Posted on 07/16/2013 5:37:39 AM PDT by Uncle Chip
Bunch o’ Interviews:
Juror B37
Rachel Jeantel
West & O'Mara
Bernie & Angie
.............
One Stop Shopping
Post em as you find em
bookmark
Post any important interviews with highlights or transcripts that might be worthwhile.
Um Jeanette says cracker or cracka isn’t racist. Ok, then I say nigger or nigga or negro isn’t racist. See how easy that is.....we each get to use our own personal criteria in determining if we think a word is or is not racist.
I call that the “Queen of Hearts Method of Linguistics.”
http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/1307/15/pmt.01.html
Interview with Rachel Jeantel
http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/1307/15/acd.01.html
Exclusive Interview With Juror B-37; Defense Team Reacts to Juror Interview
COOPER: I want to ask you a bunch of the — I want to ask you about some of the different witnesses. Rachel Jeantel, the woman who was on the phone with Trayvon Martin at the start of the incident.
What did you make of her testimony?
JUROR: I didn’t think it was very credible, but I felt very sorry for her. She didn’t ask to be in this place. She didn’t ask — she wanted to go. She wanted to leave. She didn’t want to be any part of this jury. I think she felt inadequate toward everyone because of her education and her communication skills. I just felt sadness for her.
COOPER: You felt like, what, she was in over her head?
JUROR: Well, not over her head, she just didn’t want to be there, and she was embarrassed by being there, because of her education and her communication skills, that she just wasn’t a good witness. COOPER: Did you find it hard at times to understand what she was saying?
JUROR: A lot of the times because a lot of the time she was using phrases I have never heard before, and what they meant.
COOPER: When she used the phrase, “creepy ass cracker,” what did you think of that?
JUROR: I thought it was probably the truth. I think Trayvon probably said that.
COOPER: And did you see that as a negative statement or a racial statement as the defense suggested?
JUROR: I don’t think it’s really racial. I think it’s just everyday life, the type of life that they live, and how they’re living, in the environment that they’re living in.
COOPER: So you didn’t find her credible as a witness?
JUROR: No.
COOPER: So did you find her testimony important in terms of what she actually said?
JUROR: Well, I think the most important thing is the time that she was on the phone with Trayvon. So you basically, hopefully if she heard anything, she would say she did, but the time coincides with George’s statements and testimony of time limits and what had happened during that time.
COOPER: Explain that?
JUROR: Well, because there was a — George was on the 9-1-1 call while she was on the call with Trayvon, and the times coincide, and I think there was two minutes between when George hung up from his 9-1-1 call, to the time Trayvon and Rachel had hung up.
So really nothing could have happened because the 9-1-1 call would have heard the nonemergency call that George had called, heard something happening before that.
COOPER: She said at one point that she heard the sound of wet grass.
Did that seem believable to you?
JUROR: Well, everything was wet at that point. It was pouring down rain.
Rachel Jeantel Last Person To Talk To Trayvon Martin Responds To Piers
https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=ekJbUyn0X8o#at=20
Consumption ping. Cell limited
Tell that to Paula D’s tormenters
Scheme Team “Social Engineer”
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fJgSUnd5d3o
Greta Susteren gives Jasmine Rand a much needed spanking July 15 2013
JUROR: I didn’t think it was very credible,
but I felt very sorry for her.
She lies under oath, a lie that takes away a year of a man's life as she seeks to put him away for good -- and she feels sorry for her.
Juror B37 should shut up and look at all the evidence that did not make it to the jury before doing any more interviews.
(no link)
Reaction to the George Zimmerman Verdict
FOX News Channel - Monday, July 15, 2013
Show: FOX ON THE RECORD WITH GRETA VAN SUSTEREN
Author: Greta Van Susteren
EXCERPT
VAN SUSTEREN: And now to Trayvon Martin’s family. They hardly missed a minute of the trial, but they elected not to appear as the verdict was read, Trayvon Martin’s father, Tracy Martin, tweeting just minutes after hearing the verdict, “God blessed me and Sybrina with Tray, and even in his death, I know my baby proud of the fight we all (ph) along (ph) with all of you put up for him. God bless.”
One of the Martin family attorneys, Jasmine Rand, joins us. Jasmine, how are you doing?
JASMINE RAND, MARTIN FAMILY ATTORNEY: I’m doing pretty well this evening. We’re still obviously disappointed at the outcome of not guilty. And I’d like to point out that not guilty does not necessarily mean that George Zimmerman was innocent, and we still maintain that position.
As his legal counsel and his family, I think, you know, the last couple of days has been disheartening for Tracy and Sybrina, but we have had an outcry of support from the nation and from the international community. We’ve had statements from President Obama, from Attorney General Eric Holder. So we are hopeful that we may still get some justice for Trayvon.
VAN SUSTEREN: Let me ask you, you say “get justice for Trayvon” — first of all, let me tell you, I mean, I think it’s terrible when someone loses a life. But here’s — here’s the story, is that the prosecution picked that jury with the defense. The prosecution agreed to that jury with the defense. The jury heard all the evidence. The prosecution didn’t get shut down from presenting any evidence, as far as I know. And the jury then decided the case, and everybody was happy with that jury.
And then suddenly, after the jury renders its verdict, suddenly everyone’s dissatisfied or at least not everyone but some are dissatisfied with the jury as though they did a lousy job or heard a different trial or didn’t listen to the case.
What happened? You liked the jury in the beginning!
RAND: You know, our legal team has never said that we were happy with the jury or that we liked the jury. We never specifically endorsed the jury, but...
VAN SUSTEREN: Well, the prosecution most certainly did!
RAND: ... we said that we were...
VAN SUSTEREN: The prosecution most certainly did! They helped pick it. They were right there in the courtroom! They were there every single day picking that jury!
RAND: I’m not the prosecution, I’m the family attorney. And from the family attorney’s perspective, we never endorsed that jury. We respect their decision...
VAN SUSTEREN: Are you saying it was a bad jury?
RAND: ... to the extent that — I do not believe that...
VAN SUSTEREN: Are you saying it was a bad jury?
RAND: I do not believe that Trayvon got equal justice in this instance.
VAN SUSTEREN: Specifically how? Tell me the evidence...
RAND: Because...
VAN SUSTEREN: Tell me the evidence that the jury didn’t hear.
RAND: The evidence that the jury didn’t hear?
VAN SUSTEREN: Right.
RAND: I don’t think that they properly considered the evidence. If they had listened to the evidence and if they had followed the law, then George Zimmerman would have been convicted of murder.
VAN SUSTEREN: Well...
RAND: I mean, he got out of the car — he got out of the car...
VAN SUSTEREN: Are you — you’re a lawyer!
RAND: ... with a loaded gun. He followed...
VAN SUSTEREN: You’re a lawyer, right?
RAND: Yes.
VAN SUSTEREN: And the whole point of the jury is that we assign the job to weigh the facts. We draft them. We make them sit there. Lot of times, they don’t want to be there. We then present the evidence, and the judge then says, Here’s the evidence, here’s the law, instructs them on the law, and it’s your duty — it’s not mine, it’s not yours, it’s not anybody else’s in the community, but it’s the jury’s duty to weigh them. And all of a sudden, suddenly, afterwards, that you say they can’t do their job?
RAND: I have a greater duty beyond being an attorney, and that’s to be a social engineer. And when the law doesn’t get it right, I believe that we have the right to peacefully and morally, conscientiously object to the decision of the jury.
That doesn’t mean that we believe that it’s going to be overturned or that it will or that we don’t respect the decision that those six people made. But there are millions of people out there who don’t agree with that decision. So it’s not just the legal team.
VAN SUSTEREN: You know what the problem is, though? You know, that...
RAND: It’s millions of people...
(CROSSTALK)
RAND: ... from all over the world.
VAN SUSTEREN: That’s deeply disturbing that you say millions are out there who didn’t see it! You know and I know that millions of people who may not like a verdict, whether it’s for it or against this case or another, didn’t watch the case, didn’t sit in the courtroom, didn’t weigh the evidence, didn’t listen to jury instructions. That’s just noise. That’s why we have court systems is so that people — so that both sides have an opportunity to be heard.
This social engineering — I don’t know if that’s more like social manipulation than social — I don’t want social engineering is. But actually, justice is presented in the courtroom with a jury deciding it and both sides having an opportunity. That’s justice, and the jury deciding it.
RAND: Courtrooms do not always deliver justice, as I’m sure you well know. You’re aware of the Civil Rights movement. You’re aware of the changes that we had to make...
VAN SUSTEREN: I — you know what? I bet...
RAND: ... in the courts historically in this nation...
VAN SUSTEREN: I bet if we put my career up next to yours in terms of Civil Rights and what we’ve done in the courtroom for — for people, I’ll put my career up next to yours any day you want, Jasmine! I just don’t criticize juries.
(CROSSTALK)
RAND: I haven’t been practicing law as long as you have, but I would also like an opportunity to finish my answers and explain my answers to you.
VAN SUSTEREN: Go ahead. You got a quick — I’ll let you.
RAND: I think that when I’m talking about being a social engineer, George Zimmerman never would have been arrested if it wasn’t the outcry from black people, brown people, white people, Republicans, Democrats, Christians and Muslims in this nation who demanded his arrest. He was then arrested and he was tried by a jury of his peers. I do not believe that the jury got it right, and the federal government has a every right to bring the claim. That’s why we have federal preemption.
VAN SUSTEREN: Jasmine, thank you very much for joining us. Sorry I gave you a hard time, but thanks for joining us.
RAND: Thank you.
http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/1307/15/acd.01.html
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
VINNIE POLITAN, HLN HOST: One word to describe George Zimmerman?
ANGELA COREY, FLORIDA STATE ATTORNEY: Murderer.
POLITAN: George Zimmerman?
BERNIE DE LA RIONDA, ASSISTANT STATE ATTORNEY: Lucky.
POLITAN: Trayvon Benjamin Martin.
DE LA RIONDA: I don’t know if there’s one word that can describe — victim. A victim.
POLITAN: Trayvon Benjamin Martin.
COREY: Prey. P-R-E-Y.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
Jurist husband is the lawyer. Their book will compare her experience with what he observed as a lawyer outside
Was she the jurist taking copious notes?
http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/1307/13/bn.01.html
Interview with Robert Zimmerman Following George’s Acquittal
Aired July 13, 2013
Do you think it's time the demonization stopped in relation to your brother or do you accept perhaps as a family and does George accept that the fact that his actions led to the death of a young teenage boy who turned out to be unarmed, that that in itself means that it can never be an easy ride for him?
ZIMMERMAN: Well, I don't think George accepts nor does his family that his actions led to the death nor does the jury nor does the criminal justice system. The action that led to Trayvon Martin's death was deciding to either lay in wait or return to attack George viciously continuously relentlessly, despite George's cries for help, which is a sign that he's giving up and ultimately threaten to kill him and attempt to disarm him.
Good for him --
Shame the MSM hasn’t taken the ten minutes to read his father’s post
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.