Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

A look at the jurors for George Zimmerman's trial
Yahoo News ^ | 06/20/13

Posted on 06/20/2013 8:03:26 PM PDT by BunnySlippers

B-51 is retired, not married and doesn't have kids. She has lived in Seminole County for nine years. She has worked in real estate and run a call center where she said she had experience resolving conflicts. When asked if Zimmerman did something wrong by following Martin instead of waiting for police, she said: "Yeah, I guess he did do something wrong."

___

B-29 recently moved to central Florida from Chicago. She enjoys watching the "Real Housewives" on television and works as a nurse on an Alzheimer's section of a nursing home. She said she hadn't paid much attention to the shooting. She said she has been arrested, but her case was disposed of. It's not clear why she was arrested or exactly what happened to her case, though she said she was treated fairly. She is married and has several children. A prosecutor described her as "black or Hispanic" during jury selection.

(Excerpt) Read more at news.yahoo.com ...


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Crime/Corruption; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: zimmerman
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-65 next last
They say 5 white women and one woman who may be Hispanic.

More at link.

1 posted on 06/20/2013 8:03:26 PM PDT by BunnySlippers
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: BunnySlippers

[[she said: “Yeah, I guess he did do something wrong.”]]

And she was picked as a juror? Before even hearing the evidence? Mark Omalley acceptedf her?


2 posted on 06/20/2013 8:07:20 PM PDT by CottShop (Scientific belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BunnySlippers

The jury is everything. In the OJ TV trial show, the jurors were totally racist...He walked away from a brutal double murder of white people...


3 posted on 06/20/2013 8:08:26 PM PDT by dragnet2 (Diversion and evasion are tools of deceit)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BunnySlippers

If this trial fails to meet justice, and becomes precedence, you can legally beat the crap out of someone for simply following behind you. Even if you have criminal intent while on drugs. Unless you are white, of course.


4 posted on 06/20/2013 8:08:45 PM PDT by Telepathic Intruder (The only thing the Left has learned from the failures of socialism is not to call it that)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dragnet2

I agree totally.


5 posted on 06/20/2013 8:13:26 PM PDT by BunnySlippers (I LOVE BULL MARKETS . . .)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Telepathic Intruder

I am a true rime freak and follow trials. I simply cannot follow this railroad trial.


6 posted on 06/20/2013 8:14:17 PM PDT by BunnySlippers (I LOVE BULL MARKETS . . .)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: BunnySlippers

It’s the sickening truth...The man was guilty as sin, but the only thing that mattered was his skin color.

Not guilty!


7 posted on 06/20/2013 8:16:24 PM PDT by dragnet2 (Diversion and evasion are tools of deceit)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: BunnySlippers

Sounds like B-51 is there with a chip on her shoulder.


8 posted on 06/20/2013 8:18:39 PM PDT by Christie at the beach
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BunnySlippers

Six women will have no problem convicting.


9 posted on 06/20/2013 8:18:55 PM PDT by Gay State Conservative (The Civil Servants Are No Longer Servants...Or Civil.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Gay State Conservative

So very sad. :o(


10 posted on 06/20/2013 8:19:41 PM PDT by BunnySlippers (I LOVE BULL MARKETS . . .)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: BunnySlippers

It’s a show trial, and was from the beginning. The socialist movement is particularly agitated that property rights were being protected, and anti-gun advocates are agitated that a gun was used for self-defense instead of a mass shooting. All the Left is out for innocent blood, like they always are, just because a person used a gun when they would have done the same thing themselves in the same situation.


11 posted on 06/20/2013 8:24:50 PM PDT by Telepathic Intruder (The only thing the Left has learned from the failures of socialism is not to call it that)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: BunnySlippers

If he is found innocent they will hound him till he is shot down or something.

Poor guy.


12 posted on 06/20/2013 8:26:49 PM PDT by Beowulf9
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BunnySlippers
We all know how *rational* women can be. Zimm is doomed. What are the mathematical chances that every day of the trial, one of the women will be in PMS mode? Oi!


13 posted on 06/20/2013 8:27:11 PM PDT by Daffynition (Stand Your Ground)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Daffynition

I believe the majority of women on the OJ jury were women.


14 posted on 06/20/2013 8:32:32 PM PDT by BunnySlippers (I LOVE BULL MARKETS . . .)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: BunnySlippers

These days how can one be sure?


15 posted on 06/20/2013 8:37:09 PM PDT by TruthWillWin (The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other peoples money.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: BunnySlippers

There was an issue yesterday with an Hispanic juror who asked to be excused from his duty, in part, because he was offended he’d been described as a Mexican on some blog.

Guess they’re now in a mode that reminds me of the 1957 Stan Freberg radio show. He was doing a take-off on the Cisco Kid, and reference was made to his good friend, Pancho. The interviewer asked Pancho if he was Mexican, and he replied, “No senor, Sweese. That way we don’ offend nobody”. Political correctness’s still alive and well 56 years later. And come to think of it, you probably couldn’t do that sketch on CBS now.


16 posted on 06/20/2013 8:41:31 PM PDT by ArmstedFragg (hoaxy dopey changey)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ArmstedFragg

Heck there’s lots of things on old TV shows and movies that wouldn’t be allowed nowadays.

I remember a few times on “I Love Lucy”, Ricky spanked Lucy as if she were a child. Of course, nowadays, we’re not allowed to spank children anyway.

Of course, Disney has locked away their old movie “Song of the South”, due to alleged racism. Old Stepin Fechit movies aren’t shown on TV anymore. Ditto, it’s rare to see old Charlie Chan movies. Anything which somehow is perceived as racist, bigoted, or perpetuating stereotypes of officially recognized liberal grievance groups are censored.

The irony to me is that, in the old days, open profanity was not allowed. Today, we’re oh so sensitive about political correctness, but swearing the worst possible profanity you can think of is ok. Even children can say these words under some circumstances. And that’s okay with the liberals.


17 posted on 06/20/2013 8:46:03 PM PDT by Dilbert San Diego
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: BunnySlippers

How many jurors were rejected?


18 posted on 06/20/2013 8:50:03 PM PDT by TChad
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BunnySlippers

with that collection he might as well plead guilty!


19 posted on 06/20/2013 8:50:42 PM PDT by dalereed
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BunnySlippers
I am a true rime freak and follow trials. I simply cannot follow this railroad trial.

I shall not be in denial: this trial I shall follow. To say otherwise would surely ring hollow -- I shall sneak a peek for as a rime freak, this is one show I won't say "no" to, were I closer, it's something I would go to.

20 posted on 06/20/2013 8:50:53 PM PDT by ClearCase_guy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: ClearCase_guy

I admire your fortitude.


21 posted on 06/20/2013 8:51:30 PM PDT by BunnySlippers (I LOVE BULL MARKETS . . .)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: TChad

I don’t know the answer. i know jury selection went on for some time.


22 posted on 06/20/2013 8:52:18 PM PDT by BunnySlippers (I LOVE BULL MARKETS . . .)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: BunnySlippers

Wasn’t Zimmerman allowed to get a lawyer? He obviously needs one.


23 posted on 06/20/2013 8:53:23 PM PDT by gitmo ( If your theology doesn't become your biography it's useless.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CottShop
"And she was picked as a juror? Before even hearing the evidence? Mark Omalley acceptedf her?"

I don't remember the rules, but I think the defense has a limited number of jurors they can reject "with cause" and "without cause." Just guessing, but maybe they were out of options.
24 posted on 06/20/2013 8:56:08 PM PDT by Steve_Seattle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Steve_Seattle

I don’t think either side used up all their objections.


25 posted on 06/20/2013 9:04:57 PM PDT by mac_truck ( Aide toi et dieu t aidera)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: BunnySlippers
B-29

B-51

26 posted on 06/20/2013 9:11:03 PM PDT by No One Special
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BunnySlippers

That was my point...women being notoriously emotional vis a vis rational...and issues of PMS. :D


27 posted on 06/20/2013 9:15:52 PM PDT by Daffynition (Stand Your Ground)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Daffynition

... and I agree to the max!


28 posted on 06/20/2013 9:16:53 PM PDT by BunnySlippers (I LOVE BULL MARKETS . . .)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: dragnet2
the jurors were totally racist

Famous prosecutor Vincent Bugliosi's book, "Outrage: The Five Reasons Why O.J. Simpson Got Away with Murder" makes a very convincing case that the prosecution in the Simpson trial led by Marcia Clark and Chris Darden was utterly incompetent, and that Judge Lance Ito was not far behind. The jury was never informed of the most compelling evidence against Simpson. Jury racism might have been present, but it was not necessary to produce that obscene verdict.

29 posted on 06/20/2013 9:17:50 PM PDT by TChad
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: dalereed

“with that collection he might as well plead guilty!”

I wouldn’t agree with your assessment. Most women I know LOVE a good story and will delve into the facts, and dare I say, the minutia of every facet of possible inquiry. And if they think you’re lying to them or patronizing them in any way, forget about it.

Zimmerman only needs to be represented on the jury by one. He will be fine.


30 posted on 06/20/2013 9:56:51 PM PDT by Bshaw (A nefarious deceit is upon us all!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: TChad

I think they summoned 500.

A retired judge did the initial review of questionnaires, which eliminated somewhere near a hundred. There was then a preliminary voir dire limited to just the issue of publicity, and forty prospects were chosen at that stage. The 40 then went through a second round and the final ten were chosen from them.

So, 30 rejected at the final stage, around a hundred all told for sure. I don’t know whether the retired judge went through all the questionnaires after it became apparent they could find a jury without having to interview all of them.


31 posted on 06/20/2013 9:58:33 PM PDT by ArmstedFragg (hoaxy dopey changey)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: mac_truck

You’re right. Three by prosecution, one by defense, I believe. The days when you could just arbitrarily toss out someone you didn’t like the looks of (in other words, the days when peremptory challenges were truly peremptory), are gone. You now have to convince the judge that you have a race-neutral reason for your challenge. After the prosecution threw out four white women in a row, the judge put two of them back on.


32 posted on 06/20/2013 10:06:26 PM PDT by ArmstedFragg (hoaxy dopey changey)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: TChad
Famous prosecutor Vincent Bugliosi's book, "Outrage: The Five Reasons Why O.J. Simpson Got Away with Murder" makes a very convincing case that the prosecution in the Simpson trial led by Marcia Clark and Chris Darden was utterly incompetent, and that Judge Lance Ito was not far behind.

Note, however, there was one criminal conviction arising from that trial.

On October 2, 1996, the lead detective on the case, Mark Fuhman, plead no contest to a perjury charge for lying about his use of the N-word. LOL! He is the only person to have been convicted of criminal charges related to the Simpson case. $200, three years on probation. And OJ walked!

Furhman was in the chain of custody of the evidence. He was the excuse the jury needed.

33 posted on 06/20/2013 10:18:17 PM PDT by cynwoody
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: TChad

I think you can put Gil Garcetti’s meddling on that list. There was a big concern about not repeating the “mistakes” of the King trial that impacted the whole effort.

The case should have been tried in Santa Monica, by the best prosecutor, and when Johhny C. started mumbling about racism in jury selection, they should have ignored him and followed usual procedure. Instead, they let him pack the jury, didn’t resist letting Ito get “played”, and even botched their execution of political correctness. I read Vince’s Book along with most of the others, he pretty much nailed it.

Right up there near the top, though, I’d have to put Robbery/Homicide transporting the suspect’s blood sample from the station back to the crime scene. The sucker should have gone right into the evidence room and stayed there ‘til it got transported to the lab by an officer or employee entirely uninvolved with the investigation.


34 posted on 06/20/2013 10:21:19 PM PDT by ArmstedFragg (hoaxy dopey changey)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: TChad

35 posted on 06/20/2013 10:33:52 PM PDT by UCANSEE2 (The monsters are due on Maple Street)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Dilbert San Diego

Agree with all you said in #17!!!

“Song of the South” is my favorite movie memory from when I was a young boy. Nothing racist about it!


36 posted on 06/20/2013 10:54:48 PM PDT by octex
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: octex

I agree. I liked Song of the South too. But Disney will not release it either in theaters or DVD due to political correctness..


37 posted on 06/20/2013 10:57:00 PM PDT by Dilbert San Diego
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: Steve_Seattle; All

Each side has 10 strikes.


38 posted on 06/20/2013 11:28:01 PM PDT by SWAMPSNIPER (The Second Amendment, a Matter of Fact, Not a Matter of Opinion)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: No One Special

I wasn’t going to JUDGE these selected jurors before the trial. They are who they are and what they will do, no one can say.

By now, I’m sure you have noticed the photo of the B-29 is missing. That means the B-51 wins by default.

It seems the B-51 was not widely used. It was a pretty bird, derived from plans from German aircraft manufacturers and designers. Most of our military planes were modeled after German designs from the Hitler era.

I saw a B-29 last Saturday. It flew over and circled the event I was attending. Great to see.


39 posted on 06/20/2013 11:53:00 PM PDT by UCANSEE2 (The monsters are due on Maple Street)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: SWAMPSNIPER

Jury selection is like a very long chess game. And it’s mostly boring.


40 posted on 06/21/2013 12:00:09 AM PDT by UCANSEE2 (The monsters are due on Maple Street)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: No One Special
B-29


41 posted on 06/21/2013 12:04:55 AM PDT by UCANSEE2 (The monsters are due on Maple Street)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: cynwoody
He was the excuse the jury needed.

A black jury will probably be more susceptible than a white jury to the argument that racism often motivates white police to frame black defendants. It is the prosecution's job to neutralize that set of beliefs in black jurors. Bugliosi describes how Clark and Darden failed to do that. They barely tried, which effectively conceded the issue to the defense. Pathetic.

Bugliosi presents the argument that he would have made to the jury to counter what he calls the "police-frame up theory" (on pages 260-262 of the hardcover edition.) Here's part of it:

“Now, don’t you think that if this fellow Fuhrman were the type who liked to frame black people for crimes they didn’t commit, there would have been a considerable number of black people framed by him through the years? And that all or at least most of these people would have immediately gotten on the phone and called Mr. Cochran or some other member of the defense team, and you would have heard them testify from that witness stand at this trial? There certainly cannot be even one of you who doubts this. You have to absolutely know this would’ve happened. Particularly in a big case like this where coming forward would make them a hero to many in the black community, and they’d be able to sell their stories for a lot of money. If Furhman had been the framing cop the defense wants you to believe, there would have been a virtual parade of black people he had framed through the years taking that witness stand at this trial. Yet not one, not even one such black person ever came forward."

Clear and convincing, but the jury never heard that or anything like it.

While we are on the general subject of black jurors and black defendants, it might be worth mentioning that Kermit Gosnell was just convicted by a jury that included blacks. The defense played the race card, and it lost.

42 posted on 06/21/2013 12:05:58 AM PDT by TChad
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: No One Special
Oops. What I saw wasn't a B-29.

It was a B-19.


43 posted on 06/21/2013 12:07:49 AM PDT by UCANSEE2 (The monsters are due on Maple Street)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: ArmstedFragg
So, 30 rejected at the final stage, around a hundred all told for sure.

Thanks. I hope that will be good enough.

44 posted on 06/21/2013 12:09:29 AM PDT by TChad
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: UCANSEE2
It was a B-19.

You posted a photo of a B-17. And what you saw was more likely to be a B-17 than a B-19

Only one XB-19 was ever built and it was scrapped in 1949.

45 posted on 06/21/2013 12:15:39 AM PDT by okie01 (The Mainstream Media: IGNORANCE ON PARADE)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: UCANSEE2

What? My B-29 disappeared? Wasn’t that a Twilight Zone episode? Try refreshing the page. It may just have come out of that cloud bank from the other side. ;-)


46 posted on 06/21/2013 12:28:34 AM PDT by No One Special
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: TChad

I agree. I was not working at the time and watched much of the trial...I kept yelling at Marcia Clark because she was not proving her case...and she droned on and on about DNA; but could not explain it for her jury- she spoke more like a boring college professor. I was not impressed with her as an attorney and at one time I observed quite a few trials. I was comparing her with real attorneys not Hollywood attorneys. Darden was worse than Clark and Ito was acting the part of a TV judge, as if he was auditioning.

Before the verdict I told my husband that if the parts I didn’t see were anything like what I did see and I was on the jury it would be easy to acquit if you follow the “state must prove its case” theory as opposed to the “I think he is guilty” form of reaching a verdict. Everyone I knew that watched little/none of the trial were shocked at the verdict, those that did watch the trial were not surprised.


47 posted on 06/21/2013 12:32:21 AM PDT by Tammy8 (~Secure the border and deport all illegals- do it now! ~ Support our Troops!~)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Tammy8
it would be easy to acquit if you follow the “state must prove its case” theory as opposed to the “I think he is guilty” form of reaching a verdict.

In the Zimmerman case I hope the jury does not use the "vote guilty to avoid the post-trial lynch mob if I acquit" theory.

48 posted on 06/21/2013 1:02:02 AM PDT by TChad
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: dragnet2

That’s because black women stand by their men. Marcia Clark thought that by picking black females she’d get a win due to the domestic violence issue. Juror consultants who the state had hired told her she was wrong and that black females would be way more sympathic toward OJ than even black men would.

The prosecution doesn’t have to worry in this case though. White females sold out a long time ago.

I do think a few of the females on this panel look pro defense but we’ll see.


49 posted on 06/21/2013 1:44:47 AM PDT by snarkytart
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: ArmstedFragg
Yep, the case was lost as soon as Garcetti moved the trial to LA pretending the courtroom in Santa Monica didn't have the means for all the media etc. As if he should be worried about accommodating media. He moved the trial to avoid getting a mostly white jury to guarantee a mostly black one.
This is what being a spineless worm gets you in life. He looked like a played fool at the end with the NG verdict.
50 posted on 06/21/2013 1:51:21 AM PDT by snarkytart
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-65 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson