Judge Nelson will not remove Mark O’Mara from the case

Friday, March 22, 2013

Not Angela Lansbury said,

Yes indeed, anything is possible, and I could be way off base here. But I’m not arguing that O’Mara suborned perjury, only that his own client implicated him in that crime and that that set up a conflict of interest between lawyer and client, where Fogen had an interest in being deemed credible in all things and O’Mara had an interest in Fogen being deemed a liar. O’Mara needs to be able to say to whomever it may concern that everyone knows his client was a liar. He absolutely buried Fogen with quotes like “credibility problem” and “need to restore his credibility” when he should have defended his client’s credibility and thrown Shellie under the bus all alone. When a lawyer has an interest in his client being seen as a liar, he can’t ethically represent that client.

I’m not sure a judge can bounce a defense lawyer directly, but s/he could file a complaint with the bar and/or state supreme court and halt the proceedings until the complaint is resolved. That complaint would be heard almost immediately and would have the effect in most cases of pressuring the lawyer to withdraw. The judge would need to complete the record of the ethical lapse before filing the complaint, which in this case would include Fogen’s phone call and O’Mara’s letter, together proving the conflict. So I think when O’Mara saw Lester file his letter over a month after it was submitted, he was on alert for disciplinary action. I don’t see any another reason for Lester to have entered that letter into the record.

You raise an interesting issue but I do not expect Judge Nelson, or any other judge in her situation, would take any action against O’Mara because it would be viewed as interfering in the attorney-client relationship. For better or worse, the defendant selected O’Mara as his attorney and O’Mara made a strategic decision to concede that the defendant and his wife misrepresented their assets because he was innocent, unsophisticated and did not trust the court to deal with him fairly.

The strategy worked because Judge Lester permitted the defendant to be released on bail.

I do not believe O’Mara was ever in any danger of being charged with a crime relating to his knowledge of the money and the passport and he duly informed the court about them after the bail hearing. Therefore, I do not believe that it’s fair to state that he had” an interest in his client being seen as a liar.”

Finally, Judge Nelson may not even know about the recorded jailhouse call and the defendant’s comment about the $37,000.

Nevertheless, I do believe that O’Mara has a conflict of interest between his desire to use this case as a vehicle to fame and fortune and his obligation to represent his client’s best interests.

Playing the race card, demonizing the victim, misrepresenting the facts to the media, and trying this case in the court of public opinion are not helping his client.

161 Responses to Judge Nelson will not remove Mark O’Mara from the case

  1. Animaljunkie says:

    I personally think the State of Florida should prosecute O’Mara in lying to the court, since they are burdened with escalating court costs etc. I would relish the thought of O’Mara in front of a judge, trying, unsuccessfully, to weasel his way out of being convicted/sentenced/disbarred.

  2. Not Angela Lansbury says:

    Professor Leatherman, I was wondering if you had any additional thoughts on this post, given the way BDLR threw the issue in OMara’s face in his response to the Motion for Sanctions:

    “On several occasions Defense Counsel asserted to the Court that Defendant was indigent, and he was unaware of the ‘defense fund’ dollars his client had received. However, Defendant and his wife said otherwise…”, followed by the relevant excerpt of the jailhouse phone transcript. See p.5-6 of BDLR’s response at http://www.cfnews13.com/content/dam/news/static/cfnews13/documents/2013/03/Zimmerman-States-Response-to%20-Ds-Motion-for-Sanctions-Against-State-Attorneys-Office-for-Discovery-Violations-0328.pdf

    In the context of showing that O’Mara himself had made several misstatements in the case, it seems to me BDLR pointed directly to the conflict of interest between O’Mara and his client and called him a liar using his own client’s words against him. While I still agree that Judge Nelson won’t act on this, it does appear to show that a prima facie conflict exists. I’ve been thinking for awhile now that Fogen’s only realistic shot at freedom was an ineffective assistance of counsel motion on appeal. O’Mara would never participate, of course, but are the stars lining up in Fogen’s favor here?

  3. Malisha says:

    For that to be one of the stupidest comments professor has heard, it has to be verrrrrrrry stupid; there’s SO MUCH competition for that slot! Whole web-pages devoted to stupid comments. Treehouses, outhouses, bawdy houses. Damn! :mrgreen:

  4. ay2z says:

    Suggestion for LLMPapa, the topic of the media reporters questions to Bernie, why not charge perjury as you did with Shellie, etc.

    Reporters are seen with MOM at the beginning of the hearing video for March. Then the woman, who would have been one of those women smiling at MOM as he gave them some information. (Marinade Dave may have caught what MOM said as it appears he was seated behind these mainstream reporters)

    Prof called the question, one of the stupidest he’s heard.

    Would make a revealing video topic, wouldn’t it? 🙂

  5. ay2z says:

    Anyone remember EMT Kev? The one and same EMT Kev who talked about a laceration across his nose, in court? The EMT called as a witness to describe 45% blood over face and head? The same Kev who was subject of an LLMPapa video about his testimony?

    I have a question. What is the difference, in Florida, of the job descriotion or profession of ‘Paramedic’ EMT and ‘Basic’ EMT?

    Asking because Kev was the witness the defense called to testify about all the blood and ‘across nose’ lacerations, and big percentages, yet Kev is listed as “EMP-Basic Crew Member 2”.

    Why would the defense not call the Lead Crew member, who was the only “EMP-Paramedic and opt for the less medically qualified Kev? You do want the best for your client, don’t you, Don?

    Also, EMT-Basic Kev, did not sign the call report for fogen’s treatment, the senior crew member EMT-Paramedic, Michael Brandy, did.

    Kev’s Good 45 by LLMPapa, starring Kev and West.

    • ay2z says:

      More EMT-Basic, Kev’s testimony for fogen.

      LLMPapa caught out the failures early on, of Kev’s observational skills.

    • fauxmccoy says:

      ay2z – basic emt kev can drive the fire truck, operate sirens, must know basic first aid including cpr and ASSIST the paramedic. the paramedic is capable of starting an iv, inserting a breathing tube, administering medication, etc. one of these positions has considerably more medical training and kevin’s was not it.

      • ay2z says:

        Truck driver, he can also recommend good eateries on the road.

        O’Mara got Kev on the line, wonder how much he paid or was the promise of cameras and fame enough…. but you bet he’s not on the witness list for trial, just pre-trial salting.

        He can now add ‘expert’ witness to his ‘Basic NON-Paramedic qualifications for when he applies to become a real Paramedic.

        Of course, it’s telling that he treated the ‘skin’ wounds while the real paramedic worked on, who fogen called, ‘the other guy’.

    • looneydoone says:

      Kevin O’Rourke is a 10 year SFD veteran who holds the entry level job classification of Firefighter/Engineer/EMT-Basic.
      Here’s a link to Sanford Fire Dept’s classification/duties/pay grade for O’Rourke.

      No one should be surprised to learn he performs his duties *as directed*, and said duties include janitorial services at the station where he’s assigned.
      http://governmentjobs.com/view_job.cfm?=jobID=286588

      O’Mara pulled a fast one at that Bond Hearing

      • looneydoone says:

        whoops !
        It’s been removed
        search…Firefighter/Engineer/EMT-Basic Sanford, FL for details on O’Rourke’s job with the dept.

      • Malisha says:

        The two room-mates, Selma and her room-mate, saw Fogen close up right after the shooting. Neither mentioned blood anywhere on him. The witness who was discussing what kind of bullet it was also didn’t mention, “and he was bleeding profusely while we spoke…” or the like. Hmmm.

    • Jun says:

      I do not feel the 45% blood covering statement helps the defense because, there is no dna whatsoever from Fogen on Trayvon’s hands, sleeves, cuffs and considering if it was 45%, it makes Fogen’s claims even more of a lie

      Orourke should be questioned why he made such a statement because if you look at fotos, it is maybe 20% covered

      • Malisha says:

        Looks like 13% to me. But maybe I can’t see now because my eyes are filled with blood. (Yeah, how else can the cells in my eyeballs receive oxygen and nutrients?)

      • ay2z says:

        The total blood loss, rather than total ‘coverage’, would be more appropriate. Reallly, Trayvon ‘lost’ almost none that was visible but his loss couldn’t sustain life.

        It’s rediculous to talk numbers for coverage as a degree of injury.

  6. You all have thoughtful comments says:

    Reference W8, here is what I wrote last night on the NBC site:
    .
    <blockquote
    Why believe a proven liar's account that he lost sight of Trayvon and did not know where Trayvon was? After all gz told the dispatcher that Trayvon might hear gz telling the dispatcher the address of his townhouse. Sounds as if he knew where Trayvon was.

    Oh, you might say, that even Deedee says that Trayvon told her that he had "lost" gz. Well, then, why are you trying to discredit Deedee's statements??

    Your strategy, you say, is to try to separate the events of that night into two parts……the first part being before gz supposedly lost Trayvon and the second part being the meet up. How are you going to prove a liar's story that he ever lost Trayvon without using Deedee's story?

  7. ay2z says:

    An account of the ‘hospital’ comment happened April 2, 2012 in a memo from SA’s office, listed FROM O’ Steen re:
    Sybrina Fulton interview’.

    It was originally from Sybrina’s first meeting with ‘Dee Dee’ which Sybrina retold to O’Steen and BDLR. Sybrina did not talk to Dee Dee about what Trayvon had said, seems her concern was having Dee Dee make contact with police.

    See pg 37 http://trayvon.axiomamnesia.com/documents-2/court-documents/discovery-documents-part-2-284-pages-7122012/

    Sybrina had relayed “She was emotional and said she had gone to the hospital the night of the Victim’s viewing.” (NOT under oath)

    So, if that is verbatim what Dee Dee told Trayvon’s mother, upon first meeting Sybrina, there could be a misinterpretation, it’s hearsay, isn’t it?

    Dee Dee may have wanted to give a better or simpler answer to Trayvon’s mother, a stranger until that point, about why she wasn’t at the viewing, or she may have said something different that was misinterpreted.

    • ladystclaire says:

      What ever and how ever this was or wasn’t said, it’s not relevant to this case and, the defense is making a mountain out of a mole hill, in an effort to appease a rag tag group of BIGOTED RACIST! I’m wondering if these people are in some way blackmailing these attorneys? I believe there is more than money that these people may or may not be donating to the POS for his defense and living expenses. IMO there is something more than meets the eye going on here.

    • Jun says:

      I dont know or care

      It has nothing to do with the murder 2 case

      They are trying to divert attention away

      but since the issue is moot, and purely from an academic and non-practical standpoint, it is a fine example of why there is a hearsay rule and they would want to speak to the person making the statement so that there is clarification

      It’s Chinese Whispers

      Sybrina presented hearsay of the hospital night or somewhere stay because she could only go by her interpretation of what she heard

      Crump’s recording is hard to hear and the statement is about the same, hospital at night time

      then when there is a clear clarification, it is still vague because the answer is ended up at the hospital or somewhere with Bernie

      By the time the defense got the info, it turned into hospital stays for days on end, hospitalized, it was a lie, and then West & Omara misrepresent the testimony on their motion, thereby, making their motion not credible now, because they are using a misrepresentation to claim a misrepresentation done by both Crump and DeeDee

      So the best way is to speak straight with Deedee and not have so many middle men, and then we would have a straight answer

      Hence why hearsay is not allowed, because as you can see, Chinese whispers affects all

      I agree with the judge calling it moot, because it is moot and a pointless controversy that could easily be solved by asking witness 8 and the information seeked gains absolutely nothing at all, so its moot

      • amsterdam1234 says:

        The defense repeats in their motion, which was filed on 3/15, what they allegedly heard from the prosecution on 3/4. They deposed DD on 3/13.
        It is interesting that they don’t mention what DD had to say about the matter.

      • ay2z says:

        Yes, but I wonder if the point might be to instill a seed of doubt in the public/jury mind, that the defense won’t openly further at trial, but under questioning on the stand, they might bring out some reaction or answer from Dee Dee, that the poisoned jury mind(s) may then quietly recall and even unknowingly, be influenced in a way that they will suspect, ‘read into’ the testimony, even subconsiously, to cast doubt/

        If, as should be the case, Dee Dee has answered all about that issue in deposition as of last week, and we get a motion filed to continue AFTER that deposition, that was based on Witness 8 ,quote “in effect, lied” unquote, then there must be some other gain they are after. Doubt that causes the jury to come to a flawed conclusion about Dee Dee’s truthfulness, just as fogen came to a false conclusion about Trayvon’s body language, etc.

        Jun, I hadn’t heard that term ‘Chinese Whispers’ before… thanks!

      • Jun says:

        Well if anyone actually checked out the case, they would have heard all of the defendant’s lies and Omara’s lies too so its moot

  8. ladystclaire says:

    Why are they deposing the family of the VICTIM? is this normally done in a case such as this and, will the family of the defendant be deposed as well? I know the Anthony’s were deposed in the Casey Anthony trial but, that was a different set of circumstances in that case. for one thing, the grand parents drove the car home with the smell of death in the trunk and, the brother of the defendant played around with Casey’s laptop. in this case, what can the parents and the brother’s depositions add to the defense in this case?

    From where I’m looking at things where the defense is concerned, they are doing some unnecessary BS in order to make it look like they are really defending this POS. IMO, they are only doing this in order to appease the bigoted racist. what are they fishing for as far as Trayvon’s family is concerned?

    • fauxmccoy says:

      lady – this should explain florida’s criminal deposition laws (which are quite different than most of the country’s – big surprise) in laymen’s terms.

      http://www.cobblawfirm.com/Rules_Discovery.htm

      it will detail categories of witnesses, who may be deposed and under what conditions.

    • ay2z says:

      They want to question Sybrina about her identification of the cries as that of her son. same with Tracy, and probably all family members who knew Trayvon’s voice well.

      We know the defendant claims the cries for himself, and even in Serino’s statement, he said the shooter was the one crying for help. Witnesses also said it was the person on the bottom because naturally, the person on the botton would be the one crying for help, by assumption, not by witnessing directly.

      • ay2z says:

        There was also Sybrina’s statement that she believed it was an ‘accident’, and later she explained that she in now way, meant that the shooting was accidental, but that the meeting of Trayvon with the watchman, was an accident, as in happenstance that Trayvon was where the watchman would notice his presence and decide to follow.

      • ladystclaire says:

        Let me tell you guys something, this defendant has lied from ass hole to appetite and, Serino knew he was lying when he first interviewed him yet, he for some idiotic reason he tells the witnesses that Fogen, who he knows is lying was the one screaming for help. we also have some of the witnesses who know a helluva of a lot more than what they are telling.

        How do these people sleep at night as well as go on with the business of living their own lives? this is about the murder of a child and not some common AA thug whose life didn’t matter to anyone. what these people are doing is wrong and, they will eventually see the error of their ways.

        I’m still of the belief that the night has a thousand eyes as well as whats done in the dark, will surely come out in the light. I also believe that there is someone who saw the entire incident as it played out in the area where Trayvon’s body was found. remember we haven’t seen all of the evidence against this POS and, it is very possible that, there is a witness that we know nothing about.

        Let not your left hand know what your right hand is doing! as for me, I walk by faith and not by sight and, I know GOD is going to see that his child Trayvon receive justice.

      • ay2z says:

        ladystclaire, I wonder if the alpha male in the cop shop, dictated how this investigation would go, and what direction Serino would take while at the scene on the 26th. Still want to know who was in that helicopter at 20:09 or 9:09 pm, and why Serino might have made the mistake on the time when the helicopter was overhead in his interview with a witness. (was he just distracted or read his watch wrong, or what.)

        (helicopter question– at 7:30 pm, the air ambulance was grounded due to weather, presumably visibility, yet at 8:09 (or 9:09, a helicopter is overhead, and not a high fly by obviously). Weather can clear quickly if there’s low clouds and a wind, but why would police send a helicopter when no suspect was at large?

        Did Robert Zimmerman call in the troops and did he meet with Lee and Wolfinger that very night? The father of the killer? He’s a witness, so what is he a witness to, anything besides his interpretation of who was calling for help? Something is strange with all this involvement of the Z’s and the Ostermans.

      • ladystclaire says:

        @ayz2, I have always believe that Robert Zimmerman Sr. was involved in this on the very night it happened and, that Wolfinger as well as Bill Lee all met at the SPD on that very night and, came up with this BS lie about Trayvon a scrawny little 17 yr old attacked this obese POS and was killed in self defense. someone at the SPD also came up with the going to Target regular Sunday night shopping trip as well.

        I read about that some where early on in this case that someone in LE came up with that alibi for Fogen who was actually doing his NW and, with him having that gun while doing those duties, they came up with the shopping for weekly groceries lie to cover his fat ass. SPD also arranged the HOA meeting a couple of days after the shooting as well. this meeting was held to inform the residents of the shooting and, it was there that this Fogen was on his way to Target lie was told to the residents, thinking they were ignorant of the fact that Fogen was carrying a gun while doing his NW duties.

        As for the chopper that just so happen to be hovering over that area, they certainly weren’t there to medi vac the victim to a trauma center as he had already been pronounced by EMS. I’m like you in reference to the chopper, who the hell was in that egg beater and, why would they have to arrive via helicopter?

        There is a lot more here than meets the eye and, I hope before it’s all said and done, we are going to see some big wigs go down for obstruction of justice. I don’t think the buck stops at the SPD and I also believe Robert Zimmerman Sr. is in this up to his eyeballs.

      • ladystclaire says:

        @ay2z, sorry I got your name wrong.

      • Two sides to a story says:

        And they think they’re going to get what from the Fulton-Martins? Sounds like more high theatre for the paying Fogen supporters and more jury tainting action.

      • aussie says:

        There was some (very dark) aerial footage of the scene released, way back. I think there are some shots from it on Willisnewton’s Flickr site. So that could have been a TV chopper????

        Serino’s one statement to a witness that the cries for help were from GZ were made at the scene, at the time, before he’d interviewed GZ. He would have been quoting what he’d been told, most likely by another officer at the scene.

        Besides, the witness was feeling guilty about not having helped the person crying for help, and the way Serino said it, to me, sounded like “don’t beat yourself up about it, it wasn’t the dead guy screaming”, more to comfort the witness than to create any false impressions.

        I don’t see anything particularly nefarious in either of these incidents.

        • cielo62 says:

          Aussie- while Serino might have wanted to comfort the witness, he did so in a manner that DISTORTED HER PERCEPTION. That is called witness tampering and is illegal. He should have stayed quiet or said something soothing like ” I know it was hard to hear that shot. I really understand. I empathize and thank you for speaking to me. ” There was no need to lead the witness.

          Sent from my iPod

      • looneydoone says:

        ay2z
        Yes, very curious about the helicopter and it’s timing
        Former SPD Chief Bill Lee entered the Crime Scene Contamination Area at 2040 hrs (8:40PM) according to the official log.
        Sanford has Mutual Assistance Agreements with other local agencies. I believe it’s important to know who owns/leased the chopper that was dispatched to survey the crime scene, and if there are videos from that fly over/hover above. Basically only 2 entities send helicopters to crime scenes and major accidents…law enforcement and local news agencies.

        • Lonnie Starr says:

          Hi looneydoone: Can you link me for this:

          Former SPD Chief Bill Lee entered the Crime Scene Contamination Area at 2040 hrs (8:40PM) according to the official log

          I’m trying to put the stray bits on my time line.

      • ay2z says:

        aussie, thanks for the link. I can’t yet see dark arial photos there, but might find them still.

        What is interesting is this photo: http://imgur.com/a/bcAII#B00ky

        ‘The Unbearable Lightness of Blood’ as a commentary on the big deal about 45% overage of blood as the defense uses to show damage to client, compared to one small hole that wasn’t even bleeding.

      • looneydoone says:

        Lonnie,
        The Crime Scene Contamination Area (CSCA) log is in the 284 page document dump (pages 47,48,49). Curiously, neither Officer Timothy Smith nor Mark Osterman’s name appears on that log, and we know they were both inside the crime scene.

        • Lonnie Starr says:

          Thanks that saves me time. As far as the appearance of others at the crime scene, the mentions come in the various books, IIRC. The people who are familiar with crime scene procedures, know to keep their name off the crime scene logs. Ever sit in a courtroom and watch cases? Eventually you’ll see a judge give a signal, wave a pencil, raise his gavel, scratch his nose or something similar, and the court reporter will stop typing, or today the tape will stop running. Point is, crime scene logs aren’t gospel.

        • Lonnie Starr says:

          OMG!!! Tracey Martin gave Trayvon, not 40 dollars, but 75 to 100 dollars. Trayvon did not go to the movies, but they did eat at McDee’s so where did the money go? I sincerely doubt a meal at McD’s cost 35 dollars or anywhere near it. But Trayvon was found with only 40 dollars on him? Could those three stooges at the 711 have either conned him or robbed him? Well, no, if they’d have robbed him, why would they leave him with 40 dollars? More likely they conned him, asking for a loan and promising to repay, all while acting a bit ghoulish, enough to make him want to just end it and get away.

          If so, then it’s hardly a wonder they’d want to hide their faces from the cctv’s since they couldn’t know how far they might have to go or how things would work out.

          I noticed that on the way to the store Trayvon tells DD that his misses his mother. It’s a sure thing that when a teen starts thinking that way, he’s distressed. So this wasn’t just a fun trip to the store that’s for sure, Trayvon had some worries about the trip.

        • Lonnie Starr says:

          Yes, made all the more curious because the name they’d have liked to have left off, would be Chief Bill Lee if anyone, right?

      • towerflower says:

        looneydoone, the LE helicopter is own by the Seminole Sheriff’s Dept. I don’t see anything suspicious about the flight. My son’s godmother is one of the pilots and they are required to do a couple of flights a shift and they may have heard the chatter on the lines and decided to take a look. They also carry a paramedic with them at all times in the event they are called to a scene where an airlift is required. But I don’t see anything suspicious about the overhead look see.

        • cielo62 says:

          Tower flower- the problem is that they weren’t called in! And then the cops lied saying the weather was too bad to get a helicopter there. Lots of problems from the SPD handling of the situation.

          Sent from my iPod

          • onlyiamunitron says:

            “And then the cops lied saying the weather was too bad to get a helicopter there.”

            Did they say that, or did the helicopter pilots tell them that after being asked to come in?

            unitron

          • cielo62 says:

            Uni- actually Billy Lee said that at a press conference.

            Sent from my iPod

          • onlyiamunitron says:

            But did he say the police decided the weather didn’t permit flying, and didn’t even bother to check with the pilots, or that the police were informed by the helicopter pilots that the weather didn’t permit flying?

            It’s usually the pilot’s call, and if they were in the habit of asking the race of the victim before deciding I suspect that would have leaked by now.

            I’m having a hard time picturing one or two of the cops frantically doing CPR while another one stands there and says “It’s just a black kid, so it’s not worth getting the helicopter wet, I just won’t bother to call them.”

            unitron

      • towerflower says:

        cielo62, You are reading too much into it. I worked at an airport and used to deal with these flights. They don’t go out on each and every call. They are requested. In a shooting, they are called in if a chase is underway or they need assistance to help find a suspect on the ground (they have equipment to find locate people even in the dark). The Sanford PD would have had to request the helo from the Seminole Sheriff’s Dept. If they were already up and flying they would just radio them to go to the site. They wouldn’t be called in on a single shooting where the shooter was in custody. No one to chase or search for.

        Weather may have also been a factor. If weather conditions were IFR (instrument flight rules) then the pilot would not have gone up normally, it would depend on the situation (for needing them) and the weather. Was it IFR due to visibility or due to cloud coverage or both? If it was marginal IFR with a ceiling of 900′, they could’ve requested to fly under SVFR rules (Special Visual Flight Rules). I tried to find the actual visibility and cloud layers for that night but the top sites all want $$$ to get it and this situation isn’t a deal breaker. The weather at the time, that I know of, was an on and off rain. With it raining around the timeframe of the shooting. If the weather cleared and the pilot (just one with a paramedic) decided to go flying, I could see them going for a look see over the site. I flew a couple of times with my son’s godmother, a close friend, as she would do this. She would go over FD calls for a lookie. She wasn’t requested, she was just bored with her mandatory fly and wanted to see what was going on. She would circle the area a few times and go elsewhere.

        With ay2z, helicopters do not have a minimum altitude they are required to fly at. They just have to maintain a safe distance from obstacles. Most fly around at 500 ft but it’s not unusual to see them lower. Airplanes on the other hand have to fly at least at 1000′ over a populated area and they can go lower over non-populated areas.

        But knowing how the sheriff’s helo operations works, I’m sorry, but I don’t see a controversy here. I don’t see a collusion with the Sanford PD. I think it was only a coincidence that one flew over the scene if it was a sheriff’s helo. It could have also been a news station helo who went up for a look see of the crime site. The weather conditions would have applied to them also for being IFR. Every news station here in the Central Florida area has them and you will see some of their shots in the stories of the night if it’s big enough…….gated community…..no access…..shooting……get the helo up when you can and see what’s going on. News at 11.

        • cielo62 says:

          Tower flower- thanks for the explanation. Billy Lee was the one that brought it up and started the speculation. I mean, along with the rest of the cover up, adding a lie in regards to a helicopter would just fit in.

          Sent from my iPod

    • onlyiamunitron says:

      “Why are they deposing the family of the VICTIM? ”

      They are deposing witnesses.

      They are deposing them because they are witnesses.

      And most likely they were put on the witness list by the state.

      The defense doesn’t have the time and money to waste deposing people just to be mean and cruel to them.

      unitron

    • Malisha says:

      I can just imagine the questions on the depositions to Trayvon’s family members:

      “Isn’t it true [Trayvon] was violent and often attacked innocent white men looking for addresses?”

      “Isn’t it true that [DeeDee] is a liar?”

      “Isn’t it true that Crump got you to make up this whole thing to make a bundle of money off the attempted murder of an innocent Afro-Peruvian?”

      “Isn’t it true you are all causing a political problem just to railroad an innocent man?”

      “Aren’t you therefore all bad people and Pba-lack racists?”

      QED. You can go now. Leave your second-class citizenship papers with the receptionist. NEXT!

  9. ladystclaire says:

    Will the defense be allowed to depose DeeDee more than one time? I have read somewhere that they intend to depose her again. what the hell do they want out of this girl and, I sure do hope she has a good attorney looking out for her best interest. this is the dirtiest defense team for a murder trial that I have ever seen in my life.

    The defense don’t have anything at all to defend this murderer and that is a given. they are taking orders from a racist group of “IMBECILES” as well as playing up to those who are just as sick as the defendant, in order to keep them sending in donations. I’ll be willing to bet that a lot of folks who are sending him money, are also receiving food stamps and maybe even work first checks.

    This is such a shameful display of the American Justice System and it’s rule of law being made to look like nothing more than a JOKE, in this circus atmosphere being put on by the defense.

    • fauxmccoy says:

      lady – i believe that any witness can only be deposed once unless special permission is granted by court order upon petition. fred will surely correct me if i am wrong.

      • Two sides to a story says:

        They can be deposed more than once by agreement – as in everyone agrees to continue an unfinished (by someone’s standards) depo. If what we see in the media is true, the prosecution and defense agreed to continue W8’s depo on a second day.

        • fauxmccoy says:

          i understand what you are saying. that would still be one deposition, spread out for scheduling purposes. my answer above was referring to a situation where weeks later if the defense should desire to ask more questions it would constitute a second deposition and need the judge’s approval.

          judge nelson had to approve a preliminary phone call with witness 8. in that instance, the judge was giving express permission for two depositions, but was clear on the required brevity and scope of the phone call.

          from http://www.cobblawfirm.com/Rules_Discovery.htm item H.1. Discovery Depositions

          The trial court or the clerk of the court may, upon application, issue subpoenas for the persons whose depositions are to be taken. In any case, including multiple defendants or consolidated cases, no person shall be deposed more than once except by consent of the parties or by order of the court issued on good cause shown. A witness who refuses to obey a duly served subpoena may be adjudged in contempt of the court from which the subpoena issued.

    • Jun says:

      Yeah, they want a 3rd deposition

      I dont feel it should be allowed, as her rights are being infringed by the defense

      • ladystclaire says:

        @Jun, NO a third deposition should not be allowed and, it’s up to Judge Nelson to put the reins on West and the other A’hole who is suppose to be the lead attorney. apparently they aren’t shaking her down the way they thought they would be able to do.

        BTW, according to them and the bosses at the CDH as well as the dysfunctional Zimmerman family, AA don’t have rights of any kind. THIS SHOULD NOT BE ALLOWED!

      • ladystclaire says:

        @Jun, BTW I liked your hip hop singing and, you are good.

      • Jun says:

        Thanks. Took me a while to arrange the song.

      • colin black says:

        When what where?
        A 3rd deposition of whom?

        As far as Ive read they deposed Trayvons Family an Witt8 dureing last week.
        So they have questioned dd already an yet no info re any major developments from the defence.

        And we know from prior experiance they dont keep there cards close to there chest.
        Just the mere hint from the State that wit8 would not be produceing hospital records of confirmation .
        Regarding any trip to a hospital clinic private doctor.

        Had them trumpeting an crowing that she is a liar.
        Every opertunity West had when last in court he condmed her as a liar.
        West was chosen to utter this ridiculas allegation as he has no faceial emotions so can keep a dour face.

        There client is a proven liar even his own defence had to expose him for lieing to the court.He has done nothing but lie everytime we hear his voice.
        On his non emergancy call he is lieing about Trayvon.
        His own position lies by ommision about being armed an a NW captain.
        Lie about break ins in his first sentance.
        Ther had not been a lot of break ins in the area recently or historicly.

        Nothing we hear from him is true lied to his first attorneys went rouge on them.
        Lied to his present attorneys.Lied to the veiwiing public on Hannity
        Lied when he said he waas not aware the grafitti…Long live zimmerman…Spray painted against a brick wall he used in his first beg site.therealgzdotco.
        Said he wasnt aware that said graphiti was sprayed upon a Black Learning or culture centre.
        An was being investigated as a hate crime.

        An yet not a peep agter there depo of dd whenn we know if they had discovered anything anything at all to discredit her statements to LE an the defence via Crump .
        They would let everyone know about it an all we get is nada not even one of faggagges barely audable whispers.
        When he has been caught in a lie.
        He softly says I dont know or cant remember.
        Any way surely they dont want to depose dd a 3rd time as wont they have to depose her a second time first.

        Second time first does that even compute?
        Any way you know what I mean if they cant verify or find out all the info they need at first depo they are not prepared or competent.
        They may find things out after a depo thats relevant to what a wittness said.
        An is differing to there version an ask to re depose said wittness again for clarification on specific an named criteria/facts.
        And put relevent info in front of a Judge for permision to grant another depo as far as I know..
        Do we know other than date of dd wit8 deposition.
        How long it lasted hours wise?

  10. ChrisNY~Laurie says:

    Hello everybody.

    I was just looking over the witness depostions taken on March 14, 2013 for Tracy Martin. W7, W10 and W25. It says that they were taken at FDLE, Miami Regional Operations Center.
    Does anybody know who these other witnesses are? They must be from Miami if their depos were taken there, right?

    • ay2z says:

      There were witnesses with names withheld. One name was made pubiic accidentally on a list, but it’s really not a big deal, young family members perhaps who should be protected.

    • onlyiamunitron says:

      “Does anybody know who these other witnesses are? They must be from Miami if their depos were taken there, right?”

      Witness 7 is Brandy (Brandi?) Green, and the other 2, as best I’ve been able to find out, remain a mystery.

      unitron

  11. Trained Observer says:

    Unrelated yet related sidenote:
    Today’s South Florida Sentinel has a package (link below) on fate of a mentally challenged kid wrongfully convicted of rape and murder and set free 26 years later, thanks to DNA testing.

    Jury verdict now awaited on cops coercing him into a false confession to protect his girl and on compensation. It’s quite a tale …. for anyone interested in the reality of how dirty cops can be … and to what awaits Fogen in a Florida state pen.

    Or why Sanford PD thought it could get away with letting Fogen go free. If only cops had had a patsy to pin Trayvon’d death on.

    Miramar, fy where Johnny Depp went to high school, is just north of Miami in Broward County,

    If you’ve got the time give this package a read.

    http://www.sun-sentinel.com/news/local/crime/fl-anthony-caravella-testifies-20130319,0,5192348.story

    • gbrbsb says:

      @Trained Observer
      Such a sad story and one of much too many caused by ignorance and lack of understanding. I have for the past years acted as a ferocious voluntary advocate for adults with learning difficulties and/or impairments and/or disabilities or otherwise called , or as they so wonderfully refer to them in India, “PEOPLE WITH DIFFERENT ABILITIES” a label that at least affords them all the respect they deserve as they are indeed very very special people just in a different way.

      May I first say without wanting to offend that the newspaper is incorrect, it is a misnomer to refer to those as Caravella as having a “mental” disability albeit he could of course, just as a “normal” person, also suffer from a mental disability but it is rare. On the other hand the word “retarded” is not acceptable over here and I feel sad when some posters use it as to me it is like calling Trayvon a “nigger”, and even if inadvertently and without malice, shows a lack of respect for those living, through no fault of their own, with such a condition.

      Depending on the severity of the impairment (IQ is not a true test as despite not being able to read or write many have other abilities a lot of us would die for!) they are of the most vulnerable within our society. The majority are loving, trusting and giving and the few with challenging behaviour is never from choice but from fear. Their real desire to please everyone makes them sadly the focus of use, abuse and mistreatment.

      My OH has two severely learning impaired adult sons just turned 40. We care for them at home because institutional care is just that, institutional, i.e. impersonal, cold, regimented, devoid of choices, etc. Both “boys” are the most innocent, loving, happy people you could meet and despite the hard work caring for them 24/7 they are a joy for all those who have the privilege to get to know them, indeed they are less of a problem than my OH’s only “normal” son of 30 who has caused more headaches and heartaches on his own than both boys have in all their lives.

      There is beautiful UK film, well worth the watch if you have the opportunity and are interested, called “Let Him Have it” It is based on the true story of the learning impaired adult Derek William Bentley executed as accessory to a murder in 1953 less than a month after his sentence, with his conviction only being finally quashed and a full posthumous pardon given in 1998 after a 45 year campaign to clear his name and after this film brought his case to worldwide renown. Here is a link to the trailer at least.

  12. colin black says:

    We know nothing about wit8 other than she was freinds with Trayvon an on the phone with him.
    At the time he an foggage exchanged words with each other.

    Trayvon tells her as events unfolded about being followed by car an eventually confronted by the creepy looking dude .
    She heard him say he was aproaching on foot an she urged him to run.
    Then She heard Trayvon ask in a reasondle enquiry as to why he kept following him.
    An heard the respoce as …..What are YOU doing around hear.
    Corroberated by another ear wittnes to the confrontation.

    As little we know of her we know even less about her Family..
    She may have Family members whom work in the health feild.
    Her Mother Sister or Father could have taken her blood pressure..

    Kind of an open question …Did you attend a hospital or some where?.

    Everyone is some where

    • onlyiamunitron says:

      “Kind of an open question …Did you attend a hospital or some where?.

      Everyone is some where”

      Which leaves us with the question of whether Bernie was incompetent in handling the interview with such imprecision, or whether, for whatever reason, he intentionally left a hole in that question big enough to slip a freight train through sideways.

      unitron

      • lurker says:

        BTW–I hung around the TreeHouse for the first time yesterday. They are all about DeeDee #1 and DeeDee #2.

        Dunno what they think they can do with that one. There is only one phone number he was in connection with at the beginning of the incident–and with the same number for lots of hours during that day.

        Even if their pet theory (that Crump is a liar and had someone pose as DeeDee to tell the story on tape) were true, it would matter little to the case. Only the testimony of the owner of the phone JTrayvon was conneceed to would matter.

      • lurker says:

        I think he just wasn’t interested in pursuing something not terribly relevant with a witness who was difficult to draw out.

        • onlyiamunitron says:

          “I think he just wasn’t interested in pursuing something not terribly relevant with a witness who was difficult to draw out.”

          Which leaves me to wonder why he bothered to bring it up at all.

          unitron

      • ay2z says:

        What was the name of that comedian again? You know, the one who asked questions like, if there is a Dee Dee, and if there is a second Dee Dee, does this mean that together, they would add up to Dee Dee Dee Dee?

        The TH people must be something like this? (without the question marks of course)

      • Jun says:

        It’s because its a moot issue that has nothing to do with the case and even with the Crump interview, it is still vague and ambiguous because all we can draw from it is

        a) She did not feel up to go to the wake

        b) She ended up to spend the night at the hospital or somewhere because of high blood pressure

        There’s no dates given and she could have gone anytime and may have simply gone there at night time and then went home without treatment or checking, thus no medical or hospital records, and thus is another option to fit the testimony of hers

        It’s too circumstantial to conclude anything and is really moot

        Anyways, my new opinion is it is a trap for trial, because when or if Omara or West go at DD, regarding records, it would be perfect timing to go over Fogen’s lack of medical record proof of his allegations and his refusal of such medical and hospital recording of such an incident and the EMT reports and Omara will have already made Bernie’s argument for him regarding the need for medical records, even for Omara’s moot issue

      • amsterdam1234 says:

        They don’t mention what DD said about missing the wake/funeral during the deposition, at all.

        • onlyiamunitron says:

          “They don’t mention what DD said about missing the wake/funeral during the deposition, at all.”

          They who? Which deposition? Witness 8 was recently deposed by the defense, but previously also was by Bernie de la Riondo, which is the time to which I refer, although I was really talking about what he said, and not her answer.

          unitron

        • onlyiamunitron says:

          That’s what I get for trusting my memory, it’s actually de la Rionda, not Riondo.

          (an embarrassed)
          unitron

      • Malisha says:

        He wouldn’t care about that sideways train; the question he asked was silly and irrelevant. He shouldn’t even have asked her if she went to the funeral. None of anybody’s business. But that doesn’t matter in the least and he did not HAVE to be precise in his interview. Do we not notice that there was not a SINGLE INTERVIEW of a SINGLE WITNESS that was what anybody rational would call “precise”? All the interviews, including those of Fogen, were meandering around chit-chatting interviews that hopped on and off subjects, both relevant and non-relevant, and that hit many points that any number of obsessed silly people could spend four years carrying on about. LORD!

        Let’s take one of the interviews of Fogen during the re-enactment (which was not a re-enactment, how’s that for imprecise?): “I felt like he saw my gun.”

        “You FELT like he saw it or you saw that he felt it?”

        Fogen: I felt like — I didn’t feel good.

        Q: Did you go to a hospital or somewhere?
        Fogen: Yeah. I had near-death-experience pressure.

        YOU LIED!!!!!!!!!!! ❗ ❗ ❗ ❗

        • onlyiamunitron says:

          “He wouldn’t care about that sideways train; the question he asked was silly and irrelevant. He shouldn’t even have asked her if she went to the funeral. None of anybody’s business.”

          Which only further raises the question of why he asked the question. Her testimony regarding what she heard on the phone the night of the shooting should be the same no matter what happened later or where she did or didn’t go.

          unitron

      • Trained Observer says:

        It’s important to make a distinction between Trayvon’s funeral and the wake.

        • onlyiamunitron says:

          “It’s important to make a distinction between Trayvon’s funeral and the wake.”

          I’m still waiting for a definitive answer as to whether the wake was the pre-funeral visitation or the post-funeral gathering at the family’s house, but my post, to which WordPress says you replied, was really about how Bernie handled the getting medical attention question more than it was about how the question was answered.

          unitron

          • Xena says:

            @onlyiamunitron

            I’m still waiting for a definitive answer as to whether the wake was the pre-funeral visitation or the post-funeral gathering at the family’s house,

            A Wake is held before the funeral at the funeral home or church. After internment is the “repast” where people come to the family’s home for food and fellowship.

          • onlyiamunitron says:

            “A Wake is held before the funeral at the funeral home or church. After internment is the “repast” where people come to the family’s home for food and fellowship.”

            What you refer to as the wake is what we call “the visitation”, and the repast is pretty much “hey, are y’all goin’ by the house afterwards?”

            unitron

          • Xena says:

            A wake can be a visitation, but visitation is generally when the body is laid out in the funeral home or church when family of the deceased is not present. I’ve known and attended visitations held in the evenings for those wanting to pay their respects who could not take off work during the day.

      • Jun says:

        LMAO

        Next they will say that she is lying because

        WITNESS 8 or DD is not her real name

        ROFL

      • ladystclaire says:

        @lurker-2:13pm, I thought the CDH (conservative dog house) wasn’t going to be discussing this case on their site anymore. now who are the liars here?

      • towerflower says:

        No, they said they were only going to stop the daily discussions and if SD had a conspiracy to talk about then he would post. One of the things they have discussed is to do voice comparisons on the different taped interviews of Wit. 8 to prove that there are 2 or more Dee Dees, LOL.

        It’s funny how their minds work. When I talked on the other thread how they were taking credit for MOM’s latest motion and naming it after a nut they all saw it as we were going crazy over the case falling apart when in fact the opposite is true. They even mentioned a post by Xena.

        I wonder what some of these nutters are like in real life.

        • Xena says:

          @towerflower. Oh yeah — the “Tara motion.” Well, I think that “Tara” is actually the name of an organization. (I won’t say more.) LOL!!

          Come the next hearing, we shall see whether O’Mara can stand proud with the “Tara Motion” or like the last several motion hearings, leave the court room after hearing “denied.”

      • ladystclaire says:

        These tree nuts are *IGNORANT* to the core and, they are dangerous as well. if I were in their shoes, I would shut down operations because, they have already been called out in court for the illegal BS they have been doing and, some of them are getting ready to hear these words, you’ve been SERVED.

        • Xena says:

          @ladystclaire

          …they have already been called out in court for the illegal BS they have been doing and, some of them are getting ready to hear these words, you’ve been SERVED.

          Or, we want you to come down and talk to us. You can bring an attorney if you like.

          Or, we have a search warrant for all equipment on the premises with access to the internet.

    • lurker says:

      A lot of black churches also still have “nurses” on duty at regular services, or particularly at funerals and the like where emotions run high. In most cases these folks have some training in first aid and may well also know how to run a sphygmomanometer (Blood pressure thingy). If witness #8 had previous experience with grief, hysteria and fainting–and found that in such situations her BP went up, she might well have made that connection.

      Still not particularly relevant.

      If she were nothing more to Trayvon than a wrong number, what she HEARD would still be the point and not the relationship.

      And I am still wondering if Guy told West and the court that there WERE no records, or merely that there were no records in the state’s possession.

      • willisnewton says:

        Why would the state care to possess hospital records of W8? They certainly have no obligation to do the defense’s leg work.

      • lurker says:

        Willis–agreed. And Judge Nelson has pointed this out in the past.

        So–I would imagine that the way to go about this would be for O’Mara to ask, during deposition, some pointed questions about where Witness #8 was at the time of the funeral (and if she has an attorney, one might hope that she would be directed not to answer such irrelevant prying into her private and personal live). And then, if he can get her statement that she went somewhere for medical treatment, he could obtain a subpoena for the records–assuming he could show relevance to the court.

      • Xena says:

        ASA Guy stated in open court that the witness was opposed to providing her medical records, and there are no hospital records. He suggested that the defense depose the witness for more info. The more I’ve thought about it, the more I tend to see there was no playing with semantics. There are medical records that the witness is opposed to providing, but no hospital records.

      • bettykath says:

        It’s far more likely that she went to a clinic. A clinic easily gets transposed to hospital.

      • Jun says:

        I did not watch the whole hearing but Guy saying that, just sounds like the defense is playing games

        @XENA

        • Xena says:

          @Jun. West lacks authority to question the prosecution in court about when they learned anything about a witness’ records that are protected by federal law. ASA Guy said in so many words, “Ask the witness yourself.”

          So ASA Guy was not going to cross the line and violate federal law by addressing medical records for another person. He’s smart. Can’t say that about West.

      • gbrbsb says:

        @lurker

        “If she were nothing more to Trayvon than a wrong number, what she HEARD would still be the point and not the relationship.”

        Very cleanly put!

      • Jun says:

        Xena

        I do not know what he said

        I only recall the part where Guy said in reply to their request for the records and confirmation of their allegation of it being a lie under oath

        It was moot Guy said

        There were never any medical records to obtain Guy said

        Just depose witness 8 Guy said and then we can address the issue

        Judge agreed and said to depose witness 8 and if she says differently to what is stated in court, then the defense can depose her on the medical records strictly

        West continues his allegations of the “lies” and inquires when and how the State found out, in an attempt to confirm his allegations

        Guy says it is not necessary, just depose witness 8, it’s moot

        Judge agrees and declares the issue moot without prejudice

        West asks for witness 8’s address for a 4th time and Judge says, for the 3rd time or so, go depose witness 8 and ask her

        LMAO seems like a tad bit of an overreaction but it got all the nutters like Stutzman salivating, over a MOOT issue LMAO

        that’s all I remember

        Is that what you are speaking of?

      • fauxmccoy says:

        bonus points for ‘sphygmomanometer’ 🙂 i’ve been looking for the opportunity to throw that hefty word around.

      • ladystclaire says:

        @Xena, you are right in the fact that ASA Guy is smart as far as not going where West wants him to go in reference to this girls PRIVATE medical records. West on the other hand is trying to make her out to be a liar in front of the world by what he did at the last hearing. he came right out and called her a liar in open court. the defense has been wanting the prosecution to do their work for them from the very beginning.

      • ladystclaire says:

        @Jun, the defense has no right to ask for W-8 address and, besides what the hell is Fogen’s address? the POS is in hiding and not wanting his where abouts known so, he has no right to know where she lives either. Judge Nelson needs to ask them, what is the reason for them to ask for her address. I have never heard of this before in a case like this or any other criminal case, where the defendant thinks he/she is entitled to a witnesses address.

      • pat deadder says:

        to lurker Maybe she went to a school nurse. Do schools have this in the U.S.OMG why does it matter.I feel like I’ve fallen into Omara’s trap.

      • ChrisNY~Laurie says:

        Maybe her blood pressure was taken by a neighbor, family member or friend that has training in taking blood pressure. Or an EMT perhaps. My neighbor was a Nurse and she came over and took my husbands BP for him. I take mine everytime I’m in my pharmacy with the machine.

      • Two sides to a story says:

        It sounds to me as if BDLR was simply exploring how close her relationship was to Trayvon. You were on the phone with him all day. Yeah. Did you go to the funeral/wake/whatever. No. I didn’t feel good. I had high BP.

    • ay2z says:

      There was only ONE deposition, with the limited ‘phonecall’ to get info on twitter etc.

      The state does NOT depose their witnesses, they interview them, but it is not a deposition, nor would the state have to follow rules of deposition or invite the defense to attend.

      onlyiamunitron says:
      March 22, 2013 at 6:08 pm
      “They don’t mention what DD said about missing the wake/funeral during the deposition, at all.”

      They who? Which deposition? Witness 8 was recently deposed by the defense, but previously also was by Bernie de la Riondo, which is the time to which I refer, although I was really talking about what he said, and not her answer.

      unitron

      • ay2z says:

        also, depositions are not made public, except by court order for special circumstances, so we would not be hearing any of Dee Dee’s audio interview or reading transcripts, if this were a deposition.

    • ay2z says:

      Thank you!

      Now to look forward to Bernie’s response, and his passionate argument to point this out to Judge Nelson, she will notice the purposeful omission and the reason the defense left it out. Are they really that stupid to think their omission of “or somewhere” will go unnoticed?

      Sure, the reporters who glommed onto MOM after the last hearing, are too slow to notice, or can’t be bothered to do their own reading and thinking, instead let MOM spoon feed them their ‘bullet points’.

      • gbrbsb says:

        @ay2z
        Far be it from me to defend MOM but actually after the last hearing, IIRC, (and I am pretty sure I do because it really struck me at the time), despite West in court before Nelson used the words DD lied referring to her medical records, MOM made no mention to DD “lying” whatsoever, so at least in this case the reporters must have hitched on to the “DD lied” chant from West’s pontifications it in court rather than MOM spoon feeding it to them in the conference after the hearing.

      • ay2z says:

        gbrbsb, the statement by MOM, lead lawyer, that Witness 8, quote ‘in effect lied’ about being hospitalized, is in the motion to reconsider. This motion was signed by MOM, with an assistant providing signature on his behalf. (Pg 18 ) Certificate of Service, again signature line by MOM.

        So, MOM was saying that Witness 8 “lied”, see Pg. 3 of Motion for Reconsideration.

        “8. This matter ….
        On March 4, 2013, in the evening hours, undersigned counsel received a telephone call from Assistant State Attorney, John Guy, who explained that there would be no need to move forward with the subpoena, as no hospitalization records existed for Witness 8, in that she misrepresented that she was in the hospital, and in effect, lied to those various above-referenced people, particularly in her under oath statement to Assistant State Attorney Bernie de la Rionda. …”

        The undersigned was Mark O’Mara.

    • Not Angela Lansbury says:

      Oh, it’s even worse than ignoring those 2 words. No one ever said she received any medical treatment, which is the point at which medical records are created. It is very possible to spend the night in a hospital waiting room without receiving any treatment, especially in a place like Miami Gardens. The defense has a long way to go before being able to credibly call this witness a liar.

    • Yep, that’s what I’ve saying.

      I’m shocked that they would try to make something out of that answer.

      • LLMPapa says:

        It’s hard to imagine the true state of the defense, if THIS chit is the best they’ve got.

        This young girl will be devastating for their rhetoric..

      • ladystclaire says:

        @Professor, they don’t care about doing what they are doing as far as trying to make this girl look like she’s a liar for the benefit of a possible jury pool and, to also have his followers at the CDH repeating his lies all for the sake of making this girl out to look like a dishonest person plus a liar. he is doing these things just to appease his fellow racist.

      • Trained Observer says:

        Yeah!

      • Nef05 says:

        I had not previously closely focused on her answer, beyond the affirmative response. DD’s answer is “Yeah, I had high blood pressure”. Go past “yeah” to “I had high blood pressure”.

        IMO – It sounds to me, as if it’s offered to BDLR as proof of having sought medical attention by telling him what diagnosis she received, when she went. I’ve said the same thing in the past, with the same inflection, different diagnosis, “Yeah, I’m pregnant.” (I’ll admit, I was a bit more excited though)

        I don’t think there’s any problem here. Clearly, she sought medical attention (“somewhere”). Perhaps from a clinic similar to the one fogen, went to himself. In any case, someone told her she had high blood pressure, and there will be documentation of that. Perhaps even a short-term prescription, addressing the HBP.

        I defy O’Mara to attempt to make that seem less than credible, with him trying to make an argument for fogen’s “broken” nose, using what will likely be very similar documentation. IMO – O’Mara comes off a big loser in that scenario. Whereas DD’s documentation will substantiate that she did seek medical attention (somewhere) and did have an actual diagnosis, fogen’s documentation shows the exact opposite.

      • ay2z says:

        About high blood pressure as a diagnosis, you can go to pharmacy and check yourself, talk to a pharmacist, visit a friend who is a nurse, visit the school nurse at school about anxiety.

        If this turns on an alleged post made on Twitter, which seems to be where all this originated, what does it matter unless you can prove who posted the information? And even then, why does it matter if someone, at worst, is feeling terrible about missing a service or something, for her friend because she is not feeling well. Would you need to tell the world you have debilitating physical symptoms of stress made all the worse by not going to a funeral or wake?

        Let’s let the parents on the jury, think of how they would want their child or young adult treated in this situation.

    • Jun says:

      IMO it’s pathetic

      There’s no way for the defense to prove or disprove any of her statements

      They are so vague

      even her statements to Crump were vague and open ended where they could not draw a conclusion that she is a liar

      You know for a fact it was purposely left out by the defense to build up the issue

      Wow what a smoking gun LMAO

      They will leave it up to the jury and Omara can’t bring it up (if it is even admissible or unobjectionable), till after her testimony, and her testimony matches witnesses and forensics so… LOL

    • I really doubt this issue will be in the courtroom. This was done to corrupt a jury pool. Now when she gets on the stand and 1 member of the jury has been tainted, there will be no fixing it because the defense will never bring it up. So this issue will sit in the back of 1 juror’s head during deliberations.

      KInduv a sick strategy but it is effective. This is why you don’t take lie detector tests because if you fail you can guarantee there is a juror that knows about it even though it’s never brought up in trial.

  13. Not Angela Lansbury says:

    Thanks, Professor!

  14. gbrbsb says:

    Thank you professor for the clarification, but out of interest could you explain under what circumstances would a Judge be permitted to remove a defence council from a case and what kind of misconduct on behalf of the defence lawyer would merit such a draconian measure.

  15. colin black says:

    He jummped into this an was instantly embroiled in the cess pit of lies deceit an miss information.
    His desire to bask in the lime light out weighed his responceability to defend his client ethiclly.

    At times a defence attorney must sit there client down.
    And tell them the facts an call them out on blatant immpossabilitys in there version of events.

    Its there job to represent there client even if if means calling him or her a liar to there face.
    Telling them that dog wont hunt an you will make me an you look ridiculas going with an improbable impossable set of events.

    Its there job to tell them not only are they guilty as charged.
    But will ultimitely be found guilty by a jury of there peers if they choose to go ahead with a trial.

    Its there job to explain what the fair an just options are available when to beg for a plea an how to beg for compassion from the court.
    If the client refuses to see reality then ethicaly knowing he is guilty an attorney should then part ways with the client.

    M o m has chosen to step on board foggagges deluded defence of conspircys to set up a decent Merican.
    An the attack by an out of control gansta beatdown killing machine.
    I think foggage has ended up with both West an M O M the type of advocates he deserves.

    An they are shakled with foggagge the type of client they deserve.
    Collective the Lost Boys………..

  16. Jun says:

    Just a theory with no proof

    Perhaps it was a ploy to get a continuance

    Claim Omara is incompetent?

    Not saying it will work, but we are talking the scheming mind of the Fogen, from which, the only parties who fall for it are the Treefort Gang

  17. Malisha says:

    O’Mara is what he is. Regardless of his shortcomings, he’s better than Fogen deserves!

    He won’t be removed from the case; nothing like that will happen; it would only give Fogen an excuse for putting off the trial.

    This will go to trial or get pleaded out. I don’t predict any more continuances or delays.

    • gbrbsb says:

      Agree entirely except, IANAL and IMBW,I feel that despite her stalwart beliefs Judge Nelson MAY unfortunately find herself forced by the tactics into granting at least one other continuance or the risk of an appeal could move from possibility to probability.

      • Malisha says:

        There will definitely BE an appeal but there is small chance of a SUCCESSFUL appeal and remember that appeals take TIME and MONEY. People who like to file silly incompetent motions do NOT like to do appellate work; appellate work is actually very demanding. And poor quality work really does suffer in those realms.

        • gbrbsb says:

          Thanks Malisha for jolting me back to reality. My wishful thinking that if the prosecution did its job conscientiously GZ would be have no room for appeal, when anyone under very serious charges handed down a mid to long term sentence should probably at least try to appeal even if only to try to shave off a few years! I am sure for an appeal GZ will surely need a better, i.e. even less scrupulous, team than the one he started with… Baez ? 😉

          • Lonnie Starr says:

            Appeal has a nice sound to it, but in truth it is only as good as the evidence it contains and/or the argument that clearly demonstrates; not just error. But error that would have substantially altered the outcome of the case in some meaningful or material way.

            In a case where the evidence is overwhelmingly against the defendant, it is unlikely the appellate court is going to find, that much if anything would have impacted the results. An appeal is not a “do over” trial, although defense attorneys want their losing clients to think that it is, so that they escape the emotional break downs and anger and flee to the bar to consort with their peers.

          • gbrbsb says:

            I am well aware Lonnie, I have been active on several appeals myself which is why (iirc) I said “try” to appeal. On the other hand, that the evidence is overwhelming against is a matter of opinion to at least some degree and I only wish I could be as sure as many of you on this point, but IMO BARD is a high hurdle for the prosecution when there are several very important pieces very unclear that I at least cannot be as confident as I would prefer.

          • Lonnie Starr says:

            Confidence in the likely outcome of this case, comes from the amount of material each side has to prove their case.

            As you well know, the main pieces of exculpatory evidence is what is created by GZ’s own statements and photos of injuries he claims to have received at the hands of Trayvon, an unarmed youth of some 168 lbs and 5′ 11″ tall. In short a very slender young man.

            Firstly, most evidence that is in favor of the defense, only works if the defendant can be believed to be telling the truth. MOM has had to admit to the court that GZ has lied to the court, because he was distrustful of the court in matters of money. Unfortunately, that came distrust is available in the matter of avoiding a serious jail sentence. So, a juror may conclude that if GZ would lie to the court about money, then he will most certainly lie to everyone, to avoid a long prison sentence.

            So, GZ’s first big claim is that he was seriously wounded by a vicious and almost lethal attack that this unarmed child mounted against him.
            But, the physical evidence says that no such attack took place. Who is the jury going to believe? GZ who says that his mouth and bloody nose were covered with Trayvon’s hands? Or the ME who reports that there was no evidence, dna or otherwise, that Trayvon’s hands had even touched GZ?

            Unless the defense can somehow convince the jury that Trayvon somehow managed to either wear and discard gloves, or otherwise wash his hands thoroughly with bleach before he was shot. The defense has no alternative but to move on and hope the jurors forget about this particular matter when they retire to deliberate.

            But there is another big problem for the defense, namely how do they introduce this and the “likely broken nose” into evidence? The only one who can testify to these effects, is the defendant who will be proven to be a liar, and will be proven to be lying again.

            The SP can “mop the floor” with GZ’s reputation. The defense cannot risk having one of their witnesses utter any character support for GZ. Since that would unleash a tidal wave of impeachment so devastating he’ll need a doctors report just to prove that he’s breathing.

            Finally GZ’s own testimony and recorded evidence proves that he was following Trayvon, for no purpose that the police approved of.
            His own recorded evidence will show that he had malice towards this child, even though he did not know him. His own given evidence will show that he believed, without reason therefore, that Trayvon was a criminal, intending to do criminal things. His own given evidence will show that he was exasperated to the extreme, at the thought that this criminal would also get away like they always do.

            Lastly GZ will need to sell the jury on his claims that the unarmed teen was able to render this 207 lb former barroom bouncer — who also hired out as “muscle” where he was expected to do combat with recalcitrant customers who became violent — helpless and unable to defend himself by any means other that with a deadly firearm loaded with cheap and therefore extra deadly hollow point bullets which fragment inside the body.

            Yes dear friends, the defense, as you can see, has some very steep hills to climb and DD has not even been mentioned as one of them. Hardly a wonder then that MOM is attacking everything in sight, except the pillars the case rests upon.

          • Lonnie Starr says:

            As if the above weren’t enough, I’ve just finished embedding a pdf to my evidence pile blog, “Redacted names released”, which, reports that the NW met several times and that the SPD gave them instructions on how to conduct NW, there was to be no patrolling, and of course, no guns. However, the residents knew that GZ was patrolling with his weapon. The documents do a pretty good job of damning GZ all by themselves.

          • Lonnie Starr says:

            Also says the NW had 4 or 5 members. Taaffe says he quit in December 2011, but that there was no one to report his leaving to.

          • Xena says:

            @Lonnie Starr. Re: No patrolling and no guns on NW.

            However, the residents knew that GZ was patrolling with his weapon.

            Which might be why investigators questioned if GZ had a Class G CCL. GZ knew he was patrolling with a loaded gun. Residents knew it. The HOA knew it because residents complained.

  18. Trained Observer says:

    “Playing the race card, demonizing the victim, misrepresenting the facts to the media, and trying this case in the court of public opinion are not helping his client.” — Frederick Leatherman

    Nor are these moves doing anything to burnish his own reputation — much less any desired status within legal circles.

    • I imagine that he imagines that even bad publicity is better than no publicity.

      • ay2z says:

        Yes, that seems to be the media use tactic, the jury pool won’t see the discussions if they aren’t following the case, but they may see the dramatic points in some form, and then look further and more often into what is going on in the case. Annything to draw attention, then they can see what the defense wants them to notice as well.

      • Rachael says:

        “I imagine that he imagines that even bad publicity is better than no publicity.”

        I imagine that might work in the movie or music industry but…

      • crazy1946 says:

        It is possible that with the audience that MOM is playing to, what we consider bad publicity, is viewed as just the opposite.. You need to think like fogen an company, or perhaps I should use some word other than think, they are desperate, and will say or do what ever it takes to muddy the water enough to get across the river of justice. Too bad it is a futile effort on their part..

  19. Xena says:

    Playing the race card, demonizing the victim, misrepresenting the facts to the media, and trying this case in the court of public opinion are not helping his client.

    Demonizing the victim didn’t work out for the Stuebenville rapists.

    Demonizing Travis Alexander isn’t working out too well for Jodi Arias.

    O’Mara isn’t qualified to talk about race relations. As Jane Elliot would say, he needs to walk a mile in someone’s moccasins. And Junior simply sounds like a person with racial identity crisis.

    • lurker says:

      I think O’Mara is aware of the potential to honk of potential jury members by making too much public show of demonizing Trayvon. Remember his statement on Trayvon’s birthday? He’s gotta sorta fan the flames on the DL while appearing to recognize that a family grieves the loss of their son.

      Expect a summation that talks about some “real tragedy” that Trayvon made a mistake in attacking an armed man.

      • PiranhaMom says:

        @Lurker,

        re: “Expect a summation that talks about some ‘real tragedy’ that Trayvon made a mistake in attacking an armed man” …

        … after donning a HazMat suit, mask, gloves & boots to protect himself from the armed man’s DNA, saliva and blood products. Unfortunately, he did not select the bullet-proof version …

        Ohhhhh, yeaaaaaah. “Trayvon made a mistake.” Got it!

  20. kenteoth says:

    I do not think that trying to make O’Mara a criminal in this case will help get the trial done and over with for the sake of Trayvon’s family. I think that O’Mara made some crucial mistakes and by allowing his client to implicate himself on national television was not a crime, but plain incompetency…….and the other crucial mistakes that both lawyer and client have made will be enough to get a conviction and those who have demonized the victim will see that there are consequences for the actions taken by fogen. He had no right or reason to do anything to Trayvon, all he had to do was go about his business and let Trayvon go about his own business and there would have not been a crime committed by fogen that night.

  21. onlyiamunitron says:

    follow

    unitron

Leave a Reply

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

WordPress.com Logo

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

Google photo

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

Twitter picture

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

Facebook photo

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

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: