Please Read and Comment

Friday, February 22, 2013

I have been monitoring without comment a dispute between members of this community regarding the use of unflattering characterizations of the defendant, his wife and family, and their supporters. I hoped that you all would resolve your disagreements, but you are stuck. Therefore, I am going to step in without picking a side and provide some guidance that I hope will assist all of you to settle your disagreements and refocus on Justice for Trayvon.

Although this is my blog, I am not Pharaoh and do not feel comfortable playing God. You all are good people and there is no reason that I can think of why you cannot resolve your disagreements and get back on track without causing hard feelings. To do that each side is going to have to acknowledge that the people on the other side have legitimate reasons for feeling the way they do. My take on the dispute is that no progress toward a resolution has occurred because people on both sides are focused on proving the other side is wrong.

One side believes that the defendant, his wife and family, and their supporters have demonstrated repeatedly by word and deed that they deserve to be treated with contempt. People who subscribe to this view insist that they not only have a right to express their anger and disgust, they have a duty to do so.

As one who has been viciously attacked and smeared with knowingly false allegations asserted as the truth and then repeated by sock puppets on many internet sites in the hope that the lies will acquire legitimacy by virtue of such repetition, I can say with certainty that they have no regard for the truth and no respect for anyone who disagrees with them or anyone who seeks justice for Trayvon. I have to continually struggle to keep my emotions under control because a part of me wants to retaliate and give them a reason to fear me for the rest of their lives. I am a very emotional person and I cannot deny and ignore how I feel.

I am capable of detaching, however, and when I do, I see why they have targeted me for character assassination by lie. They attack and seek to silence me because on a daily basis I expose the lies in the defendant’s statements and the weaknesses in his defense. The intensity and desperation of their attacks reflects how effective I have been. Since they have established and dedicated entire websites to spewing lies and hatred toward me, I can and do take enormous satisfaction from my accomplishments.

To me, Justice for Trayvon is about doing something to promote justice in his case. It’s not about self-validation by treating his killer, his wife and family, and their supporters with scorn and contempt. Whether the defendant and his wife have the combined intelligence of a box of rocks is not the issue. Whether they have each gained excessive weight since his arrest is not particularly noteworthy either. I know they are pathetic malcontents whose lives are going nowhere. The people who want to destroy me with lies have issues they need to deal with because their dedication to destroying good people with lies is a ticket to hell.

The other side is concerned that respectful and reasoned discussion about the evidence and the issues, which is what brought them to this site and why they remain, is degenerating. They point out that several people who ask questions and criticize others for a tendency to drift toward cliquish behavior and group-think get attacked and accused of being trolls.

I think it’s easy to judge the conduct of others when the person doing the judging is unable to understand or relate to the emotional response experienced by the person they are judging. Could the answer lie in the direction of acknowledging the validity of the emotional response while suggesting that seeking justice for Trayvon may be a more effective way of applying the energy expended on mockery and insults?

I want everyone to work through this problem to find a solution they believe in and can support.

This house will tear itself apart from the inside out if the desire for vindication precludes a mutually respectful and thoughtful discussion toward a solution that recognizes and validates the emotional reactions that lie beneath the skin.

We are here to ask questions, exchange opinions, learn new things, practice tolerance and treat each other with respect.

I am searching for a middle ground between the opposing views expressed here so that there is freedom to express righteous anger and indignation with mature restraint, tolerance and acceptance for those who occasionally get carried away, and respect for those with whom we disagree.

Finally, I hope everyone understands and accepts that sooner or later, despite best intentions or maybe because of them, each one of us is going to cross a boundary and hurt another person’s feelings or piss them off. Endeavor to cut them some slack and be as willing to forgive them their trespass as you would like them to forgive yours.

After all, since sinning is our birthright, there never is a time better than now to accept what we are, resolve to learn by our mistakes, and forgive others as we would like to be forgiven.

George Zimmerman believes that only chumps think that way. He has chosen to exist outside the collective. Sooner or later that belief leads to isolation, depression and despair beyond imagining.

The rest of us are stuck with each other and we have to learn how to live together in harmony and thank the God of our understanding that we are not George Zimmerman.

1,044 Responses to Please Read and Comment

  1. fauxmccoy says:

    please forgive me folks – am going to practice to attempt to embed a youtube vid here so as to not mess up his beautiful memorial page

  2. racerrodig says:

    Here is a direct quote from the new breed of Zidiot from the Zidiot Nation on HP….I kid you not……..

    Me .
    39 minutes ago (11:45 PM)
    First off the ZM was held at the hospital for 5 hours so seeing no blood on him while he enters the police station is explained. I mean do some research. No documented of complaints from the watch program exist. ZM would of followed TM even without gun has done so with other situations in the past. Dee Dee is a liar who hates whites and wants to profit in someway or retaliate against what she perceives as a white person..
    Favorite (0) Flag as Abusive

    I kid you not this Zidiot now has a tale of how FogenPhoole was held at the hospital for 5 hours.

    “No documented of complaints from the watch captain exist.”+

    Fail English much ??….my bad. That 6th grade edecshun is really paying off…..

    “Dee Dee is a liar who hates whites and wants to profit in someway or retaliate against what she perceives as a white person..”

    Is this a sign of the Apocalypse or merely a sign that he’s done.

    Great Moderating on that site.

    • Past done….well done…..over done….

      To the point he’s fast becoming Turkey Jerky…….

      • racerrodig says:

        Can I post


        I have video of Fogen lying in the bushes waiting to spring. Then he called Taaffe and said “..go on the other side of the building and cut him off so he’ll come back this way”

        After that Osterman called and said “where are you….SheLie’s back on the North end”

        Then, Trayvon who by now, was standing at the end of Brandi’s walkway when Taaffe chased right back to Fogen and Fogen grabbed him, held him by his hoodie.

        All at once porch lights started to go on and one guy said “..stop it out there….I’m calling the cops” Fogen just kept kind of roughing Trayvon up yelling questions at him….then..he just shot him. Oh and Fogen had his pistol in his hand the whole time.

        It would be no different than what the do…..and here, I have it on Beta Max so it must be true….

        • Lonnie Starr says:

          That’s karma for you. While we’ve known for a very long time, that Trayvon could and probably should have, gotten very far south, probably even to his house before Phogen could catch him. We were left to wonder why he didn’t go inside, but instead, probably turned and ran back north.

          Because it made little to no sense that, if Trayvon reached his home, a minute or so ahead of GZ, he’d have enough time to go inside, so why didn’t he? To satisfy our incredulity over this oddity we’ve often attempted to eliminate it entirely, by substituting a theory that Trayvon, more likely stopped and hid for a while, before resuming his walk home.

          But, finally we learned in the evidence dumps that Chad called Trayvon and asked when he would be getting back. Remembering that Chad was engrossed in video games, it’s hard to see him stopping to take the time out to make this call. We’re all familiar with how time flies when you’re having fun. So, that says a lot about what Chad was doing then. He was monitoring the phone, waiting for it to ring so he could let Trayvon back inside. That has got to be a distraction. Chad got tired of waiting, the suspense was killing him so he decided to call and find out how much longer Trayvon would be.

          This kind of “monitoring” of another persons progress by a 14 year old child is extraordinary, so there has to be something they both consider to be important going on. Chad wants his skittles and Trayvon wants to get back inside without too long a wait. Self interest has them working together like clockwork, a trait that is otherwise unusual for teens in most cases.

          So, now we’ve discovered the plan that was designed to get Trayvon back inside. Only problem is, it required anywhere from at least 30 seconds to as much a 2 minutes to execute. Not a problem under normal circumstances, but when under pressure of being stalked by an angry, half crazed adult out hunting you down, a small lead isn’t enough. If that crazy dude knows which house you’ve entered, and that house has only a flimsy glass porch door between you, your little brother and this attacker, you haven’t a choice but to turn away. You can’t afford to waste the 20 to 30 seconds it will take to dial and connect, and the 20 to 30 more seconds it will take for the door to be answered, because crazy dude will be on top of you by then.

          So, we now know that GZ did not have to cover all that distance to stop Trayvon from entering the house. All GZ had to do was cover, perhaps half that distance to be considered “behind me again!” Trayvon would have no other choice but to run away from the house.

          • racerrodig says:

            The possibilities are numerous, but no matter what, Trayvon did nothing wrong at all.

          • Lonnie Starr says:

            GZ knows that! So:

            1. He’s trying to turn a kids barehanded attack into a lethal assault!

            That won’t work because, at Trayvon’s height and weight, it’s doubtful in the extreme that he could bench press 50 lbs. So, there’s not much strength to work with for the purposes GZ would have us believe.

            GZ, on the other hand, at 204 lbs and 5′ 8″, we can figure that he could probably bench 200lbs easily, as most 200 lbs, 5′ 8″ 28 year old men probably can. So, GZ has quite some advantage over TM and his bare handed attack on Trayvon would probably be closer to being lethal than vice versa. Yet, who would expect Trayvon to be killed by a bare handed attack by GZ?

            Which is why GZ has to offer us:

            2. “He went for my gun!”

            Which may sound frightening at first blush, but when you sort out the facts, not so much.

            A) How would Trayvon know there was a gun there?
            B) How would Trayvon find the nerve to attack an armed adult?
            C) How would Trayvon come by the confidence that he could operate a firearm?
            D) How would a child, who has never fired a gun, never trained with a gun and never killed anyone, suddenly guess that he could find the nerve to do so?
            E) How could Trayvon expect that he could gain control of a gun — he didn’t know how to operate successfully — from a bigger, heavier stronger and fearsome adult?

            All of which fails to fall within the necessary parameters, to cover GZ’s fatal shot, since the law says that he brought the weapon to the altercation, and his following clearly caused it, if it even occurred.

            Of course, since the evidence of the claimed attack is absent, it’s unlikely that GZ was assaulted at all. So, how does he explain these wounds? How does he explain all this blood? And finally, how does he explain why he was screaming so desperately, when Trayvon never laid a hand on him?

            So, how can he be believed when he arranged for baldfaced lies to be presented to the court though his wife, simply to hide the fact that he had enough money to make a reasonable bail? Then we discover that he had a second passport, and that the one he was required to turn in to the court, was one ready to expire?

            GZ’s case gets weaker every day.

          • Xena says:

            @Lonnie Starr

            So, we now know that GZ did not have to cover all that distance to stop Trayvon from entering the house. All GZ had to do was cover, perhaps half that distance to be considered “behind me again!”

            When I watched Dave’s walk-through video, it occurred to me that Trayvon would hesitate walking around to the front of the house because there is a road there. The creepy guy had followed him in a vehicle. Trayvon had ran where no vehicle could drive, but he would have to expose himself to a road again in order to get into the front of the house.

            When GZ heard Trayvon talking on his phone, and changed his plans on where to meet the cops wanting them to call for his location, there should be no assumption that GZ was standing still. He then knew were Trayvon was and how to head him off.

            Trayvon is standing still watching the road ahead of him to see if any vehicle is coming, and GZ is navigating either between houses or from RVC to head Trayvon off.

            So, DeeDee says that Trayvon said he saw the creepy guy again. That was sufficient for Trayvon to walk in the opposite direction, to the north. Then Trayvon says that the creepy guy is behind him. GZ had not gone into the patio doors of any of the townhouses. There was no doubt then in Trayvon’s mind that GZ was following him.

            There is talk of a witness who saw GZ catch up to Trayvon, step in front of him, and push him. Hopefully that witness will come forth. If not, there is still sufficient evidence that Trayvon did not attack GZ and that the altercation did not occur at the T as GZ says.

    • Xena says:

      @racerrodig. HA!! You should read comments on Yahoo. Now mind you, this is on article about the anniversary of Trayvon’s death. Talk about verbal vandalism.

      I accuse TM of being a racist. The only reason TM circled back to attack Zman was because Zman was not only white, but Hispanic. If TM wasn’t such a violent racist, Zman wouldn’t have needed to discharge his weapon. Zman should sue the parents for his medical bills, as well as the cost of a reload. Ammunition isn’t cheap, thanks to “O”man’s gun-grabbing agenda.

      But, each time I read a comment such as the aforementioned, I am reminded that it sends more negative energy to GZ. He shall be sentenced to life in prison.

      • racerrodig says:

        “I accuse TM of being a racist..” Excuse my language ahead of time. but who gives Phuck what he says. Who died and left him with anything. Another brain dean moron from the Zidiot Nation.

        That clown couldn’t find a phart in a phone booth…..who’s he kidding.

        There…..I feel better.

        • Lonnie Starr says:

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

          • racerrodig says:

            Where do they come from and why are they breathing our air. This Zidiot “accuses” Trayvon of being a racist for what…..allegedly what. Since there is no proof Trayvon did that and the circling story was an after thought by a known racist what can we accuse Fogen of….

            Then some Zidiot claimed Fogen was detained over 5 hours at the hospital that night and that explains why there is no blood when he hops out of the police car.

            They smell Defeat big time…..Gee…..maybe they’ll riot.

            One Day Closer…..

      • racerrodig says:

        Oppps That would be “…brain dead moron..”

  3. Lonnie Starr says:

    Somethings been bugging me so I might as well put it out for us to consider.

    Earlier we were told by Brandy (I think) that this Sunday trip to the store was the only one Trayvon had made. Okay!

    Later we discovered in the dump that Chad says that Trayvon made a trip to the store on Thursday prior.

    So, this left me saying to myself “What? Could some one be mistaken here?”

    I’ve been to convenience stores plenty of times, so I’ve seen those trick coins planted in them, in several different locations. Some have them on the counters, while others have them on the floor somewhere. Whatever and/or where ever they place them, it’s always somewhere where they will be noticed.

    In convenience stores that run 24/7 I can imagine it’s an amusement for the staff, that also just happens to give them a reason to watch customers more closely than they otherwise might. Just imagine how amusing it is to watch the customer try to pick up the coin unnoticed, or recoil with embarrassment upon realizing it was a trick. A bright shiny quarter is hardly going to go unnoticed on a smooth bluish grey ceramic tiled floor. Since it can be seen from several feet away.

    Okay so that’s the base line. At the 711, apparently this trick coin was located in the middle of the floor as your on your way to the drink coolers. In other words hard to miss.

    Now, I keep thinking: Gee, if Trayvon has been to this store before as Chad seems to be saying he was, then how did he miss this coin before? Certainly if he’d been here before he’d have seen this coin, they’re pretty well placed as to be inescapable. So how or why is he performing like he’s never seen this one before? The only answer I can come up with is, he hasn’t been here before! In fact, his reaction says that he doesn’t go to convenience stores very much at all, because; once you’ve seen these sorts of coin tricks once or twice, you’re pretty much done with it and don’t react anymore anywhere inside a convenience store.

    So, for that reason I began to think, what if he only told Chad that he was going to the store and all he was really doing was, going somewhere to meet someone he didn’t want to talk about? Could the Sunday meeting have been set up on that Thursday with someone in the area?

    From the police report of the burglary I got the impression that Ransberg was the white guy with the three blacks. Ransberg had the stolen laptop in his back pack, the report makes clear, but Burgess quickly claims it. There’s also, according to the Police, a large screen phone found, that the Police confiscate because, they say it was being used to move stolen merchandise, although they make no mention of how they were able to reach such a conclusion.

    Many months ago when I first read that report it seemed that only Burgess was arrested, more recent readings reveal that they were all taken in. Maybe I didn’t read it right the first time? Could be, sometimes I read so much I may get confused at wee tad, I’ve read over 2,000 emails this week alone, forget about articles and surfing.
    But then there’s that inexplicable Ransberg thing. The OS says that he’s black, 20 years old and lives in RATL. I emailed the paper to get an address, they said that Ransberg was only visiting and was staying with a girlfriend there. Gee, in the original article you wouldn’t think that, because he points to a door and says that kids in trouble should know to come to that door because he’s there to help them.

    So, I’m kinda sure Chad wouldn’t lie, but I’m also kind of sure that Trayvon wasn’t telling everyone everything. Note that he doesn’t mention to DD that he’s stopped and/or meeting with these fellas at 711. Yet, after turning back into the store, walking back and bending down to pick something up off the floor, he quickly rises while continuing to move towards the rear of the store, as if to pretend he had merely stumbled and didn’t try to pick something up. He’s a bit embarrassed and so he hustles quickly out of the store. You’d certainly think that in such a state, he’d quickly get underway towards home, but no. He holds up outside the store for the 30 seconds it take for these boys to arrive, then stays there waiting for them to exit the store, before starting back east to home.

    Sorry, but that trip to the 711 has all the hall marks of being a pre planned meeting that no one was supposed to know about. Those guys at the 711 who met him knew something, because why would you hide your faces at a convenience store if you didn’t? I mean, unless you were planning to rob the place, which apparently they weren’t. So why the covered faces? But isn’t that exactly what you’d expect them to do, if they knew that the person they were meeting there was going to be in very big trouble? Trouble big enough to think that the cctv tapes would be pulled and examined?

    • onlyiamunitron says:

      As I understand it Trayvon had been to that neighborhood, TRATL, a few if not several times previously, and, one presumes, the previous times weren’t about him being suspended and getting him away from his Miami area neighborhood, so he wouldn’t have been “in trouble” or “on restriction” during the previous visits.

      Once you’ve done the swimming pool thing, is there that much else to do around there that he wouldn’t have been down to that 7-Eleven on those previous stays?

      And if, just to be “iffing”, he was lured down there as some sort of setup that the stooges were part of instigating, so that he could be “hunted” on his way back into the neighborhood, do you think the prosecution is going to want to risk introducing any of that extra stuff into what they seem to think is a straight up and winnable M2 case?

      Has anybody, prosecution or defense, shown any interest in finding and grilling these guys?

      Interesting angle on the “falling for the old glued down coin trick”, though.

      Except if it wasn’t a gold doubloon, teenagers nowadays strike me as more likely to be “can’t be bothered” to worry about something as insignificant as a quarter. Not cool, don’t you know.

      Now if you’ll excuse me I’m going to go reminisce about when that quarter would have bought a gallon of gas or a movie ticket while I yell at clouds.


      (who better not catch any of you kids on his lawn, either)

      • Xena says:


        Has anybody, prosecution or defense, shown any interest in finding and grilling these guys?

        The defense has, and asked the court to issue subpoenas to 7-Eleven.

      • gblock says:

        That to me speaks against Lonnie’s conspiracy theory. The defense might be looking for a theory of the crime that does not make GZ look as bad – and certainly, if there was a conspiracy to lure Trayvon into a trap, that makes GZ look even worse. It would be hard to convince anyone of the reverse – that Trayvon was part of a conspiracy to lure GZ into a trap. The only other possibility is that they are simply looking for a little more dirt on Trayvon – but any evidence of the conspiracy theory that Lonnie has been pushing might tend to interfere with such claims.

        • onlyiamunitron says:

          I figure that if they ever catch up to those three guys they’re going to find out their names are “Larry, my brother Daryl, and my other brother Daryl” and that they couldn’t conspiracy up a two car parade.


        • Lonnie Starr says:

          I’m not “pushing” any conspiracy theory, just working with the theories that the evidence allows or seems to encourage.

          Start with whether or not he simply decided to take this trip at this particular time. It’s a rainy Sunday night. Is it a coincidence?
          If it’s a coincidence then it stands to reason that it did not matter when Trayvon left for the store, the same results would have happened. That would have to mean that he had been followed from home to achieve that.

          On the other hand, if he has been lured from home somehow, to take this trip at this particular time. Then, if he had gone to the store at another time, these events probably would not have happened, because he’d be outside of the required time frame.

          Say, for example, he’d left home 30 minutes later. Shouldn’t GZ already be at Target? Or would he still be out patrolling the neighborhood in the rain, without knowing that there would ever be anyone coming out for him to pick on?

          If you pick “coincidence” then you’re pushing an idea that GZ has been out there patrolling all day and finally get’s lucky. But, if you don’t like that view, the only other choice you have is notification.

          But then, notification by coincidence, once again pushes the view that GZ is standing at the ready waiting to be notified. Okay, notified of what? Of Trayvon going to the store? Really? Apparently that leaves them watching for Trayvon to make a trip to the store, that Trayvon himself hasn’t even thought of making. So that’s just the start of the reasoning that leads to the creation of the necessary theory. Work with it for a while and you’ll begin to see that there just isn’t a reasonable conclusion that Trayvon wasn’t somehow lured from his house for a planned meeting.

          There’s more that goes into it but this will do for a start. Remember, no one who’s in on this plan is going to come forward, nor is GZ going to tell either. The only way to understand what had to happen is to understand the requirements. Coincidence would be if GZ and Trayvon truly ran into each other without any outside help. But the evidence shows that did not happen. Trayvon was at the mail boxes before GZ even left home.

          GZ says he first saw Trayvon by Taaffe’s, but that was a lie! Trayvon used the front gate to return. GZ says he parked in front of the clubhouse, that too was a lie, no vehicle is captured on the clubhouse cameras parking there, only passing.

          GZ says he started his NeN call while parked at the Clubhouse, another lie, he was parked on TTL when he started the call.

          To achieve these interactions he needed notification, and the notifiers needed a time frame to work with, or they would have to work all day, without any hope that they could succeed in spotting anyone. Thus, neither coincidence nor watching at random makes any sense. Only the addition of a lure, can bring things together in this way, because luck or coincidence simply doesn’t yield the guarantees that are needed to make watching and waiting make sense.

      • gblock says:


        “But then, notification by coincidence, once again pushes the view that GZ is standing at the ready waiting to be notified. Okay, notified of what? Of Trayvon going to the store? Really? Apparently that leaves them watching for Trayvon to make a trip to the store, that Trayvon himself hasn’t even thought of making.”

        That’s reasoning from a premise that is probably false. If GZ was waiting to be notified, the anticipated notification was to be of something “suspicious” in RATL, and the “suspicious” thing that turned up just happened to be Trayvon.

        “To achieve these interactions he needed notification, and the notifiers needed a time frame to work with, or they would have to work all day, without any hope that they could succeed in spotting anyone.”

        That’s based on the assumption that it was important to them to spot someone that day. It’s as likely that they were willing to wait for as much as several weeks, until one of them happened to spot someone.

    • Xena says:

      @Lonnie Starr

      From the police report of the burglary I got the impression that Ransberg was the white guy with the three blacks. Ransberg had the stolen laptop in his back pack, the report makes clear, but Burgess quickly claims it.

      There might be 2 guys with the same last name; i.e., Ransberg. The one in the 7-Eleven video does appear to be bi-racial. Like with GZ, the cops put in their report that his race is White. Maybe anyone like Ransberg with dreads or braids is presumed to be Black.

      IMO, you’re on the right road, but we are seeing through a glass darkly. It has always been my impression that GZ cut out of town as soon as leaving the police station out of fear of someone he knows. My thoughts were on Burgess, but Burgess was in jail on 2/26/12.
      Maybe GZ did not know that.

      Another thing that has peeked my interest was who was it that served at GZ’s (non) graduation party that GZ refused to pay and called the cops on? Maybe Burgess or another one of the guys who ran with him?

      • Lonnie Starr says:

        Point well taken, there certainly could be two Ransbergs. In any event, though there is much to be suspicious about, without more evidence being either released or discovered we’re at a dead end so far. Of course, that said, it helps to have theories ready to help accept, identify and categorize the bits and pieces that come our way. Just image if we had a theory that TM had been lured from his house back in march or so, it would have been easier to identify what other evidence was needed and those guys at the store would have appeared more deserving of scrutiny early on.

        People who pooh pooh theories have no idea how investigations are done. Keep an eye out, sometimes we get lucky.

        • Xena says:

          @Lonnie Starr

          People who pooh pooh theories have no idea how investigations are done. Keep an eye out, sometimes we get lucky.

          IMO, your consideration of the 3 guys in 7-Eleven, who they are, and the possibility that they lured Trayvon out of the house, coincides with my theory that GZ used NW as a cover-up for his crime-ring and needed a fall guy to get Burgess off the hook.

          Just don’t know, but I cannot give up the thought that GZ was in a fight that weekend that caused his head boo-boos and the scratches, and that whomever caused them and that he disappointed by shooting “someone else” was the reason he left R@TL like a bat out of hell after leaving the police station.

      • gblock says:

        Ransberg is not a common name. It seems to me unlikely that there are two of them unless they are related to each other, which is certainly possible.

        • Lonnie Starr says:

          A couple of searches I did shows a couple of Ransberg’s in Sanford. A musician aged about 65 who may have an offspring. One of the Ransberg’s is black and the other may be white.

          But, I don’t like the black Ransberg in the Orlando Sentinel picture, with his head bowed and eyes closed. who takes pictures for a news article like that? Also when I wrote the reporter, the story changed again. In the article she says that he’s a 20 year old home owner and black. He says “that’s my door over there, children in trouble can knock on it anytime and I’m there to help”, (not a direct quote). In the email reply she says that Ransberg was merely visiting his girlfriend.
          Plus those are some really skimpy dreadlocks almost as if photoshopped on. because that hairline doesn’t say 20 years old either.

          • Xena says:

            @Lonnie Starr. I found something — won’t post it here because it’s information of a private party. Check the chat blog.

  4. kimmi says:

    So you’re typing: symbol found over the comma; word blockquote; symbol found over the period; — before your quote.

    And you’re typing: symbol found over the comma; slash mark found under the question-mark on the keyboard; word blockquote; symbol found over the period; — after your quote.

    Testing blockquote. Thanks Malisha!

  5. ay2z says:

    I have a question that the photo editing professionals might be able to review and give an opinion about.

    The source is AxiomAmnesia’s FDLE photos of the Retreat at Twin Lakes townhouses, back side of Twin Trees Lane, middle set of houses taken from the back ‘dog walk’. Something caught the photographer’s eye and detail photos were taken, including more photos of the patio with the grey bbq cover, than any other patio on the whole block..

    Question is simply, is this what it appears to be, a round brush type photo edit and retouch to mask something, or is it the result of sloppy maintenance crews with a can of house paint?

    The defense has gone through everything by now, so they should know if it’s nothing or something they need to pay attention to.

    • racerrodig says:

      They are not blood stains. I can tell you that.

      • ay2z says:

        yeah, it’s something added on top of whatever was there before, if only grass. Either thick liquid in similar color as the townhouse, or retouch that matches the color of the townhomes.

        Whatever the spots are, it’s covered up with something in situe or on the raw file.

        We can’t know what it is, related to crime or normal activities along the community sidewalk and green area. Just want to know if it’s photo manipulation or something on the raw file. The lower sidewalk spot seems to have a round brush edit, the edges of the top spot, similar fringing. But I”m not an expert.

        • racerrodig says:

          I know enough from my LE guys and dad being a cop it’s nothing used to detect blood. Luminol needs an UV light. It could not possibly be blood on the sidewalk as that would have “trailed” into the lines and this did not. Never mind it was raining that night on and off and there was a shower some time after the crime scene was cleared as I recall.

      • ay2z says:

        this wasn’t within the crime scene, just find it odd, if it’s not paint, that grass spots would be that particular color. Personally, I’m thinking it’s more likely digital adjustments but why. Maybe the sod was cut out and the photos mask that and at the same time, mark the collection location.

        It’s strange that the photographer dwelled on these spots, but that can only be seen by looking at the photo album and compare it to all the other photos taken that day. No other details show up, only documenting the houses from all sides.

    • aussie says:

      There were various other similar splotches in that series, including some up near the T. One was under a camera tripod. At the time we discussed it, and the consensus was they were markers for where evidence had been found AND for helping triangulate the scene.

      The patio with the most pictures may have been John’s whose backyard the fight happened in.

      The paint would be the spray paint (water based) often used for marking up ground to be worked on, eg for edges of paths, garden beds etc. It comes in this pinkish red and in yellow. Builders and landscapers use it a lot.

      • ay2z says:

        This is in the next set of townhouses, south of those where the fight took place.

        It’s curious because the FDLE photographed it specifically, not accidentally. And the photos were taken long after the crime occurred.

        Someone went to trouble to document the marks, and possibly obscure them for some reason (ie: redaction or marking) for discovery.

        I’m not trying to decide what the marks are, just if they are altered with a brush tool or clone tool, looks that way. We may hear more about them later, or maybe not.

    • gbrbsb says:

      I see nothing to indicate editing. It´s small res. size, 300 dpi, does’t allow even 200% augmentation without pixels becoming visible it would be difficult to edit without it showing anyway. Exif info has it generated & digitised 18 April 2012 @ 10:53:38, using a Nikon D3005 with FL 27 mm, compression JPG (mode 2). Whatever the stains are the blades of grass are distinguishable so it is not a thick coating substance. As others note it´s not blood but could be paint or markers. I think it´s too orange to be dog pee burn and that would be nigh transparent on the path so wouldn’t tally either. IMO before suspecting manipulation best to ask “what gain?” and again IMO there seems nothing here that would benefit any side so possibly the photographer just thought he better take it just in case it was important.

    • Good read…TY

      “Battle lines …..they are drawn”

      • Rachael says:

        Good song too. TY

      • Lonnie Starr says:

        A terribly biased piece that ignores the facts of the matter. She tries her best to present the case as if the two side were on equal footing, they aren’t, GZ has badly skewed his side of the issues so badly, that even his supporters are appalled and going quiet. George has made even Hannity look foolish for having him come on the air and present his audience with catastrophic stupidity. And yet, they give no time to the fact that GZ has arranged to present lies in court about serious matters. It just boggles the mind that Kessab can say that GZ’s ability to lie under oath, recite utter stupidity and give conflicting versions of his activities that night that do not comport with the physical evidence, and still represent that the matter of guilt is a “toss up”. If the exercise is to not taint the jury pool, there should be no article at all, rather than this.

    • Mrs kassab forgets the gun Z was carrying nor mentions that there was nothing suspicious about Travon.Hello!

      • Trained Observer says:

        Yep, pretty thin soup, especially for this blog’s crowd — steeped in details on virtually every facet of a sad case. All so avoidable if the defendant stayed in his car until cops showed up.

        To be fair, reporters frequently get hit with last minute assignments — not that the dumbest of desk editors couldn’t anticipate the first anniversary of Trayvon’s death — and don’t have much time to develop. She also may have been facing a ton of other deadlines.

        Overall, the Sentinel, based on performance thus far, won’t be raking in any Pulitzers for Martin murder enterprise reporting or case coverage. But that’s more of a corporate or top editoral management weakness, rather than a slam at individual scribes.

        Kudos goes to Reuters for first bringing Trayvon’s loss of life to significant light. Norm Wolfinger hadn’t counted on that.

      • onlyiamunitron says:

        “Mrs kassab forgets the gun Z was carrying…”

        From the article–

        “Tuesday will mark one year since George Zimmerman shot and killed Trayvon Martin.”

        “Zimmerman wasn’t a white man who gunned down a black kid. It was a half-Hispanic man — who says he has black family members — who gunned down a black kid.”

        “Some wanted this case to be about a black teen who was shot and killed for no reason except that a Neighborhood Watch volunteer didn’t like his skin color.”

        “In this version, the watchman feared for his life and had no choice but to pull out his weapon and shoot.”

        “Whether Zimmerman’s injuries were serious enough for him to fear for his life and shoot Trayvon will be a question for the judge when she decides whether Zimmerman is immune from prosecution in a “stand your ground” hearing set for April.”

        Yeah, she must have meant he used a slingshot.


      • Lonnie Starr says:

        Only by ignoring the fact that there are laws against stalking on the books in Fla., can she reach for the “balanced” conclusions she’s attempting to forward. Maybe someone should send her a copy of the laws that prohibit GZ’s unilaterally taken conduct of that night.

        Sure, there are two sides to the story, but which one should take precedence over the other is not that hard to discern. Trayvon was walking slowly in the rain and that is all GZ could have seen! The fact that he decided to characterize this innocent and legal activity as some sort of precursor to “urgently actionable criminal activity”, is unsupportable hyper vigilance on his part!

        Thus, it derives that he unlawfully interferes with the peaceful enjoyment of Trayvon’s rights to be free of unwanted attention, without having been observed to be breaking the law. That means that GZ has decided unlawfully — and without any lawful reason that any reasonable person can detect — to reveal his unwarranted and troubling attention to Trayvon, without explanation therefore. He has openly displayed himself as a hostile person who is directing unwarranted animosity at an innocent youth and for no good reason, causing that youth to become concerned for his safety.

        As a law student GZ should have known that what he was doing was illegal, as a lay citizen, informed of NW rules, he should have known that what he was doing was prohibited. But, instead of obeying the laws he should have known to exist, and/or obey the rules he should have known better than to break, he aggravated the hostile situation he unlawfully created, by exiting his vehicle and continuing to follow Trayvon without explanation or intent to calm his obvious fears.

        So, I think I’ve credibly demonstrated that when GZ left his truck he became an aggravated stalker unlawful! As such, he has surrendered all claim to any right to be where he is, or to continue to do anything he is doing. Both NW and the law strip him of any protections he might believe he has, and strip him of any mission he might believe he might be lawfully engaged in.

        Thus, by the time any confrontation occurs, GZ is a criminal with criminal intentions and Trayvon is his victim.

        Thus, as I see it, the OS article seems to be saying that, a man outside a bank, wearing a mask and carrying a firearm, is legally within his rights and may not be questioned as to his intent, even if he probably intends to merely enter the bank to ask a teller for directions, but refuses to explain himself when questioned. Obviously any LEO will tell you that is absurd! GZ’s legal situation is much, much worse! So much worse in fact, there is no issue regarding who threw the first punch, because GZ is the criminal already.

        • onlyiamunitron says:

          And thus comes into consideration the concept of perspective, and apparently we have a difference of it over what the article was supposed to be.

          When I read the article I saw it not as being about the case but as being about, as she puts it, “…The gap between what we all thought we knew then and what we know now …

          It wasn’t intended as an exhaustive re-cap of everything about the case (and, as one would expect from a professional journalist, there’s no pronouncement in there of what the verdict “should” be), it was a look back at the evolution of attitudes and viewpoints about the case.


      • gblock says:

        Mrs. Kassab mentions the unimportant fact that GZ is half-hispanic, but does not mention at all the important facts that, as NW participant, he should not have attempted to confront Trayvon, and definitely should not have been following him with a gun (which is where her important omission lies when it comes to the gun, btw unitron). Even if someone is trying to give GZ the benefit of the doubt, this is an important issue.

        Also, she claims that witnesses put Trayvon on top and say that GZ was the one screaming – when really, more witnesses put GZ on top at the moment of the shooting and believe that Trayvon was the one screaming.

        Even though the article was not intended to be comprehensive by any means, it could be a lot more even-handed.

        • onlyiamunitron says:

          The article was not intended to be a re-cap of the case for someone who’s been living cut off from all media for the last couple of years, so you’re criticizing a dual-outboard Cris-Craft for being a poor 4-wheel drive. You’re complaining that last year’s Kentucky Derby winner makes a lousy camel. You’re looking at a hammer and complaining that it makes a very poor screwdriver.

          And as for the gun, after 4 or 5 mentions that Trayon got shot, I’m pretty sure the readers managed to figure out for themselves that Zimmerman had a firearm.


  6. I wonder if fogen has had his “D’oh” moment yet?

  7. @aussie my sincere apologies for misunderstanding your comments,again,my sincere apologies.

  8. @looneydoone,hello my friend,I mostly reading the beautiful factual comments and the friendship here.
    Are you still there?
    My regards to Jun,racer ,malisha,shannonmiami ,xena,colin black,
    Lonnie Starr,kindheart101 Abbyj ,the professor and many others that are contributing to Justice for Trayvon Martin with their comments and ideas 24/7.

    • racerrodig says:

      Missed Ya Joe…..sit down, take a load off and enjoy….

      • Missing you my friend too,We all over there missing you.
        Very comfy and relaxing here 🙂

        • racerrodig says:

          I miss everyone of my friends there as well. Remember “AnotherAndy” he was over for dinner a few times last year and he stayed with us for a week before Christmas….Great Guy !

          I hop on over there once in awhile and read the goings on.

    • looneydoone says:

      I hold my nose and go there (huff-poop) only to cause kerfuffles with the fogenites.

    • @ Joseph,
      Hi my fellow FOT= friend of Trayvon!
      Thank god you made it here in time!
      i heard the boogie man is stalking HP and zapping posters with the cooties!! 😆

      chat at cha latter!

      • Shannon…..You commented earlier on my avatar…with a WTF….

        I live up here in the mountains…9,000 ft…and do the Mountain Man Rendezvous thing…..I wander the forest and make things out of what I find….as with the avatar?….a back scratcher made from a Deer jaw bone..made that one for my grandson… Race wants one…

        I also make pipes out of bone and antler……Bone knife blades……..Antler & Bone powder measures for black powder shooters…

        NONE of my materials are obtained by killing any animals….

        • @pat, I hope you didn’t take offence to my use of WTF. because I absolutely did NOT mean it disrespectfully.

          and just so you know, I vetted you before I really started to communicate with you directly. 🙂
          I advocate for animals as a 12 year member of Peta ( hate animal abuse with a passion) , and happen to be vegan, but I don’t actually feel it’s wrong to eat meat, I just don’t approve of the way it is produced these days, especially in this country.
          I’ve known for a long time you are a GOOD and careful protector of nature in all aspects of your life!
          I can’t express how warm and fuzzy it makes me to know you are in this world! I really wish there were MORE people like you! you should have as many kids as possible!!!

          But, I still wouldn’t want to scratch my back with someone else’s teeth!!!LOLOLO ok!??!!! 😉

  9. @ Nefertari05,my friend glad to see you too,we are on daily contact , JN=Joen Boon:)

  10. @fauxmccoy ,indeed my friend I misunderstood and for that my sincere apologies,missing you over there at huff.

  11. colin black says:

    We Have Gangham Style Gangham is an area in S Koreas capitol known for extragivance
    Think Posh area .
    Now the Harlem Shuffle Dance Crae.

    Would love some enterpriseing writters choregraphers to create.
    The Sanford Shimmie.

  12. onlyiamunitron remind me of criminal prevail and the “civility tour”
    to divide and conquer while criminalizing and demonizing Martin.
    The professor once said more or less “a divided house can’t stand”

    • SearchingMind says:

      I have known Unitron from Susan Simpson’s website. He is NOT a troll. He is IMO:

      a. Non-aligned and
      b. A contrarian (he tries to contradict the orthodoxy by mostly asking questions without stating his personal views).

      Now and then it becomes obvious that he is leaning towards the prosecution theory but still skeptical and uncommitted). At the Jeralyn site, he fight relatively good battles for Trayvon. That’s how I understand him.

    • racerrodig says:

      Yes Joe…I see you have noticed that.

  13. colin black says:

    Unitron Rabbie was a Farm Labourer at times casual labour
    One day whils tilling a feild he disturbed a feild moused nest by accident.
    So being Rabbie he wrote a poem about it.

    That quote is the most miss quoted verse in history almost.
    A lot of people think Shakespear wrote it?
    Hears a link to entire poem if your interested

  14. colin black says:

    At the end of the day re name calling an Im talking about foggen or weezeejunior .
    Not hatefull names an words like N word.
    If we call foggen an alleged child molester thats a fact
    Call him a liar also fact.
    Child stalker an Murder i m o also fact.

    Anyway name calling by stranger behind a key board is not lethal.

    Sticks an stones may break your bones.
    An guns can surely kill you.
    But names will never hurt you.

    • Rachael says:

      Actually, you can only call him an alleged murderer – or you can call him a killer. But you cannot call him a murderer. Yet.

  15. Trained Observer says:

    Anyone know where Norm Wolfinger was stationed in Vietnam? Were he and Pop Z both in QuanLoi? Did their paths cross? Were they pals? Did their ties, if any, continue back home? Were their families neighborly up north, maybe in Pennsylvania?

    If so, this needs to be explored in detail, since it was Wolfinger, as a state attorney, who failed to have Pop Z’s killer son arrested for the point-blank slaying of Trayvon Martin.

    Wolfinger later recused himself for personal reasons via a letter to the Florida governor that — wouldn’t you just know — has been sealed. But Wolfie didn’t make his cover-the-ass move until Ben Crump put the glare of a global spotlight on an unarmed teenager’s fatal shooting — a little something old Norm hadn’t counted on, you know, what with Trayvon being, like, balack and all.

    Since opting not to run for re-election, Wolfinger is no longer in office. But that doesn’t mean he should be able to slither away unscathed.

    Crump has said, I understand, that Wolfinger and Lee, late of the Sanford PD, were in close contact (read: in cahoots) the night of the killing when it was decided to let Fogen go.

    Wolfinger has said that’s a blatant lie. Is it?

    When it comes to digging up and exposing truth, my bet is on Ben Crump. I’d also like to see Wolfinger come clean with the public — who he was supposed to be representing — on the exact nature of his personal conflict with what turned out to be a chargable murder case. He can start with releasing that letter to the guv.

    I’d also like to see Crump and Bruce Blackwell go after Wolfinger on whatever they can, starting with the lie accusation.

    • From what I’ve read they were stationed together….also wolfinger named his son Robert…..and made robert z. sr the kids godfather.

    • onlyiamunitron says:

      Earlier in the morning of the same day Crump pops up with his tape of the young lady, Wolfinger announced that he’d be taking the case to the next convening grand jury.

      (Five days before that he’d called in the state’s investigative arm, the FDLE.)

      It’s often said that a District Attorney can get a grand jury to indict a ham sandwich, but I’ve never heard of one sending a case to a grand jury to make it evaporate. Grand juries have too much power and too much autonomy for that to be a sure bet.

      Two days later the governor bigfoots the whole thing.

      If Wolfinger was really planning to ask to have the case taken away from him, do you really think he’d have announced that he was taking it to the grand jury?

      And you notice that once the governor got it turned over to Corey that the idea of letting the grand jury get its hands on the case (and start asking who knows what inconvenient questions) goes out the window and is never heard from again.


      • leander22 says:

        As so often, unitron, it depends on perspective. If you take care that the investigation is badly done or bungled, the grand jury may well be the best one can do, to make a case go away? No?

        After the firestorm that erupted once Martin’s murder became national news, Wolfinger recused himself and Florida Governor Rick Scott appointed another prosecutor, Angela Corey, to decide if Zimmerman should be charged. That there is even a grand jury, versus a direct filing of a charge from the prosecutor, is telling.

        Do you comment from the pro-GZ perspective on Jeralyn Merritt, by the way? I would appreciate your basic perspective on matters and what exactly interests you in the case.

        • onlyiamunitron says:

          Over at TalkLeft, and the separate forum they have for the Zimmmerman case, they probably think I’m on Crump’s payroll.

          As for the article you linked, they seem to have ignored or been unaware of the provision in Florida law that prevented immediate charges against Zimmmerman because they couldn’t immediately dis-prove his self-defense contention.

          And I’m convinced that the sequence of events was that the governor told Wolfinger that he’d be recusing himself, not the other way around.


      • leander22 says:

        This was meant to be a quote:

        the firestorm that erupted once Martin’s murder became national news, Wolfinger recused himself and Florida Governor Rick Scott appointed another prosecutor, Angela Corey, to decide if Zimmerman should be charged. That there is even a grand jury, versus a direct filing of a charge from the prosecutor, is telling

        Seems something wasn’t quite well done with the html tags.

      • leander22 says:

        Maybe unitron, I don’t occasionally don’t understand your positions or questions like the one below, maybe you explain:

        First the comment you respond to:

        I’d be interested in hearing a lawyer/judge’s (#2)
        by leftwig on Fri Feb 22, 2013 at 02:54:20 PM EST
        opinion of Nelson’s ruling that Crump was a part of opposing counsel. Is that ruling sound? Does that mean that any information Crump has obtained (inculpatory and exculpatory) must be turned over to the defense else he puts the case in jeopardy and risks being brought up on charges?

        Yeah, I’m wondering…(#3)
        by unitron on Fri Feb 22, 2013 at 03:10:44 PM EST
        …about that whole opposing counsel thing.

        (and how it relates to the whole “private prosecutor” thing)

        There was not yet a criminal case when Crump interviewed the young lady, so who was he opposing?

        Can just anybody insert themselves into the prosecution team?

        Could a future trial of someone else be delayed indefinitely while the state fights off a lawsuit by someone who wants to join the prosecution but the prosecution doesn’t want them?

        Concerning the first, can anybody join an action as joint plaintiff in a murder trial?

        Concerning your reply: I don’t understand your suggestion of Crump opposing nobody when he interviewed DeeDee. Obviously as counsel of the parents he opposed “non-action” and acted accordingly.

        See my more general response to Debra ( I guess) from Hell:

        So how (#10)
        by DebFrmHell on Sun Feb 24, 2013 at 11:51:47 AM EST
        can Crump be considered “opposing counsel” if there is no lawsuit filed on behalf of the Fulton-Martins against Zimmerman? They now say they intend to. Wouldn’t that then make him simply an “potential opposing counsel?”

        Anyway, that is all involving a civil case. The charges against Zimmerman are criminal.

        And the interview that he did with W8 in the presence of the media/ABC’s Matt Gutman? That was prior to any charges being filed so how is that now considered to be work product? Is that why Crump originally chanted that they wanted or needed an arrest? Seems to me what he should have been saying is that they need a conviction in order to file suit.

        Freely admit, I am confused as to her ruling.

        From my uninformed perspective Crump as the counsel of the parents is indeed something like the “opposing counsel”, not least since obviously O’Mara would love to turn back time to the state of affairs before Corey’s affidavit. No?

        Whoever from Hell (#11)
        by LeaNder on Sun Feb 24, 2013 at 12:12:24 PM EST
        Isn’t the victim’s family in US law always considered however vaguely defined as part of the prosecution in a murder case? If not, why are they allowed to witness the execution of the convict on the front row before the glass separating them from the convict during the execution?

        I am not suggesting, by the way, that either Crump or Trayvon’s family demand that. All they demand is that this case is put on trial.

        • onlyiamunitron says:

          One can only be opposing counsel in relation to another counsel (lawyer, attorney) who is representing the other side of an actual case.

          For instance, as far as BDLR is concerned, O’Mara is opposing counsel. As far as O’Mara is concerned, BDLR is opposing counsel.

          Being a lawyer and being opposed to some thing does not make one an opposing counsel.

          One has to be opposed by another counsel.

          It’s like a battery. You can’t have just a positive terminal, or just a negative terminal.

          There has to be a negative terminal in relation to which the positive terminal is positive, just as there has to be a positive terminal in relation to which the negative terminal is negative.


      • cielo62 says:

        I suspect many grand juries rubber stamp whatever is brought before them. Certainly true in Houston. It’s probably true in other cities. There was never any danger to Wolfie.

        Sent from my iPod

    • I have had those same questions and have posted about this topic of Wolfinger’s and RZSr’s connection. I would really love to see this investigated.

      Also, how can a letter to recuse be sealed in the Sunshine State with its Sunshine Laws? Why hasn’t the media not taken this issue to court???????

    • looneydoone says:

      Wolfinger is said to have been injured in a firefight at Quon Loi 12 May 1969…the same month he graduated from Fl So. College. Quan Loi was the largest battle during Viet Nam, lots of confusion made in identifying & reporting of wounded.

      • racerrodig says:

        I picture his Viet Nam record like this for some reason.

      • looneydoone says:

        I was plunking around one day
        searched….Norman Robert Wolfinger + DOD
        the results that came up included one for First Amendment Foundation….”Lt Col, USArmy retired. NRW retired from the Defense Intel Agency, US Dept of Defense. Lives in …”
        with 2 links that lead directly to his State Atty’s office in the 18th district.

        Lt Colonel ???

        • onlyiamunitron says:

          “Lt Colonel ???”

          If he went into the reserves when he left active duty, then he could have advanced to that rank before reaching the age of retirement.

          That’s how my father did it, except in the Army Air Corps/USAF


    • Nefertari05 says:

      Here’s the .pdf of the Wolfinger letter. It doesn’t say much that was not already public knowledge. It is dated the same day Chief Lee stepped down. IMHO – It was considered, discussed and planned.

      Key portions of evidence were sent to be tested on 3/20, after having sat where they were for almost a month. They weren’t waiting to be tested, they were just then being “sent” to be tested. I don’t know why all the evidence wouldn’t have been sent immediately. Bullets, gun, holster, magazine, swabs for fogen and Trayon’s nail clipping and a DNA profile card were sent on 3/1(second dump, pg 185 & 196), with a request for DNA testing on the gun and holster. So trying to get DNA from who was handling the gun went out pretty quick. 8 elements and the report was generated 7 days later. I suspect they were loking for Trayvon’s DNA on the gun (from believing fogen) and they could call it case closed.

      AFTER, the results came back on 3/8 (with no Trayvon DNA anywhere near the gun), another twelve days went by before the clothing (of both), debris (from both’s clothing) and Trayvon’s cell were sent on 3/20 (2nd dump, pg 198& 215), requesting GSR and trace. Chief Lee stepped down and Wolfinger’s letter were both 3/22. 14 elements, some with multiple testing areas, and the tests were complete, reports generated within 7 days (reports signed 3/21- 3/27, pgs between 198 and 215).Why wait almost a month to send the bulk of the forensic evidence and you have a grand jury scheduled 4/10?

      I just think once the decision had been made to step down, some housecleaning was done, in the final two days to prevent questions as to why it hadn’t already been done, from the new prosecutor. The grand jury was scheduled. Surely the new prosecutor would want to know why the evidence hadn’t even been processed. I really wonder how long it would have taken them to send in that evidence, if not for the national spotlight that was shining on this case.

      Anyway, here’s the .pdf of the letter:

      Click to access 3.22.2012WolfingerLetter.pdf

      • onlyiamunitron says:

        Just out of curiousity, in which branch did you serve during which years?


        • racerrodig says:

          Tell me in my post where I said I did.

          Just out of curiosity have you ever said anything that was not condescending and obnoxious ?

          You’ll never get it……Never !

          • onlyiamunitron says:

            I just assumed that since you were lampooning Wolfinger’s service in combat that you’d at least exposed yourself to the dangers of military training if not actual combat yourself.


          • racerrodig says:

            “I just assumed….” then an insulting condescending finish.

            How about “Grow up”

            You continue to “claim” you discuss the case….You’re Lying you just take apart everyone’s comments….in the real world we have names for people like that.

          • cielo62 says:

            You know what happens when you “ass ume”.

            Sent from my iPod

          • racerrodig says:

            He couldn’t even make a respectable comment on the Memorial Blog. All he could muster was this is the 20th of the WTC bombing.

  16. Trained Observer says:

    O’Mara’s ambitions outflanked his skills. West, supposedly brought on because of his murder case background, also looks out of place.

  17. colin black says:

    tantrum and his in court actions are no different

    onlyiamunitron says:

    February 24, 2013 at 4:03 am

    Do you honestly believe that O’Mara took on this case expecting to turn a profit on it, much less that he still believes there’s a chance of doing so?



    Of course he toook on this case for profit.
    No he didnt expect to make any money defending foggen
    I I R C He came on board claiming a charitable service Pro Bono.

    Speculate to Acumulate.
    The possibilitys of sending his name an career into the stratsphere a la J Baez was his end goal.
    All sorts of thought went a tummbling through his mind.

    Fame leads to spots on tv as an expert talking head magazine deals with book publishers ect.
    Yes he took this case on for money
    As the Famous Scots Poet Rabbie Burns wrote

    The best-laid schemes o’ mice an’ men
    Gang aft agley,


    The best laid schemes o mice an men go often astray.

    • onlyiamunitron says:

      All this time I’d been thinking that it was aft gang agley.

      I must have seen or heard it mis-quoted somewhere several decades ago.

      I’ve no doubt he considered it a possibility that he might benefit down the road from being involved in a high-profile case now, but it’s not like he saw himself tapping into that vast Zimmerman family fortune on it.


    • Aye that mate……Hamsters & Humans……….

    • racerrodig says:

      Thank You…..!

  18. Professor, I thank you for your post. I will be careful not to become too critical of others’ posts. I can be a bit hyper sensitive at times. Being called a “troll” however does hurt. To me, there is nothing wrong with our being challenged to think as a prosecutor and to respond as such without resorting to attempts at stifling the poster’s points by accusing said poster of trolling. Thank you again for this article.

    • SearchingMind says:

      Yeah, I saw that and was amazed. If I were called what you were called, it most definitely will hurt. I hope the person who did that will one day apologize.

  19. seallison says:

    Sunday morning and this is the first time I have had a chance to drop for a week.

    Having read the above comments and topic, I do not think I will go back to read the rest of the week.

    Everyone here knows how I feel about stereotyping, prejudice, self-deprecating humour, etc.. Having said that, I am happy you all have waded your way through it all.

    • cielo62 says:

      Seallison- just today I was wondering where you had gone off to. Glad you’re back.

      Sent from my iPod

      • seallison says:

        Oh Cielo – thank you. It feels good to be missed. I have two 14- year old Himalayans (brothers) and one is experiencing medical issues requiring trips to the vet, surgery, love, and care. We are working our way back to normalcy, thank goodness. Missed you too.

        • blushedbrown says:


          Welcome back, you have been missed.

        • cielo62 says:

          Seallison- I feel for you, taking care if sick babies! Baby food (the meat ones) are nearly irresistible to cats. If they are lacking an appetite, get some of that. I have an older cat with Chronic Renal Failure. I administer subcutaneous fluids 3 times a week. She’s too thin and I coax her with baby food.

          Sent from my iPod

    • jm says:

      Love your videos LLMPapa. (I hope no one thinks they are too disrespectful to GZ.) They are wonderful and you have a great sense of humor and talent to cut to the chase pointing out GZ appears to be a lying dumbazz.

    • Yup…….Career options?……….New York used bridge salesman…

      His BS has gone beyond the need of hip boots or waders….To the point that Scuba gear is needed now.

      “You can’t make this shit up”

      I posted a similar comment last night…..

      • Jun says:

        He’s not a good Brooklyn Bridge salesman

        I mean if he was trying to make a 17 year old teenage kid with Skittles, Ice Tea, $40, a heart stickered cellphone, and no history of any combat experience, deadly, he could have come up with something better than skipping LOL

        • “Skipping” is one of the most obvious ways to spot a thug / gangbanger……….it’s part of their style

          • onlyiamunitron says:

            ““Skipping” is one of the most obvious ways to spot a thug / gangbanger……….it’s part of their style”

            Yeah, it’s halfway between the Harlem Shake and the Harlem Shuffle.

            : – )


          • Lonnie Starr says:

            IIRC didn’t Al Capone drive Eliot Ness nuts by skipping to work every day? …And remember how Marlon Brando evoked the dangerous Godfather by skipping? Then came DeNiro and finally Al Pacino did Scarface, remember how he skipped around Miami? There’s a very long history of how some seriously dangerous people skipped around, all through the middle ages. That remark was sheer genius I tell ya!

          • Let us not forget that Marlon Brando “SKIP” started his motorcycle in “The Wild One”

            BTW……his bike WASN’T a Harley……… was a Triumph

          • racerrodig says:

            Fonzie rode a 750 Triumph…..and that’s good enough for me.

          • racerrodig says:

            No, no, no…..Capone skipped work every other day…..drove the Feds crazy……..Not so genius by Fogen after all !!!

          • fauxmccoy says:

            vlad the impaler — notorious skipper
            attila the hun — skipper extraordinaire
            genghis khan — master of skippery
            idi amin – routinely sang ‘skippity doo dah’ on his daily walk, er skip to work.

            heck, even the skipper on gilligan’s island probably wrecked that boat on purpose.

          • racerrodig says:

            That’s not all………….

            Hitler not only did this……………..

            He was a notorious skipper

          • Lonnie Starr says:

            We need to get this valuable information to MOM fast! The results of the trial could pivot on this information. 😀

          • racerrodig says:

            I saw trons pathetic response to your comment and let me say here’s something that has never been uttered on this planet.

            Wow tron…’re really funny….

            racerrodig I got your back MMP

    • Jun says:

      I bet you Mark Nejame is smoking a big fat cigar filled with marijuana, cracking up laughing that he recommended Omara as the Fogenhats lawyer

      • onlyiamunitron says:

        “I bet you Mark Nejame is smoking a big fat cigar filled with marijuana, cracking up laughing that he recommended Omara as the Fogenhats lawyer”

        If true, for which one was he trying to do a bad turn?


        or O’Mara?

        Or was he just contemplating overall entertainment value?


    • Malisha says:

      Right, right, LLMPapa. A normal person COULDN’T make that shit up, but…

      It can be did! 😆 😆 😆

    • LLMpapa, LMAO you kill me!
      i wish i could see your face as your trying not fall out laughing on some of these!!

  20. Malisha says:

    I’m imagining a very cool, but utterly impossible [under our system of laws] scene. I’m imagining it because it is delicious. It’s me cross-examining Jeralyn Merritt who has been put up by the defense at trial as an expert witness to the question: “Is it not true that George Zimmerman should never have been charged with a crime for having killed Trayvon Martin?” On direct exam by the defense she answered that question: “Yes, it is true that George Zimmerman should never have been charged with a crime for having killed Trayvon Martin because he killed in self-defense.”

    I start:

    Q: Ms. Merritt, you have based your opinion on the fact that you believe the defendant’s claim that he was savagely attacked by Trayvon Martin without provocation, do you not?

    A: Yes. As I said, since he was having his head slammed against the concrete and he was about to lose consciousness and believed himself to be about to die, he had no choice but to defend himself by killing his assailant.

    Q: And would your opinion still be the same had Trayvon Martin not viciously attacked him and slammed his head repeatedly upon the ground that night?

    A: It would be the same if Trayvon Martin had done something else just as murderous and dangerous.

    Q: But if Trayvon Martin had done something LESS murderous and dangerous?

    A: But there is no evidence that Trayvon Martin DID anything less murderous and dangerous.

    Q: Indulge me. What IF Trayvon Martin had done something only HALF as dangerous and murderous, would it still have been self-defense on the defendant’s part?

    A: I can’t answer that question.

    Q: So you basically accept the idea that Trayvon Martin did something that night that was very dangerous and in fact very murderous.

    A: Yes.

    Q: What do you think his motive was?

    JM’s Attorney: OBJECTION, calls for a conclusion.

    Malisha: Your Honor, may I respond?

    JN: Go ahead.

    Malisha: The witness is here because she is a well-known expert in criminal defense work for defendants accused of major felonies and in fact of capital crimes. She has more knowledge of the matter than almost any other criminal defense lawyer int he country except perhaps the Honorable Alan Dershowitz from Harvard. I know of no other expert who could be more highly qualified to answer this hypothetical question, after all the hypotheticals she answered on direct examination by counsel.

    JN: Objection overruled. Witness may answer.

    A: Would you repeat the question?

    Q: What do you think Trayvon Martin’s motive was, in attacking a stranger with intent to kill him?

    A: Well, he probably thought since he wasn’t from that area, nobody would figure out that he was the murderer so he could get away with it.

    Q: But that tells us that he thought he could get away with it; it doesn’t tell us his motive. Was his motive to rob this man who showed up and got out of his car?

    A: Probably not, because he didn’t first ask for money.

    Q: Was his motive to kill the defendant because he felt threatened by him?

    A: Oh no, he didn’t feel threatened by the defendant; in fact, he circled his car, menacing the DEFENDANT, before attacking him.

    Q: So what WAS his motive, was he just a bad person?

    A: Uh…

    Q: Perhaps he was just a bad person?

    A: It… well, there ARE bad people…

    Q: Have you ever represented them?

    A: Of course!

    Q: Can you come up with any alternative motivation on the part of Trayvon Martin for what you believe he did to the defendant that night, once you rule out fear?

    A: Uh… no, I guess it would have to be that he was a bad person, yeah.

    Q: How did the defendant know that in advance?

    • Jun says:

      LMAO so basically Jeralyn’s testimony is based on all hearsay?

      • Malisha says:

        All based on hearsay by a person who had an interest in lying, too. Not hearsay by a witness who had “no dog in the race.”

    • Rachael says:

      Q: How did the defendant know that in advance?

      A: Because he was leisurely skipping in the rain damnit! Don’t you know anything about bad people?

    • leander22 says:

      As always, perfect, Malisha. As someone that loves writing, I consider dialog the highest art, maybe even beyond poetry, with the exception of a few masters, in pretty much the same way I perfer “dramatic writers” to the masters of detailed description of interior or exterior settings beyond the necessary extend to create a space the actors occupy.

      What I pondered about in this thread is what exactly feels condescending to some here, but I hesitate to go back to understand what it could be.

      Condescension just as arrogance is something that feels very subjective and evasive to me and not so easy to grasp. I can see Fogen’s condescension towards Trayvon easily, but it seems I have more problems to grasp why e.g. Jeralyn Merrit “the democrat” unreflectively mirrors it. Does she harbor a condescension towards whatever type of easily defined persona non grata by the so-called upright and righteous or even religious, as the CTH claim to be; citizen that trust in their right to condemn to death even their right to execute while superficially rely on society’s power and legal structures? In our case the equally evasive or misused “fear for life” we are dealing with.

  21. colin black says:

    Xena says:

    February 24, 2013 at 2:32 am

    All that doing the shimmy and raising of his jacket exposing his gun, but his cell phone stayed in his jacket pocket. GZ insults the intelligence of logical people.


    foggen insults peoples intelligence period.
    Logical illogical intelegent stupid old young newborns …
    Nothing he say about events unfolding follows rhyme or reason.
    Either he is the most inconsistant self condradictary criminal in history.

    Remember its a shooting death of a fellow human being he is trying to justify.
    Not borrowing or stealing a neighbours garden hose.
    Either he was personaly told/given the nod that this was all a storm in a T Cup an wouldnt even cause a ripple media wise an criminal proceadure wise.

    We heard Serino on tape tell him he had a good kill.
    So can only imagine what he was told on the QT.

    And the uptshot was he thought he could blurt out any old nonsence .
    Makeing no sense as this was just going through the motions an closeing down the file on this non event.

    Or he is in fact …………………………Fill in the blank

  22. kimmi says:

    Can someone be so kind to answer the following? TIA.

    How does one access the gray box indent for quotes?
    Also, from what I can tell, WordPress has no option to edit a post, is that correct? Thanks again. : )

    • Malisha says:

      Kimmi, the “blockquote” function makes the little paragraphs get set off as you would like. It’s impossible for me to actually SHOW YOU the code because if I type the code, then the wordpress program does not print it because it recognizes the typed-out word as a code. But here’s how you do it.

      At the beginning of the paragraph you want to set off, you type the word “blockquote” without the quotation marks, and in place of the quotation marks, you put the symbol after the e.

      When you are done with the part you want to be in that paragraph, you type the exact same thing with the instead of the quotation marks, BUT, you add one more keystroke, being the slash mark / right after the first < and between that < and the b.

      So you're typing: symbol found over the comma; word blockquote; symbol found over the period; — before your quote.

      And you're typing: symbol found over the comma; slash mark found under the question-mark on the keyboard; word blockquote; symbol found over the period; — after your quote.

      Good luck! 😀

  23. bettykath says:

    I watched the hearing and have a question. In denying the motion to depose Mr. Crump, the judge cited the law specifying that opposing counsel were not to be deposed except ,,, [conditions not met by defense counsel.] MOM indicated that Crump is not the opposing attorney. Crump does have a role as attorney to Trayvon’s family, but is that considered opposing attorney?

    • Jun says:

      I would say he is

      I mean, if that were the case, in what Omara is considering doing, then technically, Crump could also depose Omara

      Besides, Omara fails the relevancy test, a test they could not even answer

      • Did part of omara’s $40K go on crayons to write these motions?

        MOM KNOWS fogens screwed……I think by now fogen himself knows he’s screwed….It’s all become so bizarre….the begging sites……the z family in the media……The perjury…… And as some have suggested possible accomplices.

        Pretty much, if any of us told this story to someone they’d not believe it……..

      • Jun says:

        It is what happens when Omara become a whore

        Omara should learn that just about all money has strings attached to it

        Now he has to dance to what the people giving him money ask him to dance to

        If you read his motions, it sounds like a kid throwing a tantrum and his in court actions are no different

        • onlyiamunitron says:

          Do you honestly believe that O’Mara took on this case expecting to turn a profit on it, much less that he still believes there’s a chance of doing so?


        • Xena says:


          Now he has to dance to what the people giving him money ask him to dance to

          That’s what he’s been doing. It’s wasted time, resulted in nothing beneficial for GZ, and has caused O’Mara and West to appear inefficient as lawyers.

          Something very revealing — if there was evidence to acquit GZ, the Feign Team would not be taking other roads trying to put other people on trial.

          • onlyiamunitron says:

            “Something very revealing — if there was evidence to acquit GZ, the Feign Team would not be taking other roads trying to put other people on trial.”

            Are you not familiar with the phrase “Don’t put all your eggs in one basket”?

            It’s the job of the defense to do everything they legally can to prevent a conviction and to explore all avenues regarding how to do that, instead of deciding in advance on a single approach and clinging to that no matter what.


          • Xena says:

            Defense lawyers who seek to place others on trial are not, IMO, zealously representing/defending their client. GZ is the person charged with 2nd degree murder. His claim is self-defense. That is what the Feign Team should be concentrating on proving rather than conducting smear campaigns against witnesses, the victim, and officers of the court.

          • onlyiamunitron says:

            Defense lawyers defend their clients by doing, within the law, whatever it takes to prevent a conviction as they go up against a prosecution, armed with the almost limitless resources of the state, that is going to do everything, within the law (and as we’ve seen, sometimes going beyond that), to get a conviction.

            Imagine for a moment that you’ve been arrested and charged with a murder you did not commit and the very ambitious district attorney sees you as a perfect stepping stone to higher elected office.

            Do you want a lawyer who plays nice, or one that’ll pull out all the stops to keep you from going to prison, or worse?

            As I’ve mentioned before, going up against the state in a situation like that isn’t David versus Goliath, it’s David versus a Goliath who can send the entire 82nd Airborne at you after softening you up with a barrage of Hellfire Missiles.

            The better Zimmerman’s defense, the harder for anyone to find fault with his conviction if that’s the outcome.


          • Lonnie Starr says:

            …And most especially not by wasting their time, drafting narratives, statements and throwing barbs that cannot be raised or otherwise presented in court. There is not one hot sentence in their smear campaigns that they will be able to submit to either the judge or the jury in this case. Thus, they are wasting their valuable time, creating material that can only be displayed for the public. While, what they need is material that they can submit in court.

            Every second they devote to one task, takes time and resources away from the other tasks that need to be performed.

          • Xena says:

            @Lonnie Starr

            Thus, they are wasting their valuable time, creating material that can only be displayed for the public. While, what they need is material that they can submit in court.

            Because they have no evidence that GZ killed Trayvon in self-defense. All they can do is perform a sideshow.

          • Lonnie Starr says:

            GZ says he was watching Trayvon while he stood by the mailboxes. Trayvon says that while he was standing by the mailboxes, he saw this strange, angry/crazy man watching him. Okay, hard to make a mistake about being watched, when you’re the only one out there on that dark rainy night. So, the testimony coincides that they both saw one another watching each other while Trayvon was at the mailboxes.

            Now, let’s see what this set of facts means:

            Trayvon was doing nothing wrong, either by sheltering from the rain at the mailboxes or walking slowly along.

            GZ, however, while not having witnessed any criminal activity, tells a story have having followed this youth for several minutes and over several dozens of yards, while seated in his motor vehicle.

            No problem!

            That is, until Trayvon notices that he’s being followed and cannot determine a reason therefore!

            If someone is following Trayvon, for any lawful purpose, Trayvon has a right to know what they are doing. He is not required to have to attempt to guess. He may guess, because he has a right to ensure his own safety, thus he cannot be precluded from guessing that people behaving strangely, who he cannot identify as friend, he has a right to assume they are foe, and take evasive action.

            GZ, on the other hand, has no insignia, no decals, no labels, no uniform or other means of broadcasting or publishing his mission and/or his intentions. Even though he knows that what he is doing is giving Trayvon cause to fear for his safety. GZ merely accepts that he is scaring the daylights out of a teen he’s seen walking, and GZ seeks to maintain the atmosphere of hostilities his own angry countenance incites, as evidenced by his hostile language communications to the police. He is describing Trayvon, a stranger, in unflattering terms, using pejoratives and profanities he uses language meant and designed to give and convey offense while describing a situation that appears to be grossly dangerous.

            GZ has an opportunity to identify himself and he refuses to avail himself of it, thus he willfully and with malice aforethought maintains a fear inducing hostility towards Trayvon, such that Trayvon is inspired to flee with great effort, something he would not have otherwise done but for GZ’s act of denying him peace.

            That is what makes what GZ is doing a criminal act! Zimmerman is a criminal in the eyes of the law, even before he steps out of his truck. Worse, as a criminal, he is an armed and extremely dangerous criminal to boot!

            How could an armed and dangerous person, engaging and continuing to engage in criminal activity, claim to be defending himself, while he is hunting for the purpose of waging an attack or seeking to provoke one against himself, so that he can claim self defense?

            The law is aware of such threadbare gambits and will not tolerate such false designs, thus laws have been codified to prevent these kinds of schemes from succeeding. Thus, Zimmerman is Toast!
            |||=> Tick Tock! <-|||

          • racerrodig says:

            That’s one hell of an opening statement Counselor !! I must say.

            It comes down to “….shit, he’s running….”

            Why would he say the word “shit” Like when……….

            A tool I’m using breaks and I smash my knuckles “…shit, that hurt” My truck was rear ended in July “..shit….(sons name) you OK ?”
            I run over something with the riding mower “shit…. what was that?”:
            “Oh…shit, the steaks are burning”
            That 6 foot snake slithered from under the pool cover “shit ! run! ”
            “Ahhhhh. shit….I red lighted !”

            I could cite a lot more as we all could. The point is the common theme is something bad or at least not the best just happened.

            I can buy a new tool
            I got paid for the truck’s damage
            It was really nothing
            I can flip the steaks or put new ones on
            I didn’t get bit
            I can go racing next week.

            But Fogen’s exclamation, well, that one has a bad connotation to Fogen and Fogen alone. It’s gonna be a bad thing for ME if he gets away, because that would mean “…these assholes..” DO get away but that stops now.

            Then he said “…he ran..” in a frustrated voice as if again…it’s a real bad thing. Remember he described Trayvon as “Black Dynamite.”

            Here’s frustration to me….

            “Where the hell IS that tool”
            “Got rear ended….again……where do they learn to drive”
            “Please (son’s name) pick up your stuff before I cut the grass”
            “I burned them…again” (not really a true event !)
            “These snakes…..grrrrr not again”
            “It’s rained every weekend for 2 months (it actually happened)

            Fogens frustration is “…he ran….now I have to catch him….a bad thing that I’m inconvenienced and bad for him if I catch him”

            If I determine someone is even remotely dangerous, and he runs, you’ll hear this..

            “…..shit, thank God he ran away…….everybody just stay cool…………..where’s the remote ???”

          • Xena says:

            @Lonnie Starr

            How could an armed and dangerous person, engaging and continuing to engage in criminal activity, claim to be defending himself, while he is hunting for the purpose of waging an attack or seeking to provoke one against himself, so that he can claim self defense?

            I’m simply quoting a small portion, but your entire comment is excellent. Provoking. That word speaks volumes. In one of the clubhouse videos, GZ is driving so close behind Trayvon that it looks like an intent to provoke.

            GZ sure had his tactical flashlight handy too! He jumped out of his truck to follow Trayvon with that flashlight as if it was already in his hand. Was he using it in a threatening manner as Trayvon looked at him? Was he shining it through his windshield or driver’s side window directly at Trayvon?

            Something to think about.

      • Jun says:

        Well obviously he wanted to turn a profit, otherwise he would not take money for himself, as he alleges he took 40 Grand, but who knows if that is true or not

        And, he wants to turn a profit because he keeps molesting the media with rampant begging and slandering if the victim to make money

        And if he did not need or want the money, he would act normal, instead of what appears to be pandering to the demands of Fogenhats’ gang members

      • Jun says:

        There’s a vast difference though

        A victim needs our assistance

        The victim can not stand up for themselves

        To attack a victim even further after death is despicable

        A defense lawyer is to watch out for the defendant’s rights and simply make sure the defendant is not the guy and to play fair

        It does not mean to get a person off even if they were the person who committed the heinous crime

        The state’s job is much harder because they have to look out for the victim after a criminal commits a crime like murder and then uses various methods to cover their tracks and making it difficult to catch them

        If you look at this case, the only person whose rights have been infringed is the victim, Trayvon Martin

        Trayvon’s stalker and the person who murdered Trayvon, not only attacks him further after death, he also gets to go through his personal life such as his school records, etc, when it truly has no relevance to the issue

        If anything, this case, shows the truly evil of society, such as the defendant, his family members, his gang/followers, and his sleazy lawyer who will hustle his own mother for $5

        Watching Corey and Bernie in court and press, they come off as the good guys

        • Jun said,

          “A defense lawyer is to watch out for the defendant’s rights and simply make sure the defendant is not the guy and to play fair

          It does not mean to get a person off even if they were the person who committed the heinous crime.”

          A criminal defense lawyer’s responsibility is to protect the defendant’s constitutional rights and win the case, if at all possible, while operating within the rules. If a win is not possible, then his responsibility is to minimize the consequences of a conviction on the defendant’s life as much as possible.

          Those goals often conflict as we are witnessing in the GZ case where the probability of an acquittal is slight, yet the defendant is determined to go for it.

          The lawyer’s path of least resistance is to yield to the defendant’s will and move on to the next case after the loss.

          The easy way out is not so easy in a death penalty case.

      • Jun says:

        I dont think the Fogenhats team is placing their eggs all in one basket

        They are throwing them at people, breaking all of them

      • Rachael says:


    • Xena says:

      In Non-Party Benjamin L. Crump Esq.s’ Response in Opposition to Defendant’s Motion to Compel, Attorney Blackwell argued the following on page 3, footnote 4,

      “In light of this extensive overlap, Defendant’s suggestion that Attorney Crump somehow fails to meet the “standard” of being “‘opposing counsel,”‘ (Motion at 3) – a putative standard that, in any event, is not discussed or otherwise addressed in Defendant’s Motion – misses its mark. Attorney Crump has been retained by the victim’s parents to assert civil claims against Defendant that are comprised of substantially the same – if not identical – elements as those comprising the criminal charges in this proceeding. Together with the identical issues raised byDefendant’s claim of self-defense and Florida’s Stand Your Ground Law, as well as the fact that Attomey Crump will be literally sitting across the table from Defendant’s counsel when he defends their upcoming depositions in this proceeding, the status of Attorney Crump as “opposing counsel” and the directly adverse interests of his clients to those of Defendant should be beyond peradventure.”

      The only thing that Attorney Blackwell’s motion missed is the fact that the defense previously argued that when Attorney Crump interviewed Witness 8, he acted as “Special State’s Attorney” and acts as the State’s “surrogate.” Based on their own previous argument, the defense cannot now, in good faith, argue that Attorney Crump is not “opposing” counsel.

      • onlyiamunitron says:

        “…the defense previously argued that when Attorney Crump interviewed Witness 8, he acted as “Special State’s Attorney” and acts as the State’s “surrogate.”

        Was the court in agreement with that contention?


        • Xena says:


          Was the court in agreement with that contention?

          The court ruled that Attorney Crump was a “court witness” and limited deposition to his recording of DeeDee. I would not want to interpret that as a finding to support the defense’s description of Attorney Crump. The point is that the defense cannot have it both ways.

          • onlyiamunitron says:

            If the court said that Crump did/was not “…acted as “Special State’s Attorney” and acts as the State’s “surrogate.”, then how can they turn around and allow a claim that he enjoys some sort of immunity as “opposing counsel”?


          • Xena says:


            If the court said that Crump did/was not “…acted as “Special State’s Attorney” and acts as the State’s “surrogate.”, …

            Whoa. The court did not say either. The defense argued that Attorney Crump acted as a Special State’s Attorney and as the State’s surrogate. The State’s Attorney is opposing counsel to the defense. The defense then, in their attempt to depose Crump on matters unrelated to the court’s ruling, argued that Crump is not opposing counsel.

            It’s the defense team that is inconsistent on this issue. The woman in the black robe has now spoken. The defense cannot depose Crump.

          • onlyiamunitron says:

            If Crump does not enjoy the immunity conferred by being opposing counsel, then why can he not be deposed?


          • Xena says:

            If Crump does not enjoy the immunity conferred by being opposing counsel, then why can he not be deposed?

            My initial comment on this issue was in response to Bettykath’s question. I quoted from Blackwell’s motion and made comment about the defense teams inconsistent posturing of Attorney Crump.

            You will need to listen to the last hearing for what Judge Nelson says about “opposing counsel.”

          • Lonnie Starr says:

            Because the Judge has ruled that if the defense can come up with a question or two that needs to be answered, that they are legally entitled to have answered and they can show that Attorney Crump is the only way they can get those answers, then for that purpose she will consider Attorney Crump to be the courts witness, for the limited purpose of obtaining the answers sought and no more.

            So, for all other purposes Attorney Crump is an attorney in opposition by interest to the rights of the accused/suspect/defendant.

          • onlyiamunitron says:

            “So, for all other purposes Attorney Crump is an attorney in opposition by interest to the rights of the accused/suspect/defendant.”

            So he’s opposed to Zimmerman having rights?

            Florida must have a strange legal system indeed.


          • Crump’s legal interest is based on what is in the best interests of his clients, Trayvon’s parents. Their interest is to see the defendant convicted of murdering their son. That interest is contrary to the defendant’s interest, which is to be acquitted.

            When he is convicted, Crump will file a wrongful death action against him and move for summary judgment based on the conviction.

            That is what is meant by having an interest in opposition to someone else. Has nothing to do with a defendant’s legal rights.

            Crump’s efforts to find DD and interview her should be protected from disclosure by the attorney-client work product rule.

          • onlyiamunitron says:

            “Crump’s legal interest is based on what is in the best interests of his clients, Trayvon’s parents. Their interest is to see the defendant convicted of murdering their son. That interest is contrary to the defendant’s interest, which is to be acquitted.

            When he is convicted, Crump will file a wrongful death action against him and move for summary judgment based on the conviction.

            That is what is meant by having an interest in opposition to someone else. Has nothing to do with a defendant’s legal rights.

            Crump’s efforts to find DD and interview her are protected from disclosure by the attorney-client work product rule.”

            Does any of that in any way make Crump a representative, agent, or employee of the state?


          • Lonnie Starr says:

            The problem is that you’re thinking of “attorney in opposition” as being an attorney who actually needs something to oppose. When, we know that at law, things that are “in opposition” do not need to actually be “in opposition” but are simply defined to be labeled with that title. That’s one of the problems the lay person, and indeed even practiced attorney’s and legislators have trouble with. The tendency is to reflexively believe that a term is understood, simply because one believes that they understand what the word(s) that make up the term mean.

            Robert Moses used this fault to great effect in getting his TBTA (private police force) created by tricking the state legislature of New York State by using one single word they all thought they understood the meaning of, turns out they didn’t!

          • racerrodig says:

            Did he really say this “So he’s opposed to Zimmerman having rights? because I never got the impression you inferred that at all.

        • Lonnie Starr says:

          Not only did the court agree with that contention, Nelson went one step further and stated that Attorney Crump was an Attorney in opposition by interest, further closing the door and sealing it tight.

      • kimmi says:

        If Crump does not enjoy the immunity conferred by being opposing counsel, then why can he not be deposed?

        Probably because JN (after citing numerous case laws of the reasons for her determination), came to the same conclusions as I, who has zip, zero, zilch knowlege of case law, but IMO:

        1. The defense could not answer the simple question with a valid answer of WHY Crump ‘needed’ to be deposed.

        2. Decided that Blackwell had a valid arguement stating the defense has NO right to intrude on Crump’s “work product”

        3. The relevence of the information gleaned from said deposition and its admissability at trial

        4. As Blackwell stated in conclusion, “For the foregoing reasons, the court should not countenance the efforts of this victim’s admitted killer to prepare his defense on the borrowed wits of his parents’ attorney.”

        Until now, I gave your responses the benefit of the doubt, but with many of the questions you seem to be asking, I’m starting to doubt the claims made by the others making the opposing claims. JMO

        • onlyiamunitron says:

          Thank you for your civil response.

          However, I’m quite sure that I’m not at all sure what you mean by

          “Until now, I gave your responses the benefit of the doubt, but with many of the questions you seem to be asking, I’m starting to doubt the claims made by the others making the opposing claims.”

          Are you saying that my questions have you doubting others with whom I seem not to agree, or that my questions have you doubting those who have spoken in my defense, or, well I’m not sure what 3rd interpretation there might be, but I’m open to the idea that there might be one.


      • SearchingMind says:

        @ unitron

        “If Crump does not enjoy the immunity conferred by being opposing counsel, then why can he not be deposed?”


        a. Mr. Crump is not listed as a witness, while Mr. West failed to establish that the conditions for deposing an unlisted witness are met. Remember the judge REPEATEDLY asking Mr. West: ‘what RELEVANT information do you seek to obtain from Mr. Crump’s deposition?’ and Mr. West answering: “your Honor, that’s the WRONG test!”

        b. Mr. Crump satisfies all the material requirements for determining who is (not) an opposing counsel. By way of analogous- or teleological interpretation (and those are among the five standard methods of legal interpretations within the Common- and Civil Law systems; some authors use other names to describe them in the literature), the rights and privileges accorded to an opposing Counsel apply to Mr. Crump. The fact that Mr. Crump is not the prosecutor in this case is therefore inconsequential;

        c. Mr. West was depressingly incapable of making a coherent case as to why that wall of immunity that protects opposing Counsels should be broken- through in the present case (off topic: the likes of West is among the reason why the Public Defender’s Office has such poor reputation – from the academic/intellectual point of view).

        I will come back with more after revisiting the Court’s Order.

        @ Nefertario

        Good work above. I love your curiosity and research abilities: always on topic, discussing facts and evidence and figuring out the defense, it’s motivations and strategies, etc. That’s what we need here – not wannabe rabbis who only graduated in elementary Catechism for Kids.

      • kimmi says:

        Searchingmind, you answered that so much better than I did!
        Probably one of the reasons why IANAL!

      • kimmi says:

        That would be door number two.

      • Jun says:

        It is fairly simple

        When an officer of the law wants to question someone, they have to have a valid reason

        Omara wanted to depose Crump and he had no valid reason, therefore, he was not allowed

        Not really a difficult equation

        He asked regarding witness 8, and Crump prepared a detailed affidavit on Omara’s queries

      • kimmi says:

        If that is not the case, than I apologize.
        Sometimes it’s hard to understand where others are coming from on the other side of a computer screen. I know sometimes what I write does not come out quite like I think it sounds when I write it.
        Also, I’m still in desperate need of more coffee, so I will just go back into my corner and read for now. 🙂

        • onlyiamunitron says:

          If you read what I write and that causes you to honestly agree with those who criticize me, then that’s your honest opinion, honestly arrived at, and one to which you are entitled.

          Of course it’s one with which I won’t agree. : – )


      • SearchingMind says:

        @ Unitron

        Ha! You caught that joke about our beloved Judaism and Catechism. I know you are a sharp contrarian and will always be.

        Yeah, I was talking about Nefertari05. Isn’t she/he so dedicated?

        • onlyiamunitron says:

          “Isn’t she/he so dedicated?”

          I suspect it won’t be too terribly long before you are most emphatically educated as to which gender applies. : – )


      • SearchingMind says:

        @ Kimmi

        I saw your post after I responded. Had I seen it earlier, there may not have been any need for me to respond because you did hit the proverbial nail right on the head. Frankly I am sometimes amazed at the very high degree to which “non-lawyers” on this blog command the law.

      • Nefertari05 says:


        Thank you. 🙂

      • Malisha says:

        The whole “depose Crump” caper was part of the defense’s strategy of “wild bull of the pampas.” Their position is that it was so grossly unfair to charge Fogen with a crime that anybody who participates in the calumny of so doing is ipso facto suspect of every kind of bad, wrong, racist and anti-American activity, and thus, to be found out, “discovered,” attacked, “exposed,” and most of all, MOST of all, PUT in their PLACE! The defense strategy has been: “You get in here and tell us what you did wrong and why you would participate in such a bad act as to try to punish this wonderful man just for killing a thug!” It would have worked but for the fact that SPD couldn’t hide the case from the rest of the world, this time around.

        I once met a man who responded to his wife’s filing for divorce and custody this way, and his lawyer was totally into it. Their position was that she was so horrible and wrong and mean and bad to want a divorce that anyone, including her lawyer, who would help her try to do that was to be assumed to be a criminal who was being manipulated by her to do wrong. His position on custody (when he couldn’t find a thing wrong with her parenting) was that she wanted custody for all the wrong reasons. Her wrong reasons? “That her position is that I shouldn’t have custody at all!” See, she was supposed to take the position that he SHOULD have custody but she would really LIKE it instead, and then, perhaps their attack on her character, family, mothering, history, education, appearance, and taste in clothes. It reminds me of this attack on Crump, Jackson et al.: “They’re supporting the wrongful prosecution so they are bad unAmerican people and we’re gonna show the world and get them all disbarred and punished and destroyed, so there.

  24. Jun says:

    One question

    Does anybody know where the killer holstered his weapon? Please specify the position as I am doing a little scientific analysis

    • bettykath says:

      based on his hand motions, right hip about halfway between his side and his rear. holster inside his pants.

      • Jun says:

        did the officer specify where his weapon was?

        • onlyiamunitron says:

          From Timothy Smith’s report dated in the wee hours of the next morning after the shooting–

          “Located on the inside of Zimmerman’s waist band, I removed a black Kel Tek 9mm PF9 semi auto handgun and holster.”

          That’s as specific as I’ve seen anywhere, not counting Zimmerman himself in the walk-through video using his right hand to mime reaching for the gun.


  25. Romaine says:

    Question…how do any of you visit the last refuge aka tree house and not find humor in the fact that they know and admit to knowing they are fighting a lost cause. Every now and then I stop by to witness what some of you post about their site…and I get the best laughs from their frustrations. a miserable lot they are, yet you should not allow them to drag you down into that miserable ditch they choose to dwell in.They blow smoke up their own A$$ simply to appease their own beliefs of an injustice to the defendant knowing full well it is BS; but, if they can get it off it is all good. I would say stop blessing them with the fruit of your gifts and allow them to sink their own ship. they are worthy and have the ability of earning that reward all by themselves. Karma, I like to watch Karma in silence, the saying be still and know that I am GOD..sometimes we have to listen and be still. I’m not saying shut down, just don’t feed into their BS and watch them self destruct…IT IS GOLDEN

  26. faux…..Ur on……’cept U gotta listen to Rebel Son……”Redneck piece of white trash” is a good one of theirs 🙂

    • fauxmccoy says:

      i’m all over it like a cheap suit, buddy! like a duck on a june bug!

      • fauxmccoy says:

        no matter what he sings, i am singing marshall tucker in the background ‘can’t you see’. sux to be a musician and know that every song we ever hear has really been done before as there are only 12 notes in a scale, options are limited.

        do you hear MTB there as well now/

  27. My FRIENDS i’m sorry for everything, but PLEASE let us put away this PETTY BULLSHIT!

    I’ve just come back from dinner with a close, LONGTIME TRUSTED friend of a certain distinction, at a place of significance, where a part of society’s *deciders* gather – and can be heard expressing opinions about social issues.
    And there’s no other way to say it;
    The defenses’ mantra that; ” gz was attacked and here are the PICTURES ” has WORKED to persuade these ordinarily reasonable, intelligent people, whom by necessity are totally dependent on solid facts before making many important decisions!!!!!

    The pictures of the blood have convinced them!?
    OMG, i’m disappointed and really nervous, but i won’t accept this.

    • Jun says:

      Just wait till trial when only Fogenhats is allowed to submit and wait till the jurors learn that there is no dna whatsoever from Fogenhats on the kid’s arms, hands, sleeves, and cuffs

    • No need to panic. Unlikely they will be on the jury or know anyone who will be. Extremely unlikely that they know what we know. Those photographs actually prove he’s a liar.

      • Trained Observer says:

        Am not in a panic. But given Wolfinger’s inexcusable delay in recusing himself and his long-time influence, I’m concerned that with lingering Seminole County culture reflecting his views, a sleeper might somehow be planted.

    • Yes, they DON’T know what we know, but WHY would they think that a PIC like that is any kind of PROOF when, just by gut instinct people are wired to PROTECT and BELIEVE a CHILD victim!?? once the child is established as a victim we will believe them before we’d believe the abuser!

      i mean, we will be more inclined to believe the dead person who cannot speak for themselves, then the killer’s explanation, but especially when it’s decidedly an underdog/weaker victim, like a woman or child against a grown man!

      • yes!! no, i know they won’t be on the jury Prof, but it’s scary when these jury-looking people have made such strong statements. and say it so loud! and even like they know something about the evidence! you know?
        this is a different animal than what we’re used to. it’s hard to explain,,, but what i heard was all about the PICTURE!

      • towerflower says:

        All the picture proves is that he took a hit to the nose and a fall. Cuts to the head, even minor ones, will bleed profusely. All they need to be reminded of the photos taken of him shortly afterwards in the PD.

    • Trained Observer says:

      Shannon, even back when the bloody pix first got flashed around, they seemed to me pretty much of a joke. Anybody can clonk themselves on the head with a flashlight (or a gun) and draw blood. Or, if premeditated, they can get a pal to do it.

      • Rachael says:

        And desperate people do desperate things and someone trying to avoid a murder charge is desperate. You would not believe the things someone will do to claim self-defense to get out of a murder charge.

      • Jun says:

        Just because he had blood on his face (which btw was not very much), it does not necessarily mean he got them as a cause of action by Trayvon Martin

        There’s so much that has to be passed through to claim his SYG

        1) Fogenhats has to prove that he did not go to the scene with injuries to stage the crime scene

        2) Fogenhats has to prove he was not the cause of the injuries to himself

        3) Fogenhats has to prove he was not committing a crime

        4) If Fogenhats is the proven aggressor, that must mean he has to retreat and can only attack if he is under reasonable belief he was in danger of great bodily harm and death before he can act, otherwise his action is considered illegal

        5) Fogenhats has to account for his long list of contradictions, lies, and inconsistencies

        6) Fogenhats has to prove what he was doing before the the incident occurred

        7) Considered the huge manipulation and scheme he pulled to try and hide his passport and money, and get his family to lie for him to get an easier bond, why people should believe him that this is not another scheme by Fogenhats

    • Malisha says:

      I have met people who mistakenly believe that the pictures or some other alleged “fact” (usually that Trayvon Martin was a “wannabe thug”) prove that Fogen killed in self-defense. Never yet met one of them who would say that after we chatted for a mere half hour, though. Don’t worry about it at all.

      • i have been thinking about the story you told us about your train trip. i’m trying to collect my thoughts so i don’t get all blubbery when i try to talk to him.
        i spoke to him for just a minute today, long enough so HE could finish his explanation on how he came to his decision. ( which included 7-8 *facts* that were factually incorrect ) it took everything i had to stand still! LOL i get so nervous i tremble and lose control my expressions easily, but i had my sunglasses on and stayed a little farther away than usual when talking to people.. anyway, i kept thinking about your story, i hope i can do it coherently!! i wish you were there!!!

    • Xena says:


      The pictures of the blood have convinced them!?
      OMG, i’m disappointed and really nervous, but i won’t accept this.

      HA! And Dooley thought that having the victim’s daughter testify that he was walking away when her dad tackled him was going to convince the jury that he was not the aggressor and killed David James in self-defense.

      Those you had dinner with apparently do not understand the requirements to prevail on a claim of self-defense. (Not withstanding the fact that no matter how bad those pictures of GZ may appear to them, GZ still didn’t go to the hospital.)

      • Xena, what has turned my blood to lava is how do they sit there and have any opinion when they know damn well they don’t know shit about the evidence? and smugly too? i’m not sure i’ll ever deal with these peeps again. and my friend i;ve held in the highest regard my whole adult life. how dare he not listen and trust me? it’s scary that anyone would buy a criminal’s story based on a stupid picture. and now omar has accomplished something i thought laughable!

        well my mission from what i learned today is to post Trayvon’s picture everywhere! no more effen around! i think the media is doing a disservice by printing the killer’s story more than the victim, but on twitter and social media we can do the opposite, and hope it levels the field a bit!

        • Xena says:


          Xena, what has turned my blood to lava is how do they sit there and have any opinion when they know damn well they don’t know shit about the evidence? and smugly too?

          O’Mara talks about the photos hoping that people will be impressed with the blood and draw the conclusion that GZ killed in self-defense. Yet, GZ refused to go to the hospital, and sat in the police station for hours, able to walk without assistance, write and talk without as much as an aspirin for pain.

    • Two sides to a story says:

      I think a lot of reasonable people may think that based on the pictures, but they haven’t listened to all the interviews and so on. I wouldn’t worry about it. The jury will be presented with the full picture from many angles.

      • I think the picture that really speaks volumes is the one that shows the blood running down the sides of GZ’s face and pooling in his facial hair, indicating that he was on top of Trayvon in order for that to happen. Add the pic of him at the police station a few hours after the “bloody nose” pic (I’ve seen far worse injuries from schoolyard fights when I would fill in for the school nurse) where there are a couple of minor scratches noted on his face, no distortion or swelling noted regarding his nose, no discoloration around his eyes and that puts to rest the idea that he was seriously injured.

        To this day I believe the only reason GZ put on those ridiculously sized bandages was to cover up the fact that there were only two minor lacerations, 1/4″ & 3/4″ in length and not deep enough to require sutures, although he did try to tell Serino that the P.A. said he might need sutures later–not that I believe that for a moment, but the arrogant GZ thinks he can say anything and everyone will automatically believe him.

        • Lonnie Starr says:

          Those bandages are going to come back to haunt him… How in the world does he think that BDLR is going to let the jury see them and let it go by unexplained? All BDLR has to do is have the witness read the medical report, while that bandaged head is on the video screen, then note that the doctor said “Treat with soap and water!” Not “They need to be covered with colossal bandages!”
          |||=> Tick Tock! <-|||

      • gbrbsb says:

        Operative word here is scratches… scratches on his face and at least one on his head. But how did he get scratches from Trayvon without there being any of GZ´s DNA under his fingernails or on the can or the mobile phone. Tzar did a clever montage showing how all the facial scratches go in the same direction… as if windswept by branches !!!

        In respect of the Dr saying the scratches may need stitches “later” I seem to recall that 24 hours is the max you can wait so when he went to his GP the following day time was already running out.

    • Jun says:

      You also gotta understand why Omara and Junior went on that media onslaught for 90% of this case being in the news

      They are trying to taint the jury and put an image in their mind so that Fogenhats does not have to testify

      You also gotta understand why Junior was threatening the media for putting anything other than his and the killer’s version in the news

      They know in court in a fair hearing, it is going to come up that the killer’s claims are fishy and lies

      a lot of people have gone to court falsifying injuries to get off claims but generally to sue people

      in this case, it is to try and get off a murder charge

      If I went around the news like Junior did and debated him fairly, he would be threatening me like he does Crump & Natalie Jackson and the media (I am not making this up, he actually threatened the media, to only put his version up in the news)

      • i know jun, it’s the most incredible thing I’ve ever seen! that greasy pos thinks his word matters!! he’s gonna threaten and harass the wrong person one day and i can’t tell you how bad i wanna be there to witness.

        • I’ll grab my camera out of my pocket to take pictures……OOPS WRONG POCKET….I’m sorry I Tazed you junior…… 🙂

        • onlyiamunitron says:

          You describe someone using the adjective “greasy” and it’s just some amazing co-incidence that they are of Hispanic ancestry?


          • cielo62 says:

            Unit Ron- all of a sudden “greasy” is insulting to Hispanics? Really? To me it means many things, but Hispanic isn’t one of them. Try your admonissions on dumber folks.

            Sent from my iPod

          • onlyiamunitron says:

            All of a sudden? No, it’s been that way for decades. Usually the full phrase is “greasy Spic”, sometimes “greaser”, but it’s always intended as an insult to an Hispanic.


          • racerrodig says:

            I have 6 guys in my shop as I type and none has ever heard greasy spic and 2 of them are Spanish.

            That is an old school term about Italians (grease balls) and the original Hot Rod youth (greasers) Why do you only dissect others posts ??

            You’ll never get it………Never.

          • cielo62 says:

            Racer- thanks! You are in the east coast, right? New Jersey IIRC. I’m from Maryland. Never heard that term. And nope. He’ll never get it.

            Sent from my iPod

          • racerrodig says:

            You would recall correctly !! I must have at least 200 Spanish customers as I’m between Camden, Hammonton & Vineland all of which have large Spanish populations. I do believe I’ll ask them all about that!!

            No, he’ll never get it……….never.

          • cielo62 says:

            Not where I live or grew up. Must be purely regional so there’s no need to lecture me.

            Sent from my iPod

          • fauxmccoy says:

            cielo – i am not sure where you live and i made nothing of your comment. i can however provide some background.

            in california, around the time of the gold rush and when california ceased to be mexican territory and part of the US, many of the native californios (i.e. mexicans) worked in the cattle industry, particularly in the process of rendering beef fat into tallow to be used for candles. it was because of this work that the word ‘greaser’ became to be used as a derogatory word for mexicans in california and has remained so for over 150 years now.

            i only provide this as background – it comes from my studies with a major in anthropology with minors in both spanish and california studies. sadly, i have heard the word ‘greaser’ used in a derogatory fashion all of my life here in california. i suspect it is not so commonly used outside this state, but there you have it.

            correct me if i am wrong, but it is my hunch that you do not live in the US and as such would have no idea of the history of that word in california, specifically. to be clear, i am not pointing any fingers here and giving the benefit of doubt.

          • onlyiamunitron says:

            And all this time I’d been under the impression that it was due to the apparent higher than “white” people amount of naturally occuring hair and skin “oily-ness” associated, accurately or otherwise, with Hispanics.

            But I was never under any misimpression as to the derogatory nature of using the term about them.

            Thank you for adding to my education.


          • fauxmccoy says:

            no problem unitron, i do know my subject matter, having studied quite intently. because of the very specific origin of this derogatory slur, i consider it quite possible that there would be many from outside california or the western US who are even aware, which is why i give benefit of doubt whenever possible.

          • Faux…..Agreed

            Greaser was also a term to describe young men that used A LOT of Brylcreme……Remember the movie Grease?

            It has also been used as a derogatory term for Italians…ie Grease Balls

          • racerrodig says:

            Thank You !! I posted the same thing. It’s boring with the dissection of someones posts. Greasers……….the original Hot Rod youth.

          • A little dab will do ya……………………..

          • racerrodig says:

            I remember that…

          • Whacha get for bein’ an old fart…

            At least until the Oldtimers takes ur memory…..

          • racerrodig says:

            Oh yeah…..what was the question ?

          • cielo62 says:

            Fauxmccoy- thank you for that explanation. I currently live in Texas and have for 25 years. NEVER heard that term used here. I was raised in Maryland. NEVER heard the term over there either. So honestly, why is unit ron making a big deal out of a truly regional slang insult? To me, greasers were car mechanics. Big deal. Once again, the condescending tone irks me. If the word was perceived as an insult, the smart thing to do was what you did which was to explain it. It seems tho to be a California term exclusively.

            Sent from my iPod

          • racerrodig says:

            Actually that term is more for old school Italians (grease balls) and the original Hot Rod youth…..greasers. But somehow I knew somron would make a remark.

          • fauxmccoy says:

            racer – this would be one area where words have different meanings based on location. the west coast where i live and have studied extensively, the word is used precisely how i described, although most folks no longer even know the origin.

            i’ll never a trip to visit family in the south and was asked to ‘crack the window’ … i literally had no clue as to what my aunt was suggesting.

            i knew precisely what unitron was suggesting (suspect he too is west coast) just as i suspect strongly that cielo has no clue as to alternative meanings of the word.

            to cielo – i’ll quote an old song that you likely do know 🙂

            los cielos nos lo dira
            porque solo dios sabra
            lo que sera, sera

            and will apologize for the fact that while i am bilingual, my keyboard is not. this song helped me enormously when conjugating verbs – about the most difficult aspect of learning any foreign language with the exception of being able to translate humor and knowing slang. i learned ‘the kings spanish’ of course, which was fine while touring spain, but using the verb chingar in mexico and central america was a big no-no as you most likely know.

            as in realty, language has it’s caveat
            Location, Location, Location

          • racerrodig says:

            I’m monolingual …Seems English was hard enough oh…..about 7th grade or so.

          • I can speak every language EXCEPT Greek……..

          • racerrodig says:

            Know or speak……Big Difference !!

          • cielo62 says:

            Faux McCoy- LOL! Yes, location is the key! My elementary school is very inclusive in regards to where the teachers hail from. We have Colombians, Nicaraguans, el salvadorenos, a few Venezuelans as well as Mexicans from across the entire country. We’ve sat down and compared naughty words to see what translates only to discover so many wild words that are so innocent in one place to be so deadly in others. Pendejo in Colombia just means “fool” but I was shocked at how it’s taken as a vulgar insult in Mexico! I don’t appreciate being made to feel the fool over a regional slang term. I do, however, appreciate learning new things. And therein lies the difference between you and the one who brought this up. Gracias.

            Sent from my iPod

          • racerrodig says:

            Well said and I believe he just made it up anyway.

          • cielo62 says:

            MMP- yes unit Ron had to make an assumption that just everyone would know all the slang insults, since they obviously are identical nationwide. I never ever heard that word used in relation to Hispanics in any way. I live in Texas. I was raised in Maryland. Greasers are car mechanics where I grew up. No insult in that as most make more money than I do. Condescension, anyone?

            Sent from my iPod

          • racerrodig says:

            As luck would have it I had 2 friend / customers who are Spanish standing right there !! and they never heard that used in any way regarding their Heritage. That’s what happens when you claim to discuss the case but only dissect others posts.

    • racerrodig says:

      Except they won’t be on the jury and are not a jury of his peers.

  28. Jun says:

    Okay so now I have come to realize that the whole uproar about Deedee was based on what allegedly said about her age, which when comes straight out of Omara’s mouth then becomes hearsay LMAO

  29. colin black says:

    Jun says:

    February 23, 2013 at 8:47 pm

    LMAO now the Conservative Tinfoil Hat is back to blaming Omara for Fogenhats’ predicament LOL

    They are also blaming Omara for Fogenhats getting his bond revoked for structuring, hiding his money and passport, and planning his escape from justice LMAO

    They are also blaming Ryan Julison LMAO

    And their new conspiracy theory is Deedee was created by the “media”


    Jun I I R C at one point M O M was anxious for help from the treeple nuts.
    An asked them to reveiw all his previous interveiws pressers tv shows ect.
    An to foward anything inapropriate or words to that effect he may have said.
    An was so happy to engage with them talked about setting up a Q an A Session live via the iinternet.

    Basicly an interveiw with all his palls an fogen supporters on the net
    Speaking to Sundance an his cohorts over at his site.
    Now might be a good time to renew the offer an follow through with the on line chat.

    Mind you after ten minutes of chatting to fogggens supporter wich lets be honest are
    Trayvon Haters.

    I expect he would more likely following through on his tidy tighty whiteies.

  30. Malamiyya says:

    Since the professor is educating us in trial law, perhaps he could devote an entry as to why personal invective isn’t allowed in the courtroom.

  31. Valerie says:

    I am a daily reader of this site, however like others, a very rare commenter. I like others have stated enjoy this site 150% and like others,find this site more civil than others. I find the frequent commenters and the Professors posts to be informative,funny and definitely in the spirit of Pro Trayvon. The things I agree with are #1) this is the Professors site #2) their are many who have commented that they come here to read therefore the Professor more than likely has a larger readership than he realizes and they enjoy being here #3)we are all adults #4)we are all fighting for justice for Trayvon Martin. However, I do have a tiny discomfort with the “word police” and people who may have tiny “control issues”…I would suggest that they start back reading at #1.

    Everybody’s comfort zone is different…but many seem comfortable here.

  32. colin black says:

    The Police in Europe UK have an expression regarding some victim types.
    Probably use it Stateside as well.

    Its less than dead.
    It is used to describe victims Society might not care about.
    Prostitutes Male or Female or Inbetween.
    Thugs gangbangers.
    Down an outs Street People with issues .

    And allthough this is a terrible thing .
    Get real we live in a heartless souless world at times.
    Or at least many of earths denizens have a dont give a phluck Im alright jack tude.

    An i m o in order to veiw a fellow Human as less than dead you must also consider them less than alive.
    When there walking about liveig there lifes.
    Through cirumstances we no naught off.

    Thats how fogen veiwed a Stranger a Child some one he had just clapped eyes on.
    An decided he was weird up to no good
    Running proveing his insticts right to the disspatch.

    Shit this kids running
    Told you he was up to no good thats why he running.
    These asshole always get away but not to night F N phnks/koons/ you dont know this guy from Adam.

    Within seconds streching into minutes .
    An 100 seconds that must have felt like an eternity to Trayvon as he screamed for salvation at the hands of this beast.
    An finally felt nearly 18 years flash past in an instant.

    Fogen stood up an walked away with out a flicker of emotion
    Only concern was to cover his own arse

    He considered Trayvon less than alive an better of dead for his well being.
    We know this as even confronted withthe knowlage an info.
    That Trayvon was a good kid an a loved child with loveing careing devastated Family.

    There was not one change in tone in foggens voice or responses.
    Except to stop refering to him as the suspect.
    The fact he was entitled to be were he was murdered within sight of his own backdoor an safety
    Foggen wasnt even in his own street or within site of his truck when he stood his ground.
    It was Trayvon Frakkin backyard for all in tence an purposes.
    Trayvon had more reason to be there than foggen.

    An yet despite all this being explained to him
    He still maintains he martrydom am the hero good kill persona.
    He his Family the nuts over at the treehouse all consider Trayvon

    As less than able to expect not to die.
    An now that he is dead he is just one less
    An if thats not a reason to despise an riddicule someone or group of people with similar beleifs.

    I personly dont hate them I despise there morals or lack of.
    An despise there outlook on fellow humans becuse of skin coulor
    Could you imagine a black lab hateing a golden retreiver because of colour or facial difrences..

    I pity them even foggen.
    Wont stop me letting him no what an asshole he is.
    An what a nonentity he has an wil become whilst Trayvons Name shall never be forgotten.

    An thats all down to you foggen.
    Your triggger finger is the butterfly flapping its wigs in the Amazon that cause a Tsunami of support an love to engulf many of us masses Worlwide to demand that the Martin Family See his killer punished to the fullest extent of the LAW.

    • Rachael says:

      “Fogen stood up an walked away with out a flicker of emotion
      Only concern was to cover his own arse.”

      That is his version of self-defense.

    • Two sides to a story says:

      In the Buddhist and Hindu view, that drunk homeless guy in the street might be his last lifetime before enlightenment.

    • they call it a misdemeanor murder.

      But that DID NOT happen this time did it?

      Trayvon’s life is worth a whole lot more then his pathetic existence would ever be.
      and i think gz might be jealous of Trayvon, since he sure wasn’t cared for nearly as much.

      i know if i were gz i’d wonder where the celebrity supporters are for him! why don’t they make TV shows about gz, yet they do for Trayvon.

      LOL gz, really out did his usual fuck up this time.

  33. Jun says:

    LMAO now the Conservative Tinfoil Hat is back to blaming Omara for Fogenhats’ predicament LOL

    They are also blaming Omara for Fogenhats getting his bond revoked for structuring, hiding his money and passport, and planning his escape from justice LMAO

    They are also blaming Ryan Julison LMAO

    And their new conspiracy theory is Deedee was created by the “media”


  34. Digger says:

    Professor Leatherman, you got it going on with this post! WordPress should adopt as a “must behave rule” in order to have a discussion blog. Excellent!

  35. racerrodig says:


    Mark O’ Mara, why don’t you come to your senses?
    You been out chasing ghosts for so long now
    Oh, you’re a hard one
    I know that you got your reasons
    These things that are pleasin’ you
    Can hurt you somehow

    Don’t you draw the queen of diamonds, boy
    She’ll beat you if she’s able
    You know the queen of hearts is always your best bet

    Now it seems to me, some fine things
    Have been laid upon your table
    But you only want the ones that you can’t get

    Mark O’ Mara, oh, you ain’t gettin’ no younger
    Your pain and your hunger, they’re drivin’ you on
    Fogens freedom, oh his freedom well, that’s just some people talkin’
    His prison is walking through this world all alone

    Don’t your feet get cold in the winter time?
    The sky won’t snow and the sun won’t shine
    It’s not hard to the fiction from the facts
    You’re losin’ all your Motions now
    And it won’t be funny when Fogen goes away?

    Mark O’ Mara, why don’t you come to your senses?
    Come down from from that soap box open the gate
    It may be rainin’, but there’s no rainbow above you
    You better let somebody help you, (let somebody help you)
    You better let somebody help you before it’s tooooooo late

    Personally I think it’s too late.

    • Rachael says:

      LOL Love it!!!

      • racerrodig says:

        I goofed

        It’s not hard to “tell” the fiction from the facts. How did I forget that word grrrrr !

        “You’re losin’ all your Motions now
        And it won’t be funny when Fogen goes away?”

        Sometimes it’s just to easy. I have a lot of these on Xena’s site.
        Gotta keep a sense of humor through this tragedy and lets face it…if “Weird Al Yankovic” did these, it’s because he’s a comic genius, I have someron who condemned me for it.

  36. I know this isn’t relevant to the topic at hand but it seems like this is the only place to post this question at this time in hopes it might get answered.

    Does anyone actually know whether DeeDee was a minor at the time of her conversation with Trayvon on 2/26? If Defense counsel is saying she’s not a minor yet they don’t know who she is, how can they be sure of this? I’m watching yesterday’s hearing and this creepy West is driving me nuts! He’s looking for something sinister in this interview of Crump and DeeDee despite there not being any reason to believe this. IMO, those who suspect others of being dishonest are usually themselves dishonest and that’s why they view everyone else as suspicious.

    Professor, can you tell me if GZ will be allowed to be present at the deposition of DeeDee by defense counsel? I’ve read that he’s involved with this case to a great extent, would that also include sitting in on depositions? Thanks for any info you can provide.

    I really enjoy the articles and comments on this site but rarely comment feeling most of the time that anything I might add has already been covered by the many informed posters here. Keep up the great work, Professor. Love reading your opinions and articles about this case!

    • racerrodig says:

      All I know is we were told she was 16 at the time and until proven wrong, that’s what I’ll believe.

      • Jun says:

        I think she is 16 and Omara gets his info from the Conservative Tinfoil Hat and anyone who takes what they say serious is a serious idiot

        They still think that Deedee is manufactured or there are 30 Deedees all played by Oprah Winfrey

        Anyways, it is irrelevant and even under perjury, lying about your age has no consequences at all and is not even considered perjury LMAO

        But i dont feel it is a lie and I think she is 16 but I have not heard anywhere how old she is except for Omara’s rants where he gets more wrinkles and his face turns more red than a tomato

        • racerrodig says:

          ‘But i dont feel it is a lie and I think she is 16 but I have not heard anywhere how old she is except for Omara’s rants where he gets more wrinkles and his face turns more red than a tomato”

          Some time around day 3 of the trial, and you can quote me, there will be a very resounding “3 – 2 – 1 Let the stuttering begin !!” followed by “……….Release the Kraken !!!!….”

          The Kraken being “Reality”

        • racerrodig says:

          Oppppps forgot this

      • Jun says:

        They are not ready for trial my guess is considering their constant need to unnecessarily delay and they have had over a year

        But her age confuses the hell out of me now since Omara and the Tinfoil Hat brings it up

        They claim she is 16, then 18, then 18 pretending to be 16

        It seems like some futile thing to argue over as it is not like she is buying pornography or something, which you need to be 18 for

        I do not think it is important regarding her age and what is important is that she was on the phone with the victim while he was being stalked and chased by Fogenhats

        They seem rather focused on issues that are inconsequential

        • racerrodig says:

          “They seem rather focused on issues that are inconsequential”

          Text book “Majoring in the Minors” which just sets you farther behind the 8 ball.

          It wouldn’t matter if she is a 40 year old Cougar….she’s an ear witness.

    • Rachael says:

      Until Professor comes, I’m gonna say, I can see no reason whatsoever why GZ would need to be or allowed to be present at the deposition. For DeeDee or anyone else. I could be wrong, but it makes no sense to me that it would be or should be allowed. It is just a deposition, not the trial.

      • racerrodig says:

        I do know that in civil cases the other party is allowed to be there but cannot say anything..been there, done that. In a criminal case I don’t know.

      • Jun says:

        Since Fogenhats’ family was allowed to testify without being at court and have no proof of any threats

        Then I am guessing Deedee has the same right

        What is good for the goose is good for the gander

        I think that is Omara’s problem, he acts entitled and bossy, but when asked of the same material for his client, he acts like it is some infringement of the 6th when it isnt

        Good thing Nelson can see through his BS

        But I dont know, I think I read that Fogenhats can not be there

        • racerrodig says:

          I do know in a civil case the other party is allowed and the Professor did tell us that most civil procedures are the same as criminal.

      • Someone posted the applicable court rule upthread. He cannot be present.

        • racerrodig says:

          At least in NJ in civil court the opposing party can be present but cannot utter a word. I know you have stated that many civil procedures are the same as criminal. I can see how the “intimidation factor” would be an obvious reason, any others.

          In the civil cases even as an expert the lawyer always has me at any deposition and arbitration. I take reams of notes and during any break I can chime in on what I see as fraudulent.

      • IMO, it seems the wole deposition tactic used by O’Mara is an abuse to the purpose of allowing depositions in the first place. Isn’t its purpose to hopefully save tax-payers money while attempting to gain information in an attempt to mediate an issue without having to go to court? It seems the defense is attempting to try this case outside the courtroom. This use of depositions seems improper. Am I wrong? Professor, will you respond?

      • Jun says:

        I think it is such BS that Omara tried to use as an argument to get personal addresses that the witnesses have credibility issues when in actuality the only witness with credibility issues is the defendant and witness 6 and part of witness 11’s account because there are parts she is not quite sure is going on

        Omara is basically trying to attack the witnesses

        Will he be successful?

        Not likely because the state has an obligation to watch over witness’ safety and due to protections in state and federal law, they can’t turn over the addresses but they can allow the defense to ask and allow the witnesses to object

        Witnesses can choose not to answer the questions

        And of course Omara wants to try things outside the courtroom

        He undergoes no scrutiny for truth and credibility that way, which is a huge issue for him and the killer

        If any media wants to portray what the evidence suggests, they have Junior go on a media onslaught, and then have him threaten the media to only broadcast what he says is the truth (LOL)

        I wonder when Omara is going to realize he is being used like a hooker in Vegas and the people giving him money do not respect him, and they are making him dance for their personal entertainment and nothing his “gang” or supporters actually has any substance or care what happens to Fogenhats

    • Tee says:

      @ Kate they do know Dee Dee real name, they know her age and her social network handles, and have known since April of last year. Bernie addressed this on more than one occasion before the court. MOM & West are just playing games. This is also stated in Crumps motion last week.

      • Thanks to everyone for all the answers to my questions. The reason I asked about DeeDee’s age was that the way MOM & West speak in court, it’s as if her being an adult would give them an advantage of some type versus her being a minor. I can’t imagine what type of advantage they believe they have but that’s how it comes across to me when they are speaking.

        Love hearing Judge Nelson shoot down West so very firmly in yesterday’s hearing. I keep waiting for him to blow up in court. He seems to have a short fuse and looks ready to go off at a moment’s notice with no respect for the Judge. The look on their faces was priceless when she spoke of how they would be in the same position as Crump if she were to take the same approach considering their many press conferences. Too bad GZ wasn’t there to hear the news in person, DENIED!

  37. Nefertari05 says:

    After ruminating while making dinner, I have to wonder if the whole medical records thing, is a backdoor attempt to get Crump under oath in some form. They seem quite desperate to do so, and IIRC – Crump was the person who first mentioned the hospital. I don’t recall DeeDee mentioning the hospital at all, in her statement, so how would medical records impeach her?

    Then, the word “impeach” triggered the memory of West and his argument to the judge that the state might not want to list Crump as a witness, but the defense might want him to be a witness to impeach DeeDee, depending on the outcome of her deposition.

    So failing to achieve the motion to depose Crump, are they now trying to sneak in the backway, by going after a public statement he made, that may or may not have come from the witness DeeDee. She could have actually told Sybrina, and Sybrina could have passed the info to Crump, would be privileged, except for the public statement, which West also argued invalidated privilege. In any case, something told to Trayvon’s mom, and passed to Crump is not impeachable, as a sworn statement. Nor, would Crump have been under oath, in a public statement.

    The thought is still early and marinating but I think they are still trying to get Crump under oath, so they can further question him outside of the scope that the court restricted and I don’t think it has anything to do with a hospital. I think the hospital thing is simply a means to and end. But, what end???

    • Jun says:

      she actually told Bernie she had to go to the hospital

      • Nefertari05 says:

        Thanks, Jun. It’s been a while since I listened to her statement. So that leaves Crump out. Good. It might be petty of me, but I don’t like to think of them succeeding, after the court has told them no.

    • Xena says:

      The only thing that matters as it concerns Witness 8, aka DeeDee, is that she was on the phone with Trayvon when Trayvon was in the mail shed, and also when GZ approached him. Her testimony is of time and what she heard, PERIOD. What she did thereafter is not relevant to impeachment.

      GZ’s case is to prove he killed Trayvon in self-defense. What DeeDee did after 7:16 p.m. on 2/26/12 is unrelated to GZ’s defense claim. If by chance the defense seeks to question her about her life, decisions and actions after the aforementioned time and date, I expect for the State to object on the basis of relevancy, and the judge to sustain.

      • Nefertari05 says:

        Excellent. Thank you Xena. Can we then also expect that IF Judge Nelson were to grant the motion (assuming it gets filed) that the judge would also restrict the release of any info, based on privacy laws?

        Since O’Mara likes to go front and center with anything he thinks may prejudice the jury pool, in his client’s favor, he may not bother about whether he can bring it up in court. He may just wave it at the nearest camera, in the hopes that just the “suggestion” that her statement has “inconsistencies” may influence potential jurors, and of course, the ever needed donors.

        This is just out of curiosity, basically. I really don’t see any reason why the young lady (or her parents) would lie to state prosecutors. It’s not as if she did anything wrong. In my eyes, she is almost as much a victim of fogen’s poison as Trayvon, and certainly as much as young Austin (who was showing symptoms of PTSD, within the first week after the murder).This young woman must be terrified. One more life negatively impacted by fogen’s mere existence.

        • racerrodig says:

          “One more life negatively impacted by fogen’s mere existence.”

          I sense a distinct pattern here……..Just an observation.

        • Xena says:


          Can we then also expect that IF Judge Nelson were to grant the motion (assuming it gets filed) that the judge would also restrict the release of any info, based on privacy laws?

          You mean for DeeDee’s medical records? IDK. In general, motions to issue subpoenas for discovery material are granted by the court because it does not stop there. Those subpoenaed are allowed to object and bring their objection before the court. Both sides then get to argue their positions. We recently saw this with the subpoena to depose Attorney Crump.

          I don’t get razzled about the issuing of subpoenas because they are not carved in stone like a judge’s order.

      • gbrbsb says:

        “Her testimony is of time and what she heard, PERIOD”

        But, as DD´s testimony appears set to be the most important and damning to the defence, would not finding her in a lie about the hospital go to damaging her credibility, which, added to the mess surrounding her status (i.e. the time it took to find her, the fact her statement to Crump was made several days after the NEN and 911 calls were broadcast, her age), could afford the defence more weaponry to try to discredit all or part of her testimony?

        Not trolling… just saying… just trying to to cover the possibility the defence appears intent on proving, presumably for a reason, and because it doesn´t make much sense, to me at least, that while it is affirmed here that GZ´s lies will damage his credibility with the jury, a lie by DD will simply be irrelevant.

        • Xena says:


          Not trolling… just saying… just trying to to cover the possibility the defence appears intent on proving,

          Oh, I understand. No problem. I suspect that the State will object to any questions about DeeDee’s life after 2/26/12 on the basis of relevancy. If the defense wants to impeach DeeDee, their best bet is to find inconsistencies in the statement she gave to BDLR and the testimony she gives in court.

          • gbrbsb says:

            “I do believe the weight gain and demeanor of the defendants are a tell as to the self-control issues they may have that may have led to criminal activity…”

            Rachael´s response is a poignant of this whole post. There have been others I have read who have found painful typifying people by their physique, if they live in trailers, if they are illegitimate.

            I am sure the State will object, the real question being, will the Judge overrule them. I feel that with such an important testimony the Judge may overrule on the basis that it goes towards her credibility but IANAL.

          • gbrbsb says:

            So sorry Xena. Age is suddenly catching up on me. The first two paragraphs belong to a reply I was drafting for a comment up-thread. Please ignore them as I can´t ask the professor to delete them again after last night when I had to ask him to do the same! How embarrassing again!

      • cielo62 says:

        I went and perused the CTH and I just don’t understand their obsession with DeeDee. And what is the talk about a “non registered, anonymous phone” that was supposedly found? Wasn’t that GZs phone? Those clowns seem convinced that the phone records on that phone show that TM was in contact with some criminal elements. WTF? I can hardly wait for the phone records to become available. The stuff they make up is ludicrous!

        • onlyiamunitron says:

          “I went and perused the CTH and I just don’t understand their obsession with DeeDee.”

          She’s female, so they get to despise her for that as well.

          For them, it’s a two-fer.


        • Xena says:


          And what is the talk about a “non registered, anonymous phone” that was supposedly found? Wasn’t that GZs phone?

          Their theories are based on false hypothesis and a strong need to disregard evidence. Trayvon’s phone has been sent from the south to the west coast to the east coast and back again. O’Mara and West were to travel to the east coast when the contents of Trayvon’s phone was examined, but they backed out of the trip.

          After GZ’s Blackberry was taken into custody of the SPD, he used a pre-pay phone. Investigators contacted the company to get phone records for that phone. To deflect from that, Zidiots twist the facts and built the theory that the Trayvon’s phone found at the crime scene was not his phone.

          • racerrodig says:

            “Zidiots twist the facts and built the theory that the Trayvon’s phone found at the crime scene was not his phone.”

            But that cute little heart on it is a dead giveaway. Besides skipping, all thugs have a pastel colored phone with a cute little heart on it.

          • cielo62 says:

            Thank you, Xena! I can always count on you! Now it makes sense. More projection.

  38. aussie says:

    A good part of my recent career was moderating a website about a million times bigger than this blog (good in several senses).

    I won’t say someone’s not a troll until I say he is, I might miss one every now and then……….but I can smell a troll a long way off.

    Some who seem to be trolls may just be ESL (English as Second Language) or have dyslexia or be 1 finger typists, or be good-hearted but genuinely mentally ill. Some just don’t realise the on-line community they joined is different from what they’ve known so far, they’re so young they still think the whole world is as they’ve experienced it, so they need a bit of time to adjust to what’s acceptable (especially as it applied to casual use of cuss words etc). Some, sadly, just never acquired logic or reasoning abilities, but they’re not beyond redemption.

    One tip: anyone who refers to their statements as Truth-with-capital-T is so one-eyed they don’t even know most people have two.

    @ Rachel, no, everyone’s laying their cards on the table now, it will settle down after this, unless someone has a bogus joker up his sleeve. Don’t tell ’em we’re playing without jokers. 😉

    When the trials start, I hope everyone can be fair in their assessment of each day’s action, look at what was weak for the prosecution, too, not just cheer at the “gotcha” moments (which I hope will predominate, of course).

    • No Sir with all the respect you could deserve ESL is not a well
      measurement to catch a troll.
      I’m the living proof as others that you are wrong,very wrong.
      Hello to all my friends:)

      • fauxmccoy says:

        hey joseph, good to see you again. i think you misunderstood. my interpretation of what was said is that some people may mistake an ESL poster as a troll, merely because of how something is worded, but that it is definitely NOT the case. ESL does not a troll make, in other words.

      • Nefertari05 says:

        Hey JN- Good to see you, my friend!

      • aussie says:

        Hello Joseph and yes, the others got it right. I was listing properties which might get people accused of trolling, when in fact they have good reasons for “being different”.

      • looneydoone says:

        Hi Joseph,
        Happy to see you’ve joined us here !

    • @aussie “Hello Joseph and yes, the others got it right. I was listing properties which might get people accused of trolling, when in fact they have good reasons for “being different”.
      aussie,Indeed,my sincere apologies to you ,I was wrong of your intentions.

    • @fauxmccoy ,hello my friend,you are right ,I misunderstood,glad to see you again,I hope that you and others get back to huff. I enjoy this place with all the intelligent comments and ideas.

    • aussie says:

      February 23, 2013 at 6:26 pm
      ” One tip: anyone who refers to their statements as Truth-with-capital-T is so one-eyed they don’t even know most people have two. ”

      Frankly your “tip”… eh….I’ve heard better, but the rest of the post comes off a little pretentious.
      My tip: Maybe you should refrain from calling anyone a troll, it could be a sign of short stature 😉

      I hope when the trial starts we can focus on the evidence, add to the conversation and resist the urge to become self appointed monitors.

  39. nemerinys says:

    This post is both good and timely. Thank you, Fred.

    My first comment here was back in July or August, and it was to provide a helpful link in response to another commenter. Since then, I have only occasionally commented, to provide more links and, once, a much longer two-part comment discussing specifics of Serino’s investigation compared to how things really got going when the FDLE got involved. I was clearly on the side of viewing the SPD with great distrust, and of believing Zimmerman to be guilty of murder. I still do, and I still am.

    I was first called a troll when I took a commenter to task for referring to unitron as one immediately after his first comment here after a small absence (due to WordPress security concerns). I’d already seen the growing level of group-think and disparagement of anyone who criticized the nasty level of discourse or who questioned a particular argument, but I finally spoke up since I had encouraged unitron to come back and I was subsequently embarrassed over how he was treated.

    No one here equates the status of killer and victim; there is no equivalence between Zimmermite racists and anti-Zimmerman remarks. But, there have been at times an acidity of those remarks that come very close to resembling those made by Zimmermites, in tone albeit not in substance. When one commenter writes something along those lines, others join in like sharks for the kill; readers who are put off by this end up scrolling down quite a bit until another commenter returns the conversation back on topic.

    As I mentioned in my comment yesterday, I’d been away from the Internet for a couple of months.
    was the first post I read after I returned, and what I found was not only a dramatic increase in disparaging other commenters, but also accusations that some commenters were attempting to suppress individual expression and/or of being a “Zidiot” visitor attempting to control or derail the conversation. I had to do a lot of scrolling to get past that crap, only to find it again and again in subsequent comment sections. (FYI, unlike many of you, I’ve never visited CTH or any other pro-Zimmerman site). Yesterday, I finally commented to another commenter who used these tactics in response to someone who merely expressed a liking for and appreciation of greater civility in tone.

    One can see this occurring once again in this very thread, such as the response to bettykath above that ends with “well, i wholly disagree with you..but i can’t defend myself from people who logically aren’t even in the same stratosphere. either you get it or you don’t.”

    Oh, yeah, we “get it.”

    Thank you very much for your posts, Professor.

    • Rachael says:

      I think part of the problem may be emotions are running high and will run higher the closer things get. I am not excusing it, but just noticing it and thinking this might account for some of it. I also, ironically, see it happening more in this blog entry where it has been addressed more than any other. I don’t know if I just didn’t see it before or if yesterday was just a very highly charged day or what. But again, I suspect it might get worse before it gets better.

      • Two sides to a story says:

        Personally, I think the tension situation should get better, not worse. Fogen is on his way to meet his destiny. Though we haven’t see the evidence, we can see the handwriting on the wall. We’ve seen how Judge Nelson handles her courtoom and handles the defense.

        Everything’s gonna be all right.

  40. aussie says:

    I have no authority to speak for unitron, but it seems to me he is saying we should take the high road, we should be better than the other side.

    If that is what he’s saying, I totally agree.


    That said, a small amount of venting is understandable. Venting is letting out your feelings. “I hate the POS and hope he rots in hell” is venting.

    Demonising is NOT acceptable. Demonising is what happened this week with Shellie, “with the felon father and DUI mother she’s trash” (paraphrasing).

    And that is demonising with labels, a problem that is the base cause of half your troubles in America, that I can see from here. Dog whistle words, with huge posters of hate behind them, that dehumanise the victim….

    “felon” (yeah? does one conviction, which we know can be an undeserved one, take away EVERY other characteristic of a person?)
    “dui” (does drinking too much make a person rotten in every way? or are they just trying to cope with pressures? does being caught make them worse people than the millions not caught yet?)
    “lives in trailer” = trailer park trash …. what a charming thing to call other HUMANS TRASH, based on where they live (or where you suppose they live)…………at least 2 of our excellent contributors here happen to live in mobile home ie trailer parks, are they trash?

    just as bad as “black” = thug/welfare cheat/drug dealer

    and then in other contexts, the constant use of nothing but derogatory names for the “other” political party or other religion, until there is ZERO normal discussion of any topic or any issue, and all anyone has to do it call you the “name” and that is enough reason to ignore everything you say.

    and then the dragging of politics into everything. In the very first days of this case, they kept describing GZ as neighborhood watch captain and democrat……… WHAAAAA?????? where’s the relevance? why not say police charged XYZ, 33, a vegetarian, or or ABC, 28 year old mother of 3 ballet dancers, or DGF, 52, teatotaller (or pickle lover)???

    C’mon guys. You go hanging labels onto everyone and everything, when it’s built into your system that
    * a person’s preferred politics is on public record (when the basis of democracy is the SECRET BALLOT, to avoid coercion or retaliation)
    * everyone’s convictions, and even dismissed charges, are publicly available so they can NEVER start a fresh life, they are “felons” forever
    * everyone’s race/ethnicity is always tagged on to any mention of them

    These are not a public right to know issues. These are excuses for labelling people for life, so they can be “kept in their place” forever. Dog whistles. So you can see them as everything bad attached to that label, conveniently without having to say the actual words, so YOU can sound innocent but everyone knows what you mean. And conveniently ignore that the person is HUMAN with all the human qualities of the people on your approved list of labels.

    Derogatory names, or dehumanising labels, are not acceptable in any discussion that purports to be FACTUAL and BALANCED in any way. IF you’re talking FACTS just start with the real names of the people you’re talking about; dissing their very names casts huge doubts on the reasonableness of the rest of what you’re saying.

    Calling a particular person Mark O’Money ONCE on a relevant post may be passingly funny. Calling him that ALL the time just destroys your credibility, not his.

    If you split the world into people you call by name, and people whose names you mock, you perpetuate the “us” vs “them” view of the world that is splitting your nation apart.

    To see everything as black and white (literally or otherwise) is a dangerously fundamentalist attitude that really has no place in the 21st century, and certainly doesn’t bode well for the 22nd.

    /enz rant/

    • Rachael says:

      Wonderful post!!

    • bettykath says:

      aussie, very well said. my point but stated so much better than I did or could.

    • Tommy's Mom says:

      Excellent. Having been called a “troll” before(not on this blog)and almost always called a Bible thumper on another site,when commenting on God’s biblical laws. I have never pushed my believe in God on anyone. I sometimes post a verse that applies to what I believe. I don’t expect everyone to accept my views on anything but, I do expect them to accept my right to those views,just as I respect everyones’ right to their own views. Wouldn’t it be a dull world if no one questioned anything? We had a saying where I worked; “there is no such thing as a stupid question”.

    • Tzar says:

      completely agree
      and I have no need to go overlook anything I ever wrote on this site because I walk live and breathe in the sentiments you posted

    • gbrbsb says:

      Wise and thoughtful contribution. Thank you.

    • Zhickel says:

      Thanks Aussie. Excellent post.

      Only thing I would like to add; venting has a shelf life. Everyone does it ocassionally; when it become a non-stop torrent, it borders on abuse.

      • ks says:

        Borders on abuse of whom?

      • aussie says:

        Doesn’t need to be abuse of anyone in particular. Haven’t you ever been subjected to hearing a drunk screaming abuse at the top of their lungs at nobody? Not directed at you, they mightn’t even know you exist,but you still can’t help hearing the hostile tone, the ugly language.

        You’re right Zhikel, Venting, letting off steam, is to let you calm down and be normal again. That cannot go on for too long.

      • ks says:

        That’s an exaggeration aussie. There are no “drunks” here but if you want to go down that road I’d say that the constant finger wagging and scolding has been at least as much an “abuse” or distraction. It’s derailed many a discussion lately.

    • not so great post. because you yourself are generalizing or attributing, every single insult to every person here into every single situation w/o context. that’s doing exactly what you’re so upset about.

      but let me address one tiny bit of your rant.

      in this situation we are in here, if someone is bothered enough by someone else enough to call them names i don’t think anyone else should be offended or criticize them for doing so.
      here’s what i think.

      if i’m morally insulting someone by calling them a thief or deadbeat or molester, from my perspective, it might be the most dominate of one’s personality characteristics, one i believe to be true and morally disagreeable.
      so, in certain circumstances, not most, but some, to me nothing else matters. and i know not everyone in the world would agree with me about that. but in this case i’d just stay away from them too.

      for example, pedophiles wouldn’t think a molester is such a terrible person, right? or maybe to them it depends on whether they molested an infant or prepubescent. but they wouldn’t object in some cases.
      But, i know him and i are never going to agree, and from then on that person stays on my personal shit list forever. i don’t ever want to learn anything else about them because that one part of their personal belief system is too disturbing to my senses and i’ll never be able to look past it, no matter what other decent characteristics he hasn’t shown me.

      So in my defense here about this, aside from the defendant and his defenders involved in this most serious of injustices, i don’t think too many of the people who have gathered here are overly worried or offended about what i call him. even if they disagree.
      – they may think he’s an asshole for a completely different reason. or maybe not.
      but they do think something is wrong because they are here. i don’t think they will hate me too much, or too long for my outburst (hopefully).

      Oh and they do not assume that i’m always sitting around pointing and mocking everyone else i see on TV. They would have to be reasonable and understand this is not the most dominate of my personality, just my dominate reaction to this particular group of people.
      My dislike for those people is an aspect of what has brought up together.

      • racerrodig says:

        “My dislike for those people is an aspect of what has brought up together.”

        Dead on and if someone tells us what to do they are telling us to negate part of our solidarity. If so, where does that leave them ??

      • aussie says:

        How will “venting” your dislike/hatred do anything for Trayvon or his memory?

        If name calling is your main purpose, how are you better than the “other side” who call names all day?

        The two guys who first brought this up, Whonoze and unitron, almost got accused of being GZ supporters for it. But their point isn’t that they don’t want to hear poor George being called bad names. They don’t want to hear everyone here, people they’re on one side with and respect, they don’t want US engaged in that kind of name calling and hatred spewing.

        It’s a matter of taking the high ground — no, of remaining on the high ground we started out on — to speak for a dead child who can’t speak for himself. And a matter of not letting feelings take over, to the detriment of looking at facts and reality.

        Shannon, again, it’s not to protect GZ from being called names, he probably deserves it. It’s to warn you against becoming a hate-spewing name-caller, you ARE better than that.

        Racer, the Outhouse mob have heaps of solidarity through hatred… that what we should emulate here? The main solidarity here is, or used to be, support for Trayvon’s side of the story; the shared dislike or disgust with his killer was a side issue. It should stay that way.

        • cielo62 says:

          Aussie- I don’t see how our use of humor and nicknames has detracted one iota from us dissecting facts. I feel you and unit Ron are making much ado about nothing. We are nothing like the posters at CTH. Nothing! And to be scolded like bad children who said a naughty word is also not being respectful To us as adults working on a complex series of issues, not just a murder.

          Sent from my iPod

      • ks says:

        C’mon now aussie, name calling is not shannoninmiami’s main point. Even in your “if” statement. That’s not really fair to start to frame it like that though you clean it up nicely. To the meat of your post….

        Frankly, the issues with whonoze and unitron have very little to do with name calling. It’s more the style of their posts.

        Whonoze is a valuable and often insightful poster who, unfortunately, sometimes comes across as very condescending and dismissive in his posts. Folks tend to hash it out and then move on

        Unitron is simply a bad Devils Advocate. He/she often pops in and out of here with devils advocate type questions that are usually head scratchers. For example, iirc, asking/speculating about if SZ knew she could use the money for bond. Really? At this stage, that’s an odd question. Of course he/she got several incredulous responses back and off we went.

    • ks says:

      Good post and while I tend to agree with the spirit of what you are saying, I do have a couple of issues:

      One, a persons credibility is determined based on whether their post makes sense and/or is in line with the facts. IMO, the focus on labels is more of a form vs. substance issue. The only caveat would be if the label corrupted the substance. For example, the common practice used elsewhere of calling TM a thug and launching into an irrational diatribe and counter factual post. I don’t think that happens here. The difference matters though I get your point.

      Two, people tend to react viscerally to Thread Nannies, or to use the now all encompassing term “bullying”, civility bullies, who always stand ready to lecture/scold others especially when that seems to be their main contribution to the thread though it is more understandable in a thread like this one.

      As an adjunct to point two, Devils Advocacy is fine and necessary when it’s applied properly. Questioning is a good thing. But, Devils Advocacy simply for the sake of it or as a ruse to lecture others is simply tiresome especially when the advocate(s) keep raising points that either were already raised and resolved or could be answered by reading the thread.

      • racerrodig says:

        “Questioning is a good thing. But, Devils Advocacy simply for the sake of it or as a ruse to lecture others is simply tiresome especially when the advocate(s) keep raising points that either were already raised and resolved or could be answered by reading the thread.” Which is where that was, and has been for months.

        “Majoring in the Minors” is also getting real old.

      • aussie says:

        KS you can split it up. Call them some mocking names in a post that’s nothing but venting. Then revert to normal names in a post discussing the facts. Don’t let the nasty labels “stick” because they’ll end up overshadowing anything of substance you want to say.

        In fact they ruin your credibility: if you are mocking someone’s name why should I believe your are factual or serious about the rest of your sentence? or someone may like to agree with the rest of it BUT WILL NOT because they don’t want to feel/be seen agreeing with the mocking part as well.

        That is the method by which labeling splits people into camps that have no common ground, other than the shared habit of abusing each other.

        Look at the argument a few days ago about the playground equipment known as monkey bars…….. all because for one poster “monkey” was a dog whistle word that he felt was derogatory, almost to the point of forgetting it has other meanings.

      • ks says:

        Aussie, there’s no need for me to split anything since I haven’t called anyone names but if I did it would hardly affect my “credibility” if my posts were logical and factual.

        So if I started a post with ShelLIE and went on to write a logical and factual post that would affect the “credibility” of what I posted because you didn’t like that I called her ShelLIE even if everything I said in the post was logical and factual? That’s a bit much though you are entitled to your opinion so fair enough but, imo, it’s a form over substance thing and I come down closer to the latter. YMMV.

        Actually, the monkey bar discussion makes one of my points for me which is you can’t word police everything to the point of absurdity.

    • Judy75201 says:

      I vote this best post overall.

    • Two sides to a story says:

      Love your post. Amen amen amen. Thanks for taking the time to ex-pli-cate and completly spell out the dangers and folly of namecalling and labeling.

    • cielo62 says:

      aussie~ at some point, we all HAVE to make a stand in the world of “us vs them.” GZ started it by labeling, stalking and killing a “them.” SO MANY of his like-minded friends were willing to let that slide. Then a brave soul, an “us” ( as in, “us wanting justice”) started a petition. It resonated with ALOT of “us”. And the divisiveness wasn’t CREATED at that time, but REVEALED. There are those who have no qualms about denigrating, killing or marginalizing other groups of people. “They” are the injustice loving racists. Then there are those who want America to be what we CLAIM to be, a JUST nation that is color blind when it comes to justice. That is “us.” When it comes to passing things like games and teams, or other kinds of labels like religion or race, then I agree; they serve no purpose in the long run. BUT when it comes to the foundations of righteousness and justice, upon which our civilizations are built and maintained, then YES, we must make a stand. And I am an “us.” I imagine all of Team Trayvon is an “us.” Let there be no misunderstanding; it’s a clear battle as old as good vs evil. Which wolf will you feed? Hoodies up, my friend. Hoodies up.

      • Ya’ll know which wolf I feed…….

      • cielo62 says:
        February 24, 2013 at 9:52 pm

        “And the divisiveness wasn’t CREATED at that time, but REVEALED. There are those who have no qualms about denigrating, killing or marginalizing other groups of people. “They” are the injustice loving racists.”

        i just really appreciate what you said above. we didn’t create a division. or more accurately Gz didn’t create a division, even though him and the zimmerlovers would have us believe.

        BUT YES, exactly, these events have *revealed* the division that’s been here all along. yet i simply was not aware of the profound significance of race discrimination in our society today.

        the knowledge learned from this case changed my life.
        And my perceptions of everyone, not just strangers, but even the people i’ve known are heightened, i’m suspicious and critical!
        i’m always looking for signals of their views about race and prejudice.. and yes i’m a little too paranoid. but I’ve always been an extremist so i’m working to get that part leveled out to a reasonable degree.
        but in the mean time it’s like i’m looking at the world in
        *super focus*!
        (like the commercial for those coke bottle glasses!! lol

      • blushedbrown says:


        WELL SAID!!! Thank you Cielo.

        Hoodies Up!!!

  41. Trained Observer says:

    Thanks, LLMPapa … In the end, it will be the seemingly endless yap from Fogen — on key issues and inconsequential, but telling, embellishments that get tangled up in inconsistency — that will do in this lying murderer.

    • Trained Observer says:

      Also note the frozen ye gods what am I doing here expression on MOM’s face in Papa’s vid.

      • Tommy's Mom says:

        O/T I had to laugh and read that twice. It reminds me of my believe in the “hereafter”of old age
        “I walk into a room and say what am I “hereafter”.

  42. fauxmccoy says:

    i strongly support society’s oldest tools for dealing with social misfits – as the zimmerman has shown themselves to be – mockery and ostracism. until we have a verdict, ostracism is not an option, so i will use their own words and actions to mock them. i do not delve into issues of race, do my best to keep things above board but am not exempt from my own human failings.

    for example, i do not care what shellie weighs, i do not mind however pointing out that her former training as an aesthetician which included training on makeup application resulted in the smeary eyelined, poorly applied foundation mess that she presents to the world. as this is her education in practice, i have no problem mocking that as i have no problem in mocking either of their very long stints at a junior college to achieve (and demonstrably learn) absolutely nothing. the fact that they ‘enhance’ their educational experiences into being much greater than evidence would show, sets them up for such mockery. if they had the good sense to remain quiet on such subjects, i would afford them the same courtesy.

    i will admit that there can be a fine line between mockery and derogation and that the internet has a tendency to blur that line. my intention, always, is to mock.

    • racerrodig says:

      I couldn’t care what race he is / alleged / wants to be. Like you, I am incensed by WHAT they SAY and DO.

      I’ll quote the esteemed Professor from last year on this…..

      “Anyone who supports (Fogen) is a racist…….anyone who donates to him is a stupid racist”

      • kimmi says:

        racerrodig says:

        “Like you, I am incensed by WHAT they SAY and DO.”

        Exactly. The actions of the Fogen family make it so incredibly EASY to mock them and so unbelievably hard NOT to.

        • racerrodig says:

          “Exactly. The actions of the Fogen family make it so incredibly EASY to mock them and so unbelievably hard NOT to.”

          I’m the guy who see’s the comical aspect of most things. That shows in most of my posts. It was reported to me, then I saw the blog, that one of the Zidiots takes what I say, and especially my lyric rewrites as death threats to Fogen and one song about Taaffe.

          Nothing could be further from the truth. This same blogger has stated outright he wants to see Crump, Corey, et al dead. He posted he’s thrilled Trayvon “ what was coming to him..” as “..he’d have would up as a chalk outline anyway..” and someron defended him.

          It’s just about impossible not to mock them for what they do and say.

    • racerrodig says:

      Well….LLMPapa noticed…that’s for sure. It kind of follows his
      I didn’t reflect….I did reflect…….how about the next time it’s
      “I was shocked that I had time to reflect……….over the lst 35 years’

    • Rachael says:

      You know LLMPapa, there must be a very simple explanation for it. I mean if you recall, he didn’t remember he had “the” gun with him either.

    • racerrodig says:

      “The truth never changes………but the lie always morphs”

      Proof once again……….

    • Judy75201 says:

      Great vid!! Thanks for all the work you do, LLMPapa.

      • blushedbrown says:


        Sometimes you grant request, so here’s mine.
        Could you please put a video together where GZ says and writes that Trayvon jumped out of the bushes, but a few minutes later in the same interview with Singleton he says he walked back towards him. I think it would be a great addition to the pocket phone video.

        A visual and audio of another contradiction would be greatly appreciated.

        Here are the links or data needed if you choose to produce the video.

        Written statement: Not a word of bushes, but writes he emerged from the darkness. Page 2 of 4

        http ://

        Audio track one Interview with Investigator Singleton

        Listen forward from about 13:30, at 13:35 he says he jumped out from the bushes.

        Same audio tape listen forward from 22:10 @22:15 he says I walk back towards him.

        Warning large file……

        http ://

        Contains transcripts of interview with Singleon and other relevant data

        Page 19 of 538 the transcript also documents that he said he walked back towards him…..



        • racerrodig says:

          I still laugh at FogenPhooles hand written statement where he says the dispatcher was asking for an exact location……which as we all know didn’t quite happen that way.

          …emerged from the darkness, the bushes, from nowhere…take your pick.

          • blushedbrown says:


            You know what kills me besides the obvious lies in the written statement, is how he tries to desperately remember what he wrote when he was being questioned by Singleton. How he inserted more bullshit, and had to go back to some point in his written story to remember the lie. Singleon seems to me the only person who did a pretty good interview. Not only that interview, but when she said: You expect us to believe, or pretend….. that was classic. It showed how she couldn’t even believe the bullshit he was saying.

          • racerrodig says:

            ” … desperately remember what he wrote when he was being questioned by Singleton. …….”

            I can see him on the stand…..

            BDLR “……okayyyy Mr. (FogenPhoole) exactly where were you standing when Black Dynamite Slim attacked you…..”

            Fogen “…he came out of the darkness….”

            BDLR “What’s that………what is that paper…’re reading from
            something !! what is that ??”

            O’ Mara “..Objection”

            Judge Nelson “…yes what is that ??”

            Fogen “….um…….a script”

          • blushedbrown says:



          • racerrodig says:

            Twice when I was an expert the defendant or a witness took notes to the stand that turned out to be a script…..Sidebars aplenty !!

          • blushedbrown says:



          • racerrodig says:

            Talk about ticking a judge off ….one of them had also do it at his deposition and our clients lawyer took it from him. He had all sorts of “versions” of several of the events and was told he better not do it at trial. We were looking for it……sure as God makes the grass grow green….he did it at trial…..

          • blushedbrown says:


            It boggles the mind.

          • racerrodig says:

            Yep….where do they come from…..and why are they breathing our air ?

      • Two sides to a story says:

        Cool beans.

    • Malisha says:

      OK, here’s what happens with cell phones. They do, they don’t, they are, they aren’t, if only, but if, but for, oh gee, potato, po-tah-toh, tomato, to-mah-toh, let’s call the whole thing off!

      (Got that Homie?)

    • Xena says:

      All that doing the shimmy and raising of his jacket exposing his gun, but his cell phone stayed in his jacket pocket. GZ insults the intelligence of logical people.

  43. Tzar says:

    Well he started it….
    “Fucking coon”

    • racerrodig says:

      You’re hired !!

      • Tzar says:

        and they continued

        • racerrodig says:

          Okay….Here’s a raise !! Think unitron ever tells Taaffe and the like they are offensive or what to do….sorry…..I had to.

          • Tzar says:

            probably not
            They simply wuld not stop defaming a child who ran for his life, his grieving parents nor his justice seeking attorney. Taaffee went as far as to refer to Crump as a cotton picker
            to Trayvon as a Truant (nicest thing I will post)
            And I wont repost what he wrote about Sybrina or Tracy

          • racerrodig says:

            “Meet Frank Taaffe” I’d rather not, I hate tasting the same meal twice in the same day.

            He’s a real Prince !!

          • onlyiamunitron says:

            “…Think unitron ever tells Taaffe and the like they are offensive or what to do…”

            Why ever would I want to hang out in the kind of place where I’d be likely to encounter them?

            At least around here I might bump into an open mind every 100 posts or so.


          • fauxmccoy says:

            beware of things that go ‘bump’ in the night … or not 😉

          • onlyiamunitron says:

            The last time I went bump in the night was in the summer of ’75, dancing to Van McCoy’s “The Hustle”. : – )


            (of whom there was a lot less into which to bump back then)

          • fauxmccoy says:

            hang on sloopy!

      • Tzar says:

        And they continued
        remember this is the child who ran

      • Tzar says:

        They just would not stop

        -now that the killer has been arrested
        -now that his own cousin has accused him being a violent, confrontational, racist and molester
        -now that the evidence is abundantly and clearly evinces his guilt and confirms his complete lack of innocence
        -now that the killer’s attorney has pleaded to those who, “would do what George did”, to crawl into the light of day and send George money
        -now that the killer and his family have claimed Trayvon’s last living words, his final cri(s) du coeur, as belonging to the killer

        -now that we’ve sat through 45 days of defamation of this child while his killer walked free
        -now that they have come to face the fact that there will be, there just has to be a trial
        -now that they can’t afford to hop on twitter and spew their hatred,
        NOW, they want us to check our righteous anger and disgust after we input our username and password

        Well good luck with that
        The defendant has shown himself to be to be a vile individual and lacking of virtue in all courts but out here there is no recusing of the judges when they call him out on his lack of character. They are going to have to deal with that. You want to play in the court of public opinion, well learn the rules, the simplest one that applies here is if you chase and kill unarmed children and then defame the character of that child and his family, you will be despised, you will be vilified,and that is the best treatment you can expect, that’s showing you love actually.


    • Tzar, the assholes behind those kinds of comments are exactly why WE HERE are NOTHING like them!! NO ONE here has EVER said ( could never have DREAMED) of anything close to that filth!!!
      to anyone who says i/we am/are *stooping* to that level can F the F off!
      and they need to get a grip about what they’re talking about before making those ignorant or intentional insulting accusations about anyone here. i’m getting really sick of hearing it myself!

    • Romaine says:

      I have viewed this video before and only now have I come to an understanding within myself.
      If Trayvon had simply been afforded the same concerns as the man killed in this video he may still be alive.
      Meaning—if the adult residents hearing and not seeing had simply stepped outside remaining in place would the defendant have taken that deadly shot?
      There were at least four adult men hearing and or seeing, and none of them stood their ground in their community to protect their property. All based on their claim of, I didn’t know how many people were out there. Yet hearing only one crying, pleading for life voice before the deadly shot.
      The picture guy Jon or John’s wife viewed the fight, he told her to mind her business it was not thier problem, yet he goes out to take pics and when interviewed makes jokes and laughs.
      Jon or John the mma retracted guy goes to his door views the incident then claims to run back inside versus breaking the fight up, visually seeing and knowing it was only two individuals fighting on his back lawn. He could have easily stayed in place asking his female companion to bring him the phone and called 911 reporting everything he was viewing at the time of the so called fighting to the 911 operator; yet he opted to be a coward; and his booboo was too concerned with calling her neighbor to find out if she and her mate were hearing the same thing.
      If any of the witnesses did remain outside, or viewed the incident through their window and have knowingly declined to state the truth of a life being taken for no just reason, and are now in fear of prosecutions; they should be. As adults IMO, they all made very bad decisions and are now trying to validated their reason for being untruthful because the defendant was deemed as a neighbor or a friend and was entitled to taking such deadly action for the redemption of what the defendant claims to be his life or his death event.
      This video reflects individuals who knew the gentleman sitting at a table minding his own business shot by another individual for no other reason but being present. They all knew the shooter was armed yet they still pursued him so that he would not escape the justice he deserved. They did not question wether or not the victim was justified to be shot, they simply took action on what occurred to ensure justice to the victim.
      How can any of the residents of the RTL support or declare to support the community watch program, the laws governing each individuals rights as human beings, and not get involved and be truthful about the events of Feb 26, 2012 when Trayvon Martins life was so wrecklessly taken.
      My question is, when and why would the value of your home and property be more valuable then the truth and the life of TRAYVON MARTIN.
      Trayvon did not steal from any of you.
      I can only ask that you choose not to blame him for the faults of others.
      Cast not Trayvons soul into the pot of the many wrongs that may have consumed your life believing that you have finally received vindication by his death.
      In closing I will say, let not the vengeance of GOD fall upon you because you choose not to tell the truth about the killing of this child.
      Fearing the reprecussion of the law is minor…trust and believe that when GOD moves and takes his vengeance upon your life and soul you will think back with much regret for being a liar to the truth.

      • racerrodig says:

        It ticks me off to no end that as you say, at least 3 or 4 “men” knew something was going on that was not pretty. Just one of them saying to the effect….” I see what you’re doing” and making their presence known with something as simple as a flashlight pointed at them, I believe Fogen may have backed off, maybe not, but you have to do something.

      • Tzar says:

        As I continue to say, “something much more sinister than we know happened that night”

        Remember I said that

        • racerrodig says:

          I remember…..and agree.

          • racerrodig says:

            YB !! did you see that last lap crash….I hate when that happens.

          • Just read about it……..Rookies all……well except Junior….who somehow seems to find himself involved in a lot of crashes…….

          • racerrodig says:

            Look at the car that had the front sheered clean off and there he is climbing out of the window. The construction of these cars is amazing compared to this (not to be off topic) from years ago. A local racer in town I knew was a “friend” of Don McTavish. I hate to see any driver or athlete get injured or killed.

            This is why I drag race…..straight line… turns……driver ability is more amplified, ‘cuz you don’t get a second chance.

            Junior… a crash……stunned I am. I still say his dad was in many on purpose….aggressive….and then some.

          • Kinda like Tony Stewart being aggressive?

            I think NASCAR should better enforce the rules on aggressive driving.

            One of my sons is a gearhead…..races Rally Cross… car on the course at a time….all racing the clock one after the other…..

          • racerrodig says:

            Some years ago a few tracks near here tried Rally Cross but it never caught on. Everyone wants to see side by side. which is what racing is really about, but aggressive driving gets cars busted up people injured and killed and has no place IMHO.

            Having seen a few fatal drag accidents however, every one was driver stupidity and no one else involved….and always….a rookie in a real fast car just because he had the money….I lobbied NHRA that all drivers have to spend time in a lower class before going real fast. Naaaaaaaa That’s not a good idea that said….Don’t you have to have so many races in lower classes in NASCAR ??

          • This was the Nationwide series….a step down from the cup…..most drivers started on dirt tracks……..blacktop at 180 MPH is a hell of a lot different than dirt.

          • racerrodig says:

            There ya go…I drove a dirt car for a friend some years ago…..different……you betcha… let me turn the wheel hard to the right to make that left and steer it with the throttle…..

          • fauxmccoy says:

            pat — do yourself a huge favor and listen to the band ‘southern culture on the skids’ (scots for short) singing ‘dirt track date’ … or just about anything else. i think you’ll appreciate.

          • fauxmccoy says:

            just to help you find your way … these guys just make me happy 🙂

          • Faux……:)

            The first date I took my late wife on was to Ascot speedway in LA.

            Back when I had my little red ’66 hotrod ‘Tang

          • fauxmccoy says:

            🙂 my bro builds street rods for fun and profit 🙂 i get it. he is the premier mechanic in the bay area and highly specialized with his own shop. was always honored that i was the only woman/girl he ever let drive his machines. he’d laugh at the local 1/4 mile spot when he’d let his sis drive and she won. ’67 mustang with 351C that took a quart of oil about every 20 miles. we were in high school.

            best time i had was driving through the berkeley hills in the last stang he built, still a bored out 351C, dual quads, double glass packs on the rear and nitrous boost at the touch of a button. it was about 25 years ago, after a van morrison concert and it beats the hell out of me why we’re both still living.

            we started off with a huge circular driveway and go-carts when we were 8-10 and just kept right on moving. he cleverly disguises them now as conservative suburban dad mobiles, but what’s underneath is pure genius, he custom builds the best suspensions i have ever experienced and i love his hand-me-downs.

          • racerrodig says:

            Ya just had to do it…….SCOTS……Ya just had to…..I will refrain, only to say….great entertainers.

          • fauxmccoy says:

            glad you like racer – for many years, my personal theme song has been ‘liquored up and lacquered down’ 🙂 and i stopped drinking years ago. just cannot keep away from the aqua-net. no paper bag needed, just a teasing comb 😉

          • racerrodig says:

            I’ll keep laughing for a bit on that !

        • onlyiamunitron says:

          “As I continue to say, “something much more sinister than we know happened that night”

          Remember I said that”

          Please tell me that this has absolutely nothing to do with the posts this past summer from the person convinced that the shooting was somehow involved with the then upcoming Republican National Convention in Tampa.


      • yes, all those people that heard and saw and now know what ended up happening should take a look at what they did or did not do right that night.
        and I’ve been hesitant to be critical of Jeremy in particular because i believe he knows more and still has a chance to do the right thing now!
        i don’t know how anyone who heard that could have just sat there and not go out and DO SOMTHING!

        IF someone would have done.XYZ…. Trayvon may be alive or at the very least gz wouldn’t have been able to go about his business of the continued torture of Trayvon’s family, create even more fear in the mothers and fathers of black teenage males and cause all this other nasty stuff we’re talking about here, we and the whole world~

      • towerflower says:

        Excellent post Romaine, but while most of us think we would do the right thing when the time comes, none of us really know how we would react when or if the time ever comes to us; will fear overtake us? The demands of a spouse or loved one not to get involved take control of our actions? Hesitation? Did anyone think it would really go as far as it did?

      • Rachael says:

        @towerflower – I totally agree. We ALL think we know how we would like to act, but until in that situation, we don’t really know, even if we assume we would. And the right thing also depends on the situation. I’m talking in general, not necessarily in this case, but if you had young children you were alone with in the house and you heard fighting then a gunshot, it would not, IMO, be the right thing to go out there, knowing there was a gun and not knowing what was going on and who else might be there. Just calling 911 would be correct (IMO) in that situation.

        And sometimes what you think would be helpful may not be. Do you know why police officers hate going on domestic violence calls? Because they often get shot. I had a neighbor get shot that way. A drunk was beating up his girlfriend, my neighbor instead of calling 911, went over to “help” and the drunk got mad and instead of shooting the girlfriend shot him.

        So not only do we not know how we would act, we don’t always know what would be right and when it is happening fast in the dark, there isn’t always time to evaluate it until after when it is too late.

        I’m not saying more could not have been done and I am not disagreeing that there may be people who know more than what they said, I’m just talking in general – babbling, not adding anything of value.

        Sorry. I think it is bedtime now.

      • Malisha says:

        I just watched the movie Schindler’s List for the second time — the first time I saw it was over a decade ago. I keep reminding myself throughout the movie that it is not fiction; it is not fiction; it is not fiction. People, real people, even flawed people, imperfect non-heroic people, do respond appropriately and even admirably under atrocious circumstances. It can be done.

        One neighbor with a little courage that night could have made all the difference.

      • Two sides to a story says:

        When I lived in FL 20 years ago, people would get as far away from fights and disturbances as possible because of the possibility of guns being pulled out etc. While it would have been nice if some white hat rode to the rescue, I don’t think it’s realistic. Just like it’s not a good thing for Fogen Watchman to go running after “suspicious” strangers. I think it’s too bad that the guy who went to the door and shouted at them didn’t have a cell phone in hand. Perhaps if he would have kept talking and maybe even gotten a little closer, he might have changed the course of events. Or if someone had a flashlight in hand and had even shone it on them from a window. But then, we’d probably be dealing with Fogen killing someone else down the road. : /

      • Rachael says:

        I agree totally with what you are saying about “People, real people, even flawed people, imperfect non-heroic people, do respond appropriately and even admirably under atrocious circumstances. It can be done.” When it comes to Schindler’s List, but I don’t see how you can compare what happened that night to Schindler’s List.

        Like towerflower said, ” Did anyone think it would really go as far as it did?” I mean why would you? A couple guys fighting in your back yard, you yell at them to stop and call the police. By the time you do, one has been shot and is dead.

        It was dark, a couple guys fighting, could have been just a couple drunks, what was someone really supposed to do? If they had actually seen a man and a child fighting, I could see someone getting in there and stopping it – if it was 2 children fighting, I could see someone getting in there and stopping it, but it wasn’t like 2 kids on the playground and even though Trayvon was a child and only 17, I doubt anyone could see that in the dark. If anyone knew that GZ had a gun, someone might have stepped in and done something, and even in hindsight, people probably wished there had been something they could have done, but really, what could someone have done. Now if Jeremy said (remember how he said something we don’t quite know) He warned me he was going to shoot, maybe he could have gotten in there and risked taking a bullet himself to push Trayvon out of the way or grab GZ.

        But the Holocaust lasted from 1938 to 1945. It isn’t really fair to compare that to a fight that lasted a minute and ended with a gunshot when it was dark and no one knew there was a gun or what was going on.

        Again, like towerflower said, “Did anyone think it would go as far as it did?” And even if they did, did anyone think it would so fast?

        Maybe something could have been done. I don’t know, I wasn’t there, but I’m not sure what it would have been. And hindsight is 20/20.

        However, if someone does know something that they didn’t say, yes, they do need to step forward and tell the truth. Knowing something more still does not necessarily mean they would have been able to do something to change the course of that night, but if they are aware of something that could change the course of things now, they need to use some of that 20/20 hindsight and spill it.

      • Malisha says:

        Rachel, I wasn’t comparing the events of that evening to the Holocaust and I agree that there was no similarity in the way Schindler reacted to what happened and the opportunity, or lack of opportunity, on the part of the ear-witnesses to Trayvon Martin’s death. What I am saying, though, is this:

        1. My belief that someone could have done more than they did is based upon the belief that at least two and maybe more than two of the ear-witnesses ALREADY KNEW FOGEN and knew him to be in the habit of patrolling that neighborhood with a loaded gun looking for young Black males. This seems obvious to me from several things. (a) Fogen tells the cops he “knows everybody in the nighborhood”; (b) There had been stress at HOA meetings because there were objections to Fogen patrolling with a loaded gun already, and at least two complaints had gone in to the police about that activity; (c) HOA members were among those who called 911; (d) Ibrahim Rashada had already formed the opinion that it was not safe for young Black males — even those who were homeowners — to walk around the neighborhood because of Fogen’s hobby of “chasing” them; and (e) The “Jeremy Get IN HERE” conversation sounds very peculiar to me and I believe it has something to do with the belief that indeed a handgun crime was on a high-probability list at the time of the inception of that 911 call.

        OK, so I think at least two and maybe three people in the area knew that the developing sounds and sights of that evening could result in a death. I firmly believe that only the teacher who cried and wept on the telephone reacted in a reasonable way to finding out that there had been a killing in her backyard. What was wrong with those others? Did they perhaps think that the killing was a property-enhancement killing and therefore not really a problem for the community after all? If the neighborhood had been up in arms about somebody shooting a person dead in their backyard on a Sunday evening, would those cops have felt free to kick the thing under the rug and send Fogen home with a “one free kill” card? I don’t think so! If more people reacted as did the “hysterical teacher” [a la Jeralyn Merritt, who presumably would not be at all hysterical if an innocent Black kid were to be killed in HER YARD] there might not have been the same criminal non-response from the police and this would have been handled much differently.

        Perhaps everybody meant well and after all, there was nothing they could have done any differently. Per * haps. I’m just saying, in conjunction with Tzar’s comment (which draws a kind of regretful and yet slightly haughty mini-scolding from Unitron, to my dismay) that:

        “As I continue to say, “something much more sinister than we know happened that night”

        Remember I said that”

        IT * MIGHT * ALSO * BE * that several, not all but certainly several, residents of RTL wouldn’t have minded terribly if their heroic NW captain had had to teach a lesson to some out-of-town thug so that they could rest easier [in their imaginations, since nothing about the Trayvon Martin murder was even remotely connected with their vulnerability to burglary] with their wide-screen televisions that night.

        Here are a few possibilities for “something much more sinister than we know”:

        1. Fogen could have been out deliberately hunting for someone to “assist in arresting” to show that he should be hired by HOA to patrol with a loaded gun at all times, and he could have had help with the little scripted play that he was going to perform, and some of that help could have come from Tim Smith;

        2. Fogen could have just been on his normal evening armed patrol, which he had denied he was doing, but which the neighbors knew he was doing and several of them wanted him to do, although they were aware that it was not legal and that the Neighborhood Watch guidelines prevented it;

        3. Fogen could have been working WITH one or two neighbors in identifying a good “mark” for i.d., report and arrest, to get the neighborhood into a position for more police patrols;

        4. Something could have gone on in the SPD that would make it more difficult for Fogen to justify his carrying a loaded gun while he was “patrolling” his neighborhood and Bill Lee might have let him know that if one more complaint came in about him, he would have to act on it, so there better be a “need for that gun” demonstrated or it was going to be “no more toys on patrol” for homie.

        There are many other scenarios. To me, Tzar’s comment does not really merit automatic disbelief. To me, the series of unfortunate events laid down without any emotional underpinning, and set forth by the perp himself as if they make sense (which they do NOT) doesn’t work. To me, this story, as Fogen told it, would not make it onto a TV cop drama. They would not be able to sell this story to an audience. Even if they concluded, “The perp was a racist” or “The perp had a ‘little hero’ complex,” the thing still looks too ridiculous to have happened, much less happened for any of the reasons offered or evident.

        To me, “a more sinister explanation” works better than:

        Fogen was going to the store;

        He got suspicious for no good reason;

        He got hostile and malicious for no reason other than possible racism or paranoia;

        He gave chase while he was being told not to do so;

        He either attacked or got attacked;

        He could not defend himself in any way, shape or form;

        Others from the neighborhood could not or would not “help” him even though he screamed repeatedly for help;

        He had to shoot Trayvon Martin and then embark on a bunch of idiotic actions (“spread out his hands because when he was hitting me I felt like he had something in his hands”; “put my gun back in my holster”; “told [the neighbor] no, I already called the police, help me restrain this guy”; “told him just call my wife and tell her I shot somebody”; etc.);

        The police had to believe his story because there was “no evidence” that his story was not true.

        See, that doesn’t work for me even if Fogen’s “you got a problem, homie?” happened or even if Fogen’s, “you got a problem, homie?” DID NOT happen. It doesn’t work regardless of whether it was self-defense OR murder. There is still a lot missing. And, like Tzar, I think that the lot that is missing is likely to be “more sinister” than we now know.

        I’m seeing hoof-prints. I’m saying, “That’s a horse, but it’s a horse of a different color.”

        • Malisha

          You always seem to be on target (no pun intended)

          And I agree with Tzar.

          As to the residents…most of them anyway….it could have been fear of fogen that kept them inside.

          Involved suspects on scene?……osterman….smith….taaffe (maybe)

          In the coverup offsite? DA wolfinger, Chief lee & papa z.

          Without a doubt Serrino wanted to charge fogen……yet was overruled by his superiors………….WHY?

        • onlyiamunitron says:

          Unlike Tzar’s rather cryptic remark, you actually leave me in no doubt of what you mean, so there’s no reason to wonder if there’s any connection between that to which you refer and that previous cryptic poster.

          Thank you.

          I don’t know yet if I agree or disagree with any of it, but if the time comes I’ll at least know with what I am or am not agreeing.


      • I have never posted before but a comment by Romaine brought me out of the shadows. I agree with one important question offered that I have asked from the beginning:

        Romaine says:
        February 23, 2013 at 6:08 p.m.

        “. . . if the adult residents hearing and not seeing had simply stepped outside remaining in place would the defendant have taken that deadly shot?”

        I understand the residents’ fear, but I also understand that the overall fear-in the United States at least-has been exacerbated by the sheer hatred spewed by the mainstream media who no longer are news reporters but news readers. Those who sign their paychecks also write their scripts. Yesterday I read a few comments by loyalists on a site that strongly supports the killer of Trayvon Martin, and the comments were as I expected. I was struck, however, by the fact that even though they were disheartened because things are not going their way, they say that their fight is bigger than defending the killer of Trayvon Martin. They say their fight is with Obama. Wait. What?

        In 2008 this country got possibly its last opportunity to get our house in order. The respect other nations had for us was lower than it had ever been. President Obama spent the first six months of his presidency going around the world listening to leaders of other countries. His opposition called it an apology tour. The bottom line is that we can no longer afford to prop up every country who says they are our friends and therefore want us to spend our dollars on them. At some point we have to take care of home. For far too many years we devoted much too much of our capital in being the policemen of the world, while our schools and neighborhoods and jobs were going down the toilet. The only two industries that were growing were the military industrial complex and the prison system. The script thus had to portray Black boys as thugs, suspicious, profane, drug addicted criminals that deserve to be imprisoned-or shot. Because President Obama does not fit into any of these boxes and perhaps gives young people-including young Black men-hope that they can reach lofty heights, he is also now the enemy.

        There is a divide in this country that is wider than at any time in my memory, and I go as far back as seeing the horrible picture of 14 year old Emmett Till in JET Magazine after his body was recovered from the river. I carry the faces of Addie Mae Collins, Cynthia Wesley, Carole Robertson and Denise McNair with me always. They were the four little girls killed in the Birmingham, Alabama church bombing. When I write about them I always try to acknowledge their names because their deaths shone a bright light on the hate that was cancerous in America. Three of these little angels were 14 years old and one was 11 years old.

        I shed tears when I think of the innocent, confused face of 14 year old George Stinney, who was the youngest person to be executed in the United States. Arrested in the Depression era South for killing 2 young white girls simply because he said he had seen them on the day of their deaths, his parents and siblings were run out of town soon after his arrest and he was left in jail with only his accusers and a court appointed attorney who was not even going through the motions of defending him. His total confinement was 2 ½ months; He was tried and convicted in one day. It is said he was so small that when he sat in the electric chair the Bible he carried under his arm was used as a booster seat.

        I am unfortunately seeing that same kind of hate today. If the church bombing and child deaths of 1963 had happened in 2012, I would not be too surprised if the same folks who either try to rationalize the killing of Trayvon Martin or desecrate his memory would also be digging up dirt on the parents, sisters, brothers, and church members of the four little girls. Hate and fear makes you crazy.

        Hate, fear, and racism go hand in hand. I am on the side of those who feel it is time that the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders take another look at including racism as a psychiatric disorder. I don’t have very much faith that they ever will, because racism is the kind of thing that no one wants to own up to. It is America’s dirty little secret-and it prevents us from moving forward to become the country that we pretend to be. A problem will never be solved if it is not acknowledged. At least if we acknowledge it, we can seek treatment for it and possibly get well. I am certainly not saying Trayvon was profiled on February 26, 2012 solely because of his race, but the nastiness of his killer’s defenders most certainly have everything to do with race and/or fear.

        I did not know Trayvon Martin nor do I know his parents, or cousins, or friends. I do have a grandson who will turn 18 years old soon and I love him. He wears hoodies. He goes to 7-11. At one time he had a job going into neighborhoods selling newspaper subscriptions and he was very good at it because he has a winning personality. He would go into neighborhoods that were predominantly white because his supervisor said statistically they were more likely to buy subscriptions. It didn’t matter to my grandson because he can win almost anybody over with his smile and his personality. I have a scary suspicion, though, that he had a sixth sense about something that was either said to him or done to him because one day he suddenly told his supervisor that he would not be able to work anymore. And when he came home my daughter told me that he cried because he really loved that job. That makes me sad and mad at the same time. What if he encountered someone like Trayvon’s killer who felt that “this is a suspicious Black teen in my neighborhood that I don’t recognize and he has on a hoodie and he’s walking about.” There but the grace of God go each of us. If we are mothers or grandmothers we are all Sybrina Fulton. If we are brothers we are all Jahvaris Martin. If we are fathers we are all Tracy Martin.

        Pastor Martin Niemoller said it best. He was a German theologian who, along with far too few other religious leaders, opposed Hitler. For his opposition he, too, was sent to a concentration camp. He said:

        First they came for the socialists,
        and I didn’t speak out because I wasn’t a socialist.
        Then they came for the trade unionists,
        and I didn’t speak out because I wasn’t a trade unionist.
        Then they came for the Jews,
        and I didn’t speak out because I wasn’t a Jew.
        Then they came for me, and there was no one left to speak for me.

        This is why we are all Trayvon Martin. And sometimes we’ll only have one opportunity to do the right thing.

        • Xena says:

          @Mary G.

          They say their fight is with Obama. Wait. What?

          The same White Supremacists operating under sovereign citizenship beliefs in 2008, are the same ones who started the thugification of Trayvon in 2012. They don’t like the 14th Amendment. They want their country back.

        • cielo62 says:

          Mary G. – absolutely powerful. You should comment more often!

          Sent from my iPod

  44. colin black says:

    Rachael says:

    February 23, 2013 at 10:26 am

    And also, why would the screams stop the moment we hear the gunshot? If GZ had been in the process of being beaten up and wanting the police to find him, wouldn’t he still be yelling for help? I mean maybe his “problem” was solved by shooting Trayvon, but it was not over.

    Exactly Rachel an foggen said in his own words he didnt think he had hit him.
    He was still struggling an curseing after saying
    You got me or got it.
    An said he was asking flashlight or backdoorguy with help to restain him not call 911 cos he still sqwirming ect.
    An yet in the tape shot an silance.

  45. kimmi says:

    Awesome article Professor! I have the utmost respect for you.
    Although this is your blog, which obviously allows you to ‘make the rules’ and be King of the Kingdom, you have chosen to handle this situation with wisdom and grace.

    “Since they have established and dedicated entire websites to spewing lies and hatred toward me, I can and do take enormous satisfaction from my accomplishments.”

    While dealing with your own persecution from a certain group of people and all the feelings and emotions that come with that, you have chosen to take the high road, to look beyond, and find the true message, which should be a lesson to us all.

    This case is about a senseless, unnecessary death of an unarmed youth, taken by a man who felt he had the right to be judge, jury and executioner one fateful night.

    If that weren’t enough in and of it self, it also revolves around some very sensitive subjects that have divided a country between anyone who has followed the news or only discussed it. Luckily, this thread is about Justice for Trayvon, so the argument over guilt or innocence has been pretty much uncovered and agreed upon by the investigation of the evidence against the admitted shooter.

    Then, not only does this case bring up racism, and all the aspects of those feelings and emotions, it also has stand your ground issues with gun rights activists blended into the mix, as well as all of the sub-categories of the above.

    There are also numerous individual personalities amongst the many different bloggers, which could be an issue on a ‘normal’ day, and then toss in several different extremely sensitive subjects to discuss and it’s easily a recipe for conflict in one way or another.

    The opinions and viewpoints of the opposing party have been beyond what most could ever possibly imagine. The vile, disgusting hatred spewed upon the victim and his family has been more than any family should ever have to endure. Yet through all of this, the Martin family continues to use this tragedy to be an inspiration.

    There are several blogs that have experienced these very same issues. Some have closed completely, while others have simply locked the GZ threads. The Hinkey Meter, a very respectable blog, (my first blogging experience), was very similar in the respect that the ‘owner’ Valhall, wrote thought provoking posts to keep the readers informed and the discussion flowing. It was a great place to read what’s new and discuss the various viewpoints combined with the evidence.

    It was a very sad day when it closed in May 2012; most likely do to the constant arguing, bickering, and extreme pressure caused by babysitting a bunch of uncontrollable** people, many of whom were trying to force the ‘other’ side/everyone else to conform to their same thoughts, views or perceptions. Many could no longer simply agree to disagree.

    I truly enjoy being able to come to this blog, read and discuss the issues of this case, and I would hate for this site to end up like several others have before.

    We need to remember these words of wisdom from the Professor:

    “This house will tear itself apart from the inside out if the desire for vindication precludes a mutually respectful and thoughtful discussion toward a solution that recognizes and validates the emotional reactions that lie beneath the skin.”

    Thank you Professor for reminding us of the above and the reason we are here:

    “We are here to ask questions, exchange opinions, learn new things, practice tolerance and treat each other with respect.”

    Thank you Professor, for sharing your knowledge and expertise in law. It is greatly appreciated, I know I am thankful for all the time, energy and dedication you put into each and every article. Lets not forget the main reason that brought us all here: Justice for Trayvon.

    I remember something my mom used to always say, “Never judge someone until you’ve walked a mile in their shoes.” That is something I must admit, through time and for various reasons, I have somewhat forgotten. I personally, probably due to my feelings on this issue, sometimes feel that ShelLie or O’Liar are fitting ‘nicknames’ for those that, imo, have ‘earned’ those ‘titles.’ Is it right? Probably not, but it is a way of venting the anger towards those who have done so much worse to the victim and his family.

    Yes, through this tragedy we need to find some humor as well, but should we stoop to ‘their’ level? If that is what we choose to do, then we will become no better than those we complain about.

    Which brings me to another one of mom’s memorable sayings, “Two wrongs don’t make a right.” Thanks mom for your words of wisdom, and thank you Professor, for your wisdom and guidance. It is truly refreshing to see when someone isn’t led by anyone else’s opinion, but led by their God to do what they feel in their heart is right.

    I absolutely believe the only way the Martin/Fulton family have persevered through this horrible tragedy and have maintained the dignity and grace that they have shown throughout this horrible ordeal and mockery is none other than by the “Grace of God.”

    May we honor Trayvon and his family by not allowing this tragedy to tear us apart, but use it to build us up, so we may stand United in Justice for Trayvon. Yes, we can disagree, but let us not forget what brought so many of us here in the first place. That is my opinion, I hope I haven’t offended anyone on this blog, and if I have, I apologize. My apologies for being so long-winded as well. Have a great day everyone. BBL.

    (**Not that a blog owner should ‘control’ the people, but continually asking them to simply respect each other’s viewpoints and agree to disagree can get really old, very quick, imo)

  46. colin black says:

    Dewayne G says:

    February 23, 2013 at 6:34 am

    Prof, I made a few comments on here and I don’t have y’all discuss this issue but how is the defense prove that it was GZ screaming for help? I noticed how they are relying on the supposedly statement made by Tracy Martin, saying that’s not his son voice and testimony from GZ, his family and John. John had 4 different statements can they really rely on him? GZ family and as well as Tracy, of course both sides gonna say that’s their son’s voice. Now that’s leave GZ. The state probably matched GZ statements with the cries for help. GZ stated Trayvon put his hands over his nose & mouth. So how is able to scream/yell for help if his mouth is covered? GZ also stated he was screaming cause the assault from Trayvon right? Now the assault stops when Trayvon covered GZ’s nose & mouth then Trayvon goes for gun(based on GZ statements) but GZ prevents Trayvon from getting it by applying a wristlock(Serino statement), next he unholster his gun then says he had make sure he doesn’t shot his hand. With all that GZ stated
    @ They are just useing semantics as was foggen when he said an then I started yelling as loud as i could.
    Or I was yelling for help an he is telling the truth.
    But lieing through ommision is that while he was yelling for help.
    Trayvon was simioultanasly screaming for help begging for mercy an a terrified drawn out noooo silanced by a single shot.
    The tapes be alylised an there two distict voices heaard.

    An as foggen an Trayvon were the only two people out there it has to be there voices.
    So M O M can say as he chooses even fogggen had the sence not to try an claim the agonised scream as his own
    Its significant as it one of the few truthfull things he has said about the case.
    I got out of my truck.
    Are you following him yeah.
    And then I shot him one time
    My name is George Zimmerman
    And that doesnt sound anything like me.

    He knew as soon as he heard that scream/
    He had an oh fluck momment
    An thats why he blurted out the truth.

    He could always claim later an say hey I told the truth that it wasnt me screaming at that point.

    At that point.

    An then he will casually inform us that sure the other guy was screaming but a thought he was shouting for his hommies see.
    Another reason I had to shoot him real quick before the police arrived
    Ah mean his hommies arrived.

    Thats what the tapes about an thats why it will just be one of the many many many nails in his coffin.

    What Tracy Martin did or didnt say is just another peice of inconciqencial fluff that the defence harps on about.
    They havent even done there own study of the cleaned up tape
    Let alone tried to enchance it they want the State to tell them whats on it.
    They didnt even seem to know there where two voices until B D L R informedthem in open court.

    The exampler to example the voices foggen done sounds zilch like the heart rendding screams we hear on the tape.
    They aint got a pot to piss in or piss to piss in it.

    even psters here an at other sites discern two distinct voices.
    One stern curseing interogating
    The other frigtened pleading begging.

    Ask yourself this who would be screaming beggging for mercy the person with the gun pointed at there chest.
    Or the person holding an pointing the gun.
    Same question the jury will ask them selfs if this farce of a defence even gets that far.

    • Colin, you pretty much said it all:

      “Ask yourself this who would be screaming beggging for mercy the person with the gun pointed at there chest.
      Or the person holding an pointing the gun.
      Same question the jury will ask them selfs if this farce of a defence even gets that far.”

      • Trained Observer says:

        This, asked just like that, could be the best dead-on cut to the meat of the matter question of the entire trial.

      • aussie says:

        Tracy Martin was not asked
        “is that your son””

        he was asked “are you sure that’s your son?”

        BIG difference.

        “No” just that one word they say he said just then, can mean “yes it sounds like him but I can’t be 1000% certain”. Unlike RZ Sr, he’s probably never had his son in a situation where he’d have to scream like that, to have heard it before.

        It could also mean “no, no, oh no dear God…….”

        • blushedbrown says:


          >>>>It could also mean “no, no, oh no dear God…….”

          Good post. I was trying to figure out how to express that in a post.

    • Lonnie Starr says:

      I just realized something… MOM has to try to prevent any of GZ’s friends and family members from taking the stand! There’s too great a risk that on cross, they may say something supporting GZ’s character. If they do then KaPoWee; all of that impeachment material comes in.

      The defense only has a case as long as he can keep all defense witnesses off the stand. Otherwise, he has to instruct them not to say anything in support of GZ’s character, no matter how many times or how obliquely the SP asks such questions.

      This is going to be a very tricky defense, not being able to allow witnesses to say much at all. Where MOM’s worst nightmare is that some witness will say something nice about GZ while under oath.

      • With two possible exceptions, he has no reason to call any of the defendant’s friends or family to testify because they did not witness anything relevant to the issues in this case.

        The two possible exceptions are identification of the person who uttered the death shriek and confirmation that he left the house to shop at Target.

        Given what we now know regarding the context of the shriek and the two audible voices and what they said, I do not expect anyone will believe a witness who identifies the defendant as the person screaming. Worse, they will know that the witness is lying.

        I do not see Shellie Zimmerman testifying, given her pending perjury charge.

        • Lonnie Starr says:

          Yes, MOM’s case will mainly devolve around trying to discredit Prosecution witnesses. That’s a very difficult way to have to proceed, it requires lots of time and care. Impeachment efforts must be extremely careful to direct attention and focus on the facts, not “hand waving” and/or badgering because that appears for what it is, a lack of substantive impeachment materials and/or an attempt to inflate the importance of an artifact beyond it’s real probative value. Either of these faults will throw the jurors to the other side.

          Someone needs to tell O’Mara this is not divorce court. Or maybe O’Mara has already given up? Why do his motions lack authorities?
          He seems to be constantly leaving himself at the mercy of both the court and the SP.

      • type1juve says:

        I can see RZ Sr getting up there and extolling the virtues of Fogen like he has before. Prof, can the SP use what the Zimmerman’s said about Fogen in the bail hearing during the trial, specifically them implying that he is not violent unless provoked? Will the jury get to hear about his violent history?

  47. colin black says:

    onlyiamunitron says:

    February 23, 2013 at 2:07 am

    Let me see if I’ve got this straight.

    Trayvon’s no longer alive to call Zimmerman and his family nasty names, so y’all have a sacred duty to do it for him?

    Forgive me if I don’t understand how this is of any use when it comes to actually discussing the case.

    Who did y’all have as Emmanuel Goldstein before february 26th of last year?


    @Derogatary names have been used time without begining or end.
    Presidents of your country if you are American.
    Good an Bad have been labelled with degoratry names.

    Nixon ..Tricky Dickie.
    Bill Clinton ..Take your Pick.
    Even President Kennedy before his assasination an elivation to sainthood was called degorty names,
    In fact there were wanted posters put up throughout the State of Texas.
    Claiming wanted for treason.
    Those were swiftly taken down after his muder.

    Lots of genuine Celebs get labbeled with degoratry names its just a fact of life.
    So I fail to comprehend why anyone would cry foul when a criminal or idiot gets labelled with a degoritve nickname.

    That has also happened since time imermorium its a fact.
    I dont like the defendant and If I were ever given the chance to meet him for a chat.
    I would love to say to his face what Im certain either he or his family reads at this site
    An beleive me Unitron it would be much less politicaly correct than I am on this blog.I wouldnt lay nor wish to lay a finger on him
    So if you take everthing I say above re Presidents an Celebs getting labbeled with unsauvoury names as fact.
    And I beleive most would agree its factuall info but I can post links.

    Why would or should anyone whom is not foggen or his family be upset about any degogatery terms aimed in his direction.
    I dont get it?

    • racerrodig says:

      No Colin…you get it, someron else doesn’t. When I was in HS someone game me the name WreckerXXXXX and I wasn’t offended. Someone thought they were insulting me with racerrodig….race cars and such is what I do….I wasn’t insulted and flipped it around as a nick name. You nailed it.

      Tricky Dicky Pffffft Your Kennedy statement is true. The day he was murdered there was full page ad in the Dallas Newspaper “Wanted….”

      Fogen……an insult…..ya’ll

    • cielo62 says:

      Colin~ Unit Ron is just having a hissy. Thank you for the history lesson. I didn’t know that about President Kennedy being “Wanted for Treason.” Here is a link for that:   So I learned something new today. Thanks!

  48. bettykath says:

    Professor, thanks for the post. I had decided only to read your emails and skip the comments, then you address my concerns and ask for comment.

    Many of the comments are insightful and well worth the read. Then there are a lot of comments I scroll past b/c they don’t say anything enlightening. They fit the category of venting, I guess.

    What I find offensive is when someone poses an opinion or a question that is counter to the group-think and is immediately labeled a troll. Everyone should be able to post an opinion or a question without fear. One way to disarm someone you perceive as an enemy is to treat her/him with respect. You may find out that the person isn’t and never was an enemy, or the person was and you agree to disagree and disengage. In the best case, you win them over.

    I also find it offensive when offensive posts on another website are used as an excuse for offensive posts to be made on this website as if tit-for-tat is necessary. Those on the other sites believe the defendant. Some of them have an agenda. Others don’t have the advantages that we have of a knowledgeable lawyer to explain many of the legal questions nor the talent that’s here to go through the evidence dumps in an attempt to know what really happened that night without relying on the defendant’s story.

    I did pay a visit recently to the treehouse. Maybe it was a calm day over there but what I read was not much different from some of the threads here. The main difference was their choice of who they denigrated. The difference is based on who believes the defendant and who does not. Like I said, maybe it was just a calm day for them.

    I made a decision some time ago to remove toxins from my life to the extent possible. I started with the food I eat. Then I realized that the stress of dealing with toxic people was also a problem. I left an organization that I had worked hard for b/c it became overrun with liars and cheats. Several of us left at the same time. We couldn’t abide by the bylaws being subverted nor by the outright lies that were used to marginalize minority views. I don’t think anyone here is toxic, but some of the comments are.

    Everyone here makes good comments most of the time and I’d like to benefit from those. This thread has demonstrated that it’s possible.

    • bettykath says:

      February 23, 2013 at 1:46

      “…..I did pay a visit recently to the treehouse. Maybe it was a calm day over there but what I read was not much different from some of the threads here. The main difference was their choice of who they denigrated. The difference is based on who believes the defendant and who does not. Like I said, maybe it was just a calm day for them….”

      that’s the only difference you can see? between those who believe the defendant and us? it’s all about belief in this killer’s word? so other than that, there’s NO distinction in your mind between the quality of people, comments- facts or opinions and the disseminated information posted here and there?

      well, i wholly disagree with you..but i can’t defend myself from people who logically aren’t even in the same stratosphere. either you get it or you don’t.

      • Trained Observer says:

        Shannon — You are so very right. Some of thems get it, and some of thems don’t. And some of thems are so full of themselves they don’t even get how silly or sanctimonious they sound. Somebody on this and previous threads recommended ignoring. That may be best.

      • Two sides to a story says:

        I suspect there are some very nice people who support Fogen because they really do believe he is a nice guy defending his neighborhood and they see the evidence as pointing to an assault on Fogen. I doubt that all are racist hacks.

        • Ask professor about those “very nice” people who think gz is a nice guy and ” see ” the evidence pointing to Trayvon attacking the nice “defender” with the gun. Your suspicion might be off- off the chart!!

        • cielo62 says:

          Two Sides~ What you say is probably true EXCEPT that once you even look at the slimmest of evidence, GZ is so obviously a liar. NO DNA found on Trayvon. HOW can someone attack another person and leave NO DNA behind? That one fact alone should make them see GZ for the liar he is. There really is no excuse to believe such a bogus story once you look at any of the relevent evidence. As the Professor has said several times; only racists suppport GZ.

      • onlyiamunitron says:

        “that’s the only difference you can see? ”

        As she said, “Maybe it was a calm day over there…”

        If it was, I could understand her seeing it as substituting X for Y as the target of the Two Minutes Hate.

        The time or three I looked in over there were not calm days.

        They win the “Simultaneously Nasty and Sanctimonious” contest hands down.


      • Two sides to a story says:

        There truly are two sides to a coin and I’ve often thought the same thing as BettyKath. While I understand venting, sometimes some of the comments here will come off as really being no different as namecalling attacks on Trayvon and his family. The only difference is that Fogen killed Trayvon. I don’t see any reason to act or sound like Fogen supporters on a bad day. And they don’t always sound bad – they have families, they have love in their hearts for their children and their mates, and all that stuff. Their politics get screwy and some are racists, but they’re still human.

        That said, I do enjoy the clever humor I’ve seen from each and every person here that puts Fogen and his supporters in their place but is done in a more thoughtful way.

        Sorry if that puts me in the same category. I think where my head is at probably comes with age and experience and not seeing everything in a them vs. us mentality.

        May all beings be free from suffering.

  49. colin black says:

    Two sides to a story says:

    February 23, 2013 at 12:11 am

    “We remember never to forget his actions but wish to always silance his name/brand”

    Malisha told us about the Jewish custom of speaking about someone who is bad, or evil, or not so good, or whatever you want to call it, and that the custom is to say “let his name be forgotten.” So she shortened this to Fogen and some of us adopted it. So you’re exactly right. Foggen is pretty darn good too.

    When I say foggen or fogen I mean fogen If that makes sence.
    I know everyone whom cant spell an has bad grammar claims dyslexia.
    But I suffer from letter blindness opposed to word blidness.
    There differnt types an severitys of dyslexia.

    But beleive you me when I was a kid at school an faced with the alphabet ?
    Bear in mind I was five at the time an read comics an ladybird books an I could read after a fashion.
    I wasnt stupid or as they call it special or in my day remeidial.

    But when first faced with the alphabet on a big white pull down screen.
    I might have as well been looking at Eygtptian Heirogryphycs.
    Asked to read it out as a class .
    Some kid would start of ABCD an then another an another .
    An then to me.

    Id just be stood there frozen in terrror an humilation .
    Sometimes Id be franticly going over in my head memorising the entire alphabet by rote abcdefg an hopeing to jump in at the right point whan asked to stand.
    But I always flucked up an then the kids would start laughing.
    The teacher would get mad at first thinking I was defient an takeing the piss.
    She would point her pointer an demand I start to recite from such an such a point.

    An in those days in Scotish schools we had copral punishment
    The torrs a leather weapon of pain we xalled it getting the belt,
    Thats what happened you were strapped acropss the hand .
    An when some male teachers strated there swing with the belt behind there back an then swung down .
    With full force on wee hands you better beleive it hurt.

    You received it across the hand double habded one held beneith to support the other while it received the blow.

    Anyway I ended up with a lot of sore hands in primary school.
    Not just for my dyslexia but mors so my genral attatude.

    Those close to me know that my tounge is my best medium an by far my greatest weapon.
    In my case not my words but my gift of the gabb is mightier than the sword.

    Be it flattery or full on argumentive debate type situation I can run rings round most.
    But by far an the thing Im most ashamed of is my abilty to wound an hurt people with my words via voice.
    I know exactly were to attack / what to say to hurt the most.

    An obviously its only people I know well that I have intimate an close knowlage of an amunnition to use
    Ive never ever been physically violen person
    Haveing been the victim of violence as a youngster growing up#Ive never admired it as a trait but despised it an those that use it.
    However Ive been violent with my tounge if you reduce someone to tears makes no diffrence how.
    You have hurt them.
    So I cadged that genie except for very very rare ocassions.
    The last being the day after 9 11.

    On a bus in the Uk Day after 9 11 attacks some drunk thug started giveing a Pakistani Woman her Husband an child greif.
    Curseing at them calling them vermin ect

    No one on the bus was saying anything an I was sat at the back an this was going on at the front an I could hear it.
    I wont bore you with the details but I got up went up said my peice an the gentleman left the bus of his own free will at the next stop.
    The entire bus started clapping an I though what a bunch of hypocrytes.
    Aplaud me an yet sat docile themselfs.
    Old peole kids yeah they got an excuse but most were adults fitter than me.

    So Ive gone way of point again my spelling at times is terrible sometimes its typos but mostly not.
    I excelled in secondry education because Edinburgh had a school for dyslexics I was eventuall diagnosed
    We were encouraged to spell phonetically an as long as the teachers could regognise the word that was all that mattered.
    An its so easy to recognise a word spelled phonetically spelt correctly or not
    So foggen fogen forgot its all the same to me .
    Haveing said that this post is so long Ive forgotten what I was Talking about….

    • bettykath says:

      Colin, My brother spells much the same way as you. I always thought it mark of his creativity. He’s a fabulous writer/story teller. The rest of us go rote, you go creative. 🙂

    • Two sides to a story says:

      You’re wonderfully articulate, creative, and full of humor. I still think the spelling Foggen reminds me of the fog more than Fogen and I’m sorry if that brought up bad memories for you.

    • Malisha says:

      Colin, this made my day and my week:

      So foggen fogen forgot its all the same to me .
      Haveing said that this post is so long Ive forgotten what I was Talking about….

    • cielo62 says:

      Colin, Colin, Colin~ You are man after my own heart! Yes, after the September 11 attacks, too many people were doing hateful things and too many others were scared to say anything. I applaud you for your courage. I never let anything like looks, religion, nationality etc stop me from talking to people. They only thing I can’t stand are stupid, evil people. GZ comes to mind.   I have never heard of letter blindness before. Twenty years teaching and I know about dyslexia in a general way, but nothing more than what I need to send a child on to get him/her tested for further help.   Thank you for being your irrespresible self!

  50. Prof, I thought about what you wrote and the main thing that jumped out at me was, YOU are an emotional person?!
    all this time I’ve never seen you lose your temper. even after all the slander and lies people have written about you, you still never lose your cool.

    From what i can tell when you get upset is ( afterwards i guess ) you get quiet.
    one time you stayed quiet for like two days and then came back and calmly announced that you had to file a complaint against a website, but even then it was only because they had used your name and pic and they had to stop for legal reasons, because of the brand *your professional name*.
    you didn’t seem to indicate whether what was written about you had hurt your feelings or made you particularly angry. you were as cool and collected as usual. and, you never even acknowledged a poster who came here first freaking out about what someone had written about you!! i think that person was confused and hurt that no one seemed to take her seriously.

    personally other than learning a lot more about you, i don’t want ANYTHING to change here. and i don’t want everyone to become too paranoid to speak their mind or use their usual language. and i don’t want this blog to be bland or generic that it’s limited to strictly clinical, emotionless legal references and case studies.

    But, i think there are some people that are instigators, nit pickers and attention seekers, who get off on criticizing others. the one in particular i’m thinking about, I think you believe her as innocently voicing her opinions and looking at it from a defense point of view. i could see how that would be useful to the blog and the people here just as much as you do, but i don’t believe that usefulness is her agenda. i believe starting drama is.

    (also i don’t like the idea, especially in this case, that you should be lending your *death penalty expert* defense strategies here for all to see! the defense does go over this site! and there’s other cases that will desperately need you and a real honest defense, but not this one!)

    Awhile ago i did a little checking on someone and i found a little something sneaky on another Professor’s blog. This is before you wrote a whole post about her, so you might imagine my negative emotional reaction! but i didn’t bother commenting about it. i know that if/or when you believe you’ve mistaken one’s intentions you always say something about it. if you’d like to know what i saw i can send it to you. but even this is my interpretation of someone else’s behavior and it’s not even what i consider an unforgivable betrayal.

    so anyway, my thoughts on yesterdays ( this one ) post, are this;
    wow, what a bummer! i’m getting spanked for being bad, and now i don’t wanna do anything else wrong. and i’m sorry for my childish behavior!
    but like almost all human’s- except for perfectly righteous amongst us here, i’m afraid i’ll be naughty again; so you should keep that belt handy!! 😆

    • bettykath says:


      “Awhile ago i did a little checking on someone and i found a little something sneaky on another Professor’s blog. This is before you wrote a whole post about her, so you might imagine my negative emotional reaction! but i didn’t bother commenting about it. i know that if/or when you believe you’ve mistaken one’s intentions you always say something about it. if you’d like to know what i saw i can send it to you. but even this is my interpretation of someone else’s behavior and it’s not even what i consider an unforgivable betrayal. ”

      Are you “talking” about me? If so, what blog and what did I say? If you don’t want to post it here, please sent to the professor and ask that he forward it. Even if you aren’t talking about me, but someone else, it still sounds a bit like an accusation by innuendo.

      • BK,
        remember you just said there’s really no difference between us and the treepeople besides who we believe? so i couldn’t care less what my comment sounds like to you.

      • bettykath says:

        shannon, I know you don’t care what I think. That’s obvious. I care what you think, especially when it looks like you’re attacking me, coming at me sideways.

    • Romaine says:

      lol you are funny..enjoyed your post

    • cielo62 says:

      shannoninmiami~ you are certainly a fireball! Don’t ever change!

  51. Tee says:

    MOM, wants Dee Dee’s medical records from the night of Trayvon death up until 6 months after, this is a new low. You mean to tell me that a witness have to undergo this type of treatment & scrutiny, I’m smh!

    • Rachael says:

      That is effn BS. It is like everyone is being treated like they are on trial except for the one on trial!

      • racerrodig says:

        O’ Mara would love nothing better than to wave her visit to her gynecologist’s report for the Outhouse to see. Dentist visit maybe, discuss that cavity ?? There is nothing relevant in anything he’s asking for.

        All together, lets spell it out “D – E – S – P – E – R – A – T – E”

        • I believe the sole purpose of the request is to harass and intimidate the witness. I cannot imagine that they have a good faith belief that the information they seek might lead to the discovery of relevant and admissible evidence.

          This discovery request should offend everyone and causes more damage to public perception of the defendant and his defense team.

          I cannot imagine why they thought this was a reasonable request and you are right. It does indeed signal desperation.

          Yet another example of a not ready for prime time defense team.

          • racerrodig says:

            I know I promised not to use the “M” word anymore but he’s out there. What on Gods Green Earth will they even think can be accomplished by this other than more wasted time and resources leading me back to the “M” word. Sorry….

            Maybe a song dedicated to “Desperate” ?????

      • Jun says:

        IMO The defense team are a bunch of pricks

        Omara used to act professional but he’s really rude and bossy

        I’m not going to be surprised if he gets held in contempt during trial

        • racerrodig says:

          “IMO The defense team are a bunch of pricks”
          A hahaha !! I agree but I’m glad you said it first !!

          “Omara used to act professional but he’s really rude and bossy”
          I’m not sure he ever acted professional…he’s been lying and running a Carnival Atmosphere from day one. Rude & Bossy – in spades !!

          “I’m not going to be surprised if he gets held in contempt during trial”
          He should be and has done a few things I’ve seen lawyers held for. I think Nelson won’t just so they have nothing to sink their teeth into.

      • towerflower says:

        Did he really do this or is this a new “we need you to do this” started on the CTH? I saw a post there about it but no link to the motion and I didn’t see a motion about this (might have missed it) on MOM’s site.

      • looolooo says:

        @racer…..there is a song for the defense. It’s called “Desperate but not serious” by Adam & the Ants circa 1982.

        • fauxmccoy says:

          woohoo for adman and the ants 🙂 that’s MY era, for better or worse, i have that album and still love it!

          • I LOVE Marshall Tucker…

            “Searchin’ for a Rainbow”? I’ve found mine….

            “Can’t U See”….been there….done that

            “Heard it in a Love Song”…..Yeah Buddy 🙂

    • Cercando Luce says:

      Particularly egregious since the defendant’s lawyer was successful in suppressing defendant’s medical evidence.

    • Trained Observer says:

      Tee, low only begins to scrape the slime off that request.

      Can we get a gander at Missus Fogen’s health records for the past half decade while we’re at it?

    • PYorck says:

      At this point I am not even sure that they expect any of those motions to be successful.

      The impression I get is that it is all about manufacturing controversy. That keeps the donors happy and influences the occasional potential juror.

      As far the actual crime is concerned they been backing away from their old positions for a long time. It is not a SYG case in the stricter sense. They implicitly concede that GZ may have been the aggressor. They are getting people used to the idea of skipping the immunity hearing etc. Have you noticed how long it has been since the actual defense (not GZ’s self-appointed supporters) has brought up old favorites like the ambush, the broken nose and the bashed head?

      The reason could be the credibility issues that we know about already. It wouldn’t surprise me if there were more glaring problems with the undisclosed evidence. We will see.

      Now it is all about convincing people that there is “something afoot.” He is dropping hints that he is taking fan theories seriously. Sinister motivations are ascribed to everyone involved. Everything they don’t know and even some things they probably do know are turned into secrets kept from them. Every little defeat in court is just another attempt to hamstring them.

      Of course he doesn’t explain what exactly this vast conspiracy is supposed to be. However he does get the idea into people’s heads that there is something wrong with this prosecution, no matter how damning the evidence is.

      • racerrodig says:

        ” It wouldn’t surprise me if there were more glaring problems with the undisclosed evidence. We will see.”

        BINGO…..O’ Mara knows what the phone records will show. There are more than likely a few other things that will really “…leave a mark..”

    • Tzar says:

      well for how many months can we get the killer’s medical records?

      • Lonnie Starr says:

        I can understand MOM’s need to fill the time twixt now and trial with noise, but this is sheer insanity. Were he to have prevailed with many of his motions, he’d have set precedent to drag most of the nation into Sanford to appear in this case.

        What possible bearing could DD’s medical condition have on a story that could not have been constructed falsely?

        As I’ve explained and MOM should have the mental capacity to figure out for himself, if he’s to be capable of acquitting himself as a member of the bar; she is only an ear witness AND none of the materials then currently available, would or could have aided either her or Attorney Crump in fashioning a false story that would stand up to scrutiny. Therefore, DD’s testimony must be accepted for what it is! It can be measured only against what can be demonstrated to have occurred contemporaneously with the call. To measure it against any other information is of absolutely no value, probative or otherwise!

        Of course, if MOM’s intent is to telegraph that he has no case, he’s done an admirable job of that. That he’s still collecting donations shows that there are people who react with little to no real information.
        I sincerely doubt he’s going to squander much money on “experts”, knowing that the only way such experts can help is by ignoring some of the important facts of the case. Since this will lead to worthless and easily impeachable conclusions, there’s no value in engaging in such dangerous conduct. But hey, that’s what MOM does for a living in divorce court, isn’t it?

        • Methinks that MOM would divorce himself from fogen if he had a chance now……..

          • racerrodig says:

            “Methinks that MOM would divorce himself from fogen if he had a chance now……..”

            I’m thinking O’ Mara would like to “commit a felony upon his person” like strangle, whop with a bat, something with large stones, maybe a blowtorch…..But………that’s just me. (no actual threat intended)

        • racerrodig says:

          Well said….as always. I always have at the forefront that O’ Mara is a Family Court Lawyer first & foremost. Slinging is probably all he knows. I think he took this on thinking it would make him the next Mark Geragos and get all those TV analyst gigs.

          • Lonnie Starr says:

            It’s really sad how incredibly foolish people can be. A large part of individual stupidity comes from being taught to have and rely upon faith instead of reason. Go ahead and hold whatever faith you want, but be reasonable enough to put it aside, while that predatory beast is still far enough distant for you to make your escape. Comfort yourself with your faith, but do not expect a brace of angels to lift you from the lions jaws.

            If there is anything to teach your children it’s that they need experts and that no matter how smart they may be, no matter how much they think they know, there will always be someone else who knows different things better than they do.

            MOM got really stupid when he was handed this case! This case was a godsend for anyone ready and able to seek and deal with expert advice. Expert trial lawyers would have explained how he could have appeared capable and skilled, reasoned and practical as well as fair minded and very professional. He didn’t seek them out, so now he appears harried and desperate, as well as bumbling and acridly nasty. He has taken the chance of a lifetime, to bask in the national limelight for well over a year, and turned it into a harshly abrasive negative, all while doing nothing of any utility for his client. No money, no fame, no fortune, no success. Just a string of utter and senselessly wasteful failures that even law 101 students see as avoidable. In short he has become Mark the blundering O’Mara, in the eyes of the nation.

            Expert media professionals would have groomed him to appear at his best on national venues, even while his client melted down, he would have stood above the fray. Instead he tried to do it all himself, as if he knew it all. He stood to close to his unstable and toxic client and as expected his client took them both down.

            Now the trial date is rushing towards him, he’s stupified as to what to do. He keeps stumbling and bumbling all over himself and insists on continuing to do so all by himself. I can only guess that he’s made such a gory mess of this case that no sane person wants to get involved at this point, lest they be tagged with some responsibility for this catastrophically abysmal failure of a defense, that only portends to get even worse as time goes on. He’s gotten so bad that he’s even driving die-in-the-wool racist away from their cause. Something you’d have thought would be impossible to do.

            This paring of Fogen and O’Mara seems like a match made in hell. A client who doesn’t listen paired with a lawyer who doesn’t think. Wanna talk about Karma? How does a guy with the police force and it’s top powers that be on his side, lose a case where most of the evidence was ruined, ignored, refused and/or altered, against a victim who can’t speak? Yet, fate managed to “thread the knitting mill” in such a way that truth came out despite the best efforts of them all.

            I guess this just proves: “THEY DON’T ALWAYS GET AWAY!”

          • racerrodig says:

            You’re dead on…This one didn’t get away. Fogen is that one that would have been the asshole when we played ball, rode bikes, went fishing, in school….no matter what, that’s what he is and that’s what he does.

            “Experts….experts….we don’t have no stinking experts (Mexican bandit laugh)

            I laugh at that one also, but what could an expert really prove. No matter what they say, it will be doomed to a serious shredding.

          • blushedbrown says:


            Excellent, post.

  52. Judy75201 says:

    One thing I am pretty sure of is that between Prof, Malisha, and Xena, the truth has been found right here in this blog.

  53. colin black says:

    Tuesday 26 Feburary is near upon us .
    A YEAR to the date time an to the second when foggen stole TRAYVONS LIFE VOICE ,
    An has attempted since that diobolical folly to dissrespect him as an asshole .the suspect.fn punk/knoon./

    I know the laws re fireworks differ from State to State .
    An the terminoligy differs over here we use fireworks foe New Years an Guy Fawkes night.

    An the type of fire work Im envisioning have been banned in the UK for a long time.
    But my instinct tells me they will be available in America.
    Instinct an Bart Simpson I know you guys can get them.

    Over here we called them bangers as thats what they did
    About 4ins long light the fuse an after a couple sec they go
    Imagine if all you Trayvonites Stateside hold a vigil remebrance prayers or whatever you wish for Trayvons first aniversery of being murdered.
    At the exact time he was shot if you all could let of one soliary banger.
    One time

    Would i m o be a fitting way to honour the aniversery of his unessesery passing.


    I hope you realise above is only my opinion.
    /suggestion an my honest beleif is that it would be poignant an in no way dishonour Trayvons life or memory.

    My other half whom sometimes reads here
    But never comments.
    An at times is forced to listen to me vent over something or another an has no clue what or whom Im moaning about.

    Anyway she was aware of Caylee an her plight an as moved as me an millions more over her abuse an Murder.
    She knows about J Arias an somewhat familiar with this
    Case forinstance I told her the events as happened on 26th Feb

    This was before foggen was arrested an she didnt beleive me.
    Thought I was leaveing something out.
    Couldnt understand hoy anyone could walk away from shooting anyone .
    Without cosiqence just on there say so od.
    Oh he attacked me so I had to kill him type thing.
    An I had t expain.
    Truthfully I didnt have to explain because as soon as I said Florida.
    Her responce was America this happened in America?
    I said yes an she shruged one times an said oh now I get it there effin cray with guns over there.

    She was delighted though when I informed her of the Special Prosecuter an charges being filed.

    Anyway back on point
    I talked to Gail about my banger /cherrybomb? idea.
    An she reckons its crazy an insulting so in case she is right.
    Apoligies in advance as I mean it in a respectfull manner.
    ps sorry for long post an will probably end this thread now.
    Useally my posts are followed with Profs.

    New post up.

    Q Why is the Prof like a London Bus?

    A Because none apear for ages an then you get 3 or 4 straight after each other running a convoy.

    • London bus!lol

      i see what your saying colin. i don’t think it’s disrespectful because it’s coming from a tender honest place.
      but i wouldn’t think it a good idea because a fire cracker will sound like a gun and horrify everyone there and make them recall the sound of a gun shot.. i know i would start bawling my face off- right after i picked myself off the ground from either having a heart attack at the thought of the shot going through Trayvon’s precious heart or actually dropping to the ground in fear that it really was a gun shot and the kkk is out there shooting up the place..

  54. Ty Flair says:

    Professor I am happy you post this on your blog. I started reading your blog for about nine months now. I was nervous to start blogging hear because I have seen the little fights here.I have seen people be call troll,first I did not know what that word mean until I look it up. I had to stop blogging here when someone consider me apart of Fogen family because my opinion was not the same as there. I was mad as hell at that time when they said that. We all may not agree on some stuff sometime,but we do agree we want justice for Treyvon. I will never disrespect anyone here.

  55. Elizabeth De Grave says:

    Why is the court in recess untill 5th of March?
    Was something left undecided?

    Someone mentioned a stenographer.
    Do you know of a transcript online? Because the sound was so bad at the last hearing .

    Here’s what OS conluded,0,4304478.story.

  56. Romaine says:

    he did’nt have internet
    and two hands up

  57. Romaine says:

    Judge Nelson was lady packman yesterday…chomp chomp, chomp chomp, two hand up and BOOOOM…DENIED..I loved every minute of it. Bernie tore the roof of the tree house, lmao, O’mara was so flustered he didnt know what to do. How dare Bernie use his web site post against him after he told O’mara he did have internet…lmaooo…cry baby O’Mara talking bout he can’t use that its is not relevant. that was the I want to win tantrum…well BOOM again DENIED.

    • yeah, Ms PacMan!!lolo
      But that was my favorite part – and my video was messing up too so i could only see omar’s actions AND his face turning bright red while he was fumbling to get the computer! LMAO i think i should watch that again!!!lolo

    • racerrodig says:

      I’m thinking O’ Mara and FogenPhoole are blaming each other for this mess.

      “…….um Mark….um I really didn’t want to get a new Judge, if you.”

      “Oh bullshit….it was all your idea and..”

      “Um, well, some of the guys on the internet said.”

      “Christmas (Fogen)…are you nuts….why do you listen to them..”

      “Well diwhataman said Lester was ruling against us and we..”

      “Oh sure, like he’s a lawyer……sure, listen to him now”

      And Nelson is well know for her stance as a Children’s Advocate !

    • towerflower says:

      I liked that part too, also when he had to go online to even confirm it was a statement from his own website and then objected to having it entered as evidence.

  58. Lonnie Starr says:

    Well, I’ve been at the debating game long enough to know that it’s a waste of time to invest ones self in anything other than discovery of truth. Because, just when you thought you knew a thing, that’s exactly when you’re going to discover it to be false. Should discovering that you are mistaken bring your entire world crashing down on your head? Not at all, for if that were the case, the race should have perished long before today.

    Believe what you believe as long as you believe it and until it is proven false. Be ready to accept the new when it appears and do not become so invested in your own beliefs that you cannot join with your fellow man, rather than accept discovered truth. There is not a person on this planet who has not ever been misinformed, held false ideas as true or otherwise been mistaken. There are only those who will admit it and those who never will.

  59. Malisha says:

    I would guess that DeeDee is a prosecution witness in the main case, not rebuttal, because she is the only ear-witness who heard the first exchange between the two individuals. “Why are you following me for?” and “What are you doing around here?”

    That sounds like main case to me.

    I’m still expecting the “PTSD Motion” and I think it will be a biggie.

    • Rachael says:

      I really don’t see how that would work. Besides, does the defense have the money for experts – or would they allow a court-appointed expert? I just don’t see it happening.

      • Tee says:

        MOM, have said this week that they will reached ther $30,000.00 mark to pay for expert this month.

      • Rachael says:

        In the meantime, he’s being sued for most of that – but I guess he could put that off. I guess I just don’t understand the reasoning behind it. He can’t use it as a defense for the 2nd degree murder charge. He can only use it to not have to testify, which he does not have to do anyway, so I don’t understand why they would even bother.

      • Malisha says:

        Oh they could get some shrink to go in there for a few grand and submit an affidavit that Fogen suffers from PTSD. The shrink will be real careful about how the affidavit is worded: “describes symptoms consistent with” a diagnosis of PTSD; “by history has experienced an event which falls within the criteria” for a determination of PTSD. Etc. etc. Then they say he just can’t think straight and since he has been intimately involved in all the process of his defense, NOW the defense cannot go forward because of his terrible awful crippling PTSD. I predict.

        I could be wrong, of course. I was wrong once, I believe it was in 1971. I thought I was wrong again in 1991 but it turned out that I was wrong about that, and was actually right.

      • looolooo says:

        Isn’t it telling that they’ve never claimed any brain/head damage from all the banging on concrete? Because there was no head banging, and they have no evidence to the contrary. I find it laughable that now his worst injury has become his “likely” broken nose. Since when is a “likely” broken nose a mortal injury. I’m sure GZ has had at least one before, and there’ll surely be more.

        • racerrodig says:

          Here ya go….from the Courier Post…today, my local paper

          “CAMDEN — The brother and neighbors of an autistic man who was shot along with his caretaker Friday after being mistaken as an intruder by a Camden policeman are questioning the officer’s reaction.

          Authorities said the 21-year-old man had run from his caretaker across the street to the off-duty officer’s East Camden home and was banging on the front door when the officer opened fire from inside through the slightly ajar door.

          The 21-year-old, identified by family as Louis Medina, was shot in the arm and his male caretaker in the chest. Both men were taken to Cooper University Hospital, where the caretaker was described as seriously injured. The officer, who wasn’t injured, was taken to Our Lady of Lourdes for evaluation, according to reports.”

          Taken to the hospital for evaluation……Gee, lest get an evaluation and document it.

          The officer overreacted to a neighbor beating on the door, and shot him. Thankfully no one is dead.

          Fogen “….naaaaa, I’m cool, after all…….ya can’t hurt steel, right !!”

          Over reaction….look familiar ??

      • towerflower says:

        looloo, his doctor the next day asked him numerous questions to see if he exhibited any signs of a head injury and she also examined his ears looking for bleeding. All was negative. Although RZjr in an early interview claimed that he was bleeding from the ears, the doctor never notes this. He showed no signs and he denied the signs of any type of severe head trauma.

        • racerrodig says:

          Remember both Fogen and his bombastic brother said his eyes were all full of blood….Um…..and what picture might we use for verify that claim.

      • looolooo says:

        Good, ….more proof of non-existant cranial damage. I bet he wished he had banged his head on something later that night. But I suppose MO,B.Lee, etc. assured him that he was home free. They just forgot to tell him that it would all change in June 2013. Justice for Trayvon.

    • elcymoo says:

      I think there was one other earwitness who said she heard someone say, “What are you doing…?”, which might well have been part of what DeeDee said she heard the ‘old man’ ask Trayvon.

    • Trained Observer says:

      There seems t be debate over how old Ben Crump said DD was … 16 or 18 at the time of the shooting … and how old she is now. From a common sense perspective, who cares? She was on the phone with Trayvon. Either way, she’s still a teenager, and at least a friend of Trayvon’s, if not a girlfriend.

      So what am I not getting? Are minors treated differently on the witness stand than those of majority?

      • Very young children are often treated differently than adults. Unless mentally disabled in some manner, teenage witnesses are generally going to be treated the same as adult witnesses with the possible exception that a judge might tend to be a bit more protective and more quickly cut off hostile and intrusive inquiries into irrelevant and inadmissible subject matter.

        Judges do not like lawyers who badger witnesses. Jurors also dislike them. Pissing off the jury quite possibly is the worst sin that a lawyer can commit during trial.

        Given the lack of judgment exhibited by the defense team so far, I will be surprised if they do not commit this sin multiple times.

      • Rachael says:

        I think they are off to a good start. Seems Mr. West was very disrespectful (IMO) to the judge.

        • racerrodig says:

          i see that too. It seems he is so frustrated and it comes across wrong or does he think he’s sending her a message.

      • Trained Observer says:

        Thanks for insights, professor. So the dust-up over her age appears to be just another silly distraction. I look forward to Judge Nelson putting the defense in its place if (more likely when) the badgering starts.

  60. type1juve says:

    The defense team is afraid of witness #8 and this is why they are desperately looking for a way to discredit and intimidate her. Yes her testimony is important, but it is a combination of forensics, ALL witness testimony, and Fogen’s own lies that will lead to a conviction and justice for Trayvon.

    • Cercando Luce says:

      Is she a rebuttal witness or an “A” witness, or has that not yet been determined?

    • Rachael says:

      I don’t think they are afraid of her. I think they have been spending too much time at the outhouse and believe her to be manufactured and coached by Mr. Crump and BDLR, which is why they want her address and want to depose Mr. Crump.

      I hope I’m wrong though and they are terrified of her, in which case, you are right, all they want to do is discredit her, just as they do Trayvon’s parents and Trayvon.

      What is that I read on Facebook yesterday, something like If you can’t win an argument, correct their grammar instead.

      That is what they are doing. When they can’t credit GZ, discredit everyone else.


    • I would like the parent of the mentored children called as a witness to impeach GZ on a statement he made on the Hannity Show. He said they had finished mentoring te children. I don’t believe for a moment that he and SZ mentored any children that night or any night within months or years of the killing. Catching GZ in a lie like that would further present to all his inability to tell the truth.

  61. Animaljunkie says:

    I didn’t have a clue, ALL that was occurring on your blog! It happens on Twitter sometimes, but I didn’t expect it here. I suppose it’s to be expected when people are involved in anything.

    I hope you’ve resolved it with your post, there’s nothing worse than contention in a group of basically good people, who strive for justice for a young man i.e. emotions will always come to the fore.

    United we stand, divided we fall!


  62. Well I said I’D BBL…and here I am……….First off…..Hats off to Colin…….It was myself that he refers to in his comment……And I may have come off rather harshly to him being accused of doing something I know I had not done.

    Those who remember the thread, that Colin and I resolved the issue.

    Should I still badger him because he made a mistake?

    I can’t remember the last time I walked on water….so there is no need….

    The bottom line is that we are all here in SUPPORT OF TRAYVON

    I also agree that when there is not really any new news to discuss that we get off on tangents….even getting to know each other on a more personal level…..

    I myself am one that has made comments about “BUBBA”……calling zimbots trailer trash and such…… it gallows humor.

    I DO NOT want to hear about fogen being assaulted while in prison….that would just make him a “victim” again…….

    What I do enjoy thinking about is the fear the man will constantly be feeling…..without his security detail…..No doubt fogen has already got a fear of “BUBBA” for whatever reason.

    Racists?….the link that follows….off topic as it is….a CHP officer referring to a German tourist as “BOY”…..and a threat about how sore his ass will be if he’s taken to jail…..this by a cop….

    Yeah…..welcome to the good ol USofA

    I would request though that when someone posts using the word “white”….that they define which type of “white” they are referring to.

    I say this because I take offense when the only reference is “white”
    as I am “white”….and have many redneck ways about me.

    The reason I am here is for justice for an individual….no matter the race.

    And proper punishment for the perpetrator….no matter what the race.

    Now I gotta go plow a quarter mile of driveway…

    Ya’ll have a GREAT DAY

    BTW this ol’ Redneck is gonna be watchin’ NASCAR at Daytona tomorrow……..


  63. Trained Observer says:

    After mucho fooling around, it’s high time for MOM and West to depose Witness 8. Likely Team Fogen will launch the March beg-a-thon with a plea for gas money to Miami.

    Here’s a tip: Stay off Florida’s Turnpike, stick to I-95 (mostly free, except for HOV lanes near downtown), and wear your bullet-proof vests to protect against drive-by shootings down there.

    • SearchingMind says:

      The denial of the Motion for Continuance, the strong suspicion that there would be no SYG-hearing, the fact that O’Mara has spent over $40.000.- of the donations in renovating, modernizing and expanding his office, the fact that O’Mara has spent over $30.000 on the case without anything concrete to show for it, the fact that the donors believe that O’Mara is not telling them all they want to know (contrary to his promise to put up everything on the gzlegal website) are all fund-killers. The Motions that were denied yesterday broke the Camel’s back. Donors are absolutely demoralized. Even Diwaterman is not contributing anymore (that guy is actually not stupid anyway). Sundancekracker has never contributed (his scorn for O’Mara is scary). Nothing will come of the announced vigorous fund-raising, because (a) the route to Mr. Crump has been firmly shutdown (by Judge Nelson). As such, the grand scheme and the corruption of the Scheme Team cannot be exposed anymore; (b) the preliminary deposition of DeeDee revealed nothing of relevance, etc. DeeDee actually exists and there are no fake DeeDee’s. Besides, O’Mara was not even able to obtain DeeDee’s address from her?! Given this new reality, O’Mara has ran out of red meat for the demoralized donors (who are no longer hiding their contempt for O’Mara). By the end of march a Motion for finding of indigency will be filed for GZ. I predict.

        • Lonnie Starr says:

          Did you see how much space he asked Hon. Nelson to set aside for him for the trial? Looks to me like he wanted all the space on the defense side, including the tables behind him, and three or four rows of public seating. Hon. Nelson said that, like the prosecutor, he can put many of his support staff in the grand jury room, but MOM says no, he’s just gotta have them in all in the courtroom.
          So Hon. Nelson said; “just get me the list of the numbers and titles of your support staff and we’ll figure it out from there”.

          It looks to me like MOM wants to have support staff monitoring pro Z sites in real time to provide him with clues about where to go next with his case. Perhaps even telling him when to object? MOM can then wear bluetooth and be in constant contact with the CTH, for a landmark legal first “trial by blog”. He’s gonna make Ringling Bros. Barnum & Bailey jealous.

          • jm says:

            Lonnie: “It looks to me like MOM wants to have support staff monitoring pro Z sites in real time to provide him with clues about where to go next with his case.”

            I read somewhere this is what Baez did to a degree in the Casey Anthony case. He and staff monitored social media and came up with the idea that people did not “trust/like” George Anthony and so he used a diversion to George Anthony’s alleged character/behavior flaws to distract or excuse Casey Anthony’s behavior.

          • blushedbrown says:


            My thinking on O’mara wanting the 10+ people that will be support staff, is to make it seem that the defense team is bigger then just two lawyers at a desk. jmo

          • racerrodig says:

            And some will be taking notes about one witness and others on other witnesses…..blah, blah, boring blah.

            Which of course begs the question, since he thinks he can have all new court procedures just for him is……just how many witnesses at a time will be testifying ??

          • blushedbrown says:


            Good point. I am not familar with how many people testifiy in court. It seems ludicrous to me to have a staffer assign to each witness. O’mara needs to get real, there is a court reporter, and it will be televised. They can review the footage, just like they do in football when a call needs to be reivewed. 🙂 I can see about three or four, but ten is just too much. imo of course

          • Defense counsel realize the importance of having as many supporters as possible sitting in the courtroom during the trial. Doesn’t look good if no one is there to support him. I believe that is the real basis for his motion.

            I think all available seating will be taken by reporters and members of the public. Judge Nelson probably will reserve a row of seats on each side of the aisle for family members and friends of Trayvon and the defendant. To prevent distractions, everyone will have to be seated and no one will be permitted to enter the courtroom while court is in session.

            Usually in media intensive cases like this with considerable public interest, judges will reserve another courtroom in the courthouse for the media to spread out with their laptops, cell phones, and other stuff and come and go as needed. They can watch and listen to the trial on monitors and discuss what’s going on without fear of disrupting the proceedings. This type of arrangement frees up seating in the courtroom.

            O’Mara’s request to reserve ten seats for his staff seems unreasonable to me.

          • blushedbrown says:


            I totally agree with your assessment.
            Thank you. 🙂

          • racerrodig says:

            It seems to me that if he has 10 staff members it shows “…we have no idea what we are doing… I need many more brains working on this. The state has 2 guys maybe 3 but I need at least 10…..not to mention all this security to make those “death threats” look real”

            Like the Bailiffs aren’t enough and some one from Team Trayvon is going to sneak a gun in and take a shot at him…..yaaaaaa.

          • blushedbrown says:


            O’mara is obsessed with security. You’re right, with all the baliffs and the security check you go through just to get in a courthouse is more then enough. To keep pretending security is needed in the courtroom is a real crock of sh*t. jmo

          • racerrodig says:

            I heard O’ Mara wants even more donations because he’s buying a bulletproof car since they can’t get a vest big enough.

          • blushedbrown says:


            LOL 😆

          • racerrodig says:

            He should come to me……..I can do that conversion. All I want to see is a fair trial and more than a fair amount of prison time.

            I’m just interested in “Fair” all the way around.

          • blushedbrown says:


            I know you are, Racer.

          • racerrodig says:


          • Lonnie Starr says:

            That seems to have been judge Nelson’s view too. When MOM motioned back there and started asking about two or three rows, she cut him off and told him to submit a list of titles. My guess is that based on the titles he puts on that list, she’ll assign them to the grand jury room with the reporters. Seems to me that she’s already got MOM’s little whiney number down pat.

          • cielo62 says:

            masonblue~ Do they even HAVE 10 staff members? Except for the interns dining on pizza, I haven’t heard of any additional working attorneys on the defense side.

          • Lonnie Starr says:

            We haven’t even begun to scratch the surface of problems the defense will face at trial. While they’re sprouting off on the web, none of what they’re saying is admissible at trial, and a whole lot of what they’re saying about GZ being such a respectable citizen, MOM doesn’t dare allow any defense witness to say anything good about the character of GZ. LOL, I’ll bet the jurors will be perplexed to hear the defense witnesses struggling to avoid giving GZ any character references at all. This trial will be more of a comedy than anything else.

            SP: Your brother was a “decent American” did you say?

            RZ: I… er…

            MOM: I object Your Honor!

            Judge: Over ruled, you may answer!

            RZ: I don’t remember!

            SP: Well, would you say that he’s a decent guy?

            [MOM, signaling frantically ]

            RZ: I don’t believe I would say that, no!

            SP: You don’t think your brother is a decent guy?

            [MOM doing back flips ]

            RZ: I don’t know if he is a decent guy or not.

            SP: Could he be a decent fellow?

            MOM: I object, asked and answered!

            Judge: Sustained, move on!

            SP: Nothing further!

            MOM: Whew!
            – – – – – –

          • racerrodig says:

            You and I could do “Trial Scripts” forever and never repeat ourselves. Backflips……It’s coming…..

          • The example is amusing but keep in mind that the SP cannot open the door to let in the tsunami of bad character evidence. Therefore, do not expect to see the SP ask any questions like that.

          • Lonnie Starr says:

            Yes Professor, you had already made that abundantly clear. But the hilarity of expressing the situation that way, sort of demanded creative license be taken, in the hopes that a few redeeming yuks be obtained and/or enjoyed and for which I must apologize, heretoforenotwithstanding.

      • Rachael says:

        OMG, I hadn’t thought of that. Monitoring the trial in real time in real time.

      • Trained Observer says:

        On the space request, I thought he was trying to jam up — or is hog a more accurate word — the space so it wouldn’t be so obvious the Fogen Fam was mostly absent. Can’t imagine the molested cousin will be there, even if she’s not a witness on the list. By contrast, Trayvon’s family will be there daily without fail.

      • Two sides to a story says:

        It’s encouraging that some of the ringleaders at the Treestump either quit contributing or never did, but there are many others who do and will continue to. And many who are not associated with the Treestump. I’ll think they’ll make plenty of money until either people wake up to the evidence or the fat lady sings. And some of them will probably contiribute to Fogen’s snack fund in jail as well as all the million appeals the Treestumpers want.

        • cielo62 says:

          Two Sides~ GZ will only get an appeal if they can find a reason to lodge one. So far, Judge Nelson has been very accomodating. Just because one doesn’t like the results, doesn’t mean you automatically get a new trial on appeal.

      • racerrodig says:

        Well said and I agree with your prediction.

      • Nefertari05 says:

        If the accounts of a motion for DeeDee’s medical records are accurate, I believe that’s the new red meat. The questions regarding DeeDee’s hospital stay are a staple on the outhouse blog. I don’t see any reason DeeDee and her parents would lie about such a thing, and I believe they could just as easily ask her to bring proof of her hospital stay to the deposition. So, to publicly motion for it, without even asking her, feels like red meat to me.

        That’s not to say it will work, but the defense seems to feel they have to show somethig, no matter how poorly their attempts appear. If they’re going to file indigency, I guess they’d better make it soon. June is coming up pretty fast to have to find and contract experts, and for those experts to examine and report on the evidence and be available for trial.

      • towerflower says:

        I never saw the motion on MOM’s site about Wit. 8’s medical records, although I might have missed it, maybe it’s just a thought to pass on or to see how far the rumor will go

        I don’t see anything sinister about her not attending the wake or funeral of a friend or becoming so upset that her mother takes her to the hospital. I had a close friend that I call my brother, when his younger brother died I could not go inside the church for his service. I sat outside. It just upset me too much and I wanted to remember him as he was in life. I was only 17 at the time and knew the boy since he was in diapers. No one thought ill of me for not going in and understood, yet some want to take Wit. 8’s actions as uncaring when she didn’t go, it could be that she simply wasn’t ready to say her good byes.

    • racerrodig says:

      Usually a deposition is done at the office of the party taking the depo. That would be O’ Mara’s office but once in awhile it is done a a neutral site. Since security for her safety could be an issue, where do they do it. I would not put it past FogenPhoole’s gang to stake the place out and see where they return to and find out where they live, since they talked about doing just that on a few pro Fogen sites.

      • Nefertari05 says:

        Madness! Sheer unadulterated madness. Who in their right minds would force themselves into a murder trial, in which they gain no personal benefit? You don’t have to answer. It’s pretty rhetorical. I was just basically venting about the unfathomable workings of the mind of someone who would do such a thing, with no close personal relationship with the defendent. It’s hard to figure out what they believe the personal payoff would be. Catch a lfe felony for someone you don’t even know? I can only say again, unfathomable!

        • racerrodig says:

          ” I can only say again, unfathomable!”


          Crump “I think I’ll find an imaginary witness, claim they were on the phone, hope a phone record verifies that, keep them secret and hope they don’t get called to testify”

          Dee Dee “……count me in”

          That’s exactly what the Zidiots think happened.

      • Two sides to a story says:

        Silly, enit?

  64. SearchingMind says:

    Thanks Professor for addressing this issue. Anytime there is infighting here it pains me and I go home from work a depressed. I just hope two individuals here can make their point without TRAMPLING on ALL other posters, directly/indirectly stating/suggesting that they are immoral, hateful, vindictive, indulging in orgy of intolerance, engage in cyber lynching, bullies, that their supposedly hateful posts supposedly say more about themselves than a defendant to a breathtaking brutal act of murder of a juvenile, etc. I just don’t think that any of the two individuals involved in trampling on other posters is slightly qualified, either from the moral- or academic point of view, to lecture me or anyone on either normative- or applied ethics, let alone moral theology. The pretentiousness, the intrinsic fallacious nature of their arguments and the rude and crude presentation thereof, are just quite offensive.

    On the other hand, I DESPERATELY hope that the rest of the commenters here are QUICK in noticing when someone is seeking to ignite fire, get everyone rile-up and off topic and discuss nothing but that particular troublemaker and other things that have nothing to do with the murder of Trayvon. Pls. guys, sometimes non-response IS the most resounding response you can ever give. Ignore the trouble makers and let the Professor ALONE deal with them – if he feels that a redline has been crossed. Keep your eyes on THE BALL. The quality of the arguments and analysis on this blog is excellent and unmatched. Don’t let anyone take that away!

    Now, let’s get back to work.

    • Judy75201 says:

      Somehow I don’t think telling others how to post or to whom they may respond is helping, tho. That has a bit of a “mob” feel to me.

      • SearchingMind says:

        Here we go again: “Mob”?! How educative.I believe you are capable of presenting a coherent case telling me how you “somehow” “think” whatever you “think”. There is no need to engage if you can’t do that.

      • Judy75201 says:

        Since this is not your site, you have no right to tell others how to post or to whom they may respond. Clear enough?

      • Tee says:

        A house divided will not stand. We did not have in house fighting until a certain person presented it. Justice for Trayvon.

        • onlyiamunitron says:

          “We did not have in house fighting until a certain person presented it.”

          May I assume that person was making comments here after August, when I stopped because someone else’s words were appearing credited to my WordPress user identity (and I wasn’t the only one to whom that happened at the time)?

          Go read the post-August, pre-December archives for this blog.

          If anything, the in-fighting seems more vicious when I’m not around.


      • SearchingMind says:

        Not quite, mam. I mean, where is the relationship between (a) “this is not your site” and (b) getting “mob feel” because I advise that infighting can be avoided if commenters ignore diatribes that lead to infighting? It seems there is a big disconnect between your conclusion and the premise thereof. I am also wondering if you know what the word “mob” means and whence it comes from?

      • Rachael says:

        I hesitate to jump in here, but not only did SearchingMind say:

        “Ignore the trouble makers…” Which you kinda gotta agree is very good advice, but he followed it up with “…and let the Professor ALONE deal with them – if he feels that a redline has been crossed.” And considering it IS the Professor’s site, again, very good advice.

        To me, and this is just my opinion, “Ignore the trouble makers” is kind of a stretch as to telling someone how to post and whom to respond and because IMO, it is a respectful thing to do on someone else’s blog in order to not cause trouble, I don’t see it as a “mob” mentality thing, which I associate more with disrespect.

    • ks says:

      Well said SearchingMind.

    • Cercando Luce says:

      Usually, comments focus on case events, with a bit of observation and side jokes to spice things up. It’s when the thread’s commenters focus on other commenters that the train of thought derails. Most unmonitored sites suffer that syndrome. (that’s why we’re not there)

      Thank you again, Prof, for herding the blog along and imparting knowledge of what the defendant and prosecuting attorneys must be, or should be, planning.

      • racerrodig says:

        ” It’s when the thread’s commenters focus on other commenters that the train of thought derails. ….” That is the one observation I made, stated and have a problem with.

        It comes down to…”Don’t tell me what to do here….” unless your name is Professor Leatherman. For the record, talking about the other posters, telling them they are wrong for X,Y & Z…..and disrupting the flow of the conversation is what they do to anyone pro Trayvon on a pro Fogen site.

    • Two sides to a story says:

      LOL. I don’t think anyone got as intense as you’re accusing them of.

  65. Dewayne G says:

    *cont’d now ask yourself this. With doing all that based on GZ statements means the assault stops and he was able to gain control. Now match that with the cries for help. Why is GZ still screaming for help with the assault stops and he gains control? How the defense can defend from that?

    • Two sides to a story says:

      I don’t think they can convince a jury, but they’ll claim Fogen yelled until he shot Trayvon.

      • Dewayne G says:

        I think GZ best defense is a plea deal cause with all the evidence, forensic, and even his on statements are against him. The only way he’ll walk if the jury don’t care for this case. I pray it don’t turn out that way

        • cielo62 says:

          DeWayne- remember though that a plea deal isn’t automatic. And I see no reason for the prosecution to offer one. GZ is going to trial.

          Sent from my iPod

  66. Dewayne G says:

    Prof, I made a few comments on here and I don’t have y’all discuss this issue but how is the defense prove that it was GZ screaming for help? I noticed how they are relying on the supposedly statement made by Tracy Martin, saying that’s not his son voice and testimony from GZ, his family and John. John had 4 different statements can they really rely on him? GZ family and as well as Tracy, of course both sides gonna say that’s their son’s voice. Now that’s leave GZ. The state probably matched GZ statements with the cries for help. GZ stated Trayvon put his hands over his nose & mouth. So how is able to scream/yell for help if his mouth is covered? GZ also stated he was screaming cause the assault from Trayvon right? Now the assault stops when Trayvon covered GZ’s nose & mouth then Trayvon goes for gun(based on GZ statements) but GZ prevents Trayvon from getting it by applying a wristlock(Serino statement), next he unholster his gun then says he had make sure he doesn’t shot his hand. With all that GZ stated

    • Jun says:

      Its very simple

      The defendant is lying

      The forensics will prove that part

      as for the screaming, the most obvious evidence is it sounds nothing like him, which the defendant admitted himself when he first heard the tape, and everyone has ears and can tell it is not the defendant screaming

      What they are saying about is based entirely on hearsay considering what they said about Tracy and Tracy even stated that it was not true and my guess is he must of meant it as saying “NO” to himself that this is not happening to him, not that it is not his son screaming

      Even without looking at the evidence and the two parties in the incident, Fogenhats the killer had a physical, combat, weight, mental, and weapon and tactical advantage in the struggle and the only party able to kill the other or cause great bodily harm in an instant

      Besides that, it can be proven that he aggravated stalked and threatened Trayvon, therefore, the SYG statute does not apply to him since he is the aggressor and was committing a crime

      • racerrodig says:

        Tracy Martins statement is always taken out of context. He was asked if he was 100% sure if it was Trayvon. He never said it was not Trayvon, he said he was not sure. Pretty big difference and I don’t think O” Mara will even ask that question, because the rest of the interview will be discussed.

      • Malisha says:

        Tracy Martin was not a voice identification expert. Neither is Robert Zimmerman, Sr. The identification of the screams for help, whereas they will be useful in showing the context and structure of the death, do not prove anything about who was the aggressor in the confrontation, either. In fact, my own theory is that when Fogen called NEN he was setting up a little hero scenario in his mind where he would accost an intruder, be attacked, yell for help and not get it, and be forced to use his gun to protect himself, so he could go back to the HOA and prove to them that his use of a gun when patrolling was not only perfectly OK, but actually essential to their safety. The screams prove nothing. They do, however, give us the real flavor of how egregious the killing of Trayvon Benjamin Martin really was.

    • SearchingMind says:

      The question you asked go directly to the heart of this case. The short answer would be YES – to the extent that they are necessary in proving who was screaming for his life. I would like to add the following though:

      With regard to W4, what will – if necessary – be introduced as evidence is his sworn testimony to BDLR. In that testimony he claimed that he does not know who was screaming and he also retracted 98% of his unsworn testimony. If he changes his sworn testimony on the stand and gives a different testimony under oath, he shall have perjured himself and will be going down like Shellie Zimmerman

      With regard to the question of who was crying for help, I believe the prosecution will approach the issue the following way:

      a. GZ’s own admissions. Serino played the 911 tape to GZ and asked him: do you recognize this voice, are you the person screaming (or sth. to that effect)? GZ: “no, it doesn’t even sound like me” (and he sounded like he was being insulted by the suggestion that it could be his voice on that tape);

      b. Hidden information. This will be one of the many straws that will break the Camel’s back. There are two voices on that 911-tape. BDLR has already alluded to that. Before that, the two experts hired by Orlando Sentinel have already said pretty much. On that tape are a dominant, interrogating voice demanding answers and another terrified voice answering no and screaming. Using the ‘reasonable-person-rule’ GZ will conclusively be eliminated as the screamer. Does it not baffle you that the defense does not even bother to see what other information they can glean from the 911-recording? Shouldn’t that be their NUMBER ONE priority? I think the defense has made a decision NOT to have the 911-tape analyzed by experts (as a result of “lack of funds” if you know what I mean);

      c. GZ’s own voice re-enactment. GZ also re-enacted to investigators how he was supposedly screaming that night. The relationship between GZ’s reenactments and the scream on the 911-tape is just zero. When I listened to GZ’s voice re-enactment on MSNBC, I thought it was a big old dog barking trying to establish his territory (absolutely NO offence intended; just a factual observation);

      d. Forensics: GZ claimed that Trayvon punched him, broke his nose and that his nose and eyes were covered with blood to the extent that was dazed and could not see. GZ also claimed that Trayvon used his both palms to cover his (GZ) mouth and nose to stop him from calling for help. The fatal problem with that is that NO muffled sound could be heard on the 911-tape and NO trace of GZ’s blood, saliva, other bodily fluids, in fact NO trace of GZ’s DNA was found on Trayvon’s hands, fingernail scrapings, his sleeves, the cuffs of his sleeves, etc.

      e. Witness testimony and ballistics: these will be pieced together to conclusively determine that GZ was on top of Trayvon while armed with a loaded gun and outweighing Trayvon by decisive margins – and could therefore not be the one screaming for his life.

      The reasonable person test will, based on any of the factors mentioned above or a combination of all- or some of them, rule GZ out as the screamer.

      Whatever Trayvon’s father may- or may not have said is not relevant in answering the question that needs answering or is MOOT given GZ’s own denial.

      • Dewayne G says:

        This post continue to another. My ps3 wouldn’t let me post it all together. I had to make two posts

      • elcymoo says:

        All the questions and answers about the screams are on point. I think that the defense team’s focus on what Tracy Martin said or didn’t say about whether it was his son’s voice on that tape (after being asked to listen to the tape on the same day he’d had to identify his dead son from a photo, when he must have been in shock) is just more of the effort to try the case in the court of public opinion.

        Consider all the evidence that counters GZ’s claims that it was his screams on the tape. First, and most damning, is his own denial to Serino that it was his voice when Serino first played the 911 tape for him, as other posters have pointed out. In addition, Trayvon’s mother, who could be expected to know her son’s voice better than anyone else, said it was Trayvon, and so has a cousin who spent time with him. Some earwitnesses said they thoought it was the younger person screaming, until an officer (Serino, if I remember right) ‘corrected’ them (a.k.a. ‘witness tampering’) and said it was Z. screaming. When GZ’s father testified that it was his son’s voice, he based it on the claim that he’d heard him scream like that ‘when he was a teenager’, but Z. was a decade away from being a teen when those screams were captured on the 911 tape.

      • type1juve says:

        I don’t think it would be that unusual if Tracy didn’t recognize Trayvon’s screams. He probably had never heard him yell like that before and I just don’t think some men are as attuned to their children as women are (no offense to men). As a mother, I know I would probably recognize my child’s screaming before my husband would. I think Sybrina ran from the room when she heard the tape… she knew that was her baby screaming.

        • racerrodig says:

          Keep in mind he said he was not 100% positive, he never said it was NOT Trayvon…..the Zidiots are the ones who say that’s what he said. When you slap them with Fogen saying he said “..that doesn’t even sound like me…” they just ignore that one.

          • jm says:

            Regarding Tracy’s comment to police in answer to the question of if this was his son’s voice, when did they play it for him? He had to be in pain/shock to learn of his son’s killing. For a parent to have to listen to the desperate screams for help before he was killed must have been horrific. I still can’t listen to the recording again after the first time I heard the 911 call. . I can’t imagine Tracy wanting to focus on the screams and realize this could be his son screaming for help. As another poster mentioned, he probably never heard his son scream like that before, unlike RZ, Sr who was familiar with GZ’s screaming as a teen (?!?! ) for whatever reason. (I would love to hear Papa Zim’s explanation as to why his son screamed as a teen.)

          • racerrodig says:

            ” for whatever reason. (I would love to hear Papa Zim’s explanation as to why his son screamed as a teen.)”

            And he screamed like that often….maybe a bit of an overzealous belt whipping maybe??

      • Rachael says:

        And also, why would the screams stop the moment we hear the gunshot? If GZ had been in the process of being beaten up and wanting the police to find him, wouldn’t he still be yelling for help? I mean maybe his “problem” was solved by shooting Trayvon, but it was not over.

      • Two sides to a story says:

        Actually, I think Fogen’s response to Serino was not no, it doesn’t sound like me, but a straight “it doesn’t even sound like me.” No on the no.

    • SearchingMind says:

      Sorry, I meant W6 NOT W4

    • Bill Taylor says:

      the police did the questioning wrong and gave a wrong impression of the answer from Trayvons father……the officer asked him could he be CERTAIN that was his sons screaming and he answered NO, meaning he could NOT say with CERTAINTY that was his son……the police then framed that as him saying that IS NOT my son screaming for help……

      Trayvons dad NEVER said that wasnt trayvon crying for help.

  67. onlyiamunitron says:

    Let me see if I’ve got this straight.

    Trayvon’s no longer alive to call Zimmerman and his family nasty names, so y’all have a sacred duty to do it for him?

    Forgive me if I don’t understand how this is of any use when it comes to actually discussing the case.

    Who did y’all have as Emmanuel Goldstein before february 26th of last year?


    • Gpldstein has been here for years…….Remember the “Cold War” to fight communist expansion……..The war on drugs……….and now the “global war on terror”………I see even less chance of winning that war than there was with the commie threat…

      Yeah Goldstein has been around in one form or another for decades…..Welcome to the police state.


    • SearchingMind says:

      @ Unitron,

      “y’all”? What do you mean by that? Who is/are “y’all”?

    • Cercando Luce says:

      Unitron, Trayvon never called the defendant any name at all, let alone a nasty one. “Creepy” and “Crazy” is how DeeDee said he referred to the guy in the truck bothering him, and that’s accurate. Mild, even. So please take down the false equivalent you have set up (Trayvon calling defendant nasty names, when it was the other way around).

    • Malisha says:

      Unitron, none of us had to have this in our lives. None of us felt a need to denigrate and criticize someone just to make ourselves feel superior to whoever it was. Not one of us on this blog, I believe, would be running around tearing at our hair for lack of someone to unleash anger upon had Fogen chosen NOT TO KILL Trayvon Martin on 2/26/2012. And had Fogen been arrested before we heard about the case, we would never have gotten into a big public movement to deal with the ramifications of that murder, either. Trayvon, if he were still alive, would not be spending one minute of his time or one gram of his energy “call[ing] Zimmerman and his family nasty names,” either.

      You know, there is a misconception at law and in many people’s minds that “it takes two to tango” means that nobody who has been harmed is innocent of the harm done to him. This arose as a misguided attempt during the “me” generation therapy capers to make victims of abuse stand up and “take ownership” of the fact that somebody abused them. It’s nonsense. It “spreads around” the harm done by people who do harm. If you imagine that Trayvon Martin would have been name-calling at Fogen, and therefore his position in the events of 2/26/2012 was a PARTICIPANT IN A FIGHT rather than as a VICTIM OF A MURDER, I think you are looking at this way wrong.

      Trayvon Martin DID call Fogen “a creepy guy,” most probably. He was describing him to DeeDee and he was scared of him. He was not name-calling and he was not entering voluntarily into a fight with Fogen; he was wary and worried and he was exercising his free speech. It turns out that he was intuitively onto something, because at the same time as he uttered these words to DeeDee, Fogen was telling Sean that he, Trayvon Martin, was “up to no good,” “on drugs or somepin,” “real suspicious,” an “asshole,” a “fucking punk,” and that he was “running.”

      This was not a fight between two people in which one of them lost and the other won, and in which we have to be just as respectful of the loser as of the winner, and just as respectful of the winner as of the loser.

      We are saying that this was a murder committed by an unrepentant, self-important, psychopathic killer. We are saying we disapprove of that in the strongest possible terms. We are resisting ANY “Big Brother” who tells us not to express ourselves on that count. I wish we never heard of Fogen but since we have, that’s where I stand on our expressions toward him.

      I am not protecting Trayvon Martin’s right to call Fogen nasty names. I am protecting my society. I am adding to my society’s absolute moral imperative to express its outrage, its rage, its condemnation and its utter annihilation of the idea that a Fogen is entitled to get away with killing a Trayvon Benjamin Martin. EVER.

      • type1juve says:


        Once again you have so eloquently expressed what many of us here are thinking. Thank you!

      • cielo62 says:

        Malisha- THANK YOU! I get so angry at some “fake argument” that I sputter. But you have a way with words! Thank you for explaining our response to GZ and his demented ilk.

        Sent from my iPod

    • ks says:

      No you don’t have it straight. Full stop.

      You just have another one of your dubious equivalencies/scenarios that you are using to condescend down to other posters instead of doing what you claim to do, discussing the case.

    • Tee says:

      @ Only
      Please stop instigating, you are merely trying to create a problem where non exist!

    • Tzar says:

      Forgive me if I don’t understand how this is of any use when it comes to actually discussing the case.

      oh yeah…then why do I feel so much better for it?

      • racerrodig says:

        This same thing happened about 3 months ago and I got after him with the “…don’t tell us what to do..” he disappears then pops back up withe same garbage.

        And, for the record. why do we feel so much better. Maybe I should amend my “Venting” thought to “Therapeutic”

        Now I feel even better know that !! I have you to thank !!

    • Malisha says:

      If any of us was the judge of this case, we would have no right to mock Fogen or call him disrespectful names. If any of us were to serve on the jury, ditto, no right. And if he already HAD called him names etc., we should disqualify ourselves from serving on the jury. But if we’re citizens, or even non-citizens, who simply have our own very low opinions of someone in the public eye, someone who catapulted HIMSELF into the public eye, then why should we hold our tongues? I owe no duty of care to Fogen. In fact, Fogen, as a NW participant or even captain, owed a duty of care to Trayvon Martin on 2/26/2012 and he reneged on it. I don’t owe Fogen respect and he won’t get any from me. I don’t owe his pathetic wife respect. I don’t owe his enablers in the SPD respect. R E S P E C T. Find out what it means to me: NOT being careful to speak of Fogen in clinically neutral terms. No.

    • My $.02 on this…..Ok, here goes……Perhaps unitron is suggesting that…because the victim is no longer here to call his killer names (that he rightly deserves IMO), why should we be doing this in his place, since we aren’t the victim? And, that our mission should be only to discuss the case and not to become so emotional that we start to call fogen names.
      @ Unitron…we all have different levels of emotion. Some just may have come here for just the academic side of this case. Many came here also for that but, this case is heartbreaking and there are times that our feelings pour out…sometimes in sadness, and sometimes in anger….and we share it.

      • racerrodig says:

        X 2 He doesn’t discuss the case per se…he “corrects” us and basically tells others what to do. To me, that’s subtle bullying.

    • cielo62 says:

      See? Your condescension is very annoying and personally insulting. We don’t a have sacred duty to do anything but what we can to get justice! But as we work through this case we encounter the evil that GZ and his entourage commit on a nearly daily basis. We are responding to THOSE evils in the present tense, as it insults our senses as caring human being