Posted on 06/09/2012 10:07:18 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
George Zimmerman's public image took a blow when a judge revoked his bond, alleging that Zimmerman willfully misled the court concerning his financial situation. The fact that he's back in jail makes him appear guilty in the public's eye, and that's what matters. Whether or not Zimmerman misled the court is immaterial. In fact, his guilt or innocence is immaterial. His trial has transcended justice; it's now about capitalizing on opportunity.
Zimmerman has maintained since day one that Trayvon Martin instigated their fatal confrontation. Zimmerman's various injuries coupled with autopsy results revealing Martin's injured knuckles tend to support his story. That evidence might be the reason why he wasn't charged immediately after the shooting. Yet he remains guilty until proven innocent in the eyes of many, including the federal government and national media.
Could there be an orchestrated campaign between government and media entities to see this man imprisoned, or even executed? Despite the physical evidence of which we're aware, an apparent lack of credible witnesses on either side of the case, and expert legal opinion belittling Florida's case against Zimmerman, the FBI has launched a hate crime investigation against him. And it could stick.
We might logically believe that the Fifth Amendment's protection against double jeopardy would compel the Justice Department to abandon the case if Zimmerman is acquitted. Not necessarily. According to Cleveland State Professor Jonathan Witmer-Rich, Supreme Court precedent has established a narrow threshold for claiming double jeopardy. "The double jeopardy clause would not prohibit a federal prosecution of Mr. Zimmerman, even if he were acquitted in Florida state court," Prof. Rich states, although he believes that the likelihood of federal prosecution following a state acquittal is small. However, FBI involvement means Department of Justice involvement, which in turn means Eric Holder involvement.
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...
I'm still convinced that there's something not quite right with this Zimmerman fellow. If someone I cared about was putting a gun in his belt and walking around the neighborhood searching for and confronting people he thought suspicious, I'd be very concerned. Eventually, things are almost certain to go wrong.
Maybe after a trial, I'll view him differently.
From the viewpoint of the Dems, the ideal outcome is that Zimmerman gets killed in prison. That’s the reason they wanted his bail revoked.
I doubt it. You've been pushing that baloney that he confronted Trayvon in spite of being shown that there is virtually no evidence of it for months now. Now you've upped it to searching for and confronting multiple people with absolutely no evidence of that.
Like I said, I'm withholding final judgement until after the trial.
You have been corrected over and over again that he was not on patrol that night and was just coming home after running an errand. There is also no evidence that he ever confronted anyone else in the past while on patrol.
I also am withholding judgment. However, the limited evidence we have so far is that the guy was not arming himself and stalking the neighborhood when this happened.
He was on his way to the store when he saw a suspicious person walking thru the neigoborhood. As the neighborhood watch captain he contacted the police and followed the person. Perfectly reasonable, indeed laudable, actions.
You can argue he shouldn’t have been armed, but you’ll have to take that issue up with the great number of freepers who apparently go about armed at all times.
IOW, he was not”playing cop,” he was going about his own business when he observed something fishy and responded in a reasonable manner.
There are indeed “wannabee cops” who are a danger to themselves and others. I’ve run into a couple. The evidence available at the moment does not indicate Jorge was one of them.
In this case, no, and that is why it is so egregious.
Zimmerman will not be eligible for a court appointed, taxpayer paid attorney, because he has means, it's just he can't spend them as he wishes they will be impounded for his increased bond.
The legal tactic used by the state here, is often used in taxation, drug, and organized crime cases, impound or confiscate all funds and property. The purpose is to prevent the defendant the means to litigate their side in court, as, often, the state would lose big time if the defendant can fund a proper defense.
To my knowledge, this tactic has never been used before in the US for an altercation with a claim of self defense, and no underlying crime. This includes wealthy and ultra wealthy defendants.
My perception of this is that the judge has politically agreed to railroad Zimmerman and is incensed that so many ordinary Americans would defiantly spring to his defense by contributing to his defense fund, so the judge feigns offense of non disclosure, and moves against the fund and popular support of Zimmerman.
This is Kangaroo Kabuki Theater.
It has passed beyond any doubt that you’re a troll.
AFAIAC, there is nothing wrong with being an armed neighborhood watch (small-n, small-w), I don’t care about the rules of the formal program. The “unarmed only” rule is politically correct nonsense in this day and age when armed thugs are common, and only serves to put the good guys at a legal and PR disadvantage.
Well, I may not be as smart as you, but I still have a right to an opinion. Let’s just wait for the trial. Maybe there’s more to this than we’ve heard so far.
If TM started the fight, it is probable GZ committed no crime at all.
The problem, of course, is that there is only one (surviving) witness to the start of the fight. AFAIK, all of the eyewitnesses looked out their windows only after the shouting and screaming started. IOW, after the fight had begun.
I've seen a number of claims that TM went back to the townhome, then returned to confront GZ, indicating a planned assault. If so, the location of the Skittles would seem to be critical. Surely nobody would go home, then set back off to a fight carrying Skittles. He'd leave em on the counter.
If the Skittles were in the vicinity of the body, it seems unlikely he made it home and returned.
I don’t need to wait for a trial to see that there is something very wrong with you.
How personally you wish to take this case is up to you, Tiger. If the truth comes out, I’ll be satisfied no matter which way the jury goes.
Yes, if Zimmerman is the only witness, then his credibility will be a huge part of the case. His risk may be that there exists physical evidence which contradicts his version at trial. And, that too may be unfair. He may truthfully testify that the kid started a fight and for some reason there is physical evidence that isn’t consistent with every piece of his testimony.
It should be quite a trial.
You are the one making statements that there is zero evidence of before the trial.
I’m kind of ticked at Mark O’Mara about this one. He should have warned GZ about the jailhouse phone calls ahead of time. Jailhouse recordings were a favorite tactic of the prosecution in the Casey Anthony trial. O’Mara should have known they would be listening and fishing for a hook.
Heh. That's funny.
(Prosecutorial misconduct.)
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.