Trayvon Martin, Vigilante Justice

[Rare Truth]

I don't think there is any evidence there was a "blatant deception". Zimmerman's wife was ready to put up 100k for bond, and thought that was what the money was for. Later, for reasons we don't know, her and Z changed their minds and went to their relatives for bond money.

The money certainly wasn't a secret because everyone around here knew about it, just not how much.

Holy crap man. Did you listen to the Bond hearing?

She made it sound like they were looking through the sofa cushions for change. She presented herself as near indigent, and at the hearing, Omara was in the process of declaring Z indigent.

That was an out an out LIE!

I hope the judge nails her ass for perjury.

 

[johnny karate]

I don't think there is any evidence there was a "blatant deception". Zimmerman's wife was ready to put up 100k for bond, and thought that was what the money was for. Later, for reasons we don't know, her and Z changed their minds and went to their relatives for bond money.

The money certainly wasn't a secret because everyone around here knew about it, just not how much.

"Blatant" means to be obvious and undisguised. That a deception occurred is not in question. The judge thinks so, and I agree. That it was done out in the open without any attempt at guile is what makes it "blatant".

 

[This is The End]

I know Crim says the judge laughed the passport business out of court, but could someone clear this up.

------------------------

It appears that at the bond hearing there was only one passport claimed.

"this is my client's current passport and only passport that he has"

That was 4/20/2012

Yet the jailhouse call (4/17/2002) appears to discuss two passports, or else it is just confusing:

Z: Do you know what? I think my passport is in that bag.

Z's Wife: I have one for you in saftey deposit box...

Z: OK, you hold onto that.

Z's Wife: For you...


It sounds like Z knew where the Replacement one was, which Cylinder says he found when packing after the bond hearing.

----------------

Here's something else that is a bit weird.

2002 - Original Passport Obtained

2004 - Replacement Passport Obtained - Original is claimed as lost or stolen

Yet, at the bond hearing the 2002 Original Passport is the one that is produced...

So at some point he lost the Replacement, and found the Original.


ETA: All of the above is from the motion to revoke bond.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/95593851/State-v-Zimmerman-Motion-to-revoke-bond

 

[GWCarver]

"Blatant" means to be obvious and undisguised. That a deception occurred is not in question. The judge thinks so, and I agree. That it was done out in the open without any attempt at guile is what makes it "blatant".

So, if the money was unavailable due to PayPal delay, did they actually have the money, or not?

 

[Rare Truth]

When asked if she had the money to assist with George Zimmerman's bond, Shelly Zimmerman answered "Uhm, not — not that I'm aware of," according to the transcript.
Click here to read the full transcript from the April hearing.
And click here to read the motion to revoke Zimmerman's bond.

Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/read...ns-original-bond-hearing-2012-6#ixzz1waSv8faS
​

 

[johnny karate]

So, if the money was unavailable due to PayPal delay, did they actually have the money, or not?

What... like actually on them at the time? What kind of half-assed sophistry is that?

"Gee, Your Honor, I must have left my wallet in my other pants..."

 

[GWCarver]

What... like actually on them at the time? What kind of half-assed sophistry is that?

"Gee, Your Honor, I must have left my wallet in my other pants..."

It sure is hard to get a question answered around here.

 

[This is The End]

So, if the money was unavailable due to PayPal delay, did they actually have the money, or not?

Though there is a limit to how much you can withdraw with your PayPal debit card monthly, what does that have to do with being able to use the PayPal as backing for a loan?

Plenty of places would be willing to give Z a large percentage of that PayPal balance on the spot. For a tidy percentage, of course.

 

[GWCarver]

Though there is a limit to how much you can withdraw with your PayPal debit card monthly, what does that have to do with being able to use the PayPal as backing for a loan?

Plenty of places would be willing to give Z a large percentage of that PayPal balance on the spot. For a tidy percentage, of course.

Recall that Z was in jail in protective custody.

 

[This is The End]

Recall that Z was in jail in protective custody.

Recall that Z is married. She can secure the loan.

 

[johnny karate]

It sure is hard to get a question answered around here.

Have you tried asking questions that actually address the issue without being a lame attempt at irrelevant semantic pedantry? Because you might find you get a better response rate with those.

 

[GWCarver]

Have you tried asking questions that actually address the issue without being a lame attempt at irrelevant semantic pedantry? Because you might find you get a better response rate with those.

I take it you feel it is "irrelevant" if Z's wife did not actually know whether or not the funds had been actually transferred, were pending, or were pending from PayPal. If that was the case, she could not have answered the question about how much was in the account and could not have given an estimate.

There is a reason they changed their plans from using the money for bail to needing to acquire it from relatives in the period of a few days. We'll find out soon enough what it was, but if the money wasn't actually there and available, that would be a reason.

Oh, pedantry is necessary in most discussions of criminal cases, as it is in any area that requires problems to be solved. Around here, "irrelevant" is in the eye of the beholder. Finally, there is a difference between debating and discussing. I'm here to discuss the case, not to to win debating points.

 

[johnny karate]

I take it you feel it is "irrelevant" if Z's wife did not actually know whether or not the funds had been actually transferred, were pending, or were pending from PayPal. If that was the case, she could not have answered the question about how much was in the account and could not have given an estimate.

There is a reason they changed their plans from using the money for bail to needing to acquire it from relatives in the period of a few days. We'll find out soon enough what it was, but if the money wasn't actually there and available, that would be a reason.

Oh, pedantry is necessary in most discussions of criminal cases, as it is in any area that requires problems to be solved. Around here, "irrelevant" is in the eye of the beholder. Finally, there is a difference between debating and discussing. I'm here to discuss the case, not to to win debating points.

I'm not sure to what question you're referring. As Rare Truth posted upthread, Zimmerman's wife denied having the money at all.

 

[GWCarver]

I'm not sure to what question you're referring. As Rare Truth posted upthread, Zimmerman's wife denied having the money at all.

If this is the question to which Rare Truth was referring (there was only a link above), the question actually is asking if SHE could assist in the costs.

O'MARA: Are you of any financial means where you could assist in those costs?

S. ZIMMERMAN: Not that I'm aware of.

 

[johnny karate]

If this is the question to which Rare Truth was referring (there was only a link above), the question actually is asking if SHE could assist in the costs.

O'MARA: Are you of any financial means where you could assist in those costs?

S. ZIMMERMAN: Not that I'm aware of.

Awesome. You keep splitting those hairs. I'm not buying it, and neither did the judge.

 

[Robrob]

It's pretty common for defendants to try and minimize their income in an attempt to score free "indigent" defense counsel or to get a reduced bond. Not that it makes it right, it's just not all that uncommon.

 

[Amazer]

It's pretty common for defendants to try and minimize their income in an attempt to score free "indigent" defense counsel or to get a reduced bond. Not that it makes it right, it's just not all that uncommon.

Others do it too makes for a lousy defense

 

[GWCarver]

Awesome. You keep splitting those hairs. I'm not buying it, and neither did the judge.

Here is a more complete picture of Shelly's statement transcribed from the Treehouse. Any mistakes are mine.

O'Mara - Okay. And you mentioned also, in terms of the ability of your
husband to make a bond amount, that you all had no money, is that
correct?
Shelly - To my knowledge, that's correct.
O'Mara - Okay. Were you aware of the website that Mr. Zimmerman or
somebody on his behalf created?
Shelly - I'm aware of that website.
O'Mara - And how much money is in that website right now? How much
money as a result of that website was...
Shelly - Currently, I do not know.
O'Mara - Who would know that?
Shelly - That would be my brother-in-law.
O'Mara - And is he -- I know he's not in the same room as you, but is
he available so we can speak to him, too, or the Court can inquire
through the State or the...

(snip)

Shelly - I'm sure that we could probably get him on the phone.
O'Mara - Okay. So he's not there now.
Shelly - No, he is not, sir.
O'Mara - Do you have any estimate as to how much money has already been
obtained or collected?
Shelly - I do not.
O'Mara - Okay. You haven't talked to your brother-in-law in terms of
just bare amount of how much money?
Shelly - No. No, I have not.
O'Mara - Okay. And how long has that website been in existence, ma'am?
Shelly - I do not know. I have not been with my husband since he's
been in hiding. I do not know.

 

[Amazer]

Here is a more complete picture of Shelly's statement transcribed from the Treehouse. Any mistakes are mine.

O'Mara - Okay. And you mentioned also, in terms of the ability of your
husband to make a bond amount, that you all had no money, is that
correct?
Shelly - To my knowledge, that's correct.
O'Mara - Okay. Were you aware of the website that Mr. Zimmerman or
somebody on his behalf created?
Shelly - I'm aware of that website.
O'Mara - And how much money is in that website right now? How much
money as a result of that website was...
Shelly - Currently, I do not know.
O'Mara - Who would know that?
Shelly - That would be my brother-in-law.
O'Mara - And is he -- I know he's not in the same room as you, but is
he available so we can speak to him, too, or the Court can inquire
through the State or the...

(snip)

Shelly - I'm sure that we could probably get him on the phone.
O'Mara - Okay. So he's not there now.
Shelly - No, he is not, sir.
O'Mara - Do you have any estimate as to how much money has already been
obtained or collected?
Shelly - I do not.
O'Mara - Okay. You haven't talked to your brother-in-law in terms of
just bare amount of how much money?
Shelly - No. No, I have not.
O'Mara - Okay. And how long has that website been in existence, ma'am?
Shelly - I do not know. I have not been with my husband since he's
been in hiding. I do not know.

So she's aware of the web site, she knows who is managing it, but conveniently doesn't know how much money was collected? If you believe that then I have a bridge for sale.

 

[bynmdsue]

Can monies solicited for defense be used for bail?