THey have to take at least a day to go through the evidence...
They don’t have to.... I was a jury foreman on a murder trial. We voted right off the bat.. Convicted in 45 minutes.
Testimony maybe, there is no evidence of GZ's guilt.
Why would it take a day to go through the evidence?
Have they not seen the evidence repeatedly?
Do they not know the law by now?
The verdict should happen today...
But then again, it’s an all female jury where emotion and sympathy will likely come into play..
O’Mara told them told them towards the end of his closing that if they thought Zimmerman might have been defending himself, they needed to find him not guilty based on that alone.
They will take a vote when they get in there in order to know what the score is to start with. If they all vote the same, they are done.
>> THey have to take at least a day to go through the evidence...
For what reason do they have to go through it all again? They have already seen essentially all of it once. If they already drew a conclusion they can all agree on, they don’t have to look at ANY of the evidence again.
Much more likely there will be many points of agreement and maybe a few questions that separate them — in which case they’ll take another look at PART of the evidence to resolve the questions.
On this one, I still predict in-and-out fairly quickly.
Of course I could be wrong, but that’s my gut.