Trayvon Martin, Vigilante Justice

[GWCarver]

It's not even remotely the same thing. There is demonstrable proof that Zimmerman's wife lied on the stand, as I outlined in this post.

When or if the prosecution might charge her with perjury is a separate question, and one for which I have no answer.

Conversely, there is no evidence that Gilbreath lied on the stand. Only speculation. And I'm pretty sure speculation isn't enough to warrant a perjury charge.

Well, I challenged you to come up with Shelly's lies and you gave me two examples. I'll concede I simply can't rebut them at this time and they do appear to be lies. However, like I said in an earlier post, I'm not throwing in the towel until I can review all of the recordings made of Shelly and Z discussing their finances.

I do think there is more to this than meets the eye. Not only were no new charges brought by the State, but the state didn't even request that bond be revoked commencing on the day of the media hearing:

From Jeralyn:

"The State's attorney didn't even expect the judge to revoke bond Friday. He asked the judge to hold a further hearing, in camera if necessary, where GZ and his wife could explain. He said he wanted bond revoked or increased."

Then this:

"And you haven't heard all the jail recordings. You heard the prosecutor refer to a few quotes. Until you have heard all the jail calls between them, not just portions of cherry-picked calls, it's not "clear" he and his wife knew the amount of the funds or believed the funds belonged to them."

And finally, this about Z's right to remain silent many have been asking about:

"GZ has a right to remain silent. And the judge's decision on whether to grant GZ a new bond has to be based on the same criteria as the first bond, whether the proof is evident and presumption of guilt. He can't permanently deny GZ bond solely as punishment for misrepresenting his finances. I doubt he's going to say standing by like a potted plant about the money affects whether bond should be set.

I suspect the judge will rethink saying GZ must testify. Clearly, he invited the state's attorney to file an additional criminal charge against GZ's wife. GZ has potential criminal exposure and clearly would not have to testify. The judge can't make him forego one constitutional right (right to remain silent) to exercise another (right to bail.)"

Jeralyn's above comments are scattered around this page:

http://www.talkleft.com/story/2012/6/3/14539/85018

 

[LTC8K6]

The prison phone calls were discussed in the hearing. Transcripts of them were read. How is that now news?

 

[crimresearch]

Well, I challenged you to come up with Shelly's lies and you gave me two examples. I'll concede I simply can't rebut them at this time and they do appear to be lies. However, like I said in an earlier post, I'm not throwing in the towel until I can review all of the recordings made of Shelly and Z discussing their finances.

I do think there is more to this than meets the eye. Not only were no new charges brought by the State, but the state didn't even request that bond be revoked commencing on the day of the media hearing:

From Jeralyn:

"The State's attorney didn't even expect the judge to revoke bond Friday. He asked the judge to hold a further hearing, in camera if necessary, where GZ and his wife could explain. He said he wanted bond revoked or increased."

Then this:

"And you haven't heard all the jail recordings. You heard the prosecutor refer to a few quotes. Until you have heard all the jail calls between them, not just portions of cherry-picked calls, it's not "clear" he and his wife knew the amount of the funds or believed the funds belonged to them."

And finally, this about Z's right to remain silent many have been asking about:

"GZ has a right to remain silent. And the judge's decision on whether to grant GZ a new bond has to be based on the same criteria as the first bond, whether the proof is evident and presumption of guilt. He can't permanently deny GZ bond solely as punishment for misrepresenting his finances. I doubt he's going to say standing by like a potted plant about the money affects whether bond should be set.

I suspect the judge will rethink saying GZ must testify. Clearly, he invited the state's attorney to file an additional criminal charge against GZ's wife. GZ has potential criminal exposure and clearly would not have to testify. The judge can't make him forego one constitutional right (right to remain silent) to exercise another (right to bail.)"

Jeralyn's above comments are scattered around this page:

http://www.talkleft.com/story/2012/6/3/14539/85018

The judge can require Zimmerman to explain himself on the money before granting a new release.
He cannot force him to answer anything that would incriminate him in a criminal procedure.
He can require answers to questions that might affect his chances of getting released again.

The judge doesn't have to grant bond, but it is to the system's advantage to do so, and evaluating Zimmerman as a flight risk can take in factors of credibility.

I think O'Mara was well aware of this, and prepped the judge by pointing out that the money was now totally out of GZ's hands.

Also note that the judge was very careful in his ruling on the material misrepresentation to say that he found O'Mara to be completely forthright in what he said.

So in the new hearing, exactly how much ability would GZ have to flee? The 2 things that the prosecution raised in their motion, are not available to GZ, so what exactly is the flight risk?

 

[johnny karate]

Well, I challenged you to come up with Shelly's lies and you gave me two examples. I'll concede I simply can't rebut them at this time and they do appear to be lies. However, like I said in an earlier post, I'm not throwing in the towel until I can review all of the recordings made of Shelly and Z discussing their finances.

I do think there is more to this than meets the eye. Not only were no new charges brought by the State, but the state didn't even request that bond be revoked commencing on the day of the media hearing:

...

"And you haven't heard all the jail recordings. You heard the prosecutor refer to a few quotes. Until you have heard all the jail calls between them, not just portions of cherry-picked calls, it's not "clear" he and his wife knew the amount of the funds or believed the funds belonged to them."

Yeah sorry, but that just smacks of denial born of bias.

It's perfectly clear both Zimmerman and his wife knew about the money and had an idea of the amount available. They discussed this rather explicitly. And then, Zimmerman's wife got on the stand and flatly denied having this knowledge.

It couldn't be any more clear cut.

Short of some kind of elaborate fabrication on the part of the prosecution, I'm not sure what new context or mitigating circumstances Jeralyn or anyone else could possibly expect.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

Did they discuss actual amounts, though? That is what I am asking. I only saw one sentence quoted from that conversation and it was nonspecific. The fact that there was a fund is not in question.

The passport is a non issue since he relinquished the second one to his attorney before the issue came up in court.

That makes no sense. If the knew the call was being recorded, why would they discuss their intent to deceive on the call? Was that their personal account or the account with the funds in it?

They thought they were being clever by saying 134 and not $134,000 (or whatever the number was). It will be interesting to see if they try to rationalize this with an explanation or just admit it. More tangled woven webs.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

You might want to try reading back a few pages. I think that has been the topic of discussion in the thread since friday.

I'm not keeping up daily, too much redundancy. Has anything been posted that contradicts the news I cited?

 

[sgtbaker]

You might want to try reading back a few pages. I think that has been the topic of discussion in the thread since friday.

She was filling me in. I missed a lot and didn't understand where the actual dishonesty was.

 

[LTC8K6]

I'm not keeping up daily, too much redundancy. Has anything been posted that contradicts the news I cited?

The judge was satisfied about the passport issue. So that appears to be closed.

There will be another bond hearing.

It would appear that GZ is no more able to pay a high bond now than what he claimed earlier, because those funds were surrendered shortly after that first bond hearing. GZ apparently cannot use them for bond.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

Wow that's amazing news.

BTW... The FBI experts both say it is impossible to know from audio over cell phones in the distance which party was screaming. That was in the document release posted here a while back.

Oh yes, and the actual injuries to Zimmerman's head are documented from MDs and EMS as well.

As a licensed medical professional and self proclaimed expert on those exact subjects, with your own medical practice, you are on record here as repeatedly saying they were wrong.

I'm sure you'll be backing that up with facts any old year now, right?

Or are you still in 'I don't provide proof' mode?

I believe the pros and cons of the audio have been thoroughly discussed with differing expert opinions. I also saw the controversy over the certificate mill. Again, one needs to know if Zimmerman is being included or simply excluded and if you think about it, screaming help when you have a gun is less likely than screaming, "stop or I'll shoot". Seeing the gun is consistent with screaming, "help". I have not changed my opinion of the scream and it will be interesting to see how the evidence comes out in the trial.

As for the injuries, the cut on his head isn't too drastic if you look at it closely and the nose injury is still iffy. I've not seen the MD report and the "black eyes" are not too apparent in any of the photos. The tiny scrape on a single knuckle of Trayvon is not consistent with repeated blows to Zimmer.

Did I miss something else?

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

The prison phone calls were discussed in the hearing. Transcripts of them were read. How is that now news?

The discovery of the second passport? I don't know. The news made it sound like these were new recordings being released. Friday I recall the report that the recordings would be released today. Could be I heard something wrong.

 

[marksman]

It would appear that GZ is no more able to pay a high bond now than what he claimed earlier, because those funds were surrendered shortly after that first bond hearing. GZ apparently cannot use them for bond.

That depends entirely on the source of the information about GZ's ability to pay bond. If the laywer states he gets this information from GZ, I think the judge will view that information with a good deal of suspicion, as GZ and his wife have already withheld information from the court, if not outright lied, in order to get a lower bond amount.

If the attorney can show that he independently investigated GZ's finances, speaking with accounts, looking at bank records, etc., then the attorney's statement is more reliable and the judge may be willing to reinstate the prior bond.

It's still bad for GZ. In the end, his counsel may recommend that GZ not take the stand in his own defense rather than have his credibility impeached with his behavior concerning the bond. (That may have been a good strategy even before this brouhaha.)

 

[LTC8K6]

That depends entirely on the source of the information about GZ's ability to pay bond. If the laywer states he gets this information from GZ, I think the judge will view that information with a good deal of suspicion, as GZ and his wife have already withheld information from the court, if not outright lied, in order to get a lower bond amount.

If the attorney can show that he independently investigated GZ's finances, speaking with accounts, looking at bank records, etc., then the attorney's statement is more reliable and the judge may be willing to reinstate the prior bond.

It's still bad for GZ. In the end, his counsel may recommend that GZ not take the stand in his own defense rather than have his credibility impeached with his behavior concerning the bond. (That may have been a good strategy even before this brouhaha.)

The court has known since shortly after the bond hearing, about how much was in the account. O'mara reported it. The fact that there was a lot of money in the account around the time of the bond hearing cannot be news to the court. O'mara took charge of those funds almost immediately.

http://gzlegalcase.com/index.php/press-releases/6-example-press-release

http://gzlegalcase.com/index.php/press-releases

 

[LTC8K6]

The audio recordings of Mr. Zimmerman's phone conversations while in jail make it clear that Mr. Zimmerman knew a significant sum had been raised by his original fundraising website. We feel the failure to disclose these funds was caused by fear, mistrust, and confusion. The gravity of this mistake has been distinctly illustrated, and Mr. Zimmerman understands that this mistake has undermined his credibility, which he will have to work to repair.

At the point of the bond hearing, Mr. Zimmerman had been driven from his home and neighborhood, could not go to work, his wife could not go back to a finish her nursing degree, his mother and father had been driven from their home, and he had been thrust into the national spotlight as a racist murderer by factions acting with their own agendas. None of those allegations have been supported by the discovery released to date, yet the hatred continues.

It must be noted that, when attempting to interpret George's actions regarding the funds, that he did disclose the existence of the funds five days after the bond hearing, during his first conversation with the defense about the fund. When the defense team learned of the funds, we disclosed this to the court and to the State Attorney's Office, and the money was transferred to the Legal Defense Fund which is now independently managed.

http://gzlegalcase.com/index.php/pr...or-a-second-bond-hearing-for-george-zimmerman

 

[Unabogie]

I'm not sure how much more proof you need than the fact that his lawyer says George understands how this undermines his own credibility. I don't understand how George can understand it but his supporters seem to find it baffling.

 

[lane99]

Love is blind

Paraphrasing those who for all the world appear to be supporting the shooter, that appearance is misleading. What they are actually supporting is the "truth". Except, that is, when it's the shooter being untruthful. Then, truth don't matter as much.

Or something like that.

 

[Amazer]

The audio recordings of Mr. Zimmerman's phone conversations while in jail make it clear that Mr. Zimmerman knew a significant sum had been raised by his original fundraising website.

Finally a it of honesty.... better late then never.

We feel the failure to disclose these funds was caused by fear, mistrust, and confusion.

It would seem that GZ is rather prone to these emotions, and makes very poor decisions based on those emotions.

The gravity of this mistake has been distinctly illustrated, and Mr. Zimmerman understands that this mistake has undermined his credibility, which he will have to work to repair.

Is going to be an uphill task if you ask me... reputations are easily squandered and much less easily rebuild.

At the point of the bond hearing, Mr. Zimmerman had been driven from his home and neighborhood, could not go to work, his wife could not go back to a finish her nursing degree, his mother and father had been driven from their home, and he had been thrust into the national spotlight as a racist murderer by factions acting with their own agendas. None of those allegations have been supported by the discovery released to date, yet the hatred continues.

And? That somehow makes it alright?

It must be noted that, when attempting to interpret George's actions regarding the funds, that he did disclose the existence of the funds five days after the bond hearing, during his first conversation with the defense about the fund. When the defense team learned of the funds, we disclosed this to the court and to the State Attorney's Office, and the money was transferred to the Legal Defense Fund which is now independently managed.

A little too late for disclosing the existence of the funds... and a little too early to transfer them to an independently managed Legal Defense Fund (IMO of course).

 

[BenBurch]

Yeah sorry, but that just smacks of denial born of bias.

It's perfectly clear both Zimmerman and his wife knew about the money and had an idea of the amount available. They discussed this rather explicitly. And then, Zimmerman's wife got on the stand and flatly denied having this knowledge.

It couldn't be any more clear cut.

Short of some kind of elaborate fabrication on the part of the prosecution, I'm not sure what new context or mitigating circumstances Jeralyn or anyone else could possibly expect.

They could charge criminal conspiracy, and pull the wife in. That, in turn, would be leverage to get a plea from Zimmerman.

 

[LTC8K6]

I'm not sure how much more proof you need than the fact that his lawyer says George understands how this undermines his own credibility. I don't understand how George can understand it but his supporters seem to find it baffling.

Omara has to say words to that effect.

I don't see any connection between being scared about your future and failing to immediately report some money given to you, and lying about a homicide.

I doubt any judges or jurors will either.

They made a mistake about the money and their bond. They tried to keep it because they were unable to make a living any more.

That doesn't contradict the evidence in the death of TM.

 

[Rare Truth]

Omara has to say words to that effect.

I don't see any connection between being scared about your future and failing to immediately report some money given to you, and lying about a homicide.

I doubt any judges or jurors will either.

They made a mistake about the money and their bond. They tried to keep it because they were unable to make a living any more.

That doesn't contradict the evidence in the death of TM.

The connection is HONESTY.

George has shown he does not possess that character trait.

Neither does his smart-ass wife.

 

[BenBurch]

Omara has to say words to that effect.

I don't see any connection between being scared about your future and failing to immediately report some money given to you, and lying about a homicide.

I doubt any judges or jurors will either.

They made a mistake about the money and their bond. They tried to keep it because they were unable to make a living any more.

That doesn't contradict the evidence in the death of TM.

No, but the only person who can testify as to what happened is George Zimmerman. If he takes the stand, the prosecutor will spend the first run of questioning impeaching him as a witness. The things you hope are exculpatory won't get into the record.

Then, with Zimmerman established in the eyes of the jury as a liar who will lie under oath, he begins his questioning with "And, Mr. Zimmerman, I remind you that you are once again under oath, and that you must tell the truth; Where were you at 4:00 on the day in question?" and go on from there, periodically reminding Zimmerman that he is under oath.

The jury will believe that he was lying then and is lying now.

The defense would be stupid to allow him to take the stand, now.