Posted on 07/15/2013 5:12:50 PM PDT by kristinn
On now. O'Mara, West coming up.
I think that a reasonable person could come to that conclusion without the part that was removed from the record.
He said as much with his answers on cross.
and you need to read this.....biggest eye opener you will ever see
The rest of us freedom loving, Constitutional, and free marketers who are taxed enough already SLAVES to these idiots.
they conviced one to be stupid enough for murd2
they conviced two for manslaugher.
the one could have held out
She said she was for not guilty from the outset.
perhaps, my point was that with the jury makeup, getting a conviction was pretty much never going to happen.
Likewise if the Jury was 5 black women and a hispanic woman, George would be in quite a different place right now.
You could could see she clearly has a severe underbite. (Not that that explains all of how she speaks.)
Rachel, who admitted 2 minutes into the interview that she had THREE bluetooths. She wasn’t working the auctions, she was working young black kids in rings.
She’s her own Call Center. And likely - I believe - Trayvon was only half-way to hell until she got her claws on him.
And she is from Haiti.
Take a look at the first few moments after the judge admonished the jury. O’Mara asked the same question in a slightly different way that didn’t require Serino to vouch for Zimmerman, and still elicited the same information. I think that obviates any potential problem.
Yes but it does not explain the way she speaks.
The state had no evidence yet it was 3-3. Scary. Also this juror gave credence to the lie that GZ should not have got out of his truck. First of all there is nothing ILLEGAL about that. Second of all it’s a gated community and GZ has every right to be on this PRIVATE property he lives on. The fact that this woman supports the lying narrative just burns me up.
Gonzales is a RINO. He NEVER badmouths Holder.
I’ve have an underbite my whole life, and pronounce words just fine.
Like everything else she says, not credible.
Exactly.
She has a lazy speech pattern.
The entire under bite thing was a sympathy ploy.
Yes, the unbiased would have cut out all the superfluous nonsense if they know the law. They would not even consider all side-tracking done by the prosecution or by the biased judge.
Zimmerman got out of the car - irrelevant.
Zimmerman was said that he "followed" him - irrelevant.
Zimmerman's injury wasn't "serious", said prosecuting ME witness - irrelevant.
Attempts to paint Zimmerman as a racist - irrelevant.
All of it irrelevant. And so on and so on...
It all came down to the actions of both men in last 45 seconds or so until the shot was fired resulting in the death of Martin.
Two pertinent questions that had to be answered:
Question: did Martin physically attack Zimmerman that was serious enough that Zimmerman felt that his life was at risk or serious bodily harm?
Answer: yes
Question: did Zimmerman act in self-defense in accordance with the law?
Answer: yes.
Verdict: not guilty of murder 2 or manslaughter.
A jury who knows the law could have been in and out of jury room to give their verdict of not guilty within 5 minutes. Case closed and in time to go home for dinner.
Gonzales was neutered when the Klintoon DOJ political prosecutors were fired. Bush never fought back.
That’s more or less what O’Mara did following the admonishment to the jurors the next morning. He re-asked the question in a way that didn’t have Serino vouching for Zimmerman’s honesty, but still made the point.
“This woman should not be doing this. She is jeopardizing her safety by going public.”
She’s the one who has announced she and her husband are going to write a book about this.
But I agree. She should list the book as being “By Juror B-37”. Plus I don’t think she should be giving anything away at this point. Won’t help her book sales to give away the juicy parts for free.
Burns me up to, but she said really nothing else mattered after the thug sucker-punched George in the nose and started beating his head into the pavement. She said George had the right to defend himself. So all the speculation from her about George being too “protective” or “going to far” means nothing. Would have been nice if these 6 gals were told by the judge that it is not illegal to get out of your truck and to follow someone if you feel like following them. Good Lord, the man was a neighborhood watchman and was doing his job. When the next juror speaks she might say damn right George had the right to get out of his truck and damn right he had the right to follow him. All these interviews by liberal stations are intended to try and trick the juror into saying something that they think will prove it was a wrong verdict. Jurors have no damn business giving interviews, especially two days after the trial. It’s a set-up.
Toobin giving analysis? Toobin could not give legal insight to a speeding ticket.
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.