According to several experts in Florida law, Sean Hannity could be compelled to testify about his conversations with George Zimmerman. Tamara Lave, a professor of criminal law at the Universtiy of Miami who also practiced as a public defender for 10 years, told ThinkProgress it’s a “no brainer.”

Under Florida Law, there is a “qualified privilege” for journalists that protects their conversations with sources. But this priviledge can be overcome, per Florida Evidence Code 90.5015:

A party seeking to overcome this privilege must make a clear and specific showing that:

(a) The information is relevant and material to unresolved issues that have been raised in the proceeding for which the information is sought;
(b) The information cannot be obtained from alternative sources; and
(c) A compelling interest exists for requiring disclosure of the information.

Here’s how Hannity described his conversation with George Zimmerman:

Now yesterday I was contacted by an individual that we in fact believe was George Zimmerman. He reached out to me, we spoke on the phone about his case, and I agreed not to report on the contents of that conversation.

Lave said that, in her opinion, the qualified privilege could “easily” be overcome under Florida law because Zimmerman’s statements about the incident are “relevant and material to unresolved issues.” Further, there are no “alternative sources” for his statements to Hannity and there is a compelling interest for disclosure in a potential manslaughter case.

Lyrissa Lidsky, an expert in media law at the University of Florida and the author of a book on the First Amendment, said that she also believed the factors in the Florida law would be resolved “in favor of forcing Hannity to disclose the information.”

Michael Seigel, Director of the Criminal Justice Center at the University of Florida, agreed, stating that Hannity “may very well have opened himself up to subpoena.” Kenneth Nunn, another criminal law professor a the University of Florida, concurred and said he didn’t think the journalist’s privledge could be made successfully by Hannity.

When George Zimmerman’s attorneys announced they were withdrawing from the case because they had not been in contact with him for several days, they cited a phone call Zimmerman had made to Sean Hannity directly. (Hannity has been using his show to mount a public defense of Zimmerman’s actions.)

“We believe that he spoke directly with Sean off the record and he’s not even willing to tell us what our client told him,” said Hal Uhrig, one of the attorneys who had been representing Zimmerman.

On his radio show Monday, Hannity explained that he had an “off the record” conversation with Zimmerman. The conservative host also came to Zimmerman’s defense. “I spoke to George Zimmerman, and I’m not going to reveal the contents of that conversation, but I have confirmed yes, he was a mentor to minority children. Now if you were racist, I don’t think you’d be a mentor to minority children,” Hannity said.

Then on his Fox News show last night, Hannity again discussed his phone call with Zimmerman, saying he had promised not to report about their conversation and knew nothing about Zimmerman’s relationship with his attorneys:

Now yesterday I was contacted by an individual that we in fact believe was George Zimmerman. He reached out to me, we spoke on the phone about his case, and I agreed not to report on the contents of that conversation. That’s it. I know nothing about his relationship with his now former attorneys.

Watch what Hannity said on his radio and televison shows:

At the press conference yesterday, Zimmerman’s attorneys told people who are looking for him to expand their search beyond Florida, despite earlier assurances that their former client was in the state. The family of Trayvon Martin, who Zimmerman said he shot and killed in self-defense in February, had expressed concerns that Zimmerman would flee the state.

In what may be the most ill-advised letter ever penned by a defender of someone accused of a racially motivated homicide, the conservative Daily Caller claims that an unidentified “family member” of Trayvon Martin’s shooter George Zimmerman sent a paranoid letter to Attorney General Eric Holder yesterday accusing him and much of the “black community” of racial bias:

I realize that you are no doubt aware of the events that took place on February 26, 2012 in Sanford, Florida. While the facts of the case have not been made public yet, many in the black community have formed what many are calling a “lynch mob” against George Zimmerman. The rhetoric from the black community has ranged from benign to incredibly violent. Among those that have interjected themselves include Congressmen (and women), the Congressional Black Caucus, The NAACP, Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton, Spike Lee, President Barack Obama, and the most violent, the New Black Panthers. . . .

I am not writing this letter to discuss the intricacies of the case because, as you know, the investigation by the Florida Attorney General is not complete. I am writing you to ask you why, when the law of the land is crystal clear, is your office not arresting the New Black Panthers for hate crimes? The Zimmerman family is in hiding because of the threats that have been made against us, yet the DOJ has maintained an eerie silence on this matter. These threats are very public. If you haven’t been paying attention just do a Google search and you will find plenty. Since when can a group of people in the United States put a bounty on someone’s head, circulate Wanted posters publicly, and still be walking the streets? Many people that I know (and many that I don’t) believe that racism is the only reason that this group has not been rounded up yet. Again, we are not talking about racism on the side of George Zimmerman. There is no possible explanation for why this is not the case. The entire world has seen these threats and we can all only assume that your office has as well. . . . I would surmise that, based on your own definition of a hate crime, you have chosen not to arrest these individuals based solely on your race. There is no other explanation.

Let’s be absolutely clear. The New Black Panther Party is a repulsive, bigoted organization that’s classified as a hate group by the Southern Poverty Law Center. Their actions are routinely indefensible, and their recent announcement that they are offering a $10,000 reward for the “CAPTURE AND CITIZENS ARREST FOR GEORGE ZIMMERMAN” cannot be squared with the rule of law — even though Florida officials have also been negligent in their own duty to investigate and prosecute a man who appears very likely to have killed an innocent teenager in cold blood.

But there is also a much more plausible explanation for the fact that the United States Department of Justice has not brought charges for this bounty on Zimmerman. It’s not at all clear that their actions violate a federal criminal law. Federal hate crimes statutes forbid the use of “dangerous weapon[s]” to “cause bodily injury” to someone because of their race, and they also forbid threats of force that hinder certain protected activities, such as voting or receiving federal financial assistance. But the New Black Panthers’ specific actions likely do not constitute a federal crime, no matter how deplorable they may be.

More importantly, however, there’s something bizarre and disturbing about this Zimmerman family member’s attempt to paint George as the victim of racial animus, given George Zimmerman’s likely role in a racially motivated homicide.

In a shocking turn of events, George Zimmerman’s two attorney’s — Craig Sonner and Hal Uhrig — announced they were withdrawing from the case. They said they have lost track of Zimmerman and have not been able to contact him for several days.

At various times during the press conference, both attorneys said they did not know where Zimmerman is currently.

Uhrig told the press that, if people are trying to find Zimmerman, they should “stop looking in Florida” and “look much farther way.” This directly contradicts what Craig Sonner said on March 23 when he assured a reporter from WFTV that “he’s absolutely in the state, he’s local.”

Watch a compilation:

Has George Zimmerman been on the move over the last two weeks?

Trayvon Martin’s family attorney expressed concern that Zimmerman may flee: “Trayvon’s family was always concerned that Zimmerman doesn’t try to skirt his legal responsibilities and become a flight risk.”

Over the last several days George Zimmerman’s attorneys, Hal Uhrig and Craig Sonner, have launched an aggressive public relations offensive on behalf of their client. They’ve appeared extensively on local and national media, frequently detailing their version of the events of February 26 as “fact.”

For example, on April 4, Hal Uhrig said the following on CNN:

The reason that Trayvon Martin is dead is not because he was black or because he wore a hoodie or because he was walking in the rain. It’s because that 6’3″ young man made a terrible decision and a bad judgment, when he decided to smack somebody in the face and break their nose, jump on them and smack their head into the ground. And in doing that, put him in reasonable fear for his safety.

Such statements, which have not been established by medical records or other evidence, may be in conflict with the Florida Rules of Professional Conduct. Rule 4-3.6(a) states:

Prejudicial Extrajudicial Statements Prohibited. A lawyer shall not make an extrajudicial statement that a reasonable person would expect to be disseminated by means of public communication if the lawyer knows or reasonably should know that it will have a substantial likelihood of materially prejudicing an adjudicative proceeding due to its creation of an imminent and substantial detrimental effect on that proceeding.

ThinkProgress spoke with Pat Brussard, a law professor at Florida A&M who teaches courses in Professional Responsibility. Brussard told ThinkProgress Zimmerman’s lawyers “may be in some trouble” because “it appears they are testifying.” According to Brussard, when Zimmerman’s attorneys “put out opinion information as if it were the truth” that is “sketchy behavior.” Uhrig was a paid television analyst during the Casey Anthony trial and Brussard said he may be “confusing the role of a spin-doctor on the Casey Anthony trial with what his job is now.”

Brussard could not say definitively whether Zimmerman’s lawyers were in violation of the rules, but “at a minimum it’s right there on the edge.”

Many of Brussard’s concerns were shared by Anita Allen, a law professor who teaches legal ethics at the University of Pennsylvania. Allen noted that when information because less factual and more speculative, advocates have an ethical obligation to “keep their mouths shut” to avoid prejudicing a future legal proceeding.

According to NBC News correspondent Mara Schiavocampo, George Zimmerman has launched a new website:

On the website — therealgeorgezimmerman.com — Zimmerman solicits donations to support his “living expenses and legal defense.” He writes: “I have created a Paypal account solely linked on this website as I would like to provide an avenue to thank my supporters personally and ensure that any funds provided are used only for living expenses and legal defense, in lieu of my forced inability to maintain employment. I will also personally, maintain accountability of all funds received.”

He also features a photo of a vandalized black cultural center at Ohio State University.

Zimmerman alleges that other purported legal defense funds are not actually providing him with financial support.

In an interview with ThinkProgress, Martin family attorney Natalie Jackson raised serious questions about the role of George Zimmerman’s father, Robert Zimmerman, in the case.

Specifically, Jackson pointed to Robert Zimmerman’s presence during police questioning of his son. The New York Times reported the following:

The day after the shooting, George Zimmerman, according to his father, returned with at least three police officers to the Retreat at Twin Lakes, back to that grassy area where plaintive cries for help had gone unanswered. The investigators, accompanied by someone with a video camera, wanted him to re-enact the events of the night when the two strangers had stood their ground.

Mr. Zimmerman’s father watched from nearby.

Jackson noted that Robert Zimmerman was a retired magistrate judge who “issued warrants” and knows “what probable cause needs to be” to justify an arrest. His presence at the questioning, according to Jackson, was unusual and potentially inappropriate because “we don’t know what coaching went on.”

In an interview with Fox 35 Orlando, Robert Zimmerman, speaking of his son’s conduct, said “If a law enforcement officer presented those facts to me and requested a warrant, he would absolutely be denied.” Robert Zimmerman’s unusual role could help explain how George Zimmerman avoided arrest despite the recommendation of the lead homicide investigator that he be charged with manslaughter.

Seperately, Ben Crump, Jackson’s co-council, sent a letter to the U.S. Deputy Attorney General urging him to investigate a number of irregularities in the conduct of local authorities. Crump wrote that he believed “family members of shooter George Zimmerman were present at the police department” the night Trayvon Martin was killed.

Robert Zimmerman appeared to acknowledge he had spoken to the police and the state’s attorney in the case. In his Fox 35 interview, he said, “No one knew I was a retired magistrate judge. I didn’t mention it to the police. I didn’t mention it to the state attorney’s office.” He did not elaborate on the substance of his conversations with the police or prosecutors.

Jackson noted that Robert Zimmerman has made several claims about his son’s conduct that have turned out to be “not credible.” For example, in a letter to the Orlando Sentinel, he flatly stated that at “no time did George follow or confront Mr. Martin.” Subsequently, the 911 tapes were released and revealed that George Zimmerman acknowledged chasing Trayvon Martin.