Tweet
Cross posted from Frederick Leatherman Law Blog
Seminole County Circuit Court Judge Kenneth Lester set bail today at $1 million in the George Zimmerman case.
Image: Donkey Hotey / Flickr
This means that unless Zimmerman has $1 million to post with the Clerk of the Seminole County Circuit Court to secure his release, he will have to pay a bail bondsman $100,000 (the 10% non-refundable fee charged by the bail bondsman to post the company’s bond or promise to pay $1 million to the court if Zimmerman rabbits on the bond). The bail bondsman also will require Zimmerman to secure the bonding company with cash and/or property worth $1 million.
Real estate is typically used to secure a bond this high and, unless Mark O’Mara already has a person or persons lined up with equitable interests in their real estate greater than $1 million, it may take awhile to put a deal together that satisfies the bonding company. A current appraisal of the properties reliably indicating their fair market value, reports on the financial status of any loans secured by those properties and a title report are normally required.
As y’all know, I would have issued an order denying bail based on Zimmerman’s role in misrepresenting to the court that he was indigent while at the same time he conceived and directed the efforts of at least two family members (his wife and sister) to carry out a scheme to conceal his possession of $155,000 donated to him over the internet by transferring the money into their accounts before his bail hearing and transferring it back into his account after he bonded out.
Although Judge Lester characterized Zimmerman’s misconduct in substantially similar language, including a reference to Zimmerman’s failure to surrender the second passport such that it would not have been unreasonable for the court to have concluded that Zimmerman carried out this fraudulent scheme with the intent of fleeing the country, he decided to increase the bail substantially rather than deny bail because the State of Florida had not charged Zimmerman with any crime.
I interpret his decision as sending a message to the prosecution basically telling them that he does not believe he should deny bail to Zimmerman unless they charge Zimmerman with a crime. He even mentions a charge of criminal contempt as one possibility.
I have written about the possibility of charging Zimmerman with perjury based on his conduct directing his wife’s efforts to hide the money from the court. Her perjured denial under oath of any knowledge regarding how much money had been received from donors via the internet is but a natural and reasonably foreseeable consequence of Zimmerman’s scheme to conceal the money from the court. Nevertheless, convicting him of perjury on an accomplice theory may be difficult without his wife’s assistance and willingness to testify that he told her to lie to the court, if the judge or the lawyers asked her if she knew how much money had been donated.
If the prosecutors want George Zimmerman to be in jail for the duration of this case, they should not have any doubt as to what they must do to secure that outcome.
Meanwhile I do not believe Judge Lester’s order can reasonably be interpreted as an expression of doubt regarding the strength of the prosecution’s case against Zimmerman for killing Trayvon Martin. He explained that he initially found that the prosecution’s case was “strong” because the defendant did not testify at the first bail hearing and the defense did not present any evidence of self-defense. He also specifically characterized the evidence presented by the defense at the recently concluded bail hearing in support of Zimmerman’s claim of self-defense as having “little relevance” to the issue of bail.
Therefore, I caution against assuming that Judge Lester he has formed an opinion or reached any conclusions regarding the viability of Zimmerman’s claim of self-defense.
62 Comments
If GZ pays $100k from his legal defense fund to a bail bondsman (assuming there are assets somewhere to secure the remaining $900k), and then he is charged with perjury or contempt and bond is revoked again, is he then out the $100k?
If his defense fund reaches $1M (for the sake of argument), then he could use it to pay the bond directly to the court, and later get a complete refund.
Couple things:
The assets would have to secure the entire $1 M.
If he were charged, I believe the judge would revoke his bond, but give him an opportunity to surrender within a certain time period, assuming the police had not arrested and jailed him for the offense.
The arrest would not be a violation of the order, if it relates back to his conduct deceiving the court about his finances and passport at the first bail hearing. Therefore, the security would not be forfeited.
Yes, you’re right, if he posted $1 M with the court, were to make all of his court appearances and otherwise comply with his conditions of release, he would get all of the money back after the case was over.
Good advice. The judge hasn’t seen all of the prosecutions cards yet, either.
He’s got the cash to get the bond, but I don’t think he’s got the $900K in assets to back it up. Some sugar daddy will have to come help.
Not sure he’s got a sugar daddy currently.
Boxturtle (And it would take a MAJOR Redstate Hater to be willing to publically put his cash on GZ)
Last report I heard said he had less than $200K in that bucket and that donations had pretty much dried up.
I’m betting that GZ’s lawyer is not going to complain about an “excessive bond” and try to get it lowered. He’s smart enough to realize that getting bond at all was a very close call.
Boxturtle (Rush L, somebody needs you!)
I cannot speak for others but I would never permit my property to be used as security for Zimmerman’s bond after reading Judge Lester’s comments about Zimmerman’s character.
Neither would I, even before the judge spoke.
But remember, his target audience hate thinks the earth is less than 10,000 years old, blacks are all out to get them, and watches Fox. I’m not sure you could get an easier to fool demographic without adding in WebTv.
Boxturtle (Anybody remember WebTv? No? Good!)
*sigh*
Boxturtle (Throws $1 into the proofread bucket)
But they’re not wealthy. Lots of small donations, but no sugar daddy.
Another thing to consider is that GZ’s father had put his house up as collateral for his first bond. If GZ had run, his dad would have lost the house. That does not speak well at all for GZ’s character, or lack thereof.
I happened to watch faux news (locally) the day GZ’s expenditures, regarding the legal defense fund became known, and the anchors were rather livid they had paid bills with the money. If that’s the general attitude of the rest of GZ’s supporters, I doubt he’s getting any more money out of anyone.
Zimmerman Attorney Seeks Donations From People Who Also Would Have Shot Trayvon Martin
Not to worry, Jeralyn is on the case:
Ya gotta love it.
that is a truly disgusting sight. his lawyer is soliciting gun toting racists to come out of the woodwork. bad boy that mo’m
am i missing something? i thought he was charged with second degree murder.
Sorry, I meant amend the information that charges him with murder 2 by adding a perjury charge.
Well, sure. I guess. If the prosecutor’s objective was for Zimmerman to be in jail for the duration of this case. I think prevailing local desires are getting confused with those of the prosecutor, though. Pretty sure the prosecutor’s goal is to secure a conviction on the murder charges. In fact, there’s a pretty big political price now attached to the success of doing so (also to failure).
In that context, seems like an unnecessary potential trap. Can’t imagine they’d mess with it unless their case was so weak they launched it planning to convict him of murder exclusively through smearing him on a personal level. That’s not weighing in on Z’s guilt/innocence of the speculative charges you’d like to see brought; just pointing out that regardless, bringing them doesn’t seem particularly smart from the prosecutors’ standpoint.
If they coerce Zimmerman’s wife to notably enhance already quite stiff accusations against him (like say with threats or promises on her own charges), the defense is savvy enough to assume that would totally come out in the proceedings. It’s not smart to get caught fucking with the bond between a man and his wife without a damn good reason. IMO, you are making some unrealistic assumptions of prevailing attitudes that the prosecutor will undoubtedly be aware of.
Beyond the potential of sowing hostility in a jury … this is a show trial. I imagine anyone wanting to have a career in Central Floridian politics would be thinking about how potential voters will view their conduct of the case.
I just don’t see it happening – even accepting wholecloth the pile of assumptions required to assert a conviction likely. ‘Course … been wrong before.
I clicked on the link and read Jeralyn’s post. I wish I hadn’t. She has joined the cause, and is soliciting donations herself for GZ’s legal fund. Her last two or three paragraphs made me sick.
It’s through the looking glass over there.
Smearing him? It’s pretty clear he directed the scheme to play with the money and mislead the court which led to his wife’s perjury charge. The behavior was so blatant and transparent that it led to him getting his bail revoked, his wife being charged and having his bail substantially raised with added restrictions on his movements. Even the accountant who testified for the defense admitted that they were using a code and the structuring of transactions could be considered an effort to conceal funds. Also, if you read the judge’s order you’d know that he’s STILL thinking of bringing contempt charges independent of anything the prosecution might do going forward. That’s quite a statement.
Your either/or construction is wrong. Adding perjury charges would say nothing about the weakness or strength of the prosecution’s Murder 2 case. They are separate matters and the actions of the Zimmermans created their actual and potential exposure to perjury charges. It’s a potential trap of their own making.
What is this melodramatic nonsense about not fucking with the bond between a man and his wife? You know what’s a great way to fuck with the bond between a man and his wife? Have the man use his wife, and lie to his lawyer, as part of a scheme to conceal funds from and misled the court about his financial status during his bail hearing on a Murder 2 charge. Have the man make the scheme so obvious that it’s easily discoverable and the wife gets charged with a pretty much slam dunk perjury charge based on her testimony during the bail hearing during which the man sat there like a potted plant and said nothing.
In terms of coercing the wife, trying to flip a witness is a common practice but frankly, I don’t think they need to because, based on the fact pattern if SZ gets an even remotely competent lawyer, he/she should be running to the prosecution to make a deal. I can’t imagine that either that lawyer or O’Mara would want SZ to testify in a perjury hearing. Can you imagine the cross? “So when your husband told you to….” and so on.
What is this with “the potential of sowing hostility in a jury” line? On this matter, GZ sowed any hostility he either is receiving now or may receive in the future. Notice how donations to GZ slowed to a crawl after all the stuff about his shenanigans with the money came out? It seems like folks don’t like being played for fools especially when they support you with their moola. I’m not even going to address the “show trial” nonsense. As if the admitted shooter of an unarmed minor who also deliberately schemed to and did mislead the court during his bail hearing is some sort of victim simply because he’s being tried.
Seriously? Wow..writing GZ supporting posts is one thing but using the site to actually solicit donations yourself for his defense fund is, imo, kinda out there.
I granted the thread’s assumptive slam-dunk guilt of Zimmerman for perjury as a part of my observation. (and likewise, I’ll even grant your inexplicable clairvoyant knowledge of what SZ might be able to testify to in an imaginary proceeding). No idea how you imagine isolating a perjury charge from the murder proceeding in any practical sense.
The judge has entirely different motivations. Were he to decide to hold Zimmerman in contempt that wouldn’t, actually, have any bearing on the question of the prosecution bringing charges for perjury – which is what my comment was discussing. It *would* be pretty odd for the Judge to grant bail and then turn around and sanction Zimmerman barring some additional facts coming to light. I think you are reading a bit of what you want to read into that aspect.
I don’t have any idea what you imagine local sensibilities are, who is going to be on the jury or what you think I meant by sowing hostility there … but you are talking about donations to his legal fund and crap. We honestly aren’t even really paddling with our oars in the same liquid.
Ironic criticism.
I believe this part
The NRA should have the courage of their convictions and put up the million dollar bail.
Good idea, totally LOL.
“It’s not smart to get caught fucking with the bond between a man and his wife without a damn good reason.”
For the purposes of the perjury charge, the Zimmermans were co-conspirators who happened to be married.
No idea how you imagine isolating a perjury charge from the murder proceeding in any practical sense.
While they are seprarate legal matters, to your point, if that’s the “practical” case who’s fault is it? Gee, maybe the people who lied to and misled the court during the first bail hearing? You’re blowing a lot of smoke trying to avoid that reality. The notion that it’s somehow unfair for the prosecutors and/or judge to fully persue the matter based on, speaking of speculation, some imgained local hostility in the future is absurd.
i’m sure they’re discussing it.
What’s the deal with TalkLeft?
There isn’t even the smallest attempt at objectivity over there.
Yeah, it’s gone way around the bend. It went from being the usual “defense oriented” stuff to full on strident advocacy and stifling of any dissent. It’s not a good look.
It’s the anxiety of so-called liberals who instinctively make very common racist assumptions and find themselves pressured to develop bases for their arguments other than what cannot be spoken, much less admitted to themselves — that they have automatically criminalized a teen-age boy, a hotel maid, or even a Harvard law professor because he/she was black.
He’s out.
http://usnews.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/07/06/12602454-zimmerman-posts-1-million-bond-released-from-florida-jail
I wonder who put up their property and why they were willing to risk losing it.
Ha! So I guess those desparate pleas for bail money from O’Mara and…elsewhere…weren’t really needed, huh? Unless, GZ suddenly has a rich benefactor, his family has to be in hock up to their necks.
I’m guessing he has a rich benefactor.
USA Today is reporting that, according to the Seminole County Sheriff’s Department, GZ’s father and mother put up their house to secure his release.
One bondsman from Miami quoted in the herald stated that Zimmerman would not need collateral because he “wouldn’t be hard to find” due to his high visibility and GPS device.
Could be though I’m leaning to Mason’s thinking. They already had the cash to make the 10% down and they probably just added additional collateral to cover the rest.
I am getting a kick out lauging at the folks who were foolish enough to fall for O’Mara’s plea yesterday and send in another 20K.
There you go. That explains it. Thanks.
Mason,
One quick question. Who’s playing who here? What I mean by that is that doesn’t it seem odd the after all the drama and noise from GZ’s legal team about raising money and GZ and SZ not having “anywhere near” enough money for bail, he’s out a few hours later?
My guess based on the bail hearing stuff, is that GZ might have sandbagged his lawyer again.
I believe O’Mara has requested more donations because the $85 K spent to cover the bail bondsman’s fee came out of the internet donation account, which is the same account from which he will be withdrawing his fees and costs.
Yes perhaps. Thank makes sense though it’s odd that it was characterized as needing donations for bail as opposed to funds for his general defense but that’s just a small nit on my part.
IMO, that was a pretty silly thing to type. The guy’s under 24/7 electronic monitoring and there is absolutely zero legitimate evidence he was ever a flight risk in the first place. He had the cash. He had the passport. And he came back to court rather than run. Additionally, the known facts of the perjury issue thus far are suggestive of attempted tax-evasion and/or asset-protection rather than absconding.
What legitimate risk to bail collateral do you imagine exists – and how do you imagine Zimmerman physically pulling off such a daring escape? Hell, he doesn’t even control the defense fund anymore … how would he survive financially even short term?
Puerile, but marginally witty.
Just don’t forget that until Zimmerman is charged with perjury; Mason (and anyone following him on down this rabbit trail) is the one with egg on his face. Thus far, my prediction has been the one that matches events as they have unfolded in physical reality.
Time will tell. But until time says something different … I’d argue against myself being the one who looks like they don’t know what the hell they are talking about.
If you would ever take the time to actually read something before expressing your opinion, you might avoid making a fool out of yourself.
Judge Lester said in his order that a reasonable interpretation of GZ’s behavior is that he intended to flee.
Why don’t you contact him and tell him he’s silly.
Just so you know, I agree with his assessment and I do not believe it was silly.
Nothing I said was silly.
If you don’t like what I say, go somewhere else.
I certainly won’t miss you.
It’s funny that if one were to actually read the judge’s bail order which, btw, is scathing toward GZ and compare it to Mason’s posts, they would track pretty closely in terms of having similar reasoning and coming to similar conclusions.
Seriously Mason? So, he scolded Zimmerman. And then granted bail. That pretty much speaks for itself. If the judge honestly believed Zimmerman was likely to abscond, he wouldn’t have released him. In fact, doing so would be a breach of duty.
But we aren’t talking about the judge, are we? We’re talking about the individuals who put up collateral and the genuine relative risk of loss said collateral is actually facing. The judge can talk till he’s blue in the face and it still doesn’t impact this question an iota.
You’ve decided to go with a knee-jerk personal attack rather than explain how you imagine Zimmerman could physically and financially pull off absconding considering the restrictions he’s under and seeming lack of financial means. I will assume you are ceding the point and acknowledging that, in fact, the chance of Zimmerman actually jumping bail is horribly remote. Perhaps even remote enough that the comment I reacted to appears downright silly.
I also notice that your consistent response to anyone who challenges your nonsense is to suggest they go away and leave you alone rather than addressing the criticism. If you don’t want to answer challenges to your reasoning, maybe you should consider not making posts on an open forum.
They may have sounded superficially similar … until the judge concluded by deciding to grant bail.
I would have denied bail because Zimmerman involved at least two members of his family in perpetrating a fraud on the court in order to secure his release on bond and quite likely to set-up an emergency escape option, if his case did not appear to be going as well as he hoped it would.
That misconduct shows that he does not respect the authority of the court and cannot be trusted to abide by conditions of release.
That is all I would need to know to deny bond.
You are assuming that his conditions of release are so tight that the probability of him “jumping bail is horribly remote” even as money from anonymous donors continues to pour in via his internet account.
If I were the judge, I would be concerned that his demonstrated willingness to commit a crime to get out of jail makes him a danger to the community and his continued access to a flow of money from anonymous donors makes him a flight risk.
You are free to disagree with me, but characterizing my position as “nonsensical” and “silly” only makes you look bad.
You are not welcome here, if your intent is to insult people who disagree with you.
why don’t you actually read the bond statement? then come back.
beyond scathing
and I interpret his willingness to give bail as an ironclad insurrance against any room for appeals.
again, take a moment and READ the bond statement
According to KA, who posts at my site, Don West has “hinted” that the defense may ask Judge Lester to recuse himself.
West is co-counsel with O’Mara.
I agree with your assessment that it’s unlikely Judge Lester will recuse himself and extremely unlikely that an appellate court would remove him from the case for refusing to recuse himself, especially after he granted bail.
On what grounds would they likely ask for the judge to recuse himself?
Based on the information available to us, I believe they would assert that he is prejudiced against GZ and cannot preside over his case in a fair and impartial manner as shown by his characterization of the prosecution’s case as “strong” and his statement in his recent order granting bail where he said that it would not be unreasonable to conclude that GZ’s conduct in concealing the money in the internet account was motivated by a desire to flee to avoid prosecution.
I actually welcome them to try
I have say that I am impressed with JKL at this point
OK. Aaaaand? I’m not getting your point.
I never asserted that Mason’s criticism of Zimmerman was off base. Simply questioning points of his analysis/predictions of the legal proceeding; in this case challenging randomly inflammatory statements that over-hype Zimmerman as a flight risk.
To me, construing a judge’s reasoning for imposing stiffer bail conditions as an agreement to an entirely different assertion that Zimmerman is likely to abscond *under* those bail conditions ends up being some really circular logic. Using it that way is simply not an accurate portrayal of what the bail hearing represents.
I would like them to explain what “prejudiced” means in this context, having had actual legal experience with the defendant? what if GZ did not violate bond, could the prosecution ask the judge to recuse himself on the grounds that he may have too positive a view of the defendant, since he cooperated with the law? this is preposterous. the judge has a fair view of GZ based on GZ, that is not prejudice, that is experience.
The only reasonable inference I can make regarding the initial failure to turn in the 2nd passport is that Zimmerman was at least considering if not planning to flee the country if things did not go his way.
What other reason could there be for not turning in the valid passport?
Just stop with the smoke blowing. They were not “superficially similar”. They were substantially similar in meaning and even the different conclusion is mitigated by two things – the obvious tone in in the judge’s order that he was bending over backwards to grant bail and that he granted bail under very strict conditions.
Please feel free to continue the discussion, but just so you know, I will be posting a new article regarding the polygraph test results in a few minutes.
Wait a second. I thought we were convicting Zimmerman of perjury under an accomplice theory. Did something happen to make the jump from accomplice to ring leader? (beyond self-reenforcing narratives of hypothetical SZ testimony)
I’m pretty much positive (though not bothering to check for this comment) that Zimmerman doesn’t have *control* of his defense fund. How could he use those funds without the express collusion of his lawyer – who I’m pretty sure *does* control it? He’s also under electronic monitoring. Maybe you don’t understand what that means. I was helping a guy who was monitored work on his vehicle last summer. He walked out to the trunk of my car to get some tools – stepped outside his magic circle – and the cops were there in less than a minute. Sanford PD is *not* going to take their eyes off him. Zimmerman also has a bondsman on the hook for $90k or better … collateral or no – that bondsman does *NOT* want to take a cash hit like that; what, and sell a house … especially in the Central Florida market? (Trust me – we’re stuck under one in De Bary). Zimmerman is on lock-down.
Are you really going to say that your professional experience leads you to predict that the most likely outcome is for Zimmerman to jump bail?
Considering they’re talking middle of next year for a trial, assuming no perjury charges, it seem far more likely that Zimmerman will lay low, try to find a job somewhere with physical security and in about 3-4 months of keeping his nose clean they’ll request a relaxing of the bail conditions based on Zimmerman proving himself (not saying he’ll GET it – just saying, such a hearing is probably in the future). Doesn’t that sound a lot more like what you’d be recommending/working toward as a defense attorney?
Sorry. I think the implication and tone of the comment that started this was over-the-top, inflammatory and (ultimately) based on a flawed premise … to me, silly. Maybe sloppy would be a better term? Agree or disagree with my points, I certainly supported my thought with argument well beyond just the characterization. I suppose I’d prefer people think well of me; but not enough to be cowed into failing to call a spade a spade.
Agree. If they to try and recuse the judge, it’s the sign of a desperate defense team. They didn’t have a problem when he granted the 150K bail right?
Correction: Bondsman is on the hook for $900K or better.