A Juror speaks

Discussion in 'Too Hot for Swamp Gas' started by g8orbill, Jul 15, 2013.

  1. gatornana
    Offline

    gatornana Administrator

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2007
    Messages:
    23,280
    Likes Received:
    292
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Ratings Received:
    +974
    We don't know her reasoning. But we do know she was in contact with an agent the following day after the verdict was read.......that gives the appearance she was a financial stakeholder during her service, deliberation and verdict.

    If this is justified or given a big pass then our jury system has a big problem.

    The only book I know of written by jurors was by the jurors on the Scott Peterson trial....they did have a unique experience and together wrote a book about a year later.
  2. MastaG8r
    Offline

    MastaG8r New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2007
    Messages:
    5,039
    Likes Received:
    44
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    305, USA
    Ratings Received:
    +44
    A point that came out during trial and was reiterated by O'Mara during the closing arguments (which I'm guessing you didn't watch, given your RCA dog "huh?" reaction to the Juror's comment?) was that whereas Zimmerman was eventually told to stand down, earlier in the conversation the 911 operator was asking him for more information about TM's appearance and activities. GZ has said in interviews that he took the operator's requests to mean he should go get the answer if he didn't already have it. For example, I think at one point the operator asked, "what's he doing now," or something like that, but GM couldn't see TM at that moment so he went to find out.
  3. rounds
    Offline

    rounds New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2007
    Messages:
    2,981
    Likes Received:
    19
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Ratings Received:
    +19
    Doubters should REALLY listen to her interview. Very intelligent woman.
  4. MichiGator2002
    Online

    MichiGator2002 VIP Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2007
    Messages:
    16,519
    Likes Received:
    596
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Ratings Received:
    +2,808
    We don't know her reasoning, exactly. For that matter, we don't actually know that she had anything in the works prior to the verdict, it's just speculation. Who has something to prove here, the juror, or her accusers? What has been the takeaway of the past few week's crimlaw/crimpro lecture to America?

    Any juror on a high profile press case has a story that people will be interested in. When it was published really doesn't matter other than as differing matters of taste. And, for that matter, the Peterson jury convicted, pretty much proving my other point -- it isn't an outcome based interest.
  5. MastaG8r
    Offline

    MastaG8r New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2007
    Messages:
    5,039
    Likes Received:
    44
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    305, USA
    Ratings Received:
    +44
    You are only saying all this because you didn't like the verdict. If they had sent GZ to prison you'd have no problem with any of them writing books about it, right?

    Like Michi said, the fact that one of the Jurors - or for that matter, all of them - may have been in contact with a literary agent does not call the legitimacy of their verdict into question. They all six agreed.

    For any of the Jurors who intended to go public and become some sort of celebrity off this trial, considering the obvious tilt of the media it would have behooved them to find GZ guilty of at least manslaughter. Folks on the Right would have shrugged and accepted a manslaughter verdict with resignation. They would not have harassed and vilified the Jurors over it, the way that the more emotionally-invested folks on the Left - yourself included - feel the need to vilify these ladies because you don't agree with their verdict.
  6. gatornana
    Offline

    gatornana Administrator

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2007
    Messages:
    23,280
    Likes Received:
    292
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Ratings Received:
    +974
    I can turn it the other way and say the same because y'all agree with the verdict.

    I'm surprised as lawyers that you'd justify this sort of conduct....to ignore the implications.

    I didn't like the verdict but understand it and expected it. I'm of the opinion that in order to not have this sort of thing happened again the SYG and self-defense laws need to be changed. They tip too far in favor of the shooter.
  7. rounds
    Offline

    rounds New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2007
    Messages:
    2,981
    Likes Received:
    19
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Ratings Received:
    +19
    The ladies FOLLOWED the law with much personal anguish, turned in their verdict, then cried like babies together. Only to be villified...
    • Like Like x 1
  8. reformedgator
    Offline

    reformedgator Premium Member

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2009
    Messages:
    1,913
    Likes Received:
    50
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings Received:
    +239
    Unfortunately Rounds, that's not what some want to hear.
    • Like Like x 1
  9. gatordowneast
    Offline

    gatordowneast Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2007
    Messages:
    11,730
    Likes Received:
    302
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Ratings Received:
    +984
    Yep, the left does not like it when the evidence does not point their way. And some of the jurors were likely democrats. It's not like the prosecution or defense did not have choices to seat this jury.
    • Like Like x 1
  10. gatornana
    Offline

    gatornana Administrator

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2007
    Messages:
    23,280
    Likes Received:
    292
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Ratings Received:
    +974
    To question this juror's motivation when she signs with an agent for a book deal within 36 hours of the verdict isn't vilifying her. Don't know why you're being so defensive.
  11. madgator
    Online

    madgator Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 28, 2007
    Messages:
    8,717
    Likes Received:
    230
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Location:
    South Florida
    Ratings Received:
    +829

    This trial illustrates the neo-liberals emotion driven mindset.


    -If the facts don't support their predetermined conclusion, then they are lies.

    -In order to reach their predetermined conclusion.....conclude conjecture as facts

    -Ignore the rule of law as it is only an impediment to reaching the desired conclusion

    -Blame the law for being inherently "fill in the blank" and that it needs to be changed.
  12. SmootyGator
    Offline

    SmootyGator Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2007
    Messages:
    2,974
    Likes Received:
    182
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Location:
    Tampa, Florida
    Ratings Received:
    +813
    IIRC, she said that her and her husband had talked about the book deal. I remember her also saying that she didn't really realize that this trial was this much of a circus until they finally got back to the hotel after making the decision.

    If both these facts are true, then it was probably the husband's idea to cash in on the juror thing. I would suspect he thought better of it given the reaction of the crowds after the verdict.
  13. rounds
    Offline

    rounds New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2007
    Messages:
    2,981
    Likes Received:
    19
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Ratings Received:
    +19

    It is not all about YOU, Nana.
    In case you haven't noticed, the ladies are being vilified nationwide.

    Furthermore, juror B37 stated in tears at the end of her interview with AC that she was going to give any proceeds from book to charity and would write it w lawyer husband to try to help heal the anger caused by the verdict by explaining how carefully the jury considered all the information and the law in reaching an anguished decision.
  14. MastaG8r
    Offline

    MastaG8r New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2007
    Messages:
    5,039
    Likes Received:
    44
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    305, USA
    Ratings Received:
    +44
    Well you can say whatever you want to say. Doesn't mean there's any validity to it.

    You say you're surprised that lawyers would justify "this sort of conduct" and "ignore the implications."

    WHAT sort of conduct? A juror contacting a literary agent? Doing an anonymous interview on CNN? What are the implications that concern you about that?
  15. gatornana
    Offline

    gatornana Administrator

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2007
    Messages:
    23,280
    Likes Received:
    292
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Ratings Received:
    +974
    Please point out where I've made this topic about me.....I've stuck to the facts here and my opinion on the implications.

    As far as having knowledge these jurors are being vilified, I don't. Haven't watched any coverage following the verdict. I only know about this juror's signing with an agent because I got a txt alert and went to the article to read it.
  16. gatornana
    Offline

    gatornana Administrator

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2007
    Messages:
    23,280
    Likes Received:
    292
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Ratings Received:
    +974
    You know my concerns....I've put it out there.
  17. rounds
    Offline

    rounds New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2007
    Messages:
    2,981
    Likes Received:
    19
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Ratings Received:
    +19
    The conduct I have severe trouble justifying is that of the entire State Attorneys office. This case should have never left Seminole county. It should have been presented to the local Grand Jury, if possible. Mob rule caused a ignorant Governor to send it to Corey and now look at the consequences of nationwide rioting to say nothing of GZ s expenses and unfair anguish.
  18. MastaG8r
    Offline

    MastaG8r New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2007
    Messages:
    5,039
    Likes Received:
    44
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    305, USA
    Ratings Received:
    +44
    As near as I can tell it's this, then:
    Generally speaking an advance book deal could call a juror's motivation to serve as a juror into question...although in this particular case the lady has said that IF she does a book and makes any money off it, she'll donate the profits to charity.

    However, how does it call the juror's verdict into question? She ultimately still has to agree with all the other jurors, and in any event, one verdict is not necessarily any more book-worthy than another.

    If anything, the more marketable verdict in this case would've been guilty, of manslaughter at least. Then she would've been welcomed on shows like The View and her favorite, The Today Show, to tell all about how she and the others did "justice for Trayvon." Who's going to have her on now, except to resentfully grill her over the "outrageous" verdict as some are calling it?
  19. rounds
    Offline

    rounds New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2007
    Messages:
    2,981
    Likes Received:
    19
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Ratings Received:
    +19
    O'Mara said it well in his post-verdict interview w CNN.
    The MSM failed GZ.
    The State Attorney justice system failed GZ.

    And for WHAT?
  20. whitelakegator
    Offline

    whitelakegator New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2012
    Messages:
    1,263
    Likes Received:
    20
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Ratings Received:
    +20
    Amazing to see how pro-Zimmerman supporters automatically label anyone not happy with the verdict as left or liberal or whatever. Again, I am a white repub and I think the implications are bad when you have people playing wanna be policeman on the weekends. Is anyone on here going to claim that Zimmerman was trained how to handle that confrontation properly? In fact, he was trained...only to observe and report. I can see why the HOA settled. I don't want gung ho wanna be cops running around my neighborhood UNTRAINED on how to handle potentially dangerous situations, do you?

Share This Page