General Discussion

ReRe

(12,190 posts)

72. I heard someone say tonight...

Tue Jul 16, 2013, 11:48 PM

Jul 2013

... that the defense/prosecution's best chance of winning in the end is the picking of the jurors before the trial begins (or something to that effect, but you get the gist.)

I think it was all the more difficult this time, as there were only 6 jurors. I've been watching court TV since it's inception and I have NEVER heard of a panel of only 6 jurors. The prosecution should have asked for a change of venue. Plus, things would not have gone the way they did had there been at least 3 men on the panel.

You're right...they were a panel of GZ's peers, because GZ is a spoiled brat wimp. Who would have thought that those 6 women could feel sorry for poor wittle GZ. That trial was so screwed up that some are calling it the Trayvon Martin trial!

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

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

94 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Here�s The Story Of The Twitter Hero Who Single-Handedly Killed Zimmerman Juror B37 Book Deal [View all] Playinghardball Jul 2013 OP

KR will read later. NYC_SKP Jul 2013 #1

A glimmer of hope that not all people suck!!! dorkzilla Jul 2013 #2

Amen! n/t smartalek Jul 2013 #60

The power of a tweet ! Instant knockdown! lunasun Jul 2013 #3

It is obvious from this example and the O.J. exboyfil Jul 2013 #4

Absolutely not! Jackpine Radical Jul 2013 #10

I totally agree with Jackpine.... our system isn't perfect but it's what we've got groundloop Jul 2013 #23

Will probably not work in high profile cases exboyfil Jul 2013 #25

That's a good point. LWolf Jul 2013 #63

As the old saying goes, "Bad cases make bad law." Jackpine Radical Jul 2013 #64

hopefully you meant the Rodney King jury olddots Jul 2013 #53

That one too exboyfil Jul 2013 #55

My husband always says that Rainforestgoddess Jul 2013 #84

I really think that there needs to be a system laundry_queen Jul 2013 #90

I have a buddy who is a now retired Public Defender. Hassin Bin Sober Jul 2013 #94

this whole thing stinks warrior1 Jul 2013 #5

She was sequestered but she wants to include her husband's perspective? HangOnKids Jul 2013 #13

I read somewhere that her husband has some connection to either west or o'mara or both Voice for Peace Jul 2013 #27

Thank you MoreAnd Again konnie Jul 2013 #6

She and her husband? Who the f*ck cares about her husband. He was not a juror. STINKS KittyWampus Jul 2013 #7

Countdown to the first Zimmerman apologist jumping in bullwinkle428 Jul 2013 #8

I was confronted with billh58 Jul 2013 #12

I'm pretty sure I can guess who may have posted that. Moses2SandyKoufax Jul 2013 #48

Why does one have to be a "Zimmerman apologist..." RevStPatrick Jul 2013 #15

And it's our free speech right to tell her, her agent, and her publisher that the idea sucks wryter2000 Jul 2013 #18

One would have to be an idiotic Zimmerman defender to believe that the consequences of the free mark LanternWaste Jul 2013 #20

You are 100% correct. The woman will probably still write the book and find a publisher later. n/t A Simple Game Jul 2013 #28

If that juror, or any other, does write a book, the publisher will be *Regnery* smartalek Jul 2013 #62

Free speech rights have *nothing* to do with signing a book deal. The tblue37 Jul 2013 #29

+1 eggplant Jul 2013 #36

She can self publish if she wants. She can start a blog. Her rights are not infringed. Mass Jul 2013 #39

The Government is NOT interfering with anyone's Free Speech MagickMuffin Jul 2013 #54

nobody's stopping her from exercising her free speech rights barbtries Jul 2013 #59

Not if she made the deal before the trial was over lolly Jul 2013 #75

I don't think any juror should profit from their service Chemisse Jul 2013 #81

How is the government interfering with her free speech rights? The 1st bullwinkle428 Jul 2013 #85

She is, indeed, free to pursue it, liberalhistorian Jul 2013 #89

K&R nt avebury Jul 2013 #9

one person CAN make a difference... 2theleft Jul 2013 #11

I think they should have let her write the book tofuandbeer Jul 2013 #14

I question the juror's published statement LukeFL Jul 2013 #16

I thought the same.... PsychGrad Jul 2013 #21

I thought the same thing. PR firm wrote that. yardwork Jul 2013 #51

WOW. Just WOW! People power trumps all. calimary Jul 2013 #17

Here is another link to the various tweets. gvstn Jul 2013 #19

K & R SunSeeker Jul 2013 #22

K&R Hubert Flottz Jul 2013 #24

Happy to see this. Thanks. nt ancianita Jul 2013 #26

Sometimes arm twisting is the only way to get anything done marshall Jul 2013 #30

All hail killer tweeter @MoreandAgain!!! PufPuf23 Jul 2013 #31

I'm sure the agent's phone was also ringing off the hook as well frazzled Jul 2013 #32

K&R...Thanks Playinghardball for posting this. red dog 1 Jul 2013 #33

How in the world this woman got on that jury is hard to understand. ReRe Jul 2013 #34

the question to me is how did she get on the jury when her lawyer husband is a friend of the HiPointDem Jul 2013 #38

Dead on "Conflict of Interest" to anyone with half a brain.... ReRe Jul 2013 #41

Here's how that woman got on that jury. red dog 1 Jul 2013 #43

You're right... ReRe Jul 2013 #44

It's not too late for Eric Holder to do the right thing and prosecute Zimmerman red dog 1 Jul 2013 #45

Yes, I know that... ReRe Jul 2013 #46

And don't forget what happened to O.J. Simpson after he was aquitted. red dog 1 Jul 2013 #50

Yes, GZ's days as a free man running around with a gun are going to end, none to soon. ReRe Jul 2013 #52

and simpson has paid virtually NONE of that money. just because someone receives a judgment niyad Jul 2013 #68

March 26, 1997 -- The Court orders Simpson to turn over his assets.... red dog 1 Jul 2013 #76

oh yeah, that book was a best-seller niyad Jul 2013 #86

"Virtually none"?..I don't think so. How about the Andy Warhol painting? red dog 1 Jul 2013 #87

as far as the warhol, we would have to know which one, would we not? there is a difference niyad Jul 2013 #92

I never said Simpson paid the verdict. red dog 1 Jul 2013 #93

I think it's a jury of Zimmers peers. WCLinolVir Jul 2013 #66

I heard someone say tonight... ReRe Jul 2013 #72

It was not supposed to be a jury of Trayvon's peers. Chef Eric Jul 2013 #80

You're right. ReRe Jul 2013 #88

Caution!!! JimboBillyBubbaBob Jul 2013 #35

Watch out for the movie deal! They don't give a hoot about who they make wealthy. nt kelliekat44 Jul 2013 #42

The 2nd half of Cooper's interview with Juror B37.... ReRe Jul 2013 #47

the jury was sequestered--she did not go home at night during the trial. niyad Jul 2013 #91

She keeps talking about her Husband . i don't think she was honest with how aware JI7 Jul 2013 #37

If Zimmerman was found guilty, would the book still be offensive? nt ZombieHorde Jul 2013 #40

Because I strongly disagree with the jury's decision (i.e. they blew it) I was offended ... Kennah Jul 2013 #49

Exactly. This case shows how repugnant it can be. Chemisse Jul 2013 #82

I will buy her book BigD_95 Jul 2013 #56

fuck that shit. this idiot has already proven she didn't pay attention.. frylock Jul 2013 #57

You have some word salad going Caretha Jul 2013 #65

Ha ha ha. The court system doesn't prove our guilt or innocence. WCLinolVir Jul 2013 #69

R#160 & K n/t UTUSN Jul 2013 #58

She did not 'have a deal with a publishing company', she signed with a literary agent.... PoliticAverse Jul 2013 #61

Way to go! Pretzel_Warrior Jul 2013 #67

WOW! So glad to see all of this! So Grateful to MoreandAgain! Cha Jul 2013 #70

K&R. I would have never known without your OP. David Zephyr Jul 2013 #71

@MoreAndAgain ROCKS!!!! DesertDiamond Jul 2013 #73

+100 Liberal_in_LA Jul 2013 #74

Good! obama2terms Jul 2013 #77

Great! This opens the door for Lucianne Goldberg to bottom-feed Juror B37 and snurk her up. NBachers Jul 2013 #78

Never doubt avaistheone1 Jul 2013 #79

Merely means a change of publisher is all. GreenStormCloud Jul 2013 #83