That’s what one the jurors said (the only non-white juror, too — an amazing coincidence, no?)
“I was the juror that was going to give them the hung jury. I fought to the end,” she said. “That’s where I felt confused, where if a person kills someone, then you get charged for it. But as the law was read to me, if you have no proof that he killed him intentionally, you can’t say he’s guilty.”
She apparently felt that after it was all said and done, she was constrained by the limitations of the “Stand Your Ground” law (which, I understand, was originally called the “You’re Allowed To Kill Anyone You Subjectively Feel Threatened By Even If You’re In No Real Danger Law”).
Wait, they did NOT use the “stand your ground” defense. They went with self defense .. that’s what I understood, because that changed the prosecutors case
LikeLike