Continuation: Discussion of the George Zimmerman case

[johnny karate]

Indeed. I don't think that the charge of perjury is a slam-dunk. The legal bar for perjury is set quite high, and there's a number of avenues for SZ and her lawyer(s) to explore in getting an acquittal.

Shellie Zimmerman stating on record she had money in her personal bank account:

George: You're going to take out 10 and keep it with you in cash, less than 10.

Shellie: Like 9.

George: Say about 10. I'm wondering, you have more than 10, right?

Shellie: Not with me.

George: You don't have access to more than 10 in your account?

Shellie: I do.

George: I have access to... in your account.

Shellie: Yeah.

Shellie Zimmerman five days later claiming under oath to have no money:

O'Mara: Are you of any financial means where you can assist in those costs?

Shellie: Not that I'm aware of.

What "avenue" do you feel Zimmerman's lawyer can "explore" to explain this lie?

 

[Dan O.]

And we clearly went over all this at that point in the thread, yet you continue to call it an OCR error ? That's quite dishonest of you.

Here is where it all went wrong. In your original post, you posted the OCR text as:

Have you got a source for that claim? The photographs of both flashlights seem to show they were off at the time. In one photograph of the keychain flashlight, there is a lighter color grass in a pattern that resembles the beam pattern of a flashlight. In another photo, there is a blade of grass reflecting the flash. Both of these might have been mistaken as evidence thet the litttle flashlight was on in lower resolution photos.

Yes, it's in the police report. Below is a link to a searchable PDF containing the discovery documents .

http://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/357450/trayvon-martin-documents-ocr.pdf

On 02/2612012 a t approximately 1935 hour s . f was contacted by Officer T. Smi th in reference to responding to Retreat at Twin L~kes to process a homicide scene. I arrived on scene at approximately 1955 hours and met wi th Officer Ayala and Of f icer Mead who briefed me on the scene. Currently at this time In the evening, It was dark out and we were experiencing Intermittent showers.
At that time, I walked through the scene wi th the of f icer 's and they pointed out Items of evidence that were already located, It was stili raining at this time. It was dark outside, raining of f and on, and there was not much l ight l ight ing up In the courtyard. There were a set of keys containing a smal l f lash l ight that was on, a col i phone, larger flashlight, two plast ic bags, fll1lt aid kIt, medical supplies, the vict im's body that was cover&d by a yellow medical blanket, and an Arizona tea can

Rare Truth responded with a link and clipping with: It reads "a small flash light on the ring".

LTC8K6 chimed in with a reference to page 80 where CST Smith clearly says the flashlight was on.

I had done my own search of the PDF using a phrase from your post and found Rare Truth's quote on page 20 of the PDF.

Here is the actual text from page 20:

Ciesla, Leon H F 3/2/2012 	1st discovery pg 19-20
	DETAILS:
	On 02.26.2012 at approximately 1940 hours, I was contacted by CST D. Smith, and she told me that there had 
	been a homicide at Retreat at Twin Lakes. Sgt. Joseph Santago also called me with the same information. 
	While on route I called Captain R. O'Conner and told him what I had been told and that I was responding. I 
	arrived at approximately 2010 hours and met with SCT Smith who briefed me on the scene. It was dark and 
	there were intermittent showers.

	    I walked through the scene with CST Smith and she pointed out items of evidence that were already 
	located. There was a Honda key with a small flash light on the ring, a cell phone, a larger flashlight, two 
	plastic grocery type bags, a first aid kit, and discarded medical supplies. The Victim's body was covered with 
	a yellow plastic blanket with an Arizona Ice Tea can on it.  I then assisted CST Smith in photographing the 
	scene while we waited for the Volusia County Medical Examiner's Office investigator and transport services 
	to arrive.

And here is the text from page 80.

Smith, Diana	3/6/2012	1st discovery pg 79-80
	DETAILS:
	On 02/26/2012 at approximately 1935 hours, I was contacted by Officer T. Smith in reference to responding to
	Retreat at Twin Lakes to process a homicide scene. I arrived on scene at approximately 1955 hours and met
	with Ofifcer Ayala and Officer Meed who briefed me on the scene. Currently at this time in the evening, it was
	dark out and we were experiencing intermittent showers.
	<section redacted>
	    At that tine, I walked through the scene with the officer's and they pointed out items of evidence that
	were already located. It was still raining at this time. It was dark outside, raining off and on, and there was not
	much light lighting up the courtyard. There were a set of keys containing a small flashlight that was on, a 
	cell phone, larger flashlight, two plastic bags, first aid kit, medical supplies, the victim's body that was
	covered by a yellow medical blanket, and and Arizona tea can.

The similarity of page 20 with the butchered OCR from page 80 convinced me that you were referencing page 20 in your post. It was only when I was able to view these entries side by side that I could see my mistake.

My position remains mostly unchanged. I still accept as I always have that CST D. Smith says in her report that the flashlight was on. In putting this post together, I spotted one additional item that supports the "on" hypothesis; CST D Smith initially walked the scene with Mead and Ayala. This would explain why Mead would be questioned about the state of the flashlight. But does not explain why Mead failed to mention it in his two earlier reports or why there is nothing on this from Ayala in the second discovery.

ETA: There is really only one more thing to do to completely settle this. I think someone somewhere had identified the actual model of this flashlight. If a similar unit could be found, it could be tested to see if its light would or would not show up in similar conditions.

 

[Alt+F4]

What "avenue" do you feel Zimmerman's lawyer can "explore" to explain this lie?

While I agree with you that Mrs. Z. is a liar, it seems to have little to do with GZ's guilt or innocence regarding the shooting. Perhaps she will be subjected a perjury charge, but I doubt it. What a potential jury might make of her lying, is anyone's guess, but it certainly doesn't make stupid George look good.

 

[johnny karate]

While I agree with you that Mrs. Z. is a liar, it seems to have little to do with GZ's guilt or innocence regarding the shooting. Perhaps she will be subjected a perjury charge, but I doubt it. What a potential jury might make of her lying, is anyone's guess, but it certainly doesn't make stupid George look good.

By "Zimmerman's lawyer" I meant Shellie Zimmerman's lawyer. Sorry if that was unclear.

And yeah, I agree that the perjury charge in of itself has no bearing on her husband's case, but I do think that his role in the deception as it affects his credibility might end up being a factor.

 

[Newtons Bit]

While I agree with you that Mrs. Z. is a liar, it seems to have little to do with GZ's guilt or innocence regarding the shooting. Perhaps she will be subjected a perjury charge, but I doubt it. What a potential jury might make of her lying, is anyone's guess, but it certainly doesn't make stupid George look good.

The already is a perjury charge. The case doesn't look good for the prosecutors, however.

 

[Alt+F4]

The already is a perjury charge. The case doesn't look good for the prosecutors, however.

Ah, thanks, I didn't know that (regarding perjury). I agree, it doesn't look promising for the prosecution. But hey, that's Florida for ya.

 

[LashL]

I haven't really been following this case but I seem to recall that at the (second?) bond hearing, there was a witness who set out all of the bank account transactions and PayPal transfers and such. Are the documents showing the bank transactions and such relating to that evidence available online? If they are, presumably those documents would show how much money was in which accounts on which dates so as to settle the issue of whether or not Ms. Zimmerman had money in her own bank account as of the date of her testimony that is the basis of the perjury charge?

 

[Dan O.]

I haven't really been following this case but I seem to recall that at the (second?) bond hearing, there was a witness who set out all of the bank account transactions and PayPal transfers and such. Are the documents showing the bank transactions and such relating to that evidence available online? If they are, presumably those documents would show how much money was in which accounts on which dates so as to settle the issue of whether or not Ms. Zimmerman had money in her own bank account as of the date of her testimony that is the basis of the perjury charge?

In the bank records I've seen, the account numbers were redacted. Even if they weren't, we donn't know which account is Shelly's.


If we were keeping an indexed repository of the known information, it would make looking this sort of thing up a heck of a lot easier. But I guess that's not the way of a true skeptic. Apparently the goal of skeptics is to keep information private so it can be whipped out as a zinger to win debating points.

 

[KatieG]

In the bank records I've seen, the account numbers were redacted. Even if they weren't, we donn't know which account is Shelly's.


If we were keeping an indexed repository of the known information, it would make looking this sort of thing up a heck of a lot easier. But I guess that's not the way of a true skeptic. Apparently the goal of skeptics is to keep information private so it can be whipped out as a zinger to win debating points.

At the justicequest forum, there is this thread:

http://www.justicequest.net/forums/showthread.php?t=63844&page=4

You don't have to join the forum to read, so it's a pretty good resource even if you don't want to join any discussions there. There are a couple other threads, one for transcripts, maps of the crime scene and evidence/discovery. There is some timeline information also. It's worth a look.

 

[WildCat]

No. I'm claiming that superficial abrasions too insignificant to be noted during a medical exam aren't evidence of a punch, let alone several.

And since you are claiming there were "multiple punches" I'm waiting for to provide evidence of that claim.

So the abrasions just popped up on their own, like a pimple?

 

[WildCat]

What's even more interesting is that Zimmerman, in his NEN call, states that Martin "has his hand in his waistband", indicating that he thinks that this is important and possibly threatening. And he further notes that Martin "has something in his hand" soon after this, and immediately pleads "please, just get an officer over here." And yet, he expects us to believe that *him* sticking his hands into his pants after following Martin and being confronted by him is a completely invalid reason for Martin to hit him.

Why yes, yes it is. Zimmerman called the police, Martin attacked Zimmerman.

One of those is a legal response, one isn't. Can you guess which one?

Zimmerman and his supporters use this double-standard a few times to justify Zimmerman's actions in this case.

If people were complaining that Martin called the police on Zimmerman you'd have a point. But that's not what happened, is it?

 

[johnny karate]

I haven't really been following this case but I seem to recall that at the (second?) bond hearing, there was a witness who set out all of the bank account transactions and PayPal transfers and such. Are the documents showing the bank transactions and such relating to that evidence available online? If they are, presumably those documents would show how much money was in which accounts on which dates so as to settle the issue of whether or not Ms. Zimmerman had money in her own bank account as of the date of her testimony that is the basis of the perjury charge?

The records can be found here.

Shellie Zimmerman's credit union account statement begins on page 23 (The account number is redacted, but her name still appears).

It indicates that on the day of the bond hearing (04/20) she had a balance of $57,830.81 after making a cash withdrawal of $6000.

Meanwhile, she was in court, under oath, testifying as follows:

O'Mara: Are you of any financial means where you can assist in those costs?

Shellie: Not that I'm aware of.

I'm still waiting for anyone to explain to me how that is not perjury.

 

[johnny karate]

So the abrasions just popped up on their own, like a pimple?

Superficial abrasions are minor injuries. Punches tend to cause more serious injuries. You know, like a broken nose.

Unless you think that after breaking Zimmerman's nose, Martin began to deliver a series of light, glancing blows that only slightly abraded Zimmerman's skin?

Here's a possible scenario:

Zimmerman follows Martin, and then grabs him.

Martin punches him in the nose.

The two tumble to the ground with Martin on top of Zimmerman.

Zimmerman reaches for his gun, and Martin tries to restrain him.

In the course of the struggle, Zimmerman cuts his head on the concrete and receives slight abrasions from rolling around.

Now I'm not say that's what happened. Because I don't know what happened. I'm saying it's a possible scenario.

So you tell me, what evidence exists that renders my theoretical scenario impossible and makes the scenario that Zimmerman offers - and you appear to believe - automatically true.

 

[WildCat]

Superficial abrasions are minor injuries. Punches tend to cause more serious injuries. You know, like a broken nose.

Unless you think that after breaking Zimmerman's nose, Martin began to deliver a series of light, glancing blows that only slightly abraded Zimmerman's skin?

Here's a possible scenario:

Zimmerman follows Martin, and then grabs him.

Martin punches him in the nose.

The two tumble to the ground with Martin on top of Zimmerman.

Zimmerman reaches for his gun, and Martin tries to restrain him.

In the course of the struggle, Zimmerman cuts his head on the concrete and receives slight abrasions from rolling around.

Now I'm not say that's what happened. Because I don't know what happened. I'm saying it's a possible scenario.

So you tell me, what evidence exists that renders my theoretical scenario impossible and makes the scenario that Zimmerman offers - and you appear to believe - automatically true.

Cool story bro, but there's actual evidence for Zimmerman's story. You're just making stuff up.

 

[johnny karate]

Cool story bro, but there's actual evidence for Zimmerman's story. You're just making stuff up.

You must have missed this part:

So you tell me, what evidence exists that renders my theoretical scenario impossible and makes the scenario that Zimmerman offers - and you appear to believe - automatically true.

Feel free to show me the evidence that specifically corroborates the claim that Zimmerman was punched multiple times.

 

[Unabogie]

The records can be found here.

Shellie Zimmerman's credit union account statement begins on page 23 (The account number is redacted, but her name still appears).

It indicates that on the day of the bond hearing (04/20) she had a balance of $57,830.81 after making a cash withdrawal of $6000.

Meanwhile, she was in court, under oath, testifying as follows:



I'm still waiting for anyone to explain to me how that is not perjury.

This is one of the aspects of this case I find confounding. Not only do some people think that she won't be convicted, they actually think the case is weak? I just looked up "slam dunk" and next to the picture of Chick Hearn, there's Shellie Zimmerman. This is almost a textbook case of perjury: lying about a material fact while under oath.

The woman was conspiring with her husband to hide money and a passport from the court in a murder case. In other words, her perjury could be seen as not just lying, but lying to facilitate a flight from justice.

I'm willing to make an avatar bet with anyone who cares to that there is no way in hell Shellie is acquitted.

She may take a plea deal, she may turn on her husband to make it go away, but the following two things will not happen:

1. All charges are dropped.
2. She is acquitted by a jury.

Those two things will not happen.

 

[Dan O.]

At the justicequest forum, there is this thread:

http://www.justicequest.net/forums/showthread.php?t=63844&page=4

You don't have to join the forum to read, so it's a pretty good resource even if you don't want to join any discussions there. There are a couple other threads, one for transcripts, maps of the crime scene and evidence/discovery. There is some timeline information also. It's worth a look.

A linear thread while a great tool for conversations is a silly way to try and organize information. How do you update the information once it's been laid down? How do you create indexes that don't quickly become out of date? How do you gather all the information on a single subject in one place so you can see the whole picture at a glance. How do you correct mistakes so they won't be repeatedly rediscovered in the archives?

 

[WildCat]

You must have missed this part:


Feel free to show me the evidence that specifically corroborates the claim that Zimmerman was punched multiple times.

The cuts, the broken nose, the abrasions, the witness statements, the physical evidence, Zimmerman's calls to the police.

But yeah, besides that there's nothing.

 

[Natural Born Skeptic]

We have a witness that saw one person on top repeatedly punching another. That clearly took place after whatever punch took GZ to the ground. Yet Trayvon Truthers want to go with the one punch theory and have asserted that witness may not be correct and that it may have been GZ on top of TM. I'm curious however, if that was GZ on TM, why were the ONLY injuries TM had the gunshot wound and the abrasion on his knuckle? Where are TM's face and head wounds if GZ was the one on top throwing punches? Hmm...

 

[Natural Born Skeptic]

The only conclusion I can reach is that, by his own admission, Martin should have found Zimmerman to be extremely threatening, and thus he had a legal right to beat Zimmerman, in order to protect his own life.

Using that reasoning it was a horrible misjudgment on the part of TM, and since TM was the agressor (you even used the word "beat") GZ had the same right to defend his own life and shoot TM in self-defense, thereby ending the beating.