The George Zimmerman Trial- Page 21

[Kad]

Posted: 7/25/13 at 4:09pm

These jurors need to shut up.

[Wynbish]

Posted: 7/25/13 at 4:11pm

They're not doing themselves any favors, nor are they doing Florida's justice system's reputation any favors.

I think it's just all about the moolah for them.

[Kad]

Posted: 7/25/13 at 4:12pm

I feel bad. I mean, imagine weighing in on a publicized trial without being able to have interviews! I can only imagine the pain.

[Wynbish]

Posted: 7/25/13 at 4:16pm

Can't blame her, though. I mean, God forbid Trayvon's family be upset at you when you say he deserved to be shot. Clear that air, girl!

A highly controversial verdict, and the nation gets to hear one of the only six jurors who gave it say, "...Well, damn." at a time when the verdict is obviously irreversible.

Thanks for your service, Juror B-Whatever. Now, shut up.

Updated On: 7/25/13 at 04:16 PM

[Liza's Headband]

Posted: 7/25/13 at 4:51pm

Is the one who reportedly held out and threatened to leave in the middle of deliberations for "personal reasons?"

[brdlwyr]

Posted: 7/26/13 at 8:57am

I agree - these jurors need to shut up! Nauseating!

[henrikegerman]

Posted: 7/26/13 at 2:57pm

"Can't blame her, though. I mean, God forbid Trayvon's family be upset at you when you say he deserved to be shot. Clear that air, girl!"

Leaving aside whether or not we agree with this particular verdict, there is a huge difference between saying that someone deserved to be shot and saying that the prosecution didn't prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant shot him without legal justification.



Updated On: 7/26/13 at 02:57 PM

[suestorm]

Posted: 7/26/13 at 3:03pm

very true. dont blame the jury, the prosecuters should be held accountable for over reaching. same thing happened in Casey Anthony trial. if the prosecutors didnt try for the death penalty, Casey would be in jail right now.

[Wynbish]

Posted: 7/26/13 at 3:13pm

Henrik, valid point.

I think one of the best things the defense did was use the "burden of proof" chart.



It told the jury that even if he was most likely guilty, that's still a "not guilty" verdict.

I just question this juror's need to apologize to the parents because she "let them down". I generally question any juror who speaks to the national media. What good comes from it, except for the specific juror to feel less uneasy?

[henrikegerman]

Posted: 7/26/13 at 3:14pm

Sue, while I have serious doubts whether the prosecution tried this case as well as they should have, for a variety of reasons, I disagree that overcharging was the problem here.

There was a legitimate view of the case that this was murder, and, more importantly, including a top count which the prosecution may well not succeed at getting a conviction for (for instance murder), in the hopes of having the jury reach a compromise verdict to a lesser charge (such as manslaughter) is a common and legitimate trial strategy which often succeeds. That's not even bothering to consider the political ramifications of not charging murder in this particular case, which bring up a great many concerns.

To suggest that this jury would have convicted of manslaughter had it been the top count they were asked to consider, when they acquitted of manslaughter here after having acquitted of murder, is speculative and unpersuasive hindsight. In addition, though it is far from conclusive, nothing any of the jurors have said suggests that these six people would have agreed to convict of manslaughter had that been the top count. Self-defense operates the same, at least theoretically, for murder or manslaughter.

If the prosecution had charged manslaughter as the top count and still gotten an acquittal, I can almost guarantee you that many would be suggesting that the prosecution made a grave error in not charging murder and that failing to do so prevented a likely compromise verdict - of course that opinion would be equally speculative.

Hindsight is always 20/20.

Updated On: 7/26/13 at 03:14 PM

[suestorm]

Posted: 7/26/13 at 3:23pm

you might be right Henrik, i do think however that the pressure from the outside... the press, the protests and even the President of United States gave the prosecution a false sense of security, or maybe made them go to trial when in another case they mightve waited. but as Jack McCoy has said, you can never tell how a jury is going to go

Updated On: 7/26/13 at 03:23 PM

[Wynbish]

Posted: 7/26/13 at 3:29pm

Trayvon's mother: 'It is devastating for my family to hear the comments from juror B29'

[romantico]

Posted: 7/27/13 at 7:26pm

George Zimmerman’s heroic car crash rescue appears to be a fraud

We have seen news reports of protesters doing thousands of dollars of damage to be wrong. The claims of separate attacks by protesters over the Zimmerman verdict turned out to be false. Now added to the list of false news reports appears to be the story of George Zimmerman heroically rescuing a family of four from a burning SUV.

The initial report was that George Zimmerman was ‘just coincidentally’ driving by after a car accident occurred, that he leaped out of his vehicle to come to the rescue of the family of four trapped inside as the vehicle caught fire, pulling them to safety. That was followed by the claim that the family he rescued had planned a press event to thank George Zimmerman, but that they canceled due to threats from Trayvon Martin supporters.

It appears they may have canceled the event because they did not want to be part of the fraud of making Zimmerman out to be a hero, when that story was not precisely true.

http://ivn.us/penigma/2013/07/25/george-zimmermans-heroic-car-crash-rescue-appears-to-be-a-fraud/

So, Mark O'Mara went on Piers Morgan show talking about this knowing it was not true. UNREAL!

Updated On: 7/27/13 at 07:26 PM

[henrikegerman]

Posted: 7/27/13 at 8:16pm

The defense's summation was extremely well done. O"Mara has a very compelling style and was clearly doing a very good job on behalf of his client and from what I could tell the prosecution was outclassed; they could have done a much better job of focusing the jury's attention on the facts that I keep coming back to which convince me of Zimmerman's guilt (the screaming stopping when the gun was fired, why if it had been Zimmerman wouldn't he have continued crying out for help especially if he didn't know at first that Martin was dead? Isn't it strange that if it had been Zimmerman calling out for help that he wouldn't have continued to do so, continued to try to get help because he hd just shot the man, especially if he had just gotten his head beaten as he states and was in that much pain? Does this make any sen se at all? That the shot rings out and the yelling stops? No, the reason the shot rang out and the yelling stops is clear; it's because the person doing the yelling was dead! And there's another reason why we know the yelling was Trayvon Martin's - George Zimmerman himself heard the tape and said the voice yelling for helo wasn't his! Of course it's quite possible to not recognize one's own voice on tape, but that's beside the point. Zimmerman knew he was listening to the last minutes of Trayvon Martin's life, knew he was listening to the moments before he pulled that trigger - if it had been him yelling for help nd not Trayvon Martin, than Zimmerman would have clearly said that the voice was his because he would have known it was his cries - he was there, he knows who was crying out for help, there's no reason he would say it wasn't his own voice crying out for help if it had been - no,the reason he said it wasn't his voice was because it wasn't his voice, it was the voice of Trayvon Martin clling for help, calling for help as if his life depended on it!)
In New York few judges would allow either side to instruct the jury on the law anywhere near the extent that was permitted in that closing argument. Most judges feel that it is the court's responsibility to explain the law to the jury and the defense's and prosecution's roles in closing argument are of a very different stripe. Accordingly they allow the attorneys to apply the facts to the law (there's reasonable doubt because we know from witness A that when x happened, all the defendant was doing was y, and therefore....) but not to take it upon themselves to actually give the legal standards to the jury (reasonable doubt exists if you reach any of these conclusions on this chart from he clearly didn't act without justification to he might not have acted with justification but I have reasons why I can't be completely certain).




Updated On: 7/29/13 at 08:16 PM

[artscallion]

Posted: 7/27/13 at 9:25pm

Here's an interesting Slate article that exposes that the juror's comments were highly edited and intentionally taken out of context.
SURPRISE, SURPRISE THE MEDIA LIES

[best12bars]

Posted: 7/31/13 at 5:36pm

Seriously?


George Zimmerman stopped by cops, packing heat

[romantico]

Posted: 11/18/13 at 3:03pm

Murderer George Zimmerman Arrested After Disturbance Call

http://www.mediaite.com/online/breaking-george-zimmerman-arrested-after-disturbance-call/

Wonder who he will MURDER Next?

[best12bars]

Posted: 11/18/13 at 3:17pm

I'm sure he was just standing his ground.

[Roscoe]

Posted: 11/18/13 at 3:26pm

He's been arrested more often than Trayvon Martin ever was.

[romantico]

Posted: 11/18/13 at 3:36pm

Well, this is his new girlfriend (FYI, he is STILL Married)Just wait. It will all be her fault just like his estranged wife was the reason for his last arrest. Just like Trayvon Martin was at fault and so on. This man has been arrested three times since July. He apparently has anger issues and he owns multiple guns.

Does anyone seriously think he will not kill again?

[Jordan Catalano]

Posted: 11/18/13 at 4:10pm

"He's been arrested more often than Trayvon Martin ever was."

I really like that. I'm going to steal it and use it.

[SNAFU]

Posted: 11/18/13 at 5:24pm

Yes, he was standing his ground and she walked into his balled fist a half dozen times. Leave the guy alone!

[Sutton Ross]

Posted: 11/18/13 at 5:25pm

Since you're an insane, ridiculous, angry, wanna be bully who pretends he runs these boards....that makes perfect sense. If you ever say that in public, chances are you will get assaulted. People can only home, right? :)

Updated On: 11/18/13 at 05:25 PM

[IAMWHATIAM]

Posted: 11/18/13 at 6:17pm

Sutton Ross,

I’m sure it made sense in your head, but what do you think you just said, and to whom did you say it? I’m curious and can’t follow as it doesn't make sense.

[TheatreDiva90016]

Posted: 11/18/13 at 7:45pm

Did Sutton Ross just hope that a board member gets assaulted in public?

I can't tell, since their post is such a mess.