In the first line of his Response, Crump describes himself as “non party”. If this means in legalese what it means in common sense, he has eliminated the Judge’s original excuse for letting him slide (i.e., that Crump MIGHT represent the Martin family in litigation they MIGHT file some day). If I read his Response with sufficient care, nowhere does Crump claim to represent the Martins or anyone else.
If Crump does if fact represent the Martins, Witness 8, or others in this case, the Judge should require him to present a signed agreement as evidence thereof. If Crump does present such evidence, and it shows a contingency fee arrangement for a future lawsuit (and it would, since the Martin’s have no $), then Crump has a financial motive to create the evidence, which further taints it.
I wish O’Mara would quit being coy and plainly state to the Court that his client has a right to pursue all reasonable lines of defense; that one of them is that testimony material to the charging GZ was manufactured, for either political, financial, or personal motives, with substantial and notorious involvement of Mr. Benjamin Crump; and that the defense has every right and reason to depose him about the circumstances under which he “developed” that testimony. Crump is the only person in possession of the full facts and is necessary to an effective defense.
"The reason Witness 8 gave for lying to Mr. Crump was that Trayvon Martin's mother, Sybrina Fulton, was present during the interview. Similarly, Witness 8 stated that she told Mr. de la Rionda the same lie because during Mr. de la Rionda's sworn interview of Witness 8, for unknown reasons, Ms. Sybrina Fulton was sitting next to her, and Witness 8 similarly felt the need to deceive as to the reason for not going to the wake or funeral."
Is Witness 8 saying that Sybrina was present with her on the other end of the phone during the interview or what???
Because Ben Crump in his affidavit states that Sybrina was with him on his end of the phone -- not the other end.
This really needs to be sorted out because if Sybrina was with DeeDee on her end of the phone, then it seems that we may have another Crump lie under oath.
I think defense counsel pretty well knows that Mr. Crump's purpose in contacting Dee Dee was not to have her tell him what happened, but rather to have him tell her what "happened". I don't think the purpose of the deposition is to get the truth from him, but rather to put his lies on the record.
The state has no evidence whatsoever outside the testimony of a witness whose reliability so well shot that any reasonable juror would find reason to believe that she might be lying [and would thus have to acquit]. Unfortunately, because some jurors are unreasonable, GZ would risk a hung jury unless his attorneys can establish on the record that her testimony on certain matters has been sufficiently tampered with, by persons hostile to GZ, as to be unreliable.
I suspect that the best prospect for a "peaceful" resolution would be for the case to go to trial but for Witness Eight to refuse to show up for so long that the judge has no choice but to throw out the case, extending out continuances long enough that mobs shift their ire to Witness Eight [even those blinded by race hatred would probably recognize that the state couldn't proceed without Witness Eight; they might want the state to push for continuances for while in the hope of managing to bring her in, but eventually I think they'd want the trial to be over and done with]. Too bad there's no way GZ's attorneys can plan on such a resolution, since it would save everyone a lot of time and money.