Shooting of Trayvon Martin - Page 55

On April 27 2012 18:02 woody60707 wrote:


FYI, under US law, you are not allowed to profit off a crime. But i'm not sure if this includes donations.

On April 27 2012 23:08 Sonic Death Monkey wrote:


Ahh, I see what you're saying now.

But about the bolded part. Even if the State argues that the self sefense law doesn't apply because Z "initially provokes the use of force against himself" by following M, the defense of Z can still claim that Z "reasonably believes that he is in imminent danger of death or great bodily harm" and thus it applies again. Of course such a claim could be dismissed, but it seems like a tough case to win for the State.

However, the use of deadly force is not justifiable if you find:

2. (Defendant) initially provoked the use of force against [himself] [herself], unless:
a. The force asserted toward the defendant was so great that [he] [she] reasonably believed that [he] [she] was in imminent danger of death or great bodily harm and had exhausted every reasonable means to escape the danger, other than using deadly force on (assailant).
b. In good faith, the defendant withdrew from physical contact with (assailant) and clearly indicated to (assailant) that [he] [she] wanted to withdraw and stop the use of deadly force, but (assailant) continued or resumed the use of force.

A judge is considering whether to raise or revoke the bond for George Zimmerman after his lawyer told the judge a website raised $200,000 for the defense.

Mark O'Mara told the judge Friday that Zimmerman's family hadn't told him about the money before his client was given $150,000 bond.

Florida Circuit Judge Kenneth Lester says he wants to know more about the money before he decides whether to adjust the bond. The judge will make a decision on the bond at a later date.

Zimmerman is accused of second-degree murder for the shooting death of 17-year-old Trayvon Martin, who was unarmed.

Zimmerman claims self-defense. The neighborhood watch volunteer wasn't charged for more than six weeks, leading to nationwide protests.

On April 28 2012 03:16 dAPhREAk wrote:
Judge considers adjusting Zimmerman's bond


http://news.yahoo.com/judge-considers-adjusting-zimmermans-bond-142526472.html

On April 28 2012 03:24 Kaitlin wrote:


I assume this is about the possibility of the funds being available to Z and thus enhancing the 'flight risk' aspect ?

On April 28 2012 03:27 dAPhREAk wrote:

more likely it is because he could afford a higher bond. normally the amount of the bond is tied to your finances. if you are rich, a higher bond; if you are poor, lower. judge may be concerned that zimmerman misreported his finances. thus, you see his attorney (O'Mara) saying he didn't know about it (i.e., "i didn't lie to you judge, my client tricked me.").

Prosecutors in the Trayvon Martin shooting case asked a Florida judge today to increase the bail amount for George Zimmerman after news that the 17-year-old's killer had raised more than $200,000 through a Paypal account on his website.

Circuit Court judge Kenneth Lester Jr said he wanted to scrutinize the account to learn more about who opened the site, who managed it and exactly how much money it contained.

The site called "Therealgeorgezimmerman.com" was closed earlier this week after Zimmerman's attorney Mark O'Mara took control over and deposited the money in trust accounts, he told the court today. Zimmerman faces second-degree murder charges for shooting 17-year-old Martin on February 26.

In a CNN interview Thursday, O'Mara said he was surprised to learn about the money. "He asked me what to do with his PayPal accounts, and I asked him what he was talking about," O'Mara said. "He said those were the accounts that had the money from the website he had. And there was about ... $204,000 that had come in to date."

Judge Lester said he would not make any "snap" decisions today as he deliberates what to do regarding the previously undisclosed account.

Last week, Zimmerman's attorney said his client was "financially indigent," in arguing for a lower bail. And in her testimony, Zimmerman's mother said she was willing to mortgage her home to put up bail. Early this week O'Mara told ABC News the Zimmermans had put up certain assets to secure bond for their son.

O'Mara asked that the names of the donors requested by the judge be revealed only in the judge's chambers to shield the hitherto anonymous Zimmerman donors from "ridicule and danger."

Zimmerman, 28, was a neighborhood watch volunteer when he saw Martin walking through his gated community, followed him, and shot him. Zimmerman was released early Monday on $150,000 bail --.his family put up 10 percent to secure his release. His current location is unknown.

On April 28 2012 06:42 Golem72 wrote:
Ok honestly if anything he made the mistake of prejudjing the 17 year-old but they shouldn't get it all racially charged imo. I also think if anything he should get time for committing the crime because he took a life was that boy robbing houses or committing crimes we may never know but he should still do some time for taking a life. Had it been an actual crime I don't really know what to say it's just a highly situational case.

I know ppl will want to see him pay but I am also with this guy I mean he started protecting or you know keeping any eye out for the neighborhood that devotion in itself must accomidate for something.It also shows what police are not doing or at least what government is not helping as in my case is never around when you need them to be, therefore the community took it into their own hands just to protect themselves as would you right?

On April 28 2012 03:24 Kaitlin wrote:


I assume this is about the possibility of the funds being available to Z and thus enhancing the 'flight risk' aspect ?

Independent Administrator for the George Zimmerman Defense Fund

on 01 May 2012.

An independent administrator has been chosen to oversee the George Zimmerman Defense Fund. The third-party administrator is a former IRS agent, and currently works as a CPA with experience managing Chapter 7 Trustee Funds.

The legal defense fund, as initially envisioned by George Zimmerman, as stated on his now-closed website, was set up to provide for living expenses and to fund costs and legal fees associated with his defense. This will also be the purpose of the new legal defense fund.

The fund's administrator will have sole discretion regarding the dispersal of funds, and guidelines will be put in place to define reasonable living expenses for Mr. Zimmerman and his family and to fund necessary legal expenses. Neither Mr. Zimmerman nor The O’Mara Law Group will have direct access to the funds.

There will be a strict level of confidentiality regarding those who donate to the George Zimmerman Defense Fund as their active donating is regarded as a private event and does not open them to public scrutiny.

While we are recommending a level of transparency regarding the use of these funds, that transparency is most appropriately afforded to the donors, as they are the source of the funds utilized.

The Responsible Use of Social Media in a Legal Defense

on 01 May 2012.

There has been a lot of press today regarding the online presence we have put in place for the defense of George Zimmerman, and we are not surprised to discover that our decision is controversial. Some have called it unethical, and some have called it brilliant; however, we believe much of the controversy is about the medium, not the message.

Using social media in a high-profile lawsuit is new, and relatively unprecedented, but that is only because social media itself is relatively new. We repeat our contention that social media in this day and age cannot be ignored, and it would be, in fact, irresponsible to ignore the robust online conversation.

We find ourselves in a position to set a standard for a professional, responsible, and ethical approach to new media in the legal arena. In our blog post “Why Social Media For George Zimmerman?” we explained seven objectives for our online efforts; we essentially explained what we would be doing. It is also worth taking a moment to explain what we will not be doing.
We Will Not Comment On The Character of Trayvon Martin, His Family, or His Supporters

Whatever the outcome of this case, and however it is framed by either party, what cannot be denied that a young man lost his life, his family is in mourning, and people around the country are showing their support — and they have our respect and sympathy. While certain details regarding Trayvon Martin may become part of trial, they will never be a part of our online discussion, and we will aggressively moderate comments on our page on Facebook, and discourage others from making disparaging comments.
We Will Not Use Our Online Presence As A Vehicle For Dissemination Of, Nor Will We Comment On Any Evidence Regarding this Case

One of our core objectives is to discourage speculation regarding the facts and evidence of the case. We commit to avoid even the appearance of any impropriety regarding information traveling through our website and social media profiles which could, in any way, affect the proper presentation of the case where it is to be tried — in a courtroom. An example of that commitment is our evolving rules regarding the moderation of comments posted. We intend to remain very proactive in limiting such conversations so as to avoid any possible negative impact on the criminal justice system.

Our online presence was created in response to the enormity of interest which has inundated the firm since our first day of involvement. Literally hundreds of emails and phone calls came in within hours of our announcement regarding our representation of Mr. Zimmerman. While they deserve a response, as they represent the public, the workload to do so is overpowering. It became readily apparent that an alternative forum was necessary to handle the high volume of interest we receive.

Social media is the obvious answer.

Having said that, we acknowledge the potential for misuse exists in any such forum. That is why we have established and published strict guidelines to which we will hold ourselves. Judging by the intense scrutiny our online presence is garnering, we expect many others will be watching to see that we adhere to our own guidelines. We believe that social media will inevitably become a standard part of the legal process, but we insist that while the evolution of our society’s ability to interact has enormous potential to benefit us as a whole, it must be moderated in a way which protects both an individual’s right to, and our system’s responsibility to provide a fair trial with an impartial jury.

George Zimmerman’s defense attorney says he will not comment on a Myspace page that portrays his client in a “less-than-favorable” light, because the racially charged social media postings could come up at his murder trial.

But he hinted that if Zimmerman’s postings will be scrutinized in court, Trayvon Martin’s would be too.

The Miami Herald reported that Zimmerman had a Myspace social media account where he wrote insulting remarks about Mexicans. He referred to an ex-girlfriend as a “hoe,” talked about beating a felony rap and complained that every Mexican he ran into pulled a knife on him. One line suggested that friends went to jail rather than snitch on him.

“Workin 96 hours to get a decent pay check, gettin knifes pulled on you by every mexican you run into!” Zimmerman wrote.

Defense attorney Mark O’Mara said Zimmerman’s account had been hacked and abandoned — but acknowledged that the posts cited by The Herald were written by his client.

A crucial element in Zimmerman’s criminal case is whether he racially profiled Trayvon Martin when he followed him Feb. 26, got into a fight with him and then shot him. Zimmerman denies profiling Trayvon and claims he shot him to save his own life.

Trayvon’s family’s attorney, Benjamin Crump, told The Herald the Myspace posting was disturbing because it demonstrates Zimmerman’s “pattern of profiling.”

“It’s one thing to think something like that, but to type it?” Crump said. “You really gotta be racist. You really have to have ill will and malice.”

In a statement posted on his website Wednesday, O’Mara published one of Crump’s Miami Herald quotes, and noted: “We believe that inviting public scrutiny of the contents of this social media account invites scrutiny of the social media accounts of all parties involved. While these social media accounts may be public, we will not comment on them publicly, as they may be part of the evidence produced at trial.”

O’Mara seemed to be suggesting that Trayvon’s social media accounts would be brought up at trial as well.

“I always assume they are going to attack the victim,” Crump said when told of O’Mara’s statement Wednesday. “What part of what I said wasn’t true? You don’t have to be a rocket scientist to see the behavior pattern. Zimmerman is on trial for murder: His credibility is at issue, his mentality is at issue.”

In March, conservative bloggers discovered Trayvon had a Twitter account, where he looked older and wore gold covers on his teeth. He often retweeted crude jokes riddled with foul language and posted offensive lyrics to popular rap songs.

His email was hacked by white supremacists, although most of the material found there was related to plans for college. Several other widely circulated photos showing Trayvon looking like a thug were proven to be fakes. Other sites posted screen grabs of a few comments Trayvon’s friends made on Facebook and Twitter that they interpreted to suggest that the dead teen sold marijuana and was violent.

The social media accounts were considered damaging to Trayvon’s family, because they gave the appearance that his parents had deliberately distributed photos that showed him looking angelic and considerably younger.

Crump wondered whether O’Mara’s unwillingness to discuss Zimmerman’s social media account means he is backing off the digital social network strategy the defense attorney launched last week that included Twitter, a Facebook page and a blog.

O’Mara said he began his foray into social media in part to respond to the avalanche of emails and phone calls that were overwhelming his office. He also said it would be irresponsible to ignore the robust debate taking place online about his client.

Within an hour of posting his statement on Zimmerman’s Myspace account on Facebook, 20 people had replied.

“People don’t want Trayvon’s past looked into, but it’s OK to do it to Zimmerman?” wrote Dave Brown. “Hypocrite.”

On May 02 2012 14:46 MountainDewJunkie wrote:
People are giving this guy money? This is probably the sickest thing I've seen in a while nationally.

On May 02 2012 14:46 MountainDewJunkie wrote:
People are giving this guy money? This is probably the sickest thing I've seen in a while nationally.

On May 02 2012 14:46 MountainDewJunkie wrote:
People are giving this guy money? This is probably the sickest thing I've seen in a while nationally.

On May 02 2012 14:46 MountainDewJunkie wrote:
People are giving this guy money? This is probably the sickest thing I've seen in a while nationally.