O'Mara's Latest Motions: The State Has Some Explaining to Do

In the George Zimmerman case, Mark O'Mara has filed two fairly explosive motions. You can read them here and here.

In addition to withholding the report on the analysis of the phone found at the scene alleged to have been Trayvon's, it turns out the records given to the defense by the investigator who downloaded the information from the phone's sim card don't match those turned over by the State.

Also check out Officer Joseph Santiago's chronology of events concerning the phone.

There's lots more in these motions I don't have time to get into now like issues regarding the Dee Dee (witness 8) interview. O'Mara says he will depose the Martin family lawyers and public relations adviser. Diwataman has a summary of the motions.

If the state has been playing fast and loose with its discovery obligations as alleged by O'Mara, and it seems he has the documentation to back it up, the state has some serious explaining to do.

< Monday Morning Open Thread | Monday Afternoon Open Thread >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

  • Display: Sort:
    WOW (none / 0) (#1)
    by Cashmere on Mon Oct 15, 2012 at 04:16:57 PM EST
    The plot thickens......

    Question: (none / 0) (#2)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Mon Oct 15, 2012 at 04:19:53 PM EST
    Did the State download its copy of phone records directly from Trayvon Martin's phone or his carrier / service provider, or from the SIM card itself? Therein may lie the apparent discrepancy.

    Aside from the SIM card, a cell phone can have an additional internal memory microchip which can store records and numbers beyond those contained in the SIM card. I learned that when I transferred my SIM card from one phone (Nokia) to another (Samsung), only to discover that almost 20% of my directory was missing. When I put the SIM card back into the original Nokia phone, all those missing numbers re-appeared.

    The representative from T-Mobile later explained it all to me, and said that when you have a Nokia phone that is two years old or more, it's important to manually synchronize your phone with your online account, to ensure that the integrity of your stored and important data remains current and intact. Newer model phones (2010 and later) don't have to be prompted to synchronize; they do so automatically.

    Bomb Shell ;) (none / 0) (#14)
    by LeaNder on Sat Oct 20, 2012 at 11:54:19 AM EST
    Thanks Donald,

    after I finished reading Angeala Corey's response I wondered if this "conspiracy against GZ" could reflect increasingly raw nerves. When is the SYG hearing? Is it close?

    This little bit by Diwata Man puzzles me:

    The story that says it all is in regards to Trayvon's supposed cell phone, which allow me to remind you that no evidence to date has been released which shows that there was a phone found at the scene that Trayvon was using.

    The cell phone found on the scene wasn't Trayvon Martin's at all? So the pin code Tracy Martin gave to them, was inserted as a red herring? Now that's really big news. Diwata surely is much more well read on the case than I am.


    This could be laying the groundwork... (none / 0) (#3)
    by Jello333 on Mon Oct 15, 2012 at 06:35:24 PM EST
    ... not only for this case to be dismissed, but could also be really bad news for certain individuals. (I suppose I should say, this is my OPINION.) Seems to me that if certain people refuse to be deposed, and others refuse to turn over certain info, the case will collapse. And further, it looks like certain people may have already committed some less-than-legal acts... or if they haven't yet, they may be forced to make some tough decisions when it comes time to talk to MOM/West.

    Just moving the case along (none / 0) (#4)
    by cboldt on Mon Oct 15, 2012 at 06:53:11 PM EST
    From what we've seen, the state's case is thin (at best), and the typical remedy for errors in collecting and disclosing evidence is to grant a motion to suppress the evidence at trial.  Sometimes, that evidence is of a nature that suppressing it has the effect of making the case impractical to prosecute.  I don't think that is the case here, and I don't think O'Mara is working with an eye on suppressing the evidence he is attempting to obtain.

    If the prosecution suppresses exculpatory evidence all the way through trial, that is, violates the Brady Rule, and the trial concludes in a conviction and sentencing, the most that defendant is entitled to is a new trial.

    If people refuse to testify or produce evidence, they risk being held in contempt of court.  I don't have a sense that any of the state's witnesses are on the verge of recanting.


    I don't know (none / 0) (#5)
    by Jello333 on Mon Oct 15, 2012 at 07:01:37 PM EST
    I very much think we're in for a real circus when it comes time for MOM to interview Crump and Dee Dee (and maybe even BDLR, but I doubt it). I'm still not certain about the rules here, so what I'm about to say may not be allowed. (If this comment gets deleted, please let me know why, ok?) But in my opinion, we're gonna eventually find out that a good part of Dee Dee's testimony was created by Ben Crump (and maybe others). And of course the phone records (incl. ping logs if available) are gonna play a part in that, too.

    I would just assume ... (none / 0) (#6)
    by Yman on Mon Oct 15, 2012 at 09:05:44 PM EST
    ... that the reason your comment gets deleted is because - even with the "opinion" qualifier - you are accusing Crump and "Dee Dee" of committing crimes without the slightest bit of evidence.

    Guess we'll see ...


    I don't know Yman (none / 0) (#8)
    by Slayersrezo on Mon Oct 15, 2012 at 11:12:38 PM EST
    As dispositions are taken, this kind of thing might almost be part of "evidence" or the case now. Certainly soon, because I've independently come to the same conclusion: some of the DeeDee stuff is very suspicious.

    That's the nice thing about ... (none / 0) (#12)
    by Yman on Tue Oct 16, 2012 at 06:21:44 AM EST
    ... "suspicions".

    They don't have to be based on any actual evidence.

    ... or even "almost" evidence.


    hi cbold (none / 0) (#15)
    by LeaNder on Sat Oct 20, 2012 at 12:19:05 PM EST
    according to De La Rionda (sorry not Corey as I suggested above),  all evidence was delivered by hand, which I suppose includes signatures at reception. The evidence concerning the phone, she says contains nothing he has not received or seen before I rely on these two passages:

    p. 9, Statement by De la Rionda after Corey's gag order:

    During Brenton's deposition two reports were provided to counsel. The reports don't provide much information other than identifying data and photos of the outside of the telephone, The other items mentioned by Defense Counsel are empty files or have non-germane information.

    page 5:

    5. The State arranged for Defense Counsel to look at all the physical evidence at FDLE (Florida Department of Law Enforcement, Orlando office), in the presence of the FELE personnel, State Attorney Investigators, and the undersigned. Defense Counsel spent over two hours looking at, touching and photographing whatever evidence they wanted to examine.

    I assume the cell phone is part of the physical evidence. Thus all withhold was the "identifying data", whatever that means. The phonenumber, the provider?


    Request That Judge Oversee Discovery (none / 0) (#7)
    by RickyJim on Mon Oct 15, 2012 at 09:25:51 PM EST
    I was amused that O'Mara made the request that a "senior" judge oversee discovery.  In Europe, a judge always runs discovery.  If the request is granted, what role will the judge play in the deposition process?

    Deposition decisons (none / 0) (#9)
    by MJW on Mon Oct 15, 2012 at 11:35:20 PM EST
    From the motion, I think O'Mara intends that the judge would attend the depositions. O'Mara says of the judge, "he would be able to quickly address objections made during depositions that might otherwise result in termination of the deposition pending a ruling by the court." At a minimum, that would require the judge be on call.

    Code of the West (none / 0) (#10)
    by MJW on Tue Oct 16, 2012 at 12:04:01 AM EST
    I probably should have said "West intends," since the motion is in his name, not O'Mara's. I assume, though, they both intend the same thing.

    Can... (none / 0) (#11)
    by DebFrmHell on Tue Oct 16, 2012 at 01:52:10 AM EST
    Crump or Jackson be deposed in regards to Dee Dee?  I don't know that he is actually her lawyer.  I only know that he represents Sybrina Fulton and Tracy Martin.  TO ME, it would be a conflict of interest to serve as a lawyer for both.

    Julison is in PR.  He should have no problems there, IMO.

    That West/MOM anticipate problems is most likely a candidate for The Biggest Understatement of the Year Award.

    I am willing to bet all of the Big Lawyers from the Media will be backing Team MOM for this.

    Interesting... (none / 0) (#13)
    by Mr Natural on Tue Oct 16, 2012 at 06:55:46 AM EST
    ... A lot of people rushed to judgement on this case.  "A high tech lynching."