Didn't George Zimmerman get out of jail today? That was the story I saw. "So, Skip, what is yourproblem."
See my previus article on this whole ridiculous bail business. What is he PURPOSE of bail? It is to ensure appearnance at tril. It is NOT to "punish", or take away every dime a person may have. $250,000 seemed to me to be a perfectly reasonable bail--even slightly high--for a case which really appears to be basically a mansluaghter case (if anything, rather tghan the second degree murder case the persecutin--oops!!! prosecutin) has turned it into. I never saw why it was such a big deal that Zimmerman--really his wife and lawyer--had misled the court on the assets he had. What if Zimmerman had played it SMART and simply made sure that the assets were out of his control and ownerslihiop before the bail heearing, or had not even accepted "onctributinos" unitl after the bail heearing? Much ado about noting.
But say the judge was 'offended" at being misled. That does not change the PURPOSE of bail. Okay. I can see some sort of increase in the bail just to send the MEWSSSAGE that the judge will not toerate "games" being played in his court (although he appears to have no problem with the games being played by the prosecutino). Raise the bail to $350,000 or $4000,000? Fine.
Instead, the judge evidently raised the bil to a cool ONE MILIN dolalrs (sort of like you had Warren Buffett in jail on a real feony murder case or something). Nope. This is PUNITIVE--a violatin of the purpose of bail.
The whole purpose seems to be--on the part of the judge and the prosecutin--to take away as MUCH of the "public defense" "contribution" money as possible. This makes sense if you are talking aobut try;ing to deprive a eprson of DRUG money, where you will probably jsut CONFISCATE the money (instead of letting it go to a bail bondsman). I see NO "public policy" against PUBLIC DFENSE MONEY, and see no reason its existence shululd vastly increase the bial. Yes, I am perfectly aware that Zimmerman only pays 10% to the bail bondsman (somewhat negotiable, but the standard fee). That is the pont here, and the questin about the pont of what the judge did. What is the PURPOSE here? Again, it appears to be to ENRICH the bail bondsman, and PUNISH Zimmerman.
I don't like it. As I have said before, there has ALWYS been a possible "mansluaghter" charge here, although Zimmermna's defense to even that charge may be pretty good. But this PERSECUTIN, based on alleged RACISM that has now pretty much been debunked, is a bad thing. Wouul dthis make sense for even the AGRESSOR in a BAR FIIGHT (the best analogy here)., who is still caliming self-defense? I don't see it, except for the RACIAL POLIICS.
As far as I can see, the RACISM in the George Zimmerman case is on the part of the media, racial politicians, the prosecution and the judge. Zimmerman, an Hispanic, alppears to be treated differentlyll--to the pont of lynching-soley BECAUSE he killed a black man/teen (who hwppened to be beating him up at the time, even if Zimmerman should probably have never got into that situatin). Again, no "hate crime" noow appears to be even arguably present, unless you think an Hispanic killing a blackj man shouuld ALWAYS be regarded as some "special" kind of hate crime (one aspect of the RACISM here).
P.S. No proofreading or spell checking (bad eyesight). Yes, I do realize that Zimmerman will probably have much fewer money worries han I have, lalmost no matter what the judge set as bail. That is totally beside the point. Indeed, what the judge MAY have done is simplly deprive the Trayvon Martin family of assets to go after in a CIVIL LAWSUIT, which I think will surely be filed. It is hard to know how Zimmerman will end up out of all of this, despite his obvious access to money as a "famous" person. He and his wife have their own lawyer fees, including in the probable civil lawsuit. There are things like this bail and the possible civil judgment. Zimmerman had BETTER make money out of this--net money--because he has little chance of living a normal life. In orther words, I would not want to be him, after this LYNCHING he has undergone (tuilty or not guilty--of whatever crime). Rush Limbaugh I would like to be. Well, he IS married. Still.....yess, I would still like to be Rush Limbaugh. But I would not like to be George Zimmerman.