Mere Oversight?
Friday, April 27, 2012 at 9:52AM
Several days ago, George Zimmerman’s attorney told the media that his client had nothing to do with any Websites bearing his name. That turned out to be untrue, but at the time, Mark O’Mara didn’t know that. He must have found out soon afterward because one site in particular, TheRealGeorgeZimmerman, did, in fact, belong to George. It was just taken down, but not before Ol’ Georgie Boy amassed a small fortune of $204,000. Oh my. At last week’s bond hearing, O’Mara declared him indigent. I understand that, to someone like Donald Trump, $204,000 is not much money, but to you, me and most people, including George, that’s a nice chunk of change. Granted, this is going to be an expensive run, but still…
My problem is two-fold. Did George keep the Website quiet by not disclosing its ownership until it became a bone of contention? In other words, was he deceitful about the site the moment O’Mara came on board? While that’s an issue, there’s something else that concerns me more; one that may shed light on George Zimmerman’s honesty. On CNN last night, O’Mara said he had no idea about the money at the time of the bond hearing, when he declared his client indigent. While it’s true that we, the public, have no idea how much money was in George’s PayPal account at that precise moment, it’s clear that O’Mara had no idea the account existed, let alone how much money was in it.
If George was harboring information from his attorney, how much can we believe? In my opinion, he’s already changed his story about the fatal incident on February 26. Now this misrepresentation. He sat in court, sitting on a nest egg, while his attorney argued his indigence. I humbly ask you, can we trust anything that George says? Did George even know he had that money while he sat in court?
Trayvon’s parents’ attorney, Benjamin Crump, wants the bond revoked. I don’t think it will be. What do you think?
Dave Knechel | in Benjamin Crump, Dave Knechel, David B. Knechel, David Knechel, George Zimmerman, Judge Kenneth R. Lester, Jr., Marinade Dave, Marinade Dave Knechel, Mark O'Mara, Seminole County, Seminole County Courthouse, Slimm v. Zimm, Sybrina Fulton, Tracy Martin, Trayvon Martin, Zimm v. Slimm, marinadedave | Share Article | 1 Reference 
LEGAL NOTICE
©David B. Knechel. All Rights Reserved. No portion of this site can be reproduced in it's entirety or in part without expressed written permission by the owner/administrator of this site in accordance with the Digital Millennium Copyright Act. Section 512(c)(3) of the U.S. Copyright Act, 17 U.S.C. §512(c)(3). The charges against defendants are mere accusations and the subjects are presumed innocent until found guilty in a court of law.
Reader Comments (161)
Dave~~ let's all take the chance and dare to look at the other side of the coin.
Getting the story on the man accused of killing
Dave ~~ many gave their take on what transpired on the evening that Trayvon was fatally shot . Here is another for what it is worth.
Timeline of events-Feb 26th
Good video, Snoopy. Also, the timeline matches mine, which shows Trayvon talking to his girlfriend on the phone up until one minute prior to his death. The girlfriend's statements to authorities are what separates her version of events from George's. He was unaware of another version when he gave his account to police. We'll see.
Dave~~just taking a look at things that will or may transpire down the road. The following was not copyrighted so I swiped the whole thing and will provide the source... It will be good to get some docs to sink our teeth into eh?
Here goes...
As the case against George Zimmerman progresses, a lot of In Session and HLN social media followers want to know when they will see this case play out inside the courtroom. The case is still early in the procedural process, so it is difficult to say -- a lot could happen between now and when it goes to trial. Florida law and rules of procedure give us some idea, as do previous cases, so let’s take a look.
Zimmerman has a right to a speedy trial -- within 180 days from his April 11 arrest. Zimmerman’s attorney, Mark O’Mara, may decide to fast-track the case for trial, which means it could happen later this year.
In Florida, however, defense attorneys routinely waive the right to a speedy trial, which pushes it past the 180-day deadline. If O’Mara does waive the right to a speedy trial, he will probably do it in the next month or two. And that means the trial would likely be next year.
Prosecutors may give O’Mara the first round of “discovery,” police reports, autopsy report, photographs, and other items assembled as part of the investigation, as soon as next week. Releasing documents between sides is an ongoing process as new information becomes available, new reports are generated and attorneys take depositions of key witnesses.
O’Mara says it will be at least a few months before he decides whether to ask for a pre-trial hearing on Zimmerman’s potential entitlement to the “Stand Your Ground” immunity because he wants to make sure he has all the facts.
Once O’Mara files the stand your ground motion, a hearing will be scheduled. At that hearing, Zimmerman’s team has the burden of proving by “a preponderance of the evidence” that his use of deadly force was justified. Preponderance of the evidence basically means it’s more likely than not that Zimmerman was justified in using deadly force. This is very different from a trial where the burden is on the prosecutors to prove each element of an alleged crime beyond a reasonable doubt.
Florida’s Stand Your Ground statute provides very specific elements that Zimmerman must prove: that he was not engaged in unlawful activity, that he was attacked in a place he had a right to be and that he reasonably believed his life and safety were in danger. He cannot, however, be justified in using deadly force if he provoked the altercation, unless he was attacked with more force than he initiated.
It’s hard to imagine how Zimmerman could meet those criteria without testifying at the hearing. So, expect to hear from him if he requests, and is granted, a Stand Your Ground hearing.
If the judge believes Zimmerman was standing his ground, the case will be dismissed and he will have immunity from further prosecution. If Zimmerman loses the Stand Your Ground hearing, the case will proceed to trial. But there’s a potential next step that could delay a trial: Either side -- the prosecution or defense -- can appeal the judge’s decision. The appeals process could take weeks or months.
Source
Dave~~I thought a trial date had to be set and then the state would start giving the discovery to the defense within 15 days. Once the defense has reviewed it, then we get our mitts on it. I guess I was wrong and it may be as soon as next week with no trial date set and the state may pass over the discovery....hmmm I am almost certain it was Mark O'Mara who mentioned the 15 days...
That's it until I get my next burst of energy... Snoopy is off to relax....*snide grin
I don't blame you for wanting to relax. You've done lots of intensive work, Snoopy, and it sure is appreciated. Personally, I don't believe GZ would win a SYG motion because of one simple reason... the testimony of TM's girlfriend, who was on the phone with him. Her statement will be that he TM was trying to lose the guy, not confront him, and both she and GZ have said that two exact statements were made between the two of them. Therefore, the judge will have to let it go to trial, in my opinion.
Thanks for all your help.
Dave~~I love doing what I am doing...especially when it gets down to the legal issues.... I just hope O'Mara sticks with this case so I can follow him around... BTW, I found an excerpt about the '15 days'.... The following is mostly about getting discovery released..
After Friday's hearing, O'Mara told Local 6 he disagrees with what he called Ponce's "more strict interpretation" of the discovery deadline. O'Mara believes the deadline for Corey's office to make the documents public has not yet passed because his interpretation is that the 15 day deadline for Corey's office to make its evidence public doesn't start ticking until after a defendant's arraignment. Zimmerman's is scheduled for May 8.
More here...
Lawyer: Angela Corey missed deadline to release evidence
Dave~~Re the mini trial to get Zimmerman immunity on Stand Your Ground.... Once O'Mara gets his hands on the discovery, he will make a decision if it is worth filing a motion for the mini trial. He will weigh the evidence eg: Z's medical and pics taken at scene of crime, autopsy report- was gun fired at close range ( arms length or less), projectory of bullet path, any evidence gathered in the grass and pavement where struggle took place, blood on T and Z's clothing, etc. He will weigh this against the testimony of Trayvon's girlfriend. It is her word against Z's and then they have eye witnesses who came up with different stories.
There are some people quite anxious to find out how Corey came up with a second degree murder charge. I know several lawyers who are waiting with bated breath... and one armchair detective too. *smile
Sherry,when it comes to guns Florida is hardly a "swing state". Here's an article from Palm Beach that gives an overview of the recent history of gun laws there (and, Yes, the NRA helps write the legislation much of the time):
http://www.palmbeachpost.com/news/crime/how-the-nra-attained-dominance-in-the-gunshine-2288357.html
I just got through checking out StormFront (the Nazis)- and they're all in a twist trying to figure out if supporting Zimmerman is OK- he IS after all part Hispanic! And they HAVE to hate all non-whites, don't they now? Since that's like their whole point. What to do, what to do...
Actually, a lot of NRA types don't think GZ's defense is covered by SYG, and are quietly voicing concern that they be not too closely tied in with public support, just in case.
Oh, in my Humble Opinion Obama gave a pretty brief, nuanced and personally-felt statement. The silence from Romney is deafening- I would've expected at least a lame pile of applesauce about Need-For-Fair-Trial and Wait-For-All-The-Facts, which would certainly be in order and most all Americans regardless of background/race could agree with, at least in the abstract. Someone should throw the question out there- it would give his handlers fits, especially if he brings up his "dead varmint" tally....
Sherry - As an admitted racist you couldn't possibly understand what I was trying to get across and since it's your last post here, you won't see this most likely. If you do, you need to take a break, walk away from your computer for a while, past your loan black couple, and go to one of the rallies or marches that are taking place over this case. While GZ may not have acted because of "race" the fact that people would rally to the defense of this murderer and donate over 200K is being interpreted as a racial event by many many black people. And, in case you didn't notice, this is a comment section where I am allowed to voice my opinion. You are entitled to yours for what its worth.
Snoopy: I did not say that ALL attorneys are dishonest. Reread my post. I've worked in the legal field for 30+ years so I base my comment on fact through experience. What I said was that it is not unusual for attorneys to say, "don't tell me, I don't want to know" so that they can continue to be ignorant. It's common practice especially in the criminal law field.
It is fact that O'Mara knew of the sites the first day he took on to represent GZ. If you need the link to his first press conference, let me know and I will provide it. I hold to my opinion that O'Mara purposely did not inquire into the monies that were collected through the websites. Why? Because it got GZ the low bail that he was hoping to get. I don't believe O'Mara knew exactly how much was in the account, because as I said, I believe he purposely did not want to know - but when he realized that it was in the 100's of thousands, he knew he had to come forward and disclose it. On the other hand, you can't convince me that GZ and his family didn't know. The funds went to a PayPal account - if you have ever had any experience with PayPal, you would know that you get an email each and every time there is activity in your account - yep, that means that GZ received an email each and every time someone made a donation. Now, we all know that GZs brother was supposedly handling the account while GZ was in jail - and you want me to believe he never told any of the other family members or GZ as they were scraping and scratching to dig up $15k for bail? Honey, I've got a bridge to sell you if you do. As of yet, we do not know what the Judge is going to do - but O'Mara has made no bones about saying on the media that he doesn't believe anything will come of it. So he obviously knows the judicial system like I do. The Court has bigger fish to fry than worry about this type of B.S. I stand behind my comments which were based on as much logic as you use in your comments. And because I am especially good at it, I can do two things at one time, like express emotion along with logic. What amazes me is how gullible people can be. We both have opinions, and I am entitled to mine as much as you are yours. If you won't ridicule my comments, I will be just as polite with respect to yours. Peace.
This is one of those news stories that's bound to bring out a host of emotions. The Casey Anthony case was the same way, but at least it wasn't racial. I think that most people would like to see this as something that isn't racial at all, but it is, and there's no escaping it. What we must do is to be as gracious to one another as possible. I know this brings about a lot of raw emotions, but just remember what the word "civil" means in civil rights. Trust me, it took many years of blogging before I understood it. Lots of rage was tossed around during the Anthony mess, and I like to think of myself as wiser these days. I hope, anyway.
Thanks Dave. I try to be civil. You will not see me coming to your site attempting to cause illwill or arguments, but I do believe I should be allowed to stand up for myself. I will say that I have tried to view this case as if it weren't racist profiling but more criminal profiling. The prosecuter apparently heard "fu***** punks" instead of what was originally claimed, so I am willing to take that road. Either that is what they truly found, or they are purposely ignoring it in an attempt to calm the civil unrest that has been boiling up. I am sure the FBI has scrutinized the 911 tape and most likely knows exactly what GZ said. For all we know, the prosecutor may have decided to let the FBI handle that aspect of the case should the state not obtain a conviction of their liking through its dual soveriegnty laws. In which case, I believe the affidavit of probable cause was drafted very carefully with this in mind. And, this may have been explained by the prosecutor to the Martins, and maybe not. In any event, that is why the donations of 200k offends me so. I personally do not see how anyone can expect the Martins or the black community to see this as criminal profiling and not see these donations as being support for a murderer because the victim was black. I realize that the NRA and gun activists are more than likely the major donors, but it simply looks bad.
I've noticed that there are a few who do a lot of speculation here in the comment section in favor of GZ when there is factual evidence to substantiate otherwise. I can only presume this oversight is on purpose to further their championing of GZ as the good guy or misunderstood one. That's fine, however, I do not believe that these people should be able to critique others who have taken the time to know the factual evidence, as little as there is, form opinions and express them here when they conflict with their speculations. These very same people took the same stance back in the CA case and many of us found it frustrating as I recall. I guess what I am trying to say is this - before someone starts critiquing my opinions which are formed on factual evidence that would lead a reasonable person to formulate a similar opinion (MHO) - the criticizer should have to back their speculations up with factual evidence and not just the desire that it be so.
Yes, I believe "we can all get along." Thanks Dave.
Everyone should find this interesting:
George Zimmerman Legal Case
The website posted above states, among other things:
"I want to take a moment to clear up some of the confusion regarding the monies raised on Mr. Zimmerman’s website. My understanding is that there were three websites which had PayPal accounts attached to them. One or two of them were run by friends of Mr. Zimmerman, and then there was the web site therealgeorgezimmerman.com , which George administered. Two accounts seem to have very little money in them, though I have not seen any records on those as they are not being administered by my client. Mr. Zimmerman’s former website and the PayPal attached to it raised approximately $200,000.00 over the period of time that it was up and running. Mr. Zimmerman was using this money, as mentioned on his website, for his ongoing living expenses and other necessary expenses based upon the charge and eventual arrest.
As I was ending any Internet presence George had, we removed any Facebook accounts, Twitter accounts and websites. As we shut down the web site entitled therealgeorgezimmerman.com my client asked what we should do about the outstanding fee monies in the PayPal account or that had been taken out of the PayPal account since its inception. George immediately gathered the funds that were in either his or his wife’s account, or the PayPal account, and has forwarded those funds to me presently. We are still awaiting a check from the PayPal company which takes several days.
I am also accomplishing a review of all of the monies in and expenses paid out of those accounts, so I will have that information by next week.
The large amount of money that has been raised to date for George’s defense, I believe, is a testament to the support for George as he goes through this most difficult time. Though the concept of a legal defense fund is quite unique, it serves a very valid purpose and gives an opportunity for people to show their support to Mr. Zimmerman."
This clears up the question of whether GZ and his wife were aware of the monies in the PayPal account at the bail hearing - and not only aware, but spending it- he and his wife were utilizing the money for living expenses up to the time of his arrest and indeed monies were transferred to the wife's account. According to O'Mara in media interviews there remained 150K when he took over handling of the monies, meaning GZ spent 50k - $5k went towards the bail, the rest went towards living expenses. Everyone should go and read the bail hearing transcripts and make your own mind up if you truly believe that GZ and his family, his wife in particular, were being honest. GZ and his family have severe integrity issues - so, what really happened on February 26th?
Cherokee Native~ ~let's get one thing clear. When you address a person as 'Honey' and offer to sell them a bridge, you are demeaning that person. In the future, so we will both be on the same playing field, I will be calling you 'Sweetheart'. Keep your bridge...before I am finished, you may feel like jumping off it.
Dave~ ~ I will be back a little later to add my two cents...make that $204K worth!
Snoopy - Sweetheart is a nice term of endearment and I don't take offense if that is what you are hoping. I will say that I was not attempting to "demean" you, only give you back a little of what you were trying to give me in questioning my logic. And, oh, threats and bullying do not scare me if that is what you are trying to do now. Can't wait for you to return.
Sorry Dave - she's egging it on.
Sweetheart~ ~ no egging, I do not believe in wasting good food, fried, scrambled and poached....yummy.
I have no legal background btw... zilch...nada... guess I do possess a little common sense tho..
Mark NeJame was questioned about the funds on Jane Velez Mitchell's show... he decided to withhold his opinions until he could view some figures re the accounts... in black and white. The judge withheld his ruling until he sees the figures...
Now please tell me how you have mastered something that those two could not? Mark O'Mara was made aware of the balances of those fund accounts on April 24th... now how do you know what was depositied in those accounts from the time of the bond hearing, April 20th and the 24th? From April 10th when Z was incarcerated up until the bond hearing on April 20th?
Dave~~no need to referee... I have not been known to maim or harm anyone but I will attest to the fact, I will give their gray matter a good work out..
Oh Snoopy quit being snarky. Obviously, you have spent more time on the blogs and the gossip channels than you have truly researching what you would like to know, and need to know before you go questioning other people about what they know and how they formed their opinions. And if this is your 204k worth, I am truly laughing here. O'Mara was aware of the websites as early as April 12th - when he did his first press conference - As an attorney it was his responsibility to vet his client and know what was available to him in the form of assets at the time that he represented to the Court that his client was indigent. He screwed up - he even admits it - he just didn't realize how much. That he knew ANY amount of money was in those accounts he had a legal and Bar obligation to find out if he was submitting total disclosure and accurate information to the court.
I am put off by your sense of entitlement and resulting demands. I owe you nothing, zip, nadda. As a courtesy, I provide you with the below. But from here on out - do your own research and leave me alone. I am perfectly fine with ignoring your posts if you will be so kind as to ignore mine. I think that is an amicable way of ending this fiasco. If you can't abide by this request, then yes, I would ask that Dave intervene and put an end to your attempt to bully.
He is asked about the websites at the end of the PC towards 6:55. So he was on notice clearly. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vvu_iLatGEk
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F8N76dtZ ... op&list=SL
--omara explains the 200,000 to JVM----3:03
--omara--"I guess i'll take some responsibility for not really vetting all that through, BUT----there was a lot else going on in trying to get this, keep him safe, and get him ready for release."
--omara--"I was surprised there was that much gathered in one month."
(april 10th-april 24th is not 'one month'.)
http://www.flsenate.gov/Laws/Statutes/2011/903.035
Florida Statutes --Chapter 903---Bail
903.035 Applications for bail; information provided; hearing on application for modification; penalty for providing false or misleading information or omitting material information.—
(1)(a) All information provided by a defendant, in connection with any application for or attempt to secure bail, to any court, court personnel, or individual soliciting or recording such information for the purpose of evaluating eligibility for, or securing, bail for the defendant, under circumstances such that the defendant knew or should have known that the information was to be used in connection with an application for bail, shall be accurate, truthful, and complete without omissions to the best knowledge of the defendant.
(b) The failure to comply with the provisions of paragraph (a) may result in the revocation or modification of bail.
(2) An application for modification of bail on any felony charge must be heard by a court in person, at a hearing with the defendant present, and with at least 3 hours’ notice to the state attorney.
material information in connection with an application for bail
(3) Any person who intentionally provides false or misleading material information or intentionally omits material information in connection with an application for bail or for modification of bail is guilty of a misdemeanor or felony which is one degree less than that of the crime charged for which bail is sought, but which in no event is greater than a felony of the third degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082 or s. 775.083.
Florida Statute that governs the minimum information you must disclose when filing for a determination of indigent status:
http://www.flsenate.gov/laws/statutes/2011/27.52
The application must include, at a minimum, the following financial information:
1. Net income, consisting of total salary and wages, minus deductions required by law, including court-ordered support payments.
2. Other income, including, but not limited to, social security benefits, union funds, veterans’ benefits, workers’ compensation, other regular support from absent family members, public or private employee pensions, unemployment compensation, dividends, interest, rent, trusts, and gifts.
3. Assets, including, but not limited to, cash, savings accounts, bank accounts, stocks, bonds, certificates of deposit, equity in real estate, and equity in a boat or a motor vehicle or in other tangible property.
4. All liabilities and debts.
5. If applicable, the amount of any bail paid for the applicant’s release from incarceration and the source of the funds.
Note it doesn't say - THIS ONLY MEANS ASSETS YOU CAN LIQUIDATE RIGHT THIS MOMENT. You are supposed to declare ALL assets and gifts.
http://usnews.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/ ... nfirm?lite
George Zimmerman takes to Web to raise money for legal costs, lawyers confirm
I am the real George Zimmerman. On Sunday February 26th, I was involved in a life altering event which led me to become the subject of intense media coverage. As a result of the incident and subsequent media coverage, I have been forced to leave my home, my school, my employer, my family and ultimately, my entire life. This website's sole purpose is to ensure my supporters they are receiving my full attention without any intermediaries.
It has come to my attention that some persons and/or entities have been collecting funds, thinly veiled as my “Defense Fund” or “Legal Fund”. I cannot attest to the validity of these other websites as I have not received any funds collected, intended to support my family and I through this trying, tragic time.
I have created a Paypal account solely linked on this website as I would like to provide an avenue to thank my supporters personally and ensure that any funds provided are used only for living expenses and legal defense, in lieu of my forced inability to maintain employment. I will also personally, maintain accountability of all funds received. I reassure you, every donation is appreciated.
Sincerely, George Zimmerman
CherokeeNative ~~I will take your advice and skip over your very lengthy comments. I judge comments by the qualtiy of the words written not the quantiy so I can eliminate eye strain by not reading the repetiveness of the same old... trying to shove it down another's throat.
You have me pegged as being snarky and gossipy for asking for specific answers. That is fine too. One of our faithful regular contributors has refused to comment in here anymore and I have no intentions of bringing that total up to two. I have been in this business too long to let one fly in the ointment make me throw it all away.
In the future, I will address my comments to Dave and those who do not feel intimidated by my questions, opinions and facts.
Snoopy - I have no problem with someone asking why I have formed an opinion or why I base something on fact - but when it comes with remarks questioning my logic, I take offense. Just as you now insinuated that my post was something other than quality because it contained links where you could educate yourself to why I have the opinion I do. You accuse me of saying all attorneys are dishonest. When I point out that was not my comment and explain what I said, you move on to the next contention without ever acknonwledging your mistake; I have shown you that O'Mara knew of the accounts long before the 24th - you choose to ignore that as well. What would be nice is to see is you to acknowledge when you are incorrect without adding insulting comments or inuendos. If you care to start over and try to have "civil" conversations - I am fine with that. Choice is yours. Thanks.
P.S. - I notice your statement that "[o]ne of our faithful regular contributors has refused to comment in here anymore..." and specifically "our"caught my eye - are you now a part owner of the Marinade Dave's website? Or just how does it work that you consider it "our"? Just curious.
I might add that my desire to not argue with a poster should not be interpreted as being "intimidated." Hardly, I just find it nonproductive and immature.
Snoopy. I just had a chance to look t your time line. I am curious why you have Zimmerman as the one who is yelling for help just before the shot was fired. Just what are you basing that on? Last I read, the FBI did an analysis that said it was improbable that the voice was Zimmerman. Did yo get new information?
Porky3100~ ~ that timeline was not mine. I posted a link to a site and threw it in here for others to view. Personally, I have not made any comments of who I think was doing the yelling as I just don't know.
I am anxious to get to see some discovery but first the state has to give it to the defense and then the media can go after it. We should get to see the FBI voice analysis reports then.
Porky3100~~O'Mara submitted a not guilty plea on behalf of George Zimmerman to avoid Z having to appear in court at his arraignment. Once the judge accepts that waiver, then the state has 15 days to give the defense their discovery, if I am correct.
You can read it here...
Zimmerman quietly entered not guilty plea, avoiding court appearance
Dave~~WFTV is very happy to have Bill Sheaffer back. He has a show now on, "Central Florida Spotlight." I am hoping that Bill will do his driving down the center of the road this time around. *wink
The following is Bill's analysis on Zimmerman's bond hearing last week, etc...
George Zimmerman: How will he be on the stand?
For those interested:
Zimmerman's Notice of Appearance, Waiver of Arraignment, Written Plea, Demand for Discovery, Request for Jury Trial filed by O'Mara on 4/23/12 and served by mail/facsimile/hand delivery on Corey on April 12, 2012.
http://www.flcourts18.org/PDF/Press_Releases/4-24-12a.pdf
RULE 3.220. DISCOVERY provides:
***
(b) Prosecutor’s Discovery Obligation.
(1) Within 15 days after service of the Notice of Discovery, the prosecutor shall serve a written Discovery Exhibit which shall disclose to the defendant and permit the defendant to inspect, copy, test, and photograph the following information and material within the state‘s possession or control:
See more at:
http://www.floridabar.org/TFB/TFBResources.nsf/0/BDFE1551AD291A3F85256B29004BF892/$FILE/Criminal.pdf?OpenElement
I suspect the reason for the delay is that the prosecution and defense, from listening to them speak at the hearing Friday, have entered into an agreement to extend the time for prosecution to comply with the discovery until they can get a motion before the court to deal with their concerns of redacting identifying information of witnesses, etc. Caveat: This is my own personal suspicion based upon my legal experience, so I have nothing to support this as FACT in this particular case. I could be wrong and the prosecution has simply blown off complying, but I highly doubt that.
Snoopy
Thank you so much for the pointer to the article and for telling us that Bill Sheaffer is back. I am so happy that we will hear his take on things again. I enjoy reading your well researched information. I am eagerly awaiting rhe onslought of discovery because I don't believe I have sufficient information to make up my mind yet about what has happened. I firmly believe, however, that the "stand your ground" law was a major mistake on the part of the Florida legislature. I can't imagine the amount of pain that law has caused and will continue to cause to so many people.
Is it Trayvon's girl friend who testifies about the
Why are you following
What are you doing here?
Or did that come from the dispatcher tapes?
Laser - there are tons of information about Trayvon's girlfriend, and what she supposedlly has given as her statement to LE - so I encourage you to google it. Of course we don't know exactly what her statement was since we have not seen what the prosecution has. But, for example, this is what Trayvon's parent's attorney is claiming was said.
http://content.usatoday.com/communities/ondeadline/post/2012/03/reports-treyvon-martin-was-on-cellphone-when-he-was-shot/1
Hope this helps.
Amber~~thank you. Lord knows I try to get things out there- both pro and con. Richard Hornsby has a good post on the Stand Your Ground if you can interpret some of the legal jargon. When they amended the Stand Your Ground law to include that, one does not have to retreat when faced with a threat to their life, this is where they made a fatal error. Taking the Stand Your Ground law into the streets was a risky enactment.
An ordinary layperson has to read these twice in order for some of the info to sink in....
Trayvon Martin’s Death is not a Stand Your Ground Case – Sort Of
and...
Legally, Who Was the First Aggressor?
I read that piece by Hornsby and was very disappointing. Here we have an "expert" laying out an entire case before one piece of discovery is even laid out. I think that we need ot be very careful to not get locked on what defense attorneys are saying though. I am not attacking you in any way Snoopy but it does seem like you are doing your best to make a case FOR Zimmerman.
Now that we have dolled Zimmerman up and presented his defense, it may be worth while to visit a name that we have not heard for a while now. Travon, a kid walking home only to be tracked down and shot
Porky3100~~ I thought that Richard Hornsby did a good job at looking at both sides of the coin. He was assessing the situation from a legal stance and I don't recall him coming to any concrete conclusions. I believe he mentioned, "leave it up to a jury to decide." This indicated to me that there could be a trial in the offing.
My friend, it may come across as if I am taking Zimmerman's side. I am not going to come in here and bad mouth Z nor would I do the same to Trayvon. I don't know what happened on the evening of Feb 26th and I am not about to make judgement calls. I will give both sides their just due. If I notice that most of the comments are negative towards Zimmerman, then I will try to balance things out a bit. Is that not being fair? In a court of law they have two sides, the prosecution and the defense.
We have had little to work with thus far. It has been, he said, she said... I want to see some of the discovery and then you may see me make a complete 360. The media has tried and convicted Z but that is not my style. In my own way, I am going to see he gets a fair shake on this blog and my own.
Yes, I will admit that I have been sticking up for Mark O'Mara. From his past history, he has been an honest attorney, a man with integrity and I will add classy, a rarity in a lawyer. Bill Sheaffer is another great attorney. I will continue to support O'Mara until someone can bring me proof that I am totally wrong. Just because I admire O'Mara it does not mean that I think Zimmerman should get off Scott free. Mark is just doing his job.
Where I live, I have not had to deal with or have been exposed to racial issues. We intermingle just fine here in the North. Maybe this is why I cannot get the same feeling as others do. I see two individuals at Twin Gates. One ended up fatally shot. I do not see the color of their skin. I prefer to look at the evidence instead.
Porky3100~ ~I don't mind you questioning me because you do it in a respect way and I commend you for that. Ask away anytime...Snoop
You support Omara but mention nothing of the kid? The Martins lawyers have a lot to say but I have not seen you post their side of the story. Honestly I just have no more words to say about it.
Your take on this, Dave? I forgot to post this before calling it quits with your comment lines-
Dershowitz: Prosecutor in Trayvon Martin case overreached with murder charge
Porky3100~ ~ I do not post what the Martin's lawyers have been saying but I certainly would if they file a wrongful death suit against Zimmerman. They would become part of a case. I posted Richard Hornsby take on the Stand Your Ground Law so we could understand it a little better.
I think Dave should come in here and post some things and answer more comments. Maybe he will write another article.
I am not a one person show and I notice many comments defending Trayvon, in fact the majority of comments swing in his favor.
I will have a chat with Dave and maybe he has a remedy. If it means me taking a back seat, I do not mind at all as I have my own blog to take care of...anything to keep the peace and I am flexible...
I am wondering where you live, Snoopy, that you have not been exposed to racial issues. I am in the north and, unfortunately, I cannot say that we are free of racial issues here. As an example, I will post something that happened here recently that reinforces the prevailing view among black parents that their sons will be treated differently.
I have two sons, one a bit older and one a bit younger than Trayvon. As Dave said, this is a very emotional case. For me, the case is painful because I see my sons in Trayvon, and my heart breaks when I see the pain in his parents' faces. I can only imagine the horror of having one of my sons go out for a walk, only to be shot to death.
This case also hits close to home because of my sons' black friends, some of whom I've watched grow up. I can't stand the thought that one of them could be mistaken for a thug. But one of them has been, apparently. This is the event that I mentioned above:
My younger son is in 8th grade at a school located in a very wealthy suburb, an area where large houses sit on several acres. The school has very large grounds. There is a pickup area where parents' cars line up at the end of the school day. The students at the school wear uniforms, and as the school ends at 8th grade, the oldest students are 13 or 14. One of my son's black friends saw a sports car in the pickup line and walked over to look at it. As he approached, the driver looked at him and locked the doors. This boy has a beautiful, open face. He is very well liked, the kind of kid who is nice to everyone. He has an appealing personality, and the other kids like to be around him. He told my son about the man locking the doors. He (the friend) thought it was funny.
I don't understand how anyone could have seen this boy as threatening, especially in a situation where he clearly belonged at the school. Ironically, the class is about to go on a trip and this boy admits to a little fear and sadness about being away from without his mother.
Molly K ~ ~ I am in Canada. We do not have the Stand Your Ground laws or Concealed Weapons. We have strict gun laws.
My heart aches for black people who are looked at differently. My husband (now deceased) played in a band with two black men. I have been to their homes and their families have been to mine sharing meals etc. My youngest daughter's best friend was black from childhood into their teens. She still keeps in touch with me since my daughter moved away and I get a big hug when she visits or we meet elsewhere. I generally do not discuss my private life but felt it necessary to show that I am not a racist in any way shape or form. In fact, I feel ridiculous having to explain myself.
That being said.....
Dave, I have decided to refrain from posting any more links for the time being. I did not win any popularity contests in here today, nor yesterday. The last thing I want to do is jeopardize your blog. I prefer to discuss the legal issues pert to the case in question.... Since I do not believe that Zimmerman was/is racist, I will withhold my comments as well.. maybe when some discovery comes in, I will take up where I left off....
Dave~~good time to take a vacation.... here's one last one...
Zimmerman's attorney plans to delay request for evidence
She's all yours, kid....
G'morning Dave, all. I have found that it is not uncommon for lawyers to disagree on their interpretation of the law when applied to the facts of a particular case. I always try to keep in mind that just because the legal commentary broadcasting on my favorite channel "says it is so" doesn't necessarilly make it gospel. While I have immense respect for professor Alan Dershowitz and find Mr. Hornsby to have a similar reputation within his community, I believe they too can get it wrong at times. In any event, it is sometimes refreshing to get a different perspective on the law that is being applied to a particular case, and this case is no different for me. You all may find these articles informative:
Why Alan Dershowitz Is Completely Wrong About the Zimmerman Case
and
The Statutory Basis of the Murder Charge Against George Zimmerman and His Available Defenses Under Florida Law
http://viewfromll2.com/
MollyK - I completely understand how this case hits home - I too am a mother and it terrifies me to think that there are these kinds of events happening in our communities where are children are being profiled for the color of their skin or style of their clothes. I cannot even begin to think how afraid Trayvon must have been at being confronted by GZ in the dark behind a bunch of townhomes. As I have stated all along, I truly believe that GZ had his gun unholstered at the time he confronted Trayvon and this put Trayvon in "flight or fight" mode. He had no idea who GZ was and he was frightened. For all Trayvon knew, this guy was a gang-member protecting his turf that Trayvon had unknowingly trespassed on. So, it stands to reason that Trayvon would not have taken flight, for fear of being shot in the back, but instead tried to dislodge the gun from GZ through an altercation. It is sad, but these are the issues that teens must deal with today.
I also believe that GZ turned Trayvon over after the shooting him to check for weapons and this is why Trayvon was on his stomach. Being completely versed on the SYG law, I suspect that GZ was frantic to find some sort of weapon on Trayvon and that is when he was witnessed straddling atop of Trayvon's dead body, and then putting his hands to his head, like "oh shit, what have I done?"
Caveat: These are my personal opinions based upon my own interpretation of the facts and evidence that we have to date. Under no circumstances should you interpret my comments as challenging your own opinions.
Hey Dave -
Do you (or for that matter WE) - have a way to make these comments come up in the order of "Most Recent" - 1st?
I keep having to pan down all over the place.
[Let me see what I can find out, Laser. I'm out right now and on my iPad. I'll check when I get home.]
FYI~~Dave will not be available for the remainder of today. Hopefully, he may find a few minutes to check in later this evening or tomorrow morning. S
Snoopy, I didn't imagine that you were quite that far north! You Canadians are far ahead of us in gun control and other basics of civilization.
Cherokee, I imagine what might have happened during those very few minutes, too, and how terrified Trayvon must have been. I also imagine what it must have been like for Trayvon's father to see the crime scene photo of his son and for Trayvon's parents to hear the tapes of their son screaming (assuming that it was Trayvon's voice) and know that he died alone and terrified. I imagine what it will be like for his brother to go through life without him and what it must be like for his girlfriend to have witnessed, in a way, the terrible tragedy.
I am glad that Zimmerman has a good lawyer. There can be justice only if he has a chance to present his actions in the best possible light. I don't think anyone wants him to be railroaded.
I hope the prosecutors are competent. The investigator who testified at the bail hearing did not impress me.
G'morning All. You may find this interesting. It appears O'Mara missed one of GZs web accounts - his old My Space page. If you read through this, he mentions his 2005 charges, getting down with his "home boys" etc. He is strikingly different in appearance in that he is much heavier, but it is GZ.
http://www.myspace.com/onlytobekingagain/blog
As soon as O'Mara gets wind of this site, it will be taken down for sure because it certainly shows you the "gangster side" of GZ. Seens GZ wasn't the good little catholic boy that his family and O'Mara would have us believe.
Caveat: These are my personal opinions based upon my own interpretation of the facts and evidence that we have to date. I am sharing my conclusions concerning speculative topics. Under no circumstances should you interpret my comments as challenging your own opinions and/or conclusions.
Not to take away from this case and intergrate another but a similar incident is unfolding in Arizona in which a mentally disabled man was shot to death by an individual claiming "self defense". Arizona institutes the "Make my Day Law"
Here is the article: http://www.cnn.com/2012/04/29/us/stand-your-ground/index.html?hpt=ju_t3.
This incident occurred in the unlikeliliest of places: a Taco Bell drivethru
On a national basis I can see both of these cases being brought up to reconsider these laws and there may be some scrutiny over the concealed weapons permit carrier.
A few posts ago I stated that eventually if there are no parameters set on what "stand your ground" truely entails more and more murders will take place using this defense. When is it stand you ground and when is it murder?
I dont think it is as simple as i shot because of not knowing what the other was carrying which seems to be the reason for this incident.
B-Man, I'm Just thinking! As our laws were introduced in the beginnings they were taken literally by many of us, just as Scriptures from the Bible. Today, man's laws as well as Scripture are taken and twisted to suit whatever way they are beneficial to the one applied for or by whom. It is interesting and difficult to accept how there is no law to object to the way laws are twisted and no way to know for sure how Scripture quotes are to apply to any one individual in any one particular case. More and more "today", we can not depend on how anything was meant to be, as its original has been so variably interpreted. I can see it depends on just where any one (or I) might be in a situation, as to how I would want either or all interpreted to suit my cause. It is all quite distressing.
well...I'm reminded of our Constitution and a paragraph found within stating something to the affect that if you are unhappy with your government you have a right and a duty to change it. This is where people, like you and I, contact our Gongressman/woman to point out the flaws in the law and demand change.
when it comes to religion I feel its usually subjective. If you are to believe in the Bible as truth then you can not believe the existance of dinosaurs and or evolution. Not to mention you would have to also believe that, depending on which version you entrust, the earth is only a few thousand years old. I look at the Bible as a story book of sorts that details the trials and tribulations of a person who followed a GOD.
Like so many out there I think the greatest thing Jesus did was to show that every person has within their rights the ability to folllow anyone and believe in anything. To have faith. Blasphomy, sure if you choose to look at it that way. Beit christian or catholic or whatever floats your boat its your decision. If you feel the Bible is gospel then so be it but dont keep your blinders on as you go through life.
Laws are very similar and I agree with that assessment as i'm sure many will too. Many laws play out like a story book and you can truely see how our country evolves. When our forefathers came together and formed our democratic government giving us given rights as Americans I'm certain they did not intend that we the people acquire as many weapons as possible without recourses. Laws have morphed as our nation advances. What was good in 1812 (such as no donkeys are allowed to sleep in you bathtub) is not relative today. If i'm not mistaken there was a law that required men to walk on the outside of the woman (nearest the street) and this was because of the purpose of the awning. Most tenants living on highter floors simply emptied their pee/poop pots from there window and the awning deflected it...comes shivelry i guess.
I agree that people have the right to procure what ever weapon they want. I also feel it right that a background check is done in order for you to have a weapon. But if your only intent is to carry the weapon because you can and not necessarrily for protection then its lost its purpose? The make my day law here in my state simply implies to your house/property. should someone try to enter your property without permission you have the right to defend yourself and your property. Fights are common place these days. Disagreements are settled with your fists. mano-e-mano. Its unfair to believe that should you have a disagreement with someone they can pull a gun and shoot you smiply claiming that "they thought" you were carrying a weapon and be vindicated. The "stand your ground law" is more or less legalizing murder...all you have to do is claim self defense at every encounter...i dont think that was the designed purpose of the law?
Dave~~ the lawyers will have to do a case by case to get certain documents sealed. I expect it will depend on security issues. Hopefully we will begin to see some docs soon.
May 1, 2012 3:58 PM
SANFORD (CBSMiami) – The judge in the murder case against George Zimmerman has rejected the request by prosecutors for a gag order prevention discussion of the case, and has ordered the release of all documents filed with the court for public inspection.
The decision, revealed in a Tuesday afternoon court filing, is a victory for journalists who objected to an earlier decision to keep records under seal, a decision they claimed was made without proper justification.
Judge Kenneth Lester said he would allow some documents to be kept out of public access, including documents related to security and document which revealed Zimmerman’s current address.
More here....
No Gag Order For Laywers In Zimmerman Trial
Hey, Y'all. I'm trying to keep up here as best as possible but I've been busier than a one-armed paper hanger. It occurs to me with all this heated discussion (which really is healthy and normal, or so I keep telling myself!) that there is still a boatload of facts we just don't know yet. Certain of these facts we think we know may help the defense side and some surely don't, and the one this post was originally about (monies raised but not originally brought out in Court) would fall into the latter category, regardless of all else. Without a gag order now, stand back.... We are all just going to have to thrash around like so many fish on a dock as all this settles out, pre-trial, gasping for air.
Karen C~~ I will be back in the swing of things when we get some documents.... I know the media has been waiting patiently.
All this speculation is like going around and around in a big circle of which there is no end. The discussion got a bit heated but I think you know me....LOL I don't possess any credentials re the law but I will challenge anyone who writes fiction and tries to pass it off as factual. That is why I take with a grain of salt what I read on some websites. There are a few I trust...WESH being one of them.
Dave has been very busy in the real world... Let's hope we get some docs soon and something to mull over....
Another beautiful day - hope all is well. While we are waiting on discovery to be released - or rather, for a motion to be filed to resolve the redaction issues so that discovery can be eventually released, here's what is the latest in the media:
http://www.miamiherald.com/2012/05/01/2778234/myspace-page-is-latest-salvo-in.html
George Zimmerman’s crude Myspace page from 2005 uncovered
~Last week, O’Mara said he ordered his client to wipe his Internet presence clean. Zimmerman took down his website, a Twitter account and any other social media accounts. Any remaining, O’Mara said, were fakes.
Referring to the web page: "This one is a 7-year old Myspace page called “only to be king again” that makes disparaging comments about Mexicans. The Web page, which his attorney confirmed Tuesday is legitimate, makes reference to 2005 criminal cases and a brush in court with a woman who Zimmerman called his'ex-hoe'.”
"The Joe G page includes a missive written in street slang.
'I dont miss driving around scared to hit mexicans walkin on the side of the street, soft ass wanna be thugs messin with peoples cars when they aint around (what are you provin, that you can dent a car when no ones watchin) dont make you a man in my book,' the 2005 Myspace page said. 'Workin 96 hours to get a decent pay check, gettin knifes pulled on you by every mexican you run into!'
Another line suggested his friends went to jail and did not rat him out. 'They do a year and dont ever open thier [sic] mouth to get my ass pinched.'"
The Joe G. My Space page is still active, but I would expect that now that MOM has been made aware of it, the site will be taken down any time now. In my opinion, this web page sure shows a different GZ than the alter boy some have portrayed him as being.
Caveat: These are my personal opinions based upon my own interpretation of the facts and evidence that we have to date. I am sharing my conclusions concerning speculative topics. Under no circumstances should you interpret my comments as challenging your own opinions and/or conclusions.
I dont miss driving around scared to hit mexicans walkin on the side of the street, soft ass wanna be thugs messin with peoples cars when they aint around (what are you provin, that you can dent a car when no ones watchin) dont make you a man in my book,' the 2005 Myspace page said. 'Workin 96 hours to get a decent pay check, gettin knifes pulled on you by every mexican you run into!'
If this is not evidence of Zimmerman's proclivity to racially profile, I just do not know what it would take to convince people.