Our long, national nightmare is finally over. Or at least the primary chapters have been written and sent to the printer. I have no doubt we’ll be hearing about George and Shellie Zimmerman for many years to come. But for now, Shellie’s legal nightmare is nearly at an end and she has the opportunity to reclaim something of a life. I wrote about the charge against Shellie, a charge virtually devoid of evidence, in Update 37.2.
Shellie Zimmerman
Credit: mail.com
Last week, Shellie’s trial date of August 21 was postponed in lieu of a status conference. The most common reason for such postponements this close to trial is an imminent plea agreement. We now know that was indeed the case. The Orlando Sentinel reports:
Shellie Zimmerman, the wife of acquitted murder suspect George Zimmerman, admitted Wednesday that she had committed perjury to help her husband get out of jail and agreed to a plea deal that requires her to serve a year of probation.
Shellie Zimmerman had been charged with felony perjury, which carried a possible sentence of five years in prison. Instead, she negotiated a deal to plead guilty to a less serious crime — misdemeanor perjury.
She was composed during her 10-minute hearing, answering questions from Circuit Judge Marlene Alva in a clear, confident voice, saying, ‘Yes, ma’am,’ when asked if she understood what she was doing.
Part of the plea deal required Shellie to write a letter of apology to judge Lester, who was eventually removed from the George Zimmerman case due to his obvious and blatant bias against Zimmerman. The Sentinel continues:
Shellie Zimmerman had no prior criminal record, and Assistant State Attorney John Guy of Jacksonville agreed to allow her to plead guilty to the lesser charge…
It was a negotiation designed to spare her a felony conviction and allow her to move on with her life.
When she was arrested, she was a nursing student nearly done with her schooling. Had she been found guilty of a felony, she would have been banned from applying to become a state-certified nurse for three years.
Professor Jacobson at Legal Insurrection has the text of the plea agreement at his post on this development. In addition, the Conservative Treehouse has the text of Shellie’s apology letter as well as its take on the issues at hand.
ANALYSIS AND TRANSLATION:
Why would a prosecutor’s office, a group of prosecutors desperate for George Zimmerman’s blood and damned angry about being denied their pound of flesh, back off in the slightest way in their attempt to get a piece of at least some portion of the Zimmerman family? Doesn’t the fact that Shellie admitted to perjury and wrote a fawning apology indicate that the prosecution was right? Hardly.
Consider Shellie Zimmerman. Despite George’s acquittal, he and Shellie are far from well off. Unless her attorney, Kelly Simms, is taking her case pro bono–something I very much doubt–she continues to run up a defense bill at the rate of hundreds of dollars an hour. A trial would add tens of thousands, perhaps hundreds of thousands, of dollars in legal fees. Their future is, in many ways, out of their hands, and at the moment, neither of them has a chance of the kind of solid employment that would allow them to live a low profile life. In fact, there are plenty of people who will likely never stop hounding them, such as this facebook site indicates:
It’s highly unlikely that Trayvonites will ever allow the Zimmermans any peace.
George and Shellie’s arrests halted their educations, preventing George from pursuing his dream of becoming a police officer and preventing Shellie from finishing her nursing education and seeking certification to practice. As the Orlando Sentinel article indicates, a felony conviction would not only postpone Shellie’s ability to apply for nursing certification for at least three years, it would, for all intents and purposes, make her virtually unemployable as a nurse anywhere.
This plea bargain solved all of those problems and more. For a guilty plea to a misdemeanor, Shellie got her life back as well as the potential of a future. No misdemeanor conviction would prevent Shellie from working as a nurse, and because adjudication is being deferred, after a year of probation Shellie will not have been convicted of even that. Her record will be as clean as it was before George Zimmerman had the misfortune to save his life, thereby blundering into a racial, political perfect storm. I have no doubt that Shellie believes she’ll have no trouble with probation, that it will be a mere formality. I believe it too because there is no evidence at all to indicate that she is anything other than an honest person caught up in a Kafkaesque drama.
But if she is truly innocent, why not go to trial? Simms said he believes she could win, and if the affidavit is any indication of the utter lack of evidence against her–just as the affidavit against George was–there is every reason to believe Simms is right. The reasons are simple.
The state, in the form of the prosecutors, have unlimited resources. They’re getting paid the same amount whether they take a week or a year to further the case against Shellie. There are no financial pressures on them, and the media, particularly the national media, is mostly ignoring this case. On the other hand, every hour spent on this case is costing the Zimmermans dearly. And while Shellie very well might be acquitted, while the evidence against her is incredibly weak, even non-existent, any trial is a gamble and Shellie could be convicted, destroying her future. Why not go for a sure thing, particularly when that sure thing, after a year of a probation that will surely be little more than a formality, includes no record of conviction for any crime? The psychological relief of having a pack of rabid prosecutorial dogs off her back cannot be overstated.
And what’s in it for the prosecutors? It is possible, however unlikely, that John Guy, assistant prosecutor for Angela Corey, has a conscience. He may have realized that in prosecuting Shellie, he was stepping over the grounds of professionalism and human decency and wanted to do what was right. But if that were so, why not simply dismiss the case? Why not drop the charge, particularly since the plea-bargain he struck amounts to precisely the same thing: no record for Shellie Zimmerman.
Asians refer to it as “saving face.” The prosecution was badly stung, publically humiliated in their loss to Mark O’Mara and Donald West. They stacked the deck with unlawful and unprofessional conduct, hiding and slow rolling discovery and lying not only to the defense, but to the judge, who seemed unable and/or unwilling to recognize those lies or to do anything about them. They had President Obama, the Department of Justice, the Florida Attorney General and the Governor on their side. They had the black grievance industry in their corner. And they had the full force of the local and national media continually shaping public opinion on their side. And above all, they had the judge in their pocket, a judge who ruled so often and blatantly for their untenable legal arguments that it became embarrassing. All of that, and they still lost!
Consider too that they still face possible sanctions for their malfeasance, though it’s unlikely that Judge Nelson would do anything more than issue a Hillaryesque “what difference, at this point, does it make?” ruling. We do not know what machinations may be going on behind the scenes with the Florida bar or legal community, but it is possible Judge Nelson’s rulings may be the least of the prosecutor’s worries. If this is the case, or if they fear these possibilities, they may be anxious to abate the heat of this prosecution as quickly and quietly as possible.
They know exactly how weak and/or non-existent their case is. They know as well as Mr. Simms that he could very well win the case, and while they would probably love to run up Shellie’s legal bills, their desire to make it go away was likely a stronger concern. Losing this case too with an outright acquittal was surely a possibility they did not want to confront. What would they do then? Hold another interview with a slobbering media and talk about how they believed they had the evidence to convict? Would Angela Corey call Shellie a perjurer just as she called George a murderer?
The plea bargain allows them to save face by claiming that they got a conviction. Shellie Zimmerman admitted to committing a crime. They even got an apology for Judge Lester, whose feelings were no doubt hurt by being removed from the Zimmerman trial for obvious and injudicious bias. Poor judge! And it was a particularly groveling apology too. Yes, in a year that conviction will disappear as though it never existed–because it won’t–but they can still claim victory and hope that everybody forgets the whole mess, while quietly wincing and burning in anger when their pals at bar luncheons poke fun at them and commoners snigger at them in stores and on the street. One can only imagine their rage at the scribblings of bloggers, that unruly rabble.
One should not underestimate prosecutorial concern over their win/loss records. The goal of any prosecutor is supposed to be seeing that justice is done, but do not, gentle readers, forget for a moment that prosecutors keep score, and are damned serious about it. In truth, professional, ethical prosecutors tend to have very favorable win/loss records because they don’t charge weak cases and take care to see that they don’t prosecute innocent people. As I noted in Update 36.2, Bernie de la Rionda, in the humiliating aftermath of the loss in George’s trial, brought up his win/loss record, noting that the Zimmerman case was only his second loss of a murder trial. Surely, this too was a concern.
And what about the groveling apology? Why would Shelly agree to it if she were innocent? She had no choice. Accepting a plea bargain to a lesser charge requires admission of guilt. It was that or go to trial with its inherent costs and risks.
I’ve no doubt Mr. Simms had a great deal to do with the text of the apology, and made sure it would be an appropriate prostration suitable to mollify the prosecution and an indignant Judge Lester. He understands the system and knows the players, but why not? It’s all going away in a year and everybody knows it, but for at least awhile the prosecutors and the judge have bragging rights and the media will be satisfied with this paltry, ephemeral scalp and turn its attention to other matters. It was never much interested in Shellie anyway. After all, there was no racial hook to stir up interest.
FINAL THOUGHTS:
If the prosecution thought for a moment it had a reasonable chance of convicting Shellie Zimmerman, it would never–never–have negotiated a plea bargain, particularly not one so favorable to Shellie. At the very least, it would have demanded at least a permanent misdemeanor conviction. And while a complete and unconditional dismissal of the charges, or acquittal, would have been the preferred outcome for Shellie and Simms, the plea bargain amounts to the same thing.
And so another charge that should never have been brought, a political charge rather than any concern for justice, ultimately fails and justice prevails. Of course, Shellie Zimmerman has lost more than a year of her life and suffered unimaginable stress and heartache, as well as untold financial costs to obtain this agreeable result. Do not doubt the likely damage to her marriage this has caused.
Meanwhile, it remains entirely possible that the unethical, unprofessional, and inhumane prosecutors will suffer nothing more than the torment of their own consciences for their abuse of the justice system and two innocent people. That is likely to be very slight torment indeed.
At least they are alive. This is why I make it a practice to never shoot anyone.
When you say you make a practice of never shooting anyone, I suspect you have never had your head smashed against anything made of cement while being told your assailant was going to kill you, huh?
Imagine you are being followed late at night by a stranger. He comes closer and closer and you are becoming alarmed and frightened so you reach into your purse or pocket and take out a gun, mace, whatever and turn to use it on him and he shoots you. Is that your fault or the strangers? In Florida it is your fault…And since I don’t walk around with a gun in my pocket I guess I would get a good smashing. If your head were being smashed against a cement sidewalk would you pull out your gun from your pocket and shoot your assailant? Life isn’t TV you know…
Imagine similar circumstances and I would have shot Trayvon with a full-clip of ammo between his ears, then I would have tracked down his parents and required explanations as to why they were allowing thier minor child to commit their crimes and hopefully they would have reacted violently and the whole group of those low-lifes could have been dealt with legally all in one quick swoop. Next time, watch the case of the case and not try to invent things to cover up your admiration’s for drug-thug-criminals like Trayvon. I am just so glad and so very thankful he is now dead and cannot harm another victim.
“Imagine you are being followed late at night by a stranger. He comes closer and closer and you are becoming alarmed and frightened so you reach into your purse or pocket and take out a gun, mace, whatever and turn to use it on him and he shoots you. Is that your fault or the strangers?”
Oh Lord… seriously? Where on earth did you learn the “facts” of this case? Not. Even. Close.
It’s your fault, legally and technically.
Yow! I wasn’t talking about the facts of the case. I was talking about imagining putting yourself in a similar situation. What should you do? Defend yourself? Apologize? Use force? Cry for help? Pray? Run? What was Travon Martin’s crime before he hit Mr. Zimmerman? And who witnessed the actual event?
The question is utterly irrelevant. Martin’s relevant crime was his unlawful use of force against Zimmerman – Martin’s unprovoked assault of Zimmerman.
Several people, as testified at trial.
No one witnessed the event that I’ve heard of. Who are these several people of whom you speak? Do you know their names? There was no eye witness testimony.
I guess you missed the entire trial, then? Oh well; ignorance is bliss, I suppose.
My mistake here…you are correct in that several witnesses were called to testify…although none could commit to an actual eyewitness account. My point is that according to Florida law and in the absence of eye witnesses you can kill or be killed…
“Under Florida’s Stand Your Ground law, people fearing for their lives can use deadly force without having to retreat from a confrontation, even when it is possible”…so whether or not I started the confrontation becomes irrelevant does it not? Whoever finishes it wins, whether it be the original assailant or defender. Is that not true?
Nonsense.
Perhaps you should avail yourself of John Good’s testimony.
You’re conflating two issues: the duty to retreat with the identity of the initial aggressor.
Stand Your Ground is simply the constitutionally appropriate response to the unconstitutional “duty to retreat”: we bear an inherent right to defend ourselves, regardless of where we are.
Regarding the identity of the initial physical aggressor: Florida statutes contain explicit clauses regarding the use of force in self-defense by an initial physical aggressor.
Regarding the requirement for eye witnesses: Stand Your Ground has nothing to do with having or not having – or needing/not needing – eye witnesses. The standard is reasonableness of fear. Someone claiming to have used in deadly force in self-defense must present at least a modicum of evidence in support of that claim.
So, I don’t really understand what the issue is.
“Perhaps you should avail yourself of John Good’s testimony.” —
Which one? Ground and pound or amended wrestling?
Neither of which are the initial cause, btw, only next link in a chain of events. For the square one, we rely on Zimmerman only, some one whose own testimony is admittedly fuzzy due to ADHD.
Sorry, but moving the goalposts is not permitted. You claimed that there were no eye-witnesses to Martin’s assault of Zimmerman.
One person is bloodied and beaten. The other is unscathed, except for scraped knuckles, and a fatal gunshot wound. Eyewitnesses identify the unscathed one as being on top of the bloodied and beaten one.
There is obvious evidence that the unscathed one used force against the bloodied and beaten one. There is absolutely no evidence that the bloodied and beaten one used any force against the unscathed one, whatsoever.
There is obvious evidence that the unscathed one used force against the bloodied and beaten one. There is absolutely no evidence that such force was justified.
Put all of the existing evidence together, and it supports a self-defense claim by far more than a mere preponderance.
” Someone claiming to have used in deadly force in self-defense must present at least a modicum of evidence in support of that claim.”
BTW
Smokes, dude was going for his gun, so I stopped him. You police got here just in time…
Lo, a gun is found on ‘his’ person.
Reasonable starts becoming real flexible at this point.
“Sorry, but moving the goalposts is not permitted. You claimed that there were no eye-witnesses to Martin’s assault of Zimmerman.”
Whoa whoa, tut tut. The OP was making reference to eye witness of the precursor to the events. You decided to.. um.. disregard that reference in favor of John’s (varying) relations of the event that had no relation to the OP. I made mention that he had two variations for his part in the play (again, of which were not the precursor to the events), and you direct me back to the initial point you dodged.
Clever. Not quite passive aggressive cute clever, but clever.
If it makes you feel any better, you can assume that I concede the following: there were no relevant actions, illegal or otherwise, on the part of either Martin or Zimmerman, prior to the physical altercation. Further, there were no eye-witnesses to the immaterial actions of Martin and Zimmerman, prior to the physical altercation.
But for the record, the OP stated thus:
I made the logical assumption that “actual event” referred to the actual event – that is, the physical altercation that resulted in Martin’s death – and not to some non-actual, theoretical event that may or may not have transpired before that actual event.
So, I referenced John Good’s testimony, that refutes the OP’s contention that there were no eye-witnesses to the actual event. You then weighed in with a question regarding the version of John Good’s testimony – a matter that is irrelevant with respect to a question of whether John Good’s testimony, in any version, represents eye-witness testimony.
“That the attacker sustained a mortal wound is a matter that should have been considered by the deceased before he committed himself to the task he undertook.” – 5th DCA, Stinson v. State (Fl)
Neither a borrower nor a lender be;
For loan oft loses both itself and friend,
And borrowing dulls the edge of husbandry.
This above all: to thine own self be true,
And it must follow, as the night the day,
Thou canst not then be false to any man.
-W. Shakespeare
I’m 87 years old and weigh 91lbs and at midnight I “inquire” to my 27 year old 6′ neighbor if he would like to pay his debt now, and I wait for him to come over to my house while I have a gun in my hand. What was I expecting? An ass whipping?
If you walk around with a gun you’ve got to be prepared for what you give as well as what you get. And Sometimes you get lucky I guess.
Non-sequitur Shakespeare quotes; Bernie, is that you?
(What does this nonsense have anything to do with the current discussion?)
Walking around with a gun provides the ability to “give as well as what you get”. In this country, no one is required to “get” anything before using self-defense. In this country, exercising the right to keep and bear arms does not make one liable for or deserving of being the victim of an assault.
If you can’t handle that, go live in Colorado; I hear that the only defensive measure officially sanctioned there is Use of Bodily Fluids Against an Assailant.
Have you ever been lucky enough to be assaulted while carrying a gun?
Did you read the case that you cited?
No need to be mean and insulting. Are you trying to provoke me in some way?
“Lucky enough to be assaulted”? Do you actually think through the words you write, before committing them to (virtual) ink?
Yep; sure have.
If you assault someone, and put that person in mortal fear, you and you alone are responsible for the outcome. Your victim is legally and morally justified in using deadly force to defend against your assault.
Ah, the passive-aggressive play. How cute.
Our national nightmare is finally over? Nightmare? That punk-butt-high-on-dope-criminal was killed after he attacked a victim and beat the victim while being armed with a cement sidewalk and with a metal can in his hoodie-pocket as he bashed the victim’s head against the cement and made the victim bloody and caught a bullet in his heart for his efforts. A nightmare? I think it was an act of bravery and community protection that happened that fateful night. And, thank God for the best results possible.
“butt-high-on-dope-criminal…”
“being armed with a cement sidewalk and with a metal can …”
“Next time, watch the case of the case and not try to invent things.”.
:sniff: Smells like keyboard commando to me.
“..Trayvon with a full-clip of ammo between his ears…” — a full “clip”, eh?
“I would have tracked down his parents ” — tracke’d em down, eh?
“hopefully they would have reacted violently and the whole group of those low-lifes could have been dealt with legally all in one quick swoop”, this of course coming on the heels of you ‘tracking them down’.
Yarp. Keyboard commando. But, by all means, do, go on.
I am so thankful Trayvon is now dead, praise the Lord because it frees up his inevitable need for a future prison bed. Rot in Hell Trayvon and your parents will join you later on and you can discuss all the crimes you’ve all pulled off in life.
RuleofOrder, I agree, thank God Trayvon is now dead, he got exactly what he needed and he got off pretty easy imo.
Make that three. I’m glad as anything that Trayon Martin’s future victims-to-be were relieved of him.
I want scalps. I want trophies. I want a huge settlement from nbc. I want a lawsuit against nancy grace and a huge settlement for her repeatedly accusing gz of saying “f*cking coons” on the air. I want a lawsuit against ben crump. I want a bar complaint against ben crump so he can lose his license. I want a lawsuit and large settlement against Sanford for malicious prosecution. I want a lawsuit against florida for the prosecutors withholding evidence and lying about it.
Ditto, well said.
You read my mind!!!
Sort of a fitting end for the government to end the case in this manner with nothing gained, as they should not have ventured down this course to begin with.
Thanks as always Mike.
It appears Shellie may have given an explosive interview to ABC news after her court date today. She talks of how George beat down her self-esteem and that many untruths were told.
Some mishandled evidence and she thinks had the jury heard it, may have returned a different verdict. The full interview will be shown on Good Morning America tomorrow.
http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/headlines/2013/08/george-zimmermans-wife-says-he-has-beaten-down-her-self-esteem/
George is a hero to educated and informed people.
Nettles,
I read the linked article but I did not interpret quite the same way. Shellie said her self esteem was beaten down, but I did not see where she said George was responsible. Also, the lies that were told during the trial and the evidence not seen by the jury which may have resulted in a different verdict, appeared to be attributed to the interviewer who is ALSO WRITING A BOOK ABOUT THE TRIAL.
That’s my interpretation as well… they’re probably talking about the undercover ALE incident and the restraining orders between Z and a former girlfriend.
May be those issues. Not sure they should be referred to as “mishandled evidence”. They were such a long shot, the prosecution hadn’t arranged for the officer to be in court, and since he wasn’t available, I don’t think Nelson ever ruled on admissibility. I’m betting someone will have to buy her book to find out what that evidence might be. (It won’t be me!)
I think I’ll reserve my opinion on this interview till I see the full interview. I refuse to base any opinion on the snippets or comments by a biased media about the interview.
I guess we should be hearing the outcome of the perjury trial of DeeDee (or whatever she goes by) soon, huh?
When Rachel (and others) finally are charged, it’s gonna be for much more than perjury.
Let us hope! Can’t come soon enough for me…
Dear Mike,
Your analysis tracks my thoughts on the plea (only yours is much better organized and detailed than were my rantings to my wife on the subject).
But, how did you get that written so quickly during the first week of school?
Allyn
Students clerking for him. ;)
Reblogged this on A world at war.
…because black-robed tyrants must be mollified, and must have their fragile egos stroked by the peasants they lord over.
Sorry to post this here, I didn’t see a “contact” email. I thought you would be interested in seeing this, I just found it posted to an anonymous message board. As an English teacher and someone who’s followed the Zimmerman trial I knew you would appreciate it.
http://postimg.org/image/fno8zbmb7/
Wow. That is really, really sickening. Nothing more productive to write about? Gotta bash the USA vis-à-vis lies about its laws and culture? Sad.
Dear Joey Miller:
Just hold my my photo and my contact info will come up. Thanks for the information!
I never paid any attention to the Shellie thing – in the same way I never paid any attention to the Crump thing.
Neither were witnesses to the events.
I just watched some snippets of Shellie’s GMA interview
youtube.com/watch?v=L8DurMQPWqg
She does say “I knew that I was lying”
One interesting point is that she says that she had walked out on him after a fight the day before the shooting. She was staying at her father’s house on the night in question.
This does raise some questions as to Zimmerman’s state of mind on the night.
O’Mara pointed to texts that showed Trayvon fighting with a g/f the day of the shooting. I guess that would raise some (more) questions as to Trayvon’s state of mind on the night as well, huh?
Nope. Tray Tray was just an innocent, helpless little boy skipping along with his candy. The only thing on his mind was getting home and sharing it with little brother, and then watching a few episodes of My Little Pony.
How quickly we forget…
You forgot to add that while Tray was skipping along going to someone’s home with candy, he viciously attacked George Zimmerman while Tray was armed with a metal can in his hoodie-pocket as he used a another weapon, a cement sidewalk, to bash Mr. Zimmerman’s head against repeatedly. Anyone who does think that could cause you some fear, just go outside and find a person to forcefully bash your head against the cement until you nearly pass out, then return here and offer your new-found-perspective on this topic. Bring some bandages with you, go ahead, go have your head bashed in and come back here, we’ll wait. If we don’t hear back from you shortly, we’ll just have to assume you died from your injuries.
They say memory is a tough issue for dope-heads like Trayvon. Maybe that’s why he was failing in school and why he forgot to NOT attack people and make them victims. You know, marijuana for personal use is a violation in that state without proper authorizations from medical personnel, another criminal act by Trayvon. Thank God Mr. Zimmerman was able to eliminate the threats from that wanna-be-drug-thug-hoodlum-Trayvon. Now, it’s time to go after Trayvon’s parents because parents of minor-children are legally responsible for damages perpetrated by their own kids, at least in every other state in the union.
JanCorey,
This head-bashing person…..
Should we just hang around in the dark, cold and rain for 3 minutes or so – having followed the person and probably seeking them out in the dark? Then see if they head-bash in the closing seconds of an extended fight of which the initiation is unknown?
Or should we put out an advertisement “Head-basher wanted for experiment. Meet at dog-walk. I will be carrying a gun but will not remember that I am doing so.”?
She should have stood HER ground. Two failed politically motivated
prosecutions would have been icing on the cake!
I sense that Shellie is being realistic. She knew about the money. There were those coded jailhouse phone calls. There was that moving of amounts that were just under the automatic reporting radar. She says in an interview that she was not honest under oath about it.
End of.
Sh*t happens in circumstances. Nobody sane is really exercised about her place in that money. It was relevant to the bond hearing only, and in no way relevant to the guts of the shooting case.
I hope she gets on with her life.
Reblogged this on Danny Warrior.
It’s been my opinion from the start that Zimmerman is not a racist killer.
He’s just an idiot – who also happens to have a mental condition that requires continuing medications.
This is a recordng of Shellie’s 911 call today
[audio src="http://www.clickorlando.com/blob/view/-/21852750/data/1/-/eryp8vz/-/911-call-audio.wav" /]
People here talk about Martin being a ‘dope-head’.
I’d say Zimmerman’s meds are not helping him enough.
Side effects include sudden mood swings and aggression.
We now know that Shellie had walked out on him after a fight the night before the Martin shooting and was in her father’s house. No mentoring children or cooking meals that day – as he asserted on Hannity.
Zimmerman was just doing standard NW procedures on that night – until he got out of the truck to follow.
He snapped. Would he have been in a foul humor because of Shellie walking out??
What exactly was he doing for 3+ minutes between arriving into the dog-walk and the fight breaking out?
Regarding the alleged domestic dispute thinggy: at least Shellie didn’t get shot, yet. Course, she didn’t slam George’s head against a cement sidewalk while being armed with a metal can in her hoodie-pocket like dope-head Trayvon did. Tread lightly Shellie.
Sling says:
Don’t jump the gun, there, Sling. Things aren’t looking quite on the up-and-up with that 911 call. First, about the alleged battery:
And then, about that gun?
Yeah, it could be bad news for George Zimmerman. On the other hand, if Shellie’s story doesn’t square with the facts, she could be facing a parole-violation charge, or maybe a false police report charge?
But you keep on keepin’ on with your bashing of George; that’s good work you’re doing.
I have to say that listening to the call, I get the impression that Shellie was ‘talking it up’.
“Hand continually on his gun” feels a bit like “hand in his waistband” :)
It is a bit of a turnabout here.
We’ve gone from Shellie being a truthful victim who was unjustly railroaded into taking a plea on Perjury – to Shellie as a blatant liar – another Jeantel to haunt Zimmerman. It’s a funny old world.
.
Whatever about the circumstances of her 911 call, there remains her public interviews. Are these complete inventions or the truth? She paints a picture of a guy subject to sudden rages – which would be in line with his condition and meds.
There are echoes of that in the various stories of his past.
Zimmerman is turning out to be a far ‘more interesting’ character than the public projection so far..
I still don’t think he’s a racist killer or a premeditated killer.
He’s just an idiot – not the brightest coin in the purse – with a condition that amplifies that.
You do know that there’s a difference between appendix carry – i.e. a gun holstered at the front of the waist, where it must be if one is “going for a gun” by putting a hand on one’s stomach – and 5 o’clock carry – where Zimmerman was carrying the night of the Martin altercation, with the gun at the back of the waist, right?
Zimmerman is known to carry at 5 o’clock, with the gun at the back of the waist. Unless he changed carry style, one would reasonably conclude that Shellie knew that Zimmerman putting his hand near his stomach would not represent him putting his hand anywhere near his gun (if he even had it with him at the time; the police spokesperson seems to say that he did not have a gun).
It’s far too early to know exactly what happened yesterday afternoon; but whatever the case, it has absolutely no bearing on the Martin altercation. There remains not one shred of evidence that Zimmerman was in any way at fault that night.
Agreed. The reportage has been a complete circus.
I saw very different reports about the cops taking a gun – or not. Perhaps he had one in the glove compartment – and not carrying – as with the Texas speeding stop.
The lawyers on both sides of the divorce proceedings will likely want to keep things as quiet as possible.
Whatever happened, Shellie does appear genuinely frightened – although the gun seems to have been talked up.
.
It speaks to the nature of Zimmerman.
Shellie’s recent media interview also speaks to that. She makes him sound like a powder-keg. Is this how the mutual barring orders with his previous came about?
You can’t have it both ways.
This blog is full of assertions about Martin’s character – and how that means that he must have attacked a guy who had only exited his vehicle and was innocently parambulating along a path, doing nothing illegal for some minutes in the dark rain and cold.
If one party’s character is relevant, then so is that of the other party.
If on one side we can have a thug whose demise is asserted to be an improvement for society, then we can have on the other side an unbalanced idiot prone to sudden fits of rage.
I have yet to read any theory that makes Zimmermans’s time in the dog-walk sound anywhere reasonable. Whatr was he doing for that time? 3 minutes from getting in there and 2 minutes from the end of the NEN? It’s simply not reasonable.
It also seems very clear that he lied after the event about the ‘circling’ in order to blacken Martin. That went hand-in-hand with assertions that he did not delay at any stage in there.
1) On the basis of the story linked below – if the emails are real – I believe that Police Chief Steve Bracknell should be promoted to “civilian – unemployed”.
Nobody in LE should make such comments about a person – apart from voicing them with solid reason in the course of purely internal LE meetings.
http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2013/09/12/2611711/george-zimmermans-local-police-chief-fears-hes-another-sandy-hook-waiting-to-happen/
Check the link to the full email exchange.
2) Bracknell might have somewhat of a point, but ..
3) See (1)
.
Even our genial host Mike has gone so far as to indicate an opinion (forgot which thread) that Zimmerman does not represent any sort of role model.
This falls far short of Bracknell’s purported extraordinary “sharing”, but it is a signal to those who might still believe in a Saint George.
.
Unless Zimmerman’s pocket knife managed to physically damage the iPad memory chip, we may sometime soon(ish) see a video of Zimmerman in full flow.
Assuming that the chip is intact, any delay will not be due to technical issues. It will be due to chain of custody and/or budgetary issues.
.
Again – to me, Zimmerman seems to be an idiot with a mental condition plus meds that drives him to sudden rages – and who spent an unreasonable unexplained amount of time in the dark cold rain of the dog-walk before a fight broke out.
“They stacked the deck with unlawful and unprofessional conduct, hiding and slow rolling discovery and lying not only to the defense, but to the judge, who seemed unable and/or unwilling to recognize those lies or to do anything about them. They had President Obama, the Department of Justice, the Florida Attorney General and the Governor on their side. They had the black grievance industry in their corner. And they had the full force of the local and national media continually shaping public opinion on their side. And above all, they had the judge in their pocket, a judge who ruled so often and blatantly for their untenable legal arguments that it became embarrassing.”
In other words, they had everything except for an actual case.
Thank God that Trayvon is now dead as a direct result of his illegal actions against a victim. Now, it’s time to lock up Trayvon’s parents for allowing such a dope-head to roam the community unsupervised and committing crimes. Law says parents of a minor are responsible for their teen’s illegal actions. LWOP for each of them if you ask me.
Pingback: The Trayvon Martin Case, Update 41: Paintings and Plaudits | Stately McDaniel Manor