[silverleaf]

I suppose this means the judge decided it was “fair” to confiscate virtually everything in Zimmerman’s defense fund
- doesn’t it take 10% (nonrefundable) to make bail?

If so, this won’t leave much to pay attorneys and provide living expenses for a couple forced to give up their jobs and home by a corrupt rasist injustice system that is acting like a LYNCH MOB

A real justice organization needs to take this case on pro bono.

Maybe someday Zimmerman will be able to countersue for the massive violations of his civil rights

[snarkytart]

Another punk ass judge who caved to politics. Lester probably was read the riot act by “someone” in a phone call after he set the first bail so low.

[CondorFlight]

“Maybe someday Zimmerman will be able to countersue for the massive violations of his civil rights”

I’m sorry, but the Duke lacrosse players tried to sue for violations of their civil rights, and the judge in that case ruled that the right to sue for such violations applies
only to African-Americans (I kid you not) since the applicable laws—

which refer to “every citizen” and “every person”

are really only meant to apply to persons of African descent (no matter what Congress wrote in the law).

Maybe a federal judge in Florida will rule differently;

and if you can afford to wait ten years to get the case to the Supreme Court

and IF the Court agrees to hear it

you MIGHT get a reversal on that.

In the meantime, time and money run on and on and on ...

[Netizen]

maybe Dershowitz will take a more active interest.

[petro45acp]

“I suppose this means the judge decided it was “fair” to confiscate virtually everything in Zimmerman’s defense fund
- doesn’t it take 10% (nonrefundable) to make bail?

If so, this won’t leave much to pay attorneys and provide living expenses for a couple forced to give up their jobs and home by a corrupt rasist injustice...”

We have the RICO laws to thank for this.

Amendment IV

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, ant eht persons or things to be seized.

So this judge says EFF the Bill of Rights, the highest law of the land, relying instead on a 5h1t load of preceding case law (equally malodorous).

Bill of Rights Enforcement and fully informed juries (nullification)!