What's new
US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Chauvin juror: I didn't want to go thru the rioting

Ray From Cleveland

Diamond Member
Joined
Aug 16, 2015
Messages
71,252
Reaction score
18,843
Points
2,290
I notice two threads have been merged. Before the merger I pointed out that juror intimidation would have stopped at second degree manslaughter. Second and third degree murder was a statement by the jury that they thought Chauvin was truly guilty.

It was a statement that they were intimidated. This was not an intentional killing, it was an accidental one. No different than if you got into a fight with somebody at a bar and his head hit the corner of the bar as he was falling down from a blow you delivered and it killed him.

I know how the cop haters feel, but be honest for once. If this lowlife wasn't all doped up and taking care of his serious medical conditions, do you think he's still be alive today with what Chauvin did to him? I do, and that's because I've seen police officers do the same thing to unruly suspects many times.
 

meaner gene

Platinum Member
Joined
Feb 11, 2017
Messages
9,154
Reaction score
4,820
Points
930
She was scared of the democrat mob. Do you think no one else on the actual jury also felt that way?
Remember, she thought Chauvin was guilty. Which makes jury intimidation a moot point. You can lead a horse to water, but he would have gone there on his own if he was thirsty.
 

Godboy

Platinum Member
Joined
Dec 29, 2008
Messages
20,837
Reaction score
6,517
Points
350
She was scared of the democrat mob. Do you think no one else on the actual jury also felt that way?
Remember, she thought Chauvin was guilty. Which makes jury intimidation a moot point. You can lead a horse to water, but he would have gone there on his own if he was thirsty.
Thats what she said about herself, but what about the other jurors?
 

meaner gene

Platinum Member
Joined
Feb 11, 2017
Messages
9,154
Reaction score
4,820
Points
930
Notice there were no riots in the streets over the sentence.
Youre not making any sense. The crowd was barely satisfied with this verdict and formed an autonomous zone in Minny. You’re just trolling.
Listen to your own words. The crowd was barely satisfied with this verdict.

You said they were satisfied, modified by barely, but satisfied none the less.
 

meaner gene

Platinum Member
Joined
Feb 11, 2017
Messages
9,154
Reaction score
4,820
Points
930
I pointed out that juror intimidation would have stopped at second degree manslaughter. Second and third degree murder was a statement by the jury that they thought Chauvin was truly guilty.

It was a statement that they were intimidated. This was not an intentional killing, it was an accidental one. No different than if you got into a fight with somebody at a bar and his head hit the corner of the bar as he was falling down from a blow you delivered and it killed him.
Under Minnesota law that bar fight would result in a second degree murder charge.
The fight would be the underlying predicate felony (assault) and the death the foreseeable result.

Since the death was accidental, it would not be first degree murder.
 

meaner gene

Platinum Member
Joined
Feb 11, 2017
Messages
9,154
Reaction score
4,820
Points
930
Thats what she said about herself, but what about the other jurors?
We know from hat she said, that she would have found Chauvin guilty of second degree manslaughter only.

That differs from the jury that deliberated and found Chauvin guilty of all charges.
 

Coyote

Varmint
Staff member
Moderator
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Apr 17, 2009
Messages
91,296
Reaction score
23,464
Points
2,180
Location
in between
I notice two threads have been merged. Before the merger I pointed out that juror intimidation would have stopped at second degree manslaughter. Second and third degree murder was a statement by the jury that they thought Chauvin was truly guilty.

It was a statement that they were intimidated. This was not an intentional killing, it was an accidental one. No different than if you got into a fight with somebody at a bar and his head hit the corner of the bar as he was falling down from a blow you delivered and it killed him.

I know how the cop haters feel, but be honest for once. If this lowlife wasn't all doped up and taking care of his serious medical conditions, do you think he's still be alive today with what Chauvin did to him? I do, and that's because I've seen police officers do the same thing to unruly suspects many times.

I think there is some confusion on what different murder charges mean. You dont necessarily have to act with intent to kill, but with extreme wreckless disregard for life.
 

AzogtheDefiler

The Pale Orc
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Aug 4, 2018
Messages
40,582
Reaction score
14,338
Points
2,260
Location
Boston, MA
Notice there were no riots in the streets over the sentence.
Youre not making any sense. The crowd was barely satisfied with this verdict and formed an autonomous zone in Minny. You’re just trolling.
Listen to your own words. The crowd was barely satisfied with this verdict.

You said they were satisfied, modified by barely, but satisfied none the less.
Barely...meaning if it was anything less than the maximum they would not have. You are a very stupid person. I sincerely mean it.
 

Godboy

Platinum Member
Joined
Dec 29, 2008
Messages
20,837
Reaction score
6,517
Points
350
Thats what she said about herself, but what about the other jurors?
We know from hat she said, that she would have found Chauvin guilty of second degree manslaughter only.

That differs from the jury that deliberated and found Chauvin guilty of all charges.
Of the jurors that found him guilty, how many of them came to that decision based on fear of retaliation from vengeful democrats?
 

WEATHER53

Platinum Member
Joined
Apr 13, 2017
Messages
11,992
Reaction score
4,011
Points
360
We knew this already. The principal reason for the verdict was to avoid repercussions. Any impartial body saw that and will carry that forward on appeal. Although a distressing scene to witness it was utterly no murder yet that jury/juror had to deliver a guilty verdict due to unique local pressure. Having quelled the looming mob we will now move toward true justice on appeal. The verdict could be the same, the reason for it Vastly Different
 

OldLady

Diamond Member
Joined
Nov 16, 2015
Messages
68,648
Reaction score
18,777
Points
2,220
Thats what she said about herself, but what about the other jurors?
We know from hat she said, that she would have found Chauvin guilty of second degree manslaughter only.

That differs from the jury that deliberated and found Chauvin guilty of all charges.
Of the jurors that found him guilty, how many of them came to that decision based on fear of retaliation from vengeful democrats?
ZERO.

Stop making excuses for this guy. He is guilty as sin. It doesn't matter that Floyd was a crook or a drug addict. It doesn't matter that there were riots last summer over it, or what Maxine Waters said. This is more crap just like the election fraud conspiracy theories. WHAT IFs DO NOT WORK IN COURT.
 

meaner gene

Platinum Member
Joined
Feb 11, 2017
Messages
9,154
Reaction score
4,820
Points
930
Listen to your own words. The crowd was barely satisfied with this verdict.

You said they were satisfied, modified by barely, but satisfied none the less.
Barely...meaning if it was anything less than the maximum they would not have. You are a very stupid person. I sincerely mean it.
You are confusing NOT satisfied, with BARELY satisfied.
Arguing they were barely satisfied is like arguing that Trump "barely" won in 2016. Whether by a millimeter or a mile, a win is a win, and satisfied is satisfied.

They were satisfied, and no riots broke out. So why would the Chauvin case be any different.
 

OldLady

Diamond Member
Joined
Nov 16, 2015
Messages
68,648
Reaction score
18,777
Points
2,220
We knew this already. The principal reason for the verdict was to avoid repercussions. Any impartial body saw that and will carry that forward on appeal. Although a distressing scene to witness it was utterly no murder yet that jury/juror had to deliver a guilty verdict due to unique local pressure. Having quelled the looming mob we will now move toward true justice on appeal. The verdict could be the same, the reason for it Vastly Different
Bullhockey.
 

meaner gene

Platinum Member
Joined
Feb 11, 2017
Messages
9,154
Reaction score
4,820
Points
930
Of the jurors that found him guilty, how many of them came to that decision based on fear of retaliation from vengeful democrats?
I would say that all 12 of them may have come to second degree manslaughter out of fear or intimidation. But finding Chauvin guilty of third degree murder and especially of second degree murder was because they truly believed beyond a reasonable doubt he was guilty.
 

AzogtheDefiler

The Pale Orc
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Aug 4, 2018
Messages
40,582
Reaction score
14,338
Points
2,260
Location
Boston, MA
Listen to your own words. The crowd was barely satisfied with this verdict.

You said they were satisfied, modified by barely, but satisfied none the less.
Barely...meaning if it was anything less than the maximum they would not have. You are a very stupid person. I sincerely mean it.
You are confusing NOT satisfied, with BARELY satisfied.
Arguing they were barely satisfied is like arguing that Trump "barely" won in 2016. Whether by a millimeter or a mile, a win is a win, and satisfied is satisfied.

They were satisfied, and no riots broke out. So why would the Chauvin case be any different.
They were satisfied barely due to the Max sentence. If it was anything less they would have likely rioted. You cannot prove me wrong as it is my opinion. You're free to have your own. As to why I have this opinion. The BLM and their allies rioters are feral animals who burned police stations and small businesses to the ground based on something 99% of the country agreed was bad policing without any proof that racism was involved. That is what I base my opinion on. The riots lasted all summer long. Free stuff is free stuff.
 

Leo123

Platinum Member
Joined
Aug 26, 2017
Messages
12,431
Reaction score
5,939
Points
400
She thought he was guilty and would have voted that way, but she was an alternate and did not participate in the decision. The actual jurors' names have not been released.

Before the trial, she was asked if she wanted to be a juror, and said her feelings were mixed....but after she had sat through the trial she would have voted guilty anyway. So why a retrial?
Well if jurors are intimidated, of course that helps make up their minds. This trial was a farce brought to US by Joe Biden and the rest of the radical crowd. Also, keep in mind, this alternate juror never went into deliberation so her mind was made up. The whole thing smacks of jury intimidation.
 

Leo123

Platinum Member
Joined
Aug 26, 2017
Messages
12,431
Reaction score
5,939
Points
400
ZERO.

Stop making excuses for this guy. He is guilty as sin. It doesn't matter that Floyd was a crook or a drug addict. It doesn't matter that there were riots last summer over it, or what Maxine Waters said. This is more crap just like the election fraud conspiracy theories. WHAT IFs DO NOT WORK IN COURT.
Yes, thanks for telling everyone what a closed mind you have.
 

Leo123

Platinum Member
Joined
Aug 26, 2017
Messages
12,431
Reaction score
5,939
Points
400
I would say that all 12 of them may have come to second degree manslaughter out of fear or intimidation. But finding Chauvin guilty of third degree murder and especially of second degree murder was because they truly believed beyond a reasonable doubt he was guilty.
You don't know what they believed.
 

jc456

Diamond Member
Joined
Dec 18, 2013
Messages
96,377
Reaction score
11,492
Points
2,030
I'd be willing to bet that no one had the guts to do the right thing.

Chauvin certainly did fuck up staying on Floyd's back, but he did not intend to kill him.

Furthermore how can you face 3 different charges for killing one piece of shit even if you meant to do it?
This
 

jc456

Diamond Member
Joined
Dec 18, 2013
Messages
96,377
Reaction score
11,492
Points
2,030
I would say that all 12 of them may have come to second degree manslaughter out of fear or intimidation. But finding Chauvin guilty of third degree murder and especially of second degree murder was because they truly believed beyond a reasonable doubt he was guilty.
You don't know what they believed.
He has super power
 

USMB Server Goals

Total amount
$20.00
Goal
$350.00

New Topics

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top