Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The jurors (except for B37), along with a good share of Amercans, are having difficulties reconciling the concepts of justice under law and social justice. While their decision respected legal justice it was an affront to social justice.
I underestimated the jury's willingness to follow the law. Turns out they did. Good for them.
Your wrongful conviction/DNA meme is in whodunits, not cases like this where we and the jury know whodunit.
Could be they got it wrong. maybe gz swung at tm, missed, tm defended himself by punching gz, gz stumbled, got the injuries hitting the ground, pulled his gun, blahblahblah, maybemaybemaybe.
The state did not have the evidence to prove the case. Now people like you blame the correct legal verdict on a rotten prosecutor, a dominatrix stealth juror who controlled 3 submissive women. I'm even seeing knuckleheads blaming Nelson for pro-defense bias.
Anything except gz was Not Guilty.
You missed the point. Wrongful convictions, just like not guilty for someone who was clearly guilty, happen in the system. BOTH things happen. That's just the way it is. People charged with other crimes than murder are also wrongfully convicted....again, see INNOCENCE PROJECT.
"people like you"..."dominatrix stealth juror"...."knuckleheads"..."rotten prosecutor"..."wrongful conviction/DNA meme".....do you think if you tried a little harder you could come up with more name-calling. Also, Mr. Jazzarama, how many capital cases have you worked or even observed as a citizen in your local court house?
Pure and simple, Juror B37 said several truths in her interview w/Anderson Cooper, and it pissed a lot of people off. The fact that 3 of the jurors were originally considering anything other than a not guilty verdict but then wound up unanimously declaring a not guilty verdict says a lot. Clearly, those 3 jurors were planning to use emotions (rather than evidence) to arrive at a verdict.
Simply put, that is what happens when you select a dumb juror. B37 was proud of announcing, during jury selection, that she does not read newspapers nor does she watch any news. When you're not curious about anything, that usually mean's you're not smart. Whatever beliefs and views she has, she's not open to expanding her knowledge base.
Exactly. Some people boast about never reading the news/newspapers. Those people are usually stuck in their ways and unwilling to consider possibilities other than preconceived ideas and thoughts that they hold. A terrible juror for this trial.
They cannot remove anyone they want in fact 2 jurors the prosecution wanted eliminated ended up being seated. Maybe you can argue they used their elimination powers wrong but they didn't choose their jury.
You are correct, but the state did not even try to strike B37, so they did agree to this juror. The ones they tried to strike that ended up being seated were E6 and B76.
They tried 3 separate times to strike E6. It would be really interesting to hear from her since the prosecution was so determined to strike her.
One more note on the thread in general- B37 said her husband is a "space attorney" so I don't find it that odd that they wouldn't have discussed this case.
If he was a defense attorney who spent a lot of time at the courthouse, that might be different. Bernie had to ask her during voir dire what a space attorney does.
My husband is a software engineer, but we don't discuss every big new technology things that are in the news, we only talk about some of the direct competitor news.
So now attack the jury too? Anybody not fair game in this ridiculous fiasco that is being played out. I wonder what that evil court reporter was up to the whole trial?? I bet nothing good.
Regardless of the outcome of this trial, the jury was going to be attacked. I cannot imagine the outrage if the outcome had been different and the jury been comprised of 4 black and one mixed race woman.
Anything short of 5 white guys would have been up for grabs.
Pure and simple, Juror B37 said several truths in her interview w/Anderson Cooper, and it pissed a lot of people off. The fact that 3 of the jurors were originally considering anything other than a not guilty verdict but then wound up unanimously declaring a not guilty verdict says a lot. Clearly, those 3 jurors were planning to use emotions (rather than evidence) to arrive at a verdict.
You'd be surprised how many would cave to group pressure when you've been sequestered and just want the whole thing to be over. If you have folks sticking to their "not guilty" guns and you don't see an end in sight, you might just change your vote. Not saying that's what happened here, but some people are underestimating the power of peer pressure (explicit and otherwise).
Regardless of the outcome of this trial, the jury was going to be attacked. I cannot imagine the outrage if the outcome had been different and the jury been comprised of 4 black and one mixed race woman.
Anything short of 5 white guys would have been up for grabs.
It would have been terrible, right? Remember all those nationwide protests and calls for DOJ investigations after the OJ trial?
Simply put, that is what happens when you select a dumb juror. B37 was proud of announcing, during jury selection, that she does not read newspapers nor does she watch any news. When you're not curious about anything, that usually mean's you're not smart. Whatever beliefs and views she has, she's not open to expanding her knowledge base.
Now she is dumb and not smart because she said in an interview that she doesn't watch the news? Hell that makes her one of the few who hasn't been lead on by the propaganda unit. To you that means your not smart. Any other choice words you have for this jurist who you don't even know personally or don't know all the evidence they looked at?? I'm sure you have plenty. Of course she would be a hero if she convicted Zimmerman on no evidence to appease the mob in your eyes I'm sure. Thankfully our justice system doesn't work like that and this person and the other jurists ruled on evidence not emotion.
Exactly. Some people boast about never reading the news/newspapers. Those people are usually stuck in their ways and unwilling to consider possibilities other than preconceived ideas and thoughts that they hold. A terrible juror for this trial.
Preconceived ideas and thoughts? You mean like innocent until PROVEN guilty? Things like that?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
