RE: Witness lied under oath in Trayvon Martin case

RE: Witness lied under oath in Trayvon Martin case (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

tazzygirl -> RE: Witness lied under oath in Trayvon Martin case (3/9/2013 12:54:56 PM)
It was explained to you why she wont. Far cry from Shellie's perjury.

Nosathro -> RE: Witness lied under oath in Trayvon Martin case (3/9/2013 1:07:10 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Raiikun Funny thing about Shellie's trial, is that 1) the charging document for her case edits out her testimony, thus making it a document signed by the State swearing it to be true...that has information on it that isn't, and 2) it doesn't actually ever list a statement by Shellie that it claims to be untrue and why. So, IMO Shellie is no more likely to be convicted of perjury than W8 is, if for a different reason. Though it was funny to see the prosecution get all evasive when reporters were asking if W8 would get charged with perjury for lying under oath. And I said O'Mara is not paying much attention to W8, he does not mention anything on her about the hospital thing on his website. And Shellie did not get her case dismissed she is going to trial, regardless of what you have said.

Raiikun -> RE: Witness lied under oath in Trayvon Martin case (3/9/2013 1:08:04 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl It was explained to you why she wont. Far cry from Shellie's perjury. My stance is neither of them committed perjury, for different reasons. You've not explained anything I didn't already know; I'm quite knowledgeable on the applicable statutes. In Shellie's case, it's because there's not a provable lie under oath, and W8's because materiality would be an issue. Although, if the State wished, there's a good argument as to why W8's statement is material, and it would be up to the Court to decide that matter. It won't happen though.

Raiikun -> RE: Witness lied under oath in Trayvon Martin case (3/9/2013 1:10:28 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Nosathro And I said O'Mara is not paying much attention to W8, he does not mention anything on her about the hospital thing on his website. They brought it up in court, where it matters.

tazzygirl -> RE: Witness lied under oath in Trayvon Martin case (3/9/2013 1:15:55 PM)
quote: My stance is neither of them committed perjury, for different reasons. You've not explained anything I didn't already know; I'm quite knowledgeable on the applicable statutes. I can see Shellie's case being appropriate.. the testimony they are charging her with was about a matter directly before the court. Whether they can get the charge to stick is a different story. Nothing witness 8 lied about had any direct bearing on the state's case.

Raiikun -> RE: Witness lied under oath in Trayvon Martin case (3/9/2013 1:27:06 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl Nothing witness 8 lied about had any direct bearing on the state's case. A compelling argument can be made otherwise. The reason she took so long to come forward is an issue the Defense is likely to bring up, and if she has a credible reason for why, that could have a direct effect on the outcome of the case.

Nosathro -> RE: Witness lied under oath in Trayvon Martin case (3/9/2013 1:36:22 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Raiikun quote: ORIGINAL: Nosathro And I said O'Mara is not paying much attention to W8, he does not mention anything on her about the hospital thing on his website. They brought it up in court, where it matters. And the judge denied the motion. "The defense wanted Judge Debra Nelson to question prosecutors about how they learned that this claim was not true, but Nelson refused." As I have said before the claim centers at her attending Martin funeral, not the night of the shoting. How relevant this is is a big question.

Raiikun -> RE: Witness lied under oath in Trayvon Martin case (3/9/2013 1:43:50 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Nosathro And the judge denied the motion. That wasn't a motion. The motion was a request for a subpoena of her medical records, which ended up moot, as there were none, because she lied under oath. quote: As I have said before the claim centers at her attending Martin funeral, not the night of the shoting. How relevant this is is a big question. The relevance goes to her credibility, as the State's single most important witness. The Defense is gathering up ammunition with which to request she be excluded altogether. Given the evidence that her testimony was coached, and now that she's a liar under oath, the chance she'll even be called as a witness diminishes. And that's what's important. Not whether a website known for being slow on updates has said anything about her this week.

tazzygirl -> RE: Witness lied under oath in Trayvon Martin case (3/9/2013 2:24:33 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Raiikun quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl Nothing witness 8 lied about had any direct bearing on the state's case. A compelling argument can be made otherwise. The reason she took so long to come forward is an issue the Defense is likely to bring up, and if she has a credible reason for why, that could have a direct effect on the outcome of the case. Even the length of time it took her to come forward isnt a charge for perjury... or even a requirement at all. No one in the legal arena in that area felt this was ever going to come to court. They took statements from those around then decided "case closed". It was pushed to be reopened. Who was the girl supposed to go to in the between time?

Raiikun -> RE: Witness lied under oath in Trayvon Martin case (3/9/2013 2:30:49 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl No one in the legal arena in that area felt this was ever going to come to court. They took statements from those around then decided "case closed". It was pushed to be reopened. Actually the statement the girl made under oath was done after the "push to reopen it". It was made to Bernie de la Rionda on April 2nd, after Angela Corey took over the case. quote: Even the length of time it took her to come forward isnt a charge for perjury... As I've said, I've not claimed this is perjury, nor do I expect the State will ever charge her with it. Her statement does meet every element for perjury though, except arguably it being material. There are arguments that could be made on both sides though, and it would be up to the court to decide on that issue.

tazzygirl -> RE: Witness lied under oath in Trayvon Martin case (3/9/2013 2:32:23 PM)
quote: Actually the statement the girl made under oath was done after the "push to reopen it". It was made to Bernie de la Rionda on April 2nd, after Angela Corey took over the case. Exactly... when there was finally someone to talk too besides the media. You brought up the length of time it took her to come forward. Again, who was she supposed to talk too before the case as "opened"? I say open because there never really was a case before.

Raiikun -> RE: Witness lied under oath in Trayvon Martin case (3/9/2013 2:35:45 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl You brought up the length of time it took her to come forward. I brought it up as something the Defense is likely to do. The Defense can make a good case that the reason it took so long is because her testimony was manufactured. quote: Again, who was she supposed to talk too before the case as "opened"? There's a nice, easy to remember 3 digit number I'd be calling if I knew a person I was on the phone with had been killed.

tazzygirl -> RE: Witness lied under oath in Trayvon Martin case (3/9/2013 2:43:59 PM)
quote: I brought it up as something the Defense is likely to do. The Defense can make a good case that the reason it took so long is because her testimony was manufactured. They can allege... they have no evidence. quote: There's a nice, easy to remember 3 digit number I'd be calling if I knew a person I was on the phone with had been killed. The line went dead. Could have happened for a number of reasons. At 18, I wouldnt be so sure I would want to be involved either. Then to hear the next day that it was not going to be prosecuted. Again, who was she going to tell? The police who already decided there was no murder to investigate? Hell if I would have. Its interesting how you can take Shellie's side by claiming there isnt a provable case, yet you want to make "compelling arguments" against this girl. Compelling arguments can be made that Zimmerman murdered Martin without enough cause. Thats what a court does, takes the "compelling arguments" and gets to the truth. Do you not see your own bias in this situation? Instead of letting the court decide, you have tried, judged, and prosecuted all the parties involved. Decided who all the liars are, and in your infinite wisdom declared who is guilty of what and who isnt. Where did you get your law degree? When did you review all the documents, witness statements, evidence on hand? When did you get the right to declare anyone a liar?

Raiikun -> RE: Witness lied under oath in Trayvon Martin case (3/9/2013 2:56:37 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl They can allege... they have no evidence. Benjamin Crump on a recording coaching her counts as evidence IMO. There's other evidence but that gets into an essay of backstory. quote: The line went dead. Could have happened for a number of reasons. At 18, I wouldnt be so sure I would want to be involved either. Then to hear the next day that it was not going to be prosecuted. The police was still investigating the next day. And the day after. And the day after that. If she wanted to tell her story, the option existed. Rationalizing why she might not doesn't change that. Again, who was she going to tell? The police who already decided there was no murder to investigate? quote: Its interesting how you can take Shellie's side by claiming there isnt a provable case, yet you want to make "compelling arguments" against this girl. You realize we're talking about entirely different scenarios here? One is a case in which the State must prove something beyond a reasonable doubt, where what they're trying to prove isn't even in the Probable Cause affidavit, and the other is a case where the Defense is trying to impeach the credibility of a witness. But, to make an actually relevant apples to apples comparison, my actual stance is that W8 would be as equally hard to convict of perjury as Shellie. quote: Do you not see your own bias in this situation? Nope. You're manufacturing bias by taking my actual stance out of context. quote: Instead of letting the court decide, you have tried, judged, and prosecuted all the parties involved. Decided who all the liars are, and in your infinite wisdom declared who is guilty of what and who isnt. Having an opinion does not preclude one from letting the court decide. So that's untrue. quote: When did you review all the documents, witness statements, evidence on hand? I've spent the better part of a year analyzing documents, witness statements, and evidence. Many hundreds of pages of it. I therefore have a pretty good idea of what's going to be provable in trial. And I have a right to argue that objective opinion drawn from the evidence.

tazzygirl -> RE: Witness lied under oath in Trayvon Martin case (3/9/2013 3:11:16 PM)
quote: Benjamin Crump on a recording coaching her counts as evidence IMO. There's other evidence but that gets into an essay of backstory. He can coach all he wants. They have to prove she actually went along... you know.. prove she lied... and as with age.. some lies dont matter. quote: The police was still investigating the next day. And the day after. And the day after that. If she wanted to tell her story, the option existed. Rationalizing why she might not doesn't change that. Thats why Lee said it took him days to discover Zimmerman's past history with legal problems... they took hiw word for it that he had a clean record... thats what you call investigating? Sounds more like going through the motions to come to the conclusion they police wanted. quote: Again, who was she going to tell? The police who already decided there was no murder to investigate? Exactly. The police who made no arrest? The police who didnt even investigate the shooters past record? When you become a black 18 year old girl faced with this problem, then YOU tell me why she didnt. Until then, do keep an open mind instead of labeling her a liar. quote: You realize we're talking about entirely different scenarios here? One is a case in which the State must prove something beyond a reasonable doubt, where what they're trying to prove isn't even in the Probable Cause affidavit, and the other is a case where the Defense is trying to impeach the credibility of a witness. And yet the case with Shellie continues. quote: Nope. You're manufacturing bias by taking my actual stance out of context. Your stance is well documented showing your bias. quote: I've spent the better part of a year analyzing documents, witness statements, and evidence. Many hundreds of pages of it. I therefore have a pretty good idea of what's going to be provable in trial. And I have a right to argue that objective opinion drawn from the evidence. You are fixated on this case. You are like a dog with a bone and no other outcome except the one you expect will ever be good enough. You are perfectly happy with dragging anyone through the mud that doesnt agree with you. Including an 18 year old girl who neither you nor I have any working knowledge of what she knows, when she knew it, when she decided to act, and what, if anything, she was coached into saying. I, for one, have massive issues about dragging this girl through the mud, and the media, for "points" for the defense. I have no issue with the court going after Shellie, if they cannot prove their case against her, she will go free. The same with this witness. The same with Zimmerman. But, page after page, you have decided that Martin was some thug out to kill and Zimmerman was some poor innocent soul. Two sides to every story.. and somewhere in the middle lies the truth. Sadly, its that middle that you are extremely blind too, and biased against. The outcome of these cases should be interesting, and, rest assured, your credibility may well be on the line for those who post here frequently. not that I expect you to care. But will be a hoot at the end. [;)]

trishahood -> RE: Witness lied under oath in Trayvon Martin case (3/9/2013 3:15:30 PM)
Homicide investigations are never truly closed. Because there is no statute of limitations on them, they can be re-opened at any time. The only things that alter that are: Acquittal of the person for whom all the evidence points (and who actually did it) a la OJ Simpson or A judge ruling that the homicide was justifiable. Same as double jeopardy, no further trial can be done and the case is for all intent and purpose closed. If the person who is the main suspect dies.. even that doesn't close a case.. but it will likely put it to bed. What we had in the case of Zimmerman was no different to several existing cases in FL. Two of them have been under investigation for a decade or longer and they KNOW who shot.. because the person admitted it. For what ever reason these have not gone to trial before a judge as self defense cases... but what I can tell you is that they aren't being prosecuted either. Like Zimmerman's case, it could have been left in limbo for a very long time while evidence was collected from sources that were not at the time known. That.. is why she should have said something. But we aren't even talking about "later". How about that night? Next day? Nothing. As to why she's a liar.. well.. she lied. As the joke about the Greek tour guide goes.. you can build houses.. and not be known as a carpenter. You can build boats.. but not be known as a boat builder. You can be a tour guide.. but not be known as a tour guide... ... ... all because you fucked one goat. Dee Dee didn't go to the hospital when her "friend" was having his memorial service. She said she did.. because she didn't want it to get out that she was actually having her hair and nails done. ouch. Oh well. So what we are left with are some bits that are going to get pretty sticky for the prosecution at trial. Dee Dee's statement that Martin confronted/spoke to Zimmerman first.. and Zimmerman's injuries. Following someone.. though creepy.. isn't illegal. Neither is calling the police on them. Assaulting the person following you in a public place.. however.. IS illegal. Not only is it illegal, but if you beat the person to the point where they feel they may loose consciousness.. they call for help and do not receive any.. and they are armed with a pistol... ... .. it may also be fatal. And it was. We'll see what happens at trial.

tazzygirl -> RE: Witness lied under oath in Trayvon Martin case (3/9/2013 3:27:01 PM)
quote: Dee Dee didn't go to the hospital when her "friend" was having his memorial service. She said she did.. because she didn't want it to get out that she was actually having her hair and nails done. ouch. Got proof of that?

Raiikun -> RE: Witness lied under oath in Trayvon Martin case (3/9/2013 7:46:19 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl He can coach all he wants. They have to prove she actually went along... you know.. prove she lied... and as with age.. some lies dont matter. There's quite a few areas that I think the Defense can already demonstrate how she's being less than truthful. quote: Thats why Lee said it took him days to discover Zimmerman's past history with legal problems... they took hiw word for it that he had a clean record... thats what you call investigating? Keeping George at the Station until midnight questioning him...having him do a reenactment and lie detector test the next day, then questioning him again...canvassing for witnesses, taking DNA samples...that's what I call investigating. quote: Again, who was she going to tell? The police who already decided there was no murder to investigate? quote: Until then, do keep an open mind instead of labeling her a liar. If someone lies, their by definition a liar, no matter the reason. quote: Your stance is well documented showing your bias. False. quote: You are fixated on this case. You are like a dog with a bone and no other outcome except the one you expect will ever be good enough. Ad hominem, and not a true one. quote: You are perfectly happy with dragging anyone through the mud that doesnt agree with you. Including an 18 year old girl who neither you nor I have any working knowledge of what she knows, when she knew it, when she decided to act, and what, if anything, she was coached into saying. There's a lot of audio recorded as to what she said that can be compared with the evidence and with her other statements. A lot of it contradicts known evidence, and she contradicts herself. quote: I, for one, have massive issues about dragging this girl through the mud, and the media, for "points" for the defense. It's the Defense's job to impeach her if they can. Sounds like they can. So it doesn't matter if you have massive issues with it. quote: But, page after page, you have decided that Martin was some thug out to kill and Zimmerman was some poor innocent soul. Actually, my stance is based around the entire lack of evidence that George set out to kill anyone, and based around the strong evidence that at the moment the shot was fired, George had a reasonable fear for his life. You're attacking a strawman. quote: Sadly, its that middle that you are extremely blind too, and biased against. False again. I just have an above average knowledge of the facts of the case and what's proven or not proven by those facts. quote: The outcome of these cases should be interesting, and, rest assured, your credibility may well be on the line for those who post here frequently. The advantage to sticking to truth, is that I have no reason to worry about my credibility.

Powergamz1 -> RE: Witness lied under oath in Trayvon Martin case (3/9/2013 7:51:39 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Owner59 Does self defense from an armed stranger need to be explained or defended? No... Why does george`s rights supersede Martin`s rights? They don`t... Of course......all that lying under oath by george, doesn`t look good..... Of course none of that will be admitted into evidence.

Raiikun -> RE: Witness lied under oath in Trayvon Martin case (3/9/2013 7:53:30 PM)
Oh, btw...turns out the lie about the hospital stay would likely be found to be a material statement. “Misrepresentations which tend to bolster the credibility of a witness, whether successful or not, are regarded as material for purposes of supporting a perjury conviction." Fields v. State, 114 So. 317, at 318. ETA: I still doubt a perjury charge/conviction will ever happen, but that lie does meet all the elements of perjury.

Page: << < prev 6 7 8 [9] 10 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

6.201172E-02