It is currently Sun May 18, 2025 4:24 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 ... 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Wed Mar 27, 2013 10:55 pm 
Offline
ADMIN
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 27, 2012 5:30 pm
Posts: 57118
Location: Pomeroy's Wine Bar
Close enough Jordan :lol

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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 28, 2013 1:17 am 
Offline
ADMIN
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 27, 2012 5:30 pm
Posts: 57118
Location: Pomeroy's Wine Bar
Piers Morgan Confronts Robert Zimmerman, Jr. Over Controversial Tweets In Heated Interview


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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 28, 2013 1:20 am 
Offline
ADMIN
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 27, 2012 5:30 pm
Posts: 57118
Location: Pomeroy's Wine Bar
Piers Morgan is a frustrating interviewer..... he does not let his guests speak.

But RZ jr did as good a job as he could... against a hopeless interviewer.

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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 28, 2013 1:50 am 
Offline
ADMIN
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 27, 2012 5:30 pm
Posts: 57118
Location: Pomeroy's Wine Bar
From CTH......

Robert Zimmerman Jr. On Piers Morgan Show 3/27/13 (Understand the Opposition)
Posted on March 28, 2013 by sundance


  • As expected Morgan used the Mark O’Mara interview to isolate Robert Zimmerman Jr.
  • Morgan skillfully then ridiculed him using Zimmerman’s own apology to verbally beat him up.
  • Then Morgan marginalized Zimmerman by framing the previous controversial tweet as racist.

Isolate – Ridicule – Marginalize. It is the approach always taken.

Also note when the O’Mara leverage is pulled, Piers sees himself losing ground to the point that Robert Jr. is making – as soon as he views the Zimmerman position as foundational, and with merit, he quickly moves to remove the validity of the position by using Mark O’Mara’s admonishment to marginalize and isolate Zimmerman’s point.

This is a classic example of media narrative control. The agenda is diminishment and disparagement. The approach is classic Alinsky (Fabian-Socialist) Isolate – Ridicule – Marginalize.

...more (plus comments)
http://theconservativetreehouse.com/201 ... how-32713/

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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 28, 2013 2:23 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 18, 2012 6:14 pm
Posts: 1124
The Witness 8 Interviews: Crump, ABC and the Martins
http://www.talkleft.com/zimm/abccrumpwitness8.pdf

Quote:
...The conundrum: Mr. Crump represented to the court in his affidavit that except for his
preliminary conversation with Witness 8, during which he had instructed her not to discuss
the substance of anything she might have heard during her conversation with Trayvon on
February 26, 2012, his recording contained every substantive statement she made to him
about her conversations with Trayvon that day, as well as what she overheard and
perceived.

Crump's affidavit states:
“To the best of my knowledge, while the Recording does not include the Preliminary
Inquiry, it contains every substantive statement that Witness 8 ever made to me in
regard to her conversations with Trayvon on February 26, 2012, what she heard or
might have overheard during the course of those conversations, and what she
perceived or might have been in a position to perceive as a result of those
conversations, as well as every other substantive statement that Witness 8 ever
made to me that could have a tendency to prove or disprove a material fact
potentially at issue in the Litigation or the instant case....” “.... At no time did I or, for that matter,
anyone else to my knowledge ever use the Recorder's erase function in connection with the Recording or,
more generally, otherwise delete, remove, edit, alter or spoliate any portion of the Recording. For
better or worse, the Recording on the Recorder is the true and correct original and
unedited recording that I made of the Interview.”

But Crump’s recording is missing substantive statements Witness 8 made to Crump about
her conversations with Trayvon. In the ABC recording, Witness 8 tells Crump about her
conversations with Trayvon as he walked to the store and left the store. It includes her
explaining to Crump that Trayvon told her a man was following him, it was raining, he put
his jacket on, he thought he lost the man, he ran from the back and almost got to his father's
house. It includes her telling Crump she heard Trayvon ask the man, "What are you
following me for?" after which she heard the man say "What are you talking about?" (later
changed to “What are you doing around here?”) and providing her conclusion that the
headset fell off and someone must have shoved Trayvon. She explains the phone went
dead.

At the very end of the ABC clip, Crump tells Witness 8 he wants her to stop and start over,
beginning with when Trayvon said “I thought I lost him” and Trayvon said he was going to
run home. He says, “I want you to start over, 1, 2, 3.” She dutifully begins with “Trayvon had
run for it” as the ABC clip ends. All of these substantive statements relevant to the criminal
charges are missing from the recording taken directly from Crump's recorder and provided
by the state to the defense except for the last statement, where Witness 8 starts the do over
with “Trayvon had run for it.” Crump’s clip # 3 begins with her saying, “Trayvon had
run for it...”


13 pages long...just a sample.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 28, 2013 2:33 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Mar 15, 2013 5:22 pm
Posts: 127
Saw that great work at Talk Left and read your comment there, too, DebFrmHell. And at the risk of being a geek and a jerk (I apologize for the latter in advance) the plural of 'opus' is 'opera'...

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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 28, 2013 3:23 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 18, 2012 6:14 pm
Posts: 1124
Analyst wrote:
Saw that great work at Talk Left and read your comment there, too, DebFrmHell. And at the risk of being a geek and a jerk (I apologize for the latter in advance) the plural of 'opus' is 'opera'...

:Gslap :Gslap That beats the opusi I was going to shoot for... Who knew? Opera? Really? LOL. Did I tell you I flunked my music appreciation course in college? Now you know at least one of the reasons. I am sooo not offended and enjoy using words properly though you wouldn't know it from my accent.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 28, 2013 4:21 am 
Offline
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=28636#p28636



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: Thu Mar 28, 2013 8:19 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 13, 2012 10:50 am
Posts: 66
Quote:
On Monday, March 25, the Court canceled the hearing previously scheduled on April 2. The Court did not consult with the defense before canceling the hearing. As there are only 74 days until trial, and as there are Motions before the Court, we hope to appear before the Judge for pending matters before the next hearing currently scheduled for April 30.

No mention of why the court canceled the hearing. It seems very suspicious to me in light of the defense's recent motions.

http://gzlegalcase.com/index.php/press- ... erman-case

I'd assumed that it was canceled by agreement between state and defense. That seemed very odd to me considering the defense had submitted motions that would seem to be of some importance and how little time remained before trial. Apparently it was canceled by the court and not even by the state's request?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 28, 2013 8:31 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Nov 17, 2012 10:34 am
Posts: 892
Location: Cincinnati, OH, USA
RiseFromBelow wrote:
No mention of why the court canceled the hearing. It seems very suspicious to me in light of the defense's recent motions.

http://gzlegalcase.com/index.php/press- ... erman-case

I'd assumed that it was canceled by agreement between state and defense. That seemed very odd to me considering the defense had submitted motions that would seem to be of some importance and how little time remained before trial. Apparently it was canceled by the court and not even by the state's request?


From the linked defense statement:

GZLegalCase wrote:
On Monday, March 25, the Court canceled the hearing previously scheduled on April 2. The Court did not consult with the defense before canceling the hearing. As there are only 74 days until trial, and as there are Motions before the Court, we hope to appear before the Judge for pending matters before the next hearing currently scheduled for April 30.


What the DOJ-CRS wants cancelled, the DOJ-CRS gets cancelled?

_________________
"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: Thu Mar 28, 2013 8:41 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Mar 14, 2013 3:39 pm
Posts: 585
Analyst wrote:
Saw that great work at Talk Left
,

Contains interesting speculation, but imo overlooks a few things.

TL at page 5:

Perhaps at this juncture, the end of tape 2, he used Gutman's phone to call her back.
Gutman’s phone may have had an internal recording device, which he activated before
giving it to Crump. If so, and Crump forgot to re­press the record button on his recorder, or
mistakenly assumed he had pressed it, Gutman’s phone could have recorded for five
minutes while Crump’s recorder did not. (I don’t doubt Gutman also brought other recording
equipment to record the conversation, but it seems to me from the quality of the ABC clip,
that this came from Gutman’s phone.) Interestingly, Crump says in his affidavit that to this
day he doesn’t know if Gutman actually recorded anything. (Footnote 5 of the Affidavit.)
Thus, Crump may attempt to excuse his failure to record the five minute segment of his
interview with Witness 8 that was recorded by Gutman by claiming he simply forgot to
press the record button on his device when he called her back using another phone, or that
he thought he had pressed it, and was simply mistaken.

Me:

Yes, you can dowload apps to record calls on Iphones and Android phones, but Gutman tweeted that he recorded the call, and not just 5 minutes of the call. Why wouldn't ABC use the professional recording gear they had with them? Also, MOM stated that ABC had a better quality audio 25 minute recording, not just a 5 minute recording. See Motion For Reconsideration, paragraph 16.

I don't think Crump can claim that he forgot to record because of the beep pattern and 1, 2, 3 countdown before starting to record. I think Crump knew exactly what he was doing: coaching the witness prior to recording.

TL at page 6:

Some of the missing statements, which are in the ABC recording, are quite memorable.

Me:

Yes, particularly W8's statement about the man going to beat Trayvon.

TL at pages 6-7

I think her first version, in which Zimmerman responds to Trayvon’s question by asking
“What are you talking about?” is pretty close to what Zimmerman told Detectives Serino
6and Singleton the night of the shooting.

[snip]

It sounds to me like both George and Witness 8 were providing a shorthand version of
something that went like:

Me:

I don't think W8's story is at all similar to what Z told the cops. Sounds to me like W8's story is completely fabricated.

TL at page 8:

I think Crump may have been so nonplussed by Witness 8's first rendition of how
Zimmerman responded to Travyon’s question, that in coaching her back to the version he
expected to hear, he unwittingly threw his clients under the bus.

Me:

Crump will intentionally, rather than unwittingly, throw Sybrina and Tracy under the bus if the shizzle hits the fan as evidenced by the CYA affidavit Crump filed with the court.

TL at page 9:

When interviewing Witness 8, Crump says to her, “I understand you had to go to the hospital.” How would Crump have known that before she told him? The likely answer, in my view, is he heard it from Sybrina.

Me:

Crump seems to swear that he learned that in the un-recorded preliminary portion of the interview. See Crump Affidavit, paragraph 19 h.

TL at page 10:

It’s possible, but it all sounds very rushed to me. I think it is more likely Tracy discovered
Witness 8 before the 18th, possibly through phone records provided by Crump’s
investigator, and Witness 8's conversion from a person who had told no one about her
connection to Trayvon that night, including the police, to a person ready to disclose all
during an interview in the presence of the media, took well more than 24 hours.

Me:

Why does Tracy need Crump's investigator to discovery Tracy's own online T-Mobile phone records (which say "Welsome tracy") ? I thinkTracy would have discovered the phone records not later than around March 5 when the cop asked him for the phone PIN. Seems to me that TL fails to connect the dots regarding the timing of obtaining release of the NEN and 911 calls followed by the deus ex machina production of W8 who "blows Zimmerman's absurd self-defense claims out of the water."

TL at page 11

Why would she would lie about going to the hospital? It seems that she first told the hospital
lie to Sybrina Fulton, probably during the visit to Sybrina’s apartment in March. Maybe
Sybrina mentioned not seeing her at the wake, and feeling embarrassed, Witness 8 made
up the excuse of being in the hospital.

Me:

Ronquavis said he met her at the funeral. I think the hospital lie was fabricated to cover early discovery of W8 followed by delay to obtain release of NEN and 911 calls, concoct W8's story and coach W8. The "embarrassed" lie is a further lie fabricated to explain the hospital lie. TL is not connecting the dots. Why didn't W8 know that her own cell phone was Simple Mobile and anonymous? Yes, you can conceive of innocent explanations for each lie, taken in isolation. But when you look at the big picture, the innocent explanations fall apart.

TL at page 12:

I don’t think Crump lied.

Me:

yougottabekiddingme

TL at page 12:

How much of her story is based on her independent memory, as opposed to a blending of her memory of events with what she later learned from the media and the Martins and Crump?

Me:

As near as I can tell, 100% of her story is fabricated from information obtained from the media, Martins and Crump.

TL at page 13:

A small example: She never mentions a mail area to Crump when describing how Trayvon
stayed under a covered place while it was raining. She calls it a “plaza” and then a “shade.”
She’d never been to the Retreat at Twin Lakes. It was only after the media published
maps of the complex, that she came to describe the sheltered place to the prosecutor as a
mail area.

Me:

She called it an apartment shade on March 19. She never described it as a mail area. She said "mail thing" on April 2. BDLR described it as a mail area. BDLR led her throughout the April 2 interview. "Described . . . to the prosecutor" improperly imbues the April 2 farce with an aura of legitimacy.

TL at page 13:

While her lie about the hospital might not be directly related to her version of events the
night Zimmerman was attacked and Trayvon was shot, it shows she lied to the prosecutor,
Crump and Sybrina Fulton. The jury will learn she told a lie, not once, but three times. The
jury is bound to wonder, was she lying then, or is she lying now?

Me:

W8 will obviously not repeat the lie on the stand, so my understanding is that her prior inconsistent hearsay statements will not be admitted for impeachment, since there would be nothing to impeach if she didn't repeat the lie on the stand. Also, I don't think evidence of specific lies are admissible to show a character of untruthfullness. So how will the jury learn that she lied about the hospital three times?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 28, 2013 9:55 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 05, 2013 1:39 pm
Posts: 135
Rumpole wrote:
From CTH......

Robert Zimmerman Jr. On Piers Morgan Show 3/27/13 (Understand the Opposition)
Posted on March 28, 2013 by sundance


  • As expected Morgan used the Mark O’Mara interview to isolate Robert Zimmerman Jr.
  • Morgan skillfully then ridiculed him using Zimmerman’s own apology to verbally beat him up.
  • Then Morgan marginalized Zimmerman by framing the previous controversial tweet as racist.

Isolate – Ridicule – Marginalize. It is the approach always taken.

Also note when the O’Mara leverage is pulled, Piers sees himself losing ground to the point that Robert Jr. is making – as soon as he views the Zimmerman position as foundational, and with merit, he quickly moves to remove the validity of the position by using Mark O’Mara’s admonishment to marginalize and isolate Zimmerman’s point.

This is a classic example of media narrative control. The agenda is diminishment and disparagement. The approach is classic Alinsky (Fabian-Socialist) Isolate – Ridicule – Marginalize.

...more (plus comments)
http://theconservativetreehouse.com/201 ... how-32713/

I dunno why but I have a mental picture of Nasty Nat stomping her feet throwing a fit because SHE wanna be on tv :stamp :35 LOLOLOL and Crumpy saying "Bu, bu, bu buttt.. See!! W-9 said Z's are raaaaaccist" :stamp :wall

https://twitter.com/attorneycrump/statu ... 6796048384
By the way did anyone watch this? I don't have cable anymore I found myself throwing things at my tv too often LOL :RTFM


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 28, 2013 10:19 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 05, 2013 1:39 pm
Posts: 135
BTW Not sure if anyone has seen this but its MOM this morning AFTER RZjrs PM interview

http://startingpoint.blogs.cnn.com/


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 28, 2013 10:21 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2013 3:54 pm
Posts: 659
I think I just figured something out. There must be some gang called the Astronauts. There is a rash of 17 year old future Astronauts right now that are doing their initiation by beating people, shooting babies, and shooting delivery drivers.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 28, 2013 10:32 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 05, 2013 1:39 pm
Posts: 135
mung wrote:
I think I just figured something out. There must be some gang called the Astronauts. There is a rash of 17 year old future Astronauts right now that are doing their initiation by beating people, shooting babies, and shooting delivery drivers.


I said the same thing a few days ago..


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 28, 2013 10:40 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 05, 2013 1:39 pm
Posts: 135
According to Nasty Nat The defenses motion to depose Crump has been DENIED
https://twitter.com/NatJackEsq/status/3 ... 1524685824


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 28, 2013 10:57 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Mar 14, 2013 3:39 pm
Posts: 585
menostupid wrote:
According to Nasty Nat The defenses motion to depose Crump has been DENIED
https://twitter.com/NatJackEsq/status/3 ... 1524685824


Nelson avoids an embarrassing hearing. The cover up is in full swing.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 28, 2013 11:06 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Mar 14, 2013 2:55 pm
Posts: 17
menostupid wrote:
According to Nasty Nat The defenses motion to depose Crump has been DENIED
https://twitter.com/NatJackEsq/status/3 ... 1524685824


Disgusting......


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 28, 2013 11:06 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Mar 14, 2013 10:07 pm
Posts: 21
Location: Casselberry Fl
another bs ruling


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 28, 2013 11:09 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Mar 14, 2013 3:39 pm
Posts: 585
chipbennett wrote:
What the DOJ-CRS wants cancelled, the DOJ-CRS gets cancelled?


Shizzle's gettin' real. No need for any more embarrassing televised hearings.


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 ... 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50  Next

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 14 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:  
cron
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group