Trayvon Martin

Moderators: Elvis, DrVolin, Jeff

Re: Trayvon Martin

Postby American Dream » Mon Jul 15, 2013 4:43 pm

slimmouse » Mon Jul 15, 2013 3:25 pm wrote:
slimmouse wrote:
I don't think we can say that there was anything right or good about this from top to bottom. It all needs to be confronted.


What say you AD ?


I think the System did the wrong thing but that is how it is designed.

It is only through independent grassroots activity, militantly organized but strategic, that we can create positive change.

"Did the jury do the right thing?": this question is so far off the mark as to distract from other, more important points.

The more important issues are to be found in a broader context which includes much more about institutions, and about history.
American Dream
 
Posts: 19946
Joined: Sat Sep 15, 2007 4:56 pm
Location: Planet Earth
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Trayvon Martin

Postby justdrew » Mon Jul 15, 2013 4:48 pm

It seems that the self-defense claim shouldn't stand, unless it can be proven that T.M. did attack G.Z., but no assault charges were brought against the deceased. Witnesses seem to make it clear a physical altercation was in progress, we don't know who started it, and I guess it doesn't even matter really? Apparently, once the fight started, either party was free and clear to use a gun to take the others life. Had T.M. shot G.Z. he would have been EQUALLY free to claim self-defense and face no conviction. correct?

Is this REALLY how self-defense is SUPPOSED to and has traditionally worked in this country?

It does seem clear though from injuries that G.Z. was losing the fight, whoever started it.

Losing a fight is now grounds to kill the other? I guess so...

So it seems clear T.M. was killed because he chose to escalate a situation he had every ability to walk away from. Possibly G.Z. attempted to restrain T.M. and that initiated the fight, but this point is unknown.

It's very difficult but you must never let yourself be goaded into taking the first punch. In that moment you lose the moral high ground entirely, and anything can happen.

The contrast between verbal/emotional violence and physical violence is a strange one.

Of course, then again, in court, physical violence is excused in some cases because the other used "fighting words" - so I don't know where that concept rests in law anymore either. Is that still even a thing?

However, I don't think "what are you doing around here?" can constitute "fighting words"
Last edited by justdrew on Mon Jul 15, 2013 5:05 pm, edited 3 times in total.
By 1964 there were 1.5 million mobile phone users in the US
User avatar
justdrew
 
Posts: 11966
Joined: Tue May 24, 2005 7:57 pm
Location: unknown
Blog: View Blog (11)

Re: Trayvon Martin

Postby Hunter » Mon Jul 15, 2013 4:51 pm

seemslikeadream » Mon Jul 15, 2013 10:33 am wrote:
Hunter » Mon Jul 15, 2013 8:53 am wrote:The saddest part about this thing is all the racism that is coming from the side of TM, and I am seeing very very little racism coming from those who supported GZ. I am not for either side, I support gun rights and self defense but that is the extent, I wanted justice and justice is defined as a trial by jury who then decides on a verdict, that verdict is the definition of justice, so in spite of those who dont like due process and would rather just toss people in prison without their day in court, justice was served by 6 Americans who gave their time and made every effort to listen to the facts, discuss them with eachother and not allow themselves to be influenced by those who have agendas and finally, coming to their own conclusions based on those facts that were examined and ruled upon by a sworn in judge whose job it is to over see that process and ensure it was fair, which I believe she did.


Really, end of story.



Really you didn't see any racism coming from the other side?

I guess you didn't see any of FauxNews


Fox News Guest Says Trayvon Martin Is Responsible For His Death
Fox News Commenters React to Trayvon Martin: ‘Good Shot Zimmy’
Fox News Guest Harry Houck Says Trayvon Martin Would Still Be Alive “If He Didn’t Have A Street Attitude”


just google Trayvon Martin racism....just cause you didn't see it doesn't mean it didn't happen...maybe you just didn't look for it...

I have a rather large and diverse twitter feed and they tweets are about 50 'Im gonna kill me a cracker' to 1 "the thug TM deserved what he got."



I dont watch fox so I certainly missed it and I have no doubt there is plenty of racism on both sides I was only commenting on what I saw, please dont think im taking sides here I am not, I wanted justice for TM as much as you or anyone else so do not misunderstand my knowledge of the law and the burden of the state with what my personal feelings are about this case and GZ's gun idiocy.

But I very much appreciate and read everything you have posted from that side of things and I cant say I disagree with much of it I just think because the state did such a poor job that the jury made the right decision, that doesnt mean GZ is innocent, he isnt innocent. His actions led to the death of TM and there are no two ways about that. But that is an entirely different discussion than whether or not the jury made the right decision, which I believe they did, according to the law and not emotion, emotions should be left at the door and not brought to the jurors box, it is there we deal with facts only and the state had very few of those at their disposal and since the defense didnt need any since they had no burden to prove, well, there you have it.
Hunter
 
Posts: 1455
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2012 2:10 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Trayvon Martin

Postby slimmouse » Mon Jul 15, 2013 5:01 pm

American Dream » 15 Jul 2013 20:43 wrote:
slimmouse » Mon Jul 15, 2013 3:25 pm wrote:
slimmouse wrote:
I don't think we can say that there was anything right or good about this from top to bottom. It all needs to be confronted.


What say you AD ?


I think the System did the wrong thing but that is how it is designed.

It is only through independent grassroots activity, militantly organized but strategic, that we can create positive change.

"Did the jury do the right thing?": this question is so far off the mark as to distract from other, more important points.

The more important issues are to be found in a broader context which includes much more about institutions, and about history.


I think that the fastest way to positive change is to understand that all these artificially created human fault lines are the perfect weapons of control for the architects of our personal enslavement and ongoiing misery.

Trayvon Martin is "dead", and his immediate legacy around the USA and the rest of the world revolves around such artificial faultlines, in this case the colour of his skin.

I mean really, you either get that or you dont..

But you can rest assured that the 0.01% do.
Last edited by slimmouse on Mon Jul 15, 2013 5:05 pm, edited 1 time in total.
slimmouse
 
Posts: 6129
Joined: Fri May 20, 2005 7:41 am
Location: Just outside of you.
Blog: View Blog (3)

Re: Trayvon Martin

Postby Luther Blissett » Mon Jul 15, 2013 5:05 pm

Prejudice against whites isn't and can't be racism.

http://www.rigorousintuition.ca/board2/ ... =8&t=35657
The Rich and the Corporate remain in their hundred-year fever visions of Bolsheviks taking their stuff - JackRiddler
User avatar
Luther Blissett
 
Posts: 4991
Joined: Fri Jan 02, 2009 1:31 pm
Location: Philadelphia
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Trayvon Martin

Postby American Dream » Mon Jul 15, 2013 5:23 pm

slimmouse » Mon Jul 15, 2013 4:01 pm wrote:
American Dream » 15 Jul 2013 20:43 wrote:
slimmouse » Mon Jul 15, 2013 3:25 pm wrote:
slimmouse wrote:
I don't think we can say that there was anything right or good about this from top to bottom. It all needs to be confronted.


What say you AD ?


I think the System did the wrong thing but that is how it is designed.

It is only through independent grassroots activity, militantly organized but strategic, that we can create positive change.

"Did the jury do the right thing?": this question is so far off the mark as to distract from other, more important points.

The more important issues are to be found in a broader context which includes much more about institutions, and about history.


I think that the fastest way to positive change is to understand that all these artificially created human fault lines are the perfect weapons of control for the architects of our personal enslavement and ongoiing misery.

Trayvon Martin is "dead", and his immediate legacy around the USA and the rest of the world revolves around such artificial faultlines, in this case the colour of his skin.

I mean really, you either get that or you dont..

But you can rest assured that the 0.01% do.


I agree about fault lines but probably not in the way you mean it. More like this, though I do hope any confrontations with the State are truly helpful in the long run:

Another Black youth murdered in cold blood, and the murderer, according to the courts, is not guilty! The case of Trayvon Martin is an example of what America is composed of, the racism that deeply penetrates its veins, and the state that oversees its process. Trayvon Martin was vilified by the courts as a thug, and its murderer was defended as a noble citizen. How many Black and Latino youth have to be victims of such violence? When will we build a movement so powerful that can challenge such violence? When will the working class be organized to shutdown the system when such racist violence occurs? These are the critical questions of the day. We have experienced the Rodney King movement, the movement around the murder of Sean Bell, Kimani Gray, Kenneth Harding, and Oscar Grant. Yet these murders continue unchallenged.

Our strategy against such murders shall be, in the short term, organizing militant protests when such verdicts are executed and organize the working class in the long term as preparation for such moments. Only until the working class, located in strategic industries, that shutdowns components of the system, will we see a viable movement challenging the system. In the Oscar Grant movement we experienced a wave of rebellions on January 7th, and January 14th, 2009, as well as ILWU local 10 shutting down the port on October 23rd, 2010. The combination of street rebellions and shutting down industry are effective tactics against the state. The state, a concentration of power, will not take anything seriously, until there is a force that challenges such power ascends in the field of political battle. Our history of struggles against police brutality has been paralyzed between disorganized bursts of anger coupled with nonprofit lead forces that channel anger back into the system.

We need a militant organized movement of the working class who utilizes its position in society against state supported racist violence. The racist nature of American society will never be challenged until the working class begins to shutdown the system as a political response. A political organization with such explicit aims is needed to accomplish such tasks. Now is the time to organize for justice.


http://advancethestruggle.wordpress.com ... k-out-715/
American Dream
 
Posts: 19946
Joined: Sat Sep 15, 2007 4:56 pm
Location: Planet Earth
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Trayvon Martin

Postby justdrew » Mon Jul 15, 2013 5:28 pm

Is there some reason to believe the T.M. didn't inflict the wounds on G.Z. ?

I sounds like the wounds were documented the night of the shooting as G.Z. had been brought in to the cop shop. Now I suppose it could be some friendly cop said to G.Z., "you know, you're uninjured and that's going to make your defense harder, would you like me to rough you up a bit?"

I don't know, the injuries seem to be the main issue, self-defense or not rests upon it.
By 1964 there were 1.5 million mobile phone users in the US
User avatar
justdrew
 
Posts: 11966
Joined: Tue May 24, 2005 7:57 pm
Location: unknown
Blog: View Blog (11)

Re: Trayvon Martin

Postby seemslikeadream » Mon Jul 15, 2013 5:58 pm

There is no evidence as to who started the fight ....the injury on the nose could have come from the kick back from the gun..


who was standing who's ground?


Zimmerman had no fuckin right to follow Trayvon ...you know that fucking punk .....they always get away...


Zimmerman was NOT supposed to have a gun as a neighborhood watch person
Mazars and Deutsche Bank could have ended this nightmare before it started.
They could still get him out of office.
But instead, they want mass death.
Don’t forget that.
User avatar
seemslikeadream
 
Posts: 32090
Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2005 11:28 pm
Location: into the black
Blog: View Blog (83)

Re: Trayvon Martin

Postby JackRiddler » Mon Jul 15, 2013 6:24 pm

Trayvon Martin had no interest whatsoever in Zimmerman. He was targeted and followed by Zimmerman, a man with a gun who had no business targeting or following him, and who even disobeyed the recommendation of the police not to follow him. Assuming no one disputes that, then all self-defense arguments end there. Obviously if Trayvon had successfully struck first, disarmed, beaten the holy crap out of, and left said Zimmerman unconscious on the pavement, it would have all been self-defense. Zimmerman by choosing to create a threat to Trayvon cedes all claims to self-defense. I cannot choose to start a fight with someone who has no interest in fighting me, and then shoot them when I start losing the fight, and then claim self-defense. Zimmerman by choosing to create a dangerous situation that was 100% of his own making, and thus causing Trayvon Martin to fear for his safety, committed the act of assault. (An assault is defined as causing someone to fear for their safety; no blows need be delivered. Thus the phrase "assault and battery," the latter meaning blows also delivered in the course of the assault.)

It's ludicrous that any of these need be said. It is entirely a function of the racist worldview that any of this is seen differently, that the idea of the assaulting party claiming "self-defense" acquires any credibility whatsoever. It is unimaginable that a black Zimmerman vigilante who had targeted, pursued and shot a white Trayvon would not have been immediately arrested, held without bail or at a bail too high to meet, and brought to a trial with a near-certainty of conviction for murder followed by life in prison or the death penalty. No "stand your ground" argument would have been considered.

The one thing I thought might happen would be that Zimmerman, as the party solely responsible for creating the entire situation that caused Trayvon's death (as well as the fucking triggerman), would at least have been convicted of manslaughter. Any punishment would have served as some deterrence to other lone vigilantes in this style. This is encouragement, of course.
We meet at the borders of our being, we dream something of each others reality. - Harvey of R.I.

To Justice my maker from on high did incline:
I am by virtue of its might divine,
The highest Wisdom and the first Love.

TopSecret WallSt. Iraq & more
User avatar
JackRiddler
 
Posts: 16007
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2008 2:59 pm
Location: New York City
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Trayvon Martin

Postby 8bitagent » Mon Jul 15, 2013 6:26 pm

Black people like Trayvon should never have to fear walking in a white neighborhood at night just like white and black and everyone shouldn't have to fear being in an inner city black neighborhood at night.
(of course it's not polite to talk about the latter) NOONE should have to fear walking ANYWHERE in the United States, period. End of story
"Do you know who I am? I am the arm, and I sound like this..."-man from another place, twin peaks fire walk with me
User avatar
8bitagent
 
Posts: 12244
Joined: Fri Aug 24, 2007 6:49 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Trayvon Martin

Postby 8bitagent » Mon Jul 15, 2013 6:32 pm

JackRiddler » Mon Jul 15, 2013 5:24 pm wrote:Trayvon Martin had no interest whatsoever in Zimmerman. He was targeted and followed by Zimmerman, a man with a gun who had no business targeting or following him, and who even disobeyed the recommendation of the police not to follow him. Assuming no one disputes that, then all self-defense arguments end there.



I'm surprised that central point wasn't hammered home more. The freaking cops told him not to follow the kid. This wasn't somebody Zimmerman saw breaking into a home and running out with items, or breaking into a car.
This was just someone he saw walking. He doesn't just peak around a corner or take a few steps forward to get a better look, he actively follows. With a gun. Totally bizarre.

Also isnt his dad a judge, and even the attorney general came down for a special rare midnight meeting with the lead DA or something the night Martin was killed? How come more of that wasn't made?
"Do you know who I am? I am the arm, and I sound like this..."-man from another place, twin peaks fire walk with me
User avatar
8bitagent
 
Posts: 12244
Joined: Fri Aug 24, 2007 6:49 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Trayvon Martin

Postby seemslikeadream » Mon Jul 15, 2013 6:55 pm

FUCK THE NRA

FUCK THE STAND YOUR GROUND LAWS

FUCK 6 WHITE WOMEN WHO HAVE NO IDEA WHAT IT IS LIKE TO RAISE A BLACK CHILD

FUCK WHY SHOULDN'T ALEXANDER HAVE THE RIGHT TO STAND HER GROUND???

OH THAT'S RIGHT SHE'S BLACK

Marissa Alexander Gets 20 Years For Firing Warning Shot (VIDEO)
By MITCH STACY 05/19/12 01:07 PM ET EDT



TAMPA, Fla. -- Marissa Alexander had never been arrested before she fired a bullet at a wall one day in 2010 to scare off her husband when she felt he was threatening her. Nobody got hurt, but this month a northeast Florida judge was bound by state law to sentence her to 20 years in prison.

Alexander, a 31-year-old mother of a toddler and 11-year-old twins, knew it was coming. She had claimed self-defense, tried to invoke Florida's "stand your ground" law and rejected plea deals that could have gotten her a much shorter sentence. A jury found her guilty as charged: aggravated assault with a deadly weapon. Because she fired a gun while committing a felony, Florida's mandatory-minimum gun law dictated the 20-year sentence.

Her case in Jacksonville has drawn a fresh round of criticism aimed at mandatory-minimum sentencing laws. The local NAACP chapter and the district's African-American congresswoman say blacks more often are incarcerated for long periods because of overzealous prosecutors and judges bound by the wrong-headed statute. Alexander is black.

It also has added fuel to the controversy over Florida's "stand your ground" law, which the judge would not allow Alexander to invoke. State Attorney Angela Corey, who also is overseeing the prosecution of shooter George Zimmerman in the Trayvon Martin case, stands by the handling of Alexander's case. Corey says she believes Alexander aimed the gun at the man and his two sons, and the bullet she fired could have ricocheted and hit any of them.

At the May 11 sentencing, Alexander's relatives begged Circuit Judge James Daniel for leniency but he said the decision was "out of my hands."

"The Legislature has not given me the discretion to do what the family and many others have asked me to do," he said.

The state's "10-20-life" law was implemented in 1999 and credited with helping to lower the violent crime rate. Anyone who shows a gun in the commission of certain felonies gets an automatic 10 years in prison. Fire the gun, and it's an automatic 20 years. Shoot and wound someone, and it's 25 years to life.

Critics say Alexander's case underscores the unfair sentences that can result when laws strip judges of discretion. About two-thirds of the states have mandatory-minimum sentencing laws, mostly for drug crimes, according to a website for the Families Against Mandatory Minimums advocacy group.

"We're not saying she's not guilty of a crime, we're not saying that she doesn't deserve some sort of sanction by the court," said Greg Newburn, Florida director for the group. Rather, he said, the judge should have the authority to decide an appropriate sanction after hearing all the unique circumstances of the case.


U.S. Rep. Corinne Brown, D-Jacksonville, has been an advocate for Alexander. Brown was present at the sentencing, where she and Corey had a brief, terse exchange afterward as sign-toting supporters rallied outside the courthouse.

"The Florida criminal justice system has sent two clear messages today," Brown said afterward. "One is that if women who are victims of domestic violence try to protect themselves, the `Stand Your Ground Law' will not apply to them. ... The second message is that if you are black, the system will treat you differently."

Victor Crist was a Republican state legislator who crafted the "10-20-life" bill enacted in 1999 in Gov. Jeb Bush's first term. He said Alexander's sentence – if she truly did fire a warning shot and wasn't trying to kill her husband – is not what lawmakers wanted.

"We were trying to get at the thug who was robbing a liquor store who had a gun in his possession or pulled out the gun and threatened someone or shot someone during the commission of the crime," said Crist, who served in the state House and Senate for 18 years before being elected Hillsborough County commissioner.

On Aug. 1, 2010, Alexander was working for a payroll software company. She was estranged from her husband, Rico Gray, and had a restraining order against him, even though they'd had a baby together just nine days before. Thinking he was gone, she went to their former home to retrieve the rest of her clothes, family members said.

An argument ensued, and Alexander said she feared for her life when she went out to her vehicle and retrieved the gun she legally owned. She came back inside and ended up firing a shot into the wall, which ricocheted into the ceiling.

Gray testified that he saw Alexander point the gun at him and looked away before she fired the shot. He claims she was the aggressor, and he had begged her to put away the weapon.

A judge threw out Alexander's "stand your ground" self-defense claim, noting that she could have run out of the house to escape her husband but instead got the gun and went back inside. Alexander rejected a plea deal that would have resulted in a three-year prison sentence and chose to go to trial. A jury deliberated 12 minutes before convicting her.

"The irony of the 10-20-life law is the people who actually think they're innocent of the crime, they roll the dice and take their chances, and they get the really harsh prison sentences," Newburn said. "Whereas the people who think they are actually guilty of the crime take the plea deal and get out (of prison) well before. So it certainly isn't working the way it is intended."

Alexander was also charged with domestic battery four months after the shooting in another assault on Gray. She pleaded no contest and was sentenced to time served.

Her family says that doesn't erase the fact that a relatively law-abiding person – a woman with a master's degree – who was making positive contributions to society will endure prison for two decades over a single violation in which no one was hurt.

"She had a restraining order against him. Now Marissa is incarcerated and he's not," said her father, Raoul Jenkins. "I'm wrestling with that in my mind and trying to determine how the system worked that detail out. It's really frustrating."

Newburn says Alexander's case is not an isolated incident, and that people ensnared by mandatory-minimum laws cross racial barriers.

In central Florida, a white man named Orville Lee Wollard is nearly two years into a 20-year sentence for firing his gun inside his house to scare his daughter's boyfriend. Prosecutors contended that Wollard was shooting at the young man and missed.

He rejected a plea deal that offered probation but no prison time. Like Alexander, he took his chances at trial and was convicted of aggravated assault with a firearm. Circuit Judge Donald Jacobsen said he was "duty bound" by the 10-20-life law to impose the harsh sentence.

"I would say that, if it wasn't for the minimum mandatory aspect of this, I would use my discretion and impose some separate sentence, having taken into consideration the circumstances of this event," Jacobsen said.
Mazars and Deutsche Bank could have ended this nightmare before it started.
They could still get him out of office.
But instead, they want mass death.
Don’t forget that.
User avatar
seemslikeadream
 
Posts: 32090
Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2005 11:28 pm
Location: into the black
Blog: View Blog (83)

Re: Trayvon Martin

Postby barracuda » Mon Jul 15, 2013 7:00 pm

JackRiddler » Mon Jul 15, 2013 3:24 pm wrote:Trayvon Martin had no interest whatsoever in Zimmerman. He was targeted and followed by Zimmerman, a man with a gun who had no business targeting or following him, and who even disobeyed the recommendation of the police not to follow him. Assuming no one disputes that, then all self-defense arguments end there.


It is neither against the law, nor the creation of an implicit threat, nor an invitation to a scuffle to follow someone and ask them what they are doing. At least, I don't think it is. Am I wrong about that?

It is unimaginable that a black Zimmerman vigilante who had targeted, pursued and shot a white Trayvon would not have been immediately arrested, held without bail or at a bail too high to meet, and brought to a trial with a near-certainty of conviction for murder followed by life in prison or the death penalty.


Understood, and agree. But what if a white Zimm had followed accosted and shot a white Trayvon? Would an ensuing scuffle become a self defense setting if we allow that the hypothetical white Trayvon threw the first punch?

All hypotheticals aside, though, it doesn't really matter. The institutionally racist encapsulation of the the event, the community, and the society pretty much negate any legalese wrangling that might be used by anyone, myself included, to consider this killing outside of the color of that envelope. The thing about this murder that kills me is how many persons and groups are guilty here right along with Zimmerman.
User avatar
barracuda
 
Posts: 12890
Joined: Thu Sep 06, 2007 5:58 pm
Location: Niles, California
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Trayvon Martin

Postby conniption » Mon Jul 15, 2013 7:15 pm

doghouseriley

Sunday, July 14

Justice

I KNOW two things about juries: I don't want my life or my liberty decided by one, and I don't want my sense of justice in the hands of one.

I don't think anyone with a sense of the history of this country imagined that justice was going to come out of that Florida jury. Put another way, Trayvon Martin received the full measure of American justice. Yesterday completed it. George Zimmerman is the model American. George Zimmerman is the fucking walking embodiment of America: we've got the gun, and the guy we don't like the looks of is supposed to jump when we say jump. And then, when it all goes wrong, we change the rules, congratulate ourselves on a job well done, and pretend it never happened.

There was never going to be any justice for Trayvon Martin come out of that courtroom. His chance for justice was killed by some mope who wanted to assume the moral superiority of the small-town bully cop, with none of the restraints. If he didn't die a mean and meaningless death, let that be for the one reason that's left him, and his parents: that what should die with him is the witless song and dance about this country being "over" its racist "past".
conniption
 
Posts: 2480
Joined: Sun Nov 11, 2012 10:01 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Trayvon Martin

Postby seemslikeadream » Mon Jul 15, 2013 7:53 pm

NEWS & POLITICS
AlterNet / By Alex Kane
Juror Who Found Zimmerman Innocent Cashing In With Book Deal, Called Martin "A Boy of Color”
One juror who found George Zimmerman innocent has signed on with a literary agent in the hopes of a future book deal about her experience.

July 15, 2013 |

One of the jurors who decided that George Zimmerman was not guilty on charges of manslaughter and second-degree murder for killing Trayvon Martin is now trying to cash in on her experience. Media Bistro reports that Juror B37 and her husband (who is an attorney) has signed with a literary agent. The intent is to write a book on the Zimmerman case.

The agent, Sharlene Martin, is the president of Martin Literary Management.

“My hope is that people will read Juror B37’s book, written with her attorney husband, and understand the commitment it takes to serve and be sequestered on a jury in a highly publicized murder trial and how important, despite one’s personal viewpoints, it is to follow the letter of the law,” said Martin in a statement. “It could open a whole new dialogue about laws that may need to be revised and revamped to suit a 21st century way of life. The reader will also learn why the jurors had no option but to find Zimmerman Not Guilty due to the manner in which he was charged and the content of the jury instructions.”

It is currently unknown whether or if the the juror and her husband will give any interviews to the media or reveal their identities. All of the jurors, who were women, have remained anonymous.

But some details are known about Juror B37, as Gawker’s Hamilton Nolan notes. A video of lawyers questioning the juror reveals that she is a mother of two who owns a lot of animals.

But more importantly, the juror hates the media, and thought there were “riots” in Sanford, Florida after Trayvon Martin was killed. There were no such riots.

Juror B37 referred to Martin’s killing as “an unfortunate incident that happened.” She also described Martin as “a boy of color.”
Mazars and Deutsche Bank could have ended this nightmare before it started.
They could still get him out of office.
But instead, they want mass death.
Don’t forget that.
User avatar
seemslikeadream
 
Posts: 32090
Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2005 11:28 pm
Location: into the black
Blog: View Blog (83)

PreviousNext

Return to General Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 165 guests