Skip to comments.Chief witness in Trayvon Martin case lied under oath
Posted on 03/11/2013 7:22:45 PM PDT by Olog-hai
The states chief witness in the Trayvon Martin murder case lied under oath, prosecutors say.
The young woman who says she was on the phone with Martin when he encountered George Zimmerman lied about her whereabouts at another time, the prosecution told a judge Tuesday.
The woman, whose name has not been released, had told prosecutors that she was in the hospital on the day of Martins funeral. The defense then sought her medical records.
In court on Tuesday, the state said the woman, known as Civilian Witness 8, was not in the hospital, so there are no such records to be turned over.
(Excerpt) Read more at cnn.com ...
This is about a week old.
Takes CNN that long to get on the stick.
Four days. Didn’t see it or an equivalent posted, though; used both the site’s search feature and external search engines.
I’m pretty sure this Judge will rule the lies are not material, and admit the testimony.
Angela Corey is an enemy combatant. She belongs in Gitmo. Corrupt officials such as her do more damage than any terrorist.
The way things are going, the judge will probably accept testimony from Al Sharpton: “I saw that white KKK dude murder that poor kid with my own eyes!”
Link I used to produce this list:
For an example - think back to the woman who was an eyewitness to OJ Simpson in the white Bronco making abrupt traffic maneuvers at a point between the murder scene and his home, moments after the murders are believed to have taken place. She accepted $5,000 from a tabloid television program for an interview weeks after the murders, and with that, was never even called by the prosecution. Her credibility was considered vulnerable because she took money for her story.
Here, it's not a matter of vulnerability it is simple truthfulness. This explains why the stand your ground hearing request was withdrawn. The time to drop this bomb is at trial.
Like I said, was probably slack with the keywords.
Heh. She'll be in the hospital, I'm sure. But you're correct, it will take a real trial for the lies to have any negative effect. As of now, they're still taking her at her word about what she heard on the cell phone even though she's lied about almost everything else.
Let me know when Angela Corey is in handcuffs, that would send a tingle down my leg.
I am also convinced that the investigators, as well as the Chief of Police, should be doing prison time over this, NOT George Zimmerman.
to quote hillary, “what difference does it make?”. This guy will never get a fair trial because of all the threats of violence.
Breaker Morant got a fairer trial than Zimmerman will get.
So, she didn’t lie about the actual incident, but she lied about where she was during a funeral? Why is her being at a hospital during a funeral relevant? Is that illegal?
How do you know she didn’t lie about the actual incident? Even though she’s a liar you know for sure she was honest about the actual incident?
Nick, you’ve got a lot of catching up to do on this issue. I suggest that you go over to the Conservative Treehouse at
and read up. The fact is that witness 8 may be a figment of the imagination of the “Scheme Team” as they are known at the CTH. Ben Crump first presented this supposed witness as a 16 year old girl who needed her privacy because she was so distraught over Trayvon’s death that she couldn’t even attend his funeral. He played that terrible quality recording of her speaking for the press, and then Angela Corey’s office got involved with her. The problem was, by the time she sat down with prosecutor Bernie de la Rionda for her deposition a few days or weeks later, she had suddenly become 18 years old, and she doesn’t sound AT ALL like the same girl that was on the tape that Ben Crump played. How do we know? We know because Ben Crump had allowed ABC reporter Matt Gutman to be present when he interviewed the supposed witness over the phone. Even though the recording that Ben Crump turned over was of piss-poor quality, Gutman was recording, too, and in recent days, ABC posted part of that recording on their website. When you listen to the two girls, it doesn’t sound at all like the same girl. Listen for yourself. This is a combination of two recordings - the first girl is the one on the Matt Gutman audio recording of Ben Crump’s phone call with the first Witness 8. The 2nd girl you hear is the one who actually showed up for a deposition with Bernie de la Rionda.
Because there is some question as to the very identity of Witness 8, the defense has asked the judge repeatedly to force the prosecution to give them her address, which the judge has so far refused to do, stating that they can get her address from her when they depose her. This puts them in the position of wondering who will actually be sitting down before them to testify - the assertive girl that was on the Crump/Gutman recording, or the much more illiterate wallflower that appeared before Bernie de la Rionda.
Because witness 8 has now been caught in at least one lie, and her deposition with BDLR is a horrid mishmash of obviously coached falsehoods, the folks at the Treehouse are convinced that she will never see the inside of the courtroom. There is too much on the line for those who have foisted this lie onto the court, so they will find a way to keep her out of the proceedings. The trouble with that is that Angela Corey’s Affadavit of Probable Cause was almost entirely based on the “testimony” of witness 8, so it would seem that without witness 8, the state has no probable cause to even continue the prosecution.
I don’t know that she didn’t lie, but according to this article, no one is claiming she lied about that. I just don’t understand this hospital/funeral thing.
If she doesn't exist, then the theory is that they don't intend to have her testify at the trial. Couldn't the defense subpoena her, if the prosecution doesn't I assume, even in Florida, if a prosecutor has a witness that doesn't exist, they are basically history.
So the court could dismiss the case without merit, and the prosecution will get a “do-over” to refile charges. This case won’t even have a chance to go to trial until 2015.
The witness statement goes to the question of the witness’s alleged relationship with the deceased, Trayvon Martin. The witness made certain statements regarding the actions of Trayvon Martin on the night of the incident, and she characterized those actions as being innocent in nature and intent. If the witness has lied about her own relationship with the deceased and her own intent when giving her statement about the events of that night, then her credibility in her statements about Trayvon Martin’s actions also face a lack of credibility.
In the absence of credibility from this witness, her statements may not impeach contradictory testimony from George Zimmerman and from other witnesses contradicting her testimony.
That all makes sense, but it still doesn’t tell me why her being at the hospital during the funeral is relevant? Unless you are saying she claimed she was so upset by his death that she was hospitalized, but in reality she barely knew him. In which case, why was she trying insert herself in the case anyway.
“why was she trying insert herself in the case anyway.” The defense would want to present the jury with the doubt that his witness could be lying for the purpose of obtaining a prosecution and judgement against the defendant using invented familiarity with the details of the event. In other words, she prejudicially assumed she knew Zimmerman was guilty, and she was determined to see that Zimmerman would not escape punishment if her testimony, invented or real, could be used to do so.
If a jury becomes aware of this problem with the credibility of the witness, the jury could use the lack of credibility as reasonable doubt of the defendant’s guilt.
The prosecution has a problem, because this witness testimony was usedd to arraign and indict Zimmerman and bring about the trial. If the prosecution were to omit this witness testimony at trial altogether, the whole case could be in jeapordy before it eveer goes to trial. Consequently, the prosecutor will attempt to limit the damage to credibility and do everything possible to avoid the jury becoming aware of the problem with this witness credibility.
I’ve seen problems with her witness testimony from the very beginning, because it seems to contradict the 9/11 recordings and Zimmerman’s testimony. When you look at Google Maps with the aerial view and Street View while listening to the 9/11 recordings, there simply is not enough time and space for her testimony to be true. Based on the elapsed times and the conversation on the 9/11 recordings, the only way Trayvon Martin could have disappeared around one corner of the building complex and then met Zimmerman retracing his steps toawards his vehicle on the other return side of the building complex was by deliberately running around the buildings to intercept Zimmerman. There appears to be no way possible for Zimmerman to have intercepted Trayvon Martin or preventing Trayvon Martin from entering his residence.
The testimony from this witness seems to completely omit the Trayvon Martin movements we heard about on the 9/11 recording.
It's relevant for several reasons:
1] It's an identifier since people who supposedly spoke with DeeDee1 said that she was in the hospital during the wake/funeral. If she was not in the hospital then she is either not DeeDee1 or not the person that these other people spoke with.
2] It's relevant because the prosecuting attorney deemed it relevant in his deposing of her. It wasn't information that she volunteered but information that he specifically requested of her. If it wasn't relevant he would not have asked the question and pursued the answer.
3] It's a verifiable lie, meaning that documents would exist and be provable one way or the other.
4] If she would lie on something like this that is "irrelevant" yet provable, then what else is she lying about that is relevant but not provable.
CNN now has a new category of the oppressed, "young woman". Since she lied about being under 18, they couldn't call her "under age", so she became a "young woman" to "help" readers understand she was young. It's just like the picture they printed, again, of Martin when he was 12. They could have just as easily printed the picture of him with his gang tattoos. Biased???
Yes, it is quite possible that witness 8 was a figment of Benjamin Crump’s imagination, with her part played by at least two actresses. The entire story that she tells seems made up to fit the “facts” that were publicly available (some of which were wrong) at the time she told it. However, they don’t necessarily line up with reality. Add to that the fact that the girl who testified to the prosecutors was clearly heavily coached, saying things like “oh, you want that?” She also said something very strange about her cell phone when asked if it was in her name. She said, “Now, it should be now in my name.” At the time of the shooting, the cell phone number in question was tied to a prepaid phone and had no name associated with it.
Can you begin to understand why the defense has so many questions about witness 8?
Incidentally, Mary Cucher is another witness whose recollection of that night’s events matches up with the false information that was in the media, rather than the reality of what happened that night. Several days after the shooting, when Trayvon’s picture was all over the news, she came out and said that she remembered that it was a little boy screaming that night. The problem for her is that Trayvon was no little boy, but anyone who was following the news at that point thought that he was because of the pictures that were on television and the front page of the newspapers. She clearly lied to both make herself more important to the case and to make sure that justice (as she saw it) was carried out.
The Trayvon Matin Case, Update 22: The Incredible Exploding Dee Dee
This case is over right now. The prosecution case is dead and they know it. They're just trying to prop up a corpse.