they know it will be appealed, the RAT court is simply trying to bankrupt him...
Posted on 02/22/2013 5:05:29 PM PST by Uncle Chip
A judge on Friday ruled that the defense team for George Zimmerman cannot depose Ben Crump, the attorney representing the slain teen's family.
Judge Debra Nelson said the deposition was not needed and there was no undue prejudice. She also said that the defense has not yet deposed Witness 8, whose interview with Crump is in question, even though they've had her identity for 10 months.
Nelson did grant the defense's motions for subpoenas of voice samples from Martin over the last three years. If they exist, the audio samples are in the possession of Martin's family and Witness 8.
The defense said they wanted to depose Crump before holding a deposition with Witness 8, a friend of Martin who told Crump that she was on the phone with Martin before he was shot and killed last February in a gated Sanford community.
"It is widely accepted that (the recording of the Crump's interview with Witness 8) is largely unintelligible," West said.
The defense believed Crump should have been forced to reveal details of the interview and give insight to the inaudible words.
West also said the age of the key witness was misrepresented. He said that she was 18 years old at the time of the shooting, not 16 as previously released. He also tried to argue that Crump made himself a witness in the case when he interviewed the girl.
"Mr. Crump chose to conduct the interview in the fashion that he did. He chose to have ABC News present. It's not clear to me how and why that was set up," West said. "He chose not to have law enforcement present, in fact, (he) withheld this witness from law enforcement for some time ... He made himself a witness."
(Excerpt) Read more at clickorlando.com ...
By the way, Fox in Socks was always my favorite Seuss book. I enjoyed reading it to my kids long ago, and now my grandkids.
Unless one side makes a very,*very* serious mistake during jury selection it’s difficult to imagine either a conviction *or* acquittal in this case.
No matter how good the tax situation is in Florida I’d never consider moving there. Their justice system is a joke. A bad joke.
Heck, I don’t think I’d even go to a business meeting down there.
Don’t lose hope my friend. He did nothing, zip, nada.That guy was a hooded crap head zombie. Watch “walking dead”— you will understand then.
Whatever the outcome, this will go to appeal.
5.56mm
They’ve been trying to get a clean recording for much of that time.
April 22 for the self defense immunity hearing at last report. The defense reiterated yesterday that this is a self defense case, not a stand your ground case. The procedural motions included in the stand your ground law apply to both kinds of case.
they know it will be appealed, the RAT court is simply trying to bankrupt him...
Bump
I am not as concerned about this as many.
I think some of the depositions the defense wants are to ferret out information which will benefit the defense in future defamation cases against the MSM and some of the accusers.
While I think the judge is making reversible errors along the way, there just isn’t a whole lot of evidence against GZ. Even Witness 8, is not that bad for him, and I expect that even without a prior deposition of Crump, O’Mara and West will cut her to pieces in a deposition, and if it gets to trial she will look terrible on cross-examination.
Actually, the best outcome for the state is a hung jury where there are no riots and then they decide to drop the case.
The defense already conducted its mini-deposition of Witness 8 as directed by the court for the sole purpose of getting her address from her and she declined to give it.
That tells me that she has been prepped to lie and obfuscate and refuse to answer questions with the aid and comfort of the prosecution and the defense will have no recourse.
And when she appears for her deposition she can decline to give out her address at that time too. And without that address the defense has no way of knowing if the name she is using is hers or someone else's.
This lunatic for a judge here is aiding and abetting a fraud and she knows it by referring to Crump as "opposing counsel" and denying his deposition.
She is just giddy with glee about making arrangements for the June trial as if she is planning a party. No discussion about the April Immunity Hearing as if it is a given that her mind is already made up -- were' going to have a June party no matter what.
The question is what will the defense do from here on out.
I'm wondering if the deposition of Witness 8 will be even be productive for the defense at this point without knowing who she really is ahead of time and without Crump's previous deposition.
Perhaps since the April hearing is now a throwaway, use that for the deposition of Crump and Witness 8 and Witness 8.
Looking forward to that April hearing, hopefully it happens.
I also worry about people judging the case unfairly because of Georges size and appearance these days. I support George 150% just stating the obvious.
I understand fully the stress George must be under, I to once had to defend myself from a very serious charge, I did prevail, but could have gone the other way, I was lucky that I had a good judge that believed me, Grace of God!
It`s just that so many people jurors do judge unfairly, there was a hearing some months ago, George I think was wearing a pin striped suit, he had his hair grown nicely, not brush cut, he was slim and fit and very handsome...
I think it would be very helpful to him if he could get back to that place in his life, it should NOT matter at all,however unfortunately it may hurt him otherwise
Losing the motion is disturbing. Crump has been actively polluting the jury pool, and IMO has essentially manufactured a witness. Getting that on record, and pinning him down so the conflicts and his part in her testimony were obvious would have been really helpful. Allowing him to spew lies, then hide behind a privilege claim is bad news. I couldn't read the judge... either she couldn't really grasp the situation, or she grasped it, but wasn't going to let the defense resolve it in this manner.
Wait’ll you see what Crump has "his" witness wearing at trial.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.