Open Thread for Tuesday, January 1, 2013

I have a new post up:

Jury Nullification: The Best Kept Secret in American Law

Please use this open thread to post comments on other topics.

Thanks and Happy New Year!

Fred

324 Responses to Open Thread for Tuesday, January 1, 2013

  1. Something just came to my attention from a historian friend of mine. Does anyone know where Norm Wolfinger was stationed when he was injured in Vietnam? It is my understanding that he and Zim Sr. were both stationed in QuanLoi, Vietnam together at that time. Can someone verify this? If this is true, there is an entirely new conversation that needs to take place.

  2. I just banned Ava because she is a troll pretending to be a fair and impartial person in order to continually present the defendant’s worthless arguments for discussion.

    • Xena says:

      (sigh) The trolls eventually expose themselves.

    • tonydphotog says:

      True.

      I, also, wondered if Ava’s last name might be “Tar.”

      • Xena says:

        Okay tony. You got my attention. What is behind Ava Tar?

      • tonydphotog says:

        Nothing, really. I know that trolls use fake names, and I try to see if there’s somehow a connection with Fogen and company..Every time I saw Ava posting, I’d be hearing “avatar” in the back of my mind. That’s all.

        And right before Ava was banned, I was starting to think it might be Fogen. He/she sure mentioned the name George a lot!

        • Xena says:

          I’d be hearing “avatar” in the back of my mind. That’s all.

          Ahhh. Got it! I hadn’t connected the two.

          And right before Ava was banned, I was starting to think it might be Fogen. He/she sure mentioned the name George a lot!

          Here, out of respect for this blog, I refer to him as GZ most times. It’s consistent with how I began. I didn’t really pay attention to how “ava” referred to the defendant. It was her references to Yahoo comments that caught my attention and then her allegation that he has “millions” of supporters. What’s the population of prisons in Peru? LOL!!!

  3. ava says:

    @ xena…george said that he got the gun after martin told him he was going to die….but martin proceeded to bash his head one more time so he shot him……you tube George zimmerman # 1 statement

    • You all have thoughtful comments says:

      ava, gz can say all he wants to.

      We have pointed out above to you that the physical evidence, the forensics, the autopsy, and the witness statements do not support the gz’s claims that you have referred to on this page.
      .
      Would you kindly acknowledge now some of our answers and evidence presentations so that I can see that you have been able to grasp them.
      .

      • You all have thoughtful comments says:

        If you don’t acknowledge and restate our answers and evidence presentations, I really question your purpose for being here.

      • Xena says:

        @yahtc. You wrote to Ava;

        Would you kindly acknowledge now some of our answers and evidence presentations so that I can see that you have been able to grasp them.

        I’m beginning to feel the same way. I asked her what Yahoo article she was on. No answer.

        In the last month, the most recent Yahoo articles about GZ’s case is the press release about Lonnie’s petition that references this blog.(last comment, 5 days ago); the story about the security company’s lawsuit, (last comment, 13 hours ago); and the story of the court hearing denying GZ’s motion to modify terms of bail, (last comment, 4 days ago.)

        There are no debates — only demeaning of “Travonistas,” and thugification of Trayvon comments.

        If Ava is commenting on another article where she believes GZ has a million supporters, I would like to see it.

      • You all have thoughtful comments says:

        I just told ava down below from here that she has the effect on this site that a real troll would have.

        • Lonnie Starr says:

          I think she’s just not aware of how a trial works. The defense can’t simply respond to what the evidence will show. They will have to find a witness to put on the stand, who can say with some authority/credibility, what they want to show.

          If the defense wants to claim that GZ was in France at the time, they need to first find a witness who will make that assertion. Failing that, their intended claims will never get in front of any jury.

          So, any expert witness who looks at the discovery, isn’t going to take the stand and claim that Trayvon’s hands were being used to bash GZ’s head on the concrete! Because they know it’s impossible, given the evidence. The one witness who made the claim that GZ was being ground and pounded, has withdrawn that claim. Meaning that the defense now has no way to get ground and pound in front of the jury!

          Anyone they put on the stand to say it, will be impeached by the evidence to the contrary.

          Ava doesn’t seem to understand that concept. Which is why I asked her to tell us which witness will take the stand and make the claims she’s telling us have to be refuted.

      • Xena says:

        @yahtc.

        I just told ava down below from here that she has the effect on this site that a real troll would have.

        We are now, according to Ava, “You people.”

    • Xena says:

      @ xena…george said that he got the gun after martin told him he was going to die….but martin proceeded to bash his head one more time so he shot him……you tube George zimmerman # 1 statement

      GZ also said that he had moved his head to the grass, right?. He also said that Trayvon had one hand over his mouth, and his other hand over his nose, right? Trayvon would need two additional hands to bash GZ’s head then, wouldn’t he? Plus he would need yet another hand to feel up GZ’s chest going for the gun, right? GZ said that Trayvon moved one hand off his mouth and that he pinned it under his own arm, right? GZ said that when he shot Trayvon, that he had Trayvon’s arm pinned under his own arm, right?

      • You all have thoughtful comments says:

        Hey, Xena……didn’t you know that Trayvon had 4 hands?

      • Cercando Luce says:

        I figures it out, finally! Trayvon must have lifted Fogen’s head by the nose (like a bowling ball, you know, fingers in the nostrils and thumb in the mouth) and then dropped it on the sidewalk, I forget how many times, but then so does Fogen. I’m still trying to figure out how Fogen’s DNA stayed off Trayvon’s fingers, but maybe Fogen doesn’t have any DNA.. That’s the ticket.

        • Xena says:

          …but maybe Fogen doesn’t have any DNA.. That’s the ticket.

          LOL@Cercando. Careful. GZ might pick up that argument then blame having no DNA on Reverend Sharpton or the NBP.

    • ava says:

      This is to show how the defence will respond….you people are unbelievable…do I have to spell everything out….?

      • You all have thoughtful comments says:

        We already know how the defense operates, ava.
        You may not be a troll, but you have the effect of a troll.

      • You all have thoughtful comments says:

        I think I have been too patient with you.

      • Xena says:

        This is to show how the defence will respond….

        Respond to a hypothetical question that has no basis in fact? You might want to contact a psychic hotline.

        you people are unbelievable…/blockquote>

        “You people”???

      • Lonnie Starr says:

        What you are failing to realize is, every piece of evidence that either side presents to the jury, will have to have a witness take the stand and recite it.

        Both sides will lay out what they believe they can show happened, in their opening statements. But anything they say, they will need to put on a witness to speak the words, before they can show evidence that supports those words.

        The defense isn’t going to be able to just stand up and show a bunch of photos or anything else to the jury, unless and until they can put someone on the stand, whose testimony will give that evidence context.

        You said that “maybe the wounds didn’t bleed right away!” Okay, who is O’Mara going to put on the stand to say that the wounds didn’t bleed right away? If he can’t find anyone credible to say that, it won’t get before the jury. No expert witness is going to testify about such a wild speculation that they’ve never seen happen in their experience.

        The evidence, that the forensic people, will take the stand and testify to, will be to say show that Trayvon’s hands never touched GZ’s head. So, it won’t matter when GZ’s wounds bled! Because the defense will have no way to show that the wounds were caused by Trayvon.

        Go ahead, explain to us, who MOM is going to put on the witness stand, to say that TM’s hands touched GZ head?

        Name that witness first, because if you can’t name a witness who can credibly say that, then it will never be heard by the jury.

        Get it? That’s why we’re not discussing certain speculative alternatives, because there’s no one who will, or can testify to it!

      • sdunn5 says:

        No Ava but do please learn how to spell defense without the c.

  4. Ty Flair says:

    Will the SYG hearing be shown on tv,because i cant see O’Mara putting his client on the stand at the hearing. BDLR would tear him apart,an then use the same hearing on him at trail. All BDLR have to do is go back an play the SYG hearing to the jury,an point out more lies he done made up. O’mara have to much to risk,an i want be surprise if he is telling fogen they cant take that chance.

  5. ava says:

    Ava,
    You seem to be a capable poster who seems to have a great grasp of all of the evidence against gz.

    Let me see your confidence by a post by you that disputes the gz camp’s theories that are not supported by evidence.
    ———————————————————————

    the gz supporters keep saying that trayvon could have made it home….they say that the only reason he met up with gz again is because he wanted too….and his intentions were to teach gz a lesson….

    i respond by saying that gz lied when he stated that he saw Trayvon take a right at the T….because he continued looking for trayon after that….he had no idea what direction trayvon had gone….i believe trayvon ran in between the buildings to the left and then decided to walk back in after a minute a two the he encountered gz again…he had no idea that gz would have actually gotten out of his truck to follow him……

    and i also do not believe that gz took his eye off trayvon to look for his phone….he is lying about how that physical altercation started….why would anyone take their eye off a person who is walking towards them in the dark… a person who they described as suspicious looking, like they are on drugs, one would keep their eye on that individual while taking a few steps back

    also if trayvon saw gz reaching in his pocket he probably would have searched gz’s pocket to see if he had a weapon at the first chance that he got after mounting gz( as gz claimed)…..
    the statements that gz made and what took place don’t add up..but the zimmerman supporters believe gz words as fac

    • Eric says:

      I think that Martin ran behind the buildingslike GZ said. But, I think GZ ran down the sidewalk on the front of the building that Martin was behind. I think(hoping) that maybe someone on saw GZ running south on the sidewalk that night

    • Xena says:

      @Ava,
      The following is a video of excerpts from the Montanez trial. Montanez claimed SYG. I recommend this because once you become familiar with what is relevant in court, then you can laugh or just sigh at the Zidiots’ B.S. arguments that don’t mean a hill of beans as far as the law is concerned.

    • Lonnie Starr says:

      Do you really believe that an unarmed, untrained, and uncoordinated youth of 17, is going to try and confront and search a 204 lb adult who is angry and aggressive? What would make someone, who has never fought with anyone, believe that he had any chance whatsoever of overcoming or even matching the strength of a heavy and powerful looking adult male?

      Trayvon was not “combat ready” while GZ had been a bouncer in bars and had been in combat with strangers before! GZ had confidence in his abilities to match and overcome other adults, so he had little to fear from an unarmed child, because, even if he did, he had the ultimate ace in the hole, his weapon.

      He presented as a fearsome figure in a confident and angry pursuit of Trayvon. All Trayvon could do was fear him and try to escape.
      He lacks even the psychology of aggressiveness. So, he cannot be made into an effective aggressor in just a few moments in time. Things just don’t happen that way. It’s just not reasonable to think that they do.

  6. ava says:

    Someone just peeking in at this blog might think you are just using a literary technique to sneak in here as a person from the gz camp.
    .
    Those of us who have had discussions with you know that you think gz is liar and is incriminated by the evidence.
    ————————————————————–

    what you all need to realize is that the defense is going to present an argument ….this is what a trial is about…….so i am looking at all the areas where they may be able to use it to their advantage..

    .the zimmerman fans come up with the excuse that George started bleeding when he got off his back…this is why Trayvon’s had no trace of George’s DNA on his body….and yes george stated that there was blood in his eyes when he was on the ground on his back( as he claimed)….they will probably argue that george probably felt drizzle on his face and thought it was blood…why can’t i look into this and not be viewed as a George supporter?

    as i’ve said before can’t they argue that he probably got the cuts at the back of his head towards the end of the fight…this is why the blood started pouring out when he got off his back…this is why there is no blood smear…..the defense team is going to give an argument as to why there is no blood smear wont they?

    • Xena says:

      the defense team is going to give an argument as to why there is no blood smear wont they?

      Why would the defense put that argument in the State’s lap?

      If you would like to be informed on how self-defense cases proceed in Florida, research a recent one — Trevor Dooley. He was convicted and is awaiting sentencing. You might also want to read up on John Orr. He was denied immunity and is awaiting trial. Another case is Jim Martin (Christy Martin’s husband), who was also convicted. Youtube has some videos on these cases.

      Now, chances are that the Zidiots will tell you that these cases are unlike GZ’s. That’s not the point. The point is to become familiar with legal procedure, what evidence is admitted, expert testimony.

      • ava says:

        ok at the risk of sounding stupid…..at the trial, when the prosecutions says that there should be blood smears on gz’s face and head but there is none and gives the reason why there should be blood smears…..how will the defense counteract that statement?

        • Xena says:

          ok at the risk of sounding stupid…..at the trial, when the prosecutions says that there should be blood smears on gz’s face and head but there is none and gives the reason why there should be blood smears…..how will the defense counteract that statement?

          Ava, you’re asking a question based on speculation of how the prosecution will proceed. It’s a false hypothesis. GZ has to prove that those boo-boo’s gave him reasonable fear of great bodily harm. His problem is that according to his own statement, he didn’t pull his gun because of the boo-boo’s. That in fact, according to him, he pulled his gun after moving himself in a position so he would no longer get boo-boo’s.

          The prosecution has forensic evidence. They will not argue speculation. They will argue based on evidence.

  7. colin black says:

    Dave says:

    January 1, 2013 at 6:36 pm

    Does Scottish law call for a unanimous verdict to convict or acquit? A simple majority? A 2/3 majority? It must be tough to convince all 15 jurors of anything.

    Reply

    Depends on the offence murder requires a unanimous jury
    Other offences judge prefers unanimous but may intruct the jury he or she will accempt a majority verdict.

    • Malisha says:

      I believe that ancient Hebrew law called for 17 judges, all sitting in such a way so that each could see into the eyes of each other judge, in any capital case. They had the death penalty but the conviction was not so easy — allegedly. Of course, this may all be apocryphal. But basically, if you’re taking away somebody’s freedom, I think it is essential to make it hard to do.

  8. ava says:

    @proffesor…my vocabulary is not very wide so when I say gz skin broke open I mean that his defense team will argue that George’s skin at the back of his head probably got bruised at the last two bashes….that is why there is no blood smudge……and the blood started pooring out when gz got off his back

    • You all have thoughtful comments says:

      Ava,
      You seem to be a capable poster who seems to have a great grasp of all of the evidence against gz.

      Let me see your confidence by a post by you that disputes the gz camp’s theories that are not supported by evidence.

      • You all have thoughtful comments says:

        Someone just peeking in at this blog might think you are just using a literary technique to sneak in here as a person from the gz camp.
        .
        Those of us who have had discussions with you know that you think gz is liar and is incriminated by the evidence.

      • You all have thoughtful comments says:

        The reason I stated this above is because some posters on Newsvine pretended to be open-minded and not for or against gz. Yet, they never acknowledged any evidence against gz.
        They only challenged Trayvon supporters. It was obvious to all that they were gz supporters. Gradually, these people lost their cool and revealed themselves, in fact, to be gz supporters.

    • Rachael says:

      I’m trying to understand what you are saying ava. When you say:

      “so when I say gz skin broke open I mean that his defense team will argue that George’s skin at the back of his head probably got bruised at the last two bashes….”

      Are you saying that they (the defense) will say that the 2 little abrasions on GZ’s head are from Trayvon bashing it into the sidewalk (even though that is a very odd place for one’s head to meet the sidewalk)? That is what I understand you to be saying.

      However, when you say:

      “that is why there is no blood smudge……and the blood started pooring out when gz got off his back”

      I have no clue what you are trying to say.

      • leander22 says:

        Rachael, to me it sounds somehow like that:

        I understand some of your arguments, but since I believe Fogen is innocent, could this be a way that defense tries to explain it?

        I find it touching how thoughtful tries to explain the rules about Trayvon support above. Really movingly considerate. 😉

    • Lonnie Starr says:

      Doesn’t wash even then, because the blood would be wet and liquid as it then gets dragged over wet grass. It has to smear and badly.

      I see that it’s posted that the exif data says the picture was taken at 7:19 or 2 minutes after the police arrive. The crime scene log doesn’t allow that any picture of GZ’s head was taken by anyone entering the crime scene, which is why we postulate that the picture had to be taken before the officer arrived. Exif data is easily manipulated, Faststone picture viewer is one such program that allows one to alter exif data, change time and date stamps etc., there are plenty more. So that’s a no brainer. Without a chain of custody, this picture probably won’t make it in.

      • leander22 says:

        7:19 or 2 minutes after the police arrive.

        Lonnie, the closest I can get to police on the crime scene–time wise– is via the “white t-shirt on top” witness, who reports seeing Fogen at gunpoint. Entered on the log at 7:19:43, detract 30 seconds or ask Malisha how long it would take to enter: 1 AT GUN POINT. Smith on scene ARV (arrival) in the call logs seems to allude to his arrival in RTL not on the concrete crime scene.

        Anyway I suppose that the photo was indeed taken before any officer was on the scene. Shortly before.

        see 7th supplementary discovery page 10.

        • Lonnie Starr says:

          Someone posted the exif data from the back of the head photo? That has the photo being taken at 719 or two minutes after the police arrive. Obviously, then, it’s being taken while GZ is at gunpoint? Exif data is easily altered. There are plenty of programs offered on the internet, to do exactly that.

          I was inclined to believe as others do, that the photo was taken before ofc Smith arrived. He made no mention of anyone taking a photo while he had GZ in custody and standing at the scene. Anyone know where the original is posted so I can copy the exif data myself?

    • Well, that argument, like so many other treehouse arguments you have mentioned, is a contrived and inept excuse that is contradicted by the defendant’s own statements or by the physical evidence and the forensics. Those kinds of excuses only make matters worse for this defendant.

      Think about it for a minute. How in the world is the ridiculous excuse you mentioned consistent with the defendant having the back of his head slammed against a cement sidewalk a dozen or more times until he thought his head was going to explode?

      Why do you obsess over such obvious nonsense?

      More important, why do you ask so many stupid questions?

      Use your brain and answer them yourself.

      BTW, there is nothing wrong with your vocabulary. You meant what you said and I do not accept your excuse.

      What is your agenda here?

  9. You all have thoughtful comments says:

    ava,
    Here is my idea of what might help me to understand with clarity what you are trying to say as you advocate for Trayvon:

    My suggestion is that you first present a piece of evidence against gz and then begin a sentence beginning with something like “This DISPROVES” some assertion made in the gz camp.

  10. SearchingMind says:

    Whenever there is a (tiny) cut anywhere on the head/face, it instantly begins to bleed (I am not asking you to experiment on this). Given that Fogen claimed that as soon as Trayvon hit him his nose was broken; that his eyes were covered in blood; that he as such could not see; that Trayvon grabbed his head and bashed it more than a dozen times against the concrete sidewalk that he thought that his head was going to explode as a result; that Trayvon hit him on the face and head at least more than a dozen times and that Trayvon pressed his both hands against his mouth and nose trying to suffocate him, et cetera, et cetera, one would expect Trayvon’s hands, fingernails and the cuffs of his sleeves to be saturated with Fogen’s blood, saliva and other body fluids.

    • Xena says:

      … one would expect Trayvon’s hands, fingernails and the cuffs of his sleeves to be saturated with Fogen’s blood, saliva and other body fluids.

      And blood splatter. Anytime there is running blood and punches or bashing, there should be blood splatter. Blood should have been all over GZ’s jacket, all over the sidewalk, all over the grass. If as he told Singleton that his jacket sleeves protected him from defensive wounds, then the sleeves should evidence blood splatter, but they do not.

  11. ava says:

    @yahtc
    I know …I asked my freind to lie on the bed and try to resist me a little while tried to lift his head up to slam it back down….my finger nails were digging into his skin…I had to stop because I would have scraped his skin with my fingernails….and I have short fingernails

    • You all have thoughtful comments says:

      ava, here is a link to gz’s statements during his stress test:

      Go to Time Stamp 37:12 – 37:32

      Listen to him tell how he had blood all in his eyes AS Martin “supposedly” beat him around the face and head!

      • You all have thoughtful comments says:

        Also, if you go to Time Stamp 41:53
        you will hear that “freudian” slip again (one hand over HIS nose) exactly the same as in the re-enactment!

      • You all have thoughtful comments says:

        At time stamp 34:06 gz says, “I still had my gun in my hand as I was holding his hands out.”

      • leander22 says:

        thoughtful, Interestingly he completely leaves out some of the events after the shot at the last passage. He has witness #6 –the only eye witness, as he is called now by defense–meet him while he is still supposedly struggling with dieing Trayvon.

        He has been observed by many including the “only true witness”. If I remember correctly, who states he Fogen was walking towards him.

        Why does he want to erase this part of the story? Because he only went back to the T-section to drop the little flashlight on the way?

  12. ava says:

    Regarding DNA…. If gz was hit in the nose just before he and trayvon both fell to the ground at what point would he start bleeding?
    And if he were on his back woudn’t the blood run back into his nostrils? I am sure that his defence team is going to use that argument as to why there was no blood of gz found on trayvon….they will argue that the blood started running down gz’s upper lip when he got up

    • ava says:

      And they could also argue that maybe gz’s skin broke open when he probably got bashed the last two times …so again that may be why the blood is not smudged at the back of his head

      • You all have thoughtful comments says:

        Hi ava.
        Remember, there was no gz DNA on Trayvon’s hands…..none from George’s saliva, skin cells, sweat, or blood.

      • You all have thoughtful comments says:

        Thus, Trayvon could not have been grabbing gz’s head to bash him into the concrete, neither could Trayvon have hit George, and neither could Trayvon have put his hands on George’s mouth and nose to have smothered George.

      • Xena says:

        Ava, litigation is not based on what could have happened. It will be based on GZ’s statements and evidence. Please, stop trying to develop answers to Zidiots’ arguments. They think they are mind readers and fortune tellers.

      • The defense cannot argue that the defendant’s skin “broke open” because it never did.

        The prosecution and the jury would immediately recognize that the defense was making an argument contrary to the evidence regarding an important matter and that usually dooms the defense to a guilty verdict.

    • Xena says:

      …they will argue that the blood started running down gz’s upper lip when he got up

      But GZ said that each time he lifted his head, Trayvon would bash it back down.

      Blood would not run back into his nostrils but into his throat. GZ said nothing about tasting blood.

      He did say that blood was in his eyes.

    • Xena says:

      If gz was hit in the nose just before he and trayvon both fell to the ground at what point would he start bleeding?

      The proper question at trial is, if GZ was hit in the nose just before he and Trayvon went to the ground, and the defense wants to use the photo as evidence that GZ being hit in the nose gave him reasonable fear of bodily harm, why didn’t GZ shoot Trayvon then?

      • Lonnie Starr says:

        Yes and GZ still hasn’t explained how he and Trayvon wound up ~40 feet south of the T. That’s going to puzzle the jury, since he claims everything, including the shooting happened at the T. Where he was caught by surprise, punched and knocked to the ground, and mounted, and ground and pounded, and he wiggled and drew and aimed and fired. Never once did he try to explain or identify himself, never gave any warning, never even tried to defend himself, but states he killed Trayvon, ~40 feet away from where his body was found and from where the witnesses saw him.

        He’s toast!

        • Xena says:

          Yes and GZ still hasn’t explained how he and Trayvon wound up ~40 feet south of the T. That’s going to puzzle the jury, since he claims everything, including the shooting happened at the T.

          Indeed. Combine that with “Can you have them call me and I’ll tell them where I’m at.”

    • SearchingMind says:

      Whenever there is a (tiny) cut anywhere on the head/face, it instantly begins to bleed (I am not asking you to experiment on this). Given that Fogen claimed that as soon as Trayvon hit him his nose was broken; that his eyes were covered in blood; that he as such could not see; that Trayvon grabbed his head and bashed it more than a dozen times against the concrete sidewalk that he thought that his head was going to explode as a result; that Trayvon hit him on the face and head at least more than a dozen times and that Trayvon pressed his both hands against his mouth and nose trying to suffocate him, et cetera, et cetera, one would expect Trayvon’s hands, fingernails and the cuffs of his sleeves to be saturated with Fogen’s blood, saliva and other body fluids.

    • The defense team is locked-in to the statements the defendant made and cannot make the argument you mention because it is contrary to what the defendant told the police and to the physical evidence.

      • Eric says:

        Could there be witneses under seal? For example, if GZ was seen running on the front side of the buildings, and someone saw him, could, or would that witness be under seal?

        • Lonnie Starr says:

          BDLR has intimated that they have a witness who saw the whole thing from start to finish. They haven’t said who, but if the defense has that in their discovery… I sincerely doubt they would reveal it. Or could it be a witness who has somehow been placed under court protection?

          • Xena says:

            BDLR has intimated that they have a witness who saw the whole thing from start to finish.

            A credible source reported that a witness saw GZ walk past Trayvon, turn around, and push him. The source was asked to keep the witness’ identity anonymous.

      • Malisha says:

        I don’t believe prosecution has to produce their REBUTTAL evidence yet. Therefore, they could have plenty of witnesses who will be called to REBUT a self-defense claim, and yet they haven’t named them because they’re not part of the prosecution’s main case, but rebuttal only. O’Mara knows about this, though — that’s why I think there will ultimately be a plea deal. It’s like the “fiscal cliff” thing; it was a given that there would be a deal but they had to keep us on the edge of our seats until 1/1/2013 when they could say, “we miraculously DID IT!”

  13. SearchingMind says:

    Jury Nullification and the Trayvon Martin murder case, part II

    1. The jury will further hear evidence that no trace of Zimmerman’s skin, blood or DNA was found on Trayvon’s hands, fingernails, the cuffs of his sleeves, etc.;

    2. The jury will hear evidence that there is no evidence that the minor scratches on Zimmerman’s face and the two small peripheral lacerations at the back of his head were caused by Trayvon and that the prosecution is not required to prove when and where Zimmerman got his scratches and tiny lacerations;

    3. The jury will hear evidence that injuries claimed by Zimmerman are in no way life threatening and could not lead a reasonable man to fear for his life;

    4. The jury will hear evidence that injuries will hear testimony that Zimmerman was offered a medical examination on several occasions and that Zimmerman rejected those offer;

    5. The jury will hear testimony from Zimmerman’s co-workers who would testify that Zimmerman, a few hours after murdering Trayvon, appeared for work. When asked about the scratches on his face, Zimmerman declared that he was mugged and that he shot the mugger;

    6. The combination of no. 1-4 will at least lead to the following conclusions: (a). There was no fight between Zimmerman and Trayvon; (b). Trayvon did not press his hands against Zimmerman’s mouth and nose nor did Trayvon attempted to suffocate Zimmerman; (c) Trayvon did not hit Zimmerman’s head and face (for at least a dozen times), (d). Trayvon did not bash Zimmerman’s head on the concrete sidewalk. No. 5 will lead to the reasonable conclusion that Zimmerman makes up his stories along the way and will – with regard to “what happened” on that fateful night – readily narrate nonsense to anyone in an effort to hide the truth.

    The weight of the evidence against Zimmerman is overwhelming that any jury will find it impossible exercise any powers under jury nullification. This is just but a few of such evidence.

  14. SearchingMind says:

    Jury Nullification and the Trayvon Martin murder case, part I

    While I understand the skepticism of some of us, I strongly believe that jury nullification will not be an issue in the trial of George Michael Zimmerman for the murder of Trayvon. The evidence in this case is overwhelming and I shall mention only but a FEW in this part. I base my belief on the following.

    a. Jury nullification mostly occur in cases where the letters of the law have been violated but jurors feel (for whatever reason) that no crime has been committed (if need be, I would provide text book examples). That is not the case here;

    b. The jury will hear the death cries begging for help (and the interrogation) on the 911-tape;

    c. The jury will hear those death cries cut short by a lone gunshot;

    d. The jury will hear evidence from witnesses who will unanimously testify that both Trayvon and Zimmerman were on the ground, with one of them on top of the other when the fatal shot was fired (Zimmerman’s own statement also support this);

    e. The jury will hear unanimous testimony from ballistic expert(s) and the medical examiner that Trayvon died as a result of a gunshot wound which entered his chest from the front to the back in a perfect straight line/without any angles;

    f. The ballistic experts will testify with scientific certainty that the trajectory of the bullet rules out that Zimmerman was on the ground with Trayvon mounted on top of him, straddling and suffocating him, etc. when Zimmerman shot and killed Trayvon;

    g. The jury will hear evidence that Zimmerman, according to Zimmerman himself, had Trayvon in “a wrist lock” during the struggle, thus immobilizing him;

    h. The jury will listen to Zimmerman’s voice sample as to how he was supposedly screaming for help on that fateful night and compare it to the screams on the 911-tape. The difference between the two is comparable to the one between an apple and an onion;

    i. The jury will hear testimony from world renowned audio-experts to the effect that it was not Zimmerman’s voice screaming for help on the 911-tape;

    j. The jury will hear evidence that Zimmerman, when called upon to identify the voice screaming for help on the 911-tape, affirmatively (as if he was being insulted) declared that the said voice “does not even sound like me, i.e. [Zimmerman]”.

    k. The combination of witness- and expert testimony would mean at least the following: (1) Zimmerman was indisputably on top of Trayvon when he shot and killed him, (2) it was Trayvon screaming in anguish, begging for his life (it is not reasonable to that Zimmerman was screaming for help, begging for his life), (3) Zimmerman was not in fear of his life when he shot Trayvon, (4) Zimmerman had no discernible reason to shoot Trayvon (5) Zimmerman concocted the self-defense story, etc.

    • Malisha says:

      SearchingMind, good comment, comprehensive.

      But right now some serious bigots in Florida are growing apple-onions. They are calling them apponions. They are asking Florida to pass a law that the appeals courts will no longer issue opinions, but will only issue apponions. We’re screwed!

    • Rachael says:

      Thank you for being the voice of reason to my paranoia this morning. I know you are right.

      • SearchingMind says:

        Welcome, Rach. The thought of Zimmerman going free also makes sick. BDRL glows with confidence with regard to the strength of his case. I have never seen a prosecutor literarily taunting defense counsel (O’Mara) to the effect of ‘bring it on’, let try this case in court!’. The evidence the prosecution has provided so far strengthens our faith that there will be justice for Trayvon and Ms. Fulton, his mother.

      • Malisha says:

        Jury nullification could happen if the whole jury believed that there was really NO CRIME committed, or they believe that the crime itself should not be listed on the books as a crime. No juror can say that murder should not be listed on the books as a crime, so only “he should not have been charged with murder for killing that kid” is left. To buy that, either the WHOLE jury has to believe Fogen’s self-defense theory (NOT HAPPENING) or the WHOLE jury would have to buy the story that this was a giant conspiracy to hurt poor Fogen (which is, actually, a derivative of “we believe the self-defense claim” pretence). I’m not buying that because even if there were 3 bigots and 3 normals on the jury, the normals would not cave in to the bigots in view of the fact that the evidence will be so unforgiving. Even 4 bigots and 2 normals wouldn’t go for it. Hung jury? Possible. Nullification? I don’t think so. Fogen has said too much that leaves a bad taste, for any two sane people to cave in to bullying and free him. In fact, if you remember the three kinds of evidence named at the first bond hearing: “His statements,” the shell casing, and Mr. Martin’s body, “HIS STATEMENTS” were evidence for the prosecution. I don’t think this is going to be a jury nullification.

    • Xena says:

      Excellent, SearchingMind. If I may add, the jury will hear those text messages and emails that GZ wrote while in hiding that BDLR had at the first bond hearing but Judge Lester sustained an objection that it was beyond the scope of cross. Those are the communications that BDLR wanted to present as evidence that GZ’s apology at the bond hearing was B.S.

  15. ava says:

    @Jun….I find it hard to believe that the thousands of racists comments that I read on yahoo are comming from a few people with numerous accounts

    • You all have thoughtful comments says:

      I agree with Jun……it is a much smaller amount of people with loads of extra, bogus accounts. If there were a lot of dedicated gz people out there, they would be sending lots of money in response to George’s fundraising pleas + plus they would have signed his petition.

    • Malisha says:

      It won’t matter how many racist bigots there are supporting Fogen. When it comes down to jury selection, you have two experts (and they will employ many MORE) and the process will be a lengthy and involved one.

      My guess at this point is, however, that it won’t get to the jury. My guess is that there will be a deal, unless Fogen escapes.

      • Xena says:

        My guess is that there will be a deal, unless Fogen escapes.

        Yep, or maybe take an accidental overdose of his anti-anxiety medication.

      • Xena says:

        I suspect that those signing the petitions with location in Seminole County will be checked also, as well as all IP addresses from that county. It wouldn’t surprise me if the computers in Texas and the Pentagon are not working overtime gathering that intel right now.

    • Xena says:

      I find it hard to believe that the thousands of racists comments that I read on yahoo are comming from a few people with numerous accounts

      Ava, trust me. I was there when it happened back around April-May. One person with the handle “Alexander the Great” boasted about having 36 accounts. There’s a reason for that. When pro-Trayvon comments have at least 9 thumbs up, it takes 36 thumbs down to hide the comment. Along with using them for what they call the “thumbing war,” he also uses each account to comment back and forth with his many characters. It’s one and the same person.

  16. ava says:

    Is there a possibiliy that George may have been screaming, to appear like he was so helpless so his shooting would be justified?..

    • You all have thoughtful comments says:

      The screaming stopped at the moment George shot Trayvon. This indicates that it was Trayvon screaming.

    • Xena says:

      @Ava.

      Is there a possibiliy that George may have been screaming, to appear like he was so helpless so his shooting would be justified?.

      So, the Zidiots have come up with that argument because BDLR said there are two voices on that tape. The two voices were captured on the 911 call with the screams, and consist of GZ cursing at Trayvon, while Trayvon is screaming. The tape of that call was sent to the FBI to enhance.

      • ava says:

        No they havn’t….I just thoought that one of the heeeeelp sound like george

        • Xena says:

          No they havn’t….I just thoought that one of the heeeeelp sound like george

          Did you hear GZ cursing at Trayvon?

          And please, don’t get me wrong. I mean no offense about you posting on Yahoo comments. What article are you on? Can you provide a link or title to it?

  17. ava says:

    And back on George needing his hand issue…..George claimed that he needed his hand to try to remove trayvon’s hand from his face when he was being suffocated…..he could have simply used hus gun to shoot trayvon to prevent trayvon from suffocating him…it would have been self defense…and that’s the eadiest way to get someone to stop suffocating you….why didn’t he shoot Trayvon then…..oh I forgot…he said that he totally forgot that he had a gun, he only remembere about the gun when trayvon looked at it and tried to take it to kill him

    • ava says:

      Maybe that is what malisha explained above…

      • You all have thoughtful comments says:

        Remember, ava……all that O’mara has is gz’s narrative which is devoid of evidence and common sense.

    • You all have thoughtful comments says:

      I don’t believe Trayvon was ever suffocating George. The evidence backs up my opinion….. there was NONE of George’s DNA nor blood on Trayvon’s hands.

      George took aimed to kill that night. Witnesses 5 and 16 said there was no fighting going on when George shot Trayvon.

      • ava says:

        I never aid that trayvon was suffocating George….I am simply using George’s claims to show that his actions don’t make sense…..they dont coincide with his sratements…..if anyone is being suffocated they would definitely use their gun…….but he claimed that he forgot that he hag a gun……and there are people who believe him

      • Rachael says:

        @ ava:

        “but he claimed that he forgot that he hag a gun……and there are people who believe him.”

        What people? Who are these people? What else do they believe?

        Do YOU believe that?

        Here is a man who says he ALWAYS has his (She’lLie’s) gun on him except for when he goes to work. Why would he “forget” that one night that he had it on him? He wasn’t on his way to work.

        Oh yeah, I forgot (hahahaha) – GZ forgets things, has memory problems you know.

        Maybe someone who has trouble remembering as much stuff as he does shouldn’t be carrying concealed, least they forget to conceal.

        • Lonnie Starr says:

          Yeah, he forgets the name of the street that runs from the front gate to the rear gate, that he uses every day, and walks along on his patrols. But… He remembers the name, address, and company name of the people who manage the front gate cctv, eh? Some weak memory. The man is a total fraud.

    • You all have thoughtful comments says:

      I know that you do not believe George.
      George is a liar.

      • You all have thoughtful comments says:

        Anyone who has read George’s statements full of contradictions and inconsistencies and impossibilities and has studied the evidence knows that George liar.

      • You all have thoughtful comments says:

        The following is what one post wrote on Newsvine:

        George had a long pattern of failure in his life: failed relationships, failed career attempts, fired from jobs, failed academics: failure, failure, failure. He finally went over the edge. His need to be special was so great, yet he was unable to achieve even a modicum of success in his life. I’m sure his reaction to Trayvon was, ‘How dare you disrespect my authority!'”
        .
        .

        I believe that Trayvon’s attempt to get away from George was TOO MUCH for George—the wannabe cop….the man who just never seemed to be successful at anything…..the man who desperately wanted to prove himself after failing at so many ventures………. from insurance (unable to pass the test to obtain a license)………. to police cadet (not accepted)……..to D’s in criminal justice courses …………….to rejection of his application for an associates degree at Seminole College.
        .
        .
        Yes, George decided that Trayvon was going to PAY for this “put down” that GZ had just endured I truly believed that George decided that he would make Trayvon pay for it with his LIFE!
        In this cold act……..George revealed that his mind was truly DEPRAVED!

        • Lonnie Starr says:

          I wonder if his original plan was to go after Burgess, but Burgess’s SPD handler got wind of the scheme and “pulled” Burgess out of the neighborhood by violating his parole. Forcing the conspirators to point GZ at Trayvon instead. I mean, look at where they live! Right near the back gate that GZ is always ranting about.

          With Burgess record of warrants and charges pending, it’s a wonder he wasn’t in jail much, much earlier. Just a thought.

          • Xena says:

            With Burgess record of warrants and charges pending, it’s a wonder he wasn’t in jail much, much earlier. Just a thought.

            In his NEN call that day, GZ acknowledged that he had seen Burgess on garbage days. Burgess was no stranger to GZ. It’s just that on 2/2/12, GZ felt it was necessary to call the cops on the basis that Burgess was standing outside of Taaffe’s house, planning to break-in. We do not know whether or not that is true.

            Now, I have a theory. I think that Burgess also knew GZ and was part of GZ’s burglary ring. The kids who stole jewelry and laptop computers had been caught by LE. That left older guys, like Burgess, to pick up the slack. With failing to graduate, GZ’s chances of getting a job in LE even as a probation officer were slim to none. GZ, being the lying cheater that he is, would sincerely believe that he could earn his way into a job with LE or in the alternative, get paid by the HOA for his NW activities.

            He threw Burgess under the bus. What GZ needed was another person to take the blame for being outside of Taaffe’s house so Burgess could be let go on a mistaken identify claim. That is why GZ needed to incorporate Taaffe’s house in his story on 2/26/12. But, GZ messed up. He didn’t capture a fall-guy — he killed one.

            In the alternative, if GZ could not pull off the fall-guy scheme, then he would need to shoot Burgess and thus, Osterman’s reason for saying that ShelLIE told him GZ shot “someone else.”

            Burgess was the individual who GZ is afraid of. Burgess was going to get even with GZ for throwing him under the bus.

        • Lonnie Starr says:

          I’m trying to imagine what if Burgess was the one out there that night. At 6ft+ 204 lbs, he’d have made a fearsome adversary for GZ, and I don’t think GZ would want to even let Burgess get close to him at all, less, let him lay a hand on him. In which case he’d plan to have bloody wounds already made at home, that he could display at the scene after the shooting. Because of Burgess’s size they’d certainly have been more believable.

          Burgess was probably a police informant, so maybe his police handler got wind of the scheme to have someone killed at RATL, and he thought it might be Burgess, so he violated his parole to get him out of harms way. Anyone?

      • You all have thoughtful comments says:

        I forgot to begin that first paragraph with quotation marks. The last to paragraphs were my comments.

      • You all have thoughtful comments says:

        spelling correction—TWO

      • Two sides to a story says:

        No offense, but I think all these conspiracy theories are about as relevant as all the stretches of imagination that Fogen supporters concoct to make him seem hunky-dory.

      • Rachael says:

        I agree.

  18. Jun says:

    I dont know how Fogenhats will get a jury null on murder 2…

    I do not feel there is that many people, who would have it in their conscience, to allow a kid get murdered and terrorized while the kid kept trying to get away, defend himself, and scream for help…

    & the defendant is just not a likable person, considering his history and the most recent act

    • ava says:

      Are you serious….believe me he might be found not guilty……go to yahoo and read the thousand upon thousand of racists comments that are made anytime a black person commits a crime or anytime there is an article about a black person………
      There are millions in support of George….just read the yahoo comments ,whenever they have an article on thr trayvon case…….these people just may end up being the jurers

      • Jun says:

        Jurors are supposed to be objective

        besides we have the dual sovereignty doctrine

        Zimmernuts can go to federal prison for murder 2

        Murder is a state crime and a federal crime

        • No, you’re mistaken.

          There has to be a basis for federal jurisdiction to charge the defendant under the federal murder statute. For example, that the murder occurred on federal property, such as a military base. RTL is not federal property.

          However, he could be charged with violating the federal hate crime statute if he murdered Trayvon because Trayvon was Black.

      • Xena says:

        There are millions in support of George….just read the yahoo comments ,whenever they have an article on thr trayvon case…….these people just may end up being the jurers

        @Ava. There is one person who sits on Yahoo comments who admits to having 35 accounts. There is another person who has about 26 accounts. After the first day that a news article is posted on Yahoo, comments posted slow down and the two Zidiots take over violating the board to provoke. They even use the boards for chat, causing all comments that address the article to scroll down into oblivion.

        Back in November, a man wrote and posted a petition asking the White House administration to investigate GZ’s “malicious prosecution.” That petition which was available for 30 days for signing obtained a mere 1,156 signatures WORLDWIDE. Some of them were joke signatures, such as “Zidiotdotcom.”

        Also think about it. If GZ had 22,000 supporters to send him one dollar each, he could pay what he owes to the security company rather than being sued.

      • Jun says:

        Freddy

        I get my information off the internet and looking around

        It says that every state is under two sovereigns, and if one offense, violates laws of both sovereigns, they can be indicted for both laws, and they are regarded as two separate offenses

        It also states that states are under federal and state dual sovereign

        so

        Murder 2 is a state offense, obviously

        and Murder is a federal offense 18 USC 1111

        The only thing unclear is what they mean by territorial jurisdiction and I looked it up

        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Territorial_jurisdiction

        If that is incorrect, than they should put the correct information up

    • ava says:

      George supporters may not be sending him any more money, but they would love to see him found not guilty for killing a black kid…..and there are millions of them out there

      • Jun says:

        most of them are trolls with zillions of accounts each

        it does not mean anything

        Yes it is a possibility but let us be real…

        could you find it on your conscience to let a man free who just committed such a heinous act?

        A bunch of trolls writing nonsense on yahoo comments dont mean anything

        I dont think anyone could look Trayvon’s mother in the eye, listen to Trayvon scream for help, and try to get away from a predator and psychopath, and find it in their heart, after all the evidence to just feel it would be okay to let the guy go…

        They are just trolls… trolls go anywhere on the internet to write off kilter remarks for the sole purpose of pissing people off…

      • “Millions” of supporters for this defendant?

        You cannot be serious. I think that’s a gross overstatement that is not supported by any evidence.

        • Xena says:

          “Millions” of supporters for this defendant?

          You cannot be serious. I think that’s a gross overstatement that is not supported by any evidence.

          Ava appears to base her opinion on what she sees/reads on Yahoo comments. I’ve tried reaching out to her concerning that.

      • Xena says:

        @Ava. About the petition, Robert Jr. promoted it on Fox news. I give the real numbers but if reducing it by the joke signatures, it got around 1,100 signatures worldwide — and that’s the best he could do although promoting it on Fox news. That’s a very long way from a million.

        There’s another petition on another site on behalf of GZ that has been up since November — with 16 signatures.

        There is also another Facebook page for GZ that was launched last month. It has about 214 likes — about the same amount as his Facebook page that O’Mara took down. Whomever launched and moderates that page is anonymous, so it might be GZ himself looking for support.

      • Two sides to a story says:

        Xena, I was a constant visitor to the GZLC FB page, and it had over 3,000 likes when it was taken down.

        • Xena says:

          Xena, I was a constant visitor to the GZLC FB page, and it had over 3,000 likes when it was taken down.

          Then it must have gained over 2,700 likes in one week. LOL!!!

      • Two sides to a story says:

        PS – That said, there were supporters with more than one FB account liking the page!

      • Xena says:

        Okay. Here is another support site, with 32 “likes” and its last posting in June.
        http://www.facebook.com/pages/People-Who-Support-George-Zimmerman-his-right-to-self-defense/253723021387925

        Do a Google search for “Support George Zimmerman.” You will find dead blogs and Facebook pages — no activity since April and no comments posted because trolls like violating the persons of others more than they like GZ.

    • Rachael says:

      Don’t be so naive Jun –

      “I do not feel there is that many people, who would have it in their conscience, to allow a kid get murdered and terrorized…”

      I mean that is true to an extent but the whole purpose of the “thuggification” of Trayvon and the villainization of his parents is so they can ignore that. And it is not just a few people who comment on articles and blogs who believe it.

      Hopefully, even if potential jurors have bought into the thuggification/villainization aspect, they will still be able to set it aside and look at evidence presented at trial. If, however, they are there with their own agenda…

      But they are out there Jun. They are there and they are real. I have been shocked by the people I know (from other social online entities) who buy into it – and even a few people in real life. I do think most people can be objective, but still, there are those who do try to get onto juries because they have their own agenda. I do believe the overwhelming majority of jurors take their oath very seriously, but occasionally someone with a hidden agenda will get themselves onto a jury deciding a murder charge. However, if caught, “jurors who lie to get on a jury can be charged with such offenses as contempt of court and obstruction of justice.”

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stealth_juror

      • Lonnie Starr says:

        The best that will get them is a hung jury, a couple of retrials should take care of it nevertheless. As to “juror nullification”, the jury will not be faced with choosing between a justifiable crime that they might not want to punish, and a crime that they do want to punish. There will be no such conundrum in the matter.

        It will be a very straight forward: Do you believe GZ or not? Where GZ impeaches himself very badly in so many ways at so many times, it would be a terrible insult to one’s self, to accept such a false story. Since his only defense amounts to: “Yeah, I did it, but you’re never going to prove it!” With that attitude and this evidence, everyone is being rubbed the wrong way, even his supporters have no faith that they can overcome the state of the evidence, which is why they resort to vilification and cursing.

        • Xena says:

          “Yeah, I did it, but you’re never going to prove it!” With that attitude and this evidence, everyone is being rubbed the wrong way, even his supporters have no faith that they can overcome the state of the evidence, which is why they resort to vilification and cursing.

          Exactly! I think back to when I first heard his NEN call. If I were a juror, and that recording played, all the “nosir” “yessir” in the world would not change my impression of GZ. He disrespected dispatch, was angry, vulgar and prejudicial. The sheer fact that he wanted the cops to call him for his location gives reason to believe that he had no intention of returning to his truck.

          I would then listen very carefully to expert testimony and forensics because that seals the deal regardless of GZ’s testimony, (if he testifies) or that of any witness.

          • Lonnie Starr says:

            MOM had better put GZ on the stand first, then try to drag the trial on for months, in the hope that the jury will forget his testimony.
            I don’t know how MOM intends to try to get around all the evidence.
            I guess, like the Colin Ferguson case, he’ll just put on a defense that consists of GZ’s assertions and leave it at that. What else can he do? He has to do something and say something, he can’t just sit through the trial like a pineapple waiting for the Dole pickers to come for him.

            At this point appeals will be just a formality, because there is no defense that can possibly lead to an acquittal, the appeals court will not be able to find a material defect, that stood in the way of a fair trial. To succeed with an appeal, your submission must pass the test of: “If only: _ _ _ _ _ _ _, would have led to a not guilty!” There’s nothing in evidence that would allow any submission to pass such a test. Worse yet, the incriminating materials are voluntary submissions made by the defendant himself, against the advice of his attorney.

            Both GZ and MOM seem to think that a criminal trial is a popularity contest, and not a duel between alternative offers based on facts. Oh well, the case was winnable before MOM stepped in it.

          • Xena says:

            Both GZ and MOM seem to think that a criminal trial is a popularity contest, and not a duel between alternative offers based on facts.

            Some months ago, Malisha and I discussed how O’Mara is handling GZ’s case like a family court case. Not only is that O’Mara’s concentration in law, it is also the blame-game logic that the treeslum feeds him.

          • Lonnie Starr says:

            Should read “the case was unwinnable before MOM stepped in it.”

      • Jun says:

        It is the information age

        All of Fogenhats’ dirty laundry is out there.. any intelligent person will see that Fogenhats is the one who is a thug and a liar and a scam artist…

        Anyone with a brain who comes across a Conservative Tinfoil Hat member would usually realize how biased they are and then can do their own research on the subject and find that it is not true anyways, all the stuff they spew about Trayvon, and is irrelevant to the case…

        Their case is all lies but anyways… let us look at their lies

        Does someone deserve to be stalked, terrorized and killed because they have gold teeth?

        Does someone deserve to be stalked, terrorized, and killed because they may have tried marijuana?

        Does someone deserve to be stalked terrorized and killed over theft?

        I am not worried about their fantasy assault because a lot of people are into CSI and they are gonna see that forensics dispute Fogenhats’ story

        so all they have are lies about Trayvon having gold teeth, smoking marijuana, and theft, which is irrelevant and does not amount to deserving of being terrorized and killed

  19. Jun says:

    I actually believe Omara may ask for the SYG hearing, simply to see the case the State has, and prepare for trial, to be honest

    I personally dont see how it is self defense, I just see it as murder, because clearly, the defendant went after this kid after targeting him, then he began aggressively and aggravated stalking the victim, pursuing him in a threatening manner that was even plain for the dispatch to see, which is why he stated that it was not needed for him to pursue the kid, then when he caught up to the kid, he confronted the victim and yelled at him in an angry controlling voice and in a threatening way, and then attacked the victim, terrorized and threatened the kid, and then killed the kid while he screamed to silence his screams

    All that mess about Gold Grills and MMA are so meaningless, no wonder the state never really objected it when Omara brought it up

    All it needs is a proper unbiased objective jury and it is fairly plain it was a depraved murderous act… I would say Murder 1 but the proof for Murder 2 is more clear

    • Malisha says:

      It just occurred to me. I am making a different prediction now as to what will happen if Fogen does not manage to fly the coop and go out on the lam before April.

      I believe O’Mara and West will go ahead with a “self-defense hearing” and when that is denied, they will come down on Fogen like a ton of bricks and force him to agree to a plea deal that will give him less than Murder-2 but more than his “free walk.”

      That’s my bet. Whoever takes my bet, place yours and pay off by contributing to the blog once we see the result. Right now all I can afford is $100 by the end of 2013 if this comes out as I say.
      Professor, hold on until then!

  20. acemayo says:

    this is what politicsnewsaja wrote
    can this be confirm:
    On July 1, 2006, a new law went into effect that makes personal identifying information pertaining to a Concealed Weapon or Firearm license confidential and exempt from Section 119.07(1), Florida Statutes and Section 24(a), Article 1 of the State Constitution. Learned Friday that the state may indeed have a REFUND RECEIPT for GZ CCW license. If this is true, it explains why Omara hasn’t accepted Judge Nelson offer to have the SYG hearing that Omara claimed to want so much. Further, it means GZ was illegally in possession of his wife Shellie’s gun that he used to kill Trayvon with. While Omara cries about the prosecution not handing over discovery fast enough, Omara has yet to provide the prosecution with reciprocal discovery. Notice the prosecution lack of concern? A little birdie told me it is because there is in fact a refund receipt from the state of Florida. It also explains why nothing was ever said about the revocation of GZ CCW, once he was arrested and charged with this crime. Something that would be required under Florida law. No need to revoke a license that was already revoked prior to this crime. Easily explains why the prosecution went for murder in the 2nd right off the bat of getting this case without calling for a grand jury.

    • Xena says:

      The only thing that I can confirm is that following GZ’s arrest, nothing was reported in the media that his CCL was being revoked by the state. That had not come to my attention until the state revoked ShelLIE’s CCL license after her arrest for perjury.

      There is a report in discovery that GZ paid $90 for the safety class, that the person conducting the safety class did not remember him, but also destroys records after 2 yrs so could not confirm nor deny that GZ attended. I would not think that the investigators stopped at that juncture.

      The report also provides that GZ was not licensed to carry as a private investigator or armed security guard.

      I found that very interesting because GZ’s and Osterman’s defense is that GZ was licensed to carry a gun. Whenever GZ called NEN about seeing suspicious people, he put on the NW hat. If he was carrying while making himself physically open to suspicious people, he was in violation of his license — if his license was valid.

      • Cercando Luce says:

        And, Xena, the Florida Agriculture website does admonish that having a license to carry a concealed weapon is not a license to use it.

    • Rachael says:

      Thank you. This is indeed very interesting.

  21. SearchingMind says:

    Thanks Professor for the wonderful article on jury nullification. This legal doctrine I find to be one of the Achilles-heels of- if not an outright Trojan horse within the system with credible potentials of serious harm to the system. Although I understand the historical origin of this doctrine, I am still flabbergasted by the legal-scientific rationale offered by SCOTUS et al for its continuous existence. According to SCOTUS, the Sixth Amendment grants an accused an inviolable right to have a jury determine his/her guilt or innocence (for serious offenses). Because of this right, SCOTUS ruled, a trial judge is not allowed to direct a verdict in favor of the State or set aside a jury’s verdict of not guilty, “NO MATTER HOW OVERWHELMING THE EVIDENCE”, (Sullivan v. Louisiana, 508 U.S. 275, 277 (1993)). Even in cases where the accused has confessed to the crime in front of the jury, the jury may still acquit, (Bryant v. Georgia, 163 Ga. App. 872, 296 S.E.2d 168 (Ga. Ct. App. 1982)) “without having to support its verdict by reasons or by a report of its deliberations,” (United States v. Spock, 416 F.2d 165, 181-82 (1st Cir. 1969)). The jury has the power to “err upon the side of mercy” by entering “an unassailable but unreasonable verdict of not guilty”, (Jackson v.Virginia, 443 U.S. 307, 317 n.10 (1979)). The jury is given “a general veto power, and this power should not be attenuated by requiring the jury to answer in writing a detailed list of questions or explain its reasons”, (United States v. Wilson, 629 F.2d 439, 443 (6th Cir.1980)).

    Just where is SCOTUS getting all these stuff from, one may ask? Yes, the Sixth Amendment grants an accused the right to a jury of his peers, but it does not say anything about ‘the infallibility of the jury’ (as in infallibility of the Pope) and/or ‘inviolability of jury’s verdict’. The Sixth Amendment says wholly naught about any inherent power of the jury to set aside the law and/or evidence and reach “unreasonable verdict”, etc. Above all this, there are no guidelines (offered by SCOTUS) as to possible grounds for jury nullification. SCOTUS, as such, perpetuates arbitrariness within the system – with potential severe consequences. But I guess, just like the Pope, SCOTUS is infallible and her doctrines unquestionable – just like Catholic Dogmas and Papal Edicts.

    • Xena says:

      I was just reading on jury nullification and based on what I read, it was intended as a check and balance for the jury to interpret law and if they disagreed with the law, they could acquit. This happened most recently in a northwestern state where the defendant was charged with a very small, personal amount of marijuana. The jury said that law is crazy and acquitted.

      A group in California is currently pushing the idea of jury nullification in cases involving small amounts of marijuana. It is actually a way of making the law no effect — circumventing legislation.

      Such an argument/reason would not stand in Florida however, because juries have already decided guilt in cases where self-defense immunity was denied. By doing so, they validate that the law that allows a jury to decide the guilt or innocence of those charged with violent crimes is good.

      Now, I can see where it makes sense to have an immunity hearing decided by a judge rather than a jury. Judges interpret the law, but cannot take a position that the law does not exist or is null, even if they disagree with it.

    • SearchingMind says:

      Indeed, Xena, jury nullification has its advantages. But it cannot be accepted based solely on those advantages, IMO. There are no guidelines as to when and how it should be applied. That makes abuse and/or arbitrariness possible. I also see (possible) violation of public trust (if jury acquits because it disagrees with the nature of the penalty to be imposed upon conviction or convicts because of (racial) bias against the defendant, etc.) and the principle of separation of powers (if a jury would not apply the law because it disagrees with the legislature) inherent in jury nullification. I think there is still a lot to be said and done on this subject – by heavy weights like Professor.

      • Xena says:

        There are no guidelines as to when and how it should be applied.

        Actually, it should never be applied. IMO, if a person is interviewed during jury selection and does not reveal that they are opposed to the law or the penalty, then they are deceptive, intentionally using their selection on the jury to rebel against the government. A jury is to decide on the evidence, period.

        That makes abuse and/or arbitrariness possible.

        That’s a problem with anything that involves the decision of mankind. Mankind is not perfect and no system established by mankind is perfect.

        Early on, the Zidiots argued that GZ would be set free with by a hung jury. That was around the same time that former Ill. Governor Blago was brought back to trial after the first resulted in a hung jury. When the Zidiots realized that their argument failed, they started to argue jury nullification. That’s a pretty big thing among Ron Paul followers and the Tea Party.

        If Zidiots don’t understand prosecution’s options after a hung jury, how the hell are they going to understand jury nullification?

        In GZ’s case, O’Mara would need 6 jurors and the required number of alternatives, ALL who believe in GZ’s innocence before they are sworn in as jurors. Nullification in GZ’s case would require all six jurors to find him innocent. That— ain’t — gonna— happen.

        • Lonnie Starr says:

          People don’t go onto a jury with the idea that they’re going to nullify the law. They go in with the idea that they are going to see to it, that the law is enforced. After all, you don’t want to give burglars the right to steal your stuff and endanger your family.

          What happens is, when the story of how the crime, the accused is charged with committing, becomes clear, in the context of the circumstances the defendant was confronted with. The jury may feel that the defendant is no criminal, but merely had made a decision, that had to be made, crime or no crime, for reasons they feel were justifiable. So then, they’re faced with either imposing the law on a person they do not feel the law should punish, even though the accused had actually broken the law. In such a case the jurors may all feel that, having no other choices available, they would rather set the accused free, than see them punished for a crime, they feel was justifiably committed by a person who was not seeking to gain by the criminal activity and/or is not a habitual law breaker.

          Remember, the law is designed to “let a thousand guilty people go free, than convict one innocent”. So, the jury can feel that they can easily let this one go without doing much, if any, harm to society. It’s a rather tricky position and jurors are only rarely faced with it.

  22. gbrbsb says:

    So the financial world can exhale again, but unless the percentage of US taxpayers earning over $400,000.00 year is significant not sure it´s going to make much of a dent in the trillions!!! And if it doesn’t the cuts are going to be all the more painful more especially for the vulnerable like children and the disabled, at least that is what is happening here.

    One thing clear is that the US and Europe are different worlds. In the UK the 40% higher rate tax hits anyone earning over £34,000 year and the 45% top rate hits a very few earning over £150,000 (around $250,000) while the UK has one of the lowest tax regimes in Europe!

    • gbrbsb says:

      Don´t know what happened but my above comment was meant to slot in under the professors breaking news on the fiscal cliff as I didn´t want or mean to create a new thread.

  23. Ty Flair says:

    So when Serino said the black police officers wanted him to charge fogen,he made this about race also,he make it seems like all the white officers thought it was self defense. All Serino had to say is i had some officers that wanted me to charge him,but he said black officers. Don’t trust Serino.

  24. FYI: The House just voted in favor of the bill passed by the Senate to avoid the fiscal cliff.

    President Obama should be speaking to the nation now.

  25. ava says:

    @Frederick…my point is I an just stating what George claims and showing why his statements don’t add up-makes no sense…why do yo feel the need to tell me that George lied when I am clearly pointing out his lies

  26. ava says:

    Are you people serious? Or is my writing that ambiguous?…i’ I am pro George?…

  27. Judy75201 says:

    One of the most heartbreaking things about this case to me is GZ’s claim that Trayvon said, “You got me.” I think GZ may have heard Trayvon say, in disbelief, “You shot me.”

    • You all have thoughtful comments says:

      or something like “Oh, God”

    • ava says:

      Yes I made that comment on yahooo…George knoes damnwell that trayvon said you shot me….just like he lied when asked if trayvon mentioned anything to him when he walked towards his truck….
      he said he dont know because it was raining and his window was up…it was at that point trayvon asked him if he had a problem…you can hear it in the 911 call, just before George says just get a police officer over here….iff trayvon can be heard through the 911 call then why didn’t George hear trayvon talking to him as he sat in his truck

      • Xena says:

        Yes I made that comment on yahooo

        Ava, a word of advice. Posting to comments on Yahoo about the GZ case can result in trauma and PTSD. There is one main poster who sits on those boards and posts under numerous handles, while using his multiple accounts to thumbs down opposing comments until they are hidden. He also accuses all pro Trayvon people of being a poster named “Prissy.” Then comes the impersonations using demeaning avatars and semblances of your handle.

        Let me guess — you are either debating with Dave, or Richard, or Micro, or JD, or “A Yahoo! User” or Tim, or Just Me, or Alexander the Great, or Tigger, or Dr. Smoker, or Peggy Lee. They are all the same person.

    • camanokat says:

      I don’t know. I’m not a physician, but it seems to me once you’re shot in the heart and your lungs have collapsed, how can one say anything at all?

  28. Ty Flair says:

    So if any of the jury find him not guilty,do the have to explain why the came to that verdict.They at least owe us that much. I wish I could think 100 percent that he will be found guilty,but i cant,im just being honest. This case don’t feel right to me.

    • No, they do not have to explain why they reached their verdict.

    • jm says:

      Ty Flair: “So if any of the jury find him not guilty,do the have to explain why the came to that verdict.They at least owe us that much. I wish I could think 100 percent that he will be found guilty,but i cant,im just being honest. This case don’t feel right to me.”

      Perhaps you followed the Casey Anthony case where the jury clearly did not understand the concept of circumstantial evidence and were distracted by unfounded accusations of incest and drowning of the child by the defense. I understand where your fear is coming from.

      The jury as a whole owed nothing to anyone as far as their reasons for finding someone not guilty and as far as GZ, I would expect they would not want to go public about their findings, just like the Casey Anthony jurors.

  29. ava says:

    @yahtc…what the hell are you talking about..no one has ever implied what you are saying…..who the hell has ever said that George was holding down trayvon because he had a weapon?

    • You all have thoughtful comments says:

      Not a “gun” weapon but you were suggesting an object that could serve as a make shift weapon.

      • You all have thoughtful comments says:

        Ava you yourself wrote at 9:37 the following:
        .
        “..Professor by weapon I mean an object”

      • You all have thoughtful comments says:

        Rachael had also written the following–
        .
        “And I don’t think he ever felt like he was being hit with something, that was just a story to cover his dog-poop-station head wound and an excuse to search Trayvon for a weapon. I’m sure he was very disappointed to find no weapon, as that sure would have bolstered his self-defense claim.”

      • ava says:

        You stated to KEEP him from using the weapon I said to to search for a weapon…..BIG difference

      • You all have thoughtful comments says:

        Yes, you are right on that, ava.

      • You all have thoughtful comments says:

        Zimmerman: “I don’t remember. He, I think when I shot him, it might have pushed him back. But I remember I didn’t know what he was hitting, it felt like he was hitting me with bricks. So I remember I, once I shot him, I holstered my firearm and I got on top of him and I held his hands down because he was still talking, and he, and uh, I said, Stay down. Don’t move. And, uh, then somebody comes out and I couldn’t see, there was a flashlight on my head. So I asked if it was a police officer. And he said, No, it was a witness, but he was calling the police. And I said, The police are on their way. They should be here already, because I had called.”

      • You all have thoughtful comments says:

        From reenactment video #2:
        .
        .Zimmerman…yes, sir he’s on top of me like this (he demonstrates) and I shot him and I didn’t think I hit him because he sat up and he said, ut, you got me, you got it, you got me, you got it, something like that so I thought he was just saying, I know you have a gun now, I heard it, I’m giving up. So I don’t know if I pushed him off me or he fell off me, either way I got on top of him and I pushed his arms apart and I said don’t move.
        Different Investigator…kind of flip him over
        Zimmerman…I don’t remember how I got on top of him, I’m sorry
        Different Investigator….that’s fine
        Zimmerman…but I got on his back and I moved his arms apart because when he was hitting me in the face and the head I thought he had something in his hands. So I just…I moved his hands apart
        Diferent Investigator…You had him face down then
        Zimmerman…Yes, face down and I was on his back.

      • You all have thoughtful comments says:

        It is this second one that gz says that he is holding Trayvon down with his arms out because he thought Trayvon had something in his hands.

      • Malisha says:

        And I don’t think he ever spread Trayvon’s hands; he was saying that in case somebody saw him on top of Trayvon. He knew Trayvon was unarmed. He wanted to give a reason for being on TOP of him, and he said he thought Trayvon had something in his hands to make him sound more thug-like.

        • Xena says:

          And I don’t think he ever spread Trayvon’s hands; he was saying that in case somebody saw him on top of Trayvon.

          Let’s take that thought further. Maybe he did touch Trayvon’s hand, the one that had his blood on it, to use the blood in effort to make his boo-boo’s appear fresh. An alternative;

          Maybe GZ lied because during the take-downs and wrist locks, he suspected that his DNA would be on Trayvon’s hands and/or cuffs and wanted to make up a story to cover for that. Another alternative …

          Both of the above.

      • ChrisNY~Laurie says:

        @yahtc
        He also said in one of his interviews that he still had his gun in his hand when he was holding Trayvon’s arms apart..I can’t remember which one right now. I think it was a video interview…seems like i was watching him tell this one.

      • You all have thoughtful comments says:

        Zimmerman: I didn’t need my hand any more cause he let go of my mouth. I don’t remember if I was still screaming or not. That’s when I grabbed his hand and I grabbed my, my firearm and fired.

        +
        Serino: Don’t recall. OK. Is it a full-sized 9 or a small 9?
        Zimmerman: Compact.
        Serino: Compact? And you were able to overpower him as far as holding his wrist, you gained wrist…we call it wrist control…you gained wrist control on him basically, and you were able to basically liberate both hands…
        Zimmerman: Yes, sir.
        Serino: OK. You raised it up. Do you remember hitting him with the pistol?
        Zimmerman: No, sir.
        Serino: Distance wise…
        Zimmerman: I just remember not wanting to hit my own hand, I was holding his, it went past my hand, my body… (sigh)
        Serino: You OK? You need some water or anything?
        Zimmerman: No.

      • You all have thoughtful comments says:

        I am surprised he didn’t ask for a shot of whiskey!

      • You all have thoughtful comments says:

        Xena, I kind of think that George just wanted to have an alibi in case anyone saw him on top during the struggle.

        I think that because he had already mentioned the wrist control to Serino that he was not too worried if his DNA was on Trayvon’s wrist.

        • Xena says:

          Xena, I kind of think that George just wanted to have an alibi in case anyone saw him on top during the struggle.

          The lie about spreading Trayvon’s arms is, IMO, for a purpose other than being seen on top. He could have said that he got on Trayvon’s back and was going to ___ (fill in the blank) when he saw someone with a flashlight.

          I think that because he had already mentioned the wrist control to Serino that he was not too worried if his DNA was on Trayvon’s wrist.

          GZ gave that spread eagle bs at the re-enactment. He didn’t talk about the wrist control with Serino until 2/29.

      • You all have thoughtful comments says:

        Your view is just as valid, Xena. I am going to keep it in mind.

        • Xena says:

          @You all have. It’s good to throw out thoughts to discuss. I enjoy doing that. The thing about GZ is that he lied because he didn’t want to be arrested and charged, and then he also lied for other reasons. His story about spreading out Trayvon’s arm falls under the “other reason” category.

      • You all have thoughtful comments says:

        Yes, Xena, it is good to have you contribute these kind of thoughts. I, too, think it is a good practice during a discussion. By the way, you may call me yahtc (I think of it as sounding like the game of Yahtzee) Yahtc is what my friends on Newvine call me.

      • You all have thoughtful comments says:

        I think I am getting a hint.

      • You all have thoughtful comments says:

        LOL

      • You all have thoughtful comments says:

        I am going to call it a night. Take care, Xena.

  30. ChrisNY~Laurie says:

    Oh…how rude of me, I never wished you all a Happy New Year!! 😀

  31. ava says:

    Professor by weapon I mean an object…George claimed that wheh trayvon was hitting him on the head it felt like he was hitting him with something..this is why he spread trayvon’s hand apart…to see wether he had an object……a pen could be usef as aweapon…a rock could be used as a weapon….if any object is used to hurt someone it is considered a weapon

    • Rachael says:

      IMO, that was another story as well. It was in there somewhere where he slipped up and said it felt like he was hitting him with something, a sign or something – so I don’t believe any of that happened. If he was on the ground, what kind of a sign would Trayvon be hitting him with? There are no signs on the ground – but there is the dog poop station sign and I think GZ bumped into that and “tried” to incorporate it into the story. And I don’t think he ever felt like he was being hit with something, that was just a story to cover his dog-poop-station head wound and an excuse to search Trayvon for a weapon. I’m sure he was very disappointed to find no weapon, as that sure would have bolstered his self-defense claim.

      • ava says:

        No ..the sign is something different…I think he said that his head was being slammed unto the concrete or a sign…but I’m talking about when George said he was being punched in the head…he said it felt like trayvon was using something to hit him with..this is why he spread trayvon’s hand apart…to search for an object

        • Xena says:

          he said it felt like trayvon was using something to hit him with..this is why he spread trayvon’s hand apart…to search for an object

          Yes, GZ said that when Trayvon was hitting him it felt like he had something in his hands, so after he shot Trayvon, he got on his back and spread his arms out to see if there was anything in Trayvon’s hands. What he forgot was that Trayvon could not have cupped his hands, as GZ demonstrated, over GZ’s mouth and nose with something in his hands.

      • Rachael says:

        Oh. I’ll have to listen again. I thought he said that it felt like Trayvon was hitting him with something, maybe a sign – and I thought how stupid a thing to say is that!

        • Xena says:

          Oh. I’ll have to listen again. I thought he said that it felt like Trayvon was hitting him with something, maybe a sign –

          The sign was GZ’s alternative as to what Trayvon was bashing his head on other than concrete. Having something in his hand when punching him was one of his excuses for spreading out Trayvon’s arms, which he didn’t spread out.

      • Two sides to a story says:

        Perhaps his cell phone, since it ended up on the ground, yet wasn’t checked for DNA.

      • Malisha says:

        When he was first interviewed by Singleton he said he was on his back on the ground and Trayvon was smashing his head on the sidewalk “or maybe there was a sign…” and it was a dangling phrase, belonging nowhere, and then suddenly his narrative moved along to his description of the beating.

      • Rachael says:

        Thanks. Sometimes I can’t keep his stories straight.

    • Like I said, there was no weapon and the defendant never claimed there was.

      Are you a troll?

      • ava says:

        I am going to YouTube to give to give you a clip that you can listen too…where George says that

      • ChrisNY~Laurie says:

        @Professor
        I am pretty sure ava is talking about why fogen said he got on top of Trayvon after shooting him and spread his arms apert. he said that he thought trayvon had something in his hand when he was hitting him in the face. Well, one of his stories, because he also said he did it to restrain him because trayvon was still talking and moving…lies.

      • Dave says:

        Professor, I don’t believe that ava is a troll. Like Rachel, I recall reading in one of the killer’s early statements that he thought that Trayvon had something in his hand. That’s not to say that Trayvon had a weapon, makeshift ot otherwise. Merely that the killer said that he thought he might have.

      • ChrisNY~Laurie says:

        My shift key sucks and I didn’t proof read my last post…sorry if it was hard to read.

      • ava says:

        Go to YouTube and type in George Zimmerman statement # 1…if it is not on that clip….maybe it is the reenactment video

      • You all have thoughtful comments says:

        It was just George telling a story…..like his head was going to explode. So with Singleton and some place else, he said it felt like a brick. I disregard all that stuff.

      • Rachael says:

        She’s not a troll. She is talking about when GZ said he thought Trayvon was hitting him with something and she is having trouble posting because she is using her phone – something I can relate to only too well.

      • You all have thoughtful comments says:

        George never said he was holding Trayvon down to kept him from using a weapon….he was making up a story of explaining why he was on top in case anyone had seen him on top. He said he thought Trayvon might resist him even though he knew perfectly well he had shot Trayvon.

      • tonydphotog says:

        I would guess, yes.

        Ava is very knowledgeable of Trayvon’s murder, and is presenting everything Fogen has said to be the truth. Nevermind the fact that there’s plenty of evidence proving Fogen’s stories to be false.

        • Xena says:

          Idk, tonydphotog. I think that ava is debating with the Zidiots, bringing their arguments here, and hoping to receive the best counter argument in return. There is someone else who comes here in the same manner. It sounds as though they are pro-GZ when they are actually repeating Zidiot conspiracy theories and arguments hoping to get the best counter argument that they can understand and carry back.

      • Malisha says:

        I think by “something in his hands” Fogen was referring to the idea of brass knuckles or something. Once when I was in a dangerous place I carried a roll of pennies.

      • tonydphotog says:

        @Xena
        That makes sense. I don’t go to blogs much, so I never considered that angle. I agree that this is the place to go for good counter argument material.

        • Xena says:

          @Xena
          That makes sense. I don’t go to blogs much, so I never considered that angle. I agree that this is the place to go for good counter argument material.

          Well tony, ava recently posted that she was over on Yahoo, so my guess was correct.

  32. ava says:

    Sorry for the many post…I type from my phone and it happens that way

  33. Judy75201 says:

    I’m thinking GZ’s, “it wasn’t my gun, it wasn’t his gun, it was the gun,”… was an attempt to place the blame on “the gun”, as part of God’s plan. He didn’t murder Trayvon, God did. GZ was just the divine conduit.

    • Rachael says:

      It was at that point that I lost the ability to maintain an open mind about his innocence until proven guilty. My mind just snapped shut.

      • Judy75201 says:

        The “innocent until proven guilty” right exists only in a court of law, no other venue.

      • Rachael says:

        Yes, I know that, which is why I have no qualms about saying that I no longer have an open mind about it – I mean I am not even in the jury pool. So it doesn’t bother me a bit to say I no longer believe in his innocence.

      • Judy75201 says:

        Oh, understood, Rachael, just pointing that out since its such a mantra in our society–innocent until proven guilty! Cheers.

        • Xena says:

          Oh, understood, Rachael, just pointing that out since its such a mantra in our society–innocent until proven guilty!

          Those currently using that mantra do not stand on the premise that all men are created equal, neither that the 2nd Amendment was so America would have a militia to defend the country rather than owning guns to kill other Americans.

      • Rachael says:

        Well I really did try to keep an open mind. And I suppose I could still be convinced – if there was something really convincing, but nothing he said made much sense to me and when I heard that…

        • Xena says:

          …but nothing he said made much sense to me and when I heard that…

          His NEN call did it for me. He sounded angry, agitated, rebellious and unreasonable. The fact that he referred to Trayvon in the plural spoke volumes.

      • You all have thoughtful comments says:

        And, I think when George (almost with a sigh) said in a low tone,
        “they always get away” he was basically saying that the system of waiting for the police just hadn’t been working for gz……almost like he was going to start doing things differently.

        • Xena says:

          And, I think when George (almost with a sigh) said in a low tone, “they always get away” he was basically saying that the system of waiting for the police just hadn’t been working for gz……almost like he was going to start doing things differently.

          Yes. It was veiled criticism that he could later use as an excuse for detaining. Of course, those that always got away had not been seen committing any crime. GZ did not construe his NW position as one of preventing but rather, one of capturing based on his suspicion. Kinda like concentration camp mentality where people are captured and placed to prevent certain actions because they fit a certain profile.

      • Two sides to a story says:

        Rachael, same here. That did it for me. As well as the God’s will statement and lack of remorse.

  34. ava says:

    I made a comment on YouTube…I said that George should have known that trayvon did not have a weapon in his hand when he shot him because he claimed that trayvon had one hand over his nose and one hand over his mouth suffocating him….he tried to remove trayvon’s hand from over his mouth…how could George do that without grabbing trayvons hand, maybe even scratching it in the process

    • ava says:

      did he not feel that trayvon was using his bear hands? Then he claimed that he pinched trayvon’s hand to his side…yet he still believed that trayvon was holding a weapon in his hand when he shot him…and again he said trayvon banged his head one last time so he shot him…then why spread his hand apart to look for a weapon? A George supporter rezponded by saying George was not thinking straight because he was being beatten up…so I said George was thinking straight when the police arrived

      • ava says:

        He said the police arrived seconds after and he turned his back to the police without being told to do so…he told them that his gun was in his pocket..he did not make any stupid move that would put his life in jeopardy becausr he was just in a fight and he was not thinking straight…no he knew exactly what to do..

      • No, Trayvon never had a weapon in his hands and the defendant never claimed that he did.

        Where did you get that idea?

      • Malisha says:

        Professor, Fogen said that after Trayvon “sat up” and said “You got me,” he fell back and then Fogen “lunged” at him and spread his hands apart “because when he was hitting me I felt like he had something in his hands.” I can’t remember if this was to Singleton or Serino or even Erwin. It’s in there.

        • He said it to the EMT. It’s in the EMT’s report. But no weapon or object was ever found and the defense is not claiming that Trayvon was armed with an object or a weapon.

          We also know that the defendant never spread Trayvon’s hands after the shot because his hands were found under his chest and he was lying face down.

          That spread-the-hands story was yet another lie.

    • Trayvon never attempted to suffocate the defendant.

      The defendant lied about that.

      He attempted to suffocate Trayvon.

  35. Malisha says:

    ava, Fogen is able to tell us all how Trayvon thinks. He was able to tell Sean on the NEN call that Trayvon was checking him out and that he “ran” — but he told Hannity that Trayvon was not running from fear — and he told Serino, I think it was, that Trayvon was infuriated at him for having called the cops. Each time an opportunity presents itself Fogen tells everybody what was going on inside Trayvon’s head. That’s exactly why he found him suspicious to start with. He saw that Trayvon was not an athlete, so he had no reason to be walking in the rain; obviously he was “up to no good.”

    Abusers will always inform you about what evil intent other people have. I had a very funny experience with my ex-husband once. He suddenly accused me of having married him for money. I said, “You were unemployed when I married you, and you had no savings, and you had just given that con man your last $2,000 and lost it!” WIthout a sign of embarrassment in his face, he responded, “So you thought, you will buy me! You thought, he has no money so I can buy him!”

    • ava says:

      I think I remember George saying that the POLICE told him that trayvon probably heard him on the phone talking to the authorities…so he wanted to silence his screams so the cops would not hear him when they arrive….I’m sorry but a criminal is not that dumb..if they know the police is on the way they would dissapear….only a mentally ill person would act the way George claimed that trayvon acted…..

    • ava says:

      And your huband….what can I say….some human beings are more heartless and dangerous than the devil himself

    • Rachael says:

      Don’t forget he felt like Trayvon saw his/the/She’lLie’s gun too, which is why he had to go for it.

      smh

      • Xena says:

        GZ patterned his allegations after those of Orr. I’m pretty sure that he read about that case, and since it was SYG that he probably discussed it with Osterman. Thing is, Orr’s immunity hearing was not held until after GZ killed Trayvon. Orr was denied immunity.

    • Xena says:

      ava, Fogen is able to tell us all how Trayvon thinks.

      Yep. Classic bigotvoyant.

  36. Malisha says:

    Fogen can remember what happened; he can’t remember what he SAID happened. He gave way too much detail each time he talked about the vicious attack by the suspicious punk, by the way. So then he kept having to adjust the details because none of his story was true so he couldn’t keep straight what had gone on.

    Look at this one:

    Serino: OK. 9mm inside your pants? He was mounted on you, you were able, he was mounted on your upper chest? Or, I mean, at what point were you able to free your waist side to go ahead and pull out your weapon?

    Zimmerman: When he…he was mounted on me but he had pressure on my nose and my mouth, suffocating me. And when he let go of my mouth and started reaching down my side, he said, “You’re gonna die tonight.” I didn’t need my hand any more cause he let go of my mouth. I don’t remember if I was still screaming or not. That’s when I grabbed his hand and I grabbed my, my firearm and fired. So it was one side, he let go, that I realized I didn’t need my hand and he was gonna kill me.

    Let’s analyze this from the point of view of the liar adjusting his prior lies to try to answer a tricky question. The question is obvious: How in Hell do you get your hand into your pants to the holster while the guy is sitting on top of you, on your upper chest? How do you get your hand past his knee and how can you “free your waist side” to go ahead and fit your hand in there and pull your weapon? The question is not about why you decided at that point in time to use your hand, or what you were doing with your hand before that problem came up —

    The question is about HOW you were able to take that hand, get it into your pants, pull out your gun, get the gun past Trayvon Martin’s knees that were flanking your chest, get the gun up past Trayvon Martin’s butt that was on your chest, and fire a bullet into HIS chest?

    Here’s what Fogen says:

    1. He was pushing on my nose and mouth and suffocating me.

    [This is to re-emphasize that HE is BAD and is doing something BAD to Fogen, which is not the question]

    2. But then he let go of my mouth and started reaching down my side,

    [This does not explain anything about Fogen’s hand; it details where Trayvon Martin’s hand goes, from MOUTH to DOWN MY SIDE]

    3. He said, “You’re gonna die tonight.”

    [This is to re-emphasize that HE is BAD and is saying a BAD thing to Fogen and it also is to re-emphasize that Trayvon Martin intends to kill Fogen, which is not the question]

    4. I didn’t need my hand any more cause he let go of my mouth.

    [AHA! Finally Fogen mentions his own hand. But what he says does not make sense. Fogen didn’t “need” his hand any more because Trayvon Martin “let go of [his] mouth?” Huh? What was he needing his hand for when Trayvon Martin had not yet let go of his mouth. This would be what you call a “non-responsive” answer if he were in court. The question was HOW did you get your hand down there to get the gun and bring it up. The answer is, “I didn’t need my hand any more” as if — as if nothing. He didn’t “need” his hand to begin with. It’s gibberish.]

    5. I don’t remember if I was still screaming or not.

    [This is simply a distraction. Nobody asked if he was still screaming.]

    6. That’s when I grabbed his hand and I grabbed my, my firearm and fired.

    [You still have not answered the question: HOW?]

    7. So it was one side, he let go, that I realized I didn’t need my hand and he was gonna kill me.

    [More gibberish to say he was gonna kill me, he was a thug, I was in danger, boo hoo, and by the way I didn’t “need” my hand so why not use that un-needed hand to somehow get itself around “the gun” and manage to kill a guy.]

    We can see from this that if only Trayvon Martin had kept smothering Fogen, he would have continued to “need” his hand and therefore could never have shot Trayvon and killed him. That’s something MMA fighters should take notice of in case they ever have to smother a neighborhood watch captain.

    • ava says:

      He claimed that he was using his hand because he was desperately trying to remove treyvon’s hand from over his mouth because he was being suffocted by trayvon…but trayvon removed his hand from over his mouth to reach for the gun …George did not need to use his hand to prevent trayvon from him anymore….

      • tonydphotog says:

        Really? I must have missed that tidbit of info.

        How would this free up Fogen’s hand? According to you, Fogen’s hand was on Trayvon’s hand trying to remove it from his mouth. I doubt that Fogen would release his grip when Trayvon removed his hand. If I was the one being suffocated, I can assure you I would use both of my hands, and I wouldn’t let go until I could escape.

        BTW – Who is George?

      • Malisha says:

        tonydphotog, LOL 😆

      • ChrisNY~Laurie says:

        Yeah Fogen, where are the scratches on Trayvon’s hands and wrists from you trying to get them off your face?? That is what you were implying by not needing you hand anymore when he let go and went for your gun, right?

        If someone was suffocating me they would have many many scratches on their hands, but then again if someone was on top of me against my will, they would have marks all over their hands, wrists and FACE from me trying to get away. I assure you that I and not a single other person on earth would just lay there and do nothing.

        • Xena says:

          If someone was suffocating me they would have many many scratches on their hands,

          If someone was suffocating me, they wouldn’t have any eyeballs because they would be underneath my fingernails or pushed back into their head.

      • Judy75201 says:

        Xena, thanks for the lol!

    • ava says:

      One thing that George said that was so ridiculous I can’t understand why hw wasn’t charged after saying such nonsense
      in one of the interrogation he said that Trayvon reaced for the gun..Trayvon said you are gonna die tonight MF…George claims that trayvon started sliding his hand down his side and he managed to pin trayvon’s hand too his side and as a result he was able to retrieve the gun before trayvon …..then
      bhe said trayvon banged his head one
      more time so he shot him……why didn’t
      trayvon fight for control of the gun instead of banging nbGeorge’s head again? Did trayvon know that a gun was a dangerous weapon?

      • ava says:

        Did trayvon believe that a gun in George’s hand was not as dangerous..and his headbangings were deadlier….so he decided to leave the gun in George’s hand ….remove his hand from George’s grip to bang his head one more time?

      • Xena says:

        As GZ demonstrates Trayvon’s actions of feeling him up down his side, he has Trayvon crossing his right hand/arm over his left hand/arm. If Trayvon was going for the gun on GZ’s right-side, he would have used his left, and not his right hand.

      • ChrisNY~Laurie says:

        Yes, Fogen showed Erwin how Trayvon used his right hand to cross Forgen’s body to reach for the gun.. Erwin then asked Fogen which hand Trayvon used. Realizing that he messed up, Fogen replies, “I don’t recall which hand he used.”

      • Two sides to a story says:

        I’ve always wondered why TM would see a gun and run his hand down Fogen’s side. He’d just grab for the gun, not play touchy-feely.

  37. Ty Flair says:

    Sanford is a small county,when they pick the jury. i will worry the one might know fogen or his family in some way,might have friend that knows him,Shelie have family an friend there also,the county is already mad,because they had marches there. O’mara been a lawyer there over 30 years,so alot of his clients have friends also. Trayvon was not from there,so know one knew him. I pray the move this case somewhere else. It only takes one jury to say not guilty.

    • Malisha says:

      Ty Flair, you say “O’mara been a lawyer there over 30 years,so alot of his clients have friends also.” I would counter with: “O’Mara has been a lawyer there over 30 years, so he’s got a lot of enemies there.” 😈

    • Malisha says:

      Another thing about the jury. Ordinary bigots who are not bloodthirsty pro-Fogen wannabe murderers but just ordinary bigots will probably try to avoid the jury because they will be afraid that if they manage to get an acquittal, the Black mob will come after THEM. Remember, bigots are paranoid. So the only folks who would deliberately get on the jury in order to nullify in Fogen’s favor will be bigots so crude and dumb that they won’t have the intellect and the sophistication to “pass” as a normal non-bigoted person. I trust Nelson to do a good job in guiding the parties AND the jury through this.

    • Xena says:

      If the Zimmermans had friends in Seminole County other than those already named as State witnesses, they would not need to live like vagabonds.

      • Judy75201 says:

        Bingo. Or, the friends don’t believe he is innocent. Either way, a pretty damning state of affairs.

        • Xena says:

          Bingo. Or, the friends don’t believe he is innocent. Either way, a pretty damning state of affairs.

          Judy, it puzzles me, it really does. All those years that Papa and Mama Zim worked in the court system, but no one to give them a helping hand now? They have to publicly beg for money?

      • Judy75201 says:

        It is curious, Xena. Very curious.

  38. ava says:

    Me again…I have seen movies thinking that I’ve seen it for the first time, then days later I remember that I’ve seen the movie when I was a child..about 16 to 18 years have passed…this has happened to me twice

    I have gone out in the pouring rain…place my umbrella down upon entering a building…run back home in the pouring without my umbrella(it was a short distance)…only to remember that I left/forgot my umbrella when I reached my homthinking….

  39. colin black says:

    ava they were playing good cop best buddy cop stategy on him
    If they had brgan asking for serious answers
    And pointed out his inconsistent actions statements ect
    They may have shut him down an they wanted him to keep flaping his gums
    At later interveiws when challenged he clams up an suddenly loses memory.

  40. colin black says:

    In a Scotish Court of law the Jury has three options for returning a verdict

    If they think the crown has proved there case GUILTY
    If they think they havent presented evidence that proves guilt NOT GUILTY.
    If theyre not sure if enough evidence prduced to prove guilt or innnocence NOT PROVEN.

    The last verdict enables the defendant to walk free

    Although if at a future date new evidence not used at original trial comes to light.Then they can be retried.
    We also use 15 jurours in Scotish Courts

    • Dave says:

      Does Scottish law call for a unanimous verdict to convict or acquit? A simple majority? A 2/3 majority? It must be tough to convince all 15 jurors of anything.

  41. ava says:

    I have a question. During George’s reenactment, why wasn’t he questioned about his very significant inconsistency?….when he said he stumbled foward,why didn’t anyone tell him that he said on 3 ocasions that he immidiately fell down when he got punched.

    I understand that people forget and can remember later on..but he was questioned and he said no maam I fell down immediately…i forget details myself but in his case he was intorrogated at different times and he had the chance to think yet he maintained that he fell immediately

    • ava says:

      Did they think thay the crime scene refreshed his memory?

    • They did not want to alert him to an inconsistency or contradiction in his story and provide him with an opportunity to explain it.

      On a related note, when they did the reenactment, they made sure there were no evidence markers or evidence from the crime scene marking where anything was so that he would not be able to use any of it to help him produce an exculpatory story.

      Police do not normally suggest things or attempt to fill in the blanks when they question a suspect and they avoid cross examining a suspect aggressively unless they are attempting to get a confession and going for it.

      You were watching standard operating procedure, except for various suggestions Serino made. At those times, he seemed a little too friendly and helpful than would ordinarily be the case for the Mutt ‘n Jeff or nice-cop-bad-cop approach.

    • PYorck says:

      Probably he would have stopped talking as soon as he encountered any resistance. It was more useful to let him talk about everything at least once. Eventually, in the 2/29 interview they started to ask about the inconsistencies, but GZ shut up pretty quickly.

    • Malisha says:

      It was not a reenactment, either. I hate when it is called a re-enactment, although I call it that myself. He didn’t get on the ground, he didn’t show where he was on the ground, he didn’t show where his head was banged, he didn’t show how he reached for his gun, how he “lunged” on Trayvon, how he “spread out his hands,” how he stood up and holstered his gun when the cops came, how he spoke to the witnesses who were there, how he got cuffed and put in the police car. None of it. He did a stupid little demonstration he could have done at the station house or at the amusement park or at the 7-11.

    • Xena says:

      It’s my impression that when the re-enactment was done, LE had not listened to the recording of GZ’s NEN call. When he was questioned on 2/29/12 and that recording was played for him was when Serino and Singleton then used it to ask very pinpointed questions by comparing it to the re-enactment.

  42. Operacarla says:

    In the very begining of the 911 scream call (between 2-3 seconds) you can hear “get off” just like DeeDee reported. What you don’t hear is “you’re gonna die tonight mugger fugger” Fogen makes me sick.

  43. Judy75201 says:

    Prof, I hope that you will do a companion thread to the jury nullification post addressing reasonable doubt. My perspective on reasonable doubt is that defense attorneys have manipulated juries with the concept, and that if jurors realized their nullification powers, that manipulation would be, well, nullified. However, I’d be very interested to learn more.

    • The good side of jury nullification is that it can be used to refuse to convict a cancer patient of possessing marijuana for medical purposes.

      The bad side is that it can be used to convict the innocent, despite a lack of evidence, because jurors are pretty sure the defendant is guilty. This tends to happen when all white juries convict black defendants.

  44. ava says:

    Trayvon parents should be prepared to hear a not guilty verdict..hope for justice but be prepared for the worst……they need to cope with the fact that their son’s killer may be a free man…

    • Operacarla says:

      This may well be true. After the Casey Anthony trial I realized people can kill children in Florida and get away with it. I soooo hope he is convicted. My deepest sympathies to the Martin/Fulton families.

    • Xena says:

      Tracy and Sybrina are people of faith, and faith doesn’t sit on the fence.

  45. Malisha says:

    I’m wondering if, within his own circle, Fogen has the good graces to be sorry that he caused such a furor. He blames everything outside. Are the NBP the cause of his poor parents having to leave their home? No they aren’t; Fogen is. The NBP (or the old BP or any color any cats) never heard of the guy or his parents before he murdered an innocent teen in a gated community at 7:20 pm one night for reasons still best known to himself. Is Shellie responsible for the fact that she’s in hiding, charged with a felony, and a public embarrassment? Only because he put her up to it. I”m wondering if he manages to feel any sense of responsibility for any of it. My guess is, NO. That’s the short answer. And the long answer is, no, because he has been brought up to cast blame outside in every circumstance. That is why Junior does it so seamlessly. It’s habit. No soul searching. No doubts. No feeling of responsibility or accountability. Junior wants the victim’s family to feel responsible to HIM because he doesn’t like the situation he finds himself in now, the height of wrongheadedness.

    They do not see themselves as part of the human whole; they see themselves as separate and above others. That is the real tragedy of our times.

    • Two sides to a story says:

      This blaming everything but your own actions seems to be a trait that runs throughout the Fogen familly, from what we hear from the vocal members. If only they’d publicly show just a wee bit of remorse, one iota of wishing Fogen had done something differently, some concession to free will and one’s choices – stop insulting the higher power, dammit, Fogen!

    • Operacarla says:

      Here is a really good look into the sociopath molester mindset. It fit’s fogen to a tee:
      http://www.justicequest.net/forums/showthread.php?t=65496

    • Judy75201 says:

      Good graces? You ask too much of him.

    • Rachael says:

      No, I’m sure he doesn’t because he does not see that “he” caused a furor. He doesn’t get it.

    • Xena says:

      When I heard Papa Zim’s recording with FDLE where he asked if they could make it all go away, it was the beginning of that conversation that stays with me the most. Papa Zim conveys a competitive spirit. That same competitiveness — a “them vs. us” sort of mindset, continues in their diatribes and attacks on others. Even Junior’s “We’re not racist” has a competitive tone.

      So Malisha, going back to what you asked; no, GZ is not sorry. His estranged family came to his rescue because to them, it’s about competition. It appears that all the Zimmermans who have exposed themselves thus far are driven by competing and that means winning, and no one apologizes for winning.

    • Malisha…..People like fogen are no more sorry for what they have done than a domestic abuser is sorry for his controlling, abusive actions. It makes me boil inside to hear an abuser say “WE were BOTH hurt.”……oh really? They will always act like they are a victim and will always justify their actions or completely forget about it alltogether. “I’ve forgotten about it (let it go), why haven’t you?” is a common phrase. It’s SO EASY for these sociopaths to dismiss the pain that they have caused others. They are what they, narcissistic sociopaths, because they lack something that allows them to feel empathy or guilt. Is it nurture or nature? I believe that in a large part, it is nature……a “bad seed” if you will. Which takes us into the subject of biocriminology……something for a later discussion.

    • From the U.S. National Library of Medicine – Pub Med
      Antisocial Personality Disorder- Sociopathic Personality
      Antisocial personality disorder is a mental health condition in which a person has a long-term pattern of manipulating, exploiting, or violating the rights of others. This behavior is often criminal.
      Causes unknown- Genetic factors and child abuse are believed to contribute to the development of this condition.
      Symptoms- A person with antisocial personality disorder may:

      Be able to act witty and charming.
      Be good at flattery and manipulating other people’s emotions.
      Break the law repeatedly.
      Disregard the safety of self and others.
      Have a problem with substance abuse.
      Lie,steal, and fight often.
      Not show guilt or remorse.
      Often be angry or arrogant.

      Does any of this sound like fogen?

      • Xena says:

        I met a person with all those characteristics and it came down to one reason for him — he felt that life had deprived him.

      • Malisha says:

        Xena, a sociopath says life deprived him all the time, to generate sympathy (and subjection) in others. They can lead the most sheltered and privileged of lives and still be carrying on full-time about “poor me poor me oh boo hoo.” They are, at first, somewhat magnetic because they appeal to people as babies appeal to people, because they need help, and they seem so very grateful that you “understand.” But soon they are taking advantage, and lying, and deflecting any kind of question you may have about how you are being treated, and soon after that you subtly join the ranks of the people who “don’t understand” and you’re on your way to being demonized, blamed, and outright abused for your terrible conduct in joining the legion of mean-spirited wicked monsters who stand between them and the good life. Ugh it is disgusting. And the WORST thing about it is the massive projection. While they are destroying other people’s lives, they carry on about how victimized they are.

        • Xena says:

          Xena, a sociopath says life deprived him all the time, to generate sympathy (and subjection) in others. They can lead the most sheltered and privileged of lives and still be carrying on full-time about “poor me poor me oh boo hoo.” They are, at first, somewhat magnetic because they appeal to people as babies appeal to people, because they need help, and they seem so very grateful that you “understand.” But soon they are taking advantage, and lying, and deflecting any kind of question you may have …

          Yes. That describes the person and causes me to think about another who acted the same. This was not in a domestic relationship or friendship, but people who needed legal help. For one such person, the moment she thought that she had the attorney wrapped around her finger, she started doing everything opposite of the attorney’s instructions, then saying that she didn’t understand what the attorney said. Then, she lashed out at me for not backing her up.

          After I let her air out, she apologized, but her apology was nothing more than excuses. I remember saying, “Hurting people hurt others…” but before I could complete my sentence, she interrupted saying, “I’m so glad you understand.”

          She didn’t want to accept the truth about her case, and consistently interrupt by talking about what someone else did to her. In the end, she sabotaged her case.

    • Jun says:

      The physics of humans has always been action and reaction

      Everything that has surfaced has been a result of Fogenhats’ action, and nothing else

      Fogenhats targeted and stalked a kid in an aggravated manner, and also called the Non Emergency line on him (I also theorize that the police were fed up with Fogenhats’ nonsense and false emergency calls, so they told him to not use 911 unless it was truly an emergency)

      The victim’s reaction to that was to try to get away from the situation by running away towards his home

      The victim’s reaction to Fogenhats’ stalking caused him to yell to himself “Shit, he’s running”, as if he was really angry that the kid was running away from him, and signifies he had some type of motive to stalk the victim…

      At that point the most reasonable thing to do was just let the kid run and just stay in the car and go home or go to Target with 50 cents… instead, Fogenhats continues his stalking…

      The police dispatch reaction was telling him that stalking and pursuing the kid running away from him was not needed or necessary

      Fogenhats response was Ok but he disregarded the order that it was not needed, and proceeded to search for the boy and you can tell when he says “i dont know where this kid is” to himself which signifies Fogenhats indeed continue his search

      The police dispatch reaction to Fogenhats action was to try and get him to walk back towards his vehicle by suggesting he go in the opposite direction of going towards the back entrance, but Fogenhats disregarded and told the police to call him once they arrive and Fogenhats would tell them where he is at

      Then at this point Trayvon was already away from him…. not even close to him…

      Fogenhats next action was to continue pursuing Trayvon and then eventually he caught up to the kid and Fogenhats confronted him in an aggressive and threatening manner

      Trayvon’s reaction was to ask him why Fogenhats was stalking him…

      Fogenhats’ next action was to yell at Trayvon angrily and in a threatening manner “WHAT ARE YOU DOING HERE?” and proceeds to attack Trayvon by getting on him

      Trayvon’s reaction was to ask Fogenhats to “GET OFF HIM” and then try to get away and defend himself, and scream for help, is what the kid did…

      Fogenhats eventually murders the kid and then concocts a false story about self defense and uses a loophole in the law for murder to avoid arrest for the time being…

      The world’s reaction was to spread the word on this injustice and people were marching in the streets and signing a petition for justice for this injustice caused by all of Fogenhats’ actions

      NBPP reaction was to place a bounty on Fogenhats, for citizen’s arrest, dead or alive, I think (I do not know the whole story)

      A white gentleman wrote a threatening letter to the police chief and stated that this was an outrage that you would let a man stalk and kill a kid and not arrest him

      Mayor Triplette’s reaction was to talk to Rick Scott as he was disappointed with what happened, and Rick Scott wrote an order to serve justice in this murder case and appointed Corey and her team…

      It is simply a result of Karma… if Fogenhats would have never initiated such negative action, none of what is happening now would be happening…

      • Rachael says:

        Exactly “. . .caused him to yell to himself “Shit, he’s running”, as if he was really angry that the kid was running away from him. . .”

        It is like he took it personally. I mean so the kid was running. So what? He wasn’t doing anything. There is no law against running. Why did it get him so upset. “They always get away,” WTF was that supposed to mean? Getting away with what? He wasn’t *doing* anything!!!

        Yet GZ took it personally and instead of waiting for the police and saying “shit, he ran” and letting them do THEIR job, he says “shit, he ran” and ran after him!!!

        The police could have gotten there, he could have told them he ran, the could have checked it out themselves. That is what they are trained to do. And in the meantime, Trayvon would have gotten home safe and sound.

        What a lunatic!!!!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: