Well, since we have had a chance to digest the results of the Zimmerman trial, I wanted to share my thoughts. Some of my more liberal and conservative friends might want to pay attention. You could learn something, especially from someone who just served as a juror a month ago…
Some of you may have looked at my comments in my last blog about serving on a jury and think that there was overwhelming evidence that the defendant caused the accident. In truth, because the trial was a CIVIL case, there only had to have been enough evidence that it was more likely that the defendant caused the accident than the plaintiff did. In that instance, the threshold was clearly met in my eyes and in the eyes of my fellow jurors. We made that decision within 20 minutes of deliberations and spent the remaining 3+ hours trying to calculate damages. Personal note: And the final 4 judgments weren’t easy. On the final damage award payout (future monetary damages for the female plaintiff), I was the holdout. My fellow jurors wanted to award her more money than I was willing to. I realized that certainly, the female plaintiff needed more money than her husband because she was in worse health post-accident. But I was not willing to go all the way my fellow jurors were going. After a back-and-forth of 15 minutes, we finally agreed that the damages should be 3/4 ths of what the prosecutor was asking.
By contrast, the George Zimmerman trial was a CRIMINAL case. The burden of proof for the prosecution to win the case was even higher than a civil trial. The prosecution had to prove BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT that Zimmerman was guilty of 2nd degree murder. Which leads to my first point…
(1) THE PROSECUTION’S CASE WAS BASED MORE ON THEORY THAN FACTS… AND WAS FLAWED FROM THE GET GO: It was a fuster cluck of a case that the prosecution put together. In most cases, the prosecution lays out what they believed happened, has a set of facts they put forward, and have witnesses to affirm the facts and theory. In this case, however, a theory was all they had to go on. The defense appeared to have more facts than the prosecution, and that is never a good thing if a conviction is what you are trying for. The witnesses never really backed up the theory of what happened because they were not there at the scene. Some of the witnesses were not credible. Some of the witnesses were more helpful to the defense than the prosecution. One witness was so disastrous that the prosecution took an unusual step of asking the judge to strike at least some of the testimony. But something the prosecution failed to do in their case really should have chaffed everyone…
(2) THE PROSECUTION FAILED TO PROVIDE ALL THE EVIDENCE TO THE DEFENSE IN A TIMELY FASHION BEFORE THE TRIAL: This issue was perhaps the most damaging blow to the prosecution. The prosecution failed to give the defense all the evidence they had. The defense only knew of this when someone from the DA’s office alerted them to this fact (that person, BTW, was fired as the jury began their deliberations on an allegedly unrelated issue). In the aftermath, the Prosecuting attorneys could still face sanctions for their actions.
Personal note: In the trial I was a juror in, the defense had a witness who failed to provide the prosecution with all the evidence they had. The judge laid into the witness when we were not in the room—we found out after the trial what happened. So, it goes both ways.
By the end of the trial, the prosecution realized that they had failed to prove 2nd-degree murder. They also had bungled the evidence so badly, they were facing charges themselves. Barring jury nullification, they knew they were going to lose the case. That is why an unusual step was taken...
(3) IT’S NOT A GOOD SIGN WHEN THE PROSECUTION REQUESTED ADDITIONAL LESSER CHARGES SHOULD BE FILED AFTER BOTH SIDES PRESENTED THEIR CASES: When a Manslaughter charge was added after both sides rested their cases, I was surprised. Normally, after both sides present their cases, charges can be dropped against a defendant. In the civil case I served as a juror in, the case against one of the defendants was dismissed. So, while it is legally possible for addition charges to be filed, the fact that a manslaughter charge was added should have told everyone the case for 2nd-degree murder was lost, and the prosecution was hoping for ANY sort of conviction.
The Defense’s case wasn’t exactly a thing of beauty, either. But all the defense had to do was prove reasonable doubt that 2nd-degree murder did not take place—and it was a job that was proven easier when a certain person failed to take the witness stand…
(4) THE FACT THAT GEORGE ZIMMERMAN DIDN’T TAKE THE STAND WAS A KEY POINT THAT INDICATED THE DEFENSE HAD DONE ENOUGH TO WIN THE CASE: Normally in a murder case, the defendant will only take the stand if the case is in such a desperate state that the defendant has nothing to lose. Despite my friend, John Brown, saying Zimmerman was a coward for not taking the stand, George took the smart advice his council provided and declined to take the stand. At that point, the defense knew they had established reasonable doubt. Having Zimmerman take the stand to publicly state his side of the story might have helped his, but it also would have given the prosecution a last-ditch chance to discredit Zimmerman completely and potentially prove their side of the case. So, while cowardly, it was the correct move.
(5) THE JUDGE’S INSTRUCTIONS COMPLICATED THE DELIBERATIONS… AND MAY HAVE LED TO THE NOT GUILTY VERDICT: The Judges’ instructions were very complicated to say the least. The jury had to considered so much, and the confusion eventually led to the jury asking for clarification about the manslaughter charge. That should have been the clue that 2nd-degree murder was no longer being considered by the jury. In the end, the combination of factors was too much to hope for a conviction. Plus, the laws (as bad as they may be) pretty much assured that the jury return a not guilty verdict.
Let me be clear: a NOT GUILTY verdict DOES NOT ALWAYS mean the jury thinks that the defendant is INNOCENT. It just means that the state failed to prove it’s case. In this case, Zimmerman was not innocent. Anybody with a reasonable thought process knows Zimmerman made mistakes as well that night. But reasonable people should also know there was not enough to convict. See the OJ case as an example. BTW, OJ lost the wrongful death suit filed against him by the Goldman and Brown family 2 years after his murder trial, which leads me to another point…
(6) A WRONGFUL DEATH LAWSUIT AGAINST ZIMMERMAN IS STILL COMING: Treyvon’s parents will almost certainly file a wrongful death suit against George Zimmerman and the HOA Zimmerman worked with. With this suit being a civil case, the threshold for the plaintiff’s to prove their case is lower. Will the Martin family win the case? I think there’s a good chance. I could also see an out-of-court settlement if all parties agree to it.
You will notice race has yet to be mentioned until now. A Hispanic man shoots an 17-year old African-American male, and several leaders in the Civil Rights movement used the case as a lightning rod for screaming racism. But…
(7) FILING CIVIL RIGHTS CHARGES AGAINST GEORGE ZIMMERMAN WILL BE A HIGH THRESHOLD: AG Eric Holder knows that, unless he has videotape evidence of the incident, he is going to have a nearly impossible task of proving George Zimmerman committed a hate crime. If anything, one could make an argument that Treyvon was violating George’s civil rights in allegedly beating him up before the fatal moment. If Holder files Civil Rights charges, the impression by most reasonable-minded US voters will be he did so only under pressure from Sharpton, Jackson, Jealous, Bond, and other black leaders. Which is why I ultimately believe Holder is letting the Civil Rights team at the Justice Department take a look, just to prove he is pursuing the idea. But, the Justice Department cannot file charges without risking a political backlash from political opponents who are screaming that the Justice Department is doing nothing about Fast & Furious, Benghazi, the IRS, and Gov’t leaks to the media.
In the end, we are going to have to deal with the after-effects of this trial for a long time. Only when we move past this case can we begin a healing process desperately needed in this country…
