Will you accept the verdict in the Chauven trial?

[Salty]

OKAY - I just realized that this thread has went way off OP!
It is about the Chauven trial - and particualr the JURY

There were no juries involved in the election trials.

The poll is about Chauven!

LETS get back to OP -which is Quoted in its entirety from post ## 1.

We must be able to trust our justice system, even if a trial result is different from what I believe it should be.

I remember the OJ verdict and I was stunned. On reflection, the police made so many errors in the collection and storage of evidence, reasonable doubt was certain.

The jury hears all the evidence and must follow the judges instructions. We have to trust they will get it right or our institution of Justice in America could suffer great harm.

peace to you

 

[AustinC]

OKAY - I just realized that this thread has went way off OP!
It is about the Chauven trial - and particualr the JURY

There were no juries involved in the election trials.

The poll is about Chauven!

LETS get back to OP -which is Quoted in its entirety from post ## 1.

Great.
The fact is there are 12 jurors chosen who are charged with reviewing the facts of the case and justly determining the innocence or guilt of Officer Chauvin.
I will accept the decision of the jury. Thankfully they are sequestered and aren't getting the emotionally charged information regarding the latest shooting up in the Twin Cities.

 

[777]

Accept the verdict? What does that even mean? Not going to riot regardless, my acceptance or lack thereof doesn't matter at all/

But this jury is NOT sequestered right now and they know all about the shooting:

Chauvin Trial Judge Denies Request For Jury Sequestration After Police Shooting : Live Updates: Trial Over George Floyd's Killing : NPR

reason 1,283.837 that any guilty on any charge will be overturned on appeal. That's what you'll need to accept.

 

[Revmitchell]

Prosecution, Judge Block Jury From Hearing State Interview With Floyd’s Alleged Drug Dealer


Nope I wont. Because of this I just made my decision.

 

[atpollard]

Not since David faced Goliath has there been such a heavy hand on the scales of Justice ... only this time God is on the sidelines and the hand is on the side of Goliath. The Jury of 12 ordinary citizens is free to review all of the facts presented by a Prosecutorial Dream Team related to the guilt of the officer, while denied the right to consider any of the PBA appointed Defense Attorney's information related to the criminal that might sway the jury ... and arrive at whatever verdict they think appropriate to achieve "justice", prevent riots, and avoid personal death threats.

What could be more "impartial"?

 

[canadyjd]

Prosecution, Judge Block Jury From Hearing State Interview With Floyd’s Alleged Drug Dealer


Nope I wont. Because of this I just made my decision.

The man stated he would plead the 5th. He cannot be compelled to testify.

His non-testimony cannot be used as evidence, therefore the judge rightly decided he can’t be put on the stand, in front of the jury, just to plead the 5th.

peace to you

 

[Reformed1689]

Prosecution, Judge Block Jury From Hearing State Interview With Floyd’s Alleged Drug Dealer


Nope I wont. Because of this I just made my decision.

Here is from the article: Judge Peter Cahill has denied Nelson’s request to allow the jury to hear the statement from Hall, or even a summary of the statement. According to Cahill, “there is nothing in the statement to indicate it was trustworthy which is required for it to be presented under an exception to the hearsay rule,” Law & Crime reported.

How is it hearsay if the guy was there? If he was a witness? That's not hearsay. This proves my point about judges.

 

[canadyjd]

Not since David faced Goliath has there been such a heavy hand on the scales of Justice ... only this time God is on the sidelines and the hand is on the side of Goliath. The Jury of 12 ordinary citizens is free to review all of the facts presented by a Prosecutorial Dream Team related to the guilt of the officer, while denied the right to consider any of the PBA appointed Defense Attorney's information related to the criminal that might sway the jury ... and arrive at whatever verdict they think appropriate to achieve "justice", prevent riots, and avoid personal death threats.

What could be more "impartial"?

So, Chauvin has been compared to a martyr and now compared to David, a man after God’s on heart.

Mr. Floyd was no angel. Mr. Chauvin is no David facing Goliath.

peace to you

 

[rlvaughn]

Here is an explanation of the hearsay rule, according to Cornell Law School:

"The rule prohibiting hearsay (out of court statements offered as proof of that statement) from being admitted as evidence because of the inability of the other party to cross-examine the maker of the statement. See: hearsay

"There are a number of exceptions to the hearsay rule (including present-sense impression, excited utterances, declarations of present state of mind, dying and the business records exceptions), as well as things defined not to be hearsay (admission of a party-opponent, and prior statements of a witness)."​

 

[canadyjd]

Here is an explanation of the hearsay rule, according to Cornell Law School:

"The rule prohibiting hearsay (out of court statements offered as proof of that statement) from being admitted as evidence because of the inability of the other party to cross-examine the maker of the statement. See: hearsay

"There are a number of exceptions to the hearsay rule (including present-sense impression, excited utterances, declarations of present state of mind, dying and the business records exceptions), as well as things defined not to be hearsay (admission of a party-opponent, and prior statements of a witness)."​

Thanks for the info.

peace to you

 

[atpollard]

So, Chauvin has been compared to a martyr and now compared to David, a man after God’s on heart.

Mr. Floyd was no angel. Mr. Chauvin is no David facing Goliath.

peace to you

Mr Chauvin is likely every bit the thoughtless, insensitive jerk that he appeared in the video as he restrained the lying, thrashing violent addict Mr Floyd during his fatal overdose. However, even jerks deserve a fair trail. Bringing in special prosecutors from Washington usually reserved for things like Organized Crime cases to go up against the local defense attorney hired by his union ... Can you seriously claim the playing field is level in this case?

The goal is not "justice", the goal is to ensure a "conviction".

 

[AustinC]

So, Chauvin has been compared to a martyr and now compared to David, a man after God’s on heart.

Mr. Floyd was no angel. Mr. Chauvin is no David facing Goliath.

peace to you

Correct. Officer Chauvin had been reprimanded a few times before this for abusive treatment of those he stopped. The Minneapolis Police Department has had a long history of mistreatment going back to the 1960s when they took indigenous men, threw them in the trunk, brought them out of the city and beat them to an inch of their life. The union stood up for Chauvin and then potential prosecutor, Amy Klobucheur (now Senator) chose not to prosecute.

Point is, Officer Chauvin is no saint by any means.

I will trust the jury to do what is just. If convicted, the defense can call for a retrial if they think it was unfair.

 

[AustinC]

Mr Chauvin is likely every bit the thoughtless, insensitive jerk that he appeared in the video as he restrained the lying, thrashing violent addict Mr Floyd during his fatal overdose. However, even jerks deserve a fair trail. Bringing in special prosecutors from Washington usually reserved for things like Organized Crime cases to go up against the local defense attorney hired by his union ... Can you seriously claim the playing field is level in this case?

The goal is not "justice", the goal is to ensure a "conviction".

It is clear that State Attorney General, Keith Ellison, former Congressman of Ilhan Omar's district, is a shady sleeze ball. He's got friends in low places.

This does not mean the jury cannot do its job.

 

[RighteousnessTemperance&]

Correct. Officer Chauvin had been reprimanded a few times before this for abusive treatment of those he stopped. The Minneapolis Police Department has had a long history of mistreatment going back to the 1960s when they took indigenous men, threw them in the trunk, brought them out of the city and beat them to an inch of their life. The union stood up for Chauvin and then potential prosecutor, Amy Klobucheur (now Senator) chose not to prosecute.

Point is, Officer Chauvin is no saint by any means.

I will trust the jury to do what is just. If convicted, the defense can call for a retrial if they think it was unfair.

Chauvin was born in 1976. Point is, citing an incident from the 1960’s as evidence is disingenuous. You might make a “good” prosecutor, but there is no sense of justice evident in your post, nor reason for trust.

 

[RighteousnessTemperance&]

Prosecution, Judge Block Jury From Hearing State Interview With Floyd’s Alleged Drug Dealer

What is the legal rationale that demonstrates no bias in the decision to not only disallow immunity but to not explain why? What's the judge up to?

The prosecution has made it clear that they do not want the statements from Hall to be heard by the jury; the state has even refused to grant Hall immunity in exchange for testimony. Nelson has requested that the prosecution outline their decision to deny Hall immunity, but Cahill has denied the request.​

 

[RighteousnessTemperance&]

Accept the verdict? What does that even mean? Not going to riot regardless, my acceptance or lack thereof doesn't matter at all/

But this jury is NOT sequestered right now and they know all about the shooting:

Chauvin Trial Judge Denies Request For Jury Sequestration After Police Shooting : Live Updates: Trial Over George Floyd's Killing : NPR

reason 1,283.837 that any guilty on any charge will be overturned on appeal. That's what you'll need to accept.

More likely than not, they know only certain "facts" about that shooting, the ones that fit "the narrative."

 

[AustinC]

Chauvin was born in 1976. Point is, citing an incident from the 1960’s as evidence is disingenuous. You might make a “good” prosecutor, but there is no sense of justice evident in your post, nor reason for trust.

The history of Minneapolis Police is riddled with bad cops and a union that harbored them.
Chauvin had earlier reprimands for mistreating those he stopped. This time, a person died and he kneeled on the man's throat. That kneeling may not have killed George Floyd, but it also wasn't necessary.

 

[Yeshua1]

The history of Minneapolis Police is riddled with bad cops and a union that harbored them.
Chauvin had earlier reprimands for mistreating those he stopped. This time, a person died and he kneeled on the man's throat. That kneeling may not have killed George Floyd, but it also wasn't necessary.

Why did they not request a change of venue?

 

[RighteousnessTemperance&]

The history of Minneapolis Police is riddled with bad cops and a union that harbored them.
Chauvin had earlier reprimands for mistreating those he stopped. This time, a person died and he kneeled on the man's throat. That kneeling may not have killed George Floyd, but it also wasn't necessary.

LOL. Now it’s his throat? Henry Gray must be ROFL in his grave.

And the area they were in is crime-ridden. But trying to pile on “evidence” by appealing to someone else’s history is disingenuous, the opposite of desiring justice, unless the definition of justice is to make someone a scapegoat or simply railroad them.

 

[atpollard]

Why did they not request a change of venue?

Defense did ... request was denied.