Nit-Picking Nit-Writ
Thursday, August 16, 2012 at 10:54AM This article will focus on the writ of prohibition filed by George Zimmerman’s defense attorneys, but before I do that, I’ve got to get something off my chest. It’s something I haven’t read much about elsewhere and it’s been bugging me in subtle ways for several months. As far as I’m concerned, it gets to the heart of the matter and why any motion to dismiss (in lieu of SYG) may be problematic for the defense.
I think most people will agree that Zimmerman has given several conflicting accounts of what transpired on February 26, the night Trayvon Martin died by a perfectly placed gunshot wound to the chest.
While his imagination has run wild, there’s one part of his stories that has remained consistent. He prefaces each and every 911/non-emergency call with, “We’ve had some break-ins in my neighborhood…” or words to that effect. Why does he start each one with that statement? Is it an excuse for what may transpire before the police arrive? Cover your butt? Let me tell you why I did it, in other words, by setting up his version du jour. In my opinion, it lays down a foundation as either of two things. Or both.
- He criminally profiled Trayvon, which is what the State claims, and he knows it.
- There was premeditation. By premeditation, I mean, as soon as he spotted the boy, his mind clicked into some sort of mutated high-gear attack mode and that’s when he began to stalk his prey with a vengeance. They always get away. NOT THIS TIME. In my book, it’s malice prepense, or malice aforethought — premeditation, pure and simple.
Whether he intended to shoot Trayvon or not, he began a deadly game of cat and mouse. A killer cat pseudo-cop. Have gun, will shoot. And he did just that.
§
If you’ve ever seen video footage of babies falling out of chairs, they always look around. If someone is there, they immediately begin to wail and wait for mommy or someone else to run over and comfort them. If no one is there, they shrug it off and continue going about their business, climbing back up for more fun. Of course, I mean this only when there is no real harm done. It’s human nature and we learn at a very early age how to gain sympathy. In George Zimmerman’s case, he’s lived this way all his life. Someone has always been around to comfort him, and he’s forever gotten away with everything. He reminds me so much of Casey Anthony in the sense that her mother, Cindy, let her get away with murder. Don’t ask me if I mean that figuratively or literally.
Zimmerman handily dismissed the first judge, Jessica Recksiedler, and he’s working on another. To be fair, I believe the motion to remove Recksiedler was Mark O’Mara’s idea, and he seemed to be careful when he constructed the recusal motion, just in case he needed to do it again.
Uh oh, he did it again.
This time, it was due to the “scorching” language the new judge, Kenneth R. Lester, Jr., wrote in an order denying bond after he discovered Zimmerman and his wife lied in court about a large sum of money they had in an account she only acknowledged existed. She denied knowing how much was in it when, in fact, she knew it was more than $130,000. There was also the issue of a tucked away passport they both failed to mention but openly discussed in coded jail house phone calls to each other prior to the initial bond hearing.
Oh my, judges do not like to be lied to, no matter how many inane explanations a defense attorney can conjure up.
Granted, the judge’s wording was quite tough, but did it reach the plateau that separates a legal reprimand from a personal one? It depends on which side of the fence you live on. Actually, it depends on what benches the three appellate judges sit on. That would be judges C. Alan Lawson, Jay P. Cohen and Kerry I. Evander.
After Lester revoked Zimmerman’s bond, the defense filed a new motion to set bond. Of course, the State objected, but in the end, it was granted to the tune of $1,000,000. In his ORDER SETTING BAIL, the judge noted that:
… the Defendant did not offer any explanation of or justification for his deception that was subject to cross examination… As noted, the Defendant spent a substantial portion of the hearing presenting evidence relating to self-defense in an effort to counter the State’s case because, in the initial order, the Court characterized the State’s case as “strong.” Notably, at the initial bond hearing, this Court had only limited evidence; to that point, the State showed the Defendant had shot and killed Trayvon Martin. There was other evidence presented through the probable cause affidavit and the testimony of Dale Gilbreath, an investigator with the State Attorney’s Office, that the Defendant’s actions were imminently dangerous to another and that he acted with a depraved mind regardless of human life. The Defendant certainly indicated through cross-examination that he acted in self-defense, but he put forward no evidence of such. As a consequence, this Court found as a preliminary matter that the evidence against the Defendant was “strong.”
The order further stated that:
Since the June 29, 2012 hearing addressed whether to reinstate bond was not an Arthur hearing, the presentation of evidence attacking the State’s case is of limited relevance at this stage of the proceedings… The actual questions before this Court at this time are: is the Defendant entitled to bail when he presents false testimony at a prior bond hearing and what recourse there is when the Defendant has shown blatant disregard for the judicial sysyem.
In other words, the judge maintained throughout that the reason he stated the evidence against the defendant was strong was because the defense offered up nothing substantial to prove otherwise up to that point, and since the defendant lied to the court, was granting bail the proper decision? The argument that Zimmerman claims in his PETITION FOR WRIT OF PROHIBITION isn’t worth the paper it’s printed on:
There was little evidence regarding the strength of the State’s case at the initial bond hearing other than the bare-bones probable cause affidavit… and the testimony of State Attorney Investigator Dale Gilbreath, a witness called by the defense… Gilbreath acknowledged that the State had no evidence to contradict the conclusion that Trayvon Martin was the aggressor and threw the first punch and no evidence to contest that Mr. Zimmerman was headed back to his car when Mr. Martin attacked him.
Herein lays the problem, whether you see it or not. While the writ of prohibition does make mention of the judge’s strong language, the rest of it is filled with smoke and mirrors. Why, you may ask? Because it doesn’t stick to the matter at hand, as I clearly pointed out above. The writ reads more like a motion for dismissal.
Granted, the judge did make strong statements, but the defense virtually ignored the reasons why. The fact remains, George lied, whether by remaining silent as his wife directly lied to the court, or by proxy. By that, I mean he authorized his wife to lie. Sadly, the writ includes the issue over his wife being charged with perjury. Zimmerman and O’Mara blame it on the judge, who mentioned it in his bond revocation order. Well, she did lie! She did break the law! Is that the judges’s fault? No, but Team Zimmerman thinks so.
Getting back to the June 29 bond hearing, O’Mara deviates from the truth in his writ:
On June 29, 2012 a hearing was held on Mr. Zimmerman’s Motion to Set Reasonable Bond. At this hearing, Mr, Zimmerman presented evidence… in support of his claim of self-defense. This tidal wave of evidence…
A tidal wave of evidence? In his later Order Setting Bail, Judge Lester noted that:
Argument by counsel is not evidence. See e.g. Wheeler v. State, 311 So. 2d 713 (Fla 4th DCA 1975) (noting that counsel’s opening statement is not evidence).
In plain English, it means that this tidal wave of evidence was nothing more than dirty bath water going down the drain. To clarify, the evidence was presented by O’Mara that day, not by the defendant. Sadly, the defense was aware of that, too, before it wrote the writ.
ON COURT ETIQUETTE AND ETYMOLOGY
The writ of prohibition states that:
The court chose language in its July 5, 2012 Order to describe the Defendant in ways that reflect the court’s opinion of Mr. Zimmerman’s character as much as his conduct. In its Order, the trial court said, “[u]nder any definition, the Defendant has flouted the system.”
Ouch! Poor Zimmerman threw a pity party over it because:
“Flouted” is defined at Merriam-Webster.com as “to treat with contemptuous disregard; to indulge in scornful behavior.”
In Zimmerman’s case, the court was correct in that assessment. He did flout the system. It continues…
The court went on to say that, “[t]he Defendant has tried to manipulate the system when he has been presented the opportunity to do so”… and again that “… it appears to this Court that the Defendant is manipulating the system to his own benefit”… The court also accused Mr. Zimmerman of showing “blatant disregard for the judicial system.”
The strange thing about the above statement is that every quote by the court is true. Interestingly, one of the defense team’s only ways to counter the court’s language is to camouflage it with claims of what transpired the night of February 26, which really has no bearing on the writ. Meanwhile, the defense laments that:
The court completely ignored Mr. Zimmerman’s voluntary disclosure of the alleged wrongdoing and failed to acknowledge Mr. Zimmerman’s surrender of those donated funds to his lawyer…
The problem is that Zimmerman was caught with his grubby hands in the cookie jar and something tells me he’s always been a sneaky little bastard, pardon my language, who immediately apologizes when he gets caught. See? All better. This is the type of creep who will admit to nothing if he gets away with it, and the more and more we get to know him, the more we recognize it as one of his strongest traits.
I can go on and on citing the examples the defense used in attacking the judge. I can write about harsh language the judge used in his bail order, but consider what he also wrote:
The State notes that his stories changed [with] each retelling, but on the surface he should be deemed to have been cooperative. However, he clearly understood that he was being investigated for committing a homicide and, while he believes that he was justified in his actions, there has been nothing presented which indicates that he was misled into believing that he would not be charged with a crime. Contrary to being betrayed, the Defendant received normal, reasonable treatment and was granted reasonable bail.
That sounds fair to me, but Zimmerman disagrees:
Of particular relevance in the instant case is the legitimacy of Mr. Zimmerman’s belief that the trial court has prejudged his guilt regarding the alleged (by the trial Judge) violation of Florida Statute Section 903.035(3), and how it may carry over to guilt in the underlying second degree murder case.
The way I look at this is no different from any other scolding. Just like parents disciplining their child, they get over it and move on. My God, if parents held grudges, how could they ever treat their children fairly? Even O’Mara admitted when questioned during his writ of prohibition news conference that Judge Lester is a professional and fair. Basically, he contradicted his writ.
I am convinced that this judge can proceed from here and fairly preside over the entire George Zimmerman case. In his ORDER DISMISSING DEFENDANT’S VERIFIED MOTION TO DISQUALIFY TRIAL JUDGE, Lester made it clear that the DEFENDANT’S VERIFIED MOTION TO DISQUALIFY TRIAL JUDGE was legally insufficient. He further stated that:
The Defendant moved to recuse Judge Recksiedler on the basis of Fla. R. Jud. Admin. 2.330(d)(2), which mandates recusal when a judge is related to an interested party… [The] Defendant also argued language associated with Fla. R. Jud. Admin. 2330(d)(1). However, in an abundance of caution and based on the “totality of the circumstances,” she recused herself. This would indicate that her recusal was, in fact, based upon Fla. R. Jud. Admin. 2.330(d)(1), making this a successive motion under subsection (g) of that rule. Should that be determined, this court is prepared to rule on the facts alleged in support of the motion.
What that means is simple. The lower court is ready to show the higher court what this writ may be all about. Uh huh. Judge shopping.
Dave Knechel | in Angela Corey, Bernie De la Rionda, Dave Knechel, David B. Knechel, David Knechel, Donald West, George Zimmerman, Judge Jessica Recksiedler, Judge Kenneth R. Lester, Jr., Marinade Dave, Marinade Dave Knechel, Mark O'Mara, Seminole County, Seminole County Courthouse, Shellie Zimmerman, Slimm v. Zimm, Trayvon Martin, Writ of Prohibition, Zimm v. Slimm, marinadedave | Share Article | 1 Reference 
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 (82)
FYI~~
On April 16th.... Z called Shellie from the jail....call #4 They discussed that maybe they would get Judge Eaton.
On April 18th...Judge Lester was assigned to the Zimmerman case
Judge Lester named new judge
Dave~~check those dates and then tell me why you would think Z was judge shopping. He didn't even know at the time of call #4 who the judge was going to be.
Now do you see what I am trying to get across when I say, "let's get the facts straight and be fair."
Dave~~your response to me upthread.
[Snoopy - Z was sitting in the county jail when the call took place, remanded there by one Judge Kenneth R. Lester, Jr., the judge of record. WRONG-Dave This did not sit well with Z. Was he merely looking for Eaton to relieve the judge of stress? No, because Lester was the judge of record. Judges are not relieved of work loads in the midst of a case. Look at the Anthony case. Was Perry ever off the bench? If Eaton worked to ease any court loads, they were cases not yet assigned or ones that had not yet been heard by the judge of record. Once a judge is on it, he's on it and that's where we are today. One judge. I'll give you the possibility that Z was naive about it, but I still look at this appeal as judge shopping.]
Dave~~I am quite aware that a judge does not replace another judge because of work load. The only way a judge would replace another is if the sitting judge fell sick. Why do I feel that I am forever being made to look stupid by what you add in your reponses to me? I believe it was me who told you that immunity covers both criminal and civil cases. Stupid eh?
[I didn't mean to make you look stupid. In the end, I'm the one who looks stupid.]
It's funny you found that, Snoopy, because I was looking for the same information. I know how easy it is to mix up dates with statements and who said what, why and when. That became an issue during the Casey Anthony case. Arguments ensued over this very same thing and I knew that this had the potential to be a problem. I understand your frustration, but I do not believe anything, in this situation, was intended to sabotage anyone else.
You are right and I'm sorry for the confusion, but I still believe the Zimmerman team could be judge shopping, and I said so in a post I wrote on 7/14: Why Judge Lester Will Refuse to Recuse. I think the judge is a strict jurist and O'Mara and West are quite aware of that. Zimmerman didn't like the way he was handled, too, and he'd love nothing more than to have a new judge. However, in this instance, I stand corrected. The phone call was in between judges and at the time, in a state of limbo. I am sorry. I am interested in the truth and I should have been more attentive.
Incidentally, that phone conversation was first noted in a comment on my blog on 7/24, on the "All About You" post, and in that context, it does appear more to be judge shopping. That's the way I read it, too. I think the intent was really just to show how defiant and demanding George could be.
Newbie - I'm the first one to tell you that I fully support the 2nd Amendment. I have no problem with guns... just some of the people who own them. Granted, I don't buy into some of the demands the gun lobbyists make, but I think the real problem comes in the form of George Zimmerman and his ilk. Sadly, a lot of gun people are George supporters and that tarnishes the gun industry. It's as if gun enthusiasts will support anyone with a gun. The NRA won't, and they have distanced themselves from Zimmerman. It's the nuts that do!
I would say this. If people have problems with the NRA, don't lump them in with Zimmerman, and if people have problems with Zimmerman, don't lump them in with the NRA. Four million people cannot be wrong, or Zimmerman would be sitting on millions of dollars, and he's not even close. Thanks for straightening that out. Zimmerman is a guy who never should have had a gun. Blame the state, not the majority of gun owners, who are a responsible group, or the NRA.
I was going to snip the paragraph from Judge Lester's order; but, then I decided that it was too well written and contained too much truth to do so.
He may well be forced to step down, but he eloquently put pen to paper and told the truth.
George Zimmerman is not alone in this. He has a whole family--need I say an influential family--right there beside him, every step of the way.
As stated by Judge Lester, and with which I whole heartedly agree--"the Defendant had a very sophisticated knowledge of the criminal justice system over and above that of the average, law-abiding citizen."
Mr. Zimmerman may not have been the brightest light bulb in his classes, but he is still a head above the rest of us in matters of understanding the law. IMO, he has shown himself to be very cunning, and knows all to well the advantages that one judge could bring to his case over another.
His words on that phone call are very clear. However, they do not appear in the typed transcript linked below. I do not know why. I have linked the audio version from which I did the transcript, in my original post. The link below gives the time and date of that call.
Please note it is just a few days before Judge Jessica Recksiedler recused herself.
The way I connect the dots is my opinion only.
Page 8
Note: The part I transcribed is not contained in this link.
Jail Call 18577856 | Total time on tape 00:16:09
Information from recording: Date: 2012/4/16, Time: 14:26:41, dialed number
CBS News | April 18, 2012 | Judge Jessica Recksiedler steps down from George Zimmerman murder case
Quote: "Under any definition, the Defendant has flouted the system. Counsel has attempted to portray the Defendant as being a confused young man who was fearful and experienced a moment of weakness and who may also have acted out of a sense of “betrayal” by the system. Based upon all of the evidence presented, this Court finds the opposite. The Defendant has tried to manipulate the system when he has been presented the opportunity to do so. He is an adult by every legal definition; Trayvon martin is the only male whose youth is relevant to this case. The Defendant has taken courses in criminal justice with the intention of becoming a police officer, an attorney, a judge, or a magistrate like his father. He has been arrested before, having entered and successfully completed a pre-trial intervention program. He has also obtained an injunction and had an injunction entered against him. The injunction against him has obviously been dissolved at some point for him to have validly obtained a permit to carry the firearm used to shoot Trayvon Martin. He also had the wherewithal to set up a website to collect donations to help defray the costs of his defense. Thus, before this tragic incident, the Defendant had a very sophisticated knowledge of the criminal justice system over and above that of the average, law-abiding citizen."
Reuters | George Zimmerman: Prelude to a shooting
Quote: George Michael Zimmerman was born in 1983 to Robert and Gladys Zimmerman, the third of four children. Robert Zimmerman Sr. was a U.S. Army veteran who served in Vietnam in 1970, and was stationed at Fort Myer in Arlington, Virginia, in 1975 with Gladys Mesa's brother George. Zimmerman Sr. also served two tours in Korea, and spent the final 10 years of his 22-year military career in the Pentagon, working for the Department of Defense, a family member said.
[The judge was right. ZZZimmerman does have plenty of knowledge about the criminal justice system and he used it to his advantage. Too bad he lied about graduating, though. While his family may be influential, fortunately, it doesn't carry any weight in the Seminole County court system. I guess it's like a cop getting busted in the next town over. They have no pull there.
I think he learned very young to be shrewd. I think he's always had a Plan B, too, like the night he shot Trayvon. Ready at a moment's notice, but this time it's not easy. Killing someone takes a Plan A to begin with, and he didn't have one. Did he expect it to be routine because he felt like he was a cop? One of them? He would be a hero for taking out a bad guy? Good job, George! Thank you for making the streets safer!
If he truly shot Trayvon by accident, then the whole truth would prevail. The mere fact that his stories don't jive with the evidence is a clear sign that he is lying; that the death was not an accident. It's the proof that should convict him, too.
I have been of the belief since the notion to recuse Lester has been around that the reason why he wants him gone is because Lester is so far above him in the smarts department, it's not funny. Lester scares him because he sees right through him. He will be no one's fool and this spells trouble. Personally, I don't think the appeals court is going to rule in the defense's favor. I feel the writ is flimsy. Had it been a better argument, maybe, but I just don't see it with this one. I could be wrong, or if they lose, they could appeal it to a higher court. I don't know. If Zimmerman is declared indigent, how much would the JAC be willing to pay on appeal after appeal after appeal? I don't think so.
Since the phone call was made on April 16, and Z knew that O'Mara was going to file a recusal motion against Judge Recksiedler, it should be safe to say G & S were fantasizing about what judge they wanted. Z's wish didn't come true. Maybe he's still dreaming, but I think it's very interesting to note that when asked what Z's bond should be, Judge O.H. Eaton disagreed with O'Mara. O'Mara expected it should be no higher than $10-15,000. Eaton told WESH that it could easily go as high as $50,000 and even $200,000 considering the charge. Shopping or not, one never knows what the cards hold. With the respect that Lester garners from the legal community, meaning defense attorneys and prosecutors, I really do feel that he would be fair to Z. I will guarantee this is not the first defendant to feel his wrath, yet he treated those people before him fair and square. Judges don't make it to his stature if they have an Attila the Hun demeanor.
Anyway, Z tells his wife, "as soon as you get into the car you, duplicate the password and all the questions and you keep a copy?" What's up with that? To anyone who believes that Lester was wrong about Z's flight risk, by the time the bail revocation came around, the judge had this information in his hands. Who would now say George Zimmerman was not ready to flee if necessary?]
Dave~~thank you very much. By now you know that I am a stickler for the facts. I only read comments that contain new material/opinions and elide over the content that I have read weeks or months ago. I just do not have the time.
Let's hope the appeals court is deciding O'Mara writ and giving it priority so we will have an answer soon re Judge Lester staying on the case.
Newbie~~great comments!!
[I know you are a stickler, Snoopy, and if you lived in Quebec, I'd call you a French Stickler. BTW, the filing fee for an appeal is $300. I wonder if Z was the one who paid it.]
Pardon moi, Monsieur Knechel, I am also a stickler for quality surpasses quantity in getting a point across. Mais oui?
[Oh, you mean qualitative over quantitative?]
Orlando Sentinel | Experts: Trayvon Martin's heart kept pumping after shooting
Quote: "The 17-year-old survived for several minutes, according to two experts who reviewed Trayvon's autopsy for the Orlando Sentinel."
Interesting interview with Rene Stutzman. Much too old for some to be bothered with.
VIDEO MSN | The Last Word with Lawrence O'Donnell
That is twice she attacked that comment that I made, twice. And she attacks nearly every comment I dare to make on here. But, then, she has to protect her turf.
[I read about it during a Jeopardy commercial break, but didn't watch the video. I'll do that.
BTW, all I want is peace. You both are very valuable to me, or should I say this blog. No, it's my blog. It's my turf. Maybe I should change the name from Marinade Dave to Happy Daze.]
Dave~~I do not see any reason that the filing fee for the appeal would not be paid from Zimmerman's defense fund account. Do you know something I don't? Remember we are talking about Florida here. Do they let you keep a running tab down your way for court fees? I think we may see JAC paying Z's legal fees in the very near future.
Ahhhh, how Valiant of you. LOL
[Oh, you mean qualitative over quantitative?]
[Everything with the court system is paid up front, at time of filing. If we see the JAC, it most likely will wait until any and all appeals are exhausted. I'll have to look into it. I could see paying for appeals post-conviction, but not this.
Yes, I figured you'd know what I meant.]
Nan thanks for the link to the news article. Although it is sad to know Trayvon felt pain and he more than likely was still alive when he was flipped over and touched more by Mr. Zimmerman. Heart breaking. Bet that frightened him even more even if it was only 20 to 30 seconds or minutes depending on which doctor you believe.
Dave~~I best clear up a misunderstanding. If I am being referred to as the 'she' who attacked Nan11. I did not attack anyone, I questioned YOUR response to Nan11. My comment was directed to you and you only. In order to show you that Z was not judge shopping on April 16th- Call #4, I had to use Nan 11's comment as a reference.
I hope this will clear things up. If you go back and read my comments, you will see what I mean. I apologize to you, Nan11, if my comments to Dave may have come across that I was attacking you.
[Thank you for clarifying that, Snoopy.]
Newbie, I apologize that you took offense at my comment. It was unintended. I am pro 2nd Amendment and am a concealed carry advocate and I do not support GZ. The ones I was targeting are those giving him funds and declaring he was in the right to murder the young man, Trayvon without searching the matter out through the discovery findings.
Dave - I heard or read early on in the case (sorry, no link) that the reason GZ began his non-emergency calls by saying "we've had some break-ins" was because the Neighborhood Watch liaison advised community members to use this terminology. Which, to me, does not make it any less an example of GZ's obsession with playing policeman. He just loved any chance to talk cop-speak. Many thanks for doing what you do.
[That's interesting, Portia. I had never heard that. So much for people who still insist he wasn't working in his capacity as NW coordinator that night. This was a deranged, obsessed wannabe cop, plain and simple. Thank you for the info, and I appreciate your kind words of encouragement.]
portia~~that is interesting. I thought it seemed strange for Z to say that at the beginning of his call to the non-emerg 911. It did seem like he had it memorized. Thanks for the heads up.
Dave~~I see a motion filed for indigency in the offing. The $100K for the bond took quite a chunk out of the fund. Z's appearance on the Hannity show really put the kabosh on donations coming in.
O’Mara has said that a declaration of indigency would likely be needed for Zimmerman, which would mean the state of Florida would pay for his legal defense. “The money is not coming in all that strongly right now,” O’Mara said.
The donation fund paid $100,000 for Zimmerman’s bond, approximately $50,000 for security guards for Zimmerman and his wife, Shelly, and about $30,000 for rent, utilities and other living expenses, according to O’Mara
Source
[The amount of money collected I heard last was $250,000. If true, O'Mara accounted for $180,000 of it, which jives with the amount he says is left, or was the day of his press conference.
"The fund that George Zimmerman created online after his arrest in April on charges that he killed Trayvon Martin has fallen from $250,000 to $70,000, lawyer Mark O'Mara told USA TODAY."
George Zimmerman running out of money for defense]
Sherry, I will take an apology any day even though it was not your statement that irritated me....lol. Thank you. I had read one of your comments from back when and your position regarding the 2nd amendment and was glad to see it then and to see it now !
Looking back on today, I think I was probably (I say probably) over sensitive. When the term gun nuts was used it just rang my bell. The TM case has brought out extremists of all kinds imo. I'm wondering now what O'Mara will say to the Florida gun group (can't remember their name).
Dave, I appreciate you explaining your feelings/position on the NRA and guns in general. Well said.
[My pleasure, Newbie. Guns serve multiple purposes, including to hunt food for nourishment. At the same time, there are people who shoot animals for sport. It's the same end result, but the people yielding the weapon have distinctly different reasons for pulling the trigger. It's a totally separate mindset. Such is life.]
Hello Ms Newbie~~ I am a gun owner too but only shoot the chit with mine. Sry couldn't resist. Here in N.S. we rely on axes and chain saws. LOL Blame it on the late hour.
Portia, I love "obsession for playing policeman." I've read many descriptions re GZ and find yours to be simple, true and right on target !
No, no....you can't pass that off as due to the hour...lol. Everyone knows that is how your mind works....
Newbie~~I love you too. lol
Where did everyone go? Where's Conniefl....this is her time of night too, isn't it.
I guess since I have the floor, I'll bring up something that bothers me. GZ in his re-enactment states he reached for his phone. I didn't feel like that fit in at all and am thinking that might have been when he pulled his gun. I keep wondering if he thought he might cover himself if someone saw him reaching in his jacket??
[I don't feel it fit in at all, either, Newbie. So much so, that I don't believe a word of it. He had that gun ready the moment he stepped out of his car. Wimp that he is, that was his backbone. Without it, he never would have opened the door.]
Yeah I find the whole reaching for the cell phone situation off as well.
GZ appears to be a creature of habit, so I would think that he would put it back in his normal spot.
I pretty much put my phone back in the same pocket in which I always carry it. Not 100% but close.
Also if he was just on the phone the police and trying to "find an address" then why still in his hand?
What does he need his hands free for?
[What does he need his hands free for? A gun, but he never reached for his phone. He lied.]
Dave, SnoopySleuth stated (I think in an ealier post) that GZ was diagnosed with broken/fractured nose. I think that assertion may be factually incorrect. I wonder if SnoopySleuth can provide the basis for her claim. I say this because the rapport conmpiled by the house doctor of GZ stated, among others, the following:
“1. Scalp Lacerations: No sutures needed given well-approximated skin margins. Continue to clean with soap and water dally. We discussed the red flag symptoms that would warrant Imaging given the type of assault he sustained. Given the type of trauma, we discussed that it Is imperative he be seen with his Psychologist for evaluation.
2. Broken Nose ~ We discussed that it is likely broken, but does not appear to have septal deviation. The swelling and black eyes are typical of this injury. I recommended that he be evaluated by ENT but he refused. (…)”.
I am not sure one could conclude from: “we discussed that it is likely broken” that GZ's nose was broken. I am also not sure that the statement “but [the nose] does not appear to have septal deviation” may lead anyone to conclude that GZ’s nose was “fractured”.
On the side-bar, the report did make mention of “swelling and black eyes” but these were never visible on the photos taken the night of shooting and the images of GZ in the videos of his re-enactments. On what basis was the physician in question able to make that determination of “swelling and black eyes”? The medical report seems to be internally inconsistent, don’t you think?
Moreover, (a) during police interrogations GZ demonstrated with literally all his body parts how the ‘fight’ went down with his face most of the time facing down towards the table before him; (b) there was no drop of blood coming from his nose and/or dropping on the table/anywhere; (c) GZ did not for once show any sign of having difficulty with speech or experiencing any kind of pain; (d) GZ did not any point tell the officers that he has a broken nose and the officers did not notice any sign of any broken nose; (e) when offered medical assistance, GZ declined; (f) GZ never held his head up to prevent blood from running down his nose as anyone with broken nose would. GZ never did that - not even when he (GZ) was exiting the police car unassisted!); (g) GZ’s nose never bleed from within and if it did the nosebleed miraculously stopped within minutes while GZ was in the police car being transported to the police station for interrogation, etc.
I was flaggerbasted when GZ tried hard to initiate a cozy discussion with a female officer (at the police station before the interrogation started) asking her if she has had to shoot/kill someone before, about her family, etc., the calm and the ease with which GZ initiated and continued that discussion, etc. (which made me think that GZ would also make a very good womanizer even in very EXTREME circumstances, lol). All these individually/put together is/are not consistent with ‘broken-nose-trauma’.
[Hi, Intel - Believe it or not, there is an explanation for the confusion. If you go to the link below, you will see the actual document from the attending PA, Linszee E. Folgate, PA-C:
http://184.172.211.159/~gzdocs/documents/zimmerman_bond_hearing_exhibits/george_zimmerman_medical_report.pdf
Page 1:
Diagnosis:
ICD Code
802.0 Nasal Bones, closed fracture (A bone fracture is a medical condition in which there is a break in the continuity of the bone; broken nose.
However, in the Decision Making Process listed below the diagnosis, your quotes are present. This can be confusing, so which one is it? I guess it could be a bone of contention at trial. His nose was "likely" broken and no one will contest that there was, in fact, an injury to the nose. That's the bottom line. Was he being smothered? His nose was bleeding and no trace of blood was found on Trayvon's hands. No DNA.
About his black eyes? Keep in mind that this is the next day. Witnesses from work will testify that his eyes were black. Also, if you look at page 3 of the medical document, it says: PERRLA, EOMI, conjunctiva and sclerae clear. B/L black eyes.
He had black eyes, in other words.
I would imagine, at the police station the night of the incident, that his nosebleed had cooagulated by then and he just stopped bleeding. However, his actions were recorded, and this was a man who showed no signs of physical trauma, for what it's worth. If you study the video of him getting out of the squad car inside the police station garage, there was no blood there, either. I think he spent enough time in the back seat, on scene, and with proper treatment, that his bleeding stopped. I have a history of nosebleeds and holding my head back for 5 minutes generally stopped it.
As for his nonchalant conversation with a police officer, it just goes to show how justified he thought he was for shooting the "robber." Remember, at that time, he didn't know that Trayvon was a harmless kid. Z thought he was a big hero. Sadly, he still does.
I hope that straightens everything out. Any more questions, don't hesitate to ask. Sometimes, I'm right. Other times, I need help...]
Seriously he asked that officer if she had ever shot someone?
@ Portia, thats interesting abt how he starts his calls. But not for the reason others found it so. I would need more proof of that anyway. I am surprised other professed truth seekers would take that as a fact so easily. But I digress;
Below not aimed at you, BTW.
*I didn't see that in the NHW manual.
*He didnt follow the more important basic guidelines for NHW. Carrying, patrolling (according 2 others). following,failing to wait for authorities. So 1 out of 4 doesnt cut it. He cant cherry pick and come across as vigilant, to me.
(Oddly enough, most of Zimmermans actions that night, following in a car slowly, acting suspiciously himself, etc, were all things the NW manual describes as what to look 4 and alert 911!)
But the reason it causes pause with me is he used the same language even when he wasnt calling 911. He used it when the detectives asked him what happened that night. And he even starts his written statement with a paragraph about it. Now that strikes me as odd. The answer to the question what happened tonight is not my wife is scared. Seems more likely to me he was using the tactic he may have learned to manipulate the system and to justify his actions. And it doesnt really change the association he made between other break ins and this kid.
@ John. Good point re: the phone. Even Osterman described him as meticulous and organized if I remember correctly. But not only had he just hung up, remember, he had also told the cops to call him when they got there. Why would he ever put it away in the 1st place? Hes in the dark and said he had no lite, theres a potential bad guy in the area who had just reached into his waistband and scared him so badly he couldnt talk to him, but he strolled back down the path with no phone& no gun? Yeah, right.
@ Intel. Wasnt that crazy? I believes thats Wendy D. Just schmoozing the crap out of her. Did you ever "have to" shoot someone???!!! Like they were peers. Depraved. Her response was telling. But what followed was odd too. He said to her, (paraphrase) "ur more stern than me, they'd probably listen to you". Was he implying TM didnt listen to him? Since he didnt ID himself, that would make TM in the right.
On the black eyes, you’ll notice his giant butterfly bandage conveniently covers his eyes for the reenactment. They were put on by Shelli according to the prosecutors report. Who puts a butterfly Band-Aid on a “likely” broken nose? LOL. It was never broken. The entire story is Georges. He told everyone who would listen, including his physicians assistant that the EMTs told him it was likely broken. And it took on a life of it own without a lick of proof. I am glad they pin his D on it! Easily dismissed. He did also tell Serino when confronted w his injuries being inconsistent with what he described, that he was told he was diagnosed w/ PTSD too. Unless I missed something theres no PTSD diagnosis in his med report. It actually says mood is appropriate.
Manberk the PTSD shocked me when I heard it during the Police interview. My Mom is suffering from PTSD and her Doctor told us it normally starts a month or months after the trauma. Mr. Zimmerman seems to have no trouble speaking of the shooting, comparing him to my Mom who has difficulty expressing her fears I find it highly unlikely that he suffers from PTSD. Keep in my mind I am not a doctor and I am a teen therefore this is not a medical diagnosis just my own experience.
Dave~ ~thanks for posting the information about the possible fractured/broken nose. I think a shell casing connected with Z's nose moreso than I do Trayvon's fist. There was no bruising on T's fist which should have been there had he bopped Z in the snoot.
I don't know a thing about K9 automatics and if they can kick back when discharged.
IIRC, Z did have a nose bleed as per some of the officers reports. A fractured nose doesn't even have to bleed although they generally do. It all depends if the blood vessels in the nasal passage get ruptured. You would expect Z to have discoloration set in around his nose/ eyes in approx 12 to 24 hours after the impact. It does not happen right away. From the pics of Z, it does appear that he got a ping on his snoot but it may remain a mystery what put it there. You have a minor trying to wrestle away a gun that is being aimed at him and there is bound to be bruising and cuts from the altercation.
O'Mara has his work cut out for him to prove that Z's injuries were life threatening or T had inflicted great bodily harm. I am not sure a judge will buy that at an immunity self-defense evidentiary trial or a jury at a second degree murder trial.
Z does not have to take the stand in the self-defense immunity trial but I cannot see how O'Mara can put enough evidence and/or witnesses on to support his claim. If Z wants to take the stand, it will be a disaster. JMO
[I would like to say it was a shell casing that did the damage to Z's nose, but I really don't think so. Still, it doesn't prove anything about who did. For all we know, it could have been a tree branch he ran into, a la a bumbling Chief Inspector Jacques Clouseau.
The shell casing on the gun, the Kel-Tec PF-9, ejects up and to the right, with not enough force to do any real harm. Let's assume a wayward bullet casing did fly back somehow, i.e., up and back instead of up and to the right. If fired from Z's left hand, the casing could, conceivably, leave a mark on the left side of his nose, not the right. Had he used his right hand to fire the gun, the casing would have to fly out and curve to the left, which could only occur in heavy wind.
I recommend watching this short video of the 9mm pistol in action. You can clearly see the casing trajectory and get an idea of the speed of the 7 shots in the clip. You also see that this particular gun is a locked-breach, semi-auto firearm that needs initial priming. This is particularly important because it means that Z always kept it primed, which is stupid, or he primed it before encountering Trayvon. It has an automatic hammer block safety, which is not the same as a trigger lock. I am going to link two videos on the front page that will specifically show the function of the gun and live action. This should help everyone understand what this gun is all about.
There's no doubt that Z has a cut on the top right bridge of his nose, but was it from a punch? Even if it were, that's not to say Trayvon had no right to protect himself. After all, there was a gun and it was used.
Ultimately, I adhere to the school of thought that, what it comes down to is, what have we got to lose? Without the immunity hearing, it goes to trial, with the hearing, who knows? O'Mara and Co. certainly can't lose the case at that juncture, so in my opinion, it's worth a shot.]
I have enjoyed reading your articles on the Trayvon Martin case. I also enjoy reading the comments. I have never commented before but here goes.
The doctor's report has always bothered me. It says Z's nose was LIKELY broken. And that according to Z the EMTs told him it WAS broken. (No mention of broken in EMT report.) The black eyes I have yet to see. None in police photos or reenactment video.
A coworker of Z said he was there between 8:30 and 9 am the Monday morning after the shooting (2/27/2012). The coworker said Z was going to leave after he told (blacked out) in person what happened. Did Z mean leave for good as in quitting or leave for the day? Evidently for good because the coworker said he had no contact with Z since.
The PA's notes say "Patient is here for a return note for work". The PA report says the encounter date was 2/27/2012 at 11:02 am.
Why would Z need a return to work note when he had quit his job BEFORE the doctor's appointment? Was the PA report based on lies Z told the PA? To document his injuries and make them look as serious as possible? Maybe I have something wrong. But it doesn't make sense.
[Why, thank you, Sharon. I believe the comments are just as much a part of this blog as my articles. Sometimes more.
I'm pretty sure an EMT cannot diagnose broken noses. They can suggest, but the bottom line is this: On the report, nothing is stated about having a broken nose. He had normal breathing and his mucous membrane was normal. The report states Hemorrhage (Capillary): Nose, so he did have a bloody nose, but not bad. This was not a man beaten to a pulp. Not even close.
Sanford Fire Department EMS Report
I do believe coworkers will testify that he did have black eyes the next day, but basically, isn't that bruising?
I can't say for sure, but it's my understanding, according to him, anyway, that he went to work and was told he needed a doctor's clearance. Of course, he wants to appear as close to death as possible, but his doctor (PA, actually) didn't concur.
Thanks for commenting. Now that you've broken the ice, feel free to nose around and do it again.]
Sharon ~~ I also found this a bit strange. It almost sounded like Z had been off work and needed a docs certificate saying he was fit to return to work. It looks now like he went into his work place and told them that he had to take time off work or quit his job and he would be going to the docs office and get a certificate saying he could not return to work. It seems that he had diagnosed his own condition before trucking off to the doctor's office. Judging from all the Rx meds he was on and listening to the jail calls, I would diagnose Z was being both mentally and physically fragile if not neurotic. I am not a medic.
In Snoopy's comment above she mentions a likely scenario of Trayvon wrestling GZ for the gun. Is this the life threatening situation GZ found himself in? Could be! But, he can't say that to the police because then it would make him the aggressor that he really was by having his gun cocked at the ready for some shooting action. Ha! He can't even have that brought up in court either, and yes, good luck with trying to convince a jury that those injuries were life threatening.
[I think the defense will still argue that Trayvon had him in a position he couldn't get out of, and that's what made it life-threatening. Same story with the gun - that Trayvon went for it while in that no-escape position. BALONEY! Those injuries were far from life-threatening.
What I'd like to know is whether the police examined the tree branches for breaks. I doubt it, but it could have shown that someone (Z) had contact.]
Dave~~I watched the first video. I did not look at the target but paid close attention to the gun as he was firing it. I noticed he supported his right hand with the left one. It almost looked like he was cupping the firing hand. That gun had a bit of kick back to it. I am wondering how much it would kick back if the shooter was only using the one hand while holding his victim by the scruff of the neck with the other hand. If the victim was pushing on the firing arm of the shooter, I can see the gun kicking back and popping the shooter on the nose. I cannot see Trayvon's fist connecting with Z nose...none whatsoever but I am generally wrong.
Thanks for putting those videos up....now I am off to watch the second one.