Author Topic: Day One Thoughts: June 10, 2013  (Read 11374 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Cylinder

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 730
  • Rate Post +0/-0
  • IANAL
Re: Day One Thoughts: June 10, 2013
« Reply #60 on: June 10, 2013, 11:17:05 PM »
Does anyone have anything solid on the numbers and process?...Didn't the judge say a long time ago she wanted to look at 500? And they got 100 questionnaires today? Are they going to question every single one of those 100 or is there an elimination round before they get to questioning them. Then we got the 21 number. Are they still going to question 17 for the media exposure thing then get to the 21?

From my layperson understanding.

500 summons were sent. Of those that responded, 100 filled out questionnaires today. Both the state and defense were distributed a copy of those completed questionnaires and were locked in a room to agree on a batch of candidates to call for viore dire limited to pre-trial publicity.

The goal of the court is to have a pool of 21 candidates that are pre-screened for pre-trial publicity to call for more fact-specific voir dire (e.g. Do you have any strong feelings regarding the licensed practice of carrying a concealed firearm?) There are a total of 14 preemptory challenges to seat a jury of 8. Add to that challenges for cause and it's not unlikely that the court will require a Round 2, though I'm doubting the court will be too eager to vote people off the island. Again, just my layperson understanding.

Offline unitron

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1060
  • Rate Post +0/-0
Re: Day One Thoughts: June 10, 2013
« Reply #61 on: June 10, 2013, 11:35:30 PM »
... There is no evidence GZ lied about anything...

George telling what he sincerely believes to be the truth may be more of a indicator of the quality of his character than the accuracy of his recollection.

Physical and emotional trauma are notorious for wreaking havoc with short term memory.

Which may very well explain why he thinks he got out of the truck in response to a request for an address which actually occurred after he got out.

If there's any risk of that discrepency coming to the attention of the jury, it would be well for the defense to have already taken steps to deal with that.

Offline TalkLeft

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1124
  • Rate Post +0/-0
    • TalkLeft: The Politics of Crime
Re: Day One Thoughts: June 10, 2013
« Reply #62 on: June 10, 2013, 11:42:23 PM »
I'm going to start a new thread on this because it's entirely unclear what's going on.

NBC is reporting says the prosecution and defense each get six peremptory challenges.

This news source says 100 will report each day Monday - Friday (total 500) and there will be 6 jurors and 2 alternates chosen. It also says each side gets 10 preemptory challenges.

I've read elsewhere each side gets 10 pre-emptory challenges.

I don't get what the number 21 means. If each side exercised 10 challenges, there would only be one left.

This is a crazy way of picking the jury in my view.

I'm also wondering if the sidebars weren't to agree on challenges for cause (which is the only reason I can think of for the judge asking GZ if he agreed with his lawyers choices. They just don't want the jurors to know which lawyers objected to them for cause.)

Like i said, I'll start a thread on this in a bit. 

Offline unitron

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1060
  • Rate Post +0/-0
Re: Day One Thoughts: June 10, 2013
« Reply #63 on: June 10, 2013, 11:57:07 PM »
Since these interviews seem to be focused specifically on whether the prospective juror was influenced by pre-trial publicity, can they be let slide for now and challenged later after more of them have been interviewed and each side has a better idea of what the best they can hope for out of the entire pool is?

Offline nomatter_nevermind

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5447
  • Rate Post +0/-0
Re: Day One Thoughts: June 10, 2013
« Reply #64 on: June 11, 2013, 12:30:30 AM »
I've read elsewhere each side gets 10 pre-emptory challenges.

This is Rule 3.350.

The number of peremptory challenges depends on the seriousness of the offense charged. Ten is the maximum, (plus one for each alternate, which is always the same). Ten is for capital crimes and life felonies.

Six is for all other felonies. So I'm thinking the court spokesperson who said 'six' was confused about this. He doesn't realize M2 is a life felony, or he doesn't know the rule and thinks it's six because it usually is, or the like. Maybe he's new, and has never seen a life felony tried before.

Maybe I should clarify that all the above is what is required by statute. The judge can grant more peremptories, but she can't order fewer.

Quote
I don't get what the number 21 means. If each side exercised 10 challenges, there would only be one left.

Is it 21 potential jurors for each group of 100?

Offline Cylinder

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 730
  • Rate Post +0/-0
  • IANAL
Re: Day One Thoughts: June 10, 2013
« Reply #65 on: June 11, 2013, 12:41:04 AM »
I've read elsewhere each side gets 10 pre-emptory challenges.

There doesn't seem to be a public record to resolve this discrepancy. Zimmerman filed a Motion to Set Status Conference un the middle of February. The clerk's notes for that hearing doesn't really shed any light on the issue:

Quote
02/14/2013  MNFD  --STIPULATION OF THE PARTIES.COURT HELD PRELIMINARY DISCUSSIONS WITH THE 
02/14/2013  MNFD  --PARTIES AS TO LOGISTICS OF JURY, TRIAL, AND SECURITY. DEFENSE ATTORNEY OMARA 
02/14/2013  MNFD  --MOTIONED THE COURT TO HOLD DISCUSSIONS REGARDING SECURITY IN CHAMBERS PER 
02/14/2013  MNFD  --JUDGE LESTER'S PREVIOUS RULING IN THIS CASE. COURT ORDERED THAT ANY ISSUES 
02/14/2013  MNFD  --THAT DEFENSE HAS REGARDING SECURITY SHOULD BE DISCUSSED WITH SEMINOLE COUNTY 
02/14/2013  MNFD  --SHERIFF'S OFFICE. PARTIES STIPULATED TO CALLING A VENIRE OF 500 FOR THIS CASE 
02/14/2013  MNFD  --AND INCLUDING A QUESTIONNARE TO BE PROVIDED TO THE VENIRE AT THE TIME OF JURY 
02/14/2013  MNFD  --SELECTION. DEFENSE ATTORNEY DON WEST MOTIONED THE COURT TO SET A TIME FRAME 
02/14/2013  MNFD  --FOR STATE'S RESPONSE TIME TO MOTIONS FILED BY DEFENSE. COURT RESERVED RULING 
02/14/2013  MNFD  --UNTIL AND IF IT BECOMES AN ISSUE. DONE AND ORDERED IN OPEN COURT THIS 
02/14/2013  MNFD  --14TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2013:
 

 

Site Meter
click
tracking