Breaking today was the story that witnesses in the Trayvon Martin/George Zimmerman case had changed their stories between the time they gave original statements to the police and when FDLE investigators interviewed them.

“Evidence released last week in the second-degree-murder case against George Zimmerman shows four key witnesses made major changes in what they say they saw and heard the night he fatally shot 17-year-old Trayvon Martin in Sanford.

Three changed their stories in ways that may damage Zimmerman. A fourth abandoned her initial story, that she saw one person chasing another. Now, she says, she saw a single figure running.

They were reinterviewed in mid-March, after Sanford police handed the case off to State Attorney Norm Wolfinger. The case changed hands again when Gov. Rick Scott passed it on to a special prosecutor. Zimmerman was arrested April 11 on a charge of second-degree murder.

Here are the key ways in which their stories changed.

Witness 2

A young woman who lives in the Retreat at Twin Lakes community, where Trayvon was shot, was interviewed twice by Sanford police and once by the Florida Department of Law Enforcement.

She told authorities that she had taken out her contact lenses just before the incident. In her first recorded interview with Sanford police four days after the shooting, she told lead Investigator Chris Serino, “I saw two guys running. Couldn’t tell you who was in front, who was behind.”

She stepped away from her window, and when she looked again, she “saw a fistfight. Just fists. I don’t know who was hitting who.”

A week later, she added a detail when talking again to Serino: During the chase, the two figures had been 10 feet apart.

That all changed when she was reinterviewed March 20 by an FDLE agent. That time, she recalled catching a glimpse of just one running figure, she told FDLE Investigator John Batchelor, and she heard the person more than saw him.

“I couldn’t tell you if it was a man, a woman, a kid, black or white. I couldn’t tell you because it was dark and because I didn’t have my contacts on or glasses. … I just know I saw a person out there.”

Witness 12

A young mother who is also a neighbor in the town-home community never gave a recorded interview to Sanford police, according to prosecution records released last week. She first sat down for an audio-recorded interview with an FDLE agent March 20, more than three weeks after the shooting.

During that session, she said she saw two people on the ground immediately after the shooting and was not sure who was on top, Zimmerman or Trayvon.

“I don’t know which one. … All I saw when they were on the ground was dark colors,” she said.

Six days later, however, she was sure: It was Zimmerman on top, she told trial prosecutor Bernie de la Rionda during a 21/2-minute recorded session.

“I know after seeing the TV of what’s happening, comparing their sizes, I think Zimmerman was definitely on top because of his size,” she said.

Witness 6

This witness lived a few feet from where Trayvon and Zimmerman had their fight. On the night of the shooting, he told Serino he saw a black man on top of a lighter-skinned man “just throwing down blows on the guy, MMA-style,” a reference to mixed martial arts.

He also said the one calling for help was “the one being beat up,” a reference to Zimmerman.

But three weeks later, when he was interviewed by an FDLE agent, the man said he was no longer sure which one called for help.

“I truly can’t tell who, after thinking about it, was yelling for help just because it was so dark out on that sidewalk,” he said.

He also said he was no longer sure Trayvon was throwing punches. The teenager may have simply been keeping Zimmerman pinned to the ground, he said.

He did not equivocate, though, about who was on top.

“The black guy was on top,” he said.

Another witness gave an amateur psychological workup on Zimmerman saying that directly after the shooting he acted as though nothing happened. None of these changes really affect anything and no doubt the defense will find a why to use the change to their advantage.

But there is more. According to two witnesses who spoke directly to me by phone today told me that FDLE investigators used strong armed tactics to get witnesses to change testimony.

It’s a investigator tactic. During my time it these kinds of tactics occurred a lot. In the vernacular it’s called “guidance”. Witnesses told me that investigators used such guidance and in one case actually threatened the witness with charges for “obstruction” if they didn’t “cooperate fully” with the investigation.

“I really felt that no matter what I told them I saw and heard, they had a story in mind that they wanted me to articulate, not what I witnessed”

Yes witnesses change their minds sometimes after time, but not in large groups. When you see this happen it almost always means that witnesses tampering took place.

Of course these witnesses want to remain anonymous

• 0 Comments

A promise. Harass one more conservative blogger and you’re done. Here’s more on the terrorist known as Brett Kimberlin.

Solidarity, but muscle too. If Brett thinks I’m kidding, try me.

• 0 Comments

Best of the season so far.

• 0 Comments

More of that nuance and tolerance that liberals are so known for.

“A YouTube video uploaded on Monday afternoon apparently shows a schoolteacher from the Rowan-Salisbury school district in North Carolina informing a student that failing to be respectful of President Obama is a criminal offense. Breitbart News has uncovered that the student is a high school junior, and that the teacher is apparently one Tanya Dixon-Neely.

The video shows a classroom discussion about the Washington Post hit piece about Mitt Romney bullying a kid some five decades ago. One student says, “Didn’t Obama bully someone though?” The teacher says: “Not to my knowledge.” The student then cites the fact that Obama, in Dreams from My Father, admits to shoving a little girl. “Stop, no, because there is no comparison,” screams the teacher. Romney is “running for president. Obama is the president.”

The student responds that both are “just men.”

The teacher yells — literally yells — that Obama is “due the respect that every other president is due … Listen,” she continues, “let me tell you something, you will not disrespect the president of the United States in this classroom.” She yells over the student repeatedly, and yells at him that it’s disrespect for him to even debate about Romney and Obama.

The student says that he can say what he wants.

“Not about him, you won’t,” says the teacher.

The teacher then tells the student – wrongly – that it is a criminal offense to say bad things about a president. “Do you realize that people were arrested for saying things bad about Bush? Do you realize you are not supposed to slander the president?”

The student says that it would violate First Amendment rights to jail someone for such sentiments. “You would have to say some pretty f’d up crap about him to be arrested,” says the student. “They cannot take away your right to have your opinion … They can’t take that away unless you threaten the president.”

Clearly, the student should be teaching the class, and the teacher should be reading the Constitution more often.”

• 0 Comments

The thing about hiding something, is that it makes people are the more ready to reveal it, for a price. Everybody has a price.

• 1 Comment