The Orange Mane -  a Denver Broncos Fan Community  

Go Back   The Orange Mane - a Denver Broncos Fan Community > Jibba Jabba > War, Religion and Politics Thread
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Chat Room Mark Forums Read



Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 06-14-2013, 05:27 PM   #1
txtebow
WARRIOR
 
Crash the plane HOGAN!!!

Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Big D
Posts: 1,880

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Requiem
Default Trayvon Martin justice group member tries to get onto George Zimmerman jury

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/nati...icle-1.1370906

A member of a pro-Travyon Martin group was unmasked Wednesday as he tried to get on the Florida jury in George Zimmerman痴 trial for shooting the unarmed teen.

A white male potential juror identified on his Facebook page as Jerry Counelis gave long, rambling answers about his impartiality when asked basic questions by attorneys.


Read more: http://www.nydailynews.com/news/nati...#ixzz2WEhmaSmb
txtebow is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old 06-14-2013, 05:28 PM   #2
cutthemdown
A verbis ad verbera
 
cutthemdown's Avatar
 

Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 37,267
Default

He should be prosecuted for lying under oath.
cutthemdown is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-14-2013, 05:32 PM   #3
txtebow
WARRIOR
 
Crash the plane HOGAN!!!

Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Big D
Posts: 1,880

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Requiem
Default

I guarantee a conviction despite the fact that Trayvon had abrasions to his fists, while Zimmerman had a broken nose and multiple abrasions to his face and head.....
txtebow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-14-2013, 06:22 PM   #4
txtebow
WARRIOR
 
Crash the plane HOGAN!!!

Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Big D
Posts: 1,880

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Requiem
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by cutthemdown View Post
He should be prosecuted for lying under oath.
indeed.
txtebow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-14-2013, 11:51 PM   #5
cutthemdown
A verbis ad verbera
 
cutthemdown's Avatar
 

Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 37,267
Default

I think it ends in a hung jury myself. The defense will be able to find one person who says self defense. Then it will come down to whether they have a 2nd trial.
cutthemdown is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-15-2013, 04:23 PM   #6
kappys
Ring of Famer
 
kappys's Avatar
 
的t will be of little avail to the

Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 4,241
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by cutthemdown View Post
He should be prosecuted for lying under oath.
Hmm - I read the article and I'm not sure where it says he was lying.
kappys is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-16-2013, 05:52 AM   #7
cutthemdown
A verbis ad verbera
 
cutthemdown's Avatar
 

Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 37,267
Default

They asked if he could be impartial and he said yes. Then it was shown he already made prejudicial statements to the contrary.
cutthemdown is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-16-2013, 08:25 PM   #8
kappys
Ring of Famer
 
kappys's Avatar
 
的t will be of little avail to the

Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 4,241
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by cutthemdown View Post
They asked if he could be impartial and he said yes. Then it was shown he already made prejudicial statements to the contrary.
That's still not lying - asking someone if they can be impartial is asking them to make a judgement call on themselves
kappys is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-16-2013, 08:41 PM   #9
cutthemdown
A verbis ad verbera
 
cutthemdown's Avatar
 

Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 37,267
Default

You must come from the Obama school of the truth.
cutthemdown is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-16-2013, 09:05 PM   #10
kappys
Ring of Famer
 
kappys's Avatar
 
的t will be of little avail to the

Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 4,241
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by cutthemdown View Post
You must come from the Obama school of the truth.
Well the same school of truth as most of our elected officials.

At any rate he shouldn't be on the jury - I don't think the guy perjured himself and should be open to criminal charges either.
kappys is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-16-2013, 09:31 PM   #11
cutthemdown
A verbis ad verbera
 
cutthemdown's Avatar
 

Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 37,267
Default

I'd have to see exactly everything asked. If they asked have you made any statements about the case, and he said no, then yes that is perjury.
cutthemdown is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-17-2013, 05:36 AM   #12
kappys
Ring of Famer
 
kappys's Avatar
 
的t will be of little avail to the

Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 4,241
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by cutthemdown View Post
I'd have to see exactly everything asked. If they asked have you made any statements about the case, and he said no, then yes that is perjury.
If they did that - there is nothing in the article that suggests they did. If the question was only "can you be impartial" then there is no opening for perjury
kappys is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-17-2013, 06:16 AM   #13
cutthemdown
A verbis ad verbera
 
cutthemdown's Avatar
 

Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 37,267
Default

I've sat through this stuff before Kappy. Just because we don't get all the questions you can see what happened. To disqualify a juror you need a reason. The fact they showed him something he wrote, asked if that was him, and he said yes shows before that they asked him that question.

Kappy I work as a paralegal and know what i am talking about here.

The lawyer probably asked him something like have you made statements to anyone, or on social media. Then after he answered no the lawyers showed the judge the statements, then showed him the statements and asked if he wrote them. He was caught, said yes and was excused.

You wouldn't show him those statements until you ask him. It wouldn't be a story unless he had lied trying to get on the jury. It's a very reasonable assumption.

Neither side wants a person like that on a jury.
cutthemdown is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-17-2013, 03:27 PM   #14
Garcia Bronco
Hokie since 1993
 

Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Denver, CO
Posts: 47,096

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Tom Jackson
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by kappys View Post
That's still not lying - asking someone if they can be impartial is asking them to make a judgement call on themselves
Either way...would you want that person on a jury to decide YOUR innocence or guilt? I would think not. We can't have jurors that have a conflict of interest. It taints the system. We'd lose faith in it (even more so than where you think it's at).


On the topic itself and based on the facts I have read, I can't see how Zimmerman is convicted. You never know though.
Garcia Bronco is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-17-2013, 04:37 PM   #15
cutthemdown
A verbis ad verbera
 
cutthemdown's Avatar
 

Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 37,267
Default

Kappy doesn't think the guy should be on the jury, he just thinks its not officially perjury. I think technically it probably was but we would have to see the complete transcript. They don't really say what questions he was asked and what his answers were. Only that after questioned he was shown his own words and asked if they were his. He then said yes and was excused.

Its important because defense only gets so many exclusions but I don't know what Fla law is, how many etc. They will want to save some just to get blacks off the jury. Obviously the woman who admitted her Church is in Sanford you want off. You don't want people like that on this jury lol. But its a sticky situation you can't just exclude someone because of race. But for going to church in the city it happened, you could maybe say its for bias.
cutthemdown is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-17-2013, 04:38 PM   #16
cutthemdown
A verbis ad verbera
 
cutthemdown's Avatar
 

Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 37,267
Default

jury selection is so important. You win and lose trials right here.
cutthemdown is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-17-2013, 04:49 PM   #17
kappys
Ring of Famer
 
kappys's Avatar
 
的t will be of little avail to the

Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 4,241
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Garcia Bronco View Post
Either way...would you want that person on a jury to decide YOUR innocence or guilt? I would think not. We can't have jurors that have a conflict of interest. It taints the system. We'd lose faith in it (even more so than where you think it's at).


On the topic itself and based on the facts I have read, I can't see how Zimmerman is convicted. You never know though.
This guy shouldn't be on the jury - but its going to be very challenging to find people who haven't heard about the case. The next question then is have you formed an opinion? Based on my experience people form opinions almost instantly to news - regardless of how little a news snipit they get. That doesn't mean their opinions are set in stone or not subject to change as the entire story is revealed.

I haven't followed this case as closely as many - based on what I have heard I think the verdict is likely to depend a lot on whether the jury feels Zimmerman initiated the conflict with Martin and thus Martin's actions were the ones that were excusable as self defense.
kappys is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-17-2013, 10:37 PM   #18
cutthemdown
A verbis ad verbera
 
cutthemdown's Avatar
 

Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 37,267
Default

The guy most likely lied and said no I have not made any statements. Then the lawyers showed him the statements he made and asked if they were his. Boom he's caught that's how its done in court. You don't show the person something before you have caught him in the lie.
cutthemdown is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-23-2013, 05:04 PM   #19
nyuk nyuk
Guest
 

Posts: n/a
Default

The left are so confident in their righteousness, they try to rig everything as they go along.
  Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes



Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 01:33 AM.


Denver Broncos