Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Of Klayman's fake grand jury? Please. Unless she is reading right-wing nutjob blogs for entertainment, there's no possible way it would ever come to her attention.
No, NOT of the "fake jury"
Of the SAO's failure to hand over the internal report of all evidence collected.
Quote:
You remain unclear on the concept. Please, start paying attention.
There was no "civil grand jury."
There was an amateur cluster**** that called itself a "citizen's grand jury." Back in the days when birthers were playing that same game, they met at Denney's. I'm not making that up.
Yes, citizens...that is what I meant...
your "fake jury" that is clearly what I meant..
Now...please address my argument and don't cherry pick freudian slips.
Allegations that have nothing to do with this thread.
LOL they have EVERYTHING to do with this thread...
is anybody home?
What do you think the "fake jury" is charging?? What do you think the charge is BASED on? Why do you think ovcatto hasn't mustered a single word except to chest bump you while you fail?
Quote:
If you have an argument relevant to this thread, I am frankly unaware of it.
Yes, well covering your eyes doesn't mean the ghost has gone away...
LOL they have EVERYTHING to do with this thread...
No. They don't. This thread was initiated to deceptively spread a malicious lie that a certain prosecutor was under indictment when she is not.
The responses have been about demonstrating that it is in fact a lie.
That's it. There are plenty of other Zimmerman threads you can play in (including one that I think is pinned to the top of the forum) if you want to change the subject.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hot_Handz
What do you think the "fake jury" is charging??
A fake grand jury can't charge anything.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hot_Handz
What do you think the charge is BASED on?
Hatred and bigotry.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hot_Handz
Why do you think ovcatto hasn't mustered a single word except to chest bump you while you fail?
Don't know, don't care.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hot_Handz
Yes, well covering your eyes doesn't mean the ghost has gone away...
Of the SAO's failure to hand over the internal report of all evidence collected.
Has there been a discovery motion entered by Zimmerman's attorney for exculpatory evidence being withheld by the state's attorney? NO!
Has there been a motion filed by Zimmerman's attorney to dismiss based upon Dershowitz's 2012 claim. NO!
Has there been a motion entered by Zimmerman's attorney's asking for dismissal due to any prosecutorial misconduct? NO!
But here we have this whacka nut whatever who have no connection with the case, no official recognition much less the power to compel testimony claiming that which Zimmerman's own attorney's do not claim.
No. They don't. This thread was initiated to deceptively spread a malicious lie that a certain prosecutor was under indictment when she is not.
The responses have been about demonstrating that it is in fact a lie.
That's it. There are plenty of other Zimmerman threads you can play in (including one that I think is pinned to the top of the forum) if you want to change the subject.
A despicable smear needs no rationale.
Hatred and bigotry.
Don't know, don't care.
You believe in ghosts too?
She IS under indictment from a citizens jury...whether you believe that to be significant or not is neither here nor there. it just is. Just because she is not being indicted by the state doesn't change this fact.
Nobody changed the subject...try to follow along here....
1 - Angela Corey has been indicted by a citizens grand jury (how you feel about a citizen grand jury is as irrelevant as it gets)
2 - The charges are based on the premise the prosecution withheld evidence to hand over to the defense
3 - these charges from the citizen grand jury were SUBSEQUENTLY filed AFTER O'mara motioned to have the prosecution sanctioned for withholding the internal SAO report.
4 - Judge Nelson deferred O'Maras request. Which means it will still be heard.
So....
1 - ovcattos question has been answered...WITHHOLDING EVIDENCE and there is PROOF of that.
and
2 - You were proven wrong in your declaration that these allegations had nothing to do with the citizen grand jury's allegations...
And yet... with all this alleged proof the best you can do is the impotent whining of a bunch of nutburgers playing fantasy grand jury with a lawyer who "inappropriately touches" his own children?
And I was beginning to think you just might be smart. Typical liberal bs....shoot the messenger. How original a thought is that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ovcatto
Has there been a discovery motion entered by Zimmerman's attorney for exculpatory evidence being withheld by the state's attorney? NO!
Has there been a motion filed by Zimmerman's attorney to dismiss based upon Dershowitz's 2012 claim. NO!
Has there been a motion entered by Zimmerman's attorney's asking for dismissal due to any prosecutorial misconduct? NO!
But here we have this whacka nut whatever who have no connection with the case, no official recognition much less the power to compel testimony claiming that which Zimmerman's own attorney's do not claim.
Prosecution, Fearless of Sanctions, “Slow Rolls” Discovery
As the case proceeded to trial and both sides began to investigate and share, through mandated discovery, the findings of their investigations, it became increasingly clear that the State was “slow-rolling” its own discovery obligations, and being duplicitous in the discovery it did provide.
For example, a State-generated report summarizing the data gathered from Martin’s cell phone–a process requiring equipment available only to law enforcement–was presented to the defense, along with a copy of the raw (and, to the defense, unreadable) data. When a State employee noted the discrepancy and consulted legal counsel to determine his exposure if he remained silent, that legal counsel was required by legal ethics to inform the defense of the deceptions. In court the State argued that they had, in fact, complied with their discovery obligations by providing the raw data unreadable by the defense.
This is an interesting interpretation of discovery obligations to be sure, but one which led to the initiation of sanction hearings against the State prosecutors. Ultimately, however, Judge Nelson proved uninterested in hearing the matter of the State’s dishonest discovery practices until after the jury had handed down a verdict.
Similarly, the State’s key witness who claimed to have overheard the confrontation between Zimmerman and Martin had lied under oath while being deposed on an issue directly impacting her credibility as a witness. The State informed the defense of this perjury only months after they had learned of it themselves, during which they pretended to be trying to hunt down the records that would have affirmed the known-to-be false claim by the witness, and even then only when they were ultimately cornered in Court with facts.
Has there been a discovery motion entered by Zimmerman's attorney for exculpatory evidence being withheld by the state's attorney? NO!
Has there been a motion filed by Zimmerman's attorney to dismiss based upon Dershowitz's 2012 claim. NO!
Has there been a motion entered by Zimmerman's attorney's asking for dismissal due to any prosecutorial misconduct? NO!
But here we have this whacka nut whatever who have no connection with the case, no official recognition much less the power to compel testimony claiming that which Zimmerman's own attorney's do not claim.
Here is the thing....
The evidence being withheld may have no bearing on the actual verdict!!! That is the connection you are FAILING to make.
This is about a prosecutor trying to politick her way up the ladder and pad her resume by pandering to civil unrest. Period. And in the process, disregarding the due process and Zimmermans right to a defense subject to full disclosure.
She IS under indictment from a citizens jury...whether you believe that to be significant or not is neither here nor there. it just is. Just because she is not being indicted by the state doesn't change this fact.
Pay attention.
There is no grand jury, there are no charges, there is no indictment, there has been no filing.
What you are saying happened here is legally identical to being called a poopyhead by a kindergarten class.
And I was beginning to think you just might be smart. Typical liberal bs....shoot the messenger. How original a thought is that.
I am shooting no messenger. I am pointing out that the message is a lie.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
