Trial of Derek Chauvin: A Juror Supported What?!

[Shofercia]

Once again, you only need one partial juror for a mistrial.

Indeed. That needs to be proven. Wearing a tshirt and attending a rally does suggest it. Still it needs to be proved he went in with his mind set.

Said juror's behavior implies that he's lying:

The picture shows Mitchell, 31, standing next to two cousins in Washington, D.C. He is wearing a Black T-shirt with a picture of King surrounded by the words, "GET YOUR KNEE OFF OUR NECKS" and "BLM" (Black Lives Matter). Chauvin knelt on Floyd's neck for nine minutes and 29 seconds... The event was "100 percent not" a march for Floyd, Mitchell said...

So were there t-shirts saying "get your knee off our necks" prior to the tragic killing of Floyd? Meanwhile at the event that was "100% not a march for Floyd" this happened:

Floyd's brother and sister, Philonise and Bridgett Floyd, and family members of others who have been shot by police addressed the crowd. It served as a rallying point for the George Floyd Justice in Policing Act, a federal police reform bill.

With Mitchell's mindset in mind, let's take a look at the questionnaire:

The first question asked, "Did you, or someone close to you, participate in any of the demonstrations or marches against police brutality that took place in Minneapolis after George Floyd's death?"

The second asked, "Other than what you have already described above, have you, or anyone close to you, participated in protests about police use of force or police brutality?"

Mitchell answered "no" to both questions. My question is this: do you honestly think that an event in Washington DC where Floyd's brother and sister spoke to the crowd was not about the police use of force? Honestly?

Sauce: https://www.startribune.com/chauvin-jur ... 600053102/

[The Black Forrest]

Maybe he did answer the questionnaire honestly and wasn't. Maybe the defence looked at this individual during the interview stage and decided yes, they can be impartial for a trial.

Has the defence pushed for a mistrial on account of this juror?

This is just coming out, so for all we know, they are just learning of this.

Indeed.

Still the judge may have planned for it as the sentence phase was set to June.

It will be interesting to see what comes next.

[Heloin]

Maybe he did answer the questionnaire honestly and wasn't. Maybe the defence looked at this individual during the interview stage and decided yes, they can be impartial for a trial.

Has the defence pushed for a mistrial on account of this juror?

This is just coming out, so for all we know, they are just learning of this.

No we're just learning about this. It's possible that the defence completely missed this when the jury was being selected and have also just learned this. It's also likely they did know and didn't see a problem.

[Neutraligon]

It suggests his mind was already made up before the trial. In court, the presumption is innocent until shown to be guilty, but if he did go to protest with that shirt on, it suggests he instead was going in with a presumption of guilt.

I don't think the court of appeals overturns the verdict.

If this is true, then a mistrial can easily be called. Since the jury is tainted then yes, an entire new trial would be needed.

[San Lumen]

I don't think the court of appeals overturns the verdict.

If this is true, then a mistrial can easily be called. Since the jury is tainted then yes, an entire new trial would be needed.

I still don't see how. And if a new trial is called i don't think lightning will strike twice

[Shofercia]

-snip-

Ahh anecdotal dismissal.

Still as you said the defense still has to prove he was.

Not sure they can.

I think so, see above.

If he had answered the questionnaire honestly he would have been excused. He didn't, the jury was tainted. It should be a mistrial

Maybe he did answer the questionnaire honestly and wasn't. Maybe the defence looked at this individual during the interview stage and decided yes, they can be impartial for a trial.

Has the defence pushed for a mistrial on account of this juror?

It takes quite a while to do a good mistrial motion from what I heard, and I doubt that the news is even 24 hours old. The US Court System doesn't move that quickly.

[The Black Forrest]

The first question asked, "Did you, or someone close to you, participate in any of the demonstrations or marches against police brutality that took place in Minneapolis after George Floyd's death?"

The second asked, "Other than what you have already described above, have you, or anyone close to you, participated in protests about police use of force or police brutality?"

Mitchell answered "no" to both questions. My question is this: do you honestly think that an event in Washington DC where Floyd's brother and sister spoke to the crowd was not about the police use of force? Honestly?

Sauce: https://www.startribune.com/chauvin-jur ... 600053102/

Ohhhhh. Yea that does cause a problem. Paper trail is there for a reason (my DOD days ).

What’s the next phase?


Tangent question with no meaning: i vaguely remember you being involved with the Law? Defense?

[Shofercia]

If this is true, then a mistrial can easily be called. Since the jury is tainted then yes, an entire new trial would be needed.

I still don't see how. And if a new trial is called i don't think lightning will strike twice

I'm not entirely sure why you're comparing a rare event to the conviction of someone who killed a dude on camera.

That said, I think the smarter strategy for Chauvin's defense during a second trial would be to accept the guilty verdict on Manslaughter, and fight against intent for Murder Three and Murder Two.

[Neutraligon]

If this is true, then a mistrial can easily be called. Since the jury is tainted then yes, an entire new trial would be needed.

I still don't see how. And if a new trial is called i don't think lightning will strike twice

I'm not sure what more you need. If a juror went to an anti-blm protest with a blue line t-shirt, and lied to the jurors about ever going to a protest like that, would you have an issue with them being on the jury?

I still don't see how. And if a new trial is called i don't think lightning will strike twice

I'm not entirely sure why you're comparing a rare event to the conviction of someone who killed a dude on camera.

That said, I think the smarter strategy for Chauvin's defense during a second trial would be to accept the guilty verdict on Manslaughter, and fight against intent for Murder Three and Murder Two.

...funny thing is it is actually pretty likely for lightning to strike the same place twice.

[Shofercia]

Mitchell answered "no" to both questions. My question is this: do you honestly think that an event in Washington DC where Floyd's brother and sister spoke to the crowd was not about the police use of force? Honestly?

Sauce: https://www.startribune.com/chauvin-jur ... 600053102/

Ohhhhh. Yea that does cause a problem. Paper trail is there for a reason (my DOD days ).

What’s the next phase?


Tangent question with no meaning: i vaguely remember you being involved with the Law? Defense?

Research for defense. In this case, first the defense needs to fully research this issue. This part I can explain in great depth. Then the defense is going to have aggregate all of it into a motion for appeal. Instead of arguing for individual motions, the defense is going to have to argue for the totality of the circumstances. In the meantime Chauvin still goes to sentencing, since appeals take their sweet time.

So what does this type of research entail? First, they're going to want to review all footage from the rally. They're going to want to know everything about the uncle, and other attending family members and friends of Mitchell. They're going to want to review his whereabouts, to the extent permitted by law, to see whom else he visited.

Second, the defense is going to need to massively research all cases where SCOTUS, as well as their Appellate Courts, granted appeals based on tainted jury. The appeal can only be about the jury, and nothing else. Rifling through the sheer volume of cases is going to take a massive amount of time.

Third, they're going to have to match cases to what Mitchell did, what Waters said, what the photographer did, as well as the motions to sequester and move the trial. Remember, they're arguing the totality of the circumstances, since each argument fails the test on its own. The defense is forced to put all of its ducks in a row on a single motion.

In the meantime, they need to have a word with Chauvin. If they're going to redo the trial, he's still getting Manslaughter and Murder Three; he might avoid Murder Two, but that's about it. So they need to tell Chauvin that if the appeal goes through, (and a mistrial is likely,) he should agree with the Manslaughter charge, and the entire trial should be about intent. That way he might avoid Murder Three and Murder Two.

But mistrial or not, there's no way that he's avoiding Manslaughter. I'd be surprised that they'd even get a motion out before June starts.

[Kowani]

This is just coming out, so for all we know, they are just learning of this.

Indeed.

Still the judge may have planned for it as the sentence phase was set to June.

It will be interesting to see what comes next.

while it seems unlikely he planned for this
this is really bad

why tf would you lie on a jury form
congrats, that's perjury and a mistrial
like, fuck chauvin and all but everyone deserves a fair trial and you just screwed that up

[Shofercia]

I still don't see how. And if a new trial is called i don't think lightning will strike twice

I'm not sure what more you need. If a juror went to an anti-blm protest with a blue line t-shirt, and lied to the jurors about ever going to a protest like that, would you have an issue with them being on the jury?

I'm not entirely sure why you're comparing a rare event to the conviction of someone who killed a dude on camera.

That said, I think the smarter strategy for Chauvin's defense during a second trial would be to accept the guilty verdict on Manslaughter, and fight against intent for Murder Three and Murder Two.

...funny thing is it is actually pretty likely for lightning to strike the same place twice.

Damn, there go my dreams of becoming a weatherman

[The Black Forrest]

Indeed.

Still the judge may have planned for it as the sentence phase was set to June.

It will be interesting to see what comes next.

while it seems unlikely he planned for this
this is really bad

why tf would you lie on a jury form
congrats, that's perjury and a mistrial
like, fuck chauvin and all but everyone deserves a fair trial and you just screwed that up

Thanks for the above explanation!

Yes that was extremely stupid. If I had to guess; I am getting the feeling he is an opportunist? Anyway; I am now on the “Shit!” side and can see this could very well be a mistrial.

[Shofercia]

while it seems unlikely he planned for this
this is really bad

why tf would you lie on a jury form
congrats, that's perjury and a mistrial
like, fuck chauvin and all but everyone deserves a fair trial and you just screwed that up

Thanks for the above explanation!

Yes that was extremely stupid. If I had to guess; I am getting the feeling he is an opportunist? Anyway; I am now on the “Shit!” side and can see this could very well be a mistrial.

You're very welcome, even though you quoted Kowani

I do want to point out that Chauvin is still going to be spending years in jail, no matter the outcome. The question right now if whether or not it'll be years or decades.

[Ethel mermania]

while it seems unlikely he planned for this
this is really bad

why tf would you lie on a jury form
congrats, that's perjury and a mistrial
like, fuck chauvin and all but everyone deserves a fair trial and you just screwed that up

Thanks for the above explanation!

Yes that was extremely stupid. If I had to guess; I am getting the feeling he is an opportunist? Anyway; I am now on the “Shit!” side and can see this could very well be a mistrial.

Wait, you have changed your opinion on NSG????


GANG GET THE PITCHFORKS!!

[Shofercia]

Thanks for the above explanation!

Yes that was extremely stupid. If I had to guess; I am getting the feeling he is an opportunist? Anyway; I am now on the “Shit!” side and can see this could very well be a mistrial.

Wait, you have changed your opinion on NSG????


GANG GET THE PITCHFORKS!!

Does the "Post Kaiser" want us to get the pitchforks?

[The Black Forrest]

Thanks for the above explanation!

Yes that was extremely stupid. If I had to guess; I am getting the feeling he is an opportunist? Anyway; I am now on the “Shit!” side and can see this could very well be a mistrial.

You're very welcome, even though you quoted Kowani

I do want to point out that Chauvin is still going to be spending years in jail, no matter the outcome. The question right now if whether or not it'll be years or decades.

In my defense….I am only going on 2 hours sleep. . I went to bed at 2 and work up at 4 and couldn’t go back to sleep…….

[Shofercia]

You're very welcome, even though you quoted Kowani

I do want to point out that Chauvin is still going to be spending years in jail, no matter the outcome. The question right now if whether or not it'll be years or decades.

In my defense….I am only going on 2 hours sleep. . I went to bed at 2 and work up at 4 and couldn’t go back to sleep…….

And unlike Chauvin's defense, you defense is solid

[Kowani]

Thanks for the above explanation!

Yes that was extremely stupid. If I had to guess; I am getting the feeling he is an opportunist? Anyway; I am now on the “Shit!” side and can see this could very well be a mistrial.

You're very welcome, even though you quoted Kowani

I do want to point out that Chauvin is still going to be spending years in jail, no matter the outcome. The question right now if whether or not it'll be years or decades.

i mean, yeah, i agree with you there
i'm more worried that this will just solidify the perception among some on the right that the entire political'judicial system is biased against chauvin (and by extension, them)
everything has ripples, sadly

[Ethel mermania]

Wait, you have changed your opinion on NSG????


GANG GET THE PITCHFORKS!!

Does the "Post Kaiser" want us to get the pitchforks?

Wilhelm I can walk!!!

[Ethel mermania]

You're very welcome, even though you quoted Kowani

I do want to point out that Chauvin is still going to be spending years in jail, no matter the outcome. The question right now if whether or not it'll be years or decades.

In my defense….I am only going on 2 hours sleep. . I went to bed at 2 and work up at 4 and couldn’t go back to sleep…….

Oh good, we won't have to run so far.

[Shofercia]

You're very welcome, even though you quoted Kowani

I do want to point out that Chauvin is still going to be spending years in jail, no matter the outcome. The question right now if whether or not it'll be years or decades.

i mean, yeah, i agree with you there
i'm more worried that this will just solidify the perception among some on the right that the entire political'judicial system is biased against chauvin (and by extension, them)
everything has ripples, sadly

That's very true. The Republican running against Maxine Waters in a heavily Democratic district where she was going to win no matter what, raised $10.5 million. That means that there are enough people to pay $10.5 million for the sole purpose of trolling the shit out of Maxine Waters.

This is exactly why I want Chauvin convicted by an unbiased jury of his peers, so that the Justice System can show that it works. Right now a lot of minorities think that it's broken, a lot of right wingers think that it's broken, and vigilantism is on the rise. That's the scary part and that's why a part of me wants a mistrial followed by a trial with an untainted, sequestered jury, with Maxine Waters shutting the fuck up, at least about the case, with cell phones and other photo devices banned from the courtroom, except for official broadcast news, and with the jury behind a one way mirror.

[Neutraligon]

i mean, yeah, i agree with you there
i'm more worried that this will just solidify the perception among some on the right that the entire political'judicial system is biased against chauvin (and by extension, them)
everything has ripples, sadly

That's very true. The Republican running against Maxine Waters in a heavily Democratic district where she was going to win no matter what, raised $10.5 million. That means that there are enough people to pay $10.5 million for the sole purpose of trolling the shit out of Maxine Waters.

This is exactly why I want Chauvin convicted by an unbiased jury of his peers, so that the Justice System can show that it works. Right now a lot of minorities think that it's broken, a lot of right wingers think that it's broken, and vigilantism is on the rise. That's the scary part and that's why a part of me wants a mistrial followed by a trial with an untainted, sequestered jury, with Maxine Waters shutting the fuck up, at least about the case, with cell phones and other photo devices banned from the courtroom, except for official broadcast news, and with the jury behind a one way mirror.

Problem is that at this point the trial had happened and most people have heard the evidence from both sides which means that most people who might have been neutral before are not so now. Honestly I am not sure how you go from here.

[The Nihilistic view]

Short of a recently discovered Amazonian tribe you aren't finding a jurisdiction where people have any less knowledge of what happened.

It's not about knowing what happened, foreknowledge doesn't equal bias. the juror went our and protested the event, and lied about it on the juror questionnaire. Big difference

Wanting fair treatment for all people isn't a bias against the defendant either. You wouldn't have a jury if that was the requirement.

[Great Confederacy of Commonwealth States]

i mean, yeah, i agree with you there
i'm more worried that this will just solidify the perception among some on the right that the entire political'judicial system is biased against chauvin (and by extension, them)
everything has ripples, sadly

That's very true. The Republican running against Maxine Waters in a heavily Democratic district where she was going to win no matter what, raised $10.5 million. That means that there are enough people to pay $10.5 million for the sole purpose of trolling the shit out of Maxine Waters.

This is exactly why I want Chauvin convicted by an unbiased jury of his peers, so that the Justice System can show that it works. Right now a lot of minorities think that it's broken, a lot of right wingers think that it's broken, and vigilantism is on the rise. That's the scary part and that's why a part of me wants a mistrial followed by a trial with an untainted, sequestered jury, with Maxine Waters shutting the fuck up, at least about the case, with cell phones and other photo devices banned from the courtroom, except for official broadcast news, and with the jury behind a one way mirror.

I think overturning a conviction of a 12-person jury because of the BLM cap of one of the jurors will do little to restore faith in the justice system among black Americans. It's a liberal fantasy that everyone will just respect the system if it is shown to follow its own rullset to a fault.

The American justice system, also, is just broken, and declaring a murder conviction of a cop who murdered a mistrail is not going to fix that system.