Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
There are many conditions for everyone who is released on bail; although, there may have been more for Zimmerman because there was/is concern for his safety.
In addition to considering whether or not Zimmerman is a danger to the community, normally there is consideration to whether or not he is a flight risk and/or a danger to himself. Do you know if anything came up about whether or not he has a passport or connections with his mother's family in South America? If not, I guess they were thinking the GPS monitor would take care of any attempt he might make to flee.
He had to surrender his passport. I remember that was included in the conditions of his bail.
Here: [URL="http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/story/2012/04/20/us-florida-zimmerman-hearing.html"] I found this link,[/URL] but I don't know how reliable it is:
Circuit Judge Kenneth Lester set several other bail conditions on Zimmerman:
He must wear an electronic monitoring device and surrender his passport.
He can't possess any firearms.
He can't use alcohol or drugs.
He must observe a 7 p.m. to 6 a.m. curfew and report to authorities every three days.
You're absolutely correct that the state is not required to reveal the entire case at this point, but based on the lead investigator's testimony (under oath at the bond hearing) it would seem to me that the state has very little evidence to support a 2nd degree murder charge. If more evidence comes to light in court (not the media) to support the charge, I may change my position.
Not only is the State not required to put on their entire case at a bail hearing, it would be very bad strategy on their part to do so. I'm thinking that the lead investigator revealed only what was absolutely necessary to the questions asked. I would bet that he did not elaborate on any of his answers. And, yes, when I talk about evidence, I'm referring to official evidence presented in court by the State and defense, in the form of expert witnesses, physical evidence allowed in evidence (meaning meeting the proper chain of custody requirements of the law) and the testimony of lay witnesses. Information put out by the press, as we all know, is not necessarily pure or evidence which will be allowed in trial by the Rules of Criminal Procedure, as the press is not bound by those rules.
Circuit Judge Kenneth Lester set several other bail conditions on Zimmerman:
He must wear an electronic monitoring device and surrender his passport.
He can't possess any firearms.
He can't use alcohol or drugs.
He must observe a 7 p.m. to 6 a.m. curfew and report to authorities every three days.
Thanks for that info. So they did address the passport issue.
Determining someone's age may be "subjective," but you have two completely different statements - in other words, Zimmerman has proven that he's quite capable of lying.
He also said "I didn't know if he was armed." True, but he told the 911 dispatcher that he was carrying something in his waistband, on drugs, acting suspiciously, up to no good, etc., so he certainly had that seed planted in his head.
That might be the next step for the defense...O'Mara seemed to be heading in that direction at the hearing...he did attempt to dismantle the probable cause affidavit when questioning the investigator...IMO he made some valid points...
So the bail hearing was Friday. Could be that the defense would file motions as early a Monday...is there a date set for the immunity hearing?
I would think that the defense did everything they could do in the bail hearing to find out at much as they could about the State's case at that time. Of course, the State is aware that they would be doing that, so experienced personnel in the State Attorney's office would know how to answer the questions without giving too much away while answering truthfully at the same time. Strategy is very important in these cases.
At 6:54 p.m., Trayvon received a phone call on his cell from his girlfriend. Phone records show they talked for 18 minutes. Towards the end of the conversation, Trayvon said he was being followed.
At 7:00, Zimmerman called police to report a suspicious person. The dispatcher told him not to follow that person.
Twelve minutes later, Trayvon's cell phone conversation was dropped. His girlfriend tried calling him back. But five minutes later, at 7:17, police arrived to find Trayvon dead. Sure, every 17 year old talks to the wrong number for 18 minutes. I'm sure now you'll say "she was his dealer!"
I fully expect the term "crack 'ho" to come up, if it hasn't already.
Not only is the State not required to put on their entire case at a bail hearing, it would be very bad strategy on their part to do so. I'm thinking that the lead investigator revealed only what was absolutely necessary to the questions asked. I would bet that he did not elaborate on any of his answers. And, yes, when I talk about evidence, I'm referring to official evidence presented in court by the State and defense, in the form of expert witnesses, physical evidence allowed in evidence (meaning meeting the proper chain of custody requirements of the law) and the testimony of lay witnesses. Information put out by the press, as we all know, is not necessarily pure or evidence which will be allowed in trial by the Rules of Criminal Procedure, as the press is not bound by those rules.
It's true the lead investigator was very cagey (which is to be expected), it was like watching a chess game.
So the bail hearing was Friday. Could be that the defense would file motions as early a Monday...is there a date set for the immunity hearing?
I would think that the defense did everything they could do in the bail hearing to find out at much as they could about the State's case at that time. Of course, the State is aware that they would be doing that, so experienced personnel in the State Attorney's office would know how to answer the questions without giving too much away while answering truthfully at the same time. Strategy is very important in these cases.
No date set (as far as we know) for the immunity hearing, from what I understand this could be (many) months down the road...
IMO the defense did score some points at the bond hearing...
I'm not sure what you think the author of that article is doing that's any different from what the rest of us have done for the last several weeks. And why you feel the need to question his credentials anymore than the rest of us should question yours.
His opinions are just as valid as yours. And mine.
So I'll take that as a no, thanks.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I'm sure now you'll say "she was his dealer!" 
