Cross Examining the Expert Witness: Messing with Hypotheticals

Monday, February 11, 2013

I write today about effectively cross examining expert witnesses, which was one of my specialties.

I could write a book about the subject, and maybe someday I will, but today I am going to focus on unraveling the expert’s hypothetical question.

Briefly, Rule 702 of the rules of evidence defines an expert witness as someone who is qualified by education, training or experience to express an opinion regarding a disputed matter in a legal proceeding.

When a jury needs the assistance of an expert witness to decide a disputed matter, either side may present the testimony of a duly qualified expert witness who may express an opinion regarding the disputed matter, including the answer to the ultimate question in the lawsuit.

The party that calls the expert begins by qualifying her as an expert. This normally involves having her tell the jury about her education, training or experience and publications in professional peer reviewed journals. Most experts have a curriculum vitae or CV, that lists their educational credentials and an up-to-date list of their publications. The CV is admitted into evidence.

The expert then tells the jury what evidence she has examined in the case.

Next comes a hypothetical question in which the expert is asked to assume a set of specific facts and asked if she can form an opinion to a reasonable medical or scientific certainty about the significance of those facts.

The witness will answer, “Yes.”

Next question: “What is your opinion?”

Next comes the rat-a-tat-tat of a nail gun.

One of the most effective ways to cross examine an expert is to attack the validity of the assumptions in the hypothetical question.

Undermine one and the expert’s opinion usually falls apart.

Since assumptions typically consist of assuming that disputed facts are undisputed, in a manner that benefits the party that called the expert, the opposing party cross examining the expert simply asks the expert to assume the contrary view.

Another way to challenge an expert opinion is to introduce an additional assumption into the hypothetical that undermines the conclusion.

Let us take, for example, the issue regarding whether Trayvon or the defendant was on top when the defendant fired the fatal shot.

The undisputed facts are the trajectory of the shot, which was direct from front to back, the intermediate range from which the shot was fired, the nonalignment of the two aligned holes in the sweatshirts with the entry wound and the muzzle of the gun was in contact with the outer sweatshirt when the fatal shot was fired.

The disputed fact is whether Trayvon or the defendant was in the superior position straddling the other.

The defense probably could find an expert who, given those undisputed facts, could testify to a reasonable scientific certainty that the defendant was on the bottom when he fired the fatal shot.

The problem with the hypothetical, however, is that it does not account for the presence of the gun in the defendant’s hand.

According to the defendant’s statement, he pulled the gun out of the holster that he carried inside the waistband of his jeans behind his right hip.

The expert’s opinion falls apart when you add this undisputed fact to the hypothetical because the defendant could not draw the gun and get it into the necessary position to fire the fatal shot.

Note BTW, that one also could conclude to a reasonable scientific certainty from the original set of undisputed facts that the defendant was in the superior position straddling Trayvon.

This is how you shoot down credentialed experts in just a few words.

513 Responses to Cross Examining the Expert Witness: Messing with Hypotheticals

  1. onlyiamunitron says:

    “Cercando Luce says:
    February 11, 2013 at 11:22 pm

    I always thought the voice of the guy on the phone with the teacher sounded like Sean, but I don’t recall hearing the introduction at the beginning of the call.”

    I thought so too, and was much impressed with how he handled the call, but having listened to her distress and mental anguish once was dis-inclined to go back to it, even as a printed transcript.

    However, the other day on another site another poster who had looked at the call logs pointed out that it was a different operator logged as the person who took that call.


  2. onlyiamunitron says:

    “pat deadder says:
    February 12, 2013 at 4:35 pm

    I don’t understand if he had him in a wrist lock how could he be pulling his shirts.”

    An excellent question.

    If Zimmerman’s got a fist full of hoodie in his left hand and a pistol in his right, what’s Martin doing with his two hands?


    • roderick2012 says:

      If Zimmerman’s got a fist full of hoodie in his left hand and a pistol in his right, what’s Martin doing with his two hands?

      Probably the same thing the rest of us would be doing, idiot, holding his hands up in surender hoping that George would see that he’s not a threat but unfortunately he was because George had already called the police and he had to get rid of Trayvon.

    • Malisha says:

      The better question, IMO, is IF Trayvon Martin was sitting on Fogen’s chest beating him MMA Style with killer punches, what was Fogen doing with HIS TWO HANDS? Not even folding them in pious prayer, begging for divine providence to intercede?

      We really don’t need to figure out what Trayvon did with his hands since he did NOT draw his gun and he did NOT hit Fogen.

  3. onlyiamunitron says:

    Google’s not helping me out here–was the phrase “consensual confrontation” used by O’Mara or by Michael Knox?


  4. colin black says:

    This is how it goes down.
    After a night confab with Oysterman a brainstorm.
    Foggen realises his story of the kid being the aggresor an he the heroic surviver is going to work.

    Just a couple of tweaks here an there.
    Cops seemed concerned as to this unarmed kids with juice an skittles would decide to attack me.

    Sleeps on it an by the reconstruction next day has deceided to push.
    The hey this guy was a punk thug scenario itching for to beat down my ass.
    Sure he ran but he walked right back an circled my truck twice taunting me an hey.
    A probably even told the dispatch that.

    So foggen thinks he is planting the seeds of an agresive bang ganging type dude.

    Totally forgeting that the recorded non emergancy call
    Utterly refutes that lie.
    How could Trayvon come back circle his car twice with him sat inside.
    We here him say shit he s running an exit his truck to run after him.
    So how an when was Trayvon able to circle him .
    Ah details details dont matter makes the kid sound dangerous an its a good kill anyway .
    This will bllow over in a couple of days.

  5. Rachael says:

    This is disgusting beyond words. Someone explain this to me. Also explain to me why O’Mara and the Zimmermans want to align themselves with this blatant sewage yet say they are not racist!!!!

    How does these 2 situations have ANYTHING to do with one another? A young teen girl was killed, Trayvon was killed. Yet the “author” of this article goes on to say:P

    ” You know, as a country, we are failing. We are failing miserably when it comes to children and our lack of compassion, and figuring out how do we keep the guns from killing all of these children.”

    – Jamie Foxx

    How do we keep the guns from killing all of these children? This was the question posed by Jamie Foxx at the Trayvon Martin Memorial Rally this past weekend. “The guns“, as if there are packs of wild unattended firearms running amock all by themselves.

    How about focusing your attention on how to keep the Traythugs who are using those guns from killing each other? It ain’t the guns killing kids, it’s the undisciplined young black males without fathers, faith, or direction. In short, look in the mirror.”


    Trayvon will killed with a gun – and NOT by a young black male.

    “How about focusing your attention on how to keep the Traythugs who are using those guns from killing each other?”

    WTF?!!!!! Trayvon did NOT have a gun. OMG!!!!

    “…young black males without fathers…”

    Trayvon had a father.

    WTF IS WRONG WITH THESE PEOPLE? How can they take an incident like what happened to this young girl and somehow twist it so that it is hate talk against Trayvon – and in a way that makes no sense, as Trayvon was the one who was killed and Trayvon did not have a gun? HOW THE HELL DO THEY DO THIS AND WHY?

    The ONLY thing Trayvon has in common with the young men who were arrested is that they were young BLACK men. It is obvious that the outhouse sees ALL young black men as gang members and thugs. And somehow Trayvon is responsible for every crime any young black male commits.

    Why on EARTH would O’Mara and the Zims want to associate with that? Why do they want to go out of their way to prove they are what they say they aren’t?

    • racerrodig says:

      4 Words “Race Baiting Hate Mongers”

    • Jun says:


      a) they are jealous of black people like Jamie Foxx and Obama because they are successful people

      b) they are scared because of successful black people

      c) they can not differentiate anything

      d) they are inbred

      e) they are angry at the world because they are failures

      f) they are not very intelligent

      Jamie Foxx is right because, gun violence affects us all. At the very least if we had better gun control, such as cracking down on illegal gun sales, and better licensing, we would have less funerals and pain. John Holmes walked into Walmart and decided to massacre a bunch of people. The Sandy Hook psycho, decided to kill his own mother and take her guns and massacre a bunch of people. It is directed at people who are not responsible gun owners.

      I dont expect any high academia from Conservative Tinfoil Hat

      I bet you none of those idiots would openly show their faces and express their views, and take advantage of the first amendment

      If you are going to talk all that crap, at least openly stand behind it in public with that mess

      • racerrodig says:

        Well said. Can you describe the typical house of any member of the Zidiot Nation??? Ask nice and I’ll describe it.

      • Jun says:

        Hitler flags, pictures of Fogenhats with candles lit, their secret stash of ebony porn which they dont want others to see for fear of being known as a “niggra lover”, moonshine, 10 different laptops signed into 30 social accounts each to spam their nonsense everywhere, notepads on their DD theories, notepads on why Omara is a double crosses of the defense

    • Judy75201 says:

      @Rachael: They do it because they secretely believe their God is a racist and they are indeed superior. They honestly think of themselves as Christians.

    • roderick2012 says:

      “…young black males without fathers…”

      I guess that explains the 15 y/o white kid in New Mexico who killed him mom, his three siblings and waited for his father who was a former minister to arrive home from the graveyard shift at the homeless shelter so he could ambush him.

      Oh and I didn’t know James Holmes or Adam Lanza were black..oh well.

      I guess they need to refine their stereotypes.

      • ladystclaire says:

        @Roderick, not to forget the white kids who have shot and killed school kids as well as teachers and principles. I guess they did so because they had no fathers in their homes also. Trayvon didn’t kill anybody and, he had his father in his life. just because his parents were divorced just like a lot of white kids who have divorced parents.

        People like these think that they are superior over other races when they are not. kids from other races come from broken homes but, that does not mean that they are destined to become thugs just because some of them happen to be African American.

        People like these also give this country a bad rep. let them keep showing the rest of the world just how ignorant they are and, also how hate filled they are as well.

        • racerrodig says:

          Lets make an A – B comparison

          Trayvon FogenPhoole

          Type of
          Student A-B Piss poor

          Record None Several Arrests

          Assault on
          Females None At least 2 on police

          Assault on
          Police None Yes, but it’s the cops

          Relationships Excellent Estranged for 10 years
          Molested Cousin
          May have molested
          Banned from all
          family gatherings

          Relationships Excellent He goes into a rage
          Insults Middle eastern

          History Prematurely Curtailed Chronically
          un / under employed

          Factor 100% 0%

          Misc Seen as a good kid Calls minorities by
          racial insults, has a
          desire to drive over
          Calls the police on
          black males

          Need for
          political pull Never needed 100%

          Type of
          Friends Normal 100% racist / abnormal

          Responsibility Yes Never. It’s never my

          Character Excellent Horrible
          Class & Dignity Utterly classless

          Other family
          Character Excellent RZ jr. (need I say more)

          The events of 2/26/2012

          Armed No 9mm Kel – Tek

          Legally Not armed Invalid Permit

          action Store errand out to Target (someone)

          Stalked /
          Anyone No Yes

          Activity at
          that time Talking to girl friend Stalking / Following
          (Normal) with malicious intent
          while armed

          Misc None Calls NEN and sets up
          intended victim

          Initial Action
          Taken runs away Follows / Stops / detains
          victim illegally

          Action Cries for help Detains against will
          Denies knowledge Shoots helpless
          of burglary ring victim dead

          Result Murder Victim Lies about entire
          series of events

          Fall out Family of victim Posts “datniggyTB”
          devastated, asks as insult to victim
          for investigation FogenPhamily bands
          Hires attorneys to together stages massive
          assist them campaign of propaganda
          and lies to smear actual
          Victims family is Claims victims final cries
          supported by the for help as own
          majority of the Nation Despised my all but a few
          diehard racist gun nuts

          Peaceful Marches to Racists slander victim
          remember Victim Racists slander victim

          So in the long run, when a side by side comparison is fairly made, it’s not hard to see where this will go
          III=> Tick Tock Tick Tock Tick Tock Tick Tock Tick Tock Tick Tock <=III

      • Cercando Luce says:

        It is indeed hard to see where this is going, because it’s Florida. Skipped going there this winter with family group.

  6. Jun says:

    Omara is working under 1950’s ghetto cop work defense

    all it involves is finding someone else to blame and pin it on them and frame them

    • ay2z says:

      And the list for is long, starting with the mild child victim with a tribute button for his cousin on his sweat shirt and candies in his pocket for his little brother, and a heart sticker on his cell phone, up to President Obama.

    • racerrodig says:

      He should watch “12 Angry Men” take notes and imagine the shoe being on the other foot.

      • ay2z says:

        Could the defense hearing be as much about a prosecution reveal as anything else? Is the standard the same, ‘beyond reasonable doubt’ for the judge as it is for a jury? The judge is a professional evidence evaluator, will the state be able to hold back anything that they would bring to a jury of lay persons/peers?

      • Rachael says:

        Not sure what you are asking ay2z – but if you are asking about the immunity hearing before the judge, no it is not beyond a reasonable doubt, the burden of proof is preponderance of evidence, which is less than beyond a reasonable doubt – it is more likely than not.

      • ay2z says:

        Rachel, thanks

        So this means the state doesn’t have to show all its cards pre-trial.

      • roderick2012 says:

        ay2z says: Could the defense hearing be as much about a prosecution reveal as anything else?

        I read somewhere that a possible defense strategy for having the immunity hearing even though they don’t believe that they can prevail is to find out the prosecution strategy before the trial, but that’s risky because I believe (thanks to the FL Sunshine Laws) the immunity hearing and the trial will be televised and you can bet that potential jurors will be watching.

        If George doesn’t testify he will probably lose much of his support and the money will definitely stop flowing, but I don’t see any point in holding an immunity hearing unless he testifies and with that he opens himself to cross-examination and I believe with what little l know about the case I could cross-examine him for at least three full days and since Bernie is much more experienced than I surely he can make George sweat for five days.

        If George doesn’t testify then that leaves Witness #6 and Witness #11 for the defense and while Witness #6 has his own inconsistencies Witness #11 has given statements which refute some of the main points of George’s statements like the entirety of the fight happened at the “T” and Trayvon struck George after they had a short exchange of words.

        I believe several months ago O’Mara stated that he was planning to call 50 witnesses during the immunity hearing although l have no idea how he came up with such a huge number.

        Also if the prosecution goes all out and shreds the defense it would devastate the defense to the point where they would have to consider a plea deal because the public will have witnessed EVERY single detail of the immunity hearing. Furthermore I believe that anything from the immunity hearing can be used at trial so the defense better make sure that if George testifies they win or it won’t matter if he refuses to testify during the trial.

        The question for the prosecution is how much evidence will they have present since the threshold is fairly low for the defense.

        The problem for the defense is that they have to plan for every contingency that the State will go balls to the walls so they have a counter so I don’t like their odds.

        • racerrodig says:

          No matter what road they take, they lose. If they file a SYG defense, he has to tell his story in some fashion. If he relies on evidence only, the defense has little to offer as it hinges on his claim that he was attacked and “….gonna die motherfucker…” There is no evidence he was attacked and his injuries are minor considering his tall tale.

          He also stated he had a wrist lock on Trayvon. With that statement, he just admitted to murder. His CCW permit is invalid and I know that alone could cause him to lose the SYG hearing.

          If they think they are forcing the State to show it’s hand then they are as blind as one can collectively be. If he doesn’t testify at a SYG hearing, why even file it, as nothing he claims can be admitted as it now becomes hearsay. If he does not take the stand it becomes

          1) NEN call…..motive by FogenPhoole
          2) FogenPhoole got out of the safety of his truck (admitted)
          3) FogenPhoole followed Trayvon while armed (illegal & admitted)
          4) Fogen had to have detained Trayvon (no rebuttal by Fogen)
          5) Fogen shoots Trayvon for no reason (no rebuttal & admitted)
          6) FogenPhoole never gets to say Trayvon inflicted his wounds
          (no rebuttal)
          7) The State can claim this was a murder in the 2nd degree (no
          8) The State can claim FogenPhoole is depraved (no rebuttal)
          9) The State can go the race card route (no rebuttal)

          There are more items the State can use I’m sure but if Fogen stays mum, which would be a first, he’s toast, if he testifies, he’s toast.

          If he takes the stand, the Holy Bible will spontaneously combust when he is sworn in.

          • Lonnie Starr says:

            If he takes the stand, the Holy Bible will spontaneously combust when he is sworn in.

            MOM had better save enough funds to buy GZ an asbestos glove for the swearing in. 😀

  7. Jun says:

    Click to access motion_std_witness_8.pdf

    Now he is asking for 3 years worth of Trayvon voice recordings

    • Witness 8 is DD and that’s a strange motion, IMO.

      I wonder why he thinks she has recordings of his voice.

      • acemayo says:

        she may have on her phone or house phone TM leaving a

      • Jun says:

        I feel asking for 3 years worth is a little overreaching as well

        Even if she has any recordings, it should be in camera review, so that the defendant can’t get any personal information or get off of listening to the victim’s voice or personal conversations that should be irrelevant

        I do not think she even has any such recordings anyways

        Usually cell phone mailboxes, delete old messages within 10 days, after you listen to it

      • racerrodig says:

        The strangest part is #2

        “2 Mr. Zimmerman has involved himself in the discovery process….”

      • ay2z says:

        why DD and not the family in general, if not to confuse and discredit this witness on the stand in front of a jury. She heard words to the effect of ‘old man [said] what you doin’ around here’ and Trayvon’s answer.

        Could they be going after her ability to distinguish?

      • Jun says:

        Old man could mean Taffe, Ostertrench, or Fogenhats

        sounds rather difficult to discredit when it is a easily discernible recognition

        because her testimony is strictly regarding the fact she could distinguish it as “not Trayvon, but Old man”

        • racerrodig says:

          Remember when we were kids…..anyone over 25 was old, probably married, may have had kids…….that’s old?? I’d say the lingo may still have some familiar terms. When I played semi-pro football and I was around 19 or 20 we all called our backup QB and place kicker “Grand pop” he was 34.

          To me, the picture of Fogen in the orange jumpsuit , he could be 40.

      • Jun says:


        “Mr. Fogenhats has involved himself in the discovery process…”

        $5 says Fogenhats wrote the last 20 motions, and Omara cleaned it up so it would not look like it was written with crayons

        • racerrodig says:

          Yep……I’m beginning to think Papi & RZ jr have a little more to say in this than O’ Mara does.

          Why state Mr. Zippybrain is anything but the defendant ????

        • Lonnie Starr says:

          Notice that none of those motion cite any authority? What lawyer works like that? Oh wait, Professor, isn’t there something in the legal text books about filing motions without authority? 😀

      • Rachael says:

        You better not be saying 40 is old, or that makes me ancient!!!

      • towerflower says:

        Maybe they are looking at getting their own audio experts now and need his voice…..even going back 3 yrs to try and do a voice comparison……..just my thought.

      • Cercando Luce says:

        Recordings going back to when he was 13? They’re protesting about the age 15 Hollister picture because the boy’s youth is so apparent, but now they want voice recordings from years before that for some substantial reason.

      • Cercando Luce says:

        The most reasonable explanation is Jun’s: defendant wants to get off listening to decedent’s voice.

    • roderick2012 says:

      I don’t understand what good the recording are going to do the defense because if I recall correctly the voice experts stated that the only way to determine if either voice matched the screams on the 911 tape would be to have both Trayvon and George repeat the same words under the same stress conditions.

      O’Mara is walking a fine line and better be careful!!

      • Jun says:

        I think this falls under

        Be careful what you wish for…

        Considering that the voice on the 911 tape sounds like a kid’s voice, there is a 90% probability, even if there was a 5 year old recording of Trayvon’s voice, that it would match it

        Either way, it does not sound like the defendant anyways, so not much good it will do him

      • roderick2012 says:

        @Jun, I was thinking more along the line of harassment of Trayvon’s family which of course is why he is doing this—to get the racist supporters to give more money.

        Jun: Either way, it does not sound like the defendant anyways, so not much good it will do him

        If I remember correctly George’s voice was around a 40% match and to be even close the voice has to be at least a 90% match.

      • Jun says:

        Considering it sounds like a young boy screaming

        and Trayvon is a young boy, a teenage boy

        I am going to say Omara will wish he never asked for such recordings, if they even exist

        • racerrodig says:

          “I am going to say Omara will wish he never asked for such recordings, if they even exist”

          No argument from me and 2 can play that game.

          “Recordings….none were ever saved your honor”

          BUT I think O’ Mara is telling the court and possibly the Zidiot Nation FogenPhoolePhianlyPh’dup.

          “2 Mr. Zimmerman has involved himself in the discovery process…”

          I read that as “….this ain’t my idea your honor, this is what I have to deal with”

          • jm says:

            “Mr. Zimmerman has involved himself in the discovery process…”

            Is this a necessary disclaimer?

          • racerrodig says:

            That’s a new one. I think he’s telling the court “…..this shit ain’t my idea…..he’s FogenPhoole and he’s Phucking NutZZ”

      • Rachael says:

        @jun, not just that it sounds like a teenage boy, but GZ’s own father saod he’d heard GZ scream like that lots of times (?) . . . When he was a teenager!!!

      • racerrodig says:

        Forget what he’s asking for, look at line #2.

      • roderick2012 says:

        Rachael says:@jun, not just that it sounds like a teenage boy, but GZ’s own father saod he’d heard GZ scream like that lots of times (?) . . . When he was a teenager!!!

        I thought I was hearing things when he said that.

        I don’t even want to imagine WHY George was screaming *barf*

        • jm says:

          roderick says: GZ’s own father saod he’d heard GZ scream like that lots of times (?) . . . When he was a teenager!!!
          Osterman said that GZ’s mother used to beat him while his father did nothing to stop it so that would account for RZ, Sr statement. I think that is part of Osterman’s witness statement. If not for Osterman’s statement about the beatings it would be curious why his father would hear him scream as a teenager lots of times wouldn’t it? Strange GZ’s father would want to bring that up. Wonder if RZ, Jr would want to comment on GZ screaming as a teen a lot.

          • racerrodig says:

            Lets not read to much into what he said as much as why.
            He had to keep on talking just like FogenPhoole. He was asked if he could identify his sons voice. Instead of just “..yes, that’s my son screaming…” he had to go the PhullFogenPhamily route and expound.

            All he had to say was “There is no doubt that is Fogens voice”

            As John Belushi would say “….buuuuut noooooooooooo…..” RZ had to add I have heard him scream many times when he was…..

            That was sheer stupidity.

            Remember these Phooles think they can sell ice to Eskimo’s

          • jm says:

            racerrodig: “That was sheer stupidity.”

            It was sheer stupidity on RZ, Sr’s part. Not just because of what Osterman said about the beatings which are not relevant as far as I can tell, but because GZ isn’t a teen. Surely GZ’s voice has changed as he matured.

            You are right. The Zimmerman KKKlan think they can BS their way out of this mess. Fortunately the more they talk the deeper they dig a hole for GZ.

          • racerrodig says:

            When I do trial prep for any of the lawyers in the fraud civil cases, I get this beaten into my skull all day long “…don’t expound…” “..remember…yes or no unless it’s analysis..”

            I know the routine and the lawyers I work for love what & how I do it.

            When these clowns start talking, I take notes and I’m amazed at what they say that we all know will come back to haunt them.

            If I was on the stand and added what RZ sr said about his son screaming when he was a teenager, every lawyer I know would have stated “Objection……………and you’re fired”

            I’m sure the Professor can attest to the fact that there are ways to get in what you want and not screw it up.

            “You cannot unring the bell”

          • Lonnie Starr says:

            That’s exactly what GZ believed he could do each time he revised his story. He thought that no one would remember what he said the last time he spoke, otherwise; “Why would they be asking me this stuff again?”. So Fogenhats believes that the bell can and does get unrung all day long and he and his klan are the ones who are supremely gifted to do it.

            But, like I said before, and so have others here: When a defendant in a murder case lies, it makes the jury think “he’s trying to cover his guilt”! Which is why it’s advisable to let the little stuff go, tell the truth and take the pain or hit as the case maybe, you’ll preserve your credibility for the critical stuff. GZ, on the other hand, has so foolishly tried so hard to cover up even the smallest detail, his credibility was gone before he even approached anything critical.

            I, for one, cannot wait to see the look on the jurors faces when he says “he was skipping”! I mean really?

            —-> A drug using criminal thug bad boy, up to no good and possibly armed, casing the neighborhood and skipping? <—-

            Move over Clint Eastwood, Bruce Willis, Charles Bronson, you haven't seen anything until you've seen the Art of Murderous Skipping!

      • Rachael says:

        Y’ALL MISSED MY POINT LOL!!! When I said GZ’s father said he’d heard GZ scream like that lots of times (?) . . . When he was a teenager!!! – my point was TEENAGER. He had heard him scream like that when he was a teenager.

        But who was the only teenager there?

        I found it to be a very interesting choice of words. Like a teenager – like Trayvon.

        • racerrodig says:

          I understand and can add, he wasn’t even asked that. He was asked if he could identify the voice as Fogens. He should have said a simple yes. This was not a trial.

          But he had to go what is evidently the FogenPhamilyPhantasy route. He had to expound and say I heard him scream like that many times as a teenager. Hey dork…..nobody asked “when” they asked “who”

          O’ Mara probably cringed inside while Bernie did that “Steeeerike” fist pump inside. It’s now on the record and could be used later.

          This is typical “I’ll tell you and you’ll be convinced because I’m a Zidiot” mentality. I loved when he said that.

      • Jun says:

        ah, the famous lines of the Fogenhats family

        100000% absolute undeniable

        their lying is so blatant

      • Jun says:

        They expound because they feel that people are not totally convinced, so that is when they throw on the famous “1000% absolutely undeniable” onto there

        Like jeez, we all have ears, it is obviously not Fogenhats out there screaming

      • roderick2012 says:

        A Rachael at 12:55 pm

        No I caught Papa Zim’s ‘it sounded like a teenage George’, but I also remember the look of disgust Papa Zim gave George as he left the courtroom after he finished testifying.

        It made me believe that Papa Zim is tired of saving George’s hide and wants him to go away this time.

      • roderick2012 says:

        racerrodig says: But he had to go what is evidently the FogenPhamilyPhantasy route.

        Yes all of the Zims are liars but they aren’t particularly good liars.

        I guess to marry into the family you have to pass the ‘lie’ test.

        • racerrodig says:

          “I guess to marry into the family you have to pass the ‘lie’ test.” or spend a few years in prison like SheLie’s dad.

      • roderick2012 says:

        racerrodig says:“I guess to marry into the family you have to pass the ‘lie’ test.” or spend a few years in prison like SheLie’s dad.

        I bet that Shellie used her dad as a reference when she allied for membership in the Zimmerman clan!!

        • racerrodig says:

          Picture this hypothetical at that wedding….

          “Welcome to the family SheLie, to bad your father couldn’t attend. As you know, I am a retired Magistrate Judge and any time you get into any trouble…….well……..just call me and it’s no trouble at all to pull a few strings. Hey, just ask George, I have to do that all the time for him”

    • Rachael says:

      3 years?!!! Why 3? Thats odd.unless it has something to do with maybe when his voice changed but I don’t see why.

      • racerrodig says:

        “2 Mr. Zimmerman has involved himself in the discovery process..”

        That’s the first time I recall seeing that line.

        More wasting bait on a fishing expedition.

      • roderick2012 says:

        Rachael, it’s funny that some of George’s supporters say that Trayvon’s voice was too deep for it to have been the voice crying out for help on the 911 call.

        Of course they forget that the voices of teenage boys are still developing and often ‘crack’ if they become scared or excited.

        These people are filled with such denial and hatred!!

      • roderick2012 says:

        Rachael, it’s a negotiating tactic.

        Ask for some outragous amount and get maybe a year’s worth which is what he wanted originally.

      • Jun says:

        LOL well it sounds nothing like Fogenhats’ predator voice

      • Jun says:


        I was kidding when I said Fogenhats was calling the shots and it turned out to be true LOL

    • acemayo says:

      somehow we might find a a picture of TM doing wrong

      • roderick2012 says:

        acemayo says:somehow we might find a a picture of TM doing wrong

        Woulda, coulda, shoulda

        Even if Trayvon were doing something WRONG it has no bearing on what happened between him and George.

        O’Mara is trying this case in the court of public opinion again by attempting to raise the public suspicions about ‘what if’ because all of the evidence is against his client.

      • Rachael says:

        So what if there is something Trayvon is doing wrong. What does it have to do with GZ shooting him at a totally different location. What could Trayvon have done? Did he throw a candy wrapper on the floor? We don’t shoot people for littering. Was he looking at/in cars? We don’t shoot people for that either. Even if he was in a parking lot, we don’t shoot people for doing drugs. None of anything that could have happened would have anything to do with GZ. He could have dropped his drawers and taken a poop on the sidewalk – certainly a civil offense, but not something GZ could shoot him for later.

        • racerrodig says:

          The worst will be Trayvon talking to a teenage girl saying the things teenage boys say to teenage girls.

          Ok….you hang up No, you first No….you !! I can’t ……Oh I miss you already.

          We all know what Fogen says on the phone and the names he calls people…………that he doesn’t even know.

      • Jun says:

        You keep forgetting that Fogenhats’ gang’s and Fogenhats himself, mode of defense is this

        (1) He’s a N$$$$ger and he deserved it because he is a typical thug

        (2) Fogenhats is allowed to stalk, I mean follow, I mean, go after skipping black kids

        (3) There’s actually 30 different Deedees, and they are all played by Oprah Winfrey

        (4) The only people who support the victim are black, so it is black racists

        (5) They have a picture of an alleged black grandfather, so that means they are not racist

        (6) Fogenhats needs 50 years to prepare, I mean an inordinate amount of time

        (7) Have Junior make motions, like he is masturbating, and then have him tell a story about head bashing concrete, on live television

        • racerrodig says:

          “(7) Have Junior make motions, like he is masturbating, and then have him tell a story about head bashing concrete, on live television”

          Thanks…..I needed that.

          That would be either “The My Brother is a Moron” Defense or “The Diaper Defense”

  8. acemayo says:

    GZ said in his police call on 2-26 -12 there’s a real suspicious guy
    Question what made TM a real suspicious guy how far was GZ from TM
    when GZ saw him . When ask to answer that question he didn’t give
    GZ said in his police call on 2-26 – 12 this guy looks like he’s up to no good
    what was TM doing to make him look like he up to no good.
    Question again how far was GZ form TM.
    GZ said in his police call on 2-26 – 12 this guy he’s on drugs or something
    Question did GZ work in a rehad place for people on drugs to get
    thr experince to look at a person to say that again how far was
    GZ from TM
    GZ said in his police call on 2-26-12 Its raining and he’s just walking around…
    TM was under a roof for the mail boxes waiting for the rain to let up, it is
    not a crime to move back and forth. taking to his girl friend on the phone
    it is odd that GZ at that point somehow see everything about TM but not
    him talking on a cell phone you have to put up to your ear to talk, if GZ
    can see that much why didn’t he said his hand was up too his head.
    It was confirm that he was on the phone with DD at the same time GZ
    was looking at TM I ask again how far was GZ to TM that. It was raining hard
    and dark where was GZ to see TM that good

    • Dave says:

      Trayvon had earbuds for his phone and if he was using them and had the phone in a pocket, the defendant probably wouldn’t have seen anything.

      • acemayo says:

        But he will still see his lips moving
        From a distance looking at some talking it looks likes
        he’s talking to himself, and if he walking back and forth
        while talking that made him real strange again how far was
        GZ from TM

        • cielo62 says:

          In the early days of earbuds and Bluetooth technology, I thought the people were talking to themselves. GZ should know better since those technologies are no longer new.

          Sent from my iPod

    • roderick2012 says:

      acemayo says:But he will still see his lips moving
      From a distance looking at some talking it looks likes
      he’s talking to himself, and if he walking back and forth
      while talking that made him real strange again how far was
      GZ from TM

      1) So why would George leave his vehicle (without being sure that he had his weapon) if he thought Trayvon was talking to himself?

      2) Why didn’t George hang up the NEN call and call 911 if he thought that Trayvon was an imminent threat.

      I love how George supporters like you attempt to make Trayvon so threatening only to be reminded that George’s subsequent actions prove that George didn’t find Trayvon threatening at all.

      • roderick2012 says:

        I forgot that George stated that he wasn’t afraid during the Hannity interview.

        So much for big bad Trayvon frightening little ole George.

      • Rachael says:

        Here is where the outhousers have such a problem. Law is based usually on what is reasonable to a reasonable person. They get upset when they hear that GZ should never have left his car and say something stupid like “well if Trayvon had never gotten suspended and had to be sent to his dad’s.”

        Reasonably, should someone think that if they went to visit their dad, suspended or not, that they would walk down the street and get shot? No. That is not reasonable, regardless of why he was visiting his dad.

        In the legal world there is something called proximate cause and it is decided by the “but for” test. I don’t know that it actually applies to this case because it is not a tort case, but it illustrates what I am trying to say.

        “Proximate cause is the primary cause of an injury. It is not necessarily the closest cause in time or space nor the first event that sets in motion a sequence of events leading to an injury. Proximate cause produces particular, ****foreseeable consequences***** without the intervention of any independent or unforeseeable cause. It is also known as legal cause.

        To help determine the proximate cause of an injury in Negligence or other tort cases, courts have devised the “but for” or “sine qua non” rule, which considers whether the injury would not have occurred but for the defendant’s negligent act. A finding that an injury would not have occurred but for a defendant’s act establishes that the particular act or omission is the proximate cause of the harm, but it does not necessarily establish liability since a variety of other factors can come into play in tort actions.”

        So what I mean is, is it reasonably foreseeable that if Trayvon went to visit his dad because he was suspended from school that he would get shot walking home from the store? I do not see how that would be a reasonable thought.

        However, when you call the police, say someone looks suspicious, looks like they are on drugs, they are looking at you, they have their hands in their waistband, you don’t know what their deal is, is it reasonable to think there would be foreseeable consequences if you were to get out of your car and follow that person?

        Is that really such a difficult concept to grasp?

        • Xena says:

          @Rachael (((((APPLAUSE)))))

          If not but for the fact that GZ got out of his vehicle to, and did follow Trayvon Martin, the two would not have come into physical contact.

          The jury in the Dooley case found the same way — if not but for the fact that Dooley left his drive-way/garage with a loaded gun and approached David James, the two would not have come into physical contact.

          I’d like to mention something else also in GZ’s story that puts a nail in his coffin. According to him, when Trayvon approached him from the side or from behind and asked if he had a problem, GZ did not say he had no problem, turn his back and walk away. He said he started looking for his cell phone while standing face to face with Trayvon. That is not the posture to avoid conflict. Not only does it convey that GZ desired conflict, but it also conveys that he felt that he had the advantage to prevail over conflict, whether verbal or physical.

          There is no reasonable, logical reason to call 911 when coming face to face with the person reported suspicious, unless there is intent to restrain/retain that person until the cops arrive.

      • gbrbsb says:

        “There is no reasonable, logical reason to call 911 when coming face to face with the person reported suspicious, unless there is intent to restrain/retain that person until the cops arrive.”

        And an applause, to you Xena, and good we can at least agree on this!

        As I have commented many times. For what reason would anyone of sound mind, (more especially a NW studying for police, law, etc.), alone on a dark rainy Sunday evening, down a lonely unlit footpath in a quiet gated community, stand before a hooded black youth they had already perceived as suspicious, up to no good and with something in his waistband, and who had already checked them out while they were protected in their vehicle and therefore aware they were being watched and/or followed, reply to this punk´s question, “You gotta problem homie/man” with a, “No, I don´t have a problem man” while at the same time looking downwards to search for their mobile in order to call 911? What would GZ expect the up to no good to do… wait patiently while he talked to the police?

        Farcical scenario unless GZ wanted to retain Trayvon until the police arrived, perhaps even by gunpoint although I am not wholly convinced of this last part although open to the gun appearing at some point before the scuffle.

        • Xena says:


          You gotta problem homie/man” with a, “No, I don´t have a problem man” while at the same time looking downwards to search for their mobile in order to call 911? What would GZ expect the up to no good to do… wait patiently while he talked to the police?

          Yes! GZ’s action contradicted his words. If he didn’t have a problem, he should have turned and walked away.

          Farcical scenario unless GZ wanted to retain Trayvon until the police arrived, perhaps even by gunpoint although I am not wholly convinced of this last part although open to the gun appearing at some point before the scuffle.

          Not for one moment do I believe Trayvon approached GZ. The fact that the crime scene debris is about 40 ft from where GZ said he was approached brings serious doubt that Trayvon approached GZ. That in fact, I am totally convinced it was the other way around. After GZ realized that Trayvon was not submitting to him, and he had no authority to require him to do so, and Trayvon began crying out in pain, fear, and for help, is when the gun came out.

    • racerrodig says:

      We’ve all been asking the same questions, and many more, since about late March of last year. The bottom line looks to be he’s just making stuff up randomly. As has been dissected many times, his timeline fails miserably.

      • Jun says:


        Interview one “He hit me and I fell down, and then he mounted me and pummeled me”

        interview two “He hit me and I fell down, and then he mounted me and pummeled me”

        interview three “He hit me and I fell down, and then he mounted me and pummeled me”

        interview four “He hit me and I fell down, and then he mounted me and pummeled me”

        Re-enactment day “um, I looked for an address, um he hit me, and um, er, I threw fly swatters and then um….” stares desperately down the back pathway because he knows now his story has to match where the body was

        • racerrodig says:

          The “Swatting Flies Bitch Slap Fight” is an all time show stopper.

          I said this before, he looks like “Robot” from “Lost in Space” with the
          “Warning, Warning, Danger, Danger Will Robinson” and since he likes to lift B movie lines like “…homie..” and such maybe LLMPapa can do a video on that.

      • Jun says:


        They “good copped” Fogenhats good LOL

        It got to the point where he had Omara tell the court, he felt betrayed LOL

        He do look like that ol science show robot LOL

  9. PiranhaMom says:

    @ LadyStClaire,

    Agree with you 1,000% Zimmerman had NO RIGHT to pull a gun on Trayvon. But IF (repeat, IF) he “reasonably feared for his life” – for which he should have have NO such fear, as the forensic evidence shows Zimmerman was NOT held
    captive in any way by Trayvon, considering he was armed and Trayvon was not, to answer ANY fear in Zimmerman’s OWN mind, he could have said, “Hands up. I’ve got a gun. The cops are on their way.”

    Because he had a gun and Trayvon did not.

    Yes, illegal as hell – but better than killing Trayvon. What I am saying is that Zimmerman had NO excuse for murdering Trayvon; he was not captive and at Trayvon’s mercy, no matter how he imagined he could be harmed – and he had the gun to ward of ANY THREAT he could have imagined.

    It would be errifying, yes. Deadly, no. The cops arrived two minutes later.

    • ladystclaire says:

      @PM, just the thought of knowing that this lump of nothing juist up and killed an innocent kid, just makes me ill as hell. I never meant for my reply to your comment, to cause any kind of ill feelings at all.

      Also knowing that some people in this country can support someone who has killed a child and not only do they support him, they also sit behind a keyboard and vilify this kid as well as disrespecting him and his family. I never realized just how evil some people in this country can really be.

      Had Fogen shot and killed a white kid, these very same *IDIOTS* would be the first to want him put to death.

  10. Ben says:

    Coming out of left field here, but I have a criticism of the court system. General comment not just for this case. Opinions offered as expert are not audited by independent auditors. Quality control procedures are not adequately documented.

    We do the above in our society to protect our money but not our liberty.

    When it comes to money…auditors go to payroll processing companies like ADP and audit descriptions of every imaginable aspect related to the procedures used by the a payroll company to ensure accuracy in the outcome. A report is issued on the accuracy of the description.

    That is to say that the court system has no independent attestation function to test the quality of the information asserted as truth. Asserted truth that has no measurement of its actual truth.

    There are two stages of asserted truth. First the information gathering stage and then conclusion stage.
    Standard audits attest to the accuracy of financial reports, numbers that result from procedures used to capture the transactions and produce results.

    The manner as to how information was gathered can be attested to. The accuracy of financial results attested to. By licensed independent examiners. They can also conclude that there is not enough information to draw a conclusion.

    We dont bother doing this when a person’s liberty is at stake. Instead we ask the jury to draw conclusions they probably completely dont understand.

    Money seems to be more important then people’s liberty in our society.

    I am aware that it will be said the above idea is too expensive to impliment. I will grant that. But its on those grounds by which I find the current court system so offensive. It makes a defendant buy back his own freedom but its often not affordable. I find it wreckless to have so small a budget that most defendants are prosecuted on faulty evidence. This case is rare and the information the professor ads is a minor step towards higher quality information in the courts.

    I find it criminal for any prosecutor to take an advocational stance into the court room, given the lack of information about information quality in the court system today.

    • Our court system is based on the idea that the best method to produce a just result is to have two professional adversaries slug it out on behalf of their respective clients.

      There are many problems with this idea, not the least of which is that the two adversaries almost never have equally balanced skills and available resources.

      • racerrodig says:

        “There are many problems with this idea, no(t) the least of which is that the two adversaries almost never have equally balanced skills and available resources.”

        I’ve seen that circus before…..and it can be very entertaining in civil cases, but I can’t imagine an intelligent defendant realizing about this far along what O’ Mara really is.

        Intelligent being the operative word in this case.

  11. ladystclaire says:

    A reminder for you guys, don’t forget to watch ID channel on 02/13/13 at 8:00 pm.

  12. colin black says:

    February 11, 2013 at 7:45 pm

    Good analysis.

    “The prosecution’s process needs to be “seedless” – sinsemilla, one might say, in another context.”

    You couldn’t resist, could you?


    No grass worth smokeing has seeds

    Thats why you take out the male plants soon as you notice they have spurs.
    Little hooks between stems that indicate its male.

    Those are removed atherwise they willfertilise the female plants.
    An thats a huge no no.
    You want the females to bloom an flower as thats where the thc is an the flowering buds are what you smoke.

    If theter fertilised the female shuts down on budding an growing an energy is diverted to seed production wich also stops the thc production.
    So grass with seeds id feed to budgies but not worth smokein g.

    Thats why thisticks an sensi were sought after backin the day because of the strength due to lack of seeds.

    Now all grass producers realise this an the heavy duty plants being sold under street name SKUNK is like what normal grass good grass is strong beer as comparison.
    Well thease mutant Skunk Plants are like Jack Daniels compared to good old sensi an thisticks.

    Twenty years ago all potheads in UK mostly smoked black hash.
    NOW It practicaly al skunk special among the teens an young uns.

    An its bloody strong Ive lived in centrestrasse inAmsterdam an smoked Nepalease temple Balls in Katmaandu
    Lived in India for four years.

    An Ive never experinced anything strong as skunk.
    Nearest ever was Dhurban Poison.

  13. ay2z says:

    Faced with evidence against him, he holds his own with some of the same techniques as a shooter we know.

    • ay2z says:

      or, a lesson in how NOT to cross examine

    • bettykath says:

      gee, let’s humiliate our child and post it on face book. A child that young should be taught about telling the truth, not interrogated.

      My sister was about the same age, maybe a bit older, when she was staying with me. She was not to lock any inside door. She did so repeatedly. Each time I would tell her that she is not to lock the door. After about the third time, I gave some thought to what was going on. She wasn’t otherwise acting defiantly so there had to be another reason. The reason? She didn’t know that pushing in the button on the door knob was the same thing as locking the door. Once I asked that she not push the button on the door knob, she never again locked the door.

      • racerrodig says:

        Long before the home camera age, my younger brother went “shopping” one Sunday morning. I was still asleep when mom came into our room and yelled some really wild stuff.

        Seems my brother opened a few cans of tomato paste and a can of sauerkraut and was “cooking” the kraut and painting the walls with the tomato paste. Did you do that………nooooooo mommy.

        Picture a 3 year old with a plastic farm tractor with the front wheels covered in paste being used as a brush as mom does the obligatory 3rd degree. Some images just last forever.

        Red Sprinkles, tomato past, whats the difference.

      • SearchingMind says:

        That video did make feel sick. I am a guy and do not understand how this “mother” can’t see the unhealthy nature of what she is doing.

      • When I was little I remember I spilled something on a rug, maybe my sisters were involved too, I can’t remember. When momma got to me see told me if I told the truth ,I wouldn’t be punished. I told her whatever it was I did and in 66 yrs that lesson helped me make good choices. It’s hard to be a momma, I thought the video was sweet.

      • towerflower says:

        I looked at it being a funny video and not an interrogation. When my son was little I had him convinced that if he lied he would get purple spots on his tongue. When I knew he was lying I would tell him to stick out his tongue and his response was priceless in the way he would try to keep his mouth closed so I wouldn’t see his “spots”.

    • Tzar says:

      He’s too cute, I am not sure how long I could keep up my interrogation 🙂

      • racerrodig says:

        Loved it when she says there are red sprinkles on his face. He touches his left cheek and says no there aren’t. I would have just paraded the little tyke into the bathroom and asked him to look in the mirror. Game – Set – Match !

    • PiranhaMom says:

      @ “John’s” mother –

      She needs to understand that kids don’t understand at an early age what “lies” are. What he does understand is that Mom is pissed (although she does sound kind – after all, she knows she’s on video) and he is doing his best to placate her because “eating the sprinkles,” he’s now figured out, is not making Mom happy.

      He’s trying to function in a verbal society that is quite new to him (and is remarkably articulate for his age). He doesn’t understand the inquisition, because he’s offered an answer that SHOULD make her happy – he has no idea that Mom’s skills are vastly greater than his and what led to this videotaped grilling is not the sprinkles, but “the lying.”

      Well, John IS learning that life can be difficult at times. Mom IS trying her best to teach him ethics.

      I’m more concerned about the nose ring.

      • SearchingMind says:

        And when kids of that age think anyone is pissed at them, they get scared but can’t express it (in words). The fear thus instilled in them can take a life of its own and affect the kid’s emotional and psychological development and how they relate to others (including the mother) quite negatively.

  14. colin black says:

    shannoninmiami says:

    February 11, 2013 at 1:29 pm

    Just wanted to post this for the few of you who think omar has a point to complain about the congresswoman expressing herself about the murder of Trayvon. And to remind you she obviously has the authority to do so, otherwise she wouldn’t have.
    So apparently she doesn’t have to presume gz is innocent- because she’s special!
    OTOH, omar is the lawyer in this case and he does not have the right to lie blatantly to the perspective jury.

    BTW this is from what would’ve been Trayvon’s birthday. So much for respecting the victim.

    Dureing the Charles Manson Case
    The president of the United States of America declared on Natonal tv coast to coast that Manson an the girls/family were guilty Of the Tate an La Bianca murders.
    An Nixon was a former lawer

    This was whilst the trial was still in progress.
    The jutours bused to court everday through the streets.
    Could read the headlines all over the place.
    News vendors ect an
    President says there guilty……..

  15. ay2z says:

    MO’M says he will not be ready for trial in June, so, if the self-defense hearing must he held within 45 days of the start of the trial, and they are simply not ready (say changing lead mules and have to get them up to speed), will this be allowed out of necessity, or will this judge stand her own ground on this?

    • Jun says:

      This is strictly my opinion

      I do not feel Omara and Fogenhats deserve any extension

      They have had over a year to get ready for trial and from observation it looks as though they purposely did not do any work, and instead went throughout the media to tell lies and screw around for a year

      This case also has to show respect in regards to the victim, Trayvon, who is not around today to defend his name and himself, and he deserves to have his day in court through the state

      Fogenhats chose to target and disparage a kid, stalk and chase this kid, catch the kid, confront threaten attack this kid, then kill the kid as the kid was pleading for his life and mercy and asking for his mother

      Since he wants to kill someone and claim self defense, he can get to going and claim it in court

      • Rachael says:

        And all the time they wasted getting rid of judges.

      • ladystclaire says:

        @Jun, I couldn’t agree with you more. the defense has bought this on themselves and, they do not in any way shape or form deserve any more time to prepare for this trial. had they not been so concerned with defaming the victim along with the scum of society as well as catering to them, they would be ready.

        The fact that their motion to continue being denied, did not stop O’haha from going on Hannity’s racist hour on Fox news and lying on the POTUS. these people IMO are the ones wanting civil unrest to take place in this country if you ask me. those at the CDH as well as RZ jr are the ones making this out to be all about race. Trayvon and his family deserve to have their day in court in order for him to receive the justice he so deserves.

        “JUSTICE DELAYED IS JUSTICE DENIED!” also, Robert Zimmerman Jr. has no right to quote Dr. King.

      • roderick2012 says:

        Jun, You’re completely correct. Did you notice that O’Mara ‘forgot’ to address the motion to obtain DeeDee’s interview from Matt Gutman?

        When Judge Nelson attempted to prompt the idiot by asking him if he had anything else O’Mara held that huge binder to his chest and told her no and walked back to the defense table.

        I guess he will wait until the March 5th hearing before he files the motion to compel Gutman and ABC to turn over Gutman’s recording of the DeeDee interview then he will ask for a continuance and of course that will mean that the immunity hearing that he has yet to file for will have to be cancelled because there just won’t be enough time and the George’s stupid followers will ignore the obvious bait and switch and will come up with some conspiracy theory as to why O’Mara won’t be able to obtain the ABC audio of DeeDee’s interview instead of realizing that O’Mara is a conman and will send George more of their hard-earned money. LOL

        BTW does anyone know if the security firm can obtain their $27K directly from George’s defense fund by placing a lien on it or take them to court immediately since O’Mara is all over the news announcing how much they have raised?

        If I remember correctly Xena ( I don’t recall all of the details) stated that O’Mara, George and Shelly could end up in jail if they don’t pay the $27K.

        Is it possible that any judge would allow that lawsuit to go foward before the criminal trial?

        • I believe those cases are on different tracks with different issues.

        • Xena says:


          If I remember correctly Xena ( I don’t recall all of the details) stated that O’Mara, George and Shelly could end up in jail if they don’t pay the $27K.

          No. There was a discussion here about “debtor’s prison” which concerned people who fail to file an answer with the court, have default judgments entered against them, and then fail to comply with citations to discover assets.

          In the case of AIS, if they are granted a judgment, they have options of collecting the judgment by way of filing a lien against the Paypal account, O’Mara’s property, and George and ShelLIE’s property, The judgment can be reported to the credit reporting bureaus.

      • Jun says:

        I dont know much about lawsuits but if Omara loses to AIS, and he does not promptly pay, his property can be seized and then sold to make the payment

        Omara is a con man but he just wants to get paid, although it is really grimy how he is doing it

        The fund has no guarantee of rising or lowering, and considering the habits they have gone forth with, they’d probably blow all the money

        The only assurance they have is if the court repos something of Omara’s to get the money

        So either Omara is gonna lose his house or his car

        • racerrodig says:

          “So either Omara is gonna lose his house or his car”

          I think he’ll turn over that shiny new $40,000.00 printer FogenPhoole bought him.

      • Jun says:

        LOL it is still funny how Omara continuously hustles those nimrods and they still buy it

        He wrote off $40,000 for office equipment and you and I know for a fact, he meant that he put the money in his bank account for himself

        over $300,000 spent and nothing accomplished and Omara recycles old material and they still give him money LMAO

        • Lonnie Starr says:

          If I understand Professor, the case goes to trial, not when both sides say they’re ready, but at the judges discretion. So, unless there is a material objection with authority the judge says “here we go, ready or not!”

  16. Trained Observer says:

    Hi Judy — Wish I could see Russia from my house:)

  17. Judy75201 says:

    Oh, and I also wanted to mention, there is no SYG hearing. It’s been established that it will be a standard self-defense hearing, per O’Mara. How does that affect whether fogen might testify or not?

  18. Judy75201 says:

    I can’t find the comment right now, but it’s the 2nd time Betty has said the Dorner manifesto was altered, and it’s the 2nd time I have checked, and I can only find conspiracy sites that are saying that, so I don’t appreciate it being spread here without some backup.

    Sorry, but Unitron’s definition of a troll fits.

  19. Good analysis.

    “The prosecution’s process needs to be “seedless” – sinsemilla, one might say, in another context.”

    You couldn’t resist, could you?


  20. PiranhaMom says:

    @Professor Fred,

    While we in class are trying to re-create the crime, relying on the evidence to date, until and unless fiber evidence is entered that proves Zimmerman’s levis were in contact with Trayvon’s sleeves or the front of his clothing, I would not expect the prosecution to state Zimmerman was in the mount position over Trayvon when he shot and killed the boy.

    It is a given that Zimmerman shot Trayvon and that Trayvon died within seconds or minutes after the shot. Every member of the jury will know and understand that. Zimmerman does not dispute it (at least, not up to this time).

    The issue for the jury to decide is if Zimmerman was attacked to the degree that he was reasonably in fear for his life, AND if he was unable to remove himself from danger.

    At no time has GZ or MO’M claimed that Trayvon was armed, or GZ feared he was armed. GZ claims he was imprisoned under Trayvon, thus his only chance for survival was to unholster his gun and shoot Trayvon from that position.

    Thus, (unless fiber analysis is conclusive to prove GZ was on top) the prosecution need only point out ALL of the impossibilities of what GZ claims:

    No smothering/head bashing by Trayvon because no blood/DNA evidence of this on Trayvon’s hands/sleeves. No self-defense injuries. Impossibility of being able to cry for help while being “smothered.” Minor “injuries” GZ sustained do not relate to GZ’s claim. The phyical impossibility of GZ’s ability to remove the gun from the holster and the lack of space in which to shoot Trayvon consistent with the Medical Examiner’s report of the trajectory of the bullet.

    The prosecution can present all of this without having to offer any alternative position in which Zimmerman shot Trayvon – an alternative position that, if not confirmed by further forensic evidence (e.g. fiber), could be attacked by the defense and plant seeds of doubt in jurors’ minds.

    The prosecution’s process needs to be “seedless” – sinsemilla, one might say, in another context.

    Most jurors whould then conclude there was a “controlled vertical shooting” if the prosecution shows the exhibits of Zimmerman’s grasping motion (twice, on Sanford PD videos), and the forensic evidence of the alignment of the bullet holes in the two shirts vis-a-vis the entry wound — all consistent with GZ grasping the shirts and restraining Trayvon before shooting – again, proving that Zimmerman, in vertical physical control of the victim would in no way be “in fear for his life.”

    I am not remotely saying that the above is the only evidence that the prosecution need present. What I am saying is that they need only put the lie to Zimmermn’s multiple details and assertions that he was placed in the positon (under Trayvon)in which he made the decision that his only option was to shoot and kill Trayvon.

    The prosecution’s job is just to point out all the evidence that contradicts Zimmerman’s lies – so the jury is shown by the evidence that Zimmerman’s claims are a tissue of lies because they are not physically possible.

    I do hope the prosecution uses a live demonstration, down on the courtroom floor – preferably up on an examining table of some sort, so the jury can see the action at the eye-level of the two combatants. They would be mere feet away from the officer portraying Zimmerman trying to extract his gun – this should be at eye level for the jury, with the “Z” officer’s hip facing the jury. While the combatants are in that position, the M.E. could use an actual steel rod as used in autopsies to show the impossibility of ANY angle by shooting from that position to match that of Trayvon’s mortal wound.

    (There is a large table in Jury Rooms and I would expect two jurors would try to re-create that claimed position during deliberation.)

    Likewise it doesn’t matter whether Zimmerman had the gun out earlier during the chase or extracted it prior to shooting. The defendant stated under oath, repeatedly, that he drew his gun while he was immobilized under Trayvon, and only to save himself did he extract the gun to shoot Trayvon.

    The only claim to self-defense that Zimmerman can make is that he was otherwise helpless and that his life was at immediate risk, when he made the decision to draw his weapon and shoot Trayvon in the heart.

    He never said it was an accident. He made no claim that he did not intend to shoot Tayvon.

    He said flat-out, “I shot him. It was self-defense.” That is his only claim.

    In June, that cannot be substantiated for a jury because the prosecution can pick away every lie, like stripping blood-engorged ticks off a dog that’s run wild through the brush.

    The lies will be picked off, examined, and squashed … one by one.

    For Zimmerman, it will be one bloody mess.

    • Jun says:

      If Fogenhats does not testify, there is no need to pick apart the lies, because they can prove he is the murderer without doing that, or having any of Fogenhats’ lies presented during trial or SYG, since only Fogenhats can present his statements

      All the evidence points to him going after this kid, threatening and attacking him, then killing him and there is no forensic evidence the kid even fought at all, and the kid was screaming and begging for mercy

      There is no claim of self defense without Fogenhats testifying

      • PiranhaMom says:

        @ Jun,

        I referenced the June trial, not the self-defense hearing, when I said “the lies will be picked off, examined, and squashed, one by one.”

        Just stating that I would not want to see the prosecution present “GZ mounted on top” as theory without forensic evidence
        (e.g. fibers) proving that’s where GZ was when he shot Trayvon.

        Do not want to confuse the jurors with theories.

        Do not have to proved that Zimmerman shot Trayvon – he admitted it.

        Need only destroy Zimmerman’s lies that he was captured by Trayvon and was unable to escape, and bacause of that he “had” to shoot Trayvon (in “self defense”) to survive.

        WHY ELSE would Zimmerman come up with the story that he was UNDER Zimmerman?

        It’s the ONLY position in which Zimmerman could claim “self defense.”

        Any other position, the guy with the gun could readily de-escalate the process, and could escape, so would not be in any danger – and self-defense could not be a factor.

        So, Jun, I was talking June.

        OK by you?

      • Jun says:

        My point is that there would be no need to destroy any of his lies, because, none of Fogenhats’ lies will be presented, unless, Fogenhats testifies under oath and cross examination himself

        The forensics and witnesses alone show that he is the killer and the murderer

        However, if Fogenhats does testify, then yes they can pick off each lie, one by one, and show why it is a lie via forensics or witnesses

        Of course it is okay by me, I was just saying, there is a case without using any statements made by the defendant with the exception of the NEN phone call, but that is excited utterances and present sense impression

        Think about it

        My reply is based on the hearsay rule

      • PiranhaMom says:

        @Jun –

        Jun, we ARE agreeing on forensics for the June trial (if there’s no plea). The forensics prove there was no capture of Zimmerman. Thus he had no need to shoot and he could have disengaged – or hold TM at gunpoint (not smart, but not murder).

        So, no self-defense. Murder 2. Forensics prove it. Lies are smashed like blood-filled ticks.

        Zimmerman killed TRayvon and has no credible excuse why he could not have avoided the encounter or disengage when it escalated. Forensics prove he could not have been under Trayvon.

        The prosecution has the admission by the defendant, the gun, the shell casing and bullet fragments, and they HAD Mr. Martin’s body – as was stated in court – long enough for forensic analysis.

        “Your honor, I introduce into evidence one steel rod, as used by the Medical Examiner to establish trajectory of the hollow-point bullet through the unarmed juvenile’s – Trayvon Martin’s – heart and lung on the evening of February 26, 2012 … “

      • ladystclaire says:

        @PM, Fogen aka Baby Got Back had no right or reason to even hold this child at gunpoint. I’m sorry but, I can’t believe you said that. this POS was not the law and, holding a child who had no weapon or who had committed no crime, SHOULD not have been held at gunpoint. this is so unbelievable and oh so wrong to even think something like that would have even been the thing to do.

  21. Judy75201 says:

    I’ve never met an expert witness who was anything more than a hired gun, and that goes for both sides.

    Unrelated question: How likely is a witness to confuse the order of events in a terrifying episode such as this? I’m talking about possible confusion about whether what was seen happened before or after the gunshot?

  22. Jun says:

    I did some math, but since Omara stated that Fogenhats will not take the stand and testify under oath and cross examination, meaning his statement will not have undergone scrutiny, that means none of Fogenhats claims will make it to trial, since Fogenhats claimed all those lies, Omara can not present them for him at trial or SYG hearing, so all that nonsense he said will not even be heard at trial or an SYG hearing unless Fogenhats takes the stand and testifies

    Without Fogenhats, there is

    No Bushes story

    No on top for 1 full minute story

    No 3 dozen blows landed

    No head bashing onto sidewalk theory

    No skipping and looking for an address theory

    I believe they can present him as the murderer without him ever taking the stand

    For w6, they should present forensic evidence before he takes the stand, so that they can rebut him if he tries to lie during trial

    • racerrodig says:

      Don’t ya just hate when a full years + of lies all goes up in smoke because…..well, you have no credibility….and a really lame story, and the forensics, and the witnesses, your own call to the police shows motive, the DNA – – God it really, really must suck to be FogenPhoole about now.

      • Jun says:


        I dont feel Omara’s lies about not getting discovery will fly either, since the state purposely made everything formal, so they have a line of record of giving him material

        and his lies about NBC and Obama will not fly either because making the judge and jury crack up laughing at his stupidity is not a good defense but it sure is good to break up tension

        • racerrodig says:

          These clowns just kill me. As one who does expert testimony and reports and see’s the system (civil) I make absolute certain that nothing I put in print or say can be assailed and that’s for civil suit when somebody got ripped off on an auto repair !! This is really serious stuff here.

          How can they not think “….gee, maybe we better tell the truth or at least keep things sounding realistic”

          Gee… about STFU……

          “Mr. Zimmerman, you have the right to remain silent………”

          “……um, okay…….but why would I do that……I have so many more versions to tell ya”

  23. kindheart101 says:

    I am reading, reading and reading. trying to catch up………wow! We talk a lot. 🙂

  24. acemayo says:

    In GZ reactment video in the background a black womem a an black
    child was shown walkking, can GZ name the husband or boyfriend
    of that girl, can GZ name the black brother of that girl, or a black
    friend of that girl who might be visiting I ask because in the past
    when he call the police he knows that which black male that lives

    • racerrodig says:

      FogenPhoole said he knows the names every resident….that’s what he said.

      • Bill Taylor says:

        LOL, fogen also said he couldnt remember the names of all THREE streets he patrolled….seems his memory comes and goes as it suits his needs at that moment.

      • Two sides to a story says:

        As someone who has ADD, I can tell you that my recall of events is inconsistent. However, I do think Fogen does use this excuse for a cover at times, especially when he’s trying to cover for a timeline that won’t work as self-defense.

        • racerrodig says:

          If I don’t have ADD or ADHD can I say I know everyone on the planet and get away with it……………oh, look….a red truck !

        • Lonnie Starr says:

          Fogen suffers “illnesses of convenience”. Only when his self serving narratives fail and/or are in danger of being disclosed as false, does some mental impediment appear to explain why he can’t go forward.
          Well, he’d done this so many times it’s worn out. Believe me, the defense will not try for any SYG hearing because GZ has zero credibility. MOM knows there’s no point in hiring experts and/or wasting any more money on GZ’s behalf.
          |||=> Tick Tock! <-|||

      • towerflower says:

        Not to mention several of the witnesses didn’t know who fogen was nor had even met him.

      • Dave says:

        There are 260 townhouses in R@TL so there must be somewhere between 500 and 1000 residents. That’s a lot of people to know by sight.

        • racerrodig says:

          Hey, he said he knew all of them by name……and who am I to call him a liar right !! He’s the salt of the earth, a role model and mentor of the highest caliber, the Neighborhood Watchdog, friend to all……………..A hahahahahahahahahahaha !!!!!!!!!!!!!

          Let me tell ya about this bridge I have for sale….Oh and I’m the richest man on the planet, and the greatest basketball player that ever lived……..

          My guess is he knew a few key residents and all the racists.

        • Lonnie Starr says:

          Yeah, especially for a guy who can’t remember the three streets they live on, eh?

      • Jun says:

        He just does not know the black or mexican residents as they are all punks according to him, and he simply calls the cops on them and stalks and confronts them

      • Two sides to a story says:

        Racer, if he was a truly good NW, he WOULD have cared more about Trayvon’s safety than seeing him as a suspicious person. Fogen is clearly outta whack.

      • aussie says:

        “Everyone” means “everyone who matters”.

        Non-persons don’t have to be known, especially by name. They don’t have names. They used to be addressed as “boy” and similar (and worse).

        • racerrodig says:

          “Everyone” means “everyone who matters”.

          Ohhhh…My bad………or if they act “…white enough…” as one Fogen family member stated last year.

    • tonydphotog says:

      Whenever I see that part of the video, I can’t help thinking that the little girl is running away from the scary NW guy.

  25. acemayo says:

    A dispatcher has ZERO authority related to ANYTHING.
    could anyone tell by rules of a police dept, in black and
    white that is true.

    • I believe it depends on the location……some localities the NeN operators ARE sworn LEO’s….Riverside Ca. is one such city

    • racerrodig says:

      A dispatcher is a sworn member of the dept.

      If he say’s “…we don’t need you to do that…”(follow) it has the same weight.

      Liken it to this “I think I’ll call the Police and then ignore anything they say”

      • elcymoo says:

        My younger daughter used to be a communications officer for a large police department in VA. She was a member of the department, but wasn’t a ‘sworn officer’, so I’m not sure her recommendations carried the same weight. She told me that all the ‘dispatchers’ handled both 9/11 and NEN calls during their shifts.

        I did a quick search just now, and learned – or remembered – that it was the sheriff’s office that handled calls for the police department in Sanford.

        “Records show Zimmerman, 28, called the cops 46 times between January 2011 and Feb. 26.

        Many of the calls appear related to his crime-watch volunteer role. The most frequent reason for his calls — nine times — was to report a suspicious person, according to Sanford Police Department records released last week.

        The calls released this afternoon were made to the non-emergency line. The Sheriff’s Office handles dispatching for Sanford Police.

        The Sheriff’s Office received more calls, but the audio information is retained for six-months before it is destroyed due to space issues, said spokeswoman Heather Smith. The record and the call log are not destroyed.”


        • racerrodig says:

          My dad was a cop for almost 30 years and I know a bit about this.
          Even Fogen said he knew what the dispatcher meant and that was back off.

        • Whether Sean had the lawful authority to order the defendant to stop is irrelevant.

          The issue is what was the defendant’s intent and it is crystal clear that he had decided to hunt down and, at the very least, detain Trayvon so that another asshole would not get away.

          His intent is crystal clear from his stalking behavior and his comments during the NEN call.

          For example, if a neighbor in the vicinity had shouted out to him, “Leave that kid alone,” and he ignored the neighbor and continued to hunt for Travon, it would not make any sense to argue that the neighbor had no authority to tell him what to do.

          Therefore, it does not matter who told him not to follow Trayvon or whether that person had any authority to do so.

          We also know that he knew that a NW person had no legal authority to stalk and detain anyone for any purpose, particularly while carrying a concealed weapon.

          Yet he did exactly that.

          We look at the totality of the circumstances to discern his intent. His actions after dark leaving the safety of his warm vehicle in inclement weather with police on the way, including his refusal to stop hunting for Trayvon, considered together with what he said during the NEN call and his subsequent lies to police to conceal that he followed Trayvon express that intent unambiguously.

          When he detained Trayvon, he committed an assault and battery. Trayvon had the right to use reasonable force, including deadly force, to defend himself.

          The defendant had no right or authority to use any force, much less deadly force, because he was the aggressor.

      • rayvenwolf says:

        To follow up on what the Prof said there is the fact that GZ tried to pin his leaving his continued following of Trayvon ON the NEN dispatcher. Remember in his re-enactment vid when he said he was asked if he could get somewhere to keep an eye on Trayvon? No such thing was said.

        From the start of this its never been what he did/said its what others have done/said. Even in all his rambling statements he’s painted himself as the passive victim who miraculously was able to save himself and the day.

        GZ knew what Sean meant by “we don’t need you to do that.” And that he should have taken his rusty behind back to his vehicle. Instead he decided to ignore sound advice and continue with his hunt.

        • racerrodig says:

          “….he said he was asked if he could get somewhere to keep an eye on Trayvon? No such thing was said.”

          Exactly. When his NEN call is played and then he is asked about that he’ll say “……um, I have ADD or ADHD or………oh, look…….a red truck !!”

          Yep, if that dispatcher had only been more clear about getting that infernal address, I wouldn’t have chased, er, been attacked by that Black Dynamite kid. Always someone else.

          How much more clear could that instruction have been ??

    • Xena says:

      @acemayo. Dispatchers take non-emergency as well as emergency calls. The best way to answer that question is for us to ask ourselves what would happen if we were having a stroke or heart attack, dispatch tells the caller what they should not do, but the person does it anyway that ultimately causes our death.

      When Sean told GZ “We don’t need you to do that,” he was first speaking as an organization, i.e., “we.” He spoke for the police dept. Secondly, his statement was for GZ’s benefit and safety. Sean only knew what GZ described of the “suspicious” person. He did not tell GZ “We don’t need you to do that” to protect the “suspicious person.”

      Sean’s statement to GZ clearly conveys that the liability of what could happen was placed on GZ by making his own independent decision to follow.

      • racerrodig says:

        In Sanford FL as with almost all municipalities the dispatchers are sworn in.

        I think I’ll call the police and ignore what they say. For the record FogenPhoole stated he knew that “…we don’t need yo to do that” meant stand down. If FogenPhoole knows that much, why is anyone even going down the “..the dispatcher has no authority..” road……even the defendant knows this.

        • Xena says:


          If FogenPhoole knows that much, why is anyone even going down the “..the dispatcher has no authority..” road……even the defendant knows this.

          That argument generates from a sovereign citizenship belief in entitlement to rebel against authorities other than the County Sheriff. Those repeating the theory may not know its roots. Coupled with that argument is the belief that the State lacked jurisdiction to charge GZ.

          • racerrodig says:

            Yeah, I read some time ago that one of FogenPhoolesPhreakingPhollowers said the State didn’t have any jurisdiction over him. After I stopped laughing hysterically I pretty much slapped him around pretty bad.

            Of course we all know the State doesn’t even have a case and all the evidence points to self defense.

          • Xena says:


            Of course we all know the State doesn’t even have a case and all the evidence points to self defense.

            That’s the Zidiot mantra. They also believe that GZ will be acquitted and sue Trayvon’s parents, Corey, BDLR, and President Obama for malicious prosecution. Ignorance, ignorance, ignorance.

          • racerrodig says:

            I’d be willing to make a bet that Mr. Crumo has the civil suits against Sanford, The HOA, The Sanford Police, FogenPhoole and who knows else stacked up on a corner of his desk just waiting for that moment when the jury foreperson says “..we find the defendant in the above entitled action guilty of second degree murder as charged………….”

      • Jun says:

        You also have to take into account, they prolly dealt with Fogenhats before, and he has made numerous nonsense calls to police, considering his habits

        I dont feel the police were suspicious of Trayvon at all and they also got to look at the factor that the person calling could be mistaken or “SWATTING” ie false information to police

        • racerrodig says:

          FogenPhoole did something known as “Set up by Cop”

        • Xena says:

          @Jun. Yes. Couple that with the fact that the only reason to follow a running person is to capture that person. Cops do not run after people with no intent of engaging them. “We don’t need you to do that” encapsulates a host of reasons, one in which is, cease and desist and go home. Thus, Sean asked for his name and address, in which GZ clearly conveyed that he was in an area where he suspected Trayvon was by saying, “I don’t want to give it all out. I don’t know where this kid is.”

          “I don’t know where this kid is” reasonably means that GZ continued to search for Trayvon.

      • aussie says:

        And I feel Sean probably came close to throwing up from shock, when he heard the guy at the next booth take the call about the shooting ………..

      • Cercando Luce says:

        I always thought the voice of the guy on the phone with the teacher sounded like Sean, but I don’t recall hearing the introduction at the beginning of the call.

      • ladystclaire says:

        @racer, these *ignorant* racist seem to forget that, when the state is finished with him, the feds will have their turn. I’m so hoping that he will be charged with a hate crime which IMO is exactly what it was. I also it involved the three stooges and, we all know who I’m referring to. the other 2 stooges have got a lot to worry about and, this is why they are going around telling even more lies concerning the events of that night.

      • Xena, I couldn’t find a place to reply up where you wrote this, so I’m putting it here. @vickie s. votaw. As you can see, I offered my opinion about LLMPapa’s video. I have not offered any opinion nor judgment on BettyKath. For me, the subject was the video and not BettyKath, and LLMPapa and Betty have laid that subject to rest. I wasn’t trying to criticize you. It was the comparisons that made me uneasy. Then , the incessant undercurrent about trolls. I wish there were ” like ” buttons at the posts, then I could just read & ” like” the ones I think are insightful posts, I love how kind everyone usually is to each other. Well, it all over now, I pray the change Dorner desired happens. I think he did want to die, there were too many mistakes he made, for me to think otherwise. The reason I posted about it was the unease I felt about my loyalities, trying to get to the bottom of why, was it me or were the comparisons appropriate?, I never meant you thought bettykath was a troll, I’m sorry if you thought that & I’m sorry if my post reads that way.

    • Judy75201 says:

      Fogen himself acknowledged that he understood he was supposed to stop following.

    • aussie says:

      No authority???????

      They can even tell the COPS where to go.

        • racerrodig says:

          I rode around with my dad many times when he was on duty. I can say I never heard an exchange like this…….

          “District 1 to car 1” (Seriously, we were District 1, no bull)
          “Car 1”
          “See the male at 1010 Fogehats St. The caller stated there’s a large snake in his backyard and he’ll meet you somewhere in his yard”
          “Car 1, he’s keeping an eye on it ?”
          “District 1 affirmative”
          “Sorry, me and Indiana Jones, we both hate snakes….I’m not responding”

          If the dispatcher says back off, it means just that.

          The best shift….midnight to eight.

      • racerrodig says:

        They, in fact, do that all day long.

    • Jun says:

      Whether or not the cop on dispatch had authority, under law, it is against the law to repeatedly and continuously follow, pursue and chase someone to the point that someone (the victim of the pursuit) starts to fear for their safety and feels distressed, and it becomes aggravated if there is a credible threat to that certain victim’s safety, which is what Fogenhats did, it is pretty clear to anyone

      On top, even if it is not illegal, if someone is running away from a defendant out of fear of their safety, and the defendant continuously and repeatedly pursues said victim, it is fairly safe to say that the defendant is the one instigating and going after the other person for the killing that ensued once the defendant caught the victim who was trying to get away

      Intent = the defendant went after the victim, a victim who was trying to get away from defendant. defendant caught victim then confronted threatened attacked and killed victim. since defendant went after the victim and killed him once caught, his intent is crystal clear that he wanted to catch the victim and kill the victim, otherwise, why else would he pursue the victim then confront threaten attack and kill the victim?

      • cielo62 says:

        As that moron of an “expert” said, they were having a “consensual confrontation. ” Well, running away sounds to ME to lack the “consensual” part!

        Sent from my iPod

        • A “consensual confrontation” provoked by a stalker who shoots and kills the unarmed person who ran away from him is an intentionally false, misleading and grotesque way to describe a depraved murder.

          It’s about as accurate as calling a rape murder consensual sex.

          Does MOM not realize how offensive that is to all reasonable people, regardless of color?

          I guess not.

          That incendiary statement establishes a new low for the MOM and the defense.

        • racerrodig says:

          Prosecutor “The victim was running away from the alleged consensual sexual intercourse perpetrator your honor”

          Judge “Run that by me again please”

          Court reporter (holding transcript) “The victim was running away from the alleged consensual sexual intercourse perpetrator your honor”

          Defense attorney of the firm “Dewey, Fleecem & Howe” “If I may your honor, the alleged victim was wearing a short skirt and was clearly asking for it”

          Judge “Nobody asks for it counselor, that’s been decide in courts all over this country”

          Def Att. “My client just can’t get a fair trial here your Honor.

          Prosecutor “Your Honor this is very cut & dried….the victim..”

          Def ATT “Alleged Victim”

          Judge “Overruled”

          Prosecutor “The victim was running away and heading for her car to escape the defendant”

          Def Att “He wasn’t a defendant then, how would my client know he would be the defendant Your Honor”

          Judge “Don’t play word games please”

          Prosecutor “You Honor the defense is trying to make this appear as a date or they had consensual sex, which they did not. The victim had never even met him before that night”

          Judge ” Can you tell the court what happened from the start Miss.

          Victim “Yes, gladly your Honor…..”

          Def Att ” There ya go your Honor she said she was glad they had consensual sex, she just said it”

          Prosecutor “Objection your Honor, he knows better than that”

          Victim “May I continue ? I was running away from the defendant as soon as I saw him approaching me when I was unlocking my car.

          Prosecutor “What was he wearing…”

          Victim “Nothing, he was naked.

          Prosecutor “Then what happened?”

          Victim “He said he wanted consensual sex so I said he should go Phuck himself and tried to start my car.”

          Prosecutor “Did it start ??”

          Victim “Yes it did”

          Prosecutor “Where you able to get away from him.

          Victim “No at first, he climbed into the back of my SUV as it didn’t lock when i threw my packages in the trunk.

          Prosecutor “Can you identify the accused here in court today?”

          Victim :Yes, that’s him Fairlane…..Ford Fairlane is his name (weeping)

          Prosecutor “What type of car do you drive again….”

          Victim “A Lincoln Navigator”

          Prosecutor ” So,you are trying to escape from the victim and there is now a Ford Fairlane in the back of you Lincoln ???

          Give ’em time and it will slowly devolve to this.

    • bettykath says:

      I don’t think this video is appropriate. Dorner’s manifesto is only a few pages long and doesn’t include a reference to any specific individuals except those associated with LAPD. Dorner tried to clean up some corruption from the inside and got burned. Now he’s trying to do the same thing by violent means. I don’t condone his violence.

      Contrast that to the defendant who was in no way harmed by Trayvon but who shot him anyway.

      The LAPD has lots of arms and ammunition. Trayvon had none.

      LAPD v Dorner

      • I want you too, bettykath, if I ever get in a jam 🙂

      • Tzar says:

        I agree bettyKath
        Fogen and Dorner are worlds apart for many reaons

      • Two sides to a story says:

        I’ll say it again here – I think LAPD has more in common with Fogen than with Dorner. They rammed the vehicle of and shot at a third innocent person. Duh.

      • Xena says:

        @bettykath. I don’t get the impression that the video is a comparison between Dorner and GZ. Rather, it’s my impression that the video conveys that Dorner, who has taken vigilante actions, has personal knowledge and experience with inside corruption that caused him harm, while, on the other hand, GZ was not harmed in any matter by the SPD to justify his vigilante actions in following and killing Trayvon.

      • LLMPapa says:

        Normally I don’t reply to this type post, as each are entitled to their opinion, but I’m going to make an exception in this instance.

        First of all, I stand by EVERY word and image in that video.

        Dorner’s manifesto is only a few pages long and doesn’t include a reference to any specific individuals except those associated with LAPD.

        Perhaps you’re reading a different manifesto? Google the term “Donner 11,000 word manifesto” and you will instantly find links from MSM such as CNN and ABC to his diatribe that contains specific reference to MANY outside of LAPD, including President Obama, Hillary Clinton, Charlie Sheen, Wayne LaPierre, to name a few, AS WELL AS George Zimmerman.

        This video was, and is, a direct message to one person. Perhaps you noticed, the first two words are

        “Hey George….”

        The entire video builds toward my point of:the closing 2 sentences:

        If a KILLER you share so much in common with has that opinion of your despicable killing of an unarmed 17 year old child……

        What kind of chance do you think you have against a law abiding jury of your peers in four months?

        I feel it’s a valid question.

        • racerrodig says:

          For the record…so do I.

        • jm says:

          LLMPapa: “If a KILLER you share so much in common with has that opinion of your despicable killing of an unarmed 17 year old child…… What kind of chance do you think you have against a law abiding jury of your peers in four months?”

          I think it is a valid question and one that should cause GZ and his defense team more sleepless nights.

        • Lonnie Starr says:

          @LLMPapa, you’ve, no doubt, noticed that few are responding to this line, because it’s so far off base we’re willing to just let it die. Obviously that’s about all we can do, other than petitioning to have it removed. I don’t think removal would be appropriate however, since it does pose a question, even if it contains a misstated fact.

          I don’t feel your videos are worthy of criticism from this angle. My criticism is that sometimes your sound is to low. Other than that, the only time I’ve found that your video doesn’t follow the evidence is when you’re spoofing/joking/comedy hour. 😀
          [Please do another GZ and Serino reenactment cartoon, they’re fun!]
          |||=> Tick Tock! <-|||

      • bettykath says:


        There is more than one manifesto being claimed as having been written by Dorner. Someone who has spent years in LAPD and as an investigative journalist and is familiar with the writings of many whistleblowers has serious doubts about the authenticity of the longer versions for a variety of reasons. The short version was taken from Dorner’s fb page almost immediately after he posted it.

        If the manifesto that you referred to were valid, so would be your video. My difference with you is that I accept the manifesto that is the one where Dorner speaks only about LAPD, not the one where supposedly mentions all kinds of people and includes a rant about gun control being required.

        Given his obsession with the LAPD and its corruption, I seriously doubt that he’s at all concerned about other well-known people or fogen.

      • Trained Observer says:

        Wrong, wrong, wrong. He not only mentions specific individuals known worldwide, but animals as well — namely Fogen.

      • bettykath says:

        Trained observer,

        Do you think it inconceivable that LAPD would put out a false manifesto that makes Dorner appear to be less than rational?

        If you read the short one, it makes sense and it focuses on only the LAPD. If you read the longer one, it’s rambling and ranting and, in some places nearly incoherent.

        • racerrodig says:

          “If you read the short one, it makes sense and it focuses on only the LAPD. If you read the longer one, it’s rambling and ranting and, in some places nearly incoherent.”

          Read the Unibombers Manifesto’s then get back to me.

      • Actually, I thought I was the only one who noticed that the linguistic style, language, tone, and basic writing style were different between the two parts of the manifesto. I consider myself somewhat of an expert in assessing another’s written expression, and I do not believe that both parts were written by the same person. If they were written by the same person, the psyche of the person was split by mind-altering substance, emotion, mental illness, or a combination of the three.

      • groans says:

        @LLMPapa –

        FWIW (in case you didn’t see it below) bettykath said on February 11, 2013 at 9:56 pm regarding the “manifesto” issue:

        I can’t find the information that I saw previously and I don’t remember enough to be convincing (obviously). I’ll readily concede that there is more than one version and I’m not sure which version is authentic. Objections to the video removed because I can’t substantiate the basis for the objection.

      • bettykath…..Thank you for the link.

      • Ty Flair says:

        @Bettykath it is 11,OOO words and he does mention fogen name,@ racerrodig it may sound like he is rambling and ranting to you an incoherent. But to me he sound like a man that is hurting from what the LAPD did to him.

    • @bettykath, I can’t remember anyone other you who’s ever complained about LLMpapa’s videos.
      And he’s done hundreds. so I think it’s you who’s inappropriate.

      • Tzar says:

        lol, that’s not how the truth works, it’s a popularity contest

      • bettykath says:

        Each video has to stand on its own. Most of LLMpapa’s video’s have been really great. He has way of finding nuggets and making their importance very clear. A couple have been hard for me to get the message b/c I couldn’t hear the message. That has not been the case with any of his more recent videos. Maybe my complaint made a difference, maybe not. This video doesn’t cut it.

        I urge LLMpapa to keep up the good work.

        • no, I doubt seriously your complaint made any difference what so ever! lol
          and i don’t think you’re qualified to decide what his videos should or should not do. they are his to do what he feels is appropriate.

          • racerrodig says:

            In my opinion all of his videos are appropriate and can be regarded as his opinion in some cases. Aren’t we all entitled to express our opinion ?

      • bettykath says:

        btw, I acknowledge that LLMpapa doesn’t need my “permission” to do anything.

      • bettykath says:

        A suggested topic for another video: The defendant has said repeatedly that he knows everyone RATL. He has also said he doesn’t know one person or another. Various witnesses have also said they don’t know him.

      • That is just her opinion, she is entitled to any opinion she wants

      • O, and, you are entitled to yours, but there are things I agree with Bettykath on, and why are some people so uptight here, I love this blog & that means everybody. We are all growing here. We won’t grow the exact same but we will all grow & we are not supposed to all think the same. I am sorry if this offends anyone

      • Two sides to a story says:

        Shannon, there are times when I have a hard time hearing the commentary for the music in LLMPapa’s videos. I think attacking BettyKath because she holds a particular opinion is inappropriate. Let it be.

      • Xena says:

        @bettykath. Is your criticism against LLMPapa, or the news source in which he obtained the information?

      • chills101 says:

        I appreciate everything LLMpapa do. Round of applause!!!!!!!

      • SearchingMind says:

        Shannon, I honestly think that you are completely out of line on this one. BettyKath disagreed with LLMPaga and gave her reasons for doing so. Whether or not you agree with her forms no basis at all to describe her as “inappropriate”. Pls. withdraw that statement and/or appologize.

      • Xena says, “@bettykath. I don’t get the impression that the video is a comparison between Dorner and GZ. Rather, it’s my impression that the video conveys that Dorner, who has taken vigilante actions, has personal knowledge and experience with inside corruption that caused him harm, while, on the other hand, GZ was not harmed in any matter by the SPD to justify his vigilante actions in following and killing Trayvon.”
        I felt the beginning was a comparison of sorts, it bothered me a lot, I think because my heart automatically agrees with Dorner, not with his actions but with his struggle, and a part of me hurts when I have to consider my faith was misplaced. The Internet makes it worse with trolls messing with & changing evidence.
        I do believe LLMPAPA could drive fogen to self destruct, and I wouldn’t mind abit.
        I started reading this blog when I found ” was Trayvon Martin trying to escape when …” It was a little while later that I noticed the first interaction with a troll. It was a pain in the ass to read thru all their garbage . I gave up following for awhile, but to go with only a little information on the case was then bothering me, so I came back here… I’ve missed a few ,mainly when youall are going back over & over some of the theories & evidence. A few days ago ,I read something Bettykath wrote & started thinking, maybe she is a troll, then it all exploded & the prof wrote his piece, I trust professor Leatherman’s ability to size up the people he interacts with. I also know, everybody here said mom didn’t acknowledge fogen at the end of the hearing, I watched the rerun of the hearing, mom did acknowledge fogen when he left. Bettykath called this to everyone’s attention. I respect that honesty!
        I come from an art background, when a project is developed, brainstorming is a major part of it. All kinds of information is gathered & hopefully presented honestly, the only way to developer a good product or presentation is to get ALL information possible& honestly. I don’t believe Bettykath is a troll, I also do not care if she is considered “teacher’s pet”, if she gives me more useful information than whoever said or thinks that. What did God tell Cain? Sin is at the door. Jealousy is a pain in the ass , get over it, so we can all work together . I know none of you personally, so I don’t mean any harm to any one, and I’m not a troll, just an old hippy waiting for my maker.:)

        • Xena says:

          @vickie s. votaw. As you can see, I offered my opinion about LLMPapa’s video. I have not offered any opinion nor judgment on BettyKath. For me, the subject was the video and not BettyKath, and LLMPapa and Betty have laid that subject to rest.

    • You all have thoughtful comments says:

      I don’t need this video.

    • Ty Flair says:

      Although I wish Dorner never kill those people,these cases have something in common. It show what the police with do to black people. The police in Sanford took Trayvon to be a black thug. And you had officers in LAPD calling Dorner the N word and a liar for standing up for a homeless guy. LLMPapa you are trying to connect Fogen an Dorner together it want work my friend. I have seen this to many time how police treat black people. LLMPapa I have seen all your videos I like them all they make me think. But this video right here really hurts. I will say it again I do not accept the killing Dorner did,and the LAPD is corrupt and Dorner knows that. Dorner fought for his country at war to come home an protect an serve as a police officer. To be call N words and see a homeless guy get kick in the chest an face he told the truth an was fire for stand up for what is right. Fogen have not done nothing in life but blame others. They are not connect an will never be.

      • TY did you read LLMPapa’s response?
        because it sounds like you don’t see what the video is meant to be about. in a way it’s telling gz that Dorner knows all about the BS gz has been up to, because he’s kinda been (seen it) there and done that, it’s kinda the kettle calling the other kettle out.

        and it’s LLMpapa telling gz if another kettle can see through his lies and actions, what makes him think normal, everyday, law abiding, citizens (jury) will allow him to get away with killing an unarmed kid.

        I don’t believe it’s in any way portraying gz is like Dorner, other than the superficial similarities he pointed out in the beginning of the video.

        but read what LLMPapa said about it, and see if you understand what he’s saying.

  26. So how would a defense expert know all the so-called details at the time of the shot? Will gz have to demonstrate how he was able to retrieve his weapon with Tray on top, and where exactly were his hands at the time?
    wouldn’t he have to fill in the gaps to give the expert enough to work with? I mean he can’t just watch gz’s reenactment video and listen to the video explanations and come up with a true and through reliable opinion, can he?

    so basically will gz have to get up on the stand and explain it at some point and/or beforehand in order for the expert to get his/her story straight? and if he has to do it for his expert will the prosecution be able to observe too?

    • racerrodig says:

      Good questions. FogenPhoole does not have to testify BUT, who will believe the State didn’t prove their case ?? He can try that approach, ask Charles Manson how that works out. Only FogenPhoole can refute the States case with a telling of the events, O’ Mara can only question the evidence and that won’t get him far.

      Many people have tried to recreate his pistol draw and it cannot be done as he says. The State will most assuredly harp on that big time and if he can’t demonstrate how he did it, I think the jury will believe he drew it well in advance of when he says he did.

      I don’t think they can find any experts willing to lie outright in court. I do expert witness reports and testimony in consumer fraud auto civil lawsuits and I make sure I have everything factually perfect. This is a criminal case so I’d think one would be very reluctant to take the stand and say he could easily pull his gun, the blood trails match his story etc, etc, etc…..

      • WAIT….I may be confused….I misunderstood, or didn’t understand.
        (has nothing to do with being stoned) 😉

        Doesn’t fogen HAVE TO take the stand in the SYG hearing?

        • racerrodig says:

          He does at a SYG hearing. That should be a real hoot !!

        • He is not required to testify, but he has to testify to have any hope of winning.

          • racerrodig says:

            There were several lawyers on another site that all stated Fogen must testify at a SYG or any Affirmative Defense hearing. Every lawyer I do work for has stated the same. I know he doesn’t have to at a trial but at a SYG hearing O’ Mara can just say….”… client this, that and the other thing”?????

          • Race,

            I said he wasn’t “required” to testify.

            A defendant never is required to testify in a criminal case because of the Fifth Amendment right to remain silent.

            This is a criminal case and even though the immunity hearing is more akin to a civil proceeding, the case is still Florida vs GZ.

            Of course, he must testify as a practical matter to have any chance of winning his immunity hearing or the trial.

            Because he has given so many inconsistent and conflicting statements, there is a vanishingly small chance that anyone will believe him.

            Actually, I don’t think there is any chance that he will be believed, and if any member of the jury votes NG, it will be for racist reasons.

          • racerrodig says:

            My misunderstanding. In all my days, I don’t think I’ve ever seen a defendant paint himself so completely in a corner.

            So he can take the stand at an Immunity hear and plead the 5th. For some reason I didn’t see that coming BUT, OTOH when does FogenPhoole ever stop trying to sell his sad tale of a barbaric, savage, brutal beating.

          • No, he won’t take the stand to take the Fifth.

            MOM would advise Judge Nelson that he had decided not to testify and she would confirm that by reminding him that he has a right to testify and then asking him if he wants to do that or remain silent, which he also has a right to do.

            He would remain at counsel table during the inquiry, unless he changes his mind and decides to testify.

            Given his apparently firm, if unwarranted belief, that he can lie his way out of any predicament, he may take the stand.

            Should be pretty amusing to watch, if he does.

          • racerrodig says:

            I think “..amusing..” is pretty much an understatement on that one. I can say, I will make sure I have “Record” under my thumb at the right time.

          • You said,

            ” In all my days, I don’t think I’ve ever seen a defendant paint himself so completely in a corner.”

            That’s why I said,

            “If brains were axel grease, his client wouldn’t have enough to grease the dynamo on a lightning bug’s ass.”


          • racerrodig says:

            That certainly is a pretty good comparison I must say !!

          • Lonnie Starr says:

            It’s just self serving nonsense. Just try to imagine what if GZ said that he had accompanied Trayvon at the 711 and paid for his skittles and iced tea. Now, GZ could certainly say that if he wanted to right?
            So then, would the 711 cctv confirm or refute such a claim?

            This claim of injuries is the same, he’s claiming that Trayvon beat him with his hands, yet the evidence shows that Trayvon’s hands never came in contact with GZ at all. So, that’s the same situation as with the 711 cctv hypothetical above, the evidence shows that it simply never happened at all. No matter how self serving it is, no matter how many times or what manner GZ cites the story, the evidence does not confirm, but refutes the story.

            If GZ cannot show that Trayvon assaulted him, then he cannot show that he had any reason to shoot him.

            Without a reason for shooting Trayvon, Murder 2 is the least charge GZ could face.

            As the evidence stands now, GZ is without a reason for even drawing his weapon, let alone discharging it. |||=> Tick Tock! <-|||

            btw where is our Blushedbrown?

          • racerrodig says:

            You’re right….where is BB ??

            When this 1st started to have evidence released all my friends following this said the same thing. He never should have said a word without a lawyer present and even then said nothing.

            The search for 7-11 hangers out is a joke. If they had anything to do with this, we’d know about it and they would be on somebodies witness list. At 1st I thought, playing devils advocate, his only chance was to say the gun went of by accident. He’d still have to serve time but nothing like M2. It is unlawful to pull a gun on anyone, detain anyone, question anyone unless you are in LE.

            Somewhere FogenPhoole forgot there is a line that cannot be crossed.

            Now O’ Mara wants 3 years worth of Trayvon’s recorded calls that Dee Dee has …………..but only Dee Dee. Not Dad, not Mom…..nobody by Dee Dee.

            I see his Motion says “2 Mr. Zimmerman has involved himself in the discovery process….” I see a wasted fishing trip and a preview that O’ Mara may bail.

      • Trained Observer says:

        MMountainmanpat: That was my understanding. And not only that, any Fogen testimony at an unsuccessful bid at SYG later would be admissable at trial,

      • Race,

        There are plenty of people out there for sale with fraudulent credentials masquerading as experts in the forensic sciences.

        Many of them work in crime labs.

        Even though I made it my business to seek out knowledgeable and respected teachers to learn as much as I could about the forensic sciences, I still relied on experts to review the work of the prosecution’s experts and prepare to cross examine them, make strategic decisions about independently testing evidence, and to develop and refine the defense.

        IMO there is no excuse not to do that in a murder case.

        I do not believe MOM even knows what the issues are and this is a relatively simple case because the defendant has admitted killing Trayvon and the only issue is whether he did it in self-defense.

        Waving a bloody photograph in front of the jury ain’t gonna git ‘r done.

        • racerrodig says:

          “There are plenty of people out there for sale with fraudulent credentials masquerading as experts in the forensic sciences.

          Many of them work in crime labs.”

          For some reason I went blank on all the lies I’ve heard in court by well………….almost everybody. Plaintiff’s, Defendants, Alleged Experts, Lawyers, Witnesses…..What happened to my brain for those 30 seconds.

          FogenPhoole & O’ Mara, not having someone lie outright for them, what was I thinking????????

      • towerflower says:

        MOM was on insession last week and they were comparing the self defense cases of Jody Arias and fogen. MOM was asked about the immunity hearing and the defendant having to take the stand. MOM said that there were two ways to accomplish it 1. via the defendant taking the stand and 2. via presentation of the evidence. He then started to say how strong the evidence was in his case…….and then was cut off by another question. It seemed like he was suggesting that fogen would never take the stand and that they would rely on their strong evidence (whatever that it).

        • racerrodig says:

          I read in many places a SYG hearing requires his testimony. I cannot for the life of me see how you can get immunity and not testify.

          • Lonnie Starr says:

            @racerrodig: You’re mixing the “technically permissible” with the reasonable requirements. Technically, according to the law he does not have to take the stand at a SYG hearing. If he can find another way to put on his exculpatory evidence then he can resort to that means.

            While in this case, there simply isn’t another way to put on the exculpatory evidence, if there is any, because it all amounts to self serving testimony that resides in GZ’s own head. Still, he doesn’t have to take the stand, but if he doesn’t, his attorney has nothing to present and he loses by default.

            But, if he does take the stand then he will open the doorway to a resounding thrashing by the SP, such that he cannot win that way either. Worse yet, anything he says in this effort that fails, gets to be presented to the jury at trial. Thus he would go to trial with a story that has already been labeled a failure by judicial review.

          • racerrodig says:

            “but if he doesn’t, his attorney has nothing to present and he loses by default.”

            You’re right…..I am confusing “what should” and “what might” and I think because every lawyer I have talked to about this has said “..he has to take the stand..”: in some literal form, I guess I just assumed it is mandatory.

            More accurately “…he has to take the stand and make every effort to tell a believable story and hope they find some technicality, with that, maybe he can pull it off”

            Making III=> Tick Tock <=III loom even larger

        • Lonnie Starr says:

          What is or is not “strong evidence” at this point is only in MOM’s opinion. He can call whatever he wants anything he wants to because outside of the courtroom talk is cheap.

          When it comes time to put up or shut up, however, we note that he always chooses to shut up rather than put up. At least, until the hearing is over, that is. Then he goes back to spouting the same old nonsense. We’re not supposed to notice how many times, he has had the opportunity to schedule and put on his SYG case with his “strong evidence”, the time comes and goes without a word, then he comes back on tv to talk about his powerful case. Ha!!!
          |||=> Tick Tock! <-|||

      • Jun says:

        Here is the stark difference

        If Fogenhats does not testify, he gets proven to be the aggressor, the stalker, the person threatening the victim, the attacker, the person terrorizing the victim, the killer, the depraved

        If Fogenhats does testify, he gets proven to be a liar,
        aggressor, the stalker, the person threatening the victim, the attacker, the person terrorizing the victim, the killer, the depraved

    • Xena says:

      @racerrodig, Re: GZ’s testimony at a SYG hearing. I’ve spoken with several attorneys that I know personally about this. it’s their belief that the right to not testify only applies to trial, and not petitions for immunity. For the immunity hearing, the accused brings forth the motion for immunity — it’s his filed cause of action, and he must defend it. The standard is a civil standard, and the hearing is likened to a prove-up of damages in a civil case.

      I’m in agreement with the Professor that if GZ does not take the witness stand and testify at the immunity hearing, that he pretty much forsakes his self-defense claim. GZ is the only person who can prove-up his damages giving him right to use deadly force in self-defense.

      • I gotta make a brand with his mug on it…..then burn toast with it to sell to the zidiots……..3 thank you cards so far….all for 6 cents 🙂

      • racerrodig says:

        I know it is a “Preponderance of the evidence” standard for a SYG hearing. I guess he could take the stand, plead the 5th and hope for the best.

        Pretty slim chance of that happening. The Immunity hearing is a Bench Trial and we can see Nelson isn’t going to believe a word any of them say. No jury on that one….No sir FogenPhoole !!

        • Xena says:


          Pretty slim chance of that happening. The Immunity hearing is a Bench Trial and we can see Nelson isn’t going to believe a word any of them say. No jury on that one….No sir FogenPhoole !!

          According to Florida’s Appellate Court, the immunity hearing is just that — a motion hearing. It is likened to a Motion for Summary Judgment in a civil proceeding. If no facts are in dispute, immunity is granted and disposes the criminal charge(s). The criminal charges are not tried at a immunity hearing but rather, the petitioner must prove by a preponderance of the evidence that he/she acted in self-defense.

          This can be confusing because it’s unique in that the defendant becomes the petitioner.

          • racerrodig says:

            In my opinion, it’s a very poorly written law and leaves far to much room for error. The State however will win this one. If FL treats it like a SJ Motion, which I am very familiar with….he’s toast, but we knew that already.

          • Xena says:


            In my opinion, it’s a very poorly written law and leaves far to much room for error.

            Yes, and IMO, it’s unconstitutional.

            The State however will win this one. If FL treats it like a SJ Motion, which I am very familiar with….he’s toast, but we knew that already.

            And, that is essentially how the Colorado and Florida appellate courts consider immunity hearings — a Motion for SJ hearing. I’ve read cases in Florida where after the hearing, the judge instructs counsel to brief their arguments and the judge then enters decision. Thus, it takes not only litigation skills, but also good legal writing skills. We know where that leaves O’Mara.

          • racerrodig says:

            ‘We know where that leaves O’Mara.”

            Can I take a wild stab in the dark on that one ??

          • Xena says:


            Can I take a wild stab in the dark on that one ??

            Uh, yeah, just make sure that GZ doesn’t accuse you of seeing his gun. 🙂

          • racerrodig says:

            Now there you go again with the inaccuracies.

            Say this 5 times real slowly….”…the gun….the gun…the gun…the gun….the gun”

          • Xena says:

            @Racerrodig. Thanks for the reminder; i.e., THE gun. THE gun made him do it, because it wasn’t his gun under his control. No wonder the NRA won’t support him.

      • Racer….Re: the slice of toast with an image of fogen’s face branded into it …..You can’t skip the jelly…it’s important….and it has to be red…raspberry would work best. It has to be strategically placed on the nose and middle of the lips. I will drive the Zidiots absolutely nuts…they’ll all want a slice.

        • racerrodig says:

          Hey, you know when I’m wrong I admit it. You got me on that one.
          However, the Zidiots will still proclaim it is a sign from the Heavens that FogenPhoole was savagely attacked…..or was that brutally attacked, by Slim, er, Black Dynamite.

      • bettykath says:

        I’ve been trying to figure out what evidence the defense could present at the hearing to show self-defense without the defendant testifying.

        There are his medical reports of head lacerations and a possible broken nose presented by the nurse practitioner who can testify about the severity of the injuries and when she saw the defendant. She cannot testify to anything the defendant told her about how he got the injuries. When the injuries happened would be by subpoena of the EMTs who treated him on the scene with further descriptions of the injuries. The taker of the bloody picture would be subpoenad to identify the where and when of the photo.

        There are witnesses who saw the defendant on the ground with Trayvon on top of him. The defense will claim, as it has, that the defendant was trapped and was being beaten by Trayvon.

        What else is there?

        The prosecution would claim that all the injuries were superficial. The lacerations weren’t bad enough to warrant stitches. The complementary photo of the defendant’s face taken at SPD would show that most of the swelling had gone down just a few hours later and that there was no sign of black eyes. There are no X-rays proving a broken nose, in fact, the defendant himself didn’t seem concerned enough to follow up for X-rays or further examination.

        Would the prosecution enter the autopsy report into evidence? It shows that Trayvon has no injuries or DNA on him consistent with hitting the defendant but would it open up lots more questions to the ME and turn the focus on the prosecution’s case rather than on the defendant’s stories?

        What can be used to counter the witnesses without entering the defendant’s statements into evidence? There is video of the defendant’s admission to Serino that he had Trayvon in a wrist lock and that he, the defendant had control, enough control to pull his gun, aim it, and shoot.

        And maybe this is the place for the 911 call with the scream and with the expert who can show who was screaming, who else can be heard, and what they were saying. Regardless of who was on top, the person in distress was Trayvon.

        As an aside, what’s interesting about the Serino interview video, (LLMpapa are you there?) is that the walk-thru video contradicts it. Watch the defendant’s hands in the walk-thru as he describes reaching for his gun and shooting. Then watch it in the Serino interview. Maybe I’m not remembering them right, but I don’t think they show the same thing.

    • leander22 says:

      with Tray on top, and where exactly were his hands at the time?

      that’s exactly what I have been wondering about all the time. He offers us a scenario in which Trayvon only is actively beating him up and then all of a sudden he freezes and lets him get out his gun under very difficult conditions and does nothing but wait for the shot. Add to that the complicated scenario that the gun isn’t in place for easy seizure as some here have pointed out.

      • bettykath says:

        Considering that we know that Trayvon didn’t attempt to smother the defendant, and we have seen instances of the defendant transposing the words and actions of others as his and vice versa, maybe his hands were busy trying to smother Trayvon. And we know from what he said to Serino (but he could be lying) that he put Travon in a wrist lock so he could pull his gun, aim and fire.

    • bettykath says:

      just my opinion…..

      At the self-defense hearing, it is the defense that has to put on the first show. The slate is clean. What would the expert testify to if the defendant doesn’t take the stand? She can’t use the walk-thru or other statements by the defendant b/c it’s hasn’t been presented as evidence and is otherwise considered hear-say. The prosecution hasn’t presented any of the forensic evidence and I don’t believe the defense can lay proper foundation to enter it.

      If my assumptions above are true, does it make sense that the defense will present experts except to rebut whatever the prosecution presents?

      Since no jury is involved, the prosecution presents its case that shows that the defendant’s self-defense story just doesn’t add up. I’m not sure that the prosecution would need to do much more than cross examine the defendant. If necessary, when it’s time for the prosecution’s case, it would present whatever is needed to show that self-defense did not occur. This would not necessarily be the entire arsenal that the prosecution has, just what’s necessary to demolish the self-defense claim. It may need experts and some of the forensics to demonstrate that the defendant’s new story doesn’t work either.

      At trial, with the jury, the prosecution starts off. It now has, in addition to everything else, another story by the defendant that it can use. The prosecution will undoubtedly have experts to make sense of the forensics and probably one to reconstruct and make sense of the crime scene. It will also introduce all the evidence required to show all elements needed for murder 2. The defense will have the opportunity to cross examine all the witnesses. This is where the defense will try to destroy the experts’ testimony or at least get them to admit that scenarios more friendly to the defense are possible.

      Now, when the defense presents its case, is the time for defense experts to give their explanations that will counter the prosecution’s experts. The battle of experts is on! Self defense will be a part of this presentation with defense experts providing explanations of how the forensics support self-defense. And the prosecution will cross examine.

      The defense will try to show self defense without putting the defendant on the stand. This might be done by posing hypotheticals to whatever experts being examined or cross examined.

      again, just my opinion.

      • Cercando Luce says:

        Wait a minute, what? If Defendant leads in arguing immunity hearing, is Prosecution unable to introduce evidence if Defendant doesn’t bring it up? Is there some narrow path by which Defendant’s pawn crosses the board and wins back a queen? I.e., can Defendant present in such a way that Prosecution cannot refute it?

        • Xena says:

          @Cercando Luce

          If Defendant leads in arguing immunity hearing, is Prosecution unable to introduce evidence if Defendant doesn’t bring it up?

          The prosecution presents why it believes the defendant should be denied immunity by presenting the evidence that refutes the defendant’s story. In the Orr case, the prosecution presented ME and lab witnesses who testified of the blood splatter and debris. That proved to the court that Orr was not pinned on his back, and that he stabbed the victim to death while restraining the victim in a headlock.

      • bettykath says:

        What evidence does the defense have to present except the defendant’s story? And then maybe experts to say “yes, that’s possible”. And then cross examination of prosecution’s witnesses and maybe defense experts in rebuttal to counter prosecution witnesses.

        Is it likely that MOM will try to get an ok for the defendant to testify without being cross examined?

        • He may ask, but no judge would grant such a request because every witness is subject to cross examination.

          If he testified on direct, but refused to answer any questions on cross, the judge would strike his testimony and order the jury to ignore it.

        • racerrodig says:

          Are you kidding ?? So FogenPhoole gets to have new Court Procedures enacted just for him…..Pleeeezzzeee

      • ay2z says:

        This is what I don’t understand, how much a lawyer get away with inserting into the story by using the client’s video, audio and written statements before the judge will call foul?

        This isn’t for a jury, this judge likely knows a hill of beans when she sees one.

      • Jun says:

        Omara cant pose hypotheticals without Bernie objecting it

        Remember when Omara tried that at the second bond hearing by having Fogenhats’ dad with his rehearsed 100000% absolute undeniable George act?

        Yep, when O’rourke was on, Bernie objected to the questions

        I forgot the type of objection, but Omara had to change their questioning

      • Dave says:

        Would the prosecution necessarily even have to present a case at the hearing?

        Assuming that they could destroy the defendant on cross examination (almost certain) and the defense experts (probable) wouldn’t BDLR move for dismissal of the defense motion (for the dismissal of the case) for lack of plausible evidence?

      • bettykath says:

        Up thread I posted what evidence I think the defense will use instead of testimony of the defendant. Also my take on the prosecution response.

      • pat deadder says:

        I don’t understand if he had him in a wrist lock how could he be pulling his shirts.

  27. Malisha says:

    Everybody (except Frank TV) — in another thread I saw a video by LLMPapa, just released, dealing with the idea that Fogen and Dorner had something in common. I was just beginning to listen to it when my computer went Kaflooey and when I tried to find it again, couldn’t. I also went over to YouTube and searched LLMPapa’s videos for it and couldn’t find it. I’m dying to see it — HELP!

  28. Two sides to a story says:

    Professor, were you ever involved in a case in which the forensic evidence was so clear that to have an expert refute the facts was pretty close to lying? It seems to me that all this expert stuff only works well with cases like Fogen’s in which there are mysteries to unravel or lies told by the defendant.

  29. bettykath says:

    from the same article linked above:


    * Martin was in fact leaning over Zimmerman when the fatal shot was fired, just as Zimmerman has maintained.

    To reach that last conclusion, Knox examined both a Florida Department of Law Enforcement report on the gunshot’s impact to the hooded sweatshirt Martin was wearing and the autopsy report describing the gunshot wound to the body.

    The medical examiner determined the gunshot was fired from “intermediate range,” but the hoodie showed a “contact” shot, indicating the muzzle of Zimmerman’s gun was touching or extremely close to the fabric when the shot was fired.

    Knox explained that the loose fitting sweatshirt was farther away from the body because of gravity, which pulled it down as Martin was situated above Zimmerman.

    That is consistent with Zimmerman’s claim that he was on his back struggling with Martin when he reached for the gun, pointed it upward and fired, Knox said.

    “We look at the physical evidence and then we say, ‘What does it tell us?'” said Knox, who before his 2010 retirement testified often for the same state attorney’s office that was specially appointed by the governor to prosecute Zimmerman.

    To demonstrate the effects of an “intermediate range” shot through cloth, Knox and Local 6 used a Kel-Tec 9mm handgun similar to the one Zimmerman owned and, at a local gun range, fired test shots through two pieces of fabric: One tightly stretched over cardboard, the other hanging loosely about three inches in front, in contact with the muzzle when the shot was fired.

    It produced results similar to what was found in the forensic reports: Contact damage on the cloth closest to the gun, and a 3/8-inch hole with a 2-by-2 inch pattern of stippling, or gunshot residue, on the shirt stretched skintight over the cardboard. This was not an exact scientific replication of the actual gunshot, because of differences in ammunition and the weapons’ exact specifications, but a demonstration for Local 6 viewers.
    The professor pretty well demolished this conclusion is his previous post. I don’t see the methodology that was used to be valid. Knox considered only the autopsy report and the defendant’s statement that he was on his back when he fired.

    A. 2 pieces of fabric, one stretched tightly over cardboard, the other hanging loosely.
    1. Do the pieces of fabric match that worn by Trayvon? Does it matter? Why?
    2. Stretched tightly over cardboard but no indication from the evidence how Trayvon’s inner shirt fit. Does it matter? Why?

    3. Different, but similar weapon. Does it matter? Why?

    No consideration was given for the defendant’s explanation of how he retrieved his gun, aimed and shot.

    3. Does it matter? Why?

    No consideration was given for any of the other evidence.

    4. Does it matter? Why?

    • I want you on my defense team, if I ever get in trouble. 😀

      • bettykath says:

        Amazing compliment. I’d want you on my team as well. But let’s hope we never get in that kind of trouble. : )

      • Tzar says:

        was Trayvon’s inner shirt tucked into his jeans? if it was not, knox’s theory that the killer was on the bottom is even further undermined.

      • Tee says:

        There is no way Trayvon shirt was tucked into his jeans. Boys that young don’t tuck their shirts, I can’t see it. the only shirt that my be tucked is the undershirt, we call them “wife beaters” in Miami. They usually wear a white tank undershirt ” wife beater” than a white t shirt “white T” over it.

    • towerflower says:

      While that segment addressed the contact vs intermediate shot, it did not explain how the holes in the clothing ended up further than the wound in his chest. This was never addressed or explained.

      • Xena says:

        @towerflower. Yes! Loose clothing when bending over does not mean the garment is hanging down from the shoulders. Good catch.

      • leander22 says:

        Well basically it seems a triangle scenario. Which suggests to me it should be further down on the shirt than the body, if it is true. I don’t remember what it was. But it felt at the time, the difference is too great. Although it is a mystery to me how one can reflect on these matters with inches and feet, but I guess one gets used to it. 😉

      • leander22 says:

        the further away from the body the greater the difference.
        (a²+b²=c²; a=body distance, b=distance between body and shirt, c=distance on shirt) Of course this all depends on the cut of the shirt.

      • leander22 says:

        exactly mountainpat, if you allow me to leave out the “man”.

        Pulling the shirt over and down of course should have the tendency of increasing the difference. At least it feels. But it would be pretty easy to play a little with the equation. If you consider a and b as given what is the resulting distance, so we need the square root of b, or the root of (c²-a²). The scientific option on the windows calculator offers you both square and root options.

      • leander22 says:

        I may be of course be completely mistaken and the cut of the shirt completely changes my easy right triangle or right-angled triangle scenario. On the other hand the shot channel suggests it. But it should work as some type of approximate value.

    • bettykath says:

      Another question. Michael Knox is a retired Jacksonville Sheriff’s Office detective and crime scene investigator who has written a book about the forensics in this case. Knox investigated hundreds of homicides and earned a master of science degree in forensic science from the University of Florida.

      Does this make him an expert?

      I’m inclined to say a qualified yes but I’d be better informed I read his book to see how he applies his experience and schooling.

      His analysis of the NEN tape and the walk-thru matches what’s been postulated here and I don’t see any problems with it given the parameters of his analysis – just the NEN tape and the walk-thru.

      I think his analysis of the position of Trayvon and the defendant when the shot was fired was way too simplistic to be thorough, but is it the kind of analysis that the defense would accept? It’s my expectation that an expert witness is one who can provide reasonable rationale for one scenario or another depending on who’s paying the bill. It would be up to the opposing party, as the professor indicates, to provide cross examination to show that the scenario is faulty or insufficient. In sufficiency would be when alternate scenarios are as likely.

      • bettykath says:

        last sentence – Insufficiency.

      • ay2z says:

        Definition of an EXPERT
        1. X is the unknown quanty and spurt is a drip under pressure


        2. Someone more than 50 miles from home

      • bettykath says:

        ay2z, so true. It’s amazing how geography can affect the view of one’s expertise.

      • groans says:

        @ bettykath:

        I believe the bar for qualifying a witness as an “expert” is rather low. It’s something like the expert knows more than the jury about the subject. But I’ll leave it to the professor to describe it more accurately.

        As a strategic matter – which your expectations seem to explore – a party typically wants an expert that exceeds minimal qualifications and is likely to be perceived as “more expert” than the opposing party’s expert witness.

        Also, you want an expert that won’t be perceived as biased, which would undermine her credibility. In my view, an “expert” who wrote a book about the specific case at issue, but was not otherwise published in a peer-reviewed environment, could be a weak expert, vulnerable to an effective attack by the opposing party.

      • leander22 says:

        I think his analysis of the position of Trayvon and the defendant when the shot was fired was way too simplistic to be thorough, but is it the kind of analysis that the defense would accept?

        I agree still far too many unknown factors involved in the scenario. I think the book may not contain too much on this special points. Strictly we heard nothing new but what Frederick already wrote. The shirt suggests something else than the wound. I have this vague feeling that he did not write anything relevant on that otherwise we would have heard it.

        It’s my expectation that an expert witness is one who can provide reasonable rationale for one scenario or another depending on who’s paying the bill.

        In a way even the expert is mentally arrested by Fogen’s narrative. We heard for month now, that Trayvon could have been home easily.

        With all due respect. One of my most earliest scenarios, of course there are others, like stopping or slowing down when DeeDee calls back. Imagine, you seem to have a stable connection now and quite a few of your earlier calls were interrupted, wouldn’t you hesitate to move too fast risk another disconnection.

        But what if DeeDee first question was. Is that guy still watching/following you? After you just turned the corner. Well, don’t scream at me!, the best thing would be to remain stable for a while or to peek back around the corner.

        The one thing, I could understand very, very easily is that DeeDee felt enormously guilty, Notice: I am not saying she is. But quite obviously she must have asked herself many, many “what if questions”. What if I hadn’t called him back? In any case DeeDee is both the lead witness but she also may have changed the scenario slightly. He would have needed all his attention for that dangerous man 100%. She couldn’t see it, was she getting curious in what he was about, asked question how he looked what he did (Remember Sean: just tell my what he is doing), all of this takes time and distracts attention. In other words both rain, scattered showers, that made it necessary to look for cover, feeling observed which could trigger the same, and DeeDee could explain the delays.

        He does not seem to have addressed any of this. Since all these are unknown factors, and only speculation as long as there is no GPS data that tells us more about possible scenarios. Were was Trayvon at the time the call with DeeDee was connected, were was Fogen at that point?


        Take a look at the book, the cover shows Trayvon lying on his side. Is this book a subtle psychops operation? That is incidentally the position I would have expected had he moved out of beneath Trayvon. Much more people will see the cover than read the book. This is the small print about the image:

        About the cover: The image on the front cover is a creative representation of the key elements of this case: an armed man walks away from an encounter with a teen dressed in a hooded sweatshirt carrying a bag of candy and a can of tea. The image is not intended to accurately depict any of the actual events that took place. The image is also not intended to either promote or disparage the products represented, only to include them as they have been included prominently in the public discourse associated with the killing of Trayvon Martin.

        From the introduction: The evening of February 26, 2012, police in Sanford, Florida, discovered just what [Sherlock] Holmes meant, only it wasn’t the police that were forming “premature theories upon insufficient data,” but the news media and the public who quickly took an unprecedented interest in what would ordinarily have been a brief story of the eleven o’clock local news

        • You made an excellent point that many people have overlooked, including the expert:

          “In a way even the expert is mentally arrested by Fogen’s narrative. We heard for month now, that Trayvon could have been home easily.

          With all due respect. One of my most earliest scenarios, of course there are others, like stopping or slowing down when DeeDee calls back. Imagine, you seem to have a stable connection now and quite a few of your earlier calls were interrupted, wouldn’t you hesitate to move too fast risk another disconnection.”

      • leander22 says:

        I am leaving Cologne for a while. Much to prepare and finish before that. This blog and it’s people is addictive, I am late on many things. 😉

        Keep up the good work: Justice for Trayvon Martin.

      • leander22 says:

        doesn’t sound right: moved out of beneath Trayvon.

        maybe: moved out of from beneath Trayvon Martin’s body.

        That’s too complicated. You substitute the correct version.

        In any case, if it was so easy to push Trayvon’s body off, why does he claim he thought he still had to restrain him?

      • bettykath says:

        leander, Good comments, especially why Trayvon wouldn’t have gone right home. I think Trayvon was most interested in continuing his conversation with DD, but he might also have waited to see if the creepy guy got out of his truck to follow him. Or both.

    • No consideration was given for the defendant’s explanation of how he retrieved his gun, aimed and shot.

      Never mind with his arm extended all the way!

    • bettykath says:

      Mr. Knox could only be considered as a defense expert and this would be based on his conclusion, not his methodology. However, Knox’s analysis was just to demonstrate to a tv audience a few of the aspects of what can be determined by forensics on the shot. I don’t think Knox would consider what he did for the tv show to be sufficient for expert testimony in a trial.

      I just noticed my strange numbering of the questions, but the answers to all of the questions, imo, are yes, it matters. Otherwise, it leaves open the what-if questions that the expert will have trouble answering. The last two points about the gun retrieval and the other evidence might lead the expert to a different conclusion than that the defendant had to be on the ground with Trayvon on top. I expect that there will be an expert from the prosecution that will use all the evidence and prove that the defendant’s scenario is bogus.

      • bettykath says:

        I’ve tried to put Knox as the defense witness for the defendant being on the bottom when the shot was fired and my imagination just doesn’t go there. I think Knox is smarter than to use his tv analysis and I don’t know what his book analysis is. Any defense expert who would use such a superficial analysis as was done for the tv show, would appear a bit foolish after the prosecution presents its experts that use all of the evidence to show that the defendant was not flat on his back in fear of his life when the shot was fired. Maybe I should read his book and see what else he has to say.

    • MelRoy says:

      I saw that demonstration. The fabric and cardboard were not at a forward-leaning angle.

      Now you will tell us all why that matters (in terms of presenting the demonstration as evidence).

  30. bettykath says:

    What one expert has to say:

    Michael Knox, a retired Jacksonville Sheriff’s Office detective and crime scene investigator…..

    Knox and Local 6 calculated the exact moment Zimmerman slammed shut his door as he left his truck at 7:11:48 p.m. on Feb. 26, 2011 to follow Martin through the Retreat at Twin Lakes community.
    Quick Clicks

    Knox then retraced Zimmerman’s footsteps, as Zimmerman described them in a reenactment for police videotaped the day after the shooting, and compared the results to a recording of Zimmerman’s nonemergency call to Sanford police.

    Among his conclusions:

    * If Zimmerman’s retelling of the event were accurate, the confrontation Zimmerman described with Martin would have occurred much sooner than it actually did;
    * Zimmerman covered more time and distance after leaving his truck that night than he revealed to police;
    * based on the times and distances Zimmerman said he covered, Zimmerman would have still been on the phone with Sanford police when he claims he was attacked by Martin;
    * had Martin walked directly to his destination, his father’s girlfriend’s townhome, he would have made it there safely before Zimmerman ended his nonemergency call to Sanford police;

    I’m not entirely sure that Trayvon would have made it home at a walking pace during the NEN call but that’s irrelevant considering that Trayvon had no obligation to go directly home. A point made by Knox.

    Since Knox found that the defendant’s story doesn’t hold up, he would more likely be a prosecution witness than one for the defense. How would the defense cross examine him?

    • bettykath says:

      Back to cross examining the expert witness:
      Knox, for example, is used as the prosecution’s witness and is asked, “After examining the walk-thru video and comparing it to the NEN call, what conclusions did you draw about the actions of the defendant.” (Not what conclusions in their entirety.)
      The expert responds with the first three conclusions above.

      In cross examination the defense asks, “Is it possible that the defendant’s account is accurate?”
      Response, “I don’t see how based on the NEN call and the walk-thru” (Suggests that more information is needed, e.g. an augmented story from the defendant.)
      Question: “From your analysis did Mr. Martin have sufficient time to go home before the call ended?”
      Response: “yes, but….
      Defense atty: Thank you, Mr. Knox.

      If it is deemed important , in closing arguments, the defense will argue that Trayvon had plenty of time go home but didn’t. He laid in wait for the defendant so he could attack him. The prosecution will counter that Trayvon had no obligation to go home and that he was more interested in continuing his phone conversation in the belief that he had “lost” the strange man who was following him.

  31. towerflower says:

    Well that seemed to answer one question that I had and created another. In relation to the mentoring of the children, he stated that he continued for 6 months after the end of the program. What program was that? If it was in relation to his diversion program that had been over for several years, so I don’t think it was for that. What else could it have been?

    • He stayed after 6 months because he was still trying to learn the cirriculum .

    • Two sides to a story says:

      Some mentoring programs such as Big Bros Big Sis have a minimum of one year commitment to the kids.

    • hello!! lmao!! I think you misspoke! um what kind of mentoring program would let someone who violently attacked a cop mentor kids???
      that made me laugh for a minute!

      • And we wonder how pedophiles are able to get so close to groups of children……….Apparently no background checks are done……..As with fogen….was he mentoring them academically?…..then one would want to see fogen’s scholastic records to see if he qualified.

        If he was mentoring in teaching morals and behavior then his record should have been checked.

        And also see if he was on any sex offender lists.

        Seems they failed on all accounts.

        • racerrodig says:

          It’s all just a story to make him seem like the neighborhood all around nice guy. If he mentored anyone….trust me, they’d have let us know.

      • lurker says:

        I pretty much believe that the mentoring program was made up of whole cloth. Thus far we have the word of the Z. family and Osterman that such children existed (O. claimed that they came to the “graduation” party he threw when Z. didn’t graduate). Neither the children, nor their families have ever surfaced to put in a good word. And no one has ever named the tutoring program (which has apparently and conveniently now close down).

      • Two sides to a story says:

        I pretty much think he’s making that up too, but of course there’s some possibility he really did mentor kids and somehow passed background checks or had a position of trust somehow through friendships with people who gave him good references.

    • Malisha says:

      He makes the stuff up as he goes along. Imagine him mentoring kids. To do what? To bow down to him and tell him he is right about everything in the world? To learn how to use handguns? To learn what is in God’s plan? What?

      • racerrodig says:

        He mentored nobody or we’d all have heard about it long ago.

      • I think omar finally read papaz and glayds begsite, like I did a few days ago!
        all that is on there family manifesto! LOLO
        at least he’s doing something I guess,

      • Trained Observer says:

        I’ve railed before about the absurdity of either Fogen or his missus fancying themselves mentor material, so I won’t bore with repetition.

        Now I want to hoot and holler about defense references to Fogen’s so-called “advocacy” work . His WHAT?

        Just because this renter ingratiated himself with an HOA to a point where they named him Watch Captain … or just because he showed up at a Sanford commissionon meeting smearing some cop he’d gone on a ride-along with … well, hummmph.

        That hardly qualifies this credit-card deadbeat with a criminal rap sheet and possible predator/molester problems as an advocate of anything. There, am feeling all better now.

      • lurker says:

        @Trained Observer–I believe that the particular fiction that O’Mara is referring to when he speaks of “advocacy work” is the way that Z tried to insert himself after the fact into the case of the homeless black man beaten by a policeman’s son. Seems as though ethically O’Mara is skating on some mighty thin ice with this stuff. Apparently he is simply taking George at face value on these things and hasn’t made any attempts at confirmation. And perhaps he figures that since he’s not under oath he ethically pure. Personally, I would say that he is aiding and abetting the perpetration of a big ol’ whopper.

      • Trained Observer says:

        Lurker? Big ‘ol Whopper? Burger King ought to sue:)

      • Two sides to a story says:

        Because he sees himself as superior perhaps and the children as someone to train to be more “white” as he was by his darker mother.

      • Jun says:

        Mentoring is probably some form of code word

        Considering he was molesting a dead kid’s body, I would not put strange activity done by Fogenhats past him

        Fogenhats is dangerous, crazy, and an idiot

        Just looking at him, I doubt any sane parent would leave their kid around him to be mentored

      • pat deadder says:

        I’m thinking of all the things going on in his life.1 He hadn’t paid his rent so was being evicted 2 schruck being reposed 3 failed college courses.I can imagine the arguments in his house.And imagine he had a tatoo on his chest with his cousin’s name who he had allededly molested.fogen is a sick puppy no offence to puppies and he lost it and killed a poor innocent kid,His explanation of the murder made no sense so either he had reason to believe he could get away with another crime or he is beyond stupid.

    • pat deadder says:

      I read somewhere one of his last diversion programs was extended because he had not fulfilled his god he even failed a diversion program.

  32. Just wanted to post this for the few of you who think omar has a point to complain about the congresswoman expressing herself about the murder of Trayvon. And to remind you she obviously has the authority to do so, otherwise she wouldn’t have.
    So apparently she doesn’t have to presume gz is innocent- because she’s special!
    OTOH, omar is the lawyer in this case and he does not have the right to lie blatantly to the perspective jury.

    BTW this is from what would’ve been Trayvon’s birthday. So much for respecting the victim.

    • cielo62 says:

      They are BOTH scum (MOM and GZ). Politicians aren’t always the sharpest tools in the shed, either. They are ALL wrong for the way this case is being blabbered about OUTSIDE of the courtroom. I blame the judge for not putting a GAG order on this whole mess.

      • Cercando Luce says:

        I know I’m a-doin’ my part!

      • ladystclaire says:

        I agree with you on that note because, she should have never denied the state’s motion for a gag order to be placed on MOM a couple of months ago. this poor excuse for a human being has done nothing but keep his mug in front of a camera from day one of him taking over this case. his main objective is to taint the jury pool and, beg for and receive money from those who support this bloated goat and POS for killing a black kid who was bothering no one and, he wasn’t breaking any law.

        Fogen aka Baby Got Back, will be going to prison where he definitely belongs. I can’t swear to it but, I believe he was crying in court last Tuesday and if he was, I’ve got news for him. he hasn’t cried yet and, he will shed many many tears for what he did, even though the tears he is shedding is for self. I heard that when he was arrested the first time, he was a basket case. I would have given anything to see him going out of his mind. there is more to come Fogen aka BGB and, I hope your life in prison is nothing but *PURE HELL* because that is what you deserve.

        • The image of fogen getting off a bus….orange jumpsuit….cuffed….and chained to a bunch of other newly arrived inmates walking through the gate into his new home……I can also see the tears…..and the fear he has at that point.

          Why that image just makes me smile 🙂

          • racerrodig says:

            Don’t forget the manacles !!!!!!

          • Thanks Race….forgot those…..

            OH and don’t forget his property bag / envelope with his personal possessions in it…..

            Damn the smile just got bigger 🙂

          • racerrodig says:

            Oh, no….can’t forget the file and such. What I always got a laugh out of was back last year whenever he turned himself in, was released or had a court appearance, there was Osterman right behind him carrying Fogens stuff, the lazy bastard.

      • lurker says:

        It seems as though the judge might have preferred a gag order, however felt constrained by Florida law in granting it. Having now watched several Florida court circuses, I do believe that while it is very satisfying from a spectator standpoint to have ready access to nearly every piece of paper, etc that goes through the court in practically real time, I’m not certain that justice is well served.

      • ladystclaire says:

        @racer, the way Osterman is sticking to Baby Got Back like glue, one would think he is doing so to make sure he keeps his mouth shut. I still believe Osterman was involved in this as well. how in the hell did he get there on the scene so damn fast? he definitely wasn’t at his home so, where was he in order for him to be on the scene so quick.

        • racerrodig says:

          I think he was there. I used some of my PA equipment to try to enhance a few of the 911 calls. I removed some of the frequencies and enhanced from about 1500 Hz to about 2500 Hz and I vaguely hear other voices. One of them others hear, one sounds like a female voice and is very, very faint. I am convinced Taaffe or Osterman was there and lean towards Osterman. There is far more going on than a shopping trip, that’s for sure.

      • ladystclaire says:

        @lurker, you would think that with Rasputin in the above video along with that IMBECILE Hannity lying on Obama and others in government and not to forget the older brother looking and talking as if he is three sheets in the wind, there needs to be a stop to all of this. they are only inciting some kind of trouble.

        The only thing Obama said was, “if I had a son, he would look like Trayvon.” now how was that being racial in any way shape or form? it wasn’t and Robert Zimmerman is the one who is making this out to be all about race. this judge needs to act on this and place a gag order on those who insist on doing such as JR and Rasputin are doing. this IMO is so unfair for her to allow this media blitz of the defense to continue in order to rile up the racist as well as taint the jury pool.

      • lurker says:

        @ LadySinclair–I don’t know that a gag order would do anything to prevent Hannity, or even Robert jr. from discussing the. Just the prosecution and the defense–at least so I thought.

    • rnewton32 says:

      You see, this is why the prosecution is prepared and the defense is not. They are always on television, holding interviews, pandering to the public with hopes of tainting the potential jurors when they should be finalizing GZ’s defense (if he had one). They are the only ones bringing race into this. We have two parents trying to find justice for their child. Hate is a strong word, but I really can’t think of any other word to describe my emotions towards them.

    • elcymoo says:

      The Obama administration never ‘bullied’ Zimmerman, nor did NBC. Yes, the network was at fault for its editing, but it wasn’t done by ‘journalists’, as Hannity claimed, and he and the defense team conveniently forget that they’re also guilty of ‘editing’ when they fail to play or mention the comments Z. made later in that same tape. President Obama’s statement was one of empathy for the Martin family, not an accusation of guilt on the part of the defendant.

      Also, Hannity claims in that interview that the defendant worked with children of all races and backgrounds, but O’Mara (and everyone else that I’ve seen) only mentions the two black children.

      • Malisha says:

        Fogen believes he is being bullied whenever someone disagrees with him. He believed he was being threatened when Trayvon Martin “ran” and tried to get away (as “these assholes” always did). He interprets anything that he doesn’t like as a threat — to his AUTHORITY. Remember him asking Singleton if she had ever “had to” shoot somebody? Guess what she would have had to shoot them for? Failing to acknowledge her authority!

        Fogen really DOES believe somebody died and left him king.

        Maybe it was that Black ancestor in the photo —

        • racerrodig says:

          “Fogen really DOES believe somebody died and left him king.”

          And believe you, me…..he will get Crowned when he goes to prison.

      • lurker says:

        Someone who signed themself as an anonymous member of the z. family, however did attempt to bully Eric Holder and the NAACP at about the same time as the President’s expression of empathy. There were two letters (and I recall seeing them online, but I don’t recall where) that were quite threatening in nature. It was close to the time of the arrest, shortly after the supposed flyer to organize the black community in support of the homeless black man who was beaten by a Sanford cop’s son was flying around. My take at the time was that Z. was going stir crazy in self-imposed exile and just making things up. Among the many things that he didn’t seem to grasp is that it is not wise to threaten the feds. They take that stuff very seriously.

      • leander22 says:

        That caught my attention too. He says “and he even continued after the program was stopped“. I once tried to get my hands on his old case with the undercover officer, since I thought this may have been part of his pretrial diversion program. Over here such community work is a rather frequent feature for people to make amends instead of prison terms or financial penalties.

      • Jun says:

        obviously he is lying again, but most of Zimmernuts followers or gang members are dumb as rocks or just lowlife scum anyways

        either way, neither of those facts prove that Fogenhats acted in self defense, so….

      • How long was GZ in “the program?” His arrest was seven years prior to that fatal night when GZ supposedly had just finished mentoring the children (his words on the Hannity Show) and was on his way to Target. If he continued six months after the program, what program was this? Am I missing something?

      • seallison says:

        lurker – the two letters can be found on Scribd.

      • Malisha says:

        Junior believes his threats to get Corey’s and Crump’s and Natalie Jackson’s law licenses away from them, his threats to go to congress and write laws that will allow his brother to kill anydamnbody he feels like it and have his word be held sacrosanct so that nobody’s allowed to disbelieve him, and other foolish boasts and threats are all bullying conduct. The fact that he does not have the big guns to back UP his attempts at bullying, and the fact that he is trying to bully people over whom he has no control, is merely laughable.

        That family is built on bullying behaviors. And the murder of Trayvon Martin was the outgrowth of that very nasty and quite pathetic family dysfunction, once it spread outside to the world by means of weaponry. Pfffffui.

    • And now for those of you who haven’t seen it, prepare to cry your eyes out. Dear Sybrina and Tracy have something to say to all of us.

      • Xena says:

        Class and dignity. Sybrina and Tracy took the lemons and are making lemonade, and I believe in my heart that Trayvon would not have it any other way.

        • racerrodig says:

          Wow….Class & Dignity !! Hoodies up everyone !!

          “Bookmark this page”……….You Betcha !!

        • jm says:

          Xena says: “Sybrina and Tracy took the lemons and are making lemonade.”

          Trayvon’s parents have had class and dignity throughout and I can’t say I could be as gracious if I were them watching the smirking GZ on the Hannity interview telling me my son’s killing was part of God’s plan.

          Too bad the dysfunctional lying Zimmerman KKKlan do not exhibit the same class although they have made lemonade out of GZ’s killing by begging for money for support from racists and gun nutz.

          • racerrodig says:

            Yep X2

          • Xena says:


            Too bad the dysfunctional lying Zimmerman KKKlan do not exhibit the same class although they have made lemonade out of GZ’s killing by begging for money for support from racists and gun nutz.

            A fool and his money …. at the end of the day, GZ has nothing to show for all that money other than his larger size clothes. It’s all God’s plan.

          • racerrodig says:

            I think Las Vegas will have an over / under on his weight when the trial starts. Probably 325 will be the number…..just sayin….

            I’ll take the over.

        • Lonnie Starr says:

          I find these kinds of videos hard to watch because, I know that as bad as I feel for Trayvon, his parents have to feel 10, 000,000 times worse. The only satisfaction we’re going to get is knowing that GZ is going to wet his pants at his sentencing. |||=> Tick Tock! <-|||

      • Rachael says:

        One day I hope to have the honor of meeting them and hugging them.

      • Two sides to a story says:

        He’ll be treasured always.

      • You all have thoughtful comments says:

        Sabrina’s and Tracy’s video really touches my heart.

      • chills101 says:

        Anything less than life will be total disrespect to Trayvon’s family. NOT A DAY LESS THAN LIFE….. R.I.P. TRAYVON

        I’m starting to fell like this case has nothing to do with justice. Im getting the feeling that the above power’s( whoever that b) are showing their powers. We’re losing i rights to have common sense. So if someone tells us it was a justified killing does that make it right. The justice system does not apply to people of no power, no money, or connections. LIFE 4 fogen n may his supporters rest in hell.

      • Malisha says:

        Admirable piece of work, everything fine, every sentiment true and firm.

        One thing: Be careful with the mentoring programs; screen the mentors and keep out violent and dishonest people.

    • Cercando Luce says:

      Hmm, Sean Hannity’s put on weight, too.
      RZJr looks absolutely terrible, dark rings around his eyes.

    • Jun says:


      Omara wants to get paid for representing that idiot

      I am in the hole soon once AIS sues me and wins

    • chills101 says:

      So mom needs more money to free fogen. This is country is truly disturb. We the people have to come together somehow someway n make this place we call earth a better place.

      This case is turning into a reality show. I just can’t help to try n understand these people when its obvious they don’t care about what happened to Trayvon. It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to feel like fogen did something he had no business. And for once in life i hope they convict him by any means necessary. I kno sum may say he have the right to a fair trial and I say what’s a fair trial? Did Trayvon have a fair trial? N just for those who disagree, I have been arrested 4 times n nothing was fair about none of my arrests. I have no felony convictions bc i fought like hell, and I watched people go to jail for nuthin or maybe dey lacked money to hire a private attorney. It just kills me to see this guy get the treatment of some kind of celebrity for killing a BLACK kid. He’s out on bail an I have friends in the state and federal pen for first time arrests without bond and lets say dey neva killed or tried to kill anyone. Sorry but im getting tired of fogen and anyone that supports him.

      • Malisha says:

        Well put. I heard you. Fogen is getting way too much time, money, attention, pity, etc. etc. But the day it runs out is approaching…

      • I agree chills 1000% and it’s sickening!!!! this has got to stop and in a way WE the people helped get this POS charged!! almost 2.5 million people signed a petition in support of Trayvon!

        gz is going DOWN!!!!!!!!! period!

  33. racerrodig says:

    Having testified many times as an expert in civil cases this should be very interesting……..where’s my note pad ??

    I can imagine that criminal & civil courts are worlds apart ??

  34. MelRoy says:

    And the reason the clothing was not next to the skin – the killer was pulling on the victim’s clothing.

    • racerrodig says:

      And I doubt that any expert can explain that away and the bullet trajectory. O’ Mara did say they won’t have any experts.

      Maybe he should have said……”….well, it’s undisputed that we can’t get any experts….” (because nobody is willing to lie for us)

      • Hey, if fogen was pulling on Trayvon’s outer shirt , fogen’s DNA should be on the front of the shirt where he was grabbing it.right?

        • Ya know…..maybe MOM knows fogen’s cooked…and has told him as much……now just dragging the case out to keep fogen on the streets as long as he can…

          MEANWHILE….creating all the drama in the media…(by way of an extension)…even more drama…..which will be more he’ll have to write about in his book after the conviction.

          FOLLOWED BY ……See how much more cash can be garnered from fogen’s lessening fan base.

        • racerrodig says:

          Because it is fiber, not necessarily. If Fogen had a lot sweat or any blood, I’d say yes, but it was already discussed that fibers may not, just like you can’t lift fingerprints from a fiber material.

      • Momma says:

        RE: vickie s. votaw says:

        February 11, 2013 at 3:15 pm

        Hey, if fogen was pulling on Trayvon’s outer shirt , fogen’s DNA should be on the front of the shirt where he was grabbing it.right?

        It is my understanding that fogen’s DNA was found on Trayvons shirt. Exhibit M-8 Stain A. I know that this information is in the document dump somewhere, but do not have the time to find it.

        My first post here, but I have been reading for some time. Thank you Professor for this blog.

        • racerrodig says:

          Nobody has actually seen him gain any credibility…..weight, that’s another matter. Credibility…not so much.

          • Xena says:

            Who was on top, who was on the bottom, who threw the first punch — doesn’t mean a hill of beans when it comes to self-defense. In the Dooley case, there was witness testimony that Dooley was on the bottom and David James on top. The jury decided that James saw Dooley as a threat and had the right to defend himself. If not but for the fact that Dooley left his drive-way/garage with a loaded gun and approached James, the two would not have come into physical contact leading to a confrontation and senseless death.

            The same applies to GZ.

          • racerrodig says:

            That would be correct and Fogen still has no credibility and has not gained any…..I don’t care who said he has !!

          • Xena says:

            I don’t like using the following analogy because it involves an animal, but it’s the closest I can come to describing GZ’s case.

            GZ sees a dog running loose and no one around that could be the owner. He called NEN to report the dog and says it looks rabid. He follows the dog and the headlights scare the dog and it runs off.

            GZ gets out of his truck and follows the dog on foot. GZ shoots and kills the dog and blames it on the dog for biting him. Although alleging that the dog attacked him, was rabid and bit him, GZ is satisfied having scratches washed off with peroxide, refuses to go to the hospital, and thus, refuses to undergo any tests verifying that he has rabies.

            To prevent consequences for killing a dog in which the owners say was not aggressive, GZ’s attorney announces that it’s “undisputed” that GZ has rabies from the dog bite, only has 4 months to live, but needs a continuance in the case.

          • racerrodig says:

            Good analogy actually. Was the dog named “BigBoi” by any chance.

            Are you aware of what prompted Fogen to buy a gun ?? Allegedly that is.

          • Xena says:

            @racerrodig. Oh yeah — get a gun to shoot a dog who has approached you at least twice but not bitten you. Dog biscuits may have resolved any fears — or a slice of ham. Bet he has lots of food to throw to off leashed dogs now.

          • racerrodig says:

            yep !! The “Pit Bull Defense” Then he claims the police dept animal control officer told him to buy a gun and shoot any dog that bothers you. There is not a LE officer on the planet that would tell him that !!!

          • Lonnie Starr says:

            Can there really be any point in arguing who was on top or bottom, who threw the first punch or who had the right to fear for their life, if the unarmed child never threw any blows and the bigger, older, stronger, more violent and angry armed assailant killed the child?

            |||=> Tick Tock! <-|||

          • racerrodig says:

            It looks like a few are arguing what has been put to bed already. We know that none of that matters as well as Trayvon had ample to to go all the way home.

            Even at my age when I am on my cell phone I stop and just stand there when I talk from time to time or go slow if I’m shopping or out somewhere.

      • ay2z says:

        here’s the quote from the link in my last post:

        ‘Calderon said it’s important for the defense to highlight there was one shot and stress the angle of that shot. “It’s the key to their self-defense argument,” Calderon said. “Without that, they basically have no case.”

        Pipitone added, “This does give credibility to Mr. Zimmerman when he testifies.” ‘

      • bettykath says:

        ay2z says:

        ‘Calderon said it’s important for the defense to highlight there was one shot and stress the angle of that shot. “It’s the key to their self-defense argument,” Calderon said. “Without that, they basically have no case.”

        I don’t understand why this could be true.

        • racerrodig says:

          He’s got an agenda. The angle of trajectory destroys every claim about where each of them were. The only accurate part about that is that they were both in Sanford FL.

      • ay2z says:

        yeah, I don’t understand that statement either The ‘expert’ has his own motives for doing his little investigation, and he has to get his book out now while there is still a market for it

      • chills101 says:

        Thank you Xena you always say what I feel. Thanks to you to prof for this wonder blog. I’m new but I’ve been reading every day since June.

    • lurker says:

      One of the Orlando TV stations has been featuring a forensics expert who accounts for the distance between clothing and skin by the pull of gravity–putting Trayvon above Z. It will be interesting to see all of this in play at trial.

      • Two sides to a story says:

        The can of AZ watermelon drink could help pull the hoody down. I think Fogen also pulled at Trayvon, but just saying.

      • Xena says:

        Sounds logical except that it was a contact shot. The muzzle of the gun was against Trayvon’s clothes. That would have pushed the muzzle of the gun to Trayvon’s body unless his clothes were held taunt, or resulted in the gunshot not exactly matching in both garments.

      • leander22 says:

        I was pondering if I should mention that a long time ago, but then realized I could be mistaken as a Fogen supporter.

        In any case yes, that has been on my mind too, but there are other factors that have to fit e.g. the trajectory plus the difficulty in drawing the gun as he describes it, as people with knowledge in the topic have written here …

      • He failed to take the direct front to back path and his test reflected both parties standing. The reenactment should include GZ lying down with a forensic dummy portraying Trayvon; have a stick showing the exact path and get GZ to recreate it. He’ll be toast.

      • Cercando Luce says:

        Re: Xena’s comment:
        Not only would Fogen have been pulling on Trayvon’s shirts, but Trayvon would’ve been pulling away– so that Fogey couldn’t get the gun right up against the boy’s skin.

        • Xena says:

          @Cercando Luce

          Re: Xena’s comment:
          Not only would Fogen have been pulling on Trayvon’s shirts, but Trayvon would’ve been pulling away– so that Fogey couldn’t get the gun right up against the boy’s skin.

          Absolutely. When I listen to the call that captured the screams, there is a faint “help” that is cut short by the gunshot. I envision that GZ already had his gun out on Trayvon, and also had hold of Trayvon’s shirts. The last effort to get away and cry “help” resulted in GV jerking Trayvon’s clothes towards the gun.

          In his Hannity interview, GZ said that he was terrorized not wanting the cops to arrive and see him standing there holding his gun and shoot him. What a scene had the cops arrived finding a crying teen being held at gun point by GZ.

      • Jun says:

        The Orlando expert also fails to add in the misalignment of the bullet holes, both hoodie and undershirt with the wound, and the distance that would be needed, the angle of trajectory, and that if gravity was a factor, then, what about the blood drippings on the defendant’s head? What about the fact that gravity would have caused blood to fall onto the gun? What about the fact that the witnesses saw the defendant simply rise up off the victim after killing the kid? How about the measurement of the tightness of the clothing? There is only so much gravity can do to clothing that is held onto the body, unless it is purposely pulled away from the body

        • Lonnie Starr says:

          Well the gravity thing is easily proved/disproved. Take similar clothing and punch the same holes in them. Then hang them on an equivalent frame and angle it so the clothes hang. Next, simply press a gun into the clothes and the holes should line up exactly. If not, then gravity is ruled out. Next case!

      • Judy75201 says:

        Gravity pulls straight to the earth, so I’m not convinced at all by the gravity hypothesis.

        • AND……it COULD NOT have been the can of ice tea in his hoodie pulling the loose fabric in one direction if he were at an angle to fogen…..

          Why?……….The ballistics of the wound…..were he at any kind of angle to the gun, the trajectory would follow the same path into his body.

      • seallison says:

        It isnt just the trajectory of the shot. It is also the gunshot residue that determined the placement of the Teeshirt and Hoodie.

      • Jun says:

        I am going to guess as well, there are grip marks, which would have been where Fogenhats grabbed Trayvon, and some dna from the grab onto the shirt

      • MelRoy says:

        Gravity doesn’t explain the 45 degree angle. Try restraining someone who is flat on their back with all your strength and simultaneously reaching for something on their hip (per Zimmerman) at a 45 degree angle. And try getting that shot off if someone who is 5 inches taller than you is leaning over you, holding you down (as Zimmerman claims). Impossible.

        There was no trace of Martin’s blood on Zimmerman’s jacket, because they were physically separated by some distance (arm’s length) when the shot was fired.

        If Zimmerman was on his back and Martin was straddling him, as Zimmerman claimed, Martin would have had to be sitting upright for Zimmerman to get that shot off. Let’s assume just for a second that he was (sitting upright). In that case, Martin could not have exerted the force Zimmerman claims he did. Impossible.

        If Martin was on top of Zimmerman at the correct angle to get that shot off, Martin would have fallen forward, on to Zimmerman. Not only didn’t that happen, Zimmerman doesn’t say it happened.

        So what is possible? It is possible that they were on the ground, on their sides, and Zimmerman tugged at Martin’s clothing with one hand and shot with the other. It is possible, Zimmerman being shorter, that the two men were standing or sitting up but separated, and Zimmerman tugged at Martin’s clothing with one hand and shot with the other. It is possible that Martin was standing up and leaning forward. Why would he do that? To offer the other person a hand, to get up, or to taunt him. Which totally blows Zimmerman’s self-defense claim, because the “imminent danger” had passed.

    • Jun says:

      These are the characteristics

      (1) Contact shot with hoodie and undershirt only

      (2) Intermediate range gunshot wound

      (3) Hoodie and undershirt needed to be pulled down and to the left to line up the bullet holes with the wound

      (4) Straight front to back trajectory

      (5) DNA evidence

      (6) Witnesses simply saw him rise up off of the victim, after screams for help stop

      (7) Screams were described to be that of a child

      I do not feel there is any expert that will be able to scientifically explain everything here to match the defendant’s story

Leave a Reply

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

You are commenting using your 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: