Previous Post
Next Post

“A court employee who retrieved photos and deleted text messages from Trayvon Martin’s cellphone has been placed on administrative leave after an attorney testified that prosecutors didn’t properly turn over the evidence to the defense, an attorney said Wednesday.” That’s from The prosecution, of course, has a duty to share all evidence with the defense. Given the fact that Zimmerman’s attorney, Mark O’Mara, has already released a set of photos from Martin’s phone what were less than flattering, it raises questions as to whether all the photos were ultimately turned over or if some have been deleted . . .

A former prosecutor in the office of prosecutor Angela Corey ratted out the offender, Ben Kruidbos. “‘I’m an officer of the court and I’m obliged to inform the court of any misconduct or any potential misconduct coming before the court. Whether it’s by the defense or prosecution,’ (former prosecutor Wesley) White said.” Not only has the case against Zimmerman been crumbling for months, it appears that Corey’s assembled the most effective prosecutorial team since the O.J. Simpson trial.

Previous Post
Next Post


    • Chris – Here ya go: “Former prosecutor Wesley White said he was ethically obligated to reveal that Fourth Judicial Circuit Information Technology Director Ben Kruidbos retrieved the data that weren’t turned over.”

      • I haven’t seen Ralph’s legal opinion yet but it sounds to me like prosecutorial misconduct whether the evidence was admissible or not. Former Alaska Senator Ted Steven’s conviction on corruption charges was overturned because of a similar misconduct charge. I would go further and say that by attempting to destroy evidence the prosecution team is a guilty of obstruction of justice. Florida isn’t run by a gang of criminals like the Feds. Angela Corey may be in some legal jeopardy over this. I don’t see how the case can go forward now. Any conviction is going be tossed on appeal.

      • The duty to preserve all evidence and reveal all possibly exculpatory material to the defense does not concern admissibility, but rather counsels’ access to the exculpatory material and the judge’s ability to see and rule on all evidence under various circumstances as motions, trial, and appeals proceed. The judge has not ruled the photos inadmissible, but rather inadmissible baring certain actions by the prosecution at trial. There is a vast difference.

      • Weren’t – yet – admissible.If the prosecution attempts to bring Zimmerman’s past up, then the defense can do the same for Martin.

        Probably not a mistrial, but possible grounds for appeal, and definite grounds for termination and civil charges.

      • they are not admissible at this time . . . . but they will be when anyone testifies that TM was a choir boy. This is cause for mistrial and appeal

        • We shall see I suppose. I feel it’s difficult for people on both sides avoid projecting their desired outcomes onto the most likely outcomes here.

  1. I for one will be glad when this trial is over and it’s no longer news. I’m very burnt out on this whole thing. Stupid was in abundence the night trayvon got killed, on both ends of the gun, and it’s just gotten worse since.

      • At this point i imagine he feels he should have called 911, passed along the info and went for krispy kreme. Hindsight is a beyotch.

        • He had no obligation to get involved, other than whatever obligation he felt to report a possible hazard to his community. I’ll give you that much.

          He could have called just the police and went home. The police would have showed up hours later since it wasn’t an emergency call. In the meantime, Trayvon has acquired all the information he needs for a residential burglary or home invasion or sexual assault and is long gone – but don’t worry, he’ll be back. And maybe he’ll bring some friends.

          If the police were effective in that community, they wouldn’t HAVE a neighborhood watch.

        • I consider Zimmerman the poster boy for “I shoulda’ had a Surefire!” “It was a dark and stormy night when….I forgot to bring my Surefire.”

        • @DJ.

          That’s right. The cops were probably having a Krispy Kreme. They only showed up after all the other 911 calls made indicating shots fired.

        • Ropingdown – your handle suggests you should know better.

          And tactical lights work both ways.

        • @DJ – the police don’t care at all about preventing crime. The need crime, or they’ll be out of a job.

        • DJ -Sorry, I couldn’t get your point, though it’s probably a good one. I simply meant that Zimmerman said the person he reported was suspicious. Yet (taking Zimmerman’s statements as true, which I do until proven otherwise) he could not see well in the dark and the light rain. It would be wise to carry a good flashlight and look around continuously under such circumstances. I do carry an LED headlamp when climbs begin in darkness (which is a bit rare these days). When I carry a firearm at night I always carry a 2 x CR123. What should I have known better? Help!

        • Use NVGs (night vision goggles). They are passive, and bad guys can’t see them. Clip them to your helmet, not your head. You can flip them up when you don’t need them, but you still get the benefit of kevlar on your melon.

          If you are going to use them, buy good ones (PVS-7/PVS-14) or equivalent. If you have to use an IR light for them to work, that’s the same as a flashlight if the other side has NVGs. Even crappy Gen 1, Gen 2 stuff will pick up that IR light.

          With or without NVGs, I’ve trained to fight at night, and I’ve fought at night. So in any encounter after hours, the night is my BFF. It gives me concealment, the ability to observe, and if I need to engage I get to choose when and where. I like those tactical advantages. If it comes down to stealth vs. illumination – I choose stealth, It’s my job to know where the friendlies are.

          The reason I am anti-tactical light: A bad guy can see your SureFire (or other tactical light) and if there are multiple bad guys, Bad Guy B can definitely “bust a cap” at you (if not in you) if you are busy illuminating Bad Guy A (or your wife/kid, which is why most people use lights – to be sure of their target in a dark space). I do not like taclights, for the same reason I don’t like tracers. They are a great way to ensure you draw counterfire for no significant tactical advantage.

          That’s just my two bits.

        • Zimmerman already said he was going back to his car when Martin attacked him.

          It was a leftist talking point to say he kept going, even though there was nothing to suggest that, when the 911 operator told him to go back to his car, he said okay.

          Also before you cover your ass by saying he was covering his ass by claiming that, it was part of his original statement at the scene.

    • “The decision you make in seconds is going to be reviewed in minute detail by a bunch of guys with all the time in the world, and nothing better to do with it”

      Things look differently depending on whether your perspective is from an armchair, or from a sidewalk in Florida with a 200 pound man beating your head into the concrete. TM initiated the violence. Nothing GZ did warranted an assault.

      • Coulda, shoulda, woulda. Not taking sides here, really don’t care. But if George had simply stayed in his vehicle tray wouldn’t have been bashing his head in. I imagine that in his quiet, alone moments George wishes he hadn’t let his gun override his brain and put him in that position.

        I wouldn’t be surprised when this is over and if he’s not convicted to see George shilling for the Brady Bunch or mark Kelly’s crew. He’ll need to capitalise on his 15 minutes of fame and what better way than a tearfull rant about that evil gun that ruined 2 lives.

        • Bad things happen when good men do nothing. George was a sheepdog. He adopted the mantra “If not I, then who?!”

          You sir sound like a professional sheep who is perfectly happy to see something amiss and go about your day to let the cops take care of it. If that works for you then fine, but it sure doesn’t work for whoever is the victim of the hoodlums crime.

        • Cy, had this sheepdog discussion before. A dog is a wolf that has been bred to remain a puppy. I am a wolf. A predator. But a predator with a conscience. I will and have intervened on behalf of someone weaker being victomised.

          But i prefer to think of myself as a thinking person. Tray was walking thru a neighberhood that he had a right to be in. Where was his victim before GZ introduced himself into the mix?

          No helpless victim was in immediate danger when GZ got there. He should have reported to the cops and let them handle it.

          GZ wasn’t cut out to be the hero type. When he got put into an iffy situation he made all the wrong moves and was getting b!tch slapped by a 17 yo when he ended it with a gun shot.

      • I agree. Zimmerman was just doing his job. They were in a nice neighborhood Zimmerman sees the guy seeing him and watches him run away. Why would he run away? Also, after the shots were fired it is pretty clear who was assaulting who. Trayvon didn’t have a broken nose and bashed head. Looks like a clearcut DGU to me.

        • Bashed head? No concussion and no stitches? Your definition of “bashed” and mine are somewhat different.

          He had scratches on his head. Scalp wounds bleed like hell, but they’re still scratches.

        • Ralph,

          You obviously have not seen the photos of the “scratches” on the back of GZ’s head.

          They are NOT scratches. They’re literally the taut skin of GZ’s skull that tore open from some sort of trauma, often called “cuts” in fighting sports.

          Scratches don’t bleed. Cuts or tears in skin from trauma bleed like hell from the skull region.

          You’re either trolling or you’re trolling.

        • I agree. Based on his dissension I can tell that Ralph is against the use of guns for self defense in any situation, including ones where wheelchair bound mothers are defending their wheelchair bound babies against rabid, racist, raping pit bulls with AIDS. I know cuz I’m an Obama guy.

        • Yes, we know BlinkyPete. It really has to suck for you that you’ll need to up your game; now that lower-case-matt and rtemplington-the-third have been blasted off the site and you’re here alone.

          You keep on trolling with your bad self.

        • Ralph is a long time and everyday TTAGer and I don’t see him as a troll. I have reason to believe he is also a “lawyer.” So bashed in his sense may really be what a lawyer typically sees. A bashed head in my sense is a just a guy bashing another guys head in the ground, etc. Doesn’t necessarily mean concussion or stitches. Ralph and my views may differ on things like abortion and Trayvon Martin, but regardless, Ralph is a hard core pro-gunner which immediately entails my respect.

        • Thank you, Anonymous. And yes, I was a lawyer, but now I am blissfully retired. I am now, among other things, on TTAG’s writing staff.

          And to clarify for J.K., I favor shooting anyone and everyone, even when they do not threaten me with imminent death or grievous bodily injury. Unfortunately, the laws are in disagreement with me, which makes me sad.

          And GZ had scratches on his head. They stopped bleeding all on their own, and he never went to the hospital because he didn’t need to. Which is very telling for a scalp wound, because a deep one always needs some stitching.

          Sorry to upset the narrative, but GZ panicked and shot someone he didn’t have to shoot. Which is why I see the Graybar Hotel in his future, probably for manslaughter.

        • Oh HB, I’m glad you gave up regurgitating big words from the TV on the other thread to swing by and accuse me of being inline with (in the case of matt, I don’t know the of guy) a racist, antisemetic prick simply because I think truthers are idiots.

          I’m aware that Ralph isn’t a troll. I actually agree with his analysis of this case. My comment was a reference to something he said to me about being an Obama apologist, which I am not. That’s it.

        • Ralph,

          I don’t always agree with you, but I always laugh.

          matt and rtempleton are gone? And I missed it? Damn.

        • So, HB, what you’re saying is that disagreeing with a bunch of truthers makes me comparable to (in the case of said matt) a racist, anti-semetic prick. Gotcha. Glad we cleared that up.

        • BlinkyPete, Nope, you’re an apologist troll, matt was a chameleon troll*; completely different modes of operation. (*If you observed his posting history, he searched around for a while before settling on racism as the way to get a rise out of people.)

          Liberty2Alpha, rtemplington got his about five days ago. lower-case-matt’s last performance was in the Tripoli-child thread from day before yesterday.

        • Nope, I just posses the intellectual capability to separate dislike and distrust of the government from the assumption that it’s actively involved in committing every heinous act that ever happens. It’s the same way I understand that Osama bin Laden isn’t responsible for the Holocaust, but he was still a really bad guy. I’m sorry you can’t do the same.

          Also, matt didn’t suddenly just start spouting off racism; I remember him doing that as far back as I remember him being here.

      • Ralph if you are sitting on my chest, bashing my head into the pavement, that could lead to the loss of life, limb or eyesight.

        In case you don’t recognize that language, “loss of life, limb or eyesight” is the trigger for when lethal force is authorized in the military under most circumstances when a soldier would be carrying a loaded firearm. Once that line is crossed, you have an obligation to defend yourself, your buddy, or a civilian.

        GZ had no reason to believe TM would stop. TM began the assault. TM showed no signs of ending the assault despite GZ’s repeated cries for help. GZ shot TM because he was in fear of his life.

        I know you are a lawyer, but I had a Florida CCW when I was a resident, and under Florida law, that is a no-brainer.
        You have a right to self defense and no duty to retreat.

        Did GZ have the right to be where he was and a right to carry where he was? Check. (He was in a public space)
        Was GZ assaulted? Check (No one is saying GZ threw the first punch)
        Did GZ have a reason to fear for his life? Check

        Under Florida law, that’s “’nuff said.” This should have never made it to trial under the relevant state law.

        It’s always amazing to me when people talk about “panic” – every time I have needed a firearm time has seemed to stand still. The one thing that strikes me (other than the fear) is how much time it feels like you have to decide what to do.

        • DJ, I also was a Florida resident and still have a FL license and no, you can’t kill someone because you’re losing a fistfight.

          But you don’t have to believe me. You’re always welcome to share a cell with Zimmerman.

        • If Zimmy was suckerpunched onto the ground and had a dude straddling his chest, with the wounds on his face and head (significant enough), he is gonna walk. It only takes a single smash on the ground using a dudes skull, for that dude to go lights out.
          A single shot to the chest at close range was clearly required…..and appropriate. The heathen manchild should not have gone ape over a Barney Fife wannabe.

        • Ralph the fact that you think Zimmerman will get convicted makes me doubt you were ever an attorney. I ‘know anyone who is an attorney and who thinks so and I have a family of four attorneys, two of whom deal in criminal law.
          Bothe the code and the subsequent case law make a conviction impossible in this case and we all know it. If one occurs it will be overturned in a second and we know that as well.
          Zimmerman was attacked. Martin initiated the violence and escalated the violence. He was bashing Zimmerman’s head in and Zimmerman had the contusions to prove it.
          The attempt by the investigators office to delete the photos is a patent obstruction as well

  2. I believe the photo package recently released by the defense includes the withheld photos in question. The issue wasn’t that the defense still doesn’t have them, it’s that they were not turned over in a timely manner, and appear to be purposefully withheld.

    ON THE OTHER HAND, the headline here is AGAIN misleading. Nowhere in the linked Miami Herald story does it say that anyone deleted – VERB – text messages or photos. It refers to deleted – ADJECTIVE MODIFIER – text messages.

    “A court employee who retrieved photos and deleted text messages from Trayvon Martin’s cellphone…”

    In that sentence, the clause “photos and deleted text messages” is the object of the verb “retrieved.” The employee didn’t “retrieve photos” and “delete text messages,” they “retrieved (VERB) photos and deleted text messages (OBJECT).”

    The comma in the headline is a powerful thing…

    “Zimmerman Prosecutor Withheld, Deleted Texts, Photos From Martin’s Phone”

    has a completely different meaning than

    “Zimmerman Prosecutor Withheld Deleted Texts, Photos From Martin’s Phone”


    • The real problem is in the original Miami Herald wording.

      “A court employee who retrieved photos and deleted text messages from Trayvon Martin’s cellphone…”

      What this sentence really says, grammatically, is that someone took two actions: retrieving photos and deleting text messages. This isn’t a case of a clause with a single modifier, it’s a case of parallel construction. “Retrieved” is a verb, and “deleted” shares the same syntax, so it should also be read as a verb: someone “retrieved photos and deleted text messages.”

      The reporter probably meant to say that someone retrieved photos and text messages that had been deleted…but that’s not really what the sentence says.

      • What the sentence says is that the prosecutor has been caught tampering with evidence – it doesn’t matter that the judge has ruled it inadmissible at this point. The prosecutor just committed the technological equivalency of throwing away a piece of blood-stained cloth.

      • OK, so my parsing was based on my interpretation, but in this case, if the construction is confusing, you go on context, and the context was clearly that the issue was the withholding of the evidence. If the issue had been deletion of evidence, that would be a much bigger story, and they would have led with that, unequivocally. Thus, context tells you that it was meant as a clause with a single modifier, even if the construction was poor.

        Irregardless (heh), the point stands that nobody on the prosecution actually deleted anything, and the TTAG headline is still misleading at best, and purposefully incorrect at worst. Again. Still.

        • C, I get your point, but it’s not so much about the grammar, it’s more about yet another misleading and inflammatory headline on TTAG. The grammar from the article was only to back up my assertion about the headline.

    • It’s brilliant writing, isn’t it, when nobody can figure out what the hell the author means.

      Man, I just love the MSM.

    • watch those commas people, they will confuse people years later:

      “A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.”

    • Everyone keeps saying how Zimmeron should not have done this, not have done that. How about Martin not walking through a gated community. If the homeowners wanted ghetto scum, they could have voted to take down the gates.

      • dom, trayvon was a guest in the gated community. He was there with his father at his fathers girlfriends house. Just sayin’

        • Ok. That makes more sense. Regardless, he was a suspicious character that beared watching. Am I defending zmmerman here? Not really. There were now winners here. Except for the companies that sold a crapload.of ccw guns in the aftermath.

        • No where have I ever read that the subdivision/neighborhood which TM was in when/where he was confronted and shot by GZ, is the neighborhood his father resided, which would establish that TM was not trespassing generally in a private gated community. (And as former lawyer Ralph, if you are in fact such, you should know that even if it was his dad’s neighborhood, TM was still trespassing on private property the moment he left the street and started cutting across private homeowners yards.). Nowhere have I seen that GZ was patrolling TM’s dad’s neighborhood. Everything I have read is the contrary, that TM was (as speculated by the media and his parents) cutting through that neighborhood from the store, to get to his dad’s house which was outside the neighborhood.

          Citation and links to your stated facts, please.

          (And since we’re talking facts…I have yet to see anyone establish a timeline that shows what time TM was in the store relative to the time of his death. I wonder, would it show he was really proceeding directly to his dad’s house or perhaps was there a lapse of time indicating he may have been up to other things? And how would that time correlate to any text messages or phone calls he made or received, and what would the substance of those texts or calls be? I won’t speculate, but I am legitimately curious. Seems odd no one has established a clear timeline in all this. Or maybe they have and I missed it.)

        • J in NC: I’m not doing the research for you, but both the facts as you know them, and your interpretation of them, are wrong. Have you read anything at all about this case?

          “No where have I ever read that the subdivision/neighborhood [snip] is the neighborhood his father resided…”

          The observation of TM by GZ, the altercation, and the shooting all happened within the bounds of The Retreat at Twin Lakes, where both GZ and TM’s father lived, and where TM was staying. He was not “trespassing generally in a private gated community.”

          Furthermore, (and I LOVE that you are chastising Ralph with “you should know this”), your statement that “TM was still trespassing on private property the moment he left the street and started cutting across private homeowners yards” is completely wrong, and demonstrates your complete ignorance of how community properties work. In a community like The Retreat at Twin Lakes, even though the residents own the townhomes they live in, basically everything that is outside the external walls of their home is considered a “common area.” The events transpired behind/between the buildings, on a sidewalk and in the grass adjacent thereto, in what would be deemed a “common area,” where he had every right to be.

          “Everything I have read is the contrary, that TM was (as speculated by the media and his parents) cutting through that neighborhood from the store, to get to his dad’s house which was outside the neighborhood.”

          Wrong, wrong, wrong. His dad lives in The Retreat at Twin Lakes. GZ didn’t see him until he was inside The Retreat at Twin Lakes. Everything that transpired took place in The Retreat at Twin Lakes.

          As I said, I’m not doing the research for you, because there is literally hundreds of pages out there to refute your inaccuracies, and if I include more than two hotlinks in one comment, I’ll get spam filtered. So engage the Googles, and look it up yourself.

        • To Matt in FL: (uppercase M, not trolling matt in FL)

          Mea culpa. I am man enough to admit when I’m wrong. I honestly had not read the details which your provided. And even my quick google searches, didn’t turn up specific articles on the residency question of GZ relative to TM’s dad. Also did not read it was such a villa/town home complex. So thanks for setting me straight on those points.

          To my second question of curiosity – have you seen a timeline of that night generated in media accounts, or otherwise? Again, seems like should be easy to establish given store cameras, cell records, etc. just haven’t seen that.

          Thanks again.

        • I am amazed that Ralph, claiming to be an attorney says Martin had a right to be where he was. He did not, he was trespassing and that is already established. Criminal trespass or not, it is still trespass.
          Gated communities have common and limited common.
          accessing limited common without permission specific limited common right holders (and has fathers girlfriend was not a holder on the limited common in question) IS trespass.

          Martin was probably casing for future jewelry burglary which was seems to have been his activity in the past

        • Aside from the fact that the case for Trayvon being a trespasser is weak, what’s your point? Florida law doesn’t say you can shoot trespassers who are not threatening you with lethal force. Regardless, if Martin was trespassing it wasn’t GZ’s property anyway.

          TM’s intentions, criminal or otherwise, are pure speculation and completely irrelevant to the outcome of this case. As I’ve already said, folks on both sides of this debate seem to have a lot of trouble separating what they want to happen from what is most likely to happen.

      • Unfortunatley Dom, TM did have family/business in the neighborhood. If he didnt then MAYBE this case would be different.

        • This case would be different if Trayvon didn’t run from the neighborhood watch guy and then assault him in the back alley out of view.

          I realize that there is little evidence supporting any claims to either’s innocence, but it surprises me nobody wants to look plainly at the facts that are known.

        • Nobody ever stole from the neighborhood their part-time (when Trayvon was on detention) parent lived in?

          Because when he was a good boy he lived with mama! C’mon – that gives NO ONE insight into his family life? “You misbehave, I’m gonna send you to live with your dad. See how you like that!”

          Dude, I grew up with a bunch of Trayvons, but they were all white lower class – like my family.

          And if he had burglar tools at school, and it looked like he was casing houses – then he was casing houses. He didn’t have to rob one right then – that’s the advantage the criminal has. He can come back. At the time of his choosing. With friends.

          If he’s a criminal the fact that mom/dad/stepmom/bigbrothers/bigsisters lived there does not change the fact that he was scoping out “easy marks” for future criminal behavior.

          AND HE ASSAULTED A GUY!!! Last time I checked, a troubled home life was not an excuse for pinning a dude down and bashing his head against pavement.

  3. You can call me insensitive, but it was not looking like innocent young Trayvon would have contributed much to society. He looks, based upon the evidence so far, like a street punk murderer to me.

      • He tried to, Ralph. At least once that we know of.

        We don’t know of any previous attempts, whether they were successful or not.

        If GZ had died this would be easier. But it would be easier because it wouldn’t have become a national racial firestorm. That would have been “unknown assailant kills hispanic male with his own gun” – and we could all move on.

        Maybe GZ should have let TM kill him? Then it would all be clear. But wait – then it wouldn’t make the news, either. Unknown assailant kills hispanic male. Nope, if I’m GZ I’d rather be behind bars than dead.

        • Martin tried to kill Zimmerman by punching him in the nose? DJ, you must have lived a sheltered life. How nice for you.

        • No, Ralph, Martin tried to kill Zimmerman by bashing his head into concrete. The punch to his nose is trivial, at least compared to beating someone’s head against concrete.

        • A bare knuckle punch to the nose is no joke. I’ve taken a couple and at best it takes a bit to get reoriented. Take it right under the nose and you’re down.

        • I took a few punches to the nose in my day as well… of course back then it was ok for two dudes to sort things out after school that way.

          I digress… my point is I’m still quite alive. I guess if some stranger attacked me I’d feel differently, but barring extenuating circumstances (they attacked my wife, or if I had my 15 month old with me) I don’t think I’d pop them. I figure the damage most people can do to me pales in comparison to the damage the folks in the state penn could do.

    • A few years in the Marines and Trayvon could’ve been ready for Miami-Dade Police Academy. The loss is just staggering.

      • Miami PD!? No son of Barack Huessein Obama will take a low life civil servants job!


        No really thats sarcasm, no police bashing intended

      • Right.

        Let’s see that meant to be misleading picture of him as a 13yr old again. Do it for the children; remember TM’s just a “child” until he’s 21, or what?…25 if you use stats the grabbers like to tout.

        Zimmerman had every right to be there – at least as much if not more than Martin. By all accounts Martin was the agressor and assaulted Zimmerman. Zimmerman was being subjected to great bodily injury that could have lead to his death had it continued. Self defense is a very reasonable defense for his actions.

        Heck with all this PC pandering. If Zimmerman was black and Martin was a skin head, this DGU would have never made the national spotlight.

        I think the only reason it did go national is because it gave the grabbers, starting with NBC’s false representations by using selected excerpts of the 911 call, a chance to paint gun owners and CCW holders as racist.

        • By all accounts Martin was the agressor and assaulted Zimmerman.

          All accounts? Actually, there’s only Zimmerman’s account since Martin is conveniently dead.

        • His wounds are evident. I guess it is theoretically possible he just shot Trayvon and then broke his own nose and smashed his own head into the pavement. Unlikely but possible.

        • There actually was a clear witness statement by an observer who was on his deck, close to the fight, which corroborates Zimmerman’s statement. However, during what I call “the Mau Mau days” the witness recanted his statement and has refused to speak about the event. Anyone who thinks the not-so-gated community was a nice one hasn’t read the local papers for that area. It’s nice if you have nothing left to be stolen, perhaps.

  4. They just need to acquit Zimmerman and move on. A fair trial is impossible at this point and the evidence against Zimmerman is just not there.

    Also, he is innocent until proven guilty not guilty until proven innocent.

  5. I’ve been a lawyer long enough to be shocked when the prosecution actually turns over Brady material to the defense, not when the prosecution withholds it.

    More often than not, in a high-profile case, due process is what the prosecutors want it to be — an illusion. A defendant who wants due process and a fair trial has to buy both, and they ain’t cheap.

    • I would agree with all that and further paraphrase:

      If you are a low income gun owner and you perform a legitimate DGU – you are basically screwed.

        • The law where I live says otherwise, if the required conditions for lethal defense are met. The attacker possessing or using a weapon isn’t one of them. But if the shooter isn’t in his home or place of work and doesn’t have favorable eye-witnesses, the law might well be ignored. Punches and kicks kill just fine. With two assailants they kill fine, but faster. They’ve left many men and women brain-damaged or brain-dead. I see no reason why, hypothetically, that wasn’t Zimmerman’s fear.

        • I would generally agree but not always true. I read an article once about a man who shot his abusive son in law because he was beating the mans daughter alongside the road. The man fought with his son in law over a gun that him and his wife had brought and the man shot him 4 or 5 times in rapid succession with a Ruger P90 (45cal) and he died in 3 minutes. Defense said a man shouldn’t have to tolerate being beaten to death (there was no concussion or stitches)and the Jury agreed and ruled in his favor.

          A man can be killed with hands and feet. Also, if you are losing the fight and he spots that you have a gun. You have no idea what he is going to do with it once he has it… what choice do you have then?

          My personal opinion is anyone that decides to assault another (even without a gun) should keep this consequence in mind. If more people were acquitted for DGU against assaults then my guess is… assaults would decline.

          Also, If I was on a Jury – I’d hang it to death if all the others rules against a man defending himself. My civic duty.

        • “Also, if you are losing the fight and he spots that you have a gun. You have no idea what he is going to do with it once he has it… what choice do you have then?”

          According to Zimmerman’s statement, that is what happened. He didn’t reach for the gun, he was attempting to get away from the guy beating his head into the concrete and screaming for help. His shirt rode up during the beating on the ground and when Martin noticed it, he let go of Zimmerman’s head and reached for the gun in his waistband. They both struggled for the gun, Zimmerman had a better angle to get a hold of it, and Martin’s hands here on it when the trigger was pulled.

          According to the autopsy and police reports, one shot was fired from a distance of inches, leaving a burn ring on Martin. The expended cartridge was still in the chamber when the police arrived; the gun had not cycled.

        • Yes, punches and kicks sometimes kill. Likewise, bullets sometimes don’t kill. That doesn’t make punches lethal or bullets non-lethal.

          This is the way it goes down. A 28 year old man who should know better shot a 17 year old kid because the kid was winning the fight.

          Sometimes, life just ain’t fair.

        • The law in Pennsylvania (and in FL, I recall) is that Zimmerman had a duty to withdraw from the fight and not escalate force…if he was party to the beginning of the fight, a willing participant. That changes, both in PA and FL if the ability to exit is blocked by the assailant or the person with whom you ‘got in a fight.’ This means (in PA specifically) that if the guy is sitting on you (or has blocked the exit) and is continuing a one-side beating, the rules change. From the early statements (and Zimmerman’s) I came to think Martin was sitting on Zimmerman and beating him up (winning, as you put it). In fear of grievous (alt. serious) bodily injury, Zimmerman had the right to escalate to lethal force. There are nice points in FL about how much of a beating you have to take, but not if he’s sitting on you and beating your head.

        • Ralph, Isn’t it a major bit of good sense in the law of most states that the use of lethal force is not restricted only to cases in which by-definition lethal force is being used against us? The various phrases connoting a less-than-lethal assault (grievous bodily injury, serious bodily injury, maiming) are included for exactly the reason that an old man shouldn’t have to suffer brain injury or blindness at the hands of a punk, and a citizen pulled into a fight with a thug but denied an exit shouldn’t have to suffer life-long maiming. Perhaps it is different in NYC and MA?

        • According to the police report I read, the cartridge was still in the chamber when they arrived.

          That’s the first I’ve seen that picture. But I could easily see a cop clearing the gun and dropping it before realizing what came out of the ejection port wasn’t a fresh, unrelated round; then photographing it where it fell.

        • Ralph,

          This is in response to your ridiculously flippant and high-handed remarks to the cogent replies below (or above): you should stop with such statements, while you still have any semblance of respect on this board. I am not sure what are your true colors here but you seem to be one very predisposed in this matter.

          If you were in fact a lawyer, then I cannot fathom how you take to making such blanket statements. While certainly a jury might be less inclined to deem ones fear as “reasonable” certainly one can in fact be found to have a reasonable fear of death or severe bodily harm from a physical assault, and age of the attacker almond is not dispositive.

          I know of a very recent incident here in NC, where a man walking with his wife was assaulted by a teen at a town festival, broad daylight, and beaten so badly that he died soon after in the hospital. The teen was charged with murder and convicted.

          Your version of the facts and GZ actions and demeanor that night are belied by the evidence thus far – his call to 911, the witness statements.

          And before you fall back to your trite and pointless statement of, “yeah, and the prosecution has a dead body and a bag of skittles” (or some variant thereof) – that dead body also tends to support at least some of GZ’s assertion of the facts of that night.

        • J in NC, this discussion is something of a continuation of previous threads on the same topic. In ongoing forum discussions like this, one tends to end up repeating the same arguments for new arrivals, retreading the same ground over and over, and one develops a shorthand for explaining a position without going into all the previous supporting paragraphs for it. I can assure you that Ralph has already elaborated his reasoning for the opinions he supports regarding threat of bodily harm to Zimmerman, etc. They are based on his own life experiences and were not arrived at flippantly.

          If you haven’t seen that, I can understand your frustration. Ralph has a tendency to acerbic humor to begin with, and has, at times in this discussion, had a less focused aim for his words than is his usual wont. But he is arguing his points in good faith.

          I adamantly disagree with his opinion about whether fear of bodily harm was reasonable for Zimmerman, but I respect his holding that opinion and the basis it was derived from.

      • True. In my example above, the guy didn’t go to prison or face any consequences – other than paying ridiculous amounts of money for a good defense. Without it, he would have been in prison with some certainty.

  6. Sir, Please review your terminology prior to publication. You stated that the prosecutor was “ratted out”. Mr. White did the legal, and honorable, thing and yet he is a “rat”. I hope we have more of them ratting out people in the future.
    Very sincerely,
    Robin E. Roberts
    Major, USA (Ret)

    • Robin, I couldn’t agree more. The ‘don’t be a rat’ mantra is a major cause of gang infestation in low-income neighborhoods. In high-income neighborhoods it causes new banks.

    • Rebecca, I just read the report. There is nothing in it to indicate that no punches were thrown. There is no evidence in the report that Martin was punched or otherwise hit. There is ample evidence that someone punched Zimmerman a number of times in the face, breaking his nose and causing bruising. There is also evidence (from the angle of the cuts) that the back of Zimmerman’s head hit a hard or rough surface at least twice (evidence of the angles). Of course character evidence doesn’t matter unless character is assailed, generally. The presence of THC in the blood (very recent cannabis consumption) will come into evidence. Everybody’s an expert. I’d just as well wait for the summation of evidence and the verdict.

      • I agree. No evidence he was in a fight? You actually don’t have to throw any punches to be in a fight. Maybe he tackled him and smashed his head in the ground? Where are the punches? none. Throwing a punch or not doesn’t prove a fight occurred.

      • Granted: Martin’s body shows no evidence of trauma past the wounds I’ve mentioned. Now, if Zimmerman has wounds, we have to ask: who inflicted them?

    • You apparently missed the minor injuries on the backs of Martin’s hands, which are consistent with offensive wounds.

    • If the report is accurate, Zimmerman is toast. First, the report claims that Martin was 71″ and 158 pounds — not a big man. Second — and most important — the shot was from intermediate range, not close range.

      It appears from the report that both men were standing and fighting. Martin was standing, not atop Zimmerman as we have been led to believe. Martin fell when he was shot. The trajectory was not upward, it was straight. Zimmerman was standing too.

      Recognizing that medical reports are not the gospel and this one will be challenged, still it couldn’t be worse for Zimmerman.

      • Note the burn ring, Ralph. Quote: “round entrance defect with soot, ring abrasion, and a 2×2 inch area of stippling.” That’s through his shirt. In this case, “intermediate” range means a few inches rather than contact. Also, straight front-to-back passage of the round is consistent with Zimmerman on the ground, the gun pointing up at an angle, and Martin leaning forward – which is the presentation if they were both struggling for the gun.

      • Chest-to-chest struggling on the ground the shot would naturally be straight (relative to up or down). I did not see an indication that the two men were standing, and do not believe forensics could demonstrate that, though Martin was of course not on top of Zimmerman when the police arrived. Zimmerman’s clothing should indicate the distance of the shot. The coroner was not examining that clothing. The coroner, for that matter, did not have the means to examine the micro-splattering, which will provide the best evidence of the relation of the two bodies. Had the police not blown their bit, the ground should have told the story. But the PD did blow it. In my county the scene would have quickly been tented and heavily illuminated with appropriate light wavelengths to detect blood, flesh bits, and micro-spray of the blood. It’s just typical that a highly politicized case provides weak forensics.

        • I know, RD. Still, the report that the shot was at intermediate distance and not close up or contact doesn’t help Zimmerman. Since there were no Martin fingerprints or DNA on the gun, the whole Zimmerman narrative that there was some kind of struggle for the gun is cast in grave doubt. Don’t you agree?

        • That’s not the definition of “intermediate” being used here. To wit, the Forensic definitions:

          Intermediate Range Definition: Hot powder grains accompany bullet to wound site & are driven into skin, leaving small red marks on skin – stippling/tattooing

          Contact Range Definition: Bullet hole, muzzle burn mark & impression of firearm present; loose fit – near contact; cornea of soot may be present where weapon not placed directly against skin

          Besides the autopsy report’s note of a burn ring and soot from the muzzle flash, the Orlando Florida Department of Law Enforcement tests on Martin’s shirt concluded they were “consistent with a contact shot”.

          There may be some disagreement in the evidence of whether the muzzle was touching or just a few inches away. But the shot was not from several feet, and is in either way consistent with Zimmerman’s story.

        • “The autopsy reports note of a burn ring and soot from the muzzle flash that were consistent with a contact shot”.
          Ha Ha….Zimmy walks.

        • Actually Ralph what you are saying is that Zimmerman is going to walk.
          The forensics are not consistent with the prosecution’s claims at all. They fully support Zimmerman.
          Face it, we all know this was a legal self defense shooting and that this case is political

  7. Who’d like to take bets that the court employee will be prosecuted
    for evidence tampering and destruction of same?

    Anybody…..anybody at all?

  8. I’ve said it before. Calling the police before you shoot someone in a DGU is not recommended. It’s best to call after they have bled out.

  9. In light of this new developement and since riots have been threatened for months I suggest the case is dismissed immediately or black neighborhoods will burn to the ground. Oh, and if “the Man” doesn’t prosecuted the court employee who did this I suggest those neighborhoods will get burned down twice!

    • I’m confused; are you saying that black neighborhoods will be burned to the ground if Zimmerman isn’t released? Maybe I read it wrong, and if so I apologize, but if you did can you explain exactly what that would accomplish?


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here