• 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 lawyers to judge: Sanction state for 'personal attacks'

Holy ****.
Stop playing games.
The evidence is that they haven't received all the information yet, which is evidenced by their request.
What is it?
You do not think they know (unlikely) what type of records come from a phone?
Or is it they know (most likely) and just don't have them yet?

Like I said. Where are the ping records.

What violation did the Prosecution commit? You still have not provided any evidence of such.
 
What violation did the Prosecution commit? You still have not provided any evidence of such.
:naughty
You are playing a game.

It is a game I hope you never have to experience on your own.

The evidence is that the Defense is requesting information that they should already have.
Evidence the prosecution should already have given them.
You need to be answering why they don't have it, as the rules say they are entitled to such information.
 
:naughty
You are playing a game.

It is a game I hope you never have to experience on your own.

The evidence is that the Defense is requesting information that they should already have.
Evidence the prosecution should already have given them.
You need to be answering why they don't have it, as the rules say they are entitled to such information.

Cite where they are entitled by the discovery rules? You have the link, stop spinning and do it.
 
Quoting yourself isn't going to help you! LOL!

Funny, you can quote. You just can't quote an applicable procedural law.

You lost.
As you have lost, and what I said is correct, it deserves repeating as a reply to your specific brand of posting.

And again.

no one has admitted anything except for you.
Your constant and consistent avoidance of the topic by making absurd false claims shows you are not here to discuss or debate.
It also shows you do not know the law.



So again, "What Civil law did he cite that is not applicable to what he states?"
 
Last edited:
Last edited:
3.220 b 1 florida law
"Within 15 days after service of the Notice of Discovery, the prosecutor shall serve a written Discovery Exhibit which shall disclose to the defendant and permit the defendant to inspect, copy, test, and photograph the following information and material within the state‘s possession or control, except that any property or material that portrays sexual performance by a child or constitutes child pornography may not be copied, photographed, duplicated, or otherwise reproduced:"

Is it your claim then the prosecution has 100% complied?

That the prosecution has no addition cell phone records of TM's, and they do not have any cleanup audio tapes that the defense does not have copies of?. The prosecution has made available to the defense all that it has within the timeframes required by law.

simple yes/no will do.
 
wasting keystrokes on this one my friend
anyone who believes evidence = work product is not going to be up to comprehending the information you have to offer
Yeah. I then love how he said the following.

Either way, the defense can have someone enhance it themselves.

Clearly not understanding they would have use the same enhanced product (in other words - evidence), if it even exists. :slapme:
 
Yeah. I then love how he said the following.

Either way, the defense can have someone enhance it themselves.

Clearly not understanding they would have use the same enhanced product (in other words - evidence), if it even exists. :slapme:


Imo, JF has misrepresented “work product” . It is interesting he has basically said the defense lawyer does not know the law. Imo, JF is not very up Florida law either. JF seemed to ignore my post where I showed the State has 15 days to comply.

The tape enhancement would most likely not be an opinion work product but a fact workproduct.

Bar Journal Article

“The primary policy objective of the work-product doctrine is to preserve the effective assistance of attorneys and others employed to help prepare a case for trial. By maintaining the privacy of communications between client, attorney, and others employed in preparing for litigation — especially privacy in the development of legal theories, opinions, and strategies-the doctrine fosters the effectiveness of legal assistance upon which our adversarial system of justice depends. But the courts realize that to achieve fairness in the disposition of litigation, the parties must be allowed to obtain knowledge of the relevant facts through a liberal interpretation of the rules of discovery.”

If the prosecution “enhanced” a copy of the recording and found a new fact that is relevant to the case, then the prosecution needs to make that “fact” known to the defense.

It is not as simple as take the copy and enhance it our self.

3.220 b 1 florida law
"Within 15 days after service of the Notice of Discovery, the prosecutor shall serve a written Discovery Exhibit which shall disclose to the defendant and permit the defendant to inspect, copy, test, and photograph the following information and material within the state‘s possession or control, except that any property or material that portrays sexual performance by a child or constitutes child pornography may not be copied, photographed, duplicated, or otherwise reproduced:"
 
3.220 b 1 florida law
"Within 15 days after service of the Notice of Discovery, the prosecutor shall serve a written Discovery Exhibit which shall disclose to the defendant and permit the defendant to inspect, copy, test, and photograph the following information and material within the state‘s possession or control, except that any property or material that portrays sexual performance by a child or constitutes child pornography may not be copied, photographed, duplicated, or otherwise reproduced:"

Is it your claim then the prosecution has 100% complied?

That the prosecution has no addition cell phone records of TM's, and they do not have any cleanup audio tapes that the defense does not have copies of?. The prosecution has made available to the defense all that it has within the timeframes required by law.

simple yes/no will do.

Yes, yes and yes.
 
wasting keystrokes on this one my friend
anyone who believes evidence = work product is not going to be up to comprehending the information you have to offer

Cite where they are entitled to the information they have requested by the discovery rules? Excon has the link to the pdf file, stop spinning and do it. Motions by the defense are not evidence.

Can't/won't/unable to cite your evidence?
 
Imo, JF has misrepresented “work product” . It is interesting he has basically said the defense lawyer does not know the law. Imo, JF is not very up Florida law either. JF seemed to ignore my post where I showed the State has 15 days to comply.

The tape enhancement would most likely not be an opinion work product but a fact workproduct.

Bar Journal Article

“The primary policy objective of the work-product doctrine is to preserve the effective assistance of attorneys and others employed to help prepare a case for trial. By maintaining the privacy of communications between client, attorney, and others employed in preparing for litigation — especially privacy in the development of legal theories, opinions, and strategies-the doctrine fosters the effectiveness of legal assistance upon which our adversarial system of justice depends. But the courts realize that to achieve fairness in the disposition of litigation, the parties must be allowed to obtain knowledge of the relevant facts through a liberal interpretation of the rules of discovery.”

If the prosecution “enhanced” a copy of the recording and found a new fact that is relevant to the case, then the prosecution needs to make that “fact” known to the defense.

It is not as simple as take the copy and enhance it our self.

3.220 b 1 florida law
"Within 15 days after service of the Notice of Discovery, the prosecutor shall serve a written Discovery Exhibit which shall disclose to the defendant and permit the defendant to inspect, copy, test, and photograph the following information and material within the state‘s possession or control, except that any property or material that portrays sexual performance by a child or constitutes child pornography may not be copied, photographed, duplicated, or otherwise reproduced:"

Cite where they are entitled to the information they have requested by the discovery rules? Excon has the link to the pdf file, stop spinning and do it. Motions by the defense are not evidence.

Can't/won't/unable to cite your evidence?
 
Cite where they are entitled to the information they have requested by the discovery rules? You have the link to the pdf file, stop spinning and do it. Motions by the defense are not evidence.

Can't/won't/unable to cite your evidence?
How sad.
You keep being told, but you don't pay attention.

But it figures, as you keep using this ruse to avoid answering for your ridiculous claims.
 
Motions by the defense are not evidence.
Wrong.
Motions by the defense are evidence that they do not have the requested information.
 
Cite where they are entitled to the information they have requested by the discovery rules? Excon has the link to the pdf file, stop spinning and do it. Motions by the defense are not evidence.

Can't/won't/unable to cite your evidence?

I can't help you if you cannot understand the 3.220 b 1 florida law
or what Florida considers protected workproduct. I posted the information. You seem to think it does not answer your question

Your turn, cite where in the law the prosecution does not need to provide the information requested?
 
I can't help you if you cannot understand the 3.220 b 1 florida law
or what Florida considers protected workproduct. I posted the information. You seem to think it does not answer your question

Your turn, cite where in the law the prosecution does not need to provide the information requested?

No where does it state they are entitled to the specific evidence they have requested.
 
How sad.
You keep being told, but you don't pay attention.

But it figures, as you keep using this ruse to avoid answering for your ridiculous claims.

I see you still are unable to cite the specific rule the prosecution has violated.
 
No where does it state they are entitled to the specific evidence they have requested.

So you want the law to name all "specific evidence"?

Why is the evidence requested not covered under "information and material within the state‘s possession or control"?


You have not provided evidence that the prosecution has met its obligation under the law.
 
Motions are not evidence.

You seem to be confused.
Either that, or you are playing stupid again.

The demands for discovery are evidence that they do not possess said information they are requesting.
If they had said information, they would not be requesting it. Duh! So stop playing.
 
I see you still are unable to cite the specific rule the prosecution has violated.
Already have.
It is in the the motions.
So stop being dishonest and telling untruths.
 
Cite where they are entitled to the information they have requested by the discovery rules? Excon has the link to the pdf file, stop spinning and do it. Motions by the defense are not evidence.

Can't/won't/unable to cite your evidence?


tell us some more about how "work product" is found to be enhancement of evidence
with that you demolished what remnant of credibility remained for you in this topic
 
So you want the law to name all "specific evidence"?

Why is the evidence requested not covered under "information and material within the state‘s possession or control"?


You have not provided evidence that the prosecution has met its obligation under the law.

Just the ones pertaining to the defense motions.
 
Back
Top Bottom