I voted that she would show up and take the 5th because that was the closest answer to what I think she would do.

You did not give me the option of: Would she take a fifth before she showed up?

_________________
No matter how many times a lie is repeated, it will never become the TRUTH!

Nope. Even if she was somewhat legit, I'd still say NO, because she would personally be scared to death. But it goes way beyond that. Just think about how Crump is being protected, how they're doing everything in their power to keep HIM from being questioned. And I think we all know WHY that is. Same, perhaps even moreso, goes for Dee Dee(s?) If MOM and West ever got hold of her, the entire conspiracy would be exposed, and some people would soon be looking at all kinds of problems, up to and including prison time. Do you seriously think people are gonna risk that? Only if Dee Dee were to get her own lawyer -- an HONEST lawyer -- who convinced her to come forward to spill the beans in order to help herself, would she maybe do it. But if that happened?... umm, not to be overly dramatic, but I think at that point Dee Dee's safety really MIGHT be an issue.

To Rumpole and others who think she will show up because Bernie "has to have someone show up." I don't see it that way. In fact, he might think he can make his case even stronger, as long as there's a "good" reason WHY she didn't show up. "As we've said all along, this young lady's life is in danger. She has been threatened by racist supporters of George Zimmerman, and apparently her fear has finally gotten the best of her. I'm sorry we're unable to locate her, but I can truly understand how she must feel. None of us can know the terror she must be living under."

Don't forget the health problems that have arisen because of this whole ordeal. Her inability to go, has made get an infection, which is shooting her BP through the roof and erasing any recollection she might have of the events. Truly a sad case.

Somebody claiming to be DeeDee will appear for the defense deposition. Could be Tina Turner for all we know but it surely will not be the original (now 17) 16 year old DeeDee. I don't see the big deal over this whether or not DeeDee will make a brief appearance. She could bop on in there with a picture ID, cop an attitude & again state that she's not comfortable answering those questions. Though I previously doubted the Scheme Team would've allowed any DeeDee within the same zipcode as the Seminole County Court House, I'm taking that back since Judge Nelson has baked a humble pie large enough to "gag" the State of Florida.
DeeDee #? shows up & says she's uncomfortable answering any questions pertaining to her history. She'll gladly tell O'Mara that a crazy white dude was stalking Trayvon, chased him down & shot him like a dog. The grass whispered it to her prior to the grass crying Mary (JMH)

I figure that if they were able to depose a 13yo, they will be able to haul in the now 19yo DD. Not that I think she will be entirely cooperative (I voted that yes she will come in, but plead the 5th to some/most/many questions)

That was my vote but I have never been involved with the legal system so my opinion is pretty much clueless. Just a hunch.

I believe she will be there, and will be represented by a lawyer who can be connected to Ben Crump in some fashion,
probably through Tracy Martin's sister-in-law, Patricia Jones, or through some other member of the legal team associated
with the Martin/Fulton family.

"DeeDee" will be shielded from as many questions as possible, and BDLR will be certain to object to as many questions
as he possibly can.

_________________
Figures never lie, but liars sometime figure.

I agree as well. I think it will be so easy for her to disappear and the state will through up it's arms and say " nothing we can do". The excuse will be she feared for her life.
Personally I think she is already gone I have no proof of this just a feeling. We all thought she was 16 turns out she was 18 now 19 I think she is out of state somewhere maybe at college.

She could show up as a 21 year old now.

Would love to be a fly on the wall if she does show up. If she is there MOM needs to be very hard on her let her know anytime a lawyer needs a lawyer it's not a good sign. Remember that train that was coming down the tracks well now it's about to run you over and Crump is the one who pushed you in front of it. Court would go easy on a 16 year old but 18-19 all bets are off. Like I said over at CTH if I was MOM or West gloves would be off I would be tearing everyone apart right now.

_________________
"I want to die peacefully in my sleep like my grandfather, not screaming in terror like his passengers."

"If a man talks in a forest, and there is no woman there to hear him.

Is he still wrong?"

My guess: DD 2 shows up represented by counsel, and pleads the 5th in response to all substantive questions.

Scheme Team associated counsel? That would be pretty obvious.

Independent counsel (of the Blackwell genre) ? Pretty risky, what if push came to shove and independent counsel encouraged DD 2 to make a deal to save herself?

That would be something if they encouraged her to take a deal and it's something I think she would do.

_________________
"I want to die peacefully in my sleep like my grandfather, not screaming in terror like his passengers."

"If a man talks in a forest, and there is no woman there to hear him.

Is he still wrong?"

With spectators being left out of the loop on what exactly takes place in the depositions, DD taking the fifth or being uncooperative should lead to immediate motions, I assume, so we would or should find out about them if they are filed.

You have any input to share here?

My current understanding:

If DD pleads the 5th, then the State can compel her to testify by offering "use" immunity pursuant to FS 914.04. Generally, the defense can not compel the State to offer such immunity, except upon a showing of prosecutorial misconduct, which I believe has to be related to the prospective testimony of the witness. I have read a Florida case to that effect and cited such case previously at CTH.

If DD pleads the 5th and refuses to answer any substantive questions at her deposition, does that automatically preclude her from testifying at trial? Although that seems logical, I can't find anything to that effect in a brief search. Accordingly, my current belief is that the defense would file a motion to exclude DD from testifying at trial, which would force the State to make a firm decision on the immunity issue.

Even if DD did show up and testify fully at her deposition, I think that the defense may still file a motion to exclude DD from testifying at trial. Why?

1. MOM has already publicly stated that Crump's activities associated with W8 may justify excluding her testimony.
2. Subsequent to MOM's statement, ABC released on Feb 28, 2013 an audio clip which (1) documents improper coaching by Crump and (2) references substantive conversations between W8 and Tracy and Sybrina prior to the Crump interview, contrary to what Tracy and Sybrina told the cops, as reflected in the police reports.
3. BDLR improperly coached and led W8 in the April 2 interview.
4. There is substantial evidence that improper coaching/leading has resulted in false statements: (a) ice tea, (b) little brother, (c) half-time of All State basketball game, (d) W8's failure to correctly identify her anonymous Simple Mobile cell phone carrier - shows she was coached based on Tracy's T-Mobile records available to Crump, (e) changes in W8's testimony between 3/19 and 4/ 2 interview: man gonna beat Trayvon, heard grass, heard get off get off, jacket becomes hoodie, apartment shade becomes mail shed thing, details added about call connection / disconnection times coinciding with Trayvon's alleged arrival and departure at/from mail thing, (f) "you want that too?", (g) put hoodie up, (h) What you talking about becomes Whatchu doing around here, (i) admitted hospital lie
5. Defense may have knowledge regarding some hanky panky with the phone(s).

Florida law is generally to the effect that witness exclusion is an extreme remedy and generally disfavored. I still think they might make such a motion to preserve the issue for appeal and to call the matter to Nelson's attention. We might even see a motion to depose BDLR about his dealings with Crump in connection with the 4/2 interview of W8. How did BDLR come to lead W8 to substantially follow the Crump script when the audio recording provided by Crump is largely unintelligible and did not contain the "beat" allegation of the Feb 28 released ABC recording? Was BDLR colluding with or at a minimum following the direction of a private attorney with a vested financial stake in the case? Was O'Steen present during the pre-interview coaching/prep ? Did they depose O'Steen?

The new motion to reconsider the deposition of Crump, plays well into that scenario. I too, believe that the Defense will try to exclude her testimony, due to the coaching and inconsistencies as to her provenance, as well a previous conversations with the Martins.

I think Diwataman's blog indicated that DeeDee has been deposed. When do we learn whether she answered the defense questions, took the 5th or was evasive & refused to answer some of the questions.

Thanks, John Galt, for your considered reply!

Orlando Sentinel reports that defense was not finished questioning W8 and will schedule more time on another date.
just read on Dman's blog.

Looks like results are in..... A Dee Dee did show up!!!!

And she is due to show up a second time

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