Comments

  1. MIke says

    People just can’t handle not wanting their 15 minutes of fame. A book, Anderson Cooper, Sean Hannity next I suppose. Look at me, yep, it’s me! (but let’s play the silhouette game). I read she’s an attorney’s wife, as if people can’t spend a couple hours and have her photo, cell # and Facebook page up on Reddit by noon today, assuming she doesn’t get on her Facebook and boast about who she is first.

    No matter what you thought of the verdict, a juror’s right to truly remain anonymous has to be respected and the public would be on their side, but this B37 is begging for it…..

  2. Adam says

    Why did this juror believe that Zimmerman’s life was in danger? She’s basically placing her faith in the killer’s belief. It’s a dangerous thing to do because it lacks the counter-balance of the dead victim’s point of view.

    She made a flawed decision and needs to STFU.

  3. LiamB says

    Right, I believe that she had no clue what a big media event the trial was. That idiotic statement alone makes me question anything this moron says.

  4. MIke says

    “When she says “George,” sick.”

    Yeah, I’ve seen people complain about that. “Trayvon” apparently is allowed, but not “George”.

  5. Lee says

    @fenrox he was acquitted so no he is not a murderer. Don’t like our laws which give everyone a rigt to a fair trial then leave for some ace like Iran where you’ll be happy

  6. ernstroehm's ghost says

    @Adam: First, B37 didn’t say Z.’s life was in danger. What she said was this: Z. THOUGHT his life was in danger. The legal question is whether or not Z. truly BELIEVED Martin was about to kill him. The jury decided that a reasonable man might decide that this was so. Z.’s thought process was heavily influenced by the fact that an athletic 17-year-old was on top of him, hollering “You’re gonna die!” and beating his head against the ground. In the jury’s eyes, that seemed like a good enough reason to fear for your life.

    Second, let us consider your remark that the witness “put her faith in the killer’s” version of events. You say that “this is a dangerous thing to do.” You do not, however, propose an alternative. As things fell-out, there were no substantial witnesses. Z. was the only living person to see what happened. All the physical and secondary evidence either agreed with Z.’s story or at least did not contradict it. Remember, our legal system says a man is innocent unless proven guilty. There simply wasn’t enough evidence to convict Z. Indeed, he was probably telling the truth.

  7. ripper says

    “She also says she doesn’t think race played a role in the case, and it wasn’t part of the discussion in the jury room.”

    Well, that pretty much says it all. Of course you didn’t think race played a role, privileged white woman.

  8. Derrick form Philly says

    @ “@fenrox he was acquitted so no he is not a murderer. Don’t like our laws which give everyone a rigt to a fair trial then leave for some ace like Iran where you’ll be happy”

    OJ Simpson was aquitted also, Lee. How ya’ feel about that?

  9. JY says

    Sorry Ripper, the investigators, jury, AND FBI all said race wasn’t part of it. Thank goodness you know better than EVERYONE ELSE with your magical insight. Please, lead us to the light!

  10. Lee says

    @derrick I’m fine with it as the law was followed the state in both the Zimmerman and OJ cases failed to meet the burden does that mean they are morally innocent? No. But without absolute certainty of guilt their guilt the juries in both cases did what the LAW required them to do.

  11. JohnAGJ says

    Glad she dropped the book deal, even though it was only under pressure, because I’m tired of jurors and high-profile trial participants seeking fame and fortune like this. I didn’t like it when it happened after the OJ trial and I don’t like it now.

    Interesting interview, about what I expected.

  12. Zeta says

    Well, that pretty much says it all. Of course you didn’t think race played a role, privileged white woman.

    POSTED BY: RIPPER

    Nutshell. After reading the biographies of all the jurors, it’s a wonder how they got the lone non-connected black hispanic woman with eight children on there — like loading up a jury with degreed weasels and including one chicken for insurance purposes.

    I completely agree with those who had said that this deal was in the works long before the end of the trial, especially with this woman’s husband being an attorney. Dig deeper, and wonder what family friend type things we’ll find out about the other jurors.

    It may be off for now, but trust that that book deal is still in the works in another form. Screw all of them.

  13. fervently8885 says

    I thought the juror was completely reasonable with what she said.

    Anyone with a 2nd grade education would understand that Zimmerman could not be convicted. Don’t like it? Blame the prosecutors.

    I’m so over this story.

  14. Zeta says

    OJ Simpson was aquitted also, Lee. How ya’ feel about that?

    POSTED BY: DERRICK FORM PHILLY | JUL 16, 2013 9:54:32 AM

    I think the OJ trial is the only time in my lifetime where whites didn’t pull the ‘the law has spoken and the system has worked’ card to try to shut anyone up.

  15. SamIam says

    MEANWHILE IN CHICAGO…

    17 black teens were killed in the last week.

    But they were killed by other black guys, so Al Sharpton, Jesse Jackson, and Derrick from Philly don’t care. They’re just obsessed because a black kid was killed by a BI-RACIAL dude.

    H

    Y

    P

    O

    C

    R

    I

    S

    Y

  16. ripper says

    “@ripper unless you have proof race was involved in their deliberations you can just shut the hell up with your race baiting bull crap.”

    You’re not very bright, are you? The fact that race WASN’T included in their deliberations is the problem.

  17. Carlie says

    A jury in a murder trial is supposed to consider mens rea (guilty mind), whether the accused is culpable because his “mind is guilty”. So, if they didn’t consider race is a motive, they didn’t do their job properly.

  18. Carlie says

    And, by the way, the decision to not consider race when it was part of their job to do so, is, in fact, a race-based consideration privileging the accused.

  19. Derrick form Philly says

    @ “But they were killed by other black guys, so Al Sharpton, Jesse Jackson, and Derrick from Philly don’t care”

    Neither do you, Samian.

    Did those Blacks who killed Blacks do it because of the color of their skin, or was it drug wars? It’s still awful, but, yes, racial murders touch off great emotion in our country.

    Over the last 15 months the media has helped me to know Trayvon Martin. He was not a thug. He was a good kid. I hate to see a good kid die because some paranoid fool (with a gun) thought he was a bad kid.

  20. Donny says

    “Over the last 15 months the media has helped me to know Trayvon Martin. He was not a thug. He was a good kid. I hate to see a good kid die because some paranoid fool (with a gun) thought he was a bad kid.”

    Really, Derrick? He was a good kid? Then why did he beat up a neighborhood watchman who approached him? We all know who attacked who here. He had a phone. If he felt he was being harrassed, why didn’t he call 911 instead of becoming physically violent?

  21. SamIam says

    Travyon Martin was a GOOD kid? You’re delusional. He smoked pot, took pictures of himself WITH A GUN, got suspended from school for violent activity…I could go on and on.

    But maybe in Philly, that’s a “good kid.”

    Please keep all the “good kids” there with you.

    Thanks

  22. Lee says

    @ripper no they could not consider race as the state never argued that race was a motive and thus it would have been completely inappropriate for them to consider the race of either the accused or the supposed victim.

  23. Mike in nyc says

    An armed, violent sex offender and grown adult hunted and murdered an unarmed teenage boy who was simply walking home. End of story.

    I know the world is filled with small, easily confused minds, disappointing to see how many post on here. Sad, yet predicable.

  24. MichaelJ says

    Whether or not race played a roll in the deliberations is not the point. Race played a roll in the way the whole incident played out from the night of the killing.

    Right from the start GZ’s version of events was accepted local police. They did not test GZ for alcohol or drugs, which is standard procedure in homocide is a possibility (and it should have been considered a possibility right from the start). GZ’s clothes were not taken for ananlysis of gun powder residue. None of this of course necessarily means that GZ’s version of events is necessarily untrue, but it does mean that evidence that might have provided some information about what happened was lost. Had the shooter been black and his victim been an unarmed white teenager the shooter would not have been treated with kid gloves and his word would not have been taken for granted right from the start.

    Race also played a role in that there was little discussion about whether TM had the right to stand his ground and confront GZ. I would argue that he did, even if GZ’s account of the struggle is to be accepted, in spite of there being plenty of evidence (much of it not presented in court) to doubt it. I would also argue that TM would have been justified in killing GZ in the struggle, though I doubt he would have been given any benefit of the doubt, given that he was another hoodie-wearing punk in the eyes of so many — a black one at that.

    Just read some of the online comments about the case (and not just on right-wing forums) and you’ll see the extent to which racial-profiling plays a role in how the incident was dealt with, and how people are interpreting the evidence and coming to conclusions about what really did happen.

  25. says

    A murderer is someone who murders someone it is also a legal term, you kill someone you are a murderer. Also, as precious and iron clad as Florida’s laws are, no I have ZERO respect for them.

    You know what was also against the law just days ago? Gay marriage. Were you discouraging Edie Windsor for trying to change your precious laws?

    God, you are like my grandpa, one time the indicator to a water tank broke and I was trying to explain it to him. “Grandpa the indicator is broken” “Well, what does the indicator say?” “It’s broken, it says it’s full but it isnt.” “But what does the indicator say?” “It says it’s full, but it isnt, the indicator is broken” “Yeah but it says it’s full? What is the problem?”

    Also re: race, Zimmerman hunted down the kid because he was black and looked black. Do you also think gay bashers who say they didn’t do it because of “gay”? For race to not come up means that jury didn’t even try to do it’s job.

  26. Derrick form Philly says

    @ “I could go on and on.”

    No you couldn’t.

    The “thug” image is something that many teenagers play around with nowadays–especially when they’re listening to their Rap music–specifically Gansta’ Rap. It’s part of the HipHop generation. Middle-class White and Black kids play around with that image, but they don’t act on it.

    Some of the later photographs of Trayvon Martin really struck me. One was a picture of his father kissing him on the cheek. That’s very unusual among American men to kiss their teenage sons. It showed me that their was a great deal of father to son love there. I don’t think that boys who have loving relationships with their fathers usually turn into thugs.

    The other photo was of Trayvon riding a horse–taken last year (I believe). Horse back riding is not something that inner-city thugs (if you want to call them that) are interested in. Horseback riding is an “all-American-boy” type past-time.

    Trayvon was not a thug. You, like Zimmerman, just profiled him to have been one.

  27. SamIam says

    MIKE IN NYC – Have you paid attention to ANY of the details in this case? Actually, don’t bother responding. Your comment proves you have not.

    And since when was Zimmerman a sex offender? You literally just made that up.

  28. says

    It’s disgusting that you guys so readily buy into him being a “thug”. He was a teenager. I had guns as a teen, it’s called hunting, did we ever hunt in my house? NO. Lots of white teens have the exact same experiences as Trayvon but aren’t thought of as thugs because they are white. I never looked like a thug but I assure you in HS I was a violent, mean, terrible person, and you wouldn’t have even noticed because i’m blond and wearing a school uniform.

  29. Caliban says

    The thing that bugs me about this juror is that she claimed never to read newspapers, news on the internet, or watch TV news. And her husband is a lawyer. I think she lied like a rug to get onto the jury, planning the whole time to somehow use it for her own gain.

    The ONLY reason this book deal didn’t go through is public outrage, not some sudden qualms on her part. You wait. Once the post-trial drama has died down a little I bet this book will be back on. And what’s this business about the potential book including “her husband’s perspective”? He wasn’t in the jury room with her, but what IS his “perspective” and how much did it influence hers, perhaps before the trial even started?

  30. MichaelJ says

    @Ernstroehm’s ghost: I agree that without any evidence of an alternative presented by the prosecution, it would be hard to accept a scenario different than GZ’s. But it doesn’t follow that therefore one must accept GZ’s versions of events without doubt. I didn’t hear the whole interview to know if her finding GZ’s version of events “credible” means she could believe it in spite of doubts, or just did believe it. I would hope it is not the latter.

    And I hope she would understand and recognize the difference between believing something is possible and believing something to be true. I have a real problem with the notion that jurors should be people who know little or nothing about the case at hand, particularly for highly publicized cases. I don’t think it’s good to have only low-information people making such important decisions.

  31. MichaelJ says

    If you think information about TM’s drug use and serious problems is important information to consider in deciding what happened, then you also need to consider all the incidents of GZ’s violent behavior, including being charged with resisting arrest and assaulting an officer, domestic violence which resulted in his ex-fiancee gettin a restraining order, and court-ordered anger management classes.

    And if you are going to blame TM for not calling 911, then you need to blame Zimmerman for not letting the police do their job.

  32. Jason B. says

    Just curious where all the outrage for injustice and how faulty our system is by the Black community when OJ was released after cutting a woman’s head off and killing a guy not much older than Trayvon?

    This is a great example of how our system is supposed to work. Our system assumes innocence, the prosecution must prove your guilt beyond a shadow of a doubt. George did not need to prove he is innocent, he already is. After listening to this lady it is obvious all of the jurors took their responsibility very seriously, three on the jury wanted a guilty vertict until they followed the evidence and the law. This lady didn’t do it on her own. Five others found him not guilty as well.

  33. MichaelJ says

    @Merv — Thank you for that comment. Confession: I too was a pot-smoking teenager, so much so that I was pretty stoned when I got mugged and worried when my mother had the police come over to take an incident report. (I had a few joints on me.) Of course, this was back in the 1970s, when before the war on drugs, and people (including the police) had a more benign and sane view about pot.

    Was there any information about whether TM had been smoking dope the night he was killed, or had some back in the apartment where he was staying? If so the last thing he would want to do would be to call the police. Drug use and detentions (where in a juvenile facility or jail) seem to go hand-in-hand for so many young black people, though not for young white people who use drugs.

  34. says

    @JasonB,

    How old are you? I ask because I want to know if you are willfully forgetting the outrage for the OJ trial or if you were too young to be reading newspapers back then.

    LOTS AND LOTS OF PEOPLE IN ALL COMMUNITIES WERE OUTRAGED THAT OJ GOT TO MURDER PEOPLE AND RUN AND GET OFF.

    Like, it is just so telling that you would go there. Why are you so desperate to have some math style reasoning to just write the whole thing off. Try just not caring at all in the first place.

    Also, Zimmerman is not innocent, a HORRIBLE, TERRIBLE law is what allows him to be innocent here. The innocent approach would have been to heed the 911 dispatch and not go execute a teen.

  35. Johnny says

    I’m telling you more stuff is going to surface about Trayvon that was not allowed in the court and you all will look foolish for supporting this aggressor. Time to hop off the bandwagon the ride is over…not guilty!

  36. Zeta says

    An armed, violent sex offender and grown adult hunted and murdered an unarmed teenage boy who was simply walking home. End of story.

    I know the world is filled with small, easily confused minds, disappointing to see how many post on here. Sad, yet predicable.

    POSTED BY: MIKE IN NYC | JUL 16, 2013 11:20:30 AM

    According to Juror B37, though, she whose husband is friends with the defense attorney, George Zimmerman’s heart was in the right place:
    http://abcnews.go.com/m/blogEntry?id=19675373&sid=7623874&cid=7623874&ts=true%3Cbr%3E

    Must be great to be a Southern Flower; now this child killer can continue to kill those horrible beasts who don’t know their place.

  37. Zeta says

    @Fenrox, speaking of: a question was raised recently and in this very blog about how Juror B37 could invoke Stand Your Ground when that was not the defense/issue Zimmerman and O’Mara raised themselves.

  38. ratbastard says

    When you listen all effing day to rap, live the kind of life [or try to] rap glorifies, dress like a thug, have an ‘attitude’ because it’s been ingrained in you all your young life that the proper response to anyone who interacts with you and you don’t know them is to have an ‘attitude’ and act ‘hard’….this is all a recipe for bad news. A slow effing train wreck. And we all see and hear about it every day in all the endless shootings, home invasions, drive-byes, murders, innocent bystanders being shot while sitting their couch in their apartment, neighborhoods turned into warzones, endless depravity and dysfunctional behavior and ‘lifestyle’ choices. And it’s not just young males and females ‘of color’, the translucent young men and females also get caught up in it to varying degrees. Even full grown adults get caught up in the ‘thug’ and being ‘hard’ lifestyle and attitude.

    I guess No Limit N-word actually did have a limit, and when he encountered Zimmerman, he passed his limit.

    =================

    HOW MANY SHOOTINGS AND MURDERS HAVE OCCURRED OVER THE PAST 48 HRS IN ‘URBAN’ AMERICA INVOLVING YOUNG MEN ‘OF COLOR’? ANYBODY KNOW?

  39. Frank says

    Two things. First, Mr. Zimmerman called the police a total of 47 times with bizarre reports of various suspicious activity in the past few years he was living in that community, none of which resulted in a single arrest. This was before he joined the neighborhood watch btw. That seems like a little excessive if not obsessive, don’t you think? Second, he was heard on the audio tape uttering in frustration, “these punks always get away.” That sounds to me like he might have been looking for a confrontation, like he felt impotent and powerless against the criminals in his community, and that he was going to do whatever he had to to stop them, be they real or only real in his mind. This is all despite the fact the neighborhood watch protocols specifically state that you are not to carry around weapons, and that you should only observe and report, not engage anyone you deem suspicious. This is despite the fact that he was advised by the 911 operator not to follow Mr. Martin. There’s a reason why they have these protocols in place, and that is to prevent scenarios like the one that occurred that night. I’m sorry, but this guy sounds like a very paranoid man with a hero complex, and men like him carrying around weapons and harboring that much paranoia makes me very uneasy, only now there will be more men like him.

  40. jakeinlove says

    Wow. So the person who throws the first punch after being followed, chased, and confronted is NOT ALLOWED to stand their ground – just the stalker. Good to know.

    I’ll be buying a gun. Being a person of color I’ll probably go to jail, but at least I’ll be alive.

  41. MichaelJ says

    @Johnny You’re being so sure that there will be stuff coming to the surface to show that TM was a bad person up to no good and therefore the aggressor illustrates prejudice in its literaly sense: how some people make assumptions and come to conclusions without full information — a judgment made before all the information in in. The fact that the jury found GZ not guilt (which in the narrow sense was a logical decision given the evidence that was presented and that the prosecution had the burden of proof) does not prove that TM was at fault. And because so much information that could have shed light on what happened was either not collected or not let into the courtroom means the verdict does little to establish what exactly happened.

    And I think you’re the one who has jumped on a bandwagon — a bandwagon by all too many of GZ’s supporters (his lawyers, his brother, right-wing pundits like Ann Coulter, and all too many online commenters like you to establish TM’s as the guilty party who got what he deserved and GZ as the victim. It’s all pretty disgusting.

  42. Jason B. says

    Fenton,

    I was 28 when the OJ verdict was read. My whole sales office went to a co-workers house to watch the vertict. If you don’t remember the celebrations when that POS was acquitted please watch attached video to jog you obvious bad memory. http://youtu.be/WBSzvXydptQ

    I am a huge proponent of the Castle Doctrine, if you come into my house and I don’t know who you are and there is a hint of alarm by me, you will probably die. You forfeit your choice to live when you invade a persons home. The intent of the “stand your ground law” was to remove the prosecutions ability to use the possibility you could run in a legitimate self defense scenario and extend that doctrine to your personal space with a higher threshold of personal danger. Is the law being used un-intentionally, yes. There is no perfect solution. Was this a case of legitimate self defense, the jury said yes, no one knows but george. In a case that prompted the law a young lady did run and could have defended herself and she ended up dead by the hand of her boyfriend or ex husband.

  43. ratbastard says

    And yes, Trayvon’s friend whom he was talking to on the phone, Jeantal, did say to him that Zimmerman could be a rapist [the obvious implication being a homosexual predator]. I wonder if ‘homophobic’ words were used during the incident? Hmmmm.

  44. ratbastard says

    ‘Travyon Martin was a GOOD kid? You’re delusional. He smoked pot, took pictures of himself WITH A GUN, got suspended from school for violent activity…I could go on and on.’

    —-He was busted at least once [I’m sure more than once] in school carrying screwdrivers and women’s jewelry in his backpack. Obviously he was jumping people and robbing them, using the screwdrivers as weapons, and/or he was committing burglaries or homes and vehicles.

    Trayvon Martin also as said posed with guns, *bling’ gold teeth, and displayed plenty of ‘attitude’ right down to his chosen name, No Limit N-word. Who the F is kidding who? This sh*t doesn’t fly anymore.

  45. Derrick from Philly says

    Ratbastard,

    you said something in the comment section on the murder of the Cameroonian activist that got my attention. I didn’t want to discuss it on that thread. You said that White on Black crime is so rare that you wouldn’t even mention it (something like that).

    How do you know that, Ratbastard?

    Have you asked the two groups of Blacks that would be most vulnerable to White on Black violence? That’s Black Gays and homeless Blacks. Why? Because we’re often in places at times of night that leave us vulnerable to White males looking to commit racial violence.

    I was attacked by White guys twice leaving the park (and I don’t have to tell you know what kind of park it was) Neither time did I report it to the police. Why? What’s the first thing the cops would say to me, “What the hell were you doing out in the park at 3:00am in the morning?”

    Homeless Black folks have been attacked because they’re often in locations late at night that leave them vulnerable.

    So, don’t be so sure about how “rare” this type of inter-racial violence is. It’s probably very under reported.

  46. Rion says

    A lot of you may be too young to remember but where were all the people who are now saying let the justice reign and the jury has spoken when O.J. was found not guilty. I remember everyone saying what a travesty.

  47. Beth says

    A jury in a murder trial is supposed to consider mens rea (guilty mind), whether the accused is culpable because his “mind is guilty”. So, if they didn’t consider race is a motive, they didn’t do their job properly.

    Carlie, in my opinion (I have a law degree and have passed my state’s bar examination) you are mistaken. The requisite mens rea for conviction of 2nd degree murder is a “depraved mind regardless of human life.” The prosecution might have alleged that Zimmerman had a depraved mind by attempting to prove he is a racist. Or that he shot Martin merely because Martin was black. But it failed to do so.

    If you watch the second video starting at 6:08, the juror discusses the role of race this case. She specifically said that she didn’t think Zimmerman “profiled” Martin based upon race. She stated that, in her opinion, Zimmerman was suspicious of Martin because of the neighborhood’s high crime rate.

  48. Beth says

    “After reading the biographies of all the jurors, it’s a wonder how they got the lone non-connected black hispanic woman with eight children on there — like loading up a jury with degreed weasels and including one chicken for insurance purposes.”

    Ripper, please read about peremptory challenges and the SCOTUS cases of Batson v. Kentucky (1986) and Georgia v. McCollum (1992). It is unconstitutional to exclude jurors on the basis of their race. If the prosecution suspected Zimmerman’s lawyers of striking black jurors purely based upon race, it would have objected. In which caser the judge would have required the defense to provide a neutral explanation for challenging the black jurors.

    Interestingly, I’ve read that the prosecution struck a black man from the jury because he admitted to watching Fox News. I don’t know whether that’s true.

    Does your use of the term “degreed weasels” mean that you think educated people are predisposed to racial prejudice?

Leave A Reply