It was in April of 2012 that NBC News edited audio of George Zimmerman’s call to Sanford, Florida police to make him appear racist. So obvious, and easily checked, was that edit that MBC was quickly exposed and widely ridiculed. However, the damaqe was done, and to this day, many believe that false video to be the truth, see Zimerman as a racist, and believe Martin’s death to be racially motivated. Several low level NBC employees were fired, and as I reported in Update 18 on December 10, 2012, the O’Mara law Group has partnered with the prestigious Beasely Law firm of Philadelphia to sue NBC on behalf of Zimmerman.
On Feb. 1, Brietbart News reported that Steve Capus, President of NBC News, was either fired or resigned. Speaking of the multiple frauds perpetrated by NBC News under Capus’ direction, Brietbart wrote:
The rap sheet against Capus isn’t troubling, surprising, or even disturbing — it is breathtaking:
1. During last year’s presidential election, Andrea Mitchell was caught manufacturing a Romney gaffe where none existed.
2. During last year’s GOP primary, Ed Schultz edited video of Texas Governor Rick Perry to make him look racist.
3. In April of last year, the “Today Show” was caught editing audio of a 9-1-1 call to make George Zimmerman look racist.
4. In August of 2009, Contessa Brewer sliced and diced a photograph so it wouldn’t look like a black man attended a Tea Party carrying a firearm.
5. Just this week, NBC News maliciously edited video of a town council meeting to make it look as though Second Amendment civil rights activists heckled a parent who lost his son in Newtown.
This isn’t bias; this is committing outright fraud in pursuit of a political agenda. And it is no coincidence that every single one of these incidents aided and abetted Obama directly or whatever his agenda was at the time.
Analysis:
It is certainly possible that NBC, in light of the Zimmerman suit, decided to minimize its losses by firing Capus, leaving it free to argue in court that it has done everything possible to atone by getting rid of everyone who had a hand in the fraud against Zimmerman. “It’s not our fault! We were betrayed by rogue employees, and look! We fired them, see?”
That it took so long to remove Capus is indicative only of NBC’s lack of journalistic ethics and basic human decency. However, expect NBC’s attorney’s to trumpet the firing of Capus–and lower-ranking employees–in Zimmerman’s suit against the network.
TRIAL DEVELOPMENTS:
It appears the Orlando Sentinel is less circumspect about journalistic ethics these days. In a February 5 article, Sentinel reporters Rene Stutzman and Jeff Weiner wrote:
On a day when a gospel choir stood on the Seminole County Courthouse lawn, singing “Happy Birthday” to Trayvon Martin, Circuit Judge Debra S. Nelson dealt his killer a series of setbacks.
Not “alleged” killer. The remainder of the article takes an equally informal tone.
One might be tempted to think the system is working to deny Zimmerman the resources and time he needs to mount an effective defense. Prosecutor Bernie de la Rionda asserted that Zimmerman should not be granted additional time to prepare and that he did not need expert witnesses. Judge Debra S. Nelson agreed in part and denied a continuance of the June 10 trial date.
It was also reported that the defense is nearly out of money and that O’Mara may have to petition the state to fund Zimmerman’s defense.
Another contentious issue has been the recording of an interview of “DeeDee” by Martin family attorney Benjamin Crump. I analyzed de la Rionda’s interview of Dee Dee in Update 11, and noted In Update 18 that Crump was present for de la Rionda’s in-person interview with her, though de la Rionda did not, in the transcript of that interview, reveal his presence or the presence of Scheme Team attorneys Daryl Parks and Natalie Jackson.
The court initially ruled that O’Mara could depose Crump, but Crump’s attorney Bruce Blackwell presented an affidavit from Crump claiming he did nothing to edit or change the transcript of his Dee Dee interview. Judge Nelson postponed the Crump deposition indefinitely.
The Sentinel continued:
The judge did hand O’Mara a victory Tuesday: She ordered the state to put witness 8 on the phone for a mini-deposition to allow defense attorneys to question her about the names she used on Twitter and Facebook.
Zimmerman’s lawyers say they need those before they sit her down for a full-blown deposition so they can track what she posted on the social media sites and question her about that.
Analysis:
According to Mr. de la Rionda, the defense doesn’t need expert witnesses? This is ridiculous on its face, and a continuing indication of the prosecution’s less than ethical behavior in this case. The defense is indeed entitled to expert and any other witnesses necessary to produce a competent and aggressive defense of George Zimmerman. Mr. de la Rionda surely knows this?
It is not unusual for defense attorneys to try to draw out the pre-trial process for as long as possible, usually for less than legitimate reasons. However, considering the evidence that the prosecution in this case has been slow-rolling and withholding discovery due the defense, one might expect Judge Nelson to be a bit more willing to allow O’Mara some leeway in this matter. She has been more generous in other matters, such as:
Martin’s School Records:
On January 16, the Orlando Sentinel reported that O’Mara finally received Martin’s school records.
We are entitled to receive the school records because some information in Trayvon Martin’s file could be relevant in the defense of George Zimmerman,’ the website for Zimmerman’s legal defense said Wednesday.
The records from Miami-Dade schools have not been made available to the public, but portions could be revealed later, according to Zimmerman’s legal team
‘If any detail of the school records should be considered relevant in the course of a Self-Defense Immunity Hearing, only the parts deemed relevant to the case will be entered into evidence,’ the website said.
That hearing could happen in April.
Obviously, the records will be used to paint a very different picture of Martin than the media and Scheme Team narrative:
The school records could damage Trayvon’s reputation. Police have said Trayvon was serving a 10-day school suspension at the time of his death after being caught with an empty marijuana baggie.
Zimmerman’s legal team pledged it would not “demonize” the teen.
‘A number of parties have expressed concern that we will use information found in the school records to ‘demonize’ Trayvon Martin,’ the website for Zimmerman’s legal defense said. ‘The Zimmerman defense has no intention to demonize Trayvon Martin.
Analysis:
“The school records could damage Trayvon’s reputation.” Indeed. There has been substantial speculation, including apparent evidence of three separate suspensions in a short time prior to Martin’s death. It has been widely reported that Martin was in Sanford due to a 10-day suspension for what may be an assault on a school bus driver. These records will surely shed light on these allegations and provide more factual information.
Whatever damage might be done to Martin’s reputation is the fault of no one but Martin. In contemporary education, for a student to be suspended from school even once normally requires either a very serious stand-alone violation of school rules and/or the law (drugs, weapons, assault, etc.), or is the result of a long string of lesser offenses such that the student involved has become so disruptive and/or aggressive it is not reasonable or safe to keep them in school. Three suspensions in a short time are, of course, far more serious, and a ten day suspension–there seems to be no doubt about the fact of that–is normally a final step before absolute expulsion.
Can these records be legitimately used in court? Yes, so long as the judge is satisfied that Martin’s character and behavior as revealed in the records have a direct bearing on the issues at hand in the case. These are issues well established in law. Any judge would also consider the extraordinary public assault on Zimmerman’s character, a process that is ongoing. Evidence of drug involvement, gang involvement, violent tendencies or behavior, or evidence of involvement in burglary or theft on Martin’s part would obviously be directly related to this case.
Remember that it was Zimmerman’s observation of Martin, who appeared to him to be drugged and/or casing the neighborhood, that started the incident. Martin’s violent response to Zimmerman is well established, and he was found at school in possession of women’s jewelry not his own, and a burglary tool. His social media presence was very much “thuggish” and often spoke of drug use. At the time of his death, he was carrying two of the primary ingredients for a drug concoction known as “drank,” items he purchased shortly before the encounter with Zimmerman (he did not purchase tea), and there is evidence of marijuana in Martin’s blood.
It is likely we’ll be hearing a great deal about these school records as the self-defense hearing draws near, and certainly in that hearing.
FBI Records:
The court has ordered the FBI to produce all relevant records and evidence of their investigation, including communications between the FBI and the prosecutors and police.
Analysis:
O’Mara likely has several goals here. These records are necessary to enable him to avoid being surprised in court. They will confirm–or not–what FBI experts have already testified. And most importantly, they will provide information that might lead to additional discovery. No doubt there is information helpful to Zimmerman–the FBI investigation apparently found no evidence of racial bias on his part–that the prosecution does not want O’Mara to have. I suspect this might also lead to additional information of improper behavior on the part of the prosecution.
Martin’s Cellphone and A Suspicious Gap:
New court paperwork reveals that prosecutors have unlocked a great deal more information from Trayvon Martin’s cellphone, including satellite-tracking information that shows where it was in the days leading up to his shooting.
But if it also lays out the teenager’s movements Feb. 26 — the day Trayvon was shot and killed by George Zimmerman — prosecutors have not released that to defense attorneys.
Ethical prosecutors would have turned over such obviously pertinent information without argument or concealment. Withholding evidence only makes their case look week and is a terrible public relations move. No prosecutor with a strong case is reluctant to provide evidence to which the defense is entitled, if for no reason other than to demoralize them and to encourage them to settle the case.
One of O’Mara’s frustrations, he wrote, has been getting Assistant State Attorney Bernie de la Rionda to fully disclose evidence in the case.
Information from Trayvon’s phone is one example. The Android-powered smartphone was found near his body, its battery dead, the night of the shooting. It’s a key piece of evidence because a young Miami woman [DeeDee] says she was on the phone with him moments before the shooting and overheard the conversation between Trayvon and Zimmerman.
Attempts to crack the phone without a password caused the police to be locked out. They shipped it to experts that were able to recover its data.
It shows you within 10 feet where the phone is,’ O’Mara told the Orlando Sentinel.
De la Rionda provided those new findings to defense attorneys Jan. 18, O’Mara wrote, but with a gaping hole.
‘While the analysis includes GPS locating records for Mr. Martin’s phone for all of the time he was in the Sanford area, specifically absent is any such data from February 26, 2012, the date of the event,’ O’Mara wrote.
‘Maybe it’s coincidence, but I’m way past [believing it’s] coincidence,’ O’Mara said.
There also seem to be missing phone calls and text messages, he wrote.
De la Rionda’s office did not respond to an email asking for comment.
O’Mara’s motion also complains about prosecutors not providing him information about the young woman who says she was on the phone with Trayvon in the moments just before the shooting.
She was 18 years old that day — not 16 as Martin family attorney Benjamin Crump identified her — O’Mara said, and prosecutors have not provided enough information about her to allow him to subpoena her Twitter and Facebook records.
The judge earlier authorized those subpoenas.
Analysis:
It is particularly foolish for the prosecution to withhold the GPS data for February 26th. Not only will they be court ordered to produce it, if it is particularly helpful to the defense their withholding of the evidence will not help their credibility with the judge, to say nothing of the public view of the case.
Among the factors still unknown is precisely where Martin was from the time he left the convenience store until Zimmerman first saw him. How much time did he spend in a given place? What was he doing there? It appears, from store video, that he enlisted several young men to buy him at least one “blunt” (a cheap cigar which is hollowed out and filled with marijuana) which he may have used to smoke pot on the way back to Zimmerman’s neighborhood. If phone records show him remaining stationary in an out of sight or out of the way place for some time–Martin took far more time than was necessary to walk back home–that might explain Martin’s behavior, and would certainly be something the prosecution would not want to come to light.
And as I noted in Update 18 Crump has apparently lied about Dee Dee’s age in an attempt to hide her and as much about her as possible behind the screen of juvenile records privacy law. However, that particular cat now seems to be out of the bag. I doubt it will be helpful to the prosecution.
Final Thoughts:
In past articles, I’ve speculated that Ms. Corey and perhaps even Mr. de la Rionda might find themselves joining the ranks of disgraced prosecutors like Mike Nifong. If what Mr. O’Mara is claiming is true, if only half of it is true, that possibility seems yet more likely.
It is unsurprising that Zimmerman might be running out of money. As cases of this type drag on, absent a wealthy benefactor or benefactors, public interest tends to lag and cash tends to run out for the defense. The prosecution, particularly in a politically charged case, has a bottomless public purse upon which to draw. For unscrupulous prosecutors, forcing the defense to exhaust its resources is a common tactic.
What’s that? You argue that de la Rionda has successfully resisted O’Mara’s request for a continuation? And you think that proves he is not trying to bankrupt the defense?
If, as O’Mara argues, de la Rionda is hiding and withholding evidence, forcing O’Mara to go to court to get each and every piece, it is he, not O’Mara, causing delay. Arguing that it is O’Mara that is being slow is nothing more than projection, and particularly cynical and calculated projection at that. Remember that de la Rionda can take his time, secure in the knowledge that every obstacle he puts in the way of the defense is costing O’Mara time and money and making it harder for Zimmerman to be truly afforded justice.
It’s easy to spend other people’s money, particularly when “other people” are taxpayers, a group being poorly served in this case.
NOTE: Brietbart News has recently posted an interview with George Zimmerman’s brother, Robert. It provides some perspective on the effect this case has had on Zimmerman’s family.
UPDATE, 02-14-13, 1730 CST: Regular reader “Joel” comments:
|
This is not an issue I have–to date–dealt with in any depth, primarily because much will depend on the outcome of the case. However, there are some things we know with certainty, and some that are being strongly implied.
We know that the prosecution could not sustain the charge against Zimmerman in its charging affidavit. It lacked sufficient probable cause–to say nothing of convincing evidence–to fulfill the few and simple elements of the offense. The same is true for the perjury charge lodged against Shelly Zimmerman. In addition, there may be substantial evidence that they colluded with private attorneys with a financial stake in the outcome of the case, and with the media. There may also be evidence that they are not doing their duty under the law to provide evidence the defense is due.
As with the Nifong case, while these matters may not eventually amount to specific violations of criminal law, they are certainly gross violations of legal ethics, and under the rules governing those admitted to the bar in any state, would require inquiry. It is also possible that documents filed with the courts, and statements made to the courts–as in the Nifong case–could constitute crimes. Again, these are matters very much in flux at the moment. In such cases, the coverup of unethical behavior usually leads to the commission of actual crimes such as perjury, conspiracy, etc.
In any case, the initial venue for these issues will likely be the state bar, with any criminal proceedings arising out of that. As I’ve also written, it remains to be seen whether political concerns will overpower justice in the Florida courts. As the self-defense immunity hearing draws near, expect the racial grievance industry, coordinated by the Scheme Team and fully aided by the media, to be screaming at the top of its lungs in the hope that the court of public opinion–and the threat of racially inspired riot and civil unrest–will trump all.
Michael,
Could you get more specific as to what de la Rionda and Corey could be guilty of? I mean, I know some of it. The overcharging of Zimmerman is one. This case isn’t even close to being second degree murder. Also, could you list what could be expected in way of sentencing for de la Rionda and Corey?
If the State withholds inculpatory evidence from the defense, then it is in violation of Florida discovery rule 3.220. If the State withholds exculpatory evidence from the defense, then it is additionally committing a Brady violation.
The former, when discovered (or even implied), would compel the court immediately to conduct a Richardson hearing, to determine the degree to which the discovery violations might prejudice the defense at trial. The latter is far more serious, and could form the basis for a malicious prosecution charge.
To me, a layman, this certainly seems like a politically motivated malicious prosecution intended to keep black rioters away from Disneyworld gates. They’ll try to run GZ out of money and force him to plea bargain or unjustly convict him and let him do a few years before an appeals court overrules. By then the Sharpton gang will have moved on to fresh meat.
I believe that one of the reasons for the prosecution to delay the release of cell-phone call records and cell-tower ping logs is that they may permit identification of W8.
They would also establish whether W8 was the original user of the cell phone or if it had been given to her after Trayvon Martin’s death.
Cell-tower ping logs may also reveal the presence of other cell-phone users in close proximity to the crime-scene, at the time of the shooting.
I strongly believe that the cell-phone call records will reveal that the state knowingly brought a malicious prosecution against George Zimmerman, using provably false testimony, which was known to be provably false when the state produced its probable cause for arrest.
The defense has a right to know the identity of W8, whether or not she is a minor. Her identifying information – even in the phone data and ping logs – can be redacted, should any of that information be made public.
Thus, protection of the identity of W8 is a specious argument, if the State attempts to make it.
What interests me much more, however, is that the State failed to unlock the cell phone until November (IIRC), and failed to obtain the data from the unlocked phone until January (again, IIRC).
For one: how did the State even file charges against Zimmerman without such critical information that would prove the whereabouts of Martin, and would prove that the Dee Dee phone call actually took place? Without the phone data, there should never even have been a Probable Cause Affidavit.
For another: how can the State drop such a voluminous amount of data on the defense – data that requires an expert to parse – in the third week of January, and Nelson still expect the defense to be ready for trial only three months later? Apparently, performing due diligence on the phone, and then conducting any subsequent discovery, including potential depositions, etc. all within three months isn’t “insurmountable”, according to Judge Nelson.
I believe that W8 is a fictitious creation, whose pretended testimony was only to be used in the securing of an arrest. Release of cell-phone data would necessarily reveal the subterfuge.
” In contemporary education, for a student to be suspended from school even once normally requires either a very serious stand-alone violation of school rules and/or the law (drugs, weapons, assault, etc.), or is the result of a long string of lesser offenses such that the student involved has become so disruptive and/or aggressive it is not reasonable or safe to keep them in school.”
Or maybe he was lobbing imaginary hand grenades at imaginary enemies?
Dear LC Scotty:
Thanks for your comment, and touche’! You’ll notice I qualified that statement with “normally.” I’m not aware of any such insane tendencies on the part of the educators of Martin’s school in these matters, but would surely like to know if they have, in fact, imbibed that particular Kool-Aid.
Thanks again.
Hi Mike,
On the off chance that it wasn’t clear, my comment was 100% a poke at the kool-aid drinkers suspending kids for imaginary grenades and not at all a critique of your analysis. I just hope you got a chuckle out of it.
Dear LC Scotty:
I chuckled indeed! I was merely clarifying for those few who might not have caught on. Thanks!
“Not “alleged” killer. The remainder of the article takes an equally informal tone.”
Cause Zimmerman isn’t the ‘alleged’ killer. He admits to shooting the kid.
Dear RuleofOrder:
In professional journalism, one sticks with “alleged” until a finding of guilt, particularly when a charge is pending. Yes, Zimmerman did shoot Martin, but if in self-defense–which is still being adjudicated–he’s no killer, at least not in the commonly understood meaning of the word. Yes, he “killed” Martin, but again, if in self defense, that’s not a term we normally apply, certainly not in the negative sense one reasonably gets from the media formulation.
“..at least not in the commonly understood meaning of the word…” — We just had a conversation about this regarding capital punishment re Murdering, killing, murderers, killers. You kill some one, that makes you a killer, but, as what is being adjudicated now is whether or not it was a murder. At least that is what I took away from our previous conversation.
Dear Ruleoforder:
Not to flog this dead horse too much more, but there is a difference between moral and legal terminology and journalistic practice. Killing another may be justified–as in self-defense–or unjustified, as in murder. These are the legal/moral distinctions. In journalism, it is proper to identify someone in Zimmerman’s unenviable position as an “alleged killer” until the disposition of the charge. If it is ruled that he fired in self defense, one certainly would not refer to him as a killer, but would be far more likely–and properly so–to say that he was forced to shoot in self-defense or some similar formulation.
Language matters.
I guess you would call Soldiers returning form war “killers”. You would call an innocent driver who strikes and kills a pedestrian who jumped out in to the street and did not have the right off way a “killer”. The woman who shoots a home intruder to save her child is a killer. Words have meaning. And to be honest, the dictionary meaning of “killer” suggests a habitual component, and as Mike mentioned, everyone with a lick of sense knows the word suggests an immoral, unlawful, or otherwise unjustified component. Hence, the use of the term “alleged”. You may be literal if you wish, but in doing so, your definition of “killer” and your willingness to apply it to the circumstances between Zimmerman and Trayvon Martin is…well, quite sophomoric.
Yes. I do call them (soldiers) killers. Its a large portion of their job. Dare I say, we train soldiers to make the efficient at it, with varying sizes of ordinance and equipment. That, however, doesn’t make them a murderer(s).
Yes, the woman whom shoots etc is a killer. She killed some one. Not a Murderer.
the driver whom strikes some one through accident isn’t, that was not the goal of driving the vehicle, accidents do happen.
Sorry if I don’t feel like indulging a strange sense of lexiconic window dressing to make some one softer around the edges.
So…I guess I was incorrect to hope for anything remotely intellectually enlightening, then? Because if your definition of a killer is as un-insightful as that, then all you have written is the intellectual equivalent of “The sun is ‘sunny'”, or “Water is wet” DUH!!!
… and yet here are two people trying to convince themselves otherwise with varying degrees of wetness and sunnyness. All for, as best as I can tell, a “spin”, a slant, an angle.
A misdirection. A subterfuge.
A tactic used by the “MSM” and “liberal media” that I hear so much about, round these parts. If you are looking for some degree of intellectual addition to the conversation, there you have it. If something so plain is so apt… why gussy it up?
RuleofOrder, it’s not a tactic to seek to avoid labeling George Zimmerman as a “killer” in this case. He did indeed kill Trayvon Martin, but it would be correct to say “the man who shot him” or “the man who killed him.” However, to call Zimmerman a “killer” is to imply that he is a murderer or an assassin of some sort. Look at the dictionary definition of “killer”:
kill·er
/ˈkilər/
Noun
A person, animal, or thing that kills.
Synonyms
murderer – assassin – homicide – slayer – cutthroat
Unfortunately, prosecutors enjoy complete immunity for actions taken under the aegis of their office. It goes far, far beyond the qualified immunity that law enforcement enjoys. The prosecutor could get on national television, say, “I knew Zimmerman was absolutely acting in self defense, and the only reason I pursued this was because I hate white people and mexicans” and the criminal courts could do absolutely nothing about it. Showing even actual malice does not pierce the complete immunity.
The prosecutors could be looking at disbarment from the legal community on ethical grounds, but criminal charges are flat out impossible. Even a civil claim against the prosecutors personally would be unsuccessful (and could only be lodged against the state.)
Dear Phelps:
You’re quite right. Primary action against the prosecution, if it occurs at all, will have to be initiated through the state bar and focused on ethical violations. However, as in the Duke LaCrosse case, there is always the possibility of criminal sanctions for perjury, etc. This is, of course, speculative and dependent upon future events which may or may not occur.
Thanks, as always.
Did I read corrctly that Crump and his merry pranksters attended DLRs skill less interview of Deedee and then Crump claimed he never met Deedee and shouldn’t be deposed by O’Mara? What possible justification could there be for private attorneys being present at her deposition? A not very bright or sophisticated person like deedee would probably feel pressured to stick to the script provided by the Crumpsters – and DLR probably wanted to convey that unspoken message too.
Not releasing the cell records for the day of the shooting makes me think there must be some very bad stuff there from the prosecutors perspective, Trayvon wandering all over the place is one, bad text messages is another and maybe the logged phone records don’t support Deedees coached recollection, maybe Crumpster didn’t realize what a treasure trove of information exists in cell records and maybe the calls and conversations in deedees recounting never happened.
Dear JC:
That is indeed the information contained in a report by a state agent who drove de la Rionda about and helped him arrange the interview with DeeDee. The report does not specifically state that Crump and two other members actually sat in on the entire interview, but it does suggest just that. If you have not read Update 11, an analysis of the DeeDee interview, you’ll find it most instructive.
Pingback: Chuck Todd: Too Good To Check | Stately McDaniel Manor