By Alan Dershowitz: 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.
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.
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.
Before she submitted the probable cause affidavit, Corey was fully aware that Zimmerman had sustained serious injuries to the front and back of his head. The affidavit said that her investigators “reviewed” reports, statements and “photographs” that purportedly “detail[ed] the following.”
It then went on to describe “the struggle,” but it deliberately omitted all references to Zimmerman’s injuries which were clearly visible in the photographs she and her investigators reviewed.
That is Hamlet without the Prince!
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.
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.
That’s not the way the system is supposed to work and that’s not the way prosecutors are supposed to act. That a prosecutor would hide behind the claim that she did not have an obligation to tell the whole truth until after the judge ruled on probable cause displays a kind of gamesmanship in which prosecutors should not engage.
The prisons, both in Florida and throughout the United States, are filled with felons who submitted sworn statements that contained misleading half truths. Corey herself has probably prosecuted such cases.
Ironically, Corey has now succeeded in putting Zimmerman back in prison for a comparably misleading omission in his testimony. His failure to disclose money received from a PayPal account requesting donations for his legal defense made his testimony misleadingly incomplete.
In her motion to revoke his bail, Corey argued that Zimmerman “intentionally deceived the court” by making “false representations.” The same can be said about prosecutor Corey. She too misled and deceived the court by submitting an affidavit that relied on a review of photographs and other reports that showed injuries to Zimmerman, without disclosing the existence of these highly relevant injuries.
Even if Angela Corey’s actions were debatable, which I believe they were not, I certainly have the right, as a professor who has taught and practiced criminal law nearly 50 years, to express a contrary view. The idea that a prosecutor would threaten to sue someone who disagrees with her for libel and slander, to sue the university for which he works, and to try to get him disbarred, is the epitome of unprofessionalism.
Fortunately, truth is a defense to such charges.
I will continue to criticize prosecutors when their actions warrant criticism, to praise them when their actions deserve praise, and to comment on ongoing cases in the court of public opinion.
If Angela Corey doesn’t like the way freedom of expression operates in the United States, there are plenty of countries where truthful criticism of prosecutors and other government officials result in disbarment, defamation suits and even criminal charges.
We do not want to become such a country.
Correct me if I’m wrong, but if I just read the opening part correctly, you, sundancecracker are a Harvard Professor?
No, the piece is written by Harvard Law Professor Alan Dershowitz. Where it says “By Alan Dershowitz”, it means that Dershowitz is the author.
PD, hush! LOL. I think the headline has been edited because I initially had to do a double take as well. Although, I first interpreted the title as: Angela Corey was suing Harvard for Sundance’s criticism. hehe. Thank God, it’s Wednesday.
Oops! Maybe I came in after the edit! Nevermind!
hahahHAHAHA thanks for the big laugh. Too funny!
? Title/Article was written by Dershowitz, posted by SD
Reading the replies so far, all I can say is damn my poor comprehension skills. Forgive me, I went to public school. -_-
going to public school… that explains a lot !!
No offense intended.
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2012/06/07/dershowitz-zimmerman-prosecutor-threatened-to-sue-harvard/
YEAH! Looks like the rest of Yo Squirrels up here in the Tree House done beat me on this here story! I fell out as soon as I read that Big Bull Dyke had called Harvard Law School threatening them!!! Seems like anyone and everyone associated with TEAM MARTIN are prone to VIOLENCE just like Trayvon was that very night!!!! Just Totally Unreal to say the least!!! BYE for now must get back out there and see if I can gather some more nuts for next winter!!!!
Too bad the MSM won’t print this. Or few of them will.
Because they know their little Race-baiting SCAM cooked up between them Barack (If I had a son) Obama, his Re-election Campaign Strategists and Al Sharpton is crumbling quickly! Their little scheme to herd drive a particular ghetto based segment of the Black Community to the polls come this November is quickly back-firing! Now they can see plainly that for every Black Ghetto Vote they can motivate anger stir-up rile-up to climb up out of their cribs to mosey on down to the local polling place come November the 6th! Has done cost them at least 3-4 White and Hispanic Votes of Good Decent Law-abiding folks for sure!!! But they should have known if Yo choose to play with Race-Bait-Fire Yo can get severely burned!!!!
I can’t wait to see this heifer ‘Nifonged’…
YES!
The Victim’s family is so darling and sweet. And that sweet young boy, you can just tell his innocense by looking at the picture of him when he was 11.
And Ben Crump, he is so sweet and darling. Ben said that Dersowitz is full of vile and hate. A crazy gun-toting right wingin’ red-neck.
I just want everyone to believe in me (and Ben and the sweet darling family).
.
http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/2012-06-06/news/os-george-zimmerman-dershowitz-corey-20120606_1_alan-dershowitz-murder-charge-sanford-shooting
Alan Dershowitz says Zimmerman prosecutor went on ’40-minute rant,’ threatened to sue Harvard
By Jeff Weiner, Orlando Sentinel
THANKS!!! Yo oughta too see how all the African Liberals over there on that Orlando Sentinel are trashing Mr. Dershowitz on the message board following this story that Yo linked us too! They done gots their panties all up in a bunch over Mr. Dershowitz’s comments over there! TOO FUNNY!!!!
Do as I say not as I do. This reminds me of the movie Liar, Liar, when Jim Carrey said to the Judge: I object to this line of questioning, and was asked on what grounds, he said because it is devastating to my case.
It reminded me of Legally Blonde where she comes up with evidence at the last minute to free her friend because it seems like Corey has learned law from tv and movies, which always has the climatic ending scenes of found evidence, rather than law school.
Ya beat me to it! Bahahaha! My FAVORITE law quote… so fitiing for this crazed persecutor!
Florida has adopted the ABA Standards. What is a prosecutor required to disclose in support of an information? Note: “(b) No prosecutor should knowingly fail to disclose to the grand jury evidence which tends to negate guilt or mitigate the offense.” Note that this standard is incorporated by reference with respect to charges brought without a grand jury, via filing of an information.
Standard 3-3.6 Quality and Scope of Evidence Before Grand Jury
(a) A prosecutor should only make statements or arguments to the grand jury and only present evidence to the grand jury which the prosecutor believes is appropriate or authorized under law for presentation to the grand jury. In appropriate cases, the prosecutor may present witnesses to summarize admissible evidence available to the prosecutor which the prosecutor believes he or she will be able to present at trial. The prosecutor should also inform the grand jurors that they have the right to hear any available witnesses, including eyewitnesses.
(b) No prosecutor should knowingly fail to disclose to the grand jury evidence which tends to negate guilt or mitigate the offense.
(c) A prosecutor should recommend that the grand jury not indict if he or she believes the evidence presented does not warrant an indictment under governing law.
(d) If the prosecutor believes that a witness is a potential defendant, the prosecutor should not seek to compel the witness’s testimony before the grand jury without informing the witness that he or she may be charged and that the witness should seek independent legal advice concerning his or her rights.
(e) The prosecutor should not compel the appearance of a witness before the grand jury whose activities are the subject of the inquiry if the witness states in advance that if called he or she will exercise the constitutional privilege not to testify, unless the prosecutor intends to judicially challenge the exercise of the privilege or to seek a grant of immunity according to the law.
(f) A prosecutor in presenting a case to a grand jury should not intentionally interfere with the independence of the grand jury, preempt a function of the grand jury, or abuse the processes of the grand jury.
(g) Unless the law of the jurisdiction so permits, a prosecutor should not use the grand jury in order to obtain tangible, documentary or testimonial evidence to assist the prosecutor in preparation for trial of a defendant who has already been charged by indictment or information.
(h) Unless the law of the jurisdiction so permits, a prosecutor should not use the grand jury for the purpose of aiding or assisting in any administrative inquiry.
Standard 3-3.7 Quality and Scope of Evidence for Information
Where the prosecutor is empowered to charge by information, the prosecutor’s decisions should be governed by the principles embodied in Standards 3-3.6 and 3-3.9, where applicable.
http://www.americanbar.org/publications/criminal_justice_section_archive/crimjust_standards_pfunc_blk.html#3.1
But are there rules if there is no grand jury? I would love to see Corey Crumped.
The ABA grand jury standards are incorporated by reference into the standard for charging by information, without a grand jury.
Then she should get the Nifong award.
How can there be any question?
Great info Thanks-I knew there was something out there like this but I am not any kind of computer tech in any form and I could find it.
I am not sure but I think in Florida the information must be challenged for probable cause at the arraignment and there is a time limit. All the defense did was plead.
What you seem to say is that the original sin lies with the first judge. The one that allowed the information at the first hearing. Not Lester.
That is what passes for a preliminary hearing in Florida? “I have looked at this for 30 seconds, I find probable cause.” Next. Scary stuff.
Yep.
OMA’s post the other day referred to the fact the previous discovery did not contain any inculpatory evidence. If the one this week does not either Corey and Sharpton will have to produce anything they have that is inculpatory at the new hearing. If they can not. Case dismissed. With prejudice.
Exactly what I’ve been thinking for a couple days now. The reason O’Mara isn’t in a big hurry for the bond hearing, is that it’s gonna be way MORE than a bond hearing. I think O’Mara is, as we speak, putting together everything he needs to ask for dismissal of the whole case. And hopefully the way he goes about that will not only free George, but it’ll put Corey and others in jeopardy of losing their licenses…. their wealth… and maybe even their freedom.
I think that is wishful thinking.
O’Mara seems to be doing as he’s told. I would not call him a good advocate for his client, not even close.
No matter what he is at the very least trying to bust his client out. I still think Corey is trying to go for a 3rd degree case with Racial Prejudice as a hate crime booster to the 2nd degree charge. If the investigation is ongoing she does not have to put it in discovery. What a travesty.
If Corey’s submittal LACKS the exculpatory evidence, O’Mara can ask for an acquittal. If the Judge is good – he will grant it. But this could have been resolved by the Grand Jury one month ago. (Thanks for the Grand Jury information!)
Yes, I think if there is no exc evidence included in the next discovery release it’s almost proof that the Prosecution is misleading the court via mistruth and/or omission. Where have we heard that phrase before???
Maybe that’s why defense is playing close to vest for now, let AC founder & sink on her own.
Wonder if this episode can be used by MO for Zimmermans case dismissal? Corey’s bery public response is now all over & essentially admits what she did regarding charge was ok but when she goes after GZ for basically same things (omission/mistruths) he ends up back in jail. Prosecutorial Misconduct. She also slanders AD & Harvard in the process it seems, threatening to sue one of the most prestigious institutions & a top professor.
lol
“threatening to sue”
Not only threatens to sue, but also threatens to (1) file disciplinary charges and (2) criminal charges, in an attempt to restrain Dershowitz’s 1st Amendment rights to free speech.
Note this portion which appears very early (perhaps Dershowitz thinks this part is important) in Dershowitz’s article:
“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.
Sharpton and Crump have been giving he lessons. In “VooDoo Ethics”.
Seems to me that she really didn’t think anyone within the legal community would take any interest in what she was doing. She sees herself as a trustworthy messenger for the mobs (of various stripes) and just assumed she would be protected, and have a cloak of invisibility to anyone with any significant profile. She made some presumptious assumptions about Dershowitz’s loyalties to law above politics. It also may simply be that she’s an idjit.
It obviously never occurred to her that someone of Dershowitz’ caliber would provide articulate public criticism: she lost her mind when it happened and had to have been personally out of control when she decided to call Harvard and do a personal rant.
you do not have to like Dershowitz’s politics or even some of his conclusions in this case, to actually agree with what he has to say.
Angela Corey has a history of overcharging. The case of the 12 year old being tried as an adult and in my view being overcharged for murder without clear evidence that it was his intent to kill his younger brother, is in fact one of the reasons she needs to be disbarred.
The law should not be about teaching people a lesson. It should be about justice for everyone.
Florida Courts have no problem with overcharging. The idea is that it leads to more plea bargains and save the public time and money.
Do Yo think she is going to save us Taxpayers Money concerning this here Innocent Neighborhood Watch Patrol Captain??? I DON’T THINK SO THANK YO PLEASE!!!!
JG, when Mr. Dershowitz stated that she was transferred to… and what she did once she was transferred there, says to me that he is stating that he has PROOF that she did this and not just something he is stating as he said/she said. That’s what I personally got from that lil tidbit.
I hope Corey’s call to Harvard was recorded. THAT would be interesting. She can claim she “did not do it”, or it is “hearsay”.
I’m wondering if Dershowitz is going to see to it that Corey gets her deserved due. Will she be the first to fall?
If I was Corey, I would be looking for an exit.
I agree. She needs to leave ASAP.
She should have let it be. When I first heard him, he was calling for an investigation of her.
He (rightly so) wanted her investigated for what’s she’s been doing to George, and indirectly helping to build the mob mentality (“Justice for Trayvon!”) around the country. But NOW it’s personal. If Alan was angry before, just imagine how he must feel about the scummy woman NOW. Whether you like Alan Dershowitz or not, I don’t think it’s a good idea to get on the wrong side of that guy!
Ole’ Alan Dershowitz has already Beach-slapped that Big Bull Dyke so BAD I can’t believe that she is still standing???
The fact that she would even do this says everything we need to know about her.
THANK YO EXACTLY! NO Class thus NO Professionalism period!!!!
I suspect the hope was that Harvard would apply pressure to Alan Dershowitz, telling him to stay out of such a politically charged case, and Harvard does have deep pockets, after all.
The State of Florida is bigger than Harvard and Yale combined.
And the full power of the State is going to get George Zimmerman.
.
I suspect a more simple explanation. That woman is NUTS! Bats in the Belfrey Nuts. A KuKu in a KuKu Clock.
Aren’t most liberals?
Angela Corey is no kind of liberal I’VE ever dealt with. A “liberal” (and I’d also think most decent people of ANY political stripe) would NEVER have this attitude (paraphrasing):
“Yes, this young man may only be 12 years old, but we need to send a message. If I don’t try him as an adult, and try to make sure he spends the rest of his life in prison, then other 12-yr-old, or younger, people around this country will assume it’s okay to kill their own brother or sister. We must send a message, we must have a deterrent. Of course an even better deterrent would be if this murderer could be sentenced to death, but unfortunately the Supreme Courts won’t allow that.”
THAT is not “liberal”. That’s also not moderate, or conservative, or anything else. It’s approaching Hitler and Pol Pot territory. The woman is evil.
She thinks her job is PERSECUTION of the “evil doers”. She is more of the “Spanish Inquisition” state-of-mind, rather than a fair, just, truthful prosecutor. She has gone far beyond the point of the search for exculpatory evidence – that she is required to have for her Indictment against GZ.
I am with Jello on this score. The comment she made about trying a 12 year old as an adult goes well beyond what is reasonable and just.
Angela Corey is not interested in justice.
If there should be any charges for the boy then the most is grievous bodily harm… murder in the first degree is a very long stretch.
Hitler was a socialist.
Ummm, no. “National Socialist” (Hitler/Nazis) and other types of socialism are not at all the same thing. I know that word being in there has caused all kinds of issues over the years, but without getting into all the history, philosophy, economics involved…. no, they’re not the same thing. Hopefully that’s my last word on that here, since I just wanna enjoy all you guys’ company while we’re trying to Free George!
In capitalism, man exploits man. In Socialism, it is just the opposite.
She is why people hate lawyers and the government. People like her have no interest in the truth; they just want to cover their eyes and react to the world from the confines of their inflexible ideological nightmare. Innocent people are the ones who bear the brunt of their fascistic psychosis.
“…they just want to cover their eyes and react to the world from the confines of their inflexible ideological nightmare.”
What Bro- said. Yes.
make that +2
+3
http://www.myfoxorlando.com/story/18721410/zimmermans-attorney-delays-filing-for-new-bond-hearing
Zimmerman bond hearing set for late June (29)
-
Unbelievable. 30 days in the hole.
http://www.seminoleclerk.org/CriminalDocket/case_detail.jsp?CaseNo=592012CF001083A
06/04/2012 TIBB TURNED IN BY BONDSMAN
06/04/2012 CTBD CERTIFICATE OF DISCHARGE BOND – BOND#: X3H0000875
Yeah, it’s gonna be almost exactly 30 days by that time. Hmm…. isn’t that a pretty typical sentence for your average run-of-the-mill, not-such-a-big-deal “contempt of court” ruling? I still very much think O’Mara is up to something. Could the hearing go something like this?: The judge hears the “explanations” from George and O’Mara about the bond revocation, whereupon he rules that George did, indeed, mislead the court, finds him in contempt of court, and sentences him to 30 days…. “credit for time served”. He then issues a new bond, which will allow George to be released almost immediately. So all that is out of the way.
But THEN the fun begins. The judge turns to O’Mara and says, “I understand you have some motions you’d like to make?”….. I think we can all use our imaginations here, but the main thing is that the new bond the judge just issued may quickly become a moot point! Oh, and Angela Corey and others may suddenly feel the need to “lawyer up”.
30 days and 30 dollars. He should also fine Shelley 25 dollars. He already had 4 days in his first incarceration.
Subpoena Osteen, Gilbreadth, Dee Dee, and shred everybody. O’Mara and West wear wrestler’s suits and tag team.
LOL where do I send my ticket money?
http://www.wesh.com/news/central-florida/trayvon-martin-extended-coverage/Zimmerman-s-bond-hearing-set-for-June-29-attorney-says/-/14266478/14663842/-/se1iusz/-/index.html
…According to Mark O’Mara, Zimmerman’s bond hearing will be June 29.
The bond hearing was pushed back a couple of weeks because of scheduling issues with Judge Kenneth Lester and the other attorneys.
…O’Mara said he is happy to have the time to prepare Zimmerman’s testimony, but said Zimmerman is worried about his wife’s possible legal issues for not telling the truth during the first bond hearing.
Shelly Zimmerman could face perjury charges along with her husband for lying about the money, according to veteran defense attorney Jeff Deen.
“He’s worried now because the judge is now worried about their lack of candor,” said O’Mara. “The focus is going to be on Shelly, because Shelly is the one that didn’t state affirmatively that the money was available when she knew it was there. So, yes we are going to have to deal with that.”
…O’Mara said he is confident he can keep Zimmerman’s explanation under oath to the judge limited which limits the amount of cross examination he may face at the next hearing.
Oh oh oh. This is why MOM is being gracious and humble. They have enough legally to put charges on Shelly and George, which neither of them need at this point.
actually, I think that it is still quite iffy…. especially when Shellie directed them to her brother in law for information… and they did not follow up.
I’m not talking about their winning such a case. They are scoundrel enough to put charges on them for the heck of it. OMara has to act carefully right now to avoid that.
If I were GZ I would play by her rules, throw a fit and have a hunger strike to shine an international light on his case of racial baiting judicial vigilanteism. I would sure hate to see the reaction they would get from other places.
Won’t never ever happen White Hispanic Folks are better than that!
I wonder who told Dersh about the phone call.
LOL, she has to be so pissed that this got leaked.
Ihope it was recorded. 40 minutes is a long conversation, even for a bag of wind.
Can anyone check? If Corey were smart – SHE WOULD DENY SHE MADE THE CALL. But I think her voice would be recognized, and her being “pissed off” will come through loud and clear. If she does acknowledge she called – COREY IS IN VERY SEROUS TROUBLE.
If this isn’t the voice/face of desperation, I don’t know what is. Apparently Corey took her appointment by the Gov. and state Atty Gen. as a license to act over and above the law, if not being a willing participant to act in a manner against the law. I’ve remembered a statement by Gov. Scott I believe, where it was claimed that a Special Prosecutor could not be named, until the local prosecutor Wolfinger willingly removed himself from the case. It was the same day, shortly thereafter, that both Wolfinger and Police Chief Lee made public that they were stepping aside. They were not willingly stepping aside, they were threatened in some way, that they would be forced to step aside, or face some sort of punishment. My respect for both Wolfinger and Lee grew greatly because they were not willing to become a part of a lynch mob against GZ. It will eventually all come out in the end, but not until Bonaparte and Triplett’s roles have been exposed.
I would be shocked if Dershowitz doesn’t file a complaint against Corey with the Fla. Bar. There is no better atty. than Dershowitz to Nifong Corey. If she was desperate before, she will be deadly now with this exposure. I suspect she will get even more sloppy and destructive to her own case.
I am hoping that there will be other Prosecutors around the country who will also make ethics complaints about Angela Corey and her handling of this case.
A Prosecutor should not be so far up the backside of the alleged victim’s family where the decisions because based upon emotion rather than fact. Corey overstepped the mark in the first instance when she did the following:
1, Met with Martin & Fulton, as well as their attorneys
2. Discussed what would happen if a Grand Jury brought in a verdict of self defense.
3. “prayed” with Marin and Fulton.
The second thing on this list is the one I consider to be the most serious breech of Prosecutorial ethics, especially when she then dismissed the Grand Jury and decided upon making the charge of second degree murder herself. This absolutely reeks of a breech of ethics.
For the other breeches, I think that there needs to be a constant trickle of complaints against Crump in particular.
Then someone can take care of the two wannabe revrunds …. yes I went there and called them wannabes, since they have nothing except what comes off the back of a Corn Flakes packet…. they are not Reverend anything.
When Dershowitz first started this, fox had some attorneys on saying that what Corey did goes on ALL the time. My daughter out of the blue sent me this link today for unrelated reasons to George. I am in Houston Texas / Harris county who holds first place for the worse criminal courts in the country.
http://www.crimelablies.com/
This issue is not restricted to Harris county. When all these forensic tests on DNA started (and the hollywood csi TV shows) there were no standards as to who with what qualifications could run tests and then testify in court that a person was definitely guilty. There is a group called the Innocence Project that has fought to get labs and those people qualified and certified. New York city was once on their list as BAD. I think NYC has cleaned up. And yes what I am talking about is increased regulation, but it is regulation of our government!!
Nifong? He was not his own monkey. He did what prosecutors do all throughout this country all the time It is the way our politicians have written the rape laws. Nifong assumed logically that he had an automatic notch to put in his belt. Do you know that 90 perent of males so accused of rape will go down convicted? Almost all of those come from plea bargins because the guy has next to no defense. Yep yep. And once he has plea bargained, he has admitted guilt. Next to no grounds
For appeal. And if the female later gets a stroke of conscious and goes in to admit she lied, he has a confession of
Guilt to overcome.
The only reason we are seeing these showcased situations out of Florida is because it is one of the few states (I think there are two) who have to release all to the public. That gives the press license to have heyday. It does not mean such outrageous abusives of power are not going on in our own states all the time.
A wrongful Conviction begins with a Wrongful Prosecution.
Aussie, I would add to your list #4, she referred to TM’s parents as “sweet”, and #5, she announced she was going to pursue “Justice for Trayvon” (as opposed to what a prosecutor *should* be pursuing, which is JUSTICE, full stop).
“she was going to pursue “Justice for Trayvon”
Justice™ for Trayvon
If the Florida Bar is doing anything you won’t know it until they do it.
Methinks her game of rants and threats works with O’Mara, so she tried it on Harvard.
Some of things O’Mara has said simply don’t make any sense. I expect it to get worse, O’Mara is living by the Media and Prosecutiion Narrative. A good way to send your client up the river for 28-30 years.
.
I agree something doesn’t smell right. Mr. O’Mara was fully aware that the Zimmermans was claiming indigent and was seeking a reduced bail based on that fact. At the bond hearing Mr. O’Mara learned through the prosecution questioning of Mrs. Zimmerman that out there somewhere there was a website set up for donations on behalf of Zimmerman. Mr. O’ Mara was aware that the prosecution was inquiring about that website, SO why didn’t Mr. O’Mara turn to his client and asks, “What is this about a website and donation being made to that website”? Didn’t Mr. O’Mara have a duty to his client to question him about this newly founded out information. If need be Mr. O’Mara could have asked the court for a few minutes to further discuss the matter with his client, and while doing so he could have called the brother-in-law or had Zimmerman access the site. (O’Mara screwed up)
Go back in the timeline. GZ was being represented by some idiots that did a 45 min. presser saying that they were not representing GZ any longer, because they had lost contact with him, and I believe they even indicated that he may have left the state. There presser was bizzare, and highly criticized as a search for further business, because they had represented GZ. On Fox, it was speculated that they had lost contact with GZ because he was probably out there looking for a new lawyer.
GZ set up his website on Apr. 9, and was arrested on Apr. 11, and reported to jail that night. The day before GZ was arrested, O’Mara did a presser where he said that he was in fact representing GZ. He may have indicated at that presser that GZ was indigent, don’t remember. That was just 2 days after GZ set up his website. He was truly indigent at that date. I do remember reading that someone in GZ’s family had contacted O’Mara, from a referral from Mark NeJame. I don’t know if he had even spoken with GZ at that point. The case was already high profile at that point.
The first court appearance by GZ was the day or so after his arrest. He stated that O’Mara was his attorney. It may have been at that hearing that GZ was declared indigent. Someone help me out there.
O’Mara did not move immediately to get GZ a bond hearing, but he did file for that motion a week later, after he moved to have the original judge removed from the case because of conflicting interests, with Mark NeJame.
The original bond hearing was on Apr. 20. That was just 11 days after the website, paypal account was set up. Who would have ever known that GZ would be getting the financial support he was within just a little more than a week.
The problem I have is with O’Mara saying to DLR, at the end of that hearing, that he knew about the paypal account, but “he hadn’t had a chance to look into that as of yet.” Watch the video, I promise that is there. CNN stayed with the video even when the hearing appeared to be over. Truly he had all but blown it off. At one point he said that the Z’s had told him there was $700-800 dollars in that account. When he spoke to the Z’s they obviously told him about the account, but it was just a day or so after he decided to represent GZ, obviously. That was just one day after the website was set up. O’Mara declared them as indigent in court before the bail hearing.
Think about this for a minute- GZ asked O’Mara a day or so after being out on bail, “what do I do with the paypal account.” He didn’t say, hey, we have a paypal account, he said what do I do with the paypal account. Splitting hairs, maybe, but O’Mara already admitted that he knew about the paypal account, he admitted that to DLR in the bail hearing. We have no idea when O’Mara met with GZ in jail, or what he talked with him about. I agree with those that have posited that O’Mara should have gotten that information before the bail hearing. The account was growing exponentially while GZ was in jail. When did O’Mara talk with Shelly, and what were those conversations? No one knows. Did he even ask? DLR obviously had looked into that info., why didn’t O’Mara? Did he just assume that a website, for a very hated man would not collect much money? IMO, O’Mara was completely unprepared. He told DLR that he hadn’t had a chance to look into the paypal accounts yet.
It really bothers me greatly that O’Mara took to the airwaves, on CNN, the night before he told the judge that there was that much money in the paypal account. He told Anderson Cooper that he knew about the account, but assumed there was $700-800 dollars in that account. When, and how often did he even talk to GZ before the bond hearing.
Believe me I know from personal experience, it is very difficult to get the attorney on the phone at all, and if they do answer your call, they are short, and in a hurry to get off the phone. You are lucky if you get a five minute conversation with them. Add to that that O’Mara was working pro-bono. I believe that Mark O’Mara did not do his client justice with his representation, but now that he was caught with his pants down, so to speak, he may pay much more attention to the fact that he isn’t any prettier with his pants down, than DLR is.
All your points are hard to argue with. You drive a hard bargain.
Those two lawyers that did that presser were so in the wrong. If they were his lawyers, then they really broke the attorney/client privilege. Of course, now that they went on record with what they said, it is being used against Zimmerman rather than pointing out that there is no proof that they were ever hired as his lawyers and if they were under the impression they were then they threw him under the bus for some reason. Could it be that they did so because they got some threats and were weak enough to throw him under the bus in order to stop the threats?
I thoughts exactly, Zimmerman didn’t just sit there like a lump on a log so did his attorney. Even if O’Mara didn’t know about the paypal account prior to the bond hearing he darn show found out about it during the prosecution’s questioning of SZ. Why let Zimmerman get run over by the bus when all O’Mara had to do was put the brakes on and say, “Your Honor may I have a minute to discuss this matter with my client”.
My Thoughts
Am I right in understanding that my tax dollars are paying her salary? If so, she needs to realize what her job is. I’m not an attorney and have not gone to law school, so please feel free to correct me but prosecutors are not supposed to represent the victim in a criminal case right? They are supposed to represent THE PEOPLE to seek justice. She is acting like she’s in a civil case where she is representing a plaintiff. In those cases, I’m sure she wouldn’t need to disclose everything about a case and only present the plaintiff’s side of the story. But this is not a civil case (yet) and she is supposed to be seeing JUSTICE FOR ALL. I’m going to write a note to Pam Bondi and tell her to get her people in order.
Anyone who thinks they can sue Harvard Law School is mentally incompetent. Maybe we could move to Baker Act her Highness. She belongs in an institution other than the Courtroom. Maybe a nice room in Chattahoochie.
If you live in Florida, you need to tell Bondi much more. And yes, you are paying Coreys salary. And yes, she is suppose to be seeing that the law (not written by her) is upheld. Her job is to
Present facts so the rest in the system, judges, juries, etc can deem the “truth”. Even if she is a personal civil lawyer, she still has obligation by virtue of her license, to present the truth to the best of her knowledge.
Let me add to deshowitzs point. Our courts are
Not suppose to be poker games where the best faker wins.
I still want to see Corey’s lawsuit against Harvard Law School. It will be Landmark. She wants damages for them pointing out that she is an Imbecile. In other words she is suing because she is stupid. Unless she went there I do not see a cause of action here. She should sue the Law School she attended. Definite cause of action for a major settlement.
Hahaha howie. Corey should sue her law school for not educating her in the law properly. That’s too funny, but unfortunately true. Maybe she’s 1/32 American Indian.
Maybe we could file a class action against it for mental pain and suffering. Let’s call the Dean and threaten him.
You guys are on a roll! And I am laughing all the way. Thanks for the much needed lift.
I just pray that Zimms and fam will be able to enjoy life, walk around freely and without fear and laugh once again and soon. Well, I guess they will never to really get past this. I hope his dad is doing okay. I believe he is a VietNam vet with some health issues. As I recall he said he couldn’t even go to doctor appts or anywhere where his name is necessary.
Dang this is *such* an injustice.
This woman is going completely off the rails
Another article on Dershowitz and Corey
http://news.gather.com/viewArticle.action?articleId=281474981382073
“”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,” the Harvard man said.”
No mumbo jumbo legalese. Dershowitz lays it right out for the common man to understand. Well-written.
Yea!!!! Rush Limbaugh just covered the Dershowitz/Corey issue today on his show. The more people that know about this the better.
Lets hope Rush stays on this 200% If anyone can run that Big Nasty Bull Dyke out of town Mr. Limbaugh most certainly can! She looks like a cross between Rosie O’Donnell and Hulk Hogan!!! OH MY GAWD I just hope Hulk Hogan will forgive me???