Skip to comments.Letter: Judge in Zimmerman case should recuse himself over online collections
Posted on 05/07/2012 2:33:28 AM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
I was more than surprised to see where the judge presiding over George Zimmerman's case questioned the source of $200,000 collected online and donated to Zimmerman's defense fund. Given Zimmerman's modest stature in life, there were no donations from money moguls with deep pockets. These donations were from the rank and file of average American citizens with no expectation of reward from Zimmerman should he prevail.
The judge knew this and it is obvious that he sided with Trayvon Martin's parents in wanting to know where the money came from, thereby casting a shadow of its legitimacy. Apparently the judge, a learned man, knows full well the political implications of anything that has to do with the Zimmerman case. There is a tinder box all over the country ready to prematurely explode even before justice wends its way to a conclusion if anything or anybody dares to even insinuate that Zimmerman may not be guilty.
The people donating to Zimmerman's defense fund apparently believe a man is innocent until proven guilty. Zimmerman is a complete stranger to them so they have not expressed their opinions because of love or friendship. They donated because they believe in fair play, justice and the Constitution, and they knew Zimmerman couldn't finance his defense by himself.
The judge's inquiry is not judicial; it is societal in that he believes that siding with the prosecution and Trayvon's parents, he will ameliorate the predilection to violence in this case. Whether he is right or wrong is not the issue. Officially going into where the defense funds came from is none of the court's business.
The donations are also innocent until proven otherwise. The judge must recuse himself.
The source of the contributions doesn’t really matter to the case itself. You might as well as where Zimmerman bought his clothing or his shoes.
>>These donations were from the rank and file of average American citizens
Not only Americans.
The donations are not “innocent until proven otherwise” Surely someone knows the donations haven’t been charged with a crime and the donations are not a person.
If I were Zimmerman I would want the donations examined because surely there is a risk that something stinky could have been done here to hurt his case. Such as a donation from the Klan or white supremacists. Darn right they ought to be looked at.
It’s just one more thing for Ben Crump, Martin’s parents and rest of the racialist industry to complain about.
I could raise a couple million for him in a month. He has MUCH more support than the MSM, race-baiters and Obama crew even imagine.
When I read that first sentence, I thought the Judge had donated to the defense fund.
Like others here say, what difference does it make where the money comes from?
We don’t know where Obama’s millions came from when he got elected either.
The judge’s implication about where the money came from is only to pacify Martin’s family. It’s likely they want the money to stop. However, if Zimmerman was a millionare in his own right, he would have the means necessary to defend himself, and the family would complain about the rich affording a good defense. The donations are merely giving Zimmerman a level playing field.
Is there a fund for the Martin family?? Is that the REAL problem....for the Martins and their attorneys??
I don't know if there is a fund for the Martin family, but assume their expenses, if any, are being covered. The pay-off for them will come from a civil suit against Zimmerman, or even from law enforcement. They will find a way to sue someone or everyone involved.
Yes. Has been for quite some time. Last I looked, sometime last week, it reported receipts of just under 30 grand.
The Martins don't have to pay a legal defense, as the resources of the state of Florida have been brought to bear against Zimmerman on their behalf.
My right of effective self defense under the 2nd amendment is on trial with George Zimmerman.
I know the state pays for his defense. Any monies goes into the Martin’s pocket.
Is there an implication that the judge would publish the names of people who gave money, perhaps leading to “conversations” between said donors and local supporters of “justice for Trayvon”?
I don’t see anything that says the judge wants names and addresses of donors.
His inquiry appears to be general in nature.
Well, you are not the judge and moreover, you are a fool. Zimmerman's contribution was $15,000 or 10%. That is a lot of money for a poor man, and he might feel bad about sticking his family with it. $15,000 for a rich man's freedom is nothing. $50,000,000 sacked away in offshore accounts and he is gone, and happily so.
I believe you completely misread my post. The point here is that the bond as set in his case is almost certainly ebough to make sure he will show up for his court date. The fact that the judge seems interested in revisiting it seems to be more along the lines of punishing him from having supporters who helped him with these costs, than the stated claim of the purpose of bail.
There is a big difference between this case, and some dude with $50M in offshore accounts. In the latter case, a bigger bond to ensure his showing up for court makes sense. There are also extraordinary cases, where the person is enough of a flight risk, that n amount of bail would suffice.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.