Juror B37 has reportedly signed with a literary agent and announced that she intends to write a book along with her attorney husband. Sharlene Martin, President of Martin Literary Management, represents Juror B37 in obtaining a book deal. In her release of the news, Sharlene Martin has stated that the jury in the George Zimmerman case decided he was not guilty “…due to the manner in which he was charged and the content of the jury instructions.”
On May 10, 2013, prosecutors in case number 2012-001083-CFA, The State of Florida v. George Zimmerman, filed “State’s Motion To Limit/Exclude Improper Opinion Evidence.” The three paragraph Motion sets forth in pertinent part;
“The State of Florida, by and through the undersigned Assistant State Attorney, hereby files this Motion in the above-captioned proceeding.
The Defendant has indicated via questioning in pretrial proceedings that he apparently intends to attempt to argue or introduce opinion testimony from one or more witnesses as to their opinion, prior to and/or after Defendant’s arrest, as to his guilt or the propriety of his being criminal charged.
Such testimony (be it from Defendant’s family members, civilians, or even law enforcement personnel) is improper. “
The Honorable Judge Debra Nelson granted the State’s Motion. No opinion evidence pertaining to George Zimmerman’s guilt, innocence, nor “the propriety of his being criminally charged” was allowed during trial.
Juror B37, or another juror able to persuade her, had already formed an opinion that George Zimmerman should not have been charged and therefore, the evidence presented by State prosecutors at trial was never going to be considered in determining the defendant’s guilt or innocence.
By the jury deciding that George Zimmerman should not have been charged, he effectively did not stand trial to determine his guilt or innocence. A decision of not guilty by a jury cannot be reversed. However, with the release of this information by Juror B37’s literary agent, there should certainly be an investigation that fraud was committed on the court to, and that, undermined the integrity of judicial process.