Witness 8’s (Dee Dee) alleged lies do not matter

Thursday, March 7, 2013

I write today to remind everyone that DD is not a critical prosecution witness because they can win this case without her testimony and her alleged lies about her age and whether she went to a hospital, instead of the funeral, probably are not admissible.

She is not a critical prosecution witness because the physical evidence, forensics, location of Trayvon’s body and the spent shell casing, and the defendant’s conflicting and inconsistent statements bury him beneath a mountain of evidence.

Although we will not know until trial, I am anticipating that the defendant’s interlocking phone calls with others before and after he killed Trayvon will eliminate any lingering doubt that anyone might have about his guilt. Even if it does not, I do not believe the prosecution’s case will be in any jeopardy.

BDLR will likely wait to call DD until late in his case after he has put in all of the evidence that he believes he needs to introduce in order to convict the defendant. With everything else in place, her testimony will merely confirm what everyone on the jury already knows. The jury likely will believe her because her testimony will be self-authenticating. That is, even though she had never been to the RTL, everything that she says Trayvon told her will be confirmed by the interlocking phone records of the calls she had with Trayvon, the physical layout of the place and the weather.

Because most of Trayvon’s statements to her are inadmissible hearsay, unless he was relating a present sense impression or excited utterance, which are two exceptions to the hearsay rule, I expect her testimony will be limited to he told her that,

(1) he was afraid of the creepy guy following him in the car;

(2) he ran to get away from him; the creepy guy suddenly showed up on foot; and

(3) he asked someone why he was following him;

Then she heard an older male voice respond, “What are you doing here?”

Then she heard what sounded like physical contact followed by Trayvon shouting, “Get off me,” and the phone went dead. She attempted to call him, but he did not answer.

That’s it. She does not know anything else.

The defendant’s supporters with considerable support from the lame-stream U.S. media and various lawyer-pundits who should know better have been saying things like, “The prosecution’s case is crumbling,” because Witness 8 (DD) lied or committed perjury,

(1) about her age; and

(2) when she claimed that she did not attend Trayvon’s wake or funeral because she was not feeling well and went to a hospital.

The prosecution’s case is not crumbling.

First, even assuming she lied, and I do not believe that she did, she most certainly did not commit perjury because neither of her statements are about matters that are material or important to the outcome of this case. Since materiality is an element that must be proven beyond a reasonable doubt to convict someone of perjury, there is no basis to charge her with that offense.

Second, the two alleged lies do not make it more or less likely that she is an untruthful person since a truthful person may lie about their age or when providing an excuse for not attending a funeral.

The rules of evidence permit Judge Nelson to exercise her discretion in deciding whether to permit the defense to cross examine DD about these two alleged lies.

The relevant rules of evidence are 608(b) and 403.

Evidence Rule 608(b) prohibits evidence of specific instances of the misconduct of a witness for the purpose of attacking her credibility, unless those specific instances of misconduct concern her character for truthfulness or untruthfulness.

(Emphasis supplied)

Evidence Rule 403 provides that even relevant evidence may be excluded if the judge finds that its probative value “is substantially outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice, confusion of the issues, or misleading the jury.”

(Emphasis supplied)

I can see Judge Nelson deciding that the slight probative value of the two alleged lies that she is an untruthful person is overwhelmed by their potential prejudice, since the alleged lies have nothing to do with any issues in the case, and her testimony is self-authenticating.

The admissibility of evidence about these two alleged lies probably will be the subject of a motion in limine by the prosecution for an order to prohibit the defense from mentioning them in front of the jury or cross examining her about them.

Even if Judge Nelson denies that motion, the prosecution can minimize the potential damage of that evidence by bringing it out on direct and asking her to tell the jury why she did not tell the truth about those two matters.

The defense would have to be careful cross examining her because the jury might not like it, if they do not treat her in a respectful manner.

When all is said and done by the witnesses and the lawyers, and the jury retires to deliberate on a verdict, I doubt that DD’s credibility will be a matter of any concern or discussion regarding whether the defendant killed Trayvon in self-defense.

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

615 Responses to Witness 8’s (Dee Dee) alleged lies do not matter

  1. aussie says:

    OKAY this is me as I usually post

    • aussiekay says:

      and this is me on sites where WordPress forces using the registered name

      • and I can be anybody I want to be, ain’t the internet wonderful?

      • AHA!!! the new name went into moderation. I wonder how it goes with a known name?

        sorry unitron, testing purposes only

        (actually aussie)

      • aussie says:

        OK and if Fred lets these two obvious fakes go through, from now I can use either of those extra names on this blog unmoderated. So a hacker only needs to get lucky and slip through the first time.

        I think is may be in the way the blog preferences are set (by the owner) whether it allows names other than the registered one. BUT in that case, Fred, please don’t change it, as many of us would suddenly lose our identities. Hard enough as it is to keep track of who is who, when they use different names on different blogs.

        • If this shows up with

          aussiekayexplaineditall says:

          at the top, then I now see how it was done.

          In which case WordPress.com really are idiots to leave such a gaping hole in their code.

          Which is why I couldn’t figure out how it was being done, because I was looking for an explanation that involved the impersonator actually being clever.

          unitron

          • fauxmccoy says:

            nope, impersonator was most definitely not clever as i implied with my post regarding avatar theft 😉

        • onlyiamunitron says:

          And I see that my “alter ego” awaits moderation.

          Which raises the possibility that the original impersonations were pro-actively passed through.

          An unsettling thought.

          unitron

    • OK testing if a name goes through easily once it’s passed the first moderation hurdle.

      No need to get paranoid — if they put a link or two into a new name post, moderator will think it’s the real person, held up because of the links, and so pass it. Even without links, there would be a tendency to think known name = pass it, probably held up by a GLITCH, which WP s not unknown for.

      • see? the new name only has to pass moderation once.

        I am now qualified to pretend to be unitron anytime I like, and he can keep responding that I explained it all.

        Troll heaven, this one.

        Perhaps it WOULD be better to set it to the registered-ony option, even if it means a few people here will find their well-known names changed.

        ~ aussie

  2. blushedbrown says:

    @cielo62

    “When I’m good, I’m very good, but when I’m bad, I’m better. ”

    Mae West

    🙂

  3. nate riedburg says:

    So being new here I screwed up in attempting multiple replies so I will list them here by subject. Sorry.

    Headlights/keys: we have know way of knowing if Z had his headlights on when he exited the truck. If he wanted them on to help spot T he would have had to leave his keys in the ignition in the “on” position or else the lights would have turned off after 15 seconds if he took the keys. Since T was able to see into the vehicle clearly enough to see the occupants and actions, I’m guessing his headlights were not on. If his lights were pointed away from T he would have turned them off to get a better look at T since the lights would have clouded a side view out of the truck.

    Pic of flashlight on ground: Afaik, that is the only place blood was found on the ground. Other than the flashlight and grass next to it, Z’s blood was not found anywhere else on the ground and definitely not on or next to the sidewalk.

    Picture of Z’s face: the most incriminating aspect is he claims it was the very first physical act but the only smear was from Z himself wiping blood away from his nostril. The lady gaga style blood on his lips helps prove T never touched his mouth because the blood has straight lines with no smears.

    Dee/hospital: I don’t care if she lied about it or not. My only point was the article claimed perjury requires material relevance and that is not true as I posted two statutes saying differently.

    • I told you that you were wrong and I posted the perjury statute verbatim to prove it.

      You referred to the false statements statute, which is not perjury.

      I’m still right and you are still wrong.

      • nate riedburg says:

        Let’s put this to bed.

        1. You cited one statute and that one statute does not cover all perjury offenses. The statute you cited is endemic to “official proceedings.”

        2. The statutes I cited came from Perjury Chapter 837 which includes the statute you cited. Here is the link to the chapter:
        http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&URL=0800-0899/0837/0837.html

        You cannot cite one statute, ignore the other statutes, and then claim you covered the Perjury laws. A violation of any statute in the chapter is Perjury. When someone dies and someone is convicted of manslaughter you don’t say the person must still be alive because the defendant was convicted of manslaughter and not murder.

        • Xena says:

          @Nate. You need to use the statute that applies to the situation you present. The situation with West saying that DeeDee perjured herself does not apply to obstruction of justice statute that you cited.

          • nate riedburg says:

            One more time: my comment is not about Dee. Again, I don’t care if she lied or not. The article claims perjury requires material relevance but that is wrong as the chapter on Perjury clearly gives several statutes where material relevance is not mentioned at all. Moreover, if material relevance was a universal requirement for perjury there would be no exceptions but the statute Fred cited starts off with….an exception.

            Also, I didn’t cite obstruction of justice. Once again:

            I cited the chapter on Perjury. Nothing more nothing less.

            I’ve presented the info and cited the law to the best of my ability so I have nothing else to say about it as people are free to continue disagreeing without this consuming any more energy.

          • Xena says:

            @Nate Riedburg

            One more time: my comment is not about Dee. Again, I don’t care if she lied or not. The article claims perjury requires material relevance but that is wrong as the chapter on Perjury clearly gives several statutes where material relevance is not mentioned at all.

            That’s because the statute includes perjury that falls under the charge of obstruction of justice. For instance, calling in a false police report, or false report of fire, does not require material relevance. That in fact, the lack of material relevance is what makes it a false report. That type of perjury is generally considered, and charged as, obstruction of justice.

          • nate riedburg says:

            The chapter is there and clearly has false statements under Perjury and the statutes for sentencing are the exact same ones for perjury in a courtroom. You can be charged with OOJ and Perjury at the same time. Perjury is chapter 837 while OOJ is chapter 843. Here is the entire chapter on OOJ. Show us where perjury is in one of the statutes:
            http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&URL=0800-0899/0843/0843ContentsIndex.html&StatuteYear=2012&Title=%2D%3E2012%2D%3EChapter%20843

          • fauxmccoy says:

            yes nate, we have read the statutes you are posting – now, you answer this.

            what false statement did witness 8 make to Bernie de la Rionda (the only person to have interviewed her on behalf of the state). please, be very specific.

            also note that nothing she stated to crump will be admissible in court.

          • nate riedburg says:

            I have said repeatedly I am not accusing her of lying.

            I have said repeatedly I don’t care if she did or didnt.

            I pointed out yet again my comment on perjury law has NOTHING to do with Dee you all are asking me to prove something I did not claim.

            As repeatedly stated: I’m referencing the claim in the article that Perjury requires material relevance.

            It is disturbing so many of you keep overlooking what I am actually posting. REPEATEDLY.

          • nate riedburg says:

            Missed your last sentence so wanted to show you admissibility is irrelevant under the law:

            “…regardless of its admissibility under the rules of evidence, which could affect the course or outcome of the proceeding. Whether a matter is material in a given factual situation is a question of law.”

          • fauxmccoy says:

            ok, the problem as i see it is one of clarity – you say one thing, then go on to quote statutes that seem to be relevant to you.

            i hear you that you do not care if W8 perhaps misrepresented something. loud and clear.

            yet you just quoted a bit of citation which implies that you do believe that something W8 said to crump “affect[s] the course or outcome of the proceeding…..”

            now, please, state how the course our outcome of the proceeding is/was affected, since it is inadmissible as evidence or this is a moot point.

          • nate riedburg says:

            I did not quote anything that implies I believe she mislead Crump. I said IF she lied. Do you understand “IF” is purely hypothetical?

            I also cited the text stating perjury can be committed even if it is not admissible by evidence rules and you highlight admissibility yet again.

          • fauxmccoy says:

            dude – all i wish for here is clarity, but you are making this quite difficult. the topic of this article is about whether or not W8 committed perjury and if it is or is not relevant.

            you have stated that you do not think she lied and that you do not care if she lied. then you proceed to cite irrelevant statutes to prove what exactly?

            in examining the statutes regarding perjury in the state of florida, W8 did not commit perjury — http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&URL=0800-0899/0837/0837.html

            837.012 Perjury when not in an official proceeding [because she was not under oath per definitions]

            837.02 Perjury in official proceedings. [no perjury committed]

            837.021 Perjury by contradictory statements. [not applicable because only one official statement made]

            837.05 False reports to law enforcement authorities. [W8 made only one statement to de la Rionda, assistant state attorney. no false report was made.]

            837.055 False information to law enforcement during investigation. [not relevant – no false statement made which misleads or impedes investigation]

            837.06 False official statements [not relevant, W8 made no written statement]

            837.07 Recantation as a defense [not relevant]

            these are the statutes which cover perjury, none of which are relevant to W8, as i just clearly outlined.

            what, pray tell, is your point?

          • You are either too stupid to pound sand or deliberately trying to distract discussion with your ridiculous arguments and demands.

            Either way, I am banning you.

            Buh-bye.

          • fauxmccoy says:

            fred, darling — while i was constructing a perfect argument? i am crushed 😦

            ok, thank you sweet baby jesus!

          • Xena says:

            @Nate Riedburg. Let me get this straight. You want to make yourself right, so demand that I show you where obstruction of justice statute says perjury, when in actuality, perjury statute sets forth perjury to law enforcement???

            Do you have a law degree? Because the professor, who has a J.D. and practiced law, has already told you that you are wrong.

          • nate riedburg says:

            You are the one who claimed false statements are usually charged as OOJ. I am asking you to prove your claim and even helped by giving you the entire chapter on OOJ. I have a feeling you cannot point to where perjury is under the OOJ chapter and are deflecting by not proving your claim.

            The person who said I was wrong is a lawyer but by your logic that means lawyers are never wrong.

            Furthermore, did you use that logic when Fred said Dershowitz was wrong to castigate Corey by saying the M2 charge was unethical? He’s been a lawyer a lot longer and has and much more successful career.

          • Xena says:

            @nate riedburg

            You are the one who claimed false statements are usually charged as OOJ.

            You are misrepresenting what I wrote. Calling in a false police report or fire, is obstruction of justice is included in the statute you cited for perjury.

            The person who said I was wrong is a lawyer but by your logic that means lawyers are never wrong.

            By your logic, it means you come to the blog of a retired lawyer and law professor to argue with participants after the blog owner tells you that you are wrong.

            Furthermore, did you use that logic when Fred said Dershowitz was wrong to castigate Corey by saying the M2 charge was unethical?

            Apparently, you keep up here much more than I do. When I see the name “Dershowitz” I generally skip the comment — have no interest in him.

            Are you the same Nate who posts diatribes of statistics about race on Yahoo, by chance?

          • Lonnie Starr says:

            Well, I’ll wait for the Professor’s decision, he’ll probably provide us a lesson that clears up your confusion.

            MEANWHILE LOOKEY HERE:

            843.20 Harassment of participant of neighborhood crime watch program prohibited; penalty; definitions.—
            (1) It shall be a misdemeanor of the first degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082 or s. 775.083, for any person to willfully harass, threaten, or intimidate an identifiable member of a neighborhood crime watch program while such member is engaged in, or traveling to or from, an organized neighborhood crime watch program activity or a member who is participating in an ongoing criminal investigation, as designated by a law enforcement officer.
            (2) As used in this section, the term:
            (a) “Harass” means to engage in a course of conduct directed at a specific person which causes substantial emotional distress in that person and serves no legitimate purpose.
            (b) “Organized neighborhood crime watch program activity” means any prearranged event, meeting, or other scheduled activity, or neighborhood patrol, conducted by or at the direction of a neighborhood crime watch program or the program’s authorized designee.
            History.—s. 2, ch. 2004-18.

            ———————————-

            So, it seems Neighborhood Watchers are protected by law… But, only if they identify themselves! Hardly a wonder that GZ now wants to drop his NW status and put as much distance between him and the appointment as Captain, as he possibly can.

            I was wondering why he and his attorney’s backed so swiftly away from NW. Because there are statutory protections he could have obtained, simply by identifying himself. Because he refused to identify himself, he also was refusing to take advantage of the statutory protections the law stood ready to provide. Meaning he willfully and voluntarily became a stalker unlawful and a menacing armed vigilante.

          • Lonnie Starr says:

            Are you an attorney who has practiced law? Or are you a professor who teaches law and has practiced it? If not, then I’ll take the Professors word that the statues you cite are not applicable, even if you think they are. I have more faith that the Professors definition will hold up in court.

            Perhaps he will write us another lesson to clearly delineate the issues at work here that are so confusing.

      • Jun says:

        Nate

        837.05 False reports to law enforcement authorities.—
        (1) Except as provided in subsection (2), whoever knowingly gives false information to any law enforcement officer concerning the alleged commission of any crime, commits a misdemeanor of the first degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082 or s. 775.083.
        (2) Whoever knowingly gives false information to a law enforcement officer concerning the alleged commission of a capital felony, commits a felony of the third degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084.

        Where did Deedee lie about the alleged commission of a crime?

        837.055 False information to law enforcement during investigation.—
        (1) Whoever knowingly and willfully gives false information to a law enforcement officer who is conducting a missing person investigation or a felony criminal investigation with the intent to mislead the officer or impede the investigation commits a misdemeanor of the first degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082 or s. 775.083.
        (2) Whoever knowingly and willfully gives false information to a law enforcement officer who is conducting a missing person investigation involving a child 16 years of age or younger with the intent to mislead the officer or impede the investigation, and the child who is the subject of the investigation suffers great bodily harm, permanent disability, permanent disfigurement, or death, commits a felony of the third degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084.

        How did Deedee’s alleged lie, impede investigation into the murder?

      • Jun says:

        It actually is not perjury, although false statements are under perjury, because perjury requires materiality, however false statements has to do with lying in regards to a commission of a crime or impeding an investigation with a lie, to make it a crime

        For example, I could say I ate a ham sandwich, and it could be a lie, but would it impede a murder investigation?

        • nate riedburg says:

          So a statute under the chapter on Perjury and punishable by the same statutes isn’t really perjury? That makes no sense. Even the statute Fred cited does not require material relevance in both cases. Did you notice the statute starts off with “EXCEPT.” If material relevance was always required there would not be an exception.

          Perjury is also known as giving false statement and lying. The only reason the law distinguishes in precise manner is for sentencing but it is all perjury.

          Here is an outside reference to what I am saying:

          “Although some states include materiality requirements in their perjury laws, Florida is not one of those states. The prosecutor does not need to establish the materiality of the defendant’s false statement in order to present the elements of perjury.”http://statelaws.findlaw.com/florida-law/florida-perjury-laws.html

          • fauxmccoy says:

            will try again here, nate – honestly, i only wish to understand what your point is. the article which you cited states the following:

            To establish perjury, regardless of whether the offense occurred in an official proceeding, the prosecutor must show that the defendant took an oath to tell the truth. The oath must reflect the taker’s understanding that he must speak truthfully.

            In addition, the prosecutor must prove that the defendant knowingly presented a false statement as a truthful statement. If the defendant believed that the statement was truthful, the state may be unable to establish the elements of perjury.

            1. Witness 8 is not the defendant or a defendant, so how is this relevant?

            2. as i understand the above quote, the conversation between crump and W8 would not even fall into an ‘unofficial proceeding’. that would make every conversation a potential ‘unofficial proceeding’.

            3. there was no oath in the conversation with crump and W8.

            4. the only ‘official proceeding’ was between de la rionda and W8 and W8 was under oath. do you think she perjured herself in her statement and if so, how?

      • @fauxmccoy

        fred, darling — while i was constructing a perfect argument? i am crushed

        Too funny!

    • towerflower says:

      Nate:
      Headlights/keys: We do know if you go by GZ’s statements. First you have the NEN call where at about the 3:17 mark he says “you’ll see my truck, the keys are in the ignition.”

      Next, in an interview with Singleton and Serino at the 23:25 mark Fogen states “When I was walking around, my truck lights stay on and he wasn’t there.
      Singleton: Was that portion of the T lit up by your truck lights?
      Fogen: Lit up partially, because it only stays on………I don’t know.
      Singleton: When you got out, you took the keys?
      Fogen: Yes.

      So you have another conflicting statement. In the NEN he says the keys are in the ignition and in an interview he says he took the keys. If he went back to retrieve them he NEVER states this to the police. In fact he has led them to believe that he was never able to get back to his vehicle that he was attacked first.

      Blood on the ground–I found no reference to any blood being found on the ground or on the tactical flashlight.

      Picture of the his face–Exactly, if TM had hit him more than once in his already injured nose, and he does claim he was hit several times on his nose, there would have been more evidence of this, smears, spatter, DNA on Trayvon etc.

    • Jun says:

      That specific part of chapter 837 is called false statements, therefore if someone infringed on that law, it would be called false statements yada yada

  4. colin black says:

    Ah so thats Jon cheers Xena.

    • blushedbrown says:

      @Colin
      Yep
      There is Johnathan G witness 6
      and there is Jonathan M witness 13

      same name different spelling.
      🙂

    • Xena says:

      Yep. That’s Jon who Trent Sawyer refers to as the mystery flashlight guy.

      There’s a report where Smith arrived and found two men, having both raise their hands, and then asking who fired the shot. In GZ’s statements, he makes no mention of Jon being with him when Smith arrives. GZ’s statements flow from seeing someone with a flashlight thinking it was a cop and finding out otherwise, to seeing another flashlight and finding out that was a cop.

      The time for the photo section is not mentioned by Jon neither GZ.

      Jon also photographed Trayvon’s dead body and GZ’s tactical flashlight. Comparing those photos to the one of the back of GZ’s head shows that there was more lighting when Jon photographed GZ’s head. That is why I believe that Jon used GZ’s key chain flashlight to provide more light for the pic, and when Smith arrived, Jon dropped the key chain flashlight on the ground not wanting it to be mistaken for a weapon.

      • Donna Flores says:

        I’m wondering what the reason for taking the shot of the flashlight was. Did Zimmerman tell Jon that’s why Trayvon was beating him with?

        • Xena says:

          Who knows why Jon photographed GZ’s tactical flashlight? Only Jon knows. GZ and Jon omitted things from their statements. Maybe those questions will be asked at trial.

  5. colin black says:

    If thats the guy your refering to I have no idea who he is or what he is doing there.
    Theres different images shown an at no point does he do anything other than stand there.

    Looking like a rubbernecker he carries no camera so not likely a crime tech.
    He would at least have rubber gloves an plastic foot covers on his feet.
    He has nothing like an infamous ruler or measureing equipment on his person.
    Just seems to be standing there ?

  6. colin black says:

    Medical records are private an confidential between patient an Doctor.
    The only relevant evidence witt 8 has pertaining to Trayvons MURDER.
    Is as an ear wittness so any enquiry made re her abbility to hear would an perhaps could be deemed relevent.

    Any other matters to do with her health both before Trayvons MURDER.
    And affer are irelevent and Im sure witt 8 will tell M Omara
    In her own iminatatable style exactly where he can go with his request for such intimate private info .
    His client after all MURDERED her boy Trayvon.

    We do not have to worry about wit 8 being deposed by the defence.
    Also ditto for giveing evidence for Trayvon an the State at trial.
    The treeple try to mock an demean her as she scares them.
    An at the end of the day when all is said an done they will be proven correct to fear her.

    She will destroy both fogen an his defence.
    Along with the tons of forensics an reality that proves every version of events he has given is not plausable.
    The only plausable event that accounts for Trayvon is the one he cannot rell.
    The truth.
    Dont worry about DD worry about those whom cross her.

  7. FactsFirst says:

    Can somebody tell me which witness this might be standing INSIDE the CRIME SCENE TAPE with the cops?? @1:05 in this video —> http://www.clickorlando.com/news/Sanford-police-to-wrap-up-investigation-of-teen-s-shooting-death/-/1637132/9278880/-/mo3t74/-/index.html

    • xy11xy says:

      And a close-up again at 1:29….

      If memory serves…

      There was a notation that an Asian male was seen inside crime scene.

      There was another note that a man was standing inside tape, beside officer doing scene contamination log.

      I don’t know if they are the same person.

    • colin black says:

      You mean the guy darkish grey short sleeve T Shirt with light coloured jogging pants on
      Black hair longish but not hippy type long Bruce Lee Entre the Dragon length. medium build .
      He has a half Asian half caucasion look wearing wire framed glasses.
      Either late twentys or very early 30s.
      That the guy you refering to?

    • Xena says:

      That’s Jon, the witness who photographed the back of GZ’s head while GZ was on the phone — but he and GZ failed to mention when they had time to do that before Smith arrived.

      • xy11xy says:

        But wait a sec…

        I thought Jon, or John was W6 – the person who shouted from his patio that he was calling 911. The guy who said “MMA”.

        And I thought the guy who took a pic of George’s head was W13, who lives in the corner house on the opposite side from where Trayvon was shot. The guy who took 3 pictures on his i-phone and neglected to tell police until the FDLE came calling…

      • aussie says:

        W6 MMA John is JOHN.

        W13 Iphone-photographer Jon is JONathan and is the one hanging around inside the crime scene tape.

      • onlyiamunitron says:

        “That’s Jon, the witness who photographed the back of GZ’s head while GZ was on the phone — but he and GZ failed to mention when they had time to do that before Smith arrived.”

        The time stamp his iPhone 4S put on the photo was 7:19:07 PM.

        Smith is supposed to have gotten to the front gate around 7:17, just after the gunshot, but, thanks in part to a lot of different incoming info from 911 calls, it was a couple of minutes before he got around to the east leg of RVC, got out of his patrol car, and got into the backyards where the shooting had occurred, so this picture was probably taken just before Smith comes into view.

        Since Zimmerman has his back to Jon and the camera, and apparently was concentrating on whatever he was doing with his own phone, he might not even have known the picture was being taken.

        I find your idea about Jon perhaps having dropped the keychain light where it was found intriguing.

        Which just goes to show they should have covered that entire area and everything in it with fingerprint powder, ’cause you never know what’s going to be important.

        If Jon dropped it, that means George didn’t drop it there at the beginning of the fight and that he didn’t throw it over there after the gunshot to create false evidence about the location of the fight.

        Unless he dropped it there, or somewhere, and Jon picked it up and then dropped it there.

        If they’d found his fingerprints on it, they could have leveraged him into answering a question which they didn’t know they needed to ask–“When did you have hold of this, where did you get it from, and what did you do with it afterwards?”

        unitron

      • You all have thoughtful comments says:

        Did they find any fingerprints foreign to gz on the keychain with flashlight?

        • onlyiamunitron says:

          “Did they find any fingerprints foreign to gz on the keychain with flashlight?”

          I think the question is did they ever bother to look.

          unitron

        • Xena says:

          @Yahtc

          Did they find any fingerprints foreign to gz on the keychain with flashlight?

          I don’t remember seeing any lab report for the key chain.

      • You all have thoughtful comments says:

        If they did, then Whonoze’s speculation at the end of his superb video becomes even more credible, and gz’s is in even bigger trouble.

  8. xy11xy says:

    I had concerns about DeeDee because she’s young to have so much on her shoulders.

    She seemed distracted and out of breath during BDLR’s questioning, answering questions almost before they’d fully been spoken.

    Now, I don’t know how this works, but I felt maybe they didn’t take appropriate care with DeeDee. For example, they might have had her interviewed by a woman instead. Possibly someone who could modulate her voice and someone who she would identify with.

    DeeDee sounded nervous… understandably so. Maybe there’s some Jedi master reason why there are no medical records?

    Whatever.

    The coup, I think, is that there will be no demand for her medical records…not today, anyway.

    Mission accomplished!

    • type1juve says:

      @xy11xy
      It bothered me too the way DeeDee was interviewed. I’m sure this has all been overwhelming and confusing for her. BDLR is a good prosecutor, but his interviewing technique could be improved upon, in this situation anyway.

      • xy11xy says:

        I get why her Mother didn’t want her involved.

        Maybe DeeDee needs counseling for the emotional trauma she’s been through….maybe she also needs her own lawyer to protect her rights?

        Certainly, this is an overwhelming experience, as you said.

    • leander22 says:

      I have always been worrying about her. She features very, very prominently in the affidavit which shouldn’t exist according to some, is “irresponsible and unethical” according to the the Dersh.

      When I listen her she feels completely trustworthy to me. No, she isn’t easy to understand, but one can get used to it. Thus as a non-native speaker I do not quite understand the big brouhaha. Very strange that they seemingly have much more problems than me. But maybe since they really would like to hear her lie loud and clearly. Which she does not do, which in turn leaves them frustrated. As far as I am concerned, I hear pretty much the same story over and over again and not in a rehearsed way.

      But strictly when I start to read the close up study exercises of Diwataman and the TalkLeft Forum team I can’t help but feels slightly amused by the endeavors and hype.

      The latest ABC release seems to have spurned such a collective digging exercise and Jeralyn herself is still meditating over her final analysis:

      I’m still working on the analysis I began last night, and won’t get to finish it until this evening. … Posted on Thu Mar 07, 2013 at 12:53:36 PM EST

      Strictly nothing changed, always Crump and DeeDee, either Crump is the ultimate cheating demon dictating her what to say. That’s not what it sounds to me. Or DeeDee has been cheating them from the start. That is the given that drives “the reseach”.

      I am pretty speechless watching the discussion of the newly released ABC tape over at the TalkLeft Forum. Reminds me somehow of the many things people heard on Fogen’s 911 call, I simply couldn’t hear although I bought myself the best headset available.

      Look at this enormously weak judgment. It’s as if nomatter_mattermind had switched off some of his synapses while tuning in to Diwataman and CTL.

      It’s stunning that Crump did this with a network recorder going. Did he think Gutman was his best bud, who would keep covering for him forever, even go to jail for him?

      ETA: Has this really been up on the ABC website for over a week? Why hasn’t it made headlines?

      This guy did not sound stupid back in May, maybe, I can assure you. Since at that time he caught my attention. He/she seems to have lost some of his/her marbles while turning into a hero member on the TalkLeft Forum.

      Now this is a really interesting development. This feels like a change.

      Take care DeeDee. 😉

      • xy11xy says:

        @leander22

        I just listened to that ABC audio clip.

        Strictly nothing changed, always Crump and DeeDee, either Crump is the ultimate cheating demon dictating her what to say. That’s not what it sounds to me. Or DeeDee has been cheating them from the start. That is the given that drives “the reseach”.

        The clip inspires a feeding frenzy, but there really is nothing new to eat except that Crump comes through very much clearer, while DeeDee is only a little more clear.

        Here’s a snippet of nomatter_mattermind:

        …I think the prosecution is better off not putting Dee Dee in front of a jury, and they can justify that to the public.

        This is a clue to how devastating DeeDee’s testimony is. This case is about dispensing with witnesses, beginning with Trayvon himself. This fella would LOVE if she wasn’t put “in front of a jury”. He makes it sound as if she’s the one on trial. Ah, but she is not, and putting her before a jury will be devastating to George.

        As for the Zimmerbots, I made a decision when I began paying attention to this case that I would exercise faith and NOT fear. I decided that whatever became known – good or ill – I would face it:

        Trayvon smoked pot? Yes he did. I love him still.

        DeeDee is a normal, teenaged girl who is struggling with a traumatic event perpetrated by George Zimmerman et al? Yes she is, and I love her still.

        I decided that I would not allow immoral racists to set an impossible moral standard, place it way up high…an impossible, unreachable standard that I would then attempt to reach. An impossible, unreachable standard that I would also impose upon Trayvon and his family, and his friends; that would be a mistake.

        The only approach is to state the simple truth over and over again:

        Trayvon was human, imperfect and is perfectly VALUABLE.

        DeeDee is human, imperfect and is perfectly CREDIBLE.

        Why jump through hoops for immoral racists?

        • fauxmccoy says:

          excellent decision, xy11xy. i made a similar one myself.

          • xy11xy says:

            @fauxmccoy

            And the reward is….peace.

          • fauxmccoy says:

            yes, xy11xy, peace is the reward. i have also found that i as i chose to spend zero time on web sites which are full of zimmerman apologists, my sense of peace has only been enhanced. i highly recommend it to those among us who get rattled at what they read on such sites. it does me no benefit to read, interact and especially argue in such a setting.

      • leander22 says:

        Why jump through hoops for immoral racists?

        xy11xy, I am absolutely with everything you write.

        I am trying to grasp the mindset, and I simply cannot. It’s like a different universe. They expect GZ to take the stand, they think he never ever contradicted himself. They think he will proudly stand and witness and the Jury will acquit him. They do in fact seem to love and adore Fogen. They also do not have the least problem with the strange story of a “burglary suspect” turning into a “teenage killer” in a couple of minutes. From narrative to witnesses everything adds up for them.

        *****************

        Jeralyn has visualized where the ABC audio file fit’s into the Crump files. With a little help from Diwataman? Reminds me of his attempts at audio visualization of coons versus punks. Which was plainly crazy

        In any case she supposedly wrote a 12 page assessment of matters. ( I only have one link)

        I may have caused it (none / 0) (#22)
        by Jeralyn on Sat Mar 09, 2013 at 04:11:19 AM EST
        I wrote out my analysis to the conversation and then zap, the tab disappeared, and I spent a few hours trying to find it in cache and may have mucked up some settings. If you keep having a problem, please let me know, along with what browser you are using. When I lose something I spent hours writing, I get frustrated and start clicking on things I have no idea what they are. I ended up recreating it, but it’s 15 pages, and I don’t want to publish that long a blog post, so I’m trying to figure out how to convert it to an adobe pdf so I can upload it and link to it.

        I expect her to treat this as superior corpus delicti that proves her story. …

        good night

        • xy11xy says:

          @leander22

          They also do not have the least problem with the strange story of a “burglary suspect” turning into a “teenage killer” in a couple of minutes.

          Yuk Yuk… Yeah, and the teenage killer who then transforms into a kid on his way home, carrying a soda and some Skittles. For the bots, imagination trumps reality!

          Ah..Jeralyn… Let’s all go over to her place; she’ll tell us what to do!

          I know of Diwataman because someone I’m subbed to on YouTube kept making video responses to him a while back re Trayvon; but, Diwataman bores me. I don’t watch his videos. I occasionally pop in to his blog to antagonize his sycophants….when I’m really, really bored; but, I always leave feeling even more bored. Pffft

          As for Jerry losing what she wrote….har har. These Consero-Zimm bloggers are such a bunch of scammers!

          See ya.

      • leander22 says:

        oops, not 12 but 15 pages. 😉

      • aussie says:

        Anyone who doesn’t use a word processor or text editor for posts longer than about 5 paragraphs only have themselves to blame when it gets lost.

        How very professional to write 15 pages in a blog text entry field and not have a copy.

      • leander22 says:

        Well strictly, I take that with a grain of salt, although I also felt a little guilty about my comments when I read it. It may after all be true.

        I once translated an English 1943 crime novel that needed quite a bit of research for specific reasons, and with close to no time. At the end I worked on it nonstop and at one point I lost a whole day or more, maybe around 12 hours of work. It’s an absolute horror I can tell you, even more if your time is running out.

        So yes, unfortunately it happens. Since then I have shifted to Open Office, which has an exquisite restoring tool at startup and offers you an integrated tool to save files as pdf. I advised it to her. Although I find it hard to believe that an attorney on her level has no access to tools to convert files to pdf. See, always suspicious. Besides I am bloody curious. Jeralyn is my barometer for temperatures on the other side. 😉

  9. Soulcatcher says:

    How would Mr. expert know Tryvon could have made it back to the house in that 2 min 32 sec time that is unaccounted for? Perhaps he couldn’t, maybe someone stopped him from doing so. Maybe a man in a white shirt? Do we know it was George that Dee Dee heard him speaking to at that point? What we do know is George could have made it back to his truck, which is where he states he was headed, and the rest of his stories do not match the timeline.

    George may want us to believe “it was Gods will”, or perhaps George wasn’t listening, read my lips George, God doesn’t like ugly.

    • Xena says:

      IMO, Trayvon could have, but didn’t complete his walk, because he was cautious of going onto the street and turning the corner to enter the house in the front. Trayvon had been followed by a creepy guy in a vehicle. On the dog path where Trayvon was, no vehicle could come. That dog path ended in a road. It was worth waiting a few minutes making sure that no vehicle was coming down that road before “running from the back” to the front of Ms. Green’s house.

      As well, Trayvon might have needed to call Chad to open the door, and he wanted to finish talking with DeeDee before doing so.

  10. colin black says:

    We know people like Knox an experts like silly Sally the greif expert in another high profile case in Florida have different ideas re Peer Reveiwed.
    Silly Sally told J Ashton that her books were peer reveiwed by Amazon.

    Now this Knox character could have sent a copy of his book to lets say ME.

    I read it an then return a rather soggy sealed in a jiffybag with a cover note back to him.

    The cover note reads.
    Mr Knox haveng read your book I was overcome with rage.
    Thats 50 minutes of my life I wont get back.
    Im hard pushed to think of anything more dire an irrelevant than those peices of paper an writting you allege is a book.

    After reading the alleged book I was compelled to piss all over it from a great hight.
    Hence the soggy state I return it to you.

    So given thease circumstances Mr Knox could truthfully claim that I PEE ER Reveiwed his book.

    • Two sides to a story says:

      LOL!

    • KA says:

      That book would be trashed from scientific peers. It dismisses and skirts the basic foundations of research methodology. He was proving a hypothesis by using the hypothesis as a base data assumption….not really how it works….someone should tell him before he gets in the PhD program.

      • Malisha says:

        Knox is dangerous. He could do a demonstration of how trayvon Martin attacked Fogen in an unprovoked savage attack. All he has to do is get two biodegradable puppets, one Afro-Peruvian and the other Pba-lack. The Pba-lack one will come up to the innocent Afro-Peruvian one and Knox will throw his voice: “Hey what the Fuck’s your problem, homie?” it will say. It will jerk its little head around threateningly. The Afro-Peruvian puppet will look down. “OH NO WHO TOOK MY POCKETS?” it will squeak. The Pba-lack puppet will then say: “You ain’t GOT no fucking pockets, homie, you a damn puppet, member?”

        The Afro-Peruvian puppet will be confused. “Member!” he will intone in a hoarse whisper. “Are you a member of the Kalubb house?” The Pba-lack puppet will say, “Who the fuck do you think you are, hoarse whisperer?” Then he will punch the Afro-Peruvian puppet in the nose. The Afro-Peruvian puppet will fall on his wrist (because he has no pockets and no ass, either; he’s a puppet) and the Pba-lack puppet will try to mount him, at which point Knox will be shaking his own hands, and THEN we will know how it all went down that night.

        Knox was somewhere trying to shake hands.
        He got it all wrong and somebody died.
        You need an expert to figure it out.
        Thank god for those experts.

        • Lonnie Starr says:

          Knox is back spewing on his blog, he’s reopened the comments and let one of mine go through. He answers that a straight in shot is possible, then cites Spitz & Spitz, The Medicolegal Investigation of Death as his authority.

          My guess is this is an attempt to overwhelm me, because he gives no specific page numbers or chapter titles. I’m sure Professor has knowledge of and/or copy of this book, or can ferret out whether or not there’s that kind of information in there. Just off hand, I sincerely doubt it, I’ve seen this kind of obfuscating before, this is exactly the point where it usually comes in. My experience tells me that will be a waste of time trying to track it down, and/or, even if something is said, it will not apply by even the most tortured stretch of the imagination.

          Of course, I don’t want to be blunt with Knox, because I want him to keep talking. So, I just asked him to explain the difference between the ruler he uses and the “school boy” ruler that others use. LOL

          • I do not have a copy of the book.

            You have every right to put the burden on him to supply you with page numbers, as that is the standard practice when citing references.

            Mere reference to a book is not acceptable to support specific claims and you should call him on it.

          • Lonnie Starr says:

            Will do, but I will wait a while, letting this charlatan think he’s put one over. I’ve had better than him try, As I see it, he’s taking the short end of an equation I’m very familiar with, hee hee hee. I circle and force him to keep falling back on his various false authorities. Before he knows it, he’s woven a web of lies he can’t untangle. Hahaha.

          • Xena says:

            @Lonnie Starr, The Medicolegal Investigation of Death is a text book written and edited Spitz & Spitz, Descriptions for the book say that it is for pathological study. There appears to be numerous editions ranging over a period of 20 yrs. By Knox not citing the edition, neither chapter, he is diverting from the subject, IMO.

            One thing that Knox should be able to do is at least give a summary of what the author has stated on the matter rather than just referring to a publication.

          • Lonnie Starr says:

            Just checked MK’s blog, so far he hasn’t allowed any more comments past moderation. Not good for someone to hold themselves out to the public as an expert, then hide from everyone.
            Maybe the media can be made to throw the spotlight on him?

          • cielo62 says:

            Lonnie- I left him a comment calling him a coward for having taken down all of the comments. In effect, he “took his ball and went home” like a petulant child. Some expert.

            Sent from my iPod

          • Lonnie Starr says:

            Which is another reason I don’t bother wasting my time trying to run him down on the subject. It’s long been my experience in debates, that when one of the participants begins citing unclear evidence, it’s because they’ve realized they’ve lost and must resort to dissembling.
            I’ve moved him into my “column of kooks” in my journal. Since I now know that he’ll never be able to substantiate any of his claims.

            He’s just another one of hundreds of run of the mill charlatans who are not yet ready for prime time. The OS should jettison him, before he gives cause for them to be liable to suit. The mere fact that he thinks he’s smart, is a clear sign of how dangerous he is to any organization that accepts him.

          • cielo62 says:

            “If you can’t blind them with brilliance, then baffle them with bullshit.”

            Sent from my iPod

          • onlyiamunitron says:

            “The OS should jettison him…”

            Searching the Orlando Sentinel website for “Michael Knox” only returns the one article by their entertainment guy about Knox being hired by area television station WKMG.

            I’m not sure I see how this makes the paper responsible for anything Knox says or puts any of the paper’s money in Knox’s pocket.

            If you have links for any other mentions of him by them, could you post them?

            unitron

          • Lonnie Starr says:

            The OS reporter has said that his reports will lean heavily on Knox’s work.

          • Hoo-boy!

            That means the reporter will be clueless and wrong most of the time.

            Does anyone at the OS and Channel 6 covering this case have a functioning brain cell and a desire to figure out what really happened?

            Apparently not.

          • Lonnie Starr says:

            Yep, the lunatic Pipitone is going to lean on the charlatan Knox. Who buys their newspaper?

          • onlyiamunitron says:

            “Yep, the lunatic Pipitone is going to lean on the charlatan Knox. Who buys their newspaper?”

            Pipitone works for the television station. Knox has been hired by the television station.

            Neither of them work for the newspaper.

            The guy at the newspaper who writes about television stuff reported that Knox had been hired by the television station and that he was going to be working with Pipitone on stuff about the case that they were going to run on the television station.

            They did not force the television station to hire either man.

            Reporting that something happened is not the same as being either for or against it having happened or expressing an opinion about whether it having happened was a good thing or a bad thing.

            It’s just reporting that it did happen.

            unitron

          • Lonnie Starr says:

            “Who buys their newspaper” was not meant to be connected to Pipitone, it was an “excited utterance”, Tacked on in exasperation at the fact that there’s a radio station a tv station and a newspaper that are supporting or at least ignoring clear evidence of his guilt.

          • onlyiamunitron says:

            “…there’s a radio station a tv station and a newspaper that are supporting or at least ignoring clear evidence of his guilt.”

            Declaring the accused guilty prior to a trial and a verdict is not journalism, it is editorializing.

            A failure to adequately cover all aspects of a case may just be inadvertent inadequate journalism, possibly influenced by a shortage of time and space, and not a deliberate attempt to slant the coverage.

            Not everything that displeases someone is a conspiracy, or I could blame a cabal of meteorologists for it having been raining when I put out the garbage and recycling early yesterday morning.*

            And one media outlet reporting “This is how this other media outlet (with which they have no connection) is covering the case” is nothing more than reporting how some other media outlet is covering the case.

            unitron

            * Of course everyone knows it’s really the Illuminati, the Masons, and the Knights Templar that control the weather and that yesterday’s rain here was all about controlling the outcome of today’s papal election over there. The inconvenience to me on garbage day was just the icing on the latest slice of their world domination cake.

            : – )

          • onlyiamunitron says:

            “The OS reporter has said that his reports will lean heavily on Knox’s work.”

            The Orlando Sentinel staff writer, Hal Boedeker, has said nothing about the reports of Hal Boedeker leaning, heavily or otherwise, on the work of Michael Knox.

            Unless you are accusing Hal Boedeker of holding a gun to the head of “WKMG-Channel 6’s Tony Pipitone” in order to force “Pipitone’s reports, at 6 and 11 p.m….” to “… lean heavily on Knox’s work.”, your problem is with the television station, and not the newspaper.

            FCC rules prevent the one from being owned by the other.

            But the First Amendment allows either to report on the activities of the other without being in any way liable for those activities.

            If the Orlando Sentinel had made no mention of WKMG hiring Knox as a consultant, it would not have prevented WKMG from hiring Knox as a consultant.

            unitron

          • Lonnie Starr says:

            Okay you have it, I wasn’t paying that close attention. I had the players mixed up. Probably because I was so incensed I have a hard time reading that…. well let’s say stuff.

      • KA says:

        OMG…I have tears flowing now…I will start snorting soon.

        [glad my drink is empty]

      • Nef05 says:

        He should be outted as a fake before he ruins the rep of someone’s accredited program. There’s no way he learned that methodology in an accredited lab course. Have they called LLMPapa yet? He’d be the profect guy for the job!

      • Jun says:

        The straight in shot is only possible if he holds the gun in a weird awkard way where the gun would be right at his nose area, but it would not be intermediate range, it would be a close range or contact shot through

        The other issue is Trayvon would have been sitting on the jacket, which hangs past Fogen’s waist, and also the knees and legs would be blocking access to the hip, so how would he explain how the gun was drawn while Trayvon was allegedly head smashing on the sidewalk, and how is he explaining the anti-gravity bleeding?

        How would he explain that the witness 18 said he shot the kid and simply rose to his feet? Mary Cutcher said the same thing and Selma, as well as witness 3, who says Fogen was on top of Trayvon?

        There’s too many ways to dispute shooting while on the bottom that it just will not work where it matches the story, especially the trajectory and the misalignment of the bullet holes to explain it away with gravity LMAO

        His only problem is Knox attempts to make the evidence match the story, when the evidence is supposed to tell the story, and he does not put everything together in relation to one another, nor does he do the scientific tests that match the evidence

        Bottom line, he’s an idiot, or he is playing people with nonsense

        • Lonnie Starr says:

          I sincerely doubt the OS is paying his outrageous fees, they’re using him for his sensationalism factor, come June they’ll dump him like a pair of old shoes. Maybe him and MOM can get a room together.

          • fauxmccoy says:

            lonnie says

            I sincerely doubt the OS is paying his outrageous fees, they’re using him for his sensationalism factor, come June they’ll dump him like a pair of old shoes. Maybe him and MOM can get a room together.

            bwahahahahahahahahahha — i love you man!

          • onlyiamunitron says:

            “I sincerely doubt the OS is paying his outrageous fees…”

            Extremely unlikely, since Knox is not going to be working for the Orlando Sentinel.

            Probably be considered a conflict of interest considering that he’s working for area TV station WKMG.

            unitron

    • roderick2012 says:

      I’m sure that Knox’s book will end up in the $1 bin along with Osterman’s scribblings.

      • Xena says:

        Funny thing is that Knox tweeted Junior to read his book. Knox is not impartial. In his tweets, he actually tries arguing legal defense saying that Trayvon’s fear is not relevant to the criminal case. Well, that is not what the Dooley jury believed about David James.

    • cielo62 says:

      Colin-ROTF! Yep, that sounds like an appropriate pee- er review! One which Max, my late Boxer would have approved.

      Sent from my iPod

  11. You all have thoughtful comments says:

    Now, on the NBC gz blog, another poster is questioning Frederick Leatherman’s credentials:
    .
    See click>>#432.2

    By the way, if any of you click a reply button there, all you have to do is give your email and whatever avatar name you want.

  12. Dashamimi says:

    Has anyone seen the video that was made of who they think is Witness 8 by the “z’s” supporters? I do not want to repost it…..but we are sending the video to SA office. Something really needs to be done!

    • KA says:

      Like a video of her in person? That is scary and awful.

      • Dashamimi says:

        It’s like a slide show of pictures of who they think is Witness 8….I don’t know if it’s her or not…….but it is scary.

      • Are these the pictures to which O’Mara was privy at the hearing? How else would they have gotten them?

      • I saw it, and it is pure doxing. Two of the pictures are of different girls. It amazes me how much energy and time the defense is spending of W8, who had nothing to do with the fact that GZ took Trayvon’s life. Without W8 saying a word, we know that she was on the phone with Trayvon during the moments leading up to his death… minutes even. My goodness! The time and energy they are spending on trying to discredit this witness is mindboggling!

      • Rachael says:

        They have been going through what they think are FB friends, etc. They are very scary people. I mean what reason would they have for needing or even wanting to know who she is?

    • I haven’t seen the video. What’s the name of the video?

  13. KA says:

    Just read someone’s blog about W8 testimony. I cannot believe that people attribute middle aged adult behavior to a high schooler. I wonder, “have these people actually met a teen?” They are fundamentally brain flawed when it comes to judgement. I have now reared three in to their early 20s and I am still not sure if their brain is fixed yet.

    This specific instance is someone who is a “highly trained interviewer and former detective” (AREN’T THEY ALL). He thinks the “gottcha” moment is that she said she has guilt. He thinks she is “confessing to lying” or “lying about her testimony” and that is an admission. Wow….I truly drop my mouth open at that assumption. I am so glad he has such keen skill at “reading” her meaning.

    I am positive that W8 did not know Trayvon’s life was in danger. I suspect she thought he was getting harassed by someone and he would call her back. When she found out he had been shot, I am sure it was like she felt she had done it herself because she did not know how serious the situation was and now the boy she liked is dead. What a burden to shoulder for a high school girl.

    Most teens do not take life and death as cautious as we do. They just don’t. I have seen that over and over.

    A 17 year old and a 16 year old were sword fighting with collector swords handing from the wall back several years ago when my boys were in high school. They knew them. One ended up stabbing and killing the other. He was shocked he had killed his friend. To an adult that would have to be willful and there were those that thought it was. I did not. I hated that it happened, but it was clear the one who stabbed was caught up in sword fighting and did not think that the blades killed. It was awful.

    Anyway I cannot believe the child like benefit people will give a 28 year old man with clearly a struggling life verses a 17 year old junior in high school that didn’t even have a drivers license.

    • Nef05 says:

      You are absolutely right. You learned it from experience, however fortunately not through a tragedy in the immediate family. Thank goodness, though one’s prayers must go to the family that lost a child.

      It’s been studied for years. Called the “Adolescent Invincibility theory/fable” can be cited for any number of tragic outcomes. Fortunately, you are already well aware of the danger. Here’s some info you could share with a friend if you like:

      “Risk-taking is the most dangerous hazard to adolescents’ mental and physical health (Igra & Irwin, 1996). Adolescents usually view their risks as bringing them short-term satisfaction, and they do not usually see the potentially harmful consequences their actions can bring. Out of any age group, their attitude toward risk-taking is the most lenient (Gardner, 1992, in Muuss & Porton, 1998). There are many theories offering explanations for this increase in risky behaviors. Such theories include cognitive, psychosocial, and/or biological reasoning. The current study employs biological reasoning to explain why adolescents engage in such an increase of risk-taking behavior than when they were children.”

      http://people.westminstercollege.edu/staff/mjhinsdale/Research_Journal_1/laura_paper.pdf

  14. Trained Observer says:

    I think BDLR’s “hospital or something” was deliberately crafted to give some wiggle room. Then along came West who grabbed on with “she lied.” Big bonus likely to pay off later when West is shown to be wrong. So no, I don’t find it odd. If Corey and BDLR called a news conference to clarify every time MOM & West screwed up, they’d never get anything else done … like get Fogen behind bars where he belongs. .

    • blushedbrown says:

      @TO

      Excellent Observation. You are correct. 🙂

      They don’t have time for that. BDLR has done an excellent job of it and kept his arguments in a court of law, not the court of public opinion.

    • roderick2012 says:

      Trained, DeeDee is the most important witness for the State and I am not suggesting that BDLR jump in front of a camera to correct every lie that O’Mara or West tells but to me its personal.

      It’s as if DeeDee is just another disposable black female and no one cares if her reputation is smeared unfairly because she was asked a very poorly worded question.

      Granted we know we haven’t seen all of the evidence especially George’s text messages which are under seal until the trial but it would be nice if the State actually seemed concerned about what some of their witnesses are enduring just because they want to tell the truth about what they heard and saw that night.

      • Trained Observer says:

        Roderick, it’s so true that DeeDee has been slimed seven different ways from Sunday, and it’s disgusting … personally so to you, me, and countless others. Plus, all this has occurred on top of this teenager losing Trayvon, her friend since kindergarten.

        I firmly believe that the State will have its moment in the sun to put the folks who have done her wrong in their rightful place. Meanwhile, those who malign her keep digging their own holes.

      • KA says:

        The thing is, she is the most important witness that never has to talk. Her phone records are validated. The important conversation point was heard similarly by another. Her timeline and recollection of environment details fit the timeline and evidence. She really does not have to say a word. I think that is why they are ignoring the defense tactics.

        I don’t think he thought twice about the hospital statement and maybe he knows she went somewhere. It was just not an important part and really, what value is public perception on this trial? I have several friends who barely know anything about this case, including whether or not it has even been to trial yet or if someone actually died.

        • onlyiamunitron says:

          “The thing is, she is the most important witness that never has to talk. Her phone records are validated.”

          Her phone records may be validated, but if she doesn’t take the stand at trial to testify to what she heard on the phone that night, and to be cross-examined on that testimony, then there would be no point in even mentioning them.

          The phone company or companies has or have records of when those 2 phones were connected to each other, but that’s it.

          They don’t have actual audio recordings of the actual conversations that took place over those phones.

          She has to testify in person and the defense has to be allowed to cross examine her as part of that.

          unitron

      • KA says:

        Why? She can say the things that are corroborate with other evidence. She does not have a huge amount of value outside that to the State. She didn’t tell them anything new, she just validated what they already logically concluded based on other evidence and narratives.

        Half of what she said will be considered hearsay anyway.

        BTW, the phone company may also have voicemails left or texts. If she leaves a message asking what the guy wanted or what he said or why he was following him, it is obvious TM was not preparing to fight. That would not be a logical conclusion. The NEN calls back up the fact he was running away and can be logically assumed he was worried about GZ’s behavior.

        ..but those texts have not been released. I suspect she call and/or(as she said she did) or text him afterwards. If her words ask a question like that, then I think it validates her words and hurts or kills a narrative that Trayvon “attacked” him unprovoked.

      • ladystclaire says:

        @roderick2012, if you don’t mind me asking, are you from Western North Carolina? the reason I’m asking you this is because, I know a very handsome guy and his name is Roderick. I have often wondered if you are the Roderick that I know but, I never got around to asking and, you are not on here on a regular basis.

      • roderick2012 says:

        @ladystclaire

        Sorry, lady, but I live in south FL not NC, and my real name isn’t Roderick but my first name is Irish and ‘my’ day is coming up in about a week.

        However I will accept the handsome compliment.

      • xy11xy says:

        @roderick

        I think he was concerned about what O’Mara was saying..I can’t recall ever seeing him go in front of the media presser like that before…

        Maybe DeeDee needs her own representation.

      • ladystclaire says:

        @Trainedobserver, these slime balls don’t care about the fact, that they are slandering this girl. they only care about trying to make anybody who can play a big role in seeing that he is locked up, out to look worse than he does. the only thing with that is, Fogen’s past criminal acts are on record. they want to make Trayvon and anybody who he associated with out to be a thug. we all know who the real thug is in this instance don’t we.

      • Jun says:

        Deedee is an important piece to the puzzle but let us use legal mathematics

        1) The defense never proved she lied. That was mere allegations. When it hits trial, if the defense brings it up, it will be objected on grounds of “assuming facts without evidence” and “irrelevant and immaterial”

        2) Witness 8 is in danger so, they may allow her to telephonically testify, seeing the wolves after her

        3) That is strictly what the defense claims happened and they brainwashed some people

        4) The truth will come out in court and her testimony will be supported by on scene evidence, thereby bolstering her credibility

        When it comes to other people, you can stop what they say, and what they say may not necessarily be true and if we were to argue with the defense on every single one of their claims, the trial would never get underway, because that is all they spend their time doing

        The jury can only weigh what has been authenticated and admissible during trial

        • roderick2012 says:

          Jun, again you’re assuming that jurors are robots or computers who can have their brains erased like you can delete a file.

          Human memory doesn’t work like that.

      • Jun says:

        I never called them robots

        but if Deedee gives a testimony and it matches on scene evidence and witnesses that were not even there, then it bolsters her credibility

        The issue with her hospital records is moot and there is already an objection shaped for what you are suggesting and it is called “assuming facts not in evidence” and “immaterial”

        On top of that, Omara can make accusations but it does not necessarily make them true and seeing he cant back up his allegations, and his opinion would obviously be flawed by bias, there would not be much weight given to it

        The jurors job would be to weigh what is in the evidence and what is admissible and believable, they can not weigh what is not admissible otherwise it would be easy to see and find out

        This is all they have on their allegation

        a) their allegation

        b) they asked for her personal hospital and medical records, and the state said there were never hospital records to obtain, the state never stated what methods they used to get hospital records or investigate, and they told the defense to depose witness 8 and find out from her the information, and then after that, they can readdress the issue in court. I do not see any conclusive proof. Even the judge told them to talk to witness 8 about her records. It is going to look fishy why the defense did not just go straight to witness 8 to find out the information straight from her, but rather make accusations based on ambiguous hearsay. I never heard the state say she lied in open court, did you?

        c) The issue is moot.

        d) Whether or not she lied, it does not make the defendant’s crooked’s straight.

        e) For Omara or West to even try to bring it up would be submitting hearsay to the court, and that would not be allowed.

        f) Jurors weigh evidence all the time and have to deal with accusations and lies all the time. I think any normal person will find the issue is moot and irrelevant, and it sounds like a huge invasion of her privacy, and the defense would look like jerks in front of a jury, especially badgering her with no proof.

        g) Does Omara really want to bring up the idea of medical and hospital records and it’s importance, over witness 8’s moot issue? It would raise the issue to a higher level of importance for the defendant himself.

        h) Witness 8 is witness 8, and she can only speak for herself, yet they have not spoken to her and asked her to clarify the moot issue they seek to desire. If they actually deposed and spoke to her, for all they know, it could have been a simple explanation where the state told her about what the defense wanted, and her refusing and objecting to her medical records being invaded. Until we hear from her and have evidence, it is all mere speculation at this point.

  15. Lonnie Starr says:

    Join me in sending the link to this article to Rene Stutzman The Orlando Sentinel Law Reporter who does not appear to be informed of the laws, concerning the matters she’s been reporting on. Here’s her email address: rstutzman@orlandosentinel.com in the hope that better informed reporters will foster better reporting.

    • roderick2012 says:

      Lonnie, don’t waste your time beause Stutzman and the other reporter assigned to this case have been de facto stenogophers for O’Mara since early in this trial.

      The scary part is that the Sentinel is the local paper for the area from where the jury pool will come from.

      Remember all O’Mara needs to happen is for one racist out of 500 potential jurors to slip onto the jury and George is home free.

      Good luck prosecution!!

    • jm says:

      Thanks Lonnie. At first I sent email to Rene Stutzman regarding her sloppy one-sided reporting and then thought I would forward the email to editor and publisher of Orlando Sentinel. I am so angry at the one-sided reporting either because of Stutzman’s ignorance or malice I didn’t think it would be effective to just send complaints to Stutzman. Hopefully the powers that be at OS will take the time to address my concerns regarding Stutzman’s “reporting” on Zimmerman case.

    • Trained Observer says:

      Lonnie, don’t think she’s the law reporter, and doubt OS even has one. Mostly she seems to cover courts and cops, with forays into GA.

    • nate riedburg says:

      Good luck. I emailed her on one of her first stories when she said Z was rightly not arrested due to the SYG law. In the email I linked the statute specifically highlighting how his pursuit from vehicle to foot disqualified him and his actions of creating the entire situation lead to the shooting. She ignored it, cited a different statute and said I failed to understand the article.

      If anyone gets anywhere with Rene, please post it!

  16. roderick2012 says:

    Does anyone find it odd that neither Bernie nor Corey has called a news conference to clarify that DeeDee did not lie and the question poised by Bernie was vague and poorly worded?

    I would believe that they would attempt to rehabilitate the reputation of their star witness if they truely wanted to put George away for Murder 2.

    OTOH I never trusted Corey beause she’s a Teapublican and her original news conference was overly dramatic and inappropriate as if she were trying too hard to give the impression that she was personally invested in getting justice for Trayvon and not doing her job representing the State of Florida.

    She kinda reminded me of Marsha Clark’s press conference during the OJ Simpson trial.

    I have to agree with Malisha’s assessment on another thread that the State and O’Mara are in this together and they are slow walking this case to a plea deal because they don’t want to expose the shady dealings of Wolfinger or Billy Lee or the Sanford PD to the light of day.

    • nate riedburg says:

      The reason the prosecutor is ready and Omara is not is because one of them does not waste time on press conferences, social welfare websites, and time draining useless motions in court.

      Did I read your comment correctly that you are accusing Omara of not actually representing Z and he is just a State Op undercover?

      • roderick2012 says:

        I said that is the plan.

        O’Mara has admitted by not filing for the immunity hearing that he doesn’t believe that Geroge is a viable witness therefore it will be difficult for him to put him on the stand during the jury trial which in a self-defense case is paramount to admitting guilt so the only option left strategically is a plea deal of some sort.

        O’Mara can’t force George to take it but it’s his best bet since even Serino thought that George committed manslaughter and that was before the autopsy, ballastics and forensics results came back.

        • cielo62 says:

          Roderick- the state has no reason to offer a plea deal. I don’t think they will. GZ will just have to go to court and take his lumps.

          Sent from my iPod

      • nate riedburg says:

        But you said the plea was to avoid revealing skid marks from Wolfinger and Billy lee. Now you are saying it is because it is in Z’s best legal interest. Seems like two different justifications.

        I see Omara and/or Z cracking before the trial and for whatever reason, I do not think an actual trial will take place in June. Z will fire Omara (or Omara quits under that ruse) and seek a continuance, which the judge will have to grant, or Z will commit suicide with his wife.

        If Z had ever really cared about the best possible defense he would have stayed in jail and let the donations pay for his defense and not the bond/living expenses.

      • KA says:

        I do not want to see anyone die of suicide, not GZ, not anyone. I have this feeling as well that things are not going to go as they are scheduled today. I hope that is not by death, and I also hope it is not in a way to skirt justice. I suspect MOM and West have several more attempted tricks up their sleeve to delay or change this schedule.

      • roderick2012 says:

        nate riedburg says:But you said the plea was to avoid revealing skid marks from Wolfinger and Billy lee. Now you are saying it is because it is in Z’s best legal interest. Seems like two different justifications.

        They are not mutually exclusive and since we know that the State holds something up its sleeve that prevented O’Mara from proceding with the immunity hearing especially at a time when the State is on the defensive because its star witnesses lied (although the lie didn’t involve this case) and public opinion seems to favor the murderer doesn’t make sense.

        Also the State has a weak link besides DeeDee and his name is Chris Serino, and I believe if this goes to trial the defense will attempt to turn him into Mark Furhman and make the trial about Serino’s credibility as well as DeeDee’s.

        Because Serino:

        1) Coached witnesses
        2) Been accused of leaking the jailhouse video of George to ABC
        3) Been demoted to patrol duty
        4) Changed the charges against George three times in March before he submitted his report to the SA

        Of course why he changed the final report multiple times would open up the possibility that Serino was pressured by Billy Bob Lee and no one wants to open that can of worms.

        Question: Can the State introduce George’s interviews with Serino without Serino taking the stand?

        Can the State introduce the re-enactment video by having the officer who was with Serino that day take the stand instead?

        Just keep Serino off the stand because he’s sitting duck for the defense.

        • nate riedburg says:

          I don’t see how Serino can ultimately work in the defense’s favor with those listed reasons. Here is where I see a lot of people getting off track with the case: it doesnt matter what anyone other than Z says. At the end of the day you could throw out every single witness against Z and he would still be convicted by his own lies and inconsistent statements.

          I had always wondered how Omara was going to be such a legal genius that he could figure out how to put Z on the stand before the trial without giving the prosecution more evidence. This first sparked when Omara was too afraid to put him on the stand at his second bail hearing when he requested Z be allowed to be questioned by the judge but not by the prosecutor. Obviously I am not a lawyer but that seemed like a ridiculously ignorant move due to the inherent self incriminating implications.

          • roderick2012 says:

            Two words: jury nullification and O’Mara only needs one juror to commit to this out of 500 potential jurors.

    • ay2z says:

      Apparently, the law prevents prosecutors from discussing evidence in a case publicly. The judge is the one who made the decision to allow O’Mara to do what he is doing by not stopping him with a gag order.

      • roderick2012 says:

        If I remember correctly Bernie was asked by a reporter after the hearing about Witness 8.

        If he’s not quick enough on his feet to defend her he should be replaced.

        • fauxmccoy says:

          roderick – the prosecution has been stellar so far in regards to not trying the case in the media, which they cannot do. BDLR need not defend any witness before the media and should not. i do expect that during the trial and any pre-trial hearings or depositions, that he will ensure the safety of any state’s witness as he has executed faithfully thus far. he knows that he must do so in order to preserve the integrity of his case.

      • roderick2012 says:

        fauxmccoy says:he knows that he must do so in order to preserve the integrity of his case.

        How would having a ten minute press conference explaining that the question he asked DeeDee was terrible and there was no right answer compromise the integrity of the case?

        • fauxmccoy says:

          the prosecution held it’s big presser when they filed the capeas for zim’s arrest and may have another one at the trial’s conclusion. you must have noticed that they do not discuss case specifics with the press whatsoever. their ability to do so is limited legally, if i understand correctly. i cannot tell you how precisely defense of W8’s character may or may not impact the integrity of their case because i have no clue as to what they would or could say. they have clearly determined that the less said, the better. they are protecting their witness which is indisputable as evidenced by the fact that no one has determined her identity to date. the prosecution has not to date revealed specific information as to how they intend to prove their case and a press conference could give out more information than they wish.

          if you are familiar with any of my previous comments regarding this witness, you must know that my concern for her well being is strong and sincere. i think that any defense of her character should be done by surrogates rather than the state (i.e. crump is doing so), but that the state will continue to protect her to the best of their ability throughout the trial and afterwards, if that is required.

          i understand your concern but believe that worry is misplaced. W8 has been a target of media/blog speculation and much worse from the beginning, the events of this most recent hearing merely add to that which already exists. W8 will have her day in court and has her own legal remedies should she need to pursue them once her identity is known.

    • So far, this has all been one-sided nonsense, roderick. There is no need for them to get into a no-she-didn’t, yes-she-did match. Let it come out in court. No one can change the minds of his followers. Nothing. Goodness! They are now saying that O’Mara was smart not to have a SYG hearing to save resources. Drones… following mindlessly! Oh my word!!!!!

    • Malisha says:

      Roderick, I came to that pre-conclusion a long time ago without real evidence of it, for the simple reason that I knew too much about the players, and did not trust them farther than I could throw a grand piano before breakfast. Also, I have been around the block a few times and understand the inner workings of government corruption. You cannot understand the inner workings of government without understanding the inner workings of government corruption; it is either figure or ground and at times, both. Welcome to the terrible way I think — which I have come by honestly. Sorry to report.

      • roderick2012 says:

        Malisha, your way of thinking is not terrible you’re just a realist like I am although most people would consider me a pessimist, but I have had enough hard knocks growing up to know that things don’t turn out for the better.

        When there are persons posting that they hope there is a riot so they can have an excuse to shoot black people it makes me realize how demented and evil some people truely are.

        I just wish that everyone else on this blog who are supporting just for Trayvon would stop being so damn Pollyanish and understand that there are people who don’t want George to go to jail regardless if they believe he is guilty or not and all O’Mara has to do is get one of those people on the jury.

        • xy11xy says:

          @roderick2012

          I think BDLR kinda….tried to talk… I believe he’s prohibited from doing media, O’Mara style.

          He basically told a reporter to do her research into the perjury laws. That subtext being: stop asking dumb questions, and she didn’t lie.

          That is what this whole thing is about isn’t it? The SYG laws, owning multiple assault weapons that can virtually spray bullets at groups of people… It’s what the gun rights people tell reporters whenever they are pressed as to why they NEED assault rifles: RIOTS

          Whenever there is a natural disaster that affects an Urban area, the media immediately begins worrying if there are signs of rioting. I can count on my fingers the number of seconds before they begin their offline concern trolling.

          I recall many devastating tornadoes covered in American media. I do not recall any media talk of the possibility of rioting in those communities.

          Is it any wonder they refuse to touch the assault weapon matter as it relates to race?

    • Roderick said,

      Does anyone find it odd that neither Bernie nor Corey has called a news conference to clarify that DeeDee did not lie and the question poised by Bernie was vague and poorly worded?

      I would believe that they would attempt to rehabilitate the reputation of their star witness if they truely wanted to put George away for Murder 2.

      You are mistaken. They are forbidden from doing that.

      • cielo62 says:

        Mason blue- there isn’t a gag order in place, so why can’t the prosecution clarify their position and correct media misinterpretation?

        Sent from my iPod

      • roderick2012 says:

        Then Bernie should have been more prepared during the hearing since with an explanation since he knew there were no hospital records.

        O’Mara has been trying this case in the media since the beginning and he waited until a few months ago to request a gag order and now everyone believes that DeeDee is a liar because Bernie didn’t explain that it was his vague question that caused the problem.

        • onlyiamunitron says:

          “O’Mara has been trying this case in the media since the beginning and he waited until a few months ago to request a gag order…”

          Who waited? O’Mara or Bernie?

          unitron

          • roderick2012 says:

            OMG Bernie waited until a few months ago to request a gag order.

            Why would O’Mara request a gag order since he’s been trying this case in the court of public opinion?

          • onlyiamunitron says:

            When you said “O’Mara” and “he” in the same sentence in which no other proper name appeared, I wasn’t certain whether the “he” in that sentence was O’Mara or a male person from a previous sentence.

            So I asked.

            Thank you for answering.

            unitron

          • fauxmccoy says:

            hey, unitron–

            know why the three little pigs left home?
            because their father was a boor.

            hahahahahaha woo hooo hooo – that’s a real knee slapper, alrighty!

            my grandma told it to me when i was a kid and as i grew older, i realized she told it often, usually when my grandfather was behaving like a social boor. guess what buddy? you are as well.

            thanks for the excruciatingly correct grammar lessons.

            roderick’s intent was clear enough for anyone without a hang up to ‘get it’. what purpose does this behavior of yours serve anyway? from the outside, it appears to be self serving and ugly.

          • onlyiamunitron says:

            I wasn’t certain I correctly understood what he said.

            I asked for clarification rather than make an assumption.

            unitron

    • Nef05 says:

      Name utterly insigificant and forgot to change back. Has been Corrected.

      • onlyiamunitron says:

        Please note that the avatar on the comment to which you replied is not like the one which is attached to this one.

        And that whoever posted it also forgot one other important thing.

        unitron

    • nate riedburg says:

      How is that new?

      Knox claims to be neutral and I have not read his whole book but did read the first chapter and it looks biased. He talks about the cop assault but omits two other physically violent episodes from Z’s past while claiming to provide relevant backgrounds.

      He referenced T’s vandalism at school and points out the security guard got suspicious because T was in an unauthorized area. He then claims that is the reason Z found T as suspicious but the problem is he was not in an unauthorized area and in fact, the route T took was one commonly used by people walking into TLR from the 7/11 side of the complex.
      In the article he claims Z’s version of the trigger moment is supported by the evidence but he makes the classic mistake of inductive reasoning because the evidence does not restrict the positions of Z and T to only what Z claimed and definitely not why.

      • Trained Observer says:

        The news, as stated, is that Knox will be a “regular” as forensic consultant on Channel 6 during the trial. Some of us might say alleged forensic consultant.

      • roderick2012 says:

        Frederick Leatherman says:Big mistake by Channel 6
        Instant loss of credibility.

        When was the last time the media cared about credibility?

        It’s all about ratings (dollars)….

      • Nef05 says:

        How is that new?

        It was “new” in that it was published 5 minutes before I linked it to this blog. He is biased. I believe he is also wrong. However, I was not referring to the content of the article, simply the timing of the article.

      • gbrbsb says:

        Maybe someone should whisper to Mr Knox that the “oh look at me how profound I am” citation he uses to start his book with:

        “Things are not always what they seem; the first appearance deceives many; the intelligence of a few perceives what has been carefully hidden”

        that he attributes to;

        Plato in “The Phaedrus”

        and is presumably referring to himself as one of those “few” with the “intelligence” to devise that “hidden” from us rif raf, is NOT from Plato’s “Phaedrus” (note “The” is incorrect also), but from the Roman fabulist and poet, Phaedrus, who lived some 300 years later and was the main re-compiler of the Aesop’s fables we have today. Indeed the citation is more fitting to the easy lesson of a fable than to a Socratic dialogue to ponder deep philosophical issues!

        The “expert” detective couldn’t even detect the right author! Lol!

        • fauxmccoy says:

          @gbrbsb — great catch! thanks for the lolz 😀

          • gbrbsb says:

            @fauxmccoy
            Thanks faux, I loved the reading Greeks , the cantankerous Socrates my favourite, and the quote was just too superficial to be him even via Plato so I checked it out.

            What does loiz mean?

          • fauxmccoy says:

            i thought that i typed lolz for laughs out loud … i am not one to type a straight LOL, just not my style. (note: the preceding and following ‘LOL’ typed solely as an exemplar.) 😉

          • gbrbsb says:

            Forget question, it’s Lols spelt Lolz… me bit thick!

      • gbrbsb says:

        @Professor: (sorry forgot to add ends of blockquotes so feel free to delete the previous post of mine on this topic)

        Maybe someone should whisper to Mr Knox that the “oh look at me how profound I am” citation he uses to start his book with:

        “Things are not always what they seem; the first appearance deceives many; the intelligence of a few perceives what has been carefully hidden”

        that he attributes to;

        Plato in “The Phaedrus”

        and is presumably referring to himself as one of those “few” with the “intelligence” to devise that “hidden” from us rif raf, is NOT from Plato’s “Phaedrus” (note “The” is incorrect also), but from the Roman fabulist and poet, Phaedrus, who lived some 300 years later and was the main re-compiler of the Aesop’s fables we have today. Indeed the citation is more fitting to the easy lesson of a fable than to a Socratic dialogue to ponder deep philosophical issues!

        The “expert” detective couldn’t even detect the right author! Lol!

    • Trained Observer says:

      Below is from the Orlando Sentinel TV columnist for those of you encountering paywall barriers.

      IMO, the truest statement is “Knox saw an opportunity …”
      As for the final graf … well if frogs had wings, they wouldn’t bump their butts.

      From Orlando Sentinel:
      George Zimmerman: WKMG adds forensic consultant
      February 8, 2013

      |By Hal Boedeker, Staff writer
      T
      wo Friday reports by WKMG-Channel 6’s Tony Pipitone will introduce a forensic consultant who will be a regular during the CBS affiliate’s coverage of the George Zimmerman trial.

      Michael Knox has written “Intermediate Range: The Forensic Evidence in the Killing of Trayvon Martin,” a self-published book. Pipitone’s reports, at 6 and 11 p.m., lean heavily on Knox’s work.

      The 6 p.m. report offers a timeline of the movements by Martin and Zimmerman on Feb. 26, the night Zimmerman fatally shot the teen in Sanford. The 11 p.m. report focuses on forensics to explain the wound evidence. Zimmerman is charged with second-degree murder in Martin’s death, and the trial will begin in June.

      “The 6 o’clock piece casts doubt on Zimmerman’s account, but the 11 o’clock supports Zimmerman’s account of the crucial moment when he fired the shot,” Pipitone said.
      Of the 11 p.m. report, Pipitone added, “We’re not saying it’s a scientific re-creation. It’s to visualize what stippling and cloth and gunshots produce when they come together.”

      Pipitone praised Knox’s credentials and evenhanded approach to evidence in the headline-making case.

      “He’s absolutely credible,” WKMG news director Steve Hyvonen said of Knox. “Tony did his own investigative work. We took what was in the book from this experienced officer and expanded on it.”

      The 6 p.m. report runs five minutes, an eternity in television. The 11 p.m. report was being edited Friday afternoon. Pipitone will expand on his findings on “Flashpoint,” moderated by Lauren Rowe, at 8 a.m. Sunday.

      Knox was a police officer and detective in Jacksonville, investigated hundreds of homicides and earned a master of science degree in forensic science from the University of Florida.

      Knox saw an opportunity in writing about the Zimmerman case. “With such a polarized debate, a lot of details got lost in the shuffle,” he said. “What I wanted to do was provide a more neutral presentation of the evidence.”

      What does Pipitone want viewers to take away from the reports?

      “They should wait for facts and evidence to be produced before jumping to any conclusions,” he said.

      With the timeline, he added, “You see Trayvon could have gotten back to the house, had he gone to the house. And you see George could have gotten back to the truck, had he gone back to the truck. There’s up to 2 minutes and 32 seconds where neither did what they could have done.”

      • onlyiamunitron says:

        Assuming that you are actually you and not yet another impersonation, please note that the comment to which you replied appears to have been made by me, but was actually made by an impersonator.

        unitron

      • Rachael says:

        I saw that and almost puked.

      • Grossly irresponsible decision by Channel 6.

        Knox is not a competent forensic scientist.

        He’s not a scientist.

        He’s never had anything published in a peer reviewed professional journal and his analysis in this case is fatally flawed.

        There are any number of honest and competent forensic experts in subjects relevant to the investigation and Michael Knox is not one of them.

        Massive fail.

      • ay2z says:

        Knox is somewhat deceptive in his CV. When I saw his ‘Education’ I scanned down the list of degrees, saw he had his doctorate in forensic sciences– he DOES NOT.

        Knox knows that readers of a CV will scan over the list, and he is playing a little game, lists his top degree as if he actually has that qualification, then says over on the right, he’s just working on it now.

        Properly, you do not say you have your doctorate degree and then well, just enrolled and working on it off to the side. Those working on a PhD, some for a number of years, use the distinction of ‘candidate’ so there is no mistake.

        Knox is playing a litte deception game with text. He did this with the ‘Peer Reviewed’ publications list, and giving a paper at a conference and the association puts the papers together in a book for, is NOT peer reviewed, and if he thinks so, he hasn’t got a clue what peer review means.

        If Knox plays these games with his CV to give a false impression of his qualifications, what will he do when he wants to publish a book based on a high profile case even before it goes to trial? And worse, what he is the so called ‘scientist’ who purposefully set up his CV to give a false impression to impress?

        • Lonnie Starr says:

          Gasp… Could he be a QUACK???

          • fauxmccoy says:

            yes, upon completion of his PhD, we shall call him “Duckter” Knox 😀

          • Lonnie Starr says:

            Yeah and the college he attended will be thought of as a diploma mill. I mean sheesh, in public he uses words that he clearly does not know the meaning of. Well, good thing he’s on the side of Toxic Fogen, GZ is taking them down one by another.

          • Xena says:

            Gasp… Could he be a QUACK???

            IMO, Knox thought he was a lone forensic’s commentator whose findings would not be challenged. He played for the camera, not realizing that others know important facts from evidence that he omits. Look at his blog — until he attacked LLMPapa, Knox had not posted anything about the case since around May last year. The worst thing he did was fire that shot while standing up with the cardboard upright as if Trayvon was standing.

            Now, apparently embarrassed that a Zidiot instigated him to attack LLMPapa, Knox has removed that page from his blog. He would have done better and recovered a portion of his professionalism by simply explaining how he came into knowledge of LLMPapa’s videos challenging his findings, and apologizing for not approaching it in a professional manner. He could actually agree to re-do his experiment using facts of evidence.

          • Lonnie Starr says:

            But he won’t because he’s too proud, as most ignorant people are. As my mother used to be fond of saying: “Pride goeth before the fall!”
            Historically that has always proven to be true.

          • Xena says:

            @Lonnie Starr

            As my mother used to be fond of saying: “Pride goeth before the fall!”
            Historically that has always proven to be true.

            That comes from the Book of Proverbs in the Bible. Knox demonstrated his pride when he personally attacked LLMPapa, IMO.

          • Lonnie Starr says:

            Hoo Boy did he ever!!! I guess he thought everyone was as utterly stupid as he is, my estimate is that his IQ makes it difficult for him to tie his shoes each day. I mean, if you’re going to be a con man, at least be a good con man, he couldn’t even take the 15 to 20 minutes it would have taken to learn about the subjects he’d be working with, no less the two new big words he intended to use. He didn’t know the meaning of either of them. An experienced professional is not supposed to be so far from the mark. Meaning he doesn’t even know how to do a good job of pretending. Either that or, the crowd he runs with has a very low set of standards by which they judge expertise. LOL

          • Xena says:

            @Lonnie Starr. Here’s my guess of what happened with Knox. Zidiots lurking here saw LLMPapa’s videos. One contacted Knox claiming a background for LLMPapa in their usual defamatory way, saying that Knox’s work is called “Bull Shit” on Youtube. Knox jumped on the defense and in doing so, was condescending to LLMPapa in the manner which had been communicated to him by the Zidiot.

            Now having instigated the fight, Knox found it necessary to demand that LLMPapa personally meet with him. That way, Knox could take a position of demanding personal information from LLMPapa before discussing their experiments, and then give that personal information to Zidiots.

            Knox was played. Who the hell heard of him or knew anything about his self-published book, or cared, until about a week ago?

            What he doesn’t realize is that his defensive postured has tainted his credibility. People have looked into his purported qualifications now, as well as his very poor writing skills as demonstrated in his self-published book. Everything and anything he says from this point forward is going to be scrutinized for bias and lack of facts.

          • He is in the process of being outed for not being the expert that he claims to be.

          • Xena says:

            @Professor. Turns out that Knox self-published his book in October 2012. That would be maybe a month after Osterman’s book was released. The pages that are included as samples are nothing more than information that we have heard in the news, or read online. Knox talks about “bloggers” and his “jumping to judgment” sounds very much like what Junior says.

          • cielo62 says:

            Xena- hopefully Knox will be scrutinized to the point of making him disappear.

            Sent from my iPod

      • ay2z says:

        Last sentence needed correction, sorry

        And worse, what if he is the so called ‘scientist’ called to the stand as ‘expert’ and what he purposefully set up his CV to give a false impression?

      • Two sides to a story says:

        There’s a longtime poster at Talk Left named unitron. Which one of you is that person?

        • onlyiamunitron says:

          “There’s a longtime poster at Talk Left named unitron. Which one of you is that person?”

          You mean the one everybody over there thinks is on Crump’s payroll?

          That’s me.

          If you look in the professor’s August 2012 archives you’ll see I’ve been impersonated before around here, and I haven’t been the only one.

          I’m the guy with the avatar of a certain character from a certain long running animated series attached to his WordPress.com account.

          The same guy who’s been going by unitron online since at least 1998 at slashdot.org and is unitron on HuffPo, at tivocommunity.com and a few other places and who has never used a different screen name willingly.

          Which is why in cases like WordPress.com where someone else grabbed the name first, I take something close and append my “real” internet screen name at the bottom of each post like this

          unitron

    • whonoze says:

      So February 8th was 5 minutes ago?

      I wonder if WKMG will continue to employ Knox, now that LLMPapa has exposed him. If they have any sense, they’ll realize he’s seriously damaged goods at this point and dump him.

      • roderick2012 says:

        OMG, whonoze it’s obvious to a blind man that WKMG and Pipitone have an agenda to see George aquitted and the Prosecuton is aiding and abetting them.

        • cielo62 says:

          Roderick- the prosecution is doing no such thing. Sheesh, poor girl is embarrassed to say she didn’t go to a funeral/wake/ viewing, and you make it sound like she’s in cahoots with a conspiracy theory to let GZ off the hook? That makes as much sense as GZs broken nose!

          Sent from my iPod

          • roderick2012 says:

            I said the prosecution seems to be in on a conspiracy to keep what really occurred that night a secret.

            DeeDee is a victim of circumstance who is being ignored by the Prosecution because she’s disposable.

          • onlyiamunitron says:

            “I said the prosecution seems to be in on a conspiracy to keep what really occurred that night a secret.

            DeeDee is a victim of circumstance who is being ignored by the Prosecution because she’s disposable.”

            At this point the young lady might very well be quite content to be ignored by the prosecution and everyone else connected to, or interested in, this case.

            But what could have occurred that night that the prosecution would want kept secret?

            And how does bringing this case to trial help make that happen?

            unitron

          • roderick2012 says:

            Remember the rumor that Wolfinger went to the police department to personally squash an investigation?

            The emails exchanged between Billy Bob Lee and George during an ongoing investigation.

            The alleged racism inside the SPD.

      • blushedbrown says:

        @Whonoze

        I am working on something regarding this guy. I will give you the particulars a little later.

        I want him on a platter with a apple shoved up his _______

      • nate riedburg says:

        I emailed him with questions and he was polite at first but blew off the questions I highlighted so I figured if I ever need a job I will just move to Florida and say I am a forensics expert. Doesn’t seem to be much of any requirement.

        • Lonnie Starr says:

          I’m with you on that, did you see those fees? The only requirement I can detect is a body temperature of around 98.6 Leave the schoolboy ruler and bring the cannoli’s.

      • onlyiamunitron says:

        “So February 8th was 5 minutes ago?”

        You do know that that is my impersonator to whom you are replying and not the real me, correct?

        And that they probably won’t be as conscientious about replying to your reply as would I if it had been my post?

        unitron

      • SearchingMind says:

        @ Unitron

        Yeah, Unitron. I think people here recognize that you are currently under attack by a creep. It happened a while ago with “Sdunn5”. I hope you find a way to resolve the situation. Take care.

        • onlyiamunitron says:

          “Yeah, Unitron. I think people here recognize that you are currently under attack by a creep. It happened a while ago with “Sdunn5″. I hope you find a way to resolve the situation. Take care.”

          Thanks.

          Technically it’s under attack yet again, since I went through this once already here last August before I’d stumbled onto the avatar trick.

          And I know I’m not the only target.

          So I don’t even get to feel special about it.

          : – )

          unitron

          • fauxmccoy says:

            if the imposter had any real smarts, he/she/it would steal avatars as well; it is not difficult.

          • onlyiamunitron says:

            “if the imposter had any real smarts, he/she/it would steal avatars as well; it is not difficult.”

            Since we (or at least I) don’t know exactly how “it” is making it appear to be from the same username, we don’t know what else WordPress.com will or won’t allow “it” to get away with using whatever that same exploit is.

            (alhough it’s not exactly like I drew that avatar myself. It’s the internet, things just wander in from online by themselves.

            just like that cat followed my brother home years ago

            in his bicycle basket)

            Of course in my case there’s a second line of defense after the avatar difference.

            If what appears to be a post of mine shows up and racerrodig and mountainmanpat’s collective heads don’t explode, it was written by the impersonator.

            : – )

            unitron

      • Malisha says:

        Knox has no theory of how the whole thing happened, based on his alleged forensic analyses. So I fail to see how he could be of any use to the defense, but of course, as a news commentator, he doesn’t have to have either credibility OR credentials. Strangely enough, I have asked to be a commentator on radio and even a couple of TV shows. They never asked for my cv; they never checked anything. They liked the way I talked and they thought I could “give good TV” and they told me in the Green Room to “Say whatever comes into your head so long as it will get the audience all hyped up about something.” One time they even told me to do some questioning from the AUDIENCE for a show I wasn’t ON — the producer called me, and said, “Dress like a grandmother and look very conservative and then wave your hand in the air and you’ll get called on — and then attack so-and-so and get the studio audience laughing.” I wore a polyester paisley print dress that looked boxy and unattractive and two strands of costume jewelry pearls that were too big, and the whole thing came off as planned. It’s all showmanship and none of it has real content anyway. (By the way, what I said was absolutely correct and the point I made and the way I made it was very good for the position I took in the controversy so my “disguise” was to good purpose. Had I dressed like a feminist activist I wouldn’t have been called on to ask a question.)

        • fauxmccoy says:

          you reminded me of an election some years ago – i was in the audience when bob dole fell off the stage while campaigning in chico, CA. (no issues with dole, i consider him an upright guy – but the boyfriend, now husband, and i were for the ‘other guy’). we were infiltrating the opposition with signs hidden in our clothing for that purpose. as i was 31 and he 22, i had a bit more world experience, as well as being a ‘cougar’ before the phrase existed. as such, i dressed the part; i wore a simple khaki knee length skirt and a salmon twin-set with my peals amply displayed and a well turned pageboy … i was let right in the venue. the hubster in his ‘red hot chili peppers’ Tshirt, shorts and doc martens was frisked pretty good and they discovered his contraband easily and only then decided to take a second look at me. i don’t regret that our signs were confiscated, the show was historical and i would not have missed it for anything.

          in show biz and politics, appearance is everything. truthfully, i’d be hard pressed to tell you the difference.

          • Lonnie Starr says:

            Knox seems to be smarting under a welter of criticism, such that he’s decided to reopen comments on his blog, but moderate them.

            He seems to be sticking by his story that LLMPapa got it wrong, and he’s added a new wrinkle he’s asserting that a straight in shot with no angle by GZ from his position on his back is possible, here’s his authority: Spitz & Spitz, The Medicolegal Investigation of Death

            Anyone have a copy of this book?

        • cielo62 says:

          Malisha- you are full of experiences! Anyway, this Knox fellow is just lining his pockets on the back if a dead teen. It’s disgusting. He probably realized that his book will be panned and will make enough money for a large pizza. Being a commentator will make him more money. He better hope that albatross of a brick book doesn’t come back and bite him on the butt!

          Sent from my iPod

      • Nef05 says:

        I went by the date/time in the upper left corner, as the headline as obscured with a dropdown ad. As I had no reason to believe the paper would re-run a story run amonth ago – the March 8, 2013
        2:44am data appeared sufficient. Clearly it was not. Nevertheless, what I stated was actually supported and not just made up.

        • nate riedburg says:

          A lot of news sites will have the current date/time at the top left or right side of the web page while a different date is found closer to the article stating when it was published and/or updated.

      • Nef05 says:

        @ unitron. Stop. Stop lying on me and attempting to quiet me.I could have changed my name to something you would never know, but I didn’t, because I didn’t do anything wrong. I said you lied, and you did. I have the transcripts to prove it. You KNEW there was never a need for 2 accounts, because YOU were the one who figured out the software glitch before I or the professor had – WHILE YOU WERE STILL POSTNG ONLINE UNDER YOUR NORMAL AVATAR.

        I am desperately trying to hold to the professor’s requirements. But, even after proving you wrong by posting your OWN user name, under my avatar (indicating ONE, not two email account) you just won’t let it go!

        Here’s another time you accused the Professor, of the same thing like you did last week, as if you don’t remember.

        Others may have forgotten. I haven’t.

        He gave you the SAME reason as before, and your response to this second time of the same accusation is *That’s what I’d expect an impersonator to say* Really?

        What’s curious is JUST before you made this accusation the FIRST time, Witness 9’s molestation statement was just released, Judge Lester took fogen to the woodshed for a well overdo opened can of verbal whoop@$$, and then he had the nerve to dismiss OMara’s motion to dismiss http: //www.flcourts18.org/PDF/Press_Releases/Order%20Dismissing%20Defendant’s%20Motion%20to%20Disqualify%20Trial%20Judge.pdf:

        onlyiamunitron says:
        August 1, 2012 at 7:43 am

        Oh, please.
        Wolfinger announced he was taking it to the grand jury and 2 days later the governor threw him under the bus so that they could throw Zimmerman to the wolves.

        unitron

        P.S.
        Is there some special reason for the blog owner letting who I assume is a different person use the same avatar.

        Frederick Leatherman says:
        August 1, 2012 at 7:59 am

        No conspiracies here.
        I am the same person, but when I registered for my first blog, I registered as Masonblue and Mason Bennu. I still have that blog, btw.
        Later on, I started this blog and decided to use my real name because I am proud of it. This is a law blog and I have an excellent reputation as a lawyer and professor.
        Unfortunately, Word Press defaults to Masonblue every time I comment, so I have to manually change it to Frederick Leatherman.
        Before starting this blog, I blogged for many years as Mason, Masonblue and Masoninblue. I still blog at Firedoglake as Masoninblue and Mason at the Smirking Chimp.
        You can go to those sites and read my stuff, if you are interested.I also wrote a book titled Namaste, If Not Now, When? You can read it chapter by chapter at my other site. I am working on a final edit before I submit it for publication.

        onlyiamunitron says:
        August 1, 2012 at 8:03 am

        If that’s a long way of saying that WordPress is hideously flawed and inadequate software, I most heartily concur.

        Unitron

        THIS time conveniently – O’Mara is lost in the wilderness when it comes to his never to be had Immunity Hearing, you’re seeinga ny attempt to impeach W8 imploding, and if Knox is the best they’ve got, fogen had best prepare for prison.

        The professor confirmed my status as well, and you won’t let that go either.(I have the transcript of the exchange in which I reported being hacked and you were obviously hacked, that show YOU were the first person to realize where the hack was coming from, and the problem was a username vulnerability, to TWO accounts, as you have tried to push me as a troll. The above quote should let you know what I’ve got. I want to discuss the CASE, not YOU.

        Move on to the case, and I’ll be as civil as you are. Continue to bait and lie on me, and I will post your own words that make you a liar. I’ll put up with much, but lying on me isn’t one of them. Find another hobby.

        • onlyiamunitron says:

          “WHILE YOU WERE STILL POSTNG ONLINE UNDER YOUR NORMAL AVATAR.”

          I never had a normal avatar back then, just whatever generic pattern thingie WordPress attached to the posts.

          Whenever I see a post that starts out

          onlyiamunitron says:

          and it’s not one that I wrote, I figure it’s probably the impersonator, because I wouldn’t think that anyone would do that if they did not wish me ill, and because I doubt that many here, myself certainly included, know how to get WordPress.com to let us use someone else’s name like that.

          “Stop lying on me and attempting to quiet me.”

          I don’t know what lies about you you think that I’ve told, or why you think that I would.

          As for attempting to quiet you, I don’t see you as letting anybody do that, not that I ever wanted to do so to you.

          You seem, rather often, to mistake questions I ask for accusations which you think I am making, and not just questions I’ve asked of you.

          I do not understand why this is so.

          As for my recent reply to the professor of

          “That’s what I’d expect an impersonator to say”, there was a smiley, like this

          : – )

          attached to it so that he would know that I was joking around with him.

          If that displeases him, or if he has any other problem with me, I’m sure he will not be shy about letting me know, and if there are any problems between him and me, I’m sure that he and I can, on our own, work it out somehow.

          When I first brought up the issue of what seemed like more than one person using the professor’s picture as their avatar, there was no accusation, only a question as to why what appeared to be such an unusual situation existed, as I was under the impression that whoever the other person was was doing so with his permission. As we have just seen with the Stutzman gender question issue, if there’s something on his blog which he does not want on his blog, it’s not very long until he acts to remove it, which of course he has every right to do.

          I have never intentionally accused you of anything.

          There are posters here who, in the past, used a particular name, but have since retired it and started using some other name, but the old name stays retired and does not re-appear.

          That was not the case in your case and I did not understand why, and was apparently too slow witted to understand the explanations I was given, and so was left to wonder if the impersonator was continuing to target you or what.

          Recently I finally got an answer I was capable of understanding.

          I still don’t understand how it is possible, but I take your word for it that it is.

          I may have been the first to realize that there was an impersonator, but that doesn’t mean that I figured out, or have ever figured out, how they are able to get WordPress.com to let them do it.

          As for any correlation between what’s going on with me, or with me and my impersonator, and developments in the case, those are strictly co-incidental.

          By the time I hear of any developments in the case they’ve usually already happened before I learn about them.

          unitron

          (who, whether you believe it or not, only wishes you well)

          • I like both of you but I wish y’all would agree to disagree and move on.

            Please.

          • onlyiamunitron says:

            “I like both of you but I wish y’all would agree to disagree and move on.”

            I keep trying to, despite not really understanding about what it is that we disagree, but I really don’t know what it was that brought about the post to which I was replying, just when I thought we had things worked out and settled down.

            The impersonator, however, I consider an entirely different and distinct issue (which I really wish would cease happening, as it’s most confusion-making).

            unitron

        • I like both of you but I wish y’all would agree to disagree and move on.

          Please.

      • Not Angela Lansbury says:

        blushedbrown: “I am working on something regarding this guy.”

        See my analysis of Knox’s errors: https://frederickleatherman.com/2013/03/05/llmpapa-schools-michael-knox-with-schoolboy-ruler/#comment-83998

        No need for attribution; just take it and run if it helps.

      • Nef05 says:

        @professor – Agreed, which was why I was disappointed to comein this afternoon finding some 8 posts about it. Nevertheless, your wishes regarding the stream are paramount, thought will say this
        “As for any correlation between what’s going on with me, or with me and my impersonator, and developments in the case, those are strictly co-incidental.”

        Had I ever been granted such grace as requested here by someone, we would have never had this discussion. Much seems simple, in comparison, when wearing the other’s shoes…

      • Not Angela Lansbury says:

        @blushedbrown

        YVW, but Knox has a much simpler explanation you should take into account. I’ve commented on it at

        https://frederickleatherman.com/2013/03/05/llmpapa-schools-michael-knox-with-schoolboy-ruler/#comment-85895

    • SearchingMind says:

      A fraud and a charlatan

      “What I wanted to do was provide MORE NEUTRAL neural presentation of the evidence”.

      Well, there you have it!

      Let’s be clear about the following:

      a. Evidence is NOT neutral. She is always on the side of truth;

      b. Evidence is NOT impartial. She is a deadly enemy to evil men and their criminal machinations (and no one currently understands that better than Fogen);

      c. Evidence does NOT seek balance. She is Black&White, blunt and crude. She exonerates the innocent and destroys the guilty without taking prisoners. She has no room for negotiations, give-and-takes, etc. She does not strive to keep everybody happy at the same time.

      d. Evidence is blind. She knows neither love nor hate. She presents the truth as it is. The whole truth and nothing but the truth – no matter whose ox is gored.

      You follow the evidence to wherever it leads. Period!

      Any “scientist” that makes a “more neutral presentation of the evidence” is a fraud and a charlatan.

      Mr. Knox, you act like a fraud and a charlatan, sir.

      • Two sides to a story says:

        Excellent post.

      • KA says:

        He back fit his analysis to meet the recollections of one he made a judgement call to believe. My professors would have failed his research dissertation. Inductive Reasoning only works in scientific methodology when the baseline assumptions are referenced, explained, and previously tested. He seemed to just “pick a side” verses looking at the crime scene and evidence holistically, without his own subjective parameters.

        That is junk science. Weight loss products do it all the time.

      • Malisha says:

        Bravo.

        “More neutral evidence” would include:

        Fogen shot a unarmed kid but the kid might have been armed if he had a gun.

        • Lonnie Starr says:

          Yeah, and he might have been a criminal, if he had committed a crime. He might have been a gang member, if he had joined a gang. He might have been a thug, if he wasn’t an innocent child.

          Meanwhile GZ would have been a policeman, if the police hadn’t rejected him. Or, GZ might have been a lawyer, if he could only have passed his classes. He also might have been a tenant in good standing, if he wasn’t a tenant in bad standing. GZ might have been a hero if he wasn’t such a monster!

      • KA says:

        “c. Evidence does NOT seek balance. She is Black&White, blunt and crude. She exonerates the innocent and destroys the guilty without taking prisoners. She has no room for negotiations, give-and-takes, etc. She does not strive to keep everybody happy at the same time.”

        Hear, hear….if it doesn’t do that, then you left out evidence and your conclusions are invalid…

      • Lonnie Starr says:

        “Golly SearchingMind, do you mean to say he could be a quack?”, Asked Alice.

      • Lonnie Starr says:

        Hey gang, Michael Knox is now accepting comments again here:

        Post a Comment On: Knox & Associates Forensic Consulting

        Of course he’s moderating them, and it seems he’s sticking to his story. Be sure to get over there and lend him a hand. 😀

    • cielo62 says:

      Thanks! Just read the article. Supposedly the new “expert” will be leaning heavily on Knox’s work. Hence it will be as flawed as Knox’s work. Just wait til the People of the Leatherman gets through with him!

      Sent from my iPod

  17. Trina Cosbie says:

    Spending the night at the hospital could’ve meant that DD stayed in the waiting room all night waiting to be seen, but got tired of waiting, so she left after sitting in the waiting room all night, hence the reason why she doesn’t have any medical records for that night. It is very premature to say DD lied for certain, one being that nothing has came out of her mouth confirming or denying her whereabouts that night & for two she has yet to be disposed by the defense. Something tells me, that the witnesses they have disposed recollection of events are not in GZ favor….

    • Nef05 says:

      I agree. Heck, for all we know she could have used the BP testers at CVS. Rite-aid or Walmart.

      • KA says:

        I have to say, I think she went to the hospital or medical facility. It may not have been that night (which she did not even commit to or imply) but I believe there are medical visits in those weeks of time.

        If I was sick Dec 17th and went to the doctor on December 31st and found I had bronchitis, I would say I missed something the 18th because I had Bronchitis. Anyway, not that it matters, but I do believe she sought some medical treatment sometime after as she never committed to that night in that deposition. I think this excitement is over absolutely nothing and it will look really foolish soon….except…they will just find something else I am sure….

      • Nef05 says:

        I agree with you, regarding the seriousness of medical visits, in general. But THIS “I think this excitement is over absolutely nothing and it will look really foolish soon….except…they will just find something else I am sure….” is exactly why I reduced it to a 24 hour drug store level. They’re acting as if the young woman mastermined the watergate breakin, was on the grassy knoll, and carved the wooden teeth for G. Washington, when in actuality they have nothing. It really is ridiculous.

  18. Erica says:

    Deedee said trayvon ran from the back…Im thinking the back of the clubouse and everybody is kinda assuming what is “close” in trayvons mind. When Deedee said he was close to the house I think he was close to the T so in his mind “close” could have been at or before the T.

  19. colin black says:

    correction renne zelgwieger it is a name an not just a brand of anti acid tablets……

  20. colin black says:

    Frederick Leatherman says:

    March 7, 2013 at 10:12 pm

    I saw Cercando’s question and almost deleted the question. I noticed that no one appeared willing to touch it with a 10 foot pole.

    I agree Ay2z.

    Cercando’s question was improper and so was Colin’s response.

    My bad for not acting sooner

    Hands up Im bad felt daft even writting it as being from the U K
    Have no idea what he meant by masculine an feminine spellind .
    Didnt know Rene was even a name .
    But thought id chuck a bone even if it was a rubber one that bounced back at me.

    Sorry you will probably have to build either naughty step or corner for me.

    • Malisha says:

      I don’t know what the question and answer were that have attracted attention, but if it has to do with the gender of the name Rene, there are indeed two (at least) names “Rene”: Rene (usually a man’s name, from the French) and Renee (usually a woman’s name, from the French as well). This is similar to the French names Michel (man) and Michelle (woman) and there are several other varieties. The feminine ending gets slapped onto a name and either the pronunciation can change or even remain the same. In the case of “Rene” or “Renee,” the pronunciation in French and English both remain the same. In English you have Frances (as in Frances Robles, another Florida journalist who has gotten things inaccurate in the case) and Francis (man’s name).

      I can’t think of the others right now; there are lots of them.

      • onlyiamunitron says:

        I think the perceived problem with Cercando’s question was that it appeared as though it might be questioning her sexuality or gender identification or whether she was always a she or something along those lines.

        I didn’t see the response in time before it too was “disappeared” so I can’t speak to that, but I did see Cercando’s question and it seemed a bit snarky and uncalled for and certainly off-topic.

        unitron

      • Two sides to a story says:

        I think you’re all off on a tangent, except Malisha. I think it was an innocent question. I had a grandfather named Marion and people always get confused about Marian and Marion. I also knew a women who preferred the Marion spelling.

        • onlyiamunitron says:

          “I think you’re all off on a tangent, except Malisha. I think it was an innocent question.”

          Did you see the actual post in question and the way it was worded before it got “disappeared”?

          I did.

          Perhaps I’m mistaken, but I did not get the impression of “innocent question”.

          unitron

    • gbrbsb says:

      @Colin

      “Didnt know Rene was even a name.”

      Yep colin, it’s a name alright andcan be spelt Rene or Renee like:

      Or the more famous version in the UK at the time,

      And that’s without mentioning “Rene Russo or Renee Zellweger!

  21. creepytwins says:

    She lied about going to hospital. So what, everything else she said was the truth.

  22. nate riedburg says:

    Omara can try to use the info to imply Dee was coached but it is limited due to the timing of her statement as Crump had no access to witness statements which would have been necessary.

    Regarding perjury, the article is wrong because Florida law does not require material impact. Most States have that condition but Florida does not so if you lie under oath about anything it is perjury by Florida law.

    • Nate Riedburg said,

      Regarding perjury, the article is wrong because Florida law does not require material impact. Most States have that condition but Florida does not so if you lie under oath about anything it is perjury by Florida law.

      You are wrong.

      Here’s Florida Statute 837.02

      837.02 Perjury in official proceedings.—

      (1) Except as provided in subsection (2), whoever makes a false statement, which he or she does not believe to be true, under oath in an official proceeding in regard to any material matter, commits a felony of the third degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084.

      (2) Whoever makes a false statement, which he or she does not believe to be true, under oath in an official proceeding that relates to the prosecution of a capital felony, commits a felony of the second degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084.

      (3) Knowledge of the materiality of the statement is not an element of the crime of perjury under subsection (1) or subsection (2), and the defendant’s mistaken belief that the statement was not material is not a defense.

      (Emphasis supplied)

      The false statement must be about a material matter regardless if the person who made the statement knew that it was about a material matter or believed it was not about a material matter.

      Dee Dee’s statements were not about a material matter.

      • onlyiamunitron says:

        But is there anywhere that specifically states that if what they intentionally lied under oath about turns out not to be material, then they’re off the hook?

        Subsection 3 seems to not excuse ignorance of the materiality, is there something that does excuse ignorance of the non-materiality?

        unitron

        (who has an impersonator again, just like last August)

        • Unitron said,

          But is there anywhere that specifically states that if what they intentionally lied under oath about turns out not to be material, then they’re off the hook?

          Read the statute.

          It’s not perjury unless the false statement is about a material matter, regardless of the speaker’s intent.

      • nate riedburg says:

        These are the statutes I was referencing:

        837.05 False reports to law enforcement authorities.—
        (1) Except as provided in subsection (2), whoever knowingly gives false information to any law enforcement officer concerning the alleged commission of any crime, commits a misdemeanor of the first degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082 or s. 775.083.

        837.06 False official statements.—Whoever knowingly makes a false statement in writing with the intent to mislead a public servant in the performance of his or her official duty shall be guilty of a misdemeanor of the second degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082 or s. 775.083.

        Even the statutes you cited leaves out “material” relevance which is why they are different degrees.

        I know Dee’s hospital debacle is not material but perjury in Florida, like M2, has different standards from many other States.

      • nate riedburg says:

        Just realized a typo to my last post but do not see an edit button so I will correct it here. It should say “In one of the statutes……” cited by Frederick but my post reads as if I am too stupid to see the first statute does say “material” relevance. Sorry about that.

      • ks says:

        Yep. The statue clearly says that the matter must be material and, if so, whether the person knew or believed it was material or not is not a defense against the charge. It’s pretty clear.

        On top of that, I don’t think DeeDee’s answer of “Yeah, I had high blood pressure” to BDLR’s “hospital or somewhere” question even meets the first part of the statue (“whoever makes a false statement, which he or she does not believe to be true,…”) much less the materiality part.

      • Jun says:

        Nate

        1) There is no proof she lied

        2) It is moot, a pretended controversy

        3) Her statements to police were ambiguous in answer to “did you have to go to the hospital or somewhere?” which is why the state asked them to take her depo to clarify

        4) Even if were to say she lied, she did not mislead an officer of their proceedings of their duties with the alleged lie or lie about the commission of a crime

        5) Her hospital records are private and there was no reasonable reason to get them because it is not necessary to infringe and invade her privacy over a moot issue

        • onlyiamunitron says:

          “3) Her statements to police were ambiguous in answer to “did you have to go to the hospital or somewhere?” which is why the state asked them to take her depo to clarify”

          She was interviewed by Crump.

          Later, under oath, she was interviewed by de la Rionda.

          At what point was she interviewed by the police?

          Which police? The Sanford police? The Miami police?

          unitron

      • nate riedburg says:

        @Jun. I didn’t say she lied. I don’t care if she did or didnt. However, if she did lie about the hospital Omara can use that to undermine her credibility by pointing out she inflated the level of emotional distress to bolster the prosecution, thus misleading law enforcement. If it is proven she did go to the hospital Omara can ask her how it is possible that she was that traumatized yet did not call Sanford PD or T’s parents. She knew his exact locstion when the phone went dead.

        • Lonnie Starr says:

          Please, you need to wind it back, you’re beginning to stop making sense. Her report wasn’t to law enforcement, it was to Atty Crump at first. BDLR asked her if she had gone to “the hospital OR SOMETHING!” To which she answered in the affirmative.

          You tell us which suggestion was she answering in the affirmative to: The Hospital, or “Something”? The fact is it cannot be done. If you cannot say what she actually said, you cannot say that she lied. If you cannot say that she lied, you cannot say she committed a perjury.

          Finally, whether or not she went to the hospital or anywhere else, has nothing whatsoever to do with the evidence regarding the events of that night.

          Because she is only an “ear witness”, she only gets to tell what she heard and give us the order in which she heard things. She cannot assert anything that Trayvon did not tell her and anything she says that Trayvon told her, has to be matched, as best we can, with the actual evidence and testimony available.

          There is no evidence that either she or atty Crump or she and Atty Crump had sufficient resources to enable them to fashion a story that would later be discovered to fit the facts of the case. This is a major feature that makes her testimony so trustworthy. Meaning that Trayvon had faithfully reported the truth to her, and she is faithfully reporting that truth to Atty Crump and subsequently the SP.

          Thus, no immaterial lie is going to impeach her! Unlike a person who is a witness to and in fact. GZ is a witness to fact and in fact, thus, if he is caught in a lie, he has knowledge sufficient from his first hand attendance, to conceal and/or otherwise rearrange and distort the evidence, so as to prevent and/or pervert the course of justice.

          • onlyiamunitron says:

            “Her report wasn’t to law enforcement…”

            Better not let Jun hear you say that.

            : – )

            unitron

          • fauxmccoy says:

            @lonnie who says

            Please, you need to wind it back, you’re beginning to stop making sense.

            you are adorable! (must clue you in that you are shadowboxing at this point though – nate is gone. we have a new thread up to debunk this line of circular reasoning — come join us!)

          • Lonnie Starr says:

            It’s a matter of the fact that I’m reading so far behind that by the time I catch something everyone’s moved on. Oh well, it can’t be helped, everyone’s going to fall behind for one reason or another. Still, I prefer to read to catch up, some people simply delete. That way they don’t run into provocative posts and respond to them when everyone else has moved on.

            Fear not, I’m on the new threads as well.

          • fauxmccoy says:

            fine with me lonnie 🙂 i enjoy your intellectual shadow boxing and would watch it any day. 🙂

      • Jun says:

        No, the defense can not use it

        because

        It assumes facts that are not in evidence, and will get objected as that

        because

        what evidence do they have she lied

        and Unitron, stop writing douchebag crap

        Crump is not a police officer

        • onlyiamunitron says:

          “3) Her statements to police were ambiguous…”

          Your words, not mine.

          Her statements to police were not ambiguous, they were non-existent, because she never talked to the police.

          But show off your intellect and maturity and call me a few more vulgar names, maybe that’ll re-write history and make you right retroactively.

          unitron

      • Jun says:

        Unitron

        You’re a douchebag

        It is not even worth replying to the other part of your nonsense

    • ks says:

      @ Nate Riedburg,

      How can they prove that DeeDee’s answer to BDLR was a false statement? If anything it was a vague answer to a vague question. To me, the fact that defense hasn’t deposed her yet is more telling.

      • nate riedburg says:

        It appeared the prosecutor conceded the claim by West that Dee lied about where she was. She may or may not have and I don’t really care either way. What I have found amazing is how many Z supporters have ignored his indisputable lies but claims the prosecution’s case is gone due to what Dee may have lied about. All while ignoring Omara skipping the immunity hearing.

      • Xena says:

        I’ve listened to that part of the hearing about 5 times now and actually am thinking that an inter-change of wording is playing on semantics.

        West said that BDLR communicated to him that there are no hospital records for Witness 8, West wanted to know how the State came into that knowledge.

        ASA Guy addressed the court and said that Witness 8 is opposed to providing her medical records> and the matter should be re-addressed after her deposition. ASA Guy stated that there are no hospital records .

        West then incorporated the allegation that Witness 8 lied by again asking when the State became knowledgeable that Witness 8 committed perjury.

        The State did not concede that Witness 8 committed perjury; just that there are no hospital records and the defense can address that at deposition.

        Witness 8 could have gone to a Physician’s Emergency Treatment Center. She may have gone to the ER without being admitted to the hospital. (I’ve actually known of people who went to the ER for conditions that once stabilized, were not admitted to the hospital although they spent hours in the ER.)

        The first important thing to remember in this is that ASA Guy stated that Witness 8 is opposed to giving the defense her medical records.

        The second important thing to remember is that Judge Nelson ruled the defense’s subpoena duces tecum moot. After the defense deposes Witness 8 and if it finds a need for her medical records, they can bring the subpoena matter back before the court.

      • Lonnie Starr says:

        Professor says that Florida does require the perjury to be relevant and material.

        In any event the question was: Did you go to the hospital or something.

        To which she answered : “Yeah”!

        She never said which of the two choices applied. Most likely she meant “or something”. MOM and West have blundered again!

      • Jun says:

        Nate

        read Xena’s answer

        nowhere did the state concede

        It was another blunder by the defense and his onslaught of the media with blunders

        the defense asked to obtain her medical records and never cited any reason on their motion

        the defense then attempted to use hearsay to say she misrepresented that she went to the hospital, then asked the state to confirm the defense’s allegations

        the state never confirmed what the defense stated

        The state simply said there will be no medical records in reply to their request for medical records, and to depose witness 8 (meaning go straight to the source for the info), and the issue is moot

        The judge agreed and told the defense to depose her (which means to get the information straight from her) and ask witness 8 about her medical records and if she says different than you can depose her strictly on the medical records issue

        the defense kept claiming she was lying and when the state found out and the defense said they would not withdraw their request unless the state confirm that she lied

        The state said it is not necessary, it is a moot issue, just depose witness 8 (get the information from witness 8!)

        Judge ended it with a judgement that the issue was moot, a pretended controversy, and dismissed it without prejudice

        Dont believe me, watch the hearing for yourself

        Where did the state confirm that she lied? The state’s reply to the defense for their request for medical records was that there will be no medical records and to ask and depose witness 8

        This is gonna blow up in the defense’s face at trial because they will get objected on grounds of “Assuming facts without evidence”

  23. Rachael says:

    From the same article:

    “The defendants rest on firmer ground in arguing that the outcome of the criminal case could well obviate the civil one: “[I]f Zimmerman is convicted, that fact alone will constitute substantial evidence that the destruction of his reputation is the result of his own criminal conduct, and not of the broadcasts at issue which, like countless other news resports disseminated by media entities throughout the country, reported on the underlying events.””

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/erik-wemple/wp/2013/03/07/nbcs-zimmerman-response-other-media-outlets-highlighted-race/

    • Jun says:

      Too bad

      1:03

      “He’s got his hands in his waist band. And he’s a black male”

      Fogennats said this after being asked about where he and Trayvon were

      LMAO so his claims about offering the race of the person after being asked is moot.

      • Trained Observer says:

        After listening yet again, I can’t help but continue to think that the person on drugs or sumpum sure wasn’t Trayvon.

      • kllypyn says:

        Going back to his truck yet he says “{call me and I’ll tell you where I’m at” he was not going back to his truck. And no one knows exactly where his truck was.

      • Donna Flores says:

        Never heard the dispatcher asks for an address, just at the end of the call when he asked where Zimmerman wanted to meet up with the police.

      • nate riedburg says:

        Kllypyn,

        He was at his truck at the end of the NEN call and that is when he grabbed his keys. He did not take them when he first exited to pursue T so the only way they could have been found on the ground at the sidewalk is if he got them after hanging up with dispatch.

        • onlyiamunitron says:

          “He was at his truck at the end of the NEN call and that is when he grabbed his keys. He did not take them when he first exited to pursue T so the only way they could have been found on the ground at the sidewalk is if he got them after hanging up with dispatch.”

          That assumes that the key attached to the small flashlight was:

          A. Not just for a Honda, but for his Honda truck

          B. The key for the Honda Truck that was being used in the ignition, and not a spare he kept in a different pocket in case he ever locked himself out.

          Further, what evidence is there that he left the keys in the ignition when he got out of the truck?

          The noise you hear the truck making is the noise it makes if you leave it with the lights on, not if you leave the keys in the ignition.

          It was that noise that allowed someone to figure out from listening to lots of recordings of vehicles that it was a Honda Ridgeline long before there was any official confirmation of what the vehicle was.

          unitron

      • towerflower says:

        I have always thought his “call me and I’ll tell you where I’m at” comment lead the way to his other saying “he knew he was out of time.” He knew he was out of time because his phone was ringing/vibrating with the call from the first Officer when he came in the front entrance and not because TM saw or went for the gun. He knew that the cops would be there any second.

      • KittySP says:

        @ Jun – operator actually asks him in beginning of the call if he’s white, black, or Hispanic

      • KittySP says:

        I guess only in GZs world is it suspicious to be staring at the guy that you’ve noticed has been doing a creepy, stalker, drive by as you’re walking home from the 7-11 and wondering what the hell is this dudes problem.

        Even IF, we believed GZs claim of Trayvon “coming to check him out”…he had every right to want a closer look at someone he may have considered “suspicious and up to sumpn”…and provide a description to his parents.

      • Jun says:

        He asked him earlier in the call, however, my point is he claims that he never offered the race without being asked, and at 1:03, he was never asked for the race of the person, they asked for his and Trayvon’s whereabouts, and then he says that “he’s got his hands in his waistband and he’s a black male”

        Listen for yourself, No lie

      • Jun says:

        Fogenhats “And he’s a black male”

        Sean:”How old would you say he looks?”

        Fogenhats “He’s got a button on his shirt”

        “Late teens”

        “uh hum”

        “something’s wrong with him”

        “yeah”

        “he’s coming to check me out”

        “he’s got something in his hands”

        “I dont know what his deal is”

        Sean: “let me know if he does anything else”

        Fogenhats: “Please send an officer over here”

        Sean: yeah we got them on the way

        Fogenhats: These assholes they always get away. Yeah

      • onlyiamunitron says:

        “…his claims about offering the race of the person after being asked is moot.”

        Near the beginning of the call the dispatcher asks if the “guy” is white, black, or Hispanic, and Zimmerman answers that he “looks black”, as in, that’s his best guess at that distance.

        Later, as “the guy” gets closer, and his racial appearance can be better seen, Zimmerman confirms that his earlier supposition was correct, that “the guy” is, indeed, black.

        So he was asked, gave a preliminary answer, and improved on that answer when he had more information.

        So he did, indeed, offer the race after being asked about it.

        unitron

        • cielo62 says:

          And that is why it is so crucial to know where GZ actually was at the time. I’d day he KNEW Trayvon was a black teen; that’s why he became the target! That part hesitant part was just an act and part of the script.

          Sent from my iPod

          • onlyiamunitron says:

            “And that is why it is so crucial to know where GZ actually was at the time.”

            Not to mention where Trayvon was when.

            I’m not yet sure just which mailboxes he was waiting out the rain by, the ones near the clubhouse or one neighborhood over.

            I do lean more toward a “tragedy of errors” explanation for what happened that night than a convoluted multi-person conspiracy.

            unitron

          • cielo62 says:

            I personally go for a one person conspiracy of errors. GZ is just the guy to do it!

            Sent from my iPod

      • nate riedburg says:

        @unitron,

        When he exited his truck both hands were busy not allowing him to grab his keys.

        The warning chime is for the keys or lights and nobody reported seeing lights on a parked vehicle, which surely would have been noticeable to at least the cops.

        You never hear the key/flashlight jingling during his call of getting out of his truck and running.

        You can hear him say his keys are in his truck on the recorded call.

        He had two flashlights on the scene. One on the key ring and a larger one found on the ground with his blood on it.

        Not knowing where T went, he may have been afraid T would try to steal his vehicle which is why he went back to his truck to get his keys before the shooting.

        • onlyiamunitron says:

          “When he exited his truck both hands were busy not allowing him to grab his keys.”

          When the cops ran the plates of the vehicles parked on the street, when they got to the truck they would have noticed that it was still running. Since it wasn’t, that meant Zimmerman was able to grab the key in the ignition and turn the engine off, so he would have been able to pull the key out of the ignition and stick it in his pocket.

          “The warning chime is for the keys or lights and nobody reported seeing lights on a parked vehicle, which surely would have been noticeable to at least the cops.”

          There is a different sound for “keys left in the ignition when you open the door” notification than there is for the “headlights left on when you open the door” notification.

          The sound on the NEN call recording is the headlight warning, not the key warning, so he had the engine off and the key out before he got opened the door and got out of the truck.

          If you get out and go off and leave the headlights on, they automatically go off after a certain period. By the time the police were on the scene they would have been off for several minutes.

          “You never hear the key/flashlight jingling during his call of getting out of his truck and running.”

          Because at that point he was still trying to get the big flashlight to work, (that’s the sound so many people think is him “cocking” his gun) and we don’t even know if the key that is on the keychain with the little flashlight is the same key that was in the truck’s ignition switch or not.

          “You can hear him say his keys are in his truck on the recorded call.”

          The part of the call to which you refer occurs while the dispatcher is also talking, and there is not universal agreement about what Zimmerman was saying. Some hear something entirely different. And that’s just on the “Pro-Trayvon/Anti-Zimmmerman” sites.

          unitron

      • Two sides to a story says:

        In many newer vehicles, and even in some older ones, you leave the headlights on when you shut the engine off, but after you shut the driver’s door, the lights turn off automatically eventually. Fogen may have left them on because not only is that the regular procedure with some vehicles but also because this would have helped to light his way as he followed Trayvon.

        Not to mention that even if they stayed on, Shellie was notified of the shooting quickly thereafter. And it’s possible she may have been in the vehicle, and why lights on in it could have gone unnoticed.

        It would be interesting to see Fogen’s phone records and note if SPD did actually call him when they neared RTL.

      • nate riedburg says:

        If he turned his truck off during the call we would have heard it so it was already off when be made the call. As soon as T ran he exited the vehicle with one hand holding the phone and the other opening and closing the door. Where did he get a third hand to grab his keys? If they were in his pocket he would not have dropped them at the sidewalk. They would have still been in his pocket.

        Please provide a link with the audio of his year/model truck with the headlight chime and key-in-ignition chime.

        He wasn’t trying to get the big flashlight to work when he first got out. Once again, we would have heard his key/mini light jingle on the recorded call.

        I understand it is not universally agreed as to what he said but the only word that is actually distorted is “truck.” The beginning of his statement of: “The keys are in my…” is pretty clear.

        • Lonnie Starr says:

          To hear how badly slurred GZ’s speech is that night, you’ve got to listen to the recordings that were made of his previous 911 calls. The difference is quite remarkable. Listening to the NEN call, all one has to compare his slurred speech to is the words that he slurs the worst. Listen to his previous calls, where his speech is crisp and clear, you’ll quickly realize that the 2/26/12 NEN call is, well, grossly impaired speech.

          • fauxmccoy says:

            hey lonnie – just a heads up that nate is no more. the professor booted him while i was in the midst of replying to some of his nonsense. don’t worry about responding to him…unless you must, of course. 😉

          • Lonnie Starr says:

            Thanks, I saw that… But I’m reading and answering from about 180 posts behind, so I may have said a few more things before I got to the final message. No problem, he was getting tiresome. After the Professor told him he was wrong, he should have suspected that there was something he wasn’t getting right. It happens all the time, we all, at some point, get to work from some false premise that somehow embedded itself in our mind long ago, and we never got disabused of the notion. The general rule is, think what you will, but when a trusted expert tells you otherwise, it’s time to carefully revisit and reexamine the matter, ask questions to help identify the mistaken information that’s leading to the wrong conclusion.

            Instead Nate just kept on slamming ahead. Oh well.

      • nate riedburg says:

        @twosides,

        The lights shut off automatically after 15 seconds when you remove the key and open and close the door so it wouldn’t make sense for him to have his keys and leave the lights on knowing they turn off so fast.

        • onlyiamunitron says:

          “The lights shut off automatically after 15 seconds when you remove the key and open and close the door so it wouldn’t make sense for him to have his keys and leave the lights on knowing they turn off so fast.”

          Knowing that they’ll turn themselves off automatically in a short time, why would he bother to take the time and trouble to shut them off manually?

          unitron

      • looolooo says:

        Jun is correct. GZ made a point of re-mentioning “and he’s a balaack male”. As if to say…..he’s black, you know how they are, and what they’re capable of, so get someone over here…stat.

        • nate riedburg says:

          I think it was both. He was giving a definitive answer on the question of race but also emphasizing fear by that race.

          Had a similar encounter with an older white woman who described someone she thought was carrying a rifle but instead of simply saying he was black she said “…and he was VERY black!” It gave me the impression in her view the darker the skin, the greater chance of criminal activity.

      • roderick2012 says:

        KittySP says:Even IF, we believed GZs claim of Trayvon “coming to check him out”…he had every right to want a closer look at someone he may have considered “suspicious and up to sumpn”…and provide a description to his parents.

        That’s what kills me about George’s various versions of event that—they are all completely illogical either by themselves or when taken to gather with other versions of what George claimed happened that night.

        If Trayvon were a burglar the last thing he would want to do is walk toward someone so that person could get a better view of what he looked like.

        What criminal does that?

      • Jun says:

        Listen again

        All the dispatcher asked him was

        if they were by the clubhouse

        Then Zimmerman answers that Trayvon is checking him out, has his hands in his waist band, and he’s a black male

        Where did the dispatcher ask him for the race of the person in that exchange?

        The fact is he did not, he asked if they were by the clubhouse

        and if you want to go by what was exchanged earlier to mix it altogether

        The defendant called the victim suspicious for walking around looking about, called him up to no good, and the victim is black, then says something is wrong with him, calls him an asshole, and a fucking punk/coon while chasing the victim on foot, technically speaking

        And the defendant claimed the victim was suspicious and then later to try and justify, he made sure to say, without being asked

        “he’s got his hands in his waist band, and he’s a black male”

        “something is wrong with him”

        See, I can use his earlier dialogue against him too, if you want to play it that way =)

        • fauxmccoy says:

          unitron is being unitron as only he can be unitron. he perceives zimmerman’s second statement of martin being black as as a confirmation of the initial race question by dispatch. i would argue that it could just as easily be a stand alone statement of race by the defendant without prompt by dispatch. short of asking zimmerman, no one will know for sure and even then the answer should be entertained with skepticism.

          • onlyiamunitron says:

            I’m the first person to be skeptical when something strikes me as maybe not quite what it purports to be, but the ideas behind Occam’s Razor have been around for hundreds of years and are still well regarded because they’ve been seen to have worked so many times, and the basic premise is this–

            Odds are that the simplest explanation is the correct one.

            Or as a med school lecturer might put it, if you hear hoofbeats and you aren’t in Africa, suspect horses and not zebras.

            The simplest explanation is that Zimmerman expanded on his description as he got a better look at the person, for no other reason than to increase the accuracy of his description.

            If he didn’t want the police to be able to find this guy quickly, why call them in the first place?

            unitron

      • Jun says:

        Well if that is the case, that means all of Fogen’s statements on that call can be combined with his other statements

        That means he found the victim looking black was suspicious for walking around looking about and the victim is up to no good

        If you want to claim that he can claim he answered if they were by the clubhouse with “he’s a black male” then that means we can combine his statements together even if they were stopped with new questions

        The simplest explanation is, he was asked by dispatch if they were by the club house, and he said yes, and stated he has his hands in his waist band and he’s a black male

        The dispatch never asked him for the race of the person or if his hands were in his waist band during that exchange, he asked if they were by the clubhouse

        Unitron, if you are not kidding, you’re a pretty huge troll

    • kllypyn says:

      He never had much of a reputation anyway. most peoplke don’t like it when an unarmed kid is killed. Especially when they lie afterwards.

      • nate riedburg says:

        Remember when Z said it was “…all God’s plan.”

        I wonder if he will try to sue God from prison for not telling him the whole plan?

  24. NBC’s Zimmerman response: Other media outlets highlighted race

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/erik-wemple/wp/2013/03/07/nbcs-zimmerman-response-other-media-outlets-highlighted-race/

    NBC doesn’t want to deal with George Zimmerman’s libel suit. In a Feb. 20 filing in the case, NBC Universal Media LLC asks a Florida circuit court to stay the case until the conclusion of Zimmerman’s June trial for second-degree murder of Trayvon Martin.

    The procedural part of the motion — that the libel case and the criminal case overlap and can’t proceed smoothly at the same time — is far less interesting than the substantive case that lawyers for NBC News advance in defense of the network.

  25. colin black says:

    Cercando Luce says:

    March 7, 2013 at 6:03 pm

    [comment deleted as inappropriate]

    • ay2z says:

      ? Isn’t there a line to draw where we don’t turn into the fogen’s family and their tactics of bias or hate or to wherever that leads?

      I may not agree with all reporters write, but personal attack is in the camp of the Zimmerman’s and their like. Should we rise above and attack the reporter’s words and ideas with argument?

      I don’t get why we should go there, because ‘there’ is what caused Trayvon’s death in the first place.

      Ok, enough said. I never thought to question that reporter’s personal attributes, if any, whatever.

      Sorry if this offends anyone. Maybe I missed the joke.

      • I saw Cercando’s question and almost deleted the question. I noticed that no one appeared willing to touch it with a 10 foot pole.

        I agree Ay2z.

        Cercando’s question was improper and so was Colin’s response.

        My bad for not acting sooner.

      • Trained Observer says:

        ay2z, am with you all the way. …

        The job of print reporters — rarely known for cutting-edge fashion — is to report the news, and sometimes what they report gets mangled by editors.

        Judge Nelson speaks only from the bench, and BDLR keeps things close to the vest pending trial. For now, it’s mostly motor-mouth MOM & West creating what passes for news.

        [comment edited, problem solved]

      • gbrbsb says:

        @ay2z

        “I don’t get why we should go there, because ‘there’ is what caused Trayvon’s death in the first place.”

        Absolutely, and quite a few of us here keep reminding the same but there are still those who don’t seem to have understood the problem.

  26. It is utterly ridiculous to accuse DeeDee of lying about going to the ER the day of Trayvon’s funeral. My husband and I both have BP issues. We have frequently dropped into the local ER to get our BP checked. There is no charge for this service and no redcord is kept of it, unless yoiu need further treatment. There is no way the defense can tell whether DeeDee dropped into the ER or not. This is one more defense example of Much Ado About Nothing.

  27. Malisha says:

    Dumb twits.
    A friend of mine once used to refer to “families” structured like Fogen and Shellie and Susie as a “menage a twat.”

    • Trained Observer says:

      LOL ROF, too … Fogey makes three 🙂 🙂 🙂

    • Jun says:

      So far we have learned the following from their defense of Fogenarse

      a) Trayvon had women’s jewelry and a screwdriver in a backpack, which the police concluded was not stolen, but the Zimmercult will call it stolen jewelry and burglary tool. No one is allowed to use screwdrivers anymore LOL

      b) Zimmercult has unconfirmed pictures of random black people not confirmed to be Trayvon Martin, but Zcult will call it thug evidence LOL

      c) Black people who are not Trayvon, were caught assault Peruvians in 1935, which means, Trayvon is a thug LOL

      d) Trayvon was found with an extremely tiny amount of THC in his system, which he could have gotten from second hand smoke. Zcult will portray that is a thug although a high percentage of marijuana users, medicinal or otherwise are proven non-thugs, and it is shown to not make people violent or angry, but mellow LOL

      e) Going after random twitters of black people, because that proves self defense LMAO

      f) Everyone that supports Trayvon is automatically a black person and black racists or liberal media LOL

      • Rachael says:

        And don’t forget, daily they post videos and news articles of criminal activity by young black males and it is all Trayvon’s fault, even though he is dead.

      • c) Black people who are not Trayvon, were caught assault Peruvians in 1935, which means, Trayvon is a thug LOL

        Hilarious!

      • Xena says:

        @Jun.

        Everyone that supports Trayvon is automatically a black person and black racists or liberal media LOL

        I received a comment from a treeslum Zidiot (whose handles I shall not mentioned), that said we were all old White women who play Bingo and that is why we use that word in comments. LOL!!!

      • KA says:

        Yeah, I frequently get asked to “stay home and wait on my government check” when I am on a site…they are despicable.

      • Jun says:

        There’s nothing wrong with getting gov’t money to be honest

        There are a lot of government programs where they give away a good chunk of money, so why not take advantage?

        But I guess the Fogenhats begging the court to be indigent and them for money is okay? LOL

      • towerflower says:

        Yep, and if you tell them you are white, you are lying, or on welfare, overweight and pissed because your black man left you. LOL—-after all no normal white person in their right mind would ever support the Martin family.

      • rayvenwolf says:

        Don’t forget Trayvon wasn’t going to get snacks he was 100% without a shadow of a doubt going to get supplies to make Lean. His autopsy also back up his addiction to Lean.

  28. Two sides to a story says:

    By now we can see that anything the defense rants about is suspect. It’s as simple as that.

  29. ay2z says:

    Junior had a lot of ranting about the hospital ‘lie’, getting his followers on side, but at the same time, his fogen sibling, was a no-show in court. Afterall, would fogen want to be seated there with cameras trained on him and the defense table, when Mr. West was attacking a young woman for an alleged ‘lie’– the irony of Fogen sitting there like a potted palm while he, through his lawyers attacked his victim’s friend who was in a time of grieving for her loss — she too, was a child at that time.

    • Jun says:

      Well how about when Fogenhats and Shellie conspired to structure money and hide the money and passport from the court, in order to lie to the court, to claim they were indigent to get a lower bond, and on top getting their family to put up their house?

      hmmmmmmm

      • ay2z says:

        And Sis, don’t forget Sis. She took money into her own account, attended the bank and assisted Shellie and fogen, including taking phone directions from fogen. Sis also took private word from fogen out of ear shot of his wife, to keep the password and security questions written down for herself, ‘don’t rely on her’, fogen told sis about his wife. Fogen did not want to rely on his wife getting it right nor being the only one with the ability to access and transfer funds secretively. What did he think, someone would get to Shellie before she could release funds back into his account? Or, did he think she was too unreliable to remember the codes to get the job done? Not a nice thing to say about your wife.

      • Trained Observer says:

        So far no one’s accused Fogen of being a nice guy!

      • Rachael says:

        Perhaps he didn’t want her to know. He had that passport and perhaps his intent was to go off without her.

      • Xena says:

        @Rachael

        Perhaps he didn’t want her to know. He had that passport and perhaps his intent was to go off without her.

        Well, he certainly didn’t want ShelLIE to have access to the Paypal account and only gave her the user name and password from jail after he was arrested. Had he not been arrested, ShelLIE would be still be mooching off the Ostermans. Now she’s mooching off donors like her husband and his parents.

      • Jun says:

        In all honesty, the best thing for Shellie to have done was just take the money and take off

        Fogenhats would then be 100% allowed to be claiming indigence and she would have had quite a sum of money and she could take off on him LMAO

    • tonydphotog says:

      Have you seen @MammaZimmerman on twitter? It’s pretty funny!

  30. Two sides to a story says:

    Because they should be able to see that it’s next to impossible to whip out a gun from your waist when mounted MMA style. Nor is it likely to gain wrist control as Fogen stated. The more I review the evidence and view videos like this one, the more I’m convinced that Fogen either shot Travyon standing up or was on the top by the time the shooting occurred.

    • amsterdam1234 says:

      That is one reason why they hate it. You can’t refute it. GZ claims Trayvon was sitting on him in a mounted position when Trayvon saw his gun in his waistband on his right hip and tried to grab it. GZ was able to unholster the gun, aim and shoot.

      But there are more reasons why they hate it.

    • boyd says:

      BINGO! I would have loved to see that re-enactment. lol. There was one cop who spent some time asking Zimmerman about that. He asked how did you get the gun out?

    • amsterdam1234 says:

      Trayvon was about the same age and weight. Do you think if one of these kids was killed like Trayvon, by a 28 year old man, weighing over 200 lbs, and that man told the same story as GZ, do you think anyone would’ve believed him?

    • leander22 says:

      Expert Knox elaborates about that scenario in his Kel Tec chapter. He writes police officers train for that. So I guess we can expect Osterman on the witness stand claiming he trained Fogen for it. Knox writes the Kel Tec is used in police circles and if I remember correctly they train it with the Kel Tec and later change to bigger guns.

      Strictly I could sent everybody who is interested a copy of the Kindle version if you have no Kindle you can download the Kindle reader from Amazon.

      In any case Jeralyn now seriously is back on the topic, she was after witness #8 from the start. See the ABC audio file she links to. (Interesting Tara from the Conservative Treehouse and of course Diwataman again)

      It also seems that I was correct and Tracy spoke (& Sybrina?) with DeeDee before passing on the phone number to him. I have only glanced at Diwataman’s first two sentences. Crump obviously protected his clients. No?

      good night form Europe

      • amsterdam1234 says:

        I am not going to feed this Dee Dee frenzy. I don’t think it is going to be relevant at trial.

      • amsterdam1234 says:

        You are a European too? It is kind of interesting to see non-US citizens take an interest in this case.

      • ks says:

        “No?” what? Protected his clients from what? Also, so what that Tracy spoke to Deedee before passing on the phone number to…Crump?

        Wouldn’t it make sense that TM’s father would want to speak to the last friendly person to speak to his son before his death? Especially considering that Deedee and TM appeared to be long time friends.

        Is this more of this “Deedee was coached” garbage? Insofar as Knox, he needs to quit while he’s behind.

      • Malisha says:

        Anyone’s allowed to speak with ANYONE else when that person (the first “anyone”) is not in custody or incarcerated. How is it that O’Mara and West suddenly become the wardens in charge of who is allowed to speak with witnesses for the prosecution? How is it that suddenly any person who does not adopt Fogen’s lies as the Holy Grail become “a suspect” [as Trayvon became “the suspect” by appearing “suspicious” to Fogeneyes] in the judgment of the sacred defense team?

        Get this, guys: You do not control the world.
        Get this, again, guys: You are not entitled to control the world.
        Get this straight, guys: Folks out here do not need your permission to:

        1. Go to hospitals;
        2. NOT go to hospitals;
        3. Go to funerals;
        4. NOT go to funerals;
        5. Say “homie”;
        6. NOT say “homie”;
        7. Be the wrong age;
        8. Fall from a great height; or
        9. Walk in the rain, LEISURELY.

        Go home and do something you can really control if you don’t like all this. And report to each other about it afterwards; we don’t even want to know.

      • leander22 says:

        Amsterdam, if you are from Amsterdam one of my favorite European towns, we are not that far away from each other. I am from Cologne, which spells Köln in German, in Cologne dialect it’s Kölle.

      • leander22 says:

        Wouldn’t it make sense that TM’s father would want to speak to the last friendly person to speak to his son before his death?

        KA, that’s what I always took for granted. It’s human isn’t it? If you read my comment in a different way you misunderstand me. I am not part of Team Fogen or Team O’Mara, quite the opposite.

        But it can and will no doubt be viciously twisted by the above.

      • Two sides to a story says:

        I’m interested in reading the Kindle version, Leander. Could you contact Mr. L for my e-mail address?

      • leander22 says:

        Two sides, I hope it worked and you can use it.
        I haven’t used the Kindle Desktop Reader for ages. But when I still did I do the same as with the Reader now, I occasionally copy files I do not download from Amazon but e.g. from OR books simply into the content folder. Maybe the files work with other tools too. Thanks to the Prof in any case.

    • leander22 says:

      Concerning Knox: I was alluding to this, but I am tired. Just in case everybody is puzzled what I am babbling about:

      it’s next to impossible to whip out a gun from your waist when mounted MMA style.

      sorry

      • amsterdam1234 says:

        So are you saying he claimed police train to get their guns out while someone is on top of them in a mounted position?

      • amsterdam1234 says:

        That book should be in the humor section. You can train people how to reverse a mounted position, but you can’t train someone to pass his hands through a body part. If Knox claims that they can, LLMPapa has work to do.

      • KA says:

        Mounted WHILE someone else who is handily beating your face and body and also grabbing for it at the same time?

        Gosh, they train officers well….I woulda never thought of that scenario….

      • Jun says:

        Take it from someone who understands martial arts

        when mounted, if it is even true (LOL), Trayvon would have been sitting on top of Fogen’s jacket, which hangs past his waist, whether zipped or not (I believe his jacket was zipped)…

        No he is sitting on top of the jacket, which already blocks access to the hip for the gun, and the mount blocks access to the gun, and the fact that since Fogen is a former bouncer, and Trayvon has no combat training, there is no way Trayvon would know how to hold a mount, adding on top Fogen outweighed him by over 45 pounds

        Fogen claims he was stuck in mount, therefore, he would have had no access to his hip whatsoever for the firearm

        The only way Fogen would have his gun out is if he already had it out and pulled it on Trayvon, or he did a mount sweep to get out from under Trayvon and generally end up in Trayvon’s guard

        The lack of dna found on the sleeves, cuffs, arms, and hands of Trayvon from Fogenbottoms (actually there was none), and pretty much the only blood from Fogen was on the very bottom of the hoodie (cant tell if it is a smear or drop), it is pretty safe to say the lack of dna and blood splatters and smears means Trayvon was never ever fighting or attacking Fogenhats at all

      • amsterdam1234 says:

        I know martial arts, and I’ve been trying to explain why a mounted position is one of the most unstable positions to hold. The idea that an untrained person could maintain that position with a person almost 50 lbs heavier is rediculous, but not as rediculous as a trained martial arts person who would try to suffocate someone by putting his hands on his opponents nose and mouth and then arching his back to put pressure. It would be so easy to reverse that position.

        If GZ’s jacket was zipped, his gun out. There is no gun nut who would have his gun holstered and his jacket zipped, if he would think he may need his gun.

        I’ve been wondering about that. In the photo in the police car, GZ’s jacket was zipped.

      • Jun says:

        The main issue is he claimed to not be able to get out of mount (BS)

        If Trayvon was mounted, he would be on Fogen’s jacket, which hangs past his waist, and on the stomach, so access to the firearm would be complete unavailable for Fogen, if he remained mounted like he claimed

        Math

        Jacket blocks access to hips

        Mount has knees that block access to hips

        Mount would be on top of jacket so access is blocked by jacket that hangs past the waist and the mounted knees

      • @Xena

        GZ could take some lessons from Jodi Arias on what it means to be “mounted.”

        OOPS! 🙂

      • rayvenwolf says:

        @Jun – from looking at the pics of the blood on Trayvon’s sweatshirt it looks like to me at least as if GZ had either wiped his hand on grabbed that part of the sweatshirt. As if he’d touched his bleeding nose before touching Trayvon.

      • amsterdam1234 says:

        @rayvenwolf
        I think GZ patted him down after he’d shot him.

      • leander22 says:

        Ok, before I read your responses, I’ll post a bit of the Kel-Tec chapter so you get a look and feel of the book. It’s not completely void of factual content. But as an experienced investigator shouldn’t he be slightly more familiar with rumors or how people function? In any case I would have preferred him to slightly elaborate on the ability of untrained people to achieve the task and waste less of his space with Internet rumors.

        I am not sure if the special character he uses for notes will work, I hope it does. The relevant section is on the bottom, I’ll add the following passage, so you’ll no discussion of Fogen’s ability in that context but instead an indirect hit at Dorival. Thus he manages to leave the reader with the impression Fogen could have been able to do. That is why I alluded to Osterman, it was of course a joke.

        Chapter Kel-Tec.

        One interesting little snippet:

        In Semiole Coounty, with 422,000 residents, there are 17,052 concealed firearm license holders. Sanford is the county seat and it’s most populated city

        I thought this is an interesting number. So it’s about 4% of citizen in Semiole county. Versus how many illegally carried weapons?

        The PF-9 has become a favorite among concealed carry costumers. Designed „with maximum concealability in mind“, the little pistol can easily be carried under clothing or in a pocket. The owner’s manual claims that the pistol is „especially suited for plainclothes police officers or as a secondary weapon for military personal.“ But hte little pistol packs a punch. „Thanks to its locking dynamics and superior ergonomics,“ the manual explains, „perceived recoil and practical accuracy are comparable to much larger guns.“

        The powerful little pistol has no exposed hammer. It operates in double action only, which means that one need only squeeze the trigger to fire it. There’s no manual safety to disengage, just point the pistol and pull the trigger.

        As the convict-Zimmerman-now hype swelled, all sorts of specualation about this pistol-packing vigilante was plastered on the Internet. One blogger commented that he could ‘“clearly hear“ Zimmerman cock his pistol before stepping out of his truck. But the PF-9 can’t be cocked. As has been the case with many not-so-qualified commenters, fiction has become fact.±

        ± Other bloggers have suggested that they can hear sounds consistent with Zimmerman loading the gun. However, there were a total of eight rounds in the pistol when it was fired, the gun’s maximum capacity. In order to load the pistol with eight rounds, Zimmerman would have to insert a magazine, rack the slide, remove the magazine, all while holding his cell phone and talking with the police dispatcher. The sounds required for that to happen are not heard on the recording.

        Now the relevant part:

        Many bloggers and talking heads have specualated that Zimmerman, while lying on his , straddled by Martin, could not have pulled his pistol as claimed. But these would be crime scene analysts haven’t gained an appreciation for just how simple it is to pull the Kel-Tec from a strapless, cloth, clip on holster with absolutely no built in retention features. As one blogger replied to a question on Yahoo! Answers, „Easy, he removed it from the holster, and shot him.“ In fact, police officers and military personal train for just such a scenario, and then using larger pistols and top-of-the-line security holsters. And even while lying on top of the holster, the pistol can be pulled, aimed, and fired.

        Many, including the lead detective, questioned why Zimmerman got out of his truck carrying a loaded gun and argued that, if he had not done that, Martin would still be alive. A March 25 Tampa Bay Times piece quoted Sanford police civilian employee Wendy dorival explaining what she told the Twin Lakes neighborhood watch group about their role in the ridding he community of crime. „I told them, this is not about being a vigilante police force,“ Dorival explained. „You’re not even supposed to patrol on neighborhood watch. And you’re certainly not supposed to carry a gun.“ ±

        ±: Dorival’s statement doesn’t wholly make sense. If members of the neighborhood watch are not supposed to patrol, when would they be prohibited from a (sic) carrying a gun? Zimmerman explained that he was on his way to the grocery store, not patrolling so far, the prosecution has not offered any evidence to the contrary. He had a permit issued by the State of Florida allowing him to carry a concealed firearm. Even if Zimmerman was patrolling while carrying a gun, at most he violated Sanford Police Department policy, not Florida law.

      • leander22 says:

        So are you saying he claimed police train to get their guns out while someone is on top of them in a mounted position?

        Amsterdam, that’s the more interesting point in his book. He does not tell us anything about the specific scenario. He only says they are trained to pull while lying on their back. I left out back in my quote, but there is a little space before the comma and you surely will able to add it while reading it.

      • leander22 says:

        Mounted WHILE someone else who is handily beating your face and body and also grabbing for it at the same time?

        That’s what makes me very suspicious of his book. He follows Fogen’s tale very closely but from the top of my head I cannot remember he ever points out any of these inconsistencies. But dwells a lot on the many, many inexperienced or plainly misguided people out there. That’s pretty close to the O’Mara strategy isn’t it?

        Who by the way funds O’Mara’s PR crew or man, or is he working for free too? It occasionally happened over here that interested industries borrowed their employees for free to a specific federal ministry to push through the perception helpful to the firm or it’s field. Have the mysterious sponsors morphed into such more indirect support? Could be more easily booked under manpower expenses.

      • Malisha says:

        Police train to pull their guns way in advance of approaching a “suspicious character” who may be armed.

      • amsterdam1234 says:

        He is so full of it. GZ on his back while straddled by Trayvon is basicly saying the mounted position with wiggle room. It also doesn’t say where the holster is. You could straddle someone’s face who is wearing an outside the waistband holster or straddle in a mounted position with the person wearing a shoulderholster and fit Knox’s description.
        This is one for LLMPapa. I hope he didn’t get rid of his mannequin yet.

        • blushedbrown says:

          @Amsterdam

          At first I wasn’t going to touch a part of your post, but since it’s Friday, the hell with it.

          >>>You could straddle someone’s face who is wearing an outside the waistband holster or straddle in a mounted position with the person wearing a shoulderholster and fit Knox’s description

          The images in my brain are not fit to write. 😆

    • KA says:

      I agree wholeheartedly. I think they will certainly give some compelling evidence to show he was on top.

  31. ay2z says:

    MOM went on FOX, they want a delay, boast about spike in money since crying on Tuesday, taken in 54K this year.

    Will the judge grant a delay because somehow, the junior’s twitter followers have already posted about how sorry they are that they are not given enough time to be prepared for the SYG hearing.

    • Two sides to a story says:

      Maybe Mr. L is the best person to answer this, but it doesn’t seem likely that JN will grant a continuance or she would have already. She seems determined to get this over with and seems annoyed by the defense playing around in the media rather than concentrating on the case.

    • ay2z says:

      (Junior’s followers already knew they were in delay talks with the prosecution, who knows)

    • KA says:

      Was the delay issue not already settled with Judge Nelson? What is their reason for asking again? New conspiracy theory?

    • KA says:

      Are they actually asking for a delay again? Maybe JN will say out loud, in court… “No means No”

      (done to the vocal pattern of “Swiper no swiping”)

  32. Malisha says:

    I am really wondering if perhaps Fogen and Shellie are not where they ought to be. I am really wondering about it because they are both waiving appearances and asking for continuances while O’Mara is fussing about not enough time and not enough money and Dershowitz mouths off about the IMPOSSIBILITY of a “fair trial” because of the “terrible terrible” prosecutor. Both of Fogen’s prior lawyers quit on the day that they expected he was blowing town; he miscalculated and got caught just as the charges were drawn. Then he tried to pull the fast one with the money and the hidden duplicate passport; then he asked to have the ankle bracelet off; then he put on a LOT OF WEIGHT — so how loose was that ankle bracelet when it was fitted? O’Mara and West could be keeping everyone focused on “liar liar liar” while they take the focus off the “now you see him now you don’t” — and the NRA will still keep their incomes up even if it turns out that there’s trouble in this case. Remember, the Gov of FL would have been happy to see Fogen get a “one free kill” pass if it did not mean political suicide for him. So there could be plenty of subdural assistance to an escape if Fogen takes all the skeletons with him…

    Remember what one cop claimed other cops had said when they heard that FDLE had charged Fogen with a felony? “We got phucked up the a55.” What could that mean if they were not in on the crime and/or cover-up?

    “Fogen wants to be cleared by a jury of his peers” is not credible. Fogen did not want to be CHARGED. That was O’Mara’s litany too, before February 5. Hmmm…

    • Two sides to a story says:

      Shellie was at her last appearance. Fogen waived his shortly after and I theorized then that the realization of what deep doo-doo they’re in is beginning to sink in a little after her motion was denied. Not to mention, that Fogen has waived twice, and this may simply be a defense strategy because he looks out of control with his weight problem and the odd look in his eyes.

      I think they’re exactly where they’re supposed to be, hanging mostly indoors and spending money up the ying-yang for “security”,

    • boyd says:

      Well some of those cops should get it up the ???. I’d like to know whose idea was it to forget about checking the phone out?

      They obviously made incorrect assumptions. Don’t know who.
      Serino? The Bosses? the DA?

      Based on the Police tapes , Det. Singleton was trying to catch him, Serino, not good until the pressure was too much for him.

      Why did he talk to the cops without a lawyer.

      • type1juve says:

        @boyd
        He talked to the cops without an attorney because at the time he thought he was home free. The fix was in and he was happy as hell that he was about to get away with murder. Notice the spring in his step as he climbed the stairs at the police station, this mofo had no worries about what he had just done. That’s why I can’t wait until we get to see his text messages.

    • Two sides to a story says:

      PS – “Fogen wants to be cleared by a jury of his peers” is not credible.”

      LOL – they know he doesn’t have any choice but to stand trial. This is code for “send more donations.”

      On the cop remark – it probably does mean they were in on a clean-up by Bill Lee that got turned around by the Martin family, the public, and some media, but could it also possibly mean that theis particular cop really thought the incident was self-defense and that he simply didn’t like his worldview challenged?

    • KA says:

      I noticed that she filed a waiver to appear as well.

      • Two sides to a story says:

        Shellie appeared at her last hearing two weeks ago – it was the one before that she waived. Unless you mean a hearing coming up that I don’t know about.

    • cielo62 says:

      Malisha- IIRC GZ has to check in with his parole officer every Monday and Friday. And you KNOW the bond company has a keen interest in knowing his whereabouts at all times. I don’t think GZ has been able to sneak away.

      Sent from my iPod

  33. amsterdam1234 says:

    ot
    I am now convinced GZ did not have a bloody nose during his struggle with Trayvon. They only found one bloodstain belonging to GZ on Trayvon’s bottom shirt. Any close contact struggle would have resulted in bloodsmears on both Trayvon and GZ.

    I had this argument with a GZ supporter about this fact. He went on and on about poor GZ beaten almost to death by Trayvon the Hulk.

    So I found this video of 2 kids about Trayvon’s age and weight having a backyard mma fight. The kids were obviously trained in mma.
    One of the kids had his nose broken before they hit the ground.

    I thought the video was a good depiction of what GZ claimed had happened that night.
    The GZ supporter really hated this video. He said I was comparing apples and oranges and that shouldn’t use a video of children fighting as an event that could be compared with the beating poor George got. Of course he was partly right since GZ is eleven years older and at the time 45 lbs heavier.

    Anyone wants to guess why this video could possibly be soooo upsetting to a GZ supporter?

    • PYorck says:

      Great video.

      • amsterdam1234 says:

        It covers everything that makes GZ’s story rediculous. Don’t you think?

        • PYorck says:

          Oh yes, not only the blood but also the position that makes the struggle over the gun so ridiculously impossible.

      • amsterdam1234 says:

        Also the idea that GZ’s life was in great danger.

      • towerflower says:

        Good visual, From about the 1:20 mark look at how the boy on top has to be in order to deliver blows to the face and where his lower body/legs are. Fogen expects us to believe that his gun was exposed and TM saw it and went for it. Yeah, right.

    • Jun says:

      The other kid who won the fight had the other parties blood all over his hands and body

      and the guy being mounted was able to fight the guy off him and they are both the same weight

      • amsterdam1234 says:

        Both reasons are probably true. But there are more reasons.

      • ay2z says:

        But, it’s hard to fight off someone and have a hold of his shirt while you act like a brick, a 200 plus pound brick. You have to hang on to your ‘assailant’ so the f’n punk doesn’t get away this itime, especially when your police friend told you he knows your address.

      • KittySP says:

        It be great if these types of videos could be shown during the trial to disprove GZs ridiculous claims.

    • tonydphotog says:

      The broken nose is a lie, and we know it.

      If he does come up with a doctor’s note supporting a broken nose, what proof does he have that it was caused by TM? After all, at least 12 hours went by before seeing a doctor! Who’s to say SheLie didn’t do it when they got to Osterman’s house? Or, he could have had Osterman break it. Anything is possible during those unaccountable hours.

      Of course, the Zidiots will ignore this fact, and focus on the poorly photoshopped image in the patrol car….

      • amsterdam1234 says:

        Whether it was broken or not, I say that there was no blood on his face when he was struggling with Trayvon. I think the recoil of his gun may have hit him on the nose.

        Check the video, both kids have bloodsmears all over their bodies. There was only one bloodstain that originated from GZ on Trayvon, and that was on his bottom shirt.

      • amsterdam1234 says:

        The blood on his face wasn’t smeared.

      • PYorck says:

        If they could do better than “likely broken” then the x-rays would be all over the media. And I bet those x-rays exist but unfortunately they show only his useless pristine nose.

      • tonydphotog says:

        amsterdam1234 – I agree with you 100%.

      • towerflower says:

        If there were X-rays they aren’t mentioned in the billing codes or the report. I think this is why the PA wanted fogen to see an ENT, to get a diagnosis. He didn’t go because it was better to have people guessing than know for a fact.

      • fauxmccoy says:

        PYorck says

        If they could do better than “likely broken” then the x-rays would be all over the media. And I bet those x-rays exist but unfortunately they show only his useless pristine nose.

        you telling me there are no medical records to back up z’s story? and the defense is pushing this as ‘fact’? imagine that! they must like saucy goose much more than saucy gander. i am shocked!

        oh the irony!
        /snark off

      • PYorck says:

        If there were X-rays they aren’t mentioned in the billing codes or the report.

        Not back then. O’Mara could have had him x-rayed later. GZ had some form of nose injury and it doesn’t take that much to break a nose. Even the tiniest healed would have been a great gift to the defense. On the other hand, now that I think about it, it would be unethical for O’Mara to claim that the nose was broken when he knows better. So perhaps they didn’t want to know.

      • Malisha says:

        It is obvious to me why Fogen never got an x-ray.
        He was never punched in the nose.
        He knew he had not been punched in the nose.
        He didn’t want an x-ray out there that was INCONSISTENT with a nose-punch.

        Hell, if I had based my “right” to kill somebody on a punch in the nose and I knew I had not had a punch in the nose, you wouldn’t get me within ten miles of an x-ray machine. Fogen may have graduated at the bottom of his class but he isn’t TOTALLY lacking in that amount of intelligence that would inform a decision NOT to collect evidence OF his own lies.

      • Two sides to a story says:

        Fogen could be x-rayed even now and the old healed fracture could be seen if he had one. I fell from a stepladder and the back of my ribcage met my piano. I figured I had a small fracture because of the intense soreness, but also knew nothing would be done about it (likely) so didn’t get medical care. Applied ice and took some painkillers for a few days and that was it.

        I had to go in to my doctor’s office over a year later for another more serious injury and the x-ray tech asked me if I knew I had sustained a broken rib that looked as if it had healed recently.

      • towerflower says:

        Any proof that they come up with now will come into question. They would have to have been done recently after the event or it would come into question if they occurred that night or another.

        In the Dec. hearing BDLR called out MOM about always saying the nose was broken in his motions but had not provided proof of that injury to the State. The only thing they turned over was his visit to the doctor’s office from the next morning and that doesn’t prove his nose was broken or that x-rays were taken since the billing code for it is not listed.

    • rayvenwolf says:

      because they hate being reminded that blood is a fluid that tends to get EVERYWHERE when one is wrestling around with someone else. More so when the other person has their hands on the source of the blood at one point or another. Of course you know the rain managed to wash away everything but the blood on the bottom of the sweat shirt…*>.<*

      • amsterdam1234 says:

        It didn’t wash away Trayvon’s blood.

      • amsterdam1234 says:

        I don’t think it is logic. They just don’t like reality when it intervenes with their preconceived ideas.
        That is why they get so mad when you show them a video like this.

        • rayvenwolf says:

          Or pictures of people who actually were attacked and had their heads used as a punching bag. Its hard for people who know they are wrong to admit they are wrong *coughs* Knox *coughs*

          I’d hate to see their reaction if someone did a recreation of what GZ claimed and show how impossible it would be for someone who’s looking down at someone’s face to suddenly see a gun that is behind them and under the person under them(or playing devil’s advocate on the bottom person’s hip) when both bodies are blocking direct line of site.

      • kllypyn says:

        By the time the incident happened the rain had stopped.

      • Two sides to a story says:

        That too. GZs blood should have been smeary and it wasn’t. Not on his face, not on the back of his head. If he was on his back at some point, it wasn’t for long.

        • rayvenwolf says:

          I’d have to double check the reports and photos, but I am pretty what blood was on his clothing were incidental drops, not say smeared transfer from Trayvon supposedly running his hand down his chest. < And who does that anyways while reaching for a gun?

          Long and short we all know the blood evidence doesn't match his story. Just like everything else. Team Z is crazy if they really think they can show 6 reasonable people those pictures and get them to believe he had his face and head pounded.

    • amsterdam1234 says:

      I think another reason is that they are so obviously still kids. You can hear their voices are male, but they are young voices. Anybody who claims you can’t tell a young voice from an older voice, just has to listen to this video.

    • Tavia Anderson says:

      Now that a real MMA fight…Fogen sure as hell didn’t have blood all over his shirt of all over his face.

      • Tavia Anderson says:

        Typo or

      • kllypyn says:

        in a real mma fight zimmerman would had a lot more injuries. i’ve seen mma matches.

      • Rachael says:

        Even in a real playground fight or barroom brawl, GZ would have had more injuries. All it looks like he got in a fight with is a bush/tree.

      • KA says:

        Rachael,

        That is exactly what I think. I believe he either ran into a tree or was crouching in those shrubs. There is no rational explanation for those little scratches all over his head. With no DNA in Trayvon’s nail and the fact he had no zipper it surely wasn’t him.

      • fauxmccoy says:

        i have seen worse injuries on my daughters from rough-housing when they were and 10. come to think of it, i’ve inflicted worse on my brother at the same age and we had no clue what ‘mma’ was in the 70s, or we would have tried it just for fun.

    • Rachael says:

      @ amsterdam: “The GZ supporter really hated this video. He said I was comparing apples and oranges and that shouldn’t use a video of children fighting as an event that could be compared with the beating poor George got.”

      Of course the GZ supporter hated that and said you were comparing apples to oranges – those kids are all white.

  34. Zhickel says:

    I’ve just been reading through Screamin’ Jay’s excellent transcripts of DDs interviews with both Crump and BDLR.

    https://docs.google.com/folder/d/0B2tSLwzxzTkmdmRnOV91ek05dTA/edit?pli=1#docId=0B2tSLwzxzTkmQ25tRUs4RU1fRE0

    Her answers to both were consistent; she did not contradict herself.

    In both interviews she stated that Trayvon’s phone suddenly shut off after she heard noises that sounded like the phone or the headset falling to the ground.

    The phone could have shut off in one of three ways:
    -By accident. A button on the phone coming into contact with the ground or another object
    -By Trayvon’s hand
    -By Zimmerman’s hand

    Does anyone know if Trayvon’s phone was checked for Zimmerman’s fingerprints?

    • NO! they gave that phone BACK to Tracy! but, I could see gz checking the phone. I don’t know when, but I bet you he touched since he touched everything else! PIG!
      *nothing against pigs. they are cute and smart. it’s just a saying*

      • onlyiamunitron says:

        “NO! they gave that phone BACK to Tracy!”

        When did that happen?

        Was it recently?

        unitron

      • towerflower says:

        Shannon: I highly doubt that evidence taken from the scene of a murder was given back to Tracy. They asked him for help in getting the security code but I saw nothing stating they turned it over to him, that would screw up chain of custody big time if no LE was present.

      • amsterdam1234 says:

        That phone is evidence. I seriously doubt they would give it back to Tracy.

  35. Benjamin “Justice 4 Trayvon” Crump

    https://www.facebook.com/#!/pages/Benjamin-Justice-4-Trayvon-Crump/327501447335425

    I wanted to point out a fact today is to look for the truth, authenticate information, before jumping to a conclusion

    The defense has been raping the media with their nonsense and I will show you why what they say, does not mean much anyways

    1) The case is about the defendant stalking and chasing a kid with a gun, calling him a “fucking punk/coon” while chasing the kid, and getting angry that the kid was running away from him (the defendant said “shit, he’s running”, not my words, his exact words). The defendant’s own words is that this started by the clubhouse, and the defendant ended up over 600 feet from where he started toward the kid he was chasing, where he eventually confronted, attacked, and killed the victim. Bottom line, his nonsense double back nonsense is a bunch of lines and is easily proven to be lies. You do not chase or stalk anyone that amount of distance, while yelling curse words at the victim, and have no intent on getting the victim. In fact, when he caught the victim, he was seen by w18 confronting the victim.

    2) The defense claimed that they were not getting discovery. Then when court arrived, it turned out to be a pack of lies. They got discovery and there were catalogs of what was given to them, and some of the material was re-given to them numerous times. The defense claimed that they were not getting cell phone information. When court arrived, it turned out to be a lie, and the defense was even invited to go to the cell phone forensics lab with them to watch in person the work done. The defense denied the request and invitation and instead wrote a motion which were a pack of lies. The defense claimed to only want to work the case in the court of law yet for 90% of the case, their faces have been in the media, simply spouting what they felt. The defense then claimed that the case was not about money, and all they have been doing is begging for money.

    Let’s be honest, is the defense, honest at all?

    Their allegations are their allegations. They can say anything but does it necessarily mean it is true? Was the defense there? Are they objective?

    Do not get fooled by the shiny object, because the main factor is they are trying to divert attention

  36. And another note, I patiently await the defense deposing of DeeDee. They talk a lot trash for a group who have close to a year to depose her and haven’t yet.

    • Two sides to a story says:

      Mind boggling that they hadn’t set up a deposition with her yet. Actually, it’s mind-boggling that they’ve taken so long to depose all these witnesses, since witness testimony tends to be flaky to begin with, and in many cases tends to go stale over time.

    • Xena says:

      It is funny that the defense has waited this long to depose DeeDee. They were too busy listening to Zidiot conspiracy theories trying to dig up dirt. Also, they need money because DeeDee and Trayvon’s parents do not live local to O’Mara’s office. Either the defense has to go to them (which means renting a facility to take depositions) or they have to pay per mile to bring the witnesses to Orlando.

  37. I just listened to the ABC tape…it sounds to me like she may be saying that Zimmerman started watching Trayvon when he was in the other apartment complex.

    • Malisha says:

      Where can I hear that tape?

    • boyd says:

      huh. Where is the ABC tape? I don’t understand is she audible in it?

      There is a lot of information being tossed around. I’m finding a lot of it is bogus.

      I’ve never heard this before so I am skeptical.

      • Not to be redundant…check my reply to Malisha 🙂

      • boyd says:

        Thank you. That was the most audible tape I’ve heard. She sounded so much better. What she said about TM informing her a man was following him (by Car) is what the cops thought and asked. Of course Fogen said no.. The story was simple which I would expect.

      • boyd says:

        wow, so much better. I guess Gutman must have been with DeeDee performing the recording while Crump was attempting to record it on his end. Tell Crump never tape anyone over the phone again.
        Does anyone know how Crump screwed up on her age? Did he ever ask her?

    • onlyiamunitron says:

      “…it sounds to me like she may be saying that Zimmerman started watching Trayvon when he was in the other apartment complex.”

      If you ignore the part about somebody watching him, it sounds as though perhaps he sheltered from the rain somewhere west of TRATL, which raises the question of whether someone, and perhaps someone other than Zimmerman, was watching him in that other neighborhood, and since all us old fogies look alike (old) to teenagers, Trayvon may not have realized he was being watched by first one person and then by another.

      It also raises the question of whether, if there were two different people, there was any communication between those two people.

      George’s story has Trayvon doing a lot of wandering around looking at houses, but George’s story also has George where he wouldn’t have been in a position to have seen much of that as he supposedly passed by Trayvon near Frank’s house and kept on going ’til he pulled into the clubhouse lot to call the NEN, and George’s story has Trayvon appearing near him at the clubhouse entirely too quickly for Trayvon to have had a lot of time to do anything other than walk straight from Frank’s to the clubhouse.

      If you take the start time of George’s NEN call, and work back the short amount of time it would have taken him, even driving slowly, to get from Frank’s to the clubhouse, after which Trayvon’s time is spent being watched getting to the “T” for the first time, there’s not enough time in there for Trayvon to have spent as much time sheltering from the rain at the mail kiosk next to the clubhouse as the young lady indicates that he did.

      But if he was out of the rain at a different set of mailboxes in the neighborhood west of there the time flow works better.

      unitron

      • KA says:

        He is a teen. My teens went to their cars to talk to girls, they loitered in parking lots before getting in the car talking to girls, went to slow walks…it is how teens are. To assume he was a business person late for a meeting is probably not realistic. We have proof he was on the phone talking to a girl. I suspect he was not hiding in ambush talking.

        I suspect GZ heard his talking on the phone and found him that way. There are many logical indications that GZ did not go back to his truck nor intended to.

        Trayvon thought he lost him, he went back to talking. He knew if he rushed home he would quit talking on the phone to not ignore his soon to be brother. He talked 400 minutes that day. He was obviously interested in her.

        My kids would run all sorts of errands to get alone time on the phone with a girl. I could get them to walk anywhere.

        • onlyiamunitron says:

          What you seem to be addressing

          “I suspect GZ heard his talking on the phone and found him that way. There are many logical indications that GZ did not go back to his truck nor intended to.”

          is the time after Zimmerman says, in the NEN call, that Martin ran.

          I was talking about the time prior to that when his (Martin’s) time by the mailboxes was entirely too long IF those mailboxes were the ones next to the clubhouse in the same neighborhood where the shooting occurred.

          unitron

      • KA says:

        Or maybe he had more to say that was interrupted by a guy stalking him.

        I am going to go out on a limb and say most “thugs’ do not talk on the phone (with a heart sticker) to a specific girl 400 minutes in a single day.

      • Mike says:

        The way that dee dee explanes it makes me think that TM came in at the front gate and forgen noticed him did a u turn and then started following TM. I’ve base my conclusion on teeslaw’s YouTube video.

        • onlyiamunitron says:

          “The way that dee dee explanes it makes me think that TM came in at the front gate and forgen noticed him did a u turn and then started following TM. ”

          Ever try to follow someone who’s basically standing still?

          For her story to work, Trayvon’s got to burn off some time hanging around some mail boxes somewhere waiting for the rain to lighten up.

          If that was next to the clubhouse, George would have had to sit there staring at him for a long time before his NEN call.

          unitron

      • KA says:

        To use that assumes that GZ was sitting there when he made the call. I do not think he was. I think he was driving around. I remember hearing that in the call. I think he called on his first sight (or maybe before) of Trayvon. I think he made up the story about “looking at houses”I think some alerted him. I don’t believe the Target story. I don’t think he parked where he said he was. I think they are not releasing phone and text records for GZ on purpose. There is something there.

        The time only assumes that Trayvon first said something when he was under the mailbox, he could have noticed it before then and then took a second note as odd and mentioned it to DeeDee. There are endless scenarios.

      • Not Angela Lansbury says:

        unitron: “George would have had to sit there staring at him for a long time before his NEN call.”

        And that’s what happened. Phone records show Trayvon took a call at 6:54 and told her he was “under the mail thing” and this man was watching him. Fogen’s NEN call connected at 7:09.

        • onlyiamunitron says:

          “Phone records show Trayvon took a call at 6:54 and told her he was “under the mail thing” and this man was watching him.”

          And that, along with her saying something about an apartment when talking about the “mail shed” is what has me wondering if he might not have been chilling by mailboxes other than the ones next to the clubhouse on RVC, and perhaps if, in the dark and the rain, he saw himself being watched by someone older and then later on saw Zimmerman, also older and also viewing him with suspicion, and assumed that it was only one older guy when it might have been more than one.

          I’ve seen apartment complexes where you’ve got mailboxes set into an exterior wall underneath a breezeway or in an outdoor stairwell–the kind of place where you might shelter from the rain if you were just passing through the neighborhood on foot on your way to somewhere else.

          unitron

        • Lonnie Starr says:

          Plus, the analysis of the cctv’s pool, east pool hall, kitchen and game room videos show, that the only car that could be GZ’s arrives by RVC west at approx. 7:07pm, goes over to TTL then turns back to RVC west, stops, turns around and comes back to stop in front of the mail shed. There aren’t any cars that his vehicle can be confused with during this slice of time.

          Which is how we know that GZ didn’t see Trayvon by Taaffe’s because no car, stops there. The only car to come north on RVC goes straight over to TTL then turns back to RVC before turning back again and stopping at the mail shed where the NEN call begins.

          No attempt is made by this car to go out the front gate, which it would have if GZ was really on his way to the store, because Trayvon would not have been visible from where GZ would make his left turn to leave the campus.

          • onlyiamunitron says:

            “…because Trayvon would not have been visible from where GZ would make his left turn to leave the campus.”

            Where Zimmerman would have turned left off of RVC north onto TTL to get to Oregon, he could have looked to his right and possibly seen someone under the mail kiosk, depending on how thick the foliage is on it’s north side, and exactly where under its roof the person was standing.

            Which is a separate qestion from by which mailboxes did Trayvon wait out the rain, or where, exactly Zimmerman did or didn’t drive, stop, park, turn around, or first see Martin.

            unitron

          • Lonnie Starr says:

            Boy do I hate it when you just make things up out of thin air, and assert them as though they are even half true.
            Okay… Let’s give this one more try:

            “…because Trayvon would not have been visible from where GZ would make his left turn to leave the campus.”

            Where Zimmerman would have turned left off of RVC north onto TTL to get to Oregon, he could have looked to his right and possibly seen someone under the mail kiosk, depending on how thick the foliage is on it’s north side, and exactly where under its roof the person was standing.

            Which is a separate qestion from by which mailboxes did Trayvon wait out the rain, or where, exactly Zimmerman did or didn’t drive, stop, park, turn around, or first see Martin.

            unitron

            It’s a rainy Sunday night and GZ is supposedly on his way to the store to do the weekly shopping. Okay, now, he’s just driven down RVC and he’s ready to make his turn out the front gate. The pictures of the mail shed show that, his best view into the mail shed would have been obscured and through a rain speckled passengers side window, to a place where he could not identify anyone, even if he could see someone moving about in the mail shed.

            So, now, if as you say, he looks to his right and he sees something suspicious at the mail shed. He’s supposed to go over there and have a good look around right?

            But the cctv shows he doesn’t do that either. All he does do is make a bit of a right turn on to TTL, then turns back the way he came on RVC again, before suddenly stopping, turning around again, and then going straight back to the mail boxes.

            So, that belies that he was headed out to go shopping, and his turn back to RVC says he did not see anyone at the mail boxes or he would not have bothered to turn away.

            There is no other cars to confuse with his during these maneuvers. So they know his car turned back to the mail shed, and on this second pass he stops there and begins his NEN call. Trayvon has been in the mail shed for several minutes already, arriving there several minutes before GZ even left home. That interprets the evidence Tchoupi and Whonoze an another person worked out, by viewing and reviewing hours of cctv footage with care.

            There’s nothing in there that suggests that GZ could have seen Trayvon anywhere near the mail shed during his first pass. Yet, he did not even attempt to go out the front gate. Without a target it seems from their analysis, GZ was perfectly willing to return home.
            Until, it seems, he got another call advising him to go back to the mail shed. He did and the saga starts there.

            Trayvon doesn’t go to the store here often at all and his father believes that Trayvon would have kept to the streets and not gone through those dark short cuts. There’s some talk that Trayvon hit the code and entered the front gate. Of course, what that’s all about, we’ll have to wait for BDLR to tell us at trial, there’s been no clarification at all.

            According to DD’s narrative, in the last few minutes of his 13 minute walk to the mail shed, it started raining hard and he had to run to make it there. The call dropped and when they reconnected Trayvon was in the mail shed, the time stamps say that was ~6:54.

          • onlyiamunitron says:

            When you say “make his left turn to leave the campus”, do you mean the left turn to the north off of Retreat View Circle onto Twin Trees Lane, or the left turn west off of Twin Trees Lane onto Oregon Avenue?

            unitron

          • Lonnie Starr says:

            The car that comes north on RVC, turns to pass the clubhouse, is supposed to be headed to the store. So, when it gets to TTL, it should go left and out the main gate.

          • onlyiamunitron says:

            Someone on TTL, getting ready to turn left onto Oregon, would probably have difficulty looking in their rear-view mirror and seeing much of the mail kiosk and anyone standing under its roof in the dark and rainy conditions which existed that night, but while still on RVC, before turning left onto TTL, they might be able to look to the right and have a better chance of seeing that person, if there were a person there to see.

            Again, it depends at least somewhat on the foliage between that driver and the mailboxes, but when they’re sitting at the RVC-TTL intersection, the mailboxes are to their immediate right, right behind some trees and/or bushes.

            unitron

          • Lonnie Starr says:

            Well, the evidence for my speculation is that the vehicle doesn’t go out the front gate, and it doesn’t stay focused on the mailboxes. It turns and goes back the way it came. That’s pretty good evidence that the car wasn’t headed out to the store, nor was it interrupted by having spotted someone at the mail shed. Both possibilities are ignored on the first pass.

          • onlyiamunitron says:

            You said “… Trayvon would not have been visible from where GZ would make his left turn to leave the campus.”

            The use, twice, of the word “would” makes that a hypothetical, and not a statement of what actually happened.

            I was pointing out that if you mean the left turn off of RVC onto TTL, then there was a possibility of his being visible from that site, provided those were the mailboxes by which he was standing.

            Although, as I pointed out, it depends on the density of the foliage to the north of the mailboxes east of the clubhouse.

            Someone at spot A can be visible from spot B whether there’s anyone actually at spot B to see them or not.

            If a tree falls in the forest, the air gets vibrated whether there are any eardrums nearby or not.

            unitron

          • Lonnie Starr says:

            Yes it is theory, but theory with a basis.

            1. The car is expected to go out the front gate, because that’s the destination given.

            2. If the driver does not go out the front gate, there are two possible reasons.

            a) He isn’t intending to go shopping. or
            b) He has spotted someone in the mail shed who he feels he should check on.

            If his reason is b) and he drives towards the mailboxes. He should stay until he’s had a chance to observe the person he’s already spotted.

            But the cctv’ analysis shows that he did not stay to observe anyone but instead turned away before he could have paid anyone much attention at all.

            The problem is, one, if he can’t get a good view of the mail shed, but only sees shadows that lure him there. He can’t know that it’s not merely someone picking up their mail. So, if all he’s had was some glancing view of a person at the mail shed, he needs to stay there long enough to investigate it. He doesn’t stay there that long at all, instead he turns away, as if whatever he saw or did not see, was not of sufficient interest to him.

            So, now, he’s turned away from the mail shed, which has supposedly distracted him from making his trip to the store. Okay, where should he drive his car next? Obviously out the front gate.

            But then, he doesn’t do that either. Instead he starts heading back the way he came on RVC. That means he wasn’t ever intending to go to the store, for after having “cleared” the mail shed, he should have left the RATL.

            So, after all that, he has no reason, if not notification, for turning around and making another run at the mail shed, which he’s already abandoned.

            Meanwhile none of this information is included in any of GZ’s stories, instead he replaces it with a lie that says his NEN call started at a parking space in front of the clubhouse.

            That fits with “he’s here now”, but not with the later “he’s coming towards me”, since we learned that GZ never parked in front of the clubhouse. Thus the statement “he’s here now” was part of a pre-planned script, designed for use in the tale about starting the NEN call in front of the clubhouse. A story that has Trayvon arriving at the clubhouse just 5 seconds after GZ gets there, despite it being a 1 minute 20 second walk vs a 15 second drive.

            GZ is not reporting events contemporaneously with their occurrence, but instead delivering scripted cues needed to set up his self defense story.

          • onlyiamunitron says:

            Where Zimmerman actually did or did not drive is irrelevant to the hypothetical that places him at the intersection of RVC and TTL and addresses whether he would have been able to see Martin by the mailboxes.

            If he had been at that intersection, and if he had looked to his right, and if Martin had been there, and if the foliage in between them did not sufficiently block his view, he would have been able to see him if there were sufficient light.

            The only way that “… Trayvon would not have been visible from where GZ would make his left turn to leave the campus.” is true (that is if the condition of Zimmerman being at that spot is satisfied) is if the foliage or the lack of light would have prevented it or possibly if you meant the left turn off of TTL onto Oregon instead of the left turn off of RVC onto TTL.

            You can’t say that the conjecture of “If George was at point A he would not have been able to see Trayvon” is proven by saying that George was never at point A, because George never being at point A does not satisfy the condition of “If George was at point A…”.

            unitron

          • Lonnie Starr says:

            Oh brother, yeah okay, you got it.

      • Not Angela Lansbury says:

        And this is why there’s no vehicle light shining into the front of the clubhouse. Fogen never parked there, never saw Trayvon at Taafe’s house, never saw Trayvon walking toward him at the clubhouse. He was parked on TTL facing the mail shed and watchingTrayvon there for at least 15 minutes before calling NEN.

        • Lonnie Starr says:

          Here’s a link to Tchoupi’s work on the cctv’s Whonoze and a few others assisted with this body of work, but it lays down the foundation for most of what we’ve come to believe about the timings arrivals and comings and going that night. It is by no means complete, but so far as it goes it has stood up very well.

          Trayvon had a 13 minute walk to the mail shed from the 711. During the last minute or so, the rain got so heavy he had to run for it. So, he would have been there in the mail shed, well before 6:54pm sheltering from the rain. Some time after 7:07, a car is detected coming down RVC and it heads over to TTL, it wastes about 2 minutes before locating Trayvon at the mail shed, then the NEN call begins.

          Any have a good look at tchoupi’s analysis and keep a link. Also there are 911 call transcripts made by ScreaminJ just use the search box on site, in the upper right hand corner, you’ll find ScreaminJ’s work extremely useful.

  38. cielo62 says:

    GOD I HATE CNN!

  39. Malisha says:

    O’Mara’s next motion, already in the works:

    “Motion to reassign the Tempest in a Teapot the designation of ‘Hundred-Year Storm’ in order to obscure all issues pertinent to the murder of Trayvon Martin”

    It will be 14 pages long. Thirteen of those pages will be hyperbole. That’s pronounced: Bull-feces. Stutzman is researching it as we speak; Knox is picking up another degree on-line so he can analyze it. Jeralyn Merritt is so excited she just can’t sleep. Dershowitz is rumored to have issued a statement saying Fogen cannot get a fair trial while DeeDee is permitted to have unsupervised visitation with her parents. And where oh where is Shellie nowadays? The Shadow knows…

    • truthseeker66 says:

      @malisha, u forgot Jr.

    • Malisha says:

      Oh, one more piece of information. Junior has set up a foundation to try to teach youngsters like Trayvon Martin and DeeDee how to stop causing racism. The purpose to this organization is to intervene early, when Pba-lack youth begin to exhibit signs of incipient thuggism (by attacking innocent Afro-Peruvians who are simply trying to protect them) and lying (by claiming to have needed medical care when their noses were not broken and they did not have high blood pressure) and to turn them around before it’s too late. The foundation will identify and mentor these youngsters, teaching them what to do in cases where they may feel tempted to commit thugginess or lying. In general the course will emphasize their need to submit to the will of wiser and more decent Americans so they can provide information, answer questions accurately, and in general give a complete account of themselves, their activities, their purposes, their intentions, their associates, their bad habits, their shortcomings, their failures, and all possible reasons that they require correction by superior individuals who find them suspicious or evasive in any way. For purposes of helping to identify which of these youngsters needs any correction, their social media and all their activities will be continually monitored by their natural superiors.

      The Executive Director of the Foundation will be an upstanding and credible decent American with an associate’s degree in criminal justice and a background in mentoring. He had so many African American friends that he was forced to take on a “token white” who was a reject from the school of ex-Sheriffs. The salary for the Executive Director and his right-hand man and PR person will be paid by tax-free donations solicited on-line by all non-terrible and uncriminal persons.

      At this point it appears to be undisputed that this foundation is sorely needed to fix what is wrong with our country, as a result of a form of racism that has run rampant since 2/26/2012 and that many journalists STILL have been loathe to deal with honestly. Possibly, some of those journalists who have refused to deal with it properly were, in their own pasts, young pBa-lack kids who could have greatly benefitted from this kind of rehabilitation.

      • Here’s Rene’s latest master piece.
        from Orlando Sentinel today!

        Zimmerman defense fund: We’ve taken in $54k since Jan. 1

        George and Shellie Zimmerman have spent nearly $12,000 on household expenses since then.

      • truthseeker66 says:

        Hilarious!

      • Two sides to a story says:

        You’re shittin’ us, right? 😀

      • Two sides to a story says:

        It’s no wonder Mr. and Mrs Fogen live in la-la land about their situation. The ongoing gravy train makes it all feel as if lady luck will never leave them.

      • Cercando Luce says:

        [comment deleted as inappropriate]

      • Two sides to a story says:

        Cernando, you could probably e-mail Rene at the OS and ask her why.

      • Opercarla says:

        Oh Malisha! You really need to write a novel or a screenplay or something! You are so witty. Thanks for the laughter!

      • Rachael says:

        Love it!

      • groans says:

        @ Shannon: Wish I had the killer/liar couple’s budget!

        Dang my parents. They taught me that crime doesn’t pay.

        But they never told me how lucrative alleged crime can be!!

      • towerflower says:

        Looks like they are behind schedule, MOM said he needed $30K a month to make it work. $12K for household expenses in a little over 2 months, wow and this is fogen living on a budget like MOM said he was?

      • ladystclaire says:

        Rene Stutzman acts more concerned about Fogen than his wife does. I just can’t get over how she stayed in the back of the courtroom after everyone else had exited except Fogen and his baby sitter. when the sheriff came to walk out with Fogen and the sitter, it was then and only then that she got up and walked out behind them. looking like Raggedy Ann. she then takes a look back inside the courtroom, my guess was she did that to see if anybody else was looking at them.

        She is really full of herself as far as this case is concerned. she is not publishing the truth in any sense of the word and, Lawrence O’Donnell put her in her place, LOL.

      • ladystclaire says:

        I wonder why does it take so much money for them to live from month to month. what the hell are they doing, in order to spend that much money for just two people. a married couple with kids don’t go through that much money in a month or two. this is unreal, the amount of money these two have gone through in less than a years time.

      • Xena says:

        Rene Stutzman acts more concerned about Fogen than his wife does.

        Although I have no proof, I know the sovereign citizen’s playbook and it is very obvious to me that Zidiots are using it in GZ’s case. My guess is that Rene is being blackmailed. That doesn’t mean she has done anything wrong or criminal. What it means is that she’s been threatened by Zidiots that unless she supports GZ and attacks Trayvon, that Zidiots will spread lies about her.

        It’s like they did to the professor — taking a traffic ticket and misrepresenting it as a felony charge.

        People who have the most to risk, such as Rene in terms of employment, would want to avoid being slandered and defamed. She surrenders to fear.

        Rather than emailing Rene, email the editor.

      • You all have thoughtful comments says:

        Xena, on that topic, see my post below at click>https://frederickleatherman.com/2013/03/07/witness-8s-dee-dee-alleged-lies-do-not-matter/#comment-85488

      • Malisha says:

        Opercarla, I wrote a ten-minute screenplay called “DO YOU HAVE MURDER?” about a guy named Fogen who decides to stalk a young unarmed Black kid through a residential neighborhood on a rainy evening. It’s a musical. The singer is a middle-aged African American Angel who has been assigned, against her will, to try to intervene in the scene to see if Fogen will accept God’s plan (that he can go back to his car and drive away without further harassment against the kid) or not. She has this assignment because she expressed, at her “angelhood debriefing,” the idea that a little less free will on the part of really disturbed humans might be a better divine policy than the one God had in effect for the last dozen millennia. God gives her a chance to test out her theory, saying, “Go down and choose yourself a scenario and intervene on my behalf and do it your way.” She folds her wings, hits the streets in Sanford and confronts Fogen. She sings several Negro spirituals in the course of the ten-minute play. She changes one of the spirituals when she gets really angry with Fogen (who is acting wrong) and she uses the lyrics, “Do you have murder, do you have murder, do you have murder light and handy, always ready, springing forth, fully formed?” And Fogen shoots her.

      • cielo62 says:

        Malisha- that entire description of their “purpose” sounds just like the airman Catholic Church, submitting your life and will to the whims of the wise who run the church. No thanks; the Middle Ages have already ended.

        Sent from my iPod

    • KA says:

      You crack me up!

    • texad says:

      @Malisha LOL. I needed a laugh.

  40. Jun says:

    Freddy

    If the defense attacks the witness, like 8, does it open the door on Fogenbottom?

    I’d also like to add that, even if they are to say she is untruthful regarding the hospital or age thing (LOL), her testimony is authenticated by on scene witnesses and evidence, so I do not think it matters, however, I do not believe she lied because nothing was ever heard straight from her mouth on the issue, like a deposition would have, and everything that alleged she lied was based on hearsay or other people’s statements, and not straight from her mouth

    Remember, all the prosecution said was “that there will be no medical records to obtain” and to depose the witness, and that the issue is moot, that was the bottom line, which could simply mean, if they actually asked the witness, is that she is not going to give out her medical records to the defense and she is objecting to it

    • Remember, all the prosecution said was “that there will be no medical records to obtain” and to depose the witness, and that the issue is moot, that was the bottom line, which could simply mean, if they actually asked the witness, is that she is not going to give out her medical records to the defense and she is objecting to it

      That’s the way I see it.

      • Yes, I actually believe that Dee Dee probably told the truth and this issue will disappear after the deposition.

      • PYorck says:

        There are so many ways how she could have told the truth or something close enough. For example my father was a doctor. Over the years I have been seen by many doctors off the record, often in hospitals.

      • who says the hospital and/or doctor HAS to turn over records anyway? what about the hippa laws? the judge can order the FBI to turn over their stuff, but it doesn’t make it happen. what about Facebook? they didn’t either.

        so does the judge have power over hospitals, like subpoena power?

      • ladystclaire says:

        @shannoninmiami, medical records are in themselves legal documents and, they are protected by HIPPA. if this girl doesn’t want to hand over her records to the defense, she doesn’t have to.

        These people have got some nerve. first they don’t want Fogen’s where abouts known but, they can see fit to ask the court for permission to have addresses of witnesses, which they have no need to have them. second, they want to only give the state a certain amount of Fogen’s medical records and, then they have the audacity to ask the court to give them w-8’s medical records as if they have a right to have them.

        They want to keep everything about the defendant an ancient Chinese secret, all the while they are trying to turn witnesses and the victim into criminals. Trayvonn’s cell phone was even dismantled while Fogen’s is still intact. I know they have info from Fogen’s phone that is under seal but, his phone wasn’t treated in the same manner as Trayvon’s was. the defense as well as the CDH has turned this case on Trayvon and are making the defendant the victim. smdh

    • Jun says:

      Well the defense is getting parts of the biographies

      Does that mean the state can attack Fogen’s character if he attempts at going at the witnesses at all?

      • groans says:

        Jun, has the judge issued her order on the biographies issue?

      • towerflower says:

        groans, Yes, she went through the bios and said what need to be removed and what could stay. The FDLE has a couple of days to do it and turn it over to her.

    • Jun said,

      If the defense attacks the witness, like 8, does it open the door on Fogenbottom?

      No, only if they attack Trayvon’s character.

  41. Xena says:

    Professor, I am happy you brought up about a motion in limine.

    By comparison, John has given conflicting witness statements and while the defense wants to present his first statement of “MMA style” yada, yada, John retracted that in later statements. Do you see the possibility of the prosecution also filing a motion in limine preventing John’s first statement?

    • Jun says:

      Just my opinion but witness 6 has given conflicting statements and when pressed by FDLE regarding that, he gave another new story of witness 6 was not sure what he saw

      The forensics can be presented before his testimony, therefore, anything he says can be crossed onto him

    • KA says:

      Wouldn’t MMA style fighting on a face that was 60% covered with blood (EMT testimony) result in DNA and blood on the hands of the assailant?

      • Xena says:

        @KA

        Wouldn’t MMA style fighting on a face that was 60% covered with blood (EMT testimony) result in DNA and blood on the hands of the assailant?

        I would think so, as well as blood splatter. GZ’s blood should have been all over the sleeves of Trayvon’s hoodie. The same is true for the smothering story. If GZ was hit in the nose before any other physical contact, then smothered in the way he demonstrated, blood should have been smeared on his face rather than collected on his upper lip.

        Since GZ shot with one hand, I am convinced that the nose injury was caused by the gun’s recoil. Right hand used — right side of nose injured. GZ’s demonstration is that Trayvon punched him with his right-hand, which would have caused injury to the left-side of GZ’s nose — not the right-side.

      • towerflower says:

        It’s easy to debunk a % thought. We used to show people when doing weather training and figuring out cloud coverage (is a sky scattered, broken or overcast). Just take a regular sheet of paper and cut it in half. Have one half in front of you that is 100% now rip out sections of the other half and lay them on the first one in front of you. It doesn’t take much before you think you have a high % when in fact you still have quite a bit of unripped paper in front of you. So you might think you have a good percentage, say 50%, when in fact it is a smaller %. You have to try and visualize all the areas together and then come up with a %.

      • ladystclaire says:

        @Xena, is Fogen dumber than a box of rocks or what? who the hell ever wrote that script for him, is just as dumb as he is for writing/repeating such nonsense. he knows that Trayvon never laid a finger on him, let alone did a head smashing, nose breaking beat down on his lying fat ass.

        He just knew that he was going to get away with murder but, GOD’S real plan was for him to pay for his sin of murdering a child. I for one am not going to question it or second guess it because, GOD is in control and not the murderer Fogen.

        • Xena says:

          @ladystclaire. There is discovery evidence that has been sealed from release to the public, such as GZ’s phone records. That includes texts and BDLR also mentioned about GZ’s emails. GZ’s medical reports have also been sealed from the public. The State has them. They are devastating to GZ’s defense.

          Then, there’s the tape of the 911 call that captured two voices — GZ’s and another voice screaming for help at the same time.

          There are the clubhouse videos and the M&I Bank videos, of which I keep saying that the State did not enter into discovery for nothing.

          Need I mention forensics and debris findings?

          Yes, GZ is going to prison for life. It’s all God’s plan.

      • ladystclaire says:

        @Xena, thanks so very much for your reply to my comment. you are so nice and, you are not in any way arrogant. the state has so much evidence against him, how could any jury on the planet not find him guilty? I know that a lot of his supporters are hoping that at least on racist will be able to make it on the jury in order to either hang the jury or even with two of them on there, they can acquit the monster. GOD I hope this won’t even be a possibility. I’m also hoping he will spend the rest of his miserable life in prison.

        These very same people who are supporting him and hoping that he will walk, may one day find themselves walking in Trayvon’s family’s shoes. it is so horrible that some people think that what Fogen did to this kid was justified especially when they know he wasn’t and that he is lying. when a person is born black in this country, the cards are stacked against them from the moment they enter the world. how shameful and sad but, it is oh so true.

        There are some who are saying that, Trayvon deserved to die but, no body would have been deserving of what Fogen did to this child. some of those very people are going to see the very same or something similar happen to one of their love ones but, we will never know about it. these people have no shame in their game and, they definitely have no morals. again thanks and GOD bless you.

      • Malisha says:

        Something occurs to me now that did not come to me contemporaneously because the timing of revelations by the defense or by parties supporting the defense was so inexplicably peculiar. For instance, if I were a cop trying to convince Tracy Martin that his son had attacked a “squeaky clean” white guy who was minding his own business, I believe I would have showed him a picture of Fogen, taken the night before Tracy identified his son’s body, and pointed out the rivulets of blood, and also showed him the full-face picture with the blood drip on the Fogenose. “See, he was banged up pretty good,” I would have told Tracy Martin, to convince him that the narrative given by Fogen was true.

        If Tracy Martin insisted that his son was not a violent kid, I would have played him NOT just the 911 call with the screams on it (allegedly those of poor Fogen crying out for help) but also the NEN call, and I would have asked, “Do you know why your son would have been peering into houses? Do you know why he would have been reaching into his waistband? Did he carry a knife?

        We are told that the first picture of Fogen’s bloody head, taken by the bystander, was given to ABC News some WEEKS after the event. Why wasn’t it used by Lee, Morgenstern and Wolfinger to satisfy the public that they were correct in believing Fogen about the beating he had received? Why did the cops allow a false assumption (that an armed, unharmed white man had needlessly shot an unarmed Black teen) to persist unchallenged for weeks?

        Looking back now I know why they did that. There were real problems with every single one of the pictures that surfaced to “bolster” Fogen’s story in the weeks after the event, while the public outcry against the police corruption built up to critical mass. The cops did not want to have to use any of those pictures. You can bet there is a very significant reason WHY they did not want to use any of those pictures. BDLR knows that reason. Corey knows it. O’Mara also knows it. Right up to the present, they have been doing things (with respect to the timed release of information and the protection of certain information from disclosure altogether) to keep the tension up while not committing to a real, truth-seeking, valid public denoument to the crimes. And by “crimes” I mean the following crimes:

        1. Murder by Fogen;
        2. Cover-up by Tim Smith and other cops;
        3. Obstruction and/or at least accessory after the fact by several witnesses;
        4. Deprivation of constitutional rights under color of state law by SPD and Lee and Wolfinger, at least;
        5. Witness intimidation by several SPD operatives, at least;
        6. False police reports by several individuals including but not limited to Fogen; and
        7. Interference with a law enforcement investigation on the part of several individuals.

        The “battery was dead” explanation with regard to Trayvon’s phone was not a valid excuse. Laughable. Plug that sucker in and find out what happened in the phone log.

        No, we DO KNOW what happened in one regard: We know that the public was fed fairy tales and that the public is STILL being fed fairy tales — just different fairies — with regard to what went down on 2/26/2012 in Sanford. The timing of the release of information that was allegedly good for the defense is just way too weird for it to have been attributable to that combination of errors, stupidity, forgetfulness and sloth.

        We haven’t seen the last of the fairy tales, either. New ones are being written and airbrushed as we speak. One of them, at least, involves a grassy knoll.

      • cielo62 says:

        KA- yeah, you’d think, huh? And yet not one speck o’ DNA to be found. How can did zidiots be so amazingly dense?

        Sent from my iPod

    • Xena said,

      Do you see the possibility of the prosecution also filing a motion in limine preventing John’s first statement?

      I think that is unlikely because I believe BDLR will set a trap.

      When they call him, John will likely say something consistent with his more recent statement in which he said he did not see much.

      The defense could then cross examine him about the prior inconsistent statement regarding Trayvon on top raining down MMA style blows. He admits the statement.

      On redirect, BDLR asks him if the prior statement is true and he says, “No.”

      Then BDLR asks, “Why did you tell the police that if it wasn’t true?

      He says, because the defendant asked, suggested or told me to do it.

      I’m pretty certain that will be his answer because I do not believe it is a coincidence that the bogus MMA style attack matches the defendant’s false story.

      I think the defendant called John after he killed Trayvon to get their stories together before the police arrived and I am expecting John will come clean about that when he testifies.

      Assuming I am right, this is the way that I would handle it.

      Even if I am wrong about the coincidence not being a coincidence, he’s still stuck with admitting the lie.

      No downside risk for BDLR with this move. Be interesting to see if MOM rises to the bait and “confronts” him with the prior inconsistent statement.

      This is an example of a relatively simple strategic move that makes trying a case so much fun for lawyers.

      It’s really quite addicting.

      • PYorck says:

        I think the defendant called John after he killed Trayvon to get their stories together before the police arrived and I am expecting John will come clean about that when he testifies.

        I have listened to the recordings of GZ’s statements again. He provides several accounts that are clearly supposed to be at least minute-by-minute. In retrospect it is very peculiar that he consistently omits that phone call.

        There is something seriously wrong with that call.

      • Xena says:

        @Professor. WOW! That would be something if John admitted that GZ told him tell that story. Maybe like GZ, John thought it would blow over and he would never be questioned again.

      • type1juve says:

        Professor, you have been spot on with this case thus far. I would have loved to have seen you in action in court. I’m so glad we have you as the voice of reason in this case.

      • Jun says:

        IMO

        As a person reading this blog and learning how trials work here

        I’d set John up, after I put in the forensic evidence and how it reads out and then put w6 on, after all the other witnesses

        That way he would be trapped in his statements and inconsistencies because the forensics refute his 1st testimony and I believe he would stick to his final story of he did not know what he saw

        If Omara tries to bring up the old statement, well, it contradicts with his other statements so it will just get w6 in trouble, and w6 will probably not like that

        If Fogenbottomz did threaten w6 to say what he did, I feel the jury would likely forgive him

        so Fogenbottomz’s star witness is smoked

      • aussiekay says:

        And maybe nobody TOLD him to say it…….just GZ saying what had happened, and W6 not having seen much in the darkness, embellishing a little as his one 15 minutes in the spotlight. Maybe thinking it will be all over, maybe his words helping it to be all over.

        Eyewitnesses are notoriously mistaken, and some of it is, they think they know the ending, they mentally (and often unconsciously) adjust what they “saw” to fit the outcome.

        The good and objective witness is the one, I forget her number, who kept saying on TV “I know there was nobody there in a white shirt but that IS what I saw”… not willing to back down on what her eyes told her, for the sake of what she heard later.

      • amsterdam1234 says:

        I agree with you that John’s statements are oddly in line with GZ’s. One thing that bothers me are the 2 situations John describes. First they are completely on the grass perpendicular to John’s house and then they move onto the sidewalk where they are parallel to John’s house. John doesn’t describe how they move there, but he said Trayvon stayed in the top position.

        I think anybody who is trained in sports that include groundfights, will say that that doesn’t happen unless there is a reversal of some kind taking place. Of course GZ also claimed a move, but the other way around from sidewalk to grass. W18 said the entire altercation took place on the grass.

        He also mentions GZ having his head bashed on the pavement in one of the interviews.

        But John was on the phone with 911 from 7:17:15 to 7:18:55 and w13 took the photo at 7:19:07. I guess it is not impossible but not likely.

        My hunch would be MO. In his interview he said he didn’t speak with officers and GZ in depth, which means they did allow him to speak with GZ. GZ could also been talking to MO in his phonecall.

        This is from MO’s book

        With those possible scenarios, I suggested to Shellie that we go to their place nearby and pick up a change of clothing for George. I knew if George was involved in a shooting, his clothing would be taken as evidence and examined for blood stains, gun powcer residue, etc. He would need another set of clothing at the station. At this point, around 8:10 p.m., we had not seen the yellow tarp covering the body of Trayvon Martin, so we were not aware there had been a death as a result of the shooting.

        MO, by his own admission, hung around near the crime scene for at least 20 minutes after GZ was taken to the police station.

        I do think the prosecution already has a special interest in MO. In a memo about an interview with Serino, it says that “Serino did not know the name of the air marshal who responded with Zimmerman to his additional interview”.
        That and the fact that MO was asked if he had talked with officers and GZ on the scene.

      • ladystclaire says:

        @Amsterdam1234, it is my opinion that MO was at the scene the entire time and, it was his vehicle that tore out of that complex like a bat out of hell. maybe the state’s interest in him is the fact that they know he was there because, he may have been captured on one of the many video tapes that they have.

        I’m telling you that, something didn’t seem right about his demeanor when he was on Dr. Phil’s show. IMO there was a nervousness about him the entire time. just go back and look at some of the videos on YouTube and, you will pick up on what I’m talking about.

        He was there and, not only was he there. he played a part in this murder of Trayvon Martin, which his bff Fogen committed. this is why Fogen and his old lady hid out with him, so they could get their story together. oh yes, he was there.

      • leander22 says:

        Even if I am wrong about the coincidence not being a coincidence, he’s still stuck with admitting the lie.

        I have to admit that my own favorite scenario concerning witness #6 is that he is an enormous coward, it shows in his call and he later tries to cover it up slightly with blaming it on his “fiancée”, who he claimed, forbade him to go out. He gains considerable strength in his later statement compared to his call. 😉

        If I may draw attention to witness #18’s statements in the Serino context. Serino tried to calm her down by stupidly suggesting to her that the person that cried was the one that survived. I somehow assume that # 6 managed this process on his own. When he realized the one that shot the other one surrendered to police he thought, well he could help himself after all. The rest is documented. The MMA style simply added a threat additionally explaining why he did not interfere. After all it happens occasionally if you interfere you then become the target. So I have to admit that I consider his post 911 call statements after the shot simply rationalizations.

        7:18:38 W6: I’m pretty sure
        7:18:39 the guy’s
        7:18:40 dead out here.
        7:18:41 Holy shit.
        7:18:42 Dispatch: Okay.
        7:18:43 We have several people
        7:18:44 calling in, also.
        7:18:45 Anything else that
        7:18:46 you heard?
        7:18:47
        7:18:48 W6: No.
        7:18:49 A guy yelling “help”.
        7:18:50 Oh, my God.
        7:18:51 No.
        7:18:52 There’s a guy with a
        7:18:53 flashlight in the backyard
        7:18:54 now.
        7:18:55
        7:18:56 Dispatch: Okay.
        7:18:57
        7:18:58
        7:18:59
        7:19:00 W6: I think
        7:19:01 there is flashlights
        7:19:02 and there is a guy.
        7:19:03
        7:19:04
        7:19:05 I don’t know if that’s
        7:19:06 a cop…
        7:19:07 whom, yeah…
        7:19:08 Dispatch: Okay. I have several
        7:19:09 calls. And you just heard,
        7:19:10 are you sure, did you
        7:19:11 hear, when you heard voices,
        7:19:12 it was just one
        7:19:13 person talking, right?
        7:19:14
        7:19:15 W6: There’s two guys
        7:19:16 in the backyard
        7:19:17 with flashlights.
        7:19:18 Dispatch: Okay.
        7:19:19
        7:19:20 W6: And there’s a
        7:19:21 black guy down that
        7:19:22 looks like he’s been
        7:19:23 shot and he’s dead

        Witness #6 for me is the male equivalent to the teacher on this call. He is one of three witnesses that react emotionally. The third is witness #3 who perceives it as a direct threat, since it is happening right behind her house.

        If Fogen had called him, wouldn’t he have been aware at the time he is interviewed by BDLR? Wouldn’t he try to wiggle out of it somehow?

        De la Rionda:…. Can you raise your right hand? Do you solemnly swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God?

        Witness 6: Yes.

        De la Rionda: Okay. Has anybody theatened you in order to get to make this statement right now? Have I made you any promises or threatened you in any way?

        Witness 6: No. Just nervous. Just uncomfortable.

        De la Rionda: Well, we could stop if you feel uncomfortable.

        Witness 6: No. That’s fine. It’s just a lot of stress.

      • leander22 says:

        He gains considerable strength in his later statement compared to his call.

        Yes, BDLR makes him nervous. That’s true and he somehow reverses to his initial state. But wouldn’t this nervousness suggest to him he better comes clean at that point?

        True, BDLR does not ask him specifically. But didn’t BDLR have Fogen’s phone records at the time?

        On March 26, 2012, he no doubt had some time to reflect his earlier statements. Wouldn’t an intelligent person assume that police would check Fogen’s phone records? In any case at that point he must have known the case may not go away easily based on SYG.

      • Lonnie Starr says:

        If John admits that GZ called him and asked him to tell that story, then GZ is toast and John isn’t far behind (conspiracy to obstruct justice?). While GZ is making arrangements to conceal the fact that he was not facing a life threatening situation, because he has to make arrangements to contrive the appearance of one.

        That admission by John would say that GZ contrived to create the appearance of being attacked. Something he would not have to do, if he had actually been attacked. But, added to the lack of trace on Trayvon’s hands, that would make GZ a cold blooded premeditated murderer. With malice aforethought, since it is impossible to believe he would call John, after committing a murder, and ask him to lie about it, if he did not know before he fired the kill shot, that he could count on John to do so.

        • onlyiamunitron says:

          “If John admits that GZ called him and asked him to tell that story…”

          Is it documented anywhere that Zimmerman and W6 were actually acquainted before that night?

          I ask because I haven’t seen anything definitive about it one way or the other.

          unitron

          • fauxmccoy says:

            what is documented is that john’s fiancee is the prez of the HOA, so she would certainly know gz and have a vested interest in the HOA not incurring any wrongful death suits. (am not going to pull up my references, it’s easy enough to establish.)

          • blushedbrown says:

            @fauxmccoy
            I am very very very curious. Presidency of the HOA changed hands? Give up the goods, girlie. 🙂

          • fauxmccoy says:

            oh shoot, i may have made a grievous error working off memory, now i will go back and check my references. thanks for the tip.

          • blushedbrown says:

            @fauxmccoy

            I read your post, and I said to myself, “No way is fauxmccoy holding out on information!!!

            But here you go…so you don’t have to go a diggin’

            🙂

            The President of the HOA at the time was Don or Donald B O’Brien per discovery, GZ and interview found on Axiom.

            The previous HOA president of HOA Noah Caracker which lives at the address where GZ can be seen looking for an addres in his recreation his wife’s name is Amanda, the “bitch” that Taaffee refers to her in the walk thru with Dave Knechel

            His name and picture along with Cynthia L Wibker listed as Witness 42 is on the Retreat News Letters per discovery. She is the Secretary of the HOA. Per Newsletter and other sources.

            Witness 11 Jennifer aka Jenna is on the board as the treasurer of the HOA. She is the wife of Jeremy, listed as witness 20.

            Any other witness information you may need that I may help you with please give me a holler.

            🙂

          • fauxmccoy says:

            thanks blushed – i should know better than to rely upon my memory (some short term memory loss from a hideous illness, it used to be a mind like a steel trap, nor more sieve like). i got the johns/jons/jeremys jumbled, too many j’s for me to keep track of mentally, i need to keep a color coded chart or something. please forgive 🙂 i would not hold out on anything juicy i had picked up, i assure you.

          • blushedbrown says:

            @faux

            Aw honey, we will all be your steel trap here. I’m always happy to help if I can. All those J’s drive me bonkers too.

            I found it hard to believe you would keep such news to yourself, what was I thinking!!

            How about this idea keep this link close by and all of the witness numbers and a brief summary and reports are with that particular witness.

            http://trayvon.axiomamnesia.com/people/witnesses/

          • fauxmccoy says:

            thank you so much for the link! i had a bookmark folder full of various witness lists, names and statements, multiple documents that needed to be cross referenced. i honestly did intend to make a chart of them all but am glad someone else got the gumption.

          • blushedbrown says:

            @fauxmccoy

            Early on in the case, that site was on of the only sites I could find information. They got their material directly from the State of Fl.

            But after a while the information became limited on their site when more and more information became available. They do other stuff so I believe they just did not have the time to keep up with all the new data.

            Also they had audio recordings of the witness statements and it’s well organized.

            They also have the clubhouse videos and the M & I bank videos.
            But you have to download the program to view. (DIX)

          • fauxmccoy says:

            i remember using axiom amnesia for some things myself in the beginning, but had not seen the concise witness list. it helps, a lot.

          • Lonnie Starr says:

            You are correct, I recall we had a long discussion of it over on the bcclist.com. after the last president pushed through some obnoxious regulations he then left office. His home is on RVC where GZ came through looking for an address.

            After looking at the perjury laws Professor posted, I’m wondering if GZ broke any of them? He’s certainly given enough contradictory statements. But, I guess he’s allowed to try to escape M2, by telling whatever lies he can fashion from time to time. Hey, it wouldn’t be fair to require a murderer to tell the truth now would it?

          • fauxmccoy says:

            help me out here blushed – witness 11 is a member of the HOA – was it not her with the hurt foot/ankle, yelling at her fiancee to ‘come in’ and was that not ‘john’? i have a huge file of documents bookmarked, but am now having a hard time matching them up.

          • blushedbrown says:

            @fauxmcoy

            You are thinking of witness 17 Amanda married to Witness 6 Johnathan.

            Excerpt taken from Axiom:

            She said she heard some screaming outside while she an a male companion were watching TV. She heard a male definitely yelling help, but it sounded like they were running toward them yelling help. The male with her went to the patio window and opened the blinds. It was dark and he didn’t see a whole bunch. He, then, opened the window/door and yelled “hey stop it and said he was calling 911″ she told him to come in and call 911. She crawled toward the stairs (she was crawling because she is on crutches). She heard the gunshot while she was crawling upstairs. She called the neighbors while calling 911, and they were on the phone with 911 too. The man with her said, Oh my God! Someone is lying on the grass!” Then, he told her the police were there. She says the voice calling for help was definitely male. She didn’t look out until after when they were doing CPR on Trayvon

          • fauxmccoy says:

            yup, in my cast of characters there was some wife swapping going on. it’s far more interesting in my world 🙂

          • blushedbrown says:

            @fauxmcoy

            Hahahah. I can see that.

          • Xena says:

            @Blushedbrown.

            Presidency of the HOA changed hands?

            It changed hands in September 2011, just as GZ was organizing NW.

          • blushedbrown says:

            @Xena

            Correct, from Noah to Don, right?
            I was thinking faux was holding on us 🙂 the way I read her comment I thought she knew that they changed from Don to Jenna or someone else.

            I got all happy to think that some things got changed or some new information got developed. (sigh)

          • fauxmccoy says:

            now it is me, blushing in embarrassment … yup, that flush is not pot rouge, it’s the real mccoy! (i am sooooo embarrassed.)

          • blushedbrown says:

            @fauxmccoy

            Please don’t be. We all forget things and nobody is perfect here.

            Stop flushing, the color is messing up my screen. 🙂

          • Xena says:

            @blushedbrown

            Correct, from Noah to Don, right?

            Right. Noah is the one who approved to pay the SPD to conduct patrols in that gated community for traffic and HOA violations. Then he stepped down and Don took over.

            There is talk that the HOA’s programs of paying the SPD to conduct patrols, and subsequently GZ’s harassment of Black residents, were designed to encourage Black residents to move, in violation of Federal Housing law.

          • blushedbrown says:

            @Xena

            YES!!

            IIRC, you had linked a blog piece from someone who did a very good article on it. I will have to dig for it, but I remember his analysis was spot on, at least in my view. It was written early on in the case.

          • blushedbrown says:

            @Xena

            Yes, that’s the one I was talking about!

            Thank You!!!

          • onlyiamunitron says:

            That article credits Officer Wagner with the back of the head photo taken by witness Jon.

            unitron

          • blushedbrown says:

            @Uni

            Minor thing. That has been totally cleared up by now and majority of us know that Jon Manolo witness 13 is the photo taker.

          • onlyiamunitron says:

            “Minor thing.”

            So the conspiracy theory about Zimmerman and Wagner which was based on Wagner having taken the photo is still on, then?

            unitron

          • blushedbrown says:

            @Uni

            YES! The hunt is on!

          • onlyiamunitron says:

            Did she have time to feed him the MMA lines before he first spoke to the police?

            unitron

  42. colin black says:

    Correct
    She told the truth relevant to what hapened on the day in question.She also told the truth re her call with Trayvon times that can be indepedantly verrified.
    And have in fact been so.
    Also told the truth regards what Trayvon said to her about his movements an locations.
    An area she had no knowlage of.

    The only lies that are important in this case are the many many many many ones that flowed from the susspect /accused/defendant/some day soon convicted

  43. First!

    I’m thankful for this post. I just tweeted it.

    • “The rules of evidence permit Judge Nelson to exercise her discretion in deciding whether to permit the defense to cross examine DD about these two alleged lies.”

      @SG. Hey lady 🙂
      @Prof,
      Thank you for pointing all this out.
      Let’s take note of this and see if Judge Nelson allows omar and co. to harass DD. but I’d bet she won’t.
      but if she does – that’ll show us who we’re dealing with, and I mean her true character, the way she practices her craft AND the way things are gonna be at trial! SHE is the Judge! .

      BDLR did act pretty weird after the hearing.
      he was smiling and giddy, almost skipping!!! he talked to media for a minute. he can’t say much. someone said he stood there and watched Omar talk on TV. that’s odd, isn’t it?

      but please believe that DD is well protected! and Ben Crump has helped with that. he must have predicted what gz would try to do to her!!!
      it’s unbelievable! never seen before, blatant witness intimidation, live stream! wow. this is some crazy shit!

      • Hi kid! TY for everything.

      • Trained Observer says:

        Call me an optimist, but I’m still thinking DD never lied about anything … that someone else got confused about her age … and that her “yeah” response to BDLR’s “hospital or something” query is truthful.

      • Two sides to a story says:

        TO- I think so too. I think it’s quite possible that Crump was unintentionally confused about her age, remembering her as Trayvon’s age rather than what she told him. I have no answer as to why he publicly stated she’d gone to the hospital. A lie is a lie, but answering yeah, a sloppy answer to a sloppy, open-ended question, doesn’t seem to be the end of the world.

      • KA says:

        I do not think she lied on her age i think Crump was mistaken because she is in high school.There is nothing to this.

      • Jun says:

        I think Bernie is happy because he knows the GPS records support her story, the phone records also as well as the forensic evidence and witnesses

        Her testimony actually falls in line with the evidence

        while Fogen’s claims are all over the place and make no sense

        I think what is most important is it is deemed moot and they cant even prove she actually lied anyways, and their proof is triple hearsay, which means, it is not even credible

      • I don’t know if BDLR was “wierd”, but I saw him as looking like a cat that swallowed the canary. It was like he’d “set up” MOM&West and was gleeful the fell for it hook, line and sinker.

        • Ben Crump knows what he’s doing. BDLR knows what he’s doing. Why would either one let omar catch them is some lame ass mistake?

          And we all know Omar is *willing and able* to turn the truth into lies and lies into facts!
          “I think we all can agree Gz’s nose was broken, right? Huh? Just look at these pictures!”

          This could be a totally made up bullshit story again from the defense. Maybe Omar knew this all along and has used it as a PR stunt. All the better for donations my dear!
          There’s no reason to believe anything out of omar’s or west’s mouths.

          DD’s been harassed so bad, even I, as a mom, would be re-thinking real hard about letting my kid testify and expose her to this trash! There’s no telling what’s gonna happen!

          DD didn’t do anything wrong, why would she lie? I think Ben Crump is doing his thing! He’s done the impossible already and he’s still protecting her identity! In my eyes, that’s the only decent thing about this case. So whatever he says or does is to help. Him and BDLR know Trayvon couldn’t be saved. But DD can.

      • ay2z says:

        Shannoninmiami, skipping? again with the skipping 😉

        BDLR did act pretty weird after the hearing.
        he was smiling and giddy, almost skipping!!!

        Enjoy.

        • Well of course that was the first thing I thought when I wrote that!!LOL

          But l can’t wait to hear it again in court!! what a stupid thing to say on TV!?!? maybe i’ll have time to go see it again tonight, since he said it ON TV, for the whole world to watch forever!!LMFAO

      • Bill Taylor says:

        from the start fogens call and her saying what she was hearing MATCHED, when she says martin sees some guy following him fogen is on the phone saying he IS following him…..when she says martin thinks he lost him fogen is saying he lost him…and another person heard the what are you doing around here being asked, just like she said and at the TIME she said it happened, the beginning of the confrontation and the end of her call.

      • Jun says:

        Correct me if I am incorrect but here is the objection I found from google research

        “Assumes facts not in evidence: the question assumes something as true for which no evidence has been shown.”

        I think I did the legal math correctly there LMAO

        “Calls for speculation”

        “Calls for conclusion”

        “Beyond The Scope”

        “privilege”

        “Irrelevant/Immaterial”

        “Counsel is testifying”

        “More prejudicial than probative”

      • groans says:

        @ Shannnon re:

        BDLR did act pretty weird after the hearing. he was smiling and giddy, almost skipping!!!

        And definitely not skipping “out of fear”!

      • kimmi says:

        Does anyone know why the screen would be black…
        Any suggestions to correct it?

        Also, thank you Professor, I too, am thankful for your post.

      • kimmi says:

        Finally got Ay2z’s video to play…
        Must have been operator error. lol

      • ladystclaire says:

        @Jun, Fogen is the one that’s lying and has been all along and, yet there has not been a big deal made out of his many lies. from what see, this girl did not lie and, it’s wrong for O’mara and West to even imply that she did and, then the media take their words for the truth and they themselves print lies. Fogen is to blame for what he is going through and, he just have to suffer what ever his punishment will be. he should have left Trayvon the hell alone but, he chose not to so now, he made his bed so let him lay in it. BTW, I’ve been reading over at Benjamin “Justice 4 Trayvon” Crump’s facebook page and, those people who thought they could hide behind a computer key board and, make threats and intimidate W-8, will be soon be facing some charges of their own.

        Last night I went to a site that talks about IP addresses and, when I clicked on “how do I find my IP address,” the name of my internet service, my city, zip code as well as my state popped up right off the bat. I didn’t have to type in any information at all. so, these people have gotten themselves into some serious trouble over someone they don’t even know. IMO, they ought to charge Jr, Mark, Fogen Sr. and West if he was in on this as well.

        The chickens are coming home to roost for damn sure!

      • aussie says:

        Every website has to know your IP address — or they’d not know where to send what you asked for, ie not be able to show you the pages.

        It’s only a question of whether they log it or not. Some will log every single transaction; some just record a “member’s” IP when they log in, so whatever they have showing is the current one. Some keep IP history, ie list all IPs used by a particular member, though possible without dates of usage. This would be especially so on sites that keep getting trolls or spammers with multiple accounts, as it helps them block them out.

        But on ISPs that use dynamic addressing, the same address might be given to different users each day. So it is not 100% positive identification, but comes close.

      • leander22 says:

        I didn’t have to type in any information at all. so, these people have gotten themselves into some serious trouble over someone they don’t even know.

        lady, I am using Expat Shield for a while, meaning I usually access the web via an American IP address. I use this type of access to be able to watch the many contributions which I am blocked from watching due to German copyright laws. E.g. if LLMPapa uses music that is not considered free content over here, I am blocked from watching his videos. I am in Cologne Germany, at the moment I am on the web via this location:

        IP Information: 63.141.198.106
        ISP: nLayer Communications
        Organization: GIGLINX
        Services: Network Sharing Device
        Recently report forum spam source.
        City: Mexicali
        Region: Baja California
        Country: Mexico

        The software starts now anytime I access the web and I have to stop it if I want to move unprotected or not anonymously on the web, which occasionally is necessary.

        I noticed that if I do not stop it I cannot contribute on Wikipedia since the IP address is blocked. Which suggests to me that quite a few people seem to like to hide their IP’s for not so pure reasons.

      • Tzar says:

        carabeeinqueen says:
        March 7, 2013 at 7:19 pm

        I don’t know if BDLR was “wierd”, but I saw him as looking like a cat that swallowed the canary. It was like he’d “set up” MOM&West and was gleeful the fell for it hook, line and sinker

        lol, I commented on itin the other thread
        He was literally dancing back and forth
        you could almost hear him singing, “♪♫na na na nee na naaaa, ♪♫I know something you guys don’t♪♫”

        I would thread cautiously if I were the defense and the rabble rousing lazy reporters.

    • fauxmccoy says:

      follow

Leave a Reply to SearchingMind Cancel 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