Opening Statements: Florida v. Zimmerman ©

  Throughout my legal career, I have often said that a trial is often won immediately after pre-trial publicity, jury selection and opening statements.  The “trial” is unimportant.  Most lawyers take the wrong, legal approach.  This invariably spells doom for Black defendants.  Most Black defendants will tell you that they were convicted because of ineffective assistance of counsel.

            On the other hand, whites put a lot of stock in the selection and election of district attorneys who enjoy prosecutorial discretion.  “He who pays the piper calls the tune”.  This means that prosecutors employ “stop and frisk” tactics with assistance from mayors and local departments against politically unconscious persons to compensate for the lack of white defendants.

            On Monday, Florida v. Zimmerman started with opening statements.  Usually, a prosecutor reads the indictment to the jury in its opening statement to survive a motion for failure to state a cause of action.  Commentators wrongfully define an opening statement as only a “road map”. This definition is insufficient.

            The defense may make an opening statement.  This happened in Florida v. Zimmerman.  In fact, the defense exploited the opening statement and converted it into a closing statement. This allowed the defense to not only make unsubstantiated arguments to the jury but to also put inadmissible evidence before the jury to the prejudice of the prosecution.

            Florida v. Zimmerman is emulating the murder trial in Mississippi involving the lynching of Emmett Till in 1955.  This was a “sham prosecution”.  The defendants were acquitted of all criminal charges.  White prosecutors can never be trusted, usually in racially-motivated cases, to obtain criminal convictions.  They enjoy a kinship with members of the lynch mob.

            The indictment is the most important document in a “kangaroo trial”.  All arguments should flow from it.  In Florida v. Zimmerman, it was never mentioned in opening statements. Instead, the prosecution focused on “profanity” and the defense focused on a “joke”.  On Wednesday night, I will offer a “TV Guide” on Florida v. Zimmerman.

            There will be a legal forum on Florida v. Zimmerman and there will also be an unveiling of a paid advertisement in the New York Amsterdam News on Wednesday, June 26, 2013 at 7:00 p.m.

  The venue is Brooklyn Christian Center, 1061 Atlantic Ave. (bet. Franklin and Classon) in Brooklyn.  Take the “C” train to Franklin Ave.

            P.S.  Today the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Shelby Co., Al. v. Holder that Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 is now toothless.  Blacks have never enjoyed political rights and only limited voting rights.  This is “plantation politics”.  Therefore, Blacks have never enjoyed “Black power” in this country.  This decision will have no effect on our political status but it will also be a topic of discussion Wednesday evening at the Brooklyn Christian Center.

There was an issue loading your timed LeadBox™. Please check plugin settings.
There was an issue loading your exit LeadBox™. Please check plugin settings.