Possible Jury MISCONDUCT may overturn Zimmerman Verdict!

[Tropicana]

Sign the Time Sensitive Petition:

http://www.change.org/petitions/angela-b-corey-florida-state-attorney-fourth-judicial-circuit-court-jury-interviews-for-possible-jury-misconduct-in-the-recent-zimmerman-trial-2?utm_campaign=autopublish&utm_medium=facebook&utm_source=share_petition

A post-trial television interview with juror B37 reveals that she may not have been truthful during voir dire (jury selection process) and that there may have been possible intimidation of fellow jurors during the deliberation process.

The failure to include the "Initial Aggressor" definition in the Judge's Jury Instructions combined with the fact that when a juror asked the court to clarify this exact omitted excerpt of the law, the court told the Juror to restate her question, the jury, suspiciously instead of restating the question came back with a NOT GUILTY VERDICT this series of events only heightens our suspicion of misconduct.

Petitioner Andrea Jones has provided us with the section from Florida Law regarding Jury Misconduct. The motion has to be filed within ten days of the verdict.

Florida Rules of Civil Procedure that involves suspicion of jury misconduct and post-trial interviews

(h) Interview of a Juror. A party who believes that grounds for legal challenge to a verdict exist may move for an order permitting an interview of a juror or jurors to determine whether the verdict is subject to the challenge. The motion shall be served within 10 days after rendition of the verdict unless good cause is shown for the failure to make the motion within that time. The motion shall state the name and address of each juror to be interviewed and the grounds for challenge that the party believes may exist. After notice and hearing, the trial judge shall enter an order denying the motion or permitting the interview. If the interview is permitted, the court may prescribe the place, manner, conditions, and scope of the interview.

There are other sections that give definitions of possible misconduct, but this section actually gives the time limit that is very important.

http://www.change.org/petitions/angela-b-corey-florida-state-attorney-fourth-judicial-circuit-court-jury-interviews-for-possible-jury-misconduct-in-the-recent-zimmerman-trial-2?utm_campaign=autopublish&utm_medium=facebook&utm_source=share_petition

[blugiant]

yu kno dat even iff deer was jury misconducts dem nah retry zimmerman cah aff double jeppardee

[SandiF]

To overturn the verdict it'll have to go to an appellate court and they'll have to show actual misconduct in the jury room during the case or after...such as use of outside info. Very unikely a jury misconduct will change the outcome of the verdict..

Neither can Zimmerman be tried again on the same or even similar charges after the jury legitimately voted for an acquittal.

I'm sure you know that...

Sign the Time Sensitive Petition:

http://www.change.org/petitions/angela-b-corey-florida-state-attorney-fourth-judicial-circuit-court-jury-interviews-for-possible-jury-misconduct-in-the-recent-zimmerman-trial-2?utm_campaign=autopublish&utm_medium=facebook&utm_source=share_petition

A post-trial television interview with juror B37 reveals that she may not have been truthful during voir dire (jury selection process) and that there may have been possible intimidation of fellow jurors during the deliberation process.

The failure to include the "Initial Aggressor" definition in the Judge's Jury Instructions combined with the fact that when a juror asked the court to clarify this exact omitted excerpt of the law, the court told the Juror to restate her question, the jury, suspiciously instead of restating the question came back with a NOT GUILTY VERDICT this series of events only heightens our suspicion of misconduct.

Petitioner Andrea Jones has provided us with the section from Florida Law regarding Jury Misconduct. The motion has to be filed within ten days of the verdict.

Florida Rules of Civil Procedure that involves suspicion of jury misconduct and post-trial interviews

(h) Interview of a Juror. A party who believes that grounds for legal challenge to a verdict exist may move for an order permitting an interview of a juror or jurors to determine whether the verdict is subject to the challenge. The motion shall be served within 10 days after rendition of the verdict unless good cause is shown for the failure to make the motion within that time. The motion shall state the name and address of each juror to be interviewed and the grounds for challenge that the party believes may exist. After notice and hearing, the trial judge shall enter an order denying the motion or permitting the interview. If the interview is permitted, the court may prescribe the place, manner, conditions, and scope of the interview.

There are other sections that give definitions of possible misconduct, but this section actually gives the time limit that is very important.


http://www.change.org/petitions/ange...share_petition

[Tropicana]

yu kno dat even iff deer was jury misconducts dem nah retry zimmerman cah aff double jeppardee

From what I understand if there was juror misconduct the case could be re-tried. Apparently it can be tried at the Federal level and also in civil court but for very specific charges.

Something is definitely a miss. You going tell me dat verdict delivered Saturday night, offices closed on Sunday yet within two days she had a book deal. Also, on the evening before the verdict was delivered there was smaddy interviewed on INSISTED that the jury was stuck at 5 - 1. How did he know that? He is another bleeding jackass who is milking his 15 minutes of fame for all it's worth.

How did he know there was one holdout....there was.

The first troubling sign was the announcement Monday that Juror B37 had signed a deal (later rescinded) with literary agent Sharlene Martin to market her story. The timeline proffered was that the juror had reached out to Martin on Sunday; if true, that would mean that, on a day when scores of Americans were in church struggling to make sense of the verdict, B37 was already working furiously to turn the death of Trayvon Martin into a personal profit center. Such a bent would be in keeping with the personality profile offered by Gail Brashers-Krug, a federal prosecutor and law professor turned criminal defense attorney, who after viewing B37’s voir dire told Slate:
“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. … 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.” …
Martin, the literary agent, claimed that B37 had been referred to her “by a high ranking producer at one of the morning shows.” That means the juror would have to have established a relationship with a national morning-TV producer, asked said producer to recommend an agent, contacted Martin, and agreed to a deal with her – all within a single Sunday. …
Adding to the concern over potential juror misconduct, Zimmerman neighbor and friend Frank Taaffe had appeared on both the FOX News Channel and HLN on Saturday a few hours before the verdict was read, and had claimed to possess inside knowledge that the jury was at that moment polling 5 to 1 in favor of acquitting the defendant, with one juror holding out for manslaughter. At 2:48 PM on HLN, Taaffe at first merely claimed he was “very comfortable” in this assessment and “firmly believe[d]” it was the case; prodded by host Nancy Grace to explain how he had arrived at his belief, he went even further, stating, “I know it’s 5 to 1.” …
[T]hree days later, when CNN’s Cooper aired the second part of his interview with B37, she confirmed that the penultimate jury poll had indeed been 5 to 1, with one juror holding out for manslaughter. …
[W]e should be looking deeper into the possibility that the verdict was compromised by simple and repeated misconduct –all on the part of jurors who, either on their own or through proxies, couldn’t wait to make contact with the media they purportedly deplore.

[Tropicana]

Can charges be filed against a juror?