Featuring: Lonnie Starr Explains Why Dee Dee is Credible and I Explain Witness Tampering

February 7, 2013

Thursday, February 7, 2013

Lonnie Starr is starring in today’s Featuring feature. Day in and day out, he skins the onion with solid comments that systematically peel back layer after layer of the defendant’s lies destroying his claim of self-defense.

I follow with an explanation of the excited utterance and present sense exceptions to the hearsay rule and a short explanation why the use of doxing and character assassination of Dee Dee constitutes first degree witness tampering, punishable by up to life in prison.

At 8:12 am he wrote the following comment explaining why Dee Dee’s statements are self-authenticating and the defense efforts to access her social media accounts are irrelevant:

The social media accounts of DD are not probative, because she was not physically present in RATL when these events took place, she is only an “ear witness” to what would be hearsay if not for the exceptions to those rules.

As such, I would not allow them to go after her social media material, because it’s only utility is as impeachment material. No amount of impeachment material, that is external to her statements about what she witnessed by ear, can have any fair application. If this witness is to be impeached in any way, shape or form, that impeachment must come from a demonstration that what she is testifying to is either not what occurred or could not have occurred.

This is because, obviously, without having been present and without any knowledge of the paths, roads, houses, their locations and the distances between them, she could not possibly fashion false testimony that could fit the conditions that night, with any precision at all.

MOM needs to climb back into his cave, he’s trying to cover up his own gross stupidity with even more wasteful gross stupidity.

Even if he were to get his hands on her social media materials, and managed to find some kind of impeachment material in them, it would not be allowed in court, because it would not be either relevant or probative. In short, you cannot impeach an account that cannot be falsely fashioned.

Although I think the information in Dee Dee’s social media accounts is discoverable, assuming she has any accounts, I agree with Lonnie’s conclusion that the information is irrelevant and inadmissible.

The defendant, his defense team and his rabidly confused supporters do not seem to understand that information in Dee Dee’s social media accounts, assuming she has any accounts, is unlikely to be admissible at trial.

The rules of evidence do not permit lawyers to attack the credibility of witnesses by throwing mud in their faces to see how much of it sticks. Assuming for the sake of argument that she is everything they claim she is and worse, none of that bad act and bad character evidence will be admissible. It does not matter, for example, if she lied about going to the hospital instead of Trayvon’s funeral. She could have partied naked in a crack house all night long having sex with animals and the defense would not be permitted to mention it.

Whether she was his girlfriend, boyfriend, friend, 5 years old, 100 years old or somewhere in between, is irrelevant.

She could have been a telemarketer trying to sell him a bushel of used rubbers packaged by the Koch brothers and Trayvon nothing more to her than a voice on the phone and she still would be able to testify about the conversation.

How can this be?

Simple.

The relevancy rule and excited-utterance and present-sense-impression exceptions to the hearsay rule permit her to tell the jury what Trayvon told her about his encounter with the creepy man and what he did to get away from him as well as what Trayvon and the creepy man said to each other and what she heard when the phone went dead.

The reason his statements are admissible is that he was describing an exciting event as it was happening and influencing him. Contemporaneous descriptions of exciting events by witnesses involved in and experiencing those events have long been admissible to prove those events happened as described. Indeed, this is well-settled law. If the defense objects, it will get nothing but a stern and withering glance from Judge Nelson as she says, “Objection overruled.”

The jury will assess Trayvon’s credibility regarding his encounter with the creepy man just as it will assess the credibility of the creepy man’s numerous conflicting and inconsistent statements about that encounter. The jury will look at the rest of the evidence, particularly the physical and forensic evidence as well as the testimonies of the various witnesses to the encounter and the shooting.

It doesn’t take a weatherman to tell which way the wind blows.

As Lonnie points out, Dee Dee was not present during the encounter and did not know anything about the neighborhood. She can only tell the jury what Trayvon told her. She would not have known what to lie about because she was not there. If anything, her statement is frustratingly vague and that ironically enhances her credibility in a manner that a more detailed statement tailored to establish each element of the crime charged would not.

The defense is not likely to persuade the jury that Benjamin Crump told her what to say. Matt Gutman’s (ABC News) recording will no doubt verify that. He would not have been invited to be present and record the conversation, if Crump had any funny business in mind. That recording created a great insurance policy.

As a former criminal defense lawyer and officer of the court, I am extremely offended by the efforts to dox, demonize and intimidate Dee Dee. Pure and simple it’s criminal behavior because it is motivated by a desire to keep her from testifying or to destroy her credibility if she does testify.

Witness intimidation via character assassination by false statement and innuendo is not protected speech under the First Amendment.

Since Dee Dee is a prosecution witness in a second degree murder case, those who seek to assassinate her character with false statements and innuendo are committing the crime of first degree witness intimidation.

Intimidating a witness to a murder in Florida is first degree witness tampering punishable by a sentence of imprisonment of up to life in prison.

I sincerely hope that anyone who attempts to intimidate Dee Dee is prosecuted, convicted and sentenced to a lengthy prison term.

They deserve it.


Hey Jude, Don’t Make it Bad. Take a Sad Song and Make it Better

December 6, 2012

Thursday, December 6, 2012

Good Morning:

The holidays are stressful for many of us, but we need to remember that they will be extremely difficult for Sybrina Fulton and Tracy Martin. This will be their first Christmas without Trayvon.

Added to each of our burdens, and especially to theirs, is the increasing anger, frustration, and emotional distress caused by the defense strategy to legitimize the defendant’s ludicrous claim of self-defense by appealing to racist fear of Blacks and Black gangsta stereotypes to demonize Trayvon and transform him into someone who deserved to die. But they do not stop at libeling the dead.

There is no honor, dignity or decency to be found in the defense camp.

By their racist supporters, who specialize in infesting websites where they derail peaceful and rational discussion, spew hate-driven false accusations and assassinate the character of anyone who dares to disagree with them, they have waged a no-holds barred war to destroy Sybrina Fulton, Tracy Martin, Benjamin Crump, Natalie Jackson, and an innocent young girl called Dee Dee, whose only “crime” is being Black, Trayvon’s girlfriend, and talking to Trayvon when the defendant attacked him without provocation and abruptly terminated his life in mid-shriek with a single gunshot to the heart.

We must remember to think of their pain this holiday season, instead of our own.

We also must remember that we are not powerless.

Although this case is an abomination, a marathon, and seems never ending, it will end someday.

I do what I do in this sacred place to assure that the story told about this case to generations of the unborn will be about the triumph of justice over racism, of hope over despair, of love over hate.

We will make it better.

There is a light at the end of this long tunnel, my friends, and it’s not an onrushing train.

Lonnie Starr wrote at 6:56 am today in response to Lady St.Claire:

“Step back and look at the strategy! The defense keeps asking for things, in the hopes of finding something incrimination, but all they’re getting is exculpatory material. Material that is going to be of no use to them. Meanwhile the SP is building a record of what the Defense has asked for and will not be using.

Now, under those conditions, pretty nearly anything the defense tries to present to the jury, the SP can show that the defense is also in possession of material that contradicts and precludes any such use. Each time the defense tries to take a step forward, the SP will be able to push them several steps back. Simply because the defense can be shown to be searching in vain for anything at all, no matter how minute or immaterial it might seem. Yet, still finding nothing at all.

The only question they’re probably asking around the SP’s offices is: Just how deep a hole is the defense going to dig itself into, before they realize they’d better stop digging? I can hear the peals of laughter emanating from the SP’s office from here.

Like I said, the SP’s offices have got to be one of the happiest places on earth to work about now.”

My wife Rachel posted the video early this morning of Wilson Pickett singing an incomparable soul version of song Hey, Jude, written by Paul McCartney, but credited to Lennon McCartney. According to Wikipedia, McCartney wrote the song to comfort Julian Lennon during his parent’s divorce. Listen closely to the electric slide guitar in the background by a relatively unknown studio musician at the time. His name is Duane Allman. At the end of this song, Pickett and Allman transcend.

We too shall transcend.


Featuring Lonnie Starr and his Theory of the Trayvon Martin Case

December 4, 2012

Lonnie Starr has been working this case displaying high intelligence with the focus and determination of a dog working a bone. Pity the hapless and extremely over-matched defendant and his defense team. Just don’t get carried away feeling sorry for them.

He also has written the two White House petitions seeking a federal investigation of the defendant for violating Trayvon Martin’s civil rights and an end to the SYG laws.

Here is his theory of the case as he presented it in two comments this morning on the Tempest in a Teapot thread. Please read it and join the discussion below.

If you like this article, please consider sharing and liking it by clicking on the buttons immediately below and making a financial contribution by clicking on the yellow donation button in the upper right part of this page just below the blue banner containing my name and the name of the blog.

Thank you.

Fred

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

Unlike most investigators, I gather facts and work forward from there, creating an imaginary narrative that puts all the facts in place. Then I examine the details that don’t fit, and I then work backwards to see where they can be fitted. After I have a good narrative that accounts for as much as I can, then I sort of try to view it “from the side lines”, looking for the nexus of critical details, in other words, if this had happened, then this is what had to have been taking place as well. Then you take a closer look at what had to have happened along side what did happen, and if the narrative is false, insurmountable obstacles/anomalies appear.

Evidence can only lie by being contrived to give a false impression. People, however, have more options to falsify. So, believe the evidence more than the people who observe it, but only believe the evidence itself, if you cannot imagine that it has been contrived. If it is possible to contrive evidence, then it is possible to fool witnesses, and this is exactly the objective of the criminal mind.

So, you work backward, then forward and backwards again and take looks from the sides, it’s like panning for nuggets of gold. The chaff and waste eventually washes away, leaving the hard stuff behind.

It puzzled me for a long time, why a law student, would go out on a hunt that both the law and the rules of NW definitively prohibited. What would be the percentage in that? He’d have broken every rule and the law besides! How could he think that would make him a hero? When, any fool could see, all he’d wind up with is a harmless kid being held, who had a right to be in the neighborhood. What could he possibly do in that event? The answer is, kill the kid! That’s the only thing that prevents the comparisons from being made. But that is only a stall, since the truth would probably come out anyway.

So then, what does GZ need to make the planned hunt okay, despite the laws and the rules? The answer is: evidence that a crime had been committed. So then the question is “what kind of crime can be carried and displayed under a wide variety of circumstances”? The answer is: Bloody wounds! They can be claimed to have happened outside of the sight of any witnesses who later appear. They are hard to refute because, it’s hard to believe that a “pillar of the community” would actually harm himself, for the purpose of misleading the public, about a crime, it doesn’t appear he would or could plan.

But think about it, if George leaves his house bleeding from carefully designed wounds, he has a “crime” that can be used in a variety of ways, to excuse all breaking of rules and justify breaking the law as well. Those wounds were designed to shield him from the prohibitions of rules and laws. But, because they were created before any other actions were taken, they must not be professionally examined, if the time of their creation could be determined at all. This means that the creation of these wounds could not be left to chance. They are an integral part of the nights activities, however or whatever else happens. Only the how of obtaining them need be changed to fit what actually takes place.

This leaving home on the hunt for this project, is a “high octane” emotional performance, that required dedicated intent. It is likely that medication and alcohol, which lowers inhibitions and increases calm, would be taken to steady the nerves. If so, it adds yet another reason why the ER must be avoided at all costs, and of course, to accomplish that, the wounds must be and remain superficial, and not require professional treatment.

Next up is GZ undoing himself. He rehearsed a plausible story, probably several. As a NW, who knows that he cannot be either on patrol or following, he leaves home with a story about going shopping. To cover up notification, he “spots” his target over by FT’s cut through, a good story for night time affairs, since it comes through a “strange” area. (Of course, we are later to learn it wasn’t so strange to find people walking that way at all).

But George has his bloody head wounds to shield himself, which ever way the story plays out. The first problem arises, he can’t find the target, where he has been told to look. So he retraces his path, looking to pick up the trail. (tchoupi’s work), His fellow Watchers see his predicament and call him to correct his error, by pointing out that the target is still there at the mailboxes. George goes back and spots him, and there the play begins.

According to the script, GZ needs to frighten his target into engaging actions that can be portrayed as strange. He accomplishes this by shining his lights on the target as he shelters in the mail shed. Unbeknownst to GZ, however, his target is on the phone and gives notice of GZ’s hostile presence. So, an explanation of TM’s actions from that point onward are explained. Bad news for GZ!

When TM leaves the shelter of the mail boxes, it is actually raining harder than it was when he first got there. Meaning he was already spooked. But he contains himself enough to walk, probably out of GZ’s sight before he actually runs. However, GZ has his little defense shield in place, and since this gives him the lattitude he needs to break the rules and the law, he sets up the scene with “he’s running” to the NEN operator, then he exits his car. This one cannot get away, because George has intentions that will not allow it to happen that way. Meanwhile TM is unaware of how dangerous the situation really is, so he quickly assesses that not seeing GZ, means that he’s no longer being followed, and continues his walk home. Only to find GZ behind him again.

GZ intends to grab and hold TM for the police, using his wounds as a reason and lawful cause for doing so. That would make him a hero, if it would play out that way. Only trouble was, TM was still extremely childish far beyond his years. If only TM was more mature, the story would have worked. But, since TM was so extremely childlike, the planned story would quickly reveal as absurd. A whining, crying child asking for his momma, isn’t going to sell as a thug of any kind. GZ blames TM’s lack of maturity for inexplicably thwarting his heroic plans and decides that TM’s demeanor and character must not be allowed to display. By killing TM he accomplishes, preventing immediate challenge to his claims of attack, while making himself the only credible witness of all the events of that night.

GZ had a well rehearsed story, for how things transpired. In his drug and alcohol induced state, he can do no more than recite it verbatim. It all occurred at the “T”, where he did not follow TM, but was instead attacked while attempting to retreat. The trouble is, he was unable to modify the story as needed, thus he cannot account for the fact that the body is 40.5 feet away from where it needs to be, for the purpose of his well rehearsed story.

This story could have easily been modified to account for this distance south of the ‘T’, but Georges becalmed state, as evidenced by his bio stats, precluded critical thinking.


%d bloggers like this: