TalkLeft Discussion Forums

George Zimmerman Trial Coverage => Verdict Watch and Reactions => Topic started by: TalkLeft on July 11, 2013, 04:02:53 AM

Title: Verdict Watch
Post by: TalkLeft on July 11, 2013, 04:02:53 AM
This thread will open when the jury retires to deliberate.
Title: Re: Verdict Watch
Post by: cboldt on July 12, 2013, 01:23:22 PM
Looks like jury watch time.  I wonder how late they are allowed to work, each day.  Do they get to set their own hours, or does the Court restrict them?
Title: Re: Verdict Watch
Post by: annoyedbeyond on July 12, 2013, 01:28:55 PM
Looks like jury watch time.  I wonder how late they are allowed to work, each day.  Do they get to set their own hours, or does the Court restrict them?

There's been a tweet from the court spokesman that they're going to be allowed back to the hotel when they're tired.

But one of the Twitter Lawyer Mafia (Hornsby I think) said the other day that JDN kept everyone in the court room until 4AM for a verdict once, so who really knows.
Title: Re: Verdict Watch
Post by: cboldt on July 12, 2013, 01:33:15 PM
There's been a tweet from the court spokesman that they're going to be allowed back to the hotel when they're tired.

But one of the Twitter Lawyer Mafia (Hornsby I think) said the other day that JDN kept everyone in the court room until 4AM for a verdict once, so who really knows.

Sounds like the jury can choose their own hours then.  If they want to work until 10 pm, or whenever, they can.  Each day.  I thought maybe the court would limit them to bankers hours or something.  If I was on a jury, I'd want to set my own hours, and I would bristle at the court telling me to stop deliberating.
Title: Re: Verdict Watch
Post by: annoyedbeyond on July 12, 2013, 01:42:50 PM
While we wait...there's about 20-30 minutes of pre-taped just released CNN interview with O'Mara.

http://www.cnn.com/video/data/2.0/video/us/2013/07/12/intv-savidge-omara-prosecutor-and-judge.cnn.html
Title: Re: Verdict Watch
Post by: Cylinder on July 12, 2013, 02:40:32 PM
The jury has a question. Court reconvenes.
Title: Re: Verdict Watch
Post by: Cylinder on July 12, 2013, 02:47:41 PM
They want an itemized list of exhibits. Court will comply as soon as the items that were marked for identification but not entered into evidence are redacted. Parties are accomplishing that now. Question will be filed under seal to protect foreperson's name.

They're going to go long.
Title: Re: Verdict Watch
Post by: Meni on July 12, 2013, 03:06:17 PM
They want an itemized list of exhibits. Court will comply as soon as the items that were marked for identification but not entered into evidence are redacted. Parties are accomplishing that now. Question will be filed under seal to protect foreperson's name.

They're going to go long.

Maybe they are taking O'Mara very seriously and looking for the shred of evidence that the State provided to support their case.
Title: Re: Verdict Watch
Post by: redstripe on July 12, 2013, 04:12:45 PM
The jurors asked to be adjourned, seemingly somewhat early.  Is there a disagreement or have they pretty much reached a verdict and are waiting for tomorrow to finalize it?
Title: Re: Verdict Watch
Post by: annoyedbeyond on July 12, 2013, 04:16:45 PM
could be either one. I'm not making any predictions. Or "any more predictions".

I agreed with Diana Tennis that it would be a couple of hours. I thought they'd be going home tonight.

So I'm done predicting.

Title: Re: Verdict Watch
Post by: cboldt on July 12, 2013, 04:17:04 PM
The jurors asked to be adjourned, seemingly somewhat early.  Is there a disagreement or have they pretty much reached a verdict and are waiting for tomorrow to finalize it?

Who knows.  I recall a jury that I was on.  We reached agreement in the first five minutes, then, knowing a quick return would be criticized, spent the day just hanging out.  Played cards, talked about hobbies, etc.
Title: Re: Verdict Watch
Post by: cboldt on July 12, 2013, 04:21:55 PM
I agreed with Diana Tennis that it would be a couple of hours. I thought they'd be going home tonight.

By now they have adapted to being sequestered, and have no urgent need to get out.  Their needs are catered to, better than a vacation if you can afford the time off.

There is an infinite variety of interpersonal overlay, totally unrelated to the trial, that has to shake out too.  We don't know if they get along swimmingly, or where the lines of tension fall now that they are tasked.
Title: Re: Verdict Watch
Post by: cboldt on July 12, 2013, 04:50:28 PM
So I'm done predicting.

Heck, it's not so much as predicting as speculating with benefits.

If I was on that jury, and was okay with being sequestered for longer, I'd propose delaying delivery of a verdict for "a long time" like a month.  Play mind games with the public.  Let them guess and spin and wonder and whatever.  Meanwhile, we all know what's up - after all, the system made us sit sequestered for the better part of a month.  Turnabout is fair play.
Title: Re: Verdict Watch
Post by: annoyedbeyond on July 12, 2013, 05:12:59 PM
Heck, it's not so much as predicting as speculating with benefits.

If I was on that jury, and was okay with being sequestered for longer, I'd propose delaying delivery of a verdict for "a long time" like a month.  Play mind games with the public.  Let them guess and spin and wonder and whatever.  Meanwhile, we all know what's up - after all, the system made us sit sequestered for the better part of a month.  Turnabout is fair play.

There is that, certainly.


Especially with the new rule that JDN seems to have put in, where it used to be an hour of notice, she's whittled it down to 15 minutes. Can you imagine the stress and strain on all the talking heads having to be ready to go on 15 minutes notice for even a week or so?
Title: Re: Verdict Watch
Post by: Evil Chinchilla on July 12, 2013, 05:16:44 PM
By now they have adapted to being sequestered, and have no urgent need to get out.  Their needs are catered to, better than a vacation if you can afford the time off.
Heh.

A short while ago, before I read this response, I said that the juror with the job in the Alzheimer's ward and the eight kids was going to be the one juror going, "Oh, gee... I just don't know... I'm sorry. Maybe if we all slept on it and ran through the whole thing tomorrow just one more time, to make sure we didn't miss anything..."
Title: Re: Verdict Watch
Post by: cboldt on July 12, 2013, 05:30:53 PM
Especially with the new rule that JDN seems to have put in, where it used to be an hour of notice, she's whittled it down to 15 minutes. Can you imagine the stress and strain on all the talking heads having to be ready to go on 15 minutes notice for even a week or so?

The possibilities are just so tempting.  The system is so self-serious, might as well take the opportunity to make a monkey out of it.  And by "the system," I mean both the court, but even more, the press.

How many people get the opportunity to do that?
Title: Re: Verdict Watch
Post by: Meni on July 12, 2013, 05:42:06 PM
The possibilities are just so tempting.  The system is so self-serious, might as well take the opportunity to make a monkey out of it.  And by "the system," I mean both the court, but even more, the press.

How many people get the opportunity to do that?

Maybe they want one more free dinner. ::)
Title: Re: Verdict Watch
Post by: cboldt on July 12, 2013, 05:50:36 PM
Maybe they want one more free dinner. ::)

One!  Dinner is a minor perk.  I'm talking about the power of yanking the chain of a good chunk of the press apparatus, as well as making the court work for me, instead of the other way around.  Right now, the jury holds all the power.  It is a point to ponder, like holding the genie who is granting wishes.
Title: Re: Verdict Watch
Post by: annoyedbeyond on July 12, 2013, 05:51:01 PM
Remember the All in the Family where Edith was on jury duty? She was the lone juror...or as Archie put it, "the lone dingbat".

Title: Re: Verdict Watch
Post by: nomatter_nevermind on July 12, 2013, 09:23:25 PM
After Dr. Di Maio's testimony, (http://forums.talkleft.com/index.php/topic,2586.msg116070.html#msg116070) I thought the jury might come back quickly. I thought he settled almost all the key issues regarding 'self-defense' (justifiable use of deadly force), and his testimony on those points was either uncontradicted or contradicted only by
Dr. Rao. (http://forums.talkleft.com/index.php/topic,2545.msg114730.html#msg114730) To me Dr. Rao seems a less impressive witness in both presentation and credentials, and I thought she was clearly biased.

One thing I think is especially impressive about Dr. Di Maio as a witness, is that he doesn't frequently testify for criminal defendants. For much of his career he was a medical examiner for one jurisdiction or another, and in private practice he has mostly testified in civil cases. I can hardly see him as a hired gun whose opinion is for sale, and even less so when his eminence in his field is considered as well.

But I have been living with this case for months, so it's easy for me to see how new pieces fit. The jury has had all this thrown at them over the last three weeks. They may want to take their time, and look carefully at all the evidence. It's what I would do.

By all accounts it's a conscientious jury, attentive and taking a lot of notes. Their preference for a heavy work schedule has made me wonder how patient they are with sequestration. But it may be that they pushed the trial schedule because they wanted to take their time in deliberations.

I expect all the jurors will be mindful of how the Casey Anthony jurors were criticized for bringing in an unpopular verdict after a short deliberation period. Those that don't know will have been told by the others.

Opinion on this case is more evenly divided than on the Anthony case, but that just means the jurors are on the firing line wherever they come down.

My bet is the jurors will be out for a few days.

All of the above is my opinions.
Title: Re: Verdict Watch
Post by: Cylinder on July 12, 2013, 10:25:07 PM
They're sleeping on the verdict tonight. Deputy Jarvis already told them that he's going to weekend in the Bahamas and could they please wait until he's safely in international waters before rendering a verdict. He gave them his no speeding tickets for 3 months voucher if they agreed.
Title: Re: Verdict Watch
Post by: Meni on July 13, 2013, 08:02:22 AM
Just saw this:

Valerie Boey Tweet


New seats E40, E6, B29, B76, B37, B51...alternates dismissed, but its up to them if they want to stay. #fox35


Does the dismissal of alternates mean anything?
Title: Re: Verdict Watch
Post by: cboldt on July 13, 2013, 09:09:29 AM
New seats E40, E6, B29, B76, B37, B51...alternates dismissed, but its up to them if they want to stay. #fox35

Does the dismissal of alternates mean anything?

Yes.  They are off the jury, and can't get back on it.  I don't know what "it's up to them if they want to stay" means.  They aren't in deliberations, and can't be put into deliberation if one of the 6 jurors can't complete the deliberation task or is disqualified for some reason (like referring to a dictionary, or speaking to anybody other than a juror about the case).

Maybe the 3 alternates get to hang out in sequestration with the 6 jurors - no discussing the case there either, or maybe they, like the rest of the public, can stay at the courthouse unless removed for some offense.
Title: Re: Verdict Watch
Post by: annoyedbeyond on July 13, 2013, 10:19:23 AM
Diana Tennis just tweeted that the alternates were still being sequestered, just separate from the others, which she's never seen happen before so it's confusing her.

Man. If that's true...if I were an alternate juror I'd be so pissed right now....

 ;D
Title: Re: Verdict Watch
Post by: Meni on July 13, 2013, 10:28:37 AM
Diana Tennis just tweeted that the alternates were still being sequestered, just separate from the others, which she's never seen happen before so it's confusing her.

Man. If that's true...if I were an alternate juror I'd be so pissed right now....

 ;D



Couldn't this potentially be the case with all of the jurors?
Didn't Nelson say that there could be a delay between the jury completing deliberations and the announcement of the verdict?

I don't have a link...
Title: Re: Verdict Watch
Post by: annoyedbeyond on July 13, 2013, 10:36:38 AM


Couldn't this potentially be the case with all of the jurors?
Didn't Nelson say that there could be a delay between the jury completing deliberations and the announcement of the verdict?

I don't have a link...

I don't know what you mean about all the jurors. If the members of the jury--the 6 deliberating--stay, that's their business, even if there's just one hold out, say. I'm talking about the people that sat through all the testimony, got told 'thanks but no thanks' yesterday and still don't get to go home (apparently).
Title: Re: Verdict Watch
Post by: cboldt on July 13, 2013, 10:38:06 AM
Diana Tennis just tweeted that the alternates were still being sequestered, just separate from the others, which she's never seen happen before so it's confusing her.

Man. If that's true...if I were an alternate juror I'd be so pissed right now....

 ;D

Maybe has something to do with temporarily preserving their anonymity.  I'll have to listen to what the judge said from the bench.  I thought I heard her say they were separated from the 6 jurors, and dismissed, excused.
Title: Re: Verdict Watch
Post by: cboldt on July 13, 2013, 10:40:13 AM
Didn't Nelson say that there could be a delay between the jury completing deliberations and the announcement of the verdict?

There is always a delay.  I've read a few remarks that indicate she's giving the lawyers 15 minutes to get to the courtroom, once the jury has told the court that it has reached a verdict.  The press is apoplectic over that, they are accustomed to having an hour to pump up the audience.
Title: Re: Verdict Watch
Post by: annoyedbeyond on July 13, 2013, 10:44:48 AM
There is always a delay.  I've read a few remarks that indicate she's giving the lawyers 15 minutes to get to the courtroom, once the jury has told the court that it has reached a verdict.  The press is apoplectic over that, they are accustomed to having an hour to pump up the audience.

Well be fair, also an hour for the lawyers and defendant to get there, means they can actually leave the court house instead of camping out inside it.
Title: Re: Verdict Watch
Post by: annoyedbeyond on July 13, 2013, 10:46:01 AM
Quote
Diana Tennis ‏@TennisLaw 32m
@JeffreyDeen @richardhornsby No they are being sequestered still but seperate! That's why I am confused, never saw kept before here.
Title: Re: Verdict Watch
Post by: cboldt on July 13, 2013, 10:47:54 AM
I'll have to listen to what the judge said from the bench.  I thought I heard her say they were separated from the 6 jurors, and dismissed, excused.

I listened to it.  Nelson listed the three remaining alternates, said they had been separated from the others, and would be discharged and given papers to show proof of jury service to their employers.

I guess she's like the prosecution, inviting us to leap to the conclusion that they were discharged and had been given proof of service papers as of yesterday; when what she was communicating was that they will be discharged and given proof of service papers at some indefinite time in the future.
Title: Re: Verdict Watch
Post by: annoyedbeyond on July 13, 2013, 10:51:04 AM
I listened to it.  Nelson listed the three remaining alternates, said they had been separated from the others, and would be discharged and given papers to show proof of jury service to their employers.

I guess she's like the prosecution, inviting us to leap to the conclusion that they were discharged and had been given proof of service papers as of yesterday; when what she was communicating was that they will be discharged and given proof of service papers at some indefinite time in the future.

Guess that's why the confusion.
Title: Re: Verdict Watch
Post by: cboldt on July 13, 2013, 10:52:56 AM
I'm going to speculate that Nelson decided to sequester the alternates until a verdict is read, so the alternates are prohibited from contact with the press before a verdict is rendered.

Al that does is delay any conflict between the alternates and the jurors, assuming not all 9 saw the case the same way; and it also cuts off any pre-notice to the public that would result if the alternates telegraphed "acquittal so big he is innocent" to the press.  I would not be surprised that the CRS told Nelson to keep the alternates under sequestration.
Title: Re: Verdict Watch
Post by: Meni on July 13, 2013, 11:13:50 AM
There is always a delay.  I've read a few remarks that indicate she's giving the lawyers 15 minutes to get to the courtroom, once the jury has told the court that it has reached a verdict.  The press is apoplectic over that, they are accustomed to having an hour to pump up the audience.

I see.
I was wondering if it was a possible maneuver that could be used by the judge to announce the verdict at a time more advantageous for minimizing some of the predicted social unrest.
Title: Re: Verdict Watch
Post by: nomatter_nevermind on July 13, 2013, 11:15:03 AM
I would not be surprised that the CRS told Nelson to keep the alternates under sequestration.

I'm sorry I can't keep up with all the acronyms. What is the CRS?
Title: Re: Verdict Watch
Post by: annoyedbeyond on July 13, 2013, 11:15:19 AM
Jeff Deen tweeted to D. Tennis that he checked and the alternates were actually sent home.

Apparently they're just not talking or making themselves available.
Title: Re: Verdict Watch
Post by: annoyedbeyond on July 13, 2013, 11:16:57 AM
I'm sorry I can't keep up with all the acronyms. What is the CRS?
http://www.justice.gov/crs/

DOJ community relations service. The branch Judicial Watch found out gave money to protestors in FL.
Title: Re: Verdict Watch
Post by: nomatter_nevermind on July 13, 2013, 11:50:30 AM
DOJ community relations service.

Right. I know who they are. They arranged for the four reserved seats for pastors. They've been involved from the beginning, officially to keep the peace. I just didn't immediately think of them as people who would be giving Nelson orders about her jury.
Title: Re: Verdict Watch
Post by: annoyedbeyond on July 13, 2013, 11:53:33 AM
Right. I know who they are. They arranged for the four reserved seats for pastors. They've been involved from the beginning, officially to keep the peace. I just didn't immediately think of them as people who would be giving Nelson orders about her jury.

Not sure I do either, despite the drumbeats from the CTH and Alex Jones. It's perfectly reasonable to me that JDN is simply a bad tempered judge who's always favored the prosecution over the defense, I'm sure that got magnified by this case.

That's not to let the CRS off the hook for what they've been up to, just that I don't buy the JDN connection.
Title: Re: Verdict Watch
Post by: MJW on July 13, 2013, 11:58:43 AM
Not sure I do either, despite the drumbeats from the CTH and Alex Jones. It's perfectly reasonable to me that JDN is simply a bad tempered judge who's always favored the prosecution over the defense, I'm sure that got magnified by this case.

That's not to let the CRS off the hook for what they've been up to, just that I don't buy the JDN connection.

I think that's the reason. When she was first assigned to the case, some articles mentioned she was a prosecutors' judge with a reputation for denying continuances.
Title: Re: Verdict Watch
Post by: annoyedbeyond on July 13, 2013, 12:07:28 PM
I think that's the reason. When she was first assigned to the case, some articles mentioned she was a prosecutors' judge with a reputation for denying continuances.

During the trial Diana Tennis and Richard Hornsby were tweeting that nothing we were seeing was out of the ordinary for her, and they've both been before her. Although that did change when she and West really got going at each other, no one had seen either of them behave that way before.

So, yeah. Bad tempered prosecution judge who appears to have been fighting a cold or bad allergies during the trial to boot.

Title: Re: Verdict Watch
Post by: Meni on July 13, 2013, 12:56:21 PM
If no Zimmerman verdict today, court spokeswoman: jurors will be given option to deliberate Sunday: "The jurors are driving this train."


Bob Kealing Tweet
Title: Re: Verdict Watch
Post by: cboldt on July 13, 2013, 01:00:51 PM
If no Zimmerman verdict today, court spokeswoman: jurors will be given option to deliberate Sunday: "The jurors are driving this train."

As it should be.
Title: Re: Verdict Watch
Post by: Meni on July 13, 2013, 01:08:38 PM
As it should be.

Agreed.
Title: Re: Verdict Watch
Post by: Meni on July 13, 2013, 01:11:26 PM

 Diana Tennis @TennisLaw

BTW some of our best appellate lawyers are at the appellate PD office in Daytona Beach, they will rock any brief needed for GZ.



Title: Re: Verdict Watch
Post by: annoyedbeyond on July 13, 2013, 01:40:01 PM
Diana Tennis @TennisLaw

BTW some of our best appellate lawyers are at the appellate PD office in Daytona Beach, they will rock any brief needed for GZ.

Pretty sure O'Mara would do it. He's going to be trying to sell a book soon. No point in ticking off the GZ supporters by bailing.

Pretty sure Diana also tweeted something about O'Mara probably feeling obligated to do it himself.

ETA: "compelled" not "obligated".

Title: Re: Verdict Watch
Post by: Meni on July 13, 2013, 01:47:27 PM
Pretty sure O'Mara would do it. He's going to be trying to sell a book soon. No point in ticking off the GZ supporters by bailing.

Pretty sure Diana also tweeted something about O'Mara probably feeling obligated to do it himself.

I think she said he would feel compelled but he's not legally obligated to handle the appeal(s).

I personally do not imagine him bringing in another atty to do it, after all of his personal investment in the case-
Unless he wanted to make sure Zimmerman retained ineffective counsel claim (if there is even a basis for that).
Title: Re: Verdict Watch
Post by: RickyJim on July 13, 2013, 03:57:16 PM
That Judicial Watch press release has been disputed (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/07/11/justice-department-george-zimmerman_n_3580062.html?utm_hp_ref=trayvon-martin),
Quote
The conservative outlets that have published stories alleging bias seem to have been pushed in that direction by a Judicial Watch press release that misquoted one of the documents it obtained. While the press release claimed that CRS spent $892.55 "to provide support for protest deployment in Florida," the travel voucher that Judicial Watch published actually states the purpose was "to provide interregional support," indicating that a CRS employee came in from out of the area to assist his or her colleagues.
Title: Re: Verdict Watch
Post by: cboldt on July 13, 2013, 03:57:47 PM
Prosecution and press in the courtroom.  Not sure what's up, tweeting press people speculate a jury question.

Nelson says the question is, "May we please have clarification on the instructions regarding manslaughter."  Asks counsel to come to sidebar to propose an answer.
Title: Re: Verdict Watch
Post by: annoyedbeyond on July 13, 2013, 04:06:14 PM
That Judicial Watch press release has been disputed (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/07/11/justice-department-george-zimmerman_n_3580062.html?utm_hp_ref=trayvon-martin),


Ricky, I mentioned what CRS is supposed to have done as simply a way to quickly ID the group for NM when he asked. Notice I didn't bother to get down in the political mud.

I'm happy enough to do it--but I also know The Hostess doesn't want that to happen here.

FYI.

Title: Re: Verdict Watch
Post by: cboldt on July 13, 2013, 04:06:40 PM
At about 6:03, counsel must have settled on an answer to send the the jury.  Nelson announced that court would be in recess for 30 minutes.
Title: Re: Verdict Watch
Post by: Meni on July 13, 2013, 04:07:26 PM
Prosecution and press in the courtroom.  Not sure what's up, tweeting press people speculate a jury question.

Nelson says the question is, "May we please have clarification on the instructions regarding manslaughter."  Asks counsel to come to sidebar to propose an answer.

30 minute recess now.
Title: Re: Verdict Watch
Post by: annoyedbeyond on July 13, 2013, 04:32:28 PM
Talking heads and FLTM think this means M2 is off the table.

Hornsby thinks it favors GZ.

Why are they bringing Geraldo in to chat about this? Good grief.

They should be back any minute with the answer from the lawyers for the jury.
Title: Re: Verdict Watch
Post by: Meni on July 13, 2013, 04:36:04 PM
Talking heads and FLTM think this means M2 is off the table.

Hornsby thinks it favors GZ.

Why are they bringing Geraldo in to chat about this? Good grief.

They should be back any minute with the answer from the lawyers for the jury.

I really thought the instructions were ill written so I haven't been fretting.

Geraldo.
Really? Really?
Title: Re: Verdict Watch
Post by: annoyedbeyond on July 13, 2013, 04:38:50 PM
I really thought the instructions were ill written so I haven't been fretting.

Geraldo.
Really? Really?

Although it is interesting to hear him talk about how things have changed since it first happened (things meaning perception of the facts of the event).





Title: Re: Verdict Watch
Post by: nomatter_nevermind on July 13, 2013, 04:39:26 PM
At about 6:03, counsel must have settled on an answer to send the the jury.  Nelson announced that court would be in recess for 30 minutes.

Why recess if it's settled?

Speculation on Twitter is the recess is for researching case law. Makes sense to me.
Title: Re: Verdict Watch
Post by: nomatter_nevermind on July 13, 2013, 04:41:32 PM
I really thought the instructions were ill written so I haven't been fretting.

Right. This could have nothing to do with the evidence in the case. It could just be that some of the jurors are confused by the wording of the instruction, and want it straightened out before they proceed.
Title: Re: Verdict Watch
Post by: MJW on July 13, 2013, 04:44:04 PM
At about 6:03, counsel must have settled on an answer to send the the jury.  Nelson announced that court would be in recess for 30 minutes.

I think the recess may be to allow the judge and lawyers to research case law.
Title: Re: Verdict Watch
Post by: Meni on July 13, 2013, 04:44:15 PM
Right. This could have nothing to do with the evidence in the case. It could just be that some of the jurors are confused by the wording of the instruction, and want it straightened out before they proceed.

I bet it's one of the elements of MS.
Title: Re: Verdict Watch
Post by: annoyedbeyond on July 13, 2013, 04:44:22 PM
Right. This could have nothing to do with the evidence in the case. It could just be that some of the jurors are confused by the wording of the instruction, and want it straightened out before they proceed.

That's what the FLTM members seem to be saying.

Lawyers were back in the court room, along with Crump and NatJack etc but then...nothing.

They're back.

Title: Re: Verdict Watch
Post by: nomatter_nevermind on July 13, 2013, 04:48:10 PM
From recent tweets, it seems the reason for recess was for state and defense to confer. They are said to be near agreement.
Title: Re: Verdict Watch
Post by: annoyedbeyond on July 13, 2013, 04:48:49 PM
Seems to be regarding a question of law, and they can't just  give general help, asking for a more specific question that they might be able to answer.
Title: Re: Verdict Watch
Post by: annoyedbeyond on July 13, 2013, 04:49:45 PM
Instructions of manslaughter. Law of manslaughter.
Title: Re: Verdict Watch
Post by: cboldt on July 13, 2013, 04:50:47 PM
I think the recess may be to allow the judge and lawyers to research case law.

That's what it was.  I just figured that because the jury's question was so general, that the only response from the court would be something along the lines of "please be more specific with your question."  From Mantei's presentation, that seemed to be the indicated nature of the response; and O'Mara appeared to agree.  We'll know the exact wording shortly.

Edit to add, I can see why research would be necessary.  If the court is not allowed to answer a more specific question, beyond "re-read the instructions," it would be necessary (wise, at least) to know that before asking for a more specific question.
Title: Re: Verdict Watch
Post by: nomatter_nevermind on July 13, 2013, 04:53:56 PM
That's what law school is for. Learn to take half an hour to come up with a question a lay person would ask in two seconds.
Title: Re: Verdict Watch
Post by: annoyedbeyond on July 13, 2013, 04:54:10 PM
Diana Tennis says manslaughter is one of the simplest laws there is, so if they want clarification of it it sounds to her like there's one or two jurors stuck on manslaughter, the point of the question is to jolt that one (or two) out of her stuckness.
Title: Re: Verdict Watch
Post by: annoyedbeyond on July 13, 2013, 04:55:10 PM
That's what law school is for. Learn to take half an hour to come up with a question a lay person would ask in two seconds.

The half hour was for the lawyers to gather case law and come to some kind of agreement on how to answer it.
Title: Re: Verdict Watch
Post by: cboldt on July 13, 2013, 04:59:47 PM
Diana Tennis says manslaughter is one of the simplest laws there is, so if they want clarification of it it sounds to her like there's one or two jurors stuck on manslaughter, the point of the question is to jolt that one (or two) out of her stuckness.

The manslaughter instruction in this case is more complex that just the two elements that make manslaughter, and includes language about when the killing of another human being is excusable.

Proposed answer "The court cannot engage in general discussion, but may be able to address a specific question ... if you have a specific question, please submit."

Nelson tells the court that the jury has ordered dinner, and counsel may take an hour for dinner, but starting 15 minutes from now (in case the jury comes right back with a specific question)
Title: Re: Verdict Watch
Post by: annoyedbeyond on July 13, 2013, 05:00:26 PM
Guy and Bernie don't look happy. I mean--none of the lawyers look thrilled, but those two actually look angry or disturbed.

Sending the answer back.

The jurors have ordered dinner. She was going to let the lawyers go to dinner but O'Mara suggested they hang out to see if the jurors came up with a specific question.

Recess 15 minutes.


Talking heads  suggesting this question coupled with ordering dinner (not going back to hotel at 6) shows the jurors might be heading toward the finish line.
Title: Re: Verdict Watch
Post by: annoyedbeyond on July 13, 2013, 05:01:49 PM
The manslaughter instruction in this case is more complex that just the two elements that make manslaughter, and includes language about when the killing of another human being is excusable.


I believe that was included in what she was saying.
Title: Re: Verdict Watch
Post by: Meni on July 13, 2013, 05:02:56 PM
So counsel wants to ask the jury a question before answering their question?
Title: Re: Verdict Watch
Post by: cboldt on July 13, 2013, 05:04:02 PM
Talking heads  suggesting this question coupled with ordering dinner (not going back to hotel at 6) shows the jurors might be heading toward the finish line.

Or just that they are diligent workers.  Work until it sucks to be working, then retire.  They may not know if they can work tomorrow, or they may know.  I don't think we know if they are allowed to work tomorrow or not.

Separately, I wonder how the court handles any desire on the part of a juror to attend a worship service.
Title: Re: Verdict Watch
Post by: annoyedbeyond on July 13, 2013, 05:04:29 PM
So counsel wants to ask the jury a question before answering their question?

They can't answer general questions of law, they can only provide answers to the jury on specific questions.
Title: Re: Verdict Watch
Post by: cboldt on July 13, 2013, 05:05:30 PM
I believe that was included in what she was saying.

Well then, "simple for Diana Tennis."  I share her opinion, FWIW, but I have more than a few hours of focused study on that issue under my belt.
Title: Re: Verdict Watch
Post by: annoyedbeyond on July 13, 2013, 05:06:00 PM
Or just that they are diligent workers.  Work until it sucks to be working, then retire.  They may not know if they can work tomorrow, or they may know.  I don't think we know if they are allowed to work tomorrow or not.

Separately, I wonder how the court handles any desire on the part of a juror to attend a worship service.

I believe they know they can work tomorrow, as JDN has said they can if they want to. I think they're SOL regarding church though.

Title: Re: Verdict Watch
Post by: Meni on July 13, 2013, 05:06:23 PM
They can't answer general questions of law, they can only provide answers to the jury on specific questions.

Ok.
Got it.

I'm going to throw my kids in the pool while there's time!
Title: Re: Verdict Watch
Post by: cboldt on July 13, 2013, 05:07:29 PM
Guy and Bernie don't look happy. I mean--none of the lawyers look thrilled, but those two actually look angry or disturbed.

The only time the jury gets to manslaughter is by rejecting Murder 2.

I bet Bernardo is muttering "fscking punks" under his breath, thinking about how he wants to choke the jurors.  (/levity)
Title: Re: Verdict Watch
Post by: annoyedbeyond on July 13, 2013, 05:08:13 PM
Well then, "simple for Diana Tennis."  I share her opinion, FWIW, but I have more than a few hours of focused study on that issue under my belt.

Not really sure what you mean.

When she said was simple (and I think I put it in my post) was MS as compared to most/all the rest of the FL criminal code.

Title: Re: Verdict Watch
Post by: MJW on July 13, 2013, 05:09:33 PM
Diana Tennis says manslaughter is one of the simplest laws there is, so if they want clarification of it it sounds to her like there's one or two jurors stuck on manslaughter, the point of the question is to jolt that one (or two) out of her stuckness.

I hope she's right, but the manslaughter question really has me worried. Another hypothesis is they've decided on manslaughter and just want to dot the i's and cross the t's.
Title: Re: Verdict Watch
Post by: annoyedbeyond on July 13, 2013, 05:10:47 PM
The only time the jury gets to manslaughter is by rejecting Murder 2.

I bet Bernardo is muttering "fscking punks" under his breath, thinking about how he wants to choke the jurors.  (/levity)

Yep. That's what I think as well. If they're trying to clarify MS it means they've dismissed the murder count and probably are working past MS (I'm in the holdout juror camp).

Title: Re: Verdict Watch
Post by: cboldt on July 13, 2013, 05:12:07 PM
Not really sure what you mean.

When she said was simple (and I think I put it in my post) was MS as compared to most/all the rest of the FL criminal code.

I was replying to (and maybe took it out of context) . . .
Diana Tennis says manslaughter is one of the simplest laws there is, so if they want clarification of it it sounds to her like there's one or two jurors stuck on manslaughter, the point of the question is to jolt that one (or two) out of her stuckness.


So, I was thinking about the notion of "simple" being different in her mind, compared with a juror's mind.  It's simple to her, but maybe not simple to a juror.  That was the only point I was trying to make.
Title: Re: Verdict Watch
Post by: annoyedbeyond on July 13, 2013, 05:12:35 PM
I hope she's right, but the manslaughter question really has me worried. Another hypothesis is they've decided on manslaughter and just want to dot the i's and cross the t's.

I refuse to consider that.

LA LA LA LA LA LA LA LA  ;) ;D
Title: Re: Verdict Watch
Post by: MJW on July 13, 2013, 05:13:37 PM
The only time the jury gets to manslaughter is by rejecting Murder 2.

But dismissing 2nd degree murder should have taken about ten minutes, and manslaughter is about a bad for GZ.
Title: Re: Verdict Watch
Post by: nomatter_nevermind on July 13, 2013, 05:14:08 PM
LA LA LA LA LA LA LA LA  ;) ;D

Are you, like, skipping?
Title: Re: Verdict Watch
Post by: annoyedbeyond on July 13, 2013, 05:14:34 PM
But dismissing 2nd degree murder should have taken about ten minutes, and manslaughter is about a bad for GZ.

You're killin' me.  ;D
Title: Re: Verdict Watch
Post by: annoyedbeyond on July 13, 2013, 05:15:17 PM
Are you, like, skipping?

That would be TRA LA LA!  ;D
Title: Re: Verdict Watch
Post by: cboldt on July 13, 2013, 05:15:39 PM
(I'm in the holdout juror camp).

I was firmly in that camp, at first hearing the question from the jury, but Jeralyn makes a point on the main board that maybe they are just being thorough and going through the instructions page by page, making sure they understand EXACTLY what each phrase means.

I still lean to one holdout, but nobody outside of the jury room has any way to know.  The temptation to speculate is irresistible though.
Title: Re: Verdict Watch
Post by: MJW on July 13, 2013, 05:21:09 PM
You're killin' me.  ;D

Some people see the glass as half full; others, half-empty. I assume it probably contains poison.
Title: Re: Verdict Watch
Post by: annoyedbeyond on July 13, 2013, 05:21:47 PM
I was firmly in that camp, at first hearing the question from the jury, but Jeralyn makes a point on the main board that maybe they are just being thorough and going through the instructions page by page, making sure they understand EXACTLY what each phrase means.

I still lean to one holdout, but nobody outside of the jury room has any way to know.  The temptation to speculate is irresistible though.

We didn't speculate we'd have nothing to do but our actual daily life stuff!
Title: Re: Verdict Watch
Post by: annoyedbeyond on July 13, 2013, 05:22:27 PM
Some people see the glass as half full; others, half-empty. I assume it probably contains poison.

My idol!
Title: Re: Verdict Watch
Post by: annoyedbeyond on July 13, 2013, 05:24:08 PM
Any juror can send out a question, doesn't mean it's something they all want to know.

Title: Re: Verdict Watch
Post by: cboldt on July 13, 2013, 05:31:56 PM
Some people see the glass as half full; others, half-empty. I assume it probably contains poison.

ROTFL.  I think the joke goes that engineers see it as wrong size glass or something like that.  One of my favorite stalls for time is to answer questions literally, like "Do you know what time it is?"  "Yes."  Or "Were you at the store or at the bar?" "Yes."  So, with that in mind, I was projecting/anticipating a similar sort of retort in your remark.  Some people see the glass as half full; others, half-empty. I assume it is.  The "poison" angle had me LOL.
Title: Re: Verdict Watch
Post by: RickyJim on July 13, 2013, 05:36:55 PM
Has a single tweeter/blogger pointed out what is obvious to anyone who has spent time trying to make sense out of the jury instructions?  Poorly organized, repetitious, plenty of irrelevant sentences, badly formatted and worded gobbledygook.  If it was in the form of a flowchart where you started with Justifiable or Excusable homicide at the top diamond and yes lead to Not Guilty, we would have had a verdict already.
Title: Re: Verdict Watch
Post by: annoyedbeyond on July 13, 2013, 05:39:54 PM
Has a single tweeter/blogger pointed out what is obvious to anyone who has spent time trying to make sense out of the jury instructions?  Poorly organized, repetitious, plenty of irrelevant sentences, badly formatted and worded gobbledygook.  If it was in the form of a flowchart where you started with Justifiable or Excusable homicide at the top diamond and yes lead to Not Guilty, we would have had a verdict already.

One size doesn't fit all.
Title: Re: Verdict Watch
Post by: RickyJim on July 13, 2013, 05:46:57 PM
One size doesn't fit all.
If you mean by that the instructions came from slavishly mechanically applying some template without doing any optimization, I think you've got the reason.  If that is how hard Nelson works to explain things to a jury, she should be fired or demoted to court clerk.
Title: Re: Verdict Watch
Post by: MJW on July 13, 2013, 05:59:32 PM
I think the joke goes that engineers see it as wrong size glass or something like that.

I like that joke.
Title: Re: Verdict Watch
Post by: annoyedbeyond on July 13, 2013, 05:59:39 PM
Hornsby just retweeted someone (Robin Sax? Whoever that is) that Frank Taffe says he has inside info it's 5-1 Not Guilty.

Taaffe.  :o
Title: Re: Verdict Watch
Post by: MJW on July 13, 2013, 06:03:14 PM
Hornsby just retweeted someone (Robin Sax? Whoever that is) that Frank Taffe says he has inside info it's 5-1 Not Guilty.

Now if we can get Sundance at CTH to agree -- we'll know about as much as we knew an hour ago.
Title: Re: Verdict Watch
Post by: Cylinder on July 13, 2013, 06:04:06 PM
No-one knows unless someone has a glass to the door. Deputy Jarvis don't like people with glasses to the door.
Title: Re: Verdict Watch
Post by: Meni on July 13, 2013, 06:04:32 PM
Taffe was on Fox saying he had 'insight' and there's 5 for acquittal and 1 thinking MS.
Title: Re: Verdict Watch
Post by: annoyedbeyond on July 13, 2013, 06:11:55 PM
Now if we can get Sundance at CTH to agree -- we'll know about as much as we knew an hour ago.
But if you can get Sundance involved we'll know there was a conspiracy involved.
Title: Re: Verdict Watch
Post by: annoyedbeyond on July 13, 2013, 06:13:10 PM
Taffe was on Fox saying he had 'insight' and there's 5 for acquittal and 1 thinking MS.

How come everyone's got insight but no one's got outsight?
Title: Re: Verdict Watch
Post by: Meni on July 13, 2013, 06:34:30 PM
How come everyone's got insight but no one's got outsight?

 8)
Title: Re: Verdict Watch
Post by: annoyedbeyond on July 13, 2013, 07:50:10 PM
Reports of a verdict.
Title: Re: Verdict Watch
Post by: annoyedbeyond on July 13, 2013, 07:53:50 PM
About ten minutes until the verdict is read.
Title: Re: Verdict Watch
Post by: Lousy1 on July 13, 2013, 07:54:12 PM
Just got the key to my gun locker. Just in case my neighbor a jovial,island matron decides to run up my driveway chanting 'No justice No peace!'

As she's a friend of the family I will try to just wing her :)
Title: Re: Verdict Watch
Post by: Cylinder on July 13, 2013, 07:56:06 PM
I just can't believe that the state overcame their burden.
Title: Re: Verdict Watch
Post by: annoyedbeyond on July 13, 2013, 07:59:57 PM
NOT f*ckING GUILTY!
Title: Re: Verdict Watch
Post by: Lousy1 on July 13, 2013, 08:01:16 PM
Lighting cigar and opening a bottle of Sam Adam's  Porter Locker  - tuning in MSNBC 
Title: Re: Verdict Watch
Post by: Cylinder on July 13, 2013, 08:03:07 PM
Sam, it is.

Does "evidence will be released" mean what I think it means?
Title: Re: Verdict Watch
Post by: annoyedbeyond on July 13, 2013, 08:05:51 PM
Lighting cigar and opening a bottle of Sam Adam's  Porter Locker  - tuning in MSNBC

Ooh. I don't drink but I've got some really good cigars!
Title: Re: Verdict Watch
Post by: Meni on July 13, 2013, 08:08:06 PM
Yes!
Title: Re: Verdict Watch
Post by: annoyedbeyond on July 13, 2013, 08:09:35 PM
Where's Ricky and NM? And DFH? They should be here...
Title: Re: Verdict Watch
Post by: Lousy1 on July 13, 2013, 08:17:01 PM
Ricky suffered a brain cramp from trying to fit the 4000 piece charging statement jigsaw puzzle on his living room floor.

Is there any truth to the rumor that the judge ordered the MOM and West escorted out of the court house directly to the crowd outside?

Corey is on - what a bag - we ensured due process.
Title: Re: Verdict Watch
Post by: annoyedbeyond on July 13, 2013, 08:17:28 PM
Corey sounds like she won.
Title: Re: Verdict Watch
Post by: Lousy1 on July 13, 2013, 08:26:11 PM
Corey sounds like she won.

All the flap is out of Bernie's wings 30 mealy mouth words.

Corey doesn't have a clue about the law. Common sense TM was screaming insufficient injuries.

Local fireworks display on schedule at 10 pm = makes a nice backdrop
Title: Re: Verdict Watch
Post by: annoyedbeyond on July 13, 2013, 08:34:41 PM
A very drunk but happy friend has called me. He's super excited.
I'd rather be watching Corey.
Title: Re: Verdict Watch
Post by: RickyJim on July 13, 2013, 08:35:40 PM
Where's Ricky and NM? And DFH? They should be here...
I was over on another blog writing a piece with the theme that even though the verdict was correct, it doesn't make me think any better of the American Judicial System.  But I won't repeat it here in order to keep up the festive atmosphere.  Hooray everyone!   ¡Felicidades amigos y para Señor Zimmerman! :) ;) :D ;D 8) :P :-*
Title: Re: Verdict Watch
Post by: Meni on July 13, 2013, 08:40:29 PM
Corey sounds like she won.

No kidding.
But Bernie is sore-
He's only lost two murder trials and this was his second.
Title: Re: Verdict Watch
Post by: annoyedbeyond on July 13, 2013, 08:41:54 PM
My drunk friend kept me from properly savoring Bernie's defeat. I assume it'll be on youtube soon?
Title: Re: Verdict Watch
Post by: annoyedbeyond on July 13, 2013, 08:43:03 PM
In case I haven't mentioned it before....I love Don West.

Preach it.
Title: Re: Verdict Watch
Post by: annoyedbeyond on July 13, 2013, 08:47:21 PM
Black panthers are still holding up their wanted dead or alive posters. Right in front of the court house. Maybe how about arresting a couple of them for threats, huh?

It's time now.
Title: Re: Verdict Watch
Post by: Meni on July 13, 2013, 09:09:57 PM
In case I haven't mentioned it before....I love Don West.

Preach it.

Love him too.
Loved O'Mara's last comment-
Putting it right in the media's lap.
Title: Re: Verdict Watch
Post by: annoyedbeyond on July 13, 2013, 09:11:58 PM
Love him too.
Loved O'Mara's last comment-
Putting it right in the media's lap.

And watching the talking heads try to juggle that bit was great.
Title: Re: Verdict Watch
Post by: annoyedbeyond on July 13, 2013, 09:14:25 PM
Watching Crump makes me think my little dog could go to law school.
I know for a fact she's smarter than he is.
Title: Re: Verdict Watch
Post by: cboldt on July 13, 2013, 09:19:24 PM
And watching the talking heads try to juggle that bit was great.

Heh.  The on scene reporters were pretty much stunned.  They'll get all defensive over it in a few minutes.
Title: Re: Verdict Watch
Post by: cboldt on July 13, 2013, 09:21:56 PM
Crump asked if the outcome would be the same if the races were reversed.   He's been asked that before.  Didn;t answer this time either.

Natalie Jackson claims there was no effort to persecute George Zimmerman.  That is weird.
Title: Re: Verdict Watch
Post by: cboldt on July 13, 2013, 09:23:20 PM
My drunk friend kept me from properly savoring Bernie's defeat. I assume it'll be on youtube soon?

Bernie told the press, after the verdict, that he believes Zimmerman is guilty of murder.
Title: Re: Verdict Watch
Post by: annoyedbeyond on July 13, 2013, 09:25:05 PM
Bernie told the press, after the verdict, that he believes Zimmerman is guilty of murder.

Classy to the end!
Title: Re: Verdict Watch
Post by: cboldt on July 13, 2013, 09:25:49 PM
Corey doesn't have a clue about the law. Common sense TM was screaming insufficient injuries.

If the screaming had continued, she'd have argued it was Martin screaming in pain before expiring.

She's a typical two-faced sociopathic politician.  No conscience at all.
Title: Re: Verdict Watch
Post by: annoyedbeyond on July 13, 2013, 09:26:04 PM
Greta's going on about Federal charges for George now. I'm really tired of the media.

Title: Re: Verdict Watch
Post by: annoyedbeyond on July 13, 2013, 09:27:00 PM
Crump asked if the outcome would be the same if the races were reversed.   He's been asked that before.  Didn;t answer this time either.

Natalie Jackson claims there was no effort to persecute George Zimmerman.  That is weird.

I think she was high.
No, I'm serious.
Title: Re: Verdict Watch
Post by: cboldt on July 13, 2013, 09:28:15 PM
Greta's going on about Federal charges for George now. I'm really tired of the media.

It's inane chatter to fill what would otherwise be a nice peaceful quiet.

The federal charges are going to be against the state of Florida.
Title: Re: Verdict Watch
Post by: cboldt on July 13, 2013, 09:29:39 PM
I think she was high.
No, I'm serious.

She better not put on a hoodie and stand in Taaffe's yard.
Title: Re: Verdict Watch
Post by: annoyedbeyond on July 13, 2013, 09:31:01 PM
It's inane chatter to fill what would otherwise be a nice peaceful quiet.

The federal charges are going to be against the state of Florida.

I don't watch Greta, but I never thought she was one of those inane babblers. But good grief this is painful.
Title: Re: Verdict Watch
Post by: cboldt on July 13, 2013, 09:35:06 PM
I don't watch Greta, but I never thought she was one of those inane babblers. But good grief this is painful.

They all have their moments.  I figure you know she's a Scientologist, so that tells you a bit about her critical thinking skills.  She is better than most.  She made her bones off the OJ Simpson case.
Title: Re: Verdict Watch
Post by: cboldt on July 13, 2013, 09:36:33 PM
Ooh. I don't drink but I've got some really good cigars!

I'll have a vicarious cigar with you, and having a Shipyard summer ale.  I didn't expect the verdict to come tonight.  Now I can get back to paying work until another case comes along to distract me.
Title: Re: Verdict Watch
Post by: Gunslinger on July 13, 2013, 09:39:46 PM
It's inane chatter to fill what would otherwise be a nice peaceful quiet.

The federal charges are going to be against the state of Florida.

Agreed.  Civil rights charges against GZ would open yet another political can of worms.  With any luck, the Obama Administration will decide it has enough controversy on its plate for the moment. 
Title: Re: Verdict Watch
Post by: annoyedbeyond on July 13, 2013, 09:44:31 PM
Diana Tennis points out to Greta that there can't really be federal charges against GZ because he's not an actual cop.

And civil trials will let a lot of stuff about TM be released. I'm not sure that would be helpful.
Title: Re: Verdict Watch
Post by: Meni on July 13, 2013, 09:45:57 PM
She better not put on a hoodie and stand in Taaffe's yard.

Lol-ing!
Title: Re: Verdict Watch
Post by: cboldt on July 13, 2013, 09:51:40 PM
Diana Tennis points out to Greta that there can't really be federal charges against GZ because he's not an actual cop.

And civil trials will let a lot of stuff about TM be released. I'm not sure that would be helpful.

Ummm, it is possible for a civilian to be under federal civil rights charges.  There is a federal hate crime statute that does not require "acting under color of law."  The problem with the federal case is the same as the problem with the murder case - lack of evidence.  We know from experience that lack of evidence is not a barrier to bringing charges.

As for civil trial against Zimmerman, O'Mara more or less taunted those who would bring them, to bring it on.  He'll file a motion of immunity in the civil case, he said.
Title: Re: Verdict Watch
Post by: annoyedbeyond on July 13, 2013, 10:08:57 PM
Time to drop the charges against Shellie.

Title: Re: Verdict Watch
Post by: cboldt on July 13, 2013, 10:17:31 PM
Time to drop the charges against Shellie.

She's going to be the target of prosecutorial anger that was not resolved against George.  Her case just got harder, and Nelson might feel obliged to step up her assistance to the state, as well.
Title: Re: Verdict Watch
Post by: RickyJim on July 13, 2013, 10:24:00 PM
Bernie told the press, after the verdict, that he believes Zimmerman is guilty of murder.
He also said tonight, "We live in a great country which has a great criminal justice system.  It is not perfect but it is the best in the world".  Why is that the favorite gratuitous remark of US lawyers who know zippo about other legal systems?  He's running for office?   Or maybe he does know what would happen to him if he conducted that interview of Rachel Jeantel in just about any other democratic country outside the US.   Yeah, and he is also a big fan of the death penalty.
Title: Re: Verdict Watch
Post by: MJW on July 13, 2013, 10:32:15 PM
If the screaming had continued, she'd have argued it was Martin screaming in pain before expiring.

She's a typical two-faced sociopathic politician.  No conscience at all.

But if they decide to remake the Harry Potter films, she'd be perfect as Professor Umbridge.
Title: Re: Verdict Watch
Post by: annoyedbeyond on July 13, 2013, 10:47:10 PM
He also said tonight, "We live in a great country which has a great criminal justice system.  It is not perfect but it is the best in the world".  Why is that the favorite gratuitous remark of US lawyers who know zippo about other legal systems?  He's running for office?   Or maybe he does know what would happen to him if he conducted that interview of Rachel Jeantel in just about any other democratic country outside the US.   Yeah, and he is also a big fan of the death penalty.

More blacks on death row than any other prosecutor.

Title: Re: Verdict Watch
Post by: Meni on July 13, 2013, 10:47:17 PM
But if they decide to remake the Harry Potter films, she'd be perfect as Professor Umbridge.

Well Disney is right there in case things do not work out for her in the SA office.
Title: Re: Verdict Watch
Post by: Meni on July 13, 2013, 10:48:49 PM
More blacks on death row than any other prosecutor.

And with 78 out of 79 murder convictions you would have to wonder how much ethics is behind that kind of record.
Title: Re: Verdict Watch
Post by: nomatter_nevermind on July 13, 2013, 10:51:23 PM
Where's Ricky and NM? And DFH? They should be here...

Thanks for thinking of me. I was asleep when the verdict came in. I woke up after midnight (EDT, it's earlier where I am) and heard it from CNN. I was going to finish reading the thread before adding to it.

I'm proud of those 6 jurors. Congratulations to O'Mara, West, and Hirschhorn for picking that jury, and of course to GZ's legal team for a great job all around. I hope at least one of them writes a book. I hope George Zimmerman and his family can salvage something from their lives, and happy book sales to them too.
Title: Re: Verdict Watch
Post by: nomatter_nevermind on July 13, 2013, 10:56:38 PM
As she's a friend of the family I will try to just wing her :)

Wrong.

Ascertain if she's a serious threat, then shoot center mass or not at all.

Gotta think about those bystanders.
Title: Re: Verdict Watch
Post by: DebFrmHell on July 14, 2013, 12:03:59 AM
Hi there!

I have been drifting around the web reading comments from both sides and over at the main board.  Is this just wonderful.  I swear I got nervous before the reading of the verdict.   I am grateful that the Zimmerman family can start putting their lives back in order and can hardly wait for Beasley to do their thing.

I can't believe I am going to be deleting all of my bookmarks from this case.  ((Not TL!!!!)  Thing I need to keep:
Bernie's rant over that writ!

I wish everyone well and hope that we don't lose too many cyber friends now that the case is over.

IMO, the lawsuits should be starting up in 3...2...1
Title: Re: Verdict Watch
Post by: nomatter_nevermind on July 14, 2013, 12:58:13 AM
Black panthers are still holding up their wanted dead or alive posters. Right in front of the court house. Maybe how about arresting a couple of them for threats, huh?

It's time now.

Hear, hear!
Title: Re: Verdict Watch
Post by: nomatter_nevermind on July 14, 2013, 03:50:03 AM
I don't watch Greta, but I never thought she was one of those inane babblers.

I haven't watched Susteren in a long time. She doesn't rant and yell like Nancy Grace (ironic name), and I suppose she appeals to a somewhat different audience. I think that, like most regular TV talking heads, Susteren says what she thinks her regular audience wants to hear, without much concern for what is true. That's her job now.