When lawyers fall out - take cover!

For those not hooked on American affairs let me provide a brief - very brief - summary of the Zimmerman-Martin case.  Please note that I have provided a Wiki link which I have not read and so the usual caution is advised!  In essence, Zimmerman, a sort of semi-private security guard suspected Martin, a black youth, of being up to no good one night and challenged him.  A fight ensued and Zimmerman shot Martin dead.  The local cops, in effect, shrugged and took Zimmerman's word for what happened and the whole matter was about to be filed away when the liberal MSM picked up the story and a perfect shit storm erupted.

Needless to say, as soon as this happened the very political State Attorney Angela Corey took over the case and decided to press charges of 2nd degree murder against Zimmerman.  At this point, enter the enormously distinguished and influential Professor of Law from Harvard Law School, Alan Dershowitz, who studied her probable cause affidavit and described it, according to Wiki, as:

"so thin that it won't make it past the judge," calling it "irresponsible and unethical," and opined that the charges were motivated by prosecutor Corey's desire to be re-elected.

Ouch!  Ms. Corey's response was nuclear.  According to Dershowitz, himself, as reported in Newsmax:

State Attorney Angela Corey, the prosecutor in the George Zimmerman case, recently called the Dean of Harvard Law School to complain about my criticism of some of her actions.

She was transferred to the Office of Communications and proceeded to engage in a 40-minute rant, during which she threatened to sue Harvard Law School, to try to get me disciplined by the Bar Association and to file charges against me for libel and slander.

Oh, goody-goody, I do hope she means it.  Dershowitz continues:

She said that because I work for Harvard and am identified as a professor she had the right to sue Harvard.

When the communications official explained to her that I have a right to express my opinion as “a matter of academic freedom,” and that Harvard has no control over what I say, she did not seem to understand.

She persisted in her nonstop whining, claiming that she is prohibited from responding to my attacks by the rules of professional responsibility — without mentioning that she has repeatedly held her own press conferences and made public statements throughout her career.

Oh, it just gets better and better!  One of Dershowitz's criticisms is his allegation that in presenting her case to the Judge for a 2nd degree murder charge she withheld very pertinent information, that is, the extent of the injuries inflicted on Zimmerman:

Her beef was that I criticized her for filing a misleading affidavit that willfully omitted all information about the injuries Zimmerman had sustained during the “struggle” it described. She denied that she had any obligation to include in the affidavit truthful material that was favorable to the defense.

She insisted that she is entitled to submit what, in effect, were half truths in an affidavit of probable cause, so long as she subsequently provides the defense with exculpatory evidence.

She should go back to law school, where she will learn that it is never appropriate to submit an affidavit that contains a half truth, because a half truth is regarded by the law as a lie, and anyone who submits an affidavit swears to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth.

Then Dershowitz goes in for the kill:

The judge deciding whether there is probable cause to charge the defendant with second degree murder should not have been kept in the dark about physical evidence that is so critical to determining whether a homicide occurred, and if so, a homicide of what degree. By omitting this crucial evidence, Corey deliberately misled the court. [My emphasis] 

Corey seems to believe that our criminal justice system is like a poker game in which the prosecution is entitled to show its cards only after the judge has decided to charge the defendant with second degree murder.

Subsequently, there has been a development over which afficionados of irony will positively drool.  Zimmerman obtained bail and kept the cost of the bond down by failing to own up to a defence fund which had been raised on his behalf.  For telling half-truths, his bail was revoked and he is back in the slammer.  The difference between his action and that of Ms. Corey is hard to discern!

Anyway, now it's over to Ms. Corey.  Will she do what she threatened and sue Harvard Law School and the ultra-formidable Alan Dershowitz?  (Oh, yes, yes, YES! - he whimpered, salivating with joy at the prospect.)  I would pay good money for a front row seat.

Needless to say, but I'll say it anyway, I have no strong views as to the guilt or innocence of Zimmerman.

 

Comments

[dearieme]

Mr Zimmerman is undoubtedly guilty of being less black than the arsehole he shot.

[David Duff]

You should have been a lawyer, DM!

[A K Haart]

I have no strong views as to the guilt or innocence of Zimmerman either, but it's difficult not to suspect Ms. Corey's motives.

[David Duff]

Blindingly obvious, I think, AK, given the alacrity with which she acted once the story hit the headlines.

[Dom]

After Dershowitz spilled the beans, others have come out also. Seems Corey has a history of threatening her critics:

http://jacksonville.com/opinion/blog/400601/ron-littlepage/2012-06-08/ron-littlepage-angela-coreys-hissy-fits-threats

[missred]

Quite so, dearieme.
Another excellent synopsis, my dear Duff

[David Duff]

Dom, alas, I couldn't get through on that link so I tried going via Google and whilst I reached the Jacksonville site the obviously very naughty Ron Little page would not open. Has Corey struck like a dervish?

Aw shucks, Miss Red, you say the nicest thangs, an' all!