So, Juror B37 really saw this trial as an opportunity to cash in on Trayvon Martin’s murder and the subsequent media circus laughingly called a “trial”. Little tell-tale remarks clearly show her bias towards George Zimmerman: “…I think his [Zimmerman’s] heart was in the right place. It just went terribly wrong.” “I think George got in a little bit too deep, which he shouldn’t have been there.” In fact, she refers to Zimmerman twice as “George” if you listen to her comments, although she it seems to be in her personality to refer to people she doesn’t know by their first names if you listen to her comments.
And from her comments you get the clear impression that this a well-to-do elitist white property owner who would welcome Zimmerman as a neighbor if “he didn’t go too far”—like killing an innocent male black teen on his way back to his dad’s girlfriend’s condo where he was visiting? She believes that although Zimmerman shouldn’t have gotten out of his car, she clearly believes his story that he was attacked by Trayvon Martin with no other evidence than Zimmerman’s testimony, because I think she believes this is what black men do when they’re being followed. She’s convinced it was Zimmerman’s voice on the 911 tape calling for help, because why would Trayvon be calling for help just because he’s locked in a death struggle with a scary dude who’s been stalking him for unknown reasons?
She also amply proves that, as I’ve always suspected, when a judge orders a panel to disregard certain testimony in court, at least some jurors ignore that order. She says she was influenced by the important testimony from Sanford Police Detective Chris Serino that he had found Zimmerman to be “truthful”, a remark that the judge ordered the panel to disregard. Juror B37 claims she based her decision on that testimony, which I think would and should invalidate the verdict and call for a re-trial—IF there were any justice in Florida.
She also condescendingly describes Trayvon’s friend, Rachel Jantel, “not credible” and felt sorry for her because Jantel seemed “to feel inadequate because of her poor education and communication skills” (as described in a NPR report). Juror B37 would have us believe that she is so intuitive and insightful that she can read into the minds of both George Zimmerman and Rachel Jantel and thoroughly know their characters. What a white elitist snob she is.
One of her most telling comments which clearly shows why she lives in Florida: “I think he has every right to carry a gun. I think everyone has a right to carry a gun.” You can bet this woman is a Republican who supports the Stand Your Ground law. The juror admits both she and her husband had concealed weapon permits but she let hers lapse.
The most telling comment of all was that she believed Zimmerman was not guilty from the start. And yet the prosecution allowed this person to sit on the jury which was assigned to judge Zimmerman impartially and on the facts. It was a setup from the beginning by the Florida legal system which doesn’t recognize that black citizens deserve justice, too. At least the proposed book deal that she hoped to use to capitalize on her verdict has been cancelled. I guess there is still some justice in Florida after all.
As I was upset by the black jury that acquitted O.J. Simpson of a double murder, I find no difference between that panel and this white one that acquitted Zimmerman of the shooting of Trayvon Martin. It serves to prove that miscarriage of justice in this country remains color blind.