Thread for Derek Chauvin trial watchers?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Chauvin is a murderer. That was decided in a court of law. Deal with it.

True. That jury had no other choice.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^Okay 12:26. Please tell us what the real issues are?

DP. I'll chime in. Police brutality. Bad practices. Guns. Poverty. Lack of opportunity and jobs in poor areas. Criminality. Lack of political will. Fear.

Insisting everything is about racist cops glosses over the real problem and real solutions.

95% of your list is a result of systemic racism.

In your world, is there anything you don't view as a product of systemic racism?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^Okay 12:26. Please tell us what the real issues are?

DP. I'll chime in. Police brutality. Bad practices. Guns. Poverty. Lack of opportunity and jobs in poor areas. Criminality. Lack of political will. Fear.

Insisting everything is about racist cops glosses over the real problem and real solutions.

95% of your list is a result of systemic racism.

In your world, is there anything you don't view as a product of systemic racism?

NP, I think the better question for you is, what do you see that IS the product of systemic racism? I'm sincerely curious as to what your list would be.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^Okay 12:26. Please tell us what the real issues are?

DP. I'll chime in. Police brutality. Bad practices. Guns. Poverty. Lack of opportunity and jobs in poor areas. Criminality. Lack of political will. Fear.

Insisting everything is about racist cops glosses over the real problem and real solutions.

95% of your list is a result of systemic racism.

In your world, is there anything you don't view as a product of systemic racism? [/quote

NP, I think the better question for you is, what do you see that IS the product of systemic racism? I'm sincerely curious as to what your list would be.

I asked first 😊but for starters, I think segregated facilities, very limited to substandard educational opportunities, unfair housing restrictions, biased banking limitations and few job opportunities top the list.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^Okay 12:26. Please tell us what the real issues are?

DP. I'll chime in. Police brutality. Bad practices. Guns. Poverty. Lack of opportunity and jobs in poor areas. Criminality. Lack of political will. Fear.

Insisting everything is about racist cops glosses over the real problem and real solutions.

95% of your list is a result of systemic racism.

In your world, is there anything you don't view as a product of systemic racism? [/quote

NP, I think the better question for you is, what do you see that IS the product of systemic racism? I'm sincerely curious as to what your list would be.

I asked first 😊but for starters, I think segregated facilities, very limited to substandard educational opportunities, unfair housing restrictions, biased banking limitations and few job opportunities top the list.

Tell me about current housing restrictions or banking limitations?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^Okay 12:26. Please tell us what the real issues are?

DP. I'll chime in. Police brutality. Bad practices. Guns. Poverty. Lack of opportunity and jobs in poor areas. Criminality. Lack of political will. Fear.

Insisting everything is about racist cops glosses over the real problem and real solutions.

95% of your list is a result of systemic racism.

In your world, is there anything you don't view as a product of systemic racism? [/quote

NP, I think the better question for you is, what do you see that IS the product of systemic racism? I'm sincerely curious as to what your list would be.

I asked first 😊but for starters, I think segregated facilities, very limited to substandard educational opportunities, unfair housing restrictions, biased banking limitations and few job opportunities top the list.

And all of that contributes to the things that pp pointed out as a result f systemic racism, but I guess your professor hasn't gotten to that point in the syllabus yet.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Chauvin has done this before, to a 14-year-old boy.

https://www.mprnews.org/story/2020/11/18/prosecutors-14yearold-boy-cried-mom-as-chauvin-knelt-on-his-back-for-17-minutes

The DOJ is now investigating this incident.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:^Okay 12:26. Please tell us what the real issues are?

All part of the plan. Dismantle the police force make everything about race. Destabilize the country. Allow rioting. All that pent up rage about COVID shut down directed to destabilization. Why does the death of one junkie matter so much ?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^Okay 12:26. Please tell us what the real issues are?

All part of the plan. Dismantle the police force make everything about race. Destabilize the country. Allow rioting. All that pent up rage about COVID shut down directed to destabilization. Why does the death of one junkie matter so much ?

Is this sarcasm or satire? Please tell me it is.

[Anonymous]

Interview with juror #52. One holdout on each of the charges, convinced by the others.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/a-juror-in-derek-chauvin-trial-lifts-the-curtain-on-deliberations-11619705799

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Interview with juror #52. One holdout on each of the charges, convinced by the others.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/a-juror-in-derek-chauvin-trial-lifts-the-curtain-on-deliberations-11619705799

That juror interview demonstrates that the jury violated their oath by prejudging the case rather than waiting until deliberation and discussion to form opinions. The juror in question also had an improper motive for serving on the jury, i.e., personal fame and participating in what he believes to be an historic event. His personal bias is also evident in other comments he made. Chauvin may or may not be a complete piece of crap. That doesn’t mean he wasn’t entitled to an unbiased jury that fulfilled its oath.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Interview with juror #52. One holdout on each of the charges, convinced by the others.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/a-juror-in-derek-chauvin-trial-lifts-the-curtain-on-deliberations-11619705799

That juror interview demonstrates that the jury violated their oath by prejudging the case rather than waiting until deliberation and discussion to form opinions. The juror in question also had an improper motive for serving on the jury, i.e., personal fame and participating in what he believes to be an historic event. His personal bias is also evident in other comments he made. Chauvin may or may not be a complete piece of crap. That doesn’t mean he wasn’t entitled to an unbiased jury that fulfilled its oath.

Um, you can form opinions based on the evidence presented at the trial. You don’t have to wait until you’re in the jury room.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Interview with juror #52. One holdout on each of the charges, convinced by the others.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/a-juror-in-derek-chauvin-trial-lifts-the-curtain-on-deliberations-11619705799

That juror interview demonstrates that the jury violated their oath by prejudging the case rather than waiting until deliberation and discussion to form opinions. The juror in question also had an improper motive for serving on the jury, i.e., personal fame and participating in what he believes to be an historic event. His personal bias is also evident in other comments he made. Chauvin may or may not be a complete piece of crap. That doesn’t mean he wasn’t entitled to an unbiased jury that fulfilled its oath.

Um, you can form opinions based on the evidence presented at the trial. You don’t have to wait until you’re in the jury room.

Yeah, really. Do you really think it "bias" that the natural human tendency is to form opinions as information is presented to you?

[Anonymous]

Brandon Mitchell was one of the jurors who said former officer Derek Chauvin was guilty of second-degree unintentional murder, third-degree murder and second-degree manslaughter of George Floyd.

But now a photo of Mitchell at a Washington, D.C. rally called "Get Your Knee Off Our Necks,” or “Get Off Our Necks” for short, has surfaced online, Business Insider reported, and leading some to be concerned about a conflict of interest.

The Get Your Knee Off Our Necks march on August 28, 2020 was an event organized by the National Action Network, which is owned by Al Sharpton and partnered with Martin Luther King III.

The protest, where Mitchell wore a Black Lives Matter T-shirt that read “Get your knee off our necks,” was a response to the Floyd incident that happened on May 25, 2020.

Some legal experts have told the Star Tribune, CBS Minnesota and The Washington Post the perception of a BLM supporter determining the fate of an officer could lead to questions in court but would likely not change the outcome.

“Jury consultant Alan Tuerkheimer said it is likely that Chauvin’s defense attorney Eric J. Nelson will use this information to push for an appeal but argued that the photo itself would not be enough to dismiss the conviction,” The Washington Post reported.

Jurors were instructed to answer a questionnaire if they had any involvement in the recent Floyd protests whether it be themselves or someone they know, which Mitchell felt like he answered both questions truthfully – he said no.


How can "no" be an honest answer to this question????

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Brandon Mitchell was one of the jurors who said former officer Derek Chauvin was guilty of second-degree unintentional murder, third-degree murder and second-degree manslaughter of George Floyd.

But now a photo of Mitchell at a Washington, D.C. rally called "Get Your Knee Off Our Necks,” or “Get Off Our Necks” for short, has surfaced online, Business Insider reported, and leading some to be concerned about a conflict of interest.

The Get Your Knee Off Our Necks march on August 28, 2020 was an event organized by the National Action Network, which is owned by Al Sharpton and partnered with Martin Luther King III.

The protest, where Mitchell wore a Black Lives Matter T-shirt that read “Get your knee off our necks,” was a response to the Floyd incident that happened on May 25, 2020.

Some legal experts have told the Star Tribune, CBS Minnesota and The Washington Post the perception of a BLM supporter determining the fate of an officer could lead to questions in court but would likely not change the outcome.

“Jury consultant Alan Tuerkheimer said it is likely that Chauvin’s defense attorney Eric J. Nelson will use this information to push for an appeal but argued that the photo itself would not be enough to dismiss the conviction,” The Washington Post reported.

Jurors were instructed to answer a questionnaire if they had any involvement in the recent Floyd protests whether it be themselves or someone they know, which Mitchell felt like he answered both questions truthfully – he said no.


How can "no" be an honest answer to this question????

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U38gCx4ZHXg

I just watched this video. I truly hope this does not F*** anything up or give his appeal any merit.