She’s already got a bullseye on her back. Might as well serve on the jury.
Sounds like she does not want to be on the jury. I don’t blame her.
"It's OK to demonize George Zimmerman, though, and we encourage you to do so."
I suspect that her real agenda may be to get kicked off the jury.
In America, if you want to get KICKED OUT OF A COURTROOM, TELL THE TRUTH.
Too bad Tracy Martin and Sybrina Fulton could not stand the truth. This punk was sick.
forget all that "innocent until proven guilty" stuff... that's now how it works in this case. Zim's guilty until proven innocent (which ain't gonna happen)
I’m guessing she ain’t “amish”.
I would not want to be on this jury for two reasons. One, because they are going to be sequestered away staring at each other and arguing for many months with no way to work or lead a normal life. Two, because as others have said, jurors will have a bullseye on their backs. If Zimmerman is acquitted, there will be ‘kill the jury’ riots.
It’s a shame I don’t live there. I would love to be on that jury.
The truth hurts.
The mother of George Zimmerman's attacker ADMITTED ON NATIONAL TV that she believed the shooting was an accident!
Here is the link:
http://www.today.com/video/today/47027225#47027225
But the media, eager to make George's attacker an innocent child who never did anything wrong and never stole anything, won't remind you of this fact.
Frankly, I am surprised the Today show hasn't scrubbed this video.
Well, isn’t a juror supposed to begin with a presumption of innocence, and isn’t the state SUPPOSED to have to work hard to sway the juror from that position?
So this can’t be grounds for her dismissal, exempt as a peremptory challenge, I guess.
Frankly, I think that is a pretty good standard to take into any court case. After all, we presume the innocence of the defendant. It is the prosecution's case to change that presumption of innocence, to a belief beyond a reasonable doubt that the person is guilty.
If I ever get called to a jury, and they ask me, while everybody else is going to say "open mind", I'm going to say I presume the defendant is innocent.
The prosecution AND the defense should not get to spend hours and hours of court time to ‘pick’ a jury they like- that is by definition bias.
There should be a panel of judges that select PROFESSIONAL jurists, who serve for a year or two, and who's job is to sit on juries. Then when a case comes up, you get the next 12 on the list.
The jurists would be selected based ONLY on if they have a half a brain and are able to listen to and make fair decisions. They can apply for the job or, even better, be nominated by people who think them fair-minded.
Open for discussion?
Good description of Prospective Juror E81 here...
http://legalinsurrection.com/2013/06/zimmerman-jury-selection-day-four-wrap-up/
I also found the comment by Rick | June 13, 2013 at 8:05 pm interesting...
“Some Jury Selection Reality: I tried high-stakes civil jury cases around the country for 42 years. Through those decades of jury selection I learned a fact that is extremely politically incorrect.
That fact is: Potential jurors who are liberal frequently have an agenda and lie to get on juries when they believe they can strike a blow in favor of their agenda. When, during voir dire, it is clear that such jurors likely have a bias they usually deny that they have a bias and swear, falsely, that they can treat both sides equally, and that neither party starts out with any advantage in their mind. That frequently results in them not being struck for cause.
On the other hand, potential jurors who are conservative and who may have a bias that could impact their view of the case will admit their bias and will admit that they are not absolutely certain that they can overcome that bias, which results in them being struck for cause.
The result of all of this is that the liberal potential jurors with a bias, but who deny it, can be removed only by use of limited peremptory challenges, and the ability to do that is itself limited in the situation in which such jurors are members of some protected demographic group.
On the other hand, the conservative jurors are struck for cause. The overall result is that more liberals than conservatives are on juries.”
Faced with guaranteed nationwide rioting and personal death threats, how many jurors will have the balls to do what’s right?
Apparently not. So the jury is to be made up of black postal employees, welfare mothers with incarcerated 'boyfriends,' and a token white, gay sociology professor from one of FL's innumerable community colleges.
All they are going to have in common is that
"Honest Ms. Judge, I ain't never heared a word about no Trayvon. Uh huh, no M'am, not me. Trayvon? Who he?"
I ain't complaining. Things never looked better for the St. Trayvon Hoodie and Memorabilia Company.