Why Judge Lester Will Refuse to Recuse

I can understand why George Zimmerman’s defense attorneys, Mark O’Mara and Donald West, filed a motion for Judge Kenneth Lester, Jr. to step down. It makes sense. For one thing, had they not, it wouldn’t help pave the way for a retrial later on if Zimmerman is convicted. I’m sure he requested it, too, and no matter what, the attorneys are there to work for their client. Besides, George is used to getting what he wants, he believes this is a frivolous case, and he wants a new judge. So there. Only it doesn’t work that way, and there are some rather good and strong reasons why.

Let me first mention a few “for instances” that were mentioned in the actual motion filed by his attorneys, the VERIFIED MOTION TO DISQUALIFY TRIAL JUDGE, which can be viewed HERE, directly from the gzlegal.com Website.

On page 5, the motion says:

“Generally a statement by the judge that he feels a party has lied in a case indicates bias against the party.”

Now hold on a minute. Didn’t another judge once say something about the truth and Miss Anthony are strangers? That had nothing to do with his recusal request, did it? No, it didn’t, and as a matter of fact, look at it this way. If all I had to do was lie to a judge to get him/her disqualified for bias, I’d lie to every judge who comes rolling down the pike, and I’d never go to trial. They’d run out of judges long before the statute of limitation runs out. Like a lot of defendants, lie your way out of it.

Let’s move on to page 7:

“The Court states that the money used to post bail ‘… is not money which the Defendant has earned through his hard work and savings, so forfeiting it for failing to appear would not impact the Defendant’s life in the same manner as a similarly-situated defendant who puts his house up for collateral to obtain bond.’ Page 7, (f). However, the Court fails to note that his family’s home would thereby be forfeited if he failed to appear. Further, the Court ignores the reality that those funds are the only funds available to Mr. Zimmerman to survive, to eat, to pay for utilities and to provide his family shelter.”

Here are the problems I see. George Zimmerman not only lied to the court, he lied to his parents, who took out a second mortgage on their house to secure the bond money. What a weasel. He lied to his attorneys, too. As for food and shelter, it was clearly spelled out that the money was to be used for his defense, not to pay off credit card bills and to buy expensive guns. Aside from that, it’s a lousy excuse and a cheap argument.

From page 9:

“The Court departed from its role as an impartial, objective minister of justice when it stated on two occasions on its Order that in the Court’s personal opinion there is probable cause to believe that the Defendant committed a violation of Florida Statute 903.035(3), a third degree felony punishable by five years in prison. This is tantamount to instructing the State that Mr. Zimmerman should be prosecuted for this offense. Comments like these are taken seriously by the Defendant, and further convinces him that he cannot get a fair trial from this Court. The Court made a similar comment about his wife at the June 1, 2012 bond revocation hearing when it said…”

We all know what it said, and Shellie Zimmerman was duly charged. The problem here is that the motion blames the judge and not his client. Had his client and wife just told the truth to begin with, this would not be an issue. It’s a situation that is being passed off on the judge. The fact remains that the Zimmermans lied and the judge pointed it out, including what the possible charges and penalties might be. Who is to blame for that? Was the judge merely telling the truth? Poor George says he takes the judge’s comments seriously. Well, shiver in me boots. What about the judge? He took the Zimmermans’ comments seriously, too, but according to the Book of George, he wasn’t supposed to do that? Only George is allowed? Gimme a break. I could go on and on, but…

George is responsible for his own mess. Based on the recusal motion, I see nothing that warrants the judge to step down, but that’s only part of the reason why this judge will refuse to recuse.

§

I think that most of you are aware of a role I played in a motion filed in another case where the presiding judge was asked to step down. I did an awful lot of legal studying back then, and in March of 2011, Casey Anthony’s defense filed a motion, the MOTION FOR A REHEARING ON ORDERS DENYING MOTIONS TO SUPPRESS, that had this one glaring statement:

c. The Court Did Not Look at the Evidence from the Hearing Objectively and Instead Displays a Clear Bias [emphasis mine] In Explaining Law Enforcement Conduct Rather than Evaluating Whether a Reasonable Person Would Have Felt Free to Leave.

Holy Foghorn Leghorn! Only thing is, under FLORIDA RULES OF JUDICIAL ADMINISTRATION, Rule 2.330, DISQUALIFICATION OF TRIAL JUDGES, “Any party, including the state, may move to disqualify the trial judge assigned to the case on grounds provided by rule, by statute, or by the Code of Judicial Conduct.” OK fine, but what it means is that the procedure for filing disqualification motions for civil and criminal cases is set out in Rule 2.160 of the Fla. R. Jud. Admin., amended by the Florida Supreme Court in 2004.

Since this is the route O’Mara and West are taking, they should be familiar with F.S. §38.10, which states:

Whenever a party to any action or proceeding makes and files an affidavit stating fear that he or she will not receive a fair trial in the court where the suit is pending on account of the prejudice of the judge of that court against the applicant or in favor of the adverse party, the judge shall proceed no further, but another judge shall be designated in the manner prescribed by the laws of this state for the substitution of judges for the trial of causes in which the prescribing judge is disqualified. Every such affidavit shall state the facts and the reasons for the belief that any such bias or prejudice exists and shall be accompanied by a certificate of counsel of record that such affidavit and application are made in good faith.

But please pay particular attention to this part:

However, when any party to any action has suggested the disqualification of a trial judge and an order has been made admitting the disqualification of such judge and another judge has assigned and transferred to act in lieu of the judge so held to be disqualified, the judge so assigned and transferred is not disqualified on account of alleged prejudice against the party making the suggestion in the first instance, or in favor of the adverse party, unless such judge admits and holds that it is then a fact that he or she does not stand fair and impartial between the parties. If such judge holds, rules, and adjudges that he or she does stand fair and impartial as between the parties and their respective interests, he or she shall cause such ruling to be entered on the minutes of the court and shall proceed to preside as judge in the pending cause. The ruling of such judge may be assigned as error and may be reviewed as are other rulings of the trial court.

Remember the first judge? Jessica Recksiedler? She was asked to recuse herself and that’s how Judge Lester came to the bench.

After Judge Recksiedler willfully stepped down, and she could have easily remained on the bench, Judge Lester cannot be disqualified because of alleged prejudice solely based on what Zimmerman claims. The only way it would work is if Lester admits he is biased in favor of the prosecution. Even then, his admission would merely be recorded in the court minutes and the trial would proceed on schedule. Of course, this would be reviewed after a conviction (if there is one) and it would, no doubt, lead to a retrial, but let me assure you, this judge will not fail. He will never admit to bias, and because he’s the second judge, the rules are different.

One of the misconceptions of trial court judges is that rulings are the basis for disqualifications. They are not, as O’Mara and West are claiming in their motion. A judge may not be disqualified for judicial bias. He/she can be disqualified, however, for personal bias against a party. (See Barwick, 660 So. 2d at 692, and cases cited therein.) You just have to prove it.

§

Lest you think I will leave you dangling with merely one slice of cake from the book of rules, allow me to add a thick, sweet, slab of icing to the entire cake.

Back to good old Rule 2.160…

Section (g) deals with the filing of successive disqualification motions. This is to prevent the possibility of abuse, otherwise referred to as judge-shopping. Yes, you read it right… JUDGE-SHOPPING!

When Judge Recksiedler disqualified herself, Judge Lester cannot be disqualified on any successive motions filed by Zimmerman’s defense “unless the successor judge rules that he or she is in fact not fair or impartial in the case.” And that ain’t gonna happen, folks. Judge Lester will be allowed to toss out any new dismissal motions filed on Zimmerman’s behalf.

See also: The Florida Bar Journal, Judicial Disqualification: What Every Practioner (and Judge) Should Know, Douglas J. Glaid, October, 2000 Volume LXXIV, No. 9

Comments

[Sherry]

Michelle, those things better never be in your league, lol!

Yes, GZ said that about making sure he didn't shoot his hand, and Patricia made a statement saying that grabbing the sweatshirt and putting the gun up by his hand ensured he wouldn't be shooting it.

What an idiot to make that statement. Doesn't that give it a pre-meditated flavor now?

[Michelle]

I am in trouble so this is my last comment for tonight. :/ This is going to get me in even more trouble. When the Doctor first put my Mom on Adderal she took 10mg. Did not help so they bumped it up to 20mg. It worked for her ADHD but it makes her grumpy, hence I'm in trouble. My point is Mr. Zimmerman had anger issues in his past, maybe the Adderal compounded that problem. Now I have to go before I become a victim, lol. Kidding, we have a love hate relationship I love her she hates me, when she tells it she loves me and I hate her. Good night sorry for typos trying to hurry.

[Sherry]

LOL, Michelle! You have a lovingly mean mom!

[Dave Knechel]

11. It is the canon of American Jurisprudence that an independent judiciary should maintain the dignity of the judicial office at all times. A judge shall avoid even the appearance of an impropriety at all times, and whether the conduct would create in reasonable minds a perception that the judge's ability to carry out judicial responsibilities with integrity, impartiality and competence is impaired, a judge shall disqualify himself or herself where his or her impartiality might reasonably be questioned. See Fla. Code Canon 3, ABA Model Code of Judicial Conduct Canon 1 and Canon 2 (2007).

12. A motion to recuse must be granted if the facts alleged would prompt a reasonably prudent person to fear that he could not get a fair and impartial trial from the judge. Nunez v. Backman, 645 So.2d 1063, 1064 (Fla. 4th DCA, 1994).

This sounds like something that might apply with the present situation, right?

Regarding Point 11:

Here's Canon 1:

A JUDGE SHALL UPHOLD AND PROMOTE THE INDEPENDENCE, INTEGRITY, AND IMPARTIALITY OF THE JUDICIARY, AND SHALL AVOID IMPROPRIETY AND THE APPEARANCE OF IMPROPRIETY;

Here's Canon 2:

A JUDGE SHALL PERFORM THE DUTIES OF JUDICIAL OFFICE IMPARTIALLY, COMPETENTLY, AND DILIGENTLY.

Specifically, in Canon 2:

RULE 2.2 Impartiality and Fairness

A judge shall uphold and apply the law,* and shall perform all duties of judicial office fairly and impartially.*

COMMENT
[1] To ensure impartiality and fairness to all parties, a judge must be objective and open-minded.
[2] Although each judge comes to the bench with a unique background and personal philosophy, a judge must interpret and apply the law without regard to whether the judge approves or disapproves of the law in question.
[3] When applying and interpreting the law, a judge sometimes may make good-faith errors of fact or law. Errors of this kind do not violate this Rule.
[4] It is not a violation of this Rule for a judge to make reasonable accommodations to ensure pro se litigants the opportunity to have their matters fairly heard.

RULE 2.3 Bias, Prejudice, and Harassment

(A) A judge shall perform the duties of judicial office, including administrative duties, without bias or prejudice.

(B) A judge shall not, in the performance of judicial duties, by words or conduct manifest bias or prejudice, or engage in harassment, including but not limited to bias, prejudice, or harassment based upon race, sex, gender, religion, national origin, ethnicity, disability, age, sexual orientation, marital status, socioeconomic status, or political affiliation, and shall not permit court staff, court officials, or others subject to the judge’s direction and control to do so.

(C) A judge shall require lawyers in proceedings before the court to refrain from manifesting bias or prejudice, or engaging in harassment, based upon attributes including but not limited to race, sex, gender, religion, national origin, ethnicity, disability, age, sexual orientation, marital status, socioeconomic status, or political affiliation, against parties, witnesses, lawyers, or others.

(D) The restrictions of paragraphs (B) and (C) do not preclude judges or lawyers from making legitimate reference to the listed factors, or similar factors, when they are relevant to an issue in a proceeding.

RULE 2.11 Disqualification

(A) A judge shall disqualify himself or herself in any proceeding in which the judge’s impartiality* might reasonably be questioned, including but not limited to the following circumstances:
(1) The judge has a personal bias or prejudice concerning a party or a party’s lawyer, or personal knowledge* of facts that are in dispute in the proceeding.

COMMENT
[1] Under this Rule, a judge is disqualified whenever the judge’s impartiality might reasonably be questioned, regardless of whether any of the specific provisions of paragraphs (A)(1) [...] apply. In many jurisdictions, the term “recusal” is used interchangeably with the term “disqualification.”

Regarding Point 12:

From Nunez v. Blackman:

A motion for disqualification should be granted if the facts alleged therein, taken as true, would prompt a reasonably prudent person to fear that he could not get a fair and impartial trial from the judge. Hayslip v. Douglas, 400 So.2d 553 (Fla. 4th DCA 1981). We conclude that petitioner's fear of prejudice was reasonable here [...]

From me:

Certainly, this looks like it applies today with Judge Lester, and this should be enough for him to recuse himself, right? Well, yes, but it's not the motion against him. Points 11 and 12 are from the DEFENDANT'S VERIFIED MOTION TO DISQUALIFY TRIAL JUDGE, and it was filed on April 16, 2012 by George Zimmerman against Judge Reckseidler.

[SnoopySleuth]

Dear Mr D B Knechel, Esq.

It has just come to my attention, after reading your copy and paste of every law that Mark O'Mara, learned counsel for one George Zimmerman, cited in his DEFENDANT'S VERIFIED MOTION TO DISQUALIFY TRIAL JUDGE, filed on April 16, 2012 by George Zimmerman against Judge Reckseidler, that I may have upset you.

As a legal scholar who has had the utmost respect for you, Mr Knechel, I do not get the impression that your response to me was made in good faith. I am deeply hurt after having spent hours researching the Florida rules and regulations of how to get a judge removed from the bench that you took it upon yourself to reply to me in such a way. I don't think it was necessary for you to scream at me as indicated by your capitalization of several words in your retort.

It was always my understanding that a good student should take the initiative and expand their knowledge by independently reaching out to all sources. This should in no way ruffle the feathers of her present professor nor to suggest that said professer, namely you, Mr Knechel, should feel that I was trying to prove some of your teachings wrong.

Due to the above, I wish to inform you that I will be contacting Mr Alan Dershowitz to inquire if he has an opening for another student at Harvard University.

To this NOTICE OF INTENT

I, SnoopySleuth, affix my seal. ( ö ¿ ö )

Dated this 16th day of July in the year of our Lord, 2012.

[Dave Knechel]

The capitalization was not done by me. It was a copy & paste from the ABA Model Code of Judicial Conduct.

I took your point and offered a counterpoint. In any event, I guess we should find out today because I don't think that this judge is one to rest on his laurels.

Alan Dershowitz. PFFFFFFT.

[nan11]

This article came out yesterday so many of you have probably already seen it. I did see it discussed, but I just came across the actual article.
Enterprise News –COMMENTARY: George Zimmerman’s strange ‘justice’
By Wendy Murphy (GateHouse News Service)
Quote:
For example, a man in Texas recently killed a guy to stop him from sexually abusing a child. Not only were no criminal charges filed, the guy was universally celebrated as a hero.
End of Quote

I’m trying to sit on my hands a little bit—but, shame on her. Really, shame on her.

Here is a link to the Texas story.
Sky News - No Charges For Dad Who Killed Daughter’s Rapist
Please click on the 2nd video to your right. It doesn’t play the full call, just a little.

This is what ‘regret and sorry’ sound like to me—I’ve never heard it from Mr. Zimmerman. Nothing even close. Not once.

Ms. Murphy should spend more time checking the facts, before using her considerable talents to spew such ‘commentary’. imho

[nan11]

This is a well written, fair article, in my opinion. It discusses the early ‘politics’ of this case. Yes. It mentions Mr. Martin’s acquaintance with Officer Barnes—but you won’t find that part in my quote.

I’m grateful to every single person who reached out to Trayvon’s family—no matter how.

But I’m showing my own personal bias as I digress. The article shows none.

The Grio (NBC News) -Zimmerman investigator blamed black officers for leaks, ‘pressure’ to file charges
Quote:
The case ratcheted up racial tensions in Sanford, but also within the Sanford police department, which was no stranger to racial conflict, both with the community and within its ranks.

“Serino is concerned that many of the leaks in this case are coming from within the Sanford Police Department,” the FBI report states.

Sources tell theGrio several black officers were questioned by Lee, but all denied leaking information to the media. Serino seems to have believed they were doing more than leaking. He listed Barnes, Perkins and Villalona as “all pressuring him to file charges against Zimmerman after the incident."
End of Quote

It is a two page write-up.

(lol - enough from me. I'm off to see if Witness 9's second statement has come out yet.)

[SnoopySleuth]

Nan11~~thanks for the info. I just finished reading the two pages. I am not really surprised at what I read but will withhold my comments about it.

Orlando Sentinel said to check back shortly after 11am to get the info that is being released today. Both the state and defense did not want the info released but the media won out.

[MollyK]

Wow, Nan, that Murphy piece is disgusting. She takes GZ's statements as gospel, and she seems to be offended that there was an investigation and arrest. She is missing the point that if a jury believes GZ's story after hearing all the evidence, he will be released.

She seems to make a habit of not checking facts. Did you see the correction to a previous column?

"In a recent column I wrote that Harvard Law School’s decision to hire Elizabeth Warren may have been influenced by the fact that her husband held a prominent position there. Warren was hired before Bruce Mann arrived at Harvard."

[SnoopySleuth]

More startling, however, the woman testified that Zimmerman molested her as a child.

"It started when I was six, he's almost about two years older than I am," she said, adding that Zimmerman was bigger and stronger.

"He would put his hands under my pants, under my underwear," the witness says.

(from the Orlando Sentinel... they havent got the links up yet)

[MollyK]

This is really disgusting. These claims have nothing to do with the shooting. No charges were ever filed by W9, and it is not fair to make this information public now. Wasn't the state against releasing the information? I wonder why they didn't wait for a ruling on MOM's motion to block the release? And why did MOM wait so long to file the motion? Couldn't he have done it on Friday?

The case against GZ is so strong. Now he has a basis to claim that he won't be able to get a fair trial.

[SnoopySleuth]

Witness #9 Audio

[MollyK]

And it is almost always true that abusers have been abused themselves. W9 claims that GZ started doing this when he was 8. If this is true, then I would be willing to bet that GZ was abused himself.

[SnoopySleuth]

MollyK ~~that audio clip wasn't very long...surely there is more. Mark tried quite a while ago and so did the state to have that audio sealed...

[Dave Knechel]

The state was against releasing this information. The media won out in the end. While I don't expect it to be brought into trial, it may have an impact on the money collected in donations. That may be what O'Mara was so fearful of.

10 years of molestation is sick. Any at all is disgusting, cousin or not. He's a pervert in my book, but he'll deny it. He's good at that.

... Second-degree murder, first-degree pervert.

[nan11]

Orlando Sentinel - 'Witness 9' tells prosecutors Zimmerman molested her
Quote:
Defense attorneyMark O'Mara made a last-minute attempt to block the release of witness 9's statement as well as the jail calls. He filed a motion this morning at the Seminole County Courthouse, asking that they be delayed, but Corey's office released them anyway.

Sentinel reporters are reviewing the records. Check back for more on what they reveal.
End of Quote

Oh my goodness. To steal a line from Nancy Grace: "Bombshell tonight!!" (Well, it's a little early, but it still...)

I'm a little stunned. I really thought the rumours of this were just speculation; but, I'm also stunned that they are being released in spite of Mr. O'Mara's efforts.

I hope this is a good thing for the prosecution, but I'm a little concerned.

[SnoopySleuth]

A young woman told authorities that murder suspect George Zimmerman sexually molested her for a decade, according to prosecution records released today.

The woman, identified only as "witness 9," said the abuse started when she was six years old and ended when she was 16.

(he supposedly molested her for 10 years....from Orlando Sentinel)

[nan11]

Dave: I believe I read much earlier that the prosecution actually has this woman's statement corroborated.

Is this a stupid thought to think the judge wants to force a plea?

[No, it's not a stupid thought, but it wouldn't be the judge wanting a plea. The prosecution, on the other hand...]

[SnoopySleuth]

link wont work sry

[MollyK]

If W9's story is true, then there are two things I can be pretty sure of: (1) GZ molested others and (2) GZ was molested himself, before he was 8.

I tend to believe W9's story, because of the fear in her voice when she speaks about GZ. But no charges were ever brought, and he was not convicted, so I think it is absolutely wrong that this information was made public.

I also think that it is now much less likely that we will get what we all want, Justice for Trayvon.

[nan11]

This is just something that I heard was 'tweeted': Mr. Crump is saying that 'witness 9' could be a key rebuttal witness, like in Mr. Sandusky's trial--showing that Zimmerman has a 'history of violence and manipulation'.

This could be why the prosecution also tried to keep the statement private until trial.

jmo

MollyK: I'm afraid you are right.

[nan11]

Snoop: Sorry if this is a duplicate. WKMG has links to both parts.

WKMG - Witness 9: George Zimmerman molested me

(I have trouble with Sentinel links sometimes, especially video and audio.)

[nymima]

Snoopy writes: (he supposedly molested her for 10 years....from Orlando Sentinel) Perhaps this was mentioned, but how old is the victim now? In NYS you have 10 yrs. after the molestation to report. Many choose not to report and move on with life, but she's come this far, I hope she takes it to the next level to press charges. Things need to come full circle with this predatory creature - GZ.

[Vicky]

One might also consider that the fact that George allegedly repeatedly molested #9, the information could also be used to demonstrate his lack of impulse control. Although the idea that GZ may have molested this girl, legally speaking, two years difference in their age does not make it rise to the level of his being a pedophile. Deviant behavior, perhaps, but the narrow age difference makes it unlikely criminal charges, beyond statutory rape, would have ever been charged. He should have realized his conduct was taboo and refrained from inappropriate contact by the time he reached adolescence, but it appears he was more interested in personal gratification than observing moral and legal conduct. Too bad the girl has allowed too much time to pass to file a rape/ attempted rape charge against him. I wonder if there are other victims. And if so, how old are they and when did the events occur?

More importantly, why has the media jumped all over this aspect of the case as opposed to what should be the more relevant aspect of whether or not GZ is racially biased? Seems to me, the molestation allegations could have been redacted.

[nan11]

Vicky: I do agree. But I have to say--right now my heart is acking for that young woman.

It seems that Mr. Zimmerman is about to learn that he can't hide behind his privileged family any longer.

Trayvon Martin looked down the barrel of George's gun that night and saw the monster on the other end. A monster that this girl had met many years before.

If her testimony helps convict him of 2nd degree murder--good for her. Trayvon Martin will still be dead; but she will be able to feel safer.

[nan11]

Well, it looks like Mr. O’Mara will not be getting another bite of the apple. Whether it’s a good thing or not, we will have to wait to see.
Motion To Stay Court’s July 13, 2012 Order Denying Defendant’s Amended Motion For Reconsideration
Quote:
The defendant asks this court to stay this court’s July 13, 2012 order so that the jail calls and Witness 9’s statement are not released by the state for public dissemination.
End of Quote

This was also filed:
13 pages: Notice of Filing
Quote:
I have enclosed for your review a summary page entitle “Monthly Sales Report for the month of April 2012”, which documents the inflow of monies into the PayPal account during its active time period (Exhibit A). {snipped}
End of Quote

[MollyK]

I listened to W9's interview. It is very upsetting. I am particularly disturbed because she could have had no idea that this interview would ever be made public. She must have been dreading the release.

It is obvious that her life has been a nightmare and she has never had any counseling or help with dealing with this.

In terms of the statute of limitation, she is about 2 years younger than GZ, and the last incident was when she was 16, so if the SOL is 10 years, it has either just passed or is about to pass.

[Dave Knechel]

I just received an e-mail from someone inside the case:

"As the State Attorney previously stated, she certainly would be a rebuttal witness very similar to that in the Sandusky trial showing that he has a history of violence and manipulation. Zimmerman's mentality Is very relevant to this trial."

[nan11]

Dave: Thanks for that!

It doesn't look like Mr. O'Mara is going to have to worry about the donations slowing down too much--from what I'm reading Zimmerman is getting lots and lots of support.

His devoted fans are blaming everyone else but their hero.

moo

[Sadly, the world is full of blind mice, nan11. I guess incest is OK in some circles, not to mention deviant behavior.]

[nan11]

WESH - Listen to Zimmerman jail house calls

I don't know if anyone wants to listen to these things, but WESH is downloading at the above link. They are not all there yet, but I think eventually they will be.

Thanks for the link. I think I'll puke before listening to each and every one of them.]

[Carolyn444]

Is it possible that Judge Lester would like to disassociate himself from George Zimmerman's legal proceedings? Could he be hoping for recusal?

[No, not really, Carolyn444. Take it from me, judges are there to do their job, just like the rest of us. If there's a fire, a fireman goes to put it out because it's his job. He chose to do that kind of work. So do judges. All in the line of duty.]

[Vicky]

Dave, I think the fact that George's past conduct shows that he lacks the ability or willingness to observe proper boundaries, that he lacks impulse control and is adept at changing his demeanor based upon his audience is extremely relevant. I don't necessarily view him as a sex offender, but he most certainly appears to have taken advantage of witness #9's fear and shame of disclosing his inappropriate and invasive contact with her. I wish people would ATP blowing his sexual advances out of proportion. Yes, he was way out of bounds, but unless there is an indication that he has continued to molest young girls or has recently sexually assaulted adult women, his is more a case of deviant behavior than anything else, and my guess is that he knew better, but his own needs were more important to him than the feelings of the girl(s) he was "messing" with.

This latest revelation seems more than anything, to prove that GZ doesn't feel that the rules and morays of society apply to him. And is an absolute indication of a sociopathic/borderline personality.. I would love to get a gander of his psych eval. Unfortunately, that ain't likely.

[He's definitely marches to a "different" drumbeat, Vicky, and he doesn't care about the welfare of others. Of course, through his defense, he is denying the accusations of inappropriate sexual contact with his cousin. I expected that, in light of his denial concerning Trayvon Martin's death. Zimmerman is a professional liar because he's done it all his life. Even so, he's not very proficient in anything, including that, but he sure does know how to kill. And he doesn't care who it is because he's always right in his little world.]

[nan11]

Vicky: You said: "his is more a case of deviant behavior than anything else."

Well, that will work. If they can somehow get her testimony in at trial it could help the jury agree to a 2nd degree murder charge.

[SnoopySleuth]

Dave et al~~I listened to witness #9 and about ten of the jail calls. For the life of me, I do not know why the prosecution released them. Was their intent to try and taint a jury pool? I cannot see how this can be relevant and admissable at trial. The alleged molestation took place when both were minors. I did not hear witness #9 mention that Z threatened her in any way if she ever told anyone about the fondling etc. Witness #9 said there was never ever any penetration and this happened over a period of ten years?? That's one heck of a lot of foreplay. Were they first cousins or second cousins? I thought you had to be closer related for incest to come into play as in parent child or brother sister. I believe #9 is telling the truth but maybe she is still supressing quite a bit and there is more that she could tell us. I am not buying her story that Z and his family are racists.

I am having a hard time listening to the jail calls....Z voice is just above a whisper and Shellie sounds like her mouth is full of food. Z is coming across as a sniveling child screaming for his medications and Shellie sounds more like his mother than wife.

If I were to profile Zimmerman, I would say he comes across as being a spoiled self-centered little wimp. I do not think he would have the b***s to molest a 'woman' against her will. He strikes me as a kid who still sucks their thumb.

When Z took possession of the gun, it made him feel powerful, unarmed, he was spineless. I don't think he developed emotionally beyond a boy.

Vicky, you may be right in that Canadians are more liberal when it comes to minor sex. I just cannot make a connection between Witness #9's testimony and Z murdering Trayvon in cold blood. I do believe Z is guilty and should serve a long sentence in a state prison, from what I have learned thus far, I believe there was intent on his part.

JMO.......

[Technically, the state did release the jail calls to the public, but it was only done because they were in their possession when the court order came down. The defense then got them, too, but the state is under the legal obligation to follow the court order.]

[SnoopySleuth]

I should have added 'sneaky' in my profile of Z. I would say that he started his sneaky ways when he was 8 years old... under the blanket...behind the curtain... At age twenty- eight, he is still sneaky... it is quite evident in the jail calls..just listen to his voice.

It is a known fact that likes repel... If Z saw someone who he thought was sneaking around a neighborhood, he would find them repulsive and as a result lose control.... the rest is history.

The above is the only connection I can make between W#9 and the murder... 'depraved mind' maybe?

[I especially like your part about likes repelling. I must say you're 100% right about that!]

[nan11]

I think that Mr. O'Mara is going to do a brief interview with Piers Morgan tonight.

I'm in and out because my cats are out; but I'm pretty sure that he said he was going to have George Zimmerman's lawyer on.

Update: Yes, it's coming up next.

[SnoopySleuth]

Dave et al....

Jail call#25 ( about 3/4's in on audio)

Z tells Shellie...
Taaffee called O'Mara office and said he had an interested party who would pay all the Z's defense fees if Baez could be his co counsel... Mark said...Baez could be Z's counsel and he would excuse himself

O'Mara asked Z later if he knew anyone named Frank Taaffee.... so Mark was not familar with FT

[I think Z and Taaffe are from the same cynical, egotistical mold. They'v both got that "You know who I am?" complex. Big stars, although I must say Taaffe was quite polite to me at the courthouse, inside and out.]

[Karen C.]

Whoa- Does NO ONE in MOM's office watch any CNN at all, for him not to have known about the ubiquitous Frank Taaffe? Now that is truly unbelievable.

Hate to say it, but a good defense attorney can easily make these molestation claims appear as no more than "playing doctor"- it would be another thing if intercourse was attempted. What is troubling is that whatever happened, happened for a ridiculously extended period of time, up until she was 16?! Most kids actually do outgrow this behavior- close calls in terms of exposure, one of the kids backing away, or perhaps developing a more routine boyfriend/girlfriend relationship once in Middle or High school naturally end this. Is "playing doctor" (more-or-less consensual) the same as molestation? Listening to her tape, this sounds more like molestation, or is this her after-the-fact assessment of it? There isn't that much age difference between the two, not like he was 15 and she was 6.

I can believe the families being in denial, on both sides. My Hubby had a girlfriend years ago who was diddled with by the local monsignor under a lap blanket while she, he and her brother were on the sofa together, watching TV at her home on some Sunday nights. Went on for several months- Dad in his easy chair, Mom cleaning up in the kitchen, lights out and the TV on in the living room, all watching sports together, drinking beers. Parents totally oblivious. Brother figured it out and it stopped, but no one told about anything.

[Any kind of hanky panky like that is bad. OK, when young, we explore, but I NEVER, EVER had a desire to play doctor with my cousins. There's just something innately disgusting about it. Even then, I knew in my head that it was incest and no one had to tell me so. Z is a manipulator 1st-Class.]

[ritanita]

Dave, I've been reading here from the get-go and thanks for the excellent coverage.

I listened to the cousin/Witness 9's audio and just want to opine that none of what she said will come up in the case in chief. I don't believe the prosecution wants to make this case about race. However, if her recounting of sexual molestation has been verified by family members, her statements about George's character would make great rebuttal or sentencing phase testimony.

She testified under oath as to how GZ behaved and created the "good guy" persona for some, but his actions with others were in direct contradiction.

[Hi, ritanita - Great seeing you! I'm late responding, though. Sorry.

The prosecution does not want to and will not make this about race. In addressing the court, de la Rionda has only referred to criminal profiling by Zimmerman, not racial. That's a huge difference. If anything, many in the public and some in the media have been crying racism, but even if true, it would be impossible to prove, so because of that, it's time to let it go. The problem that I see on blogs and forums is that when the race card is brought into the mix, all hell breaks loose. It ruins a website like a flash fire. I won't allow it here.

As for Zimmerman's sexual target being a rebuttal witness? Yup, I can see it because it shows a lot about his character... or lack of any.

Hey! Thanks! Y'all come back.]

[nan11]

Here is the transcript of Mark O’Mara on (CNN) Piers Morgan last night.

I don’t want to be a space hog, so below I’ll just snip a few quotes.

I found Mr. O’Mara to be quite subdued last night. It’s just my opinion, but I think he is taking this more serious than we are.

I’ll also add this—Mark O’Mara controlled that interview last night. He made the exact points he intended to make, regardless of Mr. Morgan questions. Mr. Mark O’Mara is very, very intelligent.

Quoted and snipped::
MORGAN: On that specific point, could that be admissible? A family member alleging racism from George's family?

O'MARA: I think that if they could tie that to an event of George's and if, in fact, they had some other evidence supporting a suggestion of racism. We know that this case began with the suggestion that George profiled Trayvon because he was a black male. If they were to go back there it seems that the state has left that behind or the Trayvon Martin family representative left that behind.

But if they were going back there, then potentially that part could be relevant. Nothing about the sexual abuse allegations but that one issue, it might be.

MORGAN: There's been a fairly extraordinary response I think from Trayvon Martin's family by their attorney Benjamin Crump which says as follows. "As the state attorney previously stated, witness number nine would be a rebuttal witness, very similar to that in the Sandusky trial, showing that George Zimmerman has a history of violence and manipulation. Zimmerman's mentality is very relevant to this trial."

I suppose I find it extraordinary because it seemed pretty gratuitous to lump in the name Sandusky into all this because everybody obviously associate him and that name with serious child abuse.

O'MARA: Well, you know, Mr. Crump has said in the past my client was a racist murderer. He has said then my client shouldn't have gotten out of the car. Then it moderated further that he wasn't getting beat up that badly, he didn't need to shoot. You know, he feels as though he needs to say these things to represent the Martin family and that has a benefit to his position, he has the right I guess to say that.

But what I really need to focus on is what we started out this case as. This is a charges of second degree murder case and the question is, did George Zimmerman act in appropriate self-defense in using deadly force against force likely to cause great bodily injury. We know he has the broken nose and the head. I think if we focus on those objective facts all these periphery, which, again, will never make it into a courtroom, needs to be left just there, on the periphery.
End

Mr. O'Mara has already left this response on his website.
Quote:
Now that this statement is part of the public record, the defense will vigorously defend Mr. Zimmerman against the allegations. In the next several weeks, there will be reciprocal discovery filed regarding Witness #9's statement.
End

No mention of how the young woman's claims could possibly be used to reinforce Mr. Zimmerman's 'deviant' behavior pattern. Strange about that, no? Well, maybe not.

[Except, we don't know that Z had a broken nose. There's no proof that he did.]

[nan11]

This stood out to me as being interesting. I think the ‘tone’ of the conversation, as well as what was said, clearly indicates that much was being kept from Mr. O’Mara.

Miami Herald - Jail call says defense attorney knew about Zimmerman’s hidden money
Quote: Reached late Monday, O’Mara insisted he did not know about the money.

“I recall now some conversation of a transfer, but I don’t recall a specific amount,” O’Mara told The Miami Herald. “If it was $10,000 or $100,000 or $30,000, I would have remembered. It’s not the type of thing you would risk your license to practice law over.”

He stressed that the recording shows that Zimmerman was keeping him “at an arm’s length” regarding the funding he had raised. He does not think the recording is clear-cut about whether Zimmerman told him about the money. End of Quote

I think this is a link to the call itself, plus I have transcribed a little bit below:
WKMG - Call 30
Transcribed and Snipped:
George: ...I did tell him that—you know—we did try and make one transfer of thirty-seven, and that it got held-up because it’s over the ten—you know. So.

Person George Called: Uh hm.

George: So, he knows about that. Umm.

Person George Called: Does he know the volume?

George: No.

Person George Called: Okay.

George: No. And, ahh...

Person George Called: I’d like to keep that with us.

George: I think so, too. I agree.

Person George Called: Yeah.

George: And you can share that with Shellie—that...

Person George Called: Yeah. She already—she’s up to speed.

George: Good...

[What's that old saying? ... Something smells bad in Denmark, or something like that?]

[SnoopySleuth]

Nan11~~I picked up on call #30 and even listened to it the second time... Is Ken Z's oldest brother?

Z did not tell Mark the VOLUME... To me that would have been the total in the account/accounts. .

Person George Called: Does he know the volume?

George: No.

[SnoopySleuth]

A couple things of interest....Z was having a hard time sleeping as he didn't have his medications.

Shellie asked him if he got his 'anxiety' med. She also asked him if his psychologist was in to see him.

Z speaks in Spanish to one female quite often... he seems to be fluent in that language...sadly, I am not.

[That woman speaking Spanish is Zenaida Gonzalez. That's why Frank Taaffe wanted Jose Baez as Zimmerman's attorney.]

[Dave Knechel]

There's a lot of stuff to go thru today. The state rebuttal is out, too, to the defense's recusal motion. As for O'Mara knowing about the money, I think he knew a little more than he fesses up to, which is nada.

[nan11]

Snoops: I don't know if it has been confirmed anywhere who 'Ken' is. Some are suggesting that his real name is 'Scott' and he is his brother-in-law, married to his sister, Dawn.

Not sure, though.

(Update: lol I just read where 'Ken' is Robert, Jr. So you are probably correct. (I think everyone is just guessing, though.)

I have picked up on the fact that he lives in 'heaven'--which is where Zimmerman and Shellie were discussing going at one point, iirc.

Here we have one where Georgie boy discusses his 'contact' in the FDLE. Hmmm.
WKMG - Call 10
Shellie: ...I’ll even ask Mark or I’ll call the FDLE or something to figure out the safest way to get me in there. I won’t just, you know, show up there.
George: Yeah. ‘Cause I can...[Unintelligible.]
Shellie: Don’t worry, babe.
George: How is my contact at FDLE? How did he? Did you talk to him?
Shellie: Yesterday.
George: Okay. How was he with you.
Shellie: Very nice.
George: Okay.
Shellie: Yeah.
George: I thought that, but..
Shellie: Very good.
George: ...I just wanted to make sure. Because he said—you know—that the number was just supposed to be—oh, no. He said that I could give you his number. Right.
Shellie: Right! Oh, yeah.
George: That right. Sorry, I forgot.
Shellie: Yeah. Well, at that point I didn’t care. I wanted to make sure you were safe.
George: I know.
Shellie: You know.
George: I know.
Shellie: He said. He has called me from that number before.
George: Oh, okay. (Yawning.)

[nan11]

Here is a link for the State's rebuttal. Well done, imo.

State’s Response To Defendant’s Verified Motion To Disqualify Trial Judge

From Page 5: The judge who presides at a trial may, upon completion of the evidence, be exceedingly ill disposed towards the defendant, who has been shown to be a thoroughly reprehensible person. But the judge is not thereby recusable for bias or prejudice, since his knowledge and the opinion it produced were properly and necessarily acquired in the course of the proceedings, and are indeed sometimes (as in a bench trial) necessary to completion of the judge’s task. As Judge Jerome Frank pithily put it: ”Impartiality is not gullibility. Disinterestedness does not mean child-like innocence. If the judge did not form judgements of the actors in those court-house dramas called trials, he could never render decisions.” In re J.P. Linahan, Inc., 138 F. 2d 650, 654 (CA2 1943). ... End Quote

[nan11]

It is hard to know who to believe really; but I do think being the stand-up couple that George and Shellie have proven themselves to be--we should at least take their statements with a grain of salt. moo

CBS News: CBS Did Not Send Flowers to George Zimmerman’s Family
Quoted and Snipped: A CBS News spokesperson says, quite frankly: “CBS News did not send flowers to George Zimmerman’s family.”

Fox News told TVNewser that a call suggesting that host Sean Hannity offered to pay Zimmerman’s legal fees was completely false. End of Quote

[nan11]

This little exchange between George and one of his sisters rather takes the prize.

Just think about this. He has admitted that he shot seventeen year old Trayvon Martin straight through the heart. He has admitted that. And as he sits in jail charged with 2nd degree murder, he jokes about attending a rally being held on his own behalf.

These two people exchanging thoughts on the telephone are not children. They must have realized the implications behind the rallies—but George seems so pleased with his actions that he wants to attend. And they find this humorous?

I don’t know, folks. Maybe I’m wrong. I hope so. (Or maybe these calls are just getting to me.) :-/

WKMG – Call 63
Female: Ahh, but yeah. So, that should be interesting—the rally—what they’re going to do.
George: Oh, Lord have mercy.
(Female laughter.)
George: I just hope they’re peaceful—whatever they do.
Female: Yeah. Oh, I think so.
George: Well, I hope that they plan on being peaceful; but I meant more so the [Unintelligible.]
Female: Oh. Yeah. Yeah. Well, it looks like there was some type of rally—like—you know—for—calling for your, ah [giggle][giggle] arrest. It would be equal, I guess—a while ago.
George: Yeah
Female: And him and all his people showed up.
George: Oh. Wow.
Female: ...[Unintelligible.]...with all their signs and everything. And, ah, and they were there, too—like rallying for you.
George: Oh. Wow.
Female: I don’t know. It should be interesting. It said from 1:00 to 3:00.
George: Wow.
Female: I might drive by.
George: On Saturday?
Female: Uh huh.
George: Oh. I might attend.
Female: Really? Yes, that would be good.
George: [laughing]
Female: A little guest appearance. Why not?
George: [laughing]
Female: For the supporters.

[Dave Knechel]

God bleass you, nan11. Thanks. I don't know how you can do it... listen to Z's wimpy voice. He's a huckster.