Juror ignored judges orders in decision

[Excon]

Last night on CNN a juror in the Martin/Zimmerman case - identified only as B37, admitted that she voted for conviction right off the bat and one reason was the testimony of a detective who judged Zimmerman to be considered as truthful.

Only one problem with that - the judge ordered the jury to disregard the testimony of the detective on this matter and not give it any merit. But that was ignored and it played a role in the acquittal of Zimmerman.

Zimmerman trial judge tells jury to ignore detective's description | Reuters



Sadly, this order from the judge was ignored by B37 who gave it weight.

:doh :lamo :doh
Figures, just more spun bs.

COOPER: Did you feel -- a lot of the analysts who were watching the trial, felt that the defense attorneys -- Mark O'Mara, Don West -- were able to turn prosecution witnesses to their advantage -- Chris Serino (ph), for instance, the lead investigator.

Did he make an impression on you?

JUROR: Chris Serino (ph) did. He -- but he -- to me, he just was doing his job. He was doing his job the way he was doing his job and he was going to tell the truth regardless of who asked him the questions.

COOPER: So you found him to be credible?

JUROR: I did, very credible.

COOPER: So when he testified that he found George Zimmerman to be more or less and overall truthful, did that make an impression on you?

JUROR: It did. It did. It made a big impression on me.

COOPER: Why?

JUROR: Because he deals with this all the time. He deals with, you know, murder, robberies; he's in it all the time. And I think he has a knack to pick out who's lying and who's not lying.
CNN.com - Transcripts​

 

[Peter King]

Proving that you cannot unring a bell.

And, by the way, it should have been considered. Tell us why his professional opinion should have been ignored.

You wrote it yourself, opinion! Not Fact.

 

[Lord of Planar]

Sorry, but without the whole transcript, in context, this might be misconstrued anyway.

Besides, the judge didn't say his whole testimony was to be ignored. Only his opinion that Zimmerman was innocent.

Here the M$M's are again, trying to stir things up. Sell more news, at the expense of the truth...

 

[Μολὼν λαβέ]

Last night on CNN a juror in the Martin/Zimmerman case - identified only as B37, admitted that she voted for conviction right off the bat and one reason was the testimony of a detective who judged Zimmerman to be considered as truthful.

Only one problem with that - the judge ordered the jury to disregard the testimony of the detective on this matter and not give it any merit. But that was ignored and it played a role in the acquittal of Zimmerman.

Zimmerman trial judge tells jury to ignore detective's description | Reuters

Sadly, this order from the judge was ignored by B37 who gave it weight.

Oh yeah? Which interview on CNN did you watch? During this CNN interview with Anderson Cooper juror B37 says she thought Zimmermen was not guilty from the start.

In bold is why juror B37 thought Zimmerman is not guilty. Still grasping at straws and inserting your bias instead of facts I see. You can't even be honest with yourself.

One of the jurors who acquitted George Zimmerman said she had "no doubt" he feared for his life in the final moments of his struggle with Trayvon Martin, and that was the definitive factor in the verdict.

An initial vote was divided. Three of the jurors first voted Zimmerman was guilty, while three voted he was not guilty, she said. Juror B37 was among those who believed he was not guilty from the start.

The juror said she did not believe Zimmerman profiled Martin, who was African-American, because of the color of his skin.

She believes he thought Martin was suspicious because of the way he acted.

"Anybody would think anybody walking down the road, stopping and turning and looking -- if that's exactly what happened -- is suspicious," she said.

"I think all of us thought race did not play a role," the juror said . "We never had that discussion."

She also said she believes Martin threw the first punch in the confrontation that followed.

Juror: 'No doubt' that George Zimmerman feared for his life - CNN.com

 

[Grim17]

Is this a hit and run post or what?

haymarket has left the building.

 

[Μολὼν λαβέ]

Is this a hit and run post or what?

haymarket has left the building.

Why stick around when you've been detected fabricating the truth?

 

[Fenton]

Last night on CNN a juror in the Martin/Zimmerman case - identified only as B37, admitted that she voted for
conviction right off the bat and one reason was the testimony of a detective who judged Zimmerman to be considered as truthful.

Only one problem with that - the judge ordered the jury to disregard the testimony of the detective on this matter and not give it any merit. But that was ignored and it played a role in the acquittal of Zimmerman.

Zimmerman trial judge tells jury to ignore detective's description | Reuters



Sadly, this order from the judge was ignored by B37 who gave it weight.

So. So what ?

Funny that you don't have a problem with the prosecution witholding evidence from the Defense, or trying, or the fact this whole charade bypassed a Grand Jury.

No the only issue you have is a problem with was a jurors decision to ignore a Judge's orders, well and the verdict.

Your'e getting desperate now

 

[haymarket]

So. So what ?

Funny that you don't have a problem with the prosecution witholding evidence from the Defense, or trying, or the fact this whole charade bypassed a Grand Jury.

No the only issue you have is a problem with was a jurors decision to ignore a Judge's orders, well and the verdict.

Your'e getting desperate now

Making you aware of the truth is desperate? Wow. Simply WOW!!!! :shock::doh

 

[Lord of Planar]

Is this a hit and run post or what?

haymarket has left the building.

I think it was just tossed out there for debate. I have done that before in a different forum, toss out a thread to see how people respond. Only post one or two times in it.

What I thought was funny is the link is almost two weeks old...

 

[haymarket]

Is this a hit and run post or what?

haymarket has left the building.

Oh I am sorry that I have a life which prevents me from being at your beck and call 24/7/365.

 

[Bronson]

Maybe you need to go back and listen to his testimony again... Serino's favorable testimony for Zimmerman did not hinge on that one answer to that one question.

One example was the question that preceded it, about Z's reaction to the statement he made suggesting there might be a video. He asked Serino what Z's reaction indicated... Go back and listen to that... If that doesn't convince you, then I'll be glad to post several more examples.

Notice that all the people rioting, assaulting and killing people across the country in the name of Trayvon Martin don't know a damn thing about this case. They are programmed robots doing the MSM and Pop Culture's bidding. I doubt Haymarket ever watched any of the testimony or knows even 10% of the facts and evidence surrounding this case. He just wants everyone to believe this country is Selma in the 1960s or something. It won't work.

 

[MaggieD]

You wrote it yourself, opinion! Not Fact.

Experts give their opinions all the time in the courtroom. I say he was an expert. The court apparently didn't agree. But.

You cannot unring a bell.

 

[Peter King]

Experts give their opinions all the time in the courtroom. I say he was an expert. The court apparently didn't agree. But.

You cannot unring a bell.

Usually experts speak their opinions on scientific basis on which one can hold a scientific debate. Another detective might have felt completely different if he had talked to Zimmerman. Maybe if Trayvon had survived, the detective would have believed him based on that interview, but that isn't possible.

Basing your decision of how you feel about a detective is very dangerous IMHO and that is the danger with jury verdicts. Don't get me wrong, judges can also make mistakes but normally they will not use these kinds of statements by police to base his verdict on.

 

[MaggieD]

Usually experts speak their opinions on scientific basis on which one can hold a scientific debate. Another detective might have felt completely different if he had talked to Zimmerman. Maybe if Trayvon had survived, the detective would have believed him based on that interview, but that isn't possible.

Basing your decision of how you feel about a detective is very dangerous IMHO and that is the danger with jury verdicts. Don't get me wrong, judges can also make mistakes but normally they will not use these kinds of statements by police to base his verdict on.

In my opinion, the reason the prosecution didn't object to the question (remember, it wouldn't have been answered had they done so), is that they thought it was an appropriate question.

When the answer came back!! "Yes, I think he was telling the truth," they threw a Hail Mary (the next day), and the judge caught it.

 

[joko104]

I've always stated that a judge telling a jury "disregard what you just heard" underlines it, makes it in bold, and overall has the exact opposite effect.

There is a reason they do not keep a transcript of jury deliberations. All juries break the rules all the time. Maybe the prosecution should have explained more carefully what the jury should un-hear in closing statements. More precisely, the prosecution ****ed up in not doing a pre-trial motion in limine to prevent the testimony in the first place.

 

[joko104]

Reuters is a pack of outright liars on this case in their crusade to condemn Americans as crazed gun owners.

In their post-trial question to the prosecution, the referred to the 6' 2" 17 year old Travyon Martin as "that YOUNG child." I suppose in the UK people don't actually reach full childhood until age 3o. Maybe that's why they decided UKers shouldn't let themselves have guns - because they all have childish maturity.

 

[joko104]

Doesn't matter!!!!!! Your concern for proper courtroom procedure and a jury following the law is less than impressive.

Reality is a bitch, huh? :lamo

 

[joko104]

I guess all the threats against Serino if he didn't do exactly what the politicians wanted didn't hold together too well in trial.

 

[Oceandan]

Last night on CNN a juror in the Martin/Zimmerman case - identified only as B37, admitted that she voted for conviction right off the bat and one reason was the testimony of a detective who judged Zimmerman to be considered as truthful.

Only one problem with that - the judge ordered the jury to disregard the testimony of the detective on this matter and not give it any merit. But that was ignored and it played a role in the acquittal of Zimmerman.

Zimmerman trial judge tells jury to ignore detective's description | Reuters



Sadly, this order from the judge was ignored by B37 who gave it weight.

LOL I Knew this would come up. Just FTR, Judge Nelson did NOT say disregard Detective Serino's testimony. Judge Nelson said disregard ONE answer to ONE question Mark O'Mara asked. Now, for MOST people O'Mara didn't need to even ask that question, but it was brilliant he did. The juror did not violate the Judge's orders.

 

[haymarket]

Reality is a bitch, huh? :lamo

I have no idea what that even means as a response to my post.

 

[haymarket]

LOL I Knew this would come up. Just FTR, Judge Nelson did NOT say disregard Detective Serino's testimony. Judge Nelson said disregard ONE answer to ONE question Mark O'Mara asked. Now, for MOST people O'Mara didn't need to even ask that question, but it was brilliant he did. The juror did not violate the Judge's orders.

So the juror is wrong but you are right. :doh

Got it. :roll:

 

[Grim17]

So the juror is wrong but you are right. :doh

Got it. :roll:

What?

They are both right and that juror did not ignore the judge's orders

 

[niff]

Doesn't matter!!!!!! Your concern for proper courtroom procedure and a jury following the law is less than impressive.

BOOOOOO WHOOOOOO
Go get a hanky.
Last heard from the jury as they were leaving the court house: "This one's for one Nicole and Ron".
You had no "concern" when AC and Bernie were breaking the rules of evidence. Lying to the judge. Withholding evidence.

 

[niff]

Why stick around when you've been detected fabricating the truth?

That's the reason most of the other 'T-Boners' have left also.
Only a couple didn't have the common sense to jump off the dead stinking horse a long time ago. Each lie they came up with was like they were giving the dead stinking horse a whack with a stick trying to get it to at least twitch.
They've crawled back under their rocks waiting for the next Al Sharpton farce to come along.
'Vicky' sums up their desperation best:Little Britain Live - Vicky Pollard - Yeah but no but yeah - YouTube

 

[Fisher]

If he had been found guilty, it would be an issue for appeal. but since it went the other day, nothing can be done about it.