By Guy Page
Chittenden County State’s Attorney Sarah George’s statement calling the November 25 shooting of three Palestinian men in Burlington a “hateful act” may have violated Vermont’s code of conduct for prosecutors, a vocal critic of George’s said.
That code requires prosecutors to “refrain from making extrajudicial comments that have a substantial likelihood of heightening public condemnation of the accused.” But Alan Zeltserman said that’s what George did when she accused the alleged shooter of “a hateful act.”
Zeltserman is the brother of Amy FitzGerald, whose murderer, husband Gregory FitzGerald was sentenced to life without parole. This September FitzGerald was denied parole despite an effort by George to secure a post-conviction change of sentence. George has publicly opposed sentences of life without parole. Due in part to testimony by Zeltserman, a retired attorney, the Vermont Parole Board denied parole this September.
In an email this morning, Zeltserman took issue with part of a statement made by George at a press conference following the arrest of Jason Eaton, 48, for the shooting:
“And although we do not yet have evidence to support that this was a hate crime enhancement, I want to be clear that there is no question that this was a hateful act.”
“Concerning Sarah George’s “hateful act” comments, you may want to look at Vermont Rules Of Professional Conduct Rule 3.8(f) — Special Responsibilities Of A Prosecutor,” Zeltserman wrote to VDC. He then quoted:
“The prosecutor in a criminal case shall: . . . (f) except for statements that are necessary to inform the public of the nature and extent of the prosecutor’s action and that serve a legitimate law enforcement purpose, refrain from making extrajudicial comments that have a substantial likelihood of heightening public condemnation of the accused and exercise reasonable care to prevent investigators, law enforcement personnel, employees or other persons assisting or associated with the prosecutor in a criminal case who are in the employment or under the control of the prosecutor from making an extrajudicial statement that the prosecutor would be prohibited from making under Rule 3.6 or this rule.
“See also, Bar Counsel Michael Kennedy’s December 14, 2018 blog discussing the rule, ‘Lesson from a disbarred prosecutor: don’t post that.’
“For whatever reason, the press in Vermont keeps on giving Sarah George a pass on this sort of conduct. For example, she made a number of head turning comments when discussing the Giancarlo DiGenova case in March.”
DiGenova, a state trooper, pleaded innocent in March to removing a Rolex watch from an evidence room. George said he had betrayed the public trust and should never work as a police officer in Vermont again.
VDC’s efforts to contact George’s office for comment earlier this week resulted in a returned email saying it had been “blocked.” The single phone number for the Chittenden County SA office goes to a pandemic-era recording which says most of the staff work from home and that messages are checked once a day. The call has not been returned.
Discover more from Vermont Daily Chronicle
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Categories: Uncategorized









Well, I am both surprised… and not surprised. One still holds out hope that fairness, justice and honor would prevail but no longer shocked when it doesn’t.
I noticed that comment but… didn’t catch the apparent overreach by the AG. Nice job Mr. Page. Nice job.
still waiting for my post
Because of this comment, she should retire her services.
With so little known about the incident, how can she know if it was hateful or not? Boggles the mind how these political stooges get a free pass when affirming the main streams desired narrative.
We’ve heard of legislating from the bench. George appears to enjoy legislating from the bar. There’s only one of the three branches of government entrusted to legislate, and it’s neither the bench nor the bar.
If given the chance sara will move this to family court
Thjree unarmed kids walking back from dinner at their uncles house get shot. I’m no Sarah George fan but what’s not hateful about the act?
Ethics violation – will she be held to account by her felllow officers of the court or given a pass? Her public comment taints a potential jury pool. Her opinion in a private setting is mute, but saying it to the press in her “official” capacity displays prejudice and jeopardizes the accused’s right to a fair trial and defense. Of course, that is only if there is a fair and ethical justice system in Vermont anymore – hard to tell based on what we see unfold on a daily basis. The clown show continues…carry on!
Will try again…..so here is an easy low-lying rancid piece of fruit that might serve those in Vermont to be removed. Yet no body notice the stench of lies, the stench of propaganda, the stench of an agenda not or republic origin.
And still those of whom gather in the name of the republic, that reside in the state of green mountains do what?
Nothing
Nothing
Nothing
Nothing
And they lead a party with a gentleman whom has the “highest” rating of all said people party with the name republic.
Perhaps a rewording shall get past the monitoring of commentary. Me thinks AI is really a program of propaganda control…..