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)
Okay I am ready to tell you what I think. WTF? I am a firm believer in children learn what they live. This POS mother let the step father beat on her son. He then learns this same behavior, and breaks his baby brother's leg. WTF does mom do then? She leaves the kid home to baby sit again!! To top it off the Caca kind of mom waits 8+ hours to get help for her baby.
I absolutely DO NOT agree with charging a 12 year old as an adult. IF anything he needs to be in anger management classes but in my heart I feel like if he were to be put in a good loving structured home he could learn how to love, learn right from wrong and that violence is never the answer.
At 12 did he really know pushing his baby brother into a book shelf would kill him? I do not think so and imo you would have to show intent to charge murder 1. I wish I were back to my old charming self, I would be begging to adopt him. And why charge murder one if she really wants him to plea for a lesser charge. How about we just offer the lesser charge and stop this B.S.
Snoopy are you trying to kill me? My blood is boiling. I may feel differently had this child not been abused or if he had a real mom that did the right thing. I think for a state to be able to charge murder 1 on a 12 year old - that child better be a Mensa Member. How do they even know this child knew right from wrong? We can assume he did but his upbringing leaves little hope that- that is the case. jmo
Laura~~you made an excellent observation. I came across that video last night and it broke my heart. With the proper guidance this boy can be rehabilitated. Granted, it could not be achieved overnight. I cannot believe that this young boy knew right from wrong. How could he when he had no one to teach him. I would like to know what proof they had that Cristian killed the child and not the one who did not report it for eight hours.
Now this is an example of the handiwork of Angela Corey. She dishes out a stiff charge and then wants the person to plea. She did that with the woman who fired a shot at her abusive husband... Angela offered the woman a plea and sentence of 3 years but the woman turned it down thinking she would not be found guilty but ended up being sentenced to 20 years. I will echo your WTF??
What I want to know is, who is going on trial? Corey or Zimmerman? If it were up to Dershowitz, it would be Corey, but he holds no sway in this state. NONE. This is turning into a smear campaign and the last I heard, Corey didn't pull any triggers. For that matter, Jeff Ashton's record isn't sterling. I doubt if anyone's is, but where was everyone when Casey was facing charges? After all, Dershowitz said she wasn't guilty. Hell, why wasn't he saying that before the trial ended? Why didn't he bitch slap Ashton from the start? Like he is with Corey?
Snoopy. I thought that the author presented a well written narrative of the issues that she had with AD's criticism and it was very objective. I had hoped that you would have responded in kind with something a bit more substantive. Instead, you embarked on a road of wild speculation and more unsubstantiated and irrelevant attacks on Ms. Corey. I'll just leave it at that.
The problem here is that it's like a good politician - and I'll admit I'm guilty of it, too - but the focus has shifted off of the guy sitting in jail, as if he is nothing more than the target of a corrupt, self-centered and shady assistant state attorney. Poor boy, let him go!
Dave~~when we discussed the Anthony case, did we not mention the attorneys and prosecutors? The bond hearing is not until the 29th... what would you like everyone to discuss? How many times can we reenact what happened on the nite of Feb 26th? I seem to be the only one who may be taking the focus off Zimmerman by discussing something else. Do you want this post to go into hibernation so we will not all die from boredom? Just let me know.
Porky3100~~I am seriously thinking of becoming a racist but cannot decide what color to choose. You are forcing my hand... now what do you think of that??
Dave Knechel~ ~ Corey may not have pulled any triggers but she sure has called the shots...
[This is what prosecutors do. Do you want to remove that from their job description?]
Okay so I am not as good as expressing my thoughts as all of you but I am going to give it a shot. A while ago some thought the State of Florida over charged in the Anthony case. I did not agree because I value the life of all children. (The some I refer to are other Lawyers)
So I think I understand where Snoopy is coming from. With what very little evidence we have looked at some are not ready to conclude it is murder 2 (Snoopy). I love that quality about her because she does not jump to conclusions, she needs to see it all. Where as I use feelings to jump to conclusions.
Like I think Zimmerman is the world's biggest azzhole because he shot a kid who had barely turned 17 for walking home. But imo Snoopy looks at the pictures of Z and (again imo) sees the blood and the messed up nose. When I look at those pictures I do not see someone who had been beat so badly that he feared for his life. I hope that makes sense.
Point being if we all thought just a like it would be boring here. Now I have to go to bed, good night all. Play nice and xoxo all around.
For sure, Snoopy, everyone is fair game, and that includes Angela Corey, but look at how Ashton was deified. Ultimately, he was no better than Corey, but where were his detractors? Where was this Dershowitz guy during that case? It wasn't until the end that he opened his mouth and blamed it on junk science. Had Casey been convicted, I doubt he would have sung the same tune.
With Corey, yes, you have every right to attack her and I have every right to defend her. Not that I'm going to, but I will say she's not a monster. Besides, if she runs for reelection, it won't be in Seminole County, and if she loses this case, it on't help her cause, so I take what she's doing as part of her profession. I will not second-guess her motives. Dershowitz, on the other hand, what's he got to lose? Ratings?
Laura~~thank you for your nice comments to me. It is good to see we have two brilliant minds in here this evening....yours and the other one being mine, of course.
Laura~~I know you are probably snoring away so you can read this tomorrow. When I look at Z's injuries, I do not see anything life threatening but had the altercation continued, who knows what may have happened. The following is some food for thought...
I keep hearing about people being shot who were unarmed. If a person is in good physical condition and has two hands... would you consider them armed?
Punched to Death
How easy is it to kill a man with your bare hands?
I am not shocked that over 700 people were killed by fist or feet. However to me that would almost be like manually choking someone to death, very personal.
With that said I do not believe GZ was anywhere near death. He had no right to carry that gun and crime watch. I am tired of hearing about the break-ins as a defense. His neighborhood averaged 1 break-in every two months and often they were in the middle of the day. Not 7p.m.
IMO he had no choice but to kill TM. GZ told the 911 dispatcher late teens. I think he realized this kid was not 18 and he stepped over the line and realized he would be in trouble. Kill the only other witness and blame everything on the victim. Never in a million years did he expect this kid to not have a police record. Sure he had issues at school, most teens do with peer pressure and just overall bad decisions. But imo that is what makes them kids. Their brain has yet to mature enough to realize their actions will have long term consequences.
It says a lot to me that not one adult in TM's life has spoke out badly about him. His teachers and coaches said only good things about him. Sure idiots on the street can judge but they did not know him. GZ on the other hand does have a criminal record, is now a known liar and some people in his past believe him to have a tendency for racism.
I believe it will be a lot easier for all when the evidence is released or at trial to see why they felt these charges were warranted. I believe they are, like I said I cannot get past the age of the victim. It is refreshing and frustrating :) that you have to see all the evidence to make that decision. You make rational decisions whereas I and I believe others here make emotional decisions based on the age. Plus I will say it racism is very much alive in our country. I hate (yep hate) that anyone can judge a child based on race. I personally love all kids and wish I could have 100 more. I also wish that everyone here would remember your rational and need to see all the evidence is not limited to TM. You did the same thing with the sk*nk in Florida. You should have been a judge with your middle of the road until you see it all personality.
Laura~~thanks for your response and as per usual, I can understand your position in the way you observe this whole situation. I am going to address my comments to everyone as I think it is time I cleared the air in here.
This is coming from the perspective of an outsider who does not live in your country and do not feel the border a barrier that separates me from my neighbors to the south.
I consider myself a messenger who brings you the news and yes, I will throw in my opinion occasionally but try to refrain from speculating without documented facts. Like most of you, I learned about this case weeks after it happened. Dave's first post made me aware of the situation when he attended the rally where Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson were present along with many blacks and a few whites demanding justice for a young black man who was shot and killed by a neighborhood watchman. I was familar that there were racial tensions in the US but thought they had subsided greatly after 9/11 when I watched blacks and whites embracing and trying to console one another... how wrong I was.
As the days passed, I set out to learn more about this case and since I had no dog in this fight felt that I could do so with honesty and objectively while remaining neutral, emotionally and otherwise. I learned early that this was not just going to be a neighborhood watchman who shot an unarmed black youth. It was expanding to include those with political agendas, gun owners, people up for reelection, white supremacists , new black panthers, KKK's and the lists goes on but not before including two of the main culprits, the Stand Your Ground law (amended version) and the Concealed Weapons.
Not once, have I ever stated that Zimmerman was innocent nor guilty, reason being I do not know all the facts. I have expressed that a second degree murder charge was an overcharge by the prosecution due to weighing the scant evidence we have been privy to and listening to several legal analysts. IMO, Angela Corey was working under pressure when she was called in to make a decision and feel that it would have been best for a grand jury to hear the evidence and weigh it according. This would have eliminated any bias or motives on Corey's part.
When I come in here and post a link to some story or info, it does not mean that I am backing what the author of that article and the like is writing. My aim is to try and show you the overall picture of what is taking place because of this case. We cannot live in a bubble!
Did you know that WFTV came out in advance of the document dump and stated (I have the link on my own blog) that Trayvon had injuries to his knuckles? False reporting! Look what NBC did when they made an edit to the 911 call? The news medias envisioned big bucks...make this racial and it will sell. Since this story broke and many wanted to cash in or sensationalize it to suit their own purpose, people are not only being fired, some have been forced to pass in their resignation because of making detrimental remarks against the black youth. I am reading all about it, mostly behind the scenes.
Now we come to Derch.. vs Corey... In no way was it my intention to smear the dear lady. I will leave that up to Alan who seems to be doing quite well on his own. Since Derch has 50 years invested in being a law professor etc, I expect he is due to retire soon and ratings mean nothing to him at his juncture. Isn't it wonderful that we have the 'watchdogs' out there keeping some prosecutors and wanna be lawmakers on their toes? I have no idea if Alan stated Casey Anthony was innocent of killing her child or innocent of a charge of Murder One... there is a difference.
Porky3100~~I am doing my best to tie up a few loose ends... I did read, thoroughly I may add, and tried to absorb all the info at that link you provided re the rebuttal on AD's comment... my legal knowledge is limited and I felt that I was in no position to comment on the rights and wrongs. I do appreciate your efforts and apologize for not thanking you for that info.
Laura~ ~ you see Trayvon as a child. In the eyes of the law he was a minor/child at the time of the shooting. Trayvon to me was a 5 foot 11 inch, male on the verge of the age of majority and appeared to be in good physical condition.
That's it Dave et al.... did I clear the air or add more fuel to the flames? That is entirely up to all of you....Snoopy
Well said, Snoopy~
I know what it feels like to post a link or two and be thought of as a racist, at worst, and against Trayvon, at best. As you know, I'm all for GZ getting the punishment due him because I believe he intentionally set out to get Trayvon, to not let that "f-ing punk" get away! But, I post a link or two by those deemed racists or having a bad agenda against Trayvon and everyone thinks I'm in agreement with the posts. No, I post these links because I am concerned if it could be info brought up at trial and would like others' opinions on it. Plus, in the beginning it was shown that the media were being biased idiots. Oh, I'm also a racist because I despise irrelevant race baitors-go figure, lol!
Anyhoo, my friend, please keep posting those links. I, for one, want as much info in this case as possible. I fear the outcome will another CaCa travesty and I'm not up for surprises like that anymore.
Snoop No air to clear up as far as I am concerned. I understand where you are coming from. As long as we have been commenting together imo you have always been down the middle of the road until it is crystal clear thru the evidence guilt or innocence. I only tried to point it out because this is a very sensitive case because of race more because of race ignorance. But either way I get you and I thought everyone knew you like I do.
I just do not like the tension. Porky and you leave wonderful comments and I think you all balance out the commentary. And to be quite honest I hate when my internet family fuss at each other. IT BREAKS my heart. Now I am going out to the pool while I am there I hope everyone kisses and makes up and leaves me some good comments full of all the answers from my comments over the last two days. If that does not happen you will all be responsible for me crying and throwing a fit like a toddler instead of a 30 year old. YES I am still 30, 11 years later. :)
I agree with Snoopy two important factors in this case are the Stand Your Ground law and the Concealed Carry law in Florida. While I see all of the other issues, I find them to be an "aftermath" of a situation brought about because a person who should not have had a carry permit. Yes, I am very limited in my thinking and opinion on the two laws and lawmakers involved in them being passed and the "cowboy" mentality of GZ. Legality, racism, political chit and all that follows is shameful as no matter who is right or wrong .....Trayvon Martin is needlessly dead because GZ shot and killed him.
I do hope the Florida law makers are taking a good look at changes on these laws and changes in the way they are implemented to where others cannot have the "license to kill".
Newbie~~geez, they have lowered the price for concealed weapons permits now in Florida. Soon they will give them away for free so everyone will have one. The following write up is an eye opener...
State officials on Wednesday said state law forbids them from talking about the concealed weapons permit owned by George Zimmerman, the Sanford neighborhood watch leader who fatally shot Trayvon Martin.
Information about concealed weapons was taken out of the public domain in 2006, so no one knows who has a concealed weapon. But the state does indicate a lot of people are carrying concealed weapons in Florida.
One in every 20 Floridians has a valid concealed weapons permit. Sanford shooter George Zimmerman still has his. State law is very specific about when the permits can be suspended or revoked.
Sterling Ivey is a spokesman with the Florida Dept. of Agriculture and Consumer Services, the department that issues the permits.
“If you’re charged with a felony crime, and the department is notified, we can certainly move to have the license suspended," he said. "Once a conviction takes place, we can revoke that individual’s license.”
This past year, state lawmakers lowered the cost of a concealed permit to $70 from $85. Before being granted a permit, applicants must pass a gun safety course.
The Brady Project to Prevent Gun Violence says concealed carry permits are too easy to get in Florida.
Read more here ...
Source
I find this statement quite interesting:
If you’re charged with a felony crime, and the department is notified, we can certainly move to have the license suspended," he said. "Once a conviction takes place, we can revoke that individual’s license.”
IF you're charged and IF the department (of agriculture...hmph) is notified.....etc etc.
I looked up the Florida carry-conceal law when this case first happened and was appalled at the simplicity of getting a carry permit. I would sure like to see what GZ put on his application and where he got his "training". I'd also like to know what or if he was actually advised by a law enforcement officer to get a carry permit because of his neighbor's pitt bull. Doesn't Florida have laws to assist its citizens if there are dangerous animals threatning them? Did George and his wife pursue action against the owners of the pitt bulls? Oh, I am laughing at the reduction in fee on the permit. People can afford to get a $300 pistol plus bullets and holster but not pay $85 for the permit??????
Oh well, I'm prattling. I did note at the end of the article you posted that there is to be a meeting this coming Tuesday of the Stand Your Ground Task Force. Anyway wanting to see how things can be white washed need to read the full article concerning the CarryConceal article you referenced. It is at the bottom of the page of that article you will find a news story concerning the meeting of the Task Force !!!! Ridiculous as far as I am concerned.
Newbie ~~this just came in my mail alerts... it is a puzzler and I hope we can get some feedback to see how it turns out. Here is a quote from the article..."The clear trend in American law is to expand the rights of people to protect themselves by using deadly force," Who was behind amending the SYG law in 2007? Even legal analysts cannot seem to interpret it.
Houston trial focusing on stand your ground law
Good heavens....I proof read but....last paragraph of my comment, third line....not Anyway but Anyone....and the article concerning the Task Force meeting isn't at the bottom of the page.....just the name of the article .....
I find I just don't relate things too well when I get strong thoughts....no matter how hard I try or proof read what I have typed.
Houston case will be interesting. I'm going to see what their carry/conceal law states and requirements to be eligible for a permit. Then look at their Stand Your Ground Law. It surely is not as loosey goosey as Floridas...let's hope.
Snoop, thanks for the articles and information. To other contributors on this post, thank you also for your opinions and information.
Newbie and anyone else interested in the SYG law...here are a few excerpts from a very interesting article...
An analysis of "stand your ground" self-defense cases in Florida by the Tampa Bay Times makes a strong case for the law's repeal. The 2005 state law has been the focus of attention since neighborhood watch member George Zimmerman invoked it in the shooting death of teen Trayvon Martin. But until now little was known about the way the defense is systematically used across the state. A Times examination of nearly 200 "stand your ground" cases reveals the law is inconsistently applied and too easily invoked. It has been used to exonerate drug criminals and people on violent rampages, and it has proven to be a burden to the courts. The record reflects a dangerous experiment in vigilantism and rough justice.
and....
The law extends the so-called castle doctrine beyond one's home. It says a person has no duty to retreat and may respond with deadly force if he or she is in fear of great bodily harm. Nowhere does the law say it cannot be invoked by someone who put themselves in harm's way or initiated a confrontation. That point was driven home when Zimmerman, who has been charged with second-degree murder in Martin's death, was not initially arrested despite having tracked Martin through Zimmerman's gated community in Sanford.
and.....
As the nation watches what happens to Zimmerman, who is now back in jail, it is the law that should be on trial. A task force to investigate "stand your ground," led by Lt. Gov. Jennifer Carroll, is stacked with lawmakers who either sponsored the law or are vocal supporters of it. Carroll pointed to the Times' reporting to suggest the law may need reforms, but the task force's objectivity would be more believable had the law's critics been given a seat at the table. The Times' analysis demonstrates that this is a law that cannot be fixed, and it should be repealed.
Repeal 'stand your ground-read more here
@ Newbie...God forbid if the spelling and punctuation police were on duty here...I surely would be in the cell next to Zman.
The nation's fixation on the shooting death of 17-year-old Trayvon Martin has led many to question whether an impartial jury could be found for the trial of his killer, George Zimmerman.
But it's possible a judge, not a jury, will decide Zimmerman's fate. He says he fired in self-defense, and many expect his lawyers will eventually ask for an immunity hearing under Florida's controversial "stand your ground" law.
Read more here.....
Will jury, or judge, decide George Zimmerman's fate?
Dave~~I hope you don't mind me bringing all this info here re SYG. Actually it is a big part of this case since Zimmerman is claiming self-defense. The stats in the following tell a story and should be of interest to your readers. SYG was amended to protect people after Hurricane Katrina when it was decided to take the the law into the streets. As you can see, it has ended up being a license to kill for some. Here is an excerpt... the entire article can be found at the link I am providing..
In the six years after the law was passed, 228 people were killed by citizens acting in self-defense-- about one justified homicide every 10 days.
Dan Gross, president of the Washington, D.C.-based Brady Campaign, a pro-gun control advocacy group, said stand your ground created a mentality of fear and paranoia -- a deadly combination for someone carrying a weapon.
"It was a recipe for disaster," he said.
Justifiable homicides nearly triple after Florida 'Stand Your Ground' law passed
That SYG law needs to be used only in emergencies like hurricane disasters. Only in those times. At other times, like defending your castle is fine and when one cannot back away from what could be lethal to them. It shouldn't apply to GZ and there are many who say that it doesn't. I hope the judge or jury says the same.
Sherry~~ I don't think that Judge Lester will be lenient on Z when it comes to his credibility but then again lying about one's finances does not prove that he would lie about what took place on the night of the shooting. One thing in Z's favor is the documented injuries he sustained. Going against Z is the fact that he was carrying a concealed weapon which goes against the neighborhood watch rules. The way that the SYG law is written up, you can be the aggressor and still use a lethal weapon to protect yourself against imminent bodily harm or death if you are attacked. I cannot see Z throwing the first punch but it is apparent one of them did.
I do not know Judge Lester's overall view on this SYG as not all judges are the same. I wonder if he has ever given anyone immunity since this law was amended. How many has he ever granted or denied? It would be interesting to find out.
If and when this case goes to trial, it will be impossible to pick an impartial jury. The defense would like an all white jury but the prosecution would want both white and black. I can foresee mistrial after mistrial because a jury cannot be picked. There are those who believe that Zimmerman is being used as a scapegoat. There is the other side who want him hung on the nearest tree. Either way, you will see a no win situation. This is not the Casey Anthony case because race was not involved.
We cannot hide our heads in the sand and pretend that race is not a big issue here. If Z is not found guilty of at least manslaughter, you will see riots.
The above are my own observations based on how I view the info thus far...
Estee~~Newbie tried to post the following response to you and Dave's gremlins ate it...
Estee, if the "focus police" were around me, I'd be in a cell block somewhere. I am not anti-guns but sure am not a supporter of the carry/conceal laws. Combine the Stand Your Ground laws and imo you're turning on the green light for disaster"
Thanks Snoopy...BTW down my way today a jewelry store owner shot and killed a customer/attempted robber...No charges have been filed but I'm sure if there are it will be a classisical SYG case.
Florida is a neat place, but it has certainly become a crime riddled state.
Estee~~I can see a person using a lethal weapon to protect their property but taking the SYG and the concealed weapons into the streets is ridiculous. There is nothing that would entice me to even visit the state of Florida. I will keep my four seasons and the occasional hurricane in lieu of the sunshine, alligators, snakes and Guns.
Take away the SYG and concealed weapons and we would not be discussing this case. People can pass a firearms course but what about their mental competency. That is the scary part. Give a hot tempered person a gun and it's bang bang.. in a matter of seconds.
The task force will not be making a decision until next year as to amending the SYG so in the meantime, we will have many people dying of gunshots. I have my doubts that the law will be amended. The gun owners are hoping all this will blow over by next year.
Snoopy...Believe me if I had my druthers I'd be in West Virginia, near Morgantown...Even though I'm a Floridian I have come to dislike just about everything here. If it weren't for my family being here I'd be a Mountain Mama...My comfort comes from God and the fact that I've voiced my desire to be scattered at Cooper's Rock; one of my favorite spots in the wilds of WV.
http://insurancenewsnet.com/article.aspx?id=329259&type=332155
I am wondering if GZ has insurance that would pay his attorneys. I know the above site is a very mild advertisement for such insurance. I pulled up a couple of advertisements offering training and one ad offered the insurance. In fact it was stressed as a must "just in case."
hmmmm.....wonder if GZ and his wife would reveal that they carried such insurance. My vote would be no, they would not tell as it would kill their paypal income.
Race riots could ensue if George Zimmerman -- the shooter in the Trayvon Martin case -- is found not guilty of second-degree murder by a Florida jury, the Congressional Black Caucus' executive director allowed yesterday.
Read more here....
CBC: Zimmerman acquittal could spark race riots
Dave, we must keep up with all the news. I hate to keep it all to myself when it comes in my mail...
Harvard law professor Alan Dershowitz now challenges Angela Corey to debate
Here is Derch on the radio show... He is the first guest on... Callers are not very favorable to AD so I hope you listen to the entire show...you may be surprised at some of things you hear...
Radio-Audio
Snoopy said: I don't think that Judge Lester will be lenient on Z when it comes to his credibility but then again lying about one's finances does not prove that he would lie about what took place on the night of the shooting.
According to the prosecution Z has given 3 different accounts of the night of the shooting. There is a good chance he has lied. Evidence does not match his version of the events.
With that said I am not a fan of the SYG Law at all. IMO you can go out be a jerk, get in fight and when you start losing BANG! SYG on your own property otherwise there will be more cases like this. The Government gives out these concealed weapons license they need to come up with a better system for IF something happens. If and when is not good enough. jmo
Laura~~I heard that Zimmerman's interviews also do not coincide with the testimony of the witnesses. Z kept changing his stories. Now I understand that four of the witnesses also changed their accounts of what happened.
I just wish we could read or listen to Z's interviews but apparently that is not going to happen. Z admitted to shooting Trayvon so they take that as a confession so we don't get to see it.
We may as well be realistic, Zimmeman will be found guilty of second degree murder or manslaughter. The judge will not grant him immunity on Stand Your Ground, even if it was self-defense. Can you imagine what will take place if he isn't?
Newbie~~sorry, I missed seeing your comment until now. Very interesting info at the link you posted. It is definitely food for thought. I would never admit to carrying that kind of insurance.
I keep getting timed out in here and losing my short responses. I type the long comments in notepad and then copy and paste.
I wonder how many people were killed or injured by gunfire in America today.. look what happened over the weekend and also on Memorial Day weekend...
8 Shot Dead in Chicago, 40 Injured for Second Weekend in a Row (VIDEO)
Snoopy- The Supremes turned over the no-handguns-in-Chicago law so here we see the very predictable results.
I am not one who takes pleasure in other people's misery; but, I must say I was so happy when I heard George was headed back to jail. I had been in the dumps since hearing of Trayvon's murder, and that GZ walked free, offended my sense of decency. I feel more at peace somehow, now that he's back in jail.
Dave, I don't agree that O'Mara with re-seek bond, here's why:
George will HAVE to tesify. I think we know by now that O'Mara has no control/influence over his client. George is a loose cannon. George likes to freestyle.
Remember the so-called aplology at the bail hearing? You don't think O'mara tried to talk GZ out of doing that? I'm sure he did, and I'm sure GZ insisted on doing it anyway, because he thinks he's clever and can manipulate everybody.
So, George insists, and O'mara says fine, but I'll tell you EXACTLY what to say, and more importantly what NOT to say. So, they rehearse what to say; but, George goes onto the stand, and says what he wants, and lies to the parents. There is NO way that was part of what he and O'Mara rehearsed! Not unless O'Mara is incompetent.
Here George is, having to testify again to get another bond, and O'Mara knows it's a risk to put him back on the stand. George doesn't listen to anybody. He doesn't take good advice. O'Mara does NOT want to complicate things for his client...and possibly himself ..see, now O'Mara is in an adversarial relationship with his own client! O'Mara's got to defend HIMSELF against George - never mind the Prosecutors! Because of George, O'mara is looking incompetent to the whole world that's watching. It wasn't supposed to be like this. This was O'Mara's opportunity to shine.
O'Mara can't refuse to re-seek bond if that's what his client wants to do; but, I bet his heart is in his mouth about doing it.
And now, George has lost his closest advocate: his wife. He's a grown man, his parents can only vouch for so much. What's he going to say to the judge that would make Lester risk his own reputation and that of the court in letting George back out of jail? George - who is under greater pressure now - may run. If George runs, everybody will blame Judge Lester. See, Geoge is the kind of fella who will get forged documents, if need be.