Image 01 Image 03

Implosion: Police Testify Trayvon’s Father Originally Denied Son Was Screaming

Implosion: Police Testify Trayvon’s Father Originally Denied Son Was Screaming

Also, Trayvon pot smoking to come into evidence via toxicology report

There were some big wins for the defense today, including several important rulings just before the Court recessed for the day.

By far the biggest news, however, is the utter implosion of the State’s “scream” narrative into which they had invested the heart and soul of their theory of the case.  There’s a reason that the State’s last witnesses before resting were Trayvon’s mother, Sabryna Fulton, and half-brother, Jaharvis Fulton, both of whom claimed that the screaming voice on the Jenna Lauer 911 recording was that of Trayvon Martin.

Screen Shot 2013-07-08 at 3.52.40 PM

Tracey Martin, Trayvon Martin’s father

The screamer, the State was essentially claiming, was the victim in this confrontation.  If the screamer was Trayvon Martin, he had in effect been begging for his life for 40 seconds before George Zimmerman shot him with a depraved mind, killing him.  It wasn’t much of a theory of the case given the enormous quantities of inconsistent evidence–such as Zimmerman’s injuries– as well as Jaharvis’ testimony as to his uncertainty about the matter, but it was just about all the State had left after the debacle that was the nearly two weeks case presentation to that point.

Defense Chops Away at State’s Scream Case with Increasingly Compelling Testimony

As described in the mid-day post, the defense spent the morning chopping away at the State’s scream cae with increasingly compelling testimony, culminating in the powerful combat-sourced testimony of John Donnelly just before the lunch recess. You can view the mid-day wrap-up here:

Zimmerman Trial Day 10 — Mid-day — Vietnam Combat Medic Identifies Zimmerman as Screamer

The killing blows to the State’s scream case would come immediately after lunch, with the combined and terribly destructive of Officers Singleton and Serino (the lead investigator on the case before being demoted), followed by the faltering and palpably incredible contrary testimony of Tracey Martin, Trayvon’s Martin.

Police Officers Chris Serino (formerly lead Investigator) and Doris Singleton

Right after lunch the defense called Officers Serino and Singleton, both of whom testified that when Serino played the Jenna Lauer audo recording for Tracy Martin and asked him if the screaming voice was that of Trayvon Martin he responded, “No.”

Chris Serino, Part 2

Chris Serino, Part 3

Police Officer Doris Singleton

Tracey Martin, father of Trayvon Martin

Immediately after this the defense called Tracey Martin himself. He disputed the testimony of Serino and Singleton, saying in a stumbling, rambling response that he told them at the time that he was uncertain if it was Trayvon. He further testified that after he had listened to the recording perhaps 20 times he concluded that the voice was in fact that of his son. The only reason this testimony wasn’t the least credible of the trial is because the trial has seen a great deal of incredible testimony.

With the collapse of the State’s claim that a family member’s familiarity with a loved one’s voice was a reasonable way to identify a person screaming in extremis, the totality of direct evidence (John Good) as well as circumstantial evidence as to the identify of the screamer shifted solidly to the Zimmerman side of the scale.

Tracey Martin, father of Trayvon Martin, Part 2

On his final re-direct of Tracey Martin, Mark O’Mara asked several rather cryptic questions along the lines of whether Mr. Martin had instructed his lawyer Ben Crump to lie about the police statements that Mr. Martin had not identified the screams on the Lauer tape as having come from Trayvon, and whether he had told Crump to lie about Mr. Martin having been able to make a scream identification after acquiring a cleaned or enhanced copy of the Lauer recording.

Mr. Martin denied both allegations, saying that he never told Crump to lie about anything, but the nature of the questioning and the fact taht Crump was finally deposed by the defense this past weekend makes me wonder if perhaps Mr. Crump said something foolish while under oath for the deposition.  We’ll keep our eyes on this issue.

(Former) Police Chief Bill Lee

Finally there was former Police Chief Bill Lee, one of the several law enforcement casualties resulting from this case. He testified that the Martins had identified the voice on the Lauer 911 recording as that of Trayvon in a group meeting at the Mayor’s office, with no law enforcement present. Lee testified that the identity of the screamer was still an issue for the investigation, and best practices in law enforcement would have been to have each family member listen to the recording separately, so that their reactions could be obtained without the influence of others. The manner in which the Martin identification was made, therefore, was inherently tainted.

(Former) Police Chief Bill Lee, Part 2

(Former) Police Chief Bill Lee, Part 3

Adam Pollock, Gym Owner

Next up was Adam Pollock, the owner of the “MMA” gym at which Zimmerman had enrolled for much of the year prior to the shooting. The State had argued in its opening statement that this gym membership proved that Zimmerman was skilled at bare handed fighting and need not have used a gun that night against an “unarmed” Trayvon Martin. In fact. Pollock described Zimmerman’s initial fighting ability when he enrolled at the gym as a 0.5 on a scale of 1-10, a skill level that had increased to a mere 1.0 or 1.5 in the month before the shooting. He further described Zimmerman as hard-working and very nice, but physically “soft” and lacking ins strength. Asked if he ever allowed Zimmerman to fight in a ring, he answered “Absolutely not, I wouldn’t put him in harms way.”

There also a couple of important end-of-day rulings that favored the defense, and a third that was at worst neutral to the defense.

Trayvon Martin Toxicology Results to be Admissible

First, the Court removed its in limine exclusion on Trayvon Martin’s toxicology report. Now the defense will be able to introduce his blood levels of THC into evidence and have an expert opine on their signifiance in this case. (Thank you, Dr. Bao.)  You can review the Trayvon Martin autopsy report, including the THC tox levels, here:

AUTOPSY REPORT: Analysis of clinical cause of death of Trayvon Martin

Effort by State to Strike Morning Testimony by John Donnelly Denied

Second, the State belatedly tried to get the very compelling testimony of John Donnelly struck from the record. Their argument was that the defense was aware that he was going to testify about his war service and how that allowed him to better identify the screams as being those of George Zimmerman, and failed to so notify the State. This was indeed a violation of discovery, the Court decided, but because there was no prejudice to the State that resulted she declined to strike the testimony.

Testimony by Use of Force Expert Rout to Remain Limited

On a third matter the Court sided with the State. The defense wanted to bring to court a use of force expert (Mr. Rout) to testify, among other things, that Zimmerman had acted in compliance with Florida law and had been in reasonable fear at the time he shot Martin. Those are matters, the court decided, that are in the province of the jury to decide. However, Rout will be allowed to testify on other matters–such as how the trauma of having been involved in a shooting event affects people–subject to objection by the State in the normal course.

Admissibility of Defense’s Animated Video to be Determined in Daubert Hearing

Finally, there is the matter of the animated video created by the defense. The State had objected to large parts of it, and the defense is seeking to address these complaints by changing much of the animation to still images. The parties are still discussing the matter as I write this, and will present the results of those discussions to Judge Nelson for a ruling this evening.

Those issues aside, there were other important events today in terms of testimony, as well as rulings.

That’s it for today, don’t forget to join us again tomorrow for our all-day live coverage of the court testimony, all public hearings, and our scrolling Twitter feed of selected contributors.

Andrew F. Branca is an MA lawyer and author of the seminal book “The Law of Self Defense,” now available in its just released 2nd Edition, which shows you how to successfully fight the 20-to-life legal battle everyone faces after defending themselves. Take advantage of the 20% “Zimmerman trial” discount & free shipping (ends when the jury returns a verdict). NRA & IDPA members can also use checkout coupon LOSD2-NRA for an additional 10% off. To do so simply visit the Law of Self Defense blog. (Coupon works ONLY at

Note also that “The Law of Self Defense, 2nd Edition” is also available at  They set their own price, and it can very each day, so you might want to check there to see if they are offering the best deal today.

Many thanks to Professor Jacobson for the invitation to guest-blog on the Zimmerman trial here on Legal Insurrection!

You can follow Andrew on Twitter on @LawSelfDefense (or @LawSelfDefense2 if I’m in Twitmo, follow both!)on Facebook, and at his blog, The Law of Self Defense.


Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.


The crew at CNN seem to be watching a different trial than we are.

MSNBC forced to admit that the Tox report will be admitted! They are scrambling to minimize!!

When the levee breaks, or so said Led Zep…

    Fabi in reply to Fabi. | July 8, 2013 at 7:06 pm

    Bwahahaha! MSNBC says the admission of the Tx report is a victory for the PROSECUTION! Please, stop! I’m not allowed to laugh this hard! Stop!!!!!

      MarkS in reply to Fabi. | July 8, 2013 at 7:20 pm

      Victory? When’s the last time you heard anyone argue against their victory?

      Mary Sue in reply to Fabi. | July 8, 2013 at 7:41 pm

      MSNBC thinks admission of the toxicology report boosts the prosecution since evidence of TM’s prior use of marijuana might lead jurors to conclude he’d have been too mellow to be the aggressor. Go figure.

      Lisa Bloom is clinging to a theory the rest of the Nutroots at the network have all concluded proves GZ is a liar. She believes it was impossible for TM to have seen the gun since it was holstered behind Zimmerman’s back. She also thinks it would have been difficult for TM to have reached for the gun. Did anyone else see her raise this theory?

      In any event the MSNBC crew seems to be hoping the state makes this problem with Zimmerman’s story clear before the end of the trial. I am no lawyer but shouldn’t they have done this in their case in chief?

        divemedic in reply to Mary Sue. | July 8, 2013 at 7:46 pm

        Who testified to the gun being in the back? Every witness I remember has the gun at the 3 o’clock position in an inside the waistband holster.

          Mary Sue in reply to divemedic. | July 8, 2013 at 7:51 pm

          I don’t know where she was getting this from in all honesty. She also claimed the type holster Zimmerman used is made to be worn in the back. I thought maybe some gun owners on here might know if this is true or a figment of MSNBC’s imagination.

          Lina Inverse in reply to divemedic. | July 8, 2013 at 8:15 pm

          Figment, of course.

          Lots of holsters cant the gun forwards or backwards to make it easier to draw based on where it’s located on the hip. Anything positioned past 3 o’clock or so, for a right handed person not making a cross draw, wants to be canted forwards so its grip angle is about the angle of your hand with your wrist straight as you reach back. Same with canting it backwards for 1-2 o’clock, the so called appendix carry position.

          All the pictures I’ve seen of his holster or the model of it have no cant, it’s roughly straight up and down. That’s OK for 3 o’clock plus or minus a bit. It’s also a thin gun, ~0.9 inches per Wikipedia, it won’t stick out much at that location on your hip.

          And for those claiming it can’t be seen because it’s and inside the waistband model, well, plenty of it including the grip sticks above the holster so it can be grabbed by your hand….

        Jay in reply to Mary Sue. | July 8, 2013 at 7:48 pm

        Didn’t see the Lisa Myers piece you’re talking about, but of course she is wrong on the facts. Zimmerman’s gun was not holstered “behind his back” it was on his right hip.

        I’d add, the fact that Martin had THC in his system vindicates Zimmerman’s “he looks like he’s on drugs or something” statement.

          Fabi in reply to Jay. | July 8, 2013 at 8:14 pm

          So, can GZ sue NBC and MSNBC or is that two bites at the same apple? kinda-lol

          Exactly. This information vindicates George Zimmerman. That is why the Persecution was fighting so hard to keep it out.

        Fen in reply to Mary Sue. | July 8, 2013 at 9:07 pm

        Too funny! The same media that confuses a sling keeper for a grenade launcher mount is going to “inform” us about gun holsters. Bwhahaha!

        The defense will argue that he was coming off the high, meaning he was in the aggressive phase because of withdrawal. They are fools. They do not understand what even non-users understand

      Fabi you have my permission to laugh even louder. I hear you here in Australia.

For the record, I mentioned Daubert in probably the very first one of Mr. Branca’s posts.

Looks like the casualties from this case should continue to mount; several LEOs got demoted on the front end; the MSM will yet again be shown to be incompetent in their coverage and analysis eventually, if justice is served.

And there should be political fallout eventually in FLA for the powers that be bypassing a grand jury and putting on this show trial.

Mansizedtarget | July 8, 2013 at 7:10 pm

I’m glad judge came to her senses on toxicology.

I do find it strange the two officers could testify about what Tracy Martin said. It seems like pure hearsay to me. I suppose it could be under the exception for excited or spontaneous utterances, i.e.,:

(1) SPONTANEOUS STATEMENT.—A spontaneous statement describing or explaining an event or condition made while the declarant was perceiving the event or condition, or immediately thereafter, except when such statement is made under circumstances that indicate its lack of trustworthiness.

(2) EXCITED UTTERANCE.—A statement or excited utterance relating to a startling event or condition made while the declarant was under the stress of excitement caused by the event or condition.

    Ragspierre in reply to Mansizedtarget. | July 8, 2013 at 7:19 pm

    Experts are often able to testify using hearsay if it was elemental to reaching their conclusions.

    myiq2xu in reply to Mansizedtarget. | July 8, 2013 at 7:29 pm

    It could also come in under “prior inconsistent statement”.

      Paladin1789 in reply to myiq2xu. | July 8, 2013 at 10:51 pm

      Most likely this statement falls under the “res gestae” or “verbal act” exception to hearsay. The statement was not offered for the truth of the matter asserted (“that is my so n’s voice”) but for the fact that statement was made. If father makes statement “x” today the. The fact he made statement “y” yesterday is relevant without regard to which statement is accurate.

    JackRussellTerrierist in reply to Mansizedtarget. | July 8, 2013 at 7:33 pm

    It was part of the investigation. Why shouldn’t they, as investigating officers, be able to testify about it?

    CENTFLAMIKE in reply to Mansizedtarget. | July 8, 2013 at 7:56 pm

    Re: Hearsay evidence by Serino and other officer on Tracy Martin’s non-ID of the voice.

    The prosecution knew they had a problem with the father’s originally not being able to identify the screaming voice. They thought their best solution was to allow the two officers to testify for the defense as to the initial attempt at identification, and then they would call Tracy Martin later as a rebuttal witness. That way the father’s subsequent ID would be among the last things the jury hears. So they didn’t object to the hearsay evidence. But MOM also called Tracy Martin so that his contradictions would be framed by the officers’ testimony immediately preceding it.

    I don’t think the prosecution or Tracy Martin were ready for him to testify, they were going to prep for that later.

    whateverworks in reply to Mansizedtarget. | July 8, 2013 at 9:00 pm

    It’s not hearsay — it’s not offered for the truth of the matter asserted. Serino wasn’t asked who was screaming or to make any other assertion about whose voice it was based upon the dad’s answer; he didn’t, for example, say it was not TM on the tape because his dad said so himself initially. He just related how the dad responded to his questions.

    My flawed understanding of hearsay is that it is something that is indirectly heard.

    The two officers both testified that they heard him deny it was Trayvon Martin. In my view that is not hearsay. Now if someone was to testify that they heard from one of these two that Tracy Martin said it was not his son, then that is hearsay. At least that is how I have always understood the meaning of hearsay evidence.

Here was my original question on Daubert posted on June 7th – which Mr. Branca graciously answered:

littleredhen also asked about Daubert.

Once again, it is easy to tell those people following the trial from those who don’t. Those who follow the trial are convinced of GZ’s innocence while those who have no clue about the trial are rabid and in favor of a guilty verdict. As it was once said, “Ignorance is not an opinion”.

    styro1 in reply to Cleetus. | July 8, 2013 at 7:38 pm

    Exactly! Those getting there info about trial from the Lame Stream Media think GZ will be doing hard time for 20 yrs. Except for Abrams at ABC, who really surprised me, reported the real truth not libtard truth.

      JackRussellTerrierist in reply to styro1. | July 8, 2013 at 8:11 pm

      This isn’t the first time Abrams got it right. He had it right on Duke lacrosse as well, and maybe a couple others but I can’t recall which ones.

        Abrams is smart, too. He didn’t stake out a position on either case too early, just reported what happened (say, remember when reporters just did that and didn’t feel compelled to explain what everything meant?) until the prosecutions had clearly unraveled, then is among the first in the MSM to state the obvious and looks better for it.

      DriveBy in reply to styro1. | July 8, 2013 at 8:40 pm

      Not many comments here tonight about the gym owner, Adam Pollack – he was freakin’ great! Blew me away!!!

      Related. George was portrayed up until now as a combination of Dirty Harry with a KKK leaning. But now we know he was just a fat guy with not much common sense when it comes to his own personal protection from strangers wondering his neighborhood. Poor guy, good thing he had a gun!

        Michiguy in reply to DriveBy. | July 8, 2013 at 9:08 pm

        Absolutely concur. Adam Pollock was great. He came across as extremely knowledgeable in his areas of expertise, calm, confident, and far more coherent than most, including people who presumably have more experience testifying in court.

        But now we know [Zimmerman] was just a fat guy with not much common sense when it comes to his own personal protection from strangers wondering his neighborhood.
        It came across to me as more of a “He’s a nice guy who had good intentions and worked hard at the gym, but just did not have the substrate to even learn to defend himself physically, much less be an effective aggressor.” The mental picture Pollock conjured up was, IMO, that of the nebbishy kid who always got picked last for teams. The problem was more lack of aptitude, athleticism and ability than lack of common sense.

    WMMC in reply to Cleetus. | July 8, 2013 at 8:54 pm

    It’s quite obvious by reading posts on various forums, that the people who lack knowledge of even the most basic facts of the case are the same people who KNOW for a fact that GZ is guilty of murder.

    Gremlin1974 in reply to Cleetus. | July 8, 2013 at 9:14 pm

    Well that is also because their narrative has always been that Zimmerman is guilty of being a racist murder of this poor little innocent black boy that he stalked through this gated community and killed in cold blood. I mean edited 911 calls and all the level of journalistic incompetence and lack of ethics has been stunning even for the bias MSM. Now that they can’t manipulate and hide the truth and make it fit their liberal delusion they are all in denial and withdrawal.

      Uncle Samuel in reply to Gremlin1974. | July 9, 2013 at 2:40 am

      Any more murders (there have been some already) and riots in the name of Trayvon will be the fault of that creep Crump, his partners in crime, Parks, Jackson, the Martins, Obama, Sharpton, Spike Lee, the New Black Panther Party and all their hate-mongers AND the Media.

Rout will be allowed to prevent on other matters–such as how the trauma of having been involved …

Seems like that should read … Rout will be allowed to preSent on other matters–such as how the trauma of having been involved …

If not thru some testimony like Rout, what is the path for informing the jury of FL self-defense law? Is it in the jury instructions?

I hope crump gets nailed. I have a feeling he is going down in flames.

    Uncle Samuel in reply to rspung. | July 8, 2013 at 8:07 pm

    If you play with matches…

    Or, sometimes the arsonist gets caught in the fire he sets.

btw, the details of the meeting in the mayor’s office may give Zimmerman a legal case against the city of Sanford. they violated police procedures in many ways.

The prosecution is going to find it difficult to scare the bejezzus out of the jury until closing argument. It will be interesting to hear how they will make the threats.

The suggestion that Martin was the one screaming for help is utterly preposterous on its face because:
1. Martin had no physical injuries, but Zimmerman did

2. Witness Good shouted for the fighting to stop, and heard the guy on the bottom, Zimmerman, screaming. If Martin was screaming for help when he hear Good he would have screamed “he has a gun”

3. Zimmerman is allegedly an evil genius foiling the police with his expert training in SYG at the community college, but stupid enough to allow Martin to scream for 40 seconds knowing the police were on the way before shooting him.

4. Zimmerman’s testimony has been 100% consistent on this matter and is supported by all availlable evidence.

On the matter of the toxicology report; everything about the “Justice for Trayvon” narrative is a complete and utter lie. Everything.

    BubbaLeroy in reply to Jay. | July 8, 2013 at 8:00 pm

    Martin thought that the creepy ass-cracker was trying to rape him.

      Observer in reply to BubbaLeroy. | July 8, 2013 at 11:33 pm

      Of course. That’s why, when Martin first spotted Zimmerman watching him, Martin went over to Zimmerman’s vehicle and circled it while staring menacingly at Zimmerman.

      Poor kid was clearly terrified! LOL.

      Uncle Samuel in reply to BubbaLeroy. | July 9, 2013 at 2:48 am

      That was likely paranoia from past trauma + past and present use of drugs.

    gxm17 in reply to Jay. | July 8, 2013 at 9:17 pm

    #2. This is exactly what I’ve been saying. If it were TM screaming because GZ had a gun drawn on him, he would have mentioned it, either “don’t shoot” or “he has a gun!”

    Voluble in reply to Jay. | July 9, 2013 at 12:11 am

    Don’t forget grass stains on Martin’s knees and how Zimmerman’s back was wet while Trayvon’s front was wet.

    That all firmly establishes who was on top by physical evidence that goes along with the wounds.

    For a guy with a gun hunting a poor little kid Zimmerman took a lot of damage.

just saw this on the bottom of a NBC web-page…

“Editor’s note: George Zimmerman has sued NBC Universal for defamation. The company strongly denies the allegation.”


Good for Georgie!

    Harperman in reply to Twanger. | July 8, 2013 at 7:38 pm

    And if there is any justice in the world he will win that case also.

      Uncle Samuel in reply to Harperman. | July 9, 2013 at 2:51 am

      Will the families of the people whose lives and property were lost because of murders and riots incited by the Crump/Parks/Julison/Jackson evil false narrative be able to sue Crump?

    LoriL in reply to Twanger. | July 8, 2013 at 8:50 pm

    They strongly deny it yet they for a fact altered the tapes. I read their reply to the suit and it’s a “everyone else was doing it” defense.

      Gremlin1974 in reply to LoriL. | July 8, 2013 at 9:22 pm

      Unfortunately for them that defense will last to the point of any new law school grad asking;”Then where are the tapes of everyone else doing it?” and then noting that they fired someone for editing things more than once.

      Harperman in reply to LoriL. | July 8, 2013 at 9:28 pm

      Oh, the good old Bush did it first defense?

    when George is found not guilty, NBC should settle as quickly as possible because of what they did in regard to the narrative.

Note: during his testimony last week, Bao referenced Martin’s THC level, noting that “Marijuana could have no effect or some effect.”

Look at the photo of St. Skittles too…

    Uncle Samuel in reply to Jay. | July 8, 2013 at 8:12 pm

    Depends on when Trayvon started using drugs. Marijuana and other drugs can have a serious long term effect on the brains of teenagers.

      bawatkins in reply to Uncle Samuel. | July 8, 2013 at 8:25 pm

      Heavy marijuana use as a teenager has been strongly linked with schizophrenia in the UK.

        Re drugs and schizophrenia. The UK report (and all the rest for that matter) have no way to discern the cause/effect relationship. Was the schizophrenia the cause of the drug use? Or was the drug use the cause of the schizophrenia? Despite the hysteria – no one knows. All we have are correlation studies. Which are worthless.

        Very handy though if you are trying to support criminals by keeping Prohibition in effect.

          I think the answer is that cannabis can bring on schizophrenia in individuals who are predisposed to that illness. Yes, it is cause and effect.

          At the same time, I think that more research needs to be done on methamphetamine and its relationship to people with schizophrenia.

          “I think the answer is that cannabis can bring on schizophrenia in individuals who are predisposed to that illness. Yes, it is cause and effect.”

          “I think” is not proof of cause and effect.

        Henry Hawkins in reply to bawatkins. | July 8, 2013 at 8:52 pm

        Schizophrenics (and others with mental illnesses) often self-medicate with alcohol, cannabis, or some other substance.

      Well PTSD has serious long term effects on the brain of teenagers. Pot is indicated for PTSD unless the cause is very severe. Like sexual abuse in childhood. When opiates are indicated.

      Dr. Lonny Shavelson found that 70% of female heroin users were sexually molested in childhood.

      So were the brain changes caused by the drugs or was drug use caused by the brain changes? Despite government propaganda no one knows. Very handy if you are trying to maintain the Prohibition gravy train.

      See what this former DEA agent had to say about the Drug War gravy train. About 3 minutes in:–I

        MSimon, I know you mean well, but I disagree that cannabis is necessary for anyone recovering from abuse as a child. It is not the slightest bit necessary.

        As a victim of abuse when growing up, I know for definite that cannabis is not required. Rather, the victim needs psychological counselling and guidance on how to deal with the abuse that has taken place.

        Despite what I went through as a teenager, and for that matter as a result of school bullying at a younger age, I never felt the need to use cannabis to medicate myself and to forget such abuse.

        In my circle there is a young woman who never went through the abuse, but she took drugs, including heroin. Her oldest son went through withdrawal. It was tough on her adoptive parents. She went off the rails at school. Perhaps it happened when she discovered that she was adopted. However, in her case it is more than likely that her exposure to heroin prior to her birth gave her an addictive personality. In her case, drugs was the worst possible alternative.

          “As a victim of abuse when growing up, I know for definite that cannabis is not required. Rather, the victim needs psychological counselling and guidance on how to deal with the abuse that has taken place. ”

          If you are not genetically predisposed to PTSD that will work. Otherwise pot is indicated. For the most severe cases opiates.

          Dr. Lonny Shavelson found that 70% of female heroin users were sexually molested in childhood. Why are we making war on them? Is it the Christian thing to do?

          When all this is better known the Prohibitionists will wind up in the same historical bin as the segregationists.

          Cannabis and opiates are contraindicated in PTSD. Adding drug addiction to a pre-existing mental illness is a recipe for disaster. Now you’ve got two harmful and potentially fatal illnesses to solve instead of just one.

          I get that you don’t appreciate the failed “war on drugs”, you’re certainly not the only one who feels that way about it. But your blatherings on PTSD are, frankly, nonsense.

        “MSimon, I know you mean well, but I disagree that cannabis is necessary for anyone recovering from abuse as a child. It is not the slightest bit necessary.”

        How do you know? Are you genetically predisposed to PTSD? Only 20% of the population is. Only half of that 20% gets trauma sufficient to trigger PTSD.

        BTW the Israeli military uses pot for its victims of PTSD. Look up the work of Dr. Raphael Mechoulam Faculty of Medicine, Hebrew University of Jerusalem.

        What I see here is what I see a lot on the right on the subject. Ignorance of enormous proportions.

        I’m an odd duck on this whole trial. I believe GZ is absolutely innocent. I feel very sorry for Tray esp. his abandonment by his mother.

        What I can tell you as a former victim of child abuse and who still has lingering effects from PTSD. – You have no fookin idea. None. And that is true of quite a swath of the right. And tragedy compounded – it will give the communists an edge for a while. How dumb can you get?


      JackRussellTerrierist in reply to Uncle Samuel. | July 8, 2013 at 11:52 pm

      Scientists report that the human brain is not fully developed until about the age of 25. Higher thought processes, such as judgment, analytical skills, drive, circumspection and so forth are the last parts of the brain to develop. Development of that area of the brain is severely and negatively impacted by regular marijuana use in the young.

      I know that there are people here who use Pot and they disagree with the comment that Pot can affect teenagers.

      I am here to tell you that I have had experience talking to people who had been long term users in Pot. Every one of them had mental problems. Nearly all of them had serious depressive illness. Their drug use had affected them, and they were trying to do something about what had destroyed their lives.

      The truth is that there is evidence that the use of Pot can bring about mental illness. It only happens to some, not all users. It can do more than that, and yes I have seen one person affected to the point of almost losing her life. She was definitely seriously ill after smoking just one joint.

      The defense will most likely argue that TM was coming off the high and that this had made him aggressive.

        “I am here to tell you that I have had experience talking to people who had been long term users in Pot. Every one of them had mental problems.”

        You have zero proof of cause and effect. All you have is correlation.

        No long term studies have ever been done to prove the cause/effect relationship.

        To do that you would need to have a cohort of at least 10,000 (more likely 100,000 to a million) and follow them from birth with frequent brain scans and blood draws (maybe every two weeks). Very expensive. And that is assuming that enough people would stay in such a study to get a reliable sample.

        Am I trying to convince you? Hell no. This is for the lurkers. Some of them still have open minds. It is why the legalization crowd is now up to 52% or 58%. My intent is to get it well past 70%.

        The odds are good. >80% say prohibition is not working.

        Bruce Hayden in reply to Aussie. | July 9, 2013 at 9:43 am

        Yes, pretty much everyone I know who has smoked pot regularly for a long period of time has had mental issues. Saw something the other day that it may increase the odds of schizophrenia Something like that. But, not, really with the people I know who have used it sparingly over a long period of time.

        But the problem here is that Martin was not a long term pot user. He couldn’t have been, because he was much too young. The pot smokers I know who are having mental issues have smoked it for decades – by now, mostly 30-40 years. I am not saying that it couldn’t have short term adverse effects, but rather, given the tens of millions who have smoked some pot over a portion of their lives to little if any negative affect, I think that it is hard to make the argument that someone Martin’s age would likely have been negatively affected by his habitual use of the drug (not that it didn’t happen, but rather, that it can’t be shown).

Media doing the same to GZ as they did to Richard Jewell although media had the FBI’s help during Olympic bombing investigation with the leaks to pressure him. He’s a multimillionaire now.

    Mercyneal in reply to styro1. | July 8, 2013 at 8:01 pm

    He WAS a millionaire. He died in 2007.

    BubbaLeroy in reply to styro1. | July 8, 2013 at 8:01 pm

    Actually he is dead now.

    Baker in reply to styro1. | July 8, 2013 at 8:15 pm

    Unfortunately Richard Jewell passed away several years ago of heart disease. He had earlier been diagnosed with diabetes and had suffered kidney and heart damage as a result. The amounts he settled for in several actions against the media were never disclosed but I can tell you he loved law enforcement. At the time of his death he was working in a small county as a deputy. He was a nice, soft-spoken man, and I think it was very hard for him to escape the notoriety the fell upon him. My daughter and son-in-law both knew him slightly during the last years of his life through a professional relationship (the are both in law enforcement) and had nothing but nice things to say about him.

    xbradtc in reply to styro1. | July 8, 2013 at 8:41 pm

    He’s dead now. Fat lot of good it did him.

Lucien Cordier | July 8, 2013 at 7:46 pm

O’Mara: “Was there any reason you didn’t give her that information?” (referring to the fact that Tracy Martin had listened to the Lauer 911 call with Serino but claimed that he didn’t mention it to $ybrina Fulton)

Tracy Martin: “There was a lot of stuff going on, we had to bury our son, um, a lot of emotions, and, you just don’t think of EVERY LITTLE DETAIL THAT YOU’VE BEEN THROUGH.”

Apparently listening to audio of one’s son being shot to death is a “LITTLE DETAIL”, easily overlooked and forgotten.

    Harperman in reply to Lucien Cordier. | July 8, 2013 at 7:54 pm

    Well they were kinda busy trademarking ya know!

      graytonb in reply to Harperman. | July 8, 2013 at 10:12 pm

      It also appears from their body language in court and also facial expressions that they are not exactly fond of one another.

    I thought the same thing! WHAT? A LITTLE DETAIL!!! Your son being shot to death is life altering, not a little detail! Then you DON’T tell Sabrina that you said it was not your ‘BEST FRIEND’/son screaming on the 911 call. HE knew then it was TM beating up GZ and HE was screaming for help. YOU can bet the ghetto lottery, he told Sabrina immediately! Probably called her as he left the police station. WOULD love to see their cell records! They both seemed to be lying on the stand to protect the fact their son was a thug wannabe. I pray the jury sees through their lies.

    He is lying.

    The reason that he is lying is the fact that he was present when they heard the tape together. This was the moment when that information should have been revealed.

    He most likely had mentioned it to Crump, and then Crump directed all of them on how to react to the tape when it was played.

Houston, Texas-based Armed Citizen Project has announced its National Empowerment Day, an effort to train and arm 500 single mothers and other women across the United States.
Good for them.

Andrew, Do you not think that the greatest victory today was the toxicology report? Allowing that Trayvon was on drugs is huge. Especially when GZ said so in evidence that supposed to show his irrational “depraved” mind

Nelson’s rulling on Trayvon’s toxicology report being admissible for the defense went over like a lead ballon on CNN and was ignored for hours by MSNBC

    Harperman in reply to Jay. | July 8, 2013 at 8:04 pm

    Of course they are upset. It really sucks when the person you are trying to railroad not only gets a fair trial but is pounding the crap out of the perse…uh.. prosecution.

    txantimedia in reply to Jay. | July 8, 2013 at 8:09 pm

    MSLSD needed time to get their “explanation” ready for the “news” about the trial.

    graytonb in reply to Jay. | July 8, 2013 at 10:14 pm

    Well, consider the demographic. They’re probably shrugging and saying ‘ hey, I’m stoned a lot and it doesn’t make ME dangerous…//
    Ony half sarc/

Mansizedtarget | July 8, 2013 at 8:00 pm

I think the prosecution’s failure earlier to call Tracy Martin will bug the jury now that they heard what he had to say re: the tape.

I also think I figured out how tape got in. It’s a prior statement of identification. In the sidebar, O’Mara and co. must have been explaining that they would actually call Tracy Martin.

Fla. Stat. 91.801 states as follows in relevant part, defining such identifications as non-hearsay when declarant called to testify and crossed on same:

(c) “Hearsay” is a statement, other than one made by the declarant while testifying at the trial or hearing, offered in evidence to prove the truth of the matter asserted.

(2) A statement is not hearsay if the declarant testifies at the trial or hearing and is subject to cross-examination concerning the statement and the statement is:

(a) Inconsistent with the declarant’s testimony and was given under oath subject to the penalty of perjury at a trial, hearing, or other proceeding or in a deposition;

(b) Consistent with the declarant’s testimony and is offered to rebut an express or implied charge against the declarant of improper influence, motive, or recent fabrication; or

(c) One of identification of a person made after perceiving the person.

So, under this rule, if you say you’ll let declarant testify, you can set stage before or after with a) prior inconsistent statements or “identification” statements made by a person “after perceiving the person,” in this case via audiotape.

I believe that’s it. Would love to see sidebar transcript re: that, as my prior hypothesis might have been it too.

    whateverworks in reply to Mansizedtarget. | July 8, 2013 at 9:18 pm

    Why is it hearsay at all? It’s it’s not offered for the truth of the matter asserted — Serino wasn’t asked who was screaming or to make any other assertion about whose voice it was based upon the dad’s answer; he didn’t, for example, say it was not TM on the tape because his dad said so himself initially. He just related how the dad responded to his questions.

      rhorton1 in reply to whateverworks. | July 8, 2013 at 10:28 pm

      It’s the father’s out-of-court statement saying that it was not his son’s voice that is the hearsay. The defense wants that statement admitted as proof that what was said in the statement (i.e., that the voice is not Trayvon) is true. Although, as Mansizedtarget points out, Florida evidence law law does not consider out-of-court- identifications as hearsay, it really is. It’s a fallacy that all hearsay is inadmissible. The rules against admissibility are riddled with exceptions.

        Mansizedtarget in reply to rhorton1. | July 8, 2013 at 10:59 pm

        The witness is not necessarily called to comment on the testimony when it’s offered for the truth of the matter asserted. It’s a question of what the side (i.e., the lawyers) are trying to do. So it’s one thing if someone was yelling help and you’re saying, that’s his voice. Or if someone said, “I agree” which is a legal act. But someone–the someone being Traci Martin–saying X is true or false is normally hearsay. But here it’s exempted based on hearsay definition. Arguably it would be permitted on other bases too. But I did think this looked fishy until I looked at the rule again.

        The hearsay rules in Florida can be found at 91.801-803. Fasscinating–and confusing–stuff.

        THe law of evidence is based on a series of assumptions, traditions, and what not regarding what is prejudicial, fair, predictive, etc. about evidence. Frankly, I’d err on the side of allowing more testimony than presently allowed, including regarding peoples’ pasts, but that’s me.

It seems that any probing of the marijuana angle will result in someone claiming that, despite the illegal drug activity, he was a good kid, opening the door for portraying Trayvon in a truer light. At least, that’s what my non-legal mind thinks.

    If you consider that about 50% of Americans have smoked pot by age 25 there appears to be a lot of good kids doing the stuff.

      Fabi in reply to MSimon. | July 8, 2013 at 9:09 pm

      Are you saying that kids who break the law (by smoking pot) are still classified as good kids?

      (I’m not making that argument, just asking)

        Are you saying that 50% of American kids are bad kids?

        Are you saying that alcohol users during that Prohibition were uniformly bad people? Or was it a really bad law. We do get those from time to time.

          Fabi in reply to MSimon. | July 8, 2013 at 10:06 pm

          As you are claiming that I was making that assertion, I’ll take that position. Do you think ‘breaking the law’ and ‘being a good kid’ are states that may coexist?

          Fabi in reply to MSimon. | July 8, 2013 at 10:07 pm

          i.e., a ‘good law-breaking kid’?

          “As you are claiming that I was making that assertion, I’ll take that position. Do you think ‘breaking the law’ and ‘being a good kid’ are states that may coexist?”

          When you consider that about 50% of the kids break that law I’d have to say yes.

          Of course you can counter that this is a bad country with so many kids breaking the pot and alcohol laws. I could go with that.

          Of course given that this country was founded on law breaking maybe the kids are the true Americans and those like you slavish to laws and authority are not.

          I am not a friend to a very energetic government. It is always oppressive. — Thomas Jefferson

          What country can preserve its liberties if its rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance? — Thomas Jefferson

          The spirit of resistance to government is so valuable on certain occasions that I wish it to be always kept alive. It will often be exercised when wrong, but better so than not to be exercised at all. — Thomas Jefferson

          The majority, oppressing an individual, is guilty of a crime, abuses its strength, and by acting on the law of the strongest breaks up the foundations of society. — Thomas Jefferson

          Was the government to prescribe to us our medicine and diet, our bodies would be in such keeping as our souls are now. — Thomas Jefferson

          I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it. — Thomas Jefferson

        Phillep Harding in reply to Fabi. | July 8, 2013 at 9:37 pm

        The behavior is not, IMO, especially “bad”. Malum prohibitum rather than malum in se.

        It’s a stupid prohibition.

      If there were no social stigma to being a pot-head, the prosecution would not have fought so hard to keep the jury from hearing of St. Trayvon’s drug use. Like it or not, that’s the way it is.

      graytonb in reply to MSimon. | July 8, 2013 at 10:16 pm

      There’s a difference between ‘ trying it ‘ and wandering around the streets with a level of it in your blood.

Mr. Branca – last week you made brief mention of Dr. Bao’s testimony, and the fact he used notes. I was hoping you would expand on that. From what I have read on other sites, it didn’t seem his testimony was particularly helpful to the defense. Can you illuminate for those of us unable, because of work to watch the trial during the day?

Serious question for Andrew:

It appears that Donnelly was in court during the second day of the trial. If true, (and I saw a screen capture at a site that I won’t link to – Leatherman) can or will his testimony be thrown out?

    Jazzizhep in reply to Fabi. | July 8, 2013 at 8:16 pm

    I doubt that what I am about to say is correct but I wouldn’t bet against this defense team pulling a fast one on the State. If he was in court and his testimony is stricken, can you imagine the admonishment given to the jury: You must disregard his testimony b/c it was inappropriate for a witness to be in the court room.

    If it is illegal for the defense to suggest Donnelly sit in court, then I know my suggestion is incorrect, but it is fun to think about. And, WTF is he doing in the court room (ifthe reports are true?”

    Uncle Samuel in reply to Fabi. | July 8, 2013 at 8:18 pm

    Could it be a photoshop? Or mistaken identity?

    No, State already tried to get it stricken, no go.

    –Andrew, @LawSelfDefense

      Jazzizhep in reply to Andrew Branca. | July 8, 2013 at 8:25 pm

      I believe the judge denied the motion based on Richardson rules b/c the state could not show how it was prejudicial, but Mantei said there was another matter regarding his attendance in court that he needs to verify b4 making an argument.

        If the discovery violation wasn’t enough to show prejudice, him sitting in the court room won’t be either–in any case, he was sitting there BEFORE he chose to listen to the tape, so . . . anyway, I just don’t see it being a problem.

        Of course as the State gets increasingly desperate, I suppose they might make any claims. They’re already lying through their teeth in open court.

        –Andrew, @LawSelfDefense

      Thank you, Andrew, et al.

    txantimedia in reply to Fabi. | July 8, 2013 at 8:47 pm

    Even if Donnally was in the courtroom on the second day, the tape of Lauer’s 911 call was not played.

    So I don’t see how you could argue that he either perjured himself or his testimony was influenced by the testimony of other things.

      Harperman in reply to txantimedia. | July 8, 2013 at 9:36 pm

      Wouldn’t his presence in the court room depend on whether or not he knew at the time that he was on a witness list?
      In either case removing his testimony is kind of like locking the barn door after the horse has gotten out.

What really came across to me today and Friday were the impressive friends and family GZ has. Salt of the earth compared to Witless #8 and the Scheme Team. Not to mention the disreputable and unethical prosecutors.

I’ve seen comments on other sites that the THC evidence “proves” Trayvon couldn’t have been the aggressor, since “everyone knows you get more mellow and less aggressive when high on grass”.

The spinning from the left knows no limits…

    txantimedia in reply to avwh. | July 8, 2013 at 8:17 pm

    Easily countered.

    Does smoking marijuana cause aggression?

    In general, after using marijuana a person experiences a sedating effect, which makes the drug less likely to cause violence in users than other substances such as alcohol and stimulants (e.g., amphetamines and cocaine).

    However, sometimes when marijuana is used it can cause fear, anxiety, panic or paranoia, which can result in an aggressive outburst. For most people, however, once the effects of the drug wear off, their behaviour gradually improves.

    Studies show that violence can occur more often among people who use marijuana regularly, rather than those who use it occasionally or not at all. It is unclear why this is the case, but it may be because people with violent tendencies can also have a range of other psychosocial problems and are therefore more likely to use marijuana. marijuana is also part of the illegal drug market, which may increase the chances of violence occurring in some social interactions.

    Research also shows that marijuana users who commit violent acts usually have a history of violence before they start using the drug.

    In addition, when people are withdrawing from marijuana they can be irritable, which can lead to abusive or aggressive behaviour.

    This is not a door the prosecution wants to open. If they do, O’Mara will exploit it to their chagrin. Hopefully they still have someone with half a brain who will say, “Don’t go there!”

    If they do, then ALL of TM’s drug use becomes relevant as does his fighting. This is a cavernous hole through which the case would collapse in an even bigger heap than the existing one.

    I would LOVE to see the prosecution go there, because by the time O’Mara got done destroying TM in front of the jury even some of his most ardent supporters would give up.

    I would HATE to see the prosecution go there, because the effect on his family would be devastating. They already have to deal with the knowledge (as O’Mara pointed out and Sybrina didn’t argue with) that their son caused his own death through his foolish behavior.

      Henry Hawkins in reply to txantimedia. | July 8, 2013 at 9:06 pm

      As someone with almost 30 years experience treating substance abusers, the problem with these studies is that very few marijuana users use only marijuana. At least a plurality – and in some geographic and demographic categories, a majority – also drink alcohol, while still others use other drugs in addition to marijuana and alcohol, so it is difficult to determine exactly which is causing the violence, and even when you do, you have only a correlative relationship, with causation unproved. It is exceedingly hard to isolate for study those people who use marijuana and marijuana only, nor are such mono-druggies at all common in treatment programs. An added study problem is the fact that drug users lie. A lot.

      In social use (whether recreational or at abusive levels), marijuana is sort of like alcohol – for every user who experiences serious problems with it, there are eight or nine who do not.

        This is the one post that is closest to the reality of the situation with POT use.

        One of the problems that I see, and is not addressed is a what if: what if the Pot had been laced with another drug? The effects in that case would be far more devastating.

        I do know from my own experience of mixing with former drug users that Pot is only one part of the puzzle, yet Pot was the one drug that was frequently mentioned. Methamphetamine was one of the other drugs.

      Pot users tend to have PTSD. Use also peaks in the high anxiety years (15 – 25) and tapers off after that. My guess is that if PTSD is the cause of use anxiety comes roaring back when supplies are interrupted.

      And Tm was primed for PTSD as an abandoned child.

        You keep talking about PTSD. Was Trayvon ever diagnosed with PTSD? Is there any evidence that he met the actual DSM-IV criteria for PTSD? It’s not just something kids “catch” from being raised in a fatherless home. It’s not just a casual label for any kid who is maladjusted or is suffering from what we used to call “adolescence”. Or at least it didn’t used to be.

        I have a friend who is actually disabled by PTSD which he developed after a gruesomely traumatic incident in Afghanistan, and it’s an actual thing. Trayvon seemed to function just fine in everyday life for someone allegedly suffering the same disease.

          I personally see no evidence that TM had PTSD. I do see how George Zimmerman could be diagnosed with PTSD.

          At the same time I do think that the childhood situation might have played a role in TM’s life. On the other hand, considering that his father was a member of the Crips, I would suggest that TM’s influences also came from his neighbourhood as well as a desire to emulate his father.

          Big question: which parent agreed to TM having those tatoos. It is illegal under a certain age so a parent would have to agree to them.

          “I personally see no evidence that TM had PTSD.”

          Abandoned by his mother.

          Angry. Anti-social attitudes. Prone to sudden outbursts of violence.



          Thank you for your vote of confidence. I’m always encouraged when I get such support.

          Why? Well there are actual studies on the subject and your opinion highlights the need to look at them.

          We could do more to combat crime in this country if we looked seriously at those studies. More effect than building another 2 million prison cells.

        Gremlin1974 in reply to MSimon. | July 8, 2013 at 9:59 pm

        This is the most groundless, baseless, and frankly stupid claim that I have ever heard. To quote “Billy Madison”.

        MSimon,what you just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response, were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this room is now dumber for having listened to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.”

          Gremlin1974 in reply to Gremlin1974. | July 10, 2013 at 12:57 am


          Well let me put it this way, from a Nurse with 20 years nursing experience, 10 of which was in psychiatric and substance abuse treatment. There are dozens perhaps hundreds of studies done each year that are basically nothing more than justification to keep getting grant money and amount to nothing more than psycho-babble-bullcrap and are completely ignored by anyone with little things like professionalism, ethics, and intelligence.

          So from a Medical Professional to someone who I believe has claimed to be an ex-outlaw biker and who works in aeronautics in some fashion, you are completely and utterly incorrect and I renew my “Billy Madison” notation above.

    Phillep Harding in reply to avwh. | July 8, 2013 at 9:41 pm

    My experience in short, pot seems to make a person less able to handle complications. That can sometimes result in frustration expressed through violence.

    caambers in reply to avwh. | July 8, 2013 at 9:55 pm

    I’ve been seeing that gaining steam as a meme by the Traybots. A caller to the local pundit show tonight said that very thing too…potheads are mellow blah blah blah…if only Georgie had had a bag of Funyuns none of this would have happened, etc. What they fail to realize is those who use pot can become paranoid. I won’t go there with Trayvon but I will say a juvenile ‘up to no good’ and perhaps thinking he’d been caught doing something he ought not to have been doing would be very likely to try to teach the person who had seen him a lesson. Very likely indeed.

    wyntre in reply to avwh. | July 8, 2013 at 10:20 pm

    Up to 20-30% of pot users experience negative SX like paranoia, confusion and aggression.

    I know. I was one of them. After my third attempt at being cool I gave up. The paranoia was intolerable and I felt schizoid and out of control.

    Any and every chemical substance causes side effects, some good, some bad, and everyone reacts differently to them. You can not categorically say that a little pot made no difference in TM’s perception of the world around him. It could have contributed to the way he reacted to the situation.

    graytonb in reply to avwh. | July 8, 2013 at 10:20 pm

    Try telling that to the poor homeless guy whose face was half eaten by the Miami cannibal.
    The attacker’s blood sample was loaded with THC , among other substances.

Gandalf the Black | July 8, 2013 at 8:12 pm

Until today, if y’all ever wondered what Nancy Grace would look like as a judge, that would be Nelson.

retiredprosecutor | July 8, 2013 at 8:13 pm

Does the defense possess evidence that TM had engaged in fights with other people? If so, what does it consist of?

Since the prosecution has introduced evidence about GZ’s alleged MMA training in an attempt to portray GZ as a trained fighter who, the argument goes, was likely on top winning the fight with TM, before the fatal shot was fired, can’t the defense attempt to rebut this theory by introducing evidence about TM’s fights, fighting abilities, and propensity to engage in fights?

    Trayvon wadn’t no fighter! If he was, he’d a done told Rachel ’bout it and he ain’t did that. He a momma boy!

    caambers in reply to retiredprosecutor. | July 8, 2013 at 9:58 pm

    Yes, there is plenty of information via Tweets, videos, and other social media about Trayvon’s predilection for fighting. Some of it is in the form of statements by friends telling him he shouldn’t fight so much and him complaining in one series of comments that he was upset because the other guy didn’t bleed that much. But remember, Trayvon isn’t on trial so the perse…prosecution would have to do something that would ‘crack the door’ for the Defense to bring that in to play.

    the Persecution’s attempt to use George’s gym membership has been a total failure.

    The Defense actually used the man who trained George, and he is the best person to know George’s abilities etc.

    In other words this was another BIG FAIL for the Persecution.

Gotta love that smug Nancy Grace — “correcting” Frank Taffee that “Oh what a tangled web we weave when first we practice to deceive” is NOT a rhyme but, according to Nancy, “part of iambic pentameter by William Shakespeare.” Now, most of us realize that Frank was quoting Sir Walter Scott, not Shakespeare. But not Nancy.

    Bernice in reply to Bernice. | July 8, 2013 at 8:26 pm

    Actually, I would have expected Nancy to be better versed on the Bard. After all, her entire career can be summed up, to quote Shakespeare, as “A tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury — signifying NOTHING.”

    Harperman in reply to Bernice. | July 8, 2013 at 8:30 pm

    I thought it was hilarious when Nancy, the ignorant twit, claimed that the AR in AR-15 stands for “assault rifle”. Actually it is the first two letters of ARmalite.

    byondpolitics in reply to Bernice. | July 8, 2013 at 8:39 pm

    and… it rhymes.

Mark O’Mara will be on Piers Morgan tonight. That should boost his ratings by about 5000 viewers and just maybe Piers will hit 50,000 tonight.

Gandalf the Black | July 8, 2013 at 8:36 pm

MOM’s direct of Traydaddy needs to be shown to all criminal lawyers and wannabes. He let the lie stand. He did not bore in. He did not make a big deal out of it. He fully understood the breathtaking lie just spoken and that any sentient member of the jury heard it. he knew any further inquiry on that point would serve to elicit only sympathy for the witness.

How many times have we seen interrogators (hello BDLR) refuse to let go of something, and do so loudly?

Man, this guy is good.

Wow is Nancy Grace getting massacred on Twitter…

You’ve got to hand it to Drudge – He can put it in a nutshell

Three classic photo’s from TM phone (I believe) over the caption


Carol Herman | July 8, 2013 at 8:53 pm

Mt 2-cents. Flirida’s governor Rick Scott used $25-million of his own money to win this seat. (2010). Sworn in 2011.

Remember this. He used his own money. he grew rich “in plastics.” (The last line in The Graduate, when Dustin Hoffman’s character is told he should aim there after graduation.)

After the fraud trial against the CEO of the Columbia Hospitals story; back in 1997 (sp?) Rick Scott got a black guy. But then by going into “plastics” (and, maybe, “hedge funding”) he became spectacularly rich.

Very early in Scott’s first time, he called up his wealthy friends. Who had companies in Connecticut. And, told them the benefits of moving their companies to Florida.

And, now?

Well, if you were a very wealthy factory owner, how does Florida (Flow-dia) look to you … when you see the educational products … and housing products … they produce if you’re thinking of buying in a home nearby whatever place in Miami, where Dee-Dee lives?

Separate from the racial tensions. You now know your new hometown can erupt in riots? While the TRUTH has been erased by prosecutors, who are just looking to indict innocent people?

Keep in mind, (per Meredith Whitney’s Fates of the States), that there is a sea change in America as so many people leave the coastal areas; looking for jobs and homes in our central corridor. Not one or two people. Big movement. And, of course you know Texas has become a very profitable location. Along with Wyoming (where Cheney’s daughter, Liz, is stepping forward into a political showdown with the current senator from that state. And, then you have North Dakota. More jobs than in can find homes to put workers in. (There’s something called “temporary homes” … that may include a public company?)

Sea change. Jobs. Right to work States. And, safe neighborhoods.

And, Rick Scott “invested” $25-million … not just to be a one-term governor; but to attempt, perhaps, to reach the presidency? You can see what the opposition will do to him thanks to this persecutorial flowing and going the wrong way for Flordia.

Today, Angela Corey sat in little miss debbie half-nelson’s courtroom. Did Angela wave “hi” to the judge as she passed this dame’s private chamber?

The other thing to notice? George Zimmerman speaks perfect Spanish. (Yeah, so does Dee-Dee.) But if GZ is acquitted, why can’t he speak Spanish to Hispanics? (Which is a growing desirable political base?)

If this, instead of a decent trial searching for the truth, we’ve gotten to see an innocent man put through the ringer, why would Hispanics turn away?

Can Rick Scott willingly, again, spend another $25-million, or more, of his own money just to run for a second term?

The future lays beyond the horizon. We just don’t know yet what impact this trial will have on the idea lots of Americans want to keep the 2nd Amendment intact. And, most Americans, even if you just watch the movies where films depict good guys versus bad ones … What makes you think Hollywood disdains the Spanish market film goers?

Thank you, Andrew, and Bill, for listening. And, to everyone else who is willing to slog through a long post.


    That must have been some mighty fine wine that you enjoyed at dinner tonight. Keep up the good work, but always remember that driving while wining is against the law.

    JackSheet in reply to Carol Herman. | July 8, 2013 at 10:52 pm

    Florida is a great place to live. My neighbors are great and well armed. Our gun laws are possibly the best in the US.

    Rick Scott is a rich politician…shocking.

    This trial will hopefully be a first step in reversing the power of the Racial Grievance Industry. They will discard Tracy and Sabrina the moment the civil immunity kicks in.

    Not sure what your point is about Hispanics who speak Spanish?

      Mansizedtarget in reply to JackSheet. | July 8, 2013 at 11:18 pm

      Carol, not to be dick, but if you punctuated your sentences correctly, wrote in complete sentences, and didn’t try to be so cute, your points would be more clear. As it is this reads like the crap you hear at an open mike night in a small college town.

        “Carol, not to be dick,”

        Well I have been reading Carol for years. She even used to comment at my blog. Her writing has a charm that grows on you. Give it time.

    robbi in reply to Carol Herman. | July 8, 2013 at 11:24 pm

    Your well thought out post makes perfect sense.

    I think you hit the jackpot with the fact that Corey was in the courtroom today. Reminds me of a scene in the movie, Miracle on 34th Street. The man who “made” the judge is sitting in the court room telling the judge what he should do by nodding his head yes or shaking it no.

Carol Herman | July 8, 2013 at 8:54 pm

TYPO: Black eye. Not “black guy.”

    Uncle Samuel in reply to Carol Herman. | July 9, 2013 at 3:41 am

    Thanks for clearing THAT up, I was wondering if you meant Rick Scott also SHOT a black guy and was another George Zimmerman!

if I was Crump, I would be very scared…… what he submitted in Lieu of a Deposition, think back to Miss Rachel’s testimony, take a look at page 55 or exhibit L, who is lying today Crump or TM?

    MarkS in reply to MAPTX. | July 8, 2013 at 9:11 pm

    That explains MOM’s last two questions to TM

    fogflyer in reply to MAPTX. | July 8, 2013 at 10:23 pm

    Exhibit L is on page 56 for me.
    For those that don’t want to look it up, it is an Orlando Sentinal newspaper article that quotes Crump as saying that Tracey Martin said the police officers are lying about their claim that Tracey Martin said it wasn’t Trayvon on the tape.

    In addition, it also quotes Crump as telling them that the original recording was too distorted for Tracey to make out his voice, but upon hearing a cleaned up version of the tape, Tracey was able to identify the voice as Trayvon.

    So, what does this mean???
    I am not sure.
    It was newspaper article, not something said under oath, so I don’t know the legal ramifications of that. Also, is there any way to know that it is not just the newspaper misquoting what Crump said? I certainly have no faith in accurate reporting anymore.

    Hopefully some of you legal folk can enlighten us as to how this might play out.


      If the Persecution can use the Sean Hannity interview, by picking and choosing what George said, then the Defense should be allowed to use a newspaper article where Crump made those statements about comments from Tracy Martin.

    graytonb in reply to MAPTX. | July 8, 2013 at 10:24 pm

    Crump should be very nervous tonight. Suborning perjury is frowned upon by his fellow officers of the court.

    Fabi in reply to MAPTX. | July 8, 2013 at 10:41 pm

    Ding, Ding, Ding!

    Winner, winner; chicken dinner!

      MAPTX in reply to Fabi. | July 8, 2013 at 10:50 pm

      Hey guys check out Crump’s claims on the witness 8 interview on pages 41-43……you will see Don West is also setting the trap for Crump in his questioning of Miss Rachel…either Crumpis a lying POS or everyone else is……can’t wait to see how that plays out LOL

        graytonb in reply to MAPTX. | July 8, 2013 at 11:36 pm

        That’s one reason, IMO, why Judge Nelson was making it so difficult for Crump to be deposed.

The scream testimony has been absurd.

Up next: Families dispute who was coughing.

Andrew, Power Line blog links to you today. That’s big time!

I hate the format of this website, it does not flow! I can read the comments, and then come back 10 minutes later and I have to reread all of the comments to see the new comments, which I will not do. Not good.

    Harperman in reply to DriveBy. | July 8, 2013 at 9:07 pm

    Yes, they would be much better off with the comments in the order they were made and a quote function for replying to people.

      gasper in reply to Harperman. | July 8, 2013 at 10:25 pm

      You mean like on Ace? Where you comment on #103 and the response is on #748 with a ton of silliness and attempted humor in between which has nothing to do with the posted article? How is that possibly better? Also, the Zimmerman trial has more than tripled the number of comments normally seen on an LI post. Hang around, please. You will learn to love it like the rest of us do.

    Henry Hawkins in reply to DriveBy. | July 8, 2013 at 9:12 pm

    Hey! Do we come to your house and tell you you’ve picked out the wrong curtains?


    Mika-Samy in reply to DriveBy. | July 8, 2013 at 9:54 pm

    No, you don’t have to re-read all the comments. Just refresh the page and scroll down. Make note of the time of the latest comment you read and start with the one just after that.

      fogflyer in reply to Mika-Samy. | July 8, 2013 at 10:25 pm

      Actually, that won’t work.
      You will miss all new comments that were replies.
      You will only get new threads started.

    Joy in reply to DriveBy. | July 8, 2013 at 10:30 pm

    Why not just have new comments delivered to your e-mail so you don’t have to do all of that scrolling?

    You can subscribe and read the newer comments in emails… Or just the replies to your comments.

From the Orlando Sentinel 3/17/2012:

“Serino said Trayvon’s father, Tracy Martin, listened to all of the 911 calls in the case before the entire family convened at City Hall to listen Friday night. When asked if the voice on one, a male calling forhelp was his son, told Serino no.

Police lied Friday, Crump said, when they said Tracy Martin said the voice crying for help was not his son. What Tracy Martin told police, Crump said, was that “he couldn’t tell, that it was too distorted.”

The audio has since been cleaned up, and now Tracy Martin has no doubt but that the voice is his son,
Crump said.”

I wonder if Martin not knowing Singleton also heard it is something key for the defense here.

    graytonb in reply to gtexas. | July 8, 2013 at 10:26 pm

    “The audio has since been cleaned up, and now Tracy Martin has no doubt but that the voice is his son”,
    Crump said.

      Bruce Hayden in reply to graytonb. | July 9, 2013 at 9:58 am

      I am curious a bit about how they supposedly “cleaned up” the tape. Does this mean that these witnesses were listening to a different version of the recording than has been played so repeatedly in court? Inquiring minds want to know. The problem, as pointed out by experts in the Frye hearing, is that “cleaning up” this recording is problematic. Cleaning up essentially means removing certain frequency bands (depending on the problem), and that is problematic here because the sounds that someone would want to remove (such as the foreground 911 conversation) cover essentially the same frequencies that the screams do. Plus, of course, that the original recording had minimal accuracy (remember when the one defense expert pointed out that the signal actually had half the accuracy that the prosecution witness was claiming – all the low order bits were zero). If these witnesses weren’t listening to the original recording, their testimony should be suspect until and unless it can be shown that the cleaned up version was an accurate representation of the original

MSNBC talking heads didn’t get the ‘case is not about race’ memo. Have the author of ‘Dear White America’ on the program. I have no idea which side he’s coming down on… And he’s fanning the riot flames!

And a talking head-ette says people shouldn’t have CCW permits – that they’re almost impossible to get in other states – and that TM’s parents should sue the state of Florida!

    DriveBy in reply to Fabi. | July 8, 2013 at 9:04 pm

    They will sue The State of Florida! Geez, one thing at a time!

    Lina Inverse in reply to Fabi. | July 8, 2013 at 9:11 pm

    41 other states have shall-issue or thereabouts concealed carry, and Illinois is soon going to be forced by the Federal courts to join them.

      Harperman in reply to Lina Inverse. | July 8, 2013 at 9:42 pm

      And then we have the truly sensible states like Arizona where our right to carry, either openly or concealed, is guaranteed in our constitution and there is no permit needed.
      When you have to have permission to exercise a right then it is no longer a right but a privilege.

        Fabi in reply to Harperman. | July 8, 2013 at 9:54 pm

        Funny how some people and states fail to understand what rights are all about! Good for AZ!

        graytonb in reply to Harperman. | July 8, 2013 at 11:42 pm

        My state (TN) encourages CC. If you’re a law-abiding citizen with no mental issues, you can easily be issued a permit with training.
        And if you shoot a bad guy in self defense, there’s usually no problem.

    styro1 in reply to Fabi. | July 8, 2013 at 9:52 pm

    Vermont doesn’t even issue permits so if you need one to travel out of state with a pistol you must get 1 from another state. Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, and Wyoming issues permit but it’s not necessary to have one although they have shall issue permits for out of state carry.

      Harperman in reply to styro1. | July 8, 2013 at 10:18 pm

      This is true. If an Arizonan wishes to carry when traveling in reciprocal states he must get an Arizona state permit. On the other hand, out of state people traveling in Arizona do not need a permit from their state in order to carry here.

      Gremlin1974 in reply to styro1. | July 8, 2013 at 10:20 pm

      Correction, I am an Arkansas CHP holder and it is necessary to have one in this state. People tend to think that Arkansas has open carry and we do not. We do have a “Journey Statute” that says you man have a loaded handgun in your car if you are going on a “journey” outside of your normal day to day excursions, but the firearm has to remain in your car, you can’t even take it with you to pump gas. That statue also has a mixed history when invoked, it doesn’t always work. However, we have had several CHP holder shootings and no charges have ever been filed to date.

      The good news is that they recently changed the self defense law here. There used to be a joke that if you shot someone make sure they landed inside the door,if not drag them inside. Now they updated our version of the castle law to include your yard as well as your home.

      Oh, and it is still ok to castrate someone mule if it comes on your property and does damage or eats crops or stores, lol.

        Lina Inverse in reply to Gremlin1974. | July 8, 2013 at 10:25 pm

        According to the news reports I’ve been reading, Arkansas joined the Constitutional Carry (no permit required) camp this month.

          Harperman in reply to Lina Inverse. | July 8, 2013 at 10:41 pm

          Yes indeed. Constitutional carry went into effect in Arkansas the first of July. Welcome to the state of sanity Arkansas.

          Gremlin1974 in reply to Lina Inverse. | July 10, 2013 at 1:18 am

          No, one person has been pushing the narrative that Arkansas is now constitutional carry, however they are basing that on a bill that made technical corrections to existing laws, it defined what a “Journey” was in our Journey statute, which is now traveling outside of the county in which you reside. That Journey statute also says the gun must stay in your car. It also made it clear that if you are caught with a gun in your car while on a journey the police must prove that you had criminal intent before they can harass you about it.

          It also made it clear that you have the right to carry a gun while in your home or on property that you own or control, for instance store owners can now have a gun while in their store.

          So if you leave your car with a gun while on your Journey, leave your yard, or walk out of your store with a gun, it better be concealed and you had better have a CHP or you are guilty of a crime.

          I base all of this on a couple of things. First, this question was asked directly to the Governors office and they gave a very direct reply that it was incorrect to interpret Act 746 as “Constitutional Carry” and that it would not be interpreted that way if you are caught with a firearm.

          Also, Arkansas Carry, who has been pushing this interpretation recommends contacting an Attorney before just getting strapped up and walking out the door. Se even they don’t have complete confidence in their interpretation.

          Also, I took the full CHP class this weekend and this came up. The instructor had heard of this as well and had contacted the Arkansas State Police and the Sheriff, their basic response was, “Yes, please walk around strapped, we can always use more money from fines and penalties.”

          Oh, I also base this on the fact that I actually read Act 746 and no where in it does it do what these people claim.

          Arkansas is a “Shall Issue” State, get a permit and you don’t have to worry about it.

          P.S. One other reason you know this isn’t true, is that in just one month, May I think it was, the State Police CHP division took in $84,000 in CHP fees, you think they are gonna let that go?

    There are currently over a million people in Florida with concealed carry licenses, and statistically they are more law-abiding than the general populace. These hoplophobes are worried about all the wrong people.

    Gremlin1974 in reply to Fabi. | July 8, 2013 at 10:12 pm

    LOL, I completed the 5 hours class for mine here in Arkansas on Saturday and my permit should be to me in the next few weeks, so yea, almost “impossible” to get except in Florida, LMAO.

      Harperman in reply to Gremlin1974. | July 8, 2013 at 10:55 pm

      So you completed your training on Saturday the 6th and are waiting for a license; however, on Monday, the first of July, Constitutional carry went into effect in Arkansas and you didn’t need one.

        Harperman in reply to Harperman. | July 8, 2013 at 10:56 pm

        I suggest you consider reviewing the gun laws in your state in order to discover what other critical aspects of the law you don’t know.

          Gremlin1974 in reply to Harperman. | July 10, 2013 at 1:20 am

          I suggest you review them, because according to the Governors office, the AG, the State Police, and the Sheriff you are 100% incorrect.

          Oh, the author of ACT 746 also agrees that you are incorrect.

    what a shame that they are not suggesting that TM’s parents should be used because he used his fists as a weapon.

“Pollock described Zimmerman’s initial fighting ability when he enrolled at the gym as a 0.5 on a scale of 1-10, a skill level that had increased to a mere 1.0 or 1.5 in the month before the shooting.”

I have to take exception to your characterizing GZ’s increase in fighting skill to being a “mere” 1.0 or 1.5. I mean, give the man some credit – that means he doubled or even tripled his fighting skills in that time.

    DriveBy in reply to cazinger. | July 8, 2013 at 9:08 pm

    Not many comments here tonight about the gym owner, Adam Pollack – he was freakin’ great!!! Very professional.

    Related. George was portrayed, up until now, as some weird combination of Dirty Harry crossed with a KKK Warlock (or whatever they were called). But now we know he was just a fat guy, with not much common sense when it comes to his own personal protection from strangers wondering around his neighborhood. Poor guy, good thing he had a gun!

      Baker in reply to DriveBy. | July 8, 2013 at 9:53 pm

      I loved when the prosecutor (Mantei, I think) started asking Pollock about some very specific complex holds or maneuvers and Pollock looks back at him like he is an idiot. I could have sworn Pollock was thinking “Hey dude, are you stupid or something? What you’re talking about is like teaching a major league player to adjust his batting stance and grip to help him make contact on a 98 MPH fastball low and in and what I’m working with here is trying to teach someone to hit a whiffle ball off a T without striking out.”

      (Seriously though, nothing against GZ. Not everyone is an athelete. I give him tons of credit getting into an exercise and diet program and sticking with it. Says a lot about his character. I hope he is able to get back into a program when this is over.)

Thought I saw Nancy Grace on HLN at bit ago say that Trayvon’s father stated that one of the two LEO’s that heard him wasn’t actually in the room. Wasn’t clear really. Did that really happen?

    Harperman in reply to zdude. | July 8, 2013 at 9:10 pm

    It wasn’t a room it was cubicle and the other officer was just outside the cubicle about 8 feet away.

    graytonb in reply to zdude. | July 8, 2013 at 11:45 pm

    Unbelievably, Nancy Grace actually seemed to endorse the idea that the police were lying re Martin’s response.

Gandalf the Black | July 8, 2013 at 9:06 pm

Wow. MOM just said that there is at least one more cop who can testify that Traydaddy said, “No.”

Question for Andrew (This is on the wrong page due to a log-in problem, and is related to the firearm forensics)

Are you sure the gun was recovered after the shooting (before being altered for test firing) WITH a round chambered?

I read elsewhere on the internet that there was no round in the chamber, suggestive that Trayvon had his hand on the slide mechanism at the time he was shot, thereby preventing the next round from chambering.

During the scuffle on the ground Zimmerman began trying to get his handgun out of his belt. Trayvon attempted to get the gun away from Zimmerman. Zimmerman then shot Trayvon once in the chest at very close range, according to authorities.

The impact of the shot thrust Trayvon upward, backward, and partially spun him around to land on his stomach.

The handgun was a Kel-Tec PF9 semiautomatic 9mm pistol. The police took immediate custody of the weapon when they arrived on scene. The gun was recovered with a full magazine and only the chambered round had been fired.

This is a condition associated with something preventing the gun from cycling a fresh round from the magazine into the chamber after the shot was discharged. One thing that can cause this condition is another man’s hand wrapped around the pistol, retarding its slide mechanism.

(See )

“This would indicate, as the coroner’s office affirmed, that specific gunshot residue patterns and cuts were present in certain places on Trayvon Martin’s hand(s), and that a struggle for a gun was taking place when the fatal shot was fired.”

    Henry Hawkins in reply to rduke007. | July 8, 2013 at 9:16 pm

    It should be noted that the shooter’s own hand can interrupt the slide mechanism (the flesh flap between thumb and finger), as can clothing.

      MarkS in reply to Henry Hawkins. | July 8, 2013 at 9:40 pm

      If the flesh flap on GZ’s hand prevented the pistol from cycling there would be some type of injury or bruising to the hand IMO

        Phillep Harding in reply to MarkS. | July 8, 2013 at 9:47 pm

        It can leave a nasty scar, too.

        GZ might have grabbed some cloth along with the gun. That can create a jam.

      Well I suppose the significance might be muted, as there are probably a lot ways this could happen (if my web source is even accurate, and the gun was found that way)
      The question would be then: Was the lack of a chambered-round the result of TM attempting to gain control of the gun, and if so, under what circumstances?

      The defense certainly doesn’t have to prove it was beyond reasonable doubt-reasonable doubt is created by the suggestion that it might have been.

    Lucien Cordier in reply to rduke007. | July 8, 2013 at 9:51 pm

    I’m hesitant to stick my nose in here since you addressed your question to Andrew, but here goes. On pg.20 of the first discovery dump pdf is a statement that one spent casing was found on the ground, one live round was removed from the chamber when the weapon was cleared, and 6 live rounds were in the magazine.

    Phillep Harding in reply to rduke007. | July 8, 2013 at 10:09 pm

    Wait a minute.

    “This would indicate, as the coroner’s office affirmed, that specific gunshot residue patterns and cuts were present in certain places on Trayvon Martin’s hand(s), and that a struggle for a gun was taking place when the fatal shot was fired.”

    Yet no DNA on the firearm? That’s a little odd.

    Oh. GZ was shooting from a grassy knoll, and TM was fighting w someone else.

    txantimedia in reply to rduke007. | July 8, 2013 at 10:09 pm

    You’re chasing rabbits. The forensics report described the gun as having six rounds in the magazine and “one loose round”. The magazine would have originally had seven rounds with an eighth round in the chamber. After firing one round, there would be six rounds in the magazine and one in the chamber.

    Standard police procedure is to remove the magazine and clear the chamber when acquiring a gun from a suspect. Thus the “one loose round”. The gun did not misfire or jam, and Trayvon did not prevent a round from firing. (If he had, it would have still be in the chamber anyway.)

    rduke007 writes: “The impact of the shot thrust Trayvon upward, backward, and partially spun him around to land on his stomach.”

    Dude, you watch too many movies.

    Anybody who has hunted small and medium, or even large sized game knows that no 9mm round is going to lift any 160lb object upward, backward, and partially spin it around.

    The damn things can barely knock over a Pepper Popper adjusted properly for 45ACP.

    And, no, a 45ACP won’t do any of those things either. Nor a 30-06, for that matter.

    Google the Normady invasion footage and see the guys walking up the beach get cut down by heavy machine gun fire. They get hit, drop to a knee (maybe), fall on face. That’s it. All done. That’s how even high power bullets work in real life.

    Handgun bullets, half the time the other guy is still talking to you afterwards, saying he can’t believe you actually shot him. 80%+ of people shot with handguns survive.

    Laser blasters they’re not. Nor “flip machines”.

    –Andrew, @LawSelfDefense

      Harperman in reply to Andrew Branca. | July 8, 2013 at 10:46 pm

      Funny isn’t it how many people’s only knowledge of firearms comes from the movies?
      My favorite from those people is, “Why didn’t he shoot to wound?” Or, “Why didn’t he shoot him in the arm?”
      It is very obvious that such people have never fired a handgun in their lives.

        Bruce Hayden in reply to Harperman. | July 9, 2013 at 10:05 am

        My personal pet peeve there is that in movies, and esp. on TV, bad guys fall down and die on the first shot, but good guys seemingly survive long enough to be rescued by the paramedics, or at least have a meaningful death bed scene. The bad guys, no matter how well trained, just don’t apparently shoot straight, but the good guys seemingly can consistently kill with one shot to center of mass

      txantimedia in reply to Andrew Branca. | July 8, 2013 at 10:54 pm

      Another reason to stop watching TV and movies. Do schools still teach Newton’s Law? For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction. If a gun was powerful enough to know some down when they are shot, it would also knock the shooter down.

      Think about it. As Andrew pointed out, your chances of surviving a handgun would are extremely high.

      Narniaman in reply to Andrew Branca. | July 8, 2013 at 11:41 pm

      Hmmm. . . .don’t you think a 50 caliber might be able to do that?

      Stephen in reply to Andrew Branca. | July 9, 2013 at 12:05 am

      Translation: For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction. If it will knock down the shootee, it will knock down the shooter.

        Bruce Hayden in reply to Stephen. | July 9, 2013 at 10:20 am

        Which is the answer to the .50 BMP question of the previous poster – no, you can’t shoot an M2 machine gun except from a tripod or mount. Even rifles shooting that round need to be shot from a mount of some sort, such as a bipod

        I should note from the point about the Normandy invasion above – those were likely medium to light machine gun bullets, and not heavy machine gun bullets (similar to the .50 BMP). Likely something closer to the .30 type caliber shot by most of the German machine guns. Why? Partially accuracy and partly that a true heavy machine gun requires either a large tripod mount, or some sort of permanent or vehicle mount. And, typically a 3 man team. Heavy machine guns are not really anti-personnel weapons, but rather, anti-vehicle weapons.

I wish I had one of Drudge’s blinking lights! Rachel (DeeDee) may have been catfishing Trayvon!

Again, there’s no way she was on the phone with him – it’s a scam! Crump’s likely a complete fraud! Lawsuits at 10 paces!

    Phillep Harding in reply to Fabi. | July 8, 2013 at 10:05 pm

    Well, the phone companies will have a record of the phone call, especially if it was for 4 hours.

      txantimedia in reply to Phillep Harding. | July 8, 2013 at 10:11 pm

      Guys, it is already in evidence that the phone calls were between Trayvon and Rachel. Don’t get sidetracked. Whether or not she “catfished” him is a separate matter not relevant to the case, unless you think there is some value in bringing a witness back on the stand who has already testified under oath to having perjured herself under oath.

        There is no proof whatsoever that TM and Rachel were on the phone at that time. None. TM’s phone and a phone that Rachel had access to were connected, we know that from the phone records; but it cannot be proven that she was on the other end of the call. She’s admitted that other people used her phone on a regular basis during the period in question.

        Call me a skeptic, but I think she was coached to give her testimony. Testimony that was not brought forth until after Crump had access to the NEN and 911 calls and could have created her testimony. Think about it. I believe the level of corruption is that deep. As do many.

    Yukio Ngaby in reply to Fabi. | July 8, 2013 at 11:26 pm

    OK, I’ll bite. What exactly is catfishing with a phone?

      Catfishing is when a person tries to establish a relationship with another under false pretense, i.e., person says they are attractive, young, etc. Person who is scamming the other person knows that they would not otherwise catch the person in question – because they are not actually attractive, young, etc.

      Would explain why Rachel said ‘We wuz gettin’ there.’ when Serino asked if she were TM’s girlfriend…

Dershowitz (SIC) just said on CNN, that “a 17 year old child was killed.” Wasn’t Audie Murphy a “17 year old child” when he enlisted in the US Army? And later became the most highly decorated US military soldier or any branch, like, ever????

    Baker in reply to DriveBy. | July 8, 2013 at 11:08 pm

    I knew a guy who ran away from a bad home situation soon after he turned 16, lied about his age and joined the Army. That was early 1941. When he turned 17 in Jan 1942 his unit was in a fighting withdrawal to Bataan. He was captured about 3-4 months later but just by chance missed the Death March because he was captured after the actual fall of Bataan and was separated from the bulk of the prisoners. Before capture he had been separated from his unit and on his own for over a week mostly behind enemy lines. He spent time in prison camp in the Philippines before being shipped to Japan for the remainder of the war.

    Some 17 year-olds can be pretty tough.

    Bernice in reply to DriveBy. | July 8, 2013 at 11:50 pm

    Actually, Woody Allen was “a seventeen year old child” when Dershowitz leapt fully-formed from his forehead, or so the evidence suggests.

    my grandfather was either 16 or 17 when he joined the army in World War 1. He was sent to Gallipoli but he did not land there. The ship then went to Egypt where they disembarked. He ended up being wounded in France. So before the age of 21 he lost his leg because it was amputated as a result of being a “child” who went to war.

Whoa! Tracy Martin said he listened to the Lauer 911 call 20 times so he could understand why GZ chased Trayvon? Not the NEN call, but the Lauer 911 call?!?!

Oh, oh. 1 + 1 does not equal 2 here, sirrrrr.

I’ve got a question. When Zimmerman wins his case, is found not guilty (hope, hope, hope), then when it’s all over can he sue the pants off the worthless, good-for-nothing media that spewed nothing but lies against him?

    Phillep Harding in reply to kittycat. | July 8, 2013 at 10:10 pm

    I hope the different cities bring suit against the news media for the extra expenses related to riots, prevention, etc.

      graytonb in reply to Phillep Harding. | July 8, 2013 at 11:30 pm

      Broward Sheriff tonight issued a video asking for calm among the citizens after the verdict. Members of the Miami Heat were featured, asking youths to ‘ speak up, not act up ‘.
      I wish him Godspeed with this one.

    Gremlin1974 in reply to kittycat. | July 10, 2013 at 1:24 am

    From what I understand he has already filed suit against one of them for the edited 911 call.

Walker Evans | July 8, 2013 at 10:49 pm

The serial number is on the other side of the gun and on the back of the slide, so … Nope. Won’t happen.

    Harperman in reply to Walker Evans. | July 9, 2013 at 1:21 am

    Thanks. I have several Smith and Wessons but they are all revolvers so I didn’t know where they place the SN on their semiautos.

      Gremlin1974 in reply to Harperman. | July 10, 2013 at 1:23 am

      S and W usually puts the SN on the inside of the swing arm for the cylinder, or at least that is where it is on mine.

Mansizedtarget | July 8, 2013 at 11:16 pm

I just want to say re; the Anderson Cooper show I’m watching, these commentators are lazy compared to nearly everyone on this blog.

First, they seemed to totally miss the issue re: the Crump questions of Martin. It’s clear they’re taking Crump down.

Two, everyone is a know-it-all about THC. Yes, weed is mostly harmless. It also is widely reported to make some people paranoid. Some even go full crazy. The guy in Miami who ate the other guy’s face only had marijuana in his system. Not very mellow there.

Three, know one picked up the “looks like he’s on drugs” comment as relevant to the marijuana testimony.

Four, very little discusssion of the incredible believability and overall non-weirdness of Zimmerman’s friends and witnesses. Compare them to Rachel Jeantel and Sabrina Fulton. (Traci Martin was a very sympathetic character overall, I think most would agree).

Finally, the first aggressor rule and the “who can fight” issues of self defense law were all missing from discussion. Totally unforgivable in the age of google. All lazy lazy lazy.

    I have known people who went paranoid because of their use of Pot. It is more common than people think.

    my first pot only death was servicemember in germany with only thc in system walking with buddies to get food. decided would be fun to plant a flag on top of a power pole.
    440 line blew him apart. that was fun day.
    second one was walking on autobahn, we found thc. unsure about anything else though. took us 5 hefty size bags to hold all his parts. you know 150mph mercedes will pop a person out of their shoes w/o moving the shoes?
    most other deaths I dealt with that had thc also had large amounts of alcohol so cannot say thc was the issue with them.
    stoned people do dumb things.

can zimmerman sue the prosecution team for prosecutorial misconduct?

    graytonb in reply to J. Locke. | July 8, 2013 at 11:48 pm

    Sadly, not an option.
    But I do hope he recovers or settles with NBC re the doctored tape.

      Not only that, one can slander another on the stand and it is not actionable in a civil trial. IOW, you can say anything you want to about a person without worrying about being sued for slander.

    Uncle Samuel in reply to J. Locke. | July 9, 2013 at 6:04 am

    Crump and company, the race-buzzards, the Black Panthers and the media are culpable for sure.

      TrooperJohnSmith in reply to Uncle Samuel. | July 9, 2013 at 10:06 am

      Don’t forget Owl Shawpt’n. We know he has money money money. One of his striped suits costs more than a new Lexus (w/ navigation).

txantimedia | July 8, 2013 at 11:20 pm

I’m not usually this unintelligible.

If a gun was powerful enough to knoCK someONE down when they are shot, it would also knock the shooter down.

Think about it. As Andrew pointed out, your chances of surviving a handgun wouNd are extremely high.

legacyrepublican | July 8, 2013 at 11:26 pm

I have come to the conclusion that it is easier to explain the causes of WWI than it is to understand the prosecution’s theory of murder 2 or manslaughter.

So, Andrew, could you post this video in the blog for Day 11 just so everyone can keep up with the prosecution line of reasoning.

There’s a good chap.

Something very odd when Zimmerman’s friend was testifying, they kept showing Martin’s father for reaction, but he never gave any reaction in those moments. The bald man growing that splendid hair so fast. It is impressive. Screen grab from the video above.

Yeah, this is off-topic, but just now on COPS:

– One person told the police he was having trouble with the field sobriety test because he was ‘…a little bit drunk.’

– Another jeenyus called the cops to tell them that someone had stolen some of her marijuana plants!

Paging Dr. Darwin. Stat!

    NavyMustang in reply to Fabi. | July 9, 2013 at 5:16 am

    God, I miss being a cop! One time, we had something similar. Dispatch came on the radio, directing one of my beat partners to a case where the complainant reported “somone stole my crack pipe!”

    We all had a good laugh over that one!

    snopercod in reply to Fabi. | July 9, 2013 at 7:36 am

    I was talking to a local building inspector once and he told me some guy growing pot in his attic called his office and asked for an inspector to come out because the lights were flickering. He was afraid the house was improperly wired.

A few other things happened, too, like Judge Debra Nelson ruling that the THC content within Martin’s blood stream–caused by marijuana smoking–at the time of his death is relevant information. But in the case the trial itself doesn’t satisfy news hounds, Android App developer Trade Digital, Inc. has you covered with its new Angry Trayvon game.

*Blank Stare*

So, um, what is Angry Trayvon?

“Trayvon is angry and nobody can stop him from completing his world tour of revenge on the bad guys who terrorize cities everyday.”

How would it affect Zimmerman’s case if the defense can prove that Crump got even 1 state witness to lie?

    legacyrepublican in reply to robbi. | July 9, 2013 at 12:58 am

    Don’t know, but it would earn him a medal or two from the current POTUS.

    Attempting to influence a witness’s testimony can jeopardize Crump’s law license. (Criminal Act: Suborning perjury)

    I think we know what is going on with Crump. He is smelling a huge payday in a wrongful death civil trial if he can get any kind of conviction. I have already pointed out that he told Capehart that the iconic Hollister photo showed a 16 1/2 year old Trayvon.

    If MOM takes down Crump and GZ walks, it’s a good day.

    would it nullify the HOA settlement ?

Regarding Mr Crump. How was he deposed? I’m not a lawyer, but wouldn’t all discussion between he and his client be attorney privilege? IOW, he doesn’t have to say anything.

I’d appreciate any help. Thanks everyone, and thank you Andrew Branca.

    txantimedia in reply to [email protected]. | July 9, 2013 at 12:56 am

    First of all, Crump was deposed about his interview of “Dee Dee”. She was not his client, so attorney client privilege doesn’t enter in. Secondly, even an attorney directly involved in a case can be deposed about certain things; notes, work product in certain circumstances, etc. Attorney client privilege is not a blanket grant of secrecy.

      Bruce Hayden in reply to txantimedia. | July 9, 2013 at 10:28 am

      But, since Crump was not an actual party attorney here, hie is on even shakier ground. He didn’t represent either the state of Florida or George Zimmerman in State of Florida v. George Zimmerman. So, the attorney work product privilege is also not available to him. Moreover, any confidentiality he may have had would likely have been waived by having ABC there to film the interview (and, later broadcast part of it).

I’m confused. Is it that violent people don’t smoke pot or is it that when violent people smoke pot, it calms them down so much that they are no longer violent?

    Harperman in reply to darwin-t. | July 9, 2013 at 1:30 am

    I don’t know the answer to that but the statistics tell us that a whole boatload of criminals are high on marijuana when they commit their crimes.

this is what is going to happen Tuesday, July 9 in the trial:

crump will be called to the stand. he will testify the tape he played in the mayor’s office was altered/ enhanced/modified. he will also testify he never gave the tape to the state or defense.

all hell will break loose.

the jury will be instructed to disregard the testimony of SF and TM about identifying the scream.

this will be the second occurrence of crump modifying tapes. the first was with the RJ depo.

remember, you heard it here first.

    ConradCA in reply to rspung. | July 9, 2013 at 4:22 am

    OMG! That should be interesting.

      ConradCA in reply to ConradCA. | July 9, 2013 at 4:27 am

      What? “the first was with the RJ depo.”

      Uncle Samuel in reply to ConradCA. | July 9, 2013 at 6:18 am

      The RJ depo was taken in less than impartial surroundings. There is also some doubt as to whether DeeDee/Diamond/Rachel are the same person, whether the person who appeared in court was the actual person or persons on the phone with RJ.

      We may find this is another ‘composite girlfriend’ situation as with Obama.

      There is a rumor out now (according to his friends’ tweets) that DeeDee was ‘catfishing’ Trayvon, pretending to be a sexy slender bombshell when she was rounded and older.

      Another rumor has it that Trayvon was texting several girls that evening and DeeDee was the most presentable (certainly not KokaineKay) and likely to learn her lines and stay sober long enough to testify.

      Some blacks use aliases and change homes like they father children.

      That’s how they can vote multiple times. They may be registered as Dee Dee in one district and Diamond Eugene in another district, (where their ‘uncle or aunt’ live and they once ‘stayed’) and so on.

      My family worked in the insurance business back in the 1950s and the practice of using different names for business, welfare, voting, etc. was prevalent among blacks even then.

      The definitions of Mama, Daddy, Home are fluid in this culture. A kid like Trayvon will have several father and mother figures, many times poor role models. The Village is doing a very bad job of raising their children, Hillary.

It says a lot about the wrongness of the prosecution’s case when the police are testifying for the defense.

yes that does look like him. If it is, he was present in court when the 911 tapes were played. This appears to be bad.

[…] Implosion: Police Testify Trayvon’s Father Originally Denied Son Was Screaming […]

Thanks for the correction, that is an important. It certainly reduces that negative impact substantially if the 911 were not played in the presence of Donnelly. I hope he wasn’t present on the day the tapes were played.

HRPuffingstuff | July 9, 2013 at 4:18 pm

How brilliant was it to have the last defense witness to identify George’s voice, to be an African American woman?