• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

George Zimmerman attorney again seeks to question Ben Crump

justabubba said:
so, now he has a 20% shot that he did not otherwise have
20% looks a hell of a lot better than 0% - especially if you are sitting in jail
Click to expand...

Who is going to pay for it? Do you know what is required for you to be declared indigent in Florida?
 
justabubba said:
nope. it was not about the soundness of the case
it was about the time and resources available to the defense. omara recognized he should marshal his client's assets for only a single trial
Click to expand...

Well think about it .. OMara tried to push the trial back again ... into the Fall. What did they say GZ living expenses are??? $7,000 a month? Is that right?
 
sharon said:
Who is going to pay for it? Do you know what is required for you to be declared indigent in Florida?
Click to expand...
i don't think he will need the appeal
the prosecution has no case
but his responsibility is to his client. to do the things that will preserve zimmerman's chance at another bite of the apple - if it is needed - is the prudent course of action. hence, preserving basis for an appeal via the (to be denied) request for deposition
 
justabubba said:
i don't think he will need the appeal
the prosecution has no case
but his responsibility is to his client. to do the things that will preserve zimmerman's chance at another bite of the apple - if it is needed - is the prudent course of action. hence, preserving basis for an appeal via the (to be denied) request for deposition
Click to expand...

Depose Crump about what? No judge anywhere would allow the victim's family attorney to be deposed. Next thing you know Crump will be demanding to depose OMara.
 
Excon said:
New evidence coming to light, her untruthfulness, requires that the motion be resubmitted.
And as the information that Crump has in regards to the whole affair is germane, if the Judge again denies, I suspect we might see an interlocutory appeal.
Click to expand...

Excellent point
 
sharon said:
Have you done many depositions? I have.. Digging up dirt on Dee? She didn't kill anyone and she is not responsible for anything Crump may have said.

They should have taken Dee's deposition months ago according to judge Lester.. OMara is stalling.. he wants more donations.

OMara is not as skilled as I initially thought.. He doesn't want to take this to trial... because he can't let George take the stand.

You know until he got 40K for office improvements from George.. It was a small,all purpose lawfirm.
Click to expand...
No sharon. You clearly do not know what you are talking about.


sharon said:
So it doesn't matter if she lied about going to the hospital the day of the funeral. It was several days after the death of Trayvon.. Its "immaterial".. Its not perjury..
Click to expand...
:doh
It does matter sharon, as it goes to her credibility. Which I am more than positive you know. Which would also explain why you are here saying it doesn't matter.


sharon said:
Nobody reads Miranda Rights to witnesses.
Click to expand...
Why are you trying to pull the wool over peoples eyes with this misdirection?

A witness swears to tell the truth. They do not swear to lie.

And yes it is perjury sharon. Lying under oath is the very definition of perjury.
It is false swearing.
She swore to tell the truth and she didn't.
It is important as it goes directly to her credibility. And I am sure you know that.
Her perjury is not directly to a material issue, which may not constitute a felony under Florida law.
But it is, and will ever be, perjury.


sharon said:
Depose Crump on WHAT? He was not witness to the crime..
Click to expand...
Depose Crump on what?
On what?
On the fabrication that is known as witness #8's account.
He is the mastermind behind it, not her.
And you know that in deposing him the defense will then have a trove of information and be able to ask her more poignant questions to expose this fabrication.
Of course he should be deposed
There is a reason she didn't come forward on her own sharon.


sharon said:
OMara is stalling.. He doesn't want to go to trial.. He wants to delay, blame others, blog and count the money..
Click to expand...
:doh
No sharon.
He is doing what any good attorney would do. Preserve the issue for appeal if needed.
Obviously you oppose this because you know it will make it easier for the defense to expose any such lies on her part.
Fabrications.


sharon said:
Depose Crump about what?
Click to expand...
You already knew why. I we can see why you oppose it.

sharon said:
No judge anywhere would allow the victim's family attorney to be deposed.
Click to expand...
Wrong. Especially as he was not acting as the family attorney at that point, but tampering with evidence as he did.

sharon said:
Next thing you know Crump will be demanding to depose OMara.
Click to expand...
What an absurd thing to say.


Bottom line sharon.
It is highly unlikely that she made up this lie on her own, which only leaves her acting on Crump's instructions, or both conspiring to mislead a criminal investigation.
Both Crump and Daisha conspired to tell a lie. A lie as minor and immaterial as this.
So what else did they conspire to lie about?

Of course Crump should be deposed.
 
Excon said:
No sharon. You clearly do not know what you are talking about.


:doh
It does matter sharon, as it goes to her credibility. Which I am more than positive you know. Which would also explain why you are here saying it doesn't matter.



Why are you trying to pull the wool over peoples eyes with this misdirection?

A witness swears to tell the truth. They do not swear to lie.

And yes it is perjury sharon. Lying under oath is the very definition of perjury.
It is false swearing.
She swore to tell the truth and she didn't.
It is important as it goes directly to her credibility. And I am sure you know that.
Her perjury is not directly to a material issue, which may not constitute a felony under Florida law.
But it is, and will ever be, perjury.


Depose Crump on what?
On what?
On the fabrication that is known as witness #8's account.
He is the mastermind behind it, not her.
And you know that in deposing him the defense will then have a trove of information and be able to ask her more poignant questions to expose this fabrication.
Of course he should be deposed
There is a reason she didn't come forward on her own sharon.


:doh
No sharon.
He is doing what any good attorney would do. Preserve the issue for appeal if needed.
Obviously you oppose this because you know it will make it easier for the defense to expose any such lies on her part.
Fabrications.


You already knew why. I we can see why you oppose it.

Wrong. Especially as he was not acting as the family attorney at that point, but tampering with evidence as he did.

What an absurd thing to say.


Bottom line sharon.
It is highly unlikely that she made up this lie on her own, which only leaves her acting on Crump's instructions, or both conspiring to mislead a criminal investigation.
Both Crump and Daisha conspired to tell a lie. A lie as minor and immaterial as this.
So what else did they conspire to lie about?

Of course Crump should be deposed.
Click to expand...

Crump is an officer of the court and there is NO judge in the country that would allow OMara to depose him.

OMara is doing a spaghetti defense.. I don't know whether he is incompetent or George is running the show.

READ the transcript.. BDLR shaped a POORLY worded question.. Dee responded to "go to the hospital or something".. She may have gone to her pastor.
 
sharon said:
Crump is an officer of the court and there is NO judge in the country that would allow OMara to depose him.

OMara is doing a spaghetti defense.. I don't know whether he is incompetent or George is running the show.

READ the transcript.. BDLR shaped a POORLY worded question.. Dee responded to "go to the hospital or something".. She may have gone to her pastor.
Click to expand...
When the deposition issue arose, Crump filed an affidavit which he said explained everything he knew about the interview with Witness 8. But the defense's new motion calls his affidavit "not only incomplete, but... also inaccurate."
Click to expand...
Now that Witness 8's credibility is at issue because of this contradictory and possibly perjurious testimony, deposing Mr. Crump is even more necessary and relevant for further determination of additional misrepresentation of lies, to document further bases for impeachment of Witness 8, and other necessary matters
Click to expand...
[above emphasis added by bubba]
George Zimmerman Benjamin Crump Trayvon Martin - Orlando Sentinel

i would not be surprised if the court now allows crump to be deposed, but where inquiry is tightly limited to crump's interactions with witness #8, such that he is not required to disclose privileged information of his client (not witness #8)
 
justabubba said:
[above emphasis added by bubba]
George Zimmerman Benjamin Crump Trayvon Martin - Orlando Sentinel

i would not be surprised if the court now allows crump to be deposed, but where inquiry is tightly limited to crump's interactions with witness #8, such that he is not required to disclose privileged information of his client (not witness #8)
Click to expand...

Depose Crump for WHAT?

I don't think it will be permitted.. but if so, then the prosecution can depose OMara..

The media is selling INK.. and it makes OMara appear desperate.. He should stop the blogging and PR spin and prepare George's defense.
 
sharon said:
Depose Crump for WHAT?
Click to expand...
it appears crump may have lied in his affidavit to the court. i would think the court would want to know if that was the actual circumstance
my speculation is that the defense believes crump was coaching the witness. which is why they are seeking to depose him before they depose witness #8

I don't think it will be permitted..
Click to expand...
you may be correct. the court would have to find a very compelling reason to have a representing attorney deposed. now to see if the defense's request is sufficiently compelling

but if so, then the prosecution can depose OMara..
Click to expand...
what would the legal basis for this be, sharon? i don't think "tit for tat" would be an adequate legal finding

The media is selling INK..
Click to expand...
you say that like it's a bad thing. that IS the nature of its business

and it makes OMara appear desperate..
Click to expand...
how so? how is this other than a defense attorney taking every available action to put on an adequate defense?

He should stop the blogging and PR spin and prepare George's defense.
Click to expand...
what is it that he has not properly done, sharon?
 
sharon said:
Crump is an officer of the court and there is NO judge in the country that would allow OMara to depose him.

OMara is doing a spaghetti defense.. I don't know whether he is incompetent or George is running the show.

READ the transcript.. BDLR shaped a POORLY worded question.. Dee responded to "go to the hospital or something".. She may have gone to her pastor.
Click to expand...

Apparently, you DO NOT understand the seriousness of the issue

When you read and examine, the affidavit for Z's arrest it relies heavily on Daisha's account

She was not there and saw nothing. A subjective impression of what must have happened based on the hearsay.

Now, we find out it was based on false statements
 
ric27 said:
Apparently, you DO NOT understand the seriousness of the issue

When you read and examine, the affidavit for Z's arrest it relies heavily on Daisha's account

She was not there and saw nothing. A subjective impression of what must have happened based on the hearsay.

Now, we find out it was based on false statements
Click to expand...

She knows what Tryvon was telling her when he was not in anticipation of being murdered.

Read the questions that BDLR asked her. You'll get it.

Whether or not she went to the funeral a week after the killing is immaterial.
 
sharon said:
Appeal? 80% of appeals fail..

George is charged with murder.. Neither Crump or Dee are.. So it doesn't matter if she lied about going to the hospital the day of the funeral. It was several days after the death of Trayvon.. Its "immaterial".. Its not perjury..

Since George was interrogated... he waived his Miranda Rights. Nobody reads Miranda Rights to witnesses.

Do you understand the difference? Crump ISN'T a witness.
Click to expand...

Anyone with direct or even hearsay information related to a crime is subject to discovery unless attorney-client privilege exists. That is a very, very simple concept.

You position that it is irrelevant if a material fact witness lied to other people or was telling different people different and contradictory accounts is so absurd it really does represent you are 100% OPPOSED to truth in the case - only in a conviction any way possible.

From the start, I have pointed out the judge(s) are absurdly pro-prosecution and for obvious reasons too. They are partisan elected judges who would not want the same-party prosecutor telling the media the judge is pro-crime and pro-criminal in this high media profile case. Therefore, the partisan political judges will do whatever the partisan political prosecutor wants. Latinos are the smallest population demographic - so who cares what they think? They won't be electing or defeating anyone anyway.

The State of Florida has determined that its legal system shall be partisan political. Therefore, it is partisan political. Everyone - including defendants - are just role actor is the structure - and defendants fill the role of "THE CRIMINAL" in criminal trials.

Casey Anthony is white and female, so the "criminal" role was quite different for her than a fat Latino middle aged man.
 
Last edited:
ric27 said:
Apparently, you DO NOT understand the seriousness of the issue

When you read and examine, the affidavit for Z's arrest it relies heavily on Daisha's account

She was not there and saw nothing. A subjective impression of what must have happened based on the hearsay.

Now, we find out it was based on false statements
Click to expand...

1. No it does not:lol:

2.You continue to have a problem defining what "hearsay" is:lol:
 
sharon said:
Crump is an officer of the court
and there is NO judge in the country that would allow OMara to depose him.
Click to expand...
Oh my Gawd! Stop the presses. Crump is an officer of the court.
Doh!
Well that didn't stop him from being deceitful or tampering with the evidence now did it?

Here is another news flash sharon, so is O'Mara.

And I got another news flash for you as well. It doesn't matter if he is.
Some courts (in other words the Judge) would allow him to be deposed.
Some would have immediately granted the motion.




sharon said:
READ the transcript.. BDLR shaped a POORLY worded question.. Dee responded to "go to the hospital or something"..
Click to expand...
This is at least the second time you quoted it as "or something". That is incorrect. It is "or somewhere".
Nor was it poorly constructed.
He asked a leading question and then added to "or somewhere to make it not leading.

But he knew exactly what he was asking, as that is what she told him she had done.
So it has nothing to do with it being a poorly constructed question.
But everything to do with her deliberately lying under oath.
He knew what he was asking and so did she as that is the information that came fro her to begin with.
You can attempt to deflect from that all you want. Your attempts only show your bias.
She fabricated a story and told that fabrication under oath.



sharon said:
She may have gone to her pastor.
Click to expand...
She would have stated it if she had fabricated that too.
 
sharon said:
but if so, then the prosecution can depose OMara..
Click to expand...
As justabubba said sharon. Tit for tat wouldn't work.
There would be absolutely no reason for O'Mara to be deposed.
 
sharon said:
She knows what Tryvon was telling her when he was not in anticipation of being murdered.

Read the questions that BDLR asked her. You'll get it.

Whether or not she went to the funeral a week after the killing is immaterial.
Click to expand...

Daisha didn't surface at all until weeks into this case after Crump had plenty of time and incentive to coach her.

Crump told her to say

O'mara will get to the bottom of this
 
Excon said:
As justabubba said sharon. Tit for tat wouldn't work.
There would be absolutely no reason for O'Mara to be deposed.
Click to expand...

Just as there is NO reason for Crump to be deposed.
 
ric27 said:
Daisha didn't surface at all until weeks into this case after Crump had plenty of time and incentive to coach her.

Crump told her to say

O'mara will get to the bottom of this
Click to expand...

All witnesses are coached.. Its called "prepping".. George is being coached.

OMara is on a snipe hunt.
 
sharon said:
Just as there is NO reason for Crump to be deposed.
Click to expand...
Yes there is sharon.
He made up a story to force this non-issue.
Of course it is relevant.
 
sharon said:
All witnesses are coached.. Its called "prepping".. George is being coached.

OMara is on a snipe hunt.
Click to expand...
No sharon. Prepping is not coaching.
 
Excon said:
Yes there is sharon.
He made up a story to force this non-issue.
Of course it is relevant.
Click to expand...

Dee was questioned and told her story before the release of the NEN recording.. Her account of Trayvon's movement that night confirm parts of George's stories.
 
sharon said:
Dee was questioned and told her story before the release of the NEN recording..
Click to expand...

Lets test your little theory out, shall we? First, I guess we should find out when the 911 call was released. If only there was a way to determine that... Hmm.. I know.. Let's search the internet:

Trayvon Martin Case: 911 Audio Released Of Teen Shot By Neighborhood Watch Captain (AUDIO)
Trayvon Martin Case: 911 Audio Released Of Teen Shot By Neighborhood Watch Captain (AUDIO)
Posted:03/16/2012 9:54 pm Updated: 08/12/2012 10:26 am
Click to expand...
Hmm, so it looks like the 911 call was released Friday, 03/16/12. Now we would have to try to see if there was a way to determine the date Crump recorded his call. Well.. i'm out of idea... No.. Wait.. I got it.. It worked with finding out when the 911 call was released... maybe it will also work to determine the date Crump recorded deedee.. Can it possbily work twice in a row?

she ordered Crump to answer a limited number of defense questions about a March 19 recorded interview he conducted of
Click to expand...

I really have to ask... do you really know anything about this case? It seems like you are constantly posting made up and incorrect bs.
 
buck said:
Lets test your little theory out, shall we? First, I guess we should find out when the 911 call was released. If only there was a way to determine that... Hmm.. I know.. Let's search the internet:


Hmm, so it looks like the 911 call was released Friday, 03/16/12. Now we would have to try to see if there was a way to determine the date Crump recorded his call. Well.. i'm out of idea... No.. Wait.. I got it.. It worked with finding out when the 911 call was released... maybe it will also work to determine the date Crump recorded deedee.. Can it possbily work twice in a row?



I really have to ask... do you really know anything about this case? It seems like you are constantly posting made up and incorrect bs.
Click to expand...

Ask Matt Gutman when Crump interviewed her.... The State interviewed her on April 2.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom