TexasCHLforum.com

This will be a very interesting trial.

"All six of the jurors selected are women, and five are white. The descriptions below, including the age and race or ethnicity of potential jurors, are based on the observations of a reporter in the courtroom."

http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/loc ... 7776.story" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

The 4 alternates are women as well.

RX8er wrote:The 4 alternates are women as well.

Are you calling arm wrestling dude a girly man?

Yes, I was being sarcastic.

Only 6 on the jury? I thought it was supposed to be 12.

RottenApple wrote:Only 6 on the jury? I thought it was supposed to be 12.

http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1969/1969_927" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

The Court concluded that "the fact that the jury at common law was composed of precisely 12 is a historical accident, unnecessary to effect the purposes of the jury system and wholly without significance 'except to mystics.'"

This doesn't seem like a good thing... All woman jury.

What do you guys think?

knotquiteawake wrote:This doesn't seem like a good thing... All woman jury.

What do you guys think?

Its an excellent jury for the defense. On the primary jury you have:
*one person who used this as a story to keep her kids home after dark.
*a former CHLer (yea they're going to convict)
*one who has a husband with firearms.

The defense managed to exclude lots of categories that would go against them, and we have to remember they can only go through the jury pool that was picked.

Cedar Park Dad wrote:

knotquiteawake wrote:This doesn't seem like a good thing... All woman jury.

What do you guys think?

Its an excellent jury for the defense. On the primary jury you have:
*one person who used this as a story to keep her kids home after dark.
*a former CHLer (yea they're going to convict)
*one who has a husband with firearms.

The defense managed to exclude lots of categories that would go against them, and we have to remember they can only go through the jury pool that was picked.

Ah, I hadn't read the second page of the article where is described every juror. It doesn't look so bad. I can't see how those people would possibly get 6 votes to convict.

RX8er wrote:The 4 alternates are women as well.

Two are men.

These are the alternates:

E-54: A middle-aged white man with a teenage stepson who wears hoodies. He recalled seeing photos of Zimmerman's head and face that show injuries. E-54 loves golf and genealogy, and said he's been married for five years to a technical engineer. He grew up in Seminole County and has a teenage stepson.

B-72: A young man who is possibly Hispanic, does maintenance at a school and competes in arm wrestling tournaments. He said he avoids the news because he does not want to be "brainwashed." He grew up in Chicago, is single and an alumni of Phi Beta Kappa. He is very physically active, and was a high school athlete. He said that he doesn't believe you can determine a person's strength based solely on their size or how they look.

With the evidence at hand, more specifically, a broken nose and bleeding head and no injuries on the other party. It is clear who was the aggressor and who was the one on the receiving end of the blows. The jury would render a not guilty in a flash. Enough of the appeasing a minority who claim that they are still suffering oppression that ended some 50 or 60 yrs ago.

It seems to be a good thing. As stated above several of them seem pretty reasonable people. It seems the foxes were weeded out.

Beiruty wrote:With the evidence at hand, more specifically, a broken nose and bleeding head and no injuries on the other party. It is clear who was the aggressor and who was the one on the receiving end of the blows. The jury would render a not guilty in a flash. Enough of the appeasing a minority who claim that they are still suffering oppression that ended some 50 or 60 yrs ago.

"Not so fast there Sparky"
Again I don't know the burden of proof which matters a whole heck of a lot. Its not a default to lawful self defense. The default is to mainslaughter or higher (whatever the Florida statute is) the moment Z says he shot.

He has to prove he was actually attacked or in fear of his life or whatever the standard for self defense is in Florida. The prosecution can put forth that he actually attacked or threatened T, causing T to act in his own self defense. I'd proffer it would then be Z's burden to disprove that.
-We have a witness that saw T on top of Z attacking. That support's Z at that pouint but it doesn't stop the prosecution move that T was actually defending himself from attack.
-We have an earwitness (I think) that can testify that T was worried about soeone following him - supporting the T defense move
-We have the cellphone call. If the prosecution can convince the jury that thats T then Z is in trouble. inversely same to same, or if there's enough doubt about it.

What will help is if Z's physical location at time of the incident supports him walking back to the truck at the time of the altercation. It would denote a mental state of both following orders, and attempting to leave the pursuit to the police, and not being a vigilante.

I think Z gets off based on the jury and secondarily the evidence available, but its no slam dunk.

I am convinced this will be a hung jury and all subsequent juries will be hung until the prosecution gets the exact jury they want.

The prosecution has infinite money to retry this case and Z does not...
His fancy legal team will bow out and he will get some court appointed lawyer to carry on...
He will be under house arrest for years...
He will NEVER be able to move about freely.

howdy wrote:I am convinced this will be a hung jury and all subsequent juries will be hung until the prosecution gets the exact jury they want.

The prosecution has infinite money to retry this case and Z does not...
His fancy legal team will bow out and he will get some court appointed lawyer to carry on...
He will be under house arrest for years...
He will NEVER be able to move about freely.

^ this