I 'm sure you are correct. Maybe I am missing something there, but I don't see anything particularly damning in what's been released.
In my mind, it boils down to whether or not the Court feels lied to. The cookie is the Zimmerman's possibly misrepresenting their financial status at the Bond Hearing. Now, since defense counsel had alerted the Court as to when, and how much, they had available, it seems like the Court has just been sitting around waiting for the prosecution to make an issue of it. I mean, if the Judge felt the need, couldn't he revoke the bond on O'Mara's information alone?
Yes, but (as I surmise you know) law is [generally] a lawyer driven process, not a judge driven process.
Too, Lester learned something on June 1, I think. Until he got de la Rionda's motion, Lester didn't know the contents of the prison calls, so didn't have any evidence about Shelly Zimmerman's awareness of funds. As her awareness preceded the bail hearing by days, and George was the other party to the conversation, he feels he should have been told about the money on April 20th.
Interesting argument about whether revocation is an appropriate remedy in this situation, at all. MJW Comment at TalkLeft, Sun Jun 03, 2012 at 04:12:54 PM EST. Being caught with so little notice, O'Mara couldn't mount a "as a matter of law" type of defense.