The Crump Saga Continues

Updatedown arrow gif photo:  Fingerdown-ani1.gif
If the server is down I have uploaded and linked everything here.

Motion: motion_for_reconsideration – Copy

Exhibit A: order_re_crump
Exhibit B:

I’ve combined the seven audio clips with the ABC clip here

Exhibit C: exhibit_c
Exhibit D: exhibit_d
Exhibit E: exhibit_e
Exhibit F: exhibit_f
Exhibit G:
Exhibit H:
Exhibit I: (I just uploaded a snippet that contains the relevant statement 0:13-0:33)
Exhibit J: Looking at the motion there appears to not be an Exhibit J, it seems they accidentally skipped a letter
Exhibit K: exhibit_k
Exhibit L: exhibit_l
Exhibit M:

And just for a little reminder from the October 19, 2012 hearing…


290 thoughts on “The Crump Saga Continues

  1. If I read this motion correctly, I believe it reveals Sybrina Fulton may have been deposed. This motion is dated March 15th (Friday) and on page 2 we learn that included in Exhibit “B” is a CD of recorded interview; Sybrina Fulton as well as the recorded interview of BDLR and W8 on April 2nd.

      • It’s a recored interview of Sybrina. I’m not aware one existed. I read the written report in discovery of her April 2nd interview but was it recorded? They say in the written statement they recorded W8 but no one else that day that I can find. So where did an audio interview of Sybrina Fulton come from? I’m thinking a deposition.

        • I am trying to listen to the Feb 5th Hearing, I think that might be where Omara said the depos were on March 15, I know I heard it in one of the hearings. Hoping your right 🙂 Thx Nettles

        • What a little snippet of the DD Interview by ABC has done, open the flood gates! Love this quote:
          “….Mr. Crump should not be able to hide behind his own technical incompetence to suggest he cannot be deposed on these very relevant issues; certainly not when his actions caused the concerns that now must be investigated.”

          “If that is the case…..if that was his true intent….”

          • I do enjoy all the little jabs like that we often find in the motions. What they’ll ever amount to overall remains to be seen but regarding this motion I think the judge will grant the depo.

            • How about this one from pg 6 number 16;
              “By failing to maintain even the most minimal modicum of evidence retention and security…”

              ABC has a 25 minute tape, or better quality, is official.

            • I hope you are correct. From my pov (speaking as an Aussie) this was witness tampering.

              The interference of Crump is very obvious.

              As it is, I believe that Sybrina Fulton lied when she claimed that the voice crying for help was Trayvon. There is no way that someone with such a deep voice would have that particular cadence that is detectable in the recording of the cries for help.

              I must acknowledge here the work of Dman who cleaned up the audio so that we could all better hear the person calling for help. I listened to the recording several times and I compared it to the voice of Zimmerman. It is his voice because of the distinct cadence.

                • I have doubts about this work product biz. I think the charges are based on the Crump work product. Without the Crump work product the state could not file. The first part of the charging information is all about DD. DD is his work product. Yet the trial court deems him immune to discovery by the defense because he might file a civil suit against the defendant in this murder case. He won’t dare do that. The civil discovery would cook his Goose. He took it on himself to bring forth the states star witness but hid her from them for a long time. But the state does not seem upset a bit about it. He was trying to build a civil suit against SPD for being racist. Turns out they were not. It is all so discombobulated. Unravelling this mess takes time. But the trial judge won’t grant to continue and wants to rush to trial. Maybe the defense can get a stay from district.

              • I was aggravated with Dr Phil’s “Oh, you poor dear souls” act and was only half listening to the show by the point he played the 911 call…

                …I wasn’t expecting to hear the call, there was no suggestibility involved, and I immediately recognized it as George’s distinctive voice (I’ve listened to his interviews and reenactments enough).

                That’s what really galls me about Sybrina claiming it was her son and the so called ‘expert’ who claims that he has scientifically excluded GZ as the source of the calls for help… it was George, there is absolutely not a shred of doubt in my mind.

            • I won’t bet the ranch. I think the court is tying to get this to trial asap. The court does not have to do anything and can rule the opposite of the law anytime it wants. Then the question becomes an appeal to a higher court. Maybe that is a way to get a continuance. I doubt the trial court will reconsider. Regardless of the law.

            • I think it’s kinda cool how arguments that we’ve made in the various online discussion forums can make their way into the defense motions and arguments…

              There’s a whole interactive element to this case.

  2. Thanks AGAIN and AGAIN DMAN!!!

    Hee hee Just one yr ago today, SUPPOSEDLY TrayDad found out about TM talking to DD. ANd today this new motion! Love it!

  3. {{{VROOM VROOM}}} Looks like Mark Omara has taken off the gloves & removed his pinky ring! Go git ’em MOM!!!!

    • Attention 5th District Appellate Judges. We have a Hot Potato headed your way on aisle 2. There are lots of shenanagins going on down there in the 18th. Maybe someone will finally end this bizzare tragedy.

          • I hope they find us soon. Do you remeber when one of our buds (no names) was banned from the TH for defending MOM? I laughed until I cried. I know Little Laughter has some serious legal issues regarding her son being involved in that awful accidetnt. Remember prayers for her family.

            • I sure do remember about the banning and the reason behind it. Maybe the same thing went down again…dunno. Yes! LL sure is wading thru some deep waters. Nothing but blessings for the whole family. The stress must be just awful…. thankfully they are people of faith. We will just continue them up in prayer.

              Lets send up a flare, maybe they will see it! And show up.

                • I knew what you meant. Eyes are droopy- can’t get my bio clock adjusted to time change- midnight here. Prays for LL & a flare for “others”. I stole this from a long time back but roses on your pillow 😉

            • I sure hope you really did not toss those 8″ red strapped heels / dancin’ shoes! I know, I know…you were afraid you would use them as “wepons” over there. 😀
              LL and your family constantly need our prayers; you have mine. It remains heartbreaking for me every time I read your posts WRT your family and all of you have struggled with. 😀
              nwtex—well, what can I say>>>every day you do not stop in to say “Hi” I am worse than a mother hen, worried the little chick-a-dee is blazing a new cyber-race trail and banked off a cyber curve into the oblivion filled with cyber clouds. 😀 Your favorite pic>>>

  4. I can’t wait to see how the trial court tries to weasel out of this motion. (and it will I bet) You have it all. Lying witnesses, lying lawyers, false affidavits, lying media. The whole thing. It answers everything the trial court did to try and hijack the defense. Plus if it is another rotten ruling it can be sent for emergency appeal to DCA. On so many levels the scheme team is falling apart at the seams.

    • When Nelson first took over the case, I recall her mentioning something to the effect of she doesn’t watch the news or keep up with current events. I thought, great, she hasn’t been biased by the media’s slanted reporting on the matter. Now, however, I’m starting to wonder if maybe she is too detached and out of touch with the legal world outside of her own courtroom.

      For her to arbritrarily and unilaterally decide that Crump had no relevant information concerning Wit 8, I was floored…

      And her refusing the defense’s simple request to know when the state first became aware of Wit 8’s perjury… again, it was a wtf moment.

      Keep in mind, too, that even though Judge Lester was booted from the bench for his blatant prejudice towards the defendant, Nelson still defers to his tainted rulings?

      So you’re right… she ‘should’ allow the deposition, but it’s entirely possible that she’ll pull a “I’ve already ruled on that matter.”

      • I suspect she tried to thwart the defense some to justify why she couldn’t/wouldn’t grant immunity. I’ll be interested to see her stance now that the defense has taken that load off of her, for now.

    • IMO opinion the Judge if, she is to denied the motion, will go back to the “relevancy” issue. Is Crump’s testimony relevant to the charges. What specific information is the Defense attempting to find, will that information be relevant? Can the information be obtained from other sources? Is that relevant? Has the Defense exhausted other means of obtaining the information needed?

      In this case the answer is no, there is a recording from ABC that the Defense has not obtained yet. This recording might be enough, as we have seen to completely impeach DD testimony, if that is the objective reason. Unless, I feel that MOM is alleging some conspiracy, which I think he does not, then I think the Judge can and will deny the motion.

      If you read the bottom of her order, she is, in a sense telling the Defense that the recording by ABC is all they need to impeach the witness.

        • I believe that is a separate issue for the judge, she could hold Crump in contempt of court for misleading statements but my guess if she does not dismiss, is that will she ask Crump to clarify his statements or to correct the record.
          Is hard to read the Judge since she seems to go back and forth, you can depose Crump, no you can’t, I think the most important thing will be does the Defense have enough to impeach DD, if yes, there is no need to go any further.

          • If Crump gets through this case untouched and unpunished, we will see black civil rights attorneys on every street corner in America. Every time a black person is killed, they will be right there looking for a paycheck… no office needed. Just a spare room at home, a phone, printer and a computer. Law degrees will become easily available online to be completed in 8 weeks or less.

            • I did not say he would be unscathed, but for criminal charges we have to look at what laws have been broken and is there enough evidence to convict.

              Can we say he was over-zealous in his representation of the Martins, most definitely, does it appear like he is coaching DD, hell yeah. The appearance of improper behavior is evident, can it be proved that:
              a. he knowingly solicited false statements?
              b. produced DD?
              c. instructed people to lie?
              d. obstructed justice, purposely?
              f. conspired to do any of those things?
              If we can’t the prosecution will not pursue it, one bad litigation in this case is enough. Can the Fl bar do something? Perhaps.

              • This is why a depo is essential… to prove these and OTHER legal issues. It is not a witch hunt or searching expedition.

                ALL of the circumstances about how DeeDee came on the scene are important since the State actually used her to support the PCA. If THEY will not explain that, then who will? This is crazy.

                • Crump has already said that it was Tracy and Sybrina who found and briefly spoke to DD. In essence this is part of what the Judge said to MOM, where DD came from can be determined from other sources. In this case the people who actually found her, and convinced her to come forward. If after the deposition of Sybrina and Tracy they discovered contradictory information then I think the Judge would allow a deposition. Right now we don’t have all the information, so we base everything on the crumbs we get, but it may not be the whole picture.

                • If I’m not mistaken the defense said something in the motion about not being able to ascertain when the state actually found DeeDee or how she was found. The state has refused to answer that question. In a public interview on TV didn’t Pam Bondi say they had a witness but couldn’t at that point get her to come forward? Wasn’t that the same day she announced the new prosecutor Corey as being the very best prosecutor to handle the case? She included, if I am not mistaken that she wouIdn’t be where she was without Corey’s help. I don’t remember if that was before or after the Crump presser where he claimed they found the smoking gun. He claimed that DeeDee was a minor, and he showed the copied and pasted phone bill. When did Crump talk about Tracy “looking on the phone bill and finding the last call to Taryvon”? He clearly said that Tracy had called the girl, and then called him late that night to tell him the bombshell info. As far as I am concerned the defense is doing the same drip drip drip as the state has done. They are only releasing what they absolutely have to to get what they need to blow the case to outer space.

                  • Tracy is said to have discovered W8 on the evening of March 18th and called Crump later that night. Crump did his interview with W8 the next night with ABC present. He did his press conference the next day, March 20th.

                    Pam Bondi, told Piers Morgan on March 27th (a week after Crump’s Presser) that W8 wasn’t cooperating with FDLE and she hoped that Corey would move this along. Here is the transcript of Bondi’s appearance.

                    “BONDI: Well, what we’ve done is appoint a special prosecutor. And that’s what she’s doing. Conducting a thorough investigation because we need to get Trayvon’s girlfriend to cooperate which I don’t know if was happening previously. And they may have had good reason for that. But she’s cooperating now. And again, a thorough investigation is being done to ensure that justice is sought for that family. But you can’t make an arrest until you interview all the witnesses, Piers ”


                    • In a previous post, I asked if you had ever seen the subpoena for DeeDee to appear before the Grand Jury and how it was addressed. Any idea about that?

                    • I haven’t seen that subpoena. It is said it was the last thing Wolfinger did in the case was to subpoena her to appear before the Grand Jury. That wasn’t announced until after he was off the case. He subpoenaed her on March 22nd and it was announced on March 28th.

                    • That subpoena SHOULD have contained her name and address which is why I have always believed that the defense knew who she was all along.

                      Is an example of a little thing I commented about long ago but no one responded to me much like jello’s comment about the iced tea in DeeDee’s discussion. Little things are now being noticed.

                      Another was the letter that Crump sent to the DOJ . Originally, MSM did not publish page 2. I accidentally found it somewhere else and posted it at the Tree House. No one responded.

                      Then yesterday it became significant at the TH and today there is an entire thread about it. Page 2 showed the cc:

                      Copies went to Eric Holder and Thomas Perez.

                      My point is that over the course of time, many “little” things have resurfaced that now seem to be important.

                      Fortunately, Tara’s great catch was noticed but it, too could have been ignored.

                      Sometimes, it’s the new kids on the block \who find these things so I pay close attention to their posts.


                    • I have heard conflicting stories about the subpoena, one is that it was never served on DD. The other was that the subpoena was for a Jane Doe, but again it was not served. As far as I know nobody seen it. It is possible a request was made but the subpoena was never issued.

                    • Another mystery but there are other comments here about it. How would the defense confirm the GJ story without a copy? Destroying it would be destruction of potential evidence, right?

                    • Lots of things should be included in the discovery that we have never seen. They could have redacted personal details and allowed the public to see it. Otherwise, people like me will wonder if they really did plan for the GJ to proceed and question her.

                      How do you know for sure that is true?

                      I still think O’Mara knew her identity long ago. I suspect that there is a lot the defense knows that they are hiding.

                    • A GJ was convened and the date was set, whether DD was subpoena is what we don’t know, remember there would have been many other people testifying at the GJ, IDK if DD’s identity was known by the State at that point.

                    • I cannot find my time line and I forgot the scheduled GJ date and when the State supposedly discovered her. No big deal, but I recall reading that the subpoena had been prepared but was not delivered and that the intent was to do it in person.. not by mail.

          • I believe that I read that what DeeDee lied about, no hospital visit, 16 then 18 years old, are still impeachable offence’s even though they have no relevance to her ear witness testimony. Didn’t John Galt at one time post that section of the law? If you lie, you can’t be trusted with anything further. I’m still curious why Crump said publically that DeeDee was 16, but then in his sworn affidavit said he had no knowledge about anything about DeeDee except her first name. Did he lie, or did she lie?

            • Crump, can claim privilege is the source of the information regarding DD was obtained in talks with the Martins. As Judge Nelson wrote in her order, if it is written or recorded it is discoverable, if not they are not and fall under “work product”.

            • Crump lied. . .and lied.. and lied. .

              How on earth can that not be significant in this case.. . Here’s the guy who dreamed up this saga and yet he cannot be held accountable? Give me a break. No, I do not need to read a lot of laws to excuse his behavior. I have seen quite enough, thank you, and Nelson seems to have made some of them up.

              If the laws don’t matter in other really important aspects of this case, then “justice” takes on a whole new meaning. I am sure that there are other legal ways to get this guy.

              I am truly wondering if anyone has reported his behavior to the Bar and asked for their intervention. Any way to find out about that?

              Would a petition be heard and publicized?

              • Jordan, I understand the frustration, but the 1st Amendment does protect speech, anything he said in public, can be protected under it, unless it meets the criteria. We don’t know and can’t prove that he was the one that dreamed up this saga, we can certainly use deductive reasoning and arrive at that conclusion but for a court that is not the standard, it is reasonable doubt or preponderance of the evidence if in civil court.

                That is why you see Sharpton and other still stirring up problems.

              • Hi Jordan – Crump felt that a “little lying” would elevate his “status” to a new, “Martin Luther King”. All he had to do was create, by lying, a NEW EMMET TILL CASE. And the “Black Culture” loved him for it – because they know all “Whites” are persecuting and lying to them. They know that all their “problems” are “caused” by “Whites” – never their own actions.

                  • Hi Jordan – That is why you have 500 posts on the CTH, and why we post here. It is indeed a BGI, to go after “Whites” (which included Black-Hspanics, Asians, Koreans, Indians, etc.) who stand in their way to collect $$$$ from Civil Suites – that they feel they must generate from their lies. So yes, all of us are on “trial” here – for “not being black – or something like that!!

  5. Orlando Sentinel article regarding the renewed motion to depose Ben Crump. Mentions that witness 8’s credibility is in question, and that the defense calls Crump’s affidavit “incomplete and inaccurate. As usual, Jeffrey Weiner has difficulty asking the HARD questions, or recognizing the answers when they are waved under his nose:,0,6504210.story

    • It might be that Omara has a lock on the criminal case already. He might be going after damages the easy way. Just a thought. How could the ABC release come at just the right time? Luck? Or the Beezely Boyz?

      • Or a disgruntled sympathizer inside of ABC who wanted to “spill the beans” once it became obvious that ABC was going to delay the release of Gutman’s recording while Judge Nelson was stoking the engine on the “Zimmerman Railroad Express”.

      • The state has been saying that GZ had “inconsistancies” with some of his statements. They didn’t outright call him a liar. If any other language was used in a written motion to the judge it could have been perceived as inflammatory language. Since the judge has been favoring the state with her most important rulings, no need to inflame her even further. The way I see it is that the defense has put Crump and the state on a field of quicksand, and they are watching them sinking further and further into it. That might even include the judge.

        • Agreed, lobbing charges without any way to prove them conclusively, will hurt more than help. MOM and West are just feeding them rope, allowing them to hang themselves.

  6. Guess we late comers don’t get to read the documents until O’Mara/West gets a larger bandwidth. This is the message I get when trying to open any of the new information.

    “Bandwidth Limit Exceeded

    The server is temporarily unable to service your request due to the site owner reaching his/her bandwidth limit. Please try again later.
    Apache Server at Port 80″

  7. I guess O’Mara/West didn’t pay for enough bandwidth. Us late comers can’t open the new documents 😦
    “Bandwidth Limit Exceeded

    The server is temporarily unable to service your request due to the site owner reaching his/her bandwidth limit. Please try again later.”

    • Sorry for the double post…trying to get used to this format and didn’t expect the post to be at the top instead of the bottom 😦

        • Thank you very much Dman. Having the latest comments on top makes sense. If anyone wants to know if their comment had any responses, they can click the notify me box. Actually, I am getting email notices whenever anyone adds additional comments wherever they are.

          • I just can’t handle the email volume. So to anyone I haven’t responded to … it ain’t intentional! Either I didn’t see your post, or comments had migrated so far right that there was no longer a reply button.

        • I’ll go against the grain here and say that the new format with the newest messages on top is horrible. It’s horrible because if you want to read the oldest messages first, you have to go to the bottom and then find the oldest first-level message, and then read all of the replies and sub-replies from there, then move your way back up, find the next oldest first-level message, etc., etc.. It’s annoying when it was so much easier just to read down from the top without missing anything.

        • @D-Man FYI .. The format for the replies and timestamps should be changed to over / under instead of side by side, because when several replies are made and the reply column narrows, the username and reply timestamp merge and overwrite so neither one is legible.

          • Waltherppk, you’ve really committed a faux pas now. Selfdefenseadvocate will be stopping by to warn you to quit whining and just accept things the way they are. Being a web master is hard work, and feedback is not appreciated, dontchaknow!

            • D-Man is a tech wiz, and reducing the horizontal page margins to minimum will help reduce truncating the width on the tree of replies. He will get everything fine tuned and it’s getting there.

              • D-Man does a great job. I was just commenting on selfdefensadvocate calling me out for offering my feedback about the new format showing the newest comments on top (which I don’t care for at all). Apparently, suggesting that you don’t like something in response to several people fawning over the new format makes you a whiner.

              • I might eventually get the paid version of WordPress so I can do more but as it is I am using the free version and limited in its functionality hence I can not change much including formatting the user name/date to be over/under as opposed to side/side unless I change to a free layout that already has that as its default.

                • Can you set the width lower for the page right column where your links are located, that might help to crunch them and get added width for the messages.

                • Okay. Did you send them the link? Also I have replied to George’s father at CTH, and also to JFP about the phone forensics with the name of a consultant forensics expert also FDLE, possibly internal affairs, who may help. Maybe this is OT but if it helps George then it is on target.

                • Careful, please. Nettles is NOT a conservative but deserves our respect. Imagine someone talking about you like this on THIS forum. This is NOT a political thread. NO offense meant to anyone by this post.

                  • Liberals call the new form of “progressives” these terms. I know a lot of traditional liberals and moderates and they want little or nothing to do with them. Just saying.

                • Ask her not me. Personally the term liberal in its modern context is a perversion of classical liberalism which is today called libertarianism. Socialists and communists call themselves liberals because it sounds good like liberty and freedom and stuff and conceals what they are really about is making everybody a cradle to grave GI with a phd in PC installed in place of a brain.

                  • Walther, working on a project could use your input, if you have time go to Wanted to get some input before finishing part 2 with analysis.

                  • Personally, I find fault with labeling, and prefer to respect folks right to self identify with philosophical and political beliefs.

                    I thought you might enjoy a pertinent dialog about the term Prog from today’s uber-liberal Berkeley news blog (a town which is overwhelming Democrat) about taxes and city budgeting.

                    Mbfarrel •
                    The City has neglected infrastructure ever since the progs took control of the council. The fix-it mantra was “Federal Grants.” Oops

                    Confused Mbfarrel •
                    Who are the “progs”?

                    FiatSlug Confused •
                    “progs” = shorthand for “progressives”. Folks who call themselves “progressives” in this town are often as reactionary as “conservatives” elsewhere in the United States.Labels are often a misnomer, and “progs” or “progressives” are no different.

                    • Collectivism or variants of tyranny enforced by a Police State are emblems for what are generally identified as “progressives” today, and certainly tyranny can result from the far left or the far right and lunatics at either extreme think they are perfectly sane while the rest of the world is crazy. Personally I think the moderates, centrists, the libertarians trending conservative by todays measures are the most sane, because I’m biased as one of them. There’s some good and bad at the extremes and I think it all gets sorted out sensibly somewhere in the middle. That is what the founders believed also as best I can understand.

              • Thank you. I get the vibe that a prog. is name calling but why would someone be offended by being called progressive? I define progressive as interested in new ideas, findings or opportunities. Why would that be a put down?

                Probably best not to get into a political discussion. Most especially as I’m from another country than most people on the board. Thanks for answering anyway. I appreciate it.

                • The term progressive would not have become a put down if what was being achieved was actual progress, but the reality has been regression and decadence instead of actual progress and excellence, as sanely measured by persons having realistic traditional values. Progs tend to want to fix what isn’t broken with a new improved version that is no improvement but only serves their own ideology of what is “good”. It is confusion, but progs count it for clarity. Some progressive ideas are very good when limited, but the pattern has been that given an inch the progs take a mile and the excess has a negative overall effect. Progs tend not to be practical minded, but are utopianists and believe in government regulation of virtually everything. They are statists, collectivists, drones in the hive.

    • I’ve been getting the same message, that the site owner has exceeded it’s bandwidth. That doesn’t even seem to make sense. I am not going to speculate as I am so not computer savvy, but something doesn’t make sense here.

      • It might just mean that the server is overloaded. Just imagine how many folks have tried to get on that site today. It probably caused the site to crash. Just try again later.

  8. Well, Crump is in a heap of trouble. It was obvious to me that Crump did not write his affidavit, first because it was in English, and second, because it was intelligent. IMO, Crump told his story to his shiny new down home counsel, the good ole’ boy who was gonna get him off. And this good ole’ boy dressed up the package nice and neat, and left no stone unturned. What more could the defense possible want? Everything was right there.

    Only problem was that Crump wasn’t completely truthful in giving his counsel all of the information. Now it is coming back to bite him in the ……

    • Not only that, the good ole’ boy didn’t do his due diligence in learning all the ins and outs of this case. Funny that Crump would have to rely on this good ole’ boy to bail him out. But his lawyer is well connected and that’s just the way things work down here in Flor-ee-duh!

    • Speaking of Crump’s English skills, I noticed something kinda funny in the latest motion to depose Crump. On page 15 it was written “There are many parts of the recording that seem unintelligible, and Mr. Crump, who conducted the interview, may be able to shed light on what certain words are.” He and DeeDee speak the same language.

  9. I noticed that Jasmine Rand name appears under Crumps name on the DOJ letter. Why wouldn’t Parks or Jackson’s be listed.

    • Maybe Parks has the good sense to stay out of the mess. Rand on the other hand is probably trying to become a partner in that pathetic firm.

  10. I guess the CTH thread is closed to comments now. At the very end of it, ottawa925 posted a link to an announcement of a event at the University of Florida Levin College of Law which will be held tomorrow, Wed Mar 20:

    “At Close Range: The Curious Case of Trayvon Martin,” will take place Wednesday at the University of Florida Levin College of Law in the Chesterfield Smith Ceremonial Classroom, HOL 180. The panel presentations will be from 9 a.m. to 11:30 a.m. and [Charles] Blow’s keynote lecture will be from noon to 1:30 p.m. The event is free and open to the public and law school parking restrictions will be lifted in the green lots. The event will also be webcast.

    The panels will look at a wide variety of issues raised by the case, from a multitude of academic perspectives. Some of the featured panels include “Jim Crow Riding High: The 21st Century Assault on African-American Voting Rights in Florida,” “Half-Baked: Weed, Race and the Demonization of Trayvon Martin,” and “Racial Profiling, Security and Human Rights.”

    It’s obvious just by the titles of the presentations that this is a complete farce intended to further pollute the minds of the public. They are pulling out all of the stops because the Persecution’s case is imploding. Do you think they’ll address any of the serious legal issues or the manipulation of the story by the media? Will they discuss how the public was misled into believing that Trademark was Emmett Till II?

    The University of Florida Levin College of Law’s CSRRR is committed to fostering communities of dialogue on race.

    Oh I’m sure, but only if the communities and their dialogue are BGI-approved.

    • tara:

      I just made a post about this same subject but do not see it here. Do you?

      The order of posts is confusing. Aren’t the most recent ones supposed to be on top? And shouldn’t they all be in date order? Maybe it’s a Mac Firefox issue.

          • I have no idea. When I posted new stuff, is used the last thread.

            When I’m posting things on topic, ie: Crump’s Saga, I post on that thread. I use the guide at the right-side that shows me the last posts to keep up with the latest comments on the thread.

            I was getting emailed on any new comments to the Blog thread and that’s why I saw your post.

            • Stupid question here but here goes. As you own this site, you are the blogger. When we post are we bloggers too?

              I used the term recently to describe all who post on a Word Press site but offended the owner. What is the right terminology for those who participate in the site?

              • No, you would not be considered bloggers rather commentator’s. I click on your name and see you have created a blog using the same free WordPress that I am using.

              • I agree with the Dman. If fact I cringe when I see people who are commenting referring to themselves as bloggers. They are commentators.

                However, here in Australia there is one blog that I read where people can in the end become bloggers when their postings are highlighted by the webmaster of the blog. (This is a blog that concerns the exploits of our Crime Minister). There are people who have collaborated and presented a paper on the subject matter, and they are bloggers. The rest of us are commenters only.

                    • Sorry, I didnt think was you. I clicked on the name there and is says aussiekay, but the name comes up on some post aussie. I didnt mean to offend you. Honest.

                    • I do not sully myself by going to those kind of pro-Trayvon sites. I would need to have a good scrub if I was ever to even click on them….

                    • mimi you did not offend me 🙂

                      I just want to make it clear that i have always been a supporter for George Zimmerman. I happen to understand the circumstances were indeed self-defence.

                    • GOOD! I knew YOU were a true supporter, it was just weird! I saw that name and was like wth? lol Alls good!

    • If I am not mistaken isn’t Jasmine Rand a part time law professor at that university?

      Remember the picture of her from a while ago doing the commie fist pump with a bunch of black male school students? I always considered Rand to be a major part of the inciting team while being a lawyer working for Parks and Crump. I believe she arranged the march to Sanford that ended with a police car smashed and the police department closing that day. It was one of the major protest rallies that happened early on.

    • I think it would be good for us to communicate with the law school about this upcoming event:

      The title of this presentation really angers me, “Half-Baked: Weed, Race and the Demonization of Trayvon Martin”. How about the demonization of George Zimmerman? He was demonized simply because he has white skin and decided to defend himself against a black person! These self-appointed guardians against racism engage in the very same disgusting practice that they condemn.

      • Tara I agree completely!! It would be nice, albeit a threat to the AGENDA, to actually see an unbiased discussion about these issues with BOTH SIDES of the debate represented….not gonna hold my breath on that one though….blue is not my best color!!;)

      • The center hosted an event on Trayvon Martin death last year as well. About 150 people attended according to a college news stories.
        Typical stuff on college campus these days. If I was local I would try and attend just to listen how Charles Blow omits so much evidence now available in the MSM.

    • Hi Tara – This “Howard” study makes sense – if you understand that BGI, and its followers believe that, “All whites are racists” – and lie. All “Blacks (Culture Blacks – that is) are “pure as the falling snow” and always tell the truth. NOW this symposium makes sense – if you accept that “Black Culture Logic”. And if they discover that DeeDee LIED?? Then they will say that she LIED FOR A GOOD “CAUSE” – AND THAT IS OK – IN THEIR ACCOUNTING OF THINGS.

      • “Then they will say that she LIED FOR A GOOD “CAUSE” – AND THAT IS OK . . . ”

        Hmmm . . . sounds like good ol’ TAQUIYYA to me. You know, that part of a certain nutty “religion” that says a believer can:
        “. . . commit otherwise illegal or blasphemous acts while they are at risk of significant persecution.”

    • Both the law and the ascertainable facts are GZ side.

      The thrust of this conference will be in the other direction and based on the Crump/Julison narrative being accepted as fact

      . But if someone versed in the facts of the case would attend, there is likely to be an opportunity for open questions or at least the opportunity to meet people who might open to learning a few more facts.

      The questions have to intelligent, and non-confrontational.

  11. I’ve been confused as to Nelson’s meaning of the term “opposing counsel” in reference to Crump. I wondered if she meant that he was the attorney for the Martin family for later civil cases, and that made him opposing council, or if she made him a part of the prosecution. From the motion it appears that the defense is confused as to her meaning also. They argued that if he was OC for the family, then he is eligible for deposition, as he has no nexus to the prosecution of the case by the state. I would think that if she made him a part of the prosecution team, there would have to be written authorization for that from someone at the state,

    I remember reading at Mike McDaniel’s site, in his DeeDee KABOOM article, he said that by BDLR conducting the interview of DeeDee, even though he had O’Steen and the Martin family in the room, he opened himself up to being deposed. It seems O’Steen wanted no part of it. It is considered an investigation function to interview witnesses during the investigation, and he can’t claim immunity from deposition as he took the role of an investigator and therefore gave up his immunity as a prosecutor. If that is true, then even making Crump a part of the prosecution, if that is what Nelson tried to do, immunity from deposition would not be warranted as he interviewed DeeDee as a part of the investigation. It would appear to me that no matter what Nelson tried to make Crump, she has no leeway but to allow the Crump deposition.

    • In the Judge’s motion to deny Crump’s deposition, she wrote “It is without dispute that Mr. Crump was retained to explore the possibility of seeking civil damages from the Defendant, so he must be deemed to be “opposing counsel” for the purposes of this motion. ”

      She was not linking him up as part of the prosecution team. That seems ridiculous in light of the fact there is no civil case pending right now. Any lawyer can say I’m thinking of bringing a suit to get out of depositions?

      • This is so interesting. I’m not an attorney so I’m learning everything as we go along. I see that Nelson presented the standard criteria for allowing deposition of opposing counsel:

        The party seeking the deposition must establish that “(1) no other means exist to obtain the information than to depose opposing counsel; (2) the information sought is relevant and nonprivileged; and (3) the information is crucial to the preparation of the case.”

        When the defense originally requested deposing Crump, their reasons did not satisfy these criteria, so I don’t find it upsetting that Nelson denied the request.

        But now we have proof that Crump lied, perjured himself even, about the hospitalization and about his recordings of DeeDee. So tell me if this is logical … only Crump can explain the lies thus satisfying #1, the lies are relevant and nonprivileged (I assume that no lies are privileged) thus satisfying #2, and the lies are crucial to the preparation of the case thus satisfying #3.

        • You and I (and others) have learned enough to at least be paralegals but have one common flaw… logic. It does not apply.

          So tell me if this is logical?

          Maybe the test should be 4 pronged instead of 3.. the third being: Is it illogical?

          • Logic takes the fun out of arguing. It’s so constraining and you can’t use the most important element of the human mind: feelings. (Don’t even think of that song or it will be with you the rest of the day…)

            • I remember when there logic courses in college. That, to me, was both illogical and absurd. Is logic actually still taught?

              Feelings? I once wrote a paper while in therapy about feelings.. another subject entirely.

              I learned that I had told people what I thought instead of what I felt for a large part of my life.

              When I was young, it was not uncommon to be told, “You should not feel that way.” Thus began my acting career. I was abnormal enough without that. LOL.

        • Tara, if the information regarding the hospital was arrived at in a conversation with Sybrina an Tracy, I think the privilege would be attached. The problem is the affidavit, he made personal representations that the clip prove are wrong. That is where he will run into trouble.

          As for the opposing counsel, I think the difference is was he was retained, a contract was signed detailing how any future lawsuits might proceed.

          The law also makes a distinction between saying something while knowing this was false, and asserting something that you believe was true when you said, same reason why people think that eventually Shellie will be acquitted.

          As to: “the information is crucial to the preparation of the case.” I guess this will depend on what use is intended by MOM with this information. If the goal is to impeach or strike DD’s testimony the Judge can say that enough exist already to accomplish that, without deposing Crump.

    • I meant to say that it was an informative thread to learn the origins of the case.

      I can see a competitive battle developing. This place very quickly filled a void and make the change with ease.. thanks to DMan. I read 500 posts over there and a lot more here.. long day for me.

    • Hey, Jordan—I am still trying to catch up here with all the GZ threads! I did read the article and posts at TCH—it, as usual, is very informative and I am grateful for their continued efforts to keep us up-to-date with new GZ info as it is made available.

      • It requires a lot of time to read ALL of the poss on all 3 primary sites. I have developed a good system to do it but it is still very time consuming.. I subscribe to ALL comments on ALL threads. That meant almost a thousand emails yesterday. I read all of them in email. I do not reply to everyone and have learned which ones warrant a reply. Fortunately I am retired but still have many medical appointments and some days, the pain is more than I can bear and I must take breaks. plus I have a Springer Spaniel who demands a lot of information. I live alone in a 5 bedroom 3 bath home so I have to look in the other rooms from time to time to at least dust. I usually stay on one side of the home because I have all I need over here…. including a large screened in patio, jacuzzi and my pool plus I have a billiards room but hardly use it.

        It’s a lot of house for one guy but I love it after raising both of my daughters here which is why there are so many rooms plus it’s paid for and I have no intentions to leave. I guess if the right lady came along, I would share it because it could sure use a woman’s touch. LOL>

        • Hey Jordan, wow, have I got a gal for you !!!
          J/K ,
          but it’s funny how things work out like they do. When my Mexican friends and I exchange greetings, I’m always. “Buscando, siempre buscando amigo,” usually accompanied by an index finger pointing to my eye. More or less meaning, ‘Oh, yeah, I’m always on the lookout, my friend.’

          Here’s one for you: My sister just got remarried and she’s 75. The groom is an old and dear friend of hers of 50 years or so — Sis and his deceased wife were the best of friends for all those years. BTW, he just turned ninety, so now I finally have a brother-in-law who’s actually older than I am.

          Either way, you’ve got it made. Just remember . . . Hope Springs Eternal!

        • It is a shame that Mark could not get Crump “on the record” FIRST, before witness 8 was deposed. I would be willing to bet that Crump has been made aware of EVERYTHING that witness 8 asked, and EVERY answer she gave. Now it will be easier for Crump to tailor his own responses (if he is ever deposed) to avoid contradicting her. I would have preferred that HE was deposed first. She would have been far easier to “trip up”, and contradict HIM, than the other way around.

            • Yes, and the judge is not likely to allow a second deposition, barring something very significant being discovered. Time is running out if the defense is not granted a continuance. I wonder how the defense fund has fared, and if they have been able to retain all of the expert witnesses they need? With only seven days left to submit their witness list, time is a HUGE factor right now.

    • Tracy, Brandy (W7), Chad (W10) and Stephen Martin (W25) had a video-taped deposition last Thursday in Miami. The only one living in the Miami area is Tracy. I wonder why they weren’t all deposed in Orlando. I feel bad for the position that Chad finds himself in thanks to his mother and step-daddy.

      • Two comments:

        First: I don’t feel bad for Chad at all. Maybe I should because he’s a kid, but I don’t. I believe that it was his lie that is one of the reasons that this got out of control. I believe that he was the one that started the whole idea behind the halftime NBA garbage. I also believe wholeheartedly that he was NOT home that night and it was Trayvon getting locked out that caused this. No, I don’t feel sorry for him.

        Second: Do you know you W25 is? My best guess is Alicia, or was she assigned another “W#”?

          • I believe that Chad was not home. The next morning I believe it was Chad that told Tracy the last time that he was seen was At 8:30 who inturn told the 911 dispatcher 8:30. According to his dad, Chad told him that Trayvon left at halftime of the NBA all-star game.

            Since Trayvon did not have a key on him, I believe he was locked out because I really don’t believe Chad was home and the doors were locked.

            That’s my reason.

              • IDK. Heck at one time I thought he had a girl over and forgot to put a tie on the doorknob. LOL

                If I had to guess, he was over at a friend’s house either watching the game or playing video games. My guess is that it was in the RTL.

            • Oh interesting! Trademark didn’t have a key on him. Chad told someone, investigators or a reporter, that he was in a front bedroom with headphones on playing video games, so he heard nothing. What if Trademark tried to get into the apartment but Chad didn’t hear him? So Trademark got ticked off and decided to take his anger out on George?

              • Whenever I hear, “Why would Trayvon attack George?” I’ve often said it was a combination of events that triggered it. Getting locked out was one of them. Combine that with the thought of someone you don’t know seemingly following you on a dark cold evening. I also believe that somehow, whether he heard George or it was a gut feeling, he knew the police were coming. He did NOT have any ID on him and maybe the idea that he would be arrested and have to spend a night in jail was too much for him. I really believe those combination of events is what drove him to attack George that night.

                Now you have a reasonable answer to that question

                I still don’t believe Chad was home. Even if he was in a front room, wouldn’t Trayvon try to get his attention there?

                    • I am really confused with how things are posted here but this is one and I think another was to ejarra

                      jordan2222 says:
                      March 22, 2013 at 12:43 am

                      Are we to believe that no one from LE attempted to find out if someone was there or not that night or the next morning. How would everyone in the immediate area be aware of the commotion except for the occupants of Brandi’s condo? Why on earth would Chad or even his Dad tell such a silly unnecessary lie about the 8:30 story? Wouldn’t they at least to check to see the game time?

                      It is one of many little lies that make no sense and could have been retracted at the time before things got crazy.

                  • I would, too. Did they keep a log of “no one home”? I still doubt they would have gone all the way down to Brandi’s anyway. That was about 350′ from the shooting.

                • Why would Trayvon attack IF he thought the cops were on their way? IDK, ejarra. Would he risk getting caught?

                  There has been a lot of speculation that something else happened that night that we do not yet know and may never know but I do wonder why he attacked if he knew for sure George was on the phone. Could he have been so high that he was not thinking? Is it possible that someone he knew was watching? There are several possibilities including Chad and the 3 stooges at the store. Martin is dead so he ain’t talking.

                  • I believe that one reason Trayvon did attack George was because he believed the cops were coming because George called him. I think the initial blow was for him to escape, but when he saw that Georgie wasn’t fighting back, he kept hitting him and maybe at that time he forgot that they were on their way and became more interested in knocking out or killing George.

                    I still believe that it was because of the combination of events, I outlined earlier to Tara, were the impetus behind the attack.

              • Are we to believe that no one from LE attempted to find out if someone was there or not that night or the next morning. How would everyone in the immediate area be aware of the commotion except for the occupants of Brandi’s condo? Why on earth would Chad or even his Dad tell such a silly unnecessary lie about the 8:30 story? Wouldn’t they at least to check to see the game time?

                It is one of many little lies that make no sense and could have been retracted at the time before things got crazy.

                • I need to check all the reports again, I want to know how close they got to Brandy’s Condo. As for the 8:30 pm I am pretty sure that was Chad’s story to Tracy to cover himself. I’ll get back to you tomorrow.

                  • Consider also that most neighbors would have been discussing them among selves. If they knew Tracey and son were guests, then all the more reason to check on them. This was a big thing that night. How late did LE stay there that night. How could Tracey come home and not notice?

                • “Why on earth would Chad or even his Dad tell such a silly unnecessary lie about the 8:30 story? Wouldn’t they at least to check to see the game time?”

                  You would that that people would check that out, seeing how blatant the lie is; but no one seemed to do that. It was in the media for a long time repeated over and over. Nobody came right out and said how that was impossible. The MSM keep that lie in front of the public.

                  All that does is show how stupid the MSM think the public is. Now that is SAD!

          • The lie about Trayvon leaving for the store at half time oft he NBA all-star game that he told his father. I also believe that he told Tracy, when Tracy asked him when the last time he saw Trayvon, that he replied 8:30; at half time of the NBA game. Logic dictates that Tracy would have asked him that and that was why Tracy gave the answer to the dispatcher, “8:30”.

            Yes, I believe that he is a liar and that he was NOT home that night until well after the event.

            It is his deposition that I’d like to see 2nd only to DD2’s and more than anyone else’s; even Crump’s.

            • Do we know that that is what Chad told Tracy?

              When interviewed by BDLR and Guy, I thought he did not specify anything beyond the fact that the were watching NBA game on TV.

              • We don’t know anything as a fact surrounding Chad. Just some stuff like what he told he father. Which is why I would love to know what he told MOM/West. Like I said earlier, logic dictates that Tracy would have asked him when he seen him last. I believe Chad told him 8:30, which is what Tracy then told the 911 dispatcher.

                It was Chad that started the meme about Trayvon leaving for the store during halftime of the game. My guess is that by the time Guy and BLDR got involved, he knew that that was a lie so he decided not to repeat it. I don’t believe they asked him about it.

                Hmmm….. BLDR not asking question that might end up with an answer that might be exculpatory? Who would have thought?

                • Well, what we have is BDLR’s version of what Chad had to say. We don’t have verbatim question and answer. I felt that Chad’s account as written by BDLR was honest as far as it went.

                  I could be wrong, and you have given an interesting slant on possible evasion.

                  On the evening of the tragic event we don’t know how many doors the police knocked,nor how far down the T they went, nor whether on unresponsive houses did they knock at the front or on the back facing the T sidewalk.

                  • I checked BDLR’s report on Chad –

                    “Chad and the victim were watching the NBA Basketball on TV.”

                    It does not say anything about TM leaving during halftime. It does not specify that they were watching the all-star game itself or the lead-up to the game.

                    • He told his father that he left at halftime. I can’t find the video where he’s say that. Maybe someone here has it and can play it.

                    • ‘ It does not specify that they were watching the all-star game itself or the lead-up to the game.”

                      All Chad said according to his statement giving to FDLE was that they were watching the NBA basketball game which we know did not officially start until 7:30p. Now, its possible that they were watching some sort of pre-game show. But I recall reading articles or hearing on News reports that Trayvon left during halftime. One of those interviews was with Chad’s father as posted at the CTH @

                      On the Video with Chad’s father, he mentions TM leaving at about the 25 second mark and he also mentions Chad called his mother several times

                      What to me is telling is that with all this interest in the NBA game, Chad conveniently is now in his room with his headphones on and playing games during the time of all that commotion. Also according to the statement given by Chad’s father in this interview, Chad supposedly made some calls to his mother and some other people so Chad evidently took his headphones off and was aware that something could possibly be wrong. Wouldn’t he have heard something at this point and perhaps ventured outside?

                      I have also wondered why a lie would be told about the NBA game and halftime since that is easily verified and the thing I have come up with is that when you didn’t know the facts in the beginning, its easy to kind of make stuff up. Notice how when the facts started coming out, stories started to change.

                    • Thanx Angel, Nice same, it seems to fit, BTW. I was looking for this yesterday for my replies to Hooson1st and jordan. I could not find it, even though I knew it was out there.

                      This is but one of several reason why I believe Chad lied about what went down that night and why I really, really doubt very much that he was at home until after the NBA game. He may have even seen the commotion and ran inside and did a Sgt Schulz impression the next day.

                • Also,

                  I would be interesting to know if Chad was interviewed by Sanford police during the initial stages of the investigation before the narrative and FDLE came into play as I believe he should have been since he was reportedly the last to see TM alive. Not that scripted interview he did with Geraldo Rivera and Brandy. I don’t recall nothing ever being mentioned about that. He should have been interviewed the day that Tracy reported him missing and it was learned that TM was shot at the RATL. .

                  So much that is unknown about this case.

                  • He was in school by the time Serino came over to verify that it was Trayvon who died the night before. But, you are correct, they should have come back after he came home from school to interview him. Just another example of sloppy SPD work.

      • “Tracy, Brandy (W7), Chad (W10) and Stephen Martin (W25) had a video-taped deposition last Thursday in Miami”

        I was wondering if Stephen Martin was going to be deposed by the defense. I have read and reread his statements given to FDLE and his statements (if Boobie is cousin Stephen) in the Esquire article about TM and something is not adding up about events of that weekend as stated by the cousin. I have some thoughts about it but nothing I can really substantiate at this point.

        • Me too! Something is fishy about his wanting it to be understood that he grabbed Trayvon’s phone and that Trayvon was talking to a girl.

          He brought that up in his statement to police that he took the phone off Trayvon in the early hours of Sunday Morning and talked to a girl and he told a similiar story to Esquire but this time it was at the football field on Saturday evening.

          Something is afoot.

          • Sending the Def a case of Tylenol, I know they HAVE TO HAVE A HUGE HEADACHE after those depos! And Court Reporter too

          • “Me too! Something is fishy about his wanting it to be understood that he grabbed Trayvon’s phone and that Trayvon was talking to a girl.
            He brought that up in his statement to police that he took the phone off Trayvon in the early hours of Sunday Morning and talked to a girl and he told a similiar story to Esquire but this time it was at the football field on Saturday evening.
            Something is afoot.”

            Exactly Nettles. Why change the sequence of when you supposedly took TM”s phone and talked to the girl in Brandy’s home to it being at the football game on that Saturday. And Stephen originally told FDLE that he and TM went to the movies and did not like the scene and left, went to Mickey D’s and were home by 11p. In the Esquire article , Stephen (Boobie) said when they returned from the football game, then went home and basically stayed in and then cooked chicken at 2a. Huh??

            Too many discrepancies in the stories regarding the timeline of that weekend especially that Sunday morning. The question is why?

      • Nettles, do you think maybe Brandy and Chad have moved in with Tracy? And Stephen moved back to Miami? Maybe they wanted to get the h*ll out of the Sanford/Orlando area. I feel bad for Chad too.

    • I see nothing in the Notices that state they Depo DD on phone, as stated by Rene S. I do see where most likly the same court reporter and video company were used, but in the DD Notice, they made it more generic. I will be VERY suprised if they did that depo by phone. I just dont think so, but JMHO

  12. Nettles: I asked yesterday that ˆIF the defense motion to depose Crump is permitted, does that open the door to another depo of DeeDee?

    • As long as they can argue why a 2nd deposition is needed, the judge would have to consider it. Judge Nelson has already signalled though, it would have to be a very good reason to get a witness to sit more than once.

  13. Off topic but am wondering who here uses a Mac. I have an older 2.16 Ghz Intel Core 2 Duo Mac with OS 10.4.11. The last version of Firefox for this Imac was 3.6.28 and it has become quite “sluggish.”

  14. Pingback: Crumps White Lawyer Responds «

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s