. . . “It’s certainly professional to respond, but by calling the dean and threatening to sue the school, which she knows she cannot do, is unprofessional,” Dershowitz told FoxNews.com. “I would welcome a lawsuit from Corey. It would give me a chance to prove what an awful thing she did.”
Dershowitz, who penned a column for Newsmax revealing Corey's call to the school, said he’s received “a lot” of letters of support.
Corey’s “beef,” Dershowitz wrote, pertained to his criticism of the state attorney’s filing of a “misleading affidavit” to support the second-degree murder charge against Zimmerman in the death of 17-year-old Trayvon Martin.
“When the communications official explained to her that I have a right to express my opinion as ‘a matter of academic freedom,’ and that Harvard has no control over what I say, she did not seem to understand,” Dershowitz wrote. “She persisted in her nonstop whining, claiming that she is prohibited from responding to my attacks by the rules of professional responsibility — without mentioning that she has repeatedly held her own press conferences and made public statements throughout her career.” . . .
The special prosecutor's office on Friday refused to make that evidence public -- even though an attorney fighting for the public's access insists Friday was when Florida law required Corey to share the evidence with the millions of people following the case.
The reason the deadline for Corey's evidence to become public was Friday, according to Scott Ponce, the attorney representing media organizations seeking access, is because that was 15 days after Zimmerman's attorney served Corey with an April 12 demand for evidence. This process of the state sharing evidence with both the defendant and public at large is known as discovery.
When denying requests from the public for the Zimmerman discovery records Friday, Corey's office told Local 6 Florida law allowed her to keep the records secret using a criminal investigative exemption because "no records have been provided to the defendant."
But Ponce, who specializes in public record law, believes that Corey can no longer use that reason to withhold records from the public, now that the 15 day discovery deadline has passed. That's because Florida law specifically excludes documents "required" to be given to the defendant from the type of records that can be withheld as criminal investigative information.
When Local 6 emailed Corey and her public records attorney, Lisa DiFranza, asking for an explanation as to how they concluded the records were still exempt criminal investigative information, even though Ponce advised the information was required to be given to Zimmerman Friday, the two attorneys did not respond. Neither did Corey's spokesperson, Jackelyn Barnard, even though Florida's public record law requires an agency denying records to give a written response explaining the reasons it concluded records are exempt, when requested. . . .
there are three typical situations that can constitute second degree murder: A killing done impulsively without premeditation, but with malice aforethought A killing that results from an act intended to cause serious bodily harm A killing that results from an act that demonstrates the perpetrators depraved indifference to human lifeMalice Aforethought?
For example, in the situation above, instead of shooting Bill, Adam grabs a shovel and hits Bill on the head with all his strength. Adam didnt explicitly intend to kill Bill when he hit him, but he did intend to hit him with the tire iron, and he knew that such a blow to the head carried with it a distinct possibility of death. Adams killing of Bill in this instance also constitutes second degree murder. . . .Act Intended to Cause Serious Bodily Harm?
The killer might not necessarily intend to kill the victim, but knows that death is a likely outcome. For example, in the situation above, instead of shooting Bill, Adam grabs a shovel and hits Bill on the head with all his strength. Adam didnt explicitly intend to kill Bill when he hit him, but he did intend to hit him with the tire iron, and he knew that such a blow to the head carried with it a distinct possibility of death. Adams killing of Bill in this instance also constitutes second degree murder.Depraved Indifference to Human Life?
Depraved indifference to human life can mean different things in different jurisdictions, but in general it signifies that the perpetrator had an utter disregard for the potential damage to human life that their actions could cause. Going back to Adam and Bill, imagine that, instead of hitting Bill over the head with the tire iron, Adam grabbed his gun and fired in anger into a crowd of onlookers. Adam didnt necessarily mean to kill anyone, but also didnt give any thought to the harm that his actions could cause in the crowd. . . . .
A federal judge set aside the conviction of former Alaska Sen. Ted Stevens and appointed a special prosecutor to investigate possible criminal-contempt charges against federal prosecutors who the judge said repeatedly withheld evidence from defense attorneys.
U.S. District Court Judge Emmet G. Sullivan said, "In 25 years on the bench I have never seen anything approach the mishandling and misconduct I have seen in this case."
He appoined Wahington lawyer Henry Schuelke to investigate six prosecutors who handled the case. . . . .
The Justice Department admitted Wednesday that its career prosecutors acted improperly in the prosecution that drove Senator Ted Stevens from office last fall. Indeed, the trail was was so tainted that we can't independently assess the verdict against Mr. Stevens, but one thing is clear: Federal prosecutors are guilty of misconduct that cost Republicans a Senate seat.
The original corruption charges filed against the senator on July 29, 2008 alleged that Bill Allen, an Anchorage construction contractor, added an extra storey to the Stevens family chalet and under-charged the powerful politician for the work. At trial, the government claimed that the improvements cost $250,000; Mr. Stevens apparently paid $130,000. The Justice Department now acknowledges that Mr. Allen told the government on April 15, 2008 that the improvements cost Mr. Allen only $80,000. This information was not turned over to Mr. Stevens' defense team until last week. Now his lawyers now claim that Mr. Allen, the prosecution's key witness, "was subsequently 'pushed' to provide the false 'bombshell' testimony favorable to the prosecution."
"Stevens was not informed prior to or during trial" about information "that could have been used by the defendant to cross-examine" the prosecution's main witness, according to a Justice Department court filing. Prosecutors also used evidence they now admit they knew was fabricated.
After the trial ended and information of misconduct surfaced, the Justice Department replaced the prosecutors on the trial team as well as top-ranking officials in the Public Integrity Section. The prosecutors are being investigated by the department's Office of Professional Responsibility.Judge Emmet Sullivan repeatedly delayed sentencing, faulting prosecutors for what he called prosecutorial misconduct and citing them for contempt. The judge will hear a request to dismiss the case against Mr. Stevens on April 7th.
The timing of the case itself was suspect. With the exception of extraordinary circumstances, the Justice Department generally avoids indictments that are so close to elections that they could affect the outcome. Mr. Stevens' indictment came just weeks before the Republican primary, and the trial ended just a few days before the general election. Mr. Stevens lost to Anchorage Mayor Mark Begich by 1.2 percent. Absent the criminal charges, Mr. Stevens surely would have won reelection. . . . .
Gov. Sarah Palin and the head of the Alaska Republican Party said Thursday that Sen. Mark Begich should give his Senate seat up to a special election now that prosecutors have abandoned their case against Ted Stevens.
"Alaskans deserve to have a fair election not tainted by some announcement that one of the candidates was convicted fairly of seven felonies, when in fact it wasn't a fair conviction," Palin said in a Thursday interview with the Daily News. . . . .
Begich fired back Thursday, saying that although he believed it was clear there was misconduct during the senator's trial, he stepped into the race "long before Senator Stevens' legal troubles began, because Alaskans were looking for a change and a senator as independent as Alaska.
"Today, with our country in a severe recession, it's more important than ever that we have a senator focused on fixing our economy so Alaskans have the jobs they need to support their families," he said. "That is my job in the Senate, and I'm honored to serve Alaskans for the next six years." . . . .
BERLANGGANAN VIA EMAIL
