Alternate juror in Zimmerman case: The prosecution presented “no details, no evidence” in closing

posted at 5:21 pm on July 18, 2013 by Allahpundit

Well worth your time if you can spare it, especially if you watched the CNN interview with juror B37. The contrast is striking in that B37 seemed convinced of Zimmerman’s basic decency but thought he bore some moral responsibility for the shooting by leaving his car to keep an eye on Martin. This guy, juror E54, is in a sense the opposite: He’s very much no-nonsense and “just the facts,” seemingly agnostic on what type of man Zimmerman is, but ultimately he thinks Zimmerman bears even less moral culpability for the incident than B37 does. Why should he have stayed in his car, he wonders, when he had as much of a right to be there as Martin did? (E54 also thinks it’s nonsense to want to dump “stand your ground” laws after this since they were basically irrelevant to the trial.) It’s amazing after watching these two interviews to think that, according to B37, three jurors started deliberations wanting to convict him of either murder or manslaughter. The two we’ve heard from are rock-solid in their belief that self-defense was justified; I’d be curious to hear from one of them who wasn’t so solid about how they evolved in the course of deliberations. But maybe that’s the point here — you’re not going to be eager to talk to the media about your conclusions if you had misgivings about them at some point. The jurors who firmly believed in acquittal all along are naturally more likely to want to engage with the cameras running.

Part one is him talking about the nuts and bolts of the evidence, part two is what it was like to be a juror, and part three is closing arguments and the aftermath. That’s where he calls out the prosecution for John Guy’s close, which was indeed all about appealing to the heart with “no details, no evidence” offered to help the jury fit the facts to the law. That’s the whole case in a nutshell. “Justice” demanded that Zimmerman be prosecuted and convicted, except that there was no evidence to get a jury to reach that conclusion beyond a reasonable doubt. They were supposed to do it for moral and “social” reasons, not legal ones. Didn’t work. Exit quotation from Jeralyn Merritt: “Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar. With each passing day, the case appears less and less like a case of monumental social and political import. There was a shooting and the evidence showed self-defense. The state misjudged how an impartial jury would view its evidence and overcharged the crime. The jury applied the law to the evidence produced at trial and acquitted.”


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

I’m so glad we now know Jeantel.

Schadenfreude on July 18, 2013 at 5:24 PM

(E54 also thinks it’s nonsense to want to dump “stand your ground” laws after this since they were basically irrelevant to the trial.)

In Florida: http://www.bizpacreview.com/2013/07/18/appeals-court-rules-stand-your-ground-applies-in-school-bus-fight-79923

davidk on July 18, 2013 at 5:25 PM

E54 was a prosecution juror. He has a teenage son, who wears hoodies, and said that he thought that Zimmerman was probably guilty.

Resist We Much on July 18, 2013 at 5:26 PM

With each passing day, the case appears less and less like a case of monumental social and political import.

It never was.

Only the poverty pimps, race hucksters and hypocrites, obama foremost, made it so.

When obama leaves office, the ‘post-racial’ first black Caucasian president (NYTs definition) will have set race relations back by at least 70 years.

Schadenfreude on July 18, 2013 at 5:27 PM

It was an accurate verdict. In fact it was so accurate that it didn’t require a trial at all. Too bad Holder and Obama couldn’t figure it out. Now they look like manipulative tyrants. Give it up, guys. Better yet, double down as you usually do and really bring harm to your positions.

BetseyRoss on July 18, 2013 at 5:28 PM

Facts, evidence? Who needs that when it’s all about the narrative.

rbj on July 18, 2013 at 5:30 PM

E54 was a prosecution juror. He has a teenage son, who wears hoodies, and said that he thought that Zimmerman was probably guilty.

Resist We Much on July 18, 2013 at 5:26 PM

.
Is that in the video clips?

PolAgnostic on July 18, 2013 at 5:30 PM

E54 was a prosecution juror. He has a teenage son, who wears hoodies, and said that he thought that Zimmerman was probably guilty.

Resist We Much on July 18, 2013 at 5:26 PM

Guilty of what charge?

d1carter on July 18, 2013 at 5:33 PM

Sorry, let me clarify (I was working off of memory):

E54: Alternate juror E54 is a middle-aged white man with a teenage step-son. The man said he remembered seeing photos of injuries to Zimmerman’s head and face, and he wondered why charges weren’t filed for so long. He also said his step-son wears hooded sweatshirts similar to the one worn by Martin the night of the shooting.

http://www.actionnewsjax.com/content/zimmerman/story/George-Zimmerman-trial-juror-profiles/T0mNL1xK-kKf1z5M7h37yQ.cspx

Resist We Much on July 18, 2013 at 5:33 PM

Next time I go to a restaurant, I won’t tip the waiter/waitress.

NO JUSTICE!
NO TIP!

For Trayvon….

sentinelrules on July 18, 2013 at 5:33 PM

Is that in the video clips?

PolAgnostic on July 18, 2013 at 5:30 PM

No, his juror profile. And, I was wrong about him saying that he thought GZ was probably guilty. What he said was that he wondered what took them so long to file charges, which one could argue means that, at some level, he believed GZ guilty of something. If he believed GZ had acted in self-defence from the beginning, why would he have wondered what took the state so long to press charges?

To my mind, he very obviously wasn’t a pro-defence juror going into the trial.

Resist We Much on July 18, 2013 at 5:36 PM

To my understanding, closing arguments are basically a recap of the trial; no new evidence may be introduced at that stage. So it’s right and proper the prosecution didn’t try — about the only thing they did honestly during the whole travesty.

Liam on July 18, 2013 at 5:36 PM

Liam on July 18, 2013 at 5:36 PM

While it’s true that you don’t introduce evidence in closing arguments, you’re supposed to explain to the jury how the evidence applies to the law. Mr. Guy didn’t make any effort to do that, and just appealed to the jurors’ emotions.

Syzygy on July 18, 2013 at 5:43 PM

With each passing day, the case appears less and less like a case of monumental social and political import. There was a shooting and the evidence showed self-defense. The state misjudged how an impartial jury would view its evidence and overcharged the crime. The jury applied the law to the evidence produced at trial and acquitted.”

There was nothing about the facts of the case itself to make it anything out of the ordinary.

It has “monumental social and political import” because news media tools and race hustlers fabricated and exploited a race angle, projecting the case into the national consciousness.

Now that the verdict has gone the wrong way for them, and their fabrications and false narratives are being exposed and becoming the next focus of attention, the media will conveniently decide it just wasn’t that big a deal in the first place. Sharpton, et al, will continue to milk this cow forever.

novaculus on July 18, 2013 at 5:43 PM

davidk on July 18, 2013 at 5:25 PM

From your link:

“Broward County Circuit Judge Elijah Williams convicted a middle school boy who fought with a girl on the school bus of battery, but wouldn’t allow the “stand your ground” defense because the incident took place on the bus, not in a home or vehicle, the Sun Sentinel reported.”

Ummm…When did buses stop being vehicles?

Liam on July 18, 2013 at 5:43 PM

“Broward County Circuit Judge Elijah Williams convicted a middle school boy who fought with a girl on the school bus of battery, but wouldn’t allow the “stand your ground” defense because the incident took place on the bus, not in a home or vehicle, the Sun Sentinel reported.”

Ummm…When did buses stop being vehicles?

Liam on July 18, 2013 at 5:43 PM

That’s some sheer genius, right there. I hope that I’m never before him.

Resist We Much on July 18, 2013 at 5:46 PM

Syzygy on July 18, 2013 at 5:43 PM

Now I got better what the juror must have meant. Thanks!

Liam on July 18, 2013 at 5:47 PM

Let’s see the MSM play this up. And then let’s hear the continued criticism about ‘stand your ground’.

http://rochester.ynn.com/content/top_stories/490926/jury-finds-roderick-scott-not-guilty/

GarandFan on July 18, 2013 at 5:49 PM

Resist We Much on July 18, 2013 at 5:46 PM

Are you in Florida?

Syzygy on July 18, 2013 at 5:51 PM

If you listen to B37 closely, the jurors who wanted to vote guilty in the first straw poll did so without reviewing the evidence or law. It was an emotional vote because someone died. When they closely reviewed the facts and agreed that martin attacked zimmerman, and the law of self defense they all agreed that the only verdict justified was not guilty.

Ta111 on July 18, 2013 at 5:52 PM

Liam on July 18, 2013 at 5:47 PM

You’re welcome!

Syzygy on July 18, 2013 at 5:52 PM

Let’s see the MSM play this up. And then let’s hear the continued criticism about ‘stand your ground’.

http://rochester.ynn.com/content/top_stories/490926/jury-finds-roderick-scott-not-guilty/

GarandFan on July 18, 2013 at 5:49 PM

I’m amazed he was acquitted; it’s NY, after all. Then again, people in West New York tend to be much less liberal than in NYC. There’s a lot of farm country up this way.

Liam on July 18, 2013 at 5:53 PM

A little something for any of our “we are trayvon” trolls, if/when they show up (something I posted on the Larry Elders/Piers Moron thread).

A little quiz for libtardslaveanddie
What do the following people in common?
Gizzell Ford, Ed Cooper, Demani Henard, Sterling Sims, and Antonio Fenner.

Here’s a hint:
http://homicides.suntimes.com/victims/

dentarthurdent on July 18, 2013 at 5:55 PM

Are you in Florida?

Syzygy on July 18, 2013 at 5:51 PM

About half of the time now.

Resist We Much on July 18, 2013 at 5:56 PM

dentarthurdent on July 18, 2013 at 5:55 PM

*
*
*
*

Why does black on black crime actually matter as a thing in and of itself?

libfreeordie on July 18, 2013 at 1:29 PM

Liam on July 18, 2013 at 5:59 PM

All I can say is that I’m grateful for the jury decision whatever their reasons. History has shown that no matter how high profile the case, jurors soon (and rightfully) sink into obscurity. Quick! Name or describe a single juror in the OJ Simpson case. The only caveat here would be if some vigilante discovers who they are and picks them off one by one. Then they would be immortalized-not as individuals but as a group.

Usually I get these things right but I was wrong about the verdict. I predicted a hung jury of 5-1 or 4-2 in favor of Zimmerman. In a currently unequal world on an uneven playing field (with the US President, Attorney General, State of Florida, MSM, influential pressure groups, Political Correctness and even the trial judge all against Zimmerman) the jury STILL made the correct choice.) THANK YOU!!!

MaiDee on July 18, 2013 at 6:01 PM

Resist We Much on July 18, 2013 at 5:56 PM

In my experience, the “logic” of Judge Williams is pretty typical of state court judges here.

Syzygy on July 18, 2013 at 6:02 PM

“The state misjudged how an impartial jury would view its evidence”

It was much more malevolent than that. The state wanted a human sacrifice to placate the primitive mob.

For anyone who wanted to know what life among the Aztecs was like …

And gov Scott is a despicable sack of sh#t.

ThePrimordialOrderedPair on July 18, 2013 at 6:03 PM

Liam on July 18, 2013 at 5:59 PM

Well obviously it doesn’t.
The race-baiting libtards (but I repeat myself…) don’t give a dam about black kids killed by other blacks.

dentarthurdent on July 18, 2013 at 6:04 PM

Name or describe a single juror in the OJ Simpson case.

MaiDee on July 18, 2013 at 6:01 PM

Um, middle-aged black woman?

Syzygy on July 18, 2013 at 6:06 PM

Has libfree opined since this travesty of justice occurred?

arnold ziffel on July 18, 2013 at 6:07 PM

Well obviously it doesn’t.
The race-baiting libtards (but I repeat myself…) don’t give a dam about black kids killed by other blacks.

dentarthurdent on July 18, 2013 at 6:04 PM

Strange, isn’t it, that we rootin’-tootin’ gun-totin’ NRA types care more about the black murder rate than a black liberal?

Liam on July 18, 2013 at 6:08 PM

“With each passing day, the case appears less and less like a case of monumental social and political import. There was a shooting and the evidence showed self-defense. The state misjudged how an impartial jury would view its evidence and overcharged the crime. The jury applied the law to the evidence produced at trial and acquitted.”

Yup.

Sacramento on July 18, 2013 at 6:13 PM

Arnold seriously?

Of course.

————————————-

From the post above:(not libfree)

Why should he have stayed in his car, he wonders, when he had as much of a right to be there as Martin did? (E54 also thinks it’s nonsense to want to dump “stand your ground” laws after this since they were basically irrelevant to the trial.)

Boom

and

Boom.

You can’t tell me to stay in my car and you cannot tell me I cannot defend myself.

Idiots take care of your own.

CW on July 18, 2013 at 6:14 PM

None of that matters. We have a dead seventeen year-old laying on the ground. The jury did not take into account the feelings of Travon’s parents and “the community”.

~Mor-Juan Williams

Joe Mama on July 18, 2013 at 6:18 PM

Um, middle-aged black woman?

Syzygy

Without consulting Wikipedia: Name? Color of dress? Short? Fat? Skinny? Tall? Actually there is one juror I do remember in a Scott (Somebody) case who was tall and had hideously dyed flaming red hair!!

MaiDee on July 18, 2013 at 6:18 PM

~Mor-Juan Williams

Joe Mama on July 18, 2013 at 6:18 PM

You forgot the Skittles. If you see someone with Skittles they are without sin.

CW on July 18, 2013 at 6:19 PM

Has libfree opined since this travesty of justice occurred?

arnold ziffel on July 18, 2013 at 6:07 PM

I’ve given him ample opportunity to explain what is was the Rachel Jeantel was saying about Zimmerman being gay, and maybe a rapist, and would’ve understood if he was one of the “Blood” people that Trayvon was just giving him an azz-whoopin’. But he must be busy at work or something. No response.

It seems to me that he is a good candidate to work in the Black community to help combat the homophobia that is being taught to “new-school” kids.

Just think. If he would have volunteered at Trayvon’s school, maybe Trayvon would’ve thought “oh, this guy (zimmerman) is just gay, and only a few of them are rapists, so I won’t give him an azz-whoopin’.

oldroy on July 18, 2013 at 6:21 PM

Ummm…When did buses stop being vehicles?

Liam

And when did SYG only apply to homes and vehicles anyway?

xblade on July 18, 2013 at 6:22 PM

MaiDee on July 18, 2013 at 6:18 PM

No idea. I was just making an educated guess. Generally speaking, I don’t care who they are or what they have to say. I wish they wouldn’t even give interviews.

Syzygy on July 18, 2013 at 6:22 PM

Has libfree opined since this travesty of justice occurred?

arnold ziffel on July 18, 2013 at 6:07 PM

Yes, earlier today in this thread.

Del Dolemonte on July 18, 2013 at 6:22 PM

One of the other take-aways from all of this is, if you are gay, and afraid of being profiled as gay, and maybe even a rapist, you’d better be armed at all times.

oldroy on July 18, 2013 at 6:23 PM

I wish they wouldn’t even give interviews. Syzygy

YES!!!!!!!!!!!!!

MaiDee on July 18, 2013 at 6:24 PM

Next weeks headlines: “Gay rapists join NRA in record numbers”.

oldroy on July 18, 2013 at 6:25 PM

It’s amazing after watching these two interviews to think that, according to B37, three jurors started deliberations wanting to convict him of either murder or manslaughter. The two we’ve heard from are rock-solid in their belief that self-defense was justified; I’d be curious to hear from one of them who wasn’t so solid about how they evolved in the course of deliberations.

Here’s my theory: Those three jurors assumed that the others would vote to convict because the media had told them that Zimmerman was guilty and anyone who thought otherwise was racist.

At least two of them folded really quickly, and the third held out briefly for manslaughter. IOW they weren’t very definite in their belief of guilt.

myiq2xu on July 18, 2013 at 6:26 PM

Yeah, but men and women are basically the same, right? The only differences are culturally-induced, right?

I’m thankful the 6 women came to the right conclusion in this case, but a lot of the details from B37 convinced me that I wouldn’t want to trust my fate to their reasoning skills.

Splashman on July 18, 2013 at 6:31 PM

To my understanding, closing arguments are basically a recap of the trial; no new evidence may be introduced at that stage. So it’s right and proper the prosecution didn’t try — about the only thing they did honestly during the whole travesty.

Liam on July 18, 2013 at 5:36 PM

Yes, when the attorney says, “I rest my case,” it means he is done presenting evidence. “The defense rests.” “The prosecution rests.”

Then they go to closing arguments and the judge’s instructions to the jury.

Wethal on July 18, 2013 at 6:33 PM

“Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar. With each passing day, the case appears less and less like a case of monumental social and political import. There was a shooting and the evidence showed self-defense. The state misjudged how an impartial jury would view its evidence and overcharged the crime. The jury applied the law to the evidence produced at trial and acquitted.”

Just like a cat covering its excrement in a litter-box, the lefties want to hide their evil shame.

ebrown2 on July 18, 2013 at 6:33 PM

Let’s see the MSM play this up. And then let’s hear the continued criticism about ‘stand your ground’.

http://rochester.ynn.com/content/top_stories/490926/jury-finds-roderick-scott-not-guilty/

GarandFan on July 18, 2013 at 5:49 PM

I tweeted that to Andrew Branca, got this response:

Andrew Branca, LOSD ‏@LawSelfDefense 42m

.@novaculus Sure hope that wasn’t a white kid, we’ll never hear the end of it. #eyeroll

novaculus on July 18, 2013 at 6:33 PM

Martin (or any other last name that’d be appropriate) family have a basis for suit against the State for pain and suffering (mental anguish)?

socalcon on July 18, 2013 at 6:34 PM

Has libfree opined since this travesty of justice occurred?
 
arnold ziffel on July 18, 2013 at 6:07 PM

 
Ha. Yes, quite. He suggested (again) that the NRA is racist because they don’t support the illegal possession of firearms by black minors:
 
http://hotair.com/archives/2013/07/18/war-larry-elder-versus-piers-morgan-on-the-zimmerman-trial/comment-page-3/#comment-7175191
 
Once it was shown that he didn’t know what he was talking about he abandoned the thread like he always does.
 
Oh, and something about wigs. We think he was dancing around in blackface for that bit.

rogerb on July 18, 2013 at 6:37 PM

Has libfree opined since this travesty of justice occurred?

arnold ziffel on July 18, 2013 at 6:07 PM

Why, yes, he has:

I agree but, I also think that they over estimate the black outrage.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/gallery/2013/jul/16/trayvon-martin-protests-george-zimmerman-in-pictures

Protests have been huge, they have been in big and small towns and are far bigger than anything Dick Armey’s Freedom Works rustled up in 2010. I was at a wonderful rally in Champaign, IL over the weekend with brilliant and moving testimony from inspired youth. You live in a bubble, but the world is happening. We are organizing, Trayvon is this generations Emmitt Till.

libfreeordie on July 16, 2013 at 9:58 AM

http://hotair.com/headlines/archives/2013/07/16/zimmerman-jury-initially-split-3-2-1-on-verdict/comment-page-1/#comment-2398533

ebrown2 on July 18, 2013 at 6:37 PM

Just like a cat covering its excrement in a litter-box, the lefties want to hide their evil shame.

ebrown2 on July 18, 2013 at 6:33 PM

The brand of litter: “MSM”

Splashman on July 18, 2013 at 6:37 PM

Ha. Yes, quite. He suggested (again) that the NRA is racist because they don’t support the illegal possession of firearms by black minors:

rogerb on July 18, 2013 at 6:37 PM

You kill me.

CW on July 18, 2013 at 6:38 PM

Yeah, but men and women are basically the same, right? The only differences are culturally-induced, right?

I’m thankful the 6 women came to the right conclusion in this case, but a lot of the details from B37 convinced me that I wouldn’t want to trust my fate to their reasoning skills.

Splashman on July 18, 2013 at 6:31 PM

I was on a jury once with a senior citizen who during deliberations actually said “if he’s not guilty, why did the police arrest him?”

I am surprised that juries get it right so often.

slickwillie2001 on July 18, 2013 at 6:41 PM

slickwillie2001 on July 18, 2013 at 6:41 PM

Ed Meese?

novaculus on July 18, 2013 at 6:45 PM

This is slightly OT, but according to a Breitbart story, White, the lawyer who is representing Kruidbos, the whistleblower, used to work for Angela Corey. White left to start his own law practice last December.

While White probably cannot reveal anything confidential about a specific case that was in the office when he was there, White does know how the place runs, how the grapevine works, who does what…and can draft very specific discovery requests.

Other than hiring Alan Dershowitz, I don’t know what attorney would annoy Corey more than someone who knows in exquisite detail what she’s really like.

Wethal on July 18, 2013 at 6:47 PM

I was on a jury once with a senior citizen who during deliberations actually said “if he’s not guilty, why did the police arrest him?”

I am surprised that juries get it right so often.

slickwillie2001 on July 18, 2013 at 6:41 PM

That was the old NKVD way of looking at things, that the innocent are never arrested; the State is always right.

I guess that’s why they had to beat people to get ‘confessions’ — the only ‘evidence’ they had.

Liam on July 18, 2013 at 6:48 PM

You live in a bubble, but the world is happening. We are organizing, Trayvon is this generations Emmitt Till.

libfreeordie on July 16, 2013 at 9:58 AM

Not much going on here in Philly, but a heat index over 100 may have something to do with it. The whole mid-Atlantic is like that. We are supposed to get strong storms on Saturday.

Wethal on July 18, 2013 at 6:50 PM

I was on a jury once with a senior citizen who during deliberations actually said “if he’s not guilty, why did the police arrest him?”

I am surprised that juries get it right so often.

slickwillie2001 on July 18, 2013 at 6:41 PM

Nancy Grace?

Capitalist Infidel on July 18, 2013 at 6:55 PM

The DoJ today put a hold on all evidence in the Zimmerman case, including his gun.

So, they disarmed him, and can dawdle all they like. I bet he won’t get that gun back for years.

I hope he has another one or gets a new one, what with all those death threats from the Sharpton crowd.

Liam on July 18, 2013 at 7:00 PM

The DoJ today put a hold on all evidence in the Zimmerman case, including his gun.

So, they disarmed him, and can dawdle all they like. I bet he won’t get that gun back for years.

I hope he has another one or gets a new one, what with all those death threats from the Sharpton crowd.

Liam on July 18, 2013 at 7:00 PM

At the time of his arrest in April, 2012, he already had at least one new firearm.

And I’ll bet plenty of supporters have volunteered to help him purchase as many as he needs, now that that he’s a free* man.

* (“Free”, meaning, “free to attempt to survive the government’s attempts to incite a lynch mob.”)

Splashman on July 18, 2013 at 7:09 PM

Splashman on July 18, 2013 at 7:09 PM

That’s good to know. I can easily picture Holder trying to terrorize him by leaving him at greater risk.

Liam on July 18, 2013 at 7:12 PM

That’s good to know. I can easily picture Holder trying to terrorize him by leaving him at greater risk.

Liam on July 18, 2013 at 7:12 PM

I doubt that’s his motivation. Holder is following orders from Obama: “Make it look like we’re doing all we can to lynch Zimmerman get justice for Trayvon’s family. After the 2014 elections, we can quietly let the whole thing drop.”

Splashman on July 18, 2013 at 7:18 PM

Splashman on July 18, 2013 at 7:18 PM

You’re most likely right. I’m very cynical of Holder and his boss, and most of all of Sharpton. They all strike me as being very spiteful people, in light of all they had hinging on the case (SYG, gun-control, etc). Plus the new spite-filled ‘protest’ of refusing to tip waiters and waitresses ‘for Trayvon’.

Liam on July 18, 2013 at 7:23 PM

The DoJ today put a hold on all evidence in the Zimmerman case, including his gun.

So, they disarmed him, and can dawdle all they like. I bet he won’t get that gun back for years.

I hope he has another one or gets a new one, what with all those death threats from the Sharpton crowd.

Liam on July 18, 2013 at 7:00 PM

The DOJ isn’t about to file any charges. Politically, it’s just as profitable for them to talk about filing charges and put a hold on Zimmerman’s gun and any other evidence as if they were serious about filing charges.

But actually filing charges would allow a judge to be assigned and to review the case, and the Zimmerman defense team to start filing motions. I don’t think Holder wants to have to face either possibility.

Look for a lot of smoke and no real fire.

There Goes the Neighborhood on July 18, 2013 at 7:24 PM

It’s amazing after watching these two interviews to think that, according to B37, three jurors started deliberations wanting to convict him of either murder or manslaughter.

Six female jurors, I think all mothers, had just experienced a full court press appeal to emotion by the prosecution. The final hour of the prosecution’s closing argument was Guy (described by Mark Geragos as Mr. Dreamy) doing nothing but appealing to their emotions for an hour. They heard rebuttal from the defense — not allowed.

Not too surprising if one or two were influenced to vote to convict him of something on the initial non-binding first vote, taken before any discussion, deliberations, or examination of the evidence and the jury instructions. And yet only one out of six thought the prosecution might have a case for 2nd degree murder.

And this was before they started reading what “2nd degree murder” and “manslaughter” really meant legally. They did not know what they were voting for in that initial vote.

farsighted on July 18, 2013 at 7:36 PM

They heard no rebuttal from the defense — not allowed.

farsighted on July 18, 2013 at 7:37 PM

Plus the new spite-filled ‘protest’ of refusing to tip waiters and waitresses ‘for Trayvon’.

Liam on July 18, 2013 at 7:23 PM

+++++++++++++++++

Wait, what? Did somebody post a link on that? I’m struggling to understand what “justice” (or sense) there is in doing financial harm to a generally poor working class who had nothing to do with the trial. All that will do is pi$$ off a bunch of people who might not have had strong feelings previously on the matter.

fabrexe on July 18, 2013 at 7:42 PM

There was a shooting and the evidence showed self-defense. The state misjudged how an impartial jury would view its evidence and overcharged the crime.

Any charge would be an overcharge.

With each lesser charge the prosecution had less of a case to present.

Take away 2nd degree murder and a two week prosecution turns into less than a one week prosecution.

Juror B37 said the verdict would have been the same if they had charged manslaughter from the beginning, because the evidence and the law were still the same.

Take manslaughter away and charge 3rd degree murder through child abuse and it becomes a two or three day prosecution, if that. Where is the evidence of “child abuse”? There is none. Is saying “f’n punks” and “these a$$holes” almost under one’s breath while talking to an NEN dispatcher evidence of “child abuse” inflicted on Martin by Zimmerman.

Take away all of those and what do they charge him with? Involuntary manslaughter? Then the prosecution must prove “culpable negligence” beyond reasonable doubt. How do you do that when Zimmerman did nothing illegal? And when the jury accepted self-defense as a justifiable defense for 2nd degree murder and voluntary manslaughter? He shouldn’t have gotten out of his car, some say, so he is guilty of involuntary manslaughter?

What’s next? An aggravated assault and battery charge? When the only injury to Martin is a bullet wound inflicted in self defense and Zimmerman’s head is evidence that Martin is guilty of aggravated assault and battery?

The prosecution had no case for any charge. They could not even find a CCW violation to pin on him and charge him with.

farsighted on July 18, 2013 at 7:53 PM

Wait, what? Did somebody post a link on that? I’m struggling to understand what “justice” (or sense) there is in doing financial harm to a generally poor working class who had nothing to do with the trial. All that will do is pi$$ off a bunch of people who might not have had strong feelings previously on the matter.

fabrexe on July 18, 2013 at 7:42 PM

http://hotair.com/archives/2013/07/18/war-larry-elder-versus-piers-morgan-on-the-zimmerman-trial/comment-page-4/#comment-7175808

farsighted on July 18, 2013 at 7:57 PM

Here it is in legalese: Murder is not res ipsa loquitur, that is, you can’t just say, “This person was killed, therefore it must be have been murder.”

flataffect on July 19, 2013 at 1:45 AM

fabrexe on July 18, 2013 at 7:42 PM

Statistically poor tippers, anyway, according to my waitress daughter.

BigAlSouth on July 19, 2013 at 6:09 AM