Dear Mr. Julison, thank you in advance for your candor.

1.) Are you currently under the advice of any legal representation in regard to your capacity to speak bluntly, truthfully, and honestly about the circumstances surrounding the shooting death of Trayvon Martin and your subsequent involvement with regard to any aspect of media presentation?

In short: Are you lawyered up?

2.) It is reported you became the official media consultant of the Trayvon Martin family on March 5th of 2012. Is this correct? – Are you still working on their behalf in that capacity as of today?

3.) Who specifically contacted you and requested your services? On what date prior to Monday March 5th were you initially contacted?

Previously you had worked with Natalie Jackson on the Sherman Ware case. Had you any prior affiliation with any subsequent entity who became involved in the “case” against Trayvon Martin? In what capacity?

4.) During the March 8th press conference – which you coordinated – Tracy Martin stated he would not assist the Sanford Police Department in the recovery of telephone data from the telephone found at the scene. He would not provide the passcode to the account. Why?

5.) Where, and by whom did the term “White Hisanic” originate?

6.) From the outset, every media entity who engaged in coverage of the “initial story” used the race of Trayvon Martin and the race of George Zimmerman for the basis for their articles. Was race part of the media hook you established?

7.) Did you take any measures to stop, disuage or correct the media entities, of which you had specific contact, to correct their race-based reporting? Why or why not?

8.) Knowing now the FDLE and the FBI have fully investigated the “race angle” and found no justification for cause – do you still believe race played a factor in the events?

9.) On March 22nd at Mellon Park in Sanford FL you appeared on stage with various members of the New Black Panthers, the Martin Family, Benjamin Crump, Daryl Parks, and a host of interested parties. On March 26th Daryl Parks stated the Martin Family had no affiliation with the New Black Panther organization, yet they have appeared since 3/22 at numerous events together. How do you reconcile this contradiction?

10.) Did you at any time provide material information about the criminal investigation exclusively to the Media?

11.) What was/is you relationship with the following:

• Matt Gutman (ABC)
  
• Frances Robles (Miami Herald)
  
• Joy-Ann Reid (Herald/NBC)
  
• Russell Simmons (Global Grind)
  
• Jeff Weiner (Orlando Sentinel)
  
• Rene Stutzman (Orlando Sentinel)
  
• Daralene Jones (Orlando Fox affiliate)

12.) Have you been financially compensated for any activity surrounding the Trayvon Martin case, including but not limited to your time an expenses?

13.) If so, in what amounts? (roughly)

14.) Were you part of, or impetus for, any decisionmaking to remove from public forums any information about Trayvon Martin including, but not limited to:

• Social Media Accounts (any)
  
• Public Records
  
• Prior affiliations.

15.) Who provided the initial media package (early March) to the media including photographs?

16.) Why were only 5 year old photographs provided, and why was no more recent information provided?

17.) Have you ever looked at the social media history of Trayvon Martin?

18.) If so, how did it affect your decisionmaking moving forward?

19.) Why was the relationship between Brandy Green and Tracy Martin diminished?

20.) Who was the decisionmaker to remove Chad Green from any media exposure.

21.) Prior to taking on the job of Media Consultant did you do any independent investigative work on your own?

22.) Did you hire anyone to do anything as outlined in #21 above.

23.) Do you have direct knowledge of any specific acts of deception by any party involved in the case against George Zimmerman. Are you aware of any lies told by legal representatives of the Martin family?

24.) Who made the decision to change the last name of Javaris Fulton to “Martin”?

25.) Given the numerous parties physically, emotionally, and financially injured as a consequence to the racial narrative sold by a willing media – do you feel any:

• - responsibility?
  
• - remorse?
  
• - regret?

26.) Have you seen any factual mistakes presented by myself? if so will you please outline and provide me the opportunity to review or correct?

27.) Are you going to pass your response (to these questions) through legal representation, in advance of submission, to parse any potential liability?

27.) Lastly, are you open to further contact and questioning either in writing, by phone, or in person?

Thanks again for your time, attention, honesty and candor.

Warmest regards,

on 28 November 2012.
In December, the George Zimmerman Defense fund will be moving into the hands of a new fund manager.

The original fund was formed by George Zimmerman himself -- before his arrest, in the initial days of the media frenzy started by Ben Crump, Natalie Jackson, Al Sharpton, Jesse Jackson and the PR firm hired to fan the flames, Julison Communications (the story of this PR blitz is profiled on the ParksCrump.com website). While most media outlets perpetuated the narrative repeated constantly by Ben Crump who said that what George Zimmerman did was to ". . profile, pursue, and confront Trayvon Martin, and then kill Trayvon Martin in cold blood, even though he was unarmed; (see video of Crump on Piers Morgan Tonight)" there was notable exception, Sean Hannity, who questioned the narrative pushed by Parks and Crump -- see Hannity questioning Parks on his show, asking if there has been a rush to judgement -- and Mr. Hannity urged his viewers not to jump to conclusions about George Zimmerman. As a result, thousands donated to George via TheRealGeorgeZimmerman.com website.

TheRealGeorgeZimmerman.com website was shut down by George at the request of his lawyer, Mark O'Mara, who became aware of the funds shortly after the April 20th Bond Hearing. After learning of the funds, Mr. O'Mara notified the court, and most of the funds were transferred to a trust account, and then shortly thereafter, to the independently managed George Zimmerman Defense Fund. Mr. Zimmerman paid the price for the perceived lack of candor to the Court during his April 20th Bond Hearing regarding the amount of money he had raised -- a price that included spending more than 30 days in jail (where he was housed in solitary confinement), a $1,000,000 bond, and charge of perjury levied against his wife. While the fund has been independently managed, very little has been done to solicit donations. Nonetheless, since its establishment on May 3, 2012, the George Zimmerman Defense Fund has raised just over $140,000.

Currently, the balance of the George Zimmerman Defense Fund is at its lowest, and new funds must be raised to support George's living expenses and legal costs through the end of the Self Defense Immunity Hearing and/or trial. Although neither Mr. O'Mara nor Mr. West have received any payment to date for their services, there has been a persistent concern amongst some Zimmerman supporters that donations meant to support George could be used instead for attorneys fees. This simply is not the case, and it has never been the case, but to underscore the point, management of the fund will be transferred to a new fund manager of Mr. Zimmerman's choosing. Priority for the funds will be as it has always been, in this order: to pay for George's living expenses, to pay for costs associated with the defense, and then -- only if funds remain -- to pay appropriate legal fees. That has always been the priority plan, and we reassert it now.

Once the fund is under new management, there will be more affirmative fund-raising efforts. These efforts will include an updated GZDefenseFund.com website, a disclosure of how funds have been spent, and regular updates regarding how future funds will be allocated. George will make a statement to his supporters, and he would like to send a NOTE OF THANKS to all donors who do not object to receiving one -- we are, of course, maintaining the confidentiality of donors.

The New George Zimmerman Defense Fund will be operated with the strong premise that George Zimmerman is innocent of the charges against him, and that his actions were justifiable self-defense with the purpose of preventing further great bodily harm or even death at the hands of an attacker who had already caused him great bodily injury. The New George Zimmerman Defense Fund will also be operated with the well-documented assertion that George Zimmerman was the victim of a coordinated public relations attack designed to assert that George acted with racial bias, a public relations attack that was perpetrated with the intent to prejudice the media and the citizens of this country with unfounded misinformation about George, and with the purpose of profiting from a tragedy.

The New George Zimmerman Defense Fund will be operated with the strong premise that George Zimmerman is innocent of the charges against him, and that his actions were justifiable self-defense with the purpose of preventing further great bodily harm or even death at the hands of an attacker who had already caused him great bodily injury.

I can't speak for Sundance... but my guess is the difference is "Intent" also posting what is public knowledge... but you have a good point.

on 29 November 2012.
The Miami Herald used the headline "George Zimmerman to sell autographs to pay expenses," to describe the policy of the New George Zimmerman Defense Fund of sending signed Thank You Cards to individuals who donate.

For those who look for opportunities to criticize George, we understand that the idea of sending Thank You Cards might be seen as an attempt to sell signatures to gain donations. To those who wish to criticize and ridicule, go right ahead. However, that is not George's intent. It is presumptuous to assume that George's signature is a valuable enough commodity to be an effective motivator for people to donate. Rather, what we hope motivates people is the ever increasingly undeniable conclusion that George is simply not guilty. He only did what he had to do to protect himself from an attack by an unknown assailant; a young man who broke George's nose, bloodying it, and then got him on the ground and smashed his head into concrete, causing more injury.

George has expressed a desire since the beginning of this ordeal to thank those who have supported him, not just financially, but also those who have offered their kind words and prayers, and he has wanted to send Thank You Cards for some time. The defense team has had reservations about allowing it -- partly because we anticipated it would be interpreted in this way. Now the time has come to stop acting like George is the person portrayed by those who have manipulated the facts and the media, and to be true to the innocent person George is.

If the publicity surrounding the Thank You Cards raises people's awareness of George's need for the funds to hire experts and investigators to present the truth at his trial, and results in more donations to the Defense Fund, the support is welcome. George Zimmerman is innocent and should never have been charged, and there is nothing inappropriate about raising money to fund the defense of an innocent man.

George has been the target of a coordinated public relations attack designed to create the false impression that George shot Trayvon Martin because of racial bias, instead of self-defense -- a public relations campaign perpetrated with the intent to manipulate the media and prejudice the citizens of this country against George through misinformation and emotional appeals. If a voice is raised with concern over profiteering, it should be tempered by two premises. Firstly, George and his family have been devastated by this event and left broke and displaced from their homes. That is a tragedy that should not be visited upon anyone who has yet to be convicted of a crime. It is the ultimate injustice when it is perpetrated on an innocent man. Secondly, if profiteering is a concern, that analysis should begin with those who crafted the misinformation blitz and racially charged rhetoric, shouted with reckless disregard for the truth, the result of which has been significant financial gain, not ruin. We speak not of the Martin family, who have suffered the tragedy of losing a son; we speak of the family's handlers and attorneys.

on 30 November 2012.
On November 30, the defense team filed the following MOTION TO COMPEL PRODUCTION OF EVIDENCE FROM THIRD-PARTY, which asks the Court to issue its order to attorney Benjamin Crump directing Mr. Crump to produce the original recording and the original recording device used in the telephone interview of Witness 8 on or about March 19, 2012 and surrender same, without alteration, to the Florida Department of Law Enforcement.