That account was common knowledge before the initial bail hearing. How can money donated for a "defense fund" in a separate account be deemed a "personal account"? I'm not a lawyer nor am I familiar with specifics of the rules of disclosure, but something isn't right here. All of a sudden a judge who did the right thing a couple months ago is suddenly mad about something that was common knowledge at the time of his initial decision?
If I manage a charity, use the money for personal expenses, I am committing fraud. If I were to donate money to his defense fund, I would certainly expect it to be spent on defense, not bail. Again, I'm not sure how it all is supposed to work, but I am failing to see how that money is even a factor.
Have already come to the conclusion that Zimmerman is a fool, but if someone could explain to me the specifics on how this Paypal account would even be relevant to the initial bond hearing, it would sure help. And please, legal specifics, not opinion.