45
   

Do you think Zimmerman will be convicted of murder?

 
 
hawkeye10
 
  0  
Reply Sun 3 Jun, 2012 05:50 pm
@BillRM,
BillRM wrote:

Hawkeye I think that the state is not a bit concern about Zimmerman being a flight risk but instead hope to keep him in jail long enough that he might be willing to take a plea deal inspite of the state weak case or at least take away the fundings to mount a defense by tying it up in extra bond requirements.


Bingo....they are turning the screws hoping he will break, because if the state needs to take its cards to a jury they will be up Sh+t Creek. Coercive and abusive, this is how the modern American state rolls.
0 Replies
 
JTT
 
  1  
Reply Sun 3 Jun, 2012 05:56 pm
@Joe Nation,
Quote:
If one goes back over the pages of this thread, the most consistent reporter of fact is, without doubt, Firefly.


In one sense, you seem to appreciate that, Joe.

And in another, you seem more than willing to toss around any old thing hoping upon hope that

Joe(Zimmerman is going to serve time for his actions)Nation

Why bite Bill's ass? Are you hoping that he will return the favor?

0 Replies
 
firefly
 
  1  
Reply Sun 3 Jun, 2012 08:46 pm
Even his lawyer, Mark O'Mara, now acknowedges that Zimmerman's credibility has been tarnished. And this may affect whether O'Mara can even let him testify at another bond hearing. There is also the possibility that Zimmerman's wife may be charged with perjury.
Quote:
n a defense team statement on Sunday, O'Mara said he planned to seek a new bond hearing and hoped his client's voluntary surrender "will help demonstrate to the court that he is not a flight risk."

O'Mara indicated to reporters outside the jail that his client may have acted unwisely in regards to his passports and the defense fund. "He (Zimmerman) understands the court's concern now we've had a chance to look at it," he said.

O'Mara said he believes judge Lester will want to question Zimmerman and his wife Shelly before he will consider granting bond again.

But he said he was undecided whether allowing Zimmerman to testify in a bond hearing would be wise, and acknowledged his client has a credibility problem after alleged jailhouse phone calls with his wife in which the prosecution says the couple conspired to hide the passport and money from the court.

"It's a question of credibility with Mr Zimmerman and that credibility has been attacked or tarnished and, now that has to be rehabilitated," O'Mara said.

Asked by Reuters whether Zimmerman has an explanation for the phone transcripts that differed from the prosecutors' interpretation, O'Mara said, "I think that the explanation or apology, if it is, should go to that person (the judge)."

He would not speculate about whether Zimmerman's wife might be charged with perjury. "I believe she'll have counsel," he said. Zimmerman was "very worried about Shelly, about a lot of issues," he added.

In the earlier statement on Sunday, O'Mara noted that Zimmerman had waived his right to speedy trial on May 8, meaning he could face a long wait in jail. "It is anticipated, though not certain, that the case will not be ready for trial until some time into 2013."

RECORDED CALLS

Zimmerman's whereabouts were unknown during the weeks following his release after spending 11 nights in April in a Sanford jail cell. His lawyer declined to discuss his location or living arrangements, citing death threats and fears about Zimmerman's security.

Prosecutors alleged in court on Friday that his wife knew about donations for his legal defense fund, now totaling in excess of $200,000, but she failed to disclose the money at his bond hearing.

"The defendant's wife lied to this court," prosecutor Bernardo de la Rionda told the judge.

The motion to revoke Zimmerman's bond cited phone calls made to his wife from jail in which Zimmerman instructed his wife in coded language to transfer money into her personal account.

When Zimmerman surrendered his passport at his April 20 bond hearing, he did so knowing that he had a second unexpired passport, the prosecution also alleged.

In one recorded phone call from jail, the motion said Zimmerman told his wife he thought the passport was in a bag and she replied, "I have one for you in a safety deposit box."

"OK, you hold onto that," Zimmerman allegedly told her.
http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/06/03/us-usa-florida-shooting-idUSBRE85207Q20120603
DrewDad
 
  1  
Reply Sun 3 Jun, 2012 09:04 pm
@hawkeye10,
That's a nice little fantasy you have there. Not factual or informative, but very entertaining.

As usual you ignore:

1) That under Florida law the jury can convict for lesser charges. 2nd degree murder is the highest charge that might stick, but it's not the only charge.
2) Zimmerman has already confessed to shooting Trayvon. To get an aquittal, he must show that either
a) he was justified under the stand-your-ground law or
b) he was justified under self defense.

The history of stand-your-ground and self defense claims does not seem to favor either defense, in this case.
BillRM
 
  0  
Reply Sun 3 Jun, 2012 09:15 pm
@firefly,
Sorry the creditability problems is far more the so call justice system problem then it is Zimmerman problem.

This whole case is highlighting almost everythings that had gone wrong with our system over the last few generations.

Beginning with leveling charges on Zimmerman not becuase of the facts but due to the political pressures that such men as Al Sharpton can generate with the aid of a news media that just love the story of an evil white gun carrying racist killing a poor defenseless black child. Black teenagers killing other black teenagers is not anywhere as good a story as hopefully finding a white racist killing a black teenager after all.

Little facts such as Zimmerman is about as white as Obama, or that the poor "kid" have no problem beatening the **** out of an adult, or that far from being a racist Zimmerman had a history of defending blacks and so on can not be allow to interfere with the story.

But what does facts matter any more we will just claimed falsely that the word coon can be hear on the 911 tape, or we will edit the tape to made it appear that Zimmerman was the one who was concern over Trayvon race, and we will put out all other manner of false informations such as he gotten a second passport issue to him after the shooting instead of in 2004.

Well I agree with you there is a large creditbility problems in this case but it center on the news media and the criminal justice system a hell of a lot more then on Zimmerman.

It would also center on Sharpton however he had loss his credibiltiy in the 1980s for anyone who know the facts concerning that gentleman.
0 Replies
 
hawkeye10
 
  0  
Reply Sun 3 Jun, 2012 09:36 pm
@DrewDad,
Quote:
1) That under Florida law the jury can convict for lesser charges. 2nd degree murder is the highest charge that might stick, but it's not the only charge.
2) Zimmerman has already confessed to shooting Trayvon. To get an aquittal, he must show that either
a) he was justified under the stand-your-ground law or
b) he was justified under self defense.


I continue to assert and believe that absent proof from the state that Zimmerman was looking for conflict on racial grounds or was of otherwise depraved mind that they will refuse to convict Zimmerman of anything. Right now the state has nothing that we have seen, there-for Georges plan should be to sit tight and be patient, because he is in the drivers seat. The state is doing all it can to make George hurt as much as possible in the attempt to get him to break and cop a plea, but I expect that these last weeks have been used to instill confidence that he will prevail, and that there are plenty of people willing to put up the funds for his defense. Charging his wife would be more of the same, but hopefully such abusive tactics will backfire on the state.
DrewDad
 
  2  
Reply Sun 3 Jun, 2012 09:42 pm
@hawkeye10,
As I said, that's a nice little fantasy you have there.

I hope Zimmerman gets better legal advice than what you have to offer.
hawkeye10
 
  0  
Reply Sun 3 Jun, 2012 09:46 pm
@DrewDad,
DrewDad wrote:

As I said, that's a nice little fantasy you have there.

I hope Zimmerman gets better legal advice than what you have to offer.


We will know soon enough...I fully expect that you have an "i told you so" coming....
0 Replies
 
BillRM
 
  1  
Reply Mon 4 Jun, 2012 02:44 am
@hawkeye10,
Quote:
The state is doing all it can to make George hurt as much as possible in the attempt to get him to break and cop a plea, but I expect that these last weeks have been used to instill confidence that he will prevail, and that there are plenty of people willing to put up the funds for his defense. Charging his wife would be more of the same, but hopefully such abusive tactics will backfire on the state.


If the state manage to strip him of the fundings that I and many many others had already donate to fund his defense I will cheerfully write another check.

We all need to take a stand on this matter of self defense and hopefully the state will not hold charges against his wife over his head to try to get a plea deal on the so call murder out of him.

But then the state had shown it already have no honor over this matter.
0 Replies
 
firefly
 
  2  
Reply Mon 4 Jun, 2012 11:24 am
@DrewDad,
Quote:
That's a nice little fantasy you have there. Not factual or informative, but very entertaining.

I agree that those two are in fantasy land, but I can't say I find their re-cycled comments particularly entertaining. This is their usual anti-government, anti-justice system spiel. It has little or nothing to do with Zimmerman--they don't even care whether the man is truthful or not. They ignore the fact that the man deliberately let both his wife and his lawyer mislead the court about both his finances and a second passport--indicating that he is both deceptive and dishonest--but they'll still unquestioningly buy his version of the events leading up to the shooting, because that fits in with their usual paranoid scenario of the government abusing "innocent" citizens. They can't even acknowledge that the man's wife committed perjury with her lies, and that the court has every right to hold her to account for such behavior.

We've heard all of this from both of them before--they've made the same statements in support of drunk drivers, rapists, those arrested for possession and distribution of child pornography--the government is always wrong in making arrests. But, when they don't care whether a defendant is even truthful or not in court, as is the case with Zimmerman, their own dis-ingenuousness is laid bare.

The judge would have reason not to give Zimmerman another try at bail--he cannot trust what this man tells him. His own lawyer can't really trust him either, which puts the defense in a very difficult position. And it's Zimmerman who has gotten himself into that bind--by lying. This has nothing to do with the state trying to force a plea deal from him--Zimmerman has damaged his own credibility and jeopardized his ability to be released on bail, and his lawyer has admitted that. Some explanation has to be given to the court for the lies, which might, or might not, satisfy the judge, and it remains to be seen whether he will grant Zimmerman bail for a second time. If Zimmerman winds up having to cool his heels in a jail cell, for another year, while he awaits trial, it will be his own fault.

I really don't envy Zimmerman's lawyer right now. His client's exposed lies have made his job much more difficult.

0 Replies
 
firefly
 
  2  
Reply Tue 5 Jun, 2012 06:12 pm
Quote:
Jun. 03, 2012

Race has complex role in Stand Your Ground cases

By Susan Taylor Martin, Kris Hundley and Connie Humburg
Tampa Bay Times

In 2006, Laurie Lynn Bartlett killed her boyfriend.
She said he was drunk and tried to sexually assault her. She put a knife in him and got 10 years.

A year later, Ernestine Broxsie killed her ex-boyfriend.

She said he “snapped” and began choking her, so she put a bullet in him. She walked free.

Two similar cases with one big difference — Bartlett’s victim was white, Broxsie’s was black.

The dramatic contrast in outcomes might not have had anything to do with the victims’ race. But it reflects a reality about Florida’s controversial “Stand Your Ground” law.

A Tampa Bay Times analysis of almost 200 cases — the first to examine the role of race in Stand Your Ground — found that people who killed a black person walked free 73 percent of the time, while those who killed a white person went free 59 percent of the time.

“I don’t think judges or prosecutors or whoever works in the field of criminal justice is consciously saying black life is worth less than that of other ethnicities,” said Kareem Jordan, a criminologist at the University of Central Florida. “But at the end of the day, it could be something that’s subconscious going on if you look at how the media depicts black life.”

Questions of race have surrounded Florida’s Stand Your Ground law since the February shooting death of Trayvon Martin, an unarmed black teenager, by George Zimmerman, a Hispanic neighborhood watch volunteer.

Did the teenager’s race have something to do with the initial decision not to charge Zimmerman?

If Zimmerman had been black, would authorities in Sanford have been so quick to accept his claim of self-defense? Are black defendants less likely to walk free than people of other races in Stand Your Ground cases?

The Times analysis found no obvious bias in how black defendants have been treated:

• Whites who invoked the law were charged at the same rate as blacks.

• Whites who went to trial were convicted at the same rate as blacks.

• In mixed-race cases involving fatalities, the outcomes were similar. Four of the five blacks who killed a white went free; five of the six whites who killed a black went free.

• Overall, black defendants went free 66 percent of the time in fatal cases compared to 61 percent for white defendants — a difference explained, in part, by the fact blacks were more likely to kill another black.

“Let’s be clear,” said Alfreda Coward, a black Fort Lauderdale lawyer whose clients are mostly black men. “This law was not designed for the protection of young black males, but it’s benefiting them in certain cases.”

The Times analysis does not prove that race caused the disparity in cases with black and white victims. Other factors may be at play.

The analysis, for example, found that black victims were more likely to be carrying a weapon when they were killed. They also were more likely than whites to be committing a crime, such as burglary, at the time.

Experts note that most cases have unique combinations of facts and circumstances that determine whether a person goes free or goes to prison. They caution against drawing conclusions on statistics alone.

And although the Times’ analysis probably included most of Florida’s fatal Stand Your Ground cases, some could be missing. That can make a big difference when there are few cases to examine. For example, the Times found only 26 completed cases in which a black person was killed and only eight fatalities with a Hispanic victim.

The analysis, however, is supported by numerous studies showing disparities in the way whites and blacks are treated by the criminal-justice system. Studies have found that all-white juries are more likely to convict black defendants. Someone who murders a white person is more likely to get the death penalty than someone who kills a black person.

Adora Obi Nweze, state president of the NAACP, said she was not surprised that people claiming Stand Your Ground escaped penalty more often when the victim was black. But she sharply questioned whether Stand Your Ground really helps black defendants.

“It’s very difficult to isolate the data on one law,” she said, “when we have so many laws where blacks are disproportionately not released, not given the kind of equity you want in justice.”

Through news reports, official records and interviews with dozens of prosecutors, public defenders and attorneys, the Times compiled a database of 192 Stand Your Ground cases that includes the race of every victim and defendant.

It is the first effort to determine how race affects the outcome for those who invoke the 2005 law.

The review found many cases in which people went free after killing a black victim under questionable circumstances.

A Miami man stepped out of his home and shot his ex-wife’s boyfriend at least 12 times as he sat in a car. A Jacksonville man standing in his garage shot to death an 18-year-old burglary suspect who was running away from his house. A West Palm Beach teenager shot an unarmed man he thought was demanding drugs.

But the Times found similarly questionable cases in which the victim was white or Hispanic. It also found that mixed-race cases — like that of Trayvon Martin — are relatively uncommon.

Of the 88 fatal Stand Your Ground cases that have been decided, about one-fourth involved defendants and victims of different races — including six cases in which a white killed a black, five cases in which a black killed a white and six in which a Hispanic killed a non-Hispanic.

No charges were filed in most of those mixed-race cases.

Often, the self-defense circumstances were evident: A person was being robbed or beaten.

In other cases, the type that critics of Stand Your Ground consider questionable, people killed and then went free when they might have avoided a conflict:

Damian Niemeyer was standing at the bedroom window of his Royal Palm Beach townhouse in December when he saw three men trying to back his motorcycle onto a truck. He called 911, then yelled at the men. When one of them pointed a gun at the window, Niemeyer, who is white, fatally shot Benjy Young, a black teenager.

Hygens Labidou, who is black, was driving in Deerfield Beach in 2007 when two white men jumped out of their pickup, pounded on his truck and yelled racial slurs. Labidou, still inside his car, fired his gun, striking both men and killing 28-year-old Edward Borowsky.

In Pompano Beach in 2010, Patrick Lavoie, a white man, jumped out of his girlfriend’s car and accused Cleveland Murdock, a black man, of tailgating. When Lavoie, who had a cigarette lighter in his hand, tried to reach through Murdock’s passenger window, Murdock fatally shot him.

Among the few people to be charged in a mixed-race case: Gabriel Mobley, a black Miami Lakes man.

Four years ago, Mobley and some friends started arguing with two white patrons at a Chili’s restaurant. When the bar closed, the dispute moved outside, and one of the men punched Mobley’s friend in the face. Mobley shot and killed both men.

Though Mobley claimed he was acting in self-defense, surveillance video showed one victim had his hands up when he was killed and the other did not seem to be reaching for a weapon. Neither man was armed.

After investigating for months, prosecutors charged Mobley with second-degree murder in what they called a key test of the Stand Your Ground law.

Mobley’s arrest was “very important because it sends a clear message,” Miami-Dade State Attorney Katherine Fernandez-Rundle said at the time. “The Legislature passed the Stand Your Ground law, but it is not a free-for-all to execute people.”

If the Trayvon Martin case fueled the perception that Stand Your Ground is biased against blacks, the Marissa Alexander case has ignited it.

Alexander, a 31-year-old black Jacksonville woman, told police in 2010 that she had fired a warning shot to get her abusive husband out of the house during an argument in which his two young children were present. No one was hurt, but a judge denied Alexander’s motion for immunity from prosecution.

In March, a jury convicted Alexander on three charges of aggravated assault, which carry a mandatory sentence of 20 years in prison. Her lawyer, Kevin Cobbin, complained that Stand Your Ground was not being used as legislators intended.

“They did not make [the law] for people running around on the streets shooting people,” Cobbin said. “They made it for women in their homes trying to defend themselves against abusive, mean men.”

A closer look at Alexander’s case reveals a more-complex story. After arguing with Rico Gray, her husband, Alexander went to the garage, got a gun from her car and returned to the house. Because of that, the judge who denied immunity concluded she had not been in “genuine fear” for her life.

And contrary to Alexander’s claim of firing a shot into the ceiling, a bullet hole was found in the living room wall at about the height of an adult’s head, according to the Duval County prosecutor’s office.

The case has become a cause celebre, with the NAACP and a black member of Congress jumping to Alexander’s support.

“I have spoken to countless lawyers and they have yet to discover any cases in Florida where an African American was able to successfully use the Stand Your Ground law defense in a hearing,” Rep. Corinne Brown, D-Jacksonville, claimed at Alexander’s sentencing May 11.

Brown called for a study “into racial disparities in the application of this law.”

But the Times found that blacks and whites have had nearly the same success rate when arguing Stand Your Ground in hearings before a judge.

In four domestic dispute cases similar to Alexander’s, judges granted immunity to a black woman and a white woman. Two other white women lost their bids for immunity and got lengthy prison sentences.

Duval State Attorney Angela Corey noted that both judge and jury had rejected Alexander’s Stand Your Ground defense.

“None of the physical evidence corroborates her story,” Corey told reporters. “There was the 911 call . . . and you can clearly hear the distress in Rico Gray’s voice. They had a verbal argument [in which] he said ‘I’m outta here,’ and she said, ‘I’ve got something for you.’ ”

Once little-known outside of Jacksonville, Corey is now familiar to millions. She is the prosecutor who charged George Zimmerman.

With cases like those of Trayvon Martin and Marissa Alexander grabbing the spotlight, experts say it is essential to systematically track Florida’s Stand Your Ground law.

“Given this extension in effect of the power to kill, that’s an issue that should be monitored very carefully to see who is using it and who is abusing it,” said Alfred Blumstein, a criminologist at Carnegie Mellon University.

No one knows for sure how often Stand Your Ground is used as a defense or what racial and ethnic groups are most affected by it. That’s because no one keeps track of race or ethnicity in those cases.

For example, about 7 percent of the cases identified by the Times had a Hispanic victim or defendant. But the true percentage is probably far higher because police and arrest records generally classify people as “white” or “black,” not Hispanic.

Florida and many other states already keep track of so-called “justifiable” homicides, including the race of defendant and victim. There is no Stand Your Ground designation, however.

The federal government compiles more-detailed race statistics on crime, largely to ensure that the rights of minorities are protected under civil rights and hate-crime laws.

“It’s to monitor whether there are abuses in particular areas and by particular agencies,” said George Kirkham, a professor emeritus at Florida State University who also has worked as a police officer.

Nweze, of the NAACP, agreed it would be a good idea to track Stand Your Ground cases, but not without also tracking every other type of criminal case.

“Stand Your Ground is just one law,” she said, adding that “there’s a whole litany of stuff that goes on” that can have a disproportionate impact on black defendants and black victims.

Jeffrey Rosky, a University of Central Florida criminologist, agreed that there are racial disparities in the administration of justice.

“As for policymakers, this is where they need to have their judgment brought in as to what’s too much,” Rosky said. “Any kind of disparity is too much to a certain degree.”

Tampa Bay Times researchers Caryn Baird, Carolyn Edds and Natalie Watson contributed to this report.

http://www.miamiherald.com/2012/06/03/v-print/2831277/race-has-complex-role-in-stand.html#storylink=cpy
0 Replies
 
firefly
 
  2  
Reply Tue 5 Jun, 2012 08:38 pm
Quote:
George Zimmerman's lawyer will delay filing bond request
By Bianca Prieto and Jeff Weiner, Orlando Sentinel
June 5, 2012

When George Zimmerman was arrested on a second-degree murder charge in April, he spent 12 nights in the Seminole County jail. His current stay will likely last longer than that.

Defense attorney Mark O'Mara has decided to delay filing a motion to request a new bond in the case. Zimmerman returned to the jail Sunday after his bond was revoked late last week.

"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 the motion well in advance of the hearing," a statement on O'Mara's website announced.

Circuit Judge Kenneth Lester revoked Zimmerman's bond after prosecutors said he and his wife had been untruthful during his first bond hearing.

Prosecutors told Lester Zimmerman's wife lied about the couple's finances while under oath during the April 20 hearing, which resulted in Lester granting $150,000 bail. Zimmerman was released on bond April 23.

Zimmerman's wife Shellie Zimmerman knew about thousands of dollars her husband collected in donations through his website, prosecutors said, but didn't tell the judge. Meanwhile, Zimmerman, sat by and listened as his wife spoke.

Prosecutors say the couple discussed the money in "code" during a recorded jail phone call. Zimmerman also had a second passport, the state said, that was not surrendered to the court.

Zimmerman, a former neighborhood watch volunteer, is accused of shooting and killing 17-year-old Trayvon Martin on Feb. 26. Zimmerman says he shot the teen in self-defense.

Once O'Mara files the request for a new bond, Lester will decide if he will grant another hearing.
http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/2012-06-05/news/os-george-zimmerman-bond-delay-20120605_1_delay-filing-new-bond-motion
hawkeye10
 
  0  
Reply Tue 5 Jun, 2012 10:32 pm
@firefly,
Quote:
Zimmerman, a former neighborhood watch volunteer, is accused of shooting and killing 17-year-old Trayvon Martin on Feb. 26. Zimmerman says he shot the teen in self-defense.


Zimmerman has admitted to shooting an killing Martin, he is accused of unlawfully shooting and killing Martin. A story as biased and which plays as fast and loose with the facts as the one above is useless to all sensible folk. Firefly could never be confused with fair and unbiased person.
BillRM
 
  0  
Reply Wed 6 Jun, 2012 07:17 am
@hawkeye10,
Quote:
Firefly could never be confused with fair and unbiased person.


Maybe if you are under the influence of a LSD type drug you could think that Firefly is an unbiased person.
0 Replies
 
DrewDad
 
  2  
Reply Wed 6 Jun, 2012 07:44 am
@hawkeye10,
Lol. It's taken you how long and how many pages to understand those facts?

You're saying an entire article is rendered useless because they omitted one word?
BillRM
 
  0  
Reply Wed 6 Jun, 2012 08:59 am
@DrewDad,
Quote:
You're saying an entire article is rendered useless because they omitted one word?


Let see there was an attempt to placed one little word in the 911 tape that was not there IE coon and removing of a few words of the dispatch question to Zimmerman.

One word can matter indeed in an article if like in the 911 tape the lack of the word is attempting to give a false impression.
0 Replies
 
firefly
 
  2  
Reply Wed 6 Jun, 2012 09:15 am
@DrewDad,
The rest of the article must have been too difficult for Hawkeye to understand. Laughing

That Zimmerman's lawyer is postponing the request for another bond hearing suggests he is knee deep in damage control and can't risk another bond hearing yet. Another bond hearing means another round of publicity about the fact that his client deliberately mislead the judge, and a possible denial of bail would show just how serious the consequences of his client's lies are. The defense attorney has got to wait for some of the media attention to the lies to blow over, and then he's got to come up with some sort of explanation for the lies that won't further damage his client's credibility, and offer some sort of reasonable and honest apology to the court--which won't be easy. There is a definite risk in putting Zimmerman on the stand to explain himself. And now there is also the question of whether Zimmerman's wife will be charged with perjury, which would also reflect on Zimmerman since he knowingly allowed her to mislead the court.

And, down the road, if there is an immunity hearing, based on the stand your ground law, there is the issue of how much damage Zimmerman has done to his credibility with this judge.











0 Replies
 
BillRM
 
  1  
Reply Tue 12 Jun, 2012 03:06 pm
It look like they are going to try to force Zimmerman to take a plea deal by charging his wife.

I can see it now if you will just take a plea we will drop the charges against your wife.

-------------------------------------------------------------------

http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/2012-06-12/news/os-george-zimmerman-wife-arrested-20120612_1_perjury-charge-prosecutors-deputies

George Zimmerman's wife arrested, charged with perjury
By Jeff Weiner, Orlando Sentinel


Earlier this month, a judge threw George Zimmerman back in jail, after prosecutors said Zimmerman and his wife misled the court about their finances.

On Tuesday, his wife, Shellie Zimmerman, was booked into the same facility on a perjury charge.

According to the Seminole County Sheriff's Office, deputies were alerted by prosecutors Tuesday that a warrant had been issued for Shellie Zimmerman, 25. She was arrested about 3:30 p.m. "at the location she was residing in Seminole County," deputies said in a statement.

She was booked on a perjury charge, with bond set at $1,000. She is currently "in the process of posting bond," deputies said.

The arrest comes after prosecutors in George Zimmerman's case told Judge Kenneth Lester that Shellie Zimmerman lied about her husband's finances, in order to conceal about $135,000 from the court.

This is a developing story. Check back later for updates.

Ads by Google

firefly
 
  2  
Reply Tue 12 Jun, 2012 03:11 pm
@BillRM,
Quote:
It look like they are going to try to force Zimmerman to take a plea deal by charging his wife.

No, it simply looks like she is being charged with perjury because she lied, under oath, when testifying to the judge.

Aren't you the one who carries on that people should be charged with a crime when they give false testimony? Well, that's what they are doing to Mrs Zimmerman. I'd think you'd be happy they are enforcing the perjury laws.

It's generally not a good idea to lie, under oath, when you are giving testimony to a judge. It makes the judge very angry.

firefly
 
  2  
Reply Tue 12 Jun, 2012 03:24 pm
Shellie Zimmerman is an out and out liar--and so is her husband.
Quote:

George Zimmerman's wife arrested, charged with perjury
By Jeff Weiner, Orlando Sentinel
June 12, 2012

At her husband's bond hearing, Shellie Zimmerman was asked repeatedly about money. Among the questions: How much did the couple collect in donations through the PayPal account George Zimmerman set up on his website?

"Currently, I don't know," Shellie Zimmerman replied. She and other family members described their financial situation as dire. Judge Kenneth Lester granted George Zimmerman $150,000 bond on his second-degree murder charge


But prosecutors say Shellie Zimmerman spent the days before that hearing shifting tens of thousands of dollars out of her husband's account, then deliberately lied to the judge.

On Tuesday, she was arrested on a perjury charge and booked into John E. Polk Correctional Facility, the same jail her husband has called home since the deception was revealed earlier this month, leading the judge to revoke his bond.

In an affidavit, prosecutors revealed new details about Shellie Zimmerman's alleged efforts to hide money from the court.

Four days before she testified to having no knowledge of the funds, the affidavit says, Shellie Zimmerman began a series of transfers into her account — totaling $74,000 between April 16 and April 19.

The affidavit says about $47,000 more was transferred from George Zimmerman's account to his sister's. Shellie Zimmerman withdrew about $18,000 more cash, prosecutors say.

Prosecutors say the Zimmermans used a rudimentary "code" to discuss the money in recorded jailhouse phone calls — referring to $100,000, for example, as "$100." At least two of the calls, the state alleges, were made while Shellie Zimmerman and her husband's sister were at a local credit union making the transactions.

"In my account do I have at least $100?" Zimmerman asked. "No... there's like $8. $8.60," she replied.

Zimmerman told his wife to "pay off all the bills" with the money, prosecutors said, including an American Express card and a Sam's Club card. He also instructed her on how to pay for his bail.

According to the affidavit, after her husband was released on bond days after the bond hearing, she transferred more than $85,000 back into his account. A branch manager at their credit union told prosecutors he knew the couple, and saw Shellie Zimmerman talking to her husband on the phone on April 16.

The manager said he'd helped Shellie Zimmerman transfer control of George Zimmerman's account, at one point speaking directly to George Zimmerman by phone.

Shellie Zimmerman was arrested about 3:30 p.m. Tuesday, deputies said. She quickly bonded out of jail.
http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/2012-06-12/news/os-george-zimmerman-wife-arrested-20120612_1_perjury-charge-prosecutors-deputies
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.34 seconds on 11/18/2024 at 08:30:11