Thread for Derek Chauvin trial watchers?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Coming in late: death certificate says “homocide”, wth is the debate about???

Homicide, as they said earlier in the trial, isn't a legal designation or something that results in an automatic conviction. There are only a few options; "natural", "suicide", "homicide", "other" (am I missing one?). So the ME said homicide, but the defense is arguing that that's a medical opinion.

Homicide from a medical viewpoint doesn't imply intent or malice.

I thought the defense attorney did a great job explaining that and with his closing argument. I was a full guilty and now I could not convict. I am concentrating on the entire incident, not just the 9 minutes.

Same. His earnestness is a plus.

Agreed. Can be more effective than a polished performance

Same. I am an attorney and was very much in the guilty camp for at least the second and third offenses (I was always doubtful on the top charge). After hearing the defense’s closing arguments, i could not convict on any of the charges. I am flabbergasted at my change in view.

I am as well. I was a total guilty until today. I took out the emotion and studied the video from the officer’s camera, and didn’t just focus on the 9 minutes. It was eye opening, and I would not convict. I predict a hung jury and no retrial.

How about we kneel lightly on Chauvin's neck for 9 minutes and then let him go free.

It's protocol, right?

How about he get in the car and he would be alive?

He was having an anxiety attack. That’s not an excuse to kill him.

This. Black men can have them too, not just upstanding white people. He new this police interaction would kill him, and it did. He said it over and over again. He knew.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Coming in late: death certificate says “homocide”, wth is the debate about???

Homicide, as they said earlier in the trial, isn't a legal designation or something that results in an automatic conviction. There are only a few options; "natural", "suicide", "homicide", "other" (am I missing one?). So the ME said homicide, but the defense is arguing that that's a medical opinion.

Homicide from a medical viewpoint doesn't imply intent or malice.

I thought the defense attorney did a great job explaining that and with his closing argument. I was a full guilty and now I could not convict. I am concentrating on the entire incident, not just the 9 minutes.

Same. His earnestness is a plus.

Agreed. Can be more effective than a polished performance

Same. I am an attorney and was very much in the guilty camp for at least the second and third offenses (I was always doubtful on the top charge). After hearing the defense’s closing arguments, i could not convict on any of the charges. I am flabbergasted at my change in view.

I am as well. I was a total guilty until today. I took out the emotion and studied the video from the officer’s camera, and didn’t just focus on the 9 minutes. It was eye opening, and I would not convict. I predict a hung jury and no retrial.

Another who changed their mind after the defenses closing arguments. I was 100% sure that he was guilty, until today. If I was on that jury, I wouldn’t be able to convict.

[Anonymous]

With the video tape, if they don’t convict here, cops have a license to kill black men. It’s absurd that people can watch the tape and think it’s anything but murder

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:With the video tape, if they don’t convict here, cops have a license to kill black men. It’s absurd that people can watch the tape and think it’s anything but murder

I don't understand these new posters.

What else killed Floyd besides Chauvin? Without Chauvin, he would not have died. And Chauvin wasn't kneeling on him inadvertently or accidentally. He was there on purpose.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The fact they deliberated for several hours tonight with no verdict says to me it’s going to be hung....

Analysts were saying it would be unusual to conclude quickly. They have to go over the whole trial.

They do not have to go over the whole trial. They could get back there, do an initial vote, all be unanimous and be done.

Have you ever read 12 angry men?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Coming in late: death certificate says “homocide”, wth is the debate about???

Homicide, as they said earlier in the trial, isn't a legal designation or something that results in an automatic conviction. There are only a few options; "natural", "suicide", "homicide", "other" (am I missing one?). So the ME said homicide, but the defense is arguing that that's a medical opinion.

Homicide from a medical viewpoint doesn't imply intent or malice.

I thought the defense attorney did a great job explaining that and with his closing argument. I was a full guilty and now I could not convict. I am concentrating on the entire incident, not just the 9 minutes.

Same. His earnestness is a plus.

Agreed. Can be more effective than a polished performance

Same. I am an attorney and was very much in the guilty camp for at least the second and third offenses (I was always doubtful on the top charge). After hearing the defense’s closing arguments, i could not convict on any of the charges. I am flabbergasted at my change in view.

I am as well. I was a total guilty until today. I took out the emotion and studied the video from the officer’s camera, and didn’t just focus on the 9 minutes. It was eye opening, and I would not convict. I predict a hung jury and no retrial.

How about we kneel lightly on Chauvin's neck for 9 minutes and then let him go free.

It's protocol, right?

How about he get in the car and he would be alive?

He was having an anxiety attack. That’s not an excuse to kill him.

This. Black men can have them too, not just upstanding white people. He new this police interaction would kill him, and it did. He said it over and over again. He knew.

I’m not saying what Chauvin did was right. But, had Floyd just cooperated he wouldn’t be dead! He fought them because he was jacked up on drugs. He should have just gotten in the car. Not to say that what happened is right, it’s not. But just don’t fight the cops.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The fact they deliberated for several hours tonight with no verdict says to me it’s going to be hung....

Not sure if we know that for certain, but we know the verdict won’t be read tonight. Cahill doesn’t want to read it in the evening. It looks like others following the case also remember Cahill saying they would stop at 7 tonight. But it seems like they went until 8. Don’t know if that indicates anything. Maybe the proposed schedule just changed.

I think they would deliberate at least tomorrow. If they come back and say the jury can’t reach a verdict, the judge can ask them to deliberate more (would be up to judge depending on length of time and questions that are sent out, etc).

For those who didn’t follow jury selection, the jury pool started with a questionnaire. The questionnaire asked jurors to rate “How favorable or unfavorable are you about Black Lives Matter?” and “How favorable or unfavorable are you about Blues Lives Matter?” I don’t know what the exact calculus was to determine which jurors were removed from the jury pool on the basis of the questionnaire, but I would guess generally they looked for more neutral answers. Some in the jury pool who got to voir dire (questioning by the judge and counsel) did mention they or family had attended some protests, or were close to an officer (I would guess those extremely close like married were weeded out, I recall for example one juror talking about a longtime neighbor).

You can read the whole questionnaire here: https://www.mncourts.gov/mncourtsgov/media/High-Profile-Cases/27-CR-20-12646/JurorQuestionnaire12222020.pdf

Another question that was asked of jurors was, paraphrasing here, “would you believe a police officer’s word more than a citizen.” If they stated that the police officer would be more credible, they were removed for cause.

I was surprised jury selection went as fast as it did. There was a bit of set back from the settlement announcement which led to two previously seated jurors being dismissed.

This jury is fairly young and diverse.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Coming in late: death certificate says “homocide”, wth is the debate about???

Homicide, as they said earlier in the trial, isn't a legal designation or something that results in an automatic conviction. There are only a few options; "natural", "suicide", "homicide", "other" (am I missing one?). So the ME said homicide, but the defense is arguing that that's a medical opinion.

Homicide from a medical viewpoint doesn't imply intent or malice.

I thought the defense attorney did a great job explaining that and with his closing argument. I was a full guilty and now I could not convict. I am concentrating on the entire incident, not just the 9 minutes.

Same. His earnestness is a plus.

Agreed. Can be more effective than a polished performance

Same. I am an attorney and was very much in the guilty camp for at least the second and third offenses (I was always doubtful on the top charge). After hearing the defense’s closing arguments, i could not convict on any of the charges. I am flabbergasted at my change in view.

I am as well. I was a total guilty until today. I took out the emotion and studied the video from the officer’s camera, and didn’t just focus on the 9 minutes. It was eye opening, and I would not convict. I predict a hung jury and no retrial.

How about we kneel lightly on Chauvin's neck for 9 minutes and then let him go free.

It's protocol, right?

How about he get in the car and he would be alive?

He was having an anxiety attack. That’s not an excuse to kill him.

This. Black men can have them too, not just upstanding white people. He new this police interaction would kill him, and it did. He said it over and over again. He knew.

I’m not saying what Chauvin did was right. But, had Floyd just cooperated he wouldn’t be dead! He fought them because he was jacked up on drugs. He should have just gotten in the car. Not to say that what happened is right, it’s not. But just don’t fight the cops.

Would he have lived if he had gotten into the car? Would Chauvin not have restrained him at the jail? Or accidentally driven in such a way as to accidentally kill him, as has happened in other high profile cases?

He was right to be afraid. His time was up. The police killed him.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:With the video tape, if they don’t convict here, cops have a license to kill black men. It’s absurd that people can watch the tape and think it’s anything but murder

I do so agree with you!!
He killed G Floyd, and the defense plainly manipulated fact today.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Coming in late: death certificate says “homocide”, wth is the debate about???

Homicide, as they said earlier in the trial, isn't a legal designation or something that results in an automatic conviction. There are only a few options; "natural", "suicide", "homicide", "other" (am I missing one?). So the ME said homicide, but the defense is arguing that that's a medical opinion.

Homicide from a medical viewpoint doesn't imply intent or malice.

I thought the defense attorney did a great job explaining that and with his closing argument. I was a full guilty and now I could not convict. I am concentrating on the entire incident, not just the 9 minutes.

Same. His earnestness is a plus.

Agreed. Can be more effective than a polished performance

Same. I am an attorney and was very much in the guilty camp for at least the second and third offenses (I was always doubtful on the top charge). After hearing the defense’s closing arguments, i could not convict on any of the charges. I am flabbergasted at my change in view.

I am as well. I was a total guilty until today. I took out the emotion and studied the video from the officer’s camera, and didn’t just focus on the 9 minutes. It was eye opening, and I would not convict. I predict a hung jury and no retrial.

How about we kneel lightly on Chauvin's neck for 9 minutes and then let him go free.

It's protocol, right?

How about he get in the car and he would be alive?

He was having an anxiety attack. That’s not an excuse to kill him.

This. Black men can have them too, not just upstanding white people. He new this police interaction would kill him, and it did. He said it over and over again. He knew.

I’m not saying what Chauvin did was right. But, had Floyd just cooperated he wouldn’t be dead! He fought them because he was jacked up on drugs. He should have just gotten in the car. Not to say that what happened is right, it’s not. But just don’t fight the cops.

This should never have been a matter of life and death. Period. People cooperating with the cops get killed too. There is no excuse for what Chauvin did. So sick of seeing people defend this murderous coward.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:With the video tape, if they don’t convict here, cops have a license to kill black men. It’s absurd that people can watch the tape and think it’s anything but murder

I don't understand these new posters.

What else killed Floyd besides Chauvin? Without Chauvin, he would not have died. And Chauvin wasn't kneeling on him inadvertently or accidentally. He was there on purpose.

Thank you. There are some weird posts here.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Coming in late: death certificate says “homocide”, wth is the debate about???

Homicide, as they said earlier in the trial, isn't a legal designation or something that results in an automatic conviction. There are only a few options; "natural", "suicide", "homicide", "other" (am I missing one?). So the ME said homicide, but the defense is arguing that that's a medical opinion.

Homicide from a medical viewpoint doesn't imply intent or malice.

I thought the defense attorney did a great job explaining that and with his closing argument. I was a full guilty and now I could not convict. I am concentrating on the entire incident, not just the 9 minutes.

Same. His earnestness is a plus.

Agreed. Can be more effective than a polished performance

Same. I am an attorney and was very much in the guilty camp for at least the second and third offenses (I was always doubtful on the top charge). After hearing the defense’s closing arguments, i could not convict on any of the charges. I am flabbergasted at my change in view.

I am as well. I was a total guilty until today. I took out the emotion and studied the video from the officer’s camera, and didn’t just focus on the 9 minutes. It was eye opening, and I would not convict. I predict a hung jury and no retrial.

How about we kneel lightly on Chauvin's neck for 9 minutes and then let him go free.

It's protocol, right?

How about he get in the car and he would be alive?

He was having an anxiety attack. That’s not an excuse to kill him.

This. Black men can have them too, not just upstanding white people. He new this police interaction would kill him, and it did. He said it over and over again. He knew.

I’m not saying what Chauvin did was right. But, had Floyd just cooperated he wouldn’t be dead! He fought them because he was jacked up on drugs. He should have just gotten in the car. Not to say that what happened is right, it’s not. But just don’t fight the cops.

This should never have been a matter of life and death. Period. People cooperating with the cops get killed too. There is no excuse for what Chauvin did. So sick of seeing people defend this murderous coward.

Not more than 10 miles from where George Floyd was killed is where Philando Castile was murdered. He was fully cooperating and telling the cop that he was a registered gun owner. It didn't matter. He got shot to death.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Coming in late: death certificate says “homocide”, wth is the debate about???

Homicide, as they said earlier in the trial, isn't a legal designation or something that results in an automatic conviction. There are only a few options; "natural", "suicide", "homicide", "other" (am I missing one?). So the ME said homicide, but the defense is arguing that that's a medical opinion.

Homicide from a medical viewpoint doesn't imply intent or malice.

I thought the defense attorney did a great job explaining that and with his closing argument. I was a full guilty and now I could not convict. I am concentrating on the entire incident, not just the 9 minutes.

Same. His earnestness is a plus.

Agreed. Can be more effective than a polished performance

Same. I am an attorney and was very much in the guilty camp for at least the second and third offenses (I was always doubtful on the top charge). After hearing the defense’s closing arguments, i could not convict on any of the charges. I am flabbergasted at my change in view.

I am as well. I was a total guilty until today. I took out the emotion and studied the video from the officer’s camera, and didn’t just focus on the 9 minutes. It was eye opening, and I would not convict. I predict a hung jury and no retrial.

How about we kneel lightly on Chauvin's neck for 9 minutes and then let him go free.

It's protocol, right?

How about he get in the car and he would be alive?

He was having an anxiety attack. That’s not an excuse to kill him.

This. Black men can have them too, not just upstanding white people. He new this police interaction would kill him, and it did. He said it over and over again. He knew.

I’m not saying what Chauvin did was right. But, had Floyd just cooperated he wouldn’t be dead! He fought them because he was jacked up on drugs. He should have just gotten in the car. Not to say that what happened is right, it’s not. But just don’t fight the cops.

Would he have lived if he had gotten into the car? Would Chauvin not have restrained him at the jail? Or accidentally driven in such a way as to accidentally kill him, as has happened in other high profile cases?

He was right to be afraid. His time was up. The police killed him.

I’m sorry, but this is a stretch.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Coming in late: death certificate says “homocide”, wth is the debate about???

Homicide, as they said earlier in the trial, isn't a legal designation or something that results in an automatic conviction. There are only a few options; "natural", "suicide", "homicide", "other" (am I missing one?). So the ME said homicide, but the defense is arguing that that's a medical opinion.

Homicide from a medical viewpoint doesn't imply intent or malice.

I thought the defense attorney did a great job explaining that and with his closing argument. I was a full guilty and now I could not convict. I am concentrating on the entire incident, not just the 9 minutes.

Same. His earnestness is a plus.

Agreed. Can be more effective than a polished performance

Same. I am an attorney and was very much in the guilty camp for at least the second and third offenses (I was always doubtful on the top charge). After hearing the defense’s closing arguments, i could not convict on any of the charges. I am flabbergasted at my change in view.

I am as well. I was a total guilty until today. I took out the emotion and studied the video from the officer’s camera, and didn’t just focus on the 9 minutes. It was eye opening, and I would not convict. I predict a hung jury and no retrial.

How about we kneel lightly on Chauvin's neck for 9 minutes and then let him go free.

It's protocol, right?

How about he get in the car and he would be alive?

He was having an anxiety attack. That’s not an excuse to kill him.

This. Black men can have them too, not just upstanding white people. He new this police interaction would kill him, and it did. He said it over and over again. He knew.

I’m not saying what Chauvin did was right. But, had Floyd just cooperated he wouldn’t be dead! He fought them because he was jacked up on drugs. He should have just gotten in the car. Not to say that what happened is right, it’s not. But just don’t fight the cops.

This should never have been a matter of life and death. Period. People cooperating with the cops get killed too. There is no excuse for what Chauvin did. So sick of seeing people defend this murderous coward.

No one's defending what he did. We are trying to apply the specific kind of thinking and standards you're supposed to apply if you're on a jury and certainty beyond reasonable doubt.

I could be convinced of the 3rd charge that has to do with negligence but probably not the other two.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Coming in late: death certificate says “homocide”, wth is the debate about???

Homicide, as they said earlier in the trial, isn't a legal designation or something that results in an automatic conviction. There are only a few options; "natural", "suicide", "homicide", "other" (am I missing one?). So the ME said homicide, but the defense is arguing that that's a medical opinion.

Homicide from a medical viewpoint doesn't imply intent or malice.

I thought the defense attorney did a great job explaining that and with his closing argument. I was a full guilty and now I could not convict. I am concentrating on the entire incident, not just the 9 minutes.

Same. His earnestness is a plus.

Agreed. Can be more effective than a polished performance

Same. I am an attorney and was very much in the guilty camp for at least the second and third offenses (I was always doubtful on the top charge). After hearing the defense’s closing arguments, i could not convict on any of the charges. I am flabbergasted at my change in view.

I am as well. I was a total guilty until today. I took out the emotion and studied the video from the officer’s camera, and didn’t just focus on the 9 minutes. It was eye opening, and I would not convict. I predict a hung jury and no retrial.

How about we kneel lightly on Chauvin's neck for 9 minutes and then let him go free.

It's protocol, right?

How about he get in the car and he would be alive?

He was having an anxiety attack. That’s not an excuse to kill him.

This. Black men can have them too, not just upstanding white people. He new this police interaction would kill him, and it did. He said it over and over again. He knew.

I’m not saying what Chauvin did was right. But, had Floyd just cooperated he wouldn’t be dead! He fought them because he was jacked up on drugs. He should have just gotten in the car. Not to say that what happened is right, it’s not. But just don’t fight the cops.

This should never have been a matter of life and death. Period. People cooperating with the cops get killed too. There is no excuse for what Chauvin did. So sick of seeing people defend this murderous coward.

No one's defending what he did. We are trying to apply the specific kind of thinking and standards you're supposed to apply if you're on a jury and certainty beyond reasonable doubt.

I could be convinced of the 3rd charge that has to do with negligence but probably not the other two.

That's not what you're doing. "Why didn't Floyd just get in the police car?". That's not the legal standard for justifiable homicide.