Zimmerman: Judge Nelson Should Fine Mark O’Mara $1,500 for Publicizing his Motion for Prophylactic Sequestration

I believe Judge Nelson should fine Mark O’Mara $1,500 for posting his Motion for Prophylactic Sequestration of Witnesses in the Zimmerman case on his website.

I criticized this bizarre motion in Zimmerman: Defense Motion for Prophylactic Sequestration of Witnesses Reaches a New Low.

I said,

First, O’Mara is revealing the opinions of cops overseeing an investigation. Their opinions are irrelevant and inadmissible. The evidence is whatever it is and it alone constitutes probable cause to believe a crime was committed or it does not.

Second, revealing their opinions in a motion is an underhanded way of creating an excuse to publicize that they opposed charging Zimmerman with a crime.

Third, if they were genuinely concerned about a need to order witnesses to not collaborate with each other, they should have filed the motion under seal.

Fourth, it would have been in the best interest of the defense to have the witnesses collaborate with each other so that they all objected to filing criminal charges, but that sounds like what they were going to do anyway. Therefore, there was no need for the relief he sought in the order.

I concluded:

For all of these reasons, seems pretty obvious to me that the real purpose of the motion was to publicize what should have been kept private; namely, that the brass did not want to charge Zimmerman.

The more that I think about this motion the more irritated I become.

The scope of permissible discovery is very broad and not only includes the right to discover all information relevant to the lawsuit; it also includes the right to discover all information that might reasonably be expected to lead to the discovery of relevant information.

Because the scope of permissible discovery is so broad, there have to be some limitations on what the lawyers can do with the information they obtain through discovery. Keeping the information private is one such limitation.

Let us now take a look at depositions.

Lawyers depose (i.e., question) the opposing party’s witnesses under oath in the office of the lawyer who represents the opposing party. Other than the two lawyers and the witness, the only person present is a certified court reporter who administers the oath to the witness and records everything said by the lawyers and the witness during the deposition.

There is no judge to rule on objections. Instead, objections are noted for the record and the witness answers the question. Later on, if the trial court orders the deposition published and it is read in open court, the judge can consider the objection and rule on it. Depending on the ruling, the answer given by the witness during the deposition may or may not be read in open court.

In extraordinary circumstances during a deposition, the lawyers may suspend it to go to the courthouse to seek a ruling on an objection before resuming. The basic idea, however, is to allow the lawyers to conduct a deposition to create a thorough and private record of witness responses.

I emphasize the importance of privacy because the scope of a deposition may intrude into sensitive and private matters that might embarrass a witness, or protected matters such as trade secrets that might compromise a business, if publicized.

O’Mara’s very public revelation, in his motion for prophylactic sequestration of witnesses, of what the witness disclosed during the deposition about the opinions of the members of the group of Sanford Police Department officials regarding whether to charge Zimmerman with a crime is a major game misconduct because he revealed private information that most of the members of that group did not believe Zimmerman should be charged. Not coincidentally, that information could benefit Zimmerman by influencing prospective jurors to believe that Zimmerman should not have been charged with a crime, let alone second degree murder.

Why is that bad?

The answer is that a jury verdict must be based only on the evidence admitted in court. The opinions of the police officials are not evidence and have no evidentiary value. The rules of evidence do not permit that type of testimony to be presented at trial because it might influence jurors to base their verdict on opinions or speculation of the police officials rather than the evidence.

O’Mara knows this or should know it and this is why he never should have filed his motion for prophylactic sequestration of witnesses. BTW, this is an extraordinary and unusual request that I have never heard of and I do not believe there is any legal authority that supports it. Nevertheless, he was so eager to publicize the dissenting opinions of the police officials that he filed the motion without citing any legal authority authorizing Judge Nelson to grant the relief he requested, despite a rule that requires a lawyer to cite legal authority in support of any request to have the trial court do something.

Then he published his motion on his website for all the world to see.

This is why I am so offended by what he did.

I would be furious, if I were Judge Nelson and I would strike the motion, hold him in contempt, and fine him $1,500. I would do this in open court at Friday’s hearing for all the world to see. I also would warn him that if he does it again, I would put him in the slammer for a week.

Then I would ask him to give me a reason why I should not impose a gag order as requested by the prosecution.

I would, of course, give due consideration to the Florida Sunshine Law and the public’s right to know what is going on. I would probably end up denying the motion for the gag order without prejudice. That would allow the prosecution to refile it, if it should decide to do so.

BOTTOM LINE: O’Mara needs to stop trying his case in the Court of Public Opinion.

147 Responses to Zimmerman: Judge Nelson Should Fine Mark O’Mara $1,500 for Publicizing his Motion for Prophylactic Sequestration

  1. jm says:

    Professor says: “……. if I were Judge Nelson I would strike the motion, hold him in contempt, and fine him $1,500.”

    It doesn’t seem a fine of $1,500 would bother O’Mara in the least who admittedly makes $400 an hour with continuing donations from Zimmerman supporters coming in.

    Sorry for the question that law professionals probably know the answer to but If he is held in contempt, what would that mean to O’Mara?

    If the judge strikes the motion will that mean anything to O’Mara because to me it seems the motion was meant to affect public opinion and to gain further support, financial and otherwise, and he has already accomplished this goal.

  2. grahase says:

    With this motion and the other antics he has pulled, he deserves more than a fine. $1500.00 is a drop in the bucket for what he has been doing outside of legal protocol and a disgrace to the legal profession as a whole. Baez got away with alot of the crap he pulled. I think OMara thinks he can do the same. Something has to be done with the lawyers in the State of Florida.

    • i’ve been worried about baez too.
      i know the florida bar investigated him for something, rather benign imo, compared to the out right lies about molestation! i think it was about filing paper work or something.
      Since then i haven’t seen him actually take a case. I remember right after the trial even the media pretty much black balled him. then, remember he tried to weazel into the media when the other woman went missing in aruba by acting as if he was representing the guy they arrested. since then i’ve heard he ‘helped’ the Colorado shooting victims sue, but thats it!
      I’m not sure he has his licence anymore.. does someone know if we can look it up online?
      Remember when GZ was in jail he was tring to get him to hire him instead of Omar? But Omar wanted the spot light all to himself!
      I think these lawyers who become infamous repping guilty murderers in trial by ambush end up paying for it one way or another!

      PS, Dear Beaz, i wish you nothing but the worst. have a great day :)

  3. Two sides to a story says:

    I’m confused. I can see why you don’t like the motion because it makes official what was already common knowledge. We know through media interviews that the majority of LEOs in this case didn’t see – or think they didn’t see – enough evidence to charge GZ.

    Could you explain why there’s a difference between the public already knowing this and GZLC emphasizing the point with a motion?

    I’m guessing because one is hearsay and the other makes it seem as if the situation is official discovery, hence influences a potential jury pool more than the hearsay knowledge. ?

    • Jun says:

      Omara is trying to spin it to mean something. I dont think its gonna work. There’s too much evidence that its George’s fault.

      • Two sides to a story says:

        Hopefully stuff like this will turn around and bite them in the butt, just as the Hannity interview and other things.

        Is this motion from OM and West’s arsenal, or do you think it was something stimulated/ proposed by a Treehouse type or GZ ?

      • Jun says:

        I think its a combination of both. Personally, I would object his motion or any time during SYg or Trial if he tries to state things that he has not laid a foundation on. There’s just too much evidence against Zimmerman for them to believe Omara, but he will attempt to spin it. Its nothing really. Omara tried to spin the cell phone thing and it turned out to be fluff. My guess is this is fluff too. One just needs to review the 911 tapes, especially witness 18. She saw the final moments.

    • The reinforcing effect of confirming general information several months later with specific information obtained by deposition under oath.

  4. Two sides to a story says:

    Going back and rereading, Professor, I guess your answer would be this:

    “The answer is that a jury verdict must be based only on the evidence admitted in court. The opinions of the police officials are not evidence and have no evidentiary value. The rules of evidence do not permit that type of testimony to be presented at trial because it might influence jurors to base their verdict on opinions or speculation of the police officials rather than the evidence. ”

    It takes me awhile to absorb some of this legal-ese!

  5. Xena says:

    In civil cases in Illinois, a party may file a Motion for Summary Judgment and therein, cite from deposition transcripts to support why the case, or count(s) should be dismissed. It sounds to me that MOM is trying to use his “rubber for the defense’s exclusive use” motion as a Motion for Summary Judgment in effort to have charges against GZ dismissed. In the alternative, he is trying to flush out the State’s strategy. However, his argument is circular. It was because the SPD failed to conduct impartial investigation that the Governor appointed a special prosecutor who then conducted investigation.

    By posting his “Rubber for the Defense’s Exclusive Use” motion on the website, he appealed to GZ’s supporters to present many conspiracy theories. That does taint the jury pool.

    Judge Nelson should sanction O’Mara if for nothing else, failing to provide a legal basis in his motion, for his request. In some states when attorneys are sanctioned, it must be reported to the Bar Association. Maybe MOM should be served with a dose of what the treeslummers have told him that they want done to attorneys Crump and Jackson.

    • Tzar says:

      “Judge Nelson should sanction O’Mara if for nothing else, failing to provide a legal basis in his motion, for his request. In some states when attorneys are sanctioned, it must be reported to the Bar Association. Maybe MOM should be served with a dose of what the treeslummers have told him that they want done to attorneys Crump and Jackson.”

      I totally agree

      • racerrodig says:

        Well said all….I could not agree more. His stance that if an officer said there was no crime….hey, it must be true. He did the same thing at the 2nd bond hearing and Judge Lester stated to the effect that argument by counsel in not evidence, or to that effect.

        He’s a creep and he knows Z is done. In my opinion Z has some Manson like grip on him. Maybe Da – Da told him he better get GZ off …………..or else.

    • Jun says:

      I agree… let’s do the same to Omara as he is planning to do to others.. its only fair

      • Xena says:

        I agree… let’s do the same to Omara as he is planning to do to others.. its only fair

        MOM’s last minute filings are disrespectful to judicial economy. Courts have Rules. I am at a disadvantage of knowing all of Florida’s Rules, but in Illinois, even emergency motions must be filed at least 3 days before the hearing is scheduled.

        MOM has had more than a week of knowledge of the State’s motion for a gag order. For him to wait until the 11th hour and demand that they drop everything and give him evidence is nothing more than a gorilla sticking his chest out and pounding on it.

        Also, for MOM to do this at the 11th hour means that GZ’s supporters failed coming to his aid. Oh well, maybe he will realize that there are only 50 of them nationwide and the bunch together have the equivalent of a 6th grade education and 3rd grade reading comprehension.

      • Jun says:

        Every county in the USA has standards of practice and its criminal for a defense lawyer to partake in actions as well as grounds for disbarment. I do not know Florida law but I am very certain they have standards of practice and criminal sanction if a lawyer uses unlawful actions to win a case.

      • bettykath says:

        Right. [sarcasm]

        An eye for an eye and soon everyone is blind. Not only that everyone ends up in the gutter.

      • Jun says:

        We arent exactly doing the same as him but he should get called out and face something for his actions. He’s a lawyer, and either defense or prosecution can use their powers to abuse, thats why both sides should have standards of advance. I am not asking for revenge per se but proper actions and punishments for perverting the court. A trial should be fair to both the victim and the defendant in this case.

        • Lonnie Starr says:

          The court has enough problems without sweating the small stuff. Like the OJ trial, Judge Ito had vast problems that had to be overlooked to keep him on the case (His wife was an LAPD Captain who had access to all of the police files and was over seeing the cases that many a rogue cop was pursuing or in trouble for.).

          I think they had to scrape the bottom of the barrel to find MOM, so, barring him going into a bank and taking hostages, he’ll be allowed to survive. On the plus side his shenanigans are closing out appeal issues. Thereby making any resolution of this case more “durable”.

    • KA says:

      O’Mara was, in recent years, president of the FL Bar Assoc.

      I suspect he is well protected there.

  6. bettykath says:

    In a similar vein, O’Mara’s possible misconduct.

    Shellie lied at the bond hearing about available funds. George didn’t say anything. I don’t know what O’Mara said. It is alleged that O’Mara knew about the money – George said that he told O’Mara.

    Shellie is charged with perjury. George had his bond revoked, spent time in jail and then had to post a much higher bail.

    If O’Mara knew about the funds what is the interest of the court and how is it handled? Is there a consideration that if O’Mara were held to account that it would affect the perception of a fair trial for GZ?

  7. Tee says:

    MOM, what can I say he seem to be as sleazy as George, A fine would be perfect although I like jail better. A kid is dead and he’s over there playing a game of chess with the law.

    • Malisha says:

      He’s not playing chess. Chess has rules.

      • Tee says:

        So does the justice system but he seem to be out smarting them at every turn. Having rules doesn’t mean that one will play by them as we can see MOM finds a way to bend them just just so, that it doesn’t break.

  8. Groans says:

    The defense filed a “Demand for Specific Discovery” at 11:47 this morning demanding that the State turn over – by 5:00 this afternoon:

    “Any and all evidence, documentation or information that the State intends on using at the hearing on the State’s Second Motion for Gag Order to be heard by the Court on Friday, October 26, 2012.”

    I have a hard time seeing reasonableness or good faith in this filing. I hope there was at least a phone call to the SA and some agreement on this before it was filed.

    • Jun says:

      Can the state do the same back to Omara, by simply surprising them with their motion, like he did with his recent emergency motion?

    • Xena says:

      All MOM has to do is look at the gzlegalcase website. The projections are so numerous they cannot be posted here. However, a few samples are:
      “…there is nothing to support the contention of racism in the Zimmerman case.”

      “Mr. Crump should acknowledge that the George Zimmerman case is not about race, and he should focus his efforts on a case where a black man has been wrongfully arrested for murder in a clear case of self-defense, and he should champion that cause.”

      “The Zimmerman family has been through a lot, and they have been frequently misrepresented in the media, so we do not begrudge Robert for wanting to speak out and set the record straight.”

      These statements project a message to the public that is not simply FOR GZ, but against Attorney Crump and justification for Junior.

    • Malisha says:

      Just because he demands something doesn’t mean he gets it. What he’s doing is trying to build a record of saying, “We demanded this and we moved for that and they refused and they hid this and they lied about that and they aren’t being fair” and blah blah blah so his crowd carries on more so he can get a plea for his guy.

      Anybody notice something strange? In this case, and probably this case alone, the shrine with the teddy bears and flowers for the dead kid was taken down; there’s no activity and no public weeping and wailing for the young man, no memorial — look at Sanford. Look at that low-class Hell-Hole. That’s where George thought he would get away with murder. And only because the State of Florida appointed someone with higher authority did his little plan get foiled.

      This is theater.

  9. Xena says:

    Professor, have you checked your email today?

  10. Xena says:

    An excellent portion of the only comment submitted on gzlegalcase regarding “Race and George Zimmerman”:

    “Third, the ones I hear talking about “race” at this point are the Zimmerman family and supporters – and now, unfortunately, Mr. Zimmerman’s lawyers. So while your article purports to want to keep race out of the case, the fact that the defense side constantly raises it sends a contradictory message. And your accusation that Mr. Crump is “projecting race” onto the case amounts to … well … projection.”

    Nuff said, and well said.

    • Jun says:

      There’s a reason the FBI & DOJ got into the case, and also why Bill Lee was eventually fired. Just because Omara says it aint (he pretty much just covering his ears, screaming lalala), dont mean there is no racial connotations. The actions of that night, George’s own statements and actions, George’s dad’s statements and actions, RZ Jr’s actions and statement all scream race is the issue.

      • Xena says:

        The actions of that night, George’s own statements and actions, George’s dad’s statements and actions, RZ Jr’s actions and statement all scream race is the issue.

        Right!! Among GZ’s actions for that night, he was convinced that he had killed a member of a street gang and there would be retaliation. Why pick a fight with who he believed to be a “goon” a if it means abandoning your job and home? If he truly believed that, he would have waited for the police and not exposed himself, PERIOD. IMO, he ran and hid for another reason.

      • Jun says:

        Zimmerman’s own dad said George would do the same to Asians if Asians were who he suspected. That alone says that George generalizes based on race, and based on his deranged perception, he will terrorize someone with no proof of the victim’s wrongdoing (much like the bike fiasco where he terrorized a kid and it turned out the kid never stole the bike)

    • rachael says:

      Yeah, and he doesn’t want this case tried in the media, yet he has something going pretty much every day.

      • Xena says:

        While I think that MOM may attempt to taint the jury pool, I think his public releases are to play to those he hope will pay his legal fees. IMO, MOM is trying to turn this case into everything other than a self-defense case.

  11. Jun says:

    I actually believe something will happen to Omara at this hearing. His own actions show this. The guy claims to be careful of what he says and speaks and has not been objectionable, then asks a bunch of racists and bigots to find his objectionable statements (LOL). If the guy says so much and cant even remember, he has obviously lost control of himself.

    • Brown says:

      test test test….
      checking email settings

    • Xena says:

      If the guy says so much and cant even remember, he has obviously lost control of himself.

      Okay, let’s go with that excellent logic. If MOM hasn’t said anything objectionable, then he should not be opposed to a gag order.

      Why would he be so opposed to it? Would a gag order interfere with his ability to defend his client? Taint the jury pool? Keep racial tensions stirred? Put a muzzle on his staff? Prevent the “oops” by releasing confidential discovery material?

      • Jun says:

        Even Piers Morgan, the friendly British broadcaster has brought up the low brow method of Omara trying to raise funds with his “if you would do the same as George” mess but then claims he accepts no funds from racists and then claims there are racists on both sides. I am all for George getting a fair defense and proper counsel, but there are times where professionalism is warranted, and Omara just leaves a bad taste in people’s mouths.

      • KA says:

        If he is gagged, he cannot raise funds…

        That is it.

  12. Brown says:

    @racerrodig:
    I sent you a reply to “racerr” but I think it was in an older thread, did you get it?
    : ^ )

  13. bm says:

    But starting in 2011, Zimmerman’s calls increasingly focused on what he considered “suspicious” characters walking around the neighborhood—almost all of whom were young black males.

    On April 22, 2011, Zimmerman called to report a black male about “7-9” years old, four feet tall, with a “skinny build” and short black hair. There is no indication in the police report of the reason for Zimmerman’s suspicion of the boy.

    On Aug. 3 of last year, Zimmerman reported a black male who he believed was “involved in recent” burglaries in the neighborhood.

    And on Oct. 1 he reported two black male suspects “20-30” years old, in a white Chevrolet Impala. He told police he did “not recognize” the men or their vehicle and that he was concerned because of the recent burglaries.

    The police reports were amended to bolster Zimmerman’s claim of self defense. “Initial police reports never mentioned that Zimmerman had a bloody nose or a wet shirt that showed evidence of a struggle.” [Miami Herald]

    The police did not test Zimmerman for drugs or alcohol. A law enforcement expert told ABC that Zimmerman sounds intoxicated on the 911 tapes. Drug and alcohol testing is “standard procedure in most homicide investigations.” [ABC News]

    Police ignored witness whose account was different from Zimmerman’s.“One of the witnesses who heard the crying said she called a detective repeatedly, but said he was not interested because her account differed from Zimmerman’s.” [Miami Herald]

    An eyewitness at the scene said Zimmerman “didn’t appear hurt.” [CNN]

    Martin’s funeral director said his body showed no signs of fight. “We could see no physical signs like there had been a scuffle [or] there had been a fight… The hands — I didn’t see any knuckles, bruises or what have you. [CBS]

    EMS records from the night of the shooting show Zimmerman sustained no serious injuries.New York Daily News]

    The incident occurred in a tiny gated community Zimmerman patrolled regularly. [Miami Herald]

    Police have Trayvon Martin’s cell phone but never contacted his girlfriend. [Miami Herald]

    ZG History

    • Groans says:

      I know. Go figure….

      The tip-off to me that there was something VERY wrong here was GZ’s own NEN call. That recording told me a story that I could not have envisioned.

      One thing I’ve been grateful for, though, is Miami area news agencies (and a few others). They sometimes focus on the case from their own citizen-victim’s viewpoint, which Orlando news organizations haven’t appeared quite as interested in developing.

    • rachael says:

      “On April 22, 2011, Zimmerman called to report a black male about “7-9” years old, four feet tall, with a “skinny build” and short black hair. There is no indication in the police report of the reason for Zimmerman’s suspicion of the boy.”

      He was “concerned” about the boy. I read the actual report. He was walking toward a school on a busy street. Alone. George was concerned.

      Toward a school. C’mon. It isn’t like the kid was 4 or 5.

      Lucky he didn’t chase this kid and shoot him.

      • Xena says:

        On April 22, 2011, Zimmerman called to report a black male about “7-9” years old, four feet tall, with a “skinny build” and short black hair. There is no indication in the police report of the reason for Zimmerman’s suspicion of the boy.” He was “concerned” about the boy.

        Yeah. Sure. Like he was concerned about his 8 yr old cousin maybe?

      • KA says:

        I suspect he called to implicate what he considered irresponsible parents…not the boy….he saw an opportunity to take a dig at some “irresponsible” African American parents….

        I am sure he has seen many children on their way to school. It was the “black” that stood out

        He would say he was not a racist, he just notices race and ethnicity as “warning signs” [see also his social media posts about "Mexicans" and guns]..

  14. Malisha says:

    Good work, bm, you have the frame of the house they failed to enter when they couldn’t find the elephants in the rooms.

  15. Malisha says:

    You know, I’m white, and when some whites do something that brings shame upon our race, it really gripes me! Here’s O’Mara and Here’s Zimmerman and Here’s all these Zimmerman family members and they’re all doing things that bring shame upon ME and I want to disown them!

    It’s like when somebody Black (like, say, Joe Oliver) does something that shames HIS people. It’s so embarrassing! Can’t somebody shut these people up?

    • Jun says:

      They’re an embarrassment to the human race. I am not white and I shake my head at Zimmerman and his cult.

    • rachael says:

      I’m white too and I feel like I have to apologize for people like that. I don’t understand it. It causes a pain so deep within.

    • rayvenwolf says:

      Every group has their evolutionary throwbacks. GZ’s family is just one of the worst examples of it. I’m all for standing behind a relative, but there has to be a point where you draw the line in the sand and say this is not ok. Clan zim in no way shape or form has a problem with the racists and bigots taking up for GZ. I can’t wait for them to act like fools when he’s convicted. You know the aren’t going to sit there quietly.

    • KA says:

      I am also white. The underlying white privileged sap that oozes from this case is as sickening as the direct aspects of the racial comments. The overarching superiority and entitlement is really just sickening.

      Hey, since O’Mara is trying to sway public opinion and get more funds. Why does he not do a media tour with the mother or the two kids he supposedly mentored?

      If I were promoting a product, I would surely before some of these other tactics. They have kept race front and center with his recent family’s media interviews….why not “prove” he loves black kids by parading them around. Or maybe the homeless he stuck up for….

      For a legal team lacking in morals, I am not sure why they would not…

      [unless of course they are not what they were first presented as...]

  16. Xena says:

    From the Orlando Sentinel, in pertinent part;

    “George Zimmerman’s lawyers Wednesday notified prosecutors that their witness list now includes a who’s who of the Sanford Police Department’s chain of command at the time of Trayvon Martin’s death, including the police chief, major crimes captain, sergeant and case detectives.”

    “There is no indication that the officers have approached defense attorneys, saying they wanted to help Zimmerman.”

    “Defense attorney Mark O’Mara on Friday said he was surprised when Sanford police Sgt. Joseph Santiago testified during a deposition last week that after more than two weeks of daily meetings at the police department at which officers agreed there was not enough evidence to charge Zimmerman, Serino signed paperwork that he turned over to Wolfinger, saying he had probable cause to charge Zimmerman with manslaughter.”

    IMO, no police dept. should have to meet daily for more than 2 wks to decide whether or not to charge a person who killed even when they claim self-defense. After hearing the NEN call, and watching GZ’s re-enactment, there was enough there to decide that he was lying and his story didn’t line-up with physical evidence.

    Actually, MOM is making this easy for the State. On cross, the State will embarrass those who have already been embarrassed by the loss or demotion of their jobs.

    http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/local/trayvon-martin/os-george-zimmerman-defense-witnesses-20121024,0,4087099.story

    • Xena says:

      I for one am happy that MOM has named SPD officers and Serino as defense witnesses. Now the State can ask:
      1. Why did you allow George Zimmerman’s vehicle to be removed from the area without verifying where it was parked first?

      2. Why wasn’t George Zimmerman tested for drugs and alcohol?

      3. Why did you allow George Zimmerman to be cleaned up at the scene without taking swaps of the blood on his hands?

      4. When you allowed George Zimmerman to use the bathroom in the police station, did anyone attend him to make sure he did not remove evidence from his person?

      5. Why in none of his interviews, was George Zimmerman asked why Trayvon Martin’s body was found 40 ft from where Mr. Zimmerman said the altercation occurred?

      6. During the two weeks that you met to discuss whether or not to charge George Zimmerman, did you have any experts listen to the screams in effort to determine whether they are made by Mr. Zimmerman?

      7. During the two week that you met to discuss whether or not to charge George Zimmerman, did you compare his NEN call to his re-enactment?

      • Jun says:

        I think this move actually gets the cops in trouble for not doing a proper job, because those mistakes actually helped Zimmerman

        • Xena says:

          I think this move actually gets the cops in trouble for not doing a proper job, because those mistakes actually helped Zimmerman

          For sure. The State will rip them a new one.

      • Jun says:

        Its good thing Zimmerman excitedly uttered where his car was… and then they can also located the car’s position with the camera footage, and use the reflections in the pool, clean it up, to get a good approximation of the car…

        • Brown says:

          IIRC correctly an officer ran the plates of two vehicles on 2/26/12. The dispatch answered, Zimmerman. If that officer is on the witness list, hopefully he will remember the location of the vehicle.

      • Jun says:

        Yeah, he should have them. From what I heard, cops have to take notes on everything.

      • grahase says:

        ^The second vehicle had a private plate.

      • whonoze says:

        Except Angela Corey is a political ally of tea-bag governor Rick Scott, and has pretty clearly been given marching orders to protect the reputations of Norm Wolfinger and the SPD. The idea is to take GZ down to take pressure OFF the SYG law to keep the NRA donors from getting angry, and take pressure OFF the racist LEO agencies to keep the redneck voters from getting angry and so on. Forget the nightmare forest, just look at this (small) twisted tree. Her story, and I’m sure she’ll be sticking to it, is that ‘We all were working on the investigation and we were getting around to charging GZ in due course.’

        So O’Mara’s move here puts Corey between a rock and a hard place. She does not want any of Xena’s questions to be asked. If events force her in that direction, I think we can guess how it will go: the lowest possible folks on the totem pole will be scapegoated. Timothy Smith and Ricardo Ayala could be in for a hard time possibly. But my guess is they’d sacrifice the already demoted Chris Serino. Yeah, that might seem weird to us since he seems to be the main force behind getting the evidence we do have against GZ and seeing that the investigation didn’t just fold up right away. But he was playing a political game, trying to negotiate the internal dynamics of the SPD that wanted this all to go away, so he did lots of things he can be blamed for. And he was the lead investigator at the crime scene, so he can take the fall for the truck. He told the witnesses it wasn’t Trayvon screaming. He was the one Mary Cutcher and W18 complained about disregarding their accounts…

        I’ve said before, I think Serino is the one person who knows all the hidden dirt and the skeleton-filled-closets in this tawdry mess, and will be capable of writing (‘as told to’) an awesome tell-all book. O’Mara may see that it gets a few new chapters and classic dramatic turns.

      • Jun says:

        The way the evidence is, the cops are gonna look like they were covering up. I dont feel there is some huge conspiracy to protect the cops. I think they would toss them off and the Governor would look like a big hero. I am fairly sure the cops will get counsel or avoid the deposition. Besides, the state has not filed a response yet. The best story for the cops to stick to, if they are scared of getting in trouble, is that there wasnt enough evidence, which is what they were saying, but I dont know the whole truth of that yet.

        • Xena says:

          The way the evidence is, the cops are gonna look like they were covering up.

          I’m at a lost for how the SPD operates. Police arrest. Then it’s up to detectives to uncover or document evidence supporting the arrest. It is then up to the State Attorney’s office.

          Logically, since SYG, self-defense, justifiable homicide provides an immunity hearing, no killer should ever be able to walk away without there being a grand jury or court involvement. Florida is strange in that it does not require a grand jury info unless it’s a capital murder case.

          Besides, the state has not filed a response yet. The best story for the cops to stick to, if they are scared of getting in trouble, is that there wasnt enough evidence, which is what they were saying, but I dont know the whole truth of that yet.

          IIRC, MOM based his exclusive use rubber motion on the interjection of officer Santiago who was not being deposed. Also IIRC, MOM deposed Santiago a day before the hearing when he introduced his exclusive use emergency rubber motion.

          I don’t remember there being any reports written by Santiago with discovery documents. It appears that his only knowledge of what happened on 2/26/12 comes from what he heard at meetings.

      • Lynn says:

        @ Xena
        You commented that maybe Santiago only knew from the meetings what happened on 2/26…Nope. Pg 16 halfway down…
        http://www.scribd.com/doc/93960335/Documents#fullscreen

        He played a vital part that night. He told officers to locate witnesses. He told officers to run car tags. He was the one to remove people from walking around the scene. He found the phone and called someone over to try to get info from it. (I’m sure that phone exchanged several hands instead of being preserved as evidence.) He, too, was the contact person over that next week as they tried to unlock the phone. He says he watched the Sgt recover the bullet casing and watched them log the evidence into inventory. At the police station he told Shellie to go get another set of clothes. He was everywhere!

        Report had some minor things that caught my eye. He said he arrived and Trayvon was face up facing West…the officer’s report above his mentioned he was the one who couldn’t find a pulse and rolled him over after finding him face down facing North. Did they turn him 90 degrees? He also describes the victim as wearing shorts. Um, no. They were pants. He was also the one to discover the keychain at the T. He mentioned a black flashlight just east of the keychain. wtf? From evidence photos, it looks like the keychain was ‘attached’ to a small grey flashlight and the black one was the one found some 40 ft away.

        Makes you go hmmmmm?!?

        • Xena says:

          @ Xena You commented that maybe Santiago only knew from the meetings what happened on 2/26…Nope. Pg 16 halfway down…

          THANKS LYNN!!! I remember Raimondo, but not Santiago.

          He says he watched the Sgt recover the bullet casing and watched them log the evidence into inventory.

          His actual words;
          “I also observed Sgt. Ciesla recover an empty bullet casing in the grass after Martin’s was recovered from the scene.”

          That reads really strange — can be interpreted several ways.

          I remember a YouTube vid (one of those about GZ having an accomplice) where the person suggests that GZ’s “good shoot cop defense” that he set up on his NEN call, (He’s got his hand in his waistband) was intended to give the impression that Trayvon had a gun, and a SP officer or Osterman or Taaffe, was suppose to plant one on Trayvon, (I suppose, dead or alive.)

          I get a headache with some of the conspiracy theories but can’t help to wonder now, which witness was it who said he/she heard more than one gun shot?

    • Lonnie Starr says:

      Hoo boy, this is going to be good, the SP is going to have to discredit their testimony. If they perjure themselves they’ll be kaput, without having to back track all of their cases. Perhaps MOM is playing a dual role? Who knows??? Maybe the defense is simply tied up in knots because Georgie boy has left them no where else to go.

      It sure will be interesting to learn what they believed of this case and George’s claims was so credible that they could let him go.

      • Malisha says:

        I think everybody in office including Scott was ready to sacrifice George but George had something on plenty of them so they couldn’t. I think George would have been a lot luckier personally if whoever was on his side before 2/26/2012 had allowed Serino’s charges to stick for one big reason: Serino had him charged with the manslaughter charge that only applies to someone who accidentally kills a person who was “in the process of committing a felony.” The family would not have been able to change the prosecutor’s mind about which Florida statute to use. Once George was convicted and sentenced his first appeal would immediately have succeeded (as another one already recorded in Florida law, against a police officer) because there had been no proof Trayvon was committing a felony when he was shot. So those Outhouse goons would have been screaming “Free George Zimmerman because Trayvon Martin was not a criminal” and George could not have been tried again because of double jeopardy.

        See, if they had done that, they’d have had him out in a year and clean forever! Too bad…they played for “double or nothing” and they’ll probably get a double.

    • KA says:

      Lab results were not back until mid March…

      Physical evidence in this case is overwhelming.

      I suspect the new police chief will not be so happy with this press…

    • Jun says:

      Imma be real… there are so many contradictions and inconsistencies, I have lost total track.

      I believe Fedex has records of all transactions and when it is delivered.

      They should also look into Omara’s bank account for his lawyer company.

      They can get an idea of when he deposited that cheque (my guess is right away at the 25th because its over 100 Grand)

      • Brown says:

        only a record of who sent it where and how much it weighed. O’mara really wants us to believe that Fedx, opened it verified its contents, then sent it to him, he is gettting as bad as his client. GEEZ

    • grahase says:

      Methinks MOMs foibles are being held against him by those who wish to take advantage of his services. He fears the demise of a career. He is a coward oh, sorry – like OMara always says – one would suggest – he is a coward.

    • Brown says:

      LLMPapa,

      You are the greatest!!! Love your videos!!!

    • Xena says:

      LLMPapa, MOM can count on you. Seems like he count on GZ’s supporters because today he filed for State to provide him with what he asked supporters for. LOL!!!!

    • rachael says:

      Guess he has memory problems too.

    • Lonnie Starr says:

      Mark O’Mara to LLMpapa, you bastard, you’re sinking me! I asked you for help and you throw me a life preserver made out of concrete! That isn’t funny dude! Gurgle, gurgle glub glub.

    • Tee says:

      I love love love how you do this to them.

  17. Papa, you are a hoot! I love you.

  18. Malisha says:

    Somebody tell me what the sentence was George said:

    G: You know what?
    SH: Huh?
    G: You know what?
    SH: What?
    G: I think [couldn't hear it] in [couldn't hear it].
    SH: Oh yeah? Well I have one in the safe deposit box. For you.
    G: Hold on to it.

    What did George say after “You know what” twice?

    Don’t they sound like third graders whispering behind a doorway?
    OMG how much energy these two morons have sucked up from our country, in the middle of a time when we need to do better things than play around with their little house of lies. Ugh. Makes me mad.

  19. bm says:

    Simple
    you and I
    At sometime
    Bang our head
    We also saw
    Other do it
    And not real hard
    question
    Did the pain
    make you stop
    what you are doing
    Could you think
    straight
    SomeHow
    GZ took of beating
    and the pain
    and still have an clear head
    Better then
    boxers
    street fighters
    MMA fighters
    and his opponent
    got no blood or dna
    on him
    May the
    force be with him

  20. Jun says:

    I dont feel what Omara did in his motion is going to help him. I think the cops may be pissed for being outed by Omara. I also dont feel they are going to agree to it either. Either way, the state has not filed a response yet.

  21. thejbmission says:

    Professor said;

    I emphasize the importance of privacy because the scope of a deposition may intrude into sensitive and private matters that might embarrass a witness, or protected matters such as trade secrets that might compromise a business, if publicized.

    That’s what I was thinking although I know from the Anthony trial that Florida allows the media to release depositions, some were even televised but during that trial, it wasn’t the defense who did this, it was the State and we all know how that worked out. Anthony was acquitted.
    Just a thought..

  22. Jun says:

    Just a TV show but

    CSI NY Season 3 episode 6 is an example of a person claiming self defense and was found to be staging the whole thing

  23. SupremeVictory says:

    LLMPapa,

    If you get this message, please considering using “Deception” from Lion King 2 in your vids. The hippo brings the base. Provided Disney doesn’t mind.

  24. aussie says:

    Law and Order sometimes comes out with a “current news” type of episode within 6 or 7 weeks. Either that or they are involved in an awful lot of coincidences. But a case like this has too many unique features for them to get away with claiming it’s fiction.

    CSI I don’t like. There forensics are too magical, their coincidences way too neat, and especially that the perpetrator ALWAYS was working in some job where he had to have his fingerprints on record. Waaaayyy too easy. Then they make big boo-boos like they can’t get DNA out of semen because “the guy was shooting blanks” but they manage to get some from single skin cells on a coil of rope (and none of it is the rope-maker’s).

    • Jun says:

      Watch CSI NY or the original CSI. Its not always the case. They still gather the evidence and the prints are not always on file or magical as you say.

  25. Malisha says:

    I am guessing Judge Nelson will NOT grant the gag order. I am also guessing O’Mara’s misbehavior will have no effect on any ultimate trial that may be held. I am also guessing that there will not be a trial anyway. I am guessing that neither side wants a trial. I am guessing that if Obama is still in office in 2013 the feds will come down on half a dozen people in Sanford for federal civil rights violations and that if Romney is in office that will not happen. I’m not placing bets because I don’t like to be right about the things I’m most often good at guessing about.

  26. Malisha says:

    Prosecutors have much stricter regulations against them making public statements than do defense lawyers. This is as it should be, within our adversarial system. Prosecutors who go around catching the camera and blabbing anything they want about a case (such as former prosecutor, now attorney general Douglas Gans of Maryland who was actually nailed for unethical conduct while prosecutor of supercounty Montomery County in Maryland before being elected attorney general — because in Maryland proof of unethical behavior is a necessary prerequisite for holding office) are doing wrong and are depriving all defendants of due process and fundamental fairness.

    That said, in this case there is another reason for the prosecution to remain stonily silent while O’Mara conducts his three-ring circus: Nobody is buying tickets to the show. The people who are getting excited about it are just sending O’M their money. They won’t be serving on a jury; they won’t be influencing a judge. Worries and concerns about them serving on a jury are irrelevant because the first, middle and last thing a jury is told are all the same:

    ONLY THE EVIDENCE counts;
    ONLY THE EVIDENCE counts;
    ONLY THE EVIDENCE counts.

    What police officers think about it — does not count.

  27. Malisha says:

    Last hearing, West, O’Mara and GZ wore light blue shirts. Today white. Wardrobe mistress is minding her “consistency” obligations — HA HA.

  28. Malisha says:

    Uh oh O’Mara was arguing that he was mad he had to ASK FOR SOMETHING before getting it, and he’s getting Judge Nelson pretty pissed off.

  29. Malisha says:

    O’Mara complains that all they gave him was evidence, NOT THEIR FILES —

    Their files are not evidence. If there’s a memo in there from someone to someone else saying, “O’Mara is a f*cking punk” and it is not evidence he doesn’t GET IT.

    He’s complaining but he ain’t saying sh*t.

    • jm says:

      I think O’mara is playing to his supporters and the camera with no regard to rules. He is a real punk. Did anyone notice he kind of smirked/smiled while BDLR was speaking.

  30. Malisha says:

    Judge Nelson is telling O’Mara, “if you want the FBI’s file of an ongoing investigation, go to the FBI and get it.” He’s fussing about it. Boo hoo.

    • ks says:

      Heh. It’s telling that he’s so worried about it. No way the FBI is going to give him anything on an ongoing investigation.

      • katieunc says:

        MOM is worried about the FBI! Thanks BDRL for making it clear what MOM wants since he can’t seem to spit it out!

        • Xena says:

          MOM is worried about the FBI! Thanks BDRL for making it clear what MOM wants since he can’t seem to spit it out!

          Yes, he is VERY worried what the FBI has that is NOT ASSOCIATED with the State’s case but with federal claims. It’s a backdoor approach of trying to get a State court to take jurisdiction over a federal agency — and Judge Nelson ain’t having it.

  31. Malisha says:

    I don’t like BDLR’s argument on the media thing. I think it’s OK for the defense to go nuts in public. Commenting on the evidence is OK and considering the particular evidence in this particular case, who CARES what they comment on or how? The jury system will either work or it won’t.

    • ks says:

      Given Fla’s laws, I think BDLR knows the gag order is not likely. IMO. he just wants to fire a shot across O’Mara’s bow.

    • Jun says:

      I didnt get to watch it but damn, you think it was that bad? I dont know how the judge will rule but I feel she should rule on a middle ground between the gag and the sunshine. I think it is imperative to have a proper and fair trial for both parties to see who is at fault, which I feel is completely Zimmerman

      • jm says:

        I think O’Mara made a better case for why there shouldn’t be a gag order in 2012, but he was shady in the way he went about it attributing things said by Crump, etc. as if he was part of the prosecution team. Loved when BDLR encouraged no gag order be put on GZ.

      • Jun says:

        There’s a significant difference in that Omara is representing the case and Crump is not. Omara’s actions are of utmost importance and the way he acted is of utmost importance because he is supposed to represent the case in an ethical way. What Crump says or does has no bearing but if the gag order goes, Crump would also have to defect from speaking on the case because he is now a witness (correct me if I am wrong on that)

  32. Malisha says:

    ks, I agree with you. It’s also a chance for BDLR to show he has a little fire in his belly.

  33. Malisha says:

    All GZ is scared about right now is whether HE and his sock puppets have actually been “made.”

  34. Malisha says:

    YEAH BDLR is quoting the “if you would do what George did…”
    YEAH!!!

    • grahase says:

      Did you see the Judges face when BDLR read, if you would do what George said. Man. She took the paper and proceeded to read it. She was not happy about that little piece of evidence showing exactly why MOM should be gagged. That will be the middle of the road — let the Z family do their thing, let the press do their thing and let Trayvons family do what they need to do. But, MOM — STFU., take down the site and refrain from Twitter comments, secret notes to the GZ groupies, etc.

      • jm says:

        grahase says: “…….. let the Z family do their thing, let the press do their thing and let Trayvons family do what they need to do. But, MOM — STFU., take down the site and refrain from Twitter comments, secret notes to the GZ groupies, etc.”

        But grahase, how can MOM generate $$$$$ without letting the GZ groupies what a great job he is doing. He needs those racist contributions to pay his $400 an hour fees. : (

      • Malisha says:

        “Send money if you would do what George did” is such a horrifying thing to say in the context of a criminal defense. It’s the biggest oooooop :oops: on earth, if you ask me. Zimmerman is not saying, “If you think what he did was excusable, and that he didn’t mean to do it…” or “If you think what he did was unavoidable and that he should be forgiven for it,” or anything even slightly remorseful or tinged with normal human regret. The a55hole said, “If you would have done what George did…”

        This is “Hannity squared.” This is, “I offed the punk and I’ll do it again if need be.” This is, “Don’t charge ME with a crime when I’m doing what any red-blooded American would do in my shoes.”

        What shoes? Shoes that give you privilege? Shoes that give you the right to decide who lives and who dies? Shoes that give you the right to put your foot down on someone’s neck? Those shoes?

        Judge. Debra. Nelson. Does. Not. Like. Those. Shoes.

  35. Malisha says:

    Now BDLR is citing O’Mara saying, “statements my client gave were all pretty consistent.”

    YAY! LLMPapa, you nailed it!

  36. Groans says:

    If I were the judge, I’d be thinking: If you spent less time managing your “social media” and collecting Google statistics, and more time on working your case, we could have an actual trial by within a year of the homicide!

    • Jun says:

      LMAO I agree with that. Omara is the one delaying it. If he wasnt such a media whore, it would have been over and done with. Omara is complaining about discovery the rest of the world already has, and he has more. He should do his job and read the evidence because he obviously hasnt

  37. Malisha says:

    For some reason my computer just went DOWN — black screen of death — soon after O’Mara stood up and dramatically carried on about how he was required by law and US Supreme Court precedent to try to get the charges against his client DISMISSED. He was so upset that Crump and Jackson couldn’t be charged with character assassination! What’s a poor lawya ta do? :mrgreen:

    • ks says:

      Really? Wow, I’m suprised that the entire courtroom didn’t bust out laughing at O’Mara. What nonsense.

    • ks says:

      Also the obsession with Crump and Jackson is yet another “tell” that he’s playing to the Outhouse crowd rather than trying his case. Crump and Jackson are tangential to the actual case.

    • Jun says:

      LMAO when they ever character assassinate George?

    • Jun says:

      The main point is Crump & Jackson are not part of the people prosecuting George. It is the state of Florida. They are free to say whatever, and they back up everything. Omara is representing the case and his professionalism and actions is of utmost importance

  38. Malisha says:

    The only people who can be gagged are the attorneys involved. NOT Crump NOT Jackson NOT George NOT George’s family of fools NOT anyone but O’Mara, West, prosecutors (who don’t need a gag because they’re not saying anything) and their respective offices. Still I don’t think a gag order is in order because I’m just of the opinion that the information should go where it goes and do what it does and so should a trial.

    I’m still also of the opinion that both sides are already “cool with the idea” that there will be a plea and that they were even at the point at which Corey charged George with Murder.

    Never will O’Mara be able to stop folks from calling George Zimmerman a racist child-molesting murderer. Never. Even if he is acquitted it will be fair game for anyone on earth to call him that. HA HA HA HA HA HA HA. Oh, I meant, Boo Hoo.

    And guess what the P.S. is on that message: “If you don’t like that part, don’t kill any unarmed kids.”

    • Two sides to a story says:

      And guess what the P.S. is on that message: “If you don’t like that part, don’t kill any unarmed kids.”

      Yep. That’s about the size of it.#]

    • Jun says:

      How does he expect people to paint Zimmerman in a good light?

      A good majority of people have morals and ethics and professional media people so trying to paint a known killer and bully who stalked, chased, terrorized, shot, asphyxiated a defenseless unarmed kid as a good guy is not only difficult, it would be reprehensible. Not everyone is a member of George’s cult or the Conservative Tinfoil Hat. The media even attempted by having people on shows discuss what could be used to help George or not. Omara just sounds like a media whore control freak asshole rather than a lawyer. Omara already has RZ Jr on their stupid little tour to talk. Its time to get the issue to trial already

  39. cielo62 says:

    >^..*< (Hurt my ear)

  40. leander22 says:

    Frederick, I listed to it again. Judge Debra S.. Nelson already ruled against the prophylactic sequestration. On Talk Left, no idea what is left about them, they argue that dispositions are not private, maybe I have to read your article again.

    My link to you was deleted, “for containing false information”.

  41. leander22 says:

    Frederick, I had a private exchange with Malisha about it. I am studying the careerist “left”, as I would call it.

    Your argument that disposition matters are private, if I understood you correctly, is challenged over at Jeralyn Merrit’s blog.

    It was here:

    I deleted that comment (none / 0) (#37)
    by Jeralyn on Sat Oct 27, 2012 at 12:51:47 PM EST
    for containing false information. Depositions are not secret. They just aren’t filed publicly. But anything one says in a deposition can be used to impeach that person at trial, and thus what they say at the deposition is not “secret.”

    • I should have expressed myself more clearly. I intended to say that deposing a witness under oath is a formal fact-finding method or process authorized by court rule or statute that lawyers use to acquire information about a case from a person who has been endorsed as a witness by the opposing party in the case. The permissible scope of the inquiry is very broad and not limited by rules of evidence governing the admissibility of evidence at trial. Basically, the lawyer can ask any question to discover, or which might reasonably be expected to lead to the discovery, of relevant information regarding the subject matter of the lawsuit.

      The purpose of the rule is to provide a formal process to discover all of the information that a witness may have concerning the pending lawsuit. I use the word “formal” because the lawyer who represents the opposing party to the lawsuit is present during the deposition as well as a court reporter who places the witness under oath, records the deposition and produces a verbatim transcript upon request.

      In essence, a deposition is a discovery tool to acquire information under oath that might be relevant to resolving matters disputed by the parties. Due to the broad scope of permissible inquiry, a reasonable possibility exists during any deposition that the inquiry may venture into subject matter of a sensitive nature and yield potentially embarrassing personal information. Since the scope of permissible inquiry is not limited by evidentiary rules governing the admissibility of evidence, sensitive or potentially embarrassing information acquired may not be admissible at trial. For this reason, discretion is required and a lawyer never should publicize information acquired during a deposition.

      You are right about lawyers using depositions at trial to refresh the recollection of a witness or to impeach the testimony of a witness with a prior inconsistent statement. They also read depositions or a portion of a deposition into the record when a witness is unavailable, or available but unable to recall the answer. Lawyers refer to this as publishing the contents of a deposition (incorporating it into the official record of the proceedings) and this is what I was referring to in my previous article).

  42. grahase says:

    To anyone out there – when he submitted the motion – it was on the gzlegalcase website. However, it was removed prior to him handing the paperwork to the good Judge Nelson. I firmly believe, had she seen it, gagging O’Mara would have been the decision. Not gagging the press — just MOM, his firm, employees, etc. I wanted to let the Judge know, but did not know how to contact her to let her know there was the omission. I hope someone knows and will send the information to her.

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 )

Twitter picture

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

Facebook photo

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

Google+ photo

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

Connecting to %s

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 984 other followers

%d bloggers like this: