PDA

View Full Version : Prosecution's Motion to Seal Evidence


ariesgodofwar
05-24-2012, 01:04 AM
http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/2012-05-23/news/os-george-zimmerman-motion-evidence-seal-20120523_1_statements-seal-scene-and-autopsy-photos

Prosecutors want a judge to seal key evidence in the case against George Zimmerman from the public until trial, including the statements he made to law enforcement during the investigation of 17-year-old Trayvon Martin's death.

Citing a statutory exemption barring the release of confessions, the prosecution asks Judge Kenneth Lester in a new motion to seal Zimmerman's statements, as well as any photos in the case which show the teen's body.

Is this just an attempt to manage damage control? I have a hard time understanding how a law allowing sealed confessions is applicable to evidence in a prosecution. This is America, we are not to have secret courts or tribunals, where Americans are convicted on "secret" evidence.

I do have a question, how is Bernie De la Rionda not in violation of the court's order? I thought that they had 15 Days to make the evidence public, and that last Thursday was the last day. That said, for them to withhold any documents without an order from the Court would seem to be a problem. Am I missing something here? I understand that the test they are referring to, was a VSA (Voice Stress Analysis), which the SPD asked him to voluntarily undergo, and he voluntarily consented. His father asserts that he passed.

While not always admissible, are there misconduct issues with the Prosecution asking him to take a test, which could to some degree could be exculpatory, or create reasonable doubt if passed, and then refusing to release it? It would seem if that is the case, George should have declined as there was no benefit to him. If he passes, no one hears about it, if he fails, they crucify him with it......just wrong.

http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/2012-04-03/news/os-george-zimmerman-uhrig-20120403_1_defense-team-assistant-public-defender-attorney

Zimmerman passed a voice stress test, something similar to a lie detector test, that was administered by Sanford police, Uhrig told WOFL on its 6 p.m. newscast.

http://blogs.findlaw.com/blotter/2012/04/police-gave-george-zimmerman-voice-stress-test.html?=features

Did you know that, on the night of Trayvon Martin's death, Sanford police gave George Zimmerman a voice stress test?

They did, and the results probably contributed to his release.

A voice stress test is like a polygraph, but instead of measuring heart rate and blood pressure, it looks for changes in an individual's voice patterns that are thought to suggest psychological stress. With the help of software, investigators record a suspect answering baseline questions and then compare them to answers about the case.

JBean
05-24-2012, 01:21 AM
Is this just an attempt to manage damage control? I have a hard time understanding how a law allowing sealed confessions is applicable to evidence in a prosecution. This is America, we are not to have secret courts or tribunals, where Americans are convicted on "secret" evidence.
why would it be important for the judge to release this information at this juncture? he could not be convicted on "secret" evidence ? I am not following what you mean by that.
I personally think too much information is released in general in the State of Fl,I am not a fan of the Sunshine laws but that's another topic. I am used to California telling us absolutely nothing! Defintiely not good for our inquiring minds and our discussion but better for trial, imo.

jjenny
05-24-2012, 01:27 AM
Why is prosecution supposedly so concerned about this evidence? By the way since for the most part witnesses don't agree with each other, it would be impossible for Zimmerman's statements not to contradict at least some of the witnesses.

ariesgodofwar
05-24-2012, 01:31 AM
why would it be important for the judge to release this information at this juncture? he could not be convicted on "secret" evidence ? I am not following what you mean by that.
I personally think too much information is released in general in the State of Fl,I am not a fan of the Sunshine laws but that's another topic. I am used to California telling us absolutely nothing! Defintiely not good for our inquiring minds and our discussion but better for trial, imo.

It would be important for the Judge to release the evidence because that is what is required by Florida Law. The sole exemption refers to confessions, meaning voluntary utterances of guilt of an alleged crime. I do not have my Blacks Dictionary handy, but am certain that the definition of confession is not so broad as to include any evidence which could indicate the guilt of the accused. Like it or not, that is indeed the law in Florida, and as such, it must be adhered to, or the entire legal system in the state becomes meaningless. What the Prosecution has accomplished with strategic "leaks" is conducted a trial by media intentionally. I agree with Alan Dershowitz that what is being done with the withholding of evidence and selective leaking amounts to Prosecutorial Misconduct.

Reader
05-24-2012, 01:32 AM
O’Mara had initially requested the court file be sealed, but the judge did not agree, saying he would rule on evidence on a case-by-case basis. Under Florida law, most of the evidence in a criminal court file is available to the public once it’s handed over to the defense.

De la Rionda’s motion shows he filed a motion under seal — available only to the judge and the lawyers on both sides — on May 14. [and O'Mara did not object]

The public motion filed Wednesdsay asks for the following materials to be sealed:

• Names, addresses and phone numbers of 22 witnesses.
• Crime scene photos and autopsy photos and any others showing Trayvon’s body.

• The 911 call that captured the shooting, which is already widely available on the Internet.

• Zimmerman’s statements to police.

• Cell phone records.

Prosecutors argue that some of the evidence is not subject to Florida’s public-records law.

“Publication of certain discovery materials described .. will result in this matter being tried in the press rather than in the court,” de la Rionda wrote.

Read more here: http://www.miamiherald.com/2012/05/23/2814613/prosecutors-in-george-zimmerman.html#storylink=cpy

ariesgodofwar
05-24-2012, 01:38 AM
Why is prosecution supposedly so concerned about this evidence? By the way since for the most part witnesses don't agree with each other, it would be impossible for Zimmerman's statements not to contradict at least some of the witnesses.

Yes, and as soon as a witness gives a sworn statement and days/weeks later changes it, they will have their credibility torn apart. So, did his story contradict them before of after they changed it?

The Prosecution might as well give up if they are planning on putting witnesses on the stand who substantially change their stories after the fact, and especially those that point specifically to the media as helping them reach their conclusions as to what occurred (W12)

It is amazing, I think it was Mark Fuhrman that said that during the LAPD/ Rodney King Investigation, there were "eyewitnesses" who claimed to have seen the event, only upon investigation to have been determined to have been as far as 10 miles away at the time. They based their recollection entirely on what they saw in the first days in the media.

Reader
05-24-2012, 01:40 AM
State's Motion for Protective Order

http://media.miamiherald.com/smedia/2012/05/23/20/23/MVYT6.So.56.pdf

The motion states it is to insure a fair trial for the defendent and an impartial jury, and not to be tried in the press.

Also for the protection of the witnesses from harassment and having their private information made public.

MayHaven
05-24-2012, 01:42 AM
Why is prosecution supposedly so concerned about this evidence? By the way since for the most part witnesses don't agree with each other, it would be impossible for Zimmerman's statements not to contradict at least some of the witnesses.
That's not the point. Zimmerman's own statements contradict each other.

O'Mara doesn't seem to mind sealing evidence either so I don't even understand why this is such a big deal to anyone. *insert shrugging shoulder dude here*

ariesgodofwar
05-24-2012, 01:48 AM
O’Mara had initially requested the court file be sealed, but the judge did not agree, saying he would rule on evidence on a case-by-case basis. Under Florida law, most of the evidence in a criminal court file is available to the public once it’s handed over to the defense.


Initially, O'Mara had no idea what that evidence was or would say. He had to preemptively at least ask (even knowing he would likely be turned down) to prevent its release if possible in the event is was damning for his client. I think that is every defense attorney's worst nightmare, having a client plead innocence, believing it, and then getting hit with an airtight case.

There is no legitimate public or judicial interest served however by the Prosecution withholding evidence. While I certainly understand the redaction of witness information in a case like this, the VSA results, the Full Toxicology Panel and everything else should be released. My concern is, they are trying to hold it back for fear of "social upheaval" which should never be a consideration in American Jurisprudence.

Sad to say that I take such a dim view on this, but the Crump + FL Prosecution strategy seems to be just to try and get past the SYG hearing. If the Judge kills it there, George is indemnified from Civil Claims as a result of his action. I think that is what this whole thing has been about since Day 1. Corey knows she cannot get a murder 2 conviction, but by overcharging, I think it was believed to quell any upheaval and help pass the SYG Hearing. Overcharging is prosecutorial misconduct.

ariesgodofwar
05-24-2012, 01:59 AM
That's not the point. Zimmerman's own statements contradict each other.

O'Mara doesn't seem to mind sealing evidence either so I don't even understand why this is such a big deal to anyone. *insert shrugging shoulder dude here*

It is his obligation to at least try. Many times attorneys file motions they know will be denied, but it is their ethical obligation to put on the best defense possible.

How do you know Zimmerman's statements contradict one another? (Because the Prosecution told you they did?) So, is the new standard that we just "trust" the prosecution? This is an adversarial system. If I were O'Mara, I would not be content with their representation given the embellishment, and outright mischaracterization of evidence which we have now seen released.

As for Zimmerman's statements, it reiterates that he should have said nothing to anyone beyond, "I was in fear for my life, I wish to speak to my attorney" and said absolutely nothing more. When you are in stressful situations, you cannot recall things correctly. Some senses heighten while others dull. Once cannot be expected to accurately recall the event in details which cannot be made out to be contradictory at times.

That said, look at the witnesses. They were not involved, and they are giving opposing sworn statements to not only one another, but even contradicting their own stories.

Like for example, <modsnip>said that she found out about Trayvon on March 3rd, the day after the wake, however, Crump had originally said that they did not even know she existed until March 18th I believe when they went through Trayvon's Phone records and realized she was the last one he had called, and then figured out who she was. I wonder which date she will testify to on the stand?

saguaro
05-24-2012, 07:41 AM
Yes, and as soon as a witness gives a sworn statement and days/weeks later changes it, they will have their credibility torn apart. So, did his story contradict them before of after they changed it?



I think it's very scary, regardless of where one stands on this case to hear of witnesses changing their testimony.

In my opinion, they were either coerced or they saw the news and started fearing for their safety when they saw the news in how they portrayed this story and all the calls for "justice".

gxm
05-24-2012, 08:03 AM
That's not the point. Zimmerman's own statements contradict each other.

O'Mara doesn't seem to mind sealing evidence either so I don't even understand why this is such a big deal to anyone. *insert shrugging shoulder dude here*

BBM.

I keep reading this stated as fact, but if GZ's statements haven't been released how does anyone know this?

gxm
05-24-2012, 08:06 AM
I think it's very scary, regardless of where one stands on this case to hear of witnesses changing their testimony.

In my opinion, they were either coerced or they saw the news and started fearing for their safety when they saw the news in how they portrayed this story and all the calls for "justice".

Yes. Apparently, it's okay for witnesses to "walk back" their original statements and contradict themselves yet, somehow, the alleged contradictions in GZ's statements show he's a "liar." The media and prosecution seem dead set on convicting GZ whether he's guilty or not.

JMO, OMO, and MOO

suzihawk
05-24-2012, 08:12 AM
I think it's very scary, regardless of where one stands on this case to hear of witnesses changing their testimony.

In my opinion, they were either coerced or they saw the news and started fearing for their safety when they saw the news in how they portrayed this story and all the calls for "justice".

Maybe they're scared of Taaffe who says they're crazy liars and claims to know where they live. That would scare me!

LambChop
05-24-2012, 08:13 AM
BBM.

I keep reading this stated as fact, but if GZ's statements haven't been released how does anyone know this?

Gilbreath stated so during his testimony at the bond hearing. GZ's statements were inconsistent with the evidence. jmo

gxm
05-24-2012, 10:48 AM
Gilbreath stated so during his testimony at the bond hearing. GZ's statements were inconsistent with the evidence. jmo

Yes. I know that. That is why I refer to the alleged inconsistencies as we haven't actually seen the statements yet. And given that GZ had his head bounced off the sidewalk that night, any inconsistencies might be attributed to having his bell rung.

IIRC, the problem with the Gilbreath testimony, if one reads through it all, is that he waffles. He'll say GZ's statements are inconsistent but then when MOM questions him, he'll admit that there is no evidence to contradict GZ's story of turning around to go back to his car and being assaulted by TM. IMO, the prosecution may try to say that GZ's story is inconsistent with the gf's testimony, and IMO that's just not solid enough to remove any reasonable doubt.

With public sentiment growing for GZ after the doc dump, IMO, the prosecution doesn't want any more evidence published that reveals how flimsy their case is.

JMO, OMO, and MOO

ariesgodofwar
05-24-2012, 11:47 AM
With public sentiment growing for GZ after the doc dump, IMO, the prosecution doesn't want any more evidence published that reveals how flimsy their case is.


I think you hit the nail on the head with that one. They could not leak enough "quasi"-evidence fast enough to attempt to implicate George's guilt before the last release, and now they want to stop? Whatever happened to turnabout being fair play? They do not want the defense doing the same thing?

There is a reason why Florida's law requires that the evidence be made public. It adds transparency to the entire process. The Judicial process must be transparent, regardless if there is a 24/7 news cycle or not, and regardless if there is public outrage or not. It is a good thing, unlike in many states where Police Dash Cams can be entered as evidence by the Prosecution, but prohibited from being used by the Defense as exculpatory evidence in the event of police misconduct or to contradict/validate an officer's sworn testimony because they are somehow construed as a "non-record" which is "sealed," either by statute or case law because they simply call them a "Personnel Record" or something disingenuous like that. That is a whole separate issue, but one I believe, and I could be wrong, that Florida's very broad Open Record Law prevents, and I think that is a very good thing in ensuring Justice, in a legal sense, is served under the law.

zenreaper
05-24-2012, 11:52 AM
Why is prosecution supposedly so concerned about this evidence? By the way since for the most part witnesses don't agree with each other, it would be impossible for Zimmerman's statements not to contradict at least some of the witnesses.

Well, when MOM was fighting the release, it was stated that it was because the evidence MUST be damaging to GZ. So if the prosecution is now fighting it, it MUST be, yep, you guessed it, DAMAGING TO GZ, because regardless of WHAT evidence is released or not released, it CAN'T help GZ, because most have already convicted him and evidence proving his guilt is ignored.

Concerned Papa
05-24-2012, 12:09 PM
I'm going to "step across the aisle", so to speak, and join the pro Zimmerman supporters and say I would like to see every piece of evidence released NOW. I would like to be able to read every word of each of George Zimmerman's statements, and particularly would like to see the video of the re enactment he is reported as doing the following day with SPD.

I've got a feeling that video will be very telling and noteworthy.

ariesgodofwar
05-24-2012, 12:27 PM
I'm going to "step across the aisle", so to speak, and join the pro Zimmerman supporters and say I would like to see every piece of evidence released NOW. I would like to be able to read every word of each of George Zimmerman's statements, and particularly would like to see the video of the re enactment he is reported as doing the following day with SPD.

I've got a feeling that video will be very telling and noteworthy.

I just cannot help but think that if they had any "bombshell" evidence of inconsistent statements that they felt were persuasive, that they would have had to have been included in the PC Affidavit that they sent to the Judge. It still perplexes me that a Judge even allowed it. My understanding is that they usually send it back telling the PA they needed to provide additional evidence and information to back up the assertions, or that the charge would not be issued, especially since they decided to circumvent the grand jury.

Barring that, if they felt George was a danger to the community, then they would have for sure mentioned in his Bond Hearing, assuming they actually believed his to be someone who is a depraved killer as the Murder 2 charge requires he be.

That in and of itself makes me think this is a political prosecution, and not one based on actual incriminating evidence.

elementary
05-24-2012, 02:46 PM
Initially, O'Mara had no idea what that evidence was or would say. He had to preemptively at least ask (even knowing he would likely be turned down) to prevent its release if possible in the event is was damning for his client. I think that is every defense attorney's worst nightmare, having a client plead innocence, believing it, and then getting hit with an airtight case.

There is no legitimate public or judicial interest served however by the Prosecution withholding evidence. While I certainly understand the redaction of witness information in a case like this, the VSA results, the Full Toxicology Panel and everything else should be released. My concern is, they are trying to hold it back for fear of "social upheaval" which should never be a consideration in American Jurisprudence.

Sad to say that I take such a dim view on this, but the Crump + FL Prosecution strategy seems to be just to try and get past the SYG hearing. If the Judge kills it there, George is indemnified from Civil Claims as a result of his action. I think that is what this whole thing has been about since Day 1. Corey knows she cannot get a murder 2 conviction, but by overcharging, I think it was believed to quell any upheaval and help pass the SYG Hearing. Overcharging is prosecutorial misconduct.

Actually and factually, Prosecution is not "withholding" evidence. Prosecution is asking that certain evidence be sealed for fear of tainting the jury pool (even further, IMO). Withholding evidence would mean that the defence wasn't getting all the discovery. As far as we know that is not true.

ariesgodofwar
05-24-2012, 03:03 PM
Actually and factually, Prosecution is not "withholding" evidence. Prosecution is asking that certain evidence be sealed for fear of tainting the jury pool (even further, IMO). Withholding evidence would mean that the defence wasn't getting all the discovery. As far as we know that is not true.

You are correct, I erred in not adding from "Public Inspection." I will amend my post. In no way meant to assert that information was being withheld from the Defense. I simply do not know if it is or not.

ETA: My edit button is not working on day old posts, must be a time limit, or I am restricted some how.....in any case, please accept my post below as my mea culpa, you are indeed correct in my omission.

ariesgodofwar
05-24-2012, 03:06 PM
There is no legitimate public or judicial interest served however by the Prosecution withholding evidence from public inspection.

My "Edit" button has gone missing, but Elementary is correct, I erred and failed to include the bolded above in my post. I was not asserting that anything has been denied from the defense (I do not know), I was speaking strictly to the State of Florida's Public Disclosure Statutes.

elementary
05-24-2012, 03:12 PM
http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/2012-05-23/news/os-george-zimmerman-motion-evidence-seal-20120523_1_statements-seal-scene-and-autopsy-photos



Is this just an attempt to manage damage control? I have a hard time understanding how a law allowing sealed confessions is applicable to evidence in a prosecution. This is America, we are not to have secret courts or tribunals, where Americans are convicted on "secret" evidence.

I do have a question, how is Bernie De la Rionda not in violation of the court's order? I thought that they had 15 Days to make the evidence public, and that last Thursday was the last day. That said, for them to withhold any documents without an order from the Court would seem to be a problem. Am I missing something here? I understand that the test they are referring to, was a VSA (Voice Stress Analysis), which the SPD asked him to voluntarily undergo, and he voluntarily consented. His father asserts that he passed.

While not always admissible, are there misconduct issues with the Prosecution asking him to take a test, which could to some degree could be exculpatory, or create reasonable doubt if passed, and then refusing to release it? It would seem if that is the case, George should have declined as there was no benefit to him. If he passes, no one hears about it, if he fails, they crucify him with it......just wrong.

http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/2012-04-03/news/os-george-zimmerman-uhrig-20120403_1_defense-team-assistant-public-defender-attorney



http://blogs.findlaw.com/blotter/2012/04/police-gave-george-zimmerman-voice-stress-test.html?=features

(Sorry, I don't know how to include quotes from OP.)

It seems to me that the prosecution is doing everything by the book and doing what is allowed according to Florida law.

As to the arguments above:

1. VSA (Voice Stress Analysis), as far as I know, is inadmissible in Florida, so to me it is a moot point that "exculpatory evidence" as the OP asserts "may have been withheld". Besides, the defence already has it.


2. 'According to a recent study funded by the National Institute of Justice (NIJ), two of the most popular VSA programs in use by police departments across the country are no better than flipping a coin when it comes to detecting deception regarding recent drug use.' (One can extrapolate from this, IMO).
http://www.nij.gov/journals/259/voice-stress-analysis.htm

3. The last link is a blog and therefore a secondary source expressing an opinion that has been quoted in the OP.

What isn't followed up from the title of the post is that prosecution put in a motion to seal GZ's confessions, the cell phone records of GZ, Trayvon and GF, and unidentified 'tests' which would not be admissible anyway.

What I find interesting is that, almost immediately subsequent to the motion's filing, the new guy on the expanding defence team, Uhrig, spills the beans that it was a VSA test and that GZ passed. So who is playing dirty here- as soon as defence got the motion, first thing they do is go to the media to identify the test and its results, hereby preempting the desired gag and prejudicing the jury pool (it works both ways, IMO). De la Rionda was not out of line, but IMO, Uhrig was.

I think de la Rionda was fairer to the defence than the defence was to the prosecution:

In his motion, de la Rionda says that the case "continues to be of great interest to the media," and both the state and the defense "wish to be able to receive a fair trial and try this case in the courtroom and not in the media."Sounds to me like they're leading the prosecution down the garden path. It may not be legal 'misconduct' on the defence's part, but it sure is sneaky and hypocritical, IMO.

http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/2012-05-23/news/os-george-zimmerman-motion-evidence-seal-20120523_1_statements-seal-scene-and-autopsy-photos

And last but not least, it was not the prosecution that asked him to take the test but SPD.

zenreaper
05-24-2012, 03:18 PM
(Sorry, I don't know how to include quotes from OP.)

It seems to me that the prosecution is doing everything by the book and doing what is allowed according to Florida law.

As to the arguments above:

1. VSA (Voice Stress Analysis), as far as I know, is inadmissible in Florida, so to me it is a moot point that "exculpatory evidence" as the OP asserts "may have been withheld". Besides, the defence already has it.


2. http://www.nij.gov/journals/259/voice-stress-analysis.htm

3. The last link is a blog and therefore a secondary source expressing an opinion that has been quoted in the OP.

What isn't followed up from the title of the post is that prosecution put in a motion to seal GZ's confessions, the cell phone records of GZ, Trayvon and GF, and unidentified 'tests' which would not be admissible anyway.

What I find interesting is that, almost immediately subsequent to the motion, the new guy on the expanding defence team, Uhrig, spills the beans that it was a VSA analysis test and that GZ passed. So who is playing dirty here- as soon as defence got the motion, first thing they do is go to the media to identify the test and its results, hereby preempting the desired gag and prejudicing the jury pool (it works both ways, IMO). De la Rionda was not out of line, but IMO, Uhrig was.

I think de la Rionda was fairer to the defence than the defence was to the prosecution:

Sounds to me like they're leading the prosecution down the garden path. It may not be legal 'misconduct' on the defence's part, but it sure is sneaky and hypocritical, IMO.

http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/2012-05-23/news/os-george-zimmerman-motion-evidence-seal-20120523_1_statements-seal-scene-and-autopsy-photos

And last but not least, it was not the prosecution that asked him to take the test but SPD.

Yeah, the prosecution doesn't want this tried in the media...now that the evidence is making them look BAD. They had no problem with the media trying it, even allowing the NBP to issue a BOUNTY on GZ.

Reader
05-24-2012, 03:28 PM
http://www.flcourts18.org/PDF/Press_Releases/zimmerman_prot_order.pdf

DEFENDENT'S CONCURRENCE TO THE STATE'S MOTION FOR PROTECTIVE ORDER AND OBJECTION TO RELEASE OF CERTAIN DISCOVERY AND REQUEST FOR DELAY IN RELEASE OF CERTAIN DISCOVERY TO ALLOW ANALYSIS

Signed by Mark M. O'Mara dated 5/24/12

i.b.nora
05-24-2012, 03:34 PM
All of this was talked about in the Bond Hearing (by both sides), I don't see what the big deal is. We don't need to know any of this stuff. In fact, I am starting to feel that all this Sunshine is impeding and harmful to a fair trial of any kind for anyone.

ariesgodofwar
05-24-2012, 03:41 PM
(Sorry, I don't know how to include quotes from OP.)

It seems to me that the prosecution is doing everything by the book and doing what is allowed according to Florida law.

As to the arguments above:

1. VSA (Voice Stress Analysis), as far as I know, is inadmissible in Florida, so to me it is a moot point that "exculpatory evidence" as the OP asserts "may have been withheld". Besides, the defence already has it.


2. http://www.nij.gov/journals/259/voice-stress-analysis.htm

3. The last link is a blog and therefore a secondary source expressing an opinion that has been quoted in the OP.

What isn't followed up from the title of the post is that prosecution put in a motion to seal GZ's confessions, the cell phone records of GZ, Trayvon and GF, and unidentified 'tests' which would not be admissible anyway.

What I find interesting is that, almost immediately subsequent to the motion, the new guy on the expanding defence team, Uhrig, spills the beans that it was a VSA analysis test and that GZ passed. So who is playing dirty here- as soon as defence got the motion, first thing they do is go to the media to identify the test and its results, hereby preempting the desired gag and prejudicing the jury pool (it works both ways, IMO). De la Rionda was not out of line, but IMO, Uhrig was.

I think de la Rionda was fairer to the defence than the defence was to the prosecution:

Sounds to me like they're leading the prosecution down the garden path. It may not be legal 'misconduct' on the defence's part, but it sure is sneaky and hypocritical, IMO.

http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/2012-05-23/news/os-george-zimmerman-motion-evidence-seal-20120523_1_statements-seal-scene-and-autopsy-photos

And last but not least, it was not the prosecution that asked him to take the test but SPD.

The Prosecution represents the state of Florida and the SPD represents the state of Florida. Ergo, they both represent the same entity, so they are not really separable as they both provide a function of the same judicial process, one investigates, and the other takes that investigation, and represents it in a court of law on behalf of the State.

So, a few things, about the VSA, as I understand Florida Law, they would be able to ask for a Frye Hearing on Admissibility, but not entirely positive. You make it sound as if VSA's are useless.....if that were the case, I assure you, departments and agency's would not spend $10K a pop to have them. There are some methods which are more accurate than others. Are they so good we can get rid of a jury and just use a VSA? No, but there is a reason they are widely used, and if the hundreds of agencies that use them thought they were worthless, they would save their money. They are an important investigatory tool. A bit like a home pregnancy test of sorts. No licensed physician would make a diagnosis of pregnancy based on one, but they are indeed indicative.

My understanding of the article is 2 fold-1. George took the test voluntarily at the request of the SPD and 2. According to Uhrig and George's father, his statements were deemed by the VSA to be truthful.

Is this a "leak" if George's father was the one that put this in the public domain? I think George's father has every right to disclose, and no ethical obligation to withhold information he feels is exculpatory in nature.

Now about the prosecution refusing to release it, I think is it because it supports the Defense, and they are trying to get the "upper hand" in trying this case in the Media.

Lastly, you state George's "confessions." We need to be careful with this, because it is the use of the word confession itself which is at issue here. George made statements as to the events of the evening. Setting aside whether those were true, false, contradictory, or otherwise, as to his version of what transpired. What he did not do is "confess" to any crime. Had he done so, maintaining his innocence and pleading not guilty make no sense (as he best bet would be to plea bargain and take a guilty pleas if he had).

Florida law have very strict stipulations to the limited exemptions it allows to its Public Disclosure Law, basically, the only one being a defendants confession as it would certainly prejudice a jury obviously. What De La Rionda is doing, is trying to change the definition of the word confession. Confessions are voluntary and knowing statements from the accused admitting personal responsibility for a crime, free from influence or duress. What De La Rionda is trying to do is basically get the Judge to change the definition of the statute and instead, interpret the definition of a "confession" to something which is not knowing or voluntary. He is basically trying to turn the word "confession" into "evidence which we do not want made public." He is trying to circumvent the very intent of the law. By definition, some of the very things he is withholding are not confessions, just the same as a Prosecutor is ethically required to include any exculpatory evidence that they may have in a Probable Cause Affidavit as well, and none of it, medical records, witness statements, et al. were included. This is a trainwreck you can see from a mile away, which usually happens with political prosecutions.

KateNY
05-24-2012, 03:42 PM
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-18563_162-57437482/despite-evidence-no-answers-in-martin-shooting/?tag=cbsnewsLeadStoriesArea

Some of the case's most important evidence has yet to be made public, including Zimmerman's three interviews with police, and his cell phone records. CBS News learned that includes texts Zimmerman sent after the shooting. Some of them disparage leaders of "Justice for Trayvon" rallies with language described as offensive.

Mark O'Mara, Zimmerman's lawyer, has yet to get copies of all those texts.

"So you still will be looking for them?" Strassman asked O'Mara.

"Absolutely."

"And if that is there?"

"We'll deal with it," said O'Mara. "I don't know the context of it. I don't know what is was in response to. I am sure that as every other part of this case, there will be explanations on both sides. Let's wait and see what we have."

O'Mara expects to get the rest of the prosecution's case in pieces over the next few weeks. Some of the evidence now under seal may be made public only in court.

BBM

ariesgodofwar
05-24-2012, 03:45 PM
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-18563_162-57437482/despite-evidence-no-answers-in-martin-shooting/?tag=cbsnewsLeadStoriesArea



BBM

Thanks, very interesting......so, I wonder how CBS found out about potential "text messages" about leaders for the JFTM crowd? Sadly, he probably did. I think I would say no so nice things about people calling me a deranged psychopath willing to gun down a child in cold blood. If someone said that to me in a bar, they would be fighting words.

Reader
05-24-2012, 05:11 PM
From ariesgodofwar:

Lastly, you state George's "confessions." We need to be careful with this, because it is the use of the word confession itself which is at issue here.

Remember that it was GZ's own lawyer that called his statements 'confessions' in this interview:

The most crucial evidence not being released, though, are statements his client George Zimmerman made to police.

They are exempt from disclosure at this point because they are considered confessions.

"There's a chance I may have a right to suppress some of those," O'Mara said.

http://www.clickorlando.com/news/George-Zimmerman-s-attorney-says-more-evidence-to-come/-/1637132/13486818/-/x1vridz/-/index.html

AJ Noiter
05-24-2012, 05:40 PM
From ariesgodofwar:



Remember that it was GZ's own lawyer that called his statements 'confessions' in this interview:



http://www.clickorlando.com/news/George-Zimmerman-s-attorney-says-more-evidence-to-come/-/1637132/13486818/-/x1vridz/-/index.html

I think a misunderstanding might be happening with that. Legally they -are- confessions. Outside of the courtroom if you tell someone "they have confessions" it's usually viewed as a negative statement toward the defendant. I think that's what aries is trying to say. Just my thought, of course.

jjenny
05-24-2012, 06:00 PM
Whatever prosecutions motives for wanting this evidence sealed, I really don't buy that its because prosecution wants Zimmerman's rights protected. And as far as I can tell, prosecution wants Trayvon's cell phone records sealed too? Why? That certainly has nothing to do with Zimmerman's "confessions."

cmsg2002
05-24-2012, 06:02 PM
pretty certain GZ's counsel is not objecting to same, and may have also filed a memo in support of same. In this particular case, I believe its a good idea to seal the evidence, at least at this point in the case.

Reader
05-24-2012, 06:16 PM
Whatever prosecutions motives for wanting this evidence sealed, I really don't buy that its because prosecution wants Zimmerman's rights protected. And as far as I can tell, prosecution wants Trayvon's cell phone records sealed too? Why? That certainly has nothing to do with Zimmerman's "confessions."

Then why do you think MOM agrees to have this evidence sealed and filed his own motion yesterday? See link in #26.

LambChop
05-24-2012, 08:12 PM
Then why do you think MOM agrees to have this evidence sealed and filed his own motion yesterday? See link in #26.

My guess is those records have nothing to do with the case but they checked them out anyway and were part of the investigation. Nothing in them other than the names and numbers of other minors. That would be why MOM would agree. They are of no value to the case. jmo

Karmady
05-24-2012, 08:33 PM
Then why do you think MOM agrees to have this evidence sealed and filed his own motion yesterday? See link in #26.

Just a guess, but because O'Mara doesn't care about sealing the State's evidence since he will see it anyway, and he's more likely to get his own motion about completley different evidence granted if he consents to the State's.

LambChop
05-24-2012, 08:38 PM
The Prosecution represents the state of Florida and the SPD represents the state of Florida. Ergo, they both represent the same entity, so they are not really separable as they both provide a function of the same judicial process, one investigates, and the other takes that investigation, and represents it in a court of law on behalf of the State.

So, a few things, about the VSA, as I understand Florida Law, they would be able to ask for a Frye Hearing on Admissibility, but not entirely positive. You make it sound as if VSA's are useless.....if that were the case, I assure you, departments and agency's would not spend $10K a pop to have them. There are some methods which are more accurate than others. Are they so good we can get rid of a jury and just use a VSA? No, but there is a reason they are widely used, and if the hundreds of agencies that use them thought they were worthless, they would save their money. They are an important investigatory tool. A bit like a home pregnancy test of sorts. No licensed physician would make a diagnosis of pregnancy based on one, but they are indeed indicative.

My understanding of the article is 2 fold-1. George took the test voluntarily at the request of the SPD and 2. According to Uhrig and George's father, his statements were deemed by the VSA to be truthful.

Is this a "leak" if George's father was the one that put this in the public domain? I think George's father has every right to disclose, and no ethical obligation to withhold information he feels is exculpatory in nature.

Now about the prosecution refusing to release it, I think is it because it supports the Defense, and they are trying to get the "upper hand" in trying this case in the Media.

Lastly, you state George's "confessions." We need to be careful with this, because it is the use of the word confession itself which is at issue here. George made statements as to the events of the evening. Setting aside whether those were true, false, contradictory, or otherwise, as to his version of what transpired. What he did not do is "confess" to any crime. Had he done so, maintaining his innocence and pleading not guilty make no sense (as he best bet would be to plea bargain and take a guilty pleas if he had).

Florida law have very strict stipulations to the limited exemptions it allows to its Public Disclosure Law, basically, the only one being a defendants confession as it would certainly prejudice a jury obviously. What De La Rionda is doing, is trying to change the definition of the word confession. Confessions are voluntary and knowing statements from the accused admitting personal responsibility for a crime, free from influence or duress. What De La Rionda is trying to do is basically get the Judge to change the definition of the statute and instead, interpret the definition of a "confession" to something which is not knowing or voluntary. He is basically trying to turn the word "confession" into "evidence which we do not want made public." He is trying to circumvent the very intent of the law. By definition, some of the very things he is withholding are not confessions, just the same as a Prosecutor is ethically required to include any exculpatory evidence that they may have in a Probable Cause Affidavit as well, and none of it, medical records, witness statements, et al. were included. This is a trainwreck you can see from a mile away, which usually happens with political prosecutions.

If he were on medications wouldn't that rule out the possibility of using the results of any testing good or bad. One of the questions before a deposition is are you on any type of drugs that would influence your statement. jmo

ariesgodofwar
05-24-2012, 08:51 PM
If he were on medications wouldn't that rule out the possibility of using the results of any testing good or bad. One of the questions before a deposition is are you on any type of drugs that would influence your statement. jmo

For a VSA? No. It does not measure galvanic skin like a polygraph does. VSA measures voice patterns and runs them through a computer to detect stress indicators. To say, "if he were on any medications"......is a bit over broad. While specific medications might allow one to mislead or trick the test, I am not aware of what they are.

The crux of the above is whether the drugs would "influence your statement." Why would you assume George was on such drugs? If he was on Terazapam, he would be sleeping, and Adderall would not influence his statement.

jjenny
05-24-2012, 11:44 PM
My guess is those records have nothing to do with the case but they checked them out anyway and were part of the investigation. Nothing in them other than the names and numbers of other minors. That would be why MOM would agree. They are of no value to the case. jmo

They removed the names of the witnesses so why couldn't the same thing be done with the cell phone records? I am interested in those due to girlfriend's claim she called Trayvon after head set fell off. I believe she also mentioned something about texting. Would be interesting to see if there were texts and if they fit with the story.

jjenny
05-24-2012, 11:58 PM
Then why do you think MOM agrees to have this evidence sealed and filed his own motion yesterday? See link in #26.

I assume he wants Zimmerman's statements sealed, and not Trayvon's and girlfriend's cell phone records.
The phone records have nothing to do with so-called confessions, so why have those sealed?

LambChop
05-25-2012, 07:50 AM
They removed the names of the witnesses so why couldn't the same thing be done with the cell phone records? I am interested in those due to girlfriend's claim she called Trayvon after head set fell off. I believe she also mentioned something about texting. Would be interesting to see if there were texts and if they fit with the story.

GZ's cell phone records are from AFTER the shooting. If MOM does not object there is nothing of value that pertains to this case other than the gf's calls. jmo

LambChop
05-25-2012, 08:01 AM
For a VSA? No. It does not measure galvanic skin like a polygraph does. VSA measures voice patterns and runs them through a computer to detect stress indicators. To say, "if he were on any medications"......is a bit over broad. While specific medications might allow one to mislead or trick the test, I am not aware of what they are.

The crux of the above is whether the drugs would "influence your statement." Why would you assume George was on such drugs? If he was on Terazapam, he would be sleeping, and Adderall would not influence his statement.

Some meds affect people differently. Slow the speech down, causes slurs in your words so that would affect the level of stress in your speech during a voice analysis, IMO. He certainly does look very laid back in the police video as if he was not upset. So even though LE has these tests available to them medications you are on that could affect results could be why they are not used in court. Everyone reacts differently to drugs. Since they did not test GZ for drugs, we will never know for sure what was in his system. jmo

Karmady
05-25-2012, 09:46 AM
GZ's cell phone records are from AFTER the shooting. If MOM does not object there is nothing of value that pertains to this case other than the gf's calls. jmo

I'm not following you. O'Mara gets to see the cell phone records regardless of whether they are sealed and, afaik, they are among the evidence that has not yet been turned over to him, so he hasn't seen them yet and doesn't know that value they may have aside from the girl's call. If I'm him, I would be very interested to see what other calls were made to/from Trayvon's cell phone that night and the timing of those calls. And also what the call/text history is with the girl.

Reader
05-25-2012, 10:39 AM
My guess is those records have nothing to do with the case but they checked them out anyway and were part of the investigation. Nothing in them other than the names and numbers of other minors. That would be why MOM would agree. They are of no value to the case. jmo

Just a guess, but because O'Mara doesn't care about sealing the State's evidence since he will see it anyway, and he's more likely to get his own motion about completley different evidence granted if he consents to the State's.

They removed the names of the witnesses so why couldn't the same thing be done with the cell phone records? I am interested in those due to girlfriend's claim she called Trayvon after head set fell off. I believe she also mentioned something about texting. Would be interesting to see if there were texts and if they fit with the story.

I assume he wants Zimmerman's statements sealed, and not Trayvon's and girlfriend's cell phone records.
The phone records have nothing to do with so-called confessions, so why have those sealed?

I'm not following you. O'Mara gets to see the cell phone records regardless of whether they are sealed and, afaik, they are among the evidence that has not yet been turned over to him, so he hasn't seen them yet and doesn't know that value they may have aside from the girl's call. If I'm him, I would be very interested to see what other calls were made to/from Trayvon's cell phone that night and the timing of those calls. And also what the call/text history is with the girl.

I think this article will answer most of these questions/comments, plus read the actual motion that MOM made 5/24...he wants the same things sealed as the state, until he can review them. Then he would have to go back to court to get permission to release. There is nothing nefarious about the state's motion, it is normal even in Fl. to keep certain info. out of public to protect the defendent's rights, jury selection and protect witnesses. If MOM really thought this would have hurt GZ do you think he would file an almost IDENTICAL motion, just different in form, requesting the same evidence be suppressed?

http://us.cnn.com/2012/05/24/justice/florida-teen-shooting-motions/index.html?hpt=ju_c2

(CNN) -- Florida prosecutors and George Zimmerman's defense attorney want certain evidence -- including e-mails, cell phone records and statements -- sealed until his trial in the death of Trayvon Martin.

Assistant State Attorney Bernie de la Rionda, in a motion filed Thursday, requested a judge seal statements Zimmerman made to law enforcement officers, some of which he called "contradictory."

The prosecutor said some of Zimmerman's statements were "inconsistent with the physical evidence and statements of witnesses."
--------

Zimmerman's attorney, Mark O'Mara, filed a concurring motion. He said the defense wants 1,000 e-mails received by Sanford police sealed, as well as statements by Zimmerman. He asked that text messages, e-mail messages or journals made by the defendant be kept private, at least until they can be reviewed.

Karmady
05-25-2012, 10:52 AM
I think this article will answer most of these questions/comments, plus read the actual motion that MOM made 5/24...he wants the same things sealed as the state, until he can review them. Then he would have to go back to court to get permission to release. There is nothing nefarious about the state's motion, it is normal even in Fl. to keep certain info. out of public to protect the defendent's rights, jury selection and protect witnesses. If MOM really thought this would have hurt GZ do you think he would file an almost IDENTICAL motion, just different in form, requesting the same evidence be suppressed?

http://us.cnn.com/2012/05/24/justice/florida-teen-shooting-motions/index.html?hpt=ju_c2

(CNN) -- Florida prosecutors and George Zimmerman's defense attorney want certain evidence -- including e-mails, cell phone records and statements -- sealed until his trial in the death of Trayvon Martin.

Assistant State Attorney Bernie de la Rionda, in a motion filed Thursday, requested a judge seal statements Zimmerman made to law enforcement officers, some of which he called "contradictory."

The prosecutor said some of Zimmerman's statements were "inconsistent with the physical evidence and statements of witnesses."
--------

Zimmerman's attorney, Mark O'Mara, filed a concurring motion. He said the defense wants 1,000 e-mails received by Sanford police sealed, as well as statements by Zimmerman. He asked that text messages, e-mail messages or journals made by the defendant be kept private, at least until they can be reviewed.

I read the motion, and had when I originally commented.