Continuation: Discussion of the George Zimmerman case

[triforcharity]

Does anyone know if some of these conditions are abnormal, a few seem harsh.



I can only assume that G means (by maintain) that current accounts in his name must be closed.

I'm not sure how in the world they would regulate H.

I don't think it's unusual, no. Now, some seem....over the top (No visits to Sanford-Orlando airport) but I think that is just to satisfy the judge's worries that GZ was/is going to skip town.

I think WRT: bank accounts, is that all of his accounts that he currently has, are under the control of MOM, and if he opens another one in an attempt to hide more money from the courts, that would show the court that he is still trying to game the system, which would be a violation of the courts order.

I think it's basically the judge's way of giving Zimmerman enough rope to hang himself. The judge obviously doesn't WANT to give him a bond, but by law, is required to. The judge gives him just enough rules that, if GZ is tempted to run, and violates even one of them, he'll end up back in the SC jail, and with an additional felony charge. Which, he may end up with anyway.

 

[crimresearch]

He'll end up taking a plea deal

Based on what admissable proof beyond a reasonable doubt?

Or do you think that *not* being denied bond, and *not* being convicted of felony perjury somehow makes his case a lost cause?

 

[LTC8K6]

http://www.baynews9.com/content/new...ticles/cfn/2012/7/6/george_zimmerman_rel.html

Released.

 

[Unabogie]

So George is free. I guess all that talk about it being difficult for him to make bond were, like so much of what this guys says, a big manipulation.

 

[This is The End]

Specific from today's news if it hasn't been posted yet:

Zimmerman had to pay a bond company $100,000 but also needed $1 million in collateral to secure the bail, according to his legal team. West refused to say what was being used as collateral after Zimmerman left the jail.

"We worked that out," West said, AP reported.

His parents, the document shows, put up their house as collateral, NBC News reported.

Zimmerman will stay in a "safe house" before relocating to a permanent residence, and he has hired a security team, according to information posted on a website run by his legal team, the AP reported.

http://usnews.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2...sts-1-million-bond-released-from-florida-jail

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

...

I kinda feel sorry for O'Mara at this point. He's got every defense attorney's worst nightmare. No wonder he asked for help.

I don't.


O'Mara sure does get right to the heart of things in begging for money... straight through the heart.

Zimmerman Attorney Seeks Donations From People Who Also Would Have Shot Trayvon Martin

In a posting to his website after the new bond was announced, Zimmerman attorney Mark O’Mara sought more donations from people who also would have shot and killed Trayvon Martin

Wow, that is bad if O'Mara had anything at all to do with how that is worded.


ETA D): I just checked it and it appears O'Mara's exact words are:

for those who feel Mr. Zimmerman was justified in his actions, for those who feel they would do the same if they were in Mr. Zimmerman’s shoes

So the media spun it a bit, but it is still very sad that O'Mara is framing it that way. He is implying that people should have a position without knowing all the facts, which is quite sad.

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

You mean passport issue, not paypal issue, yes ?

Yeah, not sure how I slipped up there. At least I said passport the first time in that post.

I don't get it. I can't reconcile the fact that GZ voluntarily turned in a passport, yet judge Lester claims he was getting ready to flee the country.

Well, first of all (not that you don't know this), Z turned in the passport days after the first bond hearing. So the judge is assuming Z only did that after something else prevented his escape. Perhaps a person talked sense into him, or perhaps other means prevented it.

Just having the passport is not exactly a magic "get out of the country" card.

So the time-line would go:

He's in jail supposedly planning his escape from the country.
At the bond hearing he still has hopes of escape.
He get's out of jail after the bond hearing.
His hopes are dashed for whatever reason.
Then he turns in his original passport.


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

Trouble with blindly trusting the media, is their own track record on credibility.

crimresearch, I am wondering if you have any clarifying remarks on your position concerning my posts on the passport issue from our discussions a month ago?

Detailed in the links several posts ago here:

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=8428877&postcount=1562

If you need a refresher.

I am also wondering if you read the entire new bond ruling pdf:

http://www.flcourts18.org/PDF/Press_Releases/SKMBT_363-V12070510360.pdf

And if you still hold the position that the judge is always only saying what legal thresh-holds are and never giving his opinion on the case?

Even Natural Born Skeptic's position has been reversed that the judge was not showing any emotion (or passion).

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


I know this thread takes forever now, but has anyone an opinion on the abnormality of any of those 10 conditions I listed from the bail pdf in my previous post?

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

 

[crimresearch]

It is really getting hard to know what claims to believe...

Is Zimmerman rotting in jail because he was convicted of 'felony perjury'?

Is he in jail because his offense was 'non-bondable'?

Is he in jail becaase the judge has already decided that the evidence of his guilt is insurmountable?

Is he in jail because the judge ordered him held as a flight risk?

Is he in jail because the judge ordered that he can't leave without having collateral for the whole $1 million?

Is he in jail because he had no choice but to beg for a plea deal?

Is he even in jail??

http://news.yahoo.com/george-zimmerman-jail-1-million-bond-184950395--abc-news-topstories.html

Maybe one of the 'You must be on a team' team can explain.

 

[TheL8Elvis]

So George is free. I guess all that talk about it being difficult for him to make bond were, like so much of what this guys says, a big manipulation.

How did you get from the fact that he made bail to the conclusion it was not difficult ?

Do you have any idea what was required to secure the bail ?

 

[crimresearch]

crimresearch, I am wondering if you have any clarifying remarks on your position concerning my posts on the passport issue from our discussions a month ago?

Same comments as before... the video of what the judge actually said, proved you wrong, utterly and completely wrong.
Here it is again - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S85WMM_cKpg&feature=youtu.be

And he's still saying the same words... 'reasonable' based on the date stamp and time.

The claims back then that he said George was lying about the passport *in that hearing* were false then and they are still false now.

The claims that he said that O'Mara was a liar, were false then, and they are still false now.

I've twice posted a whole list of other false claims that are refuted by the reality.

Repeating them over and over again won't make them suddenly not false.

So at the end of the day, all we have here are the teams...

One team being people who have posted logically based on the available facts, *and* who refuse to join internet lynch mobs based on hysterical over-reactions to unreliable media reports, gossip and spin.
The people who have rationally and factually pointed out where Zimmerman's weaknesses are... and where the prosecutions weaknesses are.
The people who refused to buy into the 'Martin was a deadly thug' hype, 'the Zimmerman was a fat gangbanger' hype, the magic audio software' hype and so on.

Lets call them the 'Anti-Nancy Grace' team.

And you've provided not one single valid reason as to why I should abandon the rational, non-hysterical position I've posted from the very beginning, and fall for things that have been repeatedly proven false..

 

[Natural Born Skeptic]

I think there's no chance at all of him putting himself up on the stand and subjecting himself to cross examination, if the judge thinks he's a big fat liar before he even takes the oath.

There was so much wrong in that post it was hard to pick which item to refute, but the above is the one I'll pick. GZ may or may not take the stand but you appear to be quite confused about how a court works. If GZ takes the stand the prosecutor is going to cross examine him and attempt to tear him apart and his attorney is question him in a positive light. Why you'd think what the judge thinks of him is going to affect that is a mystery.

 

[Cylinder]

I'm just curious, do you guys happen to remember the publisher of your American Government textbook? Edition number?

I'm not saying that a letter to the editor would help - I'm just saying that it could not hurt.

 

[Natural Born Skeptic]

Sorry, uniboogie was talking about syg on the last post, I'm wrong.

 

[Unabogie]

There was so much wrong in that post it was hard to pick which item to refute, but the above is the one I'll pick. GZ may or may not take the stand but you appear to be quite confused about how a court works. If GZ takes the stand the prosecutor is going to cross examine him and attempt to tear him apart and his attorney is question him in a positive light. Why you'd think what the judge thinks of him is going to affect that is a mystery.

I don't understand why this was hard for you to understand. The judge thinks George is a big fat liar. The SYG hearing is held in order to get a summary dismissal from Judge Lester. The defense would be foolish to subject George to cross examination by the prosecutor, since the odds of Judge Lester taking George's word for anything is essentially nil. Therefore, he will never get summary dismissal in this case. Hence, the defense would be foolish to try, since it's just one more whack at George's crumbling credibility.

Is that clearer or are you still confused by such a simple statement of obvious fact?

 

[Unabogie]

How did you get from the fact that he made bail to the conclusion it was not difficult ?

Do you have any idea what was required to secure the bail ?

Yes, they put up the parent's house as collateral and posted $85k.

The plea from O'Mara was just to fleece more of George's supporters of their money so George can continue paying off his debts and racking up lawyer's fees. $40k so far for "expert witnesses".

 

[This is The End]

Same comments as before... the video of what the judge actually said, proved you wrong, utterly and completely wrong.
Here it is again - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S85WMM_cKpg&feature=youtu.be

I'm not sure if you are following.

My claim, as can be seen in the links I posted, was that the judge missed something. My claim was very detailed and thoroughly cited, none of which you ever addressed. You just kept linking to the judge's original statement*! Just as you did now. Though you did back off your original claim that it was "laughed out of court".

You told me that (that the judge missed something) was impossible, and your argument was, as it appears to be now, was simply that he said differently. I can only assume that your position was that he could not possibly have been wrong. You did have another argument, that was that if I was so sure the judge missed something, I should call him and tell him....

*Remember, at that time of the statement you are so firmly attached to, he had only reviewed the information for minutes, a few hours max.

Now, after months of review, and several hours of dedicated review, the judge has completely changed his position on the passport issue.

So apparently he saw that he did indeed miss something.

Could you at least acknowledge this?

I've twice posted a whole list of other false claims that are refuted by the reality.

Well, since you bring that up. Not twice. But dozens of times you have posted a list of CT claims that you have seen in this thread. In most cases I have seen you post about them many times more than they were ever originally discussed. In almost all of the original discussions, if proven wrong, the people have acknowledged it! Keeping a list of wrongs, does not make other wrongs right.

As I said before, I have no problem with people posting their ideas, even if they are zany. This is a discussion forum, not a court room. As long as they are civil. If you see something that is incorrect, by all means post the truth, with cites. Making fun of them is uncivil. Saying they are wrong without backing it up is pointless.

There was so much wrong in that post it was hard to pick which item to refute, but the above is the one I'll pick. GZ may or may not take the stand but you appear to be quite confused about how a court works. If GZ takes the stand the prosecutor is going to cross examine him and attempt to tear him apart and his attorney is question him in a positive light. Why you'd think what the judge thinks of him is going to affect that is a mystery.

Are you suggesting that the judge can not have a huge influence on the trial?

What about which objections are overruled or sustained?

Specifically, the judge has lots of control over what lines of questioning the prosecutor can follow.

Does he not also have the final say on the jury instructions?

 

[johnny karate]

Lester made it clear that the amount he set bail for has to do with the fact that GZ is using 'other peoples money'. Not with the fact he didn't testify.

He stated "...court finds that bail should be set at $1,000,000. The defendant has the ability to post such bail. The increased bail is not punishment."

Are we reading the same order ?

Perhaps not.

I'm reading the one that says this:

The increased bail is not a punishment; it is meant to allay this Court's concern that the Defendant intended to flee the jurisdiction and a lesser amount would not ensure his presence in court.

Zimmerman's explanation for his deception (that thing the judge said was important) could have been a mitigating factor.

Zimmerman didn't offer one.

No explanation = higher bond.

But not based on him not testifying, which was the point in question. Which was why I went out of my way to ask what would him in this exact scenario, if bail was granted, but in a higher amount.

It was based on the judge's "concern that [Zimmerman] intended to flee the jurisdiction".

A concern that could have been allayed had Zimmerman offered a reasonable or innocent explanation for his actions.

He didn't.

Thus the higher bond.

Where does he maintain this ? I must have missed it.

Here:

The Defendant certainly indicated through cross-examination that he acted in self-defense, but he put forward no evidence of such. As a consequence, this Court found as a preliminary matter that the evidence against the Defendant was "strong".

In fairness, the judge is reiterating what he said in the previous hearing, but I see no indication he's changed his opinion.

 

[johnny karate]

Same comments as before... the video of what the judge actually said, proved you wrong, utterly and completely wrong.
Here it is again - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S85WMM_cKpg&feature=youtu.be

And he's still saying the same words... 'reasonable' based on the date stamp and time.

The claims back then that he said George was lying about the passport *in that hearing* were false then and they are still false now.

The claims that he said that O'Mara was a liar, were false then, and they are still false now.

I've twice posted a whole list of other false claims that are refuted by the reality.

Repeating them over and over again won't make them suddenly not false.

Speaking of false claims...

And it looks like the prosecutor is a moron. The judge just laughed him out of court on the passport conspiracy theory, and called him incompetent on the money issue.

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=8334934#post8334934

He wondered out loud why the *prosecution* didn't bring that up... and after his calling them on their passport lie...

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=8335142#post8335142

The passport was a non-issue.

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=8335153#post8335153

The proscutor stood up and deliberately told the court that there was no such evidence, and that Zimmerman had knowingly deceived the court and kept both passports.

That is lame, and incomeptent at best, much more likely thye were hoping to sneak one by the judge... who didn't fall for it...

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=8335205#post8335205

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

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=8342389#post8342389

The judge does dismiss the passport issue with the footnotes, it seems.

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=8364685#post8364685

It has already been proven that the judge dismissed the passport issue.

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=8350047#post8350047

It has been proven beyond any shred of reasonable doubt, that the judge dismissed the passport motion, and declared Zimmerman's version credible.

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=8347356#post8347356


Reality check from the judge's bond order:

The Defendant also neglected to disclose that he had a valid second passport in his safe deposit box. Notably, together with the passport, the money only had to be hidden for a short time for him to leave the country if the Defendant made a quick decision to flee.

So I guess the judge felt the second passport was an issue after all.

 

[johnny karate]

I'll post this again since I didn't get any takers the first time.

Officially documented injuries to Zimmerman:

• Broken nose (To avoid any pointless semantic tangents, I'm not going to quibble on this point)

• Two small cuts on the back of his head (2 cm and .5 cm respectively)

• Forehead abrasion (mentioned in the EMT report but not by the doctor)

And as a bonus...

Officially documented injuries to Martin's hands:

• Small abrasion on his left ring finger knuckle (no more than 1/4")

Can anyone who believes and/or has defended Zimmerman's version of events please provide evidence that the fight took place in the manner in which he described?

 

[Rare Truth]

http://articles.orlandosentinel.com...or-angela-corey-chief-bill-lee-arrest-warrant
Sanford police took one position on Trayvon shooting in public, another in paperwork to prosecutors

<snip>

At 4 p.m. March 12, Sanford police Chief Bill Lee Jr. stood in City Hall plaza in front of a hostile crowd and dozens of reporters and insisted his agency could not arrest Zimmerman because investigators had failed to establish probable cause, the minimal standard of evidence to justify filing a criminal case.

The next day, however, his agency sent prosecutors paperwork saying it did have probable cause and asked that they charge Zimmerman with manslaughter.

It was signed by lead Investigator Chris Serino and his boss, then-Sgt. Randy Smith, but it was the department's official position and had the support of Lee, said Capt. Bob O'Connor, who oversees the department's major-crimes division and also was part of the investigation.

 

[Unabogie]

Sorry, uniboogie was talking about syg on the last post, I'm wrong.

Thank you.

 

[crimresearch]

Which is routine and mundane for hundreds of thousands of Americans every year ... the $1,000,000 bail, or the $200,000+ slush fund of found money?

Being charged with a crime and going through the process of defending themselves. The whole presumption of innocence thing. Happens all the time.

The identical process that so many people here are calling 'pro-Zimmerman'.