It is currently Mon May 19, 2025 3:04 pm

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 983 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36 ... 50  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Sat Mar 23, 2013 2:07 am 
Online
ADMIN
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 27, 2012 5:30 pm
Posts: 57118
Location: Pomeroy's Wine Bar
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=27541#p27545



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

Image

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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Mar 23, 2013 7:31 am 
Online
ADMIN
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 27, 2012 5:30 pm
Posts: 57118
Location: Pomeroy's Wine Bar
MJW wrote:
According to the defense's Motion to Compel Production of Evidence from Third-Party filed Nov. 30, 2012, W8's age was first revealed to the defense in September. It was edited out of the previous disclosure.


Welcome to RT MJW
:51

Nice avatar pic :)

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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Mar 23, 2013 9:24 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Nov 17, 2012 10:34 am
Posts: 892
Location: Cincinnati, OH, USA
Teeto wrote:
GZ lied on the witness stand at the bond hearing...


George Zimmerman didn't testify at the bond hearing.

Now what?

_________________
"That the attacker sustained a mortal wound is a matter that should have been considered by the deceased before he committed himself to the task he undertook." - 5th DCA, Stinson v. State (Fl)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Mar 23, 2013 10:29 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Feb 27, 2013 5:44 pm
Posts: 290
Location: Florida
MJW wrote:


Thanks for that link, MJW. That was a great read and I would definitely have missed it. :66 It went very well with my morning coffee.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Mar 23, 2013 11:53 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2013 3:00 pm
Posts: 288
jordan2 wrote:
This just in and it looks like DeeDee was deposed twice.

http://statelymcdanielmanor.wordpress.c ... ee-erupts/


Mike is truely a gifted knowledgable writer. I am in awe of his writing talents. :86 :86 :86 What a pleasure to read his articles, his thoughts, analysis and thankfully an interpretation of the legalese for us everyday people. Thanks again Rumpole for providing this place of freedom to communicate. :heart


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Mar 23, 2013 12:23 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Nov 17, 2012 10:34 am
Posts: 892
Location: Cincinnati, OH, USA
chipbennett wrote:
Teeto wrote:
GZ lied on the witness stand at the bond hearing...


George Zimmerman didn't testify at the bond hearing.

Now what?




I take that back. Zimmerman didn't testify *about the altercation itself* at the bond hearing. He made a statement, directed at Martin's parents, expressing that he was sorry for the loss of their son.

Full testimony and cross-examination:

George Zimmerman at the bond hearing wrote:
George Zimmerman, charged with Trayvon martin's MURDER: George Michael Zimmerman, Z-i-m-m-e-r-m-a-n.

O'MARA: I think an inquiry is probably appropriate by the court just (inaudible) that he is a criminal defendant with a second-degree murder charge --

(CROSSTALK)

O'MARA: We want to make sure that (inaudible). State your name.

ZIMMERMAN: George Michael Zimmerman

O'MARA: You advised me that you wanted to make a short statement, is that correct?

ZIMMERMAN: Correct.

I wanted to say I am sorry for the loss of your son. I did not know how old he was. I thought he was a little bit younger than I am. And I did not know if he was armed or not.

O'MARA: Nothing further, your honor. UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I'm sorry, sir, you're not really addressing that to the court. You're doing it here to the victim's family, is that correct?

ZIMMERMAN: They are here in the court, yes.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I understand. But I thought you were going to address your honor, Judge Lester, not -- so that's really addressed to the family and where the media happens to be, correct, Mr. Zimmerman?

ZIMMERMAN: No, to the mother and the father.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Ok. And tell me, after you committed this crime and you spoke to the police, did you ever make that statement to the police, sir? That you were sorry for what you've done or their loss?

ZIMMERMAN: No sir.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: You never stated that, did you?

ZIMMERMAN: I don't remember what I said. I believe I did say that.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: You told that to the police?

ZIMMERMAN: In one of the statements, I said that I felt sorry for the family.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: You did.

ZIMMERMAN: Yes, sir.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: So that would be recorded because all those conversations were recorded, right?

ZIMMERMAN: Yes, sir.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: And you're sure you said that?

ZIMMERMAN: I'm fairly certain.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: And so which officer did you tell that to? You made five statements I believe, total.

ZIMMERMAN: Yes, sir, I'm sorry, all the names run together.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: And do you remember if it was a male or a female?

ZIMMERMAN: There were both males and females.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: At the time you made that statement that you were sorry?

ZIMMERMAN: Yes, sir.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: And let me make sure the record's clear, you stated exactly what to those detectives?

ZIMMERMAN: I don't remember exactly what -- verbatim.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: But you're saying you expressed concern for the loss of Mr. Martin, or that you had shot Mr. Martin, that you actually felt sorry for him.

ZIMMERMAN: I felt sorry that they lost their child, yes.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: And so you told detectives that you wanted them to convey that to the parents?

ZIMMERMAN: I don't know if they were detectives or not.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Officers, I apologize.

ZIMMERMAN: I didn't know if they were going to convey it or not. I just made the statement.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Ok. And then you said that you called them or you left a message for them to tell them that?

ZIMMERMAN: No, sir.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Why did you wait 50 something days to tell them -- that is, the parents?

ZIMMERMAN: I don't understand the question, sir.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Why did you wait so long to tell Mr. Martin and the victim's mother, the father and mother, why did you wait so long to tell them?

ZIMMERMAN: I was told not to communicate with them.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Ok. So even through your attorney, you didn't ask to do it right away? Your former attorneys or anything.

ZIMMERMAN: I did ask them to express that to them. And they said that they were going to.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: But before you committed this crime on February 26th, you were arrested -- I'm sorry, not arrested. You were questioned that day, right, February 26th?

ZIMMERMAN: That evening into the 27th.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: And then the following morning. Is that correct?

ZIMMERMAN: Yes, sir.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: And the following evening, too. ZIMMERMAN: Yes, sir.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Ok. Would it be fair to say you were questioned about four or five times?

ZIMMERMAN: I remember giving three statements, yes sir.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: And isn't it true that in some of those statement when you were confronted about your inconsistencies, you started "I don't remember"?

O'MARA: Outside the scope of direct examination. I will object your honor.

JUDGE LESTER: We'll give you a little bit of leeway. Not a whole lot but a little bit here, ok.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Isn't it true that when you were questioned about the contradictions in your statements that the police didn't believe it, that you would say "I don't remember"?

JUDGE LESTER: I'm going to grant his motion at this time.

O'MARA: Thank you, your honor.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Would you agree you changed your story as it went along?

ZIMMERMAN: Absolutely not.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Ok. Now, sir, you had a phone at some point and you agreed to turn over that phone to the police so they could make a copy of what was in there, right?

ZIMMERMAN: Yes, sir.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: And in that phone did you receive or send text messages sir.

ZIMMERMAN: Yes, sir.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Did you ever make any reference to a reverend?

O'MARA: Objection, your honor. Outside the scope.

JUDGE LESTER: Sustained.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Did you ever make any reference to Mr. Martin, the father of the victim?

JUDGE LESTER: Sustained. You're getting a little bit far away.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I apologize your honor. My question is he was asked in terms of apology to the family and I'd like to be able to address that if I could. JUDGE LESTER: I think you can classify that whether or not he asked the apology. I don't want to get into other areas.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Yes, sir.

JUDGE LESTER: Thank you.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: My question is, Mr. Zimmerman, do you recall sending a message to someone, an e-mail, about referring to the victim's father?

ZIMMERMAN: No, sir. I don't.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: And just to anticipate, I guess -- is the court ruling that I can't ask him about the statements he made to the police in terms of his limited testimony? I just want to -- before I get that out don't want to be trying to ask the question and objections being made.

JUDGE LESTER: You've already anticipated and you can anticipate my ruling.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Thank you very much, your honor. I have no further questions, your honor.

JUDGE LESTER: Thank you. You may step down.

_________________
"That the attacker sustained a mortal wound is a matter that should have been considered by the deceased before he committed himself to the task he undertook." - 5th DCA, Stinson v. State (Fl)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Mar 23, 2013 1:12 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2013 3:00 pm
Posts: 288
BDLR's affliction of prefacing his questions with "OK" will bore and wear out the Jury. :wall :wall


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Mar 23, 2013 2:37 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Mar 14, 2013 3:39 pm
Posts: 585
I wonder if Corey will handle direct examination as BDLR seems incapable of asking non-leading questions. Or maybe Nelson will allow BDLR to ask incessant leading questions on direct examination.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Mar 23, 2013 8:03 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Feb 05, 2013 1:16 am
Posts: 28
I don't think Corey will want to have her name associated with this mess once it finally gets into the courtroom. IMHO

_________________
Figures never lie, but liars sometime figure.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Mar 23, 2013 8:17 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Feb 27, 2013 5:44 pm
Posts: 290
Location: Florida
Mess is right! :95


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Mar 23, 2013 9:34 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Feb 26, 2013 12:00 am
Posts: 287
Location: Las Vegas
I saw Corey the another night on an Investigation Discovery program about some other case in Florida. Wish I could remember which one.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Mar 24, 2013 12:04 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Oct 19, 2012 12:47 am
Posts: 155
Location: Deland, Florida
I have a friend who is a retired homicide detective who used to work with Angela Corey years ago. Evidently she wasn't so bad back then. Wonder what happened to her?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Mar 24, 2013 12:25 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Nov 17, 2012 4:22 pm
Posts: 176
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Angela_Corey

IDK but this is who she is>


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Mar 24, 2013 1:36 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Mar 16, 2013 2:43 am
Posts: 86
Does anybody here know anything about the reported 2 segment deposition of W8 with the first part of the deposition of W8 on March 13, 2013 and a second continuation of that deposition of W8 nine days later on March 22, 2013? This has been reported on Mike McDaniels blog. I have inquired about this there, but while awaiting reply, does anybody else know anything about this?
http://statelymcdanielmanor.wordpress.c ... mment-8935


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Mar 24, 2013 1:44 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Mar 15, 2013 1:48 am
Posts: 64
First, I want to say thanks for the warm welcome.

To add a little Zimmerman-related substance to this comment, I wish when Mike McDaniel said "The first part of the deposition was completed on Wednesday, March 13, and additional time was reportedly scheduled for Friday, March 22," he would have said where it was reported that the deposition will be continued on March 22. That's the first mention I've heard of a specific date. I sure hope next week some defense motions give us a clue about what happened in the W8 deposition(s).


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Mar 24, 2013 1:58 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Mar 15, 2013 1:48 am
Posts: 64
Looks like waltherppk and I are thinking along the same lines.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Mar 24, 2013 2:42 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Mar 16, 2013 2:43 am
Posts: 86
MJW wrote:
First, I want to say thanks for the warm welcome.

To add a little Zimmerman-related substance to this comment, I wish when Mike McDaniel said "The first part of the deposition was completed on Wednesday, March 13, and additional time was reportedly scheduled for Friday, March 22," he would have said where it was reported that the deposition will be continued on March 22. That's the first mention I've heard of a specific date. I sure hope next week some defense motions give us a clue about what happened in the W8 deposition(s).


Maybe the March 13, 2013 deposition was interrupted by the arrest of the deponent for perjury, and the deposition was continued later on March 22, 2013 at the jail. I'm sure the jail would provide a verifiable address for the deponent. At the jail they could probably determine the name and age and identify any medical conditions with some accuracy also.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Mar 24, 2013 3:33 am 
Online
ADMIN
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 27, 2012 5:30 pm
Posts: 57118
Location: Pomeroy's Wine Bar
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=27684#p27684



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

Image

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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Mar 24, 2013 10:46 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Mar 14, 2013 4:09 pm
Posts: 27
chipbennett wrote:
Teeto wrote:
GZ lied on the witness stand at the bond hearing...


George Zimmerman didn't testify at the bond hearing.

Now what?

Chip, most of the time when the Trayvonites say that, they are referring to George saying that he thought Trayvon was "just a little bit younger" than he (George) was. Their reasoning is that George more correctly guessed at Trayvon's age ("late teens") when talking to the dispatcher the night of the incident so this statement must be a lie.

They ignore the fact that George was responding to question that Sybrina said she wanted answers to about when he shot Trayvon. They are assuming what George meant by "a little younger" and that George could very well have thought Trayvon was older than 17 when Trayvon was beating him and pounding his head into the concrete.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Mar 24, 2013 1:33 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Nov 17, 2012 10:34 am
Posts: 892
Location: Cincinnati, OH, USA
First, a 17-year-old (or "late teens") is, in fact, "a few years younger" than someone in his late 20s. So, the statement isn't untruthful.

Second, there is no logical reason to believe or assume that Zimmerman was lying, even if one disagrees with the interpretation that someone in their late 20s would view someone in his late teems as being "a few years" younger than himself.

Third, as you indicated, the close-up encounter with Martin - athletic, muscular, strong, and about 6'3" tall - led Zimmerman to believe, at the time of the altercation, that Martin was older than he actually was.

Fourth: this completely irrelevant incident is yet another example of how O'Mara completely screwed Zimmerman during the bond hearing fiasco, and how Zimmerman was so completely naive enough to believe that he would do himself any good by taking the stand and making a statement to Martin's family.

_________________
"That the attacker sustained a mortal wound is a matter that should have been considered by the deceased before he committed himself to the task he undertook." - 5th DCA, Stinson v. State (Fl)


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 983 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36 ... 50  Next

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 16 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group