On her twitter she said a white guy took it from her. But in the video, the guy is almost definitely black (Or at least he had 2-3 black friends). Also, on the Oakland scanner at the time, they said a small group of black men stole an Iphone (I was listening, but they never said if it was the same incident or not. Some people on the stream said they got on a bus and shit, but I only heard the Iphone missing mentioned in passing.)...you're joking, right?
Juror decides not to write book after all. Probably scared she'll get outed as the author and that might make her a target for violence.(Reuters) - One of the six jurors in the George Zimmerman trial has abandoned her plans to write a book explaining why she found him not guilty of murder in the shooting of unarmed teenager Trayvon Martin, her literary agent said on Monday.
The jury's decision triggered protests across the United States by activists who said Martin was targeted because he was black.
Unidentified juror B37 had signed with Martin Literary Management, an agency based in Mercer Island, Washington, the firm's president, Sharlene Martin, said in a statement on Monday.
The juror had planned to write the book with her husband, who is an attorney, explaining how the jury had "no option" but to find Zimmerman not guilty, but she subsequently decided not to proceed with publication, Martin added later.
The juror did not spell out the reasons for her change of heart but said her isolation in the jury room meant she had not been fully aware of the outrage over the case.
"The potential book was always intended to be a respectful observation of the trial from my and my husband's perspectives solely and it was to be an observation that our 'system' of justice can get so complicated that it creates a conflict with our 'spirit' of justice," she said in the written statement.
"Now that I am returned to my family and to society in general, I have realized that the best direction for me to go is away from writing any sort of book and return instead to my life as it was before I was called to sit on this jury," she added.
In other newsNEW YORK (Reuters) - George Zimmerman's chief defense lawyer on Monday called Florida prosecutors "a disgrace to my profession" for holding back evidence for months and pledged a new effort to impose sanctions against them.
Mark O'Mara and co-counsel Don West argued the self-defense case that helped Zimmerman win an acquittal of second-degree murder and manslaughter charges on Saturday for the 2012 shooting death of unarmed black teenager Trayvon Martin.
The law requires prosecutors to share evidence with defense attorneys, especially if it helps exonerate defendants. The requirement is known as the Brady disclosure.
O'Mara accused prosecutors of several Brady violations, which were heard by Judge Debra Nelson before the trial. Nelson postponed some of her decisions on sanctions until after trial, saying the process was time-consuming.
"This is not acceptable, and is not going to be tolerated in any case that I'm involved in," O'Mara told Reuters in New York on Monday, accusing special prosecutor Angela Corey and lead trial attorney Bernie de la Rionda of Brady violations.
"They are a disgrace to my profession," O'Mara said, referring specifically to de la Rionda and Corey. "They said my client was 'lucky' to have been acquitted. Really?"
Corey responded that O'Mara's comments were unprofessional and challenged him to point to any judge's ruling that her office improperly withheld evidence.
"Our office adhered to the highest standards of ethical behavior," Corey told Reuters in a telephone interview. "Our rules of professional conduct regulate comments like that. I don't think those are the kind of comments that are appropriate."
Her office confirmed last week that it had fired its information technology director, Ben Kruidbos, who had testified in a pre-trial hearing that files he created with text messages and images he retrieved from Martin's phone were not handed to the defense.
Kruidbos testified last month that he found embarrassing photos on Martin's phone that included pictures of a clump of jewelry on a bed, underage nude females, marijuana plants and a hand holding a semi-automatic pistol.
O'Mara said he intends to amend his request for sanctions against the prosecutors in light of testimony from the trial, calling prosecutors' failure to turn over data from Martin's phone records for months "an undeniable Brady violation."
Prosecutors handed over raw data from Martin's phone, but O'Mara accused them of withholding additional data that had been extracted by Kruidbos. Corey countered that the judge determined the defense was in possession.
O'Mara has quarreled with the prosecutors since they charged Zimmerman last year and has become increasingly aggressive in his criticism of the prosecution since his client's acquittal.
A jury in Sanford, Florida, found Zimmerman not guilty of second-degree murder and manslaughter after a three-week trial in which defense lawyers argued that the neighborhood watch volunteer, shot Martin in self-defense.
Stevie Wonder Boycotting Florida Following Zimmerman Verdict (Video)
The singer refuses to perform in the state until its Stand Your Ground law is "abolished."
In the wake of the George Zimmerman acquittal, the singer said he would not be performing in the Sunshine State until its Stand Your Ground law is "abolished." He also said he would not be performing in any other state that recognizes the law, which some say contributed to Zimmerman's acquittal in the shooting death of Florida teen Trayvon Martin on Feb. 26, 2012.
"I decided today that until the Stand Your Ground law is abolished in Florida, I will never perform there again," Wonder said Sunday while performing in Quebec City. "As a matter of fact, wherever I find that law exists, I will not perform in that state or in that part of the world."
I've only been in jury selection twice, and never been chosen. I loved 12 Angry Men, but is it really an accurate depiction of the jury deliberation process, then or now? I ask because I do not know.I wouldn't try to draw too many conclusions from the initial jury split or the deliberation process. Go back and watch 12 angry men.
Obviously its a little dramatic but the smart ones who paid attention always convert the followers who herp derped their way through not listening.I've only been in jury selection twice, and never been chosen. I loved 12 Angry Men, but is it really an accurate depiction of the jury deliberation process, then or now? I ask because I do not know.
He does have a defamation lawsuit against NBC for editing the 911 tape to make him sound like a racist. I have no doubt he going to get paid for that, probably through settlement.Does Zimmerman have any legal recourse against news people and especially the DA for continuing to call him a murderer even though he was found not guilty of that?
I don't *think* so, but I hate to speak definitively. Not guilty is not the same as "innocent". There is a basis for saying that, even if it is demonstrably false.Does Zimmerman have any legal recourse against news people and especially the DA for continuing to call him a murderer even though he was found not guilty of that?
Al Jazeera and the BBC.I dunno where the fuck to get my news from anymore. I can't trust anything CNN says anymore after seeing what they did to the facts in this trial.
Nah, he has yet to shoot a dog.Juror B37:
"When Cooper asked the juror if she would feel comfortable with Zimmerman being a neighborhood watch volunteer in her community, she said, "if he didn't go too far." She added, "I would feel comfortable having George (as a neighborhood watchman)...I think he's learned a good lesson."
Maybe GZ should apply to the police academy? He's got experience now.
There is, but I'm pretty sure libel laws are narrow that you'd have to be able to demonstrate someone knowingly lied on some sort of public record. Its very hard to prove that soandso knew the facts before hand while slandering another person. That said, Zimmerman can (and immediately did so already) sue for defamation, in particular, NBC.I don't *think* so, but I hate to speak definitively. Not guilty is not the same as "innocent". There is a basis for saying that, even if it is demonstrably false.