Author Topic: Notice of April 30 Hearing  (Read 5847 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline cboldt

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1262
  • Rate Post +0/-0
Notice of April 30 Hearing
« on: April 18, 2013, 09:37:36 AM »
The clerk of the court has posted a Notice of Hearing by O'Mara, relating to the hearing of April 30.

The Notice lists subjects to be covered.

March 26 Demand for specific discovery relating to state's possession of material obtained or downloaded from Zimmerman's phone

March 25 Motion for sanctions relating to discovery violations

March 26 Motion for sanctions relating to attorney costs (the objection to video depo)

April 11 Motion to unseal Crump's filing of settlement agreement, and Crump's April 12 Motion in opposition

The Notice is addressed to the state via Bernie de la Rionda, Crump, and West.

Edit adds link to the filing, and fixed one typo.

« Last Edit: April 18, 2013, 09:39:37 AM by cboldt »

Offline RickyJim

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1576
  • Rate Post +0/-0
Re: Notice of April 30 Hearing
« Reply #1 on: April 18, 2013, 10:18:59 AM »
One might interpret the first subject as meaning the prosecution has never told the defense about GPS data downloaded from Zimmerman's phone.  That would really be something, if true.

Offline cboldt

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1262
  • Rate Post +0/-0
Re: Notice of April 30 Hearing
« Reply #2 on: April 18, 2013, 10:42:27 AM »
One might interpret the first subject as meaning the prosecution has never told the defense about GPS data downloaded from Zimmerman's phone.  That would really be something, if true.

There is also the post-incident wiretap.  The motion sought all data regarding any downloads from any phone or phone number connected to George Zimmerman or his wife.  It's as though the defense is trying to build a case that is outside of defending George, and looks more like a case of malicious prosecution.  What did the state know, and knowing what it did, how does it justify bringing a murder charge against George Zimmerman?

Offline leftwig

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 532
  • Rate Post +0/-0
Re: Notice of April 30 Hearing
« Reply #3 on: April 18, 2013, 10:52:47 AM »
There is also the post-incident wiretap.  The motion sought all data regarding any downloads from any phone or phone number connected to George Zimmerman or his wife.  It's as though the defense is trying to build a case that is outside of defending George, and looks more like a case of malicious prosecution.  What did the state know, and knowing what it did, how does it justify bringing a murder charge against George Zimmerman?

I agree and believe this is why the case has been somewhat slow played by the defense.  Providing enough rope so to speak.  Of course, this is merely speculation on my part. 

Offline nomatter_nevermind

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5447
  • Rate Post +0/-0
Re: Notice of April 30 Hearing
« Reply #4 on: April 18, 2013, 11:20:14 AM »
There is also the post-incident wiretap. 

First I've heard of this.

Offline cboldt

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1262
  • Rate Post +0/-0
Re: Notice of April 30 Hearing
« Reply #5 on: April 18, 2013, 11:50:10 AM »
First I've heard of this.

I'm working off memory, and this isn't one of those "seared into my mind" recollections, so it could be a figment of my imagination too.  It' not part of the jailhouse calls exchanges used to support the perjury charge against Shellie; those were known to be recorded, by everybody.  That caveat being delivered, my recollection is that the issue came up in an early hearing.  Might have been ambiguous or a compound question by O'Mara to the state.

Offline DebFrmHell

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 954
  • Rate Post +0/-0
Re: Notice of April 30 Hearing
« Reply #6 on: April 18, 2013, 02:18:29 PM »
I'm working off memory, and this isn't one of those "seared into my mind" recollections, so it could be a figment of my imagination too.  It' not part of the jailhouse calls exchanges used to support the perjury charge against Shellie; those were known to be recorded, by everybody.  That caveat being delivered, my recollection is that the issue came up in an early hearing.  Might have been ambiguous or a compound question by O'Mara to the state.

I thought you were referring to the question asked by BDLR about the email concerning "Reverend" whoever or Tracy Martin.

Offline cboldt

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1262
  • Rate Post +0/-0
Re: Notice of April 30 Hearing
« Reply #7 on: April 18, 2013, 02:35:48 PM »
I thought you were referring to the question asked by BDLR about the email concerning "Reverend" whoever or Tracy Martin.

Could have been that.  I don't recall the details, was that an e-mail or a SMS/text from Zimmerman's phone?

Offline DebFrmHell

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 954
  • Rate Post +0/-0
Re: Notice of April 30 Hearing
« Reply #8 on: April 18, 2013, 02:44:11 PM »
Could have been that.  I don't recall the details, was that an e-mail or a SMS/text from Zimmerman's phone?

I'm not sure.  It could have come from his home computer or the phone via text.  I remember he turned over his phone at the station the night he was questioned and I seem to remember that he signed something for them to download the information from his phone.  We know that SPD has a Cellibrite instrument. 

NoMatter has a virtual memory for these things and feel certain he can link up at his pace.   Which means a nanosecond!   :D 

Offline cboldt

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1262
  • Rate Post +0/-0
Re: Notice of April 30 Hearing
« Reply #9 on: April 18, 2013, 03:38:59 PM »
I'm not sure.  It could have come from his home computer or the phone via text.  I remember he turned over his phone at the station the night he was questioned and I seem to remember that he signed something for them to download the information from his phone.  We know that SPD has a Cellibrite instrument. 

NoMatter has a virtual memory for these things and feel certain he can link up at his pace.   Which means a nanosecond!   :D

Bond hearing.  CNN Transcript - April 20, 2012

De la Rionda asks about messages to and from a phone, and mentions that Zimmerman voluntarily allowed the police to examine all the contents of the phone.  Some message referring to a reverend (O'Mara objected to the question) and to Tracy Martin.  De la Rionda says he is asking in terms of Zimmerman apologizing to the Martins.

It may be that this is what caused me to think the state had been listening to Zimmerman's phone calls, although I would think that getting a wiretap warrant would be a cinch under the circumstances.  O'Mara may be trying to find if the state has such material.

The state's May 14, 2012 Redacted Discovery Exhibit has, for item "H" (which is wiretaps and other surveillance), "None known to the state at this time."

So, on the official record, there is no evidence of a wiretap or surveillance.

Offline unitron

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1060
  • Rate Post +0/-0
Re: Notice of April 30 Hearing
« Reply #10 on: April 18, 2013, 03:52:41 PM »
Remember the idiot preacher that wanted to burn Korans?

At some point while in jail Zimmerman talked him out of staging some sort of demonstration or march (a very smart move on Zimmerman's part which he accomplished very diplomatically so that the preacher didn't realize that the real message was "The last thing I need is to be associated with a nutjob like you"), so maybe that's the "reverend" they were talking about.

Offline FromBelow

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 497
  • Rate Post +0/-0
Re: Notice of April 30 Hearing
« Reply #11 on: April 18, 2013, 04:17:14 PM »
Remember the idiot preacher that wanted to burn Korans?

At some point while in jail Zimmerman talked him out of staging some sort of demonstration or march (a very smart move on Zimmerman's part which he accomplished very diplomatically so that the preacher didn't realize that the real message was "The last thing I need is to be associated with a nutjob like you"), so maybe that's the "reverend" they were talking about.

How? That reverend wasn't involved when they got the contents of GZ's cell phone AFAIK.

Offline unitron

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1060
  • Rate Post +0/-0
Re: Notice of April 30 Hearing
« Reply #12 on: April 18, 2013, 05:00:06 PM »
How? That reverend wasn't involved when they got the contents of GZ's cell phone AFAIK.

What other reverend could Bernie be talking about?

If they took Zimmerman's phone the night of the shooting, there wouldn't be anything in it, text message or voice-mail wise, relating to the shooting that also involved a reverend unless he confessed in advance to planning to kill someone or something outlandish like that.

If he tried to get in touch with Al Sharpton or Jesse Jackson afterwards to try to get a message to Martin's parents, or just to assure them that he wasn't a racist, or whatever, that wouldn't have been in the phone prior to the shooting, and the police and prosecution wouldn't have access to any of his communications after that night (other than the calls on the jail telephone).

So who could Bernie be talking about, and more importantly, why?

Offline cboldt

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1262
  • Rate Post +0/-0
Re: Notice of April 30 Hearing
« Reply #13 on: April 18, 2013, 05:17:45 PM »
What other reverend could Bernie be talking about?

Bernardo doesn't ask about a conversation with a reverend, he asks Zimmerman about Zimmerman referring to a reverend.

I don't know when Zimmerman gave up his phone for examination.  But if it was a couple weeks after the shooting, Zimmerman might be referring to Reverend Jesse Jackson or Reverend Al Sharpton, and I would guess he would be saying they got it wrong.

Offline FromBelow

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 497
  • Rate Post +0/-0
Re: Notice of April 30 Hearing
« Reply #14 on: April 18, 2013, 05:26:22 PM »
Bernardo doesn't ask about a conversation with a reverend, he asks Zimmerman about Zimmerman referring to a reverend.

I don't know when Zimmerman gave up his phone for examination.  But if it was a couple weeks after the shooting, Zimmerman might be referring to Reverend Jesse Jackson or Reverend Al Sharpton, and I would guess he would be saying they got it wrong.

Or it could just be that after having killed a person he needed to talk to his priest. It may have nothing to do with Jesse, Al, or that other guy. Maybe BDLR jumped on the idea of a 'confession'.

 

Site Meter
click
tracking