6 blacks = guilty<quoted text>
Well, "proof beyond a reasonable doubt" is how they say it, and I'd agree....but in practice, you could probably change that to "convince the jury", because thats all they really have to do. I thought the jury choice was troubling. Both sides have all the evidence, right? Both sides know the law. So both sides probably have a pretty good idea of where this could likely (not for sure), but likely, end up. My guess is the Judge and the State know as well. And IF you think that Zimmerman walks, wouldn't you want at least a racially balanced jury with some blacks on it? I mean seriously, would you really want to walk unnecessarily into another OJ riot (all white jury frees Zimmerman) thing? But the same thing kind of works the other way too, IF you think Zimmerman gets convicted of something (all black jury convicts Zimmerman), wouldn't you want at least a balanced jury with some whites on it? And man, its like they over did it, even kicked in a hispanic for good measure. Just based on jury selection and a healthy dose of paranoia on my part, I'd say its not a good sign for the defense.
6 whites = not guilty
3 blacks and 3 whites = hung jury.
Like you said,...this ain't Los Angeles...You got nothing to worry about,....Zim walks!...Sanford burns,...So what?...better for one innocent man to be set free and a whole town burn than to see one innocent man go to prison.