Page 43 of 55 FirstFirst ... 333435363738394041424344454647484950515253 ... LastLast
Results 1,051 to 1,075 of 1353

Thread: What evidence does the prosecution have?

  1. #1051
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    598
    Quote Originally Posted by gxm View Post
    The worst part is that it's all over the web. People keep blindly referencing this mysterious affidavit as fact because so many "news" outlets posted Crump's allegation without any fact checking. It's absolutely crazy. If there's an affidavit, it should not have been reported until the MSM had access to it and could report facts. Instead, they regurgitated what appears to be misinformation exactly how Crump fed it to them.

    JMO, OMO, and
    Didn't something similar happen with one of the witnesses?
    "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence." - Carl Sagan
    “In all debates, let truth be thy aim, not victory, or an unjust interest.” - William Penn

  2. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to AJ Noiter For This Useful Post:


  3. #1052
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    2,706
    Quote Originally Posted by AJ Noiter View Post
    Didn't something similar happen with one of the witnesses?
    It was Frank Taaffe wasn't it?

    (LOL)


    But there is nothing covered up that will not be revealed, and hidden that will not be known. Accordingly, whatever you have said in the dark will be heard in the light, and what you have whispered in the inner rooms will be proclaimed upon the housetops. Luke 12, 2-3


  4. The Following 8 Users Say Thank You to Concerned Papa For This Useful Post:


  5. #1053
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Sacramento CA
    Posts
    6,135
    Looks like the FBI personnel listed on the witness list are audio forensic experts. One of them, Kenneth Marr testified at the OJ Simpson robbery/kidnapping trial.
    FBI audio analyst Kenneth Marr told the court that he was not able to authenticate the recordings on Riccio’s digital recorder.
    http://www.lasvegassun.com/news/2008...idnapping-tri/

    http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/lab/fore...1_report01.htm

    http://www.scribd.com/doc/93646122/R...Zimmerman-case

  6. The Following 7 Users Say Thank You to RANCH For This Useful Post:


  7. #1054
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    5,747
    Quote Originally Posted by LambChop View Post
    It was FT that gave that interview to the media. It shows how FT viewed GZ's state of mind. jmo
    I know, but I wasn't commenting on relevance. Just whether potential impeachment evidence would necessarily be among the items provided in the State's production. Have you looked at the list? Does it look like it's on there? I haven't been able to take a close look yet.

  8. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Karmady For This Useful Post:


  9. #1055
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    South Central Illinois
    Posts
    10,904
    Quote Originally Posted by Concerned Papa View Post
    It was Frank Taaffe wasn't it?

    (LOL)
    LOL LOL there went the coffee on the screen!

  10. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Dr.Fessel For This Useful Post:


  11. #1056
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    5,747
    Quote Originally Posted by LambChop View Post
    Do you think the reason for all the CD's is that SA made it easier for MOM to view them when some of them would not need to be held up? For instance, the authopsy report? That could be released sooner than some of the other's that MOM might want to keep from being released until he can review them further? jmo
    I think it was probably more a product of organization issues. But, jmo, obviously.

  12. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Karmady For This Useful Post:


  13. #1057
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    South Central Illinois
    Posts
    10,904
    Quote Originally Posted by Karmady View Post
    I know, but I wasn't commenting on relevance. Just whether potential impeachment evidence would necessarily be among the items provided in the State's production. Have you looked at the list? Does it look like it's on there? I haven't been able to take a close look yet.
    Here it is, I saw you ask about it last night too and was looking for it.

    http://www.scribd.com/doc/93646122/R...Zimmerman-case

  14. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Dr.Fessel For This Useful Post:


  15. #1058
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    75002
    Posts
    129
    Quote Originally Posted by HiHater View Post
    If these witnesses were useful to the defense, I'm wondering why they are on the prosecution list?
    Rules of Evidence. The prosecution must turn over all evidence, even that which may be exculpatory to Zimmerman, to the defense.

  16. The Following 9 Users Say Thank You to tpgks For This Useful Post:


  17. #1059
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    550
    Quote Originally Posted by HiHater View Post
    As for possible evidence that the prosecution has, is it possible that GZ's phone lines were recorded? I find his call records on the evidence list interesting...
    Not without a warrant.

  18. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Phoenixfla For This Useful Post:


  19. #1060
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    South Central Illinois
    Posts
    10,904
    Quote Originally Posted by AJ Noiter View Post
    So we have Mr. Wolfinger's statement that he never had any communication or meeting regarding the arrest of Mr. Zimmerman on the 26th or 27th. We also have him stating that they could make arrests anytime they wanted. We have Mr. Serino stating that he never made a claim that he wanted to make an arrest, and we have 3 people calling this claim an outright lie. We also have Mr. Crump -avoiding- the question of whether or not he made up the claim - note: not denying and not admitting to.. AVOIDING. Then he flatly stated that he had not seen an affidavit in regards to arresting Mr. Zimmerman.

    Somehow 3 statements being stated as strong, confident statements vs one weak avoidance.. and somehow the impression exists that Mr. Crump's claim is still true.

    BBM

    Did Wolfinger really say that? Or did he just deny the meeting claimed by Crump ever took place? Take one person out of the meeting Crump mentioned and Wolfinger can claim the statement is not true.

  20. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Dr.Fessel For This Useful Post:


  21. #1061
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    The Great State of TX
    Posts
    1,813
    Quote Originally Posted by tpgks View Post
    Rules of Evidence. The prosecution must turn over all evidence, even that which may be exculpatory to Zimmerman, to the defense.
    So all of those people will not necessarily testify?
    #ConvictZimmerman

    AFTER A TRIAL, OF COURSE

  22. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to HiHater For This Useful Post:


  23. #1062
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    CT/NC
    Posts
    18,946
    Quote Originally Posted by AJ Noiter View Post
    So we have Mr. Wolfinger's statement that he never had any communication or meeting regarding the arrest of Mr. Zimmerman on the 26th or 27th. We also have him stating that they could make arrests anytime they wanted. We have Mr. Serino stating that he never made a claim that he wanted to make an arrest, and we have 3 people calling this claim an outright lie. We also have Mr. Crump -avoiding- the question of whether or not he made up the claim - note: not denying and not admitting to.. AVOIDING. Then he flatly stated that he had not seen an affidavit in regards to arresting Mr. Zimmerman.

    Somehow 3 statements being stated as strong, confident statements vs one weak avoidance.. and somehow the impression exists that Mr. Crump's claim is still true.

    So what you are saying is that Wolfinger claims not to have talked to anyone regarding the GZ case? Then why is it he stepped aside if he had nothing to do with the decision and why did the Chief remove himself because of his "involvement"? And what was in GZ's statements that Gilbreath read that Serino missed? Gilbreath said inconsistencies in GZ's statements. And lastly what proof do we have that SPD did not make a decision based on an outside influence such as GZ telling LE his father was a retired judge. All we will hear is "at the time I was basing my decision on what evidence was available at the time." Most of that evidence came from GZ. jmo
    A lie will go round the world before the truth gets its pants on - Charles Spurgeon

  24. The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to LambChop For This Useful Post:


  25. #1063
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    DFW
    Posts
    5,228
    Quote Originally Posted by Sherbie View Post
    I've read that both the defense and state want certain witness information redacted. What if they want and agree to redact chunks of the actual witness accounts in the state's evidence vs. just identifying info?

    I'm guessing we'd see a full-on media challenge if that were to happen. I think this case could end up being the biggest testing ground yet of the FL Sunshine Law.
    The defense wants names, adresses etc. redacted so the lynch mobs will not call up these witnesses, locate where they live and cause havoc for the witnesses.

  26. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to iluvmua For This Useful Post:


  27. #1064
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    5,747
    Quote Originally Posted by HiHater View Post
    So all of those people will not necessarily testify?
    True, imo

  28. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Karmady For This Useful Post:


  29. #1065
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    South Central Illinois
    Posts
    10,904
    Quote Originally Posted by iluvmua View Post
    The defense wants names, adresses etc. redacted so the lynch mobs will not call up these witnesses, locate where they live and cause havoc for the witnesses.
    I wonder why Taaffe and Oliver have never had any problem or any of the other people who have been on the news?

  30. The Following 11 Users Say Thank You to Dr.Fessel For This Useful Post:


  31. #1066
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    DFW
    Posts
    5,228
    Quote Originally Posted by Dr.Fessel View Post
    I wonder why Taaffe and Oliver have never had any problem or any of the other people who have been on the news?
    I can understand why the defense wants to do this. IMO, anyone who is related to GZ is a target for the mobs.

    Remember what happened with that elderly couple's address that Spike Lee tweeted about?

    I'm sure they don't want anymore of that.

  32. The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to iluvmua For This Useful Post:


  33. #1067
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    75002
    Posts
    129
    Quote Originally Posted by HiHater View Post
    So all of those people will not necessarily testify?
    Of course not. It does not even mean that it will be introduced as evidence at trial.

  34. The Following 9 Users Say Thank You to tpgks For This Useful Post:


  35. #1068
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    South Central Illinois
    Posts
    10,904
    Quote Originally Posted by iluvmua View Post
    I can understand why the defense wants to do this. IMO, anyone who is related to GZ is a target for the mobs.

    Remember what happened with that elderly couple's address that Spike Lee tweeted about?

    I'm sure they don't want anymore of that.
    I can understand why both the SA and the Defense would want to redact names until the trial so people don't try to get to them and change their testimony or something.

    The elderly couple's trouble was because of a tweet about GZ and the wrong address. Zimmerman's real address has been out there from the start and even his wife has never received a threat. I think this danger is being all blown out of proportion by the defense.

  36. The Following 12 Users Say Thank You to Dr.Fessel For This Useful Post:


  37. #1069
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    598
    Quote Originally Posted by LambChop View Post
    So what you are saying is that Wolfinger claims not to have talked to anyone regarding the GZ case? Then why is it he stepped aside if he had nothing to do with the decision and why did the Chief remove himself because of his "involvement"? And what was in GZ's statements that Gilbreath read that Serino missed? Gilbreath said inconsistencies in GZ's statements. And lastly what proof do we have that SPD did not make a decision based on an outside influence such as GZ telling LE his father was a retired judge. All we will hear is "at the time I was basing my decision on what evidence was available at the time." Most of that evidence came from GZ. jmo
    I believe my words were that he didn't talk to anyone about it on the 26th or 27th, which is when Mr. Crump is stating that Mr. Serino wanted to make an arrest. I'd say he stepped aside because of the fabrications created by 3rd parties on him. If he's not in the story anymore no one can make fabrications about what he is or is not doing - err, of course they could, but it would be as senseless as making the fabricated stories are currently. As far as I understand, the SPD did their job - they took Mr. Zimmerman to the investigators at the police station. I'm not sure what Mr. Zimmerman stating anything about a judge would play on the police officers, they're not the ones who did the investigation, though I'm sure if he made such a statement it will be in a police report. What proof do we have that he did make such a statement? The same proof that we have that he didn't - none, other than some off the wall, so far unfounded, claims about it. To be honest I'm kind of surprised the MSM didn't take my joke about Mr. Zimmerman laying on the ground with a sniper rifle and run with it.
    "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence." - Carl Sagan
    “In all debates, let truth be thy aim, not victory, or an unjust interest.” - William Penn

  38. The Following 7 Users Say Thank You to AJ Noiter For This Useful Post:


  39. #1070
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    6,653
    Quote Originally Posted by iluvmua View Post
    I can understand why the defense wants to do this. IMO, anyone who is related to GZ is a target for the mobs.

    Remember what happened with that elderly couple's address that Spike Lee tweeted about?

    I'm sure they don't want anymore of that.
    I'm still trying to find these "mobs" you speak of?
    Justice for Trayvon

  40. The Following 10 Users Say Thank You to LolaMoon08 For This Useful Post:


  41. #1071
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    CT/NC
    Posts
    18,946
    Wouldn't posting these pictures in a public forum seem more like stirring things up than they would for informational value? I think their behavior in offering a reward for GZ is offensive enough without giving them free publicity. jmo
    A lie will go round the world before the truth gets its pants on - Charles Spurgeon

  42. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to LambChop For This Useful Post:


  43. #1072
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    the Plains & Jordan-Hare stadium
    Posts
    14,070
    Quote Originally Posted by LolaMoon08 View Post
    I'm still trying to find these "mobs" you speak of?
    The media, for one. I think it is fantastic that identifying info is being redacted. It will make it harder for tabloids to offer $$$$$$ to witnesses to sell their story. No matter how truthful the testimony they may have to give, it causes HUGE credibility problems. Hard for someone who going through financially tough times to turn down the big $$$ offered. That is good for BOTH SIDES - the prosecution AND the defense. Remember all the witnesses in that other FL case? TL being relentlessly followed into a Chili's restaurant? I will never forget that video...it was very disturbing.

    It is the best of all worlds, imo. The Florida Sunshine laws prevail - we still get to see evidence, however the witnesses are somewhat protected. I'm still on the fence about how well this will work. Time will tell. That said, no person who has witnessed an incident should ever have to be subjected to the same things we saw happen to witnesses during the Anthony fiasco.

    I hope Florida can come up with some way to amend the Sunshine Laws to protect witnesses from being hounded for months/years.
    Never interrupt your opponent when they are making a mistake.

  44. The Following 18 Users Say Thank You to beach For This Useful Post:


  45. #1073
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    75002
    Posts
    129
    Quote Originally Posted by LambChop View Post
    Wouldn't posting these pictures in a public forum seem more like stirring things up than they would for informational value? I think their behavior in offering a reward for GZ is offensive enough without giving them free publicity. jmo
    The media did not seem to have a problem giving the NBPP plenty of airtime...hell I think that either MSNBC or CNN gave a prime-time interview to their leader. (correct me if I am wrong please).

  46. #1074
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    the Plains & Jordan-Hare stadium
    Posts
    14,070
    Quote Originally Posted by LambChop View Post
    Wouldn't posting these pictures in a public forum seem more like stirring things up than they would for informational value? I think their behavior in offering a reward for GZ is offensive enough without giving them free publicity. jmo
    Agreed. Point well made.

    I'm going to remove the pics for the reasons you stated. That is exactly why we opened Sound Off downstairs. Lola, you can check out the Sound Off threads for more discussion of these "mobs". There is plenty of it down there. lol

    No offense to anyone, especially tpgks. I totally get the point you were making. However, I refuse to give those groups any free publicity - even bad publicity.

    Thanks for understanding.
    Never interrupt your opponent when they are making a mistake.

  47. The Following 7 Users Say Thank You to beach For This Useful Post:


  48. #1075
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Sacramento CA
    Posts
    6,135
    From looking at the witness list just released, there's a few witness's who don't have statements listed, W4,W7,W10 and W15 who only shows a 911 call. The latest statement is from W8 on 4/2. Is this it? Or is this just a preliminary statement list? I would hope that the state would want statements from all witness's listed. This document is dated May 14th. That's nearly a month and a half after the last statement's date. Something is missing here. JMO.

    http://www.scribd.com/doc/93646122/R...Zimmerman-case

  49. The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to RANCH For This Useful Post:


Page 43 of 55 FirstFirst ... 333435363738394041424344454647484950515253 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 589
    Last Post: 05-07-2012, 11:33 AM
  2. 17 yo Trayvon Martin Shot to Death by Neighborhood Watch Captain #36
    By SoSueMe in forum George Zimmerman Trial/Trayvon Martin
    Replies: 667
    Last Post: 05-04-2012, 02:03 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •