URL: http://prince.org/msg/105/381559

Date printed: Wed 23rd Apr 2014 8:27pm PDT

independent and unofficial
Prince fan community site
Wed 23rd Apr 2014 8:27pm
Welcome! Sign up or enter username and password to remember me
Forums > Politics & Religion > The State of Florida vs George Zimmerman Thread II
AuthorMessage
Thread started 05/21/12 5:36am

Musicslave

The State of Florida vs George Zimmerman Thread II

Let's keep it civil ladies and gents....

http://abcnews.go.com/US/...d=16392466

George Zimmerman Case: Should Charges Be Dropped?

"Two prominent U.S. lawyers are among the skeptics questioning whether evidence in the shooting death of Trayvon Martin supports the second-degree murder charge against George Zimmerman, given the confessed shooter's apparent injuries and freshly released eyewitness accounts.

"There is no second-degree murder evidence in this case," Harvard law professor Alan Dershowitz said. "It's a very close case."

Details released in the past week add to the picture of what might have transpired on that rainy Feb. 26 before Zimmerman, a neighborhood watch captain in the Sanford, Fla., community where Martin, 17, was staying with his father's fiancée, shot the teen dead.

Previously unknown particulars, including the scrape on Martin's knuckle and photos of Zimmerman's battered and swollen face -- which were taken moments after he shot and killed Martin in what he says was self defense -- coupled with eyewitness accounts that back up Zimmerman's story, suggest for some that the prosecutor overreached.

"I'd rather play the defense than the prosecutor, because there's no way you get a murder-two conviction," journalist-attorney Geraldo Rivera said on Fox News' "The O'Reilly Factor" last week.

Zimmerman, 28, whose father is white and mother Hispanic, had volunteered for the neighborhood watch committee. He has said that he shot Martin, an African-American, in self-defense after the teen knocked him to the ground, banged his head against the ground and went for Zimmerman's gun.

The release of evidence by the prosecution Thursday also included potentially damning eyewitness accounts of the tussle between the two. One man at the scene told police he saw Martin on top of Zimmerman, pummeling him mixed martial arts-style.

With more of the prosecution's evidence now public, legal experts like Dershowitz are blaming what they're already calling "the failure" of this racially charged case on Special Prosecutor Angela Corey."If there are demonstrations, the finger of responsibility will point directly at the prosecutor," Dershowitz said.

Corey, the state attorney in Florida's Fourth Judicial Circuit Court, was assigned to the case by Florida Gov. Rick Scott nearly a month after the shooting. Corey said this weekend that evidence released so far is not the sum total of her case.

"What the general public has to remember and the media has to remember is that there is a lot we cannot release by law," Corey said.

Zimmerman's attorney Mark O'Mara apparently agrees with Corey.

"[It is] way too early to tell," he said. "That's me not only commenting on evidence, but the weight of all the evidence. And I don't even have all the evidence."

One key to the case is which of the two men instigated the clash that left Martin dead. The prosecution says Zimmerman initiated the altercation when he "profiled" Martin that night, and then got out of his car to follow him. In the newly released documents, lead homicide officer on the case, Chris Serino of the Sanford Police Department, called the shooting "avoidable" had Zimmerman remained in his vehicle.

What has yet to be seen are two main pieces of evidence: Zimmerman's statement on the night of the incident, and his reenactment of the events of that night, which could prove vital when and if the case is heard in court."

So.....Does anyone here believes that charges should be dropped? Seems like some people want this case to just go away. Thank God our justice system doesn't work that way. Isn't there an evidentiary hearing or something like that, that will determine whether or not there's enough evidence to justify going to trial?

[Edited 5/21/12 5:44am]

Reply #1 posted 05/21/12 6:30am

Musicslave

Oh...and thanks to the mod gods for allowing us to continue our conversation! cool

Reply #2 posted 05/21/12 7:46am

2elijah

No I don't think the charges should be dropped. I watched Democracy Now on PBS and they (UPDATED for corrections) played the audio of TM's girlfriend being questioned by police. During the questioning she stated that when TM realized he was being followed, that she told him to run, and he did. Then when he got away from GZ, he noticed GZ apparently chased/followed him to where he ran. TM's gf told him to run again, but he said he wasn't going to because he was close to his Dad's residence. After that is when GZ did approach TM, and she heard TM asked GZ "Are you following me?" (paraphrasing), and next thing she realized is that TM's phone fell to the ground, she heard some hollering/screaming and the phone went dead.

Also, Marcia Clarke who was one of the guests on Democracy Now, said the head injuries in back of GZ's head was not by TM, it was due to GZ's own fall during the tussle between him and TM. I think GZ is going to have to answer as to why he chased TM when he saw TM had run away from him. I also believe that if GZ never approached TM, especially after TM ran away from him, that this whole situation could have been avoided.

About charges being dropped? Not all charges. I think he should serve some kind of time for a crime that resulted in the way it did, because when you listen to what happened before the confrontation, it is pretty obvious it could have been avoided.

Also, one thing that is questionable....whether GZ had time to walk away, before he pulled the gun out to shoot TM in the chest. What's strange is that he couldn't have shot him at close range, because wouldn't there have been blood all over the front of GZ's shirt? So the question is, how much space was between him and TM before he shot TM in the chest, and how much time did he have to walk away from TM before he decided to take out his gun?

[Edited 5/21/12 8:48am]

Reply #3 posted 05/21/12 7:46am

2elijah

oops, double post.

[Edited 5/21/12 7:47am]

Reply #4 posted 05/21/12 8:05am

Musicslave

2elijah said:

No I don't think the charges should be dropped. I watched Democracy Now on PBS and they played the phone call from TM's girlfriend. During the questioning she stated that when TM realized he was being followed, that she told him to run, and he did. Then when he got away from GZ, he noticed GZ apparently chased/followed him to where he ran. TM's gf told him to run again, but he said he wasn't going to because he was close to his Dad's residence. After that is when GZ did approach TM, and she heard TM asked GZ "Are you following me?" (paraphrasing), and next thing she realized is that TM's phone fell to the ground, she heard some hollering/screaming and the phone went dead.

Also, Marcia Clarke who was one of the guests on Democracy Now, said the head injuries in back of GZ's head was not by TM, it was due to GZ's own fall during the tussle between him and TM. I think GZ is going to have to answer as to why he chased TM when he saw TM had run away from him. I also believe that if GZ never approached TM, especially after TM ran away from him, that this whole situation could have been avoided.

About charges being dropped? Not all charges. I think he should serve some kind of time for a crime that resulted in the way it did, because when you listen to what happened before the confrontation, it is pretty obvious it could have been avoided.

Also, one thing that is questionable....whether GZ had time to walk away, before he pulled the gun out to shoot TM in the chest. What's strange is that he couldn't have shot him at close range, because wouldn't there have been blood all over the front of GZ's shirt? So the question is, how much space was between him and TM before he shot TM in the chest, and how much time did he have to walk away from TM before he decided to take out his gun?

Did they play the phone call between TM and his girlfriend from that night or her telling her story about what happened? Also, I'd like to hear it. Could you provide the link?

Reply #5 posted 05/21/12 8:20am

2elijah

Musicslave said:

2elijah said:

No I don't think the charges should be dropped. I watched Democracy Now on PBS and they played the phone call from TM's girlfriend. During the questioning she stated that when TM realized he was being followed, that she told him to run, and he did. Then when he got away from GZ, he noticed GZ apparently chased/followed him to where he ran. TM's gf told him to run again, but he said he wasn't going to because he was close to his Dad's residence. After that is when GZ did approach TM, and she heard TM asked GZ "Are you following me?" (paraphrasing), and next thing she realized is that TM's phone fell to the ground, she heard some hollering/screaming and the phone went dead.

Also, Marcia Clarke who was one of the guests on Democracy Now, said the head injuries in back of GZ's head was not by TM, it was due to GZ's own fall during the tussle between him and TM. I think GZ is going to have to answer as to why he chased TM when he saw TM had run away from him. I also believe that if GZ never approached TM, especially after TM ran away from him, that this whole situation could have been avoided.

About charges being dropped? Not all charges. I think he should serve some kind of time for a crime that resulted in the way it did, because when you listen to what happened before the confrontation, it is pretty obvious it could have been avoided.

Also, one thing that is questionable....whether GZ had time to walk away, before he pulled the gun out to shoot TM in the chest. What's strange is that he couldn't have shot him at close range, because wouldn't there have been blood all over the front of GZ's shirt? So the question is, how much space was between him and TM before he shot TM in the chest, and how much time did he have to walk away from TM before he decided to take out his gun?

Did they play the phone call between TM and his girlfriend from that night or her telling her story about what happened? Also, I'd like to hear it. Could you provide the link?

Ooops, let me correct that. I meant she was being questioned by an investigator about the phone call between her and TM, and they played that audio on Democracy Now on PBS this past Friday.

Update: Found the transcript and a a short summary of vid:.

http://www.democracynow.o...ed_trayvon

(Edited for compliance)

TRANSCRIPT:

JUAN GONZÁLEZ: We turn now to the killing of 17-year-old Trayvon Martin. The office of special prosecutor Anglea Corey released a trove of documents late last night revealing new details about the night George Zimmerman shot dead the teenager in Sanford, Florida. The evidence indicates a fight occurred between the two men but police determined the deadly encounter between Zimmerman and Martin was "ultimately avoidable" if Zimmerman had "remained in his vehicle and awaited the arrival of law enforcement." The police also concluded, "there is no indication that Trayvon Martin was involved in any criminal activity at the time of the encounter."

Among the released documents was Trayvon Martin’s autopsy. It showed Martin had died from a single gunshot wound to the chest fired from intermediate range. In addition, traces of marijuana were found in his blood.

New photos and medical records show Zimmerman suffered a broken nose, bruises and cuts on the back of his head. The new documents also show Sanford police received an anonymous tip less than two full days after the shooting before it became widely known to the public. The caller refused to identify herself but said that Zimmerman "...has a racist ideologies and... is fully capable of instigating a confrontation that could have escalated to the point of him having to use deadly force." The caller was never tracked down. (Edited for compliance)......., but first, we turn to a chilling recording of the police interviewing Trayvon Martin’s girlfriend. She and Trayvon were talking on the phone in the moments leading up to his death.

from Amy Goodman's show - Democracy Now - aired 5/18/12:

Transcript of Police interviewing TM's girlfriend:

PROSECUTOR: I want to focus on that day, February 26, when you know obviously he was unfortunately killed, and I’m sorry to ask you about
this. But did you have conversations with him that day?

GIRLFRIEND: Yes.

PROSECUTOR: At some point did you find out that Trayvon was going to the store?

GIRLFRIEND: Around 6 something.

PROSECUTOR: OK, and did he tell you what store he was going to?

GIRLFRIEND: No. He just said [inaudible] store.

PROSECUTOR: OK, did he say why he was going to the store?

GIRLFRIEND: Yes.

PROSECUTOR: What did he say he was going to the store for?

GIRLFRIEND: Yeah, his little brother. Some food and some drink.

PROSECUTOR: OK, yeah, tell me what happened as he’s talking to you when he’s leaving the store on his way back home.

GIRLFRIEND: It started raining.

PROSECUTOR: It started raining, and did he go somewhere?

GIRLFRIEND: Yeah, he ran to the, um, mail thing.

PROSECUTOR: I’m sorry what?

GIRLFRIEND: Like a mail, like a shed.

PROSECUTOR: Like a mail area, like a covered area, because it was raining? So did he tell you he was already inside, like, the gated place?

GIRLFRIEND: Yeah. He ran. That’s when the phone hung up.

PROSECUTOR: I’m sorry?

GIRLFRIEND: The phone hung up and I called him back again.

PROSECUTOR: And what else did Trayvon tell you?

GIRLFRIEND: And like—-

PROSECUTOR: And I know this is difficult for you but just take your time and tell us what you remember happened.

GIRLFRIEND: A couple minutes later, like, he come and tell me this man is watching him.

PROSECUTOR: OK, did he describe the man that was watching him?

GIRLFRIEND: Yeah, he said white.

PROSECUTOR: OK, did he say whether the man was standing, sitting…?

GIRLFRIEND: He was in a car.

PROSECUTOR: He was in a car? And what did he say about the man who was watching—-

GIRLFRIEND: He was on the phone.

PROSECUTOR: He was on the phone? OK, and what did Trayvon say after that?

GIRLFRIEND: He was telling me that this man was watching him, so he, like, started walking.

PROSECUTOR: He, Trayvon, started walking?

GIRLFRIEND: He gonna start walking. And then the phone hung up and then I called him back again. And then, I said, 'What are you doing?' He said he’s walking, and he said this man is still following him, behind the car. He put his hoodie on.

PROSECUTOR: He, Trayvon, put his hoodie on?

GIRLFRIEND: Yeah, 'cause, he said, it was still a little bit dripping water so he put his hoodie on. So I said, ’What's going on?’ He said,
this man is still watching from a car. So he about to run from the back. I told him, go to his dad’s house. Run to his dad’s house.

PROSECUTOR: Go to what?

GIRLFRIEND: Run to his dad’s house.

PROSECUTOR: To his dad’s house?

GIRLFRIEND: Yeah. So he said he was about to run from the back, so the next that I hear, he just run. I can hear that the wind blowing.

PROSECUTOR: So you could tell he was running at that time? OK. And then
what happened?

GIRLFRIEND: Then he said, he lost him.

PROSECUTOR: He lost what, the man?

GIRLFRIEND: Yeah.

PROSECUTOR: So was Trayvon, at that time, you could tell he was, like, out of breath, like excited?

GIRLFRIEND: Yeah.

PROSECUTOR: OK. Take your time, I know this is difficult for you.

GIRLFRIEND: So he lost him. He was breathing hard. And by the sound of his voice, his voice kind of changed.

PROSECUTOR: Who, Trayvon’s?

GIRLFRIEND: Yeah.

PROSECUTOR: OK. What do you mean by that? His voice changed?

GIRLFRIEND: [inaudible]

PROSECUTOR: I’m sorry?

GIRLFRIEND: I know he was scared.

PROSECUTOR: I know what you are trying to tell me but if you could describe to me how you could tell he was scared.

GIRLFRIEND: His voice was getting kind of low.

PROSECUTOR: So you could tell he was emotional, like somebody who was in fear?

GIRLFRIEND: Yeah.

PROSECUTOR: He was breathing hard?

GIRLFRIEND: He said he had lost him and he was breathing hard and I told him 'Keep running.'

PROSECUTOR: So Trayvon said he started walking because he thought he had lost the guy?

GIRLFRIEND: Yeah.

PROSECUTOR: OK.

GIRLFRIEND: I said, 'Keep running.' He said he ain’t gonna run. 'Cause he said he is right by his father's house. And then in a couple minutes he said the man is following him again. He’s behind him. I said, 'Run!' He said he was not going to run. I knew he was not going to run because he was out of breath. And then he was getting excited,
the guy’s getting close to him. I told him, 'Run!' And I told him, 'Keep running!' He not going to run. I tell him, 'Why are you not running?' He said ’I’m not gonna.’ He was tired. I know he was tired.

PROSECUTOR: I am sorry, Trayvon said he was not running because—-he’s not going to run he said because you could tell he was tired? How could you tell he was tired?

GIRLFRIEND: He was breathing hard.

PROSECUTOR: Real hard?

GIRLFRIEND: Real hard. And then he told me this guy was getting close! He told me the guy was getting real close to him. And the next I hear is, 'Why are you following me for?'

PROSECUTOR: OK. Let me make sure I understand this so, Trayvon tells you the guy is getting closer to him and then you hear Trayvon saying
something.

GIRLFRIEND: Yeah.

PROSECUTOR: And what do you hear Trayvon saying?

GIRLFRIEND: 'Why are you following me for?'

PROSECUTOR: 'Why are you following me for?'

GIRLFRIEND: Yeah.

PROSECUTOR: And then what happened?

GIRLFRIEND: I heard this man, like an old man say, 'What are you doing
around here?'

PROSECUTOR: OK, so you definitely could tell another voice that was not Trayvon and you heard this other voice say what?

GIRLFRIEND: 'What are you doing around here?'

PROSECUTOR: 'What are you doing around here?' OK.

GIRLFRIEND: And I call Trayvon, 'Trayon, what's going on? What’s going on?’

PROSECUTOR: This is you saying that?

GIRLFRIEND: Yeah. Then, I am calling him and he didn’t answer.

PROSECUTOR: No answer from Trayvon?

GIRLFRIEND: Yeah. I hear some like 'bump.' You could hear someone had bumped Trayvon. I could hear the grass.

PROSECUTOR: OK. So you could hear there was something going on, like something hitting something?

GIRLFRIEND: Yeah. I could hear the grass thing.

PROSECUTOR: Out of the…?

GIRLFRIEND: Yeah.

PROSECUTOR: OK, and then what happened?

GIRLFRIEND: And then, I was still screaming, I was saying, 'Trayvon! Trayvon!'

PROSECUTOR: And there was no response?

GIRLFRIEND: Yeah and then the next thing the phone just shut off.

PROSECUTOR: The phone shut off?

GIRLFRIEND: It just shut off.

[Edited 5/21/12 8:32am]

Reply #6 posted 05/21/12 8:45am

2elijah

So based on what TM's gf revealed in that phone call, it seems GZ was bent on pursuing TM almost like in stalker mode. TM's gf heard part of the conversation between the two, and she did hear GZ ask TM what he was doing in that area?

[Edited 5/21/12 8:48am]

Reply #7 posted 05/21/12 10:02am

Musicslave

2elijah said:

So based on what TM's gf revealed in that phone call, it seems GZ was bent on pursuing TM almost like in stalker mode. TM's gf heard part of the conversation between the two, and she did hear GZ ask TM what he was doing in that area?

[Edited 5/21/12 8:48am]

Thanks for sharing...

Reply #8 posted 05/21/12 10:41am

HotGritz

2elijah said:

No I don't think the charges should be dropped. I watched Democracy Now on PBS and they (UPDATED for corrections) played the audio of TM's girlfriend being questioned by police. During the questioning she stated that when TM realized he was being followed, that she told him to run, and he did. Then when he got away from GZ, he noticed GZ apparently chased/followed him to where he ran. TM's gf told him to run again, but he said he wasn't going to because he was close to his Dad's residence. After that is when GZ did approach TM, and she heard TM asked GZ "Are you following me?" (paraphrasing), and next thing she realized is that TM's phone fell to the ground, she heard some hollering/screaming and the phone went dead.

Also, Marcia Clarke who was one of the guests on Democracy Now, said the head injuries in back of GZ's head was not by TM, it was due to GZ's own fall during the tussle between him and TM. I think GZ is going to have to answer as to why he chased TM when he saw TM had run away from him. I also believe that if GZ never approached TM, especially after TM ran away from him, that this whole situation could have been avoided.

About charges being dropped? Not all charges. I think he should serve some kind of time for a crime that resulted in the way it did, because when you listen to what happened before the confrontation, it is pretty obvious it could have been avoided.

Also, one thing that is questionable....whether GZ had time to walk away, before he pulled the gun out to shoot TM in the chest. What's strange is that he couldn't have shot him at close range, because wouldn't there have been blood all over the front of GZ's shirt? So the question is, how much space was between him and TM before he shot TM in the chest, and how much time did he have to walk away from TM before he decided to take out his gun?

[Edited 5/21/12 8:48am]

clapping nod People still aren't understanding that GZ persued TM and that GZ was the one with the gun. The altercation, if you can honestly say there was one, was initiated by GZ. Why should any youth, particularly a black male, have to be subjected to stalking/harassing/interogation by some complete stranger? What would any of us do if we were being followed by someone we didn't know? What would any of us do is some stranger came up to us and started asking questions about who we are or why we are in a particular area?

How do we know what other conversation took place between GZ and TM? If GZ is heard on tape referring to the likes of TM as "effing a-holes" or "effing coons" then how do we know that same language wasn't uttered to TM's face? We're talking confrontational and hostile language which has been known to cause many a fight between two persons.

As for the marks on GZ's nose. Please! That is not a broken nose. I've seen broken noses and they are nothing slight nor pretty and need to be reset immediately.

GZ needs to go to trial no doubt. I just feel in my heart he's going to walk. sad

I'M NOT SAYING YOU'RE UGLY. YOU JUST HAVE BAD LUCK WHEN IT COMES TO MIRRORS AND SUNLIGHT!
RIP Dick Clark, Whitney Houston, Don Cornelius, Heavy D, and Donna Summer. rose
Reply #9 posted 05/21/12 11:12am

kibbles

HotGritz said:

2elijah said:

No I don't think the charges should be dropped. I watched Democracy Now on PBS and they (UPDATED for corrections) played the audio of TM's girlfriend being questioned by police. During the questioning she stated that when TM realized he was being followed, that she told him to run, and he did. Then when he got away from GZ, he noticed GZ apparently chased/followed him to where he ran. TM's gf told him to run again, but he said he wasn't going to because he was close to his Dad's residence. After that is when GZ did approach TM, and she heard TM asked GZ "Are you following me?" (paraphrasing), and next thing she realized is that TM's phone fell to the ground, she heard some hollering/screaming and the phone went dead.

Also, Marcia Clarke who was one of the guests on Democracy Now, said the head injuries in back of GZ's head was not by TM, it was due to GZ's own fall during the tussle between him and TM. I think GZ is going to have to answer as to why he chased TM when he saw TM had run away from him. I also believe that if GZ never approached TM, especially after TM ran away from him, that this whole situation could have been avoided.

About charges being dropped? Not all charges. I think he should serve some kind of time for a crime that resulted in the way it did, because when you listen to what happened before the confrontation, it is pretty obvious it could have been avoided.

Also, one thing that is questionable....whether GZ had time to walk away, before he pulled the gun out to shoot TM in the chest. What's strange is that he couldn't have shot him at close range, because wouldn't there have been blood all over the front of GZ's shirt? So the question is, how much space was between him and TM before he shot TM in the chest, and how much time did he have to walk away from TM before he decided to take out his gun?

[Edited 5/21/12 8:48am]

clapping nod People still aren't understanding that GZ persued TM and that GZ was the one with the gun. The altercation, if you can honestly say there was one, was initiated by GZ. Why should any youth, particularly a black male, have to be subjected to stalking/harassing/interogation by some complete stranger? What would any of us do if we were being followed by someone we didn't know? What would any of us do is some stranger came up to us and started asking questions about who we are or why we are in a particular area?

How do we know what other conversation took place between GZ and TM? If GZ is heard on tape referring to the likes of TM as "effing a-holes" or "effing coons" then how do we know that same language wasn't uttered to TM's face? We're talking confrontational and hostile language which has been known to cause many a fight between two persons.

As for the marks on GZ's nose. Please! That is not a broken nose. I've seen broken noses and they are nothing slight nor pretty and need to be reset immediately.

GZ needs to go to trial no doubt. I just feel in my heart he's going to walk. sad

that's what keeps going on in my mind. we heard his attitude on the tape; i doubt he was all 'sweet and light' when he approached trayvon.

even if trayvon had swung first i don't think it mitigates zimmerman's behavior at all. as you say, trayvon was being stalked. when zimmerman approached him, he was either feeling 1) threatened and scared. he's looking at this guy who's been chasing him, who's now caught up to him and is in his face questioning him, and trayvon now knows beyond a shadow of a doubt that he's being racially profiled by this jerk. how does trayvon know this guy isn't out to kick his ass because he doesn't like black people? so trayvon might have swung on zimmerman first to try to scare him into going away, or a least let zimmerman know he wasn't going to be intimidated.

or trayvon was 2) threatened and angry. here is this jerk in his face, questioning him because again, zimmerman believes trayvon is up to no good simply based on the color of his skin. i can see trayvon, or anyone, taking offense to something like that. he tried to get away from zimmerman, but no, zimmerman just had to be in his face. so trayvon handed him his ass, and being the 'punk' that he is, zimmerman shot him because he couldn't take the fact that this little (fill in the blank) had just handed him said ass.

none of this would have happened if zimmerman hadn't gone after trayvon for no reason whatsoever.

as for the marks on gz: co-sign to the nth degree. as i posted in the last thread, zimmerman looks like he's been in a fight, sure, but a LIFE THREATENING fight? no, not at all. rihanna looked worse than zimmerman, and while she was undoubtedly battered, i don't think anyone ever construed that any of her wounds were life threatening as they are here to try to justify zimmerman's behavior.

[Edited 5/21/12 11:12am]

Reply #10 posted 05/21/12 1:39pm

Musicslave

kibbles said:

HotGritz said:

clapping nod People still aren't understanding that GZ persued TM and that GZ was the one with the gun. The altercation, if you can honestly say there was one, was initiated by GZ. Why should any youth, particularly a black male, have to be subjected to stalking/harassing/interogation by some complete stranger? What would any of us do if we were being followed by someone we didn't know? What would any of us do is some stranger came up to us and started asking questions about who we are or why we are in a particular area?

How do we know what other conversation took place between GZ and TM? If GZ is heard on tape referring to the likes of TM as "effing a-holes" or "effing coons" then how do we know that same language wasn't uttered to TM's face? We're talking confrontational and hostile language which has been known to cause many a fight between two persons.

As for the marks on GZ's nose. Please! That is not a broken nose. I've seen broken noses and they are nothing slight nor pretty and need to be reset immediately.

GZ needs to go to trial no doubt. I just feel in my heart he's going to walk. sad

that's what keeps going on in my mind. we heard his attitude on the tape; i doubt he was all 'sweet and light' when he approached trayvon.

even if trayvon had swung first i don't think it mitigates zimmerman's behavior at all. as you say, trayvon was being stalked. when zimmerman approached him, he was either feeling 1) threatened and scared. he's looking at this guy who's been chasing him, who's now caught up to him and is in his face questioning him, and trayvon now knows beyond a shadow of a doubt that he's being racially profiled by this jerk. how does trayvon know this guy isn't out to kick his ass because he doesn't like black people? so trayvon might have swung on zimmerman first to try to scare him into going away, or a least let zimmerman know he wasn't going to be intimidated.

or trayvon was 2) threatened and angry. here is this jerk in his face, questioning him because again, zimmerman believes trayvon is up to no good simply based on the color of his skin. i can see trayvon, or anyone, taking offense to something like that. he tried to get away from zimmerman, but no, zimmerman just had to be in his face. so trayvon handed him his ass, and being the 'punk' that he is, zimmerman shot him because he couldn't take the fact that this little (fill in the blank) had just handed him said ass.

none of this would have happened if zimmerman hadn't gone after trayvon for no reason whatsoever.

as for the marks on gz: co-sign to the nth degree. as i posted in the last thread, zimmerman looks like he's been in a fight, sure, but a LIFE THREATENING fight? no, not at all. rihanna looked worse than zimmerman, and while she was undoubtedly battered, i don't think anyone ever construed that any of her wounds were life threatening as they are here to try to justify zimmerman's behavior.

[Edited 5/21/12 11:12am]

I co-sign the hell out of that statement! nod It's funny how being that there's proof of a fight, and traces of weed in TM system, the media want to act like GZ's story is somehow corroborated now. GTFOH!!!!! Even his own attorney (O'Mara) said that he hasn't even received all of the evidence and haven't gone through all of what he has received yet. People need to chill the fuck out and let the system run its (long ass) course.

I'm interested in GZ's text messages from that night. Angela Corey said the state has copies of his text messages too.

[Edited 5/21/12 13:52pm]

Reply #11 posted 05/21/12 2:18pm

kibbles

Musicslave said:

kibbles said:

that's what keeps going on in my mind. we heard his attitude on the tape; i doubt he was all 'sweet and light' when he approached trayvon.

even if trayvon had swung first i don't think it mitigates zimmerman's behavior at all. as you say, trayvon was being stalked. when zimmerman approached him, he was either feeling 1) threatened and scared. he's looking at this guy who's been chasing him, who's now caught up to him and is in his face questioning him, and trayvon now knows beyond a shadow of a doubt that he's being racially profiled by this jerk. how does trayvon know this guy isn't out to kick his ass because he doesn't like black people? so trayvon might have swung on zimmerman first to try to scare him into going away, or a least let zimmerman know he wasn't going to be intimidated.

or trayvon was 2) threatened and angry. here is this jerk in his face, questioning him because again, zimmerman believes trayvon is up to no good simply based on the color of his skin. i can see trayvon, or anyone, taking offense to something like that. he tried to get away from zimmerman, but no, zimmerman just had to be in his face. so trayvon handed him his ass, and being the 'punk' that he is, zimmerman shot him because he couldn't take the fact that this little (fill in the blank) had just handed him said ass.

none of this would have happened if zimmerman hadn't gone after trayvon for no reason whatsoever.

as for the marks on gz: co-sign to the nth degree. as i posted in the last thread, zimmerman looks like he's been in a fight, sure, but a LIFE THREATENING fight? no, not at all. rihanna looked worse than zimmerman, and while she was undoubtedly battered, i don't think anyone ever construed that any of her wounds were life threatening as they are here to try to justify zimmerman's behavior.

[Edited 5/21/12 11:12am]

I co-sign the hell out of that statement! nod It's funny how being that there's proof of a fight, and traces of weed in TM system, the media want to act like GZ's story is somehow corroborated now. GTFOH!!!!! Even his own attorney (O'Mara) said that he hasn't even received all of the evidence and haven't gone through all of what he has received yet. People need to chill the fuck out and let the system run its (long ass) course.

I'm interested in GZ's text messages from that night. Angela Corey said the state has copies of his text messages too.

[Edited 5/21/12 13:52pm]

i just don't understand that leap of (il)logic. so in their minds, the only way that trayvon is 'right' or 'innocent' is if he had stood there and allowed zimmerman to question and intimidate him? if only he had been 'meek and mild', then everything would have been okay? but because he fought back, zimmerman can say he was in fear of his life, and therefore justified in killing him? no one even questions the veracity of zimmerman's claims, do they? this grown assed man, afraid of a teenager? even the police officers thought he was full of it, but unfortunately for trayvon, zimmerman's dad has friends in high places.

it reminds me of to kill a mockingbird. reduce trayvon to a racial stereotype, paint him as an out of control black brute, and you can justify his mistreatment and ultimately his murder. this was a fist fight that zimmerman lost. that's all. none of this would have happened if zimmerman wasn't racially profiling trayvon.

interesting news about the txt msgs.

Reply #12 posted 05/21/12 2:38pm

HotGritz

Musicslave said:

kibbles said:

that's what keeps going on in my mind. we heard his attitude on the tape; i doubt he was all 'sweet and light' when he approached trayvon.

even if trayvon had swung first i don't think it mitigates zimmerman's behavior at all. as you say, trayvon was being stalked. when zimmerman approached him, he was either feeling 1) threatened and scared. he's looking at this guy who's been chasing him, who's now caught up to him and is in his face questioning him, and trayvon now knows beyond a shadow of a doubt that he's being racially profiled by this jerk. how does trayvon know this guy isn't out to kick his ass because he doesn't like black people? so trayvon might have swung on zimmerman first to try to scare him into going away, or a least let zimmerman know he wasn't going to be intimidated.

or trayvon was 2) threatened and angry. here is this jerk in his face, questioning him because again, zimmerman believes trayvon is up to no good simply based on the color of his skin. i can see trayvon, or anyone, taking offense to something like that. he tried to get away from zimmerman, but no, zimmerman just had to be in his face. so trayvon handed him his ass, and being the 'punk' that he is, zimmerman shot him because he couldn't take the fact that this little (fill in the blank) had just handed him said ass.

none of this would have happened if zimmerman hadn't gone after trayvon for no reason whatsoever.

as for the marks on gz: co-sign to the nth degree. as i posted in the last thread, zimmerman looks like he's been in a fight, sure, but a LIFE THREATENING fight? no, not at all. rihanna looked worse than zimmerman, and while she was undoubtedly battered, i don't think anyone ever construed that any of her wounds were life threatening as they are here to try to justify zimmerman's behavior.

[Edited 5/21/12 11:12am]

I co-sign the hell out of that statement! nod It's funny how being that there's proof of a fight, and traces of weed in TM system, the media want to act like GZ's story is somehow corroborated now. GTFOH!!!!! Even his own attorney (O'Mara) said that he hasn't even received all of the evidence and haven't gone through all of what he has received yet. People need to chill the fuck out and let the system run its (long ass) course.

I'm interested in GZ's text messages from that night. Angela Corey said the state has copies of his text messages too.

[Edited 5/21/12 13:52pm]

Certain media outlets have been trying to discredit TM since the story broke about his murder. His life was deemed less valuable for no other reason than he was a black male. Everything from him wearing a hoodie to him not answering GZ's questions to even his size are all things that have been used to discredit this boy. Its interesting that we reflect back on the Chris Brown/Rihanna incident because that was an example of sex & race! Those 2 things weigh heavily in American society and can determine how was is treated and valued. With TM, his race is used against him. With CB and RiRi, her sex is used against her. When that story broke the first thing you see on a lot of blogs and news sites is "what did she do?". She must have provoked him. Its the same thing with TM. He is automatically assumed to have "done something" to deserve being killed. neutral

I'M NOT SAYING YOU'RE UGLY. YOU JUST HAVE BAD LUCK WHEN IT COMES TO MIRRORS AND SUNLIGHT!
RIP Dick Clark, Whitney Houston, Don Cornelius, Heavy D, and Donna Summer. rose
Reply #13 posted 05/21/12 2:48pm

kibbles

2elijah said:

Also, one thing that is questionable....whether GZ had time to walk away, before he pulled the gun out to shoot TM in the chest. What's strange is that he couldn't have shot him at close range, because wouldn't there have been blood all over the front of GZ's shirt? So the question is, how much space was between him and TM before he shot TM in the chest, and how much time did he have to walk away from TM before he decided to take out his gun?

[Edited 5/21/12 8:48am]

that's what i wonder, too.

witnesses say that trayvon had managed to climb on top of zimmerman at some point during the fight.

i'm not overly knowledgeable about such things but i read on another site where a poster described intermediate range as being about 18 inches, or at least arm's length. however, it would seem to me that if zimmerman pulled the gun while he was on the ground and had to shoot upwards at trayvon, then i would expect the determination to have been 'close range' and i would expect to see blood splatter of some sort on zimmerman's clothes and body. i would also expect a more "sloppy" gunshot wound since they would have been struggling.

but if trayvon was standing when he got shot, then at some point, zimmerman threw him off or trayvon got up. they are both standing when zimmerman pulls his gun.

i'm thinking this is what corey's case hinges on. if zimmerman had time to draw his gun, and shoot point blank while they weren't actively engaged in a struggle, and perhaps with trayvon crying out for help, then zimmerman shot a man who was in fear of HIS life, not the other way around.

Reply #14 posted 05/21/12 2:50pm

2elijah

What is strange is, if where was the blood on Gz's clothes?
If TM was that close if Gz claims TM had him where his
his life was threatened? Wouldn't a lot of TM's blood
have been all over Gz? So it is apparent GZ could not have
been in TM's clutches at the time he shot TM because
where was the blood on Gz's clothes when he was
at the police station that night? It does not show
in the video. GZ's front clothing appears dry with no
blood on the front of his shirt.
Reply #15 posted 05/21/12 2:51pm

HotGritz

2elijah said:

What is strange is, if where was the blood on Gz's clothes? If TM was that close if Gz claims TM had him where his his life was threatened? Wouldn't a lot of TM's blood have been all over Gz? So it is apparent GZ could not have been in TM's clutches at the time he shot TM because where was the blood on Gz's clothes when he was at the police station that night? It does not show in the video. GZ's front clothing appears dry with no blood on the front of his shirt.

nod and why does TM only have one of his fingers cut? that's what some news outlets have reported. If you're beating the hell out of someone, your hands should be quite bruised, bloodied and possibly cut up.

I'M NOT SAYING YOU'RE UGLY. YOU JUST HAVE BAD LUCK WHEN IT COMES TO MIRRORS AND SUNLIGHT!
RIP Dick Clark, Whitney Houston, Don Cornelius, Heavy D, and Donna Summer. rose
Reply #16 posted 05/21/12 5:53pm

DiminutiveRocker

fight, and traces of weed in TM system, the media want to act like GZ's story is somehow corroborated now. GTFOH!!!!! Even his own attorney (O'Mara) said that he hasn't even received all of the evidence and haven't gone through all of what he has received yet. People need to chill the fuck out and let the system run its (long ass) course.

I'm interested in GZ's text messages from that night. Angela Corey said the state has copies of his text messages too.

[Edited 5/21/12 13:52pm]

nod The evidence is slowly coming out and I suspect there will be even more surprises during the trial.

Do you think GZ's texts will have anyting.... incriminating?

eek

[Edited 5/21/12 18:01pm]

Consider the rights of others before your own feelings, and the feelings of others before your own rights.
~ John Wooden
Reply #17 posted 05/21/12 7:54pm

free2bfreeda

HotGritz said:

2elijah said:

What is strange is, if where was the blood on Gz's clothes? If TM was that close if Gz claims TM had him where his his life was threatened? Wouldn't a lot of TM's blood have been all over Gz? So it is apparent GZ could not have been in TM's clutches at the time he shot TM because where was the blood on Gz's clothes when he was at the police station that night? It does not show in the video. GZ's front clothing appears dry with no blood on the front of his shirt.

nod and why does TM only have one of his fingers cut? that's what some news outlets have reported. If you're beating the hell out of someone, your hands should be quite bruised, bloodied and possibly cut up.

yeahthat also if GZ had a broken bloody nose, why was there no signs of blood on his shirt or shirt collar when he was transported to the sanford pd?

why does it seem as though the media is bending towards zimmerman having the right to exit his vehicle after stalking and shoot Trayvon M.?

one day a child hugged the earth & whispered 2 her,"I wish people would realize every x a bomb is launched & hits ur surface, it's like a major injury 2 u." i know war hurts u. :" the earth rumbled softly n reply, then cried a massive storm(c)
Reply #18 posted 05/21/12 9:01pm

babynoz

How some hack on tv can make that determination by only seeing a portion of the evidence is silly. The case is being heard in court where it belongs. Geraldo was, is and always will be a hack.

No one should be able to gun somebody down under questionable circumstances, claiming self defense/stand your ground and the authorities just take their word for it.

After a proper investigation was finally done the SA agreed with the officer who initially wanted to charge Zim that there was probable cause. Dershowitz and Geraldo haven't seen any more than we have.

"Success has a great tendency to conceal and throw a veil over the evil of men"....Demosthenes
Reply #19 posted 05/21/12 9:13pm

free2bfreeda

babynoz said:

How some hack on tv can make that determination by only seeing a portion of the evidence is silly. The case is being heard in court where it belongs. Geraldo was, is and always will be a hack.

No one should be able to gun somebody down under questionable circumstances, claiming self defense/stand your ground and the authorities just take their word for it.

After a proper investigation was finally done the SA agreed with the officer who initially wanted to charge Zim that there was probable cause. Dershowitz and Geraldo haven't seen any more than we have.

it seems as though geraldo continously tries to validate his self worth through dark horse controversy.

one day a child hugged the earth & whispered 2 her,"I wish people would realize every x a bomb is launched & hits ur surface, it's like a major injury 2 u." i know war hurts u. :" the earth rumbled softly n reply, then cried a massive storm(c)
Reply #20 posted 05/21/12 11:12pm

uPtoWnNY

This entire mess tells me Zimmerman was too much of a bitch to carry a gun and lead the neighborhood watch. It's his fault the kid is dead. He pressed beyond his control, got his ass kicked over-stepping, panicked and used his gun.

If you can get your ass kicked by a 17-year-old, maybe you shouldn't be the one policing the complex. Keep your bitch-ass home.

But I still think he's getting off.

[Edited 5/21/12 23:17pm]

Reply #21 posted 05/22/12 9:55am

2elijah

free2bfreeda said:

HotGritz said:

nod and why does TM only have one of his fingers cut? that's what some news outlets have reported. If you're beating the hell out of someone, your hands should be quite bruised, bloodied and possibly cut up.

yeahthat also if GZ had a broken bloody nose, why was there no signs of blood on his shirt or shirt collar when he was transported to the sanford pd?

why does it seem as though the media is bending towards zimmerman having the right to exit his vehicle after stalking and shoot Trayvon M.?

That's the question that needs to be asked. Furthermore, he had to be further away from TM, when he shot him, so the bs that GZ thought his life was in danger, is bs, because if TM was pummeling or choking him to the point GZ either couldn't break from TM's grasp or was gasping for air, then when did GZ free himself to the point he was able to shoot TM, without TM's blood on his clothes? hmm There had to be sufficient space between the two, that gave GZ time to pull out his gun and shoot TM in his chest. Had he shot him if TM was on top of him, then there would have been blood spattered all over GZ. His story doesn't hold up at all. Way too many loopholes, and he's using the SYG law to cover up what he did.

Sadly, though, I agree with others that he may go free of this tragedy. It is also sad how some in the media, made the victim out to be the agressor, when he was the one being pursued or basically hunted down by GZ, who ended up killing TM, because he probably knew he could get away with it.

Reply #22 posted 05/22/12 10:38am

DiminutiveRocker

2elijah said:

free2bfreeda said:

yeahthat also if GZ had a broken bloody nose, why was there no signs of blood on his shirt or shirt collar when he was transported to the sanford pd?

why does it seem as though the media is bending towards zimmerman having the right to exit his vehicle after stalking and shoot Trayvon M.?

That's the question that needs to be asked. Furthermore, he had to be further away from TM, when he shot him, so the bs that GZ thought his life was in danger, is bs, because if TM was pummeling or choking him to the point GZ either couldn't break from TM's grasp or was gasping for air, then when did GZ free himself to the point he was able to shoot TM, without TM's blood on his clothes? hmm There had to be sufficient space between the two, that gave GZ time to pull out his gun and shoot TM in his chest. Had he shot him if TM was on top of him, then there would have been blood spattered all over GZ. His story doesn't hold up at all. Way too many loopholes, and he's using the SYG law to cover up what he did.

Sadly, though, I agree with others that he may go free of this tragedy. It is also sad how some in the media, made the victim out to be the agressor, when he was the one being pursued or basically hunted down by GZ, who ended up killing TM, because he probably knew he could get away with it.

There are still so many questions left uanswered because not allthe evidnece has been revealed. While it's certainly a possibility GZ might get off... I hope that at least the manslaughter charge will stick.

Based on his story and the injuries he incurred - I do not believe for one minute that GZ's life was in danger that night.

Consider the rights of others before your own feelings, and the feelings of others before your own rights.
~ John Wooden
Reply #23 posted 05/22/12 12:40pm

Musicslave

Looks like some of the witnesses have changed their stories....

http://articles.orlandose...fdle-agent

Several George Zimmerman witnesses change their accounts

By Rene Stutzman and Jeff Weiner, Orlando Sentinel


2:51 p.m. EST, May 22, 2012

Evidence released last week in the second-degree murder case against George Zimmerman shows four key witnesses made major changes in what they say they saw and heard the night he fatally shot 17-year-old Trayvon Martin in Sanford.

Three changed their stories in ways that may damage Zimmerman. A fourth abandoned her initial story, that she saw one person chasing another. Now, she says, she saw a single figure running.

Here are the key ways in which their stories changed.

Witness 2

A young woman who lives in the Retreat at Twin Lakes community where Trayvon was shot, was interviewed twice by Sanford police and once by the Florida Department of Law Enforcement.

She told authorities that she had taken out her contact lenses just before the incident. In her first recorded interview with Sanford police four days after the shooting, she told lead Investigator Chris Serino, "I saw two guys running. Couldn't tell you who was in front, who was behind."

She stepped away from her window and when she looked again, she "saw a fistfight. Just fists. I don't know who was hitting who."

A week later, she added a detail when talking again to Serino: During the chase, the two figures had been 10 feet apart.

That all changed when she was re-interviewed March 20 by a Florida Department of Law Enforcement agent. That time, she recalled catching a glimpse of just one running figure, she told FDLE Investigator John Batchelor, and she heard the person more than saw him.

"I couldn't tell you if it was a man, a woman, a kid, black or white. I couldn't tell you because it was dark and because I didn't have my contacts on or glasses. … I just know I saw a person out there."

Witness 12

A young mother, who is also a neighbor in the townhome community, never gave a recorded interview to Sanford police, according to prosecution records released last week. She first sat down for an audio-recorded interview with an FDLE agent March 20, more than three weeks after the shooting.

During that session, she said she "I don't know which one. … All I saw when they were on the ground was dark colors," she said.

Six days later, however, she was sure: It was Zimmerman on top, she told trial prosecutor Bernie de la Rionda during a 2 1/2-minute recorded session.

"I know after seeing the TV of what's happening, comparing their sizes, I think Zimmerman was definitely on top because of his size," she said.

Witness 6

This witness lived a few feet from where Trayvon and Zimmerman had their fight. On the night of the shooting, he told Serino he saw a black man on top of a lighter-skinned man "just throwing down blows on the guy, MMA-style," a reference to mixed martial arts.

He also said the one calling for help was "the one being beat up," a reference to Zimmerman.

But three weeks later, when he was interviewed by an FDLE agent, the man said he was no longer sure which one called for help.

"I truly can't tell who, after thinking about it, was yelling for help just because it was so dark out on that sidewalk," he said.

He also said he was no longer sure Trayvon was throwing punches. The teenager may have simply been keeping Zimmerman pinned to the ground, he said.

He did not equivocate, though, about who was on top.

"The black guy was on top," he said.

Witness 13

He is important because he talked to Zimmerman and watched the way he behaved immediately after the shooting, before police arrived.

After this neighbor heard gunfire, he went outside and spotted Zimmerman standing there "blood on the back of his head," he told Sanford police the night of the shooting.

Zimmerman told him that Trayvon "was beating up on me, so I had to shoot him," the witness told Serino. The Neighborhood Watch captain then asked the witness to call his wife, Shellie Zimmerman, and tell her what happened.

In two subsequent interviews about a month later — one with an FDLE investigator and one with de la Rionda — the witness described Zimmerman's demeanor in greater detail, adding that he spoke as if the shooting were no big deal.

Zimmerman's tone, the witness said, was "not like 'I can't believe I just shot someone!' it was more like, 'Just tell my wife I shot somebody…' like it was nothing."

Those witnesses are likely to be interviewed at least once more before Zimmerman's trial. Defense attorneys in Florida routinely question witnesses under oath as they prepare for trial.

Reply #24 posted 05/22/12 12:44pm

Musicslave

DiminutiveRocker said:

2elijah said:

That's the question that needs to be asked. Furthermore, he had to be further away from TM, when he shot him, so the bs that GZ thought his life was in danger, is bs, because if TM was pummeling or choking him to the point GZ either couldn't break from TM's grasp or was gasping for air, then when did GZ free himself to the point he was able to shoot TM, without TM's blood on his clothes? hmm There had to be sufficient space between the two, that gave GZ time to pull out his gun and shoot TM in his chest. Had he shot him if TM was on top of him, then there would have been blood spattered all over GZ. His story doesn't hold up at all. Way too many loopholes, and he's using the SYG law to cover up what he did.

Sadly, though, I agree with others that he may go free of this tragedy. It is also sad how some in the media, made the victim out to be the agressor, when he was the one being pursued or basically hunted down by GZ, who ended up killing TM, because he probably knew he could get away with it.

There are still so many questions left uanswered because not allthe evidnece has been revealed. While it's certainly a possibility GZ might get off... I hope that at least the manslaughter charge will stick.

Based on his story and the injuries he incurred - I do not believe for one minute that GZ's life was in danger that night.

nod Even O'Mara said that only half of the evidene have been released. People really need to chill.

Corey said this weekend that evidence released so far is not the sum total of her case.

"What the general public has to remember and the media has to remember is that there is a lot we cannot release by law," Corey said.

Reply #25 posted 05/22/12 12:52pm

rudedog

DiminutiveRocker said:

There are still so many questions left uanswered because not allthe evidnece has been revealed. While it's certainly a possibility GZ might get off... I hope that at least the manslaughter charge will stick.

Based on his story and the injuries he incurred - I do not believe for one minute that GZ's life was in danger that night.

Agreed!! Those injuries were not life-threatening. If he can get up and walk and not need a hospital the same night, he did NOT just nearly escape death. A witness said he was very blasé about the whole thing afterwards. GZ had JUST killed someone, yet he's having a candid conversation about calling his wife to tell her he just killed someone. Jesus, no compassion, no remorse.

"The voter is less important than the man who provides money to the candidate," - Former Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens
Rudedog no no no!
Reply #26 posted 05/22/12 1:16pm

Musicslave

rudedog said:

DiminutiveRocker said:

There are still so many questions left uanswered because not allthe evidnece has been revealed. While it's certainly a possibility GZ might get off... I hope that at least the manslaughter charge will stick.

Based on his story and the injuries he incurred - I do not believe for one minute that GZ's life was in danger that night.

Agreed!! Those injuries were not life-threatening. If he can get up and walk and not need a hospital the same night, he did NOT just nearly escape death. A witness said he was very blasé about the whole thing afterwards. GZ had JUST killed someone, yet he's having a candid conversation about calling his wife to tell her he just killed someone. Jesus, no compassion, no remorse.

I think that decision to not go to the hospital will come back to haunt him. It weakens his case. To me it says that the night of the incident, you didn't feel like your injuries were that severe. You can't decline further medical treatment from the hospital and then claim that your life was in danger later. For him to refuse further treatment, he more than likely had to tell the EMT's that he was fine. What a contradiction! If it was really that bad, his ass would have been unconscious, with pieces of flesh hanging from the back of his head with massive bleeding. Dude didn't even need a band-aid....lol Needless to say, he was far from becoming the vegetable his brother and father made him out to be.

Reply #27 posted 05/22/12 5:15pm

2elijah

Musicslave said:

rudedog said:

Agreed!! Those injuries were not life-threatening. If he can get up and walk and not need a hospital the same night, he did NOT just nearly escape death. A witness said he was very blasé about the whole thing afterwards. GZ had JUST killed someone, yet he's having a candid conversation about calling his wife to tell her he just killed someone. Jesus, no compassion, no remorse.

I think that decision to not go to the hospital will come back to haunt him. It weakens his case. To me it says that the night of the incident, you didn't feel like your injuries were that severe. You can't decline further medical treatment from the hospital and then claim that your life was in danger later. For him to refuse further treatment, he more than likely had to tell the EMT's that he was fine. What a contradiction! If it was really that bad, his ass would have been unconscious, with pieces of flesh hanging from the back of his head with massive bleeding. Dude didn't even need a band-aid....lol Needless to say, he was far from becoming the vegetable his brother and father made him out to be.

Good point. If someone claims their life was threatened to the point they were seconds from death's door, but then refuse medical attention, how threatened were they really? If anyone's life was threatened, it was definitely TM's and he had every right to wonder why GZ was following him. The crazy thing is how GZ actually pursued TM, when TM ran, and when TM thought he got away from GZ, only to look back and still see GZ pursuing him. That right there tells you TM had every right to be concerned as to why GZ was following him.

Reply #28 posted 05/22/12 5:56pm

2elijah

DiminutiveRocker said:

2elijah said:

That's the question that needs to be asked. Furthermore, he had to be further away from TM, when he shot him, so the bs that GZ thought his life was in danger, is bs, because if TM was pummeling or choking him to the point GZ either couldn't break from TM's grasp or was gasping for air, then when did GZ free himself to the point he was able to shoot TM, without TM's blood on his clothes? hmm There had to be sufficient space between the two, that gave GZ time to pull out his gun and shoot TM in his chest. Had he shot him if TM was on top of him, then there would have been blood spattered all over GZ. His story doesn't hold up at all. Way too many loopholes, and he's using the SYG law to cover up what he did.

Sadly, though, I agree with others that he may go free of this tragedy. It is also sad how some in the media, made the victim out to be the agressor, when he was the one being pursued or basically hunted down by GZ, who ended up killing TM, because he probably knew he could get away with it.

There are still so many questions left uanswered because not allthe evidnece has been revealed. While it's certainly a possibility GZ might get off... I hope that at least the manslaughter charge will stick.

Based on his story and the injuries he incurred - I do not believe for one minute that GZ's life was in danger that night.

I hear you. I just don't get how there was no large amounts of blood on GZ if he actually shot TM while they were in the midst of a fist fight. It seems if TM really had GZ's life in real danger to the point where he was going into unconsciousness, then how did GZ have enough energy to pull out a gun and shoot, and then no blood from TM on him? GZ had to have been able to be a few feet apart before shooting TM, which is the answer to why there was no blood shown on GZ's clothes.

This also shows that GZ had time to walk away from it, but chose to use his gun. I believe it was Marcia Clarke who stated on Democracy Now, (paraphrasing) that marijuana doesn't make one 'aggressive', and that the marijuana that was found in TM's system could have been there from days ago. She also stated that it would be a weak defense for GZ to use as his defense, to say his life was threatened by TM.

Reply #29 posted 05/22/12 8:52pm

free2bfreeda

Musicslave said:

Oh...and thanks to the mod gods for allowing us to continue our conversation! cool

yeahthat

one day a child hugged the earth & whispered 2 her,"I wish people would realize every x a bomb is launched & hits ur surface, it's like a major injury 2 u." i know war hurts u. :" the earth rumbled softly n reply, then cried a massive storm(c)
Reply #30 posted 05/22/12 8:54pm

free2bfreeda

2elijah said:

If someone claims their life was threatened to the point they were seconds from death's door, but then refuse medical attention, how threatened were they really? If anyone's life was threatened, it was definitely TM's and he had every right to wonder why GZ was following him. The crazy thing is how GZ actually pursued TM, when TM ran, and when TM thought he got away from GZ, only to look back and still see GZ pursuing him. That right there tells you TM had every right to be concerned as to why GZ was following him.

i'm so agreeing with you on this. nod

one day a child hugged the earth & whispered 2 her,"I wish people would realize every x a bomb is launched & hits ur surface, it's like a major injury 2 u." i know war hurts u. :" the earth rumbled softly n reply, then cried a massive storm(c)
Reply #31 posted 05/23/12 4:44pm

babynoz

Did Zim feel that he, moreso than the cops was better qualified to mete out justice? Hmmm...does this demostrate a basis for his vigilante mentality or does it help the defense?

Posted on Wed, May. 23, 2012

Zimmerman rode with cops, ripped department

This Feb. 27, 2012 photo released by the State Attorney's Office shows George Zimmerman, the neighborhood†watch volunteer who shot Trayvon Martin. The photo and reports were among evidence released by prosecutors that also includes calls to police, video and numerous other documents. The package was received by defense lawyers earlier this week and released to the media on Thursday, May 17, 2012.
This Feb. 27, 2012 photo released by the State Attorney's Office shows George Zimmerman, the neighborhood†watch volunteer who shot Trayvon Martin.
The photo and reports were among evidence released by prosecutors that also includes calls to police, video and numerous other documents. The package was received by defense lawyers earlier this week and released to the media on Thursday, May 17, 2012.
A year before George Zimmerman killed a Miami Gardens teenager, he stood before a City Hall community forum with a grievance: Sanford cops are lazy, he told the then-mayor elect.

And he should know: Zimmerman, a community college criminal justice major, said he went on ride-alongs with the Sanford Police.

“And what I saw was disgusting,” Zimmerman said, according to a recording of the January 2011 meeting obtained by The Miami Herald. “The officer showed me his favorite hiding spots for taking naps, explained to me that he doesn’t carry a long gun in his vehicle because, in his words, ‘anything that requires a long gun requires a lot of paperwork, and you’re going to find me as far away from it.’

“He took two lunch breaks and attended a going-away party for one of his fellow officers.”

Zimmerman’s public lambasting of the police department and its outgoing chief is rich with irony: A year later, the new chief took a national beating over how the department handled Zimmerman’s shooting of high school junior Trayvon Martin. The recording raises new questions about whether the neighborhood watch volunteer might have received preferential treatment the night of the shooting because he was familiar to officers in the department — or if any of the officers who took him into custody were the among those he criticized.

The department was widely condemned for letting Zimmerman go home after being questioned. From the start, attorneys for Trayvon’s family said that Zimmerman was a wannabe cop, protected by the “blue wall.”

Sanford Police Chief Bill Lee denied at the time knowing Zimmerman, saying he had no relationship with the police department. City records show Lee exchanged emails with Zimmerman last year, when the neighborhood watch volunteer wrote to the chief to praise the department’s volunteer program coordinator.

A video released last week by the State Attorney prosecuting the case shows Zimmerman freely walked about the police station unescorted three days after the shooting.

“The deeper questions here are, what are the relationships?” said Natalie Jackson, an attorney for Trayvon’s family. “We have always had a concern about the relationships.”

Sanford Police said they have no records showing who Zimmerman rode along with, or if it ever even happened. Zimmerman applied to the ride-along in March 2010. His application was approved by the top brass of the department, records show, even though a background check showed Zimmerman had a criminal history, though no convictions.

On his application, Zimmerman said he wanted to go on the ride-along to “solidify my interest in a career in law enforcement.”

Interim Police Chief Richard Myers said in a statement Wednesday it would be “inappropriate” to speculate or come to conclusions about Zimmerman’s comments at the forum.

“Neither the city manager nor the interim police chief were with the City of Sanford at the time the recording was made, and neither were here during the tenure of the former chief,’’ Myers said. “As a police chief I embrace the notion that transparency helps build public trust, but in this case, the need to preserve the sanctity of a criminal prosecution, for both the prosecutor and the defense requires us to eschew making any comments that could taint the process.”

The community forum Zimmerman spoke at was called by Sanford’s mayor, Jeff Triplett, who at that time had yet to officially take office. The forum took place in the wake of a scandal involving the son of a police lieutenant, Justin Collison, who was captured on video punching a homeless man named Sherman Ware.

A month went by after the December 2010 attack before any arrests were made. On the same day 21-year-old Collison turned himself in, Police Chief Brian Tooley was forced out.

At the community meeting, Zimmerman also raised concerns about whether Tooley should receive his pension.

“I would like to state that the law is written in black and white and it should not and cannot be enforced in the gray for those who are in the thin blue line,” Zimmerman said.

This article will be updated as more information becomes available.




"Success has a great tendency to conceal and throw a veil over the evil of men"....Demosthenes
Reply #32 posted 05/23/12 5:26pm

free2bfreeda

babynoz said:

Did Zim feel that he, moreso than the cops was better qualified to mete out justice? Hmmm...does this demostrate a basis for his vigilante mentality or does it help the defense?

Posted on Wed, May. 23, 2012

Zimmerman rode with cops, ripped department

This article will be updated as more information becomes available.




Row Of Do... ummm hmmm, things are falling together like dominoes in a row for GZ. it's just a matter of time b4 all the evidence and surprise witness places him in the row as the last domino about to take the fall. imo GZ will be found guilty as charged.

[Edited 5/23/12 17:27pm]

one day a child hugged the earth & whispered 2 her,"I wish people would realize every x a bomb is launched & hits ur surface, it's like a major injury 2 u." i know war hurts u. :" the earth rumbled softly n reply, then cried a massive storm(c)
Reply #33 posted 05/23/12 7:06pm

babynoz

free2bfreeda said:

babynoz said:

Did Zim feel that he, moreso than the cops was better qualified to mete out justice? Hmmm...does this demostrate a basis for his vigilante mentality or does it help the defense?

Posted on Wed, May. 23, 2012

Zimmerman rode with cops, ripped department

This article will be updated as more information becomes available.




Row Of Do... ummm hmmm, things are falling together like dominoes in a row for GZ. it's just a matter of time b4 all the evidence and surprise witness places him in the row as the last domino about to take the fall. imo GZ will be found guilty as charged.

[Edited 5/23/12 17:27pm]

It really makes me wonder if his low opinion of the cops is one of the reasons he thought it was appropriate to take matters into his own hands? I also wondered if they were reluctant to lean on him too hard because he has something on some of them? I hope we get to trial in this case because it looks like a lot of things have yet to be revealed.

"Success has a great tendency to conceal and throw a veil over the evil of men"....Demosthenes
Reply #34 posted 05/23/12 7:16pm

babynoz

Musicslave said:

Looks like some of the witnesses have changed their stories....

http://articles.orlandose...fdle-agent

Several George Zimmerman witnesses change their accounts

By Rene Stutzman and Jeff Weiner, Orlando Sentinel


2:51 p.m. EST, May 22, 2012

Evidence released last week in the second-degree murder case against George Zimmerman shows four key witnesses made major changes in what they say they saw and heard the night he fatally shot 17-year-old Trayvon Martin in Sanford.

Three changed their stories in ways that may damage Zimmerman. A fourth abandoned her initial story, that she saw one person chasing another. Now, she says, she saw a single figure running.

Here are the key ways in which their stories changed.

Witness 2

A young woman who lives in the Retreat at Twin Lakes community where Trayvon was shot, was interviewed twice by Sanford police and once by the Florida Department of Law Enforcement.

She told authorities that she had taken out her contact lenses just before the incident. In her first recorded interview with Sanford police four days after the shooting, she told lead Investigator Chris Serino, "I saw two guys running. Couldn't tell you who was in front, who was behind."

She stepped away from her window and when she looked again, she "saw a fistfight. Just fists. I don't know who was hitting who."

A week later, she added a detail when talking again to Serino: During the chase, the two figures had been 10 feet apart.

That all changed when she was re-interviewed March 20 by a Florida Department of Law Enforcement agent. That time, she recalled catching a glimpse of just one running figure, she told FDLE Investigator John Batchelor, and she heard the person more than saw him.

"I couldn't tell you if it was a man, a woman, a kid, black or white. I couldn't tell you because it was dark and because I didn't have my contacts on or glasses. … I just know I saw a person out there."

Witness 12

A young mother, who is also a neighbor in the townhome community, never gave a recorded interview to Sanford police, according to prosecution records released last week. She first sat down for an audio-recorded interview with an FDLE agent March 20, more than three weeks after the shooting.

During that session, she said she "I don't know which one. … All I saw when they were on the ground was dark colors," she said.

Six days later, however, she was sure: It was Zimmerman on top, she told trial prosecutor Bernie de la Rionda during a 2 1/2-minute recorded session.

"I know after seeing the TV of what's happening, comparing their sizes, I think Zimmerman was definitely on top because of his size," she said.

Witness 6

This witness lived a few feet from where Trayvon and Zimmerman had their fight. On the night of the shooting, he told Serino he saw a black man on top of a lighter-skinned man "just throwing down blows on the guy, MMA-style," a reference to mixed martial arts.

He also said the one calling for help was "the one being beat up," a reference to Zimmerman.

But three weeks later, when he was interviewed by an FDLE agent, the man said he was no longer sure which one called for help.

"I truly can't tell who, after thinking about it, was yelling for help just because it was so dark out on that sidewalk," he said.

He also said he was no longer sure Trayvon was throwing punches. The teenager may have simply been keeping Zimmerman pinned to the ground, he said.

He did not equivocate, though, about who was on top.

"The black guy was on top," he said.

Witness 13

He is important because he talked to Zimmerman and watched the way he behaved immediately after the shooting, before police arrived.

After this neighbor heard gunfire, he went outside and spotted Zimmerman standing there "blood on the back of his head," he told Sanford police the night of the shooting.

Zimmerman told him that Trayvon "was beating up on me, so I had to shoot him," the witness told Serino. The Neighborhood Watch captain then asked the witness to call his wife, Shellie Zimmerman, and tell her what happened.

In two subsequent interviews about a month later — one with an FDLE investigator and one with de la Rionda — the witness described Zimmerman's demeanor in greater detail, adding that he spoke as if the shooting were no big deal.

Zimmerman's tone, the witness said, was "not like 'I can't believe I just shot someone!' it was more like, 'Just tell my wife I shot somebody…' like it was nothing."

Those witnesses are likely to be interviewed at least once more before Zimmerman's trial. Defense attorneys in Florida routinely question witnesses under oath as they prepare for trial.

Thanks for the info.

This is the problem with witnesses as I was telling you in the other thread. Witness testimony is one of the most difficult things to coordinate even with a simple traffic accident, much less a high profile case.

Even if ten people saw the exact same thing you still might get different accounts of what happened and the more time passes, the worse it gets. There's gonna be a bazillion depositions taken in this case.

"Success has a great tendency to conceal and throw a veil over the evil of men"....Demosthenes
Reply #35 posted 05/24/12 1:33pm

mask

^Why must you re-quote all that text again in your post?

Act like you have a little common sense.

Reply #36 posted 05/24/12 3:02pm

DiminutiveRocker

mask said:

^Why must you re-quote all that text again in your post?

Act like you have a little common sense.

^ Oh, I for one like the re-quote - then I don't have to scroll up and see the original post - especially when threads get long! lol

I've heard that eye witnesses are not a sure thing adn it's easy for the opposing attorney to attack their credibility on the stand.

I wonder if Zimmerman is now wishing that he would not have waived his right to a speedy trial - these "witnesses" will now have several months if not years to remember what happened that night. I can't see how this is a good thing for the defense.

Consider the rights of others before your own feelings, and the feelings of others before your own rights.
~ John Wooden
Reply #37 posted 05/30/12 7:10am

Musicslave

http://www.cnn.com/2012/0...?hpt=hp_c2

Excerpts from CNN article:

Trayvon Martin shooting wasn't a case of racial profiling

By Mark NeJame, CNN Contributor
updated 9:09 AM EDT, Wed May 30, 2012

"Barring new facts or possibly a more detailed analysis of Zimmerman's previous calls, there doesn't appear to be any evidence or support for the supposition that bigotry or prejudice played a role in Zimmerman's shooting of Martin.

This doesn't mean Martin had to die. Would Zimmerman have been so bold if he wasn't carrying a gun? Likely not, and I've argued before that gun laws need to be reviewed in light of this case. This was the inevitable deadly consequence when an altercation occurred and a gun was legally allowed to be in a public place.

Without establishing that the killing was racially motivated, any claim that Zimmerman committed second-degree murder in shooting Martin will not survive. Interestingly, the state in its charging affidavit simply claimed Zimmerman "profiled" Martin, not that he racially profiled him.

This allows the state to keep such a claim open-ended, likely knowing early on that it couldn't sustain the burden of proving racial profiling. More and more, this case looks like it will be thrown out in criminal court and eventually be headed to civil court."

I highlighted the part of this article that disturbs me the most. He cancels his own argument when he points out that state never officially charged him with racial profiling. The state does not have to prove racial profiling in order to prove 2nd degree murder. O'Mara's media surrogates should know better. lol

The mere fact that GZ deemed TM "up to no good" and associated him with all the other "assholes who always get away" is proof alone of criminal profiling to me. To profile someone as a criminal when they're not engaged in criminal activity is unjustified and wrong. They're trying they're best to reduce this to a civil case.

Reply #38 posted 05/30/12 7:26am

2elijah

Musicslave said:

http://www.cnn.com/2012/0...?hpt=hp_c2

Excerpts from CNN article:

Trayvon Martin shooting wasn't a case of racial profiling

By Mark NeJame, CNN Contributor
updated 9:09 AM EDT, Wed May 30, 2012

"Barring new facts or possibly a more detailed analysis of Zimmerman's previous calls, there doesn't appear to be any evidence or support for the supposition that bigotry or prejudice played a role in Zimmerman's shooting of Martin.

This doesn't mean Martin had to die. Would Zimmerman have been so bold if he wasn't carrying a gun? Likely not, and I've argued before that gun laws need to be reviewed in light of this case. This was the inevitable deadly consequence when an altercation occurred and a gun was legally allowed to be in a public place.

Without establishing that the killing was racially motivated, any claim that Zimmerman committed second-degree murder in shooting Martin will not survive. Interestingly, the state in its charging affidavit simply claimed Zimmerman "profiled" Martin, not that he racially profiled him.

This allows the state to keep such a claim open-ended, likely knowing early on that it couldn't sustain the burden of proving racial profiling. More and more, this case looks like it will be thrown out in criminal court and eventually be headed to civil court."

I highlighted the part of this article that disturbs me the most. He cancels his own argument when he points out that state never officially charged him with racial profiling. The state does not have to prove racial profiling in order to prove 2nd degree murder. O'Mara's media surrogates should know better. lol

The mere fact that GZ deemed TM "up to no good" and associated him with all the other "assholes who always get away" is proof alone of criminal profiling to me. To profile someone as a criminal when they're not engaged in criminal activity is unjustified and wrong. They're trying they're best to reduce this to a civil case.

Thanks for keeping us updated and I agree with you. As I and others stated before, the outcome of this case will not suprise me.

Reply #39 posted 05/30/12 7:34am

Musicslave

2elijah said:

Musicslave said:

http://www.cnn.com/2012/0...?hpt=hp_c2

Excerpts from CNN article:

Trayvon Martin shooting wasn't a case of racial profiling

By Mark NeJame, CNN Contributor
updated 9:09 AM EDT, Wed May 30, 2012

"Barring new facts or possibly a more detailed analysis of Zimmerman's previous calls, there doesn't appear to be any evidence or support for the supposition that bigotry or prejudice played a role in Zimmerman's shooting of Martin.

This doesn't mean Martin had to die. Would Zimmerman have been so bold if he wasn't carrying a gun? Likely not, and I've argued before that gun laws need to be reviewed in light of this case. This was the inevitable deadly consequence when an altercation occurred and a gun was legally allowed to be in a public place.

Without establishing that the killing was racially motivated, any claim that Zimmerman committed second-degree murder in shooting Martin will not survive. Interestingly, the state in its charging affidavit simply claimed Zimmerman "profiled" Martin, not that he racially profiled him.

This allows the state to keep such a claim open-ended, likely knowing early on that it couldn't sustain the burden of proving racial profiling. More and more, this case looks like it will be thrown out in criminal court and eventually be headed to civil court."

I highlighted the part of this article that disturbs me the most. He cancels his own argument when he points out that state never officially charged him with racial profiling. The state does not have to prove racial profiling in order to prove 2nd degree murder. O'Mara's media surrogates should know better. lol

The mere fact that GZ deemed TM "up to no good" and associated him with all the other "assholes who always get away" is proof alone of criminal profiling to me. To profile someone as a criminal when they're not engaged in criminal activity is unjustified and wrong. They're trying they're best to reduce this to a civil case.

Thanks for keeping us updated and I agree with you. As I and others stated before, the outcome of this case will not suprise me.

You're welcome. At this rate, I'm not even anticipating the actual trial. I'm more looking forward to the evidentiary hearing because by then O'Mara would have seen everything the state has. If he tries to cop a plea deal after reviewing the discovery that will speak volumes.

Do you think this case will go to trial and GZ will be found not guilty of 2nd degree murder or do think the charges will be dropped altogether before making it to trial? Just curious...

Reply #40 posted 05/30/12 10:06am

2elijah

Musicslave said:

2elijah said:

Thanks for keeping us updated and I agree with you. As I and others stated before, the outcome of this case will not suprise me.

You're welcome. At this rate, I'm not even anticipating the actual trial. I'm more looking forward to the evidentiary hearing because by then O'Mara would have seen everything the state has. If he tries to cop a plea deal after reviewing the discovery that will speak volumes.

Do you think this case will go to trial and GZ will be found not guilty of 2nd degree murder or do think the charges will be dropped altogether before making it to trial? Just curious...

Not sure if it will even make it to trial at this point. I also can't see how anyone can say he didn't profile TM as a possible criminal, when all the evidence is in the phone call GZ made, and the way he 'sized' TM up as one, to the 911 operator, even though TM wasn't committing any crime. He based his assumptions on how TM appeared to him, physically or else why would he even assume there was a possibility he was a criminal in the first place, had GZ not draw up his own suspicions of TM, even though no crime was being committed by TM?

I cannot say at this point, if it will even get to trial but if it does, I don't see how all the charges could be dropped. I mean could he be charged with manslaughter? I think the curiosity is why did he continue to pursue TM, if he claims TM looks like he was up to no good? I mean why would you follow or pursue someone on that basis alone, and if you feltthat individual may be a threat to your life? I mean who does that? TM was not committing any crime just for walking down the street.

GZ pretty much caused the altercation to happen, and he should take responsibility for that, because had he not followed or even approached TM, TM would be alive today, and no altercation would have taken place.

Reply #41 posted 05/30/12 12:21pm

DiminutiveRocker

2elijah said:

Musicslave said:

You're welcome. At this rate, I'm not even anticipating the actual trial. I'm more looking forward to the evidentiary hearing because by then O'Mara would have seen everything the state has. If he tries to cop a plea deal after reviewing the discovery that will speak volumes.

Do you think this case will go to trial and GZ will be found not guilty of 2nd degree murder or do think the charges will be dropped altogether before making it to trial? Just curious...

Not sure if it will even make it to trial at this point. I also can't see how anyone can say he didn't profile TM as a possible criminal, when all the evidence is in the phone call GZ made, and the way he 'sized' TM up as one, to the 911 operator, even though TM wasn't committing any crime. He based his assumptions on how TM appeared to him, physically or else why would he even assume there was a possibility he was a criminal in the first place, had GZ not draw up his own suspicions of TM, even though no crime was being committed by TM?

I cannot say at this point, if it will even get to trial but if it does, I don't see how all the charges could be dropped. I mean could he be charged with manslaughter? I think the curiosity is why did he continue to pursue TM, if he claims TM looks like he was up to no good? I mean why would you follow or pursue someone on that basis alone, and if you feltthat individual may be a threat to your life? I mean who does that? TM was not committing any crime just for walking down the street.

GZ pretty much caused the altercation to happen, and he should take responsibility for that, because had he not followed or even approached TM, TM would be alive today, and no altercation would have taken place.

hmmm Well, from what I've heard, O'mara is famous for copping pleas when it some to the SGY thing. I would not be surprised if he did in this case as well. It may very well go the manslaughter route.

Consider the rights of others before your own feelings, and the feelings of others before your own rights.
~ John Wooden
Reply #42 posted 05/30/12 3:44pm

babynoz

I wouldn't be surprised if the case ended with a lesser charge and a plea deal.

"Success has a great tendency to conceal and throw a veil over the evil of men"....Demosthenes
Reply #43 posted 05/30/12 4:26pm

OnlyNDaUsa

babynoz said:

I wouldn't be surprised if the case ended with a lesser charge and a plea deal.

yup i said that the day he was charged... well maybe not a plea unless it is down to manslaughter or felony assault

Living with a disability is not the Wurst thing in the word: Knowingly Mocking someone with one is far Wurst!.
Reply #44 posted 05/30/12 4:29pm

OnlyNDaUsa

DiminutiveRocker said:

2elijah said:

Not sure if it will even make it to trial at this point. I also can't see how anyone can say he didn't profile TM as a possible criminal, when all the evidence is in the phone call GZ made, and the way he 'sized' TM up as one, to the 911 operator, even though TM wasn't committing any crime. He based his assumptions on how TM appeared to him, physically or else why would he even assume there was a possibility he was a criminal in the first place, had GZ not draw up his own suspicions of TM, even though no crime was being committed by TM?

I cannot say at this point, if it will even get to trial but if it does, I don't see how all the charges could be dropped. I mean could he be charged with manslaughter? I think the curiosity is why did he continue to pursue TM, if he claims TM looks like he was up to no good? I mean why would you follow or pursue someone on that basis alone, and if you feltthat individual may be a threat to your life? I mean who does that? TM was not committing any crime just for walking down the street.

GZ pretty much caused the altercation to happen, and he should take responsibility for that, because had he not followed or even approached TM, TM would be alive today, and no altercation would have taken place.

hmmm Well, from what I've heard, O'mara is famous for copping pleas when it some to the SGY thing. I would not be surprised if he did in this case as well. It may very well go the manslaughter route.

the 2nd degree will be lowered... i suspect they will drop to manslaughter with a plea down to some form of assault at worst.

Living with a disability is not the Wurst thing in the word: Knowingly Mocking someone with one is far Wurst!.
Reply #45 posted 05/31/12 2:29pm

Astasheiks

2elijah said:

Musicslave said:

You're welcome. At this rate, I'm not even anticipating the actual trial. I'm more looking forward to the evidentiary hearing because by then O'Mara would have seen everything the state has. If he tries to cop a plea deal after reviewing the discovery that will speak volumes.

Do you think this case will go to trial and GZ will be found not guilty of 2nd degree murder or do think the charges will be dropped altogether before making it to trial? Just curious...

Not sure if it will even make it to trial at this point. I also can't see how anyone can say he didn't profile TM as a possible criminal, when all the evidence is in the phone call GZ made, and the way he 'sized' TM up as one, to the 911 operator, even though TM wasn't committing any crime. He based his assumptions on how TM appeared to him, physically or else why would he even assume there was a possibility he was a criminal in the first place, had GZ not draw up his own suspicions of TM, even though no crime was being committed by TM?

I cannot say at this point, if it will even get to trial but if it does, I don't see how all the charges could be dropped. I mean could he be charged with manslaughter? I think the curiosity is why did he continue to pursue TM, if he claims TM looks like he was up to no good? I mean why would you follow or pursue someone on that basis alone, and if you feltthat individual may be a threat to your life? I mean who does that? TM was not committing any crime just for walking down the street.

GZ pretty much caused the altercation to happen, and he should take responsibility for that, because had he not followed or even approached TM, TM would be alive today, and no altercation would have taken place.

When I see that video of Trayvon buying that candy and tea; and then moments later wound up dead, makes me want to fishslap GZ arse personally. mad

Reply #46 posted 05/31/12 3:29pm

OnlyNDaUsa

Astasheiks said:

When I see that video of Trayvon buying that candy and tea; and then moments later wound up dead, makes me want to fishslap GZ arse personally. mad

yeah i had a simular emotional reaction. I hope that video is not allowed in to evidence as it has zero to do with the case. I suspect however it will be...

Living with a disability is not the Wurst thing in the word: Knowingly Mocking someone with one is far Wurst!.
Reply #47 posted 06/01/12 11:13am

Musicslave

Prosecutors: Revoke Zimmerman's bond

By the CNN Wire Staff
Excerpt:

"(CNN) -- Prosecutors in Florida asked a judge Friday to revoke bond for George Zimmerman, who is charged with second-degree murder in the death of Trayvon Martin.

Prosecutors argued that Zimmerman "misrepresented, misled and deceived the court" during an April bond hearing about whether he had a U.S. passport and about his family's financial circumstances."

I thought the state was going to let that ride. I stand corrected. Although I still don't think the judge is going to budge on GZ's bond.

[Edited 6/1/12 11:16am]

Reply #48 posted 06/01/12 11:47am

Musicslave

Judge Revokes Bond for Zimmerman. Ordered to report back to jail within 48 hrs.

Reply #49 posted 06/01/12 12:01pm

2elijah

Musicslave said:

Judge Revokes Bond for Zimmerman. Ordered to report back to jail within 48 hrs.

Whoa! I've been missing out on the recent news. Thanks for posting.

Reply #50 posted 06/01/12 12:05pm

2elijah

Astasheiks said:

2elijah said:

Not sure if it will even make it to trial at this point. I also can't see how anyone can say he didn't profile TM as a possible criminal, when all the evidence is in the phone call GZ made, and the way he 'sized' TM up as one, to the 911 operator, even though TM wasn't committing any crime. He based his assumptions on how TM appeared to him, physically or else why would he even assume there was a possibility he was a criminal in the first place, had GZ not draw up his own suspicions of TM, even though no crime was being committed by TM?

I cannot say at this point, if it will even get to trial but if it does, I don't see how all the charges could be dropped. I mean could he be charged with manslaughter? I think the curiosity is why did he continue to pursue TM, if he claims TM looks like he was up to no good? I mean why would you follow or pursue someone on that basis alone, and if you feltthat individual may be a threat to your life? I mean who does that? TM was not committing any crime just for walking down the street.

GZ pretty much caused the altercation to happen, and he should take responsibility for that, because had he not followed or even approached TM, TM would be alive today, and no altercation would have taken place.

When I see that video of Trayvon buying that candy and tea; and then moments later wound up dead, makes me want to fishslap GZ arse personally. mad

I don't think I want to see that vid. I still say it's a shame he was killed just for walking through a neighborhood, and was followed and assumed to be a criminal, when he wasn't doing anything wrong, but walking home. Now he's dead. Looks like GZ's lies are catching up to him, but he'll probably be released again soon.

Reply #51 posted 06/01/12 12:07pm

kibbles

OnlyNDaUsa said:

Astasheiks said:

When I see that video of Trayvon buying that candy and tea; and then moments later wound up dead, makes me want to fishslap GZ arse personally. mad

yeah i had a simular emotional reaction. I hope that video is not allowed in to evidence as it has zero to do with the case. I suspect however it will be...

i disagree. i think has everything to do with the case and it will be allowed. it gives a window into martin's behavior, the behavior that zimmerman called 'suspicious'. if the tape doesn't reflect that martin was behaving 'suspiciously', then it calls into question zimmerman's frame of mind and his entire story about martin from the time he saw the young man until the time he killed him.

Reply #52 posted 06/01/12 12:09pm

babynoz

Musicslave said:

Prosecutors: Revoke Zimmerman's bond

By the CNN Wire Staff
Excerpt:

"(CNN) -- Prosecutors in Florida asked a judge Friday to revoke bond for George Zimmerman, who is charged with second-degree murder in the death of Trayvon Martin.

Prosecutors argued that Zimmerman "misrepresented, misled and deceived the court" during an April bond hearing about whether he had a U.S. passport and about his family's financial circumstances."

I thought the state was going to let that ride. I stand corrected. Although I still don't think the judge is going to budge on GZ's bond.

[Edited 6/1/12 11:16am]

The judge just granted the motion and Zim has 48 hours to turn himself in.

I'm surprised...I thought the prosecutor was going to let it slide too. eek

"Success has a great tendency to conceal and throw a veil over the evil of men"....Demosthenes
Reply #53 posted 06/01/12 12:11pm

babynoz

Musicslave said:

Judge Revokes Bond for Zimmerman. Ordered to report back to jail within 48 hrs.

Oopsie! I just posted the same thing, duh

"Success has a great tendency to conceal and throw a veil over the evil of men"....Demosthenes
Reply #54 posted 06/01/12 12:15pm

Musicslave

babynoz said:

Musicslave said:

Judge Revokes Bond for Zimmerman. Ordered to report back to jail within 48 hrs.

Oopsie! I just posted the same thing, duh

No prob. lol

Reply #55 posted 06/01/12 12:23pm

Musicslave

babynoz said:

Musicslave said:

Prosecutors: Revoke Zimmerman's bond

By the CNN Wire Staff
Excerpt:

"(CNN) -- Prosecutors in Florida asked a judge Friday to revoke bond for George Zimmerman, who is charged with second-degree murder in the death of Trayvon Martin.

Prosecutors argued that Zimmerman "misrepresented, misled and deceived the court" during an April bond hearing about whether he had a U.S. passport and about his family's financial circumstances."

I thought the state was going to let that ride. I stand corrected. Although I still don't think the judge is going to budge on GZ's bond.

[Edited 6/1/12 11:16am]

The judge just granted the motion and Zim has 48 hours to turn himself in.

I'm surprised...I thought the prosecutor was going to let it slide too. eek

Maybe it came down the judge being "officially" requested by the state to revoke his bond. Apparently they haven't done that until today. I remember thinking the same day of GZ's initial bond hearing that they were obviously misleading the court. In fact, the state probably could have submitted GZ's statement from his website where he claimed to be the only authorized person who was serving as administrator to the site. He knew full well how much money they had received up to the point of his arrest. (Not to mention the fact that his wife claimed that only his brother was the administrator of the site after his arrest but conveniently "wasn't available" during the hearing.)

There's no telling what other evidence the state is sitting on from his private conversations and text messages that may contradict his statements from that night, days and weeks later. He might have gotten a little too comfortable and cavalier.

One last thing: No judge wants to be disrespected or tolerate contempt in their own courtroom. His integrity would have been questioned if he were to allow GZ to stay out on bond after such evidence being presented.

I'm sure O'Mara will come up with a good excuse for GZ and his wife within the next couple of days. We'll see if this will stick.

[Edited 6/1/12 12:37pm]

Reply #56 posted 06/01/12 12:26pm

Astasheiks

2elijah said:

Astasheiks said:

When I see that video of Trayvon buying that candy and tea; and then moments later wound up dead, makes me want to fishslap GZ arse personally. mad

I don't think I want to see that vid. I still say it's a shame he was killed just for walking through a neighborhood, and was followed and assumed to be a criminal, when he wasn't doing anything wrong, but walking home. Now he's dead. Looks like GZ's lies are catching up to him, but he'll probably be released again soon.

What make you think he'll probably be released again soon?

Reply #57 posted 06/01/12 12:34pm

Astasheiks

Zimmerman's wife "said she had no money, but in fact she did," said prosecutor Bernardo de la Rionda. He pointed to $135,000 in funds the couple had access to that was not disclosed during the hearing.

"It was misleading and I don't know what other words to use except it was a blatant lie," said de la Rionda.

What else has GZ lied about, like what really happened that night!mad

Reply #58 posted 06/01/12 12:38pm

babynoz

Musicslave said:

babynoz said:

The judge just granted the motion and Zim has 48 hours to turn himself in.

I'm surprised...I thought the prosecutor was going to let it slide too. eek

Maybe it came down the judge being "officially" requested by the state to revoke his bond. Apparently they haven't done that until today. I remember thinking the same day of GZ's initial bond hearing that they were obviously misleading the court. In fact, the state probably could have submitted GZ's statement from his website where he claimed to be the only authorized person who was serving as administrator to the site. He knew full well how much money they had received up to the point of his arrest. (Not to mention the fact that his wife claimed that only his brother was the administrator of the site after his arrest but conveniently "wasn't available" during the hearing.)

There's no telling what other evidence the state is sitting on from his private conversations and text messages that may contradict his statements from that night and days and weeks later. He might have gotten a little too comfortable.

[Edited 6/1/12 12:25pm]

The state probably needed time to find evidence that Zim knew about the money. I'm told that paypal sends regular email updates of payments received so they may have needed the time to obtain the paypal records to show that Zim was lying.

I'm sure they have a bunch of evidence that we haven't seen yet. I remember Zim was boasting on that Myspace page about beating the charges in his previous court cases.

"Success has a great tendency to conceal and throw a veil over the evil of men"....Demosthenes
Reply #59 posted 06/01/12 12:40pm

babynoz

It was also discovered that Zim had a second passport in his possession that was not surrendered. eek

"Success has a great tendency to conceal and throw a veil over the evil of men"....Demosthenes
Reply #60 posted 06/01/12 12:43pm

babynoz

kibbles said:

OnlyNDaUsa said:

yeah i had a simular emotional reaction. I hope that video is not allowed in to evidence as it has zero to do with the case. I suspect however it will be...

i disagree. i think has everything to do with the case and it will be allowed. it gives a window into martin's behavior, the behavior that zimmerman called 'suspicious'. if the tape doesn't reflect that martin was behaving 'suspiciously', then it calls into question zimmerman's frame of mind and his entire story about martin from the time he saw the young man until the time he killed him.

I never thought of that but you have a good point.

"Success has a great tendency to conceal and throw a veil over the evil of men"....Demosthenes
Reply #61 posted 06/01/12 12:46pm

Musicslave

babynoz said:

It was also discovered that Zim had a second passport in his possession that was not surrendered. eek

Yeah I saw that too. If he mess around and lose O'Mara for his defense for not being forthcoming and honest about everything, he's screwed before getting to a trial. O'Mara has been the best thing he's had going for him so far, he better make sure he's not "forgetting" anything lol I could easily see his attorney bouncing if there's another "lapse of memory". Afterall, he has a career to consider too. No one wants to be made a fool, whether in private or in public.

From day one this cat seemed like the type of person who thinks they can "beat the system" or is smarter than everyone else.

[Edited 6/1/12 12:49pm]

Reply #62 posted 06/01/12 12:51pm

Musicslave

2elijah said:

Musicslave said:

Judge Revokes Bond for Zimmerman. Ordered to report back to jail within 48 hrs.

Whoa! I've been missing out on the recent news. Thanks for posting.

Nah, you haven't been missing much. Today's news is the biggest news in awhile and that just happened a little over an hour ago. You're up to speed. wink

Reply #63 posted 06/01/12 12:52pm

2elijah

babynoz said:

kibbles said:

i disagree. i think has everything to do with the case and it will be allowed. it gives a window into martin's behavior, the behavior that zimmerman called 'suspicious'. if the tape doesn't reflect that martin was behaving 'suspiciously', then it calls into question zimmerman's frame of mind and his entire story about martin from the time he saw the young man until the time he killed him.

I never thought of that but you have a good point.

Yep, very good point.

Reply #64 posted 06/01/12 12:53pm

2elijah

Musicslave said:

2elijah said:

Whoa! I've been missing out on the recent news. Thanks for posting.

Nah, you haven't been missing much. Today's news is the biggest news in awhile and that just happened a little over an hour ago. You're up to speed. wink

Cool, thanks. smile

Reply #65 posted 06/01/12 12:54pm

babynoz

Musicslave said:

babynoz said:

It was also discovered that Zim had a second passport in his possession that was not surrendered. eek

Yeah I saw that too. If he mess around and lose O'Mara for his defense for not being forthcoming and honest about everything, he's screwed before getting to a trial. O'Mara has been the best thing he's had going for him so far, he better make sure he's not "forgetting" anything lol I could easily see his attorney bouncing if there's another "lapse of memory". Afterall, he has a career to consider too. No one wants to be made a fool, whether in private or in public.

Yup, like I said before, I suspect Zim is the kind of guy who is his own worst enemy. Even those two bozo attorneys he had before got spooked. If he blows it with O'Mara he will be shooting himself in the foot yet again.

"Success has a great tendency to conceal and throw a veil over the evil of men"....Demosthenes
Reply #66 posted 06/01/12 12:55pm

2elijah

babynoz said:

It was also discovered that Zim had a second passport in his possession that was not surrendered. eek

Wow. Somehow this doesn't surprise me.

Reply #67 posted 06/01/12 12:59pm

2elijah

Astasheiks said:

2elijah said:

I don't think I want to see that vid. I still say it's a shame he was killed just for walking through a neighborhood, and was followed and assumed to be a criminal, when he wasn't doing anything wrong, but walking home. Now he's dead. Looks like GZ's lies are catching up to him, but he'll probably be released again soon.

What make you think he'll probably be released again soon?

Guess the way things had been going, but I couid be wrong. like others here are saying, he may 'slip up' or they'll find other things his family lied about, and may just end up staying in until a trial or lose his attorney, if he isn't honest to his attorneys. The guy just seems like a shady character trying to play victim from the start.

Reply #68 posted 06/01/12 12:59pm

Musicslave

babynoz said:

Musicslave said:

Yeah I saw that too. If he mess around and lose O'Mara for his defense for not being forthcoming and honest about everything, he's screwed before getting to a trial. O'Mara has been the best thing he's had going for him so far, he better make sure he's not "forgetting" anything lol I could easily see his attorney bouncing if there's another "lapse of memory". Afterall, he has a career to consider too. No one wants to be made a fool, whether in private or in public.

Yup, like I said before, I suspect Zim is the kind of guy who is his own worst enemy. Even those two bozo attorneys he had before got spooked. If he blows it with O'Mara he will be shooting himself in the foot yet again.

Remember how he went against their counsel and made calls to special prosecutor Angela Corey's office and Sean Hannity? I made a mental note of that and said okay, this guy believes he can beat the system on his own. Too smart for his own good.

Reply #69 posted 06/01/12 1:03pm

babynoz

Musicslave said:

babynoz said:

Yup, like I said before, I suspect Zim is the kind of guy who is his own worst enemy. Even those two bozo attorneys he had before got spooked. If he blows it with O'Mara he will be shooting himself in the foot yet again.

Remember how he went against their counsel and made calls to special prosecutor Angela Corey's office and Sean Hannity? I made a mental note of that and said okay, this guy believes he can beat the system on his own. Too smart for his own good.

nod

"Success has a great tendency to conceal and throw a veil over the evil of men"....Demosthenes
Reply #70 posted 06/01/12 1:04pm

Musicslave

http://www.miamiherald.co...ck-to.html

Judge orders Zimmerman back to jail

George Zimmerman was ordered back to jail on Friday for misleading the court about his access to an Internet fundraising account.


Seminole County Circuit Court Judge Kenneth Lester revoked the bail for Zimmerman — who is facing a second-degree murder charge in the shooting death of 17-year-old Trayvon Martin — after finding that Zimmerman and his wife concealed their access to a $200,000 account during a bond hearing in April.


Zimmerman, who was not present at Friday’s hearing, now must surrender to Seminole County sheriff’s deputies by Sunday.


Prosecutors said they have recordings of phone conversations between Zimmerman and his wife while Zimmerman was in jail in which they discussed moving money from a PayPal account set up to collect money for Zimmerman’s defense. But Zimmerman’s wife testified at her husband’s bond hearing that she was unaware of any additional money available for her husband’s defense — what prosecutors now call a lie.

Reply #71 posted 06/01/12 1:10pm

babynoz

2elijah said:

Astasheiks said:

When I see that video of Trayvon buying that candy and tea; and then moments later wound up dead, makes me want to fishslap GZ arse personally. mad

I don't think I want to see that vid. I still say it's a shame he was killed just for walking through a neighborhood, and was followed and assumed to be a criminal, when he wasn't doing anything wrong, but walking home. Now he's dead. Looks like GZ's lies are catching up to him, but he'll probably be released again soon.

It was so sad to watch but when I think about it Kibbles has a point that a jury seeing this could very well wonder what Zim found so suspicious.

"Success has a great tendency to conceal and throw a veil over the evil of men"....Demosthenes
Reply #72 posted 06/01/12 1:15pm

babynoz

Musicslave said:

http://www.miamiherald.co...ck-to.html

Judge orders Zimmerman back to jail

George Zimmerman was ordered back to jail on Friday for misleading the court about his access to an Internet fundraising account.


Seminole County Circuit Court Judge Kenneth Lester revoked the bail for Zimmerman — who is facing a second-degree murder charge in the shooting death of 17-year-old Trayvon Martin — after finding that Zimmerman and his wife concealed their access to a $200,000 account during a bond hearing in April.


Zimmerman, who was not present at Friday’s hearing, now must surrender to Seminole County sheriff’s deputies by Sunday.


Prosecutors said they have recordings of phone conversations between Zimmerman and his wife while Zimmerman was in jail in which they discussed moving money from a PayPal account set up to collect money for Zimmerman’s defense. But Zimmerman’s wife testified at her husband’s bond hearing that she was unaware of any additional money available for her husband’s defense — what prosecutors now call a lie.

You mean he was dumb enough to discuss it on a call from jail? Like we said...his own worst enemy, disbelief

"Success has a great tendency to conceal and throw a veil over the evil of men"....Demosthenes
Reply #73 posted 06/01/12 1:20pm

Musicslave

babynoz said:

Musicslave said:

Maybe it came down the judge being "officially" requested by the state to revoke his bond. Apparently they haven't done that until today. I remember thinking the same day of GZ's initial bond hearing that they were obviously misleading the court. In fact, the state probably could have submitted GZ's statement from his website where he claimed to be the only authorized person who was serving as administrator to the site. He knew full well how much money they had received up to the point of his arrest. (Not to mention the fact that his wife claimed that only his brother was the administrator of the site after his arrest but conveniently "wasn't available" during the hearing.)

There's no telling what other evidence the state is sitting on from his private conversations and text messages that may contradict his statements from that night and days and weeks later. He might have gotten a little too comfortable.

[Edited 6/1/12 12:25pm]

The state probably needed time to find evidence that Zim knew about the money. I'm told that paypal sends regular email updates of payments received so they may have needed the time to obtain the paypal records to show that Zim was lying.

I'm sure they have a bunch of evidence that we haven't seen yet. I remember Zim was boasting on that Myspace page about beating the charges in his previous court cases.

Now I remember why I thought he'd stay out on bond. It's because when the prosecutors first requested his bond be revoked, Judge Lester dismissed it. I forgot about that. Here's another article....

http://blogs.wsj.com/law/..._news_blog

Excerpt:

"Prosecutors filed a motion earlier Friday asking Judge Kenneth Lester to revoke the bond, arguing that Mr. Zimmerman and his wife misled the court during an April 20 bond hearing. At that hearing, Mr. Zimmernan’s wife testified by phone that she had no money available to pay bond. Mr. Zimmerman’s attorney, Mark O’Mara, made similar statements regarding his client. George Zimmerman at an April 20 bond hearing.

Yet the following week, Mr. O’Mara told Judge Lester at a subsequent hearing that he had been informed that a legal fund created by Mr. Zimmerman contained some $200,000. At the time, prosecutors requested that the bond be revoked, but the judge declined to do so.

At Friday’s hearing, however, assistant state attorney Bernie de la Rionda presented new information. He said prosecutors had reviewed phone calls between Mr. Zimmerman and his wife, made prior to the April 20 bond hearing, in which the two discussed using money from the defense fund to pay his bond.

Mr. Zimmerman couldn’t sit in court “like a potted plant and let his wife testify falsely,” Judge Lester said, clearly displeased at the revelation.

After revoking Mr. Zimmerman’s bond, he ordered the defendant to turn himself in to the Seminole County Sheriff’s Office within 48 hours. He said a hearing would be scheduled for Mr. Zimmerman to explain what transpired to the court.

Reply #74 posted 06/01/12 2:48pm

babynoz

Musicslave said:

babynoz said:

The state probably needed time to find evidence that Zim knew about the money. I'm told that paypal sends regular email updates of payments received so they may have needed the time to obtain the paypal records to show that Zim was lying.

I'm sure they have a bunch of evidence that we haven't seen yet. I remember Zim was boasting on that Myspace page about beating the charges in his previous court cases.

Now I remember why I thought he'd stay out on bond. It's because when the prosecutors first requested his bond be revoked, Judge Lester dismissed it. I forgot about that. Here's another article....

http://blogs.wsj.com/law/..._news_blog

Excerpt:

"Prosecutors filed a motion earlier Friday asking Judge Kenneth Lester to revoke the bond, arguing that Mr. Zimmerman and his wife misled the court during an April 20 bond hearing. At that hearing, Mr. Zimmernan’s wife testified by phone that she had no money available to pay bond. Mr. Zimmerman’s attorney, Mark O’Mara, made similar statements regarding his client. George Zimmerman at an April 20 bond hearing.

Yet the following week, Mr. O’Mara told Judge Lester at a subsequent hearing that he had been informed that a legal fund created by Mr. Zimmerman contained some $200,000. At the time, prosecutors requested that the bond be revoked, but the judge declined to do so.

At Friday’s hearing, however, assistant state attorney Bernie de la Rionda presented new information. He said prosecutors had reviewed phone calls between Mr. Zimmerman and his wife, made prior to the April 20 bond hearing, in which the two discussed using money from the defense fund to pay his bond.

Mr. Zimmerman couldn’t sit in court “like a potted plant and let his wife testify falsely,” Judge Lester said, clearly displeased at the revelation.

After revoking Mr. Zimmerman’s bond, he ordered the defendant to turn himself in to the Seminole County Sheriff’s Office within 48 hours. He said a hearing would be scheduled for Mr. Zimmerman to explain what transpired to the court.

Thanks,

"Success has a great tendency to conceal and throw a veil over the evil of men"....Demosthenes
Reply #75 posted 06/01/12 5:16pm

kibbles

Musicslave said:

http://www.miamiherald.co...ck-to.html

Judge orders Zimmerman back to jail

George Zimmerman was ordered back to jail on Friday for misleading the court about his access to an Internet fundraising account.


Seminole County Circuit Court Judge Kenneth Lester revoked the bail for Zimmerman — who is facing a second-degree murder charge in the shooting death of 17-year-old Trayvon Martin — after finding that Zimmerman and his wife concealed their access to a $200,000 account during a bond hearing in April.


Zimmerman, who was not present at Friday’s hearing, now must surrender to Seminole County sheriff’s deputies by Sunday.


Prosecutors said they have recordings of phone conversations between Zimmerman and his wife while Zimmerman was in jail in which they discussed moving money from a PayPal account set up to collect money for Zimmerman’s defense. But Zimmerman’s wife testified at her husband’s bond hearing that she was unaware of any additional money available for her husband’s defense — what prosecutors now call a lie.

omg, how dumb are these people? why on earth would they think that their phones and certainly the jailhouse phones wouldn't be tapped? like musicslave said, this guy is 'too smart' for his own good.

it all goes along with my observation about the convenience store tape. zimmerman claims trayvon was a 'punk' who was casing the neighborhood and later jumped him. a jury is going to have to evaluate that claim next to what they see of that young man on the tape. zimmerman and his wife claim that they have no money, a full on lie, and he's holding on to a second passport to boot. inconsistencies like this are what this case is going to hinge on. zimmerman has to make that jury believe that he is truthful about what happened that night, that things went the way he say they went. his whole defense depends on his credibility. if the prosecutor can show a pattern of lying on his part, or embellishments, in addition to any forensic, eyewitness or other circumstantial evidence, his defense is in trouble.

[Edited 6/1/12 17:25pm]

Reply #76 posted 06/02/12 7:37am

free2bfreeda

abc

Thumbnail link: George Zimmerman's Bond Revoked: Must Surrender in 48 Hours

Judge orders accused shooter of Florida teen Trayvon Martin to surrender himself in 48 hours.

in this interview with the press, listen to how o'mara skates and weaves as he answers the press about zimmerman's actions. when is the 48hrs over. will gz go back to jail on this monday?

[Edited 6/2/12 7:47am]

one day a child hugged the earth & whispered 2 her,"I wish people would realize every x a bomb is launched & hits ur surface, it's like a major injury 2 u." i know war hurts u. :" the earth rumbled softly n reply, then cried a massive storm(c)
Reply #77 posted 06/02/12 9:20am

imago

I'm about 80%-ish sure he's going to walk when all is said and done.

I hadn't read much about the case until recently, but being from Florida and know a bit about the laws his lawers are going to focus on, I'm relatively sure he'll walk.

Reply #78 posted 06/02/12 10:10am

SUPRMAN

Musicslave said:

babynoz said:

It was also discovered that Zim had a second passport in his possession that was not surrendered. eek

Yeah I saw that too. If he mess around and lose O'Mara for his defense for not being forthcoming and honest about everything, he's screwed before getting to a trial. O'Mara has been the best thing he's had going for him so far, he better make sure he's not "forgetting" anything lol I could easily see his attorney bouncing if there's another "lapse of memory". Afterall, he has a career to consider too. No one wants to be made a fool, whether in private or in public.

From day one this cat seemed like the type of person who thinks they can "beat the system" or is smarter than everyone else.

[Edited 6/1/12 12:49pm]

O'Mara can't simply 'bounce.' He has to petition the court to be replaced as counsel.

I don't want you to think like me. I just want you to think.
Reply #79 posted 06/02/12 10:14am

SUPRMAN

babynoz said:

Musicslave said:

Looks like some of the witnesses have changed their stories....

http://articles.orlandose...fdle-agent

Several George Zimmerman witnesses change their accounts

By Rene Stutzman and Jeff Weiner, Orlando Sentinel


2:51 p.m. EST, May 22, 2012

Evidence released last week in the second-degree murder case against George Zimmerman shows four key witnesses made major changes in what they say they saw and heard the night he fatally shot 17-year-old Trayvon Martin in Sanford.

Three changed their stories in ways that may damage Zimmerman. A fourth abandoned her initial story, that she saw one person chasing another. Now, she says, she saw a single figure running.

Here are the key ways in which their stories changed.

Witness 2

A young woman who lives in the Retreat at Twin Lakes community where Trayvon was shot, was interviewed twice by Sanford police and once by the Florida Department of Law Enforcement.

She told authorities that she had taken out her contact lenses just before the incident. In her first recorded interview with Sanford police four days after the shooting, she told lead Investigator Chris Serino, "I saw two guys running. Couldn't tell you who was in front, who was behind."

She stepped away from her window and when she looked again, she "saw a fistfight. Just fists. I don't know who was hitting who."

A week later, she added a detail when talking again to Serino: During the chase, the two figures had been 10 feet apart.

That all changed when she was re-interviewed March 20 by a Florida Department of Law Enforcement agent. That time, she recalled catching a glimpse of just one running figure, she told FDLE Investigator John Batchelor, and she heard the person more than saw him.

"I couldn't tell you if it was a man, a woman, a kid, black or white. I couldn't tell you because it was dark and because I didn't have my contacts on or glasses. … I just know I saw a person out there."

Witness 12

A young mother, who is also a neighbor in the townhome community, never gave a recorded interview to Sanford police, according to prosecution records released last week. She first sat down for an audio-recorded interview with an FDLE agent March 20, more than three weeks after the shooting.

During that session, she said she "I don't know which one. … All I saw when they were on the ground was dark colors," she said.

Six days later, however, she was sure: It was Zimmerman on top, she told trial prosecutor Bernie de la Rionda during a 2 1/2-minute recorded session.

"I know after seeing the TV of what's happening, comparing their sizes, I think Zimmerman was definitely on top because of his size," she said.

Witness 6

This witness lived a few feet from where Trayvon and Zimmerman had their fight. On the night of the shooting, he told Serino he saw a black man on top of a lighter-skinned man "just throwing down blows on the guy, MMA-style," a reference to mixed martial arts.

He also said the one calling for help was "the one being beat up," a reference to Zimmerman.

But three weeks later, when he was interviewed by an FDLE agent, the man said he was no longer sure which one called for help.

"I truly can't tell who, after thinking about it, was yelling for help just because it was so dark out on that sidewalk," he said.

He also said he was no longer sure Trayvon was throwing punches. The teenager may have simply been keeping Zimmerman pinned to the ground, he said.

He did not equivocate, though, about who was on top.

"The black guy was on top," he said.

Witness 13

He is important because he talked to Zimmerman and watched the way he behaved immediately after the shooting, before police arrived.

After this neighbor heard gunfire, he went outside and spotted Zimmerman standing there "blood on the back of his head," he told Sanford police the night of the shooting.

Zimmerman told him that Trayvon "was beating up on me, so I had to shoot him," the witness told Serino. The Neighborhood Watch captain then asked the witness to call his wife, Shellie Zimmerman, and tell her what happened.

In two subsequent interviews about a month later — one with an FDLE investigator and one with de la Rionda — the witness described Zimmerman's demeanor in greater detail, adding that he spoke as if the shooting were no big deal.

Zimmerman's tone, the witness said, was "not like 'I can't believe I just shot someone!' it was more like, 'Just tell my wife I shot somebody…' like it was nothing."

Those witnesses are likely to be interviewed at least once more before Zimmerman's trial. Defense attorneys in Florida routinely question witnesses under oath as they prepare for trial.

Thanks for the info.

This is the problem with witnesses as I was telling you in the other thread. Witness testimony is one of the most difficult things to coordinate even with a simple traffic accident, much less a high profile case.

Even if ten people saw the exact same thing you still might get different accounts of what happened and the more time passes, the worse it gets. There's gonna be a bazillion depositions taken in this case.

???

Each witness is only deposed once. You don't get to repeatedly depose people.

Other than witnesses, police who arrived on the scene, investigators and GZ, who is there to depose?

I don't want you to think like me. I just want you to think.
Reply #80 posted 06/02/12 10:17am

SUPRMAN

Musicslave said:

2elijah said:

Thanks for keeping us updated and I agree with you. As I and others stated before, the outcome of this case will not suprise me.

You're welcome. At this rate, I'm not even anticipating the actual trial. I'm more looking forward to the evidentiary hearing because by then O'Mara would have seen everything the state has. If he tries to cop a plea deal after reviewing the discovery that will speak volumes.

Do you think this case will go to trial and GZ will be found not guilty of 2nd degree murder or do think the charges will be dropped altogether before making it to trial? Just curious...

The charges will not be dropped. No reason to.

He will at least be found guilty of manslaughter if not 2nd degree murder.

I don't see an acquittal or a Stand Your Ground defense.

I don't want you to think like me. I just want you to think.
Reply #81 posted 06/02/12 10:19am

SUPRMAN

OnlyNDaUsa said:

DiminutiveRocker said:

hmmm Well, from what I've heard, O'mara is famous for copping pleas when it some to the SGY thing. I would not be surprised if he did in this case as well. It may very well go the manslaughter route.

the 2nd degree will be lowered... i suspect they will drop to manslaughter with a plea down to some form of assault at worst.

I don't see any reason to lower the 2nd degree charge.

Why drop it to manslaughter when you can get manslaughter at trial or in a plea?

Some form of assault? Really? I can kill someone and call it assault?!

The prosecution isn't going to entertain that thought.

I don't want you to think like me. I just want you to think.
Reply #82 posted 06/02/12 10:23am

SUPRMAN

OnlyNDaUsa said:

Astasheiks said:

When I see that video of Trayvon buying that candy and tea; and then moments later wound up dead, makes me want to fishslap GZ arse personally. mad

yeah i had a simular emotional reaction. I hope that video is not allowed in to evidence as it has zero to do with the case. I suspect however it will be...

How can you say it has no relevance?

We don't know that, yet.

What if the defense attempts to portray Trayvon Martin as being 'high,' (based on ignorance or counting on the jury's ignorance regarding the presence of marijuana in Travyon Martin's system) or aggressive or appearing to be 'on something?'

That tape becomes very relevant to disputing such characterizations.

I don't want you to think like me. I just want you to think.
Reply #83 posted 06/02/12 10:28am

SUPRMAN

Musicslave said:

babynoz said:

The judge just granted the motion and Zim has 48 hours to turn himself in.

I'm surprised...I thought the prosecutor was going to let it slide too. eek

Maybe it came down the judge being "officially" requested by the state to revoke his bond. Apparently they haven't done that until today. I remember thinking the same day of GZ's initial bond hearing that they were obviously misleading the court. In fact, the state probably could have submitted GZ's statement from his website where he claimed to be the only authorized person who was serving as administrator to the site. He knew full well how much money they had received up to the point of his arrest. (Not to mention the fact that his wife claimed that only his brother was the administrator of the site after his arrest but conveniently "wasn't available" during the hearing.)

There's no telling what other evidence the state is sitting on from his private conversations and text messages that may contradict his statements from that night, days and weeks later. He might have gotten a little too comfortable and cavalier.

One last thing: No judge wants to be disrespected or tolerate contempt in their own courtroom. His integrity would have been questioned if he were to allow GZ to stay out on bond after such evidence being presented.

I'm sure O'Mara will come up with a good excuse for GZ and his wife within the next couple of days. We'll see if this will stick.

[Edited 6/1/12 12:37pm]

We don't know when the motion to revoke was filed. It takes time to get motions on calendar and heard. There are civil procedures that have built in time scheduled between filing a motion and a judge hearing that motion. The motion was likely filed three weeks ago, at least.

It will stick. It's the judge's ruling. A appeals court is not going to hear an appeal of a bond being revoked. The court is within it's right to alter the bond. In this case based on the defendant lying to the court.

The defense wouldn't have to prevent any evidence not to revoke or raise the bond at the motion hearing. They don't get to come back again and try to persuade the judge to revoke the ruling.

I don't want you to think like me. I just want you to think.
Reply #84 posted 06/02/12 10:31am

SUPRMAN

babynoz said:

Musicslave said:

Maybe it came down the judge being "officially" requested by the state to revoke his bond. Apparently they haven't done that until today. I remember thinking the same day of GZ's initial bond hearing that they were obviously misleading the court. In fact, the state probably could have submitted GZ's statement from his website where he claimed to be the only authorized person who was serving as administrator to the site. He knew full well how much money they had received up to the point of his arrest. (Not to mention the fact that his wife claimed that only his brother was the administrator of the site after his arrest but conveniently "wasn't available" during the hearing.)

There's no telling what other evidence the state is sitting on from his private conversations and text messages that may contradict his statements from that night and days and weeks later. He might have gotten a little too comfortable.

[Edited 6/1/12 12:25pm]

The state probably needed time to find evidence that Zim knew about the money. I'm told that paypal sends regular email updates of payments received so they may have needed the time to obtain the paypal records to show that Zim was lying.

I'm sure they have a bunch of evidence that we haven't seen yet. I remember Zim was boasting on that Myspace page about beating the charges in his previous court cases.

The state had to file a motion and that this was the first available date for hearing the motion.

Again, one side cannot file a motion without giving the other side time to file an opposition to the motion and the state can then rebut the defense's oppo and the defense can rebut the state's rebuttal in writing, all before the motion comes on hearing before the judge where any additional arguments are presented. The judge doesn't have to rule on the motion at the time of the hearing, the judge can take it under advisement and notify the parties of a ruling at a later date.

I don't want you to think like me. I just want you to think.
Reply #85 posted 06/02/12 10:35am

SUPRMAN

kibbles said:

Musicslave said:

http://www.miamiherald.co...ck-to.html

Judge orders Zimmerman back to jail

George Zimmerman was ordered back to jail on Friday for misleading the court about his access to an Internet fundraising account.


Seminole County Circuit Court Judge Kenneth Lester revoked the bail for Zimmerman — who is facing a second-degree murder charge in the shooting death of 17-year-old Trayvon Martin — after finding that Zimmerman and his wife concealed their access to a $200,000 account during a bond hearing in April.


Zimmerman, who was not present at Friday’s hearing, now must surrender to Seminole County sheriff’s deputies by Sunday.


Prosecutors said they have recordings of phone conversations between Zimmerman and his wife while Zimmerman was in jail in which they discussed moving money from a PayPal account set up to collect money for Zimmerman’s defense. But Zimmerman’s wife testified at her husband’s bond hearing that she was unaware of any additional money available for her husband’s defense — what prosecutors now call a lie.

omg, how dumb are these people? why on earth would they think that their phones and certainly the jailhouse phones wouldn't be tapped? like musicslave said, this guy is 'too smart' for his own good.

it all goes along with my observation about the convenience store tape. zimmerman claims trayvon was a 'punk' who was casing the neighborhood and later jumped him. a jury is going to have to evaluate that claim next to what they see of that young man on the tape. zimmerman and his wife claim that they have no money, a full on lie, and he's holding on to a second passport to boot. inconsistencies like this are what this case is going to hinge on. zimmerman has to make that jury believe that he is truthful about what happened that night, that things went the way he say they went. his whole defense depends on his credibility. if the prosecutor can show a pattern of lying on his part, or embellishments, in addition to any forensic, eyewitness or other circumstantial evidence, his defense is in trouble.

[Edited 6/1/12 17:25pm]

clapping

Co-sign

I don't want you to think like me. I just want you to think.
Reply #86 posted 06/02/12 10:38am

SUPRMAN

imago said:

I'm about 80%-ish sure he's going to walk when all is said and done.

I hadn't read much about the case until recently, but being from Florida and know a bit about the laws his lawers are going to focus on, I'm relatively sure he'll walk.

Nah. He has no credibility. The bond revocation hearing shows he cannot take the stand in his own defense.

(The prosecution will certainly bring up his lack of candor and truth with the court as being intentional and that GZ can't be trusted to tell the truth about anything. How does the jury believe what happened that night when they hear him sitting in jail plotting to beat the 'system?')

I don't want you to think like me. I just want you to think.
Reply #87 posted 06/02/12 1:10pm

free2bfreeda

SUPRMAN said:

imago said:

I'm about 80%-ish sure he's going to walk when all is said and done.

I hadn't read much about the case until recently, but being from Florida and know a bit about the laws his lawers are going to focus on, I'm relatively sure he'll walk.

Nah. He has no credibility. The bond revocation hearing shows he cannot take the stand in his own defense.

(The prosecution will certainly bring up his lack of candor and truth with the court as being intentional and that GZ can't be trusted to tell the truth about anything. How does the jury believe what happened that night when they hear him sitting in jail plotting to beat the 'system?')

nod so true!

one day a child hugged the earth & whispered 2 her,"I wish people would realize every x a bomb is launched & hits ur surface, it's like a major injury 2 u." i know war hurts u. :" the earth rumbled softly n reply, then cried a massive storm(c)
Reply #88 posted 06/02/12 1:17pm

DiminutiveRocker

kibbles said:

Musicslave said:

http://www.miamiherald.co...ck-to.html

Judge orders Zimmerman back to jail

George Zimmerman was ordered back to jail on Friday for misleading the court about his access to an Internet fundraising account.


Seminole County Circuit Court Judge Kenneth Lester revoked the bail for Zimmerman — who is facing a second-degree murder charge in the shooting death of 17-year-old Trayvon Martin — after finding that Zimmerman and his wife concealed their access to a $200,000 account during a bond hearing in April.


Zimmerman, who was not present at Friday’s hearing, now must surrender to Seminole County sheriff’s deputies by Sunday.


Prosecutors said they have recordings of phone conversations between Zimmerman and his wife while Zimmerman was in jail in which they discussed moving money from a PayPal account set up to collect money for Zimmerman’s defense. But Zimmerman’s wife testified at her husband’s bond hearing that she was unaware of any additional money available for her husband’s defense — what prosecutors now call a lie.

omg, how dumb are these people? why on earth would they think that their phones and certainly the jailhouse phones wouldn't be tapped? like musicslave said, this guy is 'too smart' for his own good.

it all goes along with my observation about the convenience store tape. zimmerman claims trayvon was a 'punk' who was casing the neighborhood and later jumped him. a jury is going to have to evaluate that claim next to what they see of that young man on the tape. zimmerman and his wife claim that they have no money, a full on lie, and he's holding on to a second passport to boot. inconsistencies like this are what this case is going to hinge on. zimmerman has to make that jury believe that he is truthful about what happened that night, that things went the way he say they went. his whole defense depends on his credibility. if the prosecutor can show a pattern of lying on his part, or embellishments, in addition to any forensic, eyewitness or other circumstantial evidence, his defense is in trouble.

[Edited 6/1/12 17:25pm]

Excellent point. I'll bet O'Mara is slapping is forehead in frustration about now.... and starting to plot a plea bargain....

Consider the rights of others before your own feelings, and the feelings of others before your own rights.
~ John Wooden
Reply #89 posted 06/02/12 3:36pm

babynoz

SUPRMAN said:

babynoz said:

Thanks for the info.

This is the problem with witnesses as I was telling you in the other thread. Witness testimony is one of the most difficult things to coordinate even with a simple traffic accident, much less a high profile case.

Even if ten people saw the exact same thing you still might get different accounts of what happened and the more time passes, the worse it gets. There's gonna be a bazillion depositions taken in this case.

???

Each witness is only deposed once. You don't get to repeatedly depose people.

Other than witnesses, police who arrived on the scene, investigators and GZ, who is there to depose?

I did NOT say that any single witness gets deposed more than once. Please don't misrepresent my statements just for the sake of being contrary. I'm sure you realize that bazillion wasn't to be taken literally. disbelief

Furthermore, there are various experts from both sides, not to mention paramedics, Zim's physician, the medical examiner, etc, etc. I have seen depos in a case like this fill an entire room...I'm not kidding.

"Success has a great tendency to conceal and throw a veil over the evil of men"....Demosthenes
Reply #90 posted 06/02/12 4:21pm

babynoz

SUPRMAN said:

babynoz said:

The state probably needed time to find evidence that Zim knew about the money. I'm told that paypal sends regular email updates of payments received so they may have needed the time to obtain the paypal records to show that Zim was lying.

I'm sure they have a bunch of evidence that we haven't seen yet. I remember Zim was boasting on that Myspace page about beating the charges in his previous court cases.

The state had to file a motion and that this was the first available date for hearing the motion.

Again, one side cannot file a motion without giving the other side time to file an opposition to the motion and the state can then rebut the defense's oppo and the defense can rebut the state's rebuttal in writing, all before the motion comes on hearing before the judge where any additional arguments are presented. The judge doesn't have to rule on the motion at the time of the hearing, the judge can take it under advisement and notify the parties of a ruling at a later date.

Sorry but that is absolutely incorrect. The moving party most certainly does NOT have to give the opposing party time to oppose their motion. All they have to do is file what is called a certificate of service stating that the motion was sent to opposing counsel within a reasonable time.

Fl. Rules of Criminal Procedure, 3.060.

Opposing counsel can even file their motion in opposition in open court on the day of the hearing and argue it at that time...not ideal but it does happen. They don't have to file an opposition in writing at all, they can just present oral arguments. Finally, they can always ask for an extension/enlargement of time.

Again, I have been at this for over twenty five years...in Florida, I might add. I don't know everything but I know what I know.

I think even people outside of the system know that the judge does not have to rule at the hearing... lol

Anyway, the state would have needed time to investigate the paypal account plus obtain the jail recordings which is what I was originally discussing with Musicslave.

"Success has a great tendency to conceal and throw a veil over the evil of men"....Demosthenes
Reply #91 posted 06/02/12 4:36pm

SUPRMAN

babynoz said:

SUPRMAN said:

???

Each witness is only deposed once. You don't get to repeatedly depose people.

Other than witnesses, police who arrived on the scene, investigators and GZ, who is there to depose?

I did NOT say that any single witness gets deposed more than once. Please don't misrepresent my statements just for the sake of being contrary. I'm sure you realize that bazillion wasn't to be taken literally. disbelief

Furthermore, there are various experts from both sides, not to mention paramedics, Zim's physician, the medical examiner, etc, etc. I have seen depos in a case like this fill an entire room...I'm not kidding.

I was trying to figure out how you got such a high number.

Yes, I've seen case files fill a room also.

I don't want you to think like me. I just want you to think.
Reply #92 posted 06/02/12 4:38pm

babynoz

"Success has a great tendency to conceal and throw a veil over the evil of men"....Demosthenes
Reply #93 posted 06/02/12 4:39pm

SUPRMAN

babynoz said:

SUPRMAN said:

The state had to file a motion and that this was the first available date for hearing the motion.

Again, one side cannot file a motion without giving the other side time to file an opposition to the motion and the state can then rebut the defense's oppo and the defense can rebut the state's rebuttal in writing, all before the motion comes on hearing before the judge where any additional arguments are presented. The judge doesn't have to rule on the motion at the time of the hearing, the judge can take it under advisement and notify the parties of a ruling at a later date.

Sorry but that is absolutely incorrect. The moving party most certainly does NOT have to give the opposing party time to oppose their motion. All they have to do is file what is called a certificate of service stating that the motion was sent to opposing counsel within a reasonable time.

Fl. Rules of Criminal Procedure, 3.060.

Opposing counsel can even file their motion in opposition in open court on the day of the hearing and argue it at that time...not ideal but it does happen. They don't have to file an opposition in writing at all, they can just present oral arguments. Finally, they can always ask for an extension/enlargement of time.

Again, I have been at this for over twenty five years...in Florida, I might add. I don't know everything but I know what I know.

I think even people outside of the system know that the judge does not have to rule at the hearing... lol

Anyway, the state would have needed time to investigate the paypal account plus obtain the jail recordings which is what I was originally discussing with Musicslave.

Well I am in California and I did not check Florida law before posting.

I stand corrected.

Why would I assume what people know and don't know? Surely you've been surprised by lack of knowledge of what you may have thought of as common knowledge?

I don't want you to think like me. I just want you to think.
Reply #94 posted 06/02/12 6:52pm

babynoz

Link to the Motion To Revoke Bond...a must read,

http://media.miamiherald.....So.56.pdf

"Success has a great tendency to conceal and throw a veil over the evil of men"....Demosthenes
Reply #95 posted 06/02/12 7:24pm

SUPRMAN

babynoz said:

Link to the Motion To Revoke Bond...a must read,

http://media.miamiherald.....So.56.pdf

He he.

Presumably fully admissable?

If so, fat chance GZ ever takes the stand.

Recall my belief that GZ set out to get away with murder.

He's a conniving liar with no respect for police or the judiciary.

Unless he plea bargains manslaughter I don't see how he avoids a 2nd degree conviction.

[Edited 6/2/12 19:26pm]

I don't want you to think like me. I just want you to think.
Reply #96 posted 06/03/12 2:14am

free2bfreeda

link: http://www.theatlanticwir...lls/53081/

George Zimmerman Was Busted by Recorded Phone Calls

Connor Simpson Jun 2, 2012

excerpt:

In regards to Zimmerman's passport mix up, the motion uses state department records to prove the existence of a second passport. Records show Zimmerman applied for a second passport in 2004 because the passport he surrendered to the judge "was lost or stolen." Zimmerman was granted a new passport that wouldn't expire until 2014. In a recorded phone call from a few days before the April 20 bond hearing, George and Shelley talked about the passport:

Defendant: Do you know what? I think my passport is in that bag.

Shelley Zimmerman: I have one for you in a safety deposit box...

Defendant: OK, you hold on to that.

Shelley Zimmerman: For you...

It's going to be pretty difficult for Zimmerman's attorney to argue he's not a flight risk now. Zimmerman has yet to turn himself in, and has an active passport.

hey, i keyed in back in thread #2 that zimmerman was a flight risk from the get go. the man's accounts of the night of the shooting of T Martin is so full of inconsistencies and that alone should have put him behind bars, instead of his being allowed to walk away.

and now if one reads between the coded lines of the conversation between he and his wife regarding the passport, it seems more that obvious that GZ was perhaps on his way out of the country.

what a (seemingly) dumb fark for GZ, aka:sleezy zeezy to think his conversations were not being monitered by the jail watch persons.

i wonder if he's going to break down and cry when he turns his self in today - his 48hrs will be up real soon.

HTAWI HAA...

eek

[Edited 6/3/12 2:17am]

one day a child hugged the earth & whispered 2 her,"I wish people would realize every x a bomb is launched & hits ur surface, it's like a major injury 2 u." i know war hurts u. :" the earth rumbled softly n reply, then cried a massive storm(c)
Reply #97 posted 06/03/12 12:29pm

free2bfreeda

abc

Zimmerman surrenders, is booked into Florida jail

By the CNN Wire Staff Sun June 3, 2012
George Zimmerman is taken into Seminole County Jail after surrendering to authorities on Sunday.

Sanford, Florida (CNN) -- George Zimmerman was booked into jail Sunday after surrendering to authorities before an afternoon deadline, the Seminole County sheriff said.

Zimmerman met two members of the sheriff's office in a business parking lot about 1:25 p.m. Sunday and was taken into custody, Sheriff Donald Eslinger told reporters.

Zimmerman was required to return to central Florida and turn himself in after a judge revoked his bail Friday, saying Zimmerman misled the court about his finances.

Zimmerman, a neighborhood watch volunteer, is accused of shooting unarmed teenager Trayvon Martin in a gated community in Sanford in February. Zimmerman argues he acted in self-defense.

Eslinger said Zimmerman, who will be housed in administrative confinement at Seminole County's John E. Polk Correctional Facility, was "quiet and cooperative." He was being held on a no-bail status, the sheriff's office said.

Video from the jail showed Zimmerman exiting a white minivan, wearing handcuffs, jeans and a long-sleeve shirt, escorted by authorities.

read more: http://www.cnn.com/2012/0...topstories

he may well be incarcerated until his trial. it's been stated in several related articles, "at this time the pending GZimmerman trial will happen, circa 2013."

2013 Cale... popcorn >unbuttered please.

[Edited 6/3/12 12:29pm]

one day a child hugged the earth & whispered 2 her,"I wish people would realize every x a bomb is launched & hits ur surface, it's like a major injury 2 u." i know war hurts u. :" the earth rumbled softly n reply, then cried a massive storm(c)
Reply #98 posted 06/04/12 12:33pm

DiminutiveRocker

free2bfreeda said:

abc

Zimmerman surrenders, is booked into Florida jail

By the CNN Wire Staff Sun June 3, 2012
George Zimmerman is taken into Seminole County Jail after surrendering to authorities on Sunday.

Sanford, Florida (CNN) -- George Zimmerman was booked into jail Sunday after surrendering to authorities before an afternoon deadline, the Seminole County sheriff said.

Zimmerman met two members of the sheriff's office in a business parking lot about 1:25 p.m. Sunday and was taken into custody, Sheriff Donald Eslinger told reporters.

Zimmerman was required to return to central Florida and turn himself in after a judge revoked his bail Friday, saying Zimmerman misled the court about his finances.

Zimmerman, a neighborhood watch volunteer, is accused of shooting unarmed teenager Trayvon Martin in a gated community in Sanford in February. Zimmerman argues he acted in self-defense.

Eslinger said Zimmerman, who will be housed in administrative confinement at Seminole County's John E. Polk Correctional Facility, was "quiet and cooperative." He was being held on a no-bail status, the sheriff's office said.

Video from the jail showed Zimmerman exiting a white minivan, wearing handcuffs, jeans and a long-sleeve shirt, escorted by authorities.

read more: http://www.cnn.com/2012/0...topstories

he may well be incarcerated until his trial. it's been stated in several related articles, "at this time the pending GZimmerman trial will happen, circa 2013."

2013 Cale... popcorn >unbuttered please.

[Edited 6/3/12 12:29pm]

Wow - what a total idiot. He lied about his finances sothere goes the bond. He has another passport he did not turn in so now he is a flight risk. AND... he waived his right ton a speedy trial.

O'Mara has got to be plotting a plea bargain at this point.

This is total GZ douchbaggery at its best. Clearly he is a liar... this totally destroys ANY credibility he had.

Consider the rights of others before your own feelings, and the feelings of others before your own rights.
~ John Wooden
Reply #99 posted 06/04/12 12:48pm

DiminutiveRocker

babynoz said:

Link to the Motion To Revoke Bond...a must read,

http://media.miamiherald.....So.56.pdf

Definitely a MUST READ.

thanks for posting b-noz!

Just read an article and this quote from O'Mara kind of irritated me:

"You need to realize we're still talking about a 28-year-old who's being charged with a crime he does not believe he committed, and his whole life has been turned upside down, so I think that it all needs to be kept in context."

So... what's he saying here? Zimmerman at 28 years old is not "adult" enough to take full repsonsibility and accept the consequences of his own actions?

I think the defense needs to realize that a 17 year old kid is dead at the hands of his client - and THAT needs to be kept in context.

disbelief

[Edited 6/4/12 13:03pm]

Consider the rights of others before your own feelings, and the feelings of others before your own rights.
~ John Wooden
Reply #100 posted 06/04/12 1:06pm

Musicslave

http://articles.orlandose...-attorneys

Zimmerman's defense says he made a 'mistake' by not telling judge about money

Excerpts below:

"Defense attorneys for George Zimmerman issued a statement today, explaining that their client made a "mistake" when he failed to tell a judge about thousands of dollars he'd raised through his website.

"We feel the failure to disclose these funds was caused by fear, mistrust, and confusion," says the statement, posted on the defense team's blog. "The gravity of this mistake has been distinctly illustrated, and Mr. Zimmerman understands that this mistake has undermined his credibility, which he will have to work to repair."

Zimmerman had collected thousands in donations online through a PayPal account, prosecutors said, but his wife told the judge that they were basically indigent. Lester granted $150,000 bail.

According to the defense's new blog post, of the original $204,000 raised by Zimmerman's fund, about $150,000 was moved to defense fund his attorneys helped establish, and $30,000 "was used to make the complicated transition from private life in Sanford, FL to a life in hiding as a defendant in a high-profile court case."

About $20,000, the lawyers say, "was kept liquid to provide living expenses for the first several months." Neither Zimmerman nor his attorneys have direct access to the defense fund, the post says.

"While Mr. Zimmerman acknowledges that he allowed his financial situation to be misstated in court, the defense will emphasize that in all other regards, Mr. Zimmerman has been forthright and cooperative," the post says.

The statement notes that he "stayed in ongoing contact" with law enforcement, gave "voice exemplars for comparison" and "has twice surrendered himself to law enforcement when asked to do so."

"At the point of the bond hearing, Mr. Zimmerman had been driven from his home and neighborh

ood, could not go to work, his wife could not go back to a finish her nursing degree, his mother and father had been driven from their home, and he had been thrust into the national spotlight as a racist murderer by factions acting with their own agendas. None of those allegations have been supported by the discovery released to date, yet the hatred continues."

The first item I highlighted I believe should really hurt his possible upcoming bond hearing. This statement alone accepts the fact that he knowingly allowed the Court/Judge Lester to be mislead during the his first bond hearing. This constitues a lie to me. I love how they called his lie a mistake. Nice spin O'Mara lol I don't think the judge should buy into the whole, "fear, mistrust and confusion" excuse. We'll see how the judge calls it though.

Do you guys think he'll simply reset bail only at a higher price and let him go? Or do you think the judge will make him stay in jail until the trial (if he ever gets to trial)?

Lastly, I see the defense is constantly painting the suspect as the victim here.

Reply #101 posted 06/04/12 1:14pm

Musicslave

babynoz said:

Link to the Motion To Revoke Bond...a must read,

http://media.miamiherald.....So.56.pdf

Thanks for the link Babynoz! I can't see the judge letting him go out on bail after reading the details of his conversation. I would question the integrity of the judge if he doesn't retain him until trial. Not that it would matter but I think that he would be viewed as quite lenient (at best) if he does. Most judges I've stood before do not tolerate lies in their courtroom. Well see...

Reply #102 posted 06/04/12 1:17pm

DiminutiveRocker

Musicslave said:

http://articles.orlandose...-attorneys

Zimmerman's defense says he made a 'mistake' by not telling judge about money

Excerpts below:

"Defense attorneys for George Zimmerman issued a statement today, explaining that their client made a "mistake" when he failed to tell a judge about thousands of dollars he'd raised through his website.

"We feel the failure to disclose these funds was caused by fear, mistrust, and confusion," says the statement, posted on the defense team's blog. "The gravity of this mistake has been distinctly illustrated, and Mr. Zimmerman understands that this mistake has undermined his credibility, which he will have to work to repair."

Zimmerman had collected thousands in donations online through a PayPal account, prosecutors said, but his wife told the judge that they were basically indigent. Lester granted $150,000 bail.

According to the defense's new blog post, of the original $204,000 raised by Zimmerman's fund, about $150,000 was moved to defense fund his attorneys helped establish, and $30,000 "was used to make the complicated transition from private life in Sanford, FL to a life in hiding as a defendant in a high-profile court case."

About $20,000, the lawyers say, "was kept liquid to provide living expenses for the first several months." Neither Zimmerman nor his attorneys have direct access to the defense fund, the post says.

"While Mr. Zimmerman acknowledges that he allowed his financial situation to be misstated in court, the defense will emphasize that in all other regards, Mr. Zimmerman has been forthright and cooperative," the post says.

The statement notes that he "stayed in ongoing contact" with law enforcement, gave "voice exemplars for comparison" and "has twice surrendered himself to law enforcement when asked to do so."

"At the point of the bond hearing, Mr. Zimmerman had been driven from his home and neighborh

ood, could not go to work, his wife could not go back to a finish her nursing degree, his mother and father had been driven from their home, and he had been thrust into the national spotlight as a racist murderer by factions acting with their own agendas. None of those allegations have been supported by the discovery released to date, yet the hatred continues."

The first item I highlighted I believe should really hurt his possible upcoming bond hearing. This statement alone accepts the fact that he knowingly allowed the Court/Judge Lester to be mislead during the his first bond hearing. This constitues a lie to me. I love how they called his lie a mistake. Nice spin O'Mara lol I don't think the judge should buy into the whole, "fear, mistrust and confusion" excuse. We'll see how the judge calls it though.

Do you guys think he'll simply reset bail only at a higher price and let him go? Or do you think the judge will make him stay in jail until the trial (if he ever gets to trial)?

Lastly, I see the defense is constantly painting the suspect as the victim here.

^ totally agree with this (see my post above yours). After all, GZ is only a 28 year old! rolleyes

The judge seemed to be pretty irritated from the video I saw. *ALSO* what about the extra passport he did not turn over that he acknowledged with his wife on the recorded phone call?

I hope the judge simply revokes the bond and keeps him in jail while he waits for his non-speedy trial.

Consider the rights of others before your own feelings, and the feelings of others before your own rights.
~ John Wooden
Reply #103 posted 06/04/12 1:19pm

OnlyNDaUsa

That lie will hopefully never be allowed as evidence in his murder trial. I do not see how it offers any evidence to his actions on the day of the killing. If they want to hold separate trials then fine.

the wife should have just not answered as said info was privileged--unless she knew independently of the funds. He was under no obligation to say anything as he has the absolute right to remain silent.

as to what it means to his bail to have not disclosed the info and the alleged 2nd passport... that is something the judge can take into account at his next bail hearing. From total lost of bail to a whole new bail, or an increase with full credit given... or even charges... all that is up to the judge... but none of it is evidence to his actions that night.


If you look at all of his orginal statemnts that could be proven or disproven have all (as far as i know) been showen to be true.

Living with a disability is not the Wurst thing in the word: Knowingly Mocking someone with one is far Wurst!.
Reply #104 posted 06/04/12 1:22pm

OnlyNDaUsa

DiminutiveRocker said:

babynoz said:

Link to the Motion To Revoke Bond...a must read,

http://media.miamiherald.....So.56.pdf

Definitely a MUST READ.

thanks for posting b-noz!

Just read an article and this quote from O'Mara kind of irritated me:

"You need to realize we're still talking about a 28-year-old who's being charged with a crime he does not believe he committed, and his whole life has been turned upside down, so I think that it all needs to be kept in context."

So... what's he saying here? Zimmerman at 28 years old is not "adult" enough to take full responsibility and accept the consequences of his own actions?

I think the defense needs to realize that a 17 year old kid is dead at the hands of his client - and THAT needs to be kept in context.

disbelief

none of that proves any criminal acts were committed at all. it really seems to be a purely emotional reaction to a horrible event.

Living with a disability is not the Wurst thing in the word: Knowingly Mocking someone with one is far Wurst!.
Reply #105 posted 06/04/12 1:25pm

Musicslave

OnlyNDaUsa said:

That lie will hopefully never be allowed as evidence in his murder trial. I do not see how it offers any evidence to his actions on the day of the killing. If they want to hold separate trials then fine.

the wife should have just not answered as said info was privileged--unless she knew independently of the funds. He was under no obligation to say anything as he has the absolute right to remain silent.

as to what it means to his bail to have not disclosed the info and the alleged 2nd passport... that is something the judge can take into account at his next bail hearing. From total lost of bail to a whole new bail, or an increase with full credit given... or even charges... all that is up to the judge... but none of it is evidence to his actions that night.


If you look at all of his orginal statemnts that could be proven or disproven have all (as far as i know) been showen to be true.

You're right about his right to remain silent. However, his silence as his defense has acknowledged, has caused his bond to be temporarily revoked.

Reply #106 posted 06/04/12 1:29pm

OnlyNDaUsa

Musicslave said:

the wife s

You're right about his right to remain silent. However, his silence as his defense has acknowledged, has caused his bond to be temporarily revoked.

i was talking about pressing charges against him over it.

Living with a disability is not the Wurst thing in the word: Knowingly Mocking someone with one is far Wurst!.
Reply #107 posted 06/04/12 1:31pm

Musicslave

OnlyNDaUsa said:

Musicslave said:

You're right about his right to remain silent. However, his silence as his defense has acknowledged, has caused his bond to be temporarily revoked.

i was talking about pressing charges against him over it.

Okay. I gotcha.

Reply #108 posted 06/04/12 1:34pm

Musicslave

DiminutiveRocker said:

Musicslave said:

http://articles.orlandose...-attorneys

Zimmerman's defense says he made a 'mistake' by not telling judge about money

Excerpts below:

"Defense attorneys for George Zimmerman issued a statement today, explaining that their client made a "mistake" when he failed to tell a judge about thousands of dollars he'd raised through his website.

"We feel the failure to disclose these funds was caused by fear, mistrust, and confusion," says the statement, posted on the defense team's blog. "The gravity of this mistake has been distinctly illustrated, and Mr. Zimmerman understands that this mistake has undermined his credibility, which he will have to work to repair."

Zimmerman had collected thousands in donations online through a PayPal account, prosecutors said, but his wife told the judge that they were basically indigent. Lester granted $150,000 bail.

According to the defense's new blog post, of the original $204,000 raised by Zimmerman's fund, about $150,000 was moved to defense fund his attorneys helped establish, and $30,000 "was used to make the complicated transition from private life in Sanford, FL to a life in hiding as a defendant in a high-profile court case."

About $20,000, the lawyers say, "was kept liquid to provide living expenses for the first several months." Neither Zimmerman nor his attorneys have direct access to the defense fund, the post says.

"While Mr. Zimmerman acknowledges that he allowed his financial situation to be misstated in court, the defense will emphasize that in all other regards, Mr. Zimmerman has been forthright and cooperative," the post says.

The statement notes that he "stayed in ongoing contact" with law enforcement, gave "voice exemplars for comparison" and "has twice surrendered himself to law enforcement when asked to do so."

"At the point of the bond hearing, Mr. Zimmerman had been driven from his home and neighborh

ood, could not go to work, his wife could not go back to a finish her nursing degree, his mother and father had been driven from their home, and he had been thrust into the national spotlight as a racist murderer by factions acting with their own agendas. None of those allegations have been supported by the discovery released to date, yet the hatred continues."

The first item I highlighted I believe should really hurt his possible upcoming bond hearing. This statement alone accepts the fact that he knowingly allowed the Court/Judge Lester to be mislead during the his first bond hearing. This constitues a lie to me. I love how they called his lie a mistake. Nice spin O'Mara lol I don't think the judge should buy into the whole, "fear, mistrust and confusion" excuse. We'll see how the judge calls it though.

Do you guys think he'll simply reset bail only at a higher price and let him go? Or do you think the judge will make him stay in jail until the trial (if he ever gets to trial)?

Lastly, I see the defense is constantly painting the suspect as the victim here.

^ totally agree with this (see my post above yours). After all, GZ is only a 28 year old! rolleyes

The judge seemed to be pretty irritated from the video I saw. *ALSO* what about the extra passport he did not turn over that he acknowledged with his wife on the recorded phone call?

I hope the judge simply revokes the bond and keeps him in jail while he waits for his non-speedy trial.

Judge wasn't pressed by that. He pretty much blew it off and equated it to someone thinking they lost their driving license and finding it later after obtaining a new one.

Reply #109 posted 06/04/12 1:40pm

Musicslave

OnlyNDaUsa said:

That lie will hopefully never be allowed as evidence in his murder trial. I do not see how it offers any evidence to his actions on the day of the killing. If they want to hold separate trials then fine.

the wife should have just not answered as said info was privileged--unless she knew independently of the funds. He was under no obligation to say anything as he has the absolute right to remain silent.

as to what it means to his bail to have not disclosed the info and the alleged 2nd passport... that is something the judge can take into account at his next bail hearing. From total lost of bail to a whole new bail, or an increase with full credit given... or even charges... all that is up to the judge... but none of it is evidence to his actions that night.


If you look at all of his orginal statemnts that could be proven or disproven have all (as far as i know) been showen to be true.

Do you feel that his credibility is compromised now?

Reply #110 posted 06/04/12 1:43pm

OnlyNDaUsa

Musicslave said:

OnlyNDaUsa said:

That lie will hopefully never be allowed as evidence in his murder trial. I do not see how it offers any evidence to his actions on the day of the killing. If they want to hold separate trials then fine.

the wife should have just not answered as said info was privileged--unless she knew independently of the funds. He was under no obligation to say anything as he has the absolute right to remain silent.

as to what it means to his bail to have not disclosed the info and the alleged 2nd passport... that is something the judge can take into account at his next bail hearing. From total lost of bail to a whole new bail, or an increase with full credit given... or even charges... all that is up to the judge... but none of it is evidence to his actions that night.


If you look at all of his orginal statemnts that could be proven or disproven have all (as far as i know) been showen to be true.

Do you feel that his credibility is compromised now?

not in any major way that is material to the murder case.

Living with a disability is not the Wurst thing in the word: Knowingly Mocking someone with one is far Wurst!.
Reply #111 posted 06/04/12 1:48pm

Musicslave

OnlyNDaUsa said:

Musicslave said:

Do you feel that his credibility is compromised now?

not in any major way that is material to the murder case.

His defense attorney disagrees with you: "The gravity of this mistake has been distinctly illustrated, and Mr. Zimmerman understands that this mistake has undermined his credibility, which he will have to work to repair."

Reply #112 posted 06/04/12 1:51pm

SUPRMAN

OnlyNDaUsa said:

That lie will hopefully never be allowed as evidence in his murder trial. I do not see how it offers any evidence to his actions on the day of the killing. If they want to hold separate trials then fine.

the wife should have just not answered as said info was privileged--unless she knew independently of the funds. He was under no obligation to say anything as he has the absolute right to remain silent.

as to what it means to his bail to have not disclosed the info and the alleged 2nd passport... that is something the judge can take into account at his next bail hearing. From total lost of bail to a whole new bail, or an increase with full credit given... or even charges... all that is up to the judge... but none of it is evidence to his actions that night.


If you look at all of his orginal statemnts that could be proven or disproven have all (as far as i know) been showen to be true.

Why should remarks he made, pertaining to his case at issue, not be allowed at trial?

It does not offer evidence regarding what happened on the day he killed Trayvon Martin but it does offer insight into his character and intent. He made deliberate efforts to conceal material facts from the court (judge).

How is that not relevant if the he is claiming that his version of events is factual? The fact that he lied to the judge isn't relevant as to whether he would lie to a jury?

If GZ takes the stand, it will or should be admissible as it goes to his character.

I'm sure they'll introduce tweets, facebook, MySpace posts etc to smear Trayvon Martin.

His wife cannot claim privilege in such a situation. Where is the privilege? She is not incriminating herself by saying her husband has a passport or has access to money.

Spousal privilege prohibits testifying in a trial under oath involuntarily against a spouse. Not the case at a bail hearing.

What next bail hearing? How stupid does the judge look to give him bail and see him skip?

He needs to stay in jail until trial as a consequence of his lies. If he hadn't lied, he'd be out on bail. He CHOSE to lie and now has to pay for it. I cannot find a tear for him.

I don't want you to think like me. I just want you to think.
Reply #113 posted 06/04/12 1:52pm

OnlyNDaUsa

Musicslave said:

OnlyNDaUsa said:

not in any major way that is material to the murder case.

His defense attorney disagrees with you: "The gravity of this mistake has been distinctly illustrated, and Mr. Zimmerman understands that this mistake has undermined his credibility, which he will have to work to repair."

credibility with whom? any future jury would be ordered to not consider it and I am not sure it will be part of his trial. and i am not sure if i was on a jury I would hold it too much against him (or anyone for that matter).

Living with a disability is not the Wurst thing in the word: Knowingly Mocking someone with one is far Wurst!.
Reply #114 posted 06/04/12 1:54pm

SUPRMAN

OnlyNDaUsa said:

Musicslave said:

You're right about his right to remain silent. However, his silence as his defense has acknowledged, has caused his bond to be temporarily revoked.

i was talking about pressing charges against him over it.

He did not have an absolute right to silence. His Fifth Amendment is only relevant to self-incrimination. Saying you have one passport when you know you have two, becomes self-incriminating because it is a lie.

Same with the money. There was nothing illegal about having the money, concealing it from the court deliberately however is.

There won't be a separate trial. The way to deal with is to revoke bail and keep him in jail until the conclusion of the case.

I don't want you to think like me. I just want you to think.
Reply #115 posted 06/04/12 1:57pm

SUPRMAN

OnlyNDaUsa said:

Musicslave said:

His defense attorney disagrees with you: "The gravity of this mistake has been distinctly illustrated, and Mr. Zimmerman understands that this mistake has undermined his credibility, which he will have to work to repair."

credibility with whom? any future jury would be ordered to not consider it and I am not sure it will be part of his trial. and i am not sure if i was on a jury I would hold it too much against him (or anyone for that matter).

If it admissible (I don't see why it would not be) how do you order a jury not to consider it?

The defendant has conspired to lie to the court but that's irrelevant to his character on the stand.

He's not lying to the jury, just the court?

Of course I would hold it against him! You would discount his record of lying but believe him on the stand trying to save his own butt.

Yeah, right.

I don't want you to think like me. I just want you to think.
Reply #116 posted 06/04/12 2:04pm

OnlyNDaUsa

SUPRMAN said:

OnlyNDaUsa said:

That lie will hopefully never be allowed as evidence in his murder trial. I do not see how it offers any evidence to his actions on the day of the killing. If they want to hold separate trials then fine.

the wife should have just not answered as said info was privileged--unless she knew independently of the funds. He was under no obligation to say anything as he has the absolute right to remain silent.

as to what it means to his bail to have not disclosed the info and the alleged 2nd passport... that is something the judge can take into account at his next bail hearing. From total lost of bail to a whole new bail, or an increase with full credit given... or even charges... all that is up to the judge... but none of it is evidence to his actions that night.


If you look at all of his orginal statemnts that could be proven or disproven have all (as far as i know) been showen to be true.

Why should remarks he made, pertaining to his case at issue, not be allowed at trial?

It does not offer evidence regarding what happened on the day he killed Trayvon Martin but it does offer insight into his character and intent. He made deliberate efforts to conceal material facts from the court (judge).

not material to the murder case just to the bail hearing.

How is that not relevant if the he is claiming that his version of events is factual? The fact that he lied to the judge isn't relevant as to whether he would lie to a jury?

because he made no statements in that regard.

If GZ takes the stand, it will or should be admissible as it goes to his character.

If, maybe. But again there is still the issue that he did not say anything about it... i am not sure he is obligated to correct the record.

I'm sure they'll introduce tweets, facebook, MySpace posts etc to smear Trayvon Martin.

the effects of that will be limited. and in a defence there is always more leeway for what can be introduced.

His wife cannot claim privilege in such a situation. Where is the privilege? She is not incriminating herself by saying her husband has a passport or has access to money.

Spousal privilege prohibits testifying in a trial under oath involuntarily against a spouse. Not the case at a bail hearing.

First, I was saying she could have or should have not answered--now yeah I think if she is charged that a good lawyer would try to work that into a defence but that is another issue. Second if that is true that it is not in effect at a bail hearing then why are Doctors and Priests not called for them?

What next bail hearing? How stupid does the judge look to give him bail and see him skip?

I thik he has to have one.

He needs to stay in jail until trial as a consequence of his lies. If he hadn't lied, he'd be out on bail. He CHOSE to lie and now has to pay for it. I cannot find a tear for him.

I am not really arguing that part at all. Just that I do not see how it would be something a jury would put much weight on in the murder trial if it is even introduced.

Living with a disability is not the Wurst thing in the word: Knowingly Mocking someone with one is far Wurst!.
Reply #117 posted 06/04/12 2:15pm

OnlyNDaUsa

SUPRMAN said:

If it admissible (I don't see why it would not be) how do you order a jury not to consider it?

I was speaking if it was not allowed and the jury member had hard of it before being sellected. I doubt they will find 18 people that had not heard about it for a jury and alternates.

The defendant has conspired to lie to the court but that's irrelevant to his character on the stand.

I did not read the trascript of the phone call does he ask her to hide the money or just to move it?

He's not lying to the jury, just the court?

when did he lie?

Of course I would hold it against him! You would discount his record of lying but believe him on the stand trying to save his own butt.

Yeah, right.

but to what end? to get a few months out of jail? If you thought yourself to be innocent of charges would you think it was fair and just to have lies not related to the charges used to 'prove' your guilt?

REMEMBER: i have said many times I think he commited a crime... just not murder.

Living with a disability is not the Wurst thing in the word: Knowingly Mocking someone with one is far Wurst!.
Reply #118 posted 06/04/12 5:38pm

SUPRMAN

OnlyNDaUsa said:

Musicslave said:

Do you feel that his credibility is compromised now?

not in any major way that is material to the murder case.

Really?

So his lying isn't a reflection of his character or credibility regarding events on the night in question?

He'll lie under oath in court, but not in his statement to police? Why do you think he wouldn't lie facing a 2nd degree murder conviction?

I don't want you to think like me. I just want you to think.
Reply #119 posted 06/04/12 5:44pm

SUPRMAN

OnlyNDaUsa said:

SUPRMAN said:

If it admissible (I don't see why it would not be) how do you order a jury not to consider it?

I was speaking if it was not allowed and the jury member had hard of it before being sellected. I doubt they will find 18 people that had not heard about it for a jury and alternates.

I don't see how you keep it out of the trial. I don't know what makes it inadmissible. We all know the jury will have read/heard reports about the case.

The defendant has conspired to lie to the court but that's irrelevant to his character on the stand.

I did not read the trascript of the phone call does he ask her to hide the money or just to move it?


The portion I read, they were discussing moving it, which means he was aware of the money. He was not indigent as he told the court and he knew he wasn't indigent.

He's not lying to the jury, just the court?

when did he lie?
I stand corrected, GZ has never told a lie his entire life.

Of course I would hold it against him! You would discount his record of lying but believe him on the stand trying to save his own butt.

Yeah, right.

but to what end? to get a few months out of jail? If you thought yourself to be innocent of charges would you think it was fair and just to have lies not related to the charges used to 'prove' your guilt?

Not talking about a few months. If he lies at the bail hearing, you don't think he'd lie at his trial? What does he have to lose by lying? Being honest could put him in jail for the rest of his life.

REMEMBER: i have said many times I think he commited a crime... just not murder.

I don't want you to think like me. I just want you to think.
Reply #120 posted 06/04/12 5:47pm

babynoz

DiminutiveRocker said:

Musicslave said:

http://articles.orlandose...-attorneys

Zimmerman's defense says he made a 'mistake' by not telling judge about money

Excerpts below:

"Defense attorneys for George Zimmerman issued a statement today, explaining that their client made a "mistake" when he failed to tell a judge about thousands of dollars he'd raised through his website.

"We feel the failure to disclose these funds was caused by fear, mistrust, and confusion," says the statement, posted on the defense team's blog. "The gravity of this mistake has been distinctly illustrated, and Mr. Zimmerman understands that this mistake has undermined his credibility, which he will have to work to repair."

Zimmerman had collected thousands in donations online through a PayPal account, prosecutors said, but his wife told the judge that they were basically indigent. Lester granted $150,000 bail.

According to the defense's new blog post, of the original $204,000 raised by Zimmerman's fund, about $150,000 was moved to defense fund his attorneys helped establish, and $30,000 "was used to make the complicated transition from private life in Sanford, FL to a life in hiding as a defendant in a high-profile court case."

About $20,000, the lawyers say, "was kept liquid to provide living expenses for the first several months." Neither Zimmerman nor his attorneys have direct access to the defense fund, the post says.

"While Mr. Zimmerman acknowledges that he allowed his financial situation to be misstated in court, the defense will emphasize that in all other regards, Mr. Zimmerman has been forthright and cooperative," the post says.

The statement notes that he "stayed in ongoing contact" with law enforcement, gave "voice exemplars for comparison" and "has twice surrendered himself to law enforcement when asked to do so."

"At the point of the bond hearing, Mr. Zimmerman had been driven from his home and neighborh

ood, could not go to work, his wife could not go back to a finish her nursing degree, his mother and father had been driven from their home, and he had been thrust into the national spotlight as a racist murderer by factions acting with their own agendas. None of those allegations have been supported by the discovery released to date, yet the hatred continues."

The first item I highlighted I believe should really hurt his possible upcoming bond hearing. This statement alone accepts the fact that he knowingly allowed the Court/Judge Lester to be mislead during the his first bond hearing. This constitues a lie to me. I love how they called his lie a mistake. Nice spin O'Mara lol I don't think the judge should buy into the whole, "fear, mistrust and confusion" excuse. We'll see how the judge calls it though.

Do you guys think he'll simply reset bail only at a higher price and let him go? Or do you think the judge will make him stay in jail until the trial (if he ever gets to trial)?

Lastly, I see the defense is constantly painting the suspect as the victim here.

^ totally agree with this (see my post above yours). After all, GZ is only a 28 year old! rolleyes

The judge seemed to be pretty irritated from the video I saw. *ALSO* what about the extra passport he did not turn over that he acknowledged with his wife on the recorded phone call?

I hope the judge simply revokes the bond and keeps him in jail while he waits for his non-speedy trial.

'Ol Zim seems to make one "mistake" after another doesn't he? rolleyes

I imagine the state will argue vigorously that he is a flight risk and I hope the play the portion of the phone call where he tells his wife to "hold on" to the second passport.

"Success has a great tendency to conceal and throw a veil over the evil of men"....Demosthenes
Reply #121 posted 06/04/12 5:55pm

SUPRMAN

OnlyNDaUsa said:

SUPRMAN said:

Why should remarks he made, pertaining to his case at issue, not be allowed at trial?

It does not offer evidence regarding what happened on the day he killed Trayvon Martin but it does offer insight into his character and intent. He made deliberate efforts to conceal material facts from the court (judge).

not material to the murder case just to the bail hearing.

Why are we having a bail hearing? Because it relates to the murder trial. If he chooses to take the stand, his testimony is subject to being impeached. Why should everyone overlook his "mistakes" at the bail hearing? Couldn't he have also made "mistakes" the night he killed Trayvon Martin?

How is that not relevant if the he is claiming that his version of events is factual? The fact that he lied to the judge isn't relevant as to whether he would lie to a jury?

because he made no statements in that regard.


At the bail hearing. The bail hearing isn't done in isolation it is part of the murder trial. If he had fled with the money and passport on bail, then what?

If GZ takes the stand, it will or should be admissible as it goes to his character.

If, maybe. But again there is still the issue that he did not say anything about it... i am not sure he is obligated to correct the record.

He is not obligated to correct the record, but he can be asked about it under oath. He can then take the Fifth, that responding would incriminate himself.

The prosecution can use evidence to show that he has lied and that his testimony isn't credible and should not be believed. Perfectly legal. He's under oath on the stand, so why should he worry? He's only going to tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth right?

I'm sure they'll introduce tweets, facebook, MySpace posts etc to smear Trayvon Martin.

the effects of that will be limited. and in a defence there is always more leeway for what can be introduced.


How do you know the effect will be limited? how do you know how the jury will percieve and process that information? There is not more leeway for what can be introduced. It's the same set of Rules of Civil Procedure. Defendants, obviously, tend to introduce more evidence.

His wife cannot claim privilege in such a situation. Where is the privilege? She is not incriminating herself by saying her husband has a passport or has access to money.

Spousal privilege prohibits testifying in a trial under oath involuntarily against a spouse. Not the case at a bail hearing.

First, I was saying she could have or should have not answered--now yeah I think if she is charged that a good lawyer would try to work that into a defence but that is another issue. Second if that is true that it is not in effect at a bail hearing then why are Doctors and Priests not called for them?

There is no defense that you answer should be stricken because providing an answer was optional. If you feel you can't respond, you don't and take your chances with contempt charges.

What next bail hearing? How stupid does the judge look to give him bail and see him skip?

I thik he has to have one.

I don't think he has to have another one. Ruling on the motion is in effect, a bail hearing. The judge could have not heard the motion and let the status quo prevail (GZ out on bail.) The judge at the motion hearing could have raised the bail and given the defense x number of days to post the increased bond. So I don't see what a new bail hearing would do but waste time.

He needs to stay in jail until trial as a consequence of his lies. If he hadn't lied, he'd be out on bail. He CHOSE to lie and now has to pay for it. I cannot find a tear for him.

I am not really arguing that part at all. Just that I do not see how it would be something a jury would put much weight on in the murder trial if it is even introduced.

So the only person who can tell what happened is known to have lied to the court or at least "misrepresented" what he knew and conspired with his wife to do so, but that shouldn't trouble the jury because he would never lie to avoid 25 years to life . . . . .

I don't want you to think like me. I just want you to think.
Reply #122 posted 06/04/12 6:00pm

babynoz

OnlyNDaUsa said:

DiminutiveRocker said:

Definitely a MUST READ.

thanks for posting b-noz!

Just read an article and this quote from O'Mara kind of irritated me:

"You need to realize we're still talking about a 28-year-old who's being charged with a crime he does not believe he committed, and his whole life has been turned upside down, so I think that it all needs to be kept in context."

So... what's he saying here? Zimmerman at 28 years old is not "adult" enough to take full responsibility and accept the consequences of his own actions?

I think the defense needs to realize that a 17 year old kid is dead at the hands of his client - and THAT needs to be kept in context.

disbelief

none of that proves any criminal acts were committed at all. it really seems to be a purely emotional reaction to a horrible event.

The criminal act would be perjury.

"Success has a great tendency to conceal and throw a veil over the evil of men"....Demosthenes
Reply #123 posted 06/04/12 6:08pm

OnlyNDaUsa

babynoz said:

OnlyNDaUsa said:

none of that proves any criminal acts were committed at all. it really seems to be a purely emotional reaction to a horrible event.

The criminal act would be perjury.

Ok ok i was speaking about the killing... so yeah his Wife my have committed perjury... not sure GZ did.

Living with a disability is not the Wurst thing in the word: Knowingly Mocking someone with one is far Wurst!.
Reply #124 posted 06/04/12 6:09pm

free2bfreeda

abc

George Zimmerman: Will he be given a bond?

By Hal Boedeker, Staff writer
7:02 p.m. EST, June 4, 2012

Television analysts offered different takes Monday evening on whether George Zimmerman would get a new bond.

"Zimmerman will get another bond hearing. The court's going to want to hear from Zimmerman, and he probably will get a bond," WFTV-Channel 9 legal analyst Bill Sheaffer predicted.

Judge Kenneth Lester revoked Zimmerman's bond last week after it was revealed that Zimmerman and his wife hadn't told the court they received $135,000 in donations.

Zimmerman is charged with second-degree murder in the shooting death of Trayvon Martin. Zimmerman returned to Seminole County Jail on Sunday.

WKMG-Channel 6's legal analyst Luis Calderon said: "Judge Lester has put his foot down. He's not going to tolerate misrepresentation being in the court. My opinion is that I don't think he's going to be given a bond."

WKMG's Erik Von Ancken added that Calderon "believes that Judge Lester is so angry with Zimmerman that he will keep Zimmerman in jail."

WESH-Channel 2 legal analyst Jeff Deen said that attorneys will have a hard time re-establishing Zimmerman's credibility. The lawyers need Zimmerman "to be unimpeachable. They need him to be quiet. They need him to follow instructions," Deen said. "They don't need him to do any thinking."

Mark O'Mara, Zimmerman's attorney, was doing the thinking Monday in seeking a new bond hearing. O'Mara told "CBS This Morning" that the Zimmerman family "made a mistake" about the money "out of fear and maybe some frustration with having their life turned completely upside down."

O'Mara added: "I think they realize it was a mistake. They look forward to the opportunity to clearing that up with Judge Lester."

On the O'Mara website, the attorney said the Zimmermans' failure to disclose the donations "was caused by fear, mistrust and confusion.

poker » E...

free2bFreeda says, "i'll bet one cup of coffee and raise you 10 cans of red-bull that GZ is denied a bond.

one day a child hugged the earth & whispered 2 her,"I wish people would realize every x a bomb is launched & hits ur surface, it's like a major injury 2 u." i know war hurts u. :" the earth rumbled softly n reply, then cried a massive storm(c)
Reply #125 posted 06/04/12 6:13pm

SUPRMAN

OnlyNDaUsa said:

babynoz said:

The criminal act would be perjury.

Ok ok i was speaking about the killing... so yeah his Wife my have committed perjury... not sure GZ did.

But the fact that she did should be overlooked as it can't possibly be relevant -is that your position?

I don't want you to think like me. I just want you to think.
Reply #126 posted 06/04/12 6:15pm

SUPRMAN

free2bfreeda said:

abc

George Zimmerman: Will he be given a bond?

By Hal Boedeker, Staff writer
7:02 p.m. EST, June 4, 2012

Television analysts offered different takes Monday evening on whether George Zimmerman would get a new bond.

"Zimmerman will get another bond hearing. The court's going to want to hear from Zimmerman, and he probably will get a bond," WFTV-Channel 9 legal analyst Bill Sheaffer predicted.

Judge Kenneth Lester revoked Zimmerman's bond last week after it was revealed that Zimmerman and his wife hadn't told the court they received $135,000 in donations.

Zimmerman is charged with second-degree murder in the shooting death of Trayvon Martin. Zimmerman returned to Seminole County Jail on Sunday.

WKMG-Channel 6's legal analyst Luis Calderon said: "Judge Lester has put his foot down. He's not going to tolerate misrepresentation being in the court. My opinion is that I don't think he's going to be given a bond."

WKMG's Erik Von Ancken added that Calderon "believes that Judge Lester is so angry with Zimmerman that he will keep Zimmerman in jail."

WESH-Channel 2 legal analyst Jeff Deen said that attorneys will have a hard time re-establishing Zimmerman's credibility. The lawyers need Zimmerman "to be unimpeachable. They need him to be quiet. They need him to follow instructions," Deen said. "They don't need him to do any thinking."

Mark O'Mara, Zimmerman's attorney, was doing the thinking Monday in seeking a new bond hearing. O'Mara told "CBS This Morning" that the Zimmerman family "made a mistake" about the money "out of fear and maybe some frustration with having their life turned completely upside down."

O'Mara added: "I think they realize it was a mistake. They look forward to the opportunity to clearing that up with Judge Lester."

On the O'Mara website, the attorney said the Zimmermans' failure to disclose the donations "was caused by fear, mistrust and confusion.

poker » E...

free2bFreeda says, "i'll bet one cup of coffee and raise you 10 cans of red-bull that GZ is denied a bond.

O'Mara wants a new bail hearing.

Judge Lester should deny it.

O'Mara wants to use a new bail hearing as a PR stunt to clean up the mess GZ left in the courtroom.

The judge should be smarter.

I don't want you to think like me. I just want you to think.
Reply #127 posted 06/04/12 6:21pm

OnlyNDaUsa

SUPRMAN said:

OnlyNDaUsa said:

Ok ok i was speaking about the killing... so yeah his Wife my have committed perjury... not sure GZ did.

But the fact that she did should be overlooked as it can't possibly be relevant -is that your position?

to the murder charge? no. to his or her over all credibility maybe.

Living with a disability is not the Wurst thing in the word: Knowingly Mocking someone with one is far Wurst!.
Reply #128 posted 06/04/12 6:30pm

SUPRMAN

OnlyNDaUsa said:

SUPRMAN said:

But the fact that she did should be overlooked as it can't possibly be relevant -is that your position?

to the murder charge? no. to his or her over all credibility maybe.

So what about ignoring the potential perjury charge?

I don't want you to think like me. I just want you to think.
Reply #129 posted 06/04/12 6:32pm

OnlyNDaUsa

SUPRMAN said:

OnlyNDaUsa said:

to the murder charge? no. to his or her over all credibility maybe.

So what about ignoring the potential perjury charge?

that would be a separate charge.

Living with a disability is not the Wurst thing in the word: Knowingly Mocking someone with one is far Wurst!.
Reply #130 posted 06/04/12 7:34pm

SUPRMAN

OnlyNDaUsa said:

SUPRMAN said:

So what about ignoring the potential perjury charge?

that would be a separate charge.

Which could be dealt with at the same trial. No biggie.

I don't want you to think like me. I just want you to think.
Reply #131 posted 06/04/12 7:35pm

OnlyNDaUsa

SUPRMAN said:

OnlyNDaUsa said:

that would be a separate charge.

Which could be dealt with at the same trial. No biggie.

i do not think any good lawyer would go for that.

Living with a disability is not the Wurst thing in the word: Knowingly Mocking someone with one is far Wurst!.
Reply #132 posted 06/04/12 7:38pm

SUPRMAN

OnlyNDaUsa said:

SUPRMAN said:

Which could be dealt with at the same trial. No biggie.

i do not think any good lawyer would go for that.

Why not? Best use of judicial resources.

I don't want you to think like me. I just want you to think.
Reply #133 posted 06/05/12 6:06am

Musicslave

SUPRMAN said:

free2bfreeda said:

abc

George Zimmerman: Will he be given a bond?

By Hal Boedeker, Staff writer
7:02 p.m. EST, June 4, 2012

Television analysts offered different takes Monday evening on whether George Zimmerman would get a new bond.

"Zimmerman will get another bond hearing. The court's going to want to hear from Zimmerman, and he probably will get a bond," WFTV-Channel 9 legal analyst Bill Sheaffer predicted.

Judge Kenneth Lester revoked Zimmerman's bond last week after it was revealed that Zimmerman and his wife hadn't told the court they received $135,000 in donations.

Zimmerman is charged with second-degree murder in the shooting death of Trayvon Martin. Zimmerman returned to Seminole County Jail on Sunday.

WKMG-Channel 6's legal analyst Luis Calderon said: "Judge Lester has put his foot down. He's not going to tolerate misrepresentation being in the court. My opinion is that I don't think he's going to be given a bond."

WKMG's Erik Von Ancken added that Calderon "believes that Judge Lester is so angry with Zimmerman that he will keep Zimmerman in jail."

WESH-Channel 2 legal analyst Jeff Deen said that attorneys will have a hard time re-establishing Zimmerman's credibility. The lawyers need Zimmerman "to be unimpeachable. They need him to be quiet. They need him to follow instructions," Deen said. "They don't need him to do any thinking."

Mark O'Mara, Zimmerman's attorney, was doing the thinking Monday in seeking a new bond hearing. O'Mara told "CBS This Morning" that the Zimmerman family "made a mistake" about the money "out of fear and maybe some frustration with having their life turned completely upside down."

O'Mara added: "I think they realize it was a mistake. They look forward to the opportunity to clearing that up with Judge Lester."

On the O'Mara website, the attorney said the Zimmermans' failure to disclose the donations "was caused by fear, mistrust and confusion.

poker » E...

free2bFreeda says, "i'll bet one cup of coffee and raise you 10 cans of red-bull that GZ is denied a bond.

O'Mara wants a new bail hearing.

Judge Lester should deny it.

O'Mara wants to use a new bail hearing as a PR stunt to clean up the mess GZ left in the courtroom.

The judge should be smarter.

Completely agree with those statements. I noticed how they probably advised GZ to have his face shaven and to grow his hair out more. They probably figured that this will help him "LOOK" more innocent and less threatening. Best believe they're coaching him behind the scenes. It's their job. nod

I hope the judge does not allow politics to cloud his judgment. To hear the tapes of them plotting together and to go back and listen or read the transcripts from the original bond hearing should be incriminating and infuriating enough for him to not consider another bond. How many breaks is he going to get? Should be a no brainer. But that's just my opinion.

Reply #134 posted 06/05/12 7:24am

DiminutiveRocker

Musicslave said:

SUPRMAN said:

O'Mara wants a new bail hearing.

Judge Lester should deny it.

O'Mara wants to use a new bail hearing as a PR stunt to clean up the mess GZ left in the courtroom.

The judge should be smarter.

Completely agree with those statements. I noticed how they probably advised GZ to have his face shaven and to grow his hair out more. They probably figured that this will help him "LOOK" more innocent and less threatening. Best believe they're coaching him behind the scenes. It's their job. nod

I hope the judge does not allow politics to cloud his judgment. To hear the tapes of them plotting together and to go back and listen or read the transcripts from the original bond hearing should be incriminating and infuriating enough for him to not consider another bond. How many breaks is he going to get? Should be a no brainer. But that's just my opinion.

nod ^ Agree also. O'Mara is asking for the court to be compassionate to GZ because his life has turned upsidedown by this even... but GZ lied to the court. About the money - about the passport(s) - - and even to TM's parents when he said he thought TM was his age (though he is recorded on 911 call saying that the "suspicious person" he was following was in his late teens).

I hope that the judge does not grant a new hearing or allows bail and GZ has to sit in jail and await his trial NEXT YEAR... if the circus even gets that far.

Consider the rights of others before your own feelings, and the feelings of others before your own rights.
~ John Wooden
Reply #135 posted 06/05/12 7:35am

Musicslave

DiminutiveRocker said:

Musicslave said:

Completely agree with those statements. I noticed how they probably advised GZ to have his face shaven and to grow his hair out more. They probably figured that this will help him "LOOK" more innocent and less threatening. Best believe they're coaching him behind the scenes. It's their job. nod

I hope the judge does not allow politics to cloud his judgment. To hear the tapes of them plotting together and to go back and listen or read the transcripts from the original bond hearing should be incriminating and infuriating enough for him to not consider another bond. How many breaks is he going to get? Should be a no brainer. But that's just my opinion.

nod ^ Agree also. O'Mara is asking for the court to be compassionate to GZ because his life has turned upsidedown by this even... but GZ lied to the court. About the money - about the passport(s) - - and even to TM's parents when he said he thought TM was his age (though he is recorded on 911 call saying that the "suspicious person" he was following was in his late teens).

I hope that the judge does not grant a new hearing or allows bail and GZ has to sit in jail and await his trial NEXT YEAR... if the circus even gets that far.

IKR?!

Reply #136 posted 06/05/12 7:42am

OnlyNDaUsa

SUPRMAN said:

OnlyNDaUsa said:

i do not think any good lawyer would go for that.

Why not? Best use of judicial resources.

which is why a defence lawyer would nix it!

Living with a disability is not the Wurst thing in the word: Knowingly Mocking someone with one is far Wurst!.
Reply #137 posted 06/05/12 8:23am

Musicslave

Credibility may prove key in George Zimmerman case

By Rene Stutzman and Jeff Weiner / The Orlando Sentinel, Fla

(Excerpts below)

ORLANDO, Fla. — It is clear from court and public records that George Zimmerman has sometimes been less than truthful.

After shooting Trayvon Martin in late February, he told Sanford police he didn’t have a criminal history. He did. Several weeks later, he told the Seminole County Sheriff’s Office he had never been in a pretrial-diversion program. That’s also untrue.

Many have speculated that the case won’t get to trial but, rather, could be settled at an immunity hearing under Florida’s stand-your-ground law, which allows deadly force to prevent death or serious injury.

If such a hearing takes place, the outcome would be in the hands of Circuit Judge Kenneth Lester — the same judge who just determined Zimmerman was deceitful and threw him back in jail.

“Judge Lester would have to find by a preponderance of the evidence that Mr. Zimmerman was justified in doing what he did,” said Orlando defense attorney Andrew Moses. “The reality is, we’re all human, and clearly the reality is that Judge Lester believes that he was not truthful” at the bond hearing.

Michael Grieco, a South Florida defense attorney and former Miami-Dade prosecutor, said Zimmerman may have hurt his credibility with the judge, but his silence at that bond hearing should not be a factor at trial.

“It’s not going to become part of the case,” Grieco said.

That’s because before prosecutors could use Zimmerman’s behavior at the hearing against him, they’d have to prove it’s relevant. The Zimmermans’ finances, Grieco said, have nothing to do with what happened on the drizzly, dark evening when the Neighborhood Watch volunteer killed the Miami Gardens teenager.

Zimmerman cooperated with Sanford police during their investigation, agreeing to five interviews and re-enacting what he says happened, but police said afterward that they doubted some of his statements, for example that before he shot Martin, the teenager had put his hand over Zimmerman’s mouth.

If that were the case, police said, the cries for help in the background of one 911 call would be muffled.

At the April 20 bond hearing, Investigator Dale Gilbreath testified that Zimmerman’s version of events was inconsistent with other evidence. He did not provide details, and Zimmerman’s statements have not yet been released.

ZIMMERMAN’S UNTRUE STATEMENTS

— The night he shot Trayvon Martin to death, police say Zimmerman told them his record was squeaky-clean. In fact, he had been charged in 2005 with resisting arrest without violence during an altercation with a state alcohol officer. Zimmerman wound up in a pretrial-diversion program, a scaled-down version of probation offered to nonviolent first-time offenders.

— When he was booked into the Seminole County Jail on April 23, he told the booking officer that he never had been in a pretrial-diversion program before, documents show.

— At his April 20 bond hearing, while making a surprise apology to Martin’s family, Zimmerman said he didn’t realize Trayvon was so young. In his call to police moments before the shooting, however, he described Martin — who was 17 — as in his “late teens.”

— At that same hearing, Zimmerman sat silently and did not correct his wife, Shellie, when she, testifying under oath by telephone, said the couple had no savings. At that moment, the couple had at least $135,000 that she had transferred into her credit-union account a few days earlier from a PayPal account that Zimmerman had set up to collect donations

Reply #138 posted 06/05/12 8:53am

OnlyNDaUsa

Musicslave said:

— At his April 20 bond hearing, while making a surprise apology to Martin’s family, Zimmerman said he didn’t realize Trayvon was so young. In his call to police moments before the shooting, however, he described Martin — who was 17 — as in his “late teens.”

and he was in his Mid-teens! 13 14 (early) 15 16 17 (mid) 18 19 (late)

if we want to be all nic-picky... i am shocked at how so many assume his guilt when not ONE WORD of testimony ahd been given in the case.

Living with a disability is not the Wurst thing in the word: Knowingly Mocking someone with one is far Wurst!.
Reply #139 posted 06/05/12 9:05am

Musicslave

OnlyNDaUsa said:

Musicslave said:

— At his April 20 bond hearing, while making a surprise apology to Martin’s family, Zimmerman said he didn’t realize Trayvon was so young. In his call to police moments before the shooting, however, he described Martin — who was 17 — as in his “late teens.”

and he was in his Mid-teens! 13 14 (early) 15 16 17 (mid) 18 19 (late)

if we want to be all nic-picky... i am shocked at how so many assume his guilt when not ONE WORD of testimony ahd been given in the case.

What's nic-picky? Dude told the 911 operator he looked like he was in his late teens, which was correct. Later he tells the parents in court that he thought he was around his age (late twenties). I don't see nic-picking here. I can't help that he stated inconsistencies from his own mouth. What are we and the judge/jury more importantly supposed to do, ignore them and pretend they don't exist? A person can't claim that they want justice but choose to ignore indisputable facts related to the case.

One could equally be shocked that you or others may assume him not being guilty based on what's been released. One could be shocked that so many people are running to his aid and financially supporting him before there's a verdict.

We all want a fair trial and due process to run its course. At least I do.

[Edited 6/5/12 9:30am]

Reply #140 posted 06/05/12 9:24am

free2bfreeda

abc

Update on Motion for Bond

http://gzlegalcase.com/in...erman-case

on 05 June 2012.

Mr. Zimmerman's legal defense team has decided to delay filing a motion for bond. A hearing will not be scheduled for a couple of weeks, and we will file a the motion well in advance of the hearing.

your move judge.....

Playing c...imo, it's a wise move on the defense team's part. i'm sure they feel the delay will give the public a chance to forget the GZ and his Mrs jail telephone code mini-waterloo.

one day a child hugged the earth & whispered 2 her,"I wish people would realize every x a bomb is launched & hits ur surface, it's like a major injury 2 u." i know war hurts u. :" the earth rumbled softly n reply, then cried a massive storm(c)
Reply #141 posted 06/05/12 9:38am

Musicslave

free2bfreeda said:

abc

Update on Motion for Bond

http://gzlegalcase.com/in...erman-case

on 05 June 2012.

Mr. Zimmerman's legal defense team has decided to delay filing a motion for bond. A hearing will not be scheduled for a couple of weeks, and we will file a the motion well in advance of the hearing.

your move judge.....

Playing c...imo, it's a wise move on the defense team's part. i'm sure they feel the delay will give the public a chance to forget the GZ and his Mrs jail telephone code mini-waterloo.

The judge was off this week anyway. And yes, O'Mara knows that in order to try to "repair" (as he put it) some of his supposed credibility back, it would probably serve him well to do SOME time in jail after lying to the Court. Being too eager to get another bond set would appear obviously arrogant, as if you did nothing wrong and don't deserve any time. O'Mara's PR game is on point, we'll see if that translate in the courtroom.

[Edited 6/5/12 9:41am]

Reply #142 posted 06/05/12 12:21pm

DiminutiveRocker

OnlyNDaUsa said:

Musicslave said:

— At his April 20 bond hearing, while making a surprise apology to Martin’s family, Zimmerman said he didn’t realize Trayvon was so young. In his call to police moments before the shooting, however, he described Martin — who was 17 — as in his “late teens.”

and he was in his Mid-teens! 13 14 (early) 15 16 17 (mid) 18 19 (late)

if we want to be all nic-picky... i am shocked at how so many assume his guilt when not ONE WORD of testimony ahd been given in the case.

Not assuming guilt - reading his credibility! And since his case rests much on HIS version of what happened (since, as you recall, TM is dead) - his credibility is very important. He called TM's age right to the dispatcher - but then in court and to TM's parents he says he thought TM was his age? rolleyes Come on, he knew he killed a boy.

GZ is not coming off as honest. He is being charged with murder - and has every reason to lie about what happened that night.

wink

[Edited 6/5/12 12:29pm]

Consider the rights of others before your own feelings, and the feelings of others before your own rights.
~ John Wooden
Reply #143 posted 06/05/12 1:42pm

SUPRMAN

OnlyNDaUsa said:

SUPRMAN said:

Why not? Best use of judicial resources.

which is why a defence lawyer would nix it!

It wouldn't be a defense lawyer's decision thankfully.

I don't want you to think like me. I just want you to think.
Reply #144 posted 06/05/12 1:45pm

SUPRMAN

OnlyNDaUsa said:

Musicslave said:

— At his April 20 bond hearing, while making a surprise apology to Martin’s family, Zimmerman said he didn’t realize Trayvon was so young. In his call to police moments before the shooting, however, he described Martin — who was 17 — as in his “late teens.”

and he was in his Mid-teens! 13 14 (early) 15 16 17 (mid) 18 19 (late)

if we want to be all nic-picky... i am shocked at how so many assume his guilt when not ONE WORD of testimony ahd been given in the case.

Nit-picky.

Anyway. There is GZ's statements to police.

Do we need a trial to know he shot and killed Trayvon Martin?

Do you wait until a trial to form an opinion about legal matters?

If there never is a trial, would you complain?

I don't want you to think like me. I just want you to think.
Reply #145 posted 06/05/12 1:47pm

SUPRMAN

free2bfreeda said:

abc

Update on Motion for Bond

http://gzlegalcase.com/in...erman-case

on 05 June 2012.

Mr. Zimmerman's legal defense team has decided to delay filing a motion for bond. A hearing will not be scheduled for a couple of weeks, and we will file a the motion well in advance of the hearing.

your move judge.....

Playing c...imo, it's a wise move on the defense team's part. i'm sure they feel the delay will give the public a chance to forget the GZ and his Mrs jail telephone code mini-waterloo.

Nope. The prosecution isn't going to let the judge "forget." I doubt the judge is going to forget a defendant trying to play him either.

I don't want you to think like me. I just want you to think.
Reply #146 posted 06/05/12 3:20pm

free2bfreeda

SUPRMAN said:

free2bfreeda said:

abc

Update on Motion for Bond

http://gzlegalcase.com/in...erman-case

on 05 June 2012.

Mr. Zimmerman's legal defense team has decided to delay filing a motion for bond. A hearing will not be scheduled for a couple of weeks, and we will file a the motion well in advance of the hearing.

your move judge.....

Playing c...imo, it's a wise move on the defense team's part. i'm sure they feel the delay will give the public a chance to forget the GZ and his Mrs jail telephone code mini-waterloo.

Nope. The prosecution isn't going to let the judge "forget." I doubt the judge is going to forget a defendant trying to play him either.

well, i was moreso pointing to the public's forgetting in regards to the telephone thingy. we all know how the public can be fickle. and in this case, at least 70% of this case is being tried in the court of public opinion.

i believe the defense team is depending to a less than sizeable extent on public reaction to this case. although, in reality, i'm aware it won't (or shouldn't) sway the judge's decision.

(┛ò__ó)┛

one day a child hugged the earth & whispered 2 her,"I wish people would realize every x a bomb is launched & hits ur surface, it's like a major injury 2 u." i know war hurts u. :" the earth rumbled softly n reply, then cried a massive storm(c)
Reply #147 posted 06/06/12 8:21pm

free2bfreeda

abc

Judge grants Zimmerman another bond hearing

http://usnews.msnbc.msn.c...aring?lite

6 June 2012 5:16pm | By Jamie Novogrod, NBC News

Sanford, Fla. -- A new bond hearing for George Zimmerman has been set for June 29, his lawyer confirmed Wednesday.

In court Friday, prosecutors said Zimmerman did not correct his wife, Shellie Zimmerman, during an April 20 bail hearing as she misled the court about their finances, neglecting to disclose they had raised at least $135,000 in a PayPal account.

In an online statement Monday, Zimmerman’s lawyer, Mark O’Mara, said his client had acknowledged the error, saying Zimmerman allowed the couple's finances to be misstated because of fear and other pressures related to the case.

"The gravity of this mistake has been distinctly illustrated, and Mr. Zimmerman understands that this mistake has undermined his credibility, which he will have to work to repair,” O’Mara said.

50/50%? will he stay in jail, or will he be released on a set bond?

one day a child hugged the earth & whispered 2 her,"I wish people would realize every x a bomb is launched & hits ur surface, it's like a major injury 2 u." i know war hurts u. :" the earth rumbled softly n reply, then cried a massive storm(c)
Reply #148 posted 06/07/12 3:42am

DiminutiveRocker

free2bfreeda said:

abc

Judge grants Zimmerman another bond hearing

http://usnews.msnbc.msn.c...aring?lite

6 June 2012 5:16pm | By Jamie Novogrod, NBC News

Sanford, Fla. -- A new bond hearing for George Zimmerman has been set for June 29, his lawyer confirmed Wednesday.

In court Friday, prosecutors said Zimmerman did not correct his wife, Shellie Zimmerman, during an April 20 bail hearing as she misled the court about their finances, neglecting to disclose they had raised at least $135,000 in a PayPal account.

In an online statement Monday, Zimmerman’s lawyer, Mark O’Mara, said his client had acknowledged the error, saying Zimmerman allowed the couple's finances to be misstated because of fear and other pressures related to the case.

"The gravity of this mistake has been distinctly illustrated, and Mr. Zimmerman understands that this mistake has undermined his credibility, which he will have to work to repair,” O’Mara said.

50/50%? will he stay in jail, or will he be released on a set bond?

Well... GZ, addition to lying about the $$ thing, also lied aout knowing the existence of another more current passport - the passport he previuosly turned in to the court soon expired. If the prosecution is wise - they will drive both of these home like a jack hammer and since this case is SO very scrutinized (lol) in the public - it all could sway the judge as well - I am sure he does not want to appear to be played anymore.

I say it's 50/50... 1) lying about $$ 2) lying about the existence of current passport (which I assume he will turn in - again) and 3) waiving his right to s speedy trial - - - - - flight risk, anyone?

shrug

[Edited 6/7/12 3:48am]

Consider the rights of others before your own feelings, and the feelings of others before your own rights.
~ John Wooden
Reply #149 posted 06/07/12 5:45am

Musicslave

DiminutiveRocker said:

free2bfreeda said:

abc

Judge grants Zimmerman another bond hearing

http://usnews.msnbc.msn.c...aring?lite

6 June 2012 5:16pm | By Jamie Novogrod, NBC News

Sanford, Fla. -- A new bond hearing for George Zimmerman has been set for June 29, his lawyer confirmed Wednesday.

In court Friday, prosecutors said Zimmerman did not correct his wife, Shellie Zimmerman, during an April 20 bail hearing as she misled the court about their finances, neglecting to disclose they had raised at least $135,000 in a PayPal account.

In an online statement Monday, Zimmerman’s lawyer, Mark O’Mara, said his client had acknowledged the error, saying Zimmerman allowed the couple's finances to be misstated because of fear and other pressures related to the case.

"The gravity of this mistake has been distinctly illustrated, and Mr. Zimmerman understands that this mistake has undermined his credibility, which he will have to work to repair,” O’Mara said.

50/50%? will he stay in jail, or will he be released on a set bond?

Well... GZ, addition to lying about the $$ thing, also lied aout knowing the existence of another more current passport - the passport he previuosly turned in to the court soon expired. If the prosecution is wise - they will drive both of these home like a jack hammer and since this case is SO very scrutinized (lol) in the public - it all could sway the judge as well - I am sure he does not want to appear to be played anymore.

I say it's 50/50... 1) lying about $$ 2) lying about the existence of current passport (which I assume he will turn in - again) and 3) waiving his right to s speedy trial - - - - - flight risk, anyone?

shrug

[Edited 6/7/12 3:48am]

I think after the judge completes his review of the recorded tapes prior to the original hearing and considering what was said during that bond hearing, he'll conclude that this was no mere "mistake". In spite of O'Mara trying his best to paint GZ in a harmless light, I don't think he'll go for it. I'll say what I've said before: No judge wants to be made a fool of in his own courtroom. If he lets something this blantant slide, I'd be worried about a fair trial. This was calculated and conniving. Ignorance has nothing to do with this.

I think he's lucky he's getting another hearing, because he's not entitled to one. I was watching the hearing live online at the time and Judge Lester said that he wants to hear what GZ has to say. To give him a chance to explain himself. This could be a matter of humiliation to make him confront the judge face to face and apologize to the Court and offer an excuse of why. This way, the judge can appear to be fair before issuing his position on the matter.

He also may try to thread the needle by raising his bond amount extraordinary high being that he knows he has access to hundreds of thousands now. There were reports that since his bond was revoked, his donations have skyrocketed again. Imagine that hmmm

Reply #150 posted 06/07/12 7:43am

DiminutiveRocker

Musicslave said:

DiminutiveRocker said:

Well... GZ, addition to lying about the $$ thing, also lied aout knowing the existence of another more current passport - the passport he previuosly turned in to the court soon expired. If the prosecution is wise - they will drive both of these home like a jack hammer and since this case is SO very scrutinized (lol) in the public - it all could sway the judge as well - I am sure he does not want to appear to be played anymore.

I say it's 50/50... 1) lying about $$ 2) lying about the existence of current passport (which I assume he will turn in - again) and 3) waiving his right to s speedy trial - - - - - flight risk, anyone?

shrug

[Edited 6/7/12 3:48am]

I think after the judge completes his review of the recorded tapes prior to the original hearing and considering what was said during that bond hearing, he'll conclude that this was no mere "mistake". In spite of O'Mara trying his best to paint GZ in a harmless light, I don't think he'll go for it. I'll say what I've said before: No judge wants to be made a fool of in his own courtroom. If he lets something this blantant slide, I'd be worried about a fair trial. This was calculated and conniving. Ignorance has nothing to do with this.

I think he's lucky he's getting another hearing, because he's not entitled to one. I was watching the hearing live online at the time and Judge Lester said that he wants to hear what GZ has to say. To give him a chance to explain himself. This could be a matter of humiliation to make him confront the judge face to face and apologize to the Court and offer an excuse of why. This way, the judge can appear to be fair before issuing his position on the matter.

He also may try to thread the needle by raising his bond amount extraordinary high being that he knows he has access to hundreds of thousands now. There were reports that since his bond was revoked, his donations have skyrocketed again. Imagine that hmmm

eek

Or.... he may not grant him bail at all.

Consider the rights of others before your own feelings, and the feelings of others before your own rights.
~ John Wooden
Reply #151 posted 06/07/12 9:21am

Musicslave

DiminutiveRocker said:

Musicslave said:

I think after the judge completes his review of the recorded tapes prior to the original hearing and considering what was said during that bond hearing, he'll conclude that this was no mere "mistake". In spite of O'Mara trying his best to paint GZ in a harmless light, I don't think he'll go for it. I'll say what I've said before: No judge wants to be made a fool of in his own courtroom. If he lets something this blantant slide, I'd be worried about a fair trial. This was calculated and conniving. Ignorance has nothing to do with this.

I think he's lucky he's getting another hearing, because he's not entitled to one. I was watching the hearing live online at the time and Judge Lester said that he wants to hear what GZ has to say. To give him a chance to explain himself. This could be a matter of humiliation to make him confront the judge face to face and apologize to the Court and offer an excuse of why. This way, the judge can appear to be fair before issuing his position on the matter.

He also may try to thread the needle by raising his bond amount extraordinary high being that he knows he has access to hundreds of thousands now. There were reports that since his bond was revoked, his donations have skyrocketed again. Imagine that hmmm

eek

Or.... he may not grant him bail at all.

That's what I'm thinking but I guess we'll find out June 29th won't we. I just can't see him being lenient with this.

Reply #152 posted 06/07/12 10:10am

DiminutiveRocker

Musicslave said:

DiminutiveRocker said:

eek

Or.... he may not grant him bail at all.

That's what I'm thinking but I guess we'll find out June 29th won't we. I just can't see him being lenient with this.

I'm not personally buying in to GZ's excuse of being so freaked out about the case. So much so that he let his wife perjure herself? The whole $ issue seemed calculated - espeically after seeing the transcripts of those phone calls.

Consider the rights of others before your own feelings, and the feelings of others before your own rights.
~ John Wooden
Reply #153 posted 06/07/12 11:31am

Musicslave

DiminutiveRocker said:

Musicslave said:

That's what I'm thinking but I guess we'll find out June 29th won't we. I just can't see him being lenient with this.

I'm not personally buying in to GZ's excuse of being so freaked out about the case. So much so that he let his wife perjure herself? The whole $ issue seemed calculated - espeically after seeing the transcripts of those phone calls.

Exactly! Talk about self-incrimination lol Those calls are undeniable! His best bet is to ask for mercy. So far the excuses that his defense team have come up with fall way short of a plausible explanation. He didn't buy it last time either and demanded his bond revoked. Rembember the "potted plant" line from Judge Lester? O'Mara has pretty much acknowledged the lie in so many words. Their challenge now is trying to give a good excuse of WHY he lied. The ball is completely in the judges court (no pun intended).

Reply #154 posted 06/11/12 9:07pm

DiminutiveRocker

Musicslave said:

DiminutiveRocker said:

I'm not personally buying in to GZ's excuse of being so freaked out about the case. So much so that he let his wife perjure herself? The whole $ issue seemed calculated - espeically after seeing the transcripts of those phone calls.

Exactly! Talk about self-incrimination lol Those calls are undeniable! His best bet is to ask for mercy. So far the excuses that his defense team have come up with fall way short of a plausible explanation. He didn't buy it last time either and demanded his bond revoked. Rembember the "potted plant" line from Judge Lester? O'Mara has pretty much acknowledged the lie in so many words. Their challenge now is trying to give a good excuse of WHY he lied. The ball is completely in the judges court (no pun intended).

tumbleweed So....what do we do? GZ is in jail and the hearing is not till 6/29!

lol

Consider the rights of others before your own feelings, and the feelings of others before your own rights.
~ John Wooden
Reply #155 posted 06/12/12 8:09am

Musicslave

DiminutiveRocker said:

Musicslave said:

Exactly! Talk about self-incrimination lol Those calls are undeniable! His best bet is to ask for mercy. So far the excuses that his defense team have come up with fall way short of a plausible explanation. He didn't buy it last time either and demanded his bond revoked. Rembember the "potted plant" line from Judge Lester? O'Mara has pretty much acknowledged the lie in so many words. Their challenge now is trying to give a good excuse of WHY he lied. The ball is completely in the judges court (no pun intended).

tumbleweed So....what do we do? GZ is in jail and the hearing is not till 6/29!

lol

lol Yeah, things have slown down a bit.

There's been behind-the-scenes drama between the State Attorney's office and Harvard Law Professor, Alan Dershowitz over charging GZ with 2nd degree murder and the affadavit she submitted to the Court. Here's an example of their beef:

Excerpt from Alan Dershowitz Article: "

Drop Zimmerman’s murder charge

A medical report by George Zimmerman’s doctor has disclosed that Zimmerman had a fractured nose, two black eyes, two lacerations on the back of his head and a back injury on the day after the fatal shooting. If this evidence turns out to be valid, the prosecutor will have no choice but to drop the second-degree murder charge against Zimmerman — if she wants to act ethically, lawfully and professionally.

There is, of course, no assurance that the special prosecutor handling the case, State Attorney Angela Corey, will do the right thing. Because until now, her actions have been anything but ethical, lawful and professional.

http://articles.orlandose...d-shooting

Dershowitz: Zimmerman prosecutor ranted against Harvard

4:17 p.m. EST, June 6, 2012|

By Jeff Weiner, Orlando Sentinel

Famed attorney and legal commentator Alan Dershowitz has been one of the harshest critics of State Attorney Angela Corey's approach to prosecuting George Zimmerman. According to Dershowitz, Corey is none too pleased.

Writing on Newsmax.com, the Harvard Law School professor says Corey called the school and went on "a 40-minute rant, during which she threatened to sue Harvard Law School, to try to get me disciplined by the Bar Association and to file charges against me for libel and slander."

When the school explained Dershowitz has a right to express his opinions, Corey "persisted in her nonstop whining," he writes, "claiming that she is prohibited from responding to my attacks by the rules of professional responsibility."

Dershowitz has been critical of Corey since she charged Zimmerman with second-degree murder in April. He says the affidavit she filed to support that charge omitted key facts and contained "half truths."

A Corey spokeswoman declined to comment on the Newsmax column.

Dershowitz's post doesn't say when exactly Corey's call occurred. A Harvard Law School spokeswoman didn't return a call seeking comment.

Dershowitz says Corey, in her affidavit, "willfully omitted all information" about injuries Zimmerman suffered in his conflict with 17-year-old Trayvon Martin. He said Corey denied having an obligation to include that information.

"She should go back to law school, where she will learn that it is never appropriate to submit an affidavit that contains a half truth, because a half truth is regarded by the law as a lie, and anyone who submits an affidavit swears to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth," Dershowitz wrote.

Dershowitz has ripped Corey repeatedly.

The affidavit, he said in a television interview, "is not only thin, it's irresponsible." He described Corey's announcement of the charge as "a campaign speech for re-election" and later wrote that she has been "anything but ethical, lawful and professional" in prosecuting the case.

In an appearance on Fox News, he went a step further: If Corey knew about Zimmerman's injuries, he said, "This affidavit submitted by the prosecutor in the Florida case is a crime... It's a perjurious affidavit."

However, he says Corey's went too far in her response to his criticism.

"The idea that a prosecutor would threaten to sue someone who disagrees with her for libel and slander, to sue the university for which he works, and to try to get him disbarred, is the epitome of unprofessionalism," he says.

Zimmerman shot Trayvon on Feb. 26 in Sanford. He says he fired in self-defense after the teenager attacked him.

I didn't deem it important enough to post but there ya go......

Reply #156 posted 06/12/12 1:43pm

HotGritz

eek eek DAMN! But that's what she gets!!!

http://articles.orlandose...20120612_1

George Zimmerman's wife arrested, charged with perjury

  • George Zimmerman's wife, Shellie Zimmerman, was arrested June 12 on one count of perjury.
George Zimmerman's wife, Shellie Zimmerman, was arrested… (Seminole County jail, Seminole…)
4:23 p.m. EST, June 12, 2012|

By Jeff Weiner, Orlando Sentinel

Earlier this month, a judge threw George Zimmerman back in jail, after prosecutors said Zimmerman and his wife misled the court about their finances.

On Tuesday, his wife, Shellie Zimmerman, was booked into the same facility on a perjury charge.

According to the Seminole County Sheriff's Office, deputies were alerted by prosecutors Tuesday that a warrant had been issued for Shellie Zimmerman, 25. She was arrested about 3:30 p.m. "at the location she was residing in Seminole County," deputies said in a statement.

She was booked on a perjury charge, with bond set at $1,000. She is currently "in the process of posting bond," deputies said.

The arrest comes after prosecutors in George Zimmerman's case told Judge Kenneth Lester that Shellie Zimmerman lied about her husband's finances, in order to conceal about $135,000 from the court.

This is a developing story. Check back later for updates.

[Edited 6/12/12 13:44pm]

I'M NOT SAYING YOU'RE UGLY. YOU JUST HAVE BAD LUCK WHEN IT COMES TO MIRRORS AND SUNLIGHT!
RIP Dick Clark, Whitney Houston, Don Cornelius, Heavy D, and Donna Summer. rose
Reply #157 posted 06/12/12 2:00pm

free2bfreeda

HotGritz said:

eek eek DAMN! But that's what she gets!!!

http://articles.orlandose...20120612_1

George Zimmerman's wife arrested, charged with perjury

  • George Zimmerman's wife, Shellie Zimmerman, was arrested June 12 on one count of perjury.
George Zimmerman's wife, Shellie Zimmerman, was arrested… (Seminole County jail, Seminole…)
4:23 p.m. EST, June 12, 2012|

By Jeff Weiner, Orlando Sentinel

Earlier this month, a judge threw George Zimmerman back in jail, after prosecutors said Zimmerman and his wife misled the court about their finances.

On Tuesday, his wife, Shellie Zimmerman, was booked into the same facility on a perjury charge.

According to the Seminole County Sheriff's Office, deputies were alerted by prosecutors Tuesday that a warrant had been issued for Shellie Zimmerman, 25. She was arrested about 3:30 p.m. "at the location she was residing in Seminole County," deputies said in a statement.

She was booked on a perjury charge, with bond set at $1,000. She is currently "in the process of posting bond," deputies said.

The arrest comes after prosecutors in George Zimmerman's case told Judge Kenneth Lester that Shellie Zimmerman lied about her husband's finances, in order to conceal about $135,000 from the court.

This is a developing story. Check back later for updates.

[Edited 6/12/12 13:44pm]

Image Detail

she's probably thinking. "piece a cake. my father in law is a retired magistrate judge, and he'll connect the p.e.r.j.u.r.y. dots for me." "now what am i going to have for dinner?"

[Edited 6/12/12 14:01pm]

one day a child hugged the earth & whispered 2 her,"I wish people would realize every x a bomb is launched & hits ur surface, it's like a major injury 2 u." i know war hurts u. :" the earth rumbled softly n reply, then cried a massive storm(c)
Reply #158 posted 06/12/12 2:05pm

rudedog

HotGritz said:

eek eek DAMN! But that's what she gets!!!

http://articles.orlandose...20120612_1

George Zimmerman's wife arrested, charged with perjury

Jesus, i hope these idiots never procreate. Guess she can't be a character witness, if she is...it'll hurt his case. I'm going to bet the defense plea bargains once this goes to trial.

"The voter is less important than the man who provides money to the candidate," - Former Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens
Rudedog no no no!
Reply #159 posted 06/12/12 2:32pm

OnlyNDaUsa

George Zimmerman's wife, Shellie Zimmerman, was arrested June 12 on one count of perjury.

if i had to lay next to that at night... i might choose jail!

Living with a disability is not the Wurst thing in the word: Knowingly Mocking someone with one is far Wurst!.
Reply #160 posted 06/12/12 2:33pm

HotGritz

^ lol lol lol lol COLD AS HELL!

I'M NOT SAYING YOU'RE UGLY. YOU JUST HAVE BAD LUCK WHEN IT COMES TO MIRRORS AND SUNLIGHT!
RIP Dick Clark, Whitney Houston, Don Cornelius, Heavy D, and Donna Summer. rose
Reply #161 posted 06/12/12 2:37pm

OnlyNDaUsa

HotGritz said:

^ lol lol lol lol COLD AS HELL!

no it is not... she picked that make up and that eye thing... she looks scary. but then GZ looked a bit odd too.

oh and I doubt she will be convicted of anyting ... he will get 2 to 5 years for manslaughter

Living with a disability is not the Wurst thing in the word: Knowingly Mocking someone with one is far Wurst!.
Reply #162 posted 06/12/12 4:25pm

HotGritz

OnlyNDaUsa said:

HotGritz said:

^ lol lol lol lol COLD AS HELL!

no it is not... she picked that make up and that eye thing... she looks scary. but then GZ looked a bit odd too.

oh and I doubt she will be convicted of anyting ... he will get 2 to 5 years for manslaughter

Awful! And I don't fully understand the difference between manslaughter and murder. I presume one dictates premeditation but then again, how do we know Zimmerman didn't premeditate. I mean he was walking around with a loaded gun and he viewed Trayvon as "up to no good" and appearing to be on drugs. sad That part will always bother me I suppose. That a kid lost his life because he didn't look a certain way.

I'M NOT SAYING YOU'RE UGLY. YOU JUST HAVE BAD LUCK WHEN IT COMES TO MIRRORS AND SUNLIGHT!
RIP Dick Clark, Whitney Houston, Don Cornelius, Heavy D, and Donna Summer. rose
Reply #163 posted 06/12/12 4:57pm

2elijah

HotGritz said:

eek eek DAMN! But that's what she gets!!!

http://articles.orlandose...20120612_1

George Zimmerman's wife arrested, charged with perjury

  • George Zimmerman's wife, Shellie Zimmerman, was arrested June 12 on one count of perjury.
George Zimmerman's wife, Shellie Zimmerman, was arrested… (Seminole County jail, Seminole…)
4:23 p.m. EST, June 12, 2012|

By Jeff Weiner, Orlando Sentinel

Earlier this month, a judge threw George Zimmerman back in jail, after prosecutors said Zimmerman and his wife misled the court about their finances.

On Tuesday, his wife, Shellie Zimmerman, was booked into the same facility on a perjury charge.

According to the Seminole County Sheriff's Office, deputies were alerted by prosecutors Tuesday that a warrant had been issued for Shellie Zimmerman, 25. She was arrested about 3:30 p.m. "at the location she was residing in Seminole County," deputies said in a statement.

She was booked on a perjury charge, with bond set at $1,000. She is currently "in the process of posting bond," deputies said.

The arrest comes after prosecutors in George Zimmerman's case told Judge Kenneth Lester that Shellie Zimmerman lied about her husband's finances, in order to conceal about $135,000 from the court.

This is a developing story. Check back later for updates.

[Edited 6/12/12 13:44pm]

She'll be out as soon as she posts bond, but damn. Looks like GZ's chickens are coming home to roost. Now some of his family members are paying for his actions. Like they say...karma don't play!

Reply #164 posted 06/12/12 5:00pm

HotGritz

2elijah said:

HotGritz said:

eek eek DAMN! But that's what she gets!!!

http://articles.orlandose...20120612_1

George Zimmerman's wife arrested, charged with perjury

  • George Zimmerman's wife, Shellie Zimmerman, was arrested June 12 on one count of perjury.
George Zimmerman's wife, Shellie Zimmerman, was arrested… (Seminole County jail, Seminole…)
4:23 p.m. EST, June 12, 2012|

By Jeff Weiner, Orlando Sentinel

Earlier this month, a judge threw George Zimmerman back in jail, after prosecutors said Zimmerman and his wife misled the court about their finances.

On Tuesday, his wife, Shellie Zimmerman, was booked into the same facility on a perjury charge.

According to the Seminole County Sheriff's Office, deputies were alerted by prosecutors Tuesday that a warrant had been issued for Shellie Zimmerman, 25. She was arrested about 3:30 p.m. "at the location she was residing in Seminole County," deputies said in a statement.

She was booked on a perjury charge, with bond set at $1,000. She is currently "in the process of posting bond," deputies said.

The arrest comes after prosecutors in George Zimmerman's case told Judge Kenneth Lester that Shellie Zimmerman lied about her husband's finances, in order to conceal about $135,000 from the court.

This is a developing story. Check back later for updates.

[Edited 6/12/12 13:44pm]

She'll be out as soon as she posts bond, but damn. Looks like GZ's chickens are coming home to roost. Now some of his family members are paying for his actions. Like they say...karma don't play!

That's exactly what's happening. A part of me wants GZ's brother to get some karma. He has irritated me from the very first moment he spoke on his murderous brother's behalf.

I'M NOT SAYING YOU'RE UGLY. YOU JUST HAVE BAD LUCK WHEN IT COMES TO MIRRORS AND SUNLIGHT!
RIP Dick Clark, Whitney Houston, Don Cornelius, Heavy D, and Donna Summer. rose
Reply #165 posted 06/12/12 5:09pm

2elijah

HotGritz said:

2elijah said:

She'll be out as soon as she posts bond, but damn. Looks like GZ's chickens are coming home to roost. Now some of his family members are paying for his actions. Like they say...karma don't play!

That's exactly what's happening. A part of me wants GZ's brother to get some karma. He has irritated me from the very first moment he spoke on his murderous brother's behalf.

Karma is the b*tch that you never have to worry if she will show up 'on time'...'cause she's never late. What time is it? ::looks at watch:: lol popcorn

Reply #166 posted 06/12/12 5:11pm

HotGritz

giggle lol

I'M NOT SAYING YOU'RE UGLY. YOU JUST HAVE BAD LUCK WHEN IT COMES TO MIRRORS AND SUNLIGHT!
RIP Dick Clark, Whitney Houston, Don Cornelius, Heavy D, and Donna Summer. rose
Reply #167 posted 06/12/12 5:23pm

OnlyNDaUsa

HotGritz said:

OnlyNDaUsa said:

no it is not... she picked that make up and that eye thing... she looks scary. but then GZ looked a bit odd too.

oh and I doubt she will be convicted of anyting ... he will get 2 to 5 years for manslaughter

Awful! And I don't fully understand the difference between manslaughter and murder. I presume one dictates premeditation but then again,

it is complicated. but I think it is mostly intent to commit a crime. If you are setting out to commit a crime (say a mugging) and someone dies the perp can get the maximum penalty.

how do we know Zimmerman didn't premeditate.

which is why I am glad that in the US that is not the standard or burden of the defence.

I mean he was walking around with a loaded gun and he viewed Trayvon as "up to no good" and appearing to be on drugs. sad

none of which was a crime.

That part will always bother me I suppose. That a kid lost his life because he didn't look a certain way.

yeah it was tragic. which is why i have said from the start he committed a crime. just not murder. emotional reactions and what ifs and how do we knows are fine for chit chat but have NO PLACE in court.

Living with a disability is not the Wurst thing in the word: Knowingly Mocking someone with one is far Wurst!.
Reply #168 posted 06/12/12 5:39pm

babynoz

Well at least Sam's Club and American Express are happy they got paid.

Have you ever seen pathetically dumb people who think that everybody is dumb but themselves? That's the Zimmermans. disbelief

I wonder if Zim's sister is gonna have to give up the money she's hiding too?

"Success has a great tendency to conceal and throw a veil over the evil of men"....Demosthenes
Reply #169 posted 06/12/12 5:42pm

HotGritz

babynoz said:

Well at least Sam's Club and American Express are happy they got paid.

Have you ever seen pathetically dumb people who think that everybody is dumb but themselves? That's the Zimmermans. disbelief

I wonder if Zim's sister is gonna have to give up the money she's hiding too?

They never intended for that money to be used for GZ's legal defense. They are a family of hustlers.

I'M NOT SAYING YOU'RE UGLY. YOU JUST HAVE BAD LUCK WHEN IT COMES TO MIRRORS AND SUNLIGHT!
RIP Dick Clark, Whitney Houston, Don Cornelius, Heavy D, and Donna Summer. rose
Reply #170 posted 06/12/12 6:38pm

babynoz

HotGritz said:

babynoz said:

Well at least Sam's Club and American Express are happy they got paid.

Have you ever seen pathetically dumb people who think that everybody is dumb but themselves? That's the Zimmermans. disbelief

I wonder if Zim's sister is gonna have to give up the money she's hiding too?

They never intended for that money to be used for GZ's legal defense. They are a family of hustlers.

They are a family who "think" they are smart enough to be hustlers, but are actually dumb as a shoe. disbelief

Did Zim really think the State Dept. forgot all about that second passport they gave him?

"Success has a great tendency to conceal and throw a veil over the evil of men"....Demosthenes
Reply #171 posted 06/12/12 7:46pm

free2bfreeda

food for comments and thoughts:

http://www.wtsp.com/asset...-12-12.pdf

Read: Shellie Zimmerman's arrest affidavit (PDF)

dang, this whole code on the telephone thing between george and shellie zimmerman reminds me of a line from the reruns of beverly hillbillies t.v. series.

it's the scene where jethro does something real dumb.

then jed says to jethro: "boy sometimes i think you got grits for brains."

i mean imo with such obtuse actions and mindsets coming from both shellie and george, for them to think, or not to think that all their calls weren't being monitered, is like "welcome to breakfast in sanford, grits are supplied by the grittermans." "all our breakfast meals are prepared with no forethought." "yup that's right shellie, that's our motto."

friendsswinging.gif

giggle just funnin folks falloff

[Edited 6/12/12 22:55pm]

one day a child hugged the earth & whispered 2 her,"I wish people would realize every x a bomb is launched & hits ur surface, it's like a major injury 2 u." i know war hurts u. :" the earth rumbled softly n reply, then cried a massive storm(c)
Reply #172 posted 06/12/12 7:56pm

uPtoWnNY

Damn, his wife is a fucking beast.

Reply #173 posted 06/12/12 11:10pm

DiminutiveRocker

babynoz said:

HotGritz said:

They never intended for that money to be used for GZ's legal defense. They are a family of hustlers.

They are a family who "think" they are smart enough to be hustlers, but are actually dumb as a shoe. disbelief

Did Zim really think the State Dept. forgot all about that second passport they gave him?

nod

Consider the rights of others before your own feelings, and the feelings of others before your own rights.
~ John Wooden
Reply #174 posted 06/13/12 5:47am

Musicslave

"Why don't they leave that family alone?! Haven't they suffered enough already? They're whole lives have been turned up side down. They've had to deal with death threats, seclusion, unable to return to work, etc. They just seem like the average American family. The girl was just trying to protect her husband, no big deal...."

Believe it or not these are the words and opinions of some of my co-workers. No suggestions of taking responsibility for her possible perjury under oath, just excuses, sympathy and compassion because they believe her husband's story.

neutral

Reply #175 posted 06/13/12 5:56am

musicjunky318

SMH

Reply #176 posted 06/13/12 9:35am

HotGritz

Musicslave said:

"Why don't they leave that family alone?! Haven't they suffered enough already? They're whole lives have been turned up side down. They've had to deal with death threats, seclusion, unable to return to work, etc. They just seem like the average American family. The girl was just trying to protect her husband, no big deal...."

Believe it or not these are the words and opinions of some of my co-workers. No suggestions of taking responsibility for her possible perjury under oath, just excuses, sympathy and compassion because they believe her husband's story.

neutral

Damn, your coworkers are some str8 tards! neutral

I bet if the script was flipped and it was Trayvon who shot GZ using SYG, they wouldn't hold those same views.

I'M NOT SAYING YOU'RE UGLY. YOU JUST HAVE BAD LUCK WHEN IT COMES TO MIRRORS AND SUNLIGHT!
RIP Dick Clark, Whitney Houston, Don Cornelius, Heavy D, and Donna Summer. rose
Reply #177 posted 06/13/12 10:33am

OnlyNDaUsa

HotGritz said:

Musicslave said:

"Why don't they leave that family alone?! Haven't they suffered enough already? They're whole lives have been turned up side down. They've had to deal with death threats, seclusion, unable to return to work, etc. They just seem like the average American family. The girl was just trying to protect her husband, no big deal...."

Believe it or not these are the words and opinions of some of my co-workers. No suggestions of taking responsibility for her possible perjury under oath, just excuses, sympathy and compassion because they believe her husband's story.

neutral

Damn, your coworkers are some str8 tards! neutral

I bet if the script was flipped and it was Trayvon who shot GZ using SYG, they wouldn't hold those same views.

please people can we not use terms like 'tard' or 'retarded' as insults!? think about what that is saying? that people that are mentally retarded are lessor humans. it is just as bad if not worst that the use some form of the N word ( N-rigged) as insult. or insults or put downs that are based on sexual preference.

Living with a disability is not the Wurst thing in the word: Knowingly Mocking someone with one is far Wurst!.
Reply #178 posted 06/13/12 11:24am

HotGritz

OnlyNDaUsa said:

HotGritz said:

Damn, your coworkers are some str8 tards! neutral

I bet if the script was flipped and it was Trayvon who shot GZ using SYG, they wouldn't hold those same views.

please people can we not use terms like 'tard' or 'retarded' as insults!? think about what that is saying? that people that are mentally retarded are lessor humans. it is just as bad if not worst that the use some form of the N word ( N-rigged) as insult. or insults or put downs that are based on sexual preference.

Uh no it aint! Besides, we don't use the term mentally retarded anymore. We say mentally handicapped or disabled. Today, a retard is just a dumbass. A dumbass chooses to be dumb. When one is mentally disabled that is not something they can control nor are even aware of sometimes.

Ya coworkers are some basic bum bastids. Is that better? lol

I'M NOT SAYING YOU'RE UGLY. YOU JUST HAVE BAD LUCK WHEN IT COMES TO MIRRORS AND SUNLIGHT!
RIP Dick Clark, Whitney Houston, Don Cornelius, Heavy D, and Donna Summer. rose
Reply #179 posted 06/13/12 11:28am

kibbles

HotGritz said:

Musicslave said:

"Why don't they leave that family alone?! Haven't they suffered enough already? They're whole lives have been turned up side down. They've had to deal with death threats, seclusion, unable to return to work, etc. They just seem like the average American family. The girl was just trying to protect her husband, no big deal...."

Believe it or not these are the words and opinions of some of my co-workers. No suggestions of taking responsibility for her possible perjury under oath, just excuses, sympathy and compassion because they believe her husband's story.

neutral

Damn, your coworkers are some str8 tards! neutral

I bet if the script was flipped and it was Trayvon who shot GZ using SYG, they wouldn't hold those same views.

you're damn skippy they wouldn't. no way, no how. if one of trayvon's parents had been caught lying about a material fact under oath, no excuses would be made. no one would be talking about them being an average American family; they'd be described in the most withering terms possible. the word 'tard' is mild compared to what the martins would be subjected to.

Reply #180 posted 06/13/12 12:11pm

OnlyNDaUsa

HotGritz said:

OnlyNDaUsa said:

please people can we not use terms like 'tard' or 'retarded' as insults!? think about what that is saying? that people that are mentally retarded are lessor humans. it is just as bad if not worst that the use some form of the N word ( N-rigged) as insult. or insults or put downs that are based on sexual preference.

Uh no it aint! Besides, we don't use the term mentally retarded anymore. We say mentally handicapped or disabled. Today, a retard is just a dumbass. A dumbass chooses to be dumb. When one is mentally disabled that is not something they can control nor are even aware of sometimes.

Ya coworkers are some basic bum bastids. Is that better? lol

i was used as late as last year and if you want to use it, if you feel it is acceptable, if you can justify its use as an insult... that is on you.

Living with a disability is not the Wurst thing in the word: Knowingly Mocking someone with one is far Wurst!.
Reply #181 posted 06/13/12 12:46pm

Musicslave

http://abcnews.go.com/US/...d=16557010

George Zimmerman Fears for Wife's Safety After Mug Shot Publicized

Excerpts:

"Certainly now that she's been charged with a crime he's worried about her, and also worried now that she's out in the public eye," Zimmerman's attorney Mark O'Mara told ABC News after visiting his client in jail late Tuesday night. The lawyer said there are "legitimate safety concerns."

If convicted of the charge, Mrs. Zimmerman could be sentenced to five years in prison.

The move by prosecutors upset O'Mara because he says he was not given the professional courtesy of a warning beforehand.

Legal analysts speculate that Mrs. Zimmerman's arrest could be used as a tactic by the prosecutors to pressure her husband.

"They can always say, look, we won't prosecute your wife if you decide to plea to some sort of charge," legal analyst Mark Lippman told "Good Morning America" today. He added, "It seems pretty clear to me that this is not something they would do in a normal case."

What is this Lippman guy talking about? Why wouldn't a prosecutor have someone arrested after they committed perjury? Why isn't that normal? confused Am I missing something here?

Reply #182 posted 06/13/12 1:49pm

HotGritz

^ Why is GZ fearing for her safety? Shiit, its the public that needs to be in fear. HAVE YOU SEEN THAT HEFFA??? Apocalypse Now is all over her face!

I'M NOT SAYING YOU'RE UGLY. YOU JUST HAVE BAD LUCK WHEN IT COMES TO MIRRORS AND SUNLIGHT!
RIP Dick Clark, Whitney Houston, Don Cornelius, Heavy D, and Donna Summer. rose
Reply #183 posted 06/13/12 2:04pm

Musicslave

http://openchannel.msnbc....oting?lite

Judge cites Internet age, orders release of more evidence in Trayvon Martin shooting

Reply #184 posted 06/13/12 3:51pm

babynoz

HotGritz said:

OnlyNDaUsa said:

please people can we not use terms like 'tard' or 'retarded' as insults!? think about what that is saying? that people that are mentally retarded are lessor humans. it is just as bad if not worst that the use some form of the N word ( N-rigged) as insult. or insults or put downs that are based on sexual preference.

Uh no it aint! Besides, we don't use the term mentally retarded anymore. We say mentally handicapped or disabled. Today, a retard is just a dumbass. A dumbass chooses to be dumb. When one is mentally disabled that is not something they can control nor are even aware of sometimes.

Ya coworkers are some basic bum bastids. Is that better? lol

Pay no mind, it's just another of his endless attempts to take yet another thread off topic.

"Success has a great tendency to conceal and throw a veil over the evil of men"....Demosthenes
Reply #185 posted 06/13/12 4:01pm

babynoz

Musicslave said:

http://abcnews.go.com/US/...d=16557010

George Zimmerman Fears for Wife's Safety After Mug Shot Publicized

Excerpts:

"Certainly now that she's been charged with a crime he's worried about her, and also worried now that she's out in the public eye," Zimmerman's attorney Mark O'Mara told ABC News after visiting his client in jail late Tuesday night. The lawyer said there are "legitimate safety concerns."

If convicted of the charge, Mrs. Zimmerman could be sentenced to five years in prison.

The move by prosecutors upset O'Mara because he says he was not given the professional courtesy of a warning beforehand.

Legal analysts speculate that Mrs. Zimmerman's arrest could be used as a tactic by the prosecutors to pressure her husband.

"They can always say, look, we won't prosecute your wife if you decide to plea to some sort of charge," legal analyst Mark Lippman told "Good Morning America" today. He added, "It seems pretty clear to me that this is not something they would do in a normal case."

What is this Lippman guy talking about? Why wouldn't a prosecutor have someone arrested after they committed perjury? Why isn't that normal? confused Am I missing something here?

They were under no obligation to warn Omara of anything...she is not his client.

Of course now I suppose they will need more donations to finance his wife's hideout and legal defense, or maybe the Master Card bill is due. disbelief

It's possible that they will use this as leverage against Zim but the fact remains that she is the one who took it upon herself to commit perjury. No one forced her.

"Success has a great tendency to conceal and throw a veil over the evil of men"....Demosthenes
Reply #186 posted 06/13/12 4:06pm

HotGritz

babynoz said:

HotGritz said:

Uh no it aint! Besides, we don't use the term mentally retarded anymore. We say mentally handicapped or disabled. Today, a retard is just a dumbass. A dumbass chooses to be dumb. When one is mentally disabled that is not something they can control nor are even aware of sometimes.

Ya coworkers are some basic bum bastids. Is that better? lol

Pay no mind, it's just another of his endless attempts to take yet another thread off topic.

Yep nod and sad too.

I'M NOT SAYING YOU'RE UGLY. YOU JUST HAVE BAD LUCK WHEN IT COMES TO MIRRORS AND SUNLIGHT!
RIP Dick Clark, Whitney Houston, Don Cornelius, Heavy D, and Donna Summer. rose
Reply #187 posted 06/13/12 4:06pm

babynoz

Musicslave said:

http://openchannel.msnbc....oting?lite

Judge cites Internet age, orders release of more evidence in Trayvon Martin shooting

I'm not sure it's a good idea but it's been the law for 40 some years. If we ever get to trial jury selection's gonna take forever.

"Success has a great tendency to conceal and throw a veil over the evil of men"....Demosthenes
Reply #188 posted 06/13/12 4:10pm

HotGritz

So GZ is locked up right now correct? I seem to recall that in Florida they like to do that time served shit so in the event he is found guilty and sentenced to some ungodly amount of time (say 1 year) could the judge use his current incarceration to count toward his sentence? I'm thinking this whole thing will go on until at least January so I wonder if the time in jail now is all the time GZ will ever have to serve. My gut still tells me he's gonna walk. Hung jury or something like that will get him off or maybe a mistrial. sad

I'M NOT SAYING YOU'RE UGLY. YOU JUST HAVE BAD LUCK WHEN IT COMES TO MIRRORS AND SUNLIGHT!
RIP Dick Clark, Whitney Houston, Don Cornelius, Heavy D, and Donna Summer. rose
Reply #189 posted 06/13/12 4:31pm

OnlyNDaUsa

babynoz said:

HotGritz said:

Uh no it aint! Besides, we don't use the term mentally retarded anymore. We say mentally handicapped or disabled. Today, a retard is just a dumbass. A dumbass chooses to be dumb. When one is mentally disabled that is not something they can control nor are even aware of sometimes.

Ya coworkers are some basic bum bastids. Is that better? lol

Pay no mind, it's just another of his endless attempts to take yet another thread off topic.

not at all, i just call people when they use slurs as insults.

Living with a disability is not the Wurst thing in the word: Knowingly Mocking someone with one is far Wurst!.
Reply #190 posted 06/14/12 6:00am

Musicslave

Zimmerman 'does not properly respect the law,' judge says in order revoking bond

http://articles.orlandose...-zimmerman

The judge who revoked George Zimmerman's bond did so after he determined that it was "apparent" that Zimmerman's wife had lied under oath, and clear that Zimmerman "does not properly respect the law."

Circuit Judge Kenneth Lester revoked Zimmerman's bond on June 1, but his written order was filed Monday. In it, Lester lays out his rationale.

"It is apparent that [Shellie] Zimmerman testified untruthfully at the bond hearing," the judge writes in his order. "The Defendant also testified, but did not alert the Court to the misinformation."

"Had the Court been made aware of the true financial circumstances at the bond hearing, the bond decision might have been different," Lester wrote. After finding out about the discrepancy, the judge said he was left with two options: Increasing Zimmerman's bond, or revoking it.

The judge writes that his considered several factors, most of which weighed against Zimmerman.

Among them, "this is a serious charge for which life may be imposed; the evidence against him is strong; he has been charged with one prior crime, for which he went through a pre-trial diversion program, and has had an injunction lodged against him" for domestic violence.

"Most importantly, though, is the fact that he has now demonstrated that he does not properly respect the law or the integrity of the judicial process," Lester wrote.

The only factors that "heavily weigh in his favor," Lester wrote, are "that he turned himself in upon the issuance of the original warrant and has kept authorities abreast of his current location."

Zimmerman turned himself in again promptly after Lester revoked his bond. He remains in the Seminole County jail. A second bond hearing is set for June 29 in Sanford.

Reply #191 posted 06/14/12 12:11pm

rudedog

Musicslave said:

The judge writes that his considered several factors, most of which weighed against Zimmerman.

Among them, "this is a serious charge for which life may be imposed; the evidence against him is strong; he has been charged with one prior crime, for which he went through a pre-trial diversion program, and has had an injunction lodged against him" for domestic violence.

"Most importantly, though, is the fact that he has now demonstrated that he does not properly respect the law or the integrity of the judicial process," Lester wrote.

The only factors that "heavily weigh in his favor," Lester wrote, are "that he turned himself in upon the issuance of the original warrant and has kept authorities abreast of his current location."

Zimmerman turned himself in again promptly after Lester revoked his bond. He remains in the Seminole County jail. A second bond hearing is set for June 29 in Sanford.

Dude!! This is what we've all been saying for months! His goose is fuckin' cooked! I hope they throw the book at him now! That asshole is a menace to society!

[Edited 6/14/12 12:11pm]

"The voter is less important than the man who provides money to the candidate," - Former Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens
Rudedog no no no!
Reply #192 posted 06/14/12 12:37pm

Musicslave

rudedog said:

Musicslave said:

The judge writes that his considered several factors, most of which weighed against Zimmerman.

Among them, "this is a serious charge for which life may be imposed; the evidence against him is strong; he has been charged with one prior crime, for which he went through a pre-trial diversion program, and has had an injunction lodged against him" for domestic violence.

"Most importantly, though, is the fact that he has now demonstrated that he does not properly respect the law or the integrity of the judicial process," Lester wrote.

The only factors that "heavily weigh in his favor," Lester wrote, are "that he turned himself in upon the issuance of the original warrant and has kept authorities abreast of his current location."

Zimmerman turned himself in again promptly after Lester revoked his bond. He remains in the Seminole County jail. A second bond hearing is set for June 29 in Sanford.

Dude!! This is what we've all been saying for months! His goose is fuckin' cooked! I hope they throw the book at him now! That asshole is a menace to society!

[Edited 6/14/12 12:11pm]

lol We'll see what Judge Lester decides after hearing directly from GZ on the 29th. Although I don't think it will/should change anything. He already had his opportunity, he blew it. Now, he should remain in jail until the trial (if we ever get to one of course). If he simply raises his bond and let him out again after that...I don't know what to say....I think his good name and reputation would be a little tarnished (to say the least).

Yeah, that line from Lester about it being a FACT that he has now demonstrated that he does not properly respect the law or the judicial process has to hurt. I'm sure GZ/O'Mara was a little nervous when they read that one.

Reply #193 posted 06/14/12 7:30pm

SUPRMAN

rudedog said:

Musicslave said:

The judge writes that his considered several factors, most of which weighed against Zimmerman.

Among them, "this is a serious charge for which life may be imposed; the evidence against him is strong; he has been charged with one prior crime, for which he went through a pre-trial diversion program, and has had an injunction lodged against him" for domestic violence.

"Most importantly, though, is the fact that he has now demonstrated that he does not properly respect the law or the integrity of the judicial process," Lester wrote.

The only factors that "heavily weigh in his favor," Lester wrote, are "that he turned himself in upon the issuance of the original warrant and has kept authorities abreast of his current location."

Zimmerman turned himself in again promptly after Lester revoked his bond. He remains in the Seminole County jail. A second bond hearing is set for June 29 in Sanford.

Dude!! This is what we've all been saying for months! His goose is fuckin' cooked! I hope they throw the book at him now! That asshole is a menace to society!

[Edited 6/14/12 12:11pm]

Co-sign

I don't want you to think like me. I just want you to think.
Reply #194 posted 06/14/12 7:33pm

SUPRMAN

Musicslave said:

rudedog said:

Dude!! This is what we've all been saying for months! His goose is fuckin' cooked! I hope they throw the book at him now! That asshole is a menace to society!

[Edited 6/14/12 12:11pm]

lol We'll see what Judge Lester decides after hearing directly from GZ on the 29th. Although I don't think it will/should change anything. He already had his opportunity, he blew it. Now, he should remain in jail until the trial (if we ever get to one of course). If he simply raises his bond and let him out again after that...I don't know what to say....I think his good name and reputation would be a little tarnished (to say the least).

Yeah, that line from Lester about it being a FACT that he has now demonstrated that he does not properly respect the law or the judicial process has to hurt. I'm sure GZ/O'Mara was a little nervous when they read that one.

What would someone say about the judge's statement, '[T]he evidence against him is strong'?

lol lol lol lol

I don't want you to think like me. I just want you to think.
Reply #195 posted 06/16/12 8:45am

free2bfreeda

new and interesting news.

Shoot Straight owner, now a George Zimmerman witness: 'He bought the gun from us'

http://www.chicagotribune...?track=rss

2:51 p.m. CDT, June 15, 2012

SANFORD – A new list of evidence in the George Zimmerman case includes, for the first time, the names of several civilian witnesses — including several local firearms dealers and instructors — but it remains unclear what their roles will be in the neighborhood watch volunteer's prosecution.

Among the newly named witnesses is Khaled Akkawi, owner of Shoot Straight, and several of his employees. Why? Akkawi told the Orlando Sentinel the FBI paid him a visit several weeks after the shooting with a photo of Zimmerman, wanting to know if he had been to the chain's gun stores and ranges.

But according to Akkawi, there is a stronger connection to Zimmerman's shooting of 17-year-old Trayvon Martin.

"He bought the gun from us," Akkawi said.

Earlier Friday, Akkawi — who stresses that he is a strong supporter of Florida's stand-your-ground law, which has come under fire since the Feb. 26 shooting — expressed surprise when told he was named as a witness in the case. But after thinking about it further, he said there were several possible reasons.

In addition to the gun sale, Akkawi said, Zimmerman visited Shoot Straight's Casselberry location on multiple occasions, had fired on the ranges and interacted with employees. The store also is a major National Rifle Association recruiter, he said, and his employees have testified in court as experts in the past.

Prosecutors on Thursday released to defense attorneys hundreds of pages of new evidence in the murder case, including witness statements, nearly a dozen FBI reports and jail records.

The new evidence also includes email to or from Zimmerman, unspecified email involving Sanford Police Chief Bill Lee, the cell phone records of Trayvon's father Tracy Martin and surveillance video from a bank.

Defense attorney Mark O'Mara received the evidence Thursday, he wrote in a blog post.

A list of the evidence made available Friday identifies dozens of new witnesses, 21 of them whose names are being withheld to protect their privacy. Many other new witnesses also are named, including employees with the Florida Department of Law Enforcement, Seminole County Sheriff's Office and Sanford Police Department.

Among the witnesses whose names were released:

• Akkawi, the manager of his Apopka store and two employees of the Shoot Straight in Casselberry.

• Matt Brantly Jr. and D' Andre Stinnet of Brantly & Associates, a Central Florida tactical firearms training facility.

• John Wright, a Sanford private investigator. Wright told the Sentinel he was hired by the Martin family, but declined to elaborate.

• Scott McLeod, a former Seminole County sheriff's deputy now working at Chuluota Sportsmen's Club.

• Two men identified in social media as current or former employees of the Gander Mountain store in Lake Mary.

Much of the new evidence is in the form of reports written by people at the scene or those who were part of the investigation. An eight-page report from Sanford Fire-Rescue is also on the list.

Zimmerman shot Trayvon on Feb. 26 as the unarmed Miami Gardens teenager was walking back from a 7-Eleven. Zimmerman told police he acted in self-defense.

The new evidence list does not detail what each piece of evidence reveals.

For example, it lists 10 FBI reports. They appear to be summaries of witness interviews by individual agents.

The list also suggests prosecutors have looked at Zimmerman's past arrest record and his online activity.

It includes a printout from a MySpace page. Zimmerman had a MySpace account and posted comments about Mexicans some have described as insulting and bigoted.

Zimmerman was charged with resisting arrest at a bar near the University of Central Florida in 2005, and three state alcohol control agents are among the new witnesses on the list.

It's not clear when the new evidence will be made public.

... Emoti... looks like someone's up in the high elevations digging up and finding more truths. imo GZ won't walk or get a lesser charge. nod

one day a child hugged the earth & whispered 2 her,"I wish people would realize every x a bomb is launched & hits ur surface, it's like a major injury 2 u." i know war hurts u. :" the earth rumbled softly n reply, then cried a massive storm(c)
Reply #196 posted 06/18/12 11:24am

Musicslave

In case anyone was interested...you can click on the link below and then scroll down to find the 6 recorded phone calls between GZ and SZ....

http://www.orlandosentine...on-martin/

Reply #197 posted 06/18/12 11:41am

Musicslave

free2bfreeda said:

new and interesting news.

Shoot Straight owner, now a George Zimmerman witness: 'He bought the gun from us'

http://www.chicagotribune...?track=rss

2:51 p.m. CDT, June 15, 2012

SANFORD – A new list of evidence in the George Zimmerman case includes, for the first time, the names of several civilian witnesses — including several local firearms dealers and instructors — but it remains unclear what their roles will be in the neighborhood watch volunteer's prosecution.

Among the newly named witnesses is Khaled Akkawi, owner of Shoot Straight, and several of his employees. Why? Akkawi told the Orlando Sentinel the FBI paid him a visit several weeks after the shooting with a photo of Zimmerman, wanting to know if he had been to the chain's gun stores and ranges.

But according to Akkawi, there is a stronger connection to Zimmerman's shooting of 17-year-old Trayvon Martin.

"He bought the gun from us," Akkawi said.

Earlier Friday, Akkawi — who stresses that he is a strong supporter of Florida's stand-your-ground law, which has come under fire since the Feb. 26 shooting — expressed surprise when told he was named as a witness in the case. But after thinking about it further, he said there were several possible reasons.

In addition to the gun sale, Akkawi said, Zimmerman visited Shoot Straight's Casselberry location on multiple occasions, had fired on the ranges and interacted with employees. The store also is a major National Rifle Association recruiter, he said, and his employees have testified in court as experts in the past.

Prosecutors on Thursday released to defense attorneys hundreds of pages of new evidence in the murder case, including witness statements, nearly a dozen FBI reports and jail records.

The new evidence also includes email to or from Zimmerman, unspecified email involving Sanford Police Chief Bill Lee, the cell phone records of Trayvon's father Tracy Martin and surveillance video from a bank.

Defense attorney Mark O'Mara received the evidence Thursday, he wrote in a blog post.

A list of the evidence made available Friday identifies dozens of new witnesses, 21 of them whose names are being withheld to protect their privacy. Many other new witnesses also are named, including employees with the Florida Department of Law Enforcement, Seminole County Sheriff's Office and Sanford Police Department.

Among the witnesses whose names were released:

• Akkawi, the manager of his Apopka store and two employees of the Shoot Straight in Casselberry.

• Matt Brantly Jr. and D' Andre Stinnet of Brantly & Associates, a Central Florida tactical firearms training facility.

• John Wright, a Sanford private investigator. Wright told the Sentinel he was hired by the Martin family, but declined to elaborate.

• Scott McLeod, a former Seminole County sheriff's deputy now working at Chuluota Sportsmen's Club.

• Two men identified in social media as current or former employees of the Gander Mountain store in Lake Mary.

Much of the new evidence is in the form of reports written by people at the scene or those who were part of the investigation. An eight-page report from Sanford Fire-Rescue is also on the list.

Zimmerman shot Trayvon on Feb. 26 as the unarmed Miami Gardens teenager was walking back from a 7-Eleven. Zimmerman told police he acted in self-defense.

The new evidence list does not detail what each piece of evidence reveals.

For example, it lists 10 FBI reports. They appear to be summaries of witness interviews by individual agents.

The list also suggests prosecutors have looked at Zimmerman's past arrest record and his online activity.

It includes a printout from a MySpace page. Zimmerman had a MySpace account and posted comments about Mexicans some have described as insulting and bigoted.

Zimmerman was charged with resisting arrest at a bar near the University of Central Florida in 2005, and three state alcohol control agents are among the new witnesses on the list.

It's not clear when the new evidence will be made public.

... Emoti... looks like someone's up in the high elevations digging up and finding more truths. imo GZ won't walk or get a lesser charge. nod

The line items that I highlighted I find the most intriguing. Especially the eight page report from the Fire & Rescue team. For some reason I got a feeling their report will contradict the report from his family. I'm sure it acknowledges the injuries but I doubt that they described it as life threatening.

I'm sure those ATF officers will call him out on another lie. If I recall from the initial bond hearing/mini trial, the officer reported that he identified himself as a State agent. GZ said he didn't. Considering how GZ word is as good as mud now, I think the judge is more likely to believe the cop's word over GZ's. Just a hunch...wink

Reply #198 posted 06/18/12 11:53am

2elijah

http://www.huffingtonpost...d%3D170832

Click on link, and scroll down to lower part of article to listen to audio:

George Zimmerman's Jailhouse Calls To Wife Reveal Couple's Alleged Plan To Hide Funds (AUDIO)

Posted: 06/18/2012 1:17 pm Updated: 06/18/2012 2:34 pm

The special prosecutor in the case of George Zimmerman, the Florida man accused of murdering 17-year-old Trayvon Martin, released a half-dozen recorded jailhouse phone conversations between Zimmerman and his wife, Shellie, which prosecutors say reveal the couple's plans to conceal more than $130,000 of donated money via transfers between their personal bank accounts.

The release of the recordings comes just a week after Shellie Zimmerman was arr...th perjury for lying under oath about the family's financial status during an April hearing in which her husband was granted bond.

Prosecutors say that while George and Shellie Zimmerman told the judge under oath that they were broke, and their lawyer requested a low bond because of the couple's dire financial situation, they were instead paying off credit card bills and transferring funds into his wife's personal bank account from a Paypal account linked to a website to raise defense funds.

On Friday, State Attorney Angela Corey's office said that it would be releasing a trove of evidence in the case, including 151 audio recordings of phone calls that Zimmerman made from the Seminole County Jail. But not long after the announcement, Mark O'Mara, Zimmerman's attorney, argued that only a fraction of those calls -- which prosecutors used to have Zimmerman's bond revoked and charges levied against his wife -- should be released.

O'Mara has said that he plans on filing a motion to ask the judge in the case only to allow the release of phone calls that are directly related to Zimmerman's bond. Otherwise, he wrote in a web posting, the privacy of family and friends of his clients could be compromised.

(Edited for compliance) Click on above link to read more

[Edited 6/18/12 11:58am]

Reply #199 posted 06/18/12 12:05pm

2elijah

Musicslave said:

In case anyone was interested...you can click on the link below and then scroll down to find the 6 recorded phone calls between GZ and SZ....


 


http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/local/trayvon-martin/



Oops didn't realize u alresdy posted about this.
Reply #200 posted 06/18/12 12:22pm

Musicslave

2elijah said:

Musicslave said:

In case anyone was interested...you can click on the link below and then scroll down to find the 6 recorded phone calls between GZ and SZ....

http://www.orlandosentine...on-martin/

Oops didn't realize u alresdy posted about this.

No problem. Have you listened to them yet? I haven't. Unless there's something more significant other than being caught lying, I'm not that interested.

[Edited 6/18/12 12:24pm]

Reply #201 posted 06/18/12 12:36pm

2elijah

Musicslave said:

 



2elijah said:


Musicslave said:

In case anyone was interested...you can click on the link below and then scroll down to find the 6 recorded phone calls between GZ and SZ....


 


http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/local/trayvon-martin/



Oops didn't realize u alresdy posted about this.

 No problem. Have you listened to them yet? I haven't. Unless there's something more significant other than being caught lying, I'm not that interested.

[Edited 6/18/12 12:24pm]


No not yet,but will when I get a chance.
Reply #202 posted 06/18/12 3:56pm

free2bfreeda

18 June 2012 Last updated at 16:35 ET

George Zimmerman also asked his wife, Shellie, to buy bullet-proof vests, calls released by prosecutors show.

Mrs Zimmerman is charged with making false statements about the couple's finances at her husband's bail hearing.

Her husband has pleaded not guilty to charges of second-degree murder over the death of the unarmed black 17-year-old in Sanford, Florida.

Mr Zimmerman was freed in late April on payment of 10% of a $150,000 (£96,000) bail amount.

Days earlier, Mrs Zimmerman had testified that she did not know how much money had been raised by a website that asked for donations to pay for her husband's legal defence.

Mrs Zimmerman also told a court that the couple had limited finances because she was a full-time student and Mr Zimmerman was not working.

But prosecutors say that both husband and wife knew that about $135,000 had been raised through the website, the Associated Press reports.

Bank statements also released by prosecutors show several transfers of less than $10,000 between a PayPal account, Mr Zimmerman's account and Mrs Zimmerman's account, the Orlando Sentinel reports.

The Trayvon Martin case has stoked racial tension in the United States, correspondents say.

Florida police did not arrest Mr Zimmerman for six weeks after the shooting. Under the state's controversial "stand your ground" law the use of lethal force is allowed if a person feels seriously under threat.

wow! eek

one day a child hugged the earth & whispered 2 her,"I wish people would realize every x a bomb is launched & hits ur surface, it's like a major injury 2 u." i know war hurts u. :" the earth rumbled softly n reply, then cried a massive storm(c)
Reply #203 posted 06/18/12 4:09pm

DiminutiveRocker

free2bfreeda said:

18 June 2012 Last updated at 16:35 ET

George Zimmerman also asked his wife, Shellie, to buy bullet-proof vests, calls released by prosecutors show.

Mrs Zimmerman is charged with making false statements about the couple's finances at her husband's bail hearing.

Her husband has pleaded not guilty to charges of second-degree murder over the death of the unarmed black 17-year-old in Sanford, Florida.

Mr Zimmerman was freed in late April on payment of 10% of a $150,000 (£96,000) bail amount.

Days earlier, Mrs Zimmerman had testified that she did not know how much money had been raised by a website that asked for donations to pay for her husband's legal defence.

Mrs Zimmerman also told a court that the couple had limited finances because she was a full-time student and Mr Zimmerman was not working.

But prosecutors say that both husband and wife knew that about $135,000 had been raised through the website, the Associated Press reports.

Bank statements also released by prosecutors show several transfers of less than $10,000 between a PayPal account, Mr Zimmerman's account and Mrs Zimmerman's account, the Orlando Sentinel reports.

The Trayvon Martin case has stoked racial tension in the United States, correspondents say.

Florida police did not arrest Mr Zimmerman for six weeks after the shooting. Under the state's controversial "stand your ground" law the use of lethal force is allowed if a person feels seriously under threat.

wow! eek

Yep - it's no bueno for GZ dunce and spouse.

Consider the rights of others before your own feelings, and the feelings of others before your own rights.
~ John Wooden
Reply #204 posted 06/18/12 4:19pm

2elijah

Musicslave said:

2elijah said:

Musicslave said: Oops didn't realize u alresdy posted about this.

No problem. Have you listened to them yet? I haven't. Unless there's something more significant other than being caught lying, I'm not that interested.

[Edited 6/18/12 12:24pm]

Update: I read part of the transcript. and his wife had stated the day after on her phone call to him after they were talking in codes about the money in his account, and they both basically agreed telling each other they were going to be ok after this, and have a great life. So that sounds like they were referring to that money they lied they didn't have, about having a great life after it was all over, and he sounded pretty confident he was getting off the hook. This is why I don't see his apology in court that day as genuine, because he was only trying to save his own ass. By that phone call alone he didn't seem to have any remorse, other than focusing on that money. He even had the nerve to tell his wife that the people who were supporting him need to come out and 'vocalize' their support. Unbelievable. lol. I guess he figured he could outslick the court and his attorney with his crocodile tears and phony apology. It will be interesting to see how this case ends up.

Reply #205 posted 06/18/12 4:49pm

babynoz

Has Zim surrendered his back up passport yet?

"Success has a great tendency to conceal and throw a veil over the evil of men"....Demosthenes
Reply #206 posted 06/18/12 5:32pm

OnlyNDaUsa

babynoz said:

Has Zim surrendered his back up passport yet?

he is in jail and i am sure if he knows where it is... then i am sure he did.

Living with a disability is not the Wurst thing in the word: Knowingly Mocking someone with one is far Wurst!.
Reply #207 posted 06/18/12 5:50pm

DiminutiveRocker

OnlyNDaUsa said:

babynoz said:

Has Zim surrendered his back up passport yet?

he is in jail and i am sure if he knows where it is... then i am sure he did.

You're sure or you are guessing?

Not sure if he surrendered the passport. It seems like O'Mara would probably make sure it was turned in or he will surrender it in the next bond hearing like he did with the first one. rolleyes

Consider the rights of others before your own feelings, and the feelings of others before your own rights.
~ John Wooden
Reply #208 posted 06/18/12 5:55pm

OnlyNDaUsa

DiminutiveRocker said:

OnlyNDaUsa said:

he is in jail and i am sure if he knows where it is... then i am sure he did.

You're sure or you are guessing?

Not sure if he surrendered the passport. It seems like O'Mara would probably make sure it was turned in or he will surrender it in the next bond hearing like he did with the first one. rolleyes

i am pretty sure the judge knows about it and would demand it back before releasing him.

Living with a disability is not the Wurst thing in the word: Knowingly Mocking someone with one is far Wurst!.
Reply #209 posted 06/18/12 5:56pm

DiminutiveRocker

2elijah said:

Musicslave said:

No problem. Have you listened to them yet? I haven't. Unless there's something more significant other than being caught lying, I'm not that interested.

[Edited 6/18/12 12:24pm]

Update: I read part of the transcript. and his wife had stated the day after on her phone call to him after they were talking in codes about the money in his account, and they both basically agreed telling each other they were going to be ok after this, and have a great life. So that sounds like they were referring to that money they lied they didn't have, about having a great life after it was all over, and he sounded pretty confident he was getting off the hook. This is why I don't see his apology in court that day as genuine, because he was only trying to save his own ass. By that phone call alone he didn't seem to have any remorse, other than focusing on that money. He even had the nerve to tell his wife that the people who were supporting him need to come out and 'vocalize' their support. Unbelievable. lol. I guess he figured he could outslick the court and his attorney with his crocodile tears and phony apology. It will be interesting to see how this case ends up.

I thought the same thing - that thinks he will definitely get off the hook. This over-confidence and the fact that he and the wife lied about the donated money and their access to it - could be a major mistake on his part - *if* the judge takes offense.

Consider the rights of others before your own feelings, and the feelings of others before your own rights.
~ John Wooden
Reply #210 posted 06/18/12 10:21pm

SUPRMAN

DiminutiveRocker said:

OnlyNDaUsa said:

he is in jail and i am sure if he knows where it is... then i am sure he did.

You're sure or you are guessing?

Not sure if he surrendered the passport. It seems like O'Mara would probably make sure it was turned in or he will surrender it in the next bond hearing like he did with the first one. rolleyes

An attorney as an officer of the court, can hold items on behalf of the court and a client. Such as a passport. Of course, it has to be produced on demand of the court. In this case I think the court might take physical custody, so it doesn't get 'lost' or something.

I don't want you to think like me. I just want you to think.
Reply #211 posted 06/19/12 1:34am

Neophyte

OnlyNDaUsa said:

babynoz said:

Has Zim surrendered his back up passport yet?

he is in jail and i am sure if he knows where it is... then i am sure he did.

Was there some doubt expressed about him knowing where the passport was; I thought in the call his wife identified where it was and then he told her to hold onto it?! Is this wrong?

"I know that living with u baby, was sometimes hard...but I'm willing 2 give it another try.
Cause nothing compares....nothing compares 2 u!"
Reply #212 posted 06/19/12 7:49am

OnlyNDaUsa

Neophyte said:

OnlyNDaUsa said:

he is in jail and i am sure if he knows where it is... then i am sure he did.

Was there some doubt expressed about him knowing where the passport was; I thought in the call his wife identified where it was and then he told her to hold onto it?! Is this wrong?

i am pertty sure the judge was not too worried about the 2nd passport.

Living with a disability is not the Wurst thing in the word: Knowingly Mocking someone with one is far Wurst!.
Reply #213 posted 06/19/12 8:13am

Musicslave

DiminutiveRocker said:

OnlyNDaUsa said:

he is in jail and i am sure if he knows where it is... then i am sure he did.

You're sure or you are guessing?

Not sure if he surrendered the passport. It seems like O'Mara would probably make sure it was turned in or he will surrender it in the next bond hearing like he did with the first one. rolleyes

I think I remember during his last hearing before the judge (the one where his bond was revoked) that O'Mara apologized and reported during the hearing that he submitted it once he found out about it. This was either a day or two prior to that hearing date or earlier that same day.

The judge didn't sweat it too much because he equated it to someone thinking they lost their driver's license only to discover it later. His biggest beef with GZ that day was the lie.

Reply #214 posted 06/20/12 11:24pm

free2bfreeda

a little side bar to GZ news:

Police chief in Trayvon Martin case fired

Trayvon Martin Case Police Chief Bill Lee Permanently Relieved of Duty (ABC News

Sanford, Fla., has fired Bill Lee, the police chief who initially oversaw the controversial investigation into a white-Hispanic neighborhood watch captain's fatal shooting of a black 17-year-old, Trayvon Martin.

The initial lack of an arrest drove widespread protests and propelled the case into national headlines.

Lee previously took leave as chief and later offered to resign. Now, he is "permanently relieved of duty," according to a written announcement from the city.

"After much thoughtful discussion and deep consideration for the issues facing the city of Sanford, I have determined the police chief needs to have the trust and respect of the elected officials and the confidence of the entire community," Sanford City Manager Norton Bonaparte was quoted saying in the city's statement. "We need to move forward with a police chief that all the citizens of Sanford can support. I have come to this decision in light of the escalating divisiveness that has taken hold of the city."

Sanford police initially cited Florida's "stand your ground" law, which allows killings in self defense, in declining to arrest the neighborhood watch captain, George Zimmerman.

Zimmerman claimed he was defending himself, adding that after a late-night confrontation Martin was getting the better of him in a scuffle prior to the fatal shot.

Amid separate investigations into the shooting and the response to it, Lee said on March 22 that he was "temporarily" stepping aside as Sanford police chief. He later offered his full resignation but the city council narrowly voted to reject it.

In April, a special prosecutor appointed by Gov. Rick Scott charged Zimmerman with second-degree murder.

In announcing Lee's dismissal, Sanford said Interim Chief Rick Myers would continue to run the city's police department as the city conducted a nationwide search for a permanent replacement.

one day a child hugged the earth & whispered 2 her,"I wish people would realize every x a bomb is launched & hits ur surface, it's like a major injury 2 u." i know war hurts u. :" the earth rumbled softly n reply, then cried a massive storm(c)
Reply #215 posted 06/21/12 6:13am

Musicslave

Here's the written statement from your boy on the night of the shooting, Feb. 26th:

http://i2.cdn.turner.com/...t_0226.pdf

..."the suspect emerged from the darkness." George Michael Zimmerman

lol lol lol

[Edited 6/21/12 6:16am]

Reply #216 posted 06/21/12 6:28am

Musicslave

Here's your boy's reenactment of what happened:

http://abcnews.go.com/US/...g-16617874

Reply #217 posted 06/21/12 6:36am

Musicslave

Here is the audio interview GZ had with SPD the night of Feb. 26th:

http://www.cnn.com/video/...department

Here's video of his voice stress analysis exactly 24 hrs. later from the shooting.

http://usnews.msnbc.msn.c...etail?lite

[Edited 6/21/12 7:12am]

Reply #218 posted 06/21/12 10:11am

2elijah

Musicslave and Free2bfreeda, thanks for the updates on this.

Reply #219 posted 06/21/12 10:49am

Musicslave

2elijah said:

Musicslave and Free2bfreeda, thanks for the updates on this.

No problem cool Have you seen his reenactment or heard his account about how everything went down yet?

Reply #220 posted 06/21/12 1:08pm

Shanti0608

Heard about this on Democracy Now:

Sanford Police Chief Fired After Months of Criticism over Trayvon Martin Shooting

In Florida, the Sanford City Commission has fired embattled police chief Bill Lee after months of controversy surrounding his handling of the killing of Trayvon Martin. Lee had previously submitted his resignation in April, but the city council had refused to accept it. On Wednesday, city leaders switched course, voting to dismiss Lee from his job. The Sanford Police Department has come under intense criticism for failing to arrest George Zimmerman on the night he fatally shot Trayvon Martin.

My local news did not say anything about it even during there national news.

Reply #221 posted 06/21/12 10:13pm

DiminutiveRocker

Musicslave said:

Here is the audio interview GZ had with SPD the night of Feb. 26th:

http://www.cnn.com/video/...department

Here's video of his voice stress analysis exactly 24 hrs. later from the shooting.

http://usnews.msnbc.msn.c...etail?lite

[Edited 6/21/12 7:12am]

eek

hmmm The one thing that has always bothered me was this "slamming" of GZ's head. Wouldn't there be more physical damage to GZ's head and perhaps a concussion and loss of consciousness if his head were repeatedly "slammed" against the pavement?

Consider the rights of others before your own feelings, and the feelings of others before your own rights.
~ John Wooden
Reply #222 posted 06/22/12 6:38am

Musicslave

Out of all the information that's been released the past couple of days, I find Det. Chris Serino's interview the most compelling. It appears that he asked GZ the SAME kind of questions most here have been asking from the beginning.....

http://articles.orlandose...n-injuries

Detective calls George Zimmerman 'the good guy,' but questions his account

4:19 p.m. EST, June 21, 2012|

By Jeff Weiner, Orlando Sentinel

Three days after the death of 17-year-old Trayvon Martin, a police detective told George Zimmerman he believed the neighborhood watch volunteer was "the good guy," but had issues with several aspects of his account of the shooting.

In a Feb. 29 interview, lead Sanford police detective Chris Serino prodded Zimmerman on several possible inconsistencies, and asked Zimmerman repeatedly if there was anything he was withholding.

The interview was one of several released Thursday by Zimmerman's defense.

Serino's first issue: Zimmerman's injuries. The cuts and bruises to his face, Serino said, were less serious than he would expect. Zimmerman says the teen punched him to the ground, then began beating him and slamming his head into the sidewalk.

"I've consulted a lot of people," Serino said, and the force Zimmerman described is "not quite consistent with your injuries."

He added that the sidewalk should have done more damage than the cuts to Zimmerman's head.

"Skull fractures is what happens with that," he said.

Serino noted that Zimmerman's defensive wounds were "essentially nonexistent," though he said Zimmerman's long sleeves may have protected him. There was also only one small injury to Trayvon's hand, the detective said.

Serino also questioned why Zimmerman didn't tell the teen that he was with the neighborhood watch. If he'd identified himself, Serino said Zimmerman "probably wouldn't be here right now."

Zimmerman said he was afraid, and didn't want to confront Trayvon. He said he wasn't pursuing the teen when he got out of his car.

"I walked to find the street name, to find a street sign," Zimmerman said. But that only left Serino with more concerns.

"Once again, something else I gotta try to explain away, how do you not know the three streets in your neighborhood [where] you've been living for three years?" Serino asked.

Zimmerman explained that he has a bad memory, and suffers from attention deficit hyperactivity disorder.

In another interview the same day, Zimmerman said that he was afraid of Trayvon, but still got out of his car.

"So you basically jumped out of the car, to see where he was going?" Serino asked, to which Zimmerman replied, "yes."

"That's not fear," Serino said. "That's one of the problems I have with the whole thing."

Serino told Zimmerman an anonymous tipster had provided a different account of the shooting, "more along the lines you tried to detain [Trayvon]." Zimmerman said that wasn't what happened.

"You're the good guy here," Serino told Zimmerman. "If you tried to challenge this person, thinking that you had the authority to... that really could explain a lot."

Another issue Serino noted: Trayvon, he said, didn't have a history of violence.

"What set him off?" Serino asked. "There will be a question forever in everybody's mind."

I think Det. Serino saw right through GZ. When he said that ""If you tried to challenge this person, thinking that you had the authority to... that really could explain a lot."

That was probably his conclusion of the matter right there. Everything else became local politics after that.

[Edited 6/22/12 6:39am]

Reply #223 posted 06/22/12 6:44am

Musicslave

DiminutiveRocker said:

Musicslave said:

Here is the audio interview GZ had with SPD the night of Feb. 26th:

http://www.cnn.com/video/...department

Here's video of his voice stress analysis exactly 24 hrs. later from the shooting.

http://usnews.msnbc.msn.c...etail?lite

[Edited 6/21/12 7:12am]

eek

hmmm The one thing that has always bothered me was this "slamming" of GZ's head. Wouldn't there be more physical damage to GZ's head and perhaps a concussion and loss of consciousness if his head were repeatedly "slammed" against the pavement?

nod Det. Chris Serino agrees with you. See my post above with his interview with GZ.

Reply #224 posted 06/22/12 7:30am

prittypriss

Musicslave said:

Here's the written statement from your boy on the night of the shooting, Feb. 26th:

http://i2.cdn.turner.com/...t_0226.pdf

..."the suspect emerged from the darkness." George Michael Zimmerman

lol lol lol

[Edited 6/21/12 6:16am]

His written statement, does not match the recorded call with the dispatcher. I don't recall him saying that he was looking for a street sign. Also, you can hear on the recording with the dispatcher that he is running. He doesn't say that in his written statement, that he ran after the "suspect". I hope the prosecutors bring out the recording with the dispatch and his written statement to show the inconsistencies. I will say that his written statement almost seems like it was thought out to support his "stand your ground" defense. I highly doubt that Trayvon said "you're gonna die", as it does not seem to fit with the descriptions of who Trayvon was. However, those words would fit who George thought Trayvon was.

Also, he said that Trayvon put his hand over his nose and mouth, stopping him from breathing, but the call to 911 in which the person could be heard yelling "help" in the background, it doesn't seem like that person stopped yelling for help until after the shot had been fired. If Trayvon had blocked off his breathing, he could not have continued to yell for "help".

[Edited 6/22/12 7:35am]

"I gave my life to become the person I am right now. Was it worth it?" ~ Richard Bach

https://www.jewelryincand..._and_scene
Reply #225 posted 06/22/12 8:22am

Musicslave

prittypriss said:

Musicslave said:

Here's the written statement from your boy on the night of the shooting, Feb. 26th:

http://i2.cdn.turner.com/...t_0226.pdf

..."the suspect emerged from the darkness." George Michael Zimmerman

lol lol lol

[Edited 6/21/12 6:16am]

His written statement, does not match the recorded call with the dispatcher. I don't recall him saying that he was looking for a street sign. Also, you can hear on the recording with the dispatcher that he is running. He doesn't say that in his written statement, that he ran after the "suspect". I hope the prosecutors bring out the recording with the dispatch and his written statement to show the inconsistencies. I will say that his written statement almost seems like it was thought out to support his "stand your ground" defense. I highly doubt that Trayvon said "you're gonna die", as it does not seem to fit with the descriptions of who Trayvon was. However, those words would fit who George thought Trayvon was.

Also, he said that Trayvon put his hand over his nose and mouth, stopping him from breathing, but the call to 911 in which the person could be heard yelling "help" in the background, it doesn't seem like that person stopped yelling for help until after the shot had been fired. If Trayvon had blocked off his breathing, he could not have continued to yell for "help".

[Edited 6/22/12 7:35am]

nod Yup.

I believe Det. Serino hit the nail on the head in his original interview with GZ. Like others have been saying here from the beginning, this whole travesty was a matter of GZ thinking he had the authority to stop Trayvon from committing a crime (that he made up in his mind.)

He's simply a power hungry, "wanna be cop", who as Judge Lester put it, "he does not properly respect the law or the integrity of the judicial process." Everything about his personality screams this to me. Notice the jargon in his written statement. What average person talks like that? His choice of words is what a police officer might use. Why refer to TM as a "suspect" when in your own 911 call you didn't describe him doing anything illegal? You're a freakin resident in a community trying to frame a 17 year old kid as a criminal suspect. He had no legal authority to refer to him as a suspect. Who the fuck are you?

Reply #226 posted 06/22/12 8:23am

2elijah

In another interview the same day, Zimmerman said that he was afraid of Trayvon, but still got out of his car.

"So you basically jumped out of the car, to see where he was going?" Serino asked, to which Zimmerman replied, "yes."

"That's not fear," Serino said. "That's one of the problems I have with the whole thing."

See, this is the same thing I've been asking and saying all along. If you are in fear of someone, then you don't approach them. This is where I have a problem with his bs story. This dude thought he had some authority to approach a stranger and ask

What are you doing here? He had no right to walk up to a citizen who had every right as GZ to walk the streets of this country. GZ's intention was based on his profiling of TM, and that's the bottom line. He already painted TM a criminal when he saw him, and was hell bent on following and approaching him, which resulted in GZ killing an innocent person who was committing no crime. Anyone believing TM had a right to be approached in that way and killed, need to get their sick and twisted heads checked.

Reply #227 posted 06/22/12 9:02am

Musicslave

2elijah said:

In another interview the same day, Zimmerman said that he was afraid of Trayvon, but still got out of his car.

"So you basically jumped out of the car, to see where he was going?" Serino asked, to which Zimmerman replied, "yes."

"That's not fear," Serino said. "That's one of the problems I have with the whole thing."

See, this is the same thing I've been asking and saying all along. If you are in fear of someone, then you don't approach them. This is where I have a problem with his bs story. This dude thought he had some authority to approach a stranger and ask

What are you doing here? He had no right to walk up to a citizen who had every right as GZ to walk the streets of this country. GZ's intention was based on his profiling of TM, and that's the bottom line. He already painted TM a criminal when he saw him, and was hell bent on following and approaching him, which resulted in GZ killing an innocent person who was committing no crime. Anyone believing TM had a right to be approached in that way and killed, need to get their sick and twisted heads checked.

Reply #228 posted 06/22/12 11:41am

DiminutiveRocker

2elijah said:

In another interview the same day, Zimmerman said that he was afraid of Trayvon, but still got out of his car.

"So you basically jumped out of the car, to see where he was going?" Serino asked, to which Zimmerman replied, "yes."

"That's not fear," Serino said. "That's one of the problems I have with the whole thing."

See, this is the same thing I've been asking and saying all along. If you are in fear of someone, then you don't approach them. This is where I have a problem with his bs story. This dude thought he had some authority to approach a stranger and ask

What are you doing here? He had no right to walk up to a citizen who had every right as GZ to walk the streets of this country. GZ's intention was based on his profiling of TM, and that's the bottom line. He already painted TM a criminal when he saw him, and was hell bent on following and approaching him, which resulted in GZ killing an innocent person who was committing no crime. Anyone believing TM had a right to be approached in that way and killed, need to get their sick and twisted heads checked.

nod Bottom line.

Consider the rights of others before your own feelings, and the feelings of others before your own rights.
~ John Wooden
Reply #229 posted 06/22/12 11:48am

DiminutiveRocker

Musicslave said:

DiminutiveRocker said:

eek

hmmm The one thing that has always bothered me was this "slamming" of GZ's head. Wouldn't there be more physical damage to GZ's head and perhaps a concussion and loss of consciousness if his head were repeatedly "slammed" against the pavement?

nod Det. Chris Serino agrees with you. See my post above with his interview with GZ.

Also... did GZ mention on the 911 call that TM was circling his car? Did I get thatright? GZ followed TM in his car - TM saw him - went over and circled the car then walked away. GZ then got out of the car to (a. follow him? or b. find a street sign?) adn then TM jumped him? Is that GZ's story?

Consider the rights of others before your own feelings, and the feelings of others before your own rights.
~ John Wooden
Reply #230 posted 06/22/12 11:50am

free2bfreeda

2elijah said:

Musicslave and Free2bfreeda, thanks for the updates on this.

ur welcome.

one day a child hugged the earth & whispered 2 her,"I wish people would realize every x a bomb is launched & hits ur surface, it's like a major injury 2 u." i know war hurts u. :" the earth rumbled softly n reply, then cried a massive storm(c)
Reply #231 posted 06/22/12 12:19pm

free2bfreeda

DiminutiveRocker said:

eek

hmmm The one thing that has always bothered me was this "slamming" of GZ's head. Wouldn't there be more physical damage to GZ's head and perhaps a concussion and loss of consciousness if his head were repeatedly "slammed" against the pavement?

also, if Trayvon M was banging GZ's head onto the pavement, and seeing all photos on that night, why aren't there any reports of scratch marks on GZ's ears? GZ had no hair to hold onto.

also if Trayvon was slamming GZ's head on the concrete seems that Trayvon's hands would have sustained more that one very small scratch on his one finger.

if Trayvon was actually slamming GZ's head onto a concrete surface, than it is only logical that the area around the top of his knuckles as well as his fingernails would have been injured by the concrete.

also last but least, if Trayvon was pummeling GZ with his fist, seems that Trayvon's knuckles would have been swollen and scraped from the fist to face blows.

no damage was found on T. Martin's knuckles or the tips of his fingers from contact with the concrete. so far the autopsy report shows that he had only a small abrasion on his left ring finger.

eek

does anyone know when the actual autopsy report will be released to the public?

one day a child hugged the earth & whispered 2 her,"I wish people would realize every x a bomb is launched & hits ur surface, it's like a major injury 2 u." i know war hurts u. :" the earth rumbled softly n reply, then cried a massive storm(c)
Reply #232 posted 06/22/12 1:07pm

OnlyNDaUsa

free2bfreeda said:

also, if Trayvon M was banging GZ's head onto the pavement, and seeing all photos on that night, why aren't there any reports of scratch marks on GZ's ears? GZ had no hair to hold onto.

not necessary to hold on to his ears... so that is not really a valid question.

also if Trayvon was slamming GZ's head on the concrete seems that Trayvon's hands would have sustained more that one very small scratch on his one finger.

again not necessarily.

if Trayvon was actually slamming GZ's head onto a concrete surface, than it is only logical that the area around the top of his knuckles as well as his fingernails would have been injured by the concrete.

not necessarily. as it was said TM was not that big maybe he was not doing it all that hard. in fact the wounds seem to be pretty minor to GZ.

also last but least, if Trayvon was pummeling GZ with his fist, seems that Trayvon's knuckles would have been swollen and scraped from the fist to face blows.

again not necessarily. the injuries GZ suffered were not that major and soft tissue swelling occur over time. bruising occurs as blood is pumped into the damaged vessels by the heart. TM was dead so he would not show much soft tissue damage.

no damage was found on T. Martin's knuckles or the tips of his fingers from contact with the concrete. so far the autopsy report shows that he had only a small abrasion on his left ring finger.

you assume he would have had to hit his hand. you also make the mistake of forgetting that such damage may not show for several hours in a living person...maybe never in a dead person. also TM's skin tone would make it hard to notice minor or early discoloration.

eek

does anyone know when the actual autopsy report will be released to the public?

i do not think so. if not for a that one IF in the top of your post i would have tought you had read it.

what we do know is GZ account matches up as to his injuries.

Living with a disability is not the Wurst thing in the word: Knowingly Mocking someone with one is far Wurst!.
Reply #233 posted 06/22/12 1:25pm

free2bfreeda

OnlyNDaUsa said:

free2bfreeda said:

also, if Trayvon M was banging GZ's head onto the pavement, and seeing all photos on that night, why aren't there any reports of scratch marks on GZ's ears? GZ had no hair to hold onto.

you said: not necessary to hold on to his ears... so that is not really a valid question.

my q. so how does one control a repeated head banging on a near bald head w/out holding on to the ears, or each side of the head?

also if Trayvon was slamming GZ's head on the concrete seems that Trayvon's hands would have sustained more that one very small scratch on his one finger.

again not necessarily.

if Trayvon was actually slamming GZ's head onto a concrete surface, than it is only logical that the area around the top of his knuckles as well as his fingernails would have been injured by the concrete.

not necessarily. as it was said TM was not that big maybe he was not doing it all that hard. in fact the wounds seem to be pretty minor to GZ.

also last but least, if Trayvon was pummeling GZ with his fist, seems that Trayvon's knuckles would have been swollen and scraped from the fist to face blows.

again not necessarily. the injuries GZ suffered were not that major and soft tissue swelling occur over time. bruising occurs as blood is pumped into the damaged vessels by the heart. TM was dead so he would not show much soft tissue damage.

no damage was found on T. Martin's knuckles or the tips of his fingers from contact with the concrete. so far the autopsy report shows that he had only a small abrasion on his left ring finger.

you assume he would have had to hit his hand. you also make the mistake of forgetting that such damage may not show for several hours in a living person...maybe never in a dead person. also TM's skin tone would make it hard to notice minor or early discoloration.

eek

does anyone know when the actual autopsy report will be released to the public?

i do not think so. if not for a that one IF in the top of your post i would have tought you had read it.

what we do know is GZ account matches up as to his injuries.

thx 4 ur X n answering the questions posed in a concise and logical mode-set. there is no disagreement on my part to ur words. as highlighted, just questions.

one day a child hugged the earth & whispered 2 her,"I wish people would realize every x a bomb is launched & hits ur surface, it's like a major injury 2 u." i know war hurts u. :" the earth rumbled softly n reply, then cried a massive storm(c)
Reply #234 posted 06/22/12 2:01pm

Musicslave

OnlyNDaUsa said:

free2bfreeda said:

also, if Trayvon M was banging GZ's head onto the pavement, and seeing all photos on that night, why aren't there any reports of scratch marks on GZ's ears? GZ had no hair to hold onto.

not necessary to hold on to his ears... so that is not really a valid question.

also if Trayvon was slamming GZ's head on the concrete seems that Trayvon's hands would have sustained more that one very small scratch on his one finger.

again not necessarily.

if Trayvon was actually slamming GZ's head onto a concrete surface, than it is only logical that the area around the top of his knuckles as well as his fingernails would have been injured by the concrete.

not necessarily. as it was said TM was not that big maybe he was not doing it all that hard. in fact the wounds seem to be pretty minor to GZ.

also last but least, if Trayvon was pummeling GZ with his fist, seems that Trayvon's knuckles would have been swollen and scraped from the fist to face blows.

again not necessarily. the injuries GZ suffered were not that major and soft tissue swelling occur over time. bruising occurs as blood is pumped into the damaged vessels by the heart. TM was dead so he would not show much soft tissue damage.

no damage was found on T. Martin's knuckles or the tips of his fingers from contact with the concrete. so far the autopsy report shows that he had only a small abrasion on his left ring finger.

you assume he would have had to hit his hand. you also make the mistake of forgetting that such damage may not show for several hours in a living person...maybe never in a dead person. also TM's skin tone would make it hard to notice minor or early discoloration.

eek

does anyone know when the actual autopsy report will be released to the public?

i do not think so. if not for a that one IF in the top of your post i would have tought you had read it.

what we do know is GZ account matches up as to his injuries.

Really? No, that's what O'Mara wants you and everyone else to think. You said yourself that, "the injuries GZ suffered were not that major." Minor injuries isn't consistent with "Feeling like my head was going to explode." Or as he told his family members, Feeling like his life was in the balance if he slammed his head into the concrete one more time. Or he was going to end up a vegetable if he hadn't done something. Really? Dude gets up without a concussion, a hint of brain damage, or skull fracture, and then refuses more extensive medical treatment from the paramedics/hospital?

GZ is exaggerating his story to justify his shooting an unarmed teen in the chest. Even Det. Chris Serino's statements and questions from his interview show doubts of credibility on GZ's part.

Reply #235 posted 06/22/12 2:37pm

OnlyNDaUsa

Musicslave said:

Really? No, that's what O'Mara wants you and everyone else to think.

I have no idea who that is.

You said yourself that, "the injuries GZ suffered were not that major." Minor injuries isn't consistent with "Feeling like my head was going to explode." Or as he told his family members, Feeling like his life was in the balance if he slammed his head into the concrete one more time. Or he was going to end up a vegetable if he hadn't done something. Really? Dude gets up without a concussion, a hint of brain damage, or skull fracture, and then refuses more extensive medical treatment from the paramedics/hospital?

now you are talking about his state of mine and perception of danger. but it may go to the reasonable person standard.

GZ is exaggerating his story to justify his shooting an unarmed teen in the chest. Even Det. Chris Serino's statements and questions from his interview show doubts of credibility on GZ's part.

maybe he did. bit was injured. I am not sure why you are so sure he just made it up. I would think you would want justice to be served.

Living with a disability is not the Wurst thing in the word: Knowingly Mocking someone with one is far Wurst!.
Reply #236 posted 06/22/12 2:43pm

OnlyNDaUsa

free2bfreeda said:

OnlyNDaUsa said:

thx 4 ur X n answering the questions posed in a concise and logical mode-set. there is no disagreement on my part to ur words. as highlighted, just questions.

maybe GZ was trying to get up so all TM would need to do is push down so he would not need to hold on to anything. and as i said the head wound was not so bad as to in hindsight seem life threatening. but it looks like at least 2 good hits (multiple hit) by or against something. and his noes was broken (however slight).

again as i have said from the first topic: i think GZ committed a crime. I think he should do time. but it seems much closer to criminally negligent homicide than murder.

Living with a disability is not the Wurst thing in the word: Knowingly Mocking someone with one is far Wurst!.
Reply #237 posted 06/22/12 3:15pm

free2bfreeda

OnlyNDaUsa said:

maybe GZ was trying to get up so all TM would need to do is push down so he would not need to hold on to anything. and as i said the head wound was not so bad as to in hindsight seem life threatening. but it looks like at least 2 good hits (multiple hit) by or against something. and his noes was broken (however slight).

again as i have said from the first topic: i think GZ committed a crime. I think he should do time. but it seems much closer to criminally negligent homicide than murder.

GZ says his head was banged onto the concrete several times. now Trayvon had have had some sort of hold on GZ's head. either the ears or the sides of his head which if he was hold GZ's head while banging it onto the concrete several times a logical accessment would be to expect that Trayvon's fingernails would have been broken and have nail splits, and the back of fingertips would have sustained some sort skin to concrete abraisions, no matter how minute.

http://i2.cdn.turner.com/...t_0226.pdf

check out page #2 of police report where GZ has written in his recall/accounting of the slamming of the head episode.

George Zimmerman's words from police report:

"the suspect got on tope of me. I yelled "help several times. the suspect told me "shut the *uck up as i tried to sit up right, the suspect grabbed my head and slammed it into the sidewalk several times. i continued to yell "help" each time I attempted to sit up, the suspect slammed my head into the sidewalk, my head flet like it was going to expolde. i tried to slide out from under the suspec and continue to yel help.

^^^^^^^^^above written statement from police report, GZ's words on 2/26/2012^^^^^^^^^^^^^

one day a child hugged the earth & whispered 2 her,"I wish people would realize every x a bomb is launched & hits ur surface, it's like a major injury 2 u." i know war hurts u. :" the earth rumbled softly n reply, then cried a massive storm(c)
Reply #238 posted 06/22/12 3:39pm

OnlyNDaUsa

free2bfreeda said:

GZ says his head was banged onto the concrete several times. now Trayvon had have had some sort of hold on GZ's head. either the ears or the sides of his head which if he was hold GZ's head while banging it onto the concrete several times a logical accessment would be to expect that Trayvon's fingernails would have been broken and have nail splits, and the back of fingertips would have sustained some sort skin to concrete abraisions, no matter how minute.

http://i2.cdn.turner.com/...t_0226.pdf

check out page #2 of police report where GZ has written in his recall/accounting of the slamming of the head episode.

George Zimmerman's words from police report:

"the suspect got on tope of me. I yelled "help several times. the suspect told me "shut the *uck up as i tried to sit up right, the suspect grabbed my head and slammed it into the sidewalk several times. i continued to yell "help" each time I attempted to sit up, the suspect slammed my head into the sidewalk, my head flet like it was going to expolde. i tried to slide out from under the suspec and continue to yel help.

^^^^^^^^^above written statement from police report, GZ's words on 2/26/2012^^^^^^^^^^^^^

your own quote says what i said: GZ was kept trying to get up and TM kept pushing him back down. so no need to hold on to his ears to pull him up as you speculated just push him down.

Living with a disability is not the Wurst thing in the word: Knowingly Mocking someone with one is far Wurst!.
Reply #239 posted 06/22/12 3:42pm

free2bfreeda

http://www.denverpost.com...source=rss

Nation and World

Trayvon Martin case: George Zimmerman interviews released

Posted: 06/22/2012 01:00:00 AM MDT
By Mike Schneider

ORLANDO, fla. — Detectives who questioned George Zimmerman in the days after he fatally shot Trayvon Martin grilled him on his story and said some of his statements were inconsistent, according to video and audio police tapes released Thursday.

The skepticism is at odds with a public perception that the police department didn't fully investigate the neighborhood watch leader in the aftermath of the shooting.

The evidence was made public by Zimmerman's attorney almost a week before Zimmerman's second bond hearing on a second-degree murder charge. Zimmerman claims he shot the unarmed 17-year-old Martin in self-defense.

Making it public now might help Zimmerman "because this is a case being played out in the press," said criminal defense attorney David Hill, who is not involved in the case.

"If there is a strategic basis, I don't think it hurts," Hill said.

The tapes give Zimmerman's most detailed account yet of what led to the Feb. 26 shooting. In one video, he goes to the scene of the shooting and re-enacts for police what happened, answering probing questions from authorities.

In an interrogation at the police station, a detective points out inconsistencies in his story, particularly Zimmerman's claim that Martin confronted him, punched him and slammed his head onto the ground when the teenager had no prior history of violence.

Detective Chris Sereno asks Zimmerman whether he was profiling Martin because he was black, a claim Martin's parents have made.

"You know you are going to come under a lot of scrutiny for this," Sereno said. "Had this person been white, would you have felt the same way?"

"Yes," said Zimmerman, who father is white and his mother Latino.

umm hmmmm, more and more revelations are coming to fruition. :nod:

one day a child hugged the earth & whispered 2 her,"I wish people would realize every x a bomb is launched & hits ur surface, it's like a major injury 2 u." i know war hurts u. :" the earth rumbled softly n reply, then cried a massive storm(c)
Reply #240 posted 06/22/12 3:47pm

free2bfreeda

OnlyNDaUsa said:

free2bfreeda said:

GZ says his head was banged onto the concrete several times. now Trayvon had have had some sort of hold on GZ's head. either the ears or the sides of his head which if he was hold GZ's head while banging it onto the concrete several times a logical accessment would be to expect that Trayvon's fingernails would have been broken and have nail splits, and the back of fingertips would have sustained some sort skin to concrete abraisions, no matter how minute.

http://i2.cdn.turner.com/...t_0226.pdf

check out page #2 of police report where GZ has written in his recall/accounting of the slamming of the head episode.

George Zimmerman's words from police report:

"the suspect got on tope of me. I yelled "help several times. the suspect told me "shut the *uck up as i tried to sit up right, the suspect grabbed my head and slammed it into the sidewalk several times. i continued to yell "help" each time I attempted to sit up, the suspect slammed my head into the sidewalk, my head flet like it was going to expolde. i tried to slide out from under the suspec and continue to yel help.

^^^^^^^^^above written statement from police report, GZ's words on 2/26/2012^^^^^^^^^^^^^

your own quote says what i said: GZ was kept trying to get up and TM kept pushing him back down. so no need to hold on to his ears to pull him up as you speculated just push him down.

"the suspect grabbed my head and slammed it into the sidewalk several times." if trayvon martin grabbed gz's head, where did he grab? it would either have to be by the ears or by the whole cranium, which would have left trayvon's hands exposed to the concrete.

at the least some of Trayvon's nails should have sustained chipping or breakage. or the top back of his fingers should have been scuffed.

one day a child hugged the earth & whispered 2 her,"I wish people would realize every x a bomb is launched & hits ur surface, it's like a major injury 2 u." i know war hurts u. :" the earth rumbled softly n reply, then cried a massive storm(c)
Reply #241 posted 06/22/12 3:51pm

OnlyNDaUsa

free2bfreeda said:

OnlyNDaUsa said:

your own quote says what i said: GZ was kept trying to get up and TM kept pushing him back down. so no need to hold on to his ears to pull him up as you speculated just push him down.

"the suspect grabbed my head and slammed it into the sidewalk several times." if trayvon martin grabbed gz's head, where did he grab? it would either have to be by the ears or by the whole cranium, which would have left trayvon's hands exposed to the concrete.

at the least some of Trayvon's nails should have sustained chipping or breakage. or the top back of his fingers should have been scuffed.

no! just put his hands on around his head... and push. the rest is speculation that a 10 second demonstration can prove is not necessary.

Living with a disability is not the Wurst thing in the word: Knowingly Mocking someone with one is far Wurst!.
Reply #242 posted 06/22/12 6:33pm

SUPRMAN

OnlyNDaUsa said:

free2bfreeda said:

"the suspect grabbed my head and slammed it into the sidewalk several times." if trayvon martin grabbed gz's head, where did he grab? it would either have to be by the ears or by the whole cranium, which would have left trayvon's hands exposed to the concrete.

at the least some of Trayvon's nails should have sustained chipping or breakage. or the top back of his fingers should have been scuffed.

no! just put his hands on around his head... and push. the rest is speculation that a 10 second demonstration can prove is not necessary.

that can't be what you meant. His hands would then be under Zimmerman's head.

Where were Zimmerman's hands while Trayvon Martin was doing this?

I don't want you to think like me. I just want you to think.
Reply #243 posted 06/22/12 6:36pm

SUPRMAN

OnlyNDaUsa said:

free2bfreeda said:

thx 4 ur X n answering the questions posed in a concise and logical mode-set. there is no disagreement on my part to ur words. as highlighted, just questions.

maybe GZ was trying to get up so all TM would need to do is push down so he would not need to hold on to anything. and as i said the head wound was not so bad as to in hindsight seem life threatening. but it looks like at least 2 good hits (multiple hit) by or against something. and his noes was broken (however slight).

again as i have said from the first topic: i think GZ committed a crime. I think he should do time. but it seems much closer to criminally negligent homicide than murder.

Could you expound on how you make the differentiation? I'd like to read (hear) it.

I don't want you to think like me. I just want you to think.
Reply #244 posted 06/22/12 6:42pm

OnlyNDaUsa

SUPRMAN said:

OnlyNDaUsa said:

no! just put his hands on around his head... and push. the rest is speculation that a 10 second demonstration can prove is not necessary.

that can't be what you meant. His hands would then be under Zimmerman's head.

Where were Zimmerman's hands while Trayvon Martin was doing this?

how big are his hands? thumbs touching on the forehead the other fingers reach to just past the ears.

Living with a disability is not the Wurst thing in the word: Knowingly Mocking someone with one is far Wurst!.
Reply #245 posted 06/22/12 6:46pm

OnlyNDaUsa

SUPRMAN said:

OnlyNDaUsa said:

maybe GZ was trying to get up so all TM would need to do is push down so he would not need to hold on to anything. and as i said the head wound was not so bad as to in hindsight seem life threatening. but it looks like at least 2 good hits (multiple hit) by or against something. and his noes was broken (however slight).

again as i have said from the first topic: i think GZ committed a crime. I think he should do time. but it seems much closer to criminally negligent homicide than murder.

Could you expound on how you make the differentiation? I'd like to read (hear) it.

i do not believe that GZ planed to or was in the process of breaking any law when he engaged TM.

i think at worst for GZ he followed him and said something to him and may have even put his hands on him and TM fought back.

Living with a disability is not the Wurst thing in the word: Knowingly Mocking someone with one is far Wurst!.
Reply #246 posted 06/22/12 6:52pm

SUPRMAN

OnlyNDaUsa said:

SUPRMAN said:

Could you expound on how you make the differentiation? I'd like to read (hear) it.

i do not believe that GZ planed to or was in the process of breaking any law when he engaged TM.

i think at worst for GZ he followed him and said something to him and may have even put his hands on him and TM fought back.

You do not have to plan or be in the process of breaking a law to murder someone.

I still dont' feel you've answered the question.

Here are the Florida definitions to help.

In Florida...

..."the killing of a human being by the act, procurement, or culpable negligence of another, without lawful justification..., is manslaughter, a felony of the second degree." This is the definition currently used in Florida based on a decision of the Florida Supreme Court.

There has been quite a bit of discussion of how to differentiate manslaughter from first and second degree murder, but what it comes down to is this: if something you do causes someone else to die, if something you get someone else to do causes someone to die, or if you do something stupid (or fail to do something smart) that common sense would tell you would create dangerous situation and could cause someone to die and someone does die, you have committed manslaughter.

The difficulty comes with the fact that juries are often confused as to the difference between first degree murder (premeditation), second degree murder (evil intent) and manslaughter (intent to cause death). The key is that manslaughter is death to another due to reckless disregard of human life. A person may not have intended anyone to die but they didn’t care if they caused a situation where someone might die, and someone did in fact die.

.

(premeditation), second degree murder (evil intent) and manslaughter (intent to
cause death).

In order to convict someone of manslaughter by intentional act, it is not necessary for the State to prove that the defendant had a premeditated intent to cause death. A conviction for manslaughter by act does not require an intent to kill but only an intentional act that causes the death of the victim.

First degree murder implies that someone thought about causing the death of another and went to where that person was and caused them to die by either their action or inaction. Second degree murder means that someone does something on purpose that could cause someone to die, knowing that it could cause someone to die, and someone does die. Manslaughter means that someone does something on purpose that could cause someone to die without thinking of that possibility and someone dies.

Sources: http://www.floridasupreme...Report.pdf.

I don't want you to think like me. I just want you to think.
Reply #247 posted 06/22/12 7:18pm

OnlyNDaUsa

SUPRMAN said:

OnlyNDaUsa said:

i do not believe that GZ planed to or was in the process of breaking any law when he engaged TM.

i think at worst for GZ he followed him and said something to him and may have even put his hands on him and TM fought back.

You do not have to plan or be in the process of breaking a law to murder someone.

I still dont' feel you've answered the question.

Here are the Florida definitions to help.

In Florida...

..."the killing of a human being by the act, procurement, or culpable negligence of another, without lawful justification..., is manslaughter, a felony of the second degree." This is the definition currently used in Florida based on a decision of the Florida Supreme Court.

There has been quite a bit of discussion of how to differentiate manslaughter from first and second degree murder, but what it comes down to is this: if something you do causes someone else to die, if something you get someone else to do causes someone to die, or if you do something stupid (or fail to do something smart) that common sense would tell you would create dangerous situation and could cause someone to die and someone does die, you have committed manslaughter.

The difficulty comes with the fact that juries are often confused as to the difference between first degree murder (premeditation), second degree murder (evil intent) and manslaughter (intent to cause death). The key is that manslaughter is death to another due to reckless disregard of human life. A person may not have intended anyone to die but they didn’t care if they caused a situation where someone might die, and someone did in fact die.

.

(premeditation), second degree murder (evil intent) and manslaughter (intent to
cause death).

In order to convict someone of manslaughter by intentional act, it is not necessary for the State to prove that the defendant had a premeditated intent to cause death. A conviction for manslaughter by act does not require an intent to kill but only an intentional act that causes the death of the victim.

First degree murder implies that someone thought about causing the death of another and went to where that person was and caused them to die by either their action or inaction. Second degree murder means that someone does something on purpose that could cause someone to die, knowing that it could cause someone to die, and someone does die. Manslaughter means that someone does something on purpose that could cause someone to die without thinking of that possibility and someone dies.

Sources: http://www.floridasupreme...Report.pdf.

dude you have issues. there is also manslaughter that is a 3rd degree. so i am saying here as i have since the first topic on this subject it is manslaughter...but not 2nd degree. i do not care if you like my answer. you have a ridiculous standard for others that you never hold to yourself

Living with a disability is not the Wurst thing in the word: Knowingly Mocking someone with one is far Wurst!.
Reply #248 posted 06/22/12 7:26pm

free2bfreeda

OnlyNDaUsa said:

SUPRMAN said:

Could you expound on how you make the differentiation? I'd like to read (hear) it.

i do not believe that GZ planed to or was in the process of breaking any law when he engaged TM.

i think at worst for GZ he followed him and said something to him and may have even put his hands on him and TM fought back.

maybe GZ floated off into the over-medicated zone. not giving zimmerman a drug test, was highly negligent for the sanford p.d. officers. i believe if detective serino would have been allowed to follow through on the arrest of GZ, a blood test would have been taken. i mean zimmerman was/is on two types of medication on the evening of the shooting.

if the blood test detected no medication in GZ's system, then his natural state of mind (unmedicated) could be called to question as far as his competency. also if a blood test had been taken on GZ on that night, any illegal drugs could have been detected in his system.

June 22, 2012 in Nation/World

Detective troubled by holes in Zimmerman’s account

http://www.spokesman.com/...s-account/

MIAMI – Three days after George Zimmerman killed an unarmed teenager and went home free, he had a predicament: The lead detectives investigating the shooting seemed to no longer believe his story.

Sanford Police Detective Chris Serino told Zimmerman in a series of interviews that day that he was a “good guy,” but that there were holes in his story, including minor injuries that did not match the beating he said he received at the hands of a “child” who carried candy.

Zimmerman repeatedly told police that Trayvon Martin sucker-punched him, tried to suffocate him and bashed his head into the concrete to the point it felt his “head was going to explode.” He said Martin tried to take his gun from him before saying: “You’re going to die tonight … .”

But Serino wondered why Zimmerman’s skull wasn’t fractured, why he didn’t know the street names of a tiny neighborhood where he’d lived for three years and why he had no defensive wounds on his hands. Serino got him to acknowledge what Martin’s parents and lawyers have said all along: that Zimmerman got out of his car that night not so much to check for an address to give police, but to find out where the teen went.

“That was a kid with a future, a kid with folks that care. Not a goon,” Serino said. “In his mind’s eye, he perceived you as a threat. He has every right to defend himself.”

Tapes released Thursday of questioning between Zimmerman and Sanford police underscore a sharp contrast between the public statements made by the Sanford Police Department the weeks following Martin’s killing and the conversations that went on internally. They offer the first glimpse of a man who told detectives that he takes medication for attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, and who at one point became the most controversial man in America. The interrogations also reveal that detectives were troubled by a man with a history of inserting himself into law enforcement matters who did not have the training to determine what a “suspicious” person should look like.

Zimmerman detailed a harrowing night when he said a stranger accosted him for no reason and allegedly threatened to kill him. At least twice witnesses failed to come to his aid. One of the first things Zimmerman said to Detective Doris Singleton: The bad guys always get away.

Hinting that Zimmerman had left something out of his account, Serino asked over and over why Martin would have been so enraged as to deck a perfect stranger. Zimmerman, he suggested, had chased him.

At one point, Zimmerman answered: “I wasn’t following him; I was just going in the same direction he was.”

Serino retorted: “That’s following.”

Zimmerman is facing a second-degree murder charge for the killing. The arrest came six weeks after the shooting and a short time after a widely criticized investigation was handed over to other agencies. Despite Serino’s misgivings – and the detective’s recommendation that Zimmerman be charged with manslaughter – Sanford Police publicly stated that there was no probable cause to make an arrest, so the politically charged case was handed over to the Florida Department of Law Enforcement.

wow this makes for some interesting reading. get outta here detective chris serino, aka:sherlock holmes. u b the man!

[Edited 6/22/12 19:31pm]

one day a child hugged the earth & whispered 2 her,"I wish people would realize every x a bomb is launched & hits ur surface, it's like a major injury 2 u." i know war hurts u. :" the earth rumbled softly n reply, then cried a massive storm(c)
Reply #249 posted 06/22/12 8:05pm

SUPRMAN

OnlyNDaUsa said:



dude you have issues. there is also manslaughter that is a 3rd degree. so i am saying here as i have since the first topic on this subject it is manslaughter...but not 2nd degree. i do not care if you like my answer. you have a ridiculous standard for others that you never hold to yourself

You said;

i do not believe that GZ planed to or was in the process of breaking any law when he engaged TM.

Second degree murder means that someone does something on purpose that could cause someone to die, knowing that it could cause someone to die, and someone does die.

Second degree murder does not require intent.

You said:

i think at worst for GZ he followed him and said something to him and may have even put his hands on him and TM fought back.

Second degree murder means that someone does something on purpose that could cause someone to die, knowing that it could cause someone to die, and someone does die.

Again, your characterization of events makes a second degree murder charge a reasonable charge. A plea bargain to manslaughter is where I believe we'll end up.

I don't want you to think like me. I just want you to think.
Reply #250 posted 06/22/12 8:10pm

SUPRMAN

free2bfreeda said:

wow this makes for some interesting reading. get outta here detective chris serino, aka:sherlock holmes. u b the man!

[Edited 6/22/12 19:31pm]

Yes it is. Serino's initial account is what convinced me from the begining that it was first degree murder. Serino wanted to arrest him for manslaughter. My problem is we can't prove GZ left his truck intending to shoot and/or kill.

I don't want you to think like me. I just want you to think.
Reply #251 posted 06/22/12 8:26pm

free2bfreeda

SUPRMAN said:

free2bfreeda said:

wow this makes for some interesting reading. get outta here detective chris serino, aka:sherlock holmes. u b the man!

[Edited 6/22/12 19:31pm]

Yes it is. Serino's initial account is what convinced me from the begining that it was first degree murder. Serino wanted to arrest him for manslaughter. My problem is we can't prove GZ left his truck intending to shoot and/or kill.

line from article:

Detective troubled by holes in Zimmerman’s account

At one point, Zimmerman answered Serino saying: "I wasn't following him; I was just going the in the same direction he was."

Serino retorted: “That’s following.”

imo GZ wearing the gun speaks for itself.

(scenario)> if i followed you and got out of my vehicle with a knife in my pocket upon a feeling of you looking or seeming suspicious, i'd know i had my knife in my pocket in case you decided to try fight me. [wearing the gun and following Trayvon reveals some sort pre-meditated defensive intent on GZ's part]

imo, i feel i would not approach or question you with a knife in my pocket if i did not feel i would have to use it.

one day a child hugged the earth & whispered 2 her,"I wish people would realize every x a bomb is launched & hits ur surface, it's like a major injury 2 u." i know war hurts u. :" the earth rumbled softly n reply, then cried a massive storm(c)
Reply #252 posted 06/22/12 9:36pm

SUPRMAN

free2bfreeda said:

SUPRMAN said:

line from article:

Detective troubled by holes in Zimmerman’s account

At one point, Zimmerman answered Serino saying: "I wasn't following him; I was just going the in the same direction he was."

Serino retorted: “That’s following.”

imo GZ wearing the gun speaks for itself.

(scenario)> if i followed you and got out of my vehicle with a knife in my pocket upon a feeling of you looking or seeming suspicious, i'd know i had my knife in my pocket in case you decided to try fight me. [wearing the gun and following Trayvon reveals some sort pre-meditated defensive intent on GZ's part]

imo, i feel i would not approach or question you with a knife in my pocket if i did not feel i would have to use it.

If he were following with the gun in his hand, then I would argue that manifests intent. But we don't know if he was or not. He was certainly smart enough not to say he was. But if he was, then how did the fight ensue? Not that doesn't seem likely.

Therefore the only intent is in his head.

I don't want you to think like me. I just want you to think.
Reply #253 posted 06/23/12 8:29am

2elijah

free2bfreeda said:
SUPRMAN said:
line from article:

Detective troubled by holes in Zimmerman’s account

At one point, Zimmerman answered Serino saying: "I wasn't following him; I was just going the in the same direction he was."
Serino retorted: “That’s following.”
imo GZ wearing the gun speaks for itself.
(scenario)> if i followed you and got out of my vehicle with a knife in my pocket upon a feeling of you looking or seeming suspicious, i'd know i had my knife in my pocket in case you decided to try fight me. [wearing the gun and following Trayvon reveals some sort pre-meditated defensive intent on GZ's part]
imo, i feel i would not approach or question you with a knife in my pocket if i did not feel i would have to use it.
Exactly. He knew if something jumped off he had his gun to use. GZ is full of his own bs, and knows damn well TM was no threat to him. Somethihg tells me TM noticed GZ was following him, he probably flipped a bird at
GZ and GZ's didn't like that, and his ego took over and he became hell bent on following TM and approaching him, and wasn't going to be satisfied until he confronted him. GZ brought this all on himself. He could have kept moving on and minding his business, but he made it his own.
Reply #254 posted 06/23/12 8:43am

OnlyNDaUsa

free2bfreeda said:

imo GZ wearing the gun speaks for itself.

not at all.

(scenario)> if i followed you and got out of my vehicle with a knife in my pocket upon a feeling of you looking or seeming suspicious, i'd know i had my knife in my pocket in case you decided to try fight me. [wearing the gun and following Trayvon reveals some sort pre-meditated defensive intent on GZ's part]

so exercising one's right to carry a gun for self defence is evidence of a crime if they ever have to use it for self defence?

imo, i feel i would not approach or question you with a knife in my pocket if i did not feel i would have to use it.

so you would take it out and then approach? that seems weird. if you do not need it all is fine... if you do... what then.

Living with a disability is not the Wurst thing in the word: Knowingly Mocking someone with one is far Wurst!.
Reply #255 posted 06/23/12 9:32am

prittypriss

OnlyNDaUSA: The fact remains that GZ claims he was afraid for his life. He followed TM. The recording of his call to the dispatcher proves that. The dispatcher suggested GZ meet the police by the mailboxes, and GZ, at first, said yes to that. But then, you can hear this pause as though he is thinking about it, he changes his mind and tells the dispatcher what kind of a vehicle he is driving and tells the dispatcher which general direction for the police to go in. This implies that GZ was not going to give up on following TM.

He would not give the dispatcher the address of the house he was in front of because he knew he would not be there when the police arrived. It was basically, "have the police find me". He had commented in the recording "They always get away". Now in other statements of what had been going on in the neighborhood with the break-ins, in which GZ or someone else had called the police, the "suspect" had gotten away before the police arrived. The statement "they always get away" supports his frame of mind at the time. He was determined that TM was not going to get away. He was not going to let this one get away. He was not afraid of TM. Otherwise, he would have done exactly as the dispatcher had originally suggested and met the police by the mailboxes.

The only thing he was afraid of was TM getting away before the police arrived. In that frame of mind, he would not have been against pulling out his gun and holding it on Trayvon until the police arrived to prevent him from getting away. If you are determined to detain someone to prevent them from getting away, and you know you have the means necessary to do so (have a gun), then you will do so.

Yes, this is speculation on my part. I was not there and cannot say for certainty that this is what happened. However, the call to the dispatcher, GZ's comments during that call, certainly do support this as a very possible scenario.

"I gave my life to become the person I am right now. Was it worth it?" ~ Richard Bach

https://www.jewelryincand..._and_scene
Reply #256 posted 06/23/12 10:41am

free2bfreeda

OnlyNDaUsa said:

free2bfreeda said:

imo GZ wearing the gun speaks for itself.

not at all.

(scenario)> if i followed you and got out of my vehicle with a knife in my pocket upon a feeling of you looking or seeming suspicious, i'd know i had my knife in my pocket in case you decided to try fight me. [wearing the gun and following Trayvon reveals some sort pre-meditated defensive intent on GZ's part]

so exercising one's right to carry a gun for self defence is evidence of a crime if they ever have to use it for self defence?

imo, i feel i would not approach or question you with a knife in my pocket if i did not feel i would have to use it.

so you would take it out and then approach? that seems weird. if you do not need it all is fine... if you do... what then.

OnlyNDaUSA's question:

so you would take it out and then approach? that seems weird. if you do not need it all is fine... if you do... what then.

well, in the first place (remember this is a scenario), as a neighborhood watch person or no, i would never have a weapon on my person upon exiting my vehicle to approach anyone. in fact i would never aggressively follow any stranger to question their right to be in an area. to do so would be an oxymoronic move.

also, if said person looked suspicious, (as a neighborhood watch person, i would follow the neighbor hood watch rules,) i'd call 911 and wait for the police to arrive. to do more would be deemed as overzealous and weird from any pov.

point is USA, even if said person looked suspicious, GZ had no reason or right under the law to leave his vehicle with his gun and holster on his person to question a stranger, unless he was intent on feeling he would need to use it. "that (as you express) seems weird."

1. from the begining GZ was on the offense and was the aggressor while in his car following Trayvon.

2. then GZ swtiched and morphed into a defensive mode when he exited his vehicle wearing a gun. that's the real weirdness on his part.

imo GZ was in a transgression of the law after he made the 911 call and did not heed the dispatcher's advice to "stop following" Trayvon Martin.

finally most folk think at this point, GZ was initially the the violator of the law from the beginning in this shooting death-crime incident.

one day a child hugged the earth & whispered 2 her,"I wish people would realize every x a bomb is launched & hits ur surface, it's like a major injury 2 u." i know war hurts u. :" the earth rumbled softly n reply, then cried a massive storm(c)
Reply #257 posted 06/23/12 10:53am

OnlyNDaUsa

he had not reason to fear for his life until the fight occurred.

it was perfectly legal for GZ to follow TM.

As for the pause to give the address... maybe he is like me and took a second to look for it? Was the # on the mail box or the house or curb? or are you saying he refused at first? I do not recall him refusing... more of he was confused.

I do not see how much of that would have any real impact on the jury.

Living with a disability is not the Wurst thing in the word: Knowingly Mocking someone with one is far Wurst!.
Reply #258 posted 06/23/12 11:08am

free2bfreeda

OnlyNDaUsa said:

he had not reason to fear for his life until the fight occurred.

it was perfectly legal for GZ to follow TM.

As for the pause to give the address... maybe he is like me and took a second to look for it? Was the # on the mail box or the house or curb? or are you saying he refused at first? I do not recall him refusing... more of he was confused.

I do not see how much of that would have any real impact on the jury.

especially while wearing a gun. nod

eeeyeah, okayee! you've con and vinced me to the dark side of the right to kill at anyone's (suspicious) behest.

i have to agree to disagree USA.

one day a child hugged the earth & whispered 2 her,"I wish people would realize every x a bomb is launched & hits ur surface, it's like a major injury 2 u." i know war hurts u. :" the earth rumbled softly n reply, then cried a massive storm(c)
Reply #259 posted 06/23/12 11:12am

OnlyNDaUsa

free2bfreeda said:

OnlyNDaUsa said:

OnlyNDaUSA's question:

so you would take it out and then approach? that seems weird. if you do not need it all is fine... if you do... what then.

well, in the first place (remember this is a scenario), as a neighborhood watch person or no, i would never have a weapon on my person upon exiting my vehicle to approach anyone. in fact i would never aggressively follow any stranger to question their right to be in an area. to do so would be an oxymoronic move.

*First by take out above i meant take out of your pocket and leave it behind... not take out as to brandish.

that sounds like best practice. in fact i would say a watchman's role would be call police and let them do their job as they saw fit. That shows issues of judgment but it is not evidence of a crime or a criminal mind set.


also, if said person looked suspicious, (as a neighborhood watch person, i would follow the neighbor hood watch rules,) i'd call 911 and wait for the police to arrive. to do more would be deemed as overzealous and weird from any pov.

again that is good practice. but i see no crime there.

When i said it was weird that you would not take a weapon if you thought you would need it (at least that is how i read it) but you might still go talk to that person. I am thinking now it was just a oddly worded or misread by me.


point is USA, even if said person looked suspicious, GZ had no reason or right under the law to leave his vehicle with his gun and holster on his person to question a stranger, unless he was intent on feeling he would need to use it. "that (as you express) seems weird."

but he was not legally obligated to not follow him. I agree it is not the best choice of actions.


1. from the begining GZ was on the offense and was the aggressor while in his car following Trayvon.

I do not think that is self evident. it seems to be to have been done in good faith.


2. then GZ swtiched and morphed into a defensive mode when he exited his vehicle wearing a gun. that's the real weirdness on his part.

yeah i said in one of the other topics you can not start a fist fight and then when you are losing pull out a gun. (but I also was critical of a legal expert for saying that as it seemed to be he was drawling a conclusion that GZ started the fight as it was the media basically declaring GZ guilty.


imo GZ was in a transgression of the law after he made the 911 call and did not heed the dispatcher's advice to "stop following" Trayvon Martin.

what law? there is no law that i have ever seen that says you have to follow what 911 says. there was a case in TX where a man called to tell 911 that someone was robbing the house next door and that he was going to shoot them. the 911 said don't and said he was and then you cn hear the shots. As far as I know he was not charged.


finally most folk think at this point, GZ was initially the the violator of the law from the beginning in this shooting death-crime incident.

what people think the law IS is not always what it really is. the jury will be told both interpretations. they will decide the facts based on that.

Living with a disability is not the Wurst thing in the word: Knowingly Mocking someone with one is far Wurst!.
Reply #260 posted 06/23/12 11:19am

prittypriss

OnlyNDaUsa said:

he had not reason to fear for his life until the fight occurred.

it was perfectly legal for GZ to follow TM.

As for the pause to give the address... maybe he is like me and took a second to look for it? Was the # on the mail box or the house or curb? or are you saying he refused at first? I do not recall him refusing... more of he was confused.

I do not see how much of that would have any real impact on the jury.

Looking over the transcript of the call, what he actually says is "Could you have them call me and I'll tell them where I'm at".

911 dispatcher:

Alright, what address are you parked in front of? [3:21]

Zimmerman:

Um, I don’t know. It’s a cut-through so I don’t know the address. [3:25]

911 dispatcher:

OK, do you live in the area?

Zimmerman:

Yeah, yeah, I live here.

911 dispatcher:

OK, what’s your apartment number?

Zimmerman:

It’s a home. It’s 1950 – oh, crap, I don’t want to give it out – I don’t know where this kid is [inaudible] [3:40]

911 dispatcher:

OK, do you just want to meet with them at the mailboxes then? [3:42]

Zimmerman:

Yeah, that’s fine. [3:43]

911 dispatcher:

Alright, George, I’ll let them know you’ll meet them at …

Zimmerman:

Could you have them call me and I’ll tell them where I’m at? [3:49]

When asked originally for the address, he didn't know, which is understandable since he stated he was at a cut-through. When he said, "I don't know where this kid is [inaudible]" The dispatcher had not asked him where TM was at that time. His comment implies that he was still looking for Martin. The dispatcher suggested he meet the police at the mailboxes, Zimmerman said "fine" and on the actual recording it sounds as though he is distracted as he is saying it, as though his attention is not really on the conversation at that point. The dispatcher goes to confirm the location of where he will meet the police and Zimmerman instead asks if the dispatcher would have the police call him instead so he can let them know at that time where he is at. Again, the implication is that he is going to continue to look for TM, though the dispatcher has clearly told him to not follow TM.

No, it is not a crime for him to follow Martin, however, it goes to show that Martin may have felt threatened by Zimmerman and therefore would have been justified in confronting Zimmerman, "Why are you following me?" It also goes to show that Zimmerman had "intent" to "not let this one get away", because you know they always get away before the police arrive. It also shows that perhaps it was Martin who was in the right for "standing his ground" since he was being followed and persued by Zimmerman, who did not identify himself as a Neighborhood Watch person. If he had, perhaps Martin would have still been alive because he could have assured Zimmerman that he was there legitimately and had cause to be there. It also takes away from Zimmerman's claim of "standing his ground" because he was the one that was following Martin and was intent on not letting Martin get away. Zimmerman's actions brought about the confrontation, not the other way around.

"I gave my life to become the person I am right now. Was it worth it?" ~ Richard Bach

https://www.jewelryincand..._and_scene
Reply #261 posted 06/23/12 11:26am

OnlyNDaUsa

free2bfreeda said:

OnlyNDaUsa said:

he had not reason to fear for his life until the fight occurred.

it was perfectly legal for GZ to follow TM.

As for the pause to give the address... maybe he is like me and took a second to look for it? Was the # on the mail box or the house or curb? or are you saying he refused at first? I do not recall him refusing... more of he was confused.

I do not see how much of that would have any real impact on the jury.

especially while wearing a gun. nod

eeeyeah, okayee! you've con and vinced me to the dark side of the right to kill at anyone's (suspicious) behest.

i have to agree to disagree USA.

then what law did he break? i am not saying it was not just that if it was i would have thought that would have been posted.

he had a carry permit

following him was not a violation they were both in a public place.

as far as I know there is no law saying you have to follow the advice if 911

so what law did he break?

being all silly about it "eeyah" and all that aside: it seems you are grasping at straws to make the case bigger. but unless it was a against the law... then our shared opinion that it was a dumb move on GZ's part seems to go no further than showing his lack of judgement. Which might be used along with the bail issue and and shooting to convince the jury that he used poor judgement and was negligent when he used the gun.

but we can not just make up crimes based on what we think about this case.

another issue that MIGHT be used was to get a carry permit you I THINK to take gun safety classes. the content of the class he took MIGHT be brought into the case to show that he MIGHT have missed the 'rules' and may have in doing so invalidated his permit.

* the proceeding is from my own mind and memory of this case and what was posted any my beliife of the laws in question.

Living with a disability is not the Wurst thing in the word: Knowingly Mocking someone with one is far Wurst!.
Reply #262 posted 06/23/12 11:42am

2elijah

OnlyNDaUsa said:

free2bfreeda said:

especially while wearing a gun. nod

eeeyeah, okayee! you've con and vinced me to the dark side of the right to kill at anyone's (suspicious) behest.

i have to agree to disagree USA.

then what law did he break? i am not saying it was not just that if it was i would have thought that would have been posted.

he had a carry permit

following him was not a violation they were both in a public place.

as far as I know there is no law saying you have to follow the advice if 911

so what law did he break?

being all silly about it "eeyah" and all that aside: it seems you are grasping at straws to make the case bigger. but unless it was a against the law... then our shared opinion that it was a dumb move on GZ's part seems to go no further than showing his lack of judgement. Which might be used along with the bail issue and and shooting to convince the jury that he used poor judgement and was negligent when he used the gun.

but we can not just make up crimes based on what we think about this case.

another issue that MIGHT be used was to get a carry permit you I THINK to take gun safety classes. the content of the class he took MIGHT be brought into the case to show that he MIGHT have missed the 'rules' and may have in doing so invalidated his permit.

* the proceeding is from my own mind and memory of this case and what was posted any my beliife of the laws in question.

You missed the point. By GZ following TM proves his intention was to pursue and confront TM. He had no 'valid' reason for following him in the first place. His only reason was based on his own trumped-up suspicions of how he profiled TM to be a criminal. If the thought wasn't already there, GZ would never have gave it that much attention to the point he chose to pursue TM in the first place. GZ knew he would let his gun do the talking, had a confrontation ensue, and it did, and the use of his gun was his plan B, and GZ had to know that he could use the SYG law to as his excuse as to why he chose to use his gun.

[Edited 6/23/12 11:45am]

Reply #263 posted 06/23/12 11:50am

OnlyNDaUsa

2elijah said:

You missed the point. By GZ following TM proves his intention was to pursue and confront TM. He had no 'valid' reason for following him in the first place. His only reason was based on his own trumped-up suspicions of how he profiled TM to be a criminal. If the thought wasn't already there, GZ would never have gave it that much attention to the point he chose to pursue TM in the first place. GZ knew he would let his gun do the talking, had a confrontation ensue, and it did, and the use of his gun was his plan B, and GZ had to know that he could use the SYG law to as his excuse as to why he chose to use his gun.

i understand all that, and i agree to a large extent. Yet, what crime did he commit in following him?

as to the profiling him? so what? cops do that every day. there is nothing there other than foolishness--which may be used to show a pattern of poor judgment that lead to the shooting which may have some weight. (which is a slight change from what i said above) on GZ's part--but not a crime.

Living with a disability is not the Wurst thing in the word: Knowingly Mocking someone with one is far Wurst!.
Reply #264 posted 06/23/12 12:22pm

free2bfreeda

OnlyNDaUsa said:

2elijah said:

You missed the point. By GZ following TM proves his intention was to pursue and confront TM. He had no 'valid' reason for following him in the first place. His only reason was based on his own trumped-up suspicions of how he profiled TM to be a criminal. If the thought wasn't already there, GZ would never have gave it that much attention to the point he chose to pursue TM in the first place. GZ knew he would let his gun do the talking, had a confrontation ensue, and it did, and the use of his gun was his plan B, and GZ had to know that he could use the SYG law to as his excuse as to why he chose to use his gun.

i understand all that, and i agree to a large extent. Yet, what crime did he commit in following him?

as to the profiling him? so what? cops do that every day. there is nothing there other than foolishness--which may be used to show a pattern of poor judgment that lead to the shooting which may have some weight. (which is a slight change from what i said above) on GZ's part--but not a crime.

how about:

Harassment laws in Florida

According to Florida criminal statute 784.048, harass means "to engage in a course of conduct directed at a specific person that causes substantial emotional distress in such person and serves no legitimate purpose." This is often done through stalking, assault, written threats, battery and threatening/extortion.

and:

Stalking occurs when a person willfully, maliciously, and repeatedly follows, harasses, or cyberstalks another person, which results in emotional stress on the victim.

from my pov, GZ stalked, followed and killed a teen aged youth on feb 26, 2012.

GZ followed and stalked a young u.s. citizen, with no criminal background.

on the night of Trayvon Martin's death GZ did not see a person, he saw only a "suspicious" person.

so he decided he would play "daddylaw." he (imo) wanted make his authority over this young person known by any means necessary.

nothing more, nothing less.

until new hardcore and un-refuted evidence come forth for the person (GZ) currently behind bars for "not thinking rationally, and acting out overzealously" on the night of Trayvon Martin's death, i will continue to express this pov.

eek

one day a child hugged the earth & whispered 2 her,"I wish people would realize every x a bomb is launched & hits ur surface, it's like a major injury 2 u." i know war hurts u. :" the earth rumbled softly n reply, then cried a massive storm(c)
Reply #265 posted 06/23/12 12:31pm

OnlyNDaUsa

free2bfreeda said:

OnlyNDaUsa said:

i understand all that, and i agree to a large extent. Yet, what crime did he commit in following him?

as to the profiling him? so what? cops do that every day. there is nothing there other than foolishness--which may be used to show a pattern of poor judgment that lead to the shooting which may have some weight. (which is a slight change from what i said above) on GZ's part--but not a crime.

how about:

Harassment laws in Florida

According to Florida criminal statute 784.048, harass means "to engage in a course of conduct directed at a specific person that causes substantial emotional distress in such person and serves no legitimate purpose." This is often done through stalking, assault, written threats, battery and threatening/extortion.

and:

Stalking occurs when a person willfully, maliciously, and repeatedly follows, harasses, or cyberstalks another person, which results in emotional stress on the victim.

from my pov, GZ stalked, followed and killed a teen aged youth on feb 26, 2012.

GZ followed and stalked a young u.s. citizen, with no criminal background.

on the night of Trayvon Martin's death GZ did not see a person, he saw only a "suspicious" person.

so he decided he would play "daddylaw." he (imo) wanted make his authority over this young person known by any means necessary.

nothing more, nothing less.

until new hardcore and un-refuted evidence come forth for the person (GZ) currently behind bars for "not thinking rationally, and acting out overzealously" on the night of Trayvon Martin's death, i will continue to express this pov.

eek

"and repeatedly"???

Living with a disability is not the Wurst thing in the word: Knowingly Mocking someone with one is far Wurst!.
Reply #266 posted 06/23/12 12:36pm

OnlyNDaUsa

prittypriss said:

911 dispatcher:

OK, what’s your apartment number?

Zimmerman:

It’s a home. It’s 1950 – oh, crap, I don’t want to give it out – I don’t know where this kid is [inaudible] [3:40]

oh crap i missed this post: but yeah he seems reluctant to give it out. that is odd... i agree.

Living with a disability is not the Wurst thing in the word: Knowingly Mocking someone with one is far Wurst!.
Reply #267 posted 06/23/12 12:53pm

free2bfreeda

OnlyNDaUsa said:

free2bfreeda said:

how about:

Harassment laws in Florida

According to Florida criminal statute 784.048, harass means "to engage in a course of conduct directed at a specific person that causes substantial emotional distress in such person and serves no legitimate purpose." This is often done through stalking, assault, written threats, battery and threatening/extortion.

and:

Stalking occurs when a person willfully, maliciously, and repeatedly follows, harasses, or cyberstalks another person, which results in emotional stress on the victim.

from my pov, GZ stalked, followed and killed a teen aged youth on feb 26, 2012.

GZ followed and stalked a young u.s. citizen, with no criminal background.

on the night of Trayvon Martin's death GZ did not see a person, he saw only a "suspicious" person.

so he decided he would play "daddylaw." he (imo) wanted make his authority over this young person known by any means necessary.

nothing more, nothing less.

until new hardcore and un-refuted evidence come forth for the person (GZ) currently behind bars for "not thinking rationally, and acting out overzealously" on the night of Trayvon Martin's death, i will continue to express this pov.

eek

"and repeatedly"???

if someone is following someone else for more that 5 minutes while in his/her car, while making himself obvious to the person, as in Trayvon's girlfriends statement, saying that Trayvon said, "this dude is following me,' then the following can be defined as "a repeated act of following creating a harassing situation."

[Edited 6/23/12 12:57pm]

one day a child hugged the earth & whispered 2 her,"I wish people would realize every x a bomb is launched & hits ur surface, it's like a major injury 2 u." i know war hurts u. :" the earth rumbled softly n reply, then cried a massive storm(c)
Reply #268 posted 06/23/12 12:55pm

OnlyNDaUsa

free2bfreeda said:

OnlyNDaUsa said:

"and repeatedly"???

if someone is following someone else for more that 5 minutes while in his/her car, while making himself obvious to the person, as in Trayvon's girlfriends statement, saying that Trayvon said, "this dude is following me,' then the following can be defined as "a repeated act of following creating creating a harassing situation."

bull corn! that is the jut goofy as all get out.

Living with a disability is not the Wurst thing in the word: Knowingly Mocking someone with one is far Wurst!.
Reply #269 posted 06/23/12 1:00pm

OnlyNDaUsa

that is like saying if you rob a bank and get money from 3 tellers then it is 3 charges of bank robbery. (I would agree that if you rob 3 customers that would be 3 separate counts)

but really? you say because he go out of his car or that because he followed him long enough to be noticed that makes is repeated?

Living with a disability is not the Wurst thing in the word: Knowingly Mocking someone with one is far Wurst!.
Reply #270 posted 06/23/12 1:11pm

free2bfreeda

OnlyNDaUsa said:

free2bfreeda said:

if someone is following someone else for more that 5 minutes while in his/her car, while making himself obvious to the person, as in Trayvon's girlfriends statement, saying that Trayvon said, "this dude is following me,' then the following can be defined as "a repeated act of following creating a harassing situation."

bull corn! that is the jut goofy as all get out.

goofy Pic...goofy, as in more like GZ's actions on FEB 26th 2012.

GZ repeatedly (continually and incessantly) followed Trayvon. if he did not follow, Trayvon would be alive today. the dispatcher that said, "we don't want you to follow,"was most likely aware that GZ was breaking a law by following and stalking."

eek

[Edited 6/23/12 13:12pm]

one day a child hugged the earth & whispered 2 her,"I wish people would realize every x a bomb is launched & hits ur surface, it's like a major injury 2 u." i know war hurts u. :" the earth rumbled softly n reply, then cried a massive storm(c)
Reply #271 posted 06/23/12 1:39pm

2elijah

OnlyNDaUsa said:

2elijah said:

You missed the point. By GZ following TM proves his intention was to pursue and confront TM. He had no 'valid' reason for following him in the first place. His only reason was based on his own trumped-up suspicions of how he profiled TM to be a criminal. If the thought wasn't already there, GZ would never have gave it that much attention to the point he chose to pursue TM in the first place. GZ knew he would let his gun do the talking, had a confrontation ensue, and it did, and the use of his gun was his plan B, and GZ had to know that he could use the SYG law to as his excuse as to why he chose to use his gun.

i understand all that, and i agree to a large extent. Yet, what crime did he commit in following him?

as to the profiling him? so what? cops do that every day. there is nothing there other than foolishness--which may be used to show a pattern of poor judgment that lead to the shooting which may have some weight. (which is a slight change from what i said above) on GZ's part--but not a crime.

It is obvious what the following led to which is why the dispatcher told him not to follow TM, and the reason for the dispatcher telling GZ he didn't need to follow TM, was to avoid an altercation/confrontation. The following of TM led GZ to commit that crime. Had he not 'followed, pursued' TM, TM may have been alive today. Just think about that for a moment, as it doesn't take much brain cells to make common sense out of that.

GZ took matters into his own hands and is responsible for what took place once he made the personal decision to follow TM. GZ deliberately followed TM to confront him. There was absolutely no reason for GZ to follow a stranger, and no, he was not right to follow a stranger he 'assumed' and 'profiled' as suspicious, based on his own ignorant, stereotypical prejudices, especially when that stranger was not committing any crime. Your 'ok' of that type of Ok Corral attitude, is like giving the okay to KKK horseriders of back-in-the-day, who followed/chased/and killed many innocent Blacks, just to harass or harm them based on their ignorant, stereotypical ass-umptions, suspicions and hate of them. GZ's chicken-sh*t ass had no special entitlement to think he could just walk up to strangers in the street and bully them.

[Edited 6/23/12 13:42pm]

Reply #272 posted 06/23/12 1:54pm

OnlyNDaUsa

free2bfreeda said:

OnlyNDaUsa said:

bull corn! that is the jut goofy as all get out.

goofy Pic...goofy, as in more like GZ's actions on FEB 26th 2012.

GZ repeatedly (continually and incessantly) followed Trayvon. if he did not follow, Trayvon would be alive today. the dispatcher that said, "we don't want you to follow,"was most likely aware that GZ was breaking a law by following and stalking."

eek

[Edited 6/23/12 13:12pm]

if in your mind that there was more than one case of GZ following TM... then all i can do is disagree.

Living with a disability is not the Wurst thing in the word: Knowingly Mocking someone with one is far Wurst!.
Reply #273 posted 06/23/12 1:57pm

OnlyNDaUsa

2elijah said:

OnlyNDaUsa said:

i understand all that, and i agree to a large extent. Yet, what crime did he commit in following him?

as to the profiling him? so what? cops do that every day. there is nothing there other than foolishness--which may be used to show a pattern of poor judgment that lead to the shooting which may have some weight. (which is a slight change from what i said above) on GZ's part--but not a crime.

It is obvious what the following led to which is why the dispatcher told him not to follow TM, and the reason for the dispatcher telling GZ he didn't need to follow TM, was to avoid an altercation/confrontation. The following of TM led GZ to commit that crime. Had he not 'followed, pursued' TM, TM may have been alive today. Just think about that for a moment, as it doesn't take much brain cells to make common sense out of that.

GZ took matters into his own hands and is responsible for what took place once he made the personal decision to follow TM. GZ deliberately followed TM to confront him. There was absolutely no reason for GZ to follow a stranger, and no, he was not right to follow a stranger he 'assumed' and 'profiled' as suspicious, based on his own ignorant, stereotypical prejudices, especially when that stranger was not committing any crime. Your 'ok' of that type of Ok Corral attitude, is like giving the okay to KKK horseriders of back-in-the-day, who followed/chased/and killed many innocent Blacks, just to harass or harm them based on their ignorant, stereotypical ass-umptions, suspicions and hate of them. GZ's chicken-sh*t ass had no special entitlement to think he could just walk up to strangers in the street and bully them.

[Edited 6/23/12 13:42pm]

i tend to agree, but again what law did GZ break when he choose to not follow what 911 said to him in terms of following TM? (and was he told specifically NOT TO FOLLOW or that they did not NEED him to follow? but again it makes no real legal difference unless there is a law that states otherwise... and i think by now... if there was it would be posted)

Living with a disability is not the Wurst thing in the word: Knowingly Mocking someone with one is far Wurst!.
Reply #274 posted 06/23/12 3:24pm

2elijah

OnlyNDaUsa said:

2elijah said:

It is obvious what the following led to which is why the dispatcher told him not to follow TM, and the reason for the dispatcher telling GZ he didn't need to follow TM, was to avoid an altercation/confrontation. The following of TM led GZ to commit that crime. Had he not 'followed, pursued' TM, TM may have been alive today. Just think about that for a moment, as it doesn't take much brain cells to make common sense out of that.

GZ took matters into his own hands and is responsible for what took place once he made the personal decision to follow TM. GZ deliberately followed TM to confront him. There was absolutely no reason for GZ to follow a stranger, and no, he was not right to follow a stranger he 'assumed' and 'profiled' as suspicious, based on his own ignorant, stereotypical prejudices, especially when that stranger was not committing any crime. Your 'ok' of that type of Ok Corral attitude, is like giving the okay to KKK horseriders of back-in-the-day, who followed/chased/and killed many innocent Blacks, just to harass or harm them based on their ignorant, stereotypical ass-umptions, suspicions and hate of them. GZ's chicken-sh*t ass had no special entitlement to think he could just walk up to strangers in the street and bully them.

[Edited 6/23/12 13:42pm]

i tend to agree, but again what law did GZ break when he choose to not follow what 911 said to him in terms of following TM? (and was he told specifically NOT TO FOLLOW or that they did not NEED him to follow? but again it makes no real legal difference unless there is a law that states otherwise... and i think by now... if there was it would be posted)

It was pretty much common sense advice and instructions don't you think? lol The chicken ass wouldn't be sitting in jail right now and having to answer for the killing of a stranger, that GZ chose to follow/pursue/approach, who now finds himself having to answer for killing an innocent person? Now what would you have chose? To follow some 'common sense' advice or go ahead and follow an innocent stranger or let your ego get the best of you? Your ass would be sitting in jail and having t answer for a killing that could have been prevented. Had GZ listened to the 911 operator, he wouldn't be in the mess he's in now. That's the bottom line, so you keep preaching and asking if he broke the law, because your opinion won't save his ass or erase what he 'chose' to do.

Now if this goes to trial, and he is acquitted, he is the one who will have to live with the fact that it didn't have to go down that way, had he just listened to some 'common sense advice'. It is what it is, he killed TM and now he has to answer for it.

Reply #275 posted 06/23/12 4:33pm

OnlyNDaUsa

2elijah said:

It was pretty much common sense advice and instructions don't you think? lol

(snip)

yeah.... it was a bad choice that led to a tragic result.

Now if this goes to trial, and he is acquitted, he is the one who will have to live with the fact that it didn't have to go down that way, had he just listened to some 'common sense advice'. It is what it is, he killed TM and now he has to answer for it.

he will live with it at home or in prison... which would you choose? and i doubt he will do more than 5 years but he could get life.

Living with a disability is not the Wurst thing in the word: Knowingly Mocking someone with one is far Wurst!.
Reply #276 posted 06/23/12 5:57pm

2elijah

OnlyNDaUsa said:

2elijah said:

It was pretty much common sense advice and instructions don't you think? lol

ONlyndusa said:

yeah.... it was a bad choice that led to a tragic result.

Now if this goes to trial, and he is acquitted, he is the one who will have to live with the fact that it didn't have to go down that way, had he just listened to some 'common sense advice'. It is what it is, he killed TM and now he has to answer for it.

Onlyndusa said:

he will live with it at home or in prison... which would you choose? and i doubt he will do more than 5 years but he could get life.

No need to play fake mod and type in 'snip' in my posts. All you have to do is leave out the part you don't want to respond to. It's not that difficult. Now whether he serves time or not, he still has to live with what he did for the rest of his life, and that will be his prison, and when his name shows up anywhere, he will always be remembered for killiing Trayvon. Have a good evening.

Reply #277 posted 06/23/12 6:19pm

OnlyNDaUsa

2elijah said:

 



OnlyNDaUsa said:


 



2elijah said:


 


 


 


It was pretty much common sense advice and instructions don't you think? lol


 


ONlyndusa said:


yeah.... it was a bad choice that led to a tragic result.


 


 


Now if this goes to trial, and he is acquitted, he is the one who will have to live with the fact that it didn't have to go down that way, had he just listened to some 'common sense advice'. It is what it is, he killed TM and now he has to answer for it.


 


Onlyndusa said:


he will live with it at home or in prison... which would you choose? and i doubt he will do more than 5 years but he could get life.



 



No need to play fake mod and type in 'snip' in my posts. All you have to do is leave out the part you don't want to respond to. It's not that difficult. Now whether he serves time or not, he still has to live with what he did for the rest of his life, and that will be his prison, and when his name shows up anywhere, he will always be remembered for killiing Trayvon. Have a good evening.



I was not playing mod I was just noting the edit. Ironically by correcting me one might say you were.

As to the rest of your post... Huh what? I have no Idea what that has to do with anything. And he could change his name. And in a few years I doubt that many people will care that much. I am not sure why you are so obsessed with GZ suffering... But whatever makes you happy.
Living with a disability is not the Wurst thing in the word: Knowingly Mocking someone with one is far Wurst!.
Reply #278 posted 06/24/12 3:24pm

free2bfreeda

OnlyNDaUsa said:

free2bfreeda said:

goofy Pic...goofy, as in more like GZ's actions on FEB 26th 2012.

GZ repeatedly (continually and incessantly) followed Trayvon. if he did not follow, Trayvon would be alive today. the dispatcher that said, "we don't want you to follow,"was most likely aware that GZ was breaking a law by following and stalking."

eek

[Edited 6/23/12 13:12pm]

if in your mind that there was more than one case of GZ following TM... then all i can do is disagree.

nod that's mutual-respectfullly.

one day a child hugged the earth & whispered 2 her,"I wish people would realize every x a bomb is launched & hits ur surface, it's like a major injury 2 u." i know war hurts u. :" the earth rumbled softly n reply, then cried a massive storm(c)
Reply #279 posted 06/24/12 3:25pm

OnlyNDaUsa

free2bfreeda said:

OnlyNDaUsa said:

if in your mind that there was more than one case of GZ following TM... then all i can do is disagree.

nod that's mutual-respectfullly.

no disrespect intended.

Living with a disability is not the Wurst thing in the word: Knowingly Mocking someone with one is far Wurst!.
Reply #280 posted 06/25/12 3:44am

DiminutiveRocker

OnlyNDaUsa said:

yeah.... it was a bad choice that led to a tragic result.

Not only that - the SYG law may not apply. If GZ engaged or provoked the altercation by following the kid when specificaly told not to (he knew he had a gun ) then was it purely self defense?

Consider the rights of others before your own feelings, and the feelings of others before your own rights.
~ John Wooden
Reply #281 posted 06/25/12 8:16am

free2bfreeda

George Zimmerman's defense files motion for new bond in Trayvon Martin shooting

By Jeff Weiner, Orlando Sentinel

http://articles.orlandose...fense-fund

George Zimmerman's defense lawyer has filed a motion explaining why Zimmerman should be granted bond, "notwithstanding" allegations that he sat silently as his wife lied under oath about the couple's finances.

Zimmerman, the defense argues, "has no criminal convictions, no history of failing to appear at court proceedings and has significant ties to the community as evidence at his initial bond hearing."

Defense lawyer Mark O'Mara also notes that his client has maintained contact with law enforcement when not in jail, and has now twice turned himself in to authorities. A new bond hearing is set for Friday.

At that first hearing, Zimmerman was granted $150,000 bail on the second-degree murder charge he faces in the death of 17-year-old Trayvon Martin. But his bond was later revoked, after evidence surfaced that Zimmerman's wife, Shellie Zimmerman, had been untruthful during the hearing.

Prosecutors allege Shellie Zimmerman had ready access to thousands of dollars the couple had raised in donations through her husband's website, but testified that she and her husband were essentially broke.

Shellie Zimmerman has since been charged with perjury, arrested and released on bail.

In the new motion for bond, O'Mara says that the money has since been moved into an independently controlled defense fund, and Zimmerman has no direct access to it.

O'Mara also acknowledges Zimmerman's failure to tell the court about the money "was wrong and Mr. Zimmerman accepts his part in allowing the Court to be misled as to his true financial circumstances."

O'Mara is asking the court impose conditions similar to his client's original bond terms, which included GPS monitoring.Emoticon Eating 1 ¯\^^ / SmilChat  Animated Emoticons 3D Mini

[Edited 6/25/12 8:20am]

one day a child hugged the earth & whispered 2 her,"I wish people would realize every x a bomb is launched & hits ur surface, it's like a major injury 2 u." i know war hurts u. :" the earth rumbled softly n reply, then cried a massive storm(c)
Reply #282 posted 06/25/12 8:41am

OnlyNDaUsa

DiminutiveRocker said:

OnlyNDaUsa said:

Not only that - the SYG law may not apply. If GZ engaged or provoked the altercation by following the kid when specificaly told not to (he knew he had a gun ) then was it purely self defense?

I do not think it has to be purely self defence. now you can not start a fight and then pull a gun and call self defence. But even if TM is proved to have made first physical contact that is not enough to make it self defence. As GZ's acts leading up to that are fair game.

i agree that if not for his foolish acts TM would be alive. I also agree that SYG is at BEST a mitigating factor (as a jury will still be told by the defence that in the MIND of GZ he felt threatened at that moment.)

He was not legally obligated to follow the 911 advice. but it does hurt his case, but more in terms of he went out of his way to do something he was not asked to do that he knew or should have known could be dangerous.

someone above said that the phone call to 911 PROVES that GZ never felt his life was at risk. But that is how wash as that was before the 2 met.

The fact that GZ was legally carrying a gun is also not an issue in my mine. If he stabbed TM to death with his car keys would the fact that he had keys be important? Oh keys are not typical weapons? So what? really. Many self-defence classes teach to use keys as a weapon (unless it is a car jacking then toss the keys on way and run the other).

Living with a disability is not the Wurst thing in the word: Knowingly Mocking someone with one is far Wurst!.
Reply #283 posted 06/25/12 5:39pm

SUPRMAN

OnlyNDaUsa said:

DiminutiveRocker said:

Not only that - the SYG law may not apply. If GZ engaged or provoked the altercation by following the kid when specificaly told not to (he knew he had a gun ) then was it purely self defense?

I do not think it has to be purely self defence. now you can not start a fight and then pull a gun and call self defence. But even if TM is proved to have made first physical contact that is not enough to make it self defence. As GZ's acts leading up to that are fair game.

i agree that if not for his foolish acts TM would be alive. I also agree that SYG is at BEST a mitigating factor (as a jury will still be told by the defence that in the MIND of GZ he felt threatened at that moment.)

He was not legally obligated to follow the 911 advice. but it does hurt his case, but more in terms of he went out of his way to do something he was not asked to do that he knew or should have known could be dangerous.

someone above said that the phone call to 911 PROVES that GZ never felt his life was at risk. But that is how wash as that was before the 2 met.

The fact that GZ was legally carrying a gun is also not an issue in my mine. If he stabbed TM to death with his car keys would the fact that he had keys be important? Oh keys are not typical weapons? So what? really. Many self-defence classes teach to use keys as a weapon (unless it is a car jacking then toss the keys on way and run the other).

GZ cannot use Stand Your Ground as a defense unless he takes the stand to tell the jury, at the trial, why he felt it was self-defense, per Florida case law.

So I don't expect GZ to take the stand as that opens him up to cross-examination by the prosecution who will simply tear him a new one with the jury watching.

I don't want you to think like me. I just want you to think.
Reply #284 posted 06/25/12 5:58pm

free2bfreeda

SUPRMAN said:

OnlyNDaUsa said:

I do not think it has to be purely self defence. now you can not start a fight and then pull a gun and call self defence. But even if TM is proved to have made first physical contact that is not enough to make it self defence. As GZ's acts leading up to that are fair game.

i agree that if not for his foolish acts TM would be alive. I also agree that SYG is at BEST a mitigating factor (as a jury will still be told by the defence that in the MIND of GZ he felt threatened at that moment.)

He was not legally obligated to follow the 911 advice. but it does hurt his case, but more in terms of he went out of his way to do something he was not asked to do that he knew or should have known could be dangerous.

someone above said that the phone call to 911 PROVES that GZ never felt his life was at risk. But that is how wash as that was before the 2 met.

The fact that GZ was legally carrying a gun is also not an issue in my mine. If he stabbed TM to death with his car keys would the fact that he had keys be important? Oh keys are not typical weapons? So what? really. Many self-defence classes teach to use keys as a weapon (unless it is a car jacking then toss the keys on way and run the other).

GZ cannot use Stand Your Ground as a defense unless he takes the stand to tell the jury, at the trial, why he felt it was self-defense, per Florida case law.

So I don't expect GZ to take the stand as that opens him up to cross-examination by the prosecution who will simply tear him a new one with the jury watching.

yeahthat nod

one day a child hugged the earth & whispered 2 her,"I wish people would realize every x a bomb is launched & hits ur surface, it's like a major injury 2 u." i know war hurts u. :" the earth rumbled softly n reply, then cried a massive storm(c)
Reply #285 posted 06/25/12 6:17pm

OnlyNDaUsa

SUPRMAN said:

OnlyNDaUsa said:

I do not think it has to be purely self defence. now you can not start a fight and then pull a gun and call self defence. But even if TM is proved to have made first physical contact that is not enough to make it self defence. As GZ's acts leading up to that are fair game.

i agree that if not for his foolish acts TM would be alive. I also agree that SYG is at BEST a mitigating factor (as a jury will still be told by the defence that in the MIND of GZ he felt threatened at that moment.)

He was not legally obligated to follow the 911 advice. but it does hurt his case, but more in terms of he went out of his way to do something he was not asked to do that he knew or should have known could be dangerous.

someone above said that the phone call to 911 PROVES that GZ never felt his life was at risk. But that is how wash as that was before the 2 met.

The fact that GZ was legally carrying a gun is also not an issue in my mine. If he stabbed TM to death with his car keys would the fact that he had keys be important? Oh keys are not typical weapons? So what? really. Many self-defence classes teach to use keys as a weapon (unless it is a car jacking then toss the keys on way and run the other).

GZ cannot use Stand Your Ground as a defense unless he takes the stand to tell the jury, at the trial, why he felt it was self-defense, per Florida case law.

So I don't expect GZ to take the stand as that opens him up to cross-examination by the prosecution who will simply tear him a new one with the jury watching.

i think that is to use it specifically cite the SYG law. but i am pretty sure they can tell what happened. they can also use the interviews he gave to show he felt threatened. they can also have experts to say how a common person in that situation would feel threatend. Use the injuries and all that evidence to paint the picture...to tell the story.

Living with a disability is not the Wurst thing in the word: Knowingly Mocking someone with one is far Wurst!.
Reply #286 posted 06/25/12 6:22pm

SUPRMAN

OnlyNDaUsa said:

SUPRMAN said:

GZ cannot use Stand Your Ground as a defense unless he takes the stand to tell the jury, at the trial, why he felt it was self-defense, per Florida case law.

So I don't expect GZ to take the stand as that opens him up to cross-examination by the prosecution who will simply tear him a new one with the jury watching.

i think that is to use it specifically cite the SYG law. but i am pretty sure they can tell what happened. they can also use the interviews he gave to show he felt threatened. they can also have experts to say how a common person in that situation would feel threatend. Use the injuries and all that evidence to paint the picture...to tell the story.

Of course they are going to use everything but GZ on the stand to tell his story, but he cannot claim self-defense unless he takes the stand.

The jury will not be given a self-defense instruction if he does not take the stand.

I don't want you to think like me. I just want you to think.
Reply #287 posted 06/25/12 6:32pm

OnlyNDaUsa

SUPRMAN said:

OnlyNDaUsa said:

i think that is to use it specifically cite the SYG law. but i am pretty sure they can tell what happened. they can also use the interviews he gave to show he felt threatened. they can also have experts to say how a common person in that situation would feel threatend. Use the injuries and all that evidence to paint the picture...to tell the story.

Of course they are going to use everything but GZ on the stand to tell his story, but he cannot claim self-defense unless he takes the stand.

The jury will not be given a self-defense instruction if he does not take the stand.

i am saying they will say he felt threatened. let the jury fill in the blanks.

Living with a disability is not the Wurst thing in the word: Knowingly Mocking someone with one is far Wurst!.
Reply #288 posted 06/25/12 6:39pm

SUPRMAN

OnlyNDaUsa said:

SUPRMAN said:

Of course they are going to use everything but GZ on the stand to tell his story, but he cannot claim self-defense unless he takes the stand.

The jury will not be given a self-defense instruction if he does not take the stand.

i am saying they will say he felt threatened. let the jury fill in the blanks.

Understood but the jury doesn't get to do that.

If GZ doesn't take the stand, the jury can't acquit and say it was self-defense.

The jury can only call it manslaughter or second degree murder if GZ does not take the stand.

So he stand no chance of acquittal without taking the stand unless the prosecution's case is so weak they can't meet the standard for manslaughter or second degree murder (which they seem to have wrapped up.)

I don't want you to think like me. I just want you to think.
Reply #289 posted 06/25/12 6:53pm

OnlyNDaUsa

SUPRMAN said:

OnlyNDaUsa said:

i am saying they will say he felt threatened. let the jury fill in the blanks.

Understood but the jury doesn't get to do that.

If GZ doesn't take the stand, the jury can't acquit and say it was self-defense.

The jury can only call it manslaughter or second degree murder if GZ does not take the stand.

So he stand no chance of acquittal without taking the stand unless the prosecution's case is so weak they can't meet the standard for manslaughter or second degree murder (which they seem to have wrapped up.)

juries can do all kinds of weird stuff... one is called Jury nullification.

Living with a disability is not the Wurst thing in the word: Knowingly Mocking someone with one is far Wurst!.
Reply #290 posted 06/25/12 7:05pm

SUPRMAN

OnlyNDaUsa said:

SUPRMAN said:

Understood but the jury doesn't get to do that.

If GZ doesn't take the stand, the jury can't acquit and say it was self-defense.

The jury can only call it manslaughter or second degree murder if GZ does not take the stand.

So he stand no chance of acquittal without taking the stand unless the prosecution's case is so weak they can't meet the standard for manslaughter or second degree murder (which they seem to have wrapped up.)

juries can do all kinds of weird stuff... one is called Jury nullification.

Juries are unpredictable, I will give you that.

But, if the jury acquitted GZ, the judge would overturn the verdict.

He wouldn't have a choice.

The problem is, GZ cannot get his freedom without taking the stand. If he takes the stand, however irrational, the possiblity of acquittal will be there. It would be much harder to overturn THAT verdict, but again, it would possibly get overturned.

If GZ does not take the stand, there is no acquittal option for the jury. Their only options will then be was it manslaughter or was it second degree murder.

That's why I see a plea bargain to mmanslaughter. You cannot put GZ on the stand. The prosecution can bring up the fact that he's already lied to the court. Any inconsistencies the prosecution finds in his version of events becomes a web of lies. What does GZ say on the stand as they knock down his written and recorded statements and he can't defend them?

I don't want you to think like me. I just want you to think.
Reply #291 posted 06/26/12 9:59am

DiminutiveRocker

SUPRMAN said:

OnlyNDaUsa said:

juries can do all kinds of weird stuff... one is called Jury nullification.

Juries are unpredictable, I will give you that.

But, if the jury acquitted GZ, the judge would overturn the verdict.

He wouldn't have a choice.

The problem is, GZ cannot get his freedom without taking the stand. If he takes the stand, however irrational, the possiblity of acquittal will be there. It would be much harder to overturn THAT verdict, but again, it would possibly get overturned.

If GZ does not take the stand, there is no acquittal option for the jury. Their only options will then be was it manslaughter or was it second degree murder.

That's why I see a plea bargain to mmanslaughter. You cannot put GZ on the stand. The prosecution can bring up the fact that he's already lied to the court. Any inconsistencies the prosecution finds in his version of events becomes a web of lies. What does GZ say on the stand as they knock down his written and recorded statements and he can't defend them?

Yep!

Consider the rights of others before your own feelings, and the feelings of others before your own rights.
~ John Wooden
Reply #292 posted 06/26/12 1:40pm

free2bfreeda

abc

Detective faulted George Zimmerman for not avoiding confrontation with Trayvon Martin

By Jason Sickles | The Lookout1 hr 6 mins ago circa 12:25pm 2012-06-26

Neighborhood watch volunteer George Zimmerman missed two opportunities to peacefully approach Trayvon Martin before fatally shooting the unarmed teenager, according to an investigator's report released Tuesday.

"The encounter between George Zimmerman and Trayvon Martin was ultimately avoidable by Zimmerman, if Zimmerman had remained in his vehicle and awaited the arrival of law enforcement, or conversely if he had identified himself to Martin as a concerned citizen and initiated dialog in an effort to dispel each party's concern," Investigator Chris Serino wrote.

Zimmerman, who is charged with second-degree murder, maintains he feared for his life and shot Martin in self-defense under Florida's "stand your ground law." He said he fired the fatal shot only after being brutally attacked by the 17-year-old.

The deadly encounter occurred in a gated Sanford, Fla., neighborhood where Zimmerman lived and Martin was staying with a family friend. Zimmerman initially called 911 to report Martin as a suspicious person walking through the area.

In the report, detectives say Zimmerman contradicted himself by saying that he was initially fearful of Martin but later got out of his vehicle and followed after the teen.

"His actions are inconsistent with those of a person who has stated he was in fear of another subject," the detective wrote.

once again Detective Serino words echo what many people have been expressing all along. however the 29th approaches and the dialogs via replies will abound.

your honor sir,

to set bond or not to set bond, that is the question.

[Edited 6/26/12 14:06pm]

one day a child hugged the earth & whispered 2 her,"I wish people would realize every x a bomb is launched & hits ur surface, it's like a major injury 2 u." i know war hurts u. :" the earth rumbled softly n reply, then cried a massive storm(c)
Reply #293 posted 06/26/12 2:46pm

DiminutiveRocker

OnlyNDaUsa said:

SUPRMAN said:

GZ cannot use Stand Your Ground as a defense unless he takes the stand to tell the jury, at the trial, why he felt it was self-defense, per Florida case law.

So I don't expect GZ to take the stand as that opens him up to cross-examination by the prosecution who will simply tear him a new one with the jury watching.

i think that is to use it specifically cite the SYG law. but i am pretty sure they can tell what happened. they can also use the interviews he gave to show he felt threatened. they can also have experts to say how a common person in that situation would feel threatend. Use the injuries and all that evidence to paint the picture...to tell the story.

How do you know Trayvon didn't feel threatened and acted out of self-defense? He was a kid walking home from 7/11 and someone was following him.

GZ did not break a law for not heeding the 911 operator's instruction not to follow - but by not heeding the suggested course of action he instigated an altercation that resulted in a teenage boy's death. GZ knew he was carrying a loaded firearm - I do not believe for one minute he felt "threatened." And his injuries did not seem to be life threatening either.

[Edited 6/26/12 14:46pm]

Consider the rights of others before your own feelings, and the feelings of others before your own rights.
~ John Wooden
Reply #294 posted 06/26/12 4:30pm

BobGeorge909

free2bfreeda said:


George Zimmerman's defense files motion for new bond in Trayvon Martin shooting




By Jeff Weiner, Orlando Sentinoel


 


http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/2012-06-25/news/os-george-zimmerman-bond-motion-20120625_1_new-bond-defense-files-motion-defense-fund


 



George Zimmerman's defense lawyer has filed a motion explaining why Zimmerman should be granted bond, "notwithstanding" allegations that he sat silently as his wife lied under oath about the couple's finances.


Zimmerman, the defense argues, "has no criminal convictions, no history of failing to appear at court proceedings and has significant ties to the community as evidence at his initial bond hearing."


 


Defense lawyer Mark O'Mara also notes that his client has maintained contact with law enforcement when not in jail, and has now twice turned himself in to authorities. A new bond hearing is set for Friday.


At that first hearing, Zimmerman was granted $150,000 bail on the second-degree murder charge he faces in the death of 17-year-old Trayvon Martin. But his bond was later revoked, after evidence surfaced that Zimmerman's wife, Shellie Zimmerman, had been untruthful during the hearing.


Prosecutors allege Shellie Zimmerman had ready access to thousands of dollars the couple had raised in donations through her husband's website, but testified that she and her husband were essentially broke.


Shellie Zimmerman has since been charged with perjury, arrested and released on bail.


In the new motion for bond, O'Mara says that the money has since been moved into an independently controlled defense fund, and Zimmerman has no direct access to it.


O'Mara also acknowledges Zimmerman's failure to tell the court about the money "was wrong and Mr. Zimmerman accepts his part in allowing the Court to be misled as to his true financial circumstances."


O'Mara is asking the court impose conditions similar to his client's original bond terms, which included GPS monitoring.Emoticon Eating 1 ¯\^^ / SmilChat  Animated Emoticons 3D Mini



 

 

[Edited 6/25/12 8:20am]



If I was the judge, I would tell him that I have now way to know what your assets are and have no way to set an appropriate bond amount.
You used to ride on the chrome horse with your diplomat
Who carried on his shoulder a Siamese cat
Ain't it hard when you discover that
He really wasn't where it's at
After he took from you everything he could steal.
-Dy...
Oh hell...u know who
Reply #295 posted 06/27/12 5:28am

DiminutiveRocker

BobGeorge909 said:

free2bfreeda said:

George Zimmerman's defense files motion for new bond in Trayvon Martin shooting

By Jeff Weiner, Orlando Sentinoel

http://articles.orlandose...fense-fund

George Zimmerman's defense lawyer has filed a motion explaining why Zimmerman should be granted bond, "notwithstanding" allegations that he sat silently as his wife lied under oath about the couple's finances.

Zimmerman, the defense argues, "has no criminal convictions, no history of failing to appear at court proceedings and has significant ties to the community as evidence at his initial bond hearing."

Defense lawyer Mark O'Mara also notes that his client has maintained contact with law enforcement when not in jail, and has now twice turned himself in to authorities. A new bond hearing is set for Friday.

At that first hearing, Zimmerman was granted $150,000 bail on the second-degree murder charge he faces in the death of 17-year-old Trayvon Martin. But his bond was later revoked, after evidence surfaced that Zimmerman's wife, Shellie Zimmerman, had been untruthful during the hearing.

Prosecutors allege Shellie Zimmerman had ready access to thousands of dollars the couple had raised in donations through her husband's website, but testified that she and her husband were essentially broke.

Shellie Zimmerman has since been charged with perjury, arrested and released on bail.

In the new motion for bond, O'Mara says that the money has since been moved into an independently controlled defense fund, and Zimmerman has no direct access to it.

O'Mara also acknowledges Zimmerman's failure to tell the court about the money "was wrong and Mr. Zimmerman accepts his part in allowing the Court to be misled as to his true financial circumstances."

O'Mara is asking the court impose conditions similar to his client's original bond terms, which included GPS monitoring.Emoticon Eating 1 ¯\^^ / SmilChat  Animated Emoticons 3D Mini

[Edited 6/25/12 8:20am]

If I was the judge, I would tell him that I have now way to know what your assets are and have no way to set an appropriate bond amount.

yeahthat and have fun waiting for your non-speedy trial behind bars!

Consider the rights of others before your own feelings, and the feelings of others before your own rights.
~ John Wooden
Reply #296 posted 06/27/12 6:20am

Musicslave

Here's an interesting tidbit of information:

http://www.cbsnews.com/83...tive-unit/

Christopher Serino, cop who said George Zimmerman should be charged, is transferred from investigative unit

CBS) SANFORD, Fla. - The Sanford Police Department investigator who informed his superiors that he believed there was enough evidence to charge George Zimmerman with manslaughter for the shooting death of Trayvon Martin is being transferred from the investigative unit to the patrol division.

Pictures: George Zimmerma...ith murder

According to the Sanford Police Department, Christopher Serino made the decision to transfer "of his own volition."

Serino's un-redacted report detailing his findings about the shooting the night of Feb. 26 was released Tuesday.

In his report, Serino, who interviewed Zimmerman in the days following the shooting, wrote that in following Martin, Zimmerman's actions were "inconsistent with those of a person who has stated he was in fear of another subject." He wrote that Zimmerman had at least two opportunities to speak to the teen and "defuse the situation." He also noted that Zimmerman "failed to identify himself" as a concerned citizen or neighborhood watch member on two occasions that night.

Serino also reported that he thought Zimmerman's head injuries were "marginally consistent with a life-threatening episode, as described by him, during which neither a deadly weapon nor deadly force were deployed by Trayvon Martin."

According to the report, Serino recommended that Zimmerman be charged with manslaughter on March 13, one day after former Sanford police chief Bill Lee held a news conference announcing there was not enough evidence to charge Zimmerman.

The state's attorney declined to press charges and it was not until a month later, after a national outcry about the case, that Zimmerman was arrested and charged with second-degree murder.

Last week, Zimmerman's attorney released video of the former neighborhood watch volunteer walking police through the shooting scene the day after he shot Martin.

What do you guys think about this? If its true that he wasn't forced into this position, why do you think he would want to step down from being the LEAD investigator to a patrol division? Or is this punishment in spite of what the official report says? What say you?

Reply #297 posted 06/27/12 7:41am

free2bfreeda

former detective (now) officer serino probably made the decision to stepdown due to the intensity in the office and (probably) negative fallout from his police-coworkers.

i give him all due respect for having the courage to step forward and stand up to seeking out the full truth.

one day a child hugged the earth & whispered 2 her,"I wish people would realize every x a bomb is launched & hits ur surface, it's like a major injury 2 u." i know war hurts u. :" the earth rumbled softly n reply, then cried a massive storm(c)
Reply #298 posted 06/27/12 8:20am

OnlyNDaUsa

DiminutiveRocker said:

BobGeorge909 said:

free2bfreeda said: If I was the judge, I would tell him that I have now way to know what your assets are and have no way to set an appropriate bond amount.

yeahthat and have fun waiting for your non-speedy trial behind bars!

any delays to his trial will be at the request of HIS side. unless they made that request they have to have the tiral under way pretty soon.

Living with a disability is not the Wurst thing in the word: Knowingly Mocking someone with one is far Wurst!.
Reply #299 posted 06/27/12 8:34am

Musicslave

OnlyNDaUsa said:

DiminutiveRocker said:

yeahthat and have fun waiting for your non-speedy trial behind bars!

any delays to his trial will be at the request of HIS side. unless they made that request they have to have the tiral under way pretty soon.

So ONDU, do you think that GZ will be free on bail again this Friday or do you think Judge Lester will let him wait it out in jail until trial? Remember his defense attorney, Mark O'Mara said that he estimated that a trial wouldn't begin until sometime next year. That was before his client's bond was revoked. If Judge Lester determines that he should remain in jail until trial, I doubt Team GZ/O'Mara will want to wait until next year for a trial.

Perspectives change a lot when you're behind bars....lol

Reply #300 posted 06/27/12 8:48am

OnlyNDaUsa

Musicslave said:

 



OnlyNDaUsa said:


 



DiminutiveRocker said:


 


 


yeahthat  and have fun waiting for your non-speedy trial behind bars!



 


any delays to his trial will be at the request of HIS side.  unless they made that request they have to have the tiral under way pretty soon.



 So ONDU, do you think that GZ will be free on bail again this Friday or do you think Judge Lester will let him wait it out in jail until trial? Remember his defense attorney, Mark O'Mara said that he estimated that a trial wouldn't begin until sometime next year. That was before his client's bond was revoked. If Judge Lester determines that he should remain in jail until trial, I doubt Team GZ/O'Mara will want to wait until next year for a trial.


 


Perspectives change a lot when you're behind bars....lol



I think he will be granted bond. With full credit for is original one. Maybe not by Friday. As to when the trial will start? Well any delays after a reasonable time have to be at the request of or with the approval of the defendant.
Living with a disability is not the Wurst thing in the word: Knowingly Mocking someone with one is far Wurst!.
Reply #301 posted 06/27/12 8:59am

free2bfreeda

abc

George Zimmerman Bullied Former Colleague, Complaint Says

When the salesman complained to management, Zimmerman denied the harassment.

"The guy was so convincing when he was confronted by management to the point where I doubted my own self. I would not be surprised if he got away with it [Martin murder accusation]."

"He's got, like you say, a good poker face. Great poker face," said the colleague. "That pretty much summarizes this guy's personality. Great poker face."

The employee, who is an Arab-American, worked part time at the used car retailership during 2008, and rose quickly to become one of the company's top salesmen, despite the hazing, he says.

"These are some of the bully activities I have been facing that led me to be concerned about my work environment," he wrote in the one page complaint. The complaint accused Zimmerman of pressuring him to split deals with him, of repeatedly "impersonating me in a terrorist character," and mocked him constantly to earn the laughs of fellow workers.

In the letter, the colleague states, "Since I started working in CarMax Sanford, George has been dealing with me in an unprofessional manner and have mastered the art of emerging as the nice guy to others in order to make me look like the unsocial type and out of place."

The former car salesman insists that Zimmerman, who was 24 at the time, was not a racist, but would do anything to gain the approval of his colleagues, chiefly harassing their new colleague with Middle Eastern jokes. He said the racist remarks hurt more than anything else.

Speaking exclusively to ABC News, the man said, "He wasn't joking around. He was choosing his words. He was making fun of my accent, or pretending that I have a thick accent."

Zimmerman's former colleague asked that his identity not be revealed because he feared any association with the Zimmerman trial could jeopardize his family's security.

He also recounted first hearing Zimmerman's name in the media, "Because that name, I'll never forget... I had to pull over when I heard him on the news."

The former colleague says that Zimmerman, who is now 28, referred to him as "a f---ing moron" on countless occasions, despite his recognition from his superiors as a talented salesman.

The man said he wanted to do his work and go home, "But Zimmerman noticed the gap, or the unwelcome from some of the other employees, and he took that opportunity to pretty much put me as a target, and to make fun of me, bully me around, pretty much harass me 24/7. Just make it difficult for me to work there."

He says the bullying was noticed at CarMax. "Other sales people would come and approach me and say, don't worry about this guy, he's a bully, he's an idiot, he's young, he doesn't know what he's doing."

The former colleague said others at CarMax said Zimmerman was upset for not getting the promotion he thought he deserved, and that's why he took out his frustration on the colleague.

Zimmerman's attorney would not comment on the story. CarMax issued a statement saying it did check that matter, but that "CarMax does not provide information on internal human resources matters."

Other employees told ABC News they recall the two, and remember Zimmerman as a "prankster, a jokester," at work.

Zimmerman was let go shortly after the complaint was lodged, apparently on an unrelated matter.

These accusations come a day after a report by Chris Serino, the lead homicide investigator in the shooting death of Trayvon Martin, was made public. Serino's report expressed strong skepticism of Zimmerman's account of the shooting, describing Zimmerman's injuries as "marginally consistent with a life threatening violent encounter."

The detective also questioned Zimmerman's account of being afraid of Martin, who was 17 and unarmed when he was killed on Feb. 26.

Serino's report is the latest in the see-saw of information released alternately by the state and the defense, with chunks of it seemingly damning for Zimmerman, while other parts appear to support his claim of shooting Martin in self defense.

as more info is released about GZ (lying) character, the more info about his true character is being uncovered. of course i wouldn't want to label GZ as a cretin, that would be profiling.

(1 definition of cretin: a stupid obtuse, or mentally defective person.)

one day a child hugged the earth & whispered 2 her,"I wish people would realize every x a bomb is launched & hits ur surface, it's like a major injury 2 u." i know war hurts u. :" the earth rumbled softly n reply, then cried a massive storm(c)
Reply #302 posted 06/27/12 9:04am

free2bfreeda

OnlyNDaUsa said:

Musicslave said:

So ONDU, do you think that GZ will be free on bail again this Friday or do you think Judge Lester will let him wait it out in jail until trial? Remember his defense attorney, Mark O'Mara said that he estimated that a trial wouldn't begin until sometime next year. That was before his client's bond was revoked. If Judge Lester determines that he should remain in jail until trial, I doubt Team GZ/O'Mara will want to wait until next year for a trial.

Perspectives change a lot when you're behind bars....lol

I think he will be granted bond. With full credit for is original one. Maybe not by Friday. As to when the trial will start? Well any delays after a reasonable time have to be at the request of or with the approval of the defendant.

hey, how a bet that GZ will not get be granted a bond. how 'bout betting keying 20 times in this thread "i was wrong, i was wrong."

giggle oft times i have a wry sense of humor. seriously though, i do not think Judge Lester will grant GZ a bond.

[Edited 6/27/12 9:05am]

one day a child hugged the earth & whispered 2 her,"I wish people would realize every x a bomb is launched & hits ur surface, it's like a major injury 2 u." i know war hurts u. :" the earth rumbled softly n reply, then cried a massive storm(c)
Reply #303 posted 06/27/12 10:36am

Musicslave

free2bfreeda said:

former detective (now) officer serino probably made the decision to stepdown due to the intensity in the office and (probably) negative fallout from his police-coworkers.

i give him all due respect for having the courage to step forward and stand up to seeking out the full truth.

If he wasn't forced into the demotion by his superiors, I'd have to say he was probably feed up with the POLITICS that came with the job. This is him saying, "Fuck it." If his recommendation of arresting and charging GZ with manslaughter was dismissed by the former police chief Bill Lee and state attorney Wolfinger because of police politics, I can't say that I blame him. Who knows, this may not be the first time where his work was discarded.

Looks like the City of Sanford is losing a good lead investigator. If you listen to those interview tapes he had with GZ, you can tell he was seeing right through GZ's bullshit and was calling it like he saw it. GZ tried to do the police job without the training or authorization.

Reply #304 posted 06/27/12 10:45am

Musicslave

OnlyNDaUsa said:

Musicslave said:

So ONDU, do you think that GZ will be free on bail again this Friday or do you think Judge Lester will let him wait it out in jail until trial? Remember his defense attorney, Mark O'Mara said that he estimated that a trial wouldn't begin until sometime next year. That was before his client's bond was revoked. If Judge Lester determines that he should remain in jail until trial, I doubt Team GZ/O'Mara will want to wait until next year for a trial.

Perspectives change a lot when you're behind bars....lol

I think he will be granted bond. With full credit for is original one. Maybe not by Friday. As to when the trial will start? Well any delays after a reasonable time have to be at the request of or with the approval of the defendant.

If he's granted bond, it would be at a far greater amount than previously set. I think his chances are slim for another bond though. I think there's a greater chance of his bond staying revoked until trial (if they ever get to one of course).

Reply #305 posted 06/27/12 11:30am

OnlyNDaUsa

free2bfreeda said:

OnlyNDaUsa said:

Musicslave said: I think he will be granted bond. With full credit for is original one. Maybe not by Friday. As to when the trial will start? Well any delays after a reasonable time have to be at the request of or with the approval of the defendant.

hey, how a bet that GZ will not get be granted a bond. how 'bout betting keying 20 times in this thread "i was wrong, i was wrong."

giggle oft times i have a wry sense of humor. seriously though, i do not think Judge Lester will grant GZ a bond.

[Edited 6/27/12 9:05am]

if he is not i will post 'i was not not correct.. but that is not what i said or was is?' once!

Living with a disability is not the Wurst thing in the word: Knowingly Mocking someone with one is far Wurst!.
Reply #306 posted 06/27/12 2:13pm

DiminutiveRocker

OnlyNDaUsa said:

Musicslave said:

So ONDU, do you think that GZ will be free on bail again this Friday or do you think Judge Lester will let him wait it out in jail until trial? Remember his defense attorney, Mark O'Mara said that he estimated that a trial wouldn't begin until sometime next year. That was before his client's bond was revoked. If Judge Lester determines that he should remain in jail until trial, I doubt Team GZ/O'Mara will want to wait until next year for a trial.

Perspectives change a lot when you're behind bars....lol

I think he will be granted bond. With full credit for is original one. Maybe not by Friday. As to when the trial will start? Well any delays after a reasonable time have to be at the request of or with the approval of the defendant.

Keep up. Zimmerman already waived his right to a speedy trial.

Consider the rights of others before your own feelings, and the feelings of others before your own rights.
~ John Wooden
Reply #307 posted 06/27/12 2:17pm

OnlyNDaUsa

DiminutiveRocker said:

 



OnlyNDaUsa said:


Musicslave said:

 


 So ONDU, do you think that GZ will be free on bail again this Friday or do you think Judge Lester will let him wait it out in jail until trial? Remember his defense attorney, Mark O'Mara said that he estimated that a trial wouldn't begin until sometime next year. That was before his client's bond was revoked. If Judge Lester determines that he should remain in jail until trial, I doubt Team GZ/O'Mara will want to wait until next year for a trial.


 


Perspectives change a lot when you're behind bars....lol



I think he will be granted bond. With full credit for is original one. Maybe not by Friday. As to when the trial will start? Well any delays after a reasonable time have to be at the request of or with the approval of the defendant.

 


Keep up. Zimmerman already waived his right to a speedy trial.



And?
Living with a disability is not the Wurst thing in the word: Knowingly Mocking someone with one is far Wurst!.
Reply #308 posted 06/27/12 2:55pm

babynoz

free2bfreeda said:

former detective (now) officer serino probably made the decision to stepdown due to the intensity in the office and (probably) negative fallout from his police-coworkers.

i give him all due respect for having the courage to step forward and stand up to seeking out the full truth.

In his position I would be very frustrated and fed up if I turned in a solid investigative report only to have internal politics second guessing my work. Probably not the first time it happened either.

"Success has a great tendency to conceal and throw a veil over the evil of men"....Demosthenes
Reply #309 posted 06/27/12 3:58pm

babynoz

DiminutiveRocker said:

OnlyNDaUsa said:

Musicslave said: I think he will be granted bond. With full credit for is original one. Maybe not by Friday. As to when the trial will start? Well any delays after a reasonable time have to be at the request of or with the approval of the defendant.

Keep up. Zimmerman already waived his right to a speedy trial.

Yep, he waived that right weeks ago. His bond has already been revoked so he will have to cool his heels in jail if the judge denies the new motion. There will be no credit for the original bond.

Also, it's not true that further delays have to be at the request or approval of the defense. The prosecution or even the judge can further delay the trial if they have cause to do so.

"Success has a great tendency to conceal and throw a veil over the evil of men"....Demosthenes
Reply #310 posted 06/27/12 3:59pm

DiminutiveRocker

OnlyNDaUsa said:

DiminutiveRocker said:

Keep up. Zimmerman already waived his right to a speedy trial.

And?

I cannot be responsible for your lack of comprehension.

Consider the rights of others before your own feelings, and the feelings of others before your own rights.
~ John Wooden
Reply #311 posted 06/27/12 4:00pm

DiminutiveRocker

babynoz said:

DiminutiveRocker said:

Keep up. Zimmerman already waived his right to a speedy trial.

Yep, he waived that right weeks ago. His bond has already been revoked so he will have to cool his heels in jail if the judge denies the new motion. There will be no credit for the original bond.

Also, it's not true that further delays have to be at the request or approval of the defense. The prosecution or even the judge can further delay the trial if they have cause to do so.

nod thank you!

Consider the rights of others before your own feelings, and the feelings of others before your own rights.
~ John Wooden
Reply #312 posted 06/27/12 5:23pm

OnlyNDaUsa

DiminutiveRocker said:

OnlyNDaUsa said:

DiminutiveRocker said: And?

I cannot be responsible for your lack of comprehension.

no lack here. i stated a fact that in order to delay its start they have to have approval from the defence. If the defence has approved it then they can delay it. Unless the defence can withdraw that based on a new situation.

the argument that he was revoked is due to own misbehavior may not be material to that issue to the new hearing. The judge let his wife out on bail, GZ did not lie, I see no good reason to not let GZ out on a bail based on his real financial situation. And I think he will be.

Living with a disability is not the Wurst thing in the word: Knowingly Mocking someone with one is far Wurst!.
Reply #313 posted 06/27/12 5:25pm

OnlyNDaUsa

babynoz said:

DiminutiveRocker said:

Keep up. Zimmerman already waived his right to a speedy trial.

Yep, he waived that right weeks ago. His bond has already been revoked so he will have to cool his heels in jail if the judge denies the new motion. There will be no credit for the original bond.

Also, it's not true that further delays have to be at the request or approval of the defense. The prosecution or even the judge can further delay the trial if they have cause to do so.

Was the bail turned back over to the bail bondsmen?

or did he pay all of it himself? or did the lawyers?

[Edited 6/27/12 17:36pm]

Living with a disability is not the Wurst thing in the word: Knowingly Mocking someone with one is far Wurst!.
Reply #314 posted 06/27/12 5:50pm

SUPRMAN

OnlyNDaUsa said:

DiminutiveRocker said:

yeahthat and have fun waiting for your non-speedy trial behind bars!

any delays to his trial will be at the request of HIS side. unless they made that request they have to have the tiral under way pretty soon.

O'Mara has already made that request.

I don't want you to think like me. I just want you to think.
Reply #315 posted 06/27/12 5:52pm

SUPRMAN

OnlyNDaUsa said:

Musicslave said:

So ONDU, do you think that GZ will be free on bail again this Friday or do you think Judge Lester will let him wait it out in jail until trial? Remember his defense attorney, Mark O'Mara said that he estimated that a trial wouldn't begin until sometime next year. That was before his client's bond was revoked. If Judge Lester determines that he should remain in jail until trial, I doubt Team GZ/O'Mara will want to wait until next year for a trial.

Perspectives change a lot when you're behind bars....lol

I think he will be granted bond. With full credit for is original one. Maybe not by Friday. As to when the trial will start? Well any delays after a reasonable time have to be at the request of or with the approval of the defendant.

I don't see any reason to grant bond. It may be a bond he can't afford also.

Again, O'Mara requested a delayed trial date a while ago.

[Edited 6/27/12 17:53pm]

I don't want you to think like me. I just want you to think.
Reply #316 posted 06/27/12 5:56pm

SUPRMAN

OnlyNDaUsa said:

free2bfreeda said:

hey, how a bet that GZ will not get be granted a bond. how 'bout betting keying 20 times in this thread "i was wrong, i was wrong."

giggle oft times i have a wry sense of humor. seriously though, i do not think Judge Lester will grant GZ a bond.

[Edited 6/27/12 9:05am]

if he is not i will post 'i was not not correct.. but that is not what i said or was is?' once!

LOL Too much to admit being wrong? 'I was not correct,' is another way of saying it.

Act like you have a pair and if you're wrong, it's okay. Happens to the best of us (me). LMAO

I don't want you to think like me. I just want you to think.
Reply #317 posted 06/27/12 6:00pm

SUPRMAN

OnlyNDaUsa said:

DiminutiveRocker said:

I cannot be responsible for your lack of comprehension.

no lack here. i stated a fact that in order to delay its start they have to have approval from the defence. If the defence has approved it then they can delay it. Unless the defence can withdraw that based on a new situation.

the argument that he was revoked is due to own misbehavior may not be material to that issue to the new hearing. The judge let his wife out on bail, GZ did not lie, I see no good reason to not let GZ out on a bail based on his real financial situation. And I think he will be.

The defense cannot withdraw the request for a delay in trial. That would be allowing the defense to play games. If the delay is granted the court and the prosecution move according to the new schedule. To try to revoke that and catch someone unprepared? Courts aren't going to allow that.

GZ did not lie? Let me guess, he just led the court on because no one asked the right specific question? GZ got games? The prosecution is going to have fun playing at the trial. GZ, not so much.

I don't want you to think like me. I just want you to think.
Reply #318 posted 06/27/12 6:03pm

SUPRMAN

OnlyNDaUsa said:

babynoz said:

Yep, he waived that right weeks ago. His bond has already been revoked so he will have to cool his heels in jail if the judge denies the new motion. There will be no credit for the original bond.

Also, it's not true that further delays have to be at the request or approval of the defense. The prosecution or even the judge can further delay the trial if they have cause to do so.

Was the bail turned back over to the bail bondsmen?

or did he pay all of it himself? or did the lawyers?

[Edited 6/27/12 17:36pm]

Why would his lawyers pay his bond? It's not their problem. They aren't there to solve ALL their client's problems. How would they recover the money spent paying his bond?

Bailbondsman keeps the original money paid on the first bond. If he gets another bond, he has to start over.

I don't want you to think like me. I just want you to think.
Reply #319 posted 06/27/12 6:15pm

OnlyNDaUsa

SUPRMAN said:

OnlyNDaUsa said:

no lack here. i stated a fact that in order to delay its start they have to have approval from the defence. If the defence has approved it then they can delay it. Unless the defence can withdraw that based on a new situation.

the argument that he was revoked is due to own misbehavior may not be material to that issue to the new hearing. The judge let his wife out on bail, GZ did not lie, I see no good reason to not let GZ out on a bail based on his real financial situation. And I think he will be.

The defense cannot withdraw the request for a delay in trial. That would be allowing the defense to play games. If the delay is granted the court and the prosecution move according to the new schedule. To try to revoke that and catch someone unprepared? Courts aren't going to allow that.

GZ did not lie? Let me guess, he just led the court on because no one asked the right specific question? GZ got games? The prosecution is going to have fun playing at the trial. GZ, not so much.

he was not asked. and did clinton lie?

Living with a disability is not the Wurst thing in the word: Knowingly Mocking someone with one is far Wurst!.
Reply #320 posted 06/27/12 6:18pm

OnlyNDaUsa

SUPRMAN said:

OnlyNDaUsa said:

Was the bail turned back over to the bail bondsmen?

or did he pay all of it himself? or did the lawyers?

[Edited 6/27/12 17:36pm]

Why would his lawyers pay his bond? It's not their problem. They aren't there to solve ALL their client's problems. How would they recover the money spent paying his bond?

Bailbondsman keeps the original money paid on the first bond. If he gets another bond, he has to start over.

so no lawyer ever put up anyone's bail ever? do you know if he even went to a bail bondsman? I do not know... that is why thoes sentences ended with a ?

either way: he will be released on bail. or he will at least be granted a bail. if he can afford it or the 10% is another story.

Living with a disability is not the Wurst thing in the word: Knowingly Mocking someone with one is far Wurst!.
Reply #321 posted 06/27/12 6:38pm

SUPRMAN

OnlyNDaUsa said:

SUPRMAN said:

Why would his lawyers pay his bond? It's not their problem. They aren't there to solve ALL their client's problems. How would they recover the money spent paying his bond?

Bailbondsman keeps the original money paid on the first bond. If he gets another bond, he has to start over.

so no lawyer ever put up anyone's bail ever? do you know if he even went to a bail bondsman? I do not know... that is why thoes sentences ended with a ?

either way: he will be released on bail. or he will at least be granted a bail. if he can afford it or the 10% is another story.

I'm sure lawyers have, but how does get repaid? If an atty knows where the money is going to come from, I'm sure fronting isn't a problem. But if they thought GZ was indigent, why would they post his bail as opposed to letting him sit in jail? That is not their problem, nor their duty to their client.

I'm not so sure he gets released.

I don't want you to think like me. I just want you to think.
Reply #322 posted 06/27/12 6:48pm

OnlyNDaUsa

SUPRMAN said:

OnlyNDaUsa said:

so no lawyer ever put up anyone's bail ever? do you know if he even went to a bail bondsman? I do not know... that is why thoes sentences ended with a ?

either way: he will be released on bail. or he will at least be granted a bail. if he can afford it or the 10% is another story.

I'm sure lawyers have, but how does get repaid? If an atty knows where the money is going to come from, I'm sure fronting isn't a problem.

they get it back when he shows to court.

But if they thought GZ was indigent, why would they post his bail as opposed to letting him sit in jail? That is not their problem, nor their duty to their client.

you think they did not know about the fund?

I'm not so sure he gets released.

I am not sure he will be able to afford it but I think it will be set at some amount.

Living with a disability is not the Wurst thing in the word: Knowingly Mocking someone with one is far Wurst!.
Reply #323 posted 06/27/12 6:55pm

SUPRMAN

OnlyNDaUsa said:

SUPRMAN said:

The defense cannot withdraw the request for a delay in trial. That would be allowing the defense to play games. If the delay is granted the court and the prosecution move according to the new schedule. To try to revoke that and catch someone unprepared? Courts aren't going to allow that.

GZ did not lie? Let me guess, he just led the court on because no one asked the right specific question? GZ got games? The prosecution is going to have fun playing at the trial. GZ, not so much.

he was not asked. and did clinton lie?

How did Clinton's name get into this? Let's not with the diversion.

I don't want you to think like me. I just want you to think.
Reply #324 posted 06/27/12 6:59pm

SUPRMAN

OnlyNDaUsa said:

SUPRMAN said:

I'm sure lawyers have, but how does get repaid? If an atty knows where the money is going to come from, I'm sure fronting isn't a problem.

they get it back when he shows to court.

Minus the bailbondsman's fee. But him showing in court is not their problem.

But if they thought GZ was indigent, why would they post his bail as opposed to letting him sit in jail? That is not their problem, nor their duty to their client.

you think they did not know about the fund?

I don't think they knew. It would cost them their license. I'm sure that means more to them than GZ.

I'm not so sure he gets released.

I am not sure he will be able to afford it but I think it will be set at some amount.

I don't want you to think like me. I just want you to think.
Reply #325 posted 06/27/12 9:25pm

DiminutiveRocker

OnlyNDaUsa said:

DiminutiveRocker said:

I cannot be responsible for your lack of comprehension.

no lack here. i stated a fact that in order to delay its start they have to have approval from the defence. If the defence has approved it then they can delay it. Unless the defence can withdraw that based on a new situation.

the argument that he was revoked is due to own misbehavior may not be material to that issue to the new hearing. The judge let his wife out on bail, GZ did not lie, I see no good reason to not let GZ out on a bail based on his real financial situation. And I think he will be.

Lack of comprehension = GZ already waived his right to a speedy trial - what don't you get about that? rolleyes When a trial date is set it will not likely be in the near future. If the judge does not grant bail this time, GZ will have to wait in jail until the trial. rolleyes No one said anything about delaying a trial date that has not been set. Again, rolleyes

And, keep up. GZ's wife is charged with perjury, not 2nd degree murder. Of course she is out on bail - that will have no bearing on the judge's decisoin to let GZ out on bail again. By not speaking up when his wife lied to the judge - GZ willingly misled he court, EVen O'Mara admits that.

Consider the rights of others before your own feelings, and the feelings of others before your own rights.
~ John Wooden
Reply #326 posted 06/27/12 9:45pm

free2bfreeda

SUPRMAN said:

OnlyNDaUsa said:

no lack here. i stated a fact that in order to delay its start they have to have approval from the defence. If the defence has approved it then they can delay it. Unless the defence can withdraw that based on a new situation.

the argument that he was revoked is due to own misbehavior may not be material to that issue to the new hearing. The judge let his wife out on bail, GZ did not lie, I see no good reason to not let GZ out on a bail based on his real financial situation. And I think he will be.

The defense cannot withdraw the request for a delay in trial. That would be allowing the defense to play games. If the delay is granted the court and the prosecution move according to the new schedule. To try to revoke that and catch someone unprepared? Courts aren't going to allow that.

GZ did not lie? Let me guess, he just led the court on because no one asked the right specific question? GZ got games? The prosecution is going to have fun playing at the trial. GZ, not so much.

yeahthat

seems like the defence is up against "dah fence," thanks to GZ inconsistencies.

giggle

by the way does anyone know what happened to the first attorney hired for GZ?

Sonner & Uhrig

remember: Apr 13, 2012

http://www.nationalledger...6549.shtml

Zimmerman's lawyers Craig Sonner and Hal Uhrig resigned from the case earlier this week and the Wall Street Journal reveals Zimmerman had approached NeJame before they quit and again after they resigned and held a press conference.

what did G do to make them quit other than not being available to them? inquiring minds think the story goes deeper as to why they quit the GZ case. i bet there's a story there.

nod

[Edited 6/27/12 21:46pm]

one day a child hugged the earth & whispered 2 her,"I wish people would realize every x a bomb is launched & hits ur surface, it's like a major injury 2 u." i know war hurts u. :" the earth rumbled softly n reply, then cried a massive storm(c)
Reply #327 posted 06/28/12 6:29am

Musicslave

Speaking of former lawyers, check this out from the Miami Herald:

http://www.miamiherald.co...ar-in.html

Excerpts below...

Zimmerman failed to appear in previous court case, fined $10,000

By Frances Robles The Miami Herald

The man who killed Trayvon Martin once failed to show up at a deposition in his own lawsuit and was fined $10,000. Will the incident make a difference for a judge who will decide Friday whether to allow George Zimmerman to be free on bail on a murder charge.

George Zimmerman will be back in court Friday, battling for a chance to be freed on bond, for the second time, in a high-profile murder case.


Defense attorney Mark O’Mara hopes the judge considers the former neighborhood watch volunteer’s continued cooperation with police and forgives the last bond-hearing debacle, when the defendant sat silently as his wife misled the court about his finances. Among O’Mara’s arguments: Zimmerman isn’t a flight risk or a danger to the community, nor does he have any history of failing to appear at court proceedings.


But Zimmerman was once fined $10,000 in a federal civil lawsuit because he was a no-show at his own deposition, The Miami Herald has learned. Records show lawyers, including one who flew in from Atlanta to take Zimmerman’s sworn statement, waited for him for an hour and a half while they tried unsuccessfully to reach him.


Zimmerman ultimately won the overtime-pay dispute in arbitration, but the arbitrator hit him with a fine he apparently never paid. Nothing in the court file explained why he missed the deposition.


O’Mara says Zimmerman’s failure to appear at a deposition in a civil case should not count against his client in his murder trial for the shooting of Miami Gardens teen Trayvon Martin. O’Mara is asking the judge to set bond at “something similar” to $150,000 — what it was before Zimmerman was sent back to jail for keeping secret how much money he had raised from online donations.

“To the extents that courts concern themselves with a client’s appearance, missing a noticed or scheduled court proceeding is considered significant,” O’Mara said in an email to the Miami Herald. “Missing a deposition, while we don’t know why Mr. Zimmerman missed a deposition in a civil case, missing a deposition is not missing a scheduled court proceeding.”


In 2006, Zimmerman sued Aames Funding Corp., where he worked as a loan officer for three months in late 2005. The case was part of a class-action suit, which was separated from the others for reasons court records do not make clear.


On July 16, 2007, Zimmerman was scheduled to give a deposition, a mandatory sworn statement for the case. According to motions filed in court, Zimmerman did not show up, so his lawyers cited irreconcilable differences and temporarily quit the case in protest. They later mended fences.


“Because Zimmerman chose to pursue his claim, he cannot avoid the necessary process of discovery on a whim,” the opposing lawyer, Antonio Robinson, wrote in a motion. “The failure to appear was especially egregious, because the deposition was scheduled in his attorney’s office.”
The arbitrator overseeing the case agreed and fined Zimmerman $10,000. A year later the company lost the case, and was ordered to pay Zimmerman $18,000, plus another $25,000 to his attorney.

Prosecutors handling the case declined to comment on whether they think the matter would be relevant at Friday’s bond hearing.


Trayvon Martin’s family attorney, Benjamin Crump, said the incident underscores what Judge Kenneth Lester wrote when he first revoked Zimmerman’s bond: Zimmerman “does not respect the law or the integrity of the judicial process.”

Is it me or do I see a pattern here hmmm

Reply #328 posted 06/28/12 9:31am

Musicslave

Zimmerman changes details, makes claims inconsistent with other evidence

http://articles.orlandose...her-police#

George Zimmerman talked to Sanford police a half-dozen times, going over what happened the night he killed 17-year-old Trayvon Martin. In the retelling, parts of his story changed. His account also does not line up with other evidence.

Here are some of the most prominent inconsistencies:

Where the confrontation happened

In his first recorded interview with police the night of the Feb. 26 shooting, Zimmerman said Trayvon popped out at him from "the bushes."

By the time he re-enacted the shooting less than 24 hours later, however, Zimmerman was much more precise, and the spot he pointed out had no bushes nearby.

As he walked police through what happened where, he said Trayvon approached him from his left rear and at a spot near the intersection of two sidewalks.

What Trayvon said

In that first taped interview with Sanford police Investigator Doris Singleton, Zimmerman said that when he and Trayvon came face to face on that sidewalk, Trayvon said, "What the [expletive][is] your problem, homey?"

During the next 24 hours, Zimmerman's version of what Trayvon said would change slightly, becoming less offensive with each telling.

In another interview later that night, he told Investigator Chris Serino that Trayvon said, "You got a problem?"

During the re-enactment the next afternoon, he told police that Trayvon yelled, "Yo, you got a problem?"

Also, a 16-year-old Miami girl told prosecutors she heard something different. She said she was on the phone with Trayvon at the time and heard him say, "What are you following me for?"

Dispatcher asked him to find Trayvon

After first spotting Trayvon and dialing a nonemergency police number, Zimmerman parked his truck while he talked with the dispatcher, asking that an officer come to the scene.

While still on the line, he drove a short distance down the street before parking again.

Why did he move his truck?

During the re-enactment the day after the shooting, Zimmerman told detectives it was because he had lost sight of the 17-year-old, and the dispatcher asked him to find him.

A review of Zimmerman's recorded call with the dispatcher, though, shows there was no such request.

Did he follow Trayvon?

In his call to police before the shooting, Zimmerman can be heard huffing and puffing as if he had been running or walking fast.

"Are you following him?" the dispatcher asked.

"Yeah," Zimmerman answered.

"OK, we don't need you to do that," the dispatcher said.

"OK," Zimmerman said.

But after the shooting, he offered a different reason for getting out of his truck. Serino pressed him for an explanation three days later.

I was "just going in the same direction he was," Zimmerman said. He had exited his truck, he said, to get a street address for authorities.

"Did you pursue the kid? Did you want to catch him?" Serino asked.

"No," said Zimmerman.

Serino challenged him further: "How do you not know the three streets in your neighborhood [where] you've been living for three years?"

Zimmerman replied that he had a bad memory and attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder.

Other inconsistencies

Investigators also pointed out to Zimmerman in a Feb. 29 interrogation several other discrepancies, but he did not clear them up:

•He had said that during their struggle, Trayvon covered Zimmerman's nose and mouth with his hands, but in a recorded 911 call from a neighbor in which someone can be heard screaming for help, none of the cries sound muffled.

Zimmerman had injuries but not ones that matched the severity of the attack he described, according to Serino. If Trayvon had been banging Zimmerman's head on the sidewalk, the Neighborhood Watch volunteer should have had skull fractures, not just cuts, Serino said.

•There were no defensive wounds on Zimmerman's hands and just one small scrape on a finger of Trayvon's left hand, Serino said — little evidence of life-and-death struggle.

Reply #329 posted 06/28/12 10:10am

DiminutiveRocker

Musicslave said:

Zimmerman changes details, makes claims inconsistent with other evidence

http://articles.orlandose...her-police#

George Zimmerman talked to Sanford police a half-dozen times, going over what happened the night he killed 17-year-old Trayvon Martin. In the retelling, parts of his story changed. His account also does not line up with other evidence.

Here are some of the most prominent inconsistencies:

Where the confrontation happened

In his first recorded interview with police the night of the Feb. 26 shooting, Zimmerman said Trayvon popped out at him from "the bushes."

By the time he re-enacted the shooting less than 24 hours later, however, Zimmerman was much more precise, and the spot he pointed out had no bushes nearby.

As he walked police through what happened where, he said Trayvon approached him from his left rear and at a spot near the intersection of two sidewalks.

What Trayvon said

In that first taped interview with Sanford police Investigator Doris Singleton, Zimmerman said that when he and Trayvon came face to face on that sidewalk, Trayvon said, "What the [expletive][is] your problem, homey?"

During the next 24 hours, Zimmerman's version of what Trayvon said would change slightly, becoming less offensive with each telling.

In another interview later that night, he told Investigator Chris Serino that Trayvon said, "You got a problem?"

During the re-enactment the next afternoon, he told police that Trayvon yelled, "Yo, you got a problem?"

Also, a 16-year-old Miami girl told prosecutors she heard something different. She said she was on the phone with Trayvon at the time and heard him say, "What are you following me for?"

Dispatcher asked him to find Trayvon

After first spotting Trayvon and dialing a nonemergency police number, Zimmerman parked his truck while he talked with the dispatcher, asking that an officer come to the scene.

While still on the line, he drove a short distance down the street before parking again.

Why did he move his truck?

During the re-enactment the day after the shooting, Zimmerman told detectives it was because he had lost sight of the 17-year-old, and the dispatcher asked him to find him.

A review of Zimmerman's recorded call with the dispatcher, though, shows there was no such request.

Did he follow Trayvon?

In his call to police before the shooting, Zimmerman can be heard huffing and puffing as if he had been running or walking fast.

"Are you following him?" the dispatcher asked.

"Yeah," Zimmerman answered.

"OK, we don't need you to do that," the dispatcher said.

"OK," Zimmerman said.

But after the shooting, he offered a different reason for getting out of his truck. Serino pressed him for an explanation three days later.

I was "just going in the same direction he was," Zimmerman said. He had exited his truck, he said, to get a street address for authorities.

"Did you pursue the kid? Did you want to catch him?" Serino asked.

"No," said Zimmerman.

Serino challenged him further: "How do you not know the three streets in your neighborhood [where] you've been living for three years?"

Zimmerman replied that he had a bad memory and attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder.

Other inconsistencies

Investigators also pointed out to Zimmerman in a Feb. 29 interrogation several other discrepancies, but he did not clear them up:

•He had said that during their struggle, Trayvon covered Zimmerman's nose and mouth with his hands, but in a recorded 911 call from a neighbor in which someone can be heard screaming for help, none of the cries sound muffled.

Zimmerman had injuries but not ones that matched the severity of the attack he described, according to Serino. If Trayvon had been banging Zimmerman's head on the sidewalk, the Neighborhood Watch volunteer should have had skull fractures, not just cuts, Serino said.

•There were no defensive wounds on Zimmerman's hands and just one small scrape on a finger of Trayvon's left hand, Serino said — little evidence of life-and-death struggle.

eek

not looking good for him AT ALL.

Consider the rights of others before your own feelings, and the feelings of others before your own rights.
~ John Wooden
Reply #330 posted 06/28/12 3:37pm

SUPRMAN

Seeing that a man in Texas (who viedotaped his incident) is going to jail for 40 years despite claiming self-defense and invoking Stand Your Ground, I think GZ is headed for a plea bargain to manslaughter.

I don't want you to think like me. I just want you to think.
Reply #331 posted 06/28/12 3:52pm

free2bfreeda

abc

Genuine B...Take time to deliberate; but when the time for action arrives, stop thinking and go in.”

author ~ Napoleon Bonaparte

George Zimmerman asks judge to let him wear street clothes, no chains at bond hearing

By Rene Stutzman, Orlando Sentinel

George Zimmerman is asking a judge to let him wear street clothes but no shackles at Friday's bond hearing.

There will be news crews there, wrote defense attorney Mark O'Mara, and "the manner in which Mr. Zimmerman is portrayed by the media will have a tremendous impact on his ability to receive a fair trial."

read more: http://articles.orlandose...et-clothes

George Zi...george-zi...

to see guilty, or not to see guilty. we'll see the outcome 2moro in the a.m., depending on your time zone. nod

3:04 p.m. EST, June 27, 2012
one day a child hugged the earth & whispered 2 her,"I wish people would realize every x a bomb is launched & hits ur surface, it's like a major injury 2 u." i know war hurts u. :" the earth rumbled softly n reply, then cried a massive storm(c)
Reply #332 posted 06/29/12 5:22am

Musicslave

GZ's 2nd Bond Hearing Starts @ 9:30 AM EST.

That's all.

Reply #333 posted 06/29/12 6:51am

free2bfreeda

Musicslave said:

GZ's 2nd Bond Hearing Starts @ 9:30 AM EST.

That's all.

watching it right now here in my time zone. 6:50am.

eek

o'mara looks confident. GZ is suited up. the judge has a bit of wryness in his demeanor.

and the outcome is?

one day a child hugged the earth & whispered 2 her,"I wish people would realize every x a bomb is launched & hits ur surface, it's like a major injury 2 u." i know war hurts u. :" the earth rumbled softly n reply, then cried a massive storm(c)
Reply #334 posted 06/29/12 6:59am

Musicslave

free2bfreeda said:

Musicslave said:

GZ's 2nd Bond Hearing Starts @ 9:30 AM EST.

That's all.

watching it right now here in my time zone. 6:50am.

eek

o'mara looks confident. GZ is suited up. the judge has a bit of wryness in his demeanor.

and the outcome is?

lol It's funny how now they want to be all transparent about the money lol

Reply #335 posted 06/29/12 7:54am

2elijah

Musicslave said:

GZ's 2nd Bond Hearing Starts @ 9:30 AM EST.

That's all.

Watching it. They have a fireman testifying about treating GZ at time of TM's death. Claiming he treated GZ for lacerations on his head. Lacerations or not he is still responsible for initiating the situation that led to TM's death. Looks like the money from donations was transferred to GZ's personal account then traveled somehow to O'Mara's account. A guest on CNN stated GZ and his wife used some of that money to pay off credit card bills, yet claimed they had no funds. Snakes.

Reply #336 posted 06/29/12 8:04am

Musicslave

2elijah said:

Musicslave said:

GZ's 2nd Bond Hearing Starts @ 9:30 AM EST.

That's all.

Watching it. They have a fireman testifying about treating GZ at time of TM's death. Claiming he treated GZ for lacerations on his head. Lacerations or not he is still responsible for initiating the situation that led to TM's death. Looks like the money from donations was transferred to GZ's personal account then traveled somehow to O'Mara's account. A guest on CNN stated GZ and his wife used some of that money to pay off credit card bills, yet claimed they had no funds. Snakes.

The fireman was more of a help to the State if you ask me lol

[Edited 6/29/12 8:05am]

Reply #337 posted 06/29/12 11:02am

DiminutiveRocker

So what is the latest? I am at work and I missed the hearing.

So the judge is weighing the "evidence" ? I am lost as to why the fireman's testimony had any relevance as to whether or not GZ is granted a new bond? What was the point - or attempted point - by the defense?

Consider the rights of others before your own feelings, and the feelings of others before your own rights.
~ John Wooden
Reply #338 posted 06/29/12 11:15am

Musicslave

DiminutiveRocker said:

So what is the latest? I am at work and I missed the hearing.

So the judge is weighing the "evidence" ? I am lost as to why the fireman's testimony had any relevance as to whether or not GZ is granted a new bond? What was the point - or attempted point - by the defense?

What's up DR?! It appeared to me that the defense was trying somewhat of a "shock and awe" tactic by having the fireman's account of estimating that 40-45% of GZ's head was covered with blood. However during cross examination, he concurred that GZ didn't suffer a concussion or a skull fracture and didn't recommend further treatment for 24hrs. So he kind of undermined everything the defense established with his initial statements.

O'Mara tried to have GZ address the Court/Judge Lester (more than likely to apologize) without cross examination. But once Judge Lester told him that he would be subject to cross examination. O'Mara/GZ declined to address the court.

Reply #339 posted 06/29/12 11:19am

DiminutiveRocker

Musicslave said:

DiminutiveRocker said:

So what is the latest? I am at work and I missed the hearing.

So the judge is weighing the "evidence" ? I am lost as to why the fireman's testimony had any relevance as to whether or not GZ is granted a new bond? What was the point - or attempted point - by the defense?

What's up DR?! It appeared to me that the defense was trying somewhat of a "shock and awe" tactic by having the fireman's account of estimating that 40-45% of GZ's head was covered with blood. However during cross examination, he concurred that GZ didn't suffer a concussion or a skull fracture and didn't recommend further treatment for 24hrs. So he kind of undermined everything the defense established with his initial statements.

O'Mara tried to have GZ address the Court/Judge Lester (more than likely to apologize) without cross examination. But once Judge Lester told him that he would be subject to cross examination. O'Mara/GZ declined to address the court.

Hey MS! Yeah - O'mara already knows that GZ's credibility has taken a severe blow and that having him cross-examined risks further damaging the defense - GZ is way too inconsistent.

Do you think the defense showed sufficient remorse about misleading the court for the judge to grant bail - even at a much higher $$?

Consider the rights of others before your own feelings, and the feelings of others before your own rights.
~ John Wooden
Reply #340 posted 06/29/12 11:32am

Musicslave

DiminutiveRocker said:

Musicslave said:

What's up DR?! It appeared to me that the defense was trying somewhat of a "shock and awe" tactic by having the fireman's account of estimating that 40-45% of GZ's head was covered with blood. However during cross examination, he concurred that GZ didn't suffer a concussion or a skull fracture and didn't recommend further treatment for 24hrs. So he kind of undermined everything the defense established with his initial statements.

O'Mara tried to have GZ address the Court/Judge Lester (more than likely to apologize) without cross examination. But once Judge Lester told him that he would be subject to cross examination. O'Mara/GZ declined to address the court.

Hey MS! Yeah - O'mara already knows that GZ's credibility has taken a severe blow and that having him cross-examined risks further damaging the defense - GZ is way too inconsistent.

Do you think the defense showed sufficient remorse about misleading the court for the judge to grant bail - even at a much higher $$?

Although O'Mara profusely acknowledged the lie (yes he called it one) I'm not sure the Judge is weighing the defense's remorse as a guide in his decision to grant bond or not. So, I'm not sure...

Hey, we'll find out soon enough now won't we?

Reply #341 posted 06/29/12 12:11pm

2elijah

Musicslave said:

2elijah said:

Watching it. They have a fireman testifying about treating GZ at time of TM's death. Claiming he treated GZ for lacerations on his head. Lacerations or not he is still responsible for initiating the situation that led to TM's death. Looks like the money from donations was transferred to GZ's personal account then traveled somehow to O'Mara's account. A guest on CNN stated GZ and his wife used some of that money to pay off credit card bills, yet claimed they had no funds. Snakes.

The fireman was more of a help to the State if you ask me lol

[Edited 6/29/12 8:05am]

True, talking about having to treat the lacerations, which dumbass brought on himself, had he not try to play a sheriff's role.

Reply #342 posted 06/29/12 12:31pm

Musicslave

2elijah said:

Musicslave said:

The fireman was more of a help to the State if you ask me lol

[Edited 6/29/12 8:05am]

True, talking about having to treat the lacerations, which dumbass brought on himself, had he not try to play a sheriff's role.

I was truly underwhelmed when the fireman said they simply clean his head up with peroxide and basically sent him on his way. I knew from those videos at the police station that his injuries weren't as severe as he tried to make them seem. If his ass was really near death and unconscious, the paramedics would have rushed his ass immediately to the emergency room. No questions asked. It's their job.

I'm glad Judge Lester didn't allow GZ to address the Court without cross-examination. O'Mara's got balls I tell ya. The judge said GZ is just like anyone else that takes the witness stand....subject to cross-examination. O'Mara quickly got off of that one.

Reply #343 posted 06/29/12 1:38pm

DiminutiveRocker

Musicslave said:

2elijah said:

True, talking about having to treat the lacerations, which dumbass brought on himself, had he not try to play a sheriff's role.

I was truly underwhelmed when the fireman said they simply clean his head up with peroxide and basically sent him on his way. I knew from those videos at the police station that his injuries weren't as severe as he tried to make them seem. If his ass was really near death and unconscious, the paramedics would have rushed his ass immediately to the emergency room. No questions asked. It's their job.

I'm glad Judge Lester didn't allow GZ to address the Court without cross-examination. O'Mara's got balls I tell ya. The judge said GZ is just like anyone else that takes the witness stand....subject to cross-examination. O'Mara quickly got off of that one.

Yep! I said it before and I'll say it again... there is no way his head was "bashed" against a sidewalk -he would have incurred severe head injuries and certainly a concussion.

Consider the rights of others before your own feelings, and the feelings of others before your own rights.
~ John Wooden
Reply #344 posted 06/29/12 4:25pm

babynoz

Wtf kind of bond hearing was this? eek Were there any objections from the prosecution?

CNN is reporting that the defense hijacked the supposed bond hearing...I'm wondering how the hell all of this testimony comes up at a bond hearing?

"Success has a great tendency to conceal and throw a veil over the evil of men"....Demosthenes
Reply #345 posted 06/29/12 4:32pm

DiminutiveRocker

babynoz said:

Wtf kind of bond hearing was this? eek Were there any objections from the prosecution?

CNN is reporting that the defense hijacked the supposed bond hearing...I'm wondering how the hell all of this testimony comes up at a bond hearing?

I heard it was a mini trial... not sure why the fireman was called tothe stand.

Consider the rights of others before your own feelings, and the feelings of others before your own rights.
~ John Wooden
Reply #346 posted 06/29/12 5:38pm

SUPRMAN

Musicslave said:

2elijah said:

True, talking about having to treat the lacerations, which dumbass brought on himself, had he not try to play a sheriff's role.

I was truly underwhelmed when the fireman said they simply clean his head up with peroxide and basically sent him on his way. I knew from those videos at the police station that his injuries weren't as severe as he tried to make them seem. If his ass was really near death and unconscious, the paramedics would have rushed his ass immediately to the emergency room. No questions asked. It's their job.

I'm glad Judge Lester didn't allow GZ to address the Court without cross-examination. O'Mara's got balls I tell ya. The judge said GZ is just like anyone else that takes the witness stand....subject to cross-examination. O'Mara quickly got off of that one.

lol lol lol lol lol lol lol

GZ won't take the stand in his own defense? I'm shocked I tell ya! (There wasn't even a jury to hear him!)

I thought he has truth on his side? I thought everything he said was to be believed?

Plea bargain, manslaughter . . . . We may not get to a trial.

[Edited 6/29/12 17:39pm]

I don't want you to think like me. I just want you to think.
Reply #347 posted 06/30/12 10:19am

2elijah

DiminutiveRocker said:

Musicslave said:

I was truly underwhelmed when the fireman said they simply clean his head up with peroxide and basically sent him on his way. I knew from those videos at the police station that his injuries weren't as severe as he tried to make them seem. If his ass was really near death and unconscious, the paramedics would have rushed his ass immediately to the emergency room. No questions asked. It's their job.

I'm glad Judge Lester didn't allow GZ to address the Court without cross-examination. O'Mara's got balls I tell ya. The judge said GZ is just like anyone else that takes the witness stand....subject to cross-examination. O'Mara quickly got off of that one.

Yep! I said it before and I'll say it again... there is no way his head was "bashed" against a sidewalk -he would have incurred severe head injuries and certainly a concussion.

I agree with both of you, and it's funny how some GZ supporters tried to make it seem as though the lacerations was more than it was. They tried to use that to justify that it was ok to kill TM, yet if it was their own relatives, half of them would be screaming their heads off yelling "Murder!", and I don't care how anyone else objects, many of his supporters are justifying what GZ did because of who his victim was, and I bet if they were all given lie detector tests and tried to deny it, the results would come up 'fail!', that's why some of them get mad whenever someone suggests their opinions was based on the race of GZ's victim, but they're too coward to admit it.

Reply #348 posted 06/30/12 12:50pm

free2bfreeda

DiminutiveRocker said:

Yep! I said it before and I'll say it again... there is no way his head was "bashed" against a sidewalk -he would have incurred severe head injuries and certainly a concussion.

nod remember this!

Why Isn’t There Blood on George Zimmerman’s Clothes?

Posted on March 30, 2012 from: Orlando Sentinel

http://3chicspolitico.com...s-clothes/

There are no blood stains anywhere on George Zimmerman’s shirt. Why not, if Trayvon was shot within close range?

According to the Orlando Sentinel Zimmerman was bleeding from the nose, had a swollen lip and had bloody lacerations to the back of his head.

A broken nose & head bashed against the concrete cannot miraculously heal in 35 minutes. But still no blood stains on Zimmerman’s clothes. If the child, Trayvon Martin, was shot in the chest, close to the heart, then it’s going to bleed profusely. But why no blood on Zimmerman?

i've been wondering about the "bloody shirt" no show from the beginning. if my nose had been bloodied and blood was running down the back of my head, if the paramedics came to the scene, then being brought to the p.d. where is the blood on the shirt and the bandages that were supposed to be applied to GZ's head at the scene of the (murder) death of Trayvon Martin?

eek

one day a child hugged the earth & whispered 2 her,"I wish people would realize every x a bomb is launched & hits ur surface, it's like a major injury 2 u." i know war hurts u. :" the earth rumbled softly n reply, then cried a massive storm(c)
Reply #349 posted 06/30/12 3:08pm

2elijah

free2bfreeda said:

DiminutiveRocker said:

Yep! I said it before and I'll say it again... there is no way his head was "bashed" against a sidewalk -he would have incurred severe head injuries and certainly a concussion.

nod remember this!

Why Isn’t There Blood on George Zimmerman’s Clothes?

Posted on March 30, 2012 from: Orlando Sentinel

http://3chicspolitico.com...s-clothes/

There are no blood stains anywhere on George Zimmerman’s shirt. Why not, if Trayvon was shot within close range?

According to the Orlando Sentinel Zimmerman was bleeding from the nose, had a swollen lip and had bloody lacerations to the back of his head.

A broken nose & head bashed against the concrete cannot miraculously heal in 35 minutes. But still no blood stains on Zimmerman’s clothes. If the child, Trayvon Martin, was shot in the chest, close to the heart, then it’s going to bleed profusely. But why no blood on Zimmerman?

i've been wondering about the "bloody shirt" no show from the beginning. if my nose had been bloodied and blood was running down the back of my head, if the paramedics came to the scene, then being brought to the p.d. where is the blood on the shirt and the bandages that were supposed to be applied to GZ's head at the scene of the (murder) death of Trayvon Martin?

eek

Yep. That's the question we've all been asking from the beginning. I think after the tussle, GZ was pissed that he didn't win the fight, and TM had probably got up to walk away, and GZ called out to him pissed off that he got his ass kicked, and called out to TM to get him to turn around, and this is where I think at that time, is when GZ decided to use his gun and make sure he shot TM in the front, and not in the back, so he could have a reason to say, TM was a threat to his life, and so he had to use his gun. Something smells very fishy about the whole thing. He had to shoot TM at a distance, because when you shoot someone at close range, there's no way their blood couldn't splatter on you, especially if he claims they were that close, and he claims TM had him in a choke hold on top of him, when he shot him. Bottom line is GZ is guilty of this crime with the intention to commit murder and he knows it, but he will lie through his teeth to get a lesser charge or be acquitted, if there is a trial. I don't know how he could sleep at night knowing he's lying through his teeth. How could he have thought people are that stupid to not question where was the blood on GZ's clothes after shooting TM?

[Edited 6/30/12 15:12pm]

Reply #350 posted 06/30/12 4:05pm

BobGeorge909

Not to be all gz is innocent or anything....but gunshot wounds from handguns don't splatter like that....its a very small entrance wound, the bullet never left his body. I flew around inside and ripped apart all kinds of stuff, but there's essentially only a pinhole for blood to come out of. GZ wouldn't have been covered to any degree by treyvon's blood....unless he hung out underneath the body for an extended period of time. But GZ shouldn't, and doesn't have any noticeable, if any, blood splatter evidence on him.
You used to ride on the chrome horse with your diplomat
Who carried on his shoulder a Siamese cat
Ain't it hard when you discover that
He really wasn't where it's at
After he took from you everything he could steal.
-Dy...
Oh hell...u know who
Reply #351 posted 07/02/12 5:49pm

Musicslave

http://www.baynews9.com/c...decis.html

Florida law against George Zimmerman's fight for bail

With a packed docket, it’s looking less likely that Judge Kenneth Lester will rule on the George Zimmerman bond hearing Monday.

The close of court came without a ruling on whether the self-professed shooter of Trayvon Martin would be released on bond for a second time.

We have learned Zimmerman has Florida law against him when it comes to getting out of jail.

Florida statute 903.035 states:

903.035 Applications for bail; information provided; hearing on application for modification; penalty for providing false or misleading information or omitting material information.—(1)(a) All information provided by a defendant, in connection with any application for or attempt to secure bail, to any court, court personnel, or individual soliciting or recording such information for the purpose of evaluating eligibility for, or securing, bail for the defendant, under circumstances such that the defendant knew or should have known that the information was to be used in connection with an application for bail, shall be accurate, truthful, and complete without omissions to the best knowledge of the defendant.
(b) The failure to comply with the provisions of paragraph (a) may result in the revocation or modification of bail.

Legal analyst Alicia Adamson said being a flight risk or a danger to the community is also taken into consideration. However, that’s not all.

“There is a third issue to granting a bond, which is persevering judicial integrity,” Adamson said.

“I think that by George Zimmerman misleading the court, the judicial integrity has been compromised. That along with the fact that the information when requesting a bond should be truthful, should be complete and should not have any omissions, so I think that the judge is going to have to evaluate whether or not he felt that the excuse given by Zimmerman’s lawyer would suffice.”

Zimmerman’s defense team said their client was “confused and afraid.”

Denying Zimmerman’s bond request means he will remain in jail until his case is ready for the next phase.

Attorney Mark O’Mara said his case may not be ready until 2013

[Edited 7/2/12 17:52pm]

Reply #352 posted 07/02/12 5:54pm

DiminutiveRocker

Musicslave said:

http://www.baynews9.com/c...decis.html

Florida law against George Zimmerman's fight for bail

With a packed docket, it’s looking less likely that Judge Kenneth Lester will rule on the George Zimmerman bond hearing Monday.

The close of court came without a ruling on whether the self-professed shooter of Trayvon Martin would be released on bond for a second time.

We have learned Zimmerman has Florida law against him when it comes to getting out of jail.

Florida statute 903.035 states:

903.035 Applications for bail; information provided; hearing on application for modification; penalty for providing false or misleading information or omitting material information.—(1)(a) All information provided by a defendant, in connection with any application for or attempt to secure bail, to any court, court personnel, or individual soliciting or recording such information for the purpose of evaluating eligibility for, or securing, bail for the defendant, under circumstances such that the defendant knew or should have known that the information was to be used in connection with an application for bail, shall be accurate, truthful, and complete without omissions to the best knowledge of the defendant.
(b) The failure to comply with the provisions of paragraph (a) may result in the revocation or modification of bail.

Legal analyst Alicia Adamson said being a flight risk or a danger to the community is also taken into consideration. However, that’s not all.

“There is a third issue to granting a bond, which is persevering judicial integrity,” Adamson said.

“I think that by George Zimmerman misleading the court, the judicial integrity has been compromised. That along with the fact that the information when requesting a bond should be truthful, should be complete and should not have any omissions, so I think that the judge is going to have to evaluate whether or not he felt that the excuse given by Zimmerman’s lawyer would suffice.”

Zimmerman’s defense team said their client was “confused and afraid.”

Denying Zimmerman’s bond request means he will remain in jail until his case is ready for the next phase.

Attorney Mark O’Mara said his case may not be ready until 2013

"Confused and afraid" seems to be the credo GZ lives by. lol

If the judge thinks judicial integrity is important here - he may very well not give GZ another bond. I mean - why should he? By the phone calls - GZ and wife were tyring to pull one over... glad they were caught.

P.S. I STILL do not get why calling the fireman to the stand helped in obtaining the new bond - serioulsy, unless O'mara was just trying to garner sympathy for GZ?

wink

[Edited 7/2/12 17:58pm]

Consider the rights of others before your own feelings, and the feelings of others before your own rights.
~ John Wooden
Reply #353 posted 07/02/12 7:10pm

SUPRMAN

Musicslave said:

http://www.baynews9.com/c...decis.html

Florida law against George Zimmerman's fight for bail

With a packed docket, it’s looking less likely that Judge Kenneth Lester will rule on the George Zimmerman bond hearing Monday.

The close of court came without a ruling on whether the self-professed shooter of Trayvon Martin would be released on bond for a second time.

We have learned Zimmerman has Florida law against him when it comes to getting out of jail.

Florida statute 903.035 states:

903.035 Applications for bail; information provided; hearing on application for modification; penalty for providing false or misleading information or omitting material information.—(1)(a) All information provided by a defendant, in connection with any application for or attempt to secure bail, to any court, court personnel, or individual soliciting or recording such information for the purpose of evaluating eligibility for, or securing, bail for the defendant, under circumstances such that the defendant knew or should have known that the information was to be used in connection with an application for bail, shall be accurate, truthful, and complete without omissions to the best knowledge of the defendant.
(b) The failure to comply with the provisions of paragraph (a) may result in the revocation or modification of bail.

Legal analyst Alicia Adamson said being a flight risk or a danger to the community is also taken into consideration. However, that’s not all.

“There is a third issue to granting a bond, which is persevering judicial integrity,” Adamson said.

“I think that by George Zimmerman misleading the court, the judicial integrity has been compromised. That along with the fact that the information when requesting a bond should be truthful, should be complete and should not have any omissions, so I think that the judge is going to have to evaluate whether or not he felt that the excuse given by Zimmerman’s lawyer would suffice.”

Zimmerman’s defense team said their client was “confused and afraid.”

Denying Zimmerman’s bond request means he will remain in jail until his case is ready for the next phase.

Attorney Mark O’Mara said his case may not be ready until 2013

[Edited 7/2/12 17:52pm]

Thank you.

Looks like the law won't let the judge grant bail.

If bail is granted, I'm sure the prosecution will appeal the decision citing the law.

Enjoy your jail time GZ. Hopefully it won't be as bad as what people wish on others sent to jail.

I don't want you to think like me. I just want you to think.
Reply #354 posted 07/02/12 7:24pm

SUPRMAN

DiminutiveRocker said:

Musicslave said:

http://www.baynews9.com/c...decis.html

Florida law against George Zimmerman's fight for bail

With a packed docket, it’s looking less likely that Judge Kenneth Lester will rule on the George Zimmerman bond hearing Monday.

The close of court came without a ruling on whether the self-professed shooter of Trayvon Martin would be released on bond for a second time.

We have learned Zimmerman has Florida law against him when it comes to getting out of jail.

Florida statute 903.035 states:

903.035 Applications for bail; information provided; hearing on application for modification; penalty for providing false or misleading information or omitting material information.—(1)(a) All information provided by a defendant, in connection with any application for or attempt to secure bail, to any court, court personnel, or individual soliciting or recording such information for the purpose of evaluating eligibility for, or securing, bail for the defendant, under circumstances such that the defendant knew or should have known that the information was to be used in connection with an application for bail, shall be accurate, truthful, and complete without omissions to the best knowledge of the defendant.
(b) The failure to comply with the provisions of paragraph (a) may result in the revocation or modification of bail.

Legal analyst Alicia Adamson said being a flight risk or a danger to the community is also taken into consideration. However, that’s not all.

“There is a third issue to granting a bond, which is persevering judicial integrity,” Adamson said.

“I think that by George Zimmerman misleading the court, the judicial integrity has been compromised. That along with the fact that the information when requesting a bond should be truthful, should be complete and should not have any omissions, so I think that the judge is going to have to evaluate whether or not he felt that the excuse given by Zimmerman’s lawyer would suffice.”

Zimmerman’s defense team said their client was “confused and afraid.”

Denying Zimmerman’s bond request means he will remain in jail until his case is ready for the next phase.

Attorney Mark O’Mara said his case may not be ready until 2013

"Confused and afraid" seems to be the credo GZ lives by. lol

If the judge thinks judicial integrity is important here - he may very well not give GZ another bond. I mean - why should he? By the phone calls - GZ and wife were tyring to pull one over... glad they were caught.

P.S. I STILL do not get why calling the fireman to the stand helped in obtaining the new bond - serioulsy, unless O'mara was just trying to garner sympathy for GZ?

wink

[Edited 7/2/12 17:58pm]

The operative phrase is, "[C]omplete without omissions to the best knowledge of the defendant."

Can O'Mara argue that GZ met that standard? He cannot, as the phone calls show GZ had full knowledge of the financial assets available to him. Furthermore his wife perjured herself and he did not correct her statements when he had the opportunity, so again there was an unlawful omission, even if you don't admit he lied.

I don't want you to think like me. I just want you to think.
Reply #355 posted 07/03/12 6:59am

Musicslave

SUPRMAN said:

DiminutiveRocker said:

"Confused and afraid" seems to be the credo GZ lives by. lol

If the judge thinks judicial integrity is important here - he may very well not give GZ another bond. I mean - why should he? By the phone calls - GZ and wife were tyring to pull one over... glad they were caught.

P.S. I STILL do not get why calling the fireman to the stand helped in obtaining the new bond - serioulsy, unless O'mara was just trying to garner sympathy for GZ?

wink

[Edited 7/2/12 17:58pm]

The operative phrase is, "[C]omplete without omissions to the best knowledge of the defendant."

Can O'Mara argue that GZ met that standard? He cannot, as the phone calls show GZ had full knowledge of the financial assets available to him. Furthermore his wife perjured herself and he did not correct her statements when he had the opportunity, so again there was an unlawful omission, even if you don't admit he lied.

During the course of the past few weeks, O'Mara has even called it a lie. He and his wife obviously conspired to deceive the Court/Judge Lester to think they were broke.

I like the term "judicial integrity" too because that sums up what would come into question (I believe) if the judge was to grant him bond again. As you said SUPRMAN, I'm sure the State would immediately file for an appeal if he was set a new bond. Wouldn't you think the judge's impartiality would come into question? Especially knowing that Florida law doesn't allow bond after GZ's violations.

Reply #356 posted 07/03/12 11:27am

DiminutiveRocker

Musicslave said:

SUPRMAN said:

The operative phrase is, "[C]omplete without omissions to the best knowledge of the defendant."

Can O'Mara argue that GZ met that standard? He cannot, as the phone calls show GZ had full knowledge of the financial assets available to him. Furthermore his wife perjured herself and he did not correct her statements when he had the opportunity, so again there was an unlawful omission, even if you don't admit he lied.

During the course of the past few weeks, O'Mara has even called it a lie. He and his wife obviously conspired to deceive the Court/Judge Lester to think they were broke.

I like the term "judicial integrity" too because that sums up what would come into question (I believe) if the judge was to grant him bond again. As you said SUPRMAN, I'm sure the State would immediately file for an appeal if he was set a new bond. Wouldn't you think the judge's impartiality would come into question? Especially knowing that Florida law doesn't allow bond after GZ's violations.

The omissions were deliberate as the phone calls would reveal. And when it came to the money i the paypal account - GZ did not seem "confused and afraid" - did he? wink

Consider the rights of others before your own feelings, and the feelings of others before your own rights.
~ John Wooden
Reply #357 posted 07/03/12 1:07pm

Musicslave

DiminutiveRocker said:

Musicslave said:

During the course of the past few weeks, O'Mara has even called it a lie. He and his wife obviously conspired to deceive the Court/Judge Lester to think they were broke.

I like the term "judicial integrity" too because that sums up what would come into question (I believe) if the judge was to grant him bond again. As you said SUPRMAN, I'm sure the State would immediately file for an appeal if he was set a new bond. Wouldn't you think the judge's impartiality would come into question? Especially knowing that Florida law doesn't allow bond after GZ's violations.

The omissions were deliberate as the phone calls would reveal. And when it came to the money i the paypal account - GZ did not seem "confused and afraid" - did he? wink

eek Great point! lol lol lol I'm pretty sure Judge Lester knows O'Mara is full of it with that "confused and afraid" excuse.

Reply #358 posted 07/03/12 1:32pm

Musicslave

http://www.miamiherald.co...black.html

Doctor: George Zimmerman had black eyes, painful broken nose but no head trauma

A medical report conducted the day after George Zimmerman shot Trayvon Martin shows he went to the doctor the day after the killing, because he needed a doctor’s note to return to work

The day after he killed Trayvon Martin, George Zimmerman went to the doctor with a broken nose, black eyes and two cuts on his head, but the physician determined he didn’t suffer any head trauma, newly released medical records show.

Zimmerman declined to go to an ear, nose and throat specialist even though the primary care physician recommended it, the doctor twice noted.

Zimmerman’s defense attorney posted evidence that he presented Friday at his client’s bail hearing on his website. Among the documents and recordings posted are witness statements and Zimmerman’s medical records from the day after he shot Trayvon.

The medical records document several injuries, but also state that the only reason Zimmerman sought medical attention was because he needed a doctor’s note to return to work, Duval County Assistant State Attorney Bernie de la Rionda said in court last week.

At 5 feet 7½ inches and 204 lbs, the doctor described Zimmerman as “obese.” Although he did not have any blurry vision or dizziness, Zimmerman did say he got nauseous every time he thought of the night’s violence, the doctor wrote.

The doctor said Zimmerman had two cuts on his head which did not require stitches because they were already healing. His nose was fractured and hurt, and he suffered joint pain likely because of the assault, the doctor said.

“We discussed that it is likely broken, but does not appear to have septal deviation,” the doctor wrote. “The swelling and black eyes are typical of this injury. I recommended that he be evaluated by ENT but he refused.”

The records show Zimmerman takes a variety of medications, including pills that both elevate your mood and calm it. He suffers from sacroiliitis, inflammation of the joints in the lower spine. He also has had irritable bowel syndrome.

O’Mara presented the reports and witness statements to show that Zimmerman was injured from his scuffle with Trayvon. He argued in court last week that it’s unfair to keep Zimmerman in jail for up to a year for a case he may never be convicted of.


Zimmerman claims the Miami Gardens teenager attacked him and slammed his head on the concrete. Prosecutors believe Zimmerman profiled the unarmed teenager, because he assumed Trayvon was a criminal. He is charged with second-degree murder.

Seminole County Circuit Judge Kenneth Lester Jr. is expected to rule this week on whether to release Zimmerman on bond a second time. The judge had revoked Zimmerman’s bail, because

Zimmerman misrepresented how much money he had to post bond.

Looks like GZ refused an awful lot of attention and treatment back then. I guess he didn't realize he was hurting his own credibility by refusing going to the emergency room for further evaluation and refusing to go to an ENT Specialist as recommended by his primary care physician. I always thought he was embellishing the whole "slammed my head into the concrete" angle too much. Now we know for sure that his own doctor determined that there was no HEAD TRAUMA. O'Mara better go ahead and try to get a deal while he can. Because the State is going to rip him to shreads if this thing actually goes to trial.

Reply #359 posted 07/05/12 3:21am

free2bfreeda

Judge to decide if George Zimmerman will receive bond

Thursday, July 05, 2012 @ 05:27AM EST

http://www.cfnews13.com/c...ml?cid=rss

A judge should decide today if George Zimmerman will be allowed out on bond.

The judge has been looking at the new evidence since last Friday and now we're seeing it for ourselves.

There's witness testimony, pictures and a medical report of Zimmerman -- all evidence the defense hopes will convince the judge to let Zimmerman out on bond.

Some of the evidence Judge Lester has been going over also includes Images of Trayvon Martin from the night of the shooting taken at the 7-Eleven.

The defense said the pictures are to show the 17-year-old's size, again, trying to present Zimmerman as the victim in this case.

Also Images of George Zimmerman's injuries from the night -- cuts and bruises a fractured nose. All items the defense made notice of at the hearing.

The judge is also seeing the medical records for Zimmerman, including medications he'd been taking.

Adderall – which is commonly used to treat attention deficit hyperactivity disorder. He was also on medication for insomnia – Temazepam. Zimmerman was also taking Librax, which can be taken for anxiety or stomach issues.

The toxicology report for Zimmerman has not been released, so it is unclear if he was on any of those medications the night of the shooting.

These factors are what the judge is taking into consideration when determining if Zimmerman will be allowed out on bond.

Judge Lester has said he feels Zimmerman did not tell the truth about how much money his family had at the last bond hearing. Now he will decide if he thinks Zimmerman's reasoning of being afraid for his family is enough to grant him another bond. Of if he'll stay in jail until his day in court.

since i seem to have the early morning (ate too much 4th of july food) insomnia symptoms,

Emoticon ...

thought i'd post the above. right now it's 6:14am est, while it's 3:14am pst. hopefully by the time i get to sleep and awaken the GZ bond decision will have been made.

until then.

[Edited 7/5/12 3:26am]

one day a child hugged the earth & whispered 2 her,"I wish people would realize every x a bomb is launched & hits ur surface, it's like a major injury 2 u." i know war hurts u. :" the earth rumbled softly n reply, then cried a massive storm(c)
Reply #360 posted 07/05/12 9:03am

OnlyNDaUsa

Bond is $1,000,000.

Living with a disability is not the Wurst thing in the word: Knowingly Mocking someone with one is far Wurst!.
Reply #361 posted 07/05/12 9:41am

DiminutiveRocker

OnlyNDaUsa said:

Bond is $1,000,000.

This will tap out his paypal account for sure lol

Consider the rights of others before your own feelings, and the feelings of others before your own rights.
~ John Wooden
Reply #362 posted 07/05/12 9:42am

Musicslave

OnlyNDaUsa said:

Bond is $1,000,000.

What I don't understand is why even set a bond if you deem the defendant untrustworthy? There's no greater guarantee he'll be in cout than keeping him behind bars....

http://content.usatoday.c...-on-bond/1

Here's an excerpt from Judge Lester's written statement:

"Under any definition, the defendant has flaunted the system," the judge wrote. "Counsel has attempted to portray the defendant as being a confused young man who was fearful and experienced a moment of weakness and who may have also have acted out of a sense of 'betrayal' by the system. Based upon all the evidence presented, this court finds the opposite. The defendant tried to manipulate the system when he has been presented the opportunity to do so."

Update at 12:19 p.m. ET: Judge Lester largely sided with the state prosecutor's portrayal of Zimmerman as a liar who intentionally misled the court and may have been preparing to flee the country once out on bail. He rejected the notion put forth by Zimmerman's lawyer, Mark O'Mara, that Zimmerman lied about his finances because he didn't trust the system after being charged with second-degree murder.

Reply #363 posted 07/05/12 9:53am

Musicslave

DiminutiveRocker said:

OnlyNDaUsa said:

Bond is $1,000,000.

This will tap out his paypal account for sure lol

Yeah, I said last week that he may up the bond amount significantly. After reading about Florida's "Judicial Integrity" factor I'd figured he wouldn't set a bond. At least he has to cough up half of his savings. However, I get the funny feeling that the NRA, Koch brothers or some right-wing supprt group may pay it for him since he became an instant hero for getting rid of another no-good thug negra wink

Reply #364 posted 07/05/12 1:18pm

Musicslave

This cat will probably be out by this weekend.

Reply #365 posted 07/05/12 2:11pm

DiminutiveRocker

Musicslave said:

OnlyNDaUsa said:

Bond is $1,000,000.

What I don't understand is why even set a bond if you deem the defendant untrustworthy? There's no greater guarantee he'll be in cout than keeping him behind bars....

http://content.usatoday.c...-on-bond/1

Here's an excerpt from Judge Lester's written statement:

"Under any definition, the defendant has flaunted the system," the judge wrote. "Counsel has attempted to portray the defendant as being a confused young man who was fearful and experienced a moment of weakness and who may have also have acted out of a sense of 'betrayal' by the system. Based upon all the evidence presented, this court finds the opposite. The defendant tried to manipulate the system when he has been presented the opportunity to do so."

Update at 12:19 p.m. ET: Judge Lester largely sided with the state prosecutor's portrayal of Zimmerman as a liar who intentionally misled the court and may have been preparing to flee the country once out on bail. He rejected the notion put forth by Zimmerman's lawyer, Mark O'Mara, that Zimmerman lied about his finances because he didn't trust the system after being charged with second-degree murder.

I also don't get why the judge set another bond if he felt that GZ flagrantly lied and abused the system and he also did not buy O'Mara's dazed and confused defense.

But none the less, it does not bode well for Zimmerman that the judge thinks he's a liar and is not buying the line O'Mara fed as an excuse.

This has to inspire a bargain by O'Mara - he has an uphill battle if his client has lost all credibility.

Consider the rights of others before your own feelings, and the feelings of others before your own rights.
~ John Wooden
Reply #366 posted 07/05/12 3:13pm

OnlyNDaUsa

Musicslave said:

This cat will probably be out by this weekend.

why should he not have the same rights anyone else would have? Why is it that not disclosing his money is a worst crime than murder?

Living with a disability is not the Wurst thing in the word: Knowingly Mocking someone with one is far Wurst!.
Reply #367 posted 07/05/12 3:21pm

rudedog

OnlyNDaUsa said:

Musicslave said:

This cat will probably be out by this weekend.

why should he not have the same rights anyone else would have? Why is it that not disclosing his money is a worst crime than murder?

Cuz it's against the law!! You, of all ppl, criticize ppl for breaking the law and should know that. He and his wife lied under oath. You don't do that. He's on trial FOR MURDER (which he claims to be innocent of), so any kind of lying will not be a good way to show the judge or jury that you are being faithful to our system of justice.

"The voter is less important than the man who provides money to the candidate," - Former Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens
Rudedog no no no!
Reply #368 posted 07/05/12 3:45pm

OnlyNDaUsa

rudedog said:

OnlyNDaUsa said:

why should he not have the same rights anyone else would have? Why is it that not disclosing his money is a worst crime than murder?

Cuz it's against the law!! You, of all ppl, criticize ppl for breaking the law and should know that. He and his wife lied under oath. You don't do that. He's on trial FOR MURDER (which he claims to be innocent of), so any kind of lying will not be a good way to show the judge or jury that you are being faithful to our system of justice.

what does that have to do with anything I said? All asked was why should he not have a bail? To suggest he not have a bail my very well be a violation of the law.

and it was the ruling of the judge. why not just accept it as that? why not just respect the legal process? Just say "damn only you were right again, he did get bail...."

Living with a disability is not the Wurst thing in the word: Knowingly Mocking someone with one is far Wurst!.
Reply #369 posted 07/05/12 4:15pm

babynoz

O'Mara is already begging for more money...

http://www.clickorlando.c...index.html

"Success has a great tendency to conceal and throw a veil over the evil of men"....Demosthenes
Reply #370 posted 07/05/12 4:45pm

OnlyNDaUsa

babynoz said:

O'Mara is already begging for more money...

http://www.clickorlando.c...index.html

humm... "We are encouraged we can work this out. We paid $15,000 initially for the first bail fee so an additional fee of $85,000 would have to be paid to post this new bond assuming we can work out the collateral issue."

So it seems getting credit for the first one is very much possible....

Living with a disability is not the Wurst thing in the word: Knowingly Mocking someone with one is far Wurst!.
Reply #371 posted 07/05/12 5:11pm

babynoz

OnlyNDaUsa said:

babynoz said:

O'Mara is already begging for more money...

http://www.clickorlando.c...index.html

humm... "We are encouraged we can work this out. We paid $15,000 initially for the first bail fee so an additional fee of $85,000 would have to be paid to post this new bond assuming we can work out the collateral issue."

So it seems getting credit for the first one is very much possible....

Not from the court. The bondsman, on the other hand, can work out a deal if he chooses to do so, even up to how the million dollar collateral will be handled. I don't see the bondsman sticking his neck out on this one though.

"Success has a great tendency to conceal and throw a veil over the evil of men"....Demosthenes
Reply #372 posted 07/05/12 5:48pm

OnlyNDaUsa

babynoz said:

OnlyNDaUsa said:

humm... "We are encouraged we can work this out. We paid $15,000 initially for the first bail fee so an additional fee of $85,000 would have to be paid to post this new bond assuming we can work out the collateral issue."

So it seems getting credit for the first one is very much possible....

Not from the court. The bondsman, on the other hand, can work out a deal if he chooses to do so, even up to how the million dollar collateral will be handled.

I never strictly limited it as such.

I don't see the bondsman sticking his neck out on this one though.

lol do not be ridiculous of course they will

Living with a disability is not the Wurst thing in the word: Knowingly Mocking someone with one is far Wurst!.
Reply #373 posted 07/05/12 5:48pm

Musicslave

OnlyNDaUsa said:

Musicslave said:

This cat will probably be out by this weekend.

why should he not have the same rights anyone else would have? Why is it that not disclosing his money is a worst crime than murder?

The judge had every legal right to not grant bond according to Florida Statue: 903.035

Florida statute 903.035 states:

903.035 Applications for bail; information provided; hearing on application for modification; penalty for providing false or misleading information or omitting material information.—(1)(a) All information provided by a defendant, in connection with any application for or attempt to secure bail, to any court, court personnel, or individual soliciting or recording such information for the purpose of evaluating eligibility for, or securing, bail for the defendant, under circumstances such that the defendant knew or should have known that the information was to be used in connection with an application for bail, shall be accurate, truthful, and complete without omissions to the best knowledge of the defendant.
(b) The failure to comply with the provisions of paragraph (a) may result in the revocation or modification of bail.

Reply #374 posted 07/05/12 5:49pm

SUPRMAN

OnlyNDaUsa said:

Musicslave said:

This cat will probably be out by this weekend.

why should he not have the same rights anyone else would have? Why is it that not disclosing his money is a worst crime than murder?

Only . . .

Really? Maybe because the law says you get one shot and GZ blew his?

How is he being denied anything?

He was given bail based on perjury and his willful and unlawful omissions.

Who is saying that his failure to disclosse is worse than second degree murder except you?

Why do you call Obama a liar but excuse GZ? Is there something deeper going on?

I don't want you to think like me. I just want you to think.
Reply #375 posted 07/05/12 5:52pm

SUPRMAN

OnlyNDaUsa said:

rudedog said:

Cuz it's against the law!! You, of all ppl, criticize ppl for breaking the law and should know that. He and his wife lied under oath. You don't do that. He's on trial FOR MURDER (which he claims to be innocent of), so any kind of lying will not be a good way to show the judge or jury that you are being faithful to our system of justice.

what does that have to do with anything I said? All asked was why should he not have a bail? To suggest he not have a bail my very well be a violation of the law.

and it was the ruling of the judge. why not just accept it as that? why not just respect the legal process? Just say "damn only you were right again, he did get bail...."

Florida law says he should have been given bail a second time.

How would it be a violation of the law to suggest he may not have bail?

There is no legal right to bail. It is not automatic, it is basically a courtesy so space isn't required for each and everyone accused of a crime.

Accept the ruling of the judge? Like you accept the SCOTUS ruling regarding Obamacare?

I'm smelling hypocrisy.

I don't want you to think like me. I just want you to think.
Reply #376 posted 07/05/12 5:54pm

SUPRMAN

OnlyNDaUsa said:

babynoz said:

Not from the court. The bondsman, on the other hand, can work out a deal if he chooses to do so, even up to how the million dollar collateral will be handled.

I never strictly limited it as such.

I don't see the bondsman sticking his neck out on this one though.

lol do not be ridiculous of course they will

Why would a bailbondsman put up $1 million for anyone? That's not how you make money in business. I guess they aren't in business to make money but to be there for GZ's convenience?

I don't want you to think like me. I just want you to think.
Reply #377 posted 07/05/12 5:58pm

OnlyNDaUsa

Musicslave said:

OnlyNDaUsa said:

why should he not have the same rights anyone else would have? Why is it that not disclosing his money is a worst crime than murder?

The judge had every legal right to not grant bond according to Florida Statue: 903.035

yeah and? what does that have to do with anything?

Living with a disability is not the Wurst thing in the word: Knowingly Mocking someone with one is far Wurst!.
Reply #378 posted 07/05/12 6:00pm

OnlyNDaUsa

SUPRMAN said:

OnlyNDaUsa said:

Why would a bailbondsman put up $1 million for anyone? That's not how you make money in business. I guess they aren't in business to make money but to be there for GZ's convenience?

becasue it is an easy $85K... you sure do not make money turnning down clients.

Living with a disability is not the Wurst thing in the word: Knowingly Mocking someone with one is far Wurst!.
Reply #379 posted 07/05/12 6:00pm

babynoz

OnlyNDaUsa said:

babynoz said:

Not from the court. The bondsman, on the other hand, can work out a deal if he chooses to do so, even up to how the million dollar collateral will be handled.

I never strictly limited it as such.

I don't see the bondsman sticking his neck out on this one though.

lol do not be ridiculous of course they will

Okay, so you think the bondsman won't require the million dollar collateral along with the hundred grand? Alrighty then.

"Success has a great tendency to conceal and throw a veil over the evil of men"....Demosthenes
Reply #380 posted 07/05/12 6:06pm

OnlyNDaUsa

SUPRMAN said:

OnlyNDaUsa said:

what does that have to do with anything I said? All asked was why should he not have a bail? To suggest he not have a bail my very well be a violation of the law.

and it was the ruling of the judge. why not just accept it as that? why not just respect the legal process? Just say "damn only you were right again, he did get bail...."

Florida law says he should have been given bail a second time.

no it says he can have it. it is mostly up to the judge.

How would it be a violation of the law to suggest he may not have bail?

odd wording on my part.. shesh

There is no legal right to bail. It is not automatic, it is basically a courtesy so space isn't required for each and everyone accused of a crime.

no but there is to DUE PROCESS! to say he should not get it seems to be to be ignoring the right to due process.

Accept the ruling of the judge?

yup

Like you accept the SCOTUS ruling regarding Obamacare?

I accept it. my opinion was the same as theirs. I said several times passed as a tax it would stand ...under the commerce clause it would not... I was proved correct on both counts. I think it is a dangrous ruling but that is not a legal issue.

I'm smelling hypocrisy.

you smell yourself. i said nothing about the court getting it wrong. obama said it is not a tax...but again that is not a legal argument. just shows how ignorant or dishonest he is...

Living with a disability is not the Wurst thing in the word: Knowingly Mocking someone with one is far Wurst!.
Reply #381 posted 07/05/12 6:16pm

SUPRMAN

OnlyNDaUsa said:

SUPRMAN said:

Why would a bailbondsman put up $1 million for anyone? That's not how you make money in business. I guess they aren't in business to make money but to be there for GZ's convenience?

becasue it is an easy $85K... you sure do not make money turnning down clients.

Did you think before you typed this? <Rhethorical question. Obviously not.>

What makes it an easy $85,000? It also an easy $1 million to lose.

Do you think bail exists because people always show up in court when they are legally required to?

You don't stay in business paying for your client's mistakes either.

I don't want you to think like me. I just want you to think.
Reply #382 posted 07/05/12 6:19pm

SUPRMAN

OnlyNDaUsa said:

SUPRMAN said:

Florida law says he should have been given bail a second time.

no it says he can have it. it is mostly up to the judge.

My bad I mistyped that. Meant he should not be given bail. Seems to be up to the Judge but if he skips, Lester career is over.

How would it be a violation of the law to suggest he may not have bail?

odd wording on my part.. shesh

There is no legal right to bail. It is not automatic, it is basically a courtesy so space isn't required for each and everyone accused of a crime.

no but there is to DUE PROCESS! to say he should not get it seems to be to be ignoring the right to due process.

What is your interpretation of due process? Bail has nothing to do with due process. You have no constitutional right to bail.

Accept the ruling of the judge?

yup

Like you accept the SCOTUS ruling regarding Obamacare?

I accept it. my opinion was the same as theirs. I said several times passed as a tax it would stand ...under the commerce clause it would not... I was proved correct on both counts. I think it is a dangrous ruling but that is not a legal issue.

I'm smelling hypocrisy.

you smell yourself. i said nothing about the court getting it wrong. obama said it is not a tax...but again that is not a legal argument. just shows how ignorant or dishonest he is...

I don't want you to think like me. I just want you to think.
Reply #383 posted 07/05/12 6:42pm

OnlyNDaUsa

babynoz said:

OnlyNDaUsa said:

Okay, so you think the bondsman won't require the million dollar collateral along with the hundred grand? Alrighty then.

that has nothing to do with the issue. (well not my issue, as i said when he was revoked he will get a new bail and that he may get credit for what he already paid. the private/civil contract between him and his people and the bail bondsmen is not a legal issue but a private one)

[Edited 7/5/12 18:48pm]

Living with a disability is not the Wurst thing in the word: Knowingly Mocking someone with one is far Wurst!.
Reply #384 posted 07/05/12 6:46pm

OnlyNDaUsa

he is not going to skip. he will secure bail. he will be out of jail until the verdict.

Living with a disability is not the Wurst thing in the word: Knowingly Mocking someone with one is far Wurst!.
Reply #385 posted 07/05/12 7:42pm

babynoz

OnlyNDaUsa said:

babynoz said:

Okay, so you think the bondsman won't require the million dollar collateral along with the hundred grand? Alrighty then.

that has nothing to do with the issue. (well not my issue, as i said when he was revoked he will get a new bail and that he may get credit for what he already paid. the private/civil contract between him and his people and the bail bondsmen is not a legal issue but a private one)

[Edited 7/5/12 18:48pm]

That isn't what you said though...this is what you said,

I think he will be granted bond. With full credit for is original one.

Implying that the court would give him credit.

Then I said...

I don't see the bondsman sticking his neck out on this one though.

And you replied...

lol do not be ridiculous of course they will

That's why I asked if you thought the bondsman wouldn't require the collateral, so it does have something to do with a statement YOU made. It's a simple discussion, no need to act like you're the one on trial.

"Success has a great tendency to conceal and throw a veil over the evil of men"....Demosthenes
Reply #386 posted 07/05/12 9:24pm

OnlyNDaUsa

babynoz said:

I did mean to imply the court could order the bailbonds company to accept those terms, More like the court would order the bond as paid to be held until the new hearing was held and a new judgment rendered. I am not sure how it all works but I suspected--correctly--that it could be done such that he would not have to pay the full 10% of the new amount. You can try to spin what i said all you like, even if I did say the court could do it... so what? Still as I said it seems he will only have to pay the fees on the difference--thus getting full credit for what he has already paid.

That's why I asked if you thought the bondsman wouldn't require the collateral, so it does have something to do with a statement YOU made. It's a simple discussion, no need to act like you're the one on trial.

I was speaking about the legal aspects. It has to do if/when he gets out and how much he has to pay. But it has nothing to do with the legal issue of him being granted bond. As far as what he will have to do to get the loan that is a private matter. (not personal but between him and that company) I doubt he is much of a flight risk, where can he go?

Living with a disability is not the Wurst thing in the word: Knowingly Mocking someone with one is far Wurst!.
Reply #387 posted 07/05/12 11:47pm

DiminutiveRocker

babynoz said:

O'Mara is already begging for more money...

http://www.clickorlando.c...index.html

rolleyes the defense would not even be in this predicament if GZ & wife had not purposely misled the court in the first place and destroyed GZ's credibilty.

Essentially begging the public for money... I've lost respect for O'Mara.

Consider the rights of others before your own feelings, and the feelings of others before your own rights.
~ John Wooden
Reply #388 posted 07/06/12 6:46am

Musicslave

OnlyNDaUsa said:

Musicslave said:

The judge had every legal right to not grant bond according to Florida Statue: 903.035

yeah and? what does that have to do with anything?

I was pointing out that the judge did have that Florida Statue available to him if he chose to use it. He didn't. In spite of his distrust of the defendant and even citing the fact that he thought that GZ was a flight risk and conspired to bounce with his passport and cash, he ultimately set bond. So, you're wrong in saying that Judge Lester could not legally deny him bond until trial. He could have legally, but he just chose not to. End of story.

Reply #389 posted 07/06/12 7:07am

OnlyNDaUsa

Musicslave said:

OnlyNDaUsa said:

yeah and? what does that have to do with anything?

I was pointing out that the judge did have that Florida Statue available to him if he chose to use it. He didn't. In spite of his distrust of the defendant and even citing the fact that he thought that GZ was a flight risk and conspired to bounce with his passport and cash, he ultimately set bond. So, you're wrong in saying that Judge Lester could not legally deny him bond until trial. He could have legally, but he just chose not to. End of story.

I did not say that. end of story

Oh "To suggest he not have a bail my very well be a violation of the law."

that was a poorly writ en: what Iwas getting at his to not allow him a hearing and not consider it would be a violation of due process...

[Edited 7/6/12 7:15am]

Living with a disability is not the Wurst thing in the word: Knowingly Mocking someone with one is far Wurst!.
Reply #390 posted 07/06/12 7:24am

DiminutiveRocker

OnlyNDaUsa said:

Musicslave said:

I was pointing out that the judge did have that Florida Statue available to him if he chose to use it. He didn't. In spite of his distrust of the defendant and even citing the fact that he thought that GZ was a flight risk and conspired to bounce with his passport and cash, he ultimately set bond. So, you're wrong in saying that Judge Lester could not legally deny him bond until trial. He could have legally, but he just chose not to. End of story.

I did not say that. end of story

Oh "To suggest he not have a bail my very well be a violation of the law."

that was a poorly writ en: what Iwas getting at his to not allow him a hearing and not consider it would be a violation of due process...

[Edited 7/6/12 7:15am]

But that's not what happened - so what's your point in saying that?

Consider the rights of others before your own feelings, and the feelings of others before your own rights.
~ John Wooden
Reply #391 posted 07/06/12 7:30am

SUPRMAN

OnlyNDaUsa said:

Musicslave said:

I was pointing out that the judge did have that Florida Statue available to him if he chose to use it. He didn't. In spite of his distrust of the defendant and even citing the fact that he thought that GZ was a flight risk and conspired to bounce with his passport and cash, he ultimately set bond. So, you're wrong in saying that Judge Lester could not legally deny him bond until trial. He could have legally, but he just chose not to. End of story.

I did not say that. end of story

Oh "To suggest he not have a bail my very well be a violation of the law."

that was a poorly writ en: what Iwas getting at his to not allow him a hearing and not consider it would be a violation of due process...

[Edited 7/6/12 7:15am]

How would not allowing a hearing be a violation of due process? What 'right' does he have to bail? He has none.

I don't want you to think like me. I just want you to think.
Reply #392 posted 07/06/12 7:36am

OnlyNDaUsa

SUPRMAN said:

OnlyNDaUsa said:

I did not say that. end of story

Oh "To suggest he not have a bail my very well be a violation of the law."

that was a poorly writ en: what Iwas getting at his to not allow him a hearing and not consider it would be a violation of due process...

[Edited 7/6/12 7:15am]

How would not allowing a hearing be a violation of due process? What 'right' does he have to bail? He has none.

habeas corpus and the 14th ?

Living with a disability is not the Wurst thing in the word: Knowingly Mocking someone with one is far Wurst!.
Reply #393 posted 07/06/12 7:41am

SUPRMAN

OnlyNDaUsa said:

SUPRMAN said:

How would not allowing a hearing be a violation of due process? What 'right' does he have to bail? He has none.

habeas corpus and the 14th ?

Where does either mention bail? Whre are you getting this from? Thin air?

Habeus corpus means produce the body, it has nothing to do with bail.

The basic premise behind habeas corpus is that you cannot be held against your will without just cause. To put it another way, you cannot be jailed if there are no charges against you. If you are being held, and you demand it, the courts must issue a writ of habeas corpus, which forces those holding you to answer as to why. If there is no good or compelling reason, the court must set you free. It is important to note that of all the civil liberties we take for granted today as a part of the Bill of Rights, the importance of habeas corpus is illustrated by the fact that it was the sole liberty thought important enough to be included in the original text of the Constitution.

http://www.usconstitution...ssary.html

14th Amendment:

Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

Section 2. Representatives shall be apportioned among the several States according to their respective numbers, counting the whole number of persons in each State, excluding Indians not taxed. But when the right to vote at any election for the choice of electors for President and Vice President of the United States, Representatives in Congress, the Executive and Judicial officers of a State, or the members of the Legislature thereof, is denied to any of the male inhabitants of such State, being twenty-one years of age, and citizens of the United States, or in any way abridged, except for participation in rebellion, or other crime, the basis of representation therein shall be reduced in the proportion which the number of such male citizens shall bear to the whole number of male citizens twenty-one years of age in such State.

Section 3. No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any State, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any State, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may, by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability.

Section 4. The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law, including debts incurred for payment of pensions and bounties for services in suppressing insurrection or rebellion, shall not be questioned. But neither the United States nor any State shall assume or pay any debt or obligation incurred in aid of insurrection or rebellion against the United States, or any claim for the loss or emancipation of any slave; but all such debts, obligations and claims shall be held illegal and void.

Section 5. The Congress shall have power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article.


I don't want you to think like me. I just want you to think.
Reply #394 posted 07/06/12 8:03am

OnlyNDaUsa

SUPRMAN said:

OnlyNDaUsa said:

habeas corpus and the 14th ?

Where does either mention bail? Whre are you getting this from? Thin air?

it is part of due process. if the states offer bail to some they have to hold a hearing for all. the idea that we are considered innocent until proved guilty. Bail my not be required by the Constitution but again under the 14th and under the equal protection clause.

Habeus corpus means produce the body, it has nothing to do with bail.

So they can hold anyone accused of any crime until trial with out due process?

14th Amendment:

Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

LIBERTY: to I do not know? GO HOME? that means that other than a limited holding time 72 hours or so... they have to have some form of due process to hold them. in the case of a person charged with a crime, that is typicaly a bail hearing or some other process.


Living with a disability is not the Wurst thing in the word: Knowingly Mocking someone with one is far Wurst!.
Reply #395 posted 07/06/12 8:15am

SUPRMAN

OnlyNDaUsa said:

SUPRMAN said:

Where does either mention bail? Whre are you getting this from? Thin air?

it is part of due process. if the states offer bail to some they have to hold a hearing for all. the idea that we are considered innocent until proved guilty. Bail my not be required by the Constitution but again under the 14th and under the equal protection clause.

Please show me something, anything, anywhere that makes your statement true.

Bail is NOT a part of due process. You keep saying that but fail to offer any legal support for that statement.

Bail does not have to be offered to all. What law says that?

If it not required by the Constitution, how is it required by parts of the Constitution where it is not even mentioned? Makes no sense.


Habeus corpus means produce the body, it has nothing to do with bail.

So they can hold anyone accused of any crime until trial with out due process?

Again, bail has nothing to do with due process. You cannot be held and not charged, that is what habeus corpus means. You can be charged and held indefinitely. Even prisoners at Guantanamo who are being tried in civilian court have not been and will never be offered bail and guess what? Not one of their attorneys has sued to have a bond hearing. Ask them why.

14th Amendment:

Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

LIBERTY: to I do not know? GO HOME? that means that other than a limited holding time 72 hours or so... they have to have some form of due process to hold them. in the case of a person charged with a crime, that is typicaly a bail hearing or some other process.

No- it is not typically a bail hearing. It is an arraignment where the charges are read to you and you acknowledge that you know why you are being held.

Again, due process is only operative after you are charged. Being arrested does not invoke due process.

Only, you don't know what you are talking about. Please research due process and bail.


[Edited 7/6/12 8:15am]

I don't want you to think like me. I just want you to think.
Reply #396 posted 07/06/12 8:21am

Musicslave

OnlyNDaUsa said:

Musicslave said:

I was pointing out that the judge did have that Florida Statue available to him if he chose to use it. He didn't. In spite of his distrust of the defendant and even citing the fact that he thought that GZ was a flight risk and conspired to bounce with his passport and cash, he ultimately set bond. So, you're wrong in saying that Judge Lester could not legally deny him bond until trial. He could have legally, but he just chose not to. End of story.

I did not say that. end of story

Oh "To suggest he not have a bail my very well be a violation of the law."

that was a poorly writ en: what Iwas getting at his to not allow him a hearing and not consider it would be a violation of due process...

[Edited 7/6/12 7:15am]

So you concede that your original statement was wrong?

Reply #397 posted 07/06/12 8:31am

OnlyNDaUsa

due process is not just after you are arrested. you are wrong. once a state offers a process for bail then under the equal protection clause the state has to as a matter of federal law offer it to all. Now they can have some crimes that bail is denied (such as CA and double murder)... but still the process in place has to be followed. That is part of due process. In order to hold you for more than 72ish hours they have to convince a judge to let them.

but due process is much more than just crimes... one would be traffic tickets. you have the right to fight it in court.

Living with a disability is not the Wurst thing in the word: Knowingly Mocking someone with one is far Wurst!.
Reply #398 posted 07/06/12 12:50pm

Musicslave

http://abcnews.go.com/US/...d=16727196

George Zimmerman Out of Jail on $1 Million Bond

George Zimmerman walked out of jail on $1 million bond today to await his trial on charges of killing 17-year-old Trayvon Martin.

Dressed in a gray suit covering a bullet-proof vest, Zimmerman walked out of Seminole County Correctional Facility just before 3 p.m., flanked by a body guard and an unknown man.

He made no comment to reporters as he climbed into a waiting SUV.

Zimmerman, who is accused of second degree murder in the shooting death of the unarmed teen, used money donated by supporters to pay a portion of the bond.

Reply #399 posted 07/06/12 1:05pm

prittypriss

Due Process as it relates to "Liberty"

Liberty Interests

Liberty interests, like property interests, can be divided into two types. One kind is fundamental liberty interests. Fundamental liberty interests are those that are sufficiently well-recognized that they are protected regardless of how they are defined by state law. Free speech, voting, privacy and other interests that are protected explicitly or implicitly by the Constitution thus trigger a hearing requirement. Fundamental liberty interests also include significant losses of "liberty" as that term is commonly understood. Thus, for instance, a person in the general citizenry could not be committed to a mental hospital against his or her will without some sort of hearing to determine whether he or she meets the standards for commitment.

The other type is non-fundamental – or, as they are sometimes called, "state-created" – liberty interests. These liberty interests take their definition from state law. In this regard, non-fundamental liberty interests closely resemble property interests. In order for a person to successfully assert that he has a non-fundamental liberty interest, he or she must be able to point to some statute, regulation, contract or other source of law that creates an entitlement. Non-fundamental liberty interests differ from property interests only in that liberty interests lack a clear monetary value, while property interests have a clear monetary value.

One context in which claims of liberty interests are often raised is prison. Inmates – pointing to prison regulations, handbooks and the like – regularly argue that a loss of a privilege is a liberty deprivation that triggers a due process right to a hearing. In Sandin v. Conner, [515 US 472 (1995)], however, the United States Supreme Court ruled that an inmate can successfully raise such a due process claim only if he or she can show that the loss of the privilege is an "atypical and significant hardship." In the Sandin case, the Supreme Court held that an inmate's transfer to disciplinary segregation was not such a hardship and that the inmate had not been deprived of due process when the prison transferred him without first conducting a hearing.

Another special context in which liberty interests are raised in administrative matters is reputational injuries. The United States Supreme Court has held that a person does not have a liberty interest in his or her reputation as such. But, an injury to reputation plus some other significant negative consequence is a loss of liberty that triggers due process. Often, this is referred to as the "stigma plus" test: if some governmental action causes a person stigma plus some other negative consequence, that person has suffered a deprivation of liberty.

For example, in Miller v. DeBuono, [90 NY2d 783 (1997)], a nurse's aide was accused of hitting one of her patients. Under state law, her name was to be placed on a registry maintained by a state agency for the purpose of identifying abusers. The New York Court of Appeals held that the aide had a liberty interest at stake. Placement of her name in the registry called into question her reputation plus it had the effect of severely limiting her employment opportunities, as the registry was publicly-available. Because she had a liberty interest at stake, her due process rights were triggered, and the court ruled that she should have received extensive procedural protections before being placed on the registry.

As with property interests, the question of whether a party has a liberty interest can turn on very narrow factual inquiries. In close cases it is probably best to assume that the private party has a liberty interest and thus that due process principles apply.

"I gave my life to become the person I am right now. Was it worth it?" ~ Richard Bach

https://www.jewelryincand..._and_scene
Reply #400 posted 07/06/12 1:10pm

OnlyNDaUsa

Musicslave said:

http://abcnews.go.com/US/...d=16727196

George Zimmerman Out of Jail on $1 Million Bond

George Zimmerman walked out of jail on $1 million bond today to await his trial on charges of killing 17-year-old Trayvon Martin.

Dressed in a gray suit covering a bullet-proof vest, Zimmerman walked out of Seminole County Correctional Facility just before 3 p.m., flanked by a body guard and an unknown man.

He made no comment to reporters as he climbed into a waiting SUV.

Zimmerman, who is accused of second degree murder in the shooting death of the unarmed teen, used money donated by supporters to pay a portion of the bond.

seems I was correct. no apologies needed.

Living with a disability is not the Wurst thing in the word: Knowingly Mocking someone with one is far Wurst!.
Reply #401 posted 07/06/12 1:11pm

prittypriss

OnlyNDaUsa said:

due process is not just after you are arrested. you are wrong. once a state offers a process for bail then under the equal protection clause the state has to as a matter of federal law offer it to all. Now they can have some crimes that bail is denied (such as CA and double murder)... but still the process in place has to be followed. That is part of due process. In order to hold you for more than 72ish hours they have to convince a judge to let them.

but due process is much more than just crimes... one would be traffic tickets. you have the right to fight it in court.

He was not denied bail. He was released on bail. However, he committed a felony by not disclosing his assetts in detail and honestly. So he was not denied due process, whatsoever. He was given the option of bail, he lied, and he had the bail revoked and another court procedure was held to determine whether bail would be reinstated. The judge was legally able to deny a second bail to Zimmerman if he had chosen to do so. There was no denial of due process.

"I gave my life to become the person I am right now. Was it worth it?" ~ Richard Bach

https://www.jewelryincand..._and_scene
Reply #402 posted 07/06/12 1:26pm

OnlyNDaUsa

prittypriss said:

OnlyNDaUsa said:

due process is not just after you are arrested. you are wrong. once a state offers a process for bail then under the equal protection clause the state has to as a matter of federal law offer it to all. Now they can have some crimes that bail is denied (such as CA and double murder)... but still the process in place has to be followed. That is part of due process. In order to hold you for more than 72ish hours they have to convince a judge to let them.

but due process is much more than just crimes... one would be traffic tickets. you have the right to fight it in court.

He was not denied bail. He was released on bail. However, he committed a felony by not disclosing his assetts in detail and honestly. So he was not denied due process, whatsoever. He was given the option of bail, he lied, and he had the bail revoked and another court procedure was held to determine whether bail would be reinstated. The judge was legally able to deny a second bail to Zimmerman if he had chosen to do so. There was no denial of due process.

Huh? I think you may have missed something. Someone suggested he should not have been released. Some suggested he did not even have the right to a 2nd hearing. Some said that he could not be given credit for what he already paid. I said from the start: that he would get bail and that he may get credit for what he alrady paid. I have been proved to be correct. YET some that said he would not and could not who were proved incorrect seem to be obsessed with proving me wrong by some magic. But that is just refusal to accept being wrong.

(and I was dead on with obamacare too! I said it would be tossed bases on the commerce clasue argument but could be upheld as a tax)

Living with a disability is not the Wurst thing in the word: Knowingly Mocking someone with one is far Wurst!.
Reply #403 posted 07/06/12 2:08pm

Musicslave

OnlyNDaUsa said:

Musicslave said:

http://abcnews.go.com/US/...d=16727196

George Zimmerman Out of Jail on $1 Million Bond

George Zimmerman walked out of jail on $1 million bond today to await his trial on charges of killing 17-year-old Trayvon Martin.

Dressed in a gray suit covering a bullet-proof vest, Zimmerman walked out of Seminole County Correctional Facility just before 3 p.m., flanked by a body guard and an unknown man.

He made no comment to reporters as he climbed into a waiting SUV.

Zimmerman, who is accused of second degree murder in the shooting death of the unarmed teen, used money donated by supporters to pay a portion of the bond.

seems I was correct. no apologies needed.

What are you talking about? confused Just yesterday I said, he'll "probably be out by this weekend." I also said that the judge may raise the bond amount significantly too but I'm not looking for a pat on the back from you on that one either. lol

Reply #404 posted 07/06/12 2:18pm

prittypriss

OnlyNDaUsa said:

prittypriss said:

He was not denied bail. He was released on bail. However, he committed a felony by not disclosing his assetts in detail and honestly. So he was not denied due process, whatsoever. He was given the option of bail, he lied, and he had the bail revoked and another court procedure was held to determine whether bail would be reinstated. The judge was legally able to deny a second bail to Zimmerman if he had chosen to do so. There was no denial of due process.

Huh? I think you may have missed something. Someone suggested he should not have been released. Some suggested he did not even have the right to a 2nd hearing. Some said that he could not be given credit for what he already paid. I said from the start: that he would get bail and that he may get credit for what he alrady paid. I have been proved to be correct. YET some that said he would not and could not who were proved incorrect seem to be obsessed with proving me wrong by some magic. But that is just refusal to accept being wrong.

(and I was dead on with obamacare too! I said it would be tossed bases on the commerce clasue argument but could be upheld as a tax)

Saying he should not be released is not denying him due process. In fact, it is merely someone's opinion that he should not be released. As for the bail hearing a second time, he didn't have that right, however he was granted a second bail hearing. He had already had due process with the first bail hearing and ended up doing something to get that bail revoked. He had no legal right to a second bail hearing. As for being given credit for what he already paid, whatever. You were making the claim that if he did not receive a second bail hearing that he would then not be receiving due process. That is what I was commenting on. He was not denied due process after the first bail hearing. The judge "granted" him a second bail hearing but if he had denied it, he would not have been in violation of due process.

"I gave my life to become the person I am right now. Was it worth it?" ~ Richard Bach

https://www.jewelryincand..._and_scene
Reply #405 posted 07/06/12 2:21pm

2elijah

Musicslave said:

OnlyNDaUsa said:

seems I was correct. no apologies needed.

What are you talking about? confused Just yesterday I said, he'll "probably be out by this weekend." I also said that the judge may raise the bond amount significantly too but I'm not looking for a pat on the back from you on that one either. lol

Released from jail or not, that piece of sh*t will never be free of that murder. He created that situation and he will reap what he sowed. He killed an innocent human being who was minding his business on his way back home, and GZ allowed his racist mindset to be the reason behind what he started. I gather he will be losing more sleep because he knows damn well he could have avoided that child's death.

Sooner or later his lies will catch up with him, it's just a matter of time.popcorn

[Edited 7/6/12 14:27pm]

Reply #406 posted 07/06/12 3:16pm

OnlyNDaUsa

Musicslave said:

OnlyNDaUsa said:

seems I was correct. no apologies needed.

What are you talking about? confused Just yesterday I said, he'll "probably be out by this weekend." I also said that the judge may raise the bond amount significantly too but I'm not looking for a pat on the back from you on that one either. lol

apologies i mean in general... i said when his first bail was revoked that he would get a new one. some said i was wrong.

I did not intend to direct that at you... again i apologise.

Living with a disability is not the Wurst thing in the word: Knowingly Mocking someone with one is far Wurst!.
Reply #407 posted 07/06/12 3:26pm

OnlyNDaUsa

prittypriss said:

Saying he should not be released is not denying him due process. In fact, it is merely someone's opinion that he should not be released. As for the bail hearing a second time, he didn't have that right, however he was granted a second bail hearing. He had already had due process with the first bail hearing and ended up doing something to get that bail revoked. He had no legal right to a second bail hearing. As for being given credit for what he already paid, whatever. You were making the claim that if he did not receive a second bail hearing that he would then not be receiving due process. That is what I was commenting on. He was not denied due process after the first bail hearing. The judge "granted" him a second bail hearing but if he had denied it, he would not have been in violation of due process.

again I was not being clear, i was trying to say that not giving him a new hearing would be a violation of his rights... i agree that is not what i SAID...but it was what was in my head. I think he had every right to a 2nd hearing. I could be wrong. I do not think so. I think the law says that once it is revoked that the he might be denied an amended bail amount. The law SAYS "The failure to comply with the provisions of paragraph (a) may result in the revocation or modification of bail."

That sounds to me like a new bail is to be considered. Unless you can provide some other law that says once revoked than an accused can be denied a hearing I will assume it to be required. if for no other reason to address the legitimacy of the revocation. Now you can argue that happend when he first truned himself back in... but I will just say that seems more like an arranment.

either way he was granted a hearing and a new bail and is out. So other than the guess that he had not right to seek a new bail I was correct so far.

Living with a disability is not the Wurst thing in the word: Knowingly Mocking someone with one is far Wurst!.
Reply #408 posted 07/06/12 3:31pm

OnlyNDaUsa

2elijah said:

Musicslave said:

What are you talking about? confused Just yesterday I said, he'll "probably be out by this weekend." I also said that the judge may raise the bond amount significantly too but I'm not looking for a pat on the back from you on that one either. lol

Released from jail or not, that piece of sh*t will never be free of that murder. He created that situation and he will reap what he sowed. He killed an innocent human being who was minding his business on his way back home, and GZ allowed his racist mindset to be the reason behind what he started. I gather he will be losing more sleep because he knows damn well he could have avoided that child's death.

Sooner or later his lies will catch up with him, it's just a matter of time.popcorn

[Edited 7/6/12 14:27pm]

other than the total assumption of any racial motive, i agree. I have said from early on that i think he committed a crime. I called it "criminally negligent homicide" some know it all attacked over it... i say well it will be whatever the state has that is close to that but under 2nd degree murder. if there is any plea deal it will be down to even a lower charge. I predict he will SERVE less than 5 years.

Living with a disability is not the Wurst thing in the word: Knowingly Mocking someone with one is far Wurst!.
Reply #409 posted 07/06/12 3:38pm

free2bfreeda

2elijah said:

Musicslave said:

What are you talking about? confused Just yesterday I said, he'll "probably be out by this weekend." I also said that the judge may raise the bond amount significantly too but I'm not looking for a pat on the back from you on that one either. lol

Released from jail or not, that piece of sh*t will never be free of that murder. He created that situation and he will reap what he sowed. He killed an innocent human being who was minding his business on his way back home, and GZ allowed his racist mindset to be the reason behind what he started. I gather he will be losing more sleep because he knows damn well he could have avoided that child's death.

Sooner or later his lies will catch up with him, it's just a matter of time.popcorn

[Edited 7/6/12 14:27pm]

nod

“There are wrongs which even the grave does not bury.”
Harriet Ann Jacobs

one day a child hugged the earth & whispered 2 her,"I wish people would realize every x a bomb is launched & hits ur surface, it's like a major injury 2 u." i know war hurts u. :" the earth rumbled softly n reply, then cried a massive storm(c)
Reply #410 posted 07/06/12 3:42pm

babynoz

I did mean to imply the court could order the bailbonds company to accept those terms, More like the court would order the bond as paid to be held until the new hearing was held and a new judgment rendered. I am not sure how it all works but I suspected--correctly--that it could be done such that he would not have to pay the full 10% of the new amount. You can try to spin what i said all you like, even if I did say the court could do it... so what? Still as I said it seems he will only have to pay the fees on the difference--thus getting full credit for what he has already paid.

That's why I asked if you thought the bondsman wouldn't require the collateral, so it does have something to do with a statement YOU made. It's a simple discussion, no need to act like you're the one on trial.

I was speaking about the legal aspects. It has to do if/when he gets out and how much he has to pay. But it has nothing to do with the legal issue of him being granted bond. As far as what he will have to do to get the loan that is a private matter. (not personal but between him and that company) I doubt he is much of a flight risk, where can he go?


Exactly...you don't know how it works, but you're babbling again.

Regardless, he's posted bond, and we will see what the furture holds, (this is Flori-duh, after all) so nothing surprises me.

And you messed up the quoting again, razz

"Success has a great tendency to conceal and throw a veil over the evil of men"....Demosthenes
Reply #411 posted 07/06/12 3:47pm

babynoz

DiminutiveRocker said:

babynoz said:

O'Mara is already begging for more money...

http://www.clickorlando.c...index.html

rolleyes the defense would not even be in this predicament if GZ & wife had not purposely misled the court in the first place and destroyed GZ's credibilty.

Essentially begging the public for money... I've lost respect for O'Mara.

Well it worked and he's out already...I'm sure O'Mara won't be strapped for cash anytime soon either.

"Success has a great tendency to conceal and throw a veil over the evil of men"....Demosthenes
Reply #412 posted 07/06/12 4:55pm

OnlyNDaUsa

babynoz said:

I was speaking about the legal aspects. It has to do if/when he gets out and how much he has to pay. But it has nothing to do with the legal issue of him being granted bond. As far as what he will have to do to get the loan that is a private matter. (not personal but between him and that company) I doubt he is much of a flight risk, where can he go?


Exactly...you don't know how it works, but you're babbling again.

Regardless, he's posted bond, and we will see what the furture holds, (this is Flori-duh, after all) so nothing surprises me.

And you messed up the quoting again, razz

yet my 'babbling' was far more accurate in predicting what has come to pass that some that used all sorts of sources and links and all that... so call it babbling if you like: but remember it was spot on.

Living with a disability is not the Wurst thing in the word: Knowingly Mocking someone with one is far Wurst!.
Reply #413 posted 07/06/12 4:57pm

OnlyNDaUsa

babynoz said:

DiminutiveRocker said:

rolleyes the defense would not even be in this predicament if GZ & wife had not purposely misled the court in the first place and destroyed GZ's credibilty.

Essentially begging the public for money... I've lost respect for O'Mara.

Well it worked and he's out already...I'm sure O'Mara won't be strapped for cash anytime soon either.

one report said they already got 20K more in donations since yesterday... so that means they spent about 1/3 of what they had in the account.

Living with a disability is not the Wurst thing in the word: Knowingly Mocking someone with one is far Wurst!.
Reply #414 posted 07/06/12 5:09pm

2elijah

free2bfreeda said:

2elijah said:

Released from jail or not, that piece of sh*t will never be free of that murder. He created that situation and he will reap what he sowed. He killed an innocent human being who was minding his business on his way back home, and GZ allowed his racist mindset to be the reason behind what he started. I gather he will be losing more sleep because he knows damn well he could have avoided that child's death.

Sooner or later his lies will catch up with him, it's just a matter of time.popcorn

[Edited 7/6/12 14:27pm]

nod

“There are wrongs which even the grave does not bury.”
Harriet Ann Jacobs

That quote speaks volumes. Life has a funny way of reminding people of their wrongs. That's when Karma shows up without an invitation because it doesn't need one. It could be years from now, but it's always on time. When you sit back and take a look at the big picture and see how TM's death could have been avoided, it's disgusting that some idiot wanna-be-sheriff's actions, caused this young man's death. All he did was go out and buy a bag of skittles and iced tea, and who knew some psycho would end up following/pursuing him, when he was committing no crime. If GZ gets off, it will open the doors for others to use the same excuse, and use the SYG law to get over.

I'm more convinced now that whatever physical confrontation they had, that when the fight was eventually over, TM then proceeded to walk away, but they were still having words, and when TM turned to face GZ, then that's when GZ seized the opportunity to shoot TM. That in my opinion, answers why there was no blood from TM on GZ, because they had to be standing a few feet away from one another when GZ shot TM.

Also, when one of the witnesses saw GZ straddled on TM's back, that's probably when he went to check if TM was still alive after he shot him. That could be the explanation as to why there was no blood on GZ. Had he shot TM when he claimed TM was on top of him, and had him in a choke hold, then a whole lot of blood would have splattered all over GZ, but there wasn't any. So GZ had to shoot TM a few feet away. He knew he had already lost the fight, and if more words were exchanged between the two, after the fight, then I believe that is when GZ made the choice of using his gun to settle the matter. It also proves he had time to make a conscious decision not to shoot. Even if he had pulled out the gun to threaten TM, instead of actually shooting him, then he still had time to decide not to shoot to kill.

I just don't know how GZ could sleep at night knowing his ass isn't telling the truth about what really went down during their confrontation. The whole incident has too many loopholes, and the biggest one is why wasn't there any of TM's blood on GZ if he claims TM was choking him and he was near death, and only had seconds to decide to use his gun as a defense.

There's too many pieces to the puzzle of GZ's account of the confrontation missing.

[Edited 7/6/12 17:15pm]

Reply #415 posted 07/06/12 5:32pm

DiminutiveRocker

babynoz said:

DiminutiveRocker said:

rolleyes the defense would not even be in this predicament if GZ & wife had not purposely misled the court in the first place and destroyed GZ's credibilty.

Essentially begging the public for money... I've lost respect for O'Mara.

Well it worked and he's out already...I'm sure O'Mara won't be strapped for cash anytime soon either.

I think even though we all hoped the judge would keep GZ in jail till the trial (if there is one) - it was likely that he would be out again. The first time he posted bond he went into hiding (out of state?), but the judge said this time he cannot leave Seminole County and he'll have an electronic device strapped on as well. He'll be on a shorter leash, for sure.

And... who are these idiots sending him money anyway?

wacky

[Edited 7/6/12 17:34pm]

Consider the rights of others before your own feelings, and the feelings of others before your own rights.
~ John Wooden
Reply #416 posted 07/06/12 6:13pm

SUPRMAN

OnlyNDaUsa said:

due process is not just after you are arrested. you are wrong. once a state offers a process for bail then under the equal protection clause the state has to as a matter of federal law offer it to all. Now they can have some crimes that bail is denied (such as CA and double murder)... but still the process in place has to be followed. That is part of due process. In order to hold you for more than 72ish hours they have to convince a judge to let them.

but due process is much more than just crimes... one would be traffic tickets. you have the right to fight it in court.

For criminal due process, yes you need to be in custody first, such as GZ.

That there is due process regarding government action in general will not involve bail.

Fighting a traffic ticket in court is due process? How were you deprived of life, liberty or property by being issued a ticket? (Well there is the fine, and I guess you could broaden due process to include fighting a ticket, though it's hard to believe a jurisdiction would prevent you from fighting a ticket.)

You are moving the goalpost if you are now arguing that about due process outside of the criminal process.

Once a state offers a process for bail it has to be offered to all?!! No it does not. The process merely has to be applied equally to all, not offered to all.

I was wrong regarding access to bail.

But you couldn't show me I was wrong which is the same point I was trying to make in the other thread. It would be more helpful to factually someone why they are wrong, so they can learn.

Strange that I had to show you I was wrong. You should have been capable.

Under current law, a defendant has an absolute right to bail if the custody time limits have expired and otherwise ordinarily a right to bail unless there is sufficient reason not to grant it,

Any person accused of committing a crime is presumed innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. Therefore a person charged with a crime, should not be denied freedom unless there is a good reason.

The main reasons for refusing bail are that the defendant is accused of an imprisonable offence and there are substantial grounds for believing that the defendant would:

  1. abscond, or
  2. commit further offences whilst on bail, or
  3. interfere with witnesses.

The court should take into account:

  1. the nature and seriousness of the offence or default (and the probable method of dealing with the defendant for it),
  2. the character, antecedents, associations and community ties of the defendant,
  3. the defendant's bail record, and
  4. the strength of the evidence.

The court may also refuse bail:

  • for the defendant's own protection;
  • where the defendant is already serving a custodial sentence for another offence;
  • where the court is satisfied that it has not been practicable to obtain sufficient information;
  • where the defendant has already absconded in the present proceedings;
  • where the defendant has been convicted but the court is awaiting a pre-sentence report, other report or inquiry and it would be impracticable to complete the inquiries or make the report without keeping the defendant in custody;
  • where the defendant is charged with a non-imprisonable offence, has already been released on bail for the offence with which he is now accused, and has been arrested for absconding or breaching bail.

Where the accused has previous convictions for certain homicide or sexual offences, the burden of proof is on the defendant to rebut a presumption against bail.



Read more: http://wiki.answers.com/Q...z1ztXDKEbR

[Edited 7/6/12 18:24pm]

I don't want you to think like me. I just want you to think.
Reply #417 posted 07/06/12 6:15pm

SUPRMAN

OnlyNDaUsa said:

babynoz said:

Well it worked and he's out already...I'm sure O'Mara won't be strapped for cash anytime soon either.

one report said they already got 20K more in donations since yesterday... so that means they spent about 1/3 of what they had in the account.

Something's missing here. How do you know they spent about 1/3 of what they had?

What they are taking in won't tell you that.

I don't want you to think like me. I just want you to think.
Reply #418 posted 07/06/12 6:22pm

SUPRMAN

OnlyNDaUsa said:

prittypriss said:

Saying he should not be released is not denying him due process. In fact, it is merely someone's opinion that he should not be released. As for the bail hearing a second time, he didn't have that right, however he was granted a second bail hearing. He had already had due process with the first bail hearing and ended up doing something to get that bail revoked. He had no legal right to a second bail hearing. As for being given credit for what he already paid, whatever. You were making the claim that if he did not receive a second bail hearing that he would then not be receiving due process. That is what I was commenting on. He was not denied due process after the first bail hearing. The judge "granted" him a second bail hearing but if he had denied it, he would not have been in violation of due process.

again I was not being clear, i was trying to say that not giving him a new hearing would be a violation of his rights... i agree that is not what i SAID...but it was what was in my head. I think he had every right to a 2nd hearing. I could be wrong. I do not think so. I think the law says that once it is revoked that the he might be denied an amended bail amount. The law SAYS "The failure to comply with the provisions of paragraph (a) may result in the revocation or modification of bail."

That sounds to me like a new bail is to be considered. Unless you can provide some other law that says once revoked than an accused can be denied a hearing I will assume it to be required. if for no other reason to address the legitimacy of the revocation. Now you can argue that happend when he first truned himself back in... but I will just say that seems more like an arranment.

either way he was granted a hearing and a new bail and is out. So other than the guess that he had not right to seek a new bail I was correct so far.

You are so full of yourself for being correct, yet you can't admit ever being wrong. Interesting.

So do you think he'll be acquitted, or plea bargain to second degree.

I don't think even you believe he'll take the stand to try for a self-defense acquittal.

I don't want you to think like me. I just want you to think.
Reply #419 posted 07/06/12 7:39pm

OnlyNDaUsa

SUPRMAN said:

OnlyNDaUsa said:

one report said they already got 20K more in donations since yesterday... so that means they spent about 1/3 of what they had in the account.

Something's missing here. How do you know they spent about 1/3 of what they had?

What they are taking in won't tell you that.

the fund had $211K and they got another $20K and 85k-20k= 65k and that is about 1/3 of 211K... *yes i excluded what they owe.


Living with a disability is not the Wurst thing in the word: Knowingly Mocking someone with one is far Wurst!.
Reply #420 posted 07/06/12 7:44pm

OnlyNDaUsa

SUPRMAN said:

You are so full of yourself for being correct, yet you can't admit ever being wrong. Interesting.

wrong about what?

So do you think he'll be acquitted, or plea bargain to second degree.

I think the charges will be lowered to something under 2nd degree but it will not necessarily take a plea. I think he will do 5 years or less. the case for 2nd seems weak weak weak

I don't think even you believe he'll take the stand to try for a self-defense acquittal.

I do not think he will need to take the stand. I know you posted little links but I do not believe that is the only way to go with that defence. you do do with innuendo

Living with a disability is not the Wurst thing in the word: Knowingly Mocking someone with one is far Wurst!.
Reply #421 posted 07/06/12 7:50pm

OnlyNDaUsa

SUPRMAN said:

For criminal due process, yes you need to be in custody first, such as GZ.

oh you are changing it to criminal cases now? well again not true: you can be issued a summons ticket on a criminal charge and you get due process but were never in custody.

Living with a disability is not the Wurst thing in the word: Knowingly Mocking someone with one is far Wurst!.
Reply #422 posted 07/06/12 8:01pm

OnlyNDaUsa

SUPRMAN said:

I was wrong regarding access to bail.

But you couldn't show me I was wrong which is the same point I was trying to make in the other thread. It would be more helpful to factually someone why they are wrong, so they can learn.

Strange that I had to show you I was wrong. You should have been capable.

I do not rely on what other people say. Walls of text or links are cool if you do not know what you are talking about... but my record here and in obama care is better than yours and all your little links. it is funny you say 'well you were right but you did not have a link..." well you were wrong and had all kinds of links... so what does that tell you about the value of links?

Living with a disability is not the Wurst thing in the word: Knowingly Mocking someone with one is far Wurst!.
Reply #423 posted 07/06/12 9:40pm

SUPRMAN

OnlyNDaUsa said:

SUPRMAN said:

You are so full of yourself for being correct, yet you can't admit ever being wrong. Interesting.

wrong about what?

So do you think he'll be acquitted, or plea bargain to second degree.

I think the charges will be lowered to something under 2nd degree but it will not necessarily take a plea. I think he will do 5 years or less. the case for 2nd seems weak weak weak

I don't think even you believe he'll take the stand to try for a self-defense acquittal.

I do not think he will need to take the stand. I know you posted little links but I do not believe that is the only way to go with that defence. you do do with innuendo

The lines on that innuendo will be drawn before the trial starts. The defense can argue self-defense but the jury will not be given a self-defense instruction unless he takes the stand, which means, despite whatever the defense says, they cannot call it self-defense and acquit him.

I guess you don't read what I post. I posted an essay with excerpts from Florida law. Feel free to post an upgrade but I know how that goes with you . . . .

I don't want you to think like me. I just want you to think.
Reply #424 posted 07/06/12 9:47pm

SUPRMAN

OnlyNDaUsa said:

SUPRMAN said:

You are so full of yourself for being correct, yet you can't admit ever being wrong. Interesting.

wrong about what?

So do you think he'll be acquitted, or plea bargain to second degree.

I think the charges will be lowered to something under 2nd degree but it will not necessarily take a plea. I think he will do 5 years or less. the case for 2nd seems weak weak weak

I don't think even you believe he'll take the stand to try for a self-defense acquittal.

I do not think he will need to take the stand. I know you posted little links but I do not believe that is the only way to go with that defence. you do do with innuendo

The judge commented that he thought the prosection had strong evidence. I'll believe the judge. He's probably seen more of the evidence than you have.

The judge writes that his considered several factors, most of which weighed against Zimmerman.

Among them, "this is a serious charge for which life may be imposed; the evidence against him is strong; he has been charged with one prior crime, for which he went through a pre-trial diversion program, and has had an injunction lodged against him" for domestic violence.

http://articles.orlandose...-zimmerman

I don't want you to think like me. I just want you to think.
Reply #425 posted 07/07/12 12:36pm

duccichucka

I am currently forming a posse whereby we ride upon Florida,

find George, scalp him and hang him up by his bootstraps, the

cocksucker.

An honest religious thinker is like a tightrope walker. He almost looks as though he were walking on nothing but air. His support is the slenderest imaginable. And yet it really is possible to walk on it.

~Wittgenstein
Reply #426 posted 07/07/12 1:38pm

SupaFunkyOrgangrinderSexy

duccichucka said:

I am currently forming a posse whereby we ride upon Florida,

find George, scalp him and hang him up by his bootstraps, the

cocksucker.

It may come to that. There is only so much injustice people can take before they start fighting back.

2010: Healing the Wounds of the Past.... http://prince.org/msg/8/325740
Reply #427 posted 07/07/12 9:32pm

OnlyNDaUsa

duccichucka said:

I am currently forming a posse whereby we ride upon Florida,

find George, scalp him and hang him up by his bootstraps, the

cocksucker.

intresting. how is that doing that not worst that what GZ did?

Living with a disability is not the Wurst thing in the word: Knowingly Mocking someone with one is far Wurst!.
Reply #428 posted 07/08/12 1:09pm

SupaFunkyOrgangrinderSexy

OnlyNDaUsa said:

duccichucka said:

I am currently forming a posse whereby we ride upon Florida,

find George, scalp him and hang him up by his bootstraps, the

cocksucker.

intresting. how is that doing that not worst that what GZ did?

Ironically, it's the same thing: Vigilantism.

2010: Healing the Wounds of the Past.... http://prince.org/msg/8/325740
Reply #429 posted 07/08/12 2:49pm

OnlyNDaUsa

SupaFunkyOrgangrinderSexy said:

OnlyNDaUsa said:

intresting. how is that doing that not worst that what GZ did?

Ironically, it's the same thing: Vigilantism.

is really the same thing? and is it any more just?

Living with a disability is not the Wurst thing in the word: Knowingly Mocking someone with one is far Wurst!.
Reply #430 posted 07/09/12 11:19am

SupaFunkyOrgangrinderSexy

OnlyNDaUsa said:

SupaFunkyOrgangrinderSexy said:

Ironically, it's the same thing: Vigilantism.

is really the same thing? and is it any more just?

Yes. Both are seeking justice outside the law. Neither is just. Ironic though.

2010: Healing the Wounds of the Past.... http://prince.org/msg/8/325740
Reply #431 posted 07/09/12 1:17pm

OnlyNDaUsa

SupaFunkyOrgangrinderSexy said:

OnlyNDaUsa said:

is really the same thing? and is it any more just?

Yes. Both are seeking justice outside the law. Neither is just. Ironic though.

the irony is people like duccichucka or Mikhail Muhammad want to take the law into their own hands and kill a person.

Living with a disability is not the Wurst thing in the word: Knowingly Mocking someone with one is far Wurst!.
Reply #432 posted 07/09/12 1:33pm

SupaFunkyOrgangrinderSexy

OnlyNDaUsa said:

SupaFunkyOrgangrinderSexy said:

Yes. Both are seeking justice outside the law. Neither is just. Ironic though.

the irony is people like duccichucka or Mikhail Muhammad want to take the law into their own hands and kill a person.

When there is no justice through the judicial system, it's human nature to want to exact it yourself.

2010: Healing the Wounds of the Past.... http://prince.org/msg/8/325740
Reply #433 posted 07/09/12 1:44pm

DiminutiveRocker

SupaFunkyOrgangrinderSexy said:

OnlyNDaUsa said:

the irony is people like duccichucka or Mikhail Muhammad want to take the law into their own hands and kill a person.

When there is no justice through the judicial system, it's human nature to want to exact it yourself.

Or... some just want to play cop and pursue whom they suspect is a criminal and end up causing an altercation whereby an unarmed NON-CRIMINAL minor gets shot and killed.

Sometimes situations like these, where an innocent life is taken needlessly, are what cause these vigilantes to come forth - which also not right nor just.

shrug

Consider the rights of others before your own feelings, and the feelings of others before your own rights.
~ John Wooden
Reply #434 posted 07/09/12 1:47pm

OnlyNDaUsa

SupaFunkyOrgangrinderSexy said:

OnlyNDaUsa said:

the irony is people like duccichucka or Mikhail Muhammad want to take the law into their own hands and kill a person.

When there is no justice through the judicial system, it's human nature to want to exact it yourself.

wanting to and calling for are kind of different things no?

it also ASSUMES that a not-guilty verdict MUST be wrong! Justice is the truth being found.

Again I believe he committed a crime. But I do not see how any rational person can just declare him guilty of murder, ignoring GZ's story AND suggest that if he is acquitted that he should be murdered is pretty sick stuff.

Living with a disability is not the Wurst thing in the word: Knowingly Mocking someone with one is far Wurst!.
Reply #435 posted 07/09/12 1:50pm

DiminutiveRocker

OnlyNDaUsa said:

SupaFunkyOrgangrinderSexy said:

When there is no justice through the judicial system, it's human nature to want to exact it yourself.

wanting to and calling for are kind of different things no?

it also ASSUMES that a not-guilty verdict MUST be wrong! Justice is the truth being found.

Again I believe he committed a crime. But I do not see how any rational person can just declare him guilty of murder, ignoring GZ's story AND suggest that if he is acquitted that he should be murdered is pretty sick stuff.

Of course it is.

Consider the rights of others before your own feelings, and the feelings of others before your own rights.
~ John Wooden
Reply #436 posted 07/09/12 1:51pm

OnlyNDaUsa

DiminutiveRocker said:

SupaFunkyOrgangrinderSexy said:

When there is no justice through the judicial system, it's human nature to want to exact it yourself.

Or... some just want to play cop and pursue whom they suspect is a criminal and end up causing an altercation whereby an unarmed NON-CRIMINAL minor gets shot and killed.

Sometimes situations like these, where an innocent life is taken needlessly, are what cause these vigilantes to come forth - which also not right nor just.

shrug

that is just as evil as what GZ did. If not more frankly. Going after GZ would require premeditation. It very well could be 1st degree murder and a Death Penalty case.

now if that risk is that important to someone, i can kind respect that to some extent. I know there are some situations in which I might take a similar risk and simular action.

Living with a disability is not the Wurst thing in the word: Knowingly Mocking someone with one is far Wurst!.
Reply #437 posted 07/09/12 1:53pm

OnlyNDaUsa

DiminutiveRocker said:

OnlyNDaUsa said:

wanting to and calling for are kind of different things no?

it also ASSUMES that a not-guilty verdict MUST be wrong! Justice is the truth being found.

Again I believe he committed a crime. But I do not see how any rational person can just declare him guilty of murder, ignoring GZ's story AND suggest that if he is acquitted that he should be murdered is pretty sick stuff.

Of course it is.

why did my sarcasm detector just explode? confused

Living with a disability is not the Wurst thing in the word: Knowingly Mocking someone with one is far Wurst!.
Reply #438 posted 07/09/12 1:54pm

DiminutiveRocker

OnlyNDaUsa said:

DiminutiveRocker said:

Or... some just want to play cop and pursue whom they suspect is a criminal and end up causing an altercation whereby an unarmed NON-CRIMINAL minor gets shot and killed.

Sometimes situations like these, where an innocent life is taken needlessly, are what cause these vigilantes to come forth - which also not right nor just.

shrug

that is just as evil as what GZ did. If not more frankly. Going after GZ would require premeditation. It very well could be 1st degree murder and a Death Penalty case.

now if that risk is that important to someone, i can kind respect that to some extent. I know there are some situations in which I might take a similar risk and simular action.

Yes, it is just as bad as GZ - if not worse. But some believe an eye for an eye and have already convicted him in their minds.

To what "risk" are you referring?

Consider the rights of others before your own feelings, and the feelings of others before your own rights.
~ John Wooden
Reply #439 posted 07/09/12 1:55pm

DiminutiveRocker

OnlyNDaUsa said:

DiminutiveRocker said:

Of course it is.

why did my sarcasm detector just explode? confused

Your detector is off - I was affirming what you said. neutral

Consider the rights of others before your own feelings, and the feelings of others before your own rights.
~ John Wooden
Reply #440 posted 07/09/12 2:02pm

OnlyNDaUsa

DiminutiveRocker said:

OnlyNDaUsa said:

that is just as evil as what GZ did. If not more frankly. Going after GZ would require premeditation. It very well could be 1st degree murder and a Death Penalty case.

now if that risk is that important to someone, i can kind respect that to some extent. I know there are some situations in which I might take a similar risk and simular action.

Yes, it is just as bad as GZ - if not worse. But some believe an eye for an eye and have already convicted him in their minds.

To what "risk" are you referring?

I say more because it takes planing. It takes time to go find him. Now GZ followed TM for a short time. But there is no real reason to assume that GZ meant to be seen by much less confront TM. To plan to go get GZ would be admission be a case of such prior goal of ending his life (and so not say scalping and hanging him upside down would not likely result in his death).

the RISK is getting caught, charged, convicted, and sentenced to life or maybe even death.

Living with a disability is not the Wurst thing in the word: Knowingly Mocking someone with one is far Wurst!.
Reply #441 posted 07/09/12 2:03pm

OnlyNDaUsa

DiminutiveRocker said:

OnlyNDaUsa said:

why did my sarcasm detector just explode? confused

Your detector is off - I was affirming what you said. neutral

maybe it was just shocked we agreed? wink

Living with a disability is not the Wurst thing in the word: Knowingly Mocking someone with one is far Wurst!.
Reply #442 posted 07/09/12 2:06pm

13cjk13

DiminutiveRocker said:

OnlyNDaUsa said:

why did my sarcasm detector just explode? confused

Your detector is off - I was affirming what you said. neutral

A good, developed sense of humor and the ability to use and recognize sarcasm are two things that are sorely missing on the conservative side, wouldn't you say? Just saying biggrin

Reply #443 posted 07/09/12 2:07pm

OnlyNDaUsa

13cjk13 said:

DiminutiveRocker said:

Your detector is off - I was affirming what you said. neutral

A good, developed sense of humor and the ability to use and recognize sarcasm are two things that are sorely missing on the conservative side, wouldn't you say? Just saying biggrin

not any more than members of any other group.

Living with a disability is not the Wurst thing in the word: Knowingly Mocking someone with one is far Wurst!.
Reply #444 posted 07/09/12 2:45pm

SupaFunkyOrgangrinderSexy

OnlyNDaUsa said:

SupaFunkyOrgangrinderSexy said:

When there is no justice through the judicial system, it's human nature to want to exact it yourself.

wanting to and calling for are kind of different things no?

it also ASSUMES that a not-guilty verdict MUST be wrong! Justice is the truth being found.

Again I believe he committed a crime. But I do not see how any rational person can just declare him guilty of murder, ignoring GZ's story AND suggest that if he is acquitted that he should be murdered is pretty sick stuff.

None of that would be happening if he had been spending all his time in jail waiting for his trial. It took the pressure of the nation just to have this looked into. He has ruined his own life and I hope he does the jail time he deserves.

2010: Healing the Wounds of the Past.... http://prince.org/msg/8/325740
Reply #445 posted 07/09/12 2:50pm

OnlyNDaUsa

SupaFunkyOrgangrinderSexy said:

None of that would be happening if he had been spending all his time in jail waiting for his trial. It took the pressure of the nation just to have this looked into. He has ruined his own life and I hope he does the jail time he deserves.

so you are mad that he is out on bail? so that is grounds for murder?

or that it may be a year or more before he get to trial? So that is grounds for his cold blooded first degree premeditated murder?

but only to save time and money? or to spare us the pressure or stress of a wait?

and you say "the jail time he deserves" what would that be?

Living with a disability is not the Wurst thing in the word: Knowingly Mocking someone with one is far Wurst!.
Reply #446 posted 07/09/12 3:04pm

SupaFunkyOrgangrinderSexy

OnlyNDaUsa said:

SupaFunkyOrgangrinderSexy said:

so you are mad that he is out on bail? so that is grounds for murder?

or that it may be a year or more before he get to trial? So that is grounds for his cold blooded first degree premeditated murder?

but only to save time and money? or to spare us the pressure or stress of a wait?

and you say "the jail time he deserves" what would that be?

He should be in jail period. This was no stand your ground. He provoked it. I hope he becomes the poster child that affects a change in these heinous laws.

2010: Healing the Wounds of the Past.... http://prince.org/msg/8/325740
Reply #447 posted 07/09/12 3:16pm

DiminutiveRocker

SupaFunkyOrgangrinderSexy said:

OnlyNDaUsa said:

so you are mad that he is out on bail? so that is grounds for murder?

or that it may be a year or more before he get to trial? So that is grounds for his cold blooded first degree premeditated murder?

but only to save time and money? or to spare us the pressure or stress of a wait?

and you say "the jail time he deserves" what would that be?

He should be in jail period. This was no stand your ground. He provoked it. I hope he becomes the poster child that affects a change in these heinous laws.

http://www.theonion.com/a...ien,28722/

According to The Onion.. he's back on neighborhood watch lol

Consider the rights of others before your own feelings, and the feelings of others before your own rights.
~ John Wooden
Reply #448 posted 07/09/12 3:22pm

DiminutiveRocker

OnlyNDaUsa said:

SupaFunkyOrgangrinderSexy said:

so you are mad that he is out on bail? so that is grounds for murder?

or that it may be a year or more before he get to trial? So that is grounds for his cold blooded first degree premeditated murder?

but only to save time and money? or to spare us the pressure or stress of a wait?

and you say "the jail time he deserves" what would that be?

it costs time and money to go back to court and have ANOTHER bond hearing for GZ.

Um... other than the remark made by Ducchi... no one else has agreed that vigilantism is a good thing - whether carried out by an over-zealous neighborhood watchmen or an angry crowd who want to lynch.

What I believe is being expressed here is that it appears that GZ inaccuratley profiles and as a result of this fuck up and a boy is dead - and therefore he should pay a price for that fatal mistake.

It's all opinion of course, the courts will decide what his fate will be.

Consider the rights of others before your own feelings, and the feelings of others before your own rights.
~ John Wooden
Reply #449 posted 07/09/12 3:27pm

OnlyNDaUsa

SupaFunkyOrgangrinderSexy said:

He should be in jail period.

so no bail. what about how long do you think he should serve in prison once convicted? How many years?

This was no stand your ground.

I tend to agree

He provoked it.

Maybe. My thing is this: since he chose to have a gun he took the responsibility that he would use it wisely. If someone is in house at 3 am and I shoot at him and miss and hit the lady sleeping in her bed next door... i would think that would be on me. If I shoot and kill the person and it happens to be an innocent mistake on his part... i am not. even if he is 17.

I hope he becomes the poster child that affects a change in these heinous laws.

but wait! you just said this was not a case of SYG? now you want this non-example to be used to end its correct use? Or do you really thing that no person can ever used deadly force to defend their own life?

Living with a disability is not the Wurst thing in the word: Knowingly Mocking someone with one is far Wurst!.
Reply #450 posted 07/09/12 3:31pm

Neophyte

DiminutiveRocker said:

SupaFunkyOrgangrinderSexy said:

He should be in jail period. This was no stand your ground. He provoked it. I hope he becomes the poster child that affects a change in these heinous laws.

http://www.theonion.com/a...ien,28722/

According to The Onion.. he's back on neighborhood watch lol

eek

If he actually said that "one slight setback" "one crummy day" this man needs to be behind bars for life cause he is a psychopath. How can you kill someone and liken it to a slight setback?

Sick twisted bastard!

"I know that living with u baby, was sometimes hard...but I'm willing 2 give it another try.
Cause nothing compares....nothing compares 2 u!"
Reply #451 posted 07/09/12 3:31pm

OnlyNDaUsa

DiminutiveRocker said:

it costs time and money to go back to court and have ANOTHER bond hearing for GZ.

so what?

Um... other than the remark made by Ducchi... no one else has agreed that vigilantism is a good thing - whether carried out by an over-zealous neighborhood watchmen or an angry crowd who want to lynch.

I understand that emotional reaction, as long as you agree it is at least as bad as what GZ did in terms of a crime I am okay.

What I believe is being expressed here is that it appears that GZ inaccuratley profiles and as a result of this fuck up and a boy is dead - and therefore he should pay a price for that fatal mistake.

Yeah he messed up, i agree and have from the start.

It's all opinion of course, the courts will decide what his fate will be.

So how much time do you think he should serve?

Living with a disability is not the Wurst thing in the word: Knowingly Mocking someone with one is far Wurst!.
Reply #452 posted 07/09/12 3:34pm

OnlyNDaUsa

Neophyte said:

DiminutiveRocker said:

http://www.theonion.com/a...ien,28722/

According to The Onion.. he's back on neighborhood watch lol

eek

If he actually said that "one slight setback" "one crummy day" this man needs to be behind bars for life cause he is a psychopath. How can you kill someone and liken it to a slight setback?

Sick twisted bastard!

at least he is back doing what he loves to do. until convicted i see no reason why one bad day on the job should keep him off that job... Only Naysayers Ignore One's Needs!

Living with a disability is not the Wurst thing in the word: Knowingly Mocking someone with one is far Wurst!.
Reply #453 posted 07/09/12 5:52pm

SUPRMAN

OnlyNDaUsa said:

DiminutiveRocker said:

Yes, it is just as bad as GZ - if not worse. But some believe an eye for an eye and have already convicted him in their minds.

To what "risk" are you referring?

I say more because it takes planing. It takes time to go find him. Now GZ followed TM for a short time. But there is no real reason to assume that GZ meant to be seen by much less confront TM. To plan to go get GZ would be admission be a case of such prior goal of ending his life (and so not say scalping and hanging him upside down would not likely result in his death).

the RISK is getting caught, charged, convicted, and sentenced to life or maybe even death.

It is beyond me why GZ is so exempt from premeditation. No one wants to believe that GZ could have premediated a murder and lied. Why not? He's as human as the rest of us and just as capable.

I believe GZ's actions were premeditated and based on using the law to escape prison. However, I cannot prove that as that evidence is between God and GZ. But c'mon, just as a human being, why can't people admit that GZ is just as capable as anyone of a premeditated act of murder and lying about it? I acknowledge however, just because he is capable, doesn't mean that's what he actually did.

I don't think we'll ever know this side of Heaven. GZ certainly isn't going to admit it even if he did do it.

I don't want you to think like me. I just want you to think.
Reply #454 posted 07/09/12 5:55pm

SUPRMAN

OnlyNDaUsa said:

13cjk13 said:

A good, developed sense of humor and the ability to use and recognize sarcasm are two things that are sorely missing on the conservative side, wouldn't you say? Just saying biggrin

not any more than members of any other group.

What is this statement based on? Presumably nothing?

(13cjk13's statement is an observation that is open to being disproven, so that statement doesn't get the response that your 'knowing' response triggers. She's suggesting, you seem to be all knowing without explaining why you would know.)

I don't want you to think like me. I just want you to think.
Reply #455 posted 07/09/12 5:58pm

SUPRMAN

Neophyte said:

DiminutiveRocker said:

http://www.theonion.com/a...ien,28722/

According to The Onion.. he's back on neighborhood watch lol

eek

If he actually said that "one slight setback" "one crummy day" this man needs to be behind bars for life cause he is a psychopath. How can you kill someone and liken it to a slight setback?

Sick twisted bastard!

It's The Onion. How are you getting mad?

I don't want you to think like me. I just want you to think.
Reply #456 posted 07/09/12 5:59pm

SUPRMAN

OnlyNDaUsa said:

Neophyte said:

eek

If he actually said that "one slight setback" "one crummy day" this man needs to be behind bars for life cause he is a psychopath. How can you kill someone and liken it to a slight setback?

Sick twisted bastard!

at least he is back doing what he loves to do. until convicted i see no reason why one bad day on the job should keep him off that job... Only Naysayers Ignore One's Needs!

So if someone goes 'postal,' until convicted, there's no reason they shouldn't be allowed to return to work? How does that work?

You do realize that piece is from 'The Onion?'

I don't want you to think like me. I just want you to think.
Reply #457 posted 07/09/12 6:11pm

OnlyNDaUsa

SUPRMAN said:

OnlyNDaUsa said:

at least he is back doing what he loves to do. until convicted i see no reason why one bad day on the job should keep him off that job... Only Naysayers Ignore One's Needs!

So if someone goes 'postal,' until convicted, there's no reason they shouldn't be allowed to return to work? How does that work?

You do realize that piece is from 'The Onion?'

see the last sentence of my post! razz

hint: first letters!

Living with a disability is not the Wurst thing in the word: Knowingly Mocking someone with one is far Wurst!.
Reply #458 posted 07/09/12 6:18pm

OnlyNDaUsa

SUPRMAN said:

OnlyNDaUsa said:

I say more because it takes planing. It takes time to go find him. Now GZ followed TM for a short time. But there is no real reason to assume that GZ meant to be seen by much less confront TM. To plan to go get GZ would be admission be a case of such prior goal of ending his life (and so not say scalping and hanging him upside down would not likely result in his death).

the RISK is getting caught, charged, convicted, and sentenced to life or maybe even death.

It is beyond me why GZ is so exempt from premeditation. No one wants to believe that GZ could have premediated a murder and lied. Why not? He's as human as the rest of us and just as capable.

He is not exempt, it would just be difficult to prove. The state is going to have a hard enough time proving 2nd degree murder much less the added burden of premeditation.

I believe GZ's actions were premeditated and based on using the law to escape prison.

that is nonsense. That is like saying "he plead not guilty so he must have done it"

However, I cannot prove that as that evidence is between God and GZ. But c'mon, just as a human being, why can't people admit that GZ is just as capable as anyone of a premeditated act of murder and lying about it? I acknowledge however, just because he is capable, doesn't mean that's what he actually did.

which is why we thankfully the burden of proof in on the state not on the defence.

I don't think we'll ever know this side of Heaven. GZ certainly isn't going to admit it even if he did do it.

not anytime soon anyway.

Living with a disability is not the Wurst thing in the word: Knowingly Mocking someone with one is far Wurst!.
Reply #459 posted 07/09/12 8:19pm

DiminutiveRocker

SUPRMAN said:

OnlyNDaUsa said:

not any more than members of any other group.

What is this statement based on? Presumably nothing?

(13cjk13's statement is an observation that is open to being disproven, so that statement doesn't get the response that your 'knowing' response triggers. She's suggesting, you seem to be all knowing without explaining why you would know.)

First of all 13cjk13 is a dude... and he was referring to Only's defensiveness.

Consider the rights of others before your own feelings, and the feelings of others before your own rights.
~ John Wooden
Reply #460 posted 07/09/12 8:29pm

DiminutiveRocker

OnlyNDaUsa said:

DiminutiveRocker said:

it costs time and money to go back to court and have ANOTHER bond hearing for GZ.

so what?

Um... other than the remark made by Ducchi... no one else has agreed that vigilantism is a good thing - whether carried out by an over-zealous neighborhood watchmen or an angry crowd who want to lynch.

I understand that emotional reaction, as long as you agree it is at least as bad as what GZ did in terms of a crime I am okay.

What I believe is being expressed here is that it appears that GZ inaccuratley profiles and as a result of this fuck up and a boy is dead - and therefore he should pay a price for that fatal mistake.

Yeah he messed up, i agree and have from the start.

It's all opinion of course, the courts will decide what his fate will be.

So how much time do you think he should serve?

GZ & wife's lies cost tax payer money for the return to court for another bond hearing in the wake of their lies - that's what.

I don't think anyone agrees w/ Ducchi's vigilante post. No argument here - but it was ironic.

It depends on what GZ might be convicted for - 2nd degree murder or manslaughter. When someone young like TM dies as a result of someone else's fatal and needless mistake... I would hope if he is found guilty the sentence would be BIG... I am sure nothing short of a life sentence would be enough to appease TM's parents. I cannot say how long he should serve - I am really not that familiar with Florida law.

Consider the rights of others before your own feelings, and the feelings of others before your own rights.
~ John Wooden
Reply #461 posted 07/09/12 8:35pm

OnlyNDaUsa

DiminutiveRocker said:

OnlyNDaUsa said:

GZ & wife's lies cost tax payer money for the return to court for another bond hearing in the wake of their lies - that's what.

that is a issue the state can take up with her.

I don't think anyone agrees w/ Ducchi's vigilante post. No argument here - but it was ironic.

I hope not.

It depends on what GZ might be convicted for - 2nd degree murder or manslaughter. When someone young like TM dies as a result of someone else's fatal and needless mistake... I would hope if he is found guilty the sentence would be BIG...

I think it should fit the facts of the crime. I am thinking he will serve no more that 5 years.

I am sure nothing short of a life sentence would be enough to appease TM's parents.

yeah i can understand that...

I cannot say how long he should serve - I am really not that familiar with Florida law.

I was asking what you think not what the law says.

Living with a disability is not the Wurst thing in the word: Knowingly Mocking someone with one is far Wurst!.
Reply #462 posted 07/09/12 10:52pm

SUPRMAN

OnlyNDaUsa said:

SUPRMAN said:

It is beyond me why GZ is so exempt from premeditation. No one wants to believe that GZ could have premediated a murder and lied. Why not? He's as human as the rest of us and just as capable.

He is not exempt, it would just be difficult to prove. The state is going to have a hard enough time proving 2nd degree murder much less the added burden of premeditation.

I believe GZ's actions were premeditated and based on using the law to escape prison.

that is nonsense. That is like saying "he plead not guilty so he must have done it"

That is not nonsense unless you can access GZ's thinking. It is an opinion that you disagree with.

Gas at $1 is nonsense.

However, I cannot prove that as that evidence is between God and GZ. But c'mon, just as a human being, why can't people admit that GZ is just as capable as anyone of a premeditated act of murder and lying about it? I acknowledge however, just because he is capable, doesn't mean that's what he actually did.

which is why we thankfully the burden of proof in on the state not on the defence.

I don't think we'll ever know this side of Heaven. GZ certainly isn't going to admit it even if he did do it.

not anytime soon anyway.

I don't want you to think like me. I just want you to think.
Reply #463 posted 07/10/12 9:15am

Musicslave

http://articles.orlandose...st-warrant

Sanford police took one position on Trayvon shooting in public, another in paperwork to prosecutors

SANFORD — While publicly saying one thing — that they did not have enough evidence to arrest George Zimmerman — Sanford police did essentially the opposite: filing paperwork saying they had enough to charge him with manslaughter.

It's something the department kept secret for two months, according to documents recently released by the special prosecutor in the case.

Here are their words versus their actions on three key dates, all from one tumultuous week about two weeks after Zimmerman shot and killed Trayvon Martin, an unarmed black 17-year-old:

At 4 p.m. March 12, Sanford police Chief Bill Lee Jr. stood in City Hall plaza in front of a hostile crowd and dozens of reporters and insisted his agency could not arrest Zimmerman because investigators had failed to establish probable cause, the minimal standard of evidence to justify filing a criminal case.

The next day, however, his agency sent prosecutors paperwork saying it did have probable cause and asked that they charge Zimmerman with manslaughter.

It was signed by lead Investigator Chris Serino and his boss, then-Sgt. Randy Smith, but it was the department's official position and had the support of Lee, said Capt. Bob O'Connor, who oversees the department's major-crimes division and also was part of the investigation.

The request was sent to State Attorney Norm Wolfinger, whose office then took over the investigation.

Three days later, on March 16, Lee and several Sanford officers involved in the case, including Serino, went over some of the details of their investigation with the Orlando Sentinel.

They insisted they were prohibited by law from arresting or charging Zimmerman because they didn't have enough evidence to disprove his claim of self-defense.

"If we had arrested him," Lee said that day, "we feel we would have violated his constitutional rights. … I'm not going to violate the trust and oath that I took and arrest somebody, violate their rights."

Said Serino, "The best evidence we have is the testimony of George Zimmerman. … We did not have enough for an arrest warrant."

Police and prosecutors use the same evidentiary standard — probable cause — whether they arrest someone at the scene of a crime, do it later using an arrest warrant or file a criminal charge directly without an arrest.

Lee, fired two weeks ago, would not discuss why he said one thing in public but had his agency quietly ask prosecutors to charge Zimmerman. A public-relations agency issued a short statement that it attributed to him:

"As I have stated consistently, at the time and based on the evidence and testimony we had, we did not have probable cause to make a physical arrest."

His agency recommended the manslaughter charge on paper, the statement said, because without it, prosecutors would not have taken over the investigation.

A week and a half later, the investigation was out of Wolfinger's hands as well. Gov. Rick Scott appointed Special Prosecutor Angela Corey, and on April 11, she charged Zimmerman with second-degree murder and had him arrested.

Department spokesman Sgt. David Morgenstern and Mayor Jeff Triplett both said they had no idea why Lee and Serino said one thing in public but filed paperwork saying the opposite.

At the time, Sanford police were being pummeled by critics who accused them of conducting an inept and biased investigation and covering up for a wannabe cop.

The most vocal at the time were local leaders of the Urban League and the National Association for ...red People, U.S. Rep. Corrine Brown and scores of local black Sanford residents, some of whom accused the department of a long history of harassing blacks and ignoring black crime victims.

An estimated 400 people packed a Sanford church March 14 for a rally organized by a black televangelist from Baltimore.

Much of the evidence gathered by Sanford police, including paperwork, photos, witness statements and videos, has since been released and gives a fuller picture of how much work the agency did and how fully the agency investigated Trayvon's shooting.

Sanford police repeatedly canvassed the neighborhood looking for witnesses, handcuffed Zimmerman and took him to police headquarters, where they interrogated him that night before releasing him but kept his gun and clothes and took DNA samples.

They also re-interviewed him several times; had him undergo a voice-stress analysis, a lower-tech version of a lie-detector test; and aggressively challenged inconsistencies in his account.

It was the release by the special prosecutor on May 17 and June 26 of records documenting Sanford police work that revealed that when they handed off the case to prosecutors, police reported they had enough evidence to charge Zimmerman.

Reply #464 posted 07/10/12 9:26am

Musicslave

Looks like the prosecutor has some more evidence to release Thursday @ 10 AM:

http://articles.orlandose...ce-release

New evidence Thursday in Trayvon Martin shooting

More evidence in the shooting death of Trayvon Martin is set for public release Thursday morning, prosecutors said Monday.

A recent court filing shows the documents include statements from several new civilian witnesses, reports generated by the FBI and Florida Department of Law Enforcement, Zimmerman's prior calls to police and his application for a concealed weapon permit.

The evidence also includes a sketch of the crime scene, as well as notes and memos from various investigators.

Defense attorney Mark O'Mara received the evidence last month. It will be released to the media 10 a.m. Thursday. George Zimmerman faces a second-degree murder charge in the Feb. 26 shooting. He says he shot the Miami Gardens teen in self-defense.

Meanwhile, the city of Sanford announced Monday afternoon that officials had removed items left as a "curbside memorial" outside Retreat at Twin Lakes, the townhouse community where the 17-year-old was shot.

In a statement, the city said the items were moved "[i]n an effort to protect and preserve the remaining Trayvon Martin curbside memorial items, and after communicating with representatives of Trayvon Martin's family."

The items were relocated to the Sanford Museum, officials said.

This might be interesting....hmmm

Reply #465 posted 07/10/12 9:27am

OnlyNDaUsa

SUPRMAN said:

That is not nonsense unless you can access GZ's thinking. It is an opinion that you disagree with.

No! what you said is his defence tactic evidence of guilt. I do not need to get into his mind at all.

i do not get how anyone can say "he could have so he must have"

Living with a disability is not the Wurst thing in the word: Knowingly Mocking someone with one is far Wurst!.
Reply #466 posted 07/10/12 10:27am

Musicslave

OnlyNDaUsa said:

Musicslave said:

What are you talking about? confused Just yesterday I said, he'll "probably be out by this weekend." I also said that the judge may raise the bond amount significantly too but I'm not looking for a pat on the back from you on that one either. lol

apologies i mean in general... i said when his first bail was revoked that he would get a new one. some said i was wrong.

I did not intend to direct that at you... again i apologise.

No problem. I'm just now seeing this. I'm mad late. Been busy at work.

Reply #467 posted 07/10/12 11:44am

free2bfreeda

Musicslave said:

OnlyNDaUsa said:

apologies i mean in general... i said when his first bail was revoked that he would get a new one. some said i was wrong.

I did not intend to direct that at you... again i apologise.

No problem. I'm just now seeing this. I'm mad late. Been busy at work.

i must admit and agree >>>>“There are wrongs which even the grave does not bury.”
author ~ Harriet Ann Jacobs

one day a child hugged the earth & whispered 2 her,"I wish people would realize every x a bomb is launched & hits ur surface, it's like a major injury 2 u." i know war hurts u. :" the earth rumbled softly n reply, then cried a massive storm(c)
Reply #468 posted 07/10/12 12:26pm

2elijah

free2bfreeda said:

Musicslave said:

No problem. I'm just now seeing this. I'm mad late. Been busy at work.

i must admit and agree >>>>“There are wrongs which even the grave does not bury.”
author ~ Harriet Ann Jacobs

I just realized who that quote is from, and she sure is right. thumbs up!biggrin

The late, great Harriet Jacobs (aka Linda Brent) author of "Incidents in the life of a Slave Girl"

Harriet Jacobs

[Edited 7/10/12 12:30pm]

Reply #469 posted 07/10/12 1:47pm

DiminutiveRocker

OnlyNDaUsa said:

GZ & wife's lies cost tax payer money for the return to court for another bond hearing in the wake of their lies - that's what.

that is a issue the state can take up with her. They already have.

It depends on what GZ might be convicted for - 2nd degree murder or manslaughter. When someone young like TM dies as a result of someone else's fatal and needless mistake... I would hope if he is found guilty the sentence would be BIG...

I think it should fit the facts of the crime. I am thinking he will serve no more that 5 years. - If you're right, that will be a shame. 5 years is not nealry long enough for killing an unarmed boy.

I was asking what you think not what the law says. - Don't want to speculate - but I'm sure if he is convicted it won't be long enough.

Consider the rights of others before your own feelings, and the feelings of others before your own rights.
~ John Wooden
Reply #470 posted 07/10/12 2:05pm

SUPRMAN

OnlyNDaUsa said:

SUPRMAN said:

That is not nonsense unless you can access GZ's thinking. It is an opinion that you disagree with.

No! what you said is his defence tactic evidence of guilt. I do not need to get into his mind at all.

i do not get how anyone can say "he could have so he must have"

Who said, "he could have, so he must have?"

His defense tactic is evidence of guilt?

But you do get into his mind. You don't believe he could have premeditated killing anyone.

I don't want you to think like me. I just want you to think.
Reply #471 posted 07/10/12 3:08pm

OnlyNDaUsa

SUPRMAN said:

OnlyNDaUsa said:

No! what you said is his defence tactic evidence of guilt. I do not need to get into his mind at all.

i do not get how anyone can say "he could have so he must have"

Who said, "he could have, so he must have?"

His defense tactic is evidence of guilt?

Oh I read "I believe GZ's actions were premeditated and based on using the law to escape prison." that you were basing your belief on his use of the SYG as a defence. I see what you mean now.

But you do get into his mind. You don't believe he could have premeditated killing anyone.

I am not saying that he didn't just that there is zero evidence to support that. I happen to think he GZ was as shocked as anyone that it ended in a deadly shooting.

Living with a disability is not the Wurst thing in the word: Knowingly Mocking someone with one is far Wurst!.
Reply #472 posted 07/10/12 3:16pm

OnlyNDaUsa

DiminutiveRocker said:

OnlyNDaUsa said:

They already have.

I mean by trial.

If you're right, that will be a shame. 5 years is not nealry long enough for killing an unarmed boy.

Killing is not always the same as murder it is not aways a crime,


Don't want to speculate - but I'm sure if he is convicted it won't be long enough.

yet you assume guilt of murder? Now I think he committed a crime. but it was more on the negligence side. that self defence may be a factor, depending on how TM reacted. Just like it was wrong for GZ to go out of his way to follow TM it would be wrong for TM to go out of his way (did he turn around) to confront GZ.

But answer how long do you think would be long enough?


Living with a disability is not the Wurst thing in the word: Knowingly Mocking someone with one is far Wurst!.
Reply #473 posted 07/10/12 5:25pm

SUPRMAN

OnlyNDaUsa said:

SUPRMAN said:

Who said, "he could have, so he must have?"

His defense tactic is evidence of guilt?

Oh I read "I believe GZ's actions were premeditated and based on using the law to escape prison." that you were basing your belief on his use of the SYG as a defence. I see what you mean now.

But you do get into his mind. You don't believe he could have premeditated killing anyone.

I am not saying that he didn't just that there is zero evidence to support that. I happen to think he GZ was as shocked as anyone that it ended in a deadly shooting.

I agree that there is zero evidence to support my belief. The only evidence is in GZ's head, which we can't get to.

I do believe that he is capable of doing so.

I don't think GZ was shocked at what happened, it didn't happen the way he envisioned it.

I don't want you to think like me. I just want you to think.
Reply #474 posted 07/11/12 9:49am

prodigalfan

SupaFunkyOrgangrinderSexy said:

OnlyNDaUsa said:

intresting. how is that doing that not worst that what GZ did?

Ironically, it's the same thing: Vigilantism.

lol
"Remember, one man's filler is another man's killer" -- Haystack
Reply #475 posted 07/11/12 5:47pm

DiminutiveRocker

OnlyNDaUsa said:

OnlyNDaUsa said:

They already have.

I mean by trial.

If you're right, that will be a shame. 5 years is not nealry long enough for killing an unarmed boy.

Killing is not always the same as murder it is not aways a crime (1


Don't want to speculate - but I'm sure if he is convicted it won't be long enough.

yet you assume guilt of murder? (2 Now I think he committed a crime. but it was more on the negligence side. that self defence may be a factor, depending on how TM reacted. Just like it was wrong for GZ to go out of his way to follow TM it would be wrong for TM to go out of his way (did he turn around) to confront GZ.

But answer how long do you think would be long enough?

(1 - REALLY?!?!?!?!?!? rolleyes No shit.

(2 - I said IF he is convicted!!! IF IF IF IF IF! You are free to theorize it was negligence or maybe self-defense. I am free to theorize he provoked an altercation and shot that kid in cold blood. Anyway, it does not matter what you or I assume - the court will decide his fate based on the evidence presented.

Why are you so interested in how long a sentence I think he should serve?

I'll give MY opinion - if he is convicted of murder - I say 25 years to life. But that would be my sentence - we all have to accept whatever a jury/judge decides.

Consider the rights of others before your own feelings, and the feelings of others before your own rights.
~ John Wooden
Reply #476 posted 07/11/12 6:22pm

OnlyNDaUsa

DiminutiveRocker said:

OnlyNDaUsa said:

OnlyNDaUsa said:

They already have.

I mean by trial.

If you're right, that will be a shame. 5 years is not nealry long enough for killing an unarmed boy.

Killing is not always the same as murder it is not aways a crime (1


Don't want to speculate - but I'm sure if he is convicted it won't be long enough.

yet you assume guilt of murder? (2 Now I think he committed a crime. but it was more on the negligence side. that self defence may be a factor, depending on how TM reacted. Just like it was wrong for GZ to go out of his way to follow TM it would be wrong for TM to go out of his way (did he turn around) to confront GZ.

But answer how long do you think would be long enough?

(1 - REALLY?!?!?!?!?!? rolleyes No shit.

(2 - I said IF he is convicted!!! IF IF IF IF IF! You are free to theorize it was negligence or maybe self-defense. I am free to theorize he provoked an altercation and shot that kid in cold blood. Anyway, it does not matter what you or I assume - the court will decide his fate based on the evidence presented.

Why are you so interested in how long a sentence I think he should serve?

I'll give MY opinion - if he is convicted of murder - I say 25 years to life. But that would be my sentence - we all have to accept whatever a jury/judge decides.

i will give you half credit as you did say IF. Only half as you suggest that any sentence following a conviction would not be enough. That sure seems to indicate that a not guilty or some lessor conviction or any sentence less than life is too little (or as you say now 25 to life).

I predict he will do no more that 5 years (not saying that will be his sentence just that he will serve no more than 5)

Living with a disability is not the Wurst thing in the word: Knowingly Mocking someone with one is far Wurst!.
Reply #477 posted 07/11/12 8:16pm

SUPRMAN

OnlyNDaUsa said:

DiminutiveRocker said:

(1 - REALLY?!?!?!?!?!? rolleyes No shit.

(2 - I said IF he is convicted!!! IF IF IF IF IF! You are free to theorize it was negligence or maybe self-defense. I am free to theorize he provoked an altercation and shot that kid in cold blood. Anyway, it does not matter what you or I assume - the court will decide his fate based on the evidence presented.

Why are you so interested in how long a sentence I think he should serve?

I'll give MY opinion - if he is convicted of murder - I say 25 years to life. But that would be my sentence - we all have to accept whatever a jury/judge decides.

i will give you half credit as you did say IF. Only half as you suggest that any sentence following a conviction would not be enough. That sure seems to indicate that a not guilty or some lessor conviction or any sentence less than life is too little (or as you say now 25 to life).

I predict he will do no more that 5 years (not saying that will be his sentence just that he will serve no more than 5)

What makes you think he can get a 'not guilty' verdict?

He can't unless he takes the stand.

I can't believe you think he would take the stand, if it gets to a trial.

I don't want you to think like me. I just want you to think.
Reply #478 posted 07/11/12 8:23pm

OnlyNDaUsa

SUPRMAN said:

OnlyNDaUsa said:

i will give you half credit as you did say IF. Only half as you suggest that any sentence following a conviction would not be enough. That sure seems to indicate that a not guilty or some lessor conviction or any sentence less than life is too little (or as you say now 25 to life).

I predict he will do no more that 5 years (not saying that will be his sentence just that he will serve no more than 5)

What makes you think he can get a 'not guilty' verdict?

He can't unless he takes the stand.

I can't believe you think he would take the stand, if it gets to a trial.

if they sick with 2nd degree murder it will be not-guilty. he may well take the stand. And there are ways to imply self defence with out talking the stand. But he pretty much has to. I think he will.

Living with a disability is not the Wurst thing in the word: Knowingly Mocking someone with one is far Wurst!.
Reply #479 posted 07/11/12 9:20pm

DiminutiveRocker

OnlyNDaUsa said:

DiminutiveRocker said:

(1 - REALLY?!?!?!?!?!? rolleyes No shit.

(2 - I said IF he is convicted!!! IF IF IF IF IF! You are free to theorize it was negligence or maybe self-defense. I am free to theorize he provoked an altercation and shot that kid in cold blood. Anyway, it does not matter what you or I assume - the court will decide his fate based on the evidence presented.

Why are you so interested in how long a sentence I think he should serve?

I'll give MY opinion - if he is convicted of murder - I say 25 years to life. But that would be my sentence - we all have to accept whatever a jury/judge decides.

i will give you half credit as you did say IF. Only half as you suggest that any sentence following a conviction would not be enough. That sure seems to indicate that a not guilty or some lessor conviction or any sentence less than life is too little (or as you say now 25 to life).

I predict he will do no more that 5 years (not saying that will be his sentence just that he will serve no more than 5)

Credit? for MY OPINION? I suggested or predicted nothing - it was my opinion you asked for.

spit

"I predict he will do no more that 5 years (not saying that will be his sentence just that he will serve no more than 5) "

um...ok.

shrug

[Edited 7/11/12 21:21pm]

Consider the rights of others before your own feelings, and the feelings of others before your own rights.
~ John Wooden
Reply #480 posted 07/12/12 5:47am

Musicslave

Musicslave said:

Looks like the prosecutor has some more evidence to release Thursday @ 10 AM:

http://articles.orlandose...ce-release

New evidence Thursday in Trayvon Martin shooting

More evidence in the shooting death of Trayvon Martin is set for public release Thursday morning, prosecutors said Monday.

A recent court filing shows the documents include statements from several new civilian witnesses, reports generated by the FBI and Florida Department of Law Enforcement, Zimmerman's prior calls to police and his application for a concealed weapon permit.

The evidence also includes a sketch of the crime scene, as well as notes and memos from various investigators.

Defense attorney Mark O'Mara received the evidence last month. It will be released to the media 10 a.m. Thursday. George Zimmerman faces a second-degree murder charge in the Feb. 26 shooting. He says he shot the Miami Gardens teen in self-defense.

Meanwhile, the city of Sanford announced Monday afternoon that officials had removed items left as a "curbside memorial" outside Retreat at Twin Lakes, the townhouse community where the 17-year-old was shot.

In a statement, the city said the items were moved "[i]n an effort to protect and preserve the remaining Trayvon Martin curbside memorial items, and after communicating with representatives of Trayvon Martin's family."

The items were relocated to the Sanford Museum, officials said.

This might be interesting....hmmm

http://www.cnn.com/2012/0...?hpt=hp_t2

FBI interviews among evidence to be released in Zimmerman case

(CNN) -- Florida's state attorney is expected to release FBI reports Thursday that may shed light on whether race played a role the night George Zimmerman shot and killed an unarmed teen.

The investigative reports are amid evidence in the second-degree murder case expected to be released by Special Prosecutor Angela Corey to Zimmerman's attorney, according to court documents filed in June.

The U.S. Department of Justice took up a civil rights investigation following allegations that race played a part in the killing of Trayvon Martin, 17, in February in a gated community in Sanford.

An official conclusion in the Justice Department's investigation is not expected as part of the evidence release, though details about some of the interviews will be turned over to Zimmerman's attorney.

Martin's family and supporters say Zimmerman racially-profiled the teen, describing him as "suspicious" during a 911 call and ignoring a police dispatcher's request that he not follow him.

The 28-year-old neighborhood watch volunteer, who is charged with second-degree murder in the shooting, has said he killed Martin in self-defense, saying the teen punched him and slammed his head into a sidewalk before the shooting, according to family members and police.

Trayvon Martin memorial r...preserved

Among the evidence to be released are details about federal interviews with more than 30 people, including key members of the Sanford Police Department and Zimmerman's friends, according to court documents.

Also expected to be released are details about interviews with agents of the Florida Division of Alcoholic Beverages and Tobacco, who arrested Zimmerman in 2005 on suspicion of battery against a law enforcement officer and obstruction of justice.

A timeline of events

The charges against Zimmerman, who was accused of pushing an undercover agent, were later dropped after he entered a pretrial diversion program and completed an anger management class.

Additionally, according to the court filings, details about Zimmerman's MySpace account, surveillance video and e-mails between Zimmerman and ousted Sanford Police Chief Bill Lee will be released as part of the evidence handover.

Zimmerman was released on $1 million bond last week. An initial bond of $150,000 was revoked last month after a judge learned that Zimmerman and his wife failed to disclose more than $150,000 in donations from the public.

Reply #481 posted 07/12/12 10:37am

free2bfreeda

abc

FBI: George Zimmerman Tried to Buy More Guns After Trayvon Shooting

By Adam Martin | The Atlantic Wire1 hr 15 mins ago 12 July 2012

http://news.yahoo.com/fbi...28680.html

George Zimmerman was easygoing with police when they arrived at the scene of Trayvon Martin's shooting, but according to new evidence from the FBI, he afraid for his life in the weeks after the shooting became national news and even tried to buy more guns. The new batch of evidence, which special prosecutor Angela Corey released Thursday, includes findings from the FBI's investigation into whether Zimmerman violated 17-year-old Martin's civil rights. The FBI interviewed gun shop owners, according to The Orlando Sentinel's Jeff Weiner, and Darlene Jones, of WFTV. One shop owner told the FBI Zimmerman had called and said "his life was in danger and he needs more guns." So far, though, it's unclear whether he actually bought them.

The evidence also includes an email exchange between Zimmerman and Sanford police chief Bill Lee, in which Zimmerman "praises the officer he had been working with," Weiner tweeted. The Sentinel's coverage notes that Tim Smith, the first officer on the scene of the shooting, told FBI investigators he found Zimmerman with his back wet and covered in grass stains, bleeding from his nose. That suggests Martin was on top during their fight -- a key piece of evidence in Zimmerman's self-defense claim. Smith quoted Zimmerman saying, "I was yelling for help but no one would help me."

But the new evidence also includes an interview with Trayvon Martin's cousin, who was with him the day he died, and who said it was Martin, not Zimmerman, crying for help. Per the Sentinel: "One of Corey's investigators asked the cousin to identify a voice crying for help in the background of a 911 call. It was "without a doubt 'on a stack of Bibles' " Trayvon's, the cousin said, according to documents."

i'm so in agreement with the embolded part of this article. also, i'm sure Trayvon Martin's cousin would recognize the voice as being Trayvon's. imo he has no reason to lie.

the many times i've listened to the tape of the voice crying for help, without a doubt i can tell you the intonations of the voice do not match the vocal style of GZ. the sound of the voice crying out for help has the residuals left over of the post pre-teen higher pitched tones. that being of a male still in his youth. imo GZ is too old to have those teen intonations in his voice.

(many of you guys know the [what i call] yodelling period you go through during the mid-teen phase. it's where the voice warbels between lower tones and left over younger tones. well the voice sounds here is sounds like a desperate yodellers sound. not the sound of a 28yr old male.)

i remember hearing a young teen aged afican american male person (around 15yrs) yelling for help at a swimming party back in the day. i mean this guy thought he was drowing so he starts yelling help his young voice sounded much like the "help" cries from the 911 tape im-strong-o,

April 2, 2012

Thumbnailaudio link:Trayvon Martin shooting: It's not George Zimmerman crying for help on 911 recording, 2 experts say

Two audio forensics experts believe it is not George Zimmerman yelling for help in background of 911 call

when i listen starting at 1:11 when it gets to 1:18, i hear a sound similiar to "mama help me." now we know many young males call for their mother when in a life altering situation.

i doubt if GZ would be calling for his "mama" at 28yrs, especially in transistional adolenscense tonalities.

@28 years most men are no longer a yodellers when yelling for help.

imo those that do not hear the sound of a teenaged male when listening to the 911 audio tapes are (seemingly) biased and are hearing what they want to hear.

[Edited 7/12/12 20:31pm]

one day a child hugged the earth & whispered 2 her,"I wish people would realize every x a bomb is launched & hits ur surface, it's like a major injury 2 u." i know war hurts u. :" the earth rumbled softly n reply, then cried a massive storm(c)
Reply #482 posted 07/12/12 12:29pm

2elijah

^^ I sure hope those folks who gave donations to support GZ can sleep comfortable knowing they supported the killing of that child. Shame on all of them, and I wouldn't want to be in any of their shoes.

Reply #483 posted 07/12/12 12:58pm

OnlyNDaUsa

as to buying more guns... i do not care. I am not sure what happened to the gun he used that night, but where I live the police take the guns used in such shootings into evidence. (But I seem to recall the cops let him keep it. If it was me: i would lose that gun that night. But that is another issue).

Also: if he thinks he is about to lose the right to buy guns buying new ones is understandable.

Also: he was being threatened and he had bounties out on his head so again i see it as understandable.

And not evidence of anything at all. If i was on the jury that would hurt the prosecution's case. (and yes I 'know' I would not be on this jury)

To the voice: on GZ side he did say that night he was screaming for help--Yes I know he would have heard TM's cries as well so it can be argued that he was just thinking quick or said it was him (GZ) not knowing it had been recorded.

For anyone that says it was TM... there will be someone that says it was GZ. For the so called expert: (that I think is not part of the state's team) there will be other experts that will say it was GZ.

In the end they will play the tape for the jury and they will listen with head phones and they will have to decide who they think it was.

Living with a disability is not the Wurst thing in the word: Knowingly Mocking someone with one is far Wurst!.
Reply #484 posted 07/12/12 1:27pm

Musicslave

http://abcnews.go.com/US/...d=16762044

Excerpts below....

Trayvon Martin Shooter George Zimmerman Called Overzealous 'Soft Guy' With a 'Little Hero Complex'

"A Florida investigator told FBI agents weighing possible civil rights violations against the neighborhood watch volunteer who killed teenager Trayvon Martin that he believed George Zimmerman's actions were based on Martin's attire rather than skin color, describing him as "overzealous" but a "soft guy" with a "little hero complex."

Sanford Police Department investigator Chris Serino "believes that when Zimmerman saw Martin in a hoody, Zimmerman took it upon himself to view Martin as acting suspicious," according to documents released today by the State Attorney's Office.

In a statement provided by Zimmerman's ex-fiancée, she told police that Zimmerman hit her in the mouth for chewing gum, and that a few weeks later there was an incident in which Zimmerman refused to leave her house and, she said, lied to police about a scratch he had incurred from the dog, saying that she instead scratched him. The couple were engaged for a year before calling it off.

She noted Zimmerman had aspired to become a police officer and that while he had a temper, she did not consider him to be the kind of person to put himself in harm's way.

The documents also go into detail about an incident in 2005 in Orange County involving Zimmerman and off-duty officers that resulted in his allegedly shoving one of them and displaying "an angry demeanor" even after the officers identified themselves. He was promptly arrested but charges were never filed.

The girlfriend of Martin's father told investigators that this was the first time the teen had stayed at her Sanford home without his dad. Martin's father was attending a convention nearby. On the night of the teen's murder, Martin's father took his girlfriend of 2 ½ years to the dinner.

When they came home, there was no sign of Martin. She told investigators that it was probably the first time the teen had walked to the nearby convenience store."

Reply #485 posted 07/12/12 1:35pm

Musicslave

2elijah said:

^^ I sure hope those folks who gave donations to support GZ can sleep comfortable knowing they supported the killing of that child. Shame on all of them, and I wouldn't want to be in any of their shoes.

Don't worry, those people will sleep just fine at night knowing that their hero got rid of another no-good thug teenager (in their minds).

Then you got those who will feel some remorse but will justify their support in the ignorance of not knowing all the facts yet.

Reply #486 posted 07/12/12 1:51pm

OnlyNDaUsa

Musicslave said:

2elijah said:

^^ I sure hope those folks who gave donations to support GZ can sleep comfortable knowing they supported the killing of that child. Shame on all of them, and I wouldn't want to be in any of their shoes.

Don't worry, those people will sleep just fine at night knowing that their hero got rid of another no-good thug teenager (in their minds).

Then you got those who will feel some remorse but will justify their support in the ignorance of not knowing all the facts yet.

Or they may think that it is not 2nd degree murder and believe that convicting GZ for that would make it all the more tragic.

Living with a disability is not the Wurst thing in the word: Knowingly Mocking someone with one is far Wurst!.
Reply #487 posted 07/12/12 1:52pm

Astasheiks

Is GZ still locked up or did he get out again?

Reply #488 posted 07/12/12 2:09pm

OnlyNDaUsa

Astasheiks said:

Is GZ still locked up or did he get out again?

he is out on a Million Dollar bail.

Living with a disability is not the Wurst thing in the word: Knowingly Mocking someone with one is far Wurst!.
Reply #489 posted 07/12/12 3:25pm

free2bfreeda

OnlyNDaUsa said:

as to buying more guns... i do not care. I am not sure what happened to the gun he used that night, but where I live the police take the guns used in such shootings into evidence. (But I seem to recall the cops let him keep it. If it was me: i would lose that gun that night. But that is another issue).

Also: if he thinks he is about to lose the right to buy guns buying new ones is understandable.

Also: he was being threatened and he had bounties out on his head so again i see it as understandable.

And not evidence of anything at all. If i was on the jury that would hurt the prosecution's case. (and yes I 'know' I would not be on this jury)

To the voice: on GZ side he did say that night he was screaming for help--Yes I know he would have heard TM's cries as well so it can be argued that he was just thinking quick or said it was him (GZ) not knowing it had been recorded.

For anyone that says it was TM... there will be someone that says it was GZ. For the so called expert: (that I think is not part of the state's team) there will be other experts that will say it was GZ.

In the end they will play the tape for the jury and they will listen with head phones and they will have to decide who they think it was.

GZ should be in jail in protective custody. the sanford p.d. would be a safe haven for him. ya'll know GZ is on psycho-medication, and needs to be monitered to make sure he's receiving correct dosages.

1. he's scared for his safety

2. he's probably paranoid about anything and everything, i.e., his wife's safety

3. he probably cannot go online without supervision [bored to the max]

4. that ankle bracelet probably is driving him nuts.

5. he's probably living and reliving the shooting (murder) incident/or maybe not - maybe he's deluded himself into thinking he's a hero hiding out. [early signs of megalo]

the man might blow a gasket. at least in jail he could be under psychatric montering. GZ maywell be a loose cannon.

seriously though, the boy should be in lockup for his own safety and peace of mind.

in jail GZ would be safe from vigi-force

[Edited 7/12/12 20:35pm]

one day a child hugged the earth & whispered 2 her,"I wish people would realize every x a bomb is launched & hits ur surface, it's like a major injury 2 u." i know war hurts u. :" the earth rumbled softly n reply, then cried a massive storm(c)
Reply #490 posted 07/12/12 3:54pm

OnlyNDaUsa

All pretty good points. An all seem to lack any legal weight.
Living with a disability is not the Wurst thing in the word: Knowingly Mocking someone with one is far Wurst!.
Reply #491 posted 07/12/12 5:24pm

DiminutiveRocker

free2bfreeda said:

OnlyNDaUsa said:

as to buying more guns... i do not care. I am not sure what happened to the gun he used that night, but where I live the police take the guns used in such shootings into evidence. (But I seem to recall the cops let him keep it. If it was me: i would lose that gun that night. But that is another issue).

Also: if he thinks he is about to lose the right to buy guns buying new ones is understandable.

Also: he was being threatened and he had bounties out on his head so again i see it as understandable.

And not evidence of anything at all. If i was on the jury that would hurt the prosecution's case. (and yes I 'know' I would not be on this jury)

To the voice: on GZ side he did say that night he was screaming for help--Yes I know he would have heard TM's cries as well so it can be argued that he was just thinking quick or said it was him (GZ) not knowing it had been recorded.

For anyone that says it was TM... there will be someone that says it was GZ. For the so called expert: (that I think is not part of the state's team) there will be other experts that will say it was GZ.

In the end they will play the tape for the jury and they will listen with head phones and they will have to decide who they think it was.

GZ should be in jail in protective custody. the sanford p.d. would be a safe haven for him. ya'll know GZ is on psycho-medication, and needs to be monitered to make sure he's receiving correct dosages.

1. he's scared for his safety

2. he's probably paranoid about anything and everything, i.e., his wife's safety

3. he probably cannot go online without supervision [bored to the max]

4. that ankle bracelet probably is driving him nuts.

5. he's probably living and reliving the shooting (murder) incident/or maybe not - maybe he's deluded himself into thinking he's a hero hiding out. [early signs of megalo]

the man might blow a gasket. at least in jail he could be under psychatric montering. GZ maywell be a loose cannon.

seriously though, the boy should be in lockup for his own safety and peace of mind.

in jail GZ would safe from vigi-force

[Edited 7/12/12 15:26pm

True. And I belive the judged ruled that this time he must stay in Seminole County. I think he went into hiding further away after the first bail-out.

Consider the rights of others before your own feelings, and the feelings of others before your own rights.
~ John Wooden
Reply #492 posted 07/12/12 8:54pm

free2bfreeda

DiminutiveRocker said:

free2bfreeda said:

seriously though, the boy should be in lockup for his own safety and peace of mind.

in jail GZ would be safe from vigi-force

[

True. And I belive the judged ruled that this time he must stay in Seminole County. I think he went into hiding further away after the first bail-out.

yeah the passport scenario and the coded audio performance that judge lester called them on was good fodder for a screen writer.

GZ mrs. GZ

GZ "do we have enough u-no-what in the you know where?" mrs GZ, "uh-hmm and i did not pass on the two port wines you told me save in a special place."

title of story would be: 'hidden cache pass the port to escape ' starring jack black as GZ and tina fay as mrs. GZ

[Edited 7/12/12 20:56pm]

one day a child hugged the earth & whispered 2 her,"I wish people would realize every x a bomb is launched & hits ur surface, it's like a major injury 2 u." i know war hurts u. :" the earth rumbled softly n reply, then cried a massive storm(c)
Reply #493 posted 07/12/12 9:01pm

jjhunsecker

OnlyNDaUsa said:

Musicslave said:

Don't worry, those people will sleep just fine at night knowing that their hero got rid of another no-good thug teenager (in their minds).

Then you got those who will feel some remorse but will justify their support in the ignorance of not knowing all the facts yet.

Or they may think that it is not 2nd degree murder and believe that convicting GZ for that would make it all the more tragic.

Yeah, he just shot a nigger...nothing to get too upset about

Reply #494 posted 07/12/12 9:59pm

SUPRMAN

OnlyNDaUsa said:

Musicslave said:

Don't worry, those people will sleep just fine at night knowing that their hero got rid of another no-good thug teenager (in their minds).

Then you got those who will feel some remorse but will justify their support in the ignorance of not knowing all the facts yet.

Or they may think that it is not 2nd degree murder and believe that convicting GZ for that would make it all the more tragic.

How would the jury do that? That would be told to find 2nd degree or manslaughter. There are no other options unless he takes the stand.

I don't want you to think like me. I just want you to think.
Reply #495 posted 07/13/12 6:00am

Musicslave

It's not surprising that the headline from most media outlets was about GZ not being considered a racist. What's funny about this aspect of the story is that the State never charged him with a hate crime. Essentially, the State never claimed he was racist. They only investigated to see if he was. I think there's a big difference between the two. She/They were smart enough to say that he criminally profiled TM. Det. Serino said that he believed that GZ wrongly profiled TM as suspicious because he had on a hoody. He grilled him in those early interview tapes about not being TRAINED in that area to know what a suspicious person looks like. What a grave, tragic mistake.

Reply #496 posted 07/13/12 7:03am

OnlyNDaUsa

SUPRMAN said:

OnlyNDaUsa said:

Or they may think that it is not 2nd degree murder and believe that convicting GZ for that would make it all the more tragic.

How would the jury do that? That would be told to find 2nd degree or manslaughter. There are no other options unless he takes the stand.

I think if it is 2nd degree he will take the stand. But I do not think that will be the final charge. And the jury can go rouge.

Living with a disability is not the Wurst thing in the word: Knowingly Mocking someone with one is far Wurst!.
Reply #497 posted 07/13/12 7:38am

SUPRMAN

OnlyNDaUsa said:

SUPRMAN said:

How would the jury do that? That would be told to find 2nd degree or manslaughter. There are no other options unless he takes the stand.

I think if it is 2nd degree he will take the stand. But I do not think that will be the final charge. And the jury can go rouge.

Well he is currently charged with 2nd degree and I don't see that charge changing short of a plea bargain.

Don't you mean rogue? Deliver a verdict against the judge's instructions? They can try, but the court is unlikely to accept that verdict.

I don't want you to think like me. I just want you to think.
Reply #498 posted 07/13/12 7:50am

free2bfreeda

Musicslave said:

It's not surprising that the headline from most media outlets was about GZ not being considered a racist. What's funny about this aspect of the story is that the State never charged him with a hate crime. Essentially, the State never claimed he was racist. They only investigated to see if he was. I think there's a big difference between the two. She/They were smart enough to say that he criminally profiled TM. Det. Serino said that he believed that GZ wrongly profiled TM as suspicious because he had on a hoody. He grilled him in those early interview tapes about not being TRAINED in that area to know what a suspicious person looks like. What a grave, tragic mistake.

why does this bit of information keep getting swept under the rug?

Orlando Sentinel: July 2, 2012

In paperwork released Monday, Assistant State Attorney Bernie de la Rionda did not spell out what witness 9 told authorities, but he described it as information about his "bias against black persons," including an unspecified "act."

The witness is the same woman who filed a domestic violence injunction against Zimmerman in 2005. He filed one against her the following day.

Neither was arrested. Both injunctions were granted.

She told police that Zimmerman is a racist according to court records.

In her first statement, Witness 9 says that she knows Zimmerman, as well as his family:

"I know George, and I know that he does not like black people...He would start something. He's a very confrontational person. It's in his blood. Let's just say that."

She went on to describe Zimmerman and his family as:

"Just mean and open about it, and I don't know what he's capable of, but I do know things that he's done to me that I would never, I would never talk to him about ever again."


Last month in a motion filed by O'Mara it stated that the not-yet-released second statement "is not relevant" to the shooting death of 17-year-old Trayvon Martin, and "would not be admissible" at trial.

O'Mara went on to argue that the release of Witness 9's statement would:

"Serve to reignite and potentially enhance the widespread public hostility toward Mr. Zimmerman."

It looks as though Witness 9 may have damaging statements against Zimmerman, which is why O’Mara wants the statement to remain sealed and for her not to testify


Read more: http://globalgrind.com/news/george-zimmermans-trayvon-martin-witness-9-girlfriend-bias-against-black-people-details#ixzz20VvMudcF

GZ making racist statements means that he had some racist tendencies and not only spoke out but acted out and upon this biased mindset on more than one occasion.

see the following:

'Lying, manipulating' George Zimmerman 'bullied his colleague with racial comments'

By James Nye

PUBLISHED: 20:37 EST, 27 June 2012
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2165784/Trayvon-Martin-case-George-Zimmerman-bullied-colleague-racial-comments.html#ixzz20W3bpYbC

George Zimmerman bullied and aimed racist comments at an Arab-American co-worker, mocking him as a terrorist and making fun of his accent.

That is the claim from Zimmerman's 28-year-old former colleague, who worked together with him at CarMax in Sanford, Florida, in 2008 and alleges remorseless bullying.

Speaking anonymously because of fears of getting his family involved with the furore surrounding the Trayvon Martin case, the former car-salesman labelled Zimmerman a 'manipulator' and a liar with a 'great poker face'


Speaking to ABC News, the man said that upon joining CarMax four years ago, he quickly became recognised as one of the top salesmen at the car retailership, which invoked the jealously of Zimmerman, who was 24 at the time.

Claiming that Zimmerman would do anything to gain the approval of his colleagues, the unidentified man said that although he does not believe that Zimmerman is racist, he certainly made racially motivated comments towards him.

so doth making racist statements and bullying a victim not make one a racist? i think it does. nod

[Edited 7/13/12 8:19am]

one day a child hugged the earth & whispered 2 her,"I wish people would realize every x a bomb is launched & hits ur surface, it's like a major injury 2 u." i know war hurts u. :" the earth rumbled softly n reply, then cried a massive storm(c)
Reply #499 posted 07/13/12 8:18am

Musicslave

free2bfreeda said:

Musicslave said:

It's not surprising that the headline from most media outlets was about GZ not being considered a racist. What's funny about this aspect of the story is that the State never charged him with a hate crime. Essentially, the State never claimed he was racist. They only investigated to see if he was. I think there's a big difference between the two. She/They were smart enough to say that he criminally profiled TM. Det. Serino said that he believed that GZ wrongly profiled TM as suspicious because he had on a hoody. He grilled him in those early interview tapes about not being TRAINED in that area to know what a suspicious person looks like. What a grave, tragic mistake.

why does this bit of information keep getting swept under the rug?

Orlando Sentinel: July 2, 2012


Last month in a motion filed by O'Mara it stated that the not-yet-released second statement "is not relevant" to the shooting death of 17-year-old Trayvon Martin, and "would not be admissible" at trial.

O'Mara went on to argue that the release of Witness 9's statement would:

"Serve to reignite and potentially enhance the widespread public hostility toward Mr. Zimmerman."

It looks as though Witness 9 may have damaging statements against Zimmerman, which is why O’Mara wants the statement to remain sealed and for her not to testify


Read more: http://globalgrind.com/news/george-zimmermans-trayvon-martin-witness-9-girlfriend-bias-against-black-people-details#ixzz20VvMudcF

GZ making racist statements means that he had some racist tendencies and not only spoke out but acted out and upon this biased mindset on more than one occasion.

I know many may think GZ is racist but I think it would be a lot harder to prove based on the evidence released thus far. However, his profiling TM as a criminal without proper training is a lot more probable (to me at least).

Now, with that being said, did Trayvon's attire and color play into GZ calculations that night? More than likely yes.

Reply #500 posted 07/13/12 8:36am

Musicslave

free2bfreeda said:

Musicslave said:

It's not surprising that the headline from most media outlets was about GZ not being considered a racist. What's funny about this aspect of the story is that the State never charged him with a hate crime. Essentially, the State never claimed he was racist. They only investigated to see if he was. I think there's a big difference between the two. She/They were smart enough to say that he criminally profiled TM. Det. Serino said that he believed that GZ wrongly profiled TM as suspicious because he had on a hoody. He grilled him in those early interview tapes about not being TRAINED in that area to know what a suspicious person looks like. What a grave, tragic mistake.

why does this bit of information keep getting swept under the rug?

Orlando Sentinel: July 2, 2012


Last month in a motion filed by O'Mara it stated that the not-yet-released second statement "is not relevant" to the shooting death of 17-year-old Trayvon Martin, and "would not be admissible" at trial.

O'Mara went on to argue that the release of Witness 9's statement would:

"Serve to reignite and potentially enhance the widespread public hostility toward Mr. Zimmerman."

It looks as though Witness 9 may have damaging statements against Zimmerman, which is why O’Mara wants the statement to remain sealed and for her not to testify


Read more: http://globalgrind.com/news/george-zimmermans-trayvon-martin-witness-9-girlfriend-bias-against-black-people-details#ixzz20VvMudcF

GZ making racist statements means that he had some racist tendencies and not only spoke out but acted out and upon this biased mindset on more than one occasion.

see the following:

'Lying, manipulating' George Zimmerman 'bullied his colleague with racial comments'

By James Nye

PUBLISHED: 20:37 EST, 27 June 2012
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2165784/Trayvon-Martin-case-George-Zimmerman-bullied-colleague-racial-comments.html#ixzz20W3bpYbC

George Zimmerman bullied and aimed racist comments at an Arab-American co-worker, mocking him as a terrorist and making fun of his accent.

That is the claim from Zimmerman's 28-year-old former colleague, who worked together with him at CarMax in Sanford, Florida, in 2008 and alleges remorseless bullying.

Speaking anonymously because of fears of getting his family involved with the furore surrounding the Trayvon Martin case, the former car-salesman labelled Zimmerman a 'manipulator' and a liar with a 'great poker face'


Speaking to ABC News, the man said that upon joining CarMax four years ago, he quickly became recognised as one of the top salesmen at the car retailership, which invoked the jealously of Zimmerman, who was 24 at the time.

Claiming that Zimmerman would do anything to gain the approval of his colleagues, the unidentified man said that although he does not believe that Zimmerman is racist, he certainly made racially motivated comments towards him.

so doth making racist statements and bullying a victim not make one a racist? i think it does. nod

[Edited 7/13/12 8:19am]

Oh...to answer your question about the media sweeping stuff under the rug....It's not "sexy". Not sensational enough.

Reply #501 posted 07/13/12 6:31pm

babynoz

Musicslave said:

It's not surprising that the headline from most media outlets was about GZ not being considered a racist. What's funny about this aspect of the story is that the State never charged him with a hate crime. Essentially, the State never claimed he was racist. They only investigated to see if he was. I think there's a big difference between the two. She/They were smart enough to say that he criminally profiled TM. Det. Serino said that he believed that GZ wrongly profiled TM as suspicious because he had on a hoody. He grilled him in those early interview tapes about not being TRAINED in that area to know what a suspicious person looks like. What a grave, tragic mistake.

Exactly.

Like I've said numerous times, I don't care if it was Al Capone, Deputy Dawg had no business going after someone in that manner in the first place.

"Success has a great tendency to conceal and throw a veil over the evil of men"....Demosthenes
Reply #502 posted 07/14/12 5:57am

free2bfreeda

shhhees, this whole GZ (tryna be proven innocent) is turning into a real life mini-reality series. nod

check this out!!!

George Zimmerman Defense Moves to Disqualify Judge