The Official Zimmerman Trial Verdict Thread

[FJO]

Follow up: What do you think of Stephanie and CrusaderFrank?

Two morons desperate for attention, IMO.

As for B-37 I agree with Lakhota, she had an agenda going in, and that agenda had nothing to do with trying to determine the truth.

It is a safe bet that you would sing a different tune if the verdict had been more to your liking.

 

[koshergrl]

Moronic thread, stupid question. Now we know who among us wishes to target jury members.

 

[koshergrl]

I'm not naming any names (FJO)

 

[tinydancer]

Getting out of your car is not an act of aggression and it's quite legal.

Trayvon beating up Zimmerman was most definitely an act of aggression and quite illegal.

Get over it.

Cripes I have to keep remembering that you're the fool that kept posting that Canada needed to pipe our oil to the Gulf of Mexico so we could ship it to China.

You're amazingly dense. so....

 

[Wry Catcher]

Can anyone explain why there is a secrecy about the identity of jurors?

I was under the impression that serving jury duty is a civil obligation and having served jury duty is something to be proud of.

Yet, time after time, I see jurors hiding behind anonymity. Are they ashamed? Are they afraid? Is their identity protected/hidden under some law? If so, why?

There are millions of nuts, clinically fucked up people, with guns in America. That's why.

Based on the posts by you in various forums, you are obviously a liberal/Democrat.

So, your reference to "millions of nuts, clinically fucked up people, with guns in America" implies that those who threaten the jurors are those law-abiding citizens who believe and honor the Second Amendment.

Would they be those who live in the home town of the President and use those guns with great pleasure and abandon? Those whose spokesmen rally them to demonstrate, to dissent and heaven knows what else?

I am socially liberal and fiscally rational as well as a registered Democrat.

Do you know what gun violence costs to local communities, annually?

"Between 2005 and 2009, youth gun violence cost society about $234 million in San Mateo County. And local governments spend $57,000 to $856,000 per firearm crime"

Link: Officials Reveal High Cost of Youth Gun Violence - Government - San Mateo, CA Patch

I have no objection to those who legally own guns and honor that right; I completely reject the NRA and it's foolish policy preventing any efforts to regulate the ownership, possession or custody and control of guns.

 

[Wry Catcher]

Can anyone explain why there is a secrecy about the identity of jurors?

I was under the impression that serving jury duty is a civil obligation and having served jury duty is something to be proud of.

Yet, time after time, I see jurors hiding behind anonymity. Are they ashamed? Are they afraid? Is their identity protected/hidden under some law? If so, why?

Maybe its because they put murdering thugs behind bars, and the associates of said murdering thug may be a bit peeved by it.

Thank you.

Obviously, in this particular case no "murderous thug" was put behind bars, but I get your point about revenge.

So, perhaps the jurors' desire to be anonymous - seeing the political power of those who are capable to harm them - is justified.

Seems like the only ones that MAY threaten the lives and livelihoods of the jurors in this particular case are those who are doing their best (worst??) to foment riots, those who can not be respectful of existing law and the justice system, those who will NEVER be happy as long as there is a single white (or "White Hispanic) person is alive.

The only ones who are peeved are the race-hustling poverty pimps, like Al Sharpton, Eric Holder, Jesse Jackson and the One who would love to have Trayvon Martin as his son.

I see by this post that you hate the black race and in particular those African Americans who have a voice; inferred from this you must be a right wing Republican and a scared little bunny rabbit who covets guns. See how that works?

 

[Granny]

Being a juror is an obligation as well as a privilege. Selecting jurors is a rather serious matter. When I worked in law firms where we were involved in trials, jury lists were e-mailed to all employees usually giving names, ages, addresses, marital status and employment information and it was requested that anyone either knowing or having information about anyone on the list report it to the responsible attorney. If, for example, an employee is a relative or neighbor of a particular prospective juror, that juror might be eliminated as a candidate to eliminate any reason why that candidate might be influenced one way or another. A person who has an arrest record is eliminated right off the top. Then there is also the process of eliminating prospective jurors in the courtroom before trial is started. Prospective jurors can asked to be relieved from jury duty for cause - such as a scheduled major surgery and recovery time that would keep them from serving or some other reason that might raise a question about neutrality. Usually jurors come from a wide spectrum of male/female, various areas of employment classes, financial circumstances, etc. to try to make a balanced representation on the jury.

Keeping juror identities unknown is generally used only in very high profile cases so that those jurors can have some protection for their well being and safety AND also to prevent jury tampering.

 

[SantaFeWay]

Well, Andrea Sneiderman is just a manipulative bitch. I want to watch it because she was so expressive and combative when she was on the stand in her lover's trial. Unfortch we will probably not be treated to another performance since this will be her trial and she probably won't take the stand.

Also, I happened to be watching the livestream when her BFF testified, basically against her by saying the friend believed Andrea was having an affair with Neuman, something Andrea has always denied despite overwhelming evidence. During the BFF's testimony, Andrea was watching in the gallery and when she got off the stand and walked down to leave the courtroom Andrea stood up and gave her a full mouth too long Mafia kiss, right there in the aisle of the courtroom. I nearly fell off my seat! After that Andrea was banned from the proceedings.

There's a still shot of it here, at the 2:00 mark. Let me just tell you I have never seen anything like it in all my many, many years of trial watching.

Justice for Rusty Sneiderman - YouTube

Not sure how the prosecution is going to get her on all the charges, especially the murder charge. Ample proof she destroyed texts and emails and lied under oath, those will stick. But not sure what they think they can prove but I want to find out.

Creepyville.

i know absolutely nothing about this case

will wildabouttrial cover it

or some other non editorialized site cover it

is there or are there any court documents

WAT says they will livestream IF it's available or something but it's been known for awhile that it will be livestreamed on local Atlanta stations. Below is the link for WAT coverage of this. So far the only document posted is her indictment. Don't know of any others available.

@Wavngrl (sp) may be right, that this trial could be anticlimactic. Might be I'm one of the few people interested in it and that's because I saw her lover's trial where she testified.

It is interesting that she now has a new boyfriend, last name Dell. It's beginning to look like she had him all along but she led her lover Hemy Neuman (her boss and the one found guilty but mentally insane for her husband's murder) to kill her husband. Then she testified against Neuman; he was convicted; and the death freed up about $3 million so she and Dell could ride off into the sunset together.

Dell is the smoking gun. The defense says Dell and Andrea met AFTER the murder but I think the prosecution has proof they were having an affair while husband Rusty was still alive.

Here's the link to WAT:

Andrea Sneiderman: Facts | WildAboutTrial.com

Gotta get going..........

 

[LilOlLady]

That is not Holder's job to protect Zimmerman.

 

[LilOlLady]

By deliberately increasing the danger to the Zimmermans, Holder is increasing the chance that one or more of them would have to act with deadly force.

Holders's job is to INVESTIGATE civil right violations. Black Panthers had not done anything yet. IF he investigate BPs he also should investigate White Supremacist and other racist white groups.

 

[PredFan]

Eric Holder is as stupid as the idiots are who put the democrats in charge.

Stand Your Ground does not apply in the Zimmermen/Martin case.

The public display of ignorance by most of the left is only surprising in that it exceeds even the level that we thought it was.

 

[FJO]

Moronic thread, stupid question. Now we know who among us wishes to target jury members.

Regardless of the outcome of any trial, any jury decision, I NEVER would think of harming a person who did their civic duty and served on a jury.

So, you may accuse me of being naive or even a moron, ignorant of the justice system but for that reason it never occurred to me that anyone could possibly think otherwise.

If I ever targeted a juror, it would be to shake their hand and say : Well done. Their decision was based on thinking, honest deliberation, sober judgment upon knowing the facts.

Your post was not.

 

[koshergrl]

Moronic thread, stupid question. Now we know who among us wishes to target jury members.

Regardless of the outcome of any trial, any jury decision, I NEVER would think of harming a person who did their civic duty and served on a jury.

So, you may accuse me of being naive or even a moron, ignorant of the justice system but for that reason it never occurred to me that anyone could possibly think otherwise.

If I ever targeted a juror, it would be to shake their hand and say : Well done. Their decision was based on thinking, honest deliberation, sober judgment upon knowing the facts.

Your post was not.

Your OP was not.

My post was perfectly reasonable given the OP. You want to know why you can't seek out the jurors who put criminals behind bars. Nobody is that stupid. So I will continue to believe you want them targeted.

 

[FJO]

Maybe its because they put murdering thugs behind bars, and the associates of said murdering thug may be a bit peeved by it.

Thank you.

Obviously, in this particular case no "murderous thug" was put behind bars, but I get your point about revenge.

So, perhaps the jurors' desire to be anonymous - seeing the political power of those who are capable to harm them - is justified.

Seems like the only ones that MAY threaten the lives and livelihoods of the jurors in this particular case are those who are doing their best (worst??) to foment riots, those who can not be respectful of existing law and the justice system, those who will NEVER be happy as long as there is a single white (or "White Hispanic) person is alive.

The only ones who are peeved are the race-hustling poverty pimps, like Al Sharpton, Eric Holder, Jesse Jackson and the One who would love to have Trayvon Martin as his son.

I see by this post that you hate the black race and in particular those African Americans who have a voice; inferred from this you must be a right wing Republican and a scared little bunny rabbit who covets guns. See how that works?

Your pathetic ilk never disappoint.

Your accusation of me being racist was right on queue and predictably mindless.

 

[pioneerpete]

have we all noticed how now this has turned in to a a repeal the stand your ground law???? Even though stand your ground had nothing to do with this case???? So the true agenda is shown....The KKK Democrats dont care about Trayvon they just want to use his death to get rid of a law that gives everyone more freedom.

Stand your ground was covered in the jury instructions. So I think it played a part in the deliberations of the jury.

The language stand your ground is in almost every jury instruction on self-defense including federal jury instructions on self-defense.

 

[FJO]

Moronic thread, stupid question. Now we know who among us wishes to target jury members.

Regardless of the outcome of any trial, any jury decision, I NEVER would think of harming a person who did their civic duty and served on a jury.

So, you may accuse me of being naive or even a moron, ignorant of the justice system but for that reason it never occurred to me that anyone could possibly think otherwise.

If I ever targeted a juror, it would be to shake their hand and say : Well done. Their decision was based on thinking, honest deliberation, sober judgment upon knowing the facts.

Your post was not.

Your OP was not.

My post was perfectly reasonable given the OP. You want to know why you can't seek out the jurors who put criminals behind bars. Nobody is that stupid. So I will continue to believe you want them targeted.

I will not make any attempt to change your mind, because obviously you are not willing to understand that not all people in this world are evil and bad. You don't know me, but you are able, ready and willing to write me off as a potential assassin of a juror whose verdict help to put a criminal behind bars.

Strange, because in this particular case, the jurors' verdict helped an innocent man get on with and regain his life.

Moreover, my question (OP) was just that: A QUESTION. You accuse me of being an evil person with bad intention, but isn't reading evil intention into a QUESTION is more evil?

 

[PoliticalChic]

The video with this is very difficult to watch.


1." A video entered as evidence in the murder trial of John Henry Spooner on Tuesday appears to show the 76-year-old shooting his 13-year-old neighbor Darius Simmons dead.

2. The Milwaukee senior is charged with first-degree homicide after the alleged incident in May last year. Jurors saw the video (below), taken from Spooner's own surveillance camera, ... the man in the video waves the gun around before he shoots Simmons in the chest. Simmons manages to flee outside the scope of the camera before dying."
John Henry Spooner Shooting VIDEO: Evidence Shows Darius Simmons Killed (GRAPHIC)




3. [ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=OBKogMxbRAU]Video shows John Spooner shooting Darius Simmons - YouTube[/ame]




4. "(CBS/AP) MILWAUKEE- John Henry Spooner, a 76-year-old Milwaukee man, was found guilty Wednesday of fatally shooting his 13-year-old neighbor whom he suspected had broken into his home and stolen weapons. The trial now shifts into a second phase in which the defense will try to prove the defendant was mentally ill at the time of the shooting."

5.The surveillance video provides a clear view of what happened. Spooner emerges from his house and confronts the teen, who is retrieving his family's garbage cart from the street. Spooner points a gun at Darius, who quickly moves back a few steps. Spooner

then talks to Darius' mother, who's standing on her porch out of view of the camera, and Spooner briefly points the gun in her direction. Moments later, Spooner points the gun back at the boy standing a couple of feet in front of him. He fires, hitting Darius in the chest."
Darius Simmons Murder: John Henry Spooner, Wis. man, 76, guilty in fatal shooting of 13-year-old teen neighbor - Crimesider - CBS News





What would the reasoning if this case fails to take on the monumental societal impact of the Zimmerman case?

 

[The Gadfly]

The ridiculous Trayvon Martin case

It’s a failure of US judicial system. It failed to help the weak side people.

When it says Zimmerman is not guilty to kill Trayvon Martin, then what Trayvon was? He became an attacker – a threat to other’s life. That’s how a court to turn an innocent man to be a potential life threatener. An unarmed teen on his way to his relative’s house. He now was believed to be a threaten to other’s life. The other one, though proved having original bad will against Trayvon and finally killed him, became victim.

It indicates that any law abiding citizens should be obedient to unreasonable search (followed, monitored, provoked…). Or he would be killed, if the provoker announced that his life has been threatened.

This case also would encourage people to use guns in argument because dead people losing their voice in the case.

That reflects a complete ignorance of the criminal judicial process. We do NOT, in America, convict someone of a crime, simply to send a message, We do NOT, in America, convict someone of a crime, simply because of the ethnicity of himself, or the victim. We do NOT, in America, convict someone, of a crime, simply for the sake of anyone's idea of social justice. We do NOT, in America, convict someone of a crime, simply because we want to prevent a riot. We do NOT in America, convict someone of a crime, simply because we do not agree with what he did. Here, we convict someone of a crime, ONLY when the evidence proves that, beyond a reasonable doubt, he committed that crime; and anytime we do otherwise, for whatever reason, we make a mockery of the judicial process as defined by our constitution. You want social justice? You want to help the underdog? You want to send a message? Well, there's an electoral, legislative, and CIVIL judicial process, for that. USE IT.

 

[wavingrl]

maybe there is something interesting in this case.

Depends on what else was going on at the time--the original shooting seemed to occur in late fall? I just don't remember.

At any rate--not much news on the case for a long time, then the next thing I knew--there was a trial and discussion about insanity of the boss/lover. I recall thinking--Yes, I believe he is insane--some form of mental illness --schizophrenia?

Then time went by and Andrea was arrested. Her children were living with the paternal grandparents--there were trials/motions on custody.

This case has all that is needed to make a Lifetime movie.

Should you choose to visit Atlanta--neighboring Decatur, where the courthouse is located is a good place to visit. Lots of restaurants and entertainment spots conveniently located near the square. Actually, if you 'don't mind Liberals'--Decatur is one of the better places to live. They managed to come a long way--at one point in time 'very racist'. Discrimination--they did. Very WASP--very different now.

~~~
It is sometimes difficult to choose among the assorted crimes being committed here.

--CEO recently indicted--school board replaced--the surrounding counties --plenty going on

this caught my eye--
http://www.ajc.com/news/news/crime-law/4-gang-members-convicted-of-federal-murder-rackete/nYsLQ/

graffiti can be spotted 'here and there'--the predominantly Hispanic/Asian area--plenty goes on.

how we managed to transition--I can't say. The schools--lots of focus on the schools--down to a 'handful' that are meeting standards. And many that need to be closed. Proposals for cities--that is news these days.

 

[koshergrl]

I base my impression of you on your comments here. You state we should be able to target jurors...for the purpose of *congratulating* them. Yet you seem incapable of understanding that anonymity protects them from those who would do them harm.

Or bribe them.

Either way, you're dismissed as a simpleton.