"He 'got away with murder"

[handmade34]

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/chi-george-zimmerman-trial-juror-chicago-20130725,0,4361149.story?track=rss


"A juror in the George Zimmerman trial who had recently moved to Florida from Chicago said today that Zimmerman "got away with murder" for killing Trayvon Martin and feels she owes an apology to Martin's parents.

"You can't put the man in jail even though in our hearts we felt he was guilty," the woman, identified only as Juror B29 during the trial, told ABC's "Good Morning America. "We had to grab our hearts and put it aside and look at the evidence."

She said the evidence, under Florida law, did not prove murder..."

[JI7]

1. i'm tired of this shit, they seemed to feel they had to take zimmerman's story as fact

[handmade34]

2. interesting response...

[Skittles]

8. it's the CORRECT response

they were NOT required to believe Zimmerman's RIDICULOUS story

[JI7]

10. especially since there were contradictions, i think it's an excuse though

using the same thing they did, we could let Scott Peterson and many others out.

i think there were some who did not want to convict at all and they convinced people like this juror there was no proof when there was more than enough.

[Skittles]

14. CORRECT AGAIN

[Hoyt]

7. Like Zimmerman gave the unarmed kid?

[JI7]

9. it wasn ot reasonable doubt

[Captain Stern]

16. That's not how I see it.

The jury had Zimmerman's story, and an incomplete set of relevant facts. Zimmerman's story wasn't entirely consistent with the forensics, but it still loosely fitted the evidence. The prosecution pointed out discrepancies in Zimmerman's story, but never presented the jury with an alternative narrative that fitted the evidence better. They basically said "here's some stuff about his story that we think doesn't add up, you guys decide what really happened". It wasn't the jury's job to disprove Zimmerman's story, it was the prosecution's....and they didn't do it.

I think Zimmerman has gotten away with voluntary manslaughter, but I don't think it was the jury's fault.

[rhett o rick]

17. Have you ever been on a jury? nm

[JI7]

18. yes

[rhett o rick]

19. Then you must be familiar with jury instructions. They are very specific as to what you can and

can not do.

[davidn3600]

20. Jury instructions specifically state the decisions a jury can make

It's not like a lot of people think. A lot of people think when a jury deliberates, they go to the back and decide their gut feeling on guilt or innocence. It doesn't work quite like that. Jurors may take an initial tally to see where they are starting at. But that's rarely the final vote. A jury is supposed to work through the instructions given to them by the judge and considers the evidence and weighs it. They consider testimony and give it weight. They consider which witnesses are credible and which are not. Usually cases that go to trial have some type of conflict in the evidence or testimony. Meaning you may have witnesses contradicting each other. Evidence could be circumstantial or not. A jury makes the decisions as to which witnesses are credible and what evidence is valid. The jury instructions help the jury to make these determinations. The jury then discusses the evidence and the testimony and decide if the state has reached its burden of proof beyond a reasonable doubt for every part of every charge. Usually charges have multiple things that each must be proven. If the state does NOT reach the burden of proof for each part of that charge, then the jury's duty is to acquit.

It is a methodical and complex legal process.

[Jenoch]

3. This juror seems confused about Florida law.

Here is one of her quotes:

"But as the law was read to me, if you have no proof that he killed him intentionally, you can't say he's guilty."

Zimmerman's defense WAS that he killed Treyvon intentionally, but was justified in doing so because of self-defense.

I never supported Zimmerman during the trial or since, I am simply pointing out the faulty explanation by this juror.

[handmade34]

4. juror B29

seems to have allowed other jurors to convince her of what Florida law was... too bad she didn't stick to her convictions

[Jenoch]

5. I understand what you are saying,

but if the law is not relied upon, then the the next time it will not go the way you would like for the same reason, not relying upon the law.

[JI7]

12. that is exactly what i believe happened and what the defense was betting on

by letting her on. they probably knew what type of personality she was and that even if she questioned zimmerman the others would get her to go along .

[kath]

11. The stoopid, it burns!

[Jenoch]

13. Huh?