Ben Crump is often identified as the “Martin family attorney.” This implies that the Martin family always had some attorney they used for routine matters like setting up trust funds and managing their portfolio of real estate investments.
But that’s not the case at all. Ben crump is profiled in the FSU Law alumni magazine. He’s a partner in a successful “African-American” owned personal injury law firm, and he is longtime buddies with the Reverends Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson as seen in the many pictures accompanying the article.
So that explains why the threesome are involved together in the same case. They’re three race hustlers working together. Crump is probably not doing this for charity, but because he hopes to score a big lawsuit against somebody.
It should also be noted that Crump has never practiced criminal law, even though he has been putting himself forth as some sort of expert on the subject of George Zimmerman’s guilt.
* * *
Lexus Liberal writes:
This is a lost case, why would any rational individual hire a non-criminal attorney for a criminal case? It's an insult to all lawyers, especially since criminal vs. civil proceedings differ greatly.
It would have made more sense to hire a reputable criminal attorney to get the conviction then hire a civil liability attorney for compensation.
1. I’m pretty sure that Ben Crump insinuated himself and it was not the Martin family who used their high IQs to figure out the best attorney to hire.
2. Ben Crump’s angle may be to sue the homeowner association.
3. The Martins don't need a criminal attorney anyway. I haven't heard that they are being accused of any crimes.
Have you seen this website that Trayvon's parents has set up for donations?
https://www.wepay.com/donations/3819
So far they have raised almost $19000. Is this $$$ being used to pay for Mr. Crump's services? Where is the money going?
Posted by: Jennifer Caplan-Jones | March 29, 2012 at 04:08 PM
It interests me how little discussion there is about the paucity of black trial lawyers in this country. If you stop and think about it, given blacks' loquatiousness and facility with simple rhymes, they'd seem to be a natural for the courtroom. Add in 25 yrs. of affirmative action in the law schools, and you'd think they'd be a significant presence by now, but beyond Johnny Cochran, Willie Gary and John Burris (the Bay Area Cochran), I can't think of a single one. I think if I had a case that hinged on getting in some evidence of doubtful admissibility, I'd want a black lawyer, cuz he/she would have a good shot at a sympathy ruling, since judges, like the ABA generally, like to think of themselves as social progressives. I'll never forget the time I saw a black lawyer, in need of an unusual discovery ruling, drop to his knees in a judge's chambers and whine, "oh please judge, please please, I need this so bad!" The response was, "Gabe, get off your knees." But I think he got what he wanted.
Posted by: alonzo portfolio | March 29, 2012 at 04:18 PM
I'll never forget the time I saw a black lawyer, in need of an unusual discovery ruling, drop to his knees in a judge's chambers and whine, "oh please judge, please please, I need this so bad!" The response was, "Gabe, get off your knees." But I think he got what he wanted.
LOL
Posted by: Anonymous | March 29, 2012 at 04:42 PM
alonzo, at one time blacks were good BSers. Even Booker worried that his students at Tuskegee gravitated too much toward oratory rather than real work.
But, you know, I think they're losing it - their ability to speak - along with their music, and what literature they had for awhile. Black striving seemed to peak around 1960 and it's been downhill ever since.
Posted by: jeanne | March 29, 2012 at 04:42 PM
Amazing that blacks know how much they have the gift of gab, yet still let pastors rook them out of their money on Sundays. Talk about money grabs...
Posted by: g | March 29, 2012 at 05:24 PM
"...along with their music ...": ah, their Armstrong, Waller, Ellington........
Sad, isn't it?
Posted by: dearieme | March 29, 2012 at 05:27 PM
"Black striving seemed to peak around 1960 and it's been downhill ever since." - jeanne
Without the strict hand of white discipline the negro has reverted back to the state of nature. No Child Left Behind should have prioritized bootcamp style schools for NAMs and dysfunctional prole children. That would have been real reform.
Posted by: Conquistador | March 29, 2012 at 06:14 PM
This Trayvon Martin case cannot be good for Obama's reelection hopes.
Anything that puts Sharpton and Jackson out front and center in Democratic-leaning circles is not good for Obama.
Posted by: Camlost | March 29, 2012 at 06:18 PM
here's the hispanics on zimmerman
http://dailycaller.com/2012/03/29/latino-organizations-dismiss-george-zimmerman-question-his-ethnicity/
Posted by: Anonymous | March 29, 2012 at 06:31 PM
"Ben Crump is often identified as the “Martin family attorney.” This implies that the Martin family always had some attorney they used for routine matters like setting up trust funds and managing their portfolio of real estate investments."
Dry, very dry.
Posted by: Gilbert Pinfold | March 29, 2012 at 09:39 PM
This is a lost case, why would any rational individual hire a non-criminal attorney for a criminal case? It's an insult to all lawyers, especially since criminal vs. civil proceedings differ greatly.
It would have made more sense to hire a reputable criminal attorney to get the conviction then hire a civil liability attorney for compensation.
Posted by: Lexus Liberal | March 29, 2012 at 11:11 PM
Saw,heard him tonight. How the heck did he ever pass a bar exam?
Posted by: g | March 29, 2012 at 11:58 PM
"The Martins don't need a criminal attorney anyway. I haven't heard that they are being accused of any crimes."
My mistake, I should have clarified that they should be hiring their own private criminal prosecutor, unlike a court appointed public servant. It would be easier for a private "firm" to transfer the case into a civil lawsuit later and seek compensation for emotional duress or wrongful death claim.
Posted by: Lexus Liberal | March 30, 2012 at 01:04 AM
"2. Ben Crump’s angle may be to sue the homeowner association."
Well, of course. Somebody has to pay and they're the only ones with deep pockets. They probably have a million dollar insurance policy.
Posted by: AllanF | March 30, 2012 at 01:16 AM
He appears to specialize in wrongful death suits so he can definitely advise the family on the legal implications of various facts about the case as they reveal themselves. And he is also adept at manipulating the media which is the only reason any of us even care about the case to begin with. And they have a right to sue Zimmerman, the police, or the homeowners association if the facts bear it out.
I really thought he came off as unprofessional and strip mall lawyerey but he has a very nice web site ( http://parkscrump.com/ ). He takes cases that tend to result in rallies attended by Jackson and Sharpton but they dont appear that connected. http://tinyurl.com/72yjmtq All the photos of Crump with Jackson and Sharpton in the pdf are from one of those rallies.
Posted by: Anon E. Mouse | March 30, 2012 at 01:30 AM
HS: I am enjoying your posts on this issue. However, you may want to police your comments more carefully. A number of the above responses are just racist and pejorative comments on black people which do not contribute anything to your post. I suggest that you consider deleting them.
Posted by: gaiaguy | March 30, 2012 at 03:11 AM
HS,
You should be writing about the long-term implications of this case.
Homeowners associations may want to ban neighborhood watch efforts due to legal risks. Maybe even coordinating effort with local police will not be frowned upon,.
Homeowners associations and whites may want to think twice about calling 911. Look at how the media has used Zimmerman's 911 call history to portray him as a racist. I would guess that lawyers will begin to advise people to not call 911 and that homeowners insurance companies will be reviewing home much people call 911 to manage risks.
I also suspect that police departments will get the lesson once again to avoid blacks and black crime. There is, now, no upside to trying to arrest blacks for anything. The only people who will get police protection in the future will be rich whites who can force the police to do their jobs.
Posted by: superdestroyer | March 30, 2012 at 08:10 AM
@ Anonymous March29, 6:31:
I read that article. And as a Hispanic, it irritates me how they side with the thug who was behaving suspiciously rather than the guy looking out for his community.
Posted by: famously nameless | March 30, 2012 at 08:22 AM
Sir, please conduct better research...Parks and Crump has done dozens of criminal cases and they often settle out of court.
Posted by: Kendall | April 02, 2012 at 10:03 PM