Friday, January 26, 2018

Indict Prosecutor Alizadeh

We're pretty much moved on from Darren Wilson at this point in the class, but I'd like to go back for just one second and examine something we might have completely missed: The clear misconduct and misinformation spread by Prosecutor Alizadeh.

There are two main acts of misconduct committed by Alizadeh. One is less explicit one: Bringing up witnesses that clearly should not have been brought in. The most ludicrous being the person with short term memory loss who could not recall the events properly, or people who never even saw the event happen. And the more explicit one - giving the jury an outdated, and since overruled law that says an officer can shoot at someone running from them. The law? From 1987. That's ridiculous. No prosecuting attorney worth their weight would ever give the jury an outdated and overruled law from over 3 decades ago on accident. And if they did, they do not deserve to be a prosecuting attorney.

The fact that the jury had this misleading information in their conscious while the witnesses were up testifying would have undoubtably lead them to make incorrect conclusions. In addition, Alizadeh took very few steps to try to remedy this "mistake".  Not telling the jury what was incorrect, moving past the subject extremely quickly. That's not proper conduct and Alizadeh most definitely should have done more to make clear what the jury was mislead on.

Take into her account her history with the Ferguson Police Department, and her being an attorney for St Louis, and you have yourself a clear case for someone who has committed clear misconduct. The results of this Grand Jury Trial could have been seriously impacted by her misconduct, and she took very little steps to remedy this mistake. In my opinion, Prosector Alizadeh deserves to be indicted.

2 comments:

  1. There in fact was a complaint filed against Alizadeh by a fellow attorney in the area. While nothing came of this complaint, perhaps it would make her more cautious next time knowing that people were paying attention to what she was doing.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I completely agree. She should have been removed from the trial as soon as she had made that mistake or faced serious consequences after. Her actions clearly showed she either didn't care or was very incompetent and therefore shouldn't have been in charge of the trial relating to a young mans death.

    ReplyDelete