The Frederick Leatherman Law Blog makes interesting reading. If there were awards for fawning sycophancy Leatherman would be in the running for an Oscar. He seems to think that de la Rionda’s puerile rant was an “epic Shakesperean smackdown.” Some of the comments to his posts reach truly remarkable depths of racist myopia.
But the main reason why this blog deserves attention is that he has an uncanny ability to anticipate the strategy of the prosecution. According to a recent post
“The relevant questions in this case are why did the defendant get out of his vehicle to follow Trayvon Martin and why did he lie about it afterward?
I do not believe the jury is going to have any difficulty figuring out the answers to those questions: The defendant intended to prevent this “asshole” from getting away and he shot him to death when Trayvon resisted. The defendant lied about it afterward because he did not want to go to prison.
Trayvon Martin is the only person who acted in self-defense.
That is basically all there is to this case.”
This suggests that if Witness 8 is going to disappear and if the experts are not allowed or turn out to be obviously incompetent, then the best prosecution strategy will beclaim that Martin did inflict injuries on Zimmerman but only while resisting an attempt at illegal detention and that the screams were Zimmerman’s calling for help when his prey decided to resist.
At the moment there is not a shred of evidence that Zimmerman did in fact try to detain Martin but if the jury has only one or two members as bigoted and prejudiced as Leatherman’s followers it might just work.