Replies

-- 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.

"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."

If he read O'Mara's letter on 5/18 he would have had a full accounting of funds. However, it would be sans "jailhouse code speak".

"......he feels he should have been told about the money on April 20th."

A perfectly reasonable emotion.

Apparently Lester has said he was going to schedule a hearing so he could explain himself after George was back in custody.
Exactly how whether George turns himself in or not effects Lester's previous rulings remains to be seen.