All About You
Tuesday, July 24, 2012 at 1:23AM Plurality: the Concept of Quantity
Lately, I’ve been listening to the beats of distant drums. The boom-ba-boom-ba-boom I’m hearing questions whether the state has a case against Shellie Zimmerman. Was the felony perjury charge against her too far reaching that it really holds little to no merit? Or was the state correct in issuing the arrest warrant?
Some of what I’ve been reading comes down to a relatively simple, yet complex, statement similar to the one that former President Clinton once uttered. “It depends on what the meaning of the words ‘is’ is.” I think we’re familiar with that one — not that this has anything to do directly with what I’m writing about, but keep in mind that the 42nd president was also an attorney and we are talking about law. Besides, Clinton’s statement segues easily and smoothly into linguistics, which is the study of language. This post will come down to the meaning of you. Not you personally, mind you, but the meaning of the word itself. You.
In college, I was fascinated with the English language. One of my first English course books was Language in Thought and Action by the late S.I. (Samuel Ichiye) Hayakawa, once a premier linguist, psychologist, semanticist, teacher and writer. Back then, he taught me a lot about word usage. There’s a good and bad way to say things, and depending on how you use words, the outcome could be disastrous. An example of this would be in how you might order something in a restaurant. Would you ask for a chopped up dead cow sandwich when all you really want is a hamburger?
Another one of my favorite writers was (also the late) William Safire; well versed in lexicology, syntax, pragmatics and etymology, he was once the premier etymologist in the country, and for many, many years, I tried my best to read his column, On Language, every week in the Sunday New York Times Magazine. Between those two men and my (very much alive at 93) uncle, David A. Kyle, they are who inspired me to write. Not that I learned anything. Anyway, back to the matter at hand…
I’m going to ask you a simple question and I want no answer. I just want you to remember it for now and wait until I tidy it up at the end. By then, you should understand. Suppose you are at the mall without your significant other. You run into a friend with or without their spouse. You chat briefly and then are asked, “Would you like to join us for a double-date Friday night?” Keep that in mind.
§
We know what perjury is and we know Shellie Zimmerman was charged with it soon after an official courtroom proceeding. We also know why she was charged.
“… whoever makes a false statement, which he or she does not believe to be true, under oath in an official proceeding in regard to any material matter, commits a felony of the third degree…” (F.S. 837.02 - Perjury in official proceedings)
Do we agree that, in a legal sense, the charge will stand? Can we really make any call like that until after the dust settles, when a verdict is read? One of the most important things we need to keep in mind is that, in a courtroom, the battle between opposing sides comes down to the interpretations of laws and many of the statements made by people directly involved in the case and, most importantly, the defendant. That includes words and actions.
During Ms. Zimmerman’s telephonic testimony regarding finances at her husband’s bond hearing on April 20th, she was first questioned by his defense attorney, Mark O’Mara. Here is part of the exchange between them:
Q. Other major assets that you have which you can liquidate reasonably to assist in coming up with money for a bond?
A. None that I know of.
Q. I have discussed with you the pending motion to have your husband George declared indigent for cost, have I not?
A. Yes, you have.
Q. And is — are you of any financial means where you can assist in those costs?
A. Uhm, not — not that I’m aware of.
Q: I understand that you do have other family members present with you, and I’ll ask some more questions of them, but have you had discussions with them of at least trying to pull together some funds to accomplish a bond?
A: We have discussed that —
Q: Okay.
A:— trying to pull together the members of the family to scrape up anything that we possibly can.
Assistant State Attorney Bernie de la Rionda had an opportunity to cross examine her:
Q. And you mentioned also, in terms of the ability of your husband to make a bond amount, that you all had no money, is that correct?
A. To my knowledge, that is correct.
Q: Were you aware of the website that Mr. Zimmerman or somebody on his behalf created?
A: I’m aware of that website.
Q: How much money is in that website right now? How much money as a result of that website was —-
A: Currently, I do not know.
Q: Do you have any estimate as to how much money has already been obtained or collected?
A: I do not.
I don’t know if you are getting my drift or not by now, but let me say that there could be a possible problem over that final exchange and the word you. You see, there’s a method to my madness and it comes down to how that simple word is conceptualized. In the English language, there is no plural for this particular second-person pronoun. Singular is the same as plural, so it is open to interpretation. It could go either way.
In the O’Mara exchange, “other major assets that you have…,” if you is taken as plural, it would include her husband, and it would change the entire meaning. De la Rionda was a bit clearer when he worded it, “‘you all’ had no money,” but the final exchange between them is the real quandary. “Do you have any estimate as to how much money has already been obtained or collected?” Is that singular or plural? You see, the secret jail house code conversations will show that she was aware of money, and lots of it, but did she have an estimate of the amount at the precise time she was questioned by the prosecutor? That could be a sticking point. She, by herself, denied knowing, but if de la Rionda’s usage was intended to be plural, then, legally, they both had an estimate; just like asking you out on a double-date. Singly, you as a word wouldn’t work for the state. As a couple, it would.
Personally, I think the state has the goods on her — enough to convict, but you never know these days, as we all understand from the last Orlando debacle. Oh well, what will be will be. It is what it is, you know, and I guess, in the end, it may come down to what the meaning of the word “you” is.
Dave Knechel | tagged David A. Kyle, Language in Thought and Action, President Clinton, S.I. Hayakawa, William Safire | in Angela Corey, Bernie De la Rionda, Dave Knechel, David B. Knechel, David Knechel, George Zimmerman, Marinade Dave, Marinade Dave Knechel, Mark O'Mara, Seminole County, Shellie Zimmerman, Slimm v. Zimm, State Attorney Angela Corey, State Attorney's Office, Trayvon Martin, 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 (79)
Gee wizzzz...So now I guess everyone that is down on their luck moneywise needs to open a website and ask for donations...Isn't it their fault that they got in this predicament in the first place??? Let them go apply for welfare like the multitudes...I find it hard to believe that Z's dad hasn't set aside a bumper fund just in case they got financially strapped...I say...cinch in that belt...or Get a job!!!
[This is George all the way. He's using his parents to make money this time. As Newbie pointed out, he used a second person term for his father when it was supposed to be his father doing the writing. I hope he helps his folks this time. Sorry, but he's a low life in my opinion.]
Nan11~ ~ thanks for the heads up on who Shellie's lawyer will be. I thought she would plead guilty and get it over with. I think Shellie will go for a jury trial if Judge Lester stays on the bench. We should hear Lester's response next week as to the defense motion re the request for him to step down. Do you suppose Kelly Sims will go for Dave's 'you'?
[To be honest, I don't know who the judge will be. I don't think it's been assigned yet. Will Sims go with "you" at any point? Dunno, but I do expect a new post will show up soon. Sort of a sequel to the Refuse to Recuse post. More ammo, of course.]
Estee~~the web site put up by Robert and Gladys Zimmerman is to solicit funds for George. I doubt very much if they are hurting for cash. I wonder what Mark O'Mara thinks about their tactics.
I want to buy a private jet so I can visit Dave's tapioca tree so maybe I will start a web site asking for funds. What do you think? I can take all my blogging friends for a ride in my new plane. woot woot
Some legal experts said the three websites asking for money could harm George Zimmerman's case.
"I think they need to rethink their course of action," said criminal defense attorney Richard Hornsby. "I think you may be seeing some type of donation fatigue. I got to think that people who were genuinely sympathetic to George Zimmerman are going to say, 'Enough's enough. We can't support your entire family.'"
Hornsby said the websites are making it increasingly difficult for Zimmerman's attorney, Mark O'Mara, to do his job.
"I've got to think Mark O'Mara is pulling his hair out right now and wondering, "Why can't I get these people to see the big picture here?', which they don't seem to see," said Hornsby.
Article and Video here....
Zimmerman's parents create website for support
[And O'Mara has hair to pull on. Trayvon had nothing to grab on to that night.]
Dave~~the Zimmerman case is ending up to be another Media circus...
CBS News Denies Orlando Sentinel Claim it Sent George Zimmerman's Parents Flowers
Off topic~ I am watching the Summer Olympics in London....the pomp and pageantry is awesome.
[Ya just can't trust those journalists...]
I agree with Newbie... Although I feel bad about George's parents, he did it to them, not the media; not the court. I also agree that George is the author of that Website. George is using his parents to get donations for himself. He wrote the damn thing to make it read like he's the father of our country. Poor, pitiful George. Bad, bad Trayvon!
Geez, I feel like I need to wash my glasses just for having read part of that website for GZ's parents! I imagine if I had read the part about George I wouldn't have even had the inkling it was his parents who were putting it up.
This falls among the "if we have kids we can get welfare" frame of mind. It's become a scam. He hit the jackpot one time and now expects to do it over and over again. Just doesn't happen like that.
George got himself into this mess, George should be getting himself out, not his parents, not his wife, not the United States and foreign countries! sheesh.
[Not just that, but he's making his attorney, Mark O'Mara, look like a fool for staying with him. Yes, the whole mess is looking more pathetic with each passing day.]
This article contains links to six ‘jail’ phone calls between George and Shellie—links to both an audio recording and a transcript, for each one.
The Miami Herald – Wife to Zimmerman: You’re gonna have a great life
The quote below is from a phone call between George and Shellie—made in the presence of ’Susie’, while Shellie and ’Susie’ are at a ‘banking’ institution. (lol—They are careful not to reveal the name of the institution.)
Also present, is a ‘bank-teller’, (or some such authority); whom is attempting to help Ms. Shellie and Ms. ’Susie’ reset all the passwords and questions so they can do George’s banking, (i.e. money transfers from the ’Peter Pan’ account)—while he sits in jail.
It’s clear as day that Shellie knew every tiny detail about their finances. He goes over, and over, and over it with her.
And it’s obvious they were trying to get this done before the bond hearing—in other words, they appear almost desperate to have a very low balance in George’s account before April 20, 2012 rolled around.
The short part quoted below is my favorite part—’Susie’ tells Shellie how many zeros to add after the ‘10’!
This phone call is dated April 16, 2012. The first bond hearing was on April 20, 2012.
Quote | Page 6: George (to 'Susie'): No, she’s has to put in her informa, it-it says “to another” at the top.
'Susie' (to Shellie): Yeah. Okay, it says “to another”, click on right here. Okay, go ahead and do it.
Shellie (to 'Susie'): How much?
'Susie' (to Shellie): Yeah, three more zeros, okay.
Shellie (to 'Susie'): Right? End Quote
Following is a video of the first bond hearing. Shellie is the very first witness. (The sound is fairly good.)
Shellie makes one false statement after another in defense of her charming (not) husband. It must be love—what?
I guess this is just her ‘arraignment’ coming up, (and it will probably be a year or so before any actual penalty is imposed) —still, I think I’ll commit myself to saying that all she will get is a slap on the wrist.
I think the state’s true reason for pursuing this was to have Zimmerman’s bond increased—and in that they did succeed.
VIDEO | George Zimmerman 1st bond hearing | April 20, 2012
Ugh. Now, this makes me grouchy. I came across this little tid-bit earlier as I listened to the calls in my previous comment.
I don’t know—but it appears to me the defense is doing a bit of judge shopping. Read my short quote below. (I did notice it is left out of the media site’s transcript; but it appears clear to me.)
Notice, Mr. Zimmerman was hoping for Judge Eaton after the first judge recused herself. Might this have anything to do with the later motion to ditch Lester? (MOO, of course.)
Call 4 at ½ inch from the end:
Quote: George: And third, I would like to have one when I leave here.
Shellie: Absolutely.
George: And we don’t know if—you know—if I get—if we get O.H. Eaton—you know—I could have a bond hearing tomorrow. You know?
Shellie: I know. I know. End Quote
And please, don’t just disregard this by saying Eaton has retired--see link below. And if this example doesn’t quite make my point, may I suggest I little ‘googling’.
Orlando Sentinel – Zimmerman judge wins high marks in poll
Quote: The jurist with the highest rating is retired: O.H. Eaton Jr., a former Seminole circuit judge who earlier this year stepped back onto the bench to handle more that 15 trials at the Orange County Courthouse.
His most noteworthy came in February, when he acquitted Delores Laster, the former Orange County teacher charged with first-degree murder in a 20-year-old cold-case homicide.
Eaton picked a jury, listened to the state’s evidence then threw out the case, citing a lack of evidence. End Quote
You know, nan11, it's like the Anthony case when Mason was judge shopping. Only it never turns out the way the client wants it. That's very revealing about O.H. Eaton. Zimmerman is delusional. He thinks he can control the court system, too?
What a piece of crap.
Thanks for these finds. They are excellent!
Bob Kealing reports on the 'glut' of Zimmerman websites asking for money.
WESH 2 VIDEO | Bob Kealing Reports | The parents of George Zimmerman have created a website asking for donations.
[And I hope everyone has had their fill of the Zimmermans, as well. Like I said, James Holmes bought his guns legally, too. Would the same donors now support him? Of course not. His victims are the ones that need help, not GZ. I think the public is now smart enough to see right through him.]
George and his solicitations for money. I would think many, many people would like to see their money back after finding out he paid off credit cards, purchased expensive guns for he and his wife, paid for long-term phone services, etc etc And....the comment by his wife that they will have a good life, already counting the dollars on books, movie deals and tv appearances? If I recall correctly, GZ and wife lived rent free twice in his parents properties. It is whitewashed on the latest sight as the couple living there doing upkeep. No rent payment. Then they only make a monthly payment to his mother when paying off their debts with donation money. Quite the son, that one is.
Guess while I am venting I might as well bring up what else galls me. The interview with Hannity.
He wants to gain sympathy in that he hasn't seen the kids they were mentoring and probably won't for some time. Good grief, Martins parents will never see their son again. How dare he.
And Dave, I'll say it again.....he is pimping his parents out but he is lower than a street pimp as he turns around and uses his time in the church as altar boy, his mentoring, his beliefs etc etc etc to help in the pimping. What a fiss ant he is.
You know there are more than four million NRA members. He isn't receiving much from them now is he. They smelt the skunk.
I've got to get my fingers off this keyboard. GZ boils my blood more than CA ever did.
[I'm telling you, Newbie, the sick ba$tard is delusional. Not one ounce of remorse over the death. He's counting his riches and fame instead. POSSOB.]
This is a 'new', short video Mr. LLMPapa put together; whereby he takes the opportunity to point out a few of George's inconsistencies.
YouTube VIDEO | Published on Jul 28, 2012 by LLMPapa | Zimmerman is a LIAR.
Sorry about re-linking the WESH video--I just scrolled up and saw it posted previously.
Dave: Do you know if the Kelly Sims that is supposedly representing Shellie is the same Kelly Sims that represented Joe Jordan? At first I thought it was; however, some are suggesting that there is another Kelly Sims (same spelling), and also in Orlando--but a female.
So, now I don't know. lol
[I had to look it up but, yes, they are one and the same. BTW, I really like LLMPapa's videos. They're great!]
Dave~~I did a bit of homework tonight. It has bothered me that some were saying that Zimmerman's gun was confiscated from him at Sanford PD. The way the report was written up had some people confused in thinking that the PD let Zimmerman ride in their patrol car while still armed. The following indicates that was false... read on.. I have supplied the sources.
In the first recorded interview, Zimmerman said that he put his hand on top of his head. The PD cuffed him and took his gun. (this took place at the scene of the shooting)
George Zimmerman’s Statements To Sanford PD [Audio]
Page 14.... Reported by Timothy Smith, Sanford PD- who responded to the scene of the shooting.
Third Paragraph....
Zimmerman complied with all my verbal commands and was secured in handcuffs. Located on the inside of Zimmerman's waist band, I removed a black Kel Tek 9mm PF9 semi automatic handgun and holster.
Documents in PDF
Dave~~I did not take the time to search in the second doc dump to see exactly how the report was written up as to be confusing. I think it said that they removed the gun from the holster and placed it in a gun box when they arrived at the PDept. It just so happened that Zimmerman was not wearing the holster. Both the holster and gun were taken out of Z's waist band at the scene and transported to Sanford PD as one unit. (gun still in holster) so as not to disturb any evidence on gun and holster.
Snoopy, I think you are right regarding the statement regarding the gun. I believe I was the one that started the confusion....lol. I've watched the video of when the patrol car pulled into the police garage. After they got out of the car, an officer "patted him down". Or is it frisked him? Anyway, I can see an officer pulling out one side of his jacket to check the pocket and doing the same for the other pocket. I didn't see the officer pat down his waist but have to think that officer would have seen the gun and taken it at that time.
I sure appreciate you and nan's keeping us updated with the items you find !!!!!
Snoopy, there was a lady who made statement about seeing GZ at the patrol car stating something about GZ just rolled his eyes when they patted him down. So he was checked twice for sure. Now I have to go back to page 23 of the released info, second paragraph of Smiths interview :where
it says the gun was taken after GZ went to the bathroom. Smith also states he didn't see sweat or blood on the gun. I want to see how or why that statement was there.
Newbie~~I can see where the confusion is on page 23 of the second doc dump. Whoever wrote up the report did not put things in chronological order. Notice how it says that he (Smith) and the rescue were the only ones who talked to Zimmerman. Then it goes on and says that Z's back area was wet and he had grass on him. This was written after it states Z went to the bathroom. The rescue was not at the PD when Z was taken in.
My conclusion.... the gun and holster were taken from Z at the scene. Sanford PD gets a bad rap but they would not be that derelict in their duties to not take the gun from Z immediately. As far as being patted down twice, they wanted to make sure he did not have a second weapon...normal procedure which should have been done before he got in the patrol car.
Dave: Thank you. I appreciate you looking that up me for me.
(FYI: You had me stumped with POSSOB. I think I got it.)
;-)
I certainly agree with your conclusion Snoopy. I went into orbit when seeing Smith's statement. Guess that explains why you are considered Snoopy-the sleuth. In fact, I can see where your sleuthing starts when you figure out what I am talking about...lol.
Waiting for the next post !!! Not patiently but anxiously. And I was the one that told myself I was not going to get involved with this case.
Newbie~~I am getting a bit rusty in the sleuthing department. Strange how we all say that we will not get addicted to another case and here we are. This one is getting as intriguing as the Anthony case with many twists and turns. It is sad that the media is trying this case before it gets to the courts. I am cheesed off with all the gun laws and then when they try to bring race into the equation. It is ending up to be another three-ring-circus instead of getting down to the bare facts of what really happened that night.
Thanks for the nice compliment....I needed that. xo
I keep wondering when Padillia will show up. Padilia, Padilla....how did you spelll his name.....hmmm....how soon we forget.
Newbie~~as I recall, one of Dave's first posts on the Casey Anthony case was about Leonard Padilla out at Jay Blanchard park with all his divers searching the Econ River. I am surprised he has not solved the Zimmerman case. Surely he must be able to come up with a conspiracy or another daisy chain. It would be interesting to see what some of the players in the Anthony case are doing now.
I know there was a lot to talk about everybody suing everyone else after the trial but the only one that may take place is Zenaida vs Casey. I am in doubts we will ever see that trial. I heard Orange County civil court has an overload of cases and some trials may be delayed by a couple years.
Thank God Padilla didn't help GZ out of jail at no cost to GZ. That would have been the last straw ! Lord, that thought hadn't crossed my mind until now.....eeeeeek.
FRANK TAAFFE BUSTED FOR DUI IN LAKE MARY
LAST NIGHT.
Sorry, Dave. :-)
[I don't think it's all that important, but it's interesting to note. I met him at the courthouse and he was very nice to me, but I guess we all have our demons.]
Daralene Jones
Daralene Jones (WFTV I think) tweeted that he told her he mixed anxiety meds with 'drink'.
It's just that it's such a slow evening for news that it has caught everyones attention.
You are right, though. We all do have our demons.
[The Sentinel hasn't run with it yet, and I just put up a new post. I'm not going to pick on him. He's got enough problems right now.]
Dave~~personally I consider anything on Frank Taaffe to be rag mag fodder but since things a
Dave, my comment flew the coop and now I see it appeared so I will finish what I started.
Since things are so slow on the blogs, here is some more fodder... It seems Mr Taaffe was not a law abiding citizen...
Source