SANFORD – A judge in the George Zimmermancase said this morning he wants more information about the $200,000 donors sent to the defendant’sPayPal accounts.
Meanwhile, an attorney for the family of slain teenTrayvon Martin expressed outrage about Zimmerman’s money, saying the court should revoke his bond immediately. That didn’t happen at today’s hearing in Sanford.
“They tried to portray themselves as indigent that they did not have any money,” Trayvon family attorney Benjamin Crump told CNN.
Zimmerman’s attorney, Mark O’Mara, said he has taken control of the money and was not aware of the donations during the April 20 bond hearing.
About $5,000 of the donor money was used to post Zimmerman’s bond, O’Mara said.
At the bond hearing, Zimmerman had access to the funds and heard his wife say they had no savings.
O’Mara said he believed it was an oversight — not intentional deception — that his client didn’t disclose the money during the bond hearing.
O’Mara said he found out about the money four days after the bond hearing when he asked his client to shut down his website, TheRealGeorgeZimmermam.com. Zimmerman then asked him then what to do with all the PayPal donations.
O’Mara said there was about $150,000 left when he took control. The family also used the money on living expenses and on setting up somewhere secure for him to stay.
O’Mara said he did not foresee the judge increasing his client’s bond because of the donations.
“150,000 dollars is a high bond,” he said.
He said there was not one or two huge Internet donors but several people, some who gave hundreds of dollars.
He said he’d do everything in his power to keep their names private, including possibly risking a contempt ruling by keeping them secret if the judge orders him or Special Prosecutor Angela Corey to release them.
The money has since been deposited in trust accounts managed exclusively by O’Mara, he told Circuit Court Judge Kenneth Lester, Jr.
O’Mara asked the judge if he could disclose a donor list and information about who had authority over the accounts in a private meeting to avoid publicly exposing contributors to “ridicule and danger.”
He said he will file a motion soon, asking the judge to protect from release the names of witnesses.
“We have to do it,” he said, “in a way that protects the sanctity of the witnesses.”
Earlier in the courtroom, he said he fears that witnesses will refuse to cooperate out of fear of harassment.
He has not seen the state’s evidence against his client and is eager to, he said. Although today is the deadline for him to get it, he said he wants a delay of several days or weeks to keep news organizations and others from getting it.
That means there’ll likely be another hearing at which media lawyers will request full disclosure.