It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Harvard University law professor Alan Dershowitz on Thursday said that George Zimmerman, who was recently arrested second degree murder, would probably be acquitted of the crime because of a lack of evidence.
“Most affidavits of probable cause are very thin,” he said on MSNBC. “This is so thin that it won’t make it past a judge on a second degree murder charge. There’s simply nothing in there that would justify second degree murder.” “The elements of the crime aren’t established. Basically what is in the affidavit is what’s in the public domain.” ...
Dershowitz said the affidavit was not just thin, it was also irresponsible and unethical because it excluded any evidence that favors the defendant
Legal legend Alan Dershowitz blasted the special prosecutor in the Trayvon Martin case, accusing her of hiding evidence favorable to defendant George Zimmerman and committing perjury.
“If I were this prosecutor, I’d be hiring a lawyer at this point,” Dershowitz said of Angela Cory, the Florida state attorney and special prosecutor who Gov. Rick Scott appointed to handle the case.
Dershowitz leveled his bombshell charges in an interview Wednesday with Fox News' Megyn Kelly. The Harvard law professor, noted for winning an acquittal of Claus Von Bulow in the case that inspired the film “Reversal of Fortune,” said Cory overreached by charging Zimmerman with second-degree murder. And he said the affidavit she filed in support of the charges was illegal because it did not include evidence favorable to Zimmerman
Originally posted by halfoldman
Zimmerman will do time for something.
Originally posted by cavalryscout
The only reason this is getting any attention is because a white man shot a black man.
Originally posted by jimmyx
my 2 cents...if i were black in florida, i would be carrying a gun everywhere i go, and if any white person started coming toward me in an aggressive manner, i would just shoot them. that way you could claim self-defense and in fear of your life. i would use this case as an example of the fear that i have walking while black, sounds perfectly logical to me. also if a truck with white boys drives by and makes racist remarks, i would shoot them also, for fear that they will come back and kill me.edit on 26-4-2012 by jimmyx because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by SonOfTheLawOfOne
the legal holes of the case as the OP is trying to demonstrate.
Originally posted by GogoVicMorrow
reply to post by ecoparity
Yep.. stupid on her part too. I know they always want to charge murder in hopes that they get the next OJ or Casey Anthony, but as in the Casey Anthony case when you overcharge solely to get the spotlight the truth comes out and you lose the case. What is funny is this case had enough media attention that it might have been a popular case with just a manslaughter charge (maybe not though).
She had to have known that murder 2 wouldn't stick and the consequence of both not having a case or no conviction would be racial tensions verging on (or maybe culminating in) riots. So either it was intentional, or she really wanted that high rating t.v. trial. Wanted it so much that she would intentionally over charge a man and try to ruin/end his life. She absolutely deserves to lose her license before she can overcharge someone again for her own gain.
reply to post by SonOfTheLawOfOne
I'm sorry, but that's the most ridiculous statement I've heard on here in a while.... If we followed your thinking, it would be the wild wild west all over. It also has nothing to do with the topic and the legal holes of the case as the OP is trying to demonstrate.