Why did both sides pick an all female jury in the Zimmerman / Trayvon case?

They were looking for specific things in potential jurors. I suspect it was a fluke.

Wow that’s very interesting. I wonder how often this happens in jury selections here in the US. But I think regardless of the gender, both sides have calculated well and for good reasons why they chose such and such candidates.

I’m just curious as to what their reasoning is. As a woman, I feel more sympathetic toward Trayvon. But that’s just me. Maybe they’re thinking that woman have a greater ‘fear’ of “prowling black men” or something? Why don’t we have any attorneys here???

Because we have Americans have matured to be able to look beyond differences…. black/white, male/female, gay/straight, smart/stupid…

In the year 2013, it is improper and rather backwards looking to evaluate based on gender. The bottom line, and the answer to the question, is that: regardless of sex, color, or anything else, these people were seen as qualified.

End of subject.

Broads. Can’t live with ‘em…..can’t live without ‘em….

The bottom line…these people were seen as qualified.

I disagree. Jury selection is like the NFL draft – you pick the people who you think will win for you.

It involves interviewing people until you have 12 (or 14 with alternates or whatever number Florida law requires).

The judge can exclude people for being unqualified or biased.

But the defense and prosecution can exclude people for looking hostile to their goal.

Jury picking is one of the reasons that some lawyers can earn HUGE fees from wealthy clients.

I wish we could hear their reasoning. Speaking for myself, from what I know of the case, I sympathize with Trayvon.

Appealing to the the mothering side since both are men?

But one “man” was actually a kid who wasn’t doing anything wrong. He probably had an attitude, but he certainly didn’t deserve to be killed. The other was an adult. I would think most women would side with an innocent kid.

@Dutchess_III Yeah, me, too. Of course George is a man who was a boy and had a mother, too. I think in his mind, he was protecting his neighborhood from a ‘thug’, so maybe a woman could appreciate that as well?

I guess it’s just going to hinge on how well each side makes their argument. I think it’s going to be tough on Zimmerman. He was playing cowboy and shot an unarmed KID who tried to walk away. That’s how I see it.

But, on the other hand, I didn’t think there was any way OJ was guilty at first either, ‘cause he was such a nice guy!

I’d like to hear some guys’ thoughts on it. Would the fact that Trayvon was a “kid” make any difference to you guys?

I’m a guy, and I am not black, and I was not there.

But my take is that there was kid walking down the street that fit some profile in Zimmerman’s mind. (note: not a police profile, not an official profile, but a “teenage black boys are dangerous” profile.)

Zimmerman,lat some psychological level, decided to play macho man, and he had a ready person to do it on—Trayvon Martin, the black teenager. So he lives out his Eastwood fantasy.

To me, the fact it was a kid would have made a difference. But I wasn’t there.

Thank you @elbanditoroso. You’re not black???