State v. George Zimmerman (Pre-Trial) > Martin Family & Team Crump

Professionalism/ethics of the legal entities involved in the case

(1/6) > >>

FromBelow:
http://theconservativetreehouse.files.wordpress.com/2012/07/jackson20idiot.jpg

Is this comment by the Martin family's lawyer really appropriate? Ethical?

I'd like to discus the legal and ethical aspects of what the lawyers and State have done and said. I'm not sure Jeralyn is going to allow it since it could devolve into insults of those involved, but I'd find an exploration of how far those involved could go and if some may have already crossed ethical/legal boundaries interesting.

As an example:


--- Quote ---GRACE: OK, Ms. Jackson -- with me, everybody, Natalie Jackson. This is Trayvon Martin`s family lawyer joining us tonight and taking your calls.

Also with us is the Florida state attorney overseeing this case, Angela Corey, also taking your calls. Ms. Jackson, you say this is Zimmerman`s third story. What are the three stories in a nutshell?

JACKSON: The first story was Trayvon dragged him out of the car and attacked him. The second story was he was looking at -- he was looking for street signs to tell the police where he was, and Trayvon attacked him. Now we hear that Trayvon had somehow attacked him from behind and knocked him down.
--- End quote ---

http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/1203/27/ng.01.html

Jackson's claim that Zimmerman said Trayvon dragged him out of the car is an obvious lie. Can she legally and ethically lie like that? Aren't there any ethical boundaries? I didn't see the interview but if Corey heard Jackson's comment shouldn't she have corrected such a blatant lie?

cboldt:

--- Quote from: FromBelow on July 25, 2012, 12:07:13 PM ---Jackson's claim that Zimmerman said Trayvon dragged him out of the car is an obvious lie. Can she legally and ethically lie like that? Aren't there any ethical boundaries? I didn't see the interview but if Corey heard Jackson's comment shouldn't she have corrected such a blatant lie?

--- End quote ---

Maybe Jackson is referring to her own stories (which have been numerous), not narratives told by Zimmerman.

Okay, that was tongue in cheek.  I assume she's putting words in Zimmerman's mouth in order to create discredit.

Corey has no duty to correct extrajudicial statements made by others.  There is a good argument that Jackson has violated ABA Model Rule 3.6.  She might argue that her remarks don't cross the boundary, because they don't result in substantial likelihood of prejudicing a trial.

Lawyers are not immune to defamation suit, either.

DebFrmHell:

--- Quote from: cboldt on July 25, 2012, 12:33:43 PM ---Maybe Jackson is referring to her own stories (which have been numerous), not narratives told by Zimmerman.

Okay, that was tongue in cheek.  I assume she's putting words in Zimmerman's mouth in order to create discredit.

Corey has no duty to correct extrajudicial statements made by others.  There is a good argument that Jackson has violated ABA Model Rule 3.6.  She might argue that her remarks don't cross the boundary, because they don't result in substantial likelihood of prejudicing a trial.

Lawyers are not immune to defamation suit, either.

--- End quote ---

I am still wondering how it is that she came to know about W9 early on. 

She has been a HUGE source of misinformation, IMO.

cboldt:

--- Quote from: DebFrmHell on July 25, 2012, 01:02:57 PM ---I am still wondering how it is that she came to know about W9 early on. 

She has been a HUGE source of misinformation, IMO.

--- End quote ---

Who took the call from W9?  Perkins?  It's not as though Crump and Jackson were "unknown" to the community, and that they'd find that sort of information to be of interest.  Somebody inside SPD passed the information along.  At this point it;ll be seen as "no harm, no foul."  Any pressure on the leaker would probably be met with an allegation that the pressure is racially motivated, and that's the last thing the new chief, mayor, and town manager want.

Jackson and Crump are agitators, in the same mold as Sharpton.

FromBelow:

--- Quote from: DebFrmHell on July 25, 2012, 01:02:57 PM ---I am still wondering how it is that she came to know about W9 early on. 

She has been a HUGE source of misinformation, IMO.

--- End quote ---


--- Quote ---The summary of Serino’s statement does not mention the race of the officers who allegedly pressured him, but sources told The Miami Herald that Barnes and Perkins are black, and Villalona is married to an African-American man.
--- End quote ---


--- Quote ---In his FBI interview, Serino accused Sgt. Barnes of being “friendly” with Tracy Martin, Trayvon’s father. He said Tracy Martin at first understood why no charges were filed, but later changed coursse and accused Zimmerman of racial profiling.
--- End quote ---

http://www.miamiherald.com/2012/07/12/2892510/more-evidence-released-in-zimmerman.html

Possibly the information was passed from Barnes to Tracy to Team Crump? Anyway, I don't know that someone leaking information to Team Crump would put any legal or ethical burden on them. Unless they solicited the information or leaked it to the press? Could they do whatever they wanted with the information once they had it? What if they deliberately tried to spin or lie about the information to the press in order to manipulate how the public/court/jury would view it when it was ultimately released? Maybe get their interpretation out there before the official release? Illegal? Unethical?

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

Go to full version