‘He was guilty.’ Extra juror in favor of Chauvin conviction

Grumpy said:
.


Please do not misunderstand what I am about to say ...

I believe ALL that you said.

However, I will say this ... you may be comparing apples to oranges. From what I've seen of minnesomalia law ... only THE GOOD LORD knows how they do things. First off ... Derek gets three different murder charges and is guilty of ALL THREE. That in itself is my point.
Click to expand...

Minnesota also allows EMOTIONAL testimony; something that has NOTHING to do with evidence. A few other things wrong with this decision; the prosecutors never suggested any motive for why these four cops would kill a suspect knowing they are wearing cameras and that there are cameras everywhere on this "HOT" corner. The prosecutors ignored the autopsy reports and brought in OUTSIDE experts to make absolutely stupid claims.

One, a pulmonary expert actually said that Floyds severe arterial blockage, enlarged heart were not life threatening. Even the evidence of fentanyl and methamphetamines were downplayed as even having anything to do with Floyd's death. He stated, "the heart is an amazing thing and has ways of dealing with 90% and 75% blockages in both arteries". The guy was a lying dumbass. :palm:
 
RB 60 said:
Apparently, that jury was unanimously convinced he was guilty on all 3 counts before they went into deliberations because it didn't last long.
The jury I was on spent the better part of 3 days in deliberations. I made sure each juror had the time to explain their opinion. I ripped into one
juror who would inject his opinion on others when it was their turn to speak. I told him to "shut up" until it was his turn to speak, as his opinion
was no more important than the other 11 of us. That gained the respect of the other 10.
Click to expand...

The jury already had their minds made up that they were not going to have their homes destroyed by the MOB or be assaulted by it. This was a show trial with preconceived guilt associated with it. Much like you would see in a third world shit hole which is where states like Minnesota and cities like Minneapolis are headed.
 
Truth Detector said:
The jury already had their minds made up that they were not going to have their homes destroyed by the MOB or be assaulted by it. This was a show trial with preconceived guilt associated with it. Much like you would see in a third world shit hole which is where states like Minnesota and cities like Minneapolis are headed.
Click to expand...

It's hard to say. Jurors are instructed not to watch anything on the news about a case they are deciding. But this was in the news long before the jury was selected and both side's attorneys must agree on the jurors. Most ask if the potential jurors know anything about the case and if they've formed an opinion. The defense had to be satisfied with the jury.
 
.
Truth Detector said:
Minnesota also allows EMOTIONAL testimony; something that has NOTHING to do with evidence. A few other things wrong with this decision; the prosecutors never suggested any motive for why these four cops would kill a suspect knowing they are wearing cameras and that there are cameras everywhere on this "HOT" corner. The prosecutors ignored the autopsy reports and brought in OUTSIDE experts to make absolutely stupid claims.
Click to expand...


I did not know that
 
RB 60 said:
No, they do not. The alternates had no interaction with myself as the jury foreman or any of the other 11 jurors on my jury.
They did not "hang out" with us, they didn't eat with us, they didn't socialize with us in the motel in the evenings. In fact
they never had any contact whatsoever with us. None. So, until you've sat on a Federal jury, don't invoke your misconceptions as fact.
Click to expand...

This wasn't a Federal jury. Wow, you were a foreman? Man, you must be SO super cool. I understand why the alternate couldn't sit at your table with the rest of the cool kids.

LOL at you.
 
Concart said:
This wasn't a Federal jury. Wow, you were a foreman? Man, you must be SO super cool. I understand why the alternate couldn't sit at your table with the rest of the cool kids.

LOL at you.
Click to expand...

Just repeating my experience. Say what you will, you were never in a position to speak. So shut the fuck up.
 
RB 60 said:
Just repeating my experience. Say what you will, you were never in a position to speak. So shut the fuck up.
Click to expand...

No thanks. I served on a jury too. Doesn't give me any special insight into this case, and it doesn't give YOU any special insight either. It just makes you look like Commander McBragg. Thanks for the laugh.

Man, you were a jury foreman. I just can't get over how cool that is.

:rofl2::rofl2::rofl2:
 
Concart said:
Because there is no such thing as 'emotional testimony'. Truth Detector is a moron. You weren't aware of that?
Click to expand...

^Stuck on MORON. The first week of the trial was an emotional one. Witnesses who watched Chauvin hold Floyd down with his knee described the trauma they had to live with afterward. They said they were upset and desperate to save Floyd’s life; several testified to calling the police on the police. They added NOTHING to the facts of the case other than illustrating how bystanders are completely unaware of the facts and circumstances involved in the arrest.

The off duty paramedic who arrived on the scene and testified she just wanted to help was told that 5:35 minutes before she had arrived on the scene the EMS had already been called to the scene. While PRESUMING to be knowledgeable and calling the police names like "bitch", her response to the facts was; "I don't believe you."
 
RB 60 said:
There's no doubt the jury was polled.
Click to expand...

I just saw one of the jurors interviewed, and he complained that the prosecution went overboard, and presented too much proof. He said other jurors complained with him that a simple case was drawn out with repeatedly proving Chauvin guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.
 
RB 60 said:
No, they do not. The alternates had no interaction with myself as the jury foreman or any of the other 11 jurors on my jury.
Click to expand...

They sit in the same jury box. They are in the same jury pool waiting rooms. They are in the same jury waiting rooms. If sequestered, they are required to stay in the same hotel, and eat at the same tables with the regular jurors. There is no division between the regular jurors and the alternate jurors until the deliberation.

RB 60 said:
they didn't socialize with us in the motel in the evenings.
Click to expand...

A sequestered juror is extremely rare. I do not believe you when you claim to have been on a sequestered jury in a motel. Besides, they usually put sequestered jurors in hotels, not motels. It is one of the few perks.
 
Walt said:
I just saw one of the jurors interviewed, and he complained that the prosecution went overboard, and presented too much proof. He said other jurors complained with him that a simple case was drawn out with repeatedly proving Chauvin guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.
Click to expand...
That's the idea. In truth, most of the govt.'s case was spent debunking the 'stories' from Nelson and the defense team. Jury was reportedly falling asleep during much of the defense cross/direct.

I saw the one juror who said the they could have come back in 1 hour with a guilty verdict. Everyone was sure of his guilt, but they took several hours discussing the particulars of each charge.
 
Althea said:
That's the idea. In truth, most of the govt.'s case was spent debunking the 'stories' from Nelson and the defense team. Jury was reportedly falling asleep during much of the defense cross/direct.

I saw the one juror who said the they could have come back in 1 hour with a guilty verdict. Everyone was sure of his guilt, but they took several hours discussing the particulars of each charge.
Click to expand...

On the highest count, the first vote was unanimous that Chauvin was guilty. Not one of the jurors had a second thought about it. It did not even take hours, or even minutes. There was some confusion on technicalities of the lower counts that took a few hours.

Chauvin was plainly guilty. There was some question of exactly what he was guilty of. I still think he knew Floyd, and was trying to kill him... But I do not think that beyond a reasonable doubt.
 
Walt said:
They sit in the same jury box. They are in the same jury pool waiting rooms. They are in the same jury waiting rooms. If sequestered, they are required to stay in the same hotel, and eat at the same tables with the regular jurors. There is no division between the regular jurors and the alternate jurors until the deliberation.



A sequestered juror is extremely rare. I do not believe you when you claim to have been on a sequestered jury in a motel. Besides, they usually put sequestered jurors in hotels, not motels. It is one of the few perks.
Click to expand...

Walt, are you say this having personal experience?

Read what I wrote, those were the facts. The alternates had no interaction with us.
Those who lived closer could go home at night. We all went home on the weekend.
 
Walt said:
On the highest count, the first vote was unanimous that Chauvin was guilty. Not one of the jurors had a second thought about it. It did not even take hours, or even minutes. There was some confusion on technicalities of the lower counts that took a few hours.

Chauvin was plainly guilty. There was some question of exactly what he was guilty of. I still think he knew Floyd, and was trying to kill him... But I do not think that beyond a reasonable doubt.
Click to expand...
He most certainly did know Floyd, and Chauvin had a reputation for being overly aggressive in the club where they both worked as security.

Chauvin showed up in the middle of trying to cram Floyd into the tiny back seat of the vehicle. I'm not sure why he chose to step in and murder him?
 
Althea said:
He most certainly did know Floyd, and Chauvin had a reputation for being overly aggressive in the club where they both worked as security.

Chauvin showed up in the middle of trying to cram Floyd into the tiny back seat of the vehicle. I'm not sure why he chose to step in and murder him?
Click to expand...

It is certainly manslaughter, but it is almost certainly second degree murder. I understand the prosecutor not going for the full second degree murder, but it also feels like Chauvin was allowed to get away with something.
 
Walt said:
It is certainly manslaughter, but it is almost certainly second degree murder. I understand the prosecutor not going for the full second degree murder, but it also feels like Chauvin was allowed to get away with something.
Click to expand...
We've seen too many trials that have the wrong outcome based on the prosecution over charging. I think they were a bit paranoid, even though this was a slam dunk. Guilty on the three counts will make punishment commensurate.
 
Althea said:
We've seen too many trials that have the wrong outcome based on the prosecution over charging. I think they were a bit paranoid, even though this was a slam dunk. Guilty on the three counts will make punishment commensurate.
Click to expand...

Now we learn the feds would have arrested him on the spot if jury said not guilty.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top