Defense has known about bicycle fight video for 9 months

Monday, June 3, 2013

Check this out.

It’s a copy of a discovery-demand letter from Don West to Bernie de la Rionda that establishes that the defense knew about bicycle video clip on Trayvon Martin’s phone for at least nine months. The letter is dated September 19, 2012.

West says:

You mentioned that you had seen a video connected to him [Trayvon Martin] in some way regarding a bicycle. We were previously unaware of anything like that, but later saw a clip taken from his cell phone SIM card that may have been what you were referencing.

Since the defense has known about this video clip for at least 9 months, I cannot imagine how Mark O’Mara could innocently have mistaken it for a video of two of Trayvon’s friends beating up a homeless person.

Mark O’Mara has some ‘splainin’ to do and the third person apology on his website ain’t gonna git ‘r done.

While he is explaining his way out of that mess, he should also explain why the defense is now seeking sanctions on the ground that this video was not disclosed to them.

(H/T to Big Boi for letting me know that a poster at Crime Watcher’s found the letter. He is also on Twitter as @TruthThere.
Also, thanks to LLMPapa for the link to West’s letter)


Please keep the donations coming.

There will be no free time between now and when the jury renders its verdict.

Nobody else is going to write articles like this one.

I’m your ticket to Inside the Game.


270 Responses to Defense has known about bicycle fight video for 9 months

  1. BillT says:

    painted on both sides with an old style ceramic in between, and just use the edge as an outline and cut your own hair saving big bucks……seriously we have and use the same plates i ate from almost 60 years ago…..

  2. Leisa says:

    O’mara knew at the October 19th hearing that witness #8 did not go to the hospital and there were no such records. So why all of the BS in court about them. He got the information from her twitter and or Facebook posts. He is just slimy….

    • TheMindIsATerribleThingToWaste says:

      From my recollection, at the April hearing, it was exposed if you will, that MOM never really cared about those records; wasn’t a big deal to him. West was the one that took exception to just finding out the night before the prior hearing, so he took up the cause. Even MOM said, West was dealing with that. He ran with it to play it up for the media as well know and as Bernie articulated, rightfully so. Of course MOM and West work in concert though nonetheless, for their client and will push an agenda for the media.

  3. ay2z says:

    My eyeballs have given up. For now.

  4. ay2z says:

    Ok, so question is, how long before we see this used to unseat Judge Nelson, and dare she rule against the defense about sanctions, etc now?

    She may be out on a variety of excuses by the defense, but the essence will be to buy more time before trial?

    What does ‘un-unanimous’ Mean? Will we know how many were actually on the panel (3 ?) and if so, was 2 of 3 needed or one hold out needed to swing to the defense?

  5. RastaGirl says:

    This is unbelievable. I’m new here I never comment but read your blogs daily. I love how everyone comes here with great insight into the case. A lot of my questions get answered here. What a pleasure!

  6. ic2fools says:

    Does anyone know the time the hearing starts Thursday?

  7. crazy1946 says:

    It would not be a surprise, IMO, if Judge Nelson invited the attorneys on both sides into her chambers for a spot of tea before the hearings start Thursday! I hope MOM and West are smart enough to bring a change of clothes to court with them…. They will look mighty funny standing there in court with their back sides hanging out for all the world to see….

  8. groans says:

    WordPress seems to be putting comments in strange places!

  9. groans says:

    Very odd…. I left here for a while, then came back and “refreshed” the page. Some comments seem to be re-arranged in sequence and some “threads” broken, as if each comment is a top-level comment.

  10. Shari says:


    O’Mara doesn’t respect the judge. After she ruled during the last hearing he kept speaking. Once the judge rules, it’s over except for appeals.

    Instead of preparing a defense for GZ they have been busy complaining about Sharpton, Crump, and NJackson. OM has said that he NEEDS to get gossip & smears about Trayvon out because “the other side” is doing it too. Huh? The “other side” is the state of Florida, BDR and AC have NOT been trying the case in the media.

    I almost fell for Omaras good guy routine when he was first brought on the case. Remember he said he wasn’t going to try the case in the media? The local lawyers all came out and said how much of a professional and capable attorney he was.

    I empathazie, maybe too much. When Caylee Anthony’s death was national news I wanted to know how she died. For some strange reason I still do. I feel the same about Trayvon’s death. I have been a victim and I can almost feel what he felt. To be in fear, to try to escape and not be able to. I wonder if he suffered much?

    NW “patrols”: I hope that GZ is found guilty and sent to prison. Afterwards we can discuss the idea of NW and how it is supposed to function. The idea of armed citizens “patrolling” is very dangerous.

    • TheMindIsATerribleThingToWaste says:

      Shari wrote,

      “I almost fell for Omaras good guy routine when he was first brought on the case. Remember he said he wasn’t going to try the case in the media? The local lawyers all came out and said how much of a professional and capable attorney he was.”

      Me too. He was such a stark departure from those other two clowns. He appeared to have shown sympathy for the victim and his family, etc. He went downhill for me when he stated during one of the court proceedings, that TM caused his own death. Even other legal analysts who were defense attorneys said he went too far on that. But as we see, him and West are saying it more and more. I don’t have a problem with defense attorneys, but I do have a problem with being dirty, deceptive, etc.

  11. Sara ‏

    @NatJackEsq @attorneycrump IMO they did it to close the door for appeal when GZ is convicted. The depo is very limited in scope.

  12. Should Zimmerman have been arrested earlier? VOTE:

    See all the evidence on HLNAfterDark at 10pm!

  13. mcave77 says:

    oops…I think I was wrong. please delete…

    • mcave77 says: too They will allow Crump to be deposed but depo must be limited to questions about the w8 interview.

    • ks says:

      No problem. Looks like they granted it but, in a VERY limited fashion. Strictly pertaining to the interview with w8 itself and no fishing expedition for nonsense. Not a big deal at all.

      • TheMindIsATerribleThingToWaste says:

        Totally agree ks, it’s really not a big deal at all, but if someone wants to categorize it as some sort of victory, let them have their “shine” *side-eye*

    • mcave77 says:

      @Ks..I agree. They will get nothing more than what they already have in the 15 page affidavit supplied.

    • diary73 says:

      The court even said that this should not take very long.

    • bettykath says:

      Thank you. It’s good to know I’m not the only one that sometimes gets the wrong end of the stick. 🙂

      The defense finally won one. That’s what the appeal process is for, taking another look with new eyes.

      I suspect that there isn’t much more than what’s in the affidavit but the appeals court is right, follow up questions and cross-examination are essential to full disclosure and understanding.

      Damn, MOM’s “misstatement” has been replaced on the radar.

    • ks says:

      There can’t be much beyond the affidavit and, iirc, weren’t the ABC folks there too? In any event, if the defense wants to waste more time before trial on diversions I say go right ahead.

      The big story is still MOM’s lie in court and that keeps moving right on along…

    • Rachael says:

      I think the outhouse hit the nail on the head – this is an attempt to get more time. They are sure that this will now allow the defense to buy more time.

      • Nef05 says:

        I just put on the waders and headed over. They seem a little conflicted. Some are jumping for joy over what is a perceived “slap” to JN. Some seem to realise it’s basically the same as the deposition and some seem to think it’s some carte blanche to ask Crump any and everything. Also saw Unitron is posting over there. I, personally, don’t see it as much of a “win”. I didn’t think they would allow the deposition at all, but limiting it as they did to the scope of W8 only gives them access to info they had from the affidavit and restricts them from all the expanded scope and questions O’Mara wanted to ask via the “unlisted witness” rule.

        I just don’t see that they got anything they didn’t already have before requesting the writ.

        • ks says:

          Exactly. They got the barest minimum from the court. Only questions about the ABC attended interview with w8 and the contents thereof. They even instructed the Judge Nelson to limit it to that.

        • If my two eyeballs read the same document, it was not carte blanche to ask any and everything. Where I am conflicted is, what, exactly, do they want to get? In other words, what am I missing about the game here?

          • ks says:

            My two eyeballs agree. : ) There’s nothing for them to get that they don’t already have. This was a “win” that was really a loss in terms of what they were really after. Imo, the only reason they will bother to depose Crump at all now is to please their Masters over at the outhouse.

          • PYorck says:

            I don’t think they are after anything directly relevant to the murder case. They want to ask him how he got involved in the case, whether he is getting paid and by whom, if there are any civil rights organizations involved, what his objectives and strategies are… Then they’ll leak either a selection of his answers or his refusal to answer. In Zimmerman-supporter-land that will be evidence that Crump is on a personal mission from Obama and Al Sharpton to destroy a decent American, undermine the right to self defense and win a huge pile of money for the Martins.

          • PYorck says:

            Sorry, this was supposed to be a reply to Crane-Station above.

          • Ring-a-ding-ding, isn’t it?


            I suppose what that all boils down to is, a ‘decent’ American is a bigot then. This sort of distorted thinking is a ‘no’ across the board as far as I am concerned. Some days I think this country’s going straight to hell.

          • BillT says:

            noticed the name tin foil hat…in the interest of updating info anyone using tin foil to deflect the brain waves needs to find an old fiestaware bowl, the lead in the paint works far better than tin foil…only the OLD ones provide this protection…….this has been a public service announcement.

          • Oh, thank you so much BillT! I never thought of the lead, ROFLOL

          • fauxmccoy says:

            bill says in re: fiesta ware

            only the OLD ones provide this protection…….this has been a public service announcement.

            thanks for the PSA, bill. i have a collection of the old stuff and i now i know how to safely use it 🙂

          • ladystclaire says:

            @CS, Hell is exactly where this country is headed and, it’s not because of the POTUS either. it’s really terrible to see what this case has turned into at the hands of the defense. those bigots at the tree slum, have no business what so ever, having a say in this defense of this murderer.

          • Leisa says:

            I believe o’mara wants to show his superiority over Mr. Crump. I think he and West will have shit eating grins on their faces at deposition time and will no doubt try to go over the line as to what they are permitted to ask.

          • Lonnie Starr says:

            That’s why it will probably be held in Judge Nelson’s Chambers, and she will also lodge objections if they try to go beyond the scope. If they draw three or four objections in a row, Judge Nelson will take that to mean they have no more relevant questions and shut the whole thing down.

          • Mandelbaum says:

            my sentiments exactly. fear not, Blackwell will be in the hizzy.

          • TheMindIsATerribleThingToWaste says:

            mandelbaum wrote,

            “my sentiments exactly. fear not, Blackwell will be in the hizzy.”

            Fa shizzy LOL.

          • Mandelbaum says:

            @ Leisa
            my sentiments exactly. fear not, Blackwell will be in the hizzy.

    • amsterdam1234 says:

      I don’t think this is what they were looking for. I would say that it is a low return for another insult to Judge Nelson.

    • groans says:

      I don’t see that the Crump deposition will require a trial delay. It will be limited and should be short.

      And it was only a few days ago that the State got the OK to continue with Shellie’s deposition – which O’Mara frivolously cut off. So they’re still doing depositions – including experts, from what I gathered.

    • ks says:

      @Rachael, that’s probably their hope but, imo, it’s not going to happen. The judge has pretty clearly shown that she’s not going to grant a continuance and even the appeals court indicated that the limited depo should be very short and straightforward.

    • diary73 says:

      I don’t see this buying more time. The defense wanted to introduce new witnesses who must be deposed. Allowing for their deposition of Attorney Crump should not take but a short while, according to the decision. Nothing about this decision should allow for more time.

      • ay2z says:

        I bet the appeals panel in part, wanted to ensure O’Mara doesn’t come back at them with something else before trial.

    • diary73 says:

      Exactly, Amsterdam. It is always a good idea to gauge whether ticking off the judge is worth the effort. Sheesh! They just don’t get it.

    • LeaNder says:

      That’s exactly what I thought would be the best solution to the problem. A deposition limited to the interview with DeeDee. Pretty straight forward and solid argument. Besides they somehow follow judge Nelson, she always limited matters exactly to that point.

      In conclusion that the trial court erred in denying Zimmerman an opportunity to depose Crump, we caution that any deposition of Crump is to be limited to inquiry of circumstances surrounding the interview of Witness 8 and the contents of such interview. Defense cousel may not inquire into Crump’s mental impressions regarding Witness 8, nor may cousel inquire as to the reasons why Crump conducted the interview in the manner in which he did. Additionally, we believe the work product privilege precludes defense counsel from making inquiry as to the reason(s) Crump attempted to locate Witness 8 and the methods employed to do so.

      this passage I read as a polite way to say the rest of the writ was incoherent and not convincing, and that is really the best part of it. Don’t waste too much words on the more political argument:

      The deposition contemplated by our opinion should be relatively short and pretty straight forward. We are confident that the judge will be able to take the steps necessary to ensure the deposition is limited to the subject areas described above.

      since it is supposed to be short and limited, why don’t you do it yourself judge Nelson? That is the best guarantee it feels.

    • Done per request, let us know if you need more:)

    • LeaNder says:

      She cannot conduct a deposition. No judge can.

      Yes, that is for the lower orders at court, even below the magistrate judge I assume. I can easily imagine that a judge’s time is too valuable for such trivial matters.

      I am aware you said this should be summarily dismissed. Fact is I was so absolutely shocked by the argument not only the political argument at the end, that I somehow felt it should be answered. And this is a good compromise.

      Let them have their limited deposition of Benjamin Crump, it will be a waste of time. This is not what they wanted. Neither will they get from him what they want. The Appellate Court erected rigid walls to their feral desires.

      Besides, didn’t we have the non existent privilege due to a not private setting again in the case of Shellie Zimmerman? No husband wife privilege with others present. Ultimately same issue, only different privilege or situation.

      The best thing for the US it feels is that a conviction does not leave too much food for the political sacrificial lamp type of argument in it’s train. Our best hopes for that is that Angela Corey’s team or BDLR and his team will do a perfect job and leave O’Mara, West and Fogen out in the rain. I am prepared for quite a bit of attempts to manipulate the jury from the defense though, no doubt. … But I dearly wish MOM’s mistake rate will increase, I’ll pray for it.

      Wasn’t it interesting that after the last hearing Fogen junior went out to demand the charge is dropped. Isn’t this highly telling at this point in time?

      • Two sides to a story says:

        “Wasn’t it interesting that after the last hearing Fogen junior went out to demand the charge is dropped. Isn’t this highly telling at this point in time?”

        Jr. has a Treestump sort of mentality. Obviously it doesn’t matter what he calls for, but I guess you can’t blame him for trying.

  14. mcave77 says:

    Click to access dca5_opinion.pdf

    Opinion From The Fifth District Court of Appeal Regarding Petition For Certiorari

    • PYorck says:

      Actually I like the result. This way the defense can’t cry about all the things hidden from them and how deposing Crump would have changed everything.

      However it is limited to the interview itself. Considering that Crump invited the media who made their own recording I would be very surprised if he had used that opportunity for anything truly sinister. I don’t expect them to get anything of value out of this.

    • I admit to being wrong in predicting that this would be denied outright, but I am also wondering what a ‘limited deposition’ means, so will have to read (glad I am not a lawyer though).

      That said, I can’t see them getting much, and was this not the initial ruling?

    • stesha48 says:

      Hello everyone. Have been reading for a while.

      Does anyone think either Atty. Crump or the state will challenge the ruling or request a rehearing? The decision has a notation at the top which I take to mean, that option exists.


  15. Woow! says:

    I am wondering if it will come out that the pictures MOM released showing Fogen with a broken and bloody nose was photo shopped. If so and also if MOM entered that picture into evidence can he get sanctioned or receive disciplinary action from the State Bar for entering tampered evidence.

    • Nef05 says:

      I wouldn’t think so, in that specific instance. That pic came from the prosecution and was taken by Ofc. Wagner of the SPD. Now HE might have to answer some questions about that pic (and the deleted original and the conveniently “lost”phone he took it with) from the DOJ.

  16. smokeegyrl says:

    Ok, the letter was posted on Facebook HLN In Session Events page. You should see how they are defending M’OM’s misspoke words.
    Please view link. They just don’t have any wits about them.

  17. ay2z says:

    Off topic, but doesn’t Taunenbaum mean ‘tree;??? Sorry, couldn’t help it 😉

  18. ay2z says:

    CBS quotes more than Baez.

    (CBS) — Among the strongest evidence in George Zimmerman’s defense may be George Zimmerman himself, several experts say – in part, because it may prove difficult for prosecutors to refute his claim that he killed Trayvon Martin in self-defense.

    Zimmerman, a former neighborhood watch captain, is charged with second-degree murder in the shooting death of the teen during an altercation in February 2012 in Sanford, Fla. His case is set to go to trial Monday, June 10.

    “There’s only two people who know exactly what happened, and one of them is no longer alive,” said Florida criminal defense attorney Brian Tannebaum, president of the Florida Association of Bar Defense Lawyers and past president of the Florida Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers. “It’s a hard burden when Zimmerman is going to say, ‘Listen, I was in fear, I got into a fight with this kid, I didn’t know him, I didn’t know what he was going to do.’ What is out there to dispute what he’s saying? That’s the difficult part.”

    Watch key videos from the George Zimmerman/Trayvon Martin case on Crimesider

    (then the article went on about Baez, not repeating what’s already posted here)

    • ay2z says:

      Get in the box, George.

    • ay2z says:

      Oh, sorry SG, didn’t read everything, you are Alpha on this one!!

    • BillT says:

      do these lawyer menz understand the basic law?

      they are saying all a person has to do is say i was in “fear” so i shot them!

      IF they are correct then paranoid people can shoot everyone they encounter and say they scared me with their LOOKING at me…..

      but WAIT, i recall seeing where police used that very reasoning in miami recently saying a 14 year old feeding a tiny puppy with a bottle, looked at them “menacingly” so they had to tackle and subdue him so i could be wrong in todays world.

      • Two sides to a story says:

        The police have had that excuse down for many years.

      • charlieh says:

        Yeah, that’s why the law specifcially says one must be in “reasonable fear of imminent peril of death or great bodily harm” with the emphasis on “reasonable”.

        And you can be damn sure Zimmerman knew that, and it’s why he concocted a story about having his head slammed onto concrete and being smothered, none of which is borne out by the forensic evidence.

        When Zimmerman’s credibility goes away, so does his self-defense claim.

      • You have an excellent point. Maybe they can change the law to say you can kill people that simply ‘needed killin,’ and get that part over with then, if it’s that simple. Glad you brought this out; we have discussed it.

    • bettykath says:

      “It’s a hard burden when Zimmerman is going to say, ‘Listen, I was in fear, I got into a fight with this kid, I didn’t know him, I didn’t know what he was going to do.’ What is out there to dispute what he’s saying? That’s the difficult part.”

      And on cross examination: Gee, fogen, if you were so afraid of this kid, why did you follow him in the dark for so long? And don’t give me that nonsense about “going in the same direction” or “I had to get a street address on the other side of the complex so the police could find me at my truck”

      • BillT says:

        when my truck was in the opposite direction i must add.

      • Rachael says:

        I still have to wonder if someone looked suspicious, like they were up to no good, why the hell you’d get out of your car at all to begin with?

      • Trained Observer says:

        Yeah … here I am inside a running vehicle with enough gas to drive all over. Plus I’ve got a loaded gun strapped onto my ever-growing torso.

        But dang … if I didn’t find myself in fear of a skinny balaaack kid walking down the road yakin’ in the phone. Yessiree, I had every right to be in fear 🙂 🙂 🙂

        Don’t think any jury, anywhere (even a bunch of racists) will buy that bull.

      • Tzar says:

        on the front end every argument in support of Zimmerman MUST ignore all his actions before the altercation and on the back end they must completely ignore the discrepancy between his versions of the altercation and between his versions of the altercation and the forensic evidence. This is the sweet middle earth land of Narnia that his defenders take refuge in as they are besieged on all sides by common sense, logic and the available facts. Unfortunately the media is in the business of fantasy and flights of fancy, so they are going to get a podium until this case is over.

    • Cercando Luce says:

      “What is out there to dispute what he’s saying?”

      Why, the voice of Trayvon Martin himself, as recorded on the 911 call of the HOA officer who signed off on a settlement above the insurance policy amount, apparently.

  19. fauxmccoy says:


  20. BillT says:

    this is the best blog i have ever posted on by far, many dont agree with me on a political level but we all have been able to set that aside and deal with the facts of this case…….i was thinking there is no place on the internet where actual discussion of issues happens………this blog has given me hope, TY.

    • Shari says:

      Politically I know I am in the minority here but that’s okay. People are respectful and on the death penalty post my views were posted fine with some discussion. We are all here for one thing, we know the streets will be safer with GZ in prison where he belongs for stalking and murdering an innocent unarmed child.

    • vickie s. votaw says:

      It is delightful. I love the posters and their interactions. It reminds me of classes I’ve had. It is a path with a heart.

  21. Two sides to a story says:

    I do believe that many of us saw this letter last year, but of course we couldn’t see the full ramifications at the time. We only knew that the Treestump was after OM to try the case in the media. Who knew then the defense would pull this and in court, not just in the media? Wow.

    • Two sides to a story says:

      Not to diminish in any way Who – Truth There’s work, because it needed to be dug up again, obviously. Thank you, thank you for doing so.

  22. Jose Baez, go kick pointed rocks!

    George Zimmerman Trial: Experts say self-defense claim could be tough to refute in Trayvon Martin killing

    (CBS) — Among the strongest evidence in George Zimmerman’s defense may be George Zimmerman himself, several experts say – in part, because it may prove difficult for prosecutors to refute his claim that he killed Trayvon Martin in self-defense.

    Zimmerman, a former neighborhood watch captain, is charged with second-degree murder in the shooting death of the teen during an altercation in February 2012 in Sanford, Fla. His case is set to go to trial Monday, June 10.

    “There’s only two people who know exactly what happened, and one of them is no longer alive,” said Florida criminal defense attorney Brian Tannebaum, president of the Florida Association of Bar Defense Lawyers and past president of the Florida Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers. “It’s a hard burden when Zimmerman is going to say, ‘Listen, I was in fear, I got into a fight with this kid, I didn’t know him, I didn’t know what he was going to do.’ What is out there to dispute what he’s saying? That’s the difficult part.”

    Jose Baez, lead defense attorney for Casey Anthony, who was acquitted of murder, said he doesn’t believe the prosecution can prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Zimmerman’s story isn’t true.

    “The state is going to have a hard time refuting the claim of self defense- that’s where the case can easily be won by the defense,” Baez said. “The state not only has to put forward their evidence, they have to exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence and do so beyond a reasonable doubt – I don’t think they can.”

    The defense will likely point to evidence including the photos of Zimmerman bleeding from the head following the altercation to corroborate his story, Tannebaum said. Though it’s not clear whether the 29-year-old will take the stand in his defense, experts say they believe it’s likely.

    “Unless the state makes the argument that [Zimmerman’s injuries] were self-inflicted, they clearly occurred through some kind of altercation,” Tannebaum said.”If Zimmerman is going to testify and say Trayvon Martin assaulted me and I was in fear for my life, that would be a big piece of evidence.”

    • Two sides to a story says:

      Eh. Talk is cheap. Baez is full of himself because the state couldn’t proved it’s case with CA. Fogen’s mess-up is a whole different ball game.

      • racerrodig says:

        “…Among the strongest evidence in George Zimmerman’s defense may be George Zimmerman himself, several experts say – in part, because it may prove difficult for prosecutors to refute his claim that he killed Trayvon Martin in self-defense.”

        What drugs are they on ???

      • Two sides to a story says:

        Sumpin’ a lot stronger than weed. : /

      • I think they might be on something that makes you want to sniff around the edges of a high-profile case, looking for a commentator job, some money and some notoriety. It is going to come down to the jury, plain and simple. If O’Mara had a really strong so-called defense based on a photograph, that frankly, does not match the 30 times head slamming and Serino said as much, he would not be trying so hard to poison that jury pool.

        There, I said it.

      • In fact, I’ll add, Mr. Baez, if they have such a strong case why didn’t they do that immunity hearing months ago? You are ‘protesting a lot’, sir, but not making a lot of sense.

    • Jose Baez, lead defense attorney for Casey Anthony, who was acquitted of murder, said he doesn’t believe the prosecution can prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Zimmerman’s story isn’t true.

      “The state is going to have a hard time refuting the claim of self defense- that’s where the case can easily be won by the defense,” Baez said. “The state not only has to put forward their evidence, they have to exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence and do so beyond a reasonable doubt – I don’t think they can.”

      Ahem! That must be why the defense waived the immunity hearing.

      Well, I’m sure the State can prove its case and I haven’t even seen all of the evidence.

      • tinytruthseeker says:

        Me thinks that the tragic screams and hearing Trayvon BEGGING for his life will do it….

      • ay2z says:

        Yes, was just looking for a place to post that, and ask ‘what the hell is Baez doing commenting on this case with the lead homicide detective as a client who is a witness in this case?

        It says to the public, Baez knows inside stuff and he knows the case will be won by this side or that, by name.

      • lurker says:

        I am wondering about Baez’ assertion that the state must “exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence and do so beyond a reasonable doubt.” Perhaps theoretically true, and maybe so if the defense chooses not to put Z. on the stand. but it would seem that presenting more than one hypothesis raises the spectre of the various theories conflicting with one another–making them all appear to be improbable. And, of course, if on the stand he will have the impossible task of trying to weave all those improbable versions together and stand them up against the forensic evidence.

        At this point, the forensic evidence tends to confound Z’s account of WHERE the altercation took place. It confounds the account of how Z pulled his weapon. It confounds–due to the angle at which the bullet entered–Z’s account of being held down helpless with the gun being his only means of saving himself.

        And that doesn’t even begin to look at the difference between Zimmerman’s injuries and the way he describes being beaten,. And it doesn’t even mention the way that the time markers in the NEN call don’t match with the way Z describes his actions.

        And that’s without the audiologists’ reports about who was most likely yelling and a few more comments not previously noted.

        And we haven’t even gotten to the things still under wraps, like the possible GPS data from Trayvon’s phone and the calls and text messages from Z’s phone.

        So, yeah, OK. Waiting to see a single plausible hypothesis to account for all the evidence AND supporting a claim of self defense.

      • Nef05 says:

        @lurker – I am loving your post!

        In the words of one of my favorite ole skool dance songs

        “Whoomp, there it is! Whoomp, there it is!”

      • Lynn says:


        And we haven’t even gotten to the things still under wraps, like the possible GPS data from Trayvon’s phone…

        Click to access 13-1233_Appendix_to_Response.pdf

        Page 11 Bullet 6…”These items include many documents which were generated in March and April of 2012, including a map created by an FDLE analyst showing
        the whereabouts of Trayvon Martin’s phone during the hours of February 26, 2012…”

        I think this gives us more hope than “possible” GPS from Trayvon’s phone. We’ve got a freakin’ MAP!!!

        • Lonnie Starr says:

          Looks like everyone was on T-Mobile, so if they’ve got gps on Trayvon, they have it on gz as well. Meaning the lies will be stopped, whether the defense likes it or not.

    • Let’s see, where did Baez and Tannenbaum go to medical school again? Oh, that’s right, they didn’t.

      These random ‘experts’ leave out the elephant in the room: credibility, along with the real possibility, at this rate, that GZ (and his lawyers) will get utterly creamed on the stand for the non-stop changing stories.

      Assuming for the sake of argument that GZ told the truth when he stated his name, it pretty much ends there.

    • bettykath says:

      “Unless the state makes the argument that [Zimmerman’s injuries] were self-inflicted, they clearly occurred through some kind of altercation,” Tannebaum said.”If Zimmerman is going to testify and say Trayvon Martin assaulted me and I was in fear for my life, that would be a big piece of evidence.”

      The defendant needs to testify to get that in.

      Cross-examination and/or rebuttal witnesses will show that he’s lying. I found the report of the nurse practitioner to be quite thorough. I have to wonder about how serious his injuries were if NO stitches were required for the lacerations on the back of his head, NO symptoms of concussion, NO indication of a nose bleed. No report of a followup to deal with a broken nose (b/c it wasn’t broken). No black eyes the next day during the walk-thru indicating no concussion or broken nose, either of which would be likely to cause them.

      Then, of course, there is Trayvon’s autopsy report that shows only the bullet hole, none of the defendant’s DNA on his hands and no indications (except for the bullet hole) of any altercation.

      I don’t think the state needs to prove HOW fogen got the minor scrapes he got, they just need to show that they were insignificant and not life threatening by any stretch of the imagination (except fogen’s, of course).

      • Rachael says:

        I totally agree. There is no blood in the nares, the blood is dripping from the tip of the nose where if you see the next day is a tiny scratch and he sure came away unscathed for a face that he claims was punched 20-40 times. I mean think about it seriously – what do YOU think a face that was punched that many times look like?

        And I’ve been saying all along that MO’M is NOT doing his client any favor by talking so much in public with regard to this case. And now that HE has NO credibility either…

      • bettykath says:

        Actually, they don’t need the walk-thru video. He saw the nurse practitioner the next day too. The lack of black eyes can also be covered by her report. If he had black eyes she would have made a note of it and been more emphatic about a followup visit for verification of concussion or broken nose.

      • lurker says:

        While I agree, the prosecution does not need to account specifically for the injuries–only show them to be inconsistent with Z’s tale–I do personally believe that pushing through tall shrubs in pursuit coupled with the kickback from the pistol fired with the non-dominent hand while holding the victim’s shirt with the other pretty much account for the injuries. Possibly a scrape against an in-ground sprinkler for the laceration in the back. Hitting a face with fists doesn’t result in abrasions (as described on the front of the face) and pounding against cement doesn’t result in a laceration (as described on the back of the head).

        Up until the release of the DNA evidence (or lack thereof) I was leaning in the direction of Trayvon having gotten in some defensive blows. But I think even that–reasonable though it may have been given the circumstances–doesn’t seem to be supported by the evidence.

      • bettykath says:

        If fogen doesn’t testify and the defense tries to use anything else (bloody photos taken by cell phone the night of, or even the np report) to show how bad his injuries were in attempt to extrapolate “in fear for his life”, cross examination of the np and her report if used by the defense, or as a rebuttal witness if not, will show that the injuries aren’t serious. Most likely every juror will have had similar injuries or someone close to them has.

      • pat deadder says:

        Bettykath And the body 40 feet south of the T.

    • groans says:

      “The state is going to have a hard time refuting the claim of self defense – that’s where the case can easily be won by the defense,” Baez said.

      Baez is probably messing with O’Mara’s head. Like some undeclared pissing contest for who’s Orlando’s Top Dog criminal defense lawyer. So he’s talking up what a cinch O’Mara’s case is. Setting a really low bar for O’Mara. So then, when O’Mara loses, Baez clearly retains Top Dog title (in his mind), because O’Mara couldn’t even make it over the very low bar of this “easy” self-defense case! And, after all, whenever Baez is quoted, everyone gets reminded that HE got Casey Anthony acquitted!

      I don’t know this for sure, of course – just trying to look at it from another angle, such as from inside the head of someone with a super-sized ego.

    • kllypyn says:

      Why don’t they read the evidence or shut up. further more get punched in the if it had happened is not reason to shoo some one. do they not remember he’s it the one who chased Trayvon. Trayvon didn’t touch him but he would been in his rights if he had.

    • Lynn says:

      What is the probability of Baez being their anonymous witness?

    • aussie says:

      The prosecution does not have to REFUTE HIS CLAIM of self defence.

      The prosecution goes first. At that point there IS no official claim of self defence for them to refute.

      The cops found an unarmed youth shot dead. The shooter admitted doing the shooting. Witnesses heard some altercation beforehand. Terrified screams were recorded on a 911 call. The forensics show the victim had no shooter’s DNA on him. The shooter had almost no blood or damage on him. The victim was afraid (DeeDee) and the shooter had followed the victim for some time and distance (NEN call).

      So far that adds up to MURDER. And still no “self defence to refute”.

      THEN, with the details of the crime firmly in the minds of the jurors, including the location, THEN some police can give evidence of claims the defendant made in interviews about “how that wasn’t what happened”. Show the “re-enactment” tape with the joke of an injury, the shock realisation that the “knock-down blow” was 40 feet from the shooting scene. No juror in his right mind will believe a word of it.

      There is no need for the prosecution to show 1000 ways it could not have been any other way. The only ways it could not have been that matter are the 100 ways GZ has claimed.

      So, it’s “this is what happened as per forensics and recorded calls”. Then “but this is what he claimed as his excuses”. It would only strengthen the prosecution’s version that it was murder, and show the idea of self defence as the joke that it is.

      Then if GZ wants to get on the stand and tell yet another version, it won’t help him at all.

      In fact if the prosecution shows the re-enactment etc they leave the defence with NOTHING to say. Coming on TOP of the solid evidence, it only makes the murder look more like a murder.

  23. dianetrotter says:

    What can Judge Nelson/BDLR do to make sure that coverage of the error/lie is known to prospective jurors? Can they be questioned about what they have seen/heard? Can they be told that it was a deliberate, bald-faced lie?

  24. papapi says:

    Crime Watchers sleuths ROCK! Thanks to all who brought this to light, and especially thanks to Who @TruthThere Speaking of those lawerly “mistruths” and “misstatements” by Mark O’Mara, I just call those plain, old fashioned LIES.

    • tinytruthseeker says:

      Yes they do papa…. and you are one of the best!
      I’m so honored to be a part of the Trayvon Warrior family at CW…

  25. And R. Zimmerman jr  deflected MOM lie to Crump

    • Two sides to a story says:

      He never stops either, does he?

      • TheMindIsATerribleThingToWaste says:

        Two sides wrote,

        “He never stops either, does he?”

        No, he doesn’t. He is a strange one, isn’t he? Regarding R. Zim, Jr.

  26. lurker says:

    The letter from West to BDLR is pretty interesting all by itself. A request to please investigate and come up with the following things that we would like to use in our defense.

  27. From the previous post:

    SouthernGirl2 says:
    June 3, 2013 at 12:59 pm
    NOTICE OF HEARING for June 6, 2013 in #Zimmerman case.

    Click to access noh_060613.pdf

    Frederick Leatherman says:
    June 3, 2013 at 1:15 pm
    What the hell is this?

    Defendant’s Sealed Confidential Motion to Maintain Anonymity and Confidentiality of Certain

    This must be another paranoid racist bullshit claim that the defendant and his family are in mortal danger from the New Black Panthers and their mighty black minions.

    I don’t know about the rest of you, but I’m getting sick and tired of this crap.

    It’s long past time for this defendant and his family to STFU!


    Thanks Southern Girl, and to Fred: I disagree. I think more transparent motions like this are in order, I could read them all day. If he can run his mouth like that though, at least he could run a legit apology across his website, not some chicken shit third person excuse for an apology, written by somebody else.

    • Two sides to a story says:

      Funny. Fogen thinks he’s gonna win this case by hiding some damning names or sumthin’. I wonder if Nelson will bite.

      Professor, have you ever heard of keeping witness names confidential?

      • Professor, have you ever heard of keeping witness names confidential?

        Absolutely not.

      • Two sides to a story says:

        Well, that tells us something right there. Denied!

      • Tzar says:

        I would be very suspicious of what kind of “fast one” O’Mara is planning to pull for which he needs to hide his witness. This dude has shown that he can be brazen and insulting to the court and the public intelligence to the point of sublime stupidity. So I hope Bernie threads lightly.

    • Operacarla says:

      Please govern yourself accordingly? Is that normally there? Who is the comment directed towards?

    • ic2fools says:

      Ahhso Mr. Cracker leaving your tree are ya! When the Motion to Maintain Anonymity and Confidentiality of Certain
      Witnesses is denied whatcha gonna do. Walk into court wearing a brown bag with the eyes n snout cut out..

      • Hmm. It is an odd motion. Made me wonder if there are underage witnesses. The person you refer to- I don’t think he is a witness, but I am open to being wrong about anything these days.

        • ic2fools says:

          Absolutely Lady Crane. O’Mara twists an turns leave me reeling at times. I’m no longer shocked by his antics, just disgusted and saddened he hasn’t been stopped.

          Honest hard working lawyers and our judicial should not be smeared with this type filth O’Mara has brought forth since taking this case.

          Aren’t there guidelines in place to protect identity of underage witnesses?

          Honest not sure who to expect O’Mara wants to keep confidential.

          Wow he gives a whole new meaning to the phrase
          Lie-awyer for hire.

          • “Aren’t there guidelines in place to protect identity of underage witnesses?”

            They do have for juvenile defendants, but for witnesses, it is likely by agreement that that there is no need to identify them. So, while O’Mara’s motion is under seal and we cannot see it, we do not believe he is talking about juveniles.

          • Lonnie Starr says:

            Apparently Attorney’s with losing cases are expected to turn to using every dirty trick in the book on their clients behalf. This isn’t the first time we’ve seen attorney’s play dirty and I’m afraid it won’t be the last.

          • ic2fools says:

            @Lonnie Good morning. I have another question. Is it possible the GPS corrdinates will not place Trayvon and Fogen at the T at the same time Fogen where Fogen said he was punched?

            If that is the case, then those GPS coordiates are damning prove of that Fogen lie, ripping apart Fogens lie of his whereabouts,

          • Lonnie Starr says:

            It’s here
            GZ was lying through his teeth about anything happening at the T.

            He probably ran across to Jon’s knocked on the door and maybe got a lift up to the back gate. Who would know? In any event he got behind Trayvon again somehow and began forcing him north.

            Apparently Trayvon stopped by a house where he saw a light and refused to move any further, hoping that someone would come out and help him. They looked out and saw it was that nasty NW Captain who they wanted no part of and so they ducked back inside.

            GZ was a busy body, always sticking his nose into other people business. In an urban center, you’re not going to call 911 all those times without getting either sued or shot. Which is because you can’t tell who people are in the city. That bike messenger might just as easily be a second story burglar as a small drug kingpin, gang member or a college student from a very wealthy family. GZ’s routine would have landed him in so much hot water from both the innocent citizens who value their privacy and the criminals who are more than willing to fight for theirs.

            Anyway, even with the possible 70 second discrepancy, created by T-mobile’s rounding up to the next minute, the first 911 call fixes the position of them both, and they’re right there until the gunshot 45 seconds later. Obviously the cell phone is right there nearby. They didn’t run away and then come back to the same place. The screams we hear show Trayvon was to terrified to care about his phone. If he did, he couldn’t pick it up, because gz was restraining him. If he had planned an attack, the first thing a teenager would do is secure his precious cell phone. It only winds up on wet grass because Trayvon could do nothing about it, because gz had taken control.

          • We have talked about their comfort level with basically behaving like an animal: they’ve done it before, others have had their back, they have gotten away with it, and the real victims are invisible.

      • type1juve says:

        No, he’ll just wear his sheet.

        • ic2fools says:

          Yep ,interesting to see who shows and what will be said. Whom ever it is Mr. De La Rionda will, take it apart one question at a time.

          • Lonnie Starr says:

            Now Omar has said that he found pictures of Trayvon with Charles Mansion covered in blood on his phone. An hour later under questioning Omar says “Oops, it wasn’t exactly blood, it turns out it was ketchup… oh and we were mistaken about it being Manson, it was french fries, my bad we apologize!”

          • ic2fools says:

            Grrrr,the sooner that sorry excuse of a lawyer is kicked out of our Judicial System the better.

          • This case could and should wind up being a career killer for O’Mara.

          • ic2fools says:

            I agree 100%!

      • ic2fools says:

        Lonnie excellent analysis, I’ve read it a few times.

  28. Animaljunkie says:

    The Richardson hearing is going to be a doozy! I’m making sure I’m stocked up with popcorn & soft drinks! SWEET!

    I’m fully expecting Judge Nelson to get VERY angry with MOM/West, for misrepresenting the VICTIM & his family. They’re so screwed!

    • bettykath says:

      I think the hearing will be over before you get the top off the drink. 🙂

      • Animaljunkie says:

        Hahaha! Hey, that would be okay too! 😀

        Isn’t the Frye hearing also scheduled for 6th & 7th? I suspect that will be over before I pop my popcorn! XD

    • Trained Observer says:

      I expect JN to have a pleasant yet lethal freeze on …

      If they’re hoping for a Judge Lester-style potted palm outburst so they can go judge shopping again, therefore delaying trial for another year … nope, not gonna happen.

      • Tzar says:

        she has the most disarming yet killer shit eating grin face evarrrrrr
        they won’t know what hit them.

      • Trained Observer says:

        Tzar — Doesn’t she though? Your description captures it. West, especially, will take a while to process when she lowers the boom with that grin.

      • Animaljunkie says:

        If you call what I saw in 28th May hearing a ‘lethal freeze’, you must be particularly desensitised to such anger! 😀

        Saying that, it simply might be a culture disparity, since I live in the UK 🙂

      • pat deadder says:

        TO They’re hoping to go judge shopping Yes I think when omara made the comment to JN something to the affect If you are deciding because of your frustration with mr west JN immediately said ”I’m not frustrated with anybody”.And I don’t think they have any experts to testify at the Fry hearing either.Also from what I’m understanding omara has to prove procedural prejudice at the Richardson thingy this week again.I ‘m wondering how JN feels about the ruling that they can depose Mr Crump,

        • Lonnie Starr says:

          JN is probably resolved to keep it very narrowly focused and shut it down if it begins to look anything like a fishing expedition, because of the danger that something privileged might slip out. Once she spots them fishing they’re done! There won’t be any “Oh, we’re sorry” then move on and try again. This deposition is so narrowly focused in a corridor between sensitive information, they either need to come prepared to stay on a specific course, and keep to pursuit of permissible information, or get shut down.

          …And that’s if Attorney Crump doesn’t decide to appeal!

          • ic2fools says:

            Totally didn’t think of Attorney Crump appealing DCA decision. What a blow to defense if/when its’ filed. DCA decision to such appeal may not be in time for trial.

            JN and all of us well know that ‘we’re sorry is O’Mara tag phrase. Regardless of what JN has denied to be said during proceedings, O’Mara will say something and ask something not allowed.

  29. Who says:

    Thanks Mr. Leatherman. I am the one who found that bit by West in the discovery dump about the video of the bike — It was me, slugging through the docs in the early hours today: AHA! I then took the screen shot of Exhibit D, and pieced it together for our fine Truth Warriors this morning.

    And also, as to the apology issued yesterday by GZLegal:

    With the discovery by another intrepid sleuther at CW, servatugughp – who noticed the Stutzman story had vanished late Saturday night, and who pieced parts of the remaining evidence on google, hooking words together to fill out the rest of the story, I was able to sleuth further and was the one who found the whole google cache page.

    At that point, the awesome work of Papapi and BigBoi and a few others took over on the twitterverse and sent it out to the media — and to GZ LEgal asking for an explanation.

    It was a wonderful feeling of power yesterday to know that I along with some dedicated Warriors, were able to shake the long-faced mug of O’Mara from his Sunday grumps and arouse him to the point he was forced to run to the web and take action, to issue his Apologia,

    An apology, half-assed as it was, with the pathetic “misstatement” excuse, it is still a major victory, and I am only too proud to sa
    y I was a part of that helping to make that happen.

    Thank you for your dedicated work, Mr. Leatherman!
    Who aka TruthThere

    • Thank you for your efforts and welcome to the blog.

      You and the others who found this stuff are the true heroes in my mind.

      • Who says:

        Aww. Thanks. I have enormous respect for you, and those words are high honor to me coming from you.

        There are many heroes in this battle, and many dedicated Warriors who work hard to fight the uphill slug of achieving Justice for Trayvon. I thank them all.

        I do read your blog often, and have posted a few times as *Paperview* – I surely want to make it known there are many out here who praise your efforts, and though many don’t post are quietly reading and cheering your contributions, as well as the many other fine posters here.

        Thanks to ALL!

    • tonya B says:

      thank you…..

    • Operacarla says:

      Hats off Who!!! Thanks!

    • So, this is great stuff, gave O’Mara an opportunity to see what he was made of, and he choked.

      *deadpan judge hits buzzer*

    • LeaNder says:

      You and your friends have our highest respect, Who, Thanks for giving us the precise story. So you triggered the excuse and not Rene Stutzman gave O’Mara a chance to recant? OK, I’ll keep that in mind.

      O’Mara used the document at least in three not too old motions as appendix, as far as I know by now. So his excuse is even less believable.

      The one you found, and that popped up here, where it is both in the document (page 29-31) and available as extra exhibit file D:

      Motion for Consideration and Clarification of the Court Order, Dated March 4, 2014 filed March 15, 2013.

      and here:

      Motion for Sanction against the State Attorney’s Office on March filed, March 25, 2013. at the moment page 18 on gzlegal, page 17-20


      in the extended of the Appendix Writ of Certiorari, April 4, page 252 following.

      you and your friends surely are heroes. Pleased to meet you here. JUSTICE FOR TRAYVON!

    • parrot says:

      Thank you, Who! Were you looking for it or just came across it?

    • TheMindIsATerribleThingToWaste says:

      *tips hat to Who a.k.a. TruthThere. Great work:). This is unbelievable.

    • Lynn says:

      Rising from my seat and clapping…good job.

    • Wendie Dox says:

      Thank you.
      all the words I have.
      If I knew where you lived, I’d buy you a drink.

  30. diary73 says:

    He also continues to go on record a saying that GZ had a broken nose and that W6 saw MMA blows by the victim. He has not professed to authenticate the “evidence/discovery” he released either. By releasing this information and saying that it IS Trayvon without authenticating the information, could he also be subject to disciplinary action?

    He still claims that the young man with a tattoo on his left arm is Trayvon, when it is clear that there is an issue with both the pics of the person flipping the bird and the video of the “refereeing” person.

    How can this sort of thing be allowed without proof that he has accurate information. Why did Judge Nelson not ask him point blank if he had surefire authenticity of the information that was released?


    • lady2soothe says:


      Why did Judge Nelson not ask him point blank if he had surefire authenticity of the information that was released?

      I get the strong impression Judge Nelson is playing the “give ’em enough rope and they’ll hang themselves” routine. Wouldn’t surprise me at all if she’s just waiting, watching and gathering. She’s a very smart cookie!

      • diary73 says:

        I hope you are right, lady.

      • lurker says:

        I am also thinking that she has limited control over what O’Mara says outside the courtroom.

        She did make very clear that in order to get anything INTO the courtroom it would have to be relevant, authenticated and fall within the parameters of allowable hearsay.

        She has twice now denied gag orders, and while I suspect that this may not be her personal preference, she is acting in accordance with Florida law.

      • ic2fools says:

        x2. When Judge Debra lowers her gavel, she will raise it slam it once more. Retiring to her chambers completing her notes to begin Sanctions process and recommendation to have O’Mara disbarred.

      • Jun says:

        If the media were smart, her decisions prove that Omara is full of shit

        as you stated

        “authenticated, relevant, exception”

        Considering it does not fall into these categories it means he is full of shit with what he has been telling the public in his slimy and grimy sleeze and smear campaign of a dead kid

    • kllypyn says:

      Should be obvious by even the most idiotic among us that there were never any MMA style blows. If there had been zimmerman would been in the hospital for a few days and Trayvon would be still alive probably defending himself against an assault charge. I’ve seen MMA matches even with those little gloves they wear they do serious damage to their faces and their hands. There is a reason Jon changed his story.

      • ladystclaire says:

        Indeed he did change because, he knew he was lying when he told LE that BS. As we all know, there are a few more few more besides MMA liar who know more than what they are telling.

        These people have no heart AT ALL! They saw and heard the entire thing, yet they choose to LIE in order to protect this POS, who they know is guilty.

  31. Operacarla says:

    I just e-mailed Rachel Maddow and suggested she look at your blog. You are very GREAT at helping us understand all aspects of the law. I believe you need a much larger audience. The understanding you provide in the name of justice is a treasure. I am going to start e-mailing more host’s.
    Anybody care to join me?

    • vickie s. votaw says:

      Right on! Operacarla, that’s the best idea I’ve heard yet! I think Rachel Maddow would be a good match with the professor. 🙂

    • tinytruthseeker says:

      LOVE Rachel!!!! I watch her every night! Smart, Funny, Articulate…. one of the few TH that has integrity….
      Would LOVE to see the Professor on her show!!!

    • EdgySF says:

      Email the good Rev!! 🙂

    • parrot says:

      I hope you have more clout than me because I emailed the show months ago and never got a peep back.

  32. lurker says:

    Looks like the sanctions hearing should last about 5 minutes.


  33. I have reached a point with Mark O’Mara where I now presume everything he says about George Zimmerman, Trayvon Martin and the evidence and issues in the case is a lie unless his statement is independently verified.

  34. parrot says:

    I hope O’Mara reaps every bad seed he’s sowing.

    • Two sides to a story says:

      There’s no escaping karmic justice. We all dance to its tune.

      • Lynn says:

        alas, someone else who believes in karma. One example of said karma is in the Boston Bombing story. Momma Tsarnaev jumping bail on her Lord and Taylor theft…and then the Lord and Taylor cameras are what caught the sons red handed.

    • Trained Observer says:

      He’ll soon drown in a swampy field of Night Blooming Serious.

      • parrot says:

        Interesting comment, TO. Why night-blooming cereus?

      • Trained Observer says:

        Because these O’Mara (West too) are seriously blooming overnight into Bar clowns of the millennium, having planted so much mis-information and outright lies.

      • parrot says:

        TO, I’m chucklin’ ’cause that poor beautiful flower didn’t deserve to be mentioned in the same sentence as that thorn (O’Mara) and his sidekick thistle (West).

        • ic2fools says:

          LOL parrot!!! Thorn an Thistle, Skeletors revenge.

          • racerrodig says:

            They are really kicking The Moron Man’s butt over on HP with the fabrication of “evidence” story. Of the 1st 100 posts only 1 was a Zidiot….that mdmcruder805 dude….same line. Self defense isn’t murder and isn’t a crime…..what a loser.

          • ic2fools says:

            I had thought of stopping in jus to see a pc the oragatang post that he has changed his view on Fogen. Don’t trust or believe it.

            Doubt sanity will last long over at that site.

          • racerrodig says:

            It is funny the whoppin’ over there..

          • ic2fools says:

            ok racer now you got my interest peaked so i’m gonna take a peek..

            lol lol, if i get into trouble i’m coming back to drag you in the trenches!!!!
            lol lol lol

          • racerrodig says:

            Be my pleasure to jump in the trenches with you !!!! To the hunt !

          • ic2fools says:

            Cool beans! Already through truth on ’em, then posted link this
            site Bwaaahaahaaaa!!!!

          • racerrodig says:

            Tear ’em up…’s not even a challenge anymore.

          • ic2fools says:

            Reform one zidiot at a time. Too many at once they’ll spontaneously combust….. KABOOM!

          • ic2fools says:

            Racer zidiots over there are clueless, I left after reading foolish post of fogens fairytales…

            mi peeps got’em on the run.

          • racerrodig says:

            I must say that the new members of Team Trayvon really hold their ground over there.

          • ic2fools says:

            Ya notice that too. They dare not tread on Team Trayvon over here, if they do zidiot trollz are shut down with quickness. Respectful quickness at that.

          • racerrodig says:

            And damn proud of them we should be. Notice the absence of LJP and all the ones we knew were Fogen.

          • ic2fools says:

            I paid a visit ‘ova derr’. When Fogen Kogym evidence was released. ljp posted questions’ do you know what classes he took, then blah blah blah protecting the why Fogen blah blah blah mess.

  35. thejbmission says:

    Thank you Professor,
    The slimy dogs knew about this for months. Good catch LLMPaPa!! LLMPaPa doesn’t miss a beat. lol
    It’s a wonderful thing that O’Mara was caught lying. It speaks volumes as to his credibility.
    Hear that jury pool?? O’Mara is a liar just like his client. Believe nothing that this man says.

    Here’s an interesting article relating to forensics.

    • ladystclaire says:

      This an instant REPLAY, follow up to the lies he told, when he proclaimed not to know about the money Fogen had socked away. he also knew about the second hidden passport as well. this man has no honesty in him what so ever.

      • Trained Observer says:

        Don’t see how the Florida Bar can overlook O’Mara’s outrageous stack of lies laced with related misbehavior,

    • ic2fools says:

      Truly excellent article, I have it bookmarked. Thanks for sharing the link.

  36. Actually Professor, it was a poster at Crime Watcher’s who found the goodies that we’ve seen yesterday and today. He is also on Twitter as @TruthThere.

    • ay2z says:

      It’s a bit early, but since Crane gave the order….

      • OMG, I almost wet myself. Hell to the hell no, LOL!

        All rise.

      • Nellie Nell says:

        I sure needed that laugh as that is some funny crap! I am so frustrated with MOM, the murderer and all his silly supporters. So sick of the internet being used to dog the victim and for George to beg for money for his living expenses and defense. I would have never thought in a million years that a killer of a child would be rewarded for his evil deeds.

        Also causing my stress is learning that MOM purposely lied in open court about the video that he knew all along was not of Trayvon and his friend beating up a homeless man, but was of two homeless men fighting over a bike. I am sick of their tactics of lying and dragging the victim through the mud. Back in March or April, MOM did an press conference where he stated that the case is about what happened after Zimmerman confronted Trayvon and now his is saying there is no evidence that Zimmerman followed him!

        I am so sick of them and can not wait until the idiot takes the stand, sealing his fate, and is handed his sentence!

  37. racerrodig says:


    Despicable liars….

Leave a Reply

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

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

Google photo

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

Twitter picture

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

Facebook photo

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

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: