Zimmerman Shooter Out on Bond, Turns in Guns
Police report cites Apperson as saying: “I hope I got [Zimmerman] this time.”
UPDATE (5/18/15, 19:43EST): This post has been updated with additional information about Apperson’s mental health (or lack thereof) as reported today by WKMG Orlando television.
This WKMG report is based upon their obtaining a copy of the police report of officers who spoke with Apperson immediately after he tried to shoot George Zimmerman in the head. The police report specifically notes:
During the investigation, I learned that Apperson has exhibited unusual behavior in which he had recently been admitted to a mental institution. It appears that Apperson has a fixation on Zimmerman and has displayed some signs of paranoia, anxiety, and bipolar disorder.
(emphasis added)
Here’s a video of the WKMG on-air report earlier today:
A report by WESH Orlando and other news sources states that Matthew Apperson, the man arrested last Friday for firing a .357 Magnum bullet at George Zimmerman’s head a week ago, was bonded out of jail over the weekend. Bond was reportedly set at $35,000.
Apperson was formally charged this past Saturday with aggravated assault with a deadly weapon, aggravated battery with a deadly weapon and firing a deadly missile into an occupied conveyance, police said. He is scheduled to be arraigned on the charges on June 23.
As conditions of bail Apperson was ordered to turn in his firearms to police, which he reportedly did on Sunday, and to stay away from George Zimmerman.
Contributing to Apperson’s arrest were police observations of his “unusual behavior” and apparent “fixation” with Zimmerman immediately following the shooting. The police report also notes Apperson as saying “I hope I got him [Zimmerman] this time.”
We’ve previously noted Apperson’s rather extensive history with the criminal justice system, here: George Zimmerman Shooter’s Checkered Past. The WESH report provides some additional details:
Apperson has been arrested and convicted at least four times in the past, according to police records. In 2005 a woman accused Apperson of punching her window in a road rage incident, police said. That woman decided not to press charges. Winter Springs police said they have been called to Apperson’s home at least 15 times since July 2012.
Zimmerman has also had repeated interactions with law enforcement following his 2013 acquittal for his self-defense shooting of Trayon Martin. Typically these interactions were based on accusations made by angry girlfriends.
Unlike in the case of Apperson, where incomplete criminal proceedings were typically halted because the victims chose not to bring charges, Zimmerman’s girlfriend accusers have consistently recanted their accusations shortly after making them.
–-Andrew, @LawSelfDefense
NEW! The Law of Self Defense proudly announces the launch of its online, on-demand state-specific Law of Self Defense Online Training. These are interactive, online versions of the authoritative 5-hour-long state-specific Law of Self Defense Seminars that we give all over the country, but from the convenience of your laptop, tablet, or smartphone, and on your own schedule. Click over for more information on our state-specific Law of Self Defense Online Training, and get access to the ~30 minute Section 1. Introduction for free.
Andrew F. Branca is an MA lawyer and the author of the seminal book “The Law of Self Defense, 2nd Edition,” available at the Law of Self Defense blog (autographed copies available) and Amazon.com (paperback and Kindle). He also holds Law of Self Defense Seminars around the country, and provides free online self-defense law video lectures at the Law of Self Defense Institute and podcasts through iTunes, Stitcher, and elsewhere.
DONATE
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
Comments
“I hope I got him [Zimmerman] this time.”
Attempted Murder slam dunk?
Sounds like an admission against interest.
Doesn’t this mean that if Zimmerman sees Apperson and he is going any direction other than walking away, that Zimmerman should give him the Thugvon treatment?
No.
You really need to read Mr. Branca’s book. It’s called “The Law Of Self-Defense”. Perhaps you’ve heard of it?
Just PLEASE don’t make me send it to you at a prison address.
Doing that makes me feel sad. 🙂
–Andrew, @LawSelfDefense
Yep. I just love people who call attorneys for help after they do something reckless or avoidable. I used to field those calls when I was working and I used to just ask them why didn’t you call before you decided to self-help? If you could do it yourself, why do you need help now? I guess it really wasn’t a ‘self’ task after all – you just wanted to do something right then and there.
The address would more likely be for the same mental institution where Apperson was a patient; probably Apperson’s roommate and probably under court order. Hence the nic, “JusticeDelivered.” 🙂
The post was meant to be humor. I guess I should have added a smiley after the question mark.
Debra Nelson is the arraignment judge.
Does anyone know if it is usual for her to stay on to the trial, or is the assignment just for the arraignment?
BTW, what is the status of Georges appeal?
Also slightly off topic, but has a judge been assigned to hear the “Baltimopre 6” case? Or at least the pretrial motions.
Seriously, how can this woman not recuse (sp?) herself. Not one shred of integrity.
Did Nelson set the bail?
No. She may or may not be trial judge either. I don’t know if the case goes back into the pool after arraignment.
Important question, How much of Appersons past behavour is admissible? How much if he testifies? How much if he doesn’t testify?
Mouse, you should answer this yourself.
Admissible evidence would include…
1. all relevant evidence (evidence that helps meet the elements of a specific offense) that is more probative than prejudicial, and…
2. comports with the rules of evidence.
Is evidence of a prior DUI offense relevant to the charges?
The instant the defendant testifies that he is a good guy, it’s Joy in Mudville time for the prosecutor. 🙂
Guy with several items on his rap sheet, fires a .357 magnum into an occupied car, intentionally trying to kill a guy, and he’s out on a lousy $35,000 bond? WTF, Florida?
Plus he is an Obama supporter – voting for him multiple times!
Snark Snark!
You keep harping on the fact that Apperson is a registered Democrat, when so, in fact, is Zimmerman. I’m not sure what your point is.
He’s trying to be funny.
The Left would be joyously jumping up and down with wet pants if Zimmerman was a Republican, and swoon if he was a Tea Party.
Thus the snark.
It’s ok, they took his guns. He couldn’t possibly get another gun while out on bail, or already have another gun the cops don’t know about, could he?
No. You see, that would be illegal.
Because buying or borrowing or in any other way possessing a firearm would violate a condition of his bail? There is nothing in federal or Floriduh law that would prevent him from obtaining another gun, is there?
Yes. Yes, there is. It’s been ordered by the court that he is not allowed to possess or own any firearms. For him to go ahead and do so anyway would be an offense. At the very minimum, his bond would be revoked.
Well the took all the guns that he gave them. That is not to say all of his guns.
I cannot believe this man is out roaming around either, after confessing to the crime.
WTH is wrong with our court system?
Just an interesting comparison, a lot of people did say the same after Zimmerman was let out on $150,000 bond after having admitted to killing Trayvon Martin.
What crime did Zimmerman confess to?
He didn’t confess to a crime, but he did admit to killing Martin, which is a necessary part of self defense claim.
Amy, Lawful termination of a thug committing assault is not a crime.
She didn’t say anything about a crime.
Let’s go back to first principles…
1. bail bonds are FIRST…and fundamentally…intended to assure that the ACCUSED (not convicted) will stay in the jurisdiction to face trial
2. GENERALLY, the same presumption of innocence benefits the ACCUSED
3. In this specific case, Mr. Nutball has been stripped of his capacity to use firearms, AND (presumably) assured the Court he will not seek to replace them.
4. Zimmerman is very likely no longer in the area
5. bail bond hearings are not intended to pre-crime star chambers. They ARE intended to assure attendance at trial, and…with a few exceptions…that’s about all.
6. The judge issued a no-contact order.
7. According to a WESH report, the judge stated that George Zimmerman
did not want Apperson monitored, because he did not want people to
know where he was. Don’t ask me to explain it, I just repeat
what I read.
I read it that Zimmerman has chosen to keep his own location secret, so Apperson is not likely to know where to find him.
The whole point of a GPS anklet is to know whether the bailee is entering a prohibited zone.
Naturally, you need to inform him of the zone he is to avoid.
In this case, that would effectively provide Apperson with a good approximation of Zimmerman’s location.
THAT’S why no GPS anklet.
–Andrew, @LawSelfDefense
Think ‘mirror image’.
Rags,
How does depriving the accused of his natural right to keep and bear arms ensure his appearance at trial?
Seriously…???
Read what I wrote.
If you were the judge here, would you consider you could put some restrictions on LOTS of Mr. Nutball’s “natural rights” in light of his APPARENT (though not proven) conduct?
Do you think Mr. Nutball should have and exercise the natural right to travel freely?
Rags,
Yes, I’m serious and I read what you wrote, in particular:
“bail bonds are FIRST…and fundamentally…intended to assure that the ACCUSED (not convicted) will stay in the jurisdiction to face trial”
I fail to see how depriving someone of his right to keep and carry arms fundamentally assures he will remain put and show up for his trial. Restricting his right to travel freely does serve this function.
I’m not saying that it is unreasonable to disarm a loon who admits trying to murder someone, but I’m suggesting bail conditions obviously serve more that providing an assurance that the accused will appear for trial. Clearly, a valid accusation allows for the court to infringe upon many liberties, only some related to preventing the accused from skipping.
My question, if flight prevention is the first and foremost readon for bail and other conditions of pre-trial release, what are the other factors the court may consider in ordering additional infringement?
C’mon, dude…!!!!
Clues to how CONDITIONAL my post was on the matter…
1. “…bail bonds are FIRST…and fundamentally…” CLEARLY implies there are OTHER…beside the FIRST…purposes
2. “GENERALLY, the same presumption of innocence benefits the ACCUSED”, but not ALWAYS
3. “They ARE intended to assure attendance at trial, and…with a few exceptions…that’s about all.” See? EXCEPTIONS.
Conditions of bail…or even whether bail will be granted…vary a bunch, both within and between jurisdictions. The prisoner in jail is under an almost (see where I conditioned this with “almost”) complete suspension of his natural rights. That includes the right to travel, to possess property (he owns it still, but can’t have it in jail), to expression, and the use of any weapon in self defense.
A judge CAN grant bail, and STILL impose many of the same disabilities, depending on the case, the law of the jurisdiction, etc.
And they should in the right circumstances.
JUST DAMN…!!!
Most counties in Florida have a pre-determined schedule of bail. Here is the document for Seminole County.
The granting of bail is governed by FL Stat 903.046. The Court may impose conditions on pretrial release as governed by FL Stat 903.047. It is settled law in Florida that these conditions (without limitation) may include surrender of firearms, curfews, GPS monitoring or home confinement.
Skookum — stop challenging Rags. It is embarrassing for you.
Skookum, I am not an expert but normally when a person is accused of a felony they require you to turn in/ not be around firearms while awaiting trial. Even George had that restriction while awaiting trial.
It depends upon the charge. If it’s a non-violent felony then you don’t need to surrender them unless convicted.
Case in point; my ex-Governor Rick Perry. He’s been accused of a trumped-up, political non-violent felony. It would be illegal for him to buy a new firearm or to buy ammunition.
But he can keep what he has pending the outcome of his case.
What if he uses up all his ammo? Does that mean he has to go without? You never know when a biker gang is going to have lunch next door.
A god rule of thumb is probably: if convicted of the felony results in the lost of your ability to carry a gun, then you lose the right while out on bail.
The rule of thumb would be to abide by the conditions of your bond. All federal law has to say on the subject is that when indicted for a felony then you can’t buy any guns or ammo.
There isn’t anything in Texas law that says you have to surrender your guns when you’re indicted. A judge can of course impose that condition, and would if you were accused of a violent crime.
Rick Perry did have his CCL revoked automatically. There is a Texas law on that. But he can still carry a concealed weapon anywhere it’s lawful for anyone who doesn’t have a CCL to do so. Such as on his own property. He isn’t accused of a violent crime, and since the judge didn’t impose that condition he can keep what he has unless and until he’s convicted. It’s called the presumption of innocence.
http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Politics/Latest-News-Wires/2014/0827/Why-Rick-Perry-can-t-carry-a-concealed-weapon-in-Texas
He’s Rick Perry. He probably has enough ammo to last until he’s 80. I don’t think the case will take that long to resolve.
I should have mentioned he can’t buy or receive any guns or ammo. So nobody can buy any ammo for him. But as I said, that shouldn’t be a problem for him.
You know Rick Perry is making “an announcement” on June 4th, I would bet that that means the news that the case against him has been dismissed for cause is forth coming before that date.
Rags said…
“3. In this specific case, Mr. Nutball has been stripped of his capacity to use firearms, AND (presumably) assured the Court he will not seek to replace them.”
I love your stuff Rags. Truly. I have learned a ton from your posts.
Buuuuuut this guy Apperson is loony-tunes… Altered states… No grip on reality. He’s apparently willing to shoot somebody with no provocation just for “the fame of it.” His behavior bears this out.
So do you really believe a piece of paper and a “promise” would REALLY stand in the way of him from finding another gun and finishing the job?
I don’t.
Well, in the case of you and I, it don’t mean a damn thing. A judge (or other court officer) in good standing set the bail and the conditions.
I’m not defending it, though I might if I had all the facts. From the vantage (or disadvantage) of this blog thread it isn’t what I’d do.
This dolt gets a $35k bond for felonies he did commit and George Zimmerman gets slapped with a $1m bond and got it revoked because he allegedly skipped, when in all actuality, he notified the court that he had to leave town.
Zimmerman was originally let out on $150,000 bond. For a murder charge. –> http://www.cbsnews.com/news/george-zimmerman-released-from-florida-jail-on-150000-bail-in-trayvon-martin-murder-case/
It was only increased to $1m after the judge found out that (a) he had deliberately not surrendered a second passport he held, which he talked with his wife about on a monitored jailhouse phone, and (b) he had a lot of money he hadn’t told the court about, which was also discovered after he talked with his wife about it on a monitored jailhouse phone.
If he hadn’t tried to play games in re his second passport and the >$130,000 in his gofundme (or whatever) account that he instructed Shellie to siphon into her own bank account to hide it, he wouldn’t have been seen as such a grave flight risk that his bail would have had to have been increased so much.
Accurate, up to the end of your first sentence, then wanders away from the facts. The money being raised was for his defense, not his bail, and GZ was not dumb enough while in prison and surrounded by prisoners to talk about a couple hundred thousand dollars without hiding the fact. The judge was offered full access to the records of the fundraiser and turned it down, and then came back around to gig the Zimmermans on not turning over the information that was not asked for.
I may not say this often, but thank God for defense lawyers.
And the judge was removed by the Appeals Court for it. Just rounding things out.
‘Cause #BlackLivesMatter.
I’m betting Aperson is another registered lunatic Democrat.
From his statement to the cops upon his arrest it was obvious that he wanted to kill GZ. Is this the type of person that should be out on bail? It is not like he was threatened or cornered and had to shoot his way out. He tried to kill a person but missed! Why would that allow him to be out on bail?
GZ neeeds to go into hiding. MA is not going to stay away, IMO.
Don’t know if Apperson is living it, but there is a psych symptom, part of the larger diagnosis, where celebs or peple in positions of power are targeted for stalking, as Apperon has stalked the famous/notorious George Zimmerman. By stalking the famous or powerful you attract gratifying media attention in service to the delusion you are just as famous or powerful as your victim. How many had heard of John Hinckley before he shot Reagan?
I’ve been asked why I stand with Matthew.
1. His self defense claim is valid to me.
2. Seeing this reminds me of the line in the last good Stallone movie Demolition Man. “Send a maniac to catch one.”
Regardless of Matthew’s past,he has a right to defend himself.
It’s telling you don’t see how your one and two contradict each other, and eviscerate your conclusion.
I do see why you identify with Mr. Nutball, and why squirrels are so threatening to you both. The only question I have is; cashew or filbert?
Yeah, sure. Whatever.
Demolition Man, even though many took it simply for an action movie, was actually a very good comedy, and much funnier than your ridiculous comments.
You think you’re being clever, but you’re not. Maybe the children at DKos or Reddit might have a giggle, but the adults know you’re a fool.
Your meds won’t work if you don’t take them.
Self defense requires that a person makes an imminent and credible threat to attack you or actually attacks you. Trigger warning are not grounds for shooting at someone.
Zimmerman got off at his trial because the first criminal act was when Martin violently attacked him, broke his nose and proceeded to smash his head into the pavement. That was way beyond Apperson reacting to what he imagined Zimmerman was doing, sight unseen, behind his tinted windows.
you are a racist/bigoted POS who should not be allowed to access this site.
He’s just a lame-ass troll. It’s the people who insist on replying to him and giving him oxygen who are really the problem.
Word.
–Andrew, @LawSelfDefense
Thank you.
at what point do site owners/mods take responsibility?
we’ve been putting up with its crap for well over a year.
its easy to blame commentators for getting fed up but not so easy to blame site admins isn’t it?
well I do blame them.
at some point they need to man up and fix the issue.
I seldom respond to the idiot so don’t try that damned game with me.
mods/admins can either ignore the issue or fix it, I’ll be back once I see its fixed and the fed up commentators are not the ones shouldering the blame.
see ya.
I helped as an assistant admin for a while. Effective blocking is not as simple as it seems.
Fortunately, few people know how to get around being blocked.
You and Matt probably bonded during electro-shock therapy.
Trust me, nobody here GAS why you stand with Matt.
Hang on, I’d like to probe this locution “is valid to me”. Claims are either valid or not; their validity is not relative to any person. In this case, his claim is objectively invalid. To me, to you, to everyone.
This guy is obviously not completely there mentally. His behaviour in front of all the cameras is not normal.
I agree 100%. There’s something absolutely NQR with that man. His inappropriate affect during the presser spoke volumes. I’m very much on the side of erring on the side of civil liberties in most cases, but I wonder sometimes if we haven’t gone too far in how hard we’ve made it to involuntarily commit someone who obviously isn’t well, if only for a serious evaluation and possible medication management program.
Schizoaffective Disorder, Bipolar Type:
– Hallucinations, which are seeing or hearing things that aren’t there.
– Delusions, which are false, fixed beliefs that are held regardless of
contradictory evidence.
– Disorganized thinking. A person may switch very quickly from one topic
to another or provide answers that are completely unrelated.
– Manic behavior. If a person has been diagnosed with schizoaffective
disorder: bipolar type they will experience feelings of euphoria,
racing thoughts, increased risky behavior and other symptoms of mania.
https://www.nami.org/Learn-More/Mental-Health-Conditions/Schizoaffective-Disorder
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schizoaffective_disorder
I am a psychologist, but I don’t play one on TV.
I am a former Navy Corpsman who has unfortunately had experience with one or two young men who developed mental problems in early adulthood. I would not be wanting this guy to be going around armed on my base. Or, to be on my base at all.
Yep, this particular mental illness is also more likely to have what used to be cause “criminal thinking errors”.
As someone who spent 10 years working with “Criminally Insane Drug Abusers” I can tell you that you are right on track there. It is sad that a number of the people I worked with could have avoided being involved with the criminal justice system if they had just gotten help earlier. I realize hind sight is 20/20, but many of them had overt and obvious signs of problems long before they committed any crime.
The lack of mental healthcare in america is just staggering. Most insurance doesn’t pay for it so it is expensive, the drugs are horridly expensive.
But not even that is the number one reason for people not seeking help. The number one reason is the absolutely malignant stigma attached to a Mental Health diagnosis.
Our mental health system is about the equivalent of trying to piss out a forest fire. That’s why after 10 years of working my ass off to help improve things, help fight for funding, helping develop new programs, and trying to make a difference, I was so burnt out that I still get physically ill if I think about going back into that area of medicine.
The police report also notes Apperson as saying “I hope I got him [Zimmerman] this time.”
What will be interesting is, did the police also get that recorded on a body camera?
UPDATED:
Hey folks, just FYI, post has been updated with information just released from police report that Apperson had recently been admitted to a mental hospital, other details on his mental health (or lack thereof).
Video news report included, all at the top of the post.
–Andrew, @LawSelfDefense
Yep, he is a couple of post short of a fence.
So, not guilty by reason of insanity? Just asking if anyone thinks that’s possible.
He appears to me to have at least a personality disorder and possibly a mood disorder, and on the very limited info, I’d guess schizoaffective disorder, bipolar style or straight forward bipolar disorder. However, one may have either and very well know right from wrong.
Make me wonder if his history of drug convictions were the product of attempted self medication.
What is “history of drug convictions”? I missed that.
Hummm, it may have just been arrests for drug possession. I really am to tired right now to go back and look.
Apperson’s statements have established a very high hurdle for insanity, which is enormous in the first place: Did he know right from wrong at the time he acted? The prosecution doesn’t have to prove he was sane at the time; the defense has to prove he was insane.
Henry nailed it. From Hot Air:
“The report made public Tuesday also says 36-year-old Matthew Apperson had recently been admitted to a mental institution and had shown signs of paranoia, anxiety and bipolar disorder.
Apperson’s attorney didn’t immediately respond to an email seeking comment.”
Wow, M1. You really picked a winner.
Sounds to me like Apperson may have imagined Zimmerman’s threats to kill him late last year, too, that’s why Zimmerman wasn’t charged for such violent actions.. because they never happened. That’s my guess at this point.
I don’t understand. This guy attempted to murder someone, has a history of mental illness, and exhibited signs of current mental health issues. So why wasn’t he held for psychiatric evaluation?