User doodahdaze, despite being highly disruptive to both mine and the treehouse’s posts on the hearing, asks a valid question and is a question anyone with interest in this case should ask themselves. Why was a special prosecutor appointed to the George Zimmerman case? There’s only one way to really answer that. You can either accept the reasons Wolfinger provided for recusing himself from the case, thereby in effect a prosecutor is assigned by the governor, or you can speculate. Myself I have always chosen the latter. I have never accepted the response from Wolfinger as genuine. I have no direct evidence of course or else we would not be having this discussion, but there is plenty of circumstantial evidence.
In the end I have always answered it, in essence, this way. Wolfinger is a coward. That is the why. The how of it is unknown to us but I speculate Scott and Bondi essentially threatened him to press charges or get out of the way so they can get a prosecutor in who would charge. Wolfinger, with at least some integrity, wouldn’t charge that way so he agreed to recuse himself and probably with some help wrote that stupid letter recusing himself.
A bit more of the complex nature of it is that Bondi and Scott may have taken it upon themselves to do so or they were in agreement with the DOJ/CRD or proxy for the DOJ/CRD or together with the DOJ/CRD who then all or through pressured/threatened Wolfinger. The timing of it suggests that may be the case and that it was with the Assistant Attorney General for the Civil Rights Division Thomas E. Perez and Deputy Assistant Attorney General Roy L. Austin Jr.
Incentives involve many things such as wanting to keep retirement, wanting to keep career, fear of riots causing loss of revenue and death, fear of appearing racist, white guilt, perhaps they have dirt on him as well they would expose or just make up, etc.
But the why will always come down to cowardice. And I would also apply this, as well as the incentives given above, to Bondi and Scott, though in Bondi’s case she is friends with Crump so there’s that little additive that applies to her as opposed to Scott and Wolfinger.
Wolfinger has a chance to redeem himself of course, simply come out and tell the truth. But I don’t think that will ever happen.
Lastly then the question is if this is true what could that mean for the criminal case itself? Well I would assume that it would effectively end it but I don’t know how that would legally come about.
From Wolfinger to Corey
Did politics drive prosecution in Trayvon Martin case?
Articles regarding DOJ: