George Zimmerman / Trayvon Martin Case #3

Porky wrote:

snowbird wrote:I wonder why he would be calling the bail bond men. George did not even pay his last bond. I am at a loss and looking for any suggestions why he would be calling bail bond men.

My guess is that he intends to fight hard at the bond hearing and have already worked something out with these new bondsmen in case the Judge springs him. Sounds like he is going to take the "reasonable bail" route. That said, I do not know how he gets around not putting GZ on the stand ( very risky).

MOM could be seeking a way to respond with the 'law' instead of taking issue with the facts being wrong, that way avoiding putting the Zs on the stand.

snowbird wrote:

Tamta wrote:
MOM will call witnesses 6/29

http://www.flcourts18.org/PDF/Press_Releases/Def.%20witness%20list%20for%20bond%20hrg.pdf

I wonder why he would be calling the bail bond men. George did not even pay his last bond. I am at a loss and looking for any suggestions why he would be calling bail bond men.

Not all bail bondsmen charge the same, they try to be competitive. The going fee is 10% of the bond. However, some may charge 8 or 9 % and some can go as low as 6%..It would depend on the type of case and how they feel about the person running off. In a case such as this (high profile) some may take the chance at a lower % because they will make a lot of money either way. However, if the bond is 1 million, the person would have to put up something that is valued at that amount because the bondsman will have to pay the whole million if the person runs and cannot be caught. Seeing as Zimmerman skipped on paying the last bondsman the balance of his fee (10,000) it may be a little harder to get one to trust him the second go round. They probably will ask for the entire fee up front. Then it will be up to the bondsman what collateral he will require for the bond itself.

The court goes after the bondsman for the money if the person skips town. However, the law will still be after him and when they catch up with him, his bond is gone forever.

I predict that Zimmerman will not get a bond this time and if he does, it will be too high for him to meet. The judge is certainly not going to give him a bond anywhere near the pervious one.

snowbird wrote:When George gets bond set, will he have to pay the first bond making him pay both bonds before he gets out of jail, or will the first bond he didn't pay be forgiven?

Not the bond itself because he didn't run...However, he still owes the first bondman 10,000 that will have to be paid.

Unless gads more money has poured in from donations, I don't see George getting out of jail anytime soon. O'Mara really would rather have George stay in jail than to kick out a large sum of money from what was collected. If the money slows down than O'Mara will have to come back to court and again try to claim indigent for his client and that wont go over to well after all this.

Imagine a person paying 100,000 to a bondsman to get out of jail and than asking the court for a 100,000 for expert witnesses (from tax payers)...The tax payers will feel as though they were the ones that actually paid Zimmermans bond.

I believe the judge is going to take all of this into consideration at the next bond hearing.....George doesn't deserve any special treatment after lying the way he did.

Tamta wrote:

snowbird wrote:I would not think that would be a good idea, because he had the money in his account or a family account at that time. I think he only owned like 5,000 and he had 135,000. So he would not have been truthful to the bond men.

Technically, looking at the bank transfers done by Shellie, he had money is his account AFTER he was released from jail.

I personally think it may have more to do with the flight risk aspect.

MOM may not end up calling them at all.
MOM has a couple options in terms of a response.

Actually, the problem is that Zimmerman colluded with his wife to transfer all the money that was donated to him into accounts that were opened in her name, and it was done with the purpose to make him appear "penniless" ("basically indigent" as O'Mara said during the hearing) to get a lower bond.

The evidence is the recorded conversations that Zimmerman had with Shellie while he was incarcerated, the amounts of money that they discussed over the phone coincided with the amounts of the withdraws and deposits that she made. Zimmerman plotted with his wife to lie to the court, that's why his bond was revoked, what he did was an underhanded maneuver to protect his money from being used toward his bond. Under different circumstances, those actions would amount to fraud. The money was transfered back to Zimmerman after he was released on bond.

The judge have enough reasons to permanently revoke Zimmerman's bond. As the judge has stated, there is strong evidence to support the second degree murder charge, Zimmerman has a prior history of violence, and he concocted a ploy to gain advantage indirectly, or deviously, by making his wife lie for him under oath.

There are only two options, the judge can make him sit in jail for the rest of the process, or he can raise the amount of the bond to give him another opportunity to be free while he awaits trial, the options are entirely up to the judge's discretion.

Hi Tamta

What options / laws do you have in mind?
I'm not sure a judge would want to reconsider the bind without a full accounting of what went on with the bank transfers and now, the passport.
Of course, it's GZ 's right to not incriminate himself.
But if he can't explain away the perjury he conspired w Shelly to commit, he seems pretty well screwed from where I sit.

Tamta wrote:

snowbird wrote:I would not think that would be a good idea, because he had the money in his account or a family account at that time. I think he only owned like 5,000 and he had 135,000. So he would not have been truthful to the bond men.

Technically, looking at the bank transfers done by Shellie, he had money is his account AFTER he was released from jail.

I personally think it may have more to do with the flight risk aspect.

MOM may not end up calling them at all.
MOM has a couple options in terms of a response.

Gizmo711 wrote:

snowbird wrote:When George gets bond set, will he have to pay the first bond making him pay both bonds before he gets out of jail, or will the first bond he didn't pay be forgiven?

Not the bond itself because he didn't run...However, he still owes the first bondman 10,000 that will have to be paid.

Thanks so if I understand correctly he will owe the 10,000 plus what ever bond that will be given to him.

I thought you had to pay the bond before you were released. I din't know you had a option of paying after you were let out of jail.

Alessandra_Deux wrote:

Tamta wrote:Technically, looking at the bank transfers done by Shellie, he had money is his account AFTER he was released from jail.

I personally think it may have more to do with the flight risk aspect.

MOM may not end up calling them at all.
MOM has a couple options in terms of a response.

Actually, the problem is that Zimmerman colluded with his wife to transfer all the money that was donated to him into accounts that were opened in her name, and it was done with the purpose to make him appear "penniless" ("basically indigent" as O'Mara said during the hearing) to get a lower bond.

The evidence is the recorded conversations that Zimmerman had with Shellie while he was incarcerated, the amounts of money that they discussed over the phone coincided with the amounts of the withdraws and deposits that she made. Zimmerman plotted with his wife to lie to the court, that's why his bond was revoked, what he did was an underhanded maneuver to protect his money from being used toward his bond. Under different circumstances, those actions would amount to fraud. The money was transfered back to Zimmerman after he was released on bond.

The judge have enough reasons to permanently revoke Zimmerman's bond. As the judge has stated, there is strong evidence to support the second degree murder charge, Zimmerman has a prior history of violence, and he concocted a ploy to gain advantage indirectly, or deviously, by making his wife lie for him under oath.

There are only two options, the judge can make him sit in jail for the rest of the process, or he can raise the amount of the bond to give him another opportunity to be free while he awaits trial, the options are entirely up to the judge's discretion.

BBM

-The problem I understand, is that GZ failed to alert the court on material misinformation, and thus allowed the misrepresentation of material facts. As his bond amount was determined on a certain understanding of the material facts, his bond was revoked and as per closing arguments of 6/1 hearing, GZ would have to answer for this, in order to be eligible for a new bond.

-The evidence is very relevant as to whether or not GZ mislead the court.

-This is a charge against Shellie Zimmerman, a big problem for GZ, however it is not 'evidence' even though I said above the evidence in the affidavit, is relevant to whether or not he mislead the court by failing to alert the court on misinformation.


However the fact remains, that WE DO NOT KNOW why GZ did not think that that $ was not available for bond, we really do not.
Although we have heard more than once from MOM that GZ just thought that(?) and he has appeared to put forth, whether we care for it or not, that this is the reason for the misrepresentation, and in all fairness, MOM has a right and responsibility to do that, and I am confident that he will present evidence to back up his assertion.

As I understand the evidence available to the public at this time and what the facts before the court are, NONE of it answers this question, which is an important question in this matter.

My point is not to argue that GZ is 'right', wrongfully incarcerated, or that the evidence against SZ is not compelling. It is that all of the facts are not known.




__________________________________________

http://www.flcourts18.org/PDF/Press_Releases/motion%20to%20revoke%20bond.pdf

http://www.flcourts18.org/PDF/Press_Releases/order%20revoking%20bond.pdf

capias for Shellie Zimmerman on previous posting

WeeBonnie wrote:Hi Tamta

What options / laws do you have in mind?
I'm not sure a judge would want to reconsider the bind without a full accounting of what went on with the bank transfers and now, the passport.
Of course, it's GZ 's right to not incriminate himself.
But if he can't explain away the perjury he conspired w Shelly to commit, he seems pretty well screwed from where I sit.

Hi Winnie

I will get back to you after I do some work and think on it!

Tamta wrote:

Alessandra_Deux wrote:Actually, the problem is that Zimmerman colluded with his wife to transfer all the money that was donated to him into accounts that were opened in her name, and it was done with the purpose to make him appear "penniless" ("basically indigent" as O'Mara said during the hearing) to get a lower bond.

The evidence is the recorded conversations that Zimmerman had with Shellie while he was incarcerated, the amounts of money that they discussed over the phone coincided with the amounts of the withdraws and deposits that she made. Zimmerman plotted with his wife to lie to the court, that's why his bond was revoked, what he did was an underhanded maneuver to protect his money from being used toward his bond. Under different circumstances, those actions would amount to fraud. The money was transfered back to Zimmerman after he was released on bond.

The judge have enough reasons to permanently revoke Zimmerman's bond. As the judge has stated, there is strong evidence to support the second degree murder charge, Zimmerman has a prior history of violence, and he concocted a ploy to gain advantage indirectly, or deviously, by making his wife lie for him under oath.

There are only two options, the judge can make him sit in jail for the rest of the process, or he can raise the amount of the bond to give him another opportunity to be free while he awaits trial, the options are entirely up to the judge's discretion.

BBM

-The problem I understand, is that GZ failed to alert the court on material misinformation, and thus allowed the misrepresentation of material facts. As his bond amount was determined on a certain understanding of the material facts, his bond was revoked and as per closing arguments of 6/1 hearing, GZ would have to answer for this, in order to be eligible for a new bond.

-The evidence is very relevant as to whether or not GZ mislead the court.

-This is a charge against Shellie Zimmerman, a big problem for GZ, however it is not 'evidence' even though I said above the evidence in the affidavit, is relevant to whether or not he mislead the court by failing to alert the court on misinformation.


However the fact remains, that WE DO NOT KNOW why GZ did not think that that $ was not available for bond, we really do not.
Although we have heard more than once from MOM that GZ just thought that(?) and he has appeared to put forth, whether we care for it or not, that this is the reason for the misrepresentation, and in all fairness, MOM has a right and responsibility to do that, and I am confident that he will present evidence to back up his assertion.

As I understand the evidence available to the public at this time and what the facts before the court are, NONE of it answers this question, which is an important question in this matter.

My point is not to argue that GZ is 'right', wrongfully incarcerated, or that the evidence against SZ is not compelling. It is that all of the facts are not known.




__________________________________________

http://www.flcourts18.org/PDF/Press_Releases/motion%20to%20revoke%20bond.pdf

http://www.flcourts18.org/PDF/Press_Releases/order%20revoking%20bond.pdf

capias for Shellie Zimmerman on previous posting

I seriously doubt whether anyone will care whether GZ thought the money was available for bond or what other purpose GZ thought the money could be used for. I was pretty clear that the court was attempting to assess the financial position of all members of the family.

Here is where I think it gets dicey. Recall that a month GZ was asked by the police whether he was ever in a pre trial diversion program. This was asked weeks after his arrest and GZ flat out lied about that. I feel certain that the Prosecution will raise the issue of his integrity and a seemingly propensity to fool the court and authorities. Mind you, on the night of the killing, he told the police that he had clean record. Unfortunately he had already left a trail of lies *before* the bond incident.

Oh, I agree Porky...Zimmerman had lied since the night of the shooting. When they make public everything that Zimmerman told the police is even going to show that he is even a bigger liar. I'm pretty sure that the murder two charge came after the prosecution reviewed Zimmermans statements at the police department.

No, his lying at the bond hearing was not the first lies that he told, it just pizzed off the judge because he showed that he cared very little about authority or the judicial system. It's obvious that Zimmerman thinks he is above the law in every aspect of his life and lies.

http://www.flcourts18.org/PDF/Press_Releases/redacted%20second%20discovery.pdf

Judge Lester made it very clear that he thinks Zimmerman should take the stand at the next bond hearing...He may not have to, but if he wants another bond issued I think it would be wise for him to take the stand and try and come up with an explaination as to why he lied. I doubt that the judge will listen to anyone else saying it for him. JMO

GEORGE ZIMMERMAN DEFENSE TEAM RECEIVES SECOND ROUND OF DISCOVERY
ON 15 JUNE 2012.

According the June 1 ruling of the Court, the defense will have 30 days to review the discovery before it is made available to the public.

http://gzlegalcase.com/index.php/press-releases/27-george-zimmerman-defense-team-receives-second-round-of-discovery

Tamta wrote:GEORGE ZIMMERMAN DEFENSE TEAM RECEIVES SECOND ROUND OF DISCOVERY
ON 15 JUNE 2012.

According the June 1 ruling of the Court, the defense will have 30 days to review the discovery before it is made available to the public.

http://gzlegalcase.com/index.php/press-releases/27-george-zimmerman-defense-team-receives-second-round-of-discovery

This is one set of docs that I can't wait to see.....

I don't see how any of what took place at the bond hearing can be misconstrude as anything of deceit. Once again the taped calls are hanging Zimmerman...

One would think he would have had his fill of making calls and being recorded. Some people just never learn......

Gizmo711 wrote:I don't see how any of what took place at the bond hearing can be misconstrude as anything of deceit. Once again the taped calls are hanging Zimmerman...

One would think he would have had his fill of making calls and being recorded. Some people just never learn......

Gizmo,

Not only that, I just cannot wrap my head around why MOM would subject GZ to possible cross examination by the Judge AND the state. I just see this hearing as a legal land mine. The only thing that I can think of is MOM will try to limit the scope of any cross but that could turn out to be a greater risk than the benefit of GZ being out.

BTW how did you choose the name Gizmo? :)

Respectfully snipped.

Tamta wrote:

However the fact remains, that WE DO NOT KNOW why GZ did not think that that $ was not available for bond, we really do not.

We are now back to square one if we go by your analogy Tamta. You have maintained all along that because we don't know why GZ did not think the money was available, that there may be some legitimate reason for why he and Shellie did what they did. It's ludicrous. The fact is that GZ and Shellie had control over an enormous amount of funds...they transferred those funds into various accounts of their own and of family member's...they transferred or at least discussed transferring some of the funds onto gift cards...they paid private bills and obligations. What reasonable person would now believe that GZ or Shellie were unclear as to whether or not they had access to those funds? The bottom line is this - and nothing else matters - GZ had control over an enormous amount of money at the time of the bail hearing. He allowed his family and wife and attorney to make material misrepresentations (blatant lies) be made to the Court without saying anything at a very minimum to his attorney. There is no excuse other than, I f*cked up by allowing this to happen - I thought I could get away with it and I didn't. Anything else will be more lies.

I've lost my patience. You can put lipstick on a pig, but it is still a pig.

CherokeeNative wrote:Respectfully snipped.

Tamta wrote:

However the fact remains, that WE DO NOT KNOW why GZ did not think that that $ was not available for bond, we really do not.

We are now back to square one if we go by your analogy Tamta. You have maintained all along that because we don't know why GZ did not think the money was available, that there may be some legitimate reason for why he and Shellie did what they did. It's ludicrous. The fact is that GZ and Shellie had control over an enormous amount of funds...they transferred those funds into various accounts of their own and of family member's...they transferred or at least discussed transferring some of the funds onto gift cards...they paid private bills and obligations. What reasonable person would now believe that GZ or Shellie were unclear as to whether or not they had access to those funds? The bottom line is this - and nothing else matters - GZ had control over an enormous amount of money at the time of the bail hearing. He allowed his family and wife and attorney to make material misrepresentations (blatant lies) be made to the Court without saying anything at a very minimum to his attorney. There is no excuse other than, I f*cked up by allowing this to happen - I thought I could get away with it and I didn't. Anything else will be more lies.

I've lost my patience. You can put lipstick on a pig, but it is still a pig.

CN are you making vile references to me in makeup? :DD

Porky wrote:

Gizmo711 wrote:I don't see how any of what took place at the bond hearing can be misconstrude as anything of deceit. Once again the taped calls are hanging Zimmerman...

One would think he would have had his fill of making calls and being recorded. Some people just never learn......

Gizmo,

Not only that, I just cannot wrap my head around why MOM would subject GZ to possible cross examination by the Judge AND the state. I just see this hearing as a legal land mine. The only thing that I can think of is MOM will try to limit the scope of any cross but that could turn out to be a greater risk than the benefit of GZ being out.

BTW how did you choose the name Gizmo? :)

My little dog looks like Gizmo, so I named him that. 711 is a day that means a lot to me....so I put them together.

Porky wrote:

CherokeeNative wrote:Respectfully snipped.


We are now back to square one if we go by your analogy Tamta. You have maintained all along that because we don't know why GZ did not think the money was available, that there may be some legitimate reason for why he and Shellie did what they did. It's ludicrous. The fact is that GZ and Shellie had control over an enormous amount of funds...they transferred those funds into various accounts of their own and of family member's...they transferred or at least discussed transferring some of the funds onto gift cards...they paid private bills and obligations. What reasonable person would now believe that GZ or Shellie were unclear as to whether or not they had access to those funds? The bottom line is this - and nothing else matters - GZ had control over an enormous amount of money at the time of the bail hearing. He allowed his family and wife and attorney to make material misrepresentations (blatant lies) be made to the Court without saying anything at a very minimum to his attorney. There is no excuse other than, I f*cked up by allowing this to happen - I thought I could get away with it and I didn't. Anything else will be more lies.

I've lost my patience. You can put lipstick on a pig, but it is still a pig.

CN are you making vile references to me in makeup? :DD

Never Porky Never

CherokeeNative wrote:Respectfully snipped.

Tamta wrote:

However the fact remains, that WE DO NOT KNOW why GZ did not think that that $ was not available for bond, we really do not.

We are now back to square one if we go by your analogy Tamta. You have maintained all along that because we don't know why GZ did not think the money was available, that there may be some legitimate reason for why he and Shellie did what they did. It's ludicrous. The fact is that GZ and Shellie had control over an enormous amount of funds...they transferred those funds into various accounts of their own and of family member's...they transferred or at least discussed transferring some of the funds onto gift cards...they paid private bills and obligations. What reasonable person would now believe that GZ or Shellie were unclear as to whether or not they had access to those funds? The bottom line is this - and nothing else matters - GZ had control over an enormous amount of money at the time of the bail hearing. He allowed his family and wife and attorney to make material misrepresentations (blatant lies) be made to the Court without saying anything at a very minimum to his attorney. There is no excuse other than, I f*cked up by allowing this to happen - I thought I could get away with it and I didn't. Anything else will be more lies.

I've lost my patience. You can put lipstick on a pig, but it is still a pig.

Tamta - let me ask it this way. Let's say that little Jimmy goes to the local market and steals three pieces of candy. When he is caught by the store manager, he tells the store manager that he stole the candy because his mommy will never buy him candy? Did he still steal the candy?

CherokeeNative wrote:Respectfully snipped.

Tamta wrote:

However the fact remains, that WE DO NOT KNOW why GZ did not think that that $ was not available for bond, we really do not.

We are now back to square one if we go by your analogy Tamta. You have maintained all along that because we don't know why GZ did not think the money was available, that there may be some legitimate reason for why he and Shellie did what they did. It's ludicrous. The fact is that GZ and Shellie had control over an enormous amount of funds...they transferred those funds into various accounts of their own and of family member's...they transferred or at least discussed transferring some of the funds onto gift cards...they paid private bills and obligations. What reasonable person would now believe that GZ or Shellie were unclear as to whether or not they had access to those funds? The bottom line is this - and nothing else matters - GZ had control over an enormous amount of money at the time of the bail hearing. He allowed his family and wife and attorney to make material misrepresentations (blatant lies) be made to the Court without saying anything at a very minimum to his attorney. There is no excuse other than, I f*cked up by allowing this to happen - I thought I could get away with it and I didn't. Anything else will be more lies.

I've lost my patience. You can put lipstick on a pig, but it is still a pig.

Plus, Shellie even says in the call, when asking about how much of the bond to pay, "that's what it's there for" and for him to think about it and he said ok. If he had questions about it, don't you think he would've had said 'I don't know if we can use it for that', rather than agreeing to the '10' or whatever it was. I think he wanted to keep liquid in case he decided to run.

serenaz1 wrote:

CherokeeNative wrote:Respectfully snipped.


We are now back to square one if we go by your analogy Tamta. You have maintained all along that because we don't know why GZ did not think the money was available, that there may be some legitimate reason for why he and Shellie did what they did. It's ludicrous. The fact is that GZ and Shellie had control over an enormous amount of funds...they transferred those funds into various accounts of their own and of family member's...they transferred or at least discussed transferring some of the funds onto gift cards...they paid private bills and obligations. What reasonable person would now believe that GZ or Shellie were unclear as to whether or not they had access to those funds? The bottom line is this - and nothing else matters - GZ had control over an enormous amount of money at the time of the bail hearing. He allowed his family and wife and attorney to make material misrepresentations (blatant lies) be made to the Court without saying anything at a very minimum to his attorney. There is no excuse other than, I f*cked up by allowing this to happen - I thought I could get away with it and I didn't. Anything else will be more lies.

I've lost my patience. You can put lipstick on a pig, but it is still a pig.

Plus, Shellie even says in the call, when asking about how much of the bond to pay, "that's what it's there for" and for him to think about it and he said ok. If he had questions about it, don't you think he would've had said 'I don't know if we can use it for that', rather than agreeing to the '10' or whatever it was. I think he wanted to keep liquid in case he decided to run.

He was looking to switch the money from account to account, pay off his bills, pay his living expenses and now we are to believe that he didn't know he could pay his bond with it? This should not even be a question....OF COURSE he knew he could pay the bond with it, he was trying to hide every penny as NOT to give it to a bondsman. The mere fact that he still has an outstanding amount of 10,000, goes to show that he thinks it's a waste of money to give it for a bond.

Therefore I feel that he should just stay in jail, this way he can save what's left after the lawyer gets his due.

Gizmo711 wrote:

serenaz1 wrote:

Plus, Shellie even says in the call, when asking about how much of the bond to pay, "that's what it's there for" and for him to think about it and he said ok. If he had questions about it, don't you think he would've had said 'I don't know if we can use it for that', rather than agreeing to the '10' or whatever it was. I think he wanted to keep liquid in case he decided to run.

He was looking to switch the money from account to account, pay off his bills, pay his living expenses and now we are to believe that he didn't know he could pay his bond with it? This should not even be a question....OF COURSE he knew he could pay the bond with it, he was trying to hide every penny as NOT to give it to a bondsman. The mere fact that he still has an outstanding amount of 10,000, goes to show that he thinks it's a waste of money to give it for a bond.

Therefore I feel that he should just stay in jail, this way he can save what's left after the lawyer gets his due.

Hey Gizmo - so your puppy is named Gizmo? Our family cat was Gizzmo...boy we loved that little man. Anyhooo...question, I know that it was said that GZ had not paid the final 10k of his bail to the bondsman, but do we know that he still hasn't? And, is there any reason that GZ may have entered into some form of agreement with the bondsman not to pay the final 10k? I just can't see him sitting by quietly while 10k is owed him.

Gizmo711 wrote:

He was looking to switch the money from account to account, pay off his bills, pay his living expenses and now we are to believe that he didn't know he could pay his bond with it? This should not even be a question....OF COURSE he knew he could pay the bond with it, he was trying to hide every penny as NOT to give it to a bondsman. The mere fact that he still has an outstanding amount of 10,000, goes to show that he thinks it's a waste of money to give it for a bond.

Therefore I feel that he should just stay in jail, this way he can save what's left after the lawyer gets his due.

--in his letter from jail to a supporter, he even mentions putting the paypal $$$'s towards his bond...

http://www.thesmokinggun.com/documents/george-zimmerman-jail-letter-354759
Zimmerman: "This Will All Work Out For Me"

In jail letter, accused killer pitched donation to his site
---snipped--

Zimmerman wrote that, “My attorney seems cautiously optimistic about me receiving bond tomorrow and I will put funds received through my website towards my bond.” However, during Zimmerman’s April 20 bond hearing, no mention of the web site’s substantial revenues was made by the accused killer or his lawyer. Zimmerman, who was freed on $150,000 bond, had already raised about $200,000 by that time, his lawyer subsequently acknowledged.

Oh my goodness ellejay, GZ is the gift that just keeps on giving. Apparently no one ever told him never to put anything in writing you don't want to see again. The man is his own worst enemy. MOM is earning every dollor he is being paid to defend this client. However, I must give GZ credit for good manners, even if his penmanship is poor. Sending out thank you notes in a timely manner is a must according to Emily Post.

ellejay wrote:

Gizmo711 wrote:

He was looking to switch the money from account to account, pay off his bills, pay his living expenses and now we are to believe that he didn't know he could pay his bond with it? This should not even be a question....OF COURSE he knew he could pay the bond with it, he was trying to hide every penny as NOT to give it to a bondsman. The mere fact that he still has an outstanding amount of 10,000, goes to show that he thinks it's a waste of money to give it for a bond.

Therefore I feel that he should just stay in jail, this way he can save what's left after the lawyer gets his due.

--in his letter from jail to a supporter, he even mentions putting the paypal $$$'s towards his bond...

http://www.thesmokinggun.com/documents/george-zimmerman-jail-letter-354759
Zimmerman: "This Will All Work Out For Me"

In jail letter, accused killer pitched donation to his site
---snipped--

Zimmerman wrote that, “My attorney seems cautiously optimistic about me receiving bond tomorrow and I will put funds received through my website towards my bond.” However, during Zimmerman’s April 20 bond hearing, no mention of the web site’s substantial revenues was made by the accused killer or his lawyer. Zimmerman, who was freed on $150,000 bond, had already raised about $200,000 by that time, his lawyer subsequently acknowledged.

Ellejay said:
" “My attorney seems cautiously optimistic about me receiving bond tomorrow " "

Good eye. So the lawyer WAS somewhat aware or GZ is trying to lead the reader into believing the lawyer was aware and perhaps, sanctioning the paypal acct. I wonder why MOM did not directly ask GZ the questions leading to the info being revealed in court?

Freckles wrote:

ellejay wrote:

--in his letter from jail to a supporter, he even mentions putting the paypal $$$'s towards his bond...

http://www.thesmokinggun.com/documents/george-zimmerman-jail-letter-354759
Zimmerman: "This Will All Work Out For Me"

In jail letter, accused killer pitched donation to his site
---snipped--

Zimmerman wrote that, “My attorney seems cautiously optimistic about me receiving bond tomorrow and I will put funds received through my website towards my bond.” However, during Zimmerman’s April 20 bond hearing, no mention of the web site’s substantial revenues was made by the accused killer or his lawyer. Zimmerman, who was freed on $150,000 bond, had already raised about $200,000 by that time, his lawyer subsequently acknowledged.

Ellejay said:
" “My attorney seems cautiously optimistic about me receiving bond tomorrow " "

Good eye. So the lawyer WAS somewhat aware or GZ is trying to lead the reader into believing the lawyer was aware and perhaps, sanctioning the paypal acct. I wonder why MOM did not directly ask GZ the questions leading to the info being revealed in court?

I did not get the feeling that MOM knew about this letter.

Huh? I did NOT say the lawyer knew about the letter. I am sure he is well aware of it by now, however.

I extrapolated upon GS' comments and proposed two ideas: Either MOM was aware OR GZ was trying to lead the reader (Matthew) into believing the lawyer was aware and perhaps even sanctioned the paypal acct.

ellejay wrote:

Gizmo711 wrote:

He was looking to switch the money from account to account, pay off his bills, pay his living expenses and now we are to believe that he didn't know he could pay his bond with it? This should not even be a question....OF COURSE he knew he could pay the bond with it, he was trying to hide every penny as NOT to give it to a bondsman. The mere fact that he still has an outstanding amount of 10,000, goes to show that he thinks it's a waste of money to give it for a bond.

Therefore I feel that he should just stay in jail, this way he can save what's left after the lawyer gets his due.

--in his letter from jail to a supporter, he even mentions putting the paypal $$$'s towards his bond...

http://www.thesmokinggun.com/documents/george-zimmerman-jail-letter-354759
Zimmerman: "This Will All Work Out For Me"

In jail letter, accused killer pitched donation to his site
---snipped--

Zimmerman wrote that, “My attorney seems cautiously optimistic about me receiving bond tomorrow and I will put funds received through my website towards my bond.” However, during Zimmerman’s April 20 bond hearing, no mention of the web site’s substantial revenues was made by the accused killer or his lawyer. Zimmerman, who was freed on $150,000 bond, had already raised about $200,000 by that time, his lawyer subsequently acknowledged.

Therefore O'Mara was well aware of the donations coming in and he never made mention to an amount or anything near to an amount. Could be thats why O'Mara's face dropped when Zimmermans bond was revoked. I'm shocked that Zimmerman didn't speak up immediately and put the blame on the attorney to save himself. Now for sure O'Mara wont put Georgie on the stand nor want Shellie put on the stand.

This may sound way out but think about something, had Shellie put up the entire 150,000 bond it could not have gone to lawyer fees and the 150,000 would have been released upon Georgie going to jail or being found "not guilty", O'Mara would not have been able to use that money. But by using a bondsman the money was available for lawyer fees. I did find it odd that, that type of a bond hearing was set from the onset. Usually a bond is set and then when it can't be met there is a bond hearing to get it reduced. Although it could be done right away, it's unusual. Seems that O'Mara didn't want to take the chance that Shellie would have just put the entire amount up to get hubby out or that the money would have been found out by then. After all, it's like money in the bank, either way Georgie was found (guilty or not guilty) the money would have went back to the Zimmermans after the trial. A lawyer doesn't stand a chance in sueing for his fee after the fact (if he can at all). JMO

Does anyone recall MOM saying he was told it was just a couple of thousand raised by GZ?

Freckles wrote:Good eye. So the lawyer WAS somewhat aware or GZ is trying to lead the reader into believing the lawyer was aware and perhaps, sanctioning the paypal acct. I wonder why MOM did not directly ask GZ the questions leading to the info being revealed in court?

I'm not sure if he was just pointing out to his supporters he had immediate financial needs?
I wouldn't be surprised if he told MOM that Shellie was handling the money so they shouldn't ask him. My gut feeling is MOM had no idea it was a serious pile of money.
He'd have known that that would come back to bite them.

WeeBonnie wrote:

Freckles wrote:

Good eye. So the lawyer WAS somewhat aware or GZ is trying to lead the reader into believing the lawyer was aware and perhaps, sanctioning the paypal acct. I wonder why MOM did not directly ask GZ the questions leading to the info being revealed in court?

I'm not sure if he was just pointing out to his supporters he had immediate financial needs?
I wouldn't be surprised if he told MOM that Shellie was handling the money so they shouldn't ask him. My gut feeling is MOM had no idea it was a serious pile of money.
He'd have known that that would come back to bite them.

That's the part that confuses me. O'Mara would have known that this would have come back to bite him. However, only if the state would have looked into it. Usually one doesn't receive this amount from supporters especially when there usually aren't that many supporters in a case such as this one. But even Casey Anthony had some, people were putting money into her account at jail.

Actually speaking O'Mara would have had to advise the court of the money. I doubt that he would have put in for indigent for his client and sat on all that money. However, he didn't advise the court until AFTER Zimmerman was given a bond. Could be that he never dreamed that the judge would revoke the bond upon hearing of the large amount in the acount, and he probably wouldn't have had Shellie not lied outright and George just sit there while his attorney claimed his client was broke.

So when we look at it that way, there IS a possiblity that O'Mara was well aware of the amount in the account and did not want it held up in the court.

Also, I remember that O'Mara claimed that 5,000 came from the fund and that his parents had raised the other 10 by mortgaging their home etc. But O'Mara knew all along that the 10,000 had never been paid to the bondsman, so it was only the 5,000 that was put up.

O'Mara did look a little sick when the bond was revoked, I don't think he saw that coming. The judge may have wanted to give O'Mara food for thought when he praised O'Mara in open court for being honest and always showing integrity in the court. The judge may very well have seen right thru O'Mara but just chose to leave it as a bond revocation for his client.

Im not sure MOM knew the bondsman wasnt paid till the hearing when it was revoked. He seemed pissed about that- as if he had been told it was taken care of. Seems like GZ was hesitant to pay anything out at all - and trying to grab up more from his Dad too. Remember it was said his Dad tossed in only 500$. Could be yet another lie. But how does he feel now that he knows his son was hitting him up and had no need of it.
And GZ discussed trying to get the Dad to mortage the house bit MOM said he shouldn't. I mean it was 10k, not 100. Weird they would suggest mortgaging the house unless he was trying to get them to pay the full bail. Which is something MOM also said he'd discussed with him and persuaded not to. Very odds dealings, it seems like GZ was out to screw everyone who was helping him.

http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/2012-06-15/news/os-george-zimmerman-new-evidence-20120615_1_defense-team-crime-scene-surveillance-video?sadasd
Shoot Straight owner, now a George Zimmerman witness: 'He bought the gun from us'

---snipped---

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 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.

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.

Porky wrote:

Freckles wrote: Ellejay said:
" “My attorney seems cautiously optimistic about me receiving bond tomorrow " "

Good eye. So the lawyer WAS somewhat aware or GZ is trying to lead the reader into believing the lawyer was aware and perhaps, sanctioning the paypal acct. I wonder why MOM did not directly ask GZ the questions leading to the info being revealed in court?

I did not get the feeling that MOM knew about this letter.

I agree Porky. I do not see anything in this letter that indicates that MOM was aware of or was coaching GZ with regard to the Paypal account at that point. I guarantee that MOM would have never gone before the Court and made the representations that he did had he known that GZ or Shellie had access to that sum of money. This case is not worth his livelihood and career. All this does is prove, one more time, that GZ was fully aware that he could use those funds for anything he wanted, bond, bills, and legal expenses.

I am just going to throw this out there - and I want to say first that there is no doubt in my mind that GZ at some point was contemplating taking those funds and his valid passport and running. But there is another reason that he may have been transferring the monies around, putting it into gift cards, etc. and that is because I am sure it occurred to GZ and Shellie that what they had done by seeking donations through a web account might not be entirely legal - that somehow they may have to give those funds back or hand it over for some reason. Consequently, they were trying to hide as much of it as they could before the hammer came down. I don't believe any of their conduct was on the "up and up" mind you. They were just trying to figure a way to keep hold of that money should something happen down the pike that would prevent them from keeping it. Tantamount to everything was to pay off all of their debts - can you imagine having the opportunity to pay off every debt you have? Wow, and all he had to do was kill an asshole.

So, I take it from the discovery order that we will not be seeing GZ's text messages referred to by BDLR at the bond hearing. I am sure those contain more revelations. Bummer.

ellejay wrote:
http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/2012-06-15/news/os-george-zimmerman-new-evidence-20120615_1_defense-team-crime-scene-surveillance-video?sadasd
Shoot Straight owner, now a George Zimmerman witness: 'He bought the gun from us'

---snipped---

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 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.

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.

Can you tell I am trying to catch up with the thread? LOL

I have read being discussed that at some CWP classes the instructors routinely teach the students about the SYG law and self-defense in general...and that in doing so, the instructors will tell the students that if they are going to shoot someone, be sure to go for a kill shot so that there will be no one to dispute your rendition of the facts that it was in self-defense. Could it be that the prosecution has secretly video taped one of these classes, or have a witness who will testify that this particular instructor teaches this, and then have the records to show that GZ attended those very same classes? I am just speculating on to what extent the prosecution will go to prove its case - I mean they are interviewing prior coworkers and friends - why wouldn't they investigate what GZ was taught to get his CWP or to show what GZ knew about claiming self-defense and the SYG law?

One last thing - I keep seeing where GZ still owes 10k to the bondsman for the first bond, and I do recall reading that this was not paid. But how do we know that the bondsman did not have some sort of prearranged agreement with GZ regarding that 10k? I mean it doesn't sound to reason that the bondsman would just be sitting back and remaining calm while 10k is still owed to him. There has to be something we are not privy to. Or have I missed something on the thread about this?

CherokeeNative wrote:One last thing - I keep seeing where GZ still owes 10k to the bondsman for the first bond, and I do recall reading that this was not paid. But how do we know that the bondsman did not have some sort of prearranged agreement with GZ regarding that 10k? I mean it doesn't sound to reason that the bondsman would just be sitting back and remaining calm while 10k is still owed to him. There has to be something we are not privy to. Or have I missed something on the thread about this?

--omara mentioned the outstanding 10,000 at the hearing, saying something like, i guess it should be paid out of the 'defense fund acct' and that he would have to look into it.

--i see that shellie used the same bond co. (magic bailbonds) so i guess the z's are still in their good books..

http://www.seminoleclerk.org/CriminalDocket/case_detail.jsp?CaseNo=592012CF001792A
--shelliez docket---

ellejay wrote:
http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/2012-06-15/news/os-george-zimmerman-new-evidence-20120615_1_defense-team-crime-scene-surveillance-video?sadasd
Shoot Straight owner, now a George Zimmerman witness: 'He bought the gun from us'

---snipped---

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 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.

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.

Akkawi's statement proves that GZ did indeed interact with I believe two of his employees.

At another range, a manager and retired former County Sheriff, who is on the list of people contacted, was never interviewed by anyone. He said so himself.

Emails...I believe there were 4 or 5 that were with Wendy Dorcival (?) regarding the set up of the neighborhood watch, including one to Bill Lee that commended her for the job that she did in assisting them. She sent him back an email thanking him. Most of hers were concerning date and time, how many packets to bring, refrigerator magnets, pamphlets and the like. I think they settled on 25, IIRC. Those have been out for months.

The cell records for Tracy Martin have been out for easily 2 months, so no big deal there. It is in the links.

The bank surveillance is going to show Shellie Zimmerman, most likely at the Lake Mary Branch (but we may find out who Ken is.) The bank employee that Shellie had the speakerphone and/or meeting with was a female, but was unnamed.

The arresting agent from the 2005 incident said in his statement that the assault consisted basically that Zimmerman brushed his hand away from his arm. No shove or push or anything like that. He went to anger management or some such for adjudication of that charge. That has been out for months.

What isn't being said, IIRC, is that only the jail calls that were previously transcribed are going to be released and GZ's cell records are not going to be included with the exception of his NON-911s. Per Judge Lester's Orders. I have to look for the link for that. I don't have it in my link library. When I find it, I will include it in the library and I will post it here.

Edited to add link...LOL! I did have it, I just didn't remember reading all of it. See page 5 of 6.
http://www.flcourts18.org/PDF/Press_Releases/SKMBT_363-V12061312310.pdf

My question is if GZ's cell records are out, does that include the "incendiary" text that the Prosecution wanted to highlight? That makes me curious.

But...All in all, none of that in the Orlando newspaper is hardly breaking news.

DebFrmHell wrote:--------post snipped---------

The bank surveillance is going to show Shellie Zimmerman, most likely at the Lake Mary Branch (but we may find out who Ken is.) The bank employee that Shellie had the speakerphone and/or meeting with was a female, but was unnamed.

--the bank surveillance video has nothing to do w/ shellie and the paypal $$'s, that was all in april.

--the one listed in the discovery is for the M&I bank surveillance video of february 26/2012, the date of the shooting.

http://www.flcourts18.org/PDF/Press_Releases/redacted%20second%20discovery.pdf

DebFrmHell wrote:

ellejay wrote:
http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/2012-06-15/news/os-george-zimmerman-new-evidence-20120615_1_defense-team-crime-scene-surveillance-video?sadasd
Shoot Straight owner, now a George Zimmerman witness: 'He bought the gun from us'

---snipped---

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 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.

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.

Akkawi's statement proves that GZ did indeed interact with I believe two of his employees.

At another range, a manager and retired former County Sheriff, who is on the list of people contacted, was never interviewed by anyone. He said so himself.

Emails...I believe there were 4 or 5 that were with Wendy Dorcival (?) regarding the set up of the neighborhood watch, including one to Bill Lee that commended her for the job that she did in assisting them. She sent him back an email thanking him. Most of hers were concerning date and time, how many packets to bring, refrigerator magnets, pamphlets and the like. I think they settled on 25, IIRC. Those have been out for months.

The cell records for Tracy Martin have been out for easily 2 months, so no big deal there. It is in the links.

The bank surveillance is going to show Shellie Zimmerman, most likely at the Lake Mary Branch (but we may find out who Ken is.) The bank employee that Shellie had the speakerphone and/or meeting with was a female, but was unnamed.

The arresting agent from the 2005 incident said in his statement that the assault consisted basically that Zimmerman brushed his hand away from his arm. No shove or push or anything like that. He went to anger management or some such for adjudication of that charge. That has been out for months.

What isn't being said, IIRC, is that only the jail calls that were previously transcribed are going to be released and GZ's cell records are not going to be included with the exception of his NON-911s. Per Judge Lester's Orders. I have to look for the link for that. I don't have it in my link library. When I find it, I will include it in the library and I will post it here.

Edited to add link...LOL! I did have it, I just didn't remember reading all of it. See page 5 of 6.
http://www.flcourts18.org/PDF/Press_Releases/SKMBT_363-V12061312310.pdf

My question is if GZ's cell records are out, does that include the "incendiary" text that the Prosecution wanted to highlight? That makes me curious.
But...All in all, none of that in the Orlando newspaper is hardly breaking news.

BBM.

Court's Order re Cell Phone Records:

"The court has not been provided basis to find that the Defendant's cell phone records are relevant or should even be considered evidence. The persons contacted by the Defendant in the days surround the incident should not be connected to the case merely because their telephone numbers appear on the Defendant's bill. The State shall provide a list of dates and times that the Defendant contacted the Sanford Police Department, either on its non-emergency line or via 911. All other cell phone records should be exempt."

I read this to mean that if the Prosecution wants to rely upon any of the cell phone records, like the text messages referenced at the bond hearing by BDLR, they will have to provide a basis for wanting to do so via a motion in limine come trial, but in the meantime, they are exempt from production to the media. Agree? If this is correct, I am sure the prosecution is just fine with that. Unfortunately, I am not - I was wanting to read those as badly as I want to see GZ's statements. Sigh....

ETA: Question is, will the media attorneys be satisfied with that? I mean, if the prosecution provided the cell phone records to the defense through discovery, isn't the media entitled to receive the same thing whether or not they are "evidence"? I guess I have to read what the exemption would be... I have to think this through over more coffee....hmmm

ellejay wrote:

CherokeeNative wrote:One last thing - I keep seeing where GZ still owes 10k to the bondsman for the first bond, and I do recall reading that this was not paid. But how do we know that the bondsman did not have some sort of prearranged agreement with GZ regarding that 10k? I mean it doesn't sound to reason that the bondsman would just be sitting back and remaining calm while 10k is still owed to him. There has to be something we are not privy to. Or have I missed something on the thread about this?

--omara mentioned the outstanding 10,000 at the hearing, saying something like, i guess it should be paid out of the 'defense fund acct' and that he would have to look into it.

--i see that shellie used the same bond co. (magic bailbonds) so i guess the z's are still in their good books..

http://www.seminoleclerk.org/CriminalDocket/case_detail.jsp?CaseNo=592012CF001792A
--shelliez docket---

Thanks Ellejay!!

@Ellejay,
Darn! Ken has my curiosity peaked since I have never heard of a Thug named Ken! LOL!

@ CN,
I wanted to read what GZ said too but I don't think that he could have said worse than I have already thought! As I have said into infinitely, I don't like the way national attention was brought to this case, but I understand it.

Going for a short nap before work! Later.

ellejay wrote:

DebFrmHell wrote:--------post snipped---------

The bank surveillance is going to show Shellie Zimmerman, most likely at the Lake Mary Branch (but we may find out who Ken is.) The bank employee that Shellie had the speakerphone and/or meeting with was a female, but was unnamed.

--the bank surveillance video has nothing to do w/ shellie and the paypal $$'s, that was all in april.

--the one listed in the discovery is for the M&I bank surveillance video of february 26/2012, the date of the shooting.

http://www.flcourts18.org/PDF/Press_Releases/redacted%20second%20discovery.pdf

--there are only 2 M&I Banks in sanford---i imagine the feb.26th video is from this one near the townhouse complex.


M&I Bank
1381 Rinehart Road, Sanford, FL, United States

This has some surprising stuff in it. Of interest, Shellie left school two years ago but we were lead to believe that she is a *current* student at Seminole State. I could have sworn that she testified that she is a student there now.

What we already knew- These two have been perpetually broke, which was the very point that I raised earlier.

This story makes them look more sinister but the truly laughable part is all the fools who donate money so that they could pay off credit cards that they had no means to pay even had this killing never occurred.
Zimmermans struggle with money

Please cease and desist with the commentary and editorializing about GZ and SZ' mug shots.

Nothing good or productive will come from these kinds of comments.

A few more posts like this, and you will all be at each other's throats. Then the thread will be locked. You guys choose.

Continue productive, civil, and polite discussion, please.

ellejay wrote:

serenaz1 wrote:

IIRC, TM was found with $40, so maybe he made a withdrawal, which the pro-Zim's will quack about being for drugs. But since the money was on him, looks like he didn't get anything before returning home.

LMAO @ the bug-eyed emoti & the electric chair one!

--trayvon didn't have an ATM card listed though. george had those 2 quarters, in a plastic bag (still wondering why they were in a bag?) so it doesn't look like he made a withdrawl either.

--maybe the surveillance video picked up trayvon walking by? or george driving by? i guess we'll find out eventually.

Ah, good thinking, Ellejay, thanks! Yeah, I wonder what the deal was with the quarters too. Maybe to make sure he had money for a payphone like our mommies used to tell us. lol that is a weird thing, that's for sure!