The Girlfriend's Statement

[IzzyBlanche]

That is really not consistent with words being exchanged.
Which also was reported as part of Zimmerman's story.

I'm sorry, but I am not comprehending your response.

In post #222 on this thread, you wrote:

"I don't think Zimmerman ever claimed Trayvon jumped him from behind."

I posted a news report to the contrary.

With all due respect, I am really not seeing how your response here relates to the subject of whether GZ claimed TM jumped him.

 

[AJ Noiter]

Here's a question more for the Zimmerman supporters regarding this young lady's words. I'm not even sure if this could happen as I've not read up or done a lot with calling a "hostile witness." The question is: Do you think Mr. O'Mara should subpoena this young lady if the prosecution doesn't? Why/Why not?


Here's my answer: If the prosecution doesn't call her I don't think the defense should either. I can understand tearing her testimony to shreds because it would otherwise be damaging to your case, but to call her if the prosecution doesn't just to make an example out of her is wrong, I think. To do so could put a label on her name for the rest of her life, and I don't think anyone should be put through the ridicule that could follow - especially someone her age. Her story doesn't add anything to the case other than possibly who started the confrontation, but that's not solid as it would depend on one's understanding and definition of the word "confrontation." Based on the audio at the start of this thread I'm going to go on a HUGE limb and say she's probably learned from her mistake already - she sounded annoyed (kept cutting off the investigator) and to me it just seemed like she wanted to get back to her life and continue ignoring this as she was previous to Mr. Crump's involvement with her.

 

[claudicici]

I don't even think it was gossip, to be honest. I think she just informed her cousin about it, no more than a simple "hey, you remember that guy? he was shot" type deal. That's my recollection of it. I have her twitter feed saved (in case of scrubbing) so I'll take another look.

what makes you guys so sure that is even her?

 

[LambChop]

Other than Crump's words I've not heard this, and to be honest I don't trust Crump. Why was the "get off" detail left out? Why is he stating that she's the girlfriend when.. well, lets just leave that alone

Most boys that age are not on the phone all day with a casual friend. In the context of a close friend who is a girl she fits. Most people do not say I have a friend who just so happens to be a girl. They either say this is a friend, or this is my girlfriend. It really does not matter. They appeared to be close friends according to the number of phone calls going back and forth. And for court she was a friend who was on the phone with TM at the time, nothing else matters. jmo

 

[LambChop]

Here's a question more for the Zimmerman supporters regarding this young lady's words. I'm not even sure if this could happen as I've not read up or done a lot with calling a "hostile witness." The question is: Do you think Mr. O'Mara should subpoena this young lady if the prosecution doesn't? Why/Why not?


Here's my answer: If the prosecution doesn't call her I don't think the defense should either. I can understand tearing her testimony to shreds because it would otherwise be damaging to your case, but to call her if the prosecution doesn't just to make an example out of her is wrong, I think. To do so could put a label on her name for the rest of her life, and I don't think anyone should be put through the ridicule that could follow - especially someone her age. Her story doesn't add anything to the case other than possibly who started the confrontation, but that's not solid as it would depend on one's understanding and definition of the word "confrontation." Based on the audio at the start of this thread I'm going to go on a HUGE limb and say she's probably learned from her mistake already - she sounded annoyed (kept cutting off the investigator) and to me it just seemed like she wanted to get back to her life and continue ignoring this as she was previous to Mr. Crump's involvement with her.

If GZ's statements prove to be inconsistent as Gilbreath claims the girlfriend's testimony will be very important. IMO, I do not think MOM wants those statements made by GZ to ever see the light of day. jmo

 

[jjenny]

If GZ's statements prove to be inconsistent as Gilbreath claims the girlfriend's testimony will be very important. IMO, I do not think MOM wants those statements made by GZ to ever see the light of day. jmo

I am very curious how the same statement that police previously claimed was consistent with the evidence all of the sudden became inconsistent after special prosecutor was appointed and Zimmerman was arrested?

 

[AJ Noiter]

Most boys that age are not on the phone all day with a casual friend. In the context of a close friend who is a girl she fits. Most people do not say I have a friend who just so happens to be a girl. They either say this is a friend, or this is my girlfriend. It really does not matter. They appeared to be close friends according to the number of phone calls going back and forth. And for court she was a friend who was on the phone with TM at the time, nothing else matters. jmo

Ok, that's great, but that's not what I said. What I said was that I had not heard that she had called any authority.

As for males speaking with females for an ungodly number of hours, and are not boyfriend/girlfriend - you're speaking to the wrong person as I was someone who spoke with a friend for an ungodly number of hours on a daily basis - basically anytime I was awake and not at work I was on the phone with her. That was over 10 years ago, and I'm sure with the availability of cell phones these days it probably wouldn't be that far fetched (especially now that 3-way calling is widely supported).

 

[AJ Noiter]

If GZ's statements prove to be inconsistent as Gilbreath claims the girlfriend's testimony will be very important. IMO, I do not think MOM wants those statements made by GZ to ever see the light of day. jmo

I think you misunderstood my question. Obviously if the prosecution doesn't call her then they feel her story isn't worthy (for whatever reason) to be called, which is why I reversed the question.

 

[suzihawk]

I am very curious how the same statement that police previously claimed was consistent with the evidence all of the sudden became inconsistent after special prosecutor was appointed and Zimmerman was arrested?

Are you referring to the Sanford police who took Zimmerman's word at face value? Like Bill Lee, (whose job it was to investigate the crime) who stepped down due to his 'involvement' and is now under investigation by the DOJ?

 

[jjenny]

Are you referring to the Sanford police who took Zimmerman's word at face value? Like Bill Lee, (whose job it was to investigate the crime) who stepped down due to his 'involvement' and is now under investigation by the DOJ?

Which other police could I possibly be referring to? If the statement was so inconsistent how could police possibly take it at face value?

 

[suzihawk]

Which other police could I possibly be referring to? If the statement was so inconsistent how could police possibly take it at face value?

Good question! I'd like to know the answer to that as well, although I have my own opinions on the matter.

 

[LambChop]

I am very curious how the same statement that police previously claimed was consistent with the evidence all of the sudden became inconsistent after special prosecutor was appointed and Zimmerman was arrested?

Gilbreath told us. They have more information now than LE had when they did their investigation. The FBI went literally door-to-door talking to people and IMO any statements they found that related to the crime was passed on to AC's office. LE did not go door-to-door. They did not do an extensive and exhaustive investigation by their own admission. jmo

 

[Karmady]

Here's a question more for the Zimmerman supporters regarding this young lady's words. I'm not even sure if this could happen as I've not read up or done a lot with calling a "hostile witness." The question is: Do you think Mr. O'Mara should subpoena this young lady if the prosecution doesn't? Why/Why not?


Here's my answer: If the prosecution doesn't call her I don't think the defense should either. I can understand tearing her testimony to shreds because it would otherwise be damaging to your case, but to call her if the prosecution doesn't just to make an example out of her is wrong, I think. To do so could put a label on her name for the rest of her life, and I don't think anyone should be put through the ridicule that could follow - especially someone her age. Her story doesn't add anything to the case other than possibly who started the confrontation, but that's not solid as it would depend on one's understanding and definition of the word "confrontation." Based on the audio at the start of this thread I'm going to go on a HUGE limb and say she's probably learned from her mistake already - she sounded annoyed (kept cutting off the investigator) and to me it just seemed like she wanted to get back to her life and continue ignoring this as she was previous to Mr. Crump's involvement with her.

If O'Mara were to call her he would have to use her as credible on the verbal exchange and not credible on other things, especially the get off, get off part. That could be difficult, depending on what the affidavit she gave to her attorney says. Afaik, we haven't seen that yet.

 

[Karmady]

Gilbreath told us. They have more information now than LE had when they did their investigation. The FBI went literally door-to-door talking to people and IMO any statements they found that related to the crime was passed on to AC's office. LE did not go door-to-door. They did not do an extensive and exhaustive investigation by their own admission. jmo

If the SP has information from the FBI about witness statements and the SP intends to use those statements, they needed to have been included in the discovery provided.

 

[stmarysmead]

Gilbreath told us. They have more information now than LE had when they did their investigation. The FBI went literally door-to-door talking to people and IMO any statements they found that related to the crime was passed on to AC's office. LE did not go door-to-door. They did not do an extensive and exhaustive investigation by their own admission. jmo

Unfortunately, all this "new" information also came out after this case became a media sensation...where people chose "teams"...and their Team Spirit now decides whether that football was in bounds or not.

This new information came after a Hate Group was allowed to make public death threats and our Government did NOTHING...now THAT is chilling to someone who might upset one of the local "members."


This new information came after, media reports and TV sensationalists made it clear that anyone who did not HATE GZ...was a pariah.

There will be much understandable flipping and flopping. I have seen it before.

Then , if GZ is lucky and the evidence to clear him DOES emerge...they will all slink away.

OOPs.

 

[jjenny]

If O'Mara were to call her he would have to use her as credible on the verbal exchange and not credible on other things, especially the get off, get off part. That could be difficult, depending on what the affidavit she gave to her attorney says. Afaik, we haven't seen that yet.

Well I am going to make a guess that it says nothing about "get off." Since Mr. Crump never mentioned anything about "get off."

 

[LambChop]

Ok, that's great, but that's not what I said. What I said was that I had not heard that she had called any authority.

As for males speaking with females for an ungodly number of hours, and are not boyfriend/girlfriend - you're speaking to the wrong person as I was someone who spoke with a friend for an ungodly number of hours on a daily basis - basically anytime I was awake and not at work I was on the phone with her. That was over 10 years ago, and I'm sure with the availability of cell phones these days it probably wouldn't be that far fetched (especially now that 3-way calling is widely supported).

She was still a friend and obviously a girl. As an adult you might not consider her a romantic interest but she was a friend none the less. Let me say that boys that age do not usually waste their time talking to someone they are not interested in. We have not heard he was dating her, or going "steady" with her but she appeared to be his main interest at that moment in time. Good grief, some girls that age change boyfriends on a weekly basis. So I don't think Crump was intending to say any more than she was a girlfriend who was on the phone with him at time.

I remember my grandson saying his friend and then blah, blah, blah and it was obvious he was talking about a girl. Shortly afterwards he referred to her by her name, never my girlfriend. He married her recently after dating her for 7 years. I don't recall ever hearing him say "my girlfriend" he always called her by name.

I find most of the calling out of the Martins and Mr. Crump as insignificant. The Martins are doing what they have to to keep a focus on the fact they feel their son did not have to die and a proper investigation should be done. Then whatever the outcome they will accept it. I truly believe they reached out to those BP's and asked them to stop the nonsense. Not that it would do GZ any good now. The damage has been done with all the crazies out there but I don't think they should be faulted for what happened.

But for the gf I think it is very important because it backs up GZ's inconsistencies. I don't think the SA will not want to use her, it's whether or not her parents will want her to testify. SA may only get to use her statement. As a parent, given what I have seen here and some of the demeaning remarks I've seen posted about her, I would not let her take that stand for her own protection. jmo

 

[Karmady]

Well I am going to make a guess that it says nothing about "get off." Since Mr. Crump never mentioned anything about "get off."

I agree with you. But since we have never seen the original affidavit, unfortunately we may never know what it said when/if it was initially prepared. jmo

eta: as I mentioned, I did not see it in the State's production (may have missed it, though).

 

[Alecto]

I'm sorry, but I am not comprehending your response.

In post #222 on this thread, you wrote:

"I don't think Zimmerman ever claimed Trayvon jumped him from behind."

I posted a news report to the contrary.

With all due respect, I am really not seeing how your response here relates to the subject of whether GZ claimed TM jumped him.

Your news report doesn't actually report what GZ said. It reports a CBS interpretation of what an unnamed law enforcement source reported GZ said that was an unquoted interpretation as well. It's not evidence of what GZ actually said, it's just evidence of sloppy reporting by CBS.

(While even direct quotes from named sources can be wrong a report that includes neither is often just rumor mongering.)

 

[jjenny]

I agree with you. But since we have never seen the original affidavit, unfortunately we may never know what it said when/if it was initially prepared. jmo

I believe the interview she gave to the media might come in. And from what I heard, there was no "get off" in the interview given to abc.