Author Topic: Live Updates, Day 9, June 20  (Read 14371 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline TalkLeft

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1124
  • Rate Post +0/-0
    • TalkLeft: The Politics of Crime
Re: Live Updates, Day 9, June 20
« Reply #120 on: June 20, 2013, 05:02:19 PM »
The judge calls out jurors:

B-12
B-29
B76
B7
B35 State strikes
B37
B51
B 86 state strikes
E6 state strikes
E40       

the judge calls Juror 54 and asks for backstrikes

The judge calls B12, the state strikes

The judge calls B29 and E73

The defense calls upon the court to have the prosecutor provide a race and gender neutral explanation for the stateís first four challenges, which were all white women.


Offline TalkLeft

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1124
  • Rate Post +0/-0
    • TalkLeft: The Politics of Crime
Re: Live Updates, Day 9, June 20
« Reply #121 on: June 20, 2013, 05:03:16 PM »
As to B12, the state says she looked at the Zimmerman donation website (although it agrees she did not donate to it) and has a warrant for limited extradition pending. OíMara counters that looking at a website is not objectionable, the state is using this as a pretext. The court upholds the strike, B12 is gone.

The state explains its strike on Juror B86. She mentioned Trayvon was expelled and if he wasnít out there at night, it wouldnít be a problem. She thought it would be a financial hardship to serve. The court allows the strike, saying it was gender neutral.

As to Juror E6, the state says she was concerned about being sequestered and mentioned during questioning that innocent people go to prison. Ultimately, the court disallowed the strike and she stays.

As to juror B76, the state says she asked why a kid would go out at night to buy candy. She misidentified the victimís father in court. OíMara says thatís pretextual, she said she could be fair, and she may have assumed night meant midnight and would let go of that when she learned it was 7 pm. The court rejects the strike and B76 stays.

The court comments on the statistical makeup of first jurors called, noting 8 of the first 12 were women.

The panel of six is now

B29
B76
B37
B51
E6
E40

The court moves on to the alternates:


Offline TalkLeft

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1124
  • Rate Post +0/-0
    • TalkLeft: The Politics of Crime
Re: Live Updates, Day 9, June 20
« Reply #122 on: June 20, 2013, 05:03:55 PM »
For alternates the court first calls

E 54
B 73

Court asks for backstrikes
Thereís a strike as to E54.

Court calls M75. The defense strikes.
The state asks for the defense to provide a race neutral ground for striking her, she is black female.

OíMara says she is a good friend and coworker of a witness named Wes, which she did not disclose.  There has been interaction between her and Wes which she did not acknowledge. The judge tells OíMara to show the state his evidence of interaction. OíMara says she posted her jury summons online and it was available to witness Wes. .

The state withdraws its challenge to the strike of M75. She is gone.

Judge calls B61, the state strikes.

Next is B 72, no objections from either side.

Offline TalkLeft

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1124
  • Rate Post +0/-0
    • TalkLeft: The Politics of Crime
Re: Live Updates, Day 9, June 20
« Reply #123 on: June 20, 2013, 05:04:25 PM »
The Court calls E22. The defense moves to strike. The state asks for a race neutral reason to strike this black female.  OíMara says she mentioned she was a church administrator, and had worked at her church for 19 years. She said she thought police should have been more active in the initial investigation. The pastor she works with wrote a pointed letter that was published in the Orlando Sentinel that was very pro-Martin. A sermon given by her pastor evidences they were strongly in favor of the Martin side, and against Zimmerman. He talked about how they needed to make event significant, and referenced Martin Luther King and slavery in the sermon. The group the church belongs to put out a statement. The church published additonal information that discussed Martin and the path forward. The church she has worked at for 19 years has an inflamed view of the evidence. The church performed research about the case. The juror has not been straight forward about the influence of the church and itís position on her.

Bernie responds and says he disagrees with his church (Catholic) on issues like the death penalty. He says it is a pretextual strike.  He says neither side asked her about the views of her church.

The judge rules that both sides were asked if anyone at work discussed the case and disclosed their views. They were asked if the case was brought up at church. She had the opportunity to disclose this information and didnít. The court upholds the strike and Juror E22 is gone.

Offline TalkLeft

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1124
  • Rate Post +0/-0
    • TalkLeft: The Politics of Crime
Re: Live Updates, Day 9, June 20
« Reply #124 on: June 20, 2013, 05:05:18 PM »
The judge calls E13. No objections.

The alternates at this point are

E54
E73
B72
E13

The court asks for backstrikes.

The defense moves to strike E73.
The court calls E28.

Offline TalkLeft

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1124
  • Rate Post +0/-0
    • TalkLeft: The Politics of Crime
Re: Live Updates, Day 9, June 20
« Reply #125 on: June 20, 2013, 05:05:50 PM »
The state moves again to strike juror E6. It says E6 recognized a potential expert
witness named Dr. Danziger. The defense counters she just said she recognized the name, she did not know him or what he does. There were four potential witness names she recognized, referred to as DD (Danzier), WN, ZF and one I didnít catch. OíMara says she did not know them individually but by reputation and two of them are prominent doctors. OíMara says Dr.Danziger was listed as a potential defense witness and they have since notified the state he will not be called. He is not going to be a witness.

The judge again rejects the strike on E6. 

The jury panel is now complete and both sides accept the panel. The panel is brought in to court and sworn in as jurors.

Opening arguments begin Monday morning.

Offline Cylinder

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 730
  • Rate Post +0/-0
  • IANAL
Re: Live Updates, Day 9, June 20
« Reply #126 on: June 20, 2013, 05:13:02 PM »
Jeffrey Danzinger, MD is a clinical and forensic psychiatrist out of Maitland, FL. that was involved in the Casey Anthony case. He and another doctor evaluated Anthony and gave deposition, but did not testify.

Offline TalkLeft

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1124
  • Rate Post +0/-0
    • TalkLeft: The Politics of Crime
Re: Live Updates, Day 9, June 20
« Reply #127 on: June 20, 2013, 05:16:27 PM »
Once again, the final jurors are:

B29
B76
B37
B51
E6
E40

The alternates, in order, are

    E54
    B72
    E13
    E28

There are varying media descriptions of juror B29. Some refer to her as Black, others as Hispanic. In court BDLR referred to her as Black or Hispanic.

Here is a thread for discussing the final jury panel. Again, this thread is for what was said in court only.
« Last Edit: June 20, 2013, 05:25:06 PM by TalkLeft »

Offline nomatter_nevermind

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5447
  • Rate Post +0/-0
Re: Live Updates, Day 9, June 20
« Reply #128 on: June 20, 2013, 07:05:34 PM »

Bernardo again moves to strike E6 and offers additional grounds. . . . Nelson says she understands what the state is saying, but if there is any doubt she resolves it in favor of the defense.

I think this is a bit misleading. I understood Nelson's generalization to be, that in a Batson challenge, benefit of the doubt goes to granting the strike.

It ultimately didn't matter, as they had the jury before getting to him, but I have a clear recollection that Nelson said he could stay. The WFTV talking heads mentioned that he was a few places past where they stopped. They would have gotten to him if all the peremptories had been used.
« Last Edit: June 20, 2013, 07:29:23 PM by TalkLeft »

Offline cboldt

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1262
  • Rate Post +0/-0
Re: Live Updates, Day 9, June 20
« Reply #129 on: June 20, 2013, 07:27:42 PM »
I think this is a bit misleading. I understood Nelson's generalization to be, that in a Batson challenge, benefit of the doubt goes to granting the strike.

Well, after stumbling over her words a bit, she eventually did not grant the strike that the state was seeking.  Just working from memory, I think she said that in a close case, she'd resolve in favor of the defense.  I don't have that word for word, but "defense" was part of her explanation.  In this particular instance, the defense wanted to keep the juror.

I've got it audio recorded.  Now, if I can just find the spot ;-)

Edit:  Found the spot.  "defense" was not part of her explanation.  She first said when in doubt, grant the strike; then she said, no, when in doubt, deny the strike.  She did deny the strike.
« Last Edit: June 20, 2013, 07:38:34 PM by cboldt »

Offline TalkLeft

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1124
  • Rate Post +0/-0
    • TalkLeft: The Politics of Crime
Re: Live Updates, Day 9, June 20
« Reply #130 on: June 20, 2013, 07:33:11 PM »
I had that switched, sorry. I fixed it now. The state moved to strike Juror P67 for cause. The defense objected and wanted him not to be stricken.
The court refused to strike him.
It wouldn't have mattered as his number didn't come up. But it could have mattered as he was three away from being called when it ended.

Let's take this to the comment thread, but thanks for pointing it out so I could correct.

Offline nomatter_nevermind

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5447
  • Rate Post +0/-0
Re: Live Updates, Day 9, June 20
« Reply #131 on: June 20, 2013, 10:15:19 PM »
Since the thread is still open, there's one more thing I want to flesh out. O'Mara did something very effective in his opening, and I had to boil it down to a sentence.

Quote
O'Mara says both he and the prosecutors could be said to represent the people of the State of Florida.

O'Mara began this part by alluding to de la Rionda introducing himself as representing the people. O'Mara said that he had himself had served as a prosecutor for years, and he always introduced himself the same way. Then he talked about afterwards working for years as a defense attorney, representing various clients in Florida. His concluding observation, quote above, was not an abstraction, but the capstone of his personal narrative.

Offline TalkLeft

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1124
  • Rate Post +0/-0
    • TalkLeft: The Politics of Crime
Re: Live Updates, Day 9, June 20
« Reply #132 on: June 20, 2013, 11:36:03 PM »
I'm leaving this open for a bit just for that purpose, so we can add other things that were said or happened during jury selection (without comment.)

Offline nomatter_nevermind

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5447
  • Rate Post +0/-0
Re: Live Updates, Day 9, June 20
« Reply #133 on: June 21, 2013, 01:43:06 AM »
O'Mara talking about duty to retreat. SYG is shorthand for no duty to retreat.

H-6: Never thought much about the law itself. Thinks it must have been put there for a reason.

O'Mara asks if H-6 agrees with SYG. He does.

6 people have concerns about SYG.

E-7: He opposed this change in law.

B-76: Not sure she understands the retreat concept.

Nelson calls sidebar.

ETA: Clarifying, O'Mara was starting to answer B-76 when Nelson called the sidebar.

Nelson telling jurors they are finders of fact. The court will instruct them in the law. The roles do not overlap.

B-7: He would hope that he can follow the law.

'E-7' was an error for 'B-7'. There was no E-7 in Round 2.

I left out something important here. After Nelson said the two roles don't overlap, she asked if all the jurors would follow the law as she instructed. I don't recall if any of the jurors answered at that time. There was a fairly long colloquy between O'Mara and B-7, of which I only recorded the bottom line, B-7's 'would hope' remark. That was a somewhat delayed response to Nelson's question.

 

Site Meter
click
tracking