Harvard Prof. Alan Dershowitz: Zimmerman Arrest Affidavit ‘Irresponsible And ...

[mrclose]

Video at link.

Harvard University law professor Alan Dershowitz appeared on MSNBC’s Hardball where fill-in host Michel Smerconish asked him his opinions of the arrest warrant issued and carried out for alleged Trayvon Martin murderer, George Zimmerman.

Dershowitz called the affidavit justifying Zimmerman’s arrest “not only thin, it’s irresponsible.” He went on to criticize the decision to charge Zimmerman for second degree murder by special prosecutor Angela Cory as being politically motivated.

http://www.mediaite.com/tv/harvard-prof-alan-dershowitz-zimmerman-arrest-affidavit-irresponsible-and-unethical/

[Kyle Ricky]

Dershowitz is a douchebag. I wanted to punch him in the face every since I saw him on the OJ trial.

[formerlurker]

He is correct on this one.

[Kyle Ricky]

He is correct on this one.

Yeah, you are correct. I hate admitting that with him.

[BlueStateSaint]

Yeah, you are correct. I hate admitting that with him.

Well, Hell hasn't frozen over, nor is it the end of the world.  Dershowitz may be a flaming lib, but if he sees inconsistency coming from a lib, he will call it out.

[DumbAss Tanker]

Well, Hell hasn't frozen over, nor is it the end of the world.  Dershowitz may be a flaming lib, but if he sees inconsistency coming from a lib, he will call it out.

Perhaps.  Mainly I will say for him that he won't knowingly push a lie for the Libs, unlike so many of the Lib flacks I see on talk programs.  He's a Lib, but he does have some ethical standards, which sets him apart from 95% of them.

[rich_t]

He is correct on this one.

I think so too.

[Zeus]

Perhaps.  Mainly I will say for him that he won't knowingly push a lie for the Libs, unlike so many of the Lib flacks I see on talk programs.  He's a Lib, but he does have some ethical standards, which sets him apart from 95% of them.

That he does. I've watched him totally destroy lib talking points on legal matters a few times.

[obumazombie]

Dershowitz is a douchebag. I wanted to punch him in the face every since I saw him on the OJ trial.

Even the biggest libs are right every once in a while. I reserve the right to amend that remark.

[Kyle Ricky]

Even the biggest libs are right every once in a while. I reserve the right to amend that remark.

Like I said, I agree with him on this one.

[obumazombie]

Like I said, I agree with him on this one.

I think I know what you mean, but when I find myself agreeing with a lib, I know one of us isn't doing their job.

[Kyle Ricky]

I think I know what you mean, but when I find myself agreeing with a lib, I know one of us isn't doing their job.

I feel the same way.

[Eupher]

Well, the legal thing is still playing itself out. If Dershowitz is correct and the arrest warrant is "irresponsible", that would inevitably translate to the indictment (if there is one) and conviction.

We will do well to remember the Duke University lacrosse scandal. Lead prosecutor Mike Nifong was disbarred for that level of "irresponsibility."

[DumbAss Tanker]

Well, the legal thing is still playing itself out. If Dershowitz is correct and the arrest warrant is "irresponsible", that would inevitably translate to the indictment (if there is one) and conviction.

We will do well to remember the Duke University lacrosse scandal. Lead prosecutor Mike Nifong was disbarred for that level of "irresponsibility."

The procedures vary somewhat from state to state, but generally a prosecutor can charge with an "Information" (Which is I believe what this 'Probable cause affidavit' is in more-traditional terms) or by presenting a highly-selective 'best-case' version of it, without any defense evidence to contradict it or anything being presented about affirmative defenses like self-defense, to a grand jury, which produces an "Indictment" or "Returns a true bill," if they think the prosecutor has at least some credible evidence on all the elements of the offenses brought before it (Hence the saying, 'You can indict a ham sandwich').

IOW, they ain't gonna be no indictment.

[Eupher]

The procedures vary somewhat from state to state, but generally a prosecutor can charge with an "Information" (Which is I believe what this 'Probable cause affidavit' is in more-traditional terms) or by presenting a highly-selective 'best-case' version of it, without any defense evidence to contradict it or anything being presented about affirmative defenses like self-defense, to a grand jury, which produces an "Indictment" or "Returns a true bill," if they think the prosecutor has at least some credible evidence on all the elements of the offenses brought before it (Hence the saying, 'You can indict a ham sandwich').

IOW, they ain't gonna be no indictment.

Okay. If I'm getting this right, whatever document the prosecutor/district attorney prepared goes to a grand jury. Grand jury does what it does and if they deem the charges are credible, it then goes to trial.

I know nothing about the legal profession, but I believe the burden of proof on the prosecution with grand juries is a whole lot less of a requirement meaning it doesn't take much to return a "Yep, you've got something here, Mr. DA".

Is that about right, DAT?

[Elspeth]

He is correct on this one.

Yes.

Remember that the prosecutor, Angela Corey, is currently charging a 12-year-old boy with First Degree Murder as an ADULT for what appears to be a tragic accident. The boy and his toddler brother were said to be "wrestling" and the younger child's head hit a bookcase.  The mother of both boys (a 24-year old victim of domestic violence) waited 5 hours to take the toddler to the hospital, and Googled "head injuries" to look for help instead.  (And yes, she had the older child when she was 12.  That statutory rape seems never to have been prosecuted.)

Normally, the left would be outraged by Corey's actions.  But since she gave the race-baiters what they wanted, no one cares that her charges are unreasonable.

[Bad Dog]

I served on a grand jury in TX & frankly, if the prosecuter had brought us a piece of crap like this we would have no billed.  That said, we have an excellent prosecuter & he gave us both sides of the case & freely answered our questions. I don't think this complaint will survive a grand jury or a competent judge.  The good news is we are driving to FL next week to visit in laws & outlaws.  Hopefully they don't dump this thing untill we get out of there.

[Zeus]

I served on a grand jury in TX & frankly, if the prosecuter had brought us a piece of crap like this we would have no billed.  That said, we have an excellent prosecuter & he gave us both sides of the case & freely answered our questions. I don't think this complaint will survive a grand jury or a competent judge.  The good news is we are driving to FL next week to visit in laws & outlaws.  Hopefully they don't dump this thing untill we get out of there.

I'm reasonably sure the process is the same in each state. If a grand jury true Bills the charges,then a judge has to hear the prosecutors case and defense rebuttal and decide whether to exclude certain evidence , drop certain or all charges, bound it over for trial.

talking head legal experts are postulating that IF the case does make it that far it'll be 6 months to a yr before it makes it to trial.