Current Events > Derek Chauvin requests new trial because one of the jurors was BLM.

(+) Yeah! (+)

Minnesota prosecutors in the Derek Chauvin murder case filed a memorandum Wednesday asking the court to deny the defenses motions for a new trial.

"The State firmly opposes Defendants post-verdict motions," the memo says. "The jury unanimously convicted Defendant of second-degree murder, third-degree murder, and second-degree manslaughter based on the overwhelming evidence establishing Defendants guilt beyond a reasonable doubt."

The state wrote that Chauvins attorneys claims that the former Minneapolis police officer should have been tried in another county outside of Hennepin which includes Minneapolis, where George Floyd died during an arrest last year were irrelevant because publicity of the murder was widespread.

Prosecutors noted that Floyds death on May 25, 2020, after Chauvin held knelt on Floyd's neck for nine minutes, was recorded by a bystander.

"As a result, the entire world soon became aware of what had transpired on the corner of East 38th Street and Chicago Avenue," the state said. "There is no reason to believe that any part of this State was less impacted by pretrial publicity. Similarly, regardless of when this case was tried, it was always going to attract enormous attention. Under these circumstances, the law recognizes that changing venue or continuing the trial would not have had meaningfully lessened jurors exposure to pretrial publicity."

Chauvin was convicted of Floyd's murder in April and his sentencing is scheduled for June 25, according to FOX 9 in Minneapolis.

Chauvins attorneys also claimed that the jury should have been sequestered and that one of the jurors didnt reveal his bias and support for Black Lives Matter during jury selection, allegations the state said the court had already rejected, according to The Wall Street Journal.

Three other former Minneapolis officers who were present during Floyds murder face charges of aiding and abetting Chauvin and will face trial in March.

Full Article: https://www.foxnews.com/us/minnesota-prosecutors-ask-court-to-reject-derek-chauvin-defense-teams-motions-for-new-trial



Hope he fails

---

What a piece of shit

---

So they wanted a jury full of people who don't think that black lives matter?

---

dont they all

---

eston posted...

So they wanted a jury full of people who don't think that black lives matter?

Don't be so disingenuous.

---

Hes not gonna get it - both lawyers had to have vetted him and okayd them, no reason for a mistrial

Both lawyers select and agree on the jurors though, right?

---

Returning_CEmen posted...

Both lawyers select and agree on the jurors though, right?

Yes but it's a little more complicated than that.

You're only allowed a limited amount of juror rejections without reason and there were worse jurors (for the defense) on the field than this guy on paper.

They didn't want him on the jury but reluctantly accepted him.

Then the gray area came over about whether or not he lied on his questionaire.

I'm paraphrasing, someone smarter than me can find the verbatim quote but one of the questions was along the lines "Have you formally joined a BLM or affliate political movemet? Have you ever attended a BLM protest or rally?"

And the juror said no.

Then it came out that he was openly a BLM supporter (Even wearing George Floyd BLM shirts in public) and stated "They need people like me in the jury or else it will go the other way!" He just hyperliterally never went to a rally.

That's the bone of contention.

But legally there's no real ground to claim the trial wasn't fair. This is all just a lawyer fucking up and crying over spilt milk.

---

eston posted...

So they wanted a jury full of people who don't think that black lives matter?

Well... yes. I think Derek Chauvin would have greatly appreciated that.

---

Doesn't sound like he lied though. They can't expect them to be blank slates, jurors are just regular people with regular opinions

---

You need to show that the defendant was prejudiced such that there was a reasonable probability that but-for the alleged juror misconduct (assuming it was misconduct) the outcome of the trial would have been different.

On appeal this is subject to review for abuse of discretion with the overriding proposition being that the trial court is in the best position to make the call on the prejudicial nature of alleged misconduct.


---

I bet Derek would be perfectly happy with a KKK member on the jury.

eston posted...

Doesn't sound like he lied though. They can't expect them to be blank slates, jurors are just regular people with regular opinions

This is true. And why the request will fail.

But it is true that if they had known he was a BLM supporter, he would not have been on the jury. He only got on because the questionaire was too specific and the juror was very hyperliteral.

Hence the Reeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeing

---

Does he really wanna walk free though? Is that even safe?

I mean let's be honest...

---

Not a chance, stupid pig

oink in jail

This guy just cant fathom that his badge didnt protect him from murder convictions

UnfairRepresent posted...

someone smarter than me

So anyone?

---

Lol. He's obviously not gonna just sit there and reevaluate his life, this was always gonna happen. Nothing in the world makes more sense than this.

---

UnfairRepresent posted...

Yes but it's a little more complicated than that.

You're only allowed a limited amount of juror rejections without reason and there were worse jurors (for the defense) on the field than this guy on paper.

They didn't want him on the jury but reluctantly accepted him.

Then the gray area came over about whether or not he lied on his questionaire.

I'm paraphrasing, someone smarter than me can find the verbatim quote but one of the questions was along the lines "Have you formally joined a BLM or affliate political movemet? Have you ever attended a BLM protest or rally?"

And the juror said no.

Then it came out that he was openly a BLM supporter (Even wearing George Floyd BLM shirts in public) and stated "They need people like me in the jury or else it will go the other way!" He just hyperliterally never went to a rally.

That's the bone of contention.

But legally there's no real ground to claim the trial wasn't fair. This is all just a lawyer fucking up and crying over spilt milk.

if none of the questions actively asked him if he supported BLM then he technically didnt lie and theres still no reason for a mistrial

soulunison2 posted...

if none of the questions actively asked him if he supported BLM then he technically didnt lie and theres still no reason for a mistrial

Yup

That's pretty much it in a nutshell

---

Replacing the jury won't remove video proof of him caught in the act commiting murder.

---

eston posted...

So they wanted a jury full of people who don't think that black lives matter?

He's talking about BLM the movement/organization/whatever

unnamedsoldier posted...

He's talking about BLM the movement/organization/whatever

Tbf, that is what he wanted tho. Obviously anyone who thinks black lives matter seen the murder as the worst abuse of power, regardless of if you stand by the organization or not. You'd have to think black lives don't matter if you have no connection to Derek and think that shit wasn't damning evidence. It's the only way he'd get a non guilty verdict, which is his goal by any means.

---

Lost_All_Senses posted...

Tbf, that is what he wanted tho. Obviously anyone who thinks black lives matter seen the murder as the worst abuse of power, regardless of if you stand by the organization or not. You'd have to think black lives don't matter if you have no connection to Derek and think that shit wasn't damning evidence. It's the only way he'd get a non guilty verdict, which is his goal by any means.

Not really?

The defenses argument was always going to be that the kneeling didn't cause the death, not that it never occured


---

UnfairRepresent posted...

Not really?

The defenses argument was always going to be that the kneeling didn't cause the death, not that it never occured

True. Just the weak minded then. But it's more likely you find people who don't like black people before you find people stupid enough to unbiasedly believe that defense is valid.

---

Only one? Shit, we need a new trial composed of only BLM members.

---

So he wants only racist jurors

Can we cut the bullshit and put him in an acid bath already
---

he wants a jury of his peers and none of his peers believe Black lives matter.
---