Obama Administration

Here’s what the judge did to poor GZ:

Bail for George Zimmerman, charged with felony aggravated assault and two misdemeanors on allegations that he pointed a shotgun at his girlfriend in Florida, was set Tuesday afternoon at $9,000 during Zimmerman’s first court appearance.

A Seminole County judge put conditions on Zimmerman’s bail: That he cannot return to two Florida addresses; he cannot have contact with the accuser; he cannot possess weapons; he must wear a monitoring device; and he cannot travel outside Florida.

The judge initially said Zimmerman could return to one of the banned addresses with law enforcement to retrieve his belongings, but later — at the urging of the prosecutor — reversed that allowance, saying a third party could get the belongings instead.

Also, too:

Bail would normally be around $5,000 on the charges against Zimmerman, but the judge said he was increasing it to $9,000 after the state’s attorney informed the court that Scheibe had disclosed an alleged incident a week and a half ago in which Zimmerman purportedly tried to choke her. The girlfriend decided not to report it to police, the state’s attorney said.

See also Joan Walsh:

I would hate to be a former Zimmerman juror today. I’d also hate to be Sean Hannity, but that’s true every day.


Share Button


  1. Swami  •  Nov 19, 2013 @6:08 pm

    Wasn’t it Zimmerman who said: ” I’ll give up my gun when they pry it from my cold dead hand”

    Poor Georgie… he’s being forced into a separation with his one true love.

  2. erinyes  •  Nov 19, 2013 @6:45 pm

    I’d also hate to be Sean hannity. What a putz.

  3. Swami  •  Nov 19, 2013 @7:18 pm

    You mean Georgie ain’t really gonna be a pa? Why would he make such a claim if it isn’t true…it might seem like a no big deal type of thing in the big picture, but it does accentuate a conflict of truthfulness between whose version of events to believe in a he said, she said situation. There’s always the possibility that Georgie’s latest flame is just slamming him as a method to provide a proper send off in a relationship that grew sour. He’s got a history that’s weighing him down He’ll hath no fury like a women scorned?
    No matter how things turn out, Georgie can say goodbye to ever owning a gun again. He can’t afford to stand trial because of money and penalty of conviction.. So I’ll bet he takes a plea deal to avoid jail, but gives up his right to own a gun as a convicted felon.

  4. Swami  •  Nov 19, 2013 @8:59 pm
  5. Doug  •  Nov 19, 2013 @9:20 pm

    First, I want to comment about comments from the previous post about GZ and the jury in the first trial. This is just my opinion, but when the story broke, I was outraged that the shooter had not been charged. IMO, the jury came back with a bad verdict BUT, I did not sit thru the all evidence or the testimony, or the instructions to the jury. I respect the verdict because I will not disrespect the jury system. Insulting the jurors in the first trial is WAY out of line, unless you have a better system than a trial by your peers, who are as imperfect as you.

    Second, at the risk of being educated by Barbara on Karma, it seems to me that Karma is taking less time getting around to GZ than it usually does. He beat the rap the first time around – now his true nature, which brought him to grief in a conflict with Trevon is out again for all to see. Again, he will stand trial. His fans, who supported a white man shooting a black kid, will start to move away from GZ when the victim is a white woman.

    An employer would be crazy to associate with him and I predict he will have to give up his guns forever, which will feel like castration to him. Guns make him powerful – we will feel naked and helpless with the world out to get him. So even if he cops a plea and avoids jail time (a good idea – there are too many black people in FL prisons with real violent tendencies who would love to meet George) even if he skips jail, Georgie will be in a prison of his own making that he can’t escape. That’s justice.

  6. David Atkins  •  Nov 19, 2013 @10:01 pm

    I will just say what a lot of people are saying: it’s terrible what happens when a white man threatens some one who is not conveniently black or powerless. Why, you can’t even shoot them in the face.

  7. Swami  •  Nov 19, 2013 @11:38 pm

    Which Zimmerman are we talking about? The white Zimmerman or the Hispanic Zimmerman?

    How can anybody make a proper judgment as to his guilt or innocence without knowing which race he is aligning himself with for his defense? I know he was the Hispanic Zimmy when he killed Trayvon, but considering his latest run- in with the law he might want to emphasis his Caucasian-ness to avoid serving jail time….at least in Florida.

  8. c u n d gulag  •  Nov 20, 2013 @8:00 am

    I think you pretty much hit the nail on the head. *
    Particularly about GZ doing anything he can to avoid going into any prison.

    *My only quibble, if I recall correctly, is that the jury consisted of GZ’s peers, and not TM’s.

  9. LongHairedWeirdo  •  Nov 20, 2013 @2:09 pm

    Doug, I support the jury verdict and the lack of charges as being correct according to the law. Why?

    According to Florida law, if a white hispanic man were to assault a young black man, and that young man were to defend himself effectively, and put that first man in fear of getting beaten up for having started the fight, and the first man can’t retreat, he is *explicitly* allowed to use deadly force to defend himself.

    That’s the law, as written. Even if the state could prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Zimmerman had instigated a fight, once Martin was reported as having gained control of the fight (pinning Zimmerman to the ground), it was an open and shut case, Zimmerman had reasonable fear of being beat up (“great bodily injury”) and was allowed to use deadly force. To disprove that, the state would pretty much have to have someone who witnessed Zimmerman shooting Martin needlessly.

    That said, I wouldn’t blame the jury even if the law wasn’t quite so clear cut. You have to remember that when the state thinks you’re a criminal, it’s trying to hurt you. The jury is your last line of defense. Unless this had been something a lot more clear cut, I can’t find it in myself to fault the jury for an acquittal. I won’t deny they might have acquitted incorrectly (but in this case, I don’t think they did – the law is simply too clear), but that is their job – to make the state prove that a person deserves to have their freedom taken away. And if they have reasonable doubts, they are supposed to acquit.

    Not to protect George Zimmerman specifically, but to protect us all generally.

    One last thing I’ll add: if you are upset with the Zimmerman acquittal, and (generic)you have *ever* snuck out of jury duty because it was a pain in the ass, well, *you* are partly responsible. You didn’t take your chance to be the deciding voice, and vote, on a jury. You own a tiny piece of every stupid-ass verdict that you think is unjust, because when you had one of your few chances to make a difference, you chose not to.

  10. erinyes  •  Nov 20, 2013 @4:10 pm

    I saw the south park episode that did a g z parody; cart man lured token black to Florida so he could shoot him. Very dark humor.

  11. paradoctor  •  Nov 20, 2013 @5:33 pm

    From Tom Lehrer:

    The law was very firm, it
    took away my permit
    the worst punishment I ever endured
    It turned out there was a reason
    cows were our of season
    and one of the hunters wasn’t insured.

  12. paradoctor  •  Nov 20, 2013 @5:36 pm

    oops, that’s “out” of season. The lyrics of the song boasted of bagging “two game wardens, seven hunters, and a cow”. (Pure-bred Guernsey!)

  13. Doug  •  Nov 20, 2013 @10:32 pm

    LHW – Here’s a line from Dickens.

    “If the law supposes that… the law is a ass—a idiot. If that’s the eye of the law, the law is a bachelor; and the worst I wish the law is that his eye may be opened by experience—by experience.”

    I know the legal argument you are making about Florida law. It says if you are loosing a fight, you can kill your opponent even if you started the fight. The law is an ass. If I was on the jury I would disregard the instructions of the judge and argue with the rest of the jury for a sane and just verdict.

    That said, I can’t fault the jury for following the instructions of the judge. But I would liken the results of blindly following the law to blindly following the voice of your GPS. At some point, when the evidence of your eyes (or your conscience) tells you clearly the instructions are wrong, you make independent decisions. Or you drive off a cliff.

    I’m not well versed in Dickens, but I suspect by ‘bachelor’, Dickens is referring to a male virgin, inexperienced in love, physical or emotional. He has no real-world experience and his opinions are worse than worthless if they are doctrine which others must follow even when their experience tells them the doctrine is flawed.