TexasCHLforum.com

Cory and De la Riondo the prosecutors? Sure, they are willing to take unethical and probably illegal steps in the vein of Mike Nifong (Duke Lacrosse Fake Rape Case prosecutor).

In that case as well, many people thought that no matter the evidence the Duke students would be sacrificed.

But Nifong lost his job, was disbarred, and even went to jail (for 1 day) due to his malfeasance.

FYI: He has reported back to jail as of right now (Sunday afternoon).

I am a big fan of Judge Lester after having watched all of the televised access to his courtroom available.

He is a straight shooter from every indication.

He put Zimmerman back in jail because he believes the Court was mislead -- right or wrong.

He has already signaled he will entertain a new bail application, and that Zimmerman's statements to the police are exculpatory -- a big deal, and he didn't need to make this point.

He knows the law and will follow it, and in fact the way he dropped the hammer on Zimmerman is a good sign for that.

Bond is both your WORD and your BAIL -- if you mislead you don't get BOND. Personally, I think this 'misleading' or 'lying' may be much ado about nothing or very little, but he had that evidence and for now Zimmerman will sit in jail.


Were I Zimmerman, my biggest prayers would be for Judge Lester's good health until I could get a Stand Your Ground Immunity Hearing -- the Judge will dismiss at that hearing simply because Zimmerman is clearly innocent under the law and this judge follows the LAW.

At that hearing, the judge alone decides if the PREPONDERANCE of the evidence favors self-defense.

WildBill wrote:

HerbM wrote:In Judge Lester's words, Zimmerman 'sat there like a potted plant' while the Court was being mislead, not that he had actually lied. Did he do this due to misunderstanding or mere stupidity or for some other reason?

Zimmerman did not screw up nor was he being stupid. If Zimmerman did not have a lawyer and stood up to speak for himself during the hearing without being directly asked a question, the judge would have told him to sit down and shut up.

I wouldn't necessarily argue against that being part of how Zimmerman made this mistake -- it had occurred to me already but it hasn't yet been offered as part of the explanation.

The prosecutor was willing again to misrepresent the facts (re: speak to his wife in "code") and made a big deal out of what he knew was a revoked (due to loss) passport that HE AlSO KNEW Zimmerman's lawyer had long had in his possession.

--
HerbM

BillT wrote:At the bond hearing he somehow forgot that he had $135,000 in his bank, yet the testimony assured the court that he was without money. He was ordered to turn in his passport(s) and turned in the only one he said he had, keeping the other a secret. Misunderstanding??? Not very likely. Proving he has the capability to lie in court is not going to help him at all. It makes me wonder what else he has said that is not true ("officer - it was self defense - honest!"). He is helping tighten the noose around his neck. If your a documented liar, the prosecution tends to have a field day!

The above is as least a partial misrepresentation -- probably having heard if from the media.

The passport issue was no big deal (Judge Lester pretty much ignored it.) A lost & revoked passport was found, and given to his lawyer some time ago, and it had not made it's way to the court. No harm, no foul.

Zimmerman may or may not have done something purposely malicious or criminal, but he definitely screwed up and the judge revoked bail. Judge Lester also made it clear he would entertain an explanation and new bail request shortly.

In Judge Lester's words, Zimmerman 'sat there like a potted plant' while the Court was being mislead, not that he had actually lied. Did he do this due to misunderstanding or mere stupidity or for some other reason? (Remember at the bail hearing, he had been in jail for a week or so and hadn't spent much time with then new lawyer O'Mara.)

I don't want to actually defend his actions in this misrepresentation, but it is still unclear what it fully constituted.

Zimmerman definitely screwed up in this, whether maliciously or stupidly but take NOTHING the media says at face value.

Judge Lester revoked Zimmerman's bail due to his having misrepresented the amount of money he had -- the PayPal account.

This is going to hurt him in public opinion quite a bit.

The Judge said he had mislead the Court — the Judge had that much evidence. There was nothing improper about revoking the bail based on what was before the judge.

The Judge also made it clear, despite O’Mara’s deferals, that Zimmerman’s statements to the police were going to easily arguable as EXCULPATORY — he’s reviewed them he said. (He acknowledge the State would argue the opposite, but made it clear that O’Mara would have not trouble with this.)

That pretty much clear’s up the only thing we couldn’t be sure about: Did Zimmerman say something that convicted him of some crime?

It was always doubtful, but now it seems to be practically impossible.

Zimmerman screwed up. Maybe through simple stupidity and misunderstanding, but he screwed up.

If it wasn’t criminal nor malicious, then he has a chance to explain it to Judge Lester in a few weeks, take his chewing out, pay his (maybe increased bail), and get out — otherwise he sits in jail until the Immunity Hearing.

If you defend yourself with a firearm by killing (or even just threatening or wounding) a criminal you must be prepared to have EVERY ASPECT of your life turned over and exposed publicly before you will stand any chance of moving on.

To do otherwise is just as foolish as not learning how to use the firearm, or not learning enough combatives to use it effectively. Not criminal, but foolish.

--
HerbM

Psychotropic, relaxed downer, not necessarily sleeping,feeling good.

For descriptions of both good and bad trip, read this: Low Dose DXM and Weed Effect
http://theconservativetreehouse.com/201 ... ed-effect/
"...the first time resulting in a high first / low second plateau with huge music euphoria that was great fun at a concert, the second time was similar except minus the euphoria due to huge nausea, off a mildly higher dose (300-400mg), and the third time.. this...."

or
http://www.drugs-forum.com/forum/showth ... p?t=112992

There is also the fact that some people enjoy taking narcotics to the point of passing out. No accounting for taste...

Yes, DXM, Purple Trank (from his twitter and facebook account conversations). Some weed, THC in his blood from the autopsy, no timeline on last ingestion since QUANTITY cannot be determined from the "chest blood" used for that (quick) analysis. Toxicology report coming later.

Could be DXM bad trip; could be reaction between DXM/weed bad trip; could be THC withdrawal; or just stupid teenage aggression but it looks pretty likely although very circumstantial so far that DXM might have been guiding Martin's behavior that night.

No proof as yet of that last (i.e., causing the attack) but it's pretty certainly his drug of choice.


Just so we're clear though: None of this REALLY matters for Zimmerman's almost certain (based on current known facts which are unlikely to change much) innocence.

If he didn't start the physical 'fight' he is innocent.

If he started it without using deadly force (no evidence he did) and he had no way out other than deadly force (evidence is pretty overwhelming) he is AGAIN innocent.

Preponderance of evidence at Immunity Hearing; any reasonable doubt if it WERE (unlikely) to go to trial.

At trial, Martin's drug use might help the jury figure it all out, but it really shouldn't have a necessary legal effect.

Yesterday we worked this tactical Problem during combatives practice:

'Good guy' on ground with attacker already fully mounted.
Assume good guy has no significant BJJ or grappling skills (or the guy on top is much bigger & better at BJJ.)
Attacker SLAPS the devil out of your arms, shoulders, body while you protect and access (adjust level depending on experience and ability of "good guy" -- don't injure your partner)
Get to your weapon, knife or firearm, in your waistband or pocket as you normally carry.
Drill ends when you get it deployed effectively.

It's not perfect but it is definitely worth the effort to work this.

Problems with drill are mainly that since you are not really taking fists and elbows to the head or getting bounced of the mat/pavement you can cheat and just let him slap you.)

Variation: For those teams (partners) with some BJJ, allow for BJJ maneuvers to improve position AS you work to access, but the partner on top is mainly concentrating on slapping to make this uncomfortable and distracting.

BTW, if you hear today (or later) "Witnesses Change Testimony" it is only marginally true, misleading, happened weeks or months ago, and has little or no effect on Zimmerman's self-defense claim -- probably even helps it.

This headline was probably used because the (I think Orlando Sentinel started it, but not 100% sure) the media had nothing to report that was new. So they wrote about a 4 people who had slightly changed their stories between initial and later interviews, but they gave it a headline that made it sound like this was happening NOW (or at least in the past few days).

But the real journalistic malpractice was the headline -- then the others picked it up and started playing that stupid game of supposition and "Telephone" we discussed a bit back in the thread.

It is possible that Crump (lawyer for Martin's family) started this somehow by passing out talking points or something but so far no evidence of that. Somebody however did start it and it was OLD NEWS, picked up on the SAME DAY, by multiple sources who did NOT source it back to some originator. That is highly suspicious.

Edit Addition: The Fox News report (on Megyn Kelly's show) was NOT terrible, they had lawyers that understood SOME of what I have written above. Generally, I am just as critical of the COMPETENCE of Fox as of any others; their bias does less damage (since they admit where it is usually and try to correct for it), but they are just as incompetent as the rest as far as simple accuracy.

baldeagle wrote:Trayvon's girlfriend's interview has been posted on Youtube. " onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

It's confusing.

A lot of folks on TheConservativeTreeHouse have analyzed her story, delivery, confusion and posited that she is either lying or a shill.

The funny thing to me, it despite here story being offered to hurt Zimmerman, it is entirely consistent with his self-defense account.

Martin spoke to Zimmerman; Zimmerman answers; the fight began. (Phone shuts off)

Picking up the story at the actual EYE witness: Martin was mounted on top, beating Zimmerman "Mixed Martial Arts style", while Zimmerman called for help (14 times).

This went on about 48 seconds until the shot is fired.

Zimmerman asks a witness to call police.

Police arrive almost immediately and Zimmerman is entirely cooperative.


O'Mara (Zimmerman's lawyer) may well CALL HER to testify on Zimmerman's behalf. (Her story is captured in writing and recording so she can't materially change it, and Florida allows for a deposition/interview of witnesses by the defense, prior to trial.)

--
HerbM

philip964 wrote:I have always found it interesting that when you have personal knowledge of a news story, you intensely watch and read the news story from the press.

They always get it wrong.

You then ponder, if they got this wrong, do they get everything wrong.

For a while, you question, well did they get that wrong too?

After a while, you go back to believing they are accurate with everything, except your incident, until it happens again.

Happened to my son last week. His company had a hazardous truck crash. Tank held, no spill. On air reporter thirty feet from overturned truck said " Hazardous chemicals were spilled on the highway".

That day he joined the club.

Yes, they always get it wrong. You are correct about when you have knowledge of an even; it's also true when you have knowledge of a subject.

Just think how very, very few news orgs/people can get the simplest firearm or CHL story correct.

Then listen for every subject on when you are even moderately knowledgeable.

In most cases they can't string 5 sentences together without making at least two remarkable errors.

baldeagle wrote:Do they just make this stuff up and think nobody will check? http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-505263_162- ... -evidence/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

...
This is incredible to me. Has the media simply given up reporting and now just invent stuff and publish it?

Yes.

They do it in several ways which are additive.

1) To a man and women, the major media reporters, editors, producers, and on air folks are INCOMPETENT to report on the Macy Thanksgiving Day Parade. I mean this; they cannot even report accurately on a "car chase" that YOU are watching with them.

2) 90% or more are terribly politically biased (80% for the left, 10% for the right) which wouldn't be so bad perhaps EXCEPT they ALL think they are independent moderates because of #1 and because in their own world they are right in the middle so they do not watch for the bias nor make any significant attempt to correct for it.

3) They don't actually do research, move of them, they get their MISINFORMATION from each other, so they REPEAT something that isn't (quite) true adding their own little innacuracies in a massive child's game of 'telephone'.

4) Pretty soon, a bunch of misinformation becomes part of "What everyone knows".

5) Every so often they realize a big story is wrong (Duke [false] Rape Case) and start to correct -- the Zimmerman story entered this portion late last week -- but then the press goes through a period where they PRETEND to fairness by telling both the NEW (more correct) version and the OLD (full of crap) version with equal weight, and saying things like "We'll have to weight until the trial to find out the truth."

6) Most are not capable of simple logic nor scientific thought. They are 'journalist' partly (some largely) because they are BAD at science, HATE math, and incompetent at logic and reasoning.

7) Some of them actually have an ulterior agenda that they consciously pursue -- this just feeds into 1-6 for the others.

There are probably other reasons but I sincerely believe it begins with the SIMPLE INCOMPETENCE.

psijac wrote: ...
If anything the administration would ship George Zimmerman to gitmo to prevent the ease riots that would result from a not guilty verdict.

And how much worse do you estimate it will be when the judge rules, correctly and almost certainly, in favor of Zimmerman at the Stand Your Ground Self-Defense immunity from prosecution hearing?

Most of the people -- the vast majority -- posting here have a CHL, have an active application being processed, or are scheduling the classes and preparing to join the queue.

The more I have investigated this, reading the whole discovery document, listening to as many of the witness audio recordings as have so far been posted, etc the more convinced I am of the following:

If you ever have need to defend your life by shooting someone, you should PRAY that you have a legal case as sound and upstanding as George Zimmerman has.

You should also pray you don't run into a political and racial storm as he has done, but Zimmerman really did NOTHING wrong -- even leaving his truck is only a MINOR tactical mistake -- and you can't control what OTHER people do AFTER the fact so all you can do is the right thing for you.

Now, with better training could Zimmerman have prevailed without shooting Martin? Almost certainly. But then how many people (not you of course) never get any real training beyond shooting on a square range?

How many people have NEVER practiced force on force against a fully resisting attacker who does his best to SURPRISE you with that attack? Not you of course, right?

How many people think they will have time to draw their firearm before the attacker has you down on the ground beating you senseless against the sidewalk MMA style? Not you, of course, but people you know, right?

Have you ever practiced this way? If not, why not?

We actually teach a course in "Avoiding Criminal Assaults" and had Zimmerman practiced with us a few times, he probably (almost certainly) would have NONE of the problems (including a dead Martin) that he now has, but you know it isn't a crime, it's not even immoral, to avoid getting training or to put it off.

Stupid maybe, but ONLY if you KNOW you should get that training and don't follow through. Do you think 27-year old Zimmerman realized he needed more training in how to deal with REAL
ATTACKS on the street?

Probably not.

BTW, Zimmerman is NOT a "hero" -- he is just an ordinary CHL holder who was criminally assaulted by surprise, and found himself in fear for his life from a real danger and with no skills except crying over and over "Help" before finally shooting the assailant center of mass.

He didn't even have enough training to fire two shots automatically.

And yes, if you have never practiced drawing your firearm while being KNOCKED DOWN, or with someone sitting on your chest slapping HARD at your arms and chest to simulate hard blows, or against another person when both of you have an Airsoft pistol and you can't just stand there, then you know who you are.....

The 'chasing' witness doesn't know who or what she saw -- likely she saw SOMETHING (it probably wasn't something entirely different) but at that point nothing was happening and she didn't remember all this until later apparently.

The state investigator (under oath) already admitted 'she' didn't know the identities or who was chasing who of the 'shadows'. Read the 180+ report and you can find 'her' statement and this is the way it reads as well.

Some shadows went by, seemed to be chasing.

Everyone who SAW something identifiable saw pretty much what Zimmerman said.

Only real issue is that NO ONE saw the 50 seconds or so right BEFORE the FIGHT went to the ground and right after Zimmerman quit talking to non-emergency dispatch.

This 50 seconds or so is ONLY known from Zimmerman's statements, and maybe from Martin's 'girl friend' being on the phone with him (but there are a lot more problems with her statements as well.).

--
HerbM