Legal legend Alan Dershowitz blasted the special prosecutor in the Trayvon Martin case, accusing her of hiding evidence favorable to defendant George Zimmerman and committing perjury.

“If I were this prosecutor, I’d be hiring a lawyer at this point,” Dershowitz said of Angela Cory, the Florida state attorney and special prosecutor who Gov. Rick Scott appointed to handle the case.

Dershowitz leveled his bombshell charges in an interview Wednesday with Fox News' Megyn Kelly. The Harvard law professor, noted for winning an acquittal of Claus Von Bulow in the case that inspired the film “Reversal of Fortune,” said Cory overreached by charging Zimmerman with second-degree murder. And he said the affidavit she filed in support of the charges was illegal because it did not include evidence favorable to Zimmerman.

“This affidavit submitted by the prosecutor in the Florida case is a crime,” Dershowitz said. “It’s a crime.”

Zimmerman, 28, is a neighborhood watch captain who admits shooting the unarmed 17-year-old Martin on Feb. 26 after a confrontation in the gated community where he lives, but Zimmerman claims he acted in self-defense.

ABC News recently aired a photo purportedly taken minutes after the shooting that shows a bloody wound on the back of Zimmerman’s head. That photo appears to support Zimmerman’s contention that he was being beaten by the teen when he shot him.

But Cory made no mention of Zimmerman’s wounds or photos that might substantiate them when announcing the charge on April 11. Dershowitz said she was obligated to include any and all pertinent evidence.

“If she in fact knew about ABC News’ pictures of the bloody head of Zimmerman and failed to include that in the affidavit, this affidavit is not the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth,” Dershowitz said. “It’s a perjurious affidavit.”

Even worse, Dershowitz warned that by overcharging Zimmerman, Cory may have planted the seed for riots if he is acquitted, as Dershowitz predicted will happen.

“If there are riots, it will be the prosecutor’s fault because she overcharged, raised expectations,” Dershowitz said. “This prosecutor not only may have suborned perjury, she may be responsible, if there are going to be riots here, for raising expectations to unreasonable levels.”

He said it is quite possible Zimmerman was guilty of a lesser charge, but the affidavit does not support a second-degree murder charge.

“There’s nothing in this affidavit that suggests second-degree murder. The elements of second-degree murder aren’t here."

Dershowitz is not the first legal expert to question the second-degree murder charge. The Florida statute requires proof that the defendant acted in a manner that was “evincing a depraved mind.” Prominent Miami criminal defense attorney John Priovolos told The Associated Press the charge was a “huge overreach” and said Corey will be hard-pressed to show Zimmerman had the “ill will, spite, malice or hatred” needed to prove a “depraved mind.”

If convicted of the second-degree charge, Zimmerman could face a maximum sentence of life in prison. Cory could still add charges, and a jury could eventually convict him of a “lesser included” charge, such as reckless manslaughter.

When announcing the charge, Cory expressed confidence in her team’s case.

"We have to have a reasonable certainty of conviction before filing charges," Cory said.

But Dershowitz said Cory is the one who should be facing charges, arguing that her prosecution of the case has already taken a political turn.

“She was appointed to get Zimmerman,” Dershowitz said.

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/us/2012/04/25/dershowitz-trayvon-prosecutor-overreached-with-murder-charge/#ixzz1tAJU91Rb

Dershowitz said she was obligated to include any and all pertinent evidence.

Im not sure what law this person studied or what documents he was privy to being not on the case, but this is BLATANTLY false in regards to bringing charges

'all' the evidence does not have to be included in the initial filing,,

I am confident an actual CURRENT PROSECUTOR AND JUDGE are aware of the mandates,,,,,law professor or not,,

So you know more then an accomplished attorney? Interesting.

the piece says he is a LAW PROFESSOR (used to be attorney)

it would be interesting if he knew more than a CURRENT sitting judge and prosecutor...

He still is admitted to the bar and the Supreme Court. Maybe you should look at a couple of the cases he won including a huge case that was adapted into a major motion picture.

last one I found was in 1984...(unless you count his counsel to OJ in 1995) as I said

the CURRENT legal representatives of Florida probably are more aware of Florida mandates than a Harvard Law Professor

So your saying a Harvard Law Professor doesn't know what he's talking about? Becareful your talking about the same law school taught by the same people that your savior attended.

Oh yeah, he was counsel on a case in 2006 for Jeffrey Epstein on a major sex offense case that got bumped down to a single BS count. The guy knows what he is doing and what he is talking about.

what case has he won in FLORIDA in the past ten years?

Im saying a law professor who has not worked in Florida law, or as an actual lawyer(as opposed to a counsel to the lawyers) in over a decade, probably doesnt know as much about what the Florida courts require as a sitting Florida judge,,,and prosecutor,,,

Who cares? WHat case did Johnny Cochran win in the other VARIOUS states he represented people in(Other then California and New York).

he is not making claims about Johnny Cochran,, an inactive attorney from Massachusetts, is probably not more knowledgable about filing mandates in Florida as a sitting and current judge and prosecutor....