General Discussion

dkf

(37,305 posts)

23. I didn't follow the minute by minute...

Tue Jul 16, 2013, 12:08 AM

Jul 2013

But might she not have been saying the details of what happened prior to the call end, if you draw back all that happened according to Rachel, it would have started as z was still on the phone with the dispatcher?

That might be difficult to determine for us, not having all the times or the details at hand.

Honestly I've never tried to do that analysis.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

63 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

More incredible things Juror B37 said on CNN!! [View all] Duer 157099 Jul 2013 OP

Well, she was following the Defense attorney's orders not to use her common sense. Liberal_Stalwart71 Jul 2013 #1

LOL so she follows THAT instruction?? Duer 157099 Jul 2013 #4

Doesn't sound like she has any common sense. stranger81 Jul 2013 #6

Common sense is for the elite, citified arugula eaters alcibiades_mystery Jul 2013 #12

It sounds like she probably read that on a website and wasn't paying attention in court Quixote1818 Jul 2013 #2

If that was the timing of the phone calls, why doesn't that make sense? dkf Jul 2013 #3

Completely self contradictory Duer 157099 Jul 2013 #7

I didn't follow the minute by minute... dkf Jul 2013 #23

It's not the timing of the phone calls. madaboutharry Jul 2013 #13

Yes, she IS wrong. But she used "that fact" to render a witness testimony as unreliable Duer 157099 Jul 2013 #15

There is contradictory evidence tht the jury must weigh: truedelphi Jul 2013 #19

Were those scenarios presented to the jury and by whom? dkf Jul 2013 #24

Down in reply/post number 25, there is the truedelphi Jul 2013 #31

I heard what she said. I don't know if she plotted this timeline herself or if it was presented. dkf Jul 2013 #32

The phone record logs were presented as evidence Duer 157099 Jul 2013 #33

The screams went on for 40+ seconds, so you need to subtract that out. dkf Jul 2013 #34

My understanding of what phone calls she was talking about Duer 157099 Jul 2013 #35

She said on Piers Morgan her phone had her cut off at 7:16 and they reported he died at 7:17. dkf Jul 2013 #41

A minute of screaming is a long time Politicalboi Jul 2013 #51

Hold on, are you saying you think this juror thought Duer 157099 Jul 2013 #55

First, the phone company guy made the point many times that phone call times are rounded UP Duer 157099 Jul 2013 #56

I don't know what her argument for not considering her own stated "fact" that truedelphi Jul 2013 #38

there was no such instruction in the jury instructions TorchTheWitch Jul 2013 #46

You are right and thank you for the clarification. truedelphi Jul 2013 #49

She wasn't the foreman n/t Duer 157099 Jul 2013 #57

Because that is not the timing of the phone calls Quixote1818 Jul 2013 #20

If you back up the screams though, and all that she said happened, when does confrontation begin? dkf Jul 2013 #27

Tell me the precise time of the 911 scream call Duer 157099 Jul 2013 #60

Everyone noticed that the Prosecution did not develop a narrative of the case DURHAM D Jul 2013 #5

Speaking of leader, do we know who the forewoman was yet? stranger81 Jul 2013 #8

I think she said it wasn't her. NaturalHigh Jul 2013 #10

I cannot see whatever Ignore posted. If anyone else knows, still curious -- thx. [n/t] stranger81 Jul 2013 #14

Seems to defeat the purpose. n/t TroglodyteScholar Jul 2013 #21

I have been wondering that myself. DURHAM D Jul 2013 #17

That's what I was speculating. stranger81 Jul 2013 #26

.. Cha Jul 2013 #39

And the police testifying for the Defense? VanillaRhapsody Jul 2013 #29

yeah, that's a very weird thing, that the prosecution didn't do their own timeline. HiPointDem Jul 2013 #43

they did TorchTheWitch Jul 2013 #47

must have missed it then. HiPointDem Jul 2013 #48

There was never any doubt... NaturalHigh Jul 2013 #9

I disagree naaman fletcher Jul 2013 #63

Trayvon was a boy of color. johnnyrocket Jul 2013 #11

Several times in the interview madaboutharry Jul 2013 #16

Oh no! sounds like Cha Jul 2013 #40

sounds like she knows him personally. HiPointDem Jul 2013 #44

Are you sure? Duer 157099 Jul 2013 #59

She was doing exactly what the defense wanted, I expect RedCappedBandit Jul 2013 #18

Very very suspicious. That is NOT juror without preconceived notions of the case. johnnyrocket Jul 2013 #22

Here is what the Domestic Goddess herself, Roseanne, tweeted about the jury truedelphi Jul 2013 #30

CNN Anderson Cooper interviews Juror B-37 (Full, 36:49 minutes) below Tx4obama Jul 2013 #25

She had an entire NIGHT to ruminate on this. dkf Jul 2013 #28

Maybe so but I sure as hell wouldn't run onto national TV a couple days later Duer 157099 Jul 2013 #36

She was very confused about fitting Stand Your Ground law with Manslaughter law. JDPriestly Jul 2013 #50

I'm sleepy so I'll read your full comment tomorrow - but I wanted to say... Tx4obama Jul 2013 #52

I'd be interested in that. JDPriestly Jul 2013 #54

So, in spite of all the media speculation that the prosecution put on a bad case, stopbush Jul 2013 #37

Or bad instructions from the judge truebluegreen Jul 2013 #53

There's an old saying that applies to juries in the South - "They sure can pick em". Spitfire of ATJ Jul 2013 #42

She was never going to vote guility BainsBane Jul 2013 #45

I agree. She had her mind made up the moment she stepped in the courtroom. Hong Kong Cavalier Jul 2013 #58

+1 Blue_Tires Jul 2013 #61

This woman is a complete moron. I wonder why they didn't just declare a mistrial. Initech Jul 2013 #62