Sean taylor Lineup.

The line-up is shaping up for the Sean Taylor murder case.

The case has been assigned by the blind clerk to Judge Murphy. This couldn't be a better choice for both the Defendants and Taylor's family. Outside of the 8:00 AM soundings which the defense lawyers from Fort Myers will have a tough time making, we are confident Judge Murphy will handle this case with the experience and fairness he has always shown.

The Prosecution will be lead by Reid Rubin, one of the best trial lawyers the State Attorneys Office has. And whenever you see Reid in court, Penny Brill from the legal division cannot be far behind. Kathy Rundle has picked an experienced and talented legal team to seek justice in this matter.

The Defense attorneys are mostly unknown to us, however, Defendant Charles Wardlow is currently being represented by David Brenner, who was a Dade PD and was in private practice in Dade County for a while.

Predication: the length of time and costs of this case will eventually cause most if not all of the Defendant's to be represented by the PD and court appointed attorneys. Now the public will really see what they are getting from the conflict counsel's office for their tax dollars. And therein lies the problem- none of these defendants can expect to get an ounce of sympathy from the public in this high profile tragic murder case. And yet, as professionals, we know that for the legal system to work, these defendants need experienced attorneys. Right now the phrase "experienced attorneys" and "conflict counsel's office" do not necessarily fit in the same sentence. We shall see.

Legal issues:

The "shooter" in this case is 17 years old. As a juvenile he is not eligible for the death penalty. The remaining co-defendants are all facing first degree murder charges via the felony murder rule.

First question: under the principle of proportionality, can the prosecution seek the death penalty for defendants who were not the shooter when they are precluded from seeking the death penalty for the shooter based on the shooter's age?

Second question: is it time to do away with the felony murder rule?

England, Canada, India, and Hawaii, Kentucky and Michigan have all abolished the felony murder rule as contrary to the western legal traditions of punishing people in proportion to their criminal acts.

From the

NY Times Article on a man serving life in prison in Florida for loaning a friend a car:

“The felony-murder rule completely ignores the concept of determination of guilt on the basis of individual misconduct,” the Michigan Supreme Court wrote in 1980.

Rumpole says: The felony murder rule is an anachronistic legal concept whose time has come and gone. It is certainly a powerful tool for prosecutors. But do we really think justice is served when a person who loans a car, or a person who drives a killer to the scene is sentenced to life in prison? If the prosecution believes an individual actively participated in planning a homicide, then a conspiracy charge is appropriate. But if the evidence is not there, and if all parties agree that a co-defendant had no idea the defendant was armed and planning to commit a murder, then why should both individuals be punished with life in prison, when one individual is clearly more culpable than the other?

And don't start whining to us about the "independent act" jury instruction. In our opinion, that and 2 bucks gets you a cup of coffee at Starbucks allowing you to drown your sorrows in expensive caffeine after a guilty verdict.

As our society moves farther away from the principles of fairness and justice in sentencing, we can expect more two bit politicians trying to make a name on the backs of the accused. If the prosecutor in the NY Times article is correct when he told the jury " No car, no murder", then lets all back a provision to prosecute the car dealer who sold the car, the union workers who built the car, the bank officers who loaned the money to get the car, the engineers who designed the car, and the stockholders who financed the company to produce the car. If nothing else, it would create a lot more work for defense attorneys sitting around in December waiting for their phone to ring.

See you in court, where we have had nothing but unpleasant experiences with the independent act instruction.