Teenage witness in Trayvon Martin case admits she 'misrepresented' herself, prosecution says

[Pancho Schneider]

Source: Fox News

MyFoxOrlando.com reports defense attorney Mark O'Mara, who is representing the alleged shooter George Zimmerman, is seeking medical records for Martin's girlfriend after the prosecution revealed the girl had "misrepresented" herself in interviews about the case.

The girlfriend, known as Witness 8 in court proceedings, is considered to be a key witness in the case because she alleges she was on the phone with Martin before he was killed.

In a recorded interview with the attorney for Martin's parents last March, the girl claimed Martin said during that conversation that someone was following him. She said she heard a brief exchange between him and someone before the phone was cut off. Martin was shot shortly afterwards.

The girl had claimed she was unable to attend Martin's funeral because she had been hospitalized, but it was revealed in court Tuesday she had lied about the visit.




Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/us/2013/03/06/teenage-witness-in-trayvon-martin-case-admits-misrepresented-herself/

---

This is the kind of stuff that shows why one should not reach a conclusion regarding a court case until all the evidence has been presented, and all witness statements have been vetted.

[Ken Burch]

1. So, one this one tiny, trivial point, you've decided Zimmerman was innocent.

Last edited Wed Mar 6, 2013, 08:34 AM - Edit history (2)

"withholding judgment" in this case was always code for "I secretly think the white guy was right to kill the black kid, but I don't want to admit it publicly".

The case never depended on Trayvon's girlfriend anyway.

Why on earth would you start flacking for Zimmerman's defense team on a PROGRESSIVE talk board?

[Pancho Schneider]

7. lol. ok I'm a racist

No point arguing with a person who will shut down the argument from the get-go by crying "racist!". It won't lead anywhere.

[Ken Burch]

13. I edited that post. Still, this point about the girlfriend is too trivial to matter.

You make it sound like this proves Zimmerman is innocent.

It would be a tragedy and a betrayal of all black people in the country if Zimmerman walked. No good could come of it-and he's just going to devote his life to doing this over and over-he's incapable of humanity.

[eggplant]

22. Black people?

Just the black ones? You want to walk that one back too?

[Ken Burch]

189. Everyone else, to a larger degree.

I'm talking about who's going to feel that the system is permanently biased against them. The rest of us will care, but it won't be quite that personal...because the rest of us aren't in that kind of danger from the Zimmermans of the world.

[Life Long Dem]

178. Trivial matter?

The girlfriend just blew her credibility. The jury won't believe much she says now. Trivial?

[spin]

200. I feel Zimmerman deserves his day in court. ...

He has already been tried by the media and found guilty.

Based on what I have read of the incident, I currently feel the Zimmerman chased and confronted Trayvon Martin and if anyone was acting in self defense, it was Trayvon.

But I do not have access to all the evidence. I also haven't listened to the arguments that the prosecution and the defense will present in the trial. This may well prove to be a very complicated case and the jurors may take days or weeks to reach a final decision.

Would you still consider it to be a "tragedy and a betrayal of all black people" if at the trial irrefutable evidence is presented by the defense that totally exonerates Zimmerman and he walks?

It is more likely that if Zimmerman walks it, will be because the prosecution failed to convince all twelve jurors that he was guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. Sadly it is true that often the defense attorneys simply outclass the prosecution attorneys. It is also true that often juries reach a decision that confounds observers in the courtroom.

Yes, our system of justice is far from perfect but still I prefer it to trail by the media.

Am I being unreasonable? Perhaps I am wrong and Florida should just bypass the legal system and put Zimmerman behind bars for life.

[Ken Burch]

212. And he'll get his day in court.

The posting of this story isn't about "giving Zimmerman his day in court"-it's about trying to get the charges dropped. That's why Fox News ran the story in the first place(since Fox WANTS it to be easier for Anglo cop-wannabees to waste black teenagers) and it's hard to separate the motivation of Fox in running the story from the motivation of the person who started this thread.

[Pancho Schneider]

213. The rule is not to mention his Peruvian half when making an accusation of racism

To mention his Hispanic roots would water down the accusation of racism, therefore the rule is to only say he's white, or in this peculiar case, "Anglo."

[Ken Burch]

215. If his dad is a rich white judge, the "Peruvian half" of his heritage doesn't matter.

Class trumps race.

Also, by "Anglo cop wannabees", I was refererring not just to Zimmerman(I'll amend it to "semi-Anglo", even though that doesn't matter)but to all the Neighborhood Watch types with Dirty Harry fantasies who, we can assume, will go on a rampage if Zimmerman walks, a rampage no police or judicial authorities will ever try to stop.

Zimmerman was never the victim...and he was never in danger. He had an obligation to obey his dispatcher and not pursue Trayvon at all...and if Trayvon were white in that same neighborhood, Zimmerman would have just seen him as a kid going out for a snack. That's reality.

[Pancho Schneider]

216. You spoke of racism, not finances

What's the motive? I thought Fox made the girl lie because they want it to be easy for an "Anglo" to kill a black man. Now you mention income. I'm confused.

[Ken Burch]

217. You act like the fact that he was nominally Latino on one side mitigates his racism against Trayvon.

It doesn't.

The privilege his dad has as a rich judge, however, does make the Peruvian portion of his heritage moot in discussing racial politics...besides which, he was Spanish-descent Peruvian, not Afro- or mestizo-Peruvian, so even that side of his background is essentially "white" (if not "Anglo", for whatever the distinction is worth).

[Pancho Schneider]

220. You act like it's a fact that income trumps race in the mind of racist

One DU'er came up with that hypothesis, and now you repeat it, having to defend the odd practice of disappearing the race of a person's mother. It's a contrived on-the-go justification.

[Ken Burch]

222. The only reason to reference the Peruvian side of Zimmerman's heritage

(btw, "Peruvian" isn't a race...it's a nationality) is to imply that it somehow proves that Zimmerman COULDN'T be prejudiced against blacks, or that Zimmerman couldn't use "white skin privileges" to get preferential treatment from the cops(you remember the local cops...they're the ones who helped Zimmerman try to cover his traces?)

Sorry...the fact that Zimmerman's mother was Peruvian doesn't change anything. It's irrelevant.

[Guy Whitey Corngood]

235. BOOM! Well said. Thank you. nt

[Pararescue]

237. Bamm.

Spot on, his nationality, race, color, whatever, has NOTHING to do with the crime.

[Guy Whitey Corngood]

230. How exactly do "Hispanic roots would water down the accusation of racism"? nt

[michigandem58]

233. "To mention his Hispanic roots would water down the accusation of racism."

I'd love to hear you explain why. Stunningly ignorant, but please try.

[Pararescue]

234. He won't be replying to anything anymore.

He Gone.

[Bucky]

226. Race-based thinking sucks.

I suggest you start thinking of humans as humans rather than as agents of their accidental racial subcategories. You keep biting yourself in the ass in posts in this thread because of your obsession with categorizing people by their ethnicity. It's a shadow chase and you'd do better to worry about human rights instead of peoples' racial backgrounds.

[leftyohiolib]

19. the du court of popular opinion is quick to prejudge and once it's formed an opinion that's it

and if you dis-agree well then let the name calling begin

[SemperEadem]

57. bush and cheney lied us into 2 wars

and nobody gives a good God Damn about that...

[Pararescue]

60. And that has what to do with this case?

[HangOnKids]

143. You don't understand?

Pity.

[Pararescue]

146. I understand very well what that was about.

[HangOnKids]

147. More Comedy!

Keep it rolling.

[Pararescue]

149. If you have an issue with me,

spell it out, otherwise this conversation is pointless.

[HangOnKids]

151. You post on a message board I reply DIG?

I happen to think you are comedy gold. Please I know where you are trying to go with this and sorry charlie it isn't going to work.

[Pararescue]

153. I happy that I could give you comedy for the day.

My job here is done.

[HangOnKids]

156. So you are leaving?

Thank goodness.

[Pararescue]

158. I meant my job with you is done.

I'm not leaving.

[HangOnKids]

159. LOL

Comedy Gold.

[UnrepentantLiberal]

177. Oh, you'll be leaving at some point.

And probably not for the first time.

[Pararescue]

188. If you would be so kind as to enlighten me as to why I'm on your bad side?

[apocalypsehow]

202. +1. n/t.

[apocalypsehow]

245. "Pararescue" has been escorted off the premises:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=profile&uid=301663

I think that was either "Jody" or an "rdigital" sock, IMHO, but either way the shenanigans are done.

[UnrepentantLiberal]

247. Ha ha

And I wasn't even kind enough to explain why. I'm rude like that sometimes.

[SemperEadem]

210. oh, how cute

aren't you just the precious one?

if that needs spelling out to you, I don't have that kind of time. Seems others understand perfectly well why it's an appropriate comment.... which, btw, I am free to make here and do not have to entertain your snark.

[UnrepentantLiberal]

179. Good thing you signed up to DU just in time to educate us about this.

[Niceguy1]

8. normally

This would discredit everything that that witness testifies to. But since Zimmerman is unpopular i guess that doesn't apply.

And no i am not defending him..just pointing out the lack of consistency.

[Pancho Schneider]

10. Your pointing out the lack of consistency is code for "I hate black people"

Or something.

[Kingofalldems]

12. Again, clever response.

[Niceguy1]

17. actually

No i am not. I just think that this witness is tainted. I do think Zimmerman is guilty of something but the prosecution has to do it without her. Many appeals by inmate support groups are based on use of witness with credibility issues

[jberryhill]

30. Again you are completely wrong

"this witness is tainted"

Please tell us what part of her testimony in the case is shown to be false?

[Pararescue]

38. You might want to tell the prosecutor that.

http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/2013-03-05/news/os-zimmerman-witness-8-medical-records-20130305_1_george-zimmerman-trayvon-martin-bernie-de-la-rionda

If this is true, then I doubt the prosecution will put her on the stand.

[Niceguy1]

43. Making false statements under oath

Is perjury. She is toast as a witness.

[jberryhill]

44. What false statement did she make under oath?

Did you read the OP?

[Niceguy1]

48. Yes and

I even used google.

http://touch.orlandosentinel.com/#section/-1/article/p2p-74674543/

[crim son]

125. This article indicates she also lied about her age.

Why would she do that, especially as she claimed to be younger, not older, than she actually was. Odd, and makes me wonder.

[noiretextatique]

185. she said: she didn't go to Martin's funeral

because she went to the hospital. defense team claims there are no hospital records. inquiring minds might ask: does this have to do with her testimony about the night in question?! surely they can subpeona telephone records

[FarPoint]

49. Your boy Zimmy left his vehicle with intent

To catch a suspicious black child. He did catch him and killed him..... Zimmy had NO REASON to leave his vehicle nor authority to chase a child down who was just walking home. Zimmy is a sick individual who is a cop wantabe.

[Eleanors38]

112. "your boy Zimmy." Does "your boy" reference a racial category?

[FarPoint]

128. Momma's favorite

Dah

[Eleanors38]

231. In the South, it conveyed something else. Be careful with that expression.

[FarPoint]

238. I'm a pure Yankee...

and I am what I am...not a southerner. Don't read too much into a post....

[Eleanors38]

239. Just noting for your future reference.

[Niceguy1]

194. He is not my

Boy and I am not a supporter. Discussing the credibility of a witness does not make me a defender.

It is impossible to have a mature conversation with some people.

[JDPriestly]

78. What false statements did she make

under oath? I thought the report said she misrepresented herself in media interviews about something unrelated to the Martin killing.

It may cast doubt on her veracity, but then, we don't know all the facts on that any more than we know all the facts about the Martin death.

Zimmerman's big problem is explaining why it appears that he was following Martin. What had Martin done to cause Zimmerman to follow him or to want to find out where Martin was?

The issue boils down to why Zimmerman, knowing he had a gun, would stalk Martin like prey? Zimmerman will claim he wasn't stalking Martin but was just trying to see where Martin was. It will be up to the jury to decide.

Zimmerman has a very serious credibility issue because he and his wife apparently lied about how much money they had. So when it comes to credibility both sides will have a problem.

[Pararescue]

80. Here.

Even the prosecutor had to admit that she lied under oath.

http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/2013-03-05/news/os-zimmerman-witness-8-medical-records-20130305_1_george-zimmerman-trayvon-martin-bernie-de-la-rionda

They had to publicly acknowledge that their star witness had lied under oath and had to answer questions about what they intend to do about it.

Reporters asked: Will you charge the 19-year-old Miami woman with perjury?

The state's lead prosecutor, Bernie de la Rionda, gave an ambiguous answer: "You can all read the law and make your own decision."

[JDPriestly]

94. But what were the statements?

Exactly what? That makes a huge difference. The "lies" could actually help the prosecution. Depends on what they are.

[Pararescue]

97. She lied under oath about where she was on the day of Trayvon's funeral.

We'll just have to wait and see how this affects the prosecution's case.
My gut feeling is that he's guilty and will be convicted, but you just never know what a jury will do.

[JDPriestly]

174. Right. You never know, and though from what I know

which is incomplete, I think he is probably guilty, a jury could disagree with me and quite possibly for good reason.

In the OJ case, everyone assumed OJ was guilty and would be convicted. But the jury saw the witnesses and the evidence and decided that, giving OJ the benefit of the doubt, they could not convict him.

The job of the jury is to make sure that the defendant is convicted only if the evidence shows he is guilty beyond reasonable doubt. That is a tough standard. So, who knows what will happen?

[jberryhill]

98. "The "lies" could actually help the prosecution"

Correct.

People have different perceptual styles, and the tendency to assume the position of "what would *I* think if I was on the jury" generally fails to take into account that not everyone sees things and thinks about them the same way. If the perception is that she is being beaten up for not attending the funeral (for reasons which, when explained, are sympathetic - "I thought my life was in danger", "I couldn't bear the pain" - or for making an excuse - "People were attacking me for not going" - then the credibility attack can hurt the attacker more than it helps.

[JDPriestly]

173. Yes. Thanks.

[Grins]

103. Only if the testimony was material to the case.

I'm not a lawyer, but you can lie about pretty much anything under oath, but can only be charged with perjury if you lied about facts material to the charges. Making up some story about a funeral that took place six days later is not material to the charges against Zimmerman.

[noiretextatique]

182. zimmerman's attorneys are attempting to make a mountain out of this molehill

nothing in that article indicated that she lied about the night Martin was murdered by zimmerman.

[brush]

86. There are phone logs of her call with Martin

I don't care if she lied about "going to the hospital" as to why she didn't go to the funeral. All of that has nothing to do with what the phone logs will show about the conversation that she was having when Zimmerman was stalking Martin.

[Pararescue]

89. Sure there are,

but the defense can attack her on the content of that phone call, they can say that she lied under oath about where she was on the day of Trayvon's funeral, so she could be lying about the phone conversation.

She did herself and the prosecution no favors by lying under oath.

I will be surprised if they even call her as a witness now, I think they don't need her, they have enough evidence, forensics and otherwise, to convict him.

[Melon_Lord]

104. If she is shown to lie about small things...

... then she may lie about big ones as well.

IOW, it's possible that her story about their conversation on the phone may not be believed. Especially since she would have a natural inclination to speak favorably for Martin.

[curlyred]

211. Phone records document the call

Nice try

[Melon_Lord]

221. I don't think anyone is debating that the call happened...

As a liar though, a jury is less likely to believe what she has to say about the conversation itself.

[underpants]

193. Playing victim

the first of the three pillars of Fox News and RW radio

[Ken Burch]

14. The rest of the evidence against Zimmerman is overwhelming.

There's no honorable reason to help Zimmerman's defense team...they aren't working for justice or for anything positive.

[Eleanors38]

114. You speak like an inquisitor. Must be easy on the InnerTube.

[patrice]

166. FWIW: I'll vouch the KB has earned the status you ascribe to him in more than just a few sorties. nt

[fascisthunter]

208. "Inquisitor".... woow

big word

[apocalypsehow]

246. Funny that so many of our "pro gun progressives"* also happen to be in Zimmerman's corner,

ain't it?

Well, not so funny, really. It surprises me not the so many of them have showed up in this thread to defend the man who shot Trayvon Martin.


*( )

[fascisthunter]

249. ideological fanaticism?

This case reveals the danger of a law created to proliferate guns to our society, and they know it and defend Zimmerman by extension.

[jberryhill]

29. You are absolutely clueless on that point

No, being false about one thing does not "normally discredit everything that witness testifies to". The jury instruction on that is that a juror is entitled to disregard anything to which a witness testifies, if one part of their TESTIMONY is proven false. In other words, a juror is entitled to come to whatever conclusion they want concerning the weight and value of the testimony.

Has any part of her TESTIMONY been shown to be false?

No.

The claim here is that she made out of court statements in interviews which apparently were some sort of social excuse for not attending the funeral.

Did she TESTIFY under oath that she was in the hospital at the time of the funeral?

No.

Has any part of her sworn TESTIMONY been shown to be a lie?

No.

Do you have the faintest idea what you are talking about?


No.

[ZombieHorde]

124. No witness should be taken as a fountain of truth.

On a calm day, our perceptions and memories are off. Stressful situations can exaggerate this problem, and this is why police officers receive so many different eye-witness reports.

I know this situation is a bit different because she seems to have lied, but just because someone isn't lying doesn't mean he or she is telling the truth.

[Blue_Tires]

24. Leave it...

The OP is a broken record who keeps coming back with fresh accounts after getting banned multiple times...I've been dealing with him and his socks for almost a year now...

[Ken Burch]

198. Didn't know that. Thanks.

The "Fox News" link should have been the tip-off for me.

[Eleanors38]

108. "..was innocent?" "Flacking for Zimmerman?" Channeling Salem?

The OP didn't claim that, did he?

The point of the OP was to warn AGAINST that, wasn't it?

Your "flacking" smear suggests your gross intolerance -- on a "PROGRESSIVE talk board," yet.

[cheyanne]

109. Zimmerman trial

The TalkLeft zimmerman discussion site has all the information, interviews, nen calls, maps, timelines to understand the case and defense and prosecution strategies. By the way, reporting a piece of information (that has been on Talk Left for a while) is not the same as being a racist.

[24601]

191. He is innocent until found guilty in court. That's the standard for Zimmerman, and for you and

me and anyone else.

So for now, he remains innocent.

I believe that the greater DU membership wants to keep it that way and not change the Constitution just because of this case.

I'm recalling US vs. Larry Flint when he claimed to have saved the 1st Amendment when the reality was that the 1st Amendment saved him.

[Doctor_J]

228. With a post from Fox "News", no less

someone's lost.

[tblue]

252. Remember Zimmerman and his wife lied too.

To the Court.

Now, as for Trayvon's gf: "The woman had told prosecutors she was in the hospital on the day of Trayvon's funeral. "

That's it? I'd need to hear more. Maybe something else was going on with her. This doesn't appear all that damaging on its face. Between this lie and Zimmerman's, at worst it's a wash.

[Xipe Totec]

2. Shouldn't you be, like, waiting until all the evidence has been presented?

Pot, how ya' doing?

- Kettle

[Democracyinkind]

3. According to the article,

the part of her testimony in doubt is about her hospiatalization. It says nothing as to the veracity of her talking to Trayvon on the phone prior to his death.

Considering that, the wording of this op is, well, strange...

[leftynyc]

15. That's not true

The defense can claim if she lied about this...what else is she lying about? It's a legitimate question and one that will cause the prosecution heartburn.

[Democracyinkind]

18. Of course it's true.

I repeat:

The article only disputes the hospitalization.

As to her (alleged) phone call with Martin - nothing new on that - ergo; no change in credibility, whatever credibility she had before, she has now, as no new info about the phone call has come out.

People just skimming the article might get the impression that the veracity of her testimony about the phone call is in dispute - which is not what is claimed. That's why I cared to point that out.

[leftynyc]

50. The link to the story in

the Orlando Sentinel above contains this:

They had to publicly acknowledge that their star witness had lied under oath and had to answer questions about what they intend to do about it.

Reporters asked: Will you charge the 19-year-old Miami woman with perjury?

The state's lead prosecutor, Bernie de la Rionda, gave an ambiguous answer: "You can all read the law and make your own decision."


I didn't skim anything.

[jberryhill]

31. To what did she testify under oath that is false?

Unfortunately, both you and the person to whom you are responding seem to believe that she testified she was in the hospital during the funeral.

She did not make any such claim in her testimony.

Do you see the phrase "in interviews about the case" in the OP, and do you understand its meaning?

[leftynyc]

52. I know how to read

and the Orlando Sentinel story linked above has this:

They had to publicly acknowledge that their star witness had lied under oath and had to answer questions about what they intend to do about it.

Reporters asked: Will you charge the 19-year-old Miami woman with perjury?

The state's lead prosecutor, Bernie de la Rionda, gave an ambiguous answer: "You can all read the law and make your own decision."


Do you understand perjury is telling a lie under oath?

[struggle4progress]

160. A perjury charge will usually require the false statement be somehow material

as set forth in Florida Statutes 837

[leftynyc]

168. Best of luck to the defense

getting the jury to buy that lying about the small stuff is different than lying about the big stuff. They should keep her off the stand.

[struggle4progress]

172. That's a different question than whether she committed perjury

Last edited Wed Mar 6, 2013, 07:12 PM - Edit history (1)

[leftynyc]

223. I don't want anything getting

in the way for justice for the Martin family. Given what the jury make up will likely be, the prosecution needs an air tight care and I really don't want it to come down to the veracity of one of the witnesses.

[jberryhill]

227. There is nothing getting in the way of justice here

The person who killed Trayvon Martin has been charged and will face trial.

That is our system of justice.

Whether justice has or will have been served, is not a function of the eventual verdict, and IMHO it is important not to confuse the two.

[onehandle]

4. It's all about the gun rights hero. nt

[customerserviceguy]

5. As I've said all along

O'Mara didn't take this case if he wasn't sure he could win it. GZ was fully convicted in the media within a few weeks after the incident, and O'Mara figured that if he could get GZ acquitted, his fee would be in the tens of millions per case. That's important if you think there's a possibility of any banksters eventually being hauled to court in the next several years.

[Blue_Tires]

23. Some attorneys take cases for the publicity, win or lose...

I'm sure Charles Manson's attorney thought he could "win", too....

[Drale]

129. Look at Joel Brodsky and Drew Peterson

Brodsky had no intention of winning, he wanted publicity. Drew and Joel screwed themselves with their arrogant crap they kept pulling on TV.

[graham4anything]

6. Working for a bullet in the street free America, one day at a time

unfortunately he is only being charged with second degree murder
Zimmy should be charged and given the max sentence for first degree murder as Florida allows.
because this is premediated

he took his gun and looked for a kill
judge jury executioner

he deserves first degree murder charge.

Hope he gets life in prison with NO parole.

And hope his family never has a penny from all the civil lawsuit dollars they shall be charged.

Cops told him to not continue his vigilante chase.
He didn't listen and shot an unarmed man just to do it.

That is why NO private person should have a bullet in the street
Zero tolerance.
Working for a bullet in the street free America, one day at a time

He is the same as the killers of Mathew Shepard and James Byrd Jr.

and I am Juror #8.
I have examined the phone call to police, and my verdict is

GUILTY.
Too bad he wasn't charged first degree murder. Because it is premeditated.
Anarchist/Vigilante. MURDERER of an innocent man in cold blood.

People who think Kersey was real are the very reason ALL BULLETS need to be removed from the streets except for ON DUTY federal/state/local cops.
Off duty need to leave their guns/bullets in the preceinct when they end their shift.

[Starry Messenger]

9. Oh wow, so this proves Trayvon is alive?

Edit: source Fox news. Bless your heart.

[AngryAmish]

36. A Trayvon Truther!

good work.

[Starry Messenger]

79. Read again for sarcastic intent

I didn't think I needed the tag for that one.

[jberryhill]

83. Neither did Angry Amish

When a sarcastic post gets a sarcastic reply, hilarity ensues.

[Kingofalldems]

11. How is this LBN, since a thread was started in GD

yesterday?

[Eleanors38]

116. I thought if it involved guns it could go anywhere, anytime.

[Kingofalldems]

117. Yep. And BTW I think this thread smells

[UnrepentantLiberal]

187. So can RW trolls...

for awhile.

[Eleanors38]

229. In an "unrepentant liberal" contest, I got you beat hands-down...

...and I don't have to label myself to get ring-side approval.

[UnrepentantLiberal]

232. Big fan of Ted Kennedy and the EPA?

[Eleanors38]

240. Pretty much, though I prefer Hubert Humphrey...

Strange, we owe the EPA's existence to Tricky Dick.

I favor the complete decriminalization and legalization of all now-illegal drugs. How bout you?

[UnrepentantLiberal]

241. That's a libertarian position and it won't happen.

Meth and cocaine will never be legal.

[Eleanors38]

242. Ha! You jumped to the right ofq me immediately, ending a potentially

useful discussion right off the bat.

Curious how "libertarianism" has become the new bludgeon for those claiming to be more liberal than thou. Incidentally, libertarians would stop at decriminalization, understanding that legalization would introduce government controls & regulation, which this liberal-lefty favors.

You have made a prediction about meth & coke, not stated your position, which is...?

[leftynyc]

16. Can't you find a legitimate news source?

I wont touch a link to that sewer.

[Pararescue]

39. I think this is legitimate.

http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/2013-03-05/news/os-zimmerman-witness-8-medical-records-20130305_1_george-zimmerman-trayvon-martin-bernie-de-la-rionda

[leftynyc]

42. As long as it's not fox

or breitbart or some right wing crap, I'm good. Like I said in another post, this will certainly give the prosecution headaches although my feeling is that he's guilty of murder.

[Pararescue]

46. I won't link to any right wing rag.

If I can't find a legitimate source, then I'll leave it alone.

I think he's guilty as hell also, but with the prosecution's star witness lying under oath, it creates a real problem for them.
I would be surprised if the prosecutor puts her on the stand, I think that there's enough evidence, forensics and Zman's statements, to prove the case.
We'll just have to wait and see.

[leftynyc]

54. I appreciate the link

to the Orlando Sentinel. I simply wont touch anything to do with Rupert Murdock.

[melm00se]

20. Part of the defense and prosecution's

presentation (in fact duty as part of providing a vigorous defense) will be an attempt to impeach the testimony and credibility of the other side's witnesses.

As was pointed out earlier in the thread, a jury may very well ask the question:

If she misrepresented herself about one aspect of her account, regardless of which part and whether it was in direct applicability to the crime itself, what else might she be "misrepresenting"?

it is a perfectly valid question to run thru their minds.

[jberryhill]

32. It's only a valid question if she testifies falsely

What she said in unsworn statements out of court is irrelevant.

[leftynyc]

45. There is a link to an Orlando Sentinel

story upthread that states she lied under oath. That's perjury.

[jberryhill]

53. No, that is not perjury

I see you subscribe to the "impeach Clinton" school of what constitutes perjury.

Let's take the US code as an example (state codes all have the same qualifier):

Whoever—
(1) having taken an oath before a competent tribunal, officer, or person, in any case in which a law of the United States authorizes an oath to be administered, that he will testify, declare, depose, or certify truly, or that any written testimony, declaration, deposition, or certificate by him subscribed, is true, willfully and contrary to such oath states or subscribes any material matter which he does not believe to be true; or

(2) in any declaration, certificate, verification, or statement under penalty of perjury as permitted under section 1746 of title 28, United States Code, willfully subscribes as true any material matter which he does not believe to be true;

is guilty of perjury...

Please explain how her whereabouts on the day of the funeral are material to any element required to be proven by the prosecution in this case?

Making a knowingly false statement under oath is not perjury.

Making a knowingly false statement on a material matter under oath is perjury.

[leftynyc]

55. Making an untrue statement about

ANYTHING to do with the case is perjury. Her lying about her favorite color is not.

[jberryhill]

56. And her whereabouts during the funeral is relevant to what element of the charge?

Evidence is something which, if shown, renders a proposition to be more likely or less likely to be true.

Zimmerman is charged with certain crimes which the prosecution must prove.

In what way do her whereabouts during the funeral tend to show a greater or lesser likelihood that any charge in the case is proven?

[Pararescue]

59. That's not relevant,

what's relevant is that she lied under oath which will taint her testimony. Even the prosecutor has acknowledged that she lied under oath.

http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/2013-03-05/news/os-zimmerman-witness-8-medical-records-20130305_1_george-zimmerman-trayvon-martin-bernie-de-la-rionda

They had to publicly acknowledge that their star witness had lied under oath and had to answer questions about what they intend to do about it.

Reporters asked: Will you charge the 19-year-old Miami woman with perjury?

The state's lead prosecutor, Bernie de la Rionda, gave an ambiguous answer: "You can all read the law and make your own decision."

Personally, I think they still have enough evidence to convict without her testimony.
We'll just have to wait and see.

[jberryhill]

63. Note the prosecutor's answer

"You can all read the law and make your own decision"

Notice that, in this thread, I posted the federal version of the perjury statute. Every perjury statute goes to materiality. Materiality is defined in the context of the propositions required to be shown as elements of the case.

That's what the prosecutor is saying there, and it is why I ask you in what way are her whereabouts during the funeral material?

Answer: it is not material.

This can be used strategically. When she is attempted to be impeached on cross with the statement about where she was during the funeral and why she had claimed to be in the hospital - be prepared for an answer which will (a) explode in the cross examiner's face, and (b) earn her credit with the jury.

Here's the thing, nothing in the story indicates why she didn't attend the funeral and why she made up an excuse for not going to it. That provides an opportunity for a very sympathetic answer to both of those questions.

[Pararescue]

65. This isn't a federal case,

it's a state case and state perjury charges will apply if the prosecutor decides to charge her.

http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&URL=0800-0899/0837/0837ContentsIndex.html

837.02 Perjury in official proceedings.—(1) Except as provided in subsection (2), whoever makes a false statement, which he or she does not believe to be true, under oath in an official proceeding in regard to any material matter, commits a felony of the third degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084.
(2) Whoever makes a false statement, which he or she does not believe to be true, under oath in an official proceeding that relates to the prosecution of a capital felony, commits a felony of the second degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084.
(3) Knowledge of the materiality of the statement is not an element of the crime of perjury under subsection (1) or subsection (2), and the defendant’s mistaken belief that the statement was not material is not a defense.
History.—s. 1, sub-ch. 6, ch. 1637, 1868; RS 2561; GS 3473; RGS 5343; CGL 7477; s. 998, ch. 71-136; s. 55, ch. 74-383; s. 33, ch. 75-298; s. 3, ch. 97-90; s. 1311, ch. 97-102.

[jberryhill]

73. "in regard to any material matter"

You are misreading subsection 3.

Notice:

in regard to any material matter

What this statute is saying is exactly what I have been saying. Perjury statutes, in general, have a materiality provision.

The part where it says, "defendant’s mistaken belief that the statement was not material is not a defense".

All that says is that the defendant cannot say "I didn't think it was material" when the statement, objectively, was material.

As applied to the circumstances here, I ask you one more time:

Please explain how her whereabouts at the funeral are material to any charge against Zimmerman.

It is not perjury, and I find it odd that you went ahead and posted the state statute which demonstrates my point.

[Pararescue]

96. I really don't think that we're that far apart on this case.

I personally think that the evidence, forensics and other evidence, like the Zman's story of what happened, is enough to convict him without having to put her on the stand.

Then again, you never know what a jury is going to do.

[jberryhill]

101. I believe he'll be acquitted

That's not my desired outcome, but that's what I believe will happen.

Justice was served when he was arrested and given a trial. What the jury eventually does is of secondary interest.

But I don't think there is much to be made about her excuse for not attending the funeral, and I also believe that attacking her on that point could help the prosecution, should the defense decide to do that.

[Pararescue]

102. You really think he'll be acquitted?

Jeez, I sincerely hope not, but then again, you never know what a jury will do.
We'll just have to wait and see.

[jberryhill]

107. That's how I'd bet, yes

There are a lot of moving parts here. At bottom, Zimmerman should not have left his vehicle. But leaving a vehicle is not a crime either, so it comes down to what transpired between them. Any narrative of what happened requires a set of inferences derived from a constellation of facts. One can pretty readily get to a "more likely than not" conclusion that Zimmerman was up to no good, but that's not the standard here.

I believe it is most likely that Zimmerman is, in fact, guilty. That's not the standard for a criminal conviction, though.

[Leontius]

126. Why do you have any "desired outcome"

other than the truth of what happened is revealed and his guilt or innocence is proven?

[jberryhill]

130. That's not what trials do

Trials consist of a set of procedures by which we dispose of several categories of behaviors.

A trial does not prove "guilt or innocence" in some sense of "the truth of what happened". What gets "revealed" in a trial is itself filtered through the rules of evidence.

A trial determines whether a procedure conducted according to a set of rules, produces one of several outcomes.

It is not about "truth" or "justice" in any larger sense of those words, but is a procedure which has been developed as a practical approximation of those things over a large number of instances.

Do trials "work"? Well, in order to answer that question, you really have to ask "better than what alternative?" Do innocent people ever get convicted? Sure. Do guilty people ever go free? Certainly. In fact that second question and answer is a feature of the system. It is intentionally biased toward letting guilty people go free - it is designed to do that, because we consider failures of the first type to be a greater potential downside than failures of the second type.

But to suppose - as applied to any particular instance instead of the broad general results - that each and every trial gets to "the truth of what happened" and proves "guilt or innocence" is a real stretch. The system is not even advertised to prove "innocence", but only "lack of guilt shown to a certain level of confidence".

In this case, I am not a witness, victim, attorney, prosecutor, judge, or jury. I am a human being who, as sole arbiter of my own personal opinions, believes Zimmerman is a scumbag who should be locked up.

The outcome of a "trial" will actually have no impact on the opinion of this human being, nor should it.

Do you often outsource the formation of your own opinions to total strangers to tell you what you should believe? I certainly don't.

Now, eventually a verdict is going to be reached in this case. Some people are going to say "the jury got it right" and some people are going to say "the jury got it wrong."

My interest in this particular case was the shock that Zimmerman was not arrested in the first place, in order to test what happened against this thing we have called "the criminal justice system". Eventually that did happen, after a considerable public outcry. But I believe it is important to distinguish between "This man should be charged and tried" and "This man should be convicted". As far as the system goes, the only thing that matters is that he's been charged and will be tried. Whatever outcome results is not one which is to be dictated by public outcry. But any individual is entitled to cheerlead whatever way they'd like. As for me? I don't like this Zimmerman fellow. Simple, no?

[ProgressiveProfessor]

72. If it was as slam dunk as you think it was, the prosecutor would have said so

Right now her prior statements and the prosecutors are all admissible


"Goes to credibility, your honor"


This case will succeed or fail on the forensics.

[jberryhill]

75. What did I say was slam dunk?

Absolutely, it can be used for impeachment purposes. And that can blow up in the cross examiner's face for reasons I have discussed elsewhere in the thread.

The person here is saying it is perjury. It is not perjury, since her whereabouts during the funeral are not material to any element of any charge.

Her reason for not attending the funeral and for making an excuse afterwards can be very personal and highly embarrassing. If a cross examiner seeks to drag that out of her during cross, it can make the jury more sympathetic to her and less so to the defense. This is particularly true if the jury gets the impression that an attempt is being made to embarrass her on an issue which has nothing to do with her testimony on anything relevant to their job - which is to determine Zimmerman's guilt.

It is common for people to look at this kind of thing more mechanically than it actually plays out with live people. Yes, a jury can consider it in determining her credibility, but impeaching a witness can often backfire if the jury chooses to accept an explanation for a statement which is not directly relevant to the case.

[JDPriestly]

90. The Florida law on impeachment evidence:

What evidence is admissible in court for the purpose of impeaching a witness?

90.608 Who may impeach.--Any party, including the party calling the witness, may attack the credibility of a witness by:
(1) Introducing statements of the witness which are inconsistent with the witness's present testimony.
(2) Showing that the witness is biased.
(3) Attacking the character of the witness in accordance with the provisions of s. 90.609 or s. 90.610.
(4) Showing a defect of capacity, ability, or opportunity in the witness to observe, remember, or recount the matters about which the witness testified.
(5) Proof by other witnesses that material facts are not as testified to by the witness being impeached.
History.--s. 1, ch. 76-237; s. 1, ch. 77-77; ss. 14, 22, ch. 78-361; ss. 1, 2, ch. 78-379; s. 1, ch. 90-174; s. 488, ch. 95-147.

http://www.joffelaw.com/state-rules/90-608.html

90.609 Character of witness as impeachment.--A party may attack or support the credibility of a witness, including an accused, by evidence in the form of reputation, except that:

(1) The evidence may refer only to character relating to truthfulness.

(2) Evidence of a truthful character is admissible only after the character of the witness for truthfulness has been attacked by reputation evidence.

History.--s. 1, ch. 76-237; s. 1, ch. 77-77; ss. 15, 22, ch. 78-361; ss. 1, 2, ch. 78-379.

90.610 Conviction of certain crimes as impeachment.--

(1) A party may attack the credibility of any witness, including an accused, by evidence that the witness has been convicted of a crime if the crime was punishable by death or imprisonment in excess of 1 year under the law under which the witness was convicted, or if the crime involved dishonesty or a false statement regardless of the punishment, with the following exceptions:

(a) Evidence of any such conviction is inadmissible in a civil trial if it is so remote in time as to have no bearing on the present character of the witness.

(b) Evidence of juvenile adjudications are inadmissible under this subsection.

(2) The pendency of an appeal or the granting of a pardon relating to such crime does not render evidence of the conviction from which the appeal was taken or for which the pardon was granted inadmissible. Evidence of the pendency of the appeal is admissible.

(3) Nothing in this section affects the admissibility of evidence under s. 90.404 or s. 90.608.

History.--s. 1, ch. 76-237; s. 1, ch. 77-77; ss. 16, 22, ch. 78-361; ss. 1, 2, ch. 78-379; s. 489, ch. 95-147.

http://law.justia.com/codes/florida/2005/TitleVII/ch0090.html

Depends on the context of her statement. The judge may or may not allow the defense to introduce information about her statement into the trial. The judge might just consider it rather irrelevant and keep it out to save trial time, but then the judge may want to allow it in just to be sure that Zimmerman has a fair trial. I don't know how this will work.

[jberryhill]

95. It'll come in

It will come in. Whether the defense uses it effectively is an open question, because they could end up hurting themselves when she explains why she didn't go to the funeral and why she made up an excuse.

In fact, the prosecutor would bring it up on direct, in order to get her reasons out first.

When you have a witness subject to an impeachment attack - you want to be the first one to get it in front of the jury so that during cross examination the jury is essentially thinking "we heard this already".

[Pararescue]

99. Or the prosecutor may choose not to put her on the stand

to take away the possibility of having her testimony impeached.
I personally think that they don't need her testimony, I think they have enough evidence to convict him.

[JDPriestly]

175. I agree. The prosecutor will bring it in on direct.

[leftynyc]

61. You really think the defense

is going to be able to make that distinction stick with a jury? All they're going to care about is that she lied about something to do with the case. There is already enough evidence and they should keep her off the stand.

[jberryhill]

64. That distinction would not even be in issue

She's not on trial for perjury, so the entire question of perjury is irrelevant.

Impeachment is, and it can really boomerang on a cross examiner.

The cross examiner can confront her with that statement, and I will bet you that she will have a very good answer to it, and one which is not going to cover the cross examiner in glory for going after her on it.

She didn't attend the funeral. Why do you suppose she didn't, and why do you suppose she would fabricate and excuse for it?

The potential answers to those two questions can hurt the defense during cross more than it would help them.

[leftynyc]

123. Can you give me a "for instance" here

I know if I was sitting on a jury, if I found out a witness lied about the small stuff, I'd wonder about the big stuff. What could she say that would sway a person who then wouldn't care that she lied to the police (under oath).

[jberryhill]

127. But you'd get more than that

What you get, when you are sitting on a jury, is live human beings - in the form of witnesses and lawyers.

While you could, indeed, take the "lie about one thing, lie about everything" approach. When it comes down to it, when people say things which they know are untrue, it is a little more complicated than that.

My son lied to me once about having done his homework. Have I since then, or even at the time, considered everything he says to be a lie? No. No sane person does that.

The procedure you think juries mechanically execute is just not what real people do, and it isn't what real people do when they are dealing with others.

So, let's set this up... On cross, the witness is confronted with having lied about not attending the funeral. What you are missing is the part where the witness is given an opportunity to explain (a) why she didn't attend the funeral, and (b) why she said something false about it. Except for pathological liars, people say false things because they have a reason to say them.

But by the time she is sobbing about not being able to bring herself to go to the funeral because she was traumatized by the whole thing, or believe that as an identified witness her safety was jeopardized, and then feeling pressured to come up with an excuse because people were mean to her about not having attended, then in that real live setting - with real live human beings - it is just as likely that a jury can come to the conclusion that the guy badgering this poor traumatized girl over something that doesn't advance or retard the proposition that Zimmerman is guilty - is a major asshole - and that she is a sweet young lady who made what is usually classified as a "social lie", and is being beaten up over it.

[leftynyc]

137. OK - I see what you're saying, but

let me ask you a question. If after your son lied about doing his homework, I certainly wouldn't think he was lying about everything but the next time you asked him about his homework, did you just take his word?

[jberryhill]

141. No

And if she missed any other funerals, they should certainly check.

[JDPriestly]

81. Do you know whether she is a minor?

[jberryhill]

82. No, why?

[JDPriestly]

176. I am not in Florida and haven't followed this case

that closely, but I am surprised I haven't seen her name mentioned. Maybe I have just forgotten. I wondered if she was a minor and they weren't printing her name. I guess I am wrong. She is too old to have been a minor at the time of the shooting.

[Pararescue]

87. She's 19 yo.

Reporters asked: Will you charge the 19-year-old Miami woman with perjury?

[Snake Plissken]

21. If Trayvon had a gun he'd be alive right now

oh wait that only applies to White people ... um um um, I mean 'law abiding citizens' ... never mind

[Common Sense Party]

100. I thought you were dead.

[Eleanors38]

118. Another one if those speaking zombies.

[Common Sense Party]

119. No, I'm referring to the movie character.

[Guy Whitey Corngood]

25. What exactly does this change given what we've heard with our own lying ears on tape? nt

[JaneyVee]

26. Does it matter? An innocent unarmed teen was shot & killed by a threatening stalker.

[wandy]

27. With this minor script change I think I've figured out how the series ends........

I don't think I'll like it. It will make the sponsers (advirtisers) happy.
This tragity may not have started out as a TV series, but with consistant 'tweaking' of the script it could be bigger than "Lost".
Not going to give away the ending but heres a hint...

Stand You're Ground
Brought to you by ALEC

So Bold So FOX

Sarcasm tag wouldn't fit here and we don't have a tag for :discusted:

[spin]

205. There's a good chance that this case will not involve "stand your ground" ...

but instead be a simple self defense case.

Trayvon Martin case: Zimmerman drops stand-your-ground defence
Neighbourhood watch leader who shot dead teenager on Florida housing estate will instead go straight to jury trial

Richard Luscombe in Miami
guardian.co.uk, Wednesday 6 March 2013 01.14 EST

Lawyers acting for George Zimmerman, who shot dead the unarmed teenager Trayvon Martin on a Florida housing estate, have abandoned their attempt to have his murder charge thrown out on the grounds of self-defence.

Neighbourhood watch leader Zimmerman, 29, had been expected to claim immunity from prosecution at a hearing in April under the state's stand-your-ground law, which allows for the use of deadly force when a person feels their life is in danger.

But in a surprise move, his lawyer, Mark O'Mara, told a judge that the defence would take its chances at Zimmerman's trial in June for second-degree murder. He said he still intended to pursue the argument that his client was acting in self-defence in February 2012 under a violent onslaught from 17-year-old Martin.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/mar/06/trayvon-martin-case-george-zimmerman

[marble falls]

28. This is the sort of conclussion Fox makes. Trayvon was murdered. Impeaching this girl....

won't make the gun or the bullets or an innocent murder victim go away.

[Sunlei]

33. still bothers me the police didn't even bother to touch the cell phone when they closed the case.

[Happyhippychick]

34. Why are you excerpting from Fox News on a democratic website?

[Tommy_Carcetti]

35. The witness could still provide valuable testimony regardless of the statements at issue.

Simply call her to the stand and have her confirm the phone records showing she was on the phone with Trayvon from X to Y. It provides a valuable time stamp that can be contrasted with the time in which Zimmerman was on the phone with dispatch. If the two constrasting records don't jibe with Zimmerman's "pursuit, retreat and ambush" story, it's quite damning evidence.

No need to question the witness about what she said to Trayvon and what Trayvon said to her--the defense would simply try to cast doubt on that evidence as being speculative anyways.

But if you keep the questioning of her solely as to the timeline of the phone call, the scope of cross examination would be limited to that extent as well, and there would be no opportunity for the defense to raise the issue of apparent misrepresentation regarding her attendance at the funeral. Unless this girl has a prior conviction for a crime involving dishonesty (fraud, perjury, etc.), the defense can't attack her as a liar in general. They could only attack her testimony on direct and any conflicting statements on that particular testimony.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

74. If it goes to credibility, its fair game for the defense

regardless of what was or was not asked during direct examination

[Tommy_Carcetti]

110. She'd be a witness for authentication of records only.

If the prosecution brings her on the stand only to authenticate the cell phone records, no judge in his/her right mind would allow a defense attorney to bring up issues that far outside the scope of testimony. It would be way too prejudicial and would just be screaming for mistrial.

I wouldn't be too surprised if the parties wouldn't just stipulate to the authenticity of the cell phone records, thus not even needing to call her as a witness. The cell phone records are the true value of her testimony.

[Eleanors38]

120. ^^^

[mulsh]

37. ummm, Fox news.

hardly a reliable source of unimpeachable information.

[Tommy_Carcetti]

41. This Just In:

Trayvon Martin was a charter member of Friends of Hamas.

[tblue]

251. Honestly. Fox News?

Fox News--that has Zimmerman on as Hannity's guest? I won't even click on the link.

[Robb]

40. Welcome to DU!

I can only hope at some point you'll post something other than Fox News Zimmerman apologia.

[Ian David]

51. He does. He also posts about the administration using domestic drones and cutting social security.

You know. Things that Democrats might disagree about with Obama. The kinds of things that might sow the seeds of discord and disharmony.

Not that it's an unusual sort of thing for someone with less than 30 posts to do.

[mountain grammy]

47. Dear Pancho Schneider, I hate to break this to you, but Fox lies.

They will publicize any tiny morsel, real or imagined, to justify this murder. You see, Pancho, and, again I hate to break this to you, all Fox affiliates mostly appeal to people who support what Zimmerman did.

[Pararescue]

58. Fox does lie, but how about the Orlando Sentinel?

http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/2013-03-05/news/os-zimmerman-witness-8-medical-records-20130305_1_george-zimmerman-trayvon-martin-bernie-de-la-rionda

[Robb]

66. Oh look, another one!

Welcome to DU!

[Pararescue]

68. What?

If you think I'm defending the Zman, then you are wrong, I think he's guilty as hell and there's enough evidence, forensics and Zman's statement and changing story, to prove the case without the late Trayvon's girlfriend's testimony.

Thanks for the welcome.

[mountain grammy]

67. When the big headline reads the "State's main witness lied"

is yellow journalism at it's worst. Not exactly a lie, but far from the truth.
Do I think newspapers might also lie, make stuff up, or exaggerate? Here's a surprise: yes! Fox news alone can't bring down the country, they've always had plenty of help.

[Pararescue]

71. Maybe so,

but they're quoting what the prosecutor is saying.

http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/2013-03-05/news/os-zimmerman-witness-8-medical-records-20130305_1_george-zimmerman-trayvon-martin-bernie-de-la-rionda

They had to publicly acknowledge that their star witness had lied under oath and had to answer questions about what they intend to do about it.

Reporters asked: Will you charge the 19-year-old Miami woman with perjury?

The state's lead prosecutor, Bernie de la Rionda, gave an ambiguous answer: "You can all read the law and make your own decision."

I'm thinking that the prosecution already has enough evidence to convict the Zman without her testimony and I will be surprised if they even put her on the stand.

[Kingofalldems]

131. How many times have you linked to that article?

And on the same thread even. Must be a record.

[Pararescue]

132. I was just giving a different link other than Fox.

Why do you care?

[Kingofalldems]

133. Because I'm a member here and find your responses troubling

[Pararescue]

135. Why are my responses troubling?

I'm not defending Zman in any way at all.

If you read all my responses on this subject, you'll know that I think that he's guilty as hell and he will probably be convicted on the evidence available so far.

[Pancho Schneider]

134. Note that nobody has found anything wrong with this specific Fox article

They ignore that the Atlanta Black Star called Martin's girlfriend a liar in the headline, which is even a harsher approach than Fox took. http://atlantablackstar.com/2013/03/06/george-zimmerman-forgoes-important-hearing-trayvon-martin-girlfriend-lies/

Shooting the Messenger is the name of the fallacy we're seeing here.

Does Fox News often post BS? yes. Is their article about Trayvon Martin's girlfriend BS? No.

[Pararescue]

136. Maybe, but linking to a Fox source

when there are more reputable sources available is more believable is not a good thing to do.

[Kingofalldems]

148. I'll give you this, at least you didn't reference

the same article numerous times in one thread.

[LanternWaste]

209. Note that Martin is still dead...

Note that Martin is still dead...



"Shooting the Messenger is the name of the fallacy we're seeing here"
Assuming that there is indeed a messenger with the agenda of merely presenting a message. That may not be the case...

[bitchkitty]

62. So how much did you donate to Zimmie's defense fund? n/t

[JDPriestly]

69. True. The fact that her testimony has not been in the news

cast suspicion on its reliability.

Still, Zimmerman will have a hard time explaining why Trayvon Martin was killed so far from the location at which he made his first call to the police. Why did Zimmerman follow Trayvon Martin? Will the jury believe Zimmerman's explanation?

Hard to say.

My personal opinion without having seen all of the evidence: Zimmerman is guilty as sin. If you have not seen the person commit a crime, you do not FOLLOW another person while carrying a gun unless you are a police officer.

Zimmerman was not headed home. He was on foot. He could have let the police stop Trayvon Martin. The only reason he followed Trayvon Martin was because he had persuaded himself erroneously that Martin was up to no good. It was a deadly error for Martin and probably a costly one for Zimmerman.

Guns are for keeps. People who keep and carry them should remember that. You can't go back and fix the damage you do with a gun.

Zimmerman was looking for trouble regardless of whether the girl is a reliable witness or not. And in my view that places his claim of self-defense in doubt. From the beginning, his fear of Martin was irrational. You can't pick a fight by following someone and then claim that you were afraid of that person or that the person placed you in imminent danger. Ridiculous.

A person carrying a gun has a duty to avoid even the appearance of starting a fight. Because if you know you have a gun, you know you might have an advantage in a fight.

Zimmerman was playing vigilante -- not acceptable.

Still, a jury could find him innocent. The jury will give Zimmerman the benefit of the doubt -- and rightfully so.

It is an interesting case. I think that for the sake of justice it is important that Zimmerman either plead to a manslaughter charge or be found guilty.

Why do I say that? Because if we are to have a nation in which gun ownership and maybe even carrying is commonplace, we have to impress upon those with guns that THEY are responsible for ANYONE killed or harmed with the gun they own. They have to keep the guns out of the hands of those who should not have them -- including children and the emotionally volatile -- and have to observe strict rules when handling guns including no vigilantism -- and NO ALCOHOL.

A person who carries a gun and follows a 17-year old based on the illusion that the 17-year-old is dangerous is a threat to all of us.

[suffragette]

250. + 1,000

Exceptionally well said, JDPriestly.

[DallasNE]

70. This Impacts The Credibility Of This Witness

Note that no claim is made challenging her being on the phone with Martin right before he was killed as I am sure phone records support this. But her lying about going to the hospital does create credibility issues with her conversation with Martin but expert witnesses can help shore up the behavior under such duress so it should only weaken the testimony. To what extent only time will tell.

[jberryhill]

76. "expert witnesses can help shore up the behavior under such duress"

That wouldn't even be necessary after her tearful explanation of why she didn't attend the funeral ("I couldn't bring myself to do it&quot and why she made an excuse later ("I was embarrassed because people expected me to&quot .

And if that kind of thing is dragged out of her on cross, it can make the jury more sympathetic to her and less so to the defense.

Whenever a cross examiner goes gangbusters on impeachment, it can hurt more than it helps, even if they have something good to use.

[lunatica]

77. So just because the prosecution says she lied, that makes it a fact?

I thought you said people shouldn't jump to conclusions.

[Pancho Schneider]

219. Don't crop my statement

I said conclusions should not be reached until witnesses have been vetted. If you think the fact that both prosecution and defense call a prosecution of a witness a liar is not enough vetting, then that's another story. How do you expect this girl to be vetted?

[lunatica]

224. You're implying that if she lied

somehow the fact of the murder has changed. Or worse. That it was righteous.

[MaineLinePhilly]

84. Doesn't help the Prosecution but...

it still doesn't take away the fact that if Trayvon Martin were wearing madras shorts, a polo, and some boat shoes that George Zimmerman wouldn't have thought he "looked suspicious". Trayvon was profiled from the start. In addition, he should've stayed his behind in the car and waited for the police to investigate. It certainly questions/taints anything else the witness has to say but this does not change my opinion of Zimmerman's guilt.

[John2]

85. I think if she

did lie, then what would be her motive to lie? She is a material witness that is important to both the defense and prosecution. I would put her on the stand and inquire all the people she had contact with concerning this trial. Strange things can happen in Trials that get high publicity. The Defense apparently recieved this information from the prosecution. The prosecution states they have no medical records according to the Defense. That says to me, the prosecution found it neccessary to do the investigation on their own material witness. Who is the prosecution working for? That is strange to me. I understand the defendant has relationships in the Judicial system also. My final point is you need to know the credibility of your witness before you trot them out there. If this guy gets away with murder, it will be the prosecution's incompetence alone. Before you bring a case to Trial, you better know your case as a prosecutor.

[MjolnirTime]

88. Zimmerman's still going down. Nice try, "Pancho".

[Pararescue]

92. I think you're right,

there is, in my opinion, enough evidence, forensics and otherwise, to convict him without her testimony.

[Pancho Schneider]

154. I disagree with you both

I think that Zimmerman will be acquitted and many of those who believe in Zimmerman's guilt will claim that the anonymous jurors who voted to acquit are racist.

We'll see.

[Pararescue]

162. You could be right.

You just can't predict what a jury will do.
As you said, we'll see.

[Ken Burch]

190. You clearly want Zimmerman acquitted-and there's no non-ugly reason to want that.

Last edited Thu Mar 7, 2013, 12:55 AM - Edit history (1)

n/t.

[Pararescue]

192. It's my personal feeling that even without her testimony

there's enough evidence to convict him and hopefully send him to prison for a long time.
You're right, there's no reason, IMO, to want him acquitted, that would be a slap at Trayvon's family.

[Ken Burch]

196. Thank you. You support my point. This development with the girlfriend,

WHATEVER it actually means, doesn't vindicate Zimmerman's version of events. He still killed an unarmed kid just because the kid was black. And we all know it.

[Pancho Schneider]

197. "And we all know it"

Do we?

[Pararescue]

199. No, thank you.

A few here have been playing games with me because, I believe, they think that I'm defending Zman just because I'm saying that her lying under oath does the prosecution no good, but if they would bother to read all my posts, they would see that I've consistently said that I personally believe that he's guilty and her testimony isn't needed to convict him.

[Coolest Ranger]

91. I do not accept anything posted from Fox News

they lie just like most of their readers.

[AngryAmish]

93. That is the best approach

For example, they are reporting that Chavez is dead. It must be a lie. Have we seen the body?

[John2]

105. The only clear,

evidence not in dispute to me is Zimmerman stalked a person that was committing no crime. He had no authority to do so. He got out of the car and confronted the kid. He initiated the confrontation. The victim was unarmed, but Zimmerman was. Defenders of Zimmerman has tried to call into question the height of the victim, and tried to present some scenario the victim's physical size allowed him to over power an adult male.

Zimmerman outweighed this kid by a significant amount. The height of a person is minor. When you add a gun to the equation, which is a deadly weapon by definition, meant to kill or serious bodily harm, ot is not equivalent to a physical wrestling altercation. And there is no indication at all that the victim knew Zimmerman had a gun. The bottom line is a person is dead and his life was unlawfully taken. Zimmerman was the person that pulled the trigger. His life was in no danger when he was in his car either. He committed murder, when this kid did not summit to his interrogation. His reasons for following the victim is not defendable either because the victim committed no crime, unless it was because of his race.

[cheyanne]

106. Has anyone read the Talk Left Zimmerman thread?

They have all the documents from the court, maps of the area, time lines of calls and actions, and most importantly, explanations of the FLA laws surrounding the murder . . .in fact, the "stand your ground" is compared with the self-defense argument.

[EC]

111. So her whole testimony is tossed because

she didn't go to the hospital instead of to the funeral? What a crock...her not going to the hospital has nothing to do with the veracity of the rest of the testimony.

[frylock]

113. oh goody, looks like a whole new batch of zimmerman defenders are here to his rescue..

anytime this shitbag is in the news, we get an influx of brand spanking new posters coming to his defense.

[Pararescue]

115. Who's defending the Zman?

[HangOnKids]

139. LOL!!!!!

Comedy Gold. Just fucking priceless.

[Pararescue]

142. Why?

Are you insinuating that I'm defending the Zman? If so, then prove it by linking to a comment of mine defending him?

[HangOnKids]

144. Comedy Gold!!!!!

I am laughing my ass off.

[Pararescue]

145. Translated, you can't prove it.

Thanks.

[HangOnKids]

150. Prove what?

I commented on your comedy routine. You made an allegation, about an accusation that you asserted, now you are barking that I can't prove it. COMEDY FUCKING GOLD!!!!

[Pararescue]

152. What comedy routine?

If you have an issue with me, then spell it out and let's get past this.

[HangOnKids]

157. Please I think you need to get into 2013

That kind of funky internet nonsense is NOT going to get you the desired results.

[U4ikLefty]

161. You have proved it for us.

Thanks

[Pararescue]

163. Proved what?

If you would be so kind to explain.

[apocalypsehow]

203. Uh-huh. Enjoy your, *ahem*, stay at DU.

[Pararescue]

204. Oh look,

another one *ahem* piling on.

And, as I told you the last time in another thread, this is my last reply to you in this thread.

[apocalypsehow]

206. "this is my last reply to you in this thread" - That just breaks my ever-lovin' heart.

[HangOnKids]

243. Ahh He Is Gone

Really sad!

[apocalypsehow]

244. +1. n/t.

[SidDithers]

248. Maybe he'll create a new account and come back...nt

Sid

[HangOnKids]

164. Thank You

[Gemini Cat]

165. I've noticed that.

Amazing how they creep out of the shadows to defend that bag of crap. To defend the indefensible.

[noiretextatique]

183. they ae only concerned about him getting a fair trial

[Festivito]

121. To a jury it's why she lied, and if under oath.

If she didn't want to hurt the family and gave them an excuse, so what?

If it's under oath, that's another thing.

[Pararescue]

122. It was under oath, the prosecutor had to admit it.

http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/2013-03-05/news/os-zimmerman-witness-8-medical-records-20130305_1_george-zimmerman-trayvon-martin-bernie-de-la-rionda

They had to publicly acknowledge that their star witness had lied under oath and had to answer questions about what they intend to do about it.

Reporters asked: Will you charge the 19-year-old Miami woman with perjury?

The state's lead prosecutor, Bernie de la Rionda, gave an ambiguous answer: "You can all read the law and make your own decision."

The woman had told prosecutors she was in the hospital on the day of Trayvon's funeral.

[Kingofalldems]

138. Nice. You recced your own thread.

[HangOnKids]

140. That Just Kills Me

HAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!

[Pancho Schneider]

155. Hell yes

I highly recommend my thread.

[apocalypsehow]

167. Let me guess: you're a "pro gun progressive"...

See sig line.

[Squinch]

169. Good Lord! Isn't this a job for MIRT? A Dumbfoxistan news story supporting Zimmerman? On post 32?

I'm looking around for the transvaginal ultrasound support thread.

[Pararescue]

171. You said Dumbfoxistan.

Perfect description.
Actually it was post 25 at the time.

[noiretextatique]

184. ditto

these idiots don't even bother to cloak anymore

[booley]

170. The only thing I carted about was the trial

and how the police seemed to be letting the murder of a young man slip by.

Certainly I had thought the girl friend's testimony was important based on the information I had at the time. But since I never assumed I had all the facts, this doesn't really bother me.

[noiretextatique]

180. so, she didn't go to his funeral

unless she lied about the events of that evening...so fucking what? given all the inconsistencies in zimmerman's LIES, this isn't a big deal. unfortunately, she did this under oath.

[Cha]

218. no kidding.. zimmerman Lied about how much money he didn't

have to represent himself..and got busted.

This is total speculation but I can see where someone would be too upset to go to their friend's funeral especially under these horrific conditions.. And, say you had to go to the hospital to get out of it. Unfortunately, it was a bad choice for whatever reason. They check these things.

[Deep13]

181. What difference does it make if I reach a conclusion?

I'm not on the jury.

[olddots]

186. something must be brewing

This is a fox story and they admitted they are not a news source ,they entertain oafs at this time of guns getting big ratings.
Are there any non turd maggot sources covering this trial ?

[Pancho Schneider]

195. CNN: "Chief witness in Trayvon Martin case lied under oath"

http://www.cnn.com/2013/03/06/us/florida-trayvon-martin-case/index.html

[Squinch]

201. Maybe you can find out for us what Tucker Carlson thinks of all this.

[Pancho Schneider]

214. Please tell me you don't think Tucker Carlson still works for CNN

Please.

[fascisthunter]

207. those skittles were dangerous!

... Trayvon's crime was being black and alive.

[Guy Whitey Corngood]

236. Good bye, you weaselly fuckwad. nt