George Zimmerman’s Wife Arrested On Perjury Charge

George Zimmerman’s wife Shellie has been arrested on a perjury charge related to her testimony at her husband’s bond hearing back in April:

Earlier this month, a judge threw George Zimmerman, the man charged with second-degree murder in the death of Trayvon Martin, back in Sanford’s John E. Polk Correctional Facility, after concluding he and his spouse had misled the court during an earlier bond hearing.

On Tuesday, his wife, Shellie Zimmerman, was booked into the same facility on a perjury charge.

According to the Seminole County Sheriff’s Office, deputies were alerted by prosecutors Tuesday that a warrant had been issued for Shellie Zimmerman, 25. She was arrested about 3:30 p.m. “at the location she was residing in Seminole County,” deputies said in a statement.

She was booked on a perjury charge, with bond set at $1,000. She is currently “in the process of posting bond,” deputies said.

Zimmerman, meanwhile, remains in jail until at least June 29th, which is the scheduled date for the new bond hearing that his attorney has requested. This doesn’t bode well for his chances of getting out I would think.

FILED UNDER: Crime, Law and the Courts, Quick Takes, US Politics
Doug Mataconis
About Doug Mataconis
Doug holds a B.A. in Political Science from Rutgers University and J.D. from George Mason University School of Law. He joined the staff of OTB in May 2010. Before joining OTB, he wrote at Below The BeltwayThe Liberty Papers, and United Liberty Follow Doug on Twitter | Facebook

Comments

  1. Marla Hughes says:

    Maneuver to stick it to George. They know it’s not gonna stick. She kept telling them to ask her brother in law for specifics so no perjury.

  2. Chad S says:

    The lesson here is: don’t lie to a Judge’s face. They knew about the fund, they lied. Chip shot perjury.

  3. Commonist says:

    Wow, just saw a photo of her on memeorandum. I’ve never seen a woman look so republican in my entire life.

  4. hoob says:

    Commonist, your comment is ridiculous. I wasn’t aware you could tell a person’s political affiliation from a mug shot. I don’t have enough time to really lay into how ridiculous a comment it is… I just hope you thought better of it after awhile.

  5. Ron Beasley says:

    @Marla Hughes: I think they could make it stick after reading the affidavit but I agree it’s an attempt to pressure George – perhaps t do a plea bargain for manslaughter.
    @hoob: I agree, the comment was offensive and ridiculous.

  6. James H says:

    In commonist’s defense, in the mugshot, she’s wearing a giant “W. Bush 4ever” button in the mugshot.

  7. Commonist says:

    @hoob:

    “Commonist, your comment is ridiculous. I wasn’t aware you could tell a person’s political affiliation from a mug shot”

    I can. I have a good eye for people of lower quality than myself.

  8. Tsar Nicholas says:

    @Commonist:

    I have a good eye for people of lower quality than myself.

    A child psychiatrist could make a living off that statement. Also, FYI, Hitler felt the same way you do. He too believed he had a good eye for people of “lower quality” than himself. The Serbs under Milosevic. The Hutus in Rwanda. You get the point, don’t you, Sparky?

    In any case, going after the wife for perjury seems a bit heavy handed, although not completely surprising. When judges know the cameras are on them and that people are paying attention they tend to get in touch with their inner Judge Dredds.

  9. Rick Almeida says:

    In any case, going after the wife for perjury seems a bit heavy handed, although not completely surprising.

    Lying about a blowjob? Perjury.

    Lying about a $150k slush fund? Not perjury.

    I get it.

  10. mattb says:

    @Marla Hughes & @Ron Beasley:

    I think they could make it stick after reading the affidavit but I agree it’s an attempt to pressure George – perhaps t do a plea bargain for manslaughter.

    This is something for pro-Death Penalty advocates to remember when they claim the system is fair. This is a pretty standard example of how prosecutors can wield a lot of power to pressure defendants to make certain admissions or decisions.

  11. WR says:

    @Tsar Nicholas: Wow. Fastest Hitler comparison in internet history. Way to win the argument!

  12. anjin-san says:

    @ Commonist

    Don’t let the doorknob hit you in the ass on the way out.

  13. DRS says:

    I’m going to predict that being Zimmerman’s lawyer is going to be one of the less-envied positions around the courthouse before this trial is over. Why would anyone play stupid games like this during a murder trial? Like, could you do a better job of declaring: “I’m a liar when it suits me” than (obviously not very well) coded phone messages about your bond?

  14. Jenos Idanian #13 says:

    Oh, my. It turns out that the prosecutors pulled an NBC and selectively edited the transcript of Mrs. Zimmerman’s testimony…

    This raises the very same question I’ve had about the case against Mr. Zimmerman: if their guilt is so damned obvious, why do people have to keep faking evidence and lying to reinforce it?

  15. @Jenos Idanian #13:

    The argument that the transcript was “selectively edited” is specious and yet another example how conservative bloggers don’t care about truth in this case but merely about acquiting Zimmerman and, now, apparently, his wife, in the court of public opinion while at the same time, perhaps, poisoning the jury pool.

    The linked article forgets the fact that they also have transcripts and recordings of conversations between the Zimmerman’s where they discuss misleading the court about the supposed defense fund, and apparently bank records showing transfers from the fund to other accounts prior to the first bond hearing.

  16. rodney dill says:

    @Commonist:

    I can. I have a good eye for people of lower quality than myself.

    Does leave you an extremely small sampling of people to work from though.

  17. Jenos Idanian #13 says:

    @Doug Mataconis: Doug, I wasn’t commenting about the whole case, just the one aspect addressed. And in that one aspect, it does appear that the prosecution chose to cut out exculpatory portions of the discussion to make the incriminating part even more incriminating.

    Is that acceptable? Is that even common?

  18. Jenos,

    I don’t think that the unredacted transcript does anything to help Shellie Zimmerman. If it is true that she knew beforehand about the defense fund, and the allegation is that they have her on tape discussing the same with GZ before the bond hearing, then an answer of “I don’t know” is sufficient to establish probable cause that she committed perjury.

    That said, there’s clearly some leverage grasping going on here. But, GZ’s case is going to a jury at some point and, right now, he’s been burying his own credibility.

  19. Jenos Idanian #13 says:

    @Doug Mataconis: But, GZ’s case is going to a jury at some point and, right now, he’s been burying his own credibility.

    No argument there. Why, it’s almost like he’s taking lessons in that from those screaming for his head — they’ve pretty much shredded their own credibility and flushed it down the john.

    Heck, I recall one guy who suddenly had Zimmerman chasing Martin down the street with his gun drawn, based solely on “I couldn’t imagine it any other way” or some such thing.

  20. Rick Almeida says:

    @Jenos Idanian #13:

    Heck, I recall one guy who suddenly had Zimmerman chasing Martin down the street with his gun drawn, based solely on “I couldn’t imagine it any other way” or some such thing.

    I don’t believe you.

  21. Jenos Idanian #13 says:

    @Rick Almeida: See for yourself.

    For that matter, given that Martin seemingly posed zero threat to Zimmerman prior to his decision to get out of his truck and pursue him on foot with his gun drawn, Martin’s injuries could fairly be attributed to self-defense.

    My apologies; the exact words were “inconceivable” that Zimmerman did NOT draw his gun while chasing Martin.

    Yes, I got the exact word wrong, but in this case “I couldn’t imagine” and “it’s inconceivable” are pretty much interchangeable.

  22. grumpy realist says:

    @Jenos Idanian #13: But you’re not going to be a witness, so it doesn’t matter what you believe. Zimmerman will have to be a witness (otherwise there’s a pretty good argument for manslaughter at least), so his believability will be germane to the situtation.

    (I’m still wondering why they went for second-degree murder as opposed to manslaughter. Doug, care to comment?)

  23. rodney dill says:

    @Jenos Idanian #13: There were a number of similar comments over a few weeks that had Zimmerman with gun drawn, based on little or no evidence.Here’s another gem.

    Here’s what I think happened. Zimmerman is one of those loud mouth gun rights macho wannabe’s. He saw a scrawny 17 year old kid and since he had a 100 pounds on him and was carrying his beloved piece, he felt juiced up enough to go after him. First he trailed him slowly in a pickup truck, freaking out Martin, who wondered what this obviously hostile redneck was doing. Martin turned off the road and Zimmerman got out and followed him into the dark. When Martin turn around and confronted him, he pulled out his gun and started waving it around to put a little fear into the thug and prove his manhood to himself and to all his gun rights buddies when, later on they tossed back a few cold ones and he told them about the scared look on the little thugs face. Martin, seeing the gun come out and fearing for his life hit Zimmerman with everything he had and got him on the ground and started pummeling him and trying to get the gun away. Zimmerman, sh*tting his pants and blubbering by now, managed to hold onto the gun and kill the 17 year old boy, leaving parents devastated, a community up in arms, and his own life shattered.

  24. Jenos Idanian #13 says:

    @grumpy realist: Um, did you miss the part where the person saying Zimmerman had his gun drawn was not me? And later, defended that assertion by saying he found it “inconceivable” that he would not have his gun drawn?

    I’m not saying definitively one way or another on that. I’m just pointing out that that particular declaration came totally out of left field, unsupported by… well, anything. And asserted as indisputable fact.

  25. mantis says:

    @Jenos Idanian #13:

    Why, it’s almost like he’s taking lessons in that from those screaming for his head — they’ve pretty much shredded their own credibility and flushed it down the john.

    Are any of them involved in this trial? Then I guess their credibility doesn’t matter, now does it? Zimmerman’s does, and he’s got none.

  26. Rick Almeida says:

    @Jenos Idanian #13:

    I beg your pardon. When I read your comment, I interpreted it as you saying that a witness claimed Zimmerman chased Martin with a gun.

    My mistake.

  27. Jenos Idanian #13 says:

    @Rick Almeida: It’s cool. I’m not used to civilized disagreement around here; this might take some getting used to.

  28. Rufus T. Firefly says:

    @Jenos Idanian #13:

    Ora pro nobis beate martyr Sebastiane.