Prosecutors in the George Zimmerman trial are facing a collapsing case and renewed question over whether Angela Corey succumbed to the political pressure and overcharged the case. The prosecution’s case has thus far been a disaster and many are now questioning whether charges should have been brought at all, let alone charged as second degree murder. For some inexplicable reason, the prosecutors led with Rachel Jeantel, who was one of the least compelling witnesses that they could have called from earlier perjury to ever-changing testimony. Now Angela Corey (right) and her office appear to be turning toward alternative areas of prosecution involving the daughter of one of the defense counsel.
Don West, who took apart Jeantel’s conflicted testimony on the stand, took his daughter out for ice cream and she posted on Instagram a picture with the caption: “We beat stupidity celebration cones #zimmerman #defense #dadkilledit.”
Prosecutors have asked for an inquiry on the basis that witnesses should be treated with respect. However, such rules apply to counsel not their progeny. West insists that he was not aware of the message.
The photo was actually taken the day before the cross examination.
I fail to see why the prosecutors would not accept the word of opposing counsel, particularly given the fact that this is his daughter.
Given the earlier allegations of withholding evidence in the case, the prosecutors should show a bit more judgment in my view. Of course, they have been busy presenting what appears a case for acquittal.
I have long been critical of Corey’s charging of the case as second degree murder and concerned that this was a case where public pressure influenced the prosecution. The video of Zimmerman’s account and the supporting testimony of these prosecution witnesses were known to Corey before the charges. Yet, she pursued second degree murder in what would be viewed as a difficult case even for manslaughter. I would leave counsel’s daughter alone and focus on the disaster unfolding in court.
Source: ABA Journal
Hey, BarkinDog – your logic is based upon an assumption of facts not in evidence. There’s no proof – whatsoever – that “kid jumped z”.
laserhaas wrote: “your logic is based upon an assumption of facts not in evidence.”
Actually, it was put into evidence in the form of Zimmerman’s account the day after the event. Whether you believe Zimmerman or not is relevant, but his statement was put into evidence.
bill mcwilliams wrote: “Another factor that bears on the mindset of GZ, imo, is the well-known prejudice of Hispanics towards African-Americans.”
Also factor in the fact that Zimmerman tutored black children for free, has black relatives, and he also has black ancestors.
The apCray about Zimmerman’s “right to follow” the punk is over the top. Y’all have a right to follow anyone who comes into your neighborhood whether in a hoodie or not and whether he is looking into windows of homes or not and whether some schmuck from a 911 office tells you to lay off or not.
Z had a right to follow. Punk did not have a right to jump Z. End of story.
Regarding some kid’s right to “instagram” her opinion of the trial to friends. Kids and adults alike ought to instagram their thoughts on this dumb prosecutor and her dumb team. I live in FL. Prosecute me for call you an idiot Miz Prosecutor.
Malisha
Your reflection that – “there was an organized crime cover up by the cops–”
is so Spot On and KUDOs to you for getting to the core issues at hand.
(for some reason my original note to you is being auto-removed)
But thanks for taking the discussion to a core issue now bygone.
Okay Otteray – what’s up with the comment vanish?
———————————————————————
Malisha
Your reflection that – “there was an organized crime cover up by the cops–”
is so Spot On and KUDOs to you for getting to the core issues at hand.
Originally, the petition only had a few thousand signatures for several days. Then we put it up on DailyKos, Democratic Underground and we presented it as story to all the media speaking to me about Romney and I worked with MarinadeDave (the Award winning Blogger from the Casey Anthony case) – who gave U.S. excellent “on the scene” footage, maps and the like to help get everyone truly involved with the issues.
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/03/14/1074316/–Hood-Watcher-KILLS-Black-HERO
The petition then went from 25,000 signatures to several million – and that is when the police began to babble B.S. and the truth about GZ’s family and other such things were “outed”.
It is ALWAYS an issue of organized crime – when tax paid public servants engage in bad faith “cover ups” – like they tried to do in our Fullerton California case of police killing homeless man Kelly Thomas.
A young black man lost his life to a Non black man simply because a guy who tried to become a cop (more than once) – was able to carry a gun and wanted to prove himself by being over zealous.
And authorities tried their best to bury the case of a judge’s son!
Malisha
Your reflection that – “there was an organized crime cover up by the cops–”
is so Spot On and KUDOs to you for getting to the core issues at hand.
Originally, the petition only had a few thousand signatures for several days. Then we put it up on DailyKos, Democratic Underground and we presented it as story to all the media speaking to me about Romney and I worked with MarinadeDave (the Award winning Blogger from the Casey Anthony case) – who gave U.S. excellent “on the scene” footage, maps and the like to help get everyone truly involved with the issues.
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/03/14/1074316/–Hood-Watcher-KILLS-Black-HERO
http://marinadedave.com/journal/2012/3/22/the-tragedy-of-trayvon-martin.html#.UdSkNzv2Y2E
The petition then went from 25,000 signatures to several million – and that is when the police began to babble B.S. and the truth about GZ’s family and other such things were “outed”.
It is ALWAYS an issue of organized crime – when tax paid public servants engage in bad faith “cover ups” – like they tried to do in our Fullerton California case of police killing homeless man Kelly Thomas.
A young black man lost his life to a Non black man simply because a guy who tried to become a cop (more than once) – was able to carry a gun and wanted to prove himself by being over zealous.
And authorities tried their best to bury the case of a judge’s son!
@Chill1184:
Zimmerman was not a valid rent-a-cop but wanted to be one. He had a gun legally but he was “Neighborhood Watch” and they are not allowed to approach people, much less with guns. Complaints had already been made to the police about him threatening people, chasing them, and “riding herd” on residents. He was not even a home-owner but a renter and he was about to be evicted for nonpayment.
Trayvon Martin was perfectly legal there, staying with his father. Not even a question about his right to be there. Minding his own business and walking while Black. At 7:00 p.m. on a Sunday. Not even legally in line for a jaywalking ticket, just plain innocent of all wrongdoing. Yet there has been a giant campaign led by Zimmerman’s lawyers to paint Trayvon Martin as a thug, a punk, and a radio announcer actually said, not realizing the mic was still turned on: “That n****r needed to be killed.”
This case is really about how far we have sunk in our national journey back to feudalism. Soon ALEC will have it that all corporations can mow people down just as Zimmerman mowed down Trayvon Martin, and there won’t even be trials. Just kick them to the curb and keep firing.
mespo, I think O’Mara’s pretty good. The rest are as you described.
I have all good wishes to my friends on this blog. Recently I’m trying to actually write something so I don’t have as much talky talk time. Also I’m really much more interested in constitutional law and “the life interest” than I am in peculiar stuff from other countries, police misbehavior, and cats. But I love to read your comments.
EXCELLENT points, Malisha.
Although it’s disappointing that the professor would be as biased towards
the killer in this case, it;s somewhat understandable, given that much of his
legal practice is criminal defense based.
What’s puzzling to ME is why most of the regulars here are ALSO mostly
biased in favor of the killer (excuse me, the citizen accused).
That Spinelli comes across as a kindly father figure, expressing his approval (?) for all of what s/he apparently considers to be “objective” comments by
the site’s sheeple is likely flattering to the posters which he blesses.
Malisha….from your pen to god’s ear. Missed you and glad you stopped by.
“What happened there was an organized cover-up by the cops in a case where they thought nobody would ever rise up in objection to it.”
This is what I alluded to in my first comment on this. Radley Balko who is big on government thug misconduct has asked this question as well. Nobody seems to be interested in asking or answering this question.
Thats way before the questions of;
1. Was Zimmerman an actually complex sanctioned rent-a-cop?
(as far as I know the complex did not give him that authority)
2. Was Martin allowed on the property?
(reports say that he was visiting family (uncle or father, I forget) who lived there. I dont know of any apt complex that doesn’t allow family members to visit but who knows)
Thanks, Malisha. As usual, you’re much more articulate than I am. I’ve tried to forget the snarky, smarmy stuff the defense attorney put out about Trayvon without a bit of authentication, or truth. Anyone want to take a bet that O’Mara is front of mike or two right now misstating the evidence?
David2575, I don’t know those cases and the details involved except for the OJ Simpson case. And here’s the big difference: OJ did not admit that he killed Nicole Brown and THEN get away with it. There was question of whether or not he actually DID IT, not motive or justification.
In the Zimmerman case, HE says he shot Martin. HE says he did it because he had to — in self-defense. His claim is ludicrous as is demonstrated by the physical evidence. Only hysterics would believe that he had to kill that kid in self-defense.
Simply saying “Blacks can kill whites and so whites can kill Blacks” does not describe the real issues involved in the Zimmerman case. What happened there was an organized cover-up by the cops in a case where they thought nobody would ever rise up in objection to it. Not comparable to probably most of the other “Black and white” murder trials.
Hey Carterbo, here I am. I don’t check in here as often as I once did because I realized from early on that Professor Turley’s pro-Zimmerman bias was going to make discussion of the actual constitutional issues involved in this case very unlikely on this blog. But I’ll weigh in now for a few reasons.
First: let me quote a few pieces of the article:
Two answers: (1) They would not accept the word of opposing counsel because opposing counsel has violated several very important canons of ethics so far, and has left all scruple behind. In fact, the defendant’s lawyers have even published false reports to defame a dead child and then basically said, “oops, OK, kinda sorryish but so what.”
(2) This was not “a child’s message.” The offensive post was actually the work of a 23-year-old adult female. TRAYVON MARTIN was a child when he was killed; West’s daughter was NOT a child when she published it.
“allegations of withholding evidence” were just part of the defense strategy to create any kind of sideshow that would detract from the obvious. Their client set out to either “arrest” or murder someone that night; the arrest didn’t go very well so the murder had to be resorted to. Sorry for the grammar of it but that’s how it shook out. Defense has done nothing but make alternating untrue allegations about everyone and create disturbances that are full of sound and fury signifying nothing, and drum up money from racists for their poor railroaded client. The prosecution is missing some points but they are basically doing what I’m sure they agreed to do right up front in April 2012: CONVICT Zimmerman while preserving the Sanford Police Department so the feds do not have to come up with a finding of institutionalized racism, cover up and corruption. All the things that the prosecution is leaving out of their presentation would end up putting the SPD into a bad light which they can ill afford to do, considering their “gentlemen’s agreement” with SPD. But they already have an ironclad case for the conviction of the defendant, who actually murdered an unarmed child.
The video showed Zimmerman lying about things that any person regarding the physical evidence fairly would have to say were obvious. In the initial call to the police, Zimmerman announced that “These a55holes … always get away” and he called them [WHO?] “f*cking punks.” He admitted that. Then, when the dispatcher told him not to follow (he admitted this in writing in the statement he wrote out for the police on 2/26/2012), he continued to follow, later saying he had not followed but only “gone in the same direction.” His explanations were physically impossible. They have been proven wrong by the physical evidence. There will probably be a Murder-2 conviction and it would even be appropriate to consider it Murder-1 when he admits that he drew his gun, “aimed so I wouldn’t hit my other hand,” and “fired one shot.” That shot killed Trayvon Martin.
A highly qualified medical examiner testified that those injuries Professor Turley described as “serious injury” last year were “very insignificant.”
The popular idea that Zimmerman should not have been charged with any REALL BIG CRIME for simply killing a kid HE THOUGHT needed it is a very dangerous idea. It is, however, the shape of things to come in this country. Professor Turley will not like them in general, although I cannot understand the basis for approving of them in this one case.
Or as Police Detective Serino said verbatim to Zimmerman: “YOU’RE STILL THE GOOD GUY.”
Is that it?
*Cop…and oh, how could I forget — ARMED…
So any time you’re in fear, you’re clear to kill? I once ran from a cop (in a minor traffic incident) because I feared he was one of those fake cops targeting and raping women in my area. Even though all charges were dropped against me, the judge admonished me for, essentially, being “paranoid.” I sure didn’t get a pass for being legitimately fearful. Trayvon, the child, also had a legitimate right to be fearful about being stalked by an unidentified wannabe cop. Even had a right to confront him. The onus was on Zimmerman — the adult and wannabe coop — to identify himself, diffuse, and manage the situation. NONE of this is on Trayvon, a child doing nothing wrong. But of course I am not surprised to see Mr. Turley wait for an opportunity to criticize the prosecution — that has been his bias from the beginning. I’d like to know if his own child were in Trayvon’s place, if he’d be willing to look at the situation so cold-bloodedly.
This trial does not involve the stand your ground law.
Could it be that the prosecution was more or less forced into this case without a leg to stand on, and that the law needs to be changed. By Florida law he’s innocent, because in his mind he was in fear of his life and has the right to use deadly force.
hooskerdo;
That is the issue at hand – setting a case precedent.
If the system of justice is not careful, you can wind up fostering SYG Law to being the most utilized defense for homicide cases. Such as
“my wife came at me with a kitchen knife – I stood my ground and shot her”
Dredd – investigators are NOT prosecutors.
It is the prosecutor’s office decision on whom to charge what!