FTG FOR COVERAGE OF THE 2010 MIDTERM ELECTIONS / FTG OF SENATOR RUSS FEINGOLD (D-WI) CONCESSION SPEECH RS 5226 FEINGOLD REMARKS Russ Feingold (D) Wisconsin - great concession speech the bite at the end has tons of emotion 23:56:11 Sly Intros Feingold 23:57:28 Thank you 23:57:56 My friends the people of Wisconsin have spoken and I respect their decision -- I called Johnson and wished him well as our senator 23:58:28 Well being your senator has been the greatest honor of my life 23:58:46 I've enjoyed working with you and feel we have done many great things together 23:59:02 You are good fans - that is is 23:59:14 It is hard to express my gratitude for the support I've received throughout my career (Thanks Family, Staff) No one has ever had such a strong foundation it gave me my backbone you gave me my backbone 00:00:38 So to all of you in the words of Bob Dylan. "But my heart is not weary it's light and free and nothing but affection for those who have sailed with me." 00:01:13 I hope to work with all of you in the future 00:01:23 So it's on the next fight, on to the next battle it's on to 2012 and, and it is on to our next adventure forward

Tavares police said they found the mayor's wife passed out in her car in a hospital parking lot. Police said Sharon Wolfe, wife of Mayor Robert Wolfe, was driving drunk when she hit a speed limit sign on Orange Avenue before passing out in the parking lot Sunday night. Wolfe had difficulty walking a line during her field sobriety test, so she was arrested, police said. Officers said they found Kahlua, Bailey's Irish Cream and prescription drugs in her car during a search. According to the arrest affidavit, Wolfe told the officers she had used Adderal and Ambien and was using the Kahlua to flavor her coffee. Wolfe was taken to jail and charged with driving under the influence and leaving the scene of an accident. She has since bonded out.

12:04:25:03 DISK 1 // First Lady Michelle Obama and Sen Russ Feingold (D-WI) at a campagin event in Milwaukee, WI. // 12:08:45 CU woman at table eating food / 12:39:04 WS Sen Russ Feingold (D-WI) walk ...

13:53:37:27 DISK 2 // First Lady Michelle Obama and Sen Russ Feingold (D-WI) at a campagin event in Milwaukee, WI. // 13:53:37 MS First Lady Michelle Obama at podium, remarks in progress // 14:00:34 M ...

McKinley County sheriff's deputies say a driver was so drunk that he passed out right on I-40. The driver didn’t pull onto the shoulder to stop, but in the westbound lanes as traffic was moving by. A dash cam video of the recent incident was provided by the sheriff's department. Deputies say Wainright Tso was out cold when they approached the car. They say he had the car in drive and his foot was on the brake. Deputies say they were about to smash out his window because his doors were locked, when Tso suddenly woke up and took off. But before Tso got away, a reserve deputy on the scene popped Tso's tire with a service knife. The chase stopped a short while after. "Fortunately for him, and everybody else, we came long when we did-- because somebody was going to die," said Sgt. Goins, who slashed the tire. Deputies say is Tso's 2nd DWI arrest. They arrested him just 30 days ago for another DWI.

Log of House Budget Committee: 3-15-10 Health Insurance Reform Reconciliation 2002 - HENSARLING -- CBO folks are professional but they will score what is in front of them, it s like garbage in and garbage out 2009 - Connolly resolution passes by voice vote 2010 - GARRETT (R-NJ) talks about his motion 2013 - LATTA (R-OH) - my small business owners are telling me one more government mandate and I'm out of business 2016 - BLUMENAUER (D-OR) - this reform will make it possible to reduce the costs for small business to provide health insurance 2020 - BECERRA (D-CA) - greatest tax on Americans when it comes to health care is to do nothing . health costs money and but can be done in a fiscally responsible way for paying for whatever we do 1823 - GARRETT (R-NJ) -- it is not good enough to violate the Constitution, to take away liberty 2025 - Results of roll call on Garrett motion announced - 14- /21-n .motion not agreed to 2028 - Allen Boyd (D-FL) - offers student loan proposal - Sallie Mae 2032 - Gregg Harper (R-MS) - 2034 - Jordan (R-OH) - Education Dept. is asking 400-new employees to run new student loan program - teachers in classroom make half what a bureaucrat at Ed Dept. makes 2038 - Boyd - if you want to reform health care do that now, but leave student loans out of it 2040 - roll call on Boyd motion announced - 4-Y / 32-N --- motion fails 2041 - Garrett (R-NJ) explains his motion - if health care cost curve is bent upwards, then reform should not go forward . double accounting used in estimating savings .. We all agree that health care should be reformed, but there should be cost savings 2047 - Ryan (R-WI) - Schwartz (D-PA) 2052 - Andrews (D-NJ) - I'm confused..the other side seems to be saying we agree with experts except when we disagree with them on bending the cost curve 2054 - G. Moore (D-WI) - 2057 - roll call on Garrett motion announced - 13-y / 23-n ...motion is not agreed to

A Fort Smith city director candidate has been arrested for DWI and running from police. Despite these charges Eric Arthur says he'll continue his campaign."It would speed up and then slow down, speed up and slow down," Corporal Steven Dooly tHE NEWS.Fort Smith patrolmen were sitting at the intersection of North 6th and B streets when a dark colored Ferrari blew by. It happened shortly after 9 Monday night."As it passed by the officers they reported that the driver made eye contact with them as they were sitting in the alley," Dooly explained.According to their report, they were convinced the suspect knew they were trying to pull him over and actually sped up. Eric Arthur finally pulled into these apartments after several twists and turns. Police say he smelled strongly of alcohol and his words were slurred. He wanted to use the bathroom and put his dog up, but police said he could go in lock-up and they'd take care of his pet. When officers asked if he'd been drinking, he reportedly said, "No comment"--a phrase he repeated Tuesday morning.5NEWS reached Mr. Arthur on his company phone Tuesday morning. He declined comment other than to say that he will continue his candidacy. Arthur said any further statement would come from his attorney.Arthur faces four charges: DWI, fleeing, reckless driving, and refusing a breath test."All are misdemeanors. Probably the one with the stiffest penalty will be the DWI," Dooly said.Corporal Steven Dooly says this is his first arrest in Fort Smith. He was booked into the Sebastian County Detention Center where he bonded out Tuesday morning. While making a phone call in jail, Arthur reportedly said, "Everybody (expletive) up, but that's beside the point."The city clerk says there will be no primary election for director at-large position number six after Michael King withdrew from the race. Eric Arthur and incumbent Kevin Settle will now face off in the November municipal general election.

Briefing by Vice Chief of Staff of the Army General Peter Chiarelli on the Army`s Health Promotion/Risk Reduction/ Suicide Prevention Report. This report is the result of a 15-month study to better understand the causes of suicide and other challenges facing the force. I'm here to try to put in context a report that we posted online today at 10:00; and just want to tell you that, as you all know, in May of 2008, both the secretary of the Army and the chief of staff of the Army initiated a full-scale effort to understand and mitigate suicide trends within the United States Army. In January of 2009, after the Army, for the first time ever, exceeded the civilian ratio for deaths-per-100,000 due to suicide -- we were close to 20-per-100,000, as opposed to civilian deaths of 19- per-100,000 -- the secretary and the chief asked me to lead a task force to try to drive down the rate of suicide in the United States Army. In early spring, we went out to six installations in seven days, with a team that split up and talked to soldiers and family members -- family members of deployed spouses. And as any operator going out to solve a problem, I was totally focused on driving down suicide but came to understand after about the third installation we went to that this is an issue that's much larger than that. It's about the health of the entire force, and it also includes families. They are a critical piece to this whole thing. We came back, published a campaign plan, which we have been executing for the last year, and began the process of pulling together this report. We thought it absolutely critical to get this report out as soon as we possibly can so we can go about doing -- making the fixes that we know we have to do. It represents 15 months of rigorous effort by government, military, medical and behavioral health-care providers, researchers and others. It identifies indicators of high-risk behavior that are reflective of the stress and strain on the force after almost a decade of persistent conflict. It also identifies gaps in policies, processes, procedures pertaining to the surveillance and detection and mitigation of high-risk suicidal behavior. Now, the truth is that some of you are going to get stuck on chapter three, but we felt it absolutely important to lay out what the problem is and some of the indicators we see, because the rest of the report take -- report takes on how are we going to fix that. And it's important that our leaders understand the issues that we saw as we looked at the data -- some 32 databases that we pulled together to provide some of the statistics you see in chapter three. But I would hope that the report would be looked at holistically, in all 10 chapters. There's 10 chapters. It not only says where we are today and what we've done so far to try to fix it, but it also lays out a way ahead for how we're going to get us back to where we need to be. And that is absolutely critical. It has to be reviewed in context -- and understanding that you're looking at, after a decade, a force that's been stressed and strained for that decade. Now, the United States Army is a fully capable force comprised of 1.1 million men and women, totally capable of doing whatever mission the country gives it. What you're going to see in this report is a focus on 700,000 of those soldiers, because the databases I have are only for that portion of the soldiers that are serving as Title 10. It includes reserve and National Guard soldiers who are mobilized. But once a soldier is demobilized, it gets -- the fidelity of the data that I have here is almost impossible as they go back to posts, camps and stations. And I just want to stress this represents a very small portion of the population. The subset of the population we're looking at is divided into two groups of people. First are "at risk," a sustainable population who need and are seeking help. And it's absolutely critical that we understand that, because that's one of the things we have been trying to stress, is the need for soldiers who have behavioral-health issues and other issues to get the help that they need. But there's another subset of high-risk soldiers, which is a smaller population that need -- needs help but will not seek help. And it is continuing to engage in high-risk behavior. And because of some of the policies that we used to apply across the force that, because the force has been so stressed for so long, have not been followed, we've lost track of some of those high-risk soldiers. The report has over 250 recommendations to identify and mitigate some of these problems. It is a report. It is only a report. It is not a regulation. And it will now go into a staffing process where we will take those recommendations and make a determination on which ones we're going to put in place. To my left you see the first chart, and I asked to have my folks put that up there. That is basically the table of contents that lays out for you the 10 chapters of the report. The first four chapters of the report basically lay out the problem, where we are. Chapter three talks about some of the issues we see in the force today. Chapter four introduces a new piece that I will talk about today called the composite life cycle that we think is very, very important to understanding the stress that's been put on the force. Five lays out our campaign plan, where we went on our campaign plan. And then six through 10 lay out for us where we want to go in attacking the problems laid out in the first four chapters. Next slide, please. Now, in the report you're going to see charts like this. And I just put this up as illustrative. If they're not -- if someone doesn't take the time to read what is in the text, you can walk away with what I think would be incorrect perceptions. But this is a good example of recruiting waivers. I think you've all reported, at least in the last couple of years, the high number of waivers that we had in the United States Army, which peaked in 2007, as you can see by this chart. It has gone significantly down in 2009. This report covers only 2009. The data I have is not for the entire period: We are focused on 2009 data here. You can see that the number of recruiting waivers in 2009 was 6,000, almost half as many as we had in 2007, and that number continues to go down today. We are down to 10.1 percent. And a majority of those waivers are very, very minor waivers, mainly health waivers, none of the more serious waivers that many of you talked about before. But at the same time, if you follow back to FY '97, you see the number of chapter actions that we have taken to move soldiers out of the service have gone down over that time period. That's the kind of data we provided in chapter three. Next slide, please. Now, this is a model, and it's not to be taken out of context. It's our attempt to try to show to our leaders some of the issues we see. And it is in the form of a maze. As I indicated before, this is all fiscal year '09 data. And some of you who follow this very closely will look immediately to the center of the chart and see the 160 suicides and say, well, wait a second, I thought you had 162 suicides last year. We did in the calendar year, but we had to correct this data for the fiscal year, because all our databases are in fiscal year. So that's why you see that number of 162 (he meant 160). In addition to that, you see high-risk deaths of 146. This model demonstrates the complex relationships that we see between stresses associated with high-risk behavior and the increasing severity of outcomes. You must understand that outside that model is our baseline population, the large majority of soldiers who never enter into the maze. And being in the maze is not necessarily a bad thing. In fact, we are encouraging soldiers to come into that maze. And I'll explain that in a second. A soldier can enter the maze in two different ways, one to the far right, and you could enter and make your way to the first area, which is outpatient behavioral health care. And to give you an example, what we're talking about here is anyone seeking outpatient behavioral health care or anyone screened for -- by a behavioral health specialist. So I am hoping that this number, when we take this data for 2010, quite frankly, doubles. As many of you know, we're working -- virtual behavioral health care is one method of ensuring that every soldier that comes back gets a good evaluation, not just the filling out of a form, but a good evaluation from a behavioral health care specialist. And those numbers are included in that outpatient behavioral health care. So that's a very good thing. Many people will enter the maze, get that particular care, whatever it might be, or that screening, and they come right back out into the base population. It is important to increase and improve our surveillance and detection systems to better monitor and intervene the deeper folks get into the maze. And one of the things that has been very difficult for us to understand, and some of you have been at the suicide review groups that we do, is that there are some people we see walk in this maze and make their way toward the center, but there are other people that go directly to the center. And that's what's represented in the upper left-hand corner. And I will give you an example of that in a second. The goal is to get folks out of this maze as quickly as we possibly can. And the two different colors you see here, the light colors are those individuals who are at risk, who are seeking behavior, which is a good thing; and then the darker colors are individuals who are displaying some kind of high-risk behavior, not seeking help, that require intervention. Our intensity of effort increases in the inner-three rings, and I'll explain that in a second. And of course, the blue center is where we don't want anybody to go. And as you see, we've broken this into two groups, not only suicides but high-risk deaths. Now, let me give you a couple examples, vignettes. And for those of you who've looked through the report, you'll see some pretty stark vignettes that we've put in there for our leaders to take a look at. Again, they are (inaudible) of one in a force of 1.1 million, but we thought it important to lay out some real-world examples of what can happen when sometimes we don't do what we should or don't follow our policies the way we should. An example of a soldier who enters in the left-hand -- right-hand side of the maze: This is an individual who will be represented in many of these rings here. So one of the things I want to tell you is, you can't add up these numbers and say, "Ah-ha, there was X number." The numbers do not add. Let me give you an example here. We have a 28-year-old private with four years in the Army, separated from his wife, deployed twice, history of suicidal and homicidal gestures; assigned to a WTU, received treatment for PTS; under investigation for marijuana use; financial difficulties, recently lost their -- his home and his car. As you can see, he's represented in many of these rings here. Command referred to mental health; diagnosed with a personality disorder and a deep depression, prescribed several medications, including sleeping pills, anti-depression and pain relief; failed to report to duty, suicide note found in his room. He was found dead four days later from an apparent self-inflicted gunshot wound to the head. This is an individual that touched just about every single one of those rings. That's why the numbers are not additive. Now, these are the cases -- these are the -- this next example is an individual who enters at the top, and it's a direct entry. And these are the ones that are so perplexing and difficult for us to understand. Twenty-eight-year-old female staff sergeant, with eight years in the Army, on her third deployment. Married; she and her husband deployed together, and were allowed to cohabitate. And those of you who've been downrange know that that is what we do; our married couples are allowed to cohabitate if they're on the same forward operating base. This female received a Bronze Star on her first deployment for saving another soldier's life. Found dead from a self- inflicted gunshot wound to the head. No history of alcohol or drug abuse; no evidence of previous suicidal ideations or attempts; no clearly identified stressors; strong marriage, no issues there; no evidence of prior planning of suicide or pre-suicidal signals or indicators. Again, very, very perplexing. And as I get briefed on 20 to 25 cases every single month, there always seems to be two or three that are just like this. Now, let me put the numbers in context for you, so you understand those a little better. I already talked about outpatient behavioral health-care numbers. As you see here, it's over 216,000. This is a good news story. This, I think, is the Army's attempt to try to break down the stigma associated with seeking that help. And quite frankly, if that number increased to 400,000 next year, that means that virtual behavioral health is out and being worked. Because soldiers are seen by a behavioral health specialist, they are given a good look at, and they will be included in those numbers. Prescription drugs. The kind of drugs we're talking about here are indicated. They're anxiety medications, pain medications and antidepressants. Some of these will be for behavioral health issues; others will be pain medicine. Every single one of these prescriptions is someone who received a prescription for three weeks or more -- or is it 15 days? -- 15 days of pain medication. Okay? So this isn't the individual that goes in and has his wisdom teeth taken out and you give him five Percocet for pain relief. But these are not necessarily all behavioral health issues. And we can't parse the data as fine as we would like to, and this whole exercise has been important for us because we will start doing that. But if you have a soldier that has a knee problem after 15 months in Afghanistan, humping a ruck at 10,000 feet, that's an example of an individual who may come in and get pain medication and be included in that number. Inpatient behavioral health care is someone who cannot just be seen as an outpatient, is put into a facility. As you know, most of our facilities are contract facilities, and we had just over 9,000 soldiers in our fiscal year '9 data who had inpatient behavioral health care. Other criminal offenses. This is not 57,000 soldiers. Let me give you an example. If you're an individual who's picked up for DWI and titled for DWI and reckless driving, you represent two of those numbers. And many -- some people, as you well know, are titled for many, many more than two or even three offenses, depending on how serious it was. So that number there is not a number you can look at and say we had 57,000 soldiers with criminal offenses. Drug and alcohol offenses, just short of 17,000, and you can see those numbers. That's probably a pretty pure number, but somebody could have had two drug and alcohol offenses. And we saw some recidivism out there in fiscal year '9. Suicide attempts, 1,713, if anything, that number is probably a little lower, I've got to tell you that. That does not account for the individual who takes a bottle of aspirin, doesn't think they're going to wake up, wakes up the next morning, and we never hear about it. But those are the suicide attempts we know of. High-risk deaths are those individuals that are not considered suicide. But that may be the individual who gets behind a car, wraps that car around a bridge abutment at 2:00 in the morning and has a blood-alcohol level of 1.5. Next slide, please. Now, what we tried here to do is to show you that in perspective. If you take the big blue dot as a force of 700,000 folks, and if you look at the number of folks that are in outpatient behavioral care, that's the red dot you see there. Those are two good dots. I like that red dot, because we've got folks that are listening to what we're saying about stigma. Then if you look at the prescription drugs, that is a good dot, because at least these are drugs that are being prescribed by a doctor. And I think you know that there's a companion volume to what we're doing here that many of you have read about, that was done by the Pain Management Task Force, to take a look at how we can decrease our reliance on some of these pain medications and other kinds of medications. And the surgeon general has come out with a way to do that and a campaign plan to do that, which is also a good thing. As I explained, the purple dot shows people with criminal offenses. But that's the number of criminal offenses. That does not represent the number of people, nor does drug and alcohol offenses in every single incidence. Then you see inpatient behavioral health care at just over 9,000. And if we had not shadowed in suicides and high-risk deaths, you wouldn't even be able to see those dots on this chart. We are, in fact, expending much, much effort on a very, very small portion of this population in order to drive down the incidence of high-risk deaths, high-risk behavior and suicides. Next slide, please. Final chart I want to talk to you about from chapter four -- and this is exciting for me. And this is some of the things that I think are going to come out of this report that are going to help us get at this problem. And it was one of these things that, when they laid it out for me, was a blinding flash of the obvious. We tend to look at ARFORGEN [Army Force Generation] and the effect of ARFORGEN and the Army Force Generation model and the fact that our soldiers are on the BOG/dwell rate that they are today -- we still have not gotten to 1:2. We still have an Army that's out of balance. It is better today than it was four, five months ago, but I still have aviators that are going out at 1:1 -- one year home, one year deployed, one year home, one year deployed. We are approaching 1:2 with some of our MOSs, and we expect to be there with many of them in FY '12. But no one has 24 months at home until they've spent 24 months at home. The mere fact that you tell them they're going to spend 24 months at home doesn't really have an impact until they've had that 24 months at home. But you all know about that. You know we have soldiers that go, in a period of eight years at three different units, they go through a cycle of resetting their equipment, getting trained and ready and then going ahead and deploy and starting it all over again. A soldier up in that particular line, that ARFORGEN line, may have gone to three separate units; he may have stayed in the 101st the entire time. But it's representative -- and each one of those red dots indicates a stress point that that soldier goes through. In addition to that, every soldier is a soldier. And individual soldiers have stress points, as you can see here. One of the ones that we point to in the report, that's absolutely critical, is exodus leave and reception: that soldier that leaves basic training and goes to his first unit, leaves a group of individuals that he's very, very comfortable with, that he's gone through a very rigorous training regime with, and then is shipped off to a unit where in fact he doesn't have those same friends and he has to make his own way and make friends. It's a new experience for him. And as that soldier increases in experience and rank, he has other stressors, everything from promotion to his first noncommissioned officer course to his first leadership position. I don't think there's a soldier in the Army that hasn't had no- pay-due at some time, a promotion, a temporary profile. You can read those. Each one of those is a stressor. And then finally there's the one that we often forget, and that is in fact the family strand. The soldier gets married, makes a major purchase, has financial difficulties, birth of child one, and birth of child one while that soldier is in fact deployed. This chart shouldn't be looked at horizontally, it should be looked at vertically, because these are the stressors the soldiers go through. And they accumulate down here at the bottom in these stressor windows. Now, what are some of the things we're able to draw out of this? We know that 60 percent of the suicides that we have today are first- term soldiers. Those are soldiers who are in their first enlistment. And the most dangerous year to be a soldier is your first year in the United States Army. We see more suicides in that first year than in any other years. Most soldiers who enter the Army are 18, 19, 20 years old. They have that highest rate of suicide. But I can also tell you that if we look at another cohort, and that's soldiers who enter the Army when they're 28 or 29, their suicide rate is three times that of a soldier who enters the Army at 18, 19 or 20. Now, I'm not trying to typecast a soldier that enters the Army at 28 or 29 years old, but I think it's fair to say in some instances it would be a soldier that's possibly married, couple of kids, lost his job, no health-care insurance, possibly a single parent, okay, coming in the Army to start all over again, and we see this high rate of suicide -- three times the rate that we see in an individual 18, 19 or 20 years old. Now, why is that important? Young lieutenant gets a new soldier into his unit, sits him down -- 29-year-old private. We hope through this report that young lieutenant will know that maybe it's time to spend a little more time talking to that 28- or 29-year-old, understanding what his financial situation is, maybe getting him over to AER [Army Emergency Relief] if he needs it, getting him or her the financial counseling they may need, and paying a little more attention to him. We also know, by the statistics I just gave you, that 79 percent of our suicides are soldiers with no deployment history or one deployment. And the most dangerous time in that first deployment is the first six months. That's adjusting to the theater. Now, how is that important? As busy as our units are today, if sponsorship programs are not doing what they're supposed to be doing, it's probably not important to concentrate on the majors, the colonels, the lieutenant colonels and the senior non-commissioned officers. If young leaders are doing anything down there today, they ought to be focusing their sponsorship programs on young soldiers coming into the unit, that soldier that just comes out of basic who's trying to make friends, who is new to the unit. These are the kinds of things and lessons that you draw from this data that we believe are going to be absolutely essential for us getting a handle on this. And as many of you know, what's really interesting is that the bottom part of the chart -- we all know that as we get older, we get more mature; at least, hopefully, most of us do. But what we haven't understood until the advent of Comprehensive Soldier Fitness and the inculcation of that program into the Army is that we find that younger soldiers coming into the Army -- and I think the Global Assessment Tool shows that -- have a much lower rate of resiliency, much less resiliency than older members. That's not to say that everybody who's old has high resiliency. But we know through evidence-based training that we can teach soldiers to have a high rate of resiliency. And through this data, we have focused our effort, with our master resilience trainers, at basic training. Now, this may not mean anything to you, but it means something to me. And in basic training today, in a very short period of time we've added 10 hours of resiliency training for young soldiers entering the Army. That's the kind of thing that comes out of data like this, and it allows us to focus our efforts to make sure that we're expending resources where we need to expend resources, and getting a very valuable resource to us, the master resilience trainer, to the place that he needs to be. And if you have a choice, it's a great place to have him -- him or her, in basic training, beginning the process of making soldiers more resilient before they go to their first unit. Next slide, please. Now, I'll just put this one up here again because I know there's a lot of interest in Chapter 3. But there are 10 chapters here. I hope you'll help people see this report in context, an attempt by the United States Army to take a really, really hard look at itself, see some things that maybe we're not doing as well as we should before, put it in the context of a -- of a force that's been fighting for 10 years and has a plan on how it's going to fix those things that it needs to fix. That is what I'd like to say to you today. And I will open it up for questions. Sir. Q If I could make a leap of faith for a moment that probably the people who you're dealing with who are at risk of suicide probably brought issues into the Army with them, that's not something they picked up there, necessarily. How does this relate to -- you know, to your recruiting efforts and things that you try to do to try to flag some of those issues and folks before -- you know, before they come in? GEN. CHIARELLI: One of the things that we asked for and NIMH [National Institute of Mental Health] managed to do for us when they started the 50 million dollar -- the study, the big study they're doing for us on suicide was to go down and see what our screening process was for new recruits coming into the Army. We redesigned that entire program. And one of the very positive things we've heard from the National Institute of Mental Health is that we've got it about as fine as we possibly can. I think you all know we can't force anybody to turn over their medical records to us at a recruiting station. It's basically the honor system. We can't access those medical records. We have to look for other indicators that they have problems. And we have -- we have -- we have -- we have increased our screening. And NIMH told us point-blank that if you want to reduce suicides by your screening methods into the Army by two suicides a year, you'll have to disqualify such a large population that, quite frankly, you couldn't meet your recruiting goals, and you would have a very, very small return on the number of -- you would be denying a whole bunch of folks the opportunity to serve their country in the Army, and you would have very little effect on your suicide rate. Now, I think you all know that the Global Assessment Tool is something we require all soldiers to take. And we're right in that process now of finishing that out. But some of that data has showed us that young soldiers coming into the service have a lower rate of resiliency; much the same as maturity. And that's why we have focused our efforts at that particular level. Yes, sir. Q General, you've been looking at this for a long time now. You've overseen this report. The Army today, your bottom-line assessment: How good a job is the service doing at preventing suicides? Are they doing a better job today than they did 15 months ago when you started this task force? GEN. CHIARELLI: Well, I happen to believe we are. I believe we've got leaders engaged in doing the kinds of things that they need to do. This report is the next step in putting together all the databases that never before have been put together. We pulled together some 32 databases. And I don't know if you've ever tried to get somebody's database from them, but information is power, and it becomes very difficult at times to get folks to give you that data. But we pulled together all the databases to put this report together, and it pointed out some things that we think we need to work on. We've included most of those in chapter 3, with a series of recommendations. That chapter is written for the force. I've got to help leaders understand how things have changed in almost a decade of war. I mean, you need to understand that we've got platoon sergeants -- E-7s in the United States Army today -- who joined the Army after September 11th, 2001. They've known nothing other than the OPTEMPO that we're under today. Their life has been constantly: reset, train-ready, deploy; and begin that process all over again. We have families: that's all they've ever experienced. And the real exciting portion of this report -- which is a yawn for you -- is chapters 6 through 10, because now we lay out a plan for how we at Department of the Army are going to find the gaps in our programs. We're going to eliminate the redundancies, make sure that we're spending the taxpayers' money in a way that supports evidence-based ways of getting at this problem and not somebody's good idea that they think works, okay, and begin to tackle this problem. But in order to do that, we had to have chapter three to lay out for leaders some of the things that our data shows us. Q But in chapter three, but in -- of the problems today, of the ones that you can fix, what's the most important recommendation? You can't change the op tempo until it changes. GEN. CHIARELLI: I can't tell you what the most important -- there's a lot of important recommendations in there. I mean, one of the things that I think is very, very important is the 4833, something that I grew up with as a brigade commander. And I'll never forget after 30 days in command, I got a call from the deputy corps commander wanting to know where my 4833s were, the commander's report of disciplinary action. I have a soldier that's picked up for DWI. That is in fact given to the commander to take the action that the commander deems he's going to take. But no commander is forced. That commander makes a judgment on what he's going to do. But you're to report back. Nobody's grading your paper. But what you're doing is, you report back that I took no action, because there was a reason why this occurred, or I took the following action. We used to have a compliance rate on a 4833 of 99 over 99 percent. And in the force today, it's less than 65 percent. It's that kind of thing and getting that in. And that helps us to understand so that when a soldier makes a mistake -- goes on deployment, does wonderful things on deployment, comes back and makes a mistake again -- that we've captured that data and know the history of that data, when that soldier goes to his next unit. Those are the kinds of things that we've got to get back to doing in the force today. Q Sir, how did the Army get so far behind the curve on all of this? GEN. CHIARELLI: It's not -- you have to understand that we prioritized what we were going to do, and that we prioritized, I think, the way you would want us to do, and that is to fight our nation's wars and to be ready and tactically sound to go and do the mission we were given by the country. But when you come back and you're in the BOG:Dwell ratio that we were in, commanders prioritized those things that they were going to do. And they rightly prioritized the number-one thing that they were going to do is to prepare their soldiers to go into harm's way. Now as we come back and we start to see BOG:Dwell increase, or at least we forecast it's going to increase, it's time for the Army to take a hard look at itself, to sit down and say, okay, what are those things that came lower on our priority list that we need to reinstitute, reinforce and start doing to get at this problem? Q You knew most of this stuff was happening, right? I mean, you had your figures from '06, '07, wherever, that you were increasing waivers, decreasing separations. You knew the demographic of your Army was changing. GEN. CHIARELLI: I'm just saying that -- waivers aren't necessarily bad things. Okay? We have lowered the number of waivers that we provide today. And we knew some of these things were happening, but I don't think we ever put it all together in a place that could help us understand the way we've tried to do with this report. And that's exactly what the report's trying to do. Ma'am. Q (Name off mike) -- from The New York Times. Just to be counter-intuitive, if you say -- you're right that 79 percent of the suicides are soldiers within their first deployment? GEN. CHIARELLI: Seventy-nine percent of soldiers have no deployment history whatsoever -- Q Yes. GEN. CHIARELLI: -- okay -- or have one deployment. Q Seventy-nine percent soldiers who -- GEN. CHIARELLI: Seventy-nine percent. Q -- of the suicides. GEN. CHIARELLI: Yes, ma'am. Q Well, then, how does that -- that means that they haven't been deployed over and over and over again, so how is -- are you -- I mean, there's an incredible stress on the force, obviously, but that doesn't speak to incredible stress on the force over five deployments if it's only -- if most of these suicides are happening in the first deployment. GEN. CHIARELLI: Many are -- I mean, the average age for suicide is 23. Q It's sort of -- it is -- your -- this -- GEN. CHIARELLI: That still leaves 21 percent of the force, okay, that we have to take a look at. Q But you don't see that -- I mean, so maybe it's the waivers rather -- more than the stress on the force over 10 years of deployment? GEN. CHIARELLI: You can make an argument by looking at this data for just FY '09 that, as you go and have additional deployments and get older, your resiliency may get better and your ability to handle things -- you could look at the data and parse it that way. I think that would be dangerous to do, just looking at '09. I think you've got to look in total. And one thing that NIMH is going to do is help us with that. As we get more -- as we get more experience with the GAT and comprehensive soldier fitness and we start to build that database over time, that too will help us to understand this problem more. Q But you won't say that -- it seems to be, some of these numbers, that the bigger problem is granting too many waivers. GEN. CHIARELLI: I don't -- I don't agree with you at all. I don't agree with you at all. I do not agree. We see no relationship whatsoever to waivers and suicide that we were able to pull out of this. Nothing. Nothing. I just tried to pull two charts out to show you the kind of thing we lay out that will be very, very helpful in our discussions. I think the most important chart there is to -- is to look at the number of separations, how separations have gone down over time. Sir. Q General, if the new soldier is the most at-risk soldier, is there some thought to maybe taking some of these soldiers from their basic training unit and sending them to a unit together, so they have a little bit of a network, in terms of a couple of buddies going with them to a unit, for their first deployment? GEN. CHIARELLI: We haven't looked at -- I think that's the kind of debate that we will have, as we -- as we look through that. Whether or not we could do anything like that, I can't tell you. We are a transient population by nature. And it's very, very hard to send us around in groups of individuals and maintain our ability to do what we've been able to do, for the last 10 years. But I think the bigger issue there is that a commander now, a young lieutenant down there, a young captain down there, knows that his high-risk population is that new population that's coming into his unit. So what time he has or she has, they can focus it on that new soldier. And the data helps them understand that. That's why we found it so important to get this in the hands of the leaders. They don't have to read 350 pages, believe me. I know you probably all choked on the size of it. This is interactive online. And a commander can go in and only pull out those portions very, very easily that apply to a company commander, platoon sergeant, battalion commander or brigade commander. Ma'am. I'll come to you next, Mick, I promise. Q I wanted to circle back to Julian's question about solutions. Most Americans are not familiar with Army terminology, report numbers, things like that. Could you just circle back and describe in your view, after all of this -- explain to Americans what the solution is to all of this? You have laid out a very serious series of problems. What in simple language does the Army need to do now? GEN. CHIARELLI: Well, what we -- what we need to do is to take a look at what we have in the first four chapters of this report, look at those things, those processes that, because of prioritization and the way we have had to operate over the last 10 years, that we need to place more emphasis on. Q (Off mike) -- give us any examples, just real-world examples that people can understand who aren't going to be reading this report? What do you need to do? What does the Army -- what does an Army commander need to do? What do troops need to do? Just some examples of solutions. GEN. CHIARELLI: Pay attention to soldiers that demonstrate high- risk behavior. Look at the data that we were able to provide you here, and use that to help you prioritize your time on who you're going to concentrate on. This report was written for our soldiers. It was not written for us; it was written for our leaders. And the back part of it is for us on how we can provide them the things that they need to get at this problem. Q What do soldiers need? GEN. CHIARELLI: We need more drug and alcohol counselors. We need more programs like CATEP, confidential alcohol -- drug and alcohol treatment programs, where a soldier that feels like he or she has a problem with alcohol can, in fact, self -- refer themselves for help and their leadership will not be informed -- again, trying to get at the stigma. We want soldiers to understand the criticality of eliminating the stigma, with an understanding that it's not bad to go into the maze. In fact, it is exactly what is needed in some instances to get the help that you need in order to solve the problem and the behavior you're displaying. I mean, that's what we want folks to get out of this report. And we want us to look at what we can provide to commanders to make this easier for them to do; provide them the programs they need to do this. And that's where you get programs like Comprehensive Soldier Fitness. I want commanders to walk away with this with the idea that Comprehensive Soldier Fitness is the Army's attempt to move as far left as we possibly can on this program; not wait to have a soldier display high-risk behavior, but tackle that problem early on, when they join the service, and continue that education as they continue their career. Those are the kinds of things that we want folks to get out of this report. Ma'am -- oh, Mik. Mik. Q I'd like to ask you about the very title of chapter 3. I think most Americans would be surprised to learn -- or at least believe that once absent the immediate stress and chaos of combat, that it might -- that it would be easier to lead, easier to control the troops. But by the very title, it sounds like it's more difficult to lead and control the troops once they're back home. GEN. CHIARELLI: What we're trying to show there is it's very, very difficult, in the short period of time that you come back home, to do all of the different things you have to do to get ready for that next mission, plus take care of your soldiers the way you should be taking care of your soldiers. And we want to make sure that we're reorienting people, as they have more time at home; that they understand, because they've never experienced it before, some of those things that they need to do to make sure that they're taking care of their soldiers. I mean, that's the whole idea here, is to reinstitute some of those things that we used to do so well, but because we were doing exactly what the American people want us to do -- and that's prepare our soldiers to go into harm's way and prepare the best force we possibly can -- some of those things came lower in our priority list. And we need to reinstitute them. That is what this is all about. And this is a perfect time to do that now as we start to see soldiers returning from Iraq and start to see the force getting closer and closer to being in balance. Q And it's been a long time since we've heard about the kinds of numbers of drug abuse and alcohol abuse in the force. Are there any parallels to be derived here? GEN. CHIARELLI: Well, you look at those numbers and you say drug abuse. I don't agree that that's drug abuse in any way whatsoever. The good thing about that number is, those are prescriptions prescribed by doctors. Now, the report points out how sometimes that can be abused. One of the things we found out in parsing our data is that -- an open-end prescription, an individual that's given a number of pills, let's say Percocet, and told to take as needed. If you don't close that prescription and that person takes -- comes up hot on a drug test, on a urinalysis, that urinalysis is sent to a medical review officer, a doctor who looks at it, compares what that individual came up hot for against what has been prescribed for them; and if you have an open- ended prescription forever, that person would be cleared by the medical review officer because they have prescribed that. So one of the very simple things that came out of looking at this data is, hold it, let's not do that now; let's make sure that when we prescribe a prescription, that we put an end date on that prescription so that it doesn't remain an open-ended opportunity for someone to be abusing drugs, and the things that we've put in place to catch that become -- they don't work because we have not closed a gap there that we have. Q You think it would be as simple as that, putting an end date on a prescription. GEN. CHIARELLI: That would help us tremendously. It would help us for the individual who is abusing drugs but is covered by the fact that when the MRO [Medical Review Officer], the doctor, reviews that urinalysis test, he looks at it and says, "Wait a second. This person is prescribed that particular medicine. He can't -- he's not abusing it." Now, if we put an end date on that prescription and a year and a half from now that person comes up, that prescription that was written for a very specific time will not come into play in the review of that urinalysis. I mean, it's those kinds of things we are able to pull out of here, that is a gap that we had in our system that we've got to fix. But again, I -- (inaudible) -- emphasize to you, every single one of those individuals, the 106 individuals who have those prescriptions, many of them are not from behavioral issues; many of them are for pain management. And every single one of those prescriptions was written by a doctor. Now, that doesn't say we are not trying to get at alternate ways of coming after pain, and that's why I brought this with me and the work that MEDCOM [Army Medical Command] has done to get at this issue that we see out there, because we want less reliance and look for alternative ways of controlling pain. And that's what this lays out. Anything else, Mik? Okay, ma'am. Q General, you talked earlier about how many of your soldiers only know OPTEMPO, that they've only been deployed or training for deployment. I'm curious: With the drawdown happening in Iraq, with some sort of drawdown starting in Afghanistan in July of 2011, is that population the one that you feel you need to watch next, the one that has the time to sort of absorb what they've been doing for the last decade, and that be an opportunity for things like depression and things to set in? Is that -- is that a population you're looking at? GEN. CHIARELLI: That's exactly the population we're looking at. As soldiers come back and have more dwell time back home, we want to reinstitute some of the policies that will help us identify high-risk soldiers who are not seeking help but who are engaging in high-risk behavior. We want to do everything we can to get them before they get to that blue circle in any way whatsoever. Q But I mean, like, as you look at 2010 statistics, is there anything that suggests that soldiers who have -- who have been in that op tempo, who've never known the military outside of that, are having trouble dealing with being home, not preparing for war? Is that becoming a growing population that you have to look at? GEN. CHIARELLI: I can't -- I can't make any generalization like that. I know we have soldiers that come back from deployments, whether they're home for one year, two years or three years, that will develop reintegration problems. That is what our whole virtual behavioral health program is aimed at, at getting at that population and trying to find those individuals that are going to have reintegration problems and are going to begin to display high-risk kind of behavior. And we want to take as hard a look at every soldier that comes back so that we cannot wait until they demonstrate that high-risk behavior, but try to identify those that are going to have a rough time early on so we can get them the help that they need. I mean, that's -- that is the whole idea behind what we're trying to do here, and to reinstitute many of those things that we used to do very, very well that, because of the high op tempo we've been on, we just haven't been doing. Q I know you've had a lot of statistics. I'm curious, do you have any that -- of what percentage of suicides are by soldiers who have been back for more than a year? GEN. CHIARELLI: I'm sure that's somewhere in the data, but I don't have it at hand right now. Q Can I just go back to Elizabeth's question? Because I'm still confused. If so many suicides are either first-time deployment or those who have never deployed -- Q Right. That's what's confusing. Q -- how -- right. So if they're first-time deployments or never deployed, how do you square that with the notion that so many of these problems are because of stress and strain on a heavily deployed force? GEN. CHIARELLI: Let me try one more time. A soldier comes in the Army with less resiliency as a youngster than he does as he gains experience. What we're trying to do is to increase the resiliency at basic training. We know that there are soldiers that come in with stressors. That's why I tried to point out to you the 28- or 29-year-old soldier. That is a soldier that's a brand new private who makes a determination at 28 or 29 to join the United States Army. Again, I'm not trying to typecast him. And we know that that individual has a higher suicide rate than even a youngster coming into the United States Army. So, many of the stressors that people have are not just caused by deployments. And that's what the whole composite lifestyle chart is supposed to show you. It is supposed to show you that there are three strands here, that are not looked at horizontally, but they're looked at vertically. It is not -- let me just try to finish. It is not just the deployments that's causing this problem. It is all the stressors that you see, and particularly when you add that to an individual who does not have the resiliency to cope with those problems. That's why we believe we're seeing a large percentage of the suicides are occurring with youngsters, or folks who have built up a number of stressors over time and it just becomes too much for them. Q But for the majority, it's not the war at all. GEN. CHIARELLI: We have -- well, I think 21 percent of a population, 160 -- 40 deaths is a population we also want to get at. I mean we're still seeing -- and again, this is 2009 data. I mean, since we started this whole thing, we have always talked about the fact that a third of the soldiers who committed suicide have no deployment history whatsoever. We've talked about that before many, many times. And this is showing many of the things we've seen. For us to blame this thing just on the war would be wrong. That's not what we're trying to do here. Q The perception has always been that it's because of the strain of continued -- GEN. CHIARELLI: That's been your perception, and I have always backed away from that. If you go back and look at everything I've ever said, we don't really know. But we know a heck of a lot more today, and with the publication of this report, than when I sat in front of some of you in January of 2009. We know a lot more today. And it goes back and it shows that the ARFORGEN strand, this deployment -- redeployment strand, is only part of the problem, and there are other things we've got to do if we're going to really get at this problem. That's what we're trying to do with this. Q Studies find that it can be just as stressful returning home from combat as combat itself. GEN. CHIARELLI: For some individuals, it is. It is. And I know that from sitting in the SRGs, the suicide review groups, that I do, where every single suicide is briefed to me. We know that is the fact. We -- you know, one of the things we've looked at with this report is -- when soldiers used to go away from [sic] war, that family strand kind of fell off. You know, you'd get a letter every 10 days, or whatever. We've got soldiers in Iraq who go out in a 16-hour patrol, come back in to their CHU, or to their "hooch," get right onto their computer and get on Skype. And they're drug back into this family strand. And some of those soldiers, because families don't understand, become responsible for helping "Helen," because she's failing algebra; or "How are you going to work the bill that we can't pay? What are you going to do about it?" You know? And that's why this composite life cycle is so critical, to understand that every soldier is not only going through the stress of being in a unit that's deployed, he's also got individual stressors that are on him. And even when he goes to war, those family issues, looking vertically, may not be -- he may not leave those. He may not just have them given to him when he comes home. They may be part of his -- his or her complete deployment. That's what's so essential in looking at this. And we've seen some data that would show us in the more developed theaters the rate of suicide is higher than in those places where you can't necessarily get back on a computer and talk to home all the time. And if we can help families understand the importance that, when their soldiers are deployed, of not dragging them back into life -- a life at home that they have very little ability to try to fix, that too will be a benefit of what we're trying to lay out here. Q Hasn't the war driven you to this higher-risk population? And hasn't the war made you so busy that you haven't been able to pay enough attention to this higher-risk population? Are they more -- GEN. CHIARELLI: I think it'd be -- I think it'd be fairer to say that, because of everything that we're doing, we have not paid the attention we need to on high-risk behavior. Q Yeah, but the point about whether or not it's the wars -- I mean, it does seem to be the war that is causing this, one way or the other. The stress of combat, the recruitment demands that bring in this higher-risk population, the amount of dwell time which prevents you from doing all the normal -- GEN. CHIARELLI: I will let you and Elizabeth argue that one out. But I agree with you: I mean, this is all connected here. Okay, you know, I give this example a lot of times. An individual that may not have been that good a soldier goes on deployment and does absolutely fantastic. He comes back to his unit and he's back in his unit for nine months. Goes out, gets stopped at a roadside check and he blows .09. Okay, DWI. Charged with DWI. Comes to the brigade commander. Brigade commander has to make a decision on what to do: Do I go ahead and refer this soldier to ADAPC? Well, we're -- sir, we're deploying in six weeks. ADAPC can't see him for eight weeks. We're going to have to leave him back here. He'll be a stay-behind. And then I'll really make it extreme for you. This is a commander who's trying to get out at 90 percent, because he's got 12 percent of his soldiers that are assigned to him are nondeployable for medical reasons, all kinds of other things. He's at 90 percent. The quickest way for a brigade commander to become known to the chief of staff of the Army is have to sign a deployable exception report that says "Even though you filled me up to 102 percent, I can't get out of here at 90 percent. So you're going to have to do special things to get me fixed once I go into theater and get me above 90 percent." So it's old PFC Chiarelli. The commander says, "Well, listen. ADAPC can't see him. Yeah, he's screwed up. Well, Platoon Sergeant Jones, you take care of Chiarelli. You make sure he doesn't get in any trouble for the next two months. We'll get him downrange where everything will be okay, okay? He stays a deployable soldier. And you know how good Chiarelli is when he goes downrange." And off he goes. And then the 4833 that should have been filled out isn't filled out, okay? It comes, saying, "Hey, Chiarelli was picked up for DWI." Nobody fills (out/up ?) the action that's taken whatsoever. Chiarelli goes, deploys, does a fantastic job; goes to his next unit. This time, Chiarelli gets in an accident with a DWI, but there's no history that has been created, and we've lost track of -- this isn't the first time this great guy who won a Silver Star or a Bronze Star or whatever and has been on two deployments -- this isn't the first time he's demonstrated high-risk behavior; there was another time. And we saw in some instances this could happen as many as three times, where you had this recidivism, okay? Well, we needed to get Chiarelli the help that he needed when it showed its ugly face the first time, not wait for the second time. And that's what we're trying to do here, to reinstitute those processes we had that ensured we got him or her the help that they needed. Q But to follow up on David's point -- for example, the drawdown in Iraq: Does the Army believe that that is going to lower the stressors on a majority of the force? GEN. CHIARELLI: Well, I know for a fact, I know for a fact, right, looking at units -- for reasons that I won't explain here -- that have had dwell time back in the states of 2-1/2 years, I see nondeployable rates running at 4 percent, as opposed to a unit that's getting ready to go downrange that has a nondeployable rate of 14 percent. I mean, just the opportunity for somebody to come back and take care of the need that -- went out on the first deployment but they didn't have time to get it fixed because they wanted to go back with their unit in the second deployment, now they get it fixed, they have the time to get it fixed, they have the time to do it right, they have the time to rehabilitate the right way, I mean all those things happen when you have more dwell back at home. And if you go to the composite life cycle model you've seen right up there, you start eliminating stressors. You start eliminating those little dots down there in those stressor windows. And we know if we can do that at the same time we're doing programs like comprehensive soldier fitness to build up resiliency so the stressors that are left, that individual can handle better, my gosh, that's where we want to be. Q What's your message, though, to the commander who is dealing with PFC Chiarelli, who just found out that maybe there's a second DUI somewhere? How do you make that matter to him? How do you make him understand the long-term implications of having someone who is compromised in a mental-health kind of way? GEN. CHIARELLI: I think our commanders are understanding that now. As we get deeper and deeper into this and as we start talking more and more about this, and as we get together, our commanders -- the realization has come. I think it was The Washington Post or somebody -- I don't mean to point at different papers -- did this article the other day about this commander at Fort Bliss who's done all these novel things based on his second time coming back home. If you compare the things that he's doing to the recommendations we have in the report, they're almost the same thing. It's almost like he's reinvented the wheel and gone back to pick up some of the policies that we had before. Q So everybody understands this is a priority now. GEN. CHIARELLI: That's exactly right. Q General, I think your explanation on the sort of sum of the stresses has been very good. But would you say of this 20 percent which are the sort of multiple deployments, if we didn't have the multiple deployments, would the -- would the suicide rate per 100,000 in the Army be lower than the population in general? GEN. CHIARELLI: I have always felt the increase that we've seen, in suicides, has been that 21 percent. I have nothing -- I have nothing that I can lay that on. That has just always been -- my concern is that that may be it, that may be the reason. But I don't have any data that I can tie that to. I just have to believe that any of those stressor dots that we can take away, at the same time we build resiliency, is going to help the health of the force. It's going to help the health of our families, okay, because these stressors are shared by everyone. When you have a no-pay-due as a soldier, guess who else has a no- pay-due, particularly if your spouse can't find a job at the new post, camp or station that you've moved to? You know, when you give birth to a child and your spouse is located 8,000 miles away, okay, and Mom can't come and help, that's a stressor that not only the spouse feels back home but the soldier feels. I mean, these are the things that we know are always going to be a part of life. But what we have to do is try to give soldiers the tools that they need, to handle those stressors. At the same time, for those who can't and demonstrate high-risk behavior, we've got the programs in place to help them. One more question. Q Did you find a connection between doctors or other mental- health-care providers who might have made a recommendation, about how a soldier should be treated -- commanders overruling them and ignoring them? So for example, a doctor or a mental-health-care provider would recommend a soldier be returned from the battlefield to the United States or not be deployed, for PTS reasons, but the commander says, no, I want them, they're coming? GEN. CHIARELLI: I did not find any of that. I did not find any of that, and that's not anything that I tried to look at at this report. What I tried to do -- what we tried to do -- what the report team tried to do was to look at what we saw when we went out and what we were hearing as we dug into suicides and high-risk behavior and policies to try to wrap it together. One of the things I just have to talk about here that is so critical, every time I get a chance, is, you know, this co-morbidity thing is huge, okay? And I know there's a tendency to take a look at behavioral health issues and think that they're just like mechanical injuries of war. I get shot in the shoulder, I get shot in the shoulder, and you could probably give a diagnosis: "Chiarelli's been shot in the shoulder." But when you, you know, are working behavioral health issues used for TBI, those drugs aren't going to help somebody with PTS. One of the things we hoped to do and one of the chapters I'm happiest about is chapter 10, that talks about research. I want to get us some of this research. I want to make it as easy for our doctors to be able to determine -- make -- get -- push brain science further so that we can get a proper diagnosis the first time and not have to, in many instances, get it wrong the first time only to have to go back and try to get it right the second or third time. This is a huge issue, and that's what makes many of these problems so very, very, very, very difficult. Q Thank you. GEN. CHIARELLI: Thank you.

HOUSE FLOOR DEBATE The House meets for legislative business. One Minutes (5 per side) // H.R. 3534 - Consolidated Land, Energy, and Aquatic Resources Act of 2010 (Structured Rule)(Rep. Rahall / Natural Resources) // The rule provides for one hour of general debate and makes in order the following amendments: Rahall Manager's Amendment (20 minutes); Castle Amendment (10 minutes); Kind Amendment (10 minutes); Shea-Porter Amendment (10 minutes); Teague Amendment (10 minutes); Himes Amendment (10 minutes); Connolly Amendment (10 minutes); Melancon #60 Amendment (10 minutes); Melancon #58 Amendment (10 minutes) // H.R. 5851 - Offshore Oil and Gas Worker Whistleblower Legislation Act (Closed Rule, One Hour of General Debate) (Rep. Miller (CA) / Education and Labor) // Possible Furhter Action on H.R. 1264 - Multiple Peril Insurance Act (Closed Rule) (Rep. Taylor (MS) / Financial Services) // Suspensions (3 Bills): 1) H.R. __ - To increase the flexibility of the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development with respect to the amount of premiums charged for FHA single family housing mortgage insurance (Rep. Frank / Financial Services) // 2) H.R. 4862 - To permit Members of Congress to administer the oath of allegiance to applicants for naturalization (Rep. Serrano / Judiciary) // 3) H.R. __ - Small Business Tax Relief Act (Rep. Murphy (NY) / Ways and Means) // Postponed Suspension Votes (4 Votes): 1) H.Res. 1558 - Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives that fruit and vegetable and commodity producers are encouraged to display the American flag on labels of products grown in the United States (Rep. Cardoza / Agriculture) // 2) H.R. 5901 - Real Estate Jobs and Investment Act (Rep. Crowley / Ways and Means) // 3) H.Res. 1566 - Recognizing and commemorating The Fiftieth Anniversary of the Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee (SNCC) and the National Sit-In Movement (Rep. Lewis (GA) / Judiciary) // 4) H.R. 5414 - To provide for the conveyance of a small parcel of National Forest System land in the Francis Marion National Forest in South Carolina (Rep. Brown (SC) / Agriculture) 15:00:15 closing their facility have the skill and the talent that directly align with the skills needed to process oil spill claims. think should be considered first in line to beef up the newly established claims fund and ensure a high quality response for fellow gulf coast 15:00:34 residents. i recommend a yes vote on the manager's amendment and i yield back the balance of my time. 13r0eu7 the gentleman from washington. Hastings, D. (R-WA):i reserve my 15:00:46 time. the chair the gentleman from west virginia. Rahall (D-WV):i yield two minutes to the gentleman. the chair: the gentleman is recognized for two minutes. Farr (D-CA): thank you for yielding. 15:01:00 mother earth, wake up. today is the day congress is going to show some leadership. leadership is about getting are results. last week, the president of the united states enacted by executive order a government oceans plan, a governance plan 15:01:17 to look at our oceans in totality. today congress is going to enact the ability to govern the oceans and think about the totality of how this earth survives with 73% of the earth being covered by oceans. 15:01:35 too bad so many people get up and talk about in a crisis if it was just a little bit better, we could support half the bill. that's not leadership. 15:01:47 leadership is about getting results. the only way to get results today is to vote aye. it solves a lot of problems. voting no solves nothing. nothing. the planet can't stand nothing. for too long, there has not 15:02:05 been leadership. that side is the side that gave us james watt, drill, baby, drill, gave us the chair of the resources committee that never wanted -- the darth vader of environmental legislation. 15:02:19 nothing ever came out of that committee. today, what do they want? we don't want this bill because it's not perfect. ladies and gentlemen, today is the day we respect mother earth and give her a chance to help our dying oceans stop dying. the only way to do that is to 15:02:35 vote aye. the chair the gentleman yields back. the gentleman from west virginia. Rahall (D-WV): i yield the remainder of my time to the gentleman from -- from massachusetts, mr. markey who 15:02:50 has been so instrumental in this legislation as well on this issue, i yield him the balance of my time. the chair the gentleman is recognized for two minutes. Markey, E. (D-MA): i thank mr. rahall for his great leadership, working with chairman waxman 15:03:06 and chairman stupak and i on the energy and commerce committee to include new safety procedures. this bill takes lessons learned and will turn them into laws. that's what we need to do. 15:03:23 included in this bill is a provision which is going to collect $53 billion from the oil industry where they are drilling in american waters without paying any royalties to 15:03:39 the american people. in this bill, we reclaim those $53 billion from the oil companies and we will reduce the federal deficit by $53 billion. 15:03:55 that's in this bill. and it is going to be the dues which the oil company should be paying to the american people were using american waters. at $80 a barrel for the american people to be 15:04:10subsidizing bill oil to drill, it would be like subsidizing a fish to swim or a bird to fly. to subs died -- to subsidize the oil industry to drill for oil at $80 a barrel you just don't have to do it. with this bill, we cut the 15:04:28 deficit and we stop big oil from cutting corners on safety. this is b.p.'s bill, but it is america's ocean. that's what this bill is all about. 15:04:42 that's what this vote is on today. are we going to reclaim the oceans of america so that they are not po lewded, so that b.p. and the oil companies pay the royalty they owe to our people and not avoid them, that we reduce the federal deficit and 15:05:00 we make sure we never again see a day where the american people for 100 days have to watch oil flow into our oceans, vote aye on this very important legislation. the chair the gentleman's time 15:05:16 has expired. for what purpose does the gentleman from washington rise? Hastings, D. (R-WA):has all the gentleman's time been used? the chair: that is correct. 15:05:34 Hastings, D. (R-WA):i yield myself the remainder of my time. the chair: the gentleman is recognized for five minutes. Hastings, D. (R-WA):the gentleman was talking about the oceans and 15:05:44 how this bill will save the oceans. i don't think anyone in this body doesn't want to make sure our oceans are in a healthy, robust way. but it begs the questions, why are there restrictions, if this is an oceans bill and a gulf oil bill, why does this bill 15:06:01 deal with onshore oil and gas regulation and restrictions? that question, honestly, has not come up once in the debate, even though that reference has been made many times by members on this side of the aisle. 15:06:17 this amendment, of course, is on the manager's amendment. it is 17 democrat amendments and one republican amendment. there may be some good things involved with this amendment. in fact, there are. but why is there always this 15:06:33 tendency to throw so much more into these amendments when many of the subjects that are covered in it have not been fully vetted throughout the committee process? it's a pattern we see over and over and over again. 15:06:49 frankly, it's a pattern i think the american people see reandspond to when asked about how they feel this body is in a favorable or unfavorable way. this body has very low unfavorable ratings. 15:07:08 i think this is part, not the only thing, but this is certainly part of that. mr. chairman, i urge my colleagues to vote against the manager's amendment and i'm senchly going to ask them to vote against the underlying bill because the underlying bill, while purported to be in 15:07:24 response to the gulf oil spill we saw it expanded a moment ago, at least in remarks by the gentleman from massachusetts to all the oceans in fact the gentleman from california said the same thing, come to think of it, but what this bill is really all about, when you look 15:07:40 at the substance and how it affects the american people is another gigantic tax increase and an addition of mandatory spending on top of the mandatory spending we have in our government right now. we all know, all of us in this 15:07:56 body know, that the mandatory spending in this congress and our federal government is unsustainable other time. yet here we are, albeit at a small level, adding to mandatory spending. mr. chairman, i urge my 15:08:11 colleagues to oppose the rahall amendment and the underlying bill and with that, i yield back my time. the chair the gentleman yields back the lance of his time. the question son the amendment offered by the gentleman from west virginia. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the ayes have 15:08:27 it. the amendment is agreed to. Hastings, D. (R-WA):i ask for a recorded vote. the chair: pursuant to clause 6 of rule 18, further proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from west virginia will be postponed. it is now in order to consider 15:08:49 amendment number two printed in part b of house report 111-512. for what purpose does the gentleman rise? Castle (R-DE):i rise to present the amendment. the chair: the clerk will 15:09:04 report the amendment. the chair amendment number two offered by mr. castle of gare. the chair pursuant to house resolution 1574, mr. castle, and a member opposed each will control five minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from delaware. Castle (R-DE): i yield myself such 15:09:20 time as i may consume. the chair the gentleman is recognized. Castle (R-DE): i rise in support of amendment number two to ensure there's no delay in the development of ocean renewable energy resources, including offshore wind under the m.m.s. reorganization called for under 15:09:37 title 1. the actions to reform m.m.s. following the devastating oil spill are necessary and commendable. while the new bureaus and offices are focused on the critical task of transforming the agency into a more effective, trands parent 15:09:52 regulator this will require significant organizational alterations. it would be a great disappointment to lose ground in our efforts to prepare a workable comprehensive offshore energy plan for our nation. if we are serious about advancing new clean sources of power, which i sincerely hope 15:10:11 we are, an important goal of the m.m.s. reorganization must continue to facilitate, not hinder, the development of offshore renewable energy development in the united states. for offshore developments under 15:10:25 way like the wind project off the coast of delaware, progress must continue. while i continue to believe there's value in continuing a separate office for renewable energy development which we can perhaps continue to work on in discussions with the senate 15:10:41 this would at a minimum assure 15:10:45 that attention is paid to protecting against bottlenecks that could result in unnecessary delays. offshore wind farms alone present a significant and rapidly growing spors of emissions free electrical power for our constituents. 15:10:59 the u.s. department of energy reports confirm that winds off the coast of the united states are a promising source of clean, renewable electrical power. my amendment is simple and calls attention to the need to ensure that targeted efforts to support offshore wind and renewable energy continues 15:11:15 without delay. i hope my colleagues on both sides of the aisle will support its adoption. i reserve the balance of my time. Rahall (D-WV): we're prepared to accept the gentleman's amendment and thank him for 15:11:32 bringing it to us. i yield. Castle (R-DE): i yield. the chair: does the gentleman from delaware yield back the balance of his time? 15:11:49 Castle (R-DE):i yield back. the chair: the question son the amendment offered by the gentleman from delaware. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, 2/3 -- in the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it. the amendment is agreed to. it is now in order to consider 15:12:07 amendment number three printed in part b of house report 111-582. for what purpose does the gentleman from wisconsin rise? Kind, R. (D-WI):i have an amendment at the desk. THE CLERK: amendment number three printed in house report 15:12:23 111-582, offered by mr. kind of wisconsin. the chair the gentleman from wisconsin, mr. kind, and a member opposed each will control five minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from wisconsin. Kind, R. (D-WI):i yield myself one minute. 15:12:36 i ask unanimous consent to revise and extend. the chair the gentleman is recognized. Kind, R. (D-WI):one of the strengths of the clear act is it a asks companies taking from our lands to contribute to fund started 15:12:52 in the 1960's to help preserve and conserve. the problem is, so much of the public lands available are inaccessible. they're not accessible for the hunters, the fishermen, the outdoor recreationist, those who enjoy shooting sports to 15:13:09 gain access to the lands. close to 35 million acres that currently exist in public lands are inaccessible to hunters and fishermen throughout the country this amendment would direct 1.5% of the land-water conservation fund that would be 15:13:24 used to purchase easements or right of ways. so that hunters and fishermen have access to the public lands. this is one of the contributing causes to people not hunting or -- not involving in hunting. 15:13:41 it's consistent with the underlying philosophy of the land and water conservation fund. i ask my colleagues to support it and i reserve the balance of my time. the chair the gentleman from washington state. Hastings, D. (R-WA):i ask unanimous consent to claim the time in 15:13:56 opposition. the chair the gentleman is recognized. Hastings, D. (R-WA):i yield myself such time as i may consume. our main purpose here today is supposed to be, as i have said several times, to be addressing the gulf oil spill and ensuring 15:14:14 that offshore drilling is the safest in the world. unfortunately, as i have mentioned again many times, the democrats have used this vehicle to put extraneous material on this particular bill. one of the most glaring 15:14:30 unrelated items i had mentioned several times also is the $30 billion in new mandatory spending. an oil spill is not an excuse to spend more money, especially when the money is going toward provisions that are completely 15:14:45 unrelated to the gulf oil spill. regardless of your views of the land and water conservation fund and the his poric preservation fund, and i know i would probably disagree if it was my friend from wisconsin, everyone should agree that that 15:15:01 bill has no business being here in this particular bill. however, i fully support our nation's enforcement and would like to see more of our public land opened for a variety of purposes, including hunting, 15:15:17 fishing and economic development. given that the majority and the administration are looking for ways to lock up our land and block public access, it is encouraging to me to see my colleagues across the aisle for 15:15:32 supporting increased access and i thank the gentleman for that. i hope we'll work together in the future to ensure that all americans have greater access to public lands. as i have mentioned this bill 15:15:43 is not the appropriate vehicle to address this issue, i think we can do it in a much more ordered way if we take this up on its own, because there is some merit to the gentleman's proposal. but i will not stand in the way 15:15:57 of this amendment and with that, i yield back my time. the chair the gentleman from wisconsin. kind kind at this time i'd -- Kind, R. (D-WI):at this time i'd like to yield to the gentleman from maryland, mr. kratovil. the chair: the gentleman from 15:16:15 maryland is recognized. Kratovil (D-MD):thank you, mr. chairman, thank you, mr. kind, for your leadership on this amendment. i rise in strong support of the amendment so we kin crease, as was said, a -- can increase, as was said, federal land for hunters and anglers. our amendment will simply refocus a very small portion of 15:16:31 the land and water conservation fund to enhance access to existing public lands. specifically for easements or right of ways that open access to federal land which is currently inaccessible or significantly restricted. specifically the amendment 15:16:46 directs the secretary to dedicate no less than $1.-- 1.5% of the funds to increase recreational public access to existing lands for hunting, fishing or other recreational purposes. our amendment stays very true to the original intent of the fund which is stated in the statute, 15:17:04 to presift in preserving, developing and assuring accessibility to outdoor recreational resources. i urge my colleagues to support the amendment on behalf of the sports men and women throughout the country and for the communities that rely on these activities to generate and create jobs. 15:17:19 with that i yield back. the chair the gentleman from maryland yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from wisconsin. Kind, R. (D-WI): thank you, mr. chairman. at this time i'd like to yield one minute to a real champion of recreational sports men and 15:17:33 women throughout the country, the gentleman from new mexico, mr. hint rick. the chair the gentleman from new mexico is recognized. Hinojosa (D-TX): mr. chairman, as an avid hunter and sportsman, i'm very happy to sponsor this amendment. too many families, sportsmen, 15:17:50 outdoor enthusiasts across this nation continue to be locked out of public lands because of lack of legal access. Heinrich (D-NM):i personally spent hours on sports back, but 15:18:06 without permission from adjacent private land owners, which usually requires an escort from the bureau of land management, legal access to this is not available. this amendment would dedicate a small percentage of the land and water conservation fund to 15:18:22 acquire those rights of way for the public from willing sellers. public lands like this belong to every american that amendment will help ensure that future generations of americans can hunt and fish, hike and camp on these lands. 15:18:37 i urge my colleagues to support this amendment and to support the underlying legislation and i yield back the balance of my time. the chair the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from wisconsin. Kind, R. (D-WI):mr. chairman, i yield at this time one minute to a champion of outdoor recreation 15:18:54 throughout the country and state of nevada, the gentlelady from nevada, ms. titus. the chair the gentlelady from nevada is recognized for one minute. Titus (D-NV): thank you, mr. chairman. i rise in strong support of this amendment to enhance access to public lands by acquiring right of ways from willing sellers. 15:19:09 the federal government owns more than 85% of the land in my state of nevada which includes some of the most spectacular landscapes in the nation. outdoor recreation supports nearly 20,000 jobs in nevada and it generates $160 million in annual state taxes. 15:19:26 by increasing public access to these federal lands for hunting, fishing, camping, hiking, other recreational purposes, we would be doing something that would not only help our economy but would be welcomed by enthusiasts throughout the state. thank you. 15:19:42 i yield back. the chair the gentleman from wisconsin. Kind, R. (D-WI):thank you, mr. chairman. at this time i yield one minute to the gentleman from virginia, a champion for hunting and fishermen in virginia and throughout the country, mr. perriello. the chair: the gentleman from virginia is recognized for one minute. 15:19:57 Perlmutter (D-CO):i rise in support of this -- Perriello (D-VA):i rise in support of this amendment to 1.5% in the land and water conservation fund for recreational public access including hunting and fishing. 13 million hunters in the united states generate $67 billion in economic activity every year and 15:20:15 account for one million jobs. but beyond the dollars and cents this is about a way of life, about heritage and about time with families spent together. so for our sportsmen, it's not enough just to ensure their rights but to ensure there's a place to exercise those rights 15:20:30 and this is a huge step forward to make sure that those recreational activities have a place for us across the united states. i yield back. the chair the gentleman from wisconsin has one minute remaining. 15:20:43 Kind, R. (D-WI):thank you, mr. chairman. i'd like to yield 15 seconds to the chairman of the natural resources committee, mr. rahall. the chair: the gentleman is recognized for 15 seconds. Rahall (D-WV): i thank the gentleman from wisconsin for yielding and certainly support his amendment. i commend him for his leadership and for his efforts and discussions that have been held 15:21:00 long and on many occasions in regard to his amendment and support his bill and yield back. the chair the gentleman from wisconsin. Kind, R. (D-WI): i yield myself the remainder of the time. the chair: the gentleman is recognized for 45 seconds. Kind, R. (D-WI): thank you, mr. chairman. 15:21:13 i also want to thank -- i wrote a letter in support of this amendment, the wildlife conservation partners, a group of 44 outdoor recreation organizations from hunting to fishing, to shooting sports, to vonsvation groups throughout the country. they see the -- conservation 15:21:29 groups throughout the country. mr. chairman, this is also an amendment about jobs. because outdoor recreation, hunting, fishing, shooting sport, they contribute over $730 billion to the national economy every year. they support 6.5 million jobs, almost one of every 20 jobs is 15:21:45 associated with some outdoor recreational activity. and they stimulate close to 8% to 9% of consumer spending in this country. so increasing access to more people have the opportunity to get to the public plans, to do this is going to create jobs, strengthen our economy. 15:22:00 i enurge my colleagues to support the amendment. THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE:all -- the chair: all time having expired, the question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from wisconsin. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it. amendment is agreed to. Kind, R. (D-WI): on that i'd qut yeas and nays. 15:22:16 the chair a recorded vote is requested. pursuant to clause 6 of rule 18, further proceedings on this amendment offered by the gentleman from wisconsin will be postponed. it is now in order to consider amendment number 4 printed in part b of house report 111-582. for what purpose does the 15:22:34 gentlewoman from new mexico seek recognition? Shea-Porter (D-NH): i have an amendment at the desk. the chair: the clerk will designate the amendment. THE CLERK: amendment number 4 printed in part b of house report 111-582 offered by ms. shea-porter of new hampshire. the chair: pursuant to the resolution, the gentlewoman from 15:22:50 new hampshire and a member opposed each will control five minutes. the chair recognizes the gentlewoman from new hampshire. Shea-Porter (D-NH): thank you, mr. chairman. i'd like the to thank chairman rahall and his staff for this very good piece of legislation before us today. it is the products of months of hard work. i believe it is a transformative 15:23:05 bill that will go a long way to ensuring responsible energy development and better environmental protection. the tragedy in the gulf of mexico has reminded us of what can happen if we are not vigilant and constantly improving our safety in environmental protections. it is also -- it has also 15:23:23 reminded us that when we put our lands and oceans at risk for energy development in one area, we should be putting land aside and protecting it in another area. the underlying bill makes good on a promise to fully fund the land and water conservation fund. that program has protected more 15:23:37 than five million acres of land across this country. fully funding lwcf is long overdue and thank the chairman for his leadership on this issue. mr. chair, among other things, the bill before us makes needed improvements to the ways that our offshore energy leasing is carried out. 15:23:54 during my time on the natural resources committee i have been particularly troubled by the reports of unethical behavior at the government agency that was previously overseeing energy leasing. that outrageous conduct must never be allowed to happen again in any agency. this bill puts in place strong 15:24:10 ethics rirnlts -- requirements and training. my amendment takes this a step further by requiring that the ethics guidelines developed by the interior of secretary be updated every three years. mr. chairman, another lesson we have learned is that oil companies do not necessarily use 15:24:25the best available technology and that they are not fully prepared for a spill. immediately after the spill, b.p. turned to solutions that had been around for 20 years, solutions from the exxon valdez disaster. it was painfully clear that they had not spent time nor money to 15:24:42 develop new technologies to clean up the spill. the bill before us creates an offshore technology research and risk assessment program to conduct research and development of new drilling and spill response technologies. my amendment adds language to 15:24:57 ensure that we study the best available spill response technology and its availability from in regions where drill something taking place. this is to make certain that we have in place the best technology and equipment needed to respond when there is an accident. 15:25:12 finally, mr. chair, it's also critical that this new technology we're developing be integrated into exploration and response plans. my amendment requires companies to certify as part of their annual certification for offshore drilling that their plans include the best available 15:25:28 technology. when the b.p. executives testified before the natural resources committee, it was clear to me they were more concerned with cutting corners and shaving costs than making sure they had the safest operation with the best technology. 15:25:42 requiring these companies to take into account the best available technology and its availability just makes sense. again, mr. chair, this is a very strong bill we are considering today and i thank chairman rahall for all his hard work. i urge my colleagues to support this amendment and the 15:25:56 underlying bill and i reserve the balance of my time. the chair the gentleman from colorado. Lamborn (R-CO):mr. chairman, i ask unanimous consent to claim time in opposition to this amendment although i do not intend to oppose it. the chair: without objection. Lamborn (R-CO): i yield such time as i may 15:26:12 consume. the chair the gentleman is recognized. Lamborn (R-CO): mr. chairman, updating the supplemental guidelines on ethics every three years will help the department of the interior keep current with new issues as they arise and will focus the government employees' attention on appropriate ethical 15:26:28 behavior as they deal with the private sector. the horizon disaster has focused everyone's attention on the lack of any contingency plan that could be implemented expeditiously to address a blowout in deep water conditions. 15:26:44 we basically watched a three-month ongoing experiment with various devices being fabbri gated to try to -- devices to cap the well. we also found that we didn't have enough boom in place to protect the shoreline. and that new boom had to be 15:27:00 manufactured to meet the requirements in the state oil spill response plans. and we discovered that some of the plans underestimated how much boom might be required to protect the shoreline from a major spill. using the best available technology is crucial in keeping 15:27:16 the public's trust going forward with offshore oil and gas development. both republicans and democrats have brought agreed agreement on the needs to protect -- agreement on the needs to protect and improve offshore production safety and 15:27:32 environmental protection. this amendment is an example of our agreement and urge my colleagues to support it. what i don't agree with is going beyond the gulf to encompass all energy production in the entire united states in order to raise energy taxes by $22 billion, 15:27:51 raising energy taxes in a recession will kill jobs. and, mr. chairman, i reserve the balance of my time. the chair the gentleman reserves. Shea-Porter (D-NH): thank you, mr. 15:28:04 chair. i'd now like to yield one minute to the gentleman from new york, a leading environmentalist, mr. hall. the chair the gentleman is recognized for one minute. halm haul hull -- Hall, J. (D-NY): thank you, mr. speaker. and i thank the gentlelady and the chairman. i rise today in support of this amendment as well as the 15:28:20 underlying bill. the deepwater horizon explosion on april 20 cost our nation tens of billions of dollars in economic damages. and caused widespread devastation of our natural resources. it did not have to happen. this was a disaster that was preventable. 15:28:36 over the last few months we have learned that b.p. consistently made choices to sacrifice safety for profit. they testified that they did not use vital safety technology like acoustic sensing devices because u.s. law did not require it. it is time for to us change 15:28:51 that. i recently introduced legislation to require oil companies to use the best available technology and i'm proud to support this amendment which also requires oil companies to include the best available technology in their exploration and spill response 15:29:08 plans. mr. speaker, the cost of using state-of-the-art technology is much less than the cost of cleanup and the tragic loss of life. i urge my colleagues to support this amendment and the underlying bill. and i yield back. the chair the gentleman from 15:29:25 colorado. Lamborn (R-CO): i continue to reserve the balance of my time. unless there are no more speakers in which case i'd be happy to yield back. Shea-Porter (D-NH): i would like to yield one minute to the chairman, mr. rahall. the chair: the gentleman is recognized for one minute. Rahall (D-WV): i thank the gentlelady for yielding and i certainly do support her 15:29:42amendment. i commend her for her leadership on our committee on natural resources in helping to develop this legislation and it's a commonsense amendment that deserves the support of every member of this body and it certainly makes the bill better 15:29:57 and i appreciate her efforts. i yield back my time to the gentlelady. the chair the gentlewoman has 30 seconds remaining. the gentleman from colorado has 3 3/4 minutes. 15:30:17 Lamborn (R-CO):i yield back the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman yields back. Shea-Porter (D-NH): i encourage my colleagues to support this amendment and the bill and i 15:30:27 yield back my time. the chair the question son the amendment offered by the gentlewoman from new hampshire. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it. the amendment is agreed to. 15:30:45 it's now in order to consider amendment number five printed in part b of house report 111-582. for what purpose does the 15:30:54 gentleman from new mexico seek recognition? Teague (D-NM): i have an amendment at the desk. the chair: the clerk will designate the amendment. THE CLERK: amendment number five printed in house report 111-582 offered by mr. teague of new mexico. 15:31:09 the chair pursuant to house resolution 1574, the gentleman from new mexico, mr. teague, and a member opposed, each will control five minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from new mexico. Teague (D-NM): i rise today to offer a simple but important 15:31:25 amendment. my amendment would add another means by which facilities may demonstrate compliance with the financial responsibility provision of the oil pollution act of 199240e678 amendment enables two or more companies to meet individual 15:31:41 responsibility requirements by pooling resources or having joint insurance coverage this would avoid redundant coverage, redeuced insurance costs and enhanced access to insurance. in the event of a liability incident, any party to such an 15:31:59 arrangement would have full access to the amount. this amendment does not substitute or change current provisions for meeting financial responsibility. 15:32:13 rather, it simply add ootsdz -- adds another method for meeting financial responsibility requirements. there's no reduction in protection of the public interest, no reduction in protection for the environment. mr. chairman, ever since i arrived in congress, i made it my mission to fight for the 15:32:29 little guys. the companies whose names you don't see on television commercials but that provide jobs for millions of americans and produce so much of our nation's domestic energy. you find a lot of those companies around my hometown, hobbs, new mexico. 15:32:47 and you find a lot of them operating in the gulf of mexico. having independent oil and gas producers providing american energy in the gulf of mexico is critical to moving away from foreign oil. the big oil companies are generally interested in production -- in producing only the biggest plays with the 15:33:08 biggest potential playoff -- payoffs. it's the small companies that are producing energy that wouldn't get produced otherwise. independent oil and natural gas companies currently account for about half of the nearly 400,000 jobs and $20 billion in 15:33:24 federal, state and local revenues generated by the industry in 2009 this amendment simply allows smaller, independent companies the flexibility they need to meet financial responsibility requirements. i ask for broad bipartisan 15:33:37 support of this amendment and i reserve the balance of my time. the chair the gentleman from colorado. Lamborn (R-CO):i ask unanimous consent to claim time in opposition to this amendment, though i don't intend to oppose it. the chair: without objection. Lamborn (R-CO): and i yield myself such time 15:33:54 as i may consume. the chair the gentleman is recognized for such time as he may consume. Lamborn (R-CO):republicans have no problem with this amendment. the fact that it will force small companies to band together to meet sleshhold requirements is a sad statement 15:34:11 on the rest of the bill. though this provision may help small companies immediate their -- meet their certificate of financial responsibility requirements, nothing in this amendment solves the liability problem and nothing in -- in this amendment solved the $22 billion tax increase in this 15:34:28 bill. unlimited liability will cripple production by removing all but the largest companies from offshore drilling there should be reasonable liability but unlimited or infinite liability goes too far. it will kill jobs. republicans support this 15:34:46 amendment but simply like putting a band-aid on a broken leg. i suppose it doesn't hurt anything, but it doesn't cure the underlying problem. it might even lull someone into thinking we're doing something. anyone who voters in teague amendment and the underlying 15:35:01 bill together is putting the people they are purporting to help out of business. the teague amendment does absolutely nothing to cure unlimited liability. mr. chairman, at this time, i would now like to yield one minute to my colleague from 15:35:17 maryland, mr. cummings. i reserve the balance of my time. the chair the gentleman has yielded. the gentleman from maryland is recognized for one minute. the gentleman from maryland is recognized. 15:35:33 Cummings (D-MD):i thank the gentleman for yielding. i rise in support of the 15:35:37 amendment. the underlying amendment in the nature of the substitute was raised from the current $150 billion to $300 billion the amount of financial responsibility that offshore facilities must demonstrate. this is a significant increase. i believe this increased level 15:35:53 is appropriate, given the risk associated with the offshore energy production risks that the deepwater horizon spill made so clear. importantly, however, the president can lower the amount of responsibility they must 15:36:09 demonstrate if certain criteria are met. although it cannot be below $150 -- 105 million. i yield back. the chair the gentleman from 15:36:24 maryland yields back the gentleman from colorado reserve the gentleman from new mexico. Teague (D-NM): i yield two minutes to the gentlewoman from texas, congresswoman jackson lee. the chair: the gentlelady from texas is recognized for two minutes. 15:36:40 Jackson Lee, S. (D-TX):i thank the gentleman from new mexico and i thank him for working together with me on this amendment and for his leadership. i offered a similar amendment and was pleased to join this amendment as the teague-jackson lee amendment. 15:36:57 it is important to note that this is a fair amendment that does something. it really does do something for the small independent companies. this amendment would allow the financial responsibility required to operate in the gulf to be pooled among companies working together. 15:37:12 it means that we give them the opportunity, because of the $300 million necessary to be able to do business in the gulf and not go out of business. what it means is preserving thousands of jobs. first of all, the u.s. independent operation in the 15:37:29 gulf, because of their operations, have a major contribution to energy security and energy supply, providing reasonable priced fuel for our families and economy. 81% of all producing gull -- of all oil producing is in the independent leases and 46% of 15:37:45 the gulf's producing deepwater leases as well. independents have drilled 281,000 wells in the deep water and safely. they operate 78% of the farmed out acreage originally in the 15:38:00 hands of the majors over the past 10 years. almost three billion barrels of oil recovery in reserve originally found by the majors are now operated by independents. small companies that create a lot of jobs. this is an amendment that will allow them work together, pool 15:38:18 their resources and not put their burden on the taxpayers. let me acknowledge i'm glad in the manager's amendment, my requirement to have redundancies was also included. i thank the gentleman from new mexico for his leadership, it's 15:38:33 my pleasure to work with you for an amendment that's doing something, helping the independents say in -- stay in business and create jobs and it is helping them do the work that will allow for the american people to have quality oil for cheap prices. 15:38:47 i yield back. thank you. the chair the gentlelady from texas' time has expire. the gentleman from new mexico reserves, he has 30 seconds remaining. the gentleman from colorado has 2 1/2 minutes remaining. Lamborn (R-CO): i yield back the 15:39:04 balance of my time. the chair the gentleman from colorado has the right to close. does the gentleman -- does the gentleman choose to yield back. Lamborn (R-CO): i reserve the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman from new mexico. Teague (D-NM): i yield back my 15:39:22 time. the chair the gentleman from new mexico yields back. the gentleman from colorado has the right to close and has 2 1/2 minutes. Lamborn (R-CO): i reiterate we have no objection to the amendment. i wish it accomplished something because deeper things 15:39:37 in this bill are going to kill offshore production in large part and we don't need to be killing jobs and raising taxes in a time of recession. so we have no objection because it doesn't do any harm, and at this point, we would yield back. the chair the gentleman from colorado yields back. 15:39:53 all time having been yielded back, the question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from new mexico. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair the ayes have it, the amendment is agreed. to the gentleman from maryland. Cummings (D-MD): i ask for a recorded vote. the chair: pursuant to clause 6 of rule 18, further proceedings 15:40:10 on the amendment offered by the gentleman from new mexico will be postponed. it is now in order to consider 15:40:26 amendment number six printed in part b of house report 111-582. for what purpose does the gentleman from minnesota seek 15:40:37 recognition? Oberstar (D-MN): as the designee of the gentleman from connecticut, mr. himes, i offer amendment number six. the chair: the clerk will report the amendment. 15:40:50 THE CLERK:amendment number six offered by mr. oberstar of minnesota. the chair: pursuant to house resolution 1574, the gentleman from minnesota, mr. oberstar, and a member opposed each will control five minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from minnesota. Oberstar (D-MN): mr. chairman, i yield myself three minutes. 15:41:07 the chair the gentleman is recognized for three minutes. Himes (D-CT): the amendment addresses two important issue -- Oberstar (D-MN): the amendment provides two important issues you should o.p.a., the oil 15:41:24 pollution act. the first issue is acquisition of additional natural resources as part of a potential remedy for damages in instances where the existing resource cannot be or is unlikely to be successfully restored. 15:41:41 in o.p.a., section 1006, provides that damages to natural resources can be addressed through restoration, rehabilitation, replacement or acquisition of equivalent resources where other measures 15:41:55 are unlikely or impossible to be implemented. the himes amendment which i offer on his behalf, emphasizes that acquisition of an equivalent natural resource can be an acceptable alternative to restoration and rehabilitation. consistent with current law, the acquisition of an 15:42:12 equivalent natural resource should be used only when restoration is likely to be unsuccessful or the acquisition provides a substantially greater likelihood of improving lost or damaged resources and 15:42:30 supports local ecological processes. the second part they have -- of the amendment will ensure that it emphasizes restoring the entire damaged ecosystem rather than dealing simply with 15:42:45 specific segments thereof. the gulf of mexico is such a unique resource, with countless species of fish, shellfish, marine wildlife, all integrated, that it nidse to be 15:43:01 treated as an overall cohesive ecosystem. i reserve the balance of my time. the chair the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the gentleman from washington state. Hastings, D. (R-WA): i rise to claim time in opposition. 15:43:16 the chair the gentleman is recognized for five minutes. Hastings, D. (R-WA): i yield myself three minutes. the chair: the gentleman is recognized for three minutes. Hastings, D. (R-WA): let's be specific on what this particular fund is all about and i'll explain why i think it is the very, very bad idea. 15:43:34 the fundamental goal of the natural resources damages act, the fund we're talking about is to ensure the protection and restoration of all resources on federal lands, water and land. this includes restoration of 15:43:50 damages caused by fires, invasive species, oil spills, ship groundings, and vandalism. with this amendment -- what this amendment attempts to do is shift funds from the restoration of our national parks and national wildlife refuges to the purchase of not 15:44:08 impacted land. now, mr. chairman, i just find this amendment ironic. since the legislation, the underlying legislation that we're debating already mandated, let me emphasize that, mr. chairman, mandates up 15:44:23 to $30 billion work a b, dollars to spend on land acquisition over the next 30 years, why do we need this amendment? why, for goodness' sakes, will we take a fund, the natural resources damages fund if you 15:44:40 will, and say, ok, now you can use that for land acquisition. is $30 billion not enough? is $30 billion not enough? let me put it a different way, mr. chairman. one of the issues we have in 15:44:55o ur country with public lands is the maintenance backlog. we talk about, this is analogous to maintenance backlog. we talk about, we haven't got enough money to maintain our natural res sos -- resources. in fact that figure was $9 15:45:14 billion. here is a fund that is in part, part of the restoration and one could say maintenance of our federal lands and we want to take money away from that. and i choir more land. 15:45:29 what is the goal here? is the goal here to increase the $9 billion to $10 billion, 15:45:37 $11 billion? who knows how high we can't maintain. is there not enough? this amendment in my view ought to be defeated. it's not well intentioned at all. it's taken -- taken another tragedy, using the tragedy of 15:45:51 the gulf of mexico and simply saying, another opportunity to take a fund and buy more federal land. this doesn't make any sense at all to me, mr. chairman. i urge my colleagues to vote no and i reserve the balance of my time. the chair the gentleman 15:46:08 reserves the balance of his time. the gentleman from minnesota. Oberstar (D-MN):i yield one minute to the gentleman from maine. colorado, i'm sorry. the chair: the gentleman from colorado is recognized for one minute. Polis (D-CO): i rise today in support of the himes amendment and on behalf of its sponsor. 15:46:30 mr. himes' amendment builds upon lessons learned from the exxon valdez spill. the himes' amendment improves an existing environmental 15:46:42 restoration provision that authorizes a program to protect wildlife habitats and have the responsible party cover the cost of purchasing or preserving such areas. i'd also like to thank the natural resources committee and transportation committee for working with me in incorporating 15:46:57 provisions that address a number of my priorities in the manager's amendment, namely including language that will better ensure the department of interior follows the law as it is supposed to. mr. speaker, i rise in strong support of the amendment and the underlying bill. the act is good and desperately needed policy to protect 15:47:15 taxpayer bailouts for big oil failures. the sact a model of government transparency, fiscal responsibility and good stewardship and call upon my colleagues to join me in supporting the amendment and the underlying bill and i yield back the balance of my time. 15:47:29 the chair the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from minnesota reserves his time. the gentleman from washington state. Hastings, D. (R-WA): i reserve my time. i understand i have the right to close. the chair: the gentleman has the right to close. Hastings, D. (R-WA): i reserve the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman from minnesota. Oberstar (D-MN): i yield myself the 15:47:46 balance of time. the chair the gentleman is recognized for two minutes. Oberstar (D-MN):the gentleman from washington is mistaken in his understanding or his reading of the amendment that i offer. it's an amendment to o.p.a. 15:48:04 it is not an amendment to the dollar amounts and does not rerns the dollar amounts -- reference the dollar amounts. under o.p.a., quote, state and local officials designated under 15:48:22 the subsection shall develop and implement a plan for the acquisition of the equivalent of the natural resources under their trusteeship. it does not -- the language does not clearly enough refer to the 15:48:41 level of replacement resources that may be damaged. what we do with this language is clarify the ability to restore those resources that have been 15:48:58 danieled with an equivalent resource. that's all it does -- damage with the equivalent resource. that's all it does. i yield to the gentleman if he has a question. Hastings, D. (R-WA): in due respect, i thank the gentleman for yielding in due respect, you acknowledge 15:49:12 that this could be used to buy additional land with a damaged fund, is that correct? Oberstar (D-MN): it's to replace what has been restored -- been destroyed. it's really just clarifying what 15:49:27 is already available under o.p.a. by making it clear that what the funds can be used for, those resources that have been damaged so bad they can't be restored. Hastings, D. (R-WA):will the gentleman yield? Oberstar (D-MN):yes. Hastings, D. (R-WA):it clarifies but 15:49:42 it add as very important part. it allows land acquisition. now, you know, i'm thinking, if i may -- Oberstar (D-MN):the gentleman, it does not add, that is current law. that is available under o.p.a. what we're saying is, as a part of it -- 15:50:00 the chair the gentleman from minnesota's time has expired. the gentleman from west virginia. the gentleman from washington. Hastings, D. (R-WA):no offense to west virginia. thank you. how much time do i have left? the chair: the gentleman has 2 1/2 minutes remaining. Hastings, D. (R-WA):i yield my the -- 15:50:16myself the balance of the time and i yield to the gentleman to finish his remarks. Oberstar (D-MN):again, the acquisition of replacement land is available and authorized under o.p.a. 90. what this amendment does is 15:50:34clarify that in that replacement you can replace that part of the ecosystem that has been irreparabley damaged with better land. Hastings, D. (R-WA):well, reclaiming my time, reclaiming my time, and 15:50:51 i appreciate the gentleman's trying to clarify that. i have to say in my reading of this that this will lend itself to more acquisition and i will 15:51:05 simply say this, that if -- reading the language here, provides a substantially greater likelihood of improving the resilience of whatever's left. now, having said that, let me put this analogous to my part of 15:51:21 the country as it relates to refuges. if a refuge burns in my area and it might damage something, the way i envision the interpretation of this, the refuge manager can say, boy, this is an irrepairble loss and there might be some private land 15:51:37 right next doorks i think i'll buy that private land. now, in due respect, that is the way i interpret it. listen, i hope i'm wrong and i hope you're right. but i have a very strong wariness of any attempt, 15:51:52 especially in a bill, i say to my friend from -- the transportation chairman, especially when we are authorizing $30 billion of land acquisition. surely, surely there must be a way to massage that to satisfy 15:52:10 what the gentleman, at least what the gentleman's amendment purports to do. but i have to say, for this member, i am always wary when i see we are taking another fund and using that to acquire even 15:52:26 an extension of federal lands. i would yield to the gentleman. Oberstar (D-MN):i appreciate the gentleman yielding. i, too, have natural resources, national forest, national parks, wildlife refuge. 15:52:38 when fire, as it does, regularly strike the national forest, that land regenerates. the oil destroys. it likely cannot be restored by itself or by human intervention but replacing it with other land 15:52:56 and the language that's tailored very narrowly, limited to that purpose, of replacing what cannot be replaced. Hastings, D. (R-WA):reclaiming my time which i don't have, i appreciate the gentleman trying to help me through. 15:53:09 this i urge my colleagues to vote no. thank you. the chair all time has expired. the question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from connecticut -- the gentleman from connecticut's designee from minnesota, mr. oberstar. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it. 15:53:25 the amendment is agreed to. Hastings, D. (R-WA):mr. chairman, i ask for the yeas and nays. the chair: pursuant to clause 6 of rule 18, further proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from connecticut's designee, mr. oberstar, will be postponed. it is now in order to consider 15:53:41 amendment number 7 printed in part b of house report 111-582. for what purpose does the gentleman from virginia seek recognition? Connolly (D-VA):mr. chairman, i have an amendment at the desk. the chair: the clerk will designate the amendment. THE CLERK: amendment number 7 printed in house report 111-582 15:53:58 offered by mr. connolly of virginia. the chair pursuant to house resolution 1574, the gentleman from virginia, and a member opposed each will control five minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from virginia. Connolly (D-VA):thank you, mr. chairman. i want to thank chairman rahall and chairman observer tar in 15:54:12 particular for their hard work on this bill. i'm joined by congressman holt and welch who co-introduced this amendment, to ensure oil companies knt shift oil cleanup costs onto taxpayers. by allowing subsidiary companies to go bankrupt. 15:54:28 in an oil subsidiary is responsible for a spill, it can declare bankruptcy and not sell its assets in which the parent could would not get cleanup responsibilities. it would not sell liabilities to the value of cleanup and 15:54:45 liability costs exceed the value of the subsidiary's assets. this is a realistic scenario give the high cost of the cleanup of oil spills. even a well capitalized company with several billions could be responsible for an oil spill, costing tens of billions. the exxon valdez spill cost more 15:55:00 than $2 billion to clean up and that was just 10.9 million gallons of oil. the deepwater horizon bill already has cost $3 billion, with a total cleanup costs in the tens of billions at the very least. this act, through this act oil 15:55:16 companies could be responsible for much greater costs. the fishing industry in the gulf is worth $5.5 billion annualy. losing 50% of western florida's tourism would cost that state $10 billion. if congress eliminates the private liability cap, then an oil company responsible for a 15:55:34 spill could be liable for tens of billions. to reimburse property owners and lost wages. given the extraordinarily high cleanup of private liability cost of oil spills, we must close this loophole. our amendment would ensure that b.p. and other oil companies are not able to escape their cleanup 15:55:49 responsibilities without passage of this amendment. b.p. and oil companies could be could avoid paying for cleanup cost entirely. i urge my colleagues to support the amendment and i reserve the balance of my time. the chair the gentleman from virginia reserves his time. the gentleman from washington 15:56:02 state. Hastings, D. (R-WA):thank you, mr. chairman. i ask unanimous consent to claim the time in opposition although i'm not opposed to the amendment. the chair: the gentleman is recognized. Hastings, D. (R-WA):thank you, mr. chairman. i yield myself as itch time as i may consume. the chair: the gentleman is recognized. Hastings, D. (R-WA):mr. chairman, i 15:56:18 have no problem with this amendment. from the beginning we have said that the first priority is stopping the leak, cleaning up the gulf and making the communities and the people of the gulf states whole. and b.p. need to be held accountable for this disaster. having said that we need to be cognizant that our actions taken here or the actions of the administration do not in and of 15:56:35 themselves jeopardize american jobs and domestic energy production. part of holding b.p. accountable in this case, should b.p. america file for bankruptcy, is to ensure that the parent company that shares in the profits cover whatever debts may 15:56:49 be covered by b.p. america. that's what this amendment does and i am pleased to join my support for this and i will yield back the balance of my time. the chair the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from virginia. 15:57:04 Connolly (D-VA):i thank my colleague from washington. i would ask how much time remains? the chair: the gentleman has three minutes remaining. Connolly (D-VA):mr. chairman, i would request ask to yield one minute to my colleague, mr. holt, from new jersey. the chair: the gentleman is recognized for one minute. Holt (D-NJ): mr. speaker, i thank 15:57:19 the gentleman from virginia and join with him in our concern for the workers, the restaurant tours, the small business owners, all those who depend on the gulf of mexico for their livelihoods. this gives us ample motivation to close this loophole, which 15:57:36 allows oil companies to shift the cost for cleanup from the oil company to the taxpayers. current law would allow an oil company subsidiary who is responsible for an oil spill to declare bankruptcy. we must not depend just on the good word of the oil companies. 15:57:53 week of been given ample reason to question that good word. even today the new c.e.o. of b.p. says he's entertaining the idea of scaling back the cleanup in the gulf. we must close every loophole. this amendment, mr. connolly, 15:58:11 mr. welch and i and others woorks ensure that companies like b.p. pay every last cent that they're liable for, that the spill not spill over to the taxpayer. THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE: the 15:58:30 gentleman has yielded back all of -- the chair the gentleman has yielded back all of his time. Connolly (D-VA):i yield to mr. cummings. the chair: the gentleman from maryland is recognized for one minute. Cummings (D-MD):thank you very much, mr. speaker, and thank you for yielding. this amendment states that any entity other than an individual 15:58:45 person with an ownership interest in a vessel offshore, onshore facility, be pipelined of more than 5% is a responsible party under the oil policing act, if the assets of the vessels or facility are insufficient to the paid claims 15:59:02 arising from oil spill by the vessel or facility. i applaud mr. colt holte and mr. welch and i support this amendment which will ensure that parent companies with ownership stakes in subsidiaries to offshore facility ventures bear the cost owed by these 15:59:20 subsidiaries, spills from the facilities, if the facilities lack adequate assets. this will prevent such cause from being shifted to the oil spill liability trust. i urge my colleagues to support the amendment. i yield back. the chair the gentleman yields 15:59:33 back the balance of his time. the gentleman from virginia. Connolly (D-VA):thank you, mr. chairman. i want to thank my colleagues and i also want to thank the sfoling -- following staff for their assistance. dave, stacy, ben, linus, susan, george and david. we want to ensure that this 15:59:50 amendment only affects the relationship of parent subsidiary companies and i yield back. the chair the question son the amendment offered by the gentleman from virginia. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the

Roanoke police provided this dashcam video recording that documents the Sunday night police pursuit of a car being driven by Raymond Smith. It shows Smith's car, lights flashing, traveling at speeds in excess of 80 mph as it races to Baylor Regional Medical Center Grapevine with Raymond's brother, Gerald, as a passenger.Gerald was treated for a heart attack at the hospital after arrival. Roanoke police arrested Raymond Smith outside the emergency room and charged him with DWI.

INT BROLL GEORGE ZIMMERMAN TRAYVON MARTIN TRIAL / SWITCHED POOL FEED **NOTE: JUDGE'S COMMENTS IN CAPS **NAMES OF WITNESSES IN RED **VISUAL DESCRIPTIONS IN (PARENTHESES) **GOOD STATEMENTS/VIDEO BOLD 8:58:37 (Zimmerman enters, tan suit blue shirt and brown tie) (court rearranged differently) 9:00:12 PLEASE BE SEATED, GOOD MORNING. ON THE RECORD. ONE JUROR IS A FEW MINUTES LATE, WAIT FOR THEM. COUNCIL APPROACH FOR ONE MOMENT 9:00:59 (sidebar) 9:09:51 RECESS UNTIL THE POTENTIAL JURORS GET HERE 9:10:08 COURT IN RECESS ============================ 9:27:02 ATTORNEYS REQUEST THE FRYE HEARING BE TOMORROW AT 2. (sidebar) 9:31:03 deputy: jurors are present 9:32:36 PLEASE BE SEATED. GOOD MORNING... BEGIN WHATS REALLY THE JURY SELECTION, BEFORE WAS PRE SELECTION PROCESS... INSTRUCTIONS: IN ORDER TO HAVE FAIR TRIAL, RULES JURY MUST FOLLOW. MUST DECIDE CASE ON EVIDENCE IN COURT. DON'T COMMUNICATE ABOUT THE CASE. DO NOT DISCLOSE YOUR THOUGHTS OR ASK FOR ADVICE ON HOW TO DECIDE. NO ELECTRONIC DEVICES OR COMMUTERS TO COMMUNICATE ABOUT THIS CASE. DO NOT SEND OR ACCEPT MESSAGES ABOUT THIS CASE. MUST NOT DO RESEARCH THAT MAY HAVE ANYTHING TO DO WITH CASE. APPLIES IN COURT HOUSE, SEQUESTRATION, OR ANY WHERE ELSE. DEPENDING ON YOU TO FOLLOW RULES FOR A FAIR TRIAL. INVESTIGATE OR RESEARCH ON YOUR OWN, NO WAY TO ASSURE THEY ARE PROPER OR RELEVANT TO CASE. NO OPPORTUNITY TO DISPUTE EVIDENCE. BECOME AWARE OF VIOLATIONS OF INSTRUCTIONS, MUST TELL ME BY NOTE FROM COURT DEPUTY. 9:35:40 GOING TO BEGIN JURY SELECTION PROCESS, KNOWN AS VOIR DIRE. PURPOSE IS TO DETERMINE IF THE DECISION WOULD BE FAIR BASED ON EVIDENCE WITHOUT INFLUENCE FROM OUTSIDE FACTORS. NOT FOR PURPOSE OF PRYING INTO AFFAIRS... 9:36:27 CHARGES SET FORTH FOR ZIMMERMAN.... EVERY PERSON ACCUSED IS TO KNOW THE EXACT CHARGE. STATE OF FLORIDA VS. ZIMEMRMAN 12CF10838A COUNT 1 MURDER IN SECOND DEGREE. ON FEB. 26, 2012 ZIMMERMAN UNLAWFULLY KILLED MARTIN UNDER THE AGE OF 18, SHOOTING VICTIM. ZIMMERMAN CARRIED DISPLAYED USED ATTEMPT TO USE FIREARM. AS RESULT OF DEATH, INFLICTED UPON ANY PERSON.......... 9:38:13 INTRODUCED TO PARTICIPANTS OF THIS TRIAL. ARE ANY OF YOU RELATED TO ATTORNEYS OR ZIMMERMAN? NO HANDS ARE BEING RAISED 9:38:37 HANDED A LIST OF POTENTIAL WITNESSES IN THE CASE. IF YOU RECOGNIZE ANY NAMES PLEASE CIRCLE THEM. MANY MORE NAMES LISTED THAN ACTUALLY CALLED... REVIEW THAT. RAISE YOUR HAND IF YOU RECOGNIZE ANY INDIVIDUALS... ASK YOU TO TELL US WHAT PAGE AND WHAT NUMBER THEY ARE OR THEIR INITIALS. DONE READING, PLEASE LOOK UP. 9:46:19 SHOW OF HANDS BY FIRST ROW, DO YOU RECOGNIZE WITNESS NAMES? 9:46:46 (couldn't hear the juror number) ANYONE ON FRONT PAGE YOU RECOGNIZE? first page. HOW MANY? 2. they're both d's. FIRST NAME? j and d. first and fourth d. ATTORNEYS WILL ASK YOU QUESTIONS ABOUT THAT. ANYBODY ELSE ON THE LIST? no. 9:48:06 SECOND ROW, DO YOU RECOGNIZE NAMES? B61? HOW MANY? just 1, perhaps the last page the first one. ANYBODY ELSE ON THE SECOND ROW? G63? HOW MANY? 2. WHAT PAGE? second page. INITIAL OF LAST NAME? j. initial of first name? c. 5 OR 6TH DOWN FROM J's? 1 of them. the 5th. WHAT IS THE OTHER ONE? last page. INITIAL OF LAST NAME? w. INITIAL OF FIRST NAME? e. FIRST WD OR LAST WD? I only see one. oh it's the first. 9:50:14 ANYBODY ELSE? ON THE THIRD ROW? JUROR i33? WHO BY PAGE? first page last name b, first name c. THE LAST B? yes. ANYBODY ELSE ON THE LIST YOU RECOGNIZE? number 32, last c. CB? correct. last page...last name w, first name n. OK. I do have one more. last name z first name s. OK, COVER ALL OF THOSE? yes. 9:52:21 ANYBODY ELSE? JUROR E6. on last page, last name w first name n and last name z and first name s. ANYBODY ELSE? THANK YOU VERY MUCH. 9:53:20 rionda: good morning... introduce myself to you all. reviewing why this is important 9:55:11 spent last week and first two days of this week going through the process, asked all of you questions related to case regarding publicity. individual so it didn't contaminate other juror's knowledge. important at arriving a decision comes from this court room. agree? yes. issue with that, outside of courtroom can't factor into decision? 9:56:18 what you saw or read from media is irrelevant. now in stage 2. question you individually and collectively about this case or background stuff about you 9:56:45 assure us that you will give consideration to all questions asked? yes 9:56:59 if during this process I ask individually or as a group and you feel uncomfortable talking about it in a group, let us know.... 9:57:41 juror b7? correct. do you want us to bring up issues about that and the time of the question? yes sir 9:58:06 were trying to get a jury that speaks the truth and arrive at just verdict 9:58:20 some of you were talked to last week and others were Monday and Tuesday... anyone go home and celebrate going through to next round? nobody? 9:58:42 appreciate you've taken this time already. 9:58:59 juror b12.... as talked about individually, how long resident of Seminole county? at least 40 years. how long have you lived at current address? 19 years. live in state of Florida before that? Michigan. left there when I was 9. married? no. divorced? yes. how long married before divorce? a yr. what does former spouse do for living? he's dead. children? 2. how old? 32 and 19. what do they do for living? one's a full time student and the other one owns his own company. medical field and construction worker. how long have you been at current employer? since October. before that? home health nurse. how long? 5 years. supervise people in that position? no. before that? CNA. how long total? 5 years. members or involved in organizations at all? volunteer work for moose lodge and my church. how long, long time? yeah. 10:02:51 leadership position? no anymore. prior experience? no. outside work and volunteering, anything else? raising my daughter, I'm a mother. any other hobbies? part of red hat society. I like my wine and going to the beach. served on jury before? no. just don't like the media being there.... that takes away his privileges, they put everything everywhere.... 10:05:31 b29... originally from Chicago? yes. grew up there? yes. married? yes. how long? 10 years. kids, yes? lots. how many? 8. under age of 18? one is over 18. how old is that one? going to be 20. live with you and husband? resides with me now. going to school or working? arrived a few weeks ago, looking for work 10:06:32 how long at employment? 3 months. prior to that? CNA. how long? 7 years. member of organization? my house. military service? no. spend time outside work, but I know answer and what you're passionate about? kids. jury service? no. 10:07:34 b76... how long in Seminole? since 1995. how long at current address? 1 week. prior to that? another address. originally from? been here since 1966. marital status? married. how long? 30 years. children? 2. how old? 28 attorney, 26 CNA. does your son practice in Seminole? yes. what practice? not criminal, foreclosures, bankruptcies, divorce, and contract. ever practiced criminal law? no. 10:08:59 picked as jury and they haven't talked about law and you can't call your son and ask him? yes I understand. 10:09:25 how long at current place of employment? unemployed. prior? husband and I had construction company. how long? 15 yes. husband still involved in that business? no. helping out children built their home. manage rental properties. involvement? I rescue a lot of pets. how long? a long time. military service? no. outside house? managing properties and rescuing animals. passion? rescuing animals. prior jury service? no 10:10:43 b7.... living in Seminole? between orange and Seminole 30 years. born and raised in Florida. married? yes. how long? 10 years. what does spouse do? just got out of school to be a teacher. kids? no. current occupation? 11 years. any management duties? I will. tell us about that? going to be elite position among others in similar roles. how many will you supervise? just 2-3. member in organization? I'm sure I am through her. military service? no. outside work? watch sports... love video games. socialize with friends go out to bar. passion? not passionate about a lot of stuff. ever served as juror? I have. how long ago? before I was working at current job, 12-15 years. Seminole or orange? Seminole. criminal or civil? criminal. reach a verdict? yes. fore person? no. enjoy it? I did. it was one day. 10:13:37 b35.... how long in Seminole? since 1985. current address? 12 yes. marital status? married. how long? going on 20+ years. what does spouse do? local TV. is she a reporter? no. comments I made about media you won't hold against me. 10:14:24 any kids? yes. 1 son in college now. what is he studying? engineering. current occupation, how long? I manage tax office in the year, vending machines and rental... for about 7 years... before that? properties around central Florida. member in organization? fraternity and football coach. how long? 13 years. military service? yes Marine Corp Reserves. how long? 6 years. military police? no. how do you spend time out of work? watching sports, coaching, spending time together. 10:16:07 real passion in life? coaching football.... served as juror? no 10:16:19 b37.... Seminole county? 18 years. prior? dad was air force captain. born in California, but went from coast to other. married? yes. 20 years. spouse job? space attorney... rockets and space craft. how long has that been a specialty? always... since he graduated. corporate attorney? yes. practice criminal law? no. would that influence you? no he wouldn't answer me. kids? 24, pet groomer, 27 at ucf. how long at employment? 16 years. management position? now I am, converted because girl before retired. ever settle disputes? no, there's only 3 of us.. were a family. organizations? involved in rescue groups, got out because I couldn't take more animals. do you know the other juror? I do not. 10:19:08 does anybody know any other jurors here? 10:19:15 military service? no. outside, I know. jury service? called 4 times... excluded from last one because of where I work. 10:19:41 b51.... how are you? good. Seminole? 9 years. originally? orange county. central Florida? since 1987. before? Atlanta. married? no. kids? no. grand kids? no. employment? retired. retired from what work? real estate.. several careers? I have. prior to that? director of call center. how long? 10 years. managerial duties? direct reports and 1200 employees. resolve disputes? often. how? listen to all sides and make tough calls. 10:21:11 member of any organizations? no. just enjoying retirement? yes. in military? I wasn't. for fun? driving back and forth to Jacksonville... elderly parents, lots of brothers and sisters. jury service? yes, one was in Seminole county 3 years ago... called case before we were called. another one in orange county in 1991, I was an alternate. 10:22:20 b86... how long a resident? 1989. before that? 1971 in orange county. marital status? single. kids? 2. 20 and 21... full time student and trying to get the other one back in school, he was ill. the one in school, what does he want to be? childhood specialist. how long in employment? 10 years. member in organizations? not any more, once at birds of prey... worked in church with youth group. in military? no. jury service? 10:24:24 e6.... Seminole county? 2 years. before? orange. how long? since 2004. originally? Brevard. marital status? married. what does spouse do? engineer. how long married? 6 years. kids? 2, 11 and 13. current occupation? unemployed. 9 months before that and prior to that I was in school and raising kids. what filed before? financial services. member in organization? member of church and I used to volunteer at kids school 10:25:44 military? no. how do you spend time outside of work? taking care of kids, dogs, helping with the friends young kids, gardening. prior jury service? no, called but never... 10:26:09 e40... Seminole county? 7 months. before that? Iowa. how long? 2 years. before that? California. come to Florida to retire? came to work in Florida. what do you do? safety officer. how long? over 25 years. marital status? married. spouse living? chemical engineer. kids? 1 son, 28 looking for work. prior to that? he was working in western Pennsylvania in fast food service. organization? no. military? no. fun? travel, read, and sports. any particular? all but football mainly. prior jury service? yes I have served. in Pennsylvania. criminal or civil? drug dealing 10:28:14 go back and deliberate? yes. reach verdict? we were. forewoman? I was not. enjoy experience? I did 10:28:30 e54... how long in Seminole? 14 years. before that? orange. since I was 8. marital status? married for 5 years. spouse? engineering technician. kids? two step children, 16 living with us and the other is late 20s. how long working there? 3 years. before that? same field for 30 years. member involved in organizations? no. military? no. fun? reading, working on family tree, playing golf. where's family from originally? Maryland 10:29:58 passions I guess? it was for a while, now that we finished it's on the side 10:30:09 jury service? summoned but never sat 10:30:18 e73... Seminole? 13 years. prior? new jersey. grow up there? I did not. grew up? new York. current address? 13 years. marital status? married. how long? 33 years. spouse? retired. prior to that? telecommunications firm. kids? yes. how many? 2. how old and what they do? 15 on Sunday, 18. still in school? going to college. what he wants to do? I don't think he's there yet 10:31:34 retired or working? consultant. how long? 10 years. before that? large telecommunications firm. where your husband worked? yes. meet there? we did. organizations? not currently. before? various arts councils. military? no. fun? going to sporting events, children active in sports... make jewelry, read, I love the beach 10:32:28 prior jury service? yes. here in Seminole? 3 times in Seminole, once for federal court and once in Ohio. served 5 times? yes. enjoy it? not always. Ohio, criminal or civil? civil I think. deliberate? settled out of court after 5 days. federal? criminal. deliberate? I didn't get seated on jury. three here, criminal or civil? first was civil and I didn't do anything. next was criminal settled out of court, next one I didn't get seated. 10:34:16 m75.... how long in Seminole? since 2001. before that? new York. grow up there? yes. lived in current address? 2 months. prior to that? still in Seminole, just different space. married or single? single. kids? no. work? 2 months. prior? travel agent for cruise. how long? 1 year. before that? theme parks in Orlando. how long? almost 2 years. what did you do? guest service attendant moved to cashier and food service. member of organization? not currently, used to volunteer at animal shelter. military? no. fun? large family, visit with them. military service? no 10:36:22 b61... how long in Seminole? 5 years. current address for? 4 years. prior? orange, Volusia, army brat. marital status? married. how long? 2 months. husband? full time student. engineer. kids? no. engineer too? yes. how long? 7 years. member of organizations? church, professional society, and sorority. leadership? I have, but not now. military? no. fun? studying, reading and spending time with family. studying to be? for an exam. prior jury service? no 10:38:00 b72.... how long resident? 9 years. originally? Chicago. marital status? single. kids? no. work? coming to a year. same field but different job? yes. involved in organizations? alumni of fraternity. leadership? vice president of local chapter but I wouldn't say so. military? no. fun? arm wrestling, going to gym.... one arm pull up. how long? 2.5 years. wrestling in high school? weight lift, track, football 2 years. meets to arm wrestle? depends on venue, encompasses everything... I could talk about it all day 10:40:00 prior jury service? no 10:40:05 e22... how long in Seminole? 12 years. prior? orange. grow in central Florida? only since 92. up north? spend a lot of time there. married? single. kids? no. work? 19 years. organizations? social service with employer. military? no. spend time out of work? gardening, all things food. passionate about? yeah. jury service? called in asocial but didn't serve 10:41:34 e13.... how long in Seminole? 17 years. marital status? single. kids? no. how long have you been doing that? surgical assistant for 2 years. member of organizations? church. military? no. outside work? horses. passion is riding? yes. jury service? no 10:42:33 e28.... how long Seminole? 1985. before that? Texas. originally from? yes. marital? married for 28 years, 2 children... 27 and 23 work for theme park and hotel side of it. spouse do? teacher. work? 26 years. members? professional, relay for life. how you spend time out of work? yes. jury? summoned for federal, never called and served in Texas... read verdict? yes. deliberate? yes. forewoman? no. enjoy that? yes I did 10:44:16 k80... Seminole county? 2004. before? Virginia. grew up there? most of life. marital status? 15 years... spouse? maintenance tech. kids? 2. two girls. under 18? yes. work? over 5 years, same line of work for 15 years. member of organizations? attend church regularly, girl scouts, soccer. military? family members, father was navy grandfathers and cousins. fun? work absorbs time and then children. jury service? no first time 10:45:49 k95... how long in Seminole? 16 years. before that? orange for 7 and manatee for 4. marital? married. 15 years. spouse? electrician. kids? yes. how old? daughter that's 24, son that'll be 14, and a grandson. daughter? internship to be a dental hygienist. work? consultant, used to own company for 7 years. same industry for 10 10:46:51 member of organizations? yeah, ptk. pbl. fbi. Alzheimer's association, autism speaks and march of dimes. military? no. jury service? no 10:47:22 p67... why we can't do this in private... is there a way? do in private with nobody else? approach bench? VOIR DIRE HAS TO BE IN PUBLIC FORM. YOU CAN APPROACH. your name is private if that's what you're worried about. I just don't want the media to put labels on me like finding something else. JURY SELECTION PROCESS HAS TO BE OPEN COURT, OPEN TO PUBLIC...ZIMMERMAN HAS RIGHT TO BE THERE, ATTORNEYS HAVE THE RIGHT TO BE THERE... REMOVE OTHER JURY MEMBERS, WILL NOT CLEAR THE COURT ROOM... MAYBE A QUESTION ASKED THAT IS SENSITIVE NATURE TO YOU THAT I CAN'T CLEAR THE COURT ROOM, BUT I CAN DO IT OUTSIDE PRESENCE OF OTHER MEMBERS. 10:49:51 from where? been here since 2008. Seminole county how long? since 2008. before that? moved from Chicago. before that, originally? Mexico. how long in US? since I was 18 years old. married? yes. how long? about 20 years. kids? yes. how old? 18, and 16 and 11. still in school? just out of high school. work for how long? since 2008. involved in organizations? church. military? no. fun? helping wife, kids and watching sports. first time in jury? yes. looking forward to it? looking to have a nice experience, but it's been a nightmare. every day something is different. if it's going to affect my family I'm not looking forward to it...still feel it's a hardship for you? absolutely 10:52:34 g14... how long in Seminole? once before and recently from 2005 to now. grew up and moved out? no dad in military. marital status? divorced. former spouse? does not work at this time. what did he do? assembly. kids? 2 boys. 12 and 15. work? 3 years. before? sold print advertising. how long? 1996 to 2010. involved in organizations? boy scouts. how long? 6 years. military service? I have not been, but family. spend time outside work? boy scouts, taking care of my boys and reading. jury? summoned 2 other times, but never seated on jury 10:54:22 g29... Seminole county? 9 months. before that? in orange county. marital? single. kids? no. work? almost 6 years. before that? same field for total over 14 years. member of organizations? no. military? no. fun? friends and family and sports and TV. jury service? summoned in orange but never on jury 10:55:33 g47.... how long in Seminole? under 9 years. before? Boston, MA. marital? single. kids? nope. current job, how long? since October. before that? unemployed. member with organization? no. military? none. fun? sports friends beer. jury service? once, but it was settled 10:56:24 g63..... how long in Seminole? 4 years. before? orange. martial? single. kids? no. unemployed now, before that? teaching assistant and student. major? mathematics. member of any organizations? no. military service? no. fun? chess, Olympic weightlifting, piano. how long Olympic? a year. jury? no 10:57:40 g66.... Seminole? 2 years. prior? 12 years in Madison. prior to that? Chicago. marital? widow. spouse? mechanic for trucks. kids? 2 daughters. oldest is 36 works for entertainment company. 32 year old works for entertainment lighting... how long you work? retired. prior? at hospitals. financial advisor. member of organizations? started riding with Care Takers... motorcycle club. military? no. outside work? ride with my boyfriend, fish, spend time with family. what does boyfriend do? he sails. jury service? once in Chicago... alternate 10:59:45 g81.... how long in Seminole? 16 years. marital status? married. how long? 19 years. spouse? administrative assistant. how long? 19 years. member in organizations? professional. military service? no. fun? golf, travel, sports. prior service? no. 11:00:37 h6... Seminole? 1.5 years. prior? orange and Colorado. in Florida? since 2004. married? no. kids? no. current job? 5 months. prior to that? same line of work, but in it for 7 years now. member involved in organizations? no. military service? no. fun? relax... jury service? yes. in Seminole or others? orange. 2 years ago. criminal case. deliberate? yes. verdict? on most charges. foreman? no 11:02:04 h7.... in Seminole? 27 years, before Illinois, before Texas. married 44 years. 2 children ones 41 in Ireland. 39 in el Paso. spouse? weight watchers councilor for 25 years takes care of house. job? 40 years. member of organizations? professional associations, boy scouts for 35 years, instructor for merit badges, wife and I will have a small nursery. prior jury service? 1 in Seminole criminal case, foreperson we reached a verdict. 11:03:30 h18.... Seminole county? 2 years. before? orange county for almost a year. overseas before? yes. how long? 1996. marital status? going through divorce. kids? 1. girl is 7. job? in that field since I got to Florida, before that......... overseas in military? army and then contractor for defense company...involved in any organizations? no. fun? gym, tennis, swimming, with my daughter. jury service? no 11:05:05 h29... resident of Seminole? over 30 years, and orange... army brat. marital status? divorced. spouse? school teacher. kids? yeah 2 daughters, 28 and 30 year old... working with UCF and the other is handicapped. work? 30 years. member? professional and served on local city board for 15 years... leadership? yes. military? I also served too. how long? 4 years. military police? no. fun? beach, tennis... beer. jury service? summoned once 15 years ago... never sat 11:07:11 h18... military police? no 11:07:17 h35... Seminole? 24 years. martial? married. how long? 5 years. spouse? unemployed. before? lawn service. kids? no. job? unemployed taking care of grandfather before. member of organizations? was in 2010. military? no. spend time for fun? beach. jury service? no 11:08:17 h81... how long in Seminole? since 2000. prior to that? Pennsylvania. marital status? 31 years. spouse? supervisor at hotel. kids? 25 year old daughter in marketing son in navy. work? 25 years. member of organizations? 1 professional. military? no. fun? family and discovering cool internet technologies. jury service? yes. in Seminole criminal case. verdict? yes. foreman? no 11:09:39 h69... resident of Seminole? 21 years. marital status? married. how long? 11 months. spouse? technician with bright house. work? a year and 8 months. before that in school? IRA company. member of any organizations? church, human resources. military? no. fun? usually with mom or dad. prior jury service? no. 11:10:43 h86.... Seminole? born and raised. married? no. kids? no. job? 6 months. before? technician. organizations? professional and church. military? no. fun? volunteer and with family. jury? summoned, but away for school 11:11:37 i5.... how long in Seminole? 13 years. before that? Alaska for 27 years. what were you doing? working, originally in military, 7 years and then discharged work for financial... married? yes. spouse? auditor. kids? yes. 3. what do they do? oldest son is 40 worked for grocery chain, out in California. daughter is 38 works for utility company and my youngest works for IT group. work? almost 40 years. member of any organizations outside? no all professional. military police? no. fun? watching sports on TV, hang with friends, I like working with computers..... jury service? yes. Seminole or elsewhere? 2 assignments here in Seminole and when I lived in Alaska I think I had 4. 2 here, deliberate? just 1. criminal or civil? DWI. we deliberated. verdict? yes. foreman? yes. 4 in Alaska and deliberate all of them? yes. criminal or civil? all civil. foreman on 1 of them. reach verdict on all 4? yes. enjoy experiences? looking back I did... when I was on it I didn't 11:14:48 i19.... resident in Seminole? 3 years. before? orange. marital status? single. kids? no. work? 1 year. before that? retail. organizations? no. military? no. fun? school. health service admin. jury? no 11:15:36 i24... how long in Seminole? 1968. marital status? married. shy of 39 years. spouse? he is a coordinator transportation for theme park. kids? 29 athletic trainer, 22 student, 29 installer. student, studying? psychology. work? just shy of 42 years. organizations? no. military? no. fun? sports work in yard, beach, hit the road and go to mountains. jury? summoned once but never had to 11:17:09 i33... resident in Seminole? 30 years. marital? married. spouse? account manager. kids? no. work? searching for new career. how long in field before? 44 years. member in organization? yes. what kind? environmental advocacy and county board. how long? just over a year. military service? no. fun? small farm and enjoy offshore competition fishing. jury service? no. 11:18:29 i44... resident in Seminole? 2 years but 25 in orange. marital status? married. spouse? RN. kids? 3, 10, 12, and 9 month son. work? 12 years. field? before that in theme park industry. involved in organizations? Florida barbecue association. military service? no. fun? family raising little one. jury service? 4 years ago orange I was alternate 11:20:17 15 MINUTE RECESS, FOLLOW JARVIS OUTSIDE THE COURTROOM. ================================================================ 11:41:13 PLEASE BE SEATED. BACK ON RECORD. approach? YES (sidebar) 11:42:19 jurors are present 11:43:26 PLEASE BE SEATED... RIONDA YOU MAY CONTINUE 11:43:39 group questions... and then individual too... sit here today, give the defendant a fair trial? yes. give the state a fair trial? yes. give both sides fair? yes. issue? believe both sides do not deserve fair trial? defendant and stat fair trial? yes 11:44:32 state has to prove defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. it's the law. court will give you instructions. states burden, understand? yes. states prove crime was committed and defendant did it? yes. 11:45:18 read like what it is not... a reasonable doubt is not forced, imaginary, speculative... must have reason for that doubt. not to a mathematical certainty, not absolute? yes 11:46:11 believe the burden should be higher than reasonable doubt, like perfection? 11:46:34 sit here today, do you all understand concept/law talks about presumption of innocence. this defendant is presumed innocent, understand? yes. not innocent, but presumed innocent? yes. abide by that? yes. 11:47:23 live in greatest country of world and our criminal justice allows for a trial. no matter what the charge, state has burden. understand? yes. trial is the way? yes 11:47:56 defendant has no obligation? yes. how do you render a verdict? court will give instructions on how to do that. rely on facts and law and also in the process you use common sense in arriving in verdict. 11:48:45 law also says you don't speculate... not allowed in arriving in verdict. speculation plays no role, rely on evidence. agree? yes 11:49:14 what witness says is evidence, no the questions 11:49:51 difference between real world and TV world or make believe. 11:50:08 b35... if attorney asks question of witness and the witness says no, what do you believe? what witness said. is that important? yes. why? he's the witness.. he knows what's going on 11:50:58 sympathy plays no role at all in verdict, understand? yes. 11:51:22 understand that sympathy can't be consider at all, agree? yes 11:51:32 k80... agree with that? yes. why? based off facts and not emotion 11:52:05 bias shouldn't play a role at all in arriving in verdict.... g63, do you believe people are bias to certain things? yes. sometimes about people with bald heads or whatever, people has bias? yes. agree bias shouldn't play role at all? correct. biases about how people dress, should play role? no. why? not relevant to the facts that happened. do you think were always able to pick if someone is bias? not always. how can you tell? maybe if they... if they act in a way with specific preference for something more if they didn't have any advice. 11:53:57 penalties in this case, judges job what the penalties are. m75... problem with that? no. can't consider what the penalties are, no role? I understand. I agree. 11:54:49 job is only to defend guilt or innocence? yes. will anyone consider the penalties, you can't do that, agree? yes. 11:55:12 agree with that b37... I agree. why? falls in sympathy part. shouldn't play role at all? should not 11:55:59 state proves evidence, direct evidence... circumstantial evidence.... direct is someone sees something. circumstantial is added to other piece of puzzle to prove something. 11:56:25 law allows that the state can use direct evidence and circumstantial evidence. I come home and wife tells me kid brought cookie jar and the kids say they didn't do it... no eye witness, question kids... but one has crumbs in her mouth... that's an inference to prove something else 11:57:55 i44... ever used circumstantial evidence? all the time. at work or home? at home. give me an example? who made the mess, it wasn't us. who had breakfast, both of us. what did you have... oatmeal and there's oatmeal all over the counter. 11:58:47 I used to ask who watches CSI, now I ask reverse. who hasn't heard of CSI? b7 you have not watched CSI? no. anyone else who hasn't watched? b29, b35, b86, b61, b72, e28, k95, p67, h69, h86, h29. 12:01:01 not the real world... people want to believe that's real, they expect that evidence to appear out of nowhere... that's not the real world. hold state of Florida to what they've seen on csi? E6 HAS A QUESTION.... E6: going back to circumstantial evidences... circumstances can be misleading, so does it have to be very... still proven beyond unreasonable doubt. 12:02:38 never watched any of those shows? still have a few. b29... why? I like drama. real world as opposed to make believe? yeah 12:03:14 also had in last 5 or 10 years an increase in real lawyer type shows... not the real world? 12:03:43 i5... ever watch those shows? watched them don't make sense to me. some of them may be lawyers? question integrity of them... real lawyer wouldn't do that 12:04:17 not going to determine guilt or innocence from TV? yes. b61, agree with that? yes. if they're not representing client they don't know the facts, may have special interest. 12:05:35 how people feel about attorneys, how many of you liked their commercials... love those commercials??? hold against state of Florida or omara because were attorneys? anybody? 12:06:11 we realize people come into court room with opinions? yes. all come in with opinion on things, right? yes. if people are exposed to things, how do we make sure they make their decision on evidence opposed to what opinion should be. e73, what do we do with people whit opinions? that's a tough one cause I don't know that you'd always know about their opinion. e54, question? I don't know how you can guarantee that's not going to happen... you hope they don't. agree with e73 and e54? yes 12:08:18 h29... how would you assure opinions do not factor in the decision? profile a jury, ask questions look for answers that will represent you and people that are fair. no good way to do it. everyone agree? yes. telling the truth to best of ability.... 12:09:34 can you follow the law as a group? be frank with us.. does anybody feel they cannot? anybody? no from everyone? yes sir 12:10:02 h6... agree with that? yes. how would you assure that it doesn't interfere? don't know how you find out how, but keep my opinion out of it 12:10:44 both sides get fair trial 12:11:08 b67.... too personal or it's alright? it's alright. g14? agree that sometimes we make assumptions that turn out not to be true? yes. ever done that? yes. example? meet somebody and think they're stuck up and then I would find out later they were shy. agree with g14? yes. has anyone ever been wrong about an assumption? 12:12:58 assumptions play no role in a verdict? yes sir 12:13:22 opinions and assumptions play no role in a verdict? yes 12:13:30 how do we know that happens? e40, how? check our personal values and hold others accountable and challenge if we see those bias. discrepancies raise an issue 12:14:13 attorneys, who knows any attorney? b12? yes. are they here in town? Tim Morgan. what practice? friend of his. talk to him about law? no. b76? my son. asked you that before? yes. b35? friend from hometown and friends I went to college with. civil or criminal? split. discuss law? no sir... b37? married to attorney, anybody else? attorneys from work that work on cases like personal injuries. criminal or civic? not that I'm aware of. interfere in any way? no sir. b51? neighbor. corporate lawyer... 12:17:03 e6? I know a woman in Colorado in contract law... e40? several from college, woman I rent house from is in real estate law and she's in Texas. e54? I do know people who are attorneys but I don't discuss with them. 12:17:53 e73? friends and family. criminal law? no 12:18:05 g47? friends' mother for Volusia. civil law. interfere? no. g14? I know a couple attorneys through boy scout, but I don't know criminal. no interference no. 12:18:59 k95? several from network associations, patent, tax and contract. no criminal? not that I know of. interference? no sir 12:19:23 k80? friends and legal counsel at our company. criminal? no. interference? no 12:19:43 e13? moms side of families, some attorneys? criminal? I have no idea.. influence? no 12:20:04 e22? three attorneys, all civil. interfere? no 12:20:14 b61? several from college, all civil and no interference 12:20:28 h6? know an attorney that does workers comp law. interfere? no 12:20:43 h7? department of defense, contract lawyers. nephew in environmentalism 12:20:50 h29? several from my profession. interfere? no 12:21:09 h81? I know 20-25 attorneys. criminal? a handful. discussions about the law? most involved around consumer law. interfere as juror? that wouldn't influence me 12:21:56 h86? past employers were attorneys... insight into law? no 12:22:09 i33? several lawyers both civil and criminal. interfere with decision? no. 12:22:40 anybody associated with law, judges? i33? I know a few sir... 12:23:01 interfere in any way to be a juror? no. 12:23:14 personal questions about arrest, victim of crime, if it's something you want in private let us know. need to know impact it may have. 12:24:02 front row, arrested? b12, here in Seminole? Daytona. still pending? no thrown out of court, never went. would that experience factor in to be fair juror? no. set aside? I was only 17 so yeah. feel you were treated fairly? for who I was with... hold against Florida? no. hold against Zimmerman? no. 12:25:07 b29? Chicago. still pending? it's been disposed of? yeah. interfere with you? no. hold against? no. treated fairly? yes. 12:25:36 b35? orange county. still pending? no. disposed of? yes. how long ago? 1987. unfairly treated? no. prosecuted or case dismissed? I was prosecuted. hold against? no. treated fairly? yes 12:26:24 e6? in Florida, Brevard back in 1999. pending? no. treated fairly. 12:27:13 h7? 40 years ago state of Texas. not pending? correct. treated fairly? absolutely. it was acquitted. hold against? no 12:28:04 h81? Seminole. pending? no. how long ago? yr. and a half ago. treated fairly? yes. no charges it was detained.. no charges. hold against? no 12:28:55 i33? Seminole. pending? no. treated unfairly? yes. arrested or prosecuted? both. won't hold it against anybody. what happened to your case? go to court, pay a fine. won't hold against? no sir. 12:30:00 anybody been a subject of criminal investigation? no from everybody 12:30:14 close friend arrested and you felt was treated unfairly? b7? family or close friend? close friend. pending? no. orange county. arrested unfairly. dropped? I don't know. hold against? no. 12:31:13 k95? friend in Ohio arrested and treated unfairly. pending? no. when she was incarcerated. drop charges on her? no. told by the judge she could take medicine and they didn't give to her, brought her to hospital 12:32:28 b61? someone was arrested, treated unfairly. charges were dropped. here in Florida? yes. pending? no. hold against? no. 12:33:06 A LOT OF YOU HERE.... AN HOUR ENOUGH? COME BACK AT 1:45. WHILE ON LUNCH BREAK, GO WITH EACH OTHER TALK ABOUT ANYTHING BUT THIS CASE. NO RADIO OR TV REPORTS. NO ELECTRONIC DEVICES. NOT TO READ OR CREATE SOCIAL NETWORKING PAGES. ASSURANCE TO ABIDE BY INSTRUCTIONS? 12:34:23 COURT IN RECESS FOR LUNCH UNTIL 1:45 ================================================ 13:46:07 PLEASE BE SEATED. BACK ON RECORD. DO WE HAVE THE JURORS BACK? COUNCIL APPROACH FOR JUST A MOMENT (sidebar) 14:02:46 PLEASE BE SEATED. WELCOME BACK. APPEARS TO BE HERE AND IN CORRECT PLACES. DURING LUNCH DID ANY OF YOU HAVE CONVERSATIONS ABOUT THIS CASE? DID ANY OF YOU READ OR LISTEN TO ANYTHING ABOUT THIS CASE? USE ANY ELECTRONIC DEVICE ABOUT THE CASE? READ OR CREATE ANY THING ABOUT THE CASE? 14:03:39 rionda: welcome back. 14:04:05 h81... a friend or close family member? close friend. in Seminole? no. Pennsylvania. treated unfairly? yes. in prosecution. hold against us? I would no. interfere? it would not. 14:05:05 were you a victim of a crime that it impacted you so much you wouldn't be able to participate? 14:05:26 b76? yes. b7? yes. b86? yes. anybody else? e40? e73? second row: e22? k80? k95? last row: g81? h7? h35? h81? i33? i44? did I get everybody? 14:06:35 violent crime? e73, b86, k80, e22. 14:07:09 you have to set it aside for the purposes of this trial. agree to leave outside court room... think you cannot, raise your hand... e73? just because of the nature that happened to you? it was a very similar crime. wouldn't be able to.... set it aside? it's always in my mind. 14:08:27 anybody else? 14:08:49 victims of crime, let me broaden criteria... crime to your household, felt police did not do a good job investigating? b7. home break in. here in Seminole? it was. they didn't do a good job? they didn't investigate at all. do you think that would impact you at all in this case to sit as juror or can you set aside? no. it wasn't a big deal. agree to leave outside court? yeah. 14:10:17 in that case, were you present? I came home and scared of burglars I think. chase them? no. knew better? I didn't realize until later.... called police and they didn't respond? when I was in high school, police came and they asked what was stolen and officer asked me if any of my friends did this. ever find out who it was? no. anybody else? 14:11:31 b86... many years ago, fast food restaurant. police officer scared us more than the person who just robbed us with the gun. going to our car when gun was pulled on us, we ran back into the restaurant after guy grabbed a bag... police knocked on door and we thought it was the guy again. make him go around so we can see him. tell us you're a police officer, he said "this isn't TV". hold against? no. know who was arrested? yes. he hit us twice, finally got caught. testify? no I couldn't pick him out. 14:13:33 does anybody live in community in which there is no crime? anybody? collective no. 14:14:02 steps to address it in your neighborhood? e54... I assume there's crime in my neighborhood, not personally aware of it. 14:14:42 k95... I would put up a no soliciting sign in my neighborhood. effective? yes. anything further? no. there's a neighborhood watch. are you a part of it? no. 14:15:12 e73... we had a sudden increase in crime in neighborhood. they started a watch. join it? no, but went to a meeting. set up in uniform? no. armed? I don't think so. not involved in watch? no 14:15:54 anybody else? b76... just had teens vandalizing signs... police took care of it. we had a watch I just told them about it. any steps yourself to get involved? telling the other neighbors 14:16:30 b35...still with us... closing your eyes just want to make sure 14:16:51 b7: what was the question again. crime in community and you got involved? no. 14:17:26 feel like people have the right to take law into their own hands? anybody? i5 shaking your head.... there may be occasions, but basically I would say no. g63... crimes in neighborhood? I'm assuming? watch in your community? not that I'm aware of. your last question was very general we have governments that we authorize to do that. 14:19:17 as individuals people shouldn't. g7, agree? where is the process or a citizen's arrest. I don't know how it applies. 14:19:45 other than what law allows, try to arrest people on your own? never have. i24, ever crossed your mind to arrest someone? no but I would do something if they tried to break into my house. id protect my family 14:20:34 can everybody agree the law applies equally to everyone? yes. it should or it doesn't? 14:20:54 b7.... hear a lot about it in the news. always believe? not always. 14:21:13 law matter about which part of county? no. difference in wealth class? no. matter if gated or not? no. where they're from? no. b72, it shouldn't matter? no. why not? when you see the law, the law applies to everyone it doesn't discriminate or consider race or sex. if we use this as criteria, the whole system goes down. 14:22:26 should it matter about race gender or ethnicity? no. 14:22:53 ever been a witness and testify? g81... was it here in Seminole? no. orange. proceeding or hearing or trial? it was juvenile system, proceeding. testify? yes. treated fairly by lawyers and judge and deputies? yes I was. anything about that you felt would interfere? nothing that happened there 14:23:56 h7: I've given depositions before. was it unpleasant it would influence you? no it was not. representation from both sides and told them what I knew. told the truth as best you could remember? yes 14:25:03 h29... I've been deposed before. anything about that experience? I was on the good guy side, never got to the other side. 14:25:23 h81... deposition, hearing, trial? I've been a witness a few times... treated unfairly? no. 14:26:00 i24... I was a witness in a car accident. eye witness? yeah and we had to verify who hit who. more than one? several people. all have to come to court? no we all went to court and stood in front of judge and told her what we saw. questioning you? just the judge... 14:27:00 g63... witness for criminal trial in orange county. eye witness? I was an eye witness to nothing. still called? yes. badgered in any way by either side? no. it wasn't unpleasant it was inconvenient. impact you? no 14:27:48 k80.... witness in child custody case. in front of court? no jury, just a judge. treated fairly? yes, no badgering.. civil questions. 14:28:22 k95... federal lawsuit case, it wasn't a good experience. because of way you were treated? yes. by who? attorneys and judge. judge nelson? no. it wasn't in this state. attorneys were asking improper questions? I was told I was at an economic disadvantage. scream back at them? kept my cool and had to pay it off. terrible experience? yes. hold against? no this was business 14:29:50 e22... I've been deposed. treated fairly? yes. deposition end there or another proceeding? never went to trial. that experience that you were treated unfairly? no. 14:30:30 e6... custody trial and domestic violence... nothing about the proceedings. treated fairly? yes. impact? no. e40... witness to car accident, no jury... I was treated fairly. other people eye witness too. there when other witnesses testified? I was around... 20 years ago though. 14:31:40 all read the witness list... cover that. how you know the person and the impact of that.... 14:32:16 e6... SHES IN SEAT NUMBER 9, GIVE HER LIST. THAT MIGHT BE EASIER. recognize that as yours? yes. circled two names on front page. one of them starts with d and j... professional or social? I recognize the name I don't personally know them. recognize them as physician. impact you? no it would not. also have under that name, three down from that. know the name? I don't know them personally, received referral to her for one of my children. impact? no. some on last page... last name with w recognize name or the person? just the name. impact? no. third from bottom starts with z and s? know them? no. recognize name? yes. impact? no. 14:35:16 i33.... first page, last name starts with b and first name is c. know them or recognize name? right, could be somebody that I name... I have no idea if I know them or not. assuming it's the same person you know, what do they do for a living? construction business. person you know is him? correct. with the work you do? yes. if he testified, find him more credible? no sir, not necessarily no. if it's the same person could you rely just on what they said as opposed to knowing them? absolutely. another name with a c and a b? correct. recognize? just heard the name. no impact on you? no sir. first person/ another relationship, fun thing and I see him once a year... fun thing, activity? yeah it would ID me. you interact with him though? yes sir 14:38:23 last page, last name w and n? yes. recognize or personal? recognize name. know them other than that? no. 14:38:45 toward bottom of page, z and s? recognize the name. impact? no sir 14:39:22 juror number.... second page j and c... know them? as a celebrity... not the person that were talking about here. ok? and someone else.... last page last name with w and d? how do you know them? name I think I recognize. impact? no. 14:40:29 b61.... last page, at top? yes. personal or professional? if same person it's personal but haven't seen them in 2-3 years. friends? yes. exercise together. hear them on witness stand find them more or less credible? it wouldn't impact if it were any other witness. how close, how much interaction? person in social organization, saw her a lot for a while. over a yr. or two? a couple years while I was in school. is this person still a member of that organization? yes. impact you? no 14:42:49 hear from witness, evaluate based on insurrections from court? yes. g47, depend if witness has job? no. why? irrelevant to the case. g29 does it matter if they're law enforcement? no. everyone agree? yes 14:43:37 e54 agree with that? sure 14:43:41 law allows for certain witnesses to be treated differently, experts can give opinion opposed to other witnesses. e13... agree with that? yes would say.. e28 agree? yes. why? they're experts in that field. evaluate and use instructions from court and the expertise? yes 14:44:43 b51.... agree with that? I do. why? education or experience and wouldn't call on them to discuss position or opinion without experience. ever had to rely on expert testimony? not testimony. go to expert for advice? no. anybody? b7.... rely on experts on constant basis 14:45:41 b35... agree? yes. why? practice in their field. b76 agree? yes. b12... agree? yes. why? education and school and have knowledge of that. H69 HAS QUESTIONS. h69: if attorney asked for opinion and they didn't just interject it? yes. that they asked for opinion and they didn't just interject opinion. if attorneys ask expert could you rely on his opinion? yes. why? I'm going to assume a witness researches before getting on the stand... rely on expert if both side find them to be an expert 14:47:55 in this type of case, since the trial is murder.... H86... also wondering if witness on stand only giving facts or opinions unless were asking for their opinion? right... e6... clarify to me I would believe an expert has studied and accumulated knowledge in area, but sometimes experts don't always agree even if in the same field, how is that treated? use your common sense and if it's credible. judge will give instructions about that. expert can give opinion. you can find an opinion with the one you wanted... You decide... 14:50:21 juror number..... person is an expert and we assume they are.. court will give you a ruling on that. expert is entitled to give opinion. if a juror finds a person is qualified as expert they don't have to accept that opinion. you would hear their qualifications and make that determination. 14:51:44 exposed to photos you've never been exposed to, problem looking at photos? does everyone understand the question? ok? yes 14:52:29 b37 you're fine with that... yes. b35.. yes 14:52:39 everyone else agree? yes 14:52:44 law enforcement experience? nobody. h86? not myself, but two aunts and uncles who are lieutenants. 14:53:19 h86, family in law enforcement? yes. departments here in Seminole? I believe it's orange. discuss matters with them about justice system? in the past I have. impact your decision? no. how extensive, more than 1? 3 family members. close with them? 2 of them. interact on weekly basis? yes. uniform? yes. how long in field? over 20 years. look up to them for advice? in general, yes. pursue law enforcement career? no. 14:54:37 k95... when you say law enforcement, but 40 years ago I worked in retail where I used to watch shop lifters... watched them and recorded them. apprehend them? no. I just do my job and report to manager.... someone else would apprehend? yes. successful? yes. how? bust a lot of my sisters friends. 14:55:50 anybody else I overlooked... i24? sort of in same situation... I didn't catch them. I did translation when they did get caught and they didn't speak English. for a company who had a lot of guests who got caught shop lifting. what language? Portuguese. several years? quite a lot. enjoy it? yes. anything that would interfere? no. k95... anything that would interfere? no 14:57:01 anybody else? k80.... family members. tell me? uncle who was in SWAT and cousin is NCIS agent. occasions to discuss with them? no. there are stories after the fact. interfere? no 14:57:42 b35.... family members mom worked for sheriff's department and cousins in police in Titusville. see them regularly? once or twice a year. discussions about job? 14:58:14 how come you didn't join department? first not to go into law enforcement because I went to school. not exciting enough? make a little more money and wanted to do my own thing. impact you one way or another? no. more incline to favor police officer? no 14:59:05 b7.... law enforcement, my wife used to work in the field, often had discussions about it. her job and dealing with victims? absolutely. how do you feel about that, would it impact you here? no. it was a while ago. in this case you have a victim, favor state in this case? no. wouldn't impact you? not when I last served on jury 15:00:13 b86... I used to do transcription for private investigator... a while ago? 15 yes ago in orange. former officer? yeah. record and you would transcribe? yes. impact favoring? no. 15:00:54 e6... include close friends? anybody important for us to know about.... family friend he was SWAT detective... he just left the force and went into private sector but served almost 17 years... impact your opinion? no 15:01:41 b12.... my dad was a Syracuse cop and my nephew is FBI agent. anything about nature of that would favor one side? no. 15:02:36 h69... any family member? yeah. cousin who works for government.... she's working with homeland security... opportunities to discuss her job? some times. anything about what she does you feel would impact you one way or another? no. desire to join her? it sounds exciting, but not for me 15:03:34 k95.... family or friends? yes someone important to let us know. acquaintances from homeland security and friend that is head of security. discuss criminal matters? no. the law? no. 15:04:14 k80.... friends? some close to you. neighbors son in law is US Marshall... and another Seminole county deputy and then another one and family friend have deputies at jail... discussions with them? no. interfere? no 15:05:02 e22.... close friend who was in law enforcement for 2 decades... discussions? interfere? no. 15:05:27 g66... my brother in law retired from police enforce, my niece is.... discuss matters? about what they do. desire to join? when I was younger. impact you? no 15:06:05 H7 HAS HAND UP... h7: friends through boy scouts. never discussed outside of scouts. no impact one way or another 15:06:29 i19... my uncle is police officer. still? yes. local? somewhere else. impact you? no. 15:06:57 i24... husband's niece is married to gentleman in fbi. anything about that? no. 15:07:19 i33... my wife's father is retired sheriff. no impact. in this county? different state. impact you? no 15:07:44 anybody in this room that has not had a dispute with another person? anybody? physical dispute? b35... verbal to physical. a long time ago? yeah. resolve it between you two? once or twice police were called. impact you? no sir 15:08:34 anybody else? e6... I was involved in domestic violence. impact? no. b7? fight in middle school... (Everyone laughs) I think I lost. any impact? no 15:09:33 k95... just domestic. impact you? no. 15:09:45 disputes where you worked it out? everyone? b61 have you? yes. how? talk about it. 15:10:19 g66? dispute where you resolved? yes. without violence? yes. talking loud walking away 15:10:34 medical experience, in the field one way or another? g47....registered EMT. impact? not that I'm aware of. k95... CNA and activity director. anyone else? e40... certified health care officer. b12.... 15:11:42 e28.... medical. h86? home health CNA before RN. 15:12:07 other than b72... fitness people? h18... work out all the time? lifting every morning, play tennis... e13.... weight lift and run and go to gym. b72... wrestling, anybody else wrestle? boxing? h29... trying to get more George Forman on.... in the military. how well? middle levels before someone was young. I remember 5, 6.... (everyone's laughing) 15:13:46 anybody else? g63... weight lifting? yes. training for sport. endurance type thing? weight lifting. for a year? yes. 15:14:09 h18... boxing? martial arts since I was a kid. 15:14:36 involved in martial arts? yes. green belt. b86.... tae-kwon-do with my kids... couple years senior blue belt. 15:15:16 training in phonetics? linguistics? I did sign language many years ago. (juror number) 15:15:41 e13... four years of sign language 15:15:49 live in gated community? g63... 4 years ago community had security guard in its entrance. i19, h86, h81.... 15:16:28 live in neighborhood with a watch? b7... seen the signs, but I'm... b35? yes. watch? yes. involved? no. e73? yes. watch? yes. involved? no. e22 watch? sign but I don't know who's on it? involved? no. k80? watch? yes. involved? no and my husband is block captain but I don't know what he does. k95? yes. watch? yes. involved? no. (two more jurors... not involved) 15:18:32 g63... not where I live but before, I don't know who was involved. 15:18:45 last row: h18? involved? no. h29... we have signs. involved? no. I know some ladies who are. 15:19:18 anybody consider expert in DNA? no from everybody 15:19:51 who does not have a cell phone? everyone has one. anyone an expert on cell phones? i44... working knowledge of that.... 15:20:27 expert someone beyond being able to turn it on. (juror number): I am... witness? no. records of calls?. anyone else. b7? same circumstance. e73? same responses. g47: I consider myself tech savvy. k95: I have a lot of jobs, work in IT. 15:21:53 agree people dress differently? way they dress does it matter? no. 15:22:22 assume certain things based on attire? e6... lots of different things. woman dressed or wearing expensive things....rich? either that or give that appearance. if they're not, they're poor? could mean many different things. known wealthy man who preferred to dress down. we make assumptions 15:23:30 in terms of law, what does it say about assumptions? they don't count. 15:24:04 this case the victim, martin and defendant are different race, does it matter? no. h35... does it matter? absolutely not. that doesn't matter ever anywhere.... everyone agree? yes 15:24:35 victim as court read was under 18... O'Mara: approach? YES (sidebar) 15:27:49 IS EVERYONE OK TO GO ON? GO AHEAD 15:27:58 rionda: victim was under 18, does anyone believe his life is worth less because he was a minor? no. black African America, worth less? no 15:28:37 believe in right to bear arms? yes 15:28:41 who has a firearm or access to one? b35... personally own? yes. more than one? yes. target practice and hunting. what kind? caliber and shot gun. proficient? yes train in military. how often? a couple months. holster? yes. more than one? yes. internal or external? external. concealed permit? yes. 15:29:54 b76... I don't have any in our home, but we have family members that do in their own home. any experience yourself? no 15:30:12 b37.... used to have concealed weapons permit. husband wanted me to renew but I don't have a gun... no point. I can shoot a gun. we used to go out to range and shooting. basic familiarity with it 15:30:49 e6... husband has 9 millimeter, .38 and rifles... my son has a hunting rifle and bb guns. you yourself involved in firing? went to range one time and sometimes target practice with bb guns 15:31:27 e40.. brother in law has hunting rifles 15:31:38 b12.... fired a gun one time in my life and fell on my but, my son has gun and my mom and sister 15:31:57 m75.... my brother in law has 2 guns, a .38 and another handgun. shooting with him? no... goes with my sister and daughter 15:32:25 b61 repeat? do you have a firearm or have access to one. 15:32:37 ever fired a gun... recreational... 15:32:49 b7 my father has some. 15:33:03 e22... good friend has a firearm 15:33:09 e13... my step dad has a few, went and fired once 15:33:20 b86.... fired one once 15:33:43 k80.... yes own firearms... fired before? yes. familiar. own one yourself and carry with holster? no. no concealed weapons 15:34:10 k95.... I do and my son does. 15:34:17 p67... no I don't 15:34:25 g66... yes I have a .32. fire on occasion? periodically. holster? no 15:34:46 i44... hand gun. fire yourself? yes 15:35:00 i33... rifles. shooting purposes? hunting 15:35:16 i24.... handguns. revolver? yes 15:35:26 i19.... my father has them for hunting.. shoot yourself? no 15:35:38 h86... my brother in law has several. shot yourself? yes. handgun and a rifle. know the difference between semi-automatic and revolver? yes 15:36:07 h81... go to range, but don't shoot my own guns 15:36:22 (juror number) .. mom has one 15:36:29 h29...... I have daughters, so I have shot guns.... revolver and rifle 15:36:48 h18... I do. 15:36:57 h7... yes I do. member of nra? yes. anybody else? no 15:37:08 h6... father owns numerous guns and I've gone with him to the range 15:37:34 have guns or are familiar, responsibility with having one? yes. believe than h7? absolutely. everyone agree with him? yes 15:37:55 agree with that i44? yes. 15:38:01 anybody not agree? everyone agrees 15:38:12 defendant charged with murder in second degree, haven't heard evidence I don't want opinion, but can you follow a law...state has to prove victim is dead, the death was caused by criminal act of Zimmerman, and unlawful killing of martin by an act dangerous to another in a depraved mind without regard to human life.... act includes series of related to.... immanently dangerous to a deprived mind if an act that a person of ordinary judgment was known to seriously kill or done from ill will or of such nature it indicates indifferent to human life... follow that? yes. 15:40:11 not necessary for state to prove intent... 15:40:28 doesn't require certain number of shots or motive 15:40:46 understand there can be defenses to crimes, understand? yes 15:41:10 insanity or self-defense... justifiable use of deadly force...follow instruction about that? yes. 15:41:38 last week and this week about media and publicity and hardship... most of you heard that both sides expect trial to last 2-4 weeks....jury will be sequestered... family member p67... letter that it would be hardship. in addition to what you said? yes. anybody else in that predicament? b61: can you explain sequestered 15:43:42 housed together, but interaction with others will be limited.... won't be able to go home at night. contact with outside world limited. have some contact, court will give instructions about that... monitored contact. 15:45:36 b7... first time I heard about it.... I have questions that are.... 15:45:48 e6... I didn't realize, does that include weekends... YES ENTIRE TIME OF TRIAL. ok.... 15:46:11 b37: you have some contact with family. ALL THIS WILL BE EXPLAINED LATER, WILL HAVE CONTACT BUT IT WILL BE LIMITED.. WILL HAVE CONTACT 15:46:37 b6... include telephone calls can they visit? ALLOWED TO VISIT, LIMITED AS TO TIME...LIMITED PHONE CONTACT... emails? YES IT WILL BE LIMITED. YOU WON'T BE CUT OFF FROM FAMILY, STAYING IN A FACILITY, HOTEL IN THE AREA AND ALL MEALS WILL BE PROVIDED AND TRANSPORTATION AND PERSON NEEDS DURING THE TRIAL. 15:47:38 k80: if this group is sequestered where we can't return to our homes, will this case be 7 days a week? NO. so everyone gets to go home on weekends but we can't? CORRECT. PLANNED ACTIVITIES FOR YOU, THERE WILL BE MEALS... I MEAN ITS... MORE WILL BE EXPLAINED 15:48:29 rionda: attorneys and court will be busy with other matters, were not going on vacation for the weekend 15:49:01 can all of you agree since you haven't heard evidence you have to keep open mind? yes. understand that part of process is that decision needs to be unanimous? yes. 15:49:31 haven't heard evidence, presuming defendant innocent? yes. use common sense and evidence for decision? yes. could you convict him if evidence showed he was guilty? yes. and opposite? yes 15:50:11 people should be held responsible and accountable for actions? yes. picked as juror and evaluating evidence, use god given common sense to get verdict that speaks the truth? yes. 15:50:40 I'm going to sit down.... but before I do... any matter that you think you need to bring to my attention? collective no. thank you very much 15:51:16 15 MINUTE... O'Mara: approach. YES (sidebar) 15:56:15 how long will we have to get our stuff in order... I WILL TELL YOU WHEN SELECTED ON JURY 15:56:34 b61: questionnaire did that say anything about sequestering. YES IT DID... ITS NOT AS LONG AS INDICATED 15:57:04 ITS BEEN A LONG DAY AND I DONT WANT TO HAVE O'MARA BEGIN VOIR DIRE AND KEEP YOU LATE AND HAVE SPLIT IT UP... RELEASE FOR THE NIGHT. COME BACK AT 9 AM. NOT TO READ OR LISTEN TO RADIO OR TV REPORTS, NOT TO DISCUSS CASE. NOT TO USE ANY ELECTRONIC DEVICE TO GET ON INTERNET. NOT TO READ OR CREATE SOCIAL NETWORKING PAGES ABOUT CASE. ASSURANCE YOU WILL ABIDE? yes. ANY ISSUE... PLEASE RAISE YOUR HAND. P67...INDICATED MAYBE HAVING THINGS TO DISCUSS, PLEASE REMAIN AND WILL DISCUSS AFTER THAT. EVERYONE ELSE AT A QUARTER TO 9 AM. HAVE A GOOD EVENING. 15:59:54 COMFORTABLE WHERE YOU'RE SITTING. 16:00:01 rionda: P67 letter from a family member? my wife wrote about it. trouble to serve? yes. tell us more? don't tell us where you work, but the media has rights to be present. work related? yes. express in letter? yes. wife wrote letter because she's more fluent in English? yes. had her write it because she could say it better? part for her and part for me she's worried about the situation. create hardship with wife and monetary? yes. like lately my little one I don't know what she heard in the news, lately she's been living with me thinking somebody is going to get me. also nice to discover how much she loves me 16:02:28 would that in your opinion impact you to pay attention? yes. of course. anything else you want to say to judge about that? that's all. just about my family. oh the other thing, the leveling or title... been things in media that my wife and older kids.. for example: media ask a resident or citizen or Hispanic, but then don't like how media express or a nickname all over the internet. media put your name on the internet or a certain way? yes. how did you find out? my wife found out through internet and my two biggest ones. they wanted to know what's going on with dad. your wife and kids saw on internet and alerted you and you said you didn't want to talk about it? yeah. impact on your kid and wife? yes. concern about that as a result? yes. interfere with paying attention? yes. 16:05:02 O'Mara: minor concerns and I want to see if they stack... media? yes. media in court room prohibited from putting you on camera... I am, but you are not... they can't put your face or information... not public, understand that? yes sir. concern to be they have identified you by some descriptors, like a white female whatever... and you they described as well? yes. concerned by a term the way the described you? I prefer they call me a resident or citizen or Hispanic. the other one telling my kids or wife..... something else on the internet? told me they saw "Mexican". concern to be Mexican than resident? yes. 16:07:22 sounds like they were labeling you? yes which I'm not happy about.... I represent the system, we apologize about any insensitivity from the media... as juror you're being exposed to that in a profile case its unavoidable... not sure we can un-do that.... maybe media will learn lesson to be culturally sensitive. 16:08:17 30 days your employer doesn't need to pay you? that's a part of it 16:08:28 about the service and the jury I noticed a couple things, seemed to me you were looking forward to it as a citizen, feel that way still? yes, but if it takes this long... issues. I was thinking 2-3 weeks, yeah let's get it done... without guessing too much we may start Monday.... last 2-4 weeks and then you deliberate and we'd be done.... timeline put out there now.... 16:09:38 mention that because of the publicity, your little ones was wrapping arms around your leg... a loss for you and family temporarily if here with us... such imposition that it is insurmountable, you can't do it for destroying purposes? my family will be destroyed. if not to that level... hoping you would consider it... inconvenient for you, accomplish if we ask you to, 2-4 weeks? definite inconvenience. not trying to minimize that, but as citizens as we take on the role of doing everything, there's not much more asked of our citizens but war and ask them to serve on jurors... 16:12:04 if we ask you, is it something that you can accomplish even past its inconvenience? 16:12:34 judge will clear up the confusion, but in sequestration being with us you will have contact with family, telephone monitored, visits with family members monitored... not in prison but in situation where you maintain contact but supervised way to protect process...any questions that I can help answer for you to make decision to sit as juror 16:13:54 I just want to you to consider my situation. if pick you can you sit with us? if that's the only option I guess... well you can say no, but if it's an inconvenience, say yes... if it's because of destruction than you can't.... call is yours. if you can under what we talked about.... I just can't with consequences coming if over 4 weeks. I don't want to end up on the street. if I was single, it wouldn't be a problem. 16:15:09 rionda: the media itself or the internet with comments? they saw on internet, I don't know where.... EXCUSED FOR EVENING, SEE YOU TOMORROW IN THE MORNING. 16:15:44 PLEASE BE SEATED, COUNCIL COME TO BENCH..(sidebar) 16:16:22 COURT RECESS FOR THE DAY ====================================

Lancaster County Sheriff's deputies are practiced in the fine art of patience.That's clear on a video showing an SUV backing into a deputy's cruiser during a traffic stop on -- of course -- April Fools Day.Sheriff Terry Wagner said Deputy Ryan Schmuecker pulled over a 2007 BMW GL320 for speeding about 5:30 a.m. Thursday north of Bennett on Nebraska 43.In footage from the cruiser's dash-mounted camera, the Beemer begins to back up as Schmuecker walks toward it."Whoa, hey, hey, stop, stop, stop, stop, stop!" he says.Then, the sound of a crunch, and the deputy just sort of slumps.He stands on the road for a full 12 seconds, then says calmly: "Need to see your license, registration and insurance, sir.""The deputy's reaction is priceless," Wagner said in an e-mail. "I'm sure the deputy is thinking about all of the paperwork required when a government vehicle is involved in a crash."After Schmuecker collects the information, he says, "You want to pull your vehicle up so it's not on top of mine anymore, please?"And amazingly, the SUV's reverse lights pop on again."Stop!" Schmuecker shouts. "What's the problem, sir?"The driver replies he tried to put the BMW into park but it didn't go.It doesn't appear to have happened on purpose, Wagner said, and there was no alcohol involved. It was just one of those days.The driver was cited for careless driving. The cruiser, a 2009 Ford Crown Victoria, suffered $400 damage, according to the accident report.

INT BROLL GEORGE ZIMMERMAN TRAYVON MARTIN TRIAL / SWITCHED POOL FEED **NOTE: JUDGE'S COMMENTS IN CAPS **NAMES OF WITNESSES IN RED **VISUAL DESCRIPTIONS IN (PARENTHESES) **GOOD STATEMENTS/VIDEO BOLD 8:58:37 (Zimmerman enters, tan suit blue shirt and brown tie) (court rearranged differently) 9:00:12 PLEASE BE SEATED, GOOD MORNING. ON THE RECORD. ONE JUROR IS A FEW MINUTES LATE, WAIT FOR THEM. COUNCIL APPROACH FOR ONE MOMENT 9:00:59 (sidebar) 9:09:51 RECESS UNTIL THE POTENTIAL JURORS GET HERE 9:10:08 COURT IN RECESS ============================ 9:27:02 ATTORNEYS REQUEST THE FRYE HEARING BE TOMORROW AT 2. (sidebar) 9:31:03 deputy: jurors are present 9:32:36 PLEASE BE SEATED. GOOD MORNING... BEGIN WHATS REALLY THE JURY SELECTION, BEFORE WAS PRE SELECTION PROCESS... INSTRUCTIONS: IN ORDER TO HAVE FAIR TRIAL, RULES JURY MUST FOLLOW. MUST DECIDE CASE ON EVIDENCE IN COURT. DON'T COMMUNICATE ABOUT THE CASE. DO NOT DISCLOSE YOUR THOUGHTS OR ASK FOR ADVICE ON HOW TO DECIDE. NO ELECTRONIC DEVICES OR COMMUTERS TO COMMUNICATE ABOUT THIS CASE. DO NOT SEND OR ACCEPT MESSAGES ABOUT THIS CASE. MUST NOT DO RESEARCH THAT MAY HAVE ANYTHING TO DO WITH CASE. APPLIES IN COURT HOUSE, SEQUESTRATION, OR ANY WHERE ELSE. DEPENDING ON YOU TO FOLLOW RULES FOR A FAIR TRIAL. INVESTIGATE OR RESEARCH ON YOUR OWN, NO WAY TO ASSURE THEY ARE PROPER OR RELEVANT TO CASE. NO OPPORTUNITY TO DISPUTE EVIDENCE. BECOME AWARE OF VIOLATIONS OF INSTRUCTIONS, MUST TELL ME BY NOTE FROM COURT DEPUTY. 9:35:40 GOING TO BEGIN JURY SELECTION PROCESS, KNOWN AS VOIR DIRE. PURPOSE IS TO DETERMINE IF THE DECISION WOULD BE FAIR BASED ON EVIDENCE WITHOUT INFLUENCE FROM OUTSIDE FACTORS. NOT FOR PURPOSE OF PRYING INTO AFFAIRS... 9:36:27 CHARGES SET FORTH FOR ZIMMERMAN.... EVERY PERSON ACCUSED IS TO KNOW THE EXACT CHARGE. STATE OF FLORIDA VS. ZIMEMRMAN 12CF10838A COUNT 1 MURDER IN SECOND DEGREE. ON FEB. 26, 2012 ZIMMERMAN UNLAWFULLY KILLED MARTIN UNDER THE AGE OF 18, SHOOTING VICTIM. ZIMMERMAN CARRIED DISPLAYED USED ATTEMPT TO USE FIREARM. AS RESULT OF DEATH, INFLICTED UPON ANY PERSON.......... 9:38:13 INTRODUCED TO PARTICIPANTS OF THIS TRIAL. ARE ANY OF YOU RELATED TO ATTORNEYS OR ZIMMERMAN? NO HANDS ARE BEING RAISED 9:38:37 HANDED A LIST OF POTENTIAL WITNESSES IN THE CASE. IF YOU RECOGNIZE ANY NAMES PLEASE CIRCLE THEM. MANY MORE NAMES LISTED THAN ACTUALLY CALLED... REVIEW THAT. RAISE YOUR HAND IF YOU RECOGNIZE ANY INDIVIDUALS... ASK YOU TO TELL US WHAT PAGE AND WHAT NUMBER THEY ARE OR THEIR INITIALS. DONE READING, PLEASE LOOK UP. 9:46:19 SHOW OF HANDS BY FIRST ROW, DO YOU RECOGNIZE WITNESS NAMES? 9:46:46 (couldn't hear the juror number) ANYONE ON FRONT PAGE YOU RECOGNIZE? first page. HOW MANY? 2. they're both d's. FIRST NAME? j and d. first and fourth d. ATTORNEYS WILL ASK YOU QUESTIONS ABOUT THAT. ANYBODY ELSE ON THE LIST? no. 9:48:06 SECOND ROW, DO YOU RECOGNIZE NAMES? B61? HOW MANY? just 1, perhaps the last page the first one. ANYBODY ELSE ON THE SECOND ROW? G63? HOW MANY? 2. WHAT PAGE? second page. INITIAL OF LAST NAME? j. initial of first name? c. 5 OR 6TH DOWN FROM J's? 1 of them. the 5th. WHAT IS THE OTHER ONE? last page. INITIAL OF LAST NAME? w. INITIAL OF FIRST NAME? e. FIRST WD OR LAST WD? I only see one. oh it's the first. 9:50:14 ANYBODY ELSE? ON THE THIRD ROW? JUROR i33? WHO BY PAGE? first page last name b, first name c. THE LAST B? yes. ANYBODY ELSE ON THE LIST YOU RECOGNIZE? number 32, last c. CB? correct. last page...last name w, first name n. OK. I do have one more. last name z first name s. OK, COVER ALL OF THOSE? yes. 9:52:21 ANYBODY ELSE? JUROR E6. on last page, last name w first name n and last name z and first name s. ANYBODY ELSE? THANK YOU VERY MUCH. 9:53:20 rionda: good morning... introduce myself to you all. reviewing why this is important 9:55:11 spent last week and first two days of this week going through the process, asked all of you questions related to case regarding publicity. individual so it didn't contaminate other juror's knowledge. important at arriving a decision comes from this court room. agree? yes. issue with that, outside of courtroom can't factor into decision? 9:56:18 what you saw or read from media is irrelevant. now in stage 2. question you individually and collectively about this case or background stuff about you 9:56:45 assure us that you will give consideration to all questions asked? yes 9:56:59 if during this process I ask individually or as a group and you feel uncomfortable talking about it in a group, let us know.... 9:57:41 juror b7? correct. do you want us to bring up issues about that and the time of the question? yes sir 9:58:06 were trying to get a jury that speaks the truth and arrive at just verdict 9:58:20 some of you were talked to last week and others were Monday and Tuesday... anyone go home and celebrate going through to next round? nobody? 9:58:42 appreciate you've taken this time already. 9:58:59 juror b12.... as talked about individually, how long resident of Seminole county? at least 40 years. how long have you lived at current address? 19 years. live in state of Florida before that? Michigan. left there when I was 9. married? no. divorced? yes. how long married before divorce? a yr. what does former spouse do for living? he's dead. children? 2. how old? 32 and 19. what do they do for living? one's a full time student and the other one owns his own company. medical field and construction worker. how long have you been at current employer? since October. before that? home health nurse. how long? 5 years. supervise people in that position? no. before that? CNA. how long total? 5 years. members or involved in organizations at all? volunteer work for moose lodge and my church. how long, long time? yeah. 10:02:51 leadership position? no anymore. prior experience? no. outside work and volunteering, anything else? raising my daughter, I'm a mother. any other hobbies? part of red hat society. I like my wine and going to the beach. served on jury before? no. just don't like the media being there.... that takes away his privileges, they put everything everywhere.... 10:05:31 b29... originally from Chicago? yes. grew up there? yes. married? yes. how long? 10 years. kids, yes? lots. how many? 8. under age of 18? one is over 18. how old is that one? going to be 20. live with you and husband? resides with me now. going to school or working? arrived a few weeks ago, looking for work 10:06:32 how long at employment? 3 months. prior to that? CNA. how long? 7 years. member of organization? my house. military service? no. spend time outside work, but I know answer and what you're passionate about? kids. jury service? no. 10:07:34 b76... how long in Seminole? since 1995. how long at current address? 1 week. prior to that? another address. originally from? been here since 1966. marital status? married. how long? 30 years. children? 2. how old? 28 attorney, 26 CNA. does your son practice in Seminole? yes. what practice? not criminal, foreclosures, bankruptcies, divorce, and contract. ever practiced criminal law? no. 10:08:59 picked as jury and they haven't talked about law and you can't call your son and ask him? yes I understand. 10:09:25 how long at current place of employment? unemployed. prior? husband and I had construction company. how long? 15 yes. husband still involved in that business? no. helping out children built their home. manage rental properties. involvement? I rescue a lot of pets. how long? a long time. military service? no. outside house? managing properties and rescuing animals. passion? rescuing animals. prior jury service? no 10:10:43 b7.... living in Seminole? between orange and Seminole 30 years. born and raised in Florida. married? yes. how long? 10 years. what does spouse do? just got out of school to be a teacher. kids? no. current occupation? 11 years. any management duties? I will. tell us about that? going to be elite position among others in similar roles. how many will you supervise? just 2-3. member in organization? I'm sure I am through her. military service? no. outside work? watch sports... love video games. socialize with friends go out to bar. passion? not passionate about a lot of stuff. ever served as juror? I have. how long ago? before I was working at current job, 12-15 years. Seminole or orange? Seminole. criminal or civil? criminal. reach a verdict? yes. fore person? no. enjoy it? I did. it was one day. 10:13:37 b35.... how long in Seminole? since 1985. current address? 12 yes. marital status? married. how long? going on 20+ years. what does spouse do? local TV. is she a reporter? no. comments I made about media you won't hold against me. 10:14:24 any kids? yes. 1 son in college now. what is he studying? engineering. current occupation, how long? I manage tax office in the year, vending machines and rental... for about 7 years... before that? properties around central Florida. member in organization? fraternity and football coach. how long? 13 years. military service? yes Marine Corp Reserves. how long? 6 years. military police? no. how do you spend time out of work? watching sports, coaching, spending time together. 10:16:07 real passion in life? coaching football.... served as juror? no 10:16:19 b37.... Seminole county? 18 years. prior? dad was air force captain. born in California, but went from coast to other. married? yes. 20 years. spouse job? space attorney... rockets and space craft. how long has that been a specialty? always... since he graduated. corporate attorney? yes. practice criminal law? no. would that influence you? no he wouldn't answer me. kids? 24, pet groomer, 27 at ucf. how long at employment? 16 years. management position? now I am, converted because girl before retired. ever settle disputes? no, there's only 3 of us.. were a family. organizations? involved in rescue groups, got out because I couldn't take more animals. do you know the other juror? I do not. 10:19:08 does anybody know any other jurors here? 10:19:15 military service? no. outside, I know. jury service? called 4 times... excluded from last one because of where I work. 10:19:41 b51.... how are you? good. Seminole? 9 years. originally? orange county. central Florida? since 1987. before? Atlanta. married? no. kids? no. grand kids? no. employment? retired. retired from what work? real estate.. several careers? I have. prior to that? director of call center. how long? 10 years. managerial duties? direct reports and 1200 employees. resolve disputes? often. how? listen to all sides and make tough calls. 10:21:11 member of any organizations? no. just enjoying retirement? yes. in military? I wasn't. for fun? driving back and forth to Jacksonville... elderly parents, lots of brothers and sisters. jury service? yes, one was in Seminole county 3 years ago... called case before we were called. another one in orange county in 1991, I was an alternate. 10:22:20 b86... how long a resident? 1989. before that? 1971 in orange county. marital status? single. kids? 2. 20 and 21... full time student and trying to get the other one back in school, he was ill. the one in school, what does he want to be? childhood specialist. how long in employment? 10 years. member in organizations? not any more, once at birds of prey... worked in church with youth group. in military? no. jury service? 10:24:24 e6.... Seminole county? 2 years. before? orange. how long? since 2004. originally? Brevard. marital status? married. what does spouse do? engineer. how long married? 6 years. kids? 2, 11 and 13. current occupation? unemployed. 9 months before that and prior to that I was in school and raising kids. what filed before? financial services. member in organization? member of church and I used to volunteer at kids school 10:25:44 military? no. how do you spend time outside of work? taking care of kids, dogs, helping with the friends young kids, gardening. prior jury service? no, called but never... 10:26:09 e40... Seminole county? 7 months. before that? Iowa. how long? 2 years. before that? California. come to Florida to retire? came to work in Florida. what do you do? safety officer. how long? over 25 years. marital status? married. spouse living? chemical engineer. kids? 1 son, 28 looking for work. prior to that? he was working in western Pennsylvania in fast food service. organization? no. military? no. fun? travel, read, and sports. any particular? all but football mainly. prior jury service? yes I have served. in Pennsylvania. criminal or civil? drug dealing 10:28:14 go back and deliberate? yes. reach verdict? we were. forewoman? I was not. enjoy experience? I did 10:28:30 e54... how long in Seminole? 14 years. before that? orange. since I was 8. marital status? married for 5 years. spouse? engineering technician. kids? two step children, 16 living with us and the other is late 20s. how long working there? 3 years. before that? same field for 30 years. member involved in organizations? no. military? no. fun? reading, working on family tree, playing golf. where's family from originally? Maryland 10:29:58 passions I guess? it was for a while, now that we finished it's on the side 10:30:09 jury service? summoned but never sat 10:30:18 e73... Seminole? 13 years. prior? new jersey. grow up there? I did not. grew up? new York. current address? 13 years. marital status? married. how long? 33 years. spouse? retired. prior to that? telecommunications firm. kids? yes. how many? 2. how old and what they do? 15 on Sunday, 18. still in school? going to college. what he wants to do? I don't think he's there yet 10:31:34 retired or working? consultant. how long? 10 years. before that? large telecommunications firm. where your husband worked? yes. meet there? we did. organizations? not currently. before? various arts councils. military? no. fun? going to sporting events, children active in sports... make jewelry, read, I love the beach 10:32:28 prior jury service? yes. here in Seminole? 3 times in Seminole, once for federal court and once in Ohio. served 5 times? yes. enjoy it? not always. Ohio, criminal or civil? civil I think. deliberate? settled out of court after 5 days. federal? criminal. deliberate? I didn't get seated on jury. three here, criminal or civil? first was civil and I didn't do anything. next was criminal settled out of court, next one I didn't get seated. 10:34:16 m75.... how long in Seminole? since 2001. before that? new York. grow up there? yes. lived in current address? 2 months. prior to that? still in Seminole, just different space. married or single? single. kids? no. work? 2 months. prior? travel agent for cruise. how long? 1 year. before that? theme parks in Orlando. how long? almost 2 years. what did you do? guest service attendant moved to cashier and food service. member of organization? not currently, used to volunteer at animal shelter. military? no. fun? large family, visit with them. military service? no 10:36:22 b61... how long in Seminole? 5 years. current address for? 4 years. prior? orange, Volusia, army brat. marital status? married. how long? 2 months. husband? full time student. engineer. kids? no. engineer too? yes. how long? 7 years. member of organizations? church, professional society, and sorority. leadership? I have, but not now. military? no. fun? studying, reading and spending time with family. studying to be? for an exam. prior jury service? no 10:38:00 b72.... how long resident? 9 years. originally? Chicago. marital status? single. kids? no. work? coming to a year. same field but different job? yes. involved in organizations? alumni of fraternity. leadership? vice president of local chapter but I wouldn't say so. military? no. fun? arm wrestling, going to gym.... one arm pull up. how long? 2.5 years. wrestling in high school? weight lift, track, football 2 years. meets to arm wrestle? depends on venue, encompasses everything... I could talk about it all day 10:40:00 prior jury service? no 10:40:05 e22... how long in Seminole? 12 years. prior? orange. grow in central Florida? only since 92. up north? spend a lot of time there. married? single. kids? no. work? 19 years. organizations? social service with employer. military? no. spend time out of work? gardening, all things food. passionate about? yeah. jury service? called in asocial but didn't serve 10:41:34 e13.... how long in Seminole? 17 years. marital status? single. kids? no. how long have you been doing that? surgical assistant for 2 years. member of organizations? church. military? no. outside work? horses. passion is riding? yes. jury service? no 10:42:33 e28.... how long Seminole? 1985. before that? Texas. originally from? yes. marital? married for 28 years, 2 children... 27 and 23 work for theme park and hotel side of it. spouse do? teacher. work? 26 years. members? professional, relay for life. how you spend time out of work? yes. jury? summoned for federal, never called and served in Texas... read verdict? yes. deliberate? yes. forewoman? no. enjoy that? yes I did 10:44:16 k80... Seminole county? 2004. before? Virginia. grew up there? most of life. marital status? 15 years... spouse? maintenance tech. kids? 2. two girls. under 18? yes. work? over 5 years, same line of work for 15 years. member of organizations? attend church regularly, girl scouts, soccer. military? family members, father was navy grandfathers and cousins. fun? work absorbs time and then children. jury service? no first time 10:45:49 k95... how long in Seminole? 16 years. before that? orange for 7 and manatee for 4. marital? married. 15 years. spouse? electrician. kids? yes. how old? daughter that's 24, son that'll be 14, and a grandson. daughter? internship to be a dental hygienist. work? consultant, used to own company for 7 years. same industry for 10 10:46:51 member of organizations? yeah, ptk. pbl. fbi. Alzheimer's association, autism speaks and march of dimes. military? no. jury service? no 10:47:22 p67... why we can't do this in private... is there a way? do in private with nobody else? approach bench? VOIR DIRE HAS TO BE IN PUBLIC FORM. YOU CAN APPROACH. your name is private if that's what you're worried about. I just don't want the media to put labels on me like finding something else. JURY SELECTION PROCESS HAS TO BE OPEN COURT, OPEN TO PUBLIC...ZIMMERMAN HAS RIGHT TO BE THERE, ATTORNEYS HAVE THE RIGHT TO BE THERE... REMOVE OTHER JURY MEMBERS, WILL NOT CLEAR THE COURT ROOM... MAYBE A QUESTION ASKED THAT IS SENSITIVE NATURE TO YOU THAT I CAN'T CLEAR THE COURT ROOM, BUT I CAN DO IT OUTSIDE PRESENCE OF OTHER MEMBERS. 10:49:51 from where? been here since 2008. Seminole county how long? since 2008. before that? moved from Chicago. before that, originally? Mexico. how long in US? since I was 18 years old. married? yes. how long? about 20 years. kids? yes. how old? 18, and 16 and 11. still in school? just out of high school. work for how long? since 2008. involved in organizations? church. military? no. fun? helping wife, kids and watching sports. first time in jury? yes. looking forward to it? looking to have a nice experience, but it's been a nightmare. every day something is different. if it's going to affect my family I'm not looking forward to it...still feel it's a hardship for you? absolutely 10:52:34 g14... how long in Seminole? once before and recently from 2005 to now. grew up and moved out? no dad in military. marital status? divorced. former spouse? does not work at this time. what did he do? assembly. kids? 2 boys. 12 and 15. work? 3 years. before? sold print advertising. how long? 1996 to 2010. involved in organizations? boy scouts. how long? 6 years. military service? I have not been, but family. spend time outside work? boy scouts, taking care of my boys and reading. jury? summoned 2 other times, but never seated on jury 10:54:22 g29... Seminole county? 9 months. before that? in orange county. marital? single. kids? no. work? almost 6 years. before that? same field for total over 14 years. member of organizations? no. military? no. fun? friends and family and sports and TV. jury service? summoned in orange but never on jury 10:55:33 g47.... how long in Seminole? under 9 years. before? Boston, MA. marital? single. kids? nope. current job, how long? since October. before that? unemployed. member with organization? no. military? none. fun? sports friends beer. jury service? once, but it was settled 10:56:24 g63..... how long in Seminole? 4 years. before? orange. martial? single. kids? no. unemployed now, before that? teaching assistant and student. major? mathematics. member of any organizations? no. military service? no. fun? chess, Olympic weightlifting, piano. how long Olympic? a year. jury? no 10:57:40 g66.... Seminole? 2 years. prior? 12 years in Madison. prior to that? Chicago. marital? widow. spouse? mechanic for trucks. kids? 2 daughters. oldest is 36 works for entertainment company. 32 year old works for entertainment lighting... how long you work? retired. prior? at hospitals. financial advisor. member of organizations? started riding with Care Takers... motorcycle club. military? no. outside work? ride with my boyfriend, fish, spend time with family. what does boyfriend do? he sails. jury service? once in Chicago... alternate 10:59:45 g81.... how long in Seminole? 16 years. marital status? married. how long? 19 years. spouse? administrative assistant. how long? 19 years. member in organizations? professional. military service? no. fun? golf, travel, sports. prior service? no. 11:00:37 h6... Seminole? 1.5 years. prior? orange and Colorado. in Florida? since 2004. married? no. kids? no. current job? 5 months. prior to that? same line of work, but in it for 7 years now. member involved in organizations? no. military service? no. fun? relax... jury service? yes. in Seminole or others? orange. 2 years ago. criminal case. deliberate? yes. verdict? on most charges. foreman? no 11:02:04 h7.... in Seminole? 27 years, before Illinois, before Texas. married 44 years. 2 children ones 41 in Ireland. 39 in el Paso. spouse? weight watchers councilor for 25 years takes care of house. job? 40 years. member of organizations? professional associations, boy scouts for 35 years, instructor for merit badges, wife and I will have a small nursery. prior jury service? 1 in Seminole criminal case, foreperson we reached a verdict. 11:03:30 h18.... Seminole county? 2 years. before? orange county for almost a year. overseas before? yes. how long? 1996. marital status? going through divorce. kids? 1. girl is 7. job? in that field since I got to Florida, before that......... overseas in military? army and then contractor for defense company...involved in any organizations? no. fun? gym, tennis, swimming, with my daughter. jury service? no 11:05:05 h29... resident of Seminole? over 30 years, and orange... army brat. marital status? divorced. spouse? school teacher. kids? yeah 2 daughters, 28 and 30 year old... working with UCF and the other is handicapped. work? 30 years. member? professional and served on local city board for 15 years... leadership? yes. military? I also served too. how long? 4 years. military police? no. fun? beach, tennis... beer. jury service? summoned once 15 years ago... never sat 11:07:11 h18... military police? no 11:07:17 h35... Seminole? 24 years. martial? married. how long? 5 years. spouse? unemployed. before? lawn service. kids? no. job? unemployed taking care of grandfather before. member of organizations? was in 2010. military? no. spend time for fun? beach. jury service? no 11:08:17 h81... how long in Seminole? since 2000. prior to that? Pennsylvania. marital status? 31 years. spouse? supervisor at hotel. kids? 25 year old daughter in marketing son in navy. work? 25 years. member of organizations? 1 professional. military? no. fun? family and discovering cool internet technologies. jury service? yes. in Seminole criminal case. verdict? yes. foreman? no 11:09:39 h69... resident of Seminole? 21 years. marital status? married. how long? 11 months. spouse? technician with bright house. work? a year and 8 months. before that in school? IRA company. member of any organizations? church, human resources. military? no. fun? usually with mom or dad. prior jury service? no. 11:10:43 h86.... Seminole? born and raised. married? no. kids? no. job? 6 months. before? technician. organizations? professional and church. military? no. fun? volunteer and with family. jury? summoned, but away for school 11:11:37 i5.... how long in Seminole? 13 years. before that? Alaska for 27 years. what were you doing? working, originally in military, 7 years and then discharged work for financial... married? yes. spouse? auditor. kids? yes. 3. what do they do? oldest son is 40 worked for grocery chain, out in California. daughter is 38 works for utility company and my youngest works for IT group. work? almost 40 years. member of any organizations outside? no all professional. military police? no. fun? watching sports on TV, hang with friends, I like working with computers..... jury service? yes. Seminole or elsewhere? 2 assignments here in Seminole and when I lived in Alaska I think I had 4. 2 here, deliberate? just 1. criminal or civil? DWI. we deliberated. verdict? yes. foreman? yes. 4 in Alaska and deliberate all of them? yes. criminal or civil? all civil. foreman on 1 of them. reach verdict on all 4? yes. enjoy experiences? looking back I did... when I was on it I didn't 11:14:48 i19.... resident in Seminole? 3 years. before? orange. marital status? single. kids? no. work? 1 year. before that? retail. organizations? no. military? no. fun? school. health service admin. jury? no 11:15:36 i24... how long in Seminole? 1968. marital status? married. shy of 39 years. spouse? he is a coordinator transportation for theme park. kids? 29 athletic trainer, 22 student, 29 installer. student, studying? psychology. work? just shy of 42 years. organizations? no. military? no. fun? sports work in yard, beach, hit the road and go to mountains. jury? summoned once but never had to 11:17:09 i33... resident in Seminole? 30 years. marital? married. spouse? account manager. kids? no. work? searching for new career. how long in field before? 44 years. member in organization? yes. what kind? environmental advocacy and county board. how long? just over a year. military service? no. fun? small farm and enjoy offshore competition fishing. jury service? no. 11:18:29 i44... resident in Seminole? 2 years but 25 in orange. marital status? married. spouse? RN. kids? 3, 10, 12, and 9 month son. work? 12 years. field? before that in theme park industry. involved in organizations? Florida barbecue association. military service? no. fun? family raising little one. jury service? 4 years ago orange I was alternate 11:20:17 15 MINUTE RECESS, FOLLOW JARVIS OUTSIDE THE COURTROOM. ================================================================ 11:41:13 PLEASE BE SEATED. BACK ON RECORD. approach? YES (sidebar) 11:42:19 jurors are present 11:43:26 PLEASE BE SEATED... RIONDA YOU MAY CONTINUE 11:43:39 group questions... and then individual too... sit here today, give the defendant a fair trial? yes. give the state a fair trial? yes. give both sides fair? yes. issue? believe both sides do not deserve fair trial? defendant and stat fair trial? yes 11:44:32 state has to prove defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. it's the law. court will give you instructions. states burden, understand? yes. states prove crime was committed and defendant did it? yes. 11:45:18 read like what it is not... a reasonable doubt is not forced, imaginary, speculative... must have reason for that doubt. not to a mathematical certainty, not absolute? yes 11:46:11 believe the burden should be higher than reasonable doubt, like perfection? 11:46:34 sit here today, do you all understand concept/law talks about presumption of innocence. this defendant is presumed innocent, understand? yes. not innocent, but presumed innocent? yes. abide by that? yes. 11:47:23 live in greatest country of world and our criminal justice allows for a trial. no matter what the charge, state has burden. understand? yes. trial is the way? yes 11:47:56 defendant has no obligation? yes. how do you render a verdict? court will give instructions on how to do that. rely on facts and law and also in the process you use common sense in arriving in verdict. 11:48:45 law also says you don't speculate... not allowed in arriving in verdict. speculation plays no role, rely on evidence. agree? yes 11:49:14 what witness says is evidence, no the questions 11:49:51 difference between real world and TV world or make believe. 11:50:08 b35... if attorney asks question of witness and the witness says no, what do you believe? what witness said. is that important? yes. why? he's the witness.. he knows what's going on 11:50:58 sympathy plays no role at all in verdict, understand? yes. 11:51:22 understand that sympathy can't be consider at all, agree? yes 11:51:32 k80... agree with that? yes. why? based off facts and not emotion 11:52:05 bias shouldn't play a role at all in arriving in verdict.... g63, do you believe people are bias to certain things? yes. sometimes about people with bald heads or whatever, people has bias? yes. agree bias shouldn't play role at all? correct. biases about how people dress, should play role? no. why? not relevant to the facts that happened. do you think were always able to pick if someone is bias? not always. how can you tell? maybe if they... if they act in a way with specific preference for something more if they didn't have any advice. 11:53:57 penalties in this case, judges job what the penalties are. m75... problem with that? no. can't consider what the penalties are, no role? I understand. I agree. 11:54:49 job is only to defend guilt or innocence? yes. will anyone consider the penalties, you can't do that, agree? yes. 11:55:12 agree with that b37... I agree. why? falls in sympathy part. shouldn't play role at all? should not 11:55:59 state proves evidence, direct evidence... circumstantial evidence.... direct is someone sees something. circumstantial is added to other piece of puzzle to prove something. 11:56:25 law allows that the state can use direct evidence and circumstantial evidence. I come home and wife tells me kid brought cookie jar and the kids say they didn't do it... no eye witness, question kids... but one has crumbs in her mouth... that's an inference to prove something else 11:57:55 i44... ever used circumstantial evidence? all the time. at work or home? at home. give me an example? who made the mess, it wasn't us. who had breakfast, both of us. what did you have... oatmeal and there's oatmeal all over the counter. 11:58:47 I used to ask who watches CSI, now I ask reverse. who hasn't heard of CSI? b7 you have not watched CSI? no. anyone else who hasn't watched? b29, b35, b86, b61, b72, e28, k95, p67, h69, h86, h29. 12:01:01 not the real world... people want to believe that's real, they expect that evidence to appear out of nowhere... that's not the real world. hold state of Florida to what they've seen on csi? E6 HAS A QUESTION.... E6: going back to circumstantial evidences... circumstances can be misleading, so does it have to be very... still proven beyond unreasonable doubt. 12:02:38 never watched any of those shows? still have a few. b29... why? I like drama. real world as opposed to make believe? yeah 12:03:14 also had in last 5 or 10 years an increase in real lawyer type shows... not the real world? 12:03:43 i5... ever watch those shows? watched them don't make sense to me. some of them may be lawyers? question integrity of them... real lawyer wouldn't do that 12:04:17 not going to determine guilt or innocence from TV? yes. b61, agree with that? yes. if they're not representing client they don't know the facts, may have special interest. 12:05:35 how people feel about attorneys, how many of you liked their commercials... love those commercials??? hold against state of Florida or omara because were attorneys? anybody? 12:06:11 we realize people come into court room with opinions? yes. all come in with opinion on things, right? yes. if people are exposed to things, how do we make sure they make their decision on evidence opposed to what opinion should be. e73, what do we do with people whit opinions? that's a tough one cause I don't know that you'd always know about their opinion. e54, question? I don't know how you can guarantee that's not going to happen... you hope they don't. agree with e73 and e54? yes 12:08:18 h29... how would you assure opinions do not factor in the decision? profile a jury, ask questions look for answers that will represent you and people that are fair. no good way to do it. everyone agree? yes. telling the truth to best of ability.... 12:09:34 can you follow the law as a group? be frank with us.. does anybody feel they cannot? anybody? no from everyone? yes sir 12:10:02 h6... agree with that? yes. how would you assure that it doesn't interfere? don't know how you find out how, but keep my opinion out of it 12:10:44 both sides get fair trial 12:11:08 b67.... too personal or it's alright? it's alright. g14? agree that sometimes we make assumptions that turn out not to be true? yes. ever done that? yes. example? meet somebody and think they're stuck up and then I would find out later they were shy. agree with g14? yes. has anyone ever been wrong about an assumption? 12:12:58 assumptions play no role in a verdict? yes sir 12:13:22 opinions and assumptions play no role in a verdict? yes 12:13:30 how do we know that happens? e40, how? check our personal values and hold others accountable and challenge if we see those bias. discrepancies raise an issue 12:14:13 attorneys, who knows any attorney? b12? yes. are they here in town? Tim Morgan. what practice? friend of his. talk to him about law? no. b76? my son. asked you that before? yes. b35? friend from hometown and friends I went to college with. civil or criminal? split. discuss law? no sir... b37? married to attorney, anybody else? attorneys from work that work on cases like personal injuries. criminal or civic? not that I'm aware of. interfere in any way? no sir. b51? neighbor. corporate lawyer... 12:17:03 e6? I know a woman in Colorado in contract law... e40? several from college, woman I rent house from is in real estate law and she's in Texas. e54? I do know people who are attorneys but I don't discuss with them. 12:17:53 e73? friends and family. criminal law? no 12:18:05 g47? friends' mother for Volusia. civil law. interfere? no. g14? I know a couple attorneys through boy scout, but I don't know criminal. no interference no. 12:18:59 k95? several from network associations, patent, tax and contract. no criminal? not that I know of. interference? no sir 12:19:23 k80? friends and legal counsel at our company. criminal? no. interference? no 12:19:43 e13? moms side of families, some attorneys? criminal? I have no idea.. influence? no 12:20:04 e22? three attorneys, all civil. interfere? no 12:20:14 b61? several from college, all civil and no interference 12:20:28 h6? know an attorney that does workers comp law. interfere? no 12:20:43 h7? department of defense, contract lawyers. nephew in environmentalism 12:20:50 h29? several from my profession. interfere? no 12:21:09 h81? I know 20-25 attorneys. criminal? a handful. discussions about the law? most involved around consumer law. interfere as juror? that wouldn't influence me 12:21:56 h86? past employers were attorneys... insight into law? no 12:22:09 i33? several lawyers both civil and criminal. interfere with decision? no. 12:22:40 anybody associated with law, judges? i33? I know a few sir... 12:23:01 interfere in any way to be a juror? no. 12:23:14 personal questions about arrest, victim of crime, if it's something you want in private let us know. need to know impact it may have. 12:24:02 front row, arrested? b12, here in Seminole? Daytona. still pending? no thrown out of court, never went. would that experience factor in to be fair juror? no. set aside? I was only 17 so yeah. feel you were treated fairly? for who I was with... hold against Florida? no. hold against Zimmerman? no. 12:25:07 b29? Chicago. still pending? it's been disposed of? yeah. interfere with you? no. hold against? no. treated fairly? yes. 12:25:36 b35? orange county. still pending? no. disposed of? yes. how long ago? 1987. unfairly treated? no. prosecuted or case dismissed? I was prosecuted. hold against? no. treated fairly? yes 12:26:24 e6? in Florida, Brevard back in 1999. pending? no. treated fairly. 12:27:13 h7? 40 years ago state of Texas. not pending? correct. treated fairly? absolutely. it was acquitted. hold against? no 12:28:04 h81? Seminole. pending? no. how long ago? yr. and a half ago. treated fairly? yes. no charges it was detained.. no charges. hold against? no 12:28:55 i33? Seminole. pending? no. treated unfairly? yes. arrested or prosecuted? both. won't hold it against anybody. what happened to your case? go to court, pay a fine. won't hold against? no sir. 12:30:00 anybody been a subject of criminal investigation? no from everybody 12:30:14 close friend arrested and you felt was treated unfairly? b7? family or close friend? close friend. pending? no. orange county. arrested unfairly. dropped? I don't know. hold against? no. 12:31:13 k95? friend in Ohio arrested and treated unfairly. pending? no. when she was incarcerated. drop charges on her? no. told by the judge she could take medicine and they didn't give to her, brought her to hospital 12:32:28 b61? someone was arrested, treated unfairly. charges were dropped. here in Florida? yes. pending? no. hold against? no. 12:33:06 A LOT OF YOU HERE.... AN HOUR ENOUGH? COME BACK AT 1:45. WHILE ON LUNCH BREAK, GO WITH EACH OTHER TALK ABOUT ANYTHING BUT THIS CASE. NO RADIO OR TV REPORTS. NO ELECTRONIC DEVICES. NOT TO READ OR CREATE SOCIAL NETWORKING PAGES. ASSURANCE TO ABIDE BY INSTRUCTIONS? 12:34:23 COURT IN RECESS FOR LUNCH UNTIL 1:45 ================================================ 13:46:07 PLEASE BE SEATED. BACK ON RECORD. DO WE HAVE THE JURORS BACK? COUNCIL APPROACH FOR JUST A MOMENT (sidebar) 14:02:46 PLEASE BE SEATED. WELCOME BACK. APPEARS TO BE HERE AND IN CORRECT PLACES. DURING LUNCH DID ANY OF YOU HAVE CONVERSATIONS ABOUT THIS CASE? DID ANY OF YOU READ OR LISTEN TO ANYTHING ABOUT THIS CASE? USE ANY ELECTRONIC DEVICE ABOUT THE CASE? READ OR CREATE ANY THING ABOUT THE CASE? 14:03:39 rionda: welcome back. 14:04:05 h81... a friend or close family member? close friend. in Seminole? no. Pennsylvania. treated unfairly? yes. in prosecution. hold against us? I would no. interfere? it would not. 14:05:05 were you a victim of a crime that it impacted you so much you wouldn't be able to participate? 14:05:26 b76? yes. b7? yes. b86? yes. anybody else? e40? e73? second row: e22? k80? k95? last row: g81? h7? h35? h81? i33? i44? did I get everybody? 14:06:35 violent crime? e73, b86, k80, e22. 14:07:09 you have to set it aside for the purposes of this trial. agree to leave outside court room... think you cannot, raise your hand... e73? just because of the nature that happened to you? it was a very similar crime. wouldn't be able to.... set it aside? it's always in my mind. 14:08:27 anybody else? 14:08:49 victims of crime, let me broaden criteria... crime to your household, felt police did not do a good job investigating? b7. home break in. here in Seminole? it was. they didn't do a good job? they didn't investigate at all. do you think that would impact you at all in this case to sit as juror or can you set aside? no. it wasn't a big deal. agree to leave outside court? yeah. 14:10:17 in that case, were you present? I came home and scared of burglars I think. chase them? no. knew better? I didn't realize until later.... called police and they didn't respond? when I was in high school, police came and they asked what was stolen and officer asked me if any of my friends did this. ever find out who it was? no. anybody else? 14:11:31 b86... many years ago, fast food restaurant. police officer scared us more than the person who just robbed us with the gun. going to our car when gun was pulled on us, we ran back into the restaurant after guy grabbed a bag... police knocked on door and we thought it was the guy again. make him go around so we can see him. tell us you're a police officer, he said "this isn't TV". hold against? no. know who was arrested? yes. he hit us twice, finally got caught. testify? no I couldn't pick him out. 14:13:33 does anybody live in community in which there is no crime? anybody? collective no. 14:14:02 steps to address it in your neighborhood? e54... I assume there's crime in my neighborhood, not personally aware of it. 14:14:42 k95... I would put up a no soliciting sign in my neighborhood. effective? yes. anything further? no. there's a neighborhood watch. are you a part of it? no. 14:15:12 e73... we had a sudden increase in crime in neighborhood. they started a watch. join it? no, but went to a meeting. set up in uniform? no. armed? I don't think so. not involved in watch? no 14:15:54 anybody else? b76... just had teens vandalizing signs... police took care of it. we had a watch I just told them about it. any steps yourself to get involved? telling the other neighbors 14:16:30 b35...still with us... closing your eyes just want to make sure 14:16:51 b7: what was the question again. crime in community and you got involved? no. 14:17:26 feel like people have the right to take law into their own hands? anybody? i5 shaking your head.... there may be occasions, but basically I would say no. g63... crimes in neighborhood? I'm assuming? watch in your community? not that I'm aware of. your last question was very general we have governments that we authorize to do that. 14:19:17 as individuals people shouldn't. g7, agree? where is the process or a citizen's arrest. I don't know how it applies. 14:19:45 other than what law allows, try to arrest people on your own? never have. i24, ever crossed your mind to arrest someone? no but I would do something if they tried to break into my house. id protect my family 14:20:34 can everybody agree the law applies equally to everyone? yes. it should or it doesn't? 14:20:54 b7.... hear a lot about it in the news. always believe? not always. 14:21:13 law matter about which part of county? no. difference in wealth class? no. matter if gated or not? no. where they're from? no. b72, it shouldn't matter? no. why not? when you see the law, the law applies to everyone it doesn't discriminate or consider race or sex. if we use this as criteria, the whole system goes down. 14:22:26 should it matter about race gender or ethnicity? no. 14:22:53 ever been a witness and testify? g81... was it here in Seminole? no. orange. proceeding or hearing or trial? it was juvenile system, proceeding. testify? yes. treated fairly by lawyers and judge and deputies? yes I was. anything about that you felt would interfere? nothing that happened there 14:23:56 h7: I've given depositions before. was it unpleasant it would influence you? no it was not. representation from both sides and told them what I knew. told the truth as best you could remember? yes 14:25:03 h29... I've been deposed before. anything about that experience? I was on the good guy side, never got to the other side. 14:25:23 h81... deposition, hearing, trial? I've been a witness a few times... treated unfairly? no. 14:26:00 i24... I was a witness in a car accident. eye witness? yeah and we had to verify who hit who. more than one? several people. all have to come to court? no we all went to court and stood in front of judge and told her what we saw. questioning you? just the judge... 14:27:00 g63... witness for criminal trial in orange county. eye witness? I was an eye witness to nothing. still called? yes. badgered in any way by either side? no. it wasn't unpleasant it was inconvenient. impact you? no 14:27:48 k80.... witness in child custody case. in front of court? no jury, just a judge. treated fairly? yes, no badgering.. civil questions. 14:28:22 k95... federal lawsuit case, it wasn't a good experience. because of way you were treated? yes. by who? attorneys and judge. judge nelson? no. it wasn't in this state. attorneys were asking improper questions? I was told I was at an economic disadvantage. scream back at them? kept my cool and had to pay it off. terrible experience? yes. hold against? no this was business 14:29:50 e22... I've been deposed. treated fairly? yes. deposition end there or another proceeding? never went to trial. that experience that you were treated unfairly? no. 14:30:30 e6... custody trial and domestic violence... nothing about the proceedings. treated fairly? yes. impact? no. e40... witness to car accident, no jury... I was treated fairly. other people eye witness too. there when other witnesses testified? I was around... 20 years ago though. 14:31:40 all read the witness list... cover that. how you know the person and the impact of that.... 14:32:16 e6... SHES IN SEAT NUMBER 9, GIVE HER LIST. THAT MIGHT BE EASIER. recognize that as yours? yes. circled two names on front page. one of them starts with d and j... professional or social? I recognize the name I don't personally know them. recognize them as physician. impact you? no it would not. also have under that name, three down from that. know the name? I don't know them personally, received referral to her for one of my children. impact? no. some on last page... last name with w recognize name or the person? just the name. impact? no. third from bottom starts with z and s? know them? no. recognize name? yes. impact? no. 14:35:16 i33.... first page, last name starts with b and first name is c. know them or recognize name? right, could be somebody that I name... I have no idea if I know them or not. assuming it's the same person you know, what do they do for a living? construction business. person you know is him? correct. with the work you do? yes. if he testified, find him more credible? no sir, not necessarily no. if it's the same person could you rely just on what they said as opposed to knowing them? absolutely. another name with a c and a b? correct. recognize? just heard the name. no impact on you? no sir. first person/ another relationship, fun thing and I see him once a year... fun thing, activity? yeah it would ID me. you interact with him though? yes sir 14:38:23 last page, last name w and n? yes. recognize or personal? recognize name. know them other than that? no. 14:38:45 toward bottom of page, z and s? recognize the name. impact? no sir 14:39:22 juror number.... second page j and c... know them? as a celebrity... not the person that were talking about here. ok? and someone else.... last page last name with w and d? how do you know them? name I think I recognize. impact? no. 14:40:29 b61.... last page, at top? yes. personal or professional? if same person it's personal but haven't seen them in 2-3 years. friends? yes. exercise together. hear them on witness stand find them more or less credible? it wouldn't impact if it were any other witness. how close, how much interaction? person in social organization, saw her a lot for a while. over a yr. or two? a couple years while I was in school. is this person still a member of that organization? yes. impact you? no 14:42:49 hear from witness, evaluate based on insurrections from court? yes. g47, depend if witness has job? no. why? irrelevant to the case. g29 does it matter if they're law enforcement? no. everyone agree? yes 14:43:37 e54 agree with that? sure 14:43:41 law allows for certain witnesses to be treated differently, experts can give opinion opposed to other witnesses. e13... agree with that? yes would say.. e28 agree? yes. why? they're experts in that field. evaluate and use instructions from court and the expertise? yes 14:44:43 b51.... agree with that? I do. why? education or experience and wouldn't call on them to discuss position or opinion without experience. ever had to rely on expert testimony? not testimony. go to expert for advice? no. anybody? b7.... rely on experts on constant basis 14:45:41 b35... agree? yes. why? practice in their field. b76 agree? yes. b12... agree? yes. why? education and school and have knowledge of that. H69 HAS QUESTIONS. h69: if attorney asked for opinion and they didn't just interject it? yes. that they asked for opinion and they didn't just interject opinion. if attorneys ask expert could you rely on his opinion? yes. why? I'm going to assume a witness researches before getting on the stand... rely on expert if both side find them to be an expert 14:47:55 in this type of case, since the trial is murder.... H86... also wondering if witness on stand only giving facts or opinions unless were asking for their opinion? right... e6... clarify to me I would believe an expert has studied and accumulated knowledge in area, but sometimes experts don't always agree even if in the same field, how is that treated? use your common sense and if it's credible. judge will give instructions about that. expert can give opinion. you can find an opinion with the one you wanted... You decide... 14:50:21 juror number..... person is an expert and we assume they are.. court will give you a ruling on that. expert is entitled to give opinion. if a juror finds a person is qualified as expert they don't have to accept that opinion. you would hear their qualifications and make that determination. 14:51:44 exposed to photos you've never been exposed to, problem looking at photos? does everyone understand the question? ok? yes 14:52:29 b37 you're fine with that... yes. b35.. yes 14:52:39 everyone else agree? yes 14:52:44 law enforcement experience? nobody. h86? not myself, but two aunts and uncles who are lieutenants. 14:53:19 h86, family in law enforcement? yes. departments here in Seminole? I believe it's orange. discuss matters with them about justice system? in the past I have. impact your decision? no. how extensive, more than 1? 3 family members. close with them? 2 of them. interact on weekly basis? yes. uniform? yes. how long in field? over 20 years. look up to them for advice? in general, yes. pursue law enforcement career? no. 14:54:37 k95... when you say law enforcement, but 40 years ago I worked in retail where I used to watch shop lifters... watched them and recorded them. apprehend them? no. I just do my job and report to manager.... someone else would apprehend? yes. successful? yes. how? bust a lot of my sisters friends. 14:55:50 anybody else I overlooked... i24? sort of in same situation... I didn't catch them. I did translation when they did get caught and they didn't speak English. for a company who had a lot of guests who got caught shop lifting. what language? Portuguese. several years? quite a lot. enjoy it? yes. anything that would interfere? no. k95... anything that would interfere? no 14:57:01 anybody else? k80.... family members. tell me? uncle who was in SWAT and cousin is NCIS agent. occasions to discuss with them? no. there are stories after the fact. interfere? no 14:57:42 b35.... family members mom worked for sheriff's department and cousins in police in Titusville. see them regularly? once or twice a year. discussions about job? 14:58:14 how come you didn't join department? first not to go into law enforcement because I went to school. not exciting enough? make a little more money and wanted to do my own thing. impact you one way or another? no. more incline to favor police officer? no 14:59:05 b7.... law enforcement, my wife used to work in the field, often had discussions about it. her job and dealing with victims? absolutely. how do you feel about that, would it impact you here? no. it was a while ago. in this case you have a victim, favor state in this case? no. wouldn't impact you? not when I last served on jury 15:00:13 b86... I used to do transcription for private investigator... a while ago? 15 yes ago in orange. former officer? yeah. record and you would transcribe? yes. impact favoring? no. 15:00:54 e6... include close friends? anybody important for us to know about.... family friend he was SWAT detective... he just left the force and went into private sector but served almost 17 years... impact your opinion? no 15:01:41 b12.... my dad was a Syracuse cop and my nephew is FBI agent. anything about nature of that would favor one side? no. 15:02:36 h69... any family member? yeah. cousin who works for government.... she's working with homeland security... opportunities to discuss her job? some times. anything about what she does you feel would impact you one way or another? no. desire to join her? it sounds exciting, but not for me 15:03:34 k95.... family or friends? yes someone important to let us know. acquaintances from homeland security and friend that is head of security. discuss criminal matters? no. the law? no. 15:04:14 k80.... friends? some close to you. neighbors son in law is US Marshall... and another Seminole county deputy and then another one and family friend have deputies at jail... discussions with them? no. interfere? no 15:05:02 e22.... close friend who was in law enforcement for 2 decades... discussions? interfere? no. 15:05:27 g66... my brother in law retired from police enforce, my niece is.... discuss matters? about what they do. desire to join? when I was younger. impact you? no 15:06:05 H7 HAS HAND UP... h7: friends through boy scouts. never discussed outside of scouts. no impact one way or another 15:06:29 i19... my uncle is police officer. still? yes. local? somewhere else. impact you? no. 15:06:57 i24... husband's niece is married to gentleman in fbi. anything about that? no. 15:07:19 i33... my wife's father is retired sheriff. no impact. in this county? different state. impact you? no 15:07:44 anybody in this room that has not had a dispute with another person? anybody? physical dispute? b35... verbal to physical. a long time ago? yeah. resolve it between you two? once or twice police were called. impact you? no sir 15:08:34 anybody else? e6... I was involved in domestic violence. impact? no. b7? fight in middle school... (Everyone laughs) I think I lost. any impact? no 15:09:33 k95... just domestic. impact you? no. 15:09:45 disputes where you worked it out? everyone? b61 have you? yes. how? talk about it. 15:10:19 g66? dispute where you resolved? yes. without violence? yes. talking loud walking away 15:10:34 medical experience, in the field one way or another? g47....registered EMT. impact? not that I'm aware of. k95... CNA and activity director. anyone else? e40... certified health care officer. b12.... 15:11:42 e28.... medical. h86? home health CNA before RN. 15:12:07 other than b72... fitness people? h18... work out all the time? lifting every morning, play tennis... e13.... weight lift and run and go to gym. b72... wrestling, anybody else wrestle? boxing? h29... trying to get more George Forman on.... in the military. how well? middle levels before someone was young. I remember 5, 6.... (everyone's laughing) 15:13:46 anybody else? g63... weight lifting? yes. training for sport. endurance type thing? weight lifting. for a year? yes. 15:14:09 h18... boxing? martial arts since I was a kid. 15:14:36 involved in martial arts? yes. green belt. b86.... tae-kwon-do with my kids... couple years senior blue belt. 15:15:16 training in phonetics? linguistics? I did sign language many years ago. (juror number) 15:15:41 e13... four years of sign language 15:15:49 live in gated community? g63... 4 years ago community had security guard in its entrance. i19, h86, h81.... 15:16:28 live in neighborhood with a watch? b7... seen the signs, but I'm... b35? yes. watch? yes. involved? no. e73? yes. watch? yes. involved? no. e22 watch? sign but I don't know who's on it? involved? no. k80? watch? yes. involved? no and my husband is block captain but I don't know what he does. k95? yes. watch? yes. involved? no. (two more jurors... not involved) 15:18:32 g63... not where I live but before, I don't know who was involved. 15:18:45 last row: h18? involved? no. h29... we have signs. involved? no. I know some ladies who are. 15:19:18 anybody consider expert in DNA? no from everybody 15:19:51 who does not have a cell phone? everyone has one. anyone an expert on cell phones? i44... working knowledge of that.... 15:20:27 expert someone beyond being able to turn it on. (juror number): I am... witness? no. records of calls?. anyone else. b7? same circumstance. e73? same responses. g47: I consider myself tech savvy. k95: I have a lot of jobs, work in IT. 15:21:53 agree people dress differently? way they dress does it matter? no. 15:22:22 assume certain things based on attire? e6... lots of different things. woman dressed or wearing expensive things....rich? either that or give that appearance. if they're not, they're poor? could mean many different things. known wealthy man who preferred to dress down. we make assumptions 15:23:30 in terms of law, what does it say about assumptions? they don't count. 15:24:04 this case the victim, martin and defendant are different race, does it matter? no. h35... does it matter? absolutely not. that doesn't matter ever anywhere.... everyone agree? yes 15:24:35 victim as court read was under 18... O'Mara: approach? YES (sidebar) 15:27:49 IS EVERYONE OK TO GO ON? GO AHEAD 15:27:58 rionda: victim was under 18, does anyone believe his life is worth less because he was a minor? no. black African America, worth less? no 15:28:37 believe in right to bear arms? yes 15:28:41 who has a firearm or access to one? b35... personally own? yes. more than one? yes. target practice and hunting. what kind? caliber and shot gun. proficient? yes train in military. how often? a couple months. holster? yes. more than one? yes. internal or external? external. concealed permit? yes. 15:29:54 b76... I don't have any in our home, but we have family members that do in their own home. any experience yourself? no 15:30:12 b37.... used to have concealed weapons permit. husband wanted me to renew but I don't have a gun... no point. I can shoot a gun. we used to go out to range and shooting. basic familiarity with it 15:30:49 e6... husband has 9 millimeter, .38 and rifles... my son has a hunting rifle and bb guns. you yourself involved in firing? went to range one time and sometimes target practice with bb guns 15:31:27 e40.. brother in law has hunting rifles 15:31:38 b12.... fired a gun one time in my life and fell on my but, my son has gun and my mom and sister 15:31:57 m75.... my brother in law has 2 guns, a .38 and another handgun. shooting with him? no... goes with my sister and daughter 15:32:25 b61 repeat? do you have a firearm or have access to one. 15:32:37 ever fired a gun... recreational... 15:32:49 b7 my father has some. 15:33:03 e22... good friend has a firearm 15:33:09 e13... my step dad has a few, went and fired once 15:33:20 b86.... fired one once 15:33:43 k80.... yes own firearms... fired before? yes. familiar. own one yourself and carry with holster? no. no concealed weapons 15:34:10 k95.... I do and my son does. 15:34:17 p67... no I don't 15:34:25 g66... yes I have a .32. fire on occasion? periodically. holster? no 15:34:46 i44... hand gun. fire yourself? yes 15:35:00 i33... rifles. shooting purposes? hunting 15:35:16 i24.... handguns. revolver? yes 15:35:26 i19.... my father has them for hunting.. shoot yourself? no 15:35:38 h86... my brother in law has several. shot yourself? yes. handgun and a rifle. know the difference between semi-automatic and revolver? yes 15:36:07 h81... go to range, but don't shoot my own guns 15:36:22 (juror number) .. mom has one 15:36:29 h29...... I have daughters, so I have shot guns.... revolver and rifle 15:36:48 h18... I do. 15:36:57 h7... yes I do. member of nra? yes. anybody else? no 15:37:08 h6... father owns numerous guns and I've gone with him to the range 15:37:34 have guns or are familiar, responsibility with having one? yes. believe than h7? absolutely. everyone agree with him? yes 15:37:55 agree with that i44? yes. 15:38:01 anybody not agree? everyone agrees 15:38:12 defendant charged with murder in second degree, haven't heard evidence I don't want opinion, but can you follow a law...state has to prove victim is dead, the death was caused by criminal act of Zimmerman, and unlawful killing of martin by an act dangerous to another in a depraved mind without regard to human life.... act includes series of related to.... immanently dangerous to a deprived mind if an act that a person of ordinary judgment was known to seriously kill or done from ill will or of such nature it indicates indifferent to human life... follow that? yes. 15:40:11 not necessary for state to prove intent... 15:40:28 doesn't require certain number of shots or motive 15:40:46 understand there can be defenses to crimes, understand? yes 15:41:10 insanity or self-defense... justifiable use of deadly force...follow instruction about that? yes. 15:41:38 last week and this week about media and publicity and hardship... most of you heard that both sides expect trial to last 2-4 weeks....jury will be sequestered... family member p67... letter that it would be hardship. in addition to what you said? yes. anybody else in that predicament? b61: can you explain sequestered 15:43:42 housed together, but interaction with others will be limited.... won't be able to go home at night. contact with outside world limited. have some contact, court will give instructions about that... monitored contact. 15:45:36 b7... first time I heard about it.... I have questions that are.... 15:45:48 e6... I didn't realize, does that include weekends... YES ENTIRE TIME OF TRIAL. ok.... 15:46:11 b37: you have some contact with family. ALL THIS WILL BE EXPLAINED LATER, WILL HAVE CONTACT BUT IT WILL BE LIMITED.. WILL HAVE CONTACT 15:46:37 b6... include telephone calls can they visit? ALLOWED TO VISIT, LIMITED AS TO TIME...LIMITED PHONE CONTACT... emails? YES IT WILL BE LIMITED. YOU WON'T BE CUT OFF FROM FAMILY, STAYING IN A FACILITY, HOTEL IN THE AREA AND ALL MEALS WILL BE PROVIDED AND TRANSPORTATION AND PERSON NEEDS DURING THE TRIAL. 15:47:38 k80: if this group is sequestered where we can't return to our homes, will this case be 7 days a week? NO. so everyone gets to go home on weekends but we can't? CORRECT. PLANNED ACTIVITIES FOR YOU, THERE WILL BE MEALS... I MEAN ITS... MORE WILL BE EXPLAINED 15:48:29 rionda: attorneys and court will be busy with other matters, were not going on vacation for the weekend 15:49:01 can all of you agree since you haven't heard evidence you have to keep open mind? yes. understand that part of process is that decision needs to be unanimous? yes. 15:49:31 haven't heard evidence, presuming defendant innocent? yes. use common sense and evidence for decision? yes. could you convict him if evidence showed he was guilty? yes. and opposite? yes 15:50:11 people should be held responsible and accountable for actions? yes. picked as juror and evaluating evidence, use god given common sense to get verdict that speaks the truth? yes. 15:50:40 I'm going to sit down.... but before I do... any matter that you think you need to bring to my attention? collective no. thank you very much 15:51:16 15 MINUTE... O'Mara: approach. YES (sidebar) 15:56:15 how long will we have to get our stuff in order... I WILL TELL YOU WHEN SELECTED ON JURY 15:56:34 b61: questionnaire did that say anything about sequestering. YES IT DID... ITS NOT AS LONG AS INDICATED 15:57:04 ITS BEEN A LONG DAY AND I DONT WANT TO HAVE O'MARA BEGIN VOIR DIRE AND KEEP YOU LATE AND HAVE SPLIT IT UP... RELEASE FOR THE NIGHT. COME BACK AT 9 AM. NOT TO READ OR LISTEN TO RADIO OR TV REPORTS, NOT TO DISCUSS CASE. NOT TO USE ANY ELECTRONIC DEVICE TO GET ON INTERNET. NOT TO READ OR CREATE SOCIAL NETWORKING PAGES ABOUT CASE. ASSURANCE YOU WILL ABIDE? yes. ANY ISSUE... PLEASE RAISE YOUR HAND. P67...INDICATED MAYBE HAVING THINGS TO DISCUSS, PLEASE REMAIN AND WILL DISCUSS AFTER THAT. EVERYONE ELSE AT A QUARTER TO 9 AM. HAVE A GOOD EVENING. 15:59:54 COMFORTABLE WHERE YOU'RE SITTING. 16:00:01 rionda: P67 letter from a family member? my wife wrote about it. trouble to serve? yes. tell us more? don't tell us where you work, but the media has rights to be present. work related? yes. express in letter? yes. wife wrote letter because she's more fluent in English? yes. had her write it because she could say it better? part for her and part for me she's worried about the situation. create hardship with wife and monetary? yes. like lately my little one I don't know what she heard in the news, lately she's been living with me thinking somebody is going to get me. also nice to discover how much she loves me 16:02:28 would that in your opinion impact you to pay attention? yes. of course. anything else you want to say to judge about that? that's all. just about my family. oh the other thing, the leveling or title... been things in media that my wife and older kids.. for example: media ask a resident or citizen or Hispanic, but then don't like how media express or a nickname all over the internet. media put your name on the internet or a certain way? yes. how did you find out? my wife found out through internet and my two biggest ones. they wanted to know what's going on with dad. your wife and kids saw on internet and alerted you and you said you didn't want to talk about it? yeah. impact on your kid and wife? yes. concern about that as a result? yes. interfere with paying attention? yes. 16:05:02 O'Mara: minor concerns and I want to see if they stack... media? yes. media in court room prohibited from putting you on camera... I am, but you are not... they can't put your face or information... not public, understand that? yes sir. concern to be they have identified you by some descriptors, like a white female whatever... and you they described as well? yes. concerned by a term the way the described you? I prefer they call me a resident or citizen or Hispanic. the other one telling my kids or wife..... something else on the internet? told me they saw "Mexican". concern to be Mexican than resident? yes. 16:07:22 sounds like they were labeling you? yes which I'm not happy about.... I represent the system, we apologize about any insensitivity from the media... as juror you're being exposed to that in a profile case its unavoidable... not sure we can un-do that.... maybe media will learn lesson to be culturally sensitive. 16:08:17 30 days your employer doesn't need to pay you? that's a part of it 16:08:28 about the service and the jury I noticed a couple things, seemed to me you were looking forward to it as a citizen, feel that way still? yes, but if it takes this long... issues. I was thinking 2-3 weeks, yeah let's get it done... without guessing too much we may start Monday.... last 2-4 weeks and then you deliberate and we'd be done.... timeline put out there now.... 16:09:38 mention that because of the publicity, your little ones was wrapping arms around your leg... a loss for you and family temporarily if here with us... such imposition that it is insurmountable, you can't do it for destroying purposes? my family will be destroyed. if not to that level... hoping you would consider it... inconvenient for you, accomplish if we ask you to, 2-4 weeks? definite inconvenience. not trying to minimize that, but as citizens as we take on the role of doing everything, there's not much more asked of our citizens but war and ask them to serve on jurors... 16:12:04 if we ask you, is it something that you can accomplish even past its inconvenience? 16:12:34 judge will clear up the confusion, but in sequestration being with us you will have contact with family, telephone monitored, visits with family members monitored... not in prison but in situation where you maintain contact but supervised way to protect process...any questions that I can help answer for you to make decision to sit as juror 16:13:54 I just want to you to consider my situation. if pick you can you sit with us? if that's the only option I guess... well you can say no, but if it's an inconvenience, say yes... if it's because of destruction than you can't.... call is yours. if you can under what we talked about.... I just can't with consequences coming if over 4 weeks. I don't want to end up on the street. if I was single, it wouldn't be a problem. 16:15:09 rionda: the media itself or the internet with comments? they saw on internet, I don't know where.... EXCUSED FOR EVENING, SEE YOU TOMORROW IN THE MORNING. 16:15:44 PLEASE BE SEATED, COUNCIL COME TO BENCH..(sidebar) 16:16:22 COURT RECESS FOR THE DAY ====================================

The House Ways and Means continues their markup of Medicare Legislation.

You don't have to be driving a car to be charged with DUI. An Athens, Tennessee man now faces drunken driving charges, after taking a spin on a riding mower.Athens police say 30-year-old Jimmy Graham Jr., smelled of alcohol and failed a sobriety test.The field sobriety test begins 2:30 into the video above.Police say Graham told an officer he had been drinking beer and had taken a prescribed stress reliever.In the video, Graham tells Patrol Sergeant Jason Garren he had no alcoholic drinks. The officer performs 3 kinds of sobriety checks. First Garren asks Graham to count to 4 and back, a task Graham can not complete. Then, Garren has Graham recite the alphabet, something Graham also has trouble doing. Finally, Graham is asked to walk 9 stepsGraham's close friends and family call him Paul. They tell us they're not too surprised by his behavior. His sister in law Sara Zerby saw Graham in court earlier today. She describes him as "wild" and "crazy.""It's weird, but it sounds like old country Paul- It sounds like something he'd do."While receiving a DUI when driving a lawnmower might surprise some, according to the Graham family, driving a lawn mower around with a beer at hand is "pretty normal."The Graham family agrees this can be seen as a laughing matter, but Jimmy's brother Bobby Graham says he's ready to move forward."A man is in jail. He did the crime now he's doing the time. He's dealing with it. Everybody else got a laugh out of it, but it's over."

INT BROLL GEORGE ZIMMERMAN TRAYVON MARTIN TRIAL / SWITCHED POOL FEED **NOTE: JUDGE'S COMMENTS IN CAPS **NAMES OF WITNESSES IN RED **VISUAL DESCRIPTIONS IN (PARENTHESES) **GOOD STATEMENTS/VIDEO BOLD 8:58:37 (Zimmerman enters, tan suit blue shirt and brown tie) (court rearranged differently) 9:00:12 PLEASE BE SEATED, GOOD MORNING. ON THE RECORD. ONE JUROR IS A FEW MINUTES LATE, WAIT FOR THEM. COUNCIL APPROACH FOR ONE MOMENT 9:00:59 (sidebar) 9:09:51 RECESS UNTIL THE POTENTIAL JURORS GET HERE 9:10:08 COURT IN RECESS ============================ 9:27:02 ATTORNEYS REQUEST THE FRYE HEARING BE TOMORROW AT 2. (sidebar) 9:31:03 deputy: jurors are present 9:32:36 PLEASE BE SEATED. GOOD MORNING... BEGIN WHATS REALLY THE JURY SELECTION, BEFORE WAS PRE SELECTION PROCESS... INSTRUCTIONS: IN ORDER TO HAVE FAIR TRIAL, RULES JURY MUST FOLLOW. MUST DECIDE CASE ON EVIDENCE IN COURT. DON'T COMMUNICATE ABOUT THE CASE. DO NOT DISCLOSE YOUR THOUGHTS OR ASK FOR ADVICE ON HOW TO DECIDE. NO ELECTRONIC DEVICES OR COMMUTERS TO COMMUNICATE ABOUT THIS CASE. DO NOT SEND OR ACCEPT MESSAGES ABOUT THIS CASE. MUST NOT DO RESEARCH THAT MAY HAVE ANYTHING TO DO WITH CASE. APPLIES IN COURT HOUSE, SEQUESTRATION, OR ANY WHERE ELSE. DEPENDING ON YOU TO FOLLOW RULES FOR A FAIR TRIAL. INVESTIGATE OR RESEARCH ON YOUR OWN, NO WAY TO ASSURE THEY ARE PROPER OR RELEVANT TO CASE. NO OPPORTUNITY TO DISPUTE EVIDENCE. BECOME AWARE OF VIOLATIONS OF INSTRUCTIONS, MUST TELL ME BY NOTE FROM COURT DEPUTY. 9:35:40 GOING TO BEGIN JURY SELECTION PROCESS, KNOWN AS VOIR DIRE. PURPOSE IS TO DETERMINE IF THE DECISION WOULD BE FAIR BASED ON EVIDENCE WITHOUT INFLUENCE FROM OUTSIDE FACTORS. NOT FOR PURPOSE OF PRYING INTO AFFAIRS... 9:36:27 CHARGES SET FORTH FOR ZIMMERMAN.... EVERY PERSON ACCUSED IS TO KNOW THE EXACT CHARGE. STATE OF FLORIDA VS. ZIMEMRMAN 12CF10838A COUNT 1 MURDER IN SECOND DEGREE. ON FEB. 26, 2012 ZIMMERMAN UNLAWFULLY KILLED MARTIN UNDER THE AGE OF 18, SHOOTING VICTIM. ZIMMERMAN CARRIED DISPLAYED USED ATTEMPT TO USE FIREARM. AS RESULT OF DEATH, INFLICTED UPON ANY PERSON.......... 9:38:13 INTRODUCED TO PARTICIPANTS OF THIS TRIAL. ARE ANY OF YOU RELATED TO ATTORNEYS OR ZIMMERMAN? NO HANDS ARE BEING RAISED 9:38:37 HANDED A LIST OF POTENTIAL WITNESSES IN THE CASE. IF YOU RECOGNIZE ANY NAMES PLEASE CIRCLE THEM. MANY MORE NAMES LISTED THAN ACTUALLY CALLED... REVIEW THAT. RAISE YOUR HAND IF YOU RECOGNIZE ANY INDIVIDUALS... ASK YOU TO TELL US WHAT PAGE AND WHAT NUMBER THEY ARE OR THEIR INITIALS. DONE READING, PLEASE LOOK UP. 9:46:19 SHOW OF HANDS BY FIRST ROW, DO YOU RECOGNIZE WITNESS NAMES? 9:46:46 (couldn't hear the juror number) ANYONE ON FRONT PAGE YOU RECOGNIZE? first page. HOW MANY? 2. they're both d's. FIRST NAME? j and d. first and fourth d. ATTORNEYS WILL ASK YOU QUESTIONS ABOUT THAT. ANYBODY ELSE ON THE LIST? no. 9:48:06 SECOND ROW, DO YOU RECOGNIZE NAMES? B61? HOW MANY? just 1, perhaps the last page the first one. ANYBODY ELSE ON THE SECOND ROW? G63? HOW MANY? 2. WHAT PAGE? second page. INITIAL OF LAST NAME? j. initial of first name? c. 5 OR 6TH DOWN FROM J's? 1 of them. the 5th. WHAT IS THE OTHER ONE? last page. INITIAL OF LAST NAME? w. INITIAL OF FIRST NAME? e. FIRST WD OR LAST WD? I only see one. oh it's the first. 9:50:14 ANYBODY ELSE? ON THE THIRD ROW? JUROR i33? WHO BY PAGE? first page last name b, first name c. THE LAST B? yes. ANYBODY ELSE ON THE LIST YOU RECOGNIZE? number 32, last c. CB? correct. last page...last name w, first name n. OK. I do have one more. last name z first name s. OK, COVER ALL OF THOSE? yes. 9:52:21 ANYBODY ELSE? JUROR E6. on last page, last name w first name n and last name z and first name s. ANYBODY ELSE? THANK YOU VERY MUCH. 9:53:20 rionda: good morning... introduce myself to you all. reviewing why this is important 9:55:11 spent last week and first two days of this week going through the process, asked all of you questions related to case regarding publicity. individual so it didn't contaminate other juror's knowledge. important at arriving a decision comes from this court room. agree? yes. issue with that, outside of courtroom can't factor into decision? 9:56:18 what you saw or read from media is irrelevant. now in stage 2. question you individually and collectively about this case or background stuff about you 9:56:45 assure us that you will give consideration to all questions asked? yes 9:56:59 if during this process I ask individually or as a group and you feel uncomfortable talking about it in a group, let us know.... 9:57:41 juror b7? correct. do you want us to bring up issues about that and the time of the question? yes sir 9:58:06 were trying to get a jury that speaks the truth and arrive at just verdict 9:58:20 some of you were talked to last week and others were Monday and Tuesday... anyone go home and celebrate going through to next round? nobody? 9:58:42 appreciate you've taken this time already. 9:58:59 juror b12.... as talked about individually, how long resident of Seminole county? at least 40 years. how long have you lived at current address? 19 years. live in state of Florida before that? Michigan. left there when I was 9. married? no. divorced? yes. how long married before divorce? a yr. what does former spouse do for living? he's dead. children? 2. how old? 32 and 19. what do they do for living? one's a full time student and the other one owns his own company. medical field and construction worker. how long have you been at current employer? since October. before that? home health nurse. how long? 5 years. supervise people in that position? no. before that? CNA. how long total? 5 years. members or involved in organizations at all? volunteer work for moose lodge and my church. how long, long time? yeah. 10:02:51 leadership position? no anymore. prior experience? no. outside work and volunteering, anything else? raising my daughter, I'm a mother. any other hobbies? part of red hat society. I like my wine and going to the beach. served on jury before? no. just don't like the media being there.... that takes away his privileges, they put everything everywhere.... 10:05:31 b29... originally from Chicago? yes. grew up there? yes. married? yes. how long? 10 years. kids, yes? lots. how many? 8. under age of 18? one is over 18. how old is that one? going to be 20. live with you and husband? resides with me now. going to school or working? arrived a few weeks ago, looking for work 10:06:32 how long at employment? 3 months. prior to that? CNA. how long? 7 years. member of organization? my house. military service? no. spend time outside work, but I know answer and what you're passionate about? kids. jury service? no. 10:07:34 b76... how long in Seminole? since 1995. how long at current address? 1 week. prior to that? another address. originally from? been here since 1966. marital status? married. how long? 30 years. children? 2. how old? 28 attorney, 26 CNA. does your son practice in Seminole? yes. what practice? not criminal, foreclosures, bankruptcies, divorce, and contract. ever practiced criminal law? no. 10:08:59 picked as jury and they haven't talked about law and you can't call your son and ask him? yes I understand. 10:09:25 how long at current place of employment? unemployed. prior? husband and I had construction company. how long? 15 yes. husband still involved in that business? no. helping out children built their home. manage rental properties. involvement? I rescue a lot of pets. how long? a long time. military service? no. outside house? managing properties and rescuing animals. passion? rescuing animals. prior jury service? no 10:10:43 b7.... living in Seminole? between orange and Seminole 30 years. born and raised in Florida. married? yes. how long? 10 years. what does spouse do? just got out of school to be a teacher. kids? no. current occupation? 11 years. any management duties? I will. tell us about that? going to be elite position among others in similar roles. how many will you supervise? just 2-3. member in organization? I'm sure I am through her. military service? no. outside work? watch sports... love video games. socialize with friends go out to bar. passion? not passionate about a lot of stuff. ever served as juror? I have. how long ago? before I was working at current job, 12-15 years. Seminole or orange? Seminole. criminal or civil? criminal. reach a verdict? yes. fore person? no. enjoy it? I did. it was one day. 10:13:37 b35.... how long in Seminole? since 1985. current address? 12 yes. marital status? married. how long? going on 20+ years. what does spouse do? local TV. is she a reporter? no. comments I made about media you won't hold against me. 10:14:24 any kids? yes. 1 son in college now. what is he studying? engineering. current occupation, how long? I manage tax office in the year, vending machines and rental... for about 7 years... before that? properties around central Florida. member in organization? fraternity and football coach. how long? 13 years. military service? yes Marine Corp Reserves. how long? 6 years. military police? no. how do you spend time out of work? watching sports, coaching, spending time together. 10:16:07 real passion in life? coaching football.... served as juror? no 10:16:19 b37.... Seminole county? 18 years. prior? dad was air force captain. born in California, but went from coast to other. married? yes. 20 years. spouse job? space attorney... rockets and space craft. how long has that been a specialty? always... since he graduated. corporate attorney? yes. practice criminal law? no. would that influence you? no he wouldn't answer me. kids? 24, pet groomer, 27 at ucf. how long at employment? 16 years. management position? now I am, converted because girl before retired. ever settle disputes? no, there's only 3 of us.. were a family. organizations? involved in rescue groups, got out because I couldn't take more animals. do you know the other juror? I do not. 10:19:08 does anybody know any other jurors here? 10:19:15 military service? no. outside, I know. jury service? called 4 times... excluded from last one because of where I work. 10:19:41 b51.... how are you? good. Seminole? 9 years. originally? orange county. central Florida? since 1987. before? Atlanta. married? no. kids? no. grand kids? no. employment? retired. retired from what work? real estate.. several careers? I have. prior to that? director of call center. how long? 10 years. managerial duties? direct reports and 1200 employees. resolve disputes? often. how? listen to all sides and make tough calls. 10:21:11 member of any organizations? no. just enjoying retirement? yes. in military? I wasn't. for fun? driving back and forth to Jacksonville... elderly parents, lots of brothers and sisters. jury service? yes, one was in Seminole county 3 years ago... called case before we were called. another one in orange county in 1991, I was an alternate. 10:22:20 b86... how long a resident? 1989. before that? 1971 in orange county. marital status? single. kids? 2. 20 and 21... full time student and trying to get the other one back in school, he was ill. the one in school, what does he want to be? childhood specialist. how long in employment? 10 years. member in organizations? not any more, once at birds of prey... worked in church with youth group. in military? no. jury service? 10:24:24 e6.... Seminole county? 2 years. before? orange. how long? since 2004. originally? Brevard. marital status? married. what does spouse do? engineer. how long married? 6 years. kids? 2, 11 and 13. current occupation? unemployed. 9 months before that and prior to that I was in school and raising kids. what filed before? financial services. member in organization? member of church and I used to volunteer at kids school 10:25:44 military? no. how do you spend time outside of work? taking care of kids, dogs, helping with the friends young kids, gardening. prior jury service? no, called but never... 10:26:09 e40... Seminole county? 7 months. before that? Iowa. how long? 2 years. before that? California. come to Florida to retire? came to work in Florida. what do you do? safety officer. how long? over 25 years. marital status? married. spouse living? chemical engineer. kids? 1 son, 28 looking for work. prior to that? he was working in western Pennsylvania in fast food service. organization? no. military? no. fun? travel, read, and sports. any particular? all but football mainly. prior jury service? yes I have served. in Pennsylvania. criminal or civil? drug dealing 10:28:14 go back and deliberate? yes. reach verdict? we were. forewoman? I was not. enjoy experience? I did 10:28:30 e54... how long in Seminole? 14 years. before that? orange. since I was 8. marital status? married for 5 years. spouse? engineering technician. kids? two step children, 16 living with us and the other is late 20s. how long working there? 3 years. before that? same field for 30 years. member involved in organizations? no. military? no. fun? reading, working on family tree, playing golf. where's family from originally? Maryland 10:29:58 passions I guess? it was for a while, now that we finished it's on the side 10:30:09 jury service? summoned but never sat 10:30:18 e73... Seminole? 13 years. prior? new jersey. grow up there? I did not. grew up? new York. current address? 13 years. marital status? married. how long? 33 years. spouse? retired. prior to that? telecommunications firm. kids? yes. how many? 2. how old and what they do? 15 on Sunday, 18. still in school? going to college. what he wants to do? I don't think he's there yet 10:31:34 retired or working? consultant. how long? 10 years. before that? large telecommunications firm. where your husband worked? yes. meet there? we did. organizations? not currently. before? various arts councils. military? no. fun? going to sporting events, children active in sports... make jewelry, read, I love the beach 10:32:28 prior jury service? yes. here in Seminole? 3 times in Seminole, once for federal court and once in Ohio. served 5 times? yes. enjoy it? not always. Ohio, criminal or civil? civil I think. deliberate? settled out of court after 5 days. federal? criminal. deliberate? I didn't get seated on jury. three here, criminal or civil? first was civil and I didn't do anything. next was criminal settled out of court, next one I didn't get seated. 10:34:16 m75.... how long in Seminole? since 2001. before that? new York. grow up there? yes. lived in current address? 2 months. prior to that? still in Seminole, just different space. married or single? single. kids? no. work? 2 months. prior? travel agent for cruise. how long? 1 year. before that? theme parks in Orlando. how long? almost 2 years. what did you do? guest service attendant moved to cashier and food service. member of organization? not currently, used to volunteer at animal shelter. military? no. fun? large family, visit with them. military service? no 10:36:22 b61... how long in Seminole? 5 years. current address for? 4 years. prior? orange, Volusia, army brat. marital status? married. how long? 2 months. husband? full time student. engineer. kids? no. engineer too? yes. how long? 7 years. member of organizations? church, professional society, and sorority. leadership? I have, but not now. military? no. fun? studying, reading and spending time with family. studying to be? for an exam. prior jury service? no 10:38:00 b72.... how long resident? 9 years. originally? Chicago. marital status? single. kids? no. work? coming to a year. same field but different job? yes. involved in organizations? alumni of fraternity. leadership? vice president of local chapter but I wouldn't say so. military? no. fun? arm wrestling, going to gym.... one arm pull up. how long? 2.5 years. wrestling in high school? weight lift, track, football 2 years. meets to arm wrestle? depends on venue, encompasses everything... I could talk about it all day 10:40:00 prior jury service? no 10:40:05 e22... how long in Seminole? 12 years. prior? orange. grow in central Florida? only since 92. up north? spend a lot of time there. married? single. kids? no. work? 19 years. organizations? social service with employer. military? no. spend time out of work? gardening, all things food. passionate about? yeah. jury service? called in asocial but didn't serve 10:41:34 e13.... how long in Seminole? 17 years. marital status? single. kids? no. how long have you been doing that? surgical assistant for 2 years. member of organizations? church. military? no. outside work? horses. passion is riding? yes. jury service? no 10:42:33 e28.... how long Seminole? 1985. before that? Texas. originally from? yes. marital? married for 28 years, 2 children... 27 and 23 work for theme park and hotel side of it. spouse do? teacher. work? 26 years. members? professional, relay for life. how you spend time out of work? yes. jury? summoned for federal, never called and served in Texas... read verdict? yes. deliberate? yes. forewoman? no. enjoy that? yes I did 10:44:16 k80... Seminole county? 2004. before? Virginia. grew up there? most of life. marital status? 15 years... spouse? maintenance tech. kids? 2. two girls. under 18? yes. work? over 5 years, same line of work for 15 years. member of organizations? attend church regularly, girl scouts, soccer. military? family members, father was navy grandfathers and cousins. fun? work absorbs time and then children. jury service? no first time 10:45:49 k95... how long in Seminole? 16 years. before that? orange for 7 and manatee for 4. marital? married. 15 years. spouse? electrician. kids? yes. how old? daughter that's 24, son that'll be 14, and a grandson. daughter? internship to be a dental hygienist. work? consultant, used to own company for 7 years. same industry for 10 10:46:51 member of organizations? yeah, ptk. pbl. fbi. Alzheimer's association, autism speaks and march of dimes. military? no. jury service? no 10:47:22 p67... why we can't do this in private... is there a way? do in private with nobody else? approach bench? VOIR DIRE HAS TO BE IN PUBLIC FORM. YOU CAN APPROACH. your name is private if that's what you're worried about. I just don't want the media to put labels on me like finding something else. JURY SELECTION PROCESS HAS TO BE OPEN COURT, OPEN TO PUBLIC...ZIMMERMAN HAS RIGHT TO BE THERE, ATTORNEYS HAVE THE RIGHT TO BE THERE... REMOVE OTHER JURY MEMBERS, WILL NOT CLEAR THE COURT ROOM... MAYBE A QUESTION ASKED THAT IS SENSITIVE NATURE TO YOU THAT I CAN'T CLEAR THE COURT ROOM, BUT I CAN DO IT OUTSIDE PRESENCE OF OTHER MEMBERS. 10:49:51 from where? been here since 2008. Seminole county how long? since 2008. before that? moved from Chicago. before that, originally? Mexico. how long in US? since I was 18 years old. married? yes. how long? about 20 years. kids? yes. how old? 18, and 16 and 11. still in school? just out of high school. work for how long? since 2008. involved in organizations? church. military? no. fun? helping wife, kids and watching sports. first time in jury? yes. looking forward to it? looking to have a nice experience, but it's been a nightmare. every day something is different. if it's going to affect my family I'm not looking forward to it...still feel it's a hardship for you? absolutely 10:52:34 g14... how long in Seminole? once before and recently from 2005 to now. grew up and moved out? no dad in military. marital status? divorced. former spouse? does not work at this time. what did he do? assembly. kids? 2 boys. 12 and 15. work? 3 years. before? sold print advertising. how long? 1996 to 2010. involved in organizations? boy scouts. how long? 6 years. military service? I have not been, but family. spend time outside work? boy scouts, taking care of my boys and reading. jury? summoned 2 other times, but never seated on jury 10:54:22 g29... Seminole county? 9 months. before that? in orange county. marital? single. kids? no. work? almost 6 years. before that? same field for total over 14 years. member of organizations? no. military? no. fun? friends and family and sports and TV. jury service? summoned in orange but never on jury 10:55:33 g47.... how long in Seminole? under 9 years. before? Boston, MA. marital? single. kids? nope. current job, how long? since October. before that? unemployed. member with organization? no. military? none. fun? sports friends beer. jury service? once, but it was settled 10:56:24 g63..... how long in Seminole? 4 years. before? orange. martial? single. kids? no. unemployed now, before that? teaching assistant and student. major? mathematics. member of any organizations? no. military service? no. fun? chess, Olympic weightlifting, piano. how long Olympic? a year. jury? no 10:57:40 g66.... Seminole? 2 years. prior? 12 years in Madison. prior to that? Chicago. marital? widow. spouse? mechanic for trucks. kids? 2 daughters. oldest is 36 works for entertainment company. 32 year old works for entertainment lighting... how long you work? retired. prior? at hospitals. financial advisor. member of organizations? started riding with Care Takers... motorcycle club. military? no. outside work? ride with my boyfriend, fish, spend time with family. what does boyfriend do? he sails. jury service? once in Chicago... alternate 10:59:45 g81.... how long in Seminole? 16 years. marital status? married. how long? 19 years. spouse? administrative assistant. how long? 19 years. member in organizations? professional. military service? no. fun? golf, travel, sports. prior service? no. 11:00:37 h6... Seminole? 1.5 years. prior? orange and Colorado. in Florida? since 2004. married? no. kids? no. current job? 5 months. prior to that? same line of work, but in it for 7 years now. member involved in organizations? no. military service? no. fun? relax... jury service? yes. in Seminole or others? orange. 2 years ago. criminal case. deliberate? yes. verdict? on most charges. foreman? no 11:02:04 h7.... in Seminole? 27 years, before Illinois, before Texas. married 44 years. 2 children ones 41 in Ireland. 39 in el Paso. spouse? weight watchers councilor for 25 years takes care of house. job? 40 years. member of organizations? professional associations, boy scouts for 35 years, instructor for merit badges, wife and I will have a small nursery. prior jury service? 1 in Seminole criminal case, foreperson we reached a verdict. 11:03:30 h18.... Seminole county? 2 years. before? orange county for almost a year. overseas before? yes. how long? 1996. marital status? going through divorce. kids? 1. girl is 7. job? in that field since I got to Florida, before that......... overseas in military? army and then contractor for defense company...involved in any organizations? no. fun? gym, tennis, swimming, with my daughter. jury service? no 11:05:05 h29... resident of Seminole? over 30 years, and orange... army brat. marital status? divorced. spouse? school teacher. kids? yeah 2 daughters, 28 and 30 year old... working with UCF and the other is handicapped. work? 30 years. member? professional and served on local city board for 15 years... leadership? yes. military? I also served too. how long? 4 years. military police? no. fun? beach, tennis... beer. jury service? summoned once 15 years ago... never sat 11:07:11 h18... military police? no 11:07:17 h35... Seminole? 24 years. martial? married. how long? 5 years. spouse? unemployed. before? lawn service. kids? no. job? unemployed taking care of grandfather before. member of organizations? was in 2010. military? no. spend time for fun? beach. jury service? no 11:08:17 h81... how long in Seminole? since 2000. prior to that? Pennsylvania. marital status? 31 years. spouse? supervisor at hotel. kids? 25 year old daughter in marketing son in navy. work? 25 years. member of organizations? 1 professional. military? no. fun? family and discovering cool internet technologies. jury service? yes. in Seminole criminal case. verdict? yes. foreman? no 11:09:39 h69... resident of Seminole? 21 years. marital status? married. how long? 11 months. spouse? technician with bright house. work? a year and 8 months. before that in school? IRA company. member of any organizations? church, human resources. military? no. fun? usually with mom or dad. prior jury service? no. 11:10:43 h86.... Seminole? born and raised. married? no. kids? no. job? 6 months. before? technician. organizations? professional and church. military? no. fun? volunteer and with family. jury? summoned, but away for school 11:11:37 i5.... how long in Seminole? 13 years. before that? Alaska for 27 years. what were you doing? working, originally in military, 7 years and then discharged work for financial... married? yes. spouse? auditor. kids? yes. 3. what do they do? oldest son is 40 worked for grocery chain, out in California. daughter is 38 works for utility company and my youngest works for IT group. work? almost 40 years. member of any organizations outside? no all professional. military police? no. fun? watching sports on TV, hang with friends, I like working with computers..... jury service? yes. Seminole or elsewhere? 2 assignments here in Seminole and when I lived in Alaska I think I had 4. 2 here, deliberate? just 1. criminal or civil? DWI. we deliberated. verdict? yes. foreman? yes. 4 in Alaska and deliberate all of them? yes. criminal or civil? all civil. foreman on 1 of them. reach verdict on all 4? yes. enjoy experiences? looking back I did... when I was on it I didn't 11:14:48 i19.... resident in Seminole? 3 years. before? orange. marital status? single. kids? no. work? 1 year. before that? retail. organizations? no. military? no. fun? school. health service admin. jury? no 11:15:36 i24... how long in Seminole? 1968. marital status? married. shy of 39 years. spouse? he is a coordinator transportation for theme park. kids? 29 athletic trainer, 22 student, 29 installer. student, studying? psychology. work? just shy of 42 years. organizations? no. military? no. fun? sports work in yard, beach, hit the road and go to mountains. jury? summoned once but never had to 11:17:09 i33... resident in Seminole? 30 years. marital? married. spouse? account manager. kids? no. work? searching for new career. how long in field before? 44 years. member in organization? yes. what kind? environmental advocacy and county board. how long? just over a year. military service? no. fun? small farm and enjoy offshore competition fishing. jury service? no. 11:18:29 i44... resident in Seminole? 2 years but 25 in orange. marital status? married. spouse? RN. kids? 3, 10, 12, and 9 month son. work? 12 years. field? before that in theme park industry. involved in organizations? Florida barbecue association. military service? no. fun? family raising little one. jury service? 4 years ago orange I was alternate 11:20:17 15 MINUTE RECESS, FOLLOW JARVIS OUTSIDE THE COURTROOM. ================================================================ 11:41:13 PLEASE BE SEATED. BACK ON RECORD. approach? YES (sidebar) 11:42:19 jurors are present 11:43:26 PLEASE BE SEATED... RIONDA YOU MAY CONTINUE 11:43:39 group questions... and then individual too... sit here today, give the defendant a fair trial? yes. give the state a fair trial? yes. give both sides fair? yes. issue? believe both sides do not deserve fair trial? defendant and stat fair trial? yes 11:44:32 state has to prove defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. it's the law. court will give you instructions. states burden, understand? yes. states prove crime was committed and defendant did it? yes. 11:45:18 read like what it is not... a reasonable doubt is not forced, imaginary, speculative... must have reason for that doubt. not to a mathematical certainty, not absolute? yes 11:46:11 believe the burden should be higher than reasonable doubt, like perfection? 11:46:34 sit here today, do you all understand concept/law talks about presumption of innocence. this defendant is presumed innocent, understand? yes. not innocent, but presumed innocent? yes. abide by that? yes. 11:47:23 live in greatest country of world and our criminal justice allows for a trial. no matter what the charge, state has burden. understand? yes. trial is the way? yes 11:47:56 defendant has no obligation? yes. how do you render a verdict? court will give instructions on how to do that. rely on facts and law and also in the process you use common sense in arriving in verdict. 11:48:45 law also says you don't speculate... not allowed in arriving in verdict. speculation plays no role, rely on evidence. agree? yes 11:49:14 what witness says is evidence, no the questions 11:49:51 difference between real world and TV world or make believe. 11:50:08 b35... if attorney asks question of witness and the witness says no, what do you believe? what witness said. is that important? yes. why? he's the witness.. he knows what's going on 11:50:58 sympathy plays no role at all in verdict, understand? yes. 11:51:22 understand that sympathy can't be consider at all, agree? yes 11:51:32 k80... agree with that? yes. why? based off facts and not emotion 11:52:05 bias shouldn't play a role at all in arriving in verdict.... g63, do you believe people are bias to certain things? yes. sometimes about people with bald heads or whatever, people has bias? yes. agree bias shouldn't play role at all? correct. biases about how people dress, should play role? no. why? not relevant to the facts that happened. do you think were always able to pick if someone is bias? not always. how can you tell? maybe if they... if they act in a way with specific preference for something more if they didn't have any advice. 11:53:57 penalties in this case, judges job what the penalties are. m75... problem with that? no. can't consider what the penalties are, no role? I understand. I agree. 11:54:49 job is only to defend guilt or innocence? yes. will anyone consider the penalties, you can't do that, agree? yes. 11:55:12 agree with that b37... I agree. why? falls in sympathy part. shouldn't play role at all? should not 11:55:59 state proves evidence, direct evidence... circumstantial evidence.... direct is someone sees something. circumstantial is added to other piece of puzzle to prove something. 11:56:25 law allows that the state can use direct evidence and circumstantial evidence. I come home and wife tells me kid brought cookie jar and the kids say they didn't do it... no eye witness, question kids... but one has crumbs in her mouth... that's an inference to prove something else 11:57:55 i44... ever used circumstantial evidence? all the time. at work or home? at home. give me an example? who made the mess, it wasn't us. who had breakfast, both of us. what did you have... oatmeal and there's oatmeal all over the counter. 11:58:47 I used to ask who watches CSI, now I ask reverse. who hasn't heard of CSI? b7 you have not watched CSI? no. anyone else who hasn't watched? b29, b35, b86, b61, b72, e28, k95, p67, h69, h86, h29. 12:01:01 not the real world... people want to believe that's real, they expect that evidence to appear out of nowhere... that's not the real world. hold state of Florida to what they've seen on csi? E6 HAS A QUESTION.... E6: going back to circumstantial evidences... circumstances can be misleading, so does it have to be very... still proven beyond unreasonable doubt. 12:02:38 never watched any of those shows? still have a few. b29... why? I like drama. real world as opposed to make believe? yeah 12:03:14 also had in last 5 or 10 years an increase in real lawyer type shows... not the real world? 12:03:43 i5... ever watch those shows? watched them don't make sense to me. some of them may be lawyers? question integrity of them... real lawyer wouldn't do that 12:04:17 not going to determine guilt or innocence from TV? yes. b61, agree with that? yes. if they're not representing client they don't know the facts, may have special interest. 12:05:35 how people feel about attorneys, how many of you liked their commercials... love those commercials??? hold against state of Florida or omara because were attorneys? anybody? 12:06:11 we realize people come into court room with opinions? yes. all come in with opinion on things, right? yes. if people are exposed to things, how do we make sure they make their decision on evidence opposed to what opinion should be. e73, what do we do with people whit opinions? that's a tough one cause I don't know that you'd always know about their opinion. e54, question? I don't know how you can guarantee that's not going to happen... you hope they don't. agree with e73 and e54? yes 12:08:18 h29... how would you assure opinions do not factor in the decision? profile a jury, ask questions look for answers that will represent you and people that are fair. no good way to do it. everyone agree? yes. telling the truth to best of ability.... 12:09:34 can you follow the law as a group? be frank with us.. does anybody feel they cannot? anybody? no from everyone? yes sir 12:10:02 h6... agree with that? yes. how would you assure that it doesn't interfere? don't know how you find out how, but keep my opinion out of it 12:10:44 both sides get fair trial 12:11:08 b67.... too personal or it's alright? it's alright. g14? agree that sometimes we make assumptions that turn out not to be true? yes. ever done that? yes. example? meet somebody and think they're stuck up and then I would find out later they were shy. agree with g14? yes. has anyone ever been wrong about an assumption? 12:12:58 assumptions play no role in a verdict? yes sir 12:13:22 opinions and assumptions play no role in a verdict? yes 12:13:30 how do we know that happens? e40, how? check our personal values and hold others accountable and challenge if we see those bias. discrepancies raise an issue 12:14:13 attorneys, who knows any attorney? b12? yes. are they here in town? Tim Morgan. what practice? friend of his. talk to him about law? no. b76? my son. asked you that before? yes. b35? friend from hometown and friends I went to college with. civil or criminal? split. discuss law? no sir... b37? married to attorney, anybody else? attorneys from work that work on cases like personal injuries. criminal or civic? not that I'm aware of. interfere in any way? no sir. b51? neighbor. corporate lawyer... 12:17:03 e6? I know a woman in Colorado in contract law... e40? several from college, woman I rent house from is in real estate law and she's in Texas. e54? I do know people who are attorneys but I don't discuss with them. 12:17:53 e73? friends and family. criminal law? no 12:18:05 g47? friends' mother for Volusia. civil law. interfere? no. g14? I know a couple attorneys through boy scout, but I don't know criminal. no interference no. 12:18:59 k95? several from network associations, patent, tax and contract. no criminal? not that I know of. interference? no sir 12:19:23 k80? friends and legal counsel at our company. criminal? no. interference? no 12:19:43 e13? moms side of families, some attorneys? criminal? I have no idea.. influence? no 12:20:04 e22? three attorneys, all civil. interfere? no 12:20:14 b61? several from college, all civil and no interference 12:20:28 h6? know an attorney that does workers comp law. interfere? no 12:20:43 h7? department of defense, contract lawyers. nephew in environmentalism 12:20:50 h29? several from my profession. interfere? no 12:21:09 h81? I know 20-25 attorneys. criminal? a handful. discussions about the law? most involved around consumer law. interfere as juror? that wouldn't influence me 12:21:56 h86? past employers were attorneys... insight into law? no 12:22:09 i33? several lawyers both civil and criminal. interfere with decision? no. 12:22:40 anybody associated with law, judges? i33? I know a few sir... 12:23:01 interfere in any way to be a juror? no. 12:23:14 personal questions about arrest, victim of crime, if it's something you want in private let us know. need to know impact it may have. 12:24:02 front row, arrested? b12, here in Seminole? Daytona. still pending? no thrown out of court, never went. would that experience factor in to be fair juror? no. set aside? I was only 17 so yeah. feel you were treated fairly? for who I was with... hold against Florida? no. hold against Zimmerman? no. 12:25:07 b29? Chicago. still pending? it's been disposed of? yeah. interfere with you? no. hold against? no. treated fairly? yes. 12:25:36 b35? orange county. still pending? no. disposed of? yes. how long ago? 1987. unfairly treated? no. prosecuted or case dismissed? I was prosecuted. hold against? no. treated fairly? yes 12:26:24 e6? in Florida, Brevard back in 1999. pending? no. treated fairly. 12:27:13 h7? 40 years ago state of Texas. not pending? correct. treated fairly? absolutely. it was acquitted. hold against? no 12:28:04 h81? Seminole. pending? no. how long ago? yr. and a half ago. treated fairly? yes. no charges it was detained.. no charges. hold against? no 12:28:55 i33? Seminole. pending? no. treated unfairly? yes. arrested or prosecuted? both. won't hold it against anybody. what happened to your case? go to court, pay a fine. won't hold against? no sir. 12:30:00 anybody been a subject of criminal investigation? no from everybody 12:30:14 close friend arrested and you felt was treated unfairly? b7? family or close friend? close friend. pending? no. orange county. arrested unfairly. dropped? I don't know. hold against? no. 12:31:13 k95? friend in Ohio arrested and treated unfairly. pending? no. when she was incarcerated. drop charges on her? no. told by the judge she could take medicine and they didn't give to her, brought her to hospital 12:32:28 b61? someone was arrested, treated unfairly. charges were dropped. here in Florida? yes. pending? no. hold against? no. 12:33:06 A LOT OF YOU HERE.... AN HOUR ENOUGH? COME BACK AT 1:45. WHILE ON LUNCH BREAK, GO WITH EACH OTHER TALK ABOUT ANYTHING BUT THIS CASE. NO RADIO OR TV REPORTS. NO ELECTRONIC DEVICES. NOT TO READ OR CREATE SOCIAL NETWORKING PAGES. ASSURANCE TO ABIDE BY INSTRUCTIONS? 12:34:23 COURT IN RECESS FOR LUNCH UNTIL 1:45 ================================================ 13:46:07 PLEASE BE SEATED. BACK ON RECORD. DO WE HAVE THE JURORS BACK? COUNCIL APPROACH FOR JUST A MOMENT (sidebar) 14:02:46 PLEASE BE SEATED. WELCOME BACK. APPEARS TO BE HERE AND IN CORRECT PLACES. DURING LUNCH DID ANY OF YOU HAVE CONVERSATIONS ABOUT THIS CASE? DID ANY OF YOU READ OR LISTEN TO ANYTHING ABOUT THIS CASE? USE ANY ELECTRONIC DEVICE ABOUT THE CASE? READ OR CREATE ANY THING ABOUT THE CASE? 14:03:39 rionda: welcome back. 14:04:05 h81... a friend or close family member? close friend. in Seminole? no. Pennsylvania. treated unfairly? yes. in prosecution. hold against us? I would no. interfere? it would not. 14:05:05 were you a victim of a crime that it impacted you so much you wouldn't be able to participate? 14:05:26 b76? yes. b7? yes. b86? yes. anybody else? e40? e73? second row: e22? k80? k95? last row: g81? h7? h35? h81? i33? i44? did I get everybody? 14:06:35 violent crime? e73, b86, k80, e22. 14:07:09 you have to set it aside for the purposes of this trial. agree to leave outside court room... think you cannot, raise your hand... e73? just because of the nature that happened to you? it was a very similar crime. wouldn't be able to.... set it aside? it's always in my mind. 14:08:27 anybody else? 14:08:49 victims of crime, let me broaden criteria... crime to your household, felt police did not do a good job investigating? b7. home break in. here in Seminole? it was. they didn't do a good job? they didn't investigate at all. do you think that would impact you at all in this case to sit as juror or can you set aside? no. it wasn't a big deal. agree to leave outside court? yeah. 14:10:17 in that case, were you present? I came home and scared of burglars I think. chase them? no. knew better? I didn't realize until later.... called police and they didn't respond? when I was in high school, police came and they asked what was stolen and officer asked me if any of my friends did this. ever find out who it was? no. anybody else? 14:11:31 b86... many years ago, fast food restaurant. police officer scared us more than the person who just robbed us with the gun. going to our car when gun was pulled on us, we ran back into the restaurant after guy grabbed a bag... police knocked on door and we thought it was the guy again. make him go around so we can see him. tell us you're a police officer, he said "this isn't TV". hold against? no. know who was arrested? yes. he hit us twice, finally got caught. testify? no I couldn't pick him out. 14:13:33 does anybody live in community in which there is no crime? anybody? collective no. 14:14:02 steps to address it in your neighborhood? e54... I assume there's crime in my neighborhood, not personally aware of it. 14:14:42 k95... I would put up a no soliciting sign in my neighborhood. effective? yes. anything further? no. there's a neighborhood watch. are you a part of it? no. 14:15:12 e73... we had a sudden increase in crime in neighborhood. they started a watch. join it? no, but went to a meeting. set up in uniform? no. armed? I don't think so. not involved in watch? no 14:15:54 anybody else? b76... just had teens vandalizing signs... police took care of it. we had a watch I just told them about it. any steps yourself to get involved? telling the other neighbors 14:16:30 b35...still with us... closing your eyes just want to make sure 14:16:51 b7: what was the question again. crime in community and you got involved? no. 14:17:26 feel like people have the right to take law into their own hands? anybody? i5 shaking your head.... there may be occasions, but basically I would say no. g63... crimes in neighborhood? I'm assuming? watch in your community? not that I'm aware of. your last question was very general we have governments that we authorize to do that. 14:19:17 as individuals people shouldn't. g7, agree? where is the process or a citizen's arrest. I don't know how it applies. 14:19:45 other than what law allows, try to arrest people on your own? never have. i24, ever crossed your mind to arrest someone? no but I would do something if they tried to break into my house. id protect my family 14:20:34 can everybody agree the law applies equally to everyone? yes. it should or it doesn't? 14:20:54 b7.... hear a lot about it in the news. always believe? not always. 14:21:13 law matter about which part of county? no. difference in wealth class? no. matter if gated or not? no. where they're from? no. b72, it shouldn't matter? no. why not? when you see the law, the law applies to everyone it doesn't discriminate or consider race or sex. if we use this as criteria, the whole system goes down. 14:22:26 should it matter about race gender or ethnicity? no. 14:22:53 ever been a witness and testify? g81... was it here in Seminole? no. orange. proceeding or hearing or trial? it was juvenile system, proceeding. testify? yes. treated fairly by lawyers and judge and deputies? yes I was. anything about that you felt would interfere? nothing that happened there 14:23:56 h7: I've given depositions before. was it unpleasant it would influence you? no it was not. representation from both sides and told them what I knew. told the truth as best you could remember? yes 14:25:03 h29... I've been deposed before. anything about that experience? I was on the good guy side, never got to the other side. 14:25:23 h81... deposition, hearing, trial? I've been a witness a few times... treated unfairly? no. 14:26:00 i24... I was a witness in a car accident. eye witness? yeah and we had to verify who hit who. more than one? several people. all have to come to court? no we all went to court and stood in front of judge and told her what we saw. questioning you? just the judge... 14:27:00 g63... witness for criminal trial in orange county. eye witness? I was an eye witness to nothing. still called? yes. badgered in any way by either side? no. it wasn't unpleasant it was inconvenient. impact you? no 14:27:48 k80.... witness in child custody case. in front of court? no jury, just a judge. treated fairly? yes, no badgering.. civil questions. 14:28:22 k95... federal lawsuit case, it wasn't a good experience. because of way you were treated? yes. by who? attorneys and judge. judge nelson? no. it wasn't in this state. attorneys were asking improper questions? I was told I was at an economic disadvantage. scream back at them? kept my cool and had to pay it off. terrible experience? yes. hold against? no this was business 14:29:50 e22... I've been deposed. treated fairly? yes. deposition end there or another proceeding? never went to trial. that experience that you were treated unfairly? no. 14:30:30 e6... custody trial and domestic violence... nothing about the proceedings. treated fairly? yes. impact? no. e40... witness to car accident, no jury... I was treated fairly. other people eye witness too. there when other witnesses testified? I was around... 20 years ago though. 14:31:40 all read the witness list... cover that. how you know the person and the impact of that.... 14:32:16 e6... SHES IN SEAT NUMBER 9, GIVE HER LIST. THAT MIGHT BE EASIER. recognize that as yours? yes. circled two names on front page. one of them starts with d and j... professional or social? I recognize the name I don't personally know them. recognize them as physician. impact you? no it would not. also have under that name, three down from that. know the name? I don't know them personally, received referral to her for one of my children. impact? no. some on last page... last name with w recognize name or the person? just the name. impact? no. third from bottom starts with z and s? know them? no. recognize name? yes. impact? no. 14:35:16 i33.... first page, last name starts with b and first name is c. know them or recognize name? right, could be somebody that I name... I have no idea if I know them or not. assuming it's the same person you know, what do they do for a living? construction business. person you know is him? correct. with the work you do? yes. if he testified, find him more credible? no sir, not necessarily no. if it's the same person could you rely just on what they said as opposed to knowing them? absolutely. another name with a c and a b? correct. recognize? just heard the name. no impact on you? no sir. first person/ another relationship, fun thing and I see him once a year... fun thing, activity? yeah it would ID me. you interact with him though? yes sir 14:38:23 last page, last name w and n? yes. recognize or personal? recognize name. know them other than that? no. 14:38:45 toward bottom of page, z and s? recognize the name. impact? no sir 14:39:22 juror number.... second page j and c... know them? as a celebrity... not the person that were talking about here. ok? and someone else.... last page last name with w and d? how do you know them? name I think I recognize. impact? no. 14:40:29 b61.... last page, at top? yes. personal or professional? if same person it's personal but haven't seen them in 2-3 years. friends? yes. exercise together. hear them on witness stand find them more or less credible? it wouldn't impact if it were any other witness. how close, how much interaction? person in social organization, saw her a lot for a while. over a yr. or two? a couple years while I was in school. is this person still a member of that organization? yes. impact you? no 14:42:49 hear from witness, evaluate based on insurrections from court? yes. g47, depend if witness has job? no. why? irrelevant to the case. g29 does it matter if they're law enforcement? no. everyone agree? yes 14:43:37 e54 agree with that? sure 14:43:41 law allows for certain witnesses to be treated differently, experts can give opinion opposed to other witnesses. e13... agree with that? yes would say.. e28 agree? yes. why? they're experts in that field. evaluate and use instructions from court and the expertise? yes 14:44:43 b51.... agree with that? I do. why? education or experience and wouldn't call on them to discuss position or opinion without experience. ever had to rely on expert testimony? not testimony. go to expert for advice? no. anybody? b7.... rely on experts on constant basis 14:45:41 b35... agree? yes. why? practice in their field. b76 agree? yes. b12... agree? yes. why? education and school and have knowledge of that. H69 HAS QUESTIONS. h69: if attorney asked for opinion and they didn't just interject it? yes. that they asked for opinion and they didn't just interject opinion. if attorneys ask expert could you rely on his opinion? yes. why? I'm going to assume a witness researches before getting on the stand... rely on expert if both side find them to be an expert 14:47:55 in this type of case, since the trial is murder.... H86... also wondering if witness on stand only giving facts or opinions unless were asking for their opinion? right... e6... clarify to me I would believe an expert has studied and accumulated knowledge in area, but sometimes experts don't always agree even if in the same field, how is that treated? use your common sense and if it's credible. judge will give instructions about that. expert can give opinion. you can find an opinion with the one you wanted... You decide... 14:50:21 juror number..... person is an expert and we assume they are.. court will give you a ruling on that. expert is entitled to give opinion. if a juror finds a person is qualified as expert they don't have to accept that opinion. you would hear their qualifications and make that determination. 14:51:44 exposed to photos you've never been exposed to, problem looking at photos? does everyone understand the question? ok? yes 14:52:29 b37 you're fine with that... yes. b35.. yes 14:52:39 everyone else agree? yes 14:52:44 law enforcement experience? nobody. h86? not myself, but two aunts and uncles who are lieutenants. 14:53:19 h86, family in law enforcement? yes. departments here in Seminole? I believe it's orange. discuss matters with them about justice system? in the past I have. impact your decision? no. how extensive, more than 1? 3 family members. close with them? 2 of them. interact on weekly basis? yes. uniform? yes. how long in field? over 20 years. look up to them for advice? in general, yes. pursue law enforcement career? no. 14:54:37 k95... when you say law enforcement, but 40 years ago I worked in retail where I used to watch shop lifters... watched them and recorded them. apprehend them? no. I just do my job and report to manager.... someone else would apprehend? yes. successful? yes. how? bust a lot of my sisters friends. 14:55:50 anybody else I overlooked... i24? sort of in same situation... I didn't catch them. I did translation when they did get caught and they didn't speak English. for a company who had a lot of guests who got caught shop lifting. what language? Portuguese. several years? quite a lot. enjoy it? yes. anything that would interfere? no. k95... anything that would interfere? no 14:57:01 anybody else? k80.... family members. tell me? uncle who was in SWAT and cousin is NCIS agent. occasions to discuss with them? no. there are stories after the fact. interfere? no 14:57:42 b35.... family members mom worked for sheriff's department and cousins in police in Titusville. see them regularly? once or twice a year. discussions about job? 14:58:14 how come you didn't join department? first not to go into law enforcement because I went to school. not exciting enough? make a little more money and wanted to do my own thing. impact you one way or another? no. more incline to favor police officer? no 14:59:05 b7.... law enforcement, my wife used to work in the field, often had discussions about it. her job and dealing with victims? absolutely. how do you feel about that, would it impact you here? no. it was a while ago. in this case you have a victim, favor state in this case? no. wouldn't impact you? not when I last served on jury 15:00:13 b86... I used to do transcription for private investigator... a while ago? 15 yes ago in orange. former officer? yeah. record and you would transcribe? yes. impact favoring? no. 15:00:54 e6... include close friends? anybody important for us to know about.... family friend he was SWAT detective... he just left the force and went into private sector but served almost 17 years... impact your opinion? no 15:01:41 b12.... my dad was a Syracuse cop and my nephew is FBI agent. anything about nature of that would favor one side? no. 15:02:36 h69... any family member? yeah. cousin who works for government.... she's working with homeland security... opportunities to discuss her job? some times. anything about what she does you feel would impact you one way or another? no. desire to join her? it sounds exciting, but not for me 15:03:34 k95.... family or friends? yes someone important to let us know. acquaintances from homeland security and friend that is head of security. discuss criminal matters? no. the law? no. 15:04:14 k80.... friends? some close to you. neighbors son in law is US Marshall... and another Seminole county deputy and then another one and family friend have deputies at jail... discussions with them? no. interfere? no 15:05:02 e22.... close friend who was in law enforcement for 2 decades... discussions? interfere? no. 15:05:27 g66... my brother in law retired from police enforce, my niece is.... discuss matters? about what they do. desire to join? when I was younger. impact you? no 15:06:05 H7 HAS HAND UP... h7: friends through boy scouts. never discussed outside of scouts. no impact one way or another 15:06:29 i19... my uncle is police officer. still? yes. local? somewhere else. impact you? no. 15:06:57 i24... husband's niece is married to gentleman in fbi. anything about that? no. 15:07:19 i33... my wife's father is retired sheriff. no impact. in this county? different state. impact you? no 15:07:44 anybody in this room that has not had a dispute with another person? anybody? physical dispute? b35... verbal to physical. a long time ago? yeah. resolve it between you two? once or twice police were called. impact you? no sir 15:08:34 anybody else? e6... I was involved in domestic violence. impact? no. b7? fight in middle school... (Everyone laughs) I think I lost. any impact? no 15:09:33 k95... just domestic. impact you? no. 15:09:45 disputes where you worked it out? everyone? b61 have you? yes. how? talk about it. 15:10:19 g66? dispute where you resolved? yes. without violence? yes. talking loud walking away 15:10:34 medical experience, in the field one way or another? g47....registered EMT. impact? not that I'm aware of. k95... CNA and activity director. anyone else? e40... certified health care officer. b12.... 15:11:42 e28.... medical. h86? home health CNA before RN. 15:12:07 other than b72... fitness people? h18... work out all the time? lifting every morning, play tennis... e13.... weight lift and run and go to gym. b72... wrestling, anybody else wrestle? boxing? h29... trying to get more George Forman on.... in the military. how well? middle levels before someone was young. I remember 5, 6.... (everyone's laughing) 15:13:46 anybody else? g63... weight lifting? yes. training for sport. endurance type thing? weight lifting. for a year? yes. 15:14:09 h18... boxing? martial arts since I was a kid. 15:14:36 involved in martial arts? yes. green belt. b86.... tae-kwon-do with my kids... couple years senior blue belt. 15:15:16 training in phonetics? linguistics? I did sign language many years ago. (juror number) 15:15:41 e13... four years of sign language 15:15:49 live in gated community? g63... 4 years ago community had security guard in its entrance. i19, h86, h81.... 15:16:28 live in neighborhood with a watch? b7... seen the signs, but I'm... b35? yes. watch? yes. involved? no. e73? yes. watch? yes. involved? no. e22 watch? sign but I don't know who's on it? involved? no. k80? watch? yes. involved? no and my husband is block captain but I don't know what he does. k95? yes. watch? yes. involved? no. (two more jurors... not involved) 15:18:32 g63... not where I live but before, I don't know who was involved. 15:18:45 last row: h18? involved? no. h29... we have signs. involved? no. I know some ladies who are. 15:19:18 anybody consider expert in DNA? no from everybody 15:19:51 who does not have a cell phone? everyone has one. anyone an expert on cell phones? i44... working knowledge of that.... 15:20:27 expert someone beyond being able to turn it on. (juror number): I am... witness? no. records of calls?. anyone else. b7? same circumstance. e73? same responses. g47: I consider myself tech savvy. k95: I have a lot of jobs, work in IT. 15:21:53 agree people dress differently? way they dress does it matter? no. 15:22:22 assume certain things based on attire? e6... lots of different things. woman dressed or wearing expensive things....rich? either that or give that appearance. if they're not, they're poor? could mean many different things. known wealthy man who preferred to dress down. we make assumptions 15:23:30 in terms of law, what does it say about assumptions? they don't count. 15:24:04 this case the victim, martin and defendant are different race, does it matter? no. h35... does it matter? absolutely not. that doesn't matter ever anywhere.... everyone agree? yes 15:24:35 victim as court read was under 18... O'Mara: approach? YES (sidebar) 15:27:49 IS EVERYONE OK TO GO ON? GO AHEAD 15:27:58 rionda: victim was under 18, does anyone believe his life is worth less because he was a minor? no. black African America, worth less? no 15:28:37 believe in right to bear arms? yes 15:28:41 who has a firearm or access to one? b35... personally own? yes. more than one? yes. target practice and hunting. what kind? caliber and shot gun. proficient? yes train in military. how often? a couple months. holster? yes. more than one? yes. internal or external? external. concealed permit? yes. 15:29:54 b76... I don't have any in our home, but we have family members that do in their own home. any experience yourself? no 15:30:12 b37.... used to have concealed weapons permit. husband wanted me to renew but I don't have a gun... no point. I can shoot a gun. we used to go out to range and shooting. basic familiarity with it 15:30:49 e6... husband has 9 millimeter, .38 and rifles... my son has a hunting rifle and bb guns. you yourself involved in firing? went to range one time and sometimes target practice with bb guns 15:31:27 e40.. brother in law has hunting rifles 15:31:38 b12.... fired a gun one time in my life and fell on my but, my son has gun and my mom and sister 15:31:57 m75.... my brother in law has 2 guns, a .38 and another handgun. shooting with him? no... goes with my sister and daughter 15:32:25 b61 repeat? do you have a firearm or have access to one. 15:32:37 ever fired a gun... recreational... 15:32:49 b7 my father has some. 15:33:03 e22... good friend has a firearm 15:33:09 e13... my step dad has a few, went and fired once 15:33:20 b86.... fired one once 15:33:43 k80.... yes own firearms... fired before? yes. familiar. own one yourself and carry with holster? no. no concealed weapons 15:34:10 k95.... I do and my son does. 15:34:17 p67... no I don't 15:34:25 g66... yes I have a .32. fire on occasion? periodically. holster? no 15:34:46 i44... hand gun. fire yourself? yes 15:35:00 i33... rifles. shooting purposes? hunting 15:35:16 i24.... handguns. revolver? yes 15:35:26 i19.... my father has them for hunting.. shoot yourself? no 15:35:38 h86... my brother in law has several. shot yourself? yes. handgun and a rifle. know the difference between semi-automatic and revolver? yes 15:36:07 h81... go to range, but don't shoot my own guns 15:36:22 (juror number) .. mom has one 15:36:29 h29...... I have daughters, so I have shot guns.... revolver and rifle 15:36:48 h18... I do. 15:36:57 h7... yes I do. member of nra? yes. anybody else? no 15:37:08 h6... father owns numerous guns and I've gone with him to the range 15:37:34 have guns or are familiar, responsibility with having one? yes. believe than h7? absolutely. everyone agree with him? yes 15:37:55 agree with that i44? yes. 15:38:01 anybody not agree? everyone agrees 15:38:12 defendant charged with murder in second degree, haven't heard evidence I don't want opinion, but can you follow a law...state has to prove victim is dead, the death was caused by criminal act of Zimmerman, and unlawful killing of martin by an act dangerous to another in a depraved mind without regard to human life.... act includes series of related to.... immanently dangerous to a deprived mind if an act that a person of ordinary judgment was known to seriously kill or done from ill will or of such nature it indicates indifferent to human life... follow that? yes. 15:40:11 not necessary for state to prove intent... 15:40:28 doesn't require certain number of shots or motive 15:40:46 understand there can be defenses to crimes, understand? yes 15:41:10 insanity or self-defense... justifiable use of deadly force...follow instruction about that? yes. 15:41:38 last week and this week about media and publicity and hardship... most of you heard that both sides expect trial to last 2-4 weeks....jury will be sequestered... family member p67... letter that it would be hardship. in addition to what you said? yes. anybody else in that predicament? b61: can you explain sequestered 15:43:42 housed together, but interaction with others will be limited.... won't be able to go home at night. contact with outside world limited. have some contact, court will give instructions about that... monitored contact. 15:45:36 b7... first time I heard about it.... I have questions that are.... 15:45:48 e6... I didn't realize, does that include weekends... YES ENTIRE TIME OF TRIAL. ok.... 15:46:11 b37: you have some contact with family. ALL THIS WILL BE EXPLAINED LATER, WILL HAVE CONTACT BUT IT WILL BE LIMITED.. WILL HAVE CONTACT 15:46:37 b6... include telephone calls can they visit? ALLOWED TO VISIT, LIMITED AS TO TIME...LIMITED PHONE CONTACT... emails? YES IT WILL BE LIMITED. YOU WON'T BE CUT OFF FROM FAMILY, STAYING IN A FACILITY, HOTEL IN THE AREA AND ALL MEALS WILL BE PROVIDED AND TRANSPORTATION AND PERSON NEEDS DURING THE TRIAL. 15:47:38 k80: if this group is sequestered where we can't return to our homes, will this case be 7 days a week? NO. so everyone gets to go home on weekends but we can't? CORRECT. PLANNED ACTIVITIES FOR YOU, THERE WILL BE MEALS... I MEAN ITS... MORE WILL BE EXPLAINED 15:48:29 rionda: attorneys and court will be busy with other matters, were not going on vacation for the weekend 15:49:01 can all of you agree since you haven't heard evidence you have to keep open mind? yes. understand that part of process is that decision needs to be unanimous? yes. 15:49:31 haven't heard evidence, presuming defendant innocent? yes. use common sense and evidence for decision? yes. could you convict him if evidence showed he was guilty? yes. and opposite? yes 15:50:11 people should be held responsible and accountable for actions? yes. picked as juror and evaluating evidence, use god given common sense to get verdict that speaks the truth? yes. 15:50:40 I'm going to sit down.... but before I do... any matter that you think you need to bring to my attention? collective no. thank you very much 15:51:16 15 MINUTE... O'Mara: approach. YES (sidebar) 15:56:15 how long will we have to get our stuff in order... I WILL TELL YOU WHEN SELECTED ON JURY 15:56:34 b61: questionnaire did that say anything about sequestering. YES IT DID... ITS NOT AS LONG AS INDICATED 15:57:04 ITS BEEN A LONG DAY AND I DONT WANT TO HAVE O'MARA BEGIN VOIR DIRE AND KEEP YOU LATE AND HAVE SPLIT IT UP... RELEASE FOR THE NIGHT. COME BACK AT 9 AM. NOT TO READ OR LISTEN TO RADIO OR TV REPORTS, NOT TO DISCUSS CASE. NOT TO USE ANY ELECTRONIC DEVICE TO GET ON INTERNET. NOT TO READ OR CREATE SOCIAL NETWORKING PAGES ABOUT CASE. ASSURANCE YOU WILL ABIDE? yes. ANY ISSUE... PLEASE RAISE YOUR HAND. P67...INDICATED MAYBE HAVING THINGS TO DISCUSS, PLEASE REMAIN AND WILL DISCUSS AFTER THAT. EVERYONE ELSE AT A QUARTER TO 9 AM. HAVE A GOOD EVENING. 15:59:54 COMFORTABLE WHERE YOU'RE SITTING. 16:00:01 rionda: P67 letter from a family member? my wife wrote about it. trouble to serve? yes. tell us more? don't tell us where you work, but the media has rights to be present. work related? yes. express in letter? yes. wife wrote letter because she's more fluent in English? yes. had her write it because she could say it better? part for her and part for me she's worried about the situation. create hardship with wife and monetary? yes. like lately my little one I don't know what she heard in the news, lately she's been living with me thinking somebody is going to get me. also nice to discover how much she loves me 16:02:28 would that in your opinion impact you to pay attention? yes. of course. anything else you want to say to judge about that? that's all. just about my family. oh the other thing, the leveling or title... been things in media that my wife and older kids.. for example: media ask a resident or citizen or Hispanic, but then don't like how media express or a nickname all over the internet. media put your name on the internet or a certain way? yes. how did you find out? my wife found out through internet and my two biggest ones. they wanted to know what's going on with dad. your wife and kids saw on internet and alerted you and you said you didn't want to talk about it? yeah. impact on your kid and wife? yes. concern about that as a result? yes. interfere with paying attention? yes. 16:05:02 O'Mara: minor concerns and I want to see if they stack... media? yes. media in court room prohibited from putting you on camera... I am, but you are not... they can't put your face or information... not public, understand that? yes sir. concern to be they have identified you by some descriptors, like a white female whatever... and you they described as well? yes. concerned by a term the way the described you? I prefer they call me a resident or citizen or Hispanic. the other one telling my kids or wife..... something else on the internet? told me they saw "Mexican". concern to be Mexican than resident? yes. 16:07:22 sounds like they were labeling you? yes which I'm not happy about.... I represent the system, we apologize about any insensitivity from the media... as juror you're being exposed to that in a profile case its unavoidable... not sure we can un-do that.... maybe media will learn lesson to be culturally sensitive. 16:08:17 30 days your employer doesn't need to pay you? that's a part of it 16:08:28 about the service and the jury I noticed a couple things, seemed to me you were looking forward to it as a citizen, feel that way still? yes, but if it takes this long... issues. I was thinking 2-3 weeks, yeah let's get it done... without guessing too much we may start Monday.... last 2-4 weeks and then you deliberate and we'd be done.... timeline put out there now.... 16:09:38 mention that because of the publicity, your little ones was wrapping arms around your leg... a loss for you and family temporarily if here with us... such imposition that it is insurmountable, you can't do it for destroying purposes? my family will be destroyed. if not to that level... hoping you would consider it... inconvenient for you, accomplish if we ask you to, 2-4 weeks? definite inconvenience. not trying to minimize that, but as citizens as we take on the role of doing everything, there's not much more asked of our citizens but war and ask them to serve on jurors... 16:12:04 if we ask you, is it something that you can accomplish even past its inconvenience? 16:12:34 judge will clear up the confusion, but in sequestration being with us you will have contact with family, telephone monitored, visits with family members monitored... not in prison but in situation where you maintain contact but supervised way to protect process...any questions that I can help answer for you to make decision to sit as juror 16:13:54 I just want to you to consider my situation. if pick you can you sit with us? if that's the only option I guess... well you can say no, but if it's an inconvenience, say yes... if it's because of destruction than you can't.... call is yours. if you can under what we talked about.... I just can't with consequences coming if over 4 weeks. I don't want to end up on the street. if I was single, it wouldn't be a problem. 16:15:09 rionda: the media itself or the internet with comments? they saw on internet, I don't know where.... EXCUSED FOR EVENING, SEE YOU TOMORROW IN THE MORNING. 16:15:44 PLEASE BE SEATED, COUNCIL COME TO BENCH..(sidebar) 16:16:22 COURT RECESS FOR THE DAY ====================================

It’s Halloween, and 23 year old Damian Coriz has his foot on the gas of his family’s brand new 2010 Camaro. Behind him is state police officer Jake Romero, a sergeant assigned to Governor Richardson’s security detail who has his lights flashing in an unmarked state police car as he tries to pull Coriz over for failing to maintain lanes. As the two cars pass Romeroville towards Las Vegas, New Mexico, another squad car joins in the pursuit. The police car, identified only by the last name “Villa” at the bottom left of the dashcam video, documents the hour long chase up and down I-25. An officer calls out to dispatch that the Camaro’s emergency lights are blinking and reports that pursuit speeds have reached around 65 to 75 miles an hour before asking for a check to see if the car is stolen. The dispatcher reports back that the Camaro has valid registration and is insured by a member of the Coriz family out of Santo Domingo pueblo. About four minutes later, the chase escalates. Just south of Las Vegas, in the northbound lanes of I-25, another state police officer is waiting on the side of the road with spike strips laid out in the right lane. Coriz slows the Camaro as he sees the state police squad car, spots the spike strips and creeps past them in the right lane. The dashcam video shows the officer by the spike strips draw his gun and get in front of the Camaro with a hand out as Coriz lurches the car forward slowly. Seconds later, Sgt. Romero swings his unmarked unit around the front of the Camaro and jumps out of the car in plain clothing with a gun in his hand. Romero starts to use what appears to be the butt of his pistol to try and smash the driver’s side window, hitting the glass several times. Meanwhile, an officer on the other side of the car tries to use his baton to bust out the passenger window, but somehow both of the Camaro’s windows will not shatter. Shouting, Romero orders one police car to block the Camaro from the back and then runs to retrieve the spike strips. With two of the police now behind the Camaro, Coriz throws the car into reverse. Romero rushes to pull the spike strip under the Camaro as it starts to move forward. Another officer begins railing at the driver’s side window again, this time with the barrel of his gun. Coriz shifts into gear and takes off with Romero running after the car, trying to boomerang the spike strips underneath the Camaro but the tires remain intact. From then on, the video shows Coriz pushing the limits of the 2010 Camaro, causing officers to report to dispatch that pursuit speeds have reached as high as 125 miles an hour. At least five times throughout the chase Coriz is able to avoid spike strips set up by officers on the side of the interstate. Twice Coriz drives off the road into the median, at one point ramping down into a small ravine before driving back up an embankment into oncoming traffic. Near the small town of Watrous, Coriz doubles back and heads southbound towards Las Vegas. “See if they can block off all the exits into Vegas,” says one officer over the radio. “That way we can keep this thing on the interstate.” Coriz speeds past Las Vegas for the second time, again dodging spike strips. The video shows the blue sports car weave in and out of traffic and pull away from several trailing squad cars before topping out at well over 100 miles an hour. About 45 minutes into the chase, Coriz’s driving deteriorates. He narrowly avoids hitting a guard rail at high speed and is unable to avoid a pair of spike strips set up in the area near where the chase began. About a minute after hitting a strip on the left side of the Camaro, smoke begins to billow from the tires. One officer reports over the radio that both driver’s side tires have blown while another officer says “Back off, back off!” A trailing officer reports that a spike strip may be caught underneath the car but it still takes two more spike strips laid out near the San Juan exit to finally force Coriz off the interstate. The Camaro exits I-25 with police reporting all four tires have blown out and the car begins to slide on sparking rims for almost a mile before finally coming to a stop. Officers surround the Camaro as Coriz revs the engine. This time a baton breaks the driver side window, allowing rock music to blare out while several officers yell “Out of the car!” An unnamed passenger is taken to the ground on the right side of the Camaro while Coriz is pushed up against the car and handcuffed. Inside the Camaro, police find a small amount of marijuana and say they smell alcohol. According to the police report, Coriz eventually tells police he had been drinking earlier in the day and admits to having three shots of tequila and three beers. Coriz was arrested and charged with DWI and aggravated fleeing. A few weeks later, Coriz under the name “discontent” on MySpace, blogged about the pursuit saying [sic] “Let’s see, I recently lead multiple cops on a high speed chase in tha families 2010 Camaro while blasting rock & roll.” Coriz also posted a song he wrote while locked up in the San Miguel County Detention Center with the lyrics containing these words: “I’m surrounded by tha worst, No, I’m not afraid to get hurt, You know I’m just doin’ my time. For what, My unplanned crime? It’s just ALL cops piss me off.” At the end of the song Coriz adds: “This sobriety has got swirled, So as soon as I’m out, I’ma take a hit.” According to his Facebook page, Coriz works as an intern for a national nonprofit that helps dropouts to get their high school diplomas. He has bonded out of jail and is due in court in January.

INT BROLL GEORGE ZIMMERMAN TRAYVON MARTIN TRIAL / SWITCHED POOL FEED **NOTE: JUDGE'S COMMENTS IN CAPS **NAMES OF WITNESSES IN RED **VISUAL DESCRIPTIONS IN (PARENTHESES) **GOOD STATEMENTS/VIDEO BOLD 8:58:37 (Zimmerman enters, tan suit blue shirt and brown tie) (court rearranged differently) 9:00:12 PLEASE BE SEATED, GOOD MORNING. ON THE RECORD. ONE JUROR IS A FEW MINUTES LATE, WAIT FOR THEM. COUNCIL APPROACH FOR ONE MOMENT 9:00:59 (sidebar) 9:09:51 RECESS UNTIL THE POTENTIAL JURORS GET HERE 9:10:08 COURT IN RECESS ============================ 9:27:02 ATTORNEYS REQUEST THE FRYE HEARING BE TOMORROW AT 2. (sidebar) 9:31:03 deputy: jurors are present 9:32:36 PLEASE BE SEATED. GOOD MORNING... BEGIN WHATS REALLY THE JURY SELECTION, BEFORE WAS PRE SELECTION PROCESS... INSTRUCTIONS: IN ORDER TO HAVE FAIR TRIAL, RULES JURY MUST FOLLOW. MUST DECIDE CASE ON EVIDENCE IN COURT. DON'T COMMUNICATE ABOUT THE CASE. DO NOT DISCLOSE YOUR THOUGHTS OR ASK FOR ADVICE ON HOW TO DECIDE. NO ELECTRONIC DEVICES OR COMMUTERS TO COMMUNICATE ABOUT THIS CASE. DO NOT SEND OR ACCEPT MESSAGES ABOUT THIS CASE. MUST NOT DO RESEARCH THAT MAY HAVE ANYTHING TO DO WITH CASE. APPLIES IN COURT HOUSE, SEQUESTRATION, OR ANY WHERE ELSE. DEPENDING ON YOU TO FOLLOW RULES FOR A FAIR TRIAL. INVESTIGATE OR RESEARCH ON YOUR OWN, NO WAY TO ASSURE THEY ARE PROPER OR RELEVANT TO CASE. NO OPPORTUNITY TO DISPUTE EVIDENCE. BECOME AWARE OF VIOLATIONS OF INSTRUCTIONS, MUST TELL ME BY NOTE FROM COURT DEPUTY. 9:35:40 GOING TO BEGIN JURY SELECTION PROCESS, KNOWN AS VOIR DIRE. PURPOSE IS TO DETERMINE IF THE DECISION WOULD BE FAIR BASED ON EVIDENCE WITHOUT INFLUENCE FROM OUTSIDE FACTORS. NOT FOR PURPOSE OF PRYING INTO AFFAIRS... 9:36:27 CHARGES SET FORTH FOR ZIMMERMAN.... EVERY PERSON ACCUSED IS TO KNOW THE EXACT CHARGE. STATE OF FLORIDA VS. ZIMEMRMAN 12CF10838A COUNT 1 MURDER IN SECOND DEGREE. ON FEB. 26, 2012 ZIMMERMAN UNLAWFULLY KILLED MARTIN UNDER THE AGE OF 18, SHOOTING VICTIM. ZIMMERMAN CARRIED DISPLAYED USED ATTEMPT TO USE FIREARM. AS RESULT OF DEATH, INFLICTED UPON ANY PERSON.......... 9:38:13 INTRODUCED TO PARTICIPANTS OF THIS TRIAL. ARE ANY OF YOU RELATED TO ATTORNEYS OR ZIMMERMAN? NO HANDS ARE BEING RAISED 9:38:37 HANDED A LIST OF POTENTIAL WITNESSES IN THE CASE. IF YOU RECOGNIZE ANY NAMES PLEASE CIRCLE THEM. MANY MORE NAMES LISTED THAN ACTUALLY CALLED... REVIEW THAT. RAISE YOUR HAND IF YOU RECOGNIZE ANY INDIVIDUALS... ASK YOU TO TELL US WHAT PAGE AND WHAT NUMBER THEY ARE OR THEIR INITIALS. DONE READING, PLEASE LOOK UP. 9:46:19 SHOW OF HANDS BY FIRST ROW, DO YOU RECOGNIZE WITNESS NAMES? 9:46:46 (couldn't hear the juror number) ANYONE ON FRONT PAGE YOU RECOGNIZE? first page. HOW MANY? 2. they're both d's. FIRST NAME? j and d. first and fourth d. ATTORNEYS WILL ASK YOU QUESTIONS ABOUT THAT. ANYBODY ELSE ON THE LIST? no. 9:48:06 SECOND ROW, DO YOU RECOGNIZE NAMES? B61? HOW MANY? just 1, perhaps the last page the first one. ANYBODY ELSE ON THE SECOND ROW? G63? HOW MANY? 2. WHAT PAGE? second page. INITIAL OF LAST NAME? j. initial of first name? c. 5 OR 6TH DOWN FROM J's? 1 of them. the 5th. WHAT IS THE OTHER ONE? last page. INITIAL OF LAST NAME? w. INITIAL OF FIRST NAME? e. FIRST WD OR LAST WD? I only see one. oh it's the first. 9:50:14 ANYBODY ELSE? ON THE THIRD ROW? JUROR i33? WHO BY PAGE? first page last name b, first name c. THE LAST B? yes. ANYBODY ELSE ON THE LIST YOU RECOGNIZE? number 32, last c. CB? correct. last page...last name w, first name n. OK. I do have one more. last name z first name s. OK, COVER ALL OF THOSE? yes. 9:52:21 ANYBODY ELSE? JUROR E6. on last page, last name w first name n and last name z and first name s. ANYBODY ELSE? THANK YOU VERY MUCH. 9:53:20 rionda: good morning... introduce myself to you all. reviewing why this is important 9:55:11 spent last week and first two days of this week going through the process, asked all of you questions related to case regarding publicity. individual so it didn't contaminate other juror's knowledge. important at arriving a decision comes from this court room. agree? yes. issue with that, outside of courtroom can't factor into decision? 9:56:18 what you saw or read from media is irrelevant. now in stage 2. question you individually and collectively about this case or background stuff about you 9:56:45 assure us that you will give consideration to all questions asked? yes 9:56:59 if during this process I ask individually or as a group and you feel uncomfortable talking about it in a group, let us know.... 9:57:41 juror b7? correct. do you want us to bring up issues about that and the time of the question? yes sir 9:58:06 were trying to get a jury that speaks the truth and arrive at just verdict 9:58:20 some of you were talked to last week and others were Monday and Tuesday... anyone go home and celebrate going through to next round? nobody? 9:58:42 appreciate you've taken this time already. 9:58:59 juror b12.... as talked about individually, how long resident of Seminole county? at least 40 years. how long have you lived at current address? 19 years. live in state of Florida before that? Michigan. left there when I was 9. married? no. divorced? yes. how long married before divorce? a yr. what does former spouse do for living? he's dead. children? 2. how old? 32 and 19. what do they do for living? one's a full time student and the other one owns his own company. medical field and construction worker. how long have you been at current employer? since October. before that? home health nurse. how long? 5 years. supervise people in that position? no. before that? CNA. how long total? 5 years. members or involved in organizations at all? volunteer work for moose lodge and my church. how long, long time? yeah. 10:02:51 leadership position? no anymore. prior experience? no. outside work and volunteering, anything else? raising my daughter, I'm a mother. any other hobbies? part of red hat society. I like my wine and going to the beach. served on jury before? no. just don't like the media being there.... that takes away his privileges, they put everything everywhere.... 10:05:31 b29... originally from Chicago? yes. grew up there? yes. married? yes. how long? 10 years. kids, yes? lots. how many? 8. under age of 18? one is over 18. how old is that one? going to be 20. live with you and husband? resides with me now. going to school or working? arrived a few weeks ago, looking for work 10:06:32 how long at employment? 3 months. prior to that? CNA. how long? 7 years. member of organization? my house. military service? no. spend time outside work, but I know answer and what you're passionate about? kids. jury service? no. 10:07:34 b76... how long in Seminole? since 1995. how long at current address? 1 week. prior to that? another address. originally from? been here since 1966. marital status? married. how long? 30 years. children? 2. how old? 28 attorney, 26 CNA. does your son practice in Seminole? yes. what practice? not criminal, foreclosures, bankruptcies, divorce, and contract. ever practiced criminal law? no. 10:08:59 picked as jury and they haven't talked about law and you can't call your son and ask him? yes I understand. 10:09:25 how long at current place of employment? unemployed. prior? husband and I had construction company. how long? 15 yes. husband still involved in that business? no. helping out children built their home. manage rental properties. involvement? I rescue a lot of pets. how long? a long time. military service? no. outside house? managing properties and rescuing animals. passion? rescuing animals. prior jury service? no 10:10:43 b7.... living in Seminole? between orange and Seminole 30 years. born and raised in Florida. married? yes. how long? 10 years. what does spouse do? just got out of school to be a teacher. kids? no. current occupation? 11 years. any management duties? I will. tell us about that? going to be elite position among others in similar roles. how many will you supervise? just 2-3. member in organization? I'm sure I am through her. military service? no. outside work? watch sports... love video games. socialize with friends go out to bar. passion? not passionate about a lot of stuff. ever served as juror? I have. how long ago? before I was working at current job, 12-15 years. Seminole or orange? Seminole. criminal or civil? criminal. reach a verdict? yes. fore person? no. enjoy it? I did. it was one day. 10:13:37 b35.... how long in Seminole? since 1985. current address? 12 yes. marital status? married. how long? going on 20+ years. what does spouse do? local TV. is she a reporter? no. comments I made about media you won't hold against me. 10:14:24 any kids? yes. 1 son in college now. what is he studying? engineering. current occupation, how long? I manage tax office in the year, vending machines and rental... for about 7 years... before that? properties around central Florida. member in organization? fraternity and football coach. how long? 13 years. military service? yes Marine Corp Reserves. how long? 6 years. military police? no. how do you spend time out of work? watching sports, coaching, spending time together. 10:16:07 real passion in life? coaching football.... served as juror? no 10:16:19 b37.... Seminole county? 18 years. prior? dad was air force captain. born in California, but went from coast to other. married? yes. 20 years. spouse job? space attorney... rockets and space craft. how long has that been a specialty? always... since he graduated. corporate attorney? yes. practice criminal law? no. would that influence you? no he wouldn't answer me. kids? 24, pet groomer, 27 at ucf. how long at employment? 16 years. management position? now I am, converted because girl before retired. ever settle disputes? no, there's only 3 of us.. were a family. organizations? involved in rescue groups, got out because I couldn't take more animals. do you know the other juror? I do not. 10:19:08 does anybody know any other jurors here? 10:19:15 military service? no. outside, I know. jury service? called 4 times... excluded from last one because of where I work. 10:19:41 b51.... how are you? good. Seminole? 9 years. originally? orange county. central Florida? since 1987. before? Atlanta. married? no. kids? no. grand kids? no. employment? retired. retired from what work? real estate.. several careers? I have. prior to that? director of call center. how long? 10 years. managerial duties? direct reports and 1200 employees. resolve disputes? often. how? listen to all sides and make tough calls. 10:21:11 member of any organizations? no. just enjoying retirement? yes. in military? I wasn't. for fun? driving back and forth to Jacksonville... elderly parents, lots of brothers and sisters. jury service? yes, one was in Seminole county 3 years ago... called case before we were called. another one in orange county in 1991, I was an alternate. 10:22:20 b86... how long a resident? 1989. before that? 1971 in orange county. marital status? single. kids? 2. 20 and 21... full time student and trying to get the other one back in school, he was ill. the one in school, what does he want to be? childhood specialist. how long in employment? 10 years. member in organizations? not any more, once at birds of prey... worked in church with youth group. in military? no. jury service? 10:24:24 e6.... Seminole county? 2 years. before? orange. how long? since 2004. originally? Brevard. marital status? married. what does spouse do? engineer. how long married? 6 years. kids? 2, 11 and 13. current occupation? unemployed. 9 months before that and prior to that I was in school and raising kids. what filed before? financial services. member in organization? member of church and I used to volunteer at kids school 10:25:44 military? no. how do you spend time outside of work? taking care of kids, dogs, helping with the friends young kids, gardening. prior jury service? no, called but never... 10:26:09 e40... Seminole county? 7 months. before that? Iowa. how long? 2 years. before that? California. come to Florida to retire? came to work in Florida. what do you do? safety officer. how long? over 25 years. marital status? married. spouse living? chemical engineer. kids? 1 son, 28 looking for work. prior to that? he was working in western Pennsylvania in fast food service. organization? no. military? no. fun? travel, read, and sports. any particular? all but football mainly. prior jury service? yes I have served. in Pennsylvania. criminal or civil? drug dealing 10:28:14 go back and deliberate? yes. reach verdict? we were. forewoman? I was not. enjoy experience? I did 10:28:30 e54... how long in Seminole? 14 years. before that? orange. since I was 8. marital status? married for 5 years. spouse? engineering technician. kids? two step children, 16 living with us and the other is late 20s. how long working there? 3 years. before that? same field for 30 years. member involved in organizations? no. military? no. fun? reading, working on family tree, playing golf. where's family from originally? Maryland 10:29:58 passions I guess? it was for a while, now that we finished it's on the side 10:30:09 jury service? summoned but never sat 10:30:18 e73... Seminole? 13 years. prior? new jersey. grow up there? I did not. grew up? new York. current address? 13 years. marital status? married. how long? 33 years. spouse? retired. prior to that? telecommunications firm. kids? yes. how many? 2. how old and what they do? 15 on Sunday, 18. still in school? going to college. what he wants to do? I don't think he's there yet 10:31:34 retired or working? consultant. how long? 10 years. before that? large telecommunications firm. where your husband worked? yes. meet there? we did. organizations? not currently. before? various arts councils. military? no. fun? going to sporting events, children active in sports... make jewelry, read, I love the beach 10:32:28 prior jury service? yes. here in Seminole? 3 times in Seminole, once for federal court and once in Ohio. served 5 times? yes. enjoy it? not always. Ohio, criminal or civil? civil I think. deliberate? settled out of court after 5 days. federal? criminal. deliberate? I didn't get seated on jury. three here, criminal or civil? first was civil and I didn't do anything. next was criminal settled out of court, next one I didn't get seated. 10:34:16 m75.... how long in Seminole? since 2001. before that? new York. grow up there? yes. lived in current address? 2 months. prior to that? still in Seminole, just different space. married or single? single. kids? no. work? 2 months. prior? travel agent for cruise. how long? 1 year. before that? theme parks in Orlando. how long? almost 2 years. what did you do? guest service attendant moved to cashier and food service. member of organization? not currently, used to volunteer at animal shelter. military? no. fun? large family, visit with them. military service? no 10:36:22 b61... how long in Seminole? 5 years. current address for? 4 years. prior? orange, Volusia, army brat. marital status? married. how long? 2 months. husband? full time student. engineer. kids? no. engineer too? yes. how long? 7 years. member of organizations? church, professional society, and sorority. leadership? I have, but not now. military? no. fun? studying, reading and spending time with family. studying to be? for an exam. prior jury service? no 10:38:00 b72.... how long resident? 9 years. originally? Chicago. marital status? single. kids? no. work? coming to a year. same field but different job? yes. involved in organizations? alumni of fraternity. leadership? vice president of local chapter but I wouldn't say so. military? no. fun? arm wrestling, going to gym.... one arm pull up. how long? 2.5 years. wrestling in high school? weight lift, track, football 2 years. meets to arm wrestle? depends on venue, encompasses everything... I could talk about it all day 10:40:00 prior jury service? no 10:40:05 e22... how long in Seminole? 12 years. prior? orange. grow in central Florida? only since 92. up north? spend a lot of time there. married? single. kids? no. work? 19 years. organizations? social service with employer. military? no. spend time out of work? gardening, all things food. passionate about? yeah. jury service? called in asocial but didn't serve 10:41:34 e13.... how long in Seminole? 17 years. marital status? single. kids? no. how long have you been doing that? surgical assistant for 2 years. member of organizations? church. military? no. outside work? horses. passion is riding? yes. jury service? no 10:42:33 e28.... how long Seminole? 1985. before that? Texas. originally from? yes. marital? married for 28 years, 2 children... 27 and 23 work for theme park and hotel side of it. spouse do? teacher. work? 26 years. members? professional, relay for life. how you spend time out of work? yes. jury? summoned for federal, never called and served in Texas... read verdict? yes. deliberate? yes. forewoman? no. enjoy that? yes I did 10:44:16 k80... Seminole county? 2004. before? Virginia. grew up there? most of life. marital status? 15 years... spouse? maintenance tech. kids? 2. two girls. under 18? yes. work? over 5 years, same line of work for 15 years. member of organizations? attend church regularly, girl scouts, soccer. military? family members, father was navy grandfathers and cousins. fun? work absorbs time and then children. jury service? no first time 10:45:49 k95... how long in Seminole? 16 years. before that? orange for 7 and manatee for 4. marital? married. 15 years. spouse? electrician. kids? yes. how old? daughter that's 24, son that'll be 14, and a grandson. daughter? internship to be a dental hygienist. work? consultant, used to own company for 7 years. same industry for 10 10:46:51 member of organizations? yeah, ptk. pbl. fbi. Alzheimer's association, autism speaks and march of dimes. military? no. jury service? no 10:47:22 p67... why we can't do this in private... is there a way? do in private with nobody else? approach bench? VOIR DIRE HAS TO BE IN PUBLIC FORM. YOU CAN APPROACH. your name is private if that's what you're worried about. I just don't want the media to put labels on me like finding something else. JURY SELECTION PROCESS HAS TO BE OPEN COURT, OPEN TO PUBLIC...ZIMMERMAN HAS RIGHT TO BE THERE, ATTORNEYS HAVE THE RIGHT TO BE THERE... REMOVE OTHER JURY MEMBERS, WILL NOT CLEAR THE COURT ROOM... MAYBE A QUESTION ASKED THAT IS SENSITIVE NATURE TO YOU THAT I CAN'T CLEAR THE COURT ROOM, BUT I CAN DO IT OUTSIDE PRESENCE OF OTHER MEMBERS. 10:49:51 from where? been here since 2008. Seminole county how long? since 2008. before that? moved from Chicago. before that, originally? Mexico. how long in US? since I was 18 years old. married? yes. how long? about 20 years. kids? yes. how old? 18, and 16 and 11. still in school? just out of high school. work for how long? since 2008. involved in organizations? church. military? no. fun? helping wife, kids and watching sports. first time in jury? yes. looking forward to it? looking to have a nice experience, but it's been a nightmare. every day something is different. if it's going to affect my family I'm not looking forward to it...still feel it's a hardship for you? absolutely 10:52:34 g14... how long in Seminole? once before and recently from 2005 to now. grew up and moved out? no dad in military. marital status? divorced. former spouse? does not work at this time. what did he do? assembly. kids? 2 boys. 12 and 15. work? 3 years. before? sold print advertising. how long? 1996 to 2010. involved in organizations? boy scouts. how long? 6 years. military service? I have not been, but family. spend time outside work? boy scouts, taking care of my boys and reading. jury? summoned 2 other times, but never seated on jury 10:54:22 g29... Seminole county? 9 months. before that? in orange county. marital? single. kids? no. work? almost 6 years. before that? same field for total over 14 years. member of organizations? no. military? no. fun? friends and family and sports and TV. jury service? summoned in orange but never on jury 10:55:33 g47.... how long in Seminole? under 9 years. before? Boston, MA. marital? single. kids? nope. current job, how long? since October. before that? unemployed. member with organization? no. military? none. fun? sports friends beer. jury service? once, but it was settled 10:56:24 g63..... how long in Seminole? 4 years. before? orange. martial? single. kids? no. unemployed now, before that? teaching assistant and student. major? mathematics. member of any organizations? no. military service? no. fun? chess, Olympic weightlifting, piano. how long Olympic? a year. jury? no 10:57:40 g66.... Seminole? 2 years. prior? 12 years in Madison. prior to that? Chicago. marital? widow. spouse? mechanic for trucks. kids? 2 daughters. oldest is 36 works for entertainment company. 32 year old works for entertainment lighting... how long you work? retired. prior? at hospitals. financial advisor. member of organizations? started riding with Care Takers... motorcycle club. military? no. outside work? ride with my boyfriend, fish, spend time with family. what does boyfriend do? he sails. jury service? once in Chicago... alternate 10:59:45 g81.... how long in Seminole? 16 years. marital status? married. how long? 19 years. spouse? administrative assistant. how long? 19 years. member in organizations? professional. military service? no. fun? golf, travel, sports. prior service? no. 11:00:37 h6... Seminole? 1.5 years. prior? orange and Colorado. in Florida? since 2004. married? no. kids? no. current job? 5 months. prior to that? same line of work, but in it for 7 years now. member involved in organizations? no. military service? no. fun? relax... jury service? yes. in Seminole or others? orange. 2 years ago. criminal case. deliberate? yes. verdict? on most charges. foreman? no 11:02:04 h7.... in Seminole? 27 years, before Illinois, before Texas. married 44 years. 2 children ones 41 in Ireland. 39 in el Paso. spouse? weight watchers councilor for 25 years takes care of house. job? 40 years. member of organizations? professional associations, boy scouts for 35 years, instructor for merit badges, wife and I will have a small nursery. prior jury service? 1 in Seminole criminal case, foreperson we reached a verdict. 11:03:30 h18.... Seminole county? 2 years. before? orange county for almost a year. overseas before? yes. how long? 1996. marital status? going through divorce. kids? 1. girl is 7. job? in that field since I got to Florida, before that......... overseas in military? army and then contractor for defense company...involved in any organizations? no. fun? gym, tennis, swimming, with my daughter. jury service? no 11:05:05 h29... resident of Seminole? over 30 years, and orange... army brat. marital status? divorced. spouse? school teacher. kids? yeah 2 daughters, 28 and 30 year old... working with UCF and the other is handicapped. work? 30 years. member? professional and served on local city board for 15 years... leadership? yes. military? I also served too. how long? 4 years. military police? no. fun? beach, tennis... beer. jury service? summoned once 15 years ago... never sat 11:07:11 h18... military police? no 11:07:17 h35... Seminole? 24 years. martial? married. how long? 5 years. spouse? unemployed. before? lawn service. kids? no. job? unemployed taking care of grandfather before. member of organizations? was in 2010. military? no. spend time for fun? beach. jury service? no 11:08:17 h81... how long in Seminole? since 2000. prior to that? Pennsylvania. marital status? 31 years. spouse? supervisor at hotel. kids? 25 year old daughter in marketing son in navy. work? 25 years. member of organizations? 1 professional. military? no. fun? family and discovering cool internet technologies. jury service? yes. in Seminole criminal case. verdict? yes. foreman? no 11:09:39 h69... resident of Seminole? 21 years. marital status? married. how long? 11 months. spouse? technician with bright house. work? a year and 8 months. before that in school? IRA company. member of any organizations? church, human resources. military? no. fun? usually with mom or dad. prior jury service? no. 11:10:43 h86.... Seminole? born and raised. married? no. kids? no. job? 6 months. before? technician. organizations? professional and church. military? no. fun? volunteer and with family. jury? summoned, but away for school 11:11:37 i5.... how long in Seminole? 13 years. before that? Alaska for 27 years. what were you doing? working, originally in military, 7 years and then discharged work for financial... married? yes. spouse? auditor. kids? yes. 3. what do they do? oldest son is 40 worked for grocery chain, out in California. daughter is 38 works for utility company and my youngest works for IT group. work? almost 40 years. member of any organizations outside? no all professional. military police? no. fun? watching sports on TV, hang with friends, I like working with computers..... jury service? yes. Seminole or elsewhere? 2 assignments here in Seminole and when I lived in Alaska I think I had 4. 2 here, deliberate? just 1. criminal or civil? DWI. we deliberated. verdict? yes. foreman? yes. 4 in Alaska and deliberate all of them? yes. criminal or civil? all civil. foreman on 1 of them. reach verdict on all 4? yes. enjoy experiences? looking back I did... when I was on it I didn't 11:14:48 i19.... resident in Seminole? 3 years. before? orange. marital status? single. kids? no. work? 1 year. before that? retail. organizations? no. military? no. fun? school. health service admin. jury? no 11:15:36 i24... how long in Seminole? 1968. marital status? married. shy of 39 years. spouse? he is a coordinator transportation for theme park. kids? 29 athletic trainer, 22 student, 29 installer. student, studying? psychology. work? just shy of 42 years. organizations? no. military? no. fun? sports work in yard, beach, hit the road and go to mountains. jury? summoned once but never had to 11:17:09 i33... resident in Seminole? 30 years. marital? married. spouse? account manager. kids? no. work? searching for new career. how long in field before? 44 years. member in organization? yes. what kind? environmental advocacy and county board. how long? just over a year. military service? no. fun? small farm and enjoy offshore competition fishing. jury service? no. 11:18:29 i44... resident in Seminole? 2 years but 25 in orange. marital status? married. spouse? RN. kids? 3, 10, 12, and 9 month son. work? 12 years. field? before that in theme park industry. involved in organizations? Florida barbecue association. military service? no. fun? family raising little one. jury service? 4 years ago orange I was alternate 11:20:17 15 MINUTE RECESS, FOLLOW JARVIS OUTSIDE THE COURTROOM. ================================================================ 11:41:13 PLEASE BE SEATED. BACK ON RECORD. approach? YES (sidebar) 11:42:19 jurors are present 11:43:26 PLEASE BE SEATED... RIONDA YOU MAY CONTINUE 11:43:39 group questions... and then individual too... sit here today, give the defendant a fair trial? yes. give the state a fair trial? yes. give both sides fair? yes. issue? believe both sides do not deserve fair trial? defendant and stat fair trial? yes 11:44:32 state has to prove defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. it's the law. court will give you instructions. states burden, understand? yes. states prove crime was committed and defendant did it? yes. 11:45:18 read like what it is not... a reasonable doubt is not forced, imaginary, speculative... must have reason for that doubt. not to a mathematical certainty, not absolute? yes 11:46:11 believe the burden should be higher than reasonable doubt, like perfection? 11:46:34 sit here today, do you all understand concept/law talks about presumption of innocence. this defendant is presumed innocent, understand? yes. not innocent, but presumed innocent? yes. abide by that? yes. 11:47:23 live in greatest country of world and our criminal justice allows for a trial. no matter what the charge, state has burden. understand? yes. trial is the way? yes 11:47:56 defendant has no obligation? yes. how do you render a verdict? court will give instructions on how to do that. rely on facts and law and also in the process you use common sense in arriving in verdict. 11:48:45 law also says you don't speculate... not allowed in arriving in verdict. speculation plays no role, rely on evidence. agree? yes 11:49:14 what witness says is evidence, no the questions 11:49:51 difference between real world and TV world or make believe. 11:50:08 b35... if attorney asks question of witness and the witness says no, what do you believe? what witness said. is that important? yes. why? he's the witness.. he knows what's going on 11:50:58 sympathy plays no role at all in verdict, understand? yes. 11:51:22 understand that sympathy can't be consider at all, agree? yes 11:51:32 k80... agree with that? yes. why? based off facts and not emotion 11:52:05 bias shouldn't play a role at all in arriving in verdict.... g63, do you believe people are bias to certain things? yes. sometimes about people with bald heads or whatever, people has bias? yes. agree bias shouldn't play role at all? correct. biases about how people dress, should play role? no. why? not relevant to the facts that happened. do you think were always able to pick if someone is bias? not always. how can you tell? maybe if they... if they act in a way with specific preference for something more if they didn't have any advice. 11:53:57 penalties in this case, judges job what the penalties are. m75... problem with that? no. can't consider what the penalties are, no role? I understand. I agree. 11:54:49 job is only to defend guilt or innocence? yes. will anyone consider the penalties, you can't do that, agree? yes. 11:55:12 agree with that b37... I agree. why? falls in sympathy part. shouldn't play role at all? should not 11:55:59 state proves evidence, direct evidence... circumstantial evidence.... direct is someone sees something. circumstantial is added to other piece of puzzle to prove something. 11:56:25 law allows that the state can use direct evidence and circumstantial evidence. I come home and wife tells me kid brought cookie jar and the kids say they didn't do it... no eye witness, question kids... but one has crumbs in her mouth... that's an inference to prove something else 11:57:55 i44... ever used circumstantial evidence? all the time. at work or home? at home. give me an example? who made the mess, it wasn't us. who had breakfast, both of us. what did you have... oatmeal and there's oatmeal all over the counter. 11:58:47 I used to ask who watches CSI, now I ask reverse. who hasn't heard of CSI? b7 you have not watched CSI? no. anyone else who hasn't watched? b29, b35, b86, b61, b72, e28, k95, p67, h69, h86, h29. 12:01:01 not the real world... people want to believe that's real, they expect that evidence to appear out of nowhere... that's not the real world. hold state of Florida to what they've seen on csi? E6 HAS A QUESTION.... E6: going back to circumstantial evidences... circumstances can be misleading, so does it have to be very... still proven beyond unreasonable doubt. 12:02:38 never watched any of those shows? still have a few. b29... why? I like drama. real world as opposed to make believe? yeah 12:03:14 also had in last 5 or 10 years an increase in real lawyer type shows... not the real world? 12:03:43 i5... ever watch those shows? watched them don't make sense to me. some of them may be lawyers? question integrity of them... real lawyer wouldn't do that 12:04:17 not going to determine guilt or innocence from TV? yes. b61, agree with that? yes. if they're not representing client they don't know the facts, may have special interest. 12:05:35 how people feel about attorneys, how many of you liked their commercials... love those commercials??? hold against state of Florida or omara because were attorneys? anybody? 12:06:11 we realize people come into court room with opinions? yes. all come in with opinion on things, right? yes. if people are exposed to things, how do we make sure they make their decision on evidence opposed to what opinion should be. e73, what do we do with people whit opinions? that's a tough one cause I don't know that you'd always know about their opinion. e54, question? I don't know how you can guarantee that's not going to happen... you hope they don't. agree with e73 and e54? yes 12:08:18 h29... how would you assure opinions do not factor in the decision? profile a jury, ask questions look for answers that will represent you and people that are fair. no good way to do it. everyone agree? yes. telling the truth to best of ability.... 12:09:34 can you follow the law as a group? be frank with us.. does anybody feel they cannot? anybody? no from everyone? yes sir 12:10:02 h6... agree with that? yes. how would you assure that it doesn't interfere? don't know how you find out how, but keep my opinion out of it 12:10:44 both sides get fair trial 12:11:08 b67.... too personal or it's alright? it's alright. g14? agree that sometimes we make assumptions that turn out not to be true? yes. ever done that? yes. example? meet somebody and think they're stuck up and then I would find out later they were shy. agree with g14? yes. has anyone ever been wrong about an assumption? 12:12:58 assumptions play no role in a verdict? yes sir 12:13:22 opinions and assumptions play no role in a verdict? yes 12:13:30 how do we know that happens? e40, how? check our personal values and hold others accountable and challenge if we see those bias. discrepancies raise an issue 12:14:13 attorneys, who knows any attorney? b12? yes. are they here in town? Tim Morgan. what practice? friend of his. talk to him about law? no. b76? my son. asked you that before? yes. b35? friend from hometown and friends I went to college with. civil or criminal? split. discuss law? no sir... b37? married to attorney, anybody else? attorneys from work that work on cases like personal injuries. criminal or civic? not that I'm aware of. interfere in any way? no sir. b51? neighbor. corporate lawyer... 12:17:03 e6? I know a woman in Colorado in contract law... e40? several from college, woman I rent house from is in real estate law and she's in Texas. e54? I do know people who are attorneys but I don't discuss with them. 12:17:53 e73? friends and family. criminal law? no 12:18:05 g47? friends' mother for Volusia. civil law. interfere? no. g14? I know a couple attorneys through boy scout, but I don't know criminal. no interference no. 12:18:59 k95? several from network associations, patent, tax and contract. no criminal? not that I know of. interference? no sir 12:19:23 k80? friends and legal counsel at our company. criminal? no. interference? no 12:19:43 e13? moms side of families, some attorneys? criminal? I have no idea.. influence? no 12:20:04 e22? three attorneys, all civil. interfere? no 12:20:14 b61? several from college, all civil and no interference 12:20:28 h6? know an attorney that does workers comp law. interfere? no 12:20:43 h7? department of defense, contract lawyers. nephew in environmentalism 12:20:50 h29? several from my profession. interfere? no 12:21:09 h81? I know 20-25 attorneys. criminal? a handful. discussions about the law? most involved around consumer law. interfere as juror? that wouldn't influence me 12:21:56 h86? past employers were attorneys... insight into law? no 12:22:09 i33? several lawyers both civil and criminal. interfere with decision? no. 12:22:40 anybody associated with law, judges? i33? I know a few sir... 12:23:01 interfere in any way to be a juror? no. 12:23:14 personal questions about arrest, victim of crime, if it's something you want in private let us know. need to know impact it may have. 12:24:02 front row, arrested? b12, here in Seminole? Daytona. still pending? no thrown out of court, never went. would that experience factor in to be fair juror? no. set aside? I was only 17 so yeah. feel you were treated fairly? for who I was with... hold against Florida? no. hold against Zimmerman? no. 12:25:07 b29? Chicago. still pending? it's been disposed of? yeah. interfere with you? no. hold against? no. treated fairly? yes. 12:25:36 b35? orange county. still pending? no. disposed of? yes. how long ago? 1987. unfairly treated? no. prosecuted or case dismissed? I was prosecuted. hold against? no. treated fairly? yes 12:26:24 e6? in Florida, Brevard back in 1999. pending? no. treated fairly. 12:27:13 h7? 40 years ago state of Texas. not pending? correct. treated fairly? absolutely. it was acquitted. hold against? no 12:28:04 h81? Seminole. pending? no. how long ago? yr. and a half ago. treated fairly? yes. no charges it was detained.. no charges. hold against? no 12:28:55 i33? Seminole. pending? no. treated unfairly? yes. arrested or prosecuted? both. won't hold it against anybody. what happened to your case? go to court, pay a fine. won't hold against? no sir. 12:30:00 anybody been a subject of criminal investigation? no from everybody 12:30:14 close friend arrested and you felt was treated unfairly? b7? family or close friend? close friend. pending? no. orange county. arrested unfairly. dropped? I don't know. hold against? no. 12:31:13 k95? friend in Ohio arrested and treated unfairly. pending? no. when she was incarcerated. drop charges on her? no. told by the judge she could take medicine and they didn't give to her, brought her to hospital 12:32:28 b61? someone was arrested, treated unfairly. charges were dropped. here in Florida? yes. pending? no. hold against? no. 12:33:06 A LOT OF YOU HERE.... AN HOUR ENOUGH? COME BACK AT 1:45. WHILE ON LUNCH BREAK, GO WITH EACH OTHER TALK ABOUT ANYTHING BUT THIS CASE. NO RADIO OR TV REPORTS. NO ELECTRONIC DEVICES. NOT TO READ OR CREATE SOCIAL NETWORKING PAGES. ASSURANCE TO ABIDE BY INSTRUCTIONS? 12:34:23 COURT IN RECESS FOR LUNCH UNTIL 1:45 ================================================ 13:46:07 PLEASE BE SEATED. BACK ON RECORD. DO WE HAVE THE JURORS BACK? COUNCIL APPROACH FOR JUST A MOMENT (sidebar) 14:02:46 PLEASE BE SEATED. WELCOME BACK. APPEARS TO BE HERE AND IN CORRECT PLACES. DURING LUNCH DID ANY OF YOU HAVE CONVERSATIONS ABOUT THIS CASE? DID ANY OF YOU READ OR LISTEN TO ANYTHING ABOUT THIS CASE? USE ANY ELECTRONIC DEVICE ABOUT THE CASE? READ OR CREATE ANY THING ABOUT THE CASE? 14:03:39 rionda: welcome back. 14:04:05 h81... a friend or close family member? close friend. in Seminole? no. Pennsylvania. treated unfairly? yes. in prosecution. hold against us? I would no. interfere? it would not. 14:05:05 were you a victim of a crime that it impacted you so much you wouldn't be able to participate? 14:05:26 b76? yes. b7? yes. b86? yes. anybody else? e40? e73? second row: e22? k80? k95? last row: g81? h7? h35? h81? i33? i44? did I get everybody? 14:06:35 violent crime? e73, b86, k80, e22. 14:07:09 you have to set it aside for the purposes of this trial. agree to leave outside court room... think you cannot, raise your hand... e73? just because of the nature that happened to you? it was a very similar crime. wouldn't be able to.... set it aside? it's always in my mind. 14:08:27 anybody else? 14:08:49 victims of crime, let me broaden criteria... crime to your household, felt police did not do a good job investigating? b7. home break in. here in Seminole? it was. they didn't do a good job? they didn't investigate at all. do you think that would impact you at all in this case to sit as juror or can you set aside? no. it wasn't a big deal. agree to leave outside court? yeah. 14:10:17 in that case, were you present? I came home and scared of burglars I think. chase them? no. knew better? I didn't realize until later.... called police and they didn't respond? when I was in high school, police came and they asked what was stolen and officer asked me if any of my friends did this. ever find out who it was? no. anybody else? 14:11:31 b86... many years ago, fast food restaurant. police officer scared us more than the person who just robbed us with the gun. going to our car when gun was pulled on us, we ran back into the restaurant after guy grabbed a bag... police knocked on door and we thought it was the guy again. make him go around so we can see him. tell us you're a police officer, he said "this isn't TV". hold against? no. know who was arrested? yes. he hit us twice, finally got caught. testify? no I couldn't pick him out. 14:13:33 does anybody live in community in which there is no crime? anybody? collective no. 14:14:02 steps to address it in your neighborhood? e54... I assume there's crime in my neighborhood, not personally aware of it. 14:14:42 k95... I would put up a no soliciting sign in my neighborhood. effective? yes. anything further? no. there's a neighborhood watch. are you a part of it? no. 14:15:12 e73... we had a sudden increase in crime in neighborhood. they started a watch. join it? no, but went to a meeting. set up in uniform? no. armed? I don't think so. not involved in watch? no 14:15:54 anybody else? b76... just had teens vandalizing signs... police took care of it. we had a watch I just told them about it. any steps yourself to get involved? telling the other neighbors 14:16:30 b35...still with us... closing your eyes just want to make sure 14:16:51 b7: what was the question again. crime in community and you got involved? no. 14:17:26 feel like people have the right to take law into their own hands? anybody? i5 shaking your head.... there may be occasions, but basically I would say no. g63... crimes in neighborhood? I'm assuming? watch in your community? not that I'm aware of. your last question was very general we have governments that we authorize to do that. 14:19:17 as individuals people shouldn't. g7, agree? where is the process or a citizen's arrest. I don't know how it applies. 14:19:45 other than what law allows, try to arrest people on your own? never have. i24, ever crossed your mind to arrest someone? no but I would do something if they tried to break into my house. id protect my family 14:20:34 can everybody agree the law applies equally to everyone? yes. it should or it doesn't? 14:20:54 b7.... hear a lot about it in the news. always believe? not always. 14:21:13 law matter about which part of county? no. difference in wealth class? no. matter if gated or not? no. where they're from? no. b72, it shouldn't matter? no. why not? when you see the law, the law applies to everyone it doesn't discriminate or consider race or sex. if we use this as criteria, the whole system goes down. 14:22:26 should it matter about race gender or ethnicity? no. 14:22:53 ever been a witness and testify? g81... was it here in Seminole? no. orange. proceeding or hearing or trial? it was juvenile system, proceeding. testify? yes. treated fairly by lawyers and judge and deputies? yes I was. anything about that you felt would interfere? nothing that happened there 14:23:56 h7: I've given depositions before. was it unpleasant it would influence you? no it was not. representation from both sides and told them what I knew. told the truth as best you could remember? yes 14:25:03 h29... I've been deposed before. anything about that experience? I was on the good guy side, never got to the other side. 14:25:23 h81... deposition, hearing, trial? I've been a witness a few times... treated unfairly? no. 14:26:00 i24... I was a witness in a car accident. eye witness? yeah and we had to verify who hit who. more than one? several people. all have to come to court? no we all went to court and stood in front of judge and told her what we saw. questioning you? just the judge... 14:27:00 g63... witness for criminal trial in orange county. eye witness? I was an eye witness to nothing. still called? yes. badgered in any way by either side? no. it wasn't unpleasant it was inconvenient. impact you? no 14:27:48 k80.... witness in child custody case. in front of court? no jury, just a judge. treated fairly? yes, no badgering.. civil questions. 14:28:22 k95... federal lawsuit case, it wasn't a good experience. because of way you were treated? yes. by who? attorneys and judge. judge nelson? no. it wasn't in this state. attorneys were asking improper questions? I was told I was at an economic disadvantage. scream back at them? kept my cool and had to pay it off. terrible experience? yes. hold against? no this was business 14:29:50 e22... I've been deposed. treated fairly? yes. deposition end there or another proceeding? never went to trial. that experience that you were treated unfairly? no. 14:30:30 e6... custody trial and domestic violence... nothing about the proceedings. treated fairly? yes. impact? no. e40... witness to car accident, no jury... I was treated fairly. other people eye witness too. there when other witnesses testified? I was around... 20 years ago though. 14:31:40 all read the witness list... cover that. how you know the person and the impact of that.... 14:32:16 e6... SHES IN SEAT NUMBER 9, GIVE HER LIST. THAT MIGHT BE EASIER. recognize that as yours? yes. circled two names on front page. one of them starts with d and j... professional or social? I recognize the name I don't personally know them. recognize them as physician. impact you? no it would not. also have under that name, three down from that. know the name? I don't know them personally, received referral to her for one of my children. impact? no. some on last page... last name with w recognize name or the person? just the name. impact? no. third from bottom starts with z and s? know them? no. recognize name? yes. impact? no. 14:35:16 i33.... first page, last name starts with b and first name is c. know them or recognize name? right, could be somebody that I name... I have no idea if I know them or not. assuming it's the same person you know, what do they do for a living? construction business. person you know is him? correct. with the work you do? yes. if he testified, find him more credible? no sir, not necessarily no. if it's the same person could you rely just on what they said as opposed to knowing them? absolutely. another name with a c and a b? correct. recognize? just heard the name. no impact on you? no sir. first person/ another relationship, fun thing and I see him once a year... fun thing, activity? yeah it would ID me. you interact with him though? yes sir 14:38:23 last page, last name w and n? yes. recognize or personal? recognize name. know them other than that? no. 14:38:45 toward bottom of page, z and s? recognize the name. impact? no sir 14:39:22 juror number.... second page j and c... know them? as a celebrity... not the person that were talking about here. ok? and someone else.... last page last name with w and d? how do you know them? name I think I recognize. impact? no. 14:40:29 b61.... last page, at top? yes. personal or professional? if same person it's personal but haven't seen them in 2-3 years. friends? yes. exercise together. hear them on witness stand find them more or less credible? it wouldn't impact if it were any other witness. how close, how much interaction? person in social organization, saw her a lot for a while. over a yr. or two? a couple years while I was in school. is this person still a member of that organization? yes. impact you? no 14:42:49 hear from witness, evaluate based on insurrections from court? yes. g47, depend if witness has job? no. why? irrelevant to the case. g29 does it matter if they're law enforcement? no. everyone agree? yes 14:43:37 e54 agree with that? sure 14:43:41 law allows for certain witnesses to be treated differently, experts can give opinion opposed to other witnesses. e13... agree with that? yes would say.. e28 agree? yes. why? they're experts in that field. evaluate and use instructions from court and the expertise? yes 14:44:43 b51.... agree with that? I do. why? education or experience and wouldn't call on them to discuss position or opinion without experience. ever had to rely on expert testimony? not testimony. go to expert for advice? no. anybody? b7.... rely on experts on constant basis 14:45:41 b35... agree? yes. why? practice in their field. b76 agree? yes. b12... agree? yes. why? education and school and have knowledge of that. H69 HAS QUESTIONS. h69: if attorney asked for opinion and they didn't just interject it? yes. that they asked for opinion and they didn't just interject opinion. if attorneys ask expert could you rely on his opinion? yes. why? I'm going to assume a witness researches before getting on the stand... rely on expert if both side find them to be an expert 14:47:55 in this type of case, since the trial is murder.... H86... also wondering if witness on stand only giving facts or opinions unless were asking for their opinion? right... e6... clarify to me I would believe an expert has studied and accumulated knowledge in area, but sometimes experts don't always agree even if in the same field, how is that treated? use your common sense and if it's credible. judge will give instructions about that. expert can give opinion. you can find an opinion with the one you wanted... You decide... 14:50:21 juror number..... person is an expert and we assume they are.. court will give you a ruling on that. expert is entitled to give opinion. if a juror finds a person is qualified as expert they don't have to accept that opinion. you would hear their qualifications and make that determination. 14:51:44 exposed to photos you've never been exposed to, problem looking at photos? does everyone understand the question? ok? yes 14:52:29 b37 you're fine with that... yes. b35.. yes 14:52:39 everyone else agree? yes 14:52:44 law enforcement experience? nobody. h86? not myself, but two aunts and uncles who are lieutenants. 14:53:19 h86, family in law enforcement? yes. departments here in Seminole? I believe it's orange. discuss matters with them about justice system? in the past I have. impact your decision? no. how extensive, more than 1? 3 family members. close with them? 2 of them. interact on weekly basis? yes. uniform? yes. how long in field? over 20 years. look up to them for advice? in general, yes. pursue law enforcement career? no. 14:54:37 k95... when you say law enforcement, but 40 years ago I worked in retail where I used to watch shop lifters... watched them and recorded them. apprehend them? no. I just do my job and report to manager.... someone else would apprehend? yes. successful? yes. how? bust a lot of my sisters friends. 14:55:50 anybody else I overlooked... i24? sort of in same situation... I didn't catch them. I did translation when they did get caught and they didn't speak English. for a company who had a lot of guests who got caught shop lifting. what language? Portuguese. several years? quite a lot. enjoy it? yes. anything that would interfere? no. k95... anything that would interfere? no 14:57:01 anybody else? k80.... family members. tell me? uncle who was in SWAT and cousin is NCIS agent. occasions to discuss with them? no. there are stories after the fact. interfere? no 14:57:42 b35.... family members mom worked for sheriff's department and cousins in police in Titusville. see them regularly? once or twice a year. discussions about job? 14:58:14 how come you didn't join department? first not to go into law enforcement because I went to school. not exciting enough? make a little more money and wanted to do my own thing. impact you one way or another? no. more incline to favor police officer? no 14:59:05 b7.... law enforcement, my wife used to work in the field, often had discussions about it. her job and dealing with victims? absolutely. how do you feel about that, would it impact you here? no. it was a while ago. in this case you have a victim, favor state in this case? no. wouldn't impact you? not when I last served on jury 15:00:13 b86... I used to do transcription for private investigator... a while ago? 15 yes ago in orange. former officer? yeah. record and you would transcribe? yes. impact favoring? no. 15:00:54 e6... include close friends? anybody important for us to know about.... family friend he was SWAT detective... he just left the force and went into private sector but served almost 17 years... impact your opinion? no 15:01:41 b12.... my dad was a Syracuse cop and my nephew is FBI agent. anything about nature of that would favor one side? no. 15:02:36 h69... any family member? yeah. cousin who works for government.... she's working with homeland security... opportunities to discuss her job? some times. anything about what she does you feel would impact you one way or another? no. desire to join her? it sounds exciting, but not for me 15:03:34 k95.... family or friends? yes someone important to let us know. acquaintances from homeland security and friend that is head of security. discuss criminal matters? no. the law? no. 15:04:14 k80.... friends? some close to you. neighbors son in law is US Marshall... and another Seminole county deputy and then another one and family friend have deputies at jail... discussions with them? no. interfere? no 15:05:02 e22.... close friend who was in law enforcement for 2 decades... discussions? interfere? no. 15:05:27 g66... my brother in law retired from police enforce, my niece is.... discuss matters? about what they do. desire to join? when I was younger. impact you? no 15:06:05 H7 HAS HAND UP... h7: friends through boy scouts. never discussed outside of scouts. no impact one way or another 15:06:29 i19... my uncle is police officer. still? yes. local? somewhere else. impact you? no. 15:06:57 i24... husband's niece is married to gentleman in fbi. anything about that? no. 15:07:19 i33... my wife's father is retired sheriff. no impact. in this county? different state. impact you? no 15:07:44 anybody in this room that has not had a dispute with another person? anybody? physical dispute? b35... verbal to physical. a long time ago? yeah. resolve it between you two? once or twice police were called. impact you? no sir 15:08:34 anybody else? e6... I was involved in domestic violence. impact? no. b7? fight in middle school... (Everyone laughs) I think I lost. any impact? no 15:09:33 k95... just domestic. impact you? no. 15:09:45 disputes where you worked it out? everyone? b61 have you? yes. how? talk about it. 15:10:19 g66? dispute where you resolved? yes. without violence? yes. talking loud walking away 15:10:34 medical experience, in the field one way or another? g47....registered EMT. impact? not that I'm aware of. k95... CNA and activity director. anyone else? e40... certified health care officer. b12.... 15:11:42 e28.... medical. h86? home health CNA before RN. 15:12:07 other than b72... fitness people? h18... work out all the time? lifting every morning, play tennis... e13.... weight lift and run and go to gym. b72... wrestling, anybody else wrestle? boxing? h29... trying to get more George Forman on.... in the military. how well? middle levels before someone was young. I remember 5, 6.... (everyone's laughing) 15:13:46 anybody else? g63... weight lifting? yes. training for sport. endurance type thing? weight lifting. for a year? yes. 15:14:09 h18... boxing? martial arts since I was a kid. 15:14:36 involved in martial arts? yes. green belt. b86.... tae-kwon-do with my kids... couple years senior blue belt. 15:15:16 training in phonetics? linguistics? I did sign language many years ago. (juror number) 15:15:41 e13... four years of sign language 15:15:49 live in gated community? g63... 4 years ago community had security guard in its entrance. i19, h86, h81.... 15:16:28 live in neighborhood with a watch? b7... seen the signs, but I'm... b35? yes. watch? yes. involved? no. e73? yes. watch? yes. involved? no. e22 watch? sign but I don't know who's on it? involved? no. k80? watch? yes. involved? no and my husband is block captain but I don't know what he does. k95? yes. watch? yes. involved? no. (two more jurors... not involved) 15:18:32 g63... not where I live but before, I don't know who was involved. 15:18:45 last row: h18? involved? no. h29... we have signs. involved? no. I know some ladies who are. 15:19:18 anybody consider expert in DNA? no from everybody 15:19:51 who does not have a cell phone? everyone has one. anyone an expert on cell phones? i44... working knowledge of that.... 15:20:27 expert someone beyond being able to turn it on. (juror number): I am... witness? no. records of calls?. anyone else. b7? same circumstance. e73? same responses. g47: I consider myself tech savvy. k95: I have a lot of jobs, work in IT. 15:21:53 agree people dress differently? way they dress does it matter? no. 15:22:22 assume certain things based on attire? e6... lots of different things. woman dressed or wearing expensive things....rich? either that or give that appearance. if they're not, they're poor? could mean many different things. known wealthy man who preferred to dress down. we make assumptions 15:23:30 in terms of law, what does it say about assumptions? they don't count. 15:24:04 this case the victim, martin and defendant are different race, does it matter? no. h35... does it matter? absolutely not. that doesn't matter ever anywhere.... everyone agree? yes 15:24:35 victim as court read was under 18... O'Mara: approach? YES (sidebar) 15:27:49 IS EVERYONE OK TO GO ON? GO AHEAD 15:27:58 rionda: victim was under 18, does anyone believe his life is worth less because he was a minor? no. black African America, worth less? no 15:28:37 believe in right to bear arms? yes 15:28:41 who has a firearm or access to one? b35... personally own? yes. more than one? yes. target practice and hunting. what kind? caliber and shot gun. proficient? yes train in military. how often? a couple months. holster? yes. more than one? yes. internal or external? external. concealed permit? yes. 15:29:54 b76... I don't have any in our home, but we have family members that do in their own home. any experience yourself? no 15:30:12 b37.... used to have concealed weapons permit. husband wanted me to renew but I don't have a gun... no point. I can shoot a gun. we used to go out to range and shooting. basic familiarity with it 15:30:49 e6... husband has 9 millimeter, .38 and rifles... my son has a hunting rifle and bb guns. you yourself involved in firing? went to range one time and sometimes target practice with bb guns 15:31:27 e40.. brother in law has hunting rifles 15:31:38 b12.... fired a gun one time in my life and fell on my but, my son has gun and my mom and sister 15:31:57 m75.... my brother in law has 2 guns, a .38 and another handgun. shooting with him? no... goes with my sister and daughter 15:32:25 b61 repeat? do you have a firearm or have access to one. 15:32:37 ever fired a gun... recreational... 15:32:49 b7 my father has some. 15:33:03 e22... good friend has a firearm 15:33:09 e13... my step dad has a few, went and fired once 15:33:20 b86.... fired one once 15:33:43 k80.... yes own firearms... fired before? yes. familiar. own one yourself and carry with holster? no. no concealed weapons 15:34:10 k95.... I do and my son does. 15:34:17 p67... no I don't 15:34:25 g66... yes I have a .32. fire on occasion? periodically. holster? no 15:34:46 i44... hand gun. fire yourself? yes 15:35:00 i33... rifles. shooting purposes? hunting 15:35:16 i24.... handguns. revolver? yes 15:35:26 i19.... my father has them for hunting.. shoot yourself? no 15:35:38 h86... my brother in law has several. shot yourself? yes. handgun and a rifle. know the difference between semi-automatic and revolver? yes 15:36:07 h81... go to range, but don't shoot my own guns 15:36:22 (juror number) .. mom has one 15:36:29 h29...... I have daughters, so I have shot guns.... revolver and rifle 15:36:48 h18... I do. 15:36:57 h7... yes I do. member of nra? yes. anybody else? no 15:37:08 h6... father owns numerous guns and I've gone with him to the range 15:37:34 have guns or are familiar, responsibility with having one? yes. believe than h7? absolutely. everyone agree with him? yes 15:37:55 agree with that i44? yes. 15:38:01 anybody not agree? everyone agrees 15:38:12 defendant charged with murder in second degree, haven't heard evidence I don't want opinion, but can you follow a law...state has to prove victim is dead, the death was caused by criminal act of Zimmerman, and unlawful killing of martin by an act dangerous to another in a depraved mind without regard to human life.... act includes series of related to.... immanently dangerous to a deprived mind if an act that a person of ordinary judgment was known to seriously kill or done from ill will or of such nature it indicates indifferent to human life... follow that? yes. 15:40:11 not necessary for state to prove intent... 15:40:28 doesn't require certain number of shots or motive 15:40:46 understand there can be defenses to crimes, understand? yes 15:41:10 insanity or self-defense... justifiable use of deadly force...follow instruction about that? yes. 15:41:38 last week and this week about media and publicity and hardship... most of you heard that both sides expect trial to last 2-4 weeks....jury will be sequestered... family member p67... letter that it would be hardship. in addition to what you said? yes. anybody else in that predicament? b61: can you explain sequestered 15:43:42 housed together, but interaction with others will be limited.... won't be able to go home at night. contact with outside world limited. have some contact, court will give instructions about that... monitored contact. 15:45:36 b7... first time I heard about it.... I have questions that are.... 15:45:48 e6... I didn't realize, does that include weekends... YES ENTIRE TIME OF TRIAL. ok.... 15:46:11 b37: you have some contact with family. ALL THIS WILL BE EXPLAINED LATER, WILL HAVE CONTACT BUT IT WILL BE LIMITED.. WILL HAVE CONTACT 15:46:37 b6... include telephone calls can they visit? ALLOWED TO VISIT, LIMITED AS TO TIME...LIMITED PHONE CONTACT... emails? YES IT WILL BE LIMITED. YOU WON'T BE CUT OFF FROM FAMILY, STAYING IN A FACILITY, HOTEL IN THE AREA AND ALL MEALS WILL BE PROVIDED AND TRANSPORTATION AND PERSON NEEDS DURING THE TRIAL. 15:47:38 k80: if this group is sequestered where we can't return to our homes, will this case be 7 days a week? NO. so everyone gets to go home on weekends but we can't? CORRECT. PLANNED ACTIVITIES FOR YOU, THERE WILL BE MEALS... I MEAN ITS... MORE WILL BE EXPLAINED 15:48:29 rionda: attorneys and court will be busy with other matters, were not going on vacation for the weekend 15:49:01 can all of you agree since you haven't heard evidence you have to keep open mind? yes. understand that part of process is that decision needs to be unanimous? yes. 15:49:31 haven't heard evidence, presuming defendant innocent? yes. use common sense and evidence for decision? yes. could you convict him if evidence showed he was guilty? yes. and opposite? yes 15:50:11 people should be held responsible and accountable for actions? yes. picked as juror and evaluating evidence, use god given common sense to get verdict that speaks the truth? yes. 15:50:40 I'm going to sit down.... but before I do... any matter that you think you need to bring to my attention? collective no. thank you very much 15:51:16 15 MINUTE... O'Mara: approach. YES (sidebar) 15:56:15 how long will we have to get our stuff in order... I WILL TELL YOU WHEN SELECTED ON JURY 15:56:34 b61: questionnaire did that say anything about sequestering. YES IT DID... ITS NOT AS LONG AS INDICATED 15:57:04 ITS BEEN A LONG DAY AND I DONT WANT TO HAVE O'MARA BEGIN VOIR DIRE AND KEEP YOU LATE AND HAVE SPLIT IT UP... RELEASE FOR THE NIGHT. COME BACK AT 9 AM. NOT TO READ OR LISTEN TO RADIO OR TV REPORTS, NOT TO DISCUSS CASE. NOT TO USE ANY ELECTRONIC DEVICE TO GET ON INTERNET. NOT TO READ OR CREATE SOCIAL NETWORKING PAGES ABOUT CASE. ASSURANCE YOU WILL ABIDE? yes. ANY ISSUE... PLEASE RAISE YOUR HAND. P67...INDICATED MAYBE HAVING THINGS TO DISCUSS, PLEASE REMAIN AND WILL DISCUSS AFTER THAT. EVERYONE ELSE AT A QUARTER TO 9 AM. HAVE A GOOD EVENING. 15:59:54 COMFORTABLE WHERE YOU'RE SITTING. 16:00:01 rionda: P67 letter from a family member? my wife wrote about it. trouble to serve? yes. tell us more? don't tell us where you work, but the media has rights to be present. work related? yes. express in letter? yes. wife wrote letter because she's more fluent in English? yes. had her write it because she could say it better? part for her and part for me she's worried about the situation. create hardship with wife and monetary? yes. like lately my little one I don't know what she heard in the news, lately she's been living with me thinking somebody is going to get me. also nice to discover how much she loves me 16:02:28 would that in your opinion impact you to pay attention? yes. of course. anything else you want to say to judge about that? that's all. just about my family. oh the other thing, the leveling or title... been things in media that my wife and older kids.. for example: media ask a resident or citizen or Hispanic, but then don't like how media express or a nickname all over the internet. media put your name on the internet or a certain way? yes. how did you find out? my wife found out through internet and my two biggest ones. they wanted to know what's going on with dad. your wife and kids saw on internet and alerted you and you said you didn't want to talk about it? yeah. impact on your kid and wife? yes. concern about that as a result? yes. interfere with paying attention? yes. 16:05:02 O'Mara: minor concerns and I want to see if they stack... media? yes. media in court room prohibited from putting you on camera... I am, but you are not... they can't put your face or information... not public, understand that? yes sir. concern to be they have identified you by some descriptors, like a white female whatever... and you they described as well? yes. concerned by a term the way the described you? I prefer they call me a resident or citizen or Hispanic. the other one telling my kids or wife..... something else on the internet? told me they saw "Mexican". concern to be Mexican than resident? yes. 16:07:22 sounds like they were labeling you? yes which I'm not happy about.... I represent the system, we apologize about any insensitivity from the media... as juror you're being exposed to that in a profile case its unavoidable... not sure we can un-do that.... maybe media will learn lesson to be culturally sensitive. 16:08:17 30 days your employer doesn't need to pay you? that's a part of it 16:08:28 about the service and the jury I noticed a couple things, seemed to me you were looking forward to it as a citizen, feel that way still? yes, but if it takes this long... issues. I was thinking 2-3 weeks, yeah let's get it done... without guessing too much we may start Monday.... last 2-4 weeks and then you deliberate and we'd be done.... timeline put out there now.... 16:09:38 mention that because of the publicity, your little ones was wrapping arms around your leg... a loss for you and family temporarily if here with us... such imposition that it is insurmountable, you can't do it for destroying purposes? my family will be destroyed. if not to that level... hoping you would consider it... inconvenient for you, accomplish if we ask you to, 2-4 weeks? definite inconvenience. not trying to minimize that, but as citizens as we take on the role of doing everything, there's not much more asked of our citizens but war and ask them to serve on jurors... 16:12:04 if we ask you, is it something that you can accomplish even past its inconvenience? 16:12:34 judge will clear up the confusion, but in sequestration being with us you will have contact with family, telephone monitored, visits with family members monitored... not in prison but in situation where you maintain contact but supervised way to protect process...any questions that I can help answer for you to make decision to sit as juror 16:13:54 I just want to you to consider my situation. if pick you can you sit with us? if that's the only option I guess... well you can say no, but if it's an inconvenience, say yes... if it's because of destruction than you can't.... call is yours. if you can under what we talked about.... I just can't with consequences coming if over 4 weeks. I don't want to end up on the street. if I was single, it wouldn't be a problem. 16:15:09 rionda: the media itself or the internet with comments? they saw on internet, I don't know where.... EXCUSED FOR EVENING, SEE YOU TOMORROW IN THE MORNING. 16:15:44 PLEASE BE SEATED, COUNCIL COME TO BENCH..(sidebar) 16:16:22 COURT RECESS FOR THE DAY ====================================

INT BROLL GEORGE ZIMMERMAN TRAYVON MARTIN TRIAL / SWITCHED POOL FEED **NOTE: JUDGE'S COMMENTS IN CAPS **NAMES OF WITNESSES IN RED **VISUAL DESCRIPTIONS IN (PARENTHESES) **GOOD STATEMENTS/VIDEO BOLD 8:58:37 (Zimmerman enters, tan suit blue shirt and brown tie) (court rearranged differently) 9:00:12 PLEASE BE SEATED, GOOD MORNING. ON THE RECORD. ONE JUROR IS A FEW MINUTES LATE, WAIT FOR THEM. COUNCIL APPROACH FOR ONE MOMENT 9:00:59 (sidebar) 9:09:51 RECESS UNTIL THE POTENTIAL JURORS GET HERE 9:10:08 COURT IN RECESS ============================ 9:27:02 ATTORNEYS REQUEST THE FRYE HEARING BE TOMORROW AT 2. (sidebar) 9:31:03 deputy: jurors are present 9:32:36 PLEASE BE SEATED. GOOD MORNING... BEGIN WHATS REALLY THE JURY SELECTION, BEFORE WAS PRE SELECTION PROCESS... INSTRUCTIONS: IN ORDER TO HAVE FAIR TRIAL, RULES JURY MUST FOLLOW. MUST DECIDE CASE ON EVIDENCE IN COURT. DON'T COMMUNICATE ABOUT THE CASE. DO NOT DISCLOSE YOUR THOUGHTS OR ASK FOR ADVICE ON HOW TO DECIDE. NO ELECTRONIC DEVICES OR COMMUTERS TO COMMUNICATE ABOUT THIS CASE. DO NOT SEND OR ACCEPT MESSAGES ABOUT THIS CASE. MUST NOT DO RESEARCH THAT MAY HAVE ANYTHING TO DO WITH CASE. APPLIES IN COURT HOUSE, SEQUESTRATION, OR ANY WHERE ELSE. DEPENDING ON YOU TO FOLLOW RULES FOR A FAIR TRIAL. INVESTIGATE OR RESEARCH ON YOUR OWN, NO WAY TO ASSURE THEY ARE PROPER OR RELEVANT TO CASE. NO OPPORTUNITY TO DISPUTE EVIDENCE. BECOME AWARE OF VIOLATIONS OF INSTRUCTIONS, MUST TELL ME BY NOTE FROM COURT DEPUTY. 9:35:40 GOING TO BEGIN JURY SELECTION PROCESS, KNOWN AS VOIR DIRE. PURPOSE IS TO DETERMINE IF THE DECISION WOULD BE FAIR BASED ON EVIDENCE WITHOUT INFLUENCE FROM OUTSIDE FACTORS. NOT FOR PURPOSE OF PRYING INTO AFFAIRS... 9:36:27 CHARGES SET FORTH FOR ZIMMERMAN.... EVERY PERSON ACCUSED IS TO KNOW THE EXACT CHARGE. STATE OF FLORIDA VS. ZIMEMRMAN 12CF10838A COUNT 1 MURDER IN SECOND DEGREE. ON FEB. 26, 2012 ZIMMERMAN UNLAWFULLY KILLED MARTIN UNDER THE AGE OF 18, SHOOTING VICTIM. ZIMMERMAN CARRIED DISPLAYED USED ATTEMPT TO USE FIREARM. AS RESULT OF DEATH, INFLICTED UPON ANY PERSON.......... 9:38:13 INTRODUCED TO PARTICIPANTS OF THIS TRIAL. ARE ANY OF YOU RELATED TO ATTORNEYS OR ZIMMERMAN? NO HANDS ARE BEING RAISED 9:38:37 HANDED A LIST OF POTENTIAL WITNESSES IN THE CASE. IF YOU RECOGNIZE ANY NAMES PLEASE CIRCLE THEM. MANY MORE NAMES LISTED THAN ACTUALLY CALLED... REVIEW THAT. RAISE YOUR HAND IF YOU RECOGNIZE ANY INDIVIDUALS... ASK YOU TO TELL US WHAT PAGE AND WHAT NUMBER THEY ARE OR THEIR INITIALS. DONE READING, PLEASE LOOK UP. 9:46:19 SHOW OF HANDS BY FIRST ROW, DO YOU RECOGNIZE WITNESS NAMES? 9:46:46 (couldn't hear the juror number) ANYONE ON FRONT PAGE YOU RECOGNIZE? first page. HOW MANY? 2. they're both d's. FIRST NAME? j and d. first and fourth d. ATTORNEYS WILL ASK YOU QUESTIONS ABOUT THAT. ANYBODY ELSE ON THE LIST? no. 9:48:06 SECOND ROW, DO YOU RECOGNIZE NAMES? B61? HOW MANY? just 1, perhaps the last page the first one. ANYBODY ELSE ON THE SECOND ROW? G63? HOW MANY? 2. WHAT PAGE? second page. INITIAL OF LAST NAME? j. initial of first name? c. 5 OR 6TH DOWN FROM J's? 1 of them. the 5th. WHAT IS THE OTHER ONE? last page. INITIAL OF LAST NAME? w. INITIAL OF FIRST NAME? e. FIRST WD OR LAST WD? I only see one. oh it's the first. 9:50:14 ANYBODY ELSE? ON THE THIRD ROW? JUROR i33? WHO BY PAGE? first page last name b, first name c. THE LAST B? yes. ANYBODY ELSE ON THE LIST YOU RECOGNIZE? number 32, last c. CB? correct. last page...last name w, first name n. OK. I do have one more. last name z first name s. OK, COVER ALL OF THOSE? yes. 9:52:21 ANYBODY ELSE? JUROR E6. on last page, last name w first name n and last name z and first name s. ANYBODY ELSE? THANK YOU VERY MUCH. 9:53:20 rionda: good morning... introduce myself to you all. reviewing why this is important 9:55:11 spent last week and first two days of this week going through the process, asked all of you questions related to case regarding publicity. individual so it didn't contaminate other juror's knowledge. important at arriving a decision comes from this court room. agree? yes. issue with that, outside of courtroom can't factor into decision? 9:56:18 what you saw or read from media is irrelevant. now in stage 2. question you individually and collectively about this case or background stuff about you 9:56:45 assure us that you will give consideration to all questions asked? yes 9:56:59 if during this process I ask individually or as a group and you feel uncomfortable talking about it in a group, let us know.... 9:57:41 juror b7? correct. do you want us to bring up issues about that and the time of the question? yes sir 9:58:06 were trying to get a jury that speaks the truth and arrive at just verdict 9:58:20 some of you were talked to last week and others were Monday and Tuesday... anyone go home and celebrate going through to next round? nobody? 9:58:42 appreciate you've taken this time already. 9:58:59 juror b12.... as talked about individually, how long resident of Seminole county? at least 40 years. how long have you lived at current address? 19 years. live in state of Florida before that? Michigan. left there when I was 9. married? no. divorced? yes. how long married before divorce? a yr. what does former spouse do for living? he's dead. children? 2. how old? 32 and 19. what do they do for living? one's a full time student and the other one owns his own company. medical field and construction worker. how long have you been at current employer? since October. before that? home health nurse. how long? 5 years. supervise people in that position? no. before that? CNA. how long total? 5 years. members or involved in organizations at all? volunteer work for moose lodge and my church. how long, long time? yeah. 10:02:51 leadership position? no anymore. prior experience? no. outside work and volunteering, anything else? raising my daughter, I'm a mother. any other hobbies? part of red hat society. I like my wine and going to the beach. served on jury before? no. just don't like the media being there.... that takes away his privileges, they put everything everywhere.... 10:05:31 b29... originally from Chicago? yes. grew up there? yes. married? yes. how long? 10 years. kids, yes? lots. how many? 8. under age of 18? one is over 18. how old is that one? going to be 20. live with you and husband? resides with me now. going to school or working? arrived a few weeks ago, looking for work 10:06:32 how long at employment? 3 months. prior to that? CNA. how long? 7 years. member of organization? my house. military service? no. spend time outside work, but I know answer and what you're passionate about? kids. jury service? no. 10:07:34 b76... how long in Seminole? since 1995. how long at current address? 1 week. prior to that? another address. originally from? been here since 1966. marital status? married. how long? 30 years. children? 2. how old? 28 attorney, 26 CNA. does your son practice in Seminole? yes. what practice? not criminal, foreclosures, bankruptcies, divorce, and contract. ever practiced criminal law? no. 10:08:59 picked as jury and they haven't talked about law and you can't call your son and ask him? yes I understand. 10:09:25 how long at current place of employment? unemployed. prior? husband and I had construction company. how long? 15 yes. husband still involved in that business? no. helping out children built their home. manage rental properties. involvement? I rescue a lot of pets. how long? a long time. military service? no. outside house? managing properties and rescuing animals. passion? rescuing animals. prior jury service? no 10:10:43 b7.... living in Seminole? between orange and Seminole 30 years. born and raised in Florida. married? yes. how long? 10 years. what does spouse do? just got out of school to be a teacher. kids? no. current occupation? 11 years. any management duties? I will. tell us about that? going to be elite position among others in similar roles. how many will you supervise? just 2-3. member in organization? I'm sure I am through her. military service? no. outside work? watch sports... love video games. socialize with friends go out to bar. passion? not passionate about a lot of stuff. ever served as juror? I have. how long ago? before I was working at current job, 12-15 years. Seminole or orange? Seminole. criminal or civil? criminal. reach a verdict? yes. fore person? no. enjoy it? I did. it was one day. 10:13:37 b35.... how long in Seminole? since 1985. current address? 12 yes. marital status? married. how long? going on 20+ years. what does spouse do? local TV. is she a reporter? no. comments I made about media you won't hold against me. 10:14:24 any kids? yes. 1 son in college now. what is he studying? engineering. current occupation, how long? I manage tax office in the year, vending machines and rental... for about 7 years... before that? properties around central Florida. member in organization? fraternity and football coach. how long? 13 years. military service? yes Marine Corp Reserves. how long? 6 years. military police? no. how do you spend time out of work? watching sports, coaching, spending time together. 10:16:07 real passion in life? coaching football.... served as juror? no 10:16:19 b37.... Seminole county? 18 years. prior? dad was air force captain. born in California, but went from coast to other. married? yes. 20 years. spouse job? space attorney... rockets and space craft. how long has that been a specialty? always... since he graduated. corporate attorney? yes. practice criminal law? no. would that influence you? no he wouldn't answer me. kids? 24, pet groomer, 27 at ucf. how long at employment? 16 years. management position? now I am, converted because girl before retired. ever settle disputes? no, there's only 3 of us.. were a family. organizations? involved in rescue groups, got out because I couldn't take more animals. do you know the other juror? I do not. 10:19:08 does anybody know any other jurors here? 10:19:15 military service? no. outside, I know. jury service? called 4 times... excluded from last one because of where I work. 10:19:41 b51.... how are you? good. Seminole? 9 years. originally? orange county. central Florida? since 1987. before? Atlanta. married? no. kids? no. grand kids? no. employment? retired. retired from what work? real estate.. several careers? I have. prior to that? director of call center. how long? 10 years. managerial duties? direct reports and 1200 employees. resolve disputes? often. how? listen to all sides and make tough calls. 10:21:11 member of any organizations? no. just enjoying retirement? yes. in military? I wasn't. for fun? driving back and forth to Jacksonville... elderly parents, lots of brothers and sisters. jury service? yes, one was in Seminole county 3 years ago... called case before we were called. another one in orange county in 1991, I was an alternate. 10:22:20 b86... how long a resident? 1989. before that? 1971 in orange county. marital status? single. kids? 2. 20 and 21... full time student and trying to get the other one back in school, he was ill. the one in school, what does he want to be? childhood specialist. how long in employment? 10 years. member in organizations? not any more, once at birds of prey... worked in church with youth group. in military? no. jury service? 10:24:24 e6.... Seminole county? 2 years. before? orange. how long? since 2004. originally? Brevard. marital status? married. what does spouse do? engineer. how long married? 6 years. kids? 2, 11 and 13. current occupation? unemployed. 9 months before that and prior to that I was in school and raising kids. what filed before? financial services. member in organization? member of church and I used to volunteer at kids school 10:25:44 military? no. how do you spend time outside of work? taking care of kids, dogs, helping with the friends young kids, gardening. prior jury service? no, called but never... 10:26:09 e40... Seminole county? 7 months. before that? Iowa. how long? 2 years. before that? California. come to Florida to retire? came to work in Florida. what do you do? safety officer. how long? over 25 years. marital status? married. spouse living? chemical engineer. kids? 1 son, 28 looking for work. prior to that? he was working in western Pennsylvania in fast food service. organization? no. military? no. fun? travel, read, and sports. any particular? all but football mainly. prior jury service? yes I have served. in Pennsylvania. criminal or civil? drug dealing 10:28:14 go back and deliberate? yes. reach verdict? we were. forewoman? I was not. enjoy experience? I did 10:28:30 e54... how long in Seminole? 14 years. before that? orange. since I was 8. marital status? married for 5 years. spouse? engineering technician. kids? two step children, 16 living with us and the other is late 20s. how long working there? 3 years. before that? same field for 30 years. member involved in organizations? no. military? no. fun? reading, working on family tree, playing golf. where's family from originally? Maryland 10:29:58 passions I guess? it was for a while, now that we finished it's on the side 10:30:09 jury service? summoned but never sat 10:30:18 e73... Seminole? 13 years. prior? new jersey. grow up there? I did not. grew up? new York. current address? 13 years. marital status? married. how long? 33 years. spouse? retired. prior to that? telecommunications firm. kids? yes. how many? 2. how old and what they do? 15 on Sunday, 18. still in school? going to college. what he wants to do? I don't think he's there yet 10:31:34 retired or working? consultant. how long? 10 years. before that? large telecommunications firm. where your husband worked? yes. meet there? we did. organizations? not currently. before? various arts councils. military? no. fun? going to sporting events, children active in sports... make jewelry, read, I love the beach 10:32:28 prior jury service? yes. here in Seminole? 3 times in Seminole, once for federal court and once in Ohio. served 5 times? yes. enjoy it? not always. Ohio, criminal or civil? civil I think. deliberate? settled out of court after 5 days. federal? criminal. deliberate? I didn't get seated on jury. three here, criminal or civil? first was civil and I didn't do anything. next was criminal settled out of court, next one I didn't get seated. 10:34:16 m75.... how long in Seminole? since 2001. before that? new York. grow up there? yes. lived in current address? 2 months. prior to that? still in Seminole, just different space. married or single? single. kids? no. work? 2 months. prior? travel agent for cruise. how long? 1 year. before that? theme parks in Orlando. how long? almost 2 years. what did you do? guest service attendant moved to cashier and food service. member of organization? not currently, used to volunteer at animal shelter. military? no. fun? large family, visit with them. military service? no 10:36:22 b61... how long in Seminole? 5 years. current address for? 4 years. prior? orange, Volusia, army brat. marital status? married. how long? 2 months. husband? full time student. engineer. kids? no. engineer too? yes. how long? 7 years. member of organizations? church, professional society, and sorority. leadership? I have, but not now. military? no. fun? studying, reading and spending time with family. studying to be? for an exam. prior jury service? no 10:38:00 b72.... how long resident? 9 years. originally? Chicago. marital status? single. kids? no. work? coming to a year. same field but different job? yes. involved in organizations? alumni of fraternity. leadership? vice president of local chapter but I wouldn't say so. military? no. fun? arm wrestling, going to gym.... one arm pull up. how long? 2.5 years. wrestling in high school? weight lift, track, football 2 years. meets to arm wrestle? depends on venue, encompasses everything... I could talk about it all day 10:40:00 prior jury service? no 10:40:05 e22... how long in Seminole? 12 years. prior? orange. grow in central Florida? only since 92. up north? spend a lot of time there. married? single. kids? no. work? 19 years. organizations? social service with employer. military? no. spend time out of work? gardening, all things food. passionate about? yeah. jury service? called in asocial but didn't serve 10:41:34 e13.... how long in Seminole? 17 years. marital status? single. kids? no. how long have you been doing that? surgical assistant for 2 years. member of organizations? church. military? no. outside work? horses. passion is riding? yes. jury service? no 10:42:33 e28.... how long Seminole? 1985. before that? Texas. originally from? yes. marital? married for 28 years, 2 children... 27 and 23 work for theme park and hotel side of it. spouse do? teacher. work? 26 years. members? professional, relay for life. how you spend time out of work? yes. jury? summoned for federal, never called and served in Texas... read verdict? yes. deliberate? yes. forewoman? no. enjoy that? yes I did 10:44:16 k80... Seminole county? 2004. before? Virginia. grew up there? most of life. marital status? 15 years... spouse? maintenance tech. kids? 2. two girls. under 18? yes. work? over 5 years, same line of work for 15 years. member of organizations? attend church regularly, girl scouts, soccer. military? family members, father was navy grandfathers and cousins. fun? work absorbs time and then children. jury service? no first time 10:45:49 k95... how long in Seminole? 16 years. before that? orange for 7 and manatee for 4. marital? married. 15 years. spouse? electrician. kids? yes. how old? daughter that's 24, son that'll be 14, and a grandson. daughter? internship to be a dental hygienist. work? consultant, used to own company for 7 years. same industry for 10 10:46:51 member of organizations? yeah, ptk. pbl. fbi. Alzheimer's association, autism speaks and march of dimes. military? no. jury service? no 10:47:22 p67... why we can't do this in private... is there a way? do in private with nobody else? approach bench? VOIR DIRE HAS TO BE IN PUBLIC FORM. YOU CAN APPROACH. your name is private if that's what you're worried about. I just don't want the media to put labels on me like finding something else. JURY SELECTION PROCESS HAS TO BE OPEN COURT, OPEN TO PUBLIC...ZIMMERMAN HAS RIGHT TO BE THERE, ATTORNEYS HAVE THE RIGHT TO BE THERE... REMOVE OTHER JURY MEMBERS, WILL NOT CLEAR THE COURT ROOM... MAYBE A QUESTION ASKED THAT IS SENSITIVE NATURE TO YOU THAT I CAN'T CLEAR THE COURT ROOM, BUT I CAN DO IT OUTSIDE PRESENCE OF OTHER MEMBERS. 10:49:51 from where? been here since 2008. Seminole county how long? since 2008. before that? moved from Chicago. before that, originally? Mexico. how long in US? since I was 18 years old. married? yes. how long? about 20 years. kids? yes. how old? 18, and 16 and 11. still in school? just out of high school. work for how long? since 2008. involved in organizations? church. military? no. fun? helping wife, kids and watching sports. first time in jury? yes. looking forward to it? looking to have a nice experience, but it's been a nightmare. every day something is different. if it's going to affect my family I'm not looking forward to it...still feel it's a hardship for you? absolutely 10:52:34 g14... how long in Seminole? once before and recently from 2005 to now. grew up and moved out? no dad in military. marital status? divorced. former spouse? does not work at this time. what did he do? assembly. kids? 2 boys. 12 and 15. work? 3 years. before? sold print advertising. how long? 1996 to 2010. involved in organizations? boy scouts. how long? 6 years. military service? I have not been, but family. spend time outside work? boy scouts, taking care of my boys and reading. jury? summoned 2 other times, but never seated on jury 10:54:22 g29... Seminole county? 9 months. before that? in orange county. marital? single. kids? no. work? almost 6 years. before that? same field for total over 14 years. member of organizations? no. military? no. fun? friends and family and sports and TV. jury service? summoned in orange but never on jury 10:55:33 g47.... how long in Seminole? under 9 years. before? Boston, MA. marital? single. kids? nope. current job, how long? since October. before that? unemployed. member with organization? no. military? none. fun? sports friends beer. jury service? once, but it was settled 10:56:24 g63..... how long in Seminole? 4 years. before? orange. martial? single. kids? no. unemployed now, before that? teaching assistant and student. major? mathematics. member of any organizations? no. military service? no. fun? chess, Olympic weightlifting, piano. how long Olympic? a year. jury? no 10:57:40 g66.... Seminole? 2 years. prior? 12 years in Madison. prior to that? Chicago. marital? widow. spouse? mechanic for trucks. kids? 2 daughters. oldest is 36 works for entertainment company. 32 year old works for entertainment lighting... how long you work? retired. prior? at hospitals. financial advisor. member of organizations? started riding with Care Takers... motorcycle club. military? no. outside work? ride with my boyfriend, fish, spend time with family. what does boyfriend do? he sails. jury service? once in Chicago... alternate 10:59:45 g81.... how long in Seminole? 16 years. marital status? married. how long? 19 years. spouse? administrative assistant. how long? 19 years. member in organizations? professional. military service? no. fun? golf, travel, sports. prior service? no. 11:00:37 h6... Seminole? 1.5 years. prior? orange and Colorado. in Florida? since 2004. married? no. kids? no. current job? 5 months. prior to that? same line of work, but in it for 7 years now. member involved in organizations? no. military service? no. fun? relax... jury service? yes. in Seminole or others? orange. 2 years ago. criminal case. deliberate? yes. verdict? on most charges. foreman? no 11:02:04 h7.... in Seminole? 27 years, before Illinois, before Texas. married 44 years. 2 children ones 41 in Ireland. 39 in el Paso. spouse? weight watchers councilor for 25 years takes care of house. job? 40 years. member of organizations? professional associations, boy scouts for 35 years, instructor for merit badges, wife and I will have a small nursery. prior jury service? 1 in Seminole criminal case, foreperson we reached a verdict. 11:03:30 h18.... Seminole county? 2 years. before? orange county for almost a year. overseas before? yes. how long? 1996. marital status? going through divorce. kids? 1. girl is 7. job? in that field since I got to Florida, before that......... overseas in military? army and then contractor for defense company...involved in any organizations? no. fun? gym, tennis, swimming, with my daughter. jury service? no 11:05:05 h29... resident of Seminole? over 30 years, and orange... army brat. marital status? divorced. spouse? school teacher. kids? yeah 2 daughters, 28 and 30 year old... working with UCF and the other is handicapped. work? 30 years. member? professional and served on local city board for 15 years... leadership? yes. military? I also served too. how long? 4 years. military police? no. fun? beach, tennis... beer. jury service? summoned once 15 years ago... never sat 11:07:11 h18... military police? no 11:07:17 h35... Seminole? 24 years. martial? married. how long? 5 years. spouse? unemployed. before? lawn service. kids? no. job? unemployed taking care of grandfather before. member of organizations? was in 2010. military? no. spend time for fun? beach. jury service? no 11:08:17 h81... how long in Seminole? since 2000. prior to that? Pennsylvania. marital status? 31 years. spouse? supervisor at hotel. kids? 25 year old daughter in marketing son in navy. work? 25 years. member of organizations? 1 professional. military? no. fun? family and discovering cool internet technologies. jury service? yes. in Seminole criminal case. verdict? yes. foreman? no 11:09:39 h69... resident of Seminole? 21 years. marital status? married. how long? 11 months. spouse? technician with bright house. work? a year and 8 months. before that in school? IRA company. member of any organizations? church, human resources. military? no. fun? usually with mom or dad. prior jury service? no. 11:10:43 h86.... Seminole? born and raised. married? no. kids? no. job? 6 months. before? technician. organizations? professional and church. military? no. fun? volunteer and with family. jury? summoned, but away for school 11:11:37 i5.... how long in Seminole? 13 years. before that? Alaska for 27 years. what were you doing? working, originally in military, 7 years and then discharged work for financial... married? yes. spouse? auditor. kids? yes. 3. what do they do? oldest son is 40 worked for grocery chain, out in California. daughter is 38 works for utility company and my youngest works for IT group. work? almost 40 years. member of any organizations outside? no all professional. military police? no. fun? watching sports on TV, hang with friends, I like working with computers..... jury service? yes. Seminole or elsewhere? 2 assignments here in Seminole and when I lived in Alaska I think I had 4. 2 here, deliberate? just 1. criminal or civil? DWI. we deliberated. verdict? yes. foreman? yes. 4 in Alaska and deliberate all of them? yes. criminal or civil? all civil. foreman on 1 of them. reach verdict on all 4? yes. enjoy experiences? looking back I did... when I was on it I didn't 11:14:48 i19.... resident in Seminole? 3 years. before? orange. marital status? single. kids? no. work? 1 year. before that? retail. organizations? no. military? no. fun? school. health service admin. jury? no 11:15:36 i24... how long in Seminole? 1968. marital status? married. shy of 39 years. spouse? he is a coordinator transportation for theme park. kids? 29 athletic trainer, 22 student, 29 installer. student, studying? psychology. work? just shy of 42 years. organizations? no. military? no. fun? sports work in yard, beach, hit the road and go to mountains. jury? summoned once but never had to 11:17:09 i33... resident in Seminole? 30 years. marital? married. spouse? account manager. kids? no. work? searching for new career. how long in field before? 44 years. member in organization? yes. what kind? environmental advocacy and county board. how long? just over a year. military service? no. fun? small farm and enjoy offshore competition fishing. jury service? no. 11:18:29 i44... resident in Seminole? 2 years but 25 in orange. marital status? married. spouse? RN. kids? 3, 10, 12, and 9 month son. work? 12 years. field? before that in theme park industry. involved in organizations? Florida barbecue association. military service? no. fun? family raising little one. jury service? 4 years ago orange I was alternate 11:20:17 15 MINUTE RECESS, FOLLOW JARVIS OUTSIDE THE COURTROOM. ================================================================ 11:41:13 PLEASE BE SEATED. BACK ON RECORD. approach? YES (sidebar) 11:42:19 jurors are present 11:43:26 PLEASE BE SEATED... RIONDA YOU MAY CONTINUE 11:43:39 group questions... and then individual too... sit here today, give the defendant a fair trial? yes. give the state a fair trial? yes. give both sides fair? yes. issue? believe both sides do not deserve fair trial? defendant and stat fair trial? yes 11:44:32 state has to prove defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. it's the law. court will give you instructions. states burden, understand? yes. states prove crime was committed and defendant did it? yes. 11:45:18 read like what it is not... a reasonable doubt is not forced, imaginary, speculative... must have reason for that doubt. not to a mathematical certainty, not absolute? yes 11:46:11 believe the burden should be higher than reasonable doubt, like perfection? 11:46:34 sit here today, do you all understand concept/law talks about presumption of innocence. this defendant is presumed innocent, understand? yes. not innocent, but presumed innocent? yes. abide by that? yes. 11:47:23 live in greatest country of world and our criminal justice allows for a trial. no matter what the charge, state has burden. understand? yes. trial is the way? yes 11:47:56 defendant has no obligation? yes. how do you render a verdict? court will give instructions on how to do that. rely on facts and law and also in the process you use common sense in arriving in verdict. 11:48:45 law also says you don't speculate... not allowed in arriving in verdict. speculation plays no role, rely on evidence. agree? yes 11:49:14 what witness says is evidence, no the questions 11:49:51 difference between real world and TV world or make believe. 11:50:08 b35... if attorney asks question of witness and the witness says no, what do you believe? what witness said. is that important? yes. why? he's the witness.. he knows what's going on 11:50:58 sympathy plays no role at all in verdict, understand? yes. 11:51:22 understand that sympathy can't be consider at all, agree? yes 11:51:32 k80... agree with that? yes. why? based off facts and not emotion 11:52:05 bias shouldn't play a role at all in arriving in verdict.... g63, do you believe people are bias to certain things? yes. sometimes about people with bald heads or whatever, people has bias? yes. agree bias shouldn't play role at all? correct. biases about how people dress, should play role? no. why? not relevant to the facts that happened. do you think were always able to pick if someone is bias? not always. how can you tell? maybe if they... if they act in a way with specific preference for something more if they didn't have any advice. 11:53:57 penalties in this case, judges job what the penalties are. m75... problem with that? no. can't consider what the penalties are, no role? I understand. I agree. 11:54:49 job is only to defend guilt or innocence? yes. will anyone consider the penalties, you can't do that, agree? yes. 11:55:12 agree with that b37... I agree. why? falls in sympathy part. shouldn't play role at all? should not 11:55:59 state proves evidence, direct evidence... circumstantial evidence.... direct is someone sees something. circumstantial is added to other piece of puzzle to prove something. 11:56:25 law allows that the state can use direct evidence and circumstantial evidence. I come home and wife tells me kid brought cookie jar and the kids say they didn't do it... no eye witness, question kids... but one has crumbs in her mouth... that's an inference to prove something else 11:57:55 i44... ever used circumstantial evidence? all the time. at work or home? at home. give me an example? who made the mess, it wasn't us. who had breakfast, both of us. what did you have... oatmeal and there's oatmeal all over the counter. 11:58:47 I used to ask who watches CSI, now I ask reverse. who hasn't heard of CSI? b7 you have not watched CSI? no. anyone else who hasn't watched? b29, b35, b86, b61, b72, e28, k95, p67, h69, h86, h29. 12:01:01 not the real world... people want to believe that's real, they expect that evidence to appear out of nowhere... that's not the real world. hold state of Florida to what they've seen on csi? E6 HAS A QUESTION.... E6: going back to circumstantial evidences... circumstances can be misleading, so does it have to be very... still proven beyond unreasonable doubt. 12:02:38 never watched any of those shows? still have a few. b29... why? I like drama. real world as opposed to make believe? yeah 12:03:14 also had in last 5 or 10 years an increase in real lawyer type shows... not the real world? 12:03:43 i5... ever watch those shows? watched them don't make sense to me. some of them may be lawyers? question integrity of them... real lawyer wouldn't do that 12:04:17 not going to determine guilt or innocence from TV? yes. b61, agree with that? yes. if they're not representing client they don't know the facts, may have special interest. 12:05:35 how people feel about attorneys, how many of you liked their commercials... love those commercials??? hold against state of Florida or omara because were attorneys? anybody? 12:06:11 we realize people come into court room with opinions? yes. all come in with opinion on things, right? yes. if people are exposed to things, how do we make sure they make their decision on evidence opposed to what opinion should be. e73, what do we do with people whit opinions? that's a tough one cause I don't know that you'd always know about their opinion. e54, question? I don't know how you can guarantee that's not going to happen... you hope they don't. agree with e73 and e54? yes 12:08:18 h29... how would you assure opinions do not factor in the decision? profile a jury, ask questions look for answers that will represent you and people that are fair. no good way to do it. everyone agree? yes. telling the truth to best of ability.... 12:09:34 can you follow the law as a group? be frank with us.. does anybody feel they cannot? anybody? no from everyone? yes sir 12:10:02 h6... agree with that? yes. how would you assure that it doesn't interfere? don't know how you find out how, but keep my opinion out of it 12:10:44 both sides get fair trial 12:11:08 b67.... too personal or it's alright? it's alright. g14? agree that sometimes we make assumptions that turn out not to be true? yes. ever done that? yes. example? meet somebody and think they're stuck up and then I would find out later they were shy. agree with g14? yes. has anyone ever been wrong about an assumption? 12:12:58 assumptions play no role in a verdict? yes sir 12:13:22 opinions and assumptions play no role in a verdict? yes 12:13:30 how do we know that happens? e40, how? check our personal values and hold others accountable and challenge if we see those bias. discrepancies raise an issue 12:14:13 attorneys, who knows any attorney? b12? yes. are they here in town? Tim Morgan. what practice? friend of his. talk to him about law? no. b76? my son. asked you that before? yes. b35? friend from hometown and friends I went to college with. civil or criminal? split. discuss law? no sir... b37? married to attorney, anybody else? attorneys from work that work on cases like personal injuries. criminal or civic? not that I'm aware of. interfere in any way? no sir. b51? neighbor. corporate lawyer... 12:17:03 e6? I know a woman in Colorado in contract law... e40? several from college, woman I rent house from is in real estate law and she's in Texas. e54? I do know people who are attorneys but I don't discuss with them. 12:17:53 e73? friends and family. criminal law? no 12:18:05 g47? friends' mother for Volusia. civil law. interfere? no. g14? I know a couple attorneys through boy scout, but I don't know criminal. no interference no. 12:18:59 k95? several from network associations, patent, tax and contract. no criminal? not that I know of. interference? no sir 12:19:23 k80? friends and legal counsel at our company. criminal? no. interference? no 12:19:43 e13? moms side of families, some attorneys? criminal? I have no idea.. influence? no 12:20:04 e22? three attorneys, all civil. interfere? no 12:20:14 b61? several from college, all civil and no interference 12:20:28 h6? know an attorney that does workers comp law. interfere? no 12:20:43 h7? department of defense, contract lawyers. nephew in environmentalism 12:20:50 h29? several from my profession. interfere? no 12:21:09 h81? I know 20-25 attorneys. criminal? a handful. discussions about the law? most involved around consumer law. interfere as juror? that wouldn't influence me 12:21:56 h86? past employers were attorneys... insight into law? no 12:22:09 i33? several lawyers both civil and criminal. interfere with decision? no. 12:22:40 anybody associated with law, judges? i33? I know a few sir... 12:23:01 interfere in any way to be a juror? no. 12:23:14 personal questions about arrest, victim of crime, if it's something you want in private let us know. need to know impact it may have. 12:24:02 front row, arrested? b12, here in Seminole? Daytona. still pending? no thrown out of court, never went. would that experience factor in to be fair juror? no. set aside? I was only 17 so yeah. feel you were treated fairly? for who I was with... hold against Florida? no. hold against Zimmerman? no. 12:25:07 b29? Chicago. still pending? it's been disposed of? yeah. interfere with you? no. hold against? no. treated fairly? yes. 12:25:36 b35? orange county. still pending? no. disposed of? yes. how long ago? 1987. unfairly treated? no. prosecuted or case dismissed? I was prosecuted. hold against? no. treated fairly? yes 12:26:24 e6? in Florida, Brevard back in 1999. pending? no. treated fairly. 12:27:13 h7? 40 years ago state of Texas. not pending? correct. treated fairly? absolutely. it was acquitted. hold against? no 12:28:04 h81? Seminole. pending? no. how long ago? yr. and a half ago. treated fairly? yes. no charges it was detained.. no charges. hold against? no 12:28:55 i33? Seminole. pending? no. treated unfairly? yes. arrested or prosecuted? both. won't hold it against anybody. what happened to your case? go to court, pay a fine. won't hold against? no sir. 12:30:00 anybody been a subject of criminal investigation? no from everybody 12:30:14 close friend arrested and you felt was treated unfairly? b7? family or close friend? close friend. pending? no. orange county. arrested unfairly. dropped? I don't know. hold against? no. 12:31:13 k95? friend in Ohio arrested and treated unfairly. pending? no. when she was incarcerated. drop charges on her? no. told by the judge she could take medicine and they didn't give to her, brought her to hospital 12:32:28 b61? someone was arrested, treated unfairly. charges were dropped. here in Florida? yes. pending? no. hold against? no. 12:33:06 A LOT OF YOU HERE.... AN HOUR ENOUGH? COME BACK AT 1:45. WHILE ON LUNCH BREAK, GO WITH EACH OTHER TALK ABOUT ANYTHING BUT THIS CASE. NO RADIO OR TV REPORTS. NO ELECTRONIC DEVICES. NOT TO READ OR CREATE SOCIAL NETWORKING PAGES. ASSURANCE TO ABIDE BY INSTRUCTIONS? 12:34:23 COURT IN RECESS FOR LUNCH UNTIL 1:45 ================================================ 13:46:07 PLEASE BE SEATED. BACK ON RECORD. DO WE HAVE THE JURORS BACK? COUNCIL APPROACH FOR JUST A MOMENT (sidebar) 14:02:46 PLEASE BE SEATED. WELCOME BACK. APPEARS TO BE HERE AND IN CORRECT PLACES. DURING LUNCH DID ANY OF YOU HAVE CONVERSATIONS ABOUT THIS CASE? DID ANY OF YOU READ OR LISTEN TO ANYTHING ABOUT THIS CASE? USE ANY ELECTRONIC DEVICE ABOUT THE CASE? READ OR CREATE ANY THING ABOUT THE CASE? 14:03:39 rionda: welcome back. 14:04:05 h81... a friend or close family member? close friend. in Seminole? no. Pennsylvania. treated unfairly? yes. in prosecution. hold against us? I would no. interfere? it would not. 14:05:05 were you a victim of a crime that it impacted you so much you wouldn't be able to participate? 14:05:26 b76? yes. b7? yes. b86? yes. anybody else? e40? e73? second row: e22? k80? k95? last row: g81? h7? h35? h81? i33? i44? did I get everybody? 14:06:35 violent crime? e73, b86, k80, e22. 14:07:09 you have to set it aside for the purposes of this trial. agree to leave outside court room... think you cannot, raise your hand... e73? just because of the nature that happened to you? it was a very similar crime. wouldn't be able to.... set it aside? it's always in my mind. 14:08:27 anybody else? 14:08:49 victims of crime, let me broaden criteria... crime to your household, felt police did not do a good job investigating? b7. home break in. here in Seminole? it was. they didn't do a good job? they didn't investigate at all. do you think that would impact you at all in this case to sit as juror or can you set aside? no. it wasn't a big deal. agree to leave outside court? yeah. 14:10:17 in that case, were you present? I came home and scared of burglars I think. chase them? no. knew better? I didn't realize until later.... called police and they didn't respond? when I was in high school, police came and they asked what was stolen and officer asked me if any of my friends did this. ever find out who it was? no. anybody else? 14:11:31 b86... many years ago, fast food restaurant. police officer scared us more than the person who just robbed us with the gun. going to our car when gun was pulled on us, we ran back into the restaurant after guy grabbed a bag... police knocked on door and we thought it was the guy again. make him go around so we can see him. tell us you're a police officer, he said "this isn't TV". hold against? no. know who was arrested? yes. he hit us twice, finally got caught. testify? no I couldn't pick him out. 14:13:33 does anybody live in community in which there is no crime? anybody? collective no. 14:14:02 steps to address it in your neighborhood? e54... I assume there's crime in my neighborhood, not personally aware of it. 14:14:42 k95... I would put up a no soliciting sign in my neighborhood. effective? yes. anything further? no. there's a neighborhood watch. are you a part of it? no. 14:15:12 e73... we had a sudden increase in crime in neighborhood. they started a watch. join it? no, but went to a meeting. set up in uniform? no. armed? I don't think so. not involved in watch? no 14:15:54 anybody else? b76... just had teens vandalizing signs... police took care of it. we had a watch I just told them about it. any steps yourself to get involved? telling the other neighbors 14:16:30 b35...still with us... closing your eyes just want to make sure 14:16:51 b7: what was the question again. crime in community and you got involved? no. 14:17:26 feel like people have the right to take law into their own hands? anybody? i5 shaking your head.... there may be occasions, but basically I would say no. g63... crimes in neighborhood? I'm assuming? watch in your community? not that I'm aware of. your last question was very general we have governments that we authorize to do that. 14:19:17 as individuals people shouldn't. g7, agree? where is the process or a citizen's arrest. I don't know how it applies. 14:19:45 other than what law allows, try to arrest people on your own? never have. i24, ever crossed your mind to arrest someone? no but I would do something if they tried to break into my house. id protect my family 14:20:34 can everybody agree the law applies equally to everyone? yes. it should or it doesn't? 14:20:54 b7.... hear a lot about it in the news. always believe? not always. 14:21:13 law matter about which part of county? no. difference in wealth class? no. matter if gated or not? no. where they're from? no. b72, it shouldn't matter? no. why not? when you see the law, the law applies to everyone it doesn't discriminate or consider race or sex. if we use this as criteria, the whole system goes down. 14:22:26 should it matter about race gender or ethnicity? no. 14:22:53 ever been a witness and testify? g81... was it here in Seminole? no. orange. proceeding or hearing or trial? it was juvenile system, proceeding. testify? yes. treated fairly by lawyers and judge and deputies? yes I was. anything about that you felt would interfere? nothing that happened there 14:23:56 h7: I've given depositions before. was it unpleasant it would influence you? no it was not. representation from both sides and told them what I knew. told the truth as best you could remember? yes 14:25:03 h29... I've been deposed before. anything about that experience? I was on the good guy side, never got to the other side. 14:25:23 h81... deposition, hearing, trial? I've been a witness a few times... treated unfairly? no. 14:26:00 i24... I was a witness in a car accident. eye witness? yeah and we had to verify who hit who. more than one? several people. all have to come to court? no we all went to court and stood in front of judge and told her what we saw. questioning you? just the judge... 14:27:00 g63... witness for criminal trial in orange county. eye witness? I was an eye witness to nothing. still called? yes. badgered in any way by either side? no. it wasn't unpleasant it was inconvenient. impact you? no 14:27:48 k80.... witness in child custody case. in front of court? no jury, just a judge. treated fairly? yes, no badgering.. civil questions. 14:28:22 k95... federal lawsuit case, it wasn't a good experience. because of way you were treated? yes. by who? attorneys and judge. judge nelson? no. it wasn't in this state. attorneys were asking improper questions? I was told I was at an economic disadvantage. scream back at them? kept my cool and had to pay it off. terrible experience? yes. hold against? no this was business 14:29:50 e22... I've been deposed. treated fairly? yes. deposition end there or another proceeding? never went to trial. that experience that you were treated unfairly? no. 14:30:30 e6... custody trial and domestic violence... nothing about the proceedings. treated fairly? yes. impact? no. e40... witness to car accident, no jury... I was treated fairly. other people eye witness too. there when other witnesses testified? I was around... 20 years ago though. 14:31:40 all read the witness list... cover that. how you know the person and the impact of that.... 14:32:16 e6... SHES IN SEAT NUMBER 9, GIVE HER LIST. THAT MIGHT BE EASIER. recognize that as yours? yes. circled two names on front page. one of them starts with d and j... professional or social? I recognize the name I don't personally know them. recognize them as physician. impact you? no it would not. also have under that name, three down from that. know the name? I don't know them personally, received referral to her for one of my children. impact? no. some on last page... last name with w recognize name or the person? just the name. impact? no. third from bottom starts with z and s? know them? no. recognize name? yes. impact? no. 14:35:16 i33.... first page, last name starts with b and first name is c. know them or recognize name? right, could be somebody that I name... I have no idea if I know them or not. assuming it's the same person you know, what do they do for a living? construction business. person you know is him? correct. with the work you do? yes. if he testified, find him more credible? no sir, not necessarily no. if it's the same person could you rely just on what they said as opposed to knowing them? absolutely. another name with a c and a b? correct. recognize? just heard the name. no impact on you? no sir. first person/ another relationship, fun thing and I see him once a year... fun thing, activity? yeah it would ID me. you interact with him though? yes sir 14:38:23 last page, last name w and n? yes. recognize or personal? recognize name. know them other than that? no. 14:38:45 toward bottom of page, z and s? recognize the name. impact? no sir 14:39:22 juror number.... second page j and c... know them? as a celebrity... not the person that were talking about here. ok? and someone else.... last page last name with w and d? how do you know them? name I think I recognize. impact? no. 14:40:29 b61.... last page, at top? yes. personal or professional? if same person it's personal but haven't seen them in 2-3 years. friends? yes. exercise together. hear them on witness stand find them more or less credible? it wouldn't impact if it were any other witness. how close, how much interaction? person in social organization, saw her a lot for a while. over a yr. or two? a couple years while I was in school. is this person still a member of that organization? yes. impact you? no 14:42:49 hear from witness, evaluate based on insurrections from court? yes. g47, depend if witness has job? no. why? irrelevant to the case. g29 does it matter if they're law enforcement? no. everyone agree? yes 14:43:37 e54 agree with that? sure 14:43:41 law allows for certain witnesses to be treated differently, experts can give opinion opposed to other witnesses. e13... agree with that? yes would say.. e28 agree? yes. why? they're experts in that field. evaluate and use instructions from court and the expertise? yes 14:44:43 b51.... agree with that? I do. why? education or experience and wouldn't call on them to discuss position or opinion without experience. ever had to rely on expert testimony? not testimony. go to expert for advice? no. anybody? b7.... rely on experts on constant basis 14:45:41 b35... agree? yes. why? practice in their field. b76 agree? yes. b12... agree? yes. why? education and school and have knowledge of that. H69 HAS QUESTIONS. h69: if attorney asked for opinion and they didn't just interject it? yes. that they asked for opinion and they didn't just interject opinion. if attorneys ask expert could you rely on his opinion? yes. why? I'm going to assume a witness researches before getting on the stand... rely on expert if both side find them to be an expert 14:47:55 in this type of case, since the trial is murder.... H86... also wondering if witness on stand only giving facts or opinions unless were asking for their opinion? right... e6... clarify to me I would believe an expert has studied and accumulated knowledge in area, but sometimes experts don't always agree even if in the same field, how is that treated? use your common sense and if it's credible. judge will give instructions about that. expert can give opinion. you can find an opinion with the one you wanted... You decide... 14:50:21 juror number..... person is an expert and we assume they are.. court will give you a ruling on that. expert is entitled to give opinion. if a juror finds a person is qualified as expert they don't have to accept that opinion. you would hear their qualifications and make that determination. 14:51:44 exposed to photos you've never been exposed to, problem looking at photos? does everyone understand the question? ok? yes 14:52:29 b37 you're fine with that... yes. b35.. yes 14:52:39 everyone else agree? yes 14:52:44 law enforcement experience? nobody. h86? not myself, but two aunts and uncles who are lieutenants. 14:53:19 h86, family in law enforcement? yes. departments here in Seminole? I believe it's orange. discuss matters with them about justice system? in the past I have. impact your decision? no. how extensive, more than 1? 3 family members. close with them? 2 of them. interact on weekly basis? yes. uniform? yes. how long in field? over 20 years. look up to them for advice? in general, yes. pursue law enforcement career? no. 14:54:37 k95... when you say law enforcement, but 40 years ago I worked in retail where I used to watch shop lifters... watched them and recorded them. apprehend them? no. I just do my job and report to manager.... someone else would apprehend? yes. successful? yes. how? bust a lot of my sisters friends. 14:55:50 anybody else I overlooked... i24? sort of in same situation... I didn't catch them. I did translation when they did get caught and they didn't speak English. for a company who had a lot of guests who got caught shop lifting. what language? Portuguese. several years? quite a lot. enjoy it? yes. anything that would interfere? no. k95... anything that would interfere? no 14:57:01 anybody else? k80.... family members. tell me? uncle who was in SWAT and cousin is NCIS agent. occasions to discuss with them? no. there are stories after the fact. interfere? no 14:57:42 b35.... family members mom worked for sheriff's department and cousins in police in Titusville. see them regularly? once or twice a year. discussions about job? 14:58:14 how come you didn't join department? first not to go into law enforcement because I went to school. not exciting enough? make a little more money and wanted to do my own thing. impact you one way or another? no. more incline to favor police officer? no 14:59:05 b7.... law enforcement, my wife used to work in the field, often had discussions about it. her job and dealing with victims? absolutely. how do you feel about that, would it impact you here? no. it was a while ago. in this case you have a victim, favor state in this case? no. wouldn't impact you? not when I last served on jury 15:00:13 b86... I used to do transcription for private investigator... a while ago? 15 yes ago in orange. former officer? yeah. record and you would transcribe? yes. impact favoring? no. 15:00:54 e6... include close friends? anybody important for us to know about.... family friend he was SWAT detective... he just left the force and went into private sector but served almost 17 years... impact your opinion? no 15:01:41 b12.... my dad was a Syracuse cop and my nephew is FBI agent. anything about nature of that would favor one side? no. 15:02:36 h69... any family member? yeah. cousin who works for government.... she's working with homeland security... opportunities to discuss her job? some times. anything about what she does you feel would impact you one way or another? no. desire to join her? it sounds exciting, but not for me 15:03:34 k95.... family or friends? yes someone important to let us know. acquaintances from homeland security and friend that is head of security. discuss criminal matters? no. the law? no. 15:04:14 k80.... friends? some close to you. neighbors son in law is US Marshall... and another Seminole county deputy and then another one and family friend have deputies at jail... discussions with them? no. interfere? no 15:05:02 e22.... close friend who was in law enforcement for 2 decades... discussions? interfere? no. 15:05:27 g66... my brother in law retired from police enforce, my niece is.... discuss matters? about what they do. desire to join? when I was younger. impact you? no 15:06:05 H7 HAS HAND UP... h7: friends through boy scouts. never discussed outside of scouts. no impact one way or another 15:06:29 i19... my uncle is police officer. still? yes. local? somewhere else. impact you? no. 15:06:57 i24... husband's niece is married to gentleman in fbi. anything about that? no. 15:07:19 i33... my wife's father is retired sheriff. no impact. in this county? different state. impact you? no 15:07:44 anybody in this room that has not had a dispute with another person? anybody? physical dispute? b35... verbal to physical. a long time ago? yeah. resolve it between you two? once or twice police were called. impact you? no sir 15:08:34 anybody else? e6... I was involved in domestic violence. impact? no. b7? fight in middle school... (Everyone laughs) I think I lost. any impact? no 15:09:33 k95... just domestic. impact you? no. 15:09:45 disputes where you worked it out? everyone? b61 have you? yes. how? talk about it. 15:10:19 g66? dispute where you resolved? yes. without violence? yes. talking loud walking away 15:10:34 medical experience, in the field one way or another? g47....registered EMT. impact? not that I'm aware of. k95... CNA and activity director. anyone else? e40... certified health care officer. b12.... 15:11:42 e28.... medical. h86? home health CNA before RN. 15:12:07 other than b72... fitness people? h18... work out all the time? lifting every morning, play tennis... e13.... weight lift and run and go to gym. b72... wrestling, anybody else wrestle? boxing? h29... trying to get more George Forman on.... in the military. how well? middle levels before someone was young. I remember 5, 6.... (everyone's laughing) 15:13:46 anybody else? g63... weight lifting? yes. training for sport. endurance type thing? weight lifting. for a year? yes. 15:14:09 h18... boxing? martial arts since I was a kid. 15:14:36 involved in martial arts? yes. green belt. b86.... tae-kwon-do with my kids... couple years senior blue belt. 15:15:16 training in phonetics? linguistics? I did sign language many years ago. (juror number) 15:15:41 e13... four years of sign language 15:15:49 live in gated community? g63... 4 years ago community had security guard in its entrance. i19, h86, h81.... 15:16:28 live in neighborhood with a watch? b7... seen the signs, but I'm... b35? yes. watch? yes. involved? no. e73? yes. watch? yes. involved? no. e22 watch? sign but I don't know who's on it? involved? no. k80? watch? yes. involved? no and my husband is block captain but I don't know what he does. k95? yes. watch? yes. involved? no. (two more jurors... not involved) 15:18:32 g63... not where I live but before, I don't know who was involved. 15:18:45 last row: h18? involved? no. h29... we have signs. involved? no. I know some ladies who are. 15:19:18 anybody consider expert in DNA? no from everybody 15:19:51 who does not have a cell phone? everyone has one. anyone an expert on cell phones? i44... working knowledge of that.... 15:20:27 expert someone beyond being able to turn it on. (juror number): I am... witness? no. records of calls?. anyone else. b7? same circumstance. e73? same responses. g47: I consider myself tech savvy. k95: I have a lot of jobs, work in IT. 15:21:53 agree people dress differently? way they dress does it matter? no. 15:22:22 assume certain things based on attire? e6... lots of different things. woman dressed or wearing expensive things....rich? either that or give that appearance. if they're not, they're poor? could mean many different things. known wealthy man who preferred to dress down. we make assumptions 15:23:30 in terms of law, what does it say about assumptions? they don't count. 15:24:04 this case the victim, martin and defendant are different race, does it matter? no. h35... does it matter? absolutely not. that doesn't matter ever anywhere.... everyone agree? yes 15:24:35 victim as court read was under 18... O'Mara: approach? YES (sidebar) 15:27:49 IS EVERYONE OK TO GO ON? GO AHEAD 15:27:58 rionda: victim was under 18, does anyone believe his life is worth less because he was a minor? no. black African America, worth less? no 15:28:37 believe in right to bear arms? yes 15:28:41 who has a firearm or access to one? b35... personally own? yes. more than one? yes. target practice and hunting. what kind? caliber and shot gun. proficient? yes train in military. how often? a couple months. holster? yes. more than one? yes. internal or external? external. concealed permit? yes. 15:29:54 b76... I don't have any in our home, but we have family members that do in their own home. any experience yourself? no 15:30:12 b37.... used to have concealed weapons permit. husband wanted me to renew but I don't have a gun... no point. I can shoot a gun. we used to go out to range and shooting. basic familiarity with it 15:30:49 e6... husband has 9 millimeter, .38 and rifles... my son has a hunting rifle and bb guns. you yourself involved in firing? went to range one time and sometimes target practice with bb guns 15:31:27 e40.. brother in law has hunting rifles 15:31:38 b12.... fired a gun one time in my life and fell on my but, my son has gun and my mom and sister 15:31:57 m75.... my brother in law has 2 guns, a .38 and another handgun. shooting with him? no... goes with my sister and daughter 15:32:25 b61 repeat? do you have a firearm or have access to one. 15:32:37 ever fired a gun... recreational... 15:32:49 b7 my father has some. 15:33:03 e22... good friend has a firearm 15:33:09 e13... my step dad has a few, went and fired once 15:33:20 b86.... fired one once 15:33:43 k80.... yes own firearms... fired before? yes. familiar. own one yourself and carry with holster? no. no concealed weapons 15:34:10 k95.... I do and my son does. 15:34:17 p67... no I don't 15:34:25 g66... yes I have a .32. fire on occasion? periodically. holster? no 15:34:46 i44... hand gun. fire yourself? yes 15:35:00 i33... rifles. shooting purposes? hunting 15:35:16 i24.... handguns. revolver? yes 15:35:26 i19.... my father has them for hunting.. shoot yourself? no 15:35:38 h86... my brother in law has several. shot yourself? yes. handgun and a rifle. know the difference between semi-automatic and revolver? yes 15:36:07 h81... go to range, but don't shoot my own guns 15:36:22 (juror number) .. mom has one 15:36:29 h29...... I have daughters, so I have shot guns.... revolver and rifle 15:36:48 h18... I do. 15:36:57 h7... yes I do. member of nra? yes. anybody else? no 15:37:08 h6... father owns numerous guns and I've gone with him to the range 15:37:34 have guns or are familiar, responsibility with having one? yes. believe than h7? absolutely. everyone agree with him? yes 15:37:55 agree with that i44? yes. 15:38:01 anybody not agree? everyone agrees 15:38:12 defendant charged with murder in second degree, haven't heard evidence I don't want opinion, but can you follow a law...state has to prove victim is dead, the death was caused by criminal act of Zimmerman, and unlawful killing of martin by an act dangerous to another in a depraved mind without regard to human life.... act includes series of related to.... immanently dangerous to a deprived mind if an act that a person of ordinary judgment was known to seriously kill or done from ill will or of such nature it indicates indifferent to human life... follow that? yes. 15:40:11 not necessary for state to prove intent... 15:40:28 doesn't require certain number of shots or motive 15:40:46 understand there can be defenses to crimes, understand? yes 15:41:10 insanity or self-defense... justifiable use of deadly force...follow instruction about that? yes. 15:41:38 last week and this week about media and publicity and hardship... most of you heard that both sides expect trial to last 2-4 weeks....jury will be sequestered... family member p67... letter that it would be hardship. in addition to what you said? yes. anybody else in that predicament? b61: can you explain sequestered 15:43:42 housed together, but interaction with others will be limited.... won't be able to go home at night. contact with outside world limited. have some contact, court will give instructions about that... monitored contact. 15:45:36 b7... first time I heard about it.... I have questions that are.... 15:45:48 e6... I didn't realize, does that include weekends... YES ENTIRE TIME OF TRIAL. ok.... 15:46:11 b37: you have some contact with family. ALL THIS WILL BE EXPLAINED LATER, WILL HAVE CONTACT BUT IT WILL BE LIMITED.. WILL HAVE CONTACT 15:46:37 b6... include telephone calls can they visit? ALLOWED TO VISIT, LIMITED AS TO TIME...LIMITED PHONE CONTACT... emails? YES IT WILL BE LIMITED. YOU WON'T BE CUT OFF FROM FAMILY, STAYING IN A FACILITY, HOTEL IN THE AREA AND ALL MEALS WILL BE PROVIDED AND TRANSPORTATION AND PERSON NEEDS DURING THE TRIAL. 15:47:38 k80: if this group is sequestered where we can't return to our homes, will this case be 7 days a week? NO. so everyone gets to go home on weekends but we can't? CORRECT. PLANNED ACTIVITIES FOR YOU, THERE WILL BE MEALS... I MEAN ITS... MORE WILL BE EXPLAINED 15:48:29 rionda: attorneys and court will be busy with other matters, were not going on vacation for the weekend 15:49:01 can all of you agree since you haven't heard evidence you have to keep open mind? yes. understand that part of process is that decision needs to be unanimous? yes. 15:49:31 haven't heard evidence, presuming defendant innocent? yes. use common sense and evidence for decision? yes. could you convict him if evidence showed he was guilty? yes. and opposite? yes 15:50:11 people should be held responsible and accountable for actions? yes. picked as juror and evaluating evidence, use god given common sense to get verdict that speaks the truth? yes. 15:50:40 I'm going to sit down.... but before I do... any matter that you think you need to bring to my attention? collective no. thank you very much 15:51:16 15 MINUTE... O'Mara: approach. YES (sidebar) 15:56:15 how long will we have to get our stuff in order... I WILL TELL YOU WHEN SELECTED ON JURY 15:56:34 b61: questionnaire did that say anything about sequestering. YES IT DID... ITS NOT AS LONG AS INDICATED 15:57:04 ITS BEEN A LONG DAY AND I DONT WANT TO HAVE O'MARA BEGIN VOIR DIRE AND KEEP YOU LATE AND HAVE SPLIT IT UP... RELEASE FOR THE NIGHT. COME BACK AT 9 AM. NOT TO READ OR LISTEN TO RADIO OR TV REPORTS, NOT TO DISCUSS CASE. NOT TO USE ANY ELECTRONIC DEVICE TO GET ON INTERNET. NOT TO READ OR CREATE SOCIAL NETWORKING PAGES ABOUT CASE. ASSURANCE YOU WILL ABIDE? yes. ANY ISSUE... PLEASE RAISE YOUR HAND. P67...INDICATED MAYBE HAVING THINGS TO DISCUSS, PLEASE REMAIN AND WILL DISCUSS AFTER THAT. EVERYONE ELSE AT A QUARTER TO 9 AM. HAVE A GOOD EVENING. 15:59:54 COMFORTABLE WHERE YOU'RE SITTING. 16:00:01 rionda: P67 letter from a family member? my wife wrote about it. trouble to serve? yes. tell us more? don't tell us where you work, but the media has rights to be present. work related? yes. express in letter? yes. wife wrote letter because she's more fluent in English? yes. had her write it because she could say it better? part for her and part for me she's worried about the situation. create hardship with wife and monetary? yes. like lately my little one I don't know what she heard in the news, lately she's been living with me thinking somebody is going to get me. also nice to discover how much she loves me 16:02:28 would that in your opinion impact you to pay attention? yes. of course. anything else you want to say to judge about that? that's all. just about my family. oh the other thing, the leveling or title... been things in media that my wife and older kids.. for example: media ask a resident or citizen or Hispanic, but then don't like how media express or a nickname all over the internet. media put your name on the internet or a certain way? yes. how did you find out? my wife found out through internet and my two biggest ones. they wanted to know what's going on with dad. your wife and kids saw on internet and alerted you and you said you didn't want to talk about it? yeah. impact on your kid and wife? yes. concern about that as a result? yes. interfere with paying attention? yes. 16:05:02 O'Mara: minor concerns and I want to see if they stack... media? yes. media in court room prohibited from putting you on camera... I am, but you are not... they can't put your face or information... not public, understand that? yes sir. concern to be they have identified you by some descriptors, like a white female whatever... and you they described as well? yes. concerned by a term the way the described you? I prefer they call me a resident or citizen or Hispanic. the other one telling my kids or wife..... something else on the internet? told me they saw "Mexican". concern to be Mexican than resident? yes. 16:07:22 sounds like they were labeling you? yes which I'm not happy about.... I represent the system, we apologize about any insensitivity from the media... as juror you're being exposed to that in a profile case its unavoidable... not sure we can un-do that.... maybe media will learn lesson to be culturally sensitive. 16:08:17 30 days your employer doesn't need to pay you? that's a part of it 16:08:28 about the service and the jury I noticed a couple things, seemed to me you were looking forward to it as a citizen, feel that way still? yes, but if it takes this long... issues. I was thinking 2-3 weeks, yeah let's get it done... without guessing too much we may start Monday.... last 2-4 weeks and then you deliberate and we'd be done.... timeline put out there now.... 16:09:38 mention that because of the publicity, your little ones was wrapping arms around your leg... a loss for you and family temporarily if here with us... such imposition that it is insurmountable, you can't do it for destroying purposes? my family will be destroyed. if not to that level... hoping you would consider it... inconvenient for you, accomplish if we ask you to, 2-4 weeks? definite inconvenience. not trying to minimize that, but as citizens as we take on the role of doing everything, there's not much more asked of our citizens but war and ask them to serve on jurors... 16:12:04 if we ask you, is it something that you can accomplish even past its inconvenience? 16:12:34 judge will clear up the confusion, but in sequestration being with us you will have contact with family, telephone monitored, visits with family members monitored... not in prison but in situation where you maintain contact but supervised way to protect process...any questions that I can help answer for you to make decision to sit as juror 16:13:54 I just want to you to consider my situation. if pick you can you sit with us? if that's the only option I guess... well you can say no, but if it's an inconvenience, say yes... if it's because of destruction than you can't.... call is yours. if you can under what we talked about.... I just can't with consequences coming if over 4 weeks. I don't want to end up on the street. if I was single, it wouldn't be a problem. 16:15:09 rionda: the media itself or the internet with comments? they saw on internet, I don't know where.... EXCUSED FOR EVENING, SEE YOU TOMORROW IN THE MORNING. 16:15:44 PLEASE BE SEATED, COUNCIL COME TO BENCH..(sidebar) 16:16:22 COURT RECESS FOR THE DAY ====================================