What is bial? This is a seriuos question, becuause the dishoenst media is NOT asknig it."Bail" is a guarantee that a person will soiw up for a tril. It is NOT a "punishment". Yes, the "seriusness" of the charge affect bail,, but that i theoretically because th emroe serius the charge the more likely hat a person will not show up for tril. The people trying to LYNCNCH George Zimmerman, racists that they are, should remember that a person is still considred innocent until proben 'tuilty" in this country.
This is significant in the George Zimmerman case, bececause the people who want to LYNCH George Zimmerman DO regard bail as a PNNISHMENT--although they regard the bet "punishment: as enver letting George Zimmerman see the outside of a jail cell. No, that is not the purpose of bail eiher: to keep a person in jail, even though the person shows that he is going to show up for tril.
Here, the judge set abil at $250,000: more than sufficient, you would tink, in a cae which looks to be mainly a MANSLAUGHTER case. Yet, the judge, the media, and the people trying to lynch George Zimmerman (some redundancy ther) acted SHOCKED that the Zimmermans "misled" the court about the mojney they were receiving from DONATIONS. The unfari and unbbalanced network even suggested that George Zimmerman was in danger of a "guilty" verdictr MAINLY becalues of his "dishonesty" at the bail hearing. Hogwash. This "dishonety" at a BIL hearing cannot possibly be the basis of a "guilty" verdict. In fact, I don't think it is ADMISSIBLE in teh criminal tril Yet, the prosecutin ,and the lynch mob in the media ((includng at the unfair and unbalanced network, as the "yynch mob" people know who they are), seems to be aiming to try George Zimmerman for MURDER by "trying' him over the BAIL HEARING. To me, that is a total abuse of the justice systtem, and a continuation of thhe POLITICAL persecutin of George Zimmerman No, I will NOT back off of this last statemetn. This is all about POLITICAALl persectuion . Note that does not mean that a case for mansaughter can't be made, , or even that a charge of manslaughter should nto have been brought. But the DECISINS in this case are based on POLITICS and the MEDIA. I am not tal taling here about the partisan politics of the electin, but abut the POLITICS OF RACE. You will remember that the MEDIA lynch mob, and the other members of the lnch mob, were willing to convbict George Zimmerman of murder--or at least charge him with that AND with a Federal crime--ased on a "f------- coons" "racial slur" that NEVER HAPPENED. They were also willing to say taht George Zimmerman ws the one BEATING UP Trayvon Martin, wwhen iit appears that the OBVIUS evidence is taht such a thing DID NOT HAPPEN. The ONLY injuries to Trayvon Martin, besides teh gunshot, were apparently contusins on Martin's knuckles from STRIKING ZIMMERMAN. Waht does it say about the prosecution case aainst Zimmerman that they seem to want to "try" Zimmerman for EVERYTHING BUT the murder of Trayvon Martin.
No. I don't understand what al of the fuss about the bial hearing is . The defendant ALWEAYS "cries" poor". The judge, teh prosecutin, and the media seem tobe suggesting that the prupose of a bail hearing is to TAKE EVERY DIME from the defendant. That is absurd. Sue,re, the more money a defendant has, the more ABILITY a defendant has to "take it on the lam". But does that justify UNDNREASONABLE bail? This is a TRIKC question since a defendant has a RIGHT to REASONBALE BAIL in this country. $250,000 seems a reasonable bail to me, if a little high. Did not the prosectuin, and the media, KNOW that George Zimmerman was likely to gt "contributins". "But," they WHINE, we did not know HOW UUCH Zimmerman was getting. Fine. INCREASE THE BAIL. Remember, again, the PUROSE of bail is to get the defendant to SHOW UP FOR TRIAL. Did George Zimerman, desite al of this money he supposedly now has, show any indicatin of FLIGTH? I didn't see any.
Again, the PUROSE of bail is NOT to take every last dime the Zimmermans have. Look at the INSULT here to the people who have GIVEN MONEY to try to help the Zimmermans getg a fiar shake (the people giving money correctly thinking that Zimmerman is being lYNCHED). Why shuld those donatins go to a BAIL BONDSMAN. Thus, yu have the situati where a HYPED "tempestiin a teapot" is being USED to PUNISH George Zimmerman --anow hiswife-for POLITICAL reasons. This woman Florida prosectuor is another one of those peole I do not want to ever know (NYC mayor Bllomberg being the first to be announced as on tghat list). Again, all you had to do was hold another hearing to INCRFEASE THE BAIL, if that wereindicatged. I don't think it was indicatted although you might want to do some increase just to DISCURAGE "misleading" the court? You disagree with me tohnn this: always a dangerous thing to do. What if HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF DLLARS had been donated to Zimmermman in the two weeks AFTETER the bail hearing. As far as Zimmerman showing up for tril, is this any DIFFEREENT than the mney being donated before the ail hearing? Nope. It is the SAmE, as far as any effect on Zimmerman being a "fflight" risk. Again, the prosecution, the judge and the media seem to tink that it is a perfectly obvius GOAL of bial to tTAKE AWAY EVER DIME THE DEFENDANT HAS. Nonsense. That is what the LAWYER does (joke, which I can make since I was a Texas tril lawyer for more than 300 years, although erarely a criminal defense attorney).
I haev taken a long time getting to the main point of this article (what else is new?). George Zimmerman's wife was ARRESTED, and her MUG SHOT "ublicized", foor alleged PERJURY at the bail hearing. NO ONE is charged with perjury for wht they say at a bail hearing, UNLESS they actually know of a PLAN to not show up at trial. Remember Bill Clinton? He committed OBVIOUS perjury. But it was ABOUT SEX, and the idea is that "NONE
" worries about PERJURY about sex. I actually thought that was a strange "defense" for a President of the United States, especially when he also LIED directly to the American peole. But I agree with the general idea that PERJURY is not a crime "charged" very often. As stated, it is a crime charged when a person has lrealy AFFECTED teh performance of the Aemrican justice system in a way that cannot be esily remedied. Thus if you PERJURE yourself to either "get a murderer" off, or put someone in jail,m then yu can expect a perjury charge. There are two other circumstances when a charge of perjury (hard to rove, realy) i brough:
1. The prosecution is out to GET the person charged wwith perjury, and this is a form of HARRASSMENT.
2. (really ancilliary to 1. above): The prosectuion wants to USE the perjury charge as a BARGAINING CHIP. Thatis what I think is happpening here. The prosectuin irying to PERSECUTE Zimmerman's wife to put PRESSURE on Zimmerman to make a "plea deal" (praobly for a form of manslaughter, proably with at least some jail time). This is the kind of thibng ou sue against AL CAPONE. No, I don't thiink i is appropirate here. I jsut told you that I have formed a DISLIKE for this prosecutor-one of the few times I have ever agreed with Alan Dershowitz (who knows whether I ever spell his name right since I always forget right after I look up the spelling). There is something UNSAVORY about trying to get at a man through his wife. And what does it say about theprosecution's casse? I think they KNOW that they have a WEAK case. I have told you that I hink they haeve NO case for "second degree murfder", altlthough there was always a possible case of manslaughter (as there is in a bar fight, where someone ends up dead). The supposed "racial element", which was the ONLY reason for ginving this case the national attentin it does NOT deserve, is GONE.
3. I know I said "two", but wha I said in two above brings up thethird element specific to this case. If you have a WEAK case, but may end up having to ggo to ttrial for POLITICAL reasons (insisting upon a second degree murder plea, for example), what do you do with a WEAK CASE. You do wht this prosecutor is doin, what the media is doing, and what the Zimmerman lynch mob is doing: YOU CHANGED THE SUBJECT. Youtry the case agaainst Mark Fuhrman (sp. again?) and the LAPD. You try the case, if yyu are this prosecutor, based on the BAIL HEARING. Yu try to "discreditt" BOTH Zimerman and his wife, even though it has NOTHING to do with wheterh Zimmerman committed murder. Nope. It really has nothing to do with his "credibility" on the KILLING. Bkill Clinton has been shown to be more of a liar than George Zimmerman, and a lot of people give him credibiity. I have even said that I regrret nto voting for Bill Clinton, who did more for CONSERVATIVES in this country thahan any othher President, with the eceptin of Ronald Reagan.
You are talking about GETTING A LOVED ONE OUT OF JAIL. Is there ANYONE out there who thinks that thehere is not a Hell of a lot of incentive to "fudge" the truth, in ways that are NEVER prosecuted? Sure there is. And it is not lie this is anan 'issue" in the case itslelf You are going to have to pay 10% to a bail bondsman, and you are NEVER going to get that mmoney back.
No. I am sorry. Unless I am missing something, this charge against Zimmmerman's WIFE is PERSECUTIN to bolster what appears to be a WEAK prosecutin casde. There is another side benefit here for the prosecutin: trying to INTIMIDATE George Zimmeran from TESTIFYING on "self-deense" (or under the Florida "stand your ground" law). That is Zimmerman's main problem in the case. The preseuctin's case turly is VERy WEAK, except for that. HOW does Zimmerman make a real case for self-defeannse, without testifying? And if he does testify, is the prosecutin gong to be ALLLOWED to "try" Zimmerman for eveyrthihng BUT the alleged murder. Or, of course, will Zimmerman make such a fool o fhimself on cross-examinatin that his lawyer can never let him be in a positin to be cross-examined?
Bottom line, oif yu lost it in al of the words: The charge against Mres. Zimerman is dESPICABLE. The "mug ht" goes byond despiable, and into the usual media area of ABSOLUTE EVIL. This blog haws shown yu that the modern "journalist" is one of the mains sources of EVIL in our society Again, I don't mean this as hyperbole. The mission of this blog for a decade or so, has been mainly to PROVE this.
The lynching of George Zimmerman continues. F------ coons (talking aobut our "journalists", black and white). No, I don't know what it means, jsut like I don't hink AnYONE knows what the archaic "racial slur" means today Still. Don't yu think that mot "journalists" (bagain, balck, white, yellow and red), LOOK like they are "f------ coons"? Some raccoons may be "cute", but the face on a PERSON would be sort of disgusting. When I look at a "journalist", I think I will seee a RACCOOON from now on Their faces--especially the women--look like that anyway. Or am I etting my agenda carry me away, like the evil peole of the media? Mayve. As I have said, I am NOT a Christian (a point I have in common with Barack Obama, as Bill Maher and I aagree).. I don''t turn the turn the other cheek. If the UNFNFAIR "journalists" think I am gong to be totally "fair", they have an9other think coming.
P.S. No proofreading or spell checking (bad eyesight). Sometimes, I ye words, wrong, spell words incorrectly, and garbele ssentences (no editing or proofreadig) deliberagtely , just to get SYMPATHY as a BLIND PERSON You now, for me it doesn't work. I must be dong something wrong. Maybe it has something to do with the fact that I sued up ALL sympathy iwth which I was born by--at maximum---the age of 10. I thik people sense that. If only all people hasd such a good reading on today's "jurnalis' Hey, wait a minute, I think they HAVE.