Skip to comments.Dershowitz Blasts Zimmerman Prosecution: 'Not Only Immoral, But Stupid'
Posted on 04/20/2012 10:20:12 AM PDT by Free ThinkerNY
With ABC News release of the George Zimmerman photo showing blood flowing freely from his head, the question becomes whether Angela Corey, the prosecutor in the case, had access to the photo before charging Zimmerman with second-degree murder.
The arrest affidavit did not mention the photograph, or the bleeding, gashes, and bruises on Zimmermans head. Professor Alan Dershowitz of Harvard Law School stated upon release of the arrest affidavit that it was so thin that it wont make it past a judge on a second degree murder charge everything in the affidavit is completely consistent with a defense of self-defense.
After the release of the photo, however, Dershowitz went much further, telling Breitbart News that if the prosecutors did have the photo and didnt mention it in the affidavit, that would constitute a grave ethical violation, since affidavits are supposed to contain all relevant information.
Dershowitz continued, An affidavit that willfully misstates undisputed evidence known to the prosecution is not only unethical but borders on perjury because an affiant swears to tell not only the truth, but the whole truth, and suppressing an important part of the whole truth is a lie."
(Excerpt) Read more at breitbart.com ...
Ok, I think I misunderstood what you said, sorry about that. I thought what you meant was that the prosecution didn’t give the jury any charges other than first degree murder. Back when the case originally happened, there were alot of people here on FR that were certain that the only charge she was defending herself against was first degree premeditated murder.
Little Miss Nifong?
Zimmerman’s practical choices might well be to plead to Manslaughter or federal trial and conviction of civil rights charges. The DOJ is watching and ready to “rectify” any error on the part of a state court. Trial and acquittal in Florida will get Z arrested and tried by the Feds who will get whatever Decision they want.
No, I'll give it to Dershowitz, he is intellectually honest in this regard. On a legal issue he will go with what he believes is the righteous position on the principle involved regardless of where it leads or how unpopular it may be. He generally puts principle before politics. I don't always agree with him but I believe that he calls them as he see them and won't back down. This puts him a notch about the majority of the Ivy League whores who will take any position, no matter how absurd they may really find it, if it advances the cause.
Like my Daddy always said, “Never bring a bag of skittles to a gun fight!”
Pray for America
The connection is Dershowitz’s objection to Al Sharpton and his mob, because of the numerous anti-Semitic statements and incidents for which Sharpton has been responsible.
Zimmerman wasn't acting "under color of law" (ie. as a state agent) nor was there any alleged conspiracy involved. It wouldn't be as easy to try him in Federal Court as it was for the Rodney King cops or the old South Klan affiliated cops. I don't care about the legal fictions recognized by the law to justify it, to make a man stand a second criminal trial in a case like this is the epitome of double jeopardy.
Words to live by.
“Geez, why has Dershowitz been making so much sense lately?? First Media Matters... and now this? Has the Apocalypse arrived?”
Haven’t figured it out yet?
Dershowitz is pissed off about the administration’s position on Israel.
Dershowitz is a lefty, but he is Jew first, unlike everyone in Obama’s administration.
“A Change of Venue would seem likely.”
I heard this also. They are moving the trial to a location which will give Zimmerman a fighting chance.
Something about Camden, NJ.
‘Like my Daddy always said, Never bring a bag of skittles to a gun fight!
“And the award for most insensitive hurtful comments that could be hurled at a grieving family goes to (holds his nose)...........”
Sounds like you need a nap.
What the hell kind of crime is that? (I know- thought crime)
I AM BEGINNING TO THINK THIS "REPUBLICAN" PROSECUTOR IS A TRAP- SHE WILL LET HIM GO, CAUSE RIOTS, AND MANAGE TO SHIFT FULL BLAME ON THE GOP
She seems too stupid to be a real Republican- I can't see a real Republican making the charge of 'profiling' - that's a democrap talkign point
If the grieving family is searching Free Republic threads to see if anyone’s posted a snide remark, their grief counselors need to suggest they do something more productive.
Maybe she thinks she has a career in politics...
Sadly, this generation is being taught there are only two modes of political expression, liberal, and liberal in conservative clothing.
I wonder of the Vichy French were allowed to vote for their leaders under the Nazi regime...vote Nazi, or vote Nazi Stooge. Hail Democracy.
I’m sure there were a lot of French totally opposed to the Resistance as troublemakers who would never win.
Here's his booking photo.
I hope so.
The kid was not "walking home" when he was shot, he was walking on the grass between buildings, in the dark, in the rain. He attacked a guy who was trying to see where he went when he dissappeared after realizing he was being followed.
The was NOT St. Trayvon of Sanford coming home from choir practice, this was more likely Trayvon the Budding Young THUG casing the joint.
He was caught with burglary tools before, and suspicious ladies jewelry, so he IS experienced.
Has he beaten (or killed) anyone else before? He seemed experienced in that too.
And look at his facebook page with his 'poetry':
F**k a b*itch
That's what they good for
F**k a b*itch
Make you a man
or some such evil filth...
The only thing thing I wish for Trayvon is that I could have seen the look on his face when he realized why Florida (thankfully) has right to carry laws
On DU, they’re hypothesizing Z faked it (ran home and applied fake blood, smacked himself with a rock, palmed razor, something). Really desperate for proof of Z’s guilt.
I’m reminded of the Penn & Teller skit “Smoking”. Teller walks on stage and smokes a cigarette ... then does it again, demonstrating that every aspect was faked. Knowing this can be done, NOBODY ever then considers that a random smoker is “faking it”. Likewise here: _could_ it be faked? yes. _would_ it be faked? no, and anyone thinking yes is insane.
Both sides pick the jury.
It was actually started by the black radio stations in Florida. They kept up the drum beat of “Injustice” till it was picked up by TV.
Thanks for the information.
“Has he beaten (or killed) anyone else before?”
I think you’re kind of confused who killed whom...... OMG! Walking on the grass (according to Z). A shortcut home, or using the old “skittles to prop up a window after breaking it” trick. Youse push the skittles up on the window which gives you time while you keepr it propped open with one of those tall cans of Arizona iced tea.
People who are always looking to be offended, usually are. Here’s a virtual dollar, Go buy a sense of humor.
Pray for America
you are missing the point, and maybe doing it on purpose
I dont make a point that he was on the grass, as if being on the grass is a crime- but becasue he was on the grass in the dark in the rain- not a sensible place to be on your way back from getting skittles when there is a sidewalk. You do see that, don’t you?
Trayvon seemed EXPERIENCED at what he was doing- which I believe was casing the joint to make a burglary. He was caught in the past with burglary tools and womens jewelry.
He also seemed EXPERIENCE at the full on attack- I am guessing it was not the first time he gave someone a beat-down
Who did he beat before, did anyone die who lived near him, and are the burglaries stopping now
In his defense, he also defended Sarah Palin for her use of the term “blood libel” after the shooting in Tuscon last year.
Don’t both sides get a certain number of “acceptable” and a certain number of “rejects”? They do in L.A. and most cities.
Neither side gets “acceptables”, but both sides may reject an unlimited number ‘for cause’, and both sides get a set number of ‘don’t like the cut of his jib’ rejections.
I thought the number of “rejectables” or bad “jibs” were a set number. Nevermind. Thanks. Semi valuable info that I will store somewhere at the side of my brain.
An unlimited number may be rejected by either side for 'just cause' providing the judge agrees the cause is sufficient. These might be for admitted bias, relatives involved, know too much about the case, already decided about guilt, etc.