No problem. I had originally thought it was something built in and not enabled, or that I just didn't know how to do it when quoting. I just tossed that out when I researched more. I hardly expect you to go messing around with the code.


I did post some comments
If anybody wants to discuss things further
viewtopic.php?f=60&p=28362#p28362

I suppose I need a Law 101 lesson.....I do realize something about the term "non-party" (person who is not a party to the proceeding), but it struck me odd that the first words in this motion are "Non-Party, Benjamin L. Crump...."

YET, according to Nelson, he is considered "opposing counsel?"

This might be old news, but it's a link to the actual witness list filed by the defense:

http://www.gzdocs.com/documents/0313/witness_list.pdf

_________________
Figures never lie, but liars sometime figure.

Two new things on GZ Legal case:

Demand for discovery of all info from any number connested to George or Shellie

http://www.gzdocs.com/documents/0313/di ... nd_326.pdf

and the redacted witness list

http://www.gzdocs.com/documents/0313/witness_list.pdf

_________________
Figures never lie, but liars sometime figure.

Thanks, LetJusticePrevail


From GZ Legal Site

http://www.gzlegalcase.com/

http://www.gzlegalcase.com/index.php/di ... -discovery



NON-PARTY BENJAMIN L. CRUMP, ESQ.'S RESPONSE IN OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION

on 27 March 2013.
The following NON-PARTY BENJAMIN L. CRUMP, ESQ.'S RESPONSE IN OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION was filed with the Court:

NON-PARTY BENJAMIN L. CRUMP, ESQ.'S RESPONSE IN OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION
http://www.gzdocs.com/documents/0313/re ... sition.pdf



DEFENDANT'S SUPPLEMENTAL WITNESS LIST (REDACTED)

on 27 March 2013.
The following DEFENDANT'S SUPPLEMENTAL WITNESS LIST (REDACTED) has been filed with the Court:

DEFENDANT'S SUPPLEMENTAL WITNESS LIST (REDACTED)
http://www.gzdocs.com/documents/0313/witness_list.pdf



DEMAND FOR SPECIFIC DISCOVERY

on 26 March 2013.
The following DEMAND FOR SPECIFIC DISCOVERY has been filed with the Court:

DEMAND FOR SPECIFIC DISCOVERY
http://www.gzdocs.com/documents/0313/di ... nd_326.pdf

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

Ronquavis Martin ?

I thought Ronquavis was a Fulton?

Ronquavis Martin sounds better for the narrative.

Part of the Made up "Martin Family"

Mom and Pop Martin and the two younguns.

Sort of like the Waltons, only black.

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

And, not actually related. Oh, and don't live together.

A better question is who in the heck names their children Ronquavius or Jahvaris?

We're told that MOM had to keep trying to reach the judge about the videotaping - but we don't seem to know if he ever reached her. I'm thinking maybe she was hiding under the desk lol

BDLR's last minute objection to the videotaping sure seems planned - he chose not to respond earlier, when the judge would have had time to give a ruling before the actual deposition date. It seems like it's all about stalling as much as possible, hoping it never happens. But some people have posited interesting theories, such as the prosecution not wanting pictorial evidence of the body presented as "DeeDee" - however, couldn't the defense take a photo (or a copy of the photo ID) of whomever they were deposing, even without videotaping?

And all this work to keep Crump from being deposed.... The prosecution can't prevent him from being called to testify in the actual trial, right? So is all this work just more stalling - hoping trial won't happen, or... what..?

Also - it's a deposition when the opposing side interviews the person - but when their own side interviews them, is it still a "deposition"? Just curious about the terminology.

Another "also" - has Hooson1st come here yet? S/he is one of my favorite posters.

Ok, I thought of one reason to stall Crump's testimony until trial - the defense wouldn't have time to follow up on any leads they got from him...

Good update on Mike McDaniel's site, hot off the press.

http://statelymcdanielmanor.wordpress.com/2013/03/26/the-trayvon-martin-case-update-24-may-you-live-in-interesting-times/

Here's the song dedicated to the State's case against George Zimmerman

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=28440#p28440




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

Holy cow, that's quite a witness list the defense has submitted.

I have been so frustrated following this case, I could spit nails.

The below taken from your link:

Judge Nelson’s actions will reveal a great deal about her character, judicial temperament and conduct of the eventual trial. My sense of her, based on nothing more than what I’ve been able to read in public sources, is that she is somewhat hostile to the Defense and obviously deferential to the Prosecution.


I don't see Nelson doing anything different than she has all along. She is *hostile* to the defense. Its what she has been instructed to do by Corey, Biondi and perhaps the Gov.

Rumpole, I have two polls for you to do. First, a redo of a prior one. One DD or two? I've now switched my vote to one. The Second poll: June court date? or later. Comments should include when. Maybe taking bets on the new date. Like they do betting when a baby will be born. Winner gets e-cakes for a year.

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

Thanks to both JG and Rumpole for the replies. It appears we can only guess where that information came from ...but I'll go with DD being the liar until we have proof she was coached on that lie, for it's a win either way!

On another topic...
Interesting how Nelson was unavailable after discussing numerous times how they could resolve issues as they came up in the deposition.