User:Bob K31416/STM

"Factually speaking, the Prosecutor has used the word, 'mislead' - not the word 'lie.' "

"To date, the Prosecutor has only said Witness 8 gave a 'MISLEADING' comment - which explains why Witness 8 has not been charged with perjury."

On March 20, Martin family attorney, Benjamin Crump revealed that Martin had been on the phone with a friend moments before he was shot. During an ABC News exclusive report, Crump allowed portions of his recorded interview with Martin's friend to be aired. She said that Martin told her that a man was watching him from his vehicle while talking on the phone before the man started following Martin. Martin told his friend at one point that he had lost the man but the man suddenly appeared again. The friend said that she told Martin to run to the townhouse where he was staying with his father and the father's girlfriend. She then heard Martin say, "What are you following me for?" followed by a man's voice responding, "What are you doing around here?" She said that she heard the sound of pushing before the phone went dead. She immediately attempted to call him back, but was unable to reach him. Crump stated that he would turn the information over to the Justice Department because "the family does not trust the Sanford Police Department to have anything to do with the investigation." Martin's friend was subsequently interviewed by state prosecutors on April 2, 2012. During her interview with the prosecutor, Martin's friend recounted her last phone call with Martin and added that Martin had described the man as "crazy and creepy," watching him from a vehicle while the man was talking on the phone. Martin's friend told prosecutors that she heard words like "get off, get off," right before she lost contact with Martin.

On March 6, 2013, prosecutors admitted that witness 8 had lied under oath, when she falsely testified that she had been in the hospital on the day of Martin's funeral.

Crump had refused to disclose the identity of Witness 8, stating that she was only 16, a minor at the time of the shooting, and asked the media to respect her privacy. It was subsequently revealed that she was actually 18 at the time when she said she was on the phone with Martin. According to the defense, her actual age had been edited out of previously released disclosures. Crump has denied intentionally giving any misleading statements about her age.

You misleading wrote:
 * On March 6, 2013, prosecutors admitted that Martin's girlfriend had lied under oath, when she falsely testified that she had been in the hospital on the day of Martin's funeral."

Yet, the fact is, the only "lawyers" using the word "lied" is Zimmerman's lawyers. The source you use makes the claim:
 * "prosecutors acknowledged that their star witness, the 19-year old former girlfriend of the late Florida teenager Trayvon Martin, lied under oath."

But your source has no source for any Prosecutor actually saying witness 8 "lied."

Factually speaking, the Prosecutor has used the word, "mislead" - not the word "lie."

Legally, there is a huge difference between "misleading" and "lying" which might explain why the Prosecutors have NOT said, nor admitted that Witness 8 lied. Legally, misleading is not perjury but lying is perjury.

I find interesting that no other "outlets" making the claim that the "Prosecutor" said she "lied" are extreme rightwinged blogs, like the Daily Caller and Breitbart.

To date, the Prosecutor has only said Witness 8 gave a "MISLEADING" comment - which explains why Witness 8 has not been charged with perjury.

You do NOT have a direct quote from the Prosecutor "admitting" witness 8 "lied"

FACT: 1) Prosecutors did NOT "admit" that Witness 8 "lied"

2) You do NOT provide a direct quote from the Prosecutor "admitting" witness 8 "lied" when you falsely claim "On March 6, 2013, prosecutors admitted that Martin's girlfriend had lied under oath

3) Archives from Orlando Sentinel show that the only lawyers saying witness 8 a "lied" are Zimmerman's lawyers.

I have added two other references to the witness 8 sub-section from CNN and Orlando Sentinel.
 * The CNN reference states:
 * 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 Orlando Sentinel states:
 * They had to publicly acknowledge that their star witness had lied under oath and had to answer questions about what they intend to do about it.
 * We include what the reliable sources have said about this matter and that is what is reflected in the article. If the "prosecution told a judge" and "they had to publicly acknowledge it", then we are correct in saying that "they admitted it".-- Isaidnoway (talk)  00:08, 12 March 2013 (UTC)

Camrone11598 - wow dude! you are very disingenuous. Wait, no I mean you are EXTREMELY disingenuous.

Your CNN quote is not a quote from the Prosecutor. (nice try)

Your Orlando Sentimental quote is NOT a quote from the Prosecutor either (nice try)

Camron, betsyross was saying you have no direct quote from the Prosecutor to support the wiki page comment: "On March 6, 2013, prosecutors admitted that Martin's girlfriend had '''lied under oath"

And neither one of your sources support the wiki page quote because neither of your sources are quoting the Prosecutor. Plus, neither of your source say that Prosecutors "admitted" witness 8 "lied."

I read your CNN and OSent source, and betsyross is correct when she wrote "the only lawyers saying witness 8 lied are Zimmerman's lawyers."

To - Isaidnoway You wrote - "We include what the reliable sources have said about this matter and that is what is reflected in the article. If the "prosecution told a judge" and "they had to publicly acknowledge it", then we are correct in saying that "they admitted it"", then we are correct in saying that "they admitted it" ... HA HA HA ... I am sorry to laugh at your comment there but no where in the sources you use do the Prosecutors "admit it".

From your sources, the Prosecutors never "admit" witness 8 "lied"

From your sources, Zimmerman's lawyers are the only ones quoted as saying witness 8 "lied."

"In fact, she lied," Defense attorney Don West said.

You don't even quote what the Prosecutor told the judge - (sigh)


 * I really don't know how to make this any clearer to you. Wikipedia is not saying the prosecutors admitted she lied, we are saying that the reliable sources reported that. CNN said specifically that: 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. So, the reliable source is saying that the prosecution told (admitted) to the judge that she (witness 8) lied about her whereabouts. You can parse the language all you want, try to discredit CNN as a reliable source, squawk about agendas, but I believe the way it is written is compliant with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines for paraphrasing what a reliable source has reported. If you are unhappy with the language, you can always open up a WP:RFC and see what other WP editors think, or try to gather a consensus to change the wording.-- Isaidnoway (talk)  01:33, 12 March 2013 (UTC)

On January 18, 2013, Mark O'Mara filed a motion for obtaining from ABC News and reporter Matt Gutman all their recordings, notes and correspondence related to Witness Number 8, Trayvon Martin's girlfriend. She was on the phone with Martin for 26 minutes just before he was shot, but the recording that Zimmerman's attorneys received from the authorities was only 13 minutes long.

On January 18, 2013, Mark O'Mara filed a new motion that included claims that evidence may have been edited. The motion asks ABC News to turn over video and audio involving the person known as "Witness Number 8."

ABC News and reporter Matt Gutman to surrender all their recordings, notes and correspondence related to one of the most important witnesses in the murder case against their client, Trayvon Martin's girlfriend.

Since its passage in 2005, the "stand your ground'' law has protected people who have pursued another, initiated a confrontation and then used deadly force to defend themselves. Citing the law, judges have granted immunity to killers who put themselves in danger, so long as their pursuit was not criminal, so long as the person using force had a right to be there, and so long as he could convince the judge he was in fear of great danger or death.

The Tampa Bay Times has identified 140 cases across the state in which "stand your ground'' has been invoked, and many involve defendants whose lives were clearly in jeopardy. But at least a dozen share similarities with what we know about the Trayvon Martin case, and they show the law has not always worked as its sponsors say they intended.

...

"Mr. Zimmerman's unnecessary pursuit and confrontation of Trayvon Martin elevated the prospect of a violent episode and does not seem to be an act of self-defense as defined by the castle doctrine" wrote state Rep. Dennis Baxley, the Ocala Republican who co-authored the law, in a column March 21 for FOXNews.com. "There is no protection in the 'stand your ground' law for anyone who pursues and confronts people."

Lawyers say the bill's supporters are either uninformed or politically motivated.

"That's not what the law says," said Steven Romine, a Tampa Bay lawyer who has invoked "stand your ground" successfully. "They might think that in their own heads, but it's just not true.

"If you're doing something legal, no matter what the act is, and you're attacked, it's in that moment that you have a right to stand your ground."

Prosecutors, who are generally critical of the law, agree.

According to Durell Peaden and Dennis Baxley, legislative sponsors of the Florida law, the law does not say that a person has a right to confront another. Peaden said, "When he [Zimmerman] said 'I'm following him', he lost his defense." However, according to a Tampa Bay News article, this is either an uninformed or politically motivated interpretation since the "Stand Your Ground" law has been successfully applied to those situations where the defendant confronted another.

Under Florida’s “stand your ground” law, those who believe that they killed or wounded someone while acting in self-defense under the standards of the 2005 law – no duty to retreat — can ask for a hearing at which a judge can toss the charges.

O’Mara stressed that the case will not depend on the Stand Your Ground law, which eliminates a person’s duty to retreat when facing grave danger. This incident, O’Mara said, is more of a classic self-defense case.

“He didn’t have the opportunity to retreat if he was on his back,” O’Mara said of Zimmerman.

Shooter of Trayvon Martin a habitual caller to cops

Hello, world! Hello, world!

Web_colors Template:Background color Template:Font color/doc

Zimmerman told police that

http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/1204/20/cnr.01.html

http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/1204/20/cnr.02.html

http://search.yahoo.com/search?ei=utf-8&fr=aaplw&p=zimmerman+bond+hearing

http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/2012-04-20/news/os-george-zimmerman-bond-hearing-20120420_1_special-prosecutor-angela-corey-robert-zimmerman-son

http://articles.cnn.com/2012-04-20/justice/justice_florida-zimmerman-details_1_robert-zimmerman-sanford-police-lieutenant-homeless-man?_s=PM:JUSTICE

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/blog/2012/apr/20/george-zimmerman-bond-hearing-live