Posted on 07/25/2013 8:03:38 PM PDT by chessplayer
Facts is old skool. Feelings is new skool.
No one told her to come to Florida. She should have stayed in Illinois. She certainly has that Chicago state of mind.
He can’t leave yet. His wife has been charged also, and her trial hasn’t happened yet.
God owes us an apology for having created such an idiot.
God created humans, he didn’t run the public schools - he wasn’t allowed in.
She says Zimmerman got away with murder but says he should have never been brought to trial. Hmmm. Makes real clear logic - wow.
She is part Black.
“She thought that he was guilty, but the evidence forced her to acquit. At least she followed the evidence in her decision.”
It did sound bad when I first heard it, but after reading the story, it just makes me feel much better about our justice system. She had gut feelings about whether George Zimmerman was guilty, but she had to put those aside and just apply the law, which is exactly what a juror is supposed to do. The system works!
She can not be sued for her decision in court nor could she be sued simply for stating what she did in the manner of’ Zimmerman KILLED Martin’ because that is simply a matter of absolute readily conceded and admitted by Zimmerman and his lawyers as well as the police.
HOWEVER, phrasing it as ‘Zimmerman is a MURDERER’ could bring exposure since she said it not while in court or as a protected jury member but after the fact in public.
It is the word MURDERED which causes the problem due to the actual technical and legal definition and what the word conveys. There obviously and legally a difference between KILLING and MURDERING which brands someone as either righteous or horrifically immoral.
Even the bible differentiates between KILLING someone either by accident or in self defense and MURDERING someone by laying in wait and/or ambushing they.
In the case of accidental or not premeditated killing as in self defense there were seven ‘cities of refuge’ established where the one who killed someone else could flee to and be protected from retaliation.
Also the bible shows how someone such as King David could pursue the invaders who captured his family members and retrieve them even if it meant that he had to kill the offenders to save his family. King David is referred to in the bible as a ‘man after Gods own heart’ and was the author of most of the book of psalms.
Even in military matters there is a clear difference between killing in warfare and murdering innocent civilians.
Unfortunately this juror is showing a complete lack of understand of the definition of killing and murdering and a lack of understanding of hoe she is slandering Zimmerman and causing him harm by her ignorance.
She should be held accountable for the harm she is causing my her mischaracterization of Zimmerman.
Spelling correction, ‘ambushing they’ should be ‘ambushing them’.
Trayvon is dead in large part because of his parents.
Apparently, an IQ test needs to be administered before the voting AND jury booths. Perhaps one could be administered at the DMV; that way, we could keep the morons off the streets, out of elections and out of trials.
Nightline segment with Zimmerman Juror B29 July 26 2013
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sN_h8b8z_3g#at=415
Those [he got away with murder] were Robin Robert’s words
His parents should be caned for having failed to bring him up properly. The media is stirring all of this up in order to sell ads and make money. What a stupid nation we are.
Tayvon was the murderer.
Had justice not been done and he lived, he would have been guilty of at least attempted murder assuming GW lived
You were an integral part of the trial that determined that George Zimmerman did not murder Trayvon Martin.
I feel I was FORCEFULLY included in Trayvon Martin’s death
You are truly one ignorant person. As a juror, you have more power than the Judge or the Prosecution but you did not know that.
The jury is unique in America's system of due process. Due process allows the defendant to challenge the prosecution's evidence and introduce their own evidence. The only valid evidence is the evidence the judge allowed. Both the judge and the jury can judge the evidence but the jury can do something the judge cannot do, the jury can also judge the law.
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.