Shellie Zimmerman Has No Defense to the Perjury Charge II

Thursday, February 21, 2013

Greetings everyone.

Searching Mind inspired me to write this post when he mentioned Nogues v. State, 762 So.2d 967 (Fla. 3d DCA 2000) in a comment and asked what effect it might have on the State’s perjury case against Shellie Zimmerman.

This is my answer to his comment.

Great catch coming up with the Nogues case where the Court reversed the defendant police officer’s conviction for perjury because the prosecution based its case on the testimony of only one witness. The Court said,

This testimony was not legally sufficient to establish the crime of perjury. It is a well-established principle of law that “a verdict of conviction in a perjury case must have for its support something more than the testimony of one witness.” Yarbrough v. State, 79 Fla. 256, 83 So. 873, 874 (1920). “To convict of the crime of perjury, the offense must be proved by the oaths of two witnesses, or by the oath of one witness, and by other independent and corroborating circumstances, which is deemed of equal weight with another witness.” Id. (citations omitted). See also Rader v. State, 52 So.2d 105, 108 (Fla. 1951) (“The falsity of the material matter sworn to must be proved by the oaths of two witnesses, or by the oath of one witness and other independent and corroborating circumstances which are of equal weight with the testimony of another witness.”); Wells v. State, 270 So.2d 399 (Fla. 3d DCA 1972) (same), cert. denied, 277 So.2d 533 (Fla.), cert. denied, 414 U.S. 1024, 94 S.Ct. 449, 38 L.Ed.2d 316 (1973).

Nogues was a former Miami police officer who was charged with making a false statement under oath “during a formal investigation of an extortion scheme directed at other officers and related to the “Miami River Cops” scandal. In that statement, Nogues denied that he was present at a meeting between George Fonte, Charles Orrett, Armando Garcia, and Dagoberto Garcia at the defendant’s house, held to discuss extorting money from one of them. Nogues asserted that such a meeting had “never occurred,” and that he was “never present in any of that stuff.”

The only witness who testified against him was Charles Orrett, “a Metro-Dade police officer who had agreed to cooperate with State and federal authorities. Orrett testified at trial that Nogues had indeed met with other police officers at his house to plan an extortion scheme.”

I believe Shellie Zimmerman’s case is covered by the other-independent-and-corroborating-evidence exception mentioned in Nogues because the State will be relying on Paypal records and the defendant’s and her own bank statements to corroborate what she said regarding their scheme to hide the Paypal donations from the Court by transferring the money into her account and his sister’s account structuring the transfer into a series of multiple transactions in amounts less than $10,000. I expect the evidence will show that she transferred $67,000 into her account and that money was in her account when she testified at the bond hearing.

364 Responses to Shellie Zimmerman Has No Defense to the Perjury Charge II

  1. colin black says:

    @CN

    I hope you are correct. I couldn’t imagine DeeDee having to face Fogen at a deposition. It’s bad enough that she will have to see the child killer at trial.

    Reply

    Leave a Reply

    Enter your comment here…

    They could an shouls arange for her to be hidden from camera an the public in courtroom.
    By a screen.
    Ive seen vunrable witnesses due to age l
    Or spouceal abuse from a defendant
    Given protection behind a screen.
    Plus would drive the outhousers nuts.
    Ooops forgot dem nuts already thrive in the trees there natural abode

  2. type1juve says:

    @CN

    I hope you are correct. I couldn’t imagine DeeDee having to face Fogen at a deposition. It’s bad enough that she will have to see the child killer at trial.

  3. pat deadder says:

    If o’mara got the addresses would fogen also have them.I mean seriously I believe that would be dangerous.Also is fogen allowed to be there when the witnesses are deposed god I hope not.I really don’t know how Trayvon’s family can stand all this.They are much better people than me.love Trent

    • elcymoo says:

      @pat deadder: I seem to remember reading in the rules of discovery that since the defendant has chosen to ‘involve himself in discovery’, according to one or more of his attorney’s motions, GZ will be permitted to be present during depositions. How that’s not supposed to intimidate a witness like DeeDee I’ll never understand.

      • pat deadder says:

        Thank you that is outrageous imho.

      • CherokeeNative says:

        Professor Leatherman will correct me if I am wrong – but GZ will not be permitted to be present at the depositions of DeeDee or any other witness. 3.220 of Criminal Procedure provides:

        (7) Defendant’s Physical Presence. A defendant shall not be physically present at a deposition except on stipulation of the parties or as provided by this rule. The court may order the physical presence of the defendant on a showing of good cause. The court may consider (A) the need for the physical presence of the defendant to obtain effective discovery, (B) the intimidating effect of the defendant‘s presence on the witness, if any, (C)
        any cost or inconvenience which may result, and (D) any alternative electronic or audio/visual means available.

  4. colin black says:

    Xena says:

    February 22, 2013 at 6:11 pm

    @jm

    Another question I have is why does MOM need addresses of witnesses like Trayvon’s parents or Dee-Dee?

    For purposes of intimidation and terrifying. When your enemy has personal information such as your address, you are suppose to live on pins and needles.

    But maybe O’Mara wants to send investigators out to go through their garbage cans.

    Another reason M O M should in know way even had the audacity to ask for this info.
    A persons lawfull place of abode is of know possable intrest re any questioning he wishes to conduct at a neutral venue.
    keyword
    NUTRAL.

    Where a wittness lives is of no consiqence unlesss its in a Fedral or State Prison.
    Second haveing seen innocent people exposed an outed/doxed as Dee Dee wich is only a codename,
    An yet inoccents were targeted
    He even condemed it on his sleezzeegeezeepropa gander peter pan beg site Lost Boys ,org.usa.
    How unfortunate an how wrong thease things transpired over mistaken identy
    KEY WORD Misteken Identity.

    So why in the whole entire world of freaking common sence would he want to put himself in a position of GATE KEEPER.
    To the true identy of wittness eight an her adress an that of her Family loved ones ect.

    Because if per chance this infoemation did reach the domain of the Magical Kingdom of the Innerweb.

    Then he would have proved himself an his cohorts to be pretty inept Gate Keeper .

    They have not been privy to this info and it has remained secret.
    Its not nessesery for them to know as on a need to know basis they dont need to know.
    And have no right to know.
    An if they were of sound body an mind wouldnt even want to know.

  5. colin black says:

    gbrbsb says:

    February 22, 2013 at 3:42 pm

    If interested, Trent´s already got it up… manybuddies not so far.

    Reply
    If poss please post a link am avvin pc issues ..t y i a if poss

  6. FactsFirst says:

    Was that Sybrina in the court room?

  7. looolooo says:

    I’m glade that BdlR FINALLY mentioned the rabid and threatening rhetoric from our friendly neighborhood CTH. However I was disapointed that he didn’t mention how overtly racist and violent their comments typically are. And that many claim to be donators to Fogen’s defense fund.

    And does anyone know of any actuall incidents of any of GZ’s family members being threatend? Has any of them made police reports. I remember RZJ mentioning on FAIL Maher that their sister had to flee her residence because of death threats. Really? Does anyone even know or care who or where she is? And RZJ sure aint making it difficult for any would be assasins ….. is he?

    • Jun says:

      Perhaps BDLR is saving that little tidbit for trial or a deposition

    • groans says:

      BDLR is smart. He holds onto his cards until he absolutely needs them, and he never overplays his hand.

    • elcymoo says:

      I believe that Shellie Zimmerman said during the first bond hearing that she’d received hate mail but no death threats. If memory serves me well – and it doesn’t always – BdlR asked her if she’d saved that hate mail and could turn them over, and she agreed to do so. Nothing since but crickets.

      • Xena says:

        @elcymoo

        BdlR asked her if she’d saved that hate mail and could turn them over, and she agreed to do so. Nothing since but crickets.

        It is a puzzle — how in hell does GZ and ShelLIE receive hate mail or death threats when no one knows their address and/or phone numbers?

        • jm says:

          “It is a puzzle — how in hell does GZ and ShelLIE receive hate mail or death threats when no one knows their address and/or phone numbers?”

          Good question.

          Another question I have is why does MOM need addresses of witnesses like Trayvon’s parents or Dee-Dee?

          • Xena says:

            @jm

            Another question I have is why does MOM need addresses of witnesses like Trayvon’s parents or Dee-Dee?

            For purposes of intimidation and terrifying. When your enemy has personal information such as your address, you are suppose to live on pins and needles.

            But maybe O’Mara wants to send investigators out to go through their garbage cans.

          • jm says:

            Xena: “O’Mara wants to send investigators out to go through their garbage cans.”

            Oh, I thought maybe MOM wanted to send them condolences for the loss of their beloved Trayvon.

            Really, when MOM asked the judge if she trusted him I almost laughed out loud. Surely she knows MOM knew about the money GZ was hiding because of the prison phone calls where GZ says he knew. I wonder if the judge is aware of the beg sites or his interviews where he claims GZ’s nose was broken by Trayvon even though there is clearly no evidence of that.

            I’m sorry but O’Mara is one huge lying sleaze IMO who has gone beyond what a defense attorney needs to do with his website and interviews giving the public misinformation as well as grandstanding during his court appearances where he whines about not having time or money to defend his client and begging for money from racists and gun nutz.

      • Jun says:

        Xena has it right

        they are bloodclot lying

        Even BDLR said today, no one knew any of their family members or seen them before or knew where they were and they were telephonically allowed to testify

        so there is no way for hate mail to have reached them

        yet

        they feel entitled to the witnesses personal information and calling threats against them false because there was no threat specifically from them

        Well there is no specific threats from the witnesses, so why doesnt Omara give out Fogenhats’ present residence and his demographics to all the witnesses?

        I feel since they committed no crime and Omara is trying to accuse them of a crime and confronting them, then the witnesses should also have the right to confront the defendant on what he is confronting the witnesses about

        fair is fair

        No one made him kill that kid

        and even if we hypothetically state that the kid was kicking his ass, Fogenhats was obviously in no danger of dying or great bodily harm, so he chose himself to shoot the kid, even under hypothesis

        either way, the forensics prove the kid never did anything at all to Fogenhats, it is only within Fogenhats’ claims that happened, and just cause he claimed it, does not make it true…

        Cant go against witnesses for simply testifying what the defendant the killer did

    • towerflower says:

      CTH is already denying that they outed Wit. 9 saying the news agencies did it first. The only thing those sites they quote only have them saying it was a cousin. They are the ones who posted her name and life story and even encouraged people to disseminate it and research it to get more information of her.

  8. ay2z says:

    Judge Nelson was quick to stop West from elaborating on the fluff that surrounds the Crump and Witness 8 issue, but Orlando Sentinel made that front and center– were they not listening to the heart of the issues? Instead, they reported on the rhetoric of West’s ‘witness is now 19 years old, said at the time she was 16’.

    Why would a news organization not pay attention and re- report that old non-news and not how the judge slammed the door on WEst for trying to use her court to get his message out to the public?

    • groans says:

      My answer: Because it’s the Orlando Sentinel, not a news organization.

      I never read that rag before this case, but I know now not to expect journalism, let alone balanced journalism, from it in the future!

      I have often wondered if the owners and/or editorial board realizes the negative impact this coverage is having on intelligent people NATIONWIDE. But maybe they’re just struggling to stay afloat as a local yocal paper, just to survive at all.

      • Trained Observer says:

        Orlando Sentinel is part of Tribune Company, a chain that includes Chicago Tribune, Los Angeles Times, and Baltimore Sun. Like all mainstream media, staff has been pared way back. I won’t argue that the coverage is fabulous. But to classify this paper as “local yocal” is not accurate either. What the Sentinel does is report on local yocals,. jerks like Fogen.

  9. gbrbsb says:

    Anyone interested, Trent (stateoftheinternet) has already uploaded the hearing videos (1-7) on youtube.

  10. Tzar says:

    today was a good day
    not because we won the motions, that was inevitable; but because the defense got a well deserved undressing from Nelson, Blackwell and BDLR
    cheers

    • blushedbrown says:

      @Tzar
      Yes Indeed!!

    • FactsFirst says:

      Yaassss!!! My favorite part was when Judge Nelson’s response to West assertions about statements Crump made in television interviews makes him a witness, “If that’s what makes Crump a witness then every attorney in here is a witness and can be deposed, that doesn’t make Crump a witness.” Old West didn’t know to say after that… I LMAO though…

      • FactsFirst says:

        Please excuse my typo’s… I know my comments are a mess..

      • Tzar says:

        My favorite line was when Nelson had enough and after west asked her if he should do something, she replied with , “it’s your deposition, go ‘head” as in I’m gonna sit here and listen to you but I’ve already made my ruling

      • groans says:

        Exactly! I mean, get real – HOW MANY times has O’Mara talke in TV interviews about the killer’s broken nose, etc., etc.

        Mayby BDLR should add O’Mara to his witness list! LOL!

        SMH.

      • Rachael says:

        Yes, FactsFirst – that was a good one!!!

    • groans says:

      They were so spoiled early on, that I think they felt everone would think they’re ENTITLED to the whold world, and all of us in it.

      I mean, they were given a lot of leeway early on, and it seems like they took that as meaning they didn’t need to be preparing their case – that they’re so special that they could delay trial as long as they felt like it. And even now, when they “don’t have enough time to prepare a defense,” they are STILL focusing on tangential (at best) stuff.

      I think the wide “interest” in the case really went to their heads.

    • SearchingMind says:

      It still IS a good because the day is not yet over. It is a good day today because BB has been- and was excellent today. He restored the image of lawyers as fine learned gentlemen. He also undid the damage caused by O’Mara and West to the legal profession and removed the mediocre-image this duo has been presenting to the public about lawyers. Each day the legal profession wins is one of my best days. That’s just the way it is. I can’t conceive of anything more beautiful that the science- and application of Law. It is also a good because Judge Nelson showed firmness and discipline and exhibited the kind of command of the law that taxpayers must demand of Judges. I appreciate very much the fact that she is not falling over herself trying to satisfy perceived ‘public opinion’ or trying hard to “appear to be fair and just” by pandering (like our good friend Judge Lester) instead of “actually being fair and just” by adhering strictly to the law. Of course it is a very good day for Trayvon and his parents because today GZ took another step towards his trial. And lastly, it is a good day because it has been a disastrous day for O’Mara, West and Jeralyn Merritt. I think these three may start now to reevaluate their relationship/contacts with the CTH.

      • kimmi says:

        @SearchingMind says:
        “And lastly, it is a good day because it has been a disastrous day for O’Mara, West and Jeralyn Merritt. I think these three may start now to reevaluate their relationship/contacts with the CTH.”

        I totally agree it was a good day, although wouldn’t hold my breath on those three reevaluating anything…
        I popped in over there (CTH), and it seems the treepers are still trying to figure out why Dershowitz has fallen silent, and apparently have no clue about the “Response in Opposition to Defendant’s Motion to Compel” filed by Blackwell.
        They are over there complaining JN came ‘all prepared’ to deny the motion for Crumps deposition, with all the case laws prepared to deny the motion! Duh!!!
        So, if birds of a feather do flock together, they are as clueless as the rest of them over there. I’m just sayin…..

      • kimmi says:

        Papa Z is also spewing garbage how Fogen’s 6th Amendment rights are being violated for JN not allowing the release of the addresses until the deposition! Unbelievable!

        • Xena says:

          @kimmi

          Papa Z is also spewing garbage how Fogen’s 6th Amendment rights are being violated for JN not allowing the release of the addresses until the deposition! Unbelievable!

          Know what’s unbelievable for me? It is my understanding that when a judge makes a ruling that the lawyer believes is inconsistent with the law, (constitution, or rule), that they file a motion for reconsideration, citing what applies, and asking the court to reconsider its ruling and enter one consistent with the law.

          What they DON’T DO, is wait months and come back with another motion requesting the same thing as though to circumvent the court’s previous order.

      • Jun says:

        LOL

        I dont know how she infringed on the 6th amendment when she is giving them a speedy trial LMAO

      • kimmi says:

        @Xena
        “What they DON’T DO, is wait months and come back with another motion requesting the same thing as though to circumvent the court’s previous order.”

        I was wondering if West was going to come back again with a re-written motion citing the reasons Crump needs to be deposed. LOL

        • Xena says:

          @kimmi

          I was wondering if West was going to come back again with a re-written motion citing the reasons Crump needs to be deposed. LOL

          LOL!! Oh yeah, I can read a paragraph in it now;
          “The defendants’ financial supporters demand that Benjamin Crump be deposed. They have given us a mandate to humiliate Benjamin Crump so the defendant’s brother can file a complaint with the Bar Association to have him disbarred.”

      • looolooo says:

        Well said Xena.

  11. SearchingMind says:

    Checkout this exchange:

    Judge Nelson: What is the relevant information that you seek to obtain from the deposition of Mr. Crump?

    D. West: “First of all your honor, I think that is the wrong test!”

    This guy make Beavis and Butthead look really smart.

    • groans says:

      He truly never came up with anything relevant that he didn’t already know or couldn’t get elsewhere!

      Crump’s lawyer was GREAT, wasn’t he?

    • Rachael says:

      I couldn’t believe he said it that way to a judge. In fact, there were several things I could not believe he said the way he said. He seemed a bit disrespectful to me.

      • groans says:

        Yes. And unprepared. And clearly going way off topic.

        Judge Nelson was prepared. She knew exactly what the issues were.

        She’s probably always that way, but I wouldn’t be surprised if she does more preparation because she’s learned that she can’t rely on defense counsel to give her the straight up on either the facts or the law.

    • Trained Observer says:

      Definitely candidates for Darwin awards.

  12. ChrisNY~Laurie says:

    I can’t wait to watch the hearing later. i hope Trent puts it up fast.

    • groans says:

      Check manybuddies YouTube, too. They tend to post the hearings, and you can hear it all without sudden bursts of a loud voice giving commentary.

      (No offense, Trent! I enjoy your commentary, but not while I’m trying to listen to a court proceeding.)

    • looolooo says:

      Me too. I just love his hysterical commentary. I wonder if he’s noticed that the defense “Lawyer Lady” , a.k.a. GZ’s babysitter has in fact changed her suit. Trent has commented that her never- changing suit must be lucky for her. She must’ve tuned in to his channel. Good for her.

    • gbrbsb says:

      If interested, Trent´s already got it up… manybuddies not so far.

  13. looolooo says:

    So did she, or didn’t allow the defense access to DD’s and other witnesses addresses? Forgive me, I’m not as sharp as most of you guys are,

    • Two sides to a story says:

      She referred to her previous statement during the last hearing when she told them to depose the witnesses and then ask them their addresses. I don’t think they have to answer that question even then.

    • elcymoo says:

      My volume was lousy, but I thought I heard the judge say that the defense could ask the witnesses for their addresses during the depositions, and that this information would be redacted from documents and protected by the state and defense.

    • Jun says:

      She ruled that Omara can ask them at the deposition and there was no need to give them addresses ahead of time and they have had close to a year since taking this case so there was nothing infringing their usage of time

      So she ruled neutral, however, as FDLE noted, the witnesses are allowed to object

    • jm says:

      It is my understanding that Judge Nelson told MOM (as she previously) that they can ask the witnesses for their demographics when they present for the deposition and they can give it to defense or they can refuse.

    • Nefertari05 says:

      She aid theycould ask, as others have mentioned. But, what I thought was interesting was that it was indicated (BDLR, I think) that she was asked and she declined. I believe it was during the phone deposition, at least that wa my impression. But, it was definitely said she declined to give her address, and I was surprised when the defense did not follow up by stating they did ask, she declined, do we motion to compel her to give it to us(or whatever the next step would be).

  14. Jun says:

    You have had 11 months since taking this case and 5 months since the scheduling hearing

    Nelson LOL

    Omara is rude and I am glad the Judge gave the witnesses a chance to object any leering into their addresses as I am sure they will have lawyers present

    • groans says:

      And West is even worse than rude. He’s condescending to the judge. Even in the motion he filed he spent a lot of words “telling” the judge what SHE said and suggested, if not said outright, how SHE had messed up the efficiency of their deposition and trial prep. That is not prudent.

      Instead of all those wasted words, he should have stated the reasons that they NEED Crump’s testimony. Never went there. Not in the motion, and again, not in court.

      • Nefertari05 says:

        Those looooooong paaaaauuuussses, both times she asked him to specify the relevant questions they wanted to ask, were hilarious. West looked like a deer caught in the headlights.

        Then she came back and denied the same motion TWICE, for different facial insufficiencies. I know in her head she was probably saying, “what kind of half-assed motion is this, you filed in my court?” Although that description might be generous, since they didn’t even get half of it right.

  15. Two sides to a story says:

    West and OM always look mighty jolly for two attorneys who are mostly lose all their motions.

    • jm says:

      I thought they seemed happy too. Is there a conspiracy that they dislike GZ so much they are happy to lose the motions?

    • Jun says:

      This is just a wild guess but perhaps they understand forensics and the witnesses and know their client is guilty and feel it is pointless to move on and are not pleading just because of the Fogenhats

      • Two sides to a story says:

        I think they definitely know that and are playing to the paying supporters. They’re doing their best as defense attorneys but have no realistic way to save Fogen.

  16. willisnewton says:

    So did the defense argue at all about the timing of an immunity hearing? I thought that was supposed to be at issue and discussed today.

    • Nefertari05 says:

      So did I.

    • blushedbrown says:

      @Willis

      I think once the defense got banged up, they totally forget about it.

      • willisnewton says:

        And I think they know darn well there is no way that the defense can ever let GZ give testimony but that for the sake of appearances they will continue to act as though he’s ready to swear an oath and get on the stand. What else CAN they do but bluff, pose and beg for donations? Oh yes, they can stall for time and hope to drag out the process as long as possible. Prison time awaits their client and the only thing they can give him is time out on bail and a lot of hot air while they hope the prosecution somehow falls down on the job and by some miracle fails to prove M2.

        I still think that in the end GZ will ask for a plea deal. It’s the smart move. I doubt the prosecution cares to entertain the notion however.

        • blushedbrown says:

          @Willis

          No mater how many motions that are set before Judge Nelson, she tells them time and time again trial is set for June 10th 2013.

          The more they keep trying to stall, the closer the date becomes. Time marches on and O’mara can not stop time.

    • I’ll say it again, there will never be an immunity hearing!! LOLO they can’t win so why make more of a spectacle of their lack of professionalism and preparation! they already look foolish enough having all these worthless motions denied on live tv.

  17. groans says:

    Her Honor recognizes BS when she sees it.

  18. groans says:

    No internet in 1968 (and all his other OLD cited cases)!

  19. groans says:

    O’Mara is complaining about GOING FAR AFIELD???!!!

  20. Nefertari05 says:

    The outhouse is going to be pissed, that BDLR used them to support his objection to the motion. LOL! Sorry, but that tickles my funnybone!

  21. Trina Cosbie says:

    DENIED!!!!…..ZIDIOT NATION…..DENIED!!!!!

  22. groans says:

    Naughty, naughty, Treehouse!!

    • jm says:

      Love the dishonorable mention of the Conservative Treehouse. Those squirrels are going to be mad.

      Regarding addresses, it’s more grandstanding by MOM to play to the Treehouse nutz and a lame excuse for his failure.

  23. ChrisNY~Laurie says:

    the conservative treehouse…lol

  24. Rachael says:

    And the fear of them being stalked, Mr. MOM, is largely YOUR fault!!!

  25. willisnewton says:

    What if anything happened in regard to a SYG hearing date?

  26. groans says:

    Her honor has done a lot of homeword in preparation for the hearing!

  27. Bam!!! another slam to the dufense!!
    they just can’t take NO for an answer!!LOLOLOL

  28. Rachael says:

    Oh God. MOM. Time for popcorn.

  29. blushedbrown says:

    BOOM!! Done and done!! West you lose!!!

  30. Rachael says:

    “This is a sideshow” – Blackwell.

    Got that right.

  31. Rachael says:

    Oh I love you Mr. Blackwell ❤

  32. blushedbrown says:

    OMG, Bring it on Blackwell!!!

  33. Nefertari05 says:

    Go Atty Blackwell, Do Your Thing!

  34. blushedbrown says:

    Go Blackwell!!!

    • jm says:

      Blackwell is great. I could listen to him all day. He clearly has done his homework and makes West and MOM look like blathering idiots.

      • blushedbrown says:

        I love his expression, They can’t willy-nilly depose a lawyer!!

      • Rachael says:

        Because they ARE blathering idiots. Especially MOM who thankfully is not speaking today, thank goodness.

        • jm says:

          West is again playing to his crowd of GZ supporters. Gotta love Judge Nelson and Blackwell for exposing the sleazy GZ attorneys for what they are.

          • Xena says:

            WOW! I have so much to catch-up with today. Gotta love Judge Nelson for remembering her prior rulings and comments and not being persuaded by the defense to change her mind. Maybe now O’Mara and West understand that if they disagree with a judge’s decision, the proper way is file a motion for reconsideration rather than a new motion in effort to circumvent prior decisions.

          • blushedbrown says:

            @Xena

            You and me both. Now that I have spent all morning and afternoon on the computer, I have to go rattle some pots and pans real soon.
            I don’t won’t to go. 😦

  35. Rachael says:

    Look you effer, they played it for GZ himself and he said he didn’t reconize it, it didn’t even sound like him.

  36. blushedbrown says:

    Depose witness 8, for God sake. He wants Crump to interpet her words, just ask her!!! My God is he really that dense.

  37. looolooo says:

    LOL. Judge Nelson…..what is the relevant info that you need from Crump? West……nothing but crickets. West is a Nimrod.

  38. FactsFirst says:

    I LOVE JUDGE NELSON! She just handed West his ASS!

  39. ay2z says:

    WESH works but audio is terrible — correction, they’ve fixed the quality and volume! (thanks!)

    West is up, says the recording was essentially unintelligible, significant gaps and portions not recorded at all.

  40. ay2z says:

    WFTV has a live hearing banner up with a link up but says unavailable, but it’s still 5 minutes to the hearing.

    http://www.wftv.com/videos/news/wftv-livestream-717/vGcDD/

  41. colin black says:

    What arrogance to listen to an attorney state that a prosecuter does not have the right to file a charge against you….

    I would ask isnt that just a technicality over durastriction.
    Its not claiming Im innocent of lieing..Only that I shoulldnt have to be held acountable for my wrong doings?

    Isnt it that exact feeling of entitlement that got my Husband into his present predicament.
    Wont this just anger people more an cause further claims of us expecting special treatment as well as a special prosecuter.

    B T W Is it right what my husband says he gets a special prosecuter because he is special?
    Anyway I dont know if I should go along with your scheme to have the charges dissmissed on a technicality.
    Last time I agreed with my husband to lie to the courts against my better judgement all this trouble fell upon me.

    Shouldnt I just tell the truth an accept my punishment for wrong doing?
    Why are you laughing?
    OK we will do it your way I have no free will an am just a pawn in things way above my head.

  42. Deborah says:

    Does anyone know if the hearing today will be live streamed and if so can they please post a link. Thanks in advance.

  43. type1juve says:

    @R2012… Just because someone doesn’t post all the time doesn’t mean they are new. I for one, have followed this blog from the very beginning.

    • Dave says:

      People like RodERICk2012 are very obviously here to cause pointless arguments and disrupt any sort of serious discussion of the issues and are best ignored.

      • roderick2012 says:

        Really, Dave?

        I am just calling out people who want to inject BS into threads, but if you’re so blind then that’s your problem.

  44. Tee says:

    I know that many here won’t agree with me, but I feel sad for her. She looked so sad to me. Loving a man listening to him & believing in him will cost her big! She need to use common sense now because she sure didn’t use any then, and take a plea deal. Someone need to give this lady some track shoes so she could get to running away from this man.

    • Two sides to a story says:

      I think she deserves some compassion as a person who is co-dependent to Fogen. She could turn her life around by leaving him and examining her relationship to him.

    • Rachael says:

      I think many women have neen there, I know I have, just not in such a big or public way. I’m not condoning her lying for him (especially since killing an unarmed minor was part of it), but I (don’t throw things at me) do understand it. However, I won’t if she stays with him after this, though she might be in a spot where she feels she has nowhere to go. Even if she leaves him, she will always be the wife or ex-wife of GZ and that would be hard to get away from.

      • jm says:

        Rachael: “….. she might be in a spot where she feels she has nowhere to go.”

        She definitely is in a spot where she has no place to go unless her parents will take her in and support her because she will be unemployable for quite some time because she has a reputation as a liar who supported a killer. Even if she is not eventually convicted of perjury her reputation is ruined.

      • Two sides to a story says:

        I’ve been there too and thankfully left the relationship before anything hugely dramatic and toxic to anyone else happened. My ex was a Fogen disaster waiting to happen.

      • FactsFirst says:

        I feel sorry SheLie, but I really feel sorry for her if she remain in that marriage… Shid, If I was her I’d be plotting my exit strategy… I’d throw forgen under the bus, strike a plea deal, write a book, set up my own beg site, and disappear because forgen just aint worth it…

    • Jun says:

      I do not feel any compassion for her

      Although she did not kill Trayvon, she played along as if Trayvon was not even a human, a person with a soul and feelings

      Unless she had her life threatened in some way to play along, then I will show compassion but from the looks of it, that is not the case, considering the jailhouse telephone calls

      • I don’t feel sorry for her at all. in those jail calls her true colors showed the world just how self righteous, callus and greedy she really is. she’s a perfect match for gz. they are birds of a feather.

        she’s no shrinking violet, she’s no push over and she was more than a wife standing by her husband, she was his co-conspirator in a plan to abscond with the money if given the opportunity! as a matter of fact I think the only reason they didn’t take off was because they felt entitled to ALL the money rolling into their paypal and they didn’t wanna miss out on a single penny their *supporters* were sending to them!

        • jm says:

          “I don’t feel sorry for her at all. in those jail calls her true colors showed the world just how self righteous, callus and greedy she really is. she’s a perfect match for gz. they are birds of a feather.”

          I agree. I don’t feel SZ is being manipulated. If you listen to her recorded testimony she sounds very self-assured. She is greed-driven. I don’t think she will ever leave GZ. She is a willing accomplice.

      • Jun says:

        The reason why I feel she is a willing accomplice is that Fogenhats was in jail when she called and if she was in any true threatened danger because of Fogenhats, she would simply take off and told on the husband then and there in court

        In fact, I think she structured out 18 Grand for herself already

  45. roderick2012 says:

    I see some ‘new’ posters attempting to derail the discussion here again.

    It’s sad that the blog host doesn’t ban them entirely, but its his blog.

    • Rachael says:

      Why, what happened?

      • roderick2012 says:

        Rachael, posters like Unitron, BK and now nemerinys and diary are commenting on other commenters’ posts instead of commenting on the subject of the thread.

        That’s all. It’s just annoying and their intent seems to derail any discussion by bringing up trivial issues like the names some posters have given George and his family and judging some posters’ intentions.

      • Ben says:

        I was tempted to comment upon your comment about commentor’s habit of commenting upon other comments, but I insteaf decided to keep it simple by saying “no comment.”

  46. Xena says:

    ShelLIE Zimmerman in court.

    • jm says:

      Tick-tock ShelLIE.

      Don’t know if it is the special effect lighting in the video but she still seems to have stone cold eyes like in her mugshot. The eyes are said to be the window to the soul right?

      • Two sides to a story says:

        I think she’s scared and doesn’t like the camera zooming up on her. I don’t think most of us would like it either. I’d glare at it.

        • jm says:

          Two sides to a story: “I think she’s scared and doesn’t like the camera zooming up on her. I don’t think most of us would like it either. I’d glare at it.”

          If she is scared she doesn’t show it in the video or in the mug shot. If she doesn’t like cameras zooming up on her perhaps she should not lie in court in the first place as to her financial circumstances and at this point plead guilty and be done with cameras on her.

          I hope you would be smart enough not perjure yourself under oath in front of millions of people watching the court proceedings after you have plotted with your killer husband on a prison phone conversation you know is being taped to hide the money by moving it to your account or your sister-in-law’s account. I hope you never have to glare at a camera because you have been dishonest and get caught.

          Cameras zooming in on you when your lies are exposed is part of the payback when you lie in a high-profile case. Don’t know what drove her to lie but I suspect it was greed. I don’t see SZ as a shrinking violet who is just following GZ’s orders. I trust she has a mind of her own even if she may not be the brightest person.

          Maybe she can learn a lesson from this experience but then again some people aren’t smart enough and blame everyone but themselves for the unpleasant predicament they find themselves in when they get caught.

      • Two sides to a story says:

        I agree with most of what you’re saying, JM. If you don’t like the cameras, don’t do stuff to begin with. Especially with the eyes of the world watching. Trouble is, the Fogens seemed to have thought that they could fool the world.

    • Jun says:

      The eyes are the windows to the soul

      Look into them and you see she’s made of cold stone

      She tried the jurisdiction nonsense but that did not fly because the governor nor the law is just gonna let her run rampant and telling lies to help assist people when they commit crimes

      • Xena says:

        @Jun

        The eyes are the windows to the soul

        Look into them and you see she’s made of cold stone

        Could be, but I see a tired, nervous, embarrassed woman trying to hide her shame. She married a man whose dad is a retired magistrate. Things were not suppose to be this bad for her — so she assumed.

  47. Jun says:

    I guess we will find out tomorrow what happens

    Hoping for the best for the kid Trayvon and that the witnesses are protected in some way

    Amitaba

    • Same here, Jun. I am very concerned about the request for witnesses’ addresses. I haven’t seen a response yet from the state. It’s a shame for this case to cause me anxiety like this. Can’t sleep.

      • looolooo says:

        @diary……. you’re not the only one up pass 4:00 a.m.. I get more anxious as the trial draws nearer. Hang in there. Trayvon is worth it.

      • Jun says:

        My guess is Nelson will say she ruled on it already, and nothing is preventing them from deposing the witnesses, and according to what FDLE quoted and I am guessing Natalie Jackson will provide the printscreens of the threats she has received from Junior and the illegal doxing of the wrong Deedee, I am guessing she will stay with her ruling that they simply ask the witnesses themselves and that the witnesses understand that they have the right to object if they do not want to disclose their private information

        I wonder if they will show Junior’s letter where he threatened the media to only show what he wants reported or else…

      • That is what I am hoping, Jun. Someone else posted earlier that the state will just say that the issue had already been discussed and they can get the information during the deposition. I would have just liked to have seen an official response. Several motions were made, but the state has not responded to any of them (as far as we know). They asked for three years of voice recordings. What was that all about? This is just really bugging me.

      • You are right, Looo. The sad part is that I must catch a plane at 7. No sleep for me tonight, I fear. I will hang in there. My compassion toward Travon is similar to that which I would have for my own 17-year-old son. I fear everytime he leaves and stays out past dark. I don’t like what the actions of GZ have done to my day-to-day. I am angry and fearful, and I feel as if his actions have cause me to be out of control of my emotions at times. Sorry for going on. Sleep deprivation does that sometimes.

      • kimmi says:

        @Jun
        “I wonder if they will show Junior’s letter where he threatened the media to only show what he wants reported or else…”

        Does anyone have a link to that letter?
        I think I may have missed that one. TIA

      • Jun says:

        Its on the dothprotesttoomuch blog

      • pat deadder says:

        Maybe we should all have as much grace and dignity as Trayvon’s parents.

  48. Xena, I have always respected your contribution to this ongoing discussion on Professor Leatherman’s blog. Having said that, I hope you have, in turn, respected my contribution.

    I don’t think anyone would argue against my compassion toward justice for Trayvon and toward those who endure nonsense that spews from the fonts of other sites. I actually have been a regular on the GZLC FB page, Zeke’s page, Ark’s page, and now The Debate Center. I used to frequent the JFTM site until the banter from both sides became horrible; that is the very reason I choose not to frequent IS.

    Arguing with some on those pages who are rude against others with differing perspectives and with others whose bigotry taints all reason can be tiring. But I continuously go back to speak what I believe to be words of reason, hoping that my words might cause one of them to rethink his or her position. This blog, however, has always been my home base because I knew that this was a place that took the “high road,” to use the Professor’s words.

    Many of us are out there in “other battlefields” among those who use racial slurs, post monkey pics, and disparage anyone remotely connected with or in support of Trayvon. When I come to this site, it is my oasis where I do not to have to be subjected to such behavior and do not have to witness such behavior subjected on others.

    I don’t feel the need to use negative terms toward opposing players in this case to make myself feel better because “our side” is at a disadvantage. I am not the only poster who has expressed discomfort with reading disparaging terms, and I would feel terrible to know that I brought discomfort upon fellow warriors.

    There is one thing you and I agree on concerning this issue. This blog HAS been strangely quiet. To me, it has become strangely quiet with respect to our voicing opposition to posters being anything less than respectful. We kept each other in check in the early months of this case.

    You may be right, perhaps GZ, SZ, and all associated with them may not deserve respect. But regular posters on this site and our gracious host do deserve to have this blog restored to the level of respect and dignity it once had.

    Diary

    • Xena says:

      @Diary. First and foremost, it is not my belief that everyone has to join in with behavior they disagree with or do not like. Most times when I read a comment that I believe is overboard, or too far into joking about someone personally, I don’t respond. What matters to me is that those of us who post comments here respect each other; not get into making personal attacks or disagreeing on an issue unrelated to justice for Trayvon to the point where it becomes a distraction.

      Secondly, people have to be allowed to be individuals in how they communicate as long as their communications do not violate the Professor’s rules. Again, if we don’t like someone’s comment, don’t respond.

      This issue of using nicknames for GZ, O’Mara and others associated with GZ, is a non-issue as far as I’m concerned, the criticism of which appears to be intended to control individuals into passivity and submission. I know the Zidiots’ playbook. Their current goal is to silence anything that they believe is negative towards GZ, and as one Zidiot describes it, GZ’s family.

      I will not help them achieve that goal.

      I’m not involved in justice for Trayvon to try to change Zidiots.

      People have different motivations for what they do, and unlike you, I would never infer that anyone who uses nicknames or negative terms for GZ and his Feign Team do so to make themselves feel better. I am not their motivation police. I do not read minds.

      There is one thing you and I agree on concerning this issue. This blog HAS been strangely quiet. To me, it has become strangely quiet with respect to our voicing opposition to posters being anything less than respectful. We kept each other in check in the early months of this case.

      People should not feel as though they have to walk on egg-shells to avoid being held in judgment that they don’t meet the communication standards of others.

      There are traitors among us mostly because they do not take the threats and actions of Zidiots seriously. Zidiots cannot be befriended anymore than you can teach a Python not to constrict and eat when it’s hungry. The purest culture, and purest communications, is still denigrated by Zidiots unless you join their bandwagon to disparage Trayvon, his parents, their attorneys, and anyone else who is Black (or White who supports justice for Trayvon), all the way to the President of the United States.

      We can only change ourselves; not others.

      • type1juve says:

        @Xena… excellent post!

      • nemerinys says:

        Xena,

        I’m surprised, and disappointed, in your rather acerbic response to Diary.

        …it is not my belief that everyone has to join in with behavior they disagree with or do not like. Most times when I read a comment that I believe is overboard, or too far into joking about someone personally, I don’t respond. What matters to me is that those of us who post comments here respect each other; not get into making personal attacks or disagreeing on an issue unrelated to justice for Trayvon to the point where it becomes a distraction.

        [snip]

        People should not feel as though they have to walk on egg-shells to avoid being held in judgment that they don’t meet the communication standards of others.

        It’s one thing to merely ignore a particular comment. It’s quite another when the comment section becomes cliquish, with ingroup names and references, and a marked disdain for those who criticize this behavior and/or who offer a POV that deviates from group-think (who is immediately labeled a ‘troll’). What you see as individual expression had quickly become a community to which new would-be commenters can be too repelled or intimidated to actually offer their individual expressions.

        ‘Justice for Trayvon’ initially meant the arrest and trial of George Zimmerman, after which there would hopefully be a fair trial. Of course, since I detest Zimmerman and sincerely believe him guilty of murder, I extend the meaning of ‘Justice for Trayvon’ to include Zimmerman’s conviction and long imprisonment. I admire your passion, but the rest of your response to Diary seemed a bit, er, paranoid. Who in the world are the “traitors among us?” Diary? Unitron? Since when has a request, or an expression of gratitude, for civility equated a movement to “control individuals into passivity and submission?”

        I must have missed something during my two-month hiatus from the Internet, but, really, WTF?

        • Xena says:

          @nemerinys

          I’m surprised, and disappointed, in your rather acerbic response to Diary.

          Be surprised by why disappointed? No one should expect any one person to always write things they agree with.

          It’s one thing to merely ignore a particular comment. It’s quite another when the comment section becomes cliquish, with ingroup names and references, and a marked disdain for those who criticize this behavior and/or who offer a POV that deviates from group-think (who is immediately labeled a ‘troll’).

          Then you read more comments and pay more attention to “cliquish” sections than I do — because I do not see that.

          Thank you for taking opportunity to use my comment to vent your own observations and dislikes. Hopefully you feel better now.

          I must have missed something during my two-month hiatus from the Internet, but, really, WTF?

          You allege to observing things, apparently, recently or currently, that I do not see and I’ve not taken a 2-month hiatus. In the alternative, maybe your opinion is based on something you observed two months ago?

      • roderick2012 says:

        nemerinys says: It’s one thing to merely ignore a particular comment. It’s quite another when the comment section becomes cliquish, with ingroup names and references, and a marked disdain for those who criticize this behavior and/or who offer a POV that deviates from group-think (who is immediately labeled a ‘troll’). What you see as individual expression had quickly become a community to which new would-be commenters can be too repelled or intimidated to actually offer their individual expressions.

        Huh? People always form cliques whether it’s in real time or online.

        So yes people have and will continue to form groups and ‘families’ on this message board.

        I, myself do not feel comfortable using the terms ‘Fogen’ or ‘SheLie’ because someone else created those terms and I believe that they belong to the originator so I refer to George as ‘George’ or sometimes ‘GZ’.

        The reason why posters like Xena and myself call people trolls is because they get off topic and post things that have already been debunked or are based upon incomplete or totally incorrect information.

        Just yesterday Unitron posted this long hypothetical about why Shellie could not be guilty of course he either forgot or ignored those jailhouse conversations Shellie had with George during which they discussed moving around the donated funds.

        Now someone pops up to discuss not the facts of this case but what names certain posters use to refer to George and Shellie in an attempt to change the dynamics of this thread.

        • Xena says:

          @roderick2012

          The reason why posters like Xena and myself call people trolls is because they get off topic and post things that have already been debunked or are based upon incomplete or totally incorrect information.

          Actually, not once on this blog have I accused anyone of or called anyone a “troll.” This latest controversy about “trolls” — well, I stayed out of it. It was the suggestions that everyone here should talk like Nuns that perked me up and that I addressed.

          You are correct about those posting comments based on incomplete or totally incorrect information. I tend to give the benefit of the doubt — if people don’t know, they don’t know. Once they have been presented with information to help them understand and there is no response of appreciation or continuation to discuss the issue — that is when I question their purpose.

      • Two sides to a story says:

        I believe Mr. Leatherman once addressed the issue and posters have completely ignored him on the namecalling.

      • FactsFirst says:

        Sorry in advace, but Imma keep it all the way real… IDGAF what names anyone one call forgen because Trayvon can’t call anyone one ANYTHING cause he’s DEAD! I’m sure had Trayvon still been ALIVE to DEFEND himself like forgen, he’d have a few choice words for forgen and the zidiot nation also after being stalked, bullied, murdered and DEFAMED after the fact… (SMDH @ beating a DEAD KID) IMHO, most of the nick names made for forgen and his “CLICK” suit them… ShelLIED and I want to REMEMBER TRAYVON’S name and FORGET forgens (GZ)… Opinions are like assholes, everybody got one. Forgen is a murderer and ShelLIE is a lier! The difference is, Forgen and ShelLie are still alive to defend themselves while Trayvon lay in his grave and be defamed….. But were supposed to sit back like a “potted palm” and watch like forgen, while forgen and his “CLICK” FLOUT the system, defame a DEAD kid, and Trayvon wasn’t given a fair trial, but his supporters can’t even VENT their frustration like everyone else? Really? What part of the game is that? Welp, had forgen not MURDERED Trayvon we wouldn’t have a reason to call him names now would we? HIS FAULT! just my thoughts….

      • Jun says:

        I think some of yall are overreacting

        If you look at the comments, most are simply light plays on humor and are not vicious at all

      • Malisha says:

        Well, again, about “Fogen,” the name. Is it derogatory? Yes, in the sense that we are saying it to indicate that George Zimmerman has offended us so mightily that we want his name erased from society, from memory, from history. It cannot actually be done, but this is a way of expressing what I would hope is the society’s self-cleansing function.

        Our bodies are self-cleansing organisms. We have blood cells that kill and carry off toxins; we have a lymph system that removes waste and a “washing” system that balances our pH. We don’t need to drink bleach; our bodies know how to keep us in efficient running order. And a society is built on the same model. We have to be able, as a society, to identify toxins and to deal with them. This is why I feel that shaming someone who openly and happily expresses NO REMORSE at having killed an innocent kid, someone who goes on national television and says, over and over again, that he regrets NOTHING HE DID that night, NOTHING! It is a social imperative to disapprove of him in the strongest and most unmistakable terms. Even if he gets acquitted, we need, as a society, to make it clear how we reject Fogen, how we are communally appalled at him and everything he stands for, how we will never forget his disgrace and his sin but we want to forget his name.

        I’m not angry with anyone who disagrees with me on this point; I don’t think anybody who believes I shouldn’t say this is a troll or anything like that. But this is my position and this is why I am taking this position. Here I am.

        • Xena says:

          @Malisha. I understand and agree — don’t use the “may his name be forgotten” for my own spiritual reasons, but still understand the purpose behind it.

          IMO, GZ is the personification of evil, and the majority of the Zidiots are just like him.

  49. looolooo says:

    @Xena Jr’s A-P, Fogen’s white-Hispanic, maybe their sister (?) claims their father’s Caucasian/German heritage. Who knows with these people! Never thought I’d live to see a family more F’d up than the Anthony’s.

    ……….i’ll bet Jr. didn’t claim hide nor hair of Afro-anything when he was on the Randy Hahn radio show. And Fogen sure as heck don’t know nothin’ bout no “one drop” rule. The Treescum dont’ care about black on black crime. ;-p

    • Xena says:

      @looolooo

      i’ll bet Jr. didn’t claim hide nor hair of Afro-anything when he was on the Randy Hahn radio show.

      Junior is a race baiter just like O’Mara. Intelligent people with their eyes open understand that no matter GZ’s race, it was certain ones in the SPD along with Wolfinger who thought Trayvon’s life was not worth impartial investigation to charge his killer. It was the SPD who released reports to the media that provide GZ’s race as “White.”

      • looolooo says:

        @xena…..I couldn’t agree more. Jr’s motives are obvious (noteriety, money, ego, sending lil bro to prison), but O’Mara…. what’s in it for him? How would his disgusting racist defense help his future career persuits? He started out with such promise. What happened to him?

      • Rachael says:

        They are a race of convenience. Whatever race it is convenient for them to be at the time.

      • Trained Observer says:

        Xena — Race baiter is precisely how Fam Fogan and its legal team can most accurately be described.

        … Will you be in court to support Fogan? “We are not racists.”
        … Do you have family ties to Norm Wolfinger? “We are not racists, and we love balack people.”
        … Did your son assaul an undercover cop?
        “We are not racists and our son mentors kids who ar balack.”
        …Would you like to discuss the murder charge against your son over coffee? “We are not racists and we take our java blaaaaaaack.”

        These whining, self-important, race-baiting people are truly inappropriate for any occasion.

    • Two sides to a story says:

      There are childhood pictures of Fogen and Jr. with their sister. She is of the same mixture that they are.

    • Jun says:

      Tomorrow they will claim to be Puerto Rican

      Then on Monday they will be Chinese

      Then Wednesday they will claim to be Jamaican

      I think it is ridiculous if you buy any of their nonsense

      They obviously are white and hispanic and want to claim to only be white on all their government forms

  50. Colin, there is no reason for you to ever fear being accused of trolling because your post might go against the grain of what many posters feel. In fact, it’s sad that you feel the need to write a post script to your original post.

    I am reposting something I wrote on the previous thread because I’m afraid it might not have gotten much attention:

    To Whom It May Concern,

    Please stop with the “troll alert” comments. Just because someone has a different perspective does not make that poster a troll. Mob mentality and blind groupthink is far more dangerous than a differing opinion.

    As Professor Leatherman said before, all are welcome. He also, many threads ago, explained his definition of what a troll is.

    Unitron is not a troll. I have seen his posts on here and on BCClist since the early months of this case. He looks at all angles carefully, causing others to ponder beyond the obvious thought of the group.

    If you don’t wish to respond to his posts, then don’t. But please stop with the name-calling. This site was founded on a higher intellectual level than that… with all due respect. We can disagree with dignity.

    I also sympathize with the other poster who mentioned something about our calling players in this case derogatory names, such as SheLIE and O’Money. I will not try to tell anyone what to do, but it does embarrass me to see such behavior, especially when I envite others who care about Travon to this site.

    The discussion of Trayvon’s story and the GZ case turned into an attempt by our host for us to play law students and for him to post thought-provoking narratives for us to ponder. At times now however, it almost sounds like some of the nastiness I have witnessed on other sites. I wish this site could return to the dignity that lured me into this community many, many months ago.

    I am sorry if you take offense to my response. It is not meant for that purpose.

    I feel the NEED to discuss this case, and this site has stimulated my intellect and offered me a place to engage in high-level discourse about what happened to Trayvon and all issues surrounding the night of Feb. 26, 2012.

    But witnessing the attempted stifling of others’ input through name-calling is a negative distraction, one that I don’t think Professor Leatherman appreciates. If you think someone is trolling, send our host a private message. He is a smart man and can handle what needs to be handled. Otherwise, offer dignified responses to counter other perspectives.

    Name-calling only says, “I got nothing… but I don’t like what you have to say; you do not belong here, and your input is not welcomed.”

    Only our host can say who is welcomed.

    Respectfully,

    Diary

    • Xena says:

      It is my hope that all here see the results of passing judgment hypocritically and without compassion for those who fight the war on other battlefields. This blog is strangely quiet. The Zidiot plot of divide and conquer appears to be working.

      Shellie is SheLIE because she lied to the court.

      We are at a disadvantage. There is no racial slur known to man as bad as the “n” word and the Zidiots openly use it.

      We are at a disadvantage. There is no beg site for us to post comments to taint the jury pool.

      We are at a disadvantage. Coming from various backgrounds, countries. races, and genders, we cannot use racial generalizations for all White Hispanics, neither would we want to.

      • looolooo says:

        ….. don’t you mean….. for all Afro-Peruvians?

        • Xena says:

          LOL@looolooo. My bad.

          Wonder why Junior omitted his dad’s race? Then it would be Afro-Peruvian, German. (shrugs shoulders) Afro-Peruvian sounds too much like claiming Peru as the country of birth rather than America.

      • looneydoone says:

        Xena,
        I think the defense’s divide and conquer tactics have only strengthened our resolve. If you read comments from fogen’s supporters, it’s clear they’re in panic mode.
        Maybe this blog seems *quiet* because, like myself, many are reading without posting any comments

      • Two sides to a story says:

        I really don’t see any point in calling Fogen anything but Fogen and Shellie anything but Shellie or Mrs. Fogen on this blog.

        I get tired of hearing all the names for Trayvon from the other side as well. And the name Leatherheads.

        I’m guilty of calling Treepers Treestumpers.

        It’s all rather juvenile, actually.

  51. colin black says:

    B T W Before Im accused of trolling Im not saying the State was wron to charge Shellie.
    Im saying they were wrong to let Cindy walk without consiqensies.

    • kindheart101 says:

      @Colin.

      I agree. I am exhausted and calling it a night. But, I just wanted to give you a {{hug}}………you are awesome! 🙂

    • roderick2012 says:

      Colin, you are trolling because you’re talking about two very different cases in two different jurisdictions, two different judges and two different prosecutors.

      First of all Judge Lester gave George’s family the extraodinary privledge of testifying via phone because they claimed that they were too afraid for their safety to testify in open court.

      Shellie’s lies are worse because she was arrogant. She blatently lied to the court after she knew she conspired on a recorded jailhouse phone calla to move money around to make it appear that her husband had no money so he could get a lower bail.

      Cindy Anthony and that entire family seem a bit slow. I just hope she’s never my nurse.

  52. colin black says:

    Seems the D A Office in Florida picks an choooses whom it deems necessery for perjury.
    What is worse lieing in a bailbond hearing over the phone.
    About finance to enable a lower bond for your husband.

    Or blatantly lieing on the stand dureing a murder one trial/
    .
    To help your daughter escape conviction for murdering your Grand Daughter.
    Not one proveable falsehoot uttered under oath,
    But multiple perjourous statements,
    Both happened in Florida both happened in full veiw of the Nation or World.

    Wich one was the more heinous perjury an wich one did Florida choose to prosecute.
    Agenda perhaps.

  53. ChrisNY~Laurie says:

    Xena- you have mail. 🙂

  54. ChrisNY~Laurie says:

    This is straight from gzlegalcase.com from mom

    We follow the online conversation about this case very closely, and we feel most of the people who write these ugly things don’t mean them literally. We won’t speak specifically for Todd Kincannon, and we do not deny that there are unrepentant racists commenting on this case — from both sides — but for the most part, we believe these comments come from a place of frustration and anger.

    This is what i mean by stay off the computer and get your work done. Also, I couldn’t agree more with you Mr. O’Mara, comments come from a place of frustration and anger and don’t mean the ugly things literally, such as those death threats that the Zimmerman family supposedly recieved.

  55. ChrisNY~Laurie says:

    Blackwell’s response was very professional and informative…unlike each and every motion, response or BS writings from MOm and West. You can see the knowledge of the laws and experience in Blackwell.

    I scanned through the motion for production of witness addresses(link down below) real quick. Judge Nelson already ruled that they are to get the addresses during their depositions and if a witness refuses, they are to bring it to her attention and she will address it at that time on what to do next.

    According to the motion, the depos for these witnesses are set for mid March, so the defense feels that they do not have time to depo them to get their addresses, do their investigation of theses witnesses and re-depo them before trial. Give me a break! Stay the heck off of your computer reading blogs and writing BS on your website and do your job. I sure hope that Nelson asks MOM in court tomorrow to state why these depos are set for mid March and not sooner. He should have had the reason in his motion since he is saying he will have “no time” to redepose them if needed and cries that they will nort be ready for trial in June.

    http://184.172.211.159/~gzdocs/documents/0213/mot_production_of_wit_addresses.pdf

    • Jun says:

      We will see what Nelson says but my guess is it is a load of crap from the defense and they have more than enough time to go through all the information, even for the April 22, 2013 date for the SYG

    • Xena says:

      Not having the addresses for witnesses is not preventing the defense from deposing them. They need to establish its importance before deposition, and they fail to do that.

      Well, we know why — so Zidiots can make that info public or claim to have the info as to terrorize witnesses.

      • Jun says:

        I do not see why they need Sybrina and Javaris’ address

        If I were them, all the witnesses should object to it, and also be advised by the state when they are being deposed that they have the right to object to disclosing personal information to a homicide defendant

        Plus, they have proven threats by Junior toward Natalie Jackson & Crump and the Conservative Tinfoil Hat gang toward whom they thought was Deedee

        • Xena says:

          @Jun

          I do not see why they need Sybrina and Javaris’ address

          Honestly, I don’t see a good reason to depose them. They are not ear witnesses and certainly did not see what was happening in Sanford, FL. If anything, O’Mara simply wants to ask them questions about Trayvon’s life in effort to humiliate them.

          If I were them, all the witnesses should object to it, and also be advised by the state when they are being deposed that they have the right to object to disclosing personal information to a homicide defendant

          Because illegal doxing has occurred and is documented on blogs such as the treeslum, maybe they should take screen shots with them and present it to support why they have good reason to object and refuse to answer questions that could invade their privacy. It’s bad enough that Zidiots make-up their purported doxed information, and I also understand that they infer they have private information even when there is no proof. That is intimidation and harassment.

          Plus, they have proven threats by Junior toward Natalie Jackson & Crump and the Conservative Tinfoil Hat gang toward whom they thought was Deedee

          Even moreso, Zidiots have submitted those threats in comments to my blog, even saying the malicious things that West plans on doing to Attorney Crump. Effectively, they have telegraphed their maliciousness, schemes and insults, just like General Custer which resulted in what is known as his “last stand.”

      • Jun says:

        I read the law and statute that FDLE quotes and FDLE actually has it right

        The court is allowed to restrict information to a defendant if it poses a threat to the safety of that certain witness

        FDLE stated that they should allow the witnesses the right to object to it and they rightfully are allowed to

      • towerflower says:

        Jun: Is there a news story about the doxing of the Dee Dee’s? I was trying to find one and didn’t. I was wondering if they actually filed any complaints.

        I can’t imagine the fear that must have went through their minds, wondering how they got caught up in it.

      • Jun says:

        I only know that Natalie Jackson is taking care of the threats and catalogued the threats towards the wrong Deedees

    • roderick2012 says:

      ChrisNY~Laurie says:I scanned through the motion for production of witness addresses(link down below) real quick. Judge Nelson already ruled that they are to get the addresses during their depositions and if a witness refuses, they are to bring it to her attention and she will address it at that time on what to do next.

      I don’t understand why the defense needs the addresses of the witnesses for the deposition anyway because during the hearing on February 5th the state mentioned that they were transporting the witnesses to and from the defense depositions as to guard their safety and privacy.
      The only reason that the defense wants their biographical info is so that Zimmerman’s supporters can harass them.

  56. Xena says:

    Attorney Blackwell’s Response to West’s Motion to Compel.

    http://184.172.211.159/~gzdocs/documents/0213/blackwell.pdf

  57. Also off topic. Has anyone seen links to the state’s response to the motion for addresses to witnesses?

    • Rachael says:

      Isn’t there a hearing for that tomorrow? I could be confused though.

    • Two sides to a story says:

      No, but GZLC has been busy with new motions. http://www.gzlegalcase.com/index.php/court-documents

      • kimmi says:

        Looks like Fogen is taking the day off from court.

      • Rachael says:

        Notice of Hearing for February, 22 and Related Motion

        on 20 February 2013.

        The following NOTICE OF HEARING and motions has been filed with the court:
        NOTICE OF HEARING for February 22, 2012
        MOTION FOR PRODUCTION OF WITNESS ADDRESSES

        Other motions listed in the NOTICE OF HEARING have previously been disclosed on this website.

      • ChrisNY~Laurie says:

        Were all of these motions filed with the court before Nelsons 48 hour rule? I didn’t see any responses from the State.

        What time is the hearing tomorrow??

        • Xena says:

          I didn’t see any responses from the State.

          The motion to compel pertained to Attorney Crump, and his attorney has filed an answer. The Motion about the State giving witness’ addresses — well, Judge Nelson already told the defense that they ask for that information when deposing the witnesses. All BDLR has to do is remind the court of that.

      • Rachael says:

        AFAIK, 1:30PM

      • ChrisNY~Laurie says:

        Thanks rachael…btw, it took me a few minutes to figure out what AFAIK meant. lol

      • Rachael says:

        LOL, sorry ChrisNY~Laurie, I get lazy sometimes.

      • Jun says:

        I wonder if the state will bring up Junior’s threats to Natalie & Benjamin, and the threats to whom the defendant’s gang attempted to intimidate but was the wrong person

        I am sketchy about Omara and West, but it definitely should not be seen or heard by the defendant because Junior or the gang members will be seeking to ruin that person, as shown by Junior and the gang already, towards any witness or any person simply trying to help this kid Trayvon

      • ay2z says:

        We may just have a quote of the day for tomorrow from pg 19, Section V CONCLUSION of Bruce Blackwell’s response to the defendant’s motion.

        “For the foregoing reasons, the Court should not countenance the efforts of this victim’s admitted killer to prepare his defense on the borrowed wits of his parents’ attorney.”

        😉

  58. Tee says:

    Off topic here, but the defense says that they are going to reach $30,000.00 goal to hire experts. MOM, said that they are “very pleased”, I say good so now they have know reason to ask for any more delays. On to the immunity hearing!

    • Jun says:

      Until we see the actual records, we do not know the truth to those claims

      For all we know they could have claimed indigent in hopes of getting AIS to back off or perhaps it was used as a factor to claim in court to ask for a continuance

      • kimmi says:

        I almost wonder if some of it didn’t come from Mama & Papa’s begsite.Then Papa goes on a big cheerleading rant at CTH.

        See, we did it! Now we need to keep going…
        Double next month….blah blah blah

        I hope AIS is keeping track…
        Feb…….30K PAID…….$ 0
        The begsite is bringing in more than enough to pay the entire bill each month, yet the defendant(s) still refuse to pay their debt.

      • Jun says:

        I think he may have had the money all along and just told BS to the public

  59. Tee says:

    If I were SZ I would be planning my escape from this man and his family. You know when your mom say to you ” I don’t like him it’s something about him that I don’t trust and I don’t think you should stay with him.” Most of us has heard this from our mother or other love ones, I bet she wish that she listened. I can’t believe her marrying a screw up like Fogen that someone didn’t warned her of the impending danger head.

    • Trained Observer says:

      Wasn’t it mentioned that Mrs. Fogen’s own father had done time for burglary? Could be her mother, what with lacking a sleaze meter, had no common sense to pass on about lyin’ loser Fogen..

    • rayvenwolf says:

      Tee look at her parents. Daddy did time for robbery(and gods know what in his past) and we know of at least the most recent occasion of her mother driving under the influence and endangering the lives of others. You can’t be warned about the viper in your bed when you grew up in a nest of one.

      At the same time she is not some babe in the woods. Nor is she stupid or lacking in mental capabilities. She was aware to some degree how much money was floating around AND she knew how much she’d shuffled around. A smart person would have spoken up and damn the consequences(fogen being upset.) Better and upset husband than trouble down the line when the truth comes out.

      If anything Fogen is lucky she just didn’t take the money and split.

      • Xena says:

        @rayvenwolf. Sondra Osterman introduced George to ShelLIE. Kinda makes me wonder how she came to know ShelLIE and why she thought they would be a good fit. Hmmmmm.

        • rayvenwolf says:

          Maybe ShelLie used to do her make up lol

          • Xena says:

            @Rayvenwolf. That was a thought about ShelLIE providing make-up services to Sondra. However, ShelLIE’s cosmetology license is connected to her working at an address in Tallahassee.

            BTW, ShelLIE did not renew her license in October, neither had she changed her last name. Her license was still in “Dean.”

          • rayvenwolf says:

            Hmmm interesting. Well its possible that ShelLie was working under the table and without license. Wouldn’t surprise me frankly. Otherwise it does make you wonder just how these two met and then the idea that Fogen was a good match for her.

      • kimmi says:

        Remember in one of the calls, they were discussing the ‘great’ life they were going to have…
        Kill a kid, rake in the cash, live happily ever after…
        How sick!

      • Malisha says:

        Shellie and Fogen ARE a good fit! They’re fit as fiddles and ready to hit the screech notes!

      • Trained Observer says:

        This pair will have a life, all right … yet it will be anything but great. Thanks to their own publicity machine they are known as sleazeballs far and wide.

      • thejbmission says:

        Hi Rayvenwolf,
        It’s me JB..always late for the party but I just had to respond to your comment. “You can’t be warned about the viper in your bed when you grew up in a nest of one” That’s a keeper!
        As for Shellie taking off with the money, in the jail house phone calls it seemed to be that Fogen was thinking of that too.
        I also believe that’s why he let his brother and sister in on the hoax as well. It must be tough when you’re dealing with vipers.
        Another thing.. I thought it hilarious when I heard Fogen reminding Shellie about paying his mother. Can you imagine how upset Gladys would have been if Fogen forgot about her?

        • rayvenwolf says:

          obviously. I mean it must have been really important to him to pay back that loan right then and there. Have to make sure your cheer squad actually wants to keep cheering.

          Its possible he brought them in to make sure she didn’t run off, but I think it was more to make sure she did what he wanted her to do. I stand by my assertion that he thought his wife was too stupid to handle this on her own without some oversight.

  60. looolooo says:

    Will the state now be allowed to delve into SZ’s history of fraud and deceptive dealings?

  61. Tee says:

    Do you guys know what is funny? MOM & Fogen both want the public to believe in them yet they have both proven themselves liars. I am sorry that I have to call MOM out but either he is not telling the truth about not knowing about the money, or his client isn’t telling the truth. IMO they all lied to the court, and I wish that The prosecution could have charged all three of their butts.

  62. Jun says:

    I think more proof is that Shellie also promised to make the court aware of any condition, even if it is a violation of bond

    um, she hid the defendant’s passport, and she did not tell the court that he had a second passport hidden

    • Trained Observer says:

      Jun — Surprisingly (at least to me) not all that much seems to have been made thus far about the extra passport. Judge Lester himself likened the situation to a lost or misplaced driver’s license. Of course he didn’t have the full picture, due to the lying and obfuscation. Am not sure the State sees this as a minor oversight, and am definitely not sure the Feds see it that way. Another charge pending?

      • Jun says:

        They are incredibly stupid criminals

        Of all things to lie about, the freakin passports and money, through a paypal

        It is as if the cops could not subpeona their bank records

      • rayvenwolf says:

        Jun – you’re right there was no reason to lie beyond being greedy, stupid and simply thinking they could get away with it. Happens a lot unfortunately. I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again if they had been truly smart all the details would have been ironed out before he was charge ,”just in case”. Failure to plan is planning to fail.

        But then look at how many thieves have been caught because they couldn’t stop themselves from bragging about their score.

      • Nefertari05 says:

        Possibly. The passport might fall under the “intentionally omits material information” portion of the bail statute I detailed higher in the thread, as compared to the perjury charge.

      • Jun says:

        I am not a legal expert by any means

        But considering what she swore, she was sworn to tell any conditions to the court

        The fact that she hid the passport shows she knows that is an important aspect to the bond application and the fact she hid it is a violation of what she swore she would do

        http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&Search_String=&URL=0900-0999/0903/Sections/0903.035.html

        Also in part 3, she is in connection with the bond condition, and it says that she can get charged with that too

        So it looks like if they really wanted to get a hole in one with the golf swing, they could actually get her up to 10 years

      • Jun says:

        http://www.flsenate.gov/laws/statutes/2011/896.104

        According to this statute, she can also get in trouble here along with Fogenhats

        It is obvious they were attempting to hide the money

        According to Florida Statute 775.15, they have 4 years to go after Fogenhats for this

        According to the amount they structured, they can each get 15 years and a $250,000 fine

      • ay2z says:

        But didnt’ Judge Lester change his tune in his second bond order? The judge recognized that the second passport was available for flight with other people’s money.

    • Malisha says:

      A perjury charge against a witness in a criminal proceeding is exceedingly rare. EXCEEDINGLY RARE! I think this happened because (a) the offense was so great and so obvious and it made a fool of Judge Lester, which was not to be permitted; and (b) the offense was so public that it wouldn’t do to let it go unpunished or everybody loses faith in the system and everybody decides it’s perfectly OK to lie under oath.

  63. Trained Observer says:

    This Miami case cited by the professor is certainly interesting, though it doesn’t seem to help Mrs. Fogen. Jailhouse phone tapes combined with her testimony under oath, plus financial statements all do her in, and if that’s enough … there’s the credit union guy who assisted in the fund-shifting machinations. Has he been deposed?

    Separately, am wondering what the odds are that at least one contributor to Peter Pan who truly sought to support a fair defense for the sure-fire guilty shooter might not be willing to testify to feeling defrauded …

  64. bydesign2010 says:

    I’d also like to know if Mark O’mara lied about his knowledge of the money in the fund as well. Zimmerman, had said that MOM was aware of at least 37K, in one of the phone calls (#30), which was before the bond hearing. MOM has also asserted that he was unsure of what to do with the monies in the account. So there is plenty of evidence to support the assertion that MOM knew about the money during the bond hearing as well. Was he under any obligation to disclose this information to the court? If he was uncertain as to how the fund was to be used wouldn’t it had made sense for him to ask the court for clarification during the bond hearing?

    • kimmi says:

      There was a presser where MOM was asked about the money, and his response gave me the impression he ‘knew’ about the $$, but denied saying he would remember that ‘amount’ IIRC.

      I can’t find the right video, but this one has Fogen talking about how MOM did know about the $$.

      If they find out that he did in fact know about the money, and not disclose that, (ie he lied), what could/would happen?

      • very interesting. gz 2.0

        so in jail gz is leisurely chatting his ass off with loverbrother on the phone talkin about “doubling down… on the increased amount of support” he’s rolling in, how he’s getting a *dreamTeam* of lawyers and how he just hates to say it, but HE is “famous”, and gz’s also famous for saying, “things happen for a reason”!

        and then ( he’s on the jail phone with sounds like a brother-in-law ) the BIL mentions the irony that gz was cold while sitting in florida’s seminal county jail, so he had obviously been whining about that earlier.
        so then gz says he’s not cold at all now! no, he’s warm and toasty with his 2 pairs of fluffy socks and cozy thermal under ware!!! WTF?? no really WTF????

        but then as they’re having a good ol laugh- about MORE of the special treatment, gz blurts ” I feel so bad for the others who doesn’t have all the luxuries I have”! AS IF! oh he’s such a prince/mensch!

        just like he said in another call:
        – I feel so bad for all the *other* smucks in jail who don’t have all the stuff I do! maybe I can donate some of my old shitty clothes to them?

        so he’s got grands rolling in from the begsite! he thinks he’s actually famous! lol he’s talking to jose biaz.
        he thinks he’s a bigshot!

        What he’s really doing is bragging by pointing out what OTHER people DON’T have! How do you do that??
        well he’s altruistic ONLY in words and only in front of others! LMAO
        He verbally expresses his concern and (fake) pity for whoever he thinks are less fortunate.
        And he happily collects a compliment for it from whom ever he’s trying to brag to!
        BUT he never actually does anything.

      • When listening to the above call, I wanted to vomit when I heard him say, “you are famous!” and then GZ says, “I know, I know”. WTF is it with this stupid soft-spoken voice he always uses so nobody on the other end can hear him? I would tell anyone who did that to me on the phone to speak the f*ck up and stop the nonsense.

        So he wanted Shellie to open a new account? Did he really think he was going to hide this all away? The two of them laughing and joking as if this was all a great big party that was going to result in Fogen walking away with $$$ to live the good life makes me nauseous. They don’t give a damn that an innocent young man lost his life. He’s going to have decades to think about it in his tiny prison cell and he won’t be laughing then, that’s the only thing that gives me any consolation.

        Watching that tape of Shellie made me think she had a stick up her ass the way she walked into the courtroom. Was the guy sitting to her right in the courtroom the same guy we saw guarding GZ during one of his court appearances? He looked a lot like him. I wonder how his fees are being paid. I can’t imagine how the hell she thinks she might walk away from this and while many legal experts have said she most likely won’t serve time, I’ve still got my fingers crossed on that one. She lied without a moment’s hesitation while on the phone with the Judge and deserves to spend some time in jail thinking about what she did.

    • Xena says:

      @bydesign2010

      I’d also like to know if Mark O’mara lied about his knowledge of the money in the fund as well. Zimmerman, had said that MOM was aware of at least 37K, in one of the phone calls (#30), which was before the bond hearing. MOM has also asserted that he was unsure of what to do with the monies in the account. So there is plenty of evidence to support the assertion that MOM knew about the money during the bond hearing as well.

      If we believe what GZ told ShelLIE, O’Mara knew of $37K. That amount to support a family of 2 unemployed adults is not much and may result in a finding of indigence.

      It has been my impression that had O’Mara knew of the total amount, advised the court that the defendant instructed his wife to pay off debts and that she had, and had no other source of income and no residence, that Judge Lester may have ordered the bond appropriately without it being a million dollars. The court could have accessed costs against GZ on a monthly basis.

      GZ and ShelLIE dug their own graves.

      • bydesign2010 says:

        I would agree that 37K on a yearly basis would likely be enough to claim indigence, however we’re talking about them getting this amount of money within days, as more was pouring in. MOM knew about the existence of the website and knew about the monies and claimed that he wasn’t sure what to do with the money. Shouldn’t he have filed a motion to gain clarification if he wasn’t sure if a donation was in fact an asset?

        • Xena says:

          @bydesign2010

          MOM knew about the existence of the website and knew about the monies and claimed that he wasn’t sure what to do with the money. Shouldn’t he have filed a motion to gain clarification if he wasn’t sure if a donation was in fact an asset?

          The court did not care if the money was by inheritance, donation, or gambling winnings. If GZ had control of it and it was considered his money, then he was to report that to the court.

          What we have not seen is GZ’s financial statement filed by O’Mara with the court in support of his inability to pay bond and any supporting documents.

          For sure, O’Mara didn’t know what to do with the money once he learned that the amount was significant and that GZ and ShelLIE lied about the amount. He just knew he had to do something with it to convince the court that GZ would not use it to flee.

      • ay2z says:

        Interesting snippet between the shooter and ‘Scott’ at 8 minutes into this phone conversation. The jailed killer tells Scott that Shellie said news broke [presumably about his arrest] that support started to pour in,

        Scott :
        “Oh… yeah… like yeah… like uhm, you know in… in that… in that.. from that time period… ah… Wednesday afternoon until midnight, you know there was… like there was like thirty six dollars.”

        Jailbird George:
        “Wow!”

        Scott :
        “You know…. yeah, it’s cool. A lot of good news,bud.”

        ——————

        Sounds like the killer was in charge of his troops, they reported to him, he signed off on the orders, they did the dirty work for him. Is there a time limit on charging the killer with perjury?

        Is he ‘Scott’ free, so to speak? He knew what was going on, but he didn’t do anything while he was in jail, not directly.

        • Xena says:

          @ay2z. I do not know. What I suspect is that GZ was not charged for his deception because as we see, BDLR reminds the court about it at every opportunity, such as GZ’s motion to alter conditions of bond, and motion for continuance. If GZ were charged, BDLR might be prevented from bringing up the matter in hearings.

          GZ is paying for it each time he hears “denied.”

      • ay2z says:

        Thanks, Xena. If that’s the case, I’d say that BDLR should continue to let ‘er rip!

      • cielo62 says:

        Xena~ The bank statements AND the jail cell recorded calls each count as a “corroborating witness” to the perjury as well as the court proceedings? WoW! her goose is cooked and ready to serve!

        • Xena says:

          @cielo62. I would like for the Professor to address IF Judge Lester’s memorandum and order revoking GZ’s bond because of Shellie’s misrepresentations can be entered into Shellie’s case and if so, if the jury is required to give full faith and credit to that.

  65. bydesign2010 says:

    I agree, I nearly LOL’d at Kellie Simms ridiculous assertion that Shellie answered the questions truthfully. While a lie of omission, isn’t enough to commit perjury, which is where he is probably coming from, Shellie’s lies are untruthful on their face.

    • Nefertari05 says:

      Omission is covered under this statute:
      “903.035 Applications for bail; information provided; hearing on application for modification; penalty for providing false or misleading information or omitting material information.
      […]
      (3) Any person who intentionally provides false or misleading material information or intentionally omits material information in connection with an application for bail or for modification of bail is guilty of a misdemeanor or felony which is one degree less than that of the crime charged for which bail is sought, but which in no event is greater than a felony of the third degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082 or s. 775.083.”

      This and perjury are both subject to sentencing under 775.082, which carries up to 5 yrs, and are 3rd degree felonies. This one just seems to be more specific to the “bail” issue, and covers omissions. But, OTOH, perjury is a more readily known concept to the public at large, and with so much evidence of lying, perhaps they wanted something basic and simple, so it wouldn’t *appear as “picking on fogen’s wife*, by finding some relatively obscure statute, to charge her with. It would be interesting to know why they chose one over the other. Either way, I don’t see a chance of her coming out of this without a conviction.

    • Nefertari05 says:

      Oh yeah, the statute I posted above also deals with the defendent’s false, misleading or omissions, as well. So, fogen has that to look forward to, at some point.

      “(1)(a) All information provided by a defendant, in connection with any application for or attempt to secure bail, to any court, court personnel, or individual soliciting or recording such information for the purpose of evaluating eligibility for, or securing, bail for the defendant, under circumstances such that the defendant knew or should have known that the information was to be used in connection with an application for bail, shall be accurate, truthful, and complete without omissions to the best knowledge of the defendant. ”

      The way I read it, any documentation he signed, and allowing O’Mara to represent him as indigent “in connection with”…”securing bail”…”under circumstances such that the defendent knew the information was to be used in connection with an application for bail” makes him in violation of this statute, as well. So, there’s that.

    • Malisha says:

      Simms HAS to say that his client didn’t lie under oath; to say otherwise would be to fail to zealously represent his client. He should keep his comments vague and general, though.

  66. Professor, will the state also introduce the jailhouse call when SZ said to her husband, “That’s what it’s for.” She was referring to the money that was contributed through donations. She asked GZ to just think about it when she suggested that they pay the entire bond if they got enough, and he responded with an adamant: H*ll no!

    • Xena says:

      @Diary. That part of the transcript is included in the charging affidavit. It is something that ShelLIE will need to defend against.

      • bydesign2010 says:

        I’m dying to know what her defense is going to be.

        • Xena says:

          @bydesign2010

          I’m dying to know what her defense is going to be.

          Probably something like, “We needed the money. How else were we suppose to live?”

          Believe me, I’ve heard such arguments in the bankruptcy court by debtors charged with bankruptcy fraud and/or conveyance of property — “Of course I quit claimed the property to my brother before filing bankruptcy. Where else was my family suppose to live?”

      • rayvenwolf says:

        @bydesign2010 : “My husband sad it was ok. So did my brother in law.” You would think she’d know better than to listen to Fogen about something this when in their first year of marriage they bought got hauled into court over credit card debt.

        considering the part of their conversation regarding the funds and their use towards bond, she will be very hard pressed to justifying the fact she didn’t make full disclosure.

        they were trying to cheat the system, plain and simple.

      • I see, Xena. I’d only previously read the Capias, not the attached affidavit. Wow, the affidavit is pretty strong.

      • bydesign2010 says:

        My concern is that she listened to MOM AND Fogen. I’m not convinced that he is innocent of knowing that his client was not indigent during the bond hearing.

      • lurker says:

        @ ByDesign–it does seem as though O’Mara phrased his questions rather carefully for someone who was ignorant (so he claimed) of there being much, if anything, in the PayPal account.

    • Jun says:

      Not to mention, she worked in correspondence with the defendant to structure money in and out of the defendant’s account to make it appear indigent at bond hearing and then move it all back in in a structured fashion after the bond hearing

      That shows intent to lie as well

      Omara may have to answer to the court as well for stating “this is his only passport and I am surrendering it now”

      • lurker says:

        They were also putting 10 grand at a time into a safe deposit box–in other words, somewhere that it would not show up on any bank statements.

    • I think you can reasonably expect the prosecutor will confront her with that statement on cross, if she contradicts it on direct.

  67. Rachael says:

    I just want to know if I won a dollar or not lol.

  68. racerrodig says:

    Not to mention she’ll have to explain who “Peter Pan” is.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: