Another Juror, B29, speaks out.

[asaratis]

ABC is no better than NBC.

NBC is not worth two dead flies.

Screw them both.

 

[ScienceRocks]

The day our news stops striving for the truth=they're no better then what North Korea has.

 

[Noomi]

Zimmerman had to be arrested, just because there isn't enough evidence to convict, doesn't mean there isn't enough evidence to arrest.

 

[asaratis]

Lack of evidence is not proof that no crime was committed.

But it is evidence that the there should have been no prosecution.

Acquittals are not proof that there shouldn't have been a prosecution. OJ was acquitted. Casey Anthony was acquitted.

And even the argument that there shouldn't have been a prosecution doesn't change the fact that Zimmerman may have gotten away with murder.

Lack is evidence is sufficient reason NOT to prosecute.
There was evidence against OJ:

• unexplained cut finger
• blood on his foyer floor
• the bloody glove (which he managed to not get on his hand by bending his thumb...anybody can do that...but it fooled the jury and gave slick Johnny Cochran a nice rap line)
• the thump on Cato's wall when OJ climbed over the fence
• the car parked oddly outside the fence
• several other things I can't remember

There was no evidence in the Zimmerman case that pointed to anything other than self defense. The man never should have been charged.

He was charged because of demands from a duped crowd of protesters and pressure from the kings of racism, Jackson, Sharpton and Barack Obama.

 

[OriginalShroom]

Zimmerman had to be arrested, just because there isn't enough evidence to convict, doesn't mean there isn't enough evidence to arrest.

That's just it ..

There was enough evidence at the crime scene that supported Zimmerman's story that there was no need to arrest him.

He was only arrested after the Martins hired a PR Firm to embelish the Racial aspect, lying about Zimmerman's race, to make an arrest a political neccessity.

 

[BobPlumb]

Instead of presenting a case against Zimmerman, the prosecution put on a theatrical production.

 

[Papageorgio]

1. Trayvon further away
2. Trayvon came back
3. Travyon attacked
4. Zimmerman defended himself with his gun

Trayvon never should of came back and attacked. FACT.

What proof do we have that, that was what happened?

 

[Papageorgio]

1. Trayvon further away
2. Trayvon came back
3. Travyon attacked
4. Zimmerman defended himself with his gun

Trayvon never should of came back and attacked. FACT.

Another fact

Trayvon had cell phone. If Trayvon scared by crazy assed cracker Trayvon can call police and wait till police show up.

Why does Trayvon call girlfriend instead of police?

You obviously don't know much about the black experience with police.

Why black people don't trust the police - CNN.com

What personal experience do you have about the black experience with police.

 

[Lakhota]

Another fact

Trayvon had cell phone. If Trayvon scared by crazy assed cracker Trayvon can call police and wait till police show up.

Why does Trayvon call girlfriend instead of police?

You obviously don't know much about the black experience with police.

Why black people don't trust the police - CNN.com

What personal experience do you have about the black experience with police.

Why is "personal" experience required?

 

[Papageorgio]

You obviously don't know much about the black experience with police.

Why black people don't trust the police - CNN.com

What personal experience do you have about the black experience with police.

Why is "personal" experience required?

You are the one making comments about others not knowing what the "black experience" with the police is. How do you know what the "black experience" is?

 

[ScienceRocks]

1. Trayvon further away
2. Trayvon came back
3. Travyon attacked
4. Zimmerman defended himself with his gun

Trayvon never should of came back and attacked. FACT.

What proof do we have that, that was what happened?

The reliable evidence supports it.

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

Have you ever served on a jury?

Nope. Doubt I ever will, no sensible lawyer would allow an astrophysicist on the jury. Does me not serving on a jury somehow change the function of a trial jury?

Nope. But it's more clear now why you're such an asshole.

So I'm an asshole because lawyers almost universally don't like academics on a jury? Wow, OK, that's a new one! Its funny how some folks spend so much time trying to figure out how they can cast academics as bad people.

My sister is a Biochemist in L.A. She helped develop HIV/AIDs testing back in the 80s when she worked for a lab in San Francisco. I don't think she thinks she's too smart to serve on a jury.

Good for her! But sorry to say, her thoughts about whether or not she is too smart to be on a jury will not be of relevance. The courts make that decision along with the lawyers, who, through a process known as voir dire, are allowed to question jurors about their backgrounds and may, depending of course on the particulars of the local jurisdiction, reject jurors depending on those answers. And guess what? I have it on good word from a Louisiana plaintiffs attorney who has been practicing for 40 years that lawyers don't like to have to pitch arguments to juries that are smarter than they are. Who would have thought!?! Especially plaintiffs lawyers and prosecutors. Imagine having to prove beyond a reasonable doubt anything to a skeptical scientist!

 

[Lakhota]

What personal experience do you have about the black experience with police.

Why is "personal" experience required?

You are the one making comments about others not knowing what the "black experience" with the police is. How do you know what the "black experience" is?

Duh, did you read the CNN link? There are also lots of other links available. Dave Chappelle is a good source...

 

[Papageorgio]

1. Trayvon further away
2. Trayvon came back
3. Travyon attacked
4. Zimmerman defended himself with his gun

Trayvon never should of came back and attacked. FACT.

What proof do we have that, that was what happened?

The reliable evidence supports it.

No one has evidence has surfaced of what really happened, other than Martin was on top of Zimmerman. That is all the evidence we have, the rest is all unknown.

 

[Papageorgio]

Why is "personal" experience required?

You are the one making comments about others not knowing what the "black experience" with the police is. How do you know what the "black experience" is?

Duh, did you read the CNN link? There are also lots of other links available. Dave Chappelle is a good source...

So you read, so you know? LOL! Chappelle, may know, you would not.

 

[tinydancer]

Nope. Doubt I ever will, no sensible lawyer would allow an astrophysicist on the jury. Does me not serving on a jury somehow change the function of a trial jury?

Nope. But it's more clear now why you're such an asshole.

So I'm an asshole because lawyers almost universally don't like academics on a jury? Wow, OK, that's a new one! Its funny how some folks spend so much time trying to figure out how they can cast academics as bad people.

My sister is a Biochemist in L.A. She helped develop HIV/AIDs testing back in the 80s when she worked for a lab in San Francisco. I don't think she thinks she's too smart to serve on a jury.

Good for her! But sorry to say, her thoughts about whether or not she is too smart to be on a jury will not be of relevance. The courts make that decision along with the lawyers, who, through a process known as voir dire, are allowed to question jurors about their backgrounds and may, depending of course on the particulars of the local jurisdiction, reject jurors depending on those answers. And guess what? I have it on good word from a Louisiana plaintiffs attorney who has been practicing for 40 years that lawyers don't like to have to pitch arguments to juries that are smarter than they are. Who would have thought!?! Especially plaintiffs lawyers and prosecutors. Imagine having to prove beyond a reasonable doubt anything to a skeptical scientist!

Truth.

You need the lowest common denominator going back into that jury room. And by no means am I knocking jurors. I truly believe that apart from voting or being a volunteer for your country's military, sitting on a jury is the highest act of civil duty anyone can perform for their country.

Those womens' souls were torn apart. I admire this juror coming forward and saying in the simplest of terms how desperately she wanted to find Zimmerman guilty; but she couldn't.

Wow.

 

[NYcarbineer]

But it is evidence that the there should have been no prosecution.

Acquittals are not proof that there shouldn't have been a prosecution. OJ was acquitted. Casey Anthony was acquitted.

And even the argument that there shouldn't have been a prosecution doesn't change the fact that Zimmerman may have gotten away with murder.

Lack is evidence is sufficient reason NOT to prosecute.
There was evidence against OJ:

• unexplained cut finger
• blood on his foyer floor
• the bloody glove (which he managed to not get on his hand by bending his thumb...anybody can do that...but it fooled the jury and gave slick Johnny Cochran a nice rap line)
• the thump on Cato's wall when OJ climbed over the fence
• the car parked oddly outside the fence
• several other things I can't remember

There was no evidence in the Zimmerman case that pointed to anything other than self defense. The man never should have been charged.

He was charged because of demands from a duped crowd of protesters and pressure from the kings of racism, Jackson, Sharpton and Barack Obama.

Prove that Martin started the fight.

 

[Connery]

Merged threads

 

[NYcarbineer]

Zimmerman had to be arrested, just because there isn't enough evidence to convict, doesn't mean there isn't enough evidence to arrest.

That's just it ..

There was enough evidence at the crime scene that supported Zimmerman's story that there was no need to arrest him.

He was only arrested after the Martins hired a PR Firm to embelish the Racial aspect, lying about Zimmerman's race, to make an arrest a political neccessity.

None of that nonsense changes the simple fact that Zimmerman may have gotten away with murder.

The effort by the pro-Zimmerman crowd to establish a myth here that because he was acquitted,

it proves he did nothing wrong, is despicable.

 

[Connery]

Zimmerman had to be arrested, just because there isn't enough evidence to convict, doesn't mean there isn't enough evidence to arrest.

The police in the US do not need "evidence" to arrest they need "probable cause" the standard of which is a "reasonable belief" that the person committed a crime.