclusion he is mentally unbalanced. Does MOM not notice GZ’s problems or is it just me who thinks it is obvious GZ has issues beyond ADHD and/or depression?

          Still hoping to hear from someone who knows more about the law and judicial system to see what will happen to MOM, if anything, after the GZ prison phone calls when he said MOM knew about the Paypal money. Is this insignificant at this point since Judge Lester is gone?

          • Lonnie Starr says:

            I think MOM has given up on offering any rational view of the case, thus, his only hope is that donations come in, sufficient to make his time worthwhile. Even before that interview, GZ had made the case a no win. All MOM can do is go along for the ride from here.

            As far as MOM knowing about GZ’s funds, we have only GZ word for it at the jail, that doesn’t mean, and/or isn’t proof positive that MOM knew about it. GZ may just be saying that to quiet someone’s fears/trepidations, without it actually being true.

      • ks says:


        What’s amazing to me is when I saw the “logic” adopted by folks (e.g. Talkleft) who should know better. GZ’s great grandfather was a dark skinned Peruvian man. While he may have had African heritage, there’s no evidence that he considered himself or was considered Black. Certainly not in the sense that MOM and Co. is trying to pass off.

        What’s even more bizarre is that we are supposed to assume that this very distant “fact” means that GZ is not a racist but ignore what other direct and recent actions says about him (e.g. molestation claim, arrests, inability to keep a job and workplace issues, attempting to scam the court during the first bail hearing and so on.)

        • jm says:

          “What’s even more bizarre is that we are supposed to assume that this very distant “fact” means that GZ is not a racist but ignore what other direct and recent actions says about him ”

          If GZ’s black great-grandfather was walking through GZ’s neighborhood with a hoodie on, would GZ have referred to him as a suspicious effing punk and an azzhole and called the police to report him?

          • Lonnie Starr says:

            On my Zimmerman blog there’s a video and link to some martial artists who need to be introduced to the treehouse, lol, My guess is they’d give them a real run for the money, these guys are pretty darned spunky. They believe that TM’s hoodie should have rose up over his head, so that if he was on top, they would have seen his hoodie. One of them says he owns the same kind of hoodie and his always works itself up over his head if he moves vigorously.

            I’ve had hoodies like that, every once in a while you have to reach up and put it down, only to have it climb back up again.

      • jm says:

        Lonnie says: “I think MOM has given up on offering any rational view of the case, thus, his only hope is that donations come in, sufficient to make his time worthwhile. Even before that interview, GZ had made the case a no win. All MOM can do is go along for the ride from here.”

        Isn’t this unethical of MOM just to go along for the money ride? In particular, I am wondering about the wisdom of GZ’s attorney allowing him to go on Hannity. (I understood this interview was to in hopes of raising defense funds.) If you can’t control your client, shouldn’t you resign? If you have to resort to no-sense “logic” to keep those defense funds coming in, is it ethical to stay on the case? I really don’t know the answers from an ethical/legal standpoint but MOM is looking sleazy right now, all things considered.

        Lonnie says: “As far as MOM knowing about GZ’s funds, we have only GZ word for it at the jail, that doesn’t mean, and/or isn’t proof positive that MOM knew about it. GZ may just be saying that to quiet someone’s fears/trepidations, without it actually being true.”

        So in essence, MOM is calling his client a liar in a back-handed way? LOL. I vaguely remember when confronted about his knowledge of the Paypal funds, MOM said he didn’t remember hearing about the Paypal money. Sounds like he learned how to dodge direction questions with forgetfulness excuse just like his client, GZ.

        • Lonnie Starr says:

          Actually, I think GZ would keep MOM out of the loop, because MOM would have had to get the court to take control of the account, if he was to get paid from it. Meanwhile at that time MOM was pro bono, as such he’d have no interest in the money. He’d have had to stand and watch as it disappeared down the rat hole, if he knew and kept his mouth shut. I really can’t see him doing that.

          GZ could have mentioned the paypal account and said that it had only a paltry few dollars in it. MOM would have reason to believe that, because of the many debts GZ had. Then beyond asking GZ to get a statement to him later, the matter could easily be forgotten.
          After all, it’s not like they didn’t have a lot of other stuff to discuss.

          • jm says:

            Lonnie: “GZ could have mentioned the paypal account and said that it had only a paltry few dollars in it. MOM would have reason to believe that, because of the many debts GZ had. Then beyond asking GZ to get a statement to him later, the matter could easily be forgotten.”

            Lonnie, If my memory serves me correctly in the recorded prison phone call to a male friend or relative (Ken?) GZ told him that MOM was aware of $37,000. That’s pretty important info because MOM was trying to get a low bond by saying Zimmerman was indigent and the fund was designated as trying to raise money for defense (MOM). If it was forgotten, that’s another stupid move on MOM’s part. If it is a GZ lie, further undermining his client’s credibility. I find it difficult to understand why GZ would lie to his male friend/relative about MOM knowing about the money.

            The Paypal matter should not have been forgotten by MOM given he was saying Zimmerman was indigent and the funds in the defense Paypal account should have been a primary subject of conversation. It would seem it would be of primary interest for GZ’s defense attorney to know how much money was being raised for defense (MOM).

            In any case, “forgetfulness” seems to be a convenient dodge for both GZ and MOM.

            In my unprofessional opinion, it makes MOM look shady and/or incompetent.

          • Lonnie Starr says:

            People, even lawyers get lazy. MOM had a lot of other stuff to talk about and do, so the mere mention of a paypal account wouldn’t figure big with a non e-savvy lawyer like MOM. GZ had all these debts and did not appear to have any money. At least he didn’t show up in a 1,000 suit with diamonds etc., no visible signs of any access to money. MOM would just take him at his word after warning him not to lie.

            In any event, I just don’t see them spending a whole lot of time on the issue. In fact, I don’t really see any advantage of GZ making any mention to MOM at all, for fear that MOM might get all the money put into the courts hands, freeze the accounts before GZ could move the money around.

            GZ knew there was money there and he wanted to keep it all, that means he had to keep it secret from any and all “outsiders” like his own attorney. I just don’t believe we can believe anything GZ says!
            This is GZ’s word against MOM’s, I don’t see a contest.

          • jm says:

            Lonnie: “People, even lawyers get lazy.”

            I don’t make anywhere close to $400 an hour and if I get lazy and “forget” something important in my line of work I would be fired. Maybe I expected more from MOM, but as time goes on, I expect less from him and do think he is incompetent and in it for the money, which makes me question MOM’s overall ethics.

            Lonnie: “GZ knew there was money there and he wanted to keep it all, that means he had to keep it secret from any and all “outsiders” like his own attorney. I just don’t believe we can believe anything GZ says! This is GZ’s word against MOM’s, I don’t see a contest.”

            I get what you are saying about GZ wanting to keep all the money, but what I don’t get is why GZ mentioned to his male friend/relative on recorded prison phone call that he told MOM about the money. I guess I am expecting too much in a major criminal case and from an attorney who is making $400 an hour? I really don’t care who is lying, GZ or MOM, it just makes me question the legal system and whether GZ is going to walk based on someone overlooking a fact that is relevant or excuse a lie that would make a person’s character come into question. So if GZ lied to friend/family member about MOM knowing about the money for whatever reason, that is brushed aside and not relevant to GZ character and credibility?

          • Lonnie Starr says:

            If someone, behind bars and speaking in codes, asks you to move some large amount of money, one might wonder if the court has anything to say about it. Thus, GZ’s remark that his lawyer knew and/or approved, would be just the lie to settle the nerves.

      • Malisha says:

        O’Mara has said a series of idiotic things already; maybe he is practicing up to run for office after the case is over.


        1. I think my client was reacting to having his nose broken and he reacted by yelling for help;

        2. This is not about the plight of young black males in America;

        3. We don’t accept any money from racists;

        4. George can’t be a racist because he had a great-great-grandfather who was Black. (By the way, that cannot be proven without DNA testing; perhaps a Black man did marry george’s great-great-grandmother, but paternity is not necessarily established by birth records ahem ahem…)

        I’m waiting for him to comment on 47% of the jury pool —–

    • Two sides to a story says:

      You’re absolutely right, Malisha. Racism is far more complex than this and is displayed in many different ways.

      • Xena says:


        4. George can’t be a racist because he had a great-great-grandfather who was Black.

        IMO, MOM fails to understand the history of race in America, and how people pre-judge by what they see. Take his logic and apply it, for instance, to people just before and after the Civil War whose grandfathers, great grandfathers, or great-great grandfathers were White. Would MOM say that they could not be distrustful of Whites because of their racial mixture?

        Those hawking that GZ cannot be racist because of Blacks on his maternal side are the same people who argue that President Obama is racist, although his mother was White. What do they see? The color of skin.

        • jm says:

          “MOM fails to understand the history of race in America, and how people pre-judge by what they see.”

          Do you really think MOM is that stupid? Seriously?

          To me It’s simple common sense based on life experiences to understand the history of race in this country and how people prejudge by what they see – for example his client, GZ, prejudged a black male teen in his neighborhood without knowing anything about the kid.

      • Xena says:


        “MOM fails to understand the history of race in America, and how people pre-judge by what they see.”

        Do you really think MOM is that stupid? Seriously?

        Yes, JM, I really do. MOM is an attorney who concentrates in criminal and family law. He is not a constitutional or civil rights lawyer. What he may have learned in law school about civil rights applied the law for redress of grievances in areas such as employment and housing, but not actual everyday experiences and certainly not the history of race in America.

  14. Malisha says:

    Something occurs to me. George Zimmerman is the Frankenstein that the Sanford Police Department in general, and Bill Lee (and Mark Osterman) in particular, created. He’s not even an original. If an ordinary citizen starts to act up in ways that the law actually has provided for, but you do not use that law the way it needs to be used, and instead, you bend the law so that a particular citizen can be EXEMPT from it, you are creating something, not in the law, but in the citizen. Now I do not know what particular police personnel were or could have been involved in (a) helping George get away with his assault on an ATF officer; (b) helping George get away with his domestic violence problems; and/or (c) using George to help get rid of the former chief of police and get Bill Lee promoted and installed instead; and (d) helping George set up NW in his own image so he could promote HIMSELF, but whoever it was, they helped George escape the consequences of his action, helped him redefine the reality of the already deficient Florida laws, and helped him place himself, and then nearly find himself, above the law altogether. When that happened, THEY were complicit in creating the problem that (a) they now have and that (b) killed an innocent kid.

    When government enters into a private citizen’s unlawful fantasy with him, either to placate him if he’s nuts, or in a corrupt way, if they WANT to do what he wants them to do, then they create someone who has an easy path to either coerce some officials to do more and more wrongful things in office (because now he has something on THEM) or he has a method that he has learned to coerce some officials to do more and more wrongful things in office (because they have learned to cave in to him). I had an ex-husband who was both crazy and corrupt. He got some government officials to do what he wanted by the sheer force of his wacky pestiferousness; others he got to do what he wanted because they just loved the way he “went after” a woman he hated, which gave them a “secret thrill.” Either way, he got them into positions where they had to get more and more of their own colleagues and even their superiors to cover for what they had done until he created a cabal of government officials doing wrong and they went beyond all bounds. Finally, now, after 30 years, I have written evidence that will hurt two of them — and it’s not even the most important or most significant two, but I’m going to use it. And these two hapless idiots (for whom I have no sympathy because they did plenty to hurt and rob me) will fall because an Assistant US Attorney is interested in the bizarre mess created by their Frankenstein.

    In the Zimmerman case, Bill Lee has fallen because of the circle of corruption they built around George Zimmerman. I predict more will follow. It seems to me that Patty Mahany is probably on the list.

  15. TM says:

    It is interesting when there is so much discussion regarding mental illness and how people behave when people who swear they do not have any mental illness can and often are destructive and attack out of sheer will and desire to do harm to other people, especially some they have no contact with whatsoever. What can we attribute such behavior too in such instances. Stress maybe, must have their way, pleasure in making someone else squirm, jealousy, all the issues that are considered normal can be as deathly oriented as one who may act because of diagnosed mental problems. How about bullying and the effects of it pushing sensitive people to suicide or some other means of self destruction because they feel they can never be worthy of having a friend or of being understood? What is normal?

  16. TM says:

    I agree that Zimmerman will use some excuse as to his state of mind for his defense. What else is there? He will be presented
    by O’Mara as one who actually believes the lies he has stated.
    His detatchment from reality.

  17. Vicky says:

    FYI, individuals with ADHD are more than capable of living successful lives, and I don’t like the idea that GZ’s diagnosis seems to have created such a negative impression of the disorder. So, I thought I would share a list of some famous people who have/had ADHD.. Frank Lloyd Wright, Samuel Clemmens, Pablo Picasso, Terri Bradshaw, Emily Dickinson, Ralph Waldo Emerson, Mozart, Andrew Carnegie, Malcolm Forbes, ann Bancroft, Ansel Adams, John F. Kennedy, Robin Williams, Thomas Edison, Albert Einstein. There are many more, and some of those I have mentioned live(d) with coexisting disorders. A quick google search will identify hundreds of famous people with mental health challenges.
    Mental illness can often explain behaviors, but it does not excuse the actions of most individuals, unless of course they are living with a disorder that causes them to lose touch with reality. Unfortunately, for those individuals, medication management is often as challenging as the illness itself. However, a very small percentage of individuals with any SPMI become violent or bring harm to anyone but themselves.
    The negative stigma associated with mental illness comes from over exaggerated reactions when a few people with mental illness make the front page news following a tragic incident. The majority of individuals with mental illness successfully manage their disability through medication, case management, peer/family support, and/or cognitive behavioral therapy. It is more likely than not, that each of us knows someone with some form of mental illness or has been diagnosed with a mental illness. I have worked with the SED and SPMI population for twenty years and can count on one hand the number who have physically harmed another person. Unfortunately, the number who have self harmed or completed the act of suicide is far greater.
    When people identify the “side effects” of medications used to treat mental illness in a negative light or without fully understanding the numbers of people who successfully use those medications, we are misusing that information. The knowledge that certain side effects might occur is intended to assist medical professionals, patients and family members with identifying the onset of side effects so that adjustments or changes in medication can be made.

    • Two sides to a story says:

      I think some of the above is what pharmaceutical companies want you to believe. Actual patients will tell you of the real struggles and going up and down with these drugs. These have a useful role to play in treatment, but they are not perfect or infallible and they do cause problems at times, and as you mention, there are constant adjustment and readjustments that can be extremely frustrating.

      My kids used to report feeling numbed out, or feeling as if they’re going up and down or in and out with a tide on the cocktails prescribed, not only to treat the condition but to counteract the other drugs – uppers to calm and make you more alert, downers to help you sleep, etc. etc. It’s a multi-billion dollar business extravaganza.

      • princss6 says:

        My kid also has an ADD diagnosis. He would never harm a fly and as such I in no way generalize GZ’s behavior to anyone other than GZ. There is either more than ADD going on with him or he doesn’t have ADD at all. Having said that, we dropped the meds after a few months and I put him a democratic free school. Yes, he is disorganized and has hard time focusing on school work but he is brilliant. He is just fine and beautiful and complete and although we didn’t deal with the meds for very long, I do sympathize with your struggle with your children and all children who are medicated.

    • Jun says:

      I think Zimmerman is using that as backup for an insanity plea. His constant I dont know’s are also basis for him to be considered unsuitable for witness, which I think his act is for.

      • Two sides to a story says:

        I don’t think it’s an act. People with ADD / ADHD often do have memory issues.

      • jm says:

        @ Jun I think GZ’s I don’t know or I forgot are his way of not committing to an answer that may not back up his account of self-defense/SYG. GZ is manipulative and with a little coaching from Papa Zimmerman and Osterman, he dodges questions with I don’t know or I don’t remember. Just my nonprofessional opinion of GZ.

        • Lonnie Starr says:

          Well… You don’t have to take my word for it, just go back and look through the interviews, reenactment and other places where GZ is questioned, and look a the questions asked that he claims not to know or has forgotten the answers to.

          When he’s ask why he doesn’t know only one of the street names, of the three streets in the neighborhood he’s patrolled for 6 months, his answer: ” I have ADHD, I forget”.

          He doesn’t remember he has the gun he always carries, until after TM reaches for it. Oh, and before I forget, TTL is the street that connects his favorite back gate, to the front gate. He uses that street every day, and it’s the street he worries about suspects escaping on.

      • Malisha says:

        The “I forgot the name of the street” was an act. Then when it became obvious that wouldn’t work we heard, “I can’t remember because I have ADHD.” The whole thing was made up to supply a reason (other than “I was following the suspect”) for his trip la-di-da around the neighborhood. The issue is a non-issue. Cops have GPS and they have MAPS. They can look at their screens and see the street names; they don’t need george to expose himself to grave danger by thugs just to get a street name. Patty Mahany could have told them that; Sanford is a very civilized, advanced city — in spite of it having been “invaded.”

      • Xena says:

        The “I forgot the name of the street” was an act. Then when it became obvious that wouldn’t work we heard, “I can’t remember because I have ADHD.”

        In his 2/29 interview with Serino and Singleton, as they played the NEN tape for GZ, they asked where he physically was at different points of his call. GZ said that when the dispatcher said “We don’t need you to do that” that he was on RTC. When asked where he was when he gave Sean directions, he said that he was walking back from RTC.

        Now, look at his reason for going to RTC — to get a house number. According to GZ, he was still on the phone with dispatch when he did that. Rather than give Sean the house number on RTC, GZ began walking back to his truck and then wanted the cop to call him for his location.

        GZ’s inconsistencies are because of his misrepresentations. No man has a good enough memory to be a successful liar.

      • Rachael says:

        ADD/ADHD cannot be used as an insanity defense because it is not a cognitive disorder.

      • Jun says:

        So he is on on Retreat View Circle the whole time?

      • Xena says:


        So he is on on Retreat View Circle the whole time?

        He told Singleton and Serino that when the dispatcher said “We don’t need you to do that” that he was on RVC. Yes.

        When he told the dispatcher where the cop would see his truck, he said he had just turned around to walk back to his truck.

        He then said that when he reached the dog path that he went down it. Then he caught himself and said he passed it and was at the T when Trayvon jumped out at him.

        Of course, GZ’s timing is off. If it happened like he said, he would have had the house address on RTC when he was talking to Sean, and the altercation would have started before he ended his NEN call.

      • Xena says:


        I don’t think it’s an act. People with ADD / ADHD often do have memory issues.

        While that is true, GZ’s memory issue regarding the street he was on was because he was distracted. Note: After GZ gave directions to where he was parked was when Sean asked “What address are you parked in front of?”

        Thus, GZ’s entire story of looking for a house number on RTC where he wasn’t parked, actually says where his mind was going. IOWs, GZ heard Trayvon’s phone ring, or Trayvon’s voice, and was gathering his route (in his thoughts) to RTC to cut Trayvon off.

        • Lonnie Starr says:

          You can’t tell from just listening to GZ whether or not he’s telling the truth. You have to put what he says on a timeline, to see if it’s even possible. Many of the things GZ has said, are already known to be lies, because the timeline it creates doesn’t support it.
          Then, as you correct for one lie, another one is revealed.

          GZ is the only one here who gets to tell his story in full. Trayvon’s story has to be deduced from whatever evidence can be found. So, it’s not a contest between equals. If GZ did something wrong, he can simply refuse to remember it or tell another lie and move on.
          GZ get’s to explain what he was thinking and what he feared, we have to guess what TM feared and/or would have been thinking.

  18. TM says:

    Strange you should mention bullying Vicky. LOL! Good girl! Seems it always happens to people by people who have no idea who they are bullying and I’ve been wondering if there might be a time when it wasn’t considered fun, for some people. Hurrah! for October!

  19. Vicky says:

    Someone mentioned bullying in an earlier comment. So, I thought I would mention that October is National Bullying Prevention Month.

  20. Malisha says:

    Here’s something I hadn’t seen until now although it’s dated: Sanford City Commissioner Patty Mahany going OFF about the firing of Chief Lee. Note her:

    1- Failure to cite or use any facts;
    2- Emphasis on the way she personally feels, as if it proves something;
    3- body language (closing her eyes when she says something that doesn’t seem totally true or supportable, for instance, waving her head around in anger, for instance…) and —
    4- a word used by the journalists covering this: her PASSION.

    • jm says:

      Watched several Patty Mahany youtube videos. She’s an idiot spewing self-righteous nonsense.

      • bettykath says:

        No matter what the validity is of your argument, you will probably lose if you add in a good dose of emotion. The emotion is what people relate to, not the argument itself and too much emotion turns people off.

    • Patricia says:


      Just watched Patty Mahany.

      That’s not passion – that’s venom.

      • Malisha says:

        Agreed. I was calling it passion because (a) a journalist commented to HER that it was passion and she chuckled that “I’m a very important person who can grace the camera” chuckle and agreed; and (b) I meant PASSION for Bill LEE. Ahem, ahem, ahem!! (I just held myself back from observing a resemblance between her and Shellie because I thought it a bit catty of me.)

  21. Malisha says:

    Xena, thanks, very interesting in a quaint kinda way.

    But then again, to quote Shakespeare (from Julius Caesar):

    “The fault lies not within our stars, but in ourselves.”

    • Xena says:

      Malisha, I agree with Shakespeare. Whatever the stars say is not beneficial to us and mankind is what we then have opportunity to change within ourselves. The same things that can be used for good can also be used for evil or for unbeneficial purposes, so we always have a choice. GZ’s stars gave him the tendency to want perfection, but he used evil in effort to rid what he believed was evil. IMO, GZ looked for evil under every rock.

      • Malisha says:

        I believe he looked for evil under every rock. But also, if he turned over a rock and found no evil, he’s smite the rock!

        And that’s what happened.

      • Xena says:


        I believe he looked for evil under every rock. But also, if he turned over a rock and found no evil, he’s smite the rock!
        And that’s what happened.

        You are so right.
        If you listened to his jailhouse phone calls with ShelLIE, did you pick up on that need to check and double-check that she understood his instructions? There is one call where after talking to Shellie, he asked to talk to Gracie and then instructed Gracie to make sure Shellie did things as he described.

    • Two sides to a story says:

      Astrological birth charts are a map of our karmic propensities and potential. As such, these aspects are WITHIN us, not outside of us, and are self-created. I think the interpretations of GZs and TMs charts are very pertinent.

      • Xena says:

        I think the interpretations of GZs and TMs charts are very pertinent.

        What caught my eye is that about 3 astrologers all say the same, or similar things about GZ based on his birth chart. There is one astrologer who believes that GZ’s destiny is to be in isolation, such as jail or a mental hospital. More than one predicts that drug or alcohol addiction will be revealed in the future. None are predicting the outcome of his case, however.

        GZ could have made better choices for his life path.

        Many moons ago, I was told by an astrologer that Pisces was in several of my houses. (Don’t ask, I still don’t understand.) 🙂 But I did pay attention to her warning; i.e., because of Pisces in several of my houses,I should never do anything that is addictive because I would not have the ability to overcome addictions easily.

        Remember the Pong game? I learned my lesson. LOL!

        Just imagine if GZ had been told that his desire for others to be perfect would be better directed in the arts rather than in law enforcement.

      • Two sides to a story says:

        Xena –

        I’ve always wondered about GZs proposed career choices. Typically many people with ADD / ADHD and other mood disorders are highly creative and do well in one of the arts or things associated with the arts. It’s a little odd that GZ wanted to be a cop and then a judge – well, not so strange in that his father was a magistrate and that he has LEO friends, but these professions are not necessarily compatible with his limitations. We see by his school records that there’s no way he’s going to be able to get into law school, so his professed desire is not even realistic – this also leads me to believe that GZ has a deeper, undiagnosed problem.

        • jm says:

          ” This also leads me to believe that GZ has a deeper, undiagnosed problem.”

          I believe you are correct. GZ’s behavior on Hannity led me to believe GZ has a much bigger problem than ADHD. Maybe he was misdiagnosed and as GZ behavior pattern evolves as an adult he may be easier to diagnose. I see him as a sociopath after reading up on what constitutes a sociopath diagnosis.

      • Two sides to a story says:

        Also, I found that the astrological transits for both GZ and TM for the day of Feb 26 to be very striking – a danger zone for both and this shows the karma at work in this case. TM’s chart showed someone who would possibly die young and GZ someone dealing with deep anger issues (probably projecting anger with self onto others) and as you said, Xena, a future with physical isolation.

        Astrologers do not predict the future, as this is impossible because the future is never fixed and depends upon complex influences, but look instead at these astrological karmic maps to see tendencies and possibilities.

      • cielo62 says:

        And have those charts been drawn up?

      • Xena says:

        @Two sides.

        I’ve always wondered about GZs proposed career choices. Typically many people with ADD / ADHD and other mood disorders are highly creative and do well in one of the arts or things associated with the arts.

        Exactly. Even without ADHD, GZ’s astrological makeup would benefit him to concentrate in the arts. Is it any wonder that the woman he would marry is a cosmetologist?

      • Xena says:

        @ cielo62

        And have those charts been drawn up?

        Upthread is a vid of the charts. What would be more helpful to astrologers is having actual times of birth. They are using a noon time.

        Two sides to a story seems to be much more advanced in this than I am, and might find it interesting that O’Mara’s DOB is 3 days after Trayvon’s although years apart.

  22. Xena says:

    Looks like the conservative treehouse has overstepped their boundaries.

    • Jun says:

      The only reason they havent been sued by Crump and everyone else for spreading slander and libel is that Conservative Treefrog is likely owned and run by a broke loser

      • Xena says:

        @Jun. That could very well be possible. As well, the comments they allow about DeeDee on that site might be construed as witness intimidation.

      • Jun says:

        That is very well true. I am fairly sure that the State has kept watch of that site. But if not, someone should send them over there as thats proof from Z’s backers of slander and harassment and cyberstalking.

    • whonoze says:

      That letter is BS, the photo is newsworthy AND the Treehouse was commenting on it as a photograph, so it’s protected Fair Use. If they couldn’t post that photo, LLMPapa and Trent couldn’t make videos either. It’s an open and shut free speech case.

      But as for the libel, I believe they would lose if any of the people they have defamed brought suit, and I can only assume the victims have not done so because they have determined it’s not worth they’re trouble.

      As for witness intimidation, I would guess the courts would go with a free speech argument as long as the Treepers were doing their thing in their own ‘space’, and not acting in ways that a reasonable person would expect to bring their venom to DeeDee’s attention.

      • Xena says:

        @whonoze. CTH may have problems claiming fair use. For one, what they wrote was a criticism of a Huffington Post article and not the photo itself. Secondly, CTH is not a not-for-profit organization.

  23. Malisha says:

    I don’t know if George does or does not suffer from ADHD; he’s so full of bullshit we don’t even know if he DOES have a diagnosis, do we? But either way, that’s not, in my opinion, the major problem.

    I think he suffers from GVB Syndrome, that is: Garden Variety Bully.

    Oh. On Steroids. (Steroids are named Taaffe, Osterman…)

    • Jun says:

      Well if Zimmerman fights his medical records to not be used, it will be used against him when they say he has no medical records.

    • Two sides to a story says:

      I don’t think GZ would be taking the drugs listed in his medical records if he was not diagnosed with ADHD. ADHD somtimes accompanies other mood disorders like bipolar, borderline personality disorder, and so forth. These are not always easy to diagnose and from all appearances, GZ could possibly have one of these as well and be undiagnosed.

      I say this from my long experience around many family members with mood disorders, and from my own experiences with anxiety / depression. Many people with these disorders are otherwise functional and able to get by in jobs and school (though not as well as people w/o these issues) and would appear normal to others who don’t know them well. Check out BPD on Wikipedia and see if you spot some of GZ;s behavior in this description: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Borderline_personality_disorder .

      This does not mean that all people with ADHD or BPD or bipolar or combinations of these go around making strange decisions with weapons and kill people. Even though a mental health issue may not be brought up in this case, both the ADHD and possibly an associated condition or conditions along with the meds (or perhaps NOT taking them as prescribed or having side effects) are surely a facet of GZs behavior. To ignore this is folly, in my opinion. Just like GZ supporters ignoring the fact that what may be legal is not necessarily ethical or moral . . .

      • princss6 says:

        On the other hand, ADD/ADHD meds are over prescribed and I can see his family shopping for a more acceptable diagnosis than the issues that I believe really ail him. And it isn’t unheard of for ADD/ADHD to present with other illnesses and that illness seems to be the go to illness for boys. So IMO, he is misdiagnosed either through masking of more serious issues in combination with ADHD or he doesn’t have ADHD at all.

  24. jm says:

    I also thought the drugs could be affecting GZ behavior. I read about certain side effects of the drugs Adderall and temazepam, but don’t know how valid these claims are or what percentage of people prescribed the medication experience side effects.

    • rayvenwolf says:

      If GZ were to have a reaction to his meds its my opinion it would be likely from misuse.

      • MichelleO says:

        WHONOZE: I was hoping that with the next document dump, which will focus on GZ’s high school years, that we will finally see whether he had any history of animal or child abuse. I’ve known fucktards such as GZ when I was a kid, who wasn’t the biggest and baddest mofo in the crowd, but who could be depended upon to push the envelope when it came to pranks and cruelty. This sort of individual would usually hide out in the crowd, and be protected by them when finger-pointing time came.

      • Xena says:

        Okay. Don’t think I’m going off the deep end, but at times when I cannot understand a person, I seek understanding and glean what is credible or what confirms what is already known.

  25. whonoze says:

    I’ve posted this before, and I’ll probably post it again:
    PLEASE lay off GZ’s psych meds as an explanation for his behavior.

    I happen to be on a very similar cocktail for my chronic generalized anxiety disorder (GZ takes Adderall and Temazepam, I take Ritalin and Clonazepam). These meds do not incline the user towards sociopathy. Like many meds, they can be abused, but we have no evidence GZ did that. His affect on the night of 2/26 certainly is not consistent with significant doses of either med.

    ‘Minor’ mental health conditions (depression, anxiety, ADD) are horribly misunderstood and stigmatized, and so are the meds used to treat them. When people find out you have one of these conditions, they either assume you’re some kind of wimpy/whiner/faker and just don’t gave the character to tough it out – or they think you’re some kind of dangerous whacko and move away from you.

    Truth is, you’re just sick. It hurts, and it moves your life significantly toward the ‘unpleasant’ side of the scale. (I lost my career as a result, and am now living on disability payments.) But, if anything, on the behavioral side you tend to withdraw inside yourself. The thing itself is bad enough, but then you have to add in the way people shun you or just treat you differently when they find out you’re being treated for a mental health issue or taking any kind of mental health meds.

    Believe me, none of these meds come anywhere near the danger level, especially to others, of a gin and tonic or a shot of tequila. On 2/26 GZ’s speech was somewhat slow and slurred compared to normal, and yet he was also rash and over-aggressive. That’s a classic alcohol profile, not benzos (he’d be too sleepy to be aggresive) or stimulants (he’d be alert enough to talk normally, actually remember addresses, and so forth).

    Based on what we know about GZ’s history, I would guess his anxiety/ADD issues are relatively mild, since he seems to get out and about socially well enough (however much of an asshole he may act like when doing so). But I would also guess they are the tip of the iceberg of deeper seated pysch issues that do make him a potential danger, but on which common meds like Adderal and Temazepam have no more effect than would Sweetarts or Good and Plenty.

    Anyway, there are lots of us out here struggling with messed up Serotonin and/or Neuropenephrin levels or whatever the fuck has broken down in our brain chemistries, and as a whole we’re as harmless as the general population, and probably have a much lower ‘jerk’ quotient. A lot of us resist taking our meds exactly because they’re so stigmatized, which is not a good idea. We don’t need more amateur psychiatrists ascribing crazy shit to these relatively benign meds.

    (Note: I am not talking about bipolar disorder and the mood stabilzers and anti-psychotics used to treat that and other more serious conditions. These are the meds that ‘zombify’ the patients, and that people resist taking because the treatment can seem worse than the disease. That’s a whole ‘nother kettle of fish. GZ’s meds do NOT fall into that category.)

    • jm says:

      Would the drugs or the ADHD affect one’s memory?

        • cielo62 says:

          Poor memory is already a symptom of ADHD, as is being impulsive, short tempered, and disorganized. Medicine usually helps with the inability to sit still, but only behavior modification will help overcome the rest. 

      • Excellent Whonoze! Sorry for your disability and do understand.

        I’ve not posted, just been reading. Some of the posts have gotten so far away from what the Professor has taught us. Stick with the facts and what can be presented in a court of law.

        If I remember correctly when Gz saw the PA the morning after he killed Trayvon the last time he had a refill on his Adderall had been a while… she gave him a written prescription while he was there. But, it does not matter. ADHD will not help Gz explain away the facts we already know in this case. And, if the defense even goes there….a good psych doc for the prosecution will knock it down.

        Remember what the Professor has taught us. Spin it ten ways until sundown and it comes up as only one way. From the NEN call and from DeeDee’s account, Trayvon ran from the creepy man following him, until he could run no more. George Zimmerman was the aggressor and Trayvon Martin was fighting for his life. We have it from the horses mouth that he charged after a running Trayvon.

        Do I hate George Zimmerman and his kind? No. I just believe what is wrong is wrong and a person should be held accountable. How a 28 year old who lives in the United States of America and enjoys the freedom can come to the point of shooting a barely 17 year old is beyond our understanding. IMO I remember my grandpa’s words……Gz “bit off more than he could chew”….and now he has to “pay the pauper”.

        Remember, also, the document dumps. From the Anthony trial the the gazillion pieces of documents dumped, we learned. It is just that…a dump of documents…in no certain order…anything and everything that comes in by way of discovery is dumped…and it might have nothing to do with the case. What comes across the prosecutions desk is dumped. We cannot put it all together until the last page comes in.

        And the good Professor helps us analyze what can and cannot be presented at trial. Remember in the Anthony case cell phone pings were analyzed in minute detail. Proof of her lies beyond a reasonable doubt we said. BUT, no one saw her with the danged phone to her ear. So, how could we prove she was the one using the phone? Wasn’t even presented at trial. Well, hells bells we all knew she talked and texted for hours and hours after he child died….but, what we knew and what the jury heard was a different story. So how many of Gz’s lies can be proved with the evidence?

    • Malisha says:

      Very good explanation, Whonoze. I don’t think George’s meds had anything to do with ANYTHING regarding the crime, and I worked for a psychopharmacologist for a decade. I have personally researched not only all the drugs mentioned but all the diagnoses mentioned for George (ADD, ADHD, etc.)

      IT WAS GEORGE who used the ADHD for an excuse, not for the killing (that was self-defense, remember? Not “impaired capacity”) but for his having forgotten the name of a street in his neighborhood. Serino challenged him on his claim that he was out of his truck to look for a street name; Serino said it was not believable that there were 3 streets in his neighborhood and he failed to remember one out of the three; he responded that he had ADHD. He was just mentally photoshopping his excuses.

      No mental illness makes a person into a murderer unless, of course, the person is psychotic and is out of touch with reality; George never claimed that and there is no evidence of it.

      On the other issue, the stigma issue, I believe all of us who have depression and anxiety (I’m with you on that count) tend to be the more realistic, caring, and empathetic people in the general population. After all, we see what happens around us and we feel it acutely; that’s why it bothers us when someone hunts down
      and kills an innocent teen, in fact. I’m not apologizing to anybody about it because my belief is that it makes me radically DIFFERENT from George Z. I feel things too much; he feels them not at all.

      • TM says:

        Malisha, “radically DIFFERENT from George Z. I feel things too much; he feels them not at all” excellent! The difference in having compassion and caring and not having any.

      • jm says:

        I think George Zimmerman is clearly a sociopath who may or may not have side issues of ADHD/depression. The reason I believe he is a sociopath is his total lack of remorse for killing an innocent after it has been proven his suspicious person was staying in the neighborhood and had no drugs or weapons. His ability to brazenly lie is another reason I think he is a sociopath.

        GZ reminds me of Casey Anthony in so many ways.

        I also wonder if a part of GZ mental problems may have been childhood abuse – if what Mark Osterman said about Zimmerman’s parents is to be believed, that he was beat by his mother and his father did nothing to intervene.

        • Lonnie Starr says:

          My reading tells me that George has only “selective” problems. The only time they become visible is when he needs them to be visible. His memory loss only occurs when he needs to forget something, like the gun he always carries, or the name of the street that runs from the front gate to the rear gate, that he’s been driving on for three years. Notice how absent any forgetfulness is, in his complicated scheme to move his money around?

          Oh but wait! He did forget he needed his credibility, eh? I mean, he could have told his lawyer: “200,000 came in and I paid off my debts because I realized I wouldn’t be able to work, and my wife said she may be pregnant, so I couldn’t put myself ahead of my wife and child, so here’s what’s left.” But no, he goes through the trouble of trying to use a code to conceal what he’s doing, goes into court and lies, has his wife lie, and he keeps a second passport hidden from view. Could that 2nd passport be the reason why he didn’t believe he’d need any credibility any longer? I’d be willing to bet the jurors will want to evaluate that for him.

      • MichelleO says:

        HIS mother could have felt that George’s ADHD was an indictment on her as a parent. She could have felt that he wasn’t measuring up, and was an embarrassment to the family. Osterman did say that George felt that he wasn’t as loved and appreciated as other members of the family. Robert Jr. (his brother) is an attorney. The mother probably did not know how to handle an ADHD child, and took it out on George. This doesn’t excuse him, but may paint a picture as to how he gained a reputation for bucking authority. I mean, he fought cops, who were surrounded by other cops, molested his younger cousin in a room full of people, and threw a drunken young woman across a room. Let’s not forget turning off his mother’s electricity, and then taking the key to the electrical box with him. He has some very strong anger issues. Which is probably why he is all doped up with prescription drugs.

      • Xena says:

        @Lonnie Starr.

        My reading tells me that George has only “selective” problems. The only time they become visible is when he needs them to be visible. His memory loss only occurs when he needs to forget something,…

        YES! That is so clear in his interview with Singleton and Serino. I just wish that Serino had allowed Singleton to continue putting pressure on GZ as he conveniently forgot things.

        Oh but wait! He did forget he needed his credibility, eh? I mean, he could have told his lawyer: “200,000 came in and I paid off my debts …

        It has been my impression that had GZ been honest, O’Mara could have informed the court of amounts earmarked for living expenses, past-due debts, etc., and Judge Lester may have still entered bond at $150,000.

        Could that 2nd passport be the reason why he didn’t believe he’d need any credibility any longer? I’d be willing to bet the jurors will want to evaluate that for him.

        No doubt about it, GZ planned to flee. In his mind, being out of debt means that he could live off the remainder of the money for years.

        • jm says:

          “It has been my impression that had GZ been honest, O’Mara could have informed the court of amounts earmarked for living expenses, past-due debts, etc., and Judge Lester may have still entered bond at $150,000. ”

          It is my impression from prison phone calls regarding O’Mara’s knowledge of money in PayPal account, O’Mara is just as dishonest as GZ and didn’t mind helping to hide his “defense” fund money. It seems Team Zimmerman is filled with members who have issues with telling the truth and the lies are not limited to GZ.

      • princss6 says:

        What I need clarified is if GZ was recently placed on Adderall from another script (can’t remember the name) because the other med caused aggression. It could have been his prescription refill but I also think this may be why the prosecution wants more medical records.

    • bettykath says:


      I’m one of those who has highlighted GZ’s meds as a possible contributor to his inability to have an emotional reaction. It wasn’t intended as an indictment of all meds or all mental health issues requiring meds. I apologize for giving that impression.

      I do know that some meds, especially if the dosage isn’t right, can give that effect and that’s why I mentioned it. Your knowledge of the meds suggests that this isn’t the case with GZ. I’ll drop the speculation.

      So we’re back to: he’s a self-centered bully with little ability to feel empathy but we don’t know why. Is that fair?

      • whonoze says:

        It’s fair to say we don’t know why, but we can guess it might have something to do with his family history, and specifically the way he was treated as a child. It’s just a guess, but things don’t happen for no reason.

      • MichelleO says:

        BETTY: You are absolutely correct that some medications can “narcotize” a person. There are mental wards full of such individuals. I know that there are drugs used for depression, which can slow down a person’s reaction time.

      • Two sides to a story says:

        Thank you Whonnoze for your courage in speaking up.

        As a mom with two (now grown) kids with ADD and treated with similar meds, I disagree and do think that the entire spectrum of behavioral conditions plus the meds CAN lead to troubling behaviors, (just as the condition unmedicated can also lead to troubling behaviors – or not. It really depends upon the individual – and people and their body chemistries are complex.

        I think this capability for impulsivity and going up and down with the meds as they ebb and wane in the brain is demonstrated by GZs past and present behavior, but that doesn’t mean that everyone with ADD / ADHD and is on meds exhibits the same behavior.

        This doesn’t mean we can or should demonize anyone across the board with these conditions and who use pharmaceutical drugs to balance themselves. I would not belittle anyone with these issues, as I’m also ADD and fight depression /anxiety, but have always found more stability by using natural remedies, exercise, restricting social contact when necessary, meditation, and other lifestyle choices. I don’t think one type of treatment is necessarily superior to another – it just depends upon what works for the sufferer. I am overly sensitive to pharma drugs and feel toxic and have had rare side effects after a few months on them.

        It’s true that many people with ADD /ADHD and other conditions such as bipolar are quite sensitive, kind, and creative, but it’s also true that some are more negative and afflicted than others, and this comes about for many different reasons as diverse as innate personality as well as upbringing- childhood abuse, etc. GZ seems to labor under the latter banner as well as having some deepseated issues with aggression and control that are associated with the physiological expression of ADHD, but could also be related to childhood issues.

        It could well be that we’re not seeing sociopathic tendencies in GZ but a person numbed out by pharmaceuticals, or even a combination of the two.

    • cielo62 says:

      I agree with you 100% about this whonoze. Whatever mental illness GZ has, it’s NOT something that medication can alter. I only suffer from moderate depression. LOVE my Zoloft! But the calculated “hunting” of a defenseless teen is NOT something that is brought on by over-using or abusing any form of ADD, ADHD, depression or anxiety medication. It’s certainly not listed as a possible side-effect!I would expect it from maybe some hallucinogenic illegal drugs, but then GZ would have had additional symptoms. Sorry, the only “illness” GZ has is “evil”. And he has chosen that route to get whatever sick recognition he thinks he needs.

  26. Malisha says:

    TM, Z cannot retract his lies; he already believes them wholeheartedly. He considers himself very tolerant for not pressing charges against Trayvon Martin. But no prob; he’s gonna sue their parents for intentional infliction of emotional distress.

    • TM says:

      I know you are right Malisha, guess I keep looking for something so I can think there must be something good in
      “everyone” unfortunately it just isn’t always a possibility. It would be a real shocking shame, to think that his lies might be paired with the interpretations of the law and he walks. Surely not!

      • Malisha says:

        TM, I don’t think he’s gonna walk. He might run, though. We have stopped hearing reports of money coming in — but you can bet it has not stopped coming in. The gun folks and the FOXies are behind Zimmerman come hook or come crook. Or go crook.

      • I dont think GZ will walk and I dont think he will run either — maybe more like a skipping.

  27. TM says:

    Been reading back posts and find more recently there is missing that cute little brunette “Mainstreamfair” who had been having some excellent input on the Professors posts. Quite insightful and challenging in the legal profession. Hope you are not ill. MSF, did
    so very much enjoyed your comments along with others most knowledgeable of this crime. Patricia up front in class along with others offering exceptional wisdom. In going back and reading all
    again there is quite an abundance of rational thinking. Maybe if
    Z read here he would retract all his lies.

  28. Xena says:

    LLMPapa has uploaded a new video.

    • Xena says:

      LLMPapa, it was GZ who put his hand over Trayvon’s mouth and nose. I have listened to the 911 recording numerous times after reading that Trayvon called 911 seconds before he was shot. After detecting GZ’s voice, I was unable to make out all of his words but distinctly hear GZ’s voice saying the “f” word in the background. It was also at that time when Trayvon stopped screaming for a second. That was followed with a cry of pain, a long “Nooo,” a faint “help” and then the gunshot.

      GZ made sure that the EMT’s washed evidence from his hands before he was taken to the police station. But maybe, just maybe, the EMT’s saved the material they used and put it in the first aid kit that was placed into evidence.


    • Lonnie Starr says:

      I just published “Dueling videos” http://tinyurl.com/d4x2y6b

      LLMpapa has his own, reasonable, view that TM took the northern cut through. It makes sense and doesn’t change TM’s eta at the mailboxes at approx. 6:42:19 if not sooner. I still will use the Taaffe cut through, because it accounts for DD’s mention of “apartments” and because, I’d think that TM would rather travel close to places where he could shelter, than through a route where he’d be unprotected from the increasing rainfall.

      It’s also possible that by the time he reaches the apartment shelter, he feels he’s so wet already that he might as well continue on.

      But, like I said, it really makes no difference, he’s still going to reach the maiboxes at 6:42:19 or earlier, depending only on how fast he was really inspired by the rain to move. At 4.4 ft/sec. he needed only 13 minutes to reach the mailboxes, so if he jogged a bit he could easily cut that almost in half, and reach the mailboxes in as little as 7 or 8 minutes.

      Me personally? I think he hustled along, he had the game starting at 7pm and the rain would force a change of cloths. If he’s like most sports fans I know, he probably also has FSVA — “fetish sports viewing attire” — to wear while watching. A feature LLMpapa fails to take into account (LOL!)

      • Patricia says:

        @ Lonnie –

        Game started @ 7:30 p.m., right?

        Also, I thought the front gate was closed at 7:00 p.m., so that’s why Trayvon had to come inthrough the side border. But if he was at the mailbox shelter befor 7:00 p.m., does it mean he was able to come in through the front gate?


        • Lonnie Starr says:

          Yes, it makes all three entrances possible.
          If he had jogged all the way he’d have only needed ~7 minutes to get to the mailboxes after leaving the store.

          Game starts at 7:30 pm, so he left himself plenty of lee way. Since he’s been to this neighborhood before several times and has played football with other kids there, he probably knows a few of them. Could very well be that, those were some of them he met at the store. Was it a chance meeting? Had they called each other? Who knows.

          I like the cut through by Taaffe’s because it offers the most opportunities to shelter from the rain if needed. Staying on Rinehart rd doesn’t do that. He’d be exposed all the way to the mailboxes, by either the cut through close to the road or the front gate.

          But going through the apartment complex, offers shelters and DD seems to have remembered that she heard “apartments” even if she can’t recall the context. So, why would TM first tell her it had started raining, then say anything about “apartments” when there are none in RATL? The only sense that can be made of it is, that he was trying to explain that he was taking a route where shelter from the rain was available. After all, if he told his GF it was raining, he’d also want to tell her he could shelter from it, to allay her expected concern. Sure enough, there is a route to the mailboxes, that passes by apartments and shelter opportunities.

          To me that’s a very strong motive and a strong indication as to which route makes the most sense.

    • At the scene on the night of the murder, a news crew was there reporting the incident and Osterman is in the video. I have lookedfor that news report again and have been unsuccessful. I think it was a CBS affiliate. Does anyone have the reference. I do not remember the colour of the shirt he was wearing. Memories fade.

  29. Beth says:

    Is there a list of persons who was present at the crime scene when the police arrived? Did the police ever investigate who was wearing the white t-shirt that was described by witnesses?

    • Patricia says:


      I have asked if Jon (witness, Asian Male) was in a white shirt. He was the first on-scene (and with a flashlight) after the shot then the LEO arrived (also with flashlight). Do not yet have the answer. With Zimmerman, Jon and Officers Smith and Ayala milling around immediately after the shot, a witness could confuse someone in a white T-shirt as the shooter. We have no report that Zimmerman had his jacket off – but it was open and he had a light shirt underneath.

      • Xena says:

        @Patricia. If it’s the same Jon who took the pic of GZ’s head, the tactical flashlight and Trayvon’s body, he could have been the one seen on top of Trayvon’s body — maybe checking for vitals.

        The man in the white shirt doesn’t bother me as much as Jeremy who stepped out on his patio, and when coming back inside said to his wife to tell the cops to hurry up. He saw something that caused him to believe that the situation was more than just 2 guys wrestling.

        • Patricia says:

          @Xena and Beth also – yes, the Jon I mean is the guy who came out with the flashlight. Took the photos on his cell. When he first heard the ruckus (not too loud at that point) he was inside putting together a coffee table. It was early Sunday evening. Very casual time and casual activity. To me, he has a slight Hawaiian accent (I worked in HI on occasion). Kicking around in a white T-shirt doing home chores is “da kine.” (Standard in Hawaii.)

          But the guys with subpoena powers never asked him. The big deal for FDLE was getting the disk with the photos.

          AN ABSOLUTE “YES!” TO GETTING MORE INFO FROM JEREMY! Sure, he knows more than he’s said!

          (Wife is president of the HOA?)

        • Patricia says:

          @ Xena and Beth –
          @ WhoNoze

          WhoNoz just checked in and said “Jon” was wearing a brown shirt.
          So, have to keep looking for the white shirt.

          Thanks, WhoNoze!

      • whonoze says:

        JonW13 is visible in the news footage from 2/26. He’s wearing a dark T-shirt (brown, I think, hard to tell exactly in that light) and khakis. Definitely NOT a white shirt.

      • bettykath says:

        Y’all are forgetting that GZ’s jacket slid up exposing his weapon. Bet it exposed his shirt too. [derision] : )

        • Patricia says:

          BettyKath, I have been puzzled by the white T-shirt. I do NOT think it’s some co-conspirator who rushed in.

          GZ’s shirt underneath was light tan/gold with a mock turtleneck. He wore his jacket open. I don’t think he ever took it off. We know that in the dark of night, that red = black, visually, although the red on that jacket was more of an orange.

          Could the witness be describing the light-colored shirt GZ wore that was visible in the front, under the open jacket? GZ had a bit of a beer gut, so there would be some expanse – and be lighter than anything else. ….. But that doesn’t really “fit” to me.

          I noted that witnesses tended to describe the two antagonists by their shape – GZ was “bulky” or “broad-backed,” which people would do at night, because colors are so difficult to discern.

          I do not know the color of Sanford PD officers’ uniforms. Possibly a short-sleeve white shirt? Will check that out.

        • Patricia says:

          @BettyKath, Beth, WhoNoze, Xena –

          Holy cow! Google Sanford FL PD – go to their “Explorers” page (teen program). Look at the two older guys in the back row (right hand side) with some kind of badges on their shirts – obviously the Departmental mentors.

          Guys are wearing white polo shorts, short sleeve, like GZ was wearing in the video re-enactment 2.28 (except his is a LaCoste).

          Could not find any other uniformed officers. On the Explorers page the other LEO (left side, back) is wearling what looks like a standard white short-sleeve shirt (not polo).

          First arriving officers checked Trayvon’s vitals and were over the body to do so – and they arrived very quickly.

          So maybe it was Ayala or Smith checking Trayvon. (Smith was arresting; I think Ayala was checking the victim.)

          If you are looking down at some man’s white back, at night, you couldn’t tell whether it’s a T-shirt or a woven-fabric shirt.

          Think we’ve got it?

      • Xena says:

        @Patricia. Jeremy’s wife is a Board member — not president of the HOA. The president at the time that GZ killed Trayvon had come on board in September 2011. The previous president is the one who hired SPD to make extra patrols in the community for traffic and HOA violations. It was about a month after that was published in the Newsletter that GZ started going around with a clipboard to get names of people interested in starting a NW.

        Like his complaints while employed at CarMax, there is a competitive motivation within GZ. IMO, it exists in the entire family. I hear it in Papa Zim’s interview with investigators and the current media play with Junior after Osterman got some attention.

      • aussie says:

        White T-shirt was most likely Trayvon’s undershirt showing if the hoodie was up around his neck during the fight.

        Another said white t-shirt for GZ; the two-colour jacket can be seen, in bad light, as the light grey only, the red bit being close to invisible. This would make the jacket look like white (ish) and short-sleeved.

        Certainly NOT witness Jon, he was photographed wandering inside the crime scene tapes in a coloured shirt, from memory light orange? long sleeves.

      • whonoze says:

        The cops are also in the photos of the scene, wearing standard dark blue uniforms.

        But yeah, I’m convinced Jeremy and Jennifer saw much more than they’re telling. Their statements just don’t jibe with the audio of Jennifer’s 911 call.

        • Patricia says:

          Thanks, WhoNoze –

          Cops in standard blue uniforms? Drat! Not a white polo shirt among them? BACK TO SQUARE ONE on the white T-shirt quest!

          As far as I can tell the EMT’s wear navy as well – but they didn’t arrive until later.

          Re Jeremy – there was a interview of his wife by FDLE later and I perceived she was VERY hostile to the whole investigation, which I judged to be related to her serving on the HOA board and the HOA’s potential liability for Trayvon’s death. She certainly didn’t project any regret for the Martin’s family’s loss or the impact on Brandy and her son — her neighbors!. Very brittle. Have not transcribed word-for-word because I sensed she was not forthcoming, and frankly it was a distasteful experience listening to her.

          Again, WhoNoze, thanks for the input. Much appreciated!

      • Lonnie Starr says:

        White T shirt was seen before the police arrive. The only thing I can speculate is that someone, like say Osterman, who usually wears all black, could have shed a black windbreaker, quickly went to check the body, then backed away into the shadows and donned the black windbreaker, the white t shirt would vanish.
        Unfortunately there’s no evidence to separate this or elevate it above the other possibilities cited so far. So, White T-shirt seems destined to remain a cypher.

  30. aussie says:

    First wrist control statement was in the interviews with Serino, Part 1 I think from memory. He half tells half demonstrates the move, and it is Serino who adds “wrist control, we call that wrist control” (I thought a rather nice swipe at GZ’s pretensions of being an all-knowing insider).

  31. Xena says:

    For those who have wondered if Trayvon was standing, kneeling or flat on his back when GZ killed him, here is another GZ Freudian slip. I don’t favor embedding long vids, but could not find a shorter version of GZ just before taking the voice stress test. At 32:47 of the vid, GZ says that Trayvon stood up.

    It has become obvious to some of us that GZ transfers his words and actions to Trayvon. I humbly ask that is considered when listening to what GZ says about what Trayvon did, as that could be the point where GZ grabbed Trayvon’s shirts.

    This is also the interview where GZ says that he “pinched” Trayvon’s arm and aimed his gun at Trayvon.

    • Jun says:

      You know what I noticed?

      One of his big ass bandaids is out of place. There was never any injury on the top left corner of the back of his head.

    • Patricia says:

      @Xena –

      I would love to hear WhoNoze’s opinion of the technolgy and the process – and how this interview was conducted.

      Strikes me as Mickey Mouse, with a “friend of the perp” interview.

      The technician found it hard to believe Zimmerman could shoot in that position — kept quizzing him — but NEVER asked any question about it. That was the toughest part of the interview for Zimmerman and the tech let him skate right past it.

      Yes, Xena, I noted the glitch by George. Thanks for pointing it out.

      If these machines had ANY value, you could just dismantle the whole criminal justice system. Just hook the suspect up and ask him the color of the room, and if he did the crime.

      Who needs a judge?
      Who needs a jury?
      Who needs investigators?
      Scrap ’em all!

      WhoNoze, please enlighten us!

      • bettykath says:

        The use of VSA is controversial to say the least. It’s been said to be like flipping a coin.

        “There are well-document cases where confessions were obtained after DoD devices indicated stress that led to confessions by suspects that were later definitively proven innocent. In civil court testimony, the CVSA founder testified that ‘NITV acknowledges that the CVSA is not capable of lie detection and specifically cautions its users regarding proper use of the device.'”

        Google “voice stress analysis” for more information.

        • Patricia says:


          I would love to see the inventor’s opinion of this video. It was like the technician was testing his own squad-car partner. Or brother.
          Seemed useless, and the critical questions were not asked.

          Incredibly stupid process. I had heard that it was – this video proves it.

        • Lonnie Starr says:

          Judging from the amount of technobabble “am/fm frequency detections etc.,” my guess is that the primary use of this “device” is to make the interviewee think that they are under some sort of mental surveillance as a way to constrain their answers, but not as a serious investigative tool. A high school graduate would see through it, it should never be used on anyone above that level of creds, because it’s a waste of time and gives the subject a chance to “perform for the camera”, knowing the “camera” has no film.

          • Patricia says:


            What I found useful about GZ and VSA was that it had a really good video camera recording the interview, capturing excellent sound.

            Many of the Serino/Singleton/Zimmerman recordings had terrible sound – a great loss.

          • Lonnie Starr says:

            Yes, for matters of such importance as crimes, you’d certainly think they’d have state of the art equipment, eh? Kinda makes one think they do this on purpose. Since poor recordings gives them some measure of control of how the output is interpreted.

      • Xena says:

        There were only two pertinent questions asked of GZ at that test.

        “Were you in fear for your life when you shot the guy?”

        GZ told Hannity that he was nervous and terrified thinking that the police would arrive and find him standing there with his gun. Of course GZ was in fear for his life, but not having it taken by Trayvon. Rather, he didn’t want the police to shoot him.

        “Did you confront the guy you shot?”

        This question is based on GZ’s story. It is not unbiased. GZ felt that he had authority, and having that authority means he was not confronting Trayvon.

        More significant questions would have been, “Did you follow the guy?” “Did the guy bash your head on the concrete?” “Did the guy go for your gun?” “Did you scream for help?”

        • Patricia says:


          Agreed, Xena – watching that “stress test” video makes you want to SCREEEEEEAM!

          Absolute bush league technician (and as BettyKath points out, a machine to match the quality of the operator).

      • bettykath says:

        Apparently it is intended to be used to get suspects so nervous of being found out that they confess. It’s an investigation tool, not a lie finder.

        I think that GZ’s meds keep him from responding emotionally to much of anything. It would be interesting to see if his meds were changed as part of his anger management stuff after the altercation with the plainclothes cops.

      • tonydphotog says:

        I’m sure GZ already knew that the VSA test is a sham. He was familiar with the SPD, and friends with MO. I wonder if anything is taught in Criminal Justice classes about the test?

      • jun says:

        The VSA should be used for what the device is called, which is detect levels of stress. It should draw some suspicion on the fact Zimmerman claimed to be in a life or death fearful situation yet remained stress free. The polygraph is not very helpful either as it simply detects various biophysic levels.

      • whonoze says:

        I don’t know anything about the VSA technology or process. However, I’m VERY skeptical of any method that claims to reveal what’s going on in the mind by measuring a single vector of physiological change in response to stimuli. But that’s a generic opinion, and I have no specific knowledge of how they measure ‘stress’, or how they correlate ‘stress’ to truthfullness or mendacity. So I THINK it’s BS, but it’s not in my field of expertise.

        I think the police can get something out of tests like VSA or polygraph — not so much any kind of definitive proof of whether a subject is lying, but another piece of (very) subjective material that may combine with other aspects of the investigation to help point toward useful hypotheses. And also, if subjects are willing to take such a test, it seems to be a good way to get their stories recorded, in ways in which their guard is different than it would be just talking to an interviewer. It’s kind of a placebo trick. That is, the ‘test’ might be a useful interview tool even if the ‘stress’ graphs were totally random and meaningless, just for the benefit of getting the statement on tape

        • Patricia says:


          I like that statement. Crisp and perceptive. Thank you for your comments on VSA. Realistic. I am reassured by what you wrote.

    • Patricia says:


      This is my second reply to your question – my computer seems to have lost what I wrote (“the H-P ate my homework”) so if it’s redundant, I ask your forgiveness.

      I think you have hit on an incredible point: how/when did Zimmerman rotate, roll Trayvon over, and gain the ascendancy?

      The shooting took place on the last site, grassy, after they had traversed (on the ground) from in front of John W#6’s patio – towards the sidewalk. (Then John W#6 breaks visual contact to run upstairs and call 911.) Nobody saw the last transition but it’s clear (to me) that that’s where Zimmerman’s head scrapes happened – concrete, vault cover or sprinkler head.

      That transit was likely painful to Zimmerman because he is such a crybaby about everything. But he also really didn’t know what “bit him” – at one point he mentions a “sign” – which I have always felt was at the doggie station up by the T. (Where George bashed his nose, I think. Not the most nimble guy.)

      In any case, when he gets to “all grass” he’s particularly alarmed by these new abrasions, and as Trayvon leans back, I think you’ve got it – Zimmerman grabs him by the front of the shirts, rotates and pulls himself up and over Trayvon.

      (Note – Zimmerman may have tried reaching for his gun while he was on the ground, but realized it was sandwiched between his ass and the earth.) I think, though, he did not have it drawn – would need his one free arm (right) for leverage to push off from the earth and gain the ascendancy over Trayvon and get on top.

      But I think the small “scary” abrasions (Zimmerman would have no idea what caused them, which would really make them scary to Zimmerman) energized him for this one last push – because he knew he had called 311 and John W#6 said he would call 911.

      And we knew he was not under Trayvon long in this grassy area because the blood flow on his head was not smeared by the grass.

      There was, what, 40 seconds of intense screaming by Trayvon? Just the right amount of time for Zimmerman to kneel on Trayvon’s arms, (excruciating), draw the Kel-Tek from the holster, lean over and wave it in Trayvon’s face, taunting him with “Tonight, you’re going to die, Mother-Fucker,” pull the hand grasping theshirts slightly out of the firing line, line up the muzzle on the surface of the taut shirt … and fire. And there was about 40 seconds of blood flow off the back of Zimmerman’s head, forward in a diagonal line across his cheeks, to settle in the beard. So the times match.

      Xena, I do think you caught the moment that the balance of power changed between Zimmerman and Trayvon, and I thank you. So observant!.

      • Xena says:

        @Patricia, I humbly thank you, but can’t take credit. I’m a listener. I connect the dots based on what I hear. It takes others to put the picture together.

        Another thing I hear from GZ is how he claims that when he stopped “walking” in the direction that Trayvon took, he was on RTC. He said that when he gave the dispatcher directions, then changed his mind, that he was walking back from RTC to his truck. (Got that address but didn’t give it to the dispatcher, uh?)

        So, I hear GZ saying that, and knowing how he tries to CYA, suspect that he turned and went down the T because that is where he says that he last saw Trayvon. When Trayvon’s phone ranged, that clued GZ as to Trayvon’s whereabouts on the dog path.

        I don’t know whether there’s a way of cutting through the townhouses to get to RTC without taking the dog path, but now am thinking that if GZ could do that in 2 minutes or less, that he actually cut Trayvon off, thereby cutting off Trayvon’s path to his dad’s house.

        • Patricia says:

          @Xena –

          You’re a thinking listener. That’s what so valuable!

          Either I don’t have acute listening OR my computer doesn’t put out sound well, so many subtleties are lost to me. (My computer sound is definitely poor.)

          BUT – on the 311NEN call, at the end, after the last words, I hear, clear as a bell, a cell phone ring.

          Could that have been Trayvon’s, near Zimmerman – or one in the dispatch center?

          Could you listen for me and give me your opinion?

          Yes, I have been thinking GZ cut Trayvon off from getting to Brandy’s.

          I have been leaving the logistics to those who are clocking in the various moves – we have some real experts on this in our class — including YOU.

      • bettykath says:

        Now that I have some idea of where the sprinkler heads are relative to the sidewalk, I think one of them is a candidate for what GZ’s head hit. I’ll take your word for it that they’re the right shape/size. (We don’t need them here so I’ve never seen them) Given that the gap between the sprinkler head and the sidewalk is just a bit lower than the sprinkler head and the sidewalk, it’s probably the better candidate.

        • Patricia says:


          I hate to admit this to the class, but I’m on our HOA board. (Note: we have no Neighborhood Watch. We have a private security patrol and the State Police are right across the road. No Zimms!)

          We only have 31 homes, most free-standing, on 29 acres, so there is a lot of parkland and extensive irrigation (we have old agricultural wells for a good water supply.)

          The landscape contractor just upgraded most of the sprinkler heads. Right in the middle is a very sharp screwhead! I will try to get one to take apart, and report back to you.

          I was startled to see where FDLE put the colored translucent plastic on the lawn – the one by the curb would be an ideal location for a sprinkler head. Note that when they are next to the curb they still stick up a bit from the ground, I have always had a strong respect for these little guys because they are so tough they can hurt you. I accidentally stepped on one and ruined my ankle for two painful years, plus occasional twinges to this day, to remind me.

          Will report back to you.

          Thanks for pursuing these details.

      • Xena says:


        Xena –
        You’re a thinking listener. That’s what so valuable!

        It developed on my last job, listening to over 400 pro se litigants a month tell their stories before, during, and after they appeared in court. Lawfully precluded from giving legal advice, I had to listen to determine if there was any legal information in the self-help center for their matter.

        BUT – on the 311NEN call, at the end, after the last words, I hear, clear as a bell, a cell phone ring.

        Patricia, I hear that phone ring — heard it months ago when GZ’s 911 tape was first released. What I did not know then was that DeeDee called Trayvon and that she did so at 7:12 p.m. That information was released later. GZ’s entire tone changes at that time. He was on the prowl.

        • Patricia says:

          @Xena – so was that call you heard on the 311 tape DeeDee calling Trayvon and the ringtone is Trayvon’s cell?

          If so, this signalled Zimmerman that Trayvon was nearby – and in what direction.

          Who else would be out on a rainy night, to Zimmerman – just himself and “the suspect.”

        • Lonnie Starr says:

          Okay, adding this to “My deduced timeline” on my blog. After a few more additions I’ll post it again for correction. Thanks Xena and Patricia.

      • Xena says:


        @Xena – so was that call you heard on the 311 tape DeeDee calling Trayvon and the ringtone is Trayvon’s cell?

        If so, this signalled Zimmerman that Trayvon was nearby – and in what direction.

        Who else would be out on a rainy night, to Zimmerman – just himself and “the suspect.”

        Absolutely. Trayvon’s phone log provides that a call was received at 7:12 p.m. so I believe that is Trayvon’s phone we hear ringing. But, let’s take another position. Even if Trayvon has a different ring tone or no ring tone, GZ could still hear him talking.

        This is also why I believe that Trayvon was not hiding anywhere close to a residence, as the residents would also be able to hear Trayvon talking to DeeDee. Additionally, it has always been my contention that after Trayvon reached the cut-through were no vehicle could come, that he thought he had lost the creepy guy.

        What I have sought is someone who is familiar with the headlights on the clubhouse vids, and how it takes to run from point A to point B, to give me their opinion on whether Trayvon actually started running from the mailboxes and GZ exited his truck there, making it reasonable to believe that GZ STOPPED chasing behind him at the cut-through.

        Going by GZ’s words to the dispatcher, Trayvon ran towards the back entrance. GZ did not start banging on his tactical flashlight to get it to work until he stopped running. He didn’t want to go pass the cut-through without light. However, I also believe that GZ realized he could go in another direction and cut-off Trayvon from RTC.

        Keep in mind that GZ was not standing still while he continued to talk to Sean the dispatcher.

      • jun says:

        They still have Trayvon cell phone in evidence. They can check the ring that is set from Deedee’s phone.

      • Xena says:


        They still have Trayvon cell phone in evidence. They can check the ring that is set from Deedee’s phone.

        I hope so. By this time, DeeDee does not have the same phone number since the conversative doghouse posted it.

      • jun says:

        They could simply see what ringtone is set to Deedee’s number

      • jun says:

        They dont need Deedee to call, they simply need the ringtone set up

    • Jun says:


      “Have you ever had to shoot someone?”

      They can use that against Zimmerman.

      • MichelleO says:

        Jun, that statement is another one of GZ’s instances when he thinks that he is being charming and is trying to warm up to this detective. He doesn’t realize how sorely out of place that statement is. How damning. Instead of staying quiet and being reflective of the night’s events, he’s trying to befriend and smooze the detective.

      • Xena says:

        @Jun. GZ followed his question to Singleton by addressing her “authority.” He was trying to justify his killing of Trayvon as a “good shoot” conveying that Trayvon did not submit to his authority.

      • Jun says:


        It goes to prove his depraved mind. Zimmerman’s “he had to be shot” attitude goes with the disregard for human life

    • tonydphotog says:

      At 34:07, GZ mentions that he still had his gun in his hand as he was holding TM’s arms out. Really, how is it possible that there is absolutely no DNA from TM on the gun?

      • Xena says:

        @tonydphotog. GZ had to make up a story that involved him touching Trayvon’s wrists and/or hands just in case his DNA turned up there. But you might be right — if GZ touched Trayvon first, then touched his gun, there might be Trayvon’s DNA on the gun — but there isn’t.

        IMO, GZ held his gun on Trayvon in effort to get him to stop yelling for help and to allow himself to be restrained. He covered Trayvon’s mouth in that effort and when removing his hand, Trayvon cried out again. As he told Hannity, he was nervous and terrified knowing the police would arrive, and he didn’t want them finding him with his gun in his hand. I mean, think about what Ofc. Smith would have seen — a screaming kid with a man holding a gun on him. Rather than expose himself to getting shot by a cop, GZ killed Trayvon.

    • MichelleO says:

      ” If he was worried about shooting his hand, who didn’t he fling it to the side? BECAUSE THE POSITIONS WERE REVERSED AND ZIMMERMAN WAS GRABBING THE SHIRTS IN THAT LEFT HAND TO CONTROL TRAYVON.”

      BINGO! Patricia wins the gold star!

  32. Jun says:

    Anyone know which part of the interview Zimmerman admits that he overpowered Trayvon, had him in a wrist lock or wrist control, and had him under control? Then the part where Zimmerman, by his own admission, held Trayvon by his chest, had his gun already pointed at Trayvon, and then had to move his hand out of the line of fire, when he shot?

    LMAO its kind of hilarious how Zimmerman defeats himself with his own words LOL

    • Brown says:

      he can explain it

    • Fed-up taxpayer says:

      I hope he is convicted for taking this boy’s life. I can’t laugh about it. I hope this blog’s collective analysis, and Prof. Leatherman’s essays, help towards bringing GZ to justice.

      • Jun says:

        I am not laughing at the boy’s death. I am laughing at Zimmerman screwing himself. I want this monster off the streets and I want a message sent across that what he did is not okay, so his sociopathic cult of racists will sit down.

    • Patricia says:


      GZ does not say he had TM grabbed by his shirts, restrained.

      That was ascertained by The Professor in consultation with forensic specialists, to explain the “airlock” between shirts and torso.

      But that is why GZ had to be careful in aiming, so he would not shoot his own hand,

      • Jun says:

        Okay, so he admits to having Trayvon restrained by the shirt?

        I can tell by the forensics that he did indeed hold TM by the shirt and shoot him

        • Patricia says:


          Did you notice in the video how GZ kept his left hand in a curled “grasping” position close to his chest? Although he tells the technician that he had to be careful to keep his other hand away from the shot, he NEVER says why he had it in this stupid position. If he was worried about shooting his hand, who didn’t he fling it to the side? BECAUSE THE POSITIONS WERE REVERSED AND ZIMMERMAN WAS GRABBING THE SHIRTS IN THAT LEFT HAND TO CONTROL TRAYVON..

          If Trayvon was REALLY on top of him, GZ would likely be using his left (dominant, strongest hand) to prop up Trayvon’s body, so he could get his left hand with the Kel-Tek into the “cavity”” to shoot.

          Zimmerman just couldn’t think that fast.

        • Patricia says:


          Zimmerman could not admit he restrained Trayvon by grasping his shirts (as the forensic evidence shows). Because it wouldn’t make sense when he claims to be UNDER Trayvon.

          His admitted restraint was the “wrist lock” discussed with Serino.

      • Xena says:


        Did you notice in the video how GZ kept his left hand in a curled “grasping” position close to his chest?

        Osterman said something that I “heard.” He said that he told GZ to just tell the truth. That is a general response after someone has tried coaching another on what to say and find that the person is not understanding.

        So, GZ comes for the voice stress test, and while trying to remember what he has been coached to say (because he doesn’t want to tell the truth), his body language tells the truth while his mouth says something else.

        It’s the same as his swats at the re-enactment. Trayvon would have been 3 ft tall for GZ to have fought him off based on his body language.

  33. Jerome Horton, Trayvon Martin’s former football coach, says Trayvon was a “respectful” kid who never showed aggression


  34. JUN says:

    I did some research on stalkers on google last night

    and Zimmerman fits the profile of


    Resentful Stalker


    Vengeance/Terrorist Stalker


  35. Malisha says:

    MichelleO, just like with any law that is meant to keep a bad thing from happening in a certain kind of situation, one can’t narrow it down enough to make it work without judges’ and prosecutors’ discretion getting into the mix, which would make it a potentially VERY dangerous law. Just imagine that a young African American youth was just plain railroaded; someone came at him while he was walking home from the 7-11, and they pulled a gun on him and threatened to kill him, but he managed to get their gun away and shot THEM and then the police arrived and arrested him and charged him with First Degree Murder because they said that he planned the murder between the time the guy got off the phone and the time he got control of the gun. Let’s say he was convicted in, say, a death sentence state like, oh, say, Florida. Let’s say he got the death sentence because there was an “enhancement” clause for something like additional cruelty in the murder, and the guy he killed had two cuts on the back of his head and a “likely broken nose” so he was considered cruel as well as murderous. Let’s say he had a public defender and then he lost his appeal. Let’s say he was on death row for five years before the “anti-death-sentence folks” got ahold of his case and started publicizing it. Let’s say his mother or brother or father put up a website to try to get money for a serious challenge to his death sentence and even a “proof of actual innocence” action for his defense. Let’s say the lawyers on the case estimated that it would take a half million dollars just to put together the petitions and get the sworn statements of the two dozen people who knew why his trial went wrong…

    • MichelleO says:

      THERE are too many holes is this particular story and too many versions. Those are the actions of a guilty man. For this reason, I find it disgusting that child murderer can find public support and funding for a crime that he indeed committed.

    • princss6 says:

      Malisha as always you raise an interesting tangential point I want to expound on. I’ve said from day 1, the minute GZ called the police on Trayvon, the fix was in for Trayvon. Now we have clear and convincing evidence that the SPD believed they came upon a dead black thug! Imagine IF they would have arrived before Trayvon was shot and while wrestling with GZ. Can anyone be certain that the SPD would not have shot Trayvon? I’m not! Could anyone be certain that Trayvon would not have been detained by SPD that night and be facing some court battle now if he had lived (preferable but still would have irreparably damaged his future potential)?

      On another note, is there anyone that believes that GZ did not realize the optimal place to capture and detain Trayvon would have been the dogwalk? Listen to his past calls. He knew that complex in and out and I’m sure he was well aware of the difficulty police may encounter finding him in the dogwalk. Yet he walks down there in behind Trayvon and knowing what we all know, I would offer that he did so knowing it was the perfect dead spot to do what he wanted.

      Yes, GZ had a gun but if you do not believe that on some level he knew regardless of what happened it would be Trayvon’s word against his and the deck would be heavily stacked toward believing the words of this POS, then well, I’ve got some stories to tell. And for this reason, that I believe he had precognition that the deck would be stacked towards him regardless of the outcome and why he engaged in his behavior and ultimately killed a child is why I have not a wit of sympathy for GZ. I know without a doubt that GZ went in thinking he had the superior position over Trayvon not only because of his gun but because Trayvon was young and black!

      • Lonnie Starr says:

        It’s a nationwide thing blacks face everyday, google “Central Park Five” and have a good read.

        • princss6 says:

          Believe or not, I had a media studies class and did a report on the Central Park Jogger coverage vs. the coverage of the young black woman raped in NY by soccer players. No matter how heinous the crimes committed by whites, they are not depicted in the same way as blacks who commit crime. In Philly anytime more than two black people engage in a crime, they are a “pack.” And the coverage of stories regarding LGBQTs who commit crime are downright repulsive, homophobic and transphobic.

          • Lonnie Starr says:

            There’s a study that says black children are treated more harshly for infractions than others and there are stats to prove it. So, I’m not so sure that Trayvon’s suspensions are anything but more of the same ol’ same ol’.

          • princss6 says:

            Yup! And see how that sets them up for society to do anything with them as SOME believe since Trayvon was suspended (no doubt his school had a zero tolerance policy) then he was a criminal and had it coming to him. It comes from all directions.

  36. MichelleO says:

    SEEMS to me that a law will have to be created keeping true suspects from benefiting from their notoriety. Just like there are laws on the books to keep criminals from making money off of the proceeds from books or movies made about them and their crime.

    • Lynn says:

      Sadly, Gz and his lawyer do not think they are benefiting. MOM said his crazy spending was “judicious”. I know this article is old but reading it drove me nuts. http://www.miamiherald.com/2012/07/17/2900145/zimmerman-spent-35k-on-cell-phones.html
      $800 for the jail commissary…$1500 car rental…$800 gas…$1300 for food. All within the first 18 days? Didn’t MOM interview the money expert at the bond hearing about these amounts and go on about Chik-fil-a, you know, nothing over the top? He paid money to his parents. I’m certain a huge chunk went to Osterman and his “security detail”. Hard to feel for someone needing expert witness money when you read stuff like this and imagine how he blew the other quarter million.

    • Patricia says:

      Michelle. there are laws on the books in many states that criminals may not profit from their crimes, but this is enforced only when they have been judged as “criminals.”

      Until conviction, it is ther First Amendent Right to speak out.

      And make a buck off it, if they can.

      • bettykath says:

        The family of the Enron boss got to keep all of his ill-gotten gains b/c he had not been found guilty. He died before the verdict came in.

  37. Malisha says:

    jm, it’s a good question, I don’t know the answer. I expect we will see more of it in the future, though.

    What’s really bizarre about this case, in my opinion (from the legal point of view, not from the reality point of view) is that the defense is based only and solely on the story that is told, without corroboration, by the defendant himself.

    Imagine an armed robbery case. The defendant says, “He invited me into the jewelry store. I carry my gun everywhere so yeah, I had it with me. When I was in there, he said, ‘here, I’m gonna give you a bunch of jewelry, homey.’ He gave me all this jewelry and kicked me out and said, ‘don’t tell anyone where you got it.’ So I didn’t.” Then his lawyer insists that he’s innocent because the complaining witness GAVE HIM the jewelry. He sets up a web-page and asks for money for the defense. A bunch of well known defense lawyers start commenting publicly that the DA should never have charged him because they didn’t include HIS story in their affidavit of probable cause. Defense lawyers all over the country keep relying upon the DEFENDANT’S STORY to show how the prosecution is wrong and how the defendant’s constitutional rights are being violated.

    Imagine a rape case. The defendant says, “I bought her a drink. I never met her before. She invited me over to her place. I let her have another few drinks because she wanted them. Then she insisted we have rough sex. Then she told me, ‘You have to do it some more or I’ll kill you, m*therfucker,’ so I ran out of there in a big hurry. People saw me very upset, with scratches on my face, as I was leaving the scene; that proves what I said.” His lawyer relies on his version of the story and etc. etc….

    A defendant can have a self-exonerating story. A defendant can have two, three, four or more self-exonerating stories, as does George Z. But if the defense counsel wants to take one or more of those stories and make a big Internet splash over them, there will be plenty of people who will climb on board and get enthusiastic and even inspired about them, you can be sure of that. And some of them will send money.

    Anyway, sex and violence always works for getting money. As our courts become more and more theatrical, so will everything else.

    • Malisha says:

      This comment I wrote referred to a “question” but the question was whether other criminal trials had resulted in defense counsel putting up fundraising websites. It got scrambled so it looks like it was answering the questions answered by Whonoze, but it was not even about that. Sorry.

  38. whonoze says:

    @ searchingmind

    Your questions are fair, and I would like to answer them. Alas, they do not yield to ‘soundbite’ replies, and I just haven’t had the time to develop proper full explanations. I will attempt some preliminary notes, however:
    “1. Which comments do you find fascistic and why?”
    I find none of the comments fully fascistic. By ‘fascistic tendencies’ I mean a subtheme or implication, not the main thrust of the comment. And here I am referring to a unquestioning endorsement of policing and prosecution practices in a ‘law and order’ society.

    “2. Which “comments” from the commenters here” are based on “hate for GZ” and why?”
    Most of them. And that hate may be well earned. It is not the emotion to which I object, but the degree to which it obscures other matters.

    “3. What is “the big picture” you allude to, and how is that “big picture” damaged by ‘the commenters here’.”
    The big picture would include the institutional racism of law enforcement, the relationship between the gun lobby and conservative politicians, and most importantly the racist voter suppression being conducted in swing states — all of which have a certain common cast of characters. Awareness of these issues is not directly damaged here, but focus is drawn away from them by placing attention so thoroughly on the actions of George Zimmerman, who is but a single individual and merely a pawn in a larger game. Unless the larger issues are addressed, getting ‘justice for Trayvon’ will not help the next ‘Trayvon.’

    “4. Which “prosecution” is “over-zealous” and from whence proceeds the “over-zealous” forth?”
    I do not suggest Zimmerman’s prosecution is over-zealous. The factors leading to over-zealous prosecutions are too complex to discuss here.

    “5. Do you suggest that crime-victims, parents of murdered teens should quietly go home with their tale between their legs, mourn in private and suspected criminals not prosecuted?”
    That’s an insulting rhetorical question. The answer is no. I do suggest that prosecutors should not be allowed to stage spectacles of survivor-grief at trials, as they are now want to do. The pain felt by victims is not probative to the question of who actually committed the crime, and victims are inclined to project their anger and hurt onto whoever the prosecution points to as the perpetrator.

    “6. Do you have any criteria in mind for the prosecution of crimes? If yes, which are they?”
    I don’t think you mean ‘criteria’, but rather ‘rules’. Yes, I have some rough thoughts, but they’re hardly worked out, nor are they necessarily relevant to the discussion here.

    The question you did not ask: Why do i think the discussion here has focused on George Zimmerman the individual rather than the big picture issues in this case?

    a. Because that’s what the State of Florida wants, and the FDLE and SAO have been manipulating the release of information and the framing of the case in that direction.

    b. Because it’s easier and more reassuring to damn one person (especially if they deserve it) than to take on a large system. I mean, what happens here on this blog? Day after day, George Zimmerman is retried, quickly found guilty as charged, and condemned. Repeating this ritual allows the participants to feel some measure of control in their lives, that there is some order and justice ion the universe. ‘Evil’ is located within individuals. These bad people can be culled out one-by-one, tested, and then removed from society, keeping us all safe. But I think people here know at some level that’s not how things really work. Bad deeds are not merely or even mainly the result of individual pathologies but are embedded in the practices of large intractable institutions. The challenge of actually changing these institutions is so great that a form of cognitive dissonance sets in, and we project the problem onto something we can imagine actually changing, thus creating (false) hope.

    Let’s look at the Zimmerman case as an example. Now, after months and months of slow-motion discovery dumps, we have most (but not all) of the evidence that would have been available to Norm Wolfinger at the time he decided not to press charges against GZ. And what we now know is that this evidence overwhelmingly points to the fact that Zimmerman’s story was a complete fabrication. You have the concrete physical evidence of the NEN call and the 911 calls. You have the EMT reports. You have the ‘re-enactment’ video. You have the ‘help me’ exemplars. These things don’t even come close to adding up, and yet Wolfinger let Zimmerman go. Angela Corey, for her part, has had only praise for Wolfinger…

    But dumping everything on George, we are not talking about Wolfinger, about the history of institutional racism in the SPD, about the myriad ways in which the SPD is typical of police departments throughout the country. And we are not talking about the kinds of draconian laws that will fall on the poor and minorities that will be enacted if Rick Scott’s voter suppression scheme is succesful.

    Keep your eye on the Zimmonster! Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain!

    Does that answer your question?

    • bettykath says:

      Excellent response. Much better than I could have done (obviously)

      • Malisha says:

        Whonoze was answering questions and I would like to NOT try to answer the same questions, but say a few things about the issues involved in his answers.

        First of all, I wouldn’t use the word fascistic about any of the comments on this thread relating to Zimmerman or the case. I also don’t think the people who are pro-prosecution in this case are doing so for the reasons that fascists are pro-prosecution. The roles are peculiarly reversed because the crime was actually an act by a private fascist-minded person who was then officially excused and blessed by a fascist-tendency police department in a county that permitted such things. So we have a kind of anti-fascist pro-prosecution thing going on. We make strange bedfellows of course. Corey is not an admirable prosecutor; other cases prove that. This case has not done so yet.

        About hatred for GZ, that I personally admit. I just plain hate the guy, can’t stomach him, find myself feeling sick when I see his little smirk, wanna smack his smug punkydunk face. So it’s simple; I won’t serve on the jury. But the expressions of the hatred are not, IMO, hiding anything from my view. I am viewing this case with full knowledge of my hatred for GZ and in fact, I GOT my hatred of GZ from viewing this case. But to say that it obscures other matters is not true. If GZ had gone on Hannity and had said, for instance, “OK, I was following him. I was actually following him, OK? But that didn’t give him permission to attack me and scare the shit out of me and make me fear for my life.” Then I might have felt differently about him — maybe not, I don’t know. But I hate him not only for a murderer but, as well, for a liar and a person who runs around blabbing about others’ responsibility and demonstrates none of his own. HATE THAT and will always hate that.

        How can our horror at the course of the Zimmerman case show that we are ignoring the institutional racism of law enforcement, the relationship between the gun lobby and conservative politicians, and the racist voter suppression being conducted in swing states — all of which have a certain common cast of characters? I don’t think it does, not at all. I think the Zimmerman case is the natural RESULT of all these social cancers. Awareness of these issues is not only “not directly damaged here,” but I disagree with the conclusion that focus is drawn away from them by placing attention so thoroughly on the actions of George Zimmerman. In fact, for me, the most important thing going on in this case is the federal investigation by DOJ into the actions of the police, prosecutor, etc., to find out and to name and to PUNISH the behavior that not only put the gun in George’s hand, but then enabled and even encouraged him to use it for murder, and then forgave him and even blessed him for having committed that murder.

        I think the feds are the ones we should put pressure on because a case like this doesn’t detract from our attention to the problems that caused it to arise, it HIGHLIGHTS THEM.

        I do not agree that George is merely a pawn in a larger game. He was a free agent on 2/26/2012 and he is a free agent now. Then, when protests started to grow so big they could not be ignored, he became a pawn in the gun-lobby ALEC racist SYG guys’ game, but that made his downfall eve more important to those of us who need to deal with those larger issues before our society is silenced like the dying scream of Trayvon Martin.

        The only way that getting ‘justice for Trayvon will help the next ‘Trayvon’ and you, and me, and everyone, criminal defendants included, kids with skittles not excluded, is for attention to stay on Zimmerman, for this case not to fail to get to resolution, AND for the Department of Justice to NOT be permitted to let the issue drop, but for there to be such a groundswell of pressure on them to start cleaning the houses of horror that have the picket fences of “law and order” all around them today.

        There is plenty of over-zealous prosecution in our country, and here is how it is done: Take someone with NO POWER who killed someone else with NO POWER. Or take someone with NO POWER who didn’t even kill anybody. Or take someone with NO POWER who is suspected of something. And put him or HER through the “paces” of your “law and order” and make him or HER into a slave to your prison system so you can get free labor for 17 cents/hour from him or her for 40 years. That’s how. And then charge for phone calls so the family gets impoverished so much that they can’t pay for health insurance. And then and then and then and then.

        But we can’t get Al Sharpton and thousands of supporters and webpages all over the world up for every little institutional murder. The factors leading to over-zealous prosecutions are indeed many and complex but most of them have to do with corruption in government. Corruption in government has to do with lack of transparency and MONEY.

        Prosecutors actually are not “allowed to stage spectacles of survivor-grief at trials,” unless judges let them do that. Then you get into the problem of JUDGES. If you think prosecutorial misconduct is complex, try JUDGES. The bottom line is that the entire system is so rotten the stench can kill.

        By the way, we have no control over the way that FLE and SPD and DOJ and the FL AG etc. etc. will deal with this. We only were able to get a prosecution started because organizations who had been around for decades jumped into this case to make a noise about it, so it could not be ignored. The amount of time, effort and money it takes to make anything happen is just immense and no normal person can give up his or her entire life to do these things unceasingly and tirelessly forever. So it cannot be our fault that we cannot do EVERYTHING when we feel we can do SOMETHING. And yes, we do need to feel some measure of control in their lives, and we do need to try to see to it that there is some order and justice in the universe. ‘Evil’ is located within individuals, as you point out. So each of us who are individuals who are writing on this blog, with my thanks to you as the individual who is reading this, tries in his or her own way to deal with this bigger-than-can-be-expressed problem: George killed Trayvon and got away with it.

        It is not that “These bad people can be culled out one-by-one, tested, and then removed from society, keeping us all safe.”

        It is that none of us is safe unless we at least TRY to do something to correct SOMETHING SOMETIME. And we are doing that here, in our little ways, each of us.

        The Talmud says that he who destroys one life has destroyed the whole world. And, it adds, that he who saves one life has saved the whole world.

        So even though none of us can change the practices of large intractable institutions, none of us can stop the next drone that kills the next innocent bystander in the next unlucky place, we’re doing what we can, and we’re examining carefully the case and the evidence, and we’re discussing George Zimmerman and soon will be discussing, again, Trayvon Martin, and it’s OK.

        Perhaps by doing what we think we can do, we are wasting our words, our passion, and perhaps even (God forbid) creating false hope. To me, it’s not so bad, considering. There are plenty of worse things I could be doing right now.

        Angela Corey has had only praise for Wolfinger…this tells me that the final word on the Zimmerman case will be: “Everybody go home; he’s in prison; forget about it.” Maybe some of the bloggers will keep it up, put pressure on DOJ, get at Wolfinger, Morganstern, Lee (more than to fire him, but to prosecute him) and all the others who were corrupt. Maybe.

        But I don’t agree that we’re “dumping everything on George.” We’re trying to get the real evidence out to show that the fact that he was not charged was NOT because there was no evidence, but because of the history of institutional racism in the SPD, about the myriad ways in which the SPD is typical of police departments throughout the country.

        In the end, we are keeping our eye on the Zimmonster, but I think the fact that really intelligent and committed people are involved means that we will try to pay AND DRAW attention to the man behind the curtain.

        • jm says:

          Well said Malisha

        • cielo62 says:

          Once again I humbly thank you for your well reasoned post. I object being called a fascist and I doubly resent being slandered for “not caring about justice “. Are you familiar with the story of the starfish? It’s a story we hear alot as teachers. A person walking along the seashore is throwing beached starfish back into the water. Another asks him why he bothers; you can’t save them all. It can’t possibly matter. As he throws another starfish in the water, he says ” it matters to that one”. We do what we can, a case at a time. And put pressure at the upper levels where changes can be and should be made.

    • cielo62 says:

      Wow. Looks like a Wikipedia entry. My short answer is that, even though you bring up valid points, THIS IS NOT THE PLACE TO DEAL WITH THEM. This thread is about this one case. Other threads discuss various issues with laws, courts, procedures etc. Bashing commenters here will not change the purpose of this one thread. As I asked before, what do you want from us?

    • Patricia says:


      Sir Whonose, you are brilliant, brilliant, brilliant in your audio analyses. Nobody else could do what you do. You have all the love and respect I can pour out to you, electronically.

      But please, sire, don’t go all philosofuzzy on us and decide that the REAL reason we are here dissecting the evidence is that dumping on Zimmerman gives us a sense of control in our lives.

      I have more control over my life than I can stand, except for one area: the unlimited hours I spend each day communing with you and my fellow students and the Professor.

      I’m totally outta control in that area.

      So, WHY do I do it?

      (I’m telling you, because I don’t want you telling me.)

      I do it for two reasons:

      (1) Trayvon deserves the justice (for which so many have clamored) and his family deserves to know there are tens of thousands, yea, hundreds of thousands who respect and honor his memory.

      (2) If the prosecution successfully jails Zimmerman, that’s going to stop MOST of the wannabeees. But if Zimmerman gets away with it, bluntly, hundreds or thousands of young Black people are at severe and incredible risk. They will be in the crosshairs of every racist gun nut – because no penalty need be paid.

      I have no clue why others participate, nor do I think it appropriate to decide their motivation. Examining Zimmerman’s pathology is one thing – he’s the one who said “I shot him.” Examining everybody else’s motivation who participates on this website is wa-a-a-y beyond what I want to do.

      And that includes you. Because if any one asked me, “Why Whonoze?” I’d shrug, and say, “I haven’t a clue. I expect he’s got a special talent to contribute, and he does so. But for whatever reason, I’m damned glad he’s here.”

      I am, and I thank you.
      For your superb work, and for reading through this.

      • princss6 says:

        (2) If the prosecution successfully jails Zimmerman, that’s going to stop MOST of the wannabeees. But if Zimmerman gets away with it, bluntly, hundreds or thousands of young Black people are at severe and incredible risk. They will be in the crosshairs of every racist gun nut – because no penalty need be paid.

        Reminds me of a statement…

        One voice can change a room…One room can change a city…one city can change a state…one state can change a country…etc…

        One case that tackles many issues adjucated publicly is one step towards a just society. For 150 years, my people chose life over voting. Unholy alliances are made, priorities are set…and if it is all interconnected, one chink in the wall makes it all weaker. Let’s be clear and look at history, the fight for African American Civil Rights started with abolition, moved onto anti-lynching and then moved to the franchise. Trayvon never got a chance to vote and I would give up my right to vote today, if it meant no more black boys died in the streets of this country because of gun violence.

        I personally don’t get why focusing on getting justice for a black victim, Trayvon, when in the past so many times, that justice has been elusive has to be a zero sum game. Shrug. So I agree with your comment and your point. I fear for the world now with my son. I would be doubly fearful if GZ walks. I think we are all capable of deciding for ourselves what justice struggle(s) resonates with us for our own reasons without being distracted or shamed for not paying enough attention to this issue or that based on a presumption. Anywhoo…good comment.

    • SearchingMind says:

      @ Whonoze

      I shall afford you the courtesy of a response and would not run away from the debate out of fear that we both may be coming from two different worlds and may as such be unequally armed to handle complicated legal subjects of the nature and magnitude which you – apparently unknowingly – raised in your earlier post.

      RE: Fascism and hate:

      We both agree that calling “the commenters here” ‘fascists and hateful’ was a poor choice of word and very unfortunate. If/when the members of the Jury find Zimmerman guilty, they shall have done exactly what “the commenters here” have been doing – i.e. looking at the evidence, examining the evidence and apportioning blame where it belongs to, based on the said evidence. Surely, you would not then suggest that the members of the jury are fascist whose guilty verdict is based on blind hatred of Zimmerman. There was no legitimate basis for the sweeping allegations you made and you do now agree that you misspoke. I am happy we have resolved this matter and laid it to rest.

      RE: The big-picture:

      What you describe as “the big-picture” seems quite amorphous – to say the least. Also, it is unknown what the criteria are for determining what constitutes that “big-picture” and who gets to determine the said criteria. I guess you can throw anything you want in there (I mean: in “the big-picture”). In any case you have not shown how “the commenters here” do damage to that “big-picture” you describe. And I am not sure you would be able to successfully make that case. So let’s shake hands and move on – unless you want to discuss the matter any further. Most people here are of different background (conservatives, liberals, independents, blacks, whites, Chinese, etc.) and they just want to see justice done for a boy that left his home to get candies and was murdered on his way back in a senseless act of violence while he begged the assailant for his life. Nothing more. Nothing less. They do not have any agenda.

      RE: Over-zealous prosecution
      When you use terms such as “over-zealous prosecution” you really have to define what you mean precisely. You have not done that yet. The connotation “over-zealous prosecution” has its own meaning within the academic legal community/schools of law. Within the walls of the said communities, “over-zealous prosecution” would mean ‘unnecessary prosecution’, ‘prosecuting without reasonable chance of winning’, ‘prosecuting too much (from a quantitative point of view), ‘prosecuting without cause’, etc. Before discussing “the factors leading to over-zealous prosecution” which you say “are too complex to be discussed here” you MUST first define what you mean by “over-zealous prosecution”. It seems you are putting the cart before the horse.

      RE: Criteria for prosecuting crimes:

      One is astonished that you do not see the relevance of the ‘criteria for prosecuting crimes’ to this discussion. When, as in this case, a claim is made (by you) of “over-zealous prosecution”, that claim BEGS the question: ‘well, if prosecutors are over-zealous in prosecuting crimes, which crimes should be prosecuted and which ones should not (in YOUR opinion)’? If certain crimes should be prosecuted and others not, what are de determinative criteria for that (and I meant ‘CRITERIA’ not ‘rule’, because, before anything gets to be “rules” the content of it – i.e. criteria – which must be in conformity with the primary law has to be mapped out first!)? The subjects of “over-zealous prosecution” on one hand, and ‘criteria for prosecuting crimes’ on the other hand are intertwined and cannot be separated from each other. How you fail to see that is daunting. Surely, if you opine “over-zealous prosecution” you should be able to tell us (a) what you mean by that, (b) why “prosecution” of crimes is “over-zealous” and (c) offer us at least ONE alternative to “over-zealous prosecution”. I very much hope you would do that from the point of view of legal science without telling us: “they’re hardly worked out, nor are they necessarily relevant to the discussion here” – unless you acknowledge delving into topics you have no proper understanding of.

  39. Malisha says:

    LLMPapa, that’s HYSTERICAL, I LOVE it! ❗

    Of course O’Mara has to do the best job he can do; not only does the law require it of him, but it’s what a civilized country should provide for any accused defendant. I believe, by the way, that O’Mara has crossed the lines a few times already, because (a) I believe he probably wrote Hannity’s questions for him but of course I could never prove that; and (b) his saying on the web-page, “If you would do what he has done,” is out of line if, as he has said elsewhere, the evidence is not yet out about “what” George did [thus, he was frankly appealing to people who would like to kill an unarmed Black kid]; and (c) making a public statement about George “reacting to having his nose broken” while opposing the release of all George’s medical records. I wondered what my real feeling is about him asking for Trayvon Martin’s school records. It is obvious that he’ just doing that to try to intimidate people and create more ill will towards the dead victim of his client. This won’t help him at trial and there is no evidence Trayvon Martin was ever the slightest bit violent, but it would be part of a general strategy if O’Mara were trying to restructure the public opinion “room” in which he ultimately does a plea deal (so would the statement made to the gun folks that he is not going to accept a deal). But we shall see what we shall see. Meanwhile I’m willing to say, at this point, that O’Mara has a terrible client and a terrible case and he should do the best he can and a bunch of rage-addicted resentful immature gun-toting murderous assaholics are sure to keep him busy and well paid for the rest of his natural days.

    • jm says:

      I don’t like MOM. He is out for fame and fortune. Speaking of MOM’s fortune, I hate his fund-raising because it is obvious he is appealing to racists and gun-nuts for money to defend an armed GZ for killing a black teen.

      Has there ever been a case where a defense lawyer sets up a website to ask for money to defend his client?

    • cielo62 says:

      AMEN to that description! Heads like rocks. Hearts likewise.

    • Lonnie Starr says:

      Except that this search of TM’s records can come back to bite him. If he finds nothing, naturally he’d rather not have it mentioned at trial, that he even bothered to look. Well, that then walls off any attack on TM’s character, because any attempt at that, will open the door to the fact that he looked and found nothing. Thus the absence of evidence becomes very good evidence, evidence he’d rather not face.

      You’ve, no doubt, already noted that, the number of kids who wear eyeglasses and who are bullies, is astonishingly close to the vanishing point, if not already there.

      • princss6 says:

        I doubt seriously he believes he will find anything. The implication alone he so publicly advertised is a blood money-making appeal. If he can attempt to trash a dead Trayvon, the victim, then I see no reason to hold any punches toward Mark O’Mara a grown adult living man. Meh.

  40. Xena says:

    O’Mara’s complete speech at Gun Rights Convention

    • LLMPapa says:

      A little something to go with your coffee this morning….

      I’ve never downloaded a 26 minute speech for one TWO SECOND snip before, LOL LOL!

      • Lonnie Starr says:

        Don’t go too hard on MOM, he’s only a lawyer. Lawyers are needed if we’re to have the defense that everyone is entitled to.
        We demand that the lawyer be as effective as possible, if we can’t deal with even the most heinous offender having his day in court, with effective representation, we’re putting the very fundamentals of the idea of justice at risk.

        If a lawyer has a good case against a terrible person facing a terrible charge, it’s not our place to deny a defense to the accused, that’s how we get “star chamber” trials. There just isn’t a better way that’s been found. We must protect the right of any and all accused persons to have the best defense possible, since to do any less, is to deprive our own selves of the same, should we ever have such a need. Remember there is such a thing as false charges, and that means that someone is being accused of something they did not, in fact do. Meaning that even if you do nothing criminal, you still run a risk of being accused!

        Giving the accused the right to the best defense possible, goes a long way to preventing false charges from being brought willy-nilly against innocents. Such that the lawyer you vilify today, may eventually be your own. If you were to be accused of a crime you did not do, would you want the best lawyers shying away from your case, based on how terrible the charges were that you faced?
        I think not. Let MOM do the job he’s been required to do.

        If anything he deserves kudos for being able to function in face of the awesome obstacles he’s being presented with. Of course he’s trying to raise money, that’s what it means to have a job to do and get paid for doing it. I know it doesn’t look good, I’ll agree, but that’s the way the system works until we come up with better.

      • jm says:

        I’ve been hypnotized by circular logic and circular motions.

        GZ is not guilty, GZ is not guilty, GZ is not guilty,,,,,,,, .;-)

      • bettykath says:

        Good post, Lonnie

      • Patricia says:

        @Papa –

        You are inDEEEEEEfaTEEEEEgable!
        No flicker of an eyelash gets by you!

        Thank you!
        Mede the morning coffee even more invigorating!

        You get a 4-!!!! rating! (Make that 5 …

      • SearchingMind says:

        I agree and disagree with you, Lonie on this one. Of course we all recognize that a defense counsel should be able- and must in fact do all he can to provide effective defense for his client. At the same time, people who do not shear his views and modus operandi have every right to- and should in fact oppose him vigorously – all the way. That’s the way the system is meant to work. No attorney gets to say, ‘oh pls. don’t attack me because I am doing my job as a defense-counsel’. A good lawyer must always expect attacks and learn how to fight back. One of the problems I foresee for Zimmerman’s defense is that O’Mara, IMO, is righteous and weak. If I were him, I would, within the ambient of the law, have taken- and still will be taken fierce morally reprehensible- but perfectly legal approach in this case and let the chips fall where they may. For “unrighteous” lawyers, it is not really about the client (or his victim). It’s about winning a fight with your equal (the prosecutor/counsel for the opposing party) in the Court of law. It makes you feel second to OUR LORG GOD.

  41. Malisha says:

    O’Mara’s saying George won’t plead so he can posture some more. A year from now there will be a plea bargain made. I think Shellie has to have a baby first.

    • cielo62 says:

      Thanks! I went over and stirred the pot.  🙂

      • Good for you! Big Up!

      • Loved your comment over there! That’s what I’m talking ’bout! 😉

      • From the consevative treehouse…


        It’s getting pretty heated up over there with a number of pro TM people leading an all out scalding charge against GZ…..


      • Treehouse people have gone nuts. Talk about delusional!

        Surprise, surprise, a bunch of first time posters at that gunsite spreading propaganda. These are hired guns from the Crump/Julison camp trying to stave off donations to the GZ defense fund.

      • Xena says:

        There is much massive ignorance in doghouse comments; for instance;

        The “State” has an obligation to publish the “Call History” of that cell-phone found by TM’s body. But withholding that critical information, they are committing legal mal-practice.

        Trayvon’s phone log was released months ago. I have a copy. OTOH, the State has not publicly released GZ’s phone log although it was entered in discovery material. Do treehouse comment contributors ever bother to examine the discovery material? Do they bother to check with the local Bar to find out what constitutes “legal malpractice”? Have they ever researched “standing” to bring a cause of action? How about immunity?

      • Jun says:

        I dont think they do. They spend their time making up lies about Trayvon, with a picture of an older black person than Trayvon, claiming its Trayvon and then claim he is making Lean. Other than that, their other defense is media bias and railroading by Crump and other black leaders, when in fact Corey and the State are prosecuting Zimmerman and the news simply reports what is released to the media, including what Omara releases, which means, the media is basing their findings on the evidence.

        My new name for that site is “Conservative Tinfoil Hat”

  42. “Texas Man Found Guilty of Murder in Self Defense Case”
    Read it and weep, Georgie. Read it and weep.

    • I saw you on thetruthaboutguns. You, Shannon and Jun kicked butt and took names. They were left thinking…what.. what happened! LOL

      • cielo62 says:

        LOL! And to think I learned all that from you guys! Alas, they are still clinging to the misinformation and their own inability to change their minds. I doubt our words will make much of an impact, if at all. There are none so blind as those who will not see.

        • Lonnie Starr says:

          Don’t think you haven’t done anything “over there” just because they won’t publicly admit it. You post good, valid information and argument, minds soak it up and some rebel. But later it begins to work on them from the inside out. Realize there are many over there who are just “joiners”, they never bothered trying to find out what to believe, they just looked and saw a group on one side of an issue and they joined with them. Nice to be part of a group.

          But, “hammered” by facts, arguments fall away. Already some “over there” begin to wonder why they have only emotion on their side and they decide to look, to see if they can find something more to use. Once they reach the inescapable conclusions, they realize they can’t be part of the group any longer and they simply slink quietly away.

          So it does have an effect, it just takes longer.

          • cielo62 says:

            I hope so, Lonnie. Not because our “team” scores any points, but because people should learn to become critical thinkers and to look for facts and evidence. It makes one less likely to be fooled and drawn up into a bad cause.

          • Lonnie Starr says:

            I argued at length against Bush and he got a second term. I know some people who voted for him and guess what? It’s a bit too late for them to do anything about it, but they’d never, ever vote for him again. Now they won’t even look at Romney, they’re against him, but, unfortunately, if for the same impulses that they were for Bush. Egad! Just and emotional “I don’t believe anymore”. But at least now they’re wondering what. where or why they went so wrong. That’s got to be a start. But even before Bush “proved his mettle”, many of his supporters changed sides. The droves we saw on usenet during the last of the Clinton years and the first Bush years went quiet.

            Over the years I learned a few tricks that if I’d have known how to deploy them back then, I could have been much more effective. Alas, live and learn and often too late.

      • JUN says:

        Never going back on that site ever again….

        I dont believe there are people who feel it is perfectly okay for a complete stranger giving a kid unwanted attention with no instigation, stalking and chasing him with a gun and terrorizing the kid and killing him

        They make me sick…

        In other news though

        I learned a lot about court on here…

        Omara is pretty much in a position where he has to stand like a statue and either let them fling mud at GZ on the stand or GZ not take the stand and give no testimony or statements and there is no evidence.

        All Omara has is witness 6’s recanted statement, and a doctor’s note that doesnt even state it was a broken nose, and Zimmerman’s statements.

        Witness 6’s recanted statement can be proven false by the forensic evidence and other witnesses who say Zimmerman was on top but witness 6 realizes he doesn’t want to be charged and the rule is he can recant to avoid prosecution (either way, Omara will likely be bringing him in)

        Orourke can testify but he can only give his opinion on Z’s injury and if Omara tries to use it and say “hey that proves Trayvon attacked” it can be refuted in so many ways…

        Zimmerman’s dad will be forced in a position to either lie and get charged & or impeached of his credibility or he can simply stay silent and or recent

        • cielo62 says:

          I agree with you JUN. Those folks are totally blinded by their agenda to “protect” their gun rights that they can’t admit GZ is a sociopathic killer who murdered an unarmed teen. But since 1) the victim was black and 2) GZ invoked their sacred SYG, they will allow G Z anything. It would be pathetic if it weren’t so all gol- darned frightening.

        • Lonnie Starr says:

          Yeppers! GZ has ruined his defense. The SP will let MOM raise what ever issues he can, then come back and destroy them. Once enough lies have been revealed to the jury, then the SP administers the Coup de grace: GZ is free to do with his hands what he wants, because there is no longer any imminent threat in existence at the time he pulls the trigger. Even if there had been a threat sufficient before, it is nowhere in evidence at the time of the shot. Since no reasonable person can believe, that an unarmed teen can kill or seriously injure them with just his bare hands and do so while held at gunpoint to boot. Zimmerman is toast!

      • cielo62 says:

        SouthernGirl- did you see the name of the author of that piece you linked? Dan Zimmerman! Do you think there is maybe a family tie there? Weird!

      • JUN says:

        I’m all for gun rights but why are these people so stupid?

        Zimmerman’s actions are detrimental to gun rights. If they keep supporting Zimmerman, the government will take away all their gun rights. The government is going to see their comments and think “Wow these people are going to hurt and kill a lot of people and feel it is perfectly fine, I should take away their guns before something happens” opposed to “Okay Zimmerman is a nut case but at least these gun users are responsible”. Zimmerman is no different from Holmes. I do not know if they just have internet balls, but I never figured that it would be easy for someone to kll another and be so cheery over a death.

  43. Lol! They need to lock him up he is a danger to society…

  44. Malisha says:

    LLMPapa, George has a perfect explanation for that. He forgot which was front and which was back of his shoes when he put them on that day because he has ADHD.

    • Tzar says:

      Tee hee hee

    • JUN says:

      LOL I just realized that Zimmerman can keep claiming to forget and blame his ADHD (if that is even true) but then would get impeached for his credibility because he is not reliable for information on that night

      • Xena says:

        Yeah. He has a bad memory, which is why he obtained a house number on RVC that he planned to retain in his memory until he got to his truck.

        Had he called NEN with the house number while he walked back from RVC, his cell phone would have been in his hand when he reached the T so he would not have needed to search his right-side pockets for it.

    • jm says:

      Brilliant. I can only hope the prosecution is following your youtube commentary.

    • SearchingMind says:

      LLMPapa, You are able to present this tragedy with great humor, point out those little but very relevant and significant details which most trained eyes overlook/would not see and bring laughter in the midst of sorrow. That’s quite a talent. Gefeliciteerd!

      However, according to police report, the back of Zimmerman’s jacket was wet and had grass on it as if he has been lying on his back on the wet grass. Now, if the back of Zimmerman’s shoes and (lower) legs are dry and immaculate, Zimmerman could not have been lying on his back on the wet grass, unless he had his legs up in the air while on his back.

      How do you guys square this circle or circle this square?

      • Patricia says:


        Both guys were down on the grass, struggling, and both guys got wet. Zim’s jacket looks to be water-repellent and was part polyester (65%, I think). It rained heavily at times.

        Trayvon’s clothes were soaking wet.

        By the time the police photog took the pictures of Zim, I expect his cotton-fabric levis pants-legs had the chance to dry out. They are vertical, not worn close to the skin on the lower legs, and would have good air circulatiion.

        Or maybe Doris Singleton threw Zimmerman, pants & all, into the dryer and tumbled him …

    • Zhickel says:

      I believe we are seeing O’Mara’s case in a nutshell in these lines.

      “Damn straight, it makes sense because this is a self-defense case,” he said. The law outlines the circumstances by which a person is allowed to act with force, he said.

      “If you believe that you are in reasonable fear of great bodily injury or death than you are allowed to respond to that using force, up to and including, deadly force,” O’Mara said. “Basically, that’s been self-defense for as long as we have had laws.” The provision of the law regarding a person’s “duty to retreat” has been a source of misunderstanding, he said.

      -If you believe that you are in reasonable fear of great bodily injury or death……

      …I believe this is the backbone of Zimmerman’s defence. Shouldn’t be hard to disprove.

      • JUN says:

        Zimmerman so reasonably feared the 100 pound kid with Skittles & Ice tea, that he had to chase and stalk him around the complex with a gun

        I guess I figured out why Zimmerman skipped the ER. His 1/4 inch wuss cuts can only be healed by Shellie’s butterfly bandaids

      • Lonnie Starr says:

        It isn’t hard to disprove since GZ has already disproven it with his own words. He held the kid with one hand, while aiming his gun with the other! So, now he has to explain, what possible threat of imminent death or great bodily harm did he face at that moment when he decided to pull the trigger? That Trayvon could some how kill him almost instantly if he didn’t shoot him then and there?

        Like the martial artist says, people don’t scream for help while they’re fighting. If they’re screaming for help that means they’ve stopped fighting. When you are fighting you are helping yourself, there’s no mental capacity left to scream, because you’re focused on fighting. Only when you surrender is your mind free to do other things like scream for help. Clearly a person with one hand holding your clothing, while their other hand is holding a fire arm, is not in any danger and has no need of help.

        Zimmerman’s failure to show that he faced an imminent threat of death or great bodily injury AT THE TIME HE PULLED THE TRIGGER, means that he is guilty of murder. Because Trayvon had no means of either killing him or even doing him great bodily harm at that point in time. MOM has no other defense so he has to cling to the idea of self defense and hope that a jury will agree. Obviously the evidence he has will not be convincing.

        I think that at some point, either GZ will do something stupid or the SP will level another charge and bail will be either raised or revoked. Because GZ isn’t taking his case very seriously at all. He still thinks that his brand of insanity will win the day. But either way there’s no hope of a plea deal, this case is an international display. International cases can and do impact foreign policy and national security. Just like anything else that becomes a global affair. As such the pressure is on the state to prove it’s case now. The time for bargaining has passed.

      • SearchingMind says:

        Indeed, Zhickel . You captured the crux of Zimmerman’s defense. O’Mara’s interpretation of the law though is grosso modo correct. The huge problem he (O’Mara) has is getting (the details of) Zimmerman’s self-defense claim fit in within the ambits of the law. “If it doesn’t fit” in, the jury will convict.

        @MichellO. I do not agree with you. Nobody will be flushed down the toilet. That’s the kind of language we don’t want here.

      • Jun says:

        I think Omara has it wrong. The belief has to be reasonable. Besides, Omara is trying to present by omitting facts. Zimmerman also cant instigate the altercation, otherwise, another set of rules apply. Either way, he was stalking and chasing a kid throughout the complex, so if Trayvon slugged him, his force would be considered lawful. However, I dont feel Trayvon even hit Zimmerman. I think he ran into the tree when he turned the corner. Besides that, when Zimmerman fired his shot, he was in no reasonable fear of imminent danger of great bodily harm or death. By his own admission, he subdued and overpowered a kid (who’d a thunk it), restrained him by his shirt, and killed the kid with a shot, then pinned Trayvon facedown until he stopped struggling, then showed no care for the kid. In fact, they dont even need to argue the gunshot and win, they can argue from the facedown pin until he stops struggling, because at that point, he really was in no more imminent danger, and it is cruel and unusual punishment. They could even argue that force and win.

    • MichelleO says:

      GOD, I’m so sick of these people. Flush the Zimmermans’ and MOM down the toilet already.

    • bettykath says:

      Q. How did the “Hannity” experience go for your client?

      A. “George made that decision out of fear and out of need. George thought he might be arrested and never get out. This was after the million-dollar bond. So he thinks he’s going back to jail and the defense fund was at low ebb. The security expenses were outrageous because he now ordered to stay in Seminole County.

      “The fear was he was going back to jail and he was going to run out of money. The need was he believed that if he had gone on Sean Hannity show, that would be a shot in the arm for the defense fund.
      Remembering the defense fund only existed, because BEFORE MY INVOLVEMENT, HE HAD GONE ON SEAN HANNITY SHOW. That is where that $200,000 came from. In a six- or eight-day period, that $200,000 came in because Sean Hannity got on his program and said to effect, ‘Help George. This is a nice guy who’s being railroaded.’ One day $68,000 came in.
      “In George’s mind, Sean was in a sense his savior, because when Sean said, ‘Please help this guy out,’ he got helped out. I think George made the decision to go back on Sean because he thought it would help his defense fund. And that it was going to be necessary, because if he was back in jail, the fear was his wife Shellie would be unprotected by him.”

      • JUN says:

        Being in Seminole County is so fearful yet he hid out at Osterman’s house with his wife. Its getting too easy to spot all their lying.

  45. http://thefreedombulletin.com/2012/06/a-martial-artist-looks-at-the-zimmermanmartin-murder-case/

    Maybe this link has been posted before. Sorry if this is the second time.
    I just looked at it today.
    Will the prosecution call a martial arts expert show that Zimmermans story is bogus ?

    • Lonnie Starr says:

      You can bet that they’ll examine several martial artists and other combat specialists to see what, if anything can be learned and/or demonstrated. The SP probably has assigned someone to research this with more than one provider. Because they’ll be looking for irrefutable demonstrations.

      Obviously a child who wears glasses and therefore receives no sports training or plays in organized contact sports, is going to be a poor match for a professional bar room bouncer. But that’s just my guess. Maybe there are some bars who hire bouncers who can be kicked around by bookish seventeen year old kids.

      • Patricia says:

        Bonnie and Lonnie –

        This video was created in June but I had never seen it before.

        Goes without saying, I loved it.

        Lonnie, if you find that bar that hires the bookish 17-year old bouncers, let me know. I can order a lemonade and not be rousted.
        And the kid can probably fix my computer, too.


      • Malisha says:

        Don’t forget that Zimmerman LOST his job as a barroom bouncer for being too violent! The agency that hired him out was afraid of liability!

        • Lonnie Starr says:

          Excellent point Malisha. He’s a bar room bouncer who is too violent for the job, against an untrained meek and mild child with no experience at combat, or even contact sports at all.

          Let’s see how that plays in front of a jury. A man too violent to be allowed to deal with troublesome customers spoiling for a fight, against a hapless child and he claims the child was a deadly threat? While he, himself is armed with a deadly firearm? A firearm he never loses control of? While the child’s dead body shows no evidence what-so-ever that the kid engaged in a fight?
          Who is kidding who? The violent ex bouncer scream in terror for help while aiming his gun at the child’s heart?

          How many things can one find wrong with this picture?

      • JUN says:

        I wonder if we will hear a blaxploitation

        “Bitch Pleez”

        when Zimmerman makes the “deadly 100 pound child with skittles” allegations and he was so forced into the corner by the “Black Bruce Lee” because his training as a bar bouncer and being too violent for adult patrons and fully grown and trained police officers when he attacked, did not prepare him for Trayvon

        I think I am losing consciousness shaking my head at this

        • Lonnie Starr says:

          When the jurors here GZ say that TM “skipped away”, the case will be totally over! GZ’s credibility will be so far gone, it could not be found even in a galaxy far, far away.
          Night all.

    • MichelleO says:

      THANK YOU, Bonnie:

      Who was Actually on Top?

      An early witness to the fight said that she saw a situation where one person was on top, but could not tell who that person was. She made every effort not to “fill in” her observations with opinions or corrections, making her a credible witness. In fact, she actually identified Zimmerman as being on top without knowing it. Why? Because the hooded sweatshirt that Martin was wearing is the kind where the hood tends to “ride up” over the head. (I know this from experience because I own one of those types of hoodies.) In a fight situation, the hood would have tended to cover the head, and unless it were pitch black out, the witness would have clearly seen the hood. Since no hood was seen, Zimmerman was, by logical deduction, on top and not Martin. Other witnesses came forward well after this one, but this witness seemed to be a lot more credible than those.

      • SearchingMind says:

        “Who was Actually on Top?”

        To answer this question, my educated guess is that prosecutors would be relying heavily on ballistics/trajectory of the bullet that killed Trayvon Martin. That trajectory tells us that Zimmerman was NOT lying on his back with Trayvon on top of him straddling him and dishing out blows to his face and head when he (Zimmerman) fired the shot. Such is, from the point of view absolutely impossible. That leave one viable option open: Zimmerman must have been on top of Trayvon to get a perfect straight shot into his (Trayvon) chest, heart and lung. The prosecutors, I think, would be relying to a decisive degree on science (instead of conflicting witness statements) in order to deny the members of the jury the opportunity of choosing which witness not to believe – because that witness might end up being the ones who saw Zimmerman on top.

        • Patricia says:


          Sage observation, Searcher. Stick with the trajectory of the bullet.

          Zimmerman wants to use his story that Trayvon was on top BASHING ZIMMERMAN’S HEAD as his EXCUSE for shooting.

          When Trayvon had been on top EARLIER, Zimmerman had no opportunity to shoot because it was physically impossible. When Zimmerman got on top, only then was it possible for Zimmerman to shoot – and he did.

          What is clear is that Zimmerman could ONLY have shot Trayvon when Zimmerman was IN CONTROL OF TRAYVON.

          The one position that Zimmerman claims – under Trayvon – puts Zimmerman OUT OF CONTROL of Trayvon, BUT THE TRAJECTORY shows that it is a PHYSICAL IMPOSSIBILITY for Zimmerman to have made the shot that made the trajectory, in that position.

          As Lonnie points out, the position they were in does not really matter – the issue is that Zimmerman shot Trayvon when Zimmerman was IN CONTROL OF THE WEAPON and Trayvon had NO DEFENSE – and no weapon.

          Contrary to Zimmerman’s claims, Trayvon’s HANDS were never weapons – FORENSIC EVIDENCE PROVES THIS.

          Zimmerman with his gun out, could simply have got up and walked away. He had NO FEAR FOR HIS LIFE. Evidence proves Trayvon inflicted NO HARM to Zimmerman.

          But the “anger management” class Zimmerman took three years earlier didn’t work, did it? So he SHOT THE “SUSPECT.”

          Great analysis, Searcher. It’s a “stick to the basics” approach – and will be clear to the jury. Trajectory triumphs!

          • Lonnie Starr says:

            Exactly! The law does not say “You can take a shot. at your attacker, when you can!”

            It says “You can only take the shot if it is required to do so, to prevent the loss of your life or great bodily harm to yourself”.

            At the time GZ draws and aims, not one of these conditions apply!

            Therefore the law prohibited that shot from being fired then!

            Zimmerman may want to believe that he could have thought many things. But what he was thinking at the time, is not what the jury will be asked to decide!

            They will be asked to decide if “GZ had a reasonable threat of suffering great bodily harm or death at the hands of an unarmed child”. That fear is unreasonable because; no one has ever been killed by an untrained, unarmed youth while the youth was being held at the point of a gun!

            The only loss GZ had to fear at that point in time, was the loss of his reputation.

          • Patricia says:

            @ Lonnie –


            “They will be asked to decide if “GZ had a reasonable threat of suffering great bodily harm or death at the hands of an unarmed child”. That fear is unreasonable because; no one has ever been killed by an untrained, unarmed youth while the youth was being held at the point of a gun! The only loss GZ had to fear at that point in time, was the loss of his reputation.”



          • Lonnie Starr says:

            Yes, I believe they will have to. The entire trial… All the why’s, wherefore’s and “this or that” will boil down to whether or not GZ had no other choice but to either fire that shot or die, or else suffer great injury.

            The jury will retire to think over whether or not GZ had a fear sufficient to fire his weapon. They will be asked to decide if they think that fear was a reasonable one, in their own view.

            MOM’s job will be to convince the jury, that a 17 year old with empty hands, being held at gun point, represents a serious threat of great injury or death to the man who pulled the trigger.

            He’ll probably want to bring a collection of Bruce Lee films for the jury to see, but Bruce Lee was trained and older than 17, nor was Bruce Lee being held at gunpoint, and he is proficient at combat, sufficiently to have the confidence needed to proceed with offensive maneuvers, because he has every reason to believe they will be effective.

            Trayvon would not throw a punch, simply because he cannot judge what the effect of that punch would be. Other than to realize it would not kill or stop his attacker, and that it would enrage and inflame his attacker. Why would anyone want to enrage and inflame a person who appears to have superior combat abilities?
            Less, with an attack that they can only believe will be ineffective?
            Neither the logic nor the emotion lends any credence to things having happened that way.

            While George carries a gun into proximity of Trayvon, but that weapon is concealed. Only George knows of it’s availability, because he carries it all the time, everywhere he goes, he cannot forget that he has a weapon on him. Because it’s always there! Each time he wakes, dresses and leaves his house, he takes pains to ensure that his weapon is with him. Pretty much in the same way he does with is underwear, his socks, his shirt and his shoes. These are things he always puts on, every time he dresses, he does not have to think about it, he always knows they are there. Thus, a deadly weapon, which is more than just socks or shoes, has to draw more attention than items of clothing. Because it’s making a choice between being safe and not being safe. If you feel safe when you have your gun, you will not feel safe if you don’t have it. Thus you cannot forget that you have it, because you will not feel safe without it.

            “Georgie porgie puddin N pie,
            shot the boy and made him die!
            Now Georgie porgie tells his lie,
            the jury will tell him good bye!”

          • Patricia says:

            Remarkable, Lonnie. Now, if only the prosecution will boil it down to this. And repeat it.

            I have been thinking the prosecution might bring in, earlier in the process, a martial arts instructor to ask, “How many years’ instruction/practice would it take to be effective in martial arts? What would be the physical requirements? (i.e., muscle mass) What would the cost of this training be?”

            Then ask Trayvon’s parents: had they enrolled him in such classes? What was their cumulative cost?

            Might also ask his school coach if they had such programs at school and did Trayvon participate?

          • Lonnie Starr says:

            Yes, all that too, but it’s easy to see that had Trayvon, even had sports training, he’d have easily out run and managed to stay away from GZ. He was caught by GZ because he didn’t know how to properly manage his resources. When fear overpowered him, he ran all out and burnt out, before he could even reach home, in my estimation.

            Consider that he’d just walked to 711, we don’t know what time he left home, but we know it’s a 16 minute walk at 4.4 ft/sec. It could very well be that he hustled along, with rain impending and wanting to make the start of the game. He might have covered the distance in a few minutes less. On the other hand, on the trip home he actually faced escalating rain, he could reach the mailboxes in only 13 minutes at 4.4 ft/sec. It’s extremely likely he hustled along and perhaps even ran some of the distance.

            6:42:19 approx. At mailboxes: ~3452 feet from 711 @ 4.4ft/sec. 13min. @5/ft/sec ~12 min. then running even a quarter of the distance would be double speed, loping off another minute or two.

            In any event, he’d wind up sheltering at the mailboxes, not just from the rain but in an attempt to recover and rest. 10 or 12 minutes would hardly be enough to get back to “fresh”. So, when he took off running again at full tilt, he’d quickly run out of steam.

            A wee bit of sports training, and the first thing he’d learn is not to expend himself so quickly. I remember a coach saying things like that way back in high school gym. You learn to pace yourself so that you don’t burn out quickly and can last longer. Just about any coach or physical trainer of youths will tell you this, and that it’s the first major problem teens face in sports, how to last.

            So a trip of only ~3452 should not have burned TM out, so that he was breathing so heavily DD could hear him out of breath over the phone. Teens have good clear lungs able to breathe quite deeply and excellent circulation, managed properly he should have been able to run, pretty fast, for a mile or two without practice, if only he had even modest training. So, I’d rule out any martial arts training, where endurance is usually the key to success.

            From DD’s account, it seems to me that GZ caught TM because TM was used up and very tired. I’ll bet that any physical therapist who looks at the nature of the trip to and from the store will assess that TM was very tired when GZ encountered him.

          • Patricia says:

            GZ didn’t take the gun to work, but could have worn the holster at all times. Probably couldn’t get into certain buildings, armed, due to metal detectors. Like Sanford PD? The Court House?

          • Lonnie Starr says:

            There again, GZ lies so much, we can’t know what to believe. He says he didn’t wear the gun at work, but he may have anyway. He’s not one to be fastidious about rules. At the SPD, it would probably depend on who he walked in with. I’m sure a friendly PO or the Brass could get him waved through with his weapon. Probably not at the courthouse though. In which case he’d probably lock his gun in the car.

            But the point is, if he’s so fastidious about being sure to have his weapon with him, everywhere it’s legal to do so, he’s telling us that he never forgets his gun, even when he’s not permitted to carry it, he knows where it is. So, he has to know where it is when it’s on his person. Such that, in his case there is no “I forgot I was armed”. How could he not know? He knows when the gun is left in his car, he knows when he doesn’t have it. Otherwise how can he say that he carries it everywhere? It’s the “positive and negative” knowledge that comes together to create the impression that he always pays attention to his firearm.

      • SearchingMind says:

        correction: Such is, from the point of view of science ….

  46. Malisha says:

    Rachel, I understand that the video was suggesting that “a police officer, that I had called” was Osterman, but I actually don’t think his careless words necessarily mean that. I am leaning towards the idea that his NEN call was not his last call and that he phoned T. Smith at some point. Just a hunch. Osterman was a federal agent by the time — George might not have been thinking of him as “a police officer.” But it’s really a good catch. This is the third version of the events:

    1 – I was trying to maintain visual on the suspect;
    2 – I was trying to find an address (or street name);
    3 – I was trying to meet up with a police officer that I had called.

    All just supposedly plausible explanations to be preferred to, “I was following Trayvon Martin in order to unlawfully restrain him and bring him in.”

    • cielo62 says:

      Rachel and Malisha~ I don’t think we need to look that closely at GZs use of that sentence structure. I took it to mean that he was trying to meet up with the police officer he had called ie, the officer he had called with the NEN call. I didn’t really take it to mean that he had made an additional separate call to a specific cop. I couod be wrong, but GZ doesn’t strike me as being that specific a speaker.

      • Patricia says:

        Cielo, Malisha –

        Zimmerman told Hannity that he was there to meet the police officer – just another Zimmerman prevarication.

        Zimmerman did NOT want to admit on network TV that he had REFUSED to stay in a specific location to which Sean/311/NEN could direct the officers to connect with him on their arrival — and that the reason he refused is that he wanted to be a “free range hunter” to pursue his quarry, which he did.

        It’s on record that Zimmerman asked Sean that he be called upon their arrival, at which time he would tell them where he was. Clearly what he hoped was to hand over “the suspect” (his term) and to be able to do this he had to stalk and corner this kid. (And he called him a “kid.”)

        Everything he said on the NEN and all the actions clearly show his intent to pursue – and that he did pursue. HE DID NOT WANT TO ADMIT THAT TO HANNITY.

        Imagine O’Mara’s face if Zimmerman admitted the truth!

        Ay, caramba!

      • LLMPapa says:

        Patricia, you may be correct, but I will point out if you listen again, Zimmerman didn’t say he was there to meet THE police officer he called.

        He said he went to meet “A police officer I had called”. Maybe I’m reading too much into it, but remember, he was still on the phone with NEN when he supposedly went across the sidewalk to RVC.

        Seemed like reference to a separate call to me, but with Zimmerman talking, who knows? LOL

    • JUN says:

      Well you know Zimmerman was going to his car to meet officers, thats why he needed to find the address on the other side of the block opposite direction of his car… while Trayvon was skipping really fast and Zimmerman kept going in the same direction as Trayvon while closely behind him… then Zimmerman was confused if he had to meet his legions of black friends

      • cielo62 says:

        JUN~ you are a bad person!  🙂

        • Lonnie Starr says:

          Actually Zimmerman only said he was on his way back to his car. But, then… Why did he say “have them call me and I’ll tell them where I’m at!” Doesn’t that mean he’s nixed the idea of returning to his car? It’s only after he’s killed a kid, that we hear from him that he was on his way, to a place where he told the police, he didn’t think he would be. The import is that he decided not to go back to his car, and didn’t anticipate being there when the police arrived.
          When, obviously, according to him and the NW rules and the police admonishment, he actually had nothing else to do.

          • Patricia says:

            @Lonnie –

            Absolutely correct. GZ never intended to be at his truck for the officers to meet with him GZ wanted his freedom to pursue “the suspect,”.

          • Lonnie Starr says:

            Correct! It gets dizzying, but after he’s killed the kid, he then claims he was in the process of returning… To the very place he refused the police request to meet him!

      • JUN says:

        LOL jaja


      • MichelleO says:

        I BELIEVE those words “suspect” and “assholes” and “fucking goons” are going to come back to bite this very stupid man in the arse. He keeps degrading this unknown individual even after he executes him.

        • jm says:

          Aside from the lies, etc, the reason I dislike Zimmerman so much is after he was proven to be DEAD WRONG about Trayvon being “suspicious” and “on drugs or something” he has no remorse. None. The only reason Zimmerman apologized in court was for PR as he took the opportunity to lie about Trayvon’s age in court in spite of identifying Trayvon’s age as late teens to the dispatcher. It’s like the killing of an innocent teen GZ stalked is nothing to the Zimmerman team and just an opportunity to cash in, oblivious to the fact Trayvon was wrongly profiled, shot and killed by Zimmerman. I just can’t get over the no remorse part of the whole scenario once it was determined Trayvon was not a burglar and was just walking home from the store with nothing but Skittles and iced tea.

        • Patricia says:


          I always sensed that Zimmerman’s use of the word “suspect” that night at SPD really set Doris Singleton’s jaw in a clamp.

          She is sworn, and he is not.

          Singleton has the training and street cred and authority to decide someone is a “suspect.” Zimmerman does not.

          It is offensive of Zimmerman to used terminology to which he is not entitled and in this case, terminology that’s not correct.

          I don’t think that did him any good.

  47. SearchingMind says:

    @ Whonoze

    Keep up the good fight. I’m not sure whether the commenters here actually have fascist tendencies, or are just so blinded by their hate for GZ they can’t see the big picture. The fact is there is a lot of over-zealous prosecution in this country, a lot of prosecutorial misconduct, and the victims are overwhelmingly from subordinate social groups: poor, non-white, etc.”

    I am not sure what point you are making. It is neither fair nor responsible to suggest that “the commenter here” have “fascist tendencies” “or are just so blinded by their hate of GZ they can’t see the big picture” without elucidating on what you mean. IMO, the way you formulated, worded and presented you thought intimidate people into not expressing their views for fear of being called “fascists” and hateful. As such you maybe stifling healthy debate. But I do truly think that you misspoke this time. I therefore would very much like to engage you in a serious exchange of thought beginning with the following questions:

    1. Which comments do you find fascistic and why?

    2. Which “comments” from the commenters here” are based on “hate for GZ” and why?

    3. What is “the big picture” you allude to, and how is that “big picture” damaged by “the commenters here”.

    4. Which “prosecution” is “over-zealous” and from whence proceeds the “over-zealous” forth?

    5. Do you suggest that crime-victims, parents of murdered teens should quietly go home with their tale between their legs, mourn in private and suspected criminals not prosecuted?

    6. Do you have any criteria in mind for the prosecution of crimes? If yes, which are they?

    Your reply would be very much appreciated.

    • Zhickel says:

      You are asking for an encyclopaedia, not a reply.

      The regular posters here are on the same side; it’s not fair to judge any of them (especially BettyKath and Whonoze, two extremely level headed contributors) by their level of outrage not living up to your expectations.

      • SearchingMind says:

        The questions are clear and well-grounded on the post from Whonoze. You can either answer them or stay out of the debate. “Levels of outrage” “not living up to my” presumed “expectation” (whatever that means) have nothing to do with anything here.

  48. George it time to go to jail, pack your bags. maybe we can put osterman and w11/jeremy next to you. it only takes two to commit a conspiracy!

  49. Malisha says:

    I had not looked closely at the debate raging here (turning into an argument from a debate, unfortunately) about Zimmerman’s ability to get a fair trial and about Zimmerman’s deserving a fair trial. Even now I’m not sure who’s saying what to whom but that said, BettyKath is one of my favorite posters but I’m not in the debate/argument for any purpose than to chip in a few details:

    1 – As I may have revealed already, I do not trust our courts, and I do believe that many if not most trials held in them (regardless of state or jurisdiction but certainly including Florida) have great potential for unfairness;

    2 – Actually I do believe that money has a lot to do with whether you can get a RELATIVELY fair trial or not, regardless of what kind of case it is (civil or criminal) or whether you’re plaintiff-prosecution or defense; but there are some small comforts involved:

    (a) Plenty of paid lawyers are worse than public defenders or legal aid attorneys;

    (b) People with millions of dollars can be railroaded too; and

    (c) Defense spending for indigents does actually include expert witness fees. In fact, I have a friend who is a high-priced forensic psychiatrist with a law degree as well as a medical degree. His rate for “federal work” is over $500, WITH paid travel. Under the “Criminal Justice Act” he has recently been called out of state three (3) times for a defendant who was charged after a year-long investigation before his arrest. He is even paid that rate to read the documents generated by the investigation! Of course, we all know that requests for experts can be unjustifiably denied, but there has been no such request by O’Mara and if there were such a request, I can bet it would NOT be denied. Whereas I don’t know the budget a Seminole County criminal court would have for expert witnesses for the defense, that has not yet come up in the case so I doubt that it is a problem for O’Mara, who can probably get all the help he needs “pro bono” by appealing to such sources as the gun lobby and Fox News.

    3 – The biggest problem I can foresee in getting George a fair trial would be the following: IF, as Osterman said, George used to have so many “dearly loved” Black friends that he could call out a demonstration through the streets of Sanford that would be bigger than the ones held for Trayvon Martin, then probably almost every African American living in Seminole County has already been one of George’s “dearly loved” friends. They would be ruled out from jury duty in that case. The remaining few who weren’t “dearly loved” friends of George’s probably did demonstrate for Trayvon Martin so THEY would be ruled out from jury duty in that case. Therefore, only non-African Americans would be available for jury duty. Among those, you’d probably have to rule out the Mexicans (thanks to his comments on FaceBook) and perhaps “white Hispanics” (thanks to his stated wish that his mother had named him “Jorge” so he wouldn’t have been called a racist). Then you’d have to rule out anybody who had sent in money to his web-page. Whoever watches Fox News has to go because they can’t credibly say they haven’t formed an opinion about Zimmerman’s guilt or innocence when he’s practically been canonized. Who’s left? A few liberal white Southerners who would automatically believe George was guilty because Hannity liked him?

    You got no jury!

    On the other hand, I don’t believe there will be a problem. I think there will be a plea deal, probably one that nobody could predict in a million years.

    • SearchingMind says:

      “Actually I do believe that money has a lot to do with whether you can get a RELATIVELY fair trial or not, regardless of what kind of case it is (civil or criminal) or whether you’re plaintiff-prosecution or defense; but there are some small comforts involved:”

      I agree. BUT that problem is not embedded in the system as such. If it were so, the Constitution of the United States shall have been- and still would be denying fair-trial to millions of Americans who cannot afford the cost of effective defense in criminal (civil and administrative) proceeding. Surely, you do not think that’s the case. As you rightly pointed out “(a) Plenty of paid lawyers are worse than public defenders or legal aid attorneys; (b) People with millions of dollars can be railroaded too”.

      • Malisha says:

        SearchingMind, you said, “Surely, you do not think that’s the case.”

        I may be confused at this point about what you mean and what you think I mean. I surely DO believe that millions of Americans are denied anything even FAINTLY resembling fair trials, mostly because of money and also because of other flaws in the system (and in us and in our stars, etc.). I do. I do not expect justice in our court system; occasionally it does result but probably not any more often than it would by flipping coins. There’s no way to test that theory because we cannot get a good control group.

        I believe if George Zimmerman gets a trial at all, it is as likely to be fair TO HIM as any trial anywhere in this country could be to any defendant, if only because there will be massive money behind his effort, two excellent defense attorneys, and lots and lots and lots of publicity. The problem, for those of us who realize that George already got, and is already getting, a much more advantageous deal than most criminal defendants (especially in Florida) get is this: OTHERS DO NOT GET THAT MUCH FAIRNESS.

    • JUN says:

      I agree that it is much easier when you have money and connections within anything, however, you have stated the howevers, and the fact remains of the constitution. I myself have argued in court with no knowledge of law and used constitution only and won.

      • princss6 says:

        @ Malisha


        Exactly and that George is held up as some symbol for all of those who do not get nearly the sort of treatment he has is beyond ridiculous!

  50. bettykath says:

    Searchingmind, Feel better now?

    You’ve missed my main point but I don’t think you’re interested in seeing it. Some of the bloggers here are as rabid as those on the pro-Z blogs. So sad. Think I’ll just read the professors post from now on.

    • jm says:

      bettykath says: “Some of the bloggers here are as rabid as those on the pro-Z blog.”

      Really I did not notice anyone who did not give an opinion in a rationale/logical way and I missed “rabid” posts. I think everyone is entitled to an opinion and that is what this board is about, right – even if the opinion is different than yours it should give you something to think about.

      I want George Zimmerman to get a fair trial and I hope that in the end his lies will be exposed and he is sent to prison. I would hate for anyone to be encouraged to do as Zimmerman did if GZ is not held responsible for the killing of Trayvon Martin – who did not get a fair trial because he was misjudged as “suspicious” by an armed George Zimmerman who brought this whole nastiness on himself.

      I hope I am not sounding rabid or facist because I don’t mean to be hateful. I’m just giving an opinion.

      • bettykath says:

        “Some of the bloggers here are as rabid as those on the pro-Z blog.”

        I apologize for this statement. The zeal for punishing GZ is just as strong as those wanting him to walk but the language is much more civilized. There is actual dialog here that seems to be missing elsewhere.

        • Patricia says:

          @BettyKath –

          Gracious and strong of you to apologize, BettyKath. Your entire discourse clearly represents your passion for justice – for Trayvon Martin, and beyond. What’s a few word bombs among friends? We are all students of Professor Leatherman, and we’re all in this together. There was a lot of heat, and vigorous argument was had by all.

          It reminds me that I should apologize for my frequent 4-letter vocabulary.

          Although I really, really do consider Zimmerman a slug.

    • bettykath says:


      Your post is awesome. It reminds me of an incident in high school. The history teacher asked a specific question about the reading assignment. The student chosen to answer the question stood and gave an excellent summary of the entire chapter. But he missed the point of the question. Lots of words, all accurate, but they didn’t answer the question that was asked. (He’s now a retired attorney).

      • Maybe you should have stated your question CLEARER. Like I said, I saw TWO points expressed in your original post. Maybe you are like a teacher who gives an unclear assignment; don’t be surprised when you get answers that you didn’t expect. I, too, haven’t seen any “rabid” answers or character tainting slander like you could on any number of pro-Z blogs, or even on CNN. When some raw comments are made, they are either in jest OR as a response to a truly emotional bit of evidence. Our “job” on this blog is NOT to alter the “big picture” of the flaws in the legal systemt. This blog’s intent (unless I have stepped into the wrong classroom) is to dissect the available evidence and see what happened that night in February. “Fixing the Justice System” in in the room down the hall.

    • SearchingMind says:

      Betty, I do not feel better at all. I feel awful that I have to disagree with someone of enormous intelligence like you. Indeed I have read and appreciated most of your comments and I think that you – like all the participants here – do have a searching, analytical mind a good attorney must have. I understood perfectly the point you were making. By I think that you made that point in NOT such a good tactical manner and in a case where the murdered minor was treated like a sub-human and the defendant has received the kind of fair-trail most Americans can only but dream of, that the point you set out to make got lost in the middle.

      This case is unique. Almost all of my friends/family members do not like even MENTIONING this case in the house. But that death-scream on the 911-tape hunts me – and I don’t care about the race of that kid. What happened to him is sheer evil. This is neither a case where it could be suggested that Zimmerman is not getting fair trial nor a case to be used as an instrument to attain the goals of “the big picture” (whatever that is).

    • SearchingMind says:

      “Some of the bloggers here are as rabid as those on the pro-Z blogs. So sad. Think I’ll just read the professors post from now on.”

      And you are now also claiming to be a sanctimonious victim? Victim of throwing out views out there and running away from the debate when the same views are challenged. So sad. Indeed.

    • bettykath — It is not the prosecution right out there advertising their case against GZ. He has, his lawyer has, his few friends have, and his family has. They have publically displayed their ability to misstate facts as presented through discovery. As a result, they have opened themselves up to negative opinion from the public.

    • Xena says:

      Some of the bloggers here are as rabid as those on the pro-Z blogs.

      Bettykath. I’m sorry but your complaint is unsubstantiated.

      When you find something posted here as bad as the following, then your complaint about bloggers here will be more credible.


    • JUN says:


      I think you are reaching a bit with your statements or claims of rabidness or that we don’t want to give Z fair treatment or that Z is not getting any fair treatment

      Zimmerman has gotten more than fair treatment, although most people would want to strangle him, it has not happened

      No one is disagreeing with you that people abuse power (Zimmerman abused his powers over Trayvon in this case), however, to say Zimmerman is not getting fair treatment, is laughable ROFL

      Perhaps you are kidding, but we are talking about a man who got over $200,000 US, was allowed to leave the state on his first bond, was allowed to walk free for so long after having killed someone and giving a sketchy story, and even went on air on television and has not been attacked by anyone, considering what he has done.

      Zimmerman has gotten the benefit of the doubt on ridiculous motions and I would say he is getting better treatment than he ever gave Trayvon. Investigation wise, Zimmerman had many days to concoct a story, tamper with evidence, lie multiple times, and even get lawyers without paying a single dime.

      The simple fact is that to many, his presumption of guilt is great, and the evidence is strong.

      No one here has demonized his family, they do it themselves with their actions.

      How are you suppose to do PR for a child stalker murderer, incest rapist, scam artist liar like Zimmerman?

      His family lies and grifts people and have smug attitudes…

      I dont even need to use any bad words, as just using descriptions of their actions makes you think badly of them

  51. SearchingMind says:

    @ BettyKath. Re: “fair trial?”

    “ (…). I want Zimmerman to have a fair trial. That means he has to be able to have his own experts, and that means that there has to be fundraising. They also have more expenses due to the very high profile of the case. So, I don’t begrudge the Zimmerman team their efforts at fundraising (…).”

    Utter sanctimonious nonsense that is rooted in sheer fantasy, BettyKath! And I will tell you why.

    1. Zimmerman was not arrested after killing a minor. He (Zimmerman) was given quasi-VIP treatment by the police on the night of the homicide; crucial evidence that would help establish guilt/innocence were not collected; no drug-/alcohol tests were performed on Zimmerman; cries of death of the said minor were the attributed to Zimmerman by the police that had the urgent need to “correct” a witness and lecture the witness that it was Zimmerman screaming and begging for his life; Zimmerman was allowed to wash off valuable DNA material on his hands and the cuffs of his jacket sleeves, etc. It took worldwide protest, the threat of civil disobedience in Florida and the courage of an old righteous lady called Angela Corey to get the wheels of criminal justice rolling against Zimmerman. No fair trial for Zimmerman? Just a minute, I will come back to that;

    2. Before his indictment, Zimmerman was heavily represented in the media by (professional) surrogates (Joe Oliver, F. Taafe, family members, etc.) and by TWO professional civil- and criminal attorneys (Hal Ulrig & Co.);

    3. Upon indictment, another TWO criminal attorneys of Zimmerman’s own choosing took over the legal representation Zimmerman. The said counsels are being described as “some of the best criminal law attorneys in town”;

    4. Three websites (i.e. Gzlegalcase, therealgeorgezimmerman, and O’Mara’s site) and a FB-page are devoted to the defense of Zimmerman;

    5. Since the indictment, Zimmerman has had the unpaid support of some of the best lawyers in the world (e.g. Prof. Allan Dershowitz) and major cable news networks (e.g. Fox) who have engaged in sustained fierce public relations onslaught against Mrs. Corey geared towards her professional destruction. This is unique, unheard of, in the entire history of the United States;

    6. While incarcerated, Zimmerman appears in Court in civilian clothes; almost all the motions filed by Zimmerman has been granted by the trial Court;

    7. Zimmerman was granted a $150.000.-bail for killing a minor (and you might consider asking Trayvon Benjamin Martin what his life is worth). Most criminal defendants accused of murder2 stay in jail until (after) the trial;

    8. Within 2-3 months after killing a minor, Zimmerman engaged – based alone on the fact that the said minor is black – in a commercial enterprise that raised over $250.000.- from people “who would have done the same” (i.e. people who would hunt down and kill black teens and/or just hate black people and/or just want to give Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson a bleeding nose, etc.). Remove the race of Trayvon Benjamin Martin from the equation, the sum total of the donations to Zimmerman will be $00.00.- With the raised money, Zimmerman was able to “pay off all the depths”, live in expensive hotels guarded by one of the best security firms in Florida, buy expensive telephones and bullet-proof vests, pay for telephone- and internet subscription for 2-3yrs in advance, etc. This is quite unique in the entire history of the United States of America. I would like you to point out to me an example of a case where hundreds of thousands of dollars have been donated to a murder-suspect in the entire history of the United States ($10 for each example).

    9. Zimmerman manipulated the Judge and flouted the criminal justice system by conspiring with his wife to commit perjury and furnish the Court with information they knew to be false. Despite that, Zimmerman was still granted yet another bail!

    10. Upon crying “bias” Zimmerman motioned for- and was granted another trial Judge;

    11. The United States Constitution guarantees the rights of every criminal defendants to fair trial. Since I do not know from which country you are posting from, I shall here apply legal terms that are internationally accepted. Many legal principles flow forth from the principle of ‘fair trial’/‘due process’. Among them is the principle of “equality of arm” – which in lay-man’s term means that the defendant must be accorded equal opportunity to (get and provide evidence to) prove his innocence. Zimmerman has been accorded this opportunity to the fullest in the present case and there is nothing to suggest that he would not be in the future. Among others, the prosecution has thoroughly investigated the crime Zimmerman is accused of. Most of the incriminatory- and exculpatory evidence have been turned over to Zimmerman. At a certain point, Zimmerman shall have received all- and the same evidence the prosecution has. If the defence is not satisfied with certain aspects/results of the investigation, e.g. DNA-test, it could always ask for extra tests or it could have its own experts do more testing and report on the findings thereof. The cost of the later is paid for by the State/Court. AS SUCH, in the US (and the rest of the Western World), there is no reason for a criminal defendant to raise money outside the criminal justice system on the ground that he/she needs the money to pay for effective criminal defence.

    Miscarriage of justice (and I truly appreciate your general concern for the protection of the poor and the “weak”) in this country has everything to do with greedy/avaricious counsel and/or incompetent counsel and/or prosecution and/or judge and/or biased jury and/or biased judge. It is never really about lack of funds – because the law provides for enough money for everyone to get fair trial – irrespective of class, gender, age, race, ethnicity, etc. Indeed, in the US, there have been many cases where penniless defendants who were charged with murder-1 and had no single dime donated to them, were found NOT guilty of any crimes and cleared of all charges, and cases where rich (innocent) defendants were found guilty, despite their money.

    On the above grounds, I reject – with the most stringent of vehemence – your suggestion that (a) Zimmerman may not be getting fair-trial and (b) YOU ALONE wants Zimmerman to get fair trial and other participants here don’t. That suggestion is disingenuous, self-serving and is rotted neither in the law nor on the facts. Zimmerman has every opportunity/possibility he reasonably needs to mount an effective defense. The rights accorded to Zimmerman in the present case are almost unparalleled in the entire history of the United States, while his ability to raise money outside the criminal justice system (from gun-nuts, neo-Nazis, etc.) has NOTHING to do with getting- or not getting a fair trial. So pls., BettyKath, drop that condescending holier-than-thou-attitude and climb down from that presumptuous moral high-ground – for such is cheap, very easy and stifles legitimate debate, IMO!

    • rachael says:

      ^ What he said!

    • AWESOME rebuttal! I’m not sure about “the entire history of the US” part but the rest is very accurate. GZ is getting a fair trial, and because it is so public, he is getting both money and scrutiny that others would not. I see your original post to involve to points wrapped up in one statement. 1) the state of our current legal system, and 2) assurances that GZ would get a fair trial. In response to 1) this forum is not the place to change the legal system although it’s a good place to discuss the flaws that we see with it and 2) I feel that all of us want a fair trial for GZ if for no other reason than to spare the Martin family any further pain should there be issues on appeal OR a retrial.

    • Wow – SearchingMind. You are So..o..o right on and I thank you for the post.

    • Xena says:

      @SearchingMind. (Applause)

  52. Malisha says:

    “He probably thought the jail calls really weren’t recorded or, if they were, that no one listened to them, or if they were listened to, no one would figure out their code.”

    Oh, I think it’s his hubris showing up again. Although he was forced to go to jail and pretend he was really going to be prosecuted by that terrible Corey woman he did not have a chance to charm personally yet, he was still thinking, “Hey I’m in the Seminole County Jail; these are my folks here, my jailers; they’re here to help me get this to go away; they would never cooperate with the a55holes who are trying to railroad me just because I killed some punk.”

    I don’t think George has dropped that attitude YET. And strangely, he may still be right. We may all get whiplash to see how it plays out if his “they-have-to-protect-me-in-the-final-analysis-because-we’re-in-this-together” position prevails and he walks for “time served” and maybe some community service “mentoring.”

    • cielo62 says:

      If he is found guilty the judge’s hands are tied by Florida’s minimum sentencing requirements. Unless GZ gets a saccharine sweet deal that busts his actions to criminal trespass, there is no way he can get away with anything less than 25 years.

  53. Malisha says:

    Rachel, it could be that he personally called SMITH, too. NOT on the NEN, but perhaps he had Smith’s cell phone number.

    To me, the thought is almost irresistible that even now, the prosecution is protecting the SPD, and several individuals in the Department and in the State’s Attorney’s office, while prosecuting George. Smith could be one; Wolfinger is definitely one; Lee is past protecting probably (except that he is not being prosecuted for anything himself, unless the feds come in with a surprise 1981 suit).


    • rachael says:

      It could be a lot of things – but he never said anything about getting out to meet a police officer. He later said to have them call him and he would tell them where he was, so of all the things it could have been, I do not believe it was that – as well as was pointed out, what happened to he got out to look for an address?

      • rachael says:

        And I think the video was suggesting who the “police officer” he called may have been 😉

      • bettykath says:

        Good catch by llmpapa and he might be right in his suggestion of who the police officer might have been. So when did he make this call, before or after the NEN call?

    • jm says:

      If GZ called Smith, that has to be on cell phone records right? Where was GZ going to meet the police officer since he allegedly did not have an address to give the dispatcher?. Has GZ screwed up again, caught yet another lie?

    • Xena says:

      OT on the NEN, but perhaps he had Smith’s cell phone number.

      IIRC, Smith did not arrive on RVC and walk through from that direction.

  54. rachael says:


  55. LLMPapa says:

    Sorry for the delay, but it’s up now.

    • jm says:

      I loved the look on MOM’s face while GZ talked – priceless.

      Love to have a professional interpret the body language on GZ and MOM.

      Thanks LLMpapa.

      PS: Somewhere I thought I read or heard George say Osterman was at his home that evening. Is Osterman’s location documented at the time of the shooting.

    • Xena says:

      Well, that would explain why GZ had to get off the phone so fast after telling the dispatcher to have the cops call him for his location.

      IMO, GZ already located Trayvon by either hearing Trayvon’s phone ring, or hearing Trayvon talking on his phone.

      One thing that GZ ALWAYS omits from his “getting an address” story is why he did not call NEN back with that address while standing in front of that house? Why would he need to walk back to his truck before calling NEN with the address? And why, since he claims having a bad memory and not remembering the names of streets, would he depend on his memory retaining a house address during his walk back to his truck?

      Oh, I know why he omits the idea of calling NEN with the house address while standing in front of it. Because he could not then use the part of the story about not remembering what pocket his cell phone was in giving Trayvon time to sucker punch him. Then too, GZ would have to explain how he was sucker punched on RVC rather than a dark area where Trayvon jumped out of the bushes.

  56. Malisha says:

    I was just over on the “SkewedDistribution” thread for a minute checking something about Trent Sawyer, and something that never occurred to me was in the comments. Folks, consider this question for a minute: Does either Taaffe or Osterman own a taser? It would seem to me quite probable that Osterman would. Think of it — somebody tasers Martin to herd him back toward where George is when he gets away — or threatens him with the taser to get him back there? And no vehicles are searched after the shooting; and nobody’s back porches are checked or searched; and no individuals other than George Zimmerman even go down to the station house under surveillance, or get frisked, or anything like that. And the police need to ask bystanders for a first aid kit? No kit in the squad cars? And “CPR was attempted.” By which officer?

  57. whonoze says:

    Keep up the good fight. I’m not sure whether the commenters here actually have fascist tendencies, or are just so blinded by their hate for GZ they can’t see the big picture. The fact is there is a lot of over-zealous prosecution in this country, a lot of prosecutorial misconduct, and the victims are overwhelmingly from subordinate social groups: poor, non-white, etc. Check the classic Errol Morris film ‘The Thin Blue Line’ – which ought to make anybody check their hubris about anything – and look into some of the cases in Illinois that led the conservative governor there to suspend the death penalty because so many innocent men were on death row.

    • JUN says:

      Issues like that should be dealt with on a case by case basis. Everyone is speaking on this particular case and I think Zimmerman has gotten more than fair treatment. This incident is moreso of having the quality of not enough zeal and no proper conduct. There is misconduct within all facets of industry and life.

    • Malisha says:

      I agree, Whonoze, that prosecutorial misconduct is just out of control in the whole country, and most notably in cases where the defendant (a) is a minority or a despised person per se; (b) is unable to get his or her own attorney; or (c) is somehow considered “against” the establishment. Under these circumstances, not only is there no “level playingfield,” but it’s essentially a bullfight, and like a bullfight, it’s done for public show and for the purpose of hero-manufacturing, to dominate and control those of us who never actually get into the defendant’s dock but who need to be frightened on a regular basis. Of course, this is not the case in Zimmerman; he was a friend of the cops and the prosecutors and they were protecting HIM against the law, not protecting the public against HIM.

      • princss6 says:

        I WOULD love to get feedback from people in those social groups who feel that GZ is somehow the pin-up boy for their cause. Quite frankly, I find it offensive to even compare their plight to someone who would just as soon murder them and claim self-defense than identify with them!

    • Vicky says:

      Whonoze – Fascist? Blinded by hate for Zimmerman? Can’t see the big picture? Give me a break! Last I checked, the discussions here have in no way maintained that there is equal justice for all. Disproportionality is a huge problem in our criminal justice system and I don’t believe a single commenter here has argued otherwise. For you to assert otherwise Is nothing more than hubris on your part.
      Rather than make a blanket generalization about individuals you know absolutely nothing about, you might make an effort to ask for their points of view on our criminal justice system and ask whether or not they have actively advocated for change other than via anonymous comments on a blog. Specifically, what have you done? Have you ever lobbied Congress or your state legislature on behalf of individuals with financial, racial, cultural, ethnic, social, mental or educational challenges who find themselves in the criminal justice system? Have you publicly and openly expressed your concerns regarding disproportionality in your local community. Have you volunteered your time to educate young people or anyone else about their rights, if and when they ever come in contact with law enforcement? I have and have been publicly recognized for my efforts. What specifically, other than commenting on blogs, have you done?
      My opinion of George Zimmerman are based upon his actions not hate for the man. I want him to receive a fair trial and I want the outcome of his case to be based upon the law, and not public opinion. I might think he created this mess by his actions, but my opinion is not what counts in a legal sense. I have as much right to express my opinion as GZ has to a fair trial. Additionally, I do not view this case as one that is in any way a reflection of the disparity that exists in our system of justice. In my opinion, Trayvon Martin’s rights were violated that evening, and I feel GZ should face some form of punishment. Whether or not he does is up to a judge and possibly a jury. No fascist motivation on my part. Neither do I think the professor’s blog has been created to spur some fascist movement.

      • cielo62 says:

        THANK YOU! You expressed my feelings better than I could! “Fascist” SMH.

      • Why bother having Public Defenders at all then. Seems some here lack a whole lotta confidence in their abilities. In my opinion, it is a poorly chosen jury that needs to be addressed as well. They are the ultimate decision-makers, are they not.

        • Lonnie Starr says:

          The problem is, many people think that public defenders come from some pool of dysfunctional attorneys or such. They don’t! Many attorneys in these “pools” are volunteers from some big law firms and/or very highly rated and priced criminal defense lawyers who do this work either pro bono, or have given their name to the courts and/or the public defenders office that they are available for such duty. If I recall, F. Lee Bailey and Kunsler did lots of public defender work, even after they became famous they still accepted public defender cases.

          I’ll let the Professor correct me if I’m wrong.

      • Was MOM not going to represent GZ when he was declared indigent. Same lawyer – paid by the state or paid by GZ. Are you all saying that MOM would not represent his client as well if paid by the state or pro bono.

        • jm says:

          Sandra Graham says: “Was MOM not going to represent GZ when he was declared indigent.” Actually, according to GZ recorded prison call, MOM knew GZ was not indigent and had money coming into Paypal from his website – still want to know what comes of that?

      • Personally, I have heard little trashing of GZs family on this blog. I have heard much about the statements made by them and how they do not jive with the known evidence in this case. I think there is a difference. Trayvon, his friends and his family are not on trial. I have read alot of really ugly, ugly comments made about Trayvon, his family, and friends. GZ was not murdered. He certainly appears to have more rights and freedoms than the deceased.

    • bettykath says:


      Thanks for understanding my point. There is a bigger picture that is playing itself out in this case and, amazingly, in the comments section of this blog.

      There is the much bigger picture of middle class defendants going broke and poor people just not getting the resources for a strong defense. I guess it’s human nature to think it’s ok when you believe the defendant is guilty, but that’s the test of the kind of justice system people really want. It seems that if I didn’t get the resources that I needed, then a scumbag like GZ shouldn’t get them either. So where does it start? There are thousands of people who have been treated unfairly by the so-called justice system. If they all raise an objection to anyone getting a fairer chance than they got, no change will happen.

      I’ve been concerned about the demonizing of the Zimmermans, expressed mostly as criticism of their fundraising. There seems to be a conflating of the actions of the Zimmermans with that of the rabid bloggers.

      There is no room here for seeing the Zimmermans as people caught in a hard place. The Zs don’t seem to be the brightest people around, especially when it comes to interacting with the public. The statement by Jr. was probably well intended but it was poorly executed and backfired. The parents website was probably not put up by them but by some well-intended family member who wanted to help them out, with or without the consent of the parents. After all, their expenses escalated too. Not a good move but they believe that their GZ is being unjustly prosecuted and they received some of the fallout.

      GZ is a seriously damaged person with sociopathic tendencies imo. Either he was wired that way or by his meds which make him unable to feel “normal” emotions. He’s also naive or not very bright. I don’t think he realized that the NEN call was recorded, He probably thought the jail calls really weren’t recorded or, if they were, that no one listened to them, or if they were listened to, no one would figure out their code. Telling Serino that he was a graduate when he was not. Something that’s easily checked. Lying in court about the money. Spending as much money as they did on non-essentials. They really thought no one would be paying attention. Totally naive about the level of surveillance or not very bright, probably both.

      As I’ve said, I think GZ is guilty of at least murder 2 but demonizing him and his family puts us in a parallel gutter with those who demonize Trayvon. I’m not talking about the character of George or Trayvon. I’m talking about the words of the bloggers here.

      • rachael says:

        “He probably thought the jail calls really weren’t recorded or, if they were, that no one listened to them, or if they were listened to, no one would figure out their code.”

        That would just be stupidity on his part then because it is common knowledge PLUS he had taken courses in criminal justice and had friends and family and you would think he, more than anyone, would know this – as well, it is usally posted right there next to the phone that the calls are monitored.

      • rachael says:

        Also –

        “The parents website was probably not put up by them but by some well-intended family member who wanted to help them out, with or without the consent of the parents. After all, their expenses escalated too. Not a good move but they believe that their GZ is being unjustly prosecuted and they received some of the fallout.”

        I won’t say much about this and I do understand that they were trying to come up with money somehow as their expenses escalated too. IMO, doing it or having someome do it with our without your consent is just bad form. Not that it matters what I think, of course, but my point is, if you put it out in public, expect for the public to react, be it favorably or not.

        And as for “The statement by Jr. was probably well intended but it was poorly executed and backfired.” – Look, these aren’t a bunch of igorant country bumpkins who just fell off a turnip truck and don’t know any better. This is a whole family who has worked in this field for years. They are well versed as to the ins and outs of how this works and should know that keeping your mouth shut is the best way to getting a “fair” trial.

        And GZ hasn’t kept his mouth shut from the very start. He should never have said a word without getting a lawyer.

        I had to erase the rest of my response – but suffice it to say, I don’t feel too sorry for him/them. They brought it on themselves.

      • Vicky says:

        I believe strongly in the presumption of innocence. I have no issue with individuals exercising their rights to donate their money or to GZ any other legal cause they feel strongly about. I am also in favor of a rigorous defense for all defendants.
        My interest in this case is not about fundraising for a defense, an attorney doing his best to advocate for and defend his client or a defendant charged with a crime where the accused was identified via an investigation by LE. We all know who shot Trayvom Martin. The question here is whether or not he did so in self defense. Making such a determination is not a simple process, and many questions must be answered in order to satisfy the applicable laws.

        Since no one here knows for certain what GZ was thinking or what motivated his actions/reactions that evening or in the months that followed, most are relying on their own experiences and sense of logic. Arriving at conclusions that do not favor GZ or his family/supporters are no less valid than those that do.
        We don’t know if GZ is “seriously damaged” and may never know whether he is or not. It could be that his multiple versions of what happened that night and why are somehow true, but his actions and statements do not paint a favorable picture, and he is his own messenger in that regard. We don’t know his family or the motivation behind public statements made by or attributed to them. Again, a matter of perspective and/or speculation.

        Hopefully, All applicable laws and criminal procedures will be followed in legal proceedings. The collateral issues regarding the criminal justice system, it’s strengths and weaknesses will play out in a separate forum, including blog discussions.

        I find the most important issues about this specific case to be: 1) whether or not the victim was engaged in any unlawful activity when observed by and/or came into physical contact with the accused. 2) whether or not the race of a shooting victim in any way influenced the initial investigation or decision to not charge the individual who admitted to shooting him. (a social not legal issue) 3) whether or not the accused was reasonable in the use of lethal force. 4) Whether or not SYG laws need to be more clearly defined and whether there is disparity in their application (social issue).

      • rachael says:

        I mean I guess if you are talking about fair, I don’t think it is fair to go on TV, put up websites, have family and friends go on TV and then tell people not to try this case in the media when you have put it out there.

      • No need to fund raise. Pathetic. There are public defenders for the indigent. There is better security in a jail with meals supplied, etc. all compliments of the state. For the family to go public, they have exposed themselves to be judged in the court of public opinion. As a member of the public, I think GZ and his fund-raising efforts are nothing short of begging — Please, I do not want to be in jail for murdering Trayvon.

      • gblock says:

        There was an announcement at the beginning of each jail phone call that it was being recorded. Did he not believe it?

        • Lonnie Starr says:

          He believed it I think, he just thought that the SP would take his word for his financial condition and not seek to verify it. Once the SP saw those credit card payments, they knew money had come in from somewhere, so they went and took a look at his phone tapes and that was it, they broke his code and bingo, into the soup he went.

      • Xena says:


        Since no one here knows for certain what GZ was thinking or what motivated his actions/reactions that evening or in the months that followed, most are relying on their own experiences and sense of logic.

        GZ said what motivated his actions. “These assholes. They always get away.” And when Trayvon ran, GZ said “f’ing punks.” Both times, GZ used plural form. GZ did not judge Trayvon as an individual. He saw Trayvon as representing a group who GZ already decided were assholes and punks.

        These are GZ’s own words, memorialized on the recording of his NEN call. Should we toss this to the side for fear that discussing it will be construed as “demonizing” GZ?

    • cielo62 says:

      I can’t speak for everyone but I don’t care about the “larger picture.” I care first and foremost about justice in THIS case. GZ has more than enough money to defend himself. It’s his own fault if he misspends those funds. Like stated in another thread, the only way to change the system is to actually protest to upper levels of government. To insure justice, we fight for it case by case. GZ is well armed (excuse the pun) to take on the prosecution. I don’t understand what you are asking for from this forum. The Professor would be the first to tell you the Justice system is whacked. Which is why we are gathered online to follow and speak up. I personally have signed, written and called( attempted because the lines were busy from do many of us calling) to get justice in this case.

      • Had there been no out cry for justice, GZ would have been able to just walk away. Perhaps being watch dogs will go a long way to bring about reform within a broken system – top to bottom.

      • Tell me — where would this case be had GZ NOT made that NEN call that night. There would be little evidence to work with and GZ would have the advantage and would probably prevail.

    • Xena says:

      Misconduct by the prosecution? Like SA Wolfinger? Yes, this isa case of misconduct. It’s misconduct by the SPD and SA Wolfinger; but not misconduct in the investigation resulting in charging GZ with 2nd degree murder.

      The Rolando Cruz case, (which you infer regarding former Ill. Gov Ryan repealing the death penalty), consisted of misconduct by the Sheriff (DuPage County) withholding evidence that cleared Cruz of the crime. Cruz was only cleared by opting for a bench trial, as 2 juries in 2 different counties (Winnebago being one) found him guilty.

      That case was devastating, and many Illinois citizens have not forgotten. (Which is why Judy Barr-Topinka lost her bid as Governor on a ticket with the former DuPage County SA as Lt. Gov.)

      Whonoze, this case if very different. GZ admitted that he killed Trayvon. His claim of self-defense was bought by SA Wolfinger hook, line and sinker, without investigation of any forensic evidence.

    • princss6 says:

      GZ is not the poster child for….subordinate social groups: poor, non-white, etc.

      I would say most here are well aware of how subordinate groups are treated and it is my opinion that if everyone was treated like those groups are, our justice system would not be as punitive.

      That being said, we are talking apples and oranges here…the only parallels to this case and has yet to be played out is if a black victim will receive justice because the justice system has been more than fair to GZ, in fact it needs to see a chiropractor for all the bending over backwards it has done for him.

  58. Trent Sawyer (stateoftheinternet) has just posted another great video on YouTube. Those who support Zimmerman cling to the belief that George was severely beaten and bloodied. Yet, in the Serino interview, Serino asks Zimmerman if he has any bruises anywhere and Zimmerman says he does not. Beaten and bloodied – yet ZERO bruising – right from the horses mouth.

  59. Artavia Anderson says:

    Professor I just read a story from the Washington Post about Mark Osterman’s book and he states that Zimmerman told him that “Somehow I broke his grip on the gun where the guy grabbed it between the rear sight and the hammer. ” I was wondering can this be used against Zimmerman because it is something that he never said in his statements to police? This Zimmerman character is a handfull and lies so much. This doesn’t even match the DNA testing. I would love to hear your insights on this statement…. Thanks in advance.

    • Wow — again, Osterman has changed his own story from the one taken by the FDLE sworn statement. Was he lying then or is he lying now. Is his statement not worth the paper it is written on.

  60. thejbmission says:

    Thank you Professor,
    For another excellent article, I especially like this part 😎

    Damned if he testifies and damned if he does not, George Michael Zimmerman is in such a hell of a jam that no amount lawyers, guns and money will save him from a lengthy prison sentence.

    Your blog answers all of my questions and more.

  61. Malisha says:

    The thing about people like Osterman (yes, et al.) being paranoid is that it is a combination of two things happening:

    1 – They are projecting their hostility and animus outward onto other people, so they imagine that others are as hostile and virulent as THEY FEEL so they presume everyone’s dangerous; and

    2 – They really are nasty folks so they do make enemies and therefore, they do HAVE enemies and someone really DOES have it out for them.

    Remember Osterman said that if someone came to the door for him, they should rest up first because there was going to be a big fight? Look how he thinks. Like a bad boy about 7 years old imagining he’s about to be punished and planning to DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT!

    Normals don’t need to constantly fantasize about their self-defense. Either he’s a non-normal or he’s been watching too much gangster TV or playing too many psycho video games.

  62. Vicky says:

    Patricia, my thoughts exactly!
    I get the impression the Osterman’s do not lack in firepower in their house. And they all spent plenty of time on the firing range (Shellie included). Funny, they didn’t immediately call 911, fearing they had been discovered. IMO, they were fully prepared to defend the fort. Thank goodness the people in the car weren’t Jehovah’s Witnesses, and innocently came knocking on the door. Can you imagine!?!?

  63. Malisha says:

    Oooh Oooh Oooh, I just realized something.

    Shellie said, at the bond hearing, that she did not know how much was in the PayPal account because she wasn’t directly involved. When she was asked if she spoke with George about it she said that she had not seen George since the shooting because he had been in hiding! Osterman says they were in hiding with him together, right?


    • More lies… George pack your bags it time to go to jail…for life…

      • Xena says:


        Thank you. I saw the Canadian source, 84 pages! Of course, GZ might have just been a gang banger wanna be as well.

        Based on GZ’s MySpace entries about getting his boys to do things, serve a year and never snitch on him, I suspect that he was heading up his own little gang. That would have been the time he was in Virginia and according to his MySpace entries, also having Mexicans pulling knives on him.

        According to one source I read, the tattoo that GZ has is intended for protection while incarcerated; conveying gang neutrality while at the same time, gravitating towards Latin gang members for protection from rival gangs.

    • Vicky says:

      According to Osterman, they were in hiding together until shortly after the NBP “bounty”. Not long after that, GZ was outside when a car pulled up with African American occupants. GZ ran in the house convinced they had been found by a band of bounty hunters. As it turns out, Osterman’s neighbors actually had black friends who had stopped by for a visit. The event was so traumatic for the paranoia stricken hideaways, that GZ, armed with his new firearm, left the following morning w/o Shellie and went into hiding up north..

      • Patricia says:

        @Vickie – Re “Not long after that, GZ was outside when a car pulled up with African American occupants. GZ ran in the house convinced they had been found by a band of bounty hunters. As it turns out, Osterman’s neighbors actually had black friends who had stopped by for a visit. The event was so traumatic for the paranoia stricken hideaways, that GZ, armed with his new firearm, left the following morning w/o Shellie and went into hiding up north…. ”

        Bravely leaving SHELLIE behind to face the, OMG! “the black friends … ”

        Give that hero a tin medal.

        Hasn’t the guts to face anybody but a juvenile.

      • Xena says:

        So, GZ thinks that only African Americans would come after him? Based on what I’ve read on some Asian Islamic sites, they would like to see him beheaded for what he did to his former co-worker.

      • jun says:

        What happened to the trove of Z black friends?

      • jm says:

        “Not long after that, GZ was outside when a car pulled up with African American occupants. GZ ran in the house convinced they had been found by a band of bounty hunters. As it turns out, Osterman’s neighbors actually had black friends who had stopped by for a visit”

        So had GZ shot and killed them, I am sure he (and Osterman) would have made up a story about them being thugs and suspicious and that GZ was only defending himself.

        Then somebody would write a book about the fear GZ was experiencing, GZ would set up a website to ask for money to defend himself and those who do not value a black person’s life would send money and dig into the victim’s past to see if they deserved to die anyway, even though they weren’t doing anything wrong when GZ spotted them.

      • Malisha says:

        Xena, I had never thought about the “threat” from the Asian-Islamic contingent — wow, George has managed to alienate a few different folks at various times, huh? Jun, when I heard/saw Osterman say that “at one time” George could have put all his Black friends together to make a rally bigger than the one that gathered for Trayvon Martin, I suffered a little bout of helpless hilarity, and I thought, “why all the past-tense stuff? Why doesn’t George call them all right now and ask them to come out in support of him in downtown Sanford. They can all wear red jackets and carry signs saying, ‘We dearly loved our friend George Zimmerman who dearly loved us.'” Oh — and why didn’t all those African American friends open up a website called, we’re-black-and-george-zimmerman-never-shot-us.com? That way they could remain anonymous so the NBP won’t hurt them, and still show their support for someone they dearly loved?

        And, oh yeah, how come Osterman was using the past tense?

      • JUN says:

        LMAO it is such a ridiculous lie, I sometimes wonder if Osterman is just saying that crap to throw Z under the bus.

        Its pretty apparent, but I will say it, Zimmerman doesn’t have any friends, let alone black ones. & even if he did have those friends, after learning about all the recent news of Z, it would make anyone question their friendship with Z

      • cielo62 says:

        How brave of GZ to leave his woman behind in danger!

      • It is strange Osterman talks about all of GZs friends when, in his statement to the FDLE, he states GZ has few friends. If he has many friends whereby Osterman would be his token white friend, then he lied in a sworn statement, did he not.

      • Xena says:

        Well, I think anyone who has read comments that I’ve posted here already know that I like connecting dots when considering pieces of the GZ puzzle.
        One piece: GZ has a gang tattoo.

        Another piece: On his MySpace page, GZ wrote about not missing Mexicans in VA pulling knives on him. GZ would not join a Latino gang, aka, Mexican. He looks down on them.

        Another piece: GZ also wrote the following on his MySpace page:
        “… I can hit my boy up to handle a lil somethin with my sister and he’s at my house with his boys on bikes before i hang up with her! They do a year and dont ever open thier mouth to get my ass pinched…”

        That is what happened to his Black friends, possibly members of the gang he belongs to. No doubt, he boasted about his dad being a judge to give them a sigh of relief that if caught and convicted of a crime, that they would not serve more than a year. That would gain him favor and a higher position in the gang where they were willing to follow his demands and not snitch.

        • Patricia says:

          @Xena –

          Xena, I was curious as to which of the Zimmerman tattoos = which gang. Any idea?

          That would be WONDERFUL subject to be questioned by the prosecution …

        • cielo62 says:

          Xena~ I agree 100%. I’ve been imagining him as having been an active gang member back in VA and the tattoo proves it. We don’t know what Zimmerman has in or IF he has, a juvi record. His question to Martin sounds like a turf challenge to me. I had forgotten about that FB entry. GZ wanted to join one of the most powerful gangs around “the police department.”  At least, that’s what his experiences have taught him. I could see him abusing any badge or authority he was given. I wonder why “A Clockwork Orange” just popped into my head?  🙂

      • Xena says:


        @Xena –

        Xena, I was curious as to which of the Zimmerman tattoos = which gang. Any idea?

        That would be WONDERFUL subject to be questioned by the prosecution …

        Based on info published by the State of Virginia, the tattoo that GZ has is not specific to any gang affiliation in that State. However, based on the Canadian Border Patrol, they identify the tattoo that GZ has as “typical among Latin and Asian gang members.”

        The Montana Dept. of Corrections associates the tattoo “in general” as connected to the nationwide Sureno gang and gang pockets in Montana and Calif. http://info.publicintelligence.net/MTgangguide.pdf

        • cielo62 says:

          Thank you. I saw the Canadian source, 84 pages! Of course, GZ might have just been a gang banger wanna be as well.

        • Lonnie Starr says:

          Uh oh, Montana, that’s not a good sign. The white supremacist settle there and used to hold their concerts to raise funds there, until movie stars moved in and they were asked to take them elsewhere, because movies stars could not afford the bad publicity they might generate, so they moved their wp concerts to South Dakota.

          GZ doesn’t impress me as a patron of the arts. So, if I had to guess, his masks tat is probably in the “Play U Pay” corner.
          After all, he does sort of fancy himself as a gang leader.

      • MichelleO says:

        WHAT I think happened is that Osterman more than likely, put his ass out. He realized that he had created, aided, and abetted a monster who was no longer under his control. They probably talked it out where he could go, and he chose a destination out of state. Smellie is a Florida girl, so she stayed. Her family is there, and nobody at that time knew who she was.

  64. Malisha says:

    Osterman saying, “George told me he was going to die” is hearsay. George saying, “I felt I was going to die” is not hearsay. A doctor saying, “I examined George and he had a serious concussion” is not hearsay. George saying, “I was told I had a serious concussion” is hearsay.

    • George has to say he felt he was going to die, otherwise it is hearsay. If MOM introduces it at trial, it would be in opening and closing, wouldnt it. He cant introduce it as evidence, if I am understanding the Professors postings. What say you, Patricia.

      • Patricia says:

        Sandra and Malisha –

        I usually leave the opinions on rulings to The Professor and those working in the legal field. Frankly, I was wondering how O’Mara would introduce the case – perhaps along the line of “Your honor, the issue before you today is my client’s plea of self defense in the case of The State of Florida vs George Michael Zimmerman. I call as my first witness EMT ______ (the snarky guy) … examination and cross; my second, Physician’s Assistant …. examination and cross, and Dr. Sigmund Freudian, “expert witness,” who has been stirring around in my clients brain and will give you his professional opinion of the muddled grey matter in there … examine and cross.

        Doesn’t the judge have to ASK George how he pleads?

        But that’s not the same as testimony?

        The point really has to be made that Zimmerman FEARED. And only Zimmerman can make that statement. You couldn’t have Dr. Freudian saying GZ “Should have feared for his life.”

        So I expect the prosecution is really gearing up to hunt bear, bringing in ALL the presentable data and witnesses. Assuming (though I never do) that GZ is not granted self-defense, so he can’t skip off to his next Hannity interview, the Self-Defense hearing might be the one thing that convinces GZ to settle for the minimum 25 year sentence.

        He has a very tough judge for both the S-D hearing and the trial. George may still want to take his chance with a jury. Say he’s sentenced at age 30 for 25 years + 10 (for killing a juvenile). That lets him out at 65 (if he survives) which is unthinkable to a 30-year old. But so is getting out at age 55 with a plea bargain. And, as The Professor says, the prosecution figures it has a strong case, so why bargain? I also think the State would want to make this a showcase trial.

        Keep in mind that one juror can hang this case – BUT the state can re-try. AND, if GZ by some miracle gets off, the Feds will move in with their complaint.

        I know this has been no help, but were all hangin’ in here together.
        I miss Bordelaise, as he was always a good back-up on this legal stuff. What I think HAS to happen in the S-D Hearing is that GZ HAS to testify. And I don’t think this judge will put up with any games.

        One thing I have been wondering about: George has huge weight fluctuations. If he shows up before a jury weighing 140, I think he’ll get off because some jurors won’t believe it’s the same guy!

      • JUN says:

        Its true that we cant predict the future and I pray that justice is done and the truth comes out. However, Zimmerman is still in a sticky situation so thats pretty awesome for the time being. Zimmerman’s gonna have to be confronted with all his lies in court and have his credibility impeached, but I am guessing Omara will be coaching Zimmerman.

      • You can bet you bottom dollar he will be as thin as a rail, wearing an oversize suit and a shirt with a collar that could wrap around his neck twice. Osterman has lost alot of weight too. I guess they are helping each other (again) with a weight loss program. Is GZ not prescribed a drug that has weight loss as a side effect — I think so.

      • There is always a bit of truth in the lies told by GZ. When listening to his brother, he claims GZ and he look so much alike. For what purpose would he say that. Has me thinking GZ will never go to trial. A little alteration and GZ could use his brothers passport to get outta Dodge!

        • Lonnie Starr says:

          He’d have to select a country that doesn’t have an extradition treaty with the U.S. So there’s not so many places to look for him. Worse still, if he’s there under false pretenses, using his brothers passport, all one has to do is point that out to the authorities and he’ll be deported to a country that has an extradition treaty. He’d be toast.

      • jm says:

        I’m not sure why his brother said he looked like George but there is a big difference to me and that is the eyes. It seems GZ’s eyes are a bit strange. Not sure if it is due to GZ’s mental status or just a physical issue but I always felt his eyes were the window to his mind and it was wacky. I also thought it was interesting that Robert Jr, who resembles George generally speaking, is not in hiding yet George is.

      • Xena says:

        @Sandra Graham

        When listening to his brother, he claims GZ and he look so much alike. For what purpose would he say that.

        I heard Junior say that too and talked back to the television — “NO! You look more Italian and you are also gay, so stop saying you’re afraid of being mistaken for your brother!”

        No. They do not all look alike.

      • PYorck says:

        When listening to his brother, he claims GZ and he look so much alike. For what purpose would he say that.

        I took it to mean that they want to use the smarter and less creepy Zimmerman from now on, but we are not supposed to care too much about the difference.

    • JUN says:

      The fact Zimmerman uttered “These assholes, they always get away” and then “fuckin punk” or “coon” kind of contradicts the idea that he feared the victim, at all. Calling someone a punk is the same as calling someone your bitch in prison.

  65. jun says:


    Zimmerman’s statement and claim

    “It was self defense”

    Wouldnt that constitute hearsay? Would that bar Omara from evening stating it at trial and opening?

    • MichelleO says:

      I READ that piece. Unfortunately, when it comes to clear-cut cases like this, America always seems to side with the perp. I’ll never forget that young man that was shot to death while laying face down and in handcuffs in California, by a bart cop. He was shot to death in front of his very young daughter, who was no older than five. They only gave him a couple of years. So, sad and pitiful.

  66. Malisha says:

    Zhickel, I don’t know how long a normal person would take to go from “afraid I was going to die” to “able to leap buildings in a single bound and get a holstered gun out and ready and shoot and kill and turnover and lunge at and holster gun and speak and phone and be photographed” to “perfectly OK while they clean me up after the “altercation” to “sincere and self-defensey.”

    I do remember reading that George suffered from Irritable Bowel Syndrome. That kind of person has a rather jumpy and itchy reaction-time to stress, if I’m not mistaken. It would be good to understand more about what “normal” would be like under those alleged circumstances.

    I do think the “you got a problem homie” and the “shut the fuck up” and the “you’re gonna die tonight motherfucker” are defamatory because they present Trayvon Martin in a false light. Also, he cannot be heard to defend himself, can he?

    • MichelleO says:

      HE’S comically portraying this 17-year-old kid as some sort of crazed Shaft-like figure. I bet he was hoping beyond hope, that they could find some sort of illegal narcotic substance in Trayvon’s system, to go along with the other stereotypical attributes people like Zimmerman pass along to all black people. Oops!

    • GZ even steals Trayvons screams for his own cowardly self!

  67. Malisha says:

    JM, I agree wholeheartedly.

    Furthermore, the fact that George did not break own into tears and choking sobs upon being informed by Serino that he had killed “not a thug, a good kid, a mild-mannered kid, a kid with a future, with parents that cared,” immediately turned me around. Wha????? He didn’t say a word! His world should have been crumbling around him. He should have been sobbing, “Oh WHY DID HE HIT ME? WHY? WHY?” No surprise. No shock. No reaction. No tears, no falling upon the knees and gnashing of teeth — dead silence. Watchful, self-protective, wary, cagey, psychopathic, empathy-free SILENCE. As in, “What do I care; he got what was coming to him.”

    • cielo62 says:

      An opinion most sickeningly echoed by his minions.

    • bettykath says:

      That sob, GZ, doesn’t deserve a fair trial. In fact, he doesn’t deserve any trial. Let’s string him up now!

      • jm says:

        Zimmerman deserves a trial with consideration of his mental state before and after the killing, including the Hannity interview where he shows no remorse, considers it “God’s plan” even after it has been proven to him Trayvon Martin was a visitor in the neighborhood and Zimmerman was wrong to profile him as “suspicious”. No REMORSE to me under the circumstances revealed to GZ proves he is a sociopath.

        If it were left to me, I would string him up now just for the audacity of his lies, claiming to be a victim, although clearly he was the aggressor.

        I happily anticipate a court proceeding to prove GZ is guilty and sentence him to prison for life. I also will be happy to see ShelLIe pick up a felony conviction for perjury.

        Honestly, this Zimmerman team sickens me with their tactics, the latest being Robert Jr’s spin on events and his family, ultimately appealing for racist money to support George, while enjoying his 15 minutes of fame.

      • bettykath says:

        ok. No support here for a level playing field. Let’s hope you have lots of money for your own experts if you’re ever charged with a crime that has a zealous prosecutor.

        • Patricia says:


          I’m not so certain that there’s no support here for a level playing field. I think that our emotions are rubbed raw by the fact that there was no “level playing field” February 26 for young Trayvon, and that Zimmerman and his family have behaved abominably towards Trayvon’s reputation, his memory, and the grieving Martin family.

        • cielo62 says:

          I’m sure everyone posting here wants GZ to get a fair trial. The last thing we want are any appeals. I want him to stay in his 8x 9 cage for decades to come. Anyway, Zimmy probably has a ton of financial supporters who are protecting an agenda. Notice that MOM hasn’t mentioned recently how much is in the piggy bank?

      • rachael says:

        You got it Patricia!!

      • rachael says:

        Of course he deserves a fair trial. But like I said above, why is fair equated with how much one can buy and why does he deserve a more fair trial than someone who can’t afford the high-priced attorneys?

        I mean what is fair?

      • CherokeeNative says:

        Well Bettykath, if we didn’t live in a civilized country, GZ would have already been strung up as you suggest and quiet frankly, it would be more consideration that he gave Trayvon as the judge, jury and executioner. We have a legal system here in the U.S., if you can’t afford an attorney, one will be afforded to you – and your attorney will be allowed to retain expert witnesses – just not the high priced ones that can be bought off with an exorbitant amount of money to get up on the stand and lie. GZ will get his fair trial, but again, it is unfortunately far more than what he gave Trayvon. And have you forgotten that GZ was given almost 400k to afford a defense? What did he do with it Bettykath? He purchased expensive cell phones, he went and stayed in a beach house with a view from the toilet, paid off all of his past due credit cards and personal obligations…screw the defense expenses, GZ was counting on more funds rolling in. And hell, they may be for all we know. I don’t feel sorry for this sick sob – there are far more deserving defendants worthy of your concern who may be facing charges for a crime they may not have committed who do not have private attorneys or high paid experts, and what about them Bettykath? What about them? And don’t even give me that “well, you have better hope this never happens to you” routine – because I will say that right back to you – God forbid that one of your children is ever profiled, stalked and shot in the heart for doing nothing more than trying to get home from the local 7-11 after purchasing tea and candy. This pervert has no remorse, he’s trashed Trayvon’s image, he is even trying to steal Trayvon’s dying words and worse, is calling upon the skinhead white supremist of American to help him walk away from what he’s done. He will get a fair trial – rest assured – and then I will relish watching him rot in a 6 x 10 foot cell for the rest of his life and consider him lucky because he still gets to breath air….that’s more than he allowed Trayvon.

      • Vicky says:

        GZ absolutely deserves a fair trial.. In this particular case, I don’t think there has been any need for the prosecution to spend an extensive amount of $$ on experts, and with the present economy, I doubt they have it in their budget to do so. If GZ is declared indigent, then the State of Florida will pay for his expert witnesses as well. I don’t like the idea that expert testimony can be bought and paid for by anyone with enouh money either, and I believe there needs to be more regulation regarding expert witnesses. However, this case is not about a defendant that relied upon the public defender’s office following his arrest. GZ made contact with him to represent him, and that in the beginning O’Mara agreed to take his case pro bono. Therefore, he accepted the responsibility of paying for his entire legal defense, including experts. At least that is how most law firms handle cases they take on pro bono. The problem O’Marah faces now, is that he took the case under the impression that GZ was a sound investment. And like with any other investment, there are risks involved. In this case, the tree stopped bearing fruit after the first harvest.

        • Patricia says:

          And, Vickie, it’s a good thing that tree never bore fruit again – every lying apple presented by Zimmerman had a worm at the core.

        • cielo62 says:

          I never read anywhere that MOM was going to do this case pro bono. The original two lawyers DID make that announcement before GZ refused to communicate with them and they intelligently dropped him like a hot potato. But I believe MOM mentioned at one of their televised begging sessions that he had not even been paid, that is how “poor” GZ and his Paypal account had become. In either case, taking on GZ was a bad risk and a terrible professional decision.

      • bettykath – Jose Baez was Casey Anthonys Public Defender. I think you are selling PDs short and, quite frankly, assuming incompetence is insulting.

        • cielo62 says:

          Jose Baez was a lucky snake oil salesman. He was lucky he could sit a jury of brain dead zombies who didn’t know the value of circumstantial evidence. There was more than enough circumstantial behavioral evidence that Casy Anthony SHOULD be rotting in prison right now. But like the professor said, jury selection can win a trial. Jose Baez was a very lucky PD.

          • jm says:

            “Jose Baez was a lucky snake oil salesman. He was lucky he could sit a jury of brain dead zombies who didn’t know the value of circumstantial evidence.”

            No doubt Baez is a snake oil salesman, I think Jose Baez made a lot of his luck – to begin with by distracting the crime of killing her daughter, with alleged sexual abuse by George Anthony in Baez oh-so-dramatic opening as well as claiming the death was by drowning that I guess Casey and her father covered up for some unknown reason.

            I wonder if MOM could do the same in an opening statement, distracting from the actual crime by saying that Zimmerman was molested by a dark-skinned person as a child and he has remained suspicious (paranoid) ever since.

            I also read, don’t know if it is true, that Baez charmed the jurors, and they did not like the prosecution.

            It does help to get brain-dead sequestered jurors who want to go home too who would rather err on the side of caution and find the defendant not guilty rather than guilty.

            If I were GZ I would have chosen Baez over MOM.

      • jm says:

        bettykath says:. “No support here for a level playing field. Let’s hope you have lots of money for your own experts if you’re ever charged with a crime that has a zealous prosecutor.”

        I thought the state provides funds for a level playing field for people who can’t afford it. If not, it looks like a lot of people are in prison because they didn’t have a level playing field because they didn’t create a website begging for defense money.

        I have NEVER seen such a circus as the Zimmerman team have put on with their never-ending PR tour looking for money, the latest Robert Jr, trying to put lipstick on his pig brother. And they want money not just for defense but to live on including his parents.

        George has finally achieved the hero status that he wanted to be thanks to the “masses” (per GZ) who support him. I can’t imagine sending money to him (or his parents) and this begs the question what type of people support the Zimmerman’s, even after it has been proven they are capable of creating a series of lies and will perjure themselves. Would I be far off base to suggest that there are a lot of racists sending money for George’s living expenses and defense? I don’t know, just asking for an opinion.

        • Lonnie Starr says:

          One has to consider that there are a whole lot of media outlets of every shade of the spectrum. So, there may be many people who aren’t quite getting the story that people researching the matter are getting. Of course there are the racists who were pushing their version, my guess is that’s where the donors were coming from.

          I noticed donations dropped off rather precipitously once GZ announced how proud he was of his “Hispanic heritage”, since there had been no mention of this pride before the charges of racism were leveled at him. Many of the people involved have stated they believed he was white.

          You’ll, no doubt, notice that in these current forays into the limelight, in search of funds, there’s little to no mention at all of that pride in his Hispanic heritage. My guess is that it has been discovered to be a negative fundraising factor. The people supporting him now, are not so much in favor of him, as they are opposed to his black victim.

    • No reaction at the scene either. His vitals showed no elevations – cool as a cucumber and the Voice Stress Analysis Test showed he feels no guilt or responsibility for having killed someone. Not normal and this is why I feel he is a danger to society. If he does not go to jail, his exoneration will have done nothing more than reinforce his beliefs and his actions that evening.

      • Zhickel says:

        On a different tack, I’ve been searching for the EMT report of Zimmerman’s vital signs, taken at the crime scene.

        In particular I’d like to know breathing, heart rate etc and how long these measurements were taken after the shooting.

        The reason: after those anguished screams, the sheer terror conveyed in the cries, how long would it take for a persons physical state to return to normal?

          • Patricia says:

            Brown, I have been wondering for some time if GZ’s vitals are admissible in court.

            I don’t think he was Mirandized until Singleton itervened.

            What sayest thou? Class?

          • Brown says:

            First thought he was pretty calm and under self control for him to claim a fight to the death. Second thought what drugs would a person be on to contribute to a reading like that. I believe they are admissable, correct me Professor or anyone else if I’m wrong. If his doctor’s note is admitted, why not the EMT’s they have no dog in this fight. EMT report is the closest in time to the killing as to his injuries or lack thereof.

          • Patricia says:

            Well, it could be said that taking Zimmerman’s vitals was of medical service to HIM as the EMT’s decided the course of his limited treatment.

            But could the prosecution use it – since it happened pre-Miranda?

            I don’t recall Zimmerman signing any release in order to get EMT tratment (which would be coercive, anyway: “No release buddy – no treatment.”)

            I think it adds to the refutation that Zimmerman “feared for his life.”

            So I hope it can be used.

      • Xena says:


        Brown, I have been wondering for some time if GZ’s vitals are admissible in court.

        If O’Mara enters them into evidence, or calls the EMT to testify, I would think that whatever the reports contain can be addressed during cross. However, if I were the prosecution, I’m not so sure if I would want to give the jury a class in Vitals 101. The vid of GZ entering the police station might be more relevant. People in general do tend to pay more attention to what they see rather than what they hear.

        • Brown says:

          Agree, on people tend to pay attention to pictures more then what they hear. But if anyone on that jury has been to a regular check up know what normal and abnormal vitals as to blood pressure, breathing etc. I believe they will get it.

    • Lonnie Starr says:

      Of course GZ would have known the minute he heard TM speak, that he didn’t have a thug or a criminal on his hands. The choice of words the scared voice the body language would all have told GZ that he had a frightened and helpless child on his hands. Yet, GZ chose to go forward with his plans to start a fight he could use, but even that failed. So he had to phony one up.

      We do know that TM was not a deadly threat, we know that TM did not know how to fight, had no combat training or even defense skills. He was just a child walking home from the store and should not have needed any combat skills just to get home. If left alone there would have been no crime in the neighborhood caused by this kid. All we have about any of the actions GZ says he experienced that night are his own words, and those words don’t make GZ look like a hero, in fact they don’t even yield any good reason for GZ to have taken the shot. TM was unarmed and his hands are not deadly weapons. No matter how hard GZ tries to make out that they were.

  68. bettykath says:

    I’ve been wanting to say this for some time. The prosecution has funds for whatever experts it needs. The defense has to come up with its own funds for its own experts. This is a resource imbalance that puts the defense at a severe disadvantage in many cases.

    OJ had a few million for his dream team and his experts, but most defendants do not. It’s demeaning for the defense to have to beg for funds. If you begrudge the funds for GZ, what if it were you and you were innocent. Do you have the funds for experts?

    I want Zimmerman to have a fair trial. That means he has to be able to have his own experts, and that means that there has to be fundraising. They also have more expenses due to the very high profile of the case. So, I don’t begrudge the Zimmerman team their efforts at fundraising.

    • ks says:

      I don’t think “begrudging” is the issue. The problem is the method not the action. Trying to raise funds is one thing but disparaging the victim to do it is another.

      Also, GZ has gotten quite the “fair trial” so far. He’s on his 3rd judge and most defendants, especially after what GZ and Co pulled during the first bail hearing, would be in jail right now.

    • jm says:

      Doesn’t the state provide defense funds to ensure a fair trial?

      BTW, I begrudge the lies/spin that RZJ and MOM put on the case to raise funds which appeals to gun-nuts and racists.

    • ks says:

      To add, it’s hard to have any sympathy for GZ’s expense plight when he has wasted the majority of his donations of lifestyle enhancements and not paying his lawyer or any experts.

    • Rachael says:

      Why do you feel he is not or will not get a fair trial? So you agree that justice depends on money? What if he had mone and had to depend on a public defender loke you or I would? We wpuld mot get a fair trial? This is one of my issues with the legal system, justice depends on $s and eho usually has les poor people. Sigh.

      • Malisha says:

        He has money for experts and his gun-toting cheerleaders have plenty of money for experts and there’s no stress there. The thing is, where will they find an expert who’s willing to say a 1/2″ scrape on the noggin is life-threatening? Where will they find an expert to say it’s possible to shoot a bullet directly into a guy’s heart at NO ANGLE from UNDERNEATH the guy without being able to extend your arm? Where will they find an expert to say it’s possible to “squirm” 40 feet while you’re immobilized by a headsmashing incredible hulk in a hoodie?

        He’ll plead.

    • bettykath says:

      Is it GZ or MOM doing the disparaging? or is it some neanderthals on blogs?

      MOM seems to be trying to put on an assertive case for his client that does not include bad-mouthing TM. GZ has lots of stories to tell that don’t add up, but since his initial profiling of TM as a thug, he hasn’t been attacking TM’s character or his family. His other “friends” (Taafe, Osterman come to mind) have supported GZ but I don’t hear them attacking TMs character. They repeat GZ’s story of TM beating him, but they don’t go beyond that.

      I haven’t said that GZ hasn’t been treated fairly by the court so far. What I’m suggesting is that the defense is at a disadvantage when it comes to being able to do its own investigation and in being able to have its own experts to evaluate the evidence for the trial. The prosecution experts are looking at the evidence from one perspective. Defense experts would have a different mindset and could see the evidence differently. They could pick up on things that the prosecution experts might miss.

      I, too, would have stopped any further contributions (if I had made any to begin with) once I found out how he spent $30,000 of it. It’s just another example of his poor judgement.

      Please consider the question of how does the defense attorney do a true due-diligence for poor or destitute clients.

      • Malisha says:

        Justice Ginsberg once observed that defendants who got the death sentence were those who could not afford private counsel.

        It’s simply a fact of life that in the state court, public defenders are not as effective for their clients as private lawyers specializing in criminal defense. There are a hundred reasons for this; the Todd Willingham case in Texas shows about 99 of them.

      • jm says:

        “Is it GZ or MOM doing the disparaging”

        I believe by GZ’s story, he is disparging Trayvon. GZ is making Trayvon a black “thug” by “attacking” him and thus he needed to defend himself so he killed him.

        Don’t follow MOM but assume he is going along with the story that Trayvon “thugged” GZ, doubling back after GZ followed him and Trayvon attacked him breaking his nose and beat his head in concrete, thus necessitating GZ killing him. Pretty disparging to me. Then to top it off, GZ has no remorse after finding out Trayvon was visiting the community and was not a “suspicious” person and he was wrong for profiling him.

      • bettykath says:

        jm says,
        “I believe by GZ’s story, he is disparging Trayvon. GZ is making Trayvon a black ‘thug’ by ‘attacking’ him and thus he needed to defend himself so he killed him. ”

        That’s GZ’s story. His first version was very disparaging (the NEN call, his statements in the first couple of days, but he seems to have toned it down, e.g. he no longer uses the B movie thug dialog. Even in the SH interview, he told more conflicting nonsense, showed little to no real compassion (I don’t think he’s capable of it) for the Martins, but the rhetoric of his story has calmed down while retaining the basic elements.

        “Don’t follow MOM but assume he is going along with the story that Trayvon “thugged” GZ, doubling back after GZ followed him and Trayvon attacked him breaking his nose and beat his head in concrete, thus necessitating GZ killing him. Pretty disparging to me. Then to top it off, GZ has no remorse after finding out Trayvon was visiting the community and was not a “suspicious” person and he was wrong for profiling him.”

        What do you expect a defense attorney to do? He’s stuck with his client’s story, in GZ’s case his stories, until such time as the evidence is clear that the story is bogus. When that happens he doesn’t announce it in a press conference, he talks w/ his client. He may not say to his client that he’s lying, but he certainly can say that the evidence doesn’t seem to support his story. He can recommend taking a plea but, if the professor is right, that train has left the station.

        MOM has backed off the SYG defense, and he seems have backed off the head battering. At least, all I heard him mention for the classic self defense is the broken nose (which he can’t prove was broken).

        Look, I think GZ is guilty of at least murder 2, and with some of the possible scenarios, maybe murder 1, but I wouldn’t go to the grand jury to make that charge. I just think that some of the comments here re: fundraising are a bit over the top, as if a suspect, assumed to be innocent until proven guilty, is not entitled to a vigorous defense that includes access to evidence analysis to the same extent as the prosecution. It takes money to do that. If you aren’t rich you have do fundraising. The basic tenet of fundraising is find those with the money who have sympathy with your cause. Then tell them what they need to hear so they will open their wallets.

        • cielo62 says:

          And totally slandering an innocent person is OK as long as it “opens up those wallets”? Sorry but that is pretty darn pathetic. Needing funds for a vigorous defense does NOT give one the right to destroy another persons reputation. GZ and his ilk make me sick. And no real expert will deny or be able to twist forensic evidence enough to save George from years behind bars.

      • I think you may want to re-watch the bail hearing where Mr. OMara just about comes out and says Trayvon brought it on himself. No, he isnèt bad-mouthing Trayvon – he is saying he deserved what he got!

      • Zhickel says:

        Well said, you make very good points. I too want to see Zimmerman have the fairest trial possible – if only to put an end to the ridiculous stories that Trayvon was a thug.

        I also suggest that we wait and see exactly what O’Mara says to the NRA before offering criticism.

      • rachael says:


        ” What I’m suggesting is that the defense is at a disadvantage when it comes to being able to do its own investigation and in
        being able to have its own experts to evaluate the evidence for the trial.”

        Who said life and/or justice is fair? What you think is justice may not be what I think is justice.

        Who was at a disadvantage the night Trayvon was shot?

        All I know is in this system, justice is not always fair. Why should GZ be allowed any more justice than anyone else? Just because it is a high-profile case?

        A few years ago, my son had some allegations that were not true but could possibly ruin his life. I called a high-profile lawyer who gave me a quote of $50,000 for a retainer and said he would refuse a plea and practically guaranteed that my son would get off if I hired him. I had some kind of legal benefit through my work, so I called an attorney from there – she wanted even more just to start. They both told me how bleak it would be with a PD. I was terrified. I did not have that kind of money. My son stupidly took a plea because he was scared and tired of all of it and they plead it down to something so minimal that he felt it was worth it rather than going through the rest of the process, something like 6 months of probation and 50 hours of community service instead of something horrible if he did not take the plea and was convicted.

        Anyway, like I said, I was terrified and crying the whole time thinking how unfair it was that because I didn’t have $50,000 and no house to use for collateral or anything that my son could possibly suffer the dire consequences.

        I guess my point is, why should GZ get anything more or less than my son did? What makes him any better? Just because this has been highly publicized? Just because he started a fund online?

        Dang. I should have started a defense fund online.

        I too want him to have a fair trial. Everyone is entitled to a fair trial. But what makes it more fair if he can afford to hire people that he couldn’t hire if he couldn’t afford it?

        What really is fair?

        I guess I’m not really looking for answers, just pondering our judicial system.

        • Lonnie Starr says:

          George would not need any help if he had stayed in his truck and not tried to do the work that a real police officer with proper training was hired, trained and paid to do. George had none of the powers and/or rights that he needed to do any of the things that needed to be done! So he should have stayed in his truck and not tried to play super hero! The tragic results of which is, he shot and killed a helpless and innocent kid that he was not supposed to have any contact with, and whom he had no right to scare!

      • Tzar says:

        “MOM seems to be trying to put on an assertive case for his client that does not include bad-mouthing TM”

        “then [Martin] got shot, and he was killed because of his own doing,” O’Mara said.

        he also presented a picture of Trayvon at the 7-11 during the second bond hearing just to show how big and bad Martin was.

      • bettykath says:

        Rachael, “Anyway, like I said, I was terrified and crying the whole time thinking how unfair it was that because I didn’t have $50,000 and no house to use for collateral or anything that my son could possibly suffer the dire consequences. ”

        Your situation, and GZ’s are similar in that your son and GZ are both innocent until found guilty by a jury and neither have the funds to do the job. GZ is actually better off in his ability to raise funds due to the notoriety.

        There are many defendants all over the country who have to rely on public defenders, some quite good and overworked, and others not so good and overworked. And all working with minimum or non-existent staff, and no investigators or experts. I think it was the professor, or maybe on another blog, where it was suggested that the court appoint the experts, subject to agreement by the prosecution and defense attorneys. We need enough experienced and good public defenders with investigators and access to experts that work for the defense that those without funds still get good legal representation.

        What happened to your son is truly unfortunate. I’m so sorry it happened. I think you can see that there are different standards for the well-off and the not-so-well-off. Some of the mechanics of the system need to be changed.

      • jun says:

        Zimmerman had more than enough money, he simply greedily hid it and spent, & in turn got taxed for being dishonest.

        The way Zimmerman has it is more than fair. Trayvon cant even confront Z on his allegations. With his SYG claim, Z is severely infringing on Trayvons rights for presumption of innocence and the standard of evidence is low for Omara compared to finding Z guilty.

        If you want fair, Omara can hire his experts but he shouldnt of let his client blow his money, & Omara’s standard of evidence should be just as high as the State’s to prove Trayvon attacked him

        In the end, Z wouldnt be in any of his troubles if he just sat down and chilled out

      • Tzar says:

        @ rachel
        well played!

      • Didnt Casey Anthony have a Public Defender and wasnt she cleared of all charges but one. Pretty high profile case wasnt it. Her public defender wasnt even death penalty qualified, if I am not mistaken.

    • Tzar says:

      bettykath says:
      “The prosecution has funds for whatever experts it needs. The defense has to come up with its own funds for its own experts. This is a resource imbalance that puts the defense at a severe disadvantage in many cases. ”

      That’s why you stay in the truck my dear

      • bettykath says:

        Tzar, “That’s why you stay in the truck my dear”

        I’m not your dear and I don’t need that condescending bs directed at me.

        • cielo62 says:

          I don’t think the comment was meant to be condescending. But it IS true that there are consequences to stalking an unarmed kid and one of them is tangling with the legal system. If you don’t want trouble, start by not looking for it. Good advice GZ just could not seem to understand.

          • Lonnie Starr says:

            Yes, we must remember that GZ was not preventing any crime! He was not calling to prevent any crime! He had not witnessed any crime and he knew of no other reason to suspect TM, other than that he was walking slowly in the rain. Hardly a reason to consider it an emergency so serious that he has to follow a kid who he had already frightened such that the kid had run off.

            If GZ had waited for the police, as the police had instructed him to, he would not be in need of any defense! His NW rules and training taught him that following suspects could have disastrous consequences because neither party can be sure of the others intentions. So, GZ followed even though he knew what he was doing could have disastrous consequences. He decided to accept those disastrous consequences and now he has them to face.

      • bettykath says:

        Calling me “my dear” is condescending.

      • Tzar says:

        It was definitely not meant to be condescending
        but truth be told
        that really is exactly why you stay in the car

      • Tzar says:

        sorry I meant that is why you stay in the “schruck”

      • thejbmission says:

        He says “schruck” because his teeth are clenched from taking too much Adderall. He was definitely impaired the night he called NEN, no doubt.

    • Lonnie Starr says:

      Nor do I begrudge them fundraising. I do want him to get a fair trial. But it’s pretty darned moot that he’s guilty, because of his own words: “I had one hand I was trying to move out of the way, so I didn’t hit it when I fired, and the other hand holding the gun”. Not direct quotes, but taken from his own statements.

      So, he had both hands engaged while holding his victim at gun point… and screaming for his life??? What was there about Trayvon’s empty hands that was so terrifying that they could cause GZ to fear of imminent death?

  69. Malisha says:

    Tzar, those depositions will be $$$$$$$ in O’Mara’s pockets, that’s all.

    About the gun rights conference, I wanted to check out what folks were saying about O’Mara’s intent to appear there and I particularly believe that those folks are HOLDING it in Orlando specifically because of the Zimmerman case (i.e. they have no shame) and I found this comment, which I quote in its entirety as a curio:

    “Speaking on this platform is not good because OMara case hinges on the facts that his client acted willfully with every opportunity to avoid confrontation based on his own admittance of observing Trayvon. He will only speak blindly of the truth not with clarity of the real problem that can destroy lives on all fronts.”

    For some reason, as I read this comment for perhap the eighth or ninth time, a sudden wave of unclarity passed over me, and I thought, “where have I heard this stuff before?”

  70. Tzar says:

    Jeff Weiner ‏@JeffWeinerOS
    George Zimmerman’s lawyers begin depositions, interview FDLE analysts — Story: http://thesent.nl/UTfEvW #GeorgeZimmerman #TrayvonMartin

    • Lonnie Starr says:

      @Tzar: you posted: [ “Jeff Weiner ‏@JeffWeinerOS George Zimmerman’s lawyers begin depositions, interview FDLE analysts — Story: http://thesent.nl/UTfEvW #GeorgeZimmerman #TrayvonMartin”]

      That link goes to the Orlando Sentinel site, where their photo gallery shows picture no 3 of TM with the “gold grille” that picture is not Trayvon Martin and they need to be told by enough people to take it down.

  71. katieunc says:


    I read this article months ago and he really makes some great points. If you look up antisocial in the DSM IV gz’s photo should be there. I have to wonder if his ADHD was a incorrect diagnosis. Imagine what you get when you add powerful stimulants like Adderral to someone who really has antisocial personality disorder, rather than ADHD.



    I also question a PA Rxing adderral; that’s why we have psychiatrists also referenced is a psychologist, which to my knowledge has no prescribing rights in Florida. Feel free to correct me on the last comment.

  72. Malisha says:

    Oh no, this is precious.


    When I first heard the name Mark O’Mara I researched him and came up thinking he was a pretty smart guy and a good defense lawyer. Little by little (and with one very big leap when he appeared the fool on Hannity), I began to wonder if perhaps his client got a head-bang that gave the ATTORNEY brain damage. NOW I am beginning to think that whatever George has, either it’s contagious and O’Mara caught it, or they’re just birds of a feather, O’Mara being the smarter bird by far.

    Going to talk to the gun guys — OK, that’s good for business. But talking about THIS CASE to the gun guys, and talking about George as a “protector” with respect to the gun laws? OMG OMG OMG!

    Not only is that stupid, but if he DOES IT, he will have to be defaming Trayvon Martin’s name. NO EVIDENCE EXISTS that Trayvon Martin was dangerous. NO EVIDENCE EXISTS that anybody had to be “protected” from Trayvon Martin, ever in life.

    PLEASE somebody who has time and money attend that conference and report on every word O’Mara says, pleeeeeeease.
    I’ll kick in $20 for expenses right now, and maybe others will join.

    • There will be reporters there, so I think we will find out what happened.

    • jm says:

      “PLEASE somebody who has time and money attend that conference and report on every word.”

      Don’t you think O’Mara will be spreading his word on his website so he collects more money from more gun-rights people?

      I sure hope the prosecution sends a representative to record the event – just in case.

    • Patricia says:


      I’ll match.

      Whoever attends will need to let us know where to send the $.

    • Chris says:

      It seems, at the least, inappropriate for O’M to speak on this particular subject, especially in the Orlando area. It’s rather like a dress rehearsal for trying the Z case in public and in the process potentially tainting any prospective jurors. The word disingenuous comes to mind…along with weasel.

  73. rachael says:

    OMG – don’t ANY of them know when to STFU?

    In a session billed as “Protecting the Right to Protect,” George Zimmerman’s lawyer will speak to hundreds of gun-rights activists about self-protection at their national convention in Orlando this weekend.

    Orlando attorney Mark O’Mara will address the crowd about his client’s use of deadly force and the international attention that followed the Feb. 26 shooting death of 17-year-old Trayvon Martin in Sanford.


    • Malisha says:

      Someone should go and record the whole thing. O’Mara will be promoting the idea that Trayvon Martin was an aggressor against whom George needed a defense. That will be a slander.

      There is no evidence of any aggression on Trayvon Martin’s part.

    • Lonnie Starr says:

      Great, when you leave comments on the sites reporting GZ news, use this url: http://tinyurl.com/d4x2y6b the collection is chaotic, but that only invites poking around. At least they’ll be exposed to a collection of info who knows where that will lead them.

      • Lonnie Starr says:

        Oh, that’s because the site/blog has only article “teasers” with “read more links” which bounces people away so that they comment everywhere else. Meaning I don’t have to deal with pro-Z’s and neither will you be inviting them to wreck sane sites as they are known to try and do.

    • jm says:

      rachael says: “OMG – don’t ANY of them know when to STFU?”

      Team Zimmerman is on a perpetual fundraiser and will do what it takes to keep the money rolling in from gun-nutz and racists. They have absolutely no shame and that includes MOM.

      • Lonnie Starr says:

        Hey, MOM didn’t do anything wrong, he’s charged with providing the best defense he can, for a guy who has trashed every avenue MOM might try to use. What else can MOM do but attempt to see that his one last chance at a payday actually pays off? No matter what MOM does, there won’t be any issues to appeal, because GZ has ruined his own defense beyond repair. An appellate judge can only say, that whatever happened at trial was GZ’s own fault.
        HIs attorney advised him to shut up and he refused to. After the defense was irretrievably ruined did MOM decide that speaking out could not hurt the defense, because there wasn’t any left.

        It boils down to “GZ needed a gun, to defend himself from the deadly, murderous children in the neighborhood”. Making him the “Playskool Superman”.

  74. Malisha says:

    About George’s injuries — The two women who gave statements (one called 911 and the other went out there and asked if everything was OK and etc.) — the one who went OUTSIDE and asked, and George said, “Just call the police,” DID NOT MENTION BLOOD on George Z. Trayvon was already dead. She said she saw Zimmerman put his hands to his head in the “universal gesture of ‘oh no I messed up'” but she did not notice BLOOD all over his head?


    • Fed-up taxpayer says:

      “…universal gesture of ‘oh no what’s my alibi, let’s see…’ “

    • Bill Taylor says:

      ty, i mentioned that in another thread was sure one witness saw him as i recall “doing something to his head”.

      • Patricia says:

        @Bill Taylor,

        What GZ was doing (seriously) was clutching his head like he was thinking, “What the fk do I do NOW???” He had established that Trayvon was not armed, so the Thug Stuff was history. It was a skinny teen with iced tea, candy, and no ID. Some black kids lived there. He might have been thinking, “Geeeez, is this one of OURS?”

        NOW he had to come up with an alibi, FAST.

        To see in your mind what his posture was, imagine if you just stepped into the elevator on the 36th floor – and it wasn’t perfectly aligned – and you dropped your keys as you stepped in, and they fell down the elevator shaft.

        Tearing your hair out, right? Whaddya’ do NOW????

  75. Brown says:

    follow thread

  76. dr. koura says:

    @jun…this has been the best yet…i have never chimed in before…great recap of such horrific and tragic lies…

  77. Vicky says:

    I’m not sure if this has been mentioned, but In the reenactment video GZ, in another version of the Trayvon was going for my gun story, demonstrates how he reached across his body for his gun. How in the heck did he manage to reach all the way to the back side of his hip where he apparently kept his holster? I don’t know about the rest of you, but try as I might, I can’t get my arm to stretch that far in a manner that would allow me to retrieve a gun while pinning someone’s arm under my other arm.

    • JUN says:

      The other stupidity in Zimmerman’s claims is that Trayvon reached under Zimmerman’s arm pit after he saw the gun.

      He also claimed Trayvon saw Zimmerman’s gun, which was concealed, because it magically appeared to both of them, after Zimmerman forgot he had it

      Then the other ridiculousness is Zimmerman claimed his gun was on his right side hip while Trayvon mounted him (MMA), when an MMA mount would have blocked all access to Zimmerman’s hips

      Then there is the claim that Trayvon punched him, where Trayvon’s punch was in a northward direction, but somehow Zimmerman stumbles forward while making fly swatting motions

      Then there is the claim that Zimmerman was able to have a friendly conversation with witness 6 while he was getting his head bashed but he was so helpless.

      Then there is the claim that a 150 lb kid with candy, ice tea, and a heart stickered cellphone threatened a former bouncer who weighed 200 pounds and is much stronger and larger than Trayvon and that former bouncer had a firearm, a car, and a flashlight to do his stalking and chasing of a juvenile

      Then there is a the claim a scrawny mama’s boy juvenile with no history of violence or training in any martial arts was able to beat a former bouncer who outweighed the juvenile and had a weapons and tools advantage of a gun, flashlight and car

      Then there is the claim Zimmerman was going back to his car, but somehow he ended up in the direction he stated the “suspect” was going towards, which is the opposite direction of where his car was, and Zimmerman was 250 feet or so away from, so he had to have had to keep pursuit to be in that direction

      Then he claimed to have his head slammed into hard cement and somehow only walked away with 2 cat scratches and a minor bloody nose

      Then he claimed that he was following Trayvon in his car, behind him, and somehow Trayvon runs faster than olympic world records, then circles his car multiple times

      Then he claimed that he wanted to find an address for the police of where his car was by walking to the other side of the block and getting that address

      LMAO This has to seriously be the most lies a suspect has ever stated, a perp has ever stated on one case… LOL I think the Florida Law Enforcement will keep it for their party functions to watch and laugh at its absurdity

      • Nellie Nell says:

        Fantastic recap!

        My only objection would be the last…. the police are not laughing. They are scared because they are next for allowing this murderer to manipulate them in an attempt to cover-up his crime! George is not worth the headache and I am sure they all see it now.

        He should have been arrested, if not that night, then certainly after his re-enactment!

        Shame and disgust!

  78. katieunc says:

    Ok guys…… I have mentioned that I work in the medical field…so….. today I found a laceration that’s about 1 inch. This has been repaired with sutures on the inside and glue on the outside. This is a clean laceration……not something jagged you would expect to see from concrete. If gz had a 1 inch head laceration it WOULD have needed repair!

    • katieunc says:

      Ok guys…… I have mentioned that I work in the medical field…so….. today I found a laceration that’s about 1 inch. This has been repaired with sutures on the inside and glue on the outside. This is a clean laceration……not something jagged you would expect to see from concrete. If gz had a 1 inch head laceration it WOULD have needed repair!

      • Chris says:

        GZ’s medical report states he had two lacerations on his head: one was 2 cm and the other was 0.5 cm. That would indicate both were less than an inch and and med. report states no sutures required. Your thoughts?

        • jm says:

          :GZ’s medical report states he had two lacerations on his head: one was 2 cm and the other was 0.5 cm. That would indicate both were less than an inch and and med. report states no sutures required. Your thoughts?”

          My thoughts are EMS on the scene did not think GZ required sutures and that these small lacerations aren’t consistent with GZ’s story of how he got the lacerations – allegedly by his head being repeatedly smashed into concrete by a teen who amazingly had no GZ DNA on his hands/nails.

      • Nellie Nell says:

        Not for George! It only took a kiss from Shelley and a couple of finger bandaids for healing! For her to be a nursing student, she sure is dumb. I guess they wanted the biggest bandaids possible for full effect! It is also amazing that she did not encourage her hubby to seek medical attention (and not for a note to return to work, but because being in the medical field she knew that a broken nose need medical attention!

        • jm says:

          “It is also amazing that she did not encourage her hubby to seek medical attention (and not for a note to return to work, but because being in the medical field she knew that a broken nose need medical attention!”

          Good point. I would think if/when GZ described his head being repeatedly smashed into concrete to Shellie, she would be aware he needed to have hospital tests for brain injury, hemorrhage, skull fracture, etc, even more than medical attention for the broken nose.

        • Lonnie Starr says:

          Zimmerman should have shown up for the reenactment in a mummy roll! lol

    • MichelleO says:

      THIS is so sickening—I can’t do it. Sickening and self-serving. From the few short minutes I listened, the Zimmerman family is the victim here. And the Zimmerman family are wholesome people.

      • looneydoone says:

        From what we’ve seen of the 3 Zimmer*men* the lot of them are delusional, arrogant callous, and calculating. They are actively seeking out media attention in an effort to raise more “donations”. I am enraged by their shenannigans !

      • Malisha says:

        Sociopaths out-victim everybody.

        If they hurt or kill you, YOU made them do it by victimizing them.

        If they just mess up, someone else is always to blame.

        They OWN innocence. So whatever goes wrong in the world is the result of them defending themselves against something bad.

        • jm says:

          Malisha says: “Sociopaths out-victim everybody. If they hurt or kill you, YOU made them do it by victimizing them. If they just mess up, someone else is always to blame. They OWN innocence. So whatever goes wrong in the world is the result of them defending themselves against something bad.”

          It sounds as if the whole family are sociopaths and it is not limited to GZ as I first thought. Following close behind GZ, is Robert, Jr is in second place. Both these idiots sound like they learned everything they know from Robert, Sr.

      • Two sides to a story says:

        The part that bothered me most comes late in the program – about RZ Jr’s observations of GZ after the shooting – that he was deeply bothered, that because he is Catholic it upset him to take a life . . . it’s all well and good to say these and I wish it were true, but this is simply NOT reflected in any of GZs subsequent words or actions. Even accounting for the shock or a quiet personality that internalizes things, I just can’t see these feelings exuding from GZ. It appears as if the Z family is showing us THEIR reactions the incident and are ascribing their own feelings to George in an effort to save him.

    • Nellie Nell says:

      A group of manipulators – he is as unskilled as a liar as George! Even in telling the story of being chased down in the mall you could hear the lies. He forgot the lie that fast and claimed that “as the mob chased George” and then remembered that it was him that he says was being chased, like George, he had to clean it up. I’ve searched the net for this chasing (sure it would have made the news) to no avail.

      You mean to tell me that in the 3 years that your brother lived in that community, brother Robert had never visited there but somehow wants to give demographics??? How does this fool have a “recollection” of what transpired from CA? He admits that he would lie to hide money too! Why don’t they just shut the hell up and stop! He is in no way helping George’s case by giving interviews. I hope the prosecutor files this interview as evidence where he admits that he would lie to save himself which also translates into lying to save his brother! Gosh, what a bunch of idiots!

  79. rachael says:

    Here is what I have to say about that:

    “The medical records will be used in trial/Dennis hearing to show that Mr. Zimmerman did suffer great bodily harm (broken nose) and
    authorized him to react with the force that he did.”

    Great bodily harm? LMBFFAO!!!

    Oh. But seriously, what medical records? Did he go to the hospital that night? What records are there the next day that there was “great bodily harm?”

    And since when is a broken nose great bodily harm – and at that, such great bodily harm that it would “authorize” one to react with the force that he did (a gun?).

    A fractured nose is THE most common fracture of the face. And it is true that one most commonly occurs during a fight – but that is not the ONLY reason one might occur.

    However, what EVIDENCE is there that there is a fractured nose? Yeah, there was swelling and blood and one might “assume” a broken nose, but a “broken nose” is kind of a catch-all phrase, especially because unless it is symptomatic (a person cannot breathe, it leads to facial deformity), usually nothing is done more than ice and perhaps something for pain. If one needs surgery (say for a deviated septum), one must have an actual diagnosis made by X-ray and that would require a visit to an ENT – WHICH GEORGE REFUSED. As well, at this point, who knows if the broken nose was sustained then or previously.

    As far as “authorize” one to react with the force that he did – what a bogus bunch of crap. Getting popped in the nose (if that even did happen) and having a broken nose (if he even did/does have one) does not authorize the use of a gun – at least not in my opinion.

    • rachael says:

      I guess where I said:

      If one needs surgery (say for a deviated septum), one must have an actual diagnosis made by X-ray and that would require a visit to an ENT – WHICH GEORGE REFUSED. As well, at this point, who knows if the broken nose was sustained then or previously.

      I left out – if one needs verification/documentation for legal purposes (which you would think someone who just shot
      someone might think the would need for evidence), that would also require an ER visit or ENT visit for x-rays.

      Why on EARTH would this idiot think he could shoot someone, say it was self-defense and just walk away and then when asked, produce no evidence.

      Even on Judge Judy – or maybe it is one of the other judges, when they show up in court with no evidence she says, “Where did you think you were going today?” If you are going to say you have a broken nose, you have to actually HAVE a broken nose. Maybe he did, maybe he didn’t, but just like his drug levels of medication, we will never know.

      But even if he did, it does not prove that Trayvon inflicted it on him, though it would make him at least a little more credible.

      He mentioned at the beginning of his phone call that he knew he was a kid in his late teens. Did he really think he could just say self defense and walk away and no one would challenge it?

      MY GOD!!!! Do you know the fit I’d pitch if I was told that my minor son was shot by someone who said it was self-defense and my son was found armed only with Skittles and a juice drink can? What kind of parent would say “Okay office, thank you for telling me.” Wouldn’t ANY parent DEMAND to know WTF happened?

      Sorry if I sound so angry, but I go look on the nut tree site sometimes and just don’t understand those people at all.

      • Two sides to a story says:

        I hear ya. My youngest kids were barely twenty and the other seventeen at the time. Chilling.

      • MichelleO says:

        “He mentioned at the beginning of his phone call that he knew he was a kid in his late teens. Did he really think he could just say self defense and walk away and no one would challenge it?”

        WELL, he almost got away with it, didn’t he? He knew that city’s police department well enough to attempt it. Plus, he had Mark Osterman show him exactly how to do it.

      • Fed-up taxpayer says:

        Why Osterman and his wife would expend SO much effort and time on GZ and SZ, only to then publish a book that only sorta defends them… hmm.

      • jun says:

        I consider the Conservative Treefrog to be a blog of future predators (stalkers, rapists, peeping toms, serial killers, domestic violence perps, etc). Only people like that would have no regard for others. The other percentage are racist. Some are just idiots that buy Zimmerman with no check on the story’s credibility. Then there are the gun nuts that are idiots (I say this because I like guns and its a proud invention of the Chinese but I dont believe in irresponsible gun use).

      • thejbmission says:

        I know exactly what you mean. That nut tree site gets my blood boiling too.
        You asked, “Wouldn’t ANY parent DEMAND to know WTF happened?” Absolutely.
        If I were told this happened to one of my sons, I would have done anything I could to get answers. So why those nuts at the treehouse condemn Tracy and Sybrina, I’ll never know. If they disagree with that, well it doesn’t say much about them as a parent.
        God bless Trayvon’s family, for all of the hell they’ve been through since Trayvon’s death. I pray that they get justice for their son.
        If this were one of my sons I would be so angry.
        Not to mention the fact that the person who murdered my son would profit off of his death would drive me insane.
        And as for the Zim’s pathetic apology, well..they could put their sorry’s in a sack. If any of the Zims were really sorry they’d turn over any money made off of television appearances to the Martins.
        In my opinion, All their sorrys mean is “Trayvon somehow deserved to die”.

      • Nellie Nell says:

        I agree with both you and Michelle….. Zimmerman came pretty close to getting away with the help of SPD which is despicable and I sure hope that they all have to pay a price for the cover-up attempt. Him and Mark seems to think they are invincible and smart. They had no idea of what family they destroyed with their stereotyped of Trayvon. This family knows their kid would have never attacked a grown man for no reason at all. I bet they were hoping that Trayvon h