Ms. Corey, Meet Mr. Nifong
I was skeptical of the news reports that described Angela Corey, the special prosecutor in the Trayvon Martin case, as a no-nonsense lawyer. My skepticism was rewarded amply when on April 11 I watched her announce the second degree murder charge against George Zimmerman. From the moment she stepped before the microphones, she seemed to find inordinate glee at the center of the media carnival, and indeed her demeanor throughout her presentation was ill-fitted to the occasion, as though she simply didn’t know how to strike the appropriate tone.
And now we know she wasn’t just having a bad day.
Writing at Newsmax.com, Harvard Law professor Alan Dershowitz reports that Corey telephoned the law school and “engage[d] in a 40-minute rant,” threatening to sue the school and file charges against Dershowitz for “libel and slander.”
It’s rare that I find myself in agreement with Mr. Dershowitz when the subject is anything other than the defense of Israel, about which he is resolute. I am still haunted by the memory of him lending his considerable talents to the O.J. Simpson defense team, which outmaneuvered prosecutors to achieve an acquittal for a man who clearly had butchered two human beings.
But on the Trayvon Martin case I am in complete accord with Mr. Dershowitz, who among others (including me) pointed out the manifest defects in the prosecutors’ affidavit used to file the murder charge against George Zimmerman. Because Mr. Dershowitz has had the crust to find fault with Ms. Corey’s apparently casual relationship with the facts in the case, evidenced by the complete omission from the affidavit any mention of evidence of self-defense that would weigh in George Zimmerman’s favor when said evidence was known to her, she seeks to silence him through a pathetic attempt at intimidation. If what Mr. Dershowitz has written is true, Ms. Corey is not merely inept, she is unhinged. And I predict she will become more so as the case against Zimmerman comes unraveled as it surely will. She might look to the example of Mike Nifong for instruction on what not to do.
- Comment (71)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (1)
Comments:
Apr '11
Re: Ms. Corey, Meet Mr. Nifong
Tommy De Seno
Dave Carter
If you think I'm going to disagree with you, you're wrong, although your enmity should be toward the system not the lawyers.
Edited 2 hours ago
Tommy, who benefits from the system remaining the way it is, defendants? Let's see who might: prosecutors (lawyers), DA's (lawyers), Legislators (many lawyers) and even defense attorneys (also lawyers).
I think the enmity Dave Carter expressed is not misplaced.
Re: Ms. Corey, Meet Mr. Nifong
Stephen Spicer
Tommy De Seno
Dave Carter
If you think I'm going to disagree with you, you're wrong, although your enmity should be toward the system not the lawyers.
Edited 2 hours ago
Tommy, who benefits from the system remaining the way it is, defendants? Let's see who might: prosecutors (lawyers), DA's (lawyers), Legislators (many lawyers) and even defense attorneys (also lawyers).
I think the enmity Dave Carter expressed is not misplaced. · 8 minutes ago
I'm not so jaded that I will say our legal system is set up intentionally bad to benefit certain lawyers.
I will say the business of finding truth and justice is a difficult one and can only be refined so much. As refined as we get it, it's still very far from being perfect, and some might add, from even being good.
Re: Ms. Corey, Meet Mr. Nifong
The first time I wrote about this case was in a post taking NY Times and Reuters to task for calling Zimmerman "white." In my second post I took NBC to task for editing Zimmerman's 911 call to make him look like he was being unfair in racially profiling.
So I didn't have a good reaction to the media handling this case at all.
Please note too that I received no displeasing comments to those two posts.
Then I posted this one. The reaction was quite different. Blood boiled to the point that my ouster from Ricochet was discussed by the members and I was even edited for a CofC violation for defending myself against someone calling me a weasel.
The only thing stopping me from adding Ricoceht to my list of media disappointment over Zimmerman coverage is that my post hasn't been taken down completely.
continued...
Re: Ms. Corey, Meet Mr. Nifong
Anyone who denies that this hasn't turned in to a "Conservatives for Zimmerman" vs "Liberals for Trayvon" circus isn't denying in good faith. It has turned into that.
Go on any conservative Facebook page and they are viscerally in favor of killing that 17 year old boy, somehow framed in defense of the 2nd Amendment.
Go on any liberal Facebook page and they will swear Trayvon is proof that blacks get shot for the color of their skin.
Both positions lack an intellectual spark.
But not unexpected. Same was true of the OJ trial and Rodney King trial. It didn't have to be that way and it damaged relationships in this country when it was that way.
All three cases can be decided without a conservative/liberal or Republican/Democrat fight in the background, but that fight bell has once again been rung and it can't be un-rung.
Conservatives are defending Zimmerman out of backlash against the media treatment of him. But that is as wrong as blacks defending OJ over the treatment of other blacks.
Edited on June 9, 2012 at 12:07amAug '11
Re: Ms. Corey, Meet Mr. Nifong
People have become very heated about the Martin Case. Too heated I think.
I do agree with Tommy that one does not have to support Zimmerman because one supports stand your ground laws or concealed carry or even gun laws. And you don't have to support Zimmerman because he has made many of the right enemies. Zimmeran does sound like punk!
However, I was suprised that Tommy read the case the way he did. I don't think it's at all clear that Zimmerman continued to follow Martin. From what I've read, it is more likely that Martin surprised Zimmerman by attacking him. The witnesses have begun to change their stories, and Tommy cites this. I don't think that means much given the evidence that Zimmerman's been beaten, also, the witnesses changing their stories later on, after all the race-baiting and hoody marches almost seems to be expected. I'm just saying I don't think it's as clear as Tommy makes it seem. Which is why we have lawers.
Aug '10
Re: Ms. Corey, Meet Mr. Nifong
If we were talking about a major drug dealer pleading down to possession, sure. If we were talking about a cold blooded killer taking a plea deal from murder to negligent homicide, sure.
What, exactly, was the crime Alexander committed that was so necessary to prosecute in the first place?
She was protected under Stand Your Ground. She was in her house, and thus additionally covered by the castle doctrine. (The sole possible exception--the assailant is a resident in the house--was negated by the case facts, because she had a protective order against him.) She didn't fire directly at her assailant, nor did she act recklessly by firing more than one shot. She even had a carry permit for the gun.
What action was Corey trying to prosecute? Where was the need to put Alexander away? What was the crime that warranted an overcharging attempt to get "victory" in the first place?
Apr '11
Re: Ms. Corey, Meet Mr. Nifong
I'm not so jaded that I will say our legal system is set up intentionally bad to benefit certain lawyers.
Tommy, I'm not asking for you to state that, but since you brought it up, who other than lawyers are going to make the necessary changes in the system.
It also occurs to me that motives play a very important part in all aspects of the whole story; Martin"s, Zimmermen's, Corey's, Reverends Sharpton's , Jackson's and even Dershowitz's
Re: Ms. Corey, Meet Mr. Nifong
Stephen Spicer:I'm not so jaded that I will say our legal system is set up intentionally bad to benefit certain lawyers.
Tommy, I'm not asking for you to state that, but since you brought it up, who other than lawyers are going to make the necessary changes in the system.
I'm not sure too many more changes can be made. My fear is we've gotten to a point where we have refined our system as much as we can, and are finding out to our dismay, even in its rarified form, it is terribly inadequate.
Aug '11
Re: Ms. Corey, Meet Mr. Nifong
The Corey thing bothers me. First because based on my reading the Zimmerman case shouldn't have been 2nd degree murder, and that the trial would be of dubious value at best (I won't claim last word on this). My understanding is that in FL prosecutors only have a limited amount of time add lesser penalties, and that this window has closed or will soon close. I do not believe, as Tommy does, that Corey can go for 2nd and then get Zimmerman on a plea. I understand that the way FL defense is written that the family can't sue Zimmerman civily because he's being tried criminally. I could be very wrong.
Second, the affadavit wasn't complete. That's wrong.
Tommy De Seno: All three cases can be decided without a conservative/liberal or Republican/Democrat fight in the background, but that fight bell has once again been rung and it can't be un-rung.
· 12 minutes ago
Edited 1 minute ago
So true. The Martins lost their kid. And Zimmerman is going through hell. It should be about the facts, not point scoring for Left v Right.
Re: Ms. Corey, Meet Mr. Nifong
Stephen Spicer:
It also occurs to me that motives play a very important part in all aspects of the whole story; Martin"s, Zimmermen's, Corey's, Reverends Sharpton's , Jackson's and even Dershowitz's · 3 minutes ago
Agreed. But note I got in my biggest trouble here on Ricochet when I tried to consider the motives of Trayvon.
When I pondered if Tray feared Zimmerman and reacted accordingly, I got accused of fabrications I was not making. It got very ugly at that moment in the discussion.
Some of it has been revealed as true by the Prosecutor's affidavit: Tray called a friend and said a strange man was following him. That can be scary for a 17 year old boy, even one who looks like Martin's false dimensions that so many were relying upon in the previous thread (the coroner's report revealed Martin was smaller than they stated).
Edited on June 9, 2012 at 12:26amJun '12
Re: Ms. Corey, Meet Mr. Nifong
Tommy De Seno
Agreed. But note I got in my biggest trouble here on Ricochet when I tried to consider the motives of Trayvon.
When I pondered if Tray feared Zimmerman and reacted accordingly, I got accused of fabrications I was not making. It got very ugly at that moment in the discussion.
Some of it has been revealed as true by the Prosecutor's affidavit: Tray called a friend and said a strange man was following him. That can be scary for a 17 year old boy, even one who looks like Martin's false dimensions that so many were relying upon in the previous thread (the coroner's report revealed Martin was smaller than they stated). · 22 minutes ago
Edited 20 minutes ago
So you're taking the prosecutor's case as gospel?
As the MythBusters would say, "Well... there's your problem."
Jul '11
Re: Ms. Corey, Meet Mr. Nifong
Edited after praying.
Edited on June 9, 2012 at 3:19amFeb '11
Re: Ms. Corey, Meet Mr. Nifong
Tommy De Seno
.....
When I pondered if Tray feared Zimmerman and reacted accordingly, I got accused of fabrications I was not making. It got very ugly at that moment in the discussion.
.....
Tommy, where many of us on Ricochet disagree with you is when you effectively yada, yada, yada the transition from Zimmerman chasing Trayvon to the point where Trayvon and Zimmerman are locked in physical combat (e.g. "I pondered if Tray feared Zimmerman and reacted accordingly"). First, we don't know how that transition happened - and it's important, it's the crux of the case. Second, Trayvon may indeed have feared the man following him, but does that fear translate into justification for attacking the man following him? Again, we don't know if Trayvon initiated physical contact or if he was justified in doing so if he did; we don't know if Zimmerman said or did anything to initiate the physical altercation (is following enough?). Third, with all of that unknown it's a bit unseemly to be attacking Zimmerman as unmanly for not being able to take a punch and for starting something he couldn't finish like a man.
Edited on June 9, 2012 at 1:56amRe: Ms. Corey, Meet Mr. Nifong
Ed replace yada yada yada with "reasonable inferences from the facts as we know them" and that's where I'm at.
Feb '11
Re: Ms. Corey, Meet Mr. Nifong
Yes, Zimmerman was following Trayvon and Trayvon was afraid. Did Trayvon initiate contact when he finally confronted Zimmerman? Was he justified in doing so because of something Zimmerman said or did? There's no evidence on either count, so on what are you basing your inferences?
Mar '11
Re: Ms. Corey, Meet Mr. Nifong
Tommy De Seno:
Here is another twist: If lawyer A thinks Lawyer B committed an ethics violation, lawyer A MUST file an ethics complaint against Lawyer B. If he does not, Lawyer A is guilty if an ethics violation himself. Dershowitz won't, and that's why he started backing off the rest of the interview.
I understand that lawyers are Officers of the Court and thus have certain obligations like the above referenced ethical obligation. Does this obligation cross state lines? Do attorney's everywhere have the obligation to report ethics problems with a lawyer in Florida?
I guess my thought would be that if Dershowitz was not admitted/licensed to practice in Florida, then he would not be an Officer of the Court in Florida and would have no duty to report on the ethics of Florida attorneys.
Jun '12
Re: Ms. Corey, Meet Mr. Nifong
Tommy De Seno:
Here is another twist: If lawyer A thinks Lawyer B committed an ethics violation, lawyer A MUST file an ethics complaint against Lawyer B. If he does not, Lawyer A is guilty if an ethics violation himself. Dershowitz won't, and that's why he started backing off the rest of the interview. He was spouting off for the camera, exactly as he accused her of doing, and he went too far.
So, when do you file your ethics complaint against Dershowitz? You're a lawyer, and you apparently believe he committed an ethics violation -- you've been railing against him all day -- so aren't you under the same obligation you claim Dershowitz is under?
Sauce for the goose, Counselor.
Re: Ms. Corey, Meet Mr. Nifong
Jager
Tommy De Seno:
Here is another twist: If lawyer A thinks Lawyer B committed an ethics violation, lawyer A MUST file an ethics complaint against Lawyer B. If he does not, Lawyer A is guilty if an ethics violation himself. Dershowitz won't, and that's why he started backing off the rest of the interview.
I understand that lawyers are Officers of the Court and thus have certain obligations like the above referenced ethical obligation. Does this obligation cross state lines? Do attorney's everywhere have the obligation to report ethics problems with a lawyer in Florida?
I guess my thought would be that if Dershowitz was not admitted/licensed to practice in Florida, then he would not be an Officer of the Court in Florida and would have no duty to report on the ethics of Florida attorneys. · 10 minutes ago
Correct. But on the slander issue - he's liable.
Re: Ms. Corey, Meet Mr. Nifong
Ed G.
Yes, Zimmerman was following Trayvon and Trayvon was afraid. Did Trayvon initiate contact when he finally confronted Zimmerman? Was he justified in doing so because of something Zimmerman said or did? There's no evidence on either count, so on what are you basing your inferences? · 54 minutes ago
Reasonable inferences from the facts as we know them. Too tired to list them all. Read the full police report with all witness statements and listen to the full audio tapes.
Mar '11
Re: Ms. Corey, Meet Mr. Nifong
Tommy De Seno
Correct. But on the slander issue - he's liable. · 20 minutes ago
It is my understanding that as a government official with the ability to hold press conferences the prosecutor in this matter would be a "public figure" to be guilty of slander or libel there would have to be "actual malice."
Do you feel Dershowitz off hand comment on this case reaches the level of actual malice?
By that standard public officials should be suing MSNBC daily.