Oh what a tangled web is weaved…….  Some inside Treeper scoop.   Both Natalie Jackson and Benjamin Crump are, well, lets just say in deep doo-doo.   Unfortunately at this moment I cannot go into details but suffice to say the contradictory evidence weighed solidly against their previous claims has raised, and continues to raise, a “considerable interest” in various professional affiliations responsible for oversight of the legal profession.
Both on a local, and State Department of Professional Regulation (DPR) level, their licensure is entering a “phase of review“.
Significantly numerous complaints to the bar” are being independently researched.   “Significantly numerous”  has been described to me as greater than 100.   And the initial reviews have “raised eyebrows” at “the highest levels of professional oversight“.
*Note the italicized phrasing is NOT mine*
This is the first substantive good news in what potentially has the leanings to end the opportunistic legal careers of both Natalie Jackson and Benjamin Crump.   In addition, three independent analysts are now researching the initial media framework.  Ryan Julison is also under review for potential culpability in advancing an intentionally deceptive and false media narrative under the auspices of client (Jackson/Crump) representation.
At the moment of this writing I am unsure if Ms. Jackson or Mr. Crump have been notified of the DPR conduct review.   I believe they have, but I have no first hand confirmation.  However, it appears an internal professional memo of courtesy has been extended to Judge Lester.   The Judicial notification merely appears to be based on prudence and an abundance of caution for Lester’s position regarding pending litigation/motions;  Against the backdrop of considerable involvement from representatives outside current legal proceedings, yet still holding sway.

Against this backdrop, it is apparently possible that Ms. Jasmine Rand will now be pushed to take the tenuous and visible point regarding public advocacy of Team Trayvon.   She is not held in high regard inside the Crumpesque circle and considered disposable to those of vested interest in the advanced narrative.
Keep an eye on Jasmine Rand (Twitter Acct: https://twitter.com/#!/JasmineEsquire )  I highly doubt she recognizes the instability of her position, nor is she aware of the ongoing conversation(s) behind the closed doors of self-preservation.   Jasmine is considered a useful pawn and “a user” by those inside the Parks and Crump law firm where she participates in various water-carrying activity.    Unknown to her, she is about to be used, big time; and unwittingly placed upon the altar of professional sacrifice.

This just got a whole lot more interesting…….   (more to come)

Time to Let George Zimmerman Go – By Alan Dershowitz
A medical report by George  Zimmerman’s doctor has disclosed that Zimmerman had a fractured nose, two  black eyes, two lacerations on the back of his head and a back injury on the day  after the fatal shooting. If this evidence turns out to be valid, the prosecutor  will have no choice but to drop the second-degree murder charge against  Zimmerman — if she wants to act ethically, lawfully and professionally.

There is, of course, no assurance that the special prosecutor handling the  case, State Attorney Angela Corey, will do the right thing. Because until now,  her actions have been anything but ethical, lawful and professional.
She was aware when she submitted an affidavit that it did not contain the  truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth. She deliberately withheld  evidence that supported Zimmerman’s claim of self-defense. The New York Times  has reported that the police had “a full face picture” of Zimmerman, before  paramedics treated him, that showed “a bloodied nose.” The prosecutor also had  photographic evidence of bruises to the back of his head.

But none of this was included in any affidavit.
Now there is much more extensive medical evidence that would tend to support  Zimmerman’s version of events. This version, if true, would establish  self-defense even if Zimmerman had improperly followed, harassed and provoked  Martin.
A defendant, under Florida law, loses his “stand your ground” defense if he  provoked the encounter — but he retains traditional self-defense if he  reasonably believed his life was in danger and his only recourse was to employ  deadly force.
Thus, if Zimmerman verbally provoked Martin, but Martin then got on top of  Zimmerman and banged his head into the ground, broke his nose, bloodied his eyes  and persisted in attacking Zimmerman — and if Zimmerman couldn’t protect himself  from further attack except by shooting Martin — he would have the right to do  that. (The prosecution has already admitted that it has no evidence that  Zimmerman started the actual fight.)
This is a fact-specific case, in which much turns on what the jury believes  beyond a reasonable doubt. It must resolve all such doubts in favor of the  defendant, because our system of justice insists that it is better for 10 guilty  defendants to go free than for even one innocent to be wrongfully convicted.
You wouldn’t know that from listening to Corey, who announced that her jobs  was “to do justice for Trayvon Martin” — not for George Zimmerman.

As many see it, her additional job is to prevent riots of the sort that  followed the acquittal of the policemen who beat Rodney King.
Indeed, Mansfield Frazier, a columnist for the Daily Beast, has suggested  that it is the responsibility of the legal system to “avert a large-scale racial  calamity.” He has urged Zimmerman’s defense lawyer to become a “savior” by  brokering a deal to plead his client guilty to a crime that “has him back on the  streets within this decade.”
But it is not the role of a defense lawyer to save the world or the country.  His job — his only job — is to get the best result for his client, by all legal  and ethical means.
Listen to the way a famous British barrister put it in 1820:

“An advocate, by the sacred duty which he owes his client, knows, in the  discharge of that office, but one person in the world, that client and none  other . . . Nay, separating even the duties of a patriot from those of an  advocate, and casting them, if need be, to the wind, he must go on reckless of  the consequences, if his fate it should unhappily be, to involve his country in  confusion for his client’s protection.”

The prosecutor’s job is far broader: to do justice to the defendant as well  as the alleged victim. As the Supreme Court has said: “The government wins . . .  when justice is done.”
Zimmerman’s lawyer is doing his job. It’s about time for the prosecutor to  start doing hers.  (article authored by Alan Dershowitz)

Share