• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Andersen Cooper has a juror on right now...

The words "stand your ground" or "stand his ground" were in the jury instructions.
Yes, but she said that they considered Stand Your Ground (noun) along with self-defense, et al., not the words "stand your ground."
 





Here's some of the most significant answers she gave:

Serino - "Very credible"

Serino's testimony on Z's truthfulness - "It made a big impression on me"

911 calls - "The Lauer tape was the most significant"

Who was voice screaming on 911 call - "I think it was George Zimmerman's..."

How many agreed it was Zimmerman screaming - "Probably all but one"

Rachel's testimony - "I didn't think it was very credible..."

What did you think of Zimmerman - "GZ is a man who's heart was in the right place..."

Opinion about all the Zimmerman interviews - "I think George was pretty consistant and told the truth basically"

Did Martin reach for the gun - "I think that he might have, I think George probably thought he did..."

Significance of reaching for the gun - "It doesn't make any difference... George had a right to protect himself at that point"

Do you think Z felt his life was in danger - "I do... I really do"

Did Martin thow first punch - "I think he did"

Who was the aggressor - "I think the roles changed (first Z and then M)... Trayvon got mad and attacked him"

Did Zimmerman's racially profile Martin - "I don't think he did"

Did race play a role in this - "I don't think it did"

Was race part of any discussion in the jury room - "No"

Was Z an over eager wannabe cop - "I think he's over eager to help people"

Did you buy the wannabe cop angle - "No, I didn't at all"

First vote - "3 not guilty, 1 second degree murder, 2 manslaughter"

Do you feel sorry for Martin - "I feel sorry for both of them"



In the end, it turns out that my reading of the judges instructions and Florida law was absolutely correct... It did come down to the fight and the claim of self defense, and even if you felt that Zimmerman's prior actions met the definition of murder or manslaughter, the thing that took priority was whether Zimmerman felt he was in danger of great bodily harm... If so, then the jury was required to find him "not guilty" of the charges against him.

Over all, I give that woman an A+, and that also goes for the other 5 women on the jury who didn't allow their emotions to get in the way and made their decision based on the law... The way it's supposed to be done.
 
Last edited:
That interview was sickening. I don't know how she made it onto the jury.

It was sickening to you because it didn't concur with what you want to believe happened that night, and the verdict you wanted them to render.

The woman was sincere, honest and most importantly, followed the law just as the other 5 women on that jury did, even though half of them initially thought he was guilty of a crime.
 
She also said that they considered Stand Your Ground as part of legal aspect of their decision - but Stand Your Ground wasn't a part of the trial so why were they talking about it? That's screwed up.

Florida's self defense law states those very words in it, and the judge included them in her instructions.
 
Back
Top Bottom