Open Thread: Monday, January 14, 2013

Time to open up an open thread for today.

I posted an article earlier today titled, Did John (W6) Lie to the Police in the Trayvon Martin Murder Case?

Use this open thread to discuss and comment on other matters.

One topic you might want to consider is what questions would you ask prospective jurors in a jury questionnaire in the Martin murder case in order to uncover a probable likelihood that they will vote to acquit the defendant regardless of the evidence admitted at trial.

Such people will not readily admit to such a predisposition, so how do you outsmart them?

314 Responses to Open Thread: Monday, January 14, 2013

  1. colin black says:

    racerrodig says:

    January 17, 2013 at 11:16 pm

    “Extree – Extree – Extree – Read all about it,FrigginFogen abducted by ET….Extree – Extree – Extree – Moron O’ Mara stunned his client was last seen riding in an aliens bike basket – Read all about it…..
    Angela Cory says it’s all a hoax….Bernie D says I’ll get to the bottom of it……….Read all about it…….. Fogen abducted by ET…..PaPa Z say’s I knew it would happen……says the New Alien Panthers are behind it !!!” O’ Mara claims aliens want to study broken noses and since it is undisputed it was broken …Read all about it !!

    FOGGENS BUTT WOULDNT FIT IN A BIKE BASKET.

    Would have to be a flying Excuvater

    • racerrodig says:

      Ya got me there !!!

    • Malisha says:

      LOL!

      I can hear it now. Fogen is phoning home. “Shellie, I have been abducted by the NAP. Put 528 inches — remember, 528 inches — into a letter with two five-cent stamps and put on the address, “Oh shit I don’t want to give out my address; I don’t know where the kid is” and put my new planet as the home address and they’ll have to deliver it to me here for lack of postage and I’ll get it right away. Remember 528 inches. And don’t get any DNA on it. You can’t spare any DNA right now.”

  2. colin black says:

    Sorry for O.T………
    Has anyone had a shout from Cran or Prof recently.
    No its none of my biz.
    Dont need or want details just want to no they are safe an well.
    I may have missed them saying a hiatous was due.
    If so I appoligise foe being a drama queen.
    Just want to no there both hunky dory.

  3. blushedbrown says:

    Since this is an open thread, I want to post a couple of things that are happening on Feb 5, Trayvon’s Birthday, that I am aware of.

    Miami Dade Fireman, demoted now wants job back…..
    Hearing date Feb 5

    http://miami.cbslocal.com/2013/01/14/miami-dade-fire-captain-demoted-over-trayvon-martin-post-fights-for-old-job/

  4. Malisha says:

    Leander, re: “how Robles does her research”: my opinion is that she prints whatever the SPD tells her to print. I let her know three times, specifically, that she had the wrong information when she wrote on March 17 and March 18, 2012, that the RTL neighborhood had experienced “eight burglaries, nine thefts and one other shooting in the year before Trayvon Martin’s death” but she did not even bother to check it and then after promises of follow-up and phone calls and e-mails, she sent me a message that she was leaving the Miami Herald and I should have good luck in the rest of my life.

    Now a Black journalist in NY is following up on the story of the false information promulgated by the Florida press in their attempt to assist the police cover-up of the Trayvon Martin murder. Robles will find out that she appears in another journalist’s story. GOOD!

    On another issue: the voice-mail message to Taaffe from Fogen in hiding, sending condolences for the loss of his son. It was super peculiar, but it did not relate to the son who died in a car crash. Here’s how it went: first son died about 4 years ago of a drug overdose. Mom and remaining brother and sister all applied for restraining orders (which were granted) keeping Taaffe away from them. The remaining brother, who was not yet dead when Fogen made this stupid call, went public on the blogs and said that his father was hostile, racist, and dangerous. Thereafter, that remaining son was killed in an automobile accident, no mention of any drugs involved by either driver.

    My opinion about Fogen saying that ingratiating and yet stupid thing to Taaffe on his early March 2012 voice-mail message was that it was just one of those “see how good I am, how nice I am, how sympathetic and kind and caring I am” kind of things. It was as if you would offer condolences to someone every single time you spoke with them for at least five years once you realized they had suffered a loss in their life. It’s show-off fakery, the only kind of emotional life Fogen has.

    • Cercando Luce says:

      How strange. Could it have been a code? Or a rehearsal?

      Thank you Malisha for your eye-opening research and observations.

      • Malisha says:

        I was guessing that the “sorry for your loss” crap was said deliberately because Fogen realized that voice-message would be turned over to authorities. There were several people doing these faked-up “upstanding citizen” public performances then: Taaffe, Joe Oliver, later on Osterman. Morganstern and Lee were issuing statements, remember? The public vision was supposed to be of this very nice “squeaky clean” guy. It was just a stupid campaign; it failed because the Fulton-Martins did not agree that they should accept the stupid offensive explanations being peddled by the cover-up team.

        “Oh we are so indignant because we are so so so good and people are saying bad things about us” is a very old, tired, sad, worn strategy. But it is still in use.

        Notice the silence recently? O’Mara reduced to talking about a photograph of Trayvon Martin that bothers him, making sly little faked-up threats to “scrutinize” someone he has already investigated and found NOT LACKING. And silence about reducing Fogen’s bond; silence about the money; silence about the police; silence about alleged criminality of the state’s witnesses; silence about the injustices being done to Fogen; silence, even, about the honker of a broken nose.

        To me, this is the silence before the — before the nothing. I see a NOTHING coming up. Either the NOTHING will be made of “Uh Oh Mr. Zimmerman has been abducted or something because we cannot find him” or “Uh Oh, we have irreconcilable differences and Mr. Zimmerman needs appointed counsel” or “Uh Oh we cannot have a SYG hearing because we don’t have money for expert witnesses” or, I’m betting, “Uh Oh Mr. Zimmerman has really bad PTSD and he can’t participate in his defense so, uh, we can’t go to trial.”

        Remember, you read it here.

        • racerrodig says:

          “Extree – Extree – Extree – Read all about it,FrigginFogen abducted by ET….Extree – Extree – Extree – Moron O’ Mara stunned his client was last seen riding in an aliens bike basket – Read all about it…..
          Angela Cory says it’s all a hoax….Bernie D says I’ll get to the bottom of it……….Read all about it…….. Fogen abducted by ET…..PaPa Z say’s I knew it would happen……says the New Alien Panthers are behind it !!!” O’ Mara claims aliens want to study broken noses and since it is undisputed it was broken …Read all about it !!

    • racerrodig says:

      “It was as if you would offer condolences to someone every single time you spoke with them for at least five years once you realized they had suffered a loss in their life. It’s show-off fakery, the only kind of emotional life Fogen has.”

      It is so sickeningly obvious I could hurl large chunks (on his feet) This begs the question, doesn’t anyone in Camp Fogennutzz have the slightest clue that everything he says shows an insincere pathetic agenda ??

  5. colin black says:

    foggen got everything wrong re adresses an direction.
    Even though Sean corrects him about the clubhouse add .
    He lets it flow over his head.
    Its near the clubhouse 111
    Sean do you mean 1111…
    He was a thousand digits out.

  6. mgs710 says:

    As this case gets closer to trail, once again it’s being discussed a site that I sometimes post on. I wanted to share one of the posts from that site by poster wci347 that I think y’all will appreciate.

    “There are people that are going to remain solid in Zimmerman’s corner no matter what evidence comes out against him, and even if they would have taken a different approach to such evidence had it come out against Martin. Such is the nature of inherent bigotry.

    “The facts don’t lie. In 73% of Stand Your Ground Hearings where the victim is black and the shooter is white (not saying that Zimmerman was white) the shooter has gotten off. The percentage quite expectedly drops when the victim is white and the shooter is black – 59%.

    “Leatherman quite honestly only skimmed the surface of the plethora of material that the state will bring against this pathological liar. For instance he fails to mention how Zimmerman lied about his knowledge of Martin’s race. “I think he’s black” is belied by his open admission to Singleton hours later where he tells her that he had the opportunity to look Martin in the eyes and was certain that Martin was not a resident of the complex because he knew every adult and every child that resided there. Such an affirmative statement yet he is not aware of the person’s race? That is pure mularkey and not only will no jury buy that contrivance, but his lawsuit against NBC will fly out the window also.

    “He and his band of deluded followers want us to believe that Martin ran home, “he was near his daddy’s house” but fail to explain how 1) he even knew that Zimmerman got out of his vehicle, 2) that he could re-position himself to hide in the path going back to Zimmerman’s car not knowing if Zimmerman would even come back that way or where in fact he was even going, 3) that he would hide in ambush while talking on the phone with his girlfriend, 4) that he fled home out of fear or some concern of Zimmerman’s status but magically developed a sense of bravado once he got there, and 5) that his zeal in wanting to MMA Zimmerman caused him to forget to leave the can of juice (that served absolutely no purpose in the attack) on the porch.

    “Here is a man who at 28 could not even get a passing mark in Algebra, failed an introductory course in Criminal Justice that I believe ironically dealt with profiling, lied about the fact that he had a college degree to police (a matter totally unrelated to the murder) when he was in fact on academic probation much of his time at the college, who couldn’t even remember the names of the three streets in the complex and his own address, but wants to be a judge. The fact that his followers harp on Martin’s school records but ignore the telltale signs of delusion and infirmity from Zimmerman’s perception of his future career and his academic accomplishments raises serious questions about the overall mental health of those in his corner. His supporters’ willingness to embrace this man’s account despite evidence of its unreliability beyond a reasonable doubt is beyond troubling and is a harbinger of a deepening division of this country.

    “But for the tragic event that has destroyed the lives of the Martin family and friends, you cannot make up a more comical character than George Zimmerman. His, “I wasn”t following him. I was just going in the same direction as he was,” epitomizes the depth of Zimmerman’s psychological maladies.

    “When he “apologizes” to the Martins in the bail hearing, he states to them, “I thought he was a few years younger than I was” and “I didn’t know whether he had a weapon or not.” Wait a minute. You told the dispatcher he was in his late teens. Guess what? It was one of the few things you were accurate about that night. An eleven year gap is substantially different from a few years younger. And as with whether he had a weapon or not, what difference would either make if you acted because you were getting the crap beat out of you? He didn’t shoot Martin because he thought Martin had a gun. According to him he shot him because he was a second or two away from losing his life from a physical beating. What did whether Martin had a gun or not have to do with his justification for shooting him? And if none- as all sane individuals will conclude- why did he offer it up in his apology? People who have studied the criminal mind even of the most advanced sociopathic deviants of our society, will generally agree on one thing, if you let one of them talk enough, they will convict themselves. There is an inherent mechanism built inside us all that refuses to allow us to delete transgressions of such magnitudes without repercussion and without infliction of punishment. We cannot save ourselves. That is why God sent an intercessor for us all.”

    Read more: http://www.gatorcountry.com/swampgas/showthread.php?t=249984&page=11#ixzz2IAspc083

  7. colin black says:

    He is probably wrong.

  8. colin black says:

    O Mara said probably undisputed.

    • racerrodig says:

      Lets say this. It is undisputed he used the word undisputed when in fact nothing about his nose injury is undisputed. It is even disputed he had a nose injury due to anything involving Trayvon. The only things that are undisputed that we know of are these 2 things

      1) “…..that’s when I got out of my schruck..”
      B) “…..then I raised my firearm, aimed and fired on shot…”

      We’re not even sure if he’s who he says he is with the cloudiness in his family tree.Hell, they’re still trying to figure out who the real mother is !!!!

      It is undisputed you can’t use the term “…probably undisputed…” in a court of law……or any conversation for that matter.
      Probably – Undisputed ……..take your pick Markie one or the other.

      My pick is “No Evidence at all of a broken nose indicating more towards, the defendant is lying. It is Undisputed there is no evidence of a broken nose”

      Hope this clears it all up Mark.

  9. Jun says:

    I think the biggest obstacles is to look at all angles the defense will present, prepare for any new lies Omara and Fogen will tell, and the jury selection

  10. Jun says:

    I have never understood people who use the argument “were you there?”

    The person who asks this was not there either, and all of the people who were there, their testimony points to the defendant targeting, stalking, then attacking, terrorizing, and then killing an unarmed kid and so does the other evidence

    Yet

    The person asking “were you there?” knows more than the witnesses on scene and the forensic evidence of what happened…

    and they do not know Trayvon but he is a gang banger and in a gang and attacked Fogen, yet Fogen is the person who was in a gang and attacked the other party and even had a gun!

    aye dios mios!

    • racerrodig says:

      Same here as far as that “…were you there…” garbage. As a fact, those who spout that the loudest have 0 clue as to what happened.

      Just look at Huff Po and the Outhouse !!

    • Xena says:

      @Jun.

      The person asking “were you there?” knows more than the witnesses on scene and the forensic evidence of what happened…

      Yep, and they forget that the defense attorneys weren’t there either.

      • racerrodig says:

        What ?? !! ?? O’ Mara had to be there. He said it’s “..undisputed…” that his client had a broken nose and the only way he could possibly know that is if he was there……..and why would he lie about a thing like that ??

        “Undisputed” he said….

        • Xena says:

          LOL@racerrodig. O’Mara is like Junior — use adjectives and dog whistles in their mantras although they weren’t there and have no clue of the evidence that the State already examined before filing charges.

    • Rachael says:

      LOL – true all.

      • racerrodig says:

        Some of the HP Zidiots still state Z was attacked, pummeled, half beat to death, all of which are great ideas, but none of them happened and when the topic of proof is broached…..nary a response other than……”were you there?”

        It’s like he who utters “Were you there” first (flinches) is the loser.

  11. Hmmm…I know Im a little behind the times here and off topic a bit, however…what is the CNN you tube video of March 30, 2012 of voice protected/disguised person who says they actually saw the struggle and the actual shot fired, with zimmerass on top???? has this person been verified? is this person listed in the witness statements? has he changed his story since this interview with CNN?

  12. Malisha says:

    It’s perfectly obvious what would have happened, had Jose Baez represented Fogen instead of O’Mara and West. Baez would have left Fogen in jail for a few months, made a motion to dismiss the charges under the SYG law, he would NOT have recused Judge Lester, and he would have made a great opening statement at the SYG hearing. “Your Honor, my client was walking along minding his own business trying to get his flashlight to work when he was savagely attacked and had to kill his attacker to save his own life, take my word for it.” And Judge Lester would have said, “Mr. Baez, thank you, I do take your word for it, charges dismissed.” And Fogen would have walked out a free man and Shellie would not have been charged with perjury and the two of them would have lived happily ever after. The only reason this did not happen was that the fool O’Mara agreed to try to get his client out of jail and from then on, everything went south and now he’s gonna catch Hell, and all because of having the wrong lawyer(s). It’s a crying shame. 😈

    • Cercando Luce says:

      Maybe he’d have recycled his Anthony opening statement, with a few cross-outs and name substitutions, but father-mother-brother couldn’t under any circumstances allow that to happen.

    • Jun says:

      Baez looked at Fogen and then looked his character and thought to himself “On top of losing, I will not get paid by this idiot, and also lose business.”

  13. colin black says:

    I don’t take anything GZ says at face value

    Exactly this is why I beleive J Baez turned foggen down..
    The very fact he said on a jail house convo that he turned him down because of the negative publicity is BS I M O.

    He drove to meet J Baez to disscuss the possability of retaining his council.
    That meeting happened an no agreement was forthcomeing.

    Because haveing sat an listened to foggen for an hour.
    Observed his demeanour attatude ect I think he concluded that it wasnt worth the hassle.And was a no win no payday noway Hosie situation.
    He may not have as many years on the clock as M O M but he is street savvy.

    We already know gz has a habbit of reverseing roles when he is the party in the wrong.
    So him stateing he didnt hire Baez convived me it was vice verca.

    Listen to his lame excuse ….Didnt hire him as of the backlash he may receive from J Baez ..crazie anthony..conections..

    Right ok George that sounds real plausable an 100 percent true.
    Off couse you have so much on your mind this never actually ocoured to you untill you drove to meet with him.
    Suddenly there as he smoozed you aan begged you to let him run your defence.
    Even promiseing to not only defend you pro bono.
    He would pay you the privallige just to be in the presance let alone defend a great MMerican.
    Hang on You thought this is the same lawer that got a Baby Murder off an peed a lot of people of dureing the process.
    Best I give someone else the right to defend a great MERKIN.

    Sounds plausable to me.

    • Lonnie Starr says:

      Sounds to me like Fogen’s mindset would be: Who needs him? I can simply play the same game with Corey that I played with the SPD and Wolfinger, after all, with their leverage and Papa going for me, I’ve gotten this far, why should this fail now?

      As far as he was concerned, and we saw this during the hearings, it was all about a popularity contest, not a criminal trial based on legal findings and/or procedure. O’Mara was daddies political pick, so GZ had to go with that. Obviously he believed that daddy was up to more of his string pulling tricks.

  14. colin black says:

    something to the affect of, why don’t they have white history month!!

    I would answer anyone whom asked this question.

    They do have white history everyday practically everyday in school.
    And besides the history of Blacks in America is also black an white history.
    The Africans story of either capture an voyage into Slavery or there birthright..wrong..to be born into servitude.
    This is also the white peoples europeans settlers history
    Thease events include both sides of the slave trade.

    Evenntually America would fight a bloody Civil War over emancipation ,
    And the Norths refuseing to let Southerns States leave the Union.

    • Lonnie Starr says:

      You certainly have the fact down straight. Nor do many people, Black or White, realize that the schism between and among Blacks, derives from the difference in treatment of slaves, they received at the hands of the different European groups. For example, the Dutch slavery did not contain the racial component. Thus, slaves under Dutch rule were allowed many rights, were encouraged to learn and were even paid wages, small as they may have been.
      They were allowed to own property themselves and could even purchase their freedom should they obtain enough money or social positions of power. While, what other slave owning groups did was really reprehensible, how they can claim “Christian Beliefs” is simply amazing.

  15. You all have thoughtful comments says:

    Would a few of you read my comment at

    athttp://frederickleatherman.com/2013/01/14/did-john-w6-lie-to-the-police-in-the-trayvon-martin-murder-case/#comment-58826

    You might also have to read a few of my comments just above as to the lighting conditions the night of the shooting.

  16. Diane says:

    Have you, or has anyone you know, been the victim of violence perpetrated by a Black or Hispanic person?

  17. SearchingMind says:

    I would be amazed if the following questions would not be asked:

    a. Have you written and/or published and/or posted any article(s) on any blogs, websites, newspapers, magazines and/or any other daily/weekly publication regarding the death of Trayvon Martin and/or the murder trial of Fogen?

    b. Have you posted any comments on any website regarding any publication(s) on the death of Trayvon Martin and/or the murder trial of Fogen?

    c. Have you participated in any radio/TV commentary regarding the death of Trayvon Martin and/or the murder trial of Fogen?

    d. Have you ever contributed money to the George-Zimmerman-defense –fund?

    e. Have you ever heard anyone claim that Fogen should not have been indicted and prosecuted? If yes, how did you feel about that?

    f. Have you ever heard anyone claim that Fogen was overcharged? If yes, how did you feel about that?

    g. Have you had any bad experience with an African-American before? What happened and how was the issue resolve?

    h. Did you take part in the demonstration demanding the arrest of Fogen?

    Etc.

    • Dave says:

      Question (g) is interesting. Anyone who answers “No” has probably not had much interaction with African-Americans. In my 60+ years, I have had plenty of bad experiences with African-Americans, far more bad experiences with European-Americans and, as far as I can recall, no bad experiences with Asian-Americans or Native Americans. I don’t believe that Asians or Natives are any better or worse than the other two groups. I just happen to have had less contact with them over the years.

    • SearchingMind says:

      If I were the prosecutor, I would be more interested in (a) the nature of the problem and (b) how it was resolved. While the juror is answering the questions, I would be sniffing for signs of (lingering) hostility or the absence of it towards minority groups. I think you are mostly judicious and would make a good juror, Dave. I also identify 100% with your comment, with the exception that I have not had bad experience directly involving an African-American before. One of my best friends is an African-American marine. I met him, his wife and daughter in Germany (Heidelberg) where he was deployed and I was an exchange student. I do not know of anyone (including my military dad) who is more patriotic, nationalistic and disciplined than he is. Dave, good to know you are 60+. If I had known, I sure would have accorded you deserved courtesy. I kind of tend to talk to everyone as if they were my mates or younger (and that could appear disrespectful to seniors). With professor its different because one sees his photo and acts accordingly (psst: plus he is a professor).

      • Rachael says:

        Oh, so only 4 more years until I am treated with the respect and courtesy I deserve? LOL – J/K. I just feel like teasing you this morning.

        But I’m out of here now. Time for school.

      • Rachael says:

        PS – and if you ever see my photo (it does get posted with some of my comments at other areas) and say what you said about Professor’s, I won’t be teasing, I’ll be angry. LOL!!!

      • Dave says:

        SearchingMind,

        I guess my background is a bit different than yours. I spent most of my working life in big industrial-type situations where a majority or a large minority of the workers as well as managers were African American. I’ve also spent a number of years living in majority-Black neighborhoods. In any large, random sample of humanity you’re going to find a whole lot of really good people and a handful of jerks.

        As for courtesy, we’re all in this together and equally deserving of respect.

  18. Judy75201 says:

    Sorry if I got the Baez thing backward, but here is a link as to why:

    http://globalgrind.com/news/fox-news-host-sean-hannity-mark-omara-trayvon-martin-phone-calls-pay-george-zimmermans-legal-fees-details

    This is one of GZ’s jailhouse calls with “Scott” about “SH” being willing to pay for his defense IF he used “JB”.

    • Rachael says:

      I think I’m the one who had it backwards, sorry. I think it was thought Baez was too controversial and not a good idea at this time, though I don’t know by whom. I guess somewhere in the back of my head I thought Baez was the one who didn’t want to do it, but I think I had that backwards, although I wouldn’t blame him a bit if he didn’t. LOL

      • Judy75201 says:

        I’m relieved, because I was beginning to think I was dumber than a box of rocks!

      • Rachael says:

        Ooops, now looking further up, I think I was right the first time. LOL.

      • Judy75201 says:

        @Rachael, I relistened to the vid and re-read the jailhouse convo, and I just don’t see that Baez said no. In the vid it says GZ said no because of the negative Casey Anthony publicity he would get.

      • Rachael says:

        I don’t take anything GZ says at face value.

      • Xena says:

        @Rachael.

        …but I think I had that backwards, although I wouldn’t blame him a bit if he didn’t. LOL

        We have to read between lines, knowing that Taaffe and GZ are not totally honest. GZ knew or had good reason to know that Baez was controversial before he met with him. Evidently, Baez being controversial did not prevent GZ from meeting with him. So, why would GZ meet with Baez?

        To answer that, let’s consider the time frame. Sonner and Uhlrig had just canned GZ for failing to communicate with them. GZ had just launched his begging site. He had not been arrested.. Thus, when GZ met with Baez, he was looking for a mouthpiece to represent him in the media and prevent him from being charged. IOWs, he wanted a lawyer to defend him in the media and not in the judicial system.

        But, we have this offer on the side that if GZ has Baez represent him, that Baez’s legal fees will be paid. On the other side of the table sits GZ not wanting to be charged. Baez no doubt understood how GZ wanted to use him, and GZ refused to acknowledge advice that he would most likely be arrested thereby demonstrating he would not be a cooperate client.

        So, Baez more than likely told GZ to hit the road, and GZ rolled into Jacksonville with a gun and knife in his car, seeking for Corey to provide him with protection — not arrest him. DeJames then recommends O’Mara who apparently talked with Papa Zim who decided that O’Mara should represent GZ and GZ signed the agreement with O’Mara without talking to him first.

  19. Digger says:

    I am just so far behind, having been out for surgery, back to reading a little and see you are still rocking in here. Comments as always most interesting and informative. Zimmerman case if in a lull I guess. Doubt if I will get caught up on these great posts, kinda skipping over what I have missed.

    I would ask if they are familiar with the case and if they say no, do they feel they could make their decision strickly on what is presented at trial without emotions from any personal pre-conceived biases “prior” to the death of Trayvon Martin.

  20. There is something more than just racism going on. It’s the mindset too. When I hover over the at the outhouse, I can see that they really do see things differently than the folks here. It’s like the extremes of political preferences. I see it in the other subjects/issues that they talk about too…(they are VERY pro-gun, VERY anti-gun control). People who have the same mindset as the fogenfamily will identify with them. I have a strong feeling that most of the zimbots are extremely conservative and…………………………..
    r-e-p-u-b-l-i-c-a-n……………………am I in hot water for saying that?

    • Rachael says:

      They look at things kind of backwards. They had an entry the other day about how David Gregory broke the law and why shouldn’t he get in trouble, yet had it been someone they liked, it would have been more like it was a stupid law, he wasn’t trying to break it to break it, it was a teaching moment. I mean they are very hypocritical. I mean they are opposed to gun laws – unless it is someone they don’t like “breaking” them. Had it been one of their people though.

      And that is how it is with Trayvon and GZ. How do you think any of them would have reacted if one of their kids had been reported dead by a killer who stated it was self-defense but their child was unarmed and the incident was, for the most part, unwitnessed. Do you think any one of them would stand by for that for one moment? They would probably get their guns and get their own justice instead of taking it through the courts. And of course, you would NEVER hear the kind of crap about the parents as what they say about Trayvon’s parents.

    • looneydoone says:

      The outhouse gang comes across as a weird blend of xtian dominionist, gun nutz and sovereign citizen types

    • Xena says:

      @Grey winter sky. When people are confident, or even open minded, they don’t find the need to lie about others, lie about the facts. There is no reason to denigrate others in effort to make themselves look good. The people you speak about are people driven by fear, low self-esteem, lack of knowledge, and jealousy. Whether in politics, employment, and yes — even debate of GZ’s case, they can only produce the toxic fruit that produces from the toxic seeds within themselves. It is up to us not to water those toxic seeds and to reject their fruit. That is the principle behind turning the other cheek. It’s not an act of being passive but rather, the response to not feeding the evil in others.

      • That is why this kind of person needs to be weeded out of the jury pool. It’s not just about guns. There are decent people who own guns who are not of the outhouse mentality. This is about attitude. There is someone I know very well whom I have never known to be racist but, when I asked him his opinion about this case (he lives in central FL), he stated that “since Trayvon was a thug who attacked GZ, GZ had the right to kill him”. When I tried to point out some of the facts of the case, he would cut me off and ask “Were you there to see what happened?” Yet, he said that Trayvon belonged to a gang, wore grills, (same stuff that the outhouse spews). I asked him if he was there to see what happened and if he knew Trayvon personally to know if he belonged to a gang. He said “No, but my friends told me about this.” He would believe his friends, but not me. This person has an associates degree in law enforcement, was an MP in the military, (now a BS in business), is a very closed minded conservative, is a narcissist control freak too. He will NOT listen to anything anyone has to say unless it’s something that supports exactly what he says…..you basically have to be a yes-man around this person. I would NOT want this kind of opinionated closed-minded person on the jury. Just how do you weed out this kind of person????

        • Xena says:

          @grey winter sky.

          I would NOT want this kind of opinionated closed-minded person on the jury. Just how do you weed out this kind of person????

          Uh — hope that their driver’s license has expired and they are not registered to vote?? Your comment caused me to think of another jury question;
          Please define the word “thug.”

          Those applying that word to Trayvon show their ignorance because if they think Trayvon was a thug, they have no idea what a thug really is. Seems to me that since this case came to national attention, “thug” has replaced the “N” word.

        • racerrodig says:

          Amazingly you described both my brother & sister all in one !! so I know exactly what you mean as far as attitude. I KNOW EVERYTHING…..because (insert name here) said so.

      • Xena, Re: the word “thug”……..I believe you’re right.

        • Xena says:

          @grey winter sky.

          Xena, Re: the word “thug”……..I believe you’re right.

          I’ve watched it. The Zidiots like using the names Traycoon and Trayboon, but that generally gets their comments deleted. They now use TrayThug. It’s the same intent — to call him the “N” word, so yes, “thug” has now replaced the “N” word.

          • racerrodig says:

            They call us “Trayhuggers” and when I state “Proud to be a member of Team Trayvon” that usually shuts them up.

          • Xena says:

            They call us “Trayhuggers” and when I state “Proud to be a member of Team Trayvon” that usually shuts them up.

            Yep. I’ve never construed “Trayvonite” as an insult either.

          • racerrodig says:

            Me either. Zidiot….Member of the Zidiot Nation….now that’s an insult.

            Ya gotta know how to make these things work.

          • Xena says:

            I use the term Zidiots because of their ignorance of legal procedure and unwillingness to learn.

            I call them bigotvoyants because their theories such as “doubled back” requires that Trayvon be clairvoyant.

            And, I call them “haters” when they spend more time making personal attacks and threats than actually supporting GZ based on evidence and not just what he said.

            Soon, some may be called “convicts” because their internet behavior is criminal.

          • racerrodig says:

            See, you know how to make it work Trayhugger. He he he !

      • Jun says:

        Since it is a self defense hearing, I guess, the jury has to be fair for both parties, which includes the victim, and giving him a fair right to be presumed innocent as well

        Anyways, it is out and out murder, and the guy sounds like an idiot

      • Rachael says:

        grey winter sky, fortunately, someone like that would probably not get on because of their law enforcement degree background. Of course there is a lot more to it, but there really is an art and a science to jury selection.

        and Xena, thug has been a replacement for the “N” word for a LONG time. One of those dog whistle words I guess you would say. It may have become more obvious since this story came on, but believe me, it was there long before. Someone called my son a thug about 4 years ago, and there was no question what they meant by it. But yes, this case did bring it out into the public for sure.

        • racerrodig says:

          I wonder how those Mafia soldiers feel about the word “Thug” meaning the “N” word now ?? Food for thought.

          • Xena says:

            @racerrodig.

            I wonder how those Mafia soldiers feel about the word “Thug” meaning the “N” word now ?? Food for thought.

            Mafia soldiers are called “gangsters.” They are members of “gangs,” get it? 🙂 On the other hand, Black males,whether they are members of gangs or not, are “thugs.”

          • racerrodig says:

            Ohhh, then I guess when I referred to those I-talians as thugs, I was wrong. My bad.

  21. Ina says:

    I would ask: do you have an open mind and will you only look at the facts, as put down as facts, and not at what other’s opinions are about this case, how ever creative they might have become in finding their truth?

    • SearchingMind says:

      My answer, if I were a juror, would be: yes. Absolutely. Het sneeuwt heel veel vandaag in Den Haag. Mooi, zeg!

      • Ina says:

        🙂 Yes that is what he would say, but I think asking anything else would be manipulative perhaps? Weet ik veel. Hier (Terschelling) is het ook wit!

      • Rachael says:

        How do you know someone would answer that honestly? That is the kind of question people who try to get on a jury answer with yes just to be on the jury. And what about those who say yes and think they mean it but don’t realize they don’t.

        Do you think they could ask some kind of a question like was there a time when you were not swayed by other people even though you did not see it the same way and explain?

        I know I didn’t word that very well, but something to qualify the question you asked previously, because they have to ask that, but IMO, there needs to be something to qualify it more than just a yes, especially in a case like this.

      • SearchingMind says:

        Yes. (Criminal) trials are bloodless wars (as Ralf Dahrendorf put it). A good lawyer must – within accepted margins – “manipulate” to get the best possible result for his/her client. If by “manipulation” you mean ‘dialectical inquiry’, I would say, manipulate baby manipulate.

    • SearchingMind says:

      In The Netherlands, you guys have a beautiful system where a trained judge or a panel of three trained judges would examine and decide the guilt or innocence of an accused. If the accused is found guilty, he can appeal to a higher Court where another panel of three trained judges will re-examine both the facts and the law.. This (as you know) is different in Common Law systems where jurors decide. Unlike trained judges within the Civil Law systems (of Central Europe), jurors in Common Law systems are not required to lay bare their thought-process as to how they reached a particular decision. That opens the door to grave abuse. If and when I try a criminal case, I sure will subtly force my way into the potential juror’s head and dig out the truth before I accept him/her as a juror. It’s a tricky business. But it is also doable.

      {Ik studeerde twee jaar in Europa. Een jaar in Duitsland (Uni. Heidelberg) en een jaar in Nederland (Erasmus Uni. Rotterdam). Ik hou van Nederland en Duitsland}.

      • Ina says:

        🙂 Ik snap niet zoveel van het jury systeem, zie de voordelen niet, maar het is wel interessant. Uiteindelijk bleek in de Anthony zaak dat de jury zich niet helemaal gek liet maken door de media. Vond ik wel opzienbarend. Ook is het voor mij vreemd dat een officier van justitie niet in hoger beroep kan gaan. Gefeliciteerd met je/uw goede Nederlands 🙂

      • SearchingMind says:

        Het Nederlandse rechtssyteem kent wat men noemt ‘Ne bis in idem beginsel’. Dat houdt in dat nieman tweemaal of meer mag worden vervolgd voor hetzelfde feit (na een vrijspraak / bestraffing terzake van dat feit).

        Het Amerikaanse rechtssysteem kent wat men noemt: ‘The Double Jeopardy Clause’. Dat betekent grosso modo hetzelfde als het ‘Ne bis in idem beginsel’.

        Het verschil ligt wel daarin dat in het Nederlandse systeem een strafzaak pas eindigt op het moment dat uitspraak is gedaan in hoger beroep (dan wel cassatie). Indien verdachte in hoger beroep wordt vrijgesproken dan wel veroordeeld/bestraft, mag hij niet opniew worden vervolgd voor hetzelfde feit. In het Amerikaanse systeem eindigd een strafzaak pas nadat de jury uitspraak heeft gedaan en verdachte vrijgesproken, dan wel verdachte veroordeeld en die verdachte al zijn appelmogelijkheden heeft uitgeput dan wel niet heeft benut binnen de gestelde termijn.

      • SearchingMind says:

        On the sidebar: I think your English is very very good. Keep paracticing and writing in English. Practice makes perfect (Übung macht den Meister!). That’s what I did when I was in your country. I seldom let Dutch people trick me into speaking English with them – because that would seriously prevent me from learning Dutch. So, do as I did. Use us to solidify your comand of English – while learning about the case and supporting justice for Trayvon.

  22. PYorck says:

    “Do you think we should be more forgiving when dealing with good people?”

  23. Dashamimi says:

    At the last hearing, Dec 11, 2012, West informed the court that The Dept of Justice Civil Rights Division informed (Defense) they would not respond to any request, that all discovery request must be directed to the state attorney’s office. My question Is the state required to disclose all information/evidence that is not relevant to their Murder 2 investigation?

    Also West whined and whined about the voice recognition motion in regards to 3.220 (Discovery) and Brady which he stated with so much confidence about the 911 call that one can hear an “individual” crying for help. He tells the court that the murderer told the first responding police officer he was yelling for help, and also a witness “observed” the murderer yelling for help and so on. After going on and on and on and on Bernie drops a dime and tells the court that there is an indication that is there is one voice but that there could actually be two voices. My question Is the State required to disclose whether they will have an expert to testify that there are two voices or an enhanced copy and give the enhance copy to the defense as discovery?

    I hope my questions are not confusing.

    • Jun says:

      I will take a jab and see if I am correct

      The state only has to drop information regarding their case against the defendant

      The DOJ does not have to legally give anything at all to the defendant, until it presses it charges to indict the defendant

      I also believe that the enhanced copy of the tape is work product and does not need to be turned over

      but anyways, the cops made the statements before actually listening to the 911 scream tape and let us be very honest, it sounds like a kid screaming for help, just as for witnesses ID’d it as, and the only kid there was Trayvon, in fact, even the defendant himself admitted that it sounded nothing like him, and besides, the cops were not there and did not hear the screams till later on and even expert audio forensic analysts have identified it as not being from the defendant…

      So you have 4 or 5 witnesses who said it sounded like a kid squealing and yelling for help

      the rest of the witnesses, with the exception of 6 & 11, attributing the screams to that of the person who was shot, as they described it as screaming for help, which were ended with a gunshot

      Trayvon’s mom, Deedee, his brother, his father, will identify it as Trayvon

      And besides, you can hear someone saying something to the screaming kid in the call if you listen closely

    • SearchingMind says:

      The prosecution is obliged to turn over to the defense de following evidence: (a) any material that is (b) relevant to establish (b1) guilt and/or (b2) punishment and/or (b3) innocence of Zimmerman, IF that material is (c) in possession of the prosecution or (d) anyone acting on behalf of the State (regardless of whether the state know about it).

      That material includes evidence to attack (a) the reliability, thoroughness, and good faith of the police investigation and/or (b) to impeach the credibility of the state’s witnesses and/or (c) to bolster the defense case against prosecutorial attacks.

      Yes, “the state is required to disclose all information/evidence that is not relevant to their Murder 2 investigation” – because the State may not decide what is- and what is not relevant and provide the defendant with only what the State finds “not-relevant”.

      The prosecution must provide Zimmerman with the hard copy of all the NEN- and 911-calls in this case (as it already did). The prosecution is NOT obliged to provide Zimmerman with any hidden information gleaned/extracted from those tapes – unless Zimmerman is indigent and would require the service of expert(s) in the relevant field(s) to access the tapes (fully). I hope this answers your question. If not you might want to read Professor’s thread on this subject where he explained this topic in elementary english.

      • SearchingMind says:

        Correction

        Yes, “the state is required to disclose all information/evidence that is not relevant to their Murder 2 investigation” – because the State may not decide what is- and what is not relevant ‘in Murder 2 investigation’ and give the defendant only what the Stat finds “relevant”. (I apologize for the mistake).

    • Xena says:

      My question Is the State required to disclose whether they will have an expert to testify that there are two voices or an enhanced copy and give the enhance copy to the defense as discovery?

      Judge Nelson has already scheduled a date in which each side shall disclose their expert witnesses.

      Everything that the public has received by way of discovery releases, the Feign Team has also received in addition to discovery that is under seal. The Feign Team has already received the recordings of the 911 calls, just as they have received the clubhouse and M&I Bank videos. The State is not required to explain to the defense what they reveal and how they will argue them in court.

      It’s up to West and O’Mara to determine what the tapes contain and how to use them in GZ’s defense. If they don’t know or can’t, then they should hire experts.

  24. I didn’t know you guys where here!!
    so i’m reposting this from the othe page

    *Bernie: How do you feel about Black History month at your son’s schools?

    *Bernie: What did little billy do for his 4rd grade Black History month project a few months ago?

    shannoninmiami says:

    January 15, 2013 at 1:02 am

    i don’t see any other jury questions. i sure hope i didn’t make it sound as if I was the only one to write a question!!! hello?? LOL

    But anyway, the reason i suggested this question; what does she thinks of Black History month, is because recently i had a conversation with my step-sister inlaw about it.

    she’s white. and recently she had a breakup and moved across town in with her mother ( this is in Macon GA).
    well since she moved in, her mother has been making really racist comments about how much she hangs out with black people.
    This was a shock to me, although i’ve never met her mother, she is the grandmother to my nephew…

    so anyway, she has a 14 y.o. son (my brother’s son) and one day said something, in a negative way about his projects for black history month in school.
    something to the affect of, why don’t they have white history month!!

    this pissed me off because not only was that a stupid, ignorant point of view, but it’s a bad influence on my nephew.

    anyway, i think it would be interesting to hear someone white, from Sanford, who’s supposedly from a decent American, well to do family explain what they think about having their white kids studying black history.

    i think how they answer this will be a clue into their real beliefs…

  25. blushedbrown says:

    If so, why? Do think teenagers who wear hoodies are more likely to be more violent then say a person wearing a sweater vest?

    • Xena says:

      Give GZ and O’Mara heart attacks;
      If you are selected to serve on the jury, would you wear a hoodie to court each day of trial?

      • seallison says:

        Love it. They just might.

      • blushedbrown says:

        Oooo, Xena, you are wicked!
        But, I have to say HOODIES UP!

      • ChrisNY~Laurie says:

        The jury in Drew Peterson’s trial wore all the same colors and one day came in with their favorite team jersey’s on. I think that they were mocking the married couple on the defense because they wore matching outfits all the time. I would love to see them wearing hoodies. They should definately do it when they come in to read their verdict. 😀

        As for teens wearing hoodies, if that represents gangwear, then most of the kids in my son’s highschool are in gangs. They wear them everyday….the white, black and hispanic kids do. They wear all different brands too, Under Armor, Nike, Puma, Hollister, American Eagle, Sports Teams etc…and yes on chilly days or rainy days they do put their hoods up when they come out of the building even if they have a cap on.

        I wear pull over hoodies and the zip up ones all the time because I find them to be comfortable and warm and I do pull the hood up for the same reasons when I’m outside, so I don’t know why they accociate it as a gang thing, unless it’s just different in Florida than it is in other States.

        • blushedbrown says:

          I’ve said this before and I will say it again, we all have worn hoodies since we were babies, if you don’t believe me go look at your baby pictures, or your kids pictures, grandbaby’s even!

          We looked so cute with that drawstring in a nice bow under our dribbling chin. 🙂

          I’m with you ChrisNY, don’t know why it should be attributed to being in a gang or “thugwear” , maybe its just Florida, IDK

        • Lonnie Starr says:

          It was a cool, drizzly night, why shouldn’t TM have had a hoodie on? After all, even GZ had a jacket on.

          But, I wouldn’t advocate juror activism, that could be grounds for a mistrial!

      • ChrisNY~Laurie says:

        Betcha Fogen owns several hoodies and has worn them the same way.

        BTW…I love that saying- Hoodies up. I don’t know exactly who started it, but evryone that believes in Justice for Trayvon should use it.

  26. blushedbrown says:

    Question for potential jurors:

    At what age do you think a child is no longer a child?

    Have you ever seen a person of color being arrested or detained and believed they must of done something wrong?

    Do you belong to any exculsive clubs, like a spa, golf club? If so what is the racial make up? What are the qualifications to be a member?

    What are your thoughts about teenagers with tattoos?

    Have you ever helped a total stranger if they yelled help? If so what where the circumstances?

    Has the housing market affected your community? If yes how so?

    Have you ever attended a self defense class?

    Have you ever heard of SYG? If yes, how do you interpet the law?

  27. Judy75201 says:

    I would ask, “Has it ever occurred to you that you might head out for a simple errand and be profiled and murdered?”

  28. After reading the nests above, I can’t help it:

  29. colin black says:

    Frederick Leatherman says:

    January 14, 2013 at 9:49 pm

    Good question.

    Unless the organization they are thinking of is Nude Republicans for America

    Reply
    Reading backwards Judy already asked the N R A question.

    So what would I ask? mmmmmm

    Do you at present or at any time in your life resided within a gated community includeing trailer parks into that description?

  30. colin black says:

    Judy.
    Judy75201 says:

    January 14, 2013 at 9:36 pm

    Prof Fred, what do you think Jose Baez’s true motive is for defending Serino? Or is there an ulterior motive at all?

    Reply
    Like the Prof Fred i dont know what J Baez intent is .
    But I can speculate..
    One reason he has got involved in what can be perceived as the pro Trayvon Anti Zimm Camp.
    Is he has actually met face to face with the accused an for what ever reason no agreement to represent was arived at.Could be Jose Baez just didnt like the cut of his jib.
    Or the length of his fibbs.
    Second reason on why Baez would turn down foggen an yet represent Serrino.
    Trayvon is a Miami resident born an raised.
    J Baezs Law Practise is based in Miami.
    I should guestimate a large proportion of his cleints an potential clients would sympsthise with Trayvon an his Family.
    An if he had taken on foggen it could have closed down his practice by aleinateing his customer base for
    ever and a day.

    • Judy75201 says:

      Or could it be that he was turned down to be GZ’s counsel? Baez wanted in this case, and now is. Of course, I am only speculating!

      • Rachael says:

        I think you have that backwards

      • seallison says:

        Judy – I remember reading long ago that Taaffe called Baez to represent the defendant and Taaffe said Baez was not available – working on another case.

      • leander22 says:

        Strictly that is hearsay again. Understand that I absolutely respect Dave’s work, but I would prefer to take whatever Michael Wright told him with a grain of salt. Strictly I would take everything Taaffe says that way.

        Whenever there is a chain of delivery, Taaffe: Michael Wright told me and supposedly Jose Baez told Michael Wright, I tend to be slightly resistant. It’s rather amazing to what extend facts are distorted in such delivery chains.

        Besides in the Marketing & PR business you are meant to get your customer into the news.

        Let’s supposed Michael Wright was slightly worried about negative PR concerning the Anthony case, which he may well be, what better way then to suggest GZ saw him and wanted to hire him but he declined?

      • ChrisNY~Laurie says:

        I just listened to that video, and I’m hearing it differently. It sounds like Taaffe is saying that Fogen said no to Baez because of the negativity he carries from Casey Anthony case. Then that MOM said no to working with Baez as co council.

        I don’t believe that though, because according to Taaffe, if Fogen retained Baez, his defense would have been paid for…Fogen wouldn’t turn that down.

    • Jun says:

      He’s simply a lawyer and his job is to represent Serino, so my guess is considering the Bar, that is his duty and I do not believe there is some ulterior motive but I could be wrong

      • Judy75201 says:

        I can tell you that Baez is no longer just “simply a lawyer” after his Casey Anthony coup. And the sting of being turned down to be GZ’s atty on this case may have pissed him off enough to do what I hope he is doing. However, I am merely speculating.

      • Jun says:

        I think it is good to have a defense lawyer playing with the team because they can give insight on other angles that can be pursued and therefore help prepare rebuttal for it

      • Judy75201 says:

        Oh, Jun, I absolutely agree, especially if that attorney had been rebuffed as attorney for the defense.

      • Jun says:

        If you know the enemy and know yourself you need not fear the results of a hundred battles.

        Sun Tzu

        Read more at http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/authors/s/sun_tzu.html#OKD4Y0sjwSzbgXib.99

      • Rachael says:

        @Judy I thought he was the one who turned it down, and I bet he’s glad now.

      • seallison says:

        Baez is like Geraldo and Dershowitz and tries to inject himself into the High-Profile cases somehow. Geraldo did it in the Anthony case and in this case. I have seen Baez doing cameo-type appearances now and again as a trial analyst on TV with his opinions.

      • leander22 says:

        If someone wants to pay for defense, why not pay O’Mara and West? West does not seem to be a bad lawyer either, both are prominent representatives of the Florida bar. See his jail call #30 that’s what he seems to think too. Besides he seems to suggest that O’Mara wanted to get in touch with “SH” anyway. Was his contact related to the later Fox interview? It starts at 11:10. Remember West was hired much later, maybe that was part of the deal?

    • Cercando Luce says:

      Defendant approached Baez before O’Mara. Defendant had full control of his “defense fund” donations. He may have declined to pay whatever retainer Baez required, seeing as paying up is not his forte.

      • Malisha says:

        Fogen stiffed the lawyer who won his civil suit against a prior employer for him; the lawyer on that civil suit got ZERO ZILCH after representing Fogen and winning. He was a Florida lawyer. Baez had to know that. I don’t think Baez liked the look of the case he was being “offered” and probably didn’t like the look of the client either.

  31. Judy75201 says:

    I must revisit some things, because I don’t recall the slurred speech thing. Doesn’t mean it wasn’t there, but rather that I missed it.

    • Rachael says:

      Oh his speech was horribly slurred at the beginning of his police call. He sounded very impaired.

    • Try this,

      “He looks Ba-lack.”

      My name is Cheorge.”

      My shtruck.

    • Jun says:

      I noticed that Fogenhats was trying to talk like John Wayne on the phone call

      “He’s got his hand in his waist band. & He’s a ba-lack male. I dont know what his deal is”

      “He’s up to no good. he’s just walking around looking about”

      & for whatever reason, he wanted to emphasize that “he was looking at all the houses…” I dont get the reasoning but in Fogenhats theory “them wily teenage punks/coons with skittles cant look at houses without touching the houses…” (I am guessing anyways)

      • gblock says:

        I think that he was trying to give the impression that “the suspect” was looking through the windows, with the likely intent of committing a burglary.

      • Rachael says:

        Yes. He gave three different versions. The first he was just looking about. The next he was looking at houses, the next through windows or something, each progressively getting more and more sinister to look like Trayvon was more suspicious.

        But you know, I go out for a walk in the evenings and I too look at the houses, especially those with their lights on and imagine like – in this house they have finished dinner, are sitting by the fire enjoying a glass of wine; in this house, the kids are doing their homework; in this house, they are sitting down to a late dinner – and I look at the houses as I walk past them.

        And because this is Seattle – I do it in the rain, leisurely – sometimes with a hoodie.

        But I’m a short, fat, old white lady, so I guess I don’t look suspicious when I do it. Sigh.

        • blushedbrown says:

          @Rachael,

          Funny, I look at houses and think of hmm that one needs foundation work and I know a person. Or wow that paint color goes well with the roof. Or hum, I think this person really has the flower boxes hanging right.

          I tend to look at houses from a handyman/contractor point of view. Done plenty of that kind of work. 🙂

      • Rachael says:

        Oh, and that progressive thing, where it is getting more, bigger, worse each time, I was told by police and psychologists, is typical of people who are lying. This happened when someone accused my son of something and each time, their story changed and got bigger and more sinister. They said this is very typical. For some reason, they think it becomes more believable each time rather than casting doubt.

      • Jun says:

        I am up in Canada right now, and live in a multicultural neighborhood and we have never had weirdos start harassing black kids for walking around, just looking at houses. I do that myself sometimes and to see what is a good house to buy once I have the money. Even black people do this, and there never been a Fogen issue.

        Anyways, considering the time frame of the call, and Fogenhats’ past issues of manipulating the authorities through phone, that never happened

        There was no time for Trayvon to look at all the houses, unless he was simply walking down the street looking at them, then he could look at more

        To look through a window, the doors, etc, would take a few minutes, and that is for one house

        Trayvon would also not see Fogenhats coming if he was actually looking through a house because Fogenhats was stalking the kid in a car with no lights on

  32. colin black says:

    Are you or partner a member of N .R. A.

  33. Judy75201 says:

    Prof Fred, what do you think Jose Baez’s true motive is for defending Serino? Or is there an ulterior motive at all?

    • I do not know the man so I have no idea what his motive may have been.

      Let me turn the question around, however.

      If Serino contacted him and paid him the requested retainer, why wouldn’t Baez agree to represent him?

      • Judy75201 says:

        I agree, if it happened that way. But I kinda doubt it did. Me=cynic. However, best just to let it all play out and ponder motive later now that I think about it.

  34. Rachael says:

    I would ask them how much time they spend on the internet each day.

    I would ask them where they get their news (newspaper – I know, what the heck is that- TV, radio, or internet).

    I would ask them what kind of stories they read (local, US, global, sports, gardening, entertainment, dining/nightlife).

  35. Romaine says:

    Would you have any difficulty finding the defendant guilty based on the evidence presented in this case, because the victim in this case is of African American heritage…

  36. Romaine says:

    have you ever been a victim of being stalked by someone you know or a stranger, if so, what was your emotional state during and after this experience.
    have you ever been a victim of profiling
    have you ever felt like you were being followed and didnt know why, how did it make you feel
    have you ever been robbed at gun point or been a witness to such an event

    • Rachael says:

      Romaine, you have some of THE best questions!!!

    • Rachael says:

      I would ask if they ever smoked pot.

      • Rachael says:

        And maybe if they had ever been suspended from school. Not that I think that pot or suspension will come up in the trial, but I would still ask.

      • I doubt that question would be permitted, but I like it.

        Nevertheless, seems like just about everyone has smoked pot at some time in their life.

        I would be inclined to believe they were lying if they denied it.

      • Rachael says:

        I would also ask them if they have a FB account, did they ever put embellish anything on there to impress family or friends.

      • Rachael says:

        I just sat in on a trial from the time of voir dire and it was a drug case – guy sold cocaine to an undercover cop twice, and that was one of the questions asked. That is why I said that. I was also thinking of “what medications are you on,” but I KNOW that would not be allowed.

      • Rachael says:

        However, it was just after marijuana was legalized here so it wasn’t like people were admitting to doing something illegal – maybe that is why.

      • Rachael says:

        @Professor:

        “Our case isn’t a drug case.”

        I know that – but just in case the trace amount of TCH were to come up. . .(or anything about Trayvon smoking or dealing pot). But like I said, I very seriously doubt that could even be possible to come up.

        • Given the fogen’s slurred and somewhat confused speech, I believe there is a slight possibility that his cocktail might come up. I doubt it, however, because they do not have a blood or urine test to quantify the amount present. Absent that information, the evidence would only be speculation and excludable under Rule 403 because the prejudicial value of the speculative evidence would far outweigh its probative value.

          If I were the judge, I would exclude it.

          The same is true of the trace amount of marijuana metabolite detected in Trayvon’s blood.

          If I were the judge, I would exclude that evidence as well.

          Therefore, I do not believe there will be any testimony about drugs or reason to question jurors regarding their attitudes about drugs and drug users.

      • Malisha says:

        I have actually never smoked pot, so you’d put me down as a sure liar. My kid asked me, when he was 18, if I objected to HIM trying pot, and I did a little research and then came back to him saying I didn’t mind. Then he offered ME some because he thought it was so great, and I still politely declined. Weird, huh?

  37. Judy75201 says:

    Sorry, I apparently got off topic with my rant about Junior. My question would be, “Do you belong to the NRA?”

  38. Judy75201 says:

    I don’t know how many of you keep of with this subject on Twitter, but Junior’s twitter behavior is bizarre. He keeps changing his focus based on what favorable response he can get. And he keeps @ting media folk as if they are going to read his desperate fawning for attention tweets. It really makes me wonder if their is a family psychosis going on, and if Senior is the root? At any rate, it is disgusting and makes me hate Junior almost as much as I hate GZ. And yes, I went there. I hate GZ for what he did and even more so for what he did afterward and continues to do to this day.

    • Jun says:

      That is the beauty of the internet though. People can simply look up whatever he is talking about and then they figure out he is a lying bloodclot idiot who thinks he is slick but he aint got it.

      • Judy75201 says:

        It really is. Social media will be the biggest force for social justice that has ever been seen. It’s happening now! I love it.

    • looneydoone says:

      They’re all screw loose, Judy
      Nature ? Nurture ?

      • Judy75201 says:

        So good to see you, “not a cookie”. There does seem to be something seriously off about that family.

        • Xena says:

          There does seem to be something seriously off about that family.

          Their superiority in the ability to persuade was taken from them. Papa Zim could not convince investigators to make it all go away and not arrest GZ. Junior, Taaffe, and Oliver could not convince anyone that GZ should not be arrested and tried for killing Trayvon.

          Their superiority was challenged, and it was challenged by middle-class Black parents who were not suppose to have the means, intelligence, and courage to obtain the results they sought, which was an impartial investigation. All those who assisted in organizing protests and those in the media have been viciously attacked by the Zimmermans and the Zidiots.

          Finding that does not get the result they want, now those who are pro-justice for Trayvon are viciously attacked and defamed.

          But I say, let the Zimmermans and the Zidiots continue sending out that negative energy. There’s so much of it that it’s returning back upon them in full force.

      • Jun says:

        You know what I find stupid is that the Fogenhatters cult keep trying to use race and racial stereotypes to argue when the fact of the matter is, the petition was started by an Irish guy who did not know Trayvon but felt there was an injustice, and many people who signed are of many different cultures and do not look at the issue in terms of race, but that there was an injustice, and all their racism just further proves to petitioners that there was an injustice

        So

        I do not get why they continue doing so but eh, it is what it is

        The other silly part is they feel that they can convince people the kid deserved to be terrorized and harassed based on their allegations of supposed marijuana use and lies regarding him when most people can see that is irrelevant and it is about what happened that night

        but anyways, character evidence is like karma, where if the defense raises it, it can be done back to them, even worse

        • Xena says:

          @Jun.

          You know what I find stupid is that the Fogenhatters cult keep trying to use race and racial stereotypes to argue …

          That is really stupid of them because it confirms that GZ’s supporters believe he racially profiled Trayvon, thereby committing a federal hate-crime.

    • seallison says:

      Judy,
      Of course I am blocked from the Zzzz Twitter, but I do read his (their) Tweets.

      He is desperately trying to be relevant with the media. I had to laugh when Piers Morgan had Ben Shapiro on and Junior was not even mentioned. Junior tweets and Tweets Ben without response. He Tweets Media – no response.

      The NBC lawsuit has really shut them out of opportunities for media exposure. When the trial starts, the media will be silent as far as the family is concerned.

      I think they will come to realize they can not have it both ways after all is said and done.

    • I understand why you feel the way you do, but they are not worth hating.

      You have a limited amount of energy. Use it wisely. Hating does nothing to the object of your hate. It does, however, dissipate your energy and diminish your ability to be a loving person and experience joy.

      Why would you want to hurt yourself like that.

      The fogen is toxic to himself and everyone with whom he comes in contact. Detach and dispassionately observe the destructive effect he has had on his family and their effect on him. Recognize that and let go of your hate. If you permit him and his family to cause you to hate, you will have surrendered to them and your surrender may destroy you.

      They are not worth it.

      • tinytruthseeker says:

        Thank you for reminding me of this! I detest the word “Hate” I work hard to keep it out of my thought process and the words that I speak (or write) I have to admit it has creeped into my head when it comes to this entire family….. you are SO right about the energy it requires to sustain that icky feeling…the other thing that I have always tried to keep in mind is that when we feel such strong feelings (especially hate) for someone that doesn’t even know we exist….the only person that gets to experience those icky feelings….IS YOU!!!! So your question :

        “Why would you want to hurt yourself like that?”

        Is the EXACT question to ask ourselves when we start feeling those strong feelings towards this family….or anybody else in our lives that invoke not nice thoughts or feelings for that matter….

        Thank you Professor for this important lesson…and reminder…

        “Tiny”

    • Malisha says:

      Same behavior as Fogen’s. Fogen changes his story to make whoever he is speaking with appreciate him! He is not even trying to keep the story stable over time; he just wants nods and “yes yes” responses so he does whatever pops into his bizarro head! Remember his conversation with Singleton about nobody trying to question her authority? Totally bizarre!

      • blushedbrown says:

        @Malisha

        I always viewed that exchange as he was talking to a fellow officer. He was still role playing.
        He didn’t even have the common sense to realize that he was in deep DooDoo.

      • leander22 says:

        Good observation, Malisha, I almost forgot.

        Blushedbrown, true too, but it has the same manipulative quality that his “sorry” to the parents at the bond hearing has.

        That too was strictly only to get his point over: he thought Trayvon was about his age, he also thought he may carry a weapon. …

        But back to the little chat with Singleton:

        a) then he obviously wants to appear relaxed facing the test, relaxing himself. (He obviously knew he was videotaped.)
        b) he wants to get the point over that he did not want any medical examination since he feared expenses, surely she understands?
        c) Something slips out in that context, hard to control everything in an easygoing chat. A hint what is really on his mind?

        I don’t hate Fogen, but I also don’t like him, and strictly I fear manipulative characters, They are very hard to read. Pleasantly smiling into your face while conducting the most elaborate intrigues against you. It feels the ridicule of his former co-worker was only the surface of matters.

  39. Romaine says:

    Have you ever had family member or friend shot causing his or her death, do you feel the death of your family member or friend was justified by the shooter

  40. Jilly says:

    I would ask,
    Did you ever make comments on GZLC Facebook page and if yes how often did you visit there ?

    • Two sides to a story says:

      Many Trayvon supporters visited the page daily.

      • gblock says:

        In fact, being an active supporter of either GZ or Trayvon would be expected to disqualify you from serving on the jury.

    • Excellent question, but you would have to broaden it to any website.

      If the answer is yes, then you ask them to name or describe it, if they cannot recall the name.

      I would also distinguish between lurking and commenting.

      • roderick2012 says:

        Professor, what about asking the prospective jurors for their IP addresses so that their answers about their internet could be verified?

        I know that is extreme and I am sure that O’Mara would object since he only needs one GZ fan to slither onto the jury and cause a hung jury.

        Can the State subpoena the donor records which O’Mara claims he kept so he could return any money donated by racists?

      • racerrodig says:

        I’d ask in a very specific way if you are familiar with any of these websites and slip in as innocuously as possible The Conservative Treehouse somewhere in the middle.

  41. Jun says:

    I would find out more about them personally and dig to find out more them

    I think jury selection, there needs to be a good actor or actress to find out if the person is fair and reasonable or not, because it is moreso the character of the person, being fair, objective, and reasonable, than simply answering the question

    I dont know what they do exactly, but it worked in the Montanez and Dooley cases, so I expect the same

    I am not really worried about Junior or his Pops. You can already tell they have ulterior motives and have no morals and are two bit swindlers

    What gives them away is them trying to convince people that it is Fogen yelling for help when it clearly sounds like a kid yelling for help and in fact 4 to 5 witnesses have said this, and two experts, and you can tell with your own ears

    Only an idiot would take what Junior and Pops says without looking into it but at the same time a sucker is born every minute

  42. Romaine says:

    Are you familiar with SYG law, and What is your opinion of that law

  43. Romaine says:

    I would ask;
    are you a licensed to carry gun owner
    do you have family or friends working for SPD
    Are you familiar with this case and the individuals invovled with this case
    Have you ever been a victim of a home invasion, If so, were you satisfied with the end results, are you still traumitized by that event

    • Familiarity with the case probably is the most important general question because of the extensive pretrial publicity and polarization of so many people regarding guilt/innocence, SYG laws, racism and guns.

      These topics should be addressed separately and the questions should ask each juror to state their opinion.

      On the pretrial publicity issue they should be asked to state what they recall about the case, whether they have an opinion about the guilt or innocence of the defendant and whether they have ever expressed that opinion to anyone.

      The home invasion question is dangerous because this is not a home invasion case and we do not want to suggest that it might be because it raises extraneous and irrelevant considerations about which many people feel very passionate and defensive.

      Instead of home invasion, the question should be about the use of deadly force in self-defense. Ask them what their beliefs and opinions are about that subject to determine if they differ from the legal test. If they do and they cannot disregard them and follow the law as set forth in the instructions, they can be challenged and excused for cause.

  44. Xena says:

    I would ask if the have a conceal carry license.

    • Good question. If they say, “yes,” ask them why.

      • Xena says:

        And if their answer is that they carry to protect themselves from dogs running loose ….. LOL!!

      • looneydoone says:

        Professor,
        I want to go back to Tara Malphurs, the ME Investigator’s report.
        Is it feasible to think perhaps Serino saw this murder was going to be a chat & release without charges situation, and provided Malphurs with the info she included in her report knowing that she/the ME’s office wouldn’t be pressured to rewrite and revise in order to confirm with the SPD line ? Could this have been his way of slipping the truth into a coverup ? Could this be his Ace in the hole ?

      • leander22 says:

        looney, no harm meant, but strictly Tara Malphurs reports something she did not witness but was told. Whoever informed her may have been aware that GZ was the captain of RTL’s NW. Serino cannot have informed her since he was late.

      • looneydoone says:

        leander,
        ME Forensic Investigator Tara Malphurs got that info directly from Serino
        CASE SUMMARY 24043
        “Person of contact (POC) was SPD Inv Serino. POC advised of an unknown B/M who had been shot by a resident of the complex.
        POC stated the following; ” At approximately 1910 hours on 02/26/2012 911 dispatch received a call from a resident of the complex. The resident advised of a B/M who was at the complex between townhouses. The caller stated that the male should not have been in the area and that he observed the male while out walking his neighborhood watch”

      • leander22 says:

        looney I’d appreciate the source you are using. Interesting since this would mean she was informed by him much after Trayvon was declared dead. Even if that happened Serino could have got something wrong. He had not listened to the tape by then, and obviously some on the scene knew he was on the neighborhood watch none of the ones that informed Serino had listened to the call by then. I so far did not pay much attention to the interviews with Fire & Rescue. I’d appreciate a hint at the source you are using.

        I haven’t even read the latest discovery material yet. 😉 lots about Serino it seems.

      • looneydoone says:

        leander
        I found the document by searching…”Volusia County, Fl Case Report 24043″
        It’s follows the ME’s Autopsy Report, in the same batch of documents

        I get befuddled by too many bookmarks

      • leander22 says:

        looney, strictly Tara Malphur appeared on the scene around 21:30 or 9.30 pm. I don’t think it is important to consider her an important witness concerning things said or not said. It seems the only thing you can trust is the utter chaos on the early crime scene.

        From Serinos first report:

        On 2/26/2012 at approximately 2130 hours, VCME Office Investigator Tara Clark arrived on scene and assumed jurisdiction over the decendent. Initial Inspection on the decedent showed no significant trauma, other than solidary gunshot would to the chest, just left of midline.

        He uses this name down to the last version, adding in this context that since Trayvon had no ID on him he was transported as Jo Doe #3. At that point in time Serino could only repeat what he had been told, with the additional problem that the other side did not pay careful attention. It would be interesting if anyone had told him, yeah, that is the NW guy. Why do not have these internal communications unfortunately. He called before and we responded to it. How could Serino at that point in time have known anything about Target? Or anyone else informing him for that matter. Did Zimmerman talk about such really not that important matters at that point in time?

        But I’ll look into it.

        The above is follows his interview of T.Smith, is he suggesting Smith already told him that? The only relevant information I can see besides his shifting between manslaughter and 2nd degree murder is that he suggests to have been contacted way too early at approximately 19:15 hours. To the point of having TM already pronounced dead by 19:17. Till further evidence I assume that he simply had never paid enough attention to the specifics of the case as far as time-lines are concerned.

        I scanned Serino’s statements by now.. This is the most important little nugget from my own perspective:

        I was also informed that statements made by Zimmerman on scene to officers T. Smith were corraborated by several witnesses, and led to the possibility of his shooting having been in self-defense.

        Who informed him?

        Again, I don’t think that he changed essentials, but simply corrected some time matters he got very wrong and slightly added or deducted matters that had made him arrive at his conclusion. He also at one point suggests that T. Smith had been involved in CPR. Ayala tells him so. Interesting, considering that according to the 7th discovery logs the supposedly involved Stacy Mc Coy only arrived at 19:41:01. But I’ll look into this more closely. Just as into your discovery.

      • leander22 says:

        sorry, again, I have to leave.

        looney, strictly Tara Malphur appeared on the scene around 21:30 or 9.30 pm. I don’t think it is important to consider her an important witness concerning things said or not said. It seems the only thing you can trust is the utter chaos on the early crime scene.

        From Serinos first report:

        On 2/26/2012 at approximately 2130 hours, VCME Office Investigator Tara Clark arrived on scene and assumed jurisdiction over the descendant. Initial Inspection on the decedent showed no significant trauma, other than solidary gunshot would to the chest, just left of midline.

        He uses this name down to the last version, adding in this context that since Trayvon had no ID on him he was transported as Jo Doe #3. At that point in time Serino could only repeat what he had been told, with the additional problem that the other side did not pay careful attention. It would be interesting if anyone had told him, yeah, that is the NW guy. Why do not have these internal communications unfortunately. He called before and we responded to it. How could Serino at that point in time have known anything about Target? Or anyone else informing him for that matter. Did Zimmerman talk about such really not that important matters at that point in time?

        But I’ll look into it.

        The above is follows his interview of T.Smith, is he suggesting Smith already told him that? The only relevant information I can see besides his shifting between manslaughter and 2nd degree murder is that he suggests to have been contacted way too early at approximately 19:15 hours. To the point of having TM already pronounced dead by 19:17. Till further evidence I assume that he simply had never paid enough attention to the specifics of the case as far as time-lines are concerned.

        I scanned Serino’s statements by now.. This is the most important little nugget from my own perspective:

        I was also informed that statements made by Zimmerman on scene to officers T. Smith were corraborated by several witnesses, and led to the possibility of his shooting having been in self-defense.

        Who informed him?

        Again, I don’t think that he changed essentials, but simply corrected some time matters he got very wrong and slightly added or deducted matters that had made him arrive at his conclusion. He also at one point suggests that T. Smith had been involved in CPR. Ayala tells him so. Interesting, considering that according to the 7th discovery logs the supposedly involved Stacy Mc Coy only arrived at 19:41:01. But I’ll look into this more closely. Just as into your discovery

      • looneydoone says:

        leander,
        We’ve heard fogen’s non emergency calls.

        ME Forensic Investigator reported what Serino relayed to her re; a *911* call made approx 1910 hrs. I *think* that call to 911 *might* have been placed by Taaffe. I think fogen and Taaffe were outside *walking neighborhood watch * (stalking and in pursuit of Trayvon). I think Taaffe might be the as yet unidentified male in the white T-shirt.

        Remember Taaffe’s comment about “if Trayon had only answered respectfully ? The strange message fogen left for Taaffe re; losing his son 4 years after his death ? I think Taaffe was there, and a witness to the murder…which would make him an accessory.

        MOM’s fought hard to keep phone & text messages sealed, arguing they are prejudicial to his client

        It’s a reach, but I’m willing to consider Taaffe called *911* independent of fogen’s calls to the non emergency #/dispatcher

        • blushedbrown says:

          @Lonnie,

          Question:

          In one of the FBI reports, GZ made reference in a “note” section of his phone, he wrote in part, ” do you really believe I would omit the fact a narcotics officer guided me.

          I am thinking that he wasn’t referring to Singleton, Do we know if Osterman working as an air marshal is really a narcotics officer for some airline or the goverment?

          I would think that there are jobs like that for airlines. What do you think?

          • Lonnie Starr says:

            Narcotics is dangerous police work, they would never let anyone know who was doing such work. The only police who would tell anyone that they were on a narco squad, would be if they were assigned to do petty narcotics traffic and sale work. The petty criminals tend not to be very dangerous. So, just making “street buy and busts” probably wouldn’t be very clandestine.

            An air marshal working narcotics would be deep undercover, GZ has the chance of a snowball in hell of having one reveal him or herself to him. The cartels are the one’s flying mules and themselves around the world, an “air narc” would be in as much danger as a CIA agent. And I’m talking real danger, not the phony stuff you see on tv. or anything GZ could deal with.

            In any event, no one’s going to bargain with GZ for any “chip” he may have. He’s made himself into a very, very radioactive hot potato.

          • blushedbrown says:

            @Lonnie

            Your answer was excellent.

            But, I think I may have not been clear as to what I was thinking.

            I am thinking more along the lines that h, Osterman was one of those guys who walks around in airport with a dog with letters in white on the back of his shirt saying “Narcotics Officer” . Or maybe no letters and just a dog, sniffing luggage in the back where he can’t be seen checking out luggage and stuff. Nothing like undercover stuff, just real generic. Narcotics guy checking out bags that people may be transporting drugs for personal use on an airline. Something like that.

            We have to remember Gz uses terms that try to make him look better and that he knows people who may have power. He likes to sport that he has “connections”.

            Remember in one of his calls to NeN, and he said his wife spoke to a DETECTIVE. To let the Operator, know he was “someone Important” So the that operator should feel that “his call” should be taken more importantly because he said the word “detective”.

            I think he blows up the profession of the people he knows, so by association he thinks he is important. And we all know that he is not important as he tries to make himself out to be to himself and to others.

          • Lonnie Starr says:

            Well, that was my point, we know that GZ lies and we know that he is into self aggrandizement. Okay, but think about the MO w/dog scenario. LEA’s all use specialized K-9 units, with specialized K-9 handlers. So, if MO were involved in bag searches, in any way other than watching the K-9 units perform, then he would have a dog or dogs with him, nearly all the time.

            So, if you are suggesting that he took part in back office drug searches, then yes, that’s a possibility, but only as backup, not as the principle agent. I doubt such a person would be classified as a drug related agent, but would have a more general title to cover a wider range of contraband discovery.

            It’s much more likely that GZ is talking about someone on the SPD force. I don’t see SPD conducting much in the way of “Buy and Bust”, because the electronics age has made those units obsolete.
            Much of today’s narcotics work, involves electronic surveillance, profiling and data mapping. So, there’s less need for such LEO’s to keep themselves secret anymore, because they are not in the field.

            In any event, we now know that the area is rife with racists of the most dangerous kind, and as that guy on the SPLC says, he probably does have reach into Seminole/Orlando gov’t. So, when GZ says something like that, he doesn’t realize he’s treading on dangerous grounds. Exactly the kind of psychology that would identify him as an outsider, trying to join. Which is where I get the idea that this killing was really an initiation and not just an accidental/coincidental kill.

            Look at John, he pretends to be so very frightened that he runs back inside, in time not to witness much at all, and therefore not to have to explain or say much, that might conflict with GZ’s story. Yet, once the shot has been fired, suddenly his courage returns, and to such a level that he can actually make small talk with the shooter! A shooter who, the media and police reports would have us believe, was unknown to John?!? So that we can trust his report?!?

            So, why does he tell lies that would be helpful to GZ? How can he know what story GZ will tell? We know from other witnesses, that John saw no move to the concrete/sidewalk with Trayvon continually maintaining a mount position all the way. But, we also know that GZ’s lame story, requires he be on or near a concrete walkway. Unfortunately for GZ, while he is telling us that he was struggling to move away (and did so with TM maintaining his mount all the while), John has them moving in exactly the opposite direction. (insert acrid laughter).

            Anyway, I’m still working on trying to put together a more comprehensive theory, but to answer your question, I think MO is not his narcotics officer, it’s most likely someone inside the SPD who he is referring to, if he’s not just lying again.

            Oh, before I forget, you might want to check and see what the first address 911 gets it’s request for a response from. Unless I miss my guess, it’s an address on TTL. If so, then that’s the address T. Smith should have been directed to respond to. The RVC address, cost him almost a minute extra to respond to. So, did he choose to respond to this address? Or is it the one that was given him?

          • blushedbrown says:

            @Lonnie

            Oh, before I forget, you might want to check and see what the first address 911 gets it’s request for a response from. Unless I miss my guess, it’s an address on TTL. If so, then that’s the address T. Smith should have been directed to respond to. The RVC address, cost him almost a minute extra to respond to. So, did he choose to respond to this address? Or is it the one that was given him?

            I think Smith messed up big time, I think the Twin Trees Lane threw them off, RVC is the main street and I think he thought he could get access faster thru RVC. JMO

            Everyone that was calling was saying its behind my house, operators don’t live there how would they direct LE? I know everyone was scared and not really thinking clearly, but the best they could of done which I think one or two did was say: My address is XXXX but that is the front of the house, but they need to come where the dog walk separates the two rows of houses. Hindsight is 20/20 though.

            As to working on theory, is that on John? Cause’ if you are so am I.
            I am using a video of the all the first 911 callers. Work in progress.
            Maybe I’ll have something by today or tomorrow.

            Lonnie wrote in part:

            it’s most likely someone inside the SPD who he is referring to, if he’s not just lying again.

            I am thinking maybe you are right, but who? Prolly him lying again.

          • Lonnie Starr says:

            Hard to tell, he apparently gets to walk the station house freely, even after the murder, and he knows his way around. The Community Affairs officer in charge of the NW, has emailed him thanking him for putting in a good word for her with the Chief, and she plans to return the favor. So he’s pretty chummy with the police, it’s hard to tell who he connected with. It would probably be a corrupt cop, because they’re the ones who have to keep their eyes open the widest, if you get my drift.

          • Lonnie Starr says:

            See you over there.

          • racerrodig says:

            My son’s godfather was a Federal Agent and worked for the IRS (criminal investigations, not tax returns) and the Secret Service.
            When he retired from that at 56 he was hired to train the Air Marshal’s in AC airport. They are all trained there. I asked him about this Osterman thing so he did a bit of research since he never heard of him. There is no record of Mark Osterman being an Air Marshall or working for Homeland Security.

            His psychological profile would have been found along with the reason he was fired by the SPD. This would have prevented him from getting hired. The Air Marshall’s do not do any drug investigations as they are not trained for that. That is DEA & FBI territory. The closest is when drugs are discovered in baggage, on a person etc and it’s a straightforward arrest Then the DEA or whoever takes over looking for the upper level operatives.

            Yep, Osterman going after a “Tony Montana” Bet the bad guy !!

            With Ostermans history he’d be asking for a bribe to help them.

          • blushedbrown says:

            @Racer
            Thank you. He is offically marked of my list as a narcotics agent.
            I guess we will have to wait for him to sit in the hot seat in court, when he states his name and occupation.

          • racerrodig says:

            Where did you get that info from. I have only heard him as being listed working for Homeland Security as an Air Marshall as has about everyone I know.

            Is he a narcotics agent for say someone like Tony Montana ?? that’s about the only type I can see hiring him.

          • blushedbrown says:

            Oh, let me explain my madness. 🙂

            In reading thru the FBI report regarding the interivew with Singleton, GZ wrote in the “note” section of his phone. “Do you think I would of left out that a narcotics officer guided me”. The FBI in turned wanted to know what that the hell that meant, so they interivewed her because she is a narcotic officer also.

            Anywho, I had considered that he may have not being writing about Singleton, but Osterman. Does my madness now make sense, hmmmm. 🙂

          • racerrodig says:

            Makes perfect sense but Osterman was never a narc was he ? We already discussed how FrigginFogen loves to make everything bigger than the realty is so that would explain him saying Osterman was a narc.

          • blushedbrown says:

            Ok you are understanding me now. I think his convoluted thinking was (a) Singleton was a fellow officer in his role-playing, so he wrote a memo about it or (b) He really was writing about Osterman but changed his profession to make him look sort of anonymous if anyone looked in his phone. So I don’t know if Osterman was truly a narco at anytime in his working career, I was just speculating as to why he may have written that in his phone. Because it made the FBI question Singleton. I bet you she cursed him out after those agents left. She was prolly by her locker, and said to herself that f**king idiot almost got me hemmed up with the FBI. JMO

          • racerrodig says:

            Bet the farm not a single one of them has any warm & fuzzy feelings for FrigginFogen……not a one. And after all this O’ Mara still thinks the cops depositions & testimony will help his client ??

          • blushedbrown says:

            O’mara got throat punched by BDLR at the last hearing with Serino’s Brady material. He couldn’t really say anything about any regular beat cops not wanting to charge him over the lead investigator who wanted Murder Two from the gate. O’mara’s bubble blew up right in his face and Bernie was the one with the big old hatpin. He was so deflated. I couldn’t help my self and laugh at the TV at him.

          • racerrodig says:

            We promised to restrain our language about them and I sort of promised I wouldn’t call him Moron O’ Mara anymore but you’re right. This entire group is a laugh. This garbage that he was trying to sell that it mattered that the cops didn’t want to charge him was a gigantic laugh. They don’t make that call……the prosecutor makes that call in a case where the officer does not see the actual event……a huge Duhhh on that one.

            This trial, if it gets that far will be a laugh, that’s for sure. O’ Mara already regrets Fogen was ever born and the hardest part is yet to come.

          • blushedbrown says:

            O’mara thought this would be his break out case. I truly believe this man thought he could make a differnece at the very beginning, most lawyers do, that’s their job. Defense attorneys hit below the belt, they play rough, The set that he came upon was too big and his lead man too small. He didn’t realize that the “underdog” a young skinny black kid would ever get the bigger, more reasonable, audience that came to hear his story. That supported him in more ways that he thought possible. That is the power of the people. We as the general public can make a difference when we rally against our goverment
            or any entity that makes the wrong call. The SYG law is an unjust law.

            Civil disobedience has been used before, and in this case and prolly alot more to come.

            “One has a moral responsibility to disobey unjust laws.”
            ― Martin Luther King Jr.

          • racerrodig says:

            I think it’s undisputed, to use his word, he’s in way over his head.

          • blushedbrown says:

            @Racer,

            and let me add the “finger twirl” for good measure. 🙂

          • racerrodig says:

            You got it……homie !!

          • blushedbrown says:

            No warm and fuzzy feelings, not a one. I am willing to bet that those officers wil get their digs at him at trial.

          • racerrodig says:

            I can’t wait and the best part is that FrigginGogen still thinks he’s got friends in the cop shop !! Them good ole boys will save his overweight butt….. A hahahahahahahahaha !

          • blushedbrown says:

            @Racer,

            You are so funny. HAHAHAHA

          • Lonnie Starr says:

            Hahaha… I get it. But GZ has brought down a nest of racists. So, he’s done quite enough. But yeah, is he ever toxic man!

          • blushedbrown says:

            @lonnie,

            I have trouble posting on your blog, I don’t know why, but anyways I wanted to add this link for your evidence pile.

            http://www.5dca.org/Clerk/George%20Zimmerman%2012-3198/12-3198_Appendix.pdf

          • Lonnie Starr says:

            Ah, I’m a bit balled up, send me an email and I’ll put you back on as an author. I’m sure I have your email but since you don’t use Blushedbrown I don’t know which one you are.

          • blushedbrown says:

            I will send a message to Xena.

          • Xena says:

            Lonnie, check your email.

          • blushedbrown says:

            You should be getting that in a moment or two. 🙂

          • Lonnie Starr says:

            I got it and it’s done, you should be getting an email with a link real soon, use it quickly because I understand these invites expire quickly and will have to be resent.

          • blushedbrown says:

            Ok, need coffeeeeee

        • racerrodig says:

          What if Taaffe did make a 911 call in which he describes this massive beating Fogen was getting? Then the evidence starts popping up not mention no real injuries to FriggnFogen – – – – then what? Does the SPD destroy that tape? If they started the ball rolling in Fogens favor then the real stuff starts appearing, Taaffe can’t have that tape out. There is already proof of contradiction with at least one witness and everyone on the defense team.

      • leander22 says:

        leander,
        We’ve heard fogen’s non emergency calls.

        ME Forensic Investigator reported what Serino relayed to her re; a *911* call made approx 1910 hrs. I *think* that call to 911 *might* have been placed by Taaffe. I think fogen and Taaffe were outside *walking neighborhood watch * (stalking and in pursuit of Trayvon). I think Taaffe might be the as yet unidentified male in the white T-shirt.

        Sorry, I am completely unconvinced concerning Taaffe’s or Osterman’s involvement BEFORE the shooting. But concerning NEN or 911 call, what if Ayala who initially informs Serino only talks about a call he responded to, Smith repeats the same. Are you sure they know themselves at that point in time if they were dispatched bases on a NEN or 911 call?

        <Remember Taaffe’s comment about “if Trayon had only answered respectfully ? The strange message fogen left for Taaffe re; losing his son 4 years after his death ? I think Taaffe was there, and a witness to the murder…which would make him an accessory.

        I would interpret the comment about Taaffe’s son killed in a car accident, if I remember correctly, assuming it indeed was four years ago, as you write, that they didn’t speak with each other before the death about personal matters. There is nothing in that “strange phone call” that gives me the impression that they are friends or had a close relationship.

        MOM’s fought hard to keep phone & text messages sealed, arguing they are prejudicial to his client

        BDLR alluded to these text messages during the first bond hearing, while Fogen was on the stand to make a statement covered up by apologizing to Trayvon’s parents. In the larger context BDLR pestered Fogen about if he had ever said I am sorry to any officers and in this larger context he mentions the text mails. So strictly I assume they were about “not feeling sorry”.

        It’s a reach, but I’m willing to consider Taaffe called *911* independent of fogen’s calls to the non emergency #/dispatcher

        i seriously doubt that Taaffe called police that night. If anyone had alerted Fogen to Trayvon AND called NEN and/or 911 he would have called slightly before Fogen, since Fogen had to get there first and observe Trayvon.

        I am willing to applaud if it turns out that I am wrong, but I could go on and on, these are only the responses from the top of my head.

        • racerrodig says:

          In several of Taaffe’s interviews he goes on about he and Z and remember he said Z was the perfect storm. He did say they were friends for some time and he claimed to be Fogens best friend and Osterman claimed to be his “…token white friend…” With all the lies, it’s hard to remember it all. The phone call to me was a coded message. I’ll bet there is more to that suicide than meets the eye, Fogen knows it and it’s a “…I’ll drop dime big mouth, so shut up about this event”

          • Xena says:

            The phone call to me was a coded message. I’ll bet there is more to that suicide than meets the eye, Fogen knows it and it’s a “…I’ll drop dime big mouth, so shut up about this event”

            Absolutely! GZ was telling Taaffe, “Remember you’ve told me things about your family and your past. Remember, I know things you’ve done. Keep that in mind if you tell the truth about me.”

          • racerrodig says:

            Absolutely………The more I read about what went on the more I’m convinced this was an initiation of some sort. There is a guy I know who was attacked and wound up killing the attacker in SD with his bare hands. As repulsive as he knows the attack was he says the “feel” of killing the guy has a real mystique in it. The event was all on CCTV at his college no charges were even considered. The attacker was armed with a knife…..and lost to a guy who is just smart…..and big…..

            How do we know Taaffe of Osterman hasn’t killed someone and gotten away with it ?? Now they start egging weak willed Fogen on and presto….The Perfect Storm. The “I double Dog Dare Ya” would be all it takes for Fogen to get his noodle riled up. Use imagined break in’s as a cover……”…who knows what evil lurks in the hearts of man…”

          • Xena says:

            @racerrodig.

            How do we know Taaffe of Osterman hasn’t killed someone and gotten away with it ??

            There’s not enough out about Osterman for me to get a real feel for him, but Taaffe reminds me of sovereign citizens that I’ve met. They are manipulative, make statements as though they are the only and final authority, and it’s to get others to act on what they believe is the solution. They are all too willing to put others in harm’s way.

            So, I can see GZ’s mind turning to process crime; crime caused by young Black males; renters; police not doing anything; reason for decreased property values. Then Taaffe, his friend, would have all his personal and financial problems solved if the community was ridden of them. Taaffe would stand back and approve of that as long as he isn’t the one who has to do it.

          • racerrodig says:

            “So, I can see GZ’s mind turning to process crime; crime caused by young Black males; renters; police not doing anything; reason for decreased property values. Then Taaffe, his friend, would have all his personal and financial problems solved if the community was ridden of them. Taaffe would stand back and approve of that as long as he isn’t the one who has to do it.”

            I can buy that, I do believe Osterman has more going on with this however, & I think he’s just better at covering up his real agenda. Taaffe is just “…out there..” he just doesn’t see it.

          • blushedbrown says:

            @Racer

            I can buy that, I do believe Osterman has more going on with this however, & I think he’s just better at covering up his real agenda. Taaffe is just “…out there..” he just doesn’t see it.

            I couldn’t agree more. I think Osterman is quite savvy. Taaffe on the other hand is not.

          • racerrodig says:

            Exactly and what a crew it is. Taaffe just goes on a rant and never thinks. I’d love to know what his IQ is…..I’m guessing somewhere in the room temperature range. Osterman is just a better slime at the disguise end. Joe “Rent a Friend” Oliver, who has fallen off the map (Thank God) was just a seeker of fame. How did that work out. It must suck when Nancy Grace and other hosts just cut your mic off because your a fool !! Lover her or hate her….that’s a classic !

          • blushedbrown says:

            Yep. that was a classic.

    • leander22 says:

      So I don’t know if Osterman was truly a narco at anytime in his working career, I was just speculating as to why he may have written that in his phone. Because it made the FBI question Singleton.

      Can anyone tell me about the sources. Would this be second discovery, and were is this “phone note” what does “he may have written that in his phone” about?

        • Lonnie Starr says:

          Let’s see: It appears to me, he (GZ) is being accused of omitting information to someone, about the fact that a narcotics officer guided him. So, it’s a negative. He’s essentially saying that no narcotics officer guided him, or else he certainly would have said so.
          =====================

          “”I have told you all everything that has transpired, do you really believe I would ommit the fact that a narcotics officer guided me.

          My mom feels the jury will be tainted.

          The attrny said we could have the media kicked out from the gated community.

          I couldn’t think of a better outcome.

          I called to appease my father, the attorney said not to make any comments as you did.””

          =====================

          So, someone feels that GZ was guided by a narcotics officer and GZ says he wasn’t.

          Of course, we know GZ lies, so he very well may have been guided by a narcotics officer and omitted it.

          We don’t know who GZ is talking/messaging with.

          We know it’s after he’s been released on bail, because of the mention of a jury, and GZ has a lawyer who is telling him not to comment.

          He only mentions one attorney, we know that he initially had two.

          We also know that this person he called, is someone who his father knows, and who has also made comments.

          These items are important because we need to know who GZ was communicating with and when. Because that is the person who suspects that GZ was getting instructions from a narcotics officer.

      • leander22 says:

        thanks, bb, now I remember it, I took it as a message to the family considering he alludes to his father.

        “I have told you all everything that transpired, do you really believe I would ommit the fact that a narcotics officer guided me.”

        Beyond I wouldn’t want to read too much into it without the context. What time was this message sent exactly? Long before we had access to the discovery there were many rumors floating about that a narcotics officer was on the scene. Now I would assume arrest a high percentage of black people, was this the reason why it seemed important? Could that be the larger context?

        Singleton could have been the only narcotics officer “guiding him”, since Santiago was on the crime scene, but he only arrives there at 8:20 according to the crime scene contamination log. At that point he cannot have “guided” Fogen. since Smith had left with Fogen.

        Osterman as narcotics undercover agent? Interesting theory, considering that the official story sounds peculiar. On the other hand in connection with Fogen some of us were enamored in it. Kind of like: Tricked again by a fake artist. 😉

        racers comment is interesting, but do private companies hire air marshals? They may have a slightly more weak spot for a tricked police officer.

        What exactly was documented in the SAO and/or FBI investigation? This information actually helped Francis Robles to find out Osterman’s identiy? No? Wouldn’t the passage have been blackened had he been an undercover narcotics officer, or would his job allow him to disclose to state officials too only the cover story? …

        We should ask Robles how she did her research.

        • blushedbrown says:

          @leander22

          thanks, bb, now I remember it, I took it as a message to the family considering he alludes to his father.

          You are welcome.

          Btw, I disagree it was a message to his immediate family. I think it was either to Shellie and or Osterman . My reasoning is this, he says “I called to appease my father. My mother feels the jury will be tainted. You usually use “my” when speaking to a person that doesn’t share the same parents, like a wife or a friend. If he would of used “our” in place of “my” then I can see he speaking to a family mmember like a sister or brother.

          Next line, WE can kick out the media. “We” suggest wife to me. JMO.

          Next line, I have told you all…..

          Suggest to me, he is lumping wife with everyone else (all) meaning everyone else, she is part of the group who wants to know everything.
          JMO again…..

  45. Val says:

    Through my limited experience with jury duty…questions asked were like “have you ever experienced …”. I would ask jurors have they ever experienced an interaction with law enforcement whereas their truthfulness/behavior was questionable. I would ask about bad experiences with law enforcement and whether they think law enforcement would lie/cover up to protect their own.

  46. rayvenwolf says:

    Random thought – so glad Lawyers like Kevin Lomax aren’t real.

    Question – Do you believe someone would commit a more serious crime to cover a minor one?

    Question – Do you believe self defense is subjective?

    Question – Do you believe everyone is entitled to justice and/or a fair trial < looking for how they answer and how long they take to answer more than the answer in and of itself.

  47. Two sides to a story says:

    I think you’d ask them a series of targeted questions about self-defense and gun issues. The answers would provide some clues to whether or not the individual would be predisposed to support Fogen. There would have to be some oblique as well as straightforward questions – the straightforward ones would be easy to lie about, but some more oblique questions might be harder to guess what answer to give – like the questions on psychological exams.

  48. seallison says:

    I think the jury selection will be the biggest obstacle in this case given the ridiculous exposure of the defendants family and friends spinning in the court of public opinion.

    What questions would I ask a potential juror…Hmmm

    • seallison says:

      Maybe I would ask – are you racist.

      If they say No, I would excuse them.

      If they say yes, I would them to explain.

      • looneydoone says:

        I might ask if there’s a Neighborhood Watch program where they live, and if so, are they a participant

      • ladystclaire says:

        When it comes to asking them that question, they will still lie lie in order to get to serve on that jury. BTW, hasn’t it been put out there that, Fogen is 100% Hispanic seeing that he and his GAY brother were adopted? also, is RZ senior even married to this woman Gladys? I mean how do we know that this is all not just some kind of lie that they have made up, just like the Black great grandfather!

        • Hi, Lady.

          I support equal rights for gays, lesbians, bisexuals and transgenders. I do not know or care if Robert Jr., is gay. He disgusts me because he demonizes Trayvon, his family and all of his supporters. He also lies and he is a racist. Judging by his late night tweets, I also suspect he is a heavy drinker.

          I respectfully recommend we ignore his sexual orientation, whatever it is, and focus on the issues that matter.

          Thanks,

          Fred

      • looneydoone says:

        Can we ask how many times they’ve called 911 to report open garage doors, potholes, trash in the median and other such *urgent* concerns during the past year ? 😉

        • That’s another good question, but you would have to phrase it like this.

          Have you ever called 911?

          If so, please state for each call, why you called and whether you were satisfied with the police response.

          If you were not satisfied, please explain why.

      • Ty Flair says:

        Could you ask them,how do they feel about the police department.

      • looneydoone says:

        Can we ask what their favorite teevee programs are ? If they’re interested is sports, adventure, travel, cooking, home repair and decorating…or perhaps car racing, cops and cage fighting ?

        Do they read newspapers,books, magazines? If so, name them ?

      • It’s not that simple.

        Answering “no” is not a sufficient basis to persuade the court to excuse the person for cause and you would not have enough peremptory challenges to get rid of all those people.

        You would have to follow-up all “no” answers with,

        Please explain why you believe you are not racist.

      • Rachael says:

        I would ask them if there was ever a time they had to take directions from someone over the phone if if they had, to explain it.

      • Rachael says:

        I would also ask if you or anyone you know has ever had to defend themselves and explain.

        I would ask how they feel about police officers and why.

      • Jun says:

        I’d ask

        how they felt about strangers following/stalking children during the dark of the night

        & why

        when looking at issues, do they look at the whole picture to see how something occurred or do they go at everything at face value and why

        How they feel about liars and people who tell numerous contradictory stories

        I’d ask them their opinion of human rights

      • Rachael says:

        Ooooh, I would ask them if they ever felt like they had been followed. I would ask them what they would do if they were stopped by the person who was following them.

      • Jun says:

        Yes, I dont have anything against gays or transgender people, although I will admit I dont understand transexuals as it is strange to me

        however, I look at them as human equals and if they did something wrong to someone they should be called upon it like everyone else and it should not mean they deserve extra treatment over others nor should they be treated wrong by others

        Gays and Transexuals can be criminals and do people wrong too and in this case, it is Junior

        and Junior, it has nothing to do with his sexuality that people have against, it is his content of his character

        I’d like to see him get charged with something, if there is something he has committed and the only thing i can potentially see is cyber stalking and harassment and doxing and witness intimidation and potential obstruction and perjury if he dares to take the stand

      • I think that ladystclaire is right about one thing, the racists will give the answers that they feel will enable them to be picked. I believe that a psychologist is needed to ask questions in a round-about way (kind of a psychological test), that would reveal their attitudes and behavior about various subjects and thus exposing them as control-freaks, narcissists, abusers, gun advocates, and racists etc. (fogen mentality)
        Also, because these things can be checked out……
        Do they live in a mixed-race neighborhood and how long
        have they lived there. And ask them about crime in
        their neighborhood and NW.
        Are their co-workers of different races where they work,
        and how long have they worked there.

        • Xena says:

          Those are good questions, grey winter sky. Caused me to think of a question because of a cyber-bully; i.e., “Have you ever been a named defendant in an employment discrimination case whether in court or through the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission?”

      • gblock says:

        “Yes, I dont have anything against gays or transgender people, although I will admit I dont understand transexuals as it is strange to me”

        Jun,

        You seem to be making some kind of distinction between transgender and transsexual here. If so, what do you see as the difference?

      • leander22 says:

        although I will admit I dont understand transexuals as it is strange to me

        Some people are born with an odd combination of both sexes. The medical trait usually advised the parents some decades ago to make them into girls with the help of an operation. Assuming if they are brought up as girls it will be more easy for them to live their lives. It did not always work.

        And then there is the psychological component. I am fascinated by the exaggerated way male gays portrait the typical female behavior. A friend of mine, who is gay did not like it at all, he was brought up dressed as a girl in his childhood. His mother dearly wanted a girl and then he was born. …

        Complex issue. Obviously transsexual/transgender does not always need a biological basis, it simply means some people feel more comfortable with the “female part” or the “male part” in life, whatever that means.

        There is a German psychological standard tests that tests your psychological self-evaluation between “male” and “female” self-perception. Both men and women with basically a “normal” orientation do not necessarily get a result at the center, which signals “normal” or average acceptance of one’s gender role. I am female but my results are just slightly off the normal center into the male self-perception, while a friend of mine who is male being slightly off center on the female side.

        There is both nature and nature, meaning the basic anatomic disposition you are born with and the environmental psychological influences under which you grew up. All I can tell you is that I had enormous problems with the female parts in movies at the time I grew up and I often identified more with male characters than with females in fiction.

      • leander22 says:

        The medical trait

        trait-trade, I hope there isn’t more. I shouldn’t be here anyway. babbling.

      • tinytruthseeker says:

        I would ask do you have children? if yes what have you taught them to do if they feel they are being followed or if they are assaulted or someone tries to take them? Have you taught them “stranger danger?”

        Do you have a favorite sports team? Did you go to college or do you have a favorite college sports team? Do you own a sweatshirt hoodie showing your support for a sports team or perhaps your childs school sports team? Do you think wearing certain styles of clothing indicates “gang” affiliation?

      • Jun says:

        G Block

        I think I am using the wrong word, but what I mean is Transgender

      • Jun says:

        Leander

        The thing is, I understand why gay people are gay. They just happen to be sexually attracted to the same sex. It just seems a little psychotic to me to chop of your wee wee because you think you are a girl for example. But I can see it as a genetic thing and psychological issue.

        • blushedbrown says:

          Jun wrote

          It just seems a little psychotic to me to chop of your wee wee because you think you are a girl for example.

          Your wee wee. 😆

          Oh boy Jun so sorry but I couldn’t stop laughing at that. You are so male. Men can’t understand that.

          All the males on this blog will have instant penis reduction at your post about “CUTTING the wee wee”. Because that’s what it does when “threaten in such a manner”, it hides. HAHHAAHA.

      • Jun says:

        LOL

        Well yeah, it sounds funny, but that is what is weird to me, as I do not get why someone would do that

        Gay people, I completely understand. They like the same sex, while I like the opposite sex, sexually. That makes complete sense to me.

        Just the transgender thing, is weird to me. I do not understand it. It is such a drastic thing to do too. Once its cut, its gone. Genetically, they are still male.

        As an electronic musician though, I respect Trangender people, because a transgendered person invented one of the earliest synthesizers. I would not be a musician if not for him/her.

        • racerrodig says:

          As a guitar player I ask this….who owned the 1st commercial Moog Synth ?? If you don’t know….you’d never believe it.

          Sorry for being off topic.

      • Jun says:

        *First to use a synthesizer*

      • Jun says:

        I got a scholarship for music and audio engineering school. Wendy Carlos. Moog made the synth, and she/he played the instrument and made the first album with it.

        • racerrodig says:

          The answer to the Trivia question amazingly is Mickey Dolenz of the Monkeeys was the owner of the 1st one released to the public.

          He actually didn’t play a keyboard at all, some even say the drums.

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: