Angela Corey AGAIN????

[PCIntern]

Remember her at the end of the Trayvon case?

Saturday night with Angela Corey smiling?

Boris Karloff reincarnate.

[alp227]

1. She's gotta resign. She's a failure. nt

[sethgrogen]

2. Agree 100%

[TheDebbieDee]

3. She's the WORST. PROSECUTOR. EVER.

[avebury]

4. Although I do agree that

Dunn is guilty of First Degree Murder I wish he would be retried for Second Degree which might be easier to achieve on retrial.

[Diamonique]

13. Not necessarily

The jury could have found him guilty of 2nd degree today if they wanted to. It was included in this charge. Also manslaughter was included.

[arthritisR_US]

14. Also, if you try him with 2nd degree only, you have a jury of 6 not 12.

How likely are they to get a AA on a 6 person jury and it's a lot easier to sway 6 one way than it is 12, jmo.

[dsc]

32. conversely how likely is it that they will get a person racist enough to be a hold out

if the jury only has 6.

[arthritisR_US]

33. The Zimmerman case had 5 out of 6 that I think had racial biases.

I think it's easier to select for racists than not.

[dsc]

34. there is racial biases and then there is the Dunn case

I think the Zimmerman case, though a bad result, was a correct application of the charge the jury had been given. I think in that case you had a bad law and very bad charge explaining the law. Here, you had at least one juror who just plain was so racist they couldn't apply the law even close to accurately. There is no reasonable way to see manslaughter out of this set of facts.

[arthritisR_US]

35. I don't think the jury in the Z trial was a "correct application of the charge" .

They were as stupid in that case as the OJ jury was, way back when, jmo.

[dsc]

36. the jury was told that they couldn't consider

who started the fight, they only could consider if he felt in fear of his life at some point during the fight. There was literally no witness to state that he wasn't on the losing end of the fight. I think it is nothing short of crazy that one could start a fight with an unarmed teen, as I think Zimmerman did, start losing the fight (which he might have done) and then shoot the person he started the fight with, but that jury was directly told exactly that. There were left having to know, beyond a reasonable doubt, that Zimmerman was never in fear for his life during that fight.

[arthritisR_US]

37. Interesting, I don't like it

but not all reality's are to our pleasure.

[Aerows]

39. I have to agree with you

on this one.

[avebury]

15. With 2nd degree they would only have to

deal with 6 jurors and not 12.

[savalez]

20. so 2nd degree was not an option?

I'm getting conflicting reports on this.

[avebury]

24. It was an option. But it might be easier to get

6 people to agree on something then 12.

[savalez]

25. Thanks.

[avebury]

26. 1st Degree requires a 12 person jury, 2nd degree only 6. nt

[savalez]

27. wait a minute

so does that mean that this jury could not have chosen murder 2?

I found this but it's not clear.

Jurors could have decided not to convict Dunn on that charge but instead find him guilty on lesser charges such as manslaughter. Or they could have acquitted him altogether on this count.

[avebury]

28. Yes the jury could have decided on 1st degree on any of the lesser

included charges. But, a 1st degree trial require a 12 person jury panel and you have to get all 12 people to agree on the same thing or you have a hung jury. That is exactly what happened today

If you only retry him for 2nd you only need a 6 person jury panel to decide between 2nd degree and any lesser included charges. My point is that the more people you have on the jury panel, the harder it might be to get them to come to an agreement on some type of murder charge.

[savalez]

29. ah ha. OK thanks.

[TorchTheWitch]

30. could you have?

If you emphatically believe that there was no gun nor any gun-like thing and don't believe that he was ever in fear of his life could you have voted for Murder 2 agreeing with other jurors that there might have been a gun and that Davis might have gotten out of the car and threatened him giving Dunn a legitimate reason to be in fear of his life? I'm not sure I could and live with myself afterward. If I was the only holdout for Murder 1 and everyone else was for Murder 2 believing that their might have been a gun and thus a legitimate reason that Dunn was at any point afraid for his life I might, but it would be damn hard to do, and I'd feel wrong about it and guilty about it the rest of my life.

If there were other holdouts that felt as I did then YES I would absolutely dig my heels in for Murder 1. It wouldn't mean he would walk since he was found guilty on several other severe charges and would be going to jail for a long time as well as give the prosecution a chance to better try the case again and figure out where they went wrong the first time.

As for manslaughter, absolutely not even if I was the only holdout for Murder 1. I could never agree to that and live with myself and would rather have another jury make that decision than be personally responsible for voting for a charge I emphatically believed was the wrong one just to render some kind of guilty verdict.

It's so easy when it isn't you that has to make that decision. When you're on the jury it's YOUR responsibility how and WHY you vote as you do, and it's PERSONAL.

[savalez]

38. I hear what you're saying,

all good points, but I am questioning what they were legally able to do.

[TexasTowelie]

5. At least they are going to retry the case

and admonished the reporter that asked whether it would be a waste of taxpayer resources to do so.

All the same...

[scarletwoman]

6. I'm wondering if she over-charges these cases on purpose.

Maybe she doesn't actually have a problem with white guys gunning down black teens? So, she over-charges, knowing juries will balk at Murder One?

[JI7]

7. i don't think she is overcharging, i think they are guilty of what they were charged with

but racists don't think it should be illegal for white guys to shoot and kill certain people.

[bravenak]

8. She charged this case appropriately.

He knew what he was going to do before he did it. First degree murder. Instead of opening his glovebox he should have put his car into reverse, and parked somewhere else.

[demwing]

10. That's critical

He had a moment where he made a choice. He could have decided to chill, instead he decided to kill.

That's 1st degree murder alright.

[Boom Sound 416]

16. Brilliant

[scarletwoman]

19. No, I don't think so. It was just a passing thought - and probably a stupid one, at that.nt

[Tommy_Carcetti]

22. Zimmerman was not overcharged.

Neither was Michael Dunn.

[scarletwoman]

23. Please don't misunderstand me - *I* don't personally think they were over-charged,

I was just wondering in terms of actually winning a conviction, whether going for 1st degree murder made it harder for juries to agree.

But I'm no lawyer, and must plead great ignorance on how this all works. My impression is that with a 1st degree murder charge, premeditation must be proven - and isn't that a more difficult hurdle to clear?

[TorchTheWitch]

31. She didn't over-charge

It was premeditated. The evidence and his actions particularly after he left the scene showed that there was never any gun or gun-like thing, and he was never at any time afraid for his life. He shot at those boys because he was angry, not because he was threatened with any kind of weapon. He got out his gun and started firing because he was angry. That is absolutely premeditated and Murder 1, and there was a boat load of evidence that showed that.

[HipChick]

9. i read somewhere that is she is up for re-election..

[okaawhatever]

11. Angela Correy is pure evil. She was controversial before the Trayvon Martin case. She fired all

the investigators for her office, and a bunch of other things. Typical right wing Bush-esque get rid of all the competition bullcrap. I'll try to find some info on her previous misdeeds.

[okaawhatever]

12. Angela Correy's background, lawsuits, firings, pension theft.......

Fired whistleblower, Ben Kruidbos, is now suing Angela Corey, Florida State Attorney General for firing him for revealing that she had withheld evidence from the George Zimmerman defense team.

Kruidbos testified for the defense in the Zimmerman trial. After he found that the defense had not complied with the dislosure law, he informed an investigator with the state attorney's office and prosecutor, Bernie de la Riondo.

Eventually, he let the defense know through his lawyer, Wesley White, himself a former employer of the Attorney General's office, who had left in December over Corey's choice of prosecutions.

http://www.examiner.com/article/whistleblower-kruidbos-sues-angela-corey

Florida Commission on Ethics Launches Investigation of Prosecutor Angela Corey
From http://www.legalinsurrection.com by Andrew Branca, September 27, 2013

Sometimes what comes around, goes around.

The Washington Times is reporting that the Florida Commission on Ethics has launched an investigation of controversial State prosecutor Angela Corey over her firing of IT director Ben Kruidbos in the aftermath of the prosecutorial debacle that was the George Zimmerman trial: Zimmerman prosecutor Angela Corey now under state investigation.

Also:
Corey was no stranger to controversy prior to the Zimmerman trial and her firing of Mr. Kruidbos.

She had already earned headlines for an odd manipulation of State retirement funds that added several hundred thousand dollars to her own retirement account (and smaller sums to the retirement accounts of several of her staff). She denies there was any wrongdoing in these matters. It was also widely reported, however, that in retaliation for the coverage of the matter by the Jacksonville Times-Union newspaper Prosecutor Corey’s office refused henceforth to communicate with the paper as they had in the past and as they continued to do so with other news outlets.

I won't include the info on the Alan Dershowitz debacle. I think that's been well covered in the main stream press.

AND:

Even as close a follower of the Zimmerman trial as me, however, was not aware that before Corey was elected to be the top prosecutor of Metro Jacksonville she had been fired from that State Attorney’s office by her predecessor, Harry Shorstein. Shorstein explains that a law student intern working for Corey and reported to her professor, as part of a standard debriefing at the conclusion of the internship, that Corey was abusive, profane, and unprofessional. Concerned, the law school contacted Attorney Shorstein, who oversaw Corey. Shorstein reprimanded Corey. Corey, in response, called the school and told the Dean that the professor involved should be disciplined for his role in reporting her misconduct. Again the school called Shorstein and reported the matter. Shorstein ordered Corey to apologize to the Dean of the law school as well as to the professor. She failed to do so, was ordered again, again failed to apologize, and was then terminated..

There's more, but I'll put it in another post.

[JI7]

17. most of this is bs, she may be annoying but she is not at fault

[okaawhatever]

18. At fault for what? nt

[Isoldeblue]

21. Corey has no business being a prosecutor

There is no justice when she's involved with her dirty partisan shenanigans. She rigged the Zit's trial from the the beginning.