Kendall Coffey- Everything Points to Political Division

Our country is more divided than ever, particularly along party lines. Americans are not longer united by their citizenship, rather they are divided by their political parties: Democrat or Republican. Of course, there are those who fall in between, but the power of the two major political parties leaves any other options out of the running most of the time.

Any number of happenings in the U.S. provide clear demonstrations for just how divided we are. Pick a topic: health care, international relations, national debt, economic style… the list goes on and on, and the two parties can’t agree on a single thing. Miami attorney Kendall Coffey points out the singular fact that both parties were sure they’d win this election right up until the very end—“Further proof that the two political parties can hardly agree on anything.”

Despite national polls, the Republican Party had a secret vote monitoring system that was supposed to keep them updated with all the latest, most accurate, information. As it turned out, Orca had some major malfunctioning going on, and as one aide said, “Orca is lying on the beach with a harpoon in it.”

We’re finally past the election now, and our country is still facing some big issues that can’t be solved unless we stop bickering like children and actually come together. President Obama can certainly afford to be more aggressive in his policymaking in his second term, but it would be so much better for our country if the two parties would get over their differences and try to work out a solution that will get our country on the right track.

Washington is full of intelligent individuals—but they all have closed their hearts and ears to anyone who thinks differently. It’s time to open them back up and let reason in. It’s clear that when we work separately, as Kendall Coffey points out, we overlook some pretty important things.

Read more from Kendall Coffey on his Miami twitter.

Kendall Coffey Named to Election Advisory Group

After yet another election in Florida plagued with long lines and extremely late final counts, Miami-Dade mayor Carlos Gimenez has created an election advisory group. Named to the group was Kendall Coffey, former US Attorney of Miami, who played a large part in the 2000 election recount.

Kendall Coffey is now a partner in Coffey Burlington in Miami, and is one of the nation’s best litigators. He’s been a part of many high-profile cases and has appeared frequently on news channels like CNN to provide expert insights on the law. He has also been an adjunct faculty member of Florida Constitutional Law at University of Miami School of Law and for Trial Practice at University of Miami School of Law. Coffey has lectured for various organizations on trial skills and substantive law.

Other members of the election advisory group include lawyer Robert Fernandez, Property Appraiser Carlos Lopez-Cantera, Rev. Victor Curry, Miami Gardens Mayor Oliver Gilbert, former County Attorney Murray Greenberg, Executive Director of SAVE Dade CJ Ortuño, Executive Director of Sant La Gepsie Metellus, Alice Ancona, and Lovette McGill. Commissioners Lynda Bell, Sally Heyman, Dennis Moss, and Rebeca Sosa will also join Coffey in the group.

"I'm excited to get to work, and our objective is clear: now is the time to for us to take stock of what we did right, what needs to improve, take appropriate action and move forward to make our elections process the best in the nation," Gimenez said, stressing the need for change in the next election cycle. "I want to incorporate the latest technology to make voting fast and easy in our community."

Indeed, voting was frustrating for many this year, something that Coffey and many others have long thought needed to change. Florida is not only one of the largest states in terms of electoral votes, but it is also one of the most important because it is a swing state that can determine the outcome of an election during a tight race.

Kendall Coffey offers suggestions to unemployed law graduates

It's no surprise to anyone that the current job market for lawyers is bad.  But the problem is there is a great many law students who went into their education thinking that, if they worked hard, they would stand a good chance of a high-paying job once they graduated.  So they burnt the candle at both ends, saddled themselves with massive amounts of student loans, and set out to get a law degree.

Only to find that the market is saturated with experienced lawyers who were let go from their positions and that no one is hiring.

What is a law school graduate supposed to do?

Perhaps what is needed is not more jobs, but a reworking of the current system.  Perhaps law students shouldn't expect to work for a law firm where they'll be billed out at $250 an hour but should instead set out to work for themselves and serve a middle class which desperately needs legal advice but can't afford the rates of the big firms.

"Ironically, while thousands of new law graduates fret about the chronic joblessness that awaits them, tens of millions of Americans need attorneys but cannot afford them. And much of the unmet need rests in America's middle class, which is neither rich enough to pay $250 an hour for lawyers nor poor enough to qualify for legal aid organizations."

Those are the words of Kendall Coffey, a Miami lawyer, legal analyst, and author of Spinning the Law.  Kendall suggests that legal students and law schools should reexamine the way they see the legal field and should change to fit the current environment and the rampant unemployment that awaits law school graduates.

In his piece at Law.com, Kendall writes that, with prudent office economics, there's no reason why recent law graduates can't launch successful practices. The problem is that their current education neither gives them any background in how to do this nor even prepares them for the idea.  Instead law schools still teach to a model which is quickly becoming obsolete.

He suggests turning to current lawyers in order to mentor these new fledglings, "leaders of the bar are well positioned to emphasize that placing many graduates in successful careers is more important than placing a few in traditional law firms. While prestige is nice, it does not pay monthly mortgages, much less student loans."

Indeed.  And the quicker schools can get this idea through their heads, the better. 

MSNBC questions atypical police protocol in Trayvon Martin case

The widely publicized Trayvon Martin killing raised some serious questions about police protocol, the ‘stand your ground’ law in Florida, and the friction that racial and ethnic boundaries are causing in the state.

Originally, the night the event took place, the police chose not to arrest George Zimmerman for the killing of Trayvon Martin, despite the recommendation of the lead investigator, Chris Serino. The case was initially deemed a self-defense case because of the ‘stand your ground’ law that would allow Zimmerman to forcefully defend himself without the obligation to flee from the alleged attack.

In an interview with MSNBC following the news of the incident, legal commentator and former US Attorney Kendall Coffey discussed the case while examining data gathered by the news team.

The reaction from the authorities was atypical, especially considering that those who overruled the leading investigator were officials who were not at the scene of the crime. “…The lead investigator, the person that normally law enforcement would say is in the best position to assess whether or not there’s probable cause [for arrest, was] effectively overruled by people sitting back at the office,” said Kendall Coffey, adding that the scenario raised questions.

Though new information has unraveled since Feb. 26, the night of the incident, the case proceeds, unraveling new facts and triggering profound emotion and concern. 

'Stand your ground' controversy spikes in Trayvon Martin case

Hypothetical Situation:  A young man wanders around an area with which he is unfamiliar. It’s nighttime and he has somewhere to be but he’s not quite sure how to get there. His eyes meet with those of a stranger, wary of his presence. They exchange unfriendly words. Words give way to actions and soon the young man is dead. The older man killed him.

According to Florida’s ‘stand your ground’ law, someone who is being attacked or is facing an imminent threat may forcefully defend himself without the requirement to flee. Therefore, the older man, the one who’s still living in the above scenario, can invoke ‘stand your ground’ and pass the murder off as self-defense without facing any backlash. Many would consider this scenario an unfortunate encounter when an adolescent boy messed with the wrong man.

However, consider that this was perhaps not the older individual’s first run-in with the law. Would his claim of self-defense become less credible if he had a criminal history? What if this history included robbery, assault, or battery? Would he still be capable of cloaking himself in ‘stand your ground’ if he had one previous arrest? Two? Three?

Reporters at the Miami Herald uncovered the statistics behind who exactly was benefitting from ‘stand your ground.’

According to the Herald, “Nearly 60 percent of those who claimed self-defense had been arrested at least once before the day they killed someone… More than 30 of those defendants, about 1 in 3, had been accused of violent crimes, including assault, battery or robbery. Dozens had drug offenses on their records… Killers have invoked ‘stand your ground’ even after repeated run-ins with the law. Forty percent had three arrests or more. Dozens had at least four arrests.”

Legal experts like Kendall Coffey are skeptical of the controversial law. Of course, it is an inherently problematic law, because, as Coffey noted, “It would be impractical to try and apply the law differently between those who do and don’t have records. And frankly, it would be unfair.”

Obviously having a previous criminal record shouldn’t preclude someone from protecting himself when the situation warrants it. However, a guilty man should not be able to so easily invoke a law designed to protect the innocent, and run free.

“The legislators wrote this law envisioning honest assertions of self-defense, not an immunity being seized mostly by criminal defendants trying to lie their way out of a murder,” said Kendall Coffey.

Though the law would work well to protect an innocent person defending himself, it appears as though more guilty individuals have benefitted from its enactment. Legal experts like Kendall Coffey and a significant amount of Florida citizens would prefer that the law be curtailed. Time will tell whether ‘stand your ground’ has a future in Florida.  

Former South Florida U.S. Attorney joins McDermott Will & Emery

It has recently been announced that former U.S. Attorney Marcos Jimenez has joined McDermott Will & Emery to help build a white collar and business litigation team in both Miami and New York.

Jimenez has a wealth of deep trial experience, especially with health care clients, and figured prominently in a case brought against Alltel by the Florida State Attorney General.  He obtained a final judgement in Alltel's favor after an investigation that stretched over nine years. 

Kendall Coffey, another former U.S. Attorney from Miami, Fl  and partner with Coffey Burlington commented on the move.  

"They are a very lucky law firm to get him," Coffey said. "Mark is a superstar and has a huge impact wherever he goes."

Kendall Coffey on former BTU president Pat Santeramo

It doesn’t seem possible that the president of a teachers’ union would be able to amass a great deal of money, even if they were using less-than-legal means.  But in Fort Lauderdale former Broward Teachers Union Pat Santeramo seems to have proven that idea wrong, as he has been accused of stealing nearly $300,000 of union funds. 

How did he manage to do all of that?  It’s alleged that he took part of a scheme where he worked with a contracting company, Marstan Construction of Coral Springs, to charge the Union inflated prices for basic services including changing light bulbs, killing ants, dying carpets, or other maintenance work.  The construction company, in return, kicked back cash to Santeramo in amounts ranging from $1,000 to $20,000 a pop.

The board, especially former BTU board member Jeanne Albertus, became suspicious when they saw the same company receive all of the contract work, and to see large amounts of it.

“I didn’t think anyone could be infected with that many ants,” said investigator Sheriff Al Lamberti.  "With every bill, there was something tacked on for him."

Santeramo also used union credit cards to pay for items not related to BTU business, reimbursed members and associates for the contributions they made to political campaigns, and used forged documents to obtain nearly $122,000 of unused vacation and sick hours when he resigned in December.

Luckily there was documentation in the termination agreement that should help the prosecutors.  According to Kendall Coffey, the lawyer representing BTU, that agreement contained a specific carve-out that the union can seek the money if there was any kind of fraud committed.

He, and the union plan to “take whatever action may be appropriate to try to recover the funds.”  They very well might have a better chance than most, as Santeramo was under investigation by the police for about nine months. 

"We now have the benefit of a very extensive police investigation, which we suspect may well serve as a road map for our recovery efforts," Kendall Coffey explained.  

Kendall Coffey featured in Attorney at Law



Kendall Coffey

Kendall Coffey was named Attorney of the Month for Attorney at Law Magazine and featured on the cover.  They also put together a wonderful bio for him. 

Miami litigators cleared of all wrongdoing

According to the Daily Business Review Miami litigators Michael Tein and Guy Lewis have been cleared of all wrongdoing in a recent dispute.

The legal issue involved concerned their representation of Tribe members Tammy Gwen Billie and her father, Jimmy Bert, who were involved in a car crash that killed a Miami woman 14 years ago.  Although the woman’s family was supposed to be awarded $3.2 million in 2009 the amount has yet to be paid. 

The two lawyers were accused of wrongdoing over alleged discovery violations in their representation of Billie and Bert and have been cleared of all charges. 

Kendall Coffey, who is representing Lewis  and Tein in front of the bar explains that the two of them were completely cleared.  “The Bar examined the issues thoroughly and carefully, and the result is a complete vindication for Lewis Tein, one of our pre-eminent litigation firms," Kendall Coffey said.

But there is still a dispute that the Bar is monitoring, regarding whether the assertion by Tein and Lewis that the clients- not the tribe- paid their legal fees. 

Why is this an issue?  Read the full article over at the DailyBusiness Review. 

How long did the police spend investigating Trayvon Martin?

Did the Trayvon Martin investigation run its course too quickly?  This seems to be one of the biggest issues that protestors return to again and again, the fact that it only took seven hours and 50 minutes for Sanford police and the state attorney to decide to let George Zimmerman to go home, not charging him with the shooting death of Trayvon Martin.

 

According to MSNBC, nearby Lake Mary is a similar town with the same number of detectives (five).  Two years ago a shooting happened in Lake Mary and although eventually no charges were filed that city’s homicide unit called in the county sheriff’s department with its fully staffed crime lab to assist.  That investigation lasted for 16 days. 

 

Was seven hours too quick of an investigation?  Kendall Kendall Coffey, former United States Attorney thinks so.  “When a man with a gun kills someone who is unarmed, certainly should take a lot more than seven hours to reach the bottom line as to whether there's a crime,” he explains.

                                                                                                                                    

The special prosecutor examining the case will be the one to determine the truth of the matter, and is expected to report to the grand jury soon.

It doesn't take much to get away with murder

There a lot of different issues at play in the Trayvon Martin case.  There are the pictures of George Zimmerman’s injuries.  There’s the fact that he refused to stay in his car after the police dispatcher instructed him to.  There’s the mere seven hours that the police held him.  There’s Martin’s innocence and complete right to be exactly where he was.  There’s the confusion over who was calling for help in the 911 call. 

 

But the only issue that matters, according to Kendall Coffey, is who threw the first punch. 

 

This is because the case comes down to a strange Florida law called Stand Your Ground which allows someone to meet force with force if they aren’t engaging in unlawful activity and are attacked in someplace where they have the right to be. 

 

As Kendall Coffey explains, if Martin threw the first punch, no matter if he was scared of Zimmerman, Zimmerman would have had every right to shoot him.  If Zimmerman threw the first punch then he would have been taking part in unlawful activity and could not seek protection under the SYG statute.

 

With such a strange law, apparently all it takes in Florida to get away with murder is getting the other guy to attack you first.

 

Does all the evidence bolster Zimmerman's claim of self defense?

A great deal of evidence has been released in the Trayvon Martin case.  Several weeks ago the case seemed very different, before the stories, the pictures of the injuries, the witnesses accounts, all of which seems to bolster Zimmerman’s claims of self defense.  But does it?

 

Kendall Coffey was asked that very question on MSNBC.  Author of Spinning the Law, he’s an expert at trying cases in the court of public opinion.  But Coffey doesn’t think that the public reaction will change much, although it could affect the case all the same.

 

“This does more good for Zimmerman than it does for the prosecution because it tells us there are very important unanswered questions,” he explains.  “Enough unanswered questions mean unproven facts and... those are the tools of a defense lawyer trying to establish a reasonable doubt.”

Case could affect future of foreclosures

Kendall Coffey

Even though the lawsuit is already settled, Roman Pino v. Bank of New York Mellon could affect how foreclosures are filed across the entire United States. 

Right now, banks aren’t precisely as careful about the foreclosures they file because they don’t have to be.  If something ever goes wrong, say- if they filed the foreclosure with fraudulent documents- all they have to do is dismiss the mortgage and re-file correctly. 

In case you thought that fraudulent documents reference was an excessive one, the very lawsuit at hand deals with that issue.  Roman Pino’s mortgage assignment, the legal document that binds a loan to a lender, had been signed by a low-wage worker hired to simply sign the document without the due diligence of checking the document for accuracy- as is usually required.

Pino owns his house now, as the case was settled out of court, but the Florida Supreme Court is still hearing the case.  Many foreclosures in Florida have had similar fraudulent paperwork, and the voluntary dismissal strategy might be at fault.   Essentially, there is little incentive not to lie. 

As Amanda Lundergan, an associate with the law firm that represented Pino, explained, “It sets up a system where every litigant is condoned and encouraged to lie, cheat and steal, knowing that if they are caught, they can simply voluntarily dismiss and absolve themselves from that fraud."

There could be wide backlash if the court rules against voluntary dismissal.  There were more than 104,000 cases voluntarily dismissed from Florida’s courts last year.  In fact, if the court rules against the banks, "a broad universe of mortgages could be rendered unenforceable," said former U.S. Attorney Kendall Coffey, author of the book, "Foreclosures in Florida."

Will Zimmerman have to take the stand at his trial?

Read more at Kendall Coffey Celebrity Cases

 In the current climate it might make more sense if he didn’t.  After all, the public is following every bit of information with bated breath, see-sawing from one opinion to another, and him taking the stand will only feed the rumor mill- which is something that his attorney’s office seems determined to avoid.

“The O'Mara Law group stresses that while the George Zimmerman case will be explored deeply in the media and by the public, the only proper place to determine the guilt or innocence of George Zimmerman is in court,” a posting on Zimmerman’s legal defense website posted recently.  “And indeed only the jury will have all the evidence required to make such a determination.

But one of the prosecutors, Bernie De La Rionda, has hinted that Zimmerman’s story to the police varied, bringing up the possibility that he gave false testimony. And according to Miami attorney Kendall Coffey, this means that Zimmerman might very well have to take the stand.

“The most critical information in the trial could be his believability," Coffey says. "This defendant is asserting self-defense and it would be very difficult to assert self-defense without taking the stand to explain how it happened. All the more difficult if the police are holding in their hands contradictory accounts."

Mudslinging and attack ads in the sunshine state

We all know about attack ads. In fact, in an election cycle a certain amount of misleading mudslinging is expected.  But in Florida, at least, some candidates are fighting back.

Back when the recent health care bill was passed Republicans saw a chance to label the Democrats as anti-Medicare.  How?  Well, while the bill actually increases Medicare spending from $560 billion this year to $1.04 trillion in ten years, the health care bill does assume that during that time the program will result in savings of about $500 billion- mostly through increased efficiency.

But rather than explaining all of this, Republicans are just labeling the savings as cuts and telling the public that the Democrats are cutting Medicare by $500 billion.  And they’re using those numbers in a recent set of attack ads.

Not everyone is content to simply get angry at the misinformation, however.  Senator Bill Nelson, Democrat, has embarked upon a quest to get those ads off the air.  In a letter written by his attorney, former U.S. Attorney Kendall Coffey, he explains that these letters are blatantly untrue.

And stations have “a duty to protect the public from the spread of false information and deliberate deception,” writes Coffey.

Not that such letters will have made much a difference so far.  Several stations have rejected the letter from Coffey and will continue showing the messages.  But it’s nice to have someone who is willing to fight back.

Zimmerman's former attorneys' actions baffling

The Atlantic Wire has an interesting piece analyzing the actions of George Zimmerman's former attorneys, an piece that comes to the conclusion that perhaps they were the ones that went rogue, not their client.  Some of the reasons include:

They gave a press conference.  Dropping a client isn't unusual, lawyers do it every day.  But quitting via press conference is highly unusual.

Kendall Coffey, a former U.S. Attorney in Miami and author of Spinning the Law, said Uhrig and Sonner's decision to hold a news conference was baffling. "The lawyers have every right to withdraw, but it's highly unusual," he said. "In the court of public opinion, the press conference was not helpful for George Zimmerman."

They discussed George Zimmerman's mental state: Describing Zimmerman as "emotionally crippled" and posssibly suffering from PTSD is not only in bad taste, it's unethical.

"It's unbelievable that you would get on television and talk about your client's mental state," Jose Baez, a criminal defense attorney told CNN last night. "What you have here, as an attorney, you have an ethical obligation to not only not post attorney-client communication but attorney-client confidence. Things you learn in the process of representing a client are considered confidential so any conversations they have are completely protected and the holder of this privilege is George Zimmerman ... It's reprehensible."

Other concerns include the fact that they only waited three days after not hearing from Zimmerman before having a press conference and that, through explaining this, they implied that Zimmerman might be a flight risk, therefore damaging his reputation. 

George Zimmerman arraignment is set for May 29

George Zimmerman, the neighborhood watchman who shot and killed Trayvon Martin, is scheduled for an arraignment on May 29th.  So far, he has not entered a plea.

His lawyer has requested that any future records in the case, including witness statements and identifying information, be completely sealed in order to prevent the case from being tried in the media.  The prosecution agreed, but will release a two-page affidavit supporting the state's second degree murder charge.

Of course, that's assuming that the charge sticks.  According to the Miami Herald, former Miami U.S. Attorney and author of Spinning the Law Kendall Coffey suggested the prosecution might not stay with the charge through trial. Mostly because a jury could, under some circumstances, toss the second-degree murder charge and convict of a lesser charge, such as manslaughter.  This is because in order to prove Zimmerman guilty of second-degree murder they will have to show that he acted with a depraved mind when he shot Trayvon.

“This is an aggressive charge,” Coffey said. “And there are times when an aggressive charge gives more incentive for the defendant to seek a plea. The vast majority of cases don’t go to trial and end in a plea.”

Read more here: http://www.miamiherald.com/2012/04/12/v-fullstory/2744193/george-zimmerman-charged-with.html#storylink=cpy

Zimmerman Bond Not Unusual

Kendall Coffey, partner with Coffey Burlington and former U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of Florida, was featured in theGrio recently discussing the Trayvon Martin case and George Zimmerman-  especially the bail recently set by the judge in the case.  The amount of the bond was much lower than teh $1 million requested by the prosecution, and many are calling it a travesty.

"It shows you the worth of a 17-year-old black boy in America, who's been unjustly murdered and whose life is taken for granted," said Dr. Michael Eric Dyson, an MSNBC contributor and Georgetown University professor.

However, Kendall Coffey explained that the cost of a bail is based on the presumption  that defendants are innocent until proven guilty.

"Obviously, if this were Donald trump or Bill Gates accused of a crime, that would be grossly inadequate, but you cannot set a bond that a person could not possibly come up with," Coffey told theGrio. "From everything we saw, George Zimmerman is broke. His wife doesn't work, they don't own a home [they were renting the townhome in the Retreat at Twin Lakes gated community where Martin was killed.] There's no reason to believe that he could even bond out with $150,000."

 He also corrects the common misconception that Zimmerman would only have to come up with 10 percent of the $150,000 in order to be released.  While that 10% is the premium you pay the surety company most defendants still have to "fully collateralize that $150,000, meaning that either George Zimmerman or his parents have to come up with a $150,000 second mortgage on their house or from a bank. The bonding company is not a charity. They stand to lose the money. They have more than just fugitive hunters [to track down a defendant who flees.] They get collateral up front."

 Despite all the criticism, Kendall Coffey believes that the prosecution did the right thing.  "The prosecutor knew exactly wheat he was doing," Coffey explained. 

Why Agreeing to Bail for George Zimmerman Could Make Sense

Kendall Coffey on his Spinning the Law LinkedIn Discussion Group

Kendall Coffey's book Spinning the Law

Perhaps the special prosecutor should consider agreeing to bond for George Zimmerman rather than contesting it. While aggressive prosecutors are rarely enthusiastic about backing off on anything, and with a charge of second degree murder they can argue that he should be denied pretrial release, respect for the defendant's presumption of innocence and the reality that he does not seem to be a flight risk or a danger to others in the community is compelling.

Most importantly, however, agreeing to a bond with appropriate conditions could be in the prosecution 's best interest. If the special prosecutor opposes any form of pretrial release for Zimmerman, the defense will insist on a proceeding called an Arthur hearing, which is a hearing that determines whether the state's case is strong enough to eliminate the defendant's right to be released on bond.

Even in murder cases, a defendant is eligible for bond though the state can challenge that right “where the proof is evident or the presumption great.” In applying the Florida Constitution's provision concerning entitlement to bail, courts find that the burden on prosecutors is to show proof even greater than the standard needed for conviction, i.e., beyond a reasonable doubt.

Prosecutors can use transcripts and affidavits in an Arthur hearing, but it is not clear that meeting this enhanced burden will be easy for the murder charge against Zimmerman. They would likely to show most if not all of their best evidence, something the probable cause affidavit used for the arrest explicitly and strategically avoided.

If they try and fail, they run the risk that the court could enter an order that details any and all perceived weaknesses in their case. No such order would be admissible in a court of law before a jury, but it could be a jarring setback in the court of public opinion. For example, in the Kobe Bryant case, the Colorado court 's skepticism about the case against him was evident in the order that followed the preliminary hearing (and the weekending case was ultimately abandoned by the prosecution).

There is no need for prosecutors to expose all of their theories and evidence at this stage, nor can they be assured a favorable outcome. The right approach for George Zimmerman is pretrial release, perhaps home detention and electronic monitoring, with appropriate conditions.

Agreeing to that proposal could be not only the right thing for Zimmerman, it could be the correct move for the prosecution as well.

Kendall Coffey Speaks about George Zimmerman and Trayvon Martin Case

Kendall Coffey talks about the legal developments in the Trayvon Martin case and Florida’s “Stand Your Ground” law with MSNBC:  

Kendall Coffey urges public to be patient in Martin Case

Vote-Rich Florida Can Be Kind to Riches

Kendall Coffey on his Spinning the Law Discussion Group

Kendall Coffey

To many Floridians, the previous GOP Presidential contests in smaller states were sideshows.

Of the early primaries, only Florida has the size and diversity to truly reflect our nation. Although the race here is too close to call presently, Florida’s pivotal role could be good news for Mitt Romney. In the Sunshine State, a candidate’s bags of money do not seem to create much political baggage. Just ask our current Governor, Rick Scott.

The political novice ran in 2010 with very controversial wealth – Scott’s former company paid $1.7 billion in fines and damages for health care fraud. But his massive waves of television ads derailed a powerhouse primary opponent as well as a formidable Democrat in the general election. Romney’s Bain Capital issues pale in comparison to Scott’s problems (like taking the 5th Amendment dozens of times).

Throughout Florida, television executives are smiling about the medium’s critical role in the Presidential sweepstakes. While more than $13 million in pro-Romney funds have already been spent or committed – and more may be on the way – the Gingrich PAC has reportedly amassed at least $5 million. Much of the battle for Florida could turn on whose Super PAC can beat up the other – a candidate’s ground game may have too much ground to cover before January 31st.

Even so, Romney’s organization may have secured a crucial advantage with absentee voters. Plenty of them received mailings from the Romney campaign in December. Gingrich, whose organizational fumbling cost him a place on Virginia’s ballot, apparently missed that key opportunity. Like early voting, absentees make decisions before Election Day. Even with his recent surge, Gingrich may be too late for many of these voters.

Thanks to inconclusive results in the earlier states, Florida is positioned to deliver a powerful verdict in what has been a topsy-turvy GOP contest. Debates can be important, but wealth – tainted or not – can be a candidate’s best friend in a state too large for retail politics and with ten media markets that can be fed only by massive television dollars.

The Modern Employment Dilemma – Zero Job Prospects or Zero Privacy

Kendall Coffey on his Spinning the Law LinkedIn Discussion group

Kendall Coffey

Companies that want to avoid and minimize criticism or high-­profile embarrassment from Facebook and other means are increasingly conducting more thorough background investigations to monitor their employees. As a result, employees should be aware that they may suffer consequences for publishing words they had deemed innocent or private.

While most established companies have a policy or an employee manual that specifically gives the employer full permission to review what its employees are browsing online, this is very different from investigating an employee’s personal Facebook account and penalizing him or her for that content.

Several states are now considering legislation to control this breach of privacy. In the meantime, everyone from student-athletes who risk losing scholarships to prospective employees who risk not getting hired must endure this advanced scrutiny. While companies and employers are jusifiably concerned with protecting their brand, entering someone’s Facebook account provides access to private communications that reveal information on the author’s personal thoughts and viewpoints.

The courts soon might have to rule on whether this is overreaching by employers. With private employers in an at-will state that can terminate an employee for any reason besides an illegal one of discrimination, it is difficult to prevail in a legal challenge, but public employers are subject to a number of Constitutional provisions.

Student-athletes have a stronger position, for example, than a prison guard or law enforcement official because society demands a more exacting scrutiny in certain areas of employment where public security and pubic interest are an issue.

Unless legislation is passed to protect student-athletes and employees from their respective universities and employers, this society will inevitably become one in which public and private information mesh until the lines between them are indistinguishable, bringing us closer to Orwell’s prophetic '1984' state.

Kendall Coffey on the Trayvon Martin Case

According to MSNBC George Zimmerman is likely to be tried before a jury in Sanford, Fla., where the killing took place Feb. 26, though defense attorneys may argue that the trial should be moved to another jurisdiction, according to NBC News. Two attorneys who earlier worked with Zimmerman quit the case on Tuesday.

In an interview, NBC News legal analyst Kendall Coffey a former federal prosecutor and author of Spinning the Law, called the charges "aggressive," and Corey's presentation of seeking justice in the case "masterful" for emphasizing that she was following the law. Shortly before the charge was announced, Coffey said prosecutors likely face a difficult time at trial.


“Bottom line is there is very big difference between a righteous prosecution and an easy prosecution,” Coffey told msnbc TV. “I think she believes in her heart and in her mind that this is a righteous prosecution and the chips are going to fall where they may.”