I can't read the article without getting a splodey head. But comment #11 was right on target. The schemers turned this dysfunctional bunch of bio parents, step parents, mistresses, and assorted step and half siblings into something that would sell.

Pays to buy melons in pairs... good thinking

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

Bigboi likes to tweet the time that George's Curfew takes effect each day, so in reply.....


It appears that Bigboi has once again fallen into an alcohol induced coma and stopped tweeting for the day

It is safe for intelligent, informed, sane people to discuss the GZ case on twitter... for a few hours.

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

As far as the Evidentiary Hearing, I said before that I'm not sure defense needs to on this issue. It's unfortunate that the schemers did the ole squeeze play and just by weeks of a Bill being effective defense would have had a real good chance of getting this Expert and methods used on the "cries for help" "voice recognition" tossed. That said, defense has indicated that this person has no credentials .. no degree. All defense needs to do is put a REAL expert on the stand and it will CRUSH the testimony of the State's so-called expert's conclusions and his voodoo methods used to arrive his conclusions. I'm not sure how my state (Illinois) works, but I find this business of setting this "speedy trial" date something that works against the defendant. A FAIR and properly prepared defense is more important than DATES. Again, not sure how wide spread once charged that it is mandatory to count so many days to set a trial date. I know many of you want the trial to proceed soon, however, since MOM did ask for an extension (denied), I assume it was proper and that extensions are granted. I hope defense is ready. If not, they will be flying by the seat of their pants, and although you can get by if you are a hot dog type like Maverick in Top Gun ... I don't see either West or MOM as Maverick.

and defense could prove that by providing photos of George that coincide with the same time he signed up for membership at the gym.

I'd go with both. One real expert and one voodoo expert. I'd propose at the Frye hearing to have the voodoo expert slaughter a chicken in the courtroom, then read the bones, and pronounce the state's experts possessed by evil spirits from Thug Mansion that only the voodoo expert can hear. Good issue for appeal if Nelson let the state's voodoo experts testify about voices that only they can hear, but refused to let the defense's voodoo expert present similar testimony. If you let "experts" testify about test results that no one else can replicate, where's the limit? Why is voodoo witch doctor testimony any less valid than Reich's unique ability to hear voices that no one else can hear?

Isn't it a little weird that the police reports erroneously stated the drink Martin possessed was an iced tea, .....and W8 stated Martin had told her he had an iced tea (which he did not really have)? Makes me wonder if W8 had somehow read the police reports before her depo with Bernie. Why else would she have stated the same error the police had made?

lets get this thing MOVING!!! Sending Heartfelt Prayers to Geo and his Team... I can see BDLR NOW

W8 was coached by Scheme Team and responded to an inept leading question by BDLR. She didn't come up with "iced tea" by herself.

What time is the hearing?

9:00 AM EDT

There is ALWAYS a thread for hearings... details are there

HEARINGS: Various Matters 6-6-13 and 6-7-13
viewtopic.php?f=48&t=942

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

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/05/opini ... .html?_r=0
From the nytimes article
“Those waves of sorrow have been replaced by a reservoir of resolve. She now speaks of her loss with a practiced eloquence, that of a person aware that history is recording her words. And at this interview she came with her attorney and a public relations representative. ” *Wonder who the PR rep is?

I think that is definitely what happened. There is a reason why she didn't "materialize" until after the 911 tapes were released and it sure wasn't that she was so upset, didn't realize she was the last one who talked to him or any other one of the crazy stories they floated.

That is why I have never believed anything she said. Now if they have phone records showing that she showed some sort of angst contemporaneously to the events of that night, I may change my mind. But her behavior doesn't even come close to how a normal person would behave if they heard what she claims she heard.

And this same reasoning is why I believe most of Mr. Zimmerman's account that night. His initial story was backed up by the 911 tapes and the other witnesses. The only differences are witnesses who changed their story once they found out more about the deceased and Crump got into the picture.

That story is such a bare-faced fabrication... given what is known about TM.

It's beyond lies.... given what we know about likely civil suits in the future.... it is a fabricated story to influence the criminal trial as well as those civil suits.

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

Does Frye or Daubert Matter?: A Study of Scientific Admissibility Standards
by Edward K. Cheng & Albert H. Yoon

Nearly every treatment of scientific evidence begins with a faithful comparison between the Frye and Daubert standards. Since 1993, jurists and legal scholars have spiritedly debated which standard is preferable and whether particular states should adopt one standard or the other. These efforts beg the question: Does a state's choice of scientific admissibility standard matter? A growing number of scholars suspect that the answer is no.

http://virginialawreview.org/articles.php?article=60

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

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

Maybe the overall outcome would be better if the Frye standard helps Nelson admit the voices only the state expert can hear. A refresher on Hornsby's Blawg post about the topic:

...For those of you who believe that someone can magically determine the contents of unintelligible audio recordings, I invite you to look up the case of Sabrina Aisenberg.

In the Arrest Warrant to have her parents arrested and charged with murder, “the county detectives reported conversations that no reasonably prudent listener could hear from the tapes, that the county detectives quoted conversations that do not even appear at all in the supporting transcripts of the tapes or do not appear in the manner described, and that the county detectives deliberately or with reckless disregard summarized conversations out of context.” US v. Aisenberg, 358 F. 3d 1327 (US 11th Cir. 2004).

Ultimately, the Aisenberg’s not only had their case dismissed, they successfully sued the Federal Government for malicious prosecution and received $2.9 million dollars based on the fabricated and contrived audio evidence.

Typical AC and BLDR mindset, btw… “you aren’t charging enough cases in your county!” “but um, there aren’t really enough situations arising that would MERIT such charges…” “LOL! you think we care about the facts? I don’t think you’ll be in this office very long… FIND A WAY, we want those NUMBERS UP, regardless of what crimes are or are not taking place!”

Clump of jewelry on bed - image deleted! OOPS!