Jul 16 2012
How Will Witness 9 (GZ’s Molested Cousin) Effect TM Charges?
Well, a bombshell dropped in the George Zimmerman trial for Murder 2 for the killing of young Trayvon Martin:
A relative of George Zimmerman claims she was molested by him when they were both children, the latest allegation in the case against the former neighborhood watch volunteer charged in the fatal shooting of Trayvon Martin.
The interview with police, done nearly a month after the February shooting, was made public Monday after local media fought to have it released, over objections from prosecutors and the defense.
You can get all the evidence regarding Witness 9 here. Witness 9 was the anonymous caller who told police there was a sinister, hidden side to the soft-spoken, policeman-wannabe George Zimmerman. I actually don’t see much impact on the trial except to once more destroy GZ’s credibility (which is already shot to pieces). Even her claims of racism are not against GZ, but against his estranged mother. Clearly this woman has some legitimate beef with GZ, but very little is applicable to the TM case. The only connection that might be made is how well GZ can hide brutal behavior, and how little he cares about his victims (his apology to Witness 9 and her parents was a sad joke).
To be honest, not much more is needed in the case against GZ. As you sift through the evidence, more and more problems become clear. One thing I was thinking of doing was listing how GZ’s story changes over time to deal with serious flaws in his original telling. Something like this [click to enlarge]:
The data comes from this impressive analysis (not all of which I agree with BTW). I still may do one because a few key items are missing from this table – specifically the CVSA interview which has some real damning statements from GZ. For example, at around the 28 minute mark in the interview, GZ drops this whopper on why he got out of the car (may not be 100% accurate transcription):
GZ: All the houses I was next to were the back of the houses, they are town houses so I did not know the address. They [dispatch] said we need to know what street you’re on, what address. …[GZ babbles about giving his street address]… and I got out of my car to look for a street sign so I could tell what street I was on, and … there was no street sign, and I couldn’t make out the house in front of me because there was a big pick up truck there…
This is of course a lie – he saw TM run and he jumped out of his car to follow, without any prompting from the dispatcher. All the mythical interchanges with dispatch on addresses and such never happened. But the dumb part was the reason for not using an address right in front of him. It seems this ginormous pick up truck was blocking the address number of the first house (now known to be the house of Witnesses 11 and 20) at the end of the building TM ran behind. This is why GZ has to run across the top of the T to the other side of the next building over to find any house numbers.
…. yeah, right. Check out where the house numbers are:
I mean – really? A truck totally blocked this from any view? GZ had to walk over 200 feet away, crossing two sets of buildings instead, just to find a house number (instead of maybe looking at the next house to the right)? Prosecutors are going to have a field day with this BS. BTW, recall we have two witnesses who testified GZ told them he got out of the car to find TM. And GZ admitted he was chasing TM to the police dispatcher.
Of course, the fact TM ran from GZ, who then follows TM when he runs away, is proof enough this was not a self defense or stand your ground case for GZ. When one party tries to avoid the conflict (like running away) then the person who continues the confrontation is the criminal, and the other is the victim.
In this case a dead victim.
So I don’t see how Witness 9 does anything for or against GZ. His troubles are monumental already. His story is impossible on numerous levels, with witnesses and evidence poking holes into his claims. They will not need to use witness 9 in court.
But I bet some of those standing by Zimmerman now (like is Air Marshall buddy) will be rethinking which side they want to be on….
First, and this is the least important point: Witness 9 is 2 years younger than GZ, and she apparently would see him once a year, for a single day. Are we to believe that, when Witness 9 was 12, 13, 14, 15, and 16 years of age, and she was being driven to GZ’s house for a single day of visiting, that she did not have some responsibility to prevent herself being in a position where she could be molested? I don’t know if Witness 9’s story is true or false, but it has the aroma of bullshit from a person who is desperate for attention.
Separately, let us now operate on the premise that Witness 9 is telling the truth, and that GZ molested her once a year from GZ’s age 8 to GZ’s age 25ish:
WHAT significance does this have to do with ANYTHING?
I have stated, over and over, that we who defend GZ do so b/c we are interested in truth and justice. We are not emotionally attached to GZ. If he committed murder, let him pay a full price for that. A.J. says:
This quote completely reflects on A.J.’s emotional thinking, and does not reflect on us at all. “[W]hich side” we want to be on? We are on the side of searching for truth and justice, and we will not be abandoning our commitment to this side, thank you very much.
gcotharn,
The only stench around here is your denial that St Georgie could do anything wrong. Sounds like you idolize the cretin. You would protect him to your dying daze.
Clearly you don’t know shit about molestation cases.
Dude, leave and don’t let the door hit you on the way out. If you can’t deal with a charge like this without attacking the woman you are not the kind of person I want around here.
In case you missed it moron – I said this had nothing to do with the case. But at least I did not have to attack another GZ victim to make the point.
Did it ever occur to you her parents can collaborate the night GZ was confronted? Ever????
WTF? I suppose you also believe that women invite rape by their attire?
You’re one sick puppy….
AJ, do you remember the fiance’s testimony (pg 141 of the doc dump).
Don’t know if she knew of this relative’s accusations… but I’d say she called it right.
Corroborate.
You are unbelievably emotional re this case. And you are revealing yourself as a brittle person who is unwilling to admit to even small errors.
I am gone. Happily. There’s a dark vibe around here. I need to be gone.
gcothran,
You’re heavily bsing and trying to either ignore what W9 claimed or downplay it. Among other things, She is GZ’s cousin and never claimed she was molested by GZ until he was 25. The range was is from her 6 to he 8 to her 16 he 18. W9 made her first call to the cops 2 days after the TM killing and was later interviewed by them when she called back.
And as AJ pointed out her parents can collaborate the story about GZ being confronted at the restaurant and her sister can confirm that she told her that GZ molested her. On top of that her parents supposedly told his parents about it.
Also, both the prosecutors and the defense wanted this info withheld but under Fla.’s sunshine law the judge had to release it after he twice delayed doing so.
So AJ, once agian it is your biases, neuroses, preconceived notions, etc. that are on display.
“The only stench around here is your denial that St Georgie could do anything wrong. Sounds like you idolize the cretin. You would protect him to your dying daze.”
When are you going to get it thru your thick skull that there are many of us who 1) do not think GZ is a Saint, 2) are not idolizing him and protecting him, and 3) still manage to think that there was a rush to judgement, a politicization of the case, and a concerted effort by the media to destroy him.
Just because we do not believe in Saint Trevor Martin and we think there may be some element of truth to Zimmerman’s story, does not mean that we are in the tank for GZ. Some of us are actually trying to figure out what really went on. We are listening to all the evidence as it comes out, listening to other’s interpretations (hi AJ), and trying in our mind to put together a picture of how this all came about in reality – not your TV show black and white version of things.
“The content of this statement is not relevant to the issues of this case, and it would not be admissible in the state’s case in chief,” the defense team claimed in a motion filed on June 18.
The same motion argued against releasing the statements to the public, claiming there is a “substantial risk that public disclosure will lead to widespread hostile publicity which would substantially impair the defendant’s fair trial rights.”
In Monday’s statement, Zimmerman’s defense team pledged to defend their client against Witness 9’s claims and promised to release evidence against Witness 9’s statement in the coming weeks without revealing the nature of that evidence.
http://www.businessinsider.com/witness-9s-relationship-revealed-2012-7
Gcotharn, you were told to leave. Do so now.
Mata, I had forgot about he incident with the neigbor. Sadly it seems to fit St George’s dark side. Apparently both killing and molesting children is not a character flaw to some GZ defenders. I am sure which ones these are will become apparent when they take my general comments personally.
I do recall Serino mentioning her call two days in, before the story got legs in the media. Betcha she heard through the family grapevine and felt compelled to call the cops. She was not part of a PR effort as some want to think
Layman,
Show me were I was being ’emotional’ in posting about a breaking story and yet not copying over the details, or making a judgement one way or the other on it. In fact, I came down saying it had no bearing on the TM case.
Everything was logic analysis.
And yet, you took the bait about St George and attacked me, instead of assessing your own biases?
Hmm…
AJ:
I quoted your own words. I am talking about the tone of your posts but even more so your comments to others who are willing to give GZ at least the benefit of the doubt, who are willing to say that he IS innocent until PROVEN guilty. It was just a month or so back that you called me and others “groupies”.
Your comments about St. George weren’t bait and they weren’t even directed at GZ. They were directed at your readers who happen to disagree with you. And the sad thing is we agree with you about 90% – we just aren’t willing to go over the line and dismiss GZ’s account 100% and convict him without hearing all the evidence and weighing it.
Just a couple weeks ago I described a little empirical experiment I performed to see if I could explain the gunshot wound angle. All it got me was derision and criticism without anyone commenting on the merits. Minds are closed and attack mode begins.
If I made the same comments to you that you make to others in your responses you’d probably ban me.
Frogg 1, as is true in a legal cases, there are two arguments – one for the defense and one for the prosecution. The Judge then plays the referrer.
So I’m going to add the other two legs of the perspective triangle to your comment above, which only cites the defense’s argument about witness 9.
From Lester’s order, denying the request that the statement is not made public.
The error by some INRE Witness 9 is twofold. They assume it is about sexual behavior, and only about sexual behavior. To the first, molestation, and sexual crimes like rape, are not about sex… they are about power and authority. To the second, Witness 9’s statements also include her perspective on GZ’s view towards race.
Hence the reason that the state says the statement may become relevant if they attempt to portray that there may have been an underlying racist motivation. I think that is an error, but then I also have to consider what GZ’s ex-fiance said about the family’s attitude towards mixed racial marriages on pg 143, and marrying into a white family for financial status. While I don’t see this as a negative attitude towards race, there was certain a cognizance of race and perceived financial superiority on the parents’ part.
One thing is certain… Witness 9’s statement has an uncanny link to the ex-fiance’s observation about what she considered inappropriate behavior by GZ with the neighboring teenage girl. That would be circa 2004-05.
Leaving aside all the canonizing of either TM or GZ, done for effect, it cannot be stressed enough that Martin’s character is not on trial here. Despite what ever judgement calls people want to make on the teen… and there is no lack of negative calls there… only the events of that evening are in play. i.e., even if a scumbag serial killer is murdered by another loon, the character of the deceased does not exonerate the murderer.
Fact is, Martin was doing nothing wrong that evening, and he had full right to feel threatened by all of Zimmerman’s actions and behavior that night. The one who has the best SYG argument is Martin, however he is dead.
I sure end up in moderation a lot… but when it appears, just the correction in my sentence in the first paragraph… the Judge then plays the referee (not referrer).
Layman, INRE your “empirical experiment”, I had asked you why you had your son hold your wrists when, per GZ’s account, Martin never held Zimmerman’s. He says that both hands were either
1: covering his mouth and nose, suffocating hime (while he was screaming for help????), or
2: banging his head on the sidewalk.
I never heard back as to why you instructed your son to hold your wrists. If we use GZ’s account, all of his limbs were free to use, and his only limitation was with how and where Martin was supposedly “mounted”.
Strata I can only conclude that you are one sick puppy. Maybe you should get help, quickly, for your obsession.
As I said in another post, it is too bad that you have completely destroyed the credibility that you had on serious matters such as AGW. I used to quote the facts and data that you posted. I will certainly never do that again, because I would never trust that they were not tainted by your personal bias.
BTW, forgot to mention an update… Judge Lester has added O’Mara’s communications with Lester INRE the paypal funds and account to the document discovery on the Court’s website. This is one of the few times I agree with Jeralyn, that this is likely a way of him to cleanse his own files, adding them to the case file, because he will be stepping aside.
I figured he would… not that it will make much difference to the defense save make Zimmerman feel a bit better. All of the information, and the orders/rulings will remain in the file for any future judge.
OFg8r, all bloggers have opinions that are used as the construct of their posts. If you are looking for totally unbiased news, as opposed to commentary, good luck finding that anywhere these days.
Strikes me as you may be somewhat harsh because you disagree with AJ on this issue, but agree with him on others. That’s the way it goes… the Cordoba House, immigration… lots of issues find divides within conservative circles. If you are looking for the perfect commentator or blogger, agreeing with you at all times, you can only find that by looking in the mirror.
Hi Mata:
I didn’t answer your question because you seem to want to focus on an inconsequential detail rather than the overall object of the experiment.
You have to start somewhere – agreed. I guess I could have have asked him to put his hands on my face and cover my mouth but didn’t do so. Perfectly reinacting GZ’s story wasn’t the point. I layed on the ground, thumbs by ears, my son mounted on me holding my wrists, and his instructions were: “Keep me pinned down. Don’t let me throw you off me.” The entire point (as I explained) was to see if 1) I could “easily” get him off me (as so many self-styled experts have said it would be easy to do) and 2) to see if during a struggle the angle between our bodies would change.
The answers (as I explained then): 1) It was not easy to throw him off – I could not do so, and 2) We bounced all over the place. We rolled and shimmied side-to-side. His hands went from my wrists to my arms – one forearm went across my neck and face. He instinctively postured up on me to leverage his position and try to put his knee on my arm to hold me down. And several times in our 30 second struggle his body was parallel to mine, maybe 2-3 inches away. The angle did change!
My takeaway: Don’t be so anxious to dismiss GZ’s account out of hand 100%. It is in the realm of posibility. A lot of things occur during a struggle and the dynamics are complex – not simple. And my son wasn’t hitting me or kneeing me or stifling my breath.
And none of this let’s GZ off the hook for initiating the confrontation or causing TM’s death. It simply refutes AJ’s statement that the wound angle “PROVES” that GZ is a liar because physic don’t lie.
If reenacting GZ’s situation wasn’t the quest, Layman, then why bother doing it? Otherwise you are engaging in an exercise totally unrelated to the discussion of possibilities.
Layman, I agree with you about how the dynamics of the fight are not static and that things could be changed. Unless there is a video of the actual fight we will never know every little move that was made whether the fight was short or long.
Mata, 1. Layman did reenact GZ’s situation. He was on his back with someone mounted on him. His goal was to see how the body positions changed. AJStrata has said many times that 1 there was no way he could get his gun out and 2 that there is no way for the bullet to have the trajectory that it did while TM and GZ were in this position. Layman disproved #2. Read and figest the comments before jumping down the throats of people you haven’t previously agreed with.
As to the topic of this post, evidence of character is limited in criminal cases and from what I have found especially in FL. But, under the standards of evidence the characters of both the defendant and the victim can be brought up in court.
Only the Defense can bring up the character evidence of the defendant.
“In criminal actions, the Defendant can introduce character evidence when it is directed at a trait relevant to the crime. On the other hand, the prosecution cannot introduce evidence meant to prove the bad character of Defendant (or anyone else). The prosecutor can, however, rebut the Defendant’s evidence. For example, if a Defendant has been charged with a theft, it would be relevant for him/her to show that s/he has a reputation for honesty because it is inconsistent with the Defendant’s character to commit a theft crime.4 The character trait has to be relevant to the charge. Mere introduction of good character in general is not allowed.”
The prosecution can bring of acts or crimes that may point to bad character, but the cannot be introduced soley for that purpose. They must have a direct link the case.
“The prosecution is permitted to offer evidence of other crimes, wrongs or acts to prove motive, opportunity, intent, preparation, plan, knowledge, identity, or absence of mistake or accident,8 because it is probative of a material issue and is not directed at bad character or propensity.9 While this evidence may prove bad character, it cannot be offered solely for this purpose.10 This evidence is subject to several conditions including a time sensitive notice to the defense, a requirement for the proof to be clear and convincing and is subject to a Fla. Stat. §90.403 analysis.”
TM’s character can be a part of this case. Especially with regards to how that character affects conduct.
“A Defendant can also introduce evidence regarding a relevant trait of the victim (with some exceptions) and the prosecutor can rebut that evidence.6 Evidence of victim’s character can be proven by both reputation evidence and by specific instances of conduct.”
Further reading is at this link: http://ckcattorneys.com/Publications/Articles/Character%20Evidence%20in%20Civil%20and%20Criminal%20Cases.aspx