Author Topic: June 6th Hearing  (Read 10643 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline RickyJim

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1580
  • Rate Post +0/-0
June 6th Hearing
« on: June 03, 2013, 12:38:56 PM »
Announcement.

Defendant's Motion for Sanctions Against State Attorney's Officefor Discovery Violations and
Request for Judicial Inquiry Into Violations
Frye Hearing
Defendant's Sealed Confidential Motion to Maintain Anonymity and Confidentiality of Certain
Witnesses

The last one has me guessing.  Does that mean these people will testify behind a curtain?  Could they be people from Miami who will testify as to Trayvon's bad character?

Offline unitron

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1060
  • Rate Post +0/-0
Re: June 6th Hearing
« Reply #1 on: June 03, 2013, 02:55:43 PM »
Matbe those witnesses are from the Miami school system police department.

Wouldn't that be fun.

Offline DiwataMan

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 141
  • Rate Post +0/-0
Re: June 6th Hearing
« Reply #2 on: June 04, 2013, 09:31:48 AM »
Just wondering what people here think about that motion.

I asked:
Why is this motion Sealed & Confidential? Whatís in there the defense does not want you to see? Iím not so concerned right now myself with the part ďto Maintain Anonymity and Confidentiality of Certain WitnessesĒ[or who they are]. My concern right now is why we canít see this motion. Redaction has always been a part of this case so why not do that here?

Iím also wondering how they are going to deal with this at the hearing. Will it be handled in chambers?

Pugfrench asks:
Could someone who has an account in the talkleft GZ forum ask jeralyn about confidential witnesses and the law surrounding them, particularly having to do with defense witnesses?
http://diwataman.wordpress.com/2013/06/03/defendants-sealed-confidential-motion-to-maintain-anonymity-and-confidentiality-of-certain-witnesses/#comment-14586

Offline MJW

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1304
  • Rate Post +0/-0
Re: June 6th Hearing
« Reply #3 on: June 04, 2013, 11:45:37 AM »
The court's "detailed case view" for Zimmerman's case shows a State's Motion to Compel Discovery filed June 3rd. No information yet on what they want to compel. Knowing BDLR's ham-fisted style, I wouldn't be more than slightly surprised if he's asking for any video showing TM's friends beating up a homeless man, in an attempt to rub O'Mara's nose in his misstatement. Well, maybe that's going too far even for BDLR.

Offline DebFrmHell

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 954
  • Rate Post +0/-0
Re: June 6th Hearing
« Reply #4 on: June 04, 2013, 12:18:40 PM »
The court's "detailed case view" for Zimmerman's case shows a State's Motion to Compel Discovery filed June 3rd. No information yet on what they want to compel. Knowing BDLR's ham-fisted style, I wouldn't be more than slightly surprised if he's asking for any video showing TM's friends beating up a homeless man, in an attempt to rub O'Mara's nose in his misstatement. Well, maybe that's going too far even for BDLR.

I doubt that.  It is something that he would enjoy, IMO.  Just like I think that delivering that .BIN file the way he did is his version of "you want the original, here is your original."

Offline nomatter_nevermind

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5449
  • Rate Post +0/-0
Re: June 6th Hearing
« Reply #5 on: June 06, 2013, 02:39:16 AM »
Why is this motion Sealed & Confidential? Whatís in there the defense does not want you to see?

My guess is they want to avoid, for as long as possible, any public controversy over the 'snitches get stitches' problem.

Offline RickyJim

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1580
  • Rate Post +0/-0
Re: June 6th Hearing
« Reply #6 on: June 06, 2013, 07:28:04 AM »
So did she say those witnesses can't be anonymous or what?  Since she denied a motion we don't know the details of, I am confused.

Offline cboldt

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1262
  • Rate Post +0/-0
Re: June 6th Hearing
« Reply #7 on: June 06, 2013, 07:38:26 AM »
So did she say those witnesses can't be anonymous or what?  Since she denied a motion we don't know the details of, I am confused.

My impression is that she will interview the witnesses in chambers, before ruling.

White is showing Bernardo to be an angry man who asks misleading questions.  Bernardo's stated objective in cross-examination of White is to show that he has bias or animus.  How that matters is a mystery to me, as Bernardo objected to White getting into the substance of the evidence-sandbagging issue, as White has no firsthand knowledge.  Now Bernardo is trying a scorched earth action against White.

Offline cboldt

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1262
  • Rate Post +0/-0
Re: June 6th Hearing
« Reply #8 on: June 06, 2013, 07:46:35 AM »
"Did you make a negative remark about the SA office?"

"No, I made a statement of fact." regarding what Corey would be remembered for, which would be the good things she had done, the promises she kept.

White is a very confident witness.

Offline RickyJim

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1580
  • Rate Post +0/-0
Re: June 6th Hearing
« Reply #9 on: June 06, 2013, 07:51:57 AM »
BDLR can ask White all about how he met Kreibos (Sp?) but O'Mara can't ask Crump how he found out about DeeDee.  Am I right?

Offline cboldt

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1262
  • Rate Post +0/-0
Re: June 6th Hearing
« Reply #10 on: June 06, 2013, 07:53:54 AM »
BDLR can ask White all about how he met Kreibos (Sp?) but O'Mara can't ask Crump how he found out about DeeDee.  Am I right?

Yes.

Offline cboldt

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1262
  • Rate Post +0/-0
Re: June 6th Hearing
« Reply #11 on: June 06, 2013, 08:05:31 AM »
White says he didn't contact Bernardo about the evidence, because he did not think Bernardo would give a truthful answer, if, in fact, Bernardo had withheld the evidence.  He contacted O'Mara as the most expedient means to find out if the state had fulfilled its discovery obligation.  Makes sense to me.

I think Bernardo's intention to make White look bad is not going to be realized.

Offline RickyJim

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1580
  • Rate Post +0/-0
Re: June 6th Hearing
« Reply #12 on: June 06, 2013, 08:19:02 AM »
But why is White's bias important?  I agree that Kruidbos' would be.

Offline Cylinder

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 730
  • Rate Post +0/-0
  • IANAL
Re: June 6th Hearing
« Reply #13 on: June 06, 2013, 08:24:11 AM »
The stare down.

Offline cboldt

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1262
  • Rate Post +0/-0
Re: June 6th Hearing
« Reply #14 on: June 06, 2013, 08:30:57 AM »
But why is White's bias important?  I agree that Kruidbos' would be.

Bernardo could argue that White either took or allowed an improper response to what Kruidbos told him.  In short, that had the state been informed, rather that informing O'Mara, that any deficiency in turnover of evidence would have been remedied.

I think he's going to argue that anyway, but if White has animus against Bernardo, then Bernardo's going to argue that White is looking for ways to hurt the state.

Bernardo is going on to a new source of information on White, a Mr. Hughes.  Bernardo asks if White ever said that Corey would rather have him outside, pissing in (complaining about the SAO)

Bernardo accuses White of grandstanding for a run against Corey in four years.  Heck, Bernardo is giving White more face time by his own examination.  O'Mara asks if the "pissing in" conversation was about the Corey / de la Rionda retirement.  White doesn't recall.

Nelson looks very unhappy.

 

Site Meter
click
tracking