What happened to the "open mind" Juror 37B promised so she would be selected for the jury?
You have yet to provide even a modicum of evidence that this juror did not keep an open mind. Deciding after the first day of the trail that evidence was lacking to support a conviction is not the same thing as closing one's mind. It's an indication that the case should have never been brought in the first place.
Like all Zimmerman defenders, Juror 37B was not concerned with the point where "George" caught up with Trayvon - 100 yards from "George's" car.
And this disproves the claim of self defense how?
Do you have a shred of evidence to support this?
Didn't think so.
Are you suggesting it should be against the law to take notice and to follow a person trespassing...in rain...at night...while concealing their identity?
What the **** are you suggesting, exactly?
Not you.
Indeed you are.
Now, one more time, are you willing to engage in actual debate by addressing the retorts to your posts...or are you just a hateful troll? In addition to the questions posed above, you have yet to address these:
1) Explain, using logic and reason why it's troubling that she referred to Mr Zimmerman by his first name? What bias does this expose exactly?
2) Why is it a problem that she is married, has kids, or that her husband has the means to defend his family as is the case with millions of fathers?
3) She felt Zimmerman was innocent on the first day. So did the police. So what? How is that an indictment of this juror?
4) The prosecution said race was not an issue. The FBI found the same. Why are you denigrating this juror for coming to the same conclusion?
So, what is it to be? Troll or not?