But he is. He and his wife are/were on unemployment and are now dependent upon the charity of others.
Then in his testimony when he apologized to Trayvon’s parents. He said he was sorry, he had no idea how young Trayvon was. He thought he was around the same age as he is. But on the 911 tape, he told the dispatcher he was young, probably around 17.
So what??? How was he to accurately know without carding him??? It was dark. He was merely guessing at his age. He may have thought that he was 17 when he first reported him, but 27 when he was attacked by him.
Anyway it is immaterial how old an assailant is, 17 or 27. When he is beating you within an inch of your life, you defend yourself.
BTW GZ took a lie detector test that night and passed it. Regardless of what you think about whether he told the truth or not at the bond hearing, the lie detector test says that he told the truth in the statements that he gave to the SPD that night. And that, corroborated by the forensic evidence, is all that matters in this case.
But he is.
<><><><
Our respective definitions of indigent are a bit different.
They were moving around - according to the affidavit - over 100K in the days before the bond hearing. I’ve never understood the term indigent to refer to folks with that kind of scratch in their bank accounts.
At the time she perjured herself and said they were indigent they were not. They were recorded the day before on jailhouse tapes....with George telling her to transfer the paypal acct money to her credit union account. If they were indigent, she would not be charged with perjury. She lied. Hence the charge.