How does a jury become composed of all white women ...when it is supposed to

[srican69]

represent a cross-section of the society ...

a defendant should not be able to veto a juror because a juror belongs to a certain race.

what do you think?

[Decoy of Fenris]

1. The only black woman there was axed because she watches Fox. n/t

ON EDIT: Also, that was the prosecution's choice.

[Laurian]

4. Then they need to expand the pool. n/t

[Decoy of Fenris]

6. So what, just axe them all until you get a jury racially diverse enough?

I honestly don't know much about how juries work, so if that's possible, then yeah, I mean, go for it.

[Spazito]

8. She was 'axed' because the defense found posts on her Facebook page...

which showed she had 'liked' a protest photo of Trayvon Martin and when questioned on it her responses weren't credible, I think there may have been other material the defense brought forward to the prosecution and the Judge when they were all up at the bench on this.

The cause shown by the defense was accepted by both the prosecution and the Judge.

To say she was "axed because she watches Fox" is beyond merely misleading.

A question remains in my mind as to why there was only ONE black person among the ALL prospective jurors.

[Decoy of Fenris]

9. Hey, I just got the intel from CNN.

I admit I didn't delve into it further, nor did I know that the prosecution tried to axe four white women in a row.


In regards to her being the only black woman, did you ever think maybe she was the only one to show up? Demographics do get like that some time.

[Spazito]

10. Well, that explains it, believing CNN gets their 'facts' correct...

I'm surprised you think they are factual to the extent it seems you do.

Two of the four were successfully struck by the prosecution and seeing as the vast majority of the perspective jurors were white I find it hard to believe you believe those strikes and attempted strikes put the possibility of having white jurors empaneled in any kind of jeopardy but, then again, you believed CNN gets their 'facts' correct so who knows. Oh, and the defense succeeded in three strikes, just thought you might want to know.

As to demographics, that could be one possibility.

[Decoy of Fenris]

11. It was a cursory google. I didn't pay attention to the trial until it was almost over.

I don't like judging based on a lack of evidence, and to be honest, jury selection didn't bother me much; I figured that even in a worst case scenario, he'd get Manslaughter.

And again, I would point out that I genuinely have no idea how juries are seated; didn't know they went by a "Three strikes" rule, either. Hence, why I googled, and since I didn't know the proper procedure, figured "DQ because of Fox" would be a valid reason. I mean... Fox watchers -are- naturally prone to ignorance, regardless of race. Demographics would certainly play into it though, as there'd be only one black juror (male or female) out of ten in Seminole county.


ON EDIT: About CNN: Yeah, don't know much about their viability, either. I normally rely on DU to fact check for me on idle bits of trivia, but I'll take this as a light-handed warning and take CNN with a grain of salt.

[Spazito]

12. I watched the proceeding via a stream which has greatly helped me re the facts vs the media hype...

Being retired, I am fortunate to have the time to do that, I know others do not. LOL re taking CNN with a grain of salt, I had to learn to do that as well once AOL bought it years ago.

[Decoy of Fenris]

13. Hey, we all live and learn.

As I mentioned, DU's normally my go-to news source, but every now and then I'll dip into Cracked. Almost all of my intel is from the net, simply because I don't bother paying for cable any more. On the Internet, no one knows who you are or what you download. Except the NSA.

[Spazito]

14. LOL, my internet provider knows a hell of a lot more about me than the NSA...

and I'm sure if they were to actually take a look, they could use my internet history in place of a sleeping pill.

[Decoy of Fenris]

15. Whereas I'm certain I'm on twelve different watchlists from my gaming hobbies alone. ;) n/t

[Spazito]

16. LOL, hmmm, I will take that as a caution and stop going to Big Fish!

That's gaming, right?

[Decoy of Fenris]

17. I thought it was an existential movie by Tim Burton. o.O

And don't worry, you'll be okay, so long as I don't play Anno; I'll take care to avoid hitting you with my submarine.

[Spazito]

19. LOL again, with that LOL I don't want to hijack the thread so it's been an interesting...

back and forth and quite civil even when we differed, it's appreciated.

[Decoy of Fenris]

20. The same to you, friend. Take care, and stay happy. It's been my pleasure. n/t

[hlthe2b]

2. I think jury of one's peers should likewise take into account socio-economic status...

as well as race, gender and ethnicity... But, then, it appears that nothing short of a change of venue was going to have a chance of finding an unbiased jury of peers.

[Pelican]

21. So...

... what should the jury have looked like in the Zimmerman trial?

[hlthe2b]

23. Stop that BS... I said it should take into account to try to have diversity

Not, as you are implying that one need match solely on race, ethnicity.

[Pelican]

25. Untwist your undergarments...

I was just asking you to expand on your thought.

I was merely curious what an acceptable or equitable jury would have been in your eyes.

[hlthe2b]

30. 'Sorry if I jumped to conclusions, but given the posts I've seen lately vis-a-vis this whole saga

and the insidious racism that seems to underlie at least some, I'm a bit sensitized.

I believe jury selection should be as diverse as possible, racially, ethnically, and in terms of gender, but paramount is to make sure there is not a widespread community bias that will permeate whoever is chosen. I really do believe a change of venue would have been wise for this trial, but who knows..?

[One_Life_To_Give]

28. Wasn't there an English King who based a defense on that?

In the dim recesses of my memory. Seem to recall there was an English Monarch who insisted he couldn't be prosecuted due to; There being No Peers which could compose a jury. I don't think it ended well for him with that defense. No do I really want to see the Wallstreet Banksters with a similarly composed jury.

[hlthe2b]

29. The extremes of income for our poor DO make a difference...

Are you arguing that a lack of experience with or understanding of poverty does not make a difference in jury's judgment of the poorest among us?

As to the wall street example, I don't think there is a case to be made that these very entitled have suffered the biases and systematic discrimination in our judicial system that the poor surely have.

[One_Life_To_Give]

32. Risks very different outcomes based upon income level of defendent

Not that we don't already have this. But it risks making it compounded. Would a Jury of the Boards of Goldman Sachs, Citibank etc. nullify white collar crimes? Would these also become Capital felonies amongst the lowest economic classes? Would the converse be true for more violent crime? Sounds like a world where the legality of an action could be dependent upon the economic status of the perpetrator. Again we have that today but this could be magnified by limiting the jury pool further.

[hlthe2b]

33. that is not at all what I am saying, but if you don't think a jury of your peers likewise

includes at least some representation within the wide relative range of SES for the defendant, i don't know what to say to you.

[One_Life_To_Give]

34. The intent is a representative cross section

of society. In practical terms that becomes difficult especially for a longer trial. Leaving us with retirees and homemakers? It's hardly perfect but it's not so easy to improve upon. I'm sure somebody has done alot of statistical analysis on the composition of juries. But I don't want to see a different Jury for a Michael Skakel. Doesn't that invite Class based Laws?

[hlthe2b]

35. and I don't want to see a jury of "Micahel Skakels" for the most impoverished minority defendant.

[One_Life_To_Give]

38. When's the last time multi-millionairs

filled a jury box? Aside from Impeachment proceedings I can't think of any.

[PoliticAverse]

3. You are not supposed to be able to exclude a juror based on their race, but it still happens...

See: http://www.eji.org/raceandpoverty/juryselection

[srican69]

5. I think there needs to be a race quota ...

a jury of six should get 3 whites and 3 minorities ..

[Kurska]

7. That would make it far more difficult to assemble a jury in a lot of places

New Hampshire is 94% white, a lot of places in the deep south are 90%+ black.

[Niceguy1]

22. bad idea

You would lower the quality of the jury in the effort to satisfy a quota.

[rollin74]

37. Seminole County is over 80% white

why would/should there automatically be a 50% minority jury?

[Nye Bevan]

18. It was not an all-white jury.

Five of the jurors were white, one was non-white or mixed black and Hispanic

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_of_Florida_vs._George_Zimmerman

[One_Life_To_Give]

24. One doesn't have to use race

to exclude all people of certain minorities. Actually finding a body of people in that county who had not been following this case, reading media coverage, was probably going to exclude alot of minorities. The people who hadn't paid any attention and were thus unbiased are probably disproportionately White.

[KinMd]

26. IF you think that having an African-American on the jury would have changed the outcome..

remember Alan West is from Florida...just saying

[Decoy of Fenris]

27. Back to your original point: Regional demographics. 1 black per 10 "Other".

Even cycling through the max number of jurors, the guarantee of a black juror based on regional demographics is slim.

[LittleBlue]

31. The jury wasn't all white

There was one "non-white" juror

[rollin74]

36. Seminole County Fl is over 80% white, only about 10% black

there were only 6 jurors

as to how you end up with an all female jury... I'm not sure

[GiaGiovanni]

39. It's called "jury selection" and "jury consultants"

Attorneys pick the jury they think will be best for their side and will often hire jury consultants to advise them on whom to accept and whom to challenge. Notice that neither the prosecution nor the defense picked males of any color, nor any African Americans at all. That's how you got 5 white women and 1 Hispanic woman. Apparently both sides thought they would be able to emotionally move these women. (Lots of sexism in the choices, I think.)

[moondust]

40. Angela Corey says

it was all about the strict rules of jury selection, the way the jurors were seated (apparently during interviews). She explained it on AC360 Tuesday night.

[Mira]

41. I think

that
"a jury of your peers" could not be more distant from Trayvon and his life and youth than what was chosen.
It is absolutely ridiculous that the jury was comprised of white women in a local that is basically racist and only moderately educated. Jury or Peers? Give me a break!
I was at a rally today, about 2000 people, all black and 20 or so white (I'm guessing, but not off by far)
in support of Trayvon.

Defendants don't veto jurors. Their attorneys do. They have a number of challenges and folks they can exclude.

In this case all folks who were peers were challenged and excluded.