Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Trayvon Martin: Attorneys say Zimmerman contacted prosecutor, Sean Hannity
The Baltimore Sun / The Orlando Sentinel ^ | April 10, 2012 | Jeff Weiner and Hal Boedeker

Posted on 04/10/2012 5:15:23 PM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-76 next last
To: Jack Hydrazine

I get the feeling Zimmerman is throwing himself on the knife out of pressure and feelings of guilt thus his contact with the prosecutor. Absolutely disgusting to drive the guy to that when most likely he was a victim of what can only be described as a mugging. Just think: He’s getting more hate, more threats, more protests against him than Casey Anthony. But that’s liberals for you. Cop killers like Mumia Abu Jamal are heroes to them. Vermin like Stanley Tookie Smith they consider legends. But a guy who defends his life must be lynched.


41 posted on 04/10/2012 7:43:54 PM PDT by GrandJediMasterYoda (Someday our schools will teach the difference between lose and loose.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Jack Hydrazine; stephenjohnbanker; sickoflibs
Do Americans ever sneak across the border into Mexico?

he'll never get away with it, being a white-hispanic ya know...

42 posted on 04/10/2012 8:07:08 PM PDT by Gilbo_3 (Gov is not reason; not eloquent; its force.Like fire,a dangerous servant & master. George Washington)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Gilbo_3

LOL!


43 posted on 04/10/2012 8:20:17 PM PDT by stephenjohnbanker (God, family, country, mom, apple pie, the girl next door and a Ford F250 to pull my boat.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: jimjohn
Perhaps he needs $$ to get out of the country.

What does that say about our country and our justice system?

When a group can put out a bounty on someone's head and our justice system refuses to prosecute them - we're not much different from Africa or some other third world country.

I don't even have to consider that one of our GOP presidential candidates pronounced him guilty of murder.

44 posted on 04/10/2012 8:28:04 PM PDT by ladyjane
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: ladyjane
Perhaps Attorneys were afraid of the case, and looking for a reason to take the High Road and save their White Hides. Someone else may die and me thinks they do not want it to be them. Not sure I blame them but could have done it without all the Publicity, unless they wanted People to know for certain they were out of there. Maybe they were even threatened by Holders people and their Families could have been threatened.Whole thing stinks.
45 posted on 04/10/2012 10:59:52 PM PDT by easternsky
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

Bump.


46 posted on 04/10/2012 11:47:36 PM PDT by foxfield
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet
Laura, sitting in for O’reilly, said his attorneys had never met with him, only talked on the phone, and then he stopped talking to them.

What kind of attorney doesn't meet with his client after all this time?

I'd get a better attorney, stay out of sight, and if I needed money have someone else solicit it, not me. And STFU!

47 posted on 04/11/2012 1:03:24 AM PDT by MacMattico
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: P-Marlowe; ought-six

As with other professionals, the attorney-client privilege belongs to the client. In the eyes of the law, the confidentiality privilege between pastor and parishoner belongs to the parishoner and not to the pastor. Despite any vows or pledges made by the professionals, they are not the ones in charge. If a legitimate privilege exists, then it cannot be violated by the professional. In this case, that’s the client, Zimmerman.

That is true even if he releases them from their part in his case. That is true until the point he specifically releases them to speak freely.


48 posted on 04/11/2012 3:04:12 AM PDT by xzins (Retired Army Chaplain and Proud of It! Pray Continued Victory for our Troops Still in Afghan!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: EDINVA
Just how did they violate the attorney-client privilege? They gave no details or even discussed Zimmerman’s case.

For one thing they speculated about their clients mental state on national television. The mere fact they held a news conference to announce their departure was an ethical breech.

49 posted on 04/11/2012 4:14:29 AM PDT by mac_truck ( Aide toi et dieu t aidera)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: MinuteGal
I wonder if Zimmerman was told there would be no charges, to get the heck out of dodge and the lawyers are providing cover by holding a news conference - drawing everyone’s attention - allowing him to get out of town.
50 posted on 04/11/2012 4:21:51 AM PDT by liberalh8ter (If Barack has a memory like a steel trap, why can't he remember what the Constitution says?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: mac_truck

The attorneys speculated about Zimmerman’s current mental state, based on his behavior in refusing to communicate with them. They did not speculate about his mental state at the time he shot Martin. There is no ethical violation in holding a press conference for what has been made into the biggest legal media story of the moment.

How about Martin’s attorney threatening the special prosecutor with “pandemonium,” i.e., riots, if she doesn’t file charges? In a media interview for a foreign news outlet, no less.


51 posted on 04/11/2012 5:41:10 AM PDT by EDINVA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: xzins; P-Marlowe

In this case, Zimmerman apparently had an agreement for these 2 lawyers to represent his interests in matters relating to the Martin shooting. Unless and until charges are filed, there is no ‘case’ but there surely are ‘interests.’

If there were a case filed in court, the attorneys would have had to file a motion to withdraw, setting out their reasons, citing examples. In this case, it would be failure to communicate. Courts don’t let attorneys just walk away from a client, the attorneys have to set out their reasons, and the court then has to allow the withdrawal.

Were there a case, the filing of that motion would instantly become a matter of public record. In the absence of a suit or charges having been filed, and nowhere to file a motion to withdraw, they held a press conference. They had already ‘entered their appearance’ in the court of public opinion. How else were they to withdraw from that court?

Attorney-client privilege doesn’t extend to the public information of the fact that said attorneys represent(ed) Zimmerman, or the fact of their withdrawal from that representation. Those are matters of public record. I would imagine it’s not much different from a pastor acknowledging publicly that someone belonged to his congregation but no longer does. Would that mean the pastor has breached his congregant’s privilege?


52 posted on 04/11/2012 6:04:11 AM PDT by EDINVA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: EDINVA

You are 100% wrong about both the breach of client confidentiality and attorney ethics.


53 posted on 04/11/2012 6:23:54 AM PDT by mac_truck ( Aide toi et dieu t aidera)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: Jack Hydrazine
Do Americans ever sneak across the border into Mexico?

They used to.

Not anymore. The cartels have guards on the border now to ensure that NO ONE crosses IN EITHER DIRECTION without paying a fee.

54 posted on 04/11/2012 6:27:23 AM PDT by UCANSEE2 (Lame and ill-informed post)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: All

I am praying for Zimmerman.


55 posted on 04/11/2012 6:29:31 AM PDT by Maverick68
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: EDINVA; xzins
Attorney-client privilege doesn’t extend to the public information of the fact that said attorneys represent(ed) Zimmerman, or the fact of their withdrawal from that representation.

That may be true, however the attorney is not free to state the reason for the withdrawal if it conveys any privileged communication (or lack of it thereof) or it can prejudice the client.

In this case, there was no "case" so there was no reason to submit any statement to the court. The representation in this case was purely advisory and ANY statement issued by the attorneys would have to be cleared by the client. In this case these lawyers have publicly prejudiced the interests of their client by revealing that they were not only withdrawing from the case, but that they were doing it because their client was either not following their advice or was not communicating with them.

These attorneys were not looking out for the welfare of their client, they were looking out for their own public image. The ETHICAL response to why they were withdrawing should have been "No Comment". Instead they publicly threw the blame on their client and left him hanging out to dry.

Non-communication is a privileged communication. The advice an attorney gives his client (such as "Don't talk to Hannity") is also a privileged communication. The fact that they revealed that their client was not taking their advice is as much a violation ethics as their revealing things he had told them.

BTW are you an attorney?

If so would you have done what these two did if your client did not follow your advice or was not actively communicating with you?

56 posted on 04/11/2012 6:33:26 AM PDT by P-Marlowe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]

To: stephenjohnbanker

warrent.

What one pays monthly to survive in the ghetto.


57 posted on 04/11/2012 6:33:49 AM PDT by UCANSEE2 (Lame and ill-informed post)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: Jack Hydrazine

He could just dress up like OBL. Look how long it took to find him.


58 posted on 04/11/2012 6:35:50 AM PDT by UCANSEE2 (Lame and ill-informed post)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: P-Marlowe
Obviously this public announcement was not authorized by Zimmerman.

That's OK. Obama approved it , and he's the President.

59 posted on 04/11/2012 6:40:05 AM PDT by UCANSEE2 (Lame and ill-informed post)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: ought-six
They just said that under the circumstances they are no longer representing him.

They questioned his competence publicly. It is unclear that these amber lens chasers actually were his attorneys or have even met Zimmerman in person.

60 posted on 04/11/2012 6:40:05 AM PDT by MileHi ( "It's coming down to patriots vs the politicians." - ovrtaxt)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-76 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson