The New Persecution of Zimmerman's Wife, Laid Bare

UPDATE ADDENDUM: Given the phone calls recorded between Zimmerman and his wife (presuming those to be real and valid and to have occured before her denial), then indeed Zimmerman's wife did lie when she denied knowledge of the cash amounts in the PayPal account. The provenance and chain of lawful chain of possession of this evidence is not obvious at this time, of course, but Perjury could definitely have happened, given this evidence.


Original Post:
http://pjmedia.com/blog/vindictive-now-george-zimmermans-wife-faces-perjury-charge/

Perjury is very difficult to prove, rarely filed, and much misunderstood. Florida statute 837.02(1) states:

Except as provided in subsection (2), whoever makes a false statement, which he or she does not believe to be true, under oath in an official proceeding in regard to any material matter, commits a felony of the third degree …

In addition, Cohen v. State (2008) held:

Statements alleged to be perjurious must be of “empirical fact” and not of opinion, belief or perception. … One of the essential elements of perjury in official proceedings is that the person making the statement does not believe it to be true. … The questions posed to elicit perjured testimony must be asked with the appropriate specificity necessary to result in an equally specific statement of fact.

Simply put, in order to win the case against Shellie Zimmerman, the state must be able to prove every element of the offense: that she (1) while under oath (2) in a judicial proceeding (3) made a false statement (4) that she knew to be false about (5) a material matter. In addition, that statement must be about a matter of objective fact, not an opinion or an incorrect guess. If a prosecutor doesn’t ask sufficiently direct and specific questions so as to elicit objectively factual responses, he’s out of luck.

Out of luck, that is, unless that prosecutor is engaged in a political action that ignores the law and legal ethics.

And,

The affidavit for the perjury charge, written and submitted by special prosecutor investigator T.C. O’Steen, is — like the affidavit submitted for the murder charge — devoid of probable cause.

In fact, it does not establish a single specific statement made by Shellie Zimmerman and explain why that specific statement was false, why it was material, how it was a matter of objective fact, or why Shellie believed it to be false as she uttered it.

Of all of the elements of the offense that must be established and proved, the state established only that Shellie was under oath and testified in a judicial proceeding.

Read the whole thing...