If you were on the Zimmerman jury, how would you vote? 2nd degree murder, manslaughter or innocent?

by UnConfused 314 Replies latest social current

  • still thinking
    still thinking

    If you don't think they came to the wrong conclusion then what color the jurors were is irrelevant.

    It is not irrelevant...it is very relevant. If the law wants the public AS A WHOLE to support its conclusions...it needs to represent the public properly. Can you honestly tell me that a whole white female jury represents the public properly? Seriously?

    This is just another reason why people do not feel that the justice system works well...a jury should represent a cross section of society. Otherwise...it is very difficult to prove this jury was not biased. Where as, if the jury had been ballanced with a good representation of society as a whole..there would be less reason for anyone to think there was bias in the conclusion.

    To try to say that race issues are irrelevant is to pretend that there are no race issues in society. That does not achieve anything. Race issues needs to be acknowledged. If we don't...this is what happens.

  • still thinking
    still thinking

    sammies...I agree that the media has pushed the race issue for all it is worth...all the more reason to elimate that in the trial with a good representation of society in the jury. By NOT doing that, they have fed the race issue.

  • sammielee24

    Critical Race Theory, White Privilege, and George “White/Hispanic” Zimmerman Circus Trial

    The George Zimmerman trial could very well end up being a complete miscarriage of justice, if Zimmerman is convicted of anything. Former Sanford Police Chief Bill Lee has stated that his team of officers did a “sound” investigation. Because of it, they could not justify charging Zimmerman with anything. For 44 days, he remained free until things began to turn against him.

    It appeared to be an open and shut case. That is, until “a special state task force set up under pressure from the Obama administration decided it was murder — with no grand jury input. Among evidence to support the charge, the affidavit noted Martin’s mother listened to a recorded 911 call and “identified the voice crying for help as Trayvon Martin’s.”

    The entire Zimmerman/Martin fiasco has become a racially-charged vendetta against white people vs. blacks, with pressure coming down on the investigators to charge Zimmerman with murder. “The lead detective in the case, Chris Serino, said he felt pressure to charge Zimmerman with murder, even though he said there was no evidence to support it.”

    Here is an interesting timeline that shows the possibility of collusion from the federal government to charge Zimmerman with something:

    • Feb. 26, 2012: Zimmerman shoots Martin, claiming self-defense; later released after police questioning.
    • March 12: Sanford, Fla., police chief insists there’s not enough evidence to charge Zimmerman, but turns investigation over to the state attorney’s office for review after protests from civil-rights groups.
    • March 20: Attorney General Holder launches investigation of police handling of case. U.S. prosecutors meet with Martin’s parents and the Rev. Al Sharpton.
    • March 22: Al Sharpton holds rally, yelling: “We came for permanent justice. Arrest Zimmerman now!”
    • March 22: Florida Gov. Rick Scott puts Corey on case; Corey decides not to let grand jury review evidence.

    Look carefully at the sequence of events. On February 26th, Zimmerman was released without charge. Former Sanford Police Chief Bill Lee later stated that the shooting did not even fall under Florida’s “Stand Your Ground” law, but was a case of pure self-defense.

    A few weeks later, Lee insisted there was not enough evidence to charge Zimmerman with anything, but is forced to turn case over to state attorney’s office after complaints and protests from civil rights groups (funded by the Department of Justice).

    Almost one month after Zimmerman goes free without being charged, Eric Holder begins an investigation of how police handled the case. Holder’s racial animosity pushes things forward.

    Two days later, Sharpton holds a rally creating racial division and strife. That same day, Florida’s government assigns Angela Corey to the Zimmerman situation and she decides not to let the grand jury review any evidence. Her office ultimately charges Zimmerman with 2nd Degree Murder and we have since learned that she “withheld key exculpatory evidence in its arrest affidavit and charged Zimmerman under false pretenses.”

    The trial itself has continued the circus atmosphere, with heated exchanges between defense lawyers and Judge Debra Nelson. Even yesterday, the judge “overruled” Zimmerman’s lawyers when they objected to her directly asking Zimmerman a question about whether he had decided to testify on his own behalf. Beyond this, the judge has often disallowed anything to do with Martin (though she did allow the information related to the fact that Martin had marijuana in his system at the time of his death). Anything to do with Zimmerman has been allowed.

    The real tragedy of the case is that even though Zimmerman is on trial, it’s really race relations that are on trial. Political correctness, by its very nature, pits race against race. The belief that a certain ethnic group (whites) are automatically given a leg up in society over and against all others means that the wheels of “equality” must shift in order to force whites to the back of the bus, while blacks and other minorities have their turn at the table. The belief is that for too long, whites have controlled things and they must be “legally” punished for it.

    Many blacks (and leftist whites) believe in the faulty (and unproven) Critical Race Theory, which gave birth to the belief in “white privilege.” This is the idea that whites – simply by being white – automatically gain more in society than others. Critical Race Theory was created by black educators and even though they clearly stated that “white privilege” can benefit someone without that person even knowing it (that’s convenient), many blacks firmly believe that this theory is completely true in spite of all the helps they receive from the federal government that reverse discriminates against whites.

    I would say that there is something in society that would be better labeled “rich privilege,” not “white privilege.” If you’re rich in America, you have power. That’s the way it’s always been and always will be.

    George Zimmerman is being used. He is really nothing more than a patsy. The judge in the case has now even stated that if the jury can’t find him guilty of 2nd Degree Murder, they can consider lesser charges of manslaughter. The prosecution has also introduced the idea that Zimmerman can be found guilty on 3rd Degree Murder, which involved a felony against a “child.” The whole thing is ridiculous. They appear to be trying too hard to find something that will stick and if nothing does, then it proves to racists that racism is the reason.

    What we have in the offing is a no-win situation that will simply create more racial unrest and distrust. Just what America needs. Brenner .

  • Simon

    Given that you could run the trial 3 times with 3 different juries and potentially get 3 different outcomes, one could question the validity of jury trial at all. Maybe a judge should hear and decide ...

    But that is the system we have and I don't believe that any injustice was done. You would need to show that an injustice was done and I don't believe that is possible given the facts of the case and the expert legal opinion all along all saying pretty much the same thing - what case?!

    The decision was correct and valid, claiming now that the jury was unfair is just lame and another fumbling attempt to play the now dog-eared race card.

    The law does not require ethnic minorities be proportionally represented and if blacks are so upset about the proportion of jurors then maybe reporting for jury duty more often would be the answer. The fact is a disproportionately high number of african americans don't respond to the initial jury call-up questionnaire. So who's fault is it then that there are less as a proportion of them on juries?

    Don't claim you don't get to participate if you refuse to participate !!


  • TimeBandit


  • UnConfused

    I wonder if the phrase "white African American" will be used for humans with light skin and African American ancestry?

  • still thinking
    still thinking

    That was an interesting link Simon, Thanks. It would appear to be an issue that the public themselves need to address.

    That website did also make the point I was trying to make...maybe I wasn't being very clear about what I was trying to say. This was what they also said on the link you provided.

    Q: As long as court administrators are going out of their way to make sure that African Americans have the opportunity to serve on juries, why is it the court's problem -- or society's, for that matter -- if black citizens fail to exploit that opportunity?

    A: Because, in a democratic society, the legitimacy and moral authority of the courts hinges on the participation of everyone. When African Americans are consistently underrepresented, for whatever reason, confidence that minority defendants can obtain equal justice under the law inevitably suffers.

  • still thinking
    still thinking

    Well...this case sure seems to have brought a lot of underlying issues in society to the surface.


    As much as people want to deny racism in society...this doesn't happen for no reason.

    This happens when people have had enough. And people have had enough of a LOT of things at the moment.

    I do wonder what Obamas involvement in this was. Why was he fanning the flames on this issue? WHAT IS HE UP TO while everyone is focused on this? The people are getting angry...and he is focussing their anger on something that is easy to get attention ard raise deeply felt feelings and hurts. WHAT IS HIS PLAN? More of societies freedoms being signed away? More unquestionable authority being given to himself? Will anyone notice while society implodes and everyone fights against one another? Black against white...white against black.

    WE ARE NOT THE ENEMY of each other...the government is our enemy. They are feeding this hatred. We can either let them. Or we can focus on what is really happening. And it isn't about race. It's about money and control. In the end, black or white we are all screwed if we don't wake up to what they are doing. WE are all in the same boat. And it is sinking fast.

  • valkyrie

    @Sammieswife: After looking up the sources of your multiple uncredited quotations, it appears that www.breitbart.com is your 'news' and information channel of choice.

    Hardly neutral, objective or even factual. I'll stick with the U.S. Government Census report, thanks.

  • Simon
    Because, in a democratic society, the legitimacy and moral authority of the courts hinges on the participation of everyone. When African Americans are consistently underrepresented, for whatever reason, confidence that minority defendants can obtain equal justice under the law inevitably suffers.

    But the responsibility and onus is completely on them to be engaged and take part. They cannot 'opt out' of the system and then complain about the system and expect it to be suspended because they are not a part of it. Assuming we cannot force people at gunpoint or threat of prison to take part then what answer is there other than to respond to complaints of unfairness with "why should we care, you were given the opportunities and turned them down".

    The real truth isn't what we hear though - instead we get the 'black leaders' complaining about the unfairness instead of them acting like REAL leaders and telling their people to take action that actually does something meaningful but is less dramatic than "protest on the streets".

    Civil rights is now a joke isn't it? People faught for the rights and the rights they won are ignored. Pathetic.

Share this