Posted on 03/23/2013 8:04:39 AM PDT by Uncle Chip
In Update 22, “The Incredible Exploding Dee Dee,” I suggested that when Dee Dee was deposed by George Zimmerman’s attorney, Mark O’Mara, the information she provided had the potential to be even more harmful to the prosecution and to the members of the Scheme Team. The first part of the deposition was completed on Wednesday, March 20, and additional time was reportedly scheduled for Friday, March 22.
This is, in itself, unusual. A full day is usually more than enough for such matters. That another day is required suggests strongly that far more relevant evidence is being unearthed.
It is likely this information will be destructive not only to the prosecutor’s all but nonexistent case, but to the prosecutors, the Scheme Team–particularly Benjamin Crump–and others involved with them.
.......................
In a February 22, 2013 hearing, O’Mara petitioned the court to order a deposition of Crump. O’Mara sought to discover, among other information, why there were multiple interruptions in the audiotaped interview Crump conducted of Dee Dee on March 19, 2012. That interview, and Crump’s subsequent, hyperbolic statements regarding its content, were instrumental in securing Zimmerman’s eventual arrest.
Crump resisted that deposition, filing a sworn affidavit with the court in which he claimed that any interruptions were entirely innocent and no matters of substance were discussed while the recorder was off.
Apparently partially based on a non-skeptical reading of Crump’s deposition, on March 4, Judge Debra Nelson denied O’Mara’s motion to depose Crump, primarily citing the work product privilege (opposing attorneys are generally not required to submit to depositions, but this privilege is not absolute).
And this is where matters have suddenly become very, very interesting, and may, once again, blow up in the prosecution’s face just as Vesuvius blew up on Pompeii and Herculaneum in 79 AD. And once again, Dee Dee–the gift to the defense that just keeps on giving–is involved.
.......................
Now it seems clear that Mr. Crump has been caught in an obvious lie, a lie under oath–perjury. It is possible that this is only the first. It is further possible that truthful and complete testimony by Mr. Crump would unearth additional lies and the machinations of a racial grievance machine intent not only on convicting George and Shelly Zimmerman regardless of the lack of evidence against them, but on enriching the Scheme Team and its associates. I’ve little doubt that various worthies at the Department of Justice are also deeply involved in this case (the FBI doesn’t conduct investigations just for giggles).
We have only begun to scratch the surface of that particular rock. It will be interesting indeed to see what sort of creatures run for cover when and if it is overturned.
Should Judge Nelson order that Crump be deposed, one can expect two things: he will obfuscate and do his best to avoid answering direct questions. He left himself an out by claiming he remembers nothing, but that’s not likely to be convincing when he is confronted by his own voice coaching Dee Dee. One can, however, expect him to take the 5th.
Oh yes: the more trouble Mr. Crump finds himself in, the more fervently the race card will be played.
As I noted in Update 22, if Dee Dee took the 5th, the consequences for her and for the prosecution would be most unpleasant. It seems she has, instead, opted for disclosure, and if this assumption is accurate, it is Mr. Crump, the Scheme Team, and the prosecution, that have been caught, yet again, in another Dee Dee explosion.
The most delicious irony is: they lit the fuse, and may soon–figuratively–resemble the unfortunate former residents of Pompeii and Herculaneum.
“”Because the Holder Justice Department is involved. There is no truth connected to that Rogue agency and it’s subsidiaries.”
Exactly.
Holder is pure, unadulterated slime.
If he is not in jail before his sorry-*ssed life ends, we are indeed doomed.
The question most juicy to find out is whether the Martin family had an attorney at their depositions.
If Crump thinks that he is the opposing counsel then he should have been there.
If he knew that he had a conflict of interest then he would stay away.
If he can’t tell the difference then he is in trouble.
No matter what he decided to do he is in trouble.
Trayvon had plenty of time to run a couple hundred yards to his house... Saw 5’ 8” George get out of the car and decided he was gonna show him who was boss.
Black conservatives will be lynched without a show trial, and with great relish.
Why would there be any legal privilege here at all for Crump? He is not DeeDee’s attorney, and his clients, Trayvon Martin’s parents, are not facing any charges, nor will they. DeeDee is a witness whose credibility is at issue.
Work privilege my eye. Since when is suborning perjury privileged?
He was thinking of a Civil suit???...The idiot NOW knows that Zimmerman doesn't have sh**?? He has no one to sue!!
Dee Dee take the 5th?? Why...she didn’t commit a crime.
What stifles civil actions is a recognition of the statutory immunity that attaches to self defense. That recognition, in this case, will come from a judge. Until the recognition is asked for and either granted or denied, the civil plaintiffs are reluctant to sue, because, if they sue and immunity is recognized by the system, then they have to pay all costs of the legal (civil) defense.
They may have to dig deep, but there is tactical advantage to delay in responding. Judge Nelson has ruled that she will NOT entertain any motion, or at least not any from defense, that is filed less than 48 hours prior to hearing on the motion. If the state files at or close to that 48 hour cutoff, O'Mara won't have time to prepare and file the surrebuttal that he is entitled to under normal/regular motion practice.
Judge Nelson's rationale is that Crump is and will be opposing Zimmerman in legal actions. That makes him opposing counsel. Crump has stated that his intention is to sue Zimmerman. He could do that today, if he wanted to.
She may have given false testimony to investigators.
The best recourse for a person who does so is to come clean before the investigators sink too much time and effort into the case. In Zimmerman's case, my impression is that the state would rather not get to the truth, because the truth is an impediment to obtaining a conviction.
So then any lawyer, in order to avoid a deposition, would just have to claim that they intend to sue someone and they would be immune from deposition. They don't need a pending case, just the threat of one.
If they do that it will be the night before the trial. I suspect that they are so invested in this case they they cannot back down now.
They will more than likely double down on all the courtroom parlor tricks that got them this far and hope for a juror or two who lies on the jury applications.
Yes. I just finished reading O'Mara's Motion for Reconsideration, and it appears to lay out that test as well (paragraph 19 of the motion). However, the privilege is not absolute, and the privilege can be waived.
O'Mara's argument has several parts. First, that Crump is not opposing counsel. But, if Judge Nelson persists in finding that Crump -is- opposing counsel, he has waived privilege as to the facts surrounding his interaction with Witness 8 and subsequent production of evidence to various law enforcement agencies. And even if neither of those is found, by Judge Nelson, O'Mara describes how the evidence defense seeks is not protected, using the legal standard cited by Nelson (the Fireman's Fund, Shelton, and Boughten v. Cotter cases), in her March 4th Order.
One place that Nelson's logic breaks down is where she assumes that defense wants to depose Crump to learn about facts surrounding the shooting itself. But defense is not seeking that from Crump. It is seeking to learn the circumstances surrounding the appearance of Witness 8.
All the state needs, in order to get a hung jury (assuming Nelson does not find a preponderance of evidence in favor of justified self defense) is one liberal juror, or one black juror. Compared with Zimmerman, the state has infinite resources, and can keep going indefinitely.
You are arguing law. This is beyond law. This is politics.
bttt
. . . until Zimmerman gets finished suing NBC for defaming him, that is - then whatever Crump might get from Zimmerman would just be added to the tort that Zimmerman could charge NBC with. IMHO Zimmerman would be in his rights to embed that claim within his tort claim against NBC, even if he won a judgment before the result of any suit against Zimmerman.And IMHO it is impossible for anyone to seriously believe that NBC did not slander Zimmerman even if Zimmerman were convicted of murder 2. If for no other reason than the existence of “hate crime” laws . . .
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.