Zimmerman Prosp. Juror E7: “no conclusions,” but posted on pro-Trayvon, anti-Zimmerman site containing threat against Zimmerman
Coffee Party Progressive Facebook page contained pro-Trayvon and anti-Zimmerman postings including one suggested threat against Zimmerman
There were some interesting, and sometimes shocking, revelations about a couple of today’s prospective jurors. One was prospective juror E73, who stated that she doesn’t “own a gun, I can’t conceive of being armed, I can’t conceive of shooting someone.” This might make here an awkward juror on a case that is likely to center on an act of armed self-defense by a lawfully armed civilian. Then there was R39, who simply disbelieved in the legal possibility of killing in lawful self defense, saying that “murder’s murder, no matter what. Even if it’s self-defense. Self-defense doesn’t make it right to kill somebody.” He was promptly dismissed by the Court after the State’s questioning, without any need for the defense to question him.
Far more disturbing, however, was prospective juror E7. Although he claimed, when questioned by the State, that he had arrived at “no conclusion” in this case, after extensive questioning by the defense, this happened:
It would emerge after extensive questioning by the defense that he had, back in March 21, 2012, actively posted on a Facebook page, “Coffee Party Progressives.” This Facebook page was strongly pro-Trayvon, and anti-Zimmerman, with one poster commenting: “I say give the guy [Zimmerman] some skittles and an iced tea and shoot him in the head.” (We do not know whether any of the content captured in the screen captures below is that of E7, only that they represent the content posted on the page on the same date the Court determined E7 had posted.)
It appeared, in short, to be a deliberate attempt by E7 to deceive the court as to his state of mind in order to obtain a seat on the jury, deny Zimmerman his Constitutional rights to a fair and impartial jury, and obtain an improper conviction of Zimmerman for murder in the second degree.
Details of this event drawn from today’s summary of day 3 of the jury selection process:
Prospective Juror E7
E7 is a white male, in his 50’s, who works in the entertainment industry (a musician and a painter) but says he is currently “underemployed” and “things are slow.” At first he was relatively interested in the case, and thought that if the police didn’t arrest Zimmerman, there must have been a reason for that. He feels that someone has a right to defend themselves, and shouldn’t be arrested for doing so lawfully.
Later two things changed that impacted his thoughts and actions. One, Zimmerman was finally arrested. Since the facts of the case didn’t change, He wondered why the arrest didn’t happen in the first place, and believed that he should have been, since he was now. The other thing that changed was how heated the debate became, at which point he consciously decided to avoid the case and not discuss it further.
E7 says he made a conscious decision to avoid the case and not discuss it to prevent “making enemies,” and that he stopped talking about the case after he saw people around him “get so heated.” He believes, he said, that “all these suppositions don’t mean anything,” and that he’s heard recording in the case but didn’t come to any conclusions. He recalled seeing pictures of “alleged” damage to Zimmerman’s head. He said he believed that if someone’s within their right to defend themselves, they shouldn’t be arrested. He said he was aware that there’s a dispute about who is screaming on the 911 audio, but that “I haven’t formed a conclusion.”
#Zimmerman Trial: E7 said "It got just as divided here as between MSNBC and Fox News." Live: http://t.co/wUtyMCaLkq #Trayvon
— Law of Self Defense (@LawSelfDefense) June 12, 2013
#Zimmerman Trial: E7 believes If someone's within their right to defend themselves, they shouldn't be arrested. http://t.co/wUtyMCaLkq
— Law of Self Defense (@LawSelfDefense) June 12, 2013
E7: #Zimmerman "probably should have been arrested." Bases this opinion on the fact that he eventually was arrested. http://t.co/wUtyMCaLkq
— Law of Self Defense (@LawSelfDefense) June 12, 2013
Curiously, after a busy bench conference Judge Nelson addressed E7 directly, asking him if he had made a number of Facebook posts she held in her hand, on a page called “Coffee Party Progressives.” He indicated that he had. Judge Nelson sends him from the room and confirms for the record that he had made a relevant Facebook post on March 21, 2012.
#Zimmerman: Judge asked E7 if he had made a Facebook post on a page called "coffee party progressives." Says he did. http://t.co/wUtyMCaLkq
— Law of Self Defense (@LawSelfDefense) June 12, 2013
NOTE: In the interests of better informing Legal Insurrection readers on this matter, I took the liberty of examining the “Coffee Party Progressives” Facebook page and comments from March 21, 2012. Although the comments are identified by individual name, we have no knowledge that any of the individual commenters are, or are not, prospective jurors in the Martin case, and are not suggesting that to be either the case or not. Nor do we have any knowledge that any of the images below are of the post referenced by Judge Nelson in court today as those posted by prospective juror E7. The images below are provided solely to give Legal Insurrection viewers a sense of the “flavor” of the “Coffee Party Progressives” Facebook page and its commenters.
[Note — The title of this post was changed shortly after publication to better reflect the content of the page in question.]
Andrew F. Branca is a MA lawyer with a long-standing interest in the law of self defense. He authored the seminal book “The Law of Self Defense” (second edition shipping June 22–save 30% and pre-order TODAY!), and manages the Law of Self Defense web site and blog. Many thanks to the Professor for the invitation to guest-blog on the Zimmerman trial here on Legal Insurrection!
DONATE
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
Comments
A progtard “musician and painter” who is “underemployed”. An overpaid bagger at a union infested grocery store.
Another of our enlightened and tolerant betters.
The Professor is going to need to hit a few meetings or call a sponsor. He’s been known to have a bit of a coffee party addiction. 😛
How does someone like this even manage to get called for jury duty on a trial they’ve obviously been following intensely? The odds have to be in lottery-winning territory.
First, about half of Florida is progressive. Secondly, he obviously lied on the questionnaire to make the cut, and was lying on the stand to get selected. Had this worked out, he would have been gloating for the rest of his life. I imagine his name will come out soon enough. People like this can’t help but flap their jaws. The thing that bothers me, is how many others are playing this same game. At some point, it may be prudent to do background checks on these people.
I’m encouraged that the defense found this. Nice work by whomever is doing the investigative work on these prospective jurors.
I grew up in FL in the 50’s and 60’s and I can tell you that it’s not the same state I knew. I think background questions and internet postings/facebook etc and should be part of the questionnaire for potential jurors to answer. And if they are caught in a lie they should be held responsible for it. Also, one last time, can anyone explain to me how a man with no physical damage on his body except one gunshot wound would be yelling “Help” over and over? And the man who shot him is beaten to hell? For some reason I just cannot get that picture in my mind
of Martin beating George and all the time yelling help while George is getting beaten up and is bleeding from several places is silent. If George wanted to just shoot Martin like all the pro hoodie people claim then where did the beating come into play?
Certainly this can help in an appeal an unfavorable ruling if the worst happens? A jury predisposed against Zimmerman? How could that not be appealed?
How long would this last in judge Judy?
This is going to be very painful & the best that can be hoped for is that no Kardahians eventuate.
I continue to be amazed at the number of people who use their real names on social media and believe the rest of the world is too stupid to find them.
Last year, a pissed off jackass tried to kill my husband by repeatedly running him over with his car. Witnesses got the tag number and while my husband was still in the emergency room, I had the perp’s facebook page, the name of his fiancee, his address, phone number and work location. The police were able to build a great case against him and were able to quickly locate him thanks to social media. Now that he’s out on bond, I’m tracking him weekly and gathering evidence of multiple violations of his bail agreement. He’s getting married soon so I’m timing my visit to the DA with his “big day”.
Whoah Sanddog , you could be charged with intimidating a witness or stalking .
Stay away please.
No, I couldn’t.
All I’m doing is periodically monitoring social media sites where information is being posted for millions of people to read. I’m not in contact with the perpetrator or any of his family members either online or offline. If he doesn’t want everyone to know what he’s doing, he shouldn’t be telling the world.
[…] […]
So…….was E7 excused/dismissed by the judge?
He was dismissed.
According to this article: http://www.wftv.com/news/news/local/potential-zimmerman-trial-juror-dismissed-over-fac/nYKDn/
It appears the juror was Jerry P. Counelis from one of the comments listed above.
More to the point, did the Defense have to use one of their “points” against a potential juror they didn’t like? Seems to me Jerry P. Counelis dismissed himself by lying and trying to get on the jury to taint the result; the guy was obviously dreaming of being the hold out for by refusing to vote for an acquittal, or worse, being the final vote for a murder charge.
I would hope the Defense didn’t waste one of their points in the Jury selection process. Or do they actually do that? Obviously my knowledge of serving on a jury, or the its selection process is limited.
No. Typically, the exercise of preemptive challenges comes later, not during voir dire.
This venire panelist was dismissed for cause.
“Peremptory”. Spell-check, ya know…
[…] time to visit Professor Jacobson at Legal Insurrection. He has a parallel article on this mess here, and is doing a daily review of events in the courtroom, including a summary of the testimony or […]
The jury consultants must have pretty good searching skills. I just went to facebook to check out the actual post by potential juror E7 (there’s a scary thought). Apparently, according to some of the other posts from that time period, he deleted that post shortly after it went up. They must have found a cache of it somewhere.
No matter the evidence, Zimmerman will be found guilty and jailed. In prison, it is unlikely he will live safely or long.
When Obama stuck his oar in and declared “if he had a son…”, at that point, it became pretty much impossible for Zimmerman to receive fair treatment at the hands of the law. The case was then no longer a legal matter but a political one, and everything has been done and is being by the prosecution to ensure that Zimmerman is railroaded.
When people are marching up and down demanding “justice”, regardless of the facts, there is an implicit threat that if their demands are not met Zimmerman and others will not be safe. That is not rule of law; that is rule of man.
What is happening in FL vis-a-vis Zimmerman is consistent with what is happening all across America, and the lawlessness comes from the White House on down.
Just a thought, but since our blog host has in his announcements
and that is linked to the tag “zimmerman-trial”
could you make sure that all the Zimmerman trial posts by Branca actually have that tag (this one doesn’t, for instance, so anyone I tweeted that “announcement” to is missing this post)?
Cheers.
The Internet is being turned upside-down to find info on this guy.
I can not personally confirm this but here is what’s making the rounds so far:
Prospective Juror E7 IS Jerry P. Counelis who tried his darnedest to get onto the Jury but due to the Defence’s research was found out. He was playing at not having made any conclusions about the case but this is what he posted on Facebook OVER A YEAR AGO:
“Jerry P. Counelis …..In Sanford…& I CAN tell you THIS. “Justice”…IS Coming!…& I’ll tell you why. The ONLY reason this corrupt City Police dept. was stonewalling was because since they KNOWINGLY worked with this Self-appointed “Neighborhood Watch” Security…& KNEW he carried a weapon…They knew they AND the Homeowners Association were Liable for HUGE $$$ damages in court…MINUTES after the shooting occurred. But with the noise WE made…it couldn’t be covered up. I only hope the Feds go farther than just THIS case in investigating This “Police Force”. The Seminole County “Justice’ System needs an ENEMA…& they just MIGHT GET one!
March 21, 2012 at 12:39am · 1”
A question that’s come up on Twitter:
They had no problem promptly charging Shellie Zimmerman with perjury for lying (https://legalinsurrection.com/2012/06/perjury-charge-against-shellie-zimmerman-raises-more-questions-of-prosecutorial-overreaching/ )… why are they letting this guy get away with it?