Jurors start deliberating George Zimmerman case

Houston Chronicle ^ | 07/12/2013 | MIKE SCHNEIDER and KYLE HIGHTOWER

[Vinnie]

Breaking out the oil and uplula.

[ArrogantBustard]

Aeons ago, as a juror looking at a cafeteria of charges, first argument I made in deliberations was to the effect that the cafeteria was BS. If he did the deed, he was guilty of the most serious charge. If he didn’t do the deed, he was not guilty of any of it.

[Glenmore]

I’ve been on 2 juries, both with men and women on them, and in both cases I came away very impressed with all my co-jurors. Everyone took their job very seriously and worked with each other to try to understand everything we had been told. In one case the defendent was clearly guilty of doing something wrong but the law book description of the two potential charges was unintelligible, and the only ‘explanation’ we were allowed was just a re-reading of the same crap, so we convicted her of the lesser charge. The other was simple - either the defendent was the armed robber on the security camera or he wasn’t, and either all the corroborating circumstantial evidence was just coincidence or he was guilty. He was guilty.
The only common theme with the two trials was the weakness of the judges, prosecutors and procedures and the strength of the defense attorneys and the jurors.

[SoFloFreeper]

I pray they find him not guilty. This was a joke of a trial.

[1_Rain_Drop]

Has anyone heard what the jurors were asking for? a list or something?

I just heard this on the radio and didn’t catch what they were asking for.

[SeekAndFind]

RE: Has anyone heard what the jurors were asking for? a list or something?

They asked for a list of evidence.

[1_Rain_Drop]

thanks.

[Bronzy]

Is this what you may be asking. I am late to read tonight.
I think this video will answer your question:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dnV2bdbp3Fc&feature=c4-overview&list=UUvreJYGIC45aqkYOzmvShVQ