Tweet
Cross posted from Frederick Leatherman Law Blog.
George Zimmerman surrendered yesterday to police within the 48-hour deadline yesterday, as ordered by Judge Kenneth Lester of the Seminole County Circuit Court. He is back in Seminole County Jail.
Photo by Werth Media.
His attorney, Mark O’Mara, will be filing a new motion for release on bail, probably later today. Judge Lester will not be available to hear the motion this week because he will be out of court. That means the hearing will not occur until next week at the earliest.
Judge Lester revoked Zimmerman’s bond last Friday after prosecutor Bernie De la Rionda presented a partial transcript of recorded telephone conversations Zimmerman had with his wife from jail, days before the April 20 bond hearing. All jailhouse telephone conversations are routinely recorded and participants are so advised.
The transcript details their discussion regarding the amount of money he had raised from his website. He told her how to transfer funds from the PayPal account at the website into his bank account using a code to referring to “$15″ in place of “$150,000.”
When Shellie Zimmerman was asked at the bond hearing how much money was raised from the website, she said she did not know and Zimmerman never corrected the false statement.
O’Mara has stated that Zimmerman’s judgment was clouded by threats to his safety that required him to stop working and forced him and his family to leave their homes.
He said,
We feel the failure to disclose these funds was caused by fear, mistrust, and confusion.
Remains to be seen if Judge Lester will accept the excuse. I doubt it, but if he does, I have no doubt that he will substantially increase the amount of bail.
There is, after all, the matter of the second passport that Zimmerman failed to disclose and surrender.
44 Comments
In case you didn’t see this:
http://pamshouseblend.firedoglake.com/2012/06/04/no-surprise-at-all-stand-your-ground-defendants-more-likely-to-prevail-if-the-victim-is-black/
I had not seen Pam’s article on how the the SYG law has been applied in Florida. Thanks for the link. I’m going to check it out.
The only thing confusing Zimmerman is how to hold on to that ca$h.
His lawyers will help him figure that out for sure.
And it goes without saying that this law does not apply to non-whites.
I wonder what George’s next move is he plans to flee the country, he raises money from the net and seems to have an excellent PR firm working for him in the Right Wing Media.
I think someone on the Right has made him their poster boy and is advising him.
Some bizarre and disparate results there that make no sense given the statutory wording.
Yes, there is no question that racism remains strong and pervasive in our society.
I don’t blame O’Mara for trying to put the best face possible on Zimmerman’s behavior. That’s his job, to be Zimmerman’s advocate. But he didn’t have much to work with here. Since when are “fear” and “mistrust” acceptable motivations for perjury? As far as “confusion” goes, what is confusing about swearing to tell the truth, the whole truth, etc.?
Pam linked to this article in the Tampa Bay Times summarizing the results in 200 SYG cases.
Yep, I wouldn’t be amused, if I were the judge.
If I’m not mistaken, I was only listening with half an ear, one of the national news shows is going to be discussing what was on the jail phone tapes during their 7 pm coverage. It would have to be either CBS or ABC, since we don’t get NBC and I don’t watch that other channel.
I don’t have a TV, so someone else will have to cover it.
Thanks for the heads-up.
MSNBC reports that Mark O’Mara made a statement about Zimmerman today.
When caught in his lie, Zimmerman last week had the $205,000 Paypal balance transfered into a trust that “he has no control over” – His Dad the former Virginia judge is giving him good advice.
Given the loss of credibility in a case where the only defense is the credibility of your story, I wonder when Daddy will advise him to take a deal.
Funny, there are more and more of us…;)
Seems I read that when his bond was revoked, the judge also cited a duplicate passport that Zimmerman “forgot” to turn in. Maybe either the money or the passport could be an oversight but both? Seriously?
I think everybody needs to take a step back and wait for the case to be tried and see what happens.
The fact that he was hiding his additional passport could lead one to believe he is a flight risk. No bail for you Zim.
Naw. People want to talk about it.
I think that’s an excellent suggestion but here we’re just talking about the possibility of him getting a new bond set, yes?
you’re right. not sayin’ here. just mean generally.
and thanks.
“We feel the failure to disclose these funds was caused by fear, mistrust, and confusion.”
Yeah, the same conditions when Treyvon died.
Pull your head out, bud. Get a clue.
most people.
Part of the confusion is about the line between the rule of law and taking the law into your own hands, from Zimmerman to our “leaders” in Washington. Shit, Zimmerman’s defense shouldn’t be the SYG law, it should be, “If this behavior is good enough for the President, it is good enough for me.”
If Zimmerman’s actions and record of obsessive 911 calls are any indication, he has already decided he is above the law. What’s a little forgetfulness after that conclusion?
On the issue of lying to the court, why not fine or jail him for contempt, or refer the matter to the state for possible perjury prosecution if he was under oath?
If the point of bail is to ensure his appearance, which it is, I’m not sure of the point of revocation here other than punishment. As I said, I think the punishment should be on a separate track.
The issue of the passports is a whole other matter though.
I haven’t heard too much from zimmerman’s cheerleading legal dream of (Sean) Hannity/Dershowitz/and (Mark) Levin. They spewing for weeks how innocent the zimster was.
Zimmerman never said a word during his bond hearing, so he couldn’t perjure himself.
And I agree with BFL that people should back off.. The man will have his day in court and will be judged by a jury of his peers.
Since none of us were witnesses and none of us have access to all of the evidence, I think it’s wrong to pass judgment on the case before he is tried… And I’m an AA man with twin teenage sons, so one might think I have a “stake” in the result.
edit:
I haven’t heard too much from zimmerman’s cheerleading legal dream of (Sean) Hannity/Dershowitz/and (Mark) Levin. They’ve been spewing for weeks how innocent the zimster was.
Yup. That’s how it’s done. A “concerned stranger” shows up with a playbook and a checkbook. Same thing happened with a fetal rights sideshow here a year or so ago, lots of publicity and a (not-so-surprising, in retrospect) sophisticated legislative lobbying and PR effort.
It’s the all politics are local riff, and us on the L side would do well to start putting our political convictions on the ground in our communities however we can, cause the other guys have a fantastic nose for effective carny.
I always thought the DNC should’ve opened relief kitchens in NOLA after Katrina, as a visible demonstration that they cared about the little guy. They don’t.
Problem is he sat there and listened to his wife testify falsely and did nothing to correct what she said or the comments and arguments of his attorney that were based on her false testimony.
He may not have committed perjury, but his use of coded language during the recorded phone call to conceal the amount of money in his Paypal account and his shenanigans with his second passport speak volumes about his intent to deceive the court.
That does not inspire confidence in his credibility.
Zimmerman’s credibility is very much in issue.
While we have not seen his five statements because the prosecution has not released them yet, I strongly suspect there are material inconsistencies and contradictions.
I say that, in part, because I know of one major contradiction he made during his testimony under oath at the bond hearing as he was apologizing to Trayvon’s parents.
He said he thought Trayvon was in his mid twenties, but that is not what he said to the dispatcher when he described Trayvon’s age as “late teens.”
He could not have forgotten that Trayvon was a teenager and he had no reason to have increased Trayvon’s age, unless he was attempting to minimize what he had done by making it seem like he thought Trayvon was an adult close to his age and, therefore, he reasonably feared for his own life.
I’m pretty sure we’ll see more evidence of him changing his story when the five statements are released.
Well, given that he hid a passport and a large sum of money, the prosecution can pretty much keep him locked up until trial as a flight risk if they wish. At the very least, he’s looking at an ankle monitor if the judge decides to give him another chance. Which might happen, as keeping him locked up would require solitary for his safety and significant expendature of tax dollars. If they grant him bail, those are his expenses.
Boxturtle (IMO he REALLY hurt his case)
I agree.
His case depends a lot on his credibility and this little stunt may have caused irreparable damage.
If nothing else, his supporters seem to have quieted down substantially and I doubt that is due to them watching the Queen’s Jubilee.
Did you intend to post your comment to another thread?
I like your idea about the DNC running relief kitchens in NOLA, but doubt you had my post in mind.
No biggie. I’ve done that too.
I’d still rather be defending than prosecuting, based on publically available evidence. If for no other reason than I’m gonna get a Florida jury for a White-shoots-Black case.
Both sides will now turn to jury selection. Defense will try to exclude blacks and certainly blacks with teenage children. Prosecution will try seat those, and likely work to include mothers of any race.
Wonder how many challenges each side will get. I’m betting quite a few, given the publicity.
Boxturtle (This case may yet get moved)
I think Florida uses 6-person juries in felony cases. Not sure, but I think so.
Before they get to jury selection, however, the court will have to dispose of the defense pretrial motion for an SYG hearing (I assume O’Mara will file the motion even though I do not think this is a true SYG case). The burden will be on O’Mara at that hearing to prove by a preponderance of the evidence that Zimmerman stood his ground and killed in self-defense. If he succeeds, the case will be dismissed. If not, it goes to trial with the burden on the state to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Zimmerman did not kill in self-defense.
Assuming it goes to trial, neither side will be permitted to systematically exclude AA jurors with their peremptory challenges. Since it would benefit the defense to do so, I’m sure the prosecution will object when the defense uses a peremptory to excuse an AA juror.
If that happens, O’Mara will have to plausibly explain that he had another reason for challenging the juror.
Of course, there are likely to be fewer AA jurors on the panel to begin with unless Seminole County has a large AA population.
Yes, I agree that the prosecution generally will want mothers, regardless of race.
Defense will want white racists, members of NRA and rigid authoritarians, which is a switch of jury-selection tactics from the average case.
True, but VERY difficult to prove.
If I’m the judge and I want a fair trial, I just enlarge the pool sufficiently to deal with the issue. I don’t want to have a debate about a lawyers instincts or a juror’s bias.
Defense should have an easy time seating a favorable jury. It wouldn’t shock me to have the prosecutor look at that jury and offer a deal to avoid the trial. I’m thinking at least half the Jury pool will be NRA or NRA supporters in Florida. If I’m prosecutor, I might try to exclude NRA members with cause as the NRA’s position on SYG is well known. Of course, if I do that, it’ll be remembered at the next election.
Boxturtle (Defense will also be looking for crime victims)
Not that difficult. A couple of years ago the US Supreme Court reversed a conviction and death sentence of a man because the prosecution used its peremptory challenges to systematically strike all AA jurors. The prosecution claimed that it had other valid reasons, but the Supreme Court examined each excuse in light of white jurors whom the prosecutors did not strike and found that many of them exhibited the same characteristics that the prosecution evidently found objectionable only in AA jurors.
Whenever a party appears to be systematically excluding jurors based on race, gender or religious belief, the courts are supposed to basically presume the party has no no other valid reason unless they are also excluding other jurors for the same reason.
I say “supposed to” because respect for the rule of law is so broken down that many judges routinely ignore it and even take pride in doing so.
Nevertheless, if the defense in a criminal case is systematically excluding jurors based on race, a corrupted judge probably is more likely to enforce the rule against the defense attorney than a prosecutor.
I hate it when I have to say there is the rule and qualify it by saying what really happens in a court of law.
I’d simply make sure to exclude a non-black juror for the same reason.
That lawyer had to be a clown to be so obvious that this group of supremes would reverse a death sentence.
And I’ve never heard of a not guilty verdict being overturned for jury stacking. I have seen federal civil rights charges filed when there’s an obvious problem with the Jury. And succeed.
My bet: After a look at the jury, the prosecutor offers voluntary manslaughter with a long probation period.
Boxturtle (Zimmerman may well need Fed Witness protection to survive, regardless)
I think that mothers of any race might be more dangerous for the defense than AA jurors. I have a visceral response when I see pictures of Trayvon (at any age), probably because I have two (white) teenage sons. I would like to think that I could set my feelings aside and make decisions according to the law and the evidence. But I have to say that I believe that Zimmerman is morally culpable, while recognizing that the prosecutors may not be able to prove a case against him to the necessary standard. In that case, as a juror I would have to vote for acquittal, but it would tear me apart to do so with Trayvon’s parents in the courtroom.
Like telling the truth, “So help me God.”?
I was fortunate to make the acquaintance, and receive the legal help of a very senior lawyer in my community. He once told me;
“You know what the cops do if they ain’t got the evidence …
… they lie.”
All too often that is true and judges nevertheless mostly find them credible, even though they know better.
They do this to continue getting elected.
This is one of many reasons why I decided to not be a judge.
I agree and I’m pretty sure Mark O’Mara knows that mothers will not be good defense jurors in this case.
I suspect he’s hoping to resolve the case with a plea bargain, but I’m not sure the prosecution is willing to do that, especially after Zimmerman’s money/passport fiasco.