The Judge in the George Zimmerman case has ruled that George Zimmerman's police interviews and statements are not confessions because they contain no admission of guilt and therefore must be supplied to the media within 15 days. A copy of the order is here. It states:

Upon an in camera review of the Defendant's statements, they do not qualify as confessions, as the Defendant does not acknowledge guilt of the essential elements of the crime. The only element conceded by the Defendant is that he shot and killed the victim, but he does not concede any other elements of second-degree murder. Fla. Stat. §119.071(2)(e) does not exempt the statements from the public record. Since the Defendant admitted at his bond hearing that he shot the victim, disclosure of those statements will not impact the Defendant's right to a fair trial.

[More..]

At the hearing to revoke bond on June 1, 2012, Judge Kenneth Lester said he would issue a written order. Yesterday, he issued his order, which you can read here.

Interestingly, he writes for the first time that the state's evidence is "strong." The state chose not to present evidence on the facts of the case at the April 20 bond hearing, relying instead on its affidavit. The only testimony at the hearing on the facts of the case came from the state investigator, called by the defense, who acknowledged weaknesses in the state's case. The state's affidavit of probable cause, which as has been endlessly discussed, was a one-sided portrayal with factual inaccuracies and no mention defendant's claim of self-defense. It didn't contain evidence of the elements of second degree murder. [More...]

Not a good day for the Zimmermans. Shellie Zimmerman has been arrested and charged with perjury. She has been released on a $1,000.00 bond.

You can read the capias and affidavit for her arrest here. The Affidavit says the money was transferred not only by Shellie Zimmerman into her and George's accounts at the credit union, but also using George's sister's account at the credit union. It also includes transcripts of additional jail calls, none of them good for George Zimmerman. The state says the calls show they transferred and withdrew money from a safety deposit box, and that many of Shellie's deposits and withdrawals were in amounts of $9,000.00, $9,990.00 or $9,999.00, which some might argue shows an intent to evade federal currency reporting requirements. He also directed her to use some of the money to pay their bills.

ABC breaks down the charges here. [More...]

Note: This post is around 4,000 words. You may have to read it in pieces. Comments must address the topic. After familiarizing yourself with the facts and issues under discussion, feel free to post a civil response.

Despite his lawyer's statement that George Zimmerman has some repair work to do on his credibility, I'm even less convinced than I was before that Zimmerman's credibility should be affected by the matters presented in the state's motion to revoke bond or the judge's order revoking bond.

Neither alleged George Zimmerman lied. They allege he was deceitful through his silence. I think why he was silent needs to be examined, and in examining it, I can't quite decipher what his lawyer, Mark O'Mara is saying: Is he falling on his sword because Zimmerman deceitful to him and the Court, or is he acknowledging his own missteps for failing to properly inform Zimmerman and by extension, his wife?

Here is the full docket in the case, and here are the publicly released pleadings. The State's Motion to Revoke Bond is here. The transcript of his wife's testimony at the April 20th bond hearing which the state is relying on is here. The audio of the June 1 hearing revoking bond is here. The video of the Judge's ruling on June 1 is here. [More...]

As if the Zimmerman case needs more twists and turns, Harvard Law Professor Alan Dershowitz writes that States Attorney Angela Corey called Harvard Law School and went on a 40 minute rant, threatening to sue the University for Dershowitz having expressed his opinion that she misled the court by leaving exculpatory evidence out of the arrest warrant affidavit. She originally called the Dean, but got transferred to the Office of Communications:

She was transferred to the Office of Communications and proceeded to engage in a 40-minute rant, during which she threatened to sue Harvard Law School, to try to get me disciplined by the Bar Association and to file charges against me for libel and slander. She said that because I work for Harvard and am identified as a professor she had the right to sue Harvard.

[More...]

George Zimmerman's attorney Mark O'Mara announced today he is delaying the filing a motion to release George Zimmerman on bond. In a cryptic statement he writes:

Mr. Zimmerman's legal defense team has decided to delay filing a motion for bond. A hearing will not be scheduled for a couple of weeks, and we will file a the motion well in advance of the hearing.

Zimmerman will remain in jail. One reason may be that the Judge is out of town this week, so there's no reason to file it now. Why give the state any more advance notice of his arguments than necessary? Another may be that he is obtaining all of George Zimmerman's jail calls, not just those the state's attorney's office presented to the judge.

Or maybe he wants the time to retain and pay for experts, and increase the amount of earned legal fees, having the fund pay for both before filing the motion. If the fund is depleted by the time he files the motion, there's no reason to increase the amount of the bond. Any other thoughts?

Here's Mark O'Mara's 911 call on May 14 reporting a threat.

Nine jurors were picked this morning for the trial of former Penn State assistant football coach Jerry Sandusky, charged with sexual abuse of minor boys.

Here's a summary of the key players. Here's a summary of the charges and victims.

Testimony is expected to begin next week. Reporters may not tweet or use electronic devices from the courtroom and the alleged victims will have to testify using their real names.

George Zimmerman returned to the Seminole County Jail last night. His attorney, Mark O'Mara, said today he will request a new bond hearing.

Mr. Zimmerman's lawyers will request a new bond hearing where they can address the court's concerns regarding the representation of funds available at the time of the original hearing on April 20. The defense team hopes that Mr. Zimmerman's voluntary surrender to Sanford police will help demonstrate to the court that he is not a flight risk. Furthermore, the vast majority of the funds in question are in an independently managed trust, and neither Mr. Zimmerman or his attorneys have direct access to the money.

[More...]

George Zimmerman will get a hearing on the revocation of his bond , after he turns himself in. I think the judge will give him bond again.

Once he is re-bonded , this will become a minor footnote. It's just a distraction. I suggest people look at the available evidence. It either supports the state's case or it doesn't. In my view , the evidence does not defeat self -defense , which is what the state must do at trial . Other witnesses and physical evidence support that Zimmerman was attacked . Zimmerman still has a strong claim of self-defense. Keep your eyes on the big picture. This sideshow of coded calls with his wife about money won't change or undo what other evidence establishes happened. Focus on W6, W12 and W13, W11 and W20.

Even driving to Aspen I can't escape the news (I stopped for gas and turned on my iPad.)

Judge Mark Lester has revoked George Zimmerman's bond.

Here is the Motion to Revoke Bond filed today, and the partial transcript of his wife's testimony at the April bond hearing.

Driving home from work, all I had for information on the reaction to the John Edwards' verdict was Sirius. Against my better judgment, I put up with the incessant commercials for debt and income tax relief. I was sorry I did.

On MSNBC, I thought the comments of Chris Matthews and his guests, including the authors of the Game Change, on John Edwards' post-verdict press statement, were appalling.

Matthews and his panel all agreed John Edwards was a delusional egomaniac with no particular political or social insight beneath the surface. One criticized his reading ability. One even called him a psychopath.

What was the basis for these attacks? According to Matthews & panel, Edwards had the audacity to suggest during his post-verdict press conference (you can view it here) that he might still have a political future. Matthews then aired his statements. I didn't hear Edwards say a word about re-entering politics. He talked about wanting to help children in poverty -- he may have been referring to a future public presence, but that's not even close to suggesting another run for political office. [More..]

Why did the jury unanimously agree John Edwards was not guilty on Count 3 charging illegal campaign contributions from Bunny Mellon in 2008, while it was hung on the other counts?.

This was the one count that they could reject before without even having to decide whether the money was a campaign contribution. They could reject it based on both or one of the following:

• Bunny Mellons' December, 2007 and January, 2008 payments were not deposited until after John Edwards withdrew from the Presidential race. Without those two checks, Bunny Mellon's contributions for the year did not exceed $25,000.

and/or

• Venue in the Middle District of North Carolina was not proven by a preponderance of the evidence on this count. The crime charged was illegal acceptance or receipt of campaign funds. The funds weren't deposited in the Middle District. They weren't even sent there. [More...]