NBC: Liable for Libel?
Friday, October 12, 2012 at 7:29PM 
The very first thing that struck me as exceptionally odd in this George Zimmerman/Trayvon Martin fiasco came almost immediately after the news broke that he had shot a teenage boy dead. It had nothing to do with whether he or the victim were black, white, brown, yellow or red. It had nothing to do with color at all. It was simply the fact that he got out of his vehicle with a loaded gun. He knew as soon as he slammed the door shut that he was entering a very dangerous territory; one that immediately compromised his own common sense and sanity. Given what I know today, I feel the same way.
Forget the recording with the dispatcher for a moment. Initially, I paid little attention to it. Whether Trayvon attacked him first or not was not that important to me because, as far as I was concerned, Zimmerman knew exactly what he was capable of doing with that gun when he steadied himself and sidled into the unknown. No one walks with a gun without understanding the possible consequences, and that Kel-Tec PF9 pistol empowered him. It enabled him to play police officer, judge, jury and executioner with all of the bravado of Paul Kersey, and that’s precisely what he did. Paul Kersey was the character played by Charles Bronson in the Death Wish movie franchise. Take away the weapon and George Zimmerman would never have moved stealthily into the darkness, confronting a fictional fear that was as frightful as the shadow he cast on that dreary Sunday night. There was no real danger lurking about; it was created by his need and strong passion to become some kind of legendary hero that haunted his soul for years. He had to prove to himself and others just who he was. To that end, he succeeded, but at a huge loss.
Trayvon Martin was a nobody in the sense that none of us are, but you cannot put a price tag on life. He was a typical teenager who would have spent his teen years in obscurity, like most other boys and girls his age — listening to the songs from Mac Miller’s Blue Slide Park and kickin’ to the rhythmic beats of Akon. His world was different from ours as adults and unless we are in step with the minds of today’s youth, we just don’t get it. Right on and out of sight were as out of sync to him as lunchin’ and tizzle are to us. Certainly, when Zimmerman was lunchin’ that night, Trayvon was in a tizzle. (See: Hip Hop Slang.)
Because of what George Zimmerman did on the night of February 26, Trayvon is classified as either a martyr or a gangsta, when all that really matters is that he should have been left the hell alone. Because of Zimmerman, this child will never walk in his father’s footsteps. He will never become what he aspired to be, whether his mind was made up or not. After all, he was still quite young. He was at an age when aspirations are supposed to run wild. Sadly, he was snuffed out by a thief in the night, whose only screams were for power and glory.
§
My thoughts on this matter have nothing to do with NBC or any other media organization. I think on my own two feet, thank you, and if racism ever crossed my mind because the victim was African-American and the perpetrator was not, I never jumped to that conclusion. Most certainly, had I, it would NOT have been because of something that appeared on the Today show. I’ve learned, like most people, that you cannot trust any one news source. Where the Wall Street Journal runs on the conservative side, for instance, the New York Times is at the opposite end of the spectrum; and since the advent of reporting on newsworthy events, from thousands of years ago, opinions have been an integral part. It’s the nature of the beast. Who remembers the tears flowing from Walter Cronkite’s eyes as he announced the death of JFK on live television? Who could possibly be neutral on the day the Twin Towers fell? As objective as media are supposed to be, they are not, and the only advice I can proffer is to consider all options; listen to every side, considering that all sources are multi-faceted and not always reliable. Remember when WFTV reported that George and Cindy Anthony inked a book deal with Simon and Schuster? Did you ever read that book? Was the story ever rescinded?
This leads me to whether or not NBC should be held accountable for a story that skewed the events of the night of February 26. Quietly, I will tell you that skews and news are pretty much interchangeable these days, but in this case, the report that originated at an NBC affiliate station in Miami, WTVJ, before it aired on the Today show, ran perpendicular to the actual event, where Zimmerman purportedly said:
“This guy looks like he’s up to no good. He looks black.”
The New York Post reported a slightly different version on the NBC coverage:
“This guy looks like he’s up to no good or on drugs or something. He’s got his hand in his waistband. And he’s a black male.”
The actual transcript of the conversation between Zimmerman and the Seminole County emergency dispatcher clarified the error. Zimmerman did not say it like it was reported:
Zimmerman: This guy looks like he’s up to no good. Or he’s on drugs or something. It’s raining and he’s just walking around, looking about.
Dispatcher: OK, and this guy — is he black, white or Hispanic?
Zimmerman: He looks black.
I will agree that the televised segment made George Zimmerman look like a racist because it appeared that he pointed out Trayvon’s color without being prompted, and that’s simply not true. However, does it rise to the level that warrants a lawsuit and monetary settlement?
I’m not here to defend Zimmerman, but I’m not going to condemn him, either; certainly not on this one. Why? Because I have experience in this field and I can genuinely empathize with him. NBC clearly did him an injustice. The network does, however, have more going for it than meets the press, so to speak. For one thing, did George Zimmerman have a “good” name at the time of the report? While the incident happened over three weeks prior, the news of the event actually broke over a week before the NBC story aired. By then, Zimmerman’s name was already festering, and rumors of racism had already abounded.
§
Many of you are aware of what happened to me during the Casey Anthony case — that I was attacked ferociously and voraciously by a fringe element that labeled me as gay, with AIDS, an alcoholic with DUI convictions, and a convicted felon. Convicted of what felonies, I do not know, but the list didn’t end there, nor did it end with me. My friends and family were insulted and accused of crimes, as well. Names and addresses were published. Online documents, such as tax records, were altered. My parents were supposedly card carrying gay communists with AIDS. Several of my e-mail accounts were hacked. I saw counterfeit documents with my own eyes, so I completely understand why Trayvon’s family shut down his social sites.
I went to the police with what I thought was hardcore evidence on my computer. Granted, it’s not easy to identify creeps that call themselves “DEAD DAVE” and other anonymous names, but they can be found. That’s what computer crimes units are for. While it went nowhere, I also contacted a defamation attorney who helped me tremendously. Ultimately, between the two resources, I gathered comprehensive knowledge of what constitutes libel and what can legally be done about it.
First of all, here’s a quick primer. If it is written, it’s libel. If it is spoken, it’s slander. Both are considered defamation. In NBC’s case, it could be all of the above because it was seen, read, and heard. The problem is, it’s tough to prove and the laws in the United States make it a very difficult nut to crack.
In my case, there was a genuine malicious design. The objective of those people was to destroy me, physically and emotionally. They wanted me dead and said so. That’s what trolls do. In NBC’s case, there was no such intent. Was there bias? Yes. Or maybe no. It depends on which side of the fence you’re on. The media are supposed to remain truthful, but we know that, in today’s world, it’s far from reality; where even reality shows are well-choreographed. While Zimmerman’s supporters will tell you NBC’s report was so slanted against him it was sickening, Trayvon’s people will tell you the complete opposite. NBC will tell you it was a matter of time constraints — editing a story to fit in a defined time slot.
While my trolls wanted me dead, I had no direct threats. No one said they were going to kill me and without any real menace, veiled or otherwise, law enforcement was powerless to act. That’s when I decided to contact a defamation attorney. While I had no money to mount any sort of lawsuit, the attorney did tell me he would freely advise me if I found a local attorney to take on my case. I never did pursue that venue, but he continued to help. One of the key aspects of proving libel deals with search engine standings. A lot hinges on how search terms stack up in the hierarchy, and engines differ in their results. If you do a search for “marinade dave”, how long do you have to scroll before something nefarious shows up? The higher the defamation in the pecking order, the more of a case you may have. Still, in my situation, I couldn’t go after any one person or even a group because no such entity existed. There was no structured organization; no corporation and no headquarters. In Zimmerman’s case, there’s NBC.
So what does Zimmerman have stacked in his favor? Not much, really. When the news broke, he automatically became a public figure. Actually, it began the moment he squeezed the trigger, whether he knew it or not, and just because it wasn’t reported right away, which it was, locally, he was no longer a private citizen. While I was merely a bit player in the Casey Anthony case, he became the star attraction; the center ring in a vast media circus. While media outlets could have looked at me as a culprit in my situation, they chose not to. In Zimmerman’s case, he is either guilty or he’s not, and there’s no in between. I think we’ve already established that the media is not always fair and impartial, and to be frank, there’s no law that forces them to be.
According to The Florida Bar, the “mere fact that a person does not like the way an article portrays him does not entitle him to damages. Rather, a defamatory communication, in its classic definition, is one that tends to hold a person up to hatred, contempt, or ridicule or causes him to be shunned or avoided by others.”
If people are shunning Zimmerman, could it be because of his own doing, not NBC’s?
In Florida law, there’s also the element of substantial proof:
While “truth is a defense” to a claim of defamation, Florida common law has taken that notion slightly further by permitting publishers of allegedly false statements to show those statements are “substantially true” or that portions that are untrue are so insignificant that a typical reader neither would realize the difference nor draw a different conclusion about the plaintiff if the false statements had not been included. In determining, then, whether an article is libelous, Florida courts review the article as if the allegedly false statements had been omitted. If the article purged of the error would not affect the mind of the reader differently, the article is not libelous. This test allows a defendant to demonstrate the general truth of the report, even though some portions may contain inaccuracies.
If we remove the NBC report from what we know to date, would it change our minds about George Zimmerman? Did the report motivate anyone (or enough people) to turn against him by altering their opinion (at that time) regarding whether or not he was a racist, and what kind of adverse effect could it have on his future? Who or what is more to blame, NBC or George himself?
It’s very difficult to prove libel. It’s very expensive, too. Who or what is prompting the defense (or George) to file a suit? Robert, Jr.? Where will the money come from? Because this would be a civil matter, how would his criminal defense attorneys fit into the equation? Zimmerman would be up against a huge corporation, so, unless he is hoping for a quick out of court settlement, what kind of risk is he willing to take considering his odds of winning or losing?
I understand that this situation is far removed from what I went through, but in the case of media, there are issues concerning time constraints that would work in their favor. I question how difficult it would be to prove that the network set out to destroy George Zimmerman’s reputation. One other thing to take into consideration is the competitive nature of an industry where advertising revenue is based on ratings. Scoops are what count. Yes, news outlets should strive for the truth, but tell me honestly, aren’t shocking stories what we really want ? Aren’t they called headlines?
I have one more question that I’d like to address, and this one goes to George Zimmerman’s most ardent supporters. It deals with the goose and the gander. If NBC should be held responsible for destroying his “good” name, who should be held accountable for the horrible smear campaign against Trayvon Martin? What Website(s) wrote: “TRAYVON MARTIN WAS A DRUG DEALER” and “A YEAR OF DRUG USE CULMINATES IN PREDICTABLE VIOLENCE…” with nothing to legally substantiate the claims? Do they fit the description of defamation?
Incidentally, George Zimmerman was on drugs, and that’s the truth. You can’t sue me. Whether he took them that day is something else, but why not try Googling “trayvon martin was a drug dealer” and see what you get on the first page? Hmm… Could that be a lawsuit just waiting to happen?
Cross posted on the Daily Kos
Dave Knechel | tagged Akon, Charles Bronson, Death Wish, Defamation, Hip Hop, Libel, Mac Miller, Paul Kersey, Slander, Walter Cronkite | in Dave Knechel, David B. Knechel, David Knechel, George Zimmerman, Kel Tec PF 9, Kel-Tec PF-9, Marinade Dave, Marinade Dave Knechel, Mark O'Mara, Slimm v. Zimm, Trayvon Martin, Zimm v. Slimm, Zimmerman, marinadedave | Share Article 
LEGAL NOTICE
©David B. Knechel. All Rights Reserved. No portion of this site can be reproduced in it's entirety or in part without expressed written permission by the owner/administrator of this site in accordance with the Digital Millennium Copyright Act. Section 512(c)(3) of the U.S. Copyright Act, 17 U.S.C. §512(c)(3). The charges against defendants are mere accusations and the subjects are presumed innocent until found guilty in a court of law.
Reader Comments (123)
~~And don't go handing me that line, "a penny for your thoughts."
CNN VIDEO | Eyewitness to the Trayvon Martin shooting speaks out
Quote:
Or did Zimmerman act with unprovoked lethal aggression?
CNN VIDEO | Trayvon Martin shooting witness breaks silence
Quote:
An eyewitness provides details about what was heard and seen before and after George Zimmerman shot Trayvon Martin.
BTY: I knew the meaning of the word duress. I thought maybe you could provide a link to show that Zimmerman was under the influence of such. No?
With all due respect...........
The following was my opinion. Here is an example- Zimmerman told three different accounts of what took place on the night of Feb 26th. His stories varied slightly but to some varied substantially. Had his accounts of the happenings been exactly the same each time he related them, we could conclude he had them well rehearsed. Since his stories varied, can it be expected for someone under duress to state the exact chain of events that led up to a shooting and what transpired thereafter? JMO
I am quite adept at using html but have yet to come up with a hypertext code that enables me to link to my own thought processes.
With all due respect...........
The following was my opinion. Here is an example- Zimmerman told three different accounts of what took place on the night of Feb 26th. His stories varied slightly but to some varied substantially. Had his accounts of the happenings been exactly the same each time he related them, we could conclude he had them well rehearsed. Since his stories varied, can it be expected for someone under duress to state the exact chain of events that led up to a shooting and what transpired thereafter? JMO
Hmm Snoopy. Sounds more like talking points for the defense :) Actually, some liars can recant the same story over and over while keeping the integrity of the story in tact. Other liars have trouble with attention to the fine details and tend to distort each version as time passes. Then, we have lairs who did not think the original lie out that well and will adapt a more suitable variation each time the lie is told.
I don't know that duress morphs a liar into an honest person or vice versa. All I know is that once a person has demonstrated a proclivity to lie, it's best to employ just about any OTHER means with the exception of their word to sort things out.
[edit] comment deleted by Snoopy...
Has anyone ever wondered why George Zimmerman did not say that the gun went off during the struggle rather than saying, "I shot him"?
As Serino explained: Georgie boy's little hero complex.
DURESS-Unlawful pressure exerted upon a person to coerce that person to perform an act that he or she ordinarily would not perform.
I snipped only a tiny bit of the following report, as I suspect it is copyright protected. I’m praying it is okay to quote the following partial sentence:
Physiology of Stress
Page 10 of 15 (or page 43)
Quote:
Consequently, the increased secretions of vasopressin produced under DURESS will increase blood pressure {snipped.}
Less than twenty minutes after a purported fight for his very life; culminating in a struggle for his gun; resulting in the aiming and firing of said gun into the heart of a child of God; altar boy Georgie's vital signs are normal.
Nothing indicative of duress—so far, from the evidence to date.
EMT Report (Linked again for convenience and because further explanation was required.)
Incident happened: 19:17 (7:17pm)
EMT Arrives: 19:27 (7:27pm)
Assessment: 19:41 (7:41pm)
Breathing, pulse—all normal. His Glasgow Coma Scale is 15, “indicative of no impairment”. (That is the best possible score.)
Gun went off vs. I shot him:
Agree with Nan11........Georgies' hero complex first comes to mind. (And I agree that Georgie was under NO duress of any shape or form. Real or imaginary.)
Secondly: Georgie knew he was amidst several condo units that could bear several witnesses to the shooting. After all, Trayvon was screaming for help (so loudly that it was picked up on a witnesses phone). But, that takes you back to the first thought; Georgies' hero complex in the complex. (Sorry, couldn't resist). I think he wanted everyone to know that he took this "goon" or "punk" or whatever he said, out. No more problems out of this one.
Every time I think about this murder, it just makes me sick to my stomach that Trayvons' life was taken so violently; for NOTHING but Georgies' ego.
The family reminds me of another infamous family with their callous remarks and sue happy threats. Not one person in the Georgie clan has shown true remorse for the loss of Trayvon, IMO.
They seem to shrug a shoulder at the same time they say things like, "I'm sorry for THEIR loss". Almost as if they are saying Georgie had nothing to do with it; that it was Trayvon's fault that he lost his own life. So, the family would do better just to keep their pie holes shut. But, being like the other infamous family, I think they want to taint the jury pool. Nope. We haven't heard the last out of that bunch of bananas. Ok, I'm peeling out of here.
I want to add jmo also. IMO Trayvon's parents might have accepted the apology if Mr Zimmerman had not said he thought Trayvon was closer to his age after telling dispatcher kid more than once. Or maybe they would have accepted it had Mr Zimmerman and his family not went on National Television making their son out to be a thug. If you are not a thug it is very insulting to be called one.
thug noun 1. a cruel or vicious ruffian, robber, or murderer.
No one has came out and said Trayvon was a cruel person, in fact they said they exact opposite, so I see why they won't accept his apology. One day he will see what he has does and apologize for not only killing their child but also calling him names.
I do not think there is proof they struggled for the gun either. Trayvon's prints and as far as I know DNA was not on the gun. I would think a struggle would involve him grabbing the gun, well if I had a gun pointed at me I would get my hands on it unless they were held back.
Meant to add if the gun went off during a struggle (makes it sound like it was more of an accident) why did Mr Zimmerman not help Trayvon? Hold his hand, talk to him, tell it would be okay? Instead he climbed on his back, which I am sure did not help the pain in Trayvon's chest.
Oh Michelle,what an amazing girl you are.
Zimmerman holstered his weapon and decided he was right in killing the young man just weeks after Trayvon's 16th birthday.. I for one didn't believe a word from his mouth then and still don't. He has shown NO compassion for what he did or for Trayvon's parents. His only interest has been how good life will be for him after he walks free. I cannot understand the kind of person who takes the life of anyone,especially a child,if they are not defending their life,the life of a loved one or their country. I've seen the pictures and read the reports Zimmerman had NO life threatening injuries,his BP was normal as was his respiration and there were no grass stains on his jacket.
Truth be told I'm about fed up with this case already. I spent a great deal of time reading and commenting on the Anthony case,wanting justice for a beautiful baby girl so brutally murdered by her "mother" I was amazed at the verdict. That jury was either incredibly stupid or lazy,or both. They never asked to review any evidence or testimony. They just wanted to go home. The only consulation is the woman will never really be free as we know freedom. That is what George has to look forward to if he is not put on trial and convicted.
JMHO of couse
The reason I'll never grow old(I'll be 75 net February)God willing.
Always Remember This:
You don't stop laughing because you grow old,
You grow old because you stop laughing
Sarah: Yep. And he was, and is today, proud of what he did. His friends knew he was mad as he!! and not going to take 'it' anymore. Georgie intended to show his friends just what you do when you are feeling like that. imnsho
He had a gun in his waistband, just like a law enforcement officer. He wanted to aim and fire that gun, just like a law enforcement officer. He didn't want his gun to go off in a struggle--that would be small potato stuff. Georgie wanted everyone to know what a big, big man he was/is. That is, in his depraved mind.
He has never shown one morsel of sincere regret when it comes to acknowledging the true worng that he committed that night.
Indeed, that is why his apology(s) ring hollow. Because they are. moo
Michelle said Meant to add if the gun went off during a struggle (makes it sound like it was more of an accident) {snipped.}
Me: I totally agree with your statement. That is why the defense has really come out swinging (or spinning)--non stop--since the DNA results were released in discovery disclosing that Trayvon's DNA was not on the gun (or holster.)
It is a big hurdle for them to overcome. Almost as big as Trayvon's body being found 40 or so feet from the "T" intersection.
(Thanks for giving me a chance to clear that up. I regretted my wording in a previous comment. The defense wants us to believe there was a struggle, but the evidence [or lack of evidence] shows otherwise.)
Tommy's Mom I did not watch the Casey Anthony trial. My Mom did and so did my sister Meg. I knew it could not be good when Megan said she would never invest herself in another case. To this day she still does not watch the news. (and she can because she has her own home)!! My Mom on the other hand refers to that jury as village idiots. She did not think they put all the evidence together.
No problem Nan. Just wanted to add my thoughts on the struggle. Or lack there of.
Dave: Ahh, they are looking for a 'senior judge' to manage discovery?
Orlando Sentinel | Zimmerman defense attorney: State isn't giving us all the evidence
Sub-Title: Attorney: State expert testified he could not get to the most important information from Trayvon's cell phone.
Motion To Schedule Standing Hearings To Address Discovery And Other Case Management Issues Or In The Alternative To Request Assignment Of A Senior Judge To Manage Discovery
Dave~~I just read the motion that Don West filed - Request Assignment Of A Senior Judge To Manage Discovery. From what I read he certainly has a legitimate reason for filing this motion. I hope you will have the opportunity to read the motion. It seems that the state has been derelict in providing the defense with discovery.
People have been complaining or I should say bellyaching about O'Mara asking for a delay in the trial and no wonder since he cannot move forward without the cooperation of the state. I expect Don West will be badmouthed now for filing that motion so maybe O'Mara will get a break.
Dave, I would love to hear your take on that motion and hope you are planning to attend the hearing on Friday. We gotta get the choo choo train back on the tracks and the way things used to be...*smile
Dave I also read the motion and a couple of questions if you or anyone else have time to answer. I realize you are busy so I do not mind other feedback. How long does the State have to answer the motion? 2nd the Attorney mentions witness 6 as exculpatory evidence not turned over. How does witness 6's drawing become exculpatory? If he has the drawing where Mr Zimmerman claimed it happened, did Mr Zimmerman then drag Trayvon's body 20+ feet? Guess I am not following how the attorney can claim exculpatory if the evidence does not fit the crime scene. Mr Zimmerman has proven himself a liar, therefore wouldn't the crime scene trump his lies?
Trayvon Martin's parents launch website, CCE to 'shine light' on 'stand your ground' law
Dave: Ahh, they are looking for a 'senior judge' to manage discovery?
Nanu. I think that there are probably evidence fights on both sides of pretty much every contested trial in this country. Usually Judges schedule status hearings to hear these motions and sort this stuff out. I am amazed at the brassiness of the Zimmerman team who has not even given the new Judge the opportunity to review the issues.
As has been characteristic of this legal them, the continue to posture and judge shop. I'm sure that Judge Nelson can handle these rather ROUTINE motions quite well.
Glad to see you keeping up the good fight too :)
I think they want Judge Eaton in on this case and it's something I think I could (or should) write about. Didn't Z ask for him, in a round about sort of way, in a jail call with his wife?
Michelle - I'll have to do some serious studying on the new motion before I answer anything.
Thank you Dave. I emailed you my paper, it might be easier if you can transfer it to word, lol. Looked horrible in email form.
Why is Judge Eaton so important to the Defense team and Mr Zimmerman? Do they normally keep switching Judges and asking for special Judges? They will never know if they are fair if they keep swapping. Wish I could Professor shop. Just saying.
Dave~~during one of the jailhouse calls, Shellie Zimmerman said that maybe they would get Judge Eaton. At that time, they did not know who the judge may be. George was anxious for any judge to step up to the bench so he could have a bond hearing. I explained it a few months ago causing the chit to hit the fan. The defense wants to have discovery passed over in a timely manner. Every move the defense makes is scrutinized and picked apart. I don't know why people don't hunt Zimmerman down and string him up instead of letting a fair trial take place. Don West had every right to file that motion. Let the battle of the words begin.....
Look for the headlines tomorrow....The Defense is Judge Shopping...
With the election coming up, Angela Corey must be one busy gal ...using the putty knife...to smear that red on...
When in Rome...
The plot begins to thicken in the Zimmerman case. Is the state holding back the 'secret' discovery ,that will help the defense, until after the election. Don West is putting the pressure on Angela Corey and Bernie De La Rionda. Is this great strategy on the part of the defense to file a motion asking for a judge to oversee the handling of the discovery or what? This will force Judge Nelson to get the dynamite out and bang her gavel and bring the court to order. I foresee A & B being chastised by her honor to get things moving.
Don and Mark are like hungry tigers who have just broken loose from the cage and are ready to pounce and strike. Fear is beginning to build... teeth chatter and the smell of nervous sweat lingers in the air...
...to be continued if not deleted by blog administrator...
I can not speak for everyone but I want Mr Zimmerman to have a fair trial. I do not think we string people up anymore for breaking laws. As far as George being anxious to get a Judge to grant his bail, all in due time. What was the big hurry anyway? Spending money he claimed he was going to use for his defense or rushing back out into the danger him and Shelly claimed he was in? The defense has absolutely every right to file any motion they want. That does not mean we all have to agree. Dave mentioned a motion not to long ago that involved him, was that different? Or is it just this defense team you think is being treated so badly? Guess I just do not understand exactly what is at issue, but I am trying.
I tend to think that if anyone has hindered Zimmerman getting a fair trial it has been his own attorneys.I mean 400 k later they are just now doing discovery? That said, I do not know how things work in Canada Snoopy but I seriously doubt that Judges here adjudicate criminal cases along party lines. But for your information, Angela Corey was elected in April of this year so I fail to connect the dots. Even so, your argument still fails as I am sure that many democrats support Travon as well as Republicans and vise versa.
If anything, support tends to fall along race and gender lines with substantially more white women supporting Zimmerman than white men. By the way, excellent follow up questions Michelle. You've got a remarkable young mind there.
Porky3100: I tend to think that if anyone has hindered Zimmerman getting a fair trial it has been his own attorneys.I mean 400 k later they are just now doing discovery?
Bingo.
We've been seeing a flurry of motions coinciding with Zimmerman frère (and even mère) making the media rounds, and it all comes across as a PR campaign to muddy the waters. Going around saying "George is not a racist" and bitching about Crump and Jackson is not the same as working on a defense for a man facing a Murder 2 charge.
FWIW, the probable cause affidavit stated that Zimmerman "profiled," not "racially profiled," Trayvon Martin. Demanding records from the FBI is just a red herring; that's a separate investigation in federal territory, and they'll just blow O'Mara off which is just what he expects them to do. If he wants information from the SPD and FDLE, he can depose its agents; going after the agencies themselves is useless.
O'Mara is really pissing me off. The passport issue still bites; not even a rookie would "forget" something like that in a high-profile case. Issuing subpoenas without court approval is a rookie mistake - and O'Mara is not a rookie. I can only hope Judge Nelson reads him the riot act during the Oct 19 hearing that was requested by the SAO after those subpoenas were sent.
News 4 Jax | George Zimmerman wants better management of evidence
Defense lawyer Mark O'Mara says prosecutors withholding evidence
Quoted and Snipped:
Channel 4 discussed the case with a Jacksonville attorney who said paperwork means a whole lot of nothing at this point in the case.
"Ms. Corey's office has an obligation to provide the discovery as quickly as she can. There is no set forth statutory obligation that you have to provide it now," said Gene Nichols.
Nichols said O'Mara's complaint gives the defense team the chance to grandstand and keep the case in the headlines.
******************************
Dave said: "I think they want Judge Eaton in on this case and it's something I think I could (or should) write about. Didn't Z ask for him, in a round about sort of way, in a jail call with his wife?"
Me: For what it is worth, I agree.
Do you want me to link the call where Georgie asked in a (not) so round about way for Judge Eaton?
I also have come across another one. It is during a discussion with his BIL. It is not as obvious as the first one, but it is pretty hard to mistake the meaning. imo
Another thing you might be interested in is--or maybe you already know--Mr. NeJame was doing media tours a few months back promoting Judge Eaton for the case.
I can come up with at least one link for that, if you are interested.
The request for the assignment of a senior judge to manage discovery is not being discussed much on the pro-Zimmy sites.
Porky3100 said: Glad to see you keeping up the good fight too :)
Me: Thank you. Glad to see you dropping in again!
Hello all!
Dave, nice post!
Ok so while I believe race played a factor in this case it was only a small part of the overall picture.
I think that the situation that occurred was bound to happen whether the person was Trayvon or someone else of a different shade.
I think the one kid/guy caught with a stolen laptop in his bag from one of the robberies in the community was white.
So with that said it could have been any person meandering through the community wearing a hoodie and loose fitting pants that would have been targeted by GZ.
Remember in his phone call he said "these A$$holes always get away" - "FN punks".
So his mindset that night was "oh no not tonite, not on my watch".
The only thing that put Trayvon in that group was his manner of dress, which just so happens to be shared by millions of people throughout Florida, US, and the world.
The Police botched it when they should up and GZ claims self defense and they thought GZ bagged on of the bad guys "up to no good", "on drugs or something" blah blah blah all the stuff GZ was filling their ears with.
In fact GZ, filled his own head with such fodder as well, and believed it to be so.
So they proceeded as if GZ bagged a criminal and there was one less in the world.
Even if GZ caught someone walking out of a house with stolen goods in his hand, they DO NOT deserve to be shot and or killed
I believe s struggle between Trayvon and GZ ensued but it was only due to the fact of the gun.
Either way Trayvon saw the gun prior to being shot.
He saw it cause GZ showed holstered or drawn, and that is why the fight started.
Trayvon was screaming for help trying to get away, GZ's superficial wounds were a result of him trying to detain Trayvon.
Think about it GZ followed Trayvon all over that complex that night and Trayvon was aware of it, not aware that GZ is armed. Know why? Because Trayvon was unarmed himself and unlike an armed GZ he did not perceive everyone else to be armed.
So upon seeing the gun Trayvon tries to flee. Why? Because it was not a robbery i.e. GZ did not say "give me your shit man. " So Trayvon tries to get out of there, who wouldn't after being followed around and then see his pursuer is now armed.
The entire situation was entirely created by GZ in his sick little fantasy game of Good Guy vs. Bad Guy.
The small population of those that carry perceive a larger population of the bad guys carry than actually do.
The randomness of gun crime on individuals not engaging crimes themselves is statistically small.
Meaning most guns crimes and criminals vs. criminals.
That is where GZ heads down the wrong path wrongly assuming Trayvon is armed for some reason and that GZ's life was in imminent danger, that he himself put himself into by building it up in his own head and to that of the police dispatcher.
The Crux of this cause is if the prosecution can make the jury realize that GZ created the entire situation and it could have been prevented.
All other stuff with regards to race, lying, and Trayvon's background are and should be irrelevant but it is the defense's position to create doubt and that is exactly what that type of fodder does.
Thank you Porky! It means a lot to get such a compliment from you. I am glad you have been around more, you have been missed.
I guess I am confused about what Mr Zimmerman is asking of the court. It seems like Mr Zimmerman has a lot of demands, I suppose that is part of the fair trial? As far as I am concerned he lied the first night claiming he did have record, then lied about diversion program during booking, we all know how the first bail hearing turned out- potted plant, throw in a little shady passport and remove 2 Judges! The shocking part he is still asking for more!
I can assure you if I did half of that my Judge (Mom) would have already threw the key out. No bail! But if that's all part of the fair trial by all means give it to him, because more than anything I would like to see Trayvon receive Justice.
John said: The Police botched it when they [showed] up and GZ claims self defense and they thought GZ bagged one of the bad guys "up to no good", "on drugs or something" blah blah blah all the stuff GZ was filling their ears with.
Me: Great comment! Nice to see you here. I was worried that we had lost you to the other side. : ^ )
I agree with almost all your points.
I remember that Serino wrote in his report that Zimmerman be charged with 'manslaughter', and that he gave Georgie a pretty good description of the actual attire worn by hoodlums.
I have no idea as to why they actually waited 44 days to charge Mr. Georgie, but I don't think they bought what he was selling. jmo
Michelle said: I also read the motion and a couple of questions if you or anyone else have time to answer. I realize you are busy so I do not mind other feedback. How long does the State have to answer the motion? 2nd the Attorney mentions witness 6 as exculpatory evidence not turned over. How does witness 6's drawing become exculpatory? If he has the drawing where Mr Zimmerman claimed it happened, did Mr Zimmerman then drag Trayvon's body 20+ feet? Guess I am not following how the attorney can claim exculpatory if the evidence does not fit the crime scene. Mr Zimmerman has proven himself a liar, therefore wouldn't the crime scene trump his lies?
Me: This just my 2 cents here. In regards to the motion just filed by the defense--I believe it is somewhat in response to a motion written by the state requesting a hearing this Friday. That could be a very interesting hearing. There is one tomorrow, too; but, I think it is just for a routine 'docket sounding'.
As far as the 'exculpatory' drawing--I don't know how O'Mara could have missed knowing about that sooner. The witness talks about it in his earlier statement, that was released many moons ago.
We were all waiting for its release, too! Just an FYI, in a later statement given by the same witness, he somewhat retracts the story he was telling at the time he drew his 'drawing'.
My guess is that O'Mara knows this, as well.
The defense is creating drama where none exists, is what I believe. jmo
And thereby mudding the waters to justify their request for a 'senior judge to manage the discovery.' moo
John~~it was great to come in here and read your comments and I would like to commend you. It is good to know there are those who can form opinions on this case and look beyond racism.
IMO, George would have chased after anyone regardless of his color. Thank you!
[I don't believe racism has reared its ugly head on my blog. Not in some time, because I made it clear months ago that I wouldn't tolerate it. This was criminal profiling according to the State.]
On July 16th, The Grio ran an article stating that Zimmerman’s attorney, Mark O’Mara, was seeking a chat with the conservative bloggers. Evidently, The Treehouse was very unhappy with O’Mara’s handling of Zimmerman’s case so presumably one might conclude that O’Mara was going to attempt to appease Zimmerman’s biggest fans by conducting a chat with them.
If this chat ever took place, I have no idea other than to say that I have not seen it posted on their website. Perhaps it has taken place in a more inconspicuous manner. One would certainly hope that a group of bloggers were not actually in control of Zimmerman’s defense. O’Mara responded to The Grio’s question about contact with The Treehouse. However, the article went on to say that “the site has had no contact with O’Mara, and that the email exchange was provided to the site by a Treehouse reader and posted by the site editors,” who were “simply relaying the content of their communication.”
Dave~~the above content was taken from the link I provided to you that Ecossie sent me last evening. I will not post the link to that site as I do not want to give that 'trash site' any exposure. O'Mara is being accused of connecting with these idiots. There is no way on God's earth that Mark would ever lower himself to comment on their site or hook up with them on some chat site. Is it my opinion, after reading the above, that Mark may have rec'd an e-mail from someone who contributed at that site and responded out of courtesy and then it was blown all out of proportion.
Mark has no control of Robert Sr or Robert Jr. They are not attorneys and O'Mara should not be held accountable for their actions. I am so sick of the persecution that Mark is being exposed to and the rumors that are running rampant. If we profess to be sensible adults, let's prove it by getting our facts straight before making assumptions without the proof to back them.
All I can say is that someone pointed out that letter to me. I saw it on the TH site with my own eyes. However, since it's been removed, I can only surmise that it was never legitimate to begin with.
Dave. I saw the letter and accompanying email as well. Is it possible that O'mara did sent that email but TH acquiesced to a request to remove it?
Two Page Article:
The Grio | July 16, 2012 | Zimmerman’s lawyer seek a ‘chat’ with conservative bloggers?
Quote:
O’Mara’s law firm responded to theGrio’s request for comment by email, saying that “regarding The Conservative Treehouse, the email from Mr. O’Mara they published represents the only interaction we have had with them.”
Anything is possible or impossible. The true facts are what should prevail instead of mundane assumptions which come across as being very immature to those of us who want to stick to what is the real truth.
Maybe, if, let's just assume, possibly, could be, do you think, without a doubt, speculation no?
What is written on a website is purported to be gospel? Big mistake which leads to unfounded rumors which have little or no foundation and are a waste of time to discuss. We read into things what we want to believe because we do not want to accept the truth. We write things that we feel will please the reader who we already know is pro or con the accused in the case we are discussing. This reflects that the author is not being totally honest, not only with themselves but also to the readers. JMO
PS..the written word can speak volumes about the author. JMO too....
According to the author, O' Mara acknowledges sending the email. As such, the information can hardly be described as rumor or mundane. Given that this has been widely circulated, I would think that O'Mara would have publicly disavowed the email by now, as he has in past instances.
Either way he has still pandered to these type audiences since the inception of the case.
The Grio is owned by NBC. While we know what the network is capable of, I also feel that, had the letter from O'Mara not been legitimate, we would have heard something from him by now. I am going to accept it as real, but in doing so, it doesn't prove he is in bed with the refutrees. It seems like he saw them as a means of support - moral and financial. Moral because of the way they anayze and discredit Trayvon Martin, his family and the evidence presented by the State. They don't like O'Mara, either, so that went nowhere fast.
QUOTE:
Dave~~the above content was taken from the link I provided to you that Ecossie sent me last evening. I will not post the link to that site as I do not want to give that 'trash site' any exposure. O'Mara is being accused of connecting with these idiots. There is no way on God's earth that Mark would ever lower himself to comment on their site or hook up with them on some chat site.
*******************************
Why should an article that is unable to be linked because of the purported reasons that were listed in the above quote, be seen as being good enough to support an otherwise unsubstantiated opinion?
BTW--the article being discussed but not linked is called "The Truth Really Does Have an Agenda..." and is a blog. It is not a 'trash site'.
It refers to the treepers with many screen captures, but is not favorable to them. Perhaps the problem is that it would show too clear a picture of the 'trash site' who O'Mara and the Zimmerman's is/are/were associating?
JMOO
[Since O'Mara never denied the letter to the refutrees, I accept it as legit. I see nothing wrong with the blog mentioned that cited the site.]
Dave~~is it not true that some things stated as truth on blogs are so ridiculous that they do not deserve a response? Why bother to dignify someone with an answer when their motive is to malign and defame? Why waste good time with always having to defend oneself? Maybe Mark feels this way.
I am not sure what this:
I am so sick of the persecution that Mark is being exposed to and the rumors that are running rampant. If we profess to be sensible adults, let's prove it by getting our facts straight before making assumptions without the proof to back them.
all about? No one mentioned it and if they did I did not see it? Seems a little harsh, imo. If he went somewhere that is less than honorable that would be on him.
PS..the written word can speak volumes about the author. JMO too....
I know, right?
I would contact the O'Mara law firm and ask for a denial. On the gzlegal website, O'Mara states:
"For those who have given in the past, for those who have thought about giving, for those who feel Mr. Zimmerman was justified in his actions, for those who feel they would do the same if they were in Mr. Zimmerman's shoes, for those that think Mr. Zimmerman has been treated unfairly by the media, for those who feel Mr. Zimmerman has been falsely accused as a racist, for those who feel this case is an affront to their constitutional rights -- now is the time to show your support."
If O'Mara DIDN'T contact the refutrees, he should have denied it. By NOT doing so, he opens the door to criticism and that is what the public is going to do -- criticize him. There is not one single person involved in this case that is not subject to it. No one should be placed on a pedestal.
I am about one hair shy of locking this thread down. O'Mara is going to get whatever the public dishes, and that's part of the territory. No one is Teflon coated. NO ONE! However, I will NOT tolerate anyone attacking any other commenter. PERIOD!!!
Dave said: [Since O'Mara never denied the letter to the refutrees, I accept it as legit. I see nothing wrong with the blog mentioned that cited the site.]
Me: Thank you!
October 15, 2012 | The Truth Really Does Have an Agenda...
Quote:
Taking their above statement into consideration, one might raise the question as to why Robert Zimmerman, Jr. has chosen this particular site to tweet about. In a series of tweets from Zimmerman Jr., one might conclude that the Zimmerman family is endorsing the activities of The Treehouse.
{Snipped}
One might also infer from the following thank you letter emailed to The Treehouse by Zimmerman’s father, Robert Zimmerman, Sr., that he supports and condones the derogatory statements and comments on that site by the “Treepers.”