Lawyer says George Zimmerman knew judge was misinformed about his finances

[Amerigo Vespucci]

Source: MSNBC

George Zimmerman, the man charged with second-degree murder in the shooting death of Florida teenager Trayvon Martin, knew his finances had been misrepresented to the court when he sought to be freed on bond in April, his attorney said Monday.

In a statement posted to the official website for the Zimmerman legal case, Mark O'Mara said he would file a motion for a second bond hearing later Monday. (He had not done so by 5 p.m. ET, clerks told NBC News.)

In the statement, O'Mara said Zimmerman acknowledges that he "allowed his financial situation to be misstated in court."

Zimmerman, 28, returned to jailin Seminole County, Fla., on Sunday, two days after a judge revoked his $15,000 bail. Prosecutors argued that Zimmerman's wife, Shellie, misled the court about the couple's financial picture, failing to disclose money Zimmerman had raised in a PayPal account.

Read more: http://usnews.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/06/04/12053718-lawyer-says-george-zimmerman-knew-judge-was-misinformed-about-his-finances?lite

---

[Life Long Dem]

1. He's getting out again.

Bookmark.

[WingDinger]

2. And he prolly should. He should be barred from using a bail bondsman, and

it should be raised to what is in the paypal account, and 15000. And, that should get his attorney hating his ass. And, his wife should get a hearing, and prolly parole. His gun permits yanked. His ankle strapped with GPS, And an every fifteen minute phonein requirement.

Oh, and an agent to verify all of it, at his expense.

[Life Long Dem]

7. Probly

[Skittles]

11. prolly?

WTF

[JackInGreen]

14. Was the WTF

About the statement or about the use of 'Prolly'?

[grasswire]

18. prolly is old-time Internet talk.

I don't know if it's used anywhere else, but I've been seeing it on message boards for twenty years or so.

[Amerigo Vespucci]

24. Robert Crumb used to use it all the time in his comix...

...when I saw it used here, my first thought was "Bob Crumb." Zap, Mr. Natural, all of those.

[grasswire]

30. I didn't know that.

An honorable origin, then.

[Skittles]

25. so have I

and I STILL detest its usage

[tularetom]

3. This guy's either a fuckin idiot

or a fuckin idiot.

If his attorney has any hopes of keeping him out of prison he'd better keep him off the witness stand because he can't keep his mouth shut.

And it's not possible for him to make a case for self defense without testifying himself.

I'll bet O'Meara is kicking himself in the ass for ever taking this fool on as a client.

Douchebag is going to get just what he deserves.

[Life Long Dem]

8. O'Mara is covering his ass

What a good defense lawyer does. I have 100% percent respect for O'mara, and wouldn't mind having him on my defense if I ever needed one.

[DallasNE]

31. What Did O'Mara Know And When Did He Know It?

I do believe that O'Mara knew about this PayPal account so why did he not use some excuse like the wife didn't understand the question giving her a chance to correct the record. Was O'Mara aware that the Zimmerman's were talking about their bank account in code. Lastly, what happened that the Passport Zimmerman obtained 2 weeks after killing Martin was not turned in. Indeed, was O'Mara coaching the Zimmerman's on these issues? O'Mara needs to explain exactly how each of these issues came to pass. Indeed, what he knew and when he knew it.

[tammywammy]

37. Passport 2 weeks later?

I thought he had two passports one that expired 2012 and the other in 2014 and turned in the 2012 one. A 2014 expiration means he got it in 2004, not two weeks after the shooting.

[DallasNE]

41. What you're Saying is how I first heard it

Then another poster had this updated data so I asked for a link. Don't have time to look for it right now but I will come back tonight and show it as another reply here. It looked credible.

[DallasNE]

42. Response With Link On 2nd Passport

It is in the ABC link within the post. I have linked to the post so attribution for the source is present. http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1014&pid=134412

[tammywammy]

44. That article is wrong.

Here's a pdf of what the prosecutor presented. He got the second passport in 2004.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/content/dam/dailybeast/2012/6/1/Zimmerman-Motion-to-Revoke-Bond.pdf

[DallasNE]

45. Sadly, I Have To Agree

It's not like I had a fly by night source either. Who and what can you trust when ABC is not a reliable source. Misinformation rules.

That court document makes it look like O'Mara is up to his eyebrows with the deceptions. The Judge can't be too happy with this.

[1StrongBlackMan]

9. Again ...

per the Florida Statute, zimmerman's case for self-defense HAS been made ... with his merely asserting that he acted in self-defense; zimmerman need do no more beyond allowing his attorney to poke holes in the prosecution's case that he did not act in self-defense.

It is the prosecutions burden of proof; not zimmerman's!

That's what makes this law so crappy.

[tularetom]

13. It's ALWAYS the prosecution's burden of proof

As much of a piece of shit as Zimmerman is, he is innocent until the prosecution proves him guilty.

As far as the SYG law is concerned, he'll have a hard time establishing that he felt threatened when he apparently disregarded the instructions of the dispatcher to stop pursuing Trayvon Martin.

What's going to sink Zimmerman is that he apparently can't keep his mouth shut. And it shouldn't be difficult for the prosecution to goad him into making some self incriminating statement if his attorney lets him take the stand.

[1StrongBlackMan]

16. True ...

It is the prosecutions burden.

But then you go on to write:

As far as the SYG law is concerned, he'll have a hard time establishing that he felt threatened when he apparently disregarded the instructions of the dispatcher to stop pursuing Trayvon Martin.

Under Florida's SYG Statute, zimmerman has no such burden ... IOW, he doesn't has to establish that he felt threatened; he has already established that through his raising of the self-defense defense ... It is now the prosecutions burden to prove he didn't feel threatened.

zimmerman does not have to prove a single thing ... And I would be surprised if zimmerman even took the stand because he has nothing more to offer that will help his defense, and plenty that can hurt his defense.

Again ... That's what makes this case so tough for the prosecution.

[Kencorburn]

29. Not completely true, because SYG is an affirmative defense, he still has to have a hearing to

Last edited Mon Jun 4, 2012, 11:47 PM - Edit history (1)

determine whether or not SYG applies, if it does no trial, if it doesn't, there is no self-defense.








*changed one word to correctly describe the type of defense GZ is trying to use.

[1StrongBlackMan]

39. Agreed ...

zimmerman faces a hearing to determine whether SYG applies; but none-the-less, that hearing turns on the prosecution's ability to prove that zimmerman did not act in self-defense ... IOW, zimmerman is not charged with proving that he did act in self-defense; all he is required to do is assert that he did.

[Cosmocat]

35. I don't see it

Your position is absurd.

A guy robbing a bank and killing law enforcement officers can use the defense as you define it because all he has to do is use SYG and, hey, the cops were going to kill him so he was threatened.

It basically would allow ANY murder to be absolved.

This situation is WELL beyond what any reasonable person would view stand your ground.

This is not taking a shotgun to someone who broke into your house. This is not blowing the head off your girlfrield's ex who showed up at your door.

This is some half mental twit stalking a kid making a simple 7-11 trip.

Anyone short of a right wing fanatic who would find him innocent regardless is going to need to hear something pretty darn convincing from him for why he stalked and executed the kid.

[1StrongBlackMan]

38. It's NOT my position ...

It's the LAW.

I agree that zimmerman acted outside the bounds of what I consider reason; but that is not the standard used in the Florida Statute.

The law is very specific in its burdens of proof:

Someone shoots and kill (or harms) another.

The shooter raises the affirmative defense (a mere burden of pleading) that he/she acted in self-defense.

The burden shifts to the prosecution to prove that the shooter did not act in self-defense.

Period ... That's it. And that is exactly what is so problemmatic with this (and other SYG) law(s).

[1StrongBlackMan]

40. I agree ...

Anyone short of a right wing fanatic who would find him innocent regardless is going to need to hear something pretty darn convincing from him for why he stalked and executed the kid.

But unfortunately ... that is NOT the way this law works.

[Skittles]

12. he's a fucking idiot, a thug and a gun nut

[Boabab]

4. Translation: GZ lied to the judge

This is surreal. A lawyer can make a statement that his client "allowed his financial situation to be misstated in court." In other words, he committed perjury, which is a prosecutable offense last time I checked. I wonder if that will happen....

Yet, there's a presumption that GZ will be released on bond. Will he ever pay lasting consequences for murdering Trayvon?

Bail should be denied, and the killer should remain locked up until the trial.

[Igel]

23. Not necessarily an accurate translation.

He may have answered the questions correctly but not necessarily providing more information than requested. Not false, but not the whole truth. Not intentionally misleading, but certainly allowing a wrong conclusion to be drawn.

He may then have quietly watched as the judge was given information that was accurate when he provided but was out of date by the time it was actually given to the judge.

Or he may have watched as information that was incorrect but which he wasn't directly responsible for was submitted to the judge.

Any of these would satisfy the odd passive construction that his lawyer used without implying that Zimmerman actively committed perjury.

It's a standard assertion that most discourse in English assumes that the speaker is being relevant, providing all relevant information, and just the amount of information s/he thinks appropriate. This is lumped under the heading of "good will": You don't want to leave your listener in the dark, you don't want to annoy them, and you don't want to waste their time. In legal settings, as in political speech and argumentation, any assumption of good will on the part of speaker and listener is completely mistaken.

[magical thyme]

43. he watched as his wife testified that she didn't know how much money was in the paypal account

The judge said something along the lines of, "You can't sit in this courtroom like a potted plant..." referring to him not correcting his wife's misinformation.

Their phone conversations regarding the passport and money occurred just days before their court testimony, so she knew about the money.

His wife perjured herself; he failed to correct the record and took advantage of her silence...and in so doing destroyed his credibility.

His attorney has claimed that he turned the passport over and that he, the attorney, had it in his own safe deposit box and forgot to hand it in.

But the phone conversations have him saying something about his passport being in a bag and his wife says, "the one in the safe deposit box" and he instructs her to leave it there. It is pretty obvious by the wording that there are two passports and that she's referring to *their* safe deposit box, not the attorney's.

Their attorney also is now claiming that since they didn't use the money, it wasn't relevant. That is, of course, bogus. The question wasn't how much money are they using or not using. It was how much money do you have. They lied about it to get favorable bond, and they lied about the passport. There can only be one reason to hide the second passport.

[madokie]

5. Shellie meet bus

You know the one the zimmermans are fixing to throw you under, yeah that one.

[1StrongBlackMan]

6. Uhmm, Mr. O'Mara ...

positively asserting indigence is a little more than ""allow(ing) his financial situation to be misstated in court."

[PSPS]

19. Indeed. A lawyer knowingly allowing his client to commit perjury can be disbarred.

[Tx4obama]

10. Perjury charges should be brought against his wife ASAP for lying to the judge. n/t

[JBoy]

15. Gotta love the passive language

his finances had been misrepresented

allowed his financial situation to be misstated

NOT

misrepresented his finances
misstated his financial situation

[magical thyme]

22. this is extremely rare situ where the passive is accurate. his wife misstated the finances.

He sat quietly like a "potted plant" (words of the angry judge) and allowed her to misstate them.

She claimed to not know how much money was in the paypal account. Their earlier jailhouse phone conversations proved otherwise.

He never testified as to his finances. He only got up and gave his lame, lying apology, in which he stated he didn't realize how young Martin was, that he thought he was closer to his own age. (In direct contradiction of the 911 call, when he called Martin a teenager.)

[may3rd]

17. I can see this case will mirror

Bohemian rhaposedy

[lookingfortruth]

20. HIS OWN ATTORNEY THREW HIM UNDER THE BUS!!! OUCH you got to wonder what this guy will do at trail.

[obamanut2012]

27. He threw his attorney under the bus

[MADem]

28. No. By lying, by colluding with his wife to lie, by talking in lying code on the prison phone, he

threw HIMSELF under the bus.

If he hadn't lied, he would not be in this fix.

The lawyer didn't have that passport--the wife did. In a safe deposit box.

[lookingfortruth]

32. I'm just saying that the way I read it the Attorney knew about the second passport and now that

they are being called on it the Attorney is trying to push all the blame on him.


How anyone be surprised that this guy lied about the passport. The way his story kept changing.

[MADem]

33. I don't think that attorney knew about that passport--it was in a safe deposit box, not in the

lawyer's office. The lawyer told the court that the passport he turned in was his ONLY passport, too. The lawyer might be tossing bullshit to try to confuse the issue, but he stated very clearly that the passport he handed in was the only one.

Why didn't George pipe up then and say "Ooopsie, Judge--I have another passport, and the one I gave you is the one I told the federal government I lost?"


http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2012/06/01/prosecutors-say-zimmerman-hid-second-passport-lied-about-money.html

In a packed Florida courtroom in April, George Zimmerman’s defense lawyer surrendered his client’s passport—a gesture to show that Zimmerman would not attempt to flee the country if he were released on bond. It now appears that Zimmerman had another passport he didn’t hand over.


According to startling new disclosures by prosecutors in the case (PDF), the state attorney’s office says Zimmerman failed to give the court another valid American passport he had obtained in 2004....Prosecutors said Zimmerman got his second passport after claiming he’d lost his original one, which expired at the end of May 2012. It was that original passport which he turned over to the court; the second passport, which is valid until 2014, remained in his possession.

Zimmerman lied to the court, and likely lied to his lawyer. His credibility is toast.

[lookingfortruth]

34. Zimmerman lying to the court, is like Venus Transitting the sun today. I expected this guy to

lie (Zimmerman) What I question is how much the lawyer knew and when he knew it.

[MADem]

21. Very good analysis, here!

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2012/06/04/lying-to-a-judge-what-was-george-zimmerman-thinking.html

The big finish (but the whole article is good):

...Judge Lester will grant an evidentiary hearing soon on the PayPal and passport issues, which will allow the defense the opportunity to explain them away. But the hearing could turn out badly for Zimmerman, since it will allow the prosecution to go into much greater detail regarding his and his wife’s alleged attempts to fool the court.

Speaking of Mrs. Zimmerman, the perjury she clearly committed during the initial bond hearing (when she testified they were dead broke to obtain a lower bail) will almost surely be used as a bargaining chip against the couple by prosecutors at some point. The state’s attorney is not going to let an advantage like that slip away.

And let’s not forget Title 18, Chapter 75, Section 1542 of the U.S. Criminal Code, which states that lying on a passport application is punishable by a term of 10 years behind bars. To obtain his second passport, Zimmerman reportedly told authorities he’d lost his original one. It’s possible that he honestly believed he had lost it at the time, but clearly he found it again. At that point he was legally obligated to turn it in, which he did not do. On top of that, he sat silently in court as O’Mara handed it over and claimed it was his “only” passport.

Unlike the recent failed prosecution of John Edwards, who decided (wisely, it now appears) not to take the stand in his own defense, Zimmerman is the primary witness in his own defense, so if he wants any chance of being acquitted, he must take the stand and try to sell the jury his version of what happened the night he shot and killed Trayvon Martin. But when he does, the prosecutor is going to rip his credibility apart over these two issues. In a dilemma he created by himself, Zimmerman is damned if he does, and more damned if he doesn’t.

[shimonitanegi]

26. I think he is toast in a technical sense

but just one bigoted juror can easily hang a jury.
There are those who think that it's all someone's fault and Zimmerman must be a victim. It was Martin's fault and now it was O'Mara's fault despite the fact that Zimmerman's immoral, reckless and irresponsible behavior was always the cause of his problem.

[Cosmocat]

36. Jury selection is key

As long as the prosecution is able to make sure no stealth right wing loon gets on to the jury, Zimmerman is very likely to get SOME of the justice he deserves.

[uponit7771]

46. +1