George Zimmerman's lawyer revealed last night that his client had collected about $200K in donations on his website—a fact he formally admitted during a court hearing today. Attorney Mark O'Mara claims he has now taken control of the money and was not aware of the donations during last week's bail hearing, when the family testified they were financially struggling to pay bond. O'Mara added that none of the donor money was used to pay the bond; Circuit Court Judge Kenneth Lester, Jr. said he wants more information about donors before deciding whether to release information about them to the media.
Zimmerman did not appear during this morning's hearing; the prosecution argued for higher bond subsequently: "They tried to portray themselves as indigent that they did not have any money," said Martin family attorney Benjamin Crump. "We think the court should revoke his bond immediately and he should be held accountable for misleading the court."
O'Mara asked the judge if he could disclose the donor list and information about the accounts in a private meeting to avoid exposing contributors to "ridicule and danger." On CNN last night, O'Mara said up to 50 people had sent checks for Zimmerman's defense—he said Zimmerman casually brought it up with him after last week's hearing: "He asked me what to do with his PayPal accounts, and I asked him what he was talking about," O'Mara told Anderson Cooper. "He said those were the accounts that had the money from the website he had. And there was about ... $204,000 that had come in to date." O'Mara added that Zimmerman used some of the money already for living expenses, and the rest has now been placed in a trust by O'Mara.
Also at the hearing, prosecution asked for a gag order on O'Mara, which the judge rejected. And attorneys for the Orlando Sentinel, WFTV-Channel 9, NBC, CNN, The New York Times and other media companies gathered in court to argue in favor of access to records in the Zimmerman case. There was also an argument over whether or not the judge will release the names of the prosecution's witnesses and collected evidence, which the judge has not decided yet. Both prosecution and defense agreed that the names of witnesses should remained sealed regardless.
