Thread for Derek Chauvin trial watchers?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:There is 0 reason to release it just before nightfall UNLESS you want riots to happen. Why not in the daylight?

Holding it off will also set people off. There's so much tension that it doesn't matter much when you do it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is 0 reason to release it just before nightfall UNLESS you want riots to happen. Why not in the daylight?

which indicates this is a guilty verdict.

Agreed. The question now becomes how guilty they found Chauvin. If they decide on lesser charges, then that could easily prompt riots.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's gotta be a guilty verdict since they reached a fast verdict.

I hope there is peace in the streets.

why?

Why do I hope there is peace on the streets??

why are you so sure it’s guilty?

I said it in the first sentence. Because it's a fast verdict.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's gotta be a guilty verdict since they reached a fast verdict.

I hope there is peace in the streets.

why?

Why do I hope there is peace on the streets??

why are you so sure it’s guilty?

I said it in the first sentence. Because it's a fast verdict.

and ... my question is why you think fast means guilty. to me it just means they reached a unanimous quickly and easily.

[Anonymous]

To play devil’s advocate, the jury found OJ Simpson not guilty in less than 4 hours of deliberation. This was nine hours

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is 0 reason to release it just before nightfall UNLESS you want riots to happen. Why not in the daylight?

which indicates this is a guilty verdict.

Agreed. The question now becomes how guilty they found Chauvin. If they decide on lesser charges, then that could easily prompt riots.

I asked this upthread and maybe a lawyer can answer. Do you think its likely that they find him guilty on the manslaughter charge but not the murder charges? Or does fast verdict usually mean guilty of everything.

[Anonymous]

If I were a juror, I’d first vote to acquit on all charges (too much chaos to blame the officer trying to control a huge guy on drugs). But if a bunch of others want to convict, then I’d tell them that I’ll go along with manslaughter and we’re home for dinner. Or keep pushing for more and we’ll be here day after day because I’m not convicting this guy of murder.

Pretty sure the others would take my offer and call it a day.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's gotta be a guilty verdict since they reached a fast verdict.

I hope there is peace in the streets.

why?

Why do I hope there is peace on the streets??

why are you so sure it’s guilty?

I said it in the first sentence. Because it's a fast verdict.

and ... my question is why you think fast means guilty. to me it just means they reached a unanimous quickly and easily.

Well, if I am going to be perfectly honest it's because that's what CNN and all the news talking heads say a quick verdict usually means. Someone even threw out some stats. I/they could be wrong but that's what they all think- even the fox people.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:To play devil’s advocate, the jury found OJ Simpson not guilty in less than 4 hours of deliberation. This was nine hours

They only deliberated 6 hours to reach the not guilty verdict after the Rodney King beating.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:To play devil’s advocate, the jury found OJ Simpson not guilty in less than 4 hours of deliberation. This was nine hours

The defense in that case did a MUCH better job of identifying reasonable doubt, because there actually was some doubt. In this case? How?

I sat on a jury years ago, and knowing that it has to be unanimous, given the evidence we saw I find it virtually impossible to believe that ALL the jurors would vote not guilty.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If I were a juror, I’d first vote to acquit on all charges (too much chaos to blame the officer trying to control a huge guy on drugs). But if a bunch of others want to convict, then I’d tell them that I’ll go along with manslaughter and we’re home for dinner. Or keep pushing for more and we’ll be here day after day because I’m not convicting this guy of murder.

Pretty sure the others would take my offer and call it a day.

^^definitely likely scenario.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If I were a juror, I’d first vote to acquit on all charges (too much chaos to blame the officer trying to control a huge guy on drugs). But if a bunch of others want to convict, then I’d tell them that I’ll go along with manslaughter and we’re home for dinner. Or keep pushing for more and we’ll be here day after day because I’m not convicting this guy of murder.

Pretty sure the others would take my offer and call it a day.

Glad you’re not a juror because you’re wrong.

[Anonymous]

Can someone post the verdicts here when they’re announced? I’m not near a TV and don’t think my networks on Twitter or FB are going to post about it as it happens.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If I were a juror, I’d first vote to acquit on all charges (too much chaos to blame the officer trying to control a huge guy on drugs). But if a bunch of others want to convict, then I’d tell them that I’ll go along with manslaughter and we’re home for dinner. Or keep pushing for more and we’ll be here day after day because I’m not convicting this guy of murder.

Pretty sure the others would take my offer and call it a day.

You are a waste of oxygen

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If I were a juror, I’d first vote to acquit on all charges (too much chaos to blame the officer trying to control a huge guy on drugs). But if a bunch of others want to convict, then I’d tell them that I’ll go along with manslaughter and we’re home for dinner. Or keep pushing for more and we’ll be here day after day because I’m not convicting this guy of murder.

Pretty sure the others would take my offer and call it a day.

People yelling means Chauvin couldn’t help but keep his knee on the guy’s neck for 9.5 minutes? Seriously? Floyd wasn’t resisting — he was crying and saying he couldn’t breath. So I don’t know what the hell you’re talking about when you say “control a huge guy on drugs.”