George Zimmerman / Trayvon Martin Case #2

DebFrmHell wrote:I also want to say that I see no reason for GZ to "beg" for any plea. If it were me, I would let it go to trial. I think there is enough evidence supporting him to get his reasonable doubt at this time.

(Keeping in mind that we have not seen the next round of discovery nor have we seen his statements to see where the inconsistancies lie...)

To think that a prosecutor would say something to the effect that "we will back off your wife if you will take a manslaughter charge instead" is too much "made for TV." It would be considered unethical and possibly get the attorney in question a little face time before before the FL Bar. IMO.

Shellie Z and the potential for future charges being brought against her are irrelevant to the charges that have been already brought against George Z.

Wrong about that Debbie. There is nothing illegal or unethical about levering a criminal charge against one spouse. See below

http://www.cbsnews.com/2100-201_162-5627607.html

Deb- did you see MOM on the news saying he wasn't sure it was wise to have GZ testify at future hearing)?
To me, this says he needs lots of time to figure out how to pull that off.
Or if he should even try.
With Shelley's prosecution held over their heads, it'd be a good time to beg for a plea.

DebFrmHell wrote:

Or maybe, it doesn't matter because the judge in this case has cleared his docket for
Prosecution gave him a mere five hours with their Motion to Revoke so why should he give them his with nearly 3 weeks advance to prepare a rebuttal?

Porky wrote:I just noticed something in the document dump. The Police already had a suspect for the burglaries. They had fingerprints and was just waiting to pick the person up. So now there is absolutely NO reason for Zimmerman to have been chasing people with guns who he did not know.

IIRC, they had arrested one young man for his involvement in a couple or three of those burglaries. I remember something about this guy having a laptop of one of the victims in his backpack. Again going from memory, I think there were 6 recent burglaries.

I think the whole tone/attitude of the residents of The Retreat changed after the home invasion that prior August. The woman was home with her baby at that time. This is just IMO, but burglaries are more of an annoyance, expensive and a time-consuming hassle, but not nearly in the same league as a home invasion where there is the real possiblity of violence against the resident. As one woman said, "It wasn't just George that was calling, we all were calling."

I say that as a burgled person... I didn't have insurance. My neighbors moved out the next day. I suspect I gave them a very nice housewarming present for their new digs!

Wrong about that Debbie. There is nothing illegal or unethical about levering a criminal charge against one spouse. See below

I haven't had the chance to watch the link yet but I did but "IMO" at the end of that paragraph by me.

((Please don't call me Debbie. Deb is good. DFH is good. Deborah is preferred but most don't know my full first name. I see "Debbie" and all I want to do is go put my hair in pigtails and pretend I am 16! LOL! That couldn't be further from the truth and it gets further every day...))



ETA: I don't see the relevance to Balloon boys parents situation to that of the Zimmermans. Could you explain a little more because I must be missing something? TIA, Porky.

WeeBonnie wrote:Deb- did you see MOM on the news saying he wasn't sure it was wise to have GZ testify at future hearing)?
To me, this says he needs lots of time to figure out how to pull that off.
Or if he should even try.
With Shelley's prosecution held over their heads, it'd be a good time to beg for a plea.

DebFrmHell wrote:

Or maybe, it doesn't matter because the judge in this case has cleared his docket for
Prosecution gave him a mere five hours with their Motion to Revoke so why should he give them his with nearly 3 weeks advance to prepare a rebuttal?

If he does testify, he will be made available for cross examination by the State.

Ouch maybe for GZ.
Yay for BDL.

Porky wrote:I just noticed something in the document dump. The Police already had a suspect for the burglaries. They had fingerprints and was just waiting to pick the person up. So now there is absolutely NO reason for Zimmerman to have been chasing people with guns who he did not know.

Porky, I firmly am against *anyone* volunteering on a neighborhood watch while carrying a weapon - exactly for this reason here that we are discussing. However, having been burglarized (by 2 20-something white men, btw) I felt no more easier after they apprehended the two at a later time than I did while they were still on the loose. *Any* strange male doing something suspicious in the neighborhood would have - if anything - put me on greater edge because I was a little more wiser to reality than before getting invaded. And I figured there's more where they came from. Criminals like to brag about their loot to their other criminal friends -- and then you've got word spread that the neighborhood is an easy target. Cut one head off, and another sprouts in its place. Having said that -- I define "doing something supicous" NOT to be simply walking at 7pm in the rain.

Tamta wrote:

WeeBonnie wrote:Deb- did you see MOM on the news saying he wasn't sure it was wise to have GZ testify at future hearing)?
To me, this says he needs lots of time to figure out how to pull that off.
Or if he should even try.
With Shelley's prosecution held over their heads, it'd be a good time to beg for a plea.

DebFrmHell wrote:

Or maybe, it doesn't matter because the judge in this case has cleared his docket for
Prosecution gave him a mere five hours with their Motion to Revoke so why should he give them his with nearly 3 weeks advance to prepare a rebuttal?

If he does testify, he will be made available for cross examination by the State.

Ouch maybe for GZ.
Yay for BDL.

OOOhhhhh!!! *VERY* good point.

Gizmo711 wrote:I don't exactly go along with "once a persons mind in made up, that nothing will change it"...I have listened to many cases and I actually never saw that happen. I for one have taken sides and then reversed them when I saw all the evidence...just to have someone tell me "that isn't how you felt before". Well I have the right to change my mind when I listen closely to a case.

I have been wrong, especially in the "David Westerfield" case, I felt very strongly that this man was innocent, and I spoke my mind. However, I felt differently when the evidence started being produced and I again changed my mind, and rightfully so "I might add".

But when a case such as the CA case and this case, where the handwriting on on the wall, I tend to form my opinion and most likely will stick with it.

The 911 tapes are the tell tale, they plainly show a man profiling a young man for only one reason. This young man that is being profiled ends up dead within minutes. The incident happens at a location NOT near the perps car. The deceased has NO weapon on him. He was merely going to the store.

So whatever transpired between the 911 tapes and the death of Trayvon Martin will not hold up (IMO). Because whatever Trayvon did, if he attacked Zimmerman, if he beat Zimmerman up, if he tried to get the gun from Zimmerman, wont make a bit of difference because Trayvon was defending himself against an attacker. He had the right to use every means possible to defend himself, so if he did (which hasn't been proven) try to get the gun from Zimmerman, it was in hope of saving his own life, if he beat up Zimmerman, again it was in hope of saving his own life, if he thru the first punch, again it was in hope of saving his own life.

Zimmerman tried to play cop, judge and executioner when he didn't have the right to even approach Trayvon without stating WHY......

I would hope that any one of my children or grand children would also put up a fight to save their life and not just give in.

Therefore I will never change my mind as to who was wrong here and it's not because I have a closed mind but because I see perfectly well what happened here.

I concur.

Many people are ignoring Trayvon's right to walk freely (without being followed or accosted by a stranger), and his right to defend himself (under the law) against someone who he perceived as an imminent threat to his life. If anything, the Stand Your Ground Law squarely applies to Trayvon Martin.

http://twitter.com/#!/bobkealing

bob kealing‏@bobkealing
After late night jail visit his attorney tells @WESH#GeorgeZimemrman has "learned his lesson" fearful of legal fallout for his wife.

--somehow i don't think, "ok judge, i've learned my lesson"...will do it for judgeL!

ellejay wrote:http://twitter.com/#!/bobkealing

bob kealing‏@bobkealing
After late night jail visit his attorney tells @WESH#GeorgeZimemrman has "learned his lesson" fearful of legal fallout for his wife.

--somehow i don't think, "ok judge, i've learned my lesson"...will do it for judgeL!

Something tells me the only lesson he's learned is to be smarter about it when you lie.

I've rarely seen true liars (as he's proven to be) to ever change their colors -- just their brush strokes.

DebFrmHell wrote:

Porky wrote:I just noticed something in the document dump. The Police already had a suspect for the burglaries. They had fingerprints and was just waiting to pick the person up. So now there is absolutely NO reason for Zimmerman to have been chasing people with guns who he did not know.

IIRC, they had arrested one young man for his involvement in a couple or three of those burglaries. I remember something about this guy having a laptop of one of the victims in his backpack. Again going from memory, I think there were 6 recent burglaries.

I think the whole tone/attitude of the residents of The Retreat changed after the home invasion that prior August. The woman was home with her baby at that time. This is just IMO, but burglaries are more of an annoyance, expensive and a time-consuming hassle, but not nearly in the same league as a home invasion where there is the real possiblity of violence against the resident. As one woman said, "It wasn't just George that was calling, we all were calling."

I say that as a burgled person... I didn't have insurance. My neighbors moved out the next day. I suspect I gave them a very nice housewarming present for their new digs!

Wrong about that Debbie. There is nothing illegal or unethical about levering a criminal charge against one spouse. See below

I haven't had the chance to watch the link yet but I did but "IMO" at the end of that paragraph by me.

((Please don't call me Debbie. Deb is good. DFH is good. Deborah is preferred but most don't know my full first name. I see "Debbie" and all I want to do is go put my hair in pigtails and pretend I am 16! LOL! That couldn't be further from the truth and it gets further every day...))



ETA: I don't see the relevance to Balloon boys parents situation to that of the Zimmermans. Could you explain a little more because I must be missing something? TIA, Porky.

Deb Sorry about horking your name there. I posted the link simply to show you that Prosecutors have always been able to put the squeeze on one party to negotiate a deal from the other party ( where a conviction is likely). In the balloon case as in this case, the perjury was more clear cut against the wife so they used that to force a plea against the husband

Stolat wrote:

ellejay wrote:http://twitter.com/#!/bobkealing

bob kealing‏@bobkealing
After late night jail visit his attorney tells @WESH#GeorgeZimemrman has "learned his lesson" fearful of legal fallout for his wife.

--somehow i don't think, "ok judge, i've learned my lesson"...will do it for judgeL!

Something tells me the only lesson he's learned is to be smarter about it when you lie.

I've rarely seen true liars (as he's proven to be) to ever change their colors -- just their brush strokes.

Lying to on the Bond Application is very serious and warrants firm action by the Court and a new higher bond amount and maybe even an added bond or penalty for that charge.

However, and I do not know much about Lester, but I do know a few NYC judges (like a family friend) that will bust someone's ass for simply being a little bit late/unprepared for their appearance, and inviting them to a little extra time in custody until a new hearing can be scheduled in a few days or a week-
To get a point across.
(My husband was subjected to that in his youthful era of delinquentness, I call it ED.)

Lester needs to put his foot down now about these types of actions and address the violations at hand, and show who is controlling the court room and proceedings.

However right now, I am not convinced that he is anywhere close to severe action like a 2 mill bond or complete revocation.

Deb- plea deals can absolutely involve his and his wife's brand new legal issues to the table. Happens all the time. And defendants do NOT have the same set of rights at all hearing that they do at trial. Judges have a lot more discretion. Seeing as George sat by and let others do the bulk of his lies- and his attorney did not ask for a delay for the reasons you state- I think it's a go.
MOM is weighing the fallout at trial from all this deception- most lawyers agree it is admissible.
My feeling is he can't do another bond hearing without GZ fully owning up to his part in the lies. Better to move forward without that happening.
But the defense can't put in a string case without the defendant.
Unless MOM is planning a Baez and going to put GZs version out there in opening statements, he needs GZ. And GZ's credibility will be the center of the prosecutions case, IMHO. All this mess is likely admissible.
It will be terribly relevant that he is happy to lie under oath.
That's why MOM is shying away from saying GZ will appear.

Watch GZ mince words finely for NO admission of wrongdoing.
What lesson GZ? Please do tell!

ellejay wrote:http://twitter.com/#!/bobkealing

bob kealing‏@bobkealing
After late night jail visit his attorney tells @WESH#GeorgeZimemrman has "learned his lesson" fearful of legal fallout for his wife.

--somehow i don't think, "ok judge, i've learned my lesson"...will do it for judgeL!

Wee Bonnie,
You have invented ways of quoting that I never even knew existed! I hope I am laughing with you!

Maybe if you started your part after the [/quote] instead of on top. It might be the board that is hinky that way...though I have seen it work for you a couple of times.

I have no idea how you do it!

It seems that it keeps going back to the night of the killing. We have to understand one thing, this was not Beverly Hills, this was NOT an upscale neighborhood, whereas a stranger would easily be picked out. This was Sanford Florida, where there is a mixture of all nationalities. There was NOTHING indicating that Trayvon was doing anything other than walking where he belonged. It is ludicrous to think that just because a few breakins or even more than a few breakins happened in the area does not give any cause to stop someone because he happens to be the same race as the ones who were breaking in.

If that be the case than every person walking down the street would be suspect. Even if it were Beverly Hills, only the police would be called, I doubt that anyone would take the law into their own hands because a young man with a hoodie was walking down the street.

No more than I would be in the right to shoot Zimmerman because a spanish man broke into my home so therefore he must be up to no good. This is rediculous.

Also, Zimmerman had on baggy pants when he turned himself in the other day, I doubt that it's because he lost weight because he actually gained a couple of pounds. So should someone take him as a hoodlum because he is wearing baggy pants?

Zimmerman is not of a background that is considered as non-troublesome. On the contrary, I know of a few people that would not walk in Miami at night on the same street with someone that looked like Zimmerman. I'm sure that Zimmerman has met with prejudices of his own in his life, so why would he have assumed so much on another human being?
And even IF he did, why would he have taken it to that extreme? He killed a human being, a young man who was just starting out in life, who didn't make it to his 18th birthday infact he just turned 17.

Zimmerman created this horror and he should pay for it, not get paid for it. But I guess that's the mind set of some.

I think the offer by the prosecution is not fair in the respect that if Zimmerman pleads down to manslaughter he probably will be out in about 7 years and he deserves a life sentence. But of course the state doesn't want to drag this thing on and on, so I see their logic, and yes it is common practice to offer plea deals.

Hi Deb- Tks!

I was blaming my Cornish Rex yesterday! Isn't that what you have in your avatar?
If you know the breed, I'm sure you'll find me "not guilty"!

I'm thinking now it's hitting the Refresh key?!?

DebFrmHell wrote:Wee Bonnie,
You have invented ways of quoting that I never even knew existed! I hope I am laughing with you!

Maybe if you started your part after the

instead of on top. It might be the board that is hinky that way...though I have seen it work for you a couple of times.

I have no idea how you do it!



[/quote]

There is no offer for a lesser plea. It is all speculation on our behalves.

I think the offer by the prosecution is not fair in the respect that if Zimmerman pleads down to manslaughter he probably will be out in about 7 years and he deserves a life sentence. But of course the state doesn't want to drag this thing on and on, so I see their logic, and yes it is common practice to offer plea deals.

Maybe you meant to type "an" offer instead.

It was our family's experience when my cousin was murdered that the DA had a lot of contact with them in regards to charges that were being bought against the man that killed him. Part of that was not what possible charges could be brought but rather the charges they were bringing and why they were doing as such. A plea deal was never a factor, gratefully. Ours was much more cut and dried than the muddled Zimmerman case.

I seriously doubt that the Martin-Fulton's would be amendable to such deals and have stated so in the past. I believe they would have plenty to say about that. And I think they would be right in doing so.

---i meant to include this tweet along w/ the "george has learned his lesson" one..

---it appears that george isn't the only one that's 'frustrated'..

http://twitter.com/#!/bobkealing
bob kealing‏@bobkealing

#Zimmerman Atty visiting client in jail tonight tells @WESH he's frustrated about setbacks but confident he can rehabilitate GZ credibility.

Tamta wrote:ZIMMERMAN CASE DETAILS

(sorry if this is redundant, I can not do a screen shot right now.)

Detailed Information for Case 592012CF001083A

Case Number: 592012CF001083A Judge: LESTER JR, KENNETH R
Defendant Name: GEORGE ZIMMERMAN
DOB: 10/1983
Proceeding: DOCKET SOUNDING Courtroom: 5B
Court Date: 08-08-2012 Time: 08:30AM

1 MURDER IN THE SECOND DEGREE


[url=http://www.seminoleclerk.org/CriminalDocket/case_detail.jsp?CaseNo=592012CF001083A

http://www.seminoleclerk.org/CriminalDocket/case_detail.jsp?CaseNo=592012CF001083A[/quote[/url]]



Wait, is that when the trial will start?

It is curious as to why MOM is waiting two weeks or so to refile for a second bond hearing. I wonder if someone has started to go through the additional 115 hours of recorded phone calls from his first round of incarceration? There could be other extremely damaging information in there that would A) Make any chance of a SYG hearing fruitless B) Further muddy the stories of what happened on the sidewalk on Feb 26 th C) Add further professional embarrassment to MOM.

Clearly George doesn't hold attorneys in high regard. He led the first two on and made them believe they were repping him...until he went MIA. Then he doesn't tell MOM about money and passport and has MOM cover for him in court on the passport issue. If MOM is smart, and I believe he is, he has to rely upon the discovery for the truth as he can't seem to get it out of his client. MOM will get a much better idea of all the players, the family dynamics, and if he is lucky THE TRUTH from listening to these tapes. The absolute worst thing he could do is quickly arrange a new bond hearing and then get more damaging evidence from these unreviewed tapes sprung on him in front of an already angry judge.

Victim Blaming: Why we turn on Trayvon Martin and other innocent victims

http://www.goodtherapy.org/blog/victim-blaming-trayvon-martin-0405126/

It is again- more of a guy thing (present company excepted) but many many people do not want to relate to the the "loser" inane time you choose sides.
They do not want to empathize or believe for a
Minute that it could happen to you- so you grasp for reasons. I think having kids shakes that out of you a bit. All women know life's unfair- we see it every paycheck we get!

marcena2 wrote:Victim Blaming: Why we turn on Trayvon Martin and other innocent victims

http://www.goodtherapy.org/blog/victim-blaming-trayvon-martin-0405126/

emberl wrote:

Tamta wrote:ZIMMERMAN CASE DETAILS

(sorry if this is redundant, I can not do a screen shot right now.)

Detailed Information for Case 592012CF001083A

Case Number: 592012CF001083A Judge: LESTER JR, KENNETH R
Defendant Name: GEORGE ZIMMERMAN
DOB: 10/1983
Proceeding: DOCKET SOUNDING Courtroom: 5B
Court Date: 08-08-2012 Time: 08:30AM

1 MURDER IN THE SECOND DEGREE


[url=http://www.seminoleclerk.org/CriminalDocket/case_detail.jsp?CaseNo=592012CF001083A

http://www.seminoleclerk.org/CriminalDocket/case_detail.jsp?CaseNo=592012CF001083A[/quote[/url]]



Wait, is that when the trial will start?

I believe that was when it was actually scheduled to start, yet MOM has said that he intends to file Motions for delay to give time to complete depositions after the discovery review, and prepare for trial which would end up pushing it back to next summer sometime.

Of course the desire to have more time hinging upon GZ being out on bond.

marcena2 wrote:It is curious as to why MOM is waiting two weeks or so to refile for a second bond hearing. I wonder if someone has started to go through the additional 115 hours of recorded phone calls from his first round of incarceration? There could be other extremely damaging information in there that would A) Make any chance of a SYG hearing fruitless B) Further muddy the stories of what happened on the sidewalk on Feb 26 th C) Add further professional embarrassment to MOM.

Clearly George doesn't hold attorneys in high regard. He led the first two on and made them believe they were repping him...until he went MIA. Then he doesn't tell MOM about money and passport and has MOM cover for him in court on the passport issue. If MOM is smart, and I believe he is, he has to rely upon the discovery for the truth as he can't seem to get it out of his client. MOM will get a much better idea of all the players, the family dynamics, and if he is lucky THE TRUTH from listening to these tapes. The absolute worst thing he could do is quickly arrange a new bond hearing and then get more damaging evidence from these unreviewed tapes sprung on him in front of an already angry judge.

You are 100% correct...I didn't think of it that way..But that makes more sense than anything else. Of course, he has been lied to by his client so why would he take anymore chances..

I think you hit it on the head.

[quote="Tamta"]

emberl wrote:

Tamta wrote:ZIMMERMAN CASE DETAILS

(sorry if this is redundant, I can not do a screen shot right now.)

Detailed Information for Case 592012CF001083A

Case Number: 592012CF001083A Judge: LESTER JR, KENNETH R
Defendant Name: GEORGE ZIMMERMAN
DOB: 10/1983
Proceeding: DOCKET SOUNDING Courtroom: 5B
Court Date: 08-08-2012 Time: 08:30AM

1 MURDER IN THE SECOND DEGREE


http://www.seminoleclerk.org/CriminalDocket/case_detail.jsp?CaseNo=592012CF001083A[/quote]



Wait, is that when the trial will start?

I believe that was when it was actually scheduled to start, yet MOM has said that he intends to file Motions for delay to give time to complete depositions after the discovery review, and prepare for trial which would end up pushing it back to next summer sometime.

Of course the desire to have more time hinging upon GZ being out on bond.

Thanks!

Yes, things have changed a little sinse last week, he's in jail, maybe till the trial will start.

Before last week they were not in a hurry for a speedy trial.....now, it's a different story.

Not sure that this has been addressed yet......will the 151 calls between Georgie & Shellie be released to the public at some point?

alabama52 wrote:Not sure that this has been addressed yet......will the 151 calls between Georgie & Shellie be released to the public at some point?

Did everyone leave?

No I am here Alabama. Up for a game of euchre? :DD

kidding. Maybe people are just driving from work

Porky wrote:No I am here Alabama. Up for a game of euchre? :DD

kidding. Maybe people are just driving from work

Sounds fun, but don't you need four players?

I'm thinking that we will get to hear those jail house recordings. The sad part is that there are those that will keep donating money to George.

DebFrmHell wrote:

CherokeeNative wrote:Gizmo wrote: Maybe O'Mara is trying to get more donations before putting in for another bond hearing.

Bingo Gizmo. If MOM is not holding off to prepare an appeal of the Judge's ruling based upon the Judge's requirement that GZ testify, then I most certainly agree that this is a tactical manuever to allow for more monies to come into the defense's fund. The longer that GZ sits in jail, the more his supporters will become agitated that an "innocent man" is being wrongfully detained. I believe that MOM is playing out a very planned and orchestrated PR job to the public to gain more support and ultimately donations. Down to his speal to the Court at the last hearing where he comments, "for those who are listening..." that GZ has done everything the Court has required of him, yadda yadda.

Or maybe, it doesn't matter because the judge in this case has cleared his docket for this week and has nothing scheduled for the following two weeks. He is not due back for anything trial related in any case until the 24th of June.

Prosecution gave him a mere five hours with their Motion to Revoke so why should he give them his with nearly 3 weeks advance to prepare a rebuttal?

Could be - obviously they can't set it for a time that the Judge isn't on the bench - but I don't go for this "mere five hours notice" since MOM was clearly aware that the prosecution had already requested that GZ's bail be revoked at the prior hearing based upon the same grounds - this most recent filing was nothing more than a continuation of the Prosecution's earlier request, but this time they had damning evidence to support it. MOM had no reason to be surprised given that he was the one to mention in his PCs that GZ and Shellie had spent close to $50k by the time he took control of the money.

Judges usually notify attys in active court cases of their calendar schedule I am sure both parties were aware the judge was going to be gone.
Perhaps, this is the reason for the rush to get the bond issue back in court at this time?

DebFrmHell wrote:

WeeBonnie wrote:Deb- did you see MOM on the news saying he wasn't sure it was wise to have GZ testify at future hearing)?
To me, this says he needs lots of time to figure out how to pull that off.
Or if he should even try.
With Shelley's prosecution held over their heads, it'd be a good time to beg for a plea.

DebFrmHell wrote:

Or maybe, it doesn't matter because the judge in this case has cleared his docket for
Prosecution gave him a mere five hours with their Motion to Revoke so why should he give them his with nearly 3 weeks advance to prepare a rebuttal?

George Zimmerman has the Constitution on his side. He cannot be compelled to testify. The only wisdom that is applicable is a working knowledge of that Pesky Little Fifth Amendment.

You remember that one...the Right to Remain a "Potted Palm"...errr....Silent.

LOL!

And then there is the strong possibilty that GZ's rights were violated by denial of due process. He did not waive his right to attend the Motion to Revoke Bond. He only waived his right to attend the discovery motion, the only motion that was on the docket up until 8:30 in the morning of the discovery hearing...June 1st, 2012.

And, just by chance you are including the SYG hearing, he is not compelled to testify at that one either. There are facts in evidence that support his claim of self-defense. MOM can let the evidence speak for itself.

Taking the word of a proxy spokesperson is not the same as the signed statements issued by George Zimmerman. We have never seen those. A proxy may have their own interpretation of what Zimmerman said.

It is for that very reason I took exception to Judge Lester insisting that MOM speak on behalf of his client "on the fly."

BBM

I don't believe that is correct. I believe that SCOTUS in Gerstein v. Pugh, 420 U.S. 103, 95 S.Ct. 854, 43 L.Ed.2d 54 (1975), supports Judge Lester's action in holding the hearing without GZ being personally present. There was probable cause to believe that GZ committed a fraud upon the Court and his bond was revoked. He's back at ground zero. The result was that there was probable cause to detain GZ pending further proceedings, which can be determined without an adversary hearing. The same as that for an arrest, where the standard-probable cause to believe that the suspect has committed a crime-traditionally has been decided by a Judge in a nonadversary proceeding on hearsay and written testimony, and the Court has approved these informal modes of proof․

ETA: I realize that Judges are reversed all the time in cases, but I find it hard to believe that Judge Lester, with his reputation for following the law to a "T", would make such a 1st year law student mistake; I also believe that MOM would have been all over that mistake like bees on honey if Judge Lester was wrong.

CherokeeNative wrote:

DebFrmHell wrote:

CherokeeNative wrote:Gizmo wrote: Maybe O'Mara is trying to get more donations before putting in for another bond hearing.

Bingo Gizmo. If MOM is not holding off to prepare an appeal of the Judge's ruling based upon the Judge's requirement that GZ testify, then I most certainly agree that this is a tactical manuever to allow for more monies to come into the defense's fund. The longer that GZ sits in jail, the more his supporters will become agitated that an "innocent man" is being wrongfully detained. I believe that MOM is playing out a very planned and orchestrated PR job to the public to gain more support and ultimately donations. Down to his speal to the Court at the last hearing where he comments, "for those who are listening..." that GZ has done everything the Court has required of him, yadda yadda.

Or maybe, it doesn't matter because the judge in this case has cleared his docket for this week and has nothing scheduled for the following two weeks. He is not due back for anything trial related in any case until the 24th of June.

Prosecution gave him a mere five hours with their Motion to Revoke so why should he give them his with nearly 3 weeks advance to prepare a rebuttal?

Could be - obviously they can't set it for a time that the Judge isn't on the bench - but I don't go for this "mere five hours notice" since MOM was clearly aware that the prosecution had already requested that GZ's bail be revoked at the prior hearing based upon the same grounds - this most recent filing was nothing more than a continuation of the Prosecution's earlier request, but this time they had damning evidence to support it. MOM had no reason to be surprised given that he was the one to mention in his PCs that GZ and Shellie had spent close to $50k by the time he took control of the money.

If O'Mara thought for one minute that it would be a win to set a re-bond hearing he would put in for it asap. The judge doesn't have to have a clear callander to put in for a hearing. Actually it would put him first on the list to be called when the judge returns. I think it's obvious that O'Mara doesn't want to do it until he regroups on everything before him. He could think he will get more donations this way or he could want to see all the evidence and not rely on his lying client and get mudd on his face again.

Gizmo711 wrote:

CherokeeNative wrote:

DebFrmHell wrote:

CherokeeNative wrote:Gizmo wrote: Maybe O'Mara is trying to get more donations before putting in for another bond hearing.

Bingo Gizmo. If MOM is not holding off to prepare an appeal of the Judge's ruling based upon the Judge's requirement that GZ testify, then I most certainly agree that this is a tactical manuever to allow for more monies to come into the defense's fund. The longer that GZ sits in jail, the more his supporters will become agitated that an "innocent man" is being wrongfully detained. I believe that MOM is playing out a very planned and orchestrated PR job to the public to gain more support and ultimately donations. Down to his speal to the Court at the last hearing where he comments, "for those who are listening..." that GZ has done everything the Court has required of him, yadda yadda.

Or maybe, it doesn't matter because the judge in this case has cleared his docket for this week and has nothing scheduled for the following two weeks. He is not due back for anything trial related in any case until the 24th of June.

Prosecution gave him a mere five hours with their Motion to Revoke so why should he give them his with nearly 3 weeks advance to prepare a rebuttal?

Could be - obviously they can't set it for a time that the Judge isn't on the bench - but I don't go for this "mere five hours notice" since MOM was clearly aware that the prosecution had already requested that GZ's bail be revoked at the prior hearing based upon the same grounds - this most recent filing was nothing more than a continuation of the Prosecution's earlier request, but this time they had damning evidence to support it. MOM had no reason to be surprised given that he was the one to mention in his PCs that GZ and Shellie had spent close to $50k by the time he took control of the money.

If O'Mara thought for one minute that it would be a win to set a re-bond hearing he would put in for it asap. The judge doesn't have to have a clear callander to put in for a hearing. Actually it would put him first on the list to be called when the judge returns. I think it's obvious that O'Mara doesn't want to do it until he regroups on everything before him. He could think he will get more donations this way or he could want to see all the evidence and not rely on his lying client and get mudd on his face again.

Someone posted elsewhere that another bond hearing has been set for June 29th. The poster did not provide a link, though. I'll see if I can find anything.

Yep! myfoxorlando.com

CherokeeNative wrote:

DebFrmHell wrote:

WeeBonnie wrote:Deb- did you see MOM on the news saying he wasn't sure it was wise to have GZ testify at future hearing)?
To me, this says he needs lots of time to figure out how to pull that off.
Or if he should even try.
With Shelley's prosecution held over their heads, it'd be a good time to beg for a plea.

DebFrmHell wrote:

Or maybe, it doesn't matter because the judge in this case has cleared his docket for
Prosecution gave him a mere five hours with their Motion to Revoke so why should he give them his with nearly 3 weeks advance to prepare a rebuttal?

George Zimmerman has the Constitution on his side. He cannot be compelled to testify. The only wisdom that is applicable is a working knowledge of that Pesky Little Fifth Amendment.

You remember that one...the Right to Remain a "Potted Palm"...errr....Silent.

LOL!

And then there is the strong possibilty that GZ's rights were violated by denial of due process. He did not waive his right to attend the Motion to Revoke Bond. He only waived his right to attend the discovery motion, the only motion that was on the docket up until 8:30 in the morning of the discovery hearing...June 1st, 2012.

And, just by chance you are including the SYG hearing, he is not compelled to testify at that one either. There are facts in evidence that support his claim of self-defense. MOM can let the evidence speak for itself.

Taking the word of a proxy spokesperson is not the same as the signed statements issued by George Zimmerman. We have never seen those. A proxy may have their own interpretation of what Zimmerman said.

It is for that very reason I took exception to Judge Lester insisting that MOM speak on behalf of his client "on the fly."

BBM

I don't believe that is correct. I believe that SCOTUS in Gerstein v. Pugh, 420 U.S. 103, 95 S.Ct. 854, 43 L.Ed.2d 54 (1975), supports Judge Lester's action in holding the hearing without GZ being personally present. There was probable cause to believe that GZ committed a fraud upon the Court and his bond was revoked. He's back at ground zero. The result was that there was probable cause to detain GZ pending further proceedings, which can be determined without an adversary hearing. The same as that for an arrest, where the standard-probable cause to believe that the suspect has committed a crime-traditionally has been decided by a Judge in a nonadversary proceeding on hearsay and written testimony, and the Court has approved these informal modes of proof․

ETA: I realize that Judges are reversed all the time in cases, but I find it hard to believe that Judge Lester, with his reputation for following the law to a "T", would make such a 1st year law student mistake; I also believe that MOM would have been all over that mistake like bees on honey if Judge Lester was wrong.

There is also the 6th Amendment. That is the right to face your accuser. Being called a blatant liar by the prosecution is pretty much an accusation to me.

Anywhoooo, we can debate this for days. Until we find out what MOM is going to do, it is all acedemics so... agree to disagree! LOL! Story of our lives!

Here is a link to the dockets
http://www.flcourts18.org/dockets/Alva/Master-jan-jun.pdf

THe 29th of June is a Friday and it doesn't appear that there is court on Fridays so... who knows!

Update on Motion for Bond 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.

This is all that is on the GZLegal. So I question the 29th date.

DebFrmHell wrote:

Update on Motion for Bond 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.

This is all that is on the GZLegal. So I question the 29th date.

I'm not sure where myfoxorlando got their info but it is making the rounds......Orlando Sentinel has it posted (crediting my fox). Don't shoot the messenger, please. I was just passing along what I found.

alabama52 wrote:

DebFrmHell wrote:

Update on Motion for Bond 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.

This is all that is on the GZLegal. So I question the 29th date.

I'm not sure where myfoxorlando got their info but it is making the rounds......Orlando Sentinel has it posted (crediting my fox). Don't shoot the messenger, please. I was just passing along what I found.

Yes, I've seen it reported elsewhere too. The Twitter account hasn't been updated since yesterday, so I guess we'll see later if they confirm it.

Sounds odd that MOM would announce yesterday that he was delaying filing, and then today, there is a date set. I agree - something in the media has gone haywire.

DebfrmHell - I agree 100%

I have noticed Fox getting scoops before. I think the defense knows they are very sympathetic to SYG and the NRA in general.

alabama52 wrote:

DebFrmHell wrote:

Update on Motion for Bond 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.

This is all that is on the GZLegal. So I question the 29th date.

I'm not sure where myfoxorlando got their info but it is making the rounds......Orlando Sentinel has it posted (crediting my fox). Don't shoot the messenger, please. I was just passing along what I found.

"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".

http://gzlegalcase.com/index.php/press-releases/25-update-on-motion-for-bond-in-george-zimmerman-case

WeeBonnie wrote:I have noticed Fox getting scoops before. I think the defense knows they are very sympathetic to SYG and the NRA in general.

alabama52 wrote:

DebFrmHell wrote:

Update on Motion for Bond 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.

This is all that is on the GZLegal. So I question the 29th date.

I'm not sure where myfoxorlando got their info but it is making the rounds......Orlando Sentinel has it posted (crediting my fox). Don't shoot the messenger, please. I was just passing along what I found.

Hi weebonnie,

I have a real hard time reading your posts, because I don't know where they start or where they end.

If you hit the "quote" button, you'll see the other posters post, scroll down till you see this: [/quote]

Hit it right there after the ]. and hit "enter". The start your message.

Makes it easier for you and for everyone who want to read your message.

Court Schedule

http://www.flcourts18.org/dockets/Alva/Master-jan-jun.pdf

I do not see anything for 6/29.

O'Mara is going to delay it as long as he possibly can...I believe he may have multiple reasons and probably all ligit. He has a liar for a client and if this was not such a high profile case O'Mara probably would have dropped Zimmerman by now.

No lawyer enjoys a client that lies to his own lawyer. It's obvious that Zimmerman thinks he knows more than anyone and consideres himself the lawyer, the judge and the executioner. He believes that anything he does he should NOT have to be defended for, that his word should be enough.

A liars word should be enough..

Hi emberl. I haven't been able to figure out what's causing Weebonnie's quotes to do that. The quotes are done right, but they aren't displaying correctly. When I go in to edit them I just have to hit send without changing anything and then they display correctly.

Justice4all wrote:Hi emberl. I haven't been able to figure out what's causing Weebonnie's quotes to do that. The quotes are done right, but they aren't displaying correctly. When I go in to edit them I just have to hit send without changing anything and then they display correctly.

Yes, I noticed that when I quoted her, the display was correct.

Strange huh?

And it's only with her quoting posts, as far as I know.

ETA, is it maybe because she posts her comment on top of the quoted quote and not at the bottom?

test

Justice4all wrote:Hi emberl. I haven't been able to figure out what's causing Weebonnie's quotes to do that. The quotes are done right, but they aren't displaying correctly. When I go in to edit them I just have to hit send without changing anything and then they display correctly.

I already tested that theory. I'm truly baffled.

Justice4all wrote:I already tested that theory. I'm truly baffled.

OMG, I am so embarrassed but honored to have your help!
I think I figured out the multiple thing- I can't reload the page EVER. Ha.
But maybe it's my IPhone? My laptop is busted so I can't compare.
Or my preferences- Im going to mess with them Right now and see.

Thank you ALL for trying to help! I feel incredibly welcomed instead of a PITA. Which is really what I am!

Posting underneath doesn't help does it? This thing doesn't seem to have a cursor- mover, so I have been mostly stuck posting on top!