home

Zimmerman Judge Announces Jury Will Be Sequestered

By Jeralyn, Section Crime in the News
Posted on Thu Jun 13, 2013 at 12:55:39 PM EST
Tags: George Zimmerman, Trayvon Martin (all tags)
Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

The Judge in the George Zimmerman trial just announced the jury will be sequestered. She said the parties have stipulated the trial will last 2 to 4 weeks.

You can watch a live feed of proceedings here.

< Wednesday Open Thread | TalkLeft Birthday and Open Thread >

  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


    • Display: Sort:
    Zimmerman Judge Announces Jury Will Be Sequestered | 22 comments (22 topical)

    Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

    Help me correct the NYDN (5.00 / 1) (#1)
    by SuzieTampa on Thu Jun 13, 2013 at 08:49:53 PM EST
    In its coverage of the proceedings, the NY Daily News had a story that included background information. It referred to a police dispatcher on GZ's "911" call. I've looked through the forum, and I can't find a link to a primary source saying it was a non-emergency line.

    I know the reporter who wrote the NYDN story and he says he's sure it was a 911 call. Could someone -- I'm looking at you, NMNM -- give me a link to pass on to this reporter?

    I don't think this speaks too well of the (5.00 / 1) (#7)
    by Anne on Fri Jun 14, 2013 at 10:51:57 AM EST
    quality of reporting by the NYDN, when someone has to go begging on a blog for source info that the reporter should have obtained himself before writing his story.

    If he was so "sure," he ought to have the proof to back that up, not just be putting it out there as truth.

    This is unbelievably damning commentary on the abysmal state of "journalism" today.

    Parent

    New York Daily News reporter's fantasy (none / 0) (#2)
    by citizenjeff on Thu Jun 13, 2013 at 09:45:01 PM EST
    The dispatcher who answered Zimmerman's call started by saying: "Sanford Police Department." When 911 operators in Seminole County, Florida answer the phone, they say: "911, Do you need Police, Fire or Medical?"

    Parent
    Listen to the recordings of the calls... (none / 0) (#3)
    by unitron on Thu Jun 13, 2013 at 10:11:28 PM EST
    ...the one George made starts off "Sanford Police Department, this line is being recorded, this is Sean."

    Witness 11's call, and the others, start out "911, do you need police, fire, or medical?"

    Parent

    The Forum (none / 0) (#10)
    by nomatter0nevermind on Fri Jun 14, 2013 at 02:43:28 PM EST
    I've looked through the forum, and I can't find a link to a primary source saying it was a non-emergency line.

    I did post some of this information, including the link to the call logs, on the Forum a long time ago. It's on the board called Media Coverage and Bias. I thought it wasn't really about the call itself, so much as the repetition of a false meme in the media. I'm sorry you had trouble finding it.

    There's also some information about the history of the meme (with links, of course). I really just wanted a place to point people to, explaining how to verify the nature of the call. But I felt I had to justify posting it to that board.

    Parent

    Bragging A Bit (none / 0) (#11)
    by nomatter0nevermind on Fri Jun 14, 2013 at 02:50:18 PM EST
    I might add that that post was very successful. It wasn't long before every regular poster on the Forum was trained to identify the call properly.

    Parent
    Sequester rule a little late (1.00 / 3) (#18)
    by Palli on Sat Jun 15, 2013 at 10:56:45 AM EST
    Ex-judge Zimmerman publishes a rant of a book.  Read it if you have the stomach for this selfish crap.

    http://www.amazon.com/Florida-Zimmerman-Uncovering-Prosecution-ebook/dp/B00DE19P3K/ref=sr_1_1?s=book s&ie=UTF8&qid=1371182470&sr=1-

    I know this site doesn't want to hear this: but anyone who lets a wannabe cop with a gun wander around their neighborhood to keep "undesirables" out is this generation's version of lester maddox (small case intended) and endangers the entire community with inevitable gun violence.


    Pretty broad brush there (none / 0) (#19)
    by cboldt on Sat Jun 15, 2013 at 01:02:36 PM EST
    You assume the conclusion, then make disparaging remarks.  There are quite a few trustworthy people, many of whom "wannabe cops," but for one reason or another don't make the cut.  And going the other way, there are a few bad apples that make it to be cops, but that's a different issue.

    I figure most hired armed security guards are trustworthy, and likely a fraction of them are "wannabe cops," maybe a substantial fraction.  See armored car, private/licensed guards, etc.

    As for Zimmerman, I would think his neighbors have a better handle on his temperament than we do.

    Parent

    zimmerman (none / 0) (#22)
    by morphic on Tue Jun 18, 2013 at 02:44:44 PM EST
      Zimmerman was on his way to the store, when he spotted a suspicious person wandering around and reported it. IMO, if he was a wannabe cop, he could have just gone after the kid right than and there. Why take the chance of him getting away while he's talking on the phone?

    Parent
    2 Things To Add (none / 0) (#4)
    by nomatter0nevermind on Fri Jun 14, 2013 at 02:01:58 AM EST
    First, the call logs identify Zimmerman's 2/26/12 call as non-emergency (p. 46). In the header for each record, after 'call source:', 911 calls have '911', non-emergency calls have 'TEL'.

    Zimmerman's other NEN calls start the same way, sometimes with minor variations in wording.

    Sanford Police Department. This line is being recorded. This is [name].

    You can also verify that all these calls were logged as non-emergency (TEL). See pp. 39-42, 44.

    I love you (none / 0) (#5)
    by SuzieTampa on Fri Jun 14, 2013 at 09:52:35 AM EST
    No, seriously, you're my favorite commenter because you can always quote chapter and verse.

    I appreciate the other responses, but the reporter wasn't going to take my word for it -- even though he worked with me in Florida and knows I have experience with both NEN and 911 calls.

    Parent

    Door swings both ways (5.00 / 3) (#6)
    by cboldt on Fri Jun 14, 2013 at 10:22:35 AM EST
    You might let the reporter know that his word isn't trustworthy either.  He's made false assertions, didn't have "chapter and verse" backup.

    Funny that he makes you prove your contention, but he doesn't need source evidence before he publishes his remarks.

    Nothing he says should be believed.  Everything he says should be fact checked.

    Parent

    I Think My 'Favorite' (none / 0) (#9)
    by nomatter0nevermind on Fri Jun 14, 2013 at 02:10:08 PM EST
    . . . is that GZ was 'self-appointed' as head of the Neighborhood Watch. This wasn't a lie told by someone in a position to know, or a misunderstanding of some true statement. It was just completely made up out of the air. And reporter and after reporter repeated it, never asking who first said it, or how it was known.

    Parent
    Actually, he was very nice to me (none / 0) (#13)
    by SuzieTampa on Fri Jun 14, 2013 at 03:33:53 PM EST
    and I'm sorry he's getting bashed. On a continuing story, reporters don't go back and check out all the facts again. One problem with this case is that so much false information has been put out that it's hard to know what's true -- unless you have time to do original reporting.

    Most reporters are not given that time anymore. Blame the people at the top in corporate media.

    Parent

    I've had similar experience (none / 0) (#14)
    by cboldt on Fri Jun 14, 2013 at 04:43:54 PM EST
    I've interacted with a number of reporters on different subjects, and they are friendly enough.  

    The fact that their reports aren't trustworthy isn't a personal attack, per se.  If they don't have time to research the facts, then they at least have a reason for getting things wrong in the first place.

    Anyway, it isn't necessary to know why the reports are full of falsehoods, if your only mission is to get facts.

    The reporters are the ones (falsely) holding themselves out as truthful.  I have no role to play in rehabilitating their reputation.  I have a hard enough time keeping myself on a straight and narrow path.

    Parent

    But who is "truthful"? (none / 0) (#16)
    by SuzieTampa on Sat Jun 15, 2013 at 09:10:42 AM EST
    Do you think lawyers always speak and write the truth? What about bloggers? People on Twitter?

    I try to get my information from different sources, as close to the original observers or documents as I can.

    Parent

    Everybody makes mistakes (none / 0) (#17)
    by cboldt on Sat Jun 15, 2013 at 10:16:35 AM EST
    No, I don't think lawyers are particularly honest.  My experience has been that they are most adept at creating smoke, confusion, diversion, and non-responsive answers.  For those who can't cut through the smoke, the lawyers are worse than the press.

    Bloggers are a mixed bag when it comes to analysis.  Most get it wrong.  I put them in the same pigeonhole as the press.  Twitter is vapid, except for leads on breaking news.

    All of them are good sources for leads.  If an issue matters to me, which usually is just a question of curiosity, not of any skin in the game, I go to the source files and direct, complete remarks of the players.  If it's a question of legislation, I read the Congressional Record for the proposed law and sometimes, the debates.

    Sounds to me as though follow a similar practice.  I figure for every reader of TalkLeft, or Volokh, or SCOTUSBlog, there are thousands who get their impression entirely from superficial news accounts, and form erroneous view of not only the facts, but also "what the law is."

    Parent

    Hey now... (5.00 / 1) (#20)
    by bmaz on Sat Jun 15, 2013 at 02:54:31 PM EST
    ...we are honest at Emptywheel too!

    Parent
    I Suppose The Poor Man Is Deaf (none / 0) (#8)
    by nomatter0nevermind on Fri Jun 14, 2013 at 02:00:34 PM EST
    . . . and can't figure it out from listening to the calls.

    Parent
    Does Sequestration Make Conviction More Likely? (none / 0) (#12)
    by msaroff on Fri Jun 14, 2013 at 02:57:16 PM EST
    Or less likely?

    An interesting question, (none / 0) (#15)
    by Zorba on Fri Jun 14, 2013 at 06:47:06 PM EST
    which I could see going either way.  If they're grumpy because of being sequestered, might they take it out on the defendant?  But, OTOH, who is it that's sequestering them?  Not the defendant- the state is.  And the prosecution represents the state.  (Read: any governmental jurisdiction here.)  So, might disgruntled jurors be more likely to get angry at the state and take their anger out on the prosecution?  
    Who knows?  I would hope that, however they feel about being sequestered, they will listen to all the evidence, evaluate it reasonably, and render a verdict that is not colored by their feelings, pro or con, about being on a jury and being sequestered.

    Parent
    I thought (none / 0) (#21)
    by DebFrmHell on Tue Jun 18, 2013 at 12:23:28 AM EST
    that they might be more sympathetic to the Defense seeing how MOM has fought to keep identities from the press and actually thought they should be sequestered and their ID's a secret for a few days after the trial.

    It just seems like he is more concerned for their safety than the State.

    Being as IANAL, it would be something I would appreciate in a high profile trial.  No nagging fear if there is an acquittal.

    Parent

    Zimmerman Judge Announces Jury Will Be Sequestered | 22 comments (22 topical)

    Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment