Image 01 Image 03

Zimmerman bail set at $1 million

Zimmerman bail set at $1 million

But since he probably only has to put up 10% in cash, he should be walking free soon. (Order here and at bottom of post)

Via Orlando Sentinel:

A Sanford judge today ordered George Zimmerman, the Neighborhood Watch volunteer who shot and killed Trayvon Martin, an unarmed 17-year-old, released on $1 million bail.

It was not immediately clear how long it would take the 28-year-old Zimmerman to arrange his release.

Defense attorney Mark O’Mara said Friday that Zimmerman’s legal defense fund had a balance of $211,000, more than enough to cover the 10-percent non-refundable portion charged by most bonding companies.

More details to follow.

Updates:  The evidence submitted by Zimmerman at the second bond hearing is posted at a special website set up by his attorney, Mark O’Mara.

Some key passages from the Order (full embed at bottom of post):

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 experienced a moment of weakness and who may also have acted out of a sense of”betrayal” by the system. Based upon all ofthe evidence presented, this Court finds the opposite. The Defendant has tried to manipulate the system when he has been presented the opportunity to do so….

Contrary to the image presented by the Defendant not by evidence but only by argument of counsel, it appears to this Court that the Defendant ill manipulating the system to his own benefit. The evidence is clear that the Defendant and his wife acted in concert, but primarily at the Defendant’s direction, to conc’eal their cash holdings…. The Defendant also neglected to disclose that he had n valid second pa5sport in his safe deposit box. Notably, together with the passport, the money only had to be hiddell for a· short time for him to leave the country if the Defendant made a quick decision to flee [fn] It is entirely reasonable for this 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….

His lack of candor was not limited to representations made to the Court. The Defendant is represented by Mark O’Mara, a very well-respected criminal defense attorney in the Central Florida area. At the initial bond hearing. Mr. O’Mara indicated that he would be representing the Defendant without taking a fee. Attorney O’Mara also indicated that he would be filing an affidavit of indigency for costs. The Defenqant did not correct his attorney’s representations to the court on these issues. The failure to correct these representations meant that for a considerable period of time the Defendant misled his attorney as to his ability to pay counsel. No member of the Defendant’s family who had knowledge of the Defendant hiding funds alerted the court.

Here’s the Bail Order:

George Zimmerman Bail Order July 5 2012


Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.


Juba Doobai! | July 5, 2012 at 11:37 am

This is so ridiculous it’s a crying shame. No matter the evidence, the corrupt bastards in FL ignore the presumption of innocence and treat this guy like a mass murderer. Now he’s being penalized for having money or pledged money in a defense fund.

    JackRussellTerrierist in reply to Juba Doobai!. | July 5, 2012 at 2:32 pm

    While the judge complains that the defense has no actual evidence to prove their position, he speculates, without evidence, that GZ would have fled.

    Laughable if not such a serios railroading of this young man.

    I still see nothing definitive as to a finding that the defense fund should be considered an asset available for bail when it was established for GZ’s defense expenses. I see nothing where the judge addresses the fact that the court and the prosecution had the opportunity to pursue, at the first hearing, the defense account information from the person who did have the information. But they chose not to. Seems to me that was a setup for rescinding bail.

    The prosecution’s position was replete with innuendo about hiding money, but nothing about fleeing. Yet the judge, on his own, got to that conclusion even though it’s nothing but speculation. But of course he had to in order to raise the bail so high. Like John Roberts, when what you need to base your conclusion on doesn’t exist, this judge also convolutes, theorizes and conjures it out of thin air.

    Xombie in reply to Juba Doobai!. | July 5, 2012 at 2:37 pm

    He’s being penalized for conspiring fraud at a his previous bail hearing.

      The only words that GZ spoke at the previous bond hearing was his apology to the Martin family. The twist that it was his wife who misrepresented the truth doesn’t work if you include her testimony suggesting that her brother-in-law knew the balance in Paypal and could be contacted by telephone. Of course we know, thanks to this blog, that the defense screwed around with the charges that resulted in the revocation of bail.

      At the hearing where GZ’s bond was withdrawn, he was not present to confront his accuser and his attorney was denied time to mount a defense. The judge went so far as to suggest that the prosecution has made a strong case, but learned observers cannot seem to find one.

      O’Mara should have stayed with the lady judge appointed, because this one is backing himself into a corner and an easy appeal if a favorable self-defense hearing isn’t in the works. There simply is too much supporting and circumstantial pieces of evidence that favor George Zimmerman’s self-defense claim.

      GZ lost his first bail deposit, so somehow he has to come up with 100 Grand. According to testimony, all money collected has gone toward living expenses and legal fees so unless more website money is collected, there are not any funds to pay for this bond.

        Xombie in reply to gad-fly. | July 6, 2012 at 3:32 pm

        “The only words that GZ spoke at the previous bond hearing was his apology to the Martin family.”

        I didn’t say he spoke. I said he was involved in the planning of his wife perjuring herself, and involved in lying to the judge about his finances. When you do that, you can’t expect leniency. The adjusted bail matches his actual funds, as opposed to the bail the judge set according to the lie his wife told the court.

      JackRussellTerrierist in reply to Xombie. | July 6, 2012 at 1:40 am

      The setting of bail is specifically excluded from being a penalty.

        How could higher bail not be a punishment considering the Judge ruled the previous bail conditions were sufficient to prevent Zimmerman from running. The Judge ruled without electronic monitoring Zimmerman would have run. It follows that no further restraints were necessary because the ones already in place were sufficient. Thus any additional conditions must be punishment.

        Someone convince me otherwise.

          VetHusbandFather in reply to tef. | July 6, 2012 at 11:31 am

          The judge’s justification is that the money and passport indicate an intent to flee. I personally disagree with his coclusion, and think there are more indications he planned to stay.

      boricuafudd in reply to Xombie. | July 6, 2012 at 4:43 pm

      Not trying to excuse Zimmerman but the lawyer dropped the ball. In a CNN interview that was introducing him as the new lawyer he discussed that were 2 websites that were raising cash for Attorneys fees, etc, he even mentioned the amounts in them, $7000 and $500 yet he failed to take control of these accounts until after the bond hearing. Had he assumed control of the accts at the beginning none of this would have happened

    Is Zimmeran’s attorney part of the problem? It is almost like Rags is representing him.

      Ragspierre in reply to EBL. | July 6, 2012 at 11:49 am

      I’ve made it clear that I don’t represent people who lie to me.

      I’d have fired Zimmerman as a client long ago.

      Ragspierre in reply to EBL. | July 6, 2012 at 11:56 am

      BTW, sundancecracker is the same boob who had people believing “Lean” use causes brain lesions (there is no science supporting that, and his own source said so), and making up pathology from Martin’s autopsy about his brain.

      Gawd, some of you are gullible.

This is further evidence that our institutions are drifting further into lawlessness.

By the time they’re through with Zimmerman he’ll have to be tried on Mars. I don’t see how he can ever get a fair trial now. So I have an idea – we can just do away with the court system and let the media try cases.

So they take half of his defense fund? How is he supposed to pay legal fees? I thought bail was supposed to be tied to a risk of flight, not to strip the defendent of his ability to pay for his defense.

    Xombie in reply to J Motes. | July 5, 2012 at 2:38 pm

    If you actually had read the judgement, you’d know he’s not paying anything in legal fees.

      JackRussellTerrierist in reply to Xombie. | July 5, 2012 at 4:00 pm

      GZ’s defense will have extensive expenses for forensic testing and expert witnesses. There will be travel and consultation expenses, and there’s the ongoing expense of security for the Zimmermans because none of the responsible agencies will do its job with respect to the Black Panthers and other anti-white terrorists and organizations gunning for him.

        Yes, and his attorney FILED FOR COSTS so the state would pay for all that.

        I think GZ is being railroaded on the Martin charge, but all this is of his own making, and only his making. He kept a secret second passport, which he was aware of because he mentioned it to his wife while in jail. That’s the definition of a flight risk.

          JackRussellTerrierist in reply to Estragon. | July 5, 2012 at 11:31 pm

          Telling his wife about the other passport, which is expired, does not in any way mean he intended to flee.

          Here was a young man who trusted the system and the notion of truth prevailing so fully that he (foolishly in my opinion) waived his right to counsel and spoke freely with the police numerous times, took a polygraph which he passed, and cooperated fully with them. He wound up in jail because of politics and racist pressure. I think he was in emotional and/or psychological shock and disillusionment. Telling his wife about the passport, assuming that’s true, was probably no more than something said by a desperate, disillusioned young man as a means of feeling in control when clearly he was not in that position because there is no accompanying statements or actions to set the wheels in motion to flee. We don’t even know what the context of the statement was. For all I know, he was talking about a form of identification if she (his wife) needed it for something. There are no statements or actions that indicate an intention to flee or surely the prosecution would have raised it and this judge would have ballyhooed it in his decision.

          Why would they pay off their bills if they intended to flee?

          Sorry, Estragon, it doesn’t wash. I always appreciate your posts and normally agree with you, but you’re off-base in your conclusion that GZ intended to flee.

Jusuchin (Military Otaku) | July 5, 2012 at 11:51 am

They can’t pin him because it was a legit self defense, they’ll seek to ruin him.

    I’ve found that this is largely the method of corrupt prosecutors who either go on a Crusade against a particular person (because the prosecutor gets it in his or her head that the person MUST be guilty and MUST be punished) or because the Prosecutor has some hidden agenda.

    Since they know that they are unlikely to win in Court given the evidence, they go for trying to force you into financial ruin and then offer you a “deal” where you can plead out.

      Xombie in reply to Chuck Skinner. | July 5, 2012 at 2:39 pm

      According to the judgement, the $1mil was set because he CAN afford it.

        JackRussellTerrierist in reply to Xombie. | July 5, 2012 at 3:56 pm

        No, that amount is set because he would have fled but for the ankle bracelet, according to the judge’s “finding.”

        That he didn’t flee, that he turned himself in, that there are no conversations or written communications about fleeing, no record of travel inquiries, that he was so certain his faith in the system was well-placed and that truth would prevail he waived his rights and didn’t even hire an attorney for a long time and THEN HIRED AN ATTORNEY, not the act of a man who intends to flee, puts a complete lie to this judge’s words.

          This is simply false. He spoke to his wife about his duplicate passport, proving he knew it was there and did not disclose it.

          Add that to the FACT he failed to disclose the amounts collected in his defense fund, and had his wife remove them in an obvious attempt to hide them, amounts to prima facie evidence of a flight risk.

          JackRussellTerrierist in reply to JackRussellTerrierist. | July 5, 2012 at 11:38 pm

          The court didn’t ask GZ about the balance in the fund, probably because he’d been in jail and had no direct access to it. Any answer he would have given, if asked, would have been hearsay.

          The court asked GZ’s wife about it, and she stated she didn’t know but that another relative had that information and was available by phone. The court dropped the matter, and the court also, at some point, remarked that it was unclear how the fund would apply to the issue.

          The court could have had the info and elected not to pursue it. To come back later, based on statements selectively chosen by a bias party, the prosecution, and revoke bail on that basis is penalizing GZ for the court’s own failures. It is not up to the defense to do the prosecution’s nor the court’s job for them.

        Oldflyer in reply to Xombie. | July 5, 2012 at 11:54 pm

        Xombie is full of crap, but I respect his right to expound on open forums and demonstrate the fact.

        Zimmerman has been screwed over by the system at every step of the way. I have listened to the Jessie Jacksons and Al Sharptons proclaim for 40 years that the system is corrupt. Well, they accomplished their purpose, and the pendulum has swung to the opposite extreme. When the Racial Provocateurs start to howl, justice for white folks goes down the toilet. No Judge, Prosecutor, or Jury will risk racial turmoil even if they are not spring loaded to get the white man. It is for the good of society, you know? Some need to sacrifice. Zimmerman is a sacrifice.

memomachine | July 5, 2012 at 11:53 am

I must say that I don’t understand the logic of this. If Zimmerman was going to flee the jurisdiction he would have already done so. That he has not and has turned himself in more than once already should easily show that he is not a substantial flight risk.

Frankly making it so that the Zimmermans lose 1/2 of their available funds induces me to believe that the judge is being lazy and is not someone who has a firm grasp of the details of this case.

My opinion of the legal system, judges and lawyers drops even further.

    jimzinsocal in reply to memomachine. | July 5, 2012 at 12:24 pm

    and read this from the article. How the Judge gets away with this wording is amazing

    Lester also was troubled, he wrote, that Zimmerman and his wife hid the money and that George Zimmerman had a second, undisclosed passport.

    “Notably, together with the passport, the money only had to be hidden for a short time for him to leave the country if the defendant made a quick decision to flee. It is entirely reasonable for this 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.”

    Prosecutor Bernie de la Rionda had asked Lester to keep Zimmerman jailed. He killed an innocent teenager, de la Rionda argued, then made matters worse by working with his wife to transfer money between accounts and hide it.

      jimzinsocal in reply to jimzinsocal. | July 5, 2012 at 12:32 pm

      note “would” not could. He basically is saying that if the ankle bracelet hadnt been there..Zimm would have fled.

      I find it interesting the judge uses the phrase “other peoples’ money.” If it is fact “other peoples’ money” then it is not Zimmerman’s. Why would it even be an issue during the bail hearing?

      I’d wager the judge knows the money belongs to Zimmerman after he received it as a gift. The question becomes why use the phrase “other peoples’ money”? Does the judge want to make it appear that Zimmerman would be stealing from other people? I don’t know. What do you think?

    Xombie in reply to memomachine. | July 5, 2012 at 2:40 pm

    It’s bail, not a fine. They don’t “lose” the funds. They’re returned after trial.

      Robert Starr in reply to Xombie. | July 5, 2012 at 3:42 pm

      Reports do not suggest that bail is satisfied by posting cash with the court in an amount that is a percentage of the bail. Instead, bail in this case comes from a bail bond company and non refundable fees are traditionally 10% of the bond amount.

        JackRussellTerrierist in reply to Robert Starr. | July 6, 2012 at 1:28 am

        Here’s something everyone should consider when thinking about this outrageous bail amount the “judge” set and his statement that GZ would have fled.

        In Florida, bond fees are set at 10% by statute. That means the most the bondsman can charge in this case is $100,000. But, with no evidence whatsoever, the judge has called him a flight risk. He clearly went way out of his way to make this finding since there isn’t a scintilla of evidence presented to support it. He even went so far as to say GZ “would” have fled “with other people’s money” but for the ankle bracelet. It is pretty clear that this judge has prejudiced the defendant’s ability to even get a bond. What bondsman is going to risk $900k on somebody the court has “found” to be a flight risk?

        If GZ is murdered in jail, the blood will be on the hands of this SOB judge and GZ’s weak-kneed attorney. The more I think about it, the more it appears this judge has conspired, if not in word then in deed, with the anti-white racists and the prosecution in trying to get GZ killed before there ever is a trial.

        GZ should never have been arrested, but since that miscarriage of justice this has spiralled into an absolute Kafkaesque nightmare for GZ and the notion of “justice for all”.

        It’s becoming hideous.

      Sounds like somebody has never had to post bail using a bail bondsman….

      profshadow in reply to Xombie. | July 5, 2012 at 6:37 pm

      Um, no.
      They give 10% of the bail to the bail bondsman who covers 100% of the bail.

      And they don’t get that 10% back. That’s the fee the bondsman takes for covering the 90%.

      JackRussellTerrierist in reply to Xombie. | July 5, 2012 at 8:33 pm

      Where did you learn about bail and bonds? 10% of $1M is $100k. That is a non-refundable fee paid to a bondsman to post the $1M bail (actually a bond) with the court. This judge took 1/2 of GZ’s resources collected and available for his defense.

      Oldflyer in reply to Xombie. | July 5, 2012 at 11:58 pm

      Xombie you just proved that you don’t know what the hell you are talking about. Unless Zimmerman personally posts the entire $1mil with the court, he loses.

      Not many people can pony up a $mil in cash. They go to a Bondsman and put up a 10% non-refundable deposit. As soon as Zimmerman posts bail, he loses $100k out of his defense fund.

      Why don’t you educate yourself or shut the hell up?

      boricuafudd in reply to Xombie. | July 6, 2012 at 2:08 am

      Not quite, the bondsman will keep the 10% premium, also he has to come up with the collateral for the bond 1 million dollars worth. This is almost as good as no bail.

    JackRussellTerrierist in reply to memomachine. | July 5, 2012 at 4:02 pm

    I thik you give the judge more credit than he is worthy of.

Sebastian Senakiewicz, 24, entered his plea before Cook County Criminal Courts Judge Nicholas Ford. He is being held on a $750,000 bond on charges of falsely making a terrorist threat.

Prosecutors allege that Senakiewicz, a purported member of the anarchist group “Black Bloc,” boasted he had a carload of explosives and that he was determined to use them during the May summit. He also allegedly told associates he had two homemade explosives in his home, hidden in a hollowed-out Harry Potter book.

But a police search turned up no bombs, authorities said.

All three men will plead not guilty at an arraignment set for May 22, Gelsomino said. Bond was set at $1.5 million, she said. She said the men hadn’t yet been released.

The three were part of a group of nine people arrested May 16, according to a lawyers’ guild press statement. Gelsomino said two other people, who may have been part of a sting operation, were also arrested and released.

Alvarez and McCarthy said the case is still being examined with assistance from the Federal Bureau of Investigation and the U.S. Secret Service.

The men had or made improvised explosive-incendiary devices and weapons including a mortar gun, swords, a hunting bow, throwing stars and knives with brass-knuckle handles, Alvarez and McCarthy said.


    Neo in reply to Ragspierre. | July 5, 2012 at 1:50 pm

    “weapons including a mortar gun, swords, a hunting bow, throwing stars and knives with brass-knuckle handles”

    The guy across the hall from me in college had most of this same stuff. In fact, I had to open my door slowly because sometimes he would throw those “throwing stars” at my door.

    InRussetShadows in reply to Ragspierre. | July 5, 2012 at 7:02 pm

    Of course, acting in justified self defense is slightly different than conspiracy to achieve mass murder. If anything, it shows that black thug life is valued much higher than any other kind of life. Wonder why that is? Could it be…political?

    Funny that little nuances like that do seem to escape you.

      Ragspierre in reply to InRussetShadows. | July 5, 2012 at 7:09 pm

      Funny it escaped you that NOBODY is guilty of any FLUCKING thing yet under the law.

      Like the rest here, you suspend rational thinking because you are so embroiled in the racial emotions of this case.

      Have you inquired narrowly into the charges against the people I cited to? Hell no! Why? We all know the answer.

Will it cover his defense? This hearing was all about the prosecution’s attempt to deprive the guy of counsel.

    Ragspierre in reply to Valerie. | July 5, 2012 at 12:26 pm

    No. This hearing was set by the defense.

    Everybody got their innings, and the judge gave Zimmerman bond, which he did not have to do in the circumstances.

    The defense CAN urge a rehearing at another date, as well.

      JackRussellTerrierist in reply to Ragspierre. | July 5, 2012 at 4:05 pm

      A non sequitur if ever I read one.

      Getting bail revoked, after a bad faith act of manipulation by the prosecution, necessitated the new bail hearing.

        Can you link to any Florida attorney who supports your crazy rantings? I’ll be delighted to read them. You really should read O’Mara’s pleadings. There was bad faith on Zimmerman’s side, but nowhere else.

      boricuafudd in reply to Ragspierre. | July 6, 2012 at 2:11 am

      Wrong, he had by law give Zimmerman bail, is in the order.

VetHusbandFather | July 5, 2012 at 1:05 pm

Can the defense do anything to get a new judge? It seems to me that the impartiality of the judge can be called into question when he is telling the Zimmermans what they would have done under different circumstances. This is probably the most troubling thing I’ve read about the case, and makes me seriously doubt that he’ll get a fair trial.

    VetHusbandFather in reply to VetHusbandFather. | July 5, 2012 at 1:12 pm

    I meant for this to be a reply to jimzinsocal’s comments above

    Ragspierre in reply to VetHusbandFather. | July 5, 2012 at 1:16 pm

    The defense can try. The chances are very small.

    As I noted when this story broke, Zimmerman pissed in his own Wheaties. You simply do not lie to a court.

    Zimmerman’s greatest asset was his credibility, and his ability to take the witness stand in his own defense.

    The first is gone, and the second in grave doubt. I wonder how O’Mara could more skillfully try to rehabilitate his client.

    And, as I said earlier, he now faces a pissed-off judge, and has cut the legs out from under his attorney.

    And all that was unnecessary and wrong.

      Voluble in reply to Ragspierre. | July 5, 2012 at 4:32 pm

      I didn’t read everything but I was unaware it was ever even alleged that Zimmerman lied in court. I remember the exchange about the money and his wife said she did not know how much they had and gave the judge and prosecution the name of who did know.

      How does that equate to Zimmerman lying to the court?

      At any rate, I think we can all agree he should have fled the country because there is no justice to be had for the white man… or the white/hispanic man… not in Obama’s America.

        Ragspierre in reply to Voluble. | July 5, 2012 at 4:50 pm

        I want you to think about if you really want to play the victim.

          ThomasD in reply to Ragspierre. | July 5, 2012 at 5:30 pm

          This Rags doing the asked, but never answered.

          For the Umpteenth time on this particular issue.

          He’s apparently impervious to facts as regards this case.

          Estragon is a whole ‘nother level of dishonesty. Gotta be a paid Soros bot from Obsidian Wings, or Lawyers Guns and Money.

          Ragspierre in reply to Ragspierre. | July 5, 2012 at 5:48 pm

          That is a really cowardly, crappy post.

          Nobody appointed you the ThoughtPoliceman, to call other people who you disagree with dishonest.


          InRussetShadows in reply to Ragspierre. | July 5, 2012 at 6:45 pm

          But you are dishonest. You purposefully lie over and over again about Zimmerman — calling a phone call to determine the amount of money a “lie”, when it was not. It wasn’t even an evasion or a refusal to answer the question. It’s what anyone would do when they didn’t know the exact amount (and who could, given the situation)?

          But facts and reason don’t seem to trouble you much, so do carry on.

          JackRussellTerrierist in reply to Ragspierre. | July 5, 2012 at 11:42 pm

          Wha grossly arrogant and asinine thing to say.

          This is Rags out of ammo. This is when he gets personal.

      iconotastic in reply to Ragspierre. | July 5, 2012 at 5:24 pm

      Have you read through the pertinent (court) docs? Is there any chance that Zimmerman is being railroaded here? Or did he really piss in his own Wheaties?

        Ragspierre in reply to iconotastic. | July 5, 2012 at 6:20 pm
          iconotastic in reply to Ragspierre. | July 5, 2012 at 10:19 pm

          Holy cr@p!

          I think O’meara is wondering if there is some sort of SYG or justifiable assault on his client. A bigger mea culpa I haven’t often seen.

          I still think that the odds are better that Z is innocent of the charges. But he was very stupid here. Very stupid.

          VetHusbandFather in reply to Ragspierre. | July 6, 2012 at 12:45 am

          Maybe a good lawyer recognizes when the Judge has already made up his mind about something, and instead of arguing the point to the grave he concedes the battle to win the war. Any apology can gain a lot of good will with the most pigheaded of people.

          VetHusbandFather in reply to Ragspierre. | July 6, 2012 at 2:26 am

          Honestly, I can’t really think of any better reason that his lawyers would have made that statement (number 10), other than trying to win back some favor with the Judge. They say he failed to advise the court of the funds donated, but it is very clear that (1) he was not asked directly, and (2) Mrs. Zimmerman did advise them of the funds donated, she just did not indicate the amount. So I put it to you, why would his lawyers make that apology when the record contradicts it? Is it not reasonable to assume that an admission of guilt would make the judge more lenient at the bond appeal?

      Casey in reply to Ragspierre. | July 5, 2012 at 11:34 pm

      Agreed. It’s been well-documented by now that Zimmerman used a code with his wife over the phone to disguise their conversations over what to do with the contributed funds. Said funds were transferred in a way to hide them from the courts.

      This issue has nothing to do with Zimmerman’s shooting of Martin, but it was a very stupid act on his part. As Ragspierre said, he pissed in his own Wheaties.

      What I find interesting in this thread is the shift from the earlier “well, he hid the money because he feared for his life/feared he was going to be railroaded” to “he didn’t hide anything, you HATER.” Um, yeah.

        Ragspierre in reply to Casey. | July 6, 2012 at 9:08 am

        These posts are like reading things Collectivists write. Quite a few of these folks have a real talent for delusion. Some few of them are simply racists, as you’ll see a few “likes” connected with JackedRacist’s open declarations of her bigotry. I shouldn’t be disappointed, I guess, but I still am.

    Maybe if they wanted to be on the judge’s good side, they shouldn’t have conspired to defraud the court at their first bail hearing.

      JackRussellTerrierist in reply to Xombie. | July 5, 2012 at 4:09 pm

      The court never ruled that the defense account was subject to consideration of assets in the first place. The court itself expressed doubt/lack of clarity about that. The court also failed to explore the subject of the balance in the account when that opportunity was offered and suggested. The court then held those failures against the dfendant.

      If there was any consiracy, it was between the court and the prosecutor.

        InRussetShadows in reply to JackRussellTerrierist. | July 5, 2012 at 6:47 pm

        Yup. When they have the information right before them and all they needed to do was tell her to call, and they refuse to do it, something stinks.

        That the judge then found that rape of logic to be logical does suggest some sort of collaboration, especially when the outcome must be achieved at all costs: crucify Zimmerman to please the black racists.

jimzinsocal | July 5, 2012 at 1:27 pm

Just read thru the linked bail order to be sure of what the judge said..the “would or could” usage.
What a read it is and if you can read it all. On the bottom of page 6 the Judge asserts in no uncertain terms his belief that indeed Zimmerman was preparing to flee.

And BTW..the lawyer is working for no fee.

    I’m not sure that having an attorney working for no fee means there will be no legal fees for the defendant. Who pays if independent tests have to be performed or if investigators have to be hired by the defense? I’m not sure that working for no fee means the attorney will be picking up the tab for all defense-related costs… There was also some discussion a while back about whether a defense fund could be used to pay bail costs, but I don’t remember what was finally decided about that issue, if anything.

    JackRussellTerrierist in reply to jimzinsocal. | July 5, 2012 at 3:04 pm

    This ain’t the judge’s first rodeo. He knows that, whether O’Mara is getting paid or not, there are going to be loads of expenses associated with testing forensics and expert witness costs. The Zimmermans also have incurred large expenses for re-location and for providing their own security since neither the Sanford PD nor other responsible agencies, such as the prosecutor, state AG Pam Bondi, and US AG Holder will do anything about the New Black Plague and their bounties and threats. Leaving them with only about $100k to cover all this is draconian, even though the judge didn’t actually even set forth that this fund should legally be considered GZ’s personal property. The judge even referred to it as “other people’s money”, lol! What a colossal manipulator.

jimzinsocal | July 5, 2012 at 1:34 pm

If I understood correctly, the rational for the 1 Million Bond seems to be that in light of the def ability to post bond the amount is restored to what it would have been had the def not brought up inability. Also the judge makes some points about family ties to the community etc that were initially considered but dont apply now. He in a backhanded way diminishes of family ties because he seems to assume they were in on some coverup.

Good luck with a fair trial

    Ragspierre in reply to jimzinsocal. | July 5, 2012 at 1:49 pm

    Some of the lawyers who do trial work here may disagree, but…

    this judge seems to be very fair and competent.

    He placed his findings and the support for them in the record, which a lot of judges are loath to do (it gives you something definitive to take up on appeal). Maybe that is required by Florida criminal procedure. Dunno.

    His findings are not unreasonable on this record. Maybe you would make other findings, but that isn’t the issue. On appeal, the bar is set rather high, and considerable deference is afforded the trial judge. Most of us would not like appellate courts second-guessing the judge who actually heard the evidence and saw the people.

    And, on this record, I’d give Zimmerman a 0% chance of displacing the judge’s findings before an appellate court.

2nd Ammendment Mother | July 5, 2012 at 1:47 pm

How many defendants have had the New Black Panthers, Spike Lee, Jessie Jackson and Al Sharpton announcing a “wanted dead or alive” bounty on them and attempting to post the addresses and phone numbers of yourself and your family with the complicity of the DoJ and the President of the United States and major media outlets manufacturing evidence of your guilt?

I wonder how many of us would have been thinking and acting rationally or reasonably? Be honest – how many of us would have at least considered whether we should “get out of dodge” for our own safety?

As to Eric Holder’s bail…

Professor Jacobson, would appreciate some answers from you:

is it the position of the court to set bail to ensure the accused appears in court or it is the position of the court to set bail to bankrupt the defendant?

is it normal for a judge to assume that what didn’t happen (GZ fleeing the country) would have happened except for the actions of the court (the ankle bracelet) based on no sound evidence lending the impression that the court has the ability to see into the future if events would have been different?

is it normal for a judge to hold the second, and now expired, passport not being turned over to the court when the defense admitted it was their mistake, not the mistake of the defendant who turned it over to council?

is it normal for a judge to criticize a defendent for not interrupting a court procedure to disput the testimony of his own wife?

    boricuafudd in reply to retire05. | July 6, 2012 at 2:30 am

    Could this be just a case of the Judge trying not to appear like he is partial to Zimmerman due to his wife who prosecuted and worked out the deal with Zimmerman back in 2005? This involved the case with the ATF agent in the bar.

Midwest Rhino | July 5, 2012 at 2:00 pm

The judge was told the first time there was that fund, and was told who to contact to find what was in the fund, but he did not pursue that. That seems odd, or negligent.

The Zimmerman’s were misleading it would seem, in saying they didn’t have a good idea of “about how much” was there, though that was rather vague. They said here is who to call for the amount … the judge declined to make a simple phone call.

Assuming George gets released with $100,000 on his bond, how much does that diminish his ability to flee? They say he would have fled without the bracelet, but he DOES have the bracelet still, plus over $100,000. If they were preparing to flee, would they have used the money to pay off credit cards? Why is he again cast as a villain, by the judge, without evidence?

Zimmerman seems to have been a responsible citizen, tried to protect his neighborhood, shot only after a severe beating, gave up rights by talking to police and even took a lie detector test … then finds himself the victim of a political prosecution. How surprising is it that he started to lose faith in the system, and stumbled to protect those assets while his life was being taken over by racist activists and a complicit government?

“…$130,000 of other people’s money….”

So wait a second, in his order Judge Lester describes the money the Zimmerman’s have as “other people’s money.” If this as the Judge says is “other people’s money” then why would Zimmerman or his wife be expected to report this money in a bond hearing?

Basically with that one phrase this judge makes himself sound like a moron.

    Midwest Rhino in reply to JLS. | July 5, 2012 at 2:36 pm

    How could anyone have doubted that there would be a fairly large sum in this fund, after the national attention and the wave of support for Zimmerman, (though it was smaller and less violent than the Trayvon wave)?

    The judge defines it as other people’s money …. clearly it was given with the intent of defense and support of Zimmerman. But the fund seems to have been an entity in itself. Zimmerman used it to pay his bills, since he had been rendered unable to work.

    How is it the funds were “hidden”, when the amount was available with a simple phone call? O’Meara or the judge (the professionals) in essence indicated to Zimmerman that the amount was not relevant to the proceedings or the affidavit for indigency, since they knew of the fund, but did not make any conditions regarding those separate assets.

    Either could have easily stated that if funds were in excess of $5,000, that would need to be included. Their failure to make the call indicated those funds were separate. Why did they not care then, but care now? I was surprised there wasn’t much more in the fund, but these professionals assumed there was nothing?

    JackRussellTerrierist in reply to JLS. | July 5, 2012 at 3:10 pm

    Yep, I agree.

    My hope is that the fund now raises a million.

    InRussetShadows in reply to JLS. | July 5, 2012 at 6:57 pm

    I know! It was given to Z, therefore it is Z’s money. My geez.

Insufficiently Sensitive | July 5, 2012 at 2:25 pm

Sayeth the Judge: “It is entirely reasonable for this 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.”

Could have. Would have. Punishment before crime, it looks like. Or instead of crime.

If Zimmerman is a flight risk, it can be wholly accounted for by the despicable treatment he’s received from the media, the racist organizations of color, and the civic authorities who seem determined to convict him for something even before a trial.

    JackRussellTerrierist in reply to Insufficiently Sensitive. | July 5, 2012 at 3:32 pm

    That’s right. No jailhouse telephone conversations about fleeing, no written material about fleeing, no records of any queries about planes, trains, etc., nothing, zip, zilch, nada – nothing exists to suggest that GZ had any idea of fleeing the country. Everything about GZ shows a young man who naively respected and believed in the rule of law, truth, justice and the American way. Look at what that faith got him, and look at this judge and prosecutor.

    I’m sickened by what I see. These bastards learned nothing from the Duke lacrosse case, or they just can’t help themselves.

      You’re slipping into your “Free Mumia” crazy mode.

        InRussetShadows in reply to Ragspierre. | July 5, 2012 at 6:55 pm

        Nope. Mumia was a convicted cop killer. Martin was not a cop. Martin was not a sweet, innocent child, but someone taller and heavier than Zimmerman. Mumia wasn’t attacked and had his head pounded into the pavement, that I know of.

        Seriously, if resisting a brutal beating with lethal force is something that is evil, then please tell us all what rules we need to follow when our lives are in danger, and we will all make sure we have rehearsed them well enough to satisfy you.

        I’m sure that all the other street thugs will play nicely and back off once we’ve performed all of our Rag options. That’s just the way the world works, isn’t it?

          Ragspierre in reply to InRussetShadows. | July 5, 2012 at 7:04 pm

          As is often the case, you get lost in the weeds…on purpose. I did not, do not, never will compare the cases. I compare the “crazy” of the two lunatic fringes.

          JackedRacistTerrorist HATES her nation, its people, and our legal system in the same way the Free Mumia people do…and over the same issues.

          She is a racist by her own admissions, and it is her assertion Zimmerman CANNOT get a fair trial in American courts, and he should have sought “political asylum” in another nation.

          Which is whacked.

          Rags is not smart enough to realize Prosecutors lie all the time (and generally never get caught or called on it, Nifong being a very blatant but rare example of it happening). I will give Rags the benefit that he does not lie to defense counsel. But his knee jerk reaction is to blame the defendant and defend the prosecutor. He cannot help himself.

          Ragspierre in reply to InRussetShadows. | July 5, 2012 at 7:22 pm

          That happens to be untrue.

          Pretty much stem to stern.

          I maintain an objective position, which just makes me seem partisan. Guess what that says about you?

          Read what other attorney’s said about this, and get back.

          JackRussellTerrierist in reply to InRussetShadows. | July 5, 2012 at 8:51 pm

          Like the judge in this case, Rags makes giant leaps of illogic and then bounces on his ass across a mine field of lunatic conclusions about people. The only one here who’s called me a racist (actually a “bigot”) is Rags himself.

          He then ends up blasted into the weeds calling people names and making brash statements about their character, while ostensibly reading their minds and clairvoyantly channeling their innermost likes, desires, fears and so on and then goes on to pull the shovel into hole after himself by pontificating his “visions” (hallucinations) as fact.

          The bottom line is that he can’t tolerate anyone disagreeing with him, and throws a tantrum everytime it happens, which is alot. 🙂

          But even after those behaviors, he still tries to pass himself off as a lawyer on this forum. :laugh:

          Ragspierre in reply to InRussetShadows. | July 5, 2012 at 8:59 pm

          Tantrum? Nope.

          Ragspierre | June 30, 2012 at 8:24 pm

          “The fact remains that this man should not be on trial and people like you who think he should because he dared defend himself against a black person bent on killing him are what is wrong with this country.”

          Please…!!! Look are your own writing, you poor old hate-twisted bigot. Do you think nobody reads what you write?

          One of my skills is listening to people, and remembering what they say. For instance…

          “Blacks are not and can never be equal partners in this society except on paper.”

          Insert “Jews” in that sentence, and imagine what Prof. Bill would think of you. Next, try any other ethnic group.

          You are just an old, hate-twisted bigot, and it taints all your thinking.

          Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 5
          JackRussellTerrierist | July 1, 2012 at 5:24 am

          I can’t insert any other ethnic group because it is not true of any other ethnic group.

          Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 4

          See? I do this for a living.

    well yeah..the word “would” rather than “could” means an entirely different thing. Would suggests a propensity to repeat some action. Could would have been more accurate unless the Judge is aware of some track record of Zimm not showing up in court…which he doesnt.
    And based on what we know there is nothing to support what the judge has more or less concluded with the word “would”
    Im still amazed the Judge actually used the word knowing lots of folks would be reading his comments.

      JackRussellTerrierist in reply to jimzinsocal. | July 6, 2012 at 12:47 am

      Now, now, the good judge s just doing his part in advancing the narrative. After all, he has a political class to answer to.

could have also not called the cops before shooting, could have run after it instead of cooperating….
seems to be the prosecutor here likes trying gun cases…

Zimmerman is getting railroaded and it won’t be the cute train at Disney World.

Couple of other issues…

1. nobody should assume that Zimmerman will only pay 10% (unless that is set by Florida law, and I dunno);

2. the judge has provided a MUCH higher incentive for the bondsman to assure that Zimmerman will be at trial.

“If his explanation is really weak … I think Lester could keep him in jail,” said Randy McClean, an Orlando-area defense attorney who is following the case.

“If he really comes across as being genuine and has a reasonable explanation, because I don’t see how it could be a great explanation, then I think Lester will probably pump up the conditions, up his monetary conditions and let him back on bond.”


“Most importantly, though, is the fact that he has now demonstrated that he does not properly respect the law or the integrity of the judicial process,” the judge wrote in an order earlier this month.


Putting the money in a trust was smart because “now you can argue that the client does not have direct access to that money to flee the jurisdiction of the court,” said Blaine McChesney, an Orlando criminal defense attorney and former prosecutor.

McChesney said there is a good chance the judge will deny bond, in part because of the jailhouse recordings about the money transfers.

“It shows a premeditated intent to hide that,” McChesney said.


It may be up to only Zimmerman to re-establish his credibility with the judge, whether he testifies or his lawyer talks for him.

“Credibility is an issue. So O’Mara is going to certainly have to make apologies or Zimmerman will have to make apologies for what happened, and they’re going to have to convince the court that he is a good bond risk,” Karin Moore, a law professor at Florida A&M University College of Law in Orlando.

MIKE SCHNEIDER, Associated Press – Jun 28, 2012


memomachine | July 5, 2012 at 7:00 pm

What I also don’t understand is the logic of the $1 million bail order. So let’s say that Zimmerman & wife were going to flee (just speculation) with $130,000 USD. They have $250,000 or so in the paypal account. The 10% fee of $1 million is $100,000.

So if Zimmerman were still inclined to flee then … right now … he and his wife could flee with $150,000??

And seriously. This judge has a lot more confidence in ankle monitors than I do.

    iconotastic in reply to memomachine. | July 5, 2012 at 11:00 pm

    I wonder if the judge trusts the lawyer to not have lied about the money being held in trust–a pretty good assumption, I suspect. If so, the cash is not available to GZ like a checking account. And what do you bet there are multiple watchers on that account ensuring that such a large transfer doesn’t occur.

    Furthermore, getting >$100K out of the country is a non-trivial effort. Very likely to get caught. GZ certainly demonstrated that he is no rocket scientist with this latest move but his attorney and others are probably letting him know just how tough it would be to get that money and leave the country.

      Ragspierre in reply to iconotastic. | July 6, 2012 at 10:36 am

      One of the reasons the money is NOW in trust is to help with this bond application.

      One of the reasons for the bond revocation was the manipulation of funds by the Zimmermans. In fraud, we refer to “badges of fraud”, because people are crafty enough not to say on tape, “Hey, let’s defraud Jim!”. One badge of fraud is when you have people moving large sums of money around with no apparent legitimate purpose.

      As I hinted elsewhere, IF GZ finds a bondsman, you can be sure that the bondsman will have a keen interest in GZ’s doings, too.

iconotastic | July 5, 2012 at 10:54 pm

Given the hate-fest orchestrated against Zimmerman and his legitimate suspicion regarding getting a fair trial, the fact he seemed to be planning to flee (otherwise why talk about an extra passport) is a very reasonable conjecture.

But by misleading the court by failing to provide sufficient information, Z set himself up for much more pain and agony. Who does GZ think he is? Eric Holder?

Anyway, I still hope that Z gets a fair trial and that, absent some new facts in the media, he is acquitted. But GZ made matters much harder though his bone-headed attempt to hide the donation money.

    Ragspierre in reply to iconotastic. | July 5, 2012 at 10:58 pm


    JackRussellTerrierist in reply to iconotastic. | July 6, 2012 at 12:41 am

    The court did not ask GZ what the balance in the account was. GZ’s wife was asked. She said she didn’t know, but stated who did and indicated that person was presently available by phone.

    There was no evidence presented that GZ intended to flee. No conversations, as there was about the bill-paying and other matters pertaining to the money that were captured by the prosecution, no written matter, no inquiries, nothing. Had there been, the prosecution would have been braying about it from one end of the courthouse to the other.

    $1M bail for the alleged crime is an outrage, especially when one considers GZ’s very limited resources. Even $150k was too high. This judge obviously is pandering to one side, the side he views as more likely to get him re-elected or can do him a big favor some time. He’s obviously aware of which side his political bread is buttered on. This BS about being a flight risk was a huge leap of BS.

    All things considered, I think GZ needs to bring in a heavy hitter. Mousie O’Mara just doesn’t cut the mustard, and his pleading on the bail thingy seemed amateurish and weak to me. He’s firing blanks through a pea-shooter at real, live gunslingers. He seems gutless and weak. And I have to wonder why he’s doing this without charging GZ a fee. Whose side is he really on?

    It’s time for George to get some very professional, very experienced, and very objective advice on where to go from here.

      iconotastic in reply to JackRussellTerrierist. | July 6, 2012 at 1:03 am

      Rags has posted ZImmerman’s attorney’s motion. O’Meara is painfully clear that Z misled the court regarding the finances. I trust those motions more than the fragmentary information we can glean from the papers. I would love it as much as you if GZ had not done something so stupid as to lie by witholding information as well as keep a second passport hidden away, but Z did do that. While I understand the kind of pressure he was under because of the lynch mob baying at his door he still f***ed up in this matter. He is fortunate the judge let him go free at all, since Z was clearly hiding a passport as well.

      I am sure there are better attorney’s than O’Meara and I am no judge of defense attorneys. But you shouldn’t blame O’Meara for GZ’s screw up.

        boricuafudd in reply to iconotastic. | July 6, 2012 at 5:07 pm

        I beg to differ, O’Meara had prior knowledege of the 2 websites that were collecting $$ for Zimmerman’s defense to the extent that he knew the amounts at the time he took the case, $7000 and $500. He failed to secure control of the websites before the accounts exploded to the amounts at the time of the bond hearing. He dropped the ball and his client is paying for it.

Henry Hawkins | July 6, 2012 at 12:34 am

A legal question….

In a case wherein there is no media buzz, no public opinion either way, no external influences, I can understand how any funny business about how much in funds a defendant has or how many passports he has might be considered to be, um, instructive as to his guilt or innocence; flight and evasion do hint at guilt, no? However, in a case with immense media buzz, polarized and heated public opinion, and a great deal of such external influences – up to and including the president of the US commenting, and not in your favor – is it not possible that the very real possibility of a political railroading might make a defendant who is innocent of the crime with which he is charged consider running anyway, and if so, would it be fair to consider it at all instructive or indicative of his guilt or innocence of the charge?

I could easily see myself eyeing the border if I were in Zimmerman’s shoes and if I were innocent. In Zimmerman’s case, if he’s guilty, that’s reason to jump bail, of course, but if he’s innocent, there still exist reasons for him to consider jumping bail. Seems to my layman’s sensibilities (or ignorances, granted) that nothing emitting from the bonding and passport issues ought to be held against him as far as the actual charges go.

    Ragspierre in reply to Henry Hawkins. | July 6, 2012 at 8:59 am

    Your question isn’t legal; it is purely practical.

    First, Zimmerman’s conduct around the first bond setting is entirely independent of his quilt or innocence, and a judge would see it that way if he or she compartmentalizes (and most lawyers do).

    Second, the judge here has no higher motive in a bond arena than to assure the defendant will be at trial. Guilt or innocence are only vague issues to be decided later at trial, after a threshold has been crossed. Here, lots of other factors are also more at play than they would be in a less heated case, including the safety of the defendant. There is a tension between keeping control of the defendant (deny bail) and the defendant’s right to reasonable bail. Here, the state failed to show judge Lester the necessary proof to justify denying bale.

    What Zimmerman did is sink his credibility, and not just with the judge. Despite the apologists here who contort themselves into immoral pretzels, Zimmerman engaged in a series of acts intended to defraud the court. Why is completely irrelevant to anything except a study of human behavior. He did it, which is what really matters WRT this hearing. Remember, the judge looks to how to assure he will be at trial. The judge also seems like most people I know; you try to deceive them at considerable peril. Still, he was fair here, and quite professional.

    Now, when he comes to trial, I see very little chance GZ can testify. On cross, I would destroy his testimony by impeaching him over this deception to the court with his wife (who also has limited her ability to testify). And, yes, that would be fair game.

    You’ll note now that JackedRacist is also attacking O’Mara. This is a very advanced form of Corey Derangement Syndrome, indeed, where all are conspirators or incompetents. And everyone is in the wrong but her Boy George. Some of the people here should make it a point to come back in a few months, and marvel at how twisted they were over this case.

      VetHusbandFather in reply to Ragspierre. | July 6, 2012 at 9:47 am

      Rags, I’m with you that the Zimmerman’s tried to deceive the court. But I’m not sure I’m with you that the judge was “fair here, and quite professional”. I think his statement that GZ would have fled had it not been for electronic monitoring crossed the line of professional. To me it seems like conjecture that was inserted into his decision in order to justify the increased bail, instead of the other way around.

        Ragspierre in reply to VetHusbandFather. | July 6, 2012 at 10:12 am

        I understand. The judge did…and can…engage in conjecture. He’d damned well better, since he is charged with trying to predict the actions of his defendant, and build an effective hedge against escaping the jurisdiction.

        Some of the posters here seem agog that a judge would put two and two together. They are not fools, are humans, and do it every day.

        The language of the order doesn’t say the same thing to me as it does to a lot of you, which is fine. To me it says, “It is not unreasonable for me to believe on this record that, but for the monitor, Zimmerman would have escaped.” And it isn’t unreasonable. A reasonable person, who was responsible for someone being at trial, might very well look at what the Zimmermans did and say, “OH, SPIT…!!! I dodged a bullet there!!!”

        Another reasonable person might disagree.

        The judge is the only person whose opinion matters here, and he…despite being pissed off…acted professionally, IMNHO.

          VetHusbandFather in reply to Ragspierre. | July 6, 2012 at 11:15 am

          Clearly the judge is responsible for ensuring GZ appears in court, and so determining what he could do is important. What he would have done in the opinion of the judge seems rather irrelevant. I know it’s picky but could and would makes a big difference here and in the eyes of the public.

          If the only thing that prevented Zimmerman from fleeing was the monitor how is does it follow that increasing the bail make it less likely that Zimmerman will flee? Consider also he will most likely use other peoples money to post his bond.

          VetHusbandFather in reply to Ragspierre. | July 6, 2012 at 12:20 pm


          Because now there are 2 things preventing him from running. Electronic monitoring and a bondsman that wants $1M back. If he thinks GZ will run it only makes sense to add precautions.

          As for the ‘other peoples’ money’ comment that was definately unnecessary and unprofessional by the judge. After including it in GZs assets this comment was nothing but the judge scolding GZ in a very public annd political way.

      SmokeVanThorn in reply to Ragspierre. | July 6, 2012 at 11:48 am

      Is Zimmerman’s conduct entirely independent of guilt or innocence and the judge will see it that way because he or she will “compartmentalize” it, or has Zimmerman “sunk his credibility, and not just with the judge?”

      Please explain.

        Ragspierre in reply to SmokeVanThorn. | July 6, 2012 at 12:17 pm

        Let’s say that Z was straight up with the court. But let’s say he was caught paying close attention to light planes at a civil aviation strip.

        Bad George. Did he violate the terms of his bond? Let’s say yes.

        Does that make him guilty? No. Would that be mentioned at trial? (I would argue not, as it is irrelevant to anybody’s burden of proof, and is potentially much more prejudicial and inflammatory than probative of anything material.)

        But here, he was before the court, making a positive assertion (indigence), and he was not truthful.

        Does that make him guilty? No. But it damn sure is useful when he testifies, and tells the jury he is being truthful. It is SO useful, I doubt he will be able to testify, but I don’t know. Maybe O’Mara can rehabilitate him. He may HAVE to TRY, since Z really NEEDS to testify in this case, and he needs to have at least one juror believe him. It will be a much steeper hill to climb now.

SmokeVanThorn | July 6, 2012 at 1:30 pm

So – your analysis is that Zimmerman’s conduct/testimony at the first bail hearing is not probative as to guilt, but the judge would allow him to be cross-examined on it in order to impeach him?

SmokeVanThorn | July 6, 2012 at 8:57 pm

Don’t bother answering, Ragspierre. Your comments in the most recent Zimmerman thread confirm – again – that you are a waste of time.