17 yo Trayvon Martin Shot to Death by Neighborhood Watch Captain #29

[lauriej]

:what:

Who's monitoring that site? GZ isn't...how much money is donated so far?

I dont intent to go there...don't what them having my ISP..:maddening:

Liars, liars, pants on fire.....:banghead:

well, got to go and pick up my granddaughter...bbl...

--according to his wife shellie's testimony, her "brother-in-law" would have the info on the site------i assume she's referring to robertZ Jr.

--i found it 'hard' to believe, since they all knew they would be asked questions about $$$$$'s-----that all of the phone-in witnesses claimed to have NO clue about the amount of money that had been donated to the site.

--nope, the only one who would have this secret info would be the 'brother-in-law', shellie DID say that she could possibly get him on the phone, i wish the SA had followed through on that ( even though robJr. would have talked in riddles we still would have got an answer (or lie) of some sort.)

 

[Adrienne37]

I think that Mark O'Mara scored big with his questioning of investigator Dale Gilbreath.


http://news.yahoo.com/experts-zimmerman-attorney-made-smart-move-072305753.html

People seem to forget that there are two lead investigators in this case and only one was available to be called yesterday. I didn't see O'Mara score on any points myself but that's just my opinion. If what we seen from O'Mara yesterday is the best he has, then Zimmerman may as well go ahead and pack his bags to spend a long time in prison.


~jmo~

 

[Dr.Fessel]

As his head was being pounded on the ground, he had no way of knowing if the person attacking him was capable of killing him or not. Couldn't TM have called 911 to report the person following him ? Was it really reasonable that he attacked GZ if that's what happened ?

BBM

Why do you say ground?

http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/1204/20/cnr.02.html

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Mr. Gilbreath, I didn't know we were going to be trying the case, I'm going to add up -- I apologize. I want to add some questions to -- you had reviewed or other members of the team had reviewed his interviews, is that not true.

GILBREATH: That is --

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: And he gave -- he the defendant gave numerous interviews to the police did he not.

GILBREATH: Yes.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: And isn't it true that a lot of statements that he made do not make sense in terms of the injuries that he described. Did he not describe to the police that Mr. Martin had him on the ground and kept bashing his head on the concrete over and over and just physically beating him with his hands?

GILBREATH: He has said that, yes.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: And isn't it true that there is evidence that indicates that's not true?

GILBREATH: Yes.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Did he also not state that at some point, he the defendant -- did he not state or claim that the victim in this case, Mr. Martin, put both hands one over his mouth and one over his nose so that he couldn't breathe?

GILBREATH: Yes.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: And all of sudden that's when he was able to get free and grab the gun. Or I'm sorry, Martin was grabbing for the gun, did he not claim that too at some point. climb that?

GILBREATH: Yes.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: But -- and I'm going to get into every little contradiction but wouldn't you agree that a lot of his statements can be contradicted by the evidence either witnesses or just based on what he says himself?

GILBREATH: Yes.

 

[jjenny]

I am not sure how effective the suit was. He did look nice sitting there like he was in church but there was a shocking moment there when he stood up and showed all that jailhouse bling and then having to waddle to the stand.

Not sure why MOM could not get rid of the shackles.

There is no jury yet so shackles don't matter yet.

 

[Donjeta]

--according to his wife shellie's testimony, her "brother-in-law" would have the info on the site------i assume she's referring to robertZ Jr.

--i found it 'hard' to believe, since they all knew they would be asked questions about $$$$$'s-----that all of the phone-in witnesses claimed to have NO clue about the amount of money that had been donated to the site.

--nope, the only one who would have this secret info would be the 'brother-in-law', shellie DID say that she could possibly get him on the phone, i wish the SA had followed through on that ( even though robJr. would have talked in riddles we still would have got an answer (or lie) of some sort.)

I wish they had pursued that information as well. I really want to know how much money one nets from shooting somebody. (Just out of curiosity, not considering it as a career option.)

 

[MsCharlieChan]

I caught a little of NG and other shows last night and almost every TH agreed that those answers hurts the state, because now MOM has those answers on the record, under oath. He can come back and say 'you have no evidence to prove that GZ was chasing TM, you have no evidence that GZ instigated physical contact because you testified on 4/19 that you had no evidence.

True, O'Mara will have these statements. But the circumstantial evidence may add up to "provocation" in way that's more damaging.

If Jeff Ashton had had the strong circumstantial evidence and character/arrest record on CA that Angela Corey has on GZ, I believe CA would be in prison right now.

 

[cityslick]

I'm not sure what the talking head geniuses think the State should have said at a Bond Hearing, LOL. Do they have no idea of the impact of what was being said in this exchange?



Gilbreath clearly said "We have Mr. Zimmerman's statement", (saying he only followed TM for 18 seconds) "We have the shell casing" (from Zimmerman's gun), and "We have Mr. Martin's body" ( located 233 feet from Zimmerman's vehicle).

Unless you believe it's possible to walk 233 feet in 18 seconds, what else does anyone think is needed to prove he continued to follow Trayvon? :waitasec:

He shouldn't of said then that they have no evidence that GZ didn't walk back to his car. Because he said that, it creates doubt.

He should of said 'we have reason to believe he didn't walk back to his car based on a, b and c'. Not, we have no evidence that he didn't walk back to his car.

 

[cityslick]

I can't wait to see how GZ's lawyers explain how his fear of unarmed 17 year old in a hoodie was reasonable. :maddening:

Simple, they are going to say that 17 year old was on top of GZ, pushing his head against the cement and GZ was in fear of getting his brains bashed in. Then they are going to show photos and medical reports of injuries.

If they have all that......

 

[Concerned Papa]

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: But -- and I'm going to get into every little contradiction but wouldn't you agree that a lot of his statements can be contradicted by the evidence either witnesses or just based on what he says himself?

GILBREATH: Yes.

He has made this incredibly easy.

 

[Donjeta]

Did they swab GZ's wounds and find traces of concrete?

 

[RANCH]

People seem to forget that there are two lead investigators in this case and only one was available to be called yesterday. I didn't see O'Mara score on any points myself but that's just my opinion. If what we seen from O'Mara yesterday is the best he has, then Zimmerman may as well go ahead and pack his bags to spend a long time in prison.


~jmo~

I didn't forget about investigator O'Steen if that's who you mean. He didn't testify at the hearing, Gilbreath did. And if this goes to trial Gilbreath is locked into his testimony from the hearing.

"There are many miles left in this case but I think O'Mara helped the defense by eliciting those responses," Coffey said. "He is going to look for the chance to cross-examine that same investigator and ask him the same questions. If the investigator changes his story, he is going to lose credibility with the jury."

http://news.yahoo.com/experts-zimmerman-attorney-made-smart-move-072305753.html

 

[suzihawk]

I can't wait to see how GZ's lawyers explain how his fear of unarmed 17 year old in a hoodie was reasonable. :maddening:

But... but... he didn't know he was just a teen, don't 'cha know.

 

[cityslick]

BBM

Why do you say ground?

http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/1204/20/cnr.02.html

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Mr. Gilbreath, I didn't know we were going to be trying the case, I'm going to add up -- I apologize. I want to add some questions to -- you had reviewed or other members of the team had reviewed his interviews, is that not true.

GILBREATH: That is --

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: And he gave -- he the defendant gave numerous interviews to the police did he not.

GILBREATH: Yes.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: And isn't it true that a lot of statements that he made do not make sense in terms of the injuries that he described. Did he not describe to the police that Mr. Martin had him on the ground and kept bashing his head on the concrete over and over and just physically beating him with his hands?

GILBREATH: He has said that, yes.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: And isn't it true that there is evidence that indicates that's not true?

GILBREATH: Yes.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Did he also not state that at some point, he the defendant -- did he not state or claim that the victim in this case, Mr. Martin, put both hands one over his mouth and one over his nose so that he couldn't breathe?

GILBREATH: Yes.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: And all of sudden that's when he was able to get free and grab the gun. Or I'm sorry, Martin was grabbing for the gun, did he not claim that too at some point. climb that?

GILBREATH: Yes.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: But -- and I'm going to get into every little contradiction but wouldn't you agree that a lot of his statements can be contradicted by the evidence either witnesses or just based on what he says himself?

GILBREATH: Yes.

Because of this part:

O'MARA: The injuries seem to be consistent with his story, though, don't they?

Dale; The injuries are consistent with a harder object striking the back of his head than his head was.

O'MARA: Could that be cement?

GILBREATH: Could be.

O'MARA: Did you just say it was consistent or did you say it wasn't consistent?

GILBREATH: I said it was.

 

[cityslick]

Did they swab GZ's wounds and find traces of concrete?

They didn't do anything to GZ. At least I don't think they did. There was no 'investigation' in the beginning, I don't care what AC says.

 

[Isabelle]

When the SA's investigator says they have no evidence of this or that while on the stand for a Bail Hearing, are they really locked into that when the trial comes in? If this is true, it sounds like it could be over.

 

[SuziQ]

I don't think anyone could have stopped him from apologizing since he's wanted to do this for a while.

I should add that my experience with police is why I've remained so objective in regards to this case. I don't trust many of them and that investigator on the stand reconfirmed my opinion.

I feel that there is a lot of collusion going on with the police after the fact.

Of course, this is my opinion and my opinion is based solely on my past experience with law enforcement.

As opposed to SPD and their appearance of collusion when they sided with GZ and refused to arrest him or do a decent investigation? Did that not bother you?

 

[Aedrys]

I didn't forget about investigator O'Steen if that's who you mean. He didn't testify at the hearing, Gilbreath did. And if this goes to trial Gilbreath is locked into his testimony from the hearing.


http://news.yahoo.com/experts-zimmerman-attorney-made-smart-move-072305753.html

But yesterday was a bond hearing. What they are saying doesn't make sense. What is said in a hearing is not the same as what is said in trial. You can't cross examine someone for what they said in a hearing. Yesterday wasn't a deposition of the investigator, just some questions asked at a bond hearing. Hearings are separate from trials. What is said in hearing, I believe, can't be used against the same person who testifies at a trial. Hearings may affect what happens in a courtroom, but what is said in a hearing, as far as I know, can't be used to contradict someone at trial. These talking heads do not know what they are talking about.

Now, O'Mara could do a deposition of this investigator, and if he gives the same answers in that deposition, that could then be questioned at trial. Hearings are separate from the actual trial. The Casey Anthony juries had no clue about what kind and how many hearings there were before trial. The jurors in this trial aren't going have any clue either. What matters is what is said in depositions and in the trial itself.

Do we have a legal thread for this case? Because I am really confused about this and how it could come back to hurt the investigator at trial.

 

[cityslick]

When the SA's investigator says they have no evidence of this or that while on the stand for a Bail Hearing, are they really locked into that when the trial comes in? If this is true, it sounds like it could be over.

I don't see why now, it's under oath and in a transcript. MOM can pull the transcript of yesterdays hearing when he gets the same investigator on the stand during trial and point to his statements and say 'didn't you testify that you had no evidence of this or that'.

It works the other way too with GZ saying what he said on the stand, it can be used against him.

 

[Isabelle]

Who else thinks the SA handling this case is nothing more than a sham?

 

[Adrienne37]

I didn't forget about investigator O'Steen if that's who you mean. He didn't testify at the hearing, Gilbreath did. And if this goes to trial Gilbreath is locked into his testimony from the hearing.


http://news.yahoo.com/experts-zimmerman-attorney-made-smart-move-072305753.html

Yes, there is another who didn't testify yesterday or did I somehow miss that?

Zimmerman has sunk his own ship by repeatedly changing his stories to fit the scenarios in which he was presented, he has given his family/friends contradictory statements which were repeated during multiple interviews on his behalf. How do you think Joe Oliver, Frank Taaffee, Robert Zimmerman, and Robert Zimmerman, Jr. are going to hold up under cross-examination? What about Zimmerman himself. How do you think he's going to hold up on cross-examination? IMO, he nearly peed his pants yesterday when he was on the stand. I personally can't wait.


~jmo~