June 6th 2013 Hearing George Zimmerman (Day 1)




Notice of Hearing for June 6, 2013

1) Defendant’s Motion for Sanctions Against State Attorney’s Office for Discovery Violations and Request for Judicial Inquiry Into Violations

@2:01:20 May 28, 2013 Hearing

2) MOTION FOR EVIDENTIARY HEARING REGARDING ADMISSIBILITY OF EXPERT OPINION TESTIMONY

STATE’S RESPONSE TO DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR EVIDENTIARY HEARING

DEFENDANT’S REPLY TO STATE’S RESPONSE TO DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR EVIDENTIARY HEARING

@1:45:31, @2:25:20 May 28, 2013 Hearing

3) Defendant’s Sealed Confidential Motion to Maintain Anonymity and Confidentiality of Certain Witnesses
Docket

Given that this motion is sealed and confidential we do not know what it’s about other than it has to do with “to Maintain Anonymity and Confidentiality of Certain Witnesses”. As I asked on my other post:

Why is this motion Sealed & Confidential? What’s in there the defense does not want you to see? I’m not so concerned right now myself with the part “to Maintain Anonymity and Confidentiality of Certain Witnesses”. My concern right now is why we can’t see this motion. Redaction has always been a part of this case so why not do that here?

I’m also wondering how they are going to deal with this at the hearing. Will it be handled in chambers?

https://diwataman.wordpress.com/2013/06/03/defendants-sealed-confidential-motion-to-maintain-anonymity-and-confidentiality-of-certain-witnesses/

4) STATE’S MOTION TO COMPEL DISCOVERY
At this time this only appears on the Docket site and as such it is unknown at this time what it is in regards to specifically and if it will be heard at this hearing.
Docket

5) DEFENDANT’S MOTION IN LIMINE REGARDING THE USE OF CERTAIN INFLAMMATORY TERMS
Granted
http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/local/trayvon-martin/os-geo-zimmerman-trial-profile-20130617,0,1761292.story

By Rene Stutzman, Orlando Sentinel
9:09 a.m. EDT, June 17, 2013
“SANFORD – Quietly and with hardly anyone noticing, George Zimmerman’s attorneys convinced a judge to ban prosecutors from using the word “profiled” in their opening statement.”

snip/

“De la Rionda was referring not only to “profiled” but also five other words or phrases that defense attorney Mark O’Mara had asked the judge to ban in a motion he filed May 30, asking her to prohibit several “inflammatory terms”.”

The others are “vigilante,” “self-appointed Neighborhood Watch captain,” “wannabe cop,” and the phrases “He got out of the car after the police told him not to,” and “He confronted Trayvon Martin.”

Update

6) DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO PROHIBIT SPECTATORS FROM WEARING ITEMS THAT DEPICT SUPPORT

7) DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO EXTEND CURFEW

8) JOINT STIPULATION AS TO EXPERT WITNESS TESTIMONY AT FRYE HEARING

http://www.gzlegalcase.com/index.php/court-documents/189-defendant-s-motions-june-6-2013

e7tgavdgdrb

Possible Live coverage of Hearings links
For the live feeds I usually have the best luck at http://livewire.wesh.com and http://www.clickorlando.com However be sure to check the main pages of the links provided above to be sure.

Be sure to check the following sites for threads on this hearing as well:
TalkLeft GZ Forum
Random Topics GZ Thread
The Last Refuge

Advertisements

153 thoughts on “June 6th 2013 Hearing George Zimmerman (Day 1)

  1. Yeah, the witnesses are all listed by letters anyway, unless O’Mara knows these witnesses have already been identified. They could still redact, as you said.

  2. Will it be handled in chambers?

    What was the deal with discussion “in chambers” of jury sequestration that Don West “slipped” and revealed in public? Did the media verify that it actually happened and that Nelson left them out of the process? And did West accidentally AND intentionally make that statement that the jury would be sequestered which turned out to not be correct?

    Is it possible that there actually was an agreement to sequester the jury and Nelson got po’d at West and reversed their decision ? That is exactly why we have sunshine laws but now we DO NOT know for sure.

  3. They are making a huge deal out of kokopellis gym on the TM sites. Did he take actual classes there, or just work out? They have standard weight training equipment there or dies anyone know how long he was going there? And do they specialize in teaching what you do when you are sucker punched in the nose, in the dark? He could have been going there for weight loss, it doesn’t have to be mma.

  4. Are copies of the evidence the prosecution released online somewhere? Like the police rejection letter? Or is it just available to members of the media?

  5. I can’t wait for them to , after a year of showing George as doughy, claim “He was a mixed martial arts expert”. Who hides in cars and, when he leaves them, is the only one with a bloody head.

    “But you cannot use those photos, they are outdated”

    “They are why this trial exists. Now explain how Trayvon was beaten so badly he showed no bruises.”

    “…”

  6. DMan and anyone else in contact with Rumpole, please tell him I can’t log into RT and his new password server not working. Thanks all, Cherpa1

  7. Predictions:

    1) Defendant’s Motion for Sanctions Against State Attorney’s Office for Discovery Violations and Request for Judicial Inquiry Into Violations – Nelson will end the hearing abruptly at some point – To be heard after trial

    2) MOTION FOR EVIDENTIARY HEARING REGARDING ADMISSIBILITY OF EXPERT OPINION TESTIMONY – Denied

    3) Defendant’s Sealed Confidential Motion to Maintain Anonymity and Confidentiality of Certain Witnesses – We will never see this motion and the witnesses will only be known at trial if they are even ever called – Granted

    4) STATE’S MOTION TO COMPEL DISCOVERY – I’m guessing Bernie will demand O’Mara turn over this video of Trayvon’s friends beating up a homelss man – Denied if it doesn’t exist of course, handled privately somehow(little side meeting or in chambers) if it does exist.

    5) DEFENDANT’S MOTION IN LIMINE REGARDING THE USE OF CERTAIN INFLAMMATORY TERMS – Granted

    Possible 6th) Motion for Continuance – Granted

    • “Possible 6th) Motion for Continuance – Granted”

      Huh? Why would you think Nelson would grant a continuance now? What do you think has changed?

      • I’ve always thought there would be a continuance, just didn’t know when it would be granted. I didn’t think it would be so close to trial of course but I thought it would happen nonetheless. Society can’t handle a trial and verdict at this time, they’re going to have to stretch this out a while longer. I think there will be more continuances after this. However good arguments can be made that there will not be a continuance so maybe that one is 50/50.

        • Dman said: I’ve always thought there would be a continuance

          I have been posting that forever. IIRC, Jello also thinks so, too. I also have not abandoned the possibility that there will be no trial.

          If MOM proves conclusively that BLDR intentionally withheld evidence and also willingly lied to the judge, then his goose should be cooked and he should be kicked off of the case for starters but it could and should get a lot worse for him.

          Would Corey replace him and continue with this mess? Even some from the “other side” might not like it that the state has done something so clearly criminal. I think there would be a very loud public outcry to stop the train.

          George also appears to me to be a candidate for a mental and emotional breakdown. That poor guy has been through hell and his weight is a sign of inner turmoil and conflict. What would happen if George had to be hospitalized?

          • From my understanding the judge can do whatever she wants, she can just end the trial at any time if she wanted for no reason at all. But regarding the specific issue I’ve already stated I think it’s going nowhere.

            https://diwataman.wordpress.com/2013/05/29/ben-kruidbos-the-state-and-discovery-in-the-george-zimmerman-case/

            George will be okay, he made it this far. If he ends up hospitalized they will continue on without him I’m sure. Then depending on the circumstance if he’s needed they’ll work something out.

            • Only the state can withdraw the charges. And, it can’t do that without defendant agreement, once the trial starts. In order for the judge to end the case, she has to have a motion from a party, and, if it is defrense motion to dismiss, the reason for dismissal will be clear. Just saying, Nelson does not have the power to end this at any time for no reason at all.

    • Do you really believe this will happen?

      Defendant’s Motion for Sanctions Against State Attorney’s Office for Discovery Violations and Request for Judicial Inquiry Into Violations – Nelson will end the hearing abruptly at some point – To be heard after trial.

      If Nelson tries that stunt again, the defense should put on their big boy pants She would be hard pressed to not do that if the whistle blower testifies;.

      I do not think the defense should ask for sanctions. How about demanding castration?

      I can see your position on the rest.

  8. I just don’t understand why she’s allowing Bernie to go on with this. Since Bernie was the one who objected to this witness actually offering any testimony that had any bearing on this case, this witness is entirely irrelevant. Is Bernie going to attempt to show that this witness and Kruidbos are engaged in some kind of conspiracy to undermine the state’s case as payback for White being ridden out of the Nassau County SA office?

    • Bernie’s objection was to specific testimony to be proffered by White, that was hearsay. Bernie is just going scorched earth, trying to damage White. Bernardo doesn’t have anything. He took this past week as time to prepare to scorch White. Seems his plan failed.

  9. Wait a minute – Bernie can’t claim hearsay last week for anything Kruidbos told White, and now ask White to testify as to what Kruidbos told him. If Nelson doesn’t stop that, she’s an idiot.

    • FWIW, the objection last week wastechnically correct. The question was “when was the material sent / discovered by the state?” and White has no first hand knowledge of that. Now, Bernie is trying to generate testimony that creates conflict (in testimony) between Kruidbos and White. Kruidbos is outside of the hearing of this testimony.

  10. Bernie sounds like he’s going to try to impeach Kruidbos by saying that he engaged in non-SA duties while on the clock for the SA’s office. That’s what whistleblowers do, I think, so I’m not sure where Bernie is going to get with that.

  11. Funny how the judge allowed Bernie to object on the basis of hearsay last week, but she won’t allow O’Mara to object on the basis of relevance this week.

    • White is very measured. He lacks the knowledge necessary to file a bar compliant. All he had was a possibility that evidence was withheld. Even hearing from O’Mara that O’Mara didn;t have it doesn;t give White the first hand knowledge. The best person in poisiton to complain is O’Mara. A finding by the court, against Bernardo, exposes Bernardo directly to action from the bar.

        • Heh. Well, still, White’s reaction was more powerful that the direct one. His target here is the possibility of misconduct, and it serves him well to not assume anything, or jump to any conclusion.

          Bernardo has telegraphed his hand. The BIN files represent turnover, and the state was not timely made aware of any concerns of Kruidbos, either via Kruidbos, or via White. Therefore, the state should not be sanctioned – it would have turned over what it had, if it knew the turnover had been inadvertantly overlooked.

  12. Live comments on ClickOrlando are terrible. The sheer amount of misinformation continually posted is mind boggling.

  13. White seemed believable to me in that he felt it’s his obligation. He clearly doesn’t like some things about Corey and Bernie but I see no motive here to get back at them or make himself look good or for gaining public attention. His conviction to the ethics and integrity to the system appears sound to me. Bernie fail.

    • Does it really matter even if he had an axe to grind? If the State knowingly withheld, then the state withheld. Right?

      • That still has to be decided. Notice O’Mara kept saying “create”. But yes you are right in the end that even if it were the case he has these other motives what’s right is right no matter how it comes.

  14. Regarding the first motion, it appears to be now that the 3 witnesses may be 911 callers, I think they made reference to W6 but I’d have to go back and be sure. If it is the case that the 3 main witnesses that O’Mara wants protected are 3 people who would testify favorably to the defense then I would have guessed she would have denied that motion instead of granted. I don’t know. They need to get something in the rules regarding reprisal from the public which is what pro defense witnesses will get. Pro state witnesses have nothing to fear, quite the opposite really, they’ll be accepted openly, press conferences and all, like Mary and Selma.

  15. Kruidbos worried he’ll be fired now. Did this mainly because he was worried he would be in trouble for not letting the defense know but also out of a sense of fairness so there would be a fair trial. If I had a business needing his services I’d send him an offer right now.

  16. Holy smokes! O’Mara getting the same testimony from Kruidbos that he did from White about a 4th judicial circuit SA policy not to put things in writing, and the judge stops it without any objection from anyone and calls everyone to the bench? WTH?

      • Yes he did. Got lost in a couple questions, so did O’Mara, but none of those gaps matter. Nelson allowed Bernardo to go pretty far afield of the issue in hand. The motivation of a whistelblower is totally irrelevant. Whether or not they like their job or their boss is not an issue. She should have shut down all of those lines of questions, as the decider, Nelson doesn’t need to know any of that stuff, and to allow the examination and cross exam to go on is wasting her time. She allowed it because she wears prosecutor’s shoes.

  17. 4th Motion for Continuance forthcoming due to Bernie’s malfeasance. Nelson sure to deny because she wants to get this trial in before the Daubert standard takes effect.

      • Exactly. Why did she allow them to even start the proceedings today if she knew that was what she would rule? Or did she let them start and then realize it was painting her into a corner since she clearly has to find that BDLR lied to her in open court, so she decided to shut it down?

        Cboldt, can this be appealed directly? Any chance the DCA would take it up?

        • Why did she allow Bernardo to go down those irrelevant motive paths this morning? There were objections on relevance, she could have, and should have, upheld the objections. She was okay until O’Mara made it known that the SAO cheats on e-mails in order to avoid sunshine, and until he went to put Bernardo on the stand.

          AFAIK, this is not appealable pretrial, at least not in the usual sense. There are appellate cases on failures of Richardson hearing (no findings, no record), and those are all post trial cases. There may be some other basis to sustain an appeal when put into a bum’s rush, but none comes to mind. If there is some rules based basis, the DCA would be happy to take it, I’m sure.

          I wonder if it’s too late to petition for change of judge. I’m serious. That one stays the proceedings automatically.

          • That’s what I just suggested on Nettles’ blog. They should submit a request for a new judge NOW (like right now, DURING these proceedings) to the DCA. I’m sure they have an attorney who could put something together immediately. Have it filed before midnight tonight, at any rate. I honestly think at this point the DCA would remove her in a heartbeat.

            • Might be no advantage as far as the ultimate outcome goes. The state’s case is weak. What the defense gets, the more this drags on, is ammunition for use in wrongful prosecution, obstruciton of justice, and related cases.

  18. So, she stops this whole line of questioning, which obviously has proven that the SAO conspired to keep important information from the defense, which was laying the foundation for their 4th motion to continue. She makes it clear that she intends to start the trial Monday before the defense can even make said motion. This will be appealed directly to the DCA, I bet.

    • Yes. It’s a late disclosure of discovery, and the judge failed to conduct a Richardson hearing. The defense represented that its case was prejudiced due to lack of time to analyze and deal with new evidence from the state. She did not find absence of prejudice. O’Mara might move for a stay, and petition the DCA for a stay.

    • I speculate much of this foundation is to admit the proposed guidelines for speaker recognition. IOW, the person is qualified. The issue will be whether or not the guidelines should play any part in guiding the judge’s decision to admit or disqualify the expert testimony.

  19. If this goes on much longer, helping the defenses case, Nelson will end this too and move right on to start the trial today

  20. Why does the defense waste their time with this FBI guy. Is Nelson even in the courtroom? I think she just left a note taped to the bench saying Defense wants something denied, State wants something granted.

      • This witness is only available today. She’ll let this go until he’s been examined and corss examined. She won’t deny the state its right to cross examination. On second thought, maybe she will cut it off, and exclude all of this testimny because the state was denied an opportunity to cross exam.

  21. Expert opines that who ever is screaming is facing imminent threat of death or something. It’s not his ultimate opinion, just an offhand remark about rhe emotional content, which makes the sounds not amenable to speaker identification.

  22. I think that the D Team should just end this hearing and let the state put their “experts” up and follow up with Nagasaki (sp)

    • Nelson is going to rule that she slept at a Holiday Inn last night and she is going to supercede the D Team and deem that the State has the only good experts, everyone else dismissed

  23. Pingback: June 7, 2013 Hearing | DiwataMan

  24. Pingback: June 8 2013 Hearing | DiwataMan

  25. Pingback: June 17, 2013 GZ Trial/Jury Selection (Day 6) & Frye Hearing | DiwataMan

Leave a Reply

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

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com 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 )

Google+ photo

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

Connecting to %s