Author Topic: Suspicion Nation, by Lisa Bloom, says juror B-29 didn't fight to the end.  (Read 8248 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline nomatter_nevermind

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5449
  • Rate Post +0/-0
Suspicion Nation: The Inside Story of the Trayvon Martin Injustice and Why We Continue to Repeat It, by Lisa Bloom, 2014, published by Counterpoint.

I think the most interesting thing about this book is the bombshell mentioned in the thread title. Bloom claims to have interviewed juror B-29, aka 'Maddie'.

Quote
After ten hours of deliberations they took their first vote. Maddie, crushed, voted not guilty, along with another juror who'd initially wanted to convict. Two more continued to hold out for conviction, but Maddie knew it was hopeless. [p. 19]

This is what B-29 said in an ABC interview aired on 7/25/13.

Quote
My first vote was second degree murder. [4:40]

I was the juror that was gonna give them the hung jury. Oh, I was. I fought to the end. [5:20]

Bloom's version of B-29's story implies that the first vote split 4/2 for acquittal. There is an earlier mention of two jurors who 'strongly favored acquittal from the beginning' (p. 18).

Juror B-37 described an even split on the 'initial vote', in her 7/15/13 interview with Anderson Cooper (20:40).

Quote
Cooper: Did you take an initial vote to see where everybody was?

B-37: We did.

Cooper: So where was everybody, how was that first vote?

B-37: We had three not guilties, one second degree murder, and two manslaughters.

I will discuss some other aspects of the book in subsequent posts.

Offline nomatter_nevermind

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5449
  • Rate Post +0/-0

Bloom's version of B-29's story implies that the first vote split 4/2 for acquittal.

That should have been  '4/2 for conviction'.

Offline RickyJim

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1580
  • Rate Post +0/-0
Thanks.  I hadn't been aware of the book until now.  I did go on Amazon and was surprised by the number of reviews and comments on reviews, but not by the lopsided 1 star - 5 star division.  (Is her main argument really that Zimmerman kept the gun against his backside so he couldn't have gotten it out while on his back so therefore he got it out before so is guilty?   ::)  Wow!)  For me, the most interesting comment was the speculation that the book was written to influence the supposedly forthcoming trial of GZ versus NBC.  Anybody know if that trial is actually going to take place?

Offline nomatter_nevermind

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5449
  • Rate Post +0/-0
Is her main argument really that Zimmerman kept the gun against his backside so he couldn't have gotten it out while on his back so therefore he got it out before so is guilty?

I would say she relies more on the argument that TM couldn't have seen the gun, because of its location and because of the darkness. She ignores completely whether GZ could have reasonably believed TM saw the gun.

I'm working on a post to give my overall impressions of the book. Until I'm done with that, I'm not reading any on-line reviews.

Offline RickyJim

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1580
  • Rate Post +0/-0
I listened only to the audio selection available on Amazon and found it hard to believe it came from a Yale law graduate (where Hillary, Bill and Alan Dershowitz got their LL.Bs).  I hope you will explain why she thinks the issue of whether or not Trayvon saw the gun is so important in determining Zimmerman's guilt. 

Offline nomatter_nevermind

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5449
  • Rate Post +0/-0
I hope you will explain why she thinks the issue of whether or not Trayvon saw the gun is so important in determining Zimmerman's guilt.

Do you think it isn't important?

As I said, Bloom doesn't distinguish between TM actually seeing the gun, and GZ having a reasonable belief that he saw it. With that caveat, the importance of the issue seems obvious to me.

Offline RickyJim

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1580
  • Rate Post +0/-0
The importance isn't as obvious to me.  Did the issue come up at the trial?  If Zimmerman felt that he was in an extremely dangerous situation against a mad dog attacker, he would be justified in shooting in the attacker's direction, whether or not the latter saw the gun.

 

Site Meter
click
tracking