Lawyer Warns LA DA’s Incompetence Could Jeopardize Case Against Convicted Child Killer- FInd Out details

In February, after a lengthy trial, a Los Angeles jury found socialite Rebecca Grossman guilty of killing two young brothers, Jacob and Mark Iskander, ages 8 and 11, in a horrific crash in 2020. Grossman had been street racing her former boyfriend, ex-MLB player Scott Erickson, while under the influence of alcohol and drugs when she struck the boys in a crosswalk. In this article we talk about why Lawyer Warns LA DA’s Incompetence Could Jeopardize Case Against Convicted Child Killer.

The boys’ grief-stricken mother, Nancy Iskander, barely managed to pull her third son out of harm’s way as Grossman’s speeding Mercedes plowed into the children. Now, just weeks after Grossman’s conviction, concerns have been raised about potential incompetence and corruption in the Los Angeles District Attorney’s office that could jeopardize her sentencing and lead to appeals.

Potential Conflicts of Interest and Appeals

Specifically, questions center around Diana Teran, formerly the number three prosecutor in DA George Gascon’s office who indirectly supervised the Grossman prosecution. Teran was recently charged with 11 felonies for alleged misconduct during her time in the LA County Sheriff’s department and DA’s office. After her own indictment, Teran hired defense attorney James Spertus—the same lawyer who signed on to Grossman’s legal team shortly after her conviction.

Critics like attorney Nathan Hochman, who is challenging Gascon in the next election, argue this creates an “insane” conflict of interest. He warns that Grossman and potentially many other defendants overseen by Teran could now claim they deserve a retrial. While Teran did not personally try Grossman’s case, her senior management role still leaves questions about what she knew and when. Hochman blasted both Teran and Gascon’s leadership as “incompetent” and said this kind of scandal would almost never happen under typical management.

Most concerning is the lack of transparency around when the DA’s office learned of Teran’s alleged misconduct and ties to Spertus. The California Attorney General took over investigating Teran long before charges were filed, signaling Gascon was aware much earlier. Yet the Grossman prosecutors claim they only discovered Spertus was Teran’s lawyer at the same time as the media. The months-long lag raises red flags about why the conflict was not addressed sooner.

Victims’ Family Reacts to Prosecutors Being Removed

In another controversial move, last week the lead Grossman prosecutors, Ryan Gould and Jamie Castro, were abruptly pulled off the case without explanation. Their supervisor Garrett Dameron protested the decision as “unbelievable” in an email to Gascon’s second-in-command, Joseph Iniguez. The trial team had dedicated endless nights and weekends to securing a conviction, only to see their hard-won victory potentially in limbo.

The victims’ grieving mother, Nancy Iskander, initially decried the decision in a social media post, suggesting public pressure led to the prosecutors being reinstated. The DA’s office now claims Gould and Castro will stay on, assisted by the Major Crimes Division. But the mixed messages and disorder have planted seeds of doubt for Iskander and supporters about whether justice will truly be served.

Critics like Hochman contend the rapid reassignment of prosecutors post-conviction also demonstrates Gascon “has an anti-victim perspective.” He worries the emphasis seems to be on protecting the DA’s office rather than the family. Longtime friend of the Iskanders, Julie Cohen, agrees the priority should be removing defense lawyer Spertus from the case, not punishing the prosecution team.

Broader Questions About Gascon’s Leadership

More broadly, Hochman believes the Grossman debacle reflects Gascon’s pattern of “catastrophic incompetence” in appointing key leaders like Teran and Iniguez. He highlights Gascon’s lack of trial experience compared to most DAs. The concern is that if such missteps happen under the spotlight of a high-profile case like Grossman’s, even more dysfunction occurs behind the scenes in lower-visibility cases.

What happens next in the Grossman case remains to be seen. Her sentencing is still scheduled for early March, where she faces up to 34 years behind bars. However, the defense plans to contest the conviction and call for a retrial based on the questions surrounding Teran and her ties to Spertus. Hochman thinks the chances of jeopardizing the case rise the longer Spertus remains Grossman’s lawyer.

Ultimately, it will fall to the DA’s office to clearly lay out any conflict of interest argument before a judge. If Gascon’s team fails to articulate and address the swirling concerns around preferential treatment, political cronyism, and lack of transparency, public trust in the verdict against Rebecca Grossman hangs in the balance. And the chances increase that the woman who killed two innocent children could walk free. I sincerely hope you find this “Lawyer Warns LA DA’s Incompetence Could Jeopardize Case Against Convicted Child Killer- FInd Out details” article helpful.