What to expect tomorrow at the hearings in the Zimmerman case

Wednesday, June 5, 2013

Good morning:

Except for RZ, Jr.’s unsupported claim that Dr. Alan Reich’s opinions are based on voodoo science, nothing new has been reported in the press today about the case.

Speaking of new, the purpose of a Frye hearing is to determine whether a new or novel scientific theory or methodology is generally accepted in the scientific community. If the answer to the question is “No,” evidence obtained using that theory or methodology will be excluded and the jury will never hear about it.

If the theory or methodology used is not novel or new, the evidence will be admitted and objections to the accuracy of the results will go to weight and not admissibility. In other words, the jury will determine how much weight to assign to the evidence.

I think the defendant’s objections go to weight rather than admissibility, since the technology used is not novel or new.

Therefore, I am predicting that Judge Nelson will deny the defense motion to exclude testimony by the defense audiologists, including Dr. Reich.

The other motion scheduled for tomorrow is the defense motion for sanctions and a judicial review of alleged prosecution discovery violations. This will involve a continuation of the hearing that began last Tuesday with Wesley West on the stand. West, the former Nassau County prosecutor who resigned due to differences of opinion with State Attorney Angela Corey last December, represents whistleblower Ben Kruidbos, the Fourth Circuit Director of Information Technology who is going to testify that Bernie de la Rionda had photographs and video from Trayvon Martin’s cell phone that he did not disclose to the defense.

As I have said before, “Who cares?”

BDLR turned over the BIN file to the defense back in January, but the defense did not hire anyone to extract it or purchase the software to do it themselves.

In addition, the information on the phone is not relevant, admissible or exculpatory and, in light of Mark O’Mara’s lie about a video supposedly depicting Travon laughing as his buddies beat up a homeless person, O’Mara should have the decency to withdraw the motion and apologize for filing it.

He will not do that, of course.

I would deny his frivolous motion and fine him, if not jail him for contempt, but Judge Nelson is nicer than I am, so she will just deny it or hold off on issuing a ruling until after the trial, which is what she did with the last defense motion for sanctions.

The testimony from the audiologists should be interesting and worth listening to. After they are finished testifying, I think O’Mara will deeply regret having asked for a Frye hearing.

This is a golden opportunity for BDLR to inform the jury panel, the nation and the world on the eve of trial that Trayvon uttered the death shriek.

The hearing is scheduled to begin at 9 am EDT.

We will live blog on the road via livestream from a motorcycle somewhere deep in Tennessee.

Ciao, baby.

______________________________________________________________

Please keep those donations coming.

We’ll need the gas money to get home.

Many blessings to all of you from

Fred and Crane

278 Responses to What to expect tomorrow at the hearings in the Zimmerman case

  1. LeaNder says:

    does anyone know which life feed best to use? Some seem have talking heads or analysts or advertisement break. I didn’t have any of these recently but if I recall correctly early on at one point.

  2. Tee says:

    This guy will lie about anything. “Have you ever driven over the posted speed limit.” GZ, answer “no.” Really, everyone has driven over the posted speed limit even if its only 5 miles over. I drive ridiculously slow, pay attention to other cars and so carefully that my husband sometimes tells me to pull over and let him drive. i do this because I have my kids in the back seat and I still find myself adjusting my speed, slowing down from time to time because I’m over the speed limit a little. And they believe this guy! A person that just killed someone and had a normal heart rate, smh.

    • SearchingMind says:

      He was advised to lie on that point. By lying he said the truth. Regardless, Lie “detector” is the dumbest “technology” ever invented by man.

      • Malisha says:

        The voice-stress test is the favorite of the obviously guilty. IT DOES NOT MEASURE TRUTH; it measures STRESS.

        A liar does not feel stressed when he lies; he feels stressed when he says something that stresses him, and very often, telling the TRUTH about himself stresses him. Osterman advised Fogen to ask for a VSA and the guy, Erwin, was the one he requested and the guy said to Fogen, “I hear you wanted to take the VSA test” and Fogen said yes and the guy said “Your wish is granted.”

        The “lies” he provided Fogen with to calibrate his test were:

        “Did you ever drive over the speed limit?” and
        “Are the walls green?”

        C’mon, son.

        Also, he asked Fogen to tell HIM what to call Trayvon Martin, and they agreed on calling him “the guy.” Serino made Fogen say his NAME and he repeated it: “Trayvon Benjamin Martin.” HE made it REAL to Fogen that Fogen was not the one in charge of characterizing the events and choosing how to identify the victim of his shooting; several times during the interviews we hear Serino identifying the victim as a human being, as a person, and as the victim. “Not a PUNK,” comments Serino. “A good kid, a kid with parents who care,” says Serino. “Trayvon Benjamin Martin,” says Serino. Erwin asks, “What do YOU call him,” and agrees with Fogen to refer to the victim as “the guy.” “OK, the guy, OK.”

        This puts Fogen in charge. This lets him know he doesn’t have to have STRESS. That’s why Fogen “passesd” the voice stress test. When HE is in charge of the perceptions and HE can define his victim as HE CHOOSES, he is not stressed.

        • PiranhaMom says:

          @Malisha –

          Re: ” Erwin asks, “What do YOU call him,” and agrees with Fogen to refer to the victim as “the guy.”

          “OK, the guy, OK.”

          “This puts Fogen in charge. This lets him know he doesn’t have to have STRESS. That’s why Fogen “passed” the voice stress test. When HE is in charge of the perceptions and HE can define his victim as HE CHOOSES, he is not stressed”

          WOW! Malisha!

          You have made so many brilliant observations and analyses (“Malisha’s Greatest Hits,” now topping 1,460 pages and growing) but this is THE most perceptive. I’m floored.

          And thankful!.

      • racerrodig says:

        My bad, I forgot. Too many details and I just plain forgot. However, some years ago one of my responsibilities in a job I had was employee theft detection. When we had someone we had proof was stealing the boss had me take them to a PI office who did a polygraph test. Most flunked badly and admitted what they did, however I caught one guy stealing and had 100% proof. I took him and he passed the test but on the way back, he told me about everything he stole and how he beat the test. He said he just kept himself focused on something else as all answers are yes or no.

    • thejbmission says:

      Tee,
      I think the examiner may have used the question, “have you ever driven over the posted speed limit” as a some kind of test question to compare to the other questions he asked.
      As you said, everyone has gone over the speed limit at least once, so if GZ says “no” and the CVSA machine doesn’t react as deception, then the examiner knows, GZ has the capabilities to pass a CVSA even when lying.
      I believe that’s the reason the question was asked.
      JMO

  3. Judy75201 says:

    I’m surprised that O’Mara hasn’t filed a motion to limit the use of words entirely…

    • Malisha says:

      I expect a last-minute EMERGENCY MOTION to require BDLR, whenever referring to the defendant, to have to say: “That innocent man” instead of “the defendant.” It’s only fair, after all, because Fogen is innocent until proven guilty. 😆

      • SearchingMind says:

        BDLR may not even use the words ‘this defendant’, ‘crime’, ‘crime scene’, etc. because ya know, they are inflamatory and prejudicial. This is another case of O’Mara taking legal advise from internet trolls. Someone posted before that the words O’Mara wants limited were taken form nettles18’s blog (another deranged fan of GZ).

        • racerrodig says:

          I just heard The Moron Man doesn’t want the words gun, pistol, firearm, bullet, round, magazine, weapon, point, aim, shoot and shot used.

      • aussie says:

        Well that would make sense. The way he’s worried about the wording of the opening statement, it looks like he thinks the case IS just statements from the 2 sides. No “evidence” just the 2 sides lawyers getting up and telling their story.

        In fact he thinks they covered their side pretty well in the media already so Judge Nelson should just let him go with time served.

        • racerrodig says:

          But we know The Moron Man will use the words “pummeled” “viciously attacked” “ambushed” “savagely beaten” “almost died as a result…” over and over in his opening statement…..it’s coming.

  4. LLMPapa says:

    Had to ask his name and month TWICE, LOL

  5. SearchingMind says:

    @ Professor

    More headache for Judge Nelson

    Stormwatch posted information regarding the signing into law of Florida House Bill 7015. BettyKath asked a question regarding the effective date of this Bill. That question is crucial because if e.g. the effective date is the date of the signing, O’Mara’s Motion for Frye Hearing would has lost all its meaning and purpose.

    I have been doing some digging. Here is what I found. HB 7015 was signed into to law on the 4th of June 2013. The effective date is 1st July 2013.

    This is/maybe headache for Judge Nelson. Should Judge Nelson rule in accordance with a law that is not yet effective? Should Judge Nelson rule in accordance with the old law? If the answer is yes, what then would happen to that ruling on the 1st of July 2013 (assuming she (partially) rules against the State)? Would the old law still be applicable or will it be replaced by the new law and why?

    My guess is that Judge Nelson would rule that the science and methodology of State’s expert witnesses pass the admissibility test under both Frye- and Daubert Standards – without saying a word as to which Standard is applicable in the case. That’s the easy way out. That’s the route I would take. I wonder if the Professor sees this differently?

    Another headache for Judge Nelson would be questions regarding the “ex post facto clause”. Appling the new law in this case would arguably be disadvantageous to GZ but will NOT violate the “ex post facto clause”. I expect O’Mara to claim that it would, loudly cry foul and shed some crocodile tears, while GZ’s derange supporters at the CTH claim that “the fix is in”. I say that there would be no violation of the ex post facto clause because as SCOTUS said, “even if a law operates to the defendant’s detriment, the ex post facto prohibition does not restrict legislative control of remedies and modes of procedure which do not affect matters of substance. Hence, no ex post facto violation occurs if the change in the law is merely procedural and does not increase the punishment, not change the ingredients of the offence or the ultimate facts necessary to establish guilt”. That’s the case here. Bill 7015 is merely procedural and does not alter the facts, the ingredients of the offense or the expected punishment/sentence and would therefore not violate the “ex post facto clause”.

    See among others, Hopt v Uta, 10 US. 574, 590 (1884);
    Dobbert v. Florida, 432 U.S. 282, 292-94 (1977), and
    Weaver v. Graham, 450 U.S. 24, 29 n.12 (1981).

    • Jun says:

      I think her job will be easy. I think this is a case of Keep it Simple. Is the scientific method factual and is it accepted or will be accepted and it makes scientific sense and is a proven method? If so, let the jury weigh it, and if it is simple enough it is understandable. Making things overly complex is kind of stupid and pointless. As long as her ruling is factual and fair, it’s all good IMO.

      No one cares about the deranged gang members of Fogen. They are crazy people and will probably be facing charges themselves as they are a danger to society. The only person being conspired against is the teenage boy that was killed and since targeting the kid, the defendant has tried to frame him.

  6. ic2fools says:

    follow

  7. ic2fools says:

    Link for the hearing this morning:

    http://www.wftv.com/s/watchlive/

    I haven’t tried this one yet jus sharin:

    http://wildabouttrial.com/george-zimmerman-live-stream.html

  8. ic2fools says:

    Mark O’Mara on BET June 5. 2013 Get’s Emotional

    (yeah he wiped a fake tear)

    http://axiomamnesia.com/2013/06/04/watch-mark-omara-wipe-nonexistent-tear-pretending-cry-race-relations-video/

    OS has the video/article yet it only plays the commercials. Awww OS can’t have its’ readers watching Black Entertainment TV now can they.

    O’Mara literally looks sucked dry of morals, his soul
    is gone only skin bones and empty eyes.

  9. ladystclaire says:

    Not only is this country the leader in gun violence, it’s also the leader with the most ignorant heartless people. as far as some who see fit to support someone who murders an AA kid, just as others have said it’s not that these people really care about Fogen, it’s the fact that he killed an AA child is what they support.

    They feel that Trayvon caused his own death, which is not true but, they never stop to think that maybe Natalee Holloway WAS one who fit that mold. this girl was in another country where she knew no one, yet she gets in a car with three young men who she had never seen before and leaves with them to never be seen again.

    I’m in no way saying that she got what she deserved. I am just using her as a comparison when it comes to these racist who seem to believe, that Trayvon caused his own demise because he didn’t! in fact he RAN from his killer but not her, she left her fellow students and got in a car with three guys who were strangers to her.

    They will “NEVER” see these two cases in that way because, to them Trayvon’s race is what makes them say that he caused his own death. when they say that Trayvon’s parents had bad parenting skills, can we assume the same for Natlee, was she never told to not get into a car with strangers? was she never told about stranger danger? all I’m saying here is that, she made a bad choice but, Trayvon didn’t even though some are saying that he did.

    • turtlecoal says:

      I have expressed the exact sentiment about the Halloway murder the media never referred to her as a “drunk slut”, but Trayvon was a “thug” for being a black teenage kid. But I know fogen has experienced some prejudice also being hispanic.

      One thing about this evidence of kokopelli gym, isthat they offer MMA fighting but If I remember correctly fogen had a slip & said he put his hands over his mouth, detective serino caught him & he caught the slip. But in MMA thats a technique to tire out a opponent. A arm bar or wristlock would not leave bruising but when applied the person recieving the hold still has a arm free & it hurts like hell but they can still manage to escape the hold. I know belive fogen was trying use a submission move on Trayvon & thats what the shriek was but Trayvon was able to break free. A submission hold can be performed from the bottom & the being in a mounted position doesnt mean you are in the superior position especially with someone who has MMA experience. I suggest looking at mma videos & yoy will see why fogen has no stains or scuff marks on the back of his jeans. There are many types of mounts but Fogen thouhgt he was slick. Trayvon was in a mount position called the OPEN GAURD position(Google it or wiki it for a view of how the position looks take a good look at the *legs of the person at bottom* ) thats how Fogen was able to get on his back so quickly after the shot. He needs to charged with murder 1

    • turtlecoal says:

      & that is also how Fogen got his gun out since from a regular mount position it is virtually impossible . He has no other explanation. He could only get to his weapon from the bottom if he was in a *open gaurd position* or *full gaurd position*. Trayvon if in this position, would virtually be held captivate. Thats why there are no scuff marks on the back of fogens boots because they never touched the ground & if you were to see this position it would look like the person on top had complete control but its actually the exact opposite. Thats why I think witness #6 changed his testimony cause he saw Fogens legs scissorscrossed over Trayvons back. This was not self defense it was a clear case of murder 1.

      • cielo62 says:

        turtlecoal~ GZ was NEVER on the ground. His jacket was clean of debris, mud or grass. His shirt wasn’t even untucked. GZs boots DID have grass on the tips, meaning he was ON TOP of Trayvon. While your post is interesting, the evidence doesn’t support it. 

        ________________________________

  10. RastaGirl says:

    Hmmmm, “These shall be” I’ve wrecked my brain trying to see if I can hear it myself but of course I can’t lol but I truly wonder, why? In that moment, did he say that…

    • Malisha says:

      Fogen has a peculiar speech pattern. He says things that don’t actually make sense but they seem to have meaning for him. That is, by the way, prevalent in certain personality disorders, where the person is saying things that hold some meaning for him but that do not actually MEAN anything.

      Consider these snippets of Fogentalk:

      “I’m not asking you to deny his pension; I feel he has already forfeited his pension…”

      “I haven’t had any time to reflect; actually when I was in jail obviously I was in solitary and I had a lot of time to reflect…”

      “I feel like he saw my gun…”

      “He took one of his hands off my mouth…”

      “And to be honest, I had forgotten I had my gun with me…”

      “because he was trying to smother me…”

      “because when he was hitting me it felt like he had something in his hands…”

      “My wife’s a mess…”

      ===========

      I was thinking about “These shall BE…” and I figured it could have been a kind of dream-like experience for Fogen to finally be DOMINATING one of those “fucking punks” and his desires, his ambitions, his hopes and aspirations, were all suddenly being realized and he was VICTORIOUS and he was TRANSCENDANT and his pompous self-glorifying fantasies were finally within reach and he was overtaken with the adrenalin of the wonderful moment and he was the narrator to his own ascendancy and he declared to the world:

      “These [hope and dreams of mine] SHALL BE!”

      Just like the B-movie hero at the moment when he subdues the world-bedevilling anti-hero once and for all, in one of those B-movies where the hero is wearing some medieval garb and speaking some stilted post-Biblical but pre-Renaissance English: THESE SHALL BE! Lord!

      The little fleshy-butt hero-pope-cop of the crime-ridden RTL neighborhood, in his paramilitary pre-bandaid buzz cut and his all-American red jacket and “serious man” workshoes, saving the day for the beleaguered white folks and especially the trembling flower of Southern womanhood (Shellie-of-the-Swamps) at the cost of his own personal freedom, my my my my my my my!

      These shall be the laughingstock of a whole bunch of folks now. No way around that.

      • elcymoo says:

        I’ve been wondering if Reich took into account how slurred GZ’s speech sounded on the NEN call. I haven’t been able to discern specific words when listening to the 911 tape screams, because my speakers and my hearing aren’t up to par, but haven’t several other folks who could hear them by enhancing the sound said that Trayvon wailed ‘I don’t know’? Is it possible that Z. actually demanded ‘Just tell me’, and not ‘This shall be’?

        • racerrodig says:

          i have great hearing and a great sound system to enhance every different frequency. Trayvon says “..I don’t know ’emmmmmm”

      • racerrodig says:

        Well said. I think Fogen was mocking Trayvon and his “These shall be …(your last seconds alive, your last words, your last thoughts) or to that effect.

  11. Xena says:

    Didn’t O’Mara enter into discovery photos of GZ attending a graduation in cap and gown, although he did not graduate? O’Mara is such a hypocrite!

    The only photos of Trayvon that the State needs to enter at trial is the one shown to Tracy to identify Trayvon, and those of the coroner.

    • Trained Observer says:

      Hope so. Those shot of him in cap and gown grinning like a horses ass would tell jurors everything they need to know about Fogen and his penchant for fraud. Icing on the cake would be grad party pictures where the waiter got stiffed.

      • Xena says:

        @Trained Observer.

        Icing on the cake would be grad party pictures where the waiter got stiffed.

        O’Mara’s defense can be that since GZ’s GPA was so low, and he actually didn’t complete his credits to earn a degree, then he can’t be expected to understand contracts and how to count money. (snicker)

      • Soulcatcher says:

        @Xena, Or pay his rent. Or does that fall under the excuse of
        Iv’e got a bad memory. If he’s got a problem, he knows who to call. Yeah, my landlords here trying to collect the rent. I’ll bet he’s got that number programed on his phone.

  12. Leisa says:

    Just a random question. Mom was supposed to file a motion with the specific items he wanted stricken from Bernie’s response to his motion for sanctions within 5? Days I believe. I never saw anything more about it. If anyone knows if he has done anything with this I would appreciate knowing. I want to know that the document will stay as filed!

  13. Animaljunkie says:

    This motion is so ridiculous, especially as the science must have been used, numerous times in court cases, nationwide!

    The Richardson hearing will be laughable as well, I’m sure!

  14. George Zimmerman trial: Judge to rule on expert testimony for 911 call screams

    Expert says Trayvon Martin yelled, ‘I’m begging you.’

    http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/local/trayvon-martin/os-george-zimmerman-trial-audio-experts-20130606,0,6554304.story

    Amid growing protest, the city of Sanford on March 16, 2012, relented to public pressure and released dispatch recordings from the night Trayvon Martin was killed, including a 911 call that captured cries for help and the fatal shot.

    City leaders hoped the gesture would soothe tensions, but it had the opposite effect. It started one of the most contentious debates in the case: Who is heard crying out, Trayvon or his shooter, George Zimmerman?

    In a crucial hearing that starts Thursday and may drag into Friday, Circuit Judge Debra Nelson will hear from experts who say they have an answer. Then she’ll decide which, if any, Zimmerman’s jury can hear from at his second-degree-murder trial, which starts Monday.

    Of the experts who’ve weighed in on the case so far, none has been more decisive than Alan R. Reich, who could be a crucial witness for the state. Among Reich’s findings, from a recently revealed report:

    •Trayvon’s voice “is younger and he generates much of what some observers have called screams,” including the last scream, which Reich says was the word “stop.”

    •Zimmerman “makes a seemingly religious proclamation, ‘These shall be,'” about one second into the 911 call, while simultaneously Trayvon yells a “distressed, and tremulous ‘I’m begging you.'”

    Reich’s involvement in the case began when he was retained for a May 2012 article in The Washington Post, which said the former University of Washington professor “has worked … in hundreds of criminal and civil cases over a period of more than 35 years.”

    Attempts to reach Reich to discuss his findings this week were unsuccessful, but searches of scholarly publications reflect that he’s been published on an array of topics, ranging from vocal-disguising techniques to stuttering in children.

    • Cercando Luce says:

      “These shall be…”
      Whatever it was, it wasn’t addressed to Trayvon but to another person, a witness. Maybe trial will clear it up.

  15. Operacarla says:

    Safe travels Professor and Crane!

    • I promise to keep our speed under 100 mph at all times.

      • ay2z says:

        Yes, Crane and Prof, have a safe trip and enjoy the fresh air and quiet countryside, and dark star filled skies at night.

        Enjoy and take pics from the road!

        Be safe

        (PS: learned more about our ‘Square Peg in a Round Hole’ artist, and I expect Colin Black to chime in about him. Chris Rea is from Middlesborough, so another of the 70’s British scene. If you like his slide, he has a youtube talking about his Strats, he has a Signature Strat, and if you want to listen to an hour of his music, this is on Youtube as the first of his 3 CD European tour concert set).

        This is 1 hour, if anyone likes Chris Rea….

  16. Jun says:

    LMAO the Fogen Gang also wants Omara to request that no “young photos” of Trayvon allowed

    Where are we supposed to find photos that are not of a “young Trayvon”?

    He was killed when he was a kid so all his photos are kid’s photos

    • Shari says:

      They are so hung up on this issue. Trayvon WAS a child. He had just turned 17! He is the victim and I’m sure his mother will show whatever pictures she chooses in order to celebrate his life and convey to the state how the loss of her baby has hurt her so much. Maybe I watch too much Crime TV but usually aren’t the victims allowed an opportunity to make an impact statement?

      If they think pictures are what is driving us to want justice then they are deluded. I wasn’t fooled by a picture. I knew how old he was when he died.

      He was making plans to join his brother in college. He would have been more than Fogen that is for sure.

      What a bunch of subhuman cretins!

      • Jun says:

        Yes she can give an impact statement. She’s also a state witness so the state can call her up.

        • A victim impact statement can only be given at sentencing following a conviction.

          She can testify as a fact witness at trial.

          • Lonnie Starr says:

            Good, at sentencing I hope she brings out all of his baby pictures. Foggen was good a chasing down babies, I guess that’s why they didn’t make him a cop, they don’t have a toddler diaper squad… yet! 😆

      • Jun says:

        I think when she testifies, she will probably be overcome with sadness as anyone would in the situation, so whether or not the victim impact statement goes on, I think during the trial, the world, the judge, the jury will be affected by Trayvon’s mom and dad

        I will be real and admit that I feel sadness listening to her pain

        You would have to be really subhuman to not be impacted

        I honestly believe the judge and jury may even tear up a little, as it is human to empathize and sympathize with her

      • Rachael says:

        Yes Lonnie, ALL her baby pictures. I would love to see them and I want Z and all his cretinous cockroaches to look at them and get it through their reptilian nervous systems that Trayvon was a person. A human being. People loved him and still do and justified or not, Z took the life of that child he took his breath and stopped his heart forever an i would like to see some real feeling, real remorse for the fact that he killed a person, a rwal person, he took away a life God made and I want to see that he understands what he did, even if he does walk. But I know that will never happen. Any of it, including the walking.

    • Two sides to a story says:

      It’s my understanding that the Hollister t-shirt photo they yell so much about was actually taken about six months before Trayvon’s death. Also that a number of different photos of both Fogen and Trayvon were given to the media and they made their choices.

      I too feel that the public is smart enough to see who both parties are and not define them by any particular pictures.

      • Shari says:

        Yes I think they complain about the Hollister shirt. They need to accept that their guy, Fogen, murdered a CHILD. Trayvon had just turned 17, he was Slim, his mother described him as having a babyface. Sometimes the truth is biased against you. Deal with it fogenites. He should not have murdered anyone.

        I will tell you why they are outraged. Because they believe black boys don’t exist. The second a black boy is born in THEIR eyes he is a hulking mandigo thug. People of ALL ethnic backgrounds empathize. We are feeling the same things we felt when we heard of Caylee Anthony and Natalee Holloway’s passing. They can’t deal with that, it makes their skin crawl. To see so many acknowledge the humanity of a murdered boy.

      • Jun says:

        They’re really fucking ridiculous (pardon my french)

        He was a kid, of course his photos would look like that of a kid

        When i was 17, I looked like a kid, so Trayvon being having just turned 17, is a kid

        The Hollister shirt photo is fairly recent and from what I heard he was 16 and about to turn 17 in that photo

      • Girlp says:

        Jonathan Capehart at the Washington post stated he was16 years old on that photo per Crump. What the zimcult wants is that image of a 35 year old rapper they see as crimminal to represent Trayvon even though Trayvon looked nothing like the man ( I know nothing of the rappers life). Trayvon’s various pictures growing up humanizes him and that is too much for them; the zimcult wants to define Trayvon just as O’Mara did.

    • groans says:

      Jun says:

      LMAO the Fogen Gang also wants Omara to request that no “young photos” of Trayvon allowed

      Where are we supposed to find photos that are not of a “young Trayvon”?

      He was killed when he was a kid so all his photos are kid’s photos

      Absolutely. The Killer Kamp has overused their “denial” psychological defense mechanism – using it not to buffer themselves temporarily while they gradually became able to deal with reality, but clinging steadfastly to it in order to reject reality altogether.

      At this point their “denial” is no longer a coping mechanism, it’s pathological. Reality still exists, and will continue to exist, whether they’re on board with it or not.

      And, too bad for them, it looks like “reality” will label the Killer Kamp’s friend/relative a “child murderer” after his conviction. I stumbled across this while browsing Florida statutes:

      921.243 Offenses involving minor victims; offender records. — At the time of sentencing of any offender for an offense involving a victim who, at the time the offense was committed, was a minor, the court shall stamp on the face of the judgment “VICTIM IS A MINOR” and shall note this fact on any document or information sent to the Department of Law Enforcement for its incorporation into the criminal justice information system of the Department of Law Enforcement.

      http://www.leg.state.fl.us/Statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&Search_String=&URL=0900-0999/0921/Sections/0921.243.html

    • racerrodig says:

      Then the only photos of Fogen are mug shots, since he does have a lot of those.

    • Malisha says:

      O’Mara should just fess up and move the court to:

      1 – Ban any photos ever been shown to anyone that may make Trayvon Martin look like a good person or a person who might not have deserved to be killed;

      2 – Ban any comments that might cause anyone to believe that it was wrong for the defendant to murder Trayvon Martin.

  17. “We will live blog on the road via livestream from a motorcycle somewhere deep in Tennessee.”

    If we don’t, look for us, that means we might be ON the road road kill. Bad thought but realistic, and somebody will have to carry on.

    • diary73 says:

      Huh?????

      • We have a motorcycle as our only vehicle, and tomorrow, we must travel a bit for an appointment that I have. Since I don’t drive the bike we will both go. We are planning to Liveblog or update on the hearing, from a WiFi spot at our destination. No worries, don’t get alarmed. It’s just that, given my past work in trauma, I am aware of the risks anytime folks get on a bike.

        Nothing more, carry on, just being realistic!

        • Xena says:

          Crane-Station. Here’s surrounding you guys with positive thoughts of protection and safety, and loads of love.

          • Thank you, and just a heads-up, we are re-thinking our plan. My appointment is at 11 AM, so lunchtime in Florida. At first, we were going to leave very early in the morning, but now it is raining, so we will stay here and blog the beginning, which starts at 8AM our time. We will be present for the first hour and a half, and then we will leave. As fast as Judge Nelson rips through things, she may be done, but if not, we may miss an hour or so of the post-lunch period, and that is where our readers will come in. We are confident that our good readers can provide great commentary during that time.

            Thank you for your comment, Xena.

      • diary73 says:

        Please be safe. You and Prof. Leatherman are very important to us.

      • Cercando Luce says:

        Dear Crane, remember this?

        You’ve taken care of the song’s last line, dread naught!

      • ladystclaire says:

        @Crane-Station, you guys please be safe and, depending on which part of Tennessee you are going to, you might not be to far from me here in the WNC mountains.

        But any way you guys drive safely and be careful.

  18. Malisha says:

    I predict:

    1. Fogen will not attend tomorrow.
    2. Shellie will not attend tomorrow.
    3. Rene Stotzman’s demeanor will be different tomorrow.
    4. West and O’Mara will ask for more time again.
    5. Judge Nelson will be cool as a cucumber in a spring salad.
    6. Trent will have a good day tomorrow. YAY!!

  19. Trained Observer says:

    Is there an over/under on whether Fogen attends hearings tomorrow and Friday?

    • racerrodig says:

      Depends on whether they can rustle up a jacket big enough. Oh and I believe they lost the hole punch they used for those extra belt holes.

      I think if he is there I should have a friend of mine who lives near there pull one of these…….He’s a real character and would do it in a heartbeat. He’d deliver one to the judge and say it was from Fogen. I suggested delivering a huge bouquet of flowers to the judge from O’ Mara and / of Fogen.

      Remember Fogen was calling Coreys office repeatedly last March / April. Get it on the record he’s sending flowers….

  20. diary73 says:

    I thought that anything concerning Trayvon’s school records were supposed to be kept away from the public unless it was okayed by Judge Nelson. When were these documents circulated?

    [when you have 2 or more links in your comment, the software intercepts and places it in my purgatory file]

    • Rachael says:

      This was sent to MO’M by the outhouse.

    • Two sides to a story says:

      I think these were part of an FOIA that Sundance Cracker presented at the Treestump.

    • elcymoo says:

      This is just pathetic. It’s old information, which the SPD released not long after the shooting occurred. Note that Trayvon was suspended for writing on his locker, not possession of the jewelry. It’s also irrelevant to GZ’s profiling, pursuing and killing Trayvon.

    • dianetrotter says:

      From reading the q&a, I see a) not following protocol when disseminating information, b) falsification of records, and c) office politics. Whatever information was provided was done so anonymously and may be part of a conspiracy. P. 48, lines 14-19 indicates racial tension in the police department and school district.

  21. Woow! says:

    I hope the prosecution calls the dispatcher who took Zimmerman’s call to the stand to testify regarding the comment he made. I am sure the dispatcher knows whether or not Zimmerman said “coon” or “punk”

    • SearchingMind says:

      Alan Reich would know that. Tom Owen would know that. Ed Primeau would know that. All of them could testify to that at trial. The over paid, over fed, over rated, not well funded and dumb FBI guys wouldn’t know a thing of what lay folks like you and me would’nt know.

    • ladystclaire says:

      I can tell you exactly what he said, he said F’ing COONS!

      • SearchingMind says:

        Yeah. Ed and Tom have said as much in the past. We know what GZ said, but expert opinion is really what counts. Alan will also be coming with more bomb-shell, while O’Mara has no clue of what that might be. That’s why O’Mara is very nervous. As O’Mara himself said in Court, my biggest problem/frustration “is that I don’t know what I don’t know”. Woe unto you if you are a lawyer and you can’t figure out what you don’t know, while that which you don’t know can make or break the case! The ‘I am begging you stuff’ make me cringe to the bone and feel depressed each time I think of it. Pretty horrendous stuff. It will do the same to jurors. Gz’s days as a “free” man are numbered.

  22. tonya B says:

    just watched the news and fogan defense fund is at 77,000 who on this earth would donate to a child killer WOW ……..#JUSTICE4TRAY

    • Jun says:

      I wouldn’t believe it until proof is shown

      When the IRS comes a knockin on the door regarding the fund, it’s gonna be fireworks I tell ya

      • Dave says:

        With the killer in prison, guess who’s going to be stuck with the taxes on all that? (HINT: She’ll have to do a heck of a lot of cosmetologizing to pay them.)

      • Cosmetologizing? More like prosmetologizing… sorry, I’m just coming from the dark side of youtube, must cleanse my mind.

      • Trained Observer says:

        Unless some of the racists and other dopes supporting Fogen exceed 13K individually, each donor can call whatever amount sent to Peter Pan a gift, and the recipient (Fogen) can call each separate donation a gift. No federal tax liability. For Fogen, Florida has NO state income tax.

        • Xena says:

          @Trained Observer.

          and the recipient (Fogen) can call each separate donation a gift. No federal tax liability.

          I’m not on my regular computer so don’t have the IRS code handy, but it’s my understanding that because GZ asked for the money, he has to pay taxes on it. Gifts are not requested. Charity is a gift if given to and distributed by a 501(3)(c) organization. GZ requested money for his living expenses which is the same as pandering. It’s considered income, subject to federal taxes.

          • cielo62 says:

            Xena- 🙂 I should have waited before I commented. But I agree that GZ is on the hook for that money. I have friends who run a 501C cat shelter. Before they got that designation, they rarely asked for money since it was all taxable. At some point you need more than cat food and kitty litter so you get that 501C.

            FROM THE CLUTTERED DESK OF Cielo62

          • Xena says:

            @cielo62.

            Xena- 🙂 I should have waited before I commented.

            Great minds think alike. 🙂

            But I agree that GZ is on the hook for that money. I have friends who run a 501C cat shelter. Before they got that designation, they rarely asked for money since it was all taxable.

            Exactly. Donations in kind, such as cat food, dishes, kennels, etc., are exempt. Cash is another animal.

            The money that GZ received last year should have been reported to the IRS by now unless he was granted an extension to file taxes. Funny that no reporter has tried getting that info.

          • racerrodig says:

            As I’ve said before, 2 of my customer / friends are IRS Criminal Investigators. They also do work for the FBI and other agencies and one is monitoring his donations. They are flat out lying about how much they’ve raised, but it’s taxable at around 30%.

            He panhandled this money, plain & simple.

        • cielo62 says:

          Trained Observer- IIRC the fact that GZ solicited those funds makes those funds no longer “gifts” but outright donations. And since GZ is not a 501C charity, those funds ARE taxable under federal law.

          FROM THE CLUTTERED DESK OF Cielo62

  23. Shari says:

    follow. thanks for informing us.

  24. Tzar says:

    Next motion in limine: State may not use such inflammatory statements as the “killed” or “shot”.

  25. fauxmccoy says:

    follow

    • fauxmccoy says:

      professor says

      We will live blog on the road via livestream from a motorcycle somewhere deep in Tennessee.

      Ciao, baby.

      fabulous! enjoy yourselves!

  26. crazy1946 says:

    Message to MOM: You only have two more business days to come up with a defense for your client! Just as a little hint, saying the victim committed suicide by forcing Fogen to pull the trigger and murder him will not work! Wonder how many cheese puffs, and pop tarts your client will be able to gorge himself on over the next few weeks! By the way his weight gain will not be a valid defense, I know you might argue that he will be too fat to go to prison, but I’m sure they will have a good weight loss program for him to participate in…..

    • Dave says:

      Does Florida still have chain gangs?

      • Trained Observer says:

        South Florida some work-release roadside clean-up crews … but I’ve never seen any chain gangs in pinstripes and literally in chains like in some southern states in decades past.

        • fauxmccoy says:

          i’ve seen chain gangs at the side of georgia highways, literally wearing stripes and chains like out of an old movie, but have not seen in florida. maybe it’s been disneyfied in florida though, so as to not scare off the tourists.

      • Dave says:

        Oh well, I hope they have some suitable work for him.

      • Nef05 says:

        @Dave –

        Oh well, I hope they have some suitable work for him.

        Working in a public zoo, cleaning up after the animals, in the Florida high summer heat and humidity sounds suitable to me. IJS

      • Dave says:

        I always thought that working in a zoo would be a great job. Now that you mention it though, doing it in Florida in the summertime…maybe suitable for someone of Mr. Z’s talents

      • Two sides to a story says:

        Since he likes to wrestle, mount, and subdue, perhaps he can wrangle with FL ‘gators.

      • ay2z says:

        Dave, zoo worker. Hmm….. that could be risky with the suspicious nature and profiling aspects and his over caution with safety, he’d be partoling the cages watching for who just stares at him, who wears a bandit mask of suspicion, and who hides its cach of nuts and shiny things away in super suspicious manner. Who sways from their tree branches, who threatens him with posturing roars, chest thumps or hoots, and most of all, who wears black on black on black, with or without white new Nike runners. Black Panthers vs the tan ‘puma’ kind, would come under surveillance and qualify as ‘profiled’, and the big cats of all races, would be watched carefully if they pace and circle, black birds, ravens and crows with their ability to talk back and immitate, would be at risk, and pack rats would be watched every moment they are out of the shiny object filled burrows.

        The snakes, well he’s in his element there.

      • towerflower says:

        Florida does have some jail workgroups. They normally put up a road sign stating that prisoners are working and they were the familiar orange jumper. Ones that get that duty are low risk offenders and you won’t see an shotgun carrying guard, although I’m sure the guard is armed. You’ll normally see them along the highways picking up trash or trimming/landscaping areas.

      • towerflower says:

        were should be wear.

    • racerrodig says:

      Hey, don’t forget Fogen loves Root Beer Barrels. In fact, he’s imitating one with his new physic. Rotund comes to mind.

  27. Two sides to a story says:

    The defendant “Zimmered” Trayvon. : /

  28. Judy75201 says:

    It’s alright. Whatever euphemisms Bernie has to come up with to describe the fact that fogen profiled, targeted, stalked, and then murdered Trayvon will be universally understood. I’m predicting some new memes will result ha.

  29. dianetrotter says:

    Given everything that is coming out, is there a possiblity Zimmerman will cop a plea?

    • Rachael says:

      Hell no. At least no IMO.

    • Unlikely, because the State is ready for trial with a very strong case and has no incentive to plea bargain

    • Trained Observer says:

      First a plea needs to be offered. Not much incentive — practically or politically — for Angela Corey to do that.

    • type1juve says:

      I don’t think so, he’s too arrogant for that. He’s still trying to understand why he was arrested in the first place. The nitwit thinks he was protecting his neighborhood while walking around like a loose cannon with a loaded gun.

      • Trained Observer says:

        He felt certain his screw-up would all blow over in no time flat.

      • Leisa says:

        I’m sure he thinks he will walk away from this just the way he has walked away from the other f***ups he has created. I don’t think he has a clue about what is coming.

        • Lonnie Starr says:

          I’m sure he thinks a trial is something like a popularity contest where if you get enough votes you get to stay on the island. Evidence doesn’t enter into it he thinks, all he as to do is make people think that he’s a nice sweet guy and he’s home free.

      • Judy75201 says:

        The nitwit thought he was growing a pair and would be lauded far and wide. Too dense to know that ain’t ever gonna happen.

      • Rachael says:

        Seems like daddy is having a harder time getting him out of this one.

  30. Leisa says:

    Bernie asked that Mom not be allowed to speak of in admissible evidence. Can Mom legally keep Bernie from using certain language to describe defendant? Is there a law that allows this?

    • Malisha says:

      There is no law that tells a prosecutor what words he’s allowed to use and what words he’s not allowed to use. How insane is that?

      But with regard to “profiled” — that is an essential part of the murder-2 charge. It is not even legally logical to substitute “described” for “profiled” because, please remember, Fogen did NOT describe Trayvon Martin. He PROFILED him. It’s in the charging documents, it provided the motivation for the killing, it was the subject of the NEN call, and it was absolutely proven by the fact that when Fogen wrote his statement to the police THAT NIGHT he referred to Trayvon Martin as “the suspect” sixteen (16) (“Count’em — 16) times. HE found Trayvon “real suspicious.” For what? For walking in the rain in a non-athlete way? For being somewhere Fogen did not think he should be? For having “somepin wrong with” him?

      Element of murder-2 = depraved mind.
      Evidence of depraved mind = Fogen profiled a harmless kid.
      Element of murder-2 = ill will/malice.
      Evidence of illl will/malice = profiling.

      No way that the prosecutor should be restrained from using the word “profiled” when it is in fact a part of the crime committed. West and O’Mara simply want to deny First Amendment rights to the prosecutor so they can try to fake up the whole process.

      Call things what they are.

      The Florida description of what constitutes murder doesn’t say: “causing another person to pass on to a better place as a result of feelings that may be unfortunate and a way of thinking that is not as gentle and lovely as we might prefer.”

      It says “killing someone with malice or ill will and a depraved mind.”

      Use the English language in a honest way and try this case. Nothing else will do.

      • Malisha says:

        Also, saying you can’t use the trial to slander a dead victim is not the same as saying you can’t avail yourself of words that are appropriate to describe actions that are criminal. No equivalency at all.

        BDLR made a motion to keep the defense from using the trial to “thuggify” the victim with inadmissible and untrue bullshit. This defense motion is pretending to be a tit for a tat but what it really is — is: trying to disarm the prosecution by preventing it from calling a murder a murder.

      • Two sides to a story says:

        At the very least, Fogen profiled Trayvon as a punk, one of those who always get away . . .

      • LeaNder says:

        No equivalency at all.

        That’s it. That’s why I do not see any tit for that in this. Sorry, Betty.

      • Jun says:

        LMAO I know the Zidiot who wrote the motion

        It’s this Canadian Redneck Weirdo named Nettles or some crap like that

        The motion will be denied because 99% of it is false and the state never used most of the language on claimed in the motion

        The only words that I can see the state using is “confronted” “profiled” “self appointed NW” because it’s just true

        They could also use “wanna be cop” because it’s true

        It’s only prejudicial if it can help show something that is untrue but the fact is, it is true

        No one appointed Fogen NW and in fact there are numerous complaints and fear regarding his antics

        • racerrodig says:

          Lord love a duck…..FogenPhoole said he got out of his truck and admitted he knew what Sean meant with “we don’t need you to do that…” and The Moron Man thinks that prejudicial…….

          A hahahahahahahahahahahahahaha…..!!!!! my ribs hurt form laughing on this crap.

          What’s next O’ Mara….your client has suffered enough stress, lets just let this go with “time served” What a dipshit.

      • Jun says:

        http://www.thefreedictionary.com/prejudice

        LMAo Omara seriously needs to learn to use a dictionary

        Seeing how he is having a hissy fit over words, he should learn the definition of prejudice and it does not apply to his motion whatsoever LOL

        The state never said many of the things he claimed

        The biggest lie being the not get out of truck claim

        Serino simply stated that the reasonable course of action would be to go back to his truck or stay in his truck or identify himself to Trayvon as a concerned citizen as Fogen is a complete stranger to Trayvon

        The state stated that the police told Fogen that stalking was unnecessary but Fogen disregarded the order and stalked Trayvon anyways

  31. Stormwatch says:

    That’s what I was hoping to hear. Thanks, and God Bless.

  32. Judy75201 says:

    Where have Malisha and Xena been?

    • Xena says:

      @Judy75201. I’ve been without my fave computer and am using my son’s just for now, which also has problems so I can’t stay on too long. Hopefully, I’ll have my baby back tomorrow evening and can catch up. 🙂

      • Judy75201 says:

        My sympathies. I’d die without my Chromebook! Good to see you.

      • SearchingMind says:

        Good to see you back, Xena. Now, where are ‘blushed’ and whonoze? Last I heard is that both are in Cuba. Are they not back yet? Oh well, time to retire now.

    • Malisha says:

      Judy, nice to see you.

      I traveled for three days because a friend of mine gave a concert and I was her “wardrobe mistress.” I never miss a chance to be a mistress for a while! 😀

  33. ic2fools says:

    follow….

  34. ic2fools says:

    Safe n Happy Cyclin’ Professor and Crane!

    A well deserved get away, enjoy ya’ll 🙂

  35. bettykath says:

    Thanks for the heads up. A bike ride thru TN…. enjoy.

    • Two sides to a story says:

      Yeah, how cool is that – live blogging from the road. Happy Trails!

      • Operacarla says:

        Professor…do you ever ride on The Natchez Trace? I love that road! Drove it to Tupelo to see where Elvis was born.Great trip!

    • Leisa says:

      Bettykath, this is a response to your earlier post. Mom’s motion says he does not want terms used throughout the trial, not just opening statements.

      • bettykath says:

        hmmm, then in that case, I expect the motion as stated to be denied. Words appropriate to the evidence should not be forbidden.

      • PiranhaMom says:

        @Leisa,

        Following up, O’Mara will request prohibition throughout the trial of the terms “pizza, hamburger, hot dog, fried chicken, pot roast, meat loaf, mashed taters, gravy, fries, chocolate cake, ice cream, cookie, malt(s), milk shake” or the generic “breakfast, lunch, dinner, supper or snack” due to the effect on the defendant under the “cruel and unusual punishment clause” and because they make his client drool, resulting in a concomitant “eeee-ewe” impact on the jury.

        Are we politically correct yet in Florida? Should the words “kill, murder, shoot(ing), bullet, blood, death” be unheard by the jury, because they might relate them to the conduct of the defendant?

        Gosh, we couldn’t have the jury start thinking he might be guilty, could we? How unfair is that???

      • bettykath says:

        Leisa, good catch. I reread the motion. MOM is asking for two different things.

        The opening statement of the motion seeks to prohibit the use of these words throughout the trial.

        Then, in a separately numbered point, he addresses the several words to not be used in the opening statement. But they are included in his first sentence request that they not be used at all..

        The words not to be used during opening statement:
        profiled, vigilante, self-appointed NWC, wannabe cop, he got out of the car after the police (or dispatcher) told him not to, he confronted Trayvon Martin,

        The rest of the motion explains why these words are unfair to the defendant, giving MOM’s take on the evidence: that the defendant did no profiling, that he wasn’t behaving as a vigilante, that he wasn’t a self-appointed NWC, that he wasn’t a wannabe cop, that he didn’t confront Trayvon. The evidence will show otherwise.

        I hope the judge is as careful at reading this motion as you are.

        Granting the motion to keep these words out of the opening statement isn’t disastrous, but granting the motion as a whole, would be.

  36. Stormwatch says:

    Good Afternoon Professor:
    Yesterday afternoon, Governor Scott signed into law a bill changing the state’s standard for accepting testimony from expert witnesses. They are switching from the Frye standard to the federal Daubert rule. The article says that Florida was one of only 10 states still using the Frye test. Will this in any way affect the trial?

    • bettykath says:

      What’s the effective date? Most news laws don’t immediately go into effect allowing time to educate those affected and to get procedures in place to deal with the new law.

      • diary73 says:

        Effective date is July 1, Bettykath.

      • bettykath says:

        thanks, diary. so the judge uses the frye procedure on june 5, not the new one.

      • Jun says:

        Should they not just have a hearing on the accuracy of the testimony of the expert?

        I remember watching Exhibit A, and a Canadian detective used a new science, which is using the prints from leather gloves, to enter into a trial, and the way he explained it made sense to the judge and jury and was thus entered and given weight

        Just because something is new, it does not mean it is not accurate and factural

        Let’s be honest, it sounds like a kid screaming for help on the tape

    • diary73 says:

      Storm, based on the professor’s June 1 post, which outlined the difference between Frye and Daubert, I think the new law works in the prosecution’s favor, allowing additional expert testimony from possibly Owen also. Reich, I think, will pass any test. For the judge to deny his testimony would be for her to proclaim that all trials he has been an expert for have erred.

      • Tzar says:

        that’s my my conclusion based on my understanding of the prof’s article as well

      • SearchingMind says:

        @ Professor,

        BettyKath asked a good question regarding the effective date of the new law. While I try to dig out that information, there is another aspect to be considered with regard to the applicability of this new law in the present case: the “ex post facto clause” in the Constitution that prohibits retroactive penal laws. Although this prohibition has always applied to the substantive law, wouldn’t a plausible argument be made that it should also apply to the procedural laws in criminal cases. As one can see in the present case, change in existing procedure can lighten the burden of the State and substantially increase that of the defendant with serious consequences. I have not been able to find out what the Florida Justices have to say on this issue.

  37. charlieh says:

    While I agree the discovery violation motion is a snipe hunt, upon rewatching the April 30th hearing I noted that in response to a question from the judge, de la Rionda indicated he had no further information regarding the cell phone data to disclose to the defense beyond the reports he had already furnished them. Is it possible he could get in trouble over a semantic quibble as opposed to any actual discovery violation?

    • changsterdj says:

      Listen again. Omara wasusing smoke and mirrors. BDLR asked him which report he referred to and Team Fogen never made clear what report they wanted. I dont think he will get in trouble for trying to understand and potentially accommodate the request baring objection.

  38. diary73 says:

    Oh, I did not realize that responding through email would automatically post to the blog. Feel free to delete my last post.

  39. Correction to this post, Sir. Wesley White, not Wesley West.

    Diary.

    Sent from my iPad

  40. diary73 says:

    Justme, the FBI has not issued a statement on who uttered the death cries. IIRC, it was a retired FBI person who said that it could not be determined whose voice was heard on the 911 tape. This person also admitted not to have utilized the techniques that the experts used. In addition, no recording of Trayvon’s voice was available at the time.

    Has there been another FBI report that I missed?

    • Xena says:

      The FBI’s jurisdiction was to investigate whether GZ committed a racial hate crime. Their examination of his NEN call was to determine whether he said “coons.” Regarding the 911 call that captured the screams, the FBI’s job was to enhance it to determine what GZ was saying to Trayvon. Their findings is part of their investigation, which is ongoing.

      Zidiots do not distinguish between the two recordings and get things muddled in their argument.

      • XENA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

        **hugs**

      • Xena says:

        @SG2. (((((hugs))))) Just online temporarily. Hopefully will be back tomorrow evening, ongoing.

      • LeaNder says:

        Xena, I think they also argued the material is not sufficient for a reliable analysis due to the exchange between w11 and the operator. This is a recurring theme in other reports.

        New as far as the Frye hearing is concerned could well mainly mean the software. There seem to have been some colloquiums on the issue. Maybe the FBI has not decided yet what to use. Complex matters anyway.

        I am curious what we will hear tomorrow.

      • Soulcatcher says:

        Xena, glad to have you back…….

      • Xena says:

        @Leander.

        Xena, I think they also argued the material is not sufficient for a reliable analysis due to the exchange between w11 and the operator. This is a recurring theme in other reports.

        Let’s go back to the comment that generated this issue. The fact is that the FBI investigation is ongoing and separate from GZ’s murder 2 trial. Zidiots try to combine the two.

    • I remember the FBI doc recommended a good quality headphones be used to hear the dialog in 911 call. So what we hear is there and they know it.
      Maybe that was not part of their investigation i remember they focused on coon and said they are not sure if he said coon (inconclusive) .

  41. Nef05 says:

    If I understand this post accurately, it is not only an opportunity for BDLR to “to inform the jury panel, the nation and the world on the eve of trial that Trayvon uttered the death shriek.”, it is also an opportunity for BDLR to have HIS experts publicly acknowledged by the court as “experts” which goes to influence the “weight” issues mentioned by the professor, to the benefit of the prosecution?

    Looks to me like a twofer, and I love a great bargain, especially when O’Mara will be the one paying for it.

    Hoodies UP!

    • LeaNder says:

      I am wondering strictly in this context if the challenge will not be purely academic. Meaning it may not be a new technique but defense’s argument will be it shouldn’t be used any more since academia does not consider it scientifically reliable.

  42. diary73 says:

    Was it Wesley West or Wesley White?

  43. JustMe says:

    Thank you for another great post, Professor.

    I have one question and from what I am reading from the nutters is the question of, “why didn’t the FBI hear what the voice experts heard”?

    I am also attaching the defense new Motion to Limine..All I have to say is… lolololol…Your thoughts or giggles? ..:)

    http://www.gzdocs.com/documents/0613/limine_use_of_terms.pdf

    Ciao, baby… 😀

      • racerrodig says:

        He says the term “profiled” is racially charged……what about the term we all heard “…fucking coon…” ?? is that an ambivalent
        term ???

      • Rachael says:

        No, remember according to Joe, it is a term of endearment.

      • changsterdj says:

        This is Omara’s argument

        1) Omara can tell lies and it’s ok

        2) Omara can slander and smear Trayvon and it’s ok

        3) Calling the cops repeatedly on black people and harassing them is not racially charged

        4) Dont use profiled. Is stalked a better word for what Fogen did?

        5)

      • Two sides to a story says:

        It is kinda funny, but I wouldn’t be surprised if Judge Nelson allows it since she gave the prosecution some similar leeway.

        I’m surprised OM didn’t motion about effin’ coons, punks, etc, though!

      • bettykath says:

        I think the request is reasonable for the most part. It’s a tit for tat request. The state requested and received a prohibition for things that the defense cannot say. So the state can’t say certain things in opening statements. This doesn’t preclude the state from presenting evidence that some of these things are actually true and then, in closing arguments, summarize the evidence that show that the defendant continued to follow after being told not to, that he has a history of reporting on young Black males, etc.

        fwiw, I heard “f….. punks” With so much controversy about what he actually said, it would be a side show that would distract from the main show to argue word was actually said. So, regardless of what I heard, I’ll concede that others heard something else and let’s drop it. Let’s move on to the substance: the other 911 calls, the emails warning of young Black males, the neighbor who left the neighborhood to run, etc. But even these things aren’t the big story.

        The big story is what happened 2/26/12 around 1900 hours. In neutral language what’s really important are: the following, the attitude reflecting by the following and the descriptive words used on the NEN call, the confronting, the killing, the forensics related to Trayvon’s body, the gun, the bullet casing, the (lack) of DNA, the (lack) of injuries to Trayvon. In rebuttal, open the flood gates.

      • bettykath says:

        I left out the written statement of 2/26 showing attitude and 911 call that includes the shot. Probably also the EMT report and Nurse Practitioners report that show superficial lacerations on his head and a healthy nose, maybe the photos taken at SPD showing no serious injury.

        I’m not sure the state needs to show the walk-thru video or the many interviews until the defendant testifies. It’s in these that the defendant claims self defense. Let him get on the stand make the claim then use these things to impeach him.

      • Wouldn’t this go to the depraved mind for a 2nd degree murder conviction? He did say this during his chase. So whether he said punks or coons, shouldn’t it be allowed no matter what word you think he said? I definitely heard coons and the only reason why its denied is because people deny racism even when it slaps them in the face.

        • What is the difference between “description” & “Profile”?

          So BDLR can say fogen “described” Trayvon as this & that ?

          • Yes, we all know what a description is.

            A profile is usually a race-based description, such as “driving while black,” which serves as a basis to support an investigatory stop.

            In this case, the defendant believed Trayvon was up to no good because he was a young black male in the community whom he did not recognize. He did not witness or describe any facts that would lead a reasonable person to believe that Trayvon had committed, was committing, or was about to commit a crime. That’s profiling.

      • changsterdj says:

        I do not agree with Betty

        Profiled seems a spot on and the right word

        Confronted is accurate as well due to witness 8 & 18, 1, 2, 3, Mary Cutcher and Selma

      • LeaNder says:

        What is the difference between “description” & “Profile”?

        definition profiling

        definition racial profiling

        O’Mara uses a rhetorical trick. Fact is profiling must not necessarily be racial profiling unfortunately it often is. Fact is too in Fogen’s special case his amateur profiling was obviously racial profiling.

        So with this little rhetorical trick he actually wants to make an aspect of the case that sticks out prominently disappear. Profiling can be but must not be racial profiling. It surely was in his case. Or if Trayyon had been white, I doubt he would be dead now.

        • racerrodig says:

          I defy The Moron Man to describe “..these assholes..” in a positive context, that is not medically related.

          If I call someone an asshole, it’s more than a description.

      • EdgySF says:

        Remember, GZ is a wannabe cop.

        Ever watch CSI? The agents on the show are called “profilers.”

      • lurker says:

        Seems like O’Mara is asking for an advance ruling on what the evidence shows.

      • ladystclaire says:

        @LeRoy Hudson, I may not be able to see too good but, I heard him say the words, “fucking coons” and, he can just stick the words is now saying he muttered under his stinking breath. you cannot make the word “punks” out of that, no matter how you try. he said f’ing coons and he knows it.

        This he knows will get him a hate crime charge for sure and, this is why is lying yet again. I hear very damn good and, he said what we all know he said. you can’t get the p sound out of the c sound no matter how hard you try to do it. he sat there with his smirking attitude and told a bold faces lie.

    • SearchingMind says:

      The first thing that struck me after reading the Motion is that it regards the exclusion of “terms” and not evidence (i.e. written/oral statements, object, etc .). That’s odd. “Terms” and ‘evidencen’ are two different things. Chapter 90 of the Evidence Code of Florida Statute deal with the admissibility of evidence, not “terms”. O’Mara however pursues the exclusion of certain “terms” without disputing the facts underlying such terms. Thus far, I disagree with BettyKath ( 🙂 ). Maybe the Professor can weigh in, but I do not think that sections 90.403 and 90.401 Florida Statute can be relied upon to force the State to (re)characterize/(re)“term” a set of its evidence the way it suits the defense.

      I will be back with more.

      • LeaNder says:

        TM, when I read the first item, profiling I thought, oh, so you admit one can say things, and then deny one has ever implicated what was understood. Interesting. Are you so aware of that, since that is exactly what you have been doing for quite some time now?

        The term profiling is obvious. I have no objection to keep vigilante out although that is exactly what he is in my opinion.

        But this is absolutely manipulative:

        Regarding the term “self-appointed neighborhood watch captain,” there is no evidence to support the contention that Mr. Zimmerman was self-appointed. Rather significant evidence exists in this case proving Mr. Zimmerman was asked by neighbors and others to help lead the program.

        Fact is George started to collect names and addresses of supporters for a neighborhood watch. He started it. There is a statement by a later female block captain that she informed HOA about his activities in the 2nd discovery. Ultimately Fogen was mainly chosen since he was the one that initiated the enterprise.

        Now you can of course make the word go away but not the facts. And since he knows quite well he cannot change the facts, all can is manipulate people’s perception about matters.

        Finally: 😉

        Finally, there is no evidence to show that Mr. Zimmerman confronted Trayvon Martin (in fact, there is evidence to support the opposite contention through even the State’s witnesses.) This also should not be argued by the State as it would be an improper characterization of the evidence and would argued in bad faith.

        Why doesn’t he tell us who exactly saw the encounter and reported it? I am curious. Could it be the only direct witness is dead now?

        I am absolutely not with Betty. This is again a propaganda move to shape public opinion not with facts but with selective truth and partly with outright lies as above. There is no one who witnessed how it all started, and he knows that pretty well.

        There is DeeDee yes, but he is working overtime to find something, anything to get her impeached. That is no secret.

      • LeaNder says:

        Sorry, SM.

      • PiranhaMom says:

        @SearchingMind –

        For O’Mara, this is just the opening act.

        Having asked for exclusion of “terms” he’s working hard with his Crayolas, requesting “exclusion of evidence” and “exclusion of the English language in the presence of the jury.”

        Next he’ll try to get the jury seats removed …

    • Tzar says:

      Well since we have redefined “exculpatory”, why don’t we redefine “profile” while we are at it?

      LMAO

    • The FBI expert’s opinion goes to weight, not admissibility, so the jury gets to answer that question.

      The other points can be disposed of with this simple objection:

      I object your Honor. Counsel’s statement lacks a proper foundation because it assumes facts not evidence. Move to strike and I ask you to instruct the jury to disregard the statement.

      Of course, sooner or later there will be an evidentiary foundation for all of those statements, including profiling and racism.

      I say racism because of the statement in the NEN call when the defendant said, “Fucking coons.”

      Since the State has apparently decided to go with punks instead of coons, looks like they have decided not to mention race or racism.

      Meanwhile, the stop was based on profiling because it certainly wasn’t based on anything else and that is what constitutes profiling.

      • Tzar says:

        Meanwhile, the stop was based on profiling because it certainly wasn’t based on anything else and that is what constitutes profiling

        Well that’s just your and convention’s definition, you have no idea what West’s definition is, till then….

      • Malisha says:

        Also, since Fogen was not a cop, there was no valid “stop.”

        Has anyone noticed the absence of some very important data fro the defense’s stories about what happened that night?

        If Fogen really HAD been beaten nearly to death and had to kill in self-defense, his first comment to the police would not have been, “I was yelling for help but nobody helped.” It would have been, “OMG I wish you got here one minute sooner; DAMN I should have called 911 instead of NEN!”

        And he would not have holstered his gun and spread out Trayvon’s hands looking for what Trayvon had been holding, either. He would have stood up and kept his gun drawn and directed at the person who had nearly killed him, so that if he was only pretending to be immobilized so he could leap at Fogen and polish him off, Fogen would be protected.

        Fogen plays us all for idiots but it only takes for those of us who really are — including the Outhousers, Dersh, Jeralyn et alia. The rest of us can say, “right, sure, lie to me…”

    • SearchingMind says:

      Re “Profiled”

      Florida Statute 90.403 provides that relevant evidence is inadmissible “if its probative value is substantially outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice, confusion of issues, misleading the jury, or needless presentation of cumulative evidence.” Florida Statute 90.401 states that relevant evidence is “evidence tending to prove or disprove a material fact.” The State is required to prove all elements of 2nd degree murder. In GZ’s case, GZ’s attitude towards- and mental impressions of Trayvon are crucial in determining GZ’s thought-process and state of mind in the minutes and seconds preceding the murder. Clearly, GZ attached certain determinative/identifying attributes to Trayvon, formed a specific image of Trayvon in his (GZ’s) head/mind and determined thereupon that Trayvon (who was committing no crimes) was a crime “suspect”, up to no good, looks like he is on drugs or something, one of the effing coons/punks and a**holes that always get away, called the cops to apprehend Trayvon, etc. That, in and of itself, is profiling. GZ did profile Trayvon as a criminal minutes before killing him. This state of mind and thought-process (otherwise termed “profiling”) are essential element of 2nd degree murder. Thus, the term “profiled” is clearly relevant.

      Beyond that, nothing could be more probative of whether GZ acted with depraved mind than his own utterances and mental impressions of his victim, Trayvon. As such, the probative value of GZ’s utterances, actions and the correct characterization thereof with the term “profiled” substantially outweighs any prejudicial effect that term “profiled” may possess/ possesses.

      As MM and racerrodig said already: MOTION DENIED!

    • SearchingMind says:

      Re “vigilante”, “wannabe cop”, “he got out of his car after the police (or dispatcher) told him not to do so”.

      As far as I know, the State has neither called GZ a “vigilante”, “wannabe cop” nor claimed that “he got out of his car after the police (or dispatcher) told him not to do so”. These words have been used by Mr. Crump. But Mr. Crump is neither party nor “opposing counsel (ahem!)” in the case.

      The State has stated that GZ, after agreeing not to continue following Trayvon, ignored Dispatcher’s instruction to follow/pursue Trayvon and continued to do so. That’s fact – as contained in the NEN-call. It is also a fact that GZ is a Neighborhood Watchman and identified himself as such on several occasion to the police during his numerous NEN-calls. Whether or not he is “self-appointed” is not prejudicial and may even be exculpatory (i.e. show his selflessness: someone who takes responsibility for the safety of others without pay).

      • LeaNder says:

        I seem to remember that this type of argument, O’Mara’s astonishing clairvoyance about what the state will do, was somehow supported by Jonathan Turely, at least that was the impression I got.

        Here he seizes the same type of easy denial, look they charged St. George after all. And since he is a completely innocent person the State necessarily must use dirty tricks. Of course I would prefer not to do it myself, but after all I have to defend my absolutely innocent client. It’s not me who plays dirty, they are, I only have to respond.

        To be fair AC has people from Florida’s department of tabacco and alcohol (? and firearms?) on their witness list. And poor O’Mara cannot change the missing former arrests and charges of Trayvon. So he has to take what he can get.

      • LeaNder says:

        Whether or not he is “self-appointed” is not prejudicial and may even be exculpatory

        I am starting to wonder if this could be about something else. A trick. Let’s suppose he has decided that BDLR’s weak point may be the occasional rash statement. Remember his Jose Baez comment, or for that matters quite a few others that caused big stirs. E.g. DeeDee’s age. Let’s suppose too that Nelson grants the motion, it could well happen. Maybe not profiling, he cannot make the affidavit go away.

        Could the fact that BDLR accidentally uses a term that may well pop up in his mind help with the appellate court and reverse a conviction?

        Many of the items don’t make much sense to me, since you don’t need to use the word but simply point out the evidence.

        On the other hand I cannot pretend I was a fan of the prosecutor in the Arias case, at least from the little I saw.

      • Malisha says:

        Leander, calling the defendant something like “self-appointed” or “wannabe cop” or “vigilante” is not evidence. It cannot be excluded. A prosecutor cannot be given a list of words he is forbidden from using. But he doesn’t have to use certain words instead of others — that is his choice — to fall within the court rules and the legal requirements and the judge’s own requirements for how she controls her court room. Let’s say BDLR were foolish enough to start his opening argument by saying: “This racist onanistic wannabe-cop vigilante murdered a saintly young child after viciously toctilizing, profiling and nethificating him in the most fucking provubialistic manner man’s ears have never laid eyes on!” O’Mara and West could get together and object and Judge Nelson could sustain the objection. But if after that BDLR were to PROVE the racism, onanism, vigilantism, tocilization, profiling, nethification and provubialism, he could probably obtain a conviction for murder.

        O’Mara: Boo hoo kind sir, here are some words that are very prejudicial to your client but that are both evident and true:

        Suspicion always haunts the guilty mind. (Shakespeare)

        False face must hide what the false heart doth know. (ditto)

        Oftentimes excusing of a fault doth make the fault the worse by the excuse. (ditto)

        In time we hate that which we often fear. (ditto)

        Suit the action to the word, and the word to the action. (ditto)

        Lawless are they that make their wills their law. (ditto)

        If you have tears, prepare to shed them now. (ditto)

        And of course, since your damned client thought he was going to apprehend a burglar when he killed Trayvon Martin, this one should ring in your ears for years:

        “The most peaceable way for you, if you DO take a thief, is, to let him show himself what he is and steal out of your company.” William Shakespeare.

        Too bad your guy did not study his words as well as you now want the prosecutor to do.

      • LeaNder says:

        O’Mara and West could get together and object and Judge Nelson could sustain the objection.

        This is an interesting point, although I still find Fred’s explanation that many/most of O’Mara’s motions are attempts to shape public perception. But what would he fear most? Could it be that BDLR drops a remark that, while he can object, is still out there, was still heard by the Jury?

        Concerning Shakespeare. Once you start to read and study him, you cannot stop being amazed about how little people change over the ages. Really amazing.

        Hoping you and your best girlfriend friend are fine. Concert? Does she sing too? Already found it. 😉

    • Xena says:

      Appears that O’Mara is trying to do what he failed to do at the first bond hearing, which is to attack the State’s charging information as lacking facts.

      The State’s charging info/affidavit sets forth that GZ profiled Trayvon, and it provides what the State means by profiling. What O’Mara is now attempting to do is give the State’s description of “profile” in the charge a new definition to avoid the State using it in opening comments. If Judge Nelson grants that motion, then the defense can allege in closing arguments that the State failed to prove it’s charging affidavit — BECAUSE — the State will be deprived from using the term “profile.”

      It’s O’Mara’s slick way of avoiding facts at trial, or at least, his attempt to do so.

      • LeaNder says:

        Perfect, that’s it. He only wants the term profiling out and adds a little to disguise the fact. That is a brilliant explanation. I was wondering. Thanks.

        Concerning the affidavit lacking facts, he is simply following Dershowitz. Didn’t he mention in that context it needed to contain exculpatory matters, I don’t remember too well.

      • Tzar says:

        if he did not profile Trayvon as a criminal then why did he call the police?

        • racerrodig says:

          And prefaced it with “Hey, we’ve had some break in’s….” and the inference is obvious.

          • Lonnie Starr says:

            …And I sincerely doubt that he’s talking about innocent people always getting away, most especially not those who are on drugs as this one appears to be, eh?

          • racerrodig says:

            And when you consider all those, that one, break in, he’s obviously profiling.

      • bettykath says:

        What some are missing is that the motion is applicable ONLY to opening statements. It doesn’t say the state can’t use those words in its direct examination, cross examination, rebuttal, or closing arguments. The state can lay the foundation to use those anywhere but in the opening statement (assuming the judge grants the motion). Anyone who is at all aware will know that Trayvon was being profiled and stalked. The state can even point it out.

      • bettykath says:

        btw, I do think that most of the motion should be denied, however, I don’t think it’s huge hurdle for the state to not use most of those words in the opening statement. No way the state will say at any point that the dispatcher to him not to get out of his car b/c it didn’t happen.

        There is a difference between describing what the evidence will show vs. what inadmissible stuff would show if it were relevent. Let’s see what the judge says.

      • Jun says:

        I think the motion is bloodclot stupid as hell

        So now, people can’t use the proper word to describe what occurred?

        Fogen did target and “profile” Trayvon as suspicious for walking while “look pu-bu-lack” and I am using his NEN call as an example

        I do not see how that is prejudicial or incorporates racial themes

        “confronted” is also accurate because if you take into account witness 8, 18, 1, 2, 3, Mary Cutcher & Selma, and the w11 scream tape, it shows this to be true

        The rest is stuff that the state never said at all

        It’s stuff everyone else says

        I call him a wanna be cop but I do not get why saying that would be untrue considering he did try to be a cop but was not allowed to be one and then he stalks and harasses numerous residents in that neighborhood pretending to be one

        • Shari says:

          I called Fogen a wannabe cop on twitter yesterday. The defense has this issue where they will accuse the state of doing something when it was actually the Martin family attorneys or others in popular media. Why must they run from truth? He DID want to be a cop. These are not things the pubic made up about him.

          (I’m not saying they wrote that in response to my tweet)

      • Xena says:

        @bettykath.

        What some are missing is that the motion is applicable ONLY to opening statements.

        While that is true, O’Mara is a snake. If prosecutors say “profiled” during trial, you can bet that O’Mara will argue that since the court precluded the prosecution from presenting that in opening statement, that it precludes the use of that word at trial.

        Then he will probably use his hands in a circular motion and say “For example…” giving an example that he did not use “thug” in his opening statement so if the state wants to use “profile” it gives him the right to use “thug.”

    • racerrodig says:

      Are they shitting us ?? #5, there is no evidence he got out of his truck…..” Duhhhhhhhhh I shot him right through the window and, um, the bullet went right around the corner…..duhhhhhhh.

      • Tzar says:

        he got out before the dispatcher implied that he should not.

        it’s the treeper delight

        • racerrodig says:

          I know the sequence of events, I should have made that clear.

          Fogen got out and after a few seconds Sean asked if….

          My bitch is the fact they don’t want mention of him getting out. I can guarantee this is a set up so the state can’t even say, he got out of his truck….

  44. Follow…….Have a safe trip…..

  45. Malamiyya says:

    Skinnymarinkadoodle

  46. Rachael says:

    Alpha!!!

  47. racerrodig says:

    Alpha. I believe that with all the talk about experts by the judge, she will be inclined to deny.

    • Rachael says:

      Sorry, I didn’t see you there. LOL

    • kllypyn says:

      I don’t need so called voodoo science to know who was screaming.RZJjr knows his brother wasn’t screaming his parents know He wasn’t screaming and even his lawyers know he wasn’t screaming. I know a teenagers voice when i hear it. that family is sick and has NO MORALS NO VALUES AND ARE A BUNCH DAMNED LIARS.

      • racerrodig says:

        Common sense and logic tell us who was screaming. I believe the judge will deny this Motion and it’s just 1 more spike in the box. I’ll take all the spikes we can find and bury that racist, lying sack of shit forever.

      • Malisha says:

        Here’s “voodoo science”:

        1. VOODOO forensic psychiatri: A person driving along can suddenly and soundlessly understand and identify criminal intent on the part of a previously unknown person walking near his car.

        2. VOODOO physiology and martial arts: A unarmed, preoccupied, lanky 160-pound teen can subdue an angry 205-pound man with combat training and security guard experience with a single punch.

        3. VOODOO neuroscience: An uneducated 28-year-old Afro-Peruvian with a loaded gun who cannot remember the names of three streets where he daily walks his dog and runs around with clip-boards knocking on homeowners’ doors can remember every small movement and sensation in the middle of a beating that nearly killed him.

        4. VOODOO psychology: A man who in four minutes changed his intentions from “following” a “suspect” to “looking for an address” to “meeting an officer I knew that I had called” to “returning to my schruck” and who only weeks later was giving his wife detailed instructions about what to do with amounts of money as small as nine dollars and change, and whose memory of watching a “suspect” misbehave changed from “shit, he’s running” to “he was kind of skipping or walking fast but not from fear” was simultaneously a decent American whose credibility should never be challenged.

        5. VOODOO sociology: A man loves his unborn children so much that he understands how terrible it is for actual parents who have an actual 17-year-old BORN child whom HE KILLED to have to bury that child. Yet he does not believe it appropriate for those parents to be “biased” and to try to put that buried child “on a pedestal.”

        6. VOODOO biomedical physics: A man lying prone on his back with a 170-pound kid MOUNTED on him and smothering his mouth and nose and smashing his head on the ground can reach into a holster on the right side of his body WHILE pinning the assailant’s hand by pressing or pinching it to his side with his upper arm, and thereby draw his gun and fire a shot directly into the assailant’s torso at ZERO angle and intermediate range.

        7. VOODOO sociology: Because Blacks have not been properly mentored they generally try to both profit from and to railroad Afro-Peruvians who are forced to self-defensively kill their unruly thuggish kids.

        That’s it for the voodoo folks. Get your pins ready and hoodies UP!

      • I remember when GZ’s father was speaking about his alleged screaming for help in one of his first interviews. He said at least once, he recognized the screaming from when GZ was a teen. I interpret that as him hearing the voice of a young man whose voice was changing, which is what I heard and still do hear every time I listen to that part of the 911 call. I doubt his father realized what he was actually saying but he may have been helping the prosecution without even realizing it.

    • cielo62 says:

      YOWZA! You guys write fast!

    • Lonnie Starr says:

      I think the judge will hold Omar’s motion until after trial so that she can deal with it properly. That should give Omar the shudders. Good!

      • groans says:

        Yes. She’ll have compiled a veritable collection of frivolous motions for sanctions filed by the defense, by that time – which will make it obvious and easy to conclude that sanctions against the DEFENSE is actually the appropriate remedy.

        • Lonnie Starr says:

          Yes, and with the trial over and done with, there will be no “waters to muddy”. She can give Omar the slamming he so richly deserves, even throw him in jail for contempt. A couple of 30 day sentences and a few tens of thousands in fines should do it. Leaving him nearly destitute when he finishes serving his time. Then he can try to live on the remnants of his remaining reputation if any. If not, he can find a new career which promises quicker financial rewards, to get some much needed cash in his jeans. I hear Disney World may need a new Goofy.

          • Lonnie Starr says:

            Oh and don’t laugh at those workers in those hot suits under Florida sun, they get paid very well I’m told and it makes good sense that they are. The last thing that Disney would want is to have some disgruntled, under pressure and under paid worker heaving about in the heat among the visitors, it would not make for a very nice scene.
            Nor would it be likely to escape media attention, if you can imagine what I could mean.

          • cielo62 says:

            Lonnie- he looks cut out for selling used cars.

            FROM THE CLUTTERED DESK OF Cielo62

          • Lonnie Starr says:

            Publishers Clearing house magazines?

      • Trained Observer says:

        Hope you’re correct. (I’d like to see Fogen get the shudders at frequent intervals during trial testimony not just at verdict time.)

        • Lonnie Starr says:

          He probably will after the Judge calls him to the bench, after he tries some underhanded “bell ringing” tricks. My guess is, if he violates some ruling the judge makes and causes a mistrial, Judge Nelson may have his law license, in addition to fines and jail time. Just a thought.

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: