George Zimmerman trial: Lawyers finish jury selection questioning

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

It retraced one statement.. Not all.. There is a lot more going on with Saint Skittles than a little weed smoking and you know that.

You and Smoke somehow don't think I am serious. I hate punks with guns. Zimmerman is the poster child.

[The Nature Boy 4,224]

You and Smoke somehow don't think I am serious. I hate punks with guns. Zimmerman is the poster child.

Ok you hate punks with gunsand think GZi is one... Do you want me to do something to honor that ?

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

Ok you hate punks with gunsand think GZi is one... Do you want me to do something to honor that ?

As long as I can't see it from here, knock yourself out.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

Kind of hard to charge a dead man with assault, which is the charges he would be facing had GZ not capped him..

Had the dog not taken a dump, he would have caught that rabbit. There is really no merit to that argument of yours. Martin may very well have done nothing but stood his ground. You don't know that not to be case. What we do know is that Martin was followed for no reason by a vigilante wannabe cop that ended up killing him and that now stands trial for second degree murder. That would hardly be the case had he been assaulted.

If George has said coons he would have been charged with a hate crime by the FBI....

You say that like it couldn't still happen.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

Under Florida law Zimmerman is permitted to introduce evidence of Martin’s reputation in the community for violence and drug use, even though Zimmerman was not aware of this reputation at the time, as proof that it was Trayvon Martin, and not Zimmerman, who was the aggressor in the conflict.

Hilarious! You know the law better than the judge presiding over the case.

Martin's past has already been ruled inadmissable. Bummer, eh?

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

I call B.S. Show me a reasonable authority for that statement. The defense already retracted its prior statements regarding Travon Martin's violent past. I don't think many folks are going to link occasional marijuana use with violent behavior

You are right to call BS on that. Because it is BS.

During a pre-trial hearing Tuesday afternoon, a Florida judge ruled that George Zimmerman’s defense team cannot use the late Trayvon Martin’s alleged prior marijuana use, school suspension, past fighting, personal text messages or pictures during its opening statement in next month’s high-profile second-degree murder trial.

It retraced one statement.. Not all.. There is a lot more going on with Saint Skittles than a little weed smoking and you know that.

The jury won't. That's what matters. Martin's past issues are not allowed to be introduced at trial. The judge made that ruling a couple weeks back.

[The Nature Boy 4,224]

The jury won't. That's what matters. Martin's past issues are not allowed to be introduced at trial. The judge made that ruling a couple weeks back.

That is not exactly what the judge said and the jury very well may hear stuff that knocks the HALO off Saint Skittles.I believe most of the ruling was correlated to opening arguments. For someone that is always beating his chest about Facts and compression, you seem to struggle nightly with both. Maybe you could have a job at MSNBC.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/05/28/trayvon-martin-text-messages-photos_n_3345629.html

SANFORD, Fla. -- Attorneys won't be able to mention Trayvon Martin's drug use, suspension from school and past fighting during opening statements at the trial of a former neighborhood watch volunteer who fatally shot the teen, a judge ruled Tuesday.

However, Circuit Judge Debra Nelson left open the possibility that the defense could try again later during the trial if it could show relevance

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

I believe most of the ruling was correlated to opening arguments.

I know. I posted that information earlier.

However, Circuit Judge Debra Nelson left open the possibility that the defense could try again later during the trial if it could show relevance

Not likely. Here's what the defense had to say:

"We have a lot of evidence that marijuana use had something to do with the event," O'Mara said. "It could have affected his behavior."

If that's all they got, then they've got nothing.

[Dan and Judy 614]

So, by your comprehension, by asking to have one black person on a jury, when a black child was killed is being prejudiced. Your second part is correct though. How many times have blacks been killed or beaten and the culprits have gotten off? Medger Evans, Sean Bell, and quite a few others.

And you keep missing my point, if a white child was killed, would they have 5 blacks and an asian on the panel? Fair is fair right?

Your last part is true, and what my point of my last post.

If the population is 10% black and there are only 6 jurors then you could just pull names out of a hat and the chances are there would be no blacks on the jury. Out of 12 you would expect 1 black by pure chance.

Do you think we should start a quota system that says there should be 1 black on every jury? or maybe two jurors that are the race of the victim and two that are the race of the accused?

Is it fair that the lawyers do have the right to dismiss jurors they feel are predjudiced against their side?

[The Nature Boy 4,224]

If the population is 10% black and there are only 6 jurors then you could just pull names out of a hat and the chances are there would be no blacks on the jury. Out of 12 you would expect 1 black by pure chance.

Do you think we should start a quota system that says there should be 1 black on every jury? or maybe two jurors that are the race of the victim and two that are the race of the accused?

Is it fair that the lawyers do have the right to dismiss jurors they feel are predjudiced against their side?

I find it ironic that we spend so much time defining something we claim we are trying to make society blind to.

[Karee 4,191]

Do you think we should start a quota system that says there should be 1 black on every jury?

Why not? Affirmative Action for juries.

[The Nature Boy 4,224]

Why not? Affirmative Action for juries.

We must make sure we have quotas, preferences, affirmative action, set asides, black colleges,black clubs, all the while pretending we don't see color in anything..

[Dan and Judy 614]

Hispanic is not a race,

Viva La Raza

[We Keep Receipts 9,238]

If the population is 10% black and there are only 6 jurors then you could just pull names out of a hat and the chances are there would be no blacks on the jury. Out of 12 you would expect 1 black by pure chance.

Do you think we should start a quota system that says there should be 1 black on every jury? or maybe two jurors that are the race of the victim and two that are the race of the accused?

Is it fair that the lawyers do have the right to dismiss jurors they feel are predjudiced against their side?

I think by those numbers, there should have been at least one black juror. But given the racial nature of this case, I wasn't surprised.

But think about this, in the cases I mentioned before, those were mostly black neighborhoods, Mississippi, Atlanta, Alabama, yet all white juries.

[RGinWA 816]

I think with a case like this they should pull in a jury from another country.

The public here is polarized one side or the other.

I think we should all wait for the facts...its all speculation at this point.