When "Neighborhood Watch" Gets Out of Hand

[Rupert Pupkin]

Originally Posted by Riot

I've tried to post stories from Big Government or World Net Daily, but I find them woefully deficient, generally, in facts

So if I can't find the original AP story, I'll post where I find it, be it Daily Beast or Daily Kos.

I figure most here are smart enough to pick out the factual parts of the story, and separate it from (and ignore if they wish) the opinion if it's there.

Zimmerman profiled a black kid and now that kid is dead because of Zimmerman, at his hand.

We'll see if the court feels there should be a punishment for that. I sure as hell hope so.

Edit: Breaking: CBS Evening News reports that Zimmerman lied to the court regarding how much money he had. They told the court the Zimmerman's couldn't raise bail, that's he's indigent, and the family couldn't make the $15,000 10% of bail.

Whoops. Turns out Zimmerman knew at that time he had over $150,000 cash in his account, raised from his "support me" website. He just wasn't telling anybody about it ... not his lawyer, not the judge.

The real George Zimmerman is a liar, apparently. Can we trust his story about what happened with Trayvon, when he lies to the judge at his bail hearing?

This is a big deal. He may have screwed himself with his lie.

He set up a website to raise money for his defense, not a website to raise money for bail. He probably didn't think of that money as part of his net-worth. On his website, it said that any money raised would go towards his defense and for necessary living expenses.

Zimmerman probably didn't feel like he needed to disclose to the judge that money was being raised on this website. After all, what good does it do to raise money, if the judge is simply going to take all the money away (temporarily) and make you put it up for bail.

It seems like it would kind of be unfair to the donors for the judge to take away all the money they donated that was supposed to pay for Zimmerman's defense and his living expenses and make Zimmerman put it all up for bail.

Technically I guess Zimmerman should have disclosed it. I guess in the future if a guy is accused of a crime and he is going to raise money, he should wait until after the bail hearing to start raising the money. It seems pretty silly but I guess that's what you need to do. Otherwise, if you have already raised $150,000, the judge may make your bail $150,000 higher. It's better to wait until after the bail hearing to raise the money. Then you don't need to disclose it. You obviously couldn't disclose money that you hadn't made yet.

By the way, for all we know Zimmerman didn't even have access to the money at the time of the bail hearing. Was the money already in Zimmerman's bank account? We don't know the answer to this. His website went through Paypal. I don't know exactly how that works. When somebody donates money to you through Paypal, how long before you actually have your hands on that money?

Did Zimmerman have internet access in jail? When was last the time he checked his website to see how much had been raised? The bail hearing was on a Friday. Maybe Zimmerman had no internet access from jail and hadn't checked his website in several days.

No matter what, we know that Zimmerman knew his website had raised some money. He obviously should have disclosed that. But if he had no access to check the site from jail and if he hadn't checked it in several days, for all we know there might have only been $25,000 in there the last time he had checked it. The bottom line is that he should have disclosed it. But I can understand why he didn't.

[Riot]

Originally Posted by Rupert Pupkin

He set up a website to raise money for his defense, not a website to raise money for bail.

His website said it was for his defense and "living expenses." Bail is part of his legal fees.

Zimmerman apparently was given over $200,000 by his supporters. His bail was 10%, or $15,000. Zimmerman lied to the judge. The judge may or may not punish him for lying to the court.

[Rupert Pupkin]

Originally Posted by Riot

His website said it was for his defense and "living expenses." Bail is part of his legal fees.

Zimmerman apparently was given over $200,000 by his supporters. His bail was 10%, or $15,000. Zimmerman lied to the judge. The judge may or may not punish him for lying to the court.

The reason they say it costs 10% is because that is how much a bail company will charge you. If your bail is $150,000, if you can come up with $15,000, a bail company will pay the rest. The problem is that you don't get your $15,000 back. The bail company keeps it. That is what they charge you. If you have $150,000, you are better off putting the whole thing up yourself because you get the whole thing back. You save $15,000.

I doubt there will be any serious punishment from the judge. My guess is that the only punishment may be having the bail amount raised higher.

[Riot]

Originally Posted by Rupert Pupkin

The reason they say it costs 10% is because that is how much a bail company will charge you. If your bail is $150,000, if you can come up with $15,000, a bail company will pay the rest. The problem is that you don't get your $15,000 back. The bail company keeps it. That is what they charge you. If you have $150,000, you are better off putting the whole thing up yourself because you get the whole thing back. You save $15,000.

Ah, I see! I didn't know it worked like that ... thanks.

I doubt there will be any serious punishment from the judge. My guess is that the only punishment may be having the bail amount raised higher.

I think his defense lawyer is doing a great job - seriously. Got permission for Zimmerman to wear a suit in court, instead of prison garb; got permission for Zimmerman to make a public apology to the family ... he's doing a good job.

Even if the judge doesn't punish Zimmerman, geesh, it goes to his honesty. And the judge refused a press coverage info freeze. So I guess they think they can still find a jury there? We'll see.

[Rupert Pupkin]

Originally Posted by Riot

Ah, I see! I didn't know it worked like that ... thanks.



I think his defense lawyer is doing a great job - seriously. Got permission for Zimmerman to wear a suit in court, instead of prison garb; got permission for Zimmerman to make a public apology to the family ... he's doing a good job.

Even if the judge doesn't punish Zimmerman, geesh, it goes to his honesty. And the judge refused a press coverage info freeze. So I guess they think they can still find a jury there? We'll see.

Practically every defendant will try to "play poor" at the bail hearing because the lower your net worth, the lower your bail will be. I doubt there has ever been a defendant who overstated his net worth. They all understate it.

And if a defendant had some money that he thought nobody knew about, I highly doubt he would disclose it.

As Brian said, omitting $150,000 in cash is hardly a minor omission. But as I said in my previous post, we don't know the last time Zimmerman had checked his website, so we don't know if he knew how much was in there. I would have to think that someone knew how much was in there, whether it be his wife, his parents or whoever.

I guess the question is who knew what, when? O'Mara may have asked Zimmerman if he had any money when they first met. I assume Zimmerman told him he did not, and Zimmerman may have had very little money at the time. The bail hearing was around 12 days after they first met. How much of the $150,000 was raised during that 12 days? I don't know if O'Mara then asked Zimmerman the same question again before the bail hearing. O"Mara may have had no idea that Zimmerman raised $100,000 or whatever the amount was during that 12 day period.

I'm sure somebody knew how much money was in there (on the day of the bail hearing), but we don't know who knew. The one thing we know for sure is that Zimmerman knew there was at least some money in there, even if he thought it was far less than $150,000.

I'm obviously not a criminal defense lawyer, so I don't know if it is a big deal for a defendant to lowball his net worth, whether it is a major lowball or a minor lowball. It might be one of those things where you don't have anything to lose by lowballing. It might be one of those things where the worst thing that can happen to you if you get caught is that they raise your bail. I guess the judge probably has the authority to revoke the bail entirely, but I don't know if that is common or not. I certainly wouldn't expect that in this case because the prosecutor did not ask for the bail to be revoked.

[Rupert Pupkin]

According to O"Mara, practically all the money is still in the Paypal account. They have closed the account and are waiting for Paypal to send them the money by check. I guess it takes at least a few days for them to send you a check.

I think this gives Zimmerman a little bit of wiggle room. He can say that he hadn't gotten the money yet, so he didn't feel that he had to disclose money that he wasn't going to receive until a later date.

[Danzig]

lowballing= lying. never a good idea to lie to the judge.

[Rileyoriley]

3 NBC employees lose jobs after edits of 911 recording in Trayvon Martin shooting
Published: Friday, May 04, 2012, 4:02 PM

NEW YORK (AP) — Three employees of NBC or an NBC-owned television station have now lost their jobs because of editing changes to a call made to police by George Zimmerman on the night he shot Trayvon Martin.

Lilia Luciano, an NBC News correspondent based in Miami, is no longer working at the network, spokeswoman Amy Lynn said. Her departure came as a result of an investigation into her March 20 "Today" show report on the Martin case.

Each of the reports on either "Today" or NBC's Miami station WTVJ involve editing of Zimmerman's phone call to a dispatcher that emphasizes his identification of Martin as a black male. Zimmerman, a neighborhood watch volunteer in Sanford, Fla., is charged with second-degree murder in the death of 17-year-old Martin, a case that has increased racial tensions.

In the report involving Luciano, audio of the police phone call was edited to insert a reference to Martin's race that had been made later in the conversation.

Last month, a NBC News producer was fired in connection with a March 27 "Today" show report where a tape of the call was edited to suggest that Zimmerman volunteered to police that "this guy looks like he's up to no good. He's black."

The broadcast portion of the audio had deleted a part of the conversation where the police dispatcher asked Zimmerman about whether a suspicious male he was reporting was "black, white or Hispanic." Zimmerman answered, "he looks black."

Lynn said Friday that NBC News' investigation into the reports has ended.

In an investigation about a separate incident, reporter Jeff Burnside of WTVJ lost his job because of a March 19 report on the dispatcher's call that similarly edited out the dispatcher's question that prompted Zimmerman's characterization of Martin as black, said Matt Glassman, spokesman for the NBC-owned station.

The WTVJ report did not air on any other NBC stations, he said.

Last week, WTVJ aired an apology to its viewers for the report on some of its newscasts, and posted it on the station's website. The statement said that "an error in editorial judgment was made in which a question from the operator was deleted which could have created the impression that Mr. Zimmerman's statement may have been singling out Trayvon Martin because of his race.

"We take this incident very seriously and apologize to our viewers," WTVJ said. "After conducting an extensive investigation, we are putting a more stringent editorial process in place to ensure this does not happen again."

NBC News did not immediately respond to questions about whether the "Today" show has addressed the misleading reports on the air, or whether there are any plans to do so.

Brent Bozell, founder of the conservative media watchdog the Media Research Center, said NBC still has not come clean.

"The truth has been withheld from NBC's own viewers now for more than one month," he said. "Do the network executives at NBC think that this is acceptable?"

Copyright 2012 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

[Rupert Pupkin]

Zimmerman Medical Report Released:

http://news.yahoo.com/abc-news-exclu...opstories.html

[bigrun]

Originally Posted by Rupert Pupkin

Zimmerman Medical Report Released:

http://news.yahoo.com/abc-news-exclu...opstories.html

Saw that report on ABC eve news...The medical report was done the morning after...the video shot of him the nite of the shooting show no head wound and no blood...

[Rupert Pupkin]

Originally Posted by bigrun

Saw that report on ABC eve news...The medical report was done the morning after...the video shot of him the nite of the shooting show no head wound and no blood...

I have to disagree with you there. I think you could clearly see the wounds on the back of his head on the enhanced video.

[Antitrust32]

so voice experts have determined the voice yelling for help in the 911 call was NOT zimmermans voice.

Get ready to spend some time in prison, murderer.

[jms62]

Originally Posted by bigrun

Saw that report on ABC eve news...The medical report was done the morning after...the video shot of him the nite of the shooting show no head wound and no blood...

Police report will clearly show what he looked like. Pretty cut and dry if you ask me.

[Clip-Clop]

All that will matter in the end is the ME report on Martin, was the shot fired from 6" or 4' (distances are estimated). That will determine in the minds of the jury what was happening 6" they were fighting and not guilty, 4' he shot the kid to kill him and guilty.

Originally Posted by Clip-Clop

was the shot fired from 6" or 4'

I thought I read that there were powder burns found on the victim's body or clothing, so the question is moot, no?

I do agree with you that IF the prosecution has evidence to suggest the shot came from a distance, their case would be winnable. As it is, Z walks.

[Clip-Clop]

Originally Posted by Ocala Mike

I thought I read that there were powder burns found on the victim's body or clothing, so the question is moot, no?

I do agree with you that IF the prosecution has evidence to suggest the shot came from a distance, their case would be winnable. As it is, Z walks.

I did not read that anywhere if it was made available but I pretty much stopped following closely shortly after the charges were filed. At that point I figured he would walk.

[OldDog]

Originally Posted by Clip-Clop

All that will matter in the end is the ME report on Martin, was the shot fired from 6" or 4' (distances are estimated). That will determine in the minds of the jury what was happening 6" they were fighting and not guilty, 4' he shot the kid to kill him and guilty.

I think this could be spun either way. Playing devil's advocate, if a person has been involved in a physical confrontation with another, and the two become separated (perhaps by the first person either throwing the second backward, or by the first person retreating) but the second person charges, does the first person wait for more physical contact before shooting or does he shoot while the second person charges?

Just thayin, it could be manipulated both ways, and undoubtably would be.

[Riot]

George Zimmerman took a gun and followed an innocent man, Trayvon Martin. That's why Martin is dead by Zimmerman's gun, and everyone here knows it. When does the trial start, have they picked a day yet?

[jms62]

Originally Posted by OldDog

I think this could be spun either way. Playing devil's advocate, if a person has been involved in a physical confrontation with another, and the two become separated (perhaps by the first person either throwing the second backward, or by the first person retreating) but the second person charges, does the first person wait for more physical contact before shooting or does he shoot while the second person charges?

Just thayin, it could be manipulated both ways, and undoubtably would be.

Agree... 4 Feet could mean you shot someone rushing to attack you where 6 inches could be an execution.

[OldDog]

Originally Posted by Riot

George Zimmerman took a gun and followed an innocent man, Trayvon Martin. That's why Martin is dead by Zimmerman's gun, and everyone here knows it.

Everyone here has an opinion. As to Zimmerman's guilt or innocence as charged, I for one would like to hear the facts as they are presented in a trial, before I give mine.

Originally Posted by Riot

When does the trial start, have they picked a day yet?

I don't know, and am in no hurry to see the riots which (in my opinion) will ensue when the verdict is announced, no matter what the verdict might be.