""The one who spoke out stated that originally,
there were two that thought Zimmerman was guilty of manslaughter
and one who thought Zimmerman was guilty of 2nd degree murder.

2 + 1 -=3 , "three jurors believing he was guilty of either manslaughter or second-degree murder, "

The REMAINING THREE thought Zimmerman was innocent.

Thus "The jury was initially split -- three and three along the line of guilt -- she said"


YOUR claim that "The juror who was interviewed said that initially they were three to two for conviction." IS FALSE and a lie.

Are you pretending to be stupid, or are you really that dense???""

Look mate, my comment was based in, and responding to YOUR post about three to four days ago, in which none of what you have said above appeared.

If you didn't post it, how could my response to what you DID POST be a lie, or stupid?

You have a remarkable capacity for dishonest goal post shifting.

Don T.

Don T.