Lyrics & Knowledge Personal Pages Record Shop Auction Links Radio & Media Kids Membership Help
The Mudcat Cafesj

Post to this Thread - Sort Descending - Printer Friendly - Home


BS: George Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'

beardedbruce 30 May 13 - 11:50 AM
Charmion 31 May 13 - 07:41 AM
beardedbruce 31 May 13 - 07:54 AM
GUEST,gillymor 31 May 13 - 08:13 AM
beardedbruce 31 May 13 - 08:26 AM
GUEST,gillymor 31 May 13 - 08:55 AM
beardedbruce 31 May 13 - 09:01 AM
GUEST,gillymor 31 May 13 - 09:30 AM
beardedbruce 31 May 13 - 09:35 AM
Elmore 31 May 13 - 11:10 AM
beardedbruce 31 May 13 - 11:14 AM
GUEST 31 May 13 - 11:54 AM
beardedbruce 31 May 13 - 11:56 AM
Bobert 31 May 13 - 12:35 PM
beardedbruce 31 May 13 - 12:39 PM
Greg F. 31 May 13 - 12:53 PM
KB in Iowa 31 May 13 - 12:56 PM
beardedbruce 31 May 13 - 01:08 PM
Elmore 31 May 13 - 01:28 PM
KB in Iowa 31 May 13 - 01:35 PM
beardedbruce 31 May 13 - 01:37 PM
beardedbruce 31 May 13 - 01:39 PM
KB in Iowa 31 May 13 - 01:46 PM
beardedbruce 31 May 13 - 01:50 PM
GUEST 31 May 13 - 02:14 PM
KB in Iowa 31 May 13 - 02:17 PM
GUEST,Futwick 31 May 13 - 02:22 PM
YorkshireYankee 31 May 13 - 02:40 PM
Elmore 31 May 13 - 02:54 PM
GUEST,Futwick 31 May 13 - 03:20 PM
Greg F. 31 May 13 - 03:21 PM
GUEST,gillymor 31 May 13 - 03:29 PM
GUEST 31 May 13 - 03:31 PM
Greg F. 31 May 13 - 03:34 PM
GUEST 31 May 13 - 03:40 PM
Bobert 31 May 13 - 07:19 PM
YorkshireYankee 31 May 13 - 08:07 PM
Bobert 31 May 13 - 08:11 PM
GUEST 31 May 13 - 09:14 PM
McGrath of Harlow 31 May 13 - 09:21 PM
McGrath of Harlow 31 May 13 - 09:21 PM
Bobert 31 May 13 - 09:48 PM
GUEST,TIA 01 Jun 13 - 08:39 PM
Bobert 01 Jun 13 - 08:56 PM
GUEST 01 Jun 13 - 10:39 PM
YorkshireYankee 02 Jun 13 - 12:22 AM
Don(Wyziwyg)T 02 Jun 13 - 06:27 AM
Bobert 02 Jun 13 - 09:32 AM
dick greenhaus 02 Jun 13 - 12:54 PM
YorkshireYankee 02 Jun 13 - 01:57 PM
Don(Wyziwyg)T 02 Jun 13 - 02:15 PM
Greg F. 02 Jun 13 - 03:17 PM
McGrath of Harlow 02 Jun 13 - 05:23 PM
Bobert 02 Jun 13 - 07:16 PM
Bobert 02 Jun 13 - 07:46 PM
McGrath of Harlow 02 Jun 13 - 08:57 PM
Bobert 02 Jun 13 - 09:03 PM
YorkshireYankee 03 Jun 13 - 11:53 AM
McGrath of Harlow 03 Jun 13 - 01:11 PM
beardedbruce 03 Jun 13 - 01:19 PM
Bobert 03 Jun 13 - 01:27 PM
GUEST,Don Wise 03 Jun 13 - 01:37 PM
YorkshireYankee 03 Jun 13 - 05:33 PM
Bobert 03 Jun 13 - 08:19 PM
YorkshireYankee 03 Jun 13 - 10:13 PM
Richard Bridge 04 Jun 13 - 09:02 AM
beardedbruce 04 Jun 13 - 11:00 AM
beardedbruce 04 Jun 13 - 11:10 AM
beardedbruce 04 Jun 13 - 11:16 AM
Greg F. 04 Jun 13 - 11:16 AM
beardedbruce 04 Jun 13 - 11:28 AM
Bobert 04 Jun 13 - 11:30 AM
beardedbruce 04 Jun 13 - 11:31 AM
Bobert 04 Jun 13 - 11:32 AM
Bobert 04 Jun 13 - 11:35 AM
beardedbruce 04 Jun 13 - 11:36 AM
beardedbruce 04 Jun 13 - 11:44 AM
Richard Bridge 04 Jun 13 - 11:57 AM
beardedbruce 04 Jun 13 - 12:04 PM
KB in Iowa 04 Jun 13 - 01:13 PM
beardedbruce 04 Jun 13 - 01:18 PM
Bill D 04 Jun 13 - 01:29 PM
KB in Iowa 04 Jun 13 - 02:10 PM
Don(Wyziwyg)T 04 Jun 13 - 05:52 PM
Don(Wyziwyg)T 04 Jun 13 - 05:59 PM
Don(Wyziwyg)T 04 Jun 13 - 06:07 PM
Jack the Sailor 04 Jun 13 - 06:26 PM
Jack the Sailor 04 Jun 13 - 06:34 PM
Richard Bridge 04 Jun 13 - 07:29 PM
Bobert 04 Jun 13 - 07:30 PM
GUEST,TIA 04 Jun 13 - 10:15 PM
Jack the Sailor 04 Jun 13 - 10:25 PM
Greg F. 05 Jun 13 - 08:15 AM
Richard Bridge 05 Jun 13 - 09:29 AM
beardedbruce 05 Jun 13 - 09:33 AM
Richard Bridge 05 Jun 13 - 09:38 AM
Jack the Sailor 05 Jun 13 - 09:41 AM
beardedbruce 05 Jun 13 - 09:52 AM
beardedbruce 05 Jun 13 - 09:58 AM
beardedbruce 05 Jun 13 - 10:02 AM
KB in Iowa 05 Jun 13 - 10:23 AM
Greg F. 05 Jun 13 - 10:38 AM
Jack the Sailor 05 Jun 13 - 11:05 AM
beardedbruce 05 Jun 13 - 11:44 AM
KB in Iowa 05 Jun 13 - 11:59 AM
beardedbruce 05 Jun 13 - 12:14 PM
beardedbruce 05 Jun 13 - 12:21 PM
Greg F. 05 Jun 13 - 12:30 PM
Elmore 05 Jun 13 - 12:37 PM
beardedbruce 05 Jun 13 - 12:42 PM
Elmore 05 Jun 13 - 01:03 PM
beardedbruce 05 Jun 13 - 01:06 PM
Elmore 05 Jun 13 - 01:21 PM
olddude 05 Jun 13 - 01:40 PM
Greg F. 05 Jun 13 - 02:46 PM
beardedbruce 05 Jun 13 - 02:50 PM
Elmore 05 Jun 13 - 02:56 PM
Elmore 05 Jun 13 - 03:03 PM
Greg F. 05 Jun 13 - 03:06 PM
GUEST,Guest 05 Jun 13 - 04:03 PM
Elmore 05 Jun 13 - 04:16 PM
catspaw49 05 Jun 13 - 04:19 PM
Bobert 05 Jun 13 - 07:20 PM
Jack the Sailor 05 Jun 13 - 08:40 PM
Bobert 05 Jun 13 - 08:46 PM
Bobert 05 Jun 13 - 09:02 PM
Richard Bridge 06 Jun 13 - 02:48 AM
Don(Wyziwyg)T 06 Jun 13 - 05:25 AM
Don(Wyziwyg)T 06 Jun 13 - 05:35 AM
beardedbruce 06 Jun 13 - 08:22 AM
Elmore 06 Jun 13 - 08:43 AM
beardedbruce 06 Jun 13 - 09:04 AM
Bobert 06 Jun 13 - 09:08 AM
beardedbruce 06 Jun 13 - 09:15 AM
beardedbruce 06 Jun 13 - 09:17 AM
Elmore 06 Jun 13 - 09:28 AM
Elmore 06 Jun 13 - 10:04 AM
beardedbruce 06 Jun 13 - 10:07 AM
Elmore 06 Jun 13 - 10:31 AM
beardedbruce 07 Jun 13 - 09:42 AM
Greg F. 07 Jun 13 - 12:07 PM
Bobert 07 Jun 13 - 05:48 PM
YorkshireYankee 07 Jun 13 - 08:13 PM
Bobert 07 Jun 13 - 08:26 PM
YorkshireYankee 08 Jun 13 - 08:43 AM
Don(Wyziwyg)T 08 Jun 13 - 09:23 AM
Bobert 08 Jun 13 - 09:26 AM
Greg F. 08 Jun 13 - 11:33 AM
Bobert 09 Jun 13 - 09:37 PM
beardedbruce 10 Jun 13 - 09:00 AM
GUEST,gillymor 10 Jun 13 - 09:53 AM
YorkshireYankee 10 Jun 13 - 11:12 AM
beardedbruce 10 Jun 13 - 11:32 AM
Greg F. 10 Jun 13 - 02:10 PM
beardedbruce 10 Jun 13 - 02:12 PM
YorkshireYankee 10 Jun 13 - 04:52 PM
Jack the Sailor 10 Jun 13 - 05:12 PM
Bobert 10 Jun 13 - 08:51 PM
olddude 10 Jun 13 - 09:07 PM
Bobert 10 Jun 13 - 09:16 PM
Jack the Sailor 11 Jun 13 - 12:06 AM
beardedbruce 11 Jun 13 - 07:56 AM
catspaw49 11 Jun 13 - 08:19 AM
beardedbruce 11 Jun 13 - 08:22 AM
Richard Bridge 11 Jun 13 - 09:27 AM
beardedbruce 11 Jun 13 - 10:56 AM
GUEST 11 Jun 13 - 11:25 AM
Richard Bridge 11 Jun 13 - 01:37 PM
Greg F. 11 Jun 13 - 05:35 PM
Bobert 11 Jun 13 - 07:18 PM
GUEST 11 Jun 13 - 07:46 PM
catspaw49 12 Jun 13 - 10:07 AM
Richard Bridge 12 Jun 13 - 10:22 AM
catspaw49 12 Jun 13 - 10:32 AM
beardedbruce 13 Jun 13 - 09:10 AM
Don(Wyziwyg)T 13 Jun 13 - 09:40 AM
Greg F. 13 Jun 13 - 11:14 AM
olddude 13 Jun 13 - 12:12 PM
beardedbruce 13 Jun 13 - 12:15 PM
Bobert 13 Jun 13 - 07:35 PM
pdq 13 Jun 13 - 08:00 PM
Bobert 13 Jun 13 - 08:09 PM
Jack the Sailor 13 Jun 13 - 09:29 PM
Richard Bridge 14 Jun 13 - 12:25 AM
catspaw49 14 Jun 13 - 07:38 AM
beardedbruce 14 Jun 13 - 08:23 AM
Bobert 14 Jun 13 - 08:29 AM
GUEST,gillymor 14 Jun 13 - 09:08 AM
beardedbruce 14 Jun 13 - 09:37 AM
beardedbruce 14 Jun 13 - 09:42 AM
beardedbruce 14 Jun 13 - 09:45 AM
beardedbruce 14 Jun 13 - 09:51 AM
Bobert 14 Jun 13 - 10:06 AM
beardedbruce 14 Jun 13 - 10:13 AM
Bobert 14 Jun 13 - 01:00 PM
beardedbruce 14 Jun 13 - 01:06 PM
beardedbruce 14 Jun 13 - 01:08 PM
Bobert 14 Jun 13 - 01:09 PM
beardedbruce 14 Jun 13 - 01:10 PM
beardedbruce 14 Jun 13 - 01:13 PM
olddude 14 Jun 13 - 02:41 PM
beardedbruce 14 Jun 13 - 02:56 PM
Bobert 14 Jun 13 - 07:25 PM
YorkshireYankee 14 Jun 13 - 09:50 PM
beardedbruce 17 Jun 13 - 11:43 AM
Greg F. 17 Jun 13 - 12:12 PM
GUEST,Guest from Sanity 17 Jun 13 - 12:22 PM
Don(Wyziwyg)T 17 Jun 13 - 01:28 PM
beardedbruce 17 Jun 13 - 01:38 PM
beardedbruce 17 Jun 13 - 01:45 PM
beardedbruce 17 Jun 13 - 01:49 PM
beardedbruce 17 Jun 13 - 02:03 PM
GUEST,Guest from Sanity 17 Jun 13 - 02:15 PM
beardedbruce 17 Jun 13 - 02:23 PM
GUEST,Guest from Sanity 17 Jun 13 - 02:44 PM
Richard Bridge 17 Jun 13 - 03:01 PM
Bobert 17 Jun 13 - 04:07 PM
Greg F. 17 Jun 13 - 04:33 PM
Don(Wyziwyg)T 18 Jun 13 - 05:01 AM
Don(Wyziwyg)T 18 Jun 13 - 05:11 AM
Don(Wyziwyg)T 18 Jun 13 - 05:15 AM
Richard Bridge 18 Jun 13 - 07:22 AM
beardedbruce 18 Jun 13 - 08:15 AM
GUEST 18 Jun 13 - 08:18 AM
Bobert 18 Jun 13 - 09:07 AM
beardedbruce 18 Jun 13 - 10:39 AM
Bobert 18 Jun 13 - 11:05 AM
beardedbruce 18 Jun 13 - 11:07 AM
beardedbruce 18 Jun 13 - 11:14 AM
Bobert 18 Jun 13 - 11:29 AM
beardedbruce 18 Jun 13 - 11:35 AM
beardedbruce 18 Jun 13 - 11:43 AM
Bobert 18 Jun 13 - 12:52 PM
beardedbruce 18 Jun 13 - 01:24 PM
Richard Bridge 18 Jun 13 - 01:31 PM
Bobert 18 Jun 13 - 03:11 PM
beardedbruce 18 Jun 13 - 03:18 PM
Greg F. 18 Jun 13 - 03:31 PM
Don Firth 18 Jun 13 - 03:35 PM
Bobert 18 Jun 13 - 04:47 PM
beardedbruce 19 Jun 13 - 08:08 AM
Bobert 19 Jun 13 - 08:34 AM
beardedbruce 19 Jun 13 - 08:43 AM
Bobert 19 Jun 13 - 09:04 AM
beardedbruce 19 Jun 13 - 09:15 AM
Bobert 19 Jun 13 - 09:30 AM
beardedbruce 19 Jun 13 - 09:44 AM
Greg F. 19 Jun 13 - 10:52 AM
beardedbruce 19 Jun 13 - 11:00 AM
Greg F. 19 Jun 13 - 12:03 PM
Don Firth 19 Jun 13 - 12:56 PM
Bobert 19 Jun 13 - 01:10 PM
beardedbruce 19 Jun 13 - 03:14 PM
bobad 22 Jun 13 - 03:32 PM
Bobert 22 Jun 13 - 03:42 PM
bobad 22 Jun 13 - 03:45 PM
Don(Wyziwyg)T 23 Jun 13 - 08:53 AM
Greg F. 23 Jun 13 - 09:15 AM
beardedbruce 26 Jun 13 - 08:28 AM
beardedbruce 26 Jun 13 - 08:47 AM
Bobert 26 Jun 13 - 08:59 AM
beardedbruce 26 Jun 13 - 09:18 AM
Greg F. 26 Jun 13 - 09:31 AM
beardedbruce 26 Jun 13 - 10:13 AM
beardedbruce 26 Jun 13 - 10:15 AM
Bobert 26 Jun 13 - 10:31 AM
McGrath of Harlow 26 Jun 13 - 12:45 PM
Bobert 26 Jun 13 - 12:50 PM
beardedbruce 26 Jun 13 - 02:16 PM
beardedbruce 26 Jun 13 - 03:01 PM
beardedbruce 26 Jun 13 - 03:06 PM
beardedbruce 26 Jun 13 - 03:44 PM
olddude 26 Jun 13 - 03:51 PM
Richard Bridge 26 Jun 13 - 05:33 PM
McGrath of Harlow 26 Jun 13 - 06:10 PM
Bobert 26 Jun 13 - 07:27 PM
Ebbie 26 Jun 13 - 09:45 PM
Bobert 26 Jun 13 - 09:53 PM
olddude 27 Jun 13 - 12:26 PM
Bobert 28 Jun 13 - 09:56 AM
olddude 28 Jun 13 - 10:14 AM
Greg F. 28 Jun 13 - 12:31 PM
beardedbruce 28 Jun 13 - 12:45 PM
beardedbruce 28 Jun 13 - 01:07 PM
beardedbruce 28 Jun 13 - 01:25 PM
Greg F. 28 Jun 13 - 02:59 PM
GUEST,Arkie 28 Jun 13 - 03:52 PM
GUEST,Guest from Sanity 29 Jun 13 - 12:15 AM
Bobert 29 Jun 13 - 10:07 AM
GUEST,Guest from Sanity 29 Jun 13 - 10:26 AM
Bobert 29 Jun 13 - 12:47 PM
GUEST,SJL 30 Jun 13 - 08:28 AM
Don Firth 30 Jun 13 - 01:22 PM
GUEST,Guest from Sanity 30 Jun 13 - 01:34 PM
Don Firth 30 Jun 13 - 05:38 PM
GUEST,Guest from Sanity 30 Jun 13 - 06:00 PM
Richard Bridge 30 Jun 13 - 06:15 PM
beardedbruce 01 Jul 13 - 11:35 AM
Bobert 01 Jul 13 - 11:44 AM
beardedbruce 01 Jul 13 - 11:48 AM
beardedbruce 01 Jul 13 - 11:53 AM
Don(Wyziwyg)T 01 Jul 13 - 12:07 PM
Don(Wyziwyg)T 01 Jul 13 - 12:13 PM
Greg F. 01 Jul 13 - 12:18 PM
Don Firth 01 Jul 13 - 01:03 PM
Bobert 01 Jul 13 - 01:18 PM
beardedbruce 01 Jul 13 - 01:23 PM
beardedbruce 01 Jul 13 - 01:43 PM
Don(Wyziwyg)T 01 Jul 13 - 02:26 PM
beardedbruce 01 Jul 13 - 02:39 PM
Don Firth 01 Jul 13 - 03:14 PM
beardedbruce 01 Jul 13 - 03:19 PM
KB in Iowa 01 Jul 13 - 03:32 PM
Greg F. 01 Jul 13 - 03:36 PM
Greg F. 01 Jul 13 - 03:43 PM
GUEST,SJL 01 Jul 13 - 05:40 PM
GUEST,SJL 01 Jul 13 - 05:59 PM
Bobert 01 Jul 13 - 06:00 PM
GUEST,SJL 01 Jul 13 - 06:07 PM
Don Firth 01 Jul 13 - 06:08 PM
GUEST,SJL 01 Jul 13 - 06:14 PM
Greg F. 01 Jul 13 - 06:28 PM
Don Firth 01 Jul 13 - 06:35 PM
Greg F. 01 Jul 13 - 06:47 PM
Suzy Sock Puppet 02 Jul 13 - 12:22 AM
Don Firth 02 Jul 13 - 12:28 AM
Don(Wyziwyg)T 02 Jul 13 - 05:40 AM
Don(Wyziwyg)T 02 Jul 13 - 05:51 AM
Don(Wyziwyg)T 02 Jul 13 - 06:03 AM
Keith A of Hertford 02 Jul 13 - 06:11 AM
GUEST,SJL 02 Jul 13 - 07:55 AM
beardedbruce 02 Jul 13 - 08:07 AM
beardedbruce 02 Jul 13 - 08:35 AM
Bobert 02 Jul 13 - 09:33 AM
Greg F. 02 Jul 13 - 09:42 AM
beardedbruce 02 Jul 13 - 09:59 AM
beardedbruce 02 Jul 13 - 10:06 AM
beardedbruce 02 Jul 13 - 10:34 AM
Greg F. 02 Jul 13 - 10:56 AM
beardedbruce 02 Jul 13 - 11:02 AM
beardedbruce 02 Jul 13 - 11:28 AM
olddude 02 Jul 13 - 11:54 AM
Richard Bridge 02 Jul 13 - 12:12 PM
olddude 02 Jul 13 - 12:15 PM
beardedbruce 02 Jul 13 - 12:22 PM
Greg F. 02 Jul 13 - 12:25 PM
beardedbruce 02 Jul 13 - 12:28 PM
Greg F. 02 Jul 13 - 12:30 PM
beardedbruce 02 Jul 13 - 12:32 PM
beardedbruce 02 Jul 13 - 12:36 PM
Greg F. 02 Jul 13 - 12:37 PM
Greg F. 02 Jul 13 - 12:39 PM
beardedbruce 02 Jul 13 - 12:48 PM
KB in Iowa 02 Jul 13 - 12:56 PM
beardedbruce 02 Jul 13 - 01:12 PM
beardedbruce 02 Jul 13 - 01:14 PM
Don Firth 02 Jul 13 - 01:18 PM
beardedbruce 02 Jul 13 - 01:18 PM
GUEST,Guest from Sanity 02 Jul 13 - 01:52 PM
Richard Bridge 02 Jul 13 - 02:04 PM
beardedbruce 02 Jul 13 - 02:17 PM
beardedbruce 02 Jul 13 - 02:28 PM
GUEST,Guest from Sanity 02 Jul 13 - 02:37 PM
GUEST,SJL 02 Jul 13 - 02:45 PM
Greg F. 02 Jul 13 - 02:53 PM
beardedbruce 02 Jul 13 - 03:04 PM
Greg F. 02 Jul 13 - 03:49 PM
Richard Bridge 02 Jul 13 - 04:00 PM
Suzy Sock Puppet 02 Jul 13 - 05:30 PM
Bobert 02 Jul 13 - 07:20 PM
Greg F. 02 Jul 13 - 08:33 PM
Bobert 02 Jul 13 - 08:47 PM
Bert 02 Jul 13 - 09:19 PM
Bobert 02 Jul 13 - 09:42 PM
Jack the Sailor 02 Jul 13 - 09:52 PM
Jack the Sailor 02 Jul 13 - 09:59 PM
Bobert 02 Jul 13 - 10:11 PM
Jack the Sailor 02 Jul 13 - 10:59 PM
GUEST,Guest from Sanity 03 Jul 13 - 12:50 AM
Bert 03 Jul 13 - 06:17 AM
Keith A of Hertford 03 Jul 13 - 06:57 AM
Keith A of Hertford 03 Jul 13 - 07:14 AM
Richard Bridge 03 Jul 13 - 07:28 AM
Richard Bridge 03 Jul 13 - 07:30 AM
Keith A of Hertford 03 Jul 13 - 07:44 AM
beardedbruce 03 Jul 13 - 08:32 AM
beardedbruce 03 Jul 13 - 08:37 AM
Greg F. 03 Jul 13 - 08:45 AM
beardedbruce 03 Jul 13 - 08:51 AM
beardedbruce 03 Jul 13 - 08:53 AM
beardedbruce 03 Jul 13 - 08:55 AM
beardedbruce 03 Jul 13 - 09:02 AM
Greg F. 03 Jul 13 - 09:16 AM
beardedbruce 03 Jul 13 - 09:18 AM
beardedbruce 03 Jul 13 - 09:19 AM
Bobert 03 Jul 13 - 09:49 AM
pdq 03 Jul 13 - 09:58 AM
bobad 03 Jul 13 - 10:17 AM
GUEST,SJL 03 Jul 13 - 10:20 AM
GUEST,SJL 03 Jul 13 - 10:23 AM
Keith A of Hertford 03 Jul 13 - 10:30 AM
beardedbruce 03 Jul 13 - 10:37 AM
Bobert 03 Jul 13 - 10:54 AM
beardedbruce 03 Jul 13 - 10:54 AM
GUEST,Guest from Sanity 03 Jul 13 - 10:59 AM
Greg F. 03 Jul 13 - 11:04 AM
pdq 03 Jul 13 - 11:05 AM
Jack the Sailor 03 Jul 13 - 11:21 AM
beardedbruce 03 Jul 13 - 11:24 AM
Bobert 03 Jul 13 - 11:27 AM
beardedbruce 03 Jul 13 - 11:29 AM
Greg F. 03 Jul 13 - 11:35 AM
beardedbruce 03 Jul 13 - 11:40 AM
olddude 03 Jul 13 - 12:38 PM
Greg F. 03 Jul 13 - 12:38 PM
olddude 03 Jul 13 - 12:40 PM
olddude 03 Jul 13 - 12:46 PM
Bobert 03 Jul 13 - 12:46 PM
beardedbruce 03 Jul 13 - 12:54 PM
GUEST,Guest from Sanity 03 Jul 13 - 01:17 PM
beardedbruce 03 Jul 13 - 01:19 PM
Greg F. 03 Jul 13 - 01:40 PM
beardedbruce 03 Jul 13 - 01:42 PM
Greg F. 03 Jul 13 - 02:06 PM
GUEST,SJL 03 Jul 13 - 02:11 PM
GUEST,Guest from Sanity 03 Jul 13 - 02:13 PM
GUEST,TIA 03 Jul 13 - 02:20 PM
beardedbruce 03 Jul 13 - 02:30 PM
beardedbruce 03 Jul 13 - 02:42 PM
Greg F. 03 Jul 13 - 02:46 PM
beardedbruce 03 Jul 13 - 02:47 PM
beardedbruce 03 Jul 13 - 02:57 PM
Greg F. 03 Jul 13 - 03:01 PM
beardedbruce 03 Jul 13 - 03:03 PM
Keith A of Hertford 03 Jul 13 - 03:12 PM
Bobert 03 Jul 13 - 05:12 PM
GUEST,Guest from Sanity 03 Jul 13 - 05:58 PM
GUEST,SJL 03 Jul 13 - 06:00 PM
Bobert 03 Jul 13 - 07:40 PM
GUEST,Guest from Sanity 03 Jul 13 - 08:16 PM
olddude 03 Jul 13 - 08:23 PM
Bobert 03 Jul 13 - 08:26 PM
olddude 03 Jul 13 - 08:31 PM
Bobert 03 Jul 13 - 08:37 PM
GUEST,Guest from Sanity 03 Jul 13 - 10:02 PM
olddude 03 Jul 13 - 10:18 PM
Keith A of Hertford 04 Jul 13 - 01:53 AM
Don(Wyziwyg)T 04 Jul 13 - 08:38 AM
Don(Wyziwyg)T 04 Jul 13 - 08:45 AM
Bobert 04 Jul 13 - 08:48 AM
Don(Wyziwyg)T 04 Jul 13 - 09:03 AM
Keith A of Hertford 04 Jul 13 - 09:10 AM
Bobert 04 Jul 13 - 09:33 AM
Don(Wyziwyg)T 04 Jul 13 - 09:36 AM
Don(Wyziwyg)T 04 Jul 13 - 09:41 AM
Keith A of Hertford 04 Jul 13 - 09:53 AM
Don(Wyziwyg)T 04 Jul 13 - 09:57 AM
Don(Wyziwyg)T 04 Jul 13 - 10:05 AM
Don(Wyziwyg)T 04 Jul 13 - 10:15 AM
Bobert 04 Jul 13 - 10:16 AM
Greg F. 04 Jul 13 - 10:18 AM
Greg F. 04 Jul 13 - 10:22 AM
Keith A of Hertford 04 Jul 13 - 10:50 AM
Don(Wyziwyg)T 04 Jul 13 - 10:51 AM
Don(Wyziwyg)T 04 Jul 13 - 10:58 AM
GUEST,Guest from Sanity 04 Jul 13 - 12:01 PM
Greg F. 04 Jul 13 - 12:13 PM
Keith A of Hertford 04 Jul 13 - 01:19 PM
Bobert 04 Jul 13 - 03:14 PM
GUEST,Guest from Sanity 04 Jul 13 - 05:36 PM
GUEST 04 Jul 13 - 07:07 PM
Don(Wyziwyg)T 04 Jul 13 - 07:30 PM
Don(Wyziwyg)T 04 Jul 13 - 07:41 PM
Bobert 04 Jul 13 - 08:37 PM
Elmore 04 Jul 13 - 10:23 PM
GUEST,Guest from Sanity 04 Jul 13 - 11:54 PM
Keith A of Hertford 05 Jul 13 - 02:11 AM
Don(Wyziwyg)T 05 Jul 13 - 05:57 AM
Keith A of Hertford 05 Jul 13 - 06:07 AM
Don(Wyziwyg)T 05 Jul 13 - 06:16 AM
Bobert 05 Jul 13 - 08:49 AM
Greg F. 05 Jul 13 - 09:41 AM
bobad 05 Jul 13 - 10:28 AM
pdq 05 Jul 13 - 10:57 AM
GUEST,Guest Pot and Kettle Metaphor 05 Jul 13 - 11:02 AM
pdq 05 Jul 13 - 11:25 AM
GUEST,Guest from Sanity 05 Jul 13 - 12:18 PM
Greg F. 05 Jul 13 - 12:42 PM
Ebbie 05 Jul 13 - 01:14 PM
Greg F. 05 Jul 13 - 01:34 PM
Don(Wyziwyg)T 05 Jul 13 - 01:36 PM
Ebbie 05 Jul 13 - 02:01 PM
pdq 05 Jul 13 - 02:28 PM
Greg F. 05 Jul 13 - 04:09 PM
Greg F. 05 Jul 13 - 04:17 PM
Don Firth 05 Jul 13 - 06:05 PM
Bobert 05 Jul 13 - 07:44 PM
GUEST 06 Jul 13 - 02:51 AM
Ebbie 06 Jul 13 - 03:30 AM
Greg F. 06 Jul 13 - 08:17 AM
olddude 06 Jul 13 - 12:03 PM
Greg F. 06 Jul 13 - 12:09 PM
Keith A of Hertford 06 Jul 13 - 12:10 PM
Greg F. 06 Jul 13 - 12:18 PM
GUEST,Red Queen 06 Jul 13 - 12:57 PM
GUEST,Red Queen 06 Jul 13 - 01:00 PM
Bobert 06 Jul 13 - 01:08 PM
Greg F. 06 Jul 13 - 01:19 PM
Bobert 06 Jul 13 - 01:24 PM
GUEST,Red Queen 06 Jul 13 - 01:39 PM
Keith A of Hertford 06 Jul 13 - 01:58 PM
Bobert 06 Jul 13 - 02:44 PM
Don(Wyziwyg)T 06 Jul 13 - 04:21 PM
Don(Wyziwyg)T 06 Jul 13 - 04:27 PM
Don Firth 06 Jul 13 - 05:03 PM
Keith A of Hertford 06 Jul 13 - 05:16 PM
Don Firth 06 Jul 13 - 05:48 PM
Bobert 06 Jul 13 - 05:51 PM
Greg F. 06 Jul 13 - 05:58 PM
Bobert 06 Jul 13 - 06:28 PM
GUEST,Guest from Sanity 06 Jul 13 - 10:01 PM
Bobert 06 Jul 13 - 10:12 PM
GUEST,Guest from Sanity 07 Jul 13 - 12:23 AM
Keith A of Hertford 07 Jul 13 - 03:55 AM
Bobert 07 Jul 13 - 10:17 AM
Keith A of Hertford 07 Jul 13 - 12:28 PM
Bobert 07 Jul 13 - 02:27 PM
beardedbruce 08 Jul 13 - 09:35 AM
Greg F. 08 Jul 13 - 09:55 AM
Richard Bridge 08 Jul 13 - 10:02 AM
Richard Bridge 08 Jul 13 - 10:07 AM
Keith A of Hertford 08 Jul 13 - 10:12 AM
beardedbruce 08 Jul 13 - 10:14 AM
beardedbruce 08 Jul 13 - 10:15 AM
Keith A of Hertford 08 Jul 13 - 10:18 AM
beardedbruce 08 Jul 13 - 11:47 AM
Richard Bridge 08 Jul 13 - 11:53 AM
Greg F. 08 Jul 13 - 12:04 PM
Keith A of Hertford 08 Jul 13 - 12:09 PM
Greg F. 08 Jul 13 - 12:13 PM
Richard Bridge 08 Jul 13 - 03:40 PM
Keith A of Hertford 08 Jul 13 - 04:12 PM
Greg F. 08 Jul 13 - 05:23 PM
Keith A of Hertford 08 Jul 13 - 05:45 PM
Greg F. 08 Jul 13 - 05:52 PM
Richard Bridge 08 Jul 13 - 06:31 PM
Don Firth 08 Jul 13 - 06:58 PM
Bobert 08 Jul 13 - 07:46 PM
GUEST 08 Jul 13 - 09:45 PM
Bobert 09 Jul 13 - 10:19 AM
Greg F. 09 Jul 13 - 10:29 AM
beardedbruce 09 Jul 13 - 12:25 PM
kendall 09 Jul 13 - 12:47 PM
Bobert 09 Jul 13 - 01:06 PM
Keith A of Hertford 09 Jul 13 - 01:19 PM
beardedbruce 09 Jul 13 - 02:06 PM
beardedbruce 09 Jul 13 - 02:07 PM
Greg F. 09 Jul 13 - 02:17 PM
Greg F. 09 Jul 13 - 02:24 PM
beardedbruce 09 Jul 13 - 02:29 PM
Keith A of Hertford 09 Jul 13 - 02:32 PM
beardedbruce 09 Jul 13 - 02:36 PM
Greg F. 09 Jul 13 - 02:58 PM
Greg F. 09 Jul 13 - 03:00 PM
beardedbruce 09 Jul 13 - 03:02 PM
Greg F. 09 Jul 13 - 03:23 PM
beardedbruce 09 Jul 13 - 03:28 PM
GUEST 09 Jul 13 - 03:45 PM
Bobert 09 Jul 13 - 05:02 PM
GUEST,Guest from Sanity 09 Jul 13 - 06:07 PM
Greg F. 09 Jul 13 - 06:16 PM
GUEST,Guest from Sanity 09 Jul 13 - 06:37 PM
Richard Bridge 09 Jul 13 - 07:33 PM
GUEST 10 Jul 13 - 01:03 AM
GUEST 10 Jul 13 - 01:07 AM
GUEST,Guest from Sanity 10 Jul 13 - 01:58 AM
Bobert 10 Jul 13 - 09:10 AM
GUEST 10 Jul 13 - 09:14 AM
GUEST 10 Jul 13 - 10:26 AM
Bobert 10 Jul 13 - 10:39 AM
GUEST,Guest from Sanity 10 Jul 13 - 11:01 AM
Don(Wyziwyg)T 10 Jul 13 - 11:08 AM
Don(Wyziwyg)T 10 Jul 13 - 11:29 AM
GUEST,Guest from Sanity 10 Jul 13 - 11:37 AM
GUEST,Guest from Sanity 10 Jul 13 - 11:44 AM
GUEST 10 Jul 13 - 12:07 PM
Greg F. 10 Jul 13 - 12:45 PM
Don Firth 10 Jul 13 - 12:58 PM
Bobert 10 Jul 13 - 01:00 PM
Don Firth 10 Jul 13 - 01:19 PM
Keith A of Hertford 10 Jul 13 - 01:35 PM
Greg F. 10 Jul 13 - 01:47 PM
Don Firth 10 Jul 13 - 01:57 PM
GUEST 10 Jul 13 - 02:20 PM
Keith A of Hertford 10 Jul 13 - 02:41 PM
Bobert 10 Jul 13 - 02:46 PM
pdq 10 Jul 13 - 03:10 PM
Bobert 10 Jul 13 - 03:20 PM
beardedbruce 10 Jul 13 - 03:31 PM
beardedbruce 10 Jul 13 - 03:32 PM
pdq 10 Jul 13 - 03:43 PM
Bobert 10 Jul 13 - 04:03 PM
Richard Bridge 10 Jul 13 - 05:53 PM
Greg F. 10 Jul 13 - 06:06 PM
Don(Wyziwyg)T 10 Jul 13 - 08:00 PM
Don(Wyziwyg)T 10 Jul 13 - 08:09 PM
Bobert 10 Jul 13 - 08:10 PM
Don(Wyziwyg)T 10 Jul 13 - 08:14 PM
Bobert 10 Jul 13 - 08:17 PM
Don(Wyziwyg)T 10 Jul 13 - 08:21 PM
Don Firth 10 Jul 13 - 09:50 PM
GUEST,Guest from Sanity 10 Jul 13 - 10:18 PM
Don Firth 10 Jul 13 - 11:11 PM
GUEST,Guest from Sanity 10 Jul 13 - 11:13 PM
Don Firth 10 Jul 13 - 11:58 PM
GUEST,Guest from Sanity 11 Jul 13 - 12:29 AM
GUEST 11 Jul 13 - 01:16 AM
Don(Wyziwyg)T 11 Jul 13 - 07:19 AM
Don(Wyziwyg)T 11 Jul 13 - 07:24 AM
Keith A of Hertford 11 Jul 13 - 07:34 AM
bobad 11 Jul 13 - 07:39 AM
Keith A of Hertford 11 Jul 13 - 08:10 AM
GUEST,Guest from Saniy 11 Jul 13 - 08:50 AM
Richard Bridge 11 Jul 13 - 08:53 AM
Greg F. 11 Jul 13 - 08:58 AM
beardedbruce 11 Jul 13 - 09:14 AM
Keith A of Hertford 11 Jul 13 - 09:24 AM
Greg F. 11 Jul 13 - 09:25 AM
Keith A of Hertford 11 Jul 13 - 09:28 AM
Bobert 11 Jul 13 - 09:34 AM
beardedbruce 11 Jul 13 - 09:36 AM
beardedbruce 11 Jul 13 - 09:41 AM
beardedbruce 11 Jul 13 - 09:46 AM
GUEST,Guest from Sanity 11 Jul 13 - 10:23 AM
Bobert 11 Jul 13 - 10:37 AM
beardedbruce 11 Jul 13 - 10:45 AM
beardedbruce 11 Jul 13 - 10:45 AM
beardedbruce 11 Jul 13 - 10:48 AM
GUEST,Guest from Sanity 11 Jul 13 - 11:06 AM
Bobert 11 Jul 13 - 11:16 AM
beardedbruce 11 Jul 13 - 11:20 AM
beardedbruce 11 Jul 13 - 11:26 AM
Don(Wyziwyg)T 11 Jul 13 - 11:39 AM
beardedbruce 11 Jul 13 - 11:46 AM
Don(Wyziwyg)T 11 Jul 13 - 12:39 PM
Bobert 11 Jul 13 - 12:39 PM
Greg F. 11 Jul 13 - 12:42 PM
GUEST 11 Jul 13 - 12:46 PM
pdq 11 Jul 13 - 01:04 PM
beardedbruce 11 Jul 13 - 01:16 PM
Bobert 11 Jul 13 - 01:23 PM
beardedbruce 11 Jul 13 - 01:58 PM
beardedbruce 11 Jul 13 - 02:09 PM
beardedbruce 11 Jul 13 - 02:24 PM
Greg F. 11 Jul 13 - 03:19 PM
Bobert 11 Jul 13 - 03:26 PM
Ebbie 11 Jul 13 - 04:30 PM
Don Firth 11 Jul 13 - 05:01 PM
Bobert 11 Jul 13 - 05:03 PM
Don Firth 11 Jul 13 - 05:07 PM
GUEST,Guest from Sanity 11 Jul 13 - 05:38 PM
GUEST,Guest from Sanity 11 Jul 13 - 05:49 PM
Don Firth 11 Jul 13 - 06:38 PM
Bobert 11 Jul 13 - 06:53 PM
GUEST,Guest from Sanity 11 Jul 13 - 07:18 PM
Bobert 11 Jul 13 - 07:27 PM
Don Firth 11 Jul 13 - 07:51 PM
Bobert 11 Jul 13 - 08:25 PM
Songwronger 11 Jul 13 - 09:08 PM
Bobert 11 Jul 13 - 09:24 PM
Songwronger 11 Jul 13 - 09:30 PM
GUEST 11 Jul 13 - 09:41 PM
Bobert 11 Jul 13 - 09:49 PM
Don Firth 11 Jul 13 - 09:58 PM
GUEST 11 Jul 13 - 10:11 PM
Bobert 11 Jul 13 - 10:14 PM
GUEST,Guest from Sanity 11 Jul 13 - 10:31 PM
Don Firth 11 Jul 13 - 11:00 PM
GUEST 11 Jul 13 - 11:03 PM
Don Firth 11 Jul 13 - 11:09 PM
GUEST 11 Jul 13 - 11:23 PM
GUEST,olddude 11 Jul 13 - 11:25 PM
GUEST,olddude 11 Jul 13 - 11:59 PM
GUEST,Guest from Sanity 12 Jul 13 - 12:07 AM
GUEST,Guest from Sanity 12 Jul 13 - 12:11 AM
GUEST 12 Jul 13 - 12:20 AM
Don Firth 12 Jul 13 - 12:31 AM
Ebbie 12 Jul 13 - 01:40 AM
GUEST,Guest from Sanity 12 Jul 13 - 06:45 AM
GUEST 12 Jul 13 - 07:24 AM
beardedbruce 12 Jul 13 - 08:07 AM
beardedbruce 12 Jul 13 - 08:17 AM
beardedbruce 12 Jul 13 - 08:26 AM
Greg F. 12 Jul 13 - 09:42 AM
beardedbruce 12 Jul 13 - 09:44 AM
Bobert 12 Jul 13 - 10:13 AM
beardedbruce 12 Jul 13 - 10:20 AM
Poetry Bird 12 Jul 13 - 10:43 AM
Greg F. 12 Jul 13 - 10:43 AM
Poetry Bird 12 Jul 13 - 10:46 AM
Ebbie 12 Jul 13 - 10:58 AM
beardedbruce 12 Jul 13 - 12:37 PM
beardedbruce 12 Jul 13 - 12:50 PM
beardedbruce 12 Jul 13 - 12:55 PM
GUEST,Guest from Sanity 12 Jul 13 - 01:16 PM
Don Firth 12 Jul 13 - 01:51 PM
beardedbruce 12 Jul 13 - 01:59 PM
Stilly River Sage 12 Jul 13 - 02:19 PM
beardedbruce 12 Jul 13 - 02:59 PM
beardedbruce 12 Jul 13 - 03:20 PM
Don Firth 12 Jul 13 - 03:23 PM
beardedbruce 12 Jul 13 - 03:25 PM
beardedbruce 12 Jul 13 - 03:41 PM
Don Firth 12 Jul 13 - 03:52 PM
Greg F. 12 Jul 13 - 06:21 PM
Bobert 12 Jul 13 - 07:20 PM
Don Firth 12 Jul 13 - 07:26 PM
GUEST,Guest from Sanity 12 Jul 13 - 08:27 PM
GUEST,Guest from Sanity 12 Jul 13 - 08:30 PM
Bobert 12 Jul 13 - 08:32 PM
Greg F. 12 Jul 13 - 08:49 PM
Bobert 12 Jul 13 - 09:00 PM
Don Firth 12 Jul 13 - 09:13 PM
GUEST,Guest from Sanity 12 Jul 13 - 11:24 PM
GUEST,Guest from Sanity 12 Jul 13 - 11:30 PM
Suzy Sock Puppet 12 Jul 13 - 11:59 PM
GUEST,Guest from Sanity 13 Jul 13 - 12:35 AM
GUEST 13 Jul 13 - 02:41 AM
GUEST,Guest from Sanity 13 Jul 13 - 03:44 AM
GUEST 13 Jul 13 - 11:11 AM
GUEST,Guest from Sanity 13 Jul 13 - 11:30 AM
GUEST,Arkie 13 Jul 13 - 11:34 AM
GUEST,Guest from Sanity 13 Jul 13 - 12:40 PM
Bobert 13 Jul 13 - 04:17 PM
GUEST,Guest from Sanity 13 Jul 13 - 04:36 PM
KB in Iowa 13 Jul 13 - 04:43 PM
Bobert 13 Jul 13 - 04:50 PM
Don Firth 13 Jul 13 - 05:47 PM
GUEST,Guest from Sanity 13 Jul 13 - 05:55 PM
Bobert 13 Jul 13 - 08:03 PM
Elmore 13 Jul 13 - 08:59 PM
Bobert 13 Jul 13 - 09:08 PM
GUEST,SJL 13 Jul 13 - 09:17 PM
Bobert 13 Jul 13 - 09:34 PM
GUEST 13 Jul 13 - 09:53 PM
GUEST 13 Jul 13 - 09:58 PM
Bobert 13 Jul 13 - 10:04 PM
Jeri 13 Jul 13 - 10:12 PM
Ebbie 13 Jul 13 - 10:17 PM
Don Firth 13 Jul 13 - 10:38 PM
Bobert 13 Jul 13 - 10:38 PM
GUEST,Guest from Sanity 13 Jul 13 - 10:54 PM
Ebbie 14 Jul 13 - 12:10 AM
Elmore 14 Jul 13 - 12:40 AM
Don Firth 14 Jul 13 - 01:08 AM
Don Firth 14 Jul 13 - 01:48 AM
GUEST 14 Jul 13 - 03:44 AM
bobad 14 Jul 13 - 08:11 AM
bobad 14 Jul 13 - 08:11 AM
Elmore 14 Jul 13 - 08:32 AM
Greg F. 14 Jul 13 - 08:40 AM
Bobert 14 Jul 13 - 08:52 AM
GUEST 14 Jul 13 - 09:15 AM
GUEST,saulgoldie 14 Jul 13 - 09:18 AM
GUEST 14 Jul 13 - 09:45 AM
GUEST 14 Jul 13 - 10:15 AM
Greg F. 14 Jul 13 - 10:52 AM
Jeri 14 Jul 13 - 10:52 AM
Greg F. 14 Jul 13 - 10:56 AM
Don(Wyziwyg)T 14 Jul 13 - 11:08 AM
Don(Wyziwyg)T 14 Jul 13 - 11:34 AM
Don(Wyziwyg)T 14 Jul 13 - 11:36 AM
Bobert 14 Jul 13 - 11:43 AM
Elmore 14 Jul 13 - 11:59 AM
GUEST,Guest from Sanity 14 Jul 13 - 12:19 PM
GUEST,Guest from Sanity 14 Jul 13 - 12:27 PM
GUEST,Guest from Sanity 14 Jul 13 - 12:56 PM
Greg F. 14 Jul 13 - 01:17 PM
GUEST,Guest from Sanity 14 Jul 13 - 01:54 PM
Poetry Bird 14 Jul 13 - 03:06 PM
Greg F. 14 Jul 13 - 03:17 PM
Richard Bridge 14 Jul 13 - 03:26 PM
Bobert 14 Jul 13 - 04:34 PM
Greg F. 14 Jul 13 - 04:44 PM
Bobert 14 Jul 13 - 05:10 PM
GUEST,Guest from Sanity 14 Jul 13 - 05:26 PM
GUEST,Guest from Sanity 14 Jul 13 - 05:47 PM
bobad 14 Jul 13 - 07:00 PM
Greg F. 14 Jul 13 - 07:12 PM
Bobert 14 Jul 13 - 07:37 PM
GUEST 14 Jul 13 - 08:36 PM
GUEST,Guest from Sanity 14 Jul 13 - 08:46 PM
Bobert 14 Jul 13 - 08:51 PM
GUEST,Guest from Sanity 14 Jul 13 - 08:58 PM
Bobert 14 Jul 13 - 09:00 PM
GUEST,Guest from Sanity 14 Jul 13 - 09:00 PM
GUEST 14 Jul 13 - 09:03 PM
Bobert 14 Jul 13 - 09:10 PM
GUEST,Guest from Sanity 14 Jul 13 - 09:27 PM
Bobert 14 Jul 13 - 09:28 PM
GUEST,Guest from Sanity 14 Jul 13 - 09:29 PM
Bobert 14 Jul 13 - 09:36 PM
Bobert 14 Jul 13 - 09:37 PM
GUEST,Guest from Sanity 14 Jul 13 - 09:52 PM
Bobert 14 Jul 13 - 09:54 PM
Don Firth 14 Jul 13 - 09:56 PM
Bobert 14 Jul 13 - 10:04 PM
CET 14 Jul 13 - 10:23 PM
Bobert 14 Jul 13 - 10:44 PM
Bobert 14 Jul 13 - 10:46 PM
Songwronger 15 Jul 13 - 12:35 AM
michaelr 15 Jul 13 - 12:38 AM
Don(Wyziwyg)T 15 Jul 13 - 04:35 AM
Richard Bridge 15 Jul 13 - 04:53 AM
Keith A of Hertford 15 Jul 13 - 05:03 AM
Keith A of Hertford 15 Jul 13 - 06:07 AM
CET 15 Jul 13 - 06:47 AM
Don(Wyziwyg)T 15 Jul 13 - 06:56 AM
Greg F. 15 Jul 13 - 08:26 AM
Bobert 15 Jul 13 - 08:58 AM
number 6 15 Jul 13 - 09:29 AM
Richard Bridge 15 Jul 13 - 09:42 AM
Keith A of Hertford 15 Jul 13 - 09:53 AM
Greg F. 15 Jul 13 - 10:02 AM
Bobert 15 Jul 13 - 10:06 AM
Keith A of Hertford 15 Jul 13 - 10:21 AM
Elmore 15 Jul 13 - 10:31 AM
Greg F. 15 Jul 13 - 10:31 AM
Ebbie 15 Jul 13 - 10:31 AM
Don(Wyziwyg)T 15 Jul 13 - 10:32 AM
Jim Carroll 15 Jul 13 - 10:43 AM
Don(Wyziwyg)T 15 Jul 13 - 10:43 AM
Keith A of Hertford 15 Jul 13 - 10:45 AM
Keith A of Hertford 15 Jul 13 - 10:48 AM
Don(Wyziwyg)T 15 Jul 13 - 10:49 AM
Don(Wyziwyg)T 15 Jul 13 - 10:53 AM
beardedbruce 15 Jul 13 - 11:08 AM
Richard Bridge 15 Jul 13 - 11:10 AM
beardedbruce 15 Jul 13 - 11:13 AM
beardedbruce 15 Jul 13 - 11:27 AM
Keith A of Hertford 15 Jul 13 - 11:29 AM
GUEST 15 Jul 13 - 12:00 PM
Greg F. 15 Jul 13 - 12:00 PM
beardedbruce 15 Jul 13 - 12:13 PM
beardedbruce 15 Jul 13 - 12:27 PM
Don(Wyziwyg)T 15 Jul 13 - 12:32 PM
Don(Wyziwyg)T 15 Jul 13 - 12:41 PM
beardedbruce 15 Jul 13 - 12:55 PM
Don(Wyziwyg)T 15 Jul 13 - 01:12 PM
Bobert 15 Jul 13 - 01:14 PM
Greg F. 15 Jul 13 - 01:20 PM
beardedbruce 15 Jul 13 - 01:27 PM
beardedbruce 15 Jul 13 - 01:31 PM
Elmore 15 Jul 13 - 01:33 PM
GUEST 15 Jul 13 - 01:35 PM
Don(Wyziwyg)T 15 Jul 13 - 01:35 PM
Bobert 15 Jul 13 - 01:41 PM
beardedbruce 15 Jul 13 - 01:42 PM
Don(Wyziwyg)T 15 Jul 13 - 01:42 PM
Ebbie 15 Jul 13 - 01:47 PM
Don(Wyziwyg)T 15 Jul 13 - 01:50 PM
beardedbruce 15 Jul 13 - 01:52 PM
Keith A of Hertford 15 Jul 13 - 01:55 PM
Don Firth 15 Jul 13 - 01:59 PM
Ebbie 15 Jul 13 - 02:00 PM
beardedbruce 15 Jul 13 - 02:00 PM
Don(Wyziwyg)T 15 Jul 13 - 02:03 PM
Don(Wyziwyg)T 15 Jul 13 - 02:08 PM
beardedbruce 15 Jul 13 - 02:12 PM
Q (Frank Staplin) 15 Jul 13 - 02:14 PM
Bobert 15 Jul 13 - 02:34 PM
Greg F. 15 Jul 13 - 02:38 PM
Don Firth 15 Jul 13 - 02:38 PM
beardedbruce 15 Jul 13 - 02:41 PM
Bobert 15 Jul 13 - 02:41 PM
beardedbruce 15 Jul 13 - 02:42 PM
Greg F. 15 Jul 13 - 02:49 PM
Greg F. 15 Jul 13 - 02:52 PM
McGrath of Harlow 15 Jul 13 - 02:54 PM
Bobert 15 Jul 13 - 03:43 PM
catspaw49 15 Jul 13 - 03:59 PM
beardedbruce 15 Jul 13 - 04:00 PM
beardedbruce 15 Jul 13 - 04:04 PM
Bobert 15 Jul 13 - 04:13 PM
Keith A of Hertford 15 Jul 13 - 04:26 PM
Keith A of Hertford 15 Jul 13 - 04:26 PM
Elmore 15 Jul 13 - 04:28 PM
Greg F. 15 Jul 13 - 04:55 PM
Greg F. 15 Jul 13 - 05:00 PM
catspaw49 15 Jul 13 - 05:23 PM
Bobert 15 Jul 13 - 05:40 PM
Greg F. 15 Jul 13 - 05:56 PM
Don(Wyziwyg)T 15 Jul 13 - 06:06 PM
Q (Frank Staplin) 15 Jul 13 - 06:34 PM
Don(Wyziwyg)T 15 Jul 13 - 06:40 PM
Elmore 15 Jul 13 - 06:43 PM
Greg F. 15 Jul 13 - 06:49 PM
Q (Frank Staplin) 15 Jul 13 - 07:08 PM
Greg F. 15 Jul 13 - 07:17 PM
Bobert 15 Jul 13 - 07:24 PM
Elmore 15 Jul 13 - 08:21 PM
GUEST,Guest from Sanity 15 Jul 13 - 08:29 PM
Bobert 15 Jul 13 - 08:45 PM
Greg F. 15 Jul 13 - 08:58 PM
Bobert 15 Jul 13 - 09:11 PM
Wesley S 15 Jul 13 - 09:37 PM
GUEST,Guest from Sanity 15 Jul 13 - 09:47 PM
Richard Bridge 15 Jul 13 - 09:56 PM
GUEST 15 Jul 13 - 09:56 PM
GUEST,Guest from Sanity 15 Jul 13 - 10:21 PM
Elmore 15 Jul 13 - 10:48 PM
GUEST,Guest from Sanity 15 Jul 13 - 11:52 PM
Don Firth 16 Jul 13 - 01:10 AM
Richard Bridge 16 Jul 13 - 01:13 AM
GUEST,Guest from Sanity 16 Jul 13 - 02:48 AM
Richard Bridge 16 Jul 13 - 03:42 AM
beardedbruce 16 Jul 13 - 07:57 AM
beardedbruce 16 Jul 13 - 08:10 AM
beardedbruce 16 Jul 13 - 08:11 AM
Greg F. 16 Jul 13 - 08:17 AM
Greg F. 16 Jul 13 - 08:23 AM
beardedbruce 16 Jul 13 - 08:27 AM
beardedbruce 16 Jul 13 - 08:30 AM
beardedbruce 16 Jul 13 - 08:34 AM
beardedbruce 16 Jul 13 - 08:40 AM
Greg F. 16 Jul 13 - 09:13 AM
Richard Bridge 16 Jul 13 - 10:39 AM
beardedbruce 16 Jul 13 - 10:48 AM
Greg F. 16 Jul 13 - 11:09 AM
Greg F. 16 Jul 13 - 11:11 AM
beardedbruce 16 Jul 13 - 11:53 AM
beardedbruce 16 Jul 13 - 11:59 AM
beardedbruce 16 Jul 13 - 12:30 PM
Greg F. 16 Jul 13 - 12:34 PM
beardedbruce 16 Jul 13 - 12:38 PM
beardedbruce 16 Jul 13 - 12:44 PM
Greg F. 16 Jul 13 - 12:57 PM
beardedbruce 16 Jul 13 - 01:00 PM
beardedbruce 16 Jul 13 - 01:04 PM
beardedbruce 16 Jul 13 - 01:12 PM
Greg F. 16 Jul 13 - 01:14 PM
Greg F. 16 Jul 13 - 01:16 PM
Bobert 16 Jul 13 - 01:16 PM
Greg F. 16 Jul 13 - 01:19 PM
beardedbruce 16 Jul 13 - 01:23 PM
beardedbruce 16 Jul 13 - 01:26 PM
Elmore 16 Jul 13 - 01:37 PM
beardedbruce 16 Jul 13 - 01:37 PM
Don Firth 16 Jul 13 - 01:40 PM
beardedbruce 16 Jul 13 - 01:43 PM
beardedbruce 16 Jul 13 - 01:47 PM
Don(Wyziwyg)T 16 Jul 13 - 01:48 PM
Don Firth 16 Jul 13 - 01:48 PM
beardedbruce 16 Jul 13 - 01:52 PM
Don(Wyziwyg)T 16 Jul 13 - 01:53 PM
beardedbruce 16 Jul 13 - 01:57 PM
Don(Wyziwyg)T 16 Jul 13 - 01:58 PM
beardedbruce 16 Jul 13 - 02:04 PM
beardedbruce 16 Jul 13 - 02:08 PM
Richard Bridge 16 Jul 13 - 02:15 PM
GUEST,Guest from Sanity 16 Jul 13 - 02:20 PM
Don Firth 16 Jul 13 - 02:23 PM
GUEST,Guest from Sanity 16 Jul 13 - 02:25 PM
GUEST,Guest from Sanity 16 Jul 13 - 02:29 PM
beardedbruce 16 Jul 13 - 02:33 PM
beardedbruce 16 Jul 13 - 02:37 PM
Don Firth 16 Jul 13 - 02:45 PM
beardedbruce 16 Jul 13 - 02:46 PM
beardedbruce 16 Jul 13 - 02:56 PM
beardedbruce 16 Jul 13 - 03:22 PM
GUEST,Guest from Sanity 16 Jul 13 - 03:49 PM
Don Firth 16 Jul 13 - 04:06 PM
GUEST 16 Jul 13 - 04:13 PM
GUEST,Guest from Sanity 16 Jul 13 - 04:43 PM
Bobert 16 Jul 13 - 04:59 PM
Greg F. 16 Jul 13 - 05:01 PM
Don(Wyziwyg)T 16 Jul 13 - 05:30 PM
Don(Wyziwyg)T 16 Jul 13 - 05:44 PM
Don Firth 16 Jul 13 - 05:54 PM
Greg F. 16 Jul 13 - 05:57 PM
Greg F. 16 Jul 13 - 05:59 PM
Jack the Sailor 16 Jul 13 - 06:45 PM
GUEST,Guest from Sanity 16 Jul 13 - 06:59 PM
GUEST 16 Jul 13 - 07:02 PM
Bobert 16 Jul 13 - 07:31 PM
Elmore 16 Jul 13 - 08:00 PM
Bobert 16 Jul 13 - 08:11 PM
GUEST,Guest from Sanity 16 Jul 13 - 10:03 PM
Elmore 16 Jul 13 - 10:58 PM
Songwronger 16 Jul 13 - 11:47 PM
Songwronger 16 Jul 13 - 11:51 PM
GUEST,Guest from Sanity 17 Jul 13 - 12:03 AM
Songwronger 17 Jul 13 - 12:31 AM
Songwronger 17 Jul 13 - 12:44 AM
Don Firth 17 Jul 13 - 12:56 AM
Ebbie 17 Jul 13 - 01:01 AM
Richard Bridge 17 Jul 13 - 03:59 AM
beardedbruce 17 Jul 13 - 07:54 AM
beardedbruce 17 Jul 13 - 08:05 AM
beardedbruce 17 Jul 13 - 08:06 AM
beardedbruce 17 Jul 13 - 08:09 AM
beardedbruce 17 Jul 13 - 08:27 AM
beardedbruce 17 Jul 13 - 08:31 AM
beardedbruce 17 Jul 13 - 08:36 AM
beardedbruce 17 Jul 13 - 08:42 AM
Bobert 17 Jul 13 - 08:59 AM
beardedbruce 17 Jul 13 - 09:09 AM
GUEST,SJL 17 Jul 13 - 09:16 AM
GUEST,Guest from Sanity 17 Jul 13 - 09:43 AM
Keith A of Hertford 17 Jul 13 - 09:56 AM
Bobert 17 Jul 13 - 10:14 AM
beardedbruce 17 Jul 13 - 11:45 AM
beardedbruce 17 Jul 13 - 11:54 AM
beardedbruce 17 Jul 13 - 11:58 AM
redhorse 17 Jul 13 - 12:12 PM
catspaw49 17 Jul 13 - 12:13 PM
beardedbruce 17 Jul 13 - 12:18 PM
beardedbruce 17 Jul 13 - 12:26 PM
GUEST,saulgoldie 17 Jul 13 - 12:45 PM
Bobert 17 Jul 13 - 12:58 PM
GUEST 17 Jul 13 - 12:58 PM
beardedbruce 17 Jul 13 - 12:59 PM
beardedbruce 17 Jul 13 - 01:24 PM
Don(Wyziwyg)T 17 Jul 13 - 01:27 PM
GUEST 17 Jul 13 - 01:27 PM
GUEST,Guest from Sanity 17 Jul 13 - 01:46 PM
Don(Wyziwyg)T 17 Jul 13 - 02:34 PM
Don(Wyziwyg)T 17 Jul 13 - 02:40 PM
Don(Wyziwyg)T 17 Jul 13 - 02:48 PM
beardedbruce 17 Jul 13 - 02:55 PM
beardedbruce 17 Jul 13 - 02:55 PM
beardedbruce 17 Jul 13 - 02:58 PM
Richard Bridge 17 Jul 13 - 03:00 PM
beardedbruce 17 Jul 13 - 03:04 PM
beardedbruce 17 Jul 13 - 03:06 PM
Don(Wyziwyg)T 17 Jul 13 - 03:06 PM
beardedbruce 17 Jul 13 - 03:13 PM
beardedbruce 17 Jul 13 - 03:15 PM
GUEST 17 Jul 13 - 03:15 PM
GUEST,Guest from Sanity 17 Jul 13 - 03:18 PM
GUEST,olddude 17 Jul 13 - 03:18 PM
Don(Wyziwyg)T 17 Jul 13 - 03:21 PM
beardedbruce 17 Jul 13 - 03:25 PM
Don(Wyziwyg)T 17 Jul 13 - 03:33 PM
beardedbruce 17 Jul 13 - 03:36 PM
Don(Wyziwyg)T 17 Jul 13 - 03:41 PM
beardedbruce 17 Jul 13 - 03:44 PM
Don(Wyziwyg)T 17 Jul 13 - 03:46 PM
number 6 17 Jul 13 - 03:55 PM
beardedbruce 17 Jul 13 - 03:55 PM
Don(Wyziwyg)T 17 Jul 13 - 03:57 PM
GUEST,Guest from Sanity 17 Jul 13 - 04:13 PM
Bobert 17 Jul 13 - 04:14 PM
Don(Wyziwyg)T 17 Jul 13 - 04:17 PM
GUEST 17 Jul 13 - 04:19 PM
Don(Wyziwyg)T 17 Jul 13 - 04:25 PM
Don(Wyziwyg)T 17 Jul 13 - 04:31 PM
Don(Wyziwyg)T 17 Jul 13 - 04:36 PM
Don(Wyziwyg)T 17 Jul 13 - 04:44 PM
Richard Bridge 17 Jul 13 - 04:57 PM
Richard Bridge 17 Jul 13 - 05:03 PM
Greg F. 17 Jul 13 - 05:19 PM
Don Firth 17 Jul 13 - 05:20 PM
Bobert 17 Jul 13 - 05:35 PM
GUEST 17 Jul 13 - 06:05 PM
Don(Wyziwyg)T 17 Jul 13 - 06:37 PM
GUEST,olddude 17 Jul 13 - 06:37 PM
GUEST,Guest from Sanity 17 Jul 13 - 06:46 PM
Elmore 17 Jul 13 - 07:03 PM
Don Firth 17 Jul 13 - 07:16 PM
Don(Wyziwyg)T 17 Jul 13 - 07:24 PM
Greg F. 17 Jul 13 - 08:35 PM
Greg F. 17 Jul 13 - 08:51 PM
Bobert 17 Jul 13 - 10:39 PM
GUEST,Guest from Sanity 17 Jul 13 - 11:12 PM
Richard Bridge 18 Jul 13 - 04:16 AM
GUEST,Red Queen 18 Jul 13 - 05:16 AM
Don(Wyziwyg)T 18 Jul 13 - 05:57 AM
Don(Wyziwyg)T 18 Jul 13 - 06:06 AM
Don(Wyziwyg)T 18 Jul 13 - 06:09 AM
Bobert 18 Jul 13 - 09:13 AM
beardedbruce 18 Jul 13 - 09:31 AM
beardedbruce 18 Jul 13 - 09:43 AM
Greg F. 18 Jul 13 - 10:03 AM
Don(Wyziwyg)T 18 Jul 13 - 10:33 AM
beardedbruce 18 Jul 13 - 10:45 AM
GUEST,Guest from Sanity 18 Jul 13 - 10:45 AM
beardedbruce 18 Jul 13 - 10:49 AM
Don(Wyziwyg)T 18 Jul 13 - 11:27 AM
beardedbruce 18 Jul 13 - 11:31 AM
Greg F. 18 Jul 13 - 11:43 AM
beardedbruce 18 Jul 13 - 11:44 AM
Greg F. 18 Jul 13 - 11:48 AM
Greg F. 18 Jul 13 - 11:54 AM
beardedbruce 18 Jul 13 - 11:54 AM
beardedbruce 18 Jul 13 - 11:57 AM
Greg F. 18 Jul 13 - 12:09 PM
Greg F. 18 Jul 13 - 12:13 PM
Don(Wyziwyg)T 18 Jul 13 - 12:13 PM
Don(Wyziwyg)T 18 Jul 13 - 12:20 PM
beardedbruce 18 Jul 13 - 12:26 PM
beardedbruce 18 Jul 13 - 12:31 PM
beardedbruce 18 Jul 13 - 12:32 PM
Don(Wyziwyg)T 18 Jul 13 - 12:38 PM
beardedbruce 18 Jul 13 - 12:38 PM
Don(Wyziwyg)T 18 Jul 13 - 12:41 PM
Greg F. 18 Jul 13 - 12:45 PM
GUEST,saulgoldie 18 Jul 13 - 12:47 PM
beardedbruce 18 Jul 13 - 12:50 PM
Bobert 18 Jul 13 - 12:51 PM
Greg F. 18 Jul 13 - 12:54 PM
beardedbruce 18 Jul 13 - 12:56 PM
beardedbruce 18 Jul 13 - 01:01 PM
Greg F. 18 Jul 13 - 01:04 PM
Greg F. 18 Jul 13 - 01:08 PM
beardedbruce 18 Jul 13 - 01:08 PM
beardedbruce 18 Jul 13 - 01:10 PM
beardedbruce 18 Jul 13 - 01:21 PM
Greg F. 18 Jul 13 - 02:32 PM
beardedbruce 18 Jul 13 - 02:43 PM
beardedbruce 18 Jul 13 - 02:44 PM
Greg F. 18 Jul 13 - 03:00 PM
Greg F. 18 Jul 13 - 05:44 PM
GUEST,SJL 18 Jul 13 - 05:58 PM
Greg F. 18 Jul 13 - 06:31 PM
Bobert 18 Jul 13 - 07:36 PM
GUEST,Guest from Sanity 18 Jul 13 - 09:33 PM
Don(Wyziwyg)T 19 Jul 13 - 05:08 AM
Don(Wyziwyg)T 19 Jul 13 - 05:16 AM
Don(Wyziwyg)T 19 Jul 13 - 05:28 AM
Richard Bridge 19 Jul 13 - 06:14 AM
GUEST,Red Queen 19 Jul 13 - 08:13 AM
Bobert 19 Jul 13 - 08:51 AM
beardedbruce 19 Jul 13 - 08:52 AM
beardedbruce 19 Jul 13 - 08:58 AM
beardedbruce 19 Jul 13 - 09:20 AM
Greg F. 19 Jul 13 - 09:21 AM
beardedbruce 19 Jul 13 - 09:51 AM
GUEST,Guest from Sanity 19 Jul 13 - 09:54 AM
beardedbruce 19 Jul 13 - 10:00 AM
GUEST,Guest from Sanity 19 Jul 13 - 10:01 AM
beardedbruce 19 Jul 13 - 10:10 AM
Don(Wyziwyg)T 19 Jul 13 - 10:23 AM
Don(Wyziwyg)T 19 Jul 13 - 10:27 AM
Jeri 19 Jul 13 - 10:31 AM
Don(Wyziwyg)T 19 Jul 13 - 10:33 AM
beardedbruce 19 Jul 13 - 10:34 AM
beardedbruce 19 Jul 13 - 10:40 AM
Greg F. 19 Jul 13 - 10:41 AM
beardedbruce 19 Jul 13 - 10:45 AM
Don(Wyziwyg)T 19 Jul 13 - 10:45 AM
beardedbruce 19 Jul 13 - 10:48 AM
beardedbruce 19 Jul 13 - 10:58 AM
beardedbruce 19 Jul 13 - 11:05 AM
Don(Wyziwyg)T 19 Jul 13 - 11:13 AM
number 6 19 Jul 13 - 11:14 AM
olddude 19 Jul 13 - 11:19 AM
olddude 19 Jul 13 - 11:21 AM
beardedbruce 19 Jul 13 - 11:21 AM
beardedbruce 19 Jul 13 - 11:36 AM
Jeri 19 Jul 13 - 11:39 AM
GUEST,Red Queen 19 Jul 13 - 11:41 AM
beardedbruce 19 Jul 13 - 11:47 AM
Lighter 19 Jul 13 - 12:11 PM
GUEST,Guest from Sanity 19 Jul 13 - 12:14 PM
Greg F. 19 Jul 13 - 12:27 PM
Greg F. 19 Jul 13 - 12:29 PM
GUEST,Guest from Sanity 19 Jul 13 - 12:34 PM
Greg F. 19 Jul 13 - 12:45 PM
beardedbruce 19 Jul 13 - 12:46 PM
pdq 19 Jul 13 - 01:02 PM
beardedbruce 19 Jul 13 - 01:16 PM
GUEST,Guest from Sanity 19 Jul 13 - 02:07 PM
Greg F. 19 Jul 13 - 02:27 PM
GUEST,Guest from Sanity 19 Jul 13 - 02:29 PM
Greg F. 19 Jul 13 - 02:34 PM
beardedbruce 19 Jul 13 - 02:45 PM
beardedbruce 19 Jul 13 - 02:47 PM
beardedbruce 19 Jul 13 - 02:49 PM
GUEST,Red Queen 19 Jul 13 - 03:00 PM
bobad 19 Jul 13 - 03:01 PM
Greg F. 19 Jul 13 - 03:04 PM
beardedbruce 19 Jul 13 - 03:15 PM
bobad 19 Jul 13 - 03:34 PM
Greg F. 19 Jul 13 - 03:49 PM
Don Firth 19 Jul 13 - 04:08 PM
Bobert 19 Jul 13 - 04:52 PM
Don Firth 19 Jul 13 - 05:05 PM
Greg F. 19 Jul 13 - 05:36 PM
Don Firth 19 Jul 13 - 06:10 PM
olddude 19 Jul 13 - 06:38 PM
olddude 19 Jul 13 - 06:47 PM
GUEST,Guest from Sanity 19 Jul 13 - 06:58 PM
GUEST 19 Jul 13 - 07:02 PM
olddude 19 Jul 13 - 08:20 PM
Bobert 19 Jul 13 - 08:37 PM
olddude 19 Jul 13 - 08:40 PM
Bobert 19 Jul 13 - 08:50 PM
GUEST 19 Jul 13 - 08:51 PM
olddude 19 Jul 13 - 09:02 PM
Bobert 19 Jul 13 - 09:10 PM
olddude 19 Jul 13 - 09:54 PM
Bobert 19 Jul 13 - 10:03 PM
GUEST,Guest from Sanity 20 Jul 13 - 12:16 AM
Don(Wyziwyg)T 20 Jul 13 - 07:56 AM
Lighter 20 Jul 13 - 08:41 AM
Bobert 20 Jul 13 - 08:42 AM
Don(Wyziwyg)T 20 Jul 13 - 08:47 AM
Don(Wyziwyg)T 20 Jul 13 - 09:20 AM
Bobert 20 Jul 13 - 09:28 AM
Don(Wyziwyg)T 20 Jul 13 - 09:28 AM
Don(Wyziwyg)T 20 Jul 13 - 09:39 AM
Greg F. 20 Jul 13 - 09:45 AM
Greg F. 20 Jul 13 - 09:46 AM
GUEST,Guest from Sanity 20 Jul 13 - 10:59 AM
Greg F. 20 Jul 13 - 11:07 AM
GUEST,Guest from Sanity 20 Jul 13 - 11:16 AM
GUEST,Guest from Sanity 20 Jul 13 - 11:19 AM
GUEST,Guest from Sanity 20 Jul 13 - 11:24 AM
GUEST,Guest from Sanity 20 Jul 13 - 11:57 AM
number 6 20 Jul 13 - 12:04 PM
Greg F. 20 Jul 13 - 12:16 PM
GUEST,Guest from Sanity 20 Jul 13 - 12:20 PM
GUEST,Guest from Sanity 20 Jul 13 - 12:23 PM
Bobert 20 Jul 13 - 01:02 PM
Bobert 20 Jul 13 - 01:05 PM
GUEST,Guest from Sanity 20 Jul 13 - 01:26 PM
GUEST,Guest from Sanity 20 Jul 13 - 01:48 PM
Greg F. 20 Jul 13 - 03:51 PM
olddude 20 Jul 13 - 04:02 PM
Ebbie 20 Jul 13 - 04:35 PM
Lighter 20 Jul 13 - 04:57 PM
GUEST,Guest from Sanity 20 Jul 13 - 05:12 PM
Ebbie 20 Jul 13 - 05:54 PM
Ebbie 20 Jul 13 - 05:59 PM
Greg F. 20 Jul 13 - 06:04 PM
bobad 20 Jul 13 - 06:39 PM
Q (Frank Staplin) 20 Jul 13 - 07:00 PM
Bobert 20 Jul 13 - 07:31 PM
Bobert 20 Jul 13 - 07:34 PM
GUEST,Guest from Sanity 20 Jul 13 - 08:20 PM
GUEST,Guest from Sanity 20 Jul 13 - 08:30 PM
Bobert 20 Jul 13 - 08:38 PM
GUEST,Guest from Sanity 20 Jul 13 - 09:32 PM
GUEST,Guest from Sanity 20 Jul 13 - 11:03 PM
GUEST,Guest from Sanity 21 Jul 13 - 02:16 AM
GUEST,Bill Kennedy 21 Jul 13 - 04:41 AM
GUEST,TIA 21 Jul 13 - 07:55 AM
Bobert 21 Jul 13 - 09:55 AM
Don(Wyziwyg)T 21 Jul 13 - 10:12 AM
Don(Wyziwyg)T 21 Jul 13 - 10:22 AM
GUEST,Guest from Sanity 21 Jul 13 - 12:20 PM
Elmore 21 Jul 13 - 02:06 PM
GUEST,Guest from Sanity 21 Jul 13 - 02:41 PM
Don Firth 21 Jul 13 - 02:50 PM
Elmore 21 Jul 13 - 03:04 PM
Lighter 21 Jul 13 - 03:08 PM
GUEST,Guest from Sanity 21 Jul 13 - 03:10 PM
KB in Iowa 21 Jul 13 - 04:06 PM
GUEST,Guest from Sanity 21 Jul 13 - 04:44 PM
Jack the Sailor 22 Jul 13 - 11:16 AM
Greg F. 22 Jul 13 - 12:40 PM
Don(Wyziwyg)T 22 Jul 13 - 12:49 PM
beardedbruce 22 Jul 13 - 01:40 PM
Elmore 22 Jul 13 - 01:58 PM
GUEST,Guest from Sanity 22 Jul 13 - 02:37 PM
Bobert 22 Jul 13 - 07:47 PM
GUEST,Guest from Sanity 23 Jul 13 - 12:50 AM
beardedbruce 23 Jul 13 - 08:28 AM
beardedbruce 23 Jul 13 - 08:42 AM
Elmore 23 Jul 13 - 09:08 AM
Elmore 23 Jul 13 - 09:12 AM
Greg F. 23 Jul 13 - 09:16 AM
Bobert 23 Jul 13 - 09:19 AM
beardedbruce 23 Jul 13 - 10:36 AM
beardedbruce 23 Jul 13 - 10:56 AM
beardedbruce 23 Jul 13 - 11:18 AM
beardedbruce 23 Jul 13 - 11:23 AM
beardedbruce 23 Jul 13 - 11:35 AM
beardedbruce 23 Jul 13 - 11:36 AM
Don(Wyziwyg)T 23 Jul 13 - 11:52 AM
beardedbruce 23 Jul 13 - 12:06 PM
beardedbruce 23 Jul 13 - 12:06 PM
Greg F. 23 Jul 13 - 12:08 PM
beardedbruce 23 Jul 13 - 12:12 PM
beardedbruce 23 Jul 13 - 12:16 PM
Don(Wyziwyg)T 23 Jul 13 - 12:33 PM
Don(Wyziwyg)T 23 Jul 13 - 12:38 PM
beardedbruce 23 Jul 13 - 12:53 PM
GUEST,Guest from Sanity 23 Jul 13 - 12:54 PM
beardedbruce 23 Jul 13 - 12:55 PM
beardedbruce 23 Jul 13 - 01:17 PM
pdq 23 Jul 13 - 01:48 PM
Greg F. 23 Jul 13 - 01:50 PM
Greg F. 23 Jul 13 - 01:55 PM
beardedbruce 23 Jul 13 - 02:04 PM
Don(Wyziwyg)T 23 Jul 13 - 02:12 PM
Don(Wyziwyg)T 23 Jul 13 - 02:16 PM
Don(Wyziwyg)T 23 Jul 13 - 02:21 PM
beardedbruce 23 Jul 13 - 02:21 PM
Don(Wyziwyg)T 23 Jul 13 - 02:22 PM
GUEST,SJL 23 Jul 13 - 02:22 PM
beardedbruce 23 Jul 13 - 02:34 PM
GUEST,Guest from Sanity 23 Jul 13 - 02:56 PM
Greg F. 23 Jul 13 - 05:05 PM
GUEST,Guest from Sanity 23 Jul 13 - 05:10 PM
Don Firth 23 Jul 13 - 05:17 PM
GUEST,Guest from Sanity 23 Jul 13 - 05:26 PM
GUEST,Guest from Sanity 23 Jul 13 - 05:33 PM
Don Firth 23 Jul 13 - 05:42 PM
Bobert 23 Jul 13 - 07:52 PM
GUEST,Guest from Sanity 23 Jul 13 - 07:53 PM
Don Firth 23 Jul 13 - 08:26 PM
GUEST,Guest from Sanity 23 Jul 13 - 08:36 PM
Don Firth 23 Jul 13 - 08:44 PM
Bobert 23 Jul 13 - 08:47 PM
Don Firth 23 Jul 13 - 09:06 PM
Bobert 23 Jul 13 - 09:21 PM
GUEST,Guest from Sanity 23 Jul 13 - 10:59 PM
Don Firth 23 Jul 13 - 11:19 PM
GUEST,Guest from Sanity 24 Jul 13 - 01:50 AM
Richard Bridge 24 Jul 13 - 04:01 AM
Don(Wyziwyg)T 24 Jul 13 - 04:50 AM
GUEST,Guest from Sanity 24 Jul 13 - 10:28 AM
Don Firth 24 Jul 13 - 12:56 PM
Don(Wyziwyg)T 24 Jul 13 - 01:28 PM
Don(Wyziwyg)T 24 Jul 13 - 01:42 PM
beardedbruce 24 Jul 13 - 01:44 PM
beardedbruce 24 Jul 13 - 01:50 PM
Keith A of Hertford 24 Jul 13 - 01:50 PM
beardedbruce 24 Jul 13 - 01:55 PM
Lighter 24 Jul 13 - 01:56 PM
Jack the Sailor 24 Jul 13 - 01:59 PM
beardedbruce 24 Jul 13 - 02:07 PM
GUEST,Guest from Sanity 24 Jul 13 - 02:22 PM
Don Firth 24 Jul 13 - 02:57 PM
Richard Bridge 24 Jul 13 - 03:07 PM
GUEST,Guest from Sanity 24 Jul 13 - 03:58 PM
Don Firth 24 Jul 13 - 04:25 PM
Bobert 24 Jul 13 - 04:58 PM
GUEST,Guest from Sanity 24 Jul 13 - 05:19 PM
Bobert 24 Jul 13 - 05:23 PM
Don Firth 24 Jul 13 - 05:27 PM
GUEST,Guest from Sanity 24 Jul 13 - 06:38 PM
Don Firth 24 Jul 13 - 07:03 PM
GUEST,Guest from Sanity 25 Jul 13 - 08:14 AM
Bobert 25 Jul 13 - 08:43 AM
beardedbruce 25 Jul 13 - 11:15 AM
Don(Wyziwyg)T 25 Jul 13 - 11:28 AM
Don(Wyziwyg)T 25 Jul 13 - 11:35 AM
Don(Wyziwyg)T 25 Jul 13 - 11:40 AM
Don(Wyziwyg)T 25 Jul 13 - 11:52 AM
beardedbruce 25 Jul 13 - 12:13 PM
Greg F. 25 Jul 13 - 12:24 PM
Bobert 25 Jul 13 - 01:11 PM
beardedbruce 25 Jul 13 - 02:22 PM
beardedbruce 25 Jul 13 - 02:40 PM
beardedbruce 25 Jul 13 - 02:41 PM
beardedbruce 25 Jul 13 - 02:55 PM
Greg F. 25 Jul 13 - 03:39 PM
beardedbruce 25 Jul 13 - 03:47 PM
beardedbruce 25 Jul 13 - 03:51 PM
Lighter 25 Jul 13 - 04:10 PM
Lighter 25 Jul 13 - 05:38 PM
Elmore 25 Jul 13 - 05:41 PM
Bobert 25 Jul 13 - 07:58 PM
Elmore 25 Jul 13 - 08:45 PM
Bobert 25 Jul 13 - 09:00 PM
Elmore 25 Jul 13 - 09:39 PM
Gibb Sahib 25 Jul 13 - 09:40 PM
GUEST,Guest from Sanity 25 Jul 13 - 09:53 PM
Bobert 26 Jul 13 - 08:29 AM
beardedbruce 26 Jul 13 - 08:39 AM
beardedbruce 26 Jul 13 - 08:54 AM
beardedbruce 26 Jul 13 - 09:27 AM
GUEST,Guest from Sanity 26 Jul 13 - 09:49 AM
Elmore 26 Jul 13 - 09:54 AM
GUEST,Guest from Sanity 26 Jul 13 - 10:01 AM
Elmore 26 Jul 13 - 10:05 AM
beardedbruce 26 Jul 13 - 10:13 AM
GUEST,Guest from Sanity 26 Jul 13 - 10:14 AM
beardedbruce 26 Jul 13 - 10:15 AM
beardedbruce 26 Jul 13 - 10:16 AM
Elmore 26 Jul 13 - 10:21 AM
beardedbruce 26 Jul 13 - 10:29 AM
beardedbruce 26 Jul 13 - 10:32 AM
GUEST 26 Jul 13 - 10:47 AM
beardedbruce 26 Jul 13 - 10:55 AM
Bobert 26 Jul 13 - 11:30 AM
beardedbruce 26 Jul 13 - 11:31 AM
GUEST,Guest from Sanity 26 Jul 13 - 12:01 PM
gnu 26 Jul 13 - 12:50 PM
beardedbruce 26 Jul 13 - 12:57 PM
Bobert 26 Jul 13 - 01:17 PM
beardedbruce 26 Jul 13 - 01:20 PM
gnu 26 Jul 13 - 01:33 PM
beardedbruce 26 Jul 13 - 01:53 PM
gnu 26 Jul 13 - 02:02 PM
beardedbruce 26 Jul 13 - 02:13 PM
beardedbruce 26 Jul 13 - 02:14 PM
GUEST 26 Jul 13 - 03:40 PM
gnu 26 Jul 13 - 04:05 PM
Elmore 26 Jul 13 - 04:05 PM
Don(Wyziwyg)T 26 Jul 13 - 04:48 PM
Bobert 26 Jul 13 - 05:46 PM
Don Firth 26 Jul 13 - 07:49 PM
Bobert 26 Jul 13 - 07:59 PM
GUEST,Guest from Sanity 27 Jul 13 - 12:13 AM
GUEST,Guest from Sanity 27 Jul 13 - 04:53 AM
bobad 27 Jul 13 - 06:43 AM
Bobert 27 Jul 13 - 09:52 AM
Don(Wyziwyg)T 27 Jul 13 - 11:32 AM
GUEST,Guest from Sanity 27 Jul 13 - 11:33 AM
GUEST,Guest from Sanity 27 Jul 13 - 11:56 AM
Q (Frank Staplin) 27 Jul 13 - 12:08 PM
Q (Frank Staplin) 27 Jul 13 - 12:51 PM
Lighter 27 Jul 13 - 01:16 PM
Don Firth 27 Jul 13 - 05:04 PM
Bobert 27 Jul 13 - 05:54 PM
GUEST,Guest from Sanity 27 Jul 13 - 05:56 PM
Don Firth 27 Jul 13 - 06:58 PM
Don Firth 27 Jul 13 - 07:06 PM
Bobert 27 Jul 13 - 07:19 PM
Don Firth 27 Jul 13 - 07:29 PM
gnu 27 Jul 13 - 08:00 PM
GUEST,Guest from Sanity 28 Jul 13 - 12:59 AM
GUEST,Guest from Sanity 28 Jul 13 - 05:40 AM
Q (Frank Staplin) 28 Jul 13 - 12:16 PM
GUEST,Guest from Sanity 28 Jul 13 - 12:28 PM
Don Firth 28 Jul 13 - 12:49 PM
Don Firth 28 Jul 13 - 01:20 PM
GUEST,Guest from Sanity 28 Jul 13 - 01:50 PM
GUEST,SJL 28 Jul 13 - 01:51 PM
Don Firth 28 Jul 13 - 03:23 PM
Greg F. 28 Jul 13 - 03:30 PM
GUEST,Guest from Sanity 28 Jul 13 - 03:39 PM
Q (Frank Staplin) 28 Jul 13 - 04:11 PM
Greg F. 28 Jul 13 - 04:39 PM
Q (Frank Staplin) 28 Jul 13 - 04:44 PM
GUEST,Guest from Sanity 28 Jul 13 - 04:50 PM
Don Firth 28 Jul 13 - 04:56 PM
Greg F. 28 Jul 13 - 05:04 PM
Greg F. 28 Jul 13 - 05:07 PM
GUEST,Guest from Sanity 28 Jul 13 - 06:31 PM
Don Firth 28 Jul 13 - 07:00 PM
Bobert 28 Jul 13 - 07:14 PM
GUEST,SJL 28 Jul 13 - 07:59 PM
GUEST,Guest from Sanity 28 Jul 13 - 11:03 PM
GUEST 29 Jul 13 - 01:56 AM
GUEST,Guest from Sanity 29 Jul 13 - 02:47 AM
beardedbruce 29 Jul 13 - 08:48 AM
Don(Wyziwyg)T 29 Jul 13 - 09:12 AM
Bobert 29 Jul 13 - 09:59 AM
Greg F. 29 Jul 13 - 10:17 AM
beardedbruce 29 Jul 13 - 10:22 AM
Greg F. 29 Jul 13 - 10:28 AM
beardedbruce 29 Jul 13 - 10:38 AM
Richard Bridge 29 Jul 13 - 11:06 AM
Q (Frank Staplin) 29 Jul 13 - 12:07 PM
GUEST 29 Jul 13 - 12:22 PM
beardedbruce 29 Jul 13 - 12:28 PM
Bobert 29 Jul 13 - 01:07 PM
GUEST,SJL 29 Jul 13 - 01:48 PM
Don Firth 29 Jul 13 - 03:27 PM
Bobert 29 Jul 13 - 04:09 PM
Don Firth 29 Jul 13 - 04:09 PM
beardedbruce 30 Jul 13 - 07:56 AM
beardedbruce 30 Jul 13 - 08:02 AM
GUEST,SJL 30 Jul 13 - 10:46 AM
GUEST,SJL 30 Jul 13 - 11:09 AM
Richard Bridge 30 Jul 13 - 11:26 AM
beardedbruce 30 Jul 13 - 11:50 AM
Bobert 30 Jul 13 - 12:05 PM
Q (Frank Staplin) 30 Jul 13 - 01:09 PM
Greg F. 30 Jul 13 - 02:28 PM
beardedbruce 30 Jul 13 - 02:30 PM
Greg F. 30 Jul 13 - 02:32 PM
Bobert 30 Jul 13 - 02:43 PM
GUEST,SJL 30 Jul 13 - 10:17 PM
GUEST,Guest from Sanity 31 Jul 13 - 02:06 AM
Richard Bridge 31 Jul 13 - 05:23 AM
beardedbruce 31 Jul 13 - 08:10 AM
Bobert 31 Jul 13 - 08:38 AM
beardedbruce 31 Jul 13 - 08:42 AM
GUEST,Huest from Sanity 31 Jul 13 - 08:52 AM
Greg F. 31 Jul 13 - 09:02 AM
beardedbruce 31 Jul 13 - 09:13 AM
Bobert 31 Jul 13 - 09:25 AM
beardedbruce 31 Jul 13 - 09:38 AM
Greg F. 31 Jul 13 - 10:29 AM
GUEST 31 Jul 13 - 10:30 AM
GUEST,SJL 31 Jul 13 - 12:07 PM
Don Firth 31 Jul 13 - 12:35 PM
beardedbruce 31 Jul 13 - 12:36 PM
Elmore 31 Jul 13 - 12:42 PM
Bobert 31 Jul 13 - 01:03 PM
Greg F. 31 Jul 13 - 01:37 PM
beardedbruce 31 Jul 13 - 02:03 PM
Don Firth 31 Jul 13 - 02:08 PM
Bobert 31 Jul 13 - 02:08 PM
Greg F. 31 Jul 13 - 02:29 PM
Greg F. 31 Jul 13 - 02:33 PM
Don Firth 31 Jul 13 - 02:36 PM
beardedbruce 31 Jul 13 - 02:38 PM
Greg F. 31 Jul 13 - 03:03 PM
Greg F. 31 Jul 13 - 03:05 PM
beardedbruce 31 Jul 13 - 03:30 PM
beardedbruce 31 Jul 13 - 03:34 PM
Don Firth 31 Jul 13 - 03:38 PM
Greg F. 31 Jul 13 - 03:39 PM
beardedbruce 31 Jul 13 - 04:04 PM
Don Firth 31 Jul 13 - 04:24 PM
KB in Iowa 31 Jul 13 - 04:58 PM
Greg F. 31 Jul 13 - 05:01 PM
bobad 31 Jul 13 - 05:11 PM
Bobert 31 Jul 13 - 05:21 PM
Greg F. 31 Jul 13 - 05:23 PM
Greg F. 31 Jul 13 - 05:25 PM
Bobert 31 Jul 13 - 07:22 PM
GUEST,SJL 31 Jul 13 - 07:29 PM
Bobert 31 Jul 13 - 07:58 PM
Richard Bridge 01 Aug 13 - 03:26 AM
Richard Bridge 01 Aug 13 - 03:32 AM
Suzy Sock Puppet 01 Aug 13 - 03:34 AM
gnu 24 Aug 13 - 01:31 PM
GUEST,Guest from Sanity 24 Aug 13 - 02:28 PM
Bobert 24 Aug 13 - 05:20 PM
Don Firth 24 Aug 13 - 06:08 PM
Greg F. 24 Aug 13 - 06:41 PM
GUEST,Guest from Sanity 24 Aug 13 - 07:39 PM
Bobert 24 Aug 13 - 07:55 PM
GUEST,Guest from Sanity 24 Aug 13 - 08:13 PM
Bobert 24 Aug 13 - 08:20 PM
Don Firth 25 Aug 13 - 12:09 AM
Bobert 25 Aug 13 - 09:49 AM
gnu 25 Aug 13 - 05:02 PM
GUEST,Guest from Sanity 26 Aug 13 - 02:57 AM
Greg F. 26 Aug 13 - 08:48 AM
Bobert 26 Aug 13 - 09:01 AM
beardedbruce 26 Aug 13 - 09:06 AM
Don Firth 26 Aug 13 - 12:43 PM
Bobert 26 Aug 13 - 01:21 PM
beardedbruce 26 Aug 13 - 01:45 PM
Suzy Sock Puppet 26 Aug 13 - 01:59 PM
Don Firth 26 Aug 13 - 02:07 PM
beardedbruce 26 Aug 13 - 02:19 PM
Don Firth 26 Aug 13 - 03:24 PM
Don Firth 26 Aug 13 - 03:31 PM
GUEST,Guest from Sanity 26 Aug 13 - 03:37 PM
beardedbruce 26 Aug 13 - 04:05 PM
Bobert 26 Aug 13 - 04:24 PM
Greg F. 26 Aug 13 - 05:17 PM
Bobert 26 Aug 13 - 05:19 PM
Don Firth 26 Aug 13 - 05:20 PM
GUEST,Guest from Sanity 26 Aug 13 - 05:40 PM
Don Firth 26 Aug 13 - 06:13 PM
Greg F. 26 Aug 13 - 06:48 PM
GUEST,Guest from Sanity 26 Aug 13 - 06:51 PM
Don Firth 26 Aug 13 - 07:05 PM
GUEST,Guest from Sanity 26 Aug 13 - 07:35 PM
Bobert 26 Aug 13 - 07:47 PM
Don Firth 26 Aug 13 - 09:04 PM
GUEST,Guest from Sanity 27 Aug 13 - 12:31 AM
Don Firth 27 Aug 13 - 12:57 AM
Don Firth 27 Aug 13 - 01:23 AM
Suzy Sock Puppet 27 Aug 13 - 02:36 AM
beardedbruce 27 Aug 13 - 08:27 AM
Bobert 27 Aug 13 - 09:13 AM
Don Firth 27 Aug 13 - 03:06 PM
number 6 27 Aug 13 - 03:46 PM
Don Firth 27 Aug 13 - 04:47 PM
Don Firth 27 Aug 13 - 04:59 PM
GUEST,Guest from Sanity 27 Aug 13 - 05:18 PM
Don Firth 27 Aug 13 - 09:14 PM
Don Firth 27 Aug 13 - 09:41 PM
Bobert 27 Aug 13 - 09:42 PM
GUEST,Guest from Sanity 27 Aug 13 - 11:14 PM
Don Firth 28 Aug 13 - 01:59 AM
Don(Wyziwyg)T 28 Aug 13 - 07:17 AM
beardedbruce 28 Aug 13 - 08:26 AM
Greg F. 28 Aug 13 - 08:40 AM
beardedbruce 28 Aug 13 - 09:03 AM
Bobert 28 Aug 13 - 09:53 AM
beardedbruce 28 Aug 13 - 10:00 AM
Greg F. 28 Aug 13 - 10:14 AM
beardedbruce 28 Aug 13 - 10:19 AM
Greg F. 28 Aug 13 - 10:26 AM
beardedbruce 28 Aug 13 - 11:37 AM
Greg F. 28 Aug 13 - 01:03 PM
Bobert 28 Aug 13 - 01:24 PM
beardedbruce 28 Aug 13 - 01:25 PM
beardedbruce 28 Aug 13 - 01:31 PM
Greg F. 28 Aug 13 - 02:12 PM
beardedbruce 28 Aug 13 - 02:16 PM
beardedbruce 28 Aug 13 - 02:22 PM
Suzy Sock Puppet 28 Aug 13 - 03:27 PM
beardedbruce 28 Aug 13 - 03:33 PM
Bobert 28 Aug 13 - 04:28 PM
Don Firth 28 Aug 13 - 04:42 PM
Suzy Sock Puppet 28 Aug 13 - 05:17 PM
bobad 28 Aug 13 - 05:29 PM
GUEST,Lighter 28 Aug 13 - 05:47 PM
Don Firth 28 Aug 13 - 07:53 PM
Bobert 28 Aug 13 - 07:53 PM
Greg F. 28 Aug 13 - 09:07 PM
Bobert 28 Aug 13 - 09:31 PM
GUEST,Guest from Sanity 28 Aug 13 - 10:19 PM
Don Firth 28 Aug 13 - 11:08 PM
GUEST,Guest from Sanity 29 Aug 13 - 02:35 AM
Don(Wyziwyg)T 29 Aug 13 - 08:45 AM
Bobert 29 Aug 13 - 08:50 AM
Don Firth 29 Aug 13 - 12:19 PM
Don Firth 29 Aug 13 - 12:51 PM
Suzy Sock Puppet 29 Aug 13 - 04:48 PM
Suzy Sock Puppet 29 Aug 13 - 04:54 PM
Bobert 29 Aug 13 - 07:35 PM
GUEST,Guest from Sanity 30 Aug 13 - 03:21 AM
Don(Wyziwyg)T 30 Aug 13 - 05:24 AM
Bobert 30 Aug 13 - 08:39 AM
Bobert 30 Aug 13 - 09:01 AM
GUEST,Guest from Sanity 30 Aug 13 - 01:22 PM
Don(Wyziwyg)T 30 Aug 13 - 02:18 PM
Bobert 30 Aug 13 - 02:44 PM
Don Firth 30 Aug 13 - 03:03 PM
Don Firth 30 Aug 13 - 03:08 PM
Bobert 30 Aug 13 - 03:37 PM
bobad 30 Aug 13 - 07:26 PM
Bobert 30 Aug 13 - 08:00 PM
GUEST,Suzy Sock Puppet 30 Aug 13 - 09:47 PM
GUEST 30 Aug 13 - 09:56 PM
GUEST,Guest from Sanity 31 Aug 13 - 02:59 AM
Don(Wyziwyg)T 31 Aug 13 - 09:11 AM
Bobert 31 Aug 13 - 10:51 AM
GUEST,Guest from Sanity 31 Aug 13 - 10:56 AM
Suzy Sock Puppet 31 Aug 13 - 11:52 AM
Don(Wyziwyg)T 01 Sep 13 - 07:08 AM
Don(Wyziwyg)T 01 Sep 13 - 07:23 AM
Bobert 01 Sep 13 - 10:12 AM
Suzy Sock Puppet 01 Sep 13 - 11:05 AM
Bobert 01 Sep 13 - 11:24 AM
Don Firth 01 Sep 13 - 12:57 PM
GUEST,Guest from Sanity 01 Sep 13 - 01:04 PM
GUEST,Guest from Sanity 01 Sep 13 - 01:07 PM
GUEST,Guest from Sanity 01 Sep 13 - 01:18 PM
GUEST,gillymor 01 Sep 13 - 01:21 PM
GUEST,Guest from Sanity 01 Sep 13 - 01:49 PM
Bobert 01 Sep 13 - 02:05 PM
Don Firth 01 Sep 13 - 02:08 PM
GUEST,Guest from Sanity 01 Sep 13 - 02:22 PM
GUEST,gillymor 01 Sep 13 - 02:37 PM
Don Firth 01 Sep 13 - 02:40 PM
Don Firth 01 Sep 13 - 04:11 PM
GUEST,Guest from Sanity 01 Sep 13 - 04:24 PM
Don Firth 01 Sep 13 - 04:33 PM
GUEST,Guest from Sanity 01 Sep 13 - 04:38 PM
Bobert 01 Sep 13 - 04:40 PM
Suzy Sock Puppet 01 Sep 13 - 04:47 PM
GUEST,Guest from Sanity 01 Sep 13 - 04:48 PM
Don Firth 01 Sep 13 - 04:49 PM
Don Firth 01 Sep 13 - 06:23 PM
Don Firth 01 Sep 13 - 06:26 PM
Don Firth 01 Sep 13 - 06:30 PM
GUEST,Guest from Sanity 01 Sep 13 - 08:26 PM
Don Firth 01 Sep 13 - 09:49 PM
GUEST,Guest from Sanity 02 Sep 13 - 01:00 AM
Bobert 02 Sep 13 - 04:28 PM
Greg F. 02 Sep 13 - 05:49 PM
Bobert 02 Sep 13 - 07:30 PM
Greg F. 06 Sep 13 - 12:40 PM
Don Firth 06 Sep 13 - 12:56 PM
gnu 06 Sep 13 - 01:27 PM
Bobert 06 Sep 13 - 02:34 PM
Don Firth 06 Sep 13 - 02:55 PM
Greg F. 06 Sep 13 - 04:36 PM
gnu 06 Sep 13 - 04:38 PM
Greg F. 06 Sep 13 - 05:47 PM
Bobert 06 Sep 13 - 07:33 PM
Greg F. 06 Sep 13 - 08:12 PM
Bobert 06 Sep 13 - 08:43 PM
GUEST,Guest from Sanity 07 Sep 13 - 03:48 AM
Don(Wyziwyg)T 07 Sep 13 - 08:07 AM
Don(Wyziwyg)T 07 Sep 13 - 08:20 AM
Don(Wyziwyg)T 07 Sep 13 - 08:28 AM
Don(Wyziwyg)T 07 Sep 13 - 08:31 AM
Suzy Sock Puppet 07 Sep 13 - 01:39 PM
GUEST,Guest from Sanity 07 Sep 13 - 03:23 PM
Don(Wyziwyg)T 07 Sep 13 - 03:41 PM
Don(Wyziwyg)T 07 Sep 13 - 03:45 PM
GUEST,Guest from Sanity 07 Sep 13 - 03:54 PM
Bobert 07 Sep 13 - 04:39 PM
Don Firth 07 Sep 13 - 04:48 PM
Don Firth 07 Sep 13 - 04:56 PM
Bobert 07 Sep 13 - 07:41 PM
Don Firth 07 Sep 13 - 08:33 PM
Bobert 07 Sep 13 - 08:42 PM
Don(Wyziwyg)T 08 Sep 13 - 11:51 AM
GUEST,Guest from Sanity 08 Sep 13 - 01:10 PM
Don Firth 08 Sep 13 - 01:58 PM
Bobert 08 Sep 13 - 06:23 PM
Bobert 08 Sep 13 - 07:55 PM
Elmore 09 Sep 13 - 03:37 PM
Elmore 09 Sep 13 - 03:52 PM
bobad 09 Sep 13 - 03:59 PM
Don Firth 09 Sep 13 - 06:44 PM
Bobert 09 Sep 13 - 11:05 PM
Suzy Sock Puppet 09 Sep 13 - 11:42 PM
Don(Wyziwyg)T 10 Sep 13 - 04:39 PM
Bobert 10 Sep 13 - 07:42 PM
bobad 13 Sep 13 - 04:39 PM
Bobert 13 Sep 13 - 07:30 PM
bobad 13 Sep 13 - 10:30 PM
Don Firth 14 Sep 13 - 12:19 AM
Don Firth 14 Sep 13 - 01:24 AM
GUEST,Guest from Sanity 14 Sep 13 - 02:22 AM
Bobert 14 Sep 13 - 08:39 AM
bobad 19 Nov 13 - 02:34 PM
Elmore 19 Nov 13 - 03:07 PM
Don Firth 19 Nov 13 - 06:41 PM
Bobert 19 Nov 13 - 08:50 PM
GUEST,Troubadour 20 Nov 13 - 07:13 AM

Share Thread
more
Lyrics & Knowledge Search [Advanced]
DT  Forum
Sort (Forum) by:relevance date
DT Lyrics:













Subject: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: beardedbruce
Date: 30 May 13 - 11:50 AM

"ORLANDO, Fla. -- A court employee who retrieved photos and deleted text messages from Trayvon Martin's cellphone has been placed on administrative leave after an attorney testified that prosecutors didn't properly turn over the evidence to the defense, an attorney said Wednesday.

Former prosecutor Wesley White said he was ethically obligated to reveal that Fourth Judicial Circuit Information Technology Director Ben Kruidbos retrieved the data that weren't turned over.

Kruidbos was placed on leave shortly after White testified during a hearing in George Zimmerman's second-degree murder case on Tuesday. White said Kruidbos was interviewed by state attorney investigators twice before the action was taken.

White said he wasn't surprised of possible evidence violations by Zimmerman prosecutor Bernie de la Rionda.

"I was saddened by it, but I'm not surprised," he said.

White first learned about the evidence through Kruidbos more than a month ago, he said.

Phone and email messages left at the office of Fourth Judicial Circuit State Attorney Angela Corey were not immediately returned.

Zimmerman is charged with second-degree murder in 17-year-old Martin's killing and has pleaded not guilty, saying he acted in self-defense. Circuit Judge Debra Nelson has denied a defense motion to delay the trial, which scheduled to begin on June 10.

White led the Nassau County state attorney's office before resigning in December, citing differences of opinion with Corey. He is now in private practice.

White said the photos Kruidbos retrieved were of a hand holding a gun and one depicted drugs. The content of the text messages wasn't specified.

"I'm an officer of the court and I'm obliged to inform the court of any misconduct or any potential misconduct coming before the court. Whether it's by the defense or prosecution," White said.

The defense released photos of a gun, marijuana plant and Martin's text messages publicly, saying that if prosecutors planned to paint Zimmerman as the aggressor and Martin as the innocent bystander, they wanted the information to defend him. Attorneys won't be able to mention the teen's drug use, suspension from school and past fighting during opening statements at the trial, Nelson ruled Tuesday.

Nelson has set a full hearing on the turning over of evidence for next week.

Defense attorney Mark O'Mara has previously brought a handful of motions alleging that the state attorney's office had been slow to turn over other evidence.

White said his disclosure to the defense isn't sparked by any animosity toward his former employer."


Read more here: http://www.miamiherald.com/2013/05/29/3422519/lawyer-zimmerman-prosecutor-withheld.html#storylink=cpy


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Charmion
Date: 31 May 13 - 07:41 AM

If I understand correctly the decsion of the judge in this matter, the contents of the victim's cellphone (the photos and text messages in question) are irrelevant because the accused claims that it was the victim's behaviour *in the moments before the fatal shots were fired* that led him to fear for his life. The accused could not have known what photos and texts were on the victim's cellphone at that time, so those materials could not have influenced his interpretation of the victim's behaviour.

The judge's decision to exclude the photos and texts makes the ex-employee's act worse than a breach of discipline; it amounts to contempt of court, definitely a firing offence.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: beardedbruce
Date: 31 May 13 - 07:54 AM

More than contempt of court-

The problem is that the LAW requires the prosecution to provide ALL the evidence to the Defense- IN ALL CASES.

Just because "everyone" has already decided the outcome of the trial does NOT excuse this obvious violation of the defendant's rights.

Regardless of whether the evidence is relevant, it MUST be made available to the defense. The relevance is for the JUDGE to decide, and the defense has the right to appeal if it thinks otherwise.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: GUEST,gillymor
Date: 31 May 13 - 08:13 AM

Huffington Post.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: beardedbruce
Date: 31 May 13 - 08:26 AM

THAT was out over a year ago.

By THIS illegal attempt to withhold evidence from the defense, the entire case might be thrown out, and NO trail to determine the facts would occur.

Is that to be preferred????

Regardless of one's opinion of the shooting, it deserves to be tried in a fair, legal fashion, without opening up unwarranted areas for appeals or declarations of mistrial


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: GUEST,gillymor
Date: 31 May 13 - 08:55 AM

and then hang him.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: beardedbruce
Date: 31 May 13 - 09:01 AM

You and the Red Queen....



Hang him FIRST, THEN have the trial.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: GUEST,gillymor
Date: 31 May 13 - 09:30 AM

He has the right to a fair hearing. I just hope this racist, wannabe cop doesn't walk on a technicality. On that first 911 tape it's pretty obvious he was itching to mete out some justice to an "asshole" in a hoodie.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: beardedbruce
Date: 31 May 13 - 09:35 AM

It is actions such as this, violating his rights, that WILL lead to those "technicalities"


EVERYONE should agree that the trial needs to be fair and legal.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Elmore
Date: 31 May 13 - 11:10 AM

Sounds like the defense wants to blame the victim. Same old story.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: beardedbruce
Date: 31 May 13 - 11:14 AM

So that makes it OK to violate the law?

IS THAT THE LIBERAL VIEWPOINT????


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: GUEST
Date: 31 May 13 - 11:54 AM

It ain't this liberal's viewpoint. As you noted earlier, if there are technicalities like this one popping up then he will get off.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: beardedbruce
Date: 31 May 13 - 11:56 AM

Thank you, Guest. I had assumed that there were some intelligent people here that could see the obvious, but was beginning to wonder.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Bobert
Date: 31 May 13 - 12:35 PM

Zimmerman sees Martin...

Zimmerman calls police...

Police tell Zimmerman to remain in his vehicle...

Zimmerman disobeys police order...

Zimmerman kills Martin...

That's the case... Not pictures in Martin's cell phone...

What Zimmerman's attorney is trying to do is equivalent to blaming a rape victim for the way she looked...

This defense is shameful, immoral and should backfire on Zimmerman...

B~


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: beardedbruce
Date: 31 May 13 - 12:39 PM

So, Bobert,

YOU think that it is ok to violate the law when YOU think someone is guilty? YOU want to have him get odd because that law was violated?

THAT is what this thread is about- NOT his innocence or guilt, but the illegal actions of those, like you , that have decided it does not matter if he gets a fair or legal trial.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Greg F.
Date: 31 May 13 - 12:53 PM

You're getting overexcited again, Beardy, and somewhat incoherent as a result. Also not good for your blood pressure, you know.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: KB in Iowa
Date: 31 May 13 - 12:56 PM

"Nelson has set a full hearing on the turning over of evidence for next week."

Seems to me we should wait for the ruling from this hearing before we decide if any laws were violated, don't you think?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: beardedbruce
Date: 31 May 13 - 01:08 PM

It is NOT important whether the evidence is permitted or not- THE FACT THAT IT WAS WITHHELD FROM THE DEFENSE is the legal point here.


The Judge can certainly disallow this evidence- BUT IT STILL HAS TO BE AVAILABLE TO THE DEFENSE, even if it is NOT allowed at the trial. The Prosecution is NOT allowed to decide what it turns over.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Elmore
Date: 31 May 13 - 01:28 PM

Nobody thinks this guy shouldn't get a fair trial. Furthermore, if he gets off on a technicality, so be it. Despite some obvious exceptions, I have a great deal of faith in the jury system. However, I don't see the purpose of the thread, unless it was to irritate those of us who see a good deal of bigotry in our law enforcement and politics in this country and are sick and tired of it.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: KB in Iowa
Date: 31 May 13 - 01:35 PM

It is NOT important whether the evidence is permitted or not- THE FACT THAT IT WAS WITHHELD FROM THE DEFENSE is the legal point here.


The Judge can certainly disallow this evidence- BUT IT STILL HAS TO BE AVAILABLE TO THE DEFENSE, even if it is NOT allowed at the trial. The Prosecution is NOT allowed to decide what it turns over.


Is it not possible that the judge will determine that this particular 'evidence' was not germaine to the case and was therefore not something that needed to be turned over to the defense?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: beardedbruce
Date: 31 May 13 - 01:37 PM

"Former prosecutor Wesley White said he was ethically obligated to reveal that Fourth Judicial Circuit Information Technology Director Ben Kruidbos retrieved the data that weren't turned over.

White said he wasn't surprised of possible evidence violations by Zimmerman prosecutor Bernie de la Rionda.

"I was saddened by it, but I'm not surprised," he said.

....
"I'm an officer of the court and I'm obliged to inform the court of any misconduct or any potential misconduct coming before the court. Whether it's by the defense or prosecution," White said.






We have an example of an honest man ( the former prosecutor) seeing a potential miscarraige of justice ( if Zimmerman is let off because of the actions taken by the prosecution), and most in this thread turn around and jump on the defendant.

If THAT is an example of the " faith in the jury system" then maybe some need to be irritated. Why not just string him up from the nearest tree, since Bobert has already declared him guilty, and sees no need for the law to be followed in this case?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: beardedbruce
Date: 31 May 13 - 01:39 PM

KB,

That is what JUDGES do, NOT the prosecutors.


If YOU were in court, would YOU want the prosecutor to be able to withhold evidence that YOU DON'T KNOW about, and NOT have a judge rule on it?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: KB in Iowa
Date: 31 May 13 - 01:46 PM

"Nelson has set a full hearing on the turning over of evidence for next week."

I post the above again as a reference.

I will wait to see what the judge has to say in the hearing before deciding what really happened here. You see, I do have some faith in the system and am willing to let it play out.

Does the system always work? Of course not, I am just not ready to assume that in this case it has already failed.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: beardedbruce
Date: 31 May 13 - 01:50 PM

My concern is that it is OK for it to fail, in the posts of so many here that I would not trust to remain out of a lynch mob.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: GUEST
Date: 31 May 13 - 02:14 PM

'The Judge can certainly disallow this evidence- BUT IT STILL HAS TO BE AVAILABLE TO THE DEFENSE, even if it is NOT allowed at the trial. The Prosecution is NOT allowed to decide what it turns over.'

Bingo, BB. An' that's the truth!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: KB in Iowa
Date: 31 May 13 - 02:17 PM

'The Judge can certainly disallow this evidence- BUT IT STILL HAS TO BE AVAILABLE TO THE DEFENSE, even if it is NOT allowed at the trial. The Prosecution is NOT allowed to decide what it turns over.'

Bingo, BB. An' that's the truth!


Again, I will let the judge be the judge of that.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: GUEST,Futwick
Date: 31 May 13 - 02:22 PM

What is the point of this? It will go to trial soon enough and a judge can decide what's what. This thread seems to me to be nothing than stupid trolling.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: YorkshireYankee
Date: 31 May 13 - 02:40 PM

I'm with Bruce on this. Withholding evidence is unethical and unfair, whether done by the defense, the prosecution, the police or whoever.

I've been on the receiving end of such unethical treament in the past, and I won't soon forget it.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Elmore
Date: 31 May 13 - 02:54 PM

Trolled again, damn it. Is this the same individual using different names?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: GUEST,Futwick
Date: 31 May 13 - 03:20 PM

I guess people can't read. IT IS NOT FOR US TO DECIDE THIS. THE CASE IS GOING TO TRIAL AND GODDAMN JUDGE WILL DECIDE ON THIS CASE. TAKE IT UP WITH HIM!!

Are we clear now?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Greg F.
Date: 31 May 13 - 03:21 PM

However, I don't see the purpose of the thread,


There is none. Beardy doesn't have to have a purpose to post nonsensical crap ad nauseum.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: GUEST,gillymor
Date: 31 May 13 - 03:29 PM

I hear you Fut, but the real trial is the one that BB is conducting on all us liberal hypocrites. Basically it's the same show trial he conducts on most threads. He assigns us all one opinion and then tries to convict us all for it. He only has middling prosecutorial skills but can cut and paste blindfolded.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: GUEST
Date: 31 May 13 - 03:31 PM

". . . GODDAMN JUDGE WILL DECIDE ON THIS CASE. TAKE IT UP WITH HIM!!"

What if it ends up being a female judge? Huh? HUH?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Greg F.
Date: 31 May 13 - 03:34 PM

BLINDFOLDED? Hell, he can cut and paste mountains of bullshit IN HIS SLEEP!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: GUEST
Date: 31 May 13 - 03:40 PM

In this instance he's right.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Bobert
Date: 31 May 13 - 07:19 PM

Lets do a little review...

Zimmerman sees Martin and calls police...

Police dispatcher tells Zimmerman to stay in his vehicle and that real cops were on the way...

Zimmerman disobeys police and gets out of vehicle with a gun...

Zimmerman kills Martin...

That's the case here, folks...

What pictures are/were on Martin's phone have nothing to do with the facts...

Seems that Zimmerman's lawyer is trying to use a defense that if it were a rape the victim would be blames for looking good...

This is a very distasteful defense...

B~


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: YorkshireYankee
Date: 31 May 13 - 08:07 PM

Bobert, you've got me all confused, now!

I thought it was the prosecution withholding this evidence 'cos they didn't want the defense to even know about it. Am I wrong on this?

Thing is, if it's not right to withhold evidence, it's not right to withhold evidence - regardless of whether you think it will help a scumbag/hurt a victim (or vice versa).

Whether that evidence is allowed in to be heard during the trial is a separate issue entirely and - as has been pointed out - up to the judge.

Similarly, Nazis (in the US) have the right to freedom of speech, however distasteful I consider what they say (my background is Jewish).

I'm a liberal leftie, but we can't have one set of rules for those we like/approve of and another for those we don't. I'm also one of those who think that Zimmerman sounds like a sleazebag and was clearly not justified in what he did - but that still does not justify the prosecution withholding evidence that they're afraid might help his defense.

Just sayin'... :7)


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Bobert
Date: 31 May 13 - 08:11 PM

What I am getting out of this is that Zimmerman's lawyer wants to use photographs on Martin's phone as evidence from before the incident that Martin deserved to be murdered...

B~


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: GUEST
Date: 31 May 13 - 09:14 PM

"BY KYLE HIGHTOWER
ASSOCIATED PRESS
ORLANDO, Fla. -- A court employee who retrieved photos and deleted text messages from Trayvon Martin's cellphone has been placed on administrative leave after an attorney testified that prosecutors didn't properly turn over the evidence to the defense, an attorney said Wednesday.

Former prosecutor Wesley White said he was ethically obligated to reveal that Fourth Judicial Circuit Information Technology Director Ben Kruidbos retrieved the data that weren't turned over.

Kruidbos was placed on leave shortly after White testified during a hearing in George Zimmerman's second-degree murder case on Tuesday. White said Kruidbos was interviewed by state attorney investigators twice before the action was taken.

White said he wasn't surprised of possible evidence violations by Zimmerman prosecutor Bernie de la Rionda."

Part of the article BB was getting the info from. Read the article at

http://www.miamiherald.com/2013/05/29/3422519/lawyer-zimmerman-prosecutor-withheld.html


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 31 May 13 - 09:21 PM

What an incomprehensible report. What kind of people do the Miami Herald employ to make such a dog's dinner of it?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 31 May 13 - 09:21 PM

What an incomprehensible report. What kind of people do the Miami Herald employ to make such a dog's dinner of it?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Bobert
Date: 31 May 13 - 09:48 PM

This is a sideshow that Zimmerman's attorney is using to lay a big old smoke screen over the trial...

O.J. who???

B~


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: GUEST,TIA
Date: 01 Jun 13 - 08:39 PM

Bobert has explained it in terms that anyone can understand.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Bobert
Date: 01 Jun 13 - 08:56 PM

Thank you, TIA...

The last 20 years of my working life when I was in business for myself I had to represent my company in court at least a couple dozen times and had a reputation of destroying local attorneys in court... I never lost a case... No brag, just fact...

The law is pretty simple...

The way that attorneys practice it ain't...

But when you just strip off all the shit they pile on then you win...

Zimmerman's attorney is piling on truckload after truckload of shit...

Prosecution should be able to shovel all the shit off the facts...

All depends on the judge... If the judge is some Southern racist, he or she will allow Zimmerman's attorney to put Martin's prior pics from his cell phone into evidence...

If he isn't a racist then he'll disallow...

Pretty simple stuff here...

B~


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: GUEST
Date: 01 Jun 13 - 10:39 PM

Good Christ.

The prosecution is not allowed to keep any information it hopes to use from the defense. That's the law. It was instituted to prevent just such happening. You all are entitled to your respective opinions, but you are NOT entitled to interpret law in anyway that harms the accused. That's it, that's all.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: YorkshireYankee
Date: 02 Jun 13 - 12:22 AM

"What I am getting out of this is that Zimmerman's lawyer wants to use photographs on Martin's phone as evidence from before the incident that Martin deserved to be murdered..."

Bobert, I agree with you that Zimmerman's defense should not be allowed to use that information. The judge in the case should not allow it.

BUT... look at it this way: who do you think should be in charge of whether evidence is allowable in court or not: people like the prosecution and defense - who have a definite interest in wanting the case to go a certain way - or the judge, who is at least supposed to be impartial?

If you want the judge to have this power, then he must be aware of all the evidence, and both defense and prosecution must make whatever evidence they have available to the court. If you don't require both defense & prosecution to turn over all their evidence, then you are leaving the decision in their extremely partial hands (now there's an interesting image!) - and they are much less likely to be impartial than the judge.

For example: if you, Bobert, have been charged with running over some poor kittycat, and the prosecution find photos on the kitty's cellphone showing you playing happily with said kitty, do you want them to be the ones who get to decide whether that information is/is not "relevant" enough to be included in the information presented in the trial? Or would you rather have the judge make that call?

I have personal experience of police and prosecution working together to withhold evidence (even though that is illegal) which would have proved I was innocent, and I can tell you that letting one side or the other control what evidence comes to light is not the way to go. Make both sides reveal everything they know, and let a (hopefully impartial) judge decide what the jury gets to hear.

(Of course, if the judge is not impartial, then there's very little hope for anything resembling a fair trial, but that's not the issue under discussion here...)


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 02 Jun 13 - 06:27 AM

Sorry Bobert, but on this one I have to agree with Yorkshire Yankee.

If the rule says all evidence known to the prosecution must also be known to the defence, then that is what should happen.

I am inclined to think that the rule itself is wrong, but, umtil it is revoked it must be obeyed.

The judge will have the final word and will be aware of the likely effect on a jury, so the decision will be based on his assessment of that effect.

He will, if honest, rule it inadmissible, on the basis that Trayvon Martin is not on trial.

If US law is anything like UK law, the prosecution will not be allowed to evince evidence of Zimmerman's previous record until and unless a guilty verdict is returned.

Therefore it would be unfair to allow Martin's character to be blackened by the defence, using evidence outwith the scope of the incident being tried.

Still, the bottom line is, the prosecution were out of order in failing to pass on that evidence.

Don T.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Bobert
Date: 02 Jun 13 - 09:32 AM

This all boils down to what is "evidence"...

Let's say that Sallie got pregnant in high school by one of the football players and ended up getting an abortion...

Ten years later she is raped by someone else...

Should the high school incident be admissible "evidence" that she deserved to be raped???

So back to Martin...

Will either of you tell me why you think that pictures on Martin's cell phone that were taken prior to his murder that had NOTHING to do with his murder is "evidence" in the case???

I mean, "evidence" is about the facts surrounding a crime... It's not a fishing expedition thru a victim's past life...

I disagree with both of you... And I trust that any reasonable judge will tell Zimmerman's lawyer to stick with the case at hand...

This "discovery" is way beyond the any sane interpretation of "evidence"...

B~


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: dick greenhaus
Date: 02 Jun 13 - 12:54 PM

The sanity or lack of same of potential evidence is to be decided by the judge---not the prosecutor and certainly not by Bobert.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: YorkshireYankee
Date: 02 Jun 13 - 01:57 PM

No, Bobert, the high school incident absolutely should NOT be considered admissible evidence. And I, too, trust that "any reasonable judge will tell Zimmerman's lawyer to stick with the case at hand".

BUT, this is not about whether those photos are admissible evidence.

What it is about is: WHO DECIDES whether or not they are admissible?

Do you want interested parties to determine whether or not something is admissibe - or someone who is supposed to be neutral? (Defence and prosecution are not even supposed to be neutral - it's their job not to be.)

The discovery IS evidence - just not admissible evidence concerning this case. But the prosecution should not be the one(s) to make that decision. I don't wish to just blithely trust they will resist the temptation to ignore evidence that undermines their argument(s). (Likewise, I don't trust the defense to do so, either.)

Here's a thought experiment: lets pretend there are texts on Sallie's phone saying she is angry at the defendant and has decided to punish him by accusing him of rape. Do you want the prosecution to be legally allowed to decide this is "inadmissible evidence"?

I would prefer to have the judge decide.

The same law which helps someone who is innocent one day may well do the opposite on another (or even the very same) day.

Our laws (are supposed to) help protect nasty, guilty scumbags as well as innocent people - because we are fallible and don't necessarily know which is which.

Trying to be fair means you legally must treat people the same way, whether you think they "deserve" it or not. Does this make any sense to you yet?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 02 Jun 13 - 02:15 PM

AMEN to that YY!

Don T.

P.S. I too hope this scumbag gets his comeupance, but honestly, not by prosecutors making decisions which are not theirs to make.

Don T.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Greg F.
Date: 02 Jun 13 - 03:17 PM

A bullet from the back of a bush
Took Medgar Evers' blood
A finger fired the trigger to his name
A handle hid out in the dark
A hand set the spark
Two eyes took the aim
Behind a man's brain...

But he sure as hell can be blamed.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 02 Jun 13 - 05:23 PM

Of course the fact that a jurge rules stuff inadmissable doesn't stop jurors being fully aware of it. And the American system does appear to allow the lawyers an awful lot of leeway to make sure that they are so aware.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Bobert
Date: 02 Jun 13 - 07:16 PM

Here's the deal...

What Zimmerman's attorney is getting away with amounts to prejudicing perspective jurors and thus creating a scenario for a mistrial... The judge should put a gag order on both the defense and the prosecutor so that it will be possible to seat a jury that won't be prejudiced based on what is being released in the news...

That is the way it is done...

I'm sniffing O.J., Part II and frankly don't give a rip what anyone here thinks about my observations... I know the law pretty good, ya'll... Better, I'd say, than the folks here who think they know the law...

B~


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Bobert
Date: 02 Jun 13 - 07:46 PM

BTW, YY... You one one hand admits that the incident with the high school woman shouldn't be considered "evidence" but on the other hand saying that you are okay with some judge down the road should choose what is evidence and what is not...

The issue is that Zimmerman's attorneys are using the public media to introduce what they want, regardless of it's value, in an attempt to poison the jury pool...

This ain't Perry "F'n" Mason here... Common sense tells anyone with an IQ on the plus side of an animal cracker that the pics taken days before Martin was murdered by Martin and of Martin could not have 1 chance in a trillion gazillion of having any bearing on his murder...

Same exact scenario with the girl in high school...

This is what racism looks like...

The entire system is doing a rope-a-dope to get Zimmerman off...

There will be no fair trial... That is now guaranteed... Zimmerman's hired guns have shot that possibility to hell and back...

This is the worst of the American justice system... It looks rigged...

B~


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 02 Jun 13 - 08:57 PM

Some of these US lawyers seem to play it very dirty indeed, and get away with it scot free.

I googled Zimmerman and up came this:

George Zimmerman's attorneys apologize for mischaracterizing evidence

...Lawyer Mark O'Mara said during a hearing last Tuesday that the defense had obtained video footage of three fights, including one in which he said two of Martin's friends "were beating up a homeless guy."

But Zimmerman's defense team corrected that statement on Sunday, saying O'Mara had unintentionally "misstated the nature" of the footage. In a statement posted on Zimmerman's website, the defense lawyers said the footage actually showed "two homeless guys fighting each other over a bike...."


"Unintentionally misstated". "Pigs seen flying low over Florida courthouse..."


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Bobert
Date: 02 Jun 13 - 09:03 PM

Yes, this is the way it is played, McG...

The attorney puts out the shit bomb and then says, "Gee, sorry"...

This is like a boxer who hits low until the ref calls him and then says, "Gee, sorry"...

This was all intentional on Zimmerman's attorney's part... ALL!!!

It is intended to poison the jury pool just the way that Johnny Cockran did it in the O.J. trial...

B~


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: YorkshireYankee
Date: 03 Jun 13 - 11:53 AM

"BTW, YY... You one one hand admits that the incident with the high school woman shouldn't be considered "evidence" but on the other hand saying that you are okay with some judge down the road should choose what is evidence and what is not..."

So, Bobert... if not the judge, then who? Let the prosecution and defense decide for themselves? Sorry, but I trust them even less than I trust "some judge down the road". Is there someone else you would suggest? Problem is, the decision will be made by someone - even if it's just by default/not specifying who.

Sadly, in practice (as opposed to theory), the question is not so much "Who do you trust most to do the right thing?" but rather "Who do you mistrust least?".

I agree with you and McG of H that it stinks that "The attorney puts out the shit bomb and then says, "Gee, sorry"...".
That does poison the jury pool, and should not be allowed.
But - when it comes down to it - that is (yet another) separate issue.


As I see it, we have the following issues that we've been discussing:
1) Should it be legal to withhold evidence?
2) Who should decide what evidence is admissible?
3) How do you keep inadmissible evidence out of the media/public domain?

These issues all affect each other and it can be hard to tell where one begins and the other ends.

The answer to 3 does not have an easy solution (as if any of them do...). The judge putting a gag order on both defense and prosecution is an idea I like. Sadly, that hasn't happened this time. Why not, I can guess, but can't honestly say I know. Perhaps we should have a law requiring such gag orders rather than leaving it up to the judge in a case.

Some countries do not allow media to report such kinds of developments in a trial until the jury has been selected or sequestered - or even until the trial is over. There's much to be said for that approach, although questions of Freedom of Speech arise, and can be very complicated to sort through.

I agree with you both (and many others) that it's appalling and unfair, and that in our country (the US) the outcome of a trial is much more likely to be decided by
1) how much money you have available
and
2) whether you're a member of the majority or of a minority
(and in that order) than by your actual guilt or innocence, which is disgraceful.

But I still do not wish to give the defense or the prosecution the legal OK to withhold any evidence they don't like.

I repeat my question above: who do you think should be allowed to decide whether evidence is relevant/admissible?

This is not an attack. I am genuinely interested in your answer to that question. I'm open to the possibility that you have a solution that hasn't occurred to me and is fairer than the current setup.

Cheers,

YY


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 03 Jun 13 - 01:11 PM

So the ethical thing for the defence lawyer would have been to ensure that the relevant judge received and considered the evidence, but done so in such a way that it woulld be kept in confidence, and not revealed to the public.

The question of whether the proescution ought to have passed it to the defence is another matter. But in the light of the unethcal conduct demonstrated by the defence lawyers it would make much more sense for it to be revealed to the judge to pass to the defence if it was determined as relevant.

But maybe commnsense in such matters is as absent as ethics.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: beardedbruce
Date: 03 Jun 13 - 01:19 PM

" A court employee who retrieved photos and deleted text messages from Trayvon Martin's cellphone has been placed on administrative leave after an attorney testified that prosecutors didn't properly turn over the evidence to the defense, an attorney said Wednesday.

Former prosecutor Wesley White said he was ethically obligated to reveal that Fourth Judicial Circuit Information Technology Director Ben Kruidbos retrieved the data that weren't turned over.

....

White led the Nassau County state attorney's office before resigning in December, citing differences of opinion with Corey. He is now in private practice.

White said the photos Kruidbos retrieved were of a hand holding a gun and one depicted drugs. The content of the text messages wasn't specified.

"I'm an officer of the court and I'm obliged to inform the court of any misconduct or any potential misconduct coming before the court. Whether it's by the defense or prosecution," White said."


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Bobert
Date: 03 Jun 13 - 01:27 PM

The answer to your question, YY can be found in my 7:16PM post last night... The judge should have put both the defense and prosecutor under a gag order... He obviously didn't and Zimmerman's attorney took advantage of it...

This is where my problem is with the way this case is being conducted... That is irresponsible on the judge's part... Heck, once the trial begins I don't give a rat's ass what evidence people try to introduce as if the judge say's "Hey, this ain't evidence" then the jury may not hear any of it or very little of it before the judge tells them to "disregard"...

But what is happening is that the initial phase of the trial has begun in public and in a case of this stature there is no way in hell that the jury pool isn't being poisoned...

That is wrong... It is immoral... It is not fair to Trevon Martin or his family... I mean, they don't get to appeal if Zimmerman's attorney pulls a Johnny Cochran and get's this guy off by some very unethical trickery...

So I hold the judge at fault right now... He needs to assert Travon's Martin's rights, too... And he isn't doing that...

Like I said earlier... If you get some judge who has pretty much made up his or her mind they might let something slide... You have to remember that in the South lots of judges are elected and, where you might not like it, have partisan views of things...

B~


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: GUEST,Don Wise
Date: 03 Jun 13 - 01:37 PM

Like it or not, the sad truth is that in both the US and the UK innocent people are doing life or rotting on Death Row because the prosecution- police, DA etc.- DELIBERATELY withheld evidence which would have helped the case for the defence.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: YorkshireYankee
Date: 03 Jun 13 - 05:33 PM

McGrath of Harlow, Bobert, and Don - I agree with all of your most recent posts.

The reason I have such strong feelings about the wrongness of withholding evidence is that (as I mentioned before) I have sad experience (here in the U.K.) of being on the receiving end of withheld evidence (and of a judge who had already made up his mind).

My husband and I fought a speeding ticket (my husband knows his physics and realised that the camera which "caught" us speeding was set on a curve, which made its calculations inaccurate).

We didn't have a lot of money (couldn't afford a solicitor), but my husband firmly believed that the British system of justice is one of the best in the world, and was sure that we would get a fair hearing. What we experienced was a real eye-opener, and included a number of... "irregularities", including withholding of evidence (of various types) the laws say we were entitled to.

We kept fighting/appealing (against the advice of both sets of parents) because we believed it would be wrong to just knuckle under - even when we began to see just how overwhelmingly the deck is stacked against anyone without the money to make the system work in their favor.

We were found guilty and ordered to pay £15,000 court costs - which we did not have - so eventually filed for bankruptcy.

I know what happened to us is nothing, nothing, nothing! compared to what is happening to Trayvon - and has happened to so many other people. My sense of outrage - for them as well as for myself - remains.

(Note: I've tried to keep my account brief. I have written - in greater detail - on Mudcat about it once before; if you're interested, you can find it in this thread/post.)

But - that is why anyone arguing in favor of withholding evidence hits a very sore spot for me. Overall, I think we all agree that the "system" is not working as it should (to put it mildly) - in the US, and in many other places as well. Even more distressing is that there are many, many more places where it's much, much worse.

The BIG question is - how do we change things so they are fair?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Bobert
Date: 03 Jun 13 - 08:19 PM

Well, YY... I am sorry that you got screwed by the system in the UK... And you did get screwed... Bankruptcy for speeding ticket is unreal...

This is the kind of kangaroo court system that I am scared of here in the US...

90% of people here in the US think that O.J. Simpson killed his ex-wife... Okay, maybe 97%???

But he got away with it...

That's what I don't want to see here with Zimmerman...

Again, the case is just this simple:

1. Zimmerman sees Martin...

2. Zimmerman call police...

3. Police tell Zimmerman to stay in his vehicle...

4. Zimmerman ignores police...

5. Zimmerman murders Martin...

THE END...

B~


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: YorkshireYankee
Date: 03 Jun 13 - 10:13 PM

Bobert, I do understand what you're saying, and very much share your concerns.

My thought/hope is that the (potential) "silver lining" at this point, is that if Zimmerman is found "not guilty", there are grounds for a mistrial - on the basis that (as you put it) "the waters have been poisoned" - making a fair trial pretty near impossible.

Maybe it could even end up in the Supreme Court and set a precedent...

P.S.
Thanks for the kind words. I'm convinced they played extra dirty in our case because if we won, it would have set a precedent (about certain kinds of speed cameras set on curves being inaccurate - all over the country), and opened them up to possible lawsuits due to many previous fines, lost licenses, etc becoming questionable - which would have cost them huge amounts of £££. (BTW, £15,000 = $25-30,000)


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 04 Jun 13 - 09:02 AM

The key question is how far the obligation of disclosure extends.

Plainly there will have been some things on Martin's phone that would NOT have been evidence in this trial. For example if some weeks before his death he had been texting friends to arrange to go to see a film or a band - that would be completely irrelevant to the trial, and so under UK rules not obliged to be disclosed.

Equally, as Bobert says, material that might or might not have shown Martin with a gun or with drugs weeks before the night in question cannot possibly be evidence of anything happening on the night in question. What they might be is evidence of bad character and I would have thought that would clearly not be admissible - and so not evidence of relevance to the case.

It's interesting that (AFAIK) Zimmerman is still not relying on "Stand Your Ground" laws - is he?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: beardedbruce
Date: 04 Jun 13 - 11:00 AM

So, Bobert,

Since YOU know he is guilty of murder ( from the news releases)
WHY NOT JUST find a tree and lynch him?

Why have any trial at all? Why look at the evidence? Why bother risking a JURY might let him go?

Is that what you are saying???

The point of this thread is that the PROSECUTION is not acting in accord with the law, REGARDLESS OF THE CASE.

This is a reason for mistrial, and LETTING HIM OFF.


DO YOU WANT HIM TO GET OFF EVEN IF HE IS GUILTY?????


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: beardedbruce
Date: 04 Jun 13 - 11:10 AM

And what IF a text that was kept from the defense was like this:

"I'm gonna check out *** house, and see what I can take. And if anybody gets in my way, I'll beat the shit outta him."

Sure want to be sure that the defense can't get anything like that- why , the lynching might not go as Bobert wants.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: beardedbruce
Date: 04 Jun 13 - 11:16 AM

And as for "poisoning the jury pool", I think the existing press coverage has done so quite well. Just look at Bobert not even needing a trial or evidence to declare it a murder,

I would bet that if the defendent was Black, and the victim white, most here would insist that he was "innocent until PROVEN guilty".


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Greg F.
Date: 04 Jun 13 - 11:16 AM

Why have any trial at all? Why look at the evidence? Why bother risking a JURY might let him go?

Is that what you are saying???


No, that's what YOU'RE saying, Beardy, or rather shouting/ranting.

I haven't read anything by Bobert that says or remotely implies any of your screed.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: beardedbruce
Date: 04 Jun 13 - 11:28 AM

Greggie,

And I have not read anything you have posted that contributes to the thread.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Bobert
Date: 04 Jun 13 - 11:30 AM

I have no problems with having a trial... I just don't want it to be "O.J.'d" where there is no, ahhhhh, justice...

Isn't justice what all of us want???

Is justice too much to ask...

I mean, our country isn't that far removed from the Greensboro Massacre when the Klan gunned down 5 unarmed peaceful protestors and got away with it... That was in 1979 and most of us here were around then...

B~


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: beardedbruce
Date: 04 Jun 13 - 11:31 AM

*IF* Bobert sees no reason to require the prosecution TO FOLLOW THE LAW in this case, I see no difference between him and those who lynch people they are "sure" ( from news reports) have committed some crime.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Bobert
Date: 04 Jun 13 - 11:32 AM

Oh, and for the record??? Yes, based on what evidence has been made public I believe that Zimmerman is guilty of murder...

He was told by the police to stay in his car... He didn't...

B~


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Bobert
Date: 04 Jun 13 - 11:35 AM

Where did you come up with bit of mythology, bruce???

I want everyone to not only follow the law but ***RESPECT*** it as, as well... Zimmerman's attorney is not respecting the law here any more than Johnny Cochran did in the O.J. trial...

Garbage in = garbage out...

B~


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: beardedbruce
Date: 04 Jun 13 - 11:36 AM

(crosspostd)

"Isn't justice what all of us want???"


If by justice you mean that people get fair trials according to the law, I agree.

If by justice you mean that the people YOU have decided are guilty have their rights reduced, and are NOT given the benefit of a fair trail, but are punished based on news reports, I do not agree.


He may or may not have a valid defense ( I suspect not) but he deserves a FAIR TRIAL, with the prosecution playing ACCORDING to the LAW.

Otherwise, it is a lynching.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: beardedbruce
Date: 04 Jun 13 - 11:44 AM

From th OP:

" prosecutors didn't properly turn over the evidence to the defense,"


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 04 Jun 13 - 11:57 AM

"Fair trial" and "according to the law" are not the same things.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: beardedbruce
Date: 04 Jun 13 - 12:04 PM

""Fair trial" and "according to the law" are not the same things."

It is possible for a trial to be according to the law, and NOT fair, but I do not see how a trial could be fair and NOT according to the law.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: KB in Iowa
Date: 04 Jun 13 - 01:13 PM

From th OP:

" prosecutors didn't properly turn over the evidence to the defense,"


This is a quote by "Former prosecutor Wesley White" who felt the need to say that his disclosure to the defense isn't sparked by any animosity toward his former employer.

If says there is no animosity then it must be true, right? It could be true, I don't know.

Was this evidence that should have been turned over? I don't know, a Judge will decide that.

I must say that I tend to agree with Bobert until just shy of the end. I think Zimmerman is clearly resposible for Martin's death but he may not be guilty of a crime. The Stand Your Ground law means that if Martin did turn on Zimmerman and make him feel threatened for his safety then Zimmerman could be in the right legally. I believe Martin would have to have started the actual altercation for that to be true but don't remember for sure how the law reads on that. It is a terrible law but there it is.

Too bad Martin isn't here to give his version of the events.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: beardedbruce
Date: 04 Jun 13 - 01:18 PM

"I think Zimmerman is clearly resposible for Martin's death but he may not be guilty of a crime."

Agreed.


From OP:


"Former prosecutor Wesley White said he was ethically obligated to reveal that Fourth Judicial Circuit Information Technology Director Ben Kruidbos retrieved the data that weren't turned over.

Kruidbos was placed on leave shortly after White testified during a hearing in George Zimmerman's second-degree murder case on Tuesday. White said Kruidbos was interviewed by state attorney investigators twice before the action was taken.

White said he wasn't surprised of possible evidence violations by Zimmerman prosecutor Bernie de la Rionda.

"I was saddened by it, but I'm not surprised," he said.

White first learned about the evidence through Kruidbos more than a month ago, he said.
...
White led the Nassau County state attorney's office before resigning in December, citing differences of opinion with Corey. He is now in private practice."


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Bill D
Date: 04 Jun 13 - 01:29 PM

I would like to be in the courtroom when they attempt to impanel an 'impartial' jury. I halfway expect Zimmerman to get off, no matter what the 'truth' is, because he could not GET a 'fair' trial.
At worst, I predict a verdict of 'involuntary manslaughter' and a year or two sentence.

No one but Zimmerman knows exactly what happened that night, but *I* know that if a large guy in plain clothes and followed ME around and tried to 'confront' me...even when I tried to avoid him.. *I* would resist his advances and might even, if I could, bang HIS head on the ground if he wouldn't leave me alone! I don't think that would give him the right to shoot me 'in self-defense'.....and all this I believe no matter what is deemed as 'evidence' but some judge. There IS a difference between 'data' and 'relevant evidence', and I hope both judge & jury realize this.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: KB in Iowa
Date: 04 Jun 13 - 02:10 PM

bb - I am saying it is possible this has all come about because White has an axe to grind so went public with some info. Is his take on the situation accurate? I do not know, but all of this started with his revelation about a situation that may turn out to be much ado about nothing.

White claims ths was not fueled by animosity, that could be true, could be false. Again, I don't know and neither do any of the rest of us here.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 04 Jun 13 - 05:52 PM

""And I have not read anything you have posted that contributes to the thread.""

I have long suspected that you only read the posts of people you think you might browbeat into submission.

You've picked a wrong'un with Bobz. He doesn't browbeat worth a damn.

I agree with you that the evidence must be passed on under current rules. Therefore the prosecutors are wrong.

But, the rule should be what Bobert says, the evidence passed to the judge, who will decide, and pass it on if, and only if, admissible.

That is not lynch law, but recognition that in the US an honest lawyer is likely to be an oxymoron.

Not much better in the UK, among defence lawyers!

Don T.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 04 Jun 13 - 05:59 PM

""Too bad Martin isn't here to give his version of the events.""

It is precisely because he is not, that the trial must be conducted with the utmost rigour and strictly by the book, rather than being turned into the usual three ring circus of sleazy attempts to sway the Jury with inadmissible evidence and innuendo.

Don T.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 04 Jun 13 - 06:07 PM

Having said all that, I very much fear that the fix is already in!

Justice for a black teenager is still far from a certainty anywhere in the US, but especially in the South.

A Hispanic like Zimmerman would have received short shrift himself, had his victim not been black, rendering him a temporary white man.

Don T.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 04 Jun 13 - 06:26 PM

Zimerman's defense is based on self defense that is that he believed his life to be in danger and acted in self-defense. The only relevant evidence for that is proof of what Travon did THAT NIGHT that ZIMMERMAN PERSONALLY WITNESSED. As someone else said,


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 04 Jun 13 - 06:34 PM

The DELETED messages on TRAVON's cell phone could not have been part of ZIMMERMAN's thought process at the time.

Since ZIMMERMAN chose to stalk the boy, the claim of self-defense is dubious. If not for the "Stand your ground" law, I think Zimmerman would have a near impossible case. As it is, if issues of character are introduced, won't Zimmerman and his wife have to stand up and explain why they lied at their bail hearing?

I have no problem with the prosecutors deciding that the gun and weed pictures were not evidence in Zimmerman's defense. Since the prosecutors had no intent to use the pictures they were nothing buts irrelevant personal information.


Who decides which evidence is exculpatory? IMHO certainly NOT the tech who ran Norton utilities on the kid's cellphone. He certainly did deserve to be fired for that.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 04 Jun 13 - 07:29 PM

Hello? Is it no longer the case that Zimmrman has disavowed a "stand your ground" defence?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Bobert
Date: 04 Jun 13 - 07:30 PM

If the prosecutor is wrong then it would be right to use the past sex life of a rape victim as evidence...

This is all bullshit...

Tell me, anyone, how a picture that trevon took of himself a month before is fucking "evidence"???????????????????????????????????????

Or shut the fuck up about withheld so-called "evidence"...

Yes, beardedbruce... You brought this up... Use your wildest imagination on how these pics are relevant to the evidence in this case...

You can't and this is all 100% USDA Choice bullshit that allows the murder victim to become the bad guy...

This is a sick thread and a sick legal system that is tilted toward the rights of the murderer while trampling the rights of the murdered...

B~


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: GUEST,TIA
Date: 04 Jun 13 - 10:15 PM

Amen Bobert.
Someone please cite the statute that required disclosure of previous and deleted emails in discovery. I am not a lawyer.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 04 Jun 13 - 10:25 PM

" Is it no longer the case that Zimmrman has disavowed a "stand your ground" defense? "

I haven't heard that. But how could he? He stalked the kid, the kid died, shot with his gun. None of that is in dispute Without "stand your ground" he is not allowed to put himself into a situation where he confronts people while armed when he sees a threat. Without "Stand Your Ground" all he has is jury tampering and character assassination.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Greg F.
Date: 05 Jun 13 - 08:15 AM

Yes, beardedbruce... Use your wildest imagination

Should be no problem, his wildest imagination is the motivating factor behind most, if not all, of his threads.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 05 Jun 13 - 09:29 AM

I thought I'd seen, months back, that Z was running straight self-defence without reliance on local "stand your ground" statute. I have no time to look for it now.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: beardedbruce
Date: 05 Jun 13 - 09:33 AM

Bobert,

"Tell me, anyone, how a picture that trevon took of himself a month before is fucking "evidence"???????????????????????????????????????

Or shut the fuck up about withheld so-called "evidence"...

Yes, beardedbruce... You brought this up... Use your wildest imagination on how these pics are relevant to the evidence in this case...
"

My posts:


*IF* Bobert sees no reason to require the prosecution TO FOLLOW THE LAW in this case, I see no difference between him and those who lynch people they are "sure" ( from news reports) have committed some crime.




Date: 04 Jun 13 - 11:10 AM

And what IF a text that was kept from the defense was like this:

"I'm gonna check out *** house, and see what I can take. And if anybody gets in my way, I'll beat the shit outta him."

Sure want to be sure that the defense can't get anything like that- why , the lynching might not go as Bobert wants.



Such a text message MIGHT lead a reasonable jury to believe that Zimmerman was attacked, and that makes a difference, doesn't it?







"He stalked the kid, the kid died, shot with his gun."

OR

"He followed a suspected burglar, was attacked by the suspect, and in fear of his life while having his head pounded into the cement, shot the suspect with his gun"

Whether he showed good judgement in following the suspect I will not state- but THIS is as likely as any other scenario.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 05 Jun 13 - 09:38 AM

Zimmerman did waive a pre-trial hearing on Stand your ground - but has not absolutely waived it so it may come up at trial.

Make your own blicky

http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/04/30/17983728-zimmerman-waives-stand-your-ground-defense-for-now?lite


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 05 Jun 13 - 09:41 AM

Bruce, without "stand your ground" He has no business following "suspected burglers."


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: beardedbruce
Date: 05 Jun 13 - 09:52 AM

#######################################################################

"Whether he showed good judgement in following the suspect I will not state- but THIS is as likely as any other scenario."

#######################################################################


People do dumb things- that DOES NOT make them "murderers".


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: beardedbruce
Date: 05 Jun 13 - 09:58 AM

"A court employee who retrieved photos and deleted text messages from Trayvon Martin's cellphone has been placed on administrative leave after an attorney testified that prosecutors didn't properly turn over the evidence to the defense, an attorney said Wednesday."

NO FUCKING MENTION of how old the messages and photos were. They could have been deleted the day after the killing, for all we know.


But the resident lynch mob says they were too old to be evidence. Sounds like a 1940's Klan "trial" to me....

"We know he did it- so why bother with following the laws?"


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: beardedbruce
Date: 05 Jun 13 - 10:02 AM

Jack,

Ever hear the words "Neighborhood Watch"? What do you think they do? What do you think HE thought they did? WHAT HAVE THEY DONE IN THE PAST?????


He obviously had bad judgement- BUT THAT DOES NOT REMOVE a fear for his life ***IF*** he was having his head pounded into the pavement.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: KB in Iowa
Date: 05 Jun 13 - 10:23 AM

Ever hear the words "Neighborhood Watch"? What do you think they do? What do you think HE thought they did? WHAT HAVE THEY DONE IN THE PAST?????

Zimmerman was a one-man "Neighborhood Watch" who had been a bit of a pain to the local police in the past. This is what I read in the St. Pete Times in the weeks after the incident.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Greg F.
Date: 05 Jun 13 - 10:38 AM

1. Neighborhood watch people are not permitted to carry firearms in most cases, and in ALL cases are subject to the oversight and direction of law enforcement personnel.

Bruce, without "stand your ground" He has no business following "suspected burglers."

"Stand your ground" laws do not apply to someone behaving as Zimmerman did, if you read up on their provisions. That's in all probability why it wasn't tendered he & his lawyers knew it wouldn't fly. Evem WITH "stand your ground" he had no business following "suspected burglars" especially after being told not to do so by law enforcement.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 05 Jun 13 - 11:05 AM

>>People do dumb things- that DOES NOT make them "murderers". <<

The person picking the fight cannot claim "self defense" if it turns deadly. That is just common sense.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: beardedbruce
Date: 05 Jun 13 - 11:44 AM

"The person picking the fight cannot claim "self defense" if it turns deadly. That is just common sense."

So if Zimmerman yelled "stop" and Martin swung at him??? Who picked THAT fight?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: KB in Iowa
Date: 05 Jun 13 - 11:59 AM

So if Zimmerman yelled "stop" and Martin swung at him??? Who picked THAT fight?

In the real world Zimmerman for stalking Martin and then confronting him for no real reason and even though he had been told by the dispatcher not to. In Florida, who knows?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: beardedbruce
Date: 05 Jun 13 - 12:14 PM

"for no real reason"


There HAVE been reasons stated- but the lynch mob has ignored them.

. THOUGHT he was acting as a Neighborhood watch member. He saw someone HE thought was acting in a suspicious manner- WHICH HE CALLED IN. He made ( the bad) choice to follow the suspect, thinking he was in the process of committing a crime. Perhaps he yelled for him to stop- DO YOU KNOW OTHERWISE?

Z is now on the ground having his head beaten against the pavement.

WHAT WOULD YOU DO AT THAT POINT??????


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: beardedbruce
Date: 05 Jun 13 - 12:21 PM

Bobert, Please go back and read YOUR first post, and my reply. It seems you have never =bothered to read my replies, nor have you addressed the point of this thread. I restate:


Date: 31 May 13 - 12:39 PM

So, Bobert,

YOU think that it is ok to violate the law when YOU think someone is guilty? YOU want to have him get off because that law was violated?

THAT is what this thread is about- NOT his innocence or guilt, but the illegal actions of those, like you , that have decided it does not matter if he gets a fair or legal trial.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Greg F.
Date: 05 Jun 13 - 12:30 PM

Those aren't "reasons" Beardy - they're suppositions, BS and smoke.

As usual.

I suppose if he thought he was the Lone Ranger or Spiderman that would be just fine with you as well?

Does reality have no meaning for you?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Elmore
Date: 05 Jun 13 - 12:37 PM

As someone who has been horrified by lynchings and all sorts of murders perpetrated by racists and homophobes in my 72 years on earth, I deeply resent BB's continual use of the word lynching as applied to those of us who disagree with him. Christ, I don't even believe in capital punishment. I don't believe BB is using the word as a figure of speech. I believe he has some sort of fixation with lynching which needs to be addressed by mental health professionals.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: beardedbruce
Date: 05 Jun 13 - 12:42 PM

The law matters.

IF you "lynch" Zimmerman, and violate the law, he can be released and get off EVEN IF HE IS FOUND GUILTY.

I do not believe that this is what so many posters here WANT, but it is what they are supporting.

Then they can scream about how unjust and racist the system is, while the real problem is that they were willing to go along with ANYTHING that looked like a way to convict Zimmerman, regardless of it's legality.

THAT is "lynching" - violating the law in order to punish someone YOU think is guilty.

I do not judge whether Z. is guilty, (probably) but regardless, he deserves the same legal protections that ANY accused person should get. Deny him those protections, and you have NO reason to complain when the next accused person is railroaded into jail, or hung.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Elmore
Date: 05 Jun 13 - 01:03 PM

Lynching. There he goes again. Poor BB.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: beardedbruce
Date: 05 Jun 13 - 01:06 PM

You are the ones with the rope and the tree....

I just wonder if you will wear black sheets?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Elmore
Date: 05 Jun 13 - 01:21 PM

When one (like BB) is irrational and argumentative, that's indicative of some deep-seated hostility which, if not treated will worsen. Googled black sheets. Target is having a great sale on black sheets.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: olddude
Date: 05 Jun 13 - 01:40 PM

The reason for discovery is that no side knows what is relevant or not. All information must be given to the attorney that is the law and his constitutional right. I cannot stand Zimmerman from what I have read and heard, what occurred should not have occurred had he followed the police order. But .. the law is the law. He will only get grounds for either a new trial or a dismissal if the law isn't followed.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Greg F.
Date: 05 Jun 13 - 02:46 PM

Elmore, Beardy's fixation with lynching is only one of a host of his problems which need to be addressed by mental health professionals.

Don't get him started calling anyone who disagrees with him a "racist scumbag" - as if Jews were a "race".


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: beardedbruce
Date: 05 Jun 13 - 02:50 PM

Greggie,

"anyone who disagrees with him a "racist scumbag""

NO. Only YOU, since you have proven by your posts that you think somneone who is "Black, and a Democrat" is a "dumb Ni**er".


YOUR words, NOT mine, you lying racist scumbag.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Elmore
Date: 05 Jun 13 - 02:56 PM

Greg F.:BB should be ignored, but that's not easy.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Elmore
Date: 05 Jun 13 - 03:03 PM

There, there BB, calm down . I can recommend a good shrink, if you'll mail me a SASE with $100 in it.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Greg F.
Date: 05 Jun 13 - 03:06 PM

Actually, Elmore, he's amusing in small doses - kind of like a toddler throwing a tantrum.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: GUEST,Guest
Date: 05 Jun 13 - 04:03 PM

Your penchant for foul language and personal
attacks is disgusting Greg.
People like you and Elmore ruin the Mudcat.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Elmore
Date: 05 Jun 13 - 04:16 PM

Guest, Guest. Coming from a troll like you, that's a compliment. Is that you Bruce? Or Songwronger? Or the gone but not forgotten Henry Krinkle?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: catspaw49
Date: 05 Jun 13 - 04:19 PM

How? Are you here for this type of thread? If so you need to know they get raw. Don't come into these and you'll be a happy camper as there are lots of fine musical threads and some pretty fair jokes and other fun BS. If you think any thread relating to this case would be clean and pristine, you'd be wrong!

So as the old saying goes, "If you can't stand the heat you can fuckin' blow me." Now go off and have a Coke and a smile and shut the fuck up.


Spaw


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Bobert
Date: 05 Jun 13 - 07:20 PM

Wow... More shit than a manure factory...

First, bb...

1. I challenged you to use your wildest imagination to explain a situation where Martin's pictures that were taken well before he was murdered amounted to evidence... You didn't answer that question at all... You just played silly...

2. Then you say that Zimmerman had a right to defend himself from getting his pounded in the ground... First, if you come at me with a gun and I can find a way to defend myself then guess what... If it means pounding your head in the ground I'm gonna do it... Duhhhhh???

3. Bottom line, had Zimmerman ************OBEYED************* the police and stayed in his fucking car then two things would not have occurred that night... First, there would have been no self-defense my Martin and, two, Martin would not have murdered Martin...

Do you get common sense, dude...

Quit with the BS games... They are retarded... No, not even that intelligent...

B~


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 05 Jun 13 - 08:40 PM

"
The reason for discovery is that no side knows what is relevant or not. All information must be given to the attorney that is the law and his constitutional right. I cannot stand Zimmerman from what I have read and heard, what occurred should not have occurred had he followed the police order. But .. the law is the law. He will only get grounds for either a new trial or a dismissal if the law isn't followed"

At last a reasonable human to debate with!!

I totally see what you mean, but doesn't discovery apply to relevant information? To evidence the prosecution will use in its case or evidence that weakens the prosecutions case? If Zimmerman is defending himself saying that he had reasonable fear for his life. He can't say he had based that fear based on deleted picture in the kid's cellphone. He is not alleging that the kid threatened him with the marijuana leaves or the gun in the picture. The essentials of the crime and his claim of self defense is what happened that night and how he came to be there in that deadly dangerous situation. The kids prior, private life have NOTHING to do with the crime.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Bobert
Date: 05 Jun 13 - 08:46 PM

Discovery isn't supposed to be an open ended fishing expedition...

B~


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Bobert
Date: 05 Jun 13 - 09:02 PM

BTW, in my 7:20 post...

Correction: "Zimmerman would not have murdered Martin"...

B~


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 06 Jun 13 - 02:48 AM

Bah. Why don't people look shit up. From Cornell University: -

"Upon a defendant's request, the government must permit the defendant to inspect and to copy or photograph books, papers, documents, data, photographs, tangible objects, buildings or places, or copies or portions of any of these items, if the item is within the government's possession, custody, or control and:

(i) the item is material to preparing the defense;

(ii) the government intends to use the item in its case-in-chief at trial; or

(iii) the item was obtained from or belongs to the defendant".



So in the present case the key question is whether the item is material to preparing the defence. While the material MIGHT be evidential of Martin's character, it seems to me that that what may be in issue (that is not the same thing as what will necessarily be in issue) is what Zimmerman reasonably believed Martin's intentions to be that night. It is very hard indeed to see how month-old photos that Zimmerman had never seen could influence Zimmerman's belief on that night.

It looks to me therefore as if the photos were not discoverable.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 06 Jun 13 - 05:25 AM

""He will only get grounds for either a new trial or a dismissal if the law isn't followed.""

And that is the only consideration that should decide what is done with anything which might later be ruled admissible by a Court of Appeal.

It isn't about getting him falsely convicted, it's about ensuring that he cannot overturn a conviction on a technicality.

Don T.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 06 Jun 13 - 05:35 AM

Hadn't seen that when I answered Dan's post Richard, but that would seem to make the whole thing a storm in a rather dirty teacup.

After all, one might suppose that both sets of lawyers should know this, so Bobert may be right about the shit stirring intentions of a dodgy defence brief.

Don T.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: beardedbruce
Date: 06 Jun 13 - 08:22 AM

Bobert,


"1. I challenged you to use your wildest imagination to explain a situation where Martin's pictures that were taken well before he was murdered amounted to evidence... You didn't answer that question at all... You just played silly..."


I GAVE you the text message that I thought would be significant evidence- which you ignored.



"2. Then you say that Zimmerman had a right to defend himself from getting his pounded in the ground... First, if you come at me with a gun and I can find a way to defend myself then guess what... If it means pounding your head in the ground I'm gonna do it... Duhhhhh???"


IF he had the gun out. IF he had it concealed, and called out, AND WAS ATTACKED by Martin, he WAS defending himself.




"3. Bottom line, had Zimmerman ************OBEYED************* the police and stayed in his fucking car then two things would not have occurred that night... First, there would have been no self-defense my Martin and, two, Martin would not have murdered Martin...


THIS I agree with. As do MOST here that you refuse to be reasonable in this discussion with.

I stated it was a BAD DECISION.



Now, about the thread topic.

1.
DO YOU AGREE that the procecutor has now made it easier for Zimmerman to get off,

2. and that the ILLEGAL withholding of evidence from the defense was WRONG????


Two YES or NO questions.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Elmore
Date: 06 Jun 13 - 08:43 AM

BB: Could you please stop YELLING?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: beardedbruce
Date: 06 Jun 13 - 09:04 AM

Elmore,

Could you please address the thread topic?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Bobert
Date: 06 Jun 13 - 09:08 AM

He not only YELLS but his answers/responses make no sense at all..,. He avoids common sense like it was a radiation pit...

B~


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: beardedbruce
Date: 06 Jun 13 - 09:15 AM

Bobert, Try addressing the thread topic

YES or NO to my two stated questions???


Or are you saying you are just here to be a shithead about the topic, preventing reasonable discussion of the legal points involved?


Getting your hemp rope ready? Find a nice tall tree??


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: beardedbruce
Date: 06 Jun 13 - 09:17 AM

In case you have problems scrolling :



1. DO YOU AGREE that the procecutor has now made it easier for Zimmerman to get off,

2. and that the ILLEGAL withholding of evidence from the defense was WRONG????


Two YES or NO questions.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Elmore
Date: 06 Jun 13 - 09:28 AM

O.k. BB the thread topic was introduced by someone who loves to cause trouble, and is nasty and profane when someone disagrees with him. This thread topic would be a total waste were it not for intelligent, thoughtful responses by many Mudcatters. For my thoughts on this thread topic, see my May 31 entry.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Elmore
Date: 06 Jun 13 - 10:04 AM

BB says "Address the thread topic." Okay. Hellooooooh thread topic. This thread topic, like pornography, has no redeeming social value.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: beardedbruce
Date: 06 Jun 13 - 10:07 AM

Elmore,

In your first post, you were a wit.

By now, you are less than a nit-wit.




But a clever one, I will allow.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Elmore
Date: 06 Jun 13 - 10:31 AM

BB: This aged, clever nit-wit says good night and good luck. ( The good luck part may be overstated.)


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: beardedbruce
Date: 07 Jun 13 - 09:42 AM

"SANFORD, Fla. (AP) -- For a second day in a row, a Florida judge is weighing whether to allow certain voice experts to testify at the trial of a neighborhood watch volunteer charged in the fatal shooting of an unarmed teen.

Circuit Judge Debra Nelson is listening Friday to testimony from voice experts about whether witnesses with expertise in speech identification should be allowed to testify when George Zimmerman's trial starts next week.

Zimmerman is charged with second-degree murder for killing 17-year-old Trayvon Martin during a struggle in a gated community. He is pleading not guilty, claiming self-defense.

Neighbors called 911 during the fight and cries for help can be heard on the recordings.

Martin's family claim the cries came from the teen while Zimmerman's father has testified they were those of his son.'


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Greg F.
Date: 07 Jun 13 - 12:07 PM

So What, Beardy?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Bobert
Date: 07 Jun 13 - 05:48 PM

First of all, who cares???

What we are getting is a a lot of noise which is being used as a smokescreen from the facts of the case... The facts do not bode well for Zimmermen so that means its time to...

...change the subject...

B~


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: YorkshireYankee
Date: 07 Jun 13 - 08:13 PM

(posted this once already; it doesn't seem to have taken - so apologies if it eventually shows up twice...)

I've already made it pretty clear where I stand on this, i.e.:
I'm with BB (and a few others) in believing that you don't get to choose which bits of the law should apply to a case depending on who you think is guilty/innocent.

I'm with Bobert (and many others) in thinking that: this evidence is not/should not be considered admissible evidence; that the defense should not have been allowed to release it to the media/the media should not have been allowed to use it; this may well "poison the well"; and it seems all too likely that justice will not be served.

I don't see what was so terrible about the original post; it contained factual info that struck me as worth sharing.

In BB's third post, he says, "Regardless of one's opinion of the shooting, it deserves to be tried in a fair, legal fashion, without opening up unwarranted areas for appeals or declarations of mistrial."

To me, that is a pretty sensible assessment of the situation (one which I think even Bobert would agree with). In other words: if you feel Zimmerman should not "get off", you (logically) would not want the prosecution to be playing fast & loose with the law, because that increases the chance(s) that Zimmerman will get off due to a mistrial.

Seems to me that folks on this thread actually agree when it comes down to it - they just don't seem to be understanding what each other are saying (getting personal/saying nasty things doesn't help, of course).

When people keep saying the same things over and over and still not understanding each other, perhaps it's time to call it a day (or should that be "call it a thread"?). Just a thought...


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Bobert
Date: 07 Jun 13 - 08:26 PM

The problem here, YY, is that the judge is falling down on his job... His job is to insure that the trial will be untainted... He has allowed Zimmerman's attorney to use the media to poison the jury pool... That's exactly what Johnny Cochran did back in the early 90s when he got O.J. Simpson off when there was a mountain of evidence that O'J. did the crime...

My problem is with judges who sit in Southern states... The US has a history of looking the other way... Unfortunately, when it comes down to these kinds of crimes, the South has a very bad track record...

In 1979 in Greensboro, North Carolina, there was a non-violent, peaceful and legal civil rights march... The KKK set up shop on the march route and shot and killed 5 marchers... Not one ever was charged...

The South has a way of looking the other way when it comes to these kinds of things...

I know all too well... I was born in the South... Raised in the South... Educated in the South and still here... I've seen enough to suspect that one day we will look back on this trial as an injustice...

Oh, well???

B~


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: YorkshireYankee
Date: 08 Jun 13 - 08:43 AM

Wouldn't disagree with any of that, Bobert.

Suspect BB wouldn't, either...


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 08 Jun 13 - 09:23 AM

Works for me too!

I hate to say it, but I suspected things would go this way.

Zimmerman should have been tried somewhere far away from the town whose law enforcement tried to ignore the death of Trayvon Martin, and let his killer go without the circumstances even being investigated.

It took a public outcry to make them earn their pay, and even then the investigation was heavily slanted in the killer's favour, with some rather suspect cosmetically enhanced photos of dubious origin being published.

Don T.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Bobert
Date: 08 Jun 13 - 09:26 AM

No, YY... I doubt if bb would agree with me... All along he has sounded as if it's Zimmerman who is getting the shaft...

B~


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Greg F.
Date: 08 Jun 13 - 11:33 AM

Suspect BB wouldn't [disagree], either...

Oh, you kidder, you. That really IS amusing.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Bobert
Date: 09 Jun 13 - 09:37 PM

Seems that the people behind paying for Zimmerman's defense won't be happy until Zimmerman is elevated to sainthood...

B~


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: beardedbruce
Date: 10 Jun 13 - 09:00 AM

What **I** want to see is a fair trial, without lynching Zimmerman because of past injustices in the justice system.



"There had been a rash of recent break-ins at the Retreat, and Zimmerman was wary of strangers walking through the complex.
He was well-known to police dispatchers for his regular calls reporting suspicious people and events.
Martin was walking back from a convenience store after buying ice tea and Skittles. It was raining, and he was wearing a hoodie.
Zimmerman called 911, got out of his vehicle and followed Martin behind the townhomes despite being told not to by a police dispatcher.
'These a*******, they always get away,' Zimmerman said on the call. Zimmerman, who had a concealed weapons permit, was armed.
The two then got into a struggle. Zimmerman told police he had lost sight of Martin, and that Martin circled back and attacked him as he walked back to his truck. Prosecutors say he tracked down Martin and started the fight.
Zimmerman told police Martin punched him in the nose, knocking him down, and then got on top of him and began banging Zimmerman's head on the sidewalk.
Photos taken after the fight show Zimmerman with a broken nose, bruises and bloody cuts on the back of his head. He said that when Martin spotted his gun holstered around his waist under his clothes, he said: 'You are going to die tonight.'
Zimmerman said he grabbed the gun first and fired. Martin died at the scene."


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: GUEST,gillymor
Date: 10 Jun 13 - 09:53 AM

As a Floridian it distresses me that Zimmerman was given a CC permit and allowed to function as quasi police considering his own history.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: YorkshireYankee
Date: 10 Jun 13 - 11:12 AM

I think everyone on this thread wants to see a FAIR trial.

Where we differ seems to be on the odds of that occurring - and the best way to achieve it.

It's true that many of us (including me) think it highly unlikely that Zimmerman is "not guilty". If we were in the jury, that would be a serious problem, as everyone is entitled to a presumption of innocence... in court.

gillymoor - absolutely!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: beardedbruce
Date: 10 Jun 13 - 11:32 AM

I agree with Bobert's post of Date: 07 Jun 13 - 08:26 PM . All true.



However, NONE of that leads to any less need for a fair trial, with the rights of the accused being followed. He may well be guilty- but if the trial is unfair, that is a bad thing EVEN IF HE IS CONVICTED.

The Prosecution needs to be aboveboard and follow the rules.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Greg F.
Date: 10 Jun 13 - 02:10 PM

That's right, Beardy - you want a "fair trial - just so long as Zimmerman is exonerated.

Gotcha.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: beardedbruce
Date: 10 Jun 13 - 02:12 PM

BULLSHIT, Greggie boy.

I want a fair trial- YOU are the one who wants to lynch him, regardless of his guilt.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: YorkshireYankee
Date: 10 Jun 13 - 04:52 PM

BB is right: "...if the trial is unfair, that is a bad thing EVEN IF HE (i.e. Zimmerman) IS CONVICTED."

Perhaps we should all just leave it at that?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 10 Jun 13 - 05:12 PM

YY,

I think that GF and BB just like calling each other names.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Bobert
Date: 10 Jun 13 - 08:51 PM

At this point it doesn't much matter how the trial ends...

Because this event is so polorized, one half of people (regardless of the evidence) will believe that Zimnmerman in guilty and the other half will believe the opposite...

Too bad that the divide seems to follow the same divide as everything else in the country...

Republicans = innocent...

Dems = guilty...

B~


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: olddude
Date: 10 Jun 13 - 09:07 PM

Forget the politics, when you carry a firearm (I do) you need to take extra care to avoid such situations. You will be held accountable in the harshest of terms. If a police officer tells you wait in your car we are on it, the only time you could ignore that is if someone's life was immediately in danger (ie) he heard a scream or a cry for help. Ya can't be a lone ranger, you can and will be charged with murder. That being said, he is entitled to full disclosure of all evidence and nothing can be withheld that is the law ..

But I do not feel a bit sorry for him. One person is dead and his life is ruined no matter how it turns out. Ya just can't do what he did or what is reported he did.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Bobert
Date: 10 Jun 13 - 09:16 PM

Exactly, Ol'ster...

Same in martial arts... You will find that the baddest of bad asses in the dojo will do everything in their power to avoid a fight...

People who have no real training with guns are very dangerous people...

B~


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 11 Jun 13 - 12:06 AM

100% with you on that Dan.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: beardedbruce
Date: 11 Jun 13 - 07:56 AM

No arguement at all, old dude, Bobert, and JtS


- BUT HE STILL DESERVES A FAIR TRIAL.

The prosecutor cannot withhold evidence.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: catspaw49
Date: 11 Jun 13 - 08:19 AM

Well Brucie I don't think anyone doesn't want him to have a fair trial but Dan's point has always been the only salient point. The stand your ground law should be disregarded when Zimmerman should never have been on THAT ground and hence had no ground to stand. The transcript of the 911 is clear. "We don't need you to do that."(follow Martin)


Spaw


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: beardedbruce
Date: 11 Jun 13 - 08:22 AM

And his lawyer has stated he is NOT using the "Stand your ground" law in defense.


So?????


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 11 Jun 13 - 09:27 AM

Juicy Brucie - did you read what I linked to about "stand your ground"? There has been no prior hearing on "stand your ground" but it COULD still be raised at trial.

Secondly - if, as I argue, the matter in question is not evidence and is not discoverable, then no evidence has been withheld.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: beardedbruce
Date: 11 Jun 13 - 10:56 AM

Dickie Bridgie,

IT IS STILL NOT THE PROSECUTORS CALL.

That is for the JUDGE to decide.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: GUEST
Date: 11 Jun 13 - 11:25 AM

1) Q: Is it evidence at all? A: If the judge so decides.

2) Prosecution is not allowed to keep anything from the defense. On occasion, prosecutors have been know to keep some stuff until a few days before the trial, but keep it too late so it doesn't allow the defense to modify or construct its argument and the judge will be seriously POed, if the judge is worth his salt.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 11 Jun 13 - 01:37 PM

Brucie and Jest - FFS go and READ the stuff I got from Cornell University (no less).


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Greg F.
Date: 11 Jun 13 - 05:35 PM

They probably have read it, Richard - they just are incapable of comprehending it.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Bobert
Date: 11 Jun 13 - 07:18 PM

In the course of any investigation a prosecutor will come across information not related to the case and stuff that most definitely would not be considered as evidence...

Does the defense attorney have a right to that information???

That is the question here...

When it comes to the pics on Martin's phone, I haven't heard any credible reason why Zimmerman's attorney believes that:

a. These pics are evidence of a crime committed later and not related to those pictures and...

b. Why Zimmerman's attorney thinks they are...

B~


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: GUEST
Date: 11 Jun 13 - 07:46 PM

And when the judge agrees, so it will be, Bobert.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: catspaw49
Date: 12 Jun 13 - 10:07 AM

RICHARD BRIDGE---Assume the following:

Zimmerman disregards the police request and follows Martin. At one point they confront each other. Some fighting starts and Martin gets the upper hand. Zimmerman takes out his gun and kills Martin.

*Would murder be an overreach?
*No one has reported hearing cries to "STOP" but only to help.If this results in a he said/she said type of thing, how would this play out?
*I'm just curious as I still see a problem with Z following when told not to do so.

You and I often disagree but I have always respected your knowledge as a lawyer. With what "seems" to be known at this point, where do you see this trial going?


Thanks


Spaw


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 12 Jun 13 - 10:22 AM

Well, the UK does not have quite the same categories of unlawful killing as the USA so I'd have to do quite a bit of digging to form a view on that.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: catspaw49
Date: 12 Jun 13 - 10:32 AM

Fair enough Richard......Thanks


Spaw


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: beardedbruce
Date: 13 Jun 13 - 09:10 AM

http://gma.yahoo.com/blogs/abc-blogs/did-potential-zimmerman-juror-lie-court-034710693.html



Bobert,

I gave you a scenario where the TEXTS would be significant, and you keep going on about the PHOTOS. BITH were withheld- Are you trying to get around the fact that I answered your question???

Or are you just being an asshole on general principles, as your racist friend Greggie is?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 13 Jun 13 - 09:40 AM

""Well, the UK does not have quite the same categories of unlawful killing as the USA so I'd have to do quite a bit of digging to form a view on that.""

Turning it on its head, would Zimmerman pass the test of "reasonable force" in an English court Richard?

Not that this would have any bearing on US proceedings, but it is an indicator of the strength of any defence of using a weapon against an unarmed man.

Don T.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Greg F.
Date: 13 Jun 13 - 11:14 AM

Calm down, Beardy - you're spraying spittle again.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: olddude
Date: 13 Jun 13 - 12:12 PM

In all fairness he has the right to the cell phone info ... this is a murder trial so withholding any request would open up a reversal or new trial in the appellate courts just making it drag on and on. The smart thing to do is just give them the damn phone.

I can't understand this f up stand your ground law. You have a duty to avoid such situations. I have a Martial arts master rank. I can't clobber someone for insulting me..even when I would like to :-) I would go to jail right now ..as I am bound to avoid such situations as Bobart said. He was carrying a firearm even more restrictive ... he was legally bound to avoid the situation as the police ordered him to stand down ..

second degree murder is the right charge I think but I am no lawyer


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: beardedbruce
Date: 13 Jun 13 - 12:15 PM

No arguement at all, old dude.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Bobert
Date: 13 Jun 13 - 07:35 PM

Please explain, ol'ster, how pics from weeks or even days before Martin was murdered is evidence in this case...

I mean, if there was one with Martin holding up a sign saying he was going to whup Zimmerman's ass, yeah... Haven't heard that such a pic existed or that Martin even knew that Zimmerman existed...

Where, exactly, is any evidence???\

Martin smoked pot???

Last I heard that smoking pot wasn't a capital offense...

B~


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: pdq
Date: 13 Jun 13 - 08:00 PM

"...he was legally bound to avoid the situation as the police ordered him to stand down..."

Zimmerman said he was following the suspect and the dispatcher said "we don't need you to do that."

First, that is a suggestion, not an order to "stand down".

Second, it came from the dispatcher (not a cop) who has no authority to order a civilian to do anything. Besides, Zimmerman was the authorized neighborhood watchman at that time.


"...I can't understand this f up stand your ground law. You have a duty to avoid such situations...

The man who wrote the Stand Your Ground law says it does not apply in this case. The district attorney, all the lawyers involved in the case, and most of the national pundits say the Stand Your Ground has nothing to do with this case. Why do so many Mudcatters even bring it up?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Bobert
Date: 13 Jun 13 - 08:09 PM

Come on, pdq... That is a ridiculous argument...

Order v. suggestion, my butt...

Look, dude... Zimmerman called the police... Not vice versa... The dispatcher told him to stay in his vehicle and that real police were being dispatched...

Suggestion???

Get real, man... You are spinning faster than a top...

B~


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 13 Jun 13 - 09:29 PM

" The district attorney, all the lawyers involved in the case, and most of the national pundits say the Stand Your Ground has nothing to do with this case. Why do so many Mudcatters even bring it up?"

I don't know why they bring it up. I have guess. I'm pretty sure it was the excuse Sanford Law enforcement gave for not Prosecuting Zimmerman in the first place.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 14 Jun 13 - 12:25 AM

The relevant UK law (as it seems to me) is discussed in part 4 of the Law Commission Report here -

http://lawcommission.justice.gov.uk/docs/lc290_Partial_Defences_to_Murder.pdf

My first thought is that it would be impossible under UK law for Zimmerman's use of a firearm to have been "reasonable force" for the purposes of the law of self defence since it would have been impossible under UK law for Zimmerman's carriage and discharge of a firearm to ahve been lawful.

My second thought is that if one ignores the firearm element the defence of self defence would only have been possible if Martin attacked Zimmerman rather than the other way round. This becomes somewhat convoluted in that (assuming that Martin did not intend to kill Zimmerman - possibly a large assumption) if Martin genuinely and reasonably apprehended an assault on him by Zimmerman (a belief that I would have thought eminently reasonable) he would have been entitled to use reasonable force to defend himself from that apprehended assault, and the known damage to Zimmerman (if caused by Martin, another possible issue) would seem to be within that level of force. But (and so it goes round) it seems inescapable that if Martin attacked Zimmerman ( believing it to be in self defence) it is hard to doubt that Zimmerman would be likely to believe that he was being assaulted - in which case he would be entitled himself to use reasonable force.

So there are two pathways to Zimmerman being convicted of murder. First if it be found that he attacked Martin, I think he would be guilty of murder under English law. Second if it be found that he was attacked by Martin but then used excessive force, he would be guilty. I do not see how, under English law, the use of an unlawful firearm could be anything other than excessive force.

Another issue of fact would be whether Martin was merely trying to get away when Zimmerman shot him. If so the English law is beyond doubt, Zimmerman would be guilty.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: catspaw49
Date: 14 Jun 13 - 07:38 AM

Thank you Richard for the link and the analysis.


Spaw


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: beardedbruce
Date: 14 Jun 13 - 08:23 AM

TO REPEAT:

Since Bobert continues...




Bobert,

I gave you a scenario where the TEXTS would be significant, and you keep going on about the PHOTOS. BOTH were withheld- Are you trying to get around the fact that I answered your question???

Or are you just being an asshole on general principles, as your racist friend Greggie is?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Bobert
Date: 14 Jun 13 - 08:29 AM

No, bb, I am not "being an asshole" at all...

That's projectionism on your part...

Proclaiming that you have answered the question and actually having provided a reasonable answer are two different things...

You are strong at proclamations but weak in logic or honesty...

B~


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: GUEST,gillymor
Date: 14 Jun 13 - 09:08 AM

From the Guardian re Stand Your Ground Laws.
I've read elsewhere that Zimmerman's defense may try to use SYG if the jury trial doesn't work out. Considering Martin's ethnicity it could be his ace in the hole in Florida, if they're allowed.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: beardedbruce
Date: 14 Jun 13 - 09:37 AM

Bobert,

YOU have never acknowledged, or discusses the strength of MY comment. Do I have to repeat it another time??? Have you forgotten it? Are you just ignoring anything you don't agree with?

I gave you a sample text that WOULD HAVE BEEN EVIDENCE that could have been on the phone, and withheld by the prosecution - Yet you keep on about pictures? Why? YOUR posting as if I had not answered your request, WHICH I DID, is being an asshole.

If you don't want to be considered an asshole, stop acting like one.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: beardedbruce
Date: 14 Jun 13 - 09:42 AM

From: beardedbruce - PM
Date: 04 Jun 13 - 11:10 AM

And what IF a text that was kept from the defense was like this:

"I'm gonna check out *** house, and see what I can take. And if anybody gets in my way, I'll beat the shit outta him."

Sure want to be sure that the defense can't get anything like that- why , the lynching might not go as Bobert wants.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: beardedbruce
Date: 14 Jun 13 - 09:45 AM

From: beardedbruce - PM
Date: 05 Jun 13 - 09:33 AM

Bobert,

"Tell me, anyone, how a picture that trevon took of himself a month before is fucking "evidence"???????????????????????????????????????

Or shut the fuck up about withheld so-called "evidence"...

Yes, beardedbruce... You brought this up... Use your wildest imagination on how these pics are relevant to the evidence in this case...
"

My posts:


*IF* Bobert sees no reason to require the prosecution TO FOLLOW THE LAW in this case, I see no difference between him and those who lynch people they are "sure" ( from news reports) have committed some crime.




Date: 04 Jun 13 - 11:10 AM

And what IF a text that was kept from the defense was like this:

"I'm gonna check out *** house, and see what I can take. And if anybody gets in my way, I'll beat the shit outta him."

Sure want to be sure that the defense can't get anything like that- why , the lynching might not go as Bobert wants.



Such a text message MIGHT lead a reasonable jury to believe that Zimmerman was attacked, and that makes a difference, doesn't it?







"He stalked the kid, the kid died, shot with his gun."

OR

"He followed a suspected burglar, was attacked by the suspect, and in fear of his life while having his head pounded into the cement, shot the suspect with his gun"

Whether he showed good judgement in following the suspect I will not state- but THIS is as likely as any other scenario.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: beardedbruce
Date: 14 Jun 13 - 09:51 AM

Bobert,


YOU are the one who is strong at proclamations but weak or entirely failing in logic or honesty...



"That's projectionism on your part...

Proclaiming that you have answered the question and actually having provided a reasonable answer are two different things..."

You have NEVER addressed my response, except to say that it is not reasonable. Why, Can you even give a reason you reject it out of hand besides YOUR conviction that Zimmerman should be lynched to make up for past injustices of the system?

You have never provided ANY reason that the evidence SHOULD be withheld from the Defense, yet continue to protest any statement that the prosecution needs to play by the law IN ORDER TO HAVE A FAIR TRAIL.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Bobert
Date: 14 Jun 13 - 10:06 AM

Shear numbers of posts do not strengthen your arguments, bb...

If you can't make a point with a single post then that points to nothing but spin and more spin...

Guess better the first time, dude...

B~


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: beardedbruce
Date: 14 Jun 13 - 10:13 AM

Again, Bobert, you attack me and DO NOT DISCUSS the answer I gave to your question. As this is not the first time, I have to conclude that you agree it is reason enough to be evidence, and thus YOU ARE AN ASSHOLE for your continued discussion about "Pictures not being evidence " when the point is EVIDENCE BEING WITHHELD BY THE PROSECUTION.


"
Shear numbers of posts do not strengthen your arguments, bb...

If you can't make a point with a single post then that points to nothing but spin and more spin...
"

And HOW MANY times are you going to bring up the non-relevant pictures? Sheer numbers of posts DO NOT strengthen your ( nonexistent) argument.

If you can't make a point with a single post then that points to nothing but spin and more spin... As someone I used to have some respect for once said.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Bobert
Date: 14 Jun 13 - 01:00 PM

Tell ya' what, bruce...

First of all, I don't read any posts by anyone who feels they have to SCREAM...

Second of all, nor do most people...

Thirdly, people who feel they have to SCREAM at people are rude, boorish and 99% wrong...

When you can act like a sane person and quit with your rude SCREAMING then maybe I'll read your stuff... Until then. you are SCREAMING in the middle of the forest all by yourself...

Bye until you quit with the insane SCREAMING...

B~


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: beardedbruce
Date: 14 Jun 13 - 01:06 PM

Bobert,

In other words, you refuse to address the issue.

As I said, you are acting like a real asshole.

If you have a problem with my example of possible evidence, let me know why and what you disagree with- denying that I have given one makes you a liar.



And people who have one set of rules for those they agree with, and a different set for those they disagree with are bigots, whether they like the term or not. If the rules you apply to others do not apply to yourself, you might as well tell me to go sit in the back of the bus, or use separate water fountains.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: beardedbruce
Date: 14 Jun 13 - 01:08 PM

Again, Bobert, you attack me and do not discuss the answer I gave to your question. As this is not the first time, I have to conclude that you agree it is reason enough to be evidence, and thus you are an asshole for your continued discussion about "Pictures not being evidence " when the point is

***   Evidence being withheld by the Prosecution. ***

"
Shear numbers of posts do not strengthen your arguments, bb...

If you can't make a point with a single post then that points to nothing but spin and more spin...
"

And how many times are you going to bring up the non-relevant pictures? Sheer numbers of posts do not strengthen your ( nonexistent) argument.

If you can't make a point with a single post then that points to nothing but spin and more spin... As someone I used to have some respect for once said.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Bobert
Date: 14 Jun 13 - 01:09 PM

Wow... Two posts without a single episode... Good start... I'll read them later...

Break time is over...

B~


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: beardedbruce
Date: 14 Jun 13 - 01:10 PM

Yassa, Bossman.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: beardedbruce
Date: 14 Jun 13 - 01:13 PM

200


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: olddude
Date: 14 Jun 13 - 02:41 PM

Not a lawyer but as a former law enforcement officer the prosecution and defense are entitled to anything that was in possession at the time of the crime or alleged crime. If you withhold anything in discovery the case can be overturned. Yes a judge makes that decision but he is open to having the case retried or thrown out. You bet the prosecution has his cell phone, give the defense the other it is just smart. I respectfully disagree with those who say don't


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: beardedbruce
Date: 14 Jun 13 - 02:56 PM

Bobert,


You are the one who is strong at proclamations but weak or entirely failing in logic or honesty...



"That's projectionism on your part...

Proclaiming that you have answered the question and actually having provided a reasonable answer are two different things..."

You have never addressed my response, except to say that it is not reasonable. Why, Can you even give a reason you reject it out of hand besides your conviction that Zimmerman should be lynched to make up for past injustices of the system?

You have never provided any reason that the evidence SHOULD be withheld from the Defense, yet continue to protest any statement that the prosecution needs to play by the law in order to have a fair trial


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Bobert
Date: 14 Jun 13 - 07:25 PM

Screaming again, I see, bb...

Now, if you want to re-answer the original question about the so-called evidence and can do it without SCREAMING then I will respond to it...

B~


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: YorkshireYankee
Date: 14 Jun 13 - 09:50 PM

Aww, c'mon Bobert. ONE word in caps is not exactly screaming - it's just emphasis.

From my POV, both of you - and Greg, too - have gotten to the point where there's way more personal attacks and emotive language in your posts than actual discussion. One person says something nasty/baits the other person - who responds in kind - and the "debate" deteriorates from there.

Makes it kinda pointless to "discuss" it, don't it?

I respect all of you, think you're all intelligent guys and can see where you're coming from. I'd just like to see debate without all the personal animosity. Passion does not require antagonistic behavior...


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: beardedbruce
Date: 17 Jun 13 - 11:43 AM

Bobert,

"From: Bobert - PM
Date: 14 Jun 13 - 07:25 PM

Screaming again, I see, bb...

Now, if you want to re-answer the original question about the so-called evidence and can do it without SCREAMING then I will respond to it...

B~"

So, *You* can scream, and that is ok, but when *I* do so, it is wrong?
The previous post was emphasis- And you have still not addressed my last three posts.




Send me to the back of the bus.


As I stated, a person who requires one set of rules for those he agrees with, and another set for those he does not agree with is a bigot. You are busy qualifying.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Greg F.
Date: 17 Jun 13 - 12:12 PM

Send me to the back of the bus.

I'm starting to believe that BullshitBruce thinks he's a Negro, instead of just a jackass.

So, Bullshit: how old were you in 1963?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 17 Jun 13 - 12:22 PM

YorkshireYankee ...Right on!

GfS


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 17 Jun 13 - 01:28 PM

Trying to make a point with a single post!

Right, how about this.

Bobert worries that the defence will try to prejudice the case. He is RIGHT!

Given half a chance, they WILL! Simple.

Bruce is concerned that the prosecution will try to prejudice the case to secutre a conviction. He is RIGHT!

Given half a chance, they WILL! Simple.

Bruce believes that the prosecution should hand over to the defence, anything which MIGHT be evidence. He is RIGHT!

They SHOULD!

Bobert believes that the phone cannot contain anything which would constitute evidence.

He is not in a position to make that statement, since only two of many possible saved items have been mentioned.

True that, on the face of it, those two would be irrelevant, except as pertaining to the victim's character, and even that is dubious given that replica and toy guns look frighteningly real these days.

But nobody except the prosecution knows what else is on that phone, and that is why the defence must have sight of it, if a conviction is not to be overturned on appeal.

THE JUDGE is the only person qualified to rule upon the admissibility of such evidence, since he is (supposedly) the only impartial party involved.

Don T.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: beardedbruce
Date: 17 Jun 13 - 01:38 PM

Don T.

I agree with your entire post- though I did give a hypothetical text that would probably be admissible as evidence.

But since you "SHOUTED", Bobert will not bother to read anything you wore- Only he and those who support him are allowed to "SHOUT" . The rest of us are 2nd class people who should know their place and not bring up anything to disturb those who are (self-defined) "correct"

And that is what I am the most annoyed with.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: beardedbruce
Date: 17 Jun 13 - 01:45 PM

Again, for Bobert and his sensitive ego- with emphasis removed, so he can understand.




Date: 04 Jun 13 - 11:10 AM

And what IF a text that was kept from the defense was like this:

"I'm gonna check out *** house, and see what I can take. And if anybody gets in my way, I'll beat the shit outta him."

Sure want to be sure that the defense can't get anything like that- why , the lynching might not go as Bobert wants.



Such a text message *might* lead a reasonable jury to believe that Zimmerman was attacked, and that makes a difference, doesn't it?







"He stalked the kid, the kid died, shot with his gun."

or

"He followed a suspected burglar, was attacked by the suspect, and in fear of his life while having his head pounded into the cement, shot the suspect with his gun"

Whether he showed good judgement in following the suspect I will not state- but *this* is as likely as any other scenario.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: beardedbruce
Date: 17 Jun 13 - 01:49 PM

Greggie boy,

"I'm starting to believe that BullshitBruce thinks he's a Negro, instead of just a jackass."

So, *you* rate Negros as below jackasses, as well as considering "Black and a Democrat " the same as "dumb Ni**er"?

And Bobert supports you, or at least keeps quiet because you help attack those he disagrees with...


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: beardedbruce
Date: 17 Jun 13 - 02:03 PM

btw, Bobert,

"If" is a conditional- I do not claim that the statement *is* on the phone, but *if* it was, it would have a good chance of being admissible. I will continue to point this out each time you claim there is no reason for the prosecution to obey the law.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 17 Jun 13 - 02:15 PM

Well well, first Greg slurs Bruce because he says he is Jewish, and now it's because , "*you* rate Negros as below jackasses, as well as considering "Black and a Democrat " the same as "dumb Nigger"? (I put back the G's, as not to be 'discriminatory')..It sounds like if he is using these words, as a debasing tool and tactic, because he's run out of 'other' derogatory names, it sounds like he's got some REAL bigotry issues....that's one reason I've called him a 'so-called liberal'!..among other hypocrites on here...hey Greg, come on, clean up your act..starting with your ugly hatreds in your head...I'm surprised Bobart hasn't jumped your shit for it, already.......unless....

GfS


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: beardedbruce
Date: 17 Jun 13 - 02:23 PM

GfS


Greggie boy had stated

"I'm starting to believe that BullshitBruce thinks he's a Negro, instead of just a jackass."



I stated that

So, *you* rate Negros as below jackasses, as well as considering "Black and a Democrat " the same as "dumb Ni**er"?

Since he used "just" in *his* posting. He considers that *any* second class citizen must refer to Negros, from his postings.

And Bobert never says one word about how those who support him are being "rude, boorish and 99% wrong", you know- that would be from the other set of rules he has for the "master" group that agree with him.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 17 Jun 13 - 02:44 PM

The wordage might have been what it was, but the intent is obviously there....however, your point is 'so noted'.

Bobert is just a soled out Democrat. He doesn't get past their 'talking points', and stays confined within them..though I love the guy...the problem is, is that he is more dedicated to the Democrat Party, than they are to him, his best interests, or America's....they are just the other shills for the banksters, just like the Republicans, so that the national dialogue is also confined to what the party dictates that it 'should be'.....but what it really is, is distraction fodder, to keep the American people blinded, and occupied with bullshit issues, while steering us away from the bigger picture....and to keep the partisans, who think that they are so astute in such matters, preoccupied and busy with mental masturbation!!!

Sorry guys, but that's the way it REALLY is!!

GfS


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 17 Jun 13 - 03:01 PM

Don, every day, in thousands of cases, the lawyers for the parties decide what they are obliged to disclose. It's part of the disclosure process. You need to read up on your legal practice.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Bobert
Date: 17 Jun 13 - 04:07 PM

Okay, Bruce... Let's say that Martin had said that he was going to check out a house to burglarize and beat the crap out of the owner of the house... Let's also say that he had said this just the night before...

Unless Zimmerman knew that this prior to following and murdering Martin why is it relevant...

We do character witnesses for defend0ants, not murder victims...

The bottom line here is simple... In the South we have way too many judges who are either elected or appointed by the local powers at be... That is my beef here...

It's not that I don't believe that it's up to the judge to put a gag order in place on the prosecutor and defense attorney... It's that the South, especially, has a very bad record with "wink, wink" justice...

Any "fair minded" judge would/should have issued a gag order...

It's not that Zimmerman won't get a fair trial...

It's that Martin won't and he doesn't have any right to appeal...

And for the record, it is very unusual for me to SCREAM... When I was using "caps" to write "scream" it wasn't a form of screaming... It was a way of getting you to associate the word with the intent... If you don't get that copy my post and take it to an English professor and have him or her explain it to you...

B~


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Greg F.
Date: 17 Jun 13 - 04:33 PM

So, *you* rate Negros as below jackasses, as well as considering "Black and a Democrat " the same as "dumb Ni**er"?

Since he used "just" in *his* posting. He considers that *any* second class citizen must refer to Negros, from his postings.

All YOUR words, BeardedBullshit, not mine. In addition to other problems, you apparently have difficulty in reading and/or comprehending the English Language.

Get help.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 18 Jun 13 - 05:01 AM

""But since you "SHOUTED", Bobert will not bother to read anything you wore- Only he and those who support him are allowed to "SHOUT" .""

The difference BB is that I wasn't shouting AT Bobert!

Emphasis on certain words will clarify the meaning and intent of a passage.

"Answer my question!" when capitalised is shouting at the recipient, and I have to say I would share Bobert's anger at that.

None of which, of course alters my viewpoint on the topic.

Don T.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 18 Jun 13 - 05:11 AM

""Don, every day, in thousands of cases, the lawyers for the parties decide what they are obliged to disclose. It's part of the disclosure process. You need to read up on your legal practice.""

UK law Richard!

US law, as practised, seems (and I'm open to correction on this) to take a rather different view.

They seem to be saying that if the prosecution has it, the defence must be fully aware of it too.

Maybe they don't place as much trust in their lawyers as seems to be the case here.

Don T.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 18 Jun 13 - 05:15 AM

""Bobert is just a soled out Democrat. He doesn't get past their 'talking points',""

Goofus, FFS get off your political hobbyhorse.

This thread is about a specific court case, so keep the political claptrap for the political threads you so love to destroy.

Don T.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 18 Jun 13 - 07:22 AM

Well, Don that is not what the words I provided from a respected US university say is the US law. Not that anyone here seemed to notice.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: beardedbruce
Date: 18 Jun 13 - 08:15 AM

Bobert, You state:
"Okay, Bruce... Let's say that Martin had said that he was going to check out a house to burglarize and beat the crap out of the owner of the house... Let's also say that he had said this just the night before...

Unless Zimmerman knew that this prior to following and murdering Martin why is it relevant...
"


It would be relevant, because the defense has stated that it is using self-defense as it's plea. The "fact" that Martin had stated he would attack "anyone who tried to stop him" would strengthen the defense claim that Trevor *did* attack Zimmerman, and support the plea of self defense. Otherwise, it is entirely Zimmerman's word.

The present defense story is that Zimmerman followed Martin ( a mistake in my opinion, but he had his reasons) and confronted him. Zimmerman then claims he was attacked by Martin, and was having his head beaten against the ground. In self-defense, Zimmerman shot Martin.

I *do* *not* *know* the truth of this story- and neither do you. But to deny Zimmerman his rights to a fair trial because of past injustices in the legal system is wrong, as wrong as lynching someone because of his skin color.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: GUEST
Date: 18 Jun 13 - 08:18 AM

Zimmerman is going to jail.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Bobert
Date: 18 Jun 13 - 09:07 AM

So, bb, stand your ground is fine for Zimmerman but not Martin even thou Martin wasn't armed... Is he not allowed to defend himself???

B~


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: beardedbruce
Date: 18 Jun 13 - 10:39 AM

No, Bobert, *Please* learn to read what is written.

"
So, bb, stand your ground is fine for Zimmerman but not Martin even thou Martin wasn't armed... C

1. Zimmerman is ++not++ using "Stand Your Ground"

He is using self defense, claiming that after confronting Martin ("Hey! What are you doing here?") he (Zimmerman) was attacked ++by++ Martin and was having his (Zimmerman's) head pounded into a bloody pulp.

2. ++If++ you attack me with your fists, and are inflicting bodily harm on me, and I am in fear of my life, I   ++will++   shoot you if I have a gun.


"Is he not allowed to defend himself???"

++That++ is what the trial is supposed to determine - ++Who++ was attacking and who was defending themselves.

Are you stating that Zimmerman was ++not++ allowed to defend himself if he was attacked??

++If++ Zimmerman physically attacked Martin, Zimmerman is in the wrong.
++If++ Martin physically attacked Zimmerman after a verbal confrontation, ++Martin++ was in the wrong.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Bobert
Date: 18 Jun 13 - 11:05 AM

Who instigated the conflict, bb???

Martin, who was walking home from a convenience store or...

...Zimmerman who was told by the police to stay in his car???

No spin, dude... Just answer the question...

B~


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: beardedbruce
Date: 18 Jun 13 - 11:07 AM

In any case, it was a tragedy- but lynching a person who might have been defending himself from an attack ++regardless++ of the color of his skin is ++wrong++.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: beardedbruce
Date: 18 Jun 13 - 11:14 AM

Cross-posted.
Bobert,

"Who instigated the conflict, bb???

Martin, who was walking home from a convenience store or...

...Zimmerman who was told by the police to stay in his car???

No spin, dude... Just answer the question..."



++You++ have already spun it like a top.


How about


Who instigated the conflict, Bobert??

Martin, who was walking around possibly looking to break in, steal stuff, and beat up some white boy, (As ++you++ said, Zimmerman could not know why Martin was there- but could ask) or...

...Zimmerman who was the neighborhood watch in an area with previous breakins, who asked someone he saw why he was there and was physically attacked and having his head beaten into mush?????

No spin, dude... Just answer the question...

Suppose it had been an older Black preacher and a white skinhead, and the skinhead was killed. ++If++ that makes a difference, ++you++ are the one in the wrong.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Bobert
Date: 18 Jun 13 - 11:29 AM

1. As a neighborhood watch person Zimmerman was not supposed to be armed... That has been reported by a member of a nation citizen's watch association...

2. Zimmerman had a criminal history involving violence and perhaps shouldn't have been allowed to be a neighborhood watch person to begin with...

3. You are wrong as wrong can be, bb about the instigation... Zimmerman has never denied that he got out of of his vehicle... Nor has he denied that he approached Martin... Nor has he denied that he had a gun... This is just simple "common sense" to anyone who has any common sense... Perhaps you don't get it but it is common sense... Had Zimmerman not gotten out of his vehicle (the police told him to stay in his vehicle) then there wouldn't have been a murder... That is plain as day and night... That makes Zimmerman the instigator...

4. Again, Martin had a right to defend himself against someone who had instigated the conflict... You would, I would and Martin tried...

These are the facts of the case... This isn't about what Martin said that isn't related to the case... The only exception would be if Martin knew Zimmerman and made statements that he was going to try to harm Zimmerman... That would be the only exception... That is not that case...

No, I'm not spinning at all here, bb... As you will see as this case goes along what I am saying is what the case is about and what you are saying is just...

...noise...

B~


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: beardedbruce
Date: 18 Jun 13 - 11:35 AM

I disagree with you, Bobert, and think that a trial judge should determine guilt, not a public opinion poll , and even someone I think is guilty deserves to have a fair trial.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: beardedbruce
Date: 18 Jun 13 - 11:43 AM

Bobert,


"1. As a neighborhood watch person Zimmerman was not supposed to be armed... That has been reported by a member of a nation citizen's watch association..."

Standards differ in various areas. I do not know the Florida standards- Do you?



"2. Zimmerman had a criminal history involving violence and perhaps shouldn't have been allowed to be a neighborhood watch person to begin with..."

I ++agree++. That does not make him guilty of murder.



"3. You are wrong as wrong can be, bb about the instigation... Zimmerman has never denied that he got out of of his vehicle... Nor has he denied that he approached Martin... Nor has he denied that he had a gun... This is just simple "common sense" to anyone who has any common sense... Perhaps you don't get it but it is common sense... Had Zimmerman not gotten out of his vehicle (the police told him to stay in his vehicle) then there wouldn't have been a murder... That is plain as day and night... That makes Zimmerman the instigator..

So, If I am in a bad area, and the operator tells me to stay in my car, and I get out because I see suspicious people, ++I++ am the instigator if one of them kills me?



"4. Again, Martin had a right to defend himself against someone who had instigated the conflict... You would, I would and Martin tried..."

And you claim Zimmerman did not have that right, ++even++ if he was attacked physically after asking a verbal question???

++As++ ++I++ ++posted++, the trial is to determine who was at fault- ++Your++ statement as to Zimmerman's guilt is just "noise"


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Bobert
Date: 18 Jun 13 - 12:52 PM

1. There are national standards for neighborhood watches, bruce... The operative word in neighborhood watch is, ahhhhh, watch... That is the backbone of the program everywhere... The difference between a neighborhood watch program and armed security is night and day... Armed security are people who have specific training in weapons... If you can find one neighborhood watch group that arms untrained watchers please feel free to offer up your source... If not, then this argument of yours is null and void...

2. We agree but if Martin (the victim) gets a fair trial, Zimmerman has to be convicted of, at the very least, wrongful death...

3. There is a name for someone, other than a law enforcement officer, who gets out of his car with a gun because he is suspicious... It's called vigilante...

4. You miss the point yet again... If the conflict was initiated by Zimmerman then nothing that followed absolves Zimmerman from liability... Once Zimmerman made the initial contact, which BTW is not in dispute, then Martin had every right to defend himslef...

Bottom line, Part 649: The only way that anything that was on Martin's cell phone that could be relevant to this case would have to involved this case... Since Martin and Zimmerman didn't know one another at the time of the "encounter" there can be nothing on that phone that can be used as "evidence"... Zimmerman's attorney knows this yet he has used the media to try to poison the jury pool... The judge is negligent and derelict here in not imposing a gag order...

And, yes, I do know quite a bit of law... When I was in business I had the opportunity to represent my company in court well over 20 times against "real lawyers" and in all but one of those cases won the rest of them... Got to where the "real lawyers", most of whom I knew personally, would try to settle rather than litigate... No brag, just fact...

B~


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: beardedbruce
Date: 18 Jun 13 - 01:24 PM

"If the conflict was initiated by Zimmerman then nothing that followed absolves Zimmerman from liability... Once Zimmerman made the initial contact, which BTW is not in dispute, then Martin had every right to defend himslef..."


OK, I meet you on the street, and ++You++ say "What are you doing here?" I take this as an attack, and start beating your head against the ground. You shoot me- ++You++ as the instigator are guilty of murder?

That is what you are saying


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 18 Jun 13 - 01:31 PM

In the UK one is allowed to use reasonable force in self defence. Shooting an unarmed man might well not count. I have explained this above. The US belief that resort to a firearm is socially normative is out of whack by many other countries' standards.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Bobert
Date: 18 Jun 13 - 03:11 PM

This case isn't an "Okay, I meet you on the street" case, bruce... This is a case where the victim was stalked and confronted... That is a major difference...

The facts of the case as we know them are that Zimmerman got out of his vehicle with a gun and confronted the victim... That isn't at all the scenario that you have just presented... Your scenario has nothing to do with the realities of this case...

I mean, your posts are like spin on crack cocaine... If you were my lawyer I'd fire you...

B~


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: beardedbruce
Date: 18 Jun 13 - 03:18 PM

If I were your lawyer I would quit, since you don't listen to what I said.

The scenario I presented is what the defense in this case is presenting, and thus is significant in terms of the allowable evidence- ++If++ there were texts that indicated that Martin would attack someone who tried to stop him, hat would support the Defense claim that Zimmerman was attacked.

OK, have it your way- violate Zimmerman's rights, convict him in a mock trial, and have him get off for the mistrial. Then ++You++ can take credit for the (many) deaths and destruction from the riots after the "miscarriage" of justice.

Since that is what ++you++ want.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Greg F.
Date: 18 Jun 13 - 03:31 PM

The US belief that resort to a firearm is socially normative is out of whack by many other countries' standards.

Its also out of whack with the standards of many - if not most - thinking people here in the US too, Richard.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Don Firth
Date: 18 Jun 13 - 03:35 PM

I once had a friend—a guitar student of mine—who was also a gun enthusiast. I joined him a number of times at the firing range, bought myself a target pistol, and thorough enjoyed popping holes in paper at 25 yards.

But my friend carried a Colt .45 automatic with him at all times. He had a concealed weapons permit, and he was never without the pistol. His wife told me that he even slept with it on the bedside table.

There were a number of incidents. One night he very nearly shot a mutual friend approaching him whom he did not immediately recognize. Out with the .45 and drew a bead on Buzz's chest and was about to pull the trigger when he suddenly realized who it was.

Another time, he whipped out the .45 and took aim at someone trying to flee from a hit-and-run accident and got himself arrested by the police, who already had the situation in hand. My friend (ex-friend—I came to the conclusion that he was just too damned dangerous to be around—and his wife divorced him after a couple of years of marriage) was arrested by the police and his gun was confiscated. And his concealed weapons permit was rescinded for a three month period. He was told by the judge, in no uncertain terms, that the hit-and-run accident did not justify the use of lethal force.

So I know this kind of person.

They have a gun, they fancy themselves Defenders of Law and Order—and they are itching to shoot someone!!.

A black teen-ager, walking in the evening, wearing a "hoody," and carrying "something" in his hand (a box of candy he had just purchase at a convenience store), and Zimmerman assumed was casing the neighborhood, was just too big a temptation!

The police told him to cool it, but he went ahead anyway.

Don Firth


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Bobert
Date: 18 Jun 13 - 04:47 PM

Yup, Don... That's the case at hand...

BB wants to make it about Zimmerman being lynched or not getting a fair trial... What a bunch of baloney... Zimmerman's attorney is already getting away with stuff that most reasonable and non-partisan judges would have stopped immediately which does not bode well for justice being served here... Shaping up like O.J., Part II...

The point that Martin doesn't get an appeal seems to have shot right over bb's head... It's Martin who isn't going to get a fair trial... As for the lynching... Black kid with hoodie??? He got a 9mm lynching...

B~


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: beardedbruce
Date: 19 Jun 13 - 08:08 AM

I repeat, Bobert:



OK, I meet you on the street, and ++You++ say "What are you doing here?" I take this as an attack, and start beating your head against the ground. You shoot me (after getting your head pounded)

++You++ as the instigator are guilty of murder?



You have stated that you, as the instigator, are guilty of at least 2nd degree murder.

You have never answered any of my questions, nor acknowledged that I did provide an example of possible evidence that could be on the phone.

You have made a presumption of guilt on this, denying the basic tenant of American Justice that innocence is presumed, and the prosecution has to prove otherwise.

What can I say but that you are advocating a lynching to enforce your view of what happened? Where do you come off any different from the KKK, or other racist groups?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Bobert
Date: 19 Jun 13 - 08:34 AM

Your logic escapes reason, bb...

Guess better...

B~


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: beardedbruce
Date: 19 Jun 13 - 08:43 AM

Bobert,

I have tried to explain, but you refuse to address the issues.

Your failure to comprehend simple conditionals is not my problem.

Your failure to understand that a trial is to determine guilt, not rubber-stamp public opinion ++is++ of concern to me.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Bobert
Date: 19 Jun 13 - 09:04 AM

Yes, you have tried to explain... The problem is that your logic is badly flawed as you are having to invent scenarios that do not relate to the case...

B~


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: beardedbruce
Date: 19 Jun 13 - 09:15 AM

Wrong, Bobert.

Try to learn what a conditional is, someday.

I gave a set of scenarios that the Defense has stated it will be using, thus justifying the phone information as evidence. Any further "judgement" should be done by the ++Judge++ and not the prosecution, as ++You++ have stated.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Bobert
Date: 19 Jun 13 - 09:30 AM

Sorry, bruce, but I'm right and you are wrong...

A thousand more of your posts won't change that...

Like a learned clinical psychologist once told me when I was a socail worker, "You can't argue with irrational people"... He was right...

You can spin out a thousand more irrational/illogical posts but...

...I'm done with you...

Bye...

B~


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: beardedbruce
Date: 19 Jun 13 - 09:44 AM

And you, being "Right," would string Zimmerman up .


So what is the difference between you and the Klan? The color of your sheet? The fact "You" know you are right and they are "Wrong"?

You are correct in that one cannot argue with an irrational person. Maybe you should look i the mirror sometime.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Greg F.
Date: 19 Jun 13 - 10:52 AM

So what is the difference between you and the Klan

The KLAN? "LYNCHING"?? "The color of your sheet"??

This poses another question: What is the difference between yourself and an obnoxious, irrational, ignorant, foul-mouther asshole?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: beardedbruce
Date: 19 Jun 13 - 11:00 AM

"What is the difference between yourself and an obnoxious, irrational, ignorant, foul-mouther asshole?"


That's easy- I am "beardedbruce", not "GregF".


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Greg F.
Date: 19 Jun 13 - 12:03 PM

Pretty limp-dick response, Beardy. Where's your usual verbosity & rapier-like wit?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Don Firth
Date: 19 Jun 13 - 12:56 PM

The claim that Martin attacked Zimmerman is Zimmerman's story.

I saw rwo mug shots of Zimmerman, the first of which was a straight mug shot, the second of which was the same mug shot, but it had been photoshopped to make it look like he was covered with blood.

Did Martin attack Zimmerman? I don't think so! That was Zimmerman's excuse for killing Martin.

Don Firth


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Bobert
Date: 19 Jun 13 - 01:10 PM

Yeah, like I have pointed out, Don...

It was Zimmerman who ignored the police's instruction to remain in his vehicle... Had he done that then Martin would be alive today...

All this talk of lynching of Zimmerman is the sickest of sick thinking... The only lynching that has occurred was done by Zimmerman with a handgun...

Lets also look at the builds of these two people... Zimmerman is a pretty beefy dude... Martin was a skinny kid... Skinny kids generally don't go attacking guys who out weigh them by 50 or so pounds...

I mean, I understand exactly what Zimmerman's attorney is up to... It's trickery and it's part of his job but it's also the job of the judge to try to have a fair trial and unless the judge is willing to put a gag order out there then this is going to be O.J., Part 2...

B~


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: beardedbruce
Date: 19 Jun 13 - 03:14 PM

Subject: RE: BS: NON-Partisan political comments
From: beardedbruce - PM
Date: 02 Oct 04 - 11:41 PM

and from Bobert:

"Unless you are capable and willing to look beyond *your* side then you are allready in the loser category in my book. I mean no disrespect here but life isn't about winning law suits but being able to find common ground or selling visions."


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: bobad
Date: 22 Jun 13 - 03:32 PM

"The judge in the George Zimmerman trial has ruled that two voice identification experts who suggested that unarmed black teenager Trayvon Martin screamed for help before he was shot and killed by Zimmerman will not be allowed to testify at the trial."

Judge blocks audio expert testimony in Trayvon Martin case


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Bobert
Date: 22 Jun 13 - 03:42 PM

Like I have pointed out: So much for ***Martin*** getting a fair trial... Welcome to the South, folks...

B~


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: bobad
Date: 22 Jun 13 - 03:45 PM

Also from the same link:

"On Friday, the judge also dismissed a defense motion to bar certain words and phrases from the prosecution's opening statement.

She ruled prosecutors could allege that Zimmerman, who is Hispanic, "profiled" Martin but ordered them not to use the term "racial profiling."


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 23 Jun 13 - 08:53 AM

Didn't one of the first people to reach the scene say that Zimmerman was astride Martin's chest with Martin on his back?

If you were underneath someone, having your head bashed in, and you shot him, you would push him off and get up.

Why would you turn him over and kneel astride the body?

Don T.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Greg F.
Date: 23 Jun 13 - 09:15 AM

Necrophilia?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: beardedbruce
Date: 26 Jun 13 - 08:28 AM

"Meanwhile, defense attorney Mark O'Mara cross-examined Wendy Dorival, who served as volunteer program coordinator for the Sanford Police Department. Dorival stated that neighborhood watch volunteers were not supposed to follow suspects, but added that she thought Zimmerman was a professional person, and had tried to recruit him to a citizens patrol program. She said that it was suspicious that a person – Trayvon Martin – was walking in the rain between houses without a particular purpose.'



And these are the Prosecution's witnesses.



Already proven that one of Bobert's standard lies is just that- the "Police told him not to follow" line. It was the 911 operator:

"According to another witness, a 911 operator, it is not within the purview of 911 operators to give orders to callers."


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: beardedbruce
Date: 26 Jun 13 - 08:47 AM

Wendy Dorival, who trained Zimmerman in his duties as the watch representative for his gated community, described him as "a little meek" and someone who wanted to "make changes in his community to make it better."
Although a PowerPoint slide as part of Dorival's orientation presentation declared citizens are "NOT the vigilante police," she told defense attorney Don West that seeing an unknown or suspicious person walking around in the rain or on a pathway not meant for walking would be grounds for calling the police department's nonemergency number. That testimony could assist the defense in painting Zimmerman as someone who was simply carrying out his neighborhood watch duties rather than hunting down an unarmed teenager.
The defense's case was further strengthened by testimony that there had been burglaries in Zimmerman's community, including one in which a home was entered while a mother of a small child was upstairs. "She was alone," Dorival said. "It was terrifying for her. She was still shaken up by it. It seemed very fresh to her."
Dorival testified that residents who had an issue "were directed to call Mr. Zimmerman."
Perhaps just as significantly, Dorival came to Zimmerman with the idea of assuming greater duty in community policing. Asked why, Dorival said it was because of Zimmerman's "demeanor" and "his high interest in being part of a Sanford community."


http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/lookout/haunting-photos-unexpected-witness-defense-day-2-zimmerman-214809362.html


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Bobert
Date: 26 Jun 13 - 08:59 AM

Well, well, well...

Seems as if the judge has yet another opportunity to stick it to Martin and the prosecution today as police tapes of Zimmerman made prior to the murder indicating Zimmerman's focus on black males being in the neighborhood may not be admissible???

Huh???

Yup, Zimmerman had a history of calling the police when he saw black males in the neighborhood...

Not evidence???

I would think the jury has a right to know of those calls...

We'll see...

B~


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: beardedbruce
Date: 26 Jun 13 - 09:18 AM

Bobert,

From your comments, you are still only interested in finding Zimmerman guilty and punishing him for all the past injustices of the system- regardless of his guilt or innocence.

I am interested in finding out the truth. Sort of like having justice, instead of a lynching.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Greg F.
Date: 26 Jun 13 - 09:31 AM

I am interested in finding out the truth

Yeah, right.

By the way, Beardy, what's this lynching fixation of yours? Someone already asked you that a while back, & you failed to answer.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: beardedbruce
Date: 26 Jun 13 - 10:13 AM

Bobert:

"Also Wednesday, Judge Debra Nelson ruled that she would allow at trial five police dispatch calls Zimmerman made in the months prior to his encounter with Martin.
Prosecutors want to use the calls to bolster their argument that Zimmerman was increasingly frustrated with repeated burglaries and had reached a breaking point the night he shot the unarmed teenager. Prosecutors played the calls for the judge Tuesday with the jurors out of the courtroom.
The recordings show Zimmerman's "ill will," prosecutor Richard Mantei said.
"It shows the context in which the defendant sought out his encounter with Trayvon Martin," he said.
O'Mara argued that the calls were irrelevant and that nothing matters but the seven or eight minutes before Zimmerman fired the deadly shot into Martin's chest.
In the calls, Zimmerman identifies himself as a neighborhood watch volunteer and recounts that his neighborhood has had a rash of recent break-ins. In one call, he asks that officers respond quickly since the suspects "typically get away quickly."
In another, he describes suspicious black men hanging around a garage and mentions his neighborhood had a recent garage break-in.
"


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: beardedbruce
Date: 26 Jun 13 - 10:15 AM

"Seems as if the judge has yet another opportunity to stick it to Martin and the prosecution today as police tapes of Zimmerman made prior to the murder indicating Zimmerman's focus on black males being in the neighborhood may not be admissible???

Huh???

Yup, Zimmerman had a history of calling the police when he saw black males in the neighborhood...

Not evidence???

I would think the jury has a right to know of those calls..."







So did the judge.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Bobert
Date: 26 Jun 13 - 10:31 AM

Greg,

Remind bb that I don't read his posts anymore... His irrational thinking isn't worth my time...

Thanks,

B~


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 26 Jun 13 - 12:45 PM

"She said it was suspicious that a person was walking in the rain..."

That is completely insane.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Bobert
Date: 26 Jun 13 - 12:50 PM

When it comes to sanity there ain't gonna be too much of that with this trial...

The judge is already screwing around with the prosecution's case...

B~


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: beardedbruce
Date: 26 Jun 13 - 02:16 PM

Bobert:

"The judge is already screwing around with the prosecution's case..."

"Seems as if the judge has yet another opportunity to stick it to Martin and the prosecution today as police tapes of Zimmerman made prior to the murder indicating Zimmerman's focus on black males being in the neighborhood may not be admissible???


Real world:

"Also Wednesday, Judge Debra Nelson ruled that she would allow at trial five police dispatch calls Zimmerman made in the months prior to his encounter with Martin.
Prosecutors want to use the calls to bolster their argument that Zimmerman was increasingly frustrated with repeated burglaries and had reached a breaking point the night he shot the unarmed teenager. Prosecutors played the calls for the judge Tuesday with the jurors out of the courtroom.
The recordings show Zimmerman's "ill will," prosecutor Richard Mantei said.
"It shows the context in which the defendant sought out his encounter with Trayvon Martin," he said."




Of course, Real World facts have no bearing on this case- after all, in the Real World, with a fair trial Zimmerman might not be convicted.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: beardedbruce
Date: 26 Jun 13 - 03:01 PM

A former neighbor of George Zimmerman testified Wednesday that she heard a boy's cry for help shortly before hearing the firing of a gun.

But Jayne Surdyka also testified on the third day of testimony in Zimmerman's murder trial that she heard multiple gunshots: "pop, pop, pop." Only one shot was fired in the fatal encounter between Zimmerman and 17-year-old Trayvon Martin.

"I truly believe the second yell for help was a yelp," said Surdyka, who later dabbed away tears as prosecutors played her 911 call. "It was excruciating. I really felt it was a boy's voice."

Surdyka told the court that before the shooting, she heard an aggressive voice and a softer voice exchanging words for several minutes.

"It was someone being very aggressive and angry at someone," she said.

During the struggle, she said, she saw a person in dark clothes on top of the other person. Martin was wearing a dark sweatshirt and Zimmerman wore red clothing. Surdyka said she saw the person who was on top get off the body after the shot was fired.

During cross-examination, defense attorney Don West tried to show there was a lapse in what Surdyka saw. Defense attorneys contend Martin was on top of Zimmerman during the struggle, but after the neighborhood watch volunteer fired a shot, Zimmerman got on top of Martin.

West also challenged Surdyka about her belief that the cry for help was a boy's voice, saying she was making an assumption about whose voice it was.

Another neighbor, Jeannee Manalo, testified after Surdyka that she believed Zimmerman was on top of Martin. Manalo also described hearing howling, but she couldn't tell who it was coming from.

Under cross-examination, defense attorney Mark O'Mara asked why she had never mentioned her belief that Zimmerman was on top in previous police interviews. He made her read back a transcript of an interview in which she described only seeing shadows."






Note:
"During the struggle, she said, she saw a person in dark clothes on top of the other person. Martin was wearing a dark sweatshirt and Zimmerman wore red clothing. Surdyka said she saw the person who was on top get off the body after the shot was fired."


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: beardedbruce
Date: 26 Jun 13 - 03:06 PM

McGrath,

"She said that it was suspicious that a person – Trayvon Martin – was walking in the rain between houses without a particular purpose."


Along a street- not suspicious.

Between houses- suspicious.



Normally one does not go off the public right of way without a reason. Especially in a gated community


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: beardedbruce
Date: 26 Jun 13 - 03:44 PM

"Testifying in the Geoge Zimmerman trial, prosecution witness Rachel Jeantel, 19, who says she was on the phone with Trayvon Martin before he was shot, explained that Martin told her that a "creepy ass cracker" was following him. According to Jeantel, Martin was worried that Zimmerman was a rapist, and said to "stop playing with him like that." He also told Jeantel, she said, that the "n----- is now following him."
Jeantel is mumbling her testimony, leading to delays in the courtroom. She has already allegedly perjured herself months ago by stating that she missed Martin's funeral because she was in the hospital."


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: olddude
Date: 26 Jun 13 - 03:51 PM

There is one lesson in all of this. If you can carry a firearm legally. Avoid at all costs getting yourself into bad situations. Use the firearm only in the most deadly situations that you are put in and never go looking for trouble. Hell there is enough trouble out there in the world without looking for it.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 26 Jun 13 - 05:33 PM

There is another lesson in this. In fact there are several.

I can start the list with "Do not let people carry guns. Guns kill people".

I can add "Walking while black is a capital crime".   We all know of DWB but this takes it one stage further.

Who wants to carry the list on?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 26 Jun 13 - 06:10 PM

Ambiguity there. Streets are lined with houses. Walking along a street therefore involves walking between houses.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Bobert
Date: 26 Jun 13 - 07:27 PM

Thank you, ol'ster...

The one lesson that I came away with from martial arts is this: When is right to fight... Answer: never...

You understand the responsibility that goes with gun ownership... Unfortunately, you are in a small minority of gun owners... I've been hunting with people who say they understand gun safety but take unsafe shots...

B~


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Ebbie
Date: 26 Jun 13 - 09:45 PM

I've kind of kept arms length away from this shooting, trying not to get overly dogmatic about it. But I have a few questions that I have not heard addressed.

#1 According to yesterday's testimony, Martin was shot in "the chest area" and was still (barely) alive when the first responder tried to revive him. He testified that he rolled Martin's body over and gave him mouth to mouth.
#2 If Zimmerman is correct in saying that Martin was pounding his head on the concrete, then Martin was on top, i.e. you can't pound someone's head when it is at a distance. (Incidentally, were the two men curbside? Pictures show two small 'lumps' on Zimmerman's head that would seem to indicate an edge to the concrete.)
#3 Since Martin was shot in the chest, should not Zimmerman have been covered with blood? According to the first responder's testimony, Martin's heart was still beating, and therefore pumping blood. Zimmerman "was wearing red clothing"- does that explain why the blood was not the most visible thing present? The early accounts that I read never mentioned blood on Zimmerman, nor did I see any pictures of it.
#4 Zimmerman was taken down to the precinct station to make a statement and then let go. Presumably this was before he went home and changed clothes. Will there be testimony by the police department describing Zimmerman's clothing?
#4 After Martin was shot and Zimmerman was lying beneath him, presumably Martin's body was limp. What is the most common scenario in sliding out from under a limp body? Would one thrust it to the side and slide out? Or would one 'buck' it off?
#5 Did Zimmerman examine Martin's body after the shooting? In that case, it would be logical to say that he turned it face up. Yet, the first responder found it face down.

All that said, I can imagine that one's thinking processes would be so chaotic, so fragmented, that any logical sequence of events would be impossible.
As I said, I am come late to this subject- after all it is now in the trial phase - but please bear with me. I'm sure there is information out there that I don't know.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Bobert
Date: 26 Jun 13 - 09:53 PM

Thanks, Eb...

Well thought out...

B~


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: olddude
Date: 27 Jun 13 - 12:26 PM

You are very right EB, also there would be what is called tattooing on the victim (power burns on the skin from a firearm discharge closer than three to five feet. Likewise the shooters upper torso would be covered in gun shot residue, the spent cartridge would also indicate the distance. I see nothing to describe this stuff. Only questions that don't quite add up to me


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Bobert
Date: 28 Jun 13 - 09:56 AM

Well, seems like Zimmerman's attorneys are trying to make the murder victim the bad guy here...

I'm sniffing O.J. Part 2 here...

B~


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: olddude
Date: 28 Jun 13 - 10:14 AM

Bobster,
its Florida   he will walk free just watch. If it were Texas they would buy him a new gun


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Greg F.
Date: 28 Jun 13 - 12:31 PM

Not only would Texas buy him a new gun, they'd elect him to the US Senate.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: beardedbruce
Date: 28 Jun 13 - 12:45 PM

"Good took the stand today and said he first thought he was looking at a dog attack until he noticed two men. He says he yelled "stop" as he watched the fight.
"I said cut it out. I'm calling 911 because it was getting serious," said Good.
Good says he watched as what looked like punches being thrown.
"Could you describe who was on top and who was at bottom," asked prosecutor Bernie de la Rionda.
"The color on top was dark and the color at bottom was…red," responded Good referring to the men's clothing.
At another point he told the court that the person on the bottom had "lighter skin color."
Zimmerman is a white Hispanic who was wearing a red and black jacket that night. Martin, who was black, was wearing a dark sweatshirt.
He also said, "The person on the bottom, I could hear a 'Help.'"
Under cross examination by Zimmerman's lawyer, Good said he believes he saw Martin on top punching Zimmerman "MMA style," a reference to mixed martial arts.
"The person on top was ground and pounding the person on the bottom?"asked Zimmerman attorney Mark O'Mara
"Correct," said Good
But he said he did not see Martin banging Zimmerman's head on the concrete, which is what Zimmerman has claimed.
His testimony is in sharp contrast to Selma Mora, another witness to the fatal encounter between Zimmerman and Martin who testified late Thursday that Zimmerman was on top of Martin in the moments before a gunshot ended the fight.
"How were the two people positioned that you saw?" asked prosecutor John Guy.
Mora told the court Thursday that at some point she saw a man in "patterns between black and red" on top, indicating Zimmerman.
"One of them was on the ground, and the other one was on top in position like a rider," Mora, who speaks Spanish, testified through a translator."


http://gma.yahoo.com/george-zimmerman-witnesses-conflicting-versions-fatal-fight-145530258--abc-news-topstories.html



A responder at the scene said Martin's knuckles were bloodied, suggesting he had injured Zimmerman with a punch;
- The lead investigator on the scene, Officer Christopher Serino, wrote that Zimmerman could be heard "yelling for help as he was being battered by Trayvon Martin."


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: beardedbruce
Date: 28 Jun 13 - 01:07 PM

"CBS) A former neighbor of George Zimmerman testified he saw two men in a "tussle" outside his home the night of Feb. 26, 2012, and said he now believes the person on top in the altercation - which would moments later turn fatal - was Trayvon Martin.

In key testimony, he also said he believes George Zimmerman was the person yelling for help.

PICTURES: George Zimmerman on trial in death of Fla. teen

VIDEO: Zimmerman trial: Prosecutor opens with profanity

John Good took the stand Friday in the fifth day of testimony in the Zimmerman's second-degree murder trial. The former neighborhood watch captain is charged with shooting the unarmed teen as he was walking back to his father's fiancee's home through a Sanford, Fla. gated community.

John Good testified he saw a man in dark clothing on top of a man who was wearing red or light-colored clothing with lighter skin. Zimmerman, 29, was wearing a red jacket the night of the altercation, and Martin was wearing a dark hoodie. However, Good testified that he didn't see the person on top smashing the other person's head into the sidewalk, as Zimmerman claims Martin did before he fatally shot the teen.

READ: Trayvon Martin Shooting: A timeline of events

Taking the stand Thursday, John Good said he was at home watching television with his wife when he heard a "faint noise" that seemed to be getting closer. Outside, he said he saw the person on top of another man.

The man on the bottom, who he said he now believes is George Zimmerman, yelled for help.

"At first it was "What's going on," and no one answered,' " Good said, describing calling out for the men. "And then at that point the person on the bottom, I could finally see, I heard a 'help.' Then at some point I said 'Cut it out.' And then, 'I'm calling 911.' That's when I thought it was getting really serious."

The altercation seemed to escalate, according to Good. The struggle moved to the cement pathway, and he said the person in dark clothing straddled the other man in "mixed martial arts position" he later described to police as a "ground and pound." He said he saw "arm movements going downward," though he couldn't be certain the person on top was striking the person on the bottom.

"The person you now know to be Trayvon Martin was on top, correct?" asked defense attorney Mark O'Mara. "He was the one raining blows down on George Zimmerman, correct?"

"That's what it looked like," Good answered.

Good said he then went back inside to call 911. As he was dialing the phone, he heard a gunshot. His 911 call was played in court as the jury listened."

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-504083_162-57591520-504083/george-zimmerman-trial-neighbor-testifies-trayvon-martin-was-straddling-z


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: beardedbruce
Date: 28 Jun 13 - 01:25 PM

"Political Strategist Charles D. Ellison also warns that, "There is the risk of a flashpoint as intense as the aftermath of that fateful Los Angeles police brutality verdict in 1992," if Zimmerman walks free.
"At that time, many underestimated the potential for social unrest. And a bit over 20 years to the date, many could be making the same miscalculation at this very moment. The ingredients are there in Sanford and they loom large nationally, from an economy barely managing its own recovery to an unemployment rate that's much higher than it should be, particularly for African-Americans," adds Ellison.
Some are even asking whether the law should be ignored and Zimmerman convicted simply to avoid race riots.
"Regardless of whether or not Zimmerman acted in self defense, a large segment of the population, particularly the black population, are demanding Zimmerman be punished. And if they don't have their demands satisfied, it is possible they might riot," writes a poster at the Aesops Retreat forum. "So would it be appropriate to consider potential riots when deciding on whether or not to prosecute Zimmerman? Or should justice be blind and follow the rule of law?"
Critics of the attempt to convict Zimmerman have cited numerous points of evidence which clearly suggest Zimmerman acted in self-defense and that the case against him was built largely on the back of contrived racial politics."


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Greg F.
Date: 28 Jun 13 - 02:59 PM

Oh, dear - another bout of bloody postarrhoea. Condition may be approaching critical.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: GUEST,Arkie
Date: 28 Jun 13 - 03:52 PM

Seems to me the major flaw in the claim that Zimmerman acted in self defense is that he forced the contact with Martin by stalking him and while he may have been comforted in knowing that the had a hand on his pistol he could have kept his distance. He had contacted police and done his duty as neighborhood watch. I think most of us would have developed some concern if we were walking along a residential street and become aware that someone was following us. If there were an armband, cap, or insignia on a car to indicate neighbor watch, we might take note. I doubt that I would confront the stalker, but there is possibly here some who would. Even if Martin confronted Zimmerman and even if he made the first physical contact, Zimmerman is still, at least, partially at fault.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 29 Jun 13 - 12:15 AM

Let the verdict come in according to the EVIDENCE, not political posturing.

GfS


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Bobert
Date: 29 Jun 13 - 10:07 AM

What evidence???

The prosecutors have already had some of their case disallowed by the judge???

This trial is bogus as a $3 bill...

We have been told over and over by the media that the prosecution will have an uphill battle... Who writes that and gives it to the reporters to read???

There's more politics in this case than Carter has liver pills...

Welcome to the South...

Home of Jim Crow, the KKK, the Minutemen and over 1000 organized hate groups and where judges have to be partisan to get their jobs...

How do you spell Kangaroo Court???

B~


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 29 Jun 13 - 10:26 AM

Bobert: "What evidence???"
"There's more politics in this case than Carter has liver pills..."

Quit being silly...they only disallowed the unintelligible phone call recording, and both sides had their 'expert' witness, to refute each other.
It sounds to me, that the real evidence that the DO have, is just not the stuff fits your politics.

You've already decided, without hearing all the evidence, or even before the trial's over, how you want it to go, so ANY evidence that doesn't go 'your way', is considered, "What evidence???"

Watch a good football game, if you want to root for a team, one way or the other. Trials are different...they just want to get to the facts...no biases, one way or the other.

I haven't been on this thread, merely because I figured, it would be a battle of wits, for witless bigots....trying to ensure that their personal discriminations, one way or the other, would rule the day!
....nor have I 'promoted' one side or the other. All I've said was, "Let the verdict come in according to the EVIDENCE, not political posturing."
Something wrong with that..................too?

GfS


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Bobert
Date: 29 Jun 13 - 12:47 PM

I can tell that you have never lived in the South nor paid much attention to what happens down here, GfinS...

Google up Greensboro massacre for a quick primer...

BTW, the lynching has already occurred here... 9mm style...

B~


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: GUEST,SJL
Date: 30 Jun 13 - 08:28 AM

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Don Firth
Date: 18 Jun 13 - 03:35 PM

Excellent post. Pretty much says it all.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Don Firth
Date: 30 Jun 13 - 01:22 PM

Thanks, SJL.

Here is a link to my post.

Don Firth


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 30 Jun 13 - 01:34 PM

Bobert, I don't know if you have heard...but in America, or what used to be known as America, you are innocent, unless PROVEN guilty. All the prosecution has to do, is prove its case, and he's convicted. All the prejudice in the world, one way or the other, shouldn't win or lose the case.
Why do you bring up and condemn 'lynching', and the 'Greensboro massacre'...and then go on a tirade and play the part, as if you were some frothing idiot in a lynch mob???

Just calm down..let the trial run its course....if the results aren't to your liking, THEN you can join a frothing mob, and riot, like in your southern lynch mob mentality...and while you're rioting, you can keep telling yourself, that it's not about justice, it's about race!
Now, does that make you feel better??

GfS


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Don Firth
Date: 30 Jun 13 - 05:38 PM

Goofball, when the judge and some of the attorneys are displaying a considerable measure of prejudice by disallowing certain testimony and evidence to be presented, it doesn't take an intelligent person long to figure out that the court is biased, and what that bias is.

Let me repeat:   It doesn't take an intelligent person long to figure out the bias of the court.

I personally think they should take that trial out of that jurisdiction and conduct it where there is far less historical prejudice and both George Zimmerman AND Trayvon Martin get a fair verdict.

'Course don't listen to me. I'm only one of those "loony Liberals" who tend to value things like honesty and fairness. . . .

Don Firth


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 30 Jun 13 - 06:00 PM

Don: "'Course don't listen to me. I'm only one of those "loony Liberals" who tend to value things like honesty and fairness. . . ."

You had me going there..but you lost me about halfway through your last sentence!

GfS


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 30 Jun 13 - 06:15 PM

FFS.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: beardedbruce
Date: 01 Jul 13 - 11:35 AM

"The prosecutors have already had some of their case disallowed by the judge???"

I note that you did not complain when the defense had some of it's case disallowed by the judge.....




"By most accounts, last week was not what the state in the George Zimmerman case would have hoped for. In one way or another, more than half of the prosecution witnesses supported Zimmerman's account of what happened the night Trayvon Martin was killed.
Prosecutors started strong with a powerful, concise opening statement from Assistant State Attorney John Guy, in contrast to the silly knock-knock joke and seemingly disorganized and meandering defense argument.
Photos of the final candy and drink that Martin, 17, purchased minutes before his death riveted the jury, followed by haunting images of his dead body, the end result of a quick visit to a 7-11.
But then something happened that many would have thought improbable as this case received wall to wall coverage leading up to Zimmerman's arrest.

What the state hoped would be proof that Zimmerman initiated the altercation and that he, not Martin, was on top as they grappled on the ground, did not appear to proceed as planned. A variety of eye and ear witnesses of varying credibility, did offer testimony to support the prosecution theory that Zimmerman was the aggressor before the shot was fired. They either heard what they thought was Zimmerman instigating the encounter or in one case heard a chase (which Zimmerman insists never happened).
But with each witness there were either facts that we now know are not true (like hearing three shots, when there was only one) or indications that their memories have somehow become clearer since the incident itself.
While those sorts of attacks on witnesses, in particular eyewitnesses, are standard fare for cross examination, the state's troubles seemed to extend further than minor inconsistencies.
Even the prosecution's effort to show that Zimmerman was an over-eager, wannabe cop backfired when a witness from the Sanford Police Department, testifying as part of the prosecution's case, admitted that she tried to recruit Zimmerman for a citizen's patrol and that "George was very professional, a little meek, really wanted to make community better."
Then came the state's star witness, Rachel Jeantel, who recounted those final moments on the phone with Martin.
"He told me the man kept following him," Jeantel testified. "I say, 'Trayvon,' and then he said, 'Why are you following me for?' And then I heard a hard-breathing man come say, 'What you doing around here?' ... And then I was calling, 'Trayvon, Trayvon.' And then I started to hear a little bit of Trayvon saying, 'Get off, get off.'"
If jurors believe her, that Martin said "get off," then there seems to be little question that Zimmerman at least initiated the incident.
The problem? She admitted to lying on certain matters, and most importantly she was confronted with an earlier account, where she had recalled Zimmerman uttering the far more innocuous response, "What are you talking about," rather the more menacing "What are you doing around here" The difference between bewilderment by Zimmerman as opposed to a veiled accusation is a significant one.
But the ambiguity surrounding her testimony was nothing compared to the clarity of neighbor and witness John Good. His vantage point and detailed account may be more definitive than that of any other witness to date, and rather than supporting the prosecution's case, he seemed to bolster Zimmerman's claim that Martin was beating him.
Good testified that the lighter skinned man was on the bottom. He also described to the jury the clothing that he saw.
"The color on top was dark and the color at bottom was ... red," Martin said. Zimmerman is a white Hispanic who was wearing a red jacket while Martin, who was black, was wearing a dark sweatshirt.
"The person on the bottom, I could hear a 'Help,'" Good said."

http://gma.yahoo.com/george-zimmerman-prosecutions-woes-analysis-140121038--abc-news-topstories.html







"How do you spell Kangaroo Court???"

'B o b e r t'


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Bobert
Date: 01 Jul 13 - 11:44 AM

Southern courts have a long tradition of fucking over black people...

The Southern Poverty Law Center has a team of lawyers that try to level the field but it's like going up against an intransigent army of Southern white racists, bigots and, frankly, rednecks who will fight against equal justice tooth and nail...

Anyone interested in a glimpse into just how intransigent these folks can be should read Morris Dees' book "A Lawyer's Journey"...

B~


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: beardedbruce
Date: 01 Jul 13 - 11:48 AM

So the solution, your "Affirmative Action" plan, is to lynch enough non-blacks to make up for past injustices???




If the race of the defendant and victim were reversed, I would be posting the same comments- Would you?

And who would that indicate was being bigoted based on race?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: beardedbruce
Date: 01 Jul 13 - 11:53 AM

"If these six women jurors believe the fight would not have occurred but for Zimmerman "following" Martin -- which remains a matter of dispute -- and even if they are convinced that Zimmerman initiated the confrontation, that alone is not enough to convict under Florida law.

When this case entered the public consciousness, Florida's "Stand Your Ground" law became a national focus. Under that controversial law, determining who was the aggressor is crucial to assessing whether a defendant can succeed in having a case dismissed. The defense here chose not to rely on that law, probably because they would have lost at a hearing.

Instead, they are arguing classic self defense and so Zimmerman's actions and mindset when he fired the shot are at issue. Was he reasonably in fear for his life or great bodily harm at the moment he pulled the trigger?

This jury could believe Zimmerman was wrong, even be convinced that he stalked Martin and still find that the prosecution had not survived its legal burden beyond a reasonable doubt. These legal distinctions are important and as part of the live coverage on many cable and local news networks they are discussing these issues thereby allowing people to better understand the process.

This is not to suggest in any way that the prosecution should be throwing in the towel. This week they will present evidence of inconsistencies in Zimmerman's own account of what happened and if they find his story implausible that could spell trouble for the defense. Furthermore, jurors can give some witnesses far more weight than others.

But no matter what happens, I know I'll be glad that the world watched and judged it, and the verdict, for themselves."

http://abcnews.go.com/US/george-zimmerman-prosecutions-woes/story?id=19541263&page=2#.UdGlixZ1CS0


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 01 Jul 13 - 12:07 PM

""If the race of the defendant and victim were reversed, I would be posting the same comments- Would you?

And who would that indicate was being bigoted based on race?
""

If that reversal had been the case, then the black guy would have been tried, convicted and condemned by now, that is, if he hadn't been shot dead while "resisting arrest".

Don T.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 01 Jul 13 - 12:13 PM

""This jury could believe Zimmerman was wrong, even be convinced that he stalked Martin and still find that the prosecution had not survived its legal burden beyond a reasonable doubt. These legal distinctions are important and as part of the live coverage on many cable and local news networks they are discussing these issues thereby allowing people to better understand the process.""

These legal distinctions are important in the framework of allowing the gung ho killer to evade the consequences of his crime when the killee is a black child armed with candy, dangerous only to his teeth.

If Zimmerman walks this opens the hunting season on black kids in Florida.

Don T.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Greg F.
Date: 01 Jul 13 - 12:18 PM

Hey! Ol' Lynchin' Bigot Bruce is back! With the same lynchin', bigot horseshit!

Tiresome.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Don Firth
Date: 01 Jul 13 - 01:03 PM

Beardedbruce, what you are accusing others of tends to indicate the direction of your own prejudices.

Don Firth


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Bobert
Date: 01 Jul 13 - 01:18 PM

Yeah, seems that the "lynching" has already occurred... It was of the 9 mm variety and now that the lyncher has been caught seems that all the pro-gun,k right-winged racists want nothing but exoneration for their poster boy lyncher...

Who is not getting justice out of this Southern kangaroo court is Trevon Martin... Nor does he get an appeal...

Welcome to the South, ya'll... Come back, ya' hear???

Bob


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: beardedbruce
Date: 01 Jul 13 - 01:23 PM

Don,
"
Beardedbruce, what you are accusing others of tends to indicate the direction of your own prejudices.
"


So, you are stating that Bobert has indicated the direction of his thoughts, too, or is it only those your disagree with that you apply this standard to?


I have stated that the laws should be followed, and Bobert has stated that he will only be satisfied with a guilty verdict, regardless of what is brought out at the trial.Who is it that is in favor of lynching?????????????????



What a bunch of racist bigots.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: beardedbruce
Date: 01 Jul 13 - 01:43 PM

I ++have++ stated that if the races were reversed I would still be saying the same things.

The defendant in any trial is entitled to a legal trail , or the verdict can be thrown out.

I apply this to any race.

Some here have stated that they only apply it when certain races are the victims or defendants, and not if a different race is. If that is not racism, perhaps someone can politely state why not.

I have seen no criticism of Greggie boy's comments, so I continue to presume that they represent the "Liberal" majority here. If I judge you too harshly, too bad. You bring it on yourselves by your own defense of his personnel attacks.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 01 Jul 13 - 02:26 PM

""I apply this to any race.""

You may certainly be honest enough to do so.

I'd really like to be able to say that I could believe that the Sanford authorities and the Florida judiciary were half as honest.

They, absent the public outcry, were not even going to arrest the killer, let alone try him.

Can you, hand on on heart, say that you believe that would have been their reaction had the races been reversed as per your earlier comment?

If you answer yes to that, I would like a couple of ounces of what you are smoking.

Don T.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: beardedbruce
Date: 01 Jul 13 - 02:39 PM

Don,

This entire thread is about the ILLEGAL withholding BY the Prosecution of evidence, contrary to US law. Bobert thinks that is just fine as long as they string Zimmerman up. Do you agree with him, or with the goal of a fair trail, under the law, that will not be thrown out for procedural errors, regardless of the final verdict?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Don Firth
Date: 01 Jul 13 - 03:14 PM

"Withholding of evidence" are the key words here, Beardedbruce!

THAT is not "justice" for anyone!!

It has one helluva lot to do with racism, but Bobert and I are NOT the racists here!

Don Firth


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: beardedbruce
Date: 01 Jul 13 - 03:19 PM

Don F

If the defendant was black and the victim white, would Bobert be willing to accept the Prosecution violating the law and withholding evidence? I would not.



Yet he does accept it, because the victim was black and the defendent is white/hispanic.

That IS racism, regardless of what you might choose to believe.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: KB in Iowa
Date: 01 Jul 13 - 03:32 PM

This entire thread is about the ILLEGAL withholding BY the Prosecution of evidence, contrary to US law.

I have still only ever seen the comments of one former prosecutor indicating that this actually happened.

Do you have more evidence that I have missed?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Greg F.
Date: 01 Jul 13 - 03:36 PM

Yet he does accept it, because the victim was black and the defendent is white/hispanic.

More bullshit from Bullshit Bruce, who chooses to conveniently ignore 300 years of southern history and precedents.

For an obnoxious asshole that keeps going on about "lynching" one might expect some actual knowledge of the history of lynching- suggest that he read Philip Dray's At The Hands Of Persons Unknown for a start, or any of DuBois' works on the subject, or the sources cited in Dray's bibliography.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Greg F.
Date: 01 Jul 13 - 03:43 PM

Do you have more evidence that I have missed?

BullshitBruce does not, and never has, let actual evidence get in the way of his Niagara of horseshit, KB.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: GUEST,SJL
Date: 01 Jul 13 - 05:40 PM

There are people working behind the scenes to keep George Zimmerman out of jail. He's got some good buddies in his neighborhood I've noticed. Send him up here. We'll try and convict him. In my town, we don't allow vigilantes. Our neighborhood watch people call the police and report suspicious behavior only. Our police actually have a good relationship with the community and will actually respond to multiple complaints from residents trying to clean up their neighborhoods.

Of course, I'm lying about all this. My friend Nick wrote a song called "The Cops in My Town", and it went something like this:

The cops in my town will squeeze your nuts
And they won't put up with up with no ifs or ands and especially no buts
Especially no buts

They get their sleep on the top floor of the parking garage
....................................................................
And their cars you cannot dodge
Their cars you cannot dodge

That's all I remember. Wish I had written it down.

Anyway, the parking garage bit was a reference to one of our senior officers who brought a lounge chair and an alarm clock to the parking garage to get a bit of shut-eye before calling in. Of course, one time he slept through and everybody found out.

And in case you are wondering what happened to the pair of young officers who decided to get even with the local newspaper for anti-cop press by getting drunk as skunks and whipping golf balls at the newspaper office. One made detective and the other just became our new police chief.

Folks, you can't make this stuff up.

Here's to you George Wannabe. I hope you must pay for taking that boy's life. You had no business freaking him out in the first place.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: GUEST,SJL
Date: 01 Jul 13 - 05:59 PM

That's right George. It doesn't matter one whit whether Trayvon became proactive in the encounter (as a whole).

GUILTY!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Bobert
Date: 01 Jul 13 - 06:00 PM

Yup, SJL...

You murder a kid and you do time... Not get a medal from Redneck Nation...

B~


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: GUEST,SJL
Date: 01 Jul 13 - 06:07 PM

You know what Bobert? I'm beginning to like you. I'm beginning to like you a whole lot.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Don Firth
Date: 01 Jul 13 - 06:08 PM

The unalterable fact is that when Zimmerman did his duty as a block watch person and called the police about seeing what he construed to be a suspicious person (a black teenager walking home from a convenience store after buying a box of candy), the police told him not to approach the "suspect."

Zimmerman disobeyed the police and confronted Martin anyway.

If Zimmerman had obeyed the police, the whole matter would be sorted out by now. Trayvon Martin would most cartainly still be alive and this whole asininely tragic episode would never have happened.

There was an old Western on television a few decades back called "Have Gun, Will Travel." Whenever you watched the show, you could be damned sure that Paladin was going to shoot somebody before the show was over!

Like the acquaintance I talked about up-thread, undoubtedly Zimmerman was trigger-happy and itching to use his 9 mm. pistol. Otherwise, he would have just sat tight like the police told him to do.

Don Firth


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: GUEST,SJL
Date: 01 Jul 13 - 06:14 PM

Def.

"Those assholes always get away" - eh?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Greg F.
Date: 01 Jul 13 - 06:28 PM

Yeah, Don, but Paladin was more often than not on the right side of things- he did have a pretty good moral code.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Don Firth
Date: 01 Jul 13 - 06:35 PM

The difference between Paladin and Zimmerman. Paladin wasn't just trigger-happy, he made certain he knew what he was doing.

Don Firth


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Greg F.
Date: 01 Jul 13 - 06:47 PM

Roger that.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Suzy Sock Puppet
Date: 02 Jul 13 - 12:22 AM

And I was about to say that if any should oppose Don, come back in the next decade and ask us what we think then. Ain't gonna be any different.

Shut up and go to sleep Don. I never was into crystal meth. Why are you still up?

Am I am laughing? Seriously? Get out of town! The world is full of dumb fucks. Let us strive not to be one of them,


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Don Firth
Date: 02 Jul 13 - 12:28 AM

Huh?

Don Firth


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 02 Jul 13 - 05:40 AM

""This entire thread is about the ILLEGAL withholding BY the Prosecution of evidence, contrary to US law.""

You made the comment Bruce, that you would not take race into account, so how about a response to my question:
"They, absent the public outcry, were not even going to arrest the killer, let alone try him.

Can you, hand on on heart, say that you believe that would have been their reaction had the races been reversed as per your earlier comment?"

____________________________________________________________________

""Bobert thinks that is just fine as long as they string Zimmerman up. Do you agree with him, or with the goal of a fair trail, under the law, that will not be thrown out for procedural errors, regardless of the final verdict?""

I agree with you, that anybody accused of a crime should have a fair trial!

Bobert thinks this trial will be anything but fair, and I regret that I must agree with that.

The whole procedure from the time of the killing has been handled by the authorities as though Zimmerman were some kind of local superhero, fighting crime on the streets, and their foot dragging over the arrest shows clearly that they didn't want any arraignment or trial.

The prosecution too is seemingly making a complete dogs breakfast of the trial.

The only logical conclusion, as far as I can see, is that the trial has already been held and the fix is in for Zimmerman to walk.

If he had killed a white man, he would have been the Hispanic murderer, but it was only a black kid, so who cares?

Don T.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 02 Jul 13 - 05:51 AM

Richard Bridge, who is a well respected UK lawyer, took the trouble to research the disclosure rules in the USA.

Based upon the results of that research, he gave the opinion that the pictures on Trayvon Martin's phone which were the basis of the defence complaint did not fall within the realms of necessary disclosure under US LAW!

This comment was studiously ignored by Bruce!

Don T.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 02 Jul 13 - 06:03 AM

Here it is!

""Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Richard Bridge - PM
Date: 06 Jun 13 - 02:48 AM

Bah. Why don't people look shit up. From Cornell University: -

"Upon a defendant's request, the government must permit the defendant to inspect and to copy or photograph books, papers, documents, data, photographs, tangible objects, buildings or places, or copies or portions of any of these items, if the item is within the government's possession, custody, or control and:

(i) the item is material to preparing the defense;

(ii) the government intends to use the item in its case-in-chief at trial; or

(iii) the item was obtained from or belongs to the defendant".



So in the present case the key question is whether the item is material to preparing the defence. While the material MIGHT be evidential of Martin's character, it seems to me that that what may be in issue (that is not the same thing as what will necessarily be in issue) is what Zimmerman reasonably believed Martin's intentions to be that night. It is very hard indeed to see how month-old photos that Zimmerman had never seen could influence Zimmerman's belief on that night.

It looks to me therefore as if the photos were not discoverable.
""

Don T.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 02 Jul 13 - 06:11 AM

So, why not let the jury decide?
Why withhold anything from the defence?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: GUEST,SJL
Date: 02 Jul 13 - 07:55 AM

Yup. The fix is in for Zimmerman to walk. Shame, shame.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: beardedbruce
Date: 02 Jul 13 - 08:07 AM

Don T,

When asked by Bobert, I supplied a scenario where the phone TEXT messages might be significant evidence. He never bothered to comment on that. Why do you insist on talking about only the photos? Is your argument so weak that you must resort to using that sort of tactic?

As for whether this will be a fair trial, I expect that the jury will be directed to convict Zimmerman "for the public good" to prevent social reaction, regardless of his guilt or innocence.

If the trail would have been unfair had the defendant been black, then that would have been wrong. Obviously.

But to use that as an excuse to prevent a fair trial for this defendant is also wrong.


In ANY case, if one reverses the races of the individuals involved, and comes to a different conclusion, then one is a racist. Period. Too many here have demonstrated that that is what they are,


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: beardedbruce
Date: 02 Jul 13 - 08:35 AM

Don F,

In your post of 1 Jul 13 - 06:08 PM you state three times that "The police" told Zimmerman not to follow Martin. I have previously provided references and quotes from the trial where a witness stated that the 911 operator, who talked to Zimmerman and told him not to follow the suspect, did not have the right to give Zimmerman orders.





From pdq-


Date: 13 Jun 13 - 08:00 PM

"...he was legally bound to avoid the situation as the police ordered him to stand down..."

Zimmerman said he was following the suspect and the dispatcher said "we don't need you to do that."

First, that is a suggestion, not an order to "stand down".

Second, it came from the dispatcher (not a cop) who has no authority to order a civilian to do anything. Besides, Zimmerman was the authorized neighborhood watchman at that time.





My post- 26 Jun 13 - 08:28 AM

"
Already proven that one of Bobert's standard lies is just that- the "Police told him not to follow" line. It was the 911 operator:

"According to another witness, a 911 operator, it is not within the purview of 911 operators to give orders to callers."
"


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Bobert
Date: 02 Jul 13 - 09:33 AM

Thank you, DonT, for re-posting Richard's well reasoned legal opinion on the stuff in Martin's cell phone... As difficult as it is for the folks who see Zimmerman as some folk hero for gunning down a black kid there is no way in hell that Zimmerman could have known what was in Martin's phone or how that gave Zimmerman some reason to murder Martin...

This is beyond debate for rational thinking people... And this is why I no longer respond to people who can't even get that far in their reasoning... One cannot discuss, reason or debate anything with people who, frankly, are irrational...

And, yes, the prosecutors are just going thru the motions here... Reminds me of the time when I took a neighbor to court for shooting his gun irresponsibly and rounds were flying over my head while I worked in my own garden... About 3 minutes into that trial I knew that the prosecutor saw the case as some gun-rights thing and was bungling the hell out of it... I was whispering to the prosecutor things that he should be doing and saying but the prosecutor was ignoring me... Then it looked as if the judge was about to dismiss when I jumped up and took over the prosecution, approached the bench and told the judge in no uncertain terms that if he dismissed the case then he was "going to turn my property into my neighbor's one man war zone" and that it would be on him (the judge) "if anyone got shot"... That's what the real prosecutor should have done... The judge, BTW, continued the case which kept my neighbor playing nice and not shooting at us...

The Zimmerman prosecutor ain't much better than the bozo that was appointed to my case...

This is a kangaroo court... Worse than the O.J. court... Worse than any I've seen... Shame on Florida... Shame on the South... Shame, shame, shame...

B~


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Greg F.
Date: 02 Jul 13 - 09:42 AM

And shame on Beardy as a Florida Apologist.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: beardedbruce
Date: 02 Jul 13 - 09:59 AM

"Jurors today heard George Zimmerman's account in his own words of his fatal confrontation with Trayvon Martin as prosecutors played a dramatic audio tape of Zimmerman being questioned by police shortly after the shooting.

Zimmerman is heard telling a police officer how he saw Martin walking through his Sanford, Fla. neighborhood on a dark, rainy Feb. 2012 night. As a neighborhood watchman he tried to follow him in his car because there had been a series of break-ins in the gated community.



Zimmerman said he lost sight of Martin, got out of his car to call police and was walking back to his vehicle when the 17-year-old attacked him.

"He jumped out of the bushes and he said 'What the f..k is your problem, homie?'" Zimmerman said on the tape.

"And I got my cell phone out to call 911 this time, and I said 'I don't have a problem.' And he goes, 'No, now you have a problem,' and he punched me in the nose."

In court, jurors listened closely to the tape, while Zimmerman showed no emotion and Martin's father closed his eyes from time to time.

Zimmerman told police he fell down to the ground after being punched repeatedly. "I tried to defend myself. He just started punching me in the face, and I started screaming for help. I couldn't see. I couldn't breathe."

"He puts his hand on my nose and mouth, and he says 'You are going to die tonight.'

He said "the suspect" was "mounted on top of me" and began to bang his head onto the ground.

"As he banged my head again, I just pulled out my firearm and shot him," Zimmerman said.

He said Martin fell backward. "And he's like 'Alright, you got me, you got me.'"

Under questioning, Officer Doris Singleton, who conducted the audio interview, said Zimmerman appeared shocked when he learned Martin's wound was fatal.

"He's dead!?" she quoted him as saying.

"I thought you knew that," she said she replied.

Zimmerman "kinda slung his head and shook it," she said.

Jurors were also shown a second interview, this one videotaped by police a day after the slaying. In this version, Zimmerman re-enacted the confrontation and added that he pulled out his gun "after he hit my head against the concrete several times.""

http://www.nypost.com/p/news/national/describes_jumped_confrontation_trayvon_I5bI2yMehibUIdCyF6XT8H?utm_source=SFnewyorkpost&utm



And

"Zimmerman told the police officer that he lost track of Martin and got out of his truck to look for a street name he could relay to police dispatcher. When the dispatcher suggested Zimmerman didn't need to follow Martin, Zimmerman started to head back to his vehicle. At that point, Zimmerman said Martin jumped out of some bushes, punched him and he fell to the ground.

Zimmerman said that Martin began hitting his head against the sidewalk as Zimmerman yelled for help and that Martin told him, "You're going to die tonight."

With Zimmerman's shirt and jacket pushed up during the struggle and his holstered gun now visible, he thought Martin was reaching for his firearm holstered around his waist. Zimmerman told the officer that he shot Martin and the teen said, "You got me."

In a written statement, Singleton read in court, Zimmerman refers to Martin as "the suspect." Singleton said it didn't appear that Zimmerman showed any anger when talking about the teen. Prosecutors must show that Zimmerman acted with ill will or a depraved mind in order to get a second-degree murder conviction.

Singleton recounted that Zimmerman noticed a cross she was wearing and said: "In Catholic religion, it's always wrong to kill someone."

The officer responded, "If what you're telling me is true, I don't think that what God meant was that you couldn't save your own life."

Zimmerman also acted surprised when Singleton told him Martin was dead.

"He's dead?!" Singleton recalled Zimmerman saying, before he lowered his head toward the table in the interrogation room.

Jurors also heard from the lead detective in the case, Officer Chris Serino, who asked him several pointed questions about whether the teenager could have felt threatened because Zimmerman was following him."


http://tampa.cbslocal.com/2013/07/01/zimmerman-to-officer-in-catholic-religion-its-always-wrong-to-kill-someone/


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: beardedbruce
Date: 02 Jul 13 - 10:06 AM

ANd as for what the posters here "Know" about the cue:


On Monday, CNN showed George Zimmerman's Social Security number and other personal information live over the air, including address, date of birth, and phone number.
Officer Doris Singleton was testifying when the prosecutors showed a narrative report including Zimmerman's information.
That immediately launched a round of tweets by Zimmerman haters celebrating knowledge of that information.
This is hardly the first time Zimmerman's personal information has been distributed by those who oppose him. During the initial coverage of the Zimmerman trial, Spike Lee retweeted the home address of what he thought was Zimmerman's home address. It turned out to be the wrong address. Roseanne Barr then tweeted Zimmerman's parents' home address. "If Zimmerman isn't arrested I'll rt his address again. maybe go 2 his house myself," Barr tweeted.
This isn't the first element of media bias in the Zimmerman case, either. The Associated Press originally reported that Zimmerman was white. That falsehood was repeated for days by the media, heightening the racial aspect of the case.
The media also broadcast photographs of Zimmerman from a 2005 arrest rather than current photos, and conversely broadcast photographs of Martin as a pre-teen, not the 17-year-old he was at the time of the killing (the media's photographic choices actually impacted witness testimony during the trial).
NBC News manipulated tape of Zimmerman's 911 call to make it seem that Zimmerman had targeted Martin because he was black, rather than responding to 911 dispatcher questions. CNN also isolated audio of Zimmerman purportedly calling Martin a racial slur during the call -- an allegation that ended up being completely false.
Both ABC News and NBC News also alleged that Zimmerman's injuries did not exist, releasing badly-pixellated photographs from the night of the incident. As trial testimony has shown, Zimmerman was indeed injured during the incident with Martin.

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Journalism/2013/07/01/CNN-broadcasts-Zimmerman-social-security




So, Bobert, if you can't lynch Zimmerman, maybe you can join in burning out his parents.


But make sure you ignore any evidence that he acted just like you would have...


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: beardedbruce
Date: 02 Jul 13 - 10:34 AM

"Serino, who unsuccessfully recommended that manslaughter charges be filed against Zimmerman soon after the shooting, said Zimmerman appeared to be relieved when told him the shooting had been videotaped.

"Thank God," Zimmerman replied.

Serino said based on his response he thought Zimmerman was either a pathological liar or telling the truth, but concluded that Zimmerman truly wished the incident was videotaped. The shooting, however, really wasn't taped.
"
http://abcnews.go.com/2020/george-zimmerman-recalled-trayvon-martin-gosh/story?id=19543886#.UdLk4RZ1CS1


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Greg F.
Date: 02 Jul 13 - 10:56 AM

My apologies, all. I appear to have provoked yet another bout of bloody bloggy Beardy postarrhoea.

Perhaps a change in his diet would be helpful, it the paregoric isn't working.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: beardedbruce
Date: 02 Jul 13 - 11:02 AM

I note that the Zimmerman Haters have not made one comment about the evidence presented at the trial. I guess their lynching is being threatened- though I am sure Bobert and his racist Greggie boy are looking for the tree- since they have the rope ready and waiting.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: beardedbruce
Date: 02 Jul 13 - 11:28 AM

Another fucking lie noted:

"
This comment was studiously ignored by Bruce!

Don T."



"
Date: 14 Jun 13 - 08:23 AM

TO REPEAT:

Since Bobert continues...




Bobert,

I gave you a scenario where the TEXTS would be significant, and you keep going on about the PHOTOS. BOTH were withheld- Are you trying to get around the fact that I answered your question???

Or are you just being an asshole on general principles, as your racist friend Greggie is?"



Date: 14 Jun 13 - 09:37 AM

Bobert,

YOU have never acknowledged, or discusses the strength of MY comment. Do I have to repeat it another time??? Have you forgotten it? Are you just ignoring anything you don't agree with?

I gave you a sample text that WOULD HAVE BEEN EVIDENCE that could have been on the phone, and withheld by the prosecution - Yet you keep on about pictures? Why? YOUR posting as if I had not answered your request, WHICH I DID, is being an asshole.

If you don't want to be considered an asshole, stop acting like one.




Date: 14 Jun 13 - 09:42 AM

From: beardedbruce - PM
Date: 04 Jun 13 - 11:10 AM

And what IF a text that was kept from the defense was like this:

"I'm gonna check out *** house, and see what I can take. And if anybody gets in my way, I'll beat the shit outta him."

Sure want to be sure that the defense can't get anything like that- why , the lynching might not go as Bobert wants.




I had commented on that very point- that it was not the photos, of whatever age, but the text messages that could have supported the defense allegation that Martin attacked Zimmerman. Yet you bigoted, racist assholes keep repeating lies, and ignore the evidence presented at the trial.

Greggie boy really does represent the majority of liberals here on Mudcat.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: olddude
Date: 02 Jul 13 - 11:54 AM

Look stop bashing Bruce. I cannot condone the actions of Zimmerman. A reasonable man would not have left his car. That is what the law is supposed to be based on reason ability. I also don't condone the actions of Martin. If the testimony is true he should not have confronted Zimmerman. However, deadly force ... No don't get into such situations if you are armed. The law is pretty clear when you are given the responsibility of gun ownership. But Bruce is entitled to have his opinion without the name calling don't you think


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 02 Jul 13 - 12:12 PM

Juicy Brucie - if what you say Zimmerman said was what Zimmerman really said, does that not make it wholly clear that the contents of Martin's phone (about which Zimmerman could not possibly have known) could absolutely not have been evidence relevant to Zimmerman's state of mind at the time of the shooting?

The only purpose of releasing the information is to prejudice against the victim of the shooting.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: olddude
Date: 02 Jul 13 - 12:15 PM

Just a perfect example of never ever ever ever get yourself in any situation that you have to defend yourself, both wrong .. either one could have run away.

You fight, you defend when attacked but only and I mean only if there are no options. With all of my training in hand to hand or with firearms or sharp edged weapons. I am not afraid to run .. hell that is my first and foremost option. Defend only when absolutely necessary, was any of this necessary ... NO


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: beardedbruce
Date: 02 Jul 13 - 12:22 PM

Tricky Dickie,

Did you read my example of what MIGHT have been on the phone that would have been evidence?

If so, how can you ask your question- I established how the text could have supported the Defense claim that Martin attacked Zimmerman.

If not, you have no right to make your comment, and have shown yourself to be a total asshole.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Greg F.
Date: 02 Jul 13 - 12:25 PM

Bruce is indeed entitled to his own opinion, Dan, however perverse and unreasonable and unsupported by fact and/or logic that opinion may be.

But he is not entitled to his own facts, as someone once said.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: beardedbruce
Date: 02 Jul 13 - 12:28 PM

The Defense was saying that they were going to claim that Martin attacked Zimmerman.




"And what IF a text that was kept from the defense was like this:

"I'm gonna check out *** house, and see what I can take. And if anybody gets in my way, I'll beat the shit outta him."


This shows MARTIN's intent, and is certainly evidence that the Defense would be entitled to.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Greg F.
Date: 02 Jul 13 - 12:30 PM

Oh, and by the way, Dan - the person most addicted to name-calling is Bruce himself, as is obvious in almost all of his posts.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: beardedbruce
Date: 02 Jul 13 - 12:32 PM

Whereas Greggie boy and Bobert the Magnificent are entitled to state their opinion and require all to accept it as proven fact, even when contradicted by the Real World.


After all, Bobert knows the Truth, regardless of what happened here on Earth.

The rest of us better go back to our slave shacks and accept what Massa Bobert tells us, regardless of what we see, hear, or think.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: beardedbruce
Date: 02 Jul 13 - 12:36 PM

"the person most addicted to name-calling is Bruce himself, as is obvious in almost all of his posts."


Bullshit, Greggie boy. Anyone can look at your posts and see that you can't even post without name calling. Do I need to post a few hundred of your recent posts in their entirety to show what you consider "discussion" if you don't agree with the other person???


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Greg F.
Date: 02 Jul 13 - 12:37 PM

So Beardy, the "facts" on which you base your "case" - such as it is - are "could have", "might have been", "perhaps", "should have", "what if", "maybe", "would possibly" & etc.

The sad thing is that you're serious.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Greg F.
Date: 02 Jul 13 - 12:39 PM

Do I need to post a few hundred of your recent posts in their entirety...

Oh, please do, Beardy. That would be great.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: beardedbruce
Date: 02 Jul 13 - 12:48 PM

The sad thing is that you are unwilling to address the facts, and insist on attacking those you disagree with.

This indicates that you have no factual basis for your opinions, and thus have to attck the person who points out things that do not meet your desired view.


I was asked to give a POSSIBLE example of evidence that COULD have been in the information withheld by the Prosecution- I did so, even if Bobert and Richard have continued to lie and claim I did not. If it is withheld, a mistrial could be declared, and I doubt anyone wants that- thou I suspect Bobert will support social unrest and riots regardless of what happens, just so he can claim that anyone who disagrees with him is racist.

I have presented the information avaliable from the trial, while others present only unsupported opinions.


The sad thing is that you are the representatives of those who disagree with me- what a letdown for the Liberals of the world, if you are the best that they can do.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: KB in Iowa
Date: 02 Jul 13 - 12:56 PM

In ANY case, if one reverses the races of the individuals involved, and comes to a different conclusion, then one is a racist. Period. Too many here have demonstrated that that is what they are,

You don't have to be a racist to recognize racism at work.

I agree with the idea that if the man with the gun had been black he would probably have been arrested that night.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: beardedbruce
Date: 02 Jul 13 - 01:12 PM

Greg F''s contribution to reasonable discussion on this thread:


Date: 31 May 13 - 12:53 PM

You're getting overexcited again, Beardy, and somewhat incoherent as a result. Also not good for your blood pressure, you know.


Date: 31 May 13 - 03:21 PM

However, I don't see the purpose of the thread,


There is none. Beardy doesn't have to have a purpose to post nonsensical crap ad nauseum.


Date: 31 May 13 - 03:34 PM

BLINDFOLDED? Hell, he can cut and paste mountains of bullshit IN HIS SLEEP!


Date: 02 Jun 13 - 03:17 PM

A bullet from the back of a bush
Took Medgar Evers' blood
A finger fired the trigger to his name
A handle hid out in the dark
A hand set the spark
Two eyes took the aim
Behind a man's brain...

But he sure as hell can be blamed.



Date: 04 Jun 13 - 11:16 AM

Why have any trial at all? Why look at the evidence? Why bother risking a JURY might let him go?

Is that what you are saying???

No, that's what YOU'RE saying, Beardy, or rather shouting/ranting.

I haven't read anything by Bobert that says or remotely implies any of your screed.





Date: 05 Jun 13 - 08:15 AM

Yes, beardedbruce... Use your wildest imagination

Should be no problem, his wildest imagination is the motivating factor behind most, if not all, of his threads.
Date: 05 Jun 13 - 12:30 PM

Those aren't "reasons" Beardy - they're suppositions, BS and smoke.

As usual.

I suppose if he thought he was the Lone Ranger or Spiderman that would be just fine with you as well?

Does reality have no meaning for you?


Date: 05 Jun 13 - 02:46 PM

Elmore, Beardy's fixation with lynching is only one of a host of his problems which need to be addressed by mental health professionals.

Don't get him started calling anyone who disagrees with him a "racist scumbag" - as if Jews were a "race".


Date: 05 Jun 13 - 03:06 PM

Actually, Elmore, he's amusing in small doses - kind of like a toddler throwing a tantrum.


Date: 07 Jun 13 - 12:07 PM

So What, Beardy?


Date: 08 Jun 13 - 11:33 AM

Suspect BB wouldn't [disagree], either...

Oh, you kidder, you. That really IS amusing.


Date: 10 Jun 13 - 02:10 PM

That's right, Beardy - you want a "fair trial - just so long as Zimmerman is exonerated.

Gotcha.


Date: 11 Jun 13 - 05:35 PM

They probably have read it, Richard - they just are incapable of comprehending it.


Date: 13 Jun 13 - 11:14 AM

Calm down, Beardy - you're spraying spittle again.


Date: 17 Jun 13 - 12:12 PM

Send me to the back of the bus.

I'm starting to believe that BullshitBruce thinks he's a Negro, instead of just a jackass.

So, Bullshit: how old were you in 1963?


Date: 17 Jun 13 - 04:33 PM

So, *you* rate Negros as below jackasses, as well as considering "Black and a Democrat " the same as "dumb Ni**er"?

Since he used "just" in *his* posting. He considers that *any* second class citizen must refer to Negros, from his postings.

All YOUR words, BeardedBullshit, not mine. In addition to other problems, you apparently have difficulty in reading and/or comprehending the English Language.

Get help.


Date: 18 Jun 13 - 03:31 PM

The US belief that resort to a firearm is socially normative is out of whack by many other countries' standards.

Its also out of whack with the standards of many - if not most - thinking people here in the US too, Richard.


Date: 19 Jun 13 - 10:52 AM

So what is the difference between you and the Klan

The KLAN? "LYNCHING"?? "The color of your sheet"??

This poses another question: What is the difference between yourself and an obnoxious, irrational, ignorant, foul-mouther asshole?



Date: 19 Jun 13 - 12:03 PM

Pretty limp-dick response, Beardy. Where's your usual verbosity & rapier-like wit?


Date: 23 Jun 13 - 09:15 AM

Necrophilia?


Date: 26 Jun 13 - 09:31 AM

I am interested in finding out the truth

Yeah, right.

By the way, Beardy, what's this lynching fixation of yours? Someone already asked you that a while back, & you failed to answer.


Date: 28 Jun 13 - 12:31 PM

Not only would Texas buy him a new gun, they'd elect him to the US Senate.


Date: 28 Jun 13 - 02:59 PM

Oh, dear - another bout of bloody postarrhoea. Condition may be approaching critical.



Date: 01 Jul 13 - 12:18 PM

Hey! Ol' Lynchin' Bigot Bruce is back! With the same lynchin', bigot horseshit!

Tiresome.


Date: 01 Jul 13 - 03:36 PM

Yet he does accept it, because the victim was black and the defendent is white/hispanic.

More bullshit from Bullshit Bruce, who chooses to conveniently ignore 300 years of southern history and precedents.

For an obnoxious asshole that keeps going on about "lynching" one might expect some actual knowledge of the history of lynching- suggest that he read Philip Dray's At The Hands Of Persons Unknown for a start, or any of DuBois' works on the subject, or the sources cited in Dray's bibliography.


Date: 01 Jul 13 - 03:43 PM

Do you have more evidence that I have missed?

BullshitBruce does not, and never has, let actual evidence get in the way of his Niagara of horseshit, KB.


Date: 01 Jul 13 - 06:28 PM

Yeah, Don, but Paladin was more often than not on the right side of things- he did have a pretty good moral code.



Date: 01 Jul 13 - 06:47 PM

Roger that.


Date: 02 Jul 13 - 09:42 AM

And shame on Beardy as a Florida Apologist.


Date: 02 Jul 13 - 10:56 AM

My apologies, all. I appear to have provoked yet another bout of bloody bloggy Beardy postarrhoea.

Perhaps a change in his diet would be helpful, it the paregoric isn't working.


Date: 02 Jul 13 - 12:25 PM

Bruce is indeed entitled to his own opinion, Dan, however perverse and unreasonable and unsupported by fact and/or logic that opinion may be.

But he is not entitled to his own facts, as someone once said.


Date: 02 Jul 13 - 12:30 PM

Oh, and by the way, Dan - the person most addicted to name-calling is Bruce himself, as is obvious in almost all of his posts.


Date: 02 Jul 13 - 12:37 PM

So Beardy, the "facts" on which you base your "case" - such as it is - are "could have", "might have been", "perhaps", "should have", "what if", "maybe", "would possibly" & etc.

The sad thing is that you're serious.


Date: 02 Jul 13 - 12:39 PM

Do I need to post a few hundred of your recent posts in their entirety...

Oh, please do, Beardy. That would be great.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: beardedbruce
Date: 02 Jul 13 - 01:14 PM

"You don't have to be a racist to recognize racism at work."

No, but to change one's opinion about what is right based on the race of the individuals IS racism.

And that is what I see here.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Don Firth
Date: 02 Jul 13 - 01:18 PM

Page after page of hysteria.

THAT's what hysteria looks like.

Don Firth


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: beardedbruce
Date: 02 Jul 13 - 01:18 PM

Let me know if I missed any of your words of wisdom, Greg.


I want to give you full credit for your contributions to demonstrating Liberal attitudes.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 02 Jul 13 - 01:52 PM

Don Firth: "Page after page of hysteria.
THAT's what hysteria looks like."


Don should know!!!....Mudcat's got quite a few of his...wanna' see em?

GfS


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 02 Jul 13 - 02:04 PM

Brucie - whatever you might wish, Martin is not on trial. His state of mind is not in point. His intentions are not in point. His character is not in issue. Only (a) what actually happened and (b) what Zimmerman reasonably believed are in point (to an issue of self-defence). The contents of a phone about which Zimmerman knew nothing illuminate neither.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: beardedbruce
Date: 02 Jul 13 - 02:17 PM

Dickie,

" Only (a) what actually happened and (b) what Zimmerman reasonably believed are in point (to an issue of self-defence). The contents of a phone about which Zimmerman knew nothing illuminate neither."

I think you are wrong. The contents of text menages might well provide supporting evidence for what happened. If they stated "If anyone follows me, I am going to run like hell!" the defense case is weakened- if they stated "If anyone tries to stop me I'l beat the shit out of them." the defense case is strengthened.

When the defense claims that MARTIN attacked Zimmerman ( leading to the shooting), evidence that MARTIN had intentions of violence would certainly be significant evidence, and bolster the case of the Defense. I do not know if that is the case in these texts, but it could be, and thus the need for the JUDGE to rule on admissibility as evidence, NOT the prosecution.

IF Martin attacked Zimmerman, it would reinforce a claim that Zimmerman was in fear of his life, and support the rest of Zimmerman's testimony.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: beardedbruce
Date: 02 Jul 13 - 02:28 PM

whatever you might wish,


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 02 Jul 13 - 02:37 PM

Wishin' in one hand... shittin' in the other...which do you think will fill up first??!

GfS


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: GUEST,SJL
Date: 02 Jul 13 - 02:45 PM

"You got me." Really? Who says that except in an old western? Almost makes it sound like it wasn't so bad doesn't it?

The fact that George Zimmerman was relieved when he learned the shooting was videotaped does not impress me. When a cop says something like that during interrogation, there is at least a 50% chance he or she is lying. I know that. So does George. Let's not forget how he lied to the court about his assets. George is a liar.

And where was this photo in the immediate aftermath of the incident? Hard to believe it would not have surfaced when the need to gain public sympathy was so urgent that the Zimmerman Defense League" hauled out the friendly neighbor of color to say what a good guy he is. That is not a proper police evidence photo by the way. The video however is evidence. And it tells a different story.

Zimmerman Video

And, you cannot beat somebody up in the way Zimmerman claimed he was assaulted without getting some of that person's DNA on your hands.

There's a lot of lying going on here. A lot of it. Can I refresh your memory a bit more Brucie? Trayvon's body laid in the medical examiner's office for three days before his parents were notified. During this period the parents were frantically searching for him and had even reported him missing to the Sanford police. Unbelievable.

But by all means, our primary concern should be whether Whittle Wannabe Georgie gets a "fair" trial. To hell with Trayvon's parents right? After all, they're only black people. They will just have to make due with whatever treatment they are given.

If nothing else, this incident in its entirety is truly eye-opening.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Greg F.
Date: 02 Jul 13 - 02:53 PM

Gee whiz, Beardy, I couldn't find any "fucking scumbags" or
"racist scumbags", or "fucking racists", or "lynching bastards" or "fucking liberals", "no fucking mentions", "resident lynch mobs", "lying racist scumbags", "acting like a scumbag", "you ARE full of shit" or any of tha tsort of thing in any of my posts that you so generously provided.

OH WAIT! Those are YOUR words!

I'm sure your reading public would be grateful for any other juvenile nonsense that you'd care to pollute this thread with.

Have at it.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: beardedbruce
Date: 02 Jul 13 - 03:04 PM

Greggie boy,

I haven't used "lynching bastards" - I don't know your mother's marital status, if you had a mother and did not hatch from under some rock.


I use words that describe what people have shown themselves in their own words, in their own post, to be. So, in your case, "lying racist scumbag" is the appropriate term.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Greg F.
Date: 02 Jul 13 - 03:49 PM

Like I said, Beardy - pitiful.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 02 Jul 13 - 04:00 PM

I'll start this slowly Brucie. What Martin THOUGHT is not in point. Only what he did.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Suzy Sock Puppet
Date: 02 Jul 13 - 05:30 PM

Most certainly, but I cannot talk about this anymore myself. It's so ugly, I don't want to even think about it anymore.

Brucie, you're a pain in the ass, but then, aren't we all?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Bobert
Date: 02 Jul 13 - 07:20 PM

Well, Greg, ol' buddy... That is why I don't respond to BB's posts any more... He loves to invent things he wishes you had said, claims you said them and then calls you a bunch of filthy names for having said them... That, IMHO, is irrational... Not to mention dishonest...

Like I said... I once knew a very intelligent clinical psychologist when I was in social work who told me "you can't reason with illogical and crazy people"... Important lesson... You might want to just leave BB alone... His arguments are childish, irrational and dishonest and smokescreens for his highly partisanship... He doesn't give a rip about justice... Leave him alone...

B~


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Greg F.
Date: 02 Jul 13 - 08:33 PM

That's OK, Bobert-

Beardy is currently petitioning the government for a posthumous pardon for William Zantzinger, too. That 6 month sentance was cruel and unusual punishment, and there was no real evidence that he'd killed anyone.

Perhaps being wrapped up in that campaign will give him less time to vomit his horseshit here.

One can only hope.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Bobert
Date: 02 Jul 13 - 08:47 PM

If not then we don't need to feast on his vomit...

Let it be...

B~


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Bert
Date: 02 Jul 13 - 09:19 PM

A very important piece of evidence has been withheld. A week before he was killed Martin bought a pair of Argyle socks. Of course he deserved to be shot


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Bobert
Date: 02 Jul 13 - 09:42 PM

That, sadly, is what it's going to come down to, Bert...

"If it don't fit, ya' gotta acquit..."

B~


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 02 Jul 13 - 09:52 PM

If he ate a twizzler ya gotta aquizzle


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 02 Jul 13 - 09:59 PM

Snoop Lion defense


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Bobert
Date: 02 Jul 13 - 10:11 PM

Don't Bogart that joint my friend
pass it over to me...

B;~)


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 02 Jul 13 - 10:59 PM

more Snoop wisdom!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 03 Jul 13 - 12:50 AM

You know..all you guys who are fanning hatred, really ought to cool it. NOBODY was there, and NOBODY knows for sure what happened, or really, for sure, everything that led up to it...and THAT IS a FACT!
What if....just what if everything happened as Zimmerman said it did??..must the race card triumph, just because of race?? Everybody needs to chill out..BIG TIME!...I remember when the Arizona shooting happened with Gifford, the same guys who are pointing fingers then, are pointing fingers now...and they all blamed this nutcase, as being a right wing nut, who was shooting because he was a right wing nut case...and I called for restraint..and people were shocked that I wasn't on the bandwagon...well, this is pretty much of the same thing. Everybody, both sides of the 'argument', all emotionally charged..and raging with their emotions...regardless of the FACTS...just assumptions, rumors, presumptions, and a lot of fucking wishful thinking! Knock it off..calm the fuck down..chill out, and let the evidence come out as it does. One person is dead, and it really was a tragic mistake. If you think Zimmerman decided one night, to go out 'nigger hunting', after dinner, I think you're a fucking moron! If you think because Zimmerman was following Martin, was just cause for Martin to turn around and punch him out, and assault him, you're fucking idiotic!! If you think this thing escalated, because people misread the moment, you're probably closer to what actually happened...in other words, 'reality'. If you think this sad event is reason to make political hay out of it, well you're only fanning the fires for more hatred and violence...and that's REAL fucking stupid, idiotic, and moronic in full blown royalty!..If anything, we should be on the side of peace..and calm...but working each other up, on stuff, when you REALLY DON'T know what the fuck happened, then you are a fucking disgrace, to everything civil, to everything just, and everything that most of you 'SAY'(?) that you stand for!
Calm down, and let it unfold the way it does.....maybe, when all the facts finally come out, you might not have so much crow to eat!..AND...as a bonus, you would have not stirred up fear and loathing, needlessly.

Patience...the wheels of time roll slow...but grind fine!

GfS


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Bert
Date: 03 Jul 13 - 06:17 AM

I don't know GfS, maybe Zimmerman did go "out one night". We don't know.

But I don't see that Martin's phone records are any more relevant than the color of his socks.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 03 Jul 13 - 06:57 AM

Why withhold them and create a conflict, and a cause for doubt after a conviction.
Let the defence have everything and the jury can judge the relevance.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 03 Jul 13 - 07:14 AM

His state of mind is not in point. His intentions are not in point. His character is not in issue.

Zim claims self defence.
He has to convince the jury that he was attacked.
All of those factors might be considered to have made an attack more likely or less likely, therefore in point.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 03 Jul 13 - 07:28 AM

No. They are not issues in the case.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 03 Jul 13 - 07:30 AM

I should also point out that if a man with a gun is following you, you are really quite likely reasonably to apprehend an intended assault, and are therefore entitled to use reasonable force in self defence.   So "Martin assaulted Zimmerman" is by no means a foregone conclusion.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 03 Jul 13 - 07:44 AM

Of course it is not a foregone conclusion!

If I were on the jury, having to decide if it was murder or self defence, I would want to know about all the things that led up to that encounter.

The judge decides what evidence is admissible.
The jury decides what weight to put upon it.
Why keep evidence from the defence?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: beardedbruce
Date: 03 Jul 13 - 08:32 AM

Because Bobert has already convicted Zimmerman, based on biased press reports, before the trial even began.

Bobert claims to have such solid Southern roots he "Knows" exactly what happened, just from the race of the victim and defendant. One has to wonder just what dark past he is covering up, from his childhood days in the South, where every white is a Klansman.

And then there are his continuous accusations of "racism" against all that disagree with his political view. He seems to be projecting his own attitudes on everyone- Those of us who dislike the liberal actions ( or attempts) of this administration, and supported conservatives in the past, can't have ANY ( Shouting at Bobert) reason to dislike Obama except "racism".
That seem to be the focus and only point that Bobert can ever put forward- ANY failure to agree with Obama MUST be racism, since that seems to be his own controlling factor. He can't even understand that to support Obama when we objected to the same things by white WOULD be racism

What is he going to do if Condoleeza Rice runs for President? Then I will claim any lack of support is "racism" on his part, and he will deny it- the rules he puts on others don't apply to him,, as everyone knows. Only conservatives are "racist", never the liberals who treat blacks like their own private pool of votes, not even giving them the payoffs they give unions and their bank supporters.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: beardedbruce
Date: 03 Jul 13 - 08:37 AM

"It's been a great week for gay activists, but Dr. Cornel West is not happy. As the postmodern professor par excellence explained to radio host Tavis Smiley last Sunday, the advances made by gays and lesbians mean that "we black folk are just being pushed to the back of the bus":

Again this has something to do of course with what history books will say. The irony of the age of Obama in which black folks found themselves pushed to the back, [and] our gay brothers and lesbian sisters more and more pushed to the center.

Perhaps West is right, and identity politics really is a zero-sum game. Then again, the good doctor may simply be suffering from a touch of radical conditionedness.
"


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Greg F.
Date: 03 Jul 13 - 08:45 AM

And this latest blogoshit relates to the Zimmerman case how, exactly, Beardy?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: beardedbruce
Date: 03 Jul 13 - 08:51 AM

Bobert,

"He loves to invent things he wishes you had said, claims you said them and then calls you a bunch of filthy names for having said them"

Care to give some example, or should I just call you a lying bastard whose "buddy" has stated that "Black, and a Democrat" is the same in his mind as "a dumb Ni**er"?

His posts are still there ( at last check)- and I have offline copies of the thread in case his mud elf enabler cleans up in an attempt to cover up.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: beardedbruce
Date: 03 Jul 13 - 08:53 AM

Greggie,

And your attacks contribute what to this thread?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: beardedbruce
Date: 03 Jul 13 - 08:55 AM

Oh, that's right- you apply rules to other that you don't bother to follow yourself.

Typical Liberal, from the support you get here.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: beardedbruce
Date: 03 Jul 13 - 09:02 AM

In a segment discussing the start of the trial of George Zimmerman for the 2012 murder of Florida teen Trayvon Martin, MSNBC anchor Tamron Hall noted that many are concerned that the trial has the potential to exacerbate racial tensions in the United States. Hall and her guests fretted about the "firestorm" that the Martin trial could set off. After making this appropriate and responsible observation, Hall politicized the trial noting that President Barack Obama appears to be on the side of the prosecution while conservatives and Fox News Channel are seemingly supportive of the Defense.

"The emotions involved in this are tremendous," Hall observed in a question to The Washington Post columnist Jonathan Capehart. "You've written about it. You've even been, if you will, attacked by the attorneys representing George Zimmerman."

"You have people who have that pit in their stomach. The worry that the outcome of this trial could set off a firestorm, quite honestly," she continued. "And folks are worried about that, honestly."

Capehart said that the Martin family, which has called for calm and asked for the public to abide by the decision ultimately reached by a Florida jury, is concerned about unrest.

"Even though the national outrage has died down, the sort of red hot passions that this case has embroiled, for lack of a better word, are still there," Capehart noted. "The level of vitriol and also passion that attends to this case is very, very real."

Capehart said that the calls for calm from all the parties involved were helpful to quell the racial tension that the Zimmerman case naturally evokes. After that bit of responsible reporting, Hall proceeded to politicize the Martin case by observing that Republicans support an accused murderer while Obama would have loved Trayvon like a son. Fortunately, she was only observing how "others" have inflamed the nation with their coverage of the case.

"You have others, I mean, who have tried to turn this into a political story, Jonathan," Hall noted. "We know that the president gave his heartfelt words that, if he had a son, he would look like Trayvon, but we also know that George Zimmerman went on Fox News a lot because he felt that he had a sympathetic ear from conservatives."

In March of last year, MSNBC brass defended the actions of their anchor, Rev. Al Sharpton, who traveled to Florida in the wake of Trayvon Martin's death in February, to hold political rallies with the stated aim of forcing local police to charge and arrest Zimmerman. "We didn't hire Al to become a neutered kind of news presenter," said MSNBC president Phil Griffin.

MSNBC prime time anchor Lawrence O'Donnell spent one memorable segment last year angrily interrogating an empty chair after his scheduled guest, Zimmerman's attorney, cancelled last minute. "He literally ran away," O'Donnell said, "he is in our car right now taking him away from the studio."

Zimmerman is suing NBC/Universal, a fact that every MSNBC anchor has been forced to disclose amid their hourly coverage of the trial, after the network aired a misleading edit of his 911 call which made it appear as though he told the operator that Trayvon Martin was black unsolicited. In fact, he was asked to describe Martin's appearance.

When Hall says that "others" have politicized this case, one would have to assume that she is not only referring to Fox News and the President of the United States. Hopefully, she is also talking thinking her fellow MSNBC colleagues.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Greg F.
Date: 03 Jul 13 - 09:16 AM

Source of latest blogoshit, Beardy? Or did you make it up yourself?

Also, you never supplied the source or the relevence of the previous blogoshit.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: beardedbruce
Date: 03 Jul 13 - 09:18 AM

SANFORD, Fla. -
For days last summer, various news outlets analyzed the voice of George Zimmerman during his Feb. 26, 2012 call to Sanford police, and reached a conclusion that was inflammatory, shocking and false.

Asked by HLN anchor Nancy Grace what he heard on the tape, one of the lawyers representing the family of Trayvon Martin said without equivocation: "He said coon."

No, in fact, both sides of the divisive case now agree: He said, "punks."

Local 6 tracked the earliest mention of the epitaph to an amateur blogger who, like many, was outraged that Zimmerman had not been charged in connection with his shooting of the unarmed 17-year-old.

A local TV station in Orlando aired a report that parroted the blog entry and, from there, the misinformation was off and running to national cable networks.

It was one of many pieces of misinformation that have filtered into the public consciousness since Zimmerman shot Martin and claimed he acted in self defense.

As 500 potential jurors prepare to begin showing up here next week, Local 6 reviewed a few other myths or misstatements:

Trayvon Martin was not a heavily tattooed, bearded man, contrary to a well-traveled email claiming the media was hiding that image of Martin. The man pictured in the email is a 33-year-old rapper known as Game.

Nor was Martin a 6-foot-2-inches, 175-pound bundle of muscled mass, as the email claimed. He was 5-foot 11-inches, 158 pounds, according to his autopsy. (Zimmerman was listed at 5-foot-7, 204 pounds in a medical record created the day after the shooting; a jail record states he was down to 185 pounds when he was finally arrested in April 2012.)

Another falsehood wasn't promulgated by anonymous e-mailers or reckless bloggers, rather, it was broadcast in open court last week by Zimmerman's defense attorney, Mark O'Mara.

O'Mara stated he had recovered video from Martin's cell phone showing Martin taped two of his "buddies" beating up a homeless man. In fact, it was video of two homeless man fighting over a bicycle, O'Mara acknowledged days later. He apologized for the misstatement.

Finally, the most trivial of the myths, but one so prevalent it should be corrected: There was no iced tea.

The Skittles and iced tea narrative, along with the hoodie Martin was wearing, has become iconic in the aftermath of the shooting.

But evidence photos released last week show it was actually an Arizona brand fruit drink Martin carried with him when he died.

Again, a trivial matter, but, for those truly interested in facts, one that needs to be corrected.



http://www.clickorlando.com/news/myths-misstatements-surround-trayvon-martins-death/-/1637132/20441210/-/9jlkj1z/-/index.html


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: beardedbruce
Date: 03 Jul 13 - 09:19 AM

Greggie,

The only shit being posted is you.



http://www.mediaite.com/tv/msnbc-anchor-concerned-about-zimmerman-trial's-firestorm-potential-proceeds-to-politicize-it/


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Bobert
Date: 03 Jul 13 - 09:49 AM

Keith A in Hertford,

Your argument that stuff in Martin's life prior to being murdered is fair game is not only wrong but down right disrespectful to the victim...

There is a reason why past sexual activities by rape victims is not admissible in court... The logic is that it does not justify the rape... The exception, of course, is spousal rape... But the fact that a woman has had _____ sex partners in her life does not give an unknown rapist an excuse for his behavior... It is not relevant...

As for leaving it to the judge and jury to decide??? If the trial is conducted fairly then, yeah, that's the way it is supposed to work, however, we have already seen enough misconduct by both the judge and the defense team to see that is not the case here...

B~


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: pdq
Date: 03 Jul 13 - 09:58 AM

...here is a photo of the back of Zimmerman's head the night of the shooting:


http://a.abcnews.com/images/US/ht_george_zimmerman_head_dm_120419_ssh.jpg


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: bobad
Date: 03 Jul 13 - 10:17 AM

"A witness in the George Zimmerman trial described his wounds as "insignificant" and "non–life threatening." Dr. Valerie Rao, a medical examiner, made the determination after reviewing video and photographs of Zimmerman after his deadly confrontation with Trayvon Martin. Zimmerman, who faces a second-degree murder charge for shooting the unarmed teenager, said Martin repeatedly slammed his head against the ground. Rao told the jury she believed that happened maybe once. Zimmerman claims he shot Martin in self-defense."

Read it at ABC News
July 2, 2013 6:04 PM


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: GUEST,SJL
Date: 03 Jul 13 - 10:20 AM

Ok, ready to fry George again!

Don, huh?

End of big night of drinking. Nonsensical bordering on incoherent. BWI. Ought to be a law against it. They need to invent a smart phone with a built in alcohol sensor that will cut you off from posting just as soon as your ability to reason slips away until morning. If I have ever posted anything that didn't make sense or emailed songs about brother, it's generally that. I know it seems like some sort of psychotic break but it's not.

So I'm pretty sure I was making fun of people (of which I have known several growing up in the drug culture of the seventies and eighties) who drink and snort coke or crystal so they can stay up all night and half the next day getting drunker and more strung out instead of going to sleep. I'm pretty sure I was announcing my superiority over such foolish individuals. Except a.) It was completely off topic and b.) completely devoid of any decipherable context.

I'm going to have to tell my drinking partners to start hiding my phone after 12. There's no other way.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: GUEST,SJL
Date: 03 Jul 13 - 10:23 AM

Brother should be brotherhood :-)


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 03 Jul 13 - 10:30 AM


Your argument that stuff in Martin's life prior to being murdered is fair game is not only wrong but down right disrespectful to the victim...


By "fair game" do you mean admissible as evidence.
It is usual for the judge to decide.

You know which one was "the victim" already?
How?

If the trial is conducted fairly then, yeah, that's the way it is supposed to work, however, we have already seen enough misconduct by both the judge and the defense team to see that is not the case here..

You think evidence should be withheld because you think the trial may not be fair?
That would make the trial unfair if it wasn't already!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: beardedbruce
Date: 03 Jul 13 - 10:37 AM

Bobert has already decided that the only "fair" trial is one where Zimmerman gets the maximum sentence, regardless of any evidence.

Since Bobert knows all, anything less would obviously be proof of "racial" prejudice.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Bobert
Date: 03 Jul 13 - 10:54 AM

No, Keith, I don't think "evidence" should be withheld... What I am saying is that whatever was on Martin's phone - unless it implicated that he knew Zimmerman and/or planned on hurting Zimmerman - is not evidence...

Richard Bridge, who is also an attorney, says it isn't evidence...

Seems the only folks who think it is evidence are the same people who didn't think Zimmerman should have been charged in the first place and that was long before anyone knew about Martin's cell phone...

Hmmmmm??? Seems that these folks have major prejudicial leanings about what really happened... Reminds me of the stuff that used to go on here in the South...

But again, Keith... Why is anything that Martin did prior to being murdered relevant to the case???

Please use facts and not irrational arguments that have been made here before that are not facts but obvious and ***admittedly*** fictional scenarios...

B~


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: beardedbruce
Date: 03 Jul 13 - 10:54 AM

Anyway, Bobert has stated that he does not want a "fair" trial, he wants Zimmerman convicted. He already knows what happened, and has decided guilt.

"
From: Bobert - PM
Date: 18 Jun 13 - 12:52 PM

...
2. We agree but if Martin (the victim) gets a fair trial, Zimmerman has to be convicted of, at the very least, wrongful death...
"


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 03 Jul 13 - 10:59 AM

Richard Bridge: "I should also point out that if a man with a gun is following you, you are really quite likely reasonably to apprehend an intended assault, and are therefore entitled to use reasonable force in self defence.   So "Martin assaulted Zimmerman" is by no means a foregone conclusion."

Speaking of 'foregone conclusions' you seem to think that Martin KNEW that Zimmerman had a gun....would you, as an unarmed person, attack someone WITH a gun???
Your supposition, seems to have a bit of bias there, Ol' Chap!

Nobody KNOWS, not you, not Bobert, not any of us...so, as per aforementioned, 'Chill out!'

GfS


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Greg F.
Date: 03 Jul 13 - 11:04 AM

You're right. Beardy. It is obviosly the iced tea that the entire case hinges upon.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: pdq
Date: 03 Jul 13 - 11:05 AM

"A witness in the George Zimmerman trial described his wounds as...'non–life threatening.' " ~ Valarie Rao

"Zimmerman, who faces a second-degree murder charge for shooting the unarmed teenager, said Martin repeatedly slammed his head against the ground. Rao told the jury she believed that happened maybe once."


Note how ABC "news" accentuates the "unarmed teenager" point for their purposes when it is not needed to convey the facts.

More important, both statements by Dr. Roa are opinions and should not be allowed to stand, just as the cop's opinion that "Zimmerman is telling the truth" was struck from the record by the judge.

Heck, if Zimmerman had already received "life-threatening injuries", he would not have been able to defend himself.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 03 Jul 13 - 11:21 AM

"You know which one was "the victim" already?
How?"

Are you joking?

In my experience, in a murder trial, the victim is is generally the dead one.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: beardedbruce
Date: 03 Jul 13 - 11:24 AM

Bobert:
"
This case isn't an "Okay, I meet you on the street" case, bruce... This is a case where the victim was stalked and confronted... That is a major difference...

The facts of the case as we know them are that Zimmerman got out of his vehicle with a gun and confronted the victim... That isn't at all the scenario that you have just presented... Your scenario has nothing to do with the realities of this case...
"


Trial:

""Jurors today heard George Zimmerman's account in his own words of his fatal confrontation with Trayvon Martin as prosecutors played a dramatic audio tape of Zimmerman being questioned by police shortly after the shooting.

Zimmerman is heard telling a police officer how he saw Martin walking through his Sanford, Fla. neighborhood on a dark, rainy Feb. 2012 night. As a neighborhood watchman he tried to follow him in his car because there had been a series of break-ins in the gated community.

Zimmerman said he lost sight of Martin, got out of his car to call police and was walking back to his vehicle when the 17-year-old attacked him.

"He jumped out of the bushes and he said 'What the f..k is your problem, homie?'" Zimmerman said on the tape.

"And I got my cell phone out to call 911 this time, and I said 'I don't have a problem.' And he goes, 'No, now you have a problem,' and he punched me in the nose."

In court, jurors listened closely to the tape, while Zimmerman showed no emotion and Martin's father closed his eyes from time to time.

Zimmerman told police he fell down to the ground after being punched repeatedly. "I tried to defend myself. He just started punching me in the face, and I started screaming for help. I couldn't see. I couldn't breathe."

"He puts his hand on my nose and mouth, and he says 'You are going to die tonight.'

He said "the suspect" was "mounted on top of me" and began to bang his head onto the ground.

"As he banged my head again, I just pulled out my firearm and shot him," Zimmerman said."


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Bobert
Date: 03 Jul 13 - 11:27 AM

Okay, GfinS...

Are you willing to admit that this trial is a sham if the stuff found on Martin's phone has nothing to do with the case... You, and others, seem is fine to parade your fishing expedition out there that somehow because Martin did this or that in the past justified Zimmerman, who BTW didn't know Martin or if he even owned a cell phone, in murdering Martin...

That's the issue here... The defense and the judge seem to have no problem allowing Martin's past to be used to paint Martin as someone that needed to be murdered... For what??? Smoking pot and talking smack??? If that was a capital offense in America then about 300,000,000 Americans deserve to be murdered...

More insanity from the King of Insanity...

B~


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: beardedbruce
Date: 03 Jul 13 - 11:29 AM

http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/george-zimmerman-trial-race-is-a-subtext-not-the-focus/2013/07/02/a296611e-e262-11e2-a11e


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Greg F.
Date: 03 Jul 13 - 11:35 AM

Washington Post says "page not found", Beardy (big surprise. b


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: beardedbruce
Date: 03 Jul 13 - 11:40 AM

Mudcat Linkmaker:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/george-zimmerman-trial-race-is-a-subtext-not-the-focus/2013/07/02/a296611e-e262-11e2-a11e

Entered link:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/george-zimmerman-trial-race-is-a-subtext-not-the-focus/2013/07/02/a296611e-e262-11e2-a11e-c2ea876a8f30_story_1.html




So the Link maker truncates, and "Liberal Voice " claims a victory....

I guess Liberals need to claim whatever victories they can, since they can't supply facts to support their viewpoint.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: olddude
Date: 03 Jul 13 - 12:38 PM

the fuckin horse your beating is dead folks ... no one is going to budge on their opinions so why fight.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Greg F.
Date: 03 Jul 13 - 12:38 PM

That's right, Beardy, its always someone else's fault, never yours.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: olddude
Date: 03 Jul 13 - 12:40 PM

here is the reader digest condensed version ... two guys got into a confrontation. Both guys too macho to run away .. had to show off their testosterone. One is dead the other's life is ruined forever no matter how it shakes out


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: olddude
Date: 03 Jul 13 - 12:46 PM

people forget that OJ was a Buffalo Bill. He would come to buffalo to sign autographs and people lined the streets. After the trial he couldn't give away the damn things. The lawsuit took away his home and cash. His life ruined even though he was found not guilty. Then he commits another crime and ends up in jail for 30 years. Nobody is going to win on this one either way


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Bobert
Date: 03 Jul 13 - 12:46 PM

Not quite, Ol'ster...

One guy stalks another guy with a gun... The stalked party gets murdered in the course of defending himself...

Why is the stalker getting a pass??? He instigated the confrontation...

B~


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: beardedbruce
Date: 03 Jul 13 - 12:54 PM

And Bobert knows what he is saying- after all, he was there, right??????




NOT.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 03 Jul 13 - 01:17 PM

Bobert: "Are you willing to admit that this trial is a sham if the stuff found on Martin's phone has nothing to do with the case..."

Huh??....That's like asking me if it would be a sham, if he was watching cartoons on his T.V earlier in the day...Who knows what's on his phone..AND , more so, a phone narrative, is not conclusive that the narrative isn't colored, to fit the persons having it....so I guess the answer to your question is 'Maybe, Maybe not.'

Bobert: "You, and others, seem is fine to parade your fishing expedition out there that somehow because Martin did this or that in the past justified Zimmerman,...."

I have said nothing of the sort..you just interjected that. You're starting to use Firth's tactic, of making up stuff that nobody said, and then arguing it, as if it was said!


Bobert: " who BTW didn't know Martin or if he even owned a cell phone, in murdering Martin..."

Or a gun, for that matter..

You really gotta relax a second...take it easy...take a big breath. You're getting so wound up in this that your starting to show signs of mental and emotional fatigue.

Like i said before, NOBODY knows for sure what happened..let it play out...and BTW, the prosecution is fucking up his own case, more than Zimmerman's own defense.

Regardless, I have my hunches, that usually bear out...but CALM really is the best place to stay!

...I mean, I think it would be silly to get so worked up about it, that I'd take to the streets, waving a piano over my head, huh?

GfS


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: beardedbruce
Date: 03 Jul 13 - 01:19 PM

Sanford Police Chief Cecil Smith and other city officials are worried that the outcome of the George Zimmerman trial could spark "violence" and have crafted a "secret law enforcement" plan to deal with potential social disorder.

A CNN report shows Sanford police going door to door in an attempt to calm residents about possible unrest in response to the Zimmerman verdict.
"Our worst fear is that we will have people from outside of the community coming in and stirring up….violence in the community," Smith told CNN's David Mattingly.
Sanford Mayor Jeff Triplett echoes Smith's concerns, warning that just one person intent on violence could spark wider disorder and "a provocation of violence".
City Manager Norton Bonaparte is similarly on edge, fearing a Rodney King-style riot if Zimmerman is found not guilty.
"I'm saying that's a scenario that's certainly a possibility," said Bonaparte, adding that plans had been made through law enforcement but that he would not go into detail on the nature of what they were.
Police Chief Cecil Smith was similarly evasive when asked if SWAT teams or "special personnel" were on standby to respond to disorder.
"As far as the particulars of the plans, we're not releasing that," Smith told CNN.
Authorities have also enlisted the help of local pastors who are acting as "observers" in the Zimmerman trial and will then report back to their congregation.
The involvement of pastors is interesting in light of a program first reported by Infowars back in 2006 under which the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) was training pastors and other religious representatives to become secret police enforcers who teach their congregations to "obey the government" in preparation for a declaration of martial law, property and firearm seizures, and forced relocation.
As we reported earlier today, scores of Twitter users have threatened to riot and loot if George Zimmerman is acquitted.
Other prominent voices have also warned of potential civil unrest, including former Chicago police officer Paul Huebl, who said that he fully expects "organized race rioting to begin in every major city to dwarf the Rodney King and the Martin Luther King riots of past decades" if Zimmerman walks.
With police already going door to door to calm Sanford residents in anticipation of unrest, some are worried that social disorder could be used as a pretext for gun confiscation in a similar vein to how Hurricane Katrina was used as a justification to disarm residents of New Orleans.


http://www.infowars.com/sanford-police-chief-fears-violence-in-response-to-zimmerman-verdict/


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Greg F.
Date: 03 Jul 13 - 01:40 PM

INFOWARS, Beardie? WEith Alex Jones, world-famous conspiracy theorist and general all-around lunatic?

This is beneath even your usual standard of horseshit.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: beardedbruce
Date: 03 Jul 13 - 01:42 PM

"This is beneath even your usual standard of horseshit."

You mean I am approaching your standards, Greggie boy?????


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Greg F.
Date: 03 Jul 13 - 02:06 PM

No, I don't. Nor does anyone else who has followed your posting history.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: GUEST,SJL
Date: 03 Jul 13 - 02:11 PM

Well, they should worry because if Zimmerman walks, gun confiscation will probably occur just as it did during Katrina. That is, whether violence erupts or not, as one of the "pre-emptive" (where you are penalized for what you might do rather than what you do) measures our government is so fond of these days. And once confiscated, they won't get them back.

The police should have arrested and charged Zimmerman with at least manslaughter and Trayvon's parents should have been notified immediately. Basic things. A lot of this is on the Sanford police IMO. It's the ultimate irony that they will now provide a secret remedy for an outrageous situation that they themselves helped to create.

At the end of the day, I'm glad I live in an area where what George Zimmerman did wouldn't fly. People around here do not get rewarded for disregarding instructions from law enforcement and dispatchers are considered representatives of their departments at any given time- a little common sense. Having a law like Stand Your Ground is akin to deputizing all gun owners. Let's turn State St. into the Wild West. Sure. Why not? Like it's not enough of a mess with three rowdy bars in close proximity.

GfS, it really does look like they're throwing the fight. Do you think it could have anything to do with the fact that George Zimmerman's father was a magistrate in the Virginia court system. Think of what a valuable resource that is in the real world, in terms of connections, and more importantly legal knowledge and advice. I don't think that book he wrote made any sense except to a racist. It's a hoot though.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3_DBEmPjkac&sns=em


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 03 Jul 13 - 02:13 PM

I had a feeling that some 'unrest' might occur, but I hadn't heard of all this other stuff, Bruce. Do y9ou think the government, in concert with the corporate media is fanning this(with the help of our resident 'fans') to instigate unrest..and using the case to spark it?
Just a question.....and I hope the answer is 'No'....nonetheless, I'm sure there are political idiots out there who would want it to go viral!
Mayne, even in here..God Forbid!

GfS


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: GUEST,TIA
Date: 03 Jul 13 - 02:20 PM

Just a little sample of the reliability and rationality of Infowars (Alex Jones).

Absolutely bat shit crazy and obnoxious on the BBC June 9, 2013.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hc8DEpM4-6A

click


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: beardedbruce
Date: 03 Jul 13 - 02:30 PM

No idea how true any of these details are - but the "Liberal Agenda" is to outlaw private firearm ownership- How better than more riots? It will be "Temporary, for our own good".

Got to make sure the "Peeple" are under control, and do what they are told.


And riots would distract from all of Obama's other problems.

Just look at how 1968 got Johnson off the heat for Vietnam.

Of course, the entire population, minorities included, lost a lot, but since when have people with a "Cause" ever worried about the impact of heir manipulations? Dead black teenagers only matter when they can be used for political purposes, or this administration would have done far more in minority communities than it has.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: beardedbruce
Date: 03 Jul 13 - 02:42 PM

Greggie,


s\So you think that CNN is not a good enough source, when you don't agree with it???



A CNN report shows Sanford police going door to door in an attempt to calm residents about possible unrest in response to the Zimmerman verdict.
"Our worst fear is that we will have people from outside of the community coming in and stirring up….violence in the community," Smith told CNN's David Mattingly.
Sanford Mayor Jeff Triplett echoes Smith's concerns, warning that just one person intent on violence could spark wider disorder and "a provocation of violence".
City Manager Norton Bonaparte is similarly on edge, fearing a Rodney King-style riot if Zimmerman is found not guilty.
"I'm saying that's a scenario that's certainly a possibility," said Bonaparte, adding that plans had been made through law enforcement but that he would not go into detail on the nature of what they were.
Police Chief Cecil Smith was similarly evasive when asked if SWAT teams or "special personnel" were on standby to respond to disorder.
"As far as the particulars of the plans, we're not releasing that," Smith told CNN.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Greg F.
Date: 03 Jul 13 - 02:46 PM

No idea how true any of these details are

Of COURSE you're not, Beardy, but nonetheless you still willingly and enthusiastically smear this horesehit all over the place with abandon.

As expected.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: beardedbruce
Date: 03 Jul 13 - 02:47 PM

Greggie,

You and Bobert are the ones engaged in shit-spreading- It seems to be your true area of expertise. You must take pride in being so talented.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: beardedbruce
Date: 03 Jul 13 - 02:57 PM

Pastors aim to keep peace at Zimmerman trial
By Mark I. Pinsky, special to CNN

Sanford, Florida (CNN) – As opening arguments begin, courtroom seats are at a premium at the trial of George Zimmerman, charged with second degree murder in the shooting death of Trayvon Martin, an unarmed black teenager.

But in an unusual arrangement, four seats in the second row, just steps from the jury box, have been assigned to a group called "Sanford Pastors Connecting."

The multi-racial ministerial association has pledged to bear witness to the high-profile proceedings during the trial and to keep the peace afterward.

All of the clergy in the courtroom project have agreed to support the jury's verdict in the racially-charged case, which sparked large rallies and marches led by civil rights figures like the Rev. Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson.

As needed, the pastors will report courtroom events to crowds expected to gather outside the courthouse, as well as to their congregations, and have agreed to head off inflammatory rumors.

"Regardless of what the verdict is, we can avoid the violence," said the Rev. Robert K. Gregory Jr., of the Good News Jail & Prison Ministry in Sanford. "If we work together, trust can be built."

Zimmerman, a member of the Neighborhood Watch in his gated community, is accused of stalking and fatally shooting Martin, who was staying with his father, on February 26, 2012.

The defense claims that Martin, returning from a convenience store, turned on Zimmerman, who then fired in self-defense.

The Zimmerman trial: What you need to know

Two dozen media spaces on the courtroom's polished wooden seats have been assigned by lottery, with an equal amount set aside for the general public. Another twelve spots in the rectangular chamber are reserved for the Zimmerman and Martin families.

The pastoral rotation is the idea of the U.S. Department of Justice's Community Relations Service. A Seminole County Sheriff's inspector, who is also an ordained minister, handles the scheduling. Among the Christian clergy who have signed up, there are evangelical and mainline congregations; tiny, urban parishes and suburban megachurches.

"We're looking at providing leadership, to comfort people through the word of God and prayer," said the Rev. Sharon Patterson, of Getting Your House in Order Ministries, a small African-American congregation.

"We want our presence to encourage them to understand that as long as God is in control, everything will work out all right," the pastor said.

Patterson brings a particular past to her courtroom witnessing. She once aspired to be a lawyer herself, spending summers when she was first teaching public school, and had no air conditioning at home, going from trial to trial.

While most Sanford-area African-American congregations rallied around the Martin family and their call for justice immediately following the shooting, some predominately white churches and clergy were divided.

The Rev. Alan Brumback, pastor of Sanford's Central Baptist Church, was one of the first – and few – local white clergy to join the predominately black marches and demonstrations in the wake of the Martin shooting.

However, Brumback, whose congregation is multi-racial, said he would not be a part of the courtroom program.

"I am calling my church to pray for our city and to share the only news that can bring reconciliation," he said, "the Gospel of Jesus Christ. That is my only agenda."

Live blog: Zimmerman trial begins

Whatever it is, the verdict will be God's will, said the Rev. Lowman J. Oliver III of St. Paul Missionary Baptist Church in Sanford.

"We pray that the outcome will be just and fair to all parties," he said. "How will it look? I'm not able to answer that. Our roles are as peacemakers. It's more important that we send a message that we sustain the peace."

However, Oliver said, peaceful acceptance of a verdict does not mean people will have to agree with it. They can certainly have "a righteous response," as long as it is nonviolent.

"There is a history of division in this community, and there is a history involving violence against black youth" that must be addressed, said the Rev. Joel Hunter, of Northland Church in Longwood, Florida. A prominent evangelical, Hunter is also a close confidant of President Obama's.

After a long, tedious day of sitting together during jury selection, Hunter, Oliver and Gregory were finishing each other's sentences.

Laughing, they admitted that they were unused to sitting still and silent in unpadded pews for so long – while others did the talking.

http://religion.blogs.cnn.com/2013/06/24/pastors-aim-to-keep-peace-at-zimmerman-trial/


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Greg F.
Date: 03 Jul 13 - 03:01 PM

Paregoric, Beardy, Paregoric's the thing.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: beardedbruce
Date: 03 Jul 13 - 03:03 PM

http://www.cnn.com/2013/07/03/justice/zimmerman-trial-updates/index.html


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 03 Jul 13 - 03:12 PM

Bobert.
whatever was on Martin's phone - unless it implicated that he knew Zimmerman and/or planned on hurting Zimmerman - is not evidence...

If it is not, the defence will not be able to use it, so why withhold it?

Richard Bridge, who is also an attorney, says it isn't evidence...
Richard Bridge may be an attorney, but he does not know what it is, so how can he state that?

But again, Keith... Why is anything that Martin did prior to being murdered relevant to the case???


The jury have to decide if M attacked Z.
They have to make a judgement on how he might behave in that situation.
His past behaviour is relevant.
Sorry, but it is.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Bobert
Date: 03 Jul 13 - 05:12 PM

What you are missing here, Keith, is that the stuff on Martin's phone has been made public - by Zimmerman's attorney - which tends to poison the jury pool... That is wrong and the judge should have issued a gag order on both the defense and the prosecution...

This is what bad justice looks like...

If the defense had taken the material to the judge - in his chamber - in the first place for a ruling on whether or not it was related to the case then I'd have no problem what so ever...

Basic law... Not brain surgery here...

Martin's civil rights have been trampled here...

B~


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 03 Jul 13 - 05:58 PM

Bobert: "What you are missing here, Keith, is that the stuff on Martin's phone has been made public -.."

Ya' know, Martin seem to know he was being followed, right?...and was bugged about it, right?...bad enough that he turned around and confronted Zimmerman, right? ..and all the while, he's talking to his girl friend, right?...OK..I think we could all agree on that. the question would then go to, Do you think Trayvon really felt in jeopardy? Right? Some say he did..some say not...well, if I was being followed by a guy who had a gun, and I knew it..and I felt threatened by it...and had a cell phone, I'd be calling 911....wouldn't you???

Right!

GfS


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: GUEST,SJL
Date: 03 Jul 13 - 06:00 PM

Bruce, I found out about Katrina from the NRA, stay away from infowars. Alex Jones, while presenting certain facts, is framing them in the most provocative way possible, inciting unrest. Infowars is creating a nice hotspot for NSA surveillance. Alex Jones is a government shill.

I only support revolutionaries who preach non-violence and don't go on about the second amendment. Our forefathers could never have imagined the state of weapons technology today. Your government has you so outgunned, you're going to need to find another way to protest the mechanisms of what I like to refer to as the "State Apparatus." I think that's what Edward Snowden had in mind but it seems to have backfired somewhat.

Civil disobedience and peaceful protest are still time honored methods of making your point- unless of course you're still waiting for your "change" from Obama. The guy's a bust in that department. If I was a pastor in Sanford, I would refuse to be enlisted by the Sanford police to quell civil unrest- not after the way they protected George Zimmerman and disregarded Trayvon's family. Instead, I would tend to my own flock and invoke Dr. King in hopes that in my community, things would not go on that reinforce the worst stereotypes of racists. I would develop my own secret plan. My secret plan would go into effect if Zimmerman walked.

I would organize a peaceful protest of the verdict and fail to apply for a permit. You're not supposed to have to get special permission to exercise a right. Then face down on the ground with hoodies up. Right in the middle of a non-designated "free speech zone" like say, all along Main St. from one end of town to the other. But you'd have to stay down from say like noon to 3. That's plenty long enough to lay face down on the ground. From what I've heard from peaceful protesters, that's where the specially trained riot police want you anyway (On the ground!). Why not save them the trouble of putting you there? Better visual to make the point anyway. The way I see it, assembling and dispersing would be the tricky part cuz you have to stand up for that. Otherwise, my secret plan is solid.

Shhh...Secret plan. Let it be said that we took the verdict lying down :-)


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Bobert
Date: 03 Jul 13 - 07:40 PM

Who knows, GfinS... The only story we have is from a guy who has already been caught lying about other stuff... Zimmerman has no credibility here...

Do you have any money???

No... A big fat lie...

Do you have knowledge of Florida's stand your ground laws???

No... Another big fat lie...

Bottom line here???

The fact's haven't changed... Zimmerman stalks Martin... Zimmerman calls police... Police tell him to stay in his vehicle and that real cops are on the way... Zimmerman gets out of car and approaches Martin with a gun... Martin gets murdered by Zimmerman...

Everything else really doesn't much matter... That ***is*** the case...

B~


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 03 Jul 13 - 08:16 PM

Well, if that is the case, I'm sure he could get convicted on the charge of lying. Your scenario has WAY too many skips and blank spots...so if I were you, I wouldn't get all worked up about it based on your 'analysis'.

As I noted before, this is a case of young guys, misreading each other, and the circumstances. Why Zimmerman didn't stay in his truck, is as flimsy as Martin not calling 911....had either one of those things happened...this thread wouldn't be here today!

..and then you'd still be waiting for another incident to play the apologetic for.
This really is overblown by the media..and also he's being tried in the media, instead of the courts....and ALL the wannabe armchair lawyers and wannabe political activists are having a field day, getting their legal briefs from T.V. anchormen and all the hype....well almost all of the wannabe activists...Firth has wisely abstained!
...as far as I'm concerned, let the courts handle it....the prosecutors, in my opinion, fucked up when they charged him for first degree, instead of a lower charge....now proving first degree, is WAY harder with the evidence that the have shown, SO FAR! Manslaughter, they had a far better chance with..first degree...mmm..not so sure.
Stupid fuckers should have stayed in his car, and/or Martin should have dialed 911. You ever wonder if Martin talking to his chick might have said, "Fuckin' honky followin' me, here, you listen, I'm goin' to take his fuckin' honky ass out!"......maybe it's a good thing they withheld it and left something like that out!
Now don't 'soil' your panties..it was only a 'what if' supposition.

GfS


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: olddude
Date: 03 Jul 13 - 08:23 PM

yup but Martin should have taken off running away when he knew he was being followed. Zimmerman should have stayed in the car. My point I think is still valid, Macho behavior and who has the biggest dick thing. and now one dead and the others life ruined even if he walks or is found guilty it is over for him. Sad but a good lesson for others on what not to do.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Bobert
Date: 03 Jul 13 - 08:26 PM

I'm not "all worked up", GfinS... I saw OJ get away with murder... I know what the deal is here...

I'm just calling the ballgame as I see it...

Zimmerman will get his no matter the outcome of this case... Karma will fuck him up for what he has done...

B~


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: olddude
Date: 03 Jul 13 - 08:31 PM

I don't know Manslaughter would have been easier to prove. 2nd degree murder much harder to prove. Don't get me wrong I think myself he is guilty as sin but like I said Florida, that f'd up state ... I bet he walks away and I also bet there will be riots again from all those who don't like the verdict. Fucked up world we live in anymore .. I didn't like it when OJ walked either but I didn't want to set anything on fire because of it. We see this a lot sadly only a couple of people don't like a verdict then it is fun and games from a mass of humanity. Kinda like when the home town team wins something .. for some damn reason people look for any reason to riot. I mean good people who wouldn't think of doing that are jumping on cars or rushing out on the field to tear up the stadium .. someone has to explain that crowd dynamic to me.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Bobert
Date: 03 Jul 13 - 08:37 PM

How do you know you he didn't, Ol'ster...

This entire story is being concocted by a ***proven*** liar who is trying to save his own ass...

B~


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 03 Jul 13 - 10:02 PM

Either way it goes, rioting or any other form of civil unrest that may come of this, is just as fucked up as the act itself!

GfS


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: olddude
Date: 03 Jul 13 - 10:18 PM

point well taken bobster I don't know you are right and he may have


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 04 Jul 13 - 01:53 AM


This entire story is being concocted by a ***proven*** liar who is trying to save his own ass...


Very likely.
The jury will be aware that the guilty always lie at their trial anyway, and will put little or no weight on his assertions.

It is not at all unusual for a killer to plea self defence.
Guilty or not, the jury must acquit unless convinced beyond reasonable doubt that the deceased did not attack the accused.

Apart from the conflicting evidence, they will also need to assess the position of the deceased on a scale from violent thug to gentle saint.
They will need evidence of his past to do that.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 04 Jul 13 - 08:38 AM

""When asked by Bobert, I supplied a scenario where the phone TEXT messages might be significant evidence. He never bothered to comment on that. Why do you insist on talking about only the photos? Is your argument so weak that you must resort to using that sort of tactic?""

Because the defence, who were definitely aware of the photos when they complained, have complained of no other items from the phone. No such evidence as your hypothetical nonsense would have escaped complaint, had any such existed.

Remember that the complaints were made after the substance was known to the defence. They could hardly complain before they knew there was something to complain about.

Don T.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 04 Jul 13 - 08:45 AM

""In ANY case, if one reverses the races of the individuals involved, and comes to a different conclusion, then one is a racist. Period. Too many here have demonstrated that that is what they are,""

Still obfuscation and disingenuous avoidance of answering a very pertinent question.

If the neighbourhood watchman had been black (pretty unlikely in Sanford) and the dead man been white, do YOU believe the authorities would have been as reluctant to act as they were in this case?

A simple YES! or NO! is all that's required to answer this simple question.

Don T.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Bobert
Date: 04 Jul 13 - 08:48 AM

Thank you, Don T... I guess that was written by the usual suspect whose posting I no longer bother to read...

Sorry, Keith, but whether Martin was a thug or a saint is not relevant here... Zimmerman didn't know who the hell Treyvon Martin was... Plus, being a thug does not carry the death sentence as long as the thug doesn't commit murder...

Was Martin a murderer???

Your position is the same as a defense attorney asking a rape victim about her sexual past as if that justified the rape...

Your thinking is flawed here...

B~


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 04 Jul 13 - 09:03 AM

""Just a perfect example of never ever ever ever get yourself in any situation that you have to defend yourself, both wrong .. either one could have run away.

You fight, you defend when attacked but only and I mean only if there are no options. With all of my training in hand to hand or with firearms or sharp edged weapons. I am not afraid to run .. hell that is my first and foremost option. Defend only when absolutely necessary, was any of this necessary ... NO
""

And if black youngster, Trayvon Martin, had turned and run from Zimmerman, the only difference would likely have been a bullet in his back, rather than his chest.

Some Choice he had! Dead either way!

In my book an unarmed innocent, guilty only of walking while black, has been murdered, because any action he took to prevent Zimmerman from shooting him is arguably self defence.

Don T.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 04 Jul 13 - 09:10 AM

My thinking is not flawed.
If the deceased attacked the defendant, there is a defence of self-defence.
The prosecution must prove that he did not, and the jury must believe it.

If the defendant was known to be a violent thug, an attack is more believable.
If he was a gentle saint, it would not be.

Obviously it is not proof, but it is evidence that can be taken into account.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Bobert
Date: 04 Jul 13 - 09:33 AM

When Zimmerman got out of his car - not in question - to continue stalking Martin - also not in question - anything that Martin did, under Florida's stand-your-ground and self-defense statutes was justified... That includes walking up to Zimmerman and punching Zimmerman in the face...

The law says that if you feel threatened you have a right to defend yourself...

This is the exact same statute that Zimmerman's attorney - the "self defense" argument - in defending Zimmerman...

This is where your thinking is flawed, Keith... On one hand you say it's okay for Zimmerman to use the "self defense" argument but not okay for that same statute to apply to an unarmed black kid being stalked by a larger man with a gun...

If you can't get that then I might have to add you to the list of people here who are incapable of rational thought...

Reconsider, dude... You are digging a hole trying to get out of it...

B~


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 04 Jul 13 - 09:36 AM

""More important, both statements by Dr. Roa are opinions and should not be allowed to stand, just as the cop's opinion that "Zimmerman is telling the truth" was struck from the record by the judge.

Heck, if Zimmerman had already received "life-threatening injuries", he would not have been able to defend himself.
""

Bleeding from head wounds is almost always particularly copious and small cuts can look far worse than they are.

The good Dr is an expert, and her opinion would be treated as expert by any court, but of course Peedee knows better.

What are your medical qualifications Peedee?

Don T.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 04 Jul 13 - 09:41 AM

""Zimmerman said he lost sight of Martin, got out of his car to call police and was walking back to his vehicle when the 17-year-old attacked him.""

Something in his vehicle requires that he walk away from it before making a phone call?

Even when he has lost sight of a man who he regards as a likely criminal, having profiled him as Hoodie = Crook!

Does it sound likely? NO!!

Don T.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 04 Jul 13 - 09:53 AM

self-defense statutes was justified... That includes walking up to Zimmerman and punching Zimmerman in the face...

If that is true in your country, I am amazed.

you say it's okay for Zimmerman to use the "self defense" argument

It is Bobert. Not just me saying it.

but not okay for that same statute to apply to an unarmed black kid being stalked by a larger man with a gun.
Try to take race out of it
It might be OK, but I doubt it would stand up whatever the colour.

You might well be right about Z's guilt, but you can not know.
Even the court has not heard both cases yet.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 04 Jul 13 - 09:57 AM

""Sanford Police Chief Cecil Smith and other city officials are worried that the outcome of the George Zimmerman trial could spark "violence" and have crafted a "secret law enforcement" plan to deal with potential social disorder.................

..........""Our worst fear is that we will have people from outside of the community coming in and stirring up….violence in the community," Smith told CNN's David Mattingly.""

Preparing the ground already!!

They could always set "innocent" George on 'em!

Don T.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 04 Jul 13 - 10:05 AM

""No idea how true any of these details are - but the "Liberal Agenda" is to outlaw private firearm ownership- How better than more riots? It will be "Temporary, for our own good".

Got to make sure the "Peeple" are under control, and do what they are told.


And riots would distract from all of Obama's other problems.

Just look at how 1968 got Johnson off the heat for Vietnam.
""

Now Beardie has lost it and gone batshit.

The trial of some gung ho hotshot killer is another Vietnam war.

Take your meds BB.

Don T.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 04 Jul 13 - 10:15 AM

""Apart from the conflicting evidence, they will also need to assess the position of the deceased on a scale from violent thug to gentle saint.
They will need evidence of his past to do that.
""

They aren't allowed to bring up Zimmerman's past record in evidence until and unless he is convicted.

You believe that they should be able to blacken a dead teenager, who can't answer for himself?

Typical!

Don T.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly -