SGirl
Peach Master   Posts: 925 (925 all sites) Registered: 11/4/2011 Status: Offline
|
posted on 7/15/2013 at 09:21 PM |
Check out Anderson Cooper talking to a juror who remained in shadow.
Some points she said:
He got in over his head.
He should have stayed in the car.
Race had nothing to do with.
White, Black, Spanish, Geroge would have reacted the same way.
He was over eager to try to help people.
She spoke of him going too far.
Things got out of hand.
Geroge had his heart in the right place but he went too far.
She was very sympathic to George, as she calls him.
She also thinks yeah, he could be on a Neighborhood Watch committee again. WTF?!!?!
YOU BOTH said you bet that yea, the some jurors would feel that he is G but NG.
Sort of on the line.
[Edited on 7/16/2013 by SGirl]
|
| |
|
bigann
Zen Peach   Karma: Posts: 27533 (27822 all sites) Registered: 2/18/2006 Status: Offline
|
posted on 7/15/2013 at 09:32 PM |
| Wonder if the woman would have said the same things had Zimmerman been black and Martin been white. I think not. Did you see the article from Huffington Post about the woman who claims Zimmerman had molested her for years and that his family is vocally racist? Interesting read. ____________________
Sometimes we can't choose the music life gives us - but we damn sure can choose how we dance!
|
| |
sixty8
True Peach   Karma: Posts: 14590 (14590 all sites) Registered: 3/28/2006 Status: Offline
|
posted on 7/15/2013 at 09:33 PM |
| I posted in the other thread saying that when the trial was over and Zimmerman walked that the jurors or at least some of them would agree with me that Zimmerman was wrong and was the cause of the whole incident. They just couldn't apply what he did to cause the whole thing to the whacko Florida laws. Maybe some new laws could be passed from this tragedy and something positive can come of it??? Nice to know that at least one of the jurors at least knows that Zimmerman was over zealous and was the cause of the whole thing. I bet the whole jury feel that way. I have no criticism of the jury who had to go by the wording of the laws in Florida which are backward @ss. The prosecution put on a lousy case and the jury put in their work and time in deliberations. ____________________
Pete
|
| |
bigann
Zen Peach Karma: Posts: 27533 (27822 all sites) Registered: 2/18/2006 Status: Offline
|
posted on 7/15/2013 at 09:35 PM |
| You're right sixty8. ____________________
Sometimes we can't choose the music life gives us - but we damn sure can choose how we dance!
|
| |
SGirl
Peach Master Karma: Posts: 925 (925 all sites) Registered: 11/4/2011 Status: Offline
|
posted on 7/15/2013 at 10:05 PM |
agreed sixty8. 
|
| |
MartinD28
Peach Extraordinaire   Karma: Posts: 4090 (4096 all sites) Registered: 10/5/2004 Status: Offline
|
posted on 7/16/2013 at 07:33 AM |
I saw that interview. Seems like she had her mind made up early. She seemed to parrot several of the defense lines. Said she felt sorry for TM's friend, Rachel Jeantel that the defense grilled & insulted. Some of this juror's statements towards her made it seem like she really didn't understand what the young girl had to say. To me, that says more about the juror than Jeantel.
The juror & her attorney husband are planning to write a book I believe. However, she says profit is not the motive...hmmm???? So I suppose she's going to give the money to charity?
Quite frankly, I didn't find the juror's delivery all that impressive for someone who talked about the lack of education that Jeantel has. A lack of formal education doesn't preclude someone from being smart, accurate, truthful, and having proper perspective. The juror then challenged Jeantel's credibility. I'm wondering if the juror correlates education with credibility...just asking. If one saw the interview, it does raise the issue of connectivity?
|
| |
cyclone88
Peach Master Karma: Posts: 814 (814 all sites) Registered: 11/8/2008 Status: Offline
|
posted on 7/16/2013 at 07:51 AM |
The book deal has been cancelled. She changed her mind after leaving the protection of sequestration.
|
| |
SGirl
Peach Master Karma: Posts: 925 (925 all sites) Registered: 11/4/2011 Status: Offline
|
posted on 7/16/2013 at 07:55 AM |
Martin .say it again.
Cyclone, always on the facts, just the facts.
Yes, book deal cancelled.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2364213/George-Zimmerman-juror-call
ed-Trayvon-Martin-boy-color-book-deal-REVOKED.html
The juror in shadow being interviewed was none other than Juror #B37
|
| |
PauliG
Extreme Peach  Karma: Posts: 1907 (1909 all sites) Registered: 3/16/2002 Status: Offline
|
posted on 7/16/2013 at 09:46 AM |
Having served on a jury more times than I would have liked, I can say this: No matter what anyone thinks, feels, believes about the situation, it always comes down to one thing "reasonable doubt".
Whether you think its fair or not, there was not much you can do because there was too much reasonable doubt in this case...
But don't get me wrong, I strongly feel that nothing is worth a life, especially something this stupid.
|
| |
dougrhon
Zen Peach Karma: Posts: 20943 (20942 all sites) Registered: 6/15/2005 Status: Offline
|
posted on 7/16/2013 at 11:34 AM |
quote:
I posted in the other thread saying that when the trial was over and Zimmerman walked that the jurors or at least some of them would agree with me that Zimmerman was wrong and was the cause of the whole incident. They just couldn't apply what he did to cause the whole thing to the whacko Florida laws. Maybe some new laws could be passed from this tragedy and something positive can come of it??? Nice to know that at least one of the jurors at least knows that Zimmerman was over zealous and was the cause of the whole thing. I bet the whole jury feel that way. I have no criticism of the jury who had to go by the wording of the laws in Florida which are backward @ss. The prosecution put on a lousy case and the jury put in their work and time in deliberations.
There are no "lousy Florida laws." The law is the same as it is in all the other states, the law of self defense. The prosecutiion did not "do a bad job" They were forced to try a case with no evidence. The case should not have been brought. ____________________
|
| |
alloak41
Zen Peach Karma: Posts: 16027 (16019 all sites) Registered: 10/13/2007 Status: Offline
|
posted on 7/16/2013 at 11:44 AM |
quote:
quote:
I posted in the other thread saying that when the trial was over and Zimmerman walked that the jurors or at least some of them would agree with me that Zimmerman was wrong and was the cause of the whole incident. They just couldn't apply what he did to cause the whole thing to the whacko Florida laws. Maybe some new laws could be passed from this tragedy and something positive can come of it??? Nice to know that at least one of the jurors at least knows that Zimmerman was over zealous and was the cause of the whole thing. I bet the whole jury feel that way. I have no criticism of the jury who had to go by the wording of the laws in Florida which are backward @ss. The prosecution put on a lousy case and the jury put in their work and time in deliberations.
There are no "lousy Florida laws." The law is the same as it is in all the other states, the law of self defense. The prosecutiion did not "do a bad job" They were forced to try a case with no evidence. The case should not have been brought.
But you forgot, if you follow someone you forfeit your right to self-defense and deserve to be beaten to a pulp. ____________________
|
| |
gondicar
True Peach  Karma: Posts: 12503 (12493 all sites) Registered: 4/4/2003 Status: Offline
|
posted on 7/16/2013 at 11:56 AM |
quote:
There are no "lousy Florida laws." The law is the same as it is in all the other states, the law of self defense.
That's simply not true. Laws of all sorts differ by state. Many states don't have a "stand your ground law" on the books like Florida does. Many do, but again they may differ from state to state in their wording if not their intent. Some states extend their law to include civil immunity in self-defense cases. In the case of the Florida law, it has been controversial since long before the Zimmerman case and a task force had deemed it "confusing".
[Edited on 7/16/2013 by gondicar] ____________________
I pledge and support the elimination of the derogatory use of the r-word from everyday speech and promote the acceptance and inclusion of people with intellectual disabilities. http://www.r-word.org/
|
| |
MartinD28
Peach Extraordinaire Karma: Posts: 4090 (4096 all sites) Registered: 10/5/2004 Status: Offline
|
posted on 7/16/2013 at 12:23 PM |
quote:
quote:
quote:
I posted in the other thread saying that when the trial was over and Zimmerman walked that the jurors or at least some of them would agree with me that Zimmerman was wrong and was the cause of the whole incident. They just couldn't apply what he did to cause the whole thing to the whacko Florida laws. Maybe some new laws could be passed from this tragedy and something positive can come of it??? Nice to know that at least one of the jurors at least knows that Zimmerman was over zealous and was the cause of the whole thing. I bet the whole jury feel that way. I have no criticism of the jury who had to go by the wording of the laws in Florida which are backward @ss. The prosecution put on a lousy case and the jury put in their work and time in deliberations.
There are no "lousy Florida laws." The law is the same as it is in all the other states, the law of self defense. The prosecutiion did not "do a bad job" They were forced to try a case with no evidence. The case should not have been brought.
But you forgot, if you follow someone you forfeit your right to self-defense and deserve to be beaten to a pulp.
Using your logic, since Zimmerman followed TM, then Zimmerman forfeited his right to self-defense and deserved to be beaten to a pulp.
|
| |
bigann
Zen Peach Karma: Posts: 27533 (27822 all sites) Registered: 2/18/2006 Status: Offline
|
posted on 7/16/2013 at 01:01 PM |
| I admire the way some people are basing their arguments on the assumption that everything Zimmerman said is true. We don't know for a fact it happened the way it did, only that he was the last one standing and got to tell the story his way. To me, that's a rather shakey position to take since Zimmerman had self interest to sell his story the way he wanted it to be believed. ____________________
Sometimes we can't choose the music life gives us - but we damn sure can choose how we dance!
|
| |
sixty8
True Peach Karma: Posts: 14590 (14590 all sites) Registered: 3/28/2006 Status: Offline
|
posted on 7/16/2013 at 01:27 PM |
quote:
quote:
I posted in the other thread saying that when the trial was over and Zimmerman walked that the jurors or at least some of them would agree with me that Zimmerman was wrong and was the cause of the whole incident. They just couldn't apply what he did to cause the whole thing to the whacko Florida laws. Maybe some new laws could be passed from this tragedy and something positive can come of it??? Nice to know that at least one of the jurors at least knows that Zimmerman was over zealous and was the cause of the whole thing. I bet the whole jury feel that way. I have no criticism of the jury who had to go by the wording of the laws in Florida which are backward @ss. The prosecution put on a lousy case and the jury put in their work and time in deliberations.
There are no "lousy Florida laws." The law is the same as it is in all the other states, the law of self defense. The prosecutiion did not "do a bad job" They were forced to try a case with no evidence. The case should not have been brought.
C'mon now Doug!!! At least admit the obvious!!! Not only have just about every lawyer pundit on TV say that the prosecution did a lousy job with their prosecution of this case but I saw multiple posts by YOU saying the prosecution was putting on a lousy case. IMO as well as many others there are a lot of screwy laws in Florida that aren't exactly the same everywhere. Also the six juror thing which is completely stupid. Had their been 12 jurors with a few black people, Martin's peers on it I bet there is a good chance that the jury would have been hung. How the prosecution allowed that jury to be picked for this case is irresponsible on their part. The defense had everything in their favor, most of all the second witness who was dead and couldn't tell his side of the story. ____________________
Pete
|
| |
alanwoods
Zen Peach Karma: Posts: 9126 (25075 all sites) Registered: 10/30/2010 Status: Offline
|
posted on 7/16/2013 at 01:36 PM |
 ____________________
.jpg)
|
| |
sixty8
True Peach Karma: Posts: 14590 (14590 all sites) Registered: 3/28/2006 Status: Offline
|
posted on 7/16/2013 at 01:42 PM |
quote:
quote:
quote:
I posted in the other thread saying that when the trial was over and Zimmerman walked that the jurors or at least some of them would agree with me that Zimmerman was wrong and was the cause of the whole incident. They just couldn't apply what he did to cause the whole thing to the whacko Florida laws. Maybe some new laws could be passed from this tragedy and something positive can come of it??? Nice to know that at least one of the jurors at least knows that Zimmerman was over zealous and was the cause of the whole thing. I bet the whole jury feel that way. I have no criticism of the jury who had to go by the wording of the laws in Florida which are backward @ss. The prosecution put on a lousy case and the jury put in their work and time in deliberations.
There are no "lousy Florida laws." The law is the same as it is in all the other states, the law of self defense. The prosecutiion did not "do a bad job" They were forced to try a case with no evidence. The case should not have been brought.
But you forgot, if you follow someone you forfeit your right to self-defense and deserve to be beaten to a pulp.
Yeah, because following someone you don't know is a creepy thing to do especially following a young person at that age. People who follow around 17 year olds who are doing nothing more than walking up the street are creepy and scary. So, no you don't forfeit your right to anything but if you are gonna follow someone who is doing nothing wrong like a creep then expect to be confronted. Zimmerman is lucky he had a gun or he would have gotten an even bigger beating. Still don't know who started the fight which is the most disappointing part. I could easily see Zimmerman swinging and missing with his feeble can't throw a single punch fighting skills after all that successful MMA training.
Still can't figure out why Zimmerman, supposedly trained with his gun couldn't shoot Martin in a non lethal part of the body instead of pointing his gun right at Martins chest??? I still don't think the small injuries that Zimmerman got in the fight were at the level to warrent deadly physical force. The 27 year old mature man couldn't either fight off Martin until someone came and broke it up or shoot him in a non lethal spot??? He is a week coward. He is very lucky that he got found not guilty because they would have chewed that wuss up in prison. If he couldn't handle himself against a 50 pounds less 17 year old I would love to see how he would handle big bubba and his buddies. ____________________
Pete
|
| |
sixty8
True Peach Karma: Posts: 14590 (14590 all sites) Registered: 3/28/2006 Status: Offline
|
posted on 7/16/2013 at 01:45 PM |
quote:
I admire the way some people are basing their arguments on the assumption that everything Zimmerman said is true. We don't know for a fact it happened the way it did, only that he was the last one standing and got to tell the story his way. To me, that's a rather shakey position to take since Zimmerman had self interest to sell his story the way he wanted it to be believed.
Zimmerman's story has never added up to me and never will. Unfortunately he is the only one who can tell their side. ____________________
Pete
|
| |
Rydethwind
World Class Peach   Karma: Posts: 5822 (5827 all sites) Registered: 7/4/2004 Status: Offline
|
posted on 7/16/2013 at 01:57 PM |
quote:
quote:
There are no "lousy Florida laws." The law is the same as it is in all the other states, the law of self defense.
That's simply not true. Laws of all sorts differ by state. Many states don't have a "stand your ground law" on the books like Florida does. Many do, but again they may differ from state to state in their wording if not their intent. Some states extend their law to include civil immunity in self-defense cases. In the case of the Florida law, it has been controversial since long before the Zimmerman case and a task force had deemed it "confusing".
[Edited on 7/16/2013 by gondicar]
I think you misunderstood him he did not say anything about Florida's "stand your ground law" what he did say was in all the states we all we all have the right to self defense under the constitution.... and that law does not differ from state to state ____________________
"Any man who thinks he can be happy and prosperous by letting the
Government take care of him; better take a closer look at the American Indian." -Henry Ford
|
| |
alloak41
Zen Peach Karma: Posts: 16027 (16019 all sites) Registered: 10/13/2007 Status: Offline
|
posted on 7/16/2013 at 01:58 PM |
quote:
Had their been 12 jurors with a few black people, Martin's peers on it I bet there is a good chance that the jury would have been hung.
Right, they would have disregarded the evidence, testimony, and laws on the books and voted on skin color instead. BTW, one black juror was disqualified because he watches FOX News. Can't have that! ____________________
|
| |
bob1954
True Peach  Karma: Posts: 11683 (12126 all sites) Registered: 1/8/2005 Status: Offline
|
posted on 7/16/2013 at 02:07 PM |
quote:
quote:
quote:
There are no "lousy Florida laws." The law is the same as it is in all the other states, the law of self defense.
That's simply not true. Laws of all sorts differ by state. Many states don't have a "stand your ground law" on the books like Florida does. Many do, but again they may differ from state to state in their wording if not their intent. Some states extend their law to include civil immunity in self-defense cases. In the case of the Florida law, it has been controversial since long before the Zimmerman case and a task force had deemed it "confusing".
[Edited on 7/16/2013 by gondicar]
I think you misunderstood him he did not say anything about Florida's "stand your ground law" what he did say was in all the states we all we all have the right to self defense under the constitution.... and that law does not differ from state to state
The right to self defense exists in every state but there are significant variations. In some states there is a "duty to retreat" and in others there is not. In some states the right to use deadly force is limited to one's home or workplace. In others it is permitted to use deadly force anywhere a person has a right to be. But Florida laws are not unique, or even unusual. I think about 22 states have "stand your ground" laws similar to Florida's. ____________________
We'd all like to vote for the best man, but he's never a candidate.
|
| |
sixty8
True Peach Karma: Posts: 14590 (14590 all sites) Registered: 3/28/2006 Status: Offline
|
posted on 7/16/2013 at 02:12 PM |
quote:
quote:
Had their been 12 jurors with a few black people, Martin's peers on it I bet there is a good chance that the jury would have been hung.
Right, they would have disregarded the evidence, testimony, and laws on the books and voted on skin color instead. BTW, one black juror was disqualified because he watches FOX News. Can't have that!
No ,but they would have looked at the evidence from their perspective from their life experience. You are now saying that black people couldn't look at the evidence and be fair??? They are Martin's peers, not five white women and one Latino. Figures that the defense would want to include only a black person who watches FOX News who sided with Zimmerman from the get go. The defense couldn't accept a black person who doesn't watch FOX??? I am sure that wasn't the only black person questioned for this jury. ____________________
Pete
|
| |
dougrhon
Zen Peach Karma: Posts: 20943 (20942 all sites) Registered: 6/15/2005 Status: Offline
|
posted on 7/16/2013 at 02:17 PM |
quote:
quote:
There are no "lousy Florida laws." The law is the same as it is in all the other states, the law of self defense.
That's simply not true. Laws of all sorts differ by state. Many states don't have a "stand your ground law" on the books like Florida does. Many do, but again they may differ from state to state in their wording if not their intent. Some states extend their law to include civil immunity in self-defense cases. In the case of the Florida law, it has been controversial since long before the Zimmerman case and a task force had deemed it "confusing".
[Edited on 7/16/2013 by gondicar]
I will repeat yet again. The "Stand Your Ground Law" was not invoked in this case. It had nothing to do with this case as it involves a duty to retreat once danger has passed. Zimmerman was acquitted under the standard law of self-defense. In all fifty states you are allowed to defend yourself with deadly force if you reasonably perceive a threat of death or serious injury. The slandering of Florida is just the latest effort to turn this case into something more than it is, a simple tragedy in which the shooter acted in self-defense or at least the state lacked evidence to suggest otherwise. Next will come the slandering of the jury and then the slandering of the prosecution. ____________________
|
| |
dougrhon
Zen Peach Karma: Posts: 20943 (20942 all sites) Registered: 6/15/2005 Status: Offline
|
posted on 7/16/2013 at 02:18 PM |
quote:
quote:
There are no "lousy Florida laws." The law is the same as it is in all the other states, the law of self defense.
That's simply not true. Laws of all sorts differ by state. Many states don't have a "stand your ground law" on the books like Florida does. Many do, but again they may differ from state to state in their wording if not their intent. Some states extend their law to include civil immunity in self-defense cases. In the case of the Florida law, it has been controversial since long before the Zimmerman case and a task force had deemed it "confusing".
[Edited on 7/16/2013 by gondicar]
Incidentally, more than 30 states have some kind of 'Stand Your Ground Law" including the very blue state of California which actually allows pursuit. So it is hardly unusual or controverisal. Nevertheless, it is irrelevant to this case. ____________________
|
| |
dougrhon
Zen Peach Karma: Posts: 20943 (20942 all sites) Registered: 6/15/2005 Status: Offline
|
posted on 7/16/2013 at 02:22 PM |
quote:
I admire the way some people are basing their arguments on the assumption that everything Zimmerman said is true. We don't know for a fact it happened the way it did, only that he was the last one standing and got to tell the story his way. To me, that's a rather shakey position to take since Zimmerman had self interest to sell his story the way he wanted it to be believed.
We are basing it on the assumption that his story is true in relevant part. The reason we believe it is because extrinsic evidence supports it. You have based your argument on the assumption that he is lying despite a lack of evidence. SO be it. ____________________
|
| |
