The decision had not been scheduled ahead of time.
Two jurors were dismissed as a result, citing their belief that the city had signaled Chauvin's guilt with their payout. These jurors were both men. One of them was white.
Two more jurors acknowledged that they had learned of the payout, but both pinky-promised it would not impact their judgement in the case.
The latest seated jurors are a black man, a biracial woman, an unmarried white female nurse, and a retired elderly woman who volunteers to help underprivileged children.
I suspect the Minneapolis City Council deliberately timed this payout in order to influence the makeup of the jury.
Anyways, our judicial system is now much like our election system: operating on expectations of good faith and honesty between parties who view each other as existential threats.
Reminder that one of the OJ Simpson jurors is on record stating that their not-guilty verdict was payback for the decision in the Rodney King trial.
He's fucked.
I don't think so.
Not sure which ones got booted but one of the early guys seemed like a huge shitlord in disguise, the kind of guy who might force a hung jury.
Remember, all it takes is one single person to get in and hold their vote on "not guilty" to bring the whole system to heel and it's completely legal. The system itself is, after all, set up to be weighted more heavily towards a not guilty bias.
I would bet that this is going to end in a mistrial.
This is why good people don't dodge jury duty.
Yep. Overcharged him and you can thank the media for selective coverage and not showing the full video at first
Selective outrage, same reason I have no faith in America to succeed, the same people swinging with the racism bat are extremist racists.
Being judged by a trial of your peers now means that a white man on trial gets judged by darkies and women.
At least he only needs to let one based white man to slip through and it's over.
The prosecution needs a panel of 12 leftists or idiots.
but why repeat yourself?
Comment Reported for: Rule 15Comment RemovedShow me where I directed a "particularly egregious identity based slur" at a user in that post.
I did naht.
Darkies is pretty egregious.
And?
The rule says against other users.
There is no rule saying I can't use words like kike, spic, nigger, faggot, etc.
You're right. I stand corrected. Comment Approved
Could you please tone it down though? I don't want to scare off new users. We need to grow from Reddit's failures, then we have to grow outside of Reddit altogether.
I thought I was toning it down by using darkie instead of nigger lol
I also get that you want to grow the board/community, but it's a niche video game and political ethics forum. I'm not so sure that normies who can't handle words like darkie would have anything of value to contribute, though they'd certainly learn a lot by reading and doing their own research into topics.
It's a pretty thin line seems like.
That's gonna buy them soo much fentanyl.
How in the world can he get a fair trial there? I’d honestly be scared of threats
He can't and he won't. The only difference between the four compromised jurors is two of them told the truth about being compromised and two of them lied. In a hyper-polarized state with multiple factions vying for total control, the very concept of a fair trial is laughable. Right now, I wouldn't trust people of one race to determine the guilt of someone belonging to another race under any circumstances. That's the price we are going to pay for multiculturalism. That's life in a low-trust society.
I would suggest that "Jury of your peers" in a society that believes in "lived experience" and the innate viewpoint of race means that only blacks can judge blacks and only whites can judge whites....
I'll never forget the madness of the O.J trial, where many of the blacks essentially admitted that they made him not guilty as vengeance for Rodney King. That's the difference between them and us, we'd never make a black man guilty or a white man not guilty purely as racial vengeance. As much as we may not like them, we still have a sense of justice. Sadly though, the woke in our tribe have lost that sense of justice, and would gladly do the same thing those blacks did during the O.J trial to us.
That's only true if you're talking racists and people with integrity.
If your 'them and us' is racial in nature then you're as racist as they are.
It's a guarantee that the family and friends of jury members are going to be "accidentally leaked". CNN: "Oopsie whoopsie, Jenny Doe from 123 Minneapolis accidentally had her identity leaked, reminder, her husband, who is currently being held in a hotel away from her, voted no on convicting the brutal mass murderer of personally stranguling a saint. Once again, Jenny Doe is alone in 123 Minneapolis, and the police are being advised to stay inside during these riots."
That payout makes the entire trial a farce the city has declared him guilty before it even started.
Yup. And anyone who thinks the prosecution isn't in direct communication with the city council is an idiot.
A black man's life is worth nothing unless killed by a white and/or police.. if he got killed by something else, no one wouldve gave a damn.
Not true. George Floyd was killed by hooping fentanyl and meth, and his life was worth a 27 million dollar settlement, and over a billion in property damage.
Doubly less so if his mother kills him.
That will stand in a not-guilty.
In a guilty verdict, the defense can use that as grounds for mistrial.
That's great news for criminals.
In this case, all the jurors have to do is not say anything after the fact.
Viva and Barnes did a livestream on it with another lawyer who's a prosecutor, it doesn't seem as hopeless as your post suggests.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZkfPoB8kLmA
The left wins no matter what the result. If he's found guilty, then we've finally reached the dystopian promise land of justice determined entirely by identity. If he is found not guilty, then we still have a lot of work to do before we reach the dystopian promise land of justice determined entirely by identity.
The only interesting question is how severe the riots will be in the event of a not guilty verdict. There's some chance that much of the institutional support (and top down organization) of the previous riots might not exist given Trump no longer occupies the White House.
So OJ 2.0 or Rodney King 2.0......better stock up on roof Koreans.
ellison is an enemy combatant. he WANTS chaos.
I'd much rather have a judge than a jury determine my guilt.
Kamala Harris was a judge. There has been at least one judge that sent people to prison because they were paid by the prison. There have been multiple cases of children being sent to prison after being accused of stealing a backpack. At least 2 of those kids killed themselves.
Left-leaning judges will go easier on you, unless it is some sort of political offense. So then you still want a judge. If it is a political offense, then yeah, I'd rather have a jury.
Seems like a pick your poison kind of deal. Either you're at the mercy of one person who's probably corrupt, cowed by threats or opposed to you, or 12 people who weren't smart enough to get out of jury duty.
This perception is a luxury we can't afford to have in Clown World. It's going to be very important that people opposed to this insanity sit on juries to provide some semblance of balance for those who support it and those who go along with it.
People opposed to this are only going to be marginally selectable in the jury pool. White men are a tiny part of what's allowed in these higher profile cases. A black, ignorant woman is the only uncontroversial choice. For every white guy, you'll get two Latishias. Maybe a single Karen with two mulatto kids.
Then don't be opposed to it when in the jury pool. Be fully in support and have a crisis of conscience once on the jury.
Thankfully the judge in this case is smacking the prosecution around whenever they try to act cute
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZPWgVUvmUDk
Blomme.