Also in this playlist...
This transcript is automatically generated
Let me go to markets some of legal aspects of mark there's so many legal questions here on and to the extent that you're capable of -- answering.
-- let's start with Angela quarry and she initially says that she would bring this case to a grand jury.
-- She changed -- mind.
She -- discretion.
And she exercised through -- being the case and everybody wants me to have an opinion Connecticut senator -- have observed artifacts.
And -- kept saying all along let's switch of the facts.
Though she has that discretion I do you think that any more appropriate.
Our presentation -- -- due to a grand jury.
After all eighteen people in some rural county -- -- heard the evidence would have -- whatever questions they want harassed.
Quite honestly this is -- committee has an opportunity to make -- presentation to the grand jury.
Though that's the extraordinary exception to the rule of most of my life in a case like this -- -- well -- events of that.
-- -- -- grand jury had decided yes or no I don't have eighteen people decide not -- prosecutor who.
They've come down here with a particular focus.
Think that that there's political pressure.
Brought to bear in this case considering Ohio high profile do you think -- Felt they had to give -- -- Lot of conflict within the town scampered to count me.
The area new black Panthers Al Sharpton lot of pressure.
Think they capitulated and way to pressure on this and what pressure she -- on yourself but as you just said the reality of we can't deny that fact -- the social pressures that exists in this case were phenomenal.
Beyond belief or any other case.
This was in recent reports event between two young men and -- it turned out to be the case occurred literally divide the nation.
With that as a backdrop.
The FBI got involved where they normally don't we had protest where we normally don't.
To suggest that any person -- -- a political person or just annual looking at a case it's not going to be.
A way and most likely react to those pressures would be absurd.
-- like me saying.
That I'm not going to.
Understand that I may have to be on the media artist and everything in this case is gonna have to be under scrutiny.
There's no doubt that everybody involved on governor Scott to his record -- To normal failure to ability to everybody -- -- realized at some point that this case is going to be under extraordinary scrutiny.
That they have to -- Alan Dershowitz not somebody that I often politically agreement is waiting pretty heavily on this case and it's he said that Angela Corey.
Knowingly told a false story.
Fail to mention -- broken nose -- injuries.
And was very outspoken about this case you feel that there's been an injustice by especially if you look at the original order which -- have -- fronting me.
Say that -- provide evidence.
That was George Zimmerman who confronted.
Maarten -- -- struggle ensued.
Police report indicated that in fact there's no evidence and sort of corroborate that.
She has discretion in this house is gonna handle her job as a prosecutor she has wide discretion.
What did she have an obligation to put in there his injuries.
I believe that a problem cause affidavit should include all of the available information not just that -- commission which will shore and arrest.
Or -- I mean that's just.
If you really think about -- -- where you lawyers take away all that.
You're going to say this person should resources -- -- Would you want all the information available or part of it I think everybody who answers that question is gonna say give me all the information.
-- -- well and then it goes back to the question of you know for example how do you make a definitive statement Zimmerman confronted Morton and struggle ensued.
We'll have to have some evidence to back up that statement if you gonna make it.
And saying it was sworn to by.
Officer who has to say that I believe this is true.
He doesn't have any you know independent knowledge except that what tickets in his investigations that he would presume.
That if he's gonna say that statement it is backed up by evidence wanna cross examined to order of the investigators.
On the bond hearing.
He couldn't come up and others support.
A motion and you said that.
The court makes gratuitous.
Disparaging remarks about mr.
Zimmerman is character advocates for mr.
Zimmerman to be prosecuted for additional crimes.
Offers a personal opinion about the evidence for -- said prosecution.
Makes sweeping generalizations about mr.
Zimmerman based on limited information.
And contradicts those.
Conclusions pretty harsh statement.
It is -- to an accurate with everything that we started in that motion based upon review the evidence and the judge's order.
-- where does that go from here in terms of that.
The judge and the potential removal -- -- that the -- is sort of clear with the rule says is that if we filed a motion that suggests just that.
We believe you coordinated bias against my client or prejudice that it would not to be sent him a bucket of their top and a quarter past and it only at the four -- of that document.
If it's want to be judged under the rule has to believe that backs -- it are true.
End if those facts -- richer today giving reasonable belief that my client would not get a fair trial is not to go under the facts of the case.
Which is -- -- that I wouldn't wanna comment more on it because he has to rely just on that document and nothing else so you feel he went beyond the document in the comments that he made about George.
I'm sort of a back up a little bit short.
My emotions that that is not going to be for the course is sworn motion by choice or not -- it to be in good -- -- just Lester is to consider only got motion in deciding whether or not to recuse themselves -- and that's all he has to rely.
And and obviously the status.
It is put forward their motion.
Not to have that happen so that I don't believe that the rule allows for the state to respond I think it's pretty clear cut deterrence is to decide immediately.
-- more than thirty days.
On the face -- -- should we go back to the issue of the change in -- in the financial situation.
There was a period I think of four days from the time that Georges was given -- 150000 dollar bond.
And then you brought it to the court is my understanding.
The fact that wait a minute there is more money here and and that really angered the judge and that brought into the issue his wife.
And has suggested that effect in effect that she'd be brought up.
He's suggesting should be brought up on charges -- now has been and she now has.
And the court making that suggestion potentially more charges from -- well.
What can you tell us about that aspect of what's happening.
You know unfortunately I think it was.
You know if this was a case where.
Towards had taken -- hidden it in two months later it was all found out about anyone's buying cars is something I can understand it Courtney extraordinarily frustrated.
And -- I think that was an intentional currents that has no explanation.
The way this thing happened and not -- -- -- more excuses but the -- in the mid July had known at that point for a week.
Wasn't too isn't -- who had been thrown out of his house his neighbor -- his job -- white tennis school.
His mom and dad into Alzheimer written.
Relatives out of their house tells -- that the police everything that they want him to tell them.
Has to go into hiding and comes back to voluntarily and is given the -- just in donations that's there.
It doesn't disclose it -- what -- reason.
Filter by section