“Suspicion Nation” – Addressing the Critics; Re: Maddy

I tend to not like writing long blog articles but this is one that I feel cannot be parsed.  Thus, I apologize for the length, but it’s the only way for me to present an entire picture in support of my opinion.

From the time that the killing of Trayvon Martin hit the airways in March 2012, until the verdict was entered in George Zimmerman’s murder trial on July 13, 2013, there were people who kept up with every release of discovery material, every press conference held by attorney Mark O’Mara, and every hearing conducted in the courtroom.  They watched videos of George Zimmerman’s statements.  They almost memorized, word for word, all written witness statements and then their oral interviews.  Their focus was on George Zimmerman and discovery evidence beyond “George said.”

If anyone wrote a book about the George Zimmerman trial, those who diligently followed everything from the beginning might expect for it to be like an investigative piece re-litigating the trial; presenting  every aspect of evidence against Zimmerman.  After all, re-litigating is what started after the verdict, and continues to this day in social media.  In my opinion, it’s because we have heard jurors say that they considered Zimmerman’s wounds, but not that they considered any other physical evidence during deliberations.

Lisa BloomIn my opinion, Lisa Bloom writes from the perspective of a lawyer based on what she observed at trial, but without re-litigating the evidence.  Lisa Bloom conducted her interview of Maddy, also known as Juror B 29, like any author would.  She was not vetting but rather, interviewing Maddy.

Post trial, Juror B37 was the first juror in the Zimmerman case to come before television cameras in silhouette and tell why she decided to acquit George Zimmerman.   Her interview on Anderson Cooper’s 360 was almost simultaneous to the press release of her then literary agent, Sharlene Martin.  Sharlene Martin announced that Juror B37 and her husband intended to write a book of her experience on the jury in the George Zimmerman case and that the jury decided he was not guilty “…due to the manner in which he was charged…”  Immediately, I remembered that during her voir dire, Juror B37 referred to rallies and peaceful protests as “riots.”

Juror B29, known as Maddy, was interviewed after Juror B37.   Maddy abc_juror_b29_zimmerman_trial_ll_130725_16x9_992interviewed with several news journalists.  Unlike Juror B37 and alternate Juror B54, Maddy did not appear on camera in silhouette.  And, unlike Jurors B37 and B54, Maddy didn’t talk about what she thought about specific witnesses, or what she thought about evidence that proved or disapproved Zimmerman’s self-defense claim.  Maddy talked about the jury.  She said the law was “read” to her during deliberations and caused her to change her vote, resulting in acquitting George Zimmerman.

From her first interview, Maddy made it known that something happened among the jurors that displeased her.  She was not happy with her decision — George Zimmerman got away with murder.  Lisa Bloom ‘s interview of Maddy reported in her book, Suspicion Nation, is a continuation and expounding of what Maddy first said in July 2013.   She is being called a liar by the anti-Trayvon Martin camp who are also criticizing Lisa Bloom for not calling Maddy a liar.

I admit to having mixed feelings about Maddy.  Logically, if there is no law to convict an accused, then prosecutors could not bring a charge.  There are judicial processes available so that if there is no law and/or evidence to support the charge, a judge dismisses the case.  Twice as I remember, defense attorneys Mark O’Mara and Don West moved for dismissal and twice, Judge Debra Nelson denied their motions. However, Maddy would not know that.

Maddy with Lisa Bloom

Maddy with Lisa Bloom on Dr. Phil’s

There is no way I would depend on the legal interpretations of law by lay people.  Had I sat on that jury with an attorney juror whose belief was opposed to my own, I would not listen to him or her either.  They are educated and trained to convince people in black robes to believe their version of interpretations of law and facts.

Maddy did not know that having a relationship or friendship with a lawyer does not mean understanding the law. There’s a thing in the practice of  law that requires understanding legislative intent when interpreting law that even judges take under advisement.

During Maddy’s voir dire, and without physically seeing her, I heard a proud woman, but suspected that while in the box being questioned, that her pride was also used as a cover in anticipation of being wrongfully judged.  The need for acceptance has a way of presenting everything in an agreeable fashion, even when the person doesn’t want the position they are being interviewed for.

Maddy ran down what is required for her to keep her certification as a nursing assistant – showing Don West that she knows her stuff about her career.  She has two sons who financially contribute to household expenses – but she didn’t say the source of their income, possibly hiding that it might come from disability.  She had recently moved to Seminole County Florida from Chicago.  HELLO!!  That spoke volumes to me.

Here is where I can relate to Maddy.  I was born and raised in Chicago.  Although moving from Chicago in 1979, until this day I am homesick and shocked of the racial bigotry in other parts of this nation.  Even during the Civil Rights era, racial bigotry among individuals in Chicago had borders.  (Institutionalized racism and discrimination is another story.)  

Chicago gives it citizens choices.  They can live in areas that are predominate to their culture, predominate to their race, or diverse in everything imaginable.  No one living in Chicago is considered an “outsider” to Chicago.  They may be westside, or southside, or northside, but they are still Chicagoans.

chicago

To support this, the Albany Park section in the city of Chicago is the most diverse area in America.   Think about that for a moment, and ask how diverse can it be to be the MOST diverse area in the United States?  Over 40 different languages are spoken in its public schools. It consists of those originally from Latin America, the Philippines, India, Korea, Cambodia, Somalia, Iraq, Iran, Lebanon and the former Yugoslavia.   When thinking about people descended from Latin America, India, and the middle east, they come in various shades of complexion from white to black.  I don’t think it’s necessary to point out the skin color of those from Somalia.

In Chicago are college communities, such as Hyde Park where Barack Obama lived before moving to the White House.  Even in the late 1960’s and early 1970’s, it has been a community where college students of all races share apartments.  Professors from different original nationalities reside in that community.

There are also communities such as Olde Town, which going back to the 60’s, anyone interested in the arts resided without one thought of the color of their skin or how they spoke.

If anyone doesn’t want to live among others of different cultures in Chicago, they can find their own communities.  Bigots stay in their own neighborhoods.

I don’t know where Maddy lived in Chicago, but when first hearing her at voir dire, I thought about the area of St. Mary of Nazareth’s hospital.   I have experience in that area.  It is predominately Puerto Rican, of various shades of complexions, and at the time of my experience that hospital was staffed with people from the Philippines and Poland, Black, White, and Latino.

Maddy

Maddy, Juror B29

Communication problems?  No.  People in Chicago do not mock accents or pronunciations.  It must have been a horrible experience for Maddy to be mocked for saying “Roman noodles.”

When I first moved to where I now reside, it was unwelcoming.  People thought of me as an “outsider” and for a time, I felt that I had to prove myself.  Then I snapped back into reality that no one defines me – I define myself.  Watching Maddy’s media interviews, and then reading about her in Lisa Bloom’s book, I perceive a woman who, while in Florida, resisted having others define her.  Maddy has confidence to come before cameras without being in silhouette.  That is a confidence that Jurors B 37 and 54 do not have.  Why did she not have the confidence to stand on her beliefs of the facts in that jury room?

Maddy, I can understand you more now as a person, but I still don’t like that you changed your vote. There, I said it.  Does that mean that I hate you?  No.  Does it mean I have no respect for you as a person?  No. If I were to meet you, I would want to sit and hear about everything you experienced in Seminole County.  I think we might have something in common moving away from our hometown within our hometown, to find that people in other parts of this great nation are not welcoming to “outsiders.”

I would tell you that our brains process what our guts tell us.  Example?  When you were mocked and demeaned, did you first feel it in your gut, or your brain?  It took your brain time to discern that the women were not laughing with you, but at you. If your gut hadn’t processed their motivation, your brain would not have discerned it.

So, what is the problem that the anti-Trayvon Martin camp has with Maddy and Lisa Bloom’s interview of her?  They allege that Maddy told Reverend Sharpton on his Politics Nation program, that she had not been bullied.

Thankfully, that interview is on Youtube.  Reverend Sharpton said that there are those who question what happened in the jury room.  Did people pressure people?  Were people bullying Maddy?  He asked her directly, “Were you bullied, Maddy?” Maddy hesitated.  She started her answer with “we.” She stopped again, and when she continued stated, “I can’t say I was bullied.”

As she continues, she goes back and repeats what she has always contended; i.e., that the way the law was read to her, she could not say that Zimmerman was guilty.

What I see in Maddy’s interview on Politics Nation, and her interview with Lisa Bloom, is that Maddy speaks of two distinct times.  She tells Lisa Bloom what happened BEFORE the jury deliberated and it was at that time when she was bullied.   By the time that the jury deliberated, two of the jurors had already re-defined Maddy in her person to believe that she was not educated and intelligent enough to understand anything presented to the jury at trial, neither the jury instructions, nor the law to in which to apply the facts.  By the time of jury deliberations, there was no further need to bully Maddy.  She was already intimidated.

Lisa Bloom 2

Lisa Bloom

Lisa Bloom writes that there were two jurors who strongly favored acquittal from the beginning.  One juror mentioned things she knew about the case that hadn’t come up at trial and that her husband is a lawyer.  Hello Juror B 37!  She is the juror that during voir dire, was directly instructed by Mark O’Mara to tell other jurors that if it didn’t come from the “witness stand,” that it could not be considered during deliberations.  Another juror’s son is a lawyer.  Those two jurors took over interpreting the law using their associations to impress other jurors, including Maddy.

There’s another conflict in Maddy’s representations.  In her first media interview, Maddy said that she was the person who was going to hang the jury.  She told Lisa Bloom however, that she changed her vote to not guilty as two other jurors held on to convict.  Is that because of public criticism and backlash that Maddy changed her story from being the one who was going to hang the jury?  I don’t know.  What she told Lisa Bloom however, reveals a plan of leading the jury to the vote that Mark O’Mara wanted.  If Juror B37 could not convince all jurors to accept her interpretation of the law, then she would convince them to acquit Zimmerman by painting Trayvon as a “bad kid” though no evidence of that was presented at trial

I will correct Maddy’s perception on one issue about herself.  She is not the cause of Trayvon’s death.  George Zimmerman is the only person responsible for his decisions and actions.

Following this case from when George Zimmerman was arrested, I carefully listened to his lay advocates in the media.  There was something about his not being arrested from the onset due to stand your ground law.  There was something about stand your ground as presented by its defenders that appears to circumvent homicide laws, rendering them moot, as long as self-defense is raised as a defense.

After watching Juror B 37, Maddy, and alternate Juror B 54’s interviews, on July 28, 2013, I wrote an article, saying therein that I suspected that Maddy had been duped by other jurors who hold to sovereign citizen ideology.  Before the media, Frank Taaffe continuously expressed those ideologies.

I have not yet finished reading Lisa Bloom’s book, but have read portions in which there has been expressed criticism by those who make excuses for George Zimmerman.  Next, I will write about the criticism of what Lisa Bloom wrote concerning where Zimmerman carried his holster.

Posted on 03/24/2014, in George and Shellie Zimmerman, Justice For Trayvon and tagged , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink. 43 Comments.

  1. Xena, Excellent breakdown of the events that occurred during the tenure of the jury in the Zimmerman (non) trial. I do agree with all your points raised, with one small exception. The verdict in this trial was rendered many years prior to the murder of Trayvon, possibly even before the birth of the killer. The non conviction was assured by the actions of the father of the murderer and this man and his family are exempt from judgment in the criminal justice system in this nation. The real question that this sordid incident brings to mind is what has earned such a high degree of protection for this family? What do they know that allows them to violate laws to such a degree? Perhaps at some later date we will find out, but for now it is a mystery that we do not have the answer to… Justice will not come to this man in a court of law, but instead by (from) the hands of one of his own followers, but that is simply my opinion…

    Like

  2. Great post Xena, and yes Crazy1946, I agree completely, “The non conviction was assured by the actions of the father of the murderer and this man and his family are exempt from judgment in the criminal justice system in this nation.”

    I hope the whole world knows the truth one day, and this shame will stop.

    Like

  3. How many of the 6 jurors were first time jurors?

    Until I followed the GZ trial, I thought jury instructions were the same for all trials. I thought such instructions simply clarified the definitions of 1st degree murder, 2nd degree murder, manslaughter, etc.

    I had no idea that both the prosecutor and defense lawyer could rework the jury instructions. Also, I had no idea that Judge Nelson could slip in SYG ideas when GZ did not claim or assert SYG.

    Listening to the speed that judges read jury instructions to the jurors in both the GZ and Dunn trials , I felt the readings were simply for the purpose of getting them down on the court record. No doubt, some of jurors were exposed to these definitions of legal charges for the first time.

    If a social studies teacher were to read such instructions to his/her class and, then, immediately give the students a test, what would their test scores be? If the teacher allowed one of his/her students to reread the instructions, would their test scores improve? If the teacher were asked to clarify what manslaughter meant but would not answer the question because it was too general,and then asked the students to ask a SPECIFIC question about manslaughter, would the students have the ability to ask a specific question to improve their understanding?

    Would peer acceptance and social standing in the classroom cause a student to be hesitant in asking a specific question when other students just wanted to get out to recess or lunch break?

    Xena, thank you for taking the time to write your clear and informative article, helping me understand Maddy and the other jurors, and also helping me understand a bit more of the process they were undertaking and of the influences of Juror B37 and B54.

    One thing I do know with certainty is that Maddy and the other jurors did not have the time at their disposal to study, evaluate, and discuss the evidence of the case as we Trayvon advocates had over the course of a year.

    Like

    • And, of course, if a jury could be given a test right after hearing a judge read the jury instructions, I would love to know what the jury’s test score results would be.

      Like

    • Two sides to a story

      I think having a jury of 6 rather than 12 made Zimmerman’s chances of acquittal a lot greater.

      I also expected the jury to spend far longer than 16 hours in deliberation, considering the high profile of the case and the controversy it engendered. It takes far more hours than that to see the patterns that lead to the charges of 2nd degree murder. GZ supporters – and this jury – glossed over many bits of evidence – but then, the prosecution did a poor job presenting some evidence and also failed to present things that could have been used in their case, so the jury can hardly be faulted for that.

      Like

      • roderick2012

        I also expected the jury to spend far longer than 16 hours in deliberation, considering the high profile of the case and the controversy it engendered.

        Why are you surprised?

        The State presented only surface evidence and didn’t dig into the evidence nor did they present all of the evidence and explain what it meant during closing arguments.

        When the State didn’t call Frank Taaffe and play the interview where he stated that ‘if Trayvon had only answered George’s questions he would still be alive’?

        The State didn’t even depose him.

        Why didn’t they call Shellie so they could have used George’s state of mind at the time of the shooting to build a case against him?

        The State didn’t use the interview from Dr. Phil to destroy the credibility of either of the Ostermans.

        The fact that there were 58 witnesses called in a little over two weeks speaks to volumes that both the State and the defense wanted this trial over and no one cared about the truth.

        The fact that Judge Nelson was rushing the trial made me realize that she in on the conspiracy too.

        Like

    • Two sides to a story

      I also agree that there were basically stealth jurors that supported GZ – no way did these folks consider the full spectrum of evidence but instead made it onto the jury with the opinion that he was railroaded and that he acted in self defense.

      Like

  4. Crazy1946, Mindyme, Yahtzee, and Two sides;
    Thanks for your comments.

    The verdict in this trial was rendered many years prior to the murder of Trayvon, possibly even before the birth of the killer.

    Powerful statement!! An attorney friend told me that in Florida, there was no way 5 white women were going to convict a non-white person for killing a Black male. He said that’s the “south” and the way they do things. I disagreed with him. He was right. I was wrong.

    I hope the whole world knows the truth one day, and this shame will stop.

    Even the anti-Trayvon Martin camp knows that Zimmerman killed Trayvon in malice and ill-will. They take pleasure in that part.

    And, of course, if a jury could be given a test right after hearing a judge read the jury instructions, I would love to know what the jury’s test score results would be.

    BINGO!

    I also expected the jury to spend far longer than 16 hours in deliberation, considering the high profile of the case and the controversy it engendered.

    Absolutely! From what I gather, they spent more time interpreting the law than going over evidence.

    Like

  5. Hi Xena…..I am also STILL reading Lisa’s book.This book has been very strange for me to read.Normally I would have it read in 1 or 2 days.Until reading your post I didn’t figure out WHY I haven’t finished it.Its because I am so damn torn about Maddy!! One minute I feel sorry for her,the next I am pissed.
    I do understand about her just moving somewhere that would give her culture shock.My husband and I traveled all over the US for almost 10 years with his job from the 90’s to 2000.We had the pleasure of having our Dear Friends going the same place,since he was my hubby’s boss! Their family and ours were just one big happy family.Our receptions were so different,depending WHERE we were.I’m sure you have guessed WHY! We were white & they were black.The first place we lived(Portland,Oregon) was fine,the 2nd was a damn nightmare,it was a small town in Georgia.I thought we had been thrown back to the 50’s!! We actually got kicked out of the house we rented! We were informed if our friends were not at our house to do cleaning or yard work,they had to leave! Needless to say,we moved the next day! The more we traveled together,the more educated I got on so many levels.

    Like

    • It sounds as if you could write a book from a unique perspective, MarilynC.

      Sometime (or now) you will have to tell us more about the receptions you received as a White-couple and Black-couple team traveling together and landing up in the places where racism is still oozing.

      Today, I am reading a book entitled The Confederacy of Silence written by a U. of PA journalism graduate who left NYC for his first job in 1988 which was to be a sports writer for a small newspaper in Greenwood, MS.

      Like

      • Thank You Yahtzee…..You have inspired me to dig out my journals from our travel days! They were some of the greatest days to the meanest days.I would not trade them for anything.

        Like

    • Marilyn,
      “Culture shock.” That’s a good term to describe walking out of the daylight into a dark world of racial oppression. Maybe that’s a good term to apply to what I discovered when coming to the blogs around May of 2012 to support justice for Trayvon. It only took about 5 minutes to me to see that those opposed to justice for Trayvon did so because of his race.

      I’ve been saying — they never supported George Zimmerman in his person. They only supported that he killed a Black teen and was not arrested; blamed his arrest on protests, and felt that Blacks organizing those protests have too much power.

      Like

      • Absolutely – They only supported that he killed a black teen – of course they have a different word for it – and OMG, between that and what they said about his parents, it makes me sick. It has been how long now, and the tears have not stopped.

        Like

    • roderick2012

      One minute I feel sorry for her,the next I am pissed.
      I do understand about her just moving somewhere that would give her culture shock.

      Marilyn C,. you’re too nice.

      I never understood why someone anyone of color would move from a large diverse city to a town with a racist history as Sanford, FL unless they had relatives there–even then one would think that those relatives would explain to them what they were getting themselves into if they moved.

      I remember you made a statement several months ago about being ashamed of being white. Although I understood the sentiment you shouldn’t feel responsible for the actions of others just because they look like you.

      Marilyn, you have a good heart and an open mind and you get it so you won’t get lost in all of the bigotry and hatred that’s America.

      BTW I didn’t mean to sound condescending or patronizing just wanted to give you a complement.

      Like

  6. I listened the audio book of Suspicion Nation after you mentioned it on your blog Xena.

    The first half of the book is all about the failure of the justice system in the Zimmerman trial. The second half is about racial bias and racial injustice in the criminal justice system and the U.S. in general.

    It’s a great book. A ton of civil rights and racial justice information is packed into it!

    Like

    • Glenn,
      HEY! I’m currently on part one, chapter 6, after skipping about in effort to see what critics were criticizing and why. I want to soak it in — see things from the perspective of a civil rights attorney observing trial. In other words, I might be blogging about the book for months to come. 🙂

      Like

  7. Thank you so much for taking the time to write this.

    Like

  8. Reblogged this on Mysterious Observations and commented:
    It is unfortunate that “Maddy” changed her vote and allowed herself to be led astray by other jurors.

    Like

    • mysteryquest1,
      Thanks for the re-blog.

      I agree. Maddy allowed herself to be led astray by a distinct plan to acquit Zimmerman, not based on evidence, neither the law, but because Juror B37 didn’t like that he was arrested in the first place.

      Like

  9. What a great article Xena and great feedback. My dad being a cop, I saw this predetermination of guilt or innocence 1st hand in his arrests and prosecutions. As unfair as it is, when my 2 brothers got into hot water, and they did, dad could make 1 call and pffttt ! away went the problem. This is of course small potatoes compared to this murder, but it exists and God only knows what it will take to eradicate the unfairness of it.

    Like

    • racer,
      I can honestly say that I’ve never been in any trouble beyond a parking ticket, and the one time I felt it was unfair was when I used “privilege” with LE. I was just out of the hospital 2 weeks after having surgery and there were no other parking spaces available other than a handicapped space. The Chief of Police was a personal friend. I was ready to go to court, hospital records in hand, and plead my case. But, the Chief took care of it.

      I felt kinda bad about that and ended up donating money to the FOP.

      Remember in GZ’s interviews that he made sure he presented his dad as “a judge”? He didn’t say what state leaving Singleton and Serino to assume it was Florida. Papa Zim never attended law school, much less had a license to practice law. He was a magistrate in a state court, or as some in the legal community put it, “a procedural paper pusher.”

      With an uncle selling insurance, and GZ working for a mortgage company, there’s no telling how much access they had to the personal info of others to threaten extortion or blackmail.

      Like

      • Xena,

        I can tell you how much access they had to personal info on others. I have over 25 years experience working with mortgage company’s as a Sr Credit Investigator, and several years as an underwriter for insurance companies. Believe me, the information is there, you just have to know how to get it.

        Like

      • roderick2012

        With an uncle selling insurance, and GZ working for a mortgage company, there’s no telling how much access they had to the personal info of others to threaten extortion or blackmail.

        Also Mommy Dearest worked in the court system. She seems like the type to snoop into records after hours.

        Just imagine how much ‘influence’ the Zimmermans would have if she were able to peruse the family court records and read all of the allegations of physical, emotional and sexual abuse against some high profile residents.

        BTW wasn’t the uncle the insurance salemans the father of the cousin whom Piglet abused for ten years?

        Like

  10. yeah xena, nice post, it’s very interesting how the jury dynamic worked out.i could’ve sworn 6 women wld never permit a child murderer to BS his way out of that court room. disgusting really.

    i’d also be interested in reading a black civil rights lawyer interpretation of the court proceedings, how the judge allowed those bogus motions &lies by omar & west. what other judges wld’ve done in this case… especially if omar had tried the black fear defense in another jurisdiction. i’m also waiting for the jury’s names released & how the media will treat them. they need to be publicly shamed for what they did.

    Like

    • Shannon,

      i’d also be interested in reading a black civil rights lawyer interpretation of the court proceedings, how the judge allowed those bogus motions &lies by omar & west. what other judges wld’ve done in this case… especially if omar had tried the black fear defense in another jurisdiction.

      Prosecutors should have objected to much of O’Mara’s and West’s testimony and questioning. West badgered Jeantel asking the same questions over and over. Attorneys are not suppose to testify, but that is what O’Mara did many times over.

      i’m also waiting for the jury’s names released & how the media will treat them. they need to be publicly shamed for what they did.

      I don’t know if the media is interested at this time because of GZ’s depraved mind, post-verdict behavior.

      Like

  11. Just for reference, here is a video clip of a portion of the voir dire where B37 referred to the peaceful rally as a “riot”. She even adds the word “rioting” immediately after saying “riot.”

    At timestamp 2:12:

    BDLR: What do you recall other than the names, anything right now. Now you’ve had some time to think about it. What I mean by that is Monday, when you filled this out, yesterday morning, anything else kind of pop in your mind that you remember about the case?

    B37: Well, I remember the names…

    BDLR: Okay

    B37: And I remember the issues in Sanford when they were having riots…rioting

    BDLR: Okay. Tell me what you remember about that.

    B37: That’s pretty much it. Just that there was a whole lot of indiscretionand angry people and picketing people and a lot of news media.

    BLDR: Okay. Now, you know, we have the First Amendment; we have the Second Amendment; we have all kinds of amendments. How did you feel about, in terms of people having rallies? Did you form an impression based on that, if you did, tell if proper or improper….what kind of things went through your mind?

    B37: Not really proper or improper… I mean, they can do what they can do as long as it is peaceful.

    BLDR: And did you think it was inappropriate what they did?

    B37: I think, maybe it was overdone.

    BDLR: Okay, alright. As a result of that, did that impact you one way or another in favor of Mr. Zimmerman’s side or the State’s side in terms of on behalf of Trayvon Martin?

    B37: Not really, because I think it’s an unfortunate incident that happened.

    Like

    • I am bothered by B37 calling the killing of Trayvon “an unfortunate incident that happened.”

      Like

      • Or was she referring to the “riots” as “an unfortunate incident that happened”?

        Like

        • Yahtzee,
          She was referring to the killing of Trayvon as “an unfortunate incident” and rallies as “riots” because of the race of those organizing the rallies. What’s so bad about it is that B37’s biases are so engrained, she believes that she is right.

          Like

    • you’re like a stealth blogger! i so appreciate you’re dictating the video cuz i’m still too sensitive to listen & watch the trial. it still infuriates me to watch that kangaroo court,smug fatass face &those loser lawyers ALL of them!! and i really wanna smack angela upside the head when i see her for disrespecting the Martins & Trayvon murder!

      i’d like an interview w.her and ask about all the evidence she ignored, esp an explanation to leaving out/canceling the timeline analysis etc. none of those reporters have the balls to demand accountability!

      Like

  12. I thought I paid attention to everything in this case,but maybe I missed these 2 things I have often wondered about.First,did the so called judge announce WHEN the names of the jury WOULD be released? Like in the Casey Anthony case,Judge Perry said he would have a cooling off period of 90 days.Second,WHY was GZ’s phone records not used? They sure as hell went through poor Trayvons with a fine tooth comb! I seems to remember something being said by Judge Lester,but can’t remember WHAT!! I have gone back over videos,etc.I would love to see who the hell he was calling within seconds after the killing….like dear ole dad!! The picture of the back of his head taken by the neighbor shows him on the phone before the cops got there.Nobody even brought THAT UP!!! I sure was expecting so much in rebuttal,since I didn’t see it in the fake trial!
    I’m like Shannon,I want them to be publicly held accountable.I am curious if it changed their lives too.

    Like

    • Marilyn,

      First,did the so called judge announce WHEN the names of the jury WOULD be released?

      Six months after trial and to the media.

      Second,WHY was GZ’s phone records not used? They sure as hell went through poor Trayvons with a fine tooth comb!

      For the same reason that Judge Nelson did not allow Trayvon’s phone records beyond his call to Jeantel — there was no witness to testify as to their content. By GZ not taking the witness stand, there was no one to testify as to the intent of his calls and texts.

      I would love to see who the hell he was calling within seconds after the killing….like dear ole dad!!

      After he killed Trayvon, GZ called the NEN number but it did not connect. He said that he told neighbors that he had already called 911, but he had only called NEN before he killed Trayvon and knew that no ambulance would be dispatched based on his prior call, neither his subsequent call.

      The picture of the back of his head taken by the neighbor shows him on the phone before the cops got there.Nobody even brought THAT UP!!! I sure was expecting so much in rebuttal,since I didn’t see it in the fake trial!

      Like you, I anticipated that prosecutors would at least ask Jonathan Manolo to identify what GZ was holding to his ear while he was taking the photo. What Manolo did say is that GZ threw down his cell phone when the cop arrived. The prosecutors did not take opportunity to ask if the key chain flashlight was also thrown down at that time — that was the same spot where GZ alleged he was hit in the nose.

      O’Mara used the location of the key chain to say that the altercation began there. The prosecution could have questioned Manolo as to whether he saw that key chain flashlight when coming out — because it was on when photographed by the cops. If Manolo did not see that key chain flashlight when coming out and taking the photo, then it’s reasonable to believe that GZ threw it down along with his cell phone AFTER he saw the cop.

      I’m like Shannon,I want them to be publicly held accountable.I am curious if it changed their lives too.

      The only juror we know who has a conscious about the verdict is Maddy. If they sat there seeing Maddy bullied and did nothing, they can’t have much of a conscious about right and wrong.

      Like

      • why were the killer’s calls not used for the same reason as Trayvon’s phone calls, since TM’s not on trial & none of his calls wld’ve been relevant? did you mean the killer’s call records were released & that’s how you knw he never even called NEN again or that’s just what he said?
        as far as the killer’s phone records & someone to testify to the calls, wouldn’t that be the states fault for not actually calling the whoever it was to testify, not that the calls wouldn’t be important to the case? (esp the texts mentioned at bond hearing)
        also they never called osterman or shellie anyway but in normal circumstances it sure would be relevant to know who the killer was talking to before & after the murder and their location at the time.

        Like

        • i forgot to press “post” since yesterday. LOL

          Like

        • Shannon,

          did you mean the killer’s call records were released & that’s how you knw he never even called NEN again or that’s just what he said?

          His phone records were released, and he DID call NEN after he killed Trayvon.

          as far as the killer’s phone records & someone to testify to the calls, wouldn’t that be the states fault for not actually calling the whoever it was to testify, not that the calls wouldn’t be important to the case? (esp the texts mentioned at bond hearing)

          They could have called the parties who received a call from or made a call to GZ to testify to the content of the call, but we know that his witnesses do not tell the truth.

          also they never called osterman

          Mark and Sondra both took the stand as witnesses. Sondra was corrected for referring to GZ as “Georgie.”

          So much that the state released in discovery wasn’t presented at trial. Another blogger disagreed with me, but my thoughts about the communications that Bernie spoke about at the bond hearing and witnesses such as Jeremy, might have been reserved for the feds.

          Like

  13. Like

  1. Pingback: "Suspicion Nation" – Addressing the Critics; Re: Maddy | Oppression Monitor

Your comments are welcomed.

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: