I have reached the point with GZ that I now assume everything he says is a lie, unless it is independently supported by credible evidence.
It’s as if this guy is living in a movie making everything up as he goes along and now he is starring in an epic action adventure and crime thriller in which he is the heroic crime fighter targeted for assassination by all of the Black hoodlums in the land.
I cannot help but wonder if this is GZ’s consciously selected new role to play or if he’s delusional and really believes himself to be in danger.
Instead of a cape, this courageous crime fighter is wearing a bullet-proof vest and has his lead attorney pandering to the right wing drumming up dollars for justice.
For those who have given in the past, for those who have thought about giving, for those who feel Mr. Zimmerman was justified in his actions, for those who feel they would do the same if they were in Mr. Zimmerman’s shoes, for those that think Mr. Zimmerman has been treated unfairly by the media, for those who feel Mr. Zimmerman has been falsely accused as a racist, for those who feel this case is an affront to their constitutional rights — now is the time to show your support.
(Emphasis supplied)
I am not aware of any credible threat to kill GZ or a member of his family since he surrendered himself into custody after being charged with second degree murder. Before then the New Black Panther Party apparently sought to effect a citizen’s arrest, but I do not believe law enforcement took the threat seriously, or if it did, it was only for a short time.
I have to admit that I do not know for certain if he is in any danger, but I do not see any evidence that he is and, based on my experiences representing individuals who were despised and hated by most members of society, I do not believe he is in any real danger.
In my previous article, I discussed the possibility that, if GZ has chosen to play this role to garner sympathy, the strategy may backfire badly if people do not believe he is in any real danger. For example, they may see it as evidence of an obsessive and paranoid fear of Black people that explains why he would have profiled, followed, confronted and murdered an innocent unarmed teenager walking home in the rain on an early Sunday evening talking to his girlfriend on a cell phone after walking to a 7/11 to buy Arizona Iced Tea and Skittles.
If I were his lawyer, I know I would be extremely concerned that the public, especially the prospective pool of jurors, might view his actions with suspicion. Therefore, I would be advising him to cool it rather than trolling the angry sea of racism for dollars with a race-baited hook
However, what if GZ is not acting? What if he suffers from paranoid delusions that led him to profile, follow, confront and shoot TM because he was walking while Black in GZ’s neighborhood?
Is that a possibility?
Is it a legal defense?
What should a lawyer do if he believes his client is delusional?
What happens if the client insists he is right and further insists that the lawyer is crazy?
I have been there before. For example, in the late 80s, I represented a client accused of stabbing his wife to death in front of their two young children. He wanted me to try the case by blaming her for forcing him to kill her because she was having an affair. Except she was not having an affair. It was all in his mind. I refused to do it, so he fired me.
Judy Clarke, who is the head of the Federal Public Defender in San Diego and one of my heroes by the way, knows a lot about crazy clients. She represents Jared Loughner, the man accused of shooting to death six people in Tucson, including United States District Judge John Roll, and wounding 14 others, including Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords. Loughner’s case is on indefinite hold because he is mentally incompetent and unable to assist his lawyers in presenting a defense, despite having been administered medication to make him competent. I do not know if that case will ever go to trial.
Notice that we have not heard her attempting to try her case in the media. She never does because she knows that it rarely, if ever works out well for her client. Contrast that with GZ’s legal team who took a well deserved beating recently by Judge Lester in the second bail hearing after unsuccessfully attempting to portray GZ as a fearful innocent caught up in the legal system.
Among other things, he said,
Under any definition the Defendant has flaunted the system.
Counsel has attempted to portray the Defendant as being a confused young man who was fearful and experience a moment of weakness and who may also have acted out of a sense of “betrayal” by the system. Based on all of the evidence presented, the Court finds the opposite, the Defendant has tried to manipulate the system when he has been presented the opportunity to do so.
He also said,
It is entirely reasonable for the Court to find that, but for the requirement that he be placed on electronic monitoring, the Defendant and his wife would have fled the United States with at least $130,000 of other people’s money.
See: Judge Lester’s 9-page order dated July 5, 2012.
Ms. Clarke also previously represented Susan Smith, the South Carolina woman who drove her car into a lake drowning her three-year-old son and 14-month-old son and later claimed a Black man stole her car with the two boys in it. The jury rejected the death penalty and sentenced her to life in prison due to her substantial mental health issues.
It was disclosed in her trial that Smith was molested in her teens by her stepfather, who admitted that he had molested her when she was a teenager and had consensual sex with her as an adult. Her biological father committed suicide when she was 6 years old and she very rarely had a stable home life. At 13, she attempted suicide. After graduating from high school in 1989, she made a second attempt
She also represented Ted Kaczynski, the Unabomber, in a federal death penalty case. Kaczynski killed three people and injured 23 others in a letter-bombing campaign that he conducted for nearly 20 years against universities and airlines.
Judy Clarke knew he was insane and the federal prosecutors agreed, but he was unwilling to admit he was insane. They were willing to drop the death penalty in exchange for Kaczyinski pleading guilty and admitting he was insane, but he refused to do that because he was convinced that he was sane. He was so angry at his defense team that attempted to fire them. He eventually changed his mind, however, to avoid a highly publicized trial against impossible odds.
When asked if he was afraid of losing his mind in prison, Kaczynski replied:
No, what worries me is that I might in a sense adapt to this environment and come to be comfortable here and not resent it anymore. And I am afraid that as the years go by that I may forget, I may begin to lose my memories of the mountains and the woods and that’s what really worries me, that I might lose those memories, and lose that sense of contact with wild nature in general. But I am not afraid they are going to break my spirit.
Judy Clarke is a master at getting and maintaining control of the difficult client. She has saved lives others could not have saved by doing so.
After a lot of reading and a great deal of reflection, I do not believe GZ’s claim of self-defense is credible. We have spotted and discussed the inconsistencies and lies, but the biggest problem it faces is the lack of any credible straight face explanation why TM would all of a sudden decide to attack and try to kill a much heavier adult male whom he had run away from in fear and successfully eluded. And he decided to do this without picking up a weapon while talking on the phone with his girlfriend.
He was a Black thug may work at a KKK meeting but I doubt a jury will believe it.
What do y’all think GZ’s lawyers should be doing and why?
Notice: The prosecution has announced it will be releasing more discovery tomorrow morning.
I believe in Zimmerman’s twisted mind, he sees himself as the ‘one good man’ who nobly sacrificed himself by refusing to stand by and do nothing when confronted with ‘evil’.
Thumbs up !! You have his mindset perfectly pigeon holed.
Professor Leatherman, I still suspect that M. O. is attempting to sour the jury pool to the point that a trial will be impossible to hold. Every statement he makes causes me to wonder if he really knows how much he is damaging the case. I asked before, but received no response, does Mark O’s past cases include any that involve gun rights or white supremists? I keep getting the feeling that there is some one calling the shots on this case other than he or Zimmerman. I wish we had some way to “follow the money trail” in this case, it would be interesting to see just who has such a large money interest in this case. Any guesses?
I do not live in Florida and I do not know anything about Mark O’Mara or Don West, his co-counsel.
All I know is that O’Mara has claimed that people have donated $36,000 since he posted his plea for funds on his website to add to the $22,000 received after the bail hearing. That’s $58,000.
Don’t know who the donors are, how many there are, or how much they have given. We aren’t likely to know that unless he volunteers the information and he may not know all of it, if some donors have contributed anonymously.
I honestly don’t think he is being controlled by anyone, except possibly his client or maybe by his co-counsel.
I have been in a similar situation with an ethnic group providing funding, although not nearly as much money and I accepted the money on condition that I would be making all of the decisions. They agreed to my terms and no one interfered with my judgment or tried to tell me what to do.
I believe it’s actually 36k total since the hearing – 22 in the first 24 hours and the pace continued up to 36k, then dropped back down to the old rate of around 1k a day, if I’m not mistaken. I read comments at GZLC often.
Thanks, I stand corrected then.
BTW, people. Never fear correcting me, if you think I am wrong.
I sure ain’t perfect and I make mistakes just like everybody else.
We should always try to get it right.
Mark O’Mara should take down that horrid Facebook page he set up ‘George Zimmerman Legal Case “, i have never heard of a Attorney in a high profile case who condones despicable racist comments about Trayvon and his Mother with the encouragement from the moderator.
I commented on there a few weeks ago. I said that I thought the fund was illegal because it allowed him to profit from his involvement in a crime. I suggested that it was covered in the Son of Sam laws. I had to block and report at least 5 people who made nasty personal comments about me on the page, and then sent me personal messages full of racial slurs aginst me ant the Martin family, as well as threats of violence to me and my family. That facebook page is a joke. All it does is solicit funds from nasty people by giving them a seemingly legitimate outlet for their bigoted opinions and a sense of belonging to a “powerful” group. It should be shut down and O”Mara’s ethics should be scrutinized.
I can’t provide a link but a few weeks back mark o’mara told a reporter he had reported to local police a threatening phone call to his office. What struck me was that he went on to say in so many words that at that time neither the Z family nor MOM had recorded any threats. I dont mean to make light of the matter of threats but the situation speaks for itself. The NINE count em, nine clowns from te NBPP are hardly a credible threat. It is worth noting that the former Black panthers to a man have repudiated this new group as provocateurs and stooges of the right wing.
The sight of GZ moving from jail to courtroom to jail and wanting to don a bulletproof vest smacks of courtroom theatrics. Who’s going to be able to sneak a gun into a courtroom to shoot a man who is a poster boy for the NRA?
I feel Omara is just trying to milk money because he knows its a difficult case to prove because there really is no self defense claim.
Helping!
Okay, how about a reason?
O’Mara didn’t exactly get to decide in advance if he wanted to try the case in the media.
It was already there and he’s been running trying to catch up to it.
unitron
With all MOM tv antics his goal is to sway just one potential juror to hang the jury and in the process he hopes to line his pockets with those donated funds. MOM actions speaks to a depraved mind and he seems to be in lock step with the likes of all the George Zimmermans, he knows just the language to reach the type of people who would donate to “the cause.”
“Therefore, I would be advising him to cool it rather than trolling the angry sea of racism for dollars with a race-baited hook.”
Bravo! And I agree.
Zimmerman’s psychological profile was called into question when I watched the reenactment video and the SPD interviews that were conducted in the days immediately following the shooting. Anyone with a PTSD diagnosis will tell you; to recall a recent traumatic event is to relive that event in all of it’s visceral glory. This reaction is axiomatic; it can’t be controlled and it isn’t a choice.
Thirty years ago I was the victim of violent crime involving a handgun. This incident resulted in a physical struggle for possession of a S&W 9mm with one in the chamber, in a vacant lot, on a dark night, in a quiet residential neighborhood. I won that struggle and the perpetrator, a parolee, ultimately received a sentence of 34 years and 6 months for his efforts. There was another victim that night, and without going into lurid detail, most of crimes were perpetrated against her before I had a clear opportunity to act.
And if I tried to recount the fairy tales this perpetrator offered in his defense you would roar, as did the DA.
I’m not qualified to offer a diagnosis, but speaking from personal experience George Zimmerman never displayed an appropriate level of anxiety and stress in his interviews, nor did he exhibit an ounce of contrition and the inevitable psychological effects of having taken a life.
“What do y’all think GZ’s lawyers should be doing and why?”
Punt?
They won’t punt until 4th down. But they will punt nonetheless. Unless GZ flees first.
But yes, it only takes one person to hang a jury. And that may be part if the defense strategy.
GZ sounds more like a sociopath than a PTSD sufferer to me. The video walk thru stunned me when I saw it, since the ease with which he lies is visible most obviously when he says he exited the car to look for a street sign. Of course he is lying ten or twelve other places too but he had to recall admitting he had followed the teen in his call to dispatch. Being instructed to move his car from the parking lot is another clear lie he tells with a straight face. He treats the whole matter like he’s trying to talk his way out of a traffic ticket.
Sorry to hear about your encounter and glad to hear you survived it.
I bet you will never forget it and certainly not nonchalant it the way GZ does his encounter.
Chilling.
What should GZ’s lawyers do?
Move to withdraw.
Seriously, shouldn’t be too hard to get out of the case on financial grounds since no trial date has been set and everybody knows GZ attempted to conceal the money in the account from his lawyers.
I don’t think O’Mara is going to do that, but he ought to consider it, if he hasn’t already.
Consider they’ve raised $58 K since Judge Lester issued the eyebrow raising 9-page bail order — $22 K the following day and $36 K after the plea for money.
No trial date has been set. Meanwhile, GZ has living expenses and a security entourage to pay for, including a hefty fee over time for the GPS monitor. Then there are costs for investigation and the second lawyer, Don West. Plus, fees for expert witnesses.
Maybe it’s time to git while the gittin’ is good.
Or something like that.
Hi Frederick. You may have already heard this from O’Mara’s appearance with Piers Morgan last night:
“MORGAN: What is the time scale now, Mark, in terms of how you see the legal process moving forward in the next few months?
O’MARA: I still think we have about six months of discovery to go. That is getting the rest of discovery from the state, then getting our discovery, getting our request out to various state agencies and organizations that we want to get information from. Then coming up with our experts and then getting ready for either a pretrial motion, a Stand Your Ground motion and then trial if need be.”
Long scroll: http://edition.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/1207/09/pmt.01.html
If I’m reading O’Mara correctly, a SYG hearing if it occurs, will roughly coincide with the holidays and/or tax season. This means the defense will be competing for dollars against Santa Claus, The Salvation Army, and The Federal Gubmn’t.
Small comfort, O’Mara told Morgan he’s feeling ‘somewhat conflicted’ over the fund raising strategy. Once it begins to blow-up in his face, and it seems to listing in that direction as you rightly predicted; what then?
Trouble in River City.
And don’t forget he was trying to go back to work after he killed a human being that night GZ is pure evil..
It is highly likely that O’Mara has been and is complicit in Zimmerman’s attempt to deceive the Court.
As Zimmerman’s attorney, he should have known about the
funds available and he failed in his duty to surrender the 2nd
passport in a timely fashion.
Lester has a conflict of interest and I have little faith in Corey.
I feel we are witnessing an elaborately staged charade.
What is Judge Lester’s conflict of interest?
His wife is Dorothy Sedgwich , prosecutor with the States Attorney office, that was responsible for Zimmerman’s sweet deal.
When this was brought up by the Tampa Bay Times,
Lester refused to discuss it.
That association, I feel is more substantial than the circumstances that caused Judge Jessica to recuse herself.
Additionally, Sedgwich, and Corey attended law school
together.
Sorry, but I’m in the dark. What sweet deal?
Also, going to law school together does not create a conflict of interest, as for example, working for the same law firm when each represents a client whose interests are adverse to the other client’s.
They may not even have known each other, but even if they were best friends, that still would not create a conflict of interest.
For example, husbands and wives have litigated cases against each other and it’s not uncommon for friends to litigate cases against each other. I had friends who were prosecutors against whom I litigated cases.
What “sweet deal” would that be?
unitron
PTD which many perceive as a privilege rarely offered to minorities in Florida.
This is a very controversial case that smacks of favoritism.
Zimmerman’s ‘squeaky clean’ record is a definite sore point as is Wolfinger’s visit to the crime scene that night. [link supplied previously]
“… it is not merely of some importance but is of fundamental importance, that justice should not only be done, but should manifestly and undoubtedly be seen to be done.”
Why is everyone accepting the claim that Zimmerman’s gun was drawn in the very final moments, then fired? If Martin really was straddling short, stocky GZ, TM’s body would be sitting over the waistline of GZ’s pants with the holster trapped by TM’s weight.
GZ claimed his flashlight wasn’t working (debunked by Det. Sirino). Hogwash – GZ kept it off as he searched for TM, so TM could not spot him. GZ then does spot TM, and unholsters his weapon to intimidate TM to “give it up” so GZ could turn him over to the soon-to-arrive cops – and get a hero’s attaboy from the cops. (As the cops approach, he’d just reholster his gun, thus avoiding a hassle with the cops and seem more heroic to them for his prowess.) And it would protect him until the cops arrive.
But when he comes up to TM (TM being on the phone) TM barks out first, “Why are you following me?” and GZ said “What are you doing here?” and brings the gun into view to make his point.
Instinctively the taller TM smashes out with his phone in his hand, smacking GZ on the nose, knocking him over (onto the concrete pathway, resulting in the two tiny cuts?) and the fight is on. GZ may have grabbed TM on the way down. “DeeDee” reports “Get off! Get off!” as the last words she hears.
TM keeps hold of the cell phone as they wrestle the 50 ft. or so, as it is the only defensive weapon he has, but in the final turn, GZ is up top. If he had not unholstered his gun earlier, it’s easy for him to do it now.
TM, knowing what’s to come, is crying out in mortal terror as GZ aims the gun directly at TM’s heart, from a few inches above. It goes straight through with a level trajectory and implodes, as hollowpoints do. TM’s gut-wrenched cries for help stop instantly.
After all the time he’s had to consider literally blowing away TM’s life, GZ is cool as a cucumber when the neihbors and police appear.
I think you introduce a valid point. How did Zimmerman get his gun out with Martin straddling him? I don’t know a thing about gun holsters or guns, but IIRC his holster was basically inaccessible if Zimmerman is anywhere close to the truth about the violent confrontation that took place. Perhaps someone here with a clue about holsters etc and details about the case can help paint a picture.
I didn’t agree with the rest of your speculation. I do believe Zimmerman had his gun out prior to being taken down. He likely drew his weapon after Trayvon asked why he was following him. He asked what he’s doing in the neighborhood while he drew his weapon. It’s here that I believe Martin managed to tackle and pin Zimmerman down. I don’t think he ever punched him. There was a post here with an image that sort of matched the bottom of the gun and the wound on Zimmerman’s nose. I think when he fired his gun it was too close to his face, so the backfire must have broken his nose.
Furthermore, you said they wrestled the whole 50 ft to where Martin’s body was found. I’m not convinced on this either. Why would Zimmerman leave like 25 feet between where he says he went down and where Martin’s body was found?(in the reenactment) I think Zimmerman probably saw Martin while he was at the top of the T and Martin was about 20 feet down from there, then Z threw his flashlight on the ground so he could go confront Martin and would have his hands free in case he needed his weapon.
Chilling and very likely true.
BTW, I don’t believe anyone here believes the gun was in GZ’s holster when he confronted TM. We have been arguing as you just did that GZ’s claim was false,
Street brawls are frenetic, fluid and dynamic. So I do think it’s conceivable that Zimmerman created enough space, momentarily, to draw his weapon while Martin was more or less in the dominant position on the ground. I’m not convinced that’s what happened, but I believe it’s one possibility. In any event, I believe Martin became aware of the weapon well before Zimmerman claims he did, and not in the improbable manner that he suggests.
In this scenario I have Zimmerman searching for, encountering and questioning Martin somewhere near the keyring flashlight. I have Martin retreating from an overzealous watch commander in the direction of his father’s residence. I have an incensed George Zimmerman attempting to detain the ‘suspect’ as they move towards ground zero. He’s angry, emboldened by the fact that he’s armed, and the SPD is in route. Martin may be resisting by striking-out with his cell phone as they stumble south on the dog walk, and during the verbal exchanges Zimmerman warns Martin that he’s armed, e.g., “Stop MF’er, I have a gun!.” A verbal deterrent. They eventually fall and the ground struggle is all about that weapon. Zimmerman knows exactly where it is; Martin may not. Or, perhaps as people have suggested, Zimmerman managed to draw before they hit deck.
The blood curdling screams we hear leading up to the gun shot, and which cease immediately afterwards don’t sound like the screams of a man holding a gun; they sound like the screams of a man about to be shot.
In the situation I described yesterday we were both screaming as we struggled for possession of the firearm. I was screaming “Let go of the gun!”. He replied “You let go of the gun MF’er, I have another gun!” That was a verbal attempt to deter me from continuing to struggle. As it ended-up he didn’t have another gun, but I didn’t know that at the time. I should note that we stumbled about 20 ft in 3-4 seconds while standing, before I managed to spin him off and obtain sole possession the weapon. I should also note that there were essentially 3 hands on that gun during the struggle; his right hand on the grip, and both of mine controlling his hand and the direction of the barrel. The weapon never discharged. It was rather miraculous; the LEO’s agreed.
Another problem is motive. Why would a 17 year old with no history of violence launch an unprovoked attack on an absolute stranger and decide to murder him? All of this in the vicinity of his place of residence, making one hell of a ruckus, surrounded by potential witnesses, with no car and no means of escape but his feet.
?
You forgot to add that TM was unarmed and talking to his girlfriend on the phone when he supposedly suddenly went berserk.
That’s a tough sell, but it apparently made sense to GZ at the time, probably because he did not realize TM was staying at a residence in the gated community and thought he was a thug from a ghetto somewhere.
Because as his defense he is justified in doing everything to favor his client, so why would he do anything otherwise. If GZ is giving the orders Attorney O’Mara has to obey that which will have to prove itself. However, I do not see GZ as having the direction of calling all the moves by himself. He may express what he wants to happen but O’Mara would still advise if his move would bring about any “positive” results. UNLESS!!! GZ is receiving advise from his father the judge and O’Mara respects the father enough to just go along….Don’t think so. I’ll go along with O’Mara seeing it as helping his client. He is on the inside, therefore would know. We out here who object to his approach must make ourselves aware and if it is found that the law is lax on these money issues, then we must try and make some changes. Things don’t change just because we do not like it. the balance is there are some who do like it.
From the quip O’Mara made about “racism ” on both sides, I feel he has received conversations enough to know how racism is weighing in at the present time. As far as owning a gun, there are everyday people who have guns and have had them in their keeping forever, never used, with never any intent to use. Put them in the hands of one of the mentality to do harm and it is still an isolated act. Other kinds of weapons can be used just deadly Donations? Will come from those who want to donate, not just NRA and like Associations.
FYI: The lawyer gets to make the tactical decisions, whether the client likes them or not.
The client gets to decide whether he will plead guilty or go to trial and, if he goes to trial, he gets to decide whether he will testify or not.
Therefore, O’Mara should be calling the shots, even if he isn’t.
Thank you! I guess O’Mara does think he is “helping”! So, I’ll still go with that. Sure hope this case does come to “trial”, and would love to hear George Zimmerman testify on his own behalf. What a “story” that could be! Good to read the valuable
and informative straights on the laws. Appreciate your blog very very much.
Thanks for stopping by and joining in the discussion.
I believe GZ murdered TM. When GZ got out of his SUV and was told”we don’t need you to do that”.He continued,I could hear GZ huffing and puffing,then he says “I don’t know where that kid is”. He continues to walk to the end of the walk way to the street.Well did he get the address ,why didn’t he call non emergency back and give the address? He was not asked to find an address,the dispatcher asked GZ for his address. I feel gz was setting TM up way before he got out of his SUV. GZ is left handed ,his holster was letf handed,but he wore it on his right side.In one of the interviews GZ had with a detective,the detective asked GEORGE to sign a form,and he stated to the detictive that he was left handed. His reenactment was totally different than his written statement. In the written statement he stated TM punched him in the face, and he fell backwards onto his back,and TM kept punching him in the face. One would think his face would have looked like hamburger. But Trayvon only had one tiny abraison to his left ring finger below the knuckle. I would think that TM ” knuckels would have been all cut up and bleeding. In the reenactment GZ says he stumbled forward,and the he said he put his hand over TM mouth,then he caught himself and said TM coverd his mouth and nose. Well the police and the EMT’s botched up that murder investigation.The EMT’s washed away the evidence from his head and hands. One of the witnesses stated that when she saw GZ he kept putting his hands on his forehead,so if his face is 45% covered in blood, he had to have had blood on his hands.
Rebecca,It’s great that you caught that too. I just posted on the other blog. I was wandering why nobody noticed him slip up when he said “I put my hands on his mouth”.
Actually, despite frequent attempts by antigun organizations and antigun witers to link the NRA with Zimmerman, the NRA has very sensibly distanced itself from the case. The only exception that I know of was some brief remarks Executive VP Wayne LaPierre made in April criticizing the “media” for “sensationalizing” the case.
I think the solicitation of funds by a defense attorney is problematic. This behavior creates an unlevel playing field. The prosecution does not have this option, and the cost of prosecution is paid by taxpayers. The same is true for an “indigent” relying upon a court appointed defense attorney. An attorney who accepts a case “pro bono” should not be permitted to solicit funds. Further, they should not be permitted to use language that suggests their client is a victim, innocent, or has been treated unfairly – therefore you should donate. This is highly inappropriate. A defense attorney should only be focused on the law and the defense of their client. The bar and legal ethics boards should examine this.
Thanks for commenting.
The Rules of Professional Conduct do not prohibit a lawyer from soliciting money for a client’s defense and no lawyer should be forced to work for free.
I think a lawyer who agrees to take a case pro bono, because his client tells him that he has no money, should be able to change his mind, if the client comes into some money, especially if the client misrepresented to the lawyer that he had no money.
This is apparently what happened in this case.
I don’t like the way he asked for money because it has an underlying appeal to racism, as if to say “Racists of the World, Unite. And fund our defense.”
There is nothing wrong with saying your client is innocent, so long as you don’t personally vouch for your client’s innocence by saying, for example, “I know my client is innocent.”
The defense rarely solicits funds because it would be a waste of time. Very few people would contribute money because most people believe that all defendants are guilty. The Zimmerman case is a rare exception.
The prosecution usually has no problem with money because it comes out of the state budgets for prosecution and law enforcement. The sky is the limit, basically. Prosecutors almost never think in terms of how much it is going to cost the office to prosecute a given crime.
Defense almost never can compete on equal footing financially with the prosecution.
Approximately 90% of the defendants in criminal cases are indigent and their court-appointed lawyers are paid a mere pittance compared to the salaries prosecutors are paid. The situation is more balanced in cities and states that have public defender offices, but even then the prosecutors almost always are paid significantly higher salaries than the public defenders who are overworked and underpaid.
That’s just the nature of the criminal-justice system and it is a significant contributing factor to the high number of innocent people who are wrongfully convicted of crimes.
Hope this information is of assistance to you. I think some of it may have surprised you, but it’s all true.
It seems almost obvious that O’Mara took the case pro bono because of the publicity he will get. He will most likely write a book just like Jose Baez did. If I was O’Mara I would be furious with my client for lying to me and keeping me in the dark. GZ most likely did not tell O’Mara about the money transfers because he probably was going to flee and O’Mara would have advised him that would be the stupidest thing he could do.
Check out Leelee’s and Sharon Baby’s comments. They each have spotted a recorded jailhouse conversation (total: 2) in which it appears that Mark O’Mara knew what was going on with the money.
Yeah, I know and I’m shocked too.
An unlevel playing field?
When you start with the entire weight and resources of the government crashing down on the defendent, the playing field is practically vertical.
unitron
Yes, that is most definitely true.
Since I asked these questions, I suppose I should answer them.
The self-defense test is objective, not subjective. Whether GW was entitled to use deadly force depends on whether a reasonable person would have believed it necessary to use deadly force to prevent imminent death or grievous bodily harm.
Therefore, if he were delusional and believed himself to be in imminent danger of death or grievous bodily injury, but a reasonable person would not have been, then he cannot lawfully have used deadly force.
Although delusional thinking is not a defense, it could be considered a strong mitigating factor that might lead to a plea bargain in which he would plead to a less serious offense, assuming of course the delusional diagnosis were verified by the State’s own expert.
This is the sort of thinking that a lawyer like Judy Clarke and myself would have seriously considered early on, if we were representing GZ.
The question is, would he cooperate?
I don’t know the answer.
Often the task seems impossible until somehow someway you find a way.
This is what you learn how to do when you are a death penalty lawyer.
Most of the time, it’s the only thing you can do to save a life and you have to be part priest and part lawyer to git ‘r done.
FYI: I have not discussed the GZ case with Judy.
Yes, I know her personally and based on what I know about her personally and professionally, I believe she would have considered exploring the possibility of a plea based on a mental mitigation factor, assuming it exists.
All experienced death penalty lawyers do that.
It’s also possible that Mark O’Mara has thought about going down this road or soon will be, but I see no sign that he has done so or is about to do so.
Instead, I see him aggressively gearing up for a trial that I do not think he has much chance of winning for the reasons that I have expressed in this and other blogs in this continuing series.
Namaste
Fred
George seems to be so much like his father, he never admitted to having ADHD, until the 13th hour of the interrogation. He seems to be ashame of that fact and I am sure he got that shame from his father. RZ has said a lot in defense of George (as a parent I understand) and would never want anyone to know his som has any mental issues, even if it would help in his defense. If, MOM was to use that defense it will be a last resort and would be sprung on the prosecution and the public in his opening statement. Although, George wants to appear as a macho man, he would be terrified of going to prison and roll the dice for his freedom and not a reduced sentence. In addition, he has to maintain the stance that it is a clear case of self defense to keep the donations rolling in.
Your comment serves as a great fact-based example explaining why it is so important for suspects and defendants in criminal cases to keep their mouths shut, especially innocent ones, because as soon as they are regarded to be the prime suspect, the police and the prosecution focus their efforts on building a case primarily using the person’s own statements because that is the easiest way to prove a case.
A little detail added here or denied there by mistake or as a knee-jerk response to a seemingly insignificant question or accusation during a long interrogation can turn out to be an outcome determining point that cannot later be corrected without creating the appearance of lying.
GZ thought he could talk his way out of a murder charge but all he managed to do was set his story in stone tying his lawyer’s hands. Now that we can compare his story to the other evidence in the case, and we will get some more today, we are spotting an astonishing amount of inconsistencies and apparent lies that a skilled prosecutor should be able to fully exploit destroying GZ’s credibility before he ever testifies.
In fact, he may choose not to testify because there are any number of material inconsistencies and apparent lies that he cannot credibly explain.
Who knows, maybe he had a viable mental responsibility or diminished capacity argument that might have warranted a manslaughter charge, instead of a murder charge. We do not know and we probably never will.
I do know that changing the defense theory of the case from not guilty,by reason of self-defense to guilty of manslaughter, but not murder second degree, would be very difficult at this point and GZ must bear 100% of the blame for that.
Thanks for the great comment that allowed me to expound on a point that delights prosecutors and police but drives all criminal defense lawyers crazy.
Notice to all suspects and defendants: Keep your mouths shut!
You are correct. Even an innocent person should not be talking. I have a good question here. I recall you mentioned that the judge claimed that “the prosecution’s case is strong” mainly because of Zimmerman’s decision not to testify and his attempts to hide money/passport. It seems like the judge is assuming guilt because of his choice not to testify, but jurors are instructed that a defendant has the right not to testify and it can’t be considered guilt.
If we learned anything with the Amanda Knox case in Italy, you do not talk to police without a lawyer present. In this case, she should not have spoken to them without a translator present as well since she was not fluent in Italian at that time. It was ultimately proven that she was innocent and the police did not record the interrogation.
I don’t think Judge Lester’s comment can fairly be interpreted as an assumption of guilt because, without GZ’s explanation of what happened, there is no evidence of self-defense.
That’s all he was saying and he was not going to consider prior statements by GZ because they are technically hearsay and were not subject to cross examination.
I think additionally, he should be encouraging his “supporters” to quit using the word “lynch mob” to describe the treatment of Zimmerman by rational, critical thinking people. I have not heard that term in any other case, even unpopular, difficult public cases like Casey Anthony.
This term is being used, in the mainstream, is a slap in the face to many African Americans that, in fact, had family members that were lynched in a horrible ways. To refer to a Caucasian man that shot an unarmed black teen is unfathomable in this situation.
How did the race issue come up? Surely not by family, Sharpton, nor the protests. I believe it was well before the national news ever granted it’s first interview when the very white Detective Serino asked Zimmerman two days past, “Do you have a problem with black people?”
Using the term in this case is “lynch mob” is offensive and O’Mara should be spending some moral cycles squelching this overwhelming misrepresentation.
I also post my articles at Firedoglake where I have been accused by a small group of GZ supporters of leading a lynch mob against him.
Like you, I am struck by how grossly inappropriate and flat out wrong that accusation is, given the history of lynching in this country and what we are attempting to do here in our discussions.
Thanks for making that point. I had not thought of expressing it that way.
Frederick, your articles are mind blowing. After seeing the hateful comments toward Martin on Youtube videos, I have to conclude that roughly 70% or more of GZ supporters are flat out racists. I myself am Caucasian and am very sickened by the blatant racism. Zimmerman himself is Hispanic, so I am confused as to why so many racists even support him.
I recently read an article by a psychologist who has analyzed Zimmerman’s statements and also his Facebook profile. He concludes that Zimmerman is a sociopath with a narcissistic personality. He even points out how Zimmerman was studying criminal justice, so even he should know that he can’t stalk and detain an innocent person that was not witnessed committing a crime.
I’m surprised the prosecution has not charged Zimmerman with assaulting a minor and false imprisonment, because it is obvious that he tried to detain Martin. By doing this, they could then convict him under the shady 10-20-life law in Florida which gives serious prison time to anyone that fires a weapon during the commission of a crime.
If the prosecution can prove that Martin hit Zimmerman with his cellphone, I believe that would prove that Martin was assaulting Zimmerman in the act of defending himself. It would be completely illogical for Martin to beat Zimmerman down with a cellphone if he was the aggressor.
I agree.
Frederick, do you know how long it will be until we actually know for sure who was screaming on those phone calls? Or do you think that we will not see that evidence until the trial?
I am pretty sure the prosecution said they can not prove who was screaming on the calls. The two voice tests we heard about a few months back probably won’t be allowed in court and the FBI’s tests were inconclusive. It looks like we won’t get a definitive answer about that unless GZ admits it was Martin.
Don’t expect that to happen anytime soon.
Check out my recent comment to Dennis for more information about identifying the source of the terrified scream.
I think both sides will be attempting to prove that their person is screaming for help because that is the central issue in the case, Zimmerman and his dad will say it’s him. TM’s parents will say it’s TM.
Unclear at this point if audio experts can conclusively identify the source.
If I were GZ’s lawyer, I would have him secretly tested in a sound lab to see if his scream “matches” the scream in the background of the 911 call.
If it was a match, I would take it to the prosecutors and say “Checkmate, Got Yah!”
If GZ were excluded as the source, which is what I am expecting, I would never mention the test or the results.
The test and the results would not have to be disclosed since they would be protected from disclosure by the attorney-client work product privilege.
I would have thought that GZ’s lawyers would have arranged for this test while he was out before his bond was revoked. Maybe they didn’t have the time or the money to do the test. In any event, you can be certain that they would have introduced the result at the recently concluded bail hearing, if they had it.
They clearly did not, but given the relatively short opportunity to do the test between bond hearings, I don’t believe we can reasonably conclude they did the test and he failed.
The more time that passes without the defense saying anything about a test, the more likely the test was completed with unfavorable or inconclusive results.
I can’t help wondering whether any of the parents have actually heard their son screaming for help since he was a child
I’m not certain that’s necessary to identify your child’s voice.
Why do you believe it is?
In response to your question below, I’m not certain either. I would expect a parent to recognize his son’s speaking voice or even his normal shouting voice, but when the latter is screaming for help… I don’t know.
Throughout this I have never seen GZ as “insane” but incredibly needy of approval, deluded in thinking he could ever pass the Bar and ultimately become a Judge – just like his father.
I see GZ as a kid who was a constant F-up, who could never win his father’s approval, but – just but – he’d prove himself to his father if he became a judge.
So, in the short term, what he COULD do is to suck up to cops. Note he became the Neighborhood Watch coordinator but never fulfilled one iota of that job’s responsibilities – to enroll NW volunteers and coordinate their training w/Sanford PD.
I don’t see GZ’s locking on TM as a “suspect” because he (TM) was black, and GZ supposedly hated/disliked blacks (no evidence of that) – it’s that he thought he’d get better, faster attention from the cops (especially considering Sanford PD’s rep at that time) if it was a black teen he was calling in to 311 (the non-emergency phone #).
In other words, I DO see GZ profiling TM (based heavily on TM’s race) without “racist hatred.” But he PRE-JUDGED TM to be a suspect (which is, of course, prejudice) and referred to TM in his written statement as the “suspect” without one iota of probable cause – and that is profiling.
I hope he’s nailed on that by the prosecution. What’s really insane about this is that the census figures for that development has it as 20% black population. What was stupid GZ thinking???
He was thinking of potential glory, approval, acceptance, by the cops and his neighbors. No intellidence used here.
I am glad to see your opinion that there was no hinky up-side- down draw by GZ of his gun and that he had it out, menacing TM long before he shot TM. That was the reason for TM’s terrified series of cries.
Knowing the cops were enroute GZ expected he only needed to hold TM at bay for simply a minute or two. But he never explained to TM why he was detaining him, and TM, understandably was terrified by this stocky adult with a gun who had been watching, then searching, then pursuing him and TM grappled with GZ for his life. And TM lost his life.
In my view, TM was simply a trophy for GZ, and GZ, with a history of uncontrolled rage, was increasingly furious that he had to fight TM, that TM might get away, and that GZ would look like – once again – a big fat loser wanna-be cop to Sanford PD.
And so, as the seconds were running out and the enroute cops were about to arrive, and as bullies usually are, GZ was enraged by the teeny, tiny minimal cuts to his head, and I believe GZ lost all concept that this was a human inches away from the barrel of his gun – it was simpy a trophy GZ desperately needed, and in my mind I can easily see GZ coolly plugging TM in the heart from inches away, to secure that trophy.
For a few brief hours and days GZ appears to have enjoyed a “glow” through the investigation. But he’s a bad, bad script writer (TM would refer to GZ as “homie”????) and as Leatherman points out, the babbling brook is flooding GZ’s attorney’s chances.
I want to see a re-enactment by a 155 lb. 5’11″ teenager, straddling GZ in the grass – with GZ’s holster clipped inside his waistaband – with the teen far enough up on GZ’s body (or a 200 lb. 5′ 7″ shape-alike) to be able to grasp GZ’s head — all of which GZ claims happened. GZ’s pants can’t ride up that much no matter how he could have wriggled – his crotch would impede that. At the time, GZ’s belly fat would, in esence, wrap around the holster, under 155 lbs. pressure.
Then let us see if the 155 lbs. sitting on that holster, would deny GZ (or his shape-alike at the time of the shooting) access to his holster and “firearm.” (Note how GZ likes to use the LE term.)
If so, we know he had that gun out earlier – and the hunt was on. Within seconds, there was one dead trophy. TM never had a chance.
“Zimmerman was estranged from his mother and other members of his family, according to the report. His mother was “very strict and dominant” the friend told investigators.
“His father did not discipline and did not stick up for the kids as they were abused by their mother.”"
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/07/12/george-zimmerman-case_n_1669153.html?utm_hp_ref=trayvon-martin
I think O Mara is trying to help, but has screwed up by not making sure he sweats the small stuff. He probably thougth there was
9-10k in Paypal and thought little of it. I think
GZ was hiding it from MOM too. He may not have supervised that idiotic plea for funds closely, instead instructing his minions to make a laundry list out of the categories of supporters they knew of from their net research- leaving out the avowed racists.
I don’t think he realized how sneaky he was till he got the passport back too, and hoped it would all blow over.
So you think he can afford to put GZ on the stand? I’m curious about this.
I’m starting to think that his approach might be to stack the jury with a few too many people who don’t like to judge and thinks any doubt at all is a reasonable one.
And then present nothing of GZ’s stories
Or charachter. So that all that remains is some ridiculous thing he says in opening statements that will leave some weaker minds (the ones who do not understand circumstantial evidence) will find doubt.
Yeah I think it’s going to be Jose Baez all over again. I think he wants to get paid, and GZ to roll the dice.
What other choice would be have?
It’s tough to win a self-defense case without the defendant testifying because how else do you present the defense. There has to be some evidence to get an instruction on self-defense and, unless GZ testifies, he might not even get a self-defense instruction.
Counsel’s remarks in opening statements and closing arguments are not evidence and the jury will be instructed not to consider them as evidence.
The defense can’t get any of GZ’s statements to the police admitted because they are inadmissible hearsay, if offered to prove the truth of the matters asserted in the statements.
Therefore, GZ pretty much has to testify.
Is Shellie Zimmerman guilty of federal crimes such as money laundering for the transfers under $10,000. I did read that PayPal limits you to under $10,000 for transfers, but there were eight transfers and not all of them were from PayPal. If I’m not mistaken, some of them were between accounts at the Credit Union. I think I may be referring to the Money Laundering Act, but I could be wrong.
No, she did not commit a federal crime because the transfer of funds from one account to another was not a currency transaction, as that term is defined under federal law. Currency transactions have to be in cash.
She clearly structured the transactions to avoid transferring more than $10,000 in any one transaction and that would have triggered a Suspicious Activity Report, but she did not commit the crime of structuring because she was not dealing in cash.
Apparently, GZ thought otherwise.
BTW, the IRS considers the donations to be gifts and not income, so GZ does not have to declare the money as income and pay a tax on it.
Oh, the irony of it all.
She went through all that painstaking work to hide something that did not need to be hidden and then she lied about it in court, committing perjury..
So the only illegal thing that Shellie Zimmerman did was lie to the court. What is the maximum penalty for perjury in Florida? Is it true that there is no maximum sentence? If this is true, I would give her 5 years in prison for her crimes. Hiding all that money and the 2nd passport is a clear indication that Zimmerman is considering fleeing prosecution. I have read that $200k is a fortune in countries like Peru. I have no sympathy for Shellie trying to aid & abet a murderer on trial. I hope that she realizes that her future is in jeopardy if she does not play ball for the prosecution. What I wouldn’t give for Shellie going on the stand under oath and saying that George was going to flee…etc…
The maximum penalty for perjury is 5 years in prison. I do not know if she has a prior record, but even if she does not, I would expect her to have to serve some county jail time, possibly 3-9 months.
Florida has sentencing guidelines that restrict a judge’s discretion when imposing a sentence. Assuming the usual format, the crime of conviction and the prior record, if any, are crunched to spit out a presumptive sentencing range within which the judge must impose the sentence, unless substantial and compelling reasons call for a greater or lesser sentence.
The vast majority of defendants are sentenced within the standard guideline ranges.
She might do better than that and get off with no time, if she cuts a deal to cooperate and testify against GZ.
He might be well advised to be most solicitous in attendance to his queen.
Frederick, do you think TM’s parents will be filing a lawsuit in civil court against GZ for the death of TM? I’m sure we all remember how that piece of scum O.J. beat his murder charge but lost his case in civil court. In a civil suit the burden of proof is not as high so it is much easier to convict. I would really like to see GZ sued into oblivion.
Another question I have is how is the restitution decided in a civil suit and what if GZ is broke and can’t pay the family the amount ordered by the court? If he is a free person, would they garnish his wages? I’m not very familiar with civil suits.
A civil suit might be worth pursuing, if he is acquitted, but not if he is convicted.
Either way I expect all of the money in his internet account will be used up, so that money will not be available.
If he is acquitted, however, there will be a book deal and other possible income producing activities that would be an enticing target for compensation from a wrongful death lawsuit.
The burden of proof is preponderance of the evidence or more likely so than no so. Much easier to prove.
However, if he were to win the SYG hearing, he would also have immunity from civil suit.
Once a person gets a judgment in a civil case, they have a certain period of time within which to collect the judgment.
They can collect the judgment in a variety of ways. Garnishment is one. Attachment (i.e., seizing property is another).
“In fact, just yesterday, O’Mara was opining about the Zimmerman case, telling WKMG-Channel 6 that he was “surprised that two attorneys who were no longer counsel talked for an hour about a case that they’re no longer involved in.”
“I think that was a little problematic,” O’Mara said. “You’re not supposed to talk about a client’s case, for the most part at all, and yet they answered dozens of questions.” “
Oh the irony of it all.
Nice catch.
Defense Attorney O’Mara filing a motion that Judge Lester be disqualified. Where have we experienced this before? In a most popular case the accused was acquitted, but not because of a change in the judge? Does O’Mara really think this will help?? This act can become a quite a habit within the justice system.