You appear to be confusing the elements of perjury with the elements of the crime of omitting material information in a bail application. You’ll find that crime at 903.035 in the Florida statutes. All I can suggest is that you read the plain text of the law. If you don’t find that acceptable, I don’t know what more I can tell you. If you have a case that invalidates that statute, I’d appreciate a citation.
The requirement to disclose all material facts begins when you apply for bail and continues until it’s granted. Whether you give testimony or not has nothing to do with it. Note also that subsection (3) applies to “any person” without distinction to whether that person is defendant or a witness. There is no requirement that the false information come from testimony by the defendant or be provided under oath.
Note that JL prefaces his remarks in his order page 7(j) that this is a "matter of interpretation". He says that nowhere else in the order.
He says that GZ violated that statute "by providing such false statements".
I ask you as I ask him: What "false statements" did GZ "provide"??? Name the "false statements". List them. Point to them. Underline them. Where are they in the court record???
He didn't say that he violated the statute by "omissions of this or that" but by "providing such false statements". If he meant "omissionss', then why didn't he say "omissions".
I watched the hearing and didn't hear him provide any statements on money, finances, or assets.
So then what is he talking about here. My best guess is that he is saying that he is responsible for his wife's testimony, that he provided his wife to testify. Is she the "such false statements" that JL is referring to. If so why doesn't he come right out and say it -- because it is all a "matter of interpretation" and not law. How can you hold a defendant responsible for someone else's testimony, especially when you have already charged that other person.
BTW it was MoM who provided SZ's testimony not GZ. JL should be mad at MoM not GZ.