Well, why not?
It’s been running over him again and again since the beginning; he might as well buy a ticket!
Not so fast, George!
This epic ethics train wreck, which has already engulfed the news media, civil rights activists, defense attorneys, prosecutors, bloggers, pundits, members of Congress, Barney Frank, Spike Lee, the Congressional Black Caucus, President Obama, Martin’s mother, and maybe even you, just picked up George Zimmerman.
Zimmerman just had his bail revoked because he and his wife misled the court at the bail hearing, claiming they had minimal financial resources when in fact a fund for Zimmerman’s defense had already raked in $135,000. As a result, the original bail was set at a minimum level. Now Zimmerman has to turn himself in to authorities again, and whether he can get bail a second time is in doubt.
Lying to a judge is always stupid and wrong, but this instance is spectacularly so. Zimmerman’s account of what happened on the fateful night that he shot Trayvon Martin is likely to be a key aspect of his defense on second degree murder charges, and having the fact that he already lied to the court once in the case isn’t going to help his credibility with the jury. It doesn’t make him a murderer, of course. It does make him less convincing when he denies that he is a murderer.
_________________________________________
Facts: Associated Press
Graphic: Now Public
Ethics Alarms attempts to give proper attribution and credit to all sources of facts, analysis and other assistance that go into its blog posts. If you are aware of one I missed, or believe your own work was used in any way without proper attribution, please contact me, Jack Marshall, at jamproethics@verizon.net.
Ethics Alarms 
I’m willing to give him the benefit of the doubt until his hearing. One or more of the following may have occurred (and I suspect there are other plausible explanations as well):
1) Zimmerman and his family may not, in fact, have been in control of the funds;
2) The funds may have been pledged, but not yet collected;
3) The funds may have been specific to costs of his legal defense, NOT to bailing him out (or he may have believed that to be the case).
Or he could have lied about it. We’ll find out soon enough.
Please read the motion of the Prosecutor and you will see where Zimmerman in conversation with his wife was discussing the monies and his passport. He had the funds transferred to his Credit Union account. He was control of the funds at the time of the bond hearing.
We will have to wait and see what explanation the defense gives for Zimmerman and his wife’s deliberate lie.
I’m with you on this one, Arthur, except that there’s also the whole matter of the second passport because the first one was lost and then re-found. I might give him a pass on one or the other. Both… well, that seems like a stretch.
In relation to points 1 and 2. The website in question was a very simple template based website created by Zimmerman himself with a link to a paypal account. The fact that Zimmerman created the site himself suggests that he had full and complete control of the site and the funds. Because the funds were collected with paypal they were deposited from debit/credit cards or liinked and pre-approved checking and savings accounts with transfers of actual funds with no pledges involved.
He will face court. That’s all that we can ask.
Hopefully the truth will out, whatever that is. There’s so much media spin I will reserve judgement, I don’t think it’s possible for anyone not directly involved to even give an informed opinion now.
That is so right.