I wish there was a legal remedy to seperate Judge Nelson's kisser from Bernie's backside!

Hopefully the DCA will correct this issue. I sure did like West rattling BDLR cage today, I can't wait to see more of this in the future.

not at GZ legal site yet .. but will probably be there later ... Meanwhile I reuploaded them to my Mediafire: (in case anyone wants to check 'em out)

4/29/13 Proposed Respondent Benjamin L. Crump, Esq.’s Response to Petition For Writ Of Certiorari

Proposed Respondent Benjamin L. Crump, Esq.’s Response to Petition For Writ Of Certiorari that was filed with the Fifth District Court of Appeals on 4/29/2013 by Bruce Blackwell, Esq. and Shayan Modarres, Esq. on behalf of Benjamin Crump, Esq.:

5th DCA Response of Proposed Respondent B. Crump - http://www.mediafire.com/view/?gp36232723z564o

5th DCA Motion for Leave to Respond - http://www.mediafire.com/view/?kmn9y1vec9vsyfp

5th DCA Index to and Supp. App. - http://www.mediafire.com/view/?svowitqy6dpdv4o

Thanks, Chip


So they filed earlier than deadline? That makes sense with deadline being on the weekend.

I take your point... but am not SURE that then shifts the next deadline?


I'll leave it for now..... but am poised to amend the calendar

ORDERED that Petitioner is granted ten days from service of the Response ordered herein to file a Reply thereto.

ChipBennett - this is what HLN wrote about what Judge Nelson quickly said about discovery violations:



12:03 p.m. ET: Judge Nelson said she did not find any discovery violations in this case, but she will hold a hearing on whether the defense is entitled to montary compenstation from the prosecution for time wasted on the Witness 8 hospital issue. She also said the next hearing in Zimmerman's case will be held on May 28.

Yeah, this makes no sense. If there were no violations, then why would the State have to compensate the defense for time spent?

Yeah, this makes no sense. If there were no violations, then why would the State have to compensate the defense for time spent?

I wonder if she meant time lost for the Witness #8 deposition delays.

Just arrived home from work...Can anyone give me a brief outline? How did it go?

I wonder if she meant time lost for the Witness #8 deposition delays.

Just arrived home from work...Can anyone give me a brief outline? How did it go?

I’m attempting to paraphrase:

O’Mara: Your honor, we think that you should grant these motions.

Nelson: Well, you’re just stupid. Motions are for the state, not the defense.

O’Mara: Judge, we agree that normally, that is true, but in this case, the state was really stupid, hiding information from us, and we caught them red-handed. We really, really think you should grant this motion.

Nelson: Well, the fact that you’re here telling me about the things the state hid from you means that they weren’t hidden all that well. Motion denied.

O’Mara: Please?

Nelson: Mr. De la Rionda? I’ll let you decide.

De la Rionda: I challenge Mr. West to a duel!

West: Your honor…

Nelson: Answer the question! Do you accept Mr. De la Rionda’s challenge?

West: No, your honor.

Nelson: I have no choice but to reinforce my earlier denial of all defense motions and sanction the defense for wasting my time with this hearing today.