was the the SETTLEMENT for that amount or was the CLAIM for that alleged amount? I think Crump had filed a civil suit claim for that sum, but it was settled before in went to the court, for unknown amount of money.

So the insurance company didn't pay the CLAIMed amount but avoided the hassle by AGREEing to pay something ( they didn't HAVE to, the court didn't order them to pay) - so there does not necessarily be a contradiction.

But what do I know - IANAL, i'm not an American, English is my second or third language, I'm just fascinated and baffled by this case.

Join the club. (In case you aren't familiar with that saying, it means we all are, too. The whole thing is just baffling)

Re: the settlement. I have not seen any proof that MOM was involved in this, only that he was aware of it. We know that Crump filled a copy with the court and cc'd others, so there's a really simple explanation right there of why MOM was aware.

We also know Crump wants it to remain sealed to the public. For all we know, it was a settlement of $10

IOW, we know very little, but there are people spinning elaborate narratives with MOM as the evil ringmaster, as usual.

Well, we know one more thing. MOM's recent motion to the appeals court is a big deal and doesn't fit in with the "evil MOM throwing George's case" narrative - so instead people are developing a big story about evil MOM and the HOA settlement, sans any verifiable, detailed information.

There is also another consideration that nobody seems to have brought up, that is that from strictly a legal standpoint advice to the HOA to settle might be the most sound. Regardless of what he feels of GZ guilt or innocence or what he may think the outcome will be. An acquittal of GZ in Criminal Court does not by itself guaranty the same in Civil Court hearing.

I would argue that perhaps the opposite is true, since a jury might be more likely to try to find a fall guy. The State of Florida has already determined that SYG laws were not at fault, but the NW programs needed to be looked at and re-examined. We know that will become part of any Civil trial.

So any advice, in his capacity as an adviser may indeed be the correct one, GZ's case non-withstanding and it could eventually in a way help GZ, as it is proof that Crump's scheme to railroad GZ was financially profitable to Crump and the family. One last point a financial settlement is financially detrimental to MOM, as it would terminate his involvement with the HOA and his fees.

I find myself not reading much about this case any longer. It just depresses me that there is no hope of GZ ever getting a fair trial. I wish I had the stamina that many of you do to see this through. All I see is GZ has become the token for many with political agendas and aspirations to further their careers.

If this had happened anywhere else but Florida it would have been long forgotten, along with the other unsolved murders of young black men. Many, murdered by one of their own race.

Welcome to RT Hexx

As far as I can tell... Being an American, fluent in English, and even being a practising Lawyer in the State of Florida, does not mean immunity from being perplexed by this case.

It does seem to me that SD at CTH is reminding us of previous discussion.. whereby the current Insurer of TRATL "Travellers" is NOT liable, but rather the previous insurer is, since they were the company in place at the time of the incident.





Nice to see you join in discussion with a first post. Now........
You need a nice avatar pic and..... it would be nice to see you on RT Members Location Map.
Your location is a great step since I do want diversity and a few people other Countries

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

So the Martin's received over a million, does this mean they share it with Crump?

http://atlantablackstar.com/2013/04/06/ ... han-1-mil/

Trayvon Martin Family Settles with Homeowners Assn. For Over $1M
April 6, 2013


Robert Taylor, founding partner of Taylor & Carls P.A., a law firm that represents homeowner associations but has no connection to the Retreat at Twin Lakes, told the Orlando Sentinel that the settlement did not mean the association admitted any wrongdoing or liability. Taylor said the decision to settle was most likely a business decision.

“It’s really nothing more than a risk-versus-reward analysis,” Taylor said.

“When claims are filed, they’re filed against anybody who could possibly have any culpability,” he said.

He said Martin’s parents must have concluded that Zimmerman’s homeowners association had culpability.

The association’s insurer, Travelers Casualty and Surety Co. of America, issued a statement saying it wasn’t party to the settlement.

“The settlement would have been with other insurers of the homeowners association and/or the property managers,” the statement said.

“It is understood and agreed that the payment made herein is not to be construed as an admission of any liability by or on behalf of the releasing parties; but instead the monies being paid hereunder is consideration for avoiding litigation, the uncertainties stemming from litigation as well as to protect and secure the good name and good will of the released parties,” said the language in the settlement.

Under the terms of the settlement, Martin’s parents, Sybrina Fulton and Tracy Martin, and his estate agreed to set aside their wrongful-death claim and claims for pain and suffering, loss of earnings and expenses.

Crump has said he will be filing a wrongful death suit later against Zimmerman. The settlement stated that Zimmerman was not part of this deal

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=30245#p30245



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

I few days ago I was discussing the difference between Florida and federal law concerning privileges not to testify. The significance is that Florida courts should exercise great care when citing federal case law to support the existence of a privilege, even when the federal court is the U.S. Supreme Court.

In that regard, consider what the 3rd DCA said in Marshall v. Anderson, 459 So. 2d 384 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984):



Also, for those reading the case, particularly pay attention to footnote 7.

For MJW:

http://www.leagle.com/xmlResult.aspx?xm ... -1986-2006

See paragraph 34 of Crump Affidavit regarding waiver, after consultation with clients.

http://www.leagle.com/xmlResult.aspx?xm ... -1950-1985

Claim of work product in criminal case is based on civil rule of procedure.


Page 40 of petition for cert: "Mr. Crump sequestered witness 8 . . . refusing to reveal" etc.

Seems pretty close to FS 914.22 (1)(e)

http://forums.talkleft.com/index.php/topic,2343.15.html
One of Jeralyn's postings.
Bottom of the page is a letter From Thomas Slaten, counsel for the HOA to Travelers John Catizone. Dated Oct. 8th, 2012.

Did a minimum of sleuthing Slaten and can find no connection to MOM.

I have been thinking about this and even if MOM was somehow involved, is this really a bad thing for the case? I think this settlement bolsters the case that they only wanted an "arress" to extort money from the HOA.

It helps Crump's "opposing counsel" argument, although he may be too late with that because the good ship certiorari has already left the pier. The docket listing indicates that the clerk's letter is directed to Attorney Crump and I'm wondering if this is something that Crump did on his own, rather than in consultation with Blackwell. Perhaps Crump thinks he can submit and argue new evidence at first instance on appeal?

It might make it harder to argue that Crump has conflicts and is improperly profiteering off the potential civil case while involved in the criminal case if MOM is also making money from the potential civil case. The significant difference is that MOM wasn't tampering with witnesses in advance of 1st LEO contact. Even GZ had made extensive statements to LEO prior to MOM's involvement.

It may provide MOM with information useful to GZ's case.

There may be potential conflicts, although they appear to be potential future, rather than current conflicts, and, in any event, the clients may have been informed, advised and waived conflicts.

Getting money to Scheme Team via settlement, while at the same time turning up the discovery heat in the criminal case, may help GZ. If they have nothing to gain and money to lose, it may deter them from continuing risky conduct in the criminal case.

Having little extra time recently, I have not been able to keep up with the busier than normal postings and news, especially with so much going on that might not be directly related to the criminal case.

I have been unable to find out what exactly it was that Crump was filing at the Seminole County Courthouse. Has anyone figured that out?

Also, will there been any response to O'Mara's "PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI"?

At least portions of a settlement agreement with the HOA.



My understanding is that there can be no response unless / until the DCA issues a show cause order, which they will do if they accept the matter for review on the merits.

If O'Mara filed (& emailed) the 4th, and Crump filed in some type of response, he must have had it sitting and ready.

If the Fifth DCA is in Volusia County, why would Crump file in Seminole County?

Will we need to see what he filed to figure this out?

Because Crump filed with the trial court, not the appellate court.

_________________
"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)

Thank you. I was wondering who the HOA attorney is

Given their track record, the state's response should be one for the record books.

Thanks to both John and Chip!

I'm still left trying to figure out WHAT it was Crump filed. If it was in response to O'Mara's Petition, it resembles an effort to change the record for the appeal, after the fact.