One juror needed convincing of Chauvin’s guilt

quote:

---

only one jury member needed convincing

---

Innocent until proven guilty? Or Vice versa

They should have knelt on chauvin, then had him get up perfectly fine after 10 minutes.


fricking show trial. The object was never to get any truth. Just more mayhem.

It’s going to appeal and they’ll win.

Jurors weren’t impartial. Mad max threatening violence, the news letting the jurors know they knew who they were and where they lived. And the jury having their damn phones the whole time.

quote:

---

Innocent until proven guilty?

---

A jury system only works with an intelligent population. Americans today are the exact opposite of intelligent or free thinking. The presumption of innocence doesn't exist and hasn't in quite some time.

Lmao imagine your life being in that dude’s hands, he looks like he’d be an adult bagboy at his local grocery store. Buddy looks like he smoked a big arse blunt before he went on TV too. I’m sure he had no prior knowledge whatsoever of the case and went in completely unbiased

quote:

---

He acknowledge on that questionnaire that he wanted to be part of the case because it was likely to be the most 'historic' of his lifetime.

Following the outcome, Mitchell said: 'We haven't seen an outcome like this on a case. I really think this is a start and I think it's a good start.

'And then, all the attention that it is still getting. Just keeping that magnifying glass there has to spark some kind of change.'

---

I'm not a lawyer, but doesn't this show that this juror wasn't neutral? Could this statement be used during Chauvin's appeal?

I know the likelihood of an impartial jury would be difficult with this case, but this seems kind like a blatant admission.

One thing I will never understand is why the defense didn’t try to demonstrate, using the same size person and the same positionIng of all the characters involved, that Kneeling in the position he was on George Floyd for 9+ minutes isn’t the primary reason he died. Heck, it worked for OJ when he put on the glove and it didn’t fit. I would have thought the defense would have demonstrated something similar.

quote:

---

Could this statement be used during Chauvin's appeal?

---

Anyone who thinks Chauvin is going to be successful on appeal needs to get with reality. The trial judge didn't change venues. The trial judge didn't sequester the jury. The trial judge didn't declare a mistrial when a sitting US Congresswoman and scores of other activists threatened violence or confrontation if a guilty verdict wasn't reached. The first two should have been automatic and the third one wouldn't have mattered had the judge done the first two.

The judiciary in this country is completely compromised. Look at what Emmett Sullivan did to Michael Flynn, all because of who he supported politically. And he's now a hero to half the country for becoming an interested party in a trivial misdemeanor, all to punish a man for being a Trump supporter. No appellate court in Minnesota is going to reverse Chauvin's convictions regardless of what the law says.

quote:

---

They should have knelt on chauvin, then had him get up perfectly fine after 10 minutes.

---

And give em the ol blood choke

What exactly is the issue here? Seems pretty normal for a jury trial that there wouldn't be immediate, unanimous agreement. Doesn't seem like that 1 juror was very confident in their position since deliberations only took a few hours.