• Announcements

    • Zapata

      Abbreviated rules   07/28/2017

      Underdawg did an excellent job of explaining the rules.  Here's the simplified version: Don't insinuate Pedo.  Warning and or timeout for a first offense.  PermaFlick for any subsequent offenses Don't out members.  See above for penalties.  Caveat:  if you have ever used your own real name or personal information here on the forums since, like, ever - it doesn't count and you are fair game. If you see spam posts, report it to the mods.  We do not hang out in every thread 24/7 If you see any of the above, report it to the mods by hitting the Report button in the offending post.   We do not take action for foul language, off-subject content, or abusive behavior unless it escalates to persistent stalking.  There may be times that we might warn someone or flick someone for something particularly egregious.  There is no standard, we will know it when we see it.  If you continually report things that do not fall into rules #1 or 2 above, you may very well get a timeout yourself for annoying the Mods with repeated whining.  Use your best judgement. Warnings, timeouts, suspensions and flicks are arbitrary and capricious.  Deal with it.  Welcome to anarchy.   If you are a newbie, there are unwritten rules to adhere to.  They will be explained to you soon enough.  

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Happy Jack

Time to play SA Jury

Guilty ?  

15 members have voted

  1. 1. If the jury adheres to a strict interpretation of Reasonable Doubt

    • Not Guilty of all charges
      7
    • Guilty of 2nd degree murder
      2
    • Guilty of Manslaughter
      6
    • Hung Jury
      0
    • Mistrial for some other reason
      0
  2. 2. If the jury leans more on an emotional sense of justice

    • Not Guilty of all charges
      1
    • Guilty of 2nd degree murder
      5
    • Guilty of Manslaughter
      6
    • Hung Jury
      3
    • Mistrial for some other reason
      0


Recommended Posts

I'm waiting for the poll to be edited to include a choice of "Just Happy Jack starting another thread to make sure all eyes are on him."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well - Happy did step up with a poll - even though he somehow made it biased. Leave it to Happy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I missed the option for "I am not actually ON the jury, so I've have not heard all of the testimony and arguments and instructions from the judge so maybe I'm not qualified to say."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I missed the option for "I am not actually ON the jury, so I've have not heard all of the testimony and arguments and instructions from the judge so maybe I'm not qualified to say."

. Even the jury hasn't heard the instructions After lunch :)

 

I actually agree with your point

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I missed the option for "I am not actually ON the jury, so I've have not heard all of the testimony and arguments and instructions from the judge so maybe I'm not qualified to say."

. Even the jury hasn't heard the instructions After lunch :)

 

I actually agree with your point

 

You're both smart boys.. You can figure it out. Vote afer lunch.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest One of Five

well, duh..

 

 

 

I missed the option for "I am not actually ON the jury, so I've have not heard all of the testimony and arguments and instructions from the judge so maybe I'm not qualified to say."

. Even the jury hasn't heard the instructions After lunch :)

I actually agree with your point

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I missed the option for "I am not actually ON the jury, so I've have not heard all of the testimony and arguments and instructions from the judge so maybe I'm not qualified to say."

 

since when does one have to qualified around here, in order to offer an opinion?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mark me down for "Basically, I don't give a shit..."

 

I'm sure it's largely due to the fact that I was one of a Fortunate Few of Americans who happened to be off on my boat in the Bahamas when the shooting and it's aftermath occurred, but I continue to be absolutely astounded by the attention this case has received...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I submit that we will see a Hung Jury. Lots of folks on either side will hit the talk shows, decrying the injustice. Another prosecutor will handle the second trial.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Personally I think not guilty based on the evidence I have seen and heard. Leaning for manslaughter from the jury. Not sure why maybe the OJ decision is clouding my perception

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

I missed the option for "I am not actually ON the jury, so I've have not heard all of the testimony and arguments and instructions from the judge so maybe I'm not qualified to say."

. Even the jury hasn't heard the instructions After lunch :)

 

I actually agree with your point

 

You're both smart boys.. You can figure it out. Vote afer lunch.

 

The essence of Happy Jack reasoning. He never let's a lack of information get the way of forming an opinion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

Personally I think not guilty based on the evidence I have seen and heard. Leaning for manslaughter from the jury. Not sure why maybe the OJ decision is clouding my perception

Borrowed from Sol's post in the other thread.

. Really? This is a thread on PA you are entitled to your opinion don't try and lecture me on mine.

 

I have seen enough to have reasonable doubt that Zimmerman committed the crimes he is charged with. Anything I might not have seen does not matter

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

 

Personally I think not guilty based on the evidence I have seen and heard. Leaning for manslaughter from the jury. Not sure why maybe the OJ decision is clouding my perception

Borrowed from Sol's post in the other thread.

. Really? This is a thread on PA you are entitled to your opinion don't try and lecture me on mine.

 

I have seen enough to have reasonable doubt that Zimmerman committed the crimes he is charged with. Anything I might not have seen does not matter

 

You must never have received a lecture, if you think my post constitutes one.

 

I am saving that last sentence. It's golden.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Personally I think not guilty based on the evidence I have seen and heard. Leaning for manslaughter from the jury. Not sure why maybe the OJ decision is clouding my perception

Borrowed from Sol's post in the other thread.

. Really? This is a thread on PA you are entitled to your opinion don't try and lecture me on mine.

 

I have seen enough to have reasonable doubt that Zimmerman committed the crimes he is charged with. Anything I might not have seen does not matter

You must never have received a lecture, if you think my post constitutes one.

 

I am saving that last sentence. It's golden.

it's fact our system operates on reasonable doubt once you have that the rest is simply window dressing.

 

If the jury has a straw poll and they all vote guilty or innocent. That's it they do not have to review any of the evidence.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Personally I think not guilty based on the evidence I have seen and heard. Leaning for manslaughter from the jury. Not sure why maybe the OJ decision is clouding my perception

Borrowed from Sol's post in the other thread.

. Really? This is a thread on PA you are entitled to your opinion don't try and lecture me on mine.

 

I have seen enough to have reasonable doubt that Zimmerman committed the crimes he is charged with. Anything I might not have seen does not matter

You must never have received a lecture, if you think my post constitutes one.

 

I am saving that last sentence. It's golden.

it's fact our system operates on reasonable doubt once you have that the rest is simply window dressing.

 

If the jury has a straw poll and they all vote guilty or innocent. That's it they do not have to review any of the evidence.

 

Agreed. But I would be surprised if, after the jury having sat through this trial, it comes down to a straw poll.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Really! . I would expect one of the first things they did was elect a Forman. Then I would expect the Foreman to take a quick poll to see where everyone stood.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am reminded how awful deliberations were every time I was on a jury. There's always the leader wanna be who tries to organize and steer everybody his own way, the stupid one who didn't listen to a single thing during the trial, the emotional one who can't stop talking about how they "feel", the frigging genius who is smarter than everyone else - just ask him, the sarcastic one who turns every statement into an insult...............hey..............sounds like PA.........

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Really! . I would expect one of the first things they did was elect a Forman. Then I would expect the Foreman to take a quick poll to see where everyone stood.

I agree they likely took a quick poll as soon as they hit the room for deliberations. I meant I doubt that this will be over with the straw poll.

 

I might also add the following items -

 

If Z is convicted (either charge), those who feel he should have been acquitted will scream that the jury decided based on emotion, without listening to the facts/evidence. They'll add in that the verdict was more of an effort to avoid riots than justice served.

 

If Z is acquitted, those who feel he should have been convicted will cry it is evidence of the inherent racism of Sanford. They'll add in that the trial was held only to put on a show that they cared about seeking what happened that night.

 

Either way, this ain't over.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Really! . I would expect one of the first things they did was elect a Forman. Then I would expect the Foreman to take a quick poll to see where everyone stood.

I agree they likely took a quick poll as soon as they hit the room for deliberations. I meant I doubt that this will be over with the straw poll.

 

I might also add the following items -

 

If Z is convicted (either charge), those who feel he should have been acquitted will scream that the jury decided based on emotion, without listening to the facts/evidence. They'll add in that the verdict was more of an effort to avoid riots than justice served.

 

If Z is acquitted, those who feel he should have been convicted will cry it is evidence of the inherent racism of Sanford. They'll add in that the trial was held only to put on a show that they cared about seeking what happened that night.

 

Either way, this ain't over.

 

I won't be surprised by any outcome outlined - with just 6 people on the jury, it's possible a bit of bonding amongst them and a persuasive person or 2 could swing it either way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites