Bond, Revoke Bond
Tuesday, June 5, 2012 at 7:30AM Call me old fashioned or set in my ways or something, but I got used to the courtrooms run by Orange County judges Stan Strickland and Belvin Perry, Jr. By that, I mean, when we went to the Casey Anthony hearings, chances were good that the honorables would have been inclined to rule on new motions — ones presented that day — at a later date, giving the prosecution and defense (and us) time to ingest and digest the gist of what had just been presented. In other words, the judges routinely gave the opposing side an opportunity to work up a legal response to be argued at a subsequent hearing.
Don’t get me wrong. In no way am I questioning the manner in which Seminole County judge Kenneth R. Lester, Jr. (yes, another junior) runs his courtroom. As a matter of fact, I sensed from the start that this was a no nonsense judge; one who knows the law and how to interpret and implement it. Fair and firm… that’s what I’d call him. Balanced, too, but while attending the hearing last Friday, I never expected to hear a motion that had been filed a mere two hours earlier, followed by an immediate decision from the judge. Where did that come from, and why didn’t Mark O’Mara, George Zimmerman’s lead defense attorney, protest? Well, there’s more to the story, but first, the matter at hand. While the ending may have shocked us, it wasn’t the reason why we were there to begin with.
The hearing was to argue for and against releasing information pursuant to Florida’s rules of discovery, otherwise known as the Sunshine Law. The state said that the names of witnesses should be kept out of public view for their own protection. The defense agreed, and added that things should be kept at a slow pace for now. There’s no reason to release the information at the moment because there are a lot of people to interview further. This will take time.
The media wants everything made public because that’s the law, argued Orlando Sentinel attorney Rachel Fugate in response, and, eventually, the names will be made public anyway. Why not now? So far, she said, the state and defense haven’t shown good cause why any information should remain behind closed doors, and to be honest, it all depends on which way you look at things. Here, the crux of the matter goes well beyond protecting innocent witnesses, unlike the Casey Anthony case, which she compared it to. Casey never admitted that she killed anyone. George did, and that’s part of the problem, aside from race and outrage being major factors. Most of the public agreed with the prosecution in State v. Casey Anthony. Here, it’s deeply split.
Aside from race, the state contends that George Zimmerman’s statements to investigators add up to a confession, and because of that, they are exempt from disclosure. Of course, the defense disagrees. Yes, the defendant admitted he shot and killed the victim, but it was not a murder. It was in self-defense.
Judge Lester called it a matter of what’s inculpatory and what’s exculpatory. One says it’s a fish; the other says it’s a fowl, he added. Inculpatory is evidence that can establish a defendant’s guilt, while exculpatory is evidence that tends to clear a defendant of guilt.
In the end, the judge decided to follow the law and release the discovery documents, but not without poring over them, piecemeal, in camera, and redacted, which means he will most likely censor some of what’s released, like in the first document dump. And just like Judge Perry, Judge Lester reminded the attorneys that this will be no trial by ambush! What you see is what you get.
Incidentally, defense attorney Mark O’Mara said he expects to see a new round of discovery by Monday or Tuesday, so keep your eyes open, folks.
§
When Judge Lester abruptly revoked George Zimmerman’s bond on Friday, it caught me off guard. Like I said at the beginning of this post, I pretty much thought the court would allow time for the defense to prepare. After all, the motion was filed that morning. But I missed something along the way.
At the April 27 hearing to discuss the motions filed by media attorneys, O’Mara stated that his client had misinformed the court about his financial standing at the bond hearing held a week earlier, on April 20. (This signaled the prosecution to go on the offense and dig up some damning information.) While George sat silent in the courtroom, his wife Shellie, out of camera view, lied under oath about their financial situation. He was fully aware of what she was saying and doing. Instead of being flat broke like she testified, he had amassed a small fortune in excess of $135,000, give or take a few truckloads of chicken feed.
That’s not all. There was a problem with the passport — or passports — George held. At the bond hearing, he surrendered his U.S. passport and “tendered it to the court.” It was due to expire in May anyway. So far, so good, except that he failed to inform the court that he held another passport. It seems the first one was lost and he had applied for a replacement in 2004. Passports are good for ten years, so that means the new one is still good for another two years. Meanwhile, the old one resurfaced and that’s the one he turned over. While there is nothing illegal about it, the state had every right to cry foul. George is, after all, a defendant in a murder case, and the state takes EVERYTHING seriously. So does his team of defense attorneys.
And then there’s the judge.
While Judge Lester overlooked George’s indiscretion concerning the passport, he may have done so because of George’s overt lies concerning his finances. Obviously, that was the case in court last Friday, and because defense counsel had previously mentioned the money issue back on April 27, it was no real surprise when the state smacked George with its MOTION TO REVOKE BOND that day.
Did the defense see it coming? I don’t really know, but I will say this. Upon entering the courthouse, you have to pass through a security screen which includes removing your shoes. When you get to the 5th floor courtroom, you must pass through another security checkpoint before entering. As I was placing my personal items back in my pockets, Mark O’Mara came upon me. We spoke briefly. I told him how polite and respectful he was to me when Bill Sheaffer introduced us during the Anthony trial. Mark, if you recall, was hired as a legal consultant for WKMG. If you think back, you may remember Mark NeJame was also with the CBS affiliate. Anyway, whenever O’Mara and I saw each other again during the trial, we always exchanged greetings. He’s a real gentleman. This time, I did wish him the best in the courtroom and he didn’t seem preoccupied with anything that may have been coming down the pike. After the hearing, I spoke to him again, and he agreed when I said it wasn’t a good day.
“No, it wasn’t,” he admitted.
If I had to take an educated guess, I would say that the defense team did not expect this broadside from prosecutor Bernie De la Rionda, and to be honest, I don’t think it was the motion itself as much as it was De la Rionda’s blow-by-blow vocal delivery and the judge’s abrupt decision to revoke bond. It was a veritable wham-bam-thank-you-ma’am, slam dunk, bada-bing sorta thing.
Here’s the bottom line. George Zimmerman lied. While you may not have heard his own voice doing the lying, he did so through his legal counsel and through the testimony of his wife, in sickness and in health; through good and through bad. And the bad part about it was that he manipulated his attorneys and his spouse. That, in my opinion, is what really perturbed the judge the most. And lying to the court, of course. It’s a cold day in hell when you can pull the wool over a judge’s eyes, let alone get a chuckle out of him for trying.
While he sat in the Seminole County jail awaiting his bond hearing, George played his sudden fortune like a Wall Street pro, only he did it in code, assuming the law would never understand a word of it. Well, George, those plastic decoder rings you used to get in cereal and Cracker Jack boxes as a kid were invented a long, long time ago, before Dick Tracy, and it doesn’t take much of a brainiac to figure out that $135 = $135,000 in code-speak. Duh. It’s stuff like this that truly makes me wonder if George actually thinks of himself as some sort of comic book superhero who’s above the law. It’s not Superman… it’s… it’s Zimmerman!
Despite George’s immature attempt at deception, I’m going to go out on a limb and take a stab at how the judge will respond to a second bond motion filed by the defense requesting his release. Sure, it will be granted, but the judge is out of town this week, so George will have to sit and stew for awhile. God knows, he earned it. Of course, when the hearing is eventually held, he will kiss a good chunk that money in limbo good bye. Bond should be set to the tune of $1,000,000 if you ask me, which, when decoded, translates into a $100,000 down payment; still a mere pittance to a guy like him and his loyal minions, but a huge slice of the pie when it comes to the not so small matter of mounting legal fees.
[Since this writing, the defense team has decided against filing a new motion for a bond hearing at this time. See: Update For Motion On Bond]
Until the hearing comes, George and his defense team will need to do some serious head banging. He profoundly impacted his credibility with the judge. To those who disagree, listen to O’Mara’s own words. “There is a credibility question that now needs to be rehabilitated by explaining in a way what they were thinking, when they did what they did, and we’ll address it… I think that explanation or apology, if it is, should go directly to the person who deserves it. In this case, that is Judge Lester.” (See: George Zimmerman returns to Seminole County Jail)
Take a look, too, at what the Orlando Sentinel put together from their own reporting and research. This is something a jury will not ignore.
- The night he shot Trayvon Martin to death, police say Zimmerman told them his record was squeaky-clean. In fact, he had been charged in 2005 with resisting arrest without violence during an altercation with a state alcohol officer. Zimmerman wound up in a pretrial-diversion program, a scaled-down version of probation offered to nonviolent first-time offenders.
- When he was booked into the Seminole County Jail on April 23, he told the booking officer that he never had been in a pretrial-diversion program before, documents show.
- At his April 20 bond hearing, while making a surprise apology to Trayvon’s family, Zimmerman said he didn’t realize Trayvon was so young. In his call to police moments before the shooting, however, he described Trayvon — who was 17 — as in his “late teens.”
These things, plus the money deception, will not bode well for the defense. The judge will give George an opportunity to explain himself, but what does O’Mara think? “My understanding was that Judge Lester seemed to indicate that he wanted testimony. That is a very complex decision to make about what effect that would have, not only at the hearing itself, but any future testimony, so we haven’t made that decision yet.”
I don’t think I’m even close to going out on a limb when I say that George can kiss the old stand your ground defense good bye. Since it will be Judge Lester’s decision to make, wasn’t it really stupid of George to lie to him, of all people? Wasn’t that a blatant lack of common sense and honesty? Or was it stupidity? Couldn’t the night of February 26 have been the same thing? A blatant lack of common sense and honesty?
Because I am so sure this case will go to trial unless a plea deal is made — which I strongly doubt, George is going to have to do something to regain his credibility, but I don’t know what. His defense team is doing its best at damage control, but how much good will it do?
From the George Zimmerman Legal Defense Website, Details Regarding The Request For A Second Bond Hearing For George Zimmerman:
(Edited for content)
While Mr. Zimmerman acknowledges that he allowed his financial situation to be misstated in court, the defense will emphasize that in all other regards, Mr. Zimmerman has been forthright and cooperative. He gave several voluntary statements to the police, re-enacted the events for them, gave voice exemplars for comparison and stayed in ongoing contact with the Department of Law Enforcement during his initial stage of being in hiding. He has twice surrendered himself to law enforcement when asked to do so, and this should demonstrate that Mr. Zimmerman is not a flight risk. He has also complied with all conditions of his release, including curfew, keeping in touch with his supervising officers, and maintaining his GPS monitoring, without violation.
Why did George stay “in ongoing contact with the Department of Law Enforcement” when he first went into hiding? Because he thought of himself as one of them? A cop’s cop? Among his peers? The first thing a defense attorney worth his weight in salt would say to a new client is to shut up. That’s why this statement is meaningless. Of course it was his initial contact because, on advice of counsel, he stopped talking after that.
He has twice surrendered himself to law enforcement when asked to do so, and this should demonstrate that Mr. Zimmerman is not a flight risk. He has also complied with all conditions of his release, including curfew, keeping in touch with his supervising officers, and maintaining his GPS monitoring, without violation.
This, too, goes without saying. Isn’t that a given? This is what he was supposed to do, and most people comply with the law. Besides, once the cash was out of his hands, where was he supposed to hide? With what? Once the defense learned of the money, it was transferred into a trust fund where George couldn’t touch it. Neither could his wife.
The audio recordings of Mr. Zimmerman’s phone conversations while in jail make it clear that Mr. Zimmerman knew a significant sum had been raised by his original fundraising website. We feel the failure to disclose these funds was caused by fear, mistrust, and confusion. The gravity of this mistake has been distinctly illustrated, and Mr. Zimmerman understands that this mistake has undermined his credibility, which he will have to work to repair.
“We feel the failure to disclose these funds was caused by fear, mistrust, and confusion.” This is damage control at its finest. This is why exemplary defense counsel deserves to make the big bucks, and I’ve got to hand it to Mr. O’Mara, who I totally respect and admire. That sentence says it all, but it’s a classic contortion of relativity and relevance. It’s pointing the finger one way while speaking in another direction. Why? While focusing on George’s innate fear, mistrust and confusion, which we can all relate to, its actual intent is to confuse us and take the heat off him.
If George was really fearful, mistrusting and confused, why did he lie to the court? If he did nothing wrong, what was he fearful of there, of all places? The court was the first place he should have trusted. After all, the truth shall set him free. Right?
Dave Knechel | in 18th Circuit Court, Bernie De la Rionda, Bill Sheaffer, Casey Anthony, Chief Judge Belvin Perry, Dave Knechel, David B. Knechel, David Knechel, FDLE, Florida Department of Law Enforcement, Florida’s Government in the Sunshine, George Zimmerman, Judge Kenneth R. Lester, Jr., Judge Stan Strickland, Marinade Dave, Marinade Dave Knechel, Mark NeJame, Mark O'Mara, Motion in Limine, Orlando Sentinel, Rachel Fugate, Seminole County, Seminole County Courthouse, Seminole County Jail, Slimm v. Zimm, Stand Your Ground, Sunshine Law, The Retreat at Twin Lakes, Trayvon Martin, WKMG, Zimm v. Slimm, marinadedave | Share Article 
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 (140)
Dave, your last paragraph says it all about this entire fiasco. I look forward to future commentary on this case.
[Thank you, Terri. It kind of does say it all. I plan on writing a lot more on this case, too, and I hope you enjoy them all.]
This was such a wonderful read to come across this morning, Dave. I thank you for it!
My two favorite lines are:
1) Quote: “It was a veritable wham-bam-thank-you-ma’am, slam dunk, bada-bing sorta thing.”
AND
2) Quote: “It’s not Superman… it’s… it’s Zimmerman!”
I hardly dare let myself think about this case because I sense another huge miscarriage of justice is going to be the result. If one takes into consideration the money Mr. Zimmerman has received from all his ’fans’, the ‘miscarriage’ seems to be well on the way. That is in ‘my opinion only’, of course.
I appreciated your closing when you say: Quote: “After all, the truth shall set him free. Right?”
An uninformed or biased jury may allow him to walk the streets, but the ‘man in the mirror’ will always know the truth.
It is my hope that freedom only comes when that fellow 'makes himself clean' (or sets himself free), by telling the truth.
[Thank you, nan11. I spent considerable time on this post, so I'm glad you found it to be wonderful. I don't know where those lines come from in my head. As I'm writing, they just come out as I go along. I really appreciate how much you liked them. And most of the time, I don't know how I'm going to end a post until I get there, but that one was so appropriate. OK, I could understand if he lied to the public, but to the judge? Why should he have been fearful, mistrusting and confused over him, of all people? He wasn't, so that statement was nothing more than an excuse, not an explanation.
George may walk, but at the same time, many people will never forget what he did. While I would never want anything to happen to him, he will be fearful, confused and mistrusting for the rest of his life, no matter what the outcome.]
Dave, in my research on two cases where defendants (non-US citizens) successfully fled the country while on GPS monitoring, I learned that they had also been required to surrender their passports. Those passports are kept in a file drawer in the Clerk's Office (at least in Orange Co they are). I find it amazing that there's no reporting to TSA or US Customs or the airlines or whomever might be in a position to prohibit them from exiting the country to avoid being held accountable for their crimes.
[Hello, Laura! There's no doubt in my mind that George needed to turn over the second passport, but it was brought to my attention that he didn't apply for a second one prior to turning in the first. That's a misconception making the rounds. As for trusting him? No way. Not before, and certainly not now.
In this day and age, especially in the aftermath of 911, I find it hard to believe that there's still no coordination between agencies on local, state and federal levels. But it's true.
Thank you for commenting, and I'm glad to see you're back in the saddle. Also, I want to give you a call about something. Nothing major, but just a thought I have.]
I, also, appreciate your way with language, Dave. My favorite: "A shot in the dark heard round the world."
On the topic of Z perhaps considering himself one of the law enforcement "club," I wonder whether this is what was behind his attempt to speak with the special prosecutor. What could he have been thinking? Was he really going to try to talk his way out of the charges?
It seems to me that the defense is now in a catch-22 situation. The judge suggested that he would require testimony from him and his wife before bond would be granted again. Clearly, the defense does not want to put him on the stand, particularly now, perhaps never. So he may end up in jail until the trial to avoid jeopardizing his defense.
[I couldn't help myself with that title, Molly, because it was so true. Thank you for appreciating it.
As for Z wanting to speak to the special prosecutor, I think his opinion of himself is the reason why he chose to. Sadly, he was mistaken. Also, outside of his little realm that includes the duped Sanford Police Department, he carries no weight, and he failed to realize that cops are cops - what you say may be used against you in a court of law. Unfortunately for him, play cops never learned that.
I think it's interesting to now learn that the second bond motion has not been filed and may not be for weeks to come. No reason was given, but I'd say there is a conflict of interest, meaning that the judge will want George to take the stand, but the defense won't want that to happen, just as you suggest. Remember, just because a motion may be filed does not mean the judge has to hear it. I'm afraid, George will have to sit in jail for awhile. His lies have really theown a monkey wrench into his defense strategy. That prosecution means business.]
Great article! Terri and nan11 said it for me, too, about your post's stand-out comments.
Somehow, I think George is alot like Casey Anthony in the narcissism department and if he did walk away from this scot-free, he wouldn't think much of it beyond an occasional boast about how he was found to be a hero afterall. I doubt he would even be fearful of threats hanging over his head-why, that's just proof that he did the right thing and shows "reverse" racism! Ugh.
...it's Zimmerman! Whose only bravado comes not from kryptonite but from a loaded weapon.
Its like a commentor said at another site: George may be found innocent in the legal sense but he is surely culpable for Trayvon's death. Would to God it would haunt him for the rest of his life no matter how the court rules.
[Why, thank you, Sherry! I love to play with words.
I agree that George has a narcissistic streak, but I don't think he is amoral like Casey. He has a conscience, in other words, and he didn't set out to do anything harmful that day. He just has a convoluted view of life and his own prowess. As for threas hanging over his head, I am convinced he is scared to death. In the end, the gun is what gave him his powers. Without it, he would never have squared off with Trayvon; he never would have chased after him. Now, without it, he is left with his own resources, and inside, he is a weak man. Even if he's exonerated in court, he will live in fear for the rest of his life, unless he changes his name and appearance, or moves to Peru. Life in America will never be the same, so is that a form of punishment? Yes, but it's not enough to pay his debt to society for inflicting death upon another person. Death is a very serious thing. To society and to God.]
Wow, some really yummy meat-n-potatoes here, Dave! "It's...Zimmerman!"- love it. Yeah, I definitely think that that kind of mentality is at play in this guy's head at times. You've really put us right there in the hallways in the Courthouse with this one. Thank you. Worth the wait.
Excellent article Dave. I realize that Judge L. opted not to address the passport issue during the hearing, but do you think we have heard the last of it? GZ knowingly turned over an invalid passport, while apparently holding on to the valid one. It seems obvious to me that both passports were located during the move from their apartment. When GZ was issued the new passport, it came with instruction about what to do with the invalid one if found, and the paperwork also explained that the old one was useless, in so far as travel is concerned. GZ was arrested weeks after the move. As I see it, one of two things occurred. GZ gave O'Mara the reissued passport prior to the bond hearing and assumed he would turn it over or he provided it to him post hearing, along with the PayPal info. So, if he gave O'Mara the new passport ahead of time, why bother giving it to the court at all if the new one was in his attorney's possession? I guess my big question is, which passport were GZ and Shellie referring to in the jail conversation? If she was to place a passport in the safe deposit box, it seems it would have been the new one. Why bother locking it away if it was going to be turned in days later. My take is that he turned it over to O'Mara along with the $$$ and O'Mara had yet another oh crap moment, realizing that his client had pulled yet another fast one on the court. He had no idea GZ had discussed the passport while in jail, and crossed his fingers the deception would go unnoticed - Which likely would have happened had GZ not been recorded discussing his plan for locking it away with Sheila.
My next question. Do you think GZ might have contemplated leaving the country in the weeks prior to the bond hearing, once he discovered the amount of money pouring in via his PayPal Patrons?
Bottom line, IMO, the passport issue is one more incident where GZ's credibility comes into question. I just can't see the prosecution letting it slide by.
[Thank you very much, Vicky. I'm glad you like the article.
In my opinion, as far as the judge is concerned, the passport issue is over and done with. Zimmerman did enough damage, and plenty of it, with his lying, and that includes his wife. She xould be charged with perjury, but we have to remember, it costs money to prosecute someone. Yes, Judge Lester did give De la Rionda a green light, and charges could be pending, but the key ingredient in this legal recipe is George. I think the judge bypassed the passport issue because the lie trumped it beyond the point of dwelling on it. Instead, he chose to lock him up, and for how long? So, you see, what good would a passport in his possession do? He can't go anywhere.
Another way to look at it would be this. Suppose I'm caught with a counterfeit passport. The cops arrest me, but here's the catch. They're willing to let me go if I tell them who the counterfeiter is. In this case, I'm a small fish. In George's case, the passport is the small fish, and the lie is the whole meal. Believe me, George is in enough trouble with that mess, and if you look at the circumstances surrounding the passport conflict, it would be tough to prove he was contemplating a move out of the country. Do I think the thought crossed his mind? Sure, but that doesn't mean he'd ever act on it. In his mind, he's convinced himself that he is righteous on all counts, but he just got a rude awakening. The court doesn't agree with him. Neither does his attorney. Personally, I don't think the passport mix-up will be allowed at trial.]
I see the judge's quick response to the motion to revoke bond as a statement - something like, "There's no possible excuse for this." Clearly, the normal thing to do would be to give O'Mara some time to present Z's side of things and then rule after both sides had been heard. I see the fact that he didn't do this as a reaction to the strength of the evidence of lying. And O'Mara is not even trying to argue against the judge's action. He seems to be throwing Z on the judge's mercy, probably hoping at best to get bond reinstated without the need for testimony. If he manages this, it will be a victory.
I hope these events can be brought into the trial because they demonstrate something important about Z's character.
Somehow I doubt that this will be the last stupid act on Z's part.
[No doubt, George provoked the judge and that was just plain stupid. The problem here is that a simple apology won't do. Yup, George will own up to his mistake and promis not to do it again, but I see it as another phony and feeble attempt just like his apology to Trayvon's parents. He lied there, too, which rendered it meaningless. It seems George is used to getting away with everything, but this time, he's in the real world, not apologizing to his mother or cousin or friends. And the mere fact he used Feank Taaffe as his pit bull shows how he likes to pass the buck onto someone else. I'm afraid he had his SYG excuse well rehearsed, just in case something like this ever happened. It did, and his play is failing miserably at the box office. How quickly he cried SYG after the shooting. That means he was well-versed in it.
At trial, the lying to the judge may not be admissable, but all of his other lies will be.]
Dave, I found the following while looking around for information about misrepresenting information during a bond hearing. I thought it might interest you and others. It seems that what GZ stands accused of at the moment, is a third degree felony in Florida. No wonder O'Mara is stressing over this latest development. I wonder what the next move from both sides will be.
http://www.flsenate.gov/Laws/Statutes/2011/903.035
Dave, you'll have to fix the link. It didn't paste correctly. Thanks.
[The link works fine, Vicky. It took me right to the statute. Here's the most interesting part:
(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...
It appears to me that George will have to be there, and things could get ugly for him. This is a major dilemma, I'm sure. Whee-oh, I'm glad I'm not his attorney.]
Dave. Did yo also pick up that Lester specifically said that the misrepresentation was -material- in nature? This may be why. I lost the instructions from Snoopy on how to make this a click able link so be my guest if you want to.
http://www.richardhornsby.com/crimes/obstruction/providing-false-information-in-bail-application.html
[The link works, Porky3100. No need to change a thing.
What I noticed on Richard's site was this little statement:
"However, if it can be shown that the false statement did not relate to a material matter in the proceeding, the charge of perjury would be dismissed."
Of course, in George's case, the false statement was very material. He misrepresented the court through his attorney and his wife perjured herself. Thanks for the link.]
Does anyone have a copy of his actual bond application?
[I searched high and low, and came up empty-handed. However, I think there could be an issue over not just lying to the judge, but also lying on the bond application. We need to dig more into it, I think. Whether it means something, I don't know.]
Porky3100~~ I cannot locate the original appication that was heard on April 10th. In fact, I do not recall ever seeing it. Here is the one that De La Rionda filed for the bond to be revoked...
State's Motion to Revoke Bond-in pdf
Dave~~ what an excellent post... you did not miss a beat in covering it all.
I may have heard wrong but I understood that De La Rionda made a courtesy call to O'Mara the morning before he filed the motion to revoke the bond and so Mark was aware of what was due to take place. O'Mara knew that it would have been frivolous to argue against the motion as De La Rionda had every right to do so and was perfectly within his rights to expose Zimmerman and his spouse's lies.
It will be interesting to see how O'Mara will handle things from here. Mark NeJame already said that he would be more inclined to have this client wait it out in jail than to risk putting him on the stand at a new bond hearing. It would be a very risky procedure having Zimmerman testify and expose himself to some bull dog cross.
[Well, Snoopy, I'm glad you like it! I tried not to miss anything, but I'm sure I did somewhere. For instance, I wasn't aware of any courtesy call to O'Mara. I don't think Jeff Ashton ever did that for Jose Baez, but these are different attorneys, and O'Mara is well-respected in the legal community. As for O'Mara being aware of everything prior to the hearing? No way. I could clearly see that this was a case of surgically removing Zimmerman's credibility before the defense had a chance to react accordingly. There was no defense for the simple reason that, well, there was no strong defense, although O'Mara gave it his best shot, and he admitted on April 27 that there was a deception. Granted, he knew it was coming, perhaps, but De la Rionda did not have a love fest with O'Mara before this bore down on him. The whole presentation caught the defense off guard. Re: O'Mara's reaction after the hearing. He was a bit unsettled.
Mark NeJame's opinion is highly regarded, and I agree with his point of view. The thing that puzzles me now is what happens at trial. How does Zimmerman get his point across without personally telling the jury? From here on out, he's his own best friend and his own worst enemy. Then... there's the pitbull cross if he does choose to take the stand, and De la Rionda gave O'Mara a first-hand account of how he will handle it. Personally, I'd love to see De la Rionda and Taaffe have a go at it.]
Porky3100~~I made an error re the date in my previous comment to you ... The defense filed a motion to seek bond for Z on April 12th... the bond hearing took place on April 20th...not April 10th.. it is all spelled out in the state's motion to revoke the bond... sorry about that...
Snoopy. Thank you for the link. For some reason the servers at work are being really picky today. Would you mind pasting the text of that motion here? I am not able to pull up any pdf docs form work.
Porky3100~~ I cannot copy and paste from the pdf's. There are 8 pages and I would have to type it all out... Was there anything in particular you wanted to look at in the motion?
Maybe Dave knows how to copy the entire pdf motion..
I'll set up a link to the PDF, but my computer is running diagnostics after locking up again. Drats.
Dave ~~ I am well aware that De La Rionda did not show O'Mara the three aces he held up his sleeve. Remember the motion was filed only a few hours prior to the hearing as you even stated in your post.
By that, I mean when we went to the Casey Anthony hearings, chances were good that the honorables would have been inclined to rule on new motions — ones presented that day — at a later date, giving the prosecution and defense (and us) time to ingest and digest the gist of what had just been presented. In other words, the judges routinely gave the opposing side an opportunity to work up a legal response to be argued at a subsequent hearing.
This brings us to "no trial by ambush."
If O'Mara seemed to be frustrated after Judge Lester's decision on revoking the bond, I am wondering if he was aware of those deceiving jail calls between Z and his spouse. It appears that Mark is being ambushed by Z. Of course, De La Rionda would not disclose to O'Mara the contents of the motion prior to it being filed. Do you think I am tupid or sumting? Did you have to sneak Taaffee's name in there? He was tucked away in my 'old fart bag' but somehow got out and was on CNN prime last night...
Humorous moment in all of this. So I kept trying to downloads the PDF but the task indicator kept circling no matter which PDF I tried to load. I got annoyed and called IT. They were here within a few minutes. The very first thing the guy said was those dreadful words "Have you rebooted"? I could only produce a sheepish grin and rest in the solace that my office is not within an earshot of my boss and those who work for me :)
I agree that O'Mara must have known something was most likely inevitable, but he was the one who let the cat out of the bag to begin with, on April 27. My point is that he had no idea how it would play out - how bold and abrasive De la Rionda would be and how quickly the judge would render his decision. This has nothing to do with trial by ambush because it's not the trial and, more importantly, it's impossible for the defense to be ambushed by its own disclosures.
I do agree that Zimmerman is ambushing his defense by not being forthright with his own team. As for Taaffe, he makes me want to puke. Maybe that's why NG keeps him on; he's easy to hate.
Dave when O'Mara first took this case I recall you saying that O' Mara is a good Attorney and he believed in Zimmerman. You have to wonder now if O'Mara in the back ( or front) of his mind now realizes that he is representing a bold faced liar who likely make up the stuff about Travon's injuries. O'Mara does not strike me as stupid so he just has to see how Zimmerman is not only deceitful, but very conniving.
I remember saying O'Mara is a good attorney and I still feel that way. Look at the endorsement he got from Mark NeJame. I have the utmost respect for him, and I am proud to call him my friend.
I don't remember specifically saying O'Mara believed in Zimmerman, but I will make this clarification and distinction. Most attorneys do believe that their clients are telling them the truth, but remember, their job is to defend them, not to determine their guilt or innocence, so it comes down to one thing: if you're guilty, I don't want to know about it. My job is not to expose you.
Dave~~I hardly think that by O'Mara disclosing to the judge about the balance in the fund account, it should be referred to as letting a feline out of a paper sack. Really? Mark O'Mara is a man of integrity and a professional lawyer. You will never see him do anything underhanded to free his client. You and a few more are going to see this lawyer handle Z's case that will make you all shudder in your flip flops. Notice how O'Mara has delayed filing a motion for a new bond hearing? Slowly and surely just may win this race.
Everyone is so sure on how Judge Lester will rule on the mini trial for immunity on SYG. You may be in for a rude awakening in some of your predictions.
The donations are pouring in to Z's fund and have mounted since his bond was revoked. Are these all gun owners or maybe quite a few who thing that Z is being made a 'scapegoat'?
Dave, thanks for setting me straight that a bond hearing is not a trial as in the State vs Zimmerman ....will wonders never cease?
My guess is that O'Mara likely delayed filing the motion because of something that he saw but did not like.-- like what was in the remainder of those 150 recorded calls.
Isn't it great when we live in a society when....Zimmerman and his attorney said they have received death threats, and O'Mara was even forced to make a 911 call last month.
Please note...WFTV reported previously that Trayvon autopsy showed he had wounds to his knuckles/hands. We learned later from the official documents that this was false... take things reported by some of these news outlets with a grain of salt..
Zimmerman delays filing for new bond hearing-video and write up
BTW, I was under the impression that some of the jail calls would be released to the public....???
I think O'Mara is taking time to sort through all of the mess his client has created before filing a new motion for bond. I would think he would have feelers out to determine whether or not there are any plans to file charges against his client for material misrepresentations in the application for bond. I have been doing a bit of reading about reasonable bonds in Florida, and by what I have read, judges are encouraged to set bond in as low amount as possible, so my guess is his bond would not have been a whole lot more than it was to begin with. So, GZ was really dumb to mislead the court. The last thing O'Mara needs right now, is to defend a client who has been convicted of a felony, so first order of business is to make sure that does not happen. My guess is that right now, he is planning to move up his timetable for the SYG hearing before judge L, and will try to schedule it before he even looks at asking for a new bond hearing. That way, if the judge rules in GZ's favor, he will only need to deal with the lying to the court issue, and won't need to worry that a felony conviction might occur before a murder trial takes place should Judge L. rule against GZ.
There is a problem with that Sempre. In a SYG hearing the Judge must first determine if the defendant is credible. If the Judge does not find him credible then he will deny the SGY motion. So O'Mara has to first rehabilitate the credibility issue ( I do not think that he can). This is what Dave has alluded to when he said that SYG is out the windown
I am impressed with this prosecution team and can only chuckle when I recall all the legal pundits like Dershowitz screaming how Angela Corey should have been sanctioned for bringing this charge. This turn of events make him lappear clueless.
Porky3100~ ~this is off topic but you did mention something about this in one of your comments. You may find the following highly entertaining....
Zimmerman Prosecutor Also Deceived Court
Here is a tidbit that came in my alerts...
O'Mara's 911 call-Audio
Porky, I think it is SOP for all defense attorneys to claim foul when an individual is charged with a crime. LOL
I'm a fairly liberal person most of the time, but I have supported the 2nd degree charge from the beginning. I was outraged from the first time i read about Trayvon, and nothing I have read since has swayed my opinion that his death was caused by an individual who should never have been allowed to carry a gun to begin with, and who had planned out in advance what he would do and say if he ever killed someone. His ability to remain so calm and collected immediately after killing an unarmed teenager tells me he had played over the scenario many times in his mind. I live in a stand your ground state. My kids have conceal carry permits (much to my consternation) and both have said there are many instructors who tell students that if they shoot somebody, shoot to kill, because it makes a self defense claim easier. Dollar to donuts, GZ was told the same thing along the way. IMO, SYG laws have created a wild west mentality with the less civilized members of our society, and GZ is a prime example. He made the decision to take the life of another human being, just because he got his butt kicked by one of "those people" who always get away. He needs to live with the consequences of his actions.
If a jury disagrees with the 2nd degree charge, let them convict on a lesser included charge or acquit him.
Snoopy, I think it is rather disingenuous for AD to claim that GZ's injuries were serious. A possibly broken nose, and a few lacerations on the back of the head are not what I would call serious. Actually, they are probably fairly common for someone who has been in a fist fight. I've seen more serious injuries on a little league football field, and the kids dusted themselves off and kept on playing. LOL Even the doctor who examined him the following day did not view the injuries as serious enough to warrant x-rays. at least not based upon what we have been told to date.
I would also be careful if I was AD, to rely on hear say as to what was said in a phone conversation. Unless of course the call was recorded. I'm sure the communications dept. At Harvard was a bit put out over the call, and by the time content of the conversation reached AD the story had taken on a life of its own. IMO, he seemed as petty and immature in the article as he was claiming the prosecution to be.
Snoopy. Thanks for the link. I think that Dershowitz has been a first class douche about this case but Angela ought not to let him get under her skin.
His argument is very specious and does misrepresent the facts. True there was a photo of Zimmerman that surfaced AFTER the affidavit was written. Even had she seen the affidavit before filing the affidavit the rather superficial wounds mean very little particularly in light of the contradictions that he made to the police.
I think that he did kind of slander her but I agree with him that it is pointless to cal and threaten the University.
In the end, Derowitz fails to concede the most obvious- namely that Zimmermna has demonstrated a propensity to lie, which trumps a photo which hardly supports a claim of nearly beaten to death.
Sempre~~Being petty and immature has kept Alan D in the business for 50 years plus. Maybe he is like a lot of people who can slant words to discount what a person is saying to sway things in their own favor.. if you get my drift...
Now if you will read Porky3100's response to me, you will not only see my drift but a big snow bank. LOL
God love you, Porky!!
It will be Angela vs Alan before this is over. I think Angie would be more perturbed if someone smeared her lipstick rather than her name.
Thanks Snoopy!
I just finished looking over the documents released this evening. Most of it repeats information already released. I did note one item of evidence collected that I didn't notice last time around. A swab of possible blood was taken from the flashlight. However, no mention of results in the reports. Don't know what it means. I just find it odd that no report one way or the other regarding the stain on the flashlight. My inquiring mind wants to know if it was in fact blood, and if so, who did it belong to.
Dave,
Just finished reading your post, Overwhelmed by your continued excellence. A true journalist in detail and explanation. Not only do adults benefit but any student could read and fully understand the content because of your natural and extensive talent. One can tell that constructive writing in this realm is inviting to you and your audiences are very fortunate to be able to enjoy you here. Your two fingers must be exhausted but for the benefit of others who have interest and pleasure from it, I hope you can grow new ones from time to time so you can keep on expressing in your unique way and thorough coverage on whatever subject you are drawn to, whether it be news or any other various stories of your interest. Thank you!
We have watched Judge Perry in the Casey Anthony trial (what is he doing now?). Is there any like character as that of Judge (?) Lester in this case. Both were and are spoken of with high regard. In what respect do they or could they differ when each handle a murder trial and each are confronted with a lying defendant.
Do you think attorneys draw from other cases on what and what not to do in any similar case they may be handling. Murder for instance? I have respect for the position of any attorney who takes on or is appointed to work these complicated cases and are quite likely to face extensive criticism and judgement. Both the prosecution and defense. Also, I am wondering if the swinging intelligence of George Zimmerman will be used as a last measure by the defense in presenting him as incapable of having a mind of an adult with mature reasoning. Therefore, his killing Trayvon Martin could be accepted, convincing a jury or a juror that the prosecution may not have proven he killed "willfully" but from fear. Possibly the lack of physical evidence to prove that he "took aim " then fired. We know Trayvon must have been fearful and defensive for very good reason as Zimmerman approached him so I would hate to have it decided that Zimmerman was defending himself in his "job" to protect all the people living in the complex from an "a--h--e who always get away" who was up to no good. I think he may purposely be telling so many lies that a jury could end up not knowing what to believe, truth or not. Can a lesser punishment be selected as the jury comes to a decision or do they have to first know there are options. Personally, I am surprised that George Zimmerman did not claim "accidental shooting" as they fought, wouldn't that have been better for him? I still don't see a broken nose and believe any blood around his face and nose could have gotten there from his own hands touching the back of his head, then different places on his face.
Dave, Your bit of humor, comparing George Zimmerman with the comic book Superman is very likely the image he has of himself and wants to be. "It's Zimmerman" "It's Zimmerman" "The F-lying Zimmerman" .You certainly put a lot of work on your posts, really a lot so just wanted to add my word of appreciation of you for it.
Usually I can't stand defense attorneys, but in this case I find myself at times feeling sorry for Mark O'Mara. What can a person do when a client has no faith in his own defense attorney to the point he lies to him. I imagine it happens frequently to others, but it's so blatantly obvious in this case when O'Mara's been lied to. He shows his experience constantly and consistantly when faced with the lies. He brought the money issue up in court at the 4/27 hearing, so to say he was blindsided by it is a stretch. He could have and should have had at least an outline of his defense of the omission ready by the time it was brought up in court, no matter when he got served with the documents. I do remember in court the prosecution saying something to the effect he had called O'Mara, so that added to the reason for at least an outline of an explanation. I think the prison phone calls were the only surprise to him when it came up. Will Zimmerman be allowed a higher bail when his time comes? I hope not. Lie to me once shame on you, lie to me twice shame on me. Maybe more time in jail will give him more time to think about his actions. Personally I think Zimmerman didn't mention the money because he thought it would be confiscated, which in part it was. The only fear he had was that it would be taken from him.
As for George himself and what he's thinking and feeling I'm getting the impression he's acting like a cop who's been put on administrative leave because he shot someone. I don't think he thinks of it as a civilian on civilian crime. He did it "in the line of duty". He's living in lala land to me.
This country really does need to get passports checked when leaving the country in addition to checking them when they come back into the country. My daughter was detained because someone with her name had an outstanding warrant for a bad check (not her, but same name), but it only popped up when she returned from a trip overseas, not when she left the US. They would catch a whole lot of crooks if they put an alert on passports as soon as they put out a "bolo" for a car, named a person of interest, or issued an ambert. Those especially should be tied.
Good post Dave, as usual. Thanks!
I dont think you need me to be giving you praise but i will anyway's-great post; but to compare Zimmerman to Superman are you sure you weren't meaning Blubber Man? Although Zimmerman and Anthyony are polarizing cases I can see ,stretching of course, the comparison. IMO they both uncontrolably lie to those who are there to represent them.
Although I think Baez was scum on his approach he did what he could to protect KC but even he knew that his client must've been guilty otherwise why approach the DA office to procure a "deal" even after a deal was made and they refused? (i think that's how it played out but could be wrong) If anything Zimmerman will become a victim of himself and he will soon tighten the noose around his own neck.
Not that I'm adding any thing new or commenting on something enlightening but one thing keeps surfacing that I have a hard time understanding. Using your quote from above "Most of the public agreed with the prosecution in State v. Casey Anthony (you bet i did and still do). Here, it’s deeply split"
I have a hard time understanding their standing? Caylee's last days on earth played out like a horror story with only one person controlling the script. KC was a master of not only suspense but manipulation and kept her family cleaverly behind her cloak of deceipt. To be honest I can not see how you could determine the outcome any other way than guilty...still baffles me
Zimmerman and Martin on the fateful day there seems to be no attempts to be deceitful. There is no attempt to hide the truth. I see butterflies in a field of Llylacs fluttering about-just a whisp of wind flowing through the tall grasses-oh the picture it paints. However; I believe the gears in the brain were put in motion in an attempt to conjure a reasonable explanation as to what brought them together.. When everything started coming to lights 'you (the public)' immediately (IMO) take the side of Zimmerman.
Lets face it to a degree there is a little racism left in us all but its not because of "our" views' its the media's spin depiction and what is reported. Everytime you turn on the news you hear "a suspect wanted in connection with the murder of this family is a black man described by others as blah blah blah"-blubber, blubber, blubber. (Sorry if this is offensive as it is/was not intended...)
So at first you hear that Martin, a black man, was shot to death at: blah location and the man in connection with his murder is head of the Neighborhood Watch and is claiming Florida's "Stand Your Ground". Police are questioning the suspect and he is cooperating. Sound good-reasonable-Stand your ground extending so far away from "your property"...sobeit-blubber, blubber, blubber.
I think this is an agreeable synapse of what probably was related in the news to some degree. But heres the thing ,within a couple weeks, at least from where i live, information will be released that casts a little doubt on the legitimacy of Zimmermans proclomation [insert disbelief and hurl sound followed by: blubber, blubber, blubber] Starting with quotes regarding his homies and some very discriptive words used while he was placing the 911 call and his view of Martin. Bluahhh (bet you thought i was going to say blubber but not yet) It will be soon after that I will learn that Mr. Martin was on his way "home" (maybe not his permanent residence but he was going where he was staying) and Zimmerman was persuing him and Zimmerman did not live 'here'. What's more is that Martin had no weapons. Carrying candy and tea. Zimmerman was carrying A GOD DAMN GUN[inset wretch, vomit, hurl, blubber, blubber, blubber]
Where o'where do people become split to this crime? Where is "stand your ground"? Whose life was threatened? That's what gets me. I understand using deadly force if life and property are threatened but this "other half (Floridian's if you will)' is making Zimmerman the victim. Who is dead? Take away the color of these two people and explain to me what justified Zimmerman's pusuit of Martin if Martin had done nothing to provoke...
The cloak of manipulation is starting to fall and obscure and warp the truth. I'm starting to understand the reason why people waive their right ot a speedy trial. Mainly because it allows the story to evolve into something it wasnt intended to. Before it was simply whether or not this case fell under "Stand Your Ground" and has morphed into character assinations and trying to dig dirt from one end of the race field to the other continuing the race war and solidifying peoples alliances.
To add a summary please let me paraphrase from the above....blubber, blubber, blubber (isnt this fuel? for a fire?...) Thanks Dave!!
To me, Zimmerman did not have the right to pursue Martin...perior. Zimmerman did not have the authorization to carry a fire arm while on duty as "neighborhood watch". Zimmerman disobeyed an order from dispatch not to pursue all the while what was Marin doing I ask..."walking home, chatting it up with his girl eating some cany and drinking tea.
Bman, some people commenting on other blogs are making much of the fact that Z was not on his neighborhood watch patrol that night, but was on his way to do the weekly grocery shopping. Therefore, they say, he was not guilty of carrying his gun during his neighborhood watch duties. This argument ignores the fact that, once he saw Trayvon, he abandoned his shopping trip in favor of watching him, following him, and ... the rest is yet (maybe never) to be established. Did he try to restrain him to keep him from getting away (again!) before the police arrived? He assisted the police in catching a robber a few years ago; did he think he would cover himself with glory again?
I don't understand why some people can't see the situation from Trayvon's perspective. He is walking home, talking to his girlfriend. (I once read that he had spent 400 minutes talking to DeeDee that day.) He notices a truck parked on the street in a development where no one parks on the street (is there a law against it?) but in their (closed) garages (didn't Z once call the police on a neighbor who left the garage door open?) There is a guy sitting in the truck watching him. In his place, I would already be nervous. And so on.
To be honest, I am really tired of hearing about Z's fears for his safety. He is so afraid that he went into hiding. His lawyer is using his fear as an excuse for his misbehavior. What about Trayvon's safety? Don't these people recognize the threat to Trayvon and others from armed vigilantes acting out their own private superhero movies?
Mollyk~~if the black panthers had a $10, 000 bounty on Zimmerman's head, don't you think he would be afraid? Nuff said...
Dave~~this is an interesting read. Perjury charges are almost considered rare and not that easy to prove. Judge Lester would be the one to hold Shellie or Zimmeman in contempt of court while it is up to the prosecution to file the perjury charges.
Could Shellie Zimmerman face perjury charges?
WOW...$10K bounty...i think i'd be a little paranoid too but unless he's being put in witness protection jail would be the safest place wouldn't it?
I think that people are giving far too much credence to this Black Panther group. They are a nearly extinct fringe group who lost relevance more than 40 years ago. In any one major city, you may find a handful of them if that. The very vast majority of those of us who are African American and even remotely mainstream would shoo them away on sight in the same way that the vast majority of white people want nothing to do with groups such as the Aryan Nation.
I think that O'Mara knows that the Panthers present no more of a threat that any other nut case fringe group but he is playing into the fears of people. Here is a little piece written by the Southern Poverty Law group on the Panthers.
Note that the New Black Panther are not only rejected by Blacks in general but they were rejected by the Black Panthers and in fact sued by them
Please see below
http://www.splcenter.org/get-informed/intelligence-files/groups/new-black-panther-party
http://www.mediaite.com/tv/sean-hannity-resurrects-lie-that-barack-obama-spoke-with-new-black-panthers/
It's not the Black Panthers, but the New Black Panthers. I doubt whether there is $10,000 among the three of those idiots.
It's not nice to have a bounty on one's head, but this is after all a theoretical danger. Z created an actual and realized danger for Trayvon.
Snoopy
It is true that perjury cases can be difficult to prove because you have to prove intent. This case though is pretty clear cut since 1. her testimony was made in open court and 2. The recording shows and intent to deceive the court. To quote the Attorney in the very article that you presented here
"Kendall Coffey, a former U.S. attorney for the Southern District of Florida, says if Mrs. Zimmerman were to be charged with perjury, “the question becomes a matter of how, if at all, she could explain her statements at the bond hearing.” Coffey says that based on the transcript of the bond hearing, during which Shellie Zimmerman told the judge in telephone testimony that she didn’t know how much money was in her husband’s PayPal account, “her testimony treads dangerously close” to perjury."
Porky3100~~I understand that the majority of African Americans do not condone these New Black Panthers who are just out spewing 'blubber'... they are just radicals and some of them don't even know the cause they are supposed to be supporting.
We have to take all threats seriously even if they are from a bunch of loony tunes. Look what happens when a bomb threat it called into a school or other establishment. You wanna believe they are taken serious and acted on asap.
Zimmerman and now O'Mara have had threats made to their well being. There are those who want to take the law into their own hands. They do not have any faith in the justice system nor do they respect it.
Yes, from all the stats, perjury is hard to prove but there are those who have been charged with it and were penalized. I think they have enough evidence to charge Shellie Z and possibly George but will the prosecution go forth and charge them is a wait and see. Judge Lester may hold Shellie in contempt and he has every right to do so. I cannot see how she can talk her way out of it as 'ignorance' does not carry much weight in a court of law.
myorlandofox.com is reporting that a bond hearing has been set for June 29th
Snoopy. In all fairness threats are made against Judges and Prosecutors all the time. It is my understanding that Judge Lester received a threat when he revoked Zimmerman's bond. The difference is Lester apparently does not see the same need to play it up as the defense.
"We have to take all threats seriously even if they are from a bunch of loony tunes. Look what happens when a bomb threat it called into a school or other establishment. You wanna believe they are taken serious and acted on asap."
But you have to agree that a bomb threat is a far cry from a bunch of broke yahoo's who would not have the money to even pay the 10 k bounty in the first place yes?
Also as a practical matter the "bounty" was placed on his head *before* the arrest. Now that he has been arrested i would say that makes the bounty pretty moot? :)
Porky3100 ~~who reported that Judge Lester received a death threat? Did they quote the judge verbatim or was this just hearsay? I do my best to try and keep the rumors and facts separate.
I know that the threats are coming from both sides. I had an alert come in my mail of an incident that took place in California. A well known police officer was killed in the line of duty when he was investigating a bank robbery. Someone photo shopped the pic of the officer and put Trayvon's face on it and then the word 'pig' was displayed. I wont go into the whole story but it was a WHITE person who was responsible. He sent the photo shopped pic to the dead officer's best friend... There are sick people out there, Porky...God help their souls...