Am I wrong in wondering if Klayman changed his name from Clayman?
Bear_Nenno, do you also want to know if the allegations about the moon being made of green cheese are true? Just the fact that a person exists is not evidence that that person therefore committed perjury.
You said what I wanted to say – much more diplomatically.
THX
“Yeah, that’s true, but some people are saying that men are born with boobs and women are born with penises! Now, I think we need to consider BOTH SIDES of the equation here, just to be fair and balanced.”
Zimmerman? That reminds me, time to do my 2020 Death Pool list.
No, I don’t need to know if allegations about the moon being made of green cheese are true. But if a star witness is put on the stand claiming to be someone else, then that is an issue. I can’t understand why that is not an issue for you. Is it because you believe that the girl name Diamond Eugene, claiming to be Rachel’s half-sister and Treyvon’s girlfriend is a liar?
Or is it because you believe that Rachel really happens to go by the same name as her sister, and lied about her age in the initial interview for understandable reasons?
I don’t understand what you’re saying. If a witness says “I am John Smith, aged 22, and the victim’s boyfriend. I was on the phone with him and this is what I know” then, during court testimony the witness says “actually my name is Bill and I’m 24. John Smith is my nickname”
Then someone comes forward saying, “I am John Smith. I am 22. I am actually the victim’s boyfriend. I gave my statement to the defense but I didn’t want to testify, so my brother Bill took the stand as me instead”
That’s kind of a big deal if true. Instead of determining the truth, everyone seems to be focused instead at bashing Zimmerman, Klayman and Joel. I don’t really care about the bashing. I’m not defending their actions or their character. But I don’t think it should distract from the truth. Just because Zimmerman did something wrong doesn’t mean that the defense attorney and/or the victim’s mom didn’t also do something wrong. This would be a gross miscarriage of justice if true.
It takes two seconds to find out the composition of the moon. In contrast, I’ve searched for two days now trying to find someone saying that Brittany Diamond Eugene is not actually Rachel’s half sister.
Starting a transgender debate in a thread about the Treyvon Martin shooting? I don’t get it. Plus, this seems to agree with what I am saying. Regardless of how ridiculous something sounds, there is absolutely nothing wrong with hearing both sides. Nothing. And in the end, we might learn something that we never would have believed otherwise. Like in your example, people who finally grew up and considered BOTH SIDES learned that, yes, sometimes women are born with penises.
I’ve also been unable to find anything about what this Diamond Eugene has actually stated. That is also strange. I may have to watch this documentary/propaganda film this weekend to see.
It is an odd situation. Zimmerman is universally detested and there’s no question he shot Martin.
But any allegations of witness tampering need to be looked at. The integrity of our courts are a bigger concern than the unlikeable plaintiff.
A half sister might be hard to verify. She could be the progeny of a short term relationship from over 20 years ago.
Although they should be able to at least determine if two young girls grew up in that household. Establishing the existence of a half sister is step one. Rachel insisted that Diamond Eugene was a pseudonym.
Umm, I think you prosecutor not defense attorney. If the allegation is true it affects Zimmerman not one bit because Zimmerman wasn’t convicted based on this testimony. Furthermore an allegation of this type against the prosecutor is a criminal charge which ain’t handled by a civil lawsuit.
‘A gross miscarriage of justice if true’? What do you want, Zimmerman’s acquittal overturned and the court enter a verdict of extra not guilty?
CMC fnord!
Yes - but he could claim that false testimony reflected badly on him, caused people to dislike him, say mean things about him, etc.
Is this a serious question? If you don’t think the use of fake witnesses is a miscarriage of justice, then we’re just not going to agree, I guess.
I don’t care for Zimmerman to get anything. But if the allegations are true, the people and agencies should be held accountable for their actions. I don’t think they should get a pass just because they weren’t successful in getting a conviction.
Again, I am in no way saying this is all true and trying to argue in favor of this lawsuit. But IF this is true it’s a big deal.
You seem to be saying that even if it’s true it isn’t a big deal because Zimmerman didn’t go to jail. Do, you think the kind of conduct alleged in the lawsuit is okay for a prosecutor?
I’d suggest that I don’t share your understanding of the phrase ‘miscarriage of justice’.
There was no miscarriage of justice, the state had a case that could have/should have/would have gone to trial with or without this ‘witness’.
If Zimmerman had been convicted based on the testimony of a fake witness? That’s a miscarriage of justice!
If the allegations are true, the people and agencies should be held accountable for their actions in the correct place, in a criminal trial not by a civil lawsuit.
They don’t get a pass because Zimmerman was found not guilty, Zimmerman shouldn’t get a payday because he wasn’t found guilty.
What exactly are Zimmerman’s damages that are worth 100 million dollars without a finding that the, lets call it, witness tampering actually happened?
This is IMHO one of those cases where a civil suit should not precede a criminal trial because of the evidence standards involved in the respective courts. Again IMHO, there are cases where a criminal conviction should be the only evidence you need to have your civil case go directly to judgment and the only question left is what damages you should be awarded. Being convicted of prosecutorial misconduct of the type being hinted at here would be one of those case types.
The preponderance of evidence is, in many people’s opinion, that agents of the State of California tampered with the blood and DNA evidence in the case of State v Simpson, without convictions, IMHO, OJ shouldn’t get a dime either.
Where did I suggest it was? I just want it to go to criminal court before it goes to civil.
CMC fnord!
As if anything could make folks dislike him more than his behavior and personality.
Fair enough. My understanding was that it applies to any improper legal act; any incident in which justice is not properly carried out. A quick search on this found only one cite that shared my understanding.
If the allegations are true, there likely would not have been an arrest without this witness. The police and state attorney had already reviewed all of the available evidence and decided that the shooting was in self defense.
The Martin family hired civil rights attorney Benjamin Crump to take on the case. It wasn’t until a month later, after the interview with the girlfriend, that the the Martin’s attorney, Benjamin Crump, “declared to the press, ‘we have all the evidence now!’ and 'arrest George Zimmerman for the murder of Trayvon Martin!”. With this new evidence, he successfully convinced the state to charge Zimmerman. Zimmerman was acquitted of Murder and Manslaughter, and was later found not liable in the civil case.
It’s interesting that this case was not a Stand Your Ground case. It was successfully defended as a self-defense case. I didn’t know that; or I had forgotten that.
Sure. But I can’t imagine any authorities wanting to open up that can of worms. A finding in civil court would hopefully force them to take action and pursue this criminally. Or. . . this whole thing is tried in civil court and found to be bullshit, in which case Zimmerman and his attorneys will STFU. Either way, it’s a win. But I think the important thing is that the case is heard. Some posters were saying they hope it gets thrown out without being heard. I’d hate to see that happen. That would just strengthen the conspiracy theory.
If anyone is actually interested in reading the allegations, the Complaint can be found here:
Yay!!! I’m not named as a defendant.
Um, if this were true, wouldn’t it have come up in the original trial? It’s not like it was a low-profile trial where witnesses weren’t being double-checked.
Don’t fret; we’re ALL un-indicted co-conspirators somewhere or other. Your time will come soon enough. Patience, grasshopper.
Meanwhile, be aware of your rights as a us citizen. You have the right to speak and be ignored. You have the right to be disenfranchised or suppressed. You have the right to kill or be killed, including by starvation or overdose. Anything you do, say, or think will be used against you. You have the right to spin in circles till you fall over. Enjoy, citizen!