It is regrettable that there were no African-Americans involved in the trial process. 1 Latino on the jury, the rest white. All white lawyers on both sides. White judge. The race-baiters predictably seized on this. Seminole county is 88% white, so the jury makeup not a surprise. But it is regrettable.
It is regrettable that there were no African-Americans involved in the trial process. 1 Latino on the jury, the rest white. All white lawyers on both sides. White judge. The race-baiters predictably seized on this. Seminole county is 88% white, so the jury makeup not a surprise. But it is regrettable.
But they do make judgments based on their own lives and experiences. This is unavoidable as our lives and experiences factor into all of our decisions. In fact, in the CNN interview with Juror B37, she said that she thought poorly of a witness, in part, because the witness used phrases and terms she didn't understand. She also commented on the witnesses culture as if it was foreign to her and thus, she could not identify with it. Even further, the juror admitted that identifying with Zimmerman affected her decision. In both cases, her life and experiences impacted her vote. After all, how could they not? Our lives and experiences affect our evaluation of whether or not other people's stories are credible.The point I'm trying to make is that jurors aren't supposed to make judgements based on their own lives and life experiences - they're supposed to review the evidence and make an impassioned decision based on the facts.
But they do make judgments based on their own lives and experiences. This is unavoidable as our lives and experiences factor into all of our decisions. In fact, in the CNN interview with Juror B37, she said that she thought poorly of a witness, in part, because the witness used phrases and terms she didn't understand. She also commented on the witnesses culture as if it was foreign to her and thus, she could not identify with it. Even further, the juror admitted that identifying with Zimmerman affected her decision. In both cases, her life and experiences impacted her vote. After all, how could they not? Our lives and experiences affect our evaluation of whether or not other people's stories are credible.
I know what you meant, but I'm saying that since jurors experiences do play a role in how they evaluate evidence, then it makes to ensure that juries are filled with people who have a diversity of experiences with race, gender, et al. as those experiences will color how they perceive the credibility of witnesses, defendants, victims and other aspects of the case.What I meant was evaluating the evidence is the role a juror plays - a juror is not there to bring their life's experience into the discussion and decision making process. Much of what you've said simply relates to how the case of the prosecution was presented. Granted, you can't choose your witnesses, but surely you can help them understand the process and what to expect.
Why? I understand where you're coming from....but we could remove EVERY 'questionable' aspect of this trial -- the jury make-up, the jury instructions, the "whatever" -- and, as long as the verdict was Not Guilty? Race baiters would seize on something else.
I couldn't be any more disgusted about the aftermath of the trial than if he'd been found guilty.
This is inaccurate. Even Mark O'Mara and Don West admitted that the judicial system consistently fails black Americans. The inequity of the judicial system is only disputed by those who are uninformed.The US judicial system works very well overall.
This is inaccurate. Even Mark O'Mara and Don West admitted that the judicial system consistently fails black Americans. The inequity of the judicial system is only disputed by those who are uninformed.
If George Zimmerman were black, he would never have been charged with a crime in this case.
This is inaccurate. Even Mark O'Mara and Don West admitted that the judicial system consistently fails black Americans. The inequity of the judicial system is only disputed by those who are uninformed.
What will you take as proof? I'd like to know if your standards are reasonable or designed to be impossible to meet.Prove it.
What will you take as proof? I'd like to know if your standards are reasonable or designed to be impossible to meet.
Look, I have absolutely zero stake in whether or not you accept the truth I've stated. This is a request that you made - not me. Now, if you would like me to "prove" what I said, then tell me what your standards of proof are. Without those standards, I have no idea what you consider "proof" and thus, I risk wasting energy meeting a standard of proof that you do not subscribe to. That is a reasonable request and your resistance to it is making me think that you intend to reject whatever I offer which is why you don't want to specify your standards. So give me your standards or exit the conversation. It's your choice.Prove how unfair the US judicial system is to blacks compared to other races, just as you stated.
You made the assertion, so now you need to. figure out how to substantiate it.
Simply parroting the words of someone else, as you did, carries no weight without evidence to prove it.
Prove it.
Look, I have absolutely zero stake in whether or not you accept the truth I've stated. This is a request that you made - not me. Now, if you would like me to "prove" what I said, then tell me what your standards of proof are. Without those standards, I have no idea what you consider "proof" and thus, I risk wasting energy meeting a standard of proof that you do not subscribe to. That is a reasonable request and your resistance to it is making me think that you intend to reject whatever I offer which is why you don't want to specify your standards. So give me your standards or exit the conversation. It's your choice.
I know what you meant, but I'm saying that since jurors experiences do play a role in how they evaluate evidence, then it makes to ensure that juries are filled with people who have a diversity of experiences with race, gender, et al. as those experiences will color how they perceive the credibility of witnesses, defendants, victims and other aspects of the case.
Once the doors to the jury room close, just about all life experience is brought to theOnly if they're not doing their job.
"Numbers"? LOL. How vague. And you are correct, I made an argument so the burden is on me; I never contested that. However, you asked for the proof so the burden is on you to define proof. You have failed which makes it exceptionally clear to me that you have absolutely zero intention of accepting anything that I offer as "proof". You intend to reject everything no matter what is provided. However, since it's early and I'm benevolent, I'll still provide you with some of the research I've acquired over the years on the off chance that you are genuine and want to educate yourself.Numbers.
Since you are standing on the statement of someone else, and have purported it as gospel fact, the burden is on you.
It is obvious to me that you are parroting another persons words as fact (without having a clue about the authenticity) simply because you believe them with zero proof.
It is very obvious that you have no idea about how to research or understand the proof logic.
Fell free to retract your erroneous assertion at any time.
LOL, no. People cannot help letting their experiences affect their judgment. That's just how the human brain works. When you judge someone as "credible", you are evaluating them according to standards of credibility that you've acquired over your entire life. This includes the prejudices you've acquired over your lifetime. Putting your head in the sand as your doing doesn't change that. There's no need to fear the truth.Only if they're not doing their job.
"I have represented young black males for 30 years. I know better than most people, better than most of the people who are complaining how young black males are treated in the criminal justice system. And we need to fix it. We need to address those problems." - Mark O'MaraYou must mean when O'Mara said this:
Regrettable in what way? He was not convicted?It is regrettable that there were no African-Americans involved in the trial process. 1 Latino on the jury, the rest white. All white lawyers on both sides. White judge. The race-baiters predictably seized on this. Seminole county is 88% white, so the jury makeup not a surprise. But it is regrettable.
LOL, no. People cannot help letting their experiences affect their judgment. That's just how the human brain works. When you judge someone as "credible", you are evaluating them according to standards of credibility that you've acquired over your entire life. This includes the prejudices you've acquired over your lifetime. Putting your head in the sand as your doing doesn't change that. There's no need to fear the truth.
I thought one of the jurers was black. Oh well, makes no difetence.It is regrettable that there were no African-Americans involved in the trial process. 1 Latino on the jury, the rest white. All white lawyers on both sides. White judge. The race-baiters predictably seized on this. Seminole county is 88% white, so the jury makeup not a surprise. But it is regrettable.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?