Today on Power Talk with Lorraine, one of the hot topics was the reaction of four jurors from the Zimmerman trial towards Juror B37’s CNN interview. On Monday, a member from the all women, mostly white jury, referred to as Juror B37, sat down with CNN’s Anderson Cooper. She explained the jury’s reasoning behind Zimmerman’s ‘not guilty’ verdict, stating that he was justified in the shooting and killing of Trayvon Martin.

Juror B37 also planned to write a book depicting her experience throughout the trial, before deciding not to. Although anonymous, she has been relatively in the spotlight, as opposed to the other jury members. In response to the interview, four other jurors wrote a letter explaining, “We, the undersigned jurors, understand there is a great deal of interest in this case. But we ask you to remember that we are not public officials and we did not invite this type of attention into our lives.”

“We also wish to point out that the opinions of Juror B37, expressed on the Anderson Cooper show were her own, and not in any way representative of the jurors listed below.”

These jurors are wanting to distance themselves from Juror B37’s views–that by not walking away from the confrotation, Trayvon subsequently asked for his death. However, they all seem to agree that the laws and the justice system left them no choice to prove Zimmerman ‘not guilty.’ So, why are the four jurors trying to disassociate themselves from Juror B37? If they felt differently, then why was the verdict ‘not guilty?’



Part 2:

Part 3: 


Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

Watch & Listen LIVE