George Zimmerman's bloody head

[Gadawg73]

Sit down before you hurt yourself. Zimmerman is charged with a serious crime. The more serious a crime, the more likely a person is to attempt to flee and avoid having to face his charges. This is a simple fact that has been understood in criminal procedure for centuries, and hence why bail exists. It is up to the court to determine an appropriate bond that the court finds sufficient to secure a defendant's appearance, based on the circumstances. You seem to think that from the get-go Zimmerman should have been released on PR. That is an extraordinary claim. While the law always allows for PR, I challenge you to find a single example in the past ten years when a defendant charged with second degree murder has been released on PR. Furthermore, if you are going to even make the claim that PR should have been granted, you have the burden to substantiate that claim and explain why the court should have been satisfied that Zimmerman would appear simply on his own say-so, anymore than any other person facing a similar charge who was subsequently required to post a bond.

Moving forward from there, what you're not understanding is that the fact that Zimmerman lied about his financial situation in his application for bail creates sufficient cause to revoke bail, regardless of what the original bail was set at. Even if Zimmerman had been granted PR, the fact that he lied creates a reasonable concern that Zimmerman's future appearances have not be secured, because by lying to the court the defendant has demonstrated a disregard for the law in general, and for this court particularly. Especially when coupled with Zimmerman's past, the judge is absolutely correct to say that Zimmerman does not respect the law. Accordingly, he cannot be trusted to appear back in court based on nothing more than his own say so.

He lied. He lied to the court, and therefore cannot be trusted. That's what you have to get through your head. THAT is what matters in this. The fact that Zimmerman intentionally deceived the court.

None of the bail information is admissable in his case other than remand.

It could very well be admissible.

There were certainly be a fight to exclude it, and a fight to include it.

If GZ opts for a SYG hearing, all that doesn't matter, does it? The judge knows how Z now lacks credibility. And he's the one that matters.

Oh, the prosecution will try to get it in but even if they do that is grounds for appeal and if it is a guilty verdict they will have to retry him because the court of appeals will set aside the conviction.
Case law out the ass on that one.

 

[Gadawg73]

The defense will file a Motion in Limine to keep out anything to do with the bail proceedings and the affidavit.
And the Judge will rule in their favor barring any questions by the prosecution about it.

 

[Ravi]

it was his wife Shellie that filled it out.

Link?

 

[paperview]

I've read enough from respected lawyers that disagree with you, so we'll leave that as an unknown at this point. It could go either way, and it's not a certainty it would be such a slam dunk appeal matter.

Short of that, Gilligan, you seem certain Z will be out on Bond on the 29th. What makes you conclude that, and what amount do you think Bond will be set at?

 

[paperview]

it was his wife Shellie that filled it out.

Link?

He made it up.

 

[Ravi]

it was his wife Shellie that filled it out.

Link?

He made it up.

He makes up a lot of things so I figured that was the case.

 

[paperview]

The Potted Palm lied. Ain't no doubt about it, Oscar.

That's why his fat ass is sitting in the pokey right now gobbling up Jolly Ranchers.

 

[Liability]

I've read enough from respected lawyers that disagree with you, so we'll leave that as an unknown at this point. It could go either way, and it's not a certainty it would be such a slam dunk appeal matter.

Short of that, Gilligan, you seem certain Z will be out on Bond on the 29th. What makes you conclude that, and what amount do you think Bond will be set at?

That's not Gilligan. It's Maynard.

 

[Inthemiddle]

The bail hearings and everything associated is prejudicial to the jury. ONLY prior convictions are relevant and admissable if they are similar transactions.
Lying in a bail report sheet is not admissable in a murder case as it is irrelevant to the murder charge.

It's called impeaching a witness. When a witness testifies, the examining attorney has the right to attempt to impeach the witness and call into question his/her credibility for the trier of fact to consider. This can be done in several ways, to include documented instances of deceiving the court. It will be up to the trier of fact to weight the witness's credibility.

You might want to educate yourself.

And it gets even better Moe, it was his wife Shellie that filled it out and she was the one arrested for the perjury.Something about the law which you know nothing about.
Zimmerman will be released after the hearing on the 29th.

It was Zimmerman's hearing. He knowingly presented the evidence, he knowingly mislead the court. As paperview showed above, providing false information at a bail hearing need not be in the form of lying under oath. It is sufficient for Zimmerman to have willfully presented misleading information, or willfully omitted material information.

 

[beagle9]

If Martin attacked Zimmerman, because Zimmerman had let his gaurd down in a situation, where as Martin almost alledgedly had done Zimmerman in because of, then Martin is guilty of something maybe

Exactly. The only way anyone can even arrive at the idea that Martin was guilty of something, is to presume, without any valid rationale, that Martin attacked Zimmerman while Zimmerman did absolutely nothing wrong. There is absolutely no valid basis for such an assumption, and there is no rational means to even infer such a scenario from the known facts.

but this will be determined in a court of law finally, so it's still a wait and see situation & outcome for all.

So all you're saying is that since the case hasn't been tried yet, nobody has the right to consider the information given so far, to analyze it, or formulate any kind of theory or draw any conclusion based on that information. You are, therefore, arguing nothing more than a demand for absolute silence. Of course, you're not being silent....

Kidding me right ? Tell ya what, if you can go back somehow, and find anywhere in which I said Martin was laying in wait for Zimmerman, and this in order to jump him, then I won't call you a LIAR in which you just proved yourself foolishly to be. Oh and you won't find it, because I never said it, so you are a LIAR plain and simple.

The only possible way that Martin could be guilty of something would be for Martin to have been lying in wait to attack Zimmerman. If you don't want to have that claim attached to yourself, then stop arguing that Martin may have been guilty of something. I'm not a liar, I'm just calling you out. Maybe I'm just smarter than you. You don't seem very capable of connecting elementary dots.

Ok, so you can review the so called theories or so called facts and etc. here, in which people have spoken about and commented on with every angle possible, but you can't stand it when someone does comment in a fair way that gives both sides some new ideas maybe, but you think we are all Zimmerman Zombie's if we seek a fair look at this thing from all views and/or angles eh? So what you actually want is for your side of the opinion to be heard and cemented in, but how dare anyone else take another look at it, and then form an opinion for all to ponder as well. I'd say you are as bised as biased can be in such a case, even though you don't think so.

Round and around you go, trying to make excuses and trying to distract or confuse with your rude attacks on everyone who voices their opinion, but everyone see's right through you, I do hope you know that.. Don't you ??

 

[Gadawg73]

it was his wife Shellie that filled it out.

Link?

She was arrested for it. Find it yourself. Are you lazy or what?

 

[Gadawg73]

The bail hearings and everything associated is prejudicial to the jury. ONLY prior convictions are relevant and admissable if they are similar transactions.
Lying in a bail report sheet is not admissable in a murder case as it is irrelevant to the murder charge.

It's called impeaching a witness. When a witness testifies, the examining attorney has the right to attempt to impeach the witness and call into question his/her credibility for the trier of fact to consider. This can be done in several ways, to include documented instances of deceiving the court. It will be up to the trier of fact to weight the witness's credibility.

You might want to educate yourself.

And it gets even better Moe, it was his wife Shellie that filled it out and she was the one arrested for the perjury.Something about the law which you know nothing about.
Zimmerman will be released after the hearing on the 29th.

It was Zimmerman's hearing. He knowingly presented the evidence, he knowingly mislead the court. As paperview showed above, providing false information at a bail hearing need not be in the form of lying under oath. It is sufficient for Zimmerman to have willfully presented misleading information, or willfully omitted material information.

Dumbass, how many criminal trials have you investigated?
I have over 3000, over 1000 gone to trial and over 100 murder cases.
You do not even know what a Motion in Limine is do you?
When you are attempting to impeach a witness you can only ask the questions relevant to the case and only the ones that pass through the Motion in Limine.
That question and that line of questioning will be excluded long before trial.
This is getting funny. You watch too much TV.

 

[Gadawg73]

The burden in all of these bond cases where there was money not accounted for in the bail appication financial affidavit of assets is always on the prosecution. Zimmerman never used the money for anything so deceit, which is the burden, is not there.
Inculpatory evidence is always scrutinized to a higher degree by not only trial courts but in most all case law on motions in limine by the appellate courts.
Could make the Judge rule in favor of the prosecution but relevance to the charges, an affidavit signed by his wife, compared to the prejudicial effect that irrelevant inculpatory evidence on the jury points the ruling based on case law and the defense should prevail.
All of the bail proceedings should not be used as inculpatory impeachment purposes by the prosecution.
That is always the liberal argument when the tables are turned the other way. The most recent police officer killing all of the civil rights groups wanted any and all inculpatory evidence prejudicial to the jury excluded.
But when it is a white dude they change their tune.

 

[Gadawg73]

I've read enough from respected lawyers that disagree with you, so we'll leave that as an unknown at this point. It could go either way, and it's not a certainty it would be such a slam dunk appeal matter.

Short of that, Gilligan, you seem certain Z will be out on Bond on the 29th. What makes you conclude that, and what amount do you think Bond will be set at?

That is not Gilligan.
Guess who it is?
Raise the bond 100K more.
Zimmerman is not a flight risk so why waste taxpayer $$$?

 

[beagle9]

Let's make that ecstatic...I'm ecstatic that they finally locked up that racist animal. I hope they lose the keys.

Did you ever say that about OJ Simpson, just to be fair here?

Of course you didn't did you?...... B )

Wait, wait, I bet you even said that everyone should all wait for Simpson to be tried first, instead of coming to the conclusion that he may have or may not have done it right? So what is different here prior to the trial where all the evidence will be submitted finally, and all sides will be represented as they should be in a case ? Whats with the lynch mob mentality still hanging around on such a case here, and this prior to the trial or law doing their job on the case as they are doing, and will be doing with everything considered (on the table) and with much needed due process involved as it should be ?

 

[paperview]

it was his wife Shellie that filled it out.

Link?

She was arrested for it. Find it yourself. Are you lazy or what?

SHE was arrested for Perjury. Find it yourself. Are you lazy or what?

 

[paperview]

I've read enough from respected lawyers that disagree with you, so we'll leave that as an unknown at this point. It could go either way, and it's not a certainty it would be such a slam dunk appeal matter.

Short of that, Gilligan, you seem certain Z will be out on Bond on the 29th. What makes you conclude that, and what amount do you think Bond will be set at?

That is not Gilligan.
Guess who it is?
Raise the bond 100K more.
Zimmerman is not a flight risk so why waste taxpayer $$$?

Don't care if it's not Gilligan - you look (and sound) like Gilligan to me.

Wanna bet a sig line for a month his bond will not be raised by only 100K more?

I say - if Lester *does* decide to raise it, instead of revoking it completely - it's to the tune of many, many many more multiples of that. Like the 1 MIL originally requested. Maybe more.

Nonetheless, it will be *significantly* more than 100K more. Up for the bet?

 

[Ravi]

it was his wife Shellie that filled it out.

Link?

She was arrested for it. Find it yourself. Are you lazy or what?

Not at all. I just know you don't have your spouse fill out your sworn statements, you stupid asshole.

 

[Gadawg73]

Link?

She was arrested for it. Find it yourself. Are you lazy or what?

SHE was arrested for Perjury. Find it yourself. Are you lazy or what?

Are you really that stupid?
Perjury for signing the affidavit and not listing the 135K.
She was the one signing the bond affidavit. It HAS TO BE SOMEONE OTHER than the defendant.
WELL DUH!

 

[Gadawg73]

Link?

She was arrested for it. Find it yourself. Are you lazy or what?

Not at all. I just know you don't have your spouse fill out your sworn statements, you stupid asshole.

Booked for making a false statement about the bond affidavit that she filled out.
She made her $1000 bond and was released.
You people are beyond ignorant.
$1000 bond, wow, what a crime.
This is getting to be very funny.