Posters for the jury

[LockeJaw]

World Watcher would be an excellent alternate....

I just think you have a thing for guys in Uniform.


(For those that don't know, Navy Crackerjacks (Enlisted Service Dress) are absolute chick magnets.)


>>>>

Meh.... I have standards.... If you don't rank at least Capt, I ain't interested. Enlists... pah.

I was capt of my track team in high school.

 

[California Girl]

I just think you have a thing for guys in Uniform.


(For those that don't know, Navy Crackerjacks (Enlisted Service Dress) are absolute chick magnets.)


>>>>

Meh.... I have standards.... If you don't rank at least Capt, I ain't interested. Enlists... pah.

So, you are into old guys huh?


(Navy Captain is an O-5 and typically takes about 20-years to get to.)

>>>>

I do prefer older men generally.

 

[Amelia]

Well, no way I can make the list. As far as I am concerned, Zimmerman is at least guilty of manslaughter. Had he not been packing, had he not gotten out of the vehicle, had he not confronted Martin, the kid would be alive today. As a gun owner, this kind of action endangers my Second Amendment rights. For if we let people like Zimmerman get away with murder, society as a whole may decide that having armed citizens who can get away with murder is just to dangerous for the rest of us.

You are as qualified for the jury as BigReb is. He has already declared that Zimmerman is not guilty.

I don't know about the other members. I haven't been following the Zimmerman threads that closely, but BigReb stood out because I was pretty sure he had committed himself before. And he did it again in this very thread after he had already been chosen for the jury.

Funny - no one has mentioned the possibility of jury nullification yet on this thread.

Zimmerman is not technically guilty so nullification is not possible

 

[California Girl]

I just think you have a thing for guys in Uniform.


(For those that don't know, Navy Crackerjacks (Enlisted Service Dress) are absolute chick magnets.)


>>>>

Meh.... I have standards.... If you don't rank at least Capt, I ain't interested. Enlists... pah.

I was capt of my track team in high school.

Close enough.

 

[Si modo]

Well, no way I can make the list. As far as I am concerned, Zimmerman is at least guilty of manslaughter. Had he not been packing, had he not gotten out of the vehicle, had he not confronted Martin, the kid would be alive today. As a gun owner, this kind of action endangers my Second Amendment rights. For if we let people like Zimmerman get away with murder, society as a whole may decide that having armed citizens who can get away with murder is just to dangerous for the rest of us.

You are as qualified for the jury as BigReb is. He has already declared that Zimmerman is not guilty.

I don't know about the other members. I haven't been following the Zimmerman threads that closely, but BigReb stood out because I was pretty sure he had committed himself before. And he did it again in this very thread after he had already been chosen for the jury.

Funny - no one has mentioned the possibility of jury nullification yet on this thread.

Zimmerman is not technically guilty so nullification is not possible

(Psst....in this country, a defendant is presumed innocent....)

 

[California Girl]

Well, no way I can make the list. As far as I am concerned, Zimmerman is at least guilty of manslaughter. Had he not been packing, had he not gotten out of the vehicle, had he not confronted Martin, the kid would be alive today. As a gun owner, this kind of action endangers my Second Amendment rights. For if we let people like Zimmerman get away with murder, society as a whole may decide that having armed citizens who can get away with murder is just to dangerous for the rest of us.

You are as qualified for the jury as BigReb is. He has already declared that Zimmerman is not guilty.

I don't know about the other members. I haven't been following the Zimmerman threads that closely, but BigReb stood out because I was pretty sure he had committed himself before. And he did it again in this very thread after he had already been chosen for the jury.

Zimmerman is not technically guilty so nullification is not possible

(Psst....in this country, a defendant is presumed innocent....)

Don't be mean.... she's trying to appear intelligent.


And failing.... but give her some points for effort.

 

[Amelia]

Well, no way I can make the list. As far as I am concerned, Zimmerman is at least guilty of manslaughter. Had he not been packing, had he not gotten out of the vehicle, had he not confronted Martin, the kid would be alive today. As a gun owner, this kind of action endangers my Second Amendment rights. For if we let people like Zimmerman get away with murder, society as a whole may decide that having armed citizens who can get away with murder is just to dangerous for the rest of us.

You are as qualified for the jury as BigReb is. He has already declared that Zimmerman is not guilty.

I don't know about the other members. I haven't been following the Zimmerman threads that closely, but BigReb stood out because I was pretty sure he had committed himself before. And he did it again in this very thread after he had already been chosen for the jury.

Zimmerman is not technically guilty so nullification is not possible

(Psst....in this country, a defendant is presumed innocent....)

There is a difference between saying that you're waiting for the facts to determine whether someone is guilty, and declaring in advance as BigReb has done that Zimmerman is not guilty.

Entertaining thread though. A fun way to approach the coming trial.

 

[California Girl]

You are as qualified for the jury as BigReb is. He has already declared that Zimmerman is not guilty.

I don't know about the other members. I haven't been following the Zimmerman threads that closely, but BigReb stood out because I was pretty sure he had committed himself before. And he did it again in this very thread after he had already been chosen for the jury.

(Psst....in this country, a defendant is presumed innocent....)

yet to be on the jury you must presume NOTHING...otherwise bias can set in. Plus after watching worldwatcher dismantle Rebs argument he shouldnt be on it period.

In this country... along with many others... We use "Ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat".... innocent until proven guilty. Therefore, Zimmerman is innocent. It is for the state to prove that he is guilty.

 

[Sarah G]

CG you should be on the jury, you have been pretty fair in regards to this case.

Yeah, I agree. We've since updated the list. Post #167 has the current list.

We will likely need to update some more as we go along ironing out the who and hows.

If we are short of jurors, I'd like to suggest Sarah G. Rational woman. And funny.

Hey, thanks but I just wanted to wish you all luck. It's getting pretty busy here at work and I wouldn't be the one to count on.

Thanks C. Appreciate the thought.

Imma be watching tho!

 

[saveliberty]

(Psst....in this country, a defendant is presumed innocent....)

yet to be on the jury you must presume NOTHING...otherwise bias can set in. Plus after watching worldwatcher dismantle Rebs argument he shouldnt be on it period.

In this country... along with many others... We use "Ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat".... innocent until proven guilty. Therefore, Zimmerman is innocent. It is for the state to prove that he is guilty.

Don' think that applies in this case CG. In insanity cases and self defense cases as well I think, the defense must prove insanity or self defense.

 

[Si modo]

You are as qualified for the jury as BigReb is. He has already declared that Zimmerman is not guilty.

I don't know about the other members. I haven't been following the Zimmerman threads that closely, but BigReb stood out because I was pretty sure he had committed himself before. And he did it again in this very thread after he had already been chosen for the jury.

(Psst....in this country, a defendant is presumed innocent....)

yet to be on the jury you must presume NOTHING...otherwise bias can set in. Plus after watching worldwatcher dismantle Rebs argument he shouldnt be on it period.

I do believe you were serious when you posted that.

 

[saveliberty]

(A) Every person accused of an offense is presumed innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, and the burden of proof for all elements of the offense is upon the prosecution. The burden of going forward with the evidence of an affirmative defense, and the burden of proof, by a preponderance of the evidence, for an affirmative defense, is upon the accused.

Lawriter - ORC - 2901.05 Burden of proof - reasonable doubt - self-defense.

Florida might be different.

 

[California Girl]

yet to be on the jury you must presume NOTHING...otherwise bias can set in. Plus after watching worldwatcher dismantle Rebs argument he shouldnt be on it period.

In this country... along with many others... We use "Ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat".... innocent until proven guilty. Therefore, Zimmerman is innocent. It is for the state to prove that he is guilty.

Don' think that applies in this case CG. In insanity cases and self defense cases as well I think, the defense must prove insanity or self defense.

Not overly interested in what you think... other than the premise that one is innocent until proven guilty in the US.

 

[saveliberty]

In this country... along with many others... We use "Ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat".... innocent until proven guilty. Therefore, Zimmerman is innocent. It is for the state to prove that he is guilty.

Don' think that applies in this case CG. In insanity cases and self defense cases as well I think, the defense must prove insanity or self defense.

Not overly interested in what you think... other than the premise that one is innocent until proven guilty in the US.

You have the right to be wrong, should you give up that right, your still wrong. Self defense cases where the accused has already admited to the act is different.

 

[Emma]

It's a shame you can't get an hourly wage for stirring the pot and guessing based on second and third hand rumors...you'd be rich!

Another excellent idea!

Send me money. (don't forget, that's to include 50 hours at time and a half)

Would that be minimum wage or regular nurses salary?


>>>>

I'm not greedy. I'll take my regular salary.

 

[California Girl]

Yeah, I agree. We've since updated the list. Post #167 has the current list.

We will likely need to update some more as we go along ironing out the who and hows.

If we are short of jurors, I'd like to suggest Sarah G. Rational woman. And funny.

Hey, thanks but I just wanted to wish you all luck. It's getting pretty busy here at work and I wouldn't be the one to count on.

Thanks C. Appreciate the thought.

Imma be watching tho!

Watching? Ruh oh! I better be on my very bestest behavior. Shame, cuz you'd be fab on the jury. But I believe that pressure of work is a reasonable excuse.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Great input, guys!

And, I've been considering what a lot of you are saying. I think if we do this, we have to be realistic. We are all news junkies, so we ARE going to see outside influence. And, honestly, because we are a mock jury, and we've all demonstrated an ability to analyze the veracity of what the news has reported, I think we can still do it.

In fact, I think we can still do it and even discuss the case in other threads. But, when we discuss among ourselves, we agree that we only use information that is in the trial and in front of the jury. And, we agree that we will all do our best not to let the media and other information sources influence our decisions.

It's not going to be perfect, and it's not going to be real, but I think it will be an amusing exercise.

So far, our desired list of jurors is Si modo, Emma, Paperview, Gawdag, Gadfly, Bigreb, California Girl, Lockejaw, High_Gravity, Ravi, Uptownliving, and Trajan.

I propose the following alternates: Del, Intense, MeBelle , and Syrenn.

We can discuss other alternates, too.

I will send a PM to each poster informing them that they have been selected for the mock jury in this case.

I propose that they agree to the following:

1. We will be self governing, both mock jurors and alternates; and we understand that the greatest award all of us can get from this is if we all do our best to follow the guidelines we agree to follow.

2. We will only consider evidence and testimony presented at trial and while the real jury is present.

3. As we are all news junkies, we understand that we all will be exposed to media reports about the trial.

4. The mock jurors and the alternates will be equal members of this group with the only difference between the two groups is that those in the mock jurors group will have their final vote on the verdict counted.

5. We will pledge to each other that we will not allow the media reports to influence our discussions and opinions concerning the case and will each do our best to call attention to the extraneous information and not to allow that information to enter our discussion and points of arguments.

6. In breaking from the normal suggested operations of juries in the United States of America, and in the interest of keeping the thread lively and interesting, we will discuss the evidence as we become aware of it.

7. If any member believes any evidence or testimony another member presents to the group is information that is outside of what the real jury will hear or has heard, that member will tell the group. Then the group will decide, based on # 2 above, whether the group should continue discussing that information or not.

8. Of course, any member of USMB is free to post in the thread. Some of those posters may present information to the group that is not in compliance with # 2. The group will thank that other poster for their information and then inform the other poster that we cannot consider that information.

9. Invariably, there will be troll posts. Each member of the group pledges to the other members of this group that we will not be sidetracked into a troll argument and will continue to focus on the information pertaining to the trial and presented at the trial in the presence of the real jury. If we cannot resist the troll post, we pledge to start another thread on that topic.

10. We all understand that we are voluntarily participating in this exercise. We may withdraw at any time, but will let the group know immediately of our intent to leave the mock jury. At that point, the next alternate mock juror will be informed that their final vote on the case will be counted. Alternate mock jurors will be taken in alphabetical order of their usernames.

11. We will allow ourselves to participate in other threads about the trial, but will remember that we will only discuss information in compliance with # 2 above when we are in this thread.

12. If we have personal knowledge and/or experience on any topic we discuss, we will allow that input in our discussions, but we understand that we will provide supporting information to other mock jurors so that we all can be informed on that mock jurors expertise. For example, if a mock juror is personally familiar with a road intersection in Sanford, FL, and that is material information for making an intermediate decision, s/he will tell the group of that knowledge and provide supporting information about that knowledge as best s/he can.


Can you guys think of any other guideline we would all like to agree to or any edit of the above?

Once I have a final draft of the guidelines, I will send PMs to the mock jurors and alternates, and start a new thread for the mock jury and title that thread appropriately. And, when all reply and agree, we can get started.

If some of you are into more strict guidelines, I’m still open to them, of course. But I also think we need to be realistic. I believe all who have shown an interest so far are perfectly capable of following the guidelines.

One thing I may have missed but maybe the normal board demeanor such as cussing each other out or calling each others liars should not be allowed for jury members. I realize I am one of the worst but I promise to be on my best ability to refrain from cussing ravi out.

 

[WorldWatcher]

Good show BR, good show.


>>>>

 

[California Girl]

Don' think that applies in this case CG. In insanity cases and self defense cases as well I think, the defense must prove insanity or self defense.

Not overly interested in what you think... other than the premise that one is innocent until proven guilty in the US.

You have the right to be wrong, should you give up that right, your still wrong. Self defense cases where the accused has already admited to the act is different.

Self defense is the same as innocent. It means you are not guilty. See how that works?

 

[WorldWatcher]

Self defense is the same as innocent. It means you are not guilty. See how that works?

Actually, in my mind (and this is my opinion so don't get worked up about it) "innocent" and "not guilty" are two different things. "Innocent" implies no wrong doing. "Not guilty" on the other hand means you didn't commit a crime.

Someone can be "not guilty" of a crime but not be "innocent" of being responsible for the events that took place.

A subtle distinction I know - go ahead and shoot me.



>>>>