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.
Zimmerman will not be convicted of second degree murder, plain and simple. His attorney feels they have a strong case for self defense......
IF they do make a plea deal, it will be for a much lesser charge to appease the masses.
If they can get a plea deal it will be to benefit Zimmerman, period. He'd better hope they can get a good plea offer from the State. You realize the State does not have to offer any plea deal at all, don't you? Have you failed to notice that there are no "masses" advocating anything in this case AT THIS POINT? People are already forgetting about this case!!
Btw, WHY would Zimmerman take a plea at all if you're so absolutely sure he would never be convicted as charged? You're aware, certainly, that an acquittal is much better than a guilty plea, plus an acquittal means no prison, no probation, free and clear. Your assertion followed by saying there is even a possibility Zimmerman would take a plea deal is....well...to be polite, totally inconsistent at the least.
If they can get a plea deal it will be to benefit Zimmerman, period. He'd better hope they can get a good plea offer from the State. You realize the State does not have to offer any plea deal at all, don't you? Have you failed to notice that there are no "masses" advocating anything in this case AT THIS POINT? People are already forgetting about this case!!
Btw, WHY would Zimmerman take a plea at all if you're so absolutely sure he would never be convicted as charged? You're aware, certainly, that an acquittal is much better than a guilty plea, plus an acquittal means no prison, no probation, free and clear. Your assertion followed by saying there is even a possibility Zimmerman would take a plea deal is....well...to be polite, totally inconsistent at the least.
I don't think you even remembered debating about this in the previous threads where you made umpteen posts ignoring mountains of evidence that prove that a jury will have extreme difficultly convicting in this case. The evidence simply isn't there to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he acted in malice for 2nd degree murder.
Ha! Ha! Zimmerman will end up with a public defender! Good luck, Georgie! Next time think before you pull the trigger!
No he won't. O'mara took the case pro-bono before he even knew there was a defense fund. It means the taxpayers of FL will end up paying for his defense. He'll get less money for the defense witnesses, but this whole thing will end up costing the tax payers millions. Sucks to be taxpayer in FL.
No he won't. O'mara took the case pro-bono before he even knew there was a defense fund. It means the taxpayers of FL will end up paying for his defense. He'll get less money for the defense witnesses, but this whole thing will end up costing the tax payers millions. Sucks to be taxpayer in FL.
Cost the taxpayers millions.....No, it won't. The State of Florida has a budget just like every other state. There are limits to the amount of money allowed by the defense for these cases. Do you really think that every felony case taken on by the public defender's office or a CONTRACT public defender is allocated "millions" of dollars for the defense? Geeezzz. That's just stupid.
Additionally, I haven't seen O'Mara making any statements about taking this case "pro-bono".....do you have any links....if Zimmerman is declared indigent and entitled to an attorney paid for by the state, that attorney will work within the budget set up by the courts for such representation. O'Mara will not be allowed to bill the state for his work at his normal private attorney fees. And, yes, there will be less money for witnesses such as expert witnesses as well as for investigators and other people on the defense team. A LOT LESS MONEY.
O'Mara can't be forced to take this case as basically a "contract public defender." He may CHOOSE to do so, but still Zimmerman will not get the quality of defense he would have if he had "saved" the money he received in donations for his legal representation.
If the defense can't get the case thrown out, I predict the defense will hint they are open to a plea deal privately to the State, since money is becoming tight. If the State says no deal, then it will be interesting how the defense will be structured in the end.
Cost the taxpayers millions.....No, it won't. The State of Florida has a budget just like every other state. There are limits to the amount of money allowed by the defense for these cases.
Additionally, I haven't seen O'Mara making any statements about taking this case "pro-bono".....do you have any links...
.if Zimmerman is declared indigent and entitled to an attorney paid for by the state, that attorney will work within the budget set up by the courts for such representation. O'Mara will not be allowed to bill the state for his work at his normal private attorney fees. And, yes, there will be less money for witnesses such as expert witnesses as well as for investigators and other people on the defense team. A LOT LESS MONEY. O'Mara can't be forced to take this case as basically a "contract public defender." Whole section is moot, I didn't say anything to the contrary, Still cost the state money.
He may CHOOSE to do so, but still Zimmerman will not get the quality of defense he would have if he had "saved" the money he received in donations for his legal representation.
Sucks to be Zimmerman and O'Mara.
It's been said a million times. He originally took the case pro-bono. Here are a couple of quotes from different time periods:
Quote:
With him of course will be his attorney, Mark O'Mara. O'Mara is handling this case pro bono.
O’Mara, a criminal defense lawyer from central Florida, also indicated that money pouring in from Zimmerman supporters means he himself will be paid for at least some of his work, after originally agreeing to take on the defense as a pro bono case.
Work on your reading comprehension. I never said the defense would cost the taxpayers millions. I said the case would. By the end of June, the cost to Sanford was already over $385,000
Quote:
So far, costs related to the case are more than $385,000, including:
$96,000 in overtime
$182,000 in regular time
$106,000 in other expenses
Those costs don't include ones by the Florida Department of Law Enforcement, the state attorney's office, and the special prosecutor.
Throw in the costs mentioned, but not included, and it was easily over $400,000 by June 27. And that's with the defense paying for itself. If the taxpayers have to start also paying for the defense, it will absolutely run into a million +. Heck, it might even without the defense bills.
As for the money coming from a "budget" and not the taxpayers, that just makes me laugh. Geez that's just stupid. I'm sorry you don't understand that all government money comes from taxpayers.
Work on your reading comprehension. I never said the defense would cost the taxpayers millions. I said the case would. By the end of June, the cost to Sanford was already over $385,000
Throw in the costs mentioned, but not included, and it was easily over $400,000 by June 27. And that's with the defense paying for itself. If the taxpayers have to start also paying for the defense, it will absolutely run into a million +. Heck, it might even without the defense bills.
As for the money coming from a "budget" and not the taxpayers, that just makes me laugh. Geez that's just stupid. I'm sorry you don't understand that all government money comes from taxpayers.
"It's been said millions of times".....exaggerate much? What is it you don't understand about a state "budget" being the way taxpayer money is allocated to various state agencies/govt. branches? Each year a budget is proposed, whereby the various state agencies/branches of govt. submit a proposed budget for the amount of money they need to operate, and then at the end of the legislative session, the governor (in Florida) reviews the proposed budget and can veto line items and then signs the budget, which means that the way the money is allocated in the final budget is the amount of TAXPAYERS money each agency/branch receives for operation for the next fiscal year. Therefore, the judicial branch has a specific amount of money for operation for the next fiscal year. Within that amount of money, agencies such as the public defender's office and the state attorney's office has a SPECIFIC amount of money it can spend during the next year. When those agencies run out of money, they cannot spend money on anything until money money is put in their budget by the legislature for the next fiscal year. What's hard to understand about that? Do you think that taxpayers money is just put into some "general fund" and different agencies just take from that fund when they need money for operation?
The topic was about whether or not Zimmerman would have to use a public defender if he ran out of money. Perhaps you could learn to stay on topic. We were NOT talking about the total cost of the case to the state of Florida. Btw, where do you think funding comes from for the courts in Florida? WHERE do you think the judicial branch gets its money? You screwed up in your post and now you're just trying to save face. Maybe you are the one who should study-up a little about how state government is funded.
"It's been said millions of times".....exaggerate much? What is it you don't understand about a state "budget" being the way taxpayer money is allocated to various state agencies/govt. branches? Each year a budget is proposed, whereby the various state agencies/branches of govt. submit a proposed budget for the amount of money they need to operate, and then at the end of the legislative session, the governor (in Florida) reviews the proposed budget and can veto line items and then signs the budget, which means that the way the money is allocated in the final budget is the amount of TAXPAYERS money each agency/branch receives for operation for the next fiscal year. Therefore, the judicial branch has a specific amount of money for operation for the next fiscal year. Within that amount of money, agencies such as the public defender's office and the state attorney's office has a SPECIFIC amount of money it can spend during the next year. When those agencies run out of money, they cannot spend money on anything until money money is put in their budget by the legislature for the next fiscal year. What's hard to understand about that? Do you think that taxpayers money is just put into some "general fund" and different agencies just take from that fund when they need money for operation?
The topic was about whether or not Zimmerman would have to use a public defender if he ran out of money. Perhaps you could learn to stay on topic. We were NOT talking about the total cost of the case to the state of Florida. Btw, where do you think funding comes from for the courts in Florida? WHERE do you think the judicial branch gets its money? You screwed up in your post and now you're just trying to save face. Maybe you are the one who should study-up a little about how state government is funded.
Sucks to be Zimmerman and O'Mara.
Screwed up? I said this whole thing will cost the FL taxpayers millions. Then I showed a link that proved they were already well on the way to a million.
And I said if Zimmerman is declared indigent, it will give him less money for the defense.
Which one of those statements is untrue?
Also, please answer this one question. Where does the Sanford and the state of FL get its money? I'll even make it multiple choice for you:
a. Taxpayers
b. The government money tree
c. Bake sales
d. Pots of gold at the end of rainbows
Screwed up? I said this whole thing will cost the FL taxpayers millions. Then I showed a link that proved they were already well on the way to a million.
And I said if Zimmerman is declared indigent, it will give him less money for the defense.
Which one of those statements is untrue?
Also, please answer this one question. Where does the Sanford and the state of FL get its money? I'll even make it multiple choice for you:
a. Taxpayers
b. The government money tree
c. Bake sales
d. Pots of gold at the end of rainbows
Logic isn't even on the radar of some Poster's here. Way to provide clear and concise points and answers to illogical gobblygook.
Screwed up? I said this whole thing will cost the FL taxpayers millions. Then I showed a link that proved they were already well on the way to a million.
And I said if Zimmerman is declared indigent, it will give him less money for the defense.
Which one of those statements is untrue?
Also, please answer this one question. Where does the Sanford and the state of FL get its money? I'll even make it multiple choice for you:
a. Taxpayers
b. The government money tree
c. Bake sales
d. Pots of gold at the end of rainbows
And so what if it does cost "millions"? What's your point? We shouldn't charge people with crimes and try them because it cost a lot of money? What is your point?
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 sorry you don't understand that all government money comes from taxpayers.
What is it you don't understand about a state "budget" being the way taxpayer money is allocated to various state agencies/govt. branches? 
Each year a budget is proposed, whereby the various state agencies/branches of govt. submit a proposed budget for the amount of money they need to operate, and then at the end of the legislative session, the governor (in Florida) reviews the proposed budget and can veto line items and then signs the budget, which means that the way the money is allocated in the final budget is the amount of TAXPAYERS money each agency/branch receives for operation for the next fiscal year. Therefore, the judicial branch has a specific amount of money for operation for the next fiscal year. Within that amount of money, agencies such as the public defender's office and the state attorney's office has a SPECIFIC amount of money it can spend during the next year. When those agencies run out of money, they cannot spend money on anything until money money is put in their budget by the legislature for the next fiscal year. What's hard to understand about that? Do you think that taxpayers money is just put into some "general fund" and different agencies just take from that fund when they need money for operation?
