Posted on 06/12/2012 9:02:42 AM PDT by Aunt Polgara
The judge who revoked George Zimmerman's bond did so after he determined that it was "apparent" that Zimmerman's wife had lied under oath, and clear that Zimmerman "does not properly respect the law."
Circuit Judge Kenneth Lester revoked Zimmerman's bond on June 1, but his written order was filed Monday. In it, Lester lays out his rationale.
(Excerpt) Read more at articles.orlandosentinel.com ...
As someone that is considerably older than 12, I know that what one person considers to be suspicious behavior, is not always considered suspicious behavior by others.
now it seems the judge is in on the lynching as wellAbsolutely right.
Very dark days ahead for Zimmerman.
Yep, and fixed it for you.
I believe what was said was...’ok, we don’t need you to do that’...many people consider a suggestion like this, coming from a dispatcher, to be direction not to do it.
Dispatchers only provide directions to first responders such as LEOs, EMS and firefighters. They may provide suggestions to civilians. In no case do they command or instruct with the exception of coming deadline to provide medical support over the phone to civilians.
Based on the transcript, Zimmerman agreed to the dispatcher’s suggestion to break off the search.
“There’s no way to rule innocent men. The only power any government has is the power to crack down on criminals. Well, when there aren’t enough criminals, one makes them. One declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible for men to live without breaking laws. Who wants a nation of law-abiding citizens? What’s there in that for anyone? But just pass the kind of laws that can neither be observed nor enforced nor objectively interpreted and you create a nation of law-breakers — and then you cash in on guilt. Now that’s the system.”
Quote by: Ayn Rand
(1905-1982) Author
Source: “Atlas Shrugged”, Part II, Chapter 3
Yes, see my #145
This bond revocation smells to high heaven.
“If you mean you would reasonably doubt the defendant’s version of events because he misrepresented something”
I could see how that would be important, as it would rob Zimmerman of the immunity he could expect if the judge believed he was acting in self-defense. The previous poster could be arguing that there’s a reasonable doubt that Zimmerman is immune, and that’s an abuse of language if nothing else. But it’s not as if this judge was going to throw the case out before trial, nor any judge for that matter in this political climate. So what’s the difference?
As far as the actual trial is concerned certainly Zimmerman wouldn’t want the jurors to doubt his story. But legally speaking it’s neither here nor there. There is no burden of proof on the defense.
Dispatcher or 911 operator?
You do know that they are two completely different things right?
What message do you think the dispatcher was trying to convey?
Finally admit??? I never denied it, did I?
The Dispatcher or whoever said it to Zimmerman did not give a lawful order, and Zimmerman lost view of “No Limit Trayvon” which is also in the transcript. It is obvious that Trayvon doubled back to confront and he surprised Zimmerman. The belligerent aggressor was N.L. Trayvon.
It is a clear case of self-defense to everyone but to liberals, politicians, and rabble-rousers.
Sounds like the judge understands that the "Justice Brothers" know where he lives.
None of this would have happened if Trayvon had not gotten suspended from school, if he had stayed home, if he had not cold-cocked Zimmerman, if he had stopped his assault after he knocked him down, if he had not then gotten on top of him, if he had not slugged him again, .... and again, ....and again, if he had stopped when Zimmerman cried out for "help", again and again, if he had then not slammed his head on the concrete again and again, .... and then not grabbed for his gun.
How many times in that encounter did Trayvon have the opportunity to stop his assault and chose not to.
Perhaps tonite when you go to the grocery store you should stay in your car. That way you may just prevent that burglary or assault that would not have happened if you had just stayed in your car.
Yes
Aw, Jeez! This judge has been bought off. There is so much wrong with those statements.
This judge was Zimmerman's last hope for something approaching fairness and it looks like he's in with the lynch mob now.
Zimmerman was already out of the car at that point moron...
Really? I’m flattered.
Do you know about when that list was put out? I’d like to view it.
“but he was advised to not follow him”
No.
You read the transcript and apparently can’t get past racial politics and comprehend the fact the dispatcher never told him to “not follow him.”
You were on the OJ jury, weren’t you.
You ignore facts, you ignore the plain truth that a dispatcher has no authority to direct anyone to do anything—that is why the dispatcher never told him to do anything.
The dispatcher never told him to “stay in his car” as you allege and you agree because you cite the transcript where the dispatcher said they didn’t need him to follow—he did not direct him to “stay in his car” as you allege.
Therefore, factually, he was not “advised to not follow him.”
I must admit your posts are hugely amusing.
Seriously.
They are.
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.