Chief witness in Trayvon Martin case lied under oath

The state’s 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 Martin’s 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. …

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.

“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 still doesn’t tell me why her being at the hospital during the funeral is relevant?

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.

"The young woman who says she was on the phone with Martin......."

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.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.