WASHINGTON — A judge has been holding secret hearings in the case of the man convicted in the 2001 killing of Chandra Levy, the latest twist in a high-profile murder that went unsolved for years and captivated the public because of the intern’s romantic relationship with a California congressman.
The meetings, held sporadically behind closed doors at the courthouse over the last several weeks, raise questions about what comes next in a criminal case that appeared resolved by the 2010 conviction of Ingmar Guandique. The illegal immigrant from El Salvador is now serving a 60-year prison sentence in Levy’s death, but the hearings could signal a problem with the prosecution of the case.
…..There were no bailouts for the victims of this heist, but the banks were bailed out. The bankers, mortgage brokers and everyone else behind the scam retained the profits extracted as a result of fraud. Incompetent pension fund managers using other peoples’ money bought these toxic assets. They had a legally-binding fiduciary responsibility to act with prudence but failed to do so.
Yet, they kept their jobs after making these irresponsible and poorly thought-out investments.
And still, not a single one of the thousands of criminals responsible for this colossal charade is in prison. This highlights the sheer power of the Jewish Mafia. Perhaps even worse is that the scams continue to this day. Unfortunately, the Jewish Mafia will continue to defraud Main Street indefinitely because nothing has been done to prevent securities fraud. In fact, the moral hazard has been strengthened due to the absence of criminal prosecution.
Zimmerman’s jailhouse calls about money transfers, bulletproof vests could play role in bond hearing
Posted on Monday, June 18, 2012 8:47:29 PM by Red in Blue PA
ORLANDO, Fla. – The former neighborhood watch volunteer who killed Trayvon Martin told his wife to buy bulletproof vests for them and for his attorney, according to jailhouse calls released Monday.
“As uncomfortable as it is, I want you wearing one,” George Zimmerman told his wife. Zimmerman was wearing a bulletproof vest when he left jail after posting bond. His attorney, Mark O’Mara, has reported receiving threats.
The judge who revoked George Zimmerman’s bond did so after he determined that it was “apparent” that Zimmerman’s wife had lied under oath, and clear that Zimmerman “does not properly respect the law.”
Circuit Judge Kenneth Lester revoked Zimmerman’s bond on June 1, but his written order was filed Monday. In it, Lester lays out his rationale.
Yesterday I posted about how Alan Dershowitz alleged that Zimmerman prosecutor Angela Corey called up Harvard Law School complaining about Dershowitz and treatening to sue for libel based on Dershowitz’s criticisms of her handling of the case.
State Attorney Angela Corey, the prosecutor in the George Zimmerman case, recently called the Dean of Harvard Law School to complain about my criticism of some of her actions.
The Trayvon Martin case’s Judge Lester has made a judicial misstep about the George Zimmerman bond revocation. And it’s a misstep which only serves to increase the racial tensions in the country, unnecessarily.
The extent of Florida prosecutor Angela Corey’s gross indifference to the facts in the Trayvon Martin case is exceeded only by that of many in the press who agitated for George Zimmerman’s prosecution for murder. Alan Dershowitz explains the latest evidence, which causes him to conclude that Corey acted improperly:
A medical report by George Zimmerman’s doctor has disclosed that Zimmerman had a fractured nose, two black eyes, two lacerations on the back of his head and a back injury on the day after the fatal shooting. If this evidence turns out to be valid, the prosecutor will have no choice but to drop the second-degree murder charge against Zimmerman — if she wants to act ethically, lawfully and professionally.
There is, of course, no assurance that the special prosecutor handling the case, State Attorney Angela Corey, will do the right thing. Because until now, her actions have been anything but ethical, lawful and professional.
She was aware when she submitted an affidavit that it did not contain the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth. She deliberately withheld evidence that supported Zimmerman’s claim of self-defense. The New York Times has reported that the police had “a full face picture” of Zimmerman, before paramedics treated him, that showed “a bloodied nose.” The prosecutor also had photographic evidence of bruises to the back of his head.
But none of this was included in any affidavit.
Photo tells much about case against Zimmerman (Worth a look)
The Philadelphia Inquirer ^ | April 29, 2012 | George Parry, esquire
Posted on Sunday, April 29, 2012 4:15:18 PM by 2ndDivisionVet
To paraphrase President Obama, if I had a son who had been flat on the ground in a vicious fight, the back of his head would look like that of accused murderer George Zimmerman.
Harvard Law School Professor Alan Dershowitz believes the prosecution team in the George Zimmerman case should be investigated to see if they committed a criminal act.On the Glenn Beck radio program today, Professor Dershowitz said he does not believe the Florida prosecution team had sufficient evidence to charge George Zimmerman with second degree murder in the death of Trayvon Martin in Sanford, Florida.
Unless there is additional evidence, Dershowitz believes the second degree murder charge is baseless. Dershowitz added that he does not see any justification for the prosecution to withhold evidence.Furthermore, in an explosive charge, Dershowitz said he believes the Florida prosecution, may be guilty of committing an ethical violation, and potentially may have committed a criminal act by charging Zimmerman with second degree murder.
If the prosecution had access to a photograph showing the bloodied head of Mr. Zimmerman, taken immediately after the incident on February 26, there was no basis for a second degree murder charge, according to Dershowitz.
If it were proven that the prosecution had access to the photograph, and filed a second degree murder charge anyway, Dershowitz believes they may be guilty of Subornation of perjury which is a very serious charge.–snip–…This is an explosive situation because there has already apparently been violence perpetrated by people who believed they were avenging the death of Trayvon Martin.
“Don’t resist – you’ll just make it worse.”
Until recently, the only people expected to make that demand of their innocent victims were rapists and police officers. Fortunately, women are no longer expected to submit to sexual assault, but rather to fight back by whatever means are available – unless the assailant is one of the State’s costumed enforcers, in which case resisting sexual assault would be a felony.
UPI ^ | 14 November, 2011 | UPI
Posted on Thursday, November 17, 2011 9:54:08 AM by marktwain
But while he gained his freedom Friday after seven months in the Fulton County Jail, former Marine David Sturdivant, who served four tours of duty in Vietnam and received a Purple Heart, has lost a kidney after being shot by a police officer, his home, his business and all his possessions, The Atlanta Journal-Constitution reported.
MSNBC ^ | 11/15/2011 | By MIKE SCHNEIDER
Posted on Tuesday, November 15, 2011 1:43:13 PM by MizSterious
Retired prosecutor calls Casey Anthony attorney ‘smarmy’
In new book, he claims defense encouraged her not to cooperate with investigators
By MIKE SCHNEIDER
updated 11/15/2011 12:20:05 AM ET
ORLANDO, Fla. — A retired prosecutor from the Casey Anthony murder trial calls her lead attorney “smarmy” in a new book. He writes that even though the Florida mother acquitted of killing her 2-year-old daughter “may have deserved” the death penalty if convicted, he didn’t think a jury would ever agree to the punishment.
Jeff Ashton writes in Tuesday’s “Imperfect Justice: Prosecuting Casey Anthony,” that he would have been happier if the prosecution team left the death penalty off the table. He also confirmed that toward the end of the trial, Anthony’s attorneys tried to persuade the 25-year-old to accept a plea deal but she refused to listen.
EL PASO – A judge has rejected a plea deal that would have resolved Willie Nelson‘s marijuana possession case in West Texas with a fine, saying the country singer shouldn’t get what she considers special treatment.
Nelson was arrested in November after a Border Patrol agent said 6 ounces of marijuana were found on Nelson’s tour bus.
Judge Becky Dean-Walker told The Associated Press on Wednesday that she rejected prosecutor Kit Bramblett’s suggestion that Nelson resolve the case by pleading guilty and paying a $500 fine for possession of drug paraphernalia.
Dean-Walker claims the prosecutor “doesn’t do that for anybody else.”
The judge says Nelson should be charged with the misdemeanor marijuana possession, which carries up to a year in jail.
The Prosecution Rests, but I Can’t
The Prosecution Rests, but I Can’t
New York Times ^ | April 9th, 2011 | John Thompson
Posted on Sunday, April 10, 2011 12:24:30 PM by KantianBurke
I’ve been free since 2003, exonerated after evidence covered up by prosecutors surfaced just weeks before my execution date.
Those prosecutors were never punished. Last month, the Supreme Court decided 5-4 to overturn a case I’d won against them and the district attorney who oversaw my case, ruling that they were not liable for the failure to turn over that evidence — which included proof that blood at the robbery scene wasn’t mine.
Because of that, prosecutors are free to do the same thing to someone else today.
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com …
Andrew Bostom has published an excellent piece on the recent comments made by Geert Corstens, The President of the Netherlands Supreme Court. Corstens photo above alleges that accused Parliamentarian Geert Wilders is “undermining Dutch jurisprudence”. From Bostom’s article:“Geert Corstens, President of the Netherlands Supreme Court, maintains in Orwellian fashion that Dutch Parliamentarian leader Geert Wilders is “undermining” Dutch jurisprudence.
[Hat tip Fjordman]As reported here,Critical statements on jurisprudence such as Wilders has made during the proceedings against him have an “undermining” effect on jurisprudence, particularly as the leader of the PVV [Wilders’ Party for Freedom] is also still a parliamentarian, according to Corstens. MPs should contribute to the stability of the constitutional state, said the president on television programme Buitenhof. This past Friday 10/22/10, because the three sitting judges evidenced unacceptable bias, a special chamber of the Amsterdam district court ruled that the ongoing case against Wilders must be restarted with a different panel of judges.
During a dinner in May 2010, Tom Schalken, one of the judges who gave the order to the Public Prosecutor’s Office OM to prosecute Wilders, attempted to persuade Islamologist Professor Hans Jansen, an expert witness for Wilders’ defense, that the Dutch MP was guilty. Specifically, Jansen insists,…over and over [Schalken] steered the conversation towards the Wilders trial… to convince me of the correctness of his [Schalken’s] decision to drag Wilders to court.And now another “objective” jurist—the President of the Netherlands Supreme Court himself—has made plain his own hideous bias proclaiming that Wilders defense of freedom of speech, let alone fair legal proceedings, somehow undermines Dutch “jurisprudence.”…”Yes, indeedy. The hooks of Islam are sunken deeply into the highest levels of the Dutch legal system.The best analogy that comes to my mind is this: