Whonoze asked the following question that I believe warrants a lengthy response, as it touches on a number of important issues about this case and lawyers in general.
He said,
Prof. L.:
If you were Zimmerman’s attorney, how would you handle the segment of DeeDee’s interview with BdlR in which, as I put it, “she offers to perjure herself.” Please review that segment of the recording. At ~15:51 into the interview, BdlR asks DeeDee if Trayvon said the man was coming to hit him just before the confrontation.
DeeDee: [very quietly] Yeah. You could say that.
SA d l R: I don’t want you to guess. Did he ever say that?
DeeDee: [after long pause, still quietly] How he said it, he just…
SA d l R: [interrupting] No, no. Do you understand? Did he say that or not? If he didn’t, that’s alright…
DeeDee: The man, he got problems. Like he crazy.
SA d l R: Trayvon told you that?
DeeDee: Yeah the man lookin crazy. Looking at him crazy.
SA d l R: When did Trayvon tell you that?
DeeDee: …He was walkin, before he say he was gonna run….
SA d l R: He said the guy looks what?
DeeDee: Crazy. And creepy.Thus, despite BdlR’s admonition, DeeDee never says anything amounting to “No, Trayvon did did not say that,” but instead goes back to an earlier point in the conversation to bolster her assertion that Trayvon was afraid of Zimmerman.
Now, I do not care how anywhere here interprets this passage, or how they think it speaks to DeeDee’s overall veracity. I know that (and I mostly agree). But we are not going to be sitting on a jury in Seminole County FL, and we are not defense attorneys with an ethical obligation to present a zealous defense of George Zimmerman.
So, first, I would like an experienced defense attorney to role-play, evaluate this part of DeeDee’s statement to BdlR from a defense point of view, and imagine how you might use it at trial (if at all.)
Second, role playing a prosecutor, how would you prep DeeDee in anticipation of any strategies you think the defense might take?
My Answer:
I honestly do not believe Dee Dee offered to perjure herself in that exchange.
This appears to be a classic example of a witness having formed an opinion of what was happening in those final moments before the phone went dead. She’s struggling with attempting to differentiate between her opinion and what she actually heard Trayvon say or not say.
Thus, when “BDLR asks her if Trayvon said the man was coming to hit him just before the confrontation,” she answers
DeeDee: [very quietly] Yeah. You could say that.
BDLR picks up on her apparent uncertainty and says,
“I don’t want you to guess. Did he ever say that?”
She resists being pinned down to a “yes” or “no” answer because her opinion is based on more than what Trayvon said or did not say in those final moments.
For example, she knows Trayvon is a non-violent person who would never pick a fight with anyone and he had been expressing fear and describing strange, creepy and aggressive behavior to explain why he felt that way. She’s reviewing all of that preparing to tell him why she believes all of it can be summarized and expressed as a “Yes” answer to his question. In other words, she wants to supply context because context, rather than what he actually said or did not say in that final moment before the line went dead, answers the question everyone is asking.
She says,
“DeeDee: [after long pause, still quietly] How he said it, he just…
BDLR, who is not warm and fuzzy and lacks patience and an ability to listen, doesn’t “hear” what she is telling him. He interrupts.
“SA d l R: [interrupting] No, no. Do you understand? Did he say that or not? If he didn’t, that’s alright…”
Now, she realizes he doesn’t get it, so she tries to summarize it all by saying the man was crazy. She says,
“DeeDee: The man, he got problems. Like he crazy.”
BDLR is basically a bull in a china shop and he needs to develop some people skills.
Lawyers have an expression for context. We call it “totality of the circumstances.”
Story tellers have a rule for telling stories that they call “Show, don’t tell.”
Someone with some patience and listening skills needs to spend some time with her and tease out all of the specifics that she was attempting to identify and sort out before BDLR started pressuring her for a “yes” or “no” answer.
When she testifies, he needs to ask her to relate those specifics to the jury and leave out her opinion. What the hell does he expect her to say, when she wasn’t actually there and can only rely on what Trayvon told her and who she knew him to be?
Most of what Trayvon said to her, is admissible hearsay pursuant to the excited-utterance and present-sense-impression exceptions to the hearsay rule The rest is admissible non-hearsay because it will be offered to show his mental state, as opposed to being offered to prove the truth of the matter asserted in the statement.
BDLR needs to let her show, not tell.
When the defense inevitably attempts to pin her down on cross with the “yes” or “no” answer that BDLR asked, the jury will already have figured out what happened from the context that she supplied by showing rather than telling.
Her denial that Trayvon told her Zimmerman attacked him immediately before the line went dead becomes irrelevant because the jury, everyone else in the courtroom, and the world watching on TV will know that Trayvon did not have an opportunity to say anything when Zimmerman attacked him.
I used to spend a lot of time listening before I decided to do anything. It’s a good practice to develop and I do not believe very many lawyers have developed that skill.
BDLR seriously needs to spend some time working on it because he can be a hot mess without it.
Frederick Leatherman Law Blog 
I have a new post up:
Zimmerman: Representing Him and the Inevitable Question: My God, What Have I Become?
Colin B, I was trying to make a little joke — at the Outhousers’ expense. They’re so wedded to the notion that Blacks = Thugs, I figured we’d detect that inheritance in their guy.
A lot of people are losing sight of the fact that Mr. de la Rios’ interview with DeeDee is, by and large, non-admissible hearsay, and not evidence.
There are a couple of exceptions. Either side may use it in whole or in part to “refresh” DeeDee’s memory if it appears to the court (the judge) that her memory needs refreshing. The defense may use statements DeeDee made during the interview to impeach, if her trial testimony is in some way inconsistent with those statements.
It’s probably a bad idea for the defense to try using the specific statement in which DeeDee said that Mr. Martin said (note: hearsay within hearsay) that Mr. Zimmerman appeared “creepy.”
Imagine how, as the defense attorney, you’d frame the killer question. “Ms. DeeDee, didn’t you previously say that Mr. Martin said that the man following him appeared creepy” wouldn’t play well in front of many juries.
DeeDee did not “offer to commit perjury,” at least not according to any reasonable definitions of “offer” and perjury. If the defense wants to attack her credibility on the basis of dishonesty — and the defense pretty much needs to do so — it must be very careful as to how it proceeds as it runs the risk of appearing to bully a teenage girl, and or of appearing racist.
BDL
I should add:
1. If used as “refreshment,” the jury won’t get to see the transcript or hear the tape. DeeDee would be handed the transcript and allowed to read it… And that’s it.
2. If used to impeach, the defense will be allowed to use specific statements. Most courts require that the statements be very brief and limited to the statements which are specifically in controversy.
boar_d_laze says: careful as to how it proceeds as it runs the risk of appearing to bully a teenage girl, and or of appearing racist.
Um, what do you think O’Mara combing through her Facebook account looks like?
O’Mara sold his soul to Satan when he agreed to represent Zimmerman and from his actions he seems to enjoy being one of his minions placating the Conservative Nuthouse crowd.
One: I don’t do “Satan.” I stick to human beings.
Two: There’s a difference between what goes before trial and what goes on in court during the trial and in front of the jury.
But O’Mara is doing this for public consumption and some of the jurors will have followed this case extensively before trial.
roderick2012 “But O’Mara is doing this for public consumption and some of the jurors will have followed this case extensively before trial.”
I follow this case daily but my friends and family don’t. They are aware of the killing but do not follow the latest events and updates so even though O’Mara is doing this to poison the jury pool, there is a good chance he has not reached potential jurors. Maybe things are different in Seminole County Florida though.
I think MOM”s motive is to play to the pro-Zimmerman supporters for more money.
EXCELLENT post Prof.!!! I had the same impression of BdlR after hearing his depo with DeeDee. I have NO legal experience, but even I quickly noticed that his capabilities were lacking and that he has the patience of a 7 year- old. Poor DeeDee tried ( in her own way) to explain Trayvon’s fear and desperation, but he wouldn’t let her. He is causing me to lose far to much sleep . The poor kid.
You have an amazing blog here Prof. I’ve been tuning in for about 3 weeks now, and I am impressed by your knowledge and experience. Thank you.
P.s. your loyal commenters are scary smart.
Malisha Ive never heard of the thug gene,,Do you mean warrior gene.
OK, I’ll ‘toss over the cards’ and present my own thoughts on the DeeDee quote as a subject of argumentation. I think if she and BdlR aren’t prepared for an interrogation about that part of her statement her credibility will get ripped to shreds. In a gentle manner, not a hostile and aggressive one, but undermined nevertheless. If BdlR waits for re-direct to make a rebuttal, he will seem like he’s trying to cover his butt, and he’ll be unable to un-ring the bell. But he can keep the defense from going there by bringing it up himself on direct and establishing his own interpretation. He who spins first has the advantage:
(BdlR plays the segment of the recording in question)
B: I want to ask you about this part of our interview, where you said “You could say that.” Do you know exactly what I meant by my question?
D: I don’t know.
B: I was asking if Trayvon said the man was coming to hit him just before you heard Trayvon say “Why are you following me?” Did you understand that I meant just then, and not earlier?
D: I don’t know.
B: Let me ask you now, again, then, and try to be more clear. Just before Trayvon said “Why are you following me?” did he tell you the man was coming to hit him?
D: No.
B: So why did you say, “You could say that”?
D: Because of what Trayvon said before.
B: You mean when he first saw the man watching him he said the man looked crazy.
D: Yeah.
B: And you could tell he was afraid.
D: Yeah.
B: So Trayvon never used words like “I think he’s coming to hit me,” but you could tell he was worried about the man might do.
D. Yeah.
B. He didn’t tell you directly he was afraid of being attacked, but you took what he said to mean that in so many words, is that correct?
D. Yeah.
B: So when you said “You could say that,” you were referring to what Trayvon said about the man in general that evening?
D: Yeah.
B: And you meant that YOU concluded the man might hit Trayvon from what Trayvon said, not that Trayvon used those precise words.
D: Right. He said the man looked crazy, and I could tell he was real scared of real scared of the man.
(At this point DeeDee could possibly interject something else Trayvon did say to bolster the idea he was worried about what the man might do…)
B: Thank You. I’m glad we cleared that up…
(Then as BdlR continues to question her, he is careful to have her distinguish between the literal and the figurative, between concrete things she heard and what she took them to mean.)
So, if BdlR guides her through presenting an interpretation of a potentially problematic part of her recorded statement, he effectively innoculates againast a defense interpretation. If O’Mara or West try to grill her about fudging her statement, BdlR objects that she’s already answered the question, already established that it was his bad in the interview for asking questions in a way that turned out to be vague and led to potentially misleading answers but without any intent to mislead on DeeDee’s part.
The reason I bring this up is because I am not confident in the prosecution’s competence, and because – call me paranoid – I’m not convinced they really want to win this case.
whonoze says: “The reason I bring this up is because I am not confident in the prosecution’s competence, and because – call me paranoid – I’m not convinced they really want to win this case.”
From what I have seen so far, it looks like a lack of competence and it may be by selecting an incompetent person like BDLR, “they” (whoever that is and for whatever reason) really don’t want to win this case.
I would love to know the selection process and how and why BDLR was chosen.
Much of that hypothetical examination will involve leading the witness which is not allowed under direct examination. If I were the defense I would be objecting.
I don’t know what you’re even going on about! “you could say that” is a commonly used figure of speech. Lots of people use it and most can easily put it in the context it was used, just like we are here.
There isn’t any fudging in her statement that i can see. I think she answered the question simply and in her own words and anyone who tries to put words in her mouth will end up looking like they are attacking another INNOCENT KID, and end up looking desperate in front of a jury.
And i think i’ll call you paranoid as hell if you think “they” don’t wanna win this case! This isn’t a movie! This is this boy’s murder and the a quest for justice for this family. PERIOD.
DeeDee Is only ONE small part of this case. There’s no reason to put all the states eggs in her basket, they could prosecute that POS with out her and win with a fair and thoughtful jury. So all this stuff about DeeDee and worrying about a single answer in a single interview is not much of a big deal- another RED HARING.
You say:
“The reason I bring this up is because I am not confident in the prosecution’s competence, and because – call me paranoid – I’m not convinced they really want to win this case.”
Well, I think you have hit the nail on the head with the last phrase. They don’t necessarily want to win the case; I think they want a plea deal but don’t want to look weak by offering one. On the eve of trial, pretending they suddenly got worried because of all the terrible negative things that are going to possibly come out, they will cave and let George plead. That was my guess as early as April. WHY? Because Corey is still protecting Wolfinger, Smith, Ayala, the whole SPD, Lee, and others who we KNOW are vulnerable.
For a plea deal to work the public has to start thinking this case could be lost. On the physical evidence alone, it could NOT be lost unless the prosecution THREW it. You could get a couple of hung juries before it was won, but it could not just be lost. So what we will have is a lot of public theater before they all coward out on us and give their excuses. George will do significant time unless he manages to escape first. That’s my prediction.
I don’t know why you are so fixated on “you could say that.” I agree with shannoninmiami. DD’s not fudging or suggesting that BDLR make something up. She’s saying that what BDLR just asked her is a proper interpretation of what happened or of what she is trying to say. I don’t see that it reflects on her credibility at all. It’s a common term of phrase, a common way of conversing.
Whonoze, the solution to the problem, if any, that may or may not be caused by the difficulty in communications between DeeDee and BDLR can be solved before trial. DeeDee can be evaluated by a forensic psychiatrist (I know one who will do it for free if I pester him) and by an educational psychologist (there are plenty available in Miami, believe me, and probably some would do this free as well). The reports from these two specialists would then be turned over to the prosecution team and the professionals could be called as experts as to the communications issues that pertain to the interviews given, and the ramifications. This would give DeeDee something Trayvon never had: the ability to tell us their story.
As fan of martial arts and combat sports, I feel very dissed that Omara is trying to say that because you are into martial arts it automatically means that you instigate fights, are a bully, or should negate a murder claim, of a victim that may know martial arts. Bas Rutten is a famous MMA fighter and he strictly fights in the ring. Jackie Chan is a famous kung fu and action movie star and he never goes around picking fights with people.
Don’t even worry about the martial arts thing. George’s buddy-witness who was spinning yarns about the “MMA punches” decided not to try to perjure himself when push came to shove (no pun intended) and there was no evidence that martial arts had anything to do with this case. It’s O’Mara blowing smoke. Besides, if Trayvon did know martial arts, (a) it would have been all over the web by now because of real people who trained with him knowing about it; and (b) he probably would have told DeeDee, “Don’t worry though, if he finds me I’ll demonstrate my skills at the martial arts — unless he’s got a gun.” This is a non-issue. O’Mara had to have something to say to not appear as much a fool as his client.
I can see that but I still feel offended that he is saying that a martial artist does not deserve justice and should automatically be seen to be a bully and instigator of violence when they are actually self defense arts…
I feel that even if Trayvon did lay a whoopin on George’s ass, he would have been perfectly justified… however, you are correct that all evidence contradicts that assertion, including the fact that George was even on his back being pinned (thats a lie too by witness 6 as seen for forensic evidence, but we will leave it for a rainy day) and that knowing martial arts should not help a murderers evidence to try to get away
As the line goes in “The Karate Kid” you learn karate so you don’t have to fight.
Had Trayvon went off on GZ MMA style, GZ would have been removed from the scene on a stretcher. He would have needed an EMT specialist to reset his nose, repair his ear drums, and a dentist to fit him with dentures.
I agree with that… GZ would have been actually hurt (not those super minor injuries which I believe were staged by GZ)
However, I feel if Trayvon did hypothetically know MMA (its not true), he had every right to beat the crap out of GZ. A gun with one trigger pull kills you or puts you in great bodily harm. Thats a reasonable fear of imminent danger of death and great bodily harm, hence, Trayvon was allowed to beat him down. The call George made establishes him starting the whole encounter
Well see, that is the danger MOM faces when taking “MMA” and trying to find facts to support it. All the State needs is an MMA expert witness to testify that had Trayvon knew and used “MMA” that GZ would not have been able to speak to tell anything for several days. That in fact, GZ would not have been able to shimmy, neither reach his gun.
Singleton interrupted GZ a few times, when he was just about to say something interesting. Even Serino did a few times, though he was excellent at letting him ramble on.
The interviews with DeeDee were 80% interruptions.
Interviewers need to learn to SHUT UP. Interviewing is about GETTING ANSWERS, not about asking questions.
But GZ was a suspect and DeeDee was not.
Professor, did you know that Yahoo news is quoting from your blog? You’re now famous. 🙂
http://news.yahoo.com/george-zimmerman-judge-oks-real-trayvon-martin-144706611.html
I will not lie, the comments I read on http://news.yahoo.com/george-zimmerman-judge-oks-real-trayvon-martin-144706611.html bought tears to my eyes and made me want to crawl under a rock and hide. How could people be so cruel? I even read a comment on another site where a poster said, “I think we should dig Travon up and kill him again.” Even if they feel Zimmerman has a valid claim, a human loss his life. I hope BLDR and Corey can win this case, but at this point even if they do not, I have respect and admiration for the (sung and unsung) heroes that fought a good fight (bringing this case to media attention, getting an arrest, and a trial by jury when some were attempting to brush it under the rug) until the end (verdict) even if the battle (guilty of 2nd degree murder) is not won. Perhaps, this case is a start to winning a larger war against the next person(s) who thinks he/she can follow, pursue, then kill an unarmed teenager and confidently feel no one would care (just another statistic). People DID and DO care and that alone is my solace and victory within this great tragedy (regardless of the outcome). Trayvon Martin your name will not be forgotten!
@Marshalette, when i first started reading about this case i was horrified by comments like the ones you’re talking about. I couldn’t believe those idiots are actually out there.( even now, months later, i still demand them to come out of the closets and show themselves! i wanna see what they look like and expect them to reveal a signature 666 tattoo on their forehead that makes them easily identifiable for the rest of us!!)
But since then after hours -I MEAN HOURS of time spent on many different websites, reading thousands of comments, I’ve been put at ease.. The idiots are not the majority. Infact they are pretty much the same few groups of people who post those filthy comments all over the place.
We are the MAJOR MAJORITY, the most informed, and better educated. Those are just a few and they won’t even identify them selves because they know how stupid they are.
And i personally have faith in the coming conviction of GZ more than ever now that so much of Omar’s case is made public. It’s pathetic, the whole defense = Fraud Squad, is a huge loser.
@Marshalette.
Which is why I stopped posting comments to Yahoo articles. There are only a handful of Zidiots who do, but they have multiple handles/accounts. Not only do they post filth as you have pointed out, but they use their multiple handles to thumb themselves up and pro-justice comments down so they are hidden. It’s a waste of time commenting when people are not fair.
From time to time, I do my share by clicking “abuse” to comments that mask the “N” word, call Trayvon “Trayboon” and “Traycoon,”
Yahoo is robot moderated and I am sure they could enter words such as “nigra” and “Ni66ers” in their system to censor that filth. As of yet, they haven’t and since they have allowed it for months, I seriously doubt that they will.
When I have time and there are advertisers on pages with filthy comments, I email them to the companies to let them know what they are associating themselves with. Freedom of speech is not hate-speech.
Overall, this is why the public in general that read comments on Yahoo and some other internet venues, has reason to believe that GZ is racist. His supporters that post that filth certainly are.
Wow, Marshalette, sorry you had such a reaction. If I may say so, there is a good way to deal with the reaction you had to the low-lifes who felt that their membership in society gave them permission to behave that badly: they have already given up all claim to the respect of decent persons. Furthermore, in this particular case and situation, they are obvious losers. They will not get anything for all their impotent rage. If they had their way, George Zimmerman would never have been charged and he would have gone on to become a cop. REMEMBER: They already lost because George WAS charged.
Here’s what I see them doing now: expressing their hatred and their bitterness, anger, and resentment for the fact that they are not worth very much by insisting that someone else — who has already died — is worth less. They are just another form of George Zimmerman. Surely there had to be others like him; he did not arise as a lone mutation!
There are millions just like George. What we are doing is showing them all that they will NOT be able to get away with more than their hate speech. Hate speech is free. But when they try to kill somebody, they will be held accountable.
Chill. There have always been Nazis of various types and various shapes and there always will be. We’re doing what needs to be done about that. And nowhere in Trayvon’s school records will there be anything that can change that one gram, one millimeter or for one nanosecond.
You don’t need to crawl under any rocks. You need to stand up proud. Eventually some of those impotent hate-filled punks will be crawling under rocks and even then they will not admit it.
@Shannoninmiami.
Absolutely. Some of the Zidiots on Yahoo comments were banned from the Outhouse — they are just that bad. What does bother me however, is that I believe that news sources have a responsibility to allow freedom of speech, while not allowing hate-speech. Most have TOS that forbids certain conduct, yet they allow it and make it as humanely difficult as possible to report.
About the most shameful AND SHAMELESS comment I have ever heard from the beginning of this case until now is George Zimmerman himself saying to Hannity, in response to the question of whether he regretted getting out of the car, whether he regretted carrying a loaded gun with him when he got out of the car, that he said, “no, no.”
You can’t get any worse than that. He’s already convicted of being a conscience-free disgrace unfit for American citizenship AND unfit for membership in the Roman Catholic Church; he should be excommunicated. His Church believes that there should not even be executions of individuals sentenced to death! Time and time again the Pope reasserts this; the Catholics’ creed includes a person’s god-given right to live until natural death! George not regretting killing Trayvon Martin is a moral crime of the greatest magnitude, shared by a lot of the sociopathic followers who have been spewing their murderous hatred all over the web. The Seventh Circle of Hell is too good for the likes of them. 👿
Malisha says: “He’s already convicted of being a conscience-free disgrace unfit for American citizenship AND unfit for membership in the Roman Catholic Church; he should be excommunicated. His Church believes that there should not even be executions of individuals sentenced to death! Time and time again the Pope reasserts this; the Catholics’ creed includes a person’s god-given right to live until natural death!”
That is exactly why RZ Jr spouting off about how spiritual the family is sickens me. There is nothing spiritual about the execution of Trayvon Martin. The other thing that is sickening is the Conservative Treehouse “spirituality” front while supporting and praying for GZ and his family and maligning the Martin family, Trayvon and the defense team.
I imagine that Jesus Christ shakes his head each time they write stuff like that, as it gives a false witness of his nature and ways.
Marshalette….I also read the comments on Yahoo. They’re even worst that those on HuffPo…(and I thought the folks on HuffPo were nasty bass-turds). I was absolutely stunned not only by their belief in all the lies (Facebook pics of the lookalike “Trayvon’s” tattoos, gold grills, flipping the bird, etc.) but also by their hate-filled vitriol. The thought horrifies me that creatins like this, could actually be chosen to sit on a jury in a case such as this one.
@Grey Winter Sky.
Did you check out the avatars? They are intended to demean, and Yahoo allows it. Don’t worry about them being on the jury. The main culprit resides in Arizona and the rest are either too young to sit on a jury, or have had their driver’s licenses revoked for DUI, or are not registered voters.
“creatins” should be “cretins”..spelling is not one of my strong points, and when something like this upsets me, I type without going back and double checking. But you folks are understanding on that point. 🙂
There’s fame and there’s fame, I’ve seen this blog mentioned on Nuthouse too. And all of us being pitied for the fools we are to believe this tripe we read and write. LOL.
Well, at least we know the Christian Science Monitor has good judgment to know what blog owner knows their legal stuff — and it isn’t at the Outhouse.
Thanks for the link. Upon reading the article, I discovered that it was originally published by the Christian Science Monitor. That’s a first for me and it referred to our blog as a “popular law blog.”
It would not be popular without the insightful and valuable contributions from each of you.
Give yourselves a big pat on the back.
Just don’t hurt yourselves.
Fred
Smile! It’s nice to see this forum getting the positive recognition it deserves.
You’re cited again here: http://www.minnpost.com/christian-science-monitor/2012/10/george-zimmerman-judge-oks-question-who-was-real-trayvon-martin.
To embrace George Zimmerman’s story as factual requires an acceptance of extraordinary feats of human performance on the part of a 17 year old child.
Consider the following:
-If you watched the video I posted above, you can hear Zimmerman say he was parked at the clubhouse as Trayvon was “coming to check him out” at [1:15] into the NEN call, or 7:10:49 pm, and then “walked past me” and “made a right on Twin Trees Lane”.
-In his reenactment video, Zimmerman says he “backed out” at the clubhouse and drove down Twin Trees Lane and parked at a point Google Earth shows as being 167 feet from the “T”. BEFORE exiting his vehicle, he excitedly points and tells the detective “I SAW him”, “he looked back, saw me, and cut back between the houses”.
According to Google Earth, from the back of where Zimmerman says he was parked at the clubhouse to the “T” measures 508 feet.
-But that’s not all Zimmerman tells us Trayvon did BEFORE he got out of his truck, is it? In the same reenactment video, he tells the detective Trayvon “CAME BACK” the 167 feet to where he was parked, circled his car, and returned the 167 feet to the “T”, where Zimmerman told the NEN dispatcher “Shit, he’s running!”
Add ANOTHER 400 feet or so to the 508 feet from the clubhouse for a total distance, WALKED by this 17 year old child, of 908 feet!
While there’s much we don’t know as factual about this case, there’s one thing we do know because we all HEARD it. We KNOW when Zimmerman got out of his truck. We heard him shut the door and the door chimes stop at [2:14] into the NEN call, or 7:11:48 pm.
Remember the extraordinary feats of human performance on the part of a 17 year old child I mentioned at the beginning? In less than a minute, without a car, bicycle, skateboard, OR pogo stick, this accused murderer has told us his victim WALKED 908 feet!
I can’t even begin to embrace THAT story.
Excellent points..
I think the issue of trying to use the fact that someone knows MMA fighting, means they cant be a murder victim or that they were never in a position to defend themselves in a trial is kind of BS and should not fly. Just because someone knows karate or whatever, it does not mean that they attacked or instigated first, I mean they are “self defense” arts. I dont think there is any MMA videos, because honestly, if Zimmerman went up against a guy with martial arts training, he would have looked way different then what he claims. I also disagree that if you have an adversary on their back, that it negates the murder, because someone with a gun, with one trigger pull, has you in imminent danger of great bodily harm and death at any second, so under SYG, it is fairly reasonable to have the person pinned on the ground and beating him till you disarm them. This is not what happened, but I am simply disputing the assertions Omara is trying to make and I think it is BS.
Zimmerman was never pinned on his back, getting sidewalk head smashed, or smothered, or punched hundreds of times… forensics contradicts those claims…
Ditto
They seem to be desperately trying to concoct a ridiculous story hoping that the jury will believe that Zim acted in self-defense.
BTW…my comment was to Jun.
LLMPapa. absolutely! Without getting into the technical measurements, (I leave that to folks such as yourself), I could tell that what GZ told the dispatcher did not line-up with his re-enactment. “Coming towards me now” and “coming to check me out” meant that he had pulled ahead of Trayvon. Trayvon was walking pass GZ’s vehicle. It was not menacing as GZ makes it sound.
There was a time when DeeDee’s 6:54 call with Trayvon dropped. I PRAY that Trayvon then recorded what he saw of GZ and his truck until the time that he ran.
Not only did Trayvon not return and circle the truck, as Zimmerman claimed, I don’t believe he walked, ran or “skipped,” 508 feet from the Clubhouse to the T either within the 1-minute period.
Whats this business with the protective order? Can anyone explain to me what the deal is?
Okay never mind, found it
Click to access Emergency%20Motion%20for%20Protective%20Order.pdf
Professor you were quoted by the Christian Sicence Monitor yesterday. Just wanted to drop how “popular this blog” is.
Thanks.
In reviewing comments this morning that were posted after I went to bed last night (I’m reviewing them backwards from the most recent to the oldest), I came across Xena’s comment linking to the same story that was picked up and republished by Yahoo News.
I responded to her comment and I will repeat it here:
: ) impressed them with our knowledge
That’s why I came to this site. I too was impressed with everyone’s knowledge and compassion. I have learned a great deal just by reading the main post and the comments that follow. Thank you everyone!
Good night.
I prefer this one for message, just because of the instrumentals.
Ok good people, time to turn in, e-love our time together,
This song is for Trayvon, may you fly where the bluebirds go….
You know, though, about that Black ancestor? I think that might be evidence that George has a thug gene. Probably that thug gene was trying to express itself that evening in Sanford; that’s probably why George first thought Trayvon had said “homie” and later wasn’t too sure. Yeah! That’s it!
LMAO!
Seeing that GZ thinks all black males are criminals, I am surprised he hasnt offed himself
If dee dee never opens her mouth to say a single thing her phone records speak volumes that’s why the pro Zimmermans are trying to say that the phone records where fake and that Trayvon didn’t have a phone. They know that dee dee being on the phone with Trayvon moments before he was suppose to be laying in wait to attack Zimmerman totally blows that bs statement out of the water. Because we all know by just using common sense that no one hide waiting to attack but continue a phone conversation at the same time. this is not an action movie. if he was waiting to attack Zimmerman surely he would have hung up the phone put the phone in his pocket so that he wouldn’t be heard therefore giving his location away (like what zimmerman was worried about doing) and he had his hands free to fight. I grew up in the same place Trayvon lived, there is absolutely noooo way he would have remained on the phone if he thought Zimmerman was now following him on foot. This young man thought he had lost Zimmerman I’d bet the bank on that. Dee Dee being on that phone shows that Martin had no ill will in him that night. MOM just want to see if someone coached her and if she made different statements that he can use like ie. Trayvon said he was going to beat the guy azz. This is what MOM is looking for but he will not find. Dee Dee will do fine her being on the phone is key.
My thing is this even if and to me big if TM told DD, hey this guy is following me I don’t know what his deal is (no pun intended) I better be ready to throw down. He (TM) had every right to prepare to fight against a man that not only parked his car and watched him under the mailbox Kiosk. Follow him when he left the mailboxes in his car then on foot. TM felt threaten. I can see how DD might not want to reveal that if big if that was said. She may not understand that even with TM preparing to fight against a man he felt threaten by he had the law on his side, its called stand your ground.
I honestly think Trayvon was a bookworm type kid. I dont think he even knows how to fight. However, The SYG states that if there is a reasonable belief of imminent danger of death or great bodily harm, you are allowed to use deadly force. Obviously deadly force was never used by Trayvon, but he was allowed under law and justified. A complete stranger, unwilling to identify himself, stalking you by car, in the dark of the night, is much larger, then when you run, he comes chasing you and looking for you with a flashlight and a gun – that is fairly reasonable belief of danger and Trayvon would have been justified but the fact remains there is no evidence Trayvon even did that.
Correct, but what I was trying to convey was that DeeDee might not understand that he would of been justified. Let’s just say that yes TM told DeeDee that he might have to turn around and face this dude and fight him because he felt threaten. DeeDee as a young teen who doesn’t know anything about SYG, might not understand that TM would of been in the right. If you look through her eyes, she only sees TM a kid who doesn’t fight had to fight against a grown white man. Do you see how it might put her in a position of thinking that if she were to say something like that, her thought process might be, OH boy if I say that TM would be in the wrong. She doesn’t understand that the law was on his side as soon as GZ followed him.
A librarian from Miami-Dade County wrote to Lee, stating she knew Martin casually as a patron of the library where she worked.
“Trayvon came to my library and was a quiet kid who never presented a problem,” she wrote. “He was a nice, quiet kid who was decidedly not a trouble maker – a special quality in the rough and tumble environment of Miami-Dade County.”
The woman requests Lee to “do what is right because your integrity commands you to do nothing else.”
http://mysanfordherald.com/pages/full_story/push?article-Emails+to+former+chief+Lee+show+nation%E2%80%99s+reaction+to+Martin%E2%80%99s+death%20&id=20254857&instance=trayvon_martin
I doubt she doesnt understand self defense. Trayvon simply had no chance against Zimmerman. Deedee tried to tell Trayvon to keep running but he was too winded. Her story fits the timeline because There is about 2 minutes missing from Zimmerman’s claims and I believe Trayvon was running around and thought he lost him and Zimmerman was continuing his stalk and chase, as per seen by his attitude and mindstate.
Flight or fight, to think he did both and still lost his life.
There’s a part of Deedee’s testimony where she alleges she heard Trayvon said “get off get off”
I believe that is the only time Trayvon attempted some self defense but the kid had no chance
I think not, get off implies he is in a submissive position he can’t get out of.
Absolutely. Neither could GZ pass Trayvon while Trayvon was talking on his phone and not know where he was. Seeing that GZ’s NEN call demonstrates a distraction, changed tone of voice, and change of where to meet the cops at the time that Trayvon received the call, well, it speaks volumes!
Clearly, Bernie has a problem interacting with DeeDee. I didn’t like the way he conducted the interview at all. I think Prof.’s right. He needs to be more patient and do more listening. This is an example of why lawyers need to be able to listen and talk to more than other lawyers and judges.
Brown, I have a Texas speech story for you. I took my kid to a doctor in Dallas — we flew across the country to see him because of his specialty. He was Greek-American. So after the appointment we were chatting and he told us this story about the Texans and their accent. His wife was home and he had arranged for someone to come and test their back yard to see if they could put in an organic vegetable garden. So the guy calls his wife and tells her he wants to come and do some “soul testing.” She freaks and calls her husband at work and asks, “Honey, I know you’re into some new agey stuff down there, but did you send a guy to test my soul?” The doctor denied it. She gave him the guy’s name and number so he could find out who was trying to cheat or threaten his wife. When he called the number, the guy answered and said, “My boss tole me you needed us to run a soul test to see if you could put in a garden back there.”
“OH!” the doctor said, “soil?” “Yeah, soul,” the gardener replied.
That made me laugh loud. Soul soil HA!! Priceless!! I bet the gardener said “That dam ijit I said sole, can’t these yankees understand English!!!
It’s impossible to say “good eye might” without sounding Australian.
LMAO!
LOL! Don’t forget the “bald” shrimp! (Boiled , that is)
LMAO!!!
Well I’m leaving this post to the investigative team.. Will be back later… I’m very concern about the prosecution team…on this case. We need Wendy Murphy she is tough.
I think you are underestimating Bernie. I am sticking with him for time being. We haven’t really had the opportunity to see him at work – Corey had to have assigned him for a reason.
Great point! We will see and keeping my fingers crossed.
“He said the guy looked what?”
“Crazy. And creepy.”
Now I go back and remember what that co-worker said about George being a Jeckyl and Hyde character, when he worked “illegal house parties.” I think he probably has an aspect to him when he really looks different from his usual look, if he gets himself into a state of real “beside himself” anger. You could hear in his voice on the NEN call that he was “losing it” and especially when he mumbled “Fucking Punks” [or whatever] under his breath — you don’t do that on a call to the police, you try to stay very professional and informative. So I am thinking that by the time Trayvon got a close look at George, he was seeing “crazy” and “creepy” and he was justifiably freaked out.
I mean, what’s a guy supposed to look like when he’s about to kidnap you and take you off somewhere to kill? We’ve all seen it in the movies and on TV. They look concentrated, intense, wound up tight, etc., IOW “crazy and creepy.”
GZ sounds quite different during the NEN call before he killed TM compared to the recorded police interviews and the Hannity interview in July. He seems to have gone into the situation on 2-26 with a pre-existing problem or state of mind as you note, Malisha. He just sounds weird.
People who intend harm and believe that they have an advantage over you generally have a certain look about them. When his pics were taken in the police station, GZ did not look hurt, in pain. IMO, he appeared angry.
I am starting to think this is just some picture that the Zimmermans stole and claimed its theirs
Needless to say, it doesnt mean they arent racist
Jun,
That’s about as authentic as the mid century photo of a serrano worker on the Gildemeister sugar plantation (Casa Grande) passed off as “gz’s Afro-Peruvian slave great grandfather” a few months ago.
I thought this photo was debunked…. that someone came forward and said it wasn’t really the Zimmerman clan…
I dont know if it is but my guess it is a phony. Anyone can just find a photo and claim it is an ancestor and I believe it was an attempt to play the “I’m black too so I cant be racist” card
I have a source who actually has come up with a genuine picture of some of George’s ancestors. In the first picture, his great-great-great Uncle Chimu (who is Black, so George cannot be racist) is depicted sacrificing 42 children and 74 camelids to their main-man god, commonly known as “homie.” The children’s noses are all broken before they are buried alive in upright standing positions. Uncle Chimu was a well known High Priest in his sacred Peruvian culture, and he had literally thousands of alter boys. (In keeping with the tradition, George has a couple of alters himself but they only come out occasionally.)
😦
I will be honest and say I am surprised that Bernie showed up because when Corey announced the charge against Zimmerman, I was under the assumption that Corey would be prosecuting Zimmerman. Now am I correct that its gonna be a double team effort, kind of like the West & Omara fiasco? Is it Bernie alone or Corey and Bernie?
Good question… Where is Xena? She is good at answering questions like that. Maybe someone else can help? Anyone?
I am not Xena, but if the case is handled as it is here in Washington, Corey will not be participating. You have your elected County Prosecutor, or you State Attorney General. In each of those offices, you have deputy prosecutors and deputy attorneys general – these are attorneys hired to work under the County Prosecutor or the State Prosecutor – they are the ones that actually prosecute cases. Very seldom does the actual prosecutor or attorney general actually prosecute the case. In the State Attorney General’s office, the actual attorney general may do an argument now and then in front of SCOTUS just for the prestige, but even then, very seldom. It is the deputy prosecutors and deputy attorneys general that prosecute the cases. Bernie is the assigned deputy prosecutor to the GZ case – I don’t know who has been named 2nd chair since it has been somebody different each hearing. But another deputy prosecutor will most likely be assigned to attend the trial to assist Bernie as his “2nd chair.”
THANKS CherokeeNative.
: ^ ))))
Corey has tried some cases this year.
I think it would be good to have more than one person prosecuting, since Zimmerman has 3 people at his side. Like they say, 2 heads better than one. I hope Corey shows up to watch over and help because I hear she real good.
In ‘Law and Order’ terms Corey is Adam Schiff and BdlR is Jack McCoy.
I hope when they get to prepping her that’s what they do. But its imperative that BDLR be there also asking some questions at her. She has to get accustomed to a “white man asking questions” because if she is just comfortably with my imaginary attorney, she won’t be comfortable answering questions to O’mara.
And in no shape or form, I am suggesting a racist or bias view when I say White man.
Brown
I agree with you, Brown. I was born and raised in New Jersey and then when I went to college in Michigan I had a strange experience. Some people would be talking and I couldn’t get what they were saying. Whites (with the Midwest phrases I had never heard), Blacks (using a slower/faster cadence that I hadn’t adjusted to), some Indians (very good English but clipped syllables that seemed to all bear the same accents on higher or lower notes!) etc. I kept asking, “What? What? What?” and finally I felt really stupid. One guy sat down by me at the Student Union and introduced himself and then said what sounded like, “You look like you’re a najindoll.” After the second rendition I thought he had called me an “Asian Doll” but we did not use the word “Asian” in those days; we said “oriental.” On the fourth or fifth round I figured out that it was a compliment, “You aren’t aging at all.” I laughed and he said, “Damn, girl, talkin’ to you’s a day’s work!” [It hasn’t gotten any better all these 50 more years, either. It’s still a day’s work talking to me but that’s because I talk too MUCH.]
Exactly Malisha!! You understand what I am talking about. I recently had moved to Texas and for the life of me I couldn’t understand what they were saying. Sometimes the drawl was so long, I couldn’t figure it out. Or they use different words. This is funny. For example went to the store bought a few things, clerk asked do you want a sack? A sack? I thought to myself why would I want a sack, a sack to me is something you put 50lbs of potatoes. And initally I thought Ok I’m in Texas maybe this is something they ask you regardless of what you buy, you might be interested in a sack of potatoes. Of course I declined. But I kept asking myself what the hell? Next time go to store, behind a lady she tells the clerk can you put that in a sack, clerk puts items in a plastic bag. I had a freaking Eureka moment and your an idiot moment at the same time.
Brown, I’ve got family in TX. My brothers moved there as young adults. After they’d been there awhile I didn’t understand them at all. They seemed to have mush in the their mouths. One has since moved back up north and lost most of that TX accent. The other? I still don’t understand most of what he says. But he’s from TX so I guess it doesn’t matter much. (I don’t care much for TX, or southern NM either.)
Not my cup of tea, Texas that is. But it is what it is. Lived here for a couple of years and still can’t get over that fact that I can walk out the door sit on the porch and have someone riding their horse like its the 1800’s. It just amazes me, and I live in a residential neighborhood! The Texans here are proud of their state and their heritage, I don’t begrudge them for that. It’s their way I am the one who has to adjust to their ways, just a little ; ^ )))
LOL! I live in Texas. Houston is metropolitan enough that you don’t hear the more rural Texas drawl. What is annoying though is, accent of no accent, they have a very “southern” view of race. Joe Horn got away with murdering 2 men by shooting them IN THE BACK and yet was acquited in an SYG hearing, because the men he shot were illegal immigrants. Yep in Texas you can shoot and kill illegal immigrants and claim self defense. It’s sickening but GZ has plenty of supporters in Houston.
Malisha & Brown….Wow…(which stands for just plain…wow)…lol. I’m originally from Michigan and now living in Texas too, hoping to move back to the “land of real seasons” within the next year.
Brown, I know exactly what you are saying. Everybody here in Texas tells me that I have an accent…….huh??? They say that it’s obvious that I’m from the north-central US (or something to that effect)…….ok.. BTW….I learned that the road that runs along a freeway is NOT a “service drive” (as it is in MI), but it’s called an “access road” here in TX….. “Pop” (MI) is “soda” (TX). And so on…..lol
EXACTLY!!! they know automatically that I have what they call a NY accent whatever that means. The funny thing is that they are right!!
You are so dead on when you speak of the roads soda etc!!!!
OMG yes the world of seasons. It’s ridiculous to have 9 months of the year of warm warmer hot hotter hottest, then back down with a couple of weeks of some cold.
Dang! I didn’t know I have so many Texas neighbors on the professors website! I’m originally from Maryland and have NOT adopted a Texas twang. I don’t “fix” to do anything. But I do like “y’all”. Where are y’all hiding? I’d like to not feel so alone in this pro-Z landscape.
Fort Worth!!
Thats true. Everywhere and everyone has their own certain speech patterns and catchphrases.
I was born and raised on the Canadian Prairies and moved to British Columbia as an adult. Seattle, Washington is directly across the border and it is not a long drive to get there. A group of us hopped into the car to shop in Seattle for something different. I bought a Record Album and paid the clerk. He gave me my change and I said Thank you. He said – Oh, you’re Canadian. Couldn’t believe it. I said how would you know – because I said thank you. No he said – your accent gave you away. One phrase – two words. Yet, it is all considered English.
San Antonio. Some people become depressed when they move to an area where it’s rainy and bleak much of the time. OMG…I pray for bleak weather…tooooo much sun…..hot, hot sun here. I’ve never liked hot weather even as a kid. All my life I’ve actually felt more energized when the barometric pressure goes down. I’ve been in TX for 23 years and that’s why I absolutely long for a “grey winter sky”. 🙂
A Poem I wrote just for Grey Winter Sky regarding Autumn:
I do not want to see the leaves go green then brown.
I wish to see the other colors, that are so bright and bold against the ground.
How I long for those leaves to blow against my face.
To plunge in a stack and feel them around my waist.
To stare at a Grey Winter sky looming, hoping that Autumn takes it rightful place.
After moving to Texas, I discovered I have SAD (seasonal affective disorder) but the lesser known version of being made terribly sick and depressed from too much summer. Too much light, too much glare, too much heat. I also take joy in grey winter skies.
excuse all typos please doing more then three things at once !!
[Mod Note: Commenter banned for Racist Statements. Comment deleted for racist remarks]
[Mod Note: Commenter banned for Racist Statements. Comment deleted for racist remarks]
@Lexie K.
Before I retired from my job at the courthouse, there were teens and people in their 20’s (all White, btw) who wrote their pleadings like text messages, (most were for orders of protection). Some judges sent them to the Legal Self-Help Center for me to help them “Englishsize” their pleadings.
One thing I learned from them is that their verbal communications with adults is very limited.
If I’m not mistaken, Miami is a very diverse city where even those whose speak Spanish have varying dialects.
Several times I’ve heard Judge Judy correct litigants who say they “borrowed” money to another person.
Then we have Brad Pitt who cracked me up in the movie “Inglorious Basterds” speaking Italian with an southern American accent.
There are certain situations where we have to work at communicating with those who do so differently.
“I just can’t shake the feeling that she has a communication disability……in which case the WRONG person was interviewing her!!!”
I got the same idea and it must have been frustrating to both parties to try to understand each other. Maybe she was afraid of the white guy with power and maybe he was not capable of understanding her dialect or her fear.
Im not trying to offened or generalize the male species but What I have learned over time is that a lot of men don’t listen to women lots more don’t listen to children. Some Men see things as black and white yes or no and its not like that it’s a lot of gray in this big world and if they listen closely they will finally understand us we are not that hard to understand. I always tell my husband to stop talking for a minute and listen to what our son is trying to tell him. He tends to look over at me to explain what our son is trying to express to him he just don’t have the patience to decifer what our son is sayin. I find this is the problem with SP he don’t have the patience to listen carefully to this young women.
I dont doubt your assertion. Most guys just dont deal with emotions and feelings as well as women do. But I dont feel the ASP was not being empathetic, but perhaps he just not as good as dealing with insight on feelings and such
That thought had crossed my mind, but what took over that thought is she is Black. I can not find how to put this, but I will try. I think it was sometime ago everyone was discussing dog whistles. Code words. He has to use words she will understand. He has to come to her level not the other way around if that makes any sense to you. Its just like if we took the time to understand the new hip word that teenagers are using we can understand what they are talking about. Same goes for internet typing, teenagers can have whole conversations with just 3 or four letters. It took me a minute just to understand what “brb” stood for. ; ^ ) But I agree to some degree that some men do have listening disabilities.
You would think a prosecuting attorney interviewing witnesses would not have a “listening disability.” It would have been better to have a person who could relate to a 16-year-old girl and understand her speech patterns. I wonder who made the decision that BDLR should be the interviewer.
IMO, I would of gotten a young or an older black woman attorney sitting right beside BDLR while he conducted the interview. I would also had the female attorney ask more of the personal questions. A tag team if you will. I think DeeDee’s perpective might of been like this: A: There is another person here who looks like me and my family. B: She’s female so she should know about boys and things. C: The woman also wears a suit just like the man does, so she must have some kind of authority like BDLR. JMO though….
Valid point!
thanks : ^ ))))
I havent listened to that many Law Enforcement interviews but I dont feel he did as badly as some yall say. Me personally, I would have dug deeper and asked more questions but I think what she answered was sufficient testimony.
I don’t think he did that bad. He could of used his inside voice though…; ^ )
BRB! I couldn’t get “lol” even when I was doing it.
Then there was FOTFLMAO, I was gone.
I saw IIRC, IMHO, … until I just CUATIWLA! And I have never even BEEN to Mexico and wouldn’t worship an idol if you paid me!
HAHA it took me a minute on IANAL!!!
At first I thought..ANAL what the hell does your ass have to do with it? Then I thought oh no that’s wrong.. went back check… oh i get it short for I am not a lawyer!!!!
Damn. I just don’t know what you’all are saying. I don’t text but I do the iming thing on fb with my niece and nephews. I’m constantly asking them to spell it out. lol – laughing out loud or lots of love. iirc – almost had to ask about that one but finally figures it out. rofl, roflmao, I got those. imo, imho. ok. but IANAL? FOTFLMAO? CUATIWLA? yep, that last one’s definately a Mexican idol of some sort. Maybe the FOTFLMAO is too. Anyone what to provide a translation? I’m working on being bilingual.
this helps me….
http://www.netlingo.com/dictionary/all.php
I’ve spent considerable time listening to and analyzing DeeDee’s statements from her interview with Bernie De La Rionda. When called, it’s my opinion she will walk to the witness stand with a strength of purpose and tell a story effectively destroying George Zimmerman’s lies.
Consider the following statements. I’ve noted the mark run times as they occur in her interview.
[5:37] “It started raining”
[5:40] “He went into the mail thing”
[5:57] “The phone hung up and I called him back again”
[6:19] “A couple minutes later he told me this man was watching him”
[6:35] BDLR: “What did he say about the man that was watching him?”
[6:36] “He was on the phone”
[6:46] “He said the man was watching him so T started walking”
Oddly enough, Zimmerman’s own statements to Serino and Singleton support the distinct possibility of Trayvon being under the mail kiosk during this timeframe as well.
Watch the first part of this video and you will clearly hear Zimmerman saying he was parked at the clubhouse, 150 feet away from the kiosk s/w entry, when “He’s COMING to check me out” is heard at [1:15] into the NEN call or 7:10:49 pm.
Any way you look at it, George Zimmerman says Trayvon was walking TOWARDS his vehicle, from an unknown distance, IN EXCESS of 150’ away from the kiosk, one minute and 11 seconds before DeeDee tells us “The phone hung up and I called him back” while he was under the mail kiosk.
T Mobile confirms her incoming call at 7:12 pm.
If DeeDee’s testimony convinces the jury Trayvon was under the mail kiosk at 7:12 pm, Zimmerman needs to pack a toothbrush because he’s going away for a very long time.
Why?
From the NEN call, in both run and clock time:
[1m58s] [7:11:32 pm] Zimmerman: Shit, he’s running.
[2m08s] [7:11:42 pm] SPD-NE: He’s running? Which way is he running?
[2m10s] [7:11:44 pm] [Sound of vehicle door chime]
[2m10s] [7:11:44 pm] Zimmerman: Down towards the, ah, other entrance to the neighborhood.
[2m14s] [7:11:48 pm] [Sound of car door closing]
[2m14s] [7:11:48 pm] SPD-NE: OK. Which entrance is that that he’s heading towards.
[2m17s] [7:11:51 pm] Zimmerman: The back entrance.
Note the clock times for what we’ve all heard from the NEN call. It’s kinda hard for Trayvon to be running from the “T” if he’s 400 feet away in the mail kiosk.
Great post LLMPapa. You make it very easy to follow you train of thought as it pertains to the evidence. Thank you very much for your video and your comment regarding DeeDee.
: ^ )
BlushedBrown
Now you know why we e-love the papa
🙂
e-love, i like that never seen that before
Just beautiful! A fool couldn’t error..
Oh God papa…are you saying what I think you are saying? this was a scripted and planned set up?
GZ is quite the fabulist. Thanks for all your hard work, LLMPapa. I look forward to more of your commentary.
I’m in awe of who you obviously are, and the statements you’re making with your videos and comments. Wow.
I also think Omara’s political motivation claims are stupid as hell…
The fact of the matter is, Zimmerman did kill a kid. On a NEN phone call he was heard disparaging the kid, claiming he was suspicious and a criminal with no proof to back it up, calls him an asshole who always gets away, a effin coon/punk (its hard to tell), then says “sh… he’s running” and proceeds to chase the kid with a loaded gun. I am not a legal expert but that sounds like a pretty reasonable suspicion and probable cause to investigate and arrest the killer since a good part of “MURDER” is the killing of another human being, and it even says on the SYG that the police are allowed to investigate and arrest on probable cause.
Omara’s an idiot and needs to stop listening to the Conservative Treefort or whatever the hell they are called, as well as listening to Robert Zimmerman Jr, because they are idiots and their conspiracy theories make no damn sense…
So if someone kills someone, and it is investigated and charged, it is a political motivation, not the fact someone was KILLED?
Cops talk all the time about cases as they investigate to decide where the evidence is leading them and their opinions… thats pretty normal for them to feel maybe they shouldnt charge or maybe they should…
I am sure the Judge can see through this propaganda theatric
Not sure if this showed up.
I think people are overanalyzing.
This sounds like someone trying to figure out what they know and trying to figure out how to answer the question.
I think people are overanalyzing at this point.
They are assuming for Zimmerman, Dee and others a kind of Machivallian/Shakespearian like drama were all players are acting and talking with clear deliberation for what they are doing.
I had to re-read the above exchange a couple of times to even get why anyone would see “she’s offering to perjure herself” argument.
The best I could get from the exchange was confusion and trying to figure it out in the process of talking.
I agree with you. I dont feel it sounded anything like that. It just sounded like they were trying to communicate and understand each other.
ITA 100%
Thank you
I feel the same way. I could not see the where – she is offering to perjure herself and still don’t.
I agree. That is not offering to perjure herself. She said “You could say that” meaning it as a way to say what was happening, that danger was impending. I think people are making more of it than necessary. Then she explains that Zimmerman was looking all crazy to Trayvon.
Again, to clarify my stance… if DeeDee had answered and just said “yes, he did say he hit him” without interruption (regardless of us comprehending the connection between what she heard and what she felt from the totality of the circumstances), she would have lied if she then said “well, yeah you can say that”. The interviewer was smart in my opinion because he wanted to ensure she could not be perjured later for this key statement and testimony (i.e. the case rests a lot on her recounting of events). I think it was good that his style (what some think was hasty and bad) made her think twice before being locked into a statement that she may have had to change… yes, she may have been connecting what she heard to what she felt, but if not interrupted (which I think was smart), Omara and Zimmerman would have a field day with calling her testimony unreliable. Now (because of his interruption), they can not. Smart move on BLDR.
Wow, I hope you’re right.
I saw the interview as being disorienting and bossy, but I am eager to be wrong.
And I hope I’m right too Malisha… maybe, I’m being wishful (and maintaining hope that BLDR and Corey can pull this off).. but I think he prevented her from a later claim of being called unreliable by Omara later.. and his demeanor ensured she got the point to think twice without him voicing it with words per say. 😀
In Regards to DeeDee:
First and foremost I want to say that I truly appreciate Whonoze’s input on audio and other related matters at the case in hand. INAL and some people who post here have a lot of letters after their name and some who don’t. (I would be in those who do not). Everyone’s input is as valuable as the next. I take issue with a statement to Dee Dee’s intelligence “she is not the brightest bulb in the chandelier”. She is sixteen years old. Just because a person, a young person at that who has not master the English language to your standards, should not be called dumb. Just because she can not articulate as well as you does not make her substandard. Just because she did not lay out what happen in a clear concise manner that you and all of us are looking for does not make her any less credible. I bet that if she would put in a room full of her girlfriends, or for that matter her own parents, they would be able to understand word for word what she was trying to convey. But we can’t have her girlfriends or family do that, it has to come from her own mouth. I have had conversations with family that the next person to us wouldn’t understand at all. Most of us can do it. We have a separate language for work, play, family. Which brings me to GZ. He can talk “Street Talk” refer to myspace page, and carry on a complete different language approach on camera. Yes sir no sir, use three syllable words.
Back to DeeDee, the world must be on this young girl shoulders. How are we to say that DeeDee should of said it this way or that? She only knows what she knows. I don’t care if DeeDee has gotten a D in English. I don’t care if her speaking abilities are limited. I don’t care if she becomes the next president of the United States of America. I don’t care if she works at McDonald’s.
What I do care about are the following:
Is she safe? Yes Her parents have done an outstanding job on protecting her.
Was she on the phone with Trayvon Benjamin Martin? Yes
Does it establish a timeline? Yes
Does she know the character of TBM? Yes, knew him since kindergarten
Did she know someone was following him? Yes
Did she know TBM was scared? Yes
Did she hear TBM say this guy is getting close and TBM said “Why are you following me”? Yes
Did she hear a older man respond with a confrontational question “What are you doing around here?” Yes
Did you hear what sounding like a push or shove? Yes
Did you hear anything else? Yes, get off
Did you try calling back or texting? Yes
These are the only questions that she can answer to, and note that if a prosecutor / defense ask those questions, just as I posed them they are only Yes or No answers. She need not to elaborate or use more then several words to answer. I truly believe that if a person sticks to the truth no matter their educational background or lack of social skills, or speaking skills that there is no way that they will defeat her on the stand.
So in closing Whonoze, please do check yourself when you refer to DeeDee’s brain. She is not you or I or anyone for that matter. She’s just a kid just like Trayvon Benjamin Martin.
PS I have not read comments while I was writing so if I repeated myself along with others I apoligize in advance.
PSS Whonoze keep up the excellent work and keep fighting the good fight.
Brown
Brown, Isn’t that called leading the witness?
If I remember my lessons here from the Professor, leading questions can be asked when they are directed to a child, minor. Leading questions may often be answerable with a yes or no. Leading questions may be necessary to develop the witness’ testimony.
The Professor or someone else may correct me if I don’t have it right.
: ^ )
You’re right, but that rule generally applies to much younger children.
thank you and noted.
*slow clap*
thank you…….
BlushedBrown
@brown I agree with you in reference to certain comments about DD’s intelligence.
she’s 16 years old. When i was a teen i thought i was a valley girl!..
Like, Oh my God… gross me out to the max!, like…that’s like totally awesome!, like oh my god…etc..i can’t remember the rest because i’m half asleep!
HA! Gag me with a spoon! For Realll
Don’t have a cow. Duh
Totally Tubular!
LOL
How about, “shuuuut-uuuuuhup!”
hehehe
yeah, those examples are totally bitchin!
ahh the good ol days……LOL
Ah Yes the good ole days……
Thank you, Professor. I will have to come back and dissect. I really, really need people to understand that DeeDee is a child still and this is reality not TV. It is almost as if people are pissed at her for not being the smoking gun earwitness! Believe me, DeeDee keeps the ZimCamp up at night.
The Zim camp do not understand that Zimmerman’s own statements, the smoking gun, the victim’s body, actually put him away. Deedee is icing on the cake.
No…they think if ONLY they can get people to believe GZ is not a racist, i.e. that he is Hispanic the charges will be dropped. Lalaland!
I meant “come back to hurt” not “her
I think he interrupted her because he was fearful that she might perjure herself and knowing this is the deposition or interview to be broadcasted to the world (i.e. we are debating it now), he wanted to be sure she understood to not lie/exaggerate her statement in fear it would come back to her the prosecution later (especially in that her testimony is key to the moments leading up to the altercation). In my opinion, he was smart, not hasty, in ensuring she understood to think carefully and not make a statement that she would later contradict. I think we are underestimating his strategy here.
I listened to it again last night, and I disagree. Omara may try to play it up but “you could say that” just means “you could say that”. I think what she means is that he is on the right track and you could say that but not exactly. I think what she is trying to say is that there is danger impending or something along those lines because of the crazy creepy guy who turns out to be Zimmerman.
following
Cielo, I think O’Mara is hoping that if he shows that DeeDee is a liar, his client will look less like a liar himself. Furthermore, O’Mara would like the DeeDee conversation to be imagined by the jurors as:
“Then Trayvon say to me, this creepy white guy here lookin at me crazy. I’ll show him; I’m gonna kill him, see how he likes THAT!” Then, since DeeDee allegedly knows how many people Trayvon has already offed down in Miami Gardens where thugs live, he will imply to the jury that she’s hiding her intimate knowledge of Trayvon’s dark side, and all the helpless victims of his uncontrollable criminal conduct.
That’s just not gonna fly. Neither DeeDee nor Sybrina Fulton nor Tracy Martin nor any of the other people Trayvon knew and who knew Trayvon can be made out to be liars because they are not liars. The liar is clearly and obviously George and O’Mara won’t be able to get around that.
Thank you. Today I was pondering the importance of Dee Dee’s testimony. Her words along with the forensic evidence are the crucial linchpins for a guilty verdict. Anything GZ said actually becomes irrelevant. I don’t see what MOM could do to alter anything that Dee Dee said.
Professor, here’s how I see the exchange, and after that, I’ll give what I think the exchange meant. I will put what the two parties were saying in plain type, and I will put what I believe they were THINKING into wiggly brackets like this: {he’s thinking} {she’s thinking}
=============================
DeeDee: [very quietly] Yeah. You could say that. {He said he was gonna hit him…when was he gonna hit him? Uh…maybe…I dunno when he was gonna hit him…uh}
SA d l R: I don’t want you to guess. Did he ever say that?
DeeDee: {He said ‘that’? He didn’t say, ‘He’s gonna hit me right before…” Did he say it right before? um…}
DeeDee: [after long pause, still quietly] How he said it, he just…
SA d l R: [interrupting] No, no.
DeeDee: {no no? Uh…I said wrong!}
SA d l R: Do you understand?
DeeDee: {I understand did he say he’s gonna hit me? I didn’t say wrong I said…Huh?}
SA d l R: Did he say that or not?
DeeDee: {Did he say what or not? He said…he said…he…um…}
SA d l R: If he didn’t, that’s alright…
DeeDee: {If he didn’t…say what? … WTF? Naw, I gotto go back and say what he said, he said…}
DeeDee: The man, he got problems. Like he crazy.
SA d l R: Trayvon told you that?
DeeDee: Yeah the man lookin crazy. Looking at him crazy.
SA d l R: When did Trayvon tell you that?
DeeDee: {WHEN? Before he was killed, uh…he said…gimme a minute to get this in order in my mind, man, he…let’s see} …He was walkin, before he say he was gonna run….
SA d l R: He said the guy looks what?
DeeDee: {Oh, fill in the blank test, I know how to do that! OK then} Crazy. And creepy.
====================
OK here’s my own explanation, as a woman who DOES know how to talk to teen-agers, and who has actually made fast friends out of teen-agers who started off quite suspicious and hostile.
DeeDee is being pinned down and having questions shot at her like buckshot. She is not relaxed, and she is not used to this kind of interrogation. The interviewer, meanwhile, is one of the worst I have seen, and I have seen approximately 100 videotapes of interviews done by authority figures to abused children, ages 4 to 16, and they are generally rather atrocious but this one takes the cake except for two others I have seen that were worse yet.
One of the “worse yet” category came from a child abuse investigator from the Office of Janet Reno when she was the prosecutor in Miami. This disgraceful example of how not to ask a kid anything designed to get an illuminating answer showed a four-year-old kid doing a puzzle in a playroom and in walks the interviewer. She says his name, gives him her name, and sits down right beside him. She does not ask him a single question about what he is doing, or about the puzzle, or anything normal. She launches into 28 (count’em twenty-eight) questions about what he said his father did to him that he didn’t like and didn’t want to happen again. He not only did not choose to answer a single one of her questions, but he tried to interrupt twice to show her something about the puzzle and she overrode him and charged ahead like a bull in a china cabinet. She kept saying to him, “[name omitted], I asked you a question!” He wouldn’t look at her. She didn’t make eye contact with him once. He couldn’t finish the puzzle because he kept taking one piece out and putting it back in again.
After he turned 18 and got out of his home, and got to where he felt safe, he was going into the library one day and there he saw Janet Reno, who had already become Attorney General and then retired. He went up to her and said, “Are you Janet Reno?” She said she was. “You ruined my life!” he declared.
The other interview that was worse than the DeeDee one was an interview where a 6’3″ 280 pound man walked into the interview room where the six year old girl had been sitting for three minutes on a chair with nothing in the room but two chairs, not even a table between them. The guy looms into the room and the little girl shifts in her chair and tucks in her dress under her, looking up at him apprehensively. He booms out, “Are you [name omitted]?” She nods. He says, “I hear you said some pretty bad things about your father, is that true?” She shakes her head, “no” and then looks down. He sits on the chair opposite her, which is a child’s chair the same size as the one she’s in, so his knees come WAY UP and he appears both hulking and ridiculous. He says, “You DIDN’T?” She shakes her head “no” again. He says, “So your daddy didn’t do anything bad?” She shakes her head “no” again. “OK,” he says, “I’m gonna believe you, OK?” She shakes her head “no” again and he leaves.
But back to DeeDee. She should have never been interviewed in a guided interview. First, she should have been interviewed by a person who could really understand her speech pattern and her verbal skills, probably after taking some standardized test such as the “VIP” or Validity Indicator Profile. It is not too late for this, of course. But if I were interviewing her, I would have begun like this:
We’re just trying to find out as much as we possibly can about what you and Trayvon said on the phone that night. Tell me in your own words as much as you can remember.” I’d let her talk as long as she wanted without a single interruption. In between sentences or phrases I’d say, “OK” and “mmm-hmmm” ONLY.
Then I would have clarified that I appreciated all her impressions but for the SECOND run-through, I wanted to concentrate on only what HE actually SAID and not on what she also was thinking while the conversation went on. I’d say, “so you go ahead and tell me every single thing you can remember that he actually said, and the words he actually used, and I’ll write down the words he used, and we’ll go back and talk about them some more.”
Then I’d let her go on and on and in between her sentences, I would simply repeat the last two or three words I had heard her say, but put a question mark sound after them. So if she said, “He say he was gonna hit him,” I’d wait for her voice to pause and then I’d say, “he was gonna hit him?” and we’d go on. I would never question her about what she said, simply repeat short phrases back.
Only THEN would I ask specific questions about what was said, the order it was said in, and so forth. This could take hours and hours. I’d make sure she didn’t get frustrated with me, by asking her periodically how she felt, if she was tired, if there was anything she wanted to ask me. I would NEVER try to cut her off or dominate her.
Poor kid!
Oh I forgot to say what I thought the interview meant.
I think it meant DeeDee heard Trayvon say he was being followed by a creepy lookin guy who was looking at him crazy. Trayvon walked and at one point ran and at one point eluded him but then “here he is again” and Trayvon was trapped. When Trayvon said “he’s gonna hit me” George was still in the car. When he later said “here he is again” George was OUT of the car. When Trayvon said, “why you following me for?” he probably really said, “Why are you following me?” or even “How come you’re following me?” but memory put it into DeeDee’s speech pattern rather than (I’m guessing) Trayvon’s.
“You could say that” is simply a teen telling an authority figure that she defers to HIS WAY of expressing things, rather than insisting upon her own. She’s used to that. Furthermore, “you could say that” is common speech for AGREEMENT with the questioner.
“Are you out of class without permission?”
“You could say that.”
malisha – thanks for sharing your experience. although my social work was with battered women and not abused children, the similarities are striking. what you are describing is exactly how i was trained to perform an intake evaluation – to get the person to say as much as they can, in their own words while paying close attention to their comfort level and not over doing it.
we would usually make a decision on that interview whether or not to offer shelter after asking some basic lifestyle questions regarding drugs and alcohol (both forbidden in the shelter). we would usually go over the initial eval the next day making any clarifications necessary and from that point, we could assist the client in preparing the paperwork for restraining order, which had to be in the client’s own words.
the important thing though was getting as much of the story written as close to the events as possible. it was through that process that our psych counselors could best help and that we could offer the best help for emergency restraining orders. it also helped the folks down at the legal aid clinic.
it would have been super spiffy if BDLR could have remembered one simple fact: we are born with 2 ears, but only one mouth.
Malisha says: “The interviewer, meanwhile, is one of the worst I have seen, and I have seen approximately 100 videotapes of interviews done by authority figures to abused children…….. but this one takes the cake except for two others I have seen that were worse yet.”
I am not impressed with BLDR and actually afraid he is not competent from what I have seen so far.
Does anyone know if the prosecution has a Plan B or backup for BLDR or is this as good as it gets? Seems he could use some help.
Isnt Corey gonna be there? From my understanding, Bernie is just the assistant, Corey is the lead
[Mod Note: Commenter banned for Racist Statements. Comment deleted for racist remarks and false statements]
Where is Angela Corey? Will she have a more visible role during the trial? I’d feel much better about her being on the frontline than BDLR.
I’ve been asking this from the beginning. BDLR isn’t compelling to me. He appears weak and fidgety. I’m extremely concern. That’s why I really stop posting as before; I lose hope when I see him.
I believe she sat in on one hearing in court and was at the probable cause with a judge on a TV with GZ in shackles and prison uniform. Other then that I haven’t seen much of her. I do believe she has a presence about her. Maybe she will be second chair. IDK
Besides giving her stump speech! Lol
LOL!!
Stump speech indeed! I thought she was accepting a Grammy.
Me too. BDLR worries me a bit.
I had been thinking this exact same thing and after the last motion hearing I began to voice this concern. BDLR does not come across confident and ready for judicial battle, against team MOM… He often looks weak and intimidated. He apologetic and stutters… Nor should he come across arrogant, overbearing and pushy, but can we get some balance, please?
Prof~~I love seeing you in action as per your take on what you would do if in the defense’s shoes or the state’s. Bravo!
May God bless this child caught up in the whirl of unsought publicity, violence to her friend, and dominating adult strangers from all sides.
Thank you for your analysis. I did listen to the recorded interview, and came away with the impression that BDLR rushed her and interrupted her and actually prevented her from expressing her 16 year-old self. I could not put together from a legal perspective, just had the impression that BDLR might not be a strong prosecutor.
Following
Excellent post once again Prof. I have something to say about DeeDee regarding Whonoze’s post. I have to get my thoughts together first because it was one thing he wrote and it put a bee in my bonnet, so I want to be careful of what I write and how I write it.
I will leave this post to everyone else. Excellently written.. My concern since the beginning of this case was and still is can BDLR handle this case to success. Maybe the professor and clarify…. I’m concerned about the prosecution selection… I’m really concern if BDLR is tuff enough yet alone organized.
Professor normally there is a team of prosecutors coming out why is BDLR always alone? I will just follow for now…..
Excuse spelling on iPad now….really don’t know much about making spelling corrects….this button skips everywhere.
That makes perfect sense Professor.