Posted on 07/25/2013 8:03:38 PM PDT by chessplayer
To see the evidence she saw and still say that......she is a special kind of stupid.
“To see the evidence she saw and still say that......she is a special kind of stupid.”
Then again, she’s playing to the audience of stupid. They enjoy being told what to “feel”, never mind the facts.
She is clearly angry that she was compelled by the agreement she signed to set aside her biases and “hate whitey” prejudices and had to make her decision based on the law and the evidence.
How else do you think she got seated in this trial?
http://legalinsurrection.com/2013/07/next-up-florida-v-shellie-zimmerman/
Professor jacobson has a good read on Shellie’s issues.
Based on his read, she was likely the subject of prsecutorial overreach as well.
Typical lefty nut-job.
“You can’t put the man in jail even though in our hearts we felt he was guilty,”. . .“But we had to grab our hearts and put it aside and look at the evidence.”…
Sheesh. . .in our hearts we knew he was guilty BUT there was no evidence of his guilt and that is somehow wrong?
Evidence be darned. He is guilty if we FEEL he is guilty.!!
She FEELS (not thinks) that anytime someone kills someone they are guilty of something. . .but because we need evidence to put in jail and there was no evidence, he goes free—in her mind that is a travesty?!
This idiot is a loon. (And I suspect she is a coward as well. . .caving to the pressure of the mob).
And those that say that are the first to bemoan silly and insane verdicts by the same jury. . .
Oh.....wait.....the poseur Marco Rubio and the Amnesty crowd want to do just that.
“Proof is she could not get out of jury duty.”
Yeah. . .not as clever as all those smart people that avoid jury duty. . .you know, those people that brag about avoiding jury duty then shake their heads and tsk-tsk those insane jury verdicts.
Merely making a comment on the current social situation, good people are treated badly and bad people are exalted.
Particularly, in our jury system today, if you exhibit one iota of common sense, you are disqualified by voir doire. But if, to coin a phrase, you are a low-information voter, then the $25 a day looks like free money. Just a case of bad driving out good. My expert testimony has been commended in open court by a Federal judge for making a difficult subject clear... Lawyers are impressed. And I've been tossed out of jury selection numerous time in both State and Federal courts. I've looked at my fellow jurors in waiting and wondered just exactly what in hell was I doing there. Of course I've never been sat. So now I don't look down on those who avoid jury duty, they are my peers, not the jurors.
Excellent comment.
Let me comment on this part of your post: “Now I don’t look down on those who avoid jury duty, they are my peers, not the jurors. “
I think those that avoid—as opposed to those that are stricken from—jury duty are being less than civic-minded and not my peers. Those that mock those not “smart enough” to avoid jury duty most assuredly are not my peers.
In my view, while we that pay attention will likely be stricken from the jury pool, it is a failure of the system and we should make the system disqualify us and not make it easy for the dolts of the world.
Just my view. Cheers.
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.