Can a jury bring back a guilty verdict out of fear for the lives? Do they have to explain to anyone why they decided the way they did? I'm just thinking about one comment I heard on tv, that 'a boy was killed after a wannabecop got out and followed him and someone needs to pay for that.' When I heard that, it stayed with me because I think that is exactly what the jury will ultimately feel whether the defense LEGALLY proved GZ innocent of all charges. I think the jury is looking for any reason at all to convict GZ....they are in genuine fear of their own and families lives.
I think the jury is looking for any reason at all to convict GZ....they are in genuine fear of their own and families lives.
I believe there is no doubt whatsoever they will convict him and send him to prison for something. If not murder, it will be manslaughter.
That is why you have a judge. The judge should make sure that if the prosecution has not proven up the elements of the crime on a legal basis that the case should not go to the jury.
But juries are free to decide whatever they want for whatever reason they want. I actually believe this jury is comprised of responsible citizens who knew the score going in and were not afraid of rendering a verdict in this case. If they had any reason to "fear for their lives" I'm sure they could have gotten out of jury duty on this case.
I was called for jury duty on a gang murder case. They gave everyone a set of form questions for jury qualifications. One of the questions was whether or not I had any reason not to sit on the jury and I honestly answered that because it was a gang shooting that I really had some serious reservations about rendering a verdict on the case. I was promptly excused from service.
I think the jury is looking for any reason at all to convict GZ....they are in genuine fear of their own and families lives.
I don't think so. At this point I would suspect that the jury is chomping at the bit to get this over so they can acquit him.
We can't assume every jury is an OJ jury. I have no information that these jurors are anything other than responsible members of the public. They are not going to send some guy to prison for the rest of his life just because they are afraid to render a verdict in his favor. They would have to live with that for the rest of their lives.
How so? The Knock Knock joke is NOW very important.
These jury members were picked because they were not really watching Zimmerman/Martin stuff much.
Therefore, WHY would they feel at risk now?
Those who might feel at risk could have easily done something on purpose, to be excused from the Jury.