Author Topic: Day Five, Thoughts, June 14, 2013  (Read 3002 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline cboldt

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1262
  • Rate Post +0/-0
Re: Day Five, Thoughts, June 14, 2013
« Reply #15 on: June 14, 2013, 01:52:11 PM »
G87 says that there were tour buses brought in to view the Martin makeshift memorial, and her boss, which is likely a school principal or something, told the bus drivers/tourists that they couldn't stay on the worker's business location.  She can see RTL from work.

Anyway, I didn't realize how astroturfed that aspect was.  Amazing to me to organize tour buses to visit a makeshift memorial.

Offline nomatter_nevermind

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5449
  • Rate Post +0/-0
Re: Day Five, Thoughts, June 14, 2013
« Reply #16 on: June 14, 2013, 02:02:50 PM »
From Updates thread.
BDLR left-handedly uses "addiction" to describe people who pay close attention to this case.

I'm cut to the quick.

Offline nomatter_nevermind

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5449
  • Rate Post +0/-0
Re: Day Five, Thoughts, June 14, 2013
« Reply #17 on: June 14, 2013, 03:01:43 PM »
At least two of today's potential jurors mentioned talk show host Jim Philips as a news source.

I found an archive of Orlando Sentinel articles about or mentioning him.

The earliest, from 1995, mentioned his contract being renewed, by the same station he is on today. It seems he was already a popular radio host almost two decades ago.

Quote
Jim Philips fans will be happy to know that the talk show host last week reached a new multiyear contract agreement with 104.1 FM (WTKS). His contract was to expire in early March, and prior to last Friday station sources said negotiations were ''not going well.''

Philips, whose Philips Phile from 3-7 p.m. weekdays is No. 2 among listeners ages 25-54, is enjoying the best ratings of his long career in Orlando.

Offline cboldt

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1262
  • Rate Post +0/-0
Re: Day Five, Thoughts, June 14, 2013
« Reply #18 on: June 14, 2013, 03:25:06 PM »
O'Mara's presser.  Happy that we'll be able to seat a jury in Seminole County.  It's moving along well, pretty fast, from an insider's perspective.  Jurors have been mostly truthful, a few examples otherwise, but have been found out.  Confident that outside influences won't have play.  (distracted here)  O'Mara says he's not concerned that people bring in predispositions.  What he cares about is jurors who have predispositions but don't tell the court.  Stealth juror, unbelievably dangerous to the case and the system, lose faith in the system, start having justice on the streets.  Soap box on stealth jurors.  Defense found him out.  Could easily have gotten by them, they were lucky to catch them, need to redouble effort on jurors yet to come, catching E7 was coincidence.  He would have thought there were more people with more information.  He thought the press would have imparted more information and opinions.  So, he is concerned that maybe people aren't being open with their degree of knowledge.  He saw a lot about this case in the 2 weeks before he signed on.  He is surprised that the press has not had more of an impact on the jurors.

He did hear that E7 came back and was trespassed to get off the property.  He was attempting to get to jurors.  If he had been successful, may have wasted the week of jury selection.  O'Mara is glad the sheriff caught him.  E7 is lucky O'Mara is not the sheriff.

Frye hearing Monday afternoon starting at 4PM.  He figures 3 hours for the defense witness.  State has right to bring rebuttal witnesses, and if so, they will come Tuesday.  Decision comes at judge's pace.

Did not schedule deposition with Crump, other than sometime before testimony in trial begins.

Asked why 2-4 weeks, instead of 4-6?  He says the difference is jury selection.  There is also the issue of the Frye hearing decision (experts or not), which affects the trial by a week, or a touch more.

Back to the subject of jurors not having much information.  If he was to ask 20 people in the Sanford Mall, he thinks all of them would know more than the jurors put in front of the lawyers in the jury selection process.

5:23 presser over.

Offline TalkLeft

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1125
  • Rate Post +0/-0
    • TalkLeft: The Politics of Crime
Re: Day Five, Thoughts, June 14, 2013
« Reply #19 on: June 14, 2013, 03:28:32 PM »
Frye hearing to continue Monday. Thread  started on that in "Trial Motions and Rulings".

Offline cboldt

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1262
  • Rate Post +0/-0
Re: Day Five, Thoughts, June 14, 2013
« Reply #20 on: June 14, 2013, 03:32:09 PM »
Frye hearing to continue Monday. Thread  started on that in "Trial Motions and Rulings".

There is a substantial amount of Frye Hearing material under dated boards in the Court Proceedings (IIRC) topic.  For example, there are posts titled "Hearing of June 8" or similar, dedicated to the expert witness testimony.  Is it your intention to close off discussion in that area, and restrict discussion to the "Trial" section of the forum?  Likewise the topics that are titled "Voice Experts" and similar.  Is your preference that those not receive any more action that reflects formal proceedings in court?

Offline TalkLeft

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1125
  • Rate Post +0/-0
    • TalkLeft: The Politics of Crime
Re: Day Five, Thoughts, June 14, 2013
« Reply #21 on: June 14, 2013, 03:41:36 PM »
No I am not closing those boards and it is fine to continue discussion in them for as long as you want, even during trial.
 
When the Frye Hearing happens on Monday, was going to start a thread here on them, since the hearing is occurring after jury selection has started.

Do you (and others) think the continued hearing should be in the pre-trial forums?

"Trial" really doesn't begin until the jury is empaneled and sworn, but for the purposes of the forums, I've included jury selection and all events after June 10 in the Trial forums.

When I log on, I can see new comments posted in both the trial and pretrial forums on the same screen. So everyone should be able to see where there is continuing discussion.

Where do you think it fits best?

Offline cboldt

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1262
  • Rate Post +0/-0
Re: Day Five, Thoughts, June 14, 2013
« Reply #22 on: June 14, 2013, 03:56:06 PM »
Where do you think it fits best?

I'm biased to keeping the Frye hearing collection of threads under the same heading.  I think having them on "by date" threads works.  Having all of their titles appear on one screen is, I think, convenient for recreating the historical record, if anybody happens to be referring to this stuff say a year or five from now.

But I'll go where the consensus or boss, whichever wins, says.

Offline nomatter_nevermind

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5449
  • Rate Post +0/-0
Re: Day Five, Thoughts, June 14, 2013
« Reply #23 on: June 17, 2013, 03:39:32 AM »
I estimate the black population of Seminole County as 13.1% of the total population.

How I got that is a bit complicated, so I'll devote a post to explaining it.

First the data sources, both from the U.S. Census Bureau, with thanks to DiwataMan for the 2010 report.

2010 (counted)

Enter 'Seminole County, Florida'.
Click on the link under:
2010 Census
    Population, Age, Sex, Race, Households and Housing


2011 (projected)



                                                                    2010        2011

                                   Black, Single Race       11.1         11.7

                                   Black, One or More      12.4         N/A
                                   Races



Census data is based on self-reporting. Our classifications of the potential jurors is based mostly on reporters' observations. I think the category I have labeled 'Black, One or More Races' will correspond most closely to our classifications of jurors as black. Unfortunately, it's not available in our most recent data set, for 2011.

The 'Single Race' category rose to 11.7 in 2011, an increase of 0.054 over 2010. I wouldn't assume that the 'One or More' category changed in exactly the same way, but I think making use of that assumption is likely to get a bit closer to an accurate estimate for 2011, our best proxy for 2013.

             12.4 * 1.054 = 13.1

Assuming a jury pool matching the population, and a selection random with respect to race, the probability of a 6-person jury have no black jurors is:

             (1 - .13)6 = .43 = 43%


Forum Note: I tried to do the above table as an HTML table. It didn't work in Preview. I know the format was right, because I cut and pasted from a practice site where I had tested it. Either there's a trick to making that work, or it just isn't supported here.
« Last Edit: June 17, 2013, 03:42:58 AM by nomatter_nevermind »

 

Site Meter
click
tracking