Welcome to RT Ausie54


What you need is a nice avatar pic.

You can do that yourself.. but I am happy to help
if you tell me a pic you like

_________________
Do not go gentle into that good night.
___________ Rage, rage against the dying of the light

Reminder


As well as this DAILY discussion thread about the GZ case... there is also

DAILY DAFT POSTS FROM JUSTARSE QUEST
viewtopic.php?f=45&t=822&p=30610#p30610



If only Trayvon had kept his hands in his pockets, none of this would have happened.

]

_________________
Do not go gentle into that good night.
___________ Rage, rage against the dying of the light

I am seriously thinking of doing just that. IF anyone can file on a criminal case, maybe a filing that summarizes the "facts" so that even feeble-minded folks such as Nelson can understand the gravity of the lies and machinations of the Scheme Team and Team Miss Piggy.

Hmmmm

Maybe this will help with a starting point, from which you can expand...
http://www.gzdocs.com/documents/0413/petition.pdf
PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI
(page 39)
5. To Disallow Mr. Crump's Deposition Creates Bad Policy
Mr. Crump led the effort to pressure the State of Florida to charge Mr.
Zimmerman with the murder of Trayvon Martin. To fuel his effort, Mr. Crump
solicited the help of a public relations firm App. CC: 266. With the firm's help,
Mr. Crump made several high-profile television appearances where he made
accusations about law enforcement corruption, speculated about the evidence in
this case, and accused Mr. Zimmerman of an egregious act by stating repeatedly
that George Zimmerman "profil[ed], pursu[ed], and confront[ed] Trayvon Martin
and then kill[ed] Trayvon Martin in cold blood." App. H: Clip 8; 00:35. More
significantly, Mr. Crump sequestered Witness 8, coordinated her first interview
(App. H: Clip 1 ), misstated the circumstances regarding the taking of the
statement, and shared select portions of the interview with the press while
simultaneously refusing to reveal the witness' identity or testimony to law
enforcement or provide any other information to the agencies responsible for the
investigation.

A civil lawyer with a vested interest in the outcome of the case should not be
allowed to keep evidence from law enforcement; potentially influence significant
witnesses; speak on national television about evidence he claims to exist and
witnesses he has spoken with; accuse several law enforcement agencies of
dishonesty; otherwise play a central role in the media persecution; and then gather
evidence to further the prosecution of the Petitioner and, as a result, significantly
threaten Mr. Zimmerman's chance of having a fair trial, yet claim he is not subject
to a deposition regarding non-privileged matters.

HT to Carole Green (Twitter)

http://blogs.lawyers.com/2013/04/trayvon-martins-parents-settle-with-homeowners-assn/


snip“What is important to the defense, in terms of the HOA settlement to the Martin family, is whether the threat of litigation or the promise of monetary settlement affects their testimony,” he says. “We will be looking carefully at statements made by the Martin family before and after they began legal action against the Home Owner’s Association.”
snip

Pay attention to the above statement. Huge IMHO

What I love is the comment at the bottom of that page. I won't repeat it here because it is vile. The part I find amusing is yet another person who is associating George with the KKK. Apparently they know nothing about the KKK, since they would never allow George in.

It is almost as amusing as the person I got into a debate with about the NBPP who said he had never heard of them. He was one of the Malcolm X types and was blasting people about the old BPP and saying that the person didn't know what they were talking about. I had to explain that there is a NEW BPP and that was the ones making the death threats. Of course based on his picture, I am darker than this black activist, so...

Nelson's first order regarding denial of deposing Crump:
http://www.gzdocs.com/documents/0313/order_re_crump.pdf

Page 4, Paragraph 2:
The Defendant has similarly failed to demonstrate the need to depose Mr. Crump as to any matters outside of his interview with Witness #8

This seemed to be the issue Nelson used to disallow the deposition, to which O'Mara responded with:

O'Mara's Petition:
http://www.gzdocs.com/documents/0413/petition.pdf

Page 32, Paragraph 2 (starting at):
As to the "relevant information" portion of the second prong, the trial court
suggested in its March 4, 2013 Order, that the Defendant has failed to show that
the information sought is needed for any relevant purpose. App. P: 177. However,
at the hearing on this issue on February 22, 2013, counsel for Petitioner proffered
many reasons why a deposition of Mr. Crump possesses relevant information to the
case. Additionally, counsel for Petitioner offered to present video clips and other
evidence for the trial court's review, further showing why a deposition of Mr.
Crump is relevant, given the fact that he has made public, unprivileged statements
regarding the case:


MR. WEST: ... whether I need to put that in the record or if the Court
will accept my proffer. If the Court wants me to put it in the record, I
have it here, I have it on my computer, and I would like the
opportunity to introduce that as exhibits. I have the letter Mr. Crump
wrote, I have the newspaper article where he said Sanford was lying
about Tracy Martin. And I have the various video press conferences
where he said exactly what I said he said. So, shall I do that? I can
take a few minutes and we can play them right now if that's if- Mr.

Blackwell is challenging the accuracy of the statements contained
within my proffer.

App. 0: 162; L 17. The trial court indicated that it did not need any further
information.

It appears the State will need to rewrite a reason for denial and why the 'cause I said' order that followed the Motion for Reconsideration ignored the fact that Nelson was incorrect and that Crump's Affidavit was full of holes, to put it politely.

I am WAAAYY beyond confused with this whole mess! I

Could that be because it is such a mess?

I think the defense might come up with some interesting results if they had W8 write out (from dictation) a few sentences from that document AND if they had other members of the Martin/Fulton "family" write out those same sentences - y'know, people like the TrayParents, the TrayUncle and TrayAunt with whom TM was living, and other close family members of that generation (including Brandi Green). Let's throw in cousin Boobie and some of TM's half-sisters for good measure. I wonder what we might see...

After all, if TrayMom wrote out that document herself and gave it to DeeDee to sign and then DeeDee gave it back to her, technically BDL wouldn't be lying if he said that it was a document that DeeDee gave to TrayMom.

Chip Bennett has done some really incisive summaries at times when the CTH has been invaded by a troll. If you could copy/paste one of those, you could save yourself a lot of work. Goodness knows Nelson needs something she can understand.

Let us know the response if you try to file something.

I'd like to go on record that I was joking and that I seriously discourage making any improper filings with the court.

If I was state, I would limit argument to "GZ has an adequate remedy in appeal after conviction and petition for cert. on a pretrial discovery order should be denied because petitioner has not met his burden of demonstrating irreparable harm."

Leave the defense of hiding witness tampering behind attorney work product doctrine to Blackwell.

What are the odds of the DCA seeing the Pandora's Box they will be laying precedent for by allowing the sequestering and manipulation of witness testimony by a "Private Attorney General"? To allow criminal witnesses to be protected and hidden in the hopes of furthering or solidifying a civil claim is a complete perversion of our justice system. What happens when we get to the point that Law Enforcement is tasked with sifting through huge amounts of "witnesses" to criminal actions which, while their testimony is not enough to meet beyond a reasonable doubt, but might satisfy "Preponderance of the evidence", especially in front of sympathetic jurors. The very same actions which would be considered witness tampering by non-officers of the court would suddenly be tacitly approved for the same "officers of the court"/"Co-Counsel"/"Private Attorney General" who are supposed to be held to a higher ethical and legal standard.

100%, imho. What's good for the goose is good for the gander. Do they want to authorize defense attorneys to crump witnesses?

If MOM was smart, he would use that very term "to crump a witness" derisively in any arguments to drive home that very aspect as to what they would be endorsing......that is, unless they punt for ripeness, but you would think that if that was their inclination, they would have just denied issuing the writ without prejudice and tell them to bring it back post-trial. While that certainly could ultimately still happen, in the larger context of this case, and the time frame with the trial dates, it would seem to me that if they did not consider the petition at least mildly persuasive, they would have just denied out of hand. Perhaps a glimmer of hope of Due Process, or am I being too optimistic? I am still not sure if removing Lester was a gutsy move by the DCA, or if it was a ploy to get it in front of Nelson, who seems even less concerned with the law than Lester was, if that is even possible.

Wow, I thought the Click Orlando posters were special, the OS takes the cake though. They are still convinced that George didn't have his wallet on him and that someone called him to keep an eye on Trayvon that night, so he was on watch and broke the NWA laws (the non existent ones) or a new one, was acting as an armed security guard without the proper permits.

Not his style. MOM is master of understatement. Look at page 40 of the petition for cert. Describes witness tampering / obstruction in detail, but doesn't use those terms. The concept is that the judges at the DCA reading that will infer for themselves: "holy chit! That's outrageous!"

The polite, polished understated style can be extremely effective, particularly with very sharp, highly competent judges. MOM is in his element at the DCA, whereas such sophistication is very likely lost on Nelson.

I'm guessing that Crump, et al., took the settlement because it was at the policy limit and he knew that - with no hospital records forthcoming - there was (or soon would be) a crack in the public's perception. No great analysis, per se, just my two cents...

_________________
Getting facts right is a fundamental requirement of morality.
- P. J. O'Rourke