eric.feldkamp wrote:1. Zimmerman did not testify at his bail hearing. Only his wife did.
2. His wife offered, during testimony, to contact the person that knew exactly how much was in the accounts in question so as to get an accurate figure. The prosecution didn't take her up on it.
3. It looks so bad for the two of them that the prosecutor edited the transcript on the perjury charging document in order to cover up point 2 above. Which is to say: It looks worse for the prosecutor.
Zimmerman did testify at his bail hearing- but not about money- only an apology to Trayvon's family.
Z's wife was asked to estimate the amount in trust, but claimed she couldn't. Yet a few days before, IIRC, she and her husband discussed on the jailhouse phone about transferring $130k form one account to another. She was also asked at the bond hearing whether there were any additional assets that could be liquidated, but failed to at least mention the $130k.
The court transcript itself was not edited. What the prosecution did was not fully include all testimony from it in the papers filed against Z's wife. This could have been a bad move, but not one which will prevent charges against her.
I have both read and listened to Z's wife's testimony and believe that while it cannot be proved that she out and out lied, she certainly can legitimately be accused of having been very deceptive and IMO probably lied by omission IMO. The problem for Mrs and Mr. Z is that neither he never made any attempt to correct the record during or following Mrs. Z's testimony, when arguably, they should have.
When I think about it all, the family plan was to use the pay-pal money to pay Z's bail. How then, could they have not known of it?
Nevertheless, this is a close one as prosecution for perjury in a case like Mrs. Z's is very difficult to prove because her answers were rather ambiguous and strict proof of full knowledge of a lie under oath is required.