ZIMMERMAN CHARGED!? Tune in @ 6:00pm EST News

[WilliamB]

Zimmermans bond revoked!

The prosecutor said the judge "relied on false representations and statements" by Zimmerman and his wife when the court set his bond at $150,000. He was required to post only 10% of that.
Corey argued that the court should revoke the bond or increase it "substantially."
Lester appeared angry that the court had not been told about the money. "Does your client get to sit there like a potted palm and let you lead me down the primrose path?" he asked Zimmerman's lawyer. "That's the issue."

Judge revokes Zimmerman's bond - CNN.com

 

[WinBySurrender]

Zimmermans bond revoked!

The prosecutor said the judge "relied on false representations and statements" by Zimmerman and his wife when the court set his bond at $150,000. He was required to post only 10% of that.
Corey argued that the court should revoke the bond or increase it "substantially."
Lester appeared angry that the court had not been told about the money. "Does your client get to sit there like a potted palm and let you lead me down the primrose path?" he asked Zimmerman's lawyer. "That's the issue."

Judge revokes Zimmerman's bond - CNN.com

Bond isn't a punishment, it it a guarantee that the defendant will show up in court. Zimmerman and his wife represented to the court they didn't have the funds to produce the $150,000 bond. They didn't say that others had set up a website to raise money for a bond that was not yet set when the money was collected. The Zimmerman's didn't ask for the funds, given they could truthfully state that they didn't have the funds to post the bond, as the money was in the control of others. Why ask for the bond money if you can truthfully state for the record that you don't have the money personally, and the judge agrees to set a lower requirement for posting the bond?

The judge has erred here. He has allowed the prosecutor to wield bond as a punishment rather than for its intended purpose. The Zimmerman's don't have the money personally, and if they can avoid relying on others to post bond for him, why shouldn't they? This will be overturned on appeal, I feel confident.

 

[WilliamB]

Bond isn't a punishment, it it a guarantee that the defendant will show up in court. Zimmerman and his wife represented to the court they didn't have the funds to produce the $150,000 bond. They didn't say that others had set up a website to raise money for a bond that was not yet set when the money was collected. The Zimmerman's didn't ask for the funds, given they could truthfully state that they didn't have the funds to post the bond, as the money was in the control of others. Why ask for the bond money if you can truthfully state for the record that you don't have the money personally, and the judge agrees to set a lower requirement for posting the bond?

The judge has erred here. He has allowed the prosecutor to wield bond as a punishment rather than for its intended purpose. The Zimmerman's don't have the money personally, and if they can avoid relying on others to post bond for him, why shouldn't they? This will be overturned on appeal, I feel confident.

Court papers provided a partial transcript of a phone call allegedly showing the code used by Zimmerman and his wife on April 16:

Zimmerman: "In my account do I have at least $100?"
His wife: "No."
Zimmerman: "How close am I?"
His wife: "$8. $8.60."
Zimmerman: "Really. So total everything how much are we looking at?"
His wife: "Like $155."

Did you read the article? Not only did they present transcripts of recorded phone calls of him and his wife discussing the funds in code, they presented recordings of him acknowledging he had a second passport and lied about that too. It's not about punishment, it's about his credibility. He continues to prove himself a liar. Just like when he stated at the bond hearing that he thought Trayvon was closer to his own age, when we all know he identified him on the 911 call as a late teen.

He's going for self defense, which means he has to be believable to win that argument, as he will most definitely have to take the stand at trial. (assuming there is a trial).

 

[WinBySurrender]

Court papers provided a partial transcript of a phone call allegedly showing the code used by Zimmerman and his wife on April 16:

Zimmerman: "In my account do I have at least $100?"
His wife: "No."
Zimmerman: "How close am I?"
His wife: "$8. $8.60."
Zimmerman: "Really. So total everything how much are we looking at?"
His wife: "Like $155."

Did you read the article? Not only did they present transcripts of recorded phone calls of him and his wife discussing the funds in code, they presented recordings of him acknowledging he had a second passport and lied about that too. It's not about punishment, it's about his credibility. He continues to prove himself a liar. Just like when he stated at the bond hearing that he thought Trayvon was closer to his own age, when we all know he identified him on the 911 call as a late teen.

He's going for self defense, which means he has to be believable to win that argument, as he will most definitely have to take the stand at trial. (assuming there is a trial).

Well, the judge wasn't too concerned about the passport, or he would have cited it. As it was, treated it as a "lost and found" item and then dismissed that part of the bond revocation petition. As to the speaking in code, I missed that, so I apologize. I remembed the statements by his attorney that he controlled the trust account into which the Internet-raised money was deposited. At any rate, this is all going to have to play out in court anyway. What we think or say don't amount to nuthin'.

 

[WilliamB]

Well, the judge wasn't too concerned about the passport, or he would have cited it. As it was, treated it as a "lost and found" item and then dismissed that part of the bond revocation petition. As to the speaking in code, I missed that, so I apologize. I remembed the statements by his attorney that he controlled the trust account into which the Internet-raised money was deposited. At any rate, this is all going to have to play out in court anyway. What we think or say don't amount to nuthin'.

I figured that might have been the case, that's why I asked. It's certainly has nothing to do with the events of that night but it does speak to the larger credibility issue. And unless they are letting arm chair lawyers in on the court proceedings, you are absolutely right.

 

[WinBySurrender]

I figured that might have been the case, that's why I asked. It's certainly has nothing to do with the events of that night but it does speak to the larger credibility issue. And unless they are letting arm chair lawyers in on the court proceedings, you are absolutely right.

Yeah, and my arm chair isn't an accredited law school anyway.

 

[WilliamB]

Yeah, and my arm chair isn't an accredited law school anyway.

 

[Lovely Lane]

Goes to creditability doesn't it?

But this information won't be let into trial, will it. Unless Z-man takes the stand and I don't think that's going to happen.

Now how much is the bond? A million?

Yep, toss the guy in jail and break him down to sign a plea deal, and it looks to me the judge played along.

...and my armchair has PHD in public opinion when it comes to truthfulness.

 

[WilliamB]

Goes to creditability doesn't it?

But this information won't be let into trial, will it. Unless Z-man takes the stand and I don't think that's going to happen.

Now how much is the bond? A million?

Yep, toss the guy in jail and break him down to sign a plea deal, and it looks to me the judge played along.

...and my armchair has PHD in public opinion when it comes to truthfulness.

No bond. They will have to have another bond hearing. I honestly can't see how he avoids taking the stand, given he's taken the self-defense position. What makes you think he won't take the stand?

I just watched a portion of the judge speaking and he was surprised that the state hadent moved to file against the wife for lying but said they may in the future. This case just gets more and more outrageous everyday.

 

[Lovely Lane]

No bond. They will have to have another bond hearing. I honestly can't see how he avoids taking the stand, given he's taken the self-defense position. What makes you think he won't take the stand?

I just watched a portion of the judge speaking and he was surprised that the state hadent moved to file against the wife for lying but said they may in the future. This case just gets more and more outrageous everyday.

What!?
Charges against the wife, how crazy. That charge is hard to prove because we need to know what she was thinking, her intent, did she fully understand the question, and her knowledge of the funds as in who's was it.

Sounds to me that the judge is wanting off the bench on this one. Making open-court remarks and such isn't the kind of judge I want at my trial.

No, I do not think Z-man will take the stand. That is the worst move ever to be examined by a skilled prosecutor in open court in front of jury, especially when his trustworthiness is the center of his defense and now the bond issue to be used to impeach his creditability among other things, e-mails, texts, telephone recordings, slip in statements made at different times, etc.
I just bet that any skilled prosecutor during examination of the accused could make a Nun appear to be a liar. The D.A. is there to win, and they step on peoples creditability and dignity as if it were a bug on the floor. (my opinion)

 

[WilliamB]

What!?
Charges against the wife, how crazy. That charge is hard to prove because we need to know what she was thinking, her intent, did she fully understand the question, and her knowledge of the funds as in who's was it.

Sounds to me that the judge is wanting off the bench on this one. Making open-court remarks and such isn't the kind of judge I want at my trial.

No, I do not think Z-man will take the stand. That is the worst move ever to be examined by a skilled prosecutor in open court in front of jury, especially when his trustworthiness is the center of his defense and now the bond issue to be used to impeach his creditability among other things, e-mails, texts, telephone recordings, slip in statements made at different times, etc.
I just bet that any skilled prosecutor during examination of the accused could make a Nun appear to be a liar. The D.A. is there to win, and they step on peoples creditability and dignity as if it were a bug on the floor. (my opinion)

In fairness, I may have exaggerated the judges comments abit for clarity. But if you watch the video, you'll see how he stated it. Not sure if it's a violation or not but my wording was not verbatim. That said, the wife testified they had no money, and did not mention the donation money. Yet, knew enough to speak in code about the money, prior to the bond hearing so they wouldnt jeopardize a lower bond amount ruling. Maybe it's just me but I'm thinking...hand meet cookie jar.

As for zman, I'm not sure how he's supposed to get a jury to buy self-defense if he refuses to testify. If he truly believes he acted in self-defense, why not tell your side of the story? If I were a juror, I would be thinking that. Not that that means a lot, just saying. The again, with his credibility falling apart every time he speaks, you may be right.

 

[Lovely Lane]

In fairness, I may have exaggerated the judges comments abit for clarity. But if you watch the video, you'll see how he stated it. Not sure if it's a violation or not but my wording was not verbatim. That said, the wife testified they had no money, and did not mention the donation money. Yet, knew enough to speak in code about the money, prior to the bond hearing so they wouldnt jeopardize a lower bond amount ruling. Maybe it's just me but I'm thinking...hand meet cookie jar.

As for zman, I'm not sure how he's supposed to get a jury to buy self-defense if he refuses to testify. If he truly believes he acted in self-defense, why not tell your side of the story? If I were a juror, I would be thinking that. Not that that means a lot, just saying. The again, with his credibility falling apart every time he speaks, you may be right.

Oh yeah, I forgot the code and wasn't aware it took place prior to hearing. This isn't a good thing for Zman defense.

About self-defense theory, that's the job for defense counsel to successfully express to the jury I believe. Through testimony of character from family, friends, associates, pastor, school teacher, etc. As well as repeatedly speaking to the evidence that supports the theory and impeaching evidence that doesn't. (my thoughts)

 

[WilliamB]

Oh yeah, I forgot the code and wasn't aware it took place prior to hearing. This isn't a good thing for Zman defense.

About self-defense theory, that's the job for defense counsel to successfully express to the jury I believe. Through testimony of character from family, friends, associates, pastor, school teacher, etc. As well as repeatedly speaking to the evidence that supports the theory and impeaching evidence that doesn't. (my thoughts)

Yeah, I can see that. I was just curious on your thoughts. I guess if they feel the evidence is weak against zman, why risk putting him on the stand.

 

[Lovely Lane]

Yeah, I can see that. I was just curious on your thoughts. I guess if they feel the evidence is weak against zman, why risk putting him on the stand.

It's a tough call, maybe they will or maybe not. I haven't seen Zman speak and have no idea of his personal fortitude. It is just my best guess that he won't take the stand...for what it's worth.

That article spoke of evidence that I hadn't heard, it will be interesting to see it introduced in court.

 

[pureinheart]

I'm a little unclear about this "money" thing. If memory serves me correct, the online donations were specific to Zimmermans "defence" meaning legal fees (lawyer) and should have nothing to do with bail.

IMO, watching how everything went down, I think it is a racial/culture message being sent out by Sharpton and Jackson. They knew exactly what they were doing and found the perfect set of circumstances to send yet another racial war in motion. This racial war has a smokescreen though. They (Sharpton and Jackson) were correct within "race terminology" to call Zimmerman White because there is no skin color term for Hispanic (which I totally don't get). Hispanic falls under the culture definition.

In my area and in many others there is much tension concerning Hispanics and Blacks and the word on the streets there is fear concerning the Blacks that the Hispanics will take over. Priddy much where I live, which used to consist of racial wars between Whites and Blacks has changed to Hispanics and Blacks. I'm sure mine is not the only area that is experiencing this. I'm sure this may sound strange to some of you, although I see this everyday. It's about territory.

Now what do Sharpton and Jackson stand for? Justice? No, they are about culture and race. Weren't most people kind of perplexed when they called Zimmerman White, when seeing him, he is clearly Hispanic and he is Hispanic because the culture/race is determined by the mothers culture/race technically (I think one can put anything on a birth cert though).

So Jackson and Sharpton raise a national stink, call it a "hate" crime and call Zimmerman "White", but at the same time can send out a loud message to Hispanics creating more dissentions between the three cultures/races.

Our current administration is condoning all of this. "Trayvon Martin Day" at the Malcolm X Elementary School... they gave the kids Skittles and sports drinks (or whatever that drink was that Trayvon bought shortly before the encounter)....really?????

How come the New Black Panther Party wasn't charged with anything after calling for a bounty "dead or alive"??????

There is a clear agenda here and God is the only one that can make all of this right...I wonder if Zimmerman is saved....

 

[John S]

Zimmerman isn't saved or condemned because he isn't dead yet. ONLY God decides this AFTER people die - and not before.

 

[Life2Christ]

Our current administration is condoning all of this. "Trayvon Martin Day" at the Malcolm X Elementary School... they gave the kids Skittles and sports drinks (or whatever that drink was that Trayvon bought shortly before the encounter)....really?????

Do you really care? The boy is dead.

 

[WilliamB]

Yes, it was sharpton and Jackson who made zman kill an unarmed teenager. It was also their fault the police dept tried to sweep it under the rug. And since it was a red haired, white man who started the petition and continued to push media, lawmakers and activists to act (including more than 1 million Americans), it surely must be sharpton and Jackson's fault.

 

[Lovely Lane]

I'm a little unclear about this "money" thing. If memory serves me correct, the online donations were specific to Zimmermans "defence" meaning legal fees (lawyer) and should have nothing to do with bail.

I thought the money went into a trust account for legal fees, I may be wrong.

There is a clear agenda here and God is the only one that can make all of this right...I wonder if Zimmerman is saved

Yes, many groups have their agendas. Southern Baptist Convention Richard Land had an agenda just as Sharpton and Jackson. Best thing to do is not really concern ourselves with groups of agenda and concentrate on groups for the Lord.
I nor anyone else knows if Zimmerman is saved, hopefully the spirit dwells within him. (for another thread)

Zimmerman isn't saved or condemned because he isn't dead yet. ONLY God decides this AFTER people die - and not before.

hello John S
I subscribe to that same dogma.

 

[Lovely Lane]

Zimmerman's wife arrested, accused of perjury - CNN.com

Can you believe it?
It seems to me that the prosecution is going all out to force George Zimmerman into plea deal.

At her husband's April 20 bond hearing, Shellie Zimmerman was asked whether the couple had financial means to assist in the defense.
"Uhm, not -- not that I'm aware of," she replied, according to a probable cause affidavit filed Monday.

In uttering these little words, one goes to jail.

p.s. If she is found guilty on this the husband can be charged for 'subornation of perjury' which carries about 5 years.