General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsWhat Juror B37 actually revealed.
She told Anderson Cooper that "I think Trayvon got mad and attacked George"; "George feared for his life.'
This reveals the institutional racism within us. Trayvon had anger. George had fear. This juror was unable to even consider that Trayvon may have had fear. Why is that? Anderson Cooper failed journalism 101 by not asking her this question.
lolly
(3,248 posts)And could not even imagine that there could be another perspective.
KurtNYC
(14,549 posts)Even believed that Zim was the one screaming for help.
They flipped Zimmerman's Dirty Harry (f'ing punks) anger and Trayvon's running away from a creepy staring dude fear 180 degrees.
matthews
(497 posts)Make no mistake, that is exactly what was happening, by a joker with an agenda who was stalking him with a gun.
I hate it when people call Martin 'angry' simply because he fought with Zimmerman. I would be damn scared and ANGRY too if I was being stalked by some really creepy guy when all I was doing was minding my own damn business. And then to see that he had a gun, what was the kid supposed to think? His only options were fight or flight. And taking off and running for it was not an option. He did the only thing that we left open to him, to try to fight the thug off him and hope that he could get away and make it home.
mzmolly
(51,003 posts)to bolster his self defense claim?
matthews
(497 posts)mzmolly
(51,003 posts)to DU.
And let me add my own welcome to the group.
hopemountain
(3,919 posts)his wounds were too superficial.
and, no concussion - from that big ol' chunk of cement o'mara lugged into court.
mzmolly
(51,003 posts)himself.
There was no evidence of a fight or zimmerman dna on Trayvon's body so how could he have done all the head bashing and punching and smothering that zimmerman claimed.
There may have been a tussle, zimmerman and they fell to the ground and zimmerman scratched the back of his head (remember he just needed a band-aid for treatment as testified to by the woman ME).
zimmerman could easily have conked himself in the face, maybe even the back of his head with the gun.
He knew the stand your ground law because he had studied it. He also knew he had just screwed up big time and had to make it look like he was afraid and had to defend himself in a fight.
secondwind
(16,903 posts)Justice
(7,188 posts)Unbelievable.
AndyA
(16,993 posts)A 17 year old unarmed kid vs. an armed adult...
Adult pursues kid even though he was told not to by the 911 operator, thus taking matters into his own hands.
Kid has a history of issues that many kids have today, most grow up and put those issues behind them.
Adult has a history of domestic abuse, assault and battery on a policeman.
Kid is unarmed (did I say that?) and has only a cell phone, beverage, and Skittles. Adult has a chip on his shoulder, anger issues, and a loaded gun (did I mention that?)
What could possibly go wrong?
Zimmerman is at fault. He should have left well enough alone, and let the police arrive on the scene to deal with Martin. But he didn't, he went after him with a loaded gun. Who's the instigator here? Who started this? The second that Martin realized he was being followed, he had cause to fear for his safety. Zimmerman only came to that point AFTER he went after Martin.
I can't comprehend that anyone could possibly say that Martin was to blame. Martin was the victim here, not Zimmerman. Martin wasn't following Zimmerman around, and he wasn't armed as if he was looking for or expecting a problem. Zimmerman was.
LisaLynne
(14,554 posts)that because Trayvon may have initiated verbal contact, that some how that was being the aggressor. I just don't see how that can be. As you so perfectly state, Zimmerman was the adult. He was the one in his car who got out to follow Trayvon. At night. With a gun. That is on him. He'd called the police. He could have waited. Trayvon wasn't doing anything wrong that needed to be stopped.
So, yeah, I'm with you.
uponit7771
(90,359 posts)LisaLynne
(14,554 posts)BlueJazz
(25,348 posts)PsychGrad
(239 posts)noiretextatique
(27,275 posts)because she was already biased against martin and favored zimmerman.
Blue_Tires
(55,445 posts)that she almost certainly had her mind made up before the trial started...That's what's troubling...
naaman fletcher
(7,362 posts)I'm not a big fan of this juror, but what did she say that implies she had her mind made up?
yardwork
(61,700 posts)That's what she said during jury selection, too. Trayvon was killed at 7 pm. The juror didn't listen to the prosecution's case. She learned nothing.
naaman fletcher
(7,362 posts)I guess I just didn't take that as "mind made up beforehand" as opposed to "idiot".
JI7
(89,262 posts)there were NO riots before he was charged. they were all peaceful protests calling for him to be charged.
live love laugh
(13,124 posts)I'm not giving him a pass--but he did seem to be trying to absorb the incredulous bullshit he was hearing.
Hoyt
(54,770 posts)just allowed an armed bigot to get away with murdering an innocent kid, and it will likely lead to more tragedies."
denverbill
(11,489 posts)And the judge specifically directed the jury to disregard his statement.
And she claimed to know what was in Zimmerman's heart, despite the fact that he didn't even testify.
We all know what's in Trayvon's heart now, because Georgie put it there
Ruby the Liberal
(26,219 posts)it was the testimony of the defense's Medical Examiner that it was George Zimmerman yelling on the tape that convinced her - because of his war experience? She conflated the Vietnam Vet's testimony with the ME. Cooper called her back on that, but she doubled down.
The sheer stupidity of that is mind boggling.
On Cooper's behalf though - I think he did the right thing by just letting her ramble incoherently without challenging her. That way he got more raw foot-in-mouth remarks than if she were to feel like it was more confrontational.
Flashmann
(2,140 posts)I've not seen one thing,EVER,that would make me imagine Cooper even ATTENDED journalism 101...
RevStPatrick
(2,208 posts)...of one of the wealthiest families in American history.
His "job" is to use his position as a propagandist to protect his family's wealth, and the wealth of the rest of the 0.01%
Period.
That he gets it right on occasion is incedental.
Flashmann
(2,140 posts)Yeah I agree...I hope I'd be one of the last to ever accuse him of it.
bettyellen
(47,209 posts)(forget where) and just dove right in and started taping. Got someone to hire him from that.
I guess it's better than a what a lot of filthy rich heirs do with themselves all day, but yeah- he catapulted himself into it with some serious $$$.
JI7
(89,262 posts)jimlup
(7,968 posts)The juror was incapable of seeing the situation from any other perspective than the defense. It shows why the law in Florida is so badly flawed. I am left asking why the jury makeup wasn't more diverse? There should have been at least 2 black jurors. What was the ethnicity of the "non-white" juror? I can't find it in the news feeds.
rl6214
(8,142 posts)I also believe the black population in Sanford is on like six percent.
John2
(2,730 posts)rl6214
(8,142 posts)So that means one of the jurors should have been black but then again the prosecution did nothing to impress me.
John2
(2,730 posts)I'm wrong. Sanford Florida is over 30 percent Black and 20 percent Hispanic.
rl6214
(8,142 posts)According to the 2011 census, Seminole County is composed of 65.8 percent non-Hispanic whites, 17.7 percent Hispanic, and just 11.7 percent African-American.
whopis01
(3,522 posts)(Proportionally speaking of course)
The area around Sanford has some historically African-American areas within it or bordering it. Midway, for example, is over 90% African-American. That's about 6 miles east of from the neighborhood where Trayvon Martin was killed. There are other similar neighborhoods throughout that area.
In fact, the African-American population in Seminole county is fairly concentrated in two areas, one being Sanford, the other being Altamonte Springs. The rest of the county tends to have far less.
azmom
(5,208 posts)She referred to hispanics as Spanish. We hispanics never do that.
mzmolly
(51,003 posts)Yet so many are focused on the supposed lack of education of Rachel Jeantel?
JI7
(89,262 posts)i bet she was taking notes of things not related to the trial itself such as who was seated where. which famous news reporters were sitting where and talking to who and what people were wearing and other stupid shit she could put in the book she planned to write.
doodling?
Yeah, good point on the book! I bet you're right.
Glimmer of Hope
(5,823 posts)Trilingual Rachel is way more sophisticated and brighter than this piece of shit.
mzmolly
(51,003 posts)Fully agree.
That privileged woman has no excuse for her ignorance. Her attorney husband didn't marry her for brains, that's for certain.
Quixote1818
(28,960 posts)PADemD
(4,482 posts)when she said, "What was he doing out so late?" Did she even look at the evidence timeline? Seven o'clock is not too late to run to the store.
PsychGrad
(239 posts)it is. I live in a small, rural town in Missouri and this place is closed up by 6pm at the latest. This whole thing is disgusting and saddening and ridiculous... this woman is an idiot, and I'm GLAD that she did an interview before she got a PR person to advise her. Stupidity on display.
I live in a rural township in PA, and our local grocery stores are open until midnight. I'd think nothing of a 10 p.m. run to the store for chocolate. The only thing we have to be careful of are the deer.
PsychGrad
(239 posts)But I'm not making this up. Every business downtown is closed and locked by about 6 pm - and a few stay open until 10 pm, but that is LATE to most residents. I am a night person, and I literally have to go out of town after 8 pm at the latest to get anything - including gasoline. I go out often at 1am, but have to drive to the "city" (KC is about 30 miles from me) to do or get anything. Of course, we literally have zero stoplights in our town, one four way stop in the middle of downtown, and a population of about 5,000... but, we are the biggest town in the county... Most people here are inside and ready for bed by 7 pm... lol. I will say too that, there are a lot of farmers, so they use the daylight, so that affects it somewhat too - as things open pretty early.
IrishAyes
(6,151 posts)Due to financial necessity, not for the ambience or friendliness. 99% of these people are xenophobic as geese and not half as smart or nice. (For those of you who might not know about geese, they're vicious and make good guard animals.) After 7 years a lot fewer of them scream in my face anymore, but I think that's mostly because they ran out of breath and words. One guy cornered me and bragged incessantly about his superior intellect though he admitted his girlfriend was the real intellectual; after all, SHE almost made it through 11th grade! I had to keep a straight face because he's an ex-con with a violent drug abuse history and even the police chief calls him "the craziest man I've ever met."
News flash - half of them are like that. Why don't I move? Partly for spite I guess, and partly because I can't afford to. This was as far north as I could make it.
PsychGrad
(239 posts)It's so odd. My town has a shit ton of churches and everyone here claims christianity of some sort - honestly, I know of only 3 other Atheists here and I know a LOT of people (in a small town, it's hard not to). And I agree. My town is very rural, so I get the gun nuts x1000 - the old school "it's our right". I just don't agree - I think owning a gun should be a privilege - and you should lose that privilege when you exhibit inability to act like a rational adult. I know it "needed" to be a right 200 years ago or so, but now? I mean - it's so ridiculous. And, I didn't even put signs in my yard for Obama the second time around, because I KNEW I would be vandalized. A friend of mine had someone try to run him off the road, with his two little boys in the backseat of the car, bc of an Obama sticker... the guy that tried to run them off, rolled down his window and was screaming at them about "niggers" and satan and such... he said it was surreal.
This town is filled with good people - CONDITIONALLY good people. They are caring - towards their "own", but that's about it. It's such a freakin' disconnect sometimes that I have considered moving - but like you said, it's affordable and I own my house, and don't want to try to sell it and buy another one. I would really love to get back out into the country - At least then I would have some space to myself. I'm honestly surprised I haven't been attacked or vandalized - but I do own two very large and protective dogs too, lol.
IrishAyes
(6,151 posts)Or any sane religion, for that matter. Please don't blame the song when the choir's tone deaf. But I appreciate your empathy, and it proves my point in the title consequently that you are far more my brother or sister than many in the churches. Your friend is very fortunate to have escaped with his life and that of his children. I'd say 'unharmed' or 'unscathed' except we both know the scars such a trauma can leave, especially on the little ones. Hopefully your friend can explain to his sons that they've just seen what a hateful monster conservatism has produced, and they'll be forewarned as they go through life to avoid such traps. This never should've happened but since it did, try to use it for educational purposes.
Since my mom was a New South southern belle, I got somewhat similar exposure to that sort of person early on in life, when we visited her relatives before the final breaking point. She and I thought we were going on a summer's evening scenic car ride but we wound up in the woods at a Klan rally with no way out. It was the single most terrifying moment of my life, and on the way back to my aunt's house later I learned that my exquisitely graceful parent could swear like a whole boatload of sailors. We didn't dare tell my father the whole story when we got off the plane at home, because he would've gone ballistic. He got an appropriately watered down version, which was more than enough to convince him all ties to that branch of the relatives - I refuse to call them family - must be severed.
I've been through two presidential election cycles here now, both when my 2 chows were still alive. Which is a major reason I still am! One of the first things I invested in was a fence around the complete perimeter, and when I put up my 4'x5' handcrafted sign, I set it toward the front of a side yard so if anyone shot it up - as they openly threatened to do - at least maybe house and occupants would survive. But I also installed a row of small American flags across the top in hopes that the wingers might not be in such a hurry to shoot at that. Don't know if it helped, but no shots were fired that I know about.
And when the wingers took the House in the last midterms, a pickup truck full of armed teabaggers parked in front of my house, honking the horn and raising all kinds of hell. I went outside and waved at them with a grin on my face, called a few by name, and then pulled out an old camera they didn't know was broken. As I pretended to take pictures, they peeled out and never came back. But they're still out in the woods playing soldier, you know that. Some guy wrote a letter to the local weekly in response to one of mine, and it had 'LYING HYENAS OF SOCIALISM!' in large bold caps for a title. I guess that was meant to put me in my place.
Oh, well... guess we could trade war stories all day. But if we ever met for a beer, I don't think we'd lack for things to talk about.
Rex
(65,616 posts)nt.
TorchTheWitch
(11,065 posts)A prospective juror that displays any bias whatsoever is canned. Jurors are not even allowed to lean to one side or the other during the trial but must by law keep an open mind until deliberations. Of course, we know that at some point jurors are naturally going to lean to one side or the other the closer the trial comes to a close, but by law they can't go into it with any bias and cannot form a bias for one side or the other until all the evidence has been presented. It's part of their oath.
Clearly, from how she answered Cooper's questions she had to have not paid one wit of attention through the trial and not even to the judge's admonition that Serino's statement about his believing that Zimmerman was being truthful was to be disregarded. No juror could possibly get that much basic information THAT mixed up unless they slept through the entire thing, didn't pay a single bit of attention whatsoever or just aren't mentally competent enough to be a juror. Personally, I think she really may be missing some important marbles upstairs and was never mentally competent to serve as a juror. Either that or she spent the whole time day dreaming and scribbling notes for her trial fiction novel. Seriously, though I really have to question if she's playing with a full deck.
Rex
(65,616 posts)undo it.
Wow, yeah and now the other jurors are coming out with their initial verdicts. Half said he did nothing wrong, 2 for manslaughter and 1 for second degree murder.
I wonder how much information did they use to make their decision with that wasn't admissible as evidence? In the end they all decided to acquit. Looks like he is in some serious trouble in another legal case. Zimmerman is proven scum and will end up in prison one way or another imo.
Punkingal
(9,522 posts)She also said Rachel was not credible. But she believed "George."
protect our future
(1,156 posts)Trayvon was armed with a sidewalk and a nose-breaking fist. The brother announced that on cable TV shortly after the verdict.
protect our future
(1,156 posts)by AndyA.
rl6214
(8,142 posts)Everyone keeps going on about what an idiot she is but fails to mention that five other jurors came to the same conclusion.
COLGATE4
(14,732 posts)that all the jury were confused, racist bumpkins that were seduced by (pick your choice) by 1) the cops, 2) the Defense attorneys, 3) innate racism or 4) the jury instructions. Don't you see - there's no other possible explanation.
HiPointDem
(20,729 posts)though.
being as how the woman was the wife of an attorney who knew o'mara professionally.
and possibly knew zimmy, as she keeps calling him 'georgie' like an intimate.
protect our future
(1,156 posts)I need to type faster.
COLGATE4
(14,732 posts)already posted. Unless you have some actual proof that the women herself knew O'Mara personally there is absolutely no reason to challenge her presence on a jury. The fact that her husband, an attorney may (or may not) have known O'Mara (as opposed to knowing who O'Mara is) is irrelevant.
HiPointDem
(20,729 posts)of reason to take her off that jury.
naaman fletcher
(7,362 posts)She does not call him "georgie" in it at all.
edit to add link: http://www.miamiherald.com/2013/07/15/v-print/3502047/zimmerman-juror-speaks-out-transcript.html
protect our future
(1,156 posts)"George he" as in "George, he did this and he did that, blah blah blah." Maybe.
brush
(53,840 posts)should have disqualified her from the jury.
I was called to jury duty once in New York but was excused during voir dire because I knew one of the attorneys from a writing workshop we both attended.
But that was New York not Flori DUH!
brush
(53,840 posts)The other five are just as much at fault for not seeing the huge glaring inconsistencies in zimmerman's several changes in his story his huge whopper-sized lies.
COLGATE4
(14,732 posts)brush
(53,840 posts)I certainly didn't see anything other than your implied support of a killer getting off.
COLGATE4
(14,732 posts)invested in a given narrative to understand that there was also the possibility that they are wrong in their assumptions and that the jury did its job. I don't support any Defendant - I support our system of Justice and accept its results whether I personally agree with them or not.
protect our future
(1,156 posts)use of the name "George" as if they were friends, which was completely inappropriate. In the AC interview this juror kept referring to Zimmerman as "George" and talking about all the nice things "George" did for his neighbors, which made me wonder if they knew each other.
HiPointDem
(20,729 posts)they'e 1) intimates or 2) making fun of the person?
& we know she wasn't making fun of him.
something stinks.
protect our future
(1,156 posts)or was she hand-picked and not asked certain specific questions during voir dire. Hmmm...attorney husband....who would know other attorneys....rumors of book deal being in progress prior to the verdict....hmmm....
anneboleyn
(5,611 posts)protect our future
(1,156 posts)naaman fletcher
(7,362 posts)HiPointDem
(20,729 posts)transcripts are not infallible (often wrong in fact)
B37 showed obvious sympathy towards Zimmerman, which makes since given her decision. She became increasingly comfortable, calling the 29 year old "Georgie," during one exchange, and Martin a "boy of color." Unfortunately, the commentary, may not have helped the semi-public relations tour of which she is embarking. Hours after announcing she signed a book deal, the offer was dropped.
http://hiphopwired.com/2013/07/16/juror-b37-says-trayvon-martin-shooting-wasnt-about-race-calls-teen-a-boy-of-color-video/
naaman fletcher
(7,362 posts)chuckstevens
(1,201 posts)It was so sweet of her to get weepy knowing that she just let 28 year old man who murdered a 17 year kid unarmed kid, whose only crime was being black in the wrong neighborhood, walk free. After all Trayvon must have been "angry", right?
How can people be so blind to the truth? I would have loved for Cooper to have had the guts to ask her one simple question, "if Trayvon had been white, do you think Zimmerman who have followed him around?"
COLGATE4
(14,732 posts)Z following T is irrelevant to the charges brought against Z. The only issues before the court are those that determine what happened when the physical confrontation between the two men started and during the course of the confrontation. The rest is legally irrelevant.
erpowers
(9,350 posts)Anderson Cooper asked juror B37 if she felt George Zimmerman racially profiled Trayvon Martin. She said no. She then went on to say that she felt that if the person had been of any other race Zimmerman would have followed that person.
chuckstevens
(1,201 posts)Sorry! I missed that!
DhhD
(4,695 posts)B Calm
(28,762 posts)hue
(4,949 posts)Z had a loong record of calling the police & reporting that someone looked suspicious. This was, IMHO, a projection on his part. He was fishing for a long time for the right moment to "defend himself" with his loaded gun. He instigated the situation, against police instructions, and created the reality that he had fantasized would justify his killing the paranoia and bigotry that rotted/festered in his mind & character for so long.
The jury instructions were badly written and confusing. They exacerbated the inability of the simple minded jurors to analyze and come to an objective decision.
Just perusing Z's past--he needs a psych eval...
ReRe
(10,597 posts)... is as immature as Juror B37. While interviewing her, he probably had no idea what this was sounding like to the greater audience and went right along with her.
Renew Deal
(81,870 posts)mstinamotorcity2
(1,451 posts)get on my nerves. Almost every question asked was leading or in Agreement with her. He has a jaded view of people of color with his privilege rich little life.
Sparkly
(24,149 posts)Crazy.
Rosa Luxemburg
(28,627 posts)she didn't know what happened. I think the whole thing was flawed.
NYC_SKP
(68,644 posts)Jefferson23
(30,099 posts)I do believe, a bit conflicted. She was going to write a book, but now they're not. No one
expected an interview to be given, and certainly not so quickly yet she gives one and
implies what other jurors positions were.
Something about her is not right, and I don't mean just the fact that she bought Zimmerman's
entire story.
She seems like a loose canon.
sinkingfeeling
(51,471 posts)Heather MC
(8,084 posts)IrishAyes
(6,151 posts)She talked about "the kind of life these people live. What their lives are like." So she exhibited the same ignorant bigotry that GZ shows. Presupposing they're always up to no good and causing trouble. If Trayvon had survived and GZ sued him for assault, B37 would've nailed Trayvon's hide to the wall in a flash. Damn the bigots like her. She's just as bad as GZ.
olegramps
(8,200 posts)I have no idea if it is according to the law that all the events leading up to the actual confrontation had to be totally ignored. As for her credibility I am very skeptical since she again states that Martin was out late at night. That is absolutely ridiculous. Her being married to an attorney is also significant and I absolutely don't believe that she had very little knowledge about the incident and even said the demonstrations were riots. I also believe that she revealed a degree of racism in her statements, i.e., "they, and "person of color" "demonstrations were riots".