HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » The Strange Fruit of Juro...
Introducing Discussionist: A new forum by the creators of DU

Tue Jul 16, 2013, 02:58 AM

The Strange Fruit of Juror B37 --- George Zimmerman Trial

Normally, I don't dip my toes in the water of conspiracy theories but in my strong opinion, the fix was in on George Zimmerman's "Not-Guilty" verdict. The line connecting all the dots is Juror B37. I'll post a part the article "The Strange Fruit of Juror B37" here on Democratic Underground but, before I do, let's connect all the tealeaves -- so to speak.

Juror B37 - A Resident of Seminole County, Florida husband is an attorney.

Juror B37 - Possibly has a book deal to detail her actions during the Zimmerman trial

Juror B37 - Attorney Husband is co-authoring the book, with her.

Zimmerman Attorney - Mark O' Mara is President of the Seminole County, Florida Bar

Juror B37 - During the jury selection process claimed she did not watch TV, follow the media but said "riots" occurred in Seminole County, Florida in the city of Sanford after George Zimmerman was not immediately charged with the killing of Trayvon Martin. No such riots occurred.

Juror B37 - Referred to victim Trayvon Martin -- during the jury selection process -- as a "Color Boy" and called his death by the gun of Twin Lakes Condo Watchman George Zimmerman a "unfortunate incident that happened".

Frank Taffee a "friend" of George Zimmerman stated on Fox News last Friday that the Zimmerman jury were 5-1 for acquittal with one hold out for the charge of Manslaugher.

Juror B37 - During a interview on CNN's Anderson Cooper states that one juror held out until the Judge's "non-answer" to the Manslaughter definition question was received back by the jury.

One hour after the Judge requested clarity in the juries question about the manslaughter charge, George Zimmerman is Acquitted of all charges.

Juror B37 - Throughout the interview with Anderson Cooper repeatedly referenced George Zimmerman in the "first person" as George, instead of Mr. Zimmerman or Zimmerman.

Juror B37 - Stated to Cooper she believe the incident between Zimmerman and victim Trayvon Martin was "unfortunate for both individuals" yet she felt sympathy for "George".

Juror B37 - Told Cooper the testimony of a Doctor who was in war describing "the screams of injured soldiers", was the witness who impacted her final verdict to acquit Zimmerman. None of the Doctors testifying during the Zimmerman trial veterans of war. Only the testimony of John Donnelly, describing how George Zimmerman was like a "Son" to him and donated up to $50K to Zimmerman's legal defense fund, testified on hearing the "screams of injured soldiers during Vietnam". Anderson Cooper asked Juror B37 for clarification -- i.e. was she speaking on Donnelly's testimony -- and the Juror continued to insist she was referencing "a doctor" expert testimony.

Remember the song "Strange Fruit" sung by Billie Holiday? The fix of "Strange Fruit" was in I believe, granting George Zimmerman a "not-guilty" verdict -- regardless of the evidence presented.

Here's a link to the article: http://bit.ly/18icCWL

22 replies, 3023 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 22 replies Author Time Post
Reply The Strange Fruit of Juror B37 --- George Zimmerman Trial (Original post)
LovingA2andMI Jul 2013 OP
Lucinda Jul 2013 #1
Half-Century Man Jul 2013 #2
VanillaRhapsody Jul 2013 #3
Skittles Jul 2013 #4
Cha Jul 2013 #5
truebluegreen Jul 2013 #6
Blue_Tires Jul 2013 #15
Half-Century Man Jul 2013 #7
John2 Jul 2013 #8
Spitfire of ATJ Jul 2013 #9
John2 Jul 2013 #10
Blue_Roses Jul 2013 #11
John2 Jul 2013 #12
Blue_Roses Jul 2013 #13
VanillaRhapsody Jul 2013 #16
uponit7771 Jul 2013 #17
Shrek Jul 2013 #14
Spitfire of ATJ Jul 2013 #22
Skwmom Jul 2013 #19
Spitfire of ATJ Jul 2013 #21
Skwmom Jul 2013 #18
Hong Kong Cavalier Jul 2013 #20

Response to LovingA2andMI (Original post)

Tue Jul 16, 2013, 03:03 AM

1. Bookmarking to read later. Thank you. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LovingA2andMI (Original post)

Tue Jul 16, 2013, 03:06 AM

2. Sharp eyes and ears

Interesting catches.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LovingA2andMI (Original post)

Tue Jul 16, 2013, 03:26 AM

3. It was rigged....something tells me so...

just gut feeling.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to VanillaRhapsody (Reply #3)

Tue Jul 16, 2013, 03:43 AM

4. it would explain a lot

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to VanillaRhapsody (Reply #3)

Tue Jul 16, 2013, 04:09 AM

5. If not.. this juror is sure giving it her all to give

people that impression.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to VanillaRhapsody (Reply #3)

Tue Jul 16, 2013, 04:23 AM

6. Sure looked like it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to VanillaRhapsody (Reply #3)

Tue Jul 16, 2013, 09:59 AM

15. +1

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LovingA2andMI (Original post)

Tue Jul 16, 2013, 05:03 AM

7. It was pointed out that the only way to avoid Double Jeopardy..

...when seeking a retrial was in the case of JURY MISCONDUCT.

Is this that? Would the National Bar Association see it this way?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LovingA2andMI (Original post)

Tue Jul 16, 2013, 05:40 AM

8. I said

 

that I wanted to hear the jurors give their explanations on the verdict. Now that we have heard one, what about the other five women, Zimmerman's supporters claim went by the evidence? I would like to hear them explain how they arrived at George Zimmerman was justified for killing an unarmed teenager. Imagine that, a 204 pound grown man armed with a loaded gun crying because an unarmed 158 pound 17 year old slim kid was beating him to death. Donnelly was full of shit. He used his status as a veteran to play on people. Remember, Zimmerman's father was an ex-marine. It was a show for Fox viewers and the rightwingers in America. The first thing they went to was crticizing Reverand Sharpton and Jessie Jackson after that jury of white women gave their verdict. they got the jury they wanted, thanks to the judge. No blacks in Sanford needed to apply. Only whites could make an unbias decision and go by the evidence. Does anybody honestly believe that jury wasn't bias against Trayvon? He became the person on trial for attacking George Zimmerman. I don't know any 158 pound white kid can beat me to death even if I had a gun, and I'm an expert and outta shape. You want see me crying. I know this would seem kinda sexist but it is a male thing. A kid sure, but a grown man. Especially a grown man that saw his wife as property and was protective of her. Especially someone that sought trouble and tried to be a hero. That verdict was a travesty of justice based on one thing. They didn't see Trayvon Martin as a person, but just as another Black kid to them, whose life didn't mean anything. If it was me doing that to a white kid, I bet it would have been a different verdict from those women. If one did hold out for manslaughter, I wonder which one did? And that woman was probably itching to get on that jury.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LovingA2andMI (Original post)

Tue Jul 16, 2013, 05:42 AM

9. Now ask yourself why the PROSECUTION approved her and you'll realize this "trial" was a scam.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Spitfire of ATJ (Reply #9)

Tue Jul 16, 2013, 06:17 AM

10. Well, I figured

 

that out because of how passively they acted towards proving their case. It looked like a great big love fest with O'Mara and the Defense. Like I said, I wouldn't have called Detective Serino nor John Good as prosecution witnesses. I would have went after both, and I definately would have went after John Good, the same way the defense went after Jenteal about his testimony and what he really saw. They talked about Crump but what about Good and Serino. I wouldn't have accepted his explanation about clarifying anything. He changed his testimony, no different than Jenteal, to strenghten the self defense theme for Zimmerman. Just who suggested MMA or ground pound, Serino or Good? I would have broke both of them down. Good is the only witness, claiming Martin was beating Zimmerman to death and Zimmerman was calling for help. He saw and heard all that without any lights. There wasn't light enough for anybodyelse to see that.

If he was that close and saw all those details, then why did he run in the House to call 911 instead of helping Zimmerman when he asked him? That made no sense, especially when Zimmerman claims it was too dark to see Martin jump him. That means Good had even better vision than Zimmerman from a further distance on the porch. Zimmerman told his ex police friend that he made eye contact with Good when he told him to help too. I would say they both would have a problem with me, trying to get their stories to fit. Serino also gives me a problem with some things he claims to put the story together. And another point too in that testimony. Zimmerman never said Good told them to stop and Good's voice never came up on any of the other 911 calls or even him being seen by other witnesses in the vicinity.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to John2 (Reply #10)

Tue Jul 16, 2013, 06:27 AM

11. Serino changed his story.

Didn't he tell one of the witnesses-when he was doing the investigating--that he thought Zimmerman was lying? He just seemed to do a 180.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Blue_Roses (Reply #11)

Tue Jul 16, 2013, 07:00 AM

12. Well, I

 

missed that part, but his investigation gives me problems. Especially his statements to the FBI investigation about gangs and goons having the same clothing attire as Trayvon Martin. He claimed Zimmerman knew about the clothing or colors of gangs in the area. I don't recall Zimmerman mentioning anything about that in relation to Trayvon Martin and why he felt Martin was suspicious. I thought he was talking about accounts of other incidents with breakins relating to Black youths. That would have been related to racial profiling and not gangs or their colors. Only Serino would have information about identifying gangs and their symbols, because he is a detective. The only reason I can think of mentioning that, would lead someone away from thinking it was racial profiling by using the symbols or gangs and their activity. It just make you suspicious that he would be helping Zimmerman explain the weaknesses in his defense, instead of just taking statements. as the prosecution, I would have really interrogated him, because he was very favorable to Zimmerman and more hostile to the prosecution's case.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to John2 (Reply #12)

Tue Jul 16, 2013, 07:33 AM

13. he sure was...

I was surprised how much he helped the defense. I listened and read the transcript of the "questioning" that he and Singleton did and I thought they sounded like they knew Zimmerman was lying. Then when he took the stand I was surprised at the way he and Singleton leaned toward helping the defense.

This trial was a farce.I hope we get to the truth of it all soon. I feel for the Martin family--especially, Trayvon's mother.


Here is some info about why he possibly changed stories:

"Serino was reassigned to the overnight shift soon after video and audio interrogation tapes were released last summer that revealed he had doubts about Zimmerman's version of events in the fatal shooting of 17-year-old unarmed teenager Trayvon Martin last Feb. 26.

Zimmerman, a former neighborhood watch captain, said Martin was acting suspicious and soon became confrontational when Zimmerman encountered him walking through the subdivision where Zimmerman lived. In audio tapes recorded three days after the shooting, Zimmerman claimed he was attacked by Martin and shot him in self-defense.

But in the Feb. 29 recordings, Serino openly doubted the story.

"You ever hear of Murphy's Law," asks Serino. "This person was not doing anything bad. You know the name of the person that died?"

"Tavon," responds Zimmerman. "Trayvon," Serino shot back. "Trayvon Martin" responds Zimmerman. "Trayvon Benjamin Martin. ... He was 17. ... A kid with a future," said Serino. "In his possession we found a can of ice tea and a bag of Skittles. And $40 in cash. Not the goon."

Serino then questioned the extent of Zimmerman's injuries, telling him that despite the broken nose and two lacerations on the back of his head, his injuries did not seem consistent with someone involved in a life-or-death struggle..."

more ...

http://abcnews.go.com/m/story?id=17767789&ref=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com%2F

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Blue_Roses (Reply #13)

Tue Jul 16, 2013, 01:19 PM

16. Randi Rhodes....who's boyfriend is an Attorney as well

pointed out that she had never heard of the police testifying for the Defense not the State. I thought that was a brilliant observation.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to VanillaRhapsody (Reply #16)

Tue Jul 16, 2013, 01:22 PM

17. +1

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Spitfire of ATJ (Reply #9)

Tue Jul 16, 2013, 08:40 AM

14. Here's an article that explains that

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/jurisprudence/2013/07/zimmerman_trial_juror_b37_why_did_prosecutors_let_her_on_the_trayvon_martin.single.html

Jury selection is not jury selection. “It’s de-selection” explains Howard Lidsky, a board-certified criminal-law attorney in Florida. “It’s impossible to make a judgment about jury selection unless you’re seated in the room,” he says. “You have 18 people in the box and just six strikes. You may dislike a juror, but you might like the person sitting next to him even less.” Ken White is a former prosecutor and criminal defense attorney at Brown White & Newhouse in Los Angeles. He blogs at Popehat.com. He makes the same point: “Even if one prospective juror seems bad, you have a limited number of peremptories, and they may have judged the others as even worse. What was the alternative?”

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Shrek (Reply #14)

Tue Jul 16, 2013, 03:09 PM

22. I'm telling you, the State wanted to lose this case.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Spitfire of ATJ (Reply #9)

Tue Jul 16, 2013, 02:11 PM

19. A lot about the prosecution just doesn't make sense. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Skwmom (Reply #19)

Tue Jul 16, 2013, 02:21 PM

21. It makes perfect sense if you consider their goal was to lose.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LovingA2andMI (Original post)

Tue Jul 16, 2013, 02:08 PM

18. How about forgetting it was Zimmerman not Trayvon Martin who was on trial...

When AC asked about who was screaming she said only one juror wasn't sure if it was Z or TM (everyone else thought it was Z) she said that juror just "wanted to give everybody absolute out of being guilty." Hmmm. I didn't know TM was on trial.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LovingA2andMI (Original post)

Tue Jul 16, 2013, 02:14 PM

20. The sheer gall of that juror to even say that it was "unfortunate for both individuals"...

...pisses me off.

"Unfortunate" for Zimmerman. Poor baby fake-cop Georgie.

And Travyon Martin is dead. How "unfortunate" for him.



This juror had her mind made up the minute she walked in the courtroom.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread