Judge to Sequester Jury During Zimmerman Trial

Judge Nelson

The jurors chosen in the George Zimmerman murder trial will be sequestered during the proceedings, putting them out of contact with the outside world, Judge Debra Nelson has announced.

The identities of the jurors will also be hidden from the public, Nelson ruled.

The issue of sequestering had been up in the air for months leading up to the trial, as attorneys were worried that juries might be susceptible to outside influences if they had contact with family, friends and the public in the closely watched trial in Seminole County, Florida. Nelson had declined to sequester the 500 people who had been summoned to be potential jurors in the case.

“Both parties have stipulated they anticipate the trial will last between two and four weeks,” Nelson said. “Based on that, I will be sequestering the jury.”

Thus far, after attorneys have questioned potential jurors all week about their exposure to the details of the case and their potential impartiality, they have identified 20 people to move on to the next stage of questioning. They need to move 30 to the next stage before they can begin asking jurors more personal questions.

Benjamin Crump, the attorney representing the Martin family, who doesn’t have a role in the trial, displayed his anger at a comment made by former New York City police Detective Harry Houck Tuesday on a FoxNews.com live panel. Houck said Martin would still be alive if he hadn’t had a “street attitude.”

“This comment is reprehensible and extremely reminiscent of the victim-blaming rhetoric we saw a year ago,” Crump said.

The prosecutors and defense attorneys have been having a difficult time finding Florida residents who haven’t been affected by the overwhelming news coverage.

“Unless you’ve been living under a rock for the last year, it’s been pretty hard for people not to have gotten a lot of information,” one woman said.

“You’ve shown remarkable insight into our very problem,” defense lawyer Don West said in response, according to published reports.

Some of the responses have revealed how people get their information in the Internet age, such as the college student who said she doesn’t watch television news or read a newspaper. She got her knowledge of Zimmerman and Martin mainly through friends’ Facebook status updates. Her takeaway?

“An African-American was wearing a hoodie or something like that,” she said.

A mother of three said she heard of the case because her pastor led the congregation in prayers for Martin and Zimmerman, but she hadn’t heard much else because she doesn’t have cable TV or Internet service.

A former financial services worker, who estimated she had seen 200 news reports, called the shooting “a very unfortunate incident” and said she used it to talk to her sons about the dangers of going out at night.

One man told the court he had not made up his mind, but  “murder is murder.”

“Even in self-defense, it’s still murder,” he said.

He was dismissed for cause.

Democracy needs journalism it can trust.

This election season, the stakes are higher than usual — and so is the pressure on newsrooms to soften their coverage, stay quiet, or just disappear. Independent reporting, the kind that answers to readers instead of advertisers or political pressure, matters more in a moment like this, not less.

For over 14 years, Atlanta Black Star has stayed independent and reader-funded. We have no corporate owner and no shareholders telling us what to cover or how to cover it. That independence is also our biggest vulnerability: nothing protects it except readers choosing to fund it directly.

Newspaper ad revenue has fallen more than 80% since 2005, and local newsrooms are closing at a rate of roughly two a week nationwide. When outlets go under in a moment like this, it's rarely the independent, reader-funded ones that get to stick around.

We know a request for support isn't why you came here. But without readers choosing to fund this work directly, the depth of reporting we can do at home and abroad shrinks along with everyone else's. If you're not in a position to give, that doesn't change how much we value you as a reader.

If you are able to, a recurring contribution does more for us than a single one-time gift, because it lets us plan the next investigation instead of just the next invoice. It takes about 30 seconds, no long form, no account. Thank you for continuing to support independent journalism and freedom of the press.

Back to top