Juror B29
 

She wanted to find George Zimmerman guilty, but there wasn't enough evidence to convict him. Is she now being irresponsible coming on tv and saying George Zimmerman got away with murder and stirring the pot??? If there is no evidence proving this how can you say he committed murder?

So what she is saying is that she lied during jury selection questioning, if they asked if she could look fairly and impartially a the cases and evidence presented? Did she lie when the verdict was read and jurors were asked individually in open court if they freely made their decision/vote that became unanimous?

There is a difference between "no" evidence and "not enough" evidence to convict. She is not being irresponsible, she is being honest..

Do we see a book in her future ????

:throwtomatoes:

What is her point? IMO she's just another attention seeking bored housewife missing the excitement.

I see ALOT of books in ALOT of futures! ***sigh***

Aha!

:BigApplause::BigApplause::BigApplause:

There is also a big difference between saying (as the juror), "There was not enough evidence to convict him" or "there was reasonable doubt as to whether he was guilty".......and "He got away with murder".

By saying "he got away with murder", she is making herself the prosecution, judge and jury.

I don't think she honors the high calling of a juror, and the need to leave the "convictions" to the justice system in the court room.

And I think she is looking for gigs on TV talk shows and for book deals, with Sharpton, Jackson and all the others peddling this tabloid version of courtroom justice and making a living off the increasing racial tensions this throws fuel on.

I think she is merely a person who has been hounded by the press and finally made her statement. Maybe it's not agreeable with you but she made it.

She's looking for attention. Period!

She's also sucking up, big time, to the Martin-Sharpton-Jackson camp that generates income.

Somehow, they make a living by going around the country stirring up protests, rallies and t.v. interviews with pandering media hosts, while honest, hardworking Americans go to work at a job and pay their taxes, mortgage and their own kids' college costs.

I don't know a single person--employee or employer--who can take weeks and months off work as these people do, going around the country to protest and do interviews, and still keep their job or keep their business intact, solvent and producing.

I think some members of the public have a short memory. If you recall, after the Casey Anthony trial, juror Jennifer Ford said that she and the other jurors cried and were "sick to our stomachs" after voting to acquit Casey Anthony of charges that she killed her 2-year-old daughter Caylee.

"I did not say she was innocent," said Ford, who had previously only been identified as juror No. 3. "I just said there was not enough evidence.

I suspect the same is true in this case. The jurors feel emotional about the verdict - they know, or they think they know Zimmerman was not innocent when he murdered Martin, yet there was not evidence enough to convict.

I can't speak for how Rev Jesse Jackson makes his living, but I know that Rev Al Sharpton has a daily one hour show on MSNBC that I personally watch everyday at 6:00pm. He never misses a show. Even the day of his mother's funeral, he broadcast live from somewhere in Alabama.

Plenty of people seem to live quite well while working for a cable network and having their own daily shows, for example Bill O'Reilly, Greta Van Susteren, Chris Matthews, Rachel Maddow, etc etc.

Sure looks like a book deal to me, but apparently she has every right, to have her 15 minutes of fame. I think she has 8 children, so probably taking advantage of the money issue. Oh well, on to the next juror.

I hope there is no book deal in the making, but yes, she does have 8 children and is a Nurse's Aid (not enough $$ to support all of them on her own). However, why in the world does she have an attorney sitting so close to her?

They may be honest. Could possibly work hard. Might even pay their taxes and mortgages. :doh:

I still can't figure out why the Fulton/Martin team is always surrounded by attorneys.

They? We were talking about just one person. Now now.

Read post #12.

I wrote post #12 and I stand by what I said:

"I don't know a single person--employee or employer--who can take weeks and months off work as these people do, going around the country to protest and do interviews, and still keep their job or keep their business intact, solvent and producing."

What do Trayvon's parents do for a living, that they can afford to leave work to go around the country and do t.v. interviews, rallies, etc., and still keep the job or business intact and solvent??

How will this juror with a nurse's aide job keep her job, going around doing interviews, talk shows, etc.??

It's also quite telling that the other jurors fear for their personal and family safety so much that they don't reveal their names and faces, but this one, who has the favor of the Jackson-Sharpton-Martin camp, feels safe to reveal her identity and then cash in on it.

This country's justice system has a serious problem if jurors, who made the best decision they could have under the circumstances, have to fear for their lives and those of their families!

I hope that jurors are not hounded by the press. This kind of information protects the integrity of the jury system. I mean the names of the jurors on various cases. You would think that these names would be protected for a certain amount of time especially in hot button cases.

I remember as a student lawyer at the U of MN Law School at Legal Assistance to Minnesota Prisoners I was trying to change the name of someone who had committed a particularly heinous crime in Minnesota and I got a lot of ill will from the judge as well as her staff while trying to put through this name change for him. (I cannot reveal the name because of client privileges and the like) The victim as far as I knew would be kept informed anyway about my client who still had quite a number of years at Stillwater Prison. This was a hot button case in Minnesota (@ 1988) and the judge's staff still had ill will towards the convict which is to be expected.

My point is that there should be some privacy for those who are pulled into situations like this. Jurors are just doing their duty. The woman in question looks like she was going for her 15 minutes of fame. She also to me sounds very reasonable given her background. There was reasonable doubt as defined by the jury instructions as to manslaughter and homicide; but she thought that George Zimmerman was guilty of deliberately killing Trayvon Martin.

I believe the juror's name have to remain sealed according to court order for a specified period of time. Don't know where someone got the information the press was hounding them.

I think her vote made her unpopular with her friends. And that my dears is a very strong reason to change one's stance. I still say that it was a very valid verdict with the information presented.

What is this nowadays when jurors emerge, change their minds and get all of this media attention? Happened with the Casey Anthony case.

It is crazy.

What is also crazy that the Department of Justice isn't allowing a valid verdict to stand and are further investigating. In my whole life I haven't felt such bitterness between races as I feel now.

It's up to the judge in the case to decide how long to keep the juror's names sealed. In the Casey Anthony case, the judge kept the names sealed for 90 days.

Your clear implication is that they are not honest nor hardworking and further don't work or pay taxes or their mortgage or contribute to their kids' college expenses. I doubt you have any basis, in fact, for your assertion.

The Department of Justice investigation has nothing to do with overturning the verdict in the case of Florida vs George M Zimmerman. The DOJ will investigate whether Trayvon Martin's civil rights were violated.

Regarding:
I don't blame either of the races for the bitterness/tension as much as I do the tabloid style the 24-hour "news" networks. They take factual news events and turn them into sick entertainment, like a trashy, cheesy circus.

News is now entertainment and it is trash from many of the networks.

"Objective" reporting seems like an unknown concept anymore.

So what?? It's an opinion! Just like it is an opinion expressed above about me!!

But that is okay. I was four and in kindergarten when we were taught:

"Sticks and stones can break my bones, but names can NEVER hurt me."

What a shame that mindset has long disappeared from this screwed up society!

IMHO juror B29 is another Octo-Mom. How responsible can she be to birth eight children without being able to afford them? We tax payers in one way or another have to be picking up a great deal of what should be her tab in raising them.

She is after the bucks and fame, her one shot at the big time. Allying with the Jackson - Sharpton professional race baiters gives her "protection". If I were a juror coming out on the side that justice was done I would be afraid for my life and remain anonymous.

I e-mailed O'Reilly on this right after the verdict. Here is what I said. It is disconcerting to witness that jurors will display post traumatic stress syndrome owing to balancing their decision on rendering a verdict between the evidence presented in trial or meeting the demands for public outcry. Clearly cameras ought to be removed from the court room because it has built a whole industry around public trials that are de facto modern day version of feeding Christians to lions.

In my view this is a violation of person's Constitutional right to due process and if I were Zimmerman's attorney I would have filed such.

JurorB29 motives could be profit. Her motives could also be post traumatic stress feeling guilty about the verdict. However she also seems very confused because she clearly stated the evidence did not support murder yet she continues to call Zimmerman a murder. It is possible that it is all of the preceding?????

One thing is clear citizen apparently have little stomach or understanding concerning our jury system.

MARTIN was suspended twice from Miami-Dade School because of carrying marijuana and then police found stolen jewelry in his backpack. Since he was suspended he traveled up to stay with his Dad's girlfriend in Sanford,
the kicker to this story is that the Miami Police Chief fudging stats reported the stolen jewelry in Martin backpack as recovered property. so instead of going to jail Martin got suspended and traveled to Sanford. The police chief was outed after Martin's death and was fired

For some clarification he better make more money....

"As The Post’s Isabel Vincent and Melissa Klein reported last year, Sharpton “owe[d] the IRS $2.6 million in income tax, and nearly $900,000 in state tax.”

And his personal pride and joy National Action Network owed more than $880,000 in unpaid federal payroll taxes, interest and penalties, Vincent and Klein found."

"In all, the controversial activist and his empire, including the National Action Network and two for-profit companies, were $5.3 million in the red, public records show.

Most of NAN’s money woes stemmed from more than $880,000 in unpaid federal payroll taxes, interest and penalties. It also paid more than $100,000 to settle two lawsuits, byproducts of the unpaid bills.

And it still owed $206,252 in loans to Sharpton’s for-profit Bo-Spanky Consulting Inc. and Sharpton Media LLC, the records show.

Sharpton drew a $241,732 salary and perks that included first-class or charter air travel, tax filings show. He owes the IRS $2.6 million in income tax, and nearly $900,000 in state tax."

Tax dodger Al Sharpton backs tax hikes—Editorial - NYPOST.com

MSNBC’s Al Sharpton Owes IRS 2.6 Million In Income Tax, And Nearly $900,000 In State Tax

A good man to follow his advice for sure........

Bucco an article written in the Orlando Sentinel described the Great Havana Club in New York at least that is the name of the club as I remember . Anyway it is very exclusive to captains of industry, movies stars etc. Guess who is a member. Yep Al Sharpton. So the author asks who is paying for his membership? This same article says when people ask him who buys his expensive suits he claims he rents them

Too much

I may have missed it, who said she can't afford them?

When one apears before a jury, this just shows how stupid some people are who might have your life in their hands. This dumb juror wants it to be both ways, She believes Zimmerman committed murder but at the same time says the was insuffient evidence to prove Zimmerman committed murder. The best thing she could do is keep her mouth shut, the trial is over, she supported not guilty.

How can she on what she makes as a nursing assistant? OK, she is married and we do not know how much her husband makes.

The Havana Club is a cigar bar, not sure how exclusive it is but if they acknowledge Sharpton and Baldwin as members I'm thinking it's not the Metropolitan Club.

It could be that with all the publicity, controversy, and the black community being upset with the verdict, she felt uneasy about her safety. She might have wondered if her identity could truly be kept a secret. So, by saying she thinks he got away with murder, she's nutralizing any anger that might otherwise have been directed toward her by the black community.

:agree:

He is a bum, and I know that is ok to say as Mr. Zimmerman has been called MUCH worse on this forum, and I suppose it is great that he has at least one fervent fan and devotee on here, as his show is raked over the coals on a steady basis.

Al Sharpton


"The Brawley case that captivated New York in the late eighties is a shocking reminder of the toxic mix racial exploitation and personal ambition can produce. The New York Times and Retroreport.org have just released a new 15-minute documentary on the despicable hoax, which should be required viewing for the NBC News executives who are heavily invested in rehabilitating a key culprit of this loathsome episode: the Rev. Al Sharpton."