Zimmerman: Pssst hey buddy what’s a Frye hearing

Tuesday, May 7, 2013

To Frye or not to Frye,
that is the question.
Whether ’tis nobler in the mind
to suffer the slings and arrows
of outrageous fortune
or to take arms against
a sea of troubles
and by opposing end them.

Hamlet, Act III, by William Shakespeare

Good morning:

I write today to explain the Frye Rule and Mark O’Mara’s latest strategic mistake. Let’s begin with the mistake.

If Judge Nelson grants his motion, there will not be any testimony by an expert witness regarding the identity of the person who uttered the terrified shriek. That will not help the defense because that intense, high-pitched, and prolonged nightmarish shriek of sheer terror ends abruptly with the fatal gunshot to the heart.

Just as it does not take a weatherman to tell which direction the wind blows, no juror is going to have any difficulty figuring out that the person who uttered that inhuman shriek is the victim of that gunshot. No juror is going to believe that the person armed with the gun; who pulled it out of a holster; who extended his arm; who aimed the gun taking care to make sure his left hand was out of the way; and who pulled the trigger at point-blank range is the person who screamed.

I am certain the prosecutor will not forget to remind the jury that the defendant told the police that he kept screaming for help after the shot because he thought he missed Trayvon Martin.

Apparently, Mark O’Mara has not listened to that agonizing shriek because, if he had listened to it, he never would have filed this ridiculous motion that can only hurt his client, if Judge Nelson grants it, since the absence of expert testimony would simplify identifying Trayvon as the source of the shriek while also disproving the defendant’s claim that Trayvon was beating him to death and attempting to smother him when he fired the fatal shot.

Breath. Taking. Stupidity.

Now, let’s take a look at the Frye-hearing request.

Every once in awhile someone develops a new theory or a new way of performing some task (i.e., a new methodology). A lawyer finds out about it and decides he wants to apply that new theory or methodology to win a case. Opposing counsel says, “Not so fast, pal. Not without a Frye hearing.”

A Frye hearing is a pretrial hearing to determine if evidence obtained pursuant to a new theory or methodology should be admitted or excluded during the trial. Think of it as a judicial screening device to exclude potentially inaccurate and unreliable evidence based on a new untested theory or methodology.

We call it a Frye hearing because the first published case that dealt with this issue was Frye v. United States, 293 F. 1013 (D.C. Cir 1923). Judge Van Orsdell laid out the facts:

A single assignment of error is presented for our consideration. In the course of the trial counsel for defendant offered an expert witness to testify to the result of a deception test made upon defendant. The test is described as the systolic blood pressure deception test. It is asserted that blood pressure is influenced by change in the emotions of the witness, and that the systolic blood pressure rises are brought about by nervous impulses sent to the sympathetic branch of the autonomic nervous system. Scientific experiments, it is claimed, have demonstrated that fear, rage, and pain always produce a rise of systolic blood pressure, and that conscious deception or falsehood, concealment of facts, or guilt of crime, accompanied by fear of detection when the person is under examination, raises the systolic blood pressure in a curve, which corresponds exactly to the struggle going on in the subject’s mind, between fear and attempted control of that fear, as the examination touches the vital points in respect of which he is attempting to deceive the examiner.

In other words, the theory seems to be that truth is spontaneous, and comes without conscious effort, while the utterance of a falsehood requires a conscious effort, which is reflected in the blood pressure. The rise thus produced is easily detected and distinguished from the rise produced by mere fear of the examination itself. In the former instance, the pressure rises higher than in the latter, and is more pronounced as the examination proceeds, while in the latter case, if the subject is telling the truth, the pressure registers highest at the beginning of the examination, and gradually diminishes as the examination proceeds.

Prior to the trial defendant was subjected to this deception test, and counsel offered the scientist who conducted the test as an expert to testify to the results obtained. The offer was objected to by counsel for the government, and the court sustained the objection. Counsel for defendant then offered to have the proffered witness conduct a test in the presence of the jury. This also was denied.

Judge Van Orsdell then proceeded to define the new rule:

The rule is that the opinions of experts or skilled witnesses are admissible in evidence in those cases in which the matter of inquiry is such that inexperienced persons are unlikely to prove capable of forming a correct judgment upon it, for the reason that the subject-matter so far partakes of a science, art, or trade as to require a previous habit or experience or study in it, in order to acquire a knowledge of it. When the question involved does not lie within the range of common experience or common knowledge, but requires special experience or special knowledge, then the opinions of witnesses skilled in that particular science, art, or trade to which the question relates are admissible in evidence.

Numerous cases are cited in support of this rule. Just when a scientific principle or discovery crosses the line between the experimental and demonstrable stages is difficult to define. Somewhere in this twilight zone the evidential force of the principle must be recognized, and while courts will go a long way in admitting expert testimony deduced from a well-recognized scientific principle or discovery, the thing from which the deduction is made must be sufficiently established to have gained general acceptance in the particular field in which it belongs.

We think the systolic blood pressure deception test has not yet gained such standing and scientific recognition among physiological and psychological authorities as would justify the courts in admitting expert testimony deduced from the discovery, development, and experiments thus far made.

(Emphasis supplied)

The issue Judge Nelson would have to decide, assuming she decides to hold a Frye hearing, is whether the methodologies used by the state’s experts are generally accepted by audiologists as capable of producing accurate and reliable results.

The Frye test has been described as a counting-heads test because it does not require the judge to understand the theory or methodology at issue. The judge need only count the heads of the experts in the particular field and decide whether they generally accept the methodology.

As I recall, two experts used different methodologies to compare the shriek to a voice exemplar provided by the defendant. One methodology has been used for many years and the other one, which was developed recently, involves the use of a software program.

Both experts have excluded the defendant as the source of the scream.

Since the first method has been used for many years, it probably has survived a Frye challenge in Florida.

The second method may be too new to have been challenged at a Frye hearing.

The glaring, and I believe fatal, omission in O’Mara’s motion for a Frye hearing is the absence of any supporting affidavits from experts in audiology that one or both of the methodologies used are not generally accepted by audiologists as capable of producing accurate and reliable results.

Nobody gives a damn about what the non-expert lawyer thinks. He is not qualified to express an opinion about general acceptance of these methodologies.

Therefore, I would deny his motion for a Frye hearing.

Notice that regardless whether Judge Nelson grants or denies O’Mara’s motion, the State will still be required to lay a proper foundation for each of its expert audiologists at trial pursuant to Evidence Rule 702 that the witness is a duly qualified expert in the field and the result obtained using the particular methodology in question will assist the jury to decide who is screaming.

In conclusion, if I were the prosecutor, I would be inclined to try the case without putting on any audiologists during my case-in-chief for the simple reason that I do not believe they are necessary. This is another illustration of the KISS rule.

BTW, all that sparring about whether Tracy Martin could identify Trayvon as the source of the shriek does not matter.

Hardly anyone ever shrieks like that and lives to tell about it, so it stands to reason that no one, including his father, ever heard Trayvon utter a shriek like that. This may explain why it may not be possible for any expert to positively identify the source of the shriek without considering the circumstances or context that produced it.

That’s why it sounds inhuman.


Writing articles every day and maintaining the integrity and safety of this site from people who would like nothing better than to silence us forever is a tough job requiring many hours of work.

If you like this site, please consider making a secure donation via Paypal by clicking the yellow donation button in the upper right corner just below the search box.

Thank you,


120 Responses to Zimmerman: Pssst hey buddy what’s a Frye hearing

  1. hotheadpaisen says:

    Hello – Sorry, I’m having trouble replying to the right post. Hope you don’t mind a new thread. regarding GZ’s injury, I see a deep abrasion, high on the right side of the bridge of his nose which trails downward and more superficial (less deep) to his face. ~IF~ this was done by a punch, that punch would have had to come from above, at a significant angle, and from a left handed punch. As we know, Trayvon is right handed. his 2-3 inch height advantage would not be sufficient to to strike so high, In a downward motion unless it was a spectacular ‘Superman punch’ . Very doubtful. Also, we know GZ had been standing in the rain for several minutes before the altercation. His face would have been wet. It is highly doubtful that one skin on WET skin hit would have generated enough friction to make that deep (but very small) abrasion on the bridge of his nose. However, humor me for a sec. Put your elbow against the back of your chair, approximating GZ’s elbow on the ground. Extend your index finger. In the classic “gun” position, angle it slightly in toward the left in front of you, so as to shoot a person infect of you in the heart. Now, bring your hand in to your face directly. Where does your finger hit? Why, on the right side of the bridge of your nose, and continuing the move would trailbitvdown the sidebofbyour nosevto your face, just like GZ’s abrasion. That crappy little kelt tec has a notoriously light trigger pull and it is well known to have a ‘significant’ recoil problem. friends, that blow to his nose came from his own gun.

    • Xena says:


      That crappy little kelt tec has a notoriously light trigger pull and it is well known to have a ‘significant’ recoil problem. friends, that blow to his nose came from his own gun.

      I’ve said all along that GZ’s nose injury was caused by the recoil. Happy to see another person see the same. GZ actually demonstrated that when he took the voice stress test. The prosecution should have their ballistic expert testify of the recoil resulting from shooting with one hand.

    • Xena says:


      …that blow to his nose came from his own gun.

      Here’s something for you — How Zimmerman injured his nose

  2. more info says:

    Great post, summarizing what a Frye hearing really is,. Love the Hamlet excerpt in this post, very fitting!

  3. Xena says:

    The State agrees with the professor. A Frye hearing is inappropriate.

    Click to access 051013_response_to_evidenciary_hearing.pdf

  4. silk says:

    To lonnie star; what I should had stated is mom and defense team is probally begging for a plea deal.

  5. paul says:

    if omara cant eliminate all of the audio experts gz would be indeed finished!!!!!!! so he can get ready for prison!!!!!!!! look for a plea deal ……..

    • Lonnie Starr says:

      A deal isn’t possible now that MOM has stated that he will seek an immunity hearing after trial. That means that the SP has to take this case all the way. Not to do so would mean that critical witness testimony could be lost forever. MOM has been working hard at painting himself into a corner, I do believe that he has finally succeeded.

      • cielo62 says:

        Lonnie~ The prosecution has NO incentive to offer a plea deal. And every motive to nail GZ to the wall.

      • Xena says:

        @Lonnie Starr.

        A deal isn’t possible now that MOM has stated that he will seek an immunity hearing after trial.

        It’s my impression that O’Mara knows the law does not provide for a during or post-trial immunity hearing. He argues that in court NOW in effort to see if the State will argue back. BDLR has demonstrated throughout the pre-trial hearings of not taking ambush baits. I suspect that IF O’Mara files such a motion during or after trial, that the State will file a response eating O’Mara up.

        • Lonnie Starr says:

          I’m sure of it too, but… well, shaking your fist in people’s faces is hardly a good way to make friends and O’Mara needs to stop doing it. He’s in a very deep hole and yet he insists on digging deeper.

  6. Stormwatch says:

    Custodian of records for Seminole County jail is in receipt of his notice to appear June 10th.

  7. Tzar says:

    The glaring, and I believe fatal, omission in O’Mara’s motion for a Frye hearing is the absence of any supporting affidavits from experts in audiology that one or both of the methodologies used are not generally accepted by audiologists as capable of producing accurate and reliable results.

    hardly matters, he gets to be on teeveeee

    • Romaine says:

      Professor thank you for the opportunity of experiencing your knowledge of the law, I’ve learned a lot and enjoy all that you post. This is a very special forum filled with positive energy, may your blessing of giving be abundantly filled with all that you desire in life. You have earned it..Peace to you and Crane-station

  8. Judy75201 says:

    Great article. Not sure I get why you wouldn’t put on at least the audiologist who has used a tested and accepted methodology?

  9. Romaine says:

    oh fogen oh fogen where for art thou, oh fogen. look over by the club house, its a bird!!! its a plane!!!
    no its creepy old man foggen, the underdog coming to save his neighborhoods day.
    there he was to save the day this f*cking a$$hole coon would not get away, he can run, he can skip; but i the mighty fogen will slay my prey.

    sh#t this fools making me run, oh he’s gonna pay!!! where’s my gun?

    damn I fell down and bumped my head!!!! enraged is what i am, no second thought about him going down.

    what are you doing around here, where do you live, whose breaking into the homes of my neighbors and friends, i don’t know, let me go, i’m begging you please, momma help me, shut the fuck up and stop crying, noooo!!!! ooooouuuwwwooooo!!!!! a mimmicing help me is heard, a gun shot the cries stop!!!!! Trayvon is dead.

    a bloodied nose, a few bruises to my head, surely no way this one was getting way, nah uh he’s gone, he’s dead; he never should have ran away.

    i tried to talk with him, for i am a man of reason; i only wanted answers, but he kept on screaming.
    why didnt he just shut the fuck up, all the neighbors can hear us, now they are looking and can see us.

    f**k!!!, the cops will be here soon; what’s a underdog to do, if i flee he’ll tell i stalked him, chased him, harrassed him, and threatened him with my gun!!!!
    time is running out, i’m pulling the trigger; he’s just another thieving thug no one will miss, crying for his momma, hell i’m not her son!!!

    oh fogen oh fogen where for art thou, oh fogen. oh i’m hiding out now and they took my gun away.

    its a judge!!! its a jury!!! now it’s time to pay!!! it’s time for creepy old man foggen, the underdog coming to save his neighborhoods day, to GET IN THE BOX!!!!!


  10. colin black says:

    Or asfoggagges first statement was written /

    Pure Edgar Allen POE.

    It was a dark an stormmy night an out of the fog emerged the dreaded.
    Nija Black Assasin intent on mayhem an no good.
    What was his deal?
    Who knew.

    But foggagge knew what to deal him ,
    The Ace of Spades.
    Otherwise known as the card of DEATH.

    Thats what foggagge dealt him death.

  11. Bydesign2010 says:

    Pure opinion exception

    [embedded the link for you]

    • colin black says:

      Shinnola they go on about a contraption called a zincam? In florida law newspaper thinie describe ing pure exception to fryes..

      This is why American Law baffles out siders its written in English.

      Only Gibberish version?.

      wonder if Travon got any zimm on his cam?

    • Thanks for clearing up the meaning of POE. The pure opinion exception mentioned in the article is consistent with the Frye rule. Neither requires a reliability analysis.

      The POE exception is an extremely bad idea IMO because there are far too many whores out there with opinions for sale and nothing to back it up.

      • Bydesign2010 says:

        You’re welcome and I agree. I think it could be used successfully to rebut MOMs motion easily but it’s unlikely that Nelson will grant it anyway.

    • LeaNder says:

      Thank, okay, POE = pure opinion exception.

    • aussie says:


      This is going to be GZ’s only expert witness.

      MOM – please state your qualifications
      expert – I’ve been an opinionated @ss all my life
      MOM – and how long is that?
      exert – 55 years now
      MOM – good, well, what is your opinion here?
      expert – GZ IS INNOCENT, I reckon, my pure opinion
      MOM – no further questions

  12. colin black says:

    BRADY bloody bunch of mistakes i make.

  13. Shari says:

    This case has motivated me to stop and re think my ideology. I have always supported the 2nd ad. and self defense. The problem is things are being taken too far. Instead of self defense we have people chasing and hunting people down and getting away with it due to stand your ground laws.

    1) Joe Horn in TX. Yikes. This man LEFT the safety of his home was never in danger. Killed 2 suspected theives.

    2) FL man who chased down the thief and stabbed him to death.

    3) Older black gentlemen who killed over a skateboarder?

    4) In the beginning of this case the police said their hands were tied by the local DA due to SYG law.

    5) Young man murdered for playing loud music. Drunken white couple come home from wedding. Man ALLEGES the teens threatened to kill him.

    • Two sides to a story says:

      i think we need some tightazz self-defense laws that really make people think twice before they engage anyone unnecessarily as Fogen did. I’m glad that quite a few people are finding their self-defense is actually manslaughter or murder – and in some cases karma is catching up to some of them after exoneration as self-defense. We used to essentially have these (to a point – not as stringent as other countries) and there were far fewer frivolous claims of self-defense.

      Value life. Hoodies up!

    • Bydesign2010 says:

      Common law self defense would already allow someone to stand their ground. Stand your ground laws are not new. Caselaw would show that they have been around for well over 100 years with Castle Doctrine laws being around for at least 400 years. What happened was after Katrina “refugees” as they were so condescendingly referred to were displaced to states such as Georgia and Florida from Louisiana. With this induction of people came an increase in crime in those states and the NRA and ALEC lobbied to change stand your ground laws to the vague versions now used today. I had drafted an amendment to Kansas stand your ground law to include qualified immunity which would make the stand your ground hearing mandatory to determine if the law applied to the situation. Floridas laws are exceedingly vague and have allowed for misapplication and misinterpretation to occur.

    • dbj says:

      I tend to agree with you. It seems as though the people who use the SYG defense take these laws into account before they take up arms.I would think that by doing so that person becomes the aggressor and not a person defending themselves since they seem to be the only ones wielding a weapon. It is really sickening to think that someone is innocent of murder when they brought a gun to a fist-fight (no pun intended).

  14. colin black says:

    B T W Frye is the one I mixed up an called it a bready on last thread.
    But fryes the one.
    They had one over the sniffer tech used to detect cadavers.

    By the guys at the body farm.
    An the friggin devise they had a fre hearing over was never even used in the search for CAYLEE.

    Remember the will they wont thet pop the can a do a sniff test??

  15. Rachael says:

    “No juror is going to believe that the person armed with the gun; who pulled it out of a holster; who extended his arm; who aimed the gun taking care to make sure his left hand was out of the way; and who pulled the trigger at point-blank range is the person who screamed.”

    “I am certain the prosecutor will not forget to remind the jury that the defendant told the police that he kept screaming for help after the shot because he thought he missed Trayvon Martin.”

    The screams stopped when the gunshot was heard – shot by a man who forgot he had a gun.

    You know, sometimes I honestly think MO’M is trying to lose this case. He has been a lawyer for a long time. I really doubt he is a stupid man. So why would he try to lose this case on purpose? Or is he that stupid?

    Or does he think We The People are?

  16. BTW, there is a possibility there might be a verdict this afternoon in the Jodi Arias case.

    • colin black says:

      three an bit an counting hors left they break 4 30 Arziona time rumours say that
      J Arrias mitigation expert is in the building
      Confering withh???

  17. Shari says:

    Think about this: It’s almost Mother’s Day. Keep poor Sybrina in your thoughts. Racists are tweeting her hateful messages about her son. She can’t even grieve in piece. People are on the internet questioning a mothers love for her child. Thugboats mom has the nerve to publish a letter complaining about her son and he plight.Give me a break.

    Happy Mother’s Day Sybrina.

    • Rachael says:

      Thank you Shari

      Happy Mother’s Day Sybrina.

    • Shari says:

      Yikes the typos!

      peace, his

    • racerrodig says:

      Positive Messages are what keep hopes afloat. They know what’s up and I’m pretty certain they know these race baiting hate mongers have a higher power to answer to.

      You posted a Positive Message……Keep up the Great Work !!

      Many of us will shed tears of relief / satisfaction / justice served sometime in late June ~ early July…….it’s coming.

      Fogen will just shed tears from a defeat, Robbie the Racist will cry his brother was Railroaded, Mama Z will rip the justice system and Papa Z will say this was rigged. He’ll be all over HP as his sock puppet LJP crying like a baby……which he is.

  18. Xena says:

    34 days until trial.

  19. Xena says:

    Tom Owen, who conducted the voice analysis for the Orlando Sentinel, said that he is one of about 9 people worldwide trained in the software program that he uses. According to Tom, that program is used by the FBI and security in other nations to compare voices to identify terrorists. Tom also said that he has testified previously in another trial.

    O’Mara will have a hard time convincing Judge Nelson that voice analysis is “new” and not reliable. He would not say that if there was an expert to testify that the voice is that of GZ, however, the two experts already making their findings public say that the voice is not that of Zimmerman.

    • That sounds like it might pass the Frye test.

      • Xena says:

        @Professor. Yes.

        What would be really interesting is if Judge Nelson ordered that the defense and prosecution present their experts to testify at the evidentiary hearing, and the defense has no expert.

        • Yep.

          I certainly do not expect the State’s experts to come in and testify that the methodologies they used are not generally accepted.

          That ain’t going to happen, so he better present at least three experts to say the methodologies are not generally accepted, plus a survey of the professional peer reviewed literature to back them up, or he will be wasting everyone’s time.

          He’s a really bad lawyer.

          • racerrodig says:

            “He’s a really bad lawyer.”

            Hehehehehehe Professor, nobody has more respect for you than I, but I recall you telling us way back he was, well…….sort of……
            lets say you had a blog on that topic……He’s a moron..no way around it for me. (I’m sorry and I’ll stand in the corner for awhile)

          • I’ll cop to it.

            You’re right. I thought he knew what he was doing.

            Wow, was I ever mistaken.

            Wish it were the only serious mistake I made.

            What can I say.

            I’ve logged a lot of miles without a whole lotta smiles.

          • Xena says:

            O’Mara might be a good lawyer in family cases, or criminal cases that result in plea bargains. We should consider that he doesn’t have the best client. It’s one thing to have a client tell their lawyer the truth and deal with that in representing them, and another thing to have a client that lies and insists that their lie is promoted above evidence.

          • racerrodig says:

            I hear ya but best client or not, what he does is off the charts.

            Any takers he’s done with “Pro Bono” work ????????

          • Xena says:


            I hear ya but best client or not, what he does is off the charts.

            I’ve heard some lawyers raise dumb-ass arguments in civil court because their client insisted on it. In most of those situations, the next motion filed was one to withdraw due to lack of cooperation and lack of payment as agreed.

          • racerrodig says:

            Can I get out of the corner now ?????

          • Coroner, what coroner?

            We ain’t go no stinkin’ corners.

            We live in and on a sphere.

          • racerrodig says:

            When I get out of line Xena makes me stand in the corner.

          • Xena says:


            When I get out of line Xena makes me stand in the corner.

            That only works when MMPat isn’t in another corner, because you two guys together can make a lemon laugh.

          • racerrodig says:

            Well….that’s who we are….and that’s what we do. Hehehehehe !!

          • racerrodig says:

            If the incredible tragedy of this was not a death, I’d say the laugh factor is off the scale with this guy. And to allow the denigration of the victim is just despicable.

            Who in their right mind would want this guy as a lawyer??

      • Rachael says:

        I really have a very difficult time believing a lawyer, someone who studied, went to school, took the exams, can be that bad. It just astounds me.

        I know the joke my former husband would always say about what do you call the doctor who graduated last in his class – you call him doctor, but really, can a lawyer be that bad?

        I agree when you say “so he better present at least three experts to say the methodologies are not generally accepted, plus a survey of the professional peer reviewed literature to back them up,” but I doubt he will or even could.

        Can a lawyer really be that bad? Really?

        • Yes, indeed.

          And you know what’s scary?

          I’ve seen worse.

          • racerrodig says:

            “I’ve seen worse.” We had one in 2010 where OPCO had initials with 2 capital M’s in his name as well. Smoked ‘Em. For all the lawyers I’ve seen….this one’s close. The problem is, one was a civil case and one is a murder.

            So this one lost a Consumer Fraud case……Fogen has no chance.

            It must be something with 2 M’s.

            I may have my friend who lives about 5 miles from O’ Mara’s office deliver a case of Jack Daniels or something……on me…..he’ll need it.

      • Bill Taylor says:

        his method is fantastic for excluding voices and that is all that is needed that it could NOT have been fogen’s voice…..of course those with common sense knew that long ago.

      • Jun says:

        I do not know what the hell a Frye test is, but there’s nothing un-scientific about the method

        It is basically saying, does it sound like Fogen, or not?

        It’s obviously not Fogen and to be honest, it sounds like a kid’s voice to me

        Add the expert testimony, with the witnesses testifying to Fogen being the aggressor and Trayvon the one screaming for help, the forensics, the 911 and NEN tapes, the victim impact statements, it’s fairly clear what happened

      • Jun says:

        People may find it despicable, the attack of the victim, but, it seems to be the modus operandi nowadays

        Watch Jodi Arias for example

        The lawyers not only ransacked Travis, they ransacked Jodi too

      • Tzar says:

        Frederick Leatherman says:
        May 7, 2013 at 2:56 pm
        He’s a really bad lawyer.


      • Nellie Nell says:

        At the last hearing, didn’t MOM point at himself and say something to the fact, “At $400 an hour” and then point at West and say, “$350 an hour”?

        Pro Bono was off the table when they filed that nonsense lawsuit against NBC with dollar signs in their eyes with an expectation of a jackpot!!! Pissing them off even more that the victims parents got the settlement from the HOA. This is why they are so determined to find out how much and not this nonsense that the victims parents have a vested interest to lie about their kid being murdered!

        • We have to exercise some care in dealing with this issue because the defense is entitled to impeach the credibility of a prosecution witness by showing that the witness has a financial motive to lie.

          Of course, that does not mean that the witness lied and it would be up to the jury to decide whether the witness lied.

          O’Mara risks deeply offending the members of the jury, if he argues that Sybrina Fulton and Tracy Martin lied for financial gain.

          Nevertheless, he appears to be determined to go down that road.

          I believe that would be a catastrophically stupid thing to do for a bunch of reasons, not the least of which is that infuriating the jury can only benefit the prosecution.

          • racerrodig says:

            I believe the jury can put the following events in chronological order

            Dee Dee Lied
            Jr has racist rants
            Fogen goes on Hannity
            O Mara claims this is a “murder for profit” case
            Fogen was arrested & charged with M2
            Tracey Martin & Sabrina Fulton settled with the HOA
            Fogen got out of his schruck
            O’ Mara makes senseless allegations
            911 calls are made about a struggle in the rain
            Fogen sued NBC
            Trayvon is denigrated and dehumanized by the defense
            Taaffe said Fogen was “…mad as hell……..”
            Fogen sets up a begsite
            SheLie committed perjury
            Fogen states to co-workers “i was mugged”
            BDLR fires back with a scathing Motion
            Moronic Motions are filed
            A SPD cover up was found
            Osterman wrote a book titled “The most hated man….”
            Clubhouse video is uncovered
            Team Trayvon takes up “Hoodies Up”
            A hate crime investigation is started by the FBI
            Fogen refuses medical treatment and verification of “wounds”
            Trayvon went to the 7 – 11
            Fogen was arrested again
            “Pictures” surface of Fogens noggin.
            There was an autopsy
            Corey was appointed
            Fogen Waives SYG claim
            A college student sets up an online petition for an investigation
            Fogen “…..aimed and……fired one shot”

            Of course we all know that the chronology is important. O’ Mara is forgetting the fact that he has to convince someone on the jury that Tracey Martin, in some way, sent and / or knew his son would be murdered so they could rake in the big $$$$$$ which is preposterous, or they simply said….lets take advantage of this, and of course the fact that “The Trayvon Martin Foundation” will be mentioned

            The other thing O’ Mara forgets is……..most people have common sense….unlike Zidiots.

      • Jun says:

        There’s no evidence that there is a financial motive to lie, regarding Trayvon’s mom and dad, so, there is no motive at all

        You can make up millions of motives and it proves absolutely nothing

        The only proven parties to have repeatedly lied is Fogen, Joonyah, and Omara.

        Having said that, you can only apply motive to Fogen, Joonyah, and Omara regarding lying, since it is proven they lied

        The only testimony Sybrina would be bringing is a victim impact statement and her testifying that it is Trayvon screaming on the tape, and having said that, the tape does sound like a kid screaming for help, therefore, there is no proof she lied, therefore, there is nothing to back up any motive that Omara claims

        My opinion, but Omara making that statement to a grieving mother, and no proof she lied, just makes him look like a fucking jerk

        On top, Bernie can easily fire back with his long records of Omara’s ethics and statements, as Omara has numerous ones of those, so no one will believe Omara anyways

        • There’s no evidence that there is a financial motive to lie, regarding Trayvon’s mom and dad, so, there is no motive at all

          The motive is the amount of the financial settlement. However, like I said, a motive to lie to obtain money via a financial settlement with the HOA does not mean that Sybrina and Tracy lied.

          We have to look at the rest of the evidence and when we do that we can clearly see that they did not lie when they identified Trayvon as the person who uttered the terrified shriek.

          To accuse them of lying about that to shakedown the HOA for more than a million dollars is disgusting and O’Mara risks losing all credibility with the jury, if he makes that accusation.

          He can get away with arguing that they were innocently mistaken, but he will cross the Rubicon, if he claims that they and DD are part of a conspiracy hatched by Benjamin Crump to shakedown the HOA.

          The jury won’t take him seriously after that. They won’t even listen to him.

          • Lonnie Starr says:

            With you 100% on that reply Professor. It will reveal, for once and for all, whether O’mara is really stupid or just playing dumb.

  20. ay2z says:

    Like MOM is going to want the slate cleared of experts who will testify either way about the shrieks and go instead, . with Sr. Zim telling his story about who he, and everyone in his family, friends of the Zims believes is the voice heard.

    The jury would have no problem deciding how shallow and self-centered and self-serving, and void of a grain of empathy. Sr. Zim’s statement to FDLE was. Followed by the recording of Sr. Zim telling FDLE investigators, how the mother of the killed child would be upset, ‘like the rest of us’, Bernie might ask ex-non-federal-judge, magistrate Zim, just what he meant by his questions to investigators paired with statements that he wanted this all to just go away and didn’t know what to do.

    Sybrina, Trayvon’s mother, wanted this all to go away too, but it never can, the nightmare and grief will never end for her, she has a life sentence with a hole in her heart.

    • Rachael says:

      I’m still puzzled by Sr. statement having heard GZ yell like that when he was a “teenager.” There was only one teenager there. I wonder why he said that? Very odd. That statement might come back to bite him in the butt. He basically said he heard a teenager screaming.

    • ladystclaire says:

      @ay2z, you are spot on about Sybrina bcause this will NEVER go away for her. This murdering asshole took the life of her baby boy. I’m a mother and I wouldn’t know what to do or if I could goon without that life, that I carried for nine months under my heart. Fogen’s mother has got some nerve, by the way she and the rest of her family thums their noses up at the family of Fogen’s victim.

      Gladys can only wish that she had a small measure of the grace and dignity of Sybrina Fulton. IMO, her status is a big fat zero as is the white man she married and, I don’t think it’s been a happy marriage at that. There are many skeletons in that Z family closet.

  21. bydesign2010 says:

    Prof, wouldn’t the POE wouldn’t allow for the second experts testimony to be admitted?

  22. Trained Observer says:

    “I am certain the prosecutor will not forget to remind the jury that the defendant told the police that he kept screaming for help after the shot because he thought he missed Trayvon Martin.” — Frederick Leatherman

    Oh, yes, the “I thought I missed him” remark. Another brilliant stroke of phony embellishment that will send Fogen to the slammer.

    • racerrodig says:

      I had to make sure I didn’t shoot my left hand…..um, but you can see, I did…….um, it was still self defense though.

      If he had, the bullet being a hollow point would not have done anywhere near as much damage to Trayvon……who may have lived to say…….

      “That creepy guy was holding my hoodie and pulling it down and to my right…….then BANG……the next thing I knew it was a few days later and my mom & dad were standing over the hospital bed.” I remember that guy…..shaved head…..asking me about somebody I don’t know who”

  23. racerrodig says:

    This begs the question……when will O’ Mara get tired of getting his brains beat in……figuratively speaking.

    • ay2z says:

      You’d think he would. He could be on the endless Escherian staircase, figuratively speaking and not know enough to get off.

      • racerrodig says:

        That’s what I was thinking…I’ll just keep walking to nowhere….staring these firestorms along the way……meaningless firestorms…….pissing off the Judge as I go.

    • manberk says:

      I like when MOM suggests that if he didnt “do what he does” ie victimize TM, DD, the state, chat with the Pee House etc. it would be malpractice…..but not hiring experts and frivolous motions isn’t?

      • Xena says:

        @manberk. I don’t think I’m far off base when saying that Zidiots read pro-justice for Trayvon blogs. Each time we present posts grounded in evidence that convicts GZ, Zidiots contact O’Mara’s office to alert them. And, they no doubt tell them what to argue in effort to counter evidence.

        By looking at when certain articles are posted, you can line-up the arguments we’ve heard from West and O’Mara at hearings. They are predictable.

      • manberk says:

        No doubt Xena. If GZLegal isnt read it themselves. I just find it ironic how often he mentions avoiding malpractice by chasing rabbits into holes; when his legal work has been incomplete -at best.

        Theres no doubt where it comes from. When both the Pee House and MOM ended up referencing the same wrong girl the link was obvious. I dont think they care really. They are doing no more or less than trying to create reasonable doubt for a guilty client IMO. They realize there is a segment of underbelly that really doesnt care about justice and will believe anything that supports their fears and prejudices. So IMO they are rolling with it hoping for one on the jury.

        • Xena says:

          @manberk .

          They realize there is a segment of underbelly that really doesnt care about justice and will believe anything that supports their fears and prejudices.

          O’Mara and Zidiots have never wanted GZ’s case to proceed to trial. While it is obvious that O’Mara and Junior want to taint the jury pool, it’s more like acts of intimidation. That actually works against them.

          Think about it — who wants to sit on a jury when the brother of the accused murderer uses the media to disparage others? Who wants to sit on a jury when the accused murderer has followers who dox, threaten and intimidate everyone who does not support GZ?

          This reduces possible jury members to one type — those who are not afraid of Zidiots.

      • racerrodig says:

        Which begs this question….is he really that stupid ??

        “I’ll take Moronic, Incompetent, Deceitful Lawyers for $5,000.00 Alex”

      • Jun says:


        Threatening jurors and treating them like they are stupid and without any human dignity is such a bad idea, especially since these people have Fogen’s life in their hands and is definitely a weighable characteristic as to the validity of said lawyer Omara

  24. fauxmccoy says:

    thanks for the explanation of the frye hearing in layman’s terms, prof!

  25. Manberk says:

    If Fogen was yelling for help, it was to detain Trayvon. You make a great point, how could he be screaming while aiming and shooting if it was from pain? Not to mention having his mouth covered. OOOOPS! Probably why investigators pressed for exactly what took place before the shot,

    • Yep, we don’t need no stinkin’ machines to tell us who uttered the death shriek.

      • Shari says:

        This makes me sick to my stomach. Where have we gone as a country? Aren’t life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness SUPPOSED to be SHARED values?

        Occam’s Razor: Fogen called NEN to report he was following Travyon. Fogen was armed. Fogen had a history of stalking and harrasing black males who were LEGALLY where they had a right to be. Fogen called the victim an “asshole” who always gets away. Fogen fired the shot. No wounds on the victim proving any life or death struggle. Fogen was a failure at life who gave himself authority, “collaring” Trayvon was to be his trophy. His accomplishment so he could be one of the guys.

        It was the UNARMED CHILD screaming for his life. Afraid of this stranger trying to detain him most likely using a grip hold he learned from someone in law enforcement.

        6/10/13 Fogen. This is all we have been asking for. You murder an unarmed child you are a danger to us all, you are a violent criminal. Go directly to jail.

        • racerrodig says:

          “… Fogen had a history of stalking and harrasing black males who were LEGALLY where they had a right to be.”

          With all due respect, he has a history of calling the police on Black Males. He may have stalked them before, but it’s not on the record.

          One of the residents there, a black male (gee, imagine that) had to drive outside of the complex to take his exercise walks because he knew Fogen was armed and NutZZ. That is on the record as are many complaints about similar behavior.

      • abbyj says:

        Excellent post, Professor. Thank you for the details of the Frye hearing.

      • kllypyn says:

        I knew instantly who was and who wasn’t screaming. No one screams like that unless they know they are about to die. Trayvon knew just seconds before he was killed that Zimmerpunk was gonna kill him.

        We will never know if it was something Zimmerpunk said or if it was something Trayvon saw in his eyes as he tried to escape But he knew he was done and he would never see his mother again.

        This poor kid just went to buy candy and a drink. He was not bothering anyone he was not looking into cars or houses and even if he had been so what,hardly carries a death sentence. He never did any harm anyone. He is dead because of a nut Balls anger and hatred toward him.

        Trayvon knew nothing about this so called man. He had never seen him before during the whole last week of his life he had never laid eyes on him. According to some reports that was the first time Trayvon went anywhere alone in that neighborhood during the week before his murder.

        He wants to portray Trayvon as the aggressor despite the fact he was the one who watched Trayvon as he sheltered under the mail shed( i personally believe he was watching him for much longer than that.) He is the one who followed Trayvon as he continued his walk home. He is the one who got out of his vehicle and chased Trayvon after he got scared and ran. He was the aggressor not Trayvon.

        Watching a teenager while he takes shelter from the rain,not necessarily aggressive but creepy. In your car following a teenager as he continues his walk home,an aggressive act and creepy. Getting out of your car after the teenager gets scared and runs away,an aggressive act. you don’t chase people unless you are planning on starting something. He should have left Trayvon alone

      • BlueJ says:

        Great post as always professor. Thanks for explaining these things so even I can understand them :-).
        Nice summary by Shari… That’s what BDLR has to get across to the jury.

      • MelRoy says:

        Am I missing something? I thought the defence had hired its own experts and their results were “inconclusive”?

        Of course this is just a flurry of last-minute motions before the deadline. You may think O’Mara is stupid, Professor – I just think he is throwing everything out there in the hope that something – anything – goes in his favor. Sequestering the jury, for example, isn’t an unusual request, but we all know that it narrows the jury pool because people with jobs, childcare commitments, etc, will do whatever they have to do to get out of jury service rather than be locked up for three weeks or more. In fact, nobody who has something better to do wants to spend three or more weeks locked up in a hotel room doing jury service. That leaves one group who are particularly civic-minded with a large proportion who have “nothing better to do”.

        What else defines this group? They tend not to like people who win a lot of money in lawsuits. They tend to be more frightened of young people – especially young black males. They are much more pro-gun than people under 40. They identify with other retirees – people like them and Zimmerman’s parents who retired to Florida. They respect authority – police, judges, magistrates and neighborhood watch captains.

        There are a lot of them in Seminole County – so many, in fact, that , I think you’ll find the jury will be made up mostly of seniors. Which is a nightmare for the State. If they can’t seat a jury of 6 truly unbiased jurors out of 500 potentials, what happens? Mistrial or bench trial?

        Not so dumb after all.

    • Lonnie Starr says:

      As usual, GZ is welcomed to try and sell this lie to the jury. However, O’mara should know that the attempt to do so will alienate the jury, once they hear that GZ had to be still under the threat of a lethal attack at the time he pulled the trigger.

      A person experiencing a lethal attack, cannot devote one hand to hold onto the clothing of his attacker, because that hand is needed to fend off the attack and preserve his own precious life.
      This, in turn creates another very serious problem: How does the person in control of the deadly weapon, using only one hand to operate it, and his other hand to detain and restrain his “lethal attacker”, believe that the unarmed person is able to do something that will almost instantly kill him?

      Think about this question because, the more you think about it, the better you will eventually be able to frame it. But, since both of GZ’s hands are accounted for, and both of Trayvon’s hands show no signs of use… GZ is of course T-O-A-S-T!

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: