I do not recall any mention of Deedee's age other then she knew Trayvon since Kindergarten. Maybe you are getting your data from the same source that had Trayvon's 2011 "cherub" photo as a twelve year old?
Crump said the witness was 16 years old. But prosecutors have since said she was already 18 -- legally an adult -- on the night of the killing, February 26, 2012, in Sanford, Florida.
KYRA PHILLIPS, CNN ANCHOR: Hello, everyone. I'm Kyra Phillips. It's 11:00 on the East coast, 8:00 out West and we do have a chilling new perspective on the shooting death of an unarmed Florida teen by a neighborhood watch volunteer last month.
ABC News has spoken with a 16-year-old girl who was on the phone with TM during that fatal encounter with GZ in a gated community just north of Orlando. Take a listen to this.
(BEGIN AUDIO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Then the man said, "What are you doing around here?" Then somebody pushed TM because the head set fell."
(END AUDIO CLIP)
Well, GZ says he was acting in self-defense and has never been arrested or charged, but Martin's family and their many supporters claim that racial bias in the shooting and the investigation.
So, now the FBI has stepped in and the Justice Department has opened a civil rights investigation.
CNN legal analyst, Sunny Hostin joining, me now with more on all of this.
Why don't we go ahead and start with TM's cell phone friend? I understand you actually have a copy of her sworn affidavit. Give us the details, Sunny. We'll kind of unfold the conversation from there.
SUNNY HOSTIN, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: Good morning, Kyra. I do not have a copy, though, of the sworn affidavit, but I did speak to one of the Martin family attorneys this morning for at least half an hour and she and I discussed this phone call.
Apparently TM on that night had been trading phone calls with a 16-year-old friend, a girl, and as they traded phone calls, one of the last phone calls, was at about 7:04.
TM told his friend that someone was following him. He was nervous. He was concerned. She explained to him that he should run. He told her he was not going to run, but he was going to walk quickly in an effort to get away from the person that he thought was pursuing him.
Well, Kyra, she then heard TM say to someone, "Why are you following me?"
That person then said to TM, "Who are you? Why are you here? What is your name?"
At that point at about 7:16 p.m., she says that the phone call dropped, that she felt that someone had pushed or tackled TM and, at that point, the phone call dropped.
A 16-year-old girl said she was on the phone with the Florida teen shot by a neighborhod watch volunteer moments before he was killed, and that he feared he was being stalked.
The 16-year-old girl who was on the phone with TM in his final moments has come forward, saying that she has not been interviewed by Sanford police - despite TM telling her he was being followed.
Ts 16-year-old girlfriend, who is only being identified as DeeDee, recounted the final moments of her conversation with TM before the line went dead
1. From Crump's 3/20 press conference, linked above:
This young lady details it completely, the tone of the conversation and the nature of the conversation, and what was happening the last minutes of his life. I will ask you -- her parents does (ph) not in any way want to reveal her identity. She is a minor. Her parents are very worried about her. She is traumatized over this. This was her really, really close personal friend. They were dating. And so it's a situation where to know that you were the last person to talk to the young man who you thought was one of the most special people in the world to you, and know that he got killed moments after he was talking to you, is just riveting to this young lady.
In fact, she couldn't even go to his wake she was so sick. Her mother had to take her to the hospital. She spent the night in the hospital. She is traumatized beyond anything you could imagine. (my emphasis)
2. On March 28, on ABC News Tonight with Diane Sawyer GUNNED DOWN; NEW IMAGES (via Lexis.com) (video here)
MATT GUTMAN (ABC NEWS )(Voiceover) Tonight, ABC News spoke exclusively with Martin's 16-year-old girlfriend, Dee Dee. She describes being on the phone with Martin as he described Zimmerman following him.
6. Benjamin Crump and Sybrina Fulton interview with Matt Lauer on the Today Show, March 21, 2012 (available on Lexis.com):
LAUER: This is not a recorded phone call, Mrs. Fulton. The young lady--the police in Sanford asked anyone with information to come forward if they had that. This young lady, according to our reporting, had not come forward. And we're now getting her version of this phone call. Can it be trusted?
Ms. FULTON: Yes, it can. She was distraught because of the situation that happened with Trayvon and that--the fact that she was on the phone with him when he--when the incident occurred--right before the incident occurred. So she was very distraught. She had to go to the hospital. She was hospitalized. She also mentioned to us that she had feelings for Trayvon, so it hurt her dearly to know that he has passed away.
LAUER: Mr. Crump, though, as an attorney, does it worry you that really what this is, is hearsay evidence?
Mr. CRUMP: It really doesn't because she is a 16-year-old teenager who just lost a person very special to her. Her parents are very concerned. They did not want her to get involved. And it wasn't till Mr. Martin found the phone records and saw that she called him at 7:12--the police got on the scene 7:17. He was shot and dead on the ground. Five minutes.
7. From RadarOnLine (mostly gossip):
"The day after his wake, Trayvon's family attorney, Benjamin Crump, who had been conducting his own extensive investigation because cops had determined the shooting was in self defense, told Trayvon's girlfriend she was the last person to talk to him," a source close to the situation tells RadarOnline.com. "George [sic] had reviewed Trayvon's cell phone bill and it was revealed that she was on the phone with him in the moments before Trayvan was shot.
"His girlfriend became absolutely inconsolable and had trouble breathing so her mother took her to a nearby hospital emergency room. She had never seen her daughter this upset before, ever. She had a battery of tests, including an EKG, and was there for over 12 hours. Doctors ultimately told her that she was going to be ok, but advised her mother to keep a close eye on her and try to minimize the stress around her."
BDLR: OK, so you’ve known him for how long about? Approximately...
DeeDee: Kindergarten...?
BDLR: Kindergarten...wow, that long. So he was a good friend of yours...right?
DeeDee: Yeah, he was alright...
BDLR: OK, and he was a good guy, wasn’t he?
DeeDee: Yeah...sumpin’...
Perjury requires someone to knowing lie under oath. All we now have is a phone conversation with Crump. As I have said before scatter-brained Deedee needs to be put on the stand under oath and carefully questioned to find out the truth.
OK, my name is Bernie de la Rionda. I’m an assistant state attorney. I’m going to get you to raise your right hand, please. Do you solemnly swear to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth, so help you God?
Why wouldn't it be? She "perpetrated a fraud on the court" just like Zimmerman's wife.
What's good for the goose is good for the gander.
Why wouldn't it be? She "perpetrated a fraud on the court" just like Zimmerman's wife.
What's good for the goose is good for the gander.
It does not accomplish anything by charging her with perjury.
As to being under 18; realize that most teenager of that age bracket know that if they are under 18; they are much more protected for adult related penalties.
Theory:
She may have felt that by stating she was 16; if any bad repercussions were to happen; being a minor would protect her.
Fact:
Because is has been shown that she did lie under oath; it will make it easier for O'Mara to reduce the impact of her testimony should the prosecution attempt to use her as a witness.
Speculation:
If the prosecution does not put her on the stand; it may be easier to O'Mara to argue before the judge during the trial that the prosecution has not met the burden of proof for Murder 2.
maybe because Z's wife lied to a judge (judge Lester) and Witness 8 only lied to BDLR ?Why wouldn't it be? She "perpetrated a fraud on the court" just like Zimmerman's wife.
What's good for the goose is good for the gander.
There you are correct; legally Martin's race did not matter at all until it was specifically played into racial politics. And I don't blame his parents at all; their child has been killed, they can never get him back, and they at the least want someone to pay for killing him. That's only human nature. Where I don't think this approaches Tawana Brawley and the Duke case is that the apparent lackadaisical approach of the LEOs, who seem to have accepted at face value the premise that Martin was a criminal, seems to be indicative of an all-too-common attitude that the life of a young black man is worth less than that of the rest of society. This may not be the case - the LEOs knew Zimmerman, and witnesses largely reinforced his story, and Martin was dressed consistently with what they expected of a criminal - but it is sufficiently similar to past behavior as to be troubling to those people who are hypersensitive to racial discrimination, without any fraud being committed. (Well, except by the media.) I won't call them race pimps here because some who meet the description "those people who are hypersensitive to racial discrimination" are honest civil rights advocates.Treyvon's/GZ's race didn't matter until it was concluded it could be used to apply a sick double standard to justice and a twisted media shaping of the story.
Agree with the line you take in your argument, though we are focused on micro vs macro aspects of the media and justice system as it applies to cases involving race baiting by those involved.
Here with TM's tragedy, I see it more simply as was there a crime committed? (I see it clearly as No) Without going to great lengths to marginalize GZ and apply special treatment to TM I believe it's clear from the outset that GZ shot in self defense. Tracing GZ back to his car and beyond to apply a gross understanding of responsibility in the final outcome here is absurd, but somehow we see this line taken again and again yet clear evidence of TM assaulting GZ is marginalized by the media and race baiters. So what has REALLY played into the pursuit of supposed "justice" for the involved black person. Racism, good old ugly and racism, just like the other cases mentioned. Justice again is showing a double standard based on race, and there are plenty of folks going along with it to allow this to continue.
The one (Martin) folks are seeking "justice" for is the one who committed the crime. Yes GZ killed Martin, but it's more than clear what happened and there has been a willingness by those involved to cover up/ignore/brush off/discount the clear evidence of Martin's assault on GZ. It's the idea that b/c Martin is black that he deserves special treatment and a double standard that benefits the black involved and the special treatment goes so far as to marginalizes the justice for the white (I know GZ is hispanic/white) involved. Let's not forget the case was closed, only to be reopened after the white/black angle was put across every media outlet and Sunday news show. And lets not forget that on the night of the incident TM's own family said the cries of help were clearly not that of TM,... only after this special treatment appeared to be primed and ready was that account recanted and reversed. Folks get wrapped up when opportunity presents, here there has been an opportunity to receive special treatment as long as you side with TM. The racists involved fight tooth and nail to marginalize one side and and give unreasonable benefit of the doubt to another (yes this goes both ways), and this draws parralles to other cases.
This is the crux of the problem here, I think. From Martin's point of view, Zimmerman is potentially dangerous, but Zimmerman (knowing himself to be Neighborhood Watch engaged in protecting his neighborhood within the law) does not understand how he appears to Martin. From Zimmerman's point of view, Martin is potentially dangerous, but Martin (knowing himself to be just walking around talking on the phone) does not understand how he appears to Zimmerman. From that misunderstanding a situation developed which left one young man dead and another with his life in ruins. Knowing what we now know about each and examining their behavior (Zimmerman only watched from his truck, waiting on the police, until Martin ran out of sight -as a criminal would - without attempting to detain or confront Martin; Martin moved away from Zimmerman's truck, not attempting to confront Zimmerman) it seems reasonable to guess that they suddenly found themselves face to face without either desiring that. At that point, this sudden confrontation would reinforce each's reasonable belief that the other was dangerous and/or a criminal. One can guess about what might have transpired at that point, but it is just that - a guess.I'm not seeing how Martin knows who Zimmerman is any better after he gets out of his truck ? He could be a cop, a pervert, a robber, a racist, a nut.
What he does know is, whoever this guy is who was eyeballing him from his truck, has now actually gotten out of his truck and is looking for him.
From Martin's POV, Martin isn't doing anything to warrant this attention. He is walking home from the store, talking on the phone.
Well said. The prosecution should not be able to prove murder or manslaughter without first proving that Martin was not on top of Zimmerman and slamming his head into the ground or sidewalk. There is jury nullification to be considered though. Sometimes a jury delivers a verdict not based on the letter of the law, but on what they consider to be justice. Therefore Zimmerman may well be found guilty without the state proving that Martin was not on top of Zimmerman and slamming his head into the ground or sidewalk.Mounting somebody and slamming their head into the concrete cannot be self defense. That right there is a felony, a forcible felony to be exact. This has been explained to you many times over.
From a self defense perspective it's the same as if you shot somebody, and then when they were on the ground you shot them again.
Guess what? The first shot would be good/legal. The use of force when the threat was on the ground and no longer a threat would be VERY illegal and of course a felony.
Martin's initial blow could be considered self defense, I've said that all along. Everything past that gets into forcible felony Territory. It is a known fact that martin had committed and was in the commission of a forcible felony when shot. This fact is supported by all evidence and is irrefutable.
Well said. The prosecution should not be able to prove murder or manslaughter without first proving that Martin was not on top of Zimmerman and slamming his head into the ground or sidewalk. There is jury nullification to be considered though. Sometimes a jury delivers a verdict not based on the letter of the law, but on what they consider to be justice. Therefore Zimmerman may well be found guilty without the state proving that Martin was not on top of Zimmerman and slamming his head into the ground or sidewalk.
Wrong. There is no equivalent of jury nullification for convictions. If the jury renders a verdict not supported by law the judge is duty bound to ignore it; it happens often enough there is a name for it: judgement notwithstanding the verdict. http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judgment_notwithstanding_verdict
If you read a bit further, it states in a civil trial that is the case.
In theory the judge is duty bound to overturn ANY verdict not in accordance with the evidence presented in the case, but seldom do. I can't imagine any judge with the stones to overturn a guilty verdict in such a high profile, racially charged case.Wrong. There is no equivalent of jury nullification for convictions. If the jury renders a verdict not supported by law the judge is duty bound to ignore it; it happens often enough there is a name for it: judgement notwithstanding the verdict. http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judgment_notwithstanding_verdict
In theory the judge is duty bound to overturn ANY verdict not in accordance with the evidence presented in the case, but seldom do. I can't imagine any judge with the stones to overturn a guilty verdict in such a high profile, racially charged case.
I guess you just ignored all the different news outlets stating such.
From CNN.
http://www.cnn.com/2013/03/06/us/florida-trayvon-martin-case
http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/1203/20/cnr.03.html
ABC news
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/nat...tes-martin-shot-dead-report-article-1.1047445
Global Grind
http://globalgrind.com/news/trayvon-martins-girlfriend-speaks-out-details#ixzz2MsiIyQYd
I'm not sure if you're being sarcastic or simply not following the details of the case. She sworn in an affidavit to Crump that she didnt attend the funeral because she was in the hospital.
Later she lied under oath in her deposition with BDR when she answered in the affirmative that she missed the funeral because she was at the hospital.
Did you miss my post where I say Deedee is scattered brained, prone to forgetting her lines and needs careful coaching to get the desired story out of her?
So you have nothing on Deedee saying she is 16? Second hand (third hand quoting Crump)media reports only? Time to fact check don't you think? Or just swallow whole heartedly what fits your bias?
“His girlfriend became absolutely inconsolable and had trouble breathing so her mother took her to a nearby hospital emergency room. She had never seen her daughter this upset before, ever. She had a battery of tests, including an EKG, and was there for over 12 hours. Doctors ultimately told her that she was going to be ok, but advised her mother to keep a close eye on her and try to minimize the stress around her.”
So you have nothing on Deedee saying she is 16? Second hand (third hand quoting Crump)media reports only? Time to fact check don't you think? Or just swallow whole heartedly what fits your bias?
Did you miss my post where I say Deedee is scattered brained, prone to exaggeration and needs careful questioning to get a truthfull story out of her? The same goes for recant John.
Did you miss my post where I say Deedee is scattered brained, prone to exaggeration and needs careful questioning to get a truthfull story out of her? The same goes for recant John.
Oh, you mean like sticking to your guns that DeeDee's story (never contacting anyone after hearing her "boyfriend"/friend-she's-known-since-kindergarten get murdered, etc.) makes a lick of sense, especially now after she made up (more like Crump made up for her) some elaborate story about being so distraught about TM's death that she had to go to the hospital?
Where do you think that story came from? Who do you think this "source close to the situation" was? No doubt from the ringleader of this entire facade (Crump). She's just another pawn.
http://radaronline.com/exclusives/2012/03/trayvon-martin-girlfriend-hospitalized-following-death/
After all you swallowed hook, line and sinker this story, Martin's 2011 photo was of a 12 year old cherub and Orange Shirt Zimmerman was him in prison garb.
Can anyone provide a link that confirms this? To me, TM looks a LOT younger in the "Hollister" picture than he does in the photos supposedly taken ~8 days before his death. So in ~6 months he goes from this:16 years old, spidey. The red shirt Trayvon photo was taken in August of 2011. It has been researched.
to this:
Not the best comparison, but I think his face alone looks like it's aged a LOT more than ~6 months, if the "Hollister" photo is supposed to be from August '11
Unsure of the legitimacy of this site or this article, but I found this:
http://www.poynter.org/latest-news/...rge-zimmerman-why-you-may-not-see-the-others/
I asked you for a link to the bolded previously, and you either chose not to provide one, or missed my post. Please provide a link that details when the photo was taken.As research into the truth shows it was not Trayvon's 12 year old photo but him at 16 and not George wearing inmate orange but his own choice of day ware.
I found this link: http://www.poynter.org/latest-news/...rge-zimmerman-why-you-may-not-see-the-others/
The dominant photo of Martin shows him 13 or 14 years old, wearing a red Hollister T-shirt.