B37..There She Goes Again

After the trial and acquittal of George Zimmerman, there was a juror that has made splashes in the media. She is only known as B37 and her jury selection video is here:  (http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/jurisprudence/2013/07/zimmerman_trial_juror_b37_why_did_prosecutors_let_her_on_the_trayvon_martin.html) There is also now talk of unsupervised visits that she had with family and that could sway her decision by a simple comment. Another thing that makes me leery of her is that she said that even though the Stand Your Ground Law wasn’t given as a defense, they still considered simply: did Zimmerman feel as if his life were in danger? She also said that his history of reporting black men to the police wasn’t looked at in the deliberations and further, she denied that race was even a part of it though George is recorded saying: Those fucking punks they always get away. She also said that Martin was responsible for  his own death and that Zimmerman should continue as a neighborhood watchman because he “learned his lesson”

Gail Brashers-Krug, a former federal prosecutor and law professor, is currently a criminal defense attorney in Iowa. She also jumped back when B37 said, ”You never get all the information.“ “That's exactly what a defense attorney loves to hear,” says Brashers-Krug. “That's reasonable doubt, right there. If I were a prosecutor, that would make me extremely nervous about her.” She adds that B37’s devotion to animals might raise flags for her as well. “The animal thing is weird. She doesn't know how many animals she has, and she mentions her animals far, far more than her two daughters. She strikes me as eccentric and unpredictable. I never, ever want eccentric, unpredictable people on a jury.”

Brashers-Krug has another reservation about seating B37: “She really wants to be a juror. She seems to be going out of her way to minimize the disruptive effect of a multiweek trial on her life. Jurors rarely do that. She is also taking pains to avoid saying anything particularly sympathetic to either side. Both sides tend to be very skeptical of jurors who are particularly eager to serve on high-profile cases. Often they have their own agendas, or are attention-seekers.”

This is what I think we’re seeing and how the juror wasn’t even dismissed is beyond me especially when she says “you never have all the information” “That's exactly what a defense attorney loves to hear,” says Brashers-Krug. “That's reasonable doubt, right there. If I were a prosecutor, that would make me extremely nervous about her.” She adds that B37’s devotion to animals might raise flags for her as well. “The animal thing is weird. She doesn't know how many animals she has, and she mentions her animals far, far more than her two daughters. She strikes me as eccentric and unpredictable. I never, ever want eccentric, unpredictable people on a jury.”

After the verdict we hear that she had a book deal, which was thwarted by a determined tweeter and for that I am thankful. This is a woman who wasted no time in exploiting a tragedy of a young man’s murder to talk about this case and get her 15 minutes. Now the fact that they were left UNSUPERVISED, makes me think that this is grounds for a mistrial/ Whether or not this jury tampering will be investigated by Rick Scott remains to be seen. He’s a Tea Party darling that doesn’t care that a kid was killed, let alone a black kid. The prosecutors dropped the ball when they didn’t use one of their free passes to dismiss her.