TexasCHLforum.com

I tend to beleive they only want him in jail so he can be mysteriously found non alive
if it the case gets thrown out of found not guilty...he is a walking dead man, the retards that stir controversy will be there marching until he is found un alive

if he found guilty, he will still be a dead man walking, the stirrer will insist he get a the death penalty.
either way
two lives at a minimum are gone by the wayside

raising money for your defense shouldn't have anything to do with your bail. when i was in the clink, the judge never asked if i had funds for bail? or my financial status?
he just said pay da man xxxx to go home, later to be found dismissed.
cops cant read in nm.
anyway...
this poor sap is screwed like no other.
lets pray a civil course shall remain.
i ask where is holder investigating the civil rights of ME that were violated....he never replies.
just makes me sick to see all this go around and around down there

powerboatr wrote:I tend to beleive they only want him in jail so he can be mysteriously found non alive
if it the case gets thrown out of found not guilty...he is a walking dead man, the retards that stir controversy will be there marching until he is found un alive

if he found guilty, he will still be a dead man walking, the stirrer will insist he get a the death penalty.
either way
two lives at a minimum are gone by the wayside

"Unalive Man Walking!" just doesn't sound that good. In Florida, the death penalty can be not be imposed for a charge of second degree murder.

WildBill wrote:

jerry_r60 wrote:Evidence was looking in his favor but this stuff may just give more weight to the prosecuter claiming Z's word is no good.

It doesn't matter what the procescutor claims. That "evidence" will never be heard by a jury.

That may be, sounds like reasonable speculation. It seems to me it would have been better had there been full disclosure on the money (if he did in fact know), and there not be records of he and his wife discussin a 2nd passport, even if it could not actually be used. It can look like they were conspiring on something. It may all amount to a hill of beans but these issues seem like they were avoidable.

jerry_r60 wrote:

WildBill wrote:

jerry_r60 wrote:Evidence was looking in his favor but this stuff may just give more weight to the prosecuter claiming Z's word is no good.

It doesn't matter what the procescutor claims. That "evidence" will never be heard by a jury.

That may be, sounds like reasonable speculation. It seems to me it would have been better had there been full disclosure on the money (if he did in fact know), and there not be records of he and his wife discussin a 2nd passport, even if it could not actually be used. It can look like they were conspiring on something. It may all amount to a hill of beans but these issues seem like they were avoidable.

It may get the prosecutor's name in the paper and make good press for the media, but it won't amount to a hill of beans if or when it goes to trial.

If any physical harm befalls him in custody, I pray to God it will return like bread on the water to those who put him there.

RoyGBiv wrote: Interesting.... If I was the judge, I'd be more peeved about the hidden passport...
Seriously... does anyone believe that Zimmerman didn't know he had another passport.?

The way it reads, I found myself assuming that he turned in the original and kept the replacement, but, that is also not clear.

Passport = Busted.
Too much money in his legal fund = Political Bull Poop.

I have (illegally) two driver's licenses. Not only that, I "knew" about it two different times, and only tonight will I finally do something about it.

Here's how stuff like this happens. I lost my driver's license. Looked (what I thought was) everywhere for it. Couldn't find it, so I did the proper thing, I got another one.

Few weeks later, I flew to DC. I picked up my ticket, and put my driver's license in the wrong place in my wallet (I usually put it in the clear license holder, but was in a hurry so I slipped it in with the business cards I collect). When I got to the security gate, I remembered where I put it, and found that's where I put it last time I flew. So there I was, holding (illegally) two diver's licenses. I was embarrassed, and started to throw the old one away. The TSA agent (correctly) told me not to do that, to take it home and shred it. Back it went behind the business cards.

Where I promptly forgot about it again. Last night, I was cleaning out old business cards, and there's that DL. So, tonight it gets cut up and tossed.

I feel like such a scofflaw.

The Mad Moderate wrote:He lied, and he payed the price. He will likely be given another hearing and granted bail, had he been honest in the first plea this would't have happened. Actually had he stayed in his truck like the police dispatch told him too and not followed Trevon he could of avoided this all together.

Except no police dispatcher told him to stay in his truck.
He was already outside of his truck, and when affirming that he was following Martin, he was told "we don't need you to do that".

Nothing about staying in a truck, and not even technically told not to follow, just that they didn't "need" him to do so (of course, we know what they meant).

See how stuff like this gets twisted up?

ScooterSissy wrote:

RoyGBiv wrote: Interesting.... If I was the judge, I'd be more peeved about the hidden passport...
Seriously... does anyone believe that Zimmerman didn't know he had another passport.?

The way it reads, I found myself assuming that he turned in the original and kept the replacement, but, that is also not clear.

Passport = Busted.
Too much money in his legal fund = Political Bull Poop.

I have (illegally) two driver's licenses. Not only that, I "knew" about it two different times, and only tonight will I finally do something about it.

Here's how stuff like this happens. I lost my driver's license. Looked (what I thought was) everywhere for it. Couldn't find it, so I did the proper thing, I got another one.

Few weeks later, I flew to DC. I picked up my ticket, and put my driver's license in the wrong place in my wallet (I usually put it in the clear license holder, but was in a hurry so I slipped it in with the business cards I collect). When I got to the security gate, I remembered where I put it, and found that's where I put it last time I flew. So there I was, holding (illegally) two diver's licenses. I was embarrassed, and started to throw the old one away. The TSA agent (correctly) told me not to do that, to take it home and shred it. Back it went behind the business cards.

Where I promptly forgot about it again. Last night, I was cleaning out old business cards, and there's that DL. So, tonight it gets cut up and tossed.

I feel like such a scofflaw.

Maybe I just have a super-fantastic memory.. but..
If I had a replacement passport issued to me, and was in Z's shoes, you can bet your bippy that I'd tell the judge "Your honor, here is the passport that I have in my possession. I lost my original, I believe it's in my house someplace, but honestly Sir, I cannot find it and this replacement was issued. The original one is no longer valid, but if I do find it, I assure you that I will turn it in to the court immediately."

And BTW.... Did Z turn in the original or the replacement?
If he turned in the original, then "I didn't know I had two" is perjury.

jerry_r60 wrote:

WildBill wrote:

jerry_r60 wrote:Evidence was looking in his favor but this stuff may just give more weight to the prosecuter claiming Z's word is no good.

It doesn't matter what the procescutor claims. That "evidence" will never be heard by a jury.

That may be, sounds like reasonable speculation. It seems to me it would have been better had there been full disclosure on the money (if he did in fact know), and there not be records of he and his wife discussin a 2nd passport, even if it could not actually be used. It can look like they were conspiring on something. It may all amount to a hill of beans but these issues seem like they were avoidable.

I really haven't been keeping up with this case, but I have never heard of having bail determined by the amount of money possessed by the defendant. I could see a disclosure of money to see if he could afford a lawyer, but not for bail purposes.

WildBill wrote:

jerry_r60 wrote:

WildBill wrote:

jerry_r60 wrote:Evidence was looking in his favor but this stuff may just give more weight to the prosecuter claiming Z's word is no good.

It doesn't matter what the procescutor claims. That "evidence" will never be heard by a jury.

That may be, sounds like reasonable speculation. It seems to me it would have been better had there been full disclosure on the money (if he did in fact know), and there not be records of he and his wife discussin a 2nd passport, even if it could not actually be used. It can look like they were conspiring on something. It may all amount to a hill of beans but these issues seem like they were avoidable.

I really haven't been keeping up with this case, but I have never heard of having bail determined by the amount of money possessed by the defendant. I could see a disclosure of money to see if he could afford a lawyer, but not for bail purposes.

It may well be that the bulk of the money was collected during or just after the bail hearing, and he really didn't have access to it at the time. I donated $25 myself, and that was probably a day or two before the bail hearing, and it was in response to his attempt to raise money for his legal defense, not for bail as he had not yet been incarcerated at that time. It can take a day or two sometimes for money to show up in your Paypal account. All that needs to happen is for someone to subpoena his Paypal account records and that will answer the question.

In either case, he was a low flight risk. He may well have actually lost, and then found his other passport. My current passport was procured because my mother lost my previous one sometime between 1971 and 2005. It's conceivable that in going through her things, the old one might turn up. That's two passports. Does that make me any more likely to flee if I were in his shoes? No. And "cryptic conservation" about the second passport might mean nothing more than "holy crap! I found the other....you know....passport...... the one you lost? Remember? What should I do with it?"

It is my fervent prayer that he prevails. It is my equally fervent prayer that his tormentors—particularly the attorneys involved—choke on a bone.

The Annoyed Man wrote:

WildBill wrote:

jerry_r60 wrote:

WildBill wrote:

jerry_r60 wrote:Evidence was looking in his favor but this stuff may just give more weight to the prosecuter claiming Z's word is no good.

It doesn't matter what the procescutor claims. That "evidence" will never be heard by a jury.

That may be, sounds like reasonable speculation. It seems to me it would have been better had there been full disclosure on the money (if he did in fact know), and there not be records of he and his wife discussin a 2nd passport, even if it could not actually be used. It can look like they were conspiring on something. It may all amount to a hill of beans but these issues seem like they were avoidable.

I really haven't been keeping up with this case, but I have never heard of having bail determined by the amount of money possessed by the defendant. I could see a disclosure of money to see if he could afford a lawyer, but not for bail purposes.

It may well be that the bulk of the money was collected during or just after the bail hearing, and he really didn't have access to it at the time. I donated $25 myself, and that was probably a day or two before the bail hearing, and it was in response to his attempt to raise money for his legal defense, not for bail as he had not yet been incarcerated at that time. It can take a day or two sometimes for money to show up in your Paypal account. All that needs to happen is for someone to subpoena his Paypal account records and that will answer the question.

In either case, he was a low flight risk. He may well have actually lost, and then found his other passport. My current passport was procured because my mother lost my previous one sometime between 1971 and 2005. It's conceivable that in going through her things, the old one might turn up. That's two passports. Does that make me any more likely to flee if I were in his shoes? No. And "cryptic conservation" about the second passport might mean nothing more than "holy crap! I found the other....you know....passport...... the one you lost? Remember? What should I do with it?"

It is my fervent prayer that he prevails. It is my equally fervent prayer that his tormentors—particularly the attorneys involved—choke on a bone.

Except for the part about the bone. IMO, it is just posturing. As I stated previously, "Much Ado About Nothing."

The Annoyed Man wrote: It is my fervent prayer that he prevails. It is my equally fervent prayer that his tormentors—particularly the attorneys involved—choke on a bone.

Perhaps you should just "Wish them into the Corn Field..."!

sjfcontrol wrote:

The Annoyed Man wrote: It is my fervent prayer that he prevails. It is my equally fervent prayer that his tormentors—particularly the attorneys involved—choke on a bone.

Perhaps you should just "Wish them into the Corn Field..."!

I was thinking The Onion Field.

tacticool wrote:

sjfcontrol wrote:

The Annoyed Man wrote: It is my fervent prayer that he prevails. It is my equally fervent prayer that his tormentors—particularly the attorneys involved—choke on a bone.

Perhaps you should just "Wish them into the Corn Field..."!

I was thinking The Onion Field.

I was thinking corn chips and onion rings.

I prefer the dry lake bed aournd Al Asad Airbase Iraq, really good place to loose things