How to Nullify Jury Nullification and Obtain Justice for Trayvon Martin

Wednesday, January 2, 2013

I was inspired by Xena to write this article today to warn the prosecution and all of my readers to take the defense seriously in the Travon Martin murder case

She said,

“In GZ’s case, O’Mara would need 6 jurors and the required number of alternates, 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.”

I hope you are right, Xena, but I am not certain that you are.

I prefer to evaluate the case in terms of potential strategies and probable outcomes. I am compulsive by nature and always evaluated my cases in this fashion. There is no downside to being prepared.

I think the defense is focused on the only argument that it believes has any probability of success and that is jury nullification.

Every effort and every public statement appears to be focused on poisoning the pool of prospective jurors in Seminole County by appealing to racism demonizing Trayvon Martin as a crazed Black Gangsta who deserved to die and portraying the prosecution and the Florida Department of Law Enforcement as outsiders who overruled the local authorities and bypassed a local grand jury to prosecute the defendant for political purposes to appease Black “racist rage.” That is, the defense is attempting to maximize the probability of success through the use of sleazy character assassination and grotesque propaganda in a highly focused way that I have only seen in used in elections.

Keep in mind that the defense does not necessarily need to have convinced all six jurors to vote “not guilty” before the trial starts. They just need to convince one or two strong personalities who will serve as their voices during deliberations refusing to vote guilty and pushing the same buttons that O’Mara, West and Robert Jr., are pushing until they finally achieve consensus.

Whether this strategy will succeed in the face of an extremely unlikable defendant and a veritable mountain of evidence of his guilt is unknown and difficult for me to estimate at this time.

I can only do what is within my power to do and that is to illuminate and publicize what I see hoping that my efforts to warn will inspire others to act in ways that will reduce the probability that the defense strategy will succeed.

I believe this case will be won or lost in jury selection.

I firmly believe that an unbiased and unprejudiced jury of reasonable people will reject this defendant’s claim off self-defense and convict him of murder in the second degree. I do not believe there is a reasonable probability that such a jury will acquit this defendant.

However, I believe there is a statistically significant probability that a biased and prejudiced jury will acquit this defendant despite overwhelming evidence of guilt.

If for no other reason than to avoid overconfidence, the prosecution needs to focus on jury selection now to develop a strategy to identify and excuse potential pro-defendant stealth jurors willing to lie in order to get on the jury and wreak havoc.

The prosecution should consider retaining one or more jury consultants familiar with the demographics of Seminole County and polling residents regarding their knowledge and opinions of the case. Careful consideration should be given to developing a comprehensive juror questionnaire that exposes not only bias or prejudice but efforts to conceal bias or prejudice. The prosecution should request additional peremptory challenges since they may be the only means it has to strike dishonest stealth jurors. The use of individual attorney-conducted voir dire is critically important as is cultivating the art of asking open-ended questions, carefully listening to the answers and following-up with insightful and respectful questions to discover and reveal possible biases or prejudices.

I recommend against sequestering the jury because sequestration is equivalent to being imprisoned and that will cause juror hostility to the court to no good end.

This team of prosecutors is on unfamiliar ground and should not assume that they will be regarded with the usual degree of respect to which they have become accustomed on their home turf. They must do everything possible to avoid being seen as an outsider seeking to convict and imprison a decent local citizen to serve the governor’s political agenda.

The defendant’s supporters do not fight fair. They have no respect for the truth and will use any tactic to discredit and intimidate. I know what I am talking about because they have been impersonating me, including using my photograph as an avatar at the Huffington Post and other sites, spreading false and malicious information to discredit me and my efforts to seek justice for Trayvon.

What they have done and continue to do to me pales into insignificance when compared to what they have done to demonize Trayvon and intimidate Dee Dee, Sybrina Fulton, Tracy Martin, the Martin family, Benjamin Crump, Natalie Jackson and others who support justice for Trayvon.

The prosecution is not only on unfamiliar ground in Seminole County, it’s on unfamiliar ground in a propaganda war.

The sooner it acknowledges the potential danger and develops a comprehensive strategy to deal with it the more likely it will obtain a just result and convict this defendant.

158 Responses to How to Nullify Jury Nullification and Obtain Justice for Trayvon Martin

  1. lairdbearly says:

    I’m sad this happened! Ugh

  2. Islander says:

    About jury nullification. It can be tragic really. My experience in Canada (not that I’m saying it’s good Judicial practice) but our Courts – have dealt with it twice within my memory. Both were not guilty. Morgentaler and Latimer . Morgentaler was abortion/right to choice etc. Latimer makes one want to lie down and weep from grief with no end to it. Two juries voted not guilty for Latimer and the crown appealed until they finally demanded a guilty by forcing a definition and then they locked him away. A man that had lived all his life farming being a citizen and family man and father and doing the right thing by everyone. One day while his family was at church Robert Latimer lovingly and gently ended the life of his severely disabled daughter Tracy. It was from mercy. He could not bear what had been done to her especially knowing of the near future medical interventions planned which he could not override. The Latimer case is unbearably sad. Juries knew where his heart was.Truly what they had already done to Tracy and what was up next was way beyond bad.

  3. Malisha says:

    Of course, if there is jury nullification in favor of the prosecution, there can be an appeal. If there is nullification in favor of the defense there is no appeal. But in this case, were there to be nullification in favor of the defendant there could be a federal prosecution for a hate crime, especially if the e-mails turn up something incriminating, which is between possible and probable.

    • ladystclaire says:

      I’m very anxious to see whats in those e-mails and text messages of his. I guess this is why he was chomping at the bit, for ShelLie to get his lap top. also, his defense team is wanting them sealed and, they should not be because he is no better than Casey Anthony. her entire life was laid out for all to see and, he is no better than she is. I say let the sunshine in and, let those messages go public!

      • Xena says:

        I’m very anxious to see whats in those e-mails and text messages of his.

        One thing I think is a fair presumption is, whatever GZ texted and emailed about a Reverend and Tracy Martin is not to his benefit. While I am curious as to their content, I like the suspense of waiting.

        It can only make the Zidiots climb the walls too.

    • Jun says:

      I think there is something there…

      this is the same guy who after being told by the jailhouse calling system that his call was being recorded…

      goes onto to belt out his whole plans and plots, and thought that if he structured his money, he would be able to hide it…

      Fogenhats wrote something incriminating

      I am gonna guess that Fogenhats texted Mark Ostertrench that he got the “fucking asshole who always gets away” in his imaginary rash of break ins…

      or Fogenhats texted that “the fucking coon” was crying like a little baby…

      Fogenhats also prolly texted Shellie “to help him stage his injuries” for when he has to act and lie on film about his murder

      • Cercando Luce says:

        “Get me ready for my close-up, darlin’…”

      • ladystclaire says:

        @Jun, I think there is a lot of somethings there that he thought nobody would ever know that he penned. he was about to burst his fat gut in order to get that lap top so so he could do some deleting. when will *CRIMINALS* ever learn, that you can’t truly delete things on a computers hard drive! this thing looking like the GEICO pig thinks he is smarter than everyone else, when he is actually the opposite.

        Oh sure he had ShelLie to put the big knuckle bandages on his *empty* head. but, that just made him look even more the *murderer* that he is because, as we all know he refused medical attention that night as well as his refusal to follow up with an ENT as recommended by the PA he saw the next day after he committed his crime.

        Those who support him are very well aware that he is lying but, seeing that his victim was black, they are more than willing to overlook his crime.

      • Jun says:

        That is actually true. I am not a computer expert but I have watched enough Crime TV to know that it is entirely possible to find what is on a hard drive after being deleted….

        • Lonnie Starr says:

          Just google “file recovery software”. You’ll get a whole bunch of hits. If you’ve just deleted a file you’re almost certain to get it back.
          This is because it isn’t erased at all. When you hit the delete key, what happens is windows wipes out the first letter of the files name, then marks the space the file took up on the drive, as free space in the File Allocation Table or FAT, but the file data is still there and it will stay there until that space is needed, then it will be over written.

          But, since magnetism is like gravity, it goes on forever. All the overwrite does is degauss the drives file space a bit, then write a new file using a stronger signal. Specialized software can read through these layers of file degausses all the way back to the first file ever written on the drive. Of course, those programs cost tens of thousands of dollars, so file recoveries at that level are going to cost hundreds of dollars to recover all the data on the drive. Which is why the experts say, the only way to be sure your data is gone, is to grind the drive into dust.

  4. Judy75201 says:

    *faked

    • Malisha says:

      Jury nullification cannot be exercised in “Trayvon’s favor” (in favor of the People) because reasonable doubt is not dependent upon the veracity of the photograph — or any photograph — and because the evidence that is already in evidence and not subject to “faking” (remember “his statements, the shell casing, and Mr. Martin’s body) is enough evidence to provide a prima facie case. Jury nullification is what happens where the jury refuses to rule WITH the law and the facts.

  5. Judy75201 says:

    Can’t jury nullification work in Trayvon’s favor? I guess this is the crux of my first even mentioning it. If the photo cannot conclusively be proven facked, thereby creating reasonable doubt, can’t the jury refuse to accept that “reasonable doubt” which will be thrust on them by the defense?

    • Even if it wasn’t photoshopped, the minor nature of the capillary scrapes and the directional flow of the blood trails contradict the defendant’s story proving he is a liar.

      The photographs taken at the police station by a professional photographer with good equipment powerfully refute the weird iPod photo of the defendant’s face while sitting in the police car.

      He loses no matter which way he turns.

      • Judy75201 says:

        I hope. But I also fear when I think about, for instance, the Casey Anthony outcome. Thx.

      • Judy75201 says:

        Oh, wait, I just realized you didn’t actually answer my question (or I was once again unclear). Could nullification work in Trayvon’s favor if a jury rejects a reasonable doubt argument (regardless of which reasonable doubt element that might be)?

      • Judy75201 says:

        Ok, I’ll try again. Can nullification ever favor the prosecution?

      • I am am emergency room nurse .I have seen all types of injuries,including injuries cause by a persons head being repeatedly slammed into a concrete surface. Zimmernuts head was never slammed into the sidewalk.The fact he was able to walk with out help and needed no medical attention that night proves it. Now for his face.I can’t count how many times i have seen people who have been beaten in the face. Zimmernut was never beaten in the face. He had no busted lips no swelling to his face no black eyes and of course no broken nose. after taking Kelly’s suggestion.I looked closely at those little injuries on the back of his head. he has one round puncture wound and a one inch long cut. He didn’t get those from a sidewalk. he lied to justify killing an unarmed teenager because he knew he $%*& up. It’s the same with those screams. He knew everyone within a block of where he killed Trayvon heard those screams. he had to account for that,that’s why he claimed he was the one screaming. he’s a liar and a murderer. Unless they get a bunch of nuts on the jury he’s going away.

        • esentrick says:

          I agree Jessica…he did not have so much as a bruise. For someone who claims to have their head repeatedly slammed in the concrete and “feared for his life”, you would think he would go to the hospital to make certain he did not suffer a concussion or some other traumatic injury. IMO the defendant chose not to go to the ER because he did not want to take a drug/alcohol test.

          • That makes perfect sense…..
            And the reason for him going to the doctor’s the following day was to get a “back to work” release……while refusing to have anything other than a PA examine his wounds…..AND he rejected an XRay.

            All of this would portray that fogen didn’t think his wounds were that serious……And by rejecting further treatment? In his mind any other treatment that showed the wounds to be superficial would go against him.

          • Xena says:

            All of this would portray that fogen didn’t think his wounds were that serious……

            Something else conveys that also; i.e., he didn’t pull his gun after being hit in the nose neither when purportedly getting his head bashed. GZ said that he killed Trayvon because he “felt” Trayvon saw his gun and was going for it. On Hannity, he identified his fear of losing his life was because the cops would arrive and find him with his firearm and shoot him.

          • esentrick says:

            Also, Michael Brandy, the paramedic was the one that treated the defendant. The paramedic stated during his first interview the defendant was silent and did not mention how the injuries happen nor did anybody (EMT professionals) asked the defendant how he got his injuries. Why wouldn’t the defendant tell the EMTs that his head was banged against the concrete numerous times?

          • I hadn’t heard about that…..If it were me sitting there?…I know damn well I would be recounting EVERYTHING that had just happened…..Unless in a total state of shock.

            Something else maybe someone can investige. As we all know fogen is hurting for $$$$$$$…..he has also claimed that he now has PTSD since the incident…..It would be interesting to find out if he has applied for any disability benefits….state & federal both?
            Fogen refued medical treatment…….Is he still under psyciatric treatment?……Even more so that he now has a new DX of PTSD on top of the others he was being treated for.

            Anyway if the court can get his psych records? That could be damning as hell to read the shrinks observations of fogen !!!!!!!!!

          • esentrick says:

            My thoughts exactly!

          • Xena says:

            IMO the defendant chose not to go to the ER because he did not want to take a drug/alcohol test.

            Yep, and because those scratches and boo-boos were at least a day old. Under professional medical lighting, medical staff would have been able to see that.

    • Xena says:

      I hope. But I also fear when I think about, for instance, the Casey Anthony outcome.

      Totally different issues between the cases. In the Anthony case, you had a dead baby, no cause of death determined, and no one admitting to killing the baby. The jury did not convict Anthony because the State failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt hat she killed her daughter.

      Here, GZ admitted to killing Trayvon. The cause of death is known. GZ says that he killed in self-defense, and that is the issue before the court.

      • Judy75201 says:

        However, the totality of the evidence clearly showed a statistically-significant unlikelihood that Casey did not murder Caylee. Or at least it seemed so to me.

        • Xena says:

          However, the totality of the evidence clearly showed a statistically-significant unlikelihood that Casey did not murder Caylee. Or at least it seemed so to me.

          I didn’t keep up with the Anthony case and know very little about it. After the verdict, I did watch programs that reported on their interview of jurors and why they reached the not guilty verdict.

    • Judy75201 says:

      So, does that mean we simply need to use a word other than nullification? Can a jury vote guilty regardless of the “reasonable doubt” argument by the defense?

      • Yes, that is a form of nullification and no, we do not need a different word for it.

        In the final analysis, the jury can disregard the evidence, the arguments of counsel, the jury instructions and do whatever it decides to do for whatever reason it decides to do it.

      • Rachael says:

        Reasonable doubt is not an argument by the defense. Reasonable doubt is the burden of proof the prosecution must show in order to get a guilty conviction. The burden of proof is on the prosecution, not the defense.

        Here – go to this link and read under where it says Criminal Law. It might clear a few things up.

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

      • whonoze says:

        I believe the Prof. has already answered your question in the previous thread:

        “Far more likely is the wrongful conviction of innocent people, which happens possibly as often as 20% of the cases.
        “I fear racist jurors would increase the already unacceptable rate off wrongful convictions, if they could ignore the evidence pursuant to jury nullification and convict minority defendants who should be acquitted.
        “That danger is an every day reality in the South.”

        So if the defense has not met it’s burden, and, for example, an all white jury convicts a black defendant anyway, that’s an example of jury nullification that favors the prosecution.

        Prof., perhaps you could explain to all of us what role the judge’s instructions to the jury play in all of this, and whether those are typically invoked for a verdict to be labeled as “nullification” rather than just “unexpected.”

        The application of the label seems to be somewhat subjective, as some might consider the Simpson or Anthony verdicts to be nullification, while others would consider that the State did NOT meet its burden in either case, depending upon how each evaluates the evidence and argument presented at trial. Do I have that right?

      • whonoze says:

        It would seem that a classic (if fictional) model of a racist jury nullification favoring the prosecution occurs in the novel (and film version of) “To Kill A Mockingbird.”

      • Lonnie Starr says:

        They could, but if the isn’t sufficient evidence to support a guilty at law, the judge will have to set the verdict aside on motion of the defense. If he doesn’t do it, it will happen on appeal and the case will be remanded for retrial.

  6. http://newsone.com/2103331/jordan-davis-michael-dunn-first-degree-murder/
    If there is any hope in this case, you might want to consider the Grand Jury’s decision in the Michael Dunn case.
    I remember the outhouse’s remarks about that case too, claiming that Dunn must have seen a shotgun as he claimed and that he had every right to defend himself….etc..etc….spewing on and on.

    • Malisha says:

      Isn’t it amazing how gun-bearing adults seem to see danger everywhere? I have never carried a gun and I am very slow to presume that someone I see walking along is a criminal. I wonder if it’s the actual gun-carrying activity that makes folks think they are surrounded by “suspects” and that if they see any movement at all, it is an enemy reaching for a gun to blow them away.

      • The only place I carry is in the forest, hiking or camping….Bear & Mountain Lion.

        Even then I have no desire to be in a situation to use it, as the animals are just doing what comes natural.

      • Two sides to a story says:

        Studies indicate that people who carry tend to be more aggressive than people who don’t. Whether it’s the gun that causes the aggression or the personality type that wants to carry the gun is more aggressive is the question.

    • Xena says:

      I remember the outhouse’s remarks about that case too, claiming that Dunn must have seen a shotgun as he claimed and that he had every right to defend himself…

      Even if Dunn saw a shotgun, he took and had time to go into the glove dept. of his car and get out his gun — without one shot being fired at him. He had time to remove himself from the situation.

      • Cercando Luce says:

        But that damned Stand Your Ground law encouraged this aggressor to go ahead and kill and then see if SYG won’t get him off for criminal AND civil charges. It’s a gamble, but murderers are gambling men.

        Wouldn’t the states with the ALEC-SYG laws save so much LE time and money just getting rid of this idiotic law? And save face as well. The contortions Florida has gone through just for Fogen make the state look like it’s run by immoral lunatics determined to breed more dangerous, ungovernable murderers. I know we have to make sure Fogen gets every chance to find a way to be excused for this murder, but SYG stacks the chances in his favor, and the constables have bungled all over in his favor as well.

    • ladystclaire says:

      The only thing wrong with their *spew* is the *fact* that, there was no shotgun found in the vehicle in which Jordan Davis was killed. this fool is charged with first degree murder and, I’m glad the LE in Jacksonville is no where like the good ole boys in Sanford. these were innocent kids who have been killed and, no matter how black their skin may be, they are still human beings. there have been a lot of white racist who proclaim that they got what they deserved. how can anybody be so heartless as to say something like that? its as if to them, the lives of these two black kids didn’t mean a thing to their families and friends. those two lives were just as precious as any other murdered child in this country. so many other child murder victims in this country but, for these two kids the white racist have come out full force in support of their killers. ONLY IN THE GOOD OLD U.S.A.!

      • Xena says:

        The only thing wrong with their *spew* is the *fact* that, there was no shotgun found in the vehicle in which Jordan Davis was killed.

        But Dunn says that they drove away, tossed the shotgun (still not found) and then drove back. IOWs, he thinks they should have remained parked while he continued firing inside their vehicle. It never occurred to him that they drove off BECAUSE he was firing into their vehicle. (SMH)

  7. Malisha says:

    @Dave, you say, “There have been too many of these shootings already by ignorant yahoos who think that SYG laws are a license to kill for the slightest affront.”

    That is true. But also consider the kind of killing that results from NO AFFRONT at all, and the killer simply targets the victim, approaches him, GIVES AFFRONT when there are no witnesses, and kills on purpose, using the presumed affront for an excuse. It seems that the Trayvon Martin killing would fit into that category.

  8. Dave says:

    I agree that a hung jury would be a lot easier to get than an acquital but if the state goes for a retrial I doubt whether O’Mara would be willing to represent the killer pro bono (if at all) and also doubt that the latter’s fans would continue to fund him.

    If he manages to get a mistrial I think he’ll walk away leaving the defendant to his own devices.

    In case of a mistrial, I believe that the State will retry the case. It’s just too important to drop. It’s not just a question of “Justice for Trayvon” or even of getting a dangerous, vicious criminal off the streets (and these objectives are VERY important.). More important still is sending a message, through a highly visible trial, to the gun-owning public that there are limits to what is legal under the right to self defense (including SYG) and that anyone going beyond those limits will pay for it heavily. There have been too many of these shootings already by ignorant yahoos who think that SYG laws are a license to kill for the slightest affront. I believe that the State will find preventing a wave of “SYG” murders even more important than saving the careers of a few corrupt cops and public officials.

  9. I gotta laugh….. 🙂

    So he got a refund on his CCW class (which he would have to have asked or applied for)….

    It would be VERY interesting to find out if his CCW was legal….and he knew it……To ask to obtain a refund would indicate that it was something he neither wanted or qualified for?

    Then gets sued by his security company for non payment…….

    And on of the cryptic instructions to shelLie from fogen in jail was to pay off the Sams Club & Target cards I believe……

    The guy seems like such a deadbeat….always trying to get something for nothing… :\

    .25 APC is the next largest size of handgun ammunition over a .22 Cal…..Not to be sexist…It is a preferred Ladies gun.

    • His gun was a 9 millimeter KelTec 9.

      • Dave says:

        He killed Trayvon with the KelTec. The .25 (which Osterman said he lent to the killer) was in the rental car he had been driving when he was arrested and charged with murder.

    • Xena says:

      To ask to obtain a refund would indicate that it was something he neither wanted or qualified for?

      Or the check bounced. In discovery, there is a report that GZ paid $90 for the class. The person conducting the class did not remember GZ, and he destroys his files after 2 yrs so he has no records of the class now.

      The feds did verify that GZ’s license was not a class G for a private investigator, armed security guard, or otherwise, someone who carries in the line of employment. I don’t suspect that this will come out at trial in the State’s case but rather, the feds case since GZ carried while performing NW and all suspicious persons that he called in, while carrying his gun, were young Black males.

      • Rachael says:

        Why would he get a refund if his check bounced? Anyway, **if** it turned out that his permit was not legit, why wouldn’t it come up in this trial?

        • Because he would have committed the crimes of unlawful possession and unlawful use of a firearm.

        • Xena says:

          Why would he get a refund if his check bounced?

          It would be a returned check rather than return of the money. I have not seen a refund in the discovery docs but did read the report about GZ paying with a check.

          Anyway, **if** it turned out that his permit was not legit, why wouldn’t it come up in this trial?

          Can’t say for sure, but my guess is that LE is deciding if its more relevant under federal jurisdiction. The report provides that investigators took interest in the class of GZ’s license. I can see how that comes into play considering that he carried while calling NEN on suspicious Black males and more importantly, that he physically, and deliberately followed Trayvon under semblance of NW authority.

  10. colin black says:

    OK Like I said know zero about guns
    If it was a small calibre back up weapon perhaps it was loaned to him by Ostermann
    Cant think were I got the armour peirceing cop killer description from.
    Unless it was an article I read where a gunshop owner whom sold him or Shellie the original weapons
    Saying he came in wanting to by more guns an ammo/
    An the copkiller type weapon was mentioned.
    I know I read or heard it somewhere.

    • Cercando Luce says:

      I made a comment above, corrected by Prof Leatherman, that hollow-point bullets were cop-killers when they are actually known as dum-dum bullets.

  11. whonoze says:

    Prof:

    Do you think the defense may be aiming not for an acquittal, but a hung jury, hoping the state will elect not to pursue a retrial given that the outcome would be unlikely to change? IIRC FL oesn’t reuire unanimity for a quilty verdict. so they would need to have only two bigots on the jury, is that not so/ (A Sith lord leader, and a dark side apprentice who follows his master’s lead…)

    • I believe they have to be unanimous to convict of M2.

      Yes, the more realistic goal is to get a hung jury and keep getting hung juries on subsequent retrials until the prosecution gives up and dismisses.

      • Two sides to a story says:

        In which case, I have every confidence in God’s plan . . .

        Fogen’s life in or out of jail will be a struggle, and without the transformative power of facing what he has done, he will do something else stupid down the road and end up incarcerated or dead. He set his karma in motion on 2-26-12 and is careening toward his destiny.

      • Cercando Luce says:

        If dismissed he will surely shoot someone else the next time he feels like it. He has a taste for blood now, which is why he has no regrets.

        If dismissed he qualifies for the immediate right to conceal-carry under Florida law, and won’t have to wait until 3 years after completing “diversion” like last time.

  12. seallison says:

    Does anyone think there will be changes in this case with regard to the lawyer, family, and friends propaganda campaign against the victim, the victims family, and lawyers.

    Am I alone in thinking that this case was just way over the top after the lawyer announced he would not try his case in the court of public opinion.

    Something is just not right.

    The Foghorn had two lawyers before MOM recommended my Fogen Sr. When they came out on television to talk about their client the way they did, I couldn’t believe what I was hearing.

    This campaign had begun right from Day 1 as though the strategy was already established.

  13. Jun says:

    Would the defense’s propaganda machine be considered “opening the door” for character evidence and being called out on it at trial?

    I would think the State are keeping an eye on all of the defense’s media actions to use against them in court

    Bernie did it in the recent hearing by calling Fogenhats out on his lies

  14. truthseeker66 says:

    Extremely insightful post Professor. I have feared that racism would prevent justice for Trayvon. As an AA I have seen it happen time and time again. This type of case is not new to the AA community. Although I will say this propaganda machine that the Zimbots have is unprecedented indeed!!!

  15. Jun says:

    Another issue is, with the biased stealth juror, what if they change their minds during trial?

    Eventually it is gonna come out that the defendant is a scheming liar with a history of violence and bullying

  16. Jun says:

    I agree

    From my understanding, the defense’s goal is to have a corrupt and biased jury, to get him off

  17. colin black says:

    Dave The police found a .25 acp caliber Browning pistol in his car that Osterman has stated belonged to him. Apparently the killer thought that he was just going in for an interview and didn’t expect to be arrested. Since he had not yet been charged with a crime, he was not legally barred from possessing firearms and supposedly he thought that his life was in danger

    I M O The accused bought this gun with some of the spoils of his blood money donations.
    Im no expert in guns but apparently the type of gun retreived from his car on his arrest .Was known as a Cop Killer because it can peirce tevlon body armour.And was vastly superior to his previous weapon.

    Osterman probably lied saying he had loned it to accused so he could gain possesion of a weapon.

    As a skymarshall Osterman would have no need of such a high powered pistol
    They train with special low velocity type weapons.
    In case they have to fire there weapons in mid air the low velocity ensures the planes fussalage isnt peirced by a bullet. m o o.

  18. Would someone please answer a question?

    Did or did not fogen have a CCW?

    I read here and there about references to him not having a CCW……but big shelLIE did.

    If he did not have a CCW then wouldn’t that be another charge against fogen?

    BTW….Happy New Year from the mountain 🙂

    • seallison says:

      mountainmanpat – Further to your question, I am wondering why there were weapons found in the rental vehicle Fogen used to turn himself in.

      It all is strange that there is no mention of him having to surrender his CCW Permit. In fact, he tried to purchase more weapons when he was released on bail. Why would he have been able to do that if he was awaiting trial for murder.

      • Dave says:

        The police found a .25 acp caliber Browning pistol in his car that Osterman has stated belonged to him. Apparently the killer thought that he was just going in for an interview and didn’t expect to be arrested. Since he had not yet been charged with a crime, he was not legally barred from possessing firearms and supposedly he thought that his life was in danger.

      • Malisha says:

        I think he tried to purchase more weapons NOT when he was out on bail but when he was out for those 40-some-odd days before he was charged with murder. He had a gun in the rental car (and a knife) that he drove in the day he was arrested, but he did not expect to BE arrested.

      • Xena says:

        n fact, he tried to purchase more weapons when he was released on bail.

        GZ attempted to buy guns while he was in hiding before he was charged. It has not after he was released on bail.

    • He did have a CCW license, but we wonder whether it was valid because he was issued a refund for withdrawing from a class that he was required to take to qualify for the CCW license. Apparently, he was issued the license before he received his refund for withdrawing from the course.

      That would suggest his license should have been suspended, but apparently it wasn’t.

      There may be a lack-of-notice defense involved which may explain why the prosecution has not amended the Information to add an unlawful possession or use off a firearm charge.

      Whether there is a lack-of-notice issue, I expect the prosecution will introduce evidence about this little scam he pulled to avoid taking the required class and paying for it. I think this evidence will be admissible pursuant to Rule 404(b) relating to the admissibility of uncharged-misconduct evidence.

      • Cercando Luce says:

        Because he was using his wife’s gun, and because of the refund issue, I thought his CCW license was invalid. However, it is possible that Mark Osterman, if a qualified firearms instructor, could have given him private lessons to prove competence with a firearm as required by the FL Dept of Agriculture (which administers firearms licenses). Or, Fogen could have convinced some qualified person to sign off on his application without taking the course.

        Details at http://licgweb.doacs.state.fl.us/weapons/index.html

      • Rachael says:

        Maybe that would account for him not knowing about the SYG law (sarcasm intended).

  19. seallison says:

    If LetJusticePrevail is indeed Robert Sr., he is now trying to have the Fogen groupies go one step further. He does not believe there is much benefit to limiting comments to a particular blog any more. He does not feel comments in newspaper comments sections or other -Fogen is guilty – sites is getting the exposure needed any more.

    He is asking that each of them write the news agencies – TV, newspapers, whatever, the columnists and writers when there are omissions, or inaccuracies (according to their POV) reported.

    The way I am interpreting this is an attempt to eliminate or cloud the awareness of the actual facts of the case. He does not like the way they portray Fogen.

    Another example of Juniors motto – one person at a time.

  20. Operacarla says:

    I just love your goodness Professor! Happy New Year!

  21. colin black says:

    lender Colin, all I have on my mind concerning Baez, is that he objected to BDLR’s statement during the hearing with judge Nelson. Is there anything else, I missed concerning his client Serino? I am aware I may not be completely up to date.

    Serrino hired Baez as his Attorney
    Baez handed the State papers containing three drafte off an e mail athoured by his cleint Serrino
    Alluded they may contain Brady material re his client..exculpabable.
    First two drafts asked for second degree murder charges against the accused
    Amended by third draught to manslaughter
    Bernie brought it up i mo to silance O Maras contant diatribe off L E didnt want to prosecute my cleint ect.

    • leander22 says:

      Ok, I understand we know about these papers, (I should occasionally add a comma) but since they are handed to the state, we cannot have a look at them.

      thanks Colin, maybe I should go back and read the Prof’s comments on these matters. Porous mind, some things seem to fall through. I’ll look into it, thanks.

      ************************************************************************

      I just realized something else. Supposedly there was no air rescue available for Trayvon Martin due to weather, according to the documents, but if you listen to Serino’s interview with witness #6 the same night, you can clearly hear an helicopter, Serino even makes a remark about it, see transcript attached to the motion to modify conditions of release: Exhibit A, page 11.

    • Tzar says:

      Alluded they may contain Brady material re his client..exculpabable.
      d

      which tells me there’s about to be indictments on culpable people and Serino is getting ahead of it

  22. Lonnie Starr says:

    Very well stated Professor. Giving up a vote.

  23. esentrick says:

    Great post Professor! Happy New Year All!

  24. colin black says:

    It was stated in the papers that the State received from Baez.
    The D A did not want this to go before a Grand Jury as they would have moved to prosecute the accused.
    And he didnt want to haveing recently lost a double murder case or manslaughter were S Y G was the defence.

    • leander22 says:

      Colin, all I have on my mind concerning Baez, is that he objected to BDLR’s statement during the hearing with judge Nelson. Is there anything else, I missed concerning his client Serino? I am aware I may not be completely up to date. 😉

  25. Cercando Luce says:

    Be Prepared is an excellent motto.

    I hope that prosecution presents this case to bring home to each juror that this impulsive and non-CCW-permitted gunman defendant is first and foremost a danger to each and every member of the public.

    Once each one realizes what it means to acquit such a person, any decent person on the jury will vote to convict with maximum penalty.

    • Cercando Luce says:

      I might be wrong about non-CCW license, so for now I amend the above to merely “…this impulsive gunman defendant…”

    • ladystclaire says:

      So, since Fogen was not *LEGALLY* carrying a CW will he be charged with that also? this POS has gotten away with so much and he did it with the help of those whose job it is to serve and protect. his fat officer buddy Tim Smith should also be charged for lying about him having a CCW permit when he knew that he was lying when he said it was in his wallet.

      with a police force like this one in Sanford, FL, we are all at the mercy of the most dangerous of criminals among us. they enabled this creature to do what he did and now they are lying for him in order to keep him out of prison. hopefully the DOJ will make them all accountable for what ever part that they played in this murder cover up.

  26. leander22 says:

    this is a really interesting idea, Frederick.

    I didn’t immediately grasp to what extend jury nullification could be connected or connectible to the defense stategy, but now that you combined them, the connection it is more obvious.

    From the limited arguments by Jeralyn that still stick on my mind, obviously since they troubled me most, at one point she predicted an enormous amount of mudslinging concerning Trayvon’s character. I am not completely sure, but may have asked the rhetorical question if the parents could really wish for that to happen. I find this type of argument peculiar, since obviously if George simply walks away he is also handed the power to define who Trayvon was with exactly the same outcome.

    I have read the latest missives or motions by defense yesterday and one little item puzzled me (Modifcation of release):

    “specifically, the statement of the only eyewitness of the event, Witness 6, who, when interviewed on the night of the events, said”

    The “only” eyewitness? Notice, selection.

    I am absolutely with you, do not underestimate defense, the selective way they publish materials lately tells us all we need to know concerning their strategy.

    Besides I can now understand more clearly why people start to ask themselves what this is about.

    Is it a common rule that a defendant can communicate with potential witnesses to his heart’s delight? There is something murky about these motions. Witness 6 would be such a potential witness to have a couple of nice chats with too, after all.

    What supports your basic assessment if I remember the motions correctly there were also hints that strictly a grand jury should have made the whole matter simply go away.

    • leander22 says:

      correction:

      I am not completely sure, but she may have asked the rhetorical question if the parents could really wish for that to happen.

      • Malisha says:

        Yes, she said something like, “Trayvon’s family will not enjoy hearing all the bad things about him that will inevitably come out,” or some such garbage. Her opinions on the matter were just past the point of being outrageous, into slanderous, but she felt free to say those things because the dead cannot be slandered. If I live to be 100 I will never understand why she presumed that the ridiculous story told by Fogen was credible enough for her to pin her professional credibility on. More the sillier of her.

    • seallison says:

      Like Jr. said early in his media tour and in Twitter – one person at a time. Everyone commenting on Jrs statements calls him a liar, and his statements are lies. His statements are formulated to rile people because they are so outrageous. Now, he is saying that Fogen looked for his phone in his shirt pocket. Obviously a lie to anyone who has watched Fogens recounting of the shooting.

      Purpose – change the mind of one person at a time. Trial date is a long way away.

      Fogens innocence camp ramps up the propaganda just before there is to be a release of evidence, hearing, or any media coverage.

  27. Malisha says:

    Professor, I didn’t even know it was possible to ask for extra peremptory challenges. It would be good to do so except that then O’Mara would challenge the smartest people who were available, hoping that the less smart ones could be bullied more efficiently.

    Jury selection experts are a MUST in this case. There are ways to recognize racists and bigots and of course the racists and bigots are cocky and arrogant so they think they cannot be found out. I would recommend a good forensic psychiatrist and an experienced social science researcher to be included in the jury selection team. I even think body language should be an area of evaluation because most of the bigots I know give off definite “rigid correctness” signals even as they speak. I hope BDLR can get a good “Cousin Vinnie” type of guy to work with him when questioning prospective jurors. I think O’Mara and West are going to be just plain OUT OF CONTROL during the process. They’re gonna be violating every rule of decent behavior and smashing the “bounds of advocacy” with regularity.

    At the bottom of it all, however, I still believe that there will be a plea deal at the last minute, and that it will involve an inadequate sentence (less than 25 years) because Corey does not want the knock-down-drag-out to actually happen, for political reasons. I think her political reasons (not to expose Wolfinger et al. to a complete public awareness of their criminal behavior in that RICO organization known as Seminole County) are well known to O’Mara and form part of the reason he has felt so free to violate his own ethical standards as well.

    We have unscrupulous and dishonest people all over the place in this case; we don’t even know who is doing what to whom.

    • tinytruthseeker says:

      So if in fact BDLR does sniff out a racist during jury selection how does he frame his objection to that person being seated? Does he use a peremptory challenge? And what happens if he has used up his challenges and he feels a potential juror is racist? Surely it isn’t possible that due to a lack of challenges the judge would allow a racist to be seated in THIS case….

      • He has an unlimited number of challenges for cause and he would have to persuade the judge that the prospective juror is really a racist to set up the challenge and persuade her to grant it.

        • tinytruthseeker says:

          Ahhh. I understand now….Thank you so much professor for taking the time to answer my question directly.

          Like so many that come here to read and learn I so appreciate what you do and how much of yourself you have given in the fight for justice and sharing your knowledge of the law. with all of us.

      • Malisha says:

        There is excellent research done on racism and bigotry, even the unconscious kind. One study I saw had a questionnaire and then a video test. Even people who came out non-racist on the questionnaire had prejudiced responses to the video because they did not know what their responses WERE. Faces flashed up on the screen quickly — too quickly for people to focus on — and then people were asked to identify objects. They identified objects that had to do with criminality (guns, knives, handcuffs, jail bars, judge gavels, police cars) more quickly when they had just seen Black faces than when they had just seen white faces; even CHILDREN’s Black or white faces. They identified neutral objects (pencils, can openers, bottles, toys, shelves, shoes) at the same speed for either Black or white faces. Things like that. There ARE ways of finding out how we really think and feel, in general. Language is, of course, one of the most significant “tells.” I think if there is one thing that is the most incriminating among all the things Fogen did, it was calling Trayvon Martin “the suspect” 18 times in his written statement at police HQ, after he had killed him.

        • tinytruthseeker says:

          Nods…. I have found while discussing this case that people that do hold racist thoughts communicate in such sly ways. All the while shouting that they are not racist. It is sad that our society has such hateful thoughts and feelings running so deep that a lot of times people don’t even realize they are participating in racism.

          I am a college student (nothing to do with the law…. I have been led to follow this case because Trayvon had he lived would have been a contemporary of mine. He was the kind of person I would have been led to befriend. Gentle, smart, such love for his family…)

          Somehow his being murdered feels like a personal assault. My friends and myself live in hoodies at school. It is common to find students headed out after dark to walk and get a drink or snack….. If what George claims was actually true then I could have been Trayvon…. a little white girl…. but we all know that what he claims are lies! Trayvon was a “black” boy. He was profiled because of the color of his skin…. not the clothes he was wearing. Not the way he was walking, not the way he was talking….he was profiled because he was a black boy.

          If it had been the dead of night some people MIGHT accept his BS as truth….no matter the color of Trayvon’s skin…. some people might perhaps feel some hesitation seeing a young person walking in between homes in the rain. Trayvon wasn’t holding his phone to his ear….in the right environment, time and space I can see some people could feel some dis-ease at a stranger sauntering through a small quiet neighborhood…. I try very hard to see all sides of this argument…. it is still too big a pill for me to swallow personally….BUT…. I know that people older than myself can be flustered or frightened easily by anything out of the ordinary in their own little world…. but George is NOT old. He must have been associating every day with people my age. Trayvon’s age. He went to college where he was surrounded no doubt by students who looked and walked and talked EXACTLY like Trayvon did. It was barely nightfall the night GZ murdered him…. he had NO cause to be scared of Trayvon. He will NEVER convince me otherwise no matter how many lies he tells….no matter how many distractions his brother throws around.

          GZ fancied himself a LE sort of person. He wasn’t…. probably never would have been. His delusions coupled with mind altering medications and a personal and serious problem with anger management….along with an obvious predilection for racist thoughts and words, and a gun. What a terrible, terrible but perfect storm for disaster.

          I try very hard not to hold hateful feelings for anyone…. I fail miserably in the case of GZ. He is the most disgusting sort of person. He not only stole the life of a child…. he continues every day to lie and attempts to even steal that final scream…. that final plea for life from the boy he killed…. I hate him….

          • blushedbrown says:

            @Tiny

            Thank you for your post. I really felt and got what you were saying.

            Nodding my head to you as well.

    • seallison says:

      Malisha –

      You say that racists and bigots are cocky and arrogant. I strongly disagree with that statement. While one may think they are not racist,
      there are subtle questions that can be asked of them that will expose prejudice.

      My grandmother was so obviously racist – mostly about new Canadian immigrants (even though she too was an immigrant from Scotland in 1910). As an adult, I made a point of calling her out each and every time she made comment. I loved her. But, I had threatened her on many an occasion to never go out with her in public because she would cause embarrassment when she would expose her racism. There is no way I would ever be able to change her thoughts and wouldn’t even try. She was who she was. It was her generation.

      My mother, on the other hand, is more discrete with her racism. Like Fogens mother & father. Many racist comments confined to home discussion. I call her out in the privacy of home each and every time. It only causes debate. I will never change her. She is who she is.

      I am racist because, you see, racism is in my family. I have always recognized it for what it is and faced it head on. I have not overcome it entirely because of personal history. But, I work on it every day.

      Believe me, you would have a difficult time finding out what question to ask me to expose my prejudices.

      In conclusion, I would say that the jury selection experts will be looking for a younger generation (under 40) and will need to be very, very good at formulating questions.

      • seallison says:

        p.s. I have been following this case since it first hit the papers in Winnipeg. I discuss it with my Mom to hear her perspective. And, you what she is STILL stuck on.

        It was the one question GZ asks Travon – What are you doing around here. She can not overcome that question. She says that Trayvon should have just answered the question. No matter the evidence I duscuss, she insists Fogen had a right to follow him because he did not recognize him as someone who lives in the complex. She feels he had a right to ask Trayvon the question.

        That is her generation.

        • I think Trayvon probably told him that he lived there, but he didn’t believe him.

          In other words, answering the question made no difference to the outcome.

        • cielo62 says:

          That is the Zidiots favorite point: GZ was selflessly protecting his neighborhood! Nobody has the right to terrorize someone and yet GZ had that “right” because his intentions were good! AUGH!

          Sent from my iPod

          • Lonnie Starr says:

            GZ’s presenting himself to Trayvon was an unlawful act under the circumstances given. When Trayvon asked “Why are you following me for?” He was giving GZ a chance to end his illegal operations/activities and hostilities by explaining himself. Instead, GZ took the opportunity to illegally escalate the hostile situation he had created, by issuing an illegal challenge he had no right to issue.

            GZ cannot claim any right to present himself to Trayvon at all! Doing so is simply unlawful, in the given situation, because GZ has not the powers to do so.

            It is night, it is dark, it is raining and Trayvon has offended no one, committed no offense, and has a right to be free of impediment along his course. GZ intentionally violates Trayvon’s rights by confronting Trayvon with surveillance. Surveillance, for a purpose and purposes unknown, by a person unknown, who causes another to fear for their own safety and well being. That is a criminal act.

          • cielo62 says:

            Lonnie- you are preaching to the choir with me. I am merely pointing out a Zidiot comment hat many racists will find compelling on the face of it. Another reason to be careful at jury selection. “Do you feel that people have the right to patrol their neighborhoods armed with a gun and NOT have to identify himself?” That would get a few of the older Taafe-types out of the jury pool.

            Sent from my iPod

          • Lonnie Starr says:

            Having a black man and a white woman, exchanging hugs and meaningful gazes in the audience, would get rid of a few more.

          • cielo62 says:

            LOL! Lonnie! Yeah, the sounds of their heads exploding would single them out!

            Sent from my iPod

          • Your comment made me think of that scene with Meg Ryan in the deli pretending to have an orgasm.

            Seriously, you have a great idea there!

      • seallison says:

        Professor – You are likely right about Trayvon’s answering him making no difference to the outcome. However, his answering the question was not mentioned by DeeDee after she heard the exchange between the two.

        I would say he more than likely, at some point, told the vigilante that he was staying in the complex. It just isn’t in evidence. More importantly, why should he be obligated to answer someone who has not identified himself, who has been sneaking around in an intimidating manner to even warrant a response.

      • cielo62 says:

        Good points seallison! The age thing helps even though GZ is 29. I’ve seen that the younger generation is more accepting of diversity. And less tolerant of racism and homophobia. Throw a very fine net indeed.

        Sent from my iPod

      • leander22 says:

        Seallison, one could even complicate matters. Let’s suppose for one moment that Fogen studied the case of Burgess and realized he lived in the complex, would Trayvon’s answer have mattered?

        There is one core aspect of the case or the larger scenario, and I may not be able to put it into words, I am struggling with from the very start.

        But have you ever faced somebody that suspects you of something. What would be the correct behavior towards such a person, and how should you know if s/he start out with believing to know everything about you there is to know? All I remember from this type of encounters quite a long time ago, is that you only become highly alert to the fact that whatever you may do, may be wrong. Run? Not run? …

        I agree basically that many people understand the ideas behind questions and may occasionally respond accordingly, but it will not work as easily with a questionnaire that contains not as easily discernible control questions and such tests exist. It’s all simply a matter of using the correct type of expertise as Malisha suggests above.

        Nelson has a degree in psychology too, I think that is a basic strategic advantage.

      • whonoze says:

        seallison: Tell your Mom the issue is not so much what question GZ asked, but what he DID? How did he ask it? What actions was he taking when he asked it. According to DeeDee (I take this from memory, it’s not an exact quote) Trayvon said “What you following me for?” and the man said “What you doing around here?” and the next thing somebody pushed… somebody pushed Trayvon and the headset just fell.’ The point being that as DeeDee relates it the shoving commences immediately after GZ’s question. This means the two men must have been within arms distance of each other.

        Now, do we imagineTrayvon, who was the quarry of a chase, was the aggressor and moved into GZ’s personal space getting them close enough for pushing… Or is it more likely George Zimmerman the enforcer was demonstraing his macho and trying assert control over Trayvon by getting up in his face ala a military drill sergeant? (It’s a rhetorical question obviously.)

        I have been saying for months that I believe the fight started when GZ violated Trayvon’s personal space. There’s no evidence that would help us identify the germination of the struggle, but this seems the most logical to me. And, if so, it doesn’t matter who pushed who first, because intentionally moving inside someone else’s comfort zone is universally understood as an an act of aggression.

      • Malisha says:

        I’m not sure we totally disagree, Seallison, because I didn’t express myself well enough. There are racists and there are racists. I am one, although neither my father nor my mother would EVER express a single racist, bigoted or prejudiced thought. My mother hauled me in from the backyard when I was about 7 because she heard me and the girl next door chanting the rhyme “Eenie Meenie Miney Moe” but we were unaware that the original rhyme from which that came was a racist taunt! She gave me a stern warning and a lesson in what we then called “prejudice” which she likened to the worst of anti-semitism which, as a post-Holocaust Jew, impressed me strenuously. My father lectured us on using ANY “wrong words” even though he had it all wrong. He claimed that “Mama Mia” was a slur against Catholics (which it turned out it was not) and he claimed that “Oh Boy!” was a slur against Blacks (whom we then called “Negroes” before our language evolved). We could hardly talk, for fear of saying anything wrongful. We limited ourselves to “Hell” and “Damn” because our parents were not religious. My father traveled in the South for the Army (he was a civilian engineer in essential services for Fort Monmouth) and was refused service at lunch counters because of olive skin, curly hair and thick lips. He declared: “I would rather starve than eat Nazi food!” Of course he wouldn’t, but he liked to say that.

        But I am also a racist. So we are, and so we deal with it. But we do not make our decisions based upon prejudice. Just as I did not decide that Trayvon Martin was a thug (because there was no evidence that he was), just so I did not decide that Fogen was a racist murderer on prejudice. I decided that Fogen was a murderer (and I’m 90% sure he’s a racist too) because of the uncontrovertible evidence that has already been provided.

        The “arrogant and cocky” racists are the ones who would try to hijack a jury and bully everyone into a nullification. Those are the ones we have to fear. Ordinary racists, who have some prejudiced beliefs, are not a danger to the jury at all. They may even go in there believing that Trayvon Martin was probably suspicious, probably not a great kid, probably a future drug dealer, probably a kid who deserved to be rousted by cops from time to time to keep him in line. But those — who are not the cocky ones and who would not put their own initial prejudices above the emerging story of what actually took place that night — are not, in my opinion, a real danger to a valid jury decision. Because those people, who harbor some prejudice but who are not psycho-lunatic-batsh*t-crazy-Nazi-skinhead-a55holes per se through and through, still will not tolerate that a guy looks at a kid, decides that he should be rousted, and then appoints himself God’s Enforcer on Earth and kills the kid, afterwards lying about it and slandering the kid remorselessly. I don’t think a half-decent person (all they have to be is HALF-decent) is going to go for that even if they are by nature racist and even moderately bigoted.

        The ones I called “arrogant and cocky” are the ones who would bully all the other jurors into a nullification. THOSE are the dangers and those I believe are so firmly convinced of their righteousness that they not only would like to have killed a Trayvon of their own somewhere, but also would like to infiltrate a jury and give their “hero-killer” a walk for his murder. THEY are cocky and arrogant and they would imagine that they could hide their racism but they are probably not smart enough to do so effectively.

        Remember, we are not seeing all the evidence. If there is a trial, and the prosecution puts things in front of a jury, even if there is one of these super-nazis on the panel, if one slipped by the jury process, I still don’t think it will carry the day. There is, strangely enough, heroism in ordinary people. Ordinary people will quite often refuse to go along with absolute wrongheadedness. I would expect a hung jury ten times more probable than a nullification. And a hung jury would lead to another trial. And damage would have been done to the defense in the first trial, so the second would be worse for Fogen.

        Think of it. Would any of your racist ancestors actually go along with the idea that a white man with NO PROVOCATION could kill a Black kid who had done him no wrong? I think the prosecution will be able to prove that Fogen’s story cannot be true. And then the jury (racists and those who are not actively racist) will be looking at a situation where the ONLY person who claims Trayvon Martin “hit [him] first” is a proven liar. Even a racist doesn’t want to endorse a non-cop deciding to kill a Black kid without probable cause.

      • Malisha says:

        Here’s where I see a possible jury nullification issue. Let’s say Fogen walks. Let’s say someone kills him soon after. Let’s say that person is charged with 2nd degree murder. Let’s say that person’s defense was that Fogen threatened him and said, “I killed one punk and I can kill another,” and that Fogen then reached into his pocket and the person feared being shot with a hollow-point bullet. I can see THAT killer’s jury ending up with a jury nullification. I can actually see that! I might write that script up and try to sell it RIGHT NOW!

      • ladystclaire says:

        I agree with you Professor, even if Trayvon had told Fogen that he lived there it may not have made a difference to him because, he was known to follow African-Americans who actually owned homes there and he also asked them the very same question that he asked of Trayvon.

        he also followed a 16 yr old kid and harassed him, about a bicycle that he called LE about saying the kid stole his bicycle. it was proved that he did not steal the bike and that it was legally his. I blame the SPD for this murder just as much as I blame Fogen. they put up with his excessive phone calls of him calling for petty nit picking little things that didn’t really matter. from pot holes to garbage in the streets, he was on the phone to LE.

        had Fogen been able to hold down a job, he wouldn’t have had the time to be the busy body that he was. the bottom line here is the FACT that he and Taaffe didn’t want blacks living in that neighborhood, even though some of them were owners and Fogen himself was a renter. it would be shameful and very wrong for this lying cunning snake to get away with killing a child in cold blood, just because of the color of his skin.

      • Malisha says:

        But Seallison, do you think your mother would still vote to let Fogen go unpunished if it were proven that he had lied about the beat-down? So let’s say she kept thinking that Trayvon was wrong to not politely and humbly respond to Fogen. In her mind, would that mean that Fogen was entitled to kill him? If she sat through the whole trial and learned that: (a) the experts say that Trayvon had no signs on his body of having beaten Fogen; and (b) witnesses say that they saw Fogen trying to restrain Trayvon; and (c) Fogen’s story is bogus in three or four other main elements, do you not think that other jurors would be able to convince her that even if she thought Trayvon was a snarky disrespectful little “colored boy,” he was supposed to get shot through the heart? Couldn’t she be convinced that Fogen should have waited for the police to show up and take the little brat off to Juvy to serve out his six month sentence for sassing a white guy? THAT’s where I believe that regardless of the initial prejudices of jurors, the trial DOES matter. The presentation of the prosecution’s case WILL matter.

      • seallison says:

        Thank you Malisha, et al

        I agree with all of your points and read every word very carefully. No one in my family would ever think that killing anyone was ever the right thing to do unless it was a last resort. We also do not agree with owning guns. My step-father turned in his hunting rifles years ago – when he stopped hunting for food (not sport).

        Although my family is racist to varying degrees, I think any one of them would be good jurors.

        I think the tests mentioned are an excellent means of identifying those who would be good jurors in this case.

        Thanks everyone. I have been over on the open-thread.

    • Erica says:

      I think there is a strong possibilty gz will take a plea deal too. i think the state will use shellies perjury chargers and offer to drop the charges. i think its very likely if he is aquitted bdlr will make it his busines to get sz some prison time time.

      • cielo62 says:

        I don’t think GZ will be offered a deal at all. I read this all the time “GZ will probably take a plea deal” as if it is an automatic option. But the prosecution has a strong case. They have no reason to offer GZ anything. Not that GZ would take it. His ego is too big. But don’t be looking for a plea deal. It’s not going to be offered.

        Sent from my iPod

        • I like your comment about fogen big ego……

          It’s the same ego that wouldn’t let him admit he got wacked in the nose by his own firearm….

          I still firmly believe that’s how he got the injury to the RIGHT side of his nose.

      • Erica says:

        I can’t believe GZ would let his wife go to jail because of something she did for him. I mean would he really let his wife go down and to jail for him? Is he that selfish? The possibility that he can get off and his wife will go to jail should stink to GZ. But there is always the possibility that Shellie will agree to testify aganist GZ to save her self. Think about this……

        BDLR offers to drop the charges aganist Shellie in exchange for 15-20. GZ says no and he appears selfish to Shellie and she turns on him to save herself since he would not.

        BDLR could even use Shellie’s charges to spark divison amng the two. BDLR offers GZ 10 year in exchange, the will drop her charges, GZ says no, because he’s selfish and has an ego, this doesn’t sit well with Shellie and she turns on GZ

        Can the prosecution offer a deal and take the deal back?

        • Xena says:

          I can’t believe GZ would let his wife go to jail because of something she did for him. I mean would he really let his wife go down and to jail for him? Is he that selfish?

          According to his MySpace page, his “boys” violated law on his behalf, did a year in jail, and kept their mouths closed so he wouldn’t be “pinched.”

        • cielo62 says:

          GZ would be more than willing to throw his wife under the bus. He’s getting ready to leave his parents be homeless. GZ is a sociopath after all. He could not care less about anybody else.

          Sent from my iPod

      • Erica says:

        Shellie is wayyyy more likely to be convicted and go to jail than GZ. She was caught red handed. She can not disprove it. This gives BDLR a lot to work with as far a a plea deal.

  28. Xena says:

    @Professor, I’m honored.

    I hope you are right, Xena, but I am not certain that you are.

    By nature, I’m an optimist and by faith, believe that positive reaps positive. That doesn’t mean closing eyes and shutting down brain, but more like the little engine that could — never stop thinking positively.

    BDLR has stated that it will take at least 2 weeks to seat a jury. That conveys to me that he is taking jury selection seriously.

    The prosecution should request additional peremptory challenges since they may be the only means it has to strike dishonest stealth jurors.

    Indeed. I’ve observed the thugification of Trayvon Martin and through the months, what began as outright racist comments are now combined with dog whistles. If the prosecution employs your suggestions, cunning potential jurors should stick out like sore thumbs. And to be fair, I would say this also applies to those potential jurors who have already decided on GZ’s guilt.

    The attacks on you and impersonation, is a demonstration of cowards — envious cowards. They are attempts to provoke like responses. Professor, you’re just too cool 🙂

  29. Ty Flair says:

    Professor thats why i said this case look winable to us,but the big picture is this case is scary. This case does not lay in the hands of BDLR, O’Mara,or Fogen. It lay in the hand of the jury,one evil jury can slip in an say not guilty. These people are out there. They are just hateful people,i read some of the stuff they said,an they could be in Sanford,they could be docters,teachers,college students,or anybody with a pretty smile,but evil inside. We have this case beat with hard forensic,an his own words,but that want matter with one evil jury.

  30. colin black says:

    I agree a seqestered jury can be a resentfull group of people.It also gives a stealth juror with an agenda to aquitt the accussed.
    Time to size up others on the jury .

    I expect the defence will go all in to attempt to have the jury seqestered.

  31. Thanks for the smack upside the head with reality Professor. It’s pretty shocking and might be the most important post to date.
    I’m going to mass email this to everyone at the state attorney’s office once a week until trial!

  32. looneydoone says:

    Professor,
    That’s why many of us encourage you to demand AOL/Huff-Post provide you with the IP of the person who’s posting under the screennames “masoninblue” and “Professor Leatherman”.

    We suspect it’s someone in the immediate family and/or for the defense team. If so, that information must be made known to the Prosecution.

    • The AOL/Huffington Post does not respond to complaints.

      • ladystclaire says:

        Hello and Happy New Year Professor. you don’t know juist how right you are when it comes to AOL/Huffington Post. they could care less about complaints being made concerning the things going on, on their web site.

        those who support Fogen can say what ever they want to in the way of slandering and dissing Trayvon and his family and, they get away with it. some of the comments they make should not be allowed to be posted. as for what they are doing to you over there, this person has now changed his/her username but, their avatar is your photo. smdh

      • ladystclaire says:

        I know you are right but, what they are doing is wrong and it just burns me up knowing they are being allowed to get away with this BS. you are a good and decent man and, I just don’t like the way they are trying to tarnish your name. I’m on your side all the way and never for get that. I am thankful for what you and the rest of the people here are doing and that is fighting for justice for an innocent kid who was minding his own business and ended up being murdered.

        I hope the prosecutors will be able to prevent those who wish to see this thing get away with his crime. Trayvon was a 17 yr old kid and, according to the law, he was still a child. only a couple of weeks of just turning 17 and now he is gone. it’s just unreal knowing that some people in this country can and do support the killer of a child.

  33. You all have thoughtful comments says:

    Fascinating article, Professor. I am just going to sit back, read, and learn from this page.

  34. cielo62 says:

    >^..^< although it is best to he as prepared as possible, I don't imagine that THAT many people are watching this case locally. It should be possible to seat a jury. It's not that common to get even get called for jury duty. I've never been called up for any juicy cases. In fact I rarely get called at all! I got a DL. I'm registered to vote. But I get called once ever 3 or 4 years. It would take amazing luck to get a stealth juror even called up. Obviously I am no good for the prosecution. I'm optimistic enough to think seating a jury would take some planning. But I cant imagine having that many racists smart enough to lie convincingly enough to get on the short list.

    • You may be right, but what if you are wrong?

      Does it make any sense to risk losing the case by not taking care of business?

      Specifically, the business of jury selection?

    • Two sides to a story says:

      Sanford is a smalish community and Seminole County has a moderate population. I’m guessing people do get called regularly for jury duty with the population figures there. Far different than a county with a Miami or a Denver or a Phoenix. I betcha people are well aware of the case coming up this June.

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: