Chauvin Juror lied - Expect another trial

596 Views | 17 Replies | Last: 1 mo ago by quash
Canon
How long do you want to ignore this user?


He's the one with the BLM hat and "Get your knee off our necks" shirt.


drahthaar
How long do you want to ignore this user?
The judge prolly now wishes he had granted a change of venue.
I'm not bothered by his t-shirt or attending the protest.
In the only interview I herd, the juror sounded reasonable and intelligent.
What did he lie about? Was it in his jury selection interview?
RD2WINAGNBEAR86
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Chauvin can be tried 100 times and the juries will come back with guilty verdicts 100 times, as they should.

The good news is that every new trial will be an opportunity to score some Air Jordans and a new big screen TV!
"Fear does not prevent death. It prevents life."
Forest Bueller_bf
How long do you want to ignore this user?

Quote:

What is an impartial trial?

Impartial means that the jury does not have any prejudice towards you as a defendant and will render a verdict based on the evidence in the case. But ensuring an impartial jury starts even before a defendant is in the courtroom.
So much for an impartial jury.

I don't have any problem with the hat and the shirt at all, any more than I would have issue with a make America great hat, but it would certainly indicate partiality, so I wouldn't want them on a jury for this specific case, as I would hope nobody would want a partial juror on a case.


Unfortunately, impartiality is impossible with this juror selected, the Judge, Lawyers, etc, should have done a better job of vetting this.

Will it be overturned? Not likely. Was it an impartial jury? No.
drahthaar
How long do you want to ignore this user?
I agree a retrial(s) will return a guilty verdict every time. It will be interesting to see how this juror's story impacts the concept of "impartial".
Doc Holliday
How long do you want to ignore this user?
drahthaar said:

The judge prolly now wishes he had granted a change of venue.
I'm not bothered by his t-shirt or attending the protest.
In the only interview I herd, the juror sounded reasonable and intelligent.
What did he lie about? Was it in his jury selection interview?
The issue is the "Knee off our necks" line on his shirt being a direct reference to George Floyd.
Redbrickbear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
It had the liberal activist and media generated hysteria of a political trial from day one.

How can you be guilty of both 2nd-degree murder (intentional murder with malice aforethought), 3rd degree murder, and manslaughter (unintentional homicide that was committed in a criminally negligent manner) all at the same time?

They even tried for 1st degree murder charges at the start but the judge made them throw them out. No doubt the jury in Minneapolis would have convicted him of that charge as well if allowed.

At one point the prosecution had more than 15 high priced attorneys brought in to help. Most from out side the State and paid big money to help. All against 1 local attorney assigned to defend the accused.

The trail was not moved out of town to another venue...even with active threats by activists to riot if the jury did not give them the "correct" verdict.

The Feds, working with Minneapolis politicians and officials, had a plan to arrest Chauvin in court if he was somehow acquitted.

https://www.businessinsider.com/doj-planned-derek-chauvin-arrest-charge-if-acquitted-murder-report-2021-4#:~:text=DOJ%20planned%20to%20arrest%20Derek,acquitted%20of%20murder%2C%20report%20says&text=DOJ%20has%20been%20building%20a,was%20not%20convicted%20of%20murder.

The whole thing was conducted with pseudo-show trial vibes.

ImwithBU
How long do you want to ignore this user?
RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:

Chauvin can be tried 100 times and the juries will come back with guilty verdicts 100 times, as they should.

The good news is that every new trial will be an opportunity to score some Air Jordans and a new big screen TV!


Maybe not the Jordan's. Never owned a pair in my life but I worked at a shoe store as a teenager. The shoes are priced the way they are because you might get 24 pair per store and they only come out a handful of times per year. Nevertheless Chauvin will be in prison regardless
Porteroso
How long do you want to ignore this user?
In most cases, something like this would get a retrial. A bit of a difficult situation though. I can see a judge not granting another trial.
Canon
How long do you want to ignore this user?
drahthaar said:

The judge prolly now wishes he had granted a change of venue.
I'm not bothered by his t-shirt or attending the protest.
In the only interview I herd, the juror sounded reasonable and intelligent.
What did he lie about? Was it in his jury selection interview?


Yes. In the questionnaire. He was 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 first asked, with the second asking: "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 reportedly answered "no" to both questions.
quash
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Canon said:

drahthaar said:

The judge prolly now wishes he had granted a change of venue.
I'm not bothered by his t-shirt or attending the protest.
In the only interview I herd, the juror sounded reasonable and intelligent.
What did he lie about? Was it in his jury selection interview?


Yes. In the questionnaire. He was 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 first asked, with the second asking: "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 reportedly answered "no" to both questions.
Do you have a link to the questionnaire? I did not know about the second question.
“Life, liberty, and property do not exist because men have made laws. On the contrary, it was the fact that life, liberty, and property existed beforehand that caused men to make laws in the first place.” (The Law, p.6) Frederic Bastiat
Canon
How long do you want to ignore this user?
quash said:

Canon said:

drahthaar said:

The judge prolly now wishes he had granted a change of venue.
I'm not bothered by his t-shirt or attending the protest.
In the only interview I herd, the juror sounded reasonable and intelligent.
What did he lie about? Was it in his jury selection interview?


Yes. In the questionnaire. He was 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 first asked, with the second asking: "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 reportedly answered "no" to both questions.
Do you have a link to the questionnaire? I did not know about the second question.


Just the story linked in the OP.
57Bear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Canon said:

quash said:

Canon said:

drahthaar said:

The judge prolly now wishes he had granted a change of venue.
I'm not bothered by his t-shirt or attending the protest.
In the only interview I herd, the juror sounded reasonable and intelligent.
What did he lie about? Was it in his jury selection interview?


Yes. In the questionnaire. He was 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 first asked, with the second asking: "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 reportedly answered "no" to both questions.
Do you have a link to the questionnaire? I did not know about the second question.


Just the story linked in the OP.
https://fox2now.com/news/national/chauvin-juror-defends-participation-in-dc-protest-after-online-scrutiny/

https://thehill.com/homenews/state-watch/551624-chauvin-juror-on-attending-protest-i-just-thought-it-was-a-good

https://sports.yahoo.com/chauvin-trial-juror-participated-blm-203729051.html

https://www.thehour.com/news/article/Chauvin-juror-defends-participation-in-Washington-16148644.php

SIC EM 94
How long do you want to ignore this user?
One of the other juries said she could hear the police helicopters at night and feared what might happen to her neighborhood...before they had reached a verdict.
OsoCoreyell
How long do you want to ignore this user?
I think from the video that Chauvin was guilty. I listened to a lot of the trial, and I thought he was guilty.

But I am an absolutist when it comes to defendant's rights. Everyone deserves and has a right to a fair trial by an impartial jury of his or her peers. I know that won't be a popular opinion, but if you allow yourself as a society to say "Yeah, but in this case, everyone kind of agrees he's a bad guy, so lets just let this one pass," then the principle means nothing for the rest of us. This is formerly the position of the ACLU. I don't even know those guys anymore.
drahthaar
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Canon said:

drahthaar said:

The judge prolly now wishes he had granted a change of venue.
I'm not bothered by his t-shirt or attending the protest.
In the only interview I herd, the juror sounded reasonable and intelligent.
What did he lie about? Was it in his jury selection interview?


Yes. In the questionnaire. He was 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 first asked, with the second asking: "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 reportedly answered "no" to both questions.
Ah! That's going to make this interesting beyond the shirt logo.
Canon
How long do you want to ignore this user?
drahthaar said:

Canon said:

drahthaar said:

The judge prolly now wishes he had granted a change of venue.
I'm not bothered by his t-shirt or attending the protest.
In the only interview I herd, the juror sounded reasonable and intelligent.
What did he lie about? Was it in his jury selection interview?


Yes. In the questionnaire. He was 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 first asked, with the second asking: "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 reportedly answered "no" to both questions.
Ah! That's going to make this interesting beyond the shirt logo.


To be sure.
quash
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Canon said:

quash said:

Canon said:

drahthaar said:

The judge prolly now wishes he had granted a change of venue.
I'm not bothered by his t-shirt or attending the protest.
In the only interview I herd, the juror sounded reasonable and intelligent.
What did he lie about? Was it in his jury selection interview?


Yes. In the questionnaire. He was 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 first asked, with the second asking: "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 reportedly answered "no" to both questions.
Do you have a link to the questionnaire? I did not know about the second question.


Just the story linked in the OP.


My bad, I see it now.

There's a discussion about this on a Texas lawyers group. Most feel like the first question set the framework for the second question as limited to Minnesota.

In any event, here it would be harmless error on appeal. No idea about Minnesota.

The expected motion for new trial has been filed. I don't expect the venue portion to be successful. The juror issue has mucked it up but probably not enough for a retrial. This will be decided on appeal.
“Life, liberty, and property do not exist because men have made laws. On the contrary, it was the fact that life, liberty, and property existed beforehand that caused men to make laws in the first place.” (The Law, p.6) Frederic Bastiat
Refresh
Page 1 of 1
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.