Shellie Zimmerman Arrested: Charged with Perjury [Archive] - Glock Talk

PDA

View Full Version : Shellie Zimmerman Arrested: Charged with Perjury


HarlDane
06-12-2012, 16:41
Thinks keep getting worse for George and the family. Now his wife is in trouble for allegedly lying during the bond hearing.

http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/lookout/zimmerman-wife-arrest-perjury-charges-210257372.html

Cavalry Doc
06-12-2012, 17:08
I'm sure I remember someone around here cautioning people to wait for it to play out, because there really might not be a good guy in this story. There was definitely at least one bad guy though. Who was that guy?

CAcop
06-12-2012, 17:25
I'm sure I remember someone around here cautioning people to wait for it to play out, because there really might not be a good guy in this story. There was definitely at least one bad guy though. Who was that guy?

I like the way you phrased that.

Angry Fist
06-12-2012, 17:27
Buncha dumbasses.

jakebrake
06-12-2012, 17:28
who's the bad guy? make it quicker and easier...

who's the good guy? cause i haven't seen him yet.

TheExplorer
06-12-2012, 17:30
I guess the DA's office has a lot of free time on their hands. I'm sure nothing going on there is as detrimental to local society as this woman.

Cavalry Doc
06-12-2012, 17:36
who's the bad guy? make it quicker and easier...

who's the good guy? cause i haven't seen him yet.

In digital analysis, good vs. bad, between two people, there are only so many possibilities.

__(Z)(M)
1. (+)(+)
2. (+)(-)
3. (-)(+)
4. (-)(-)

I'll let you know when I find out.

Dexters
06-12-2012, 17:42
Thinks keep getting worse for George and the family. Now his wife is in trouble for allegedly lying during the bond hearing.

http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/lookout/zimmerman-wife-arrest-perjury-charges-210257372.html

Even if it went to trial I'm guessing she would get a slap on the wrist - not jail time and maybe a small fine.

Gunnut 45/454
06-12-2012, 17:43
Looks to be a vindictive DA to me! Prejury is hardly ever charged now a days. She see's her case going up in smoke. Can't wait for Durshiwhich to testfy how she broke the law in filing charges to begin wtih. And eventual jury finding of not guilty(Selfdefense).:supergrin:

IGotIt
06-12-2012, 17:44
Yep, let's really put the screws to the Zimmermans, arrest his wife. That'll show them we mean business. Of course, perjury is a bit more serious than a group of terrorists who threaten to hunt down, kidnap, and kill someone in retribution.

sbhaven
06-12-2012, 17:47
Shellie Zimmerman Arrest 6-12-12 Probable Cause Affidavit
http://www.scribd.com/jeweiner/d/96873221-Shellie-Zimmerman-Arrest-6-12-12

Cavalry Doc
06-12-2012, 17:48
Looks to be a vindictive DA to me! Prejury is hardly ever charged no a days. She see's her case going up in smoke. Can't wait for Durshiwhich to testfy how she broke the law in filing charges to begin wtih. And eventual jury finding of not guilty(Selfdefense).:supergrin:

Wait a minute, I see it now. Ms. Zimmerman = Mr. Libby.

Good post.

countrygun
06-12-2012, 17:55
Couldn't be that they are trying to financially tap the family out to hinder his defense?

I swear they mentioned the Paypal account in the hearing

concretefuzzynuts
06-12-2012, 17:55
And the black panthers who posted a bounty on a U.S. citizen Walk away clear.

Cavalry Doc
06-12-2012, 17:58
And the black panthers who posted a bounty on a U.S. citizen Walk away clear.

Those guys are just misunderstood youts.



Just more proof of the "your turn" policy of the Holder guys.

jakebrake
06-12-2012, 18:01
In digital analysis, good vs. bad, between two people, there are only so many possibilities.


4. (-)(-)

I'll let you know when I find out.

this would be my read...i'll put the flame suit on now.

i don't see a good guy in this.

Cavalry Doc
06-12-2012, 18:30
this would be my read...i'll put the flame suit on now.

i don't see a good guy in this.

I'm still waiting for it. I'll know when I know, but I don't know when that will be.

Bruce H
06-12-2012, 19:00
There are a lot of people that need killing over this deal and it ain't the Zimmermans.

DOC44
06-12-2012, 19:06
Couldn't be that they are trying to financially tap the family out to hinder his defense?

I swear they mentioned the Paypal account in the hearing

The websites and paypal was mentioned by Z's lawyer in court. Wonder where the transcripts of the hearing are?

Where is Z now.... still in jail?

This is not going to end well.

Doc44

ModGlock17
06-12-2012, 19:16
It sounds like Shellie would have been better off selling guns that kill US Border patrol.

That way, she wouldn't have to go to jail.

countrygun
06-12-2012, 19:31
The websites and paypal was mentioned by Z's lawyer in court. Wonder where the transcripts of the hearing are?

Where is Z now.... still in jail?

This is not going to end well.

Doc44


The Zimmermans told the Court about the Paypal acct and the website at his hearing.

The tapes of the Zimmermans alledgedly talking in code about money existed BEFORE he was released.

He was none-the-less released only to be jerked back in a very public manner.

His wife has now been arrested for perjury, apparently based on the evidence and facts that existed when Zimmerman was released. also done in a very public manner.

Seems like all of this could have been addressed before he was released, but it wouldn't have had the same effect on the jury pool.

Sharkey
06-12-2012, 19:32
Looks to be a vindictive DA to me! Prejury is hardly ever charged now a days. She see's her case going up in smoke. Can't wait for Durshiwhich to testfy how she broke the law in filing charges to begin wtih. And eventual jury finding of not guilty(Selfdefense).:supergrin:

Exactly.
I'm sure the DA is watching their case evaporates.
A trumped up charge that is hardly used. Seems the DA could have perjured herself by minimizing Zimmerman's injuries in the PC affidavit.

HarlDane
06-12-2012, 19:50
The websites and paypal was mentioned by Z's lawyer in court. Wonder where the transcripts of the hearing are?

Where is Z now.... still in jail?

This is not going to end well.

Doc44here is a link to the affidavit with transcripts of the bond hearing and the recorded phone calls.

http://www.scribd.com/mobile/doc/96873221

sbhaven
06-13-2012, 07:15
here is a link to the affidavit with transcripts of the bond hearing and the recorded phone calls.
Look up a few posts to post 11 (http://www.glocktalk.com/forums/showpost.php?p=19082104&postcount=11)... :winkie:

DonGlock26
06-13-2012, 07:28
Perjury is a crime now? I thought we decriminalized it during the Clinton admin.?

_

countrygun
06-13-2012, 10:36
Perjury is a crime now? I thought we decriminalized it during the Clinton admin.?

_

Making something an art form doen't neccessarily decriminalize it

AA#5
06-13-2012, 10:51
who's the bad guy? make it quicker and easier...

who's the good guy? cause i haven't seen him yet.

No good or bad guys in this story.

Just two really stupid guys.

oldman11
06-13-2012, 12:06
Unfortunately Zimmerman is up against a crooked DA and a crooked judge, who are all backed by the Brady bunch and Barrak Hussein. I think charges should be brought against the DA and the judge.

TBO
06-13-2012, 12:21
If she didn't lie they couldn't charge her.

Sent from my mind using Tapatalk 2

countrygun
06-13-2012, 13:05
If she didn't lie they couldn't charge her.

Sent from my mind using Tapatalk 2


So, that taptalk works from Mars does it?

Maybe just Syria, around here the law works a little different. I've known some people that were charged with something that were actually innocent, really, honest-injun.

Snowman92D
06-13-2012, 13:08
I'm guessing that the DA is figuring Zim will take a plea on shooting Trayvon in exchange for dropping the charges on Zim's wife. (Seen that done a lot of times over the years.) That way the DA gets a "conviction" on a weak-at-best case. The DA wins, the "community" is happy, Al Sharpton and Jessie Jackson make money, and the "we'll-riot-unless-you-do-what-we-want" model is again successful.

concretefuzzynuts
06-13-2012, 13:56
From what I've read she spread $74,000 dollars between 8 different bank accounts before the first hearing to set bond. All deposits less than $10,000 so as not to draw attention from the government.

And George transfered $47,000 to his moms account.

Sounds like they were trying to hide money to me.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/george-zimmermans-wife-charged-with-perjury-over-finances/2012/06/13/gJQAjBdzZV_story.html

FFR Spyder GT
06-13-2012, 14:09
If she didn't lie they couldn't charge her.

Sent from my mind using Tapatalk 2

From what I've read she spread $74,000 dollars between 8 different bank accounts before the first hearing to set bond. All deposits less than $10,000 so as not to draw attention from the government.

And George transfered $47,000 to his moms account.

Sounds like they were trying to hide money to me.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/george-zimmermans-wife-charged-with-perjury-over-finances/2012/06/13/gJQAjBdzZV_story.html

+1


Never a smart move to lie to a Judge especially when your the defendent in a 2nd degree murder trial and your only evidence is your credibility.

concretefuzzynuts
06-13-2012, 14:16
+1


Never a smart move to lie to a Judge especially when your the defendent in a 2nd degree murder trial and your only evidence is your credibility.

Money makes people do stupid things.

FFR Spyder GT
06-13-2012, 15:18
Money makes people do stupid things.

Being stupid makes people do stupid things.

Cavalry Doc
06-13-2012, 16:59
Being stupid makes people do stupid things.

Stress and Adrenalin makes you stupid. Go figure. But if she lied, and they can prove she did it intentionally, then she did it. Tough cookies.

Goaltender66
06-13-2012, 20:28
Time to fire Angela Corey. She can't win the case against Zimmerman on the merits so she's resorting to two-bit bully tactics to try and force a plea, or ruin Zimmerman's life in the process.

She overcharged Mrs. Z, citing Florida Statute 832.02(1) (http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&Search_String=&URL=0800-0899/0837/Sections/0837.02.html) which says :

(1) Except as provided in subsection (2), whoever makes a false statement, which he or she does not believe to be true, under oath in an official proceeding in regard to any material matter, commits a felony of the third degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084.
But Corey never identifies the specific false statement made by Mrs. Z. Sure, there's a recital of testimony, evidence of money transactions, and phone transcripts. But nothing in there about the specific statement identified as false along with an explanation as to why it's false.

Oh, and Corey altered the transcript of Mrs. Z's testimony in the Affadavit in order to conjure up a perjury charge. Here's the full testimony, with the bolder parts what Corey omitted:

How much money is in that website right now? How much money as a result of that website was —

A: Currently, I do not know.

Q: Who would know that?

A: That would be my brother-in-law.

Q: And is he — I know he’s not in the same room as you, but is he available so we can speak to him, too, or the Court can inquire through the State or the Defense?

A: I’m sure that we could probably get him on the phone.

Q: Okay.* So he’s not there now.

A: No, he is not, sir.

Q: Do you have any estimate as to how much money has already been obtained or collected?

A: I do not.

This is outrageous prosecutorial misconduct. Combine this with her threats to sue Alan Dershowitz and Harvard University in reaction to being criticized and, well, you have a pretty clear picture as to the competence, or lack thereof, of one Angela Corey.

Probably more distressing is that, even after all of this, people are still willing, eager even, to believe the absolute worst of George Zimmerman...based on what Angela Corey says.

countrygun
06-13-2012, 20:33
Petty details, as if accuracy and "the whole truth" matters to the persecut,,,I mean "Prosecutor".

BTW "Dershowitz" that doesn't dound like an Indian name <snicker>

series1811
06-14-2012, 05:27
I would love to talk to some cops down in that area and ask them how many times they have tried to have serious thugs indicted for perjury, and were laughed out of the prosecutor's office.

As bad as this looks for people who don't work in the criminal justice system, it looks even worse for the people who do.

walt cowan
06-14-2012, 05:46
Perjury is a crime now? I thought we decriminalized it during the Clinton admin.?

_

:rofl:only if you use terms like, i forgot, i don't remember, i can't recall and if i could only find my lost notes.:rofl:

NDCent
06-14-2012, 05:47
I went to court yesterday, we were all sworn to tell the truth. The defendant and her witness (who the judge let ramble on about stuff not pertaining to the case) blatantly lied on multiple occasions to the court/judge. I presented several pieces of documented proof showing them lying directly to the judge/court. I received judgement, that was it.

Apparently, it only matters to certain judges and courts whether you lie under oath. :dunno:

Cavalry Doc
06-14-2012, 07:03
Watching people lie under oath only takes a couple of trips to a court room. I've seen it every time I've been in a hearing or court proceeding. It is something that is obviously selectively prosecuted at best.

Sharkey
06-14-2012, 08:55
Time to fire Angela Corey. She can't win the case against Zimmerman on the merits so she's resorting to two-bit bully tactics to try and force a plea, or ruin Zimmerman's life in the process.

She overcharged Mrs. Z, citing Florida Statute 832.02(1) (http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&Search_String=&URL=0800-0899/0837/Sections/0837.02.html) which says :


But Corey never identifies the specific false statement made by Mrs. Z. Sure, there's a recital of testimony, evidence of money transactions, and phone transcripts. But nothing in there about the specific statement identified as false along with an explanation as to why it's false.

Oh, and Corey altered the transcript of Mrs. Z's testimony in the Affadavit in order to conjure up a perjury charge. Here's the full testimony, with the bolder parts what Corey omitted:



This is outrageous prosecutorial misconduct. Combine this with her threats to sue Alan Dershowitz and Harvard University in reaction to being criticized and, well, you have a pretty clear picture as to the competence, or lack thereof, of one Angela Corey.

Probably more distressing is that, even after all of this, people are still willing, eager even, to believe the absolute worst of George Zimmerman...based on what Angela Corey says.

For God's sake, stop making sense. Nit isn't allowed in this section.

tslex
06-14-2012, 12:53
My post from GNG on the subject:

Just for giggles and grins, do the research where you live and find out how many perjury charges your prosecutor brought in the last year. Then see how many were brought on a transcript like this.

Here's what I promise you will find: A number between zero and very damn few.

If SAs prosecuted everyone for perjury who could possibly BE prosecuted, you'd need dedicated divisions just to hear the pleas. It's called prosecutorial discretion. Corey is a power-mad, political animal with a hugely inflated sense of the breadth of her authority. Read the PC affidavits against Zimmerman for what was missing from them. (Sue Harvard for Derhsowitz's comments? Was she absent the day they taught law in law school?)

The prosecution of the wife, on the basis of this evidence, is pure tactics and it stinks.

ETA: The $9900 transfers ARE kind of hilarious. Nothing worse than a thinking you know something that you don't know at all. To be clear: I think she probably lied. I think she may even have told "a 1. knowing lie 2. under oath 3. about a fact material to the proceedings," which is a pretty fair definition of perjury. MY point is, these kinds of prosecutions never happen for their own sake, and this one is no different.

FFR Spyder GT
06-14-2012, 13:53
Time to fire Angela Corey. She can't win the case against Zimmerman on the merits so she's resorting to two-bit bully tactics to try and force a plea, or ruin Zimmerman's life in the process.

She overcharged Mrs. Z, citing Florida Statute 832.02(1) (http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&Search_String=&URL=0800-0899/0837/Sections/0837.02.html) which says :


But Corey never identifies the specific false statement made by Mrs. Z. Sure, there's a recital of testimony, evidence of money transactions, and phone transcripts. But nothing in there about the specific statement identified as false along with an explanation as to why it's false.

Oh, and Corey altered the transcript of Mrs. Z's testimony in the Affadavit in order to conjure up a perjury charge. Here's the full testimony, with the bolder parts what Corey omitted:



This is outrageous prosecutorial misconduct. Combine this with her threats to sue Alan Dershowitz and Harvard University in reaction to being criticized and, well, you have a pretty clear picture as to the competence, or lack thereof, of one Angela Corey.

Probably more distressing is that, even after all of this, people are still willing, eager even, to believe the absolute worst of George Zimmerman...based on what Angela Corey says.

Gee, I do not know where you get your info but it's wrong.

Shellie was asked by the Judge if they had any money and she replied something like "Umm....None that I know of."

When in fact she knew they had money in the fund.

Plus if they were sooooooooo poor, how could they afford to live in a half million dollar home in a gated community?

If you willingly and knowingly lie to a Judge that is over your husband's 2nd degree murder trial, well, like you dumbbutt husband, you used pisspoor judgement.

aircarver
06-14-2012, 14:07
Are we dealing in transcripts, or just making stuff up ? .....:upeyes:

.

Goaltender66
06-14-2012, 14:18
Gee, I do not know where you get your info but it's wrong.

Shellie was asked by the Judge if they had any money and she replied something like "Umm....None that I know of."

When in fact she knew they had money in the fund.

Plus if they were sooooooooo poor, how could they afford to live in a half million dollar home in a gated community?

If you willingly and knowingly lie to a Judge that is over your husband's 2nd degree murder trial, well, like you dumbbutt husband, you used pisspoor judgement.

Gee, I got my info from the law and the transcripts. Where'd you get your info as to what exactly Mrs. Zimmerman "knew of?" Tea leaves or a crystal ball?

You seem to get off on accusing others of ignorance and then, well, posting things which are wrong. So here, I'll walk through the whole thing extra slowly and methodically, and then you can apply the same standard you demand of others in rebutting it.

First, perjury is covered in Florida under 837.02(1) which states: (http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&Search_String=&URL=0800-0899/0837/Sections/0837.02.html)

837.02 Perjury in official proceedings.—

(1) Except as provided in subsection (2), whoever makes a false statement, which he or she does not believe to be true, under oath in an official proceeding in regard to any material matter, commits a felony of the third degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084.
(2) Whoever makes a false statement, which he or she does not believe to be true, under oath in an official proceeding that relates to the prosecution of a capital felony, commits a felony of the second degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084.
(3) Knowledge of the materiality of the statement is not an element of the crime of perjury under subsection (1) or subsection (2), and the defendant’s mistaken belief that the statement was not material is not a defense.

Next, let's go ahead and look at what Florida uses for a jury instruction: (http://www.floridasupremecourt.org/jury_instructions/instructions.shtml#)

To prove the crime of [Perjury Not in an Official Proceeding] [Perjury in an Official Proceeding], the State must prove the following five elements beyond a reasonable doubt:

1. (Defendant) took an oath or otherwise affirmed that [he] [she] was obligated by conscience or by law to speak the truth in (describe proceedings, official or unofficial, in which the alleged oath was taken).

2. The oath or affirmation was made to (person allegedly administering oath), who was a (official capacity).

3. (Defendant), while under an oath, made the statement (read from charge).

4. The statement was false.

5. (Defendant) did not believe the statement was true when [he] [she] made it.


So, what is the specific false statement made by Mrs. Zimmerman? You haven't offered one, there isn't one in the transcript, and certainly Angela Corey hasn't offered one. Instead she (and you) offers inspecific testimony, allegations of money received and transferred, and a phone call transcript. Now, that's germane as to whether the Zimmermans deceived the court, but deception is not perjury. Perjury is, as I've shown three times now, a specific statement of empirical fact, not of opinion, belief, or perception, that is not only false, but the person making the statement must not believe it to be true, and the question posed must be specific enough to elicit an equally specific statement of fact.

Nothing in the affadavit, support, or your assertions comes close to that standard.

And as long as you're mentioning the transcripts, I think it's kind of ignorant to say she said "something like" when you're trying to support a perjury charge. "Something like" tells me you're not at all familiar with the transcripts. But hey, let me help you out.

The reality is Mrs. Zimmerman's answers were non-committal. For instance:

Q. Other major assets that you have which you can liquidate reasonably to assist
in coming up with money for a bond?
A. None that I know of.

What, exactly, are "major assets?" That's a matter of opinion, as is "reasonably." Further, if the alleged money was in a bank account, well, they are already liquid and it's not possible to liquidate them.

Or this:

Q. I have discussed with you the pending motion to have your husband George
declared indigent for cost, have I not?
A. Yes, you have.
Q. And is – - are you of any financial means where you can assist in those costs?
A. Uhrn, not- – not that I’m aware of.

This opens up another conversation, curiously absent from the Affadavit, which is what was in the pending motion and the discussions that took place out of court. What was her understanding as to who owned the funds, what they could be used for, and if they were actually her funds at all (Are you of any financial means...). If the funds were George's or belonged to the defense fund, well, they weren't hers, were they?

Q: I understand that you do have other family members present with you, and I’ll
ask some more questions of them, but have you had discussions with them of at
least trying to pull together some funds to accomplish a bond?
A: We have discussed that—
Q: Okay
A: —-trying to pull together the members of the family to scrape up anything that
we possibly can.
What could possibly be false about any of this? Yet it's offered up as evidence of perjury. How, exactly? Remember, it's a matter of law, not opinion.

Q. And you mentioned also, in terms of the ability of your husband to make a
bond amount, that you all had no money, is that correct?
A. To my knowledge, that is correct.
Q: Were you aware of the website that Mr. Zimmerman or somebody on his
behalf created?
A: I’m aware of that website.
Q: How much money is in that website right now? How much money as a result
of that website was —
A: Currently, I do not know.
Q: Do you have any estimate as to how much money has already been obtained
or collected?
A: I do not.

Again, the specific wording of the questions are such that they focus on whether Mrs. Zimmerman previously said there was no money, not whether there was actually no money.

But the very next question raised had to do with the website and she said she didn't currently know how much was in that website right now, or how much was raised as a result. The word "currently" means she didn't know at that moment, and proving her as a liar there means, again, you must be Carnac the Magnificent or something.

And then, of course, we have the little matter of what Angela Corey conveniently left out of this exchange. Again, bolded words were what Corey edited out: (http://www.flcourts18.org/PDF/Press_Releases/excerpt%20of%20bond%20hearing.pdf)

How much money is in that website right now? How much money as a result of that website was —

A: Currently, I do not know.

Q: Who would know that?

A: That would be my brother-in-law.

Q: And is he — I know he’s not in the same room as you, but is he available so we can speak to him, too, or the Court can inquire through the State or the Defense?

A: I’m sure that we could probably get him on the phone.

Q: Okay.* So he’s not there now.

A: No, he is not, sir.

Q: Do you have any estimate as to how much money has already been obtained or collected?

A: I do not.

So she was asked if she had an estimate. She didn't, and she OFFERED TO GET THE PERSON WHO WOULD KNOW ON THE PHONE, BUT THE PROSECUTION DIDN'T TAKE HER UP ON IT.

Oh, and to tie this all up for you, let's just look at, oh, Cohen v. State, 985 So.2d 1207 (Fla. App. 3 Dist. 2008):

This Court has held that statements alleged to be perjurious must be of “empirical fact” and not of opinion, belief or perception…. One of the essential elements of perjury in official proceedings is that the person making the statement does not believe it to be true… The questions posed to elicit perjured testimony must be asked with the appropriate specificity necessary to result in an equally specific statement of fact.

Statements alleged to be perjurious must be of empirical fact.

Not of opinion.

Not of belief.

Not of perception.

The person making the statement doesn't believe it's true.

Questions asked must be specific enough to elicit equally specific statements of fact.

Yes, I'm sure I said something about those requirements above.

Bottom line, FFR Spyder, I think you really have a long way to go before you start accusing others of being ignorant or offering unsupported arguments.

That said, your turn. What about any of this is incorrect as a matter of Florida law?

tslex
06-16-2012, 22:35
Rather than quite the entire thing, let me just say "Post 46 by Goaltender."

QFMFT

Good analysis, Goalie -- and, I have to believe, the same clear analysis in which Corey engaged, before charging the wife any-damned-way for political and tactical reasons that run along the border between prosecutorial discretion and misconduct.

countrygun
06-16-2012, 23:17
Rather than quite the entire thing, let me just say "Post 46 by Goaltender."

QFMFT

Good analysis, Goalie -- and, I have to believe, the same clear analysis in which Corey engaged, before charging the wife any-damned-way for political and tactical reasons that run along the border between prosecutorial discretion and misconduct.


Stick a fork in Spyder--he's done.

Cavalry Doc
06-17-2012, 06:20
Stick a fork in Spyder--he's done.

Black Flag Ant & Roach Killer commercial - 1990 - YouTube

Kingarthurhk
06-17-2012, 15:25
Anything to put pressure on Zimmerman. Plead to this Political Offense, or we will go after your family ploy. I wonder when Animal Control will be instructed to go pick up the family dog next and threaten euthenasia unless he pleas to their trumped up charges.:upeyes:

DOC44
06-17-2012, 15:29
WHERE IS ZIMMERMAN NOW.... OUT ON BAIL OR STILL IN LOCKUP?

Doc44

Jonesee
06-17-2012, 19:53
He is still in jail.

The six recorded jailhouse phone calls that led to the revocation of bail and the wife's perjury charge will be released Monday at 10:00 am.

countrygun
06-17-2012, 20:13
He is still in jail.

The six recorded jailhouse phone calls that led to the revocation of bail and the wife's perjury charge will be released Monday at 10:00 am.


Are those the recorded calls that the prosecution had before he was released from jail?

FFR Spyder GT
06-17-2012, 22:05
Gee, I got my info from the law and the transcripts. Where'd you get your info as to what exactly Mrs. Zimmerman "knew of?" Tea leaves or a crystal ball?

You seem to get off on accusing others of ignorance and then, well, posting things which are wrong. So here, I'll walk through the whole thing extra slowly and methodically, and then you can apply the same standard you demand of others in rebutting it.

First, perjury is covered in Florida under 837.02(1) which states: (http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&Search_String=&URL=0800-0899/0837/Sections/0837.02.html)



Next, let's go ahead and look at what Florida uses for a jury instruction: (http://www.floridasupremecourt.org/jury_instructions/instructions.shtml#)



So, what is the specific false statement made by Mrs. Zimmerman? You haven't offered one, there isn't one in the transcript, and certainly Angela Corey hasn't offered one. Instead she (and you) offers inspecific testimony, allegations of money received and transferred, and a phone call transcript. Now, that's germane as to whether the Zimmermans deceived the court, but deception is not perjury. Perjury is, as I've shown three times now, a specific statement of empirical fact, not of opinion, belief, or perception, that is not only false, but the person making the statement must not believe it to be true, and the question posed must be specific enough to elicit an equally specific statement of fact.

Nothing in the affadavit, support, or your assertions comes close to that standard.

And as long as you're mentioning the transcripts, I think it's kind of ignorant to say she said "something like" when you're trying to support a perjury charge. "Something like" tells me you're not at all familiar with the transcripts. But hey, let me help you out.

The reality is Mrs. Zimmerman's answers were non-committal. For instance:



What, exactly, are "major assets?" That's a matter of opinion, as is "reasonably." Further, if the alleged money was in a bank account, well, they are already liquid and it's not possible to liquidate them.

Or this:



This opens up another conversation, curiously absent from the Affadavit, which is what was in the pending motion and the discussions that took place out of court. What was her understanding as to who owned the funds, what they could be used for, and if they were actually her funds at all (Are you of any financial means...). If the funds were George's or belonged to the defense fund, well, they weren't hers, were they?


What could possibly be false about any of this? Yet it's offered up as evidence of perjury. How, exactly? Remember, it's a matter of law, not opinion.



Again, the specific wording of the questions are such that they focus on whether Mrs. Zimmerman previously said there was no money, not whether there was actually no money.

But the very next question raised had to do with the website and she said she didn't currently know how much was in that website right now, or how much was raised as a result. The word "currently" means she didn't know at that moment, and proving her as a liar there means, again, you must be Carnac the Magnificent or something.

And then, of course, we have the little matter of what Angela Corey conveniently left out of this exchange. Again, bolded words were what Corey edited out: (http://www.flcourts18.org/PDF/Press_Releases/excerpt%20of%20bond%20hearing.pdf)



So she was asked if she had an estimate. She didn't, and she OFFERED TO GET THE PERSON WHO WOULD KNOW ON THE PHONE, BUT THE PROSECUTION DIDN'T TAKE HER UP ON IT.

Oh, and to tie this all up for you, let's just look at, oh, Cohen v. State, 985 So.2d 1207 (Fla. App. 3 Dist. 2008):



Statements alleged to be perjurious must be of empirical fact.

Not of opinion.

Not of belief.

Not of perception.

The person making the statement doesn't believe it's true.

Questions asked must be specific enough to elicit equally specific statements of fact.

Yes, I'm sure I said something about those requirements above.

Bottom line, FFR Spyder, I think you really have a long way to go before you start accusing others of being ignorant or offering unsupported arguments.

That said, your turn. What about any of this is incorrect as a matter of Florida law?

Goaltender,

Just remember...... It's toke, toke, pass. Stop hoggin' the bong!

That's some of the lamest BS that I've ever read!

It's almost to the point of being ridiculous. You make a statement and for proof you post something else that proves your statement is wrong.

The PA edited out parts of the statements because they were not important. Kinda just the highlights.

Bottom line is that your hatred toward black people has clouded your judgement.

Shellie knew to a dime how much money was in the account and she knowingly and willingly lie to the Judge and Court.

Pretty simple.

You can post lame BS all day and it still doesn't change the truth.
http://i222.photobucket.com/albums/dd248/stengun/1339992453.jpg

Spyder

countrygun
06-17-2012, 22:27
Goaltender,

Just remember...... It's toke, toke, pass. Stop hoggin' the bong!

That's some of the lamest BS that I've ever read!

It's almost to the point of being ridiculous. You make a statement and for proof you post something else that proves your statement is wrong.

The PA edited out parts of the statements because they were not important. Kinda just the highlights.

Bottom line is that your hatred toward black people has clouded your judgement.

Shellie knew to a dime how much money was in the account and she knowingly and willingly lie to the Judge and Court.

Pretty simple.

You can post lame BS all day and it still doesn't change the truth.
http://i222.photobucket.com/albums/dd248/stengun/1339992453.jpg

Spyder





You have to be a heck of a loser to say that the facts are "lame". It seems as though YOU are posting from a position of hatred. You must be to claim those edited sections werent important.

BTW, I was going to make this a seperate post but since we're here I might as well make Spyder's useless post somewhat useful.

In the proceedings at the bail hearing, if it is like other bail hearings I have attended, did the judge ask the usual question of the Prosecutor?
That would be something along the line of "Do you know of any other evidence that should be considered in this matter?"

If the DA had those conversation tapes at the time of the bail hearing and didn't tell the Court at the bail hearing.....

Pigeon
06-17-2012, 23:58
I have to ask.

Is she hot?

Outdoor Hub mobile, the outdoor information engine

Goaltender66
06-18-2012, 05:41
Goaltender,

Just remember...... It's toke, toke, pass. Stop hoggin' the bong!

That's some of the lamest BS that I've ever read!
THAT'S your response? That's the rebuttal from the arbiter of truth? No details, nothing? Just a blanket assertion?



It's almost to the point of being ridiculous. You make a statement and for proof you post something else that proves your statement is wrong.

The PA edited out parts of the statements because they were not important. Kinda just the highlights.
This excuse is actually kind of lame, and for two reasons.

1) Corey did not place ellipses in the redacted portion, nor did she take any other measures to alert the reader (ie the "judge") that the quote was missing context. This means the edit was deliberate and had a particular motive behind it.

2) The redacted portion is actually exculpatory, evidence which Corey has a history of omitting in these kinds of documents (see Charging Document, Zimmerman, G). The original statement was "I don't know, but my brother in law knows and I can get him if you'd like, but no, I don't know" and changed to "I don't know, no, I don't know."



Bottom line is that your hatred toward black people has clouded your judgement.
No more than your hatred toward hispanics and/or Jews has clouded yours.

Shellie knew to a dime how much money was in the account and she knowingly and willingly lie to the Judge and Court.
And you know this...how? Tarot cards? What? Simple fact that by the laws of Florida she didn't commit perjury. I've demonstrated this several times now.

So where's your evidence that she "knew to a dime" and how exactly does it meet the demands of the Florida perjury statute and case law?

Pretty simple.
Actually what seems pretty simple is that you've made a knee-jerk (emphasis on jerk) decision that someone is guilty based on your own worldview, biases, and prejudices. This has placed you into a thought bubble and you don't seem to have the chops to escape it. Hence your banal and superficial remarks.

You can post lame BS all day and it still doesn't change the truth.
http://i222.photobucket.com/albums/dd248/stengun/1339992453.jpg

Yes, because no innocent person has ever been arrested as a pawn in a larger political scheme. After all, if someone is arrested, well, that person must be guilty.

http://i.cdn.turner.com/dr/teg/tsg/release/sites/default/files/imagecache/670xX/photos/rparksmug1.jpg

Oh, well, not her. That was a unique situation.

http://i.cdn.turner.com/dr/teg/tsg/release/sites/default/files/imagecache/670xX/photos/mlkingmug1.jpg

Maybe not so unique. But hey, we've progressed past such nonsense, right?


http://i.cdn.turner.com/dr/teg/tsg/release/sites/default/files/imagecache/670xX/photos/tomdelaymug1.jpg
Oh. Well, hey, that was a few years ago. It's not like that happens NOW.


http://i.cdn.turner.com/dr/teg/tsg/release/sites/default/files/imagecache/670xX/photos/johnedwardsmugshot1.jpg


Oooops.

I'm actually a little concerned that you would use the fact that someone has been arrested as evidence of guilt. Perhaps you need to reexamine the philosophies that underlie our system of government. Seems to me you have a very superficial understanding of them.

Skyhook
06-18-2012, 07:21
.. here's part of the reason - http://jewishworldreview.com/0612/zimmerman_polls_changing.php3

aircarver
06-18-2012, 07:38
Goaltender,

Just remember...... It's toke, toke, pass. Stop hoggin' the bong!

That's some of the lamest BS that I've ever read!

It's almost to the point of being ridiculous. You make a statement and for proof you post something else that proves your statement is wrong.

The PA edited out parts of the statements because they were not important. Kinda just the highlights.

Bottom line is that your hatred toward black people has clouded your judgement.

Shellie knew to a dime how much money was in the account and she knowingly and willingly lie to the Judge and Court.

Pretty simple.

You can post lame BS all day and it still doesn't change the truth.


Spyder
So once again, you got nuthin' ? .....:shakehead:

.

walt cowan
06-18-2012, 09:02
Are those the recorded calls that the prosecution had before he was released from jail?

damm good question. if true, the da had to have them before the bail hearing. wtf!

TBO
06-18-2012, 12:45
damm good question. if true, the da had to have them before the bail hearing. wtf!
Critical thinking time.

ALL calls are RECORDED.

When are they listened to by a human?

The master conspiracy exists only between the ears.

countrygun
06-18-2012, 12:54
Critical thinking time.

ALL calls are RECORDED.

When are they listened to by a human?

The master conspiracy exists only between the ears.



Critical EXPERIENCE APPLICATION in progress. (better cover your ears and start chanting "Not listening")

These tapes, IME, were always listened to by prosecutors before bail hearings, it would be complete incompetence not to. Can you imagine what would happen if a felon skipped town while on bail, and on the tapes he was heard asking his wife,

"Is the plane gassed up and ready to roll when I get out of here?"

No, I don't believe you are really dumb enough to stand behind your lame defense of the Prosecutor, therefore it must be a deliberate attempt at obfuscation.

Jerry
06-18-2012, 12:55
Anything to put pressure on Zimmerman. Plead to this Political Offense, or we will go after your family ploy. I wonder when Animal Control will be instructed to go pick up the family dog next and threaten euthenasia unless he pleas to their trumped up charges.:upeyes:

No doubt in my mind that the government in this country has gone the way of every other repressive country in the world. If you don't do what we want your family will pay. Even the Mafia believed family was sacred and wouldn't go after your wife and children. Our justice(?) system is being run by thugs and lowlifes. By any means necessary!

TBO
06-18-2012, 13:00
Critical EXPERIENCE APPLICATION in progress. (better cover your ears and start chanting "Not listening")

These tapes, IME, were always listened to by prosecutors before bail hearings, it would be complete incompetence not to. Can you imagine what would happen if a felon skipped town while on bail, and on the tapes he was heard asking his wife,

"Is the plane gassed up and ready to roll when I get out of here?"

No, I don't believe you are really dumb enough to stand behind your lame defense of the Prosecutor, therefore it must be a deliberate attempt at obfuscation.
Are you speaking from direct experience with the jail in question the DA office in question?

countrygun
06-18-2012, 13:23
Are you speaking from direct experience with the jail in question the DA office in question?


Only from a 100% record with the 4 agencies I have been involved with. You can't quibble around common sense. If the Prosecutor was opposing bail, why wouldn't they listen to the tapes to find evidence to block bail? That would be pretty incompetent.

I will spell it out for you.

If this had been brought forward at the bail hearing it wouldn't have gotten the publicity, bringing Zimmerman back in the media glare. In as much as it has nothing to do with the facts in the Martin shooting, the jury, in the matter of Martin's death, would never have heard about it. The tapes would not have been heard in court so as to not prejudice the jury. The way it was played and the release of the tapes has assured that THE ENTIRE JURY POOL, has been potentially exposed to it and influenced by it.

You may now respond with a smart alec sentence, sit back, pat your fingers together and say to yourself "What a clever boy am I " but I think most people seriously looking at the case, no matter how they feel about Zimmerman, must have the same issues about this part of the drama.

TBO
06-18-2012, 13:33
Just trying hard to make sure we're on the same page.

You do not have any direct experience with either the jail or DA office involved in this case, correct?Only from a 100% record with the 4 agencies I have been involved with. You can't quibble around common sense. If the Prosecutor was opposing bail, why wouldn't they listen to the tapes to find evidence to block bail? That would be pretty incompetent.

I will spell it out for you.

If this had been brought forward at the bail hearing it wouldn't have gotten the publicity, bringing Zimmerman back in the media glare. In as much as it has nothing to do with the facts in the Martin shooting, the jury, in the matter of Martin's death, would never have heard about it. The tapes would not have been heard in court so as to not prejudice the jury. The way it was played and the release of the tapes has assured that THE ENTIRE JURY POOL, has been potentially exposed to it and influenced by it.

You may now respond with a smart alec sentence, sit back, pat your fingers together and say to yourself "What a clever boy am I " but I think most people seriously looking at the case, no matter how they feel about Zimmerman, must have the same issues about this part of the drama.

FFR Spyder GT
06-18-2012, 13:39
No more than your hatred toward hispanics and/or Jews has clouded yours.


Gee, my Dad is Jewish and my Mom is from Saltillo, Mexico.

So, according to you I hate my parents, grandparents, siblings, wife (she's from Mexico too), kids, nieces and nephews?

OMG! I didn't realize I hated my family.

Spyder

Goaltender66
06-18-2012, 13:46
Gee, my Dad is Jewish and my Mom is from Saltillo, Mexico.

So, according to you I hate my parents, grandparents, siblings, wife (she's from Mexico too), kids, nieces and nephews?

OMG! I didn't realize I hated my family.

Spyder

It finally dawns on me. I was trying to put a name to the person you remind me of.

It's John Cleese:

Argument Clinic - YouTube


Anyway, you toss out the race card and that's your justification? Add to that your lame-o response which demonstrates a serious lack of reading comprehension skills (more plainly, your attempt at a gotcha fails because you just conceded that I'm approaching this on the merits and not from some mythical hatred of black people...thanks for admitting your error...).

Congratulations, you've proven yourself to be a person no longer to be taken seriously. From the inanity of your posts, I can only guess that's been your goal all along.

madbaumer
06-18-2012, 15:49
I have to ask.

Is she hot?

Outdoor Hub mobile, the outdoor information engine

Nope.

Jerry
06-18-2012, 18:11
Just trying hard to make sure we're on the same page.

You do not have any direct experience with either the jail or DA office involved in this case, correct?

You don't have to be a genius or have direct experience with the jail or DA's office involved to understand that this is a UNDERHANDED political ploy. You have to ask yourself, is the DA and idiot. If you answer no then only someone without a lick of commonsense would believe it was anything other than a lowdown, underhanded and deliberated attempt too get to and discredit the "accused".

TBO
06-18-2012, 23:00
Based on the phone conversations, does it look like he knew about the money?

Sent from my mind using Tapatalk 2

Jerry
06-19-2012, 09:54
Based on the phone conversations, does it look like he knew about the money?

Sent from my mind using Tapatalk 2

What does that have to do with price of tea in china?

TBO
06-19-2012, 15:41
The Cops & Prosecutors didn't "Release" anything upon "the public".
The media filed a request for the reports/recordings that are available once the defendant has been charged (arraigned in court).
The media "released" the recordings to the public.

TBO
06-25-2012, 13:10
Zimmerman lawyer argues for new bond

http://www.cnn.com/2012/06/25/justice/florida-zimmerman-bond/index.html?eref=mrss_igoogle_cnn