Author Topic: Witness #8 (DeeDee)  (Read 277174 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline unitron

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1060
  • Rate Post +0/-0
Re: Witness #8 (DeeDee)
« Reply #180 on: August 04, 2012, 02:49:32 AM »
I'm pretty sure JusticeQuest falls into the "has a specific point of view" category which may affect their impartiality.

They also seem to have a target demographic to which they restrict those signing up for user accounts.

Offline annoyedbeyond

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1407
  • Rate Post +0/-0
Re: Witness #8 (DeeDee)
« Reply #181 on: August 04, 2012, 07:04:17 AM »
I'm pretty sure JusticeQuest falls into the "has a specific point of view" category which may affect their impartiality.

They also seem to have a target demographic to which they restrict those signing up for user accounts.

Oh my yes.

Offline leftwig

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 532
  • Rate Post +0/-0
Re: Witness #8 (DeeDee)
« Reply #182 on: August 04, 2012, 07:19:13 AM »
If they choose to call her, there are a couple of references to a fight in her statements.  She started to say  something that "Trayon bump-Trayvon was bumped"  She said that she heard "pushing noises" and the "Get Off Get Off."

Kind of paraphrasing as I have to leave for work.  Memory and all.

Objection, goes to speculation.  No way she could discern that TM was bumped.  She could testify to noises heard and to the "little bit of get off or something".  She won't be able to testify about anything related to injuries or how they were obtained during the fight.

Offline whitecap333

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 70
  • Rate Post +0/-0
Re: Witness #8 (DeeDee)
« Reply #183 on: August 05, 2012, 01:23:01 AM »
Anyone believe the prosecution will try to build its "theory of the case" around Dee Dee?  Will they urge the jury to buy into this "chase" up and down the complex, or just try to do a little "cherry picking"?  How do you finesse her near three weeks of silence after learning that some "creepy," "crazy" person had murdered Trayvon?  If she spent 5 or 6 hours on the phone with him that day, she must have known he was in Sanford.  Would you risk her becoming unraveled under examination?  O'Mara can be expected, through discovery, to aggressively explore the possibility she was "coached."  If he hits "paydirt," there will be egg on many faces.  So what do you do with her?  Because without her, there would seem to be no credible evidence of a "chase."  But "dropping" her (as Crump may very well have done already) will certainly set tongues to wagging.

Offline nomatter_nevermind

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5447
  • Rate Post +0/-0
Will She Testify?
« Reply #184 on: August 05, 2012, 07:10:34 AM »
If the prosecution drops Dee Dee, and Zimmerman walks (acquittal or hung jury), forever after critics will say he would have been convicted if the prosecution had just used Dee Dee.

I don't think the prosecutors believe they have much chance of winning. I think spreading the blame for probable failure is a priority.

If the prosecution doesn't call her, would the defense? I think that's risky. She could blow up in their faces too.


Offline whitecap333

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 70
  • Rate Post +0/-0
Re: Witness #8 (DeeDee)
« Reply #185 on: August 05, 2012, 07:22:37 AM »
I don't know beans about criminal procedure, but seems like I've heard that O'Mara will be permitted to take the depositions of witnesses.  That will be the "moment of truth."  I wonder if attorney client privilege will prevent him from deposing whoever it was in Crump's office that "debriefed" her?  Seems like he doesn't claim to represent her, but perhaps he did at the time.

Offline annoyedbeyond

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1407
  • Rate Post +0/-0
Re: Witness #8 (DeeDee)
« Reply #186 on: August 05, 2012, 07:27:26 AM »
I don't know beans about criminal procedure, but seems like I've heard that O'Mara will be permitted to take the depositions of witnesses.  That will be the "moment of truth."  I wonder if attorney client privilege will prevent him from deposing whoever it was in Crump's office that "debriefed" her?  Seems like he doesn't claim to represent her, but perhaps he did at the time.

Why would he need to? I'm not even certain O'Mara needs to depose her (although I'm sure there are good reasons for it that I'm overlooking), I think her version is already out there and he could just as easily impeach her--or destroy her, if he felt like it-- on the stand using her own words (all of them. Even ones not in evidence yet that we can't talk about).

But I really don't know why you're even wondering about him deposing Crump or whoever. Not trying to argue, I really don't see it.

Offline nomatter_nevermind

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5447
  • Rate Post +0/-0
Re: Witness #8 (DeeDee)
« Reply #187 on: August 05, 2012, 07:30:37 AM »
There's also a 'work product' privilege. That would cover the lawyers interactions with Dee Dee as part of their work for the Martins.

Offline annoyedbeyond

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1407
  • Rate Post +0/-0
Re: Will She Testify?
« Reply #188 on: August 05, 2012, 07:31:30 AM »
If the prosecution drops Dee Dee, and Zimmerman walks (acquittal or hung jury), forever after critics will say he would have been convicted if the prosecution had just used Dee Dee.

I don't think the prosecutors believe they have much chance of winning. I think spreading the blame for probable failure is a priority.

If the prosecution doesn't call her, would the defense? I think that's risky. She could blow up in their faces too.

It's interesting. I wonder if they might come out with a statement to the effect that her testimony has been too tainted by news coverage or something else along the same lines as a way to cop out?

It depends on how serious the prosecution is, doesn't it? If this whole thing has been a politically motivated stall tactic as some people have suggested, then they might not call her. If they really mean it, then I can't see how they couldn't not have her on the stand.


Offline whitecap333

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 70
  • Rate Post +0/-0
Re: Witness #8 (DeeDee)
« Reply #189 on: August 05, 2012, 10:00:06 AM »
I think O'Mara absolutely has to take her deposition.  Why would he want to wait until she's on the stand to find out what she's going to say?  If she implodes, during her deposition, that could have a major impact on how the public views the integrity with which these charges were brought.

Offline annoyedbeyond

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1407
  • Rate Post +0/-0
Re: Witness #8 (DeeDee)
« Reply #190 on: August 05, 2012, 10:17:50 AM »
I think O'Mara absolutely has to take her deposition.  Why would he want to wait until she's on the stand to find out what she's going to say?  If she implodes, during her deposition, that could have a major impact on how the public views the integrity with which these charges were brought.

If she implodes during her deposition the public might never know about it, at least not like watching it on live court tv.

She's already been interviewed. A version is already out there. OTOH, there's a lot of other stuff out there that O'Mara would be a fool not to already have copies of--twitter and other social media stuff that The Hostess doesn't like us to talk about, all of which O'Mara could use to impeach her on the stand.

I don't know.

Offline whitecap333

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 70
  • Rate Post +0/-0
Re: Witness #8 (DeeDee)
« Reply #191 on: August 05, 2012, 10:39:58 AM »
I will see to it that part of the public hears about it, and I will have numerous helpers.  You suggesting that O'Mara should be content with De la Rionda's half-hearted interview?  Seriously?

Offline annoyedbeyond

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1407
  • Rate Post +0/-0
Re: Witness #8 (DeeDee)
« Reply #192 on: August 05, 2012, 11:00:36 AM »
I will see to it that part of the public hears about it, and I will have numerous helpers.  You suggesting that O'Mara should be content with De la Rionda's half-hearted interview?  Seriously?


Numerous? Wow. I'm awed.

If you're not going to read what I post, that's fine--I don't blame you. But if you're going to make up things I didn't say to respond to--I'd rather you didn't, and I didn't say O'Mara should be content with DLR's interview.


Offline nomatter_nevermind

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5447
  • Rate Post +0/-0
Re: Witness #8 (DeeDee)
« Reply #193 on: August 05, 2012, 11:10:02 AM »
If she implodes during her deposition the public might never know about it, at least not like watching it on live court tv.

She can implode twice.


Offline annoyedbeyond

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1407
  • Rate Post +0/-0
Re: Witness #8 (DeeDee)
« Reply #194 on: August 05, 2012, 11:14:15 AM »
She can implode twice.

She does badly during the deposition they have time to coach hell out of her or figure some way to get her original interview read into evidence (yes that part's unlikely, but would you put it past Corey et al?).

Like I said--we'll know eventually.

 

Site Meter
click
tracking