Chauvin’s lawyer seeks new trial, hearing to impeach verdict

[Lesh]

Big Al simply picked that date because it's when MLK gave his speech. But it had nothing to do with King.

The juror's continued dishonesty is alarming really...I mean if he simply came clean, and said yes I went to a protest...it might be less of an issue It certainly is putting up a red flag...in addition to the fact this is the juror that decided to come forward and go on Good Morning America (I believe, could have been the Today Show) after the other juror's interview came public when she mentioned how the riots and threat of more weighted on her mind.

He actually perjured himself because you fill out that questionnaire under oath. Then he tried to play it off saying that yes, he was there, but he wasn't wearing those clothes. What? We have a picture of you wearing those clothes dummy.

I thought he said he "didn't remember" wearing that shirt. As Matt Walsh said, that disqualifies him for the jury, as well, since retarded people are excused from jury duty.

That was a huge fail. But hey, ya tried

 

[Meathead]

What a load of bullshit.

You lot are gunning for the policeman who shot Ashli Babbit.

And why not? When a white police officer shoots an unarmed black, it's protest and riot time. When a black police officer shoots and kills an unarmed white veteran woman, we are not even privileged to know his name yet alone an investigation or charges.

He attended an event in DC to honor MLK.

Yes he did. An MLK event titled get your knee off of my neck. Gee, I don't recall MLK ever having a situation with somebody's knee on his neck. Look at the question again that your comrade provided: Did you participate in ANY protest or march. In case you're a little slow tonight, any also includes DC.

Are you really that slow.

Page 4 question 7. Did you or anybody you know participate IN ANY of the demonstration or marches against police brutality that took place in Minnesota after George Floyd's death?

The question doesn't say anywhere in the country, it specifically states the state of MINNESOTA.

LOL. like that's going to make any difference on the appeal. Between this, your hideous Auntie and the judges failure to provide an alternet venue outside the shithole of New Mogadishu, MN, the appeal be lost.

Alternate venue my ass, you wanted the trial moved to a right wing, racist county which would have got him off. Sorry not going to happen, he was judged where he committed the crime.

Just cuz no one had ever heard of you or your thuggery when you were called to court, that doesn't make the standard.

He wins on appeal easily and goes to retrial. Simple

Yea, yea, yea. The days of Roy Bryant and JW Milam are coming to an end.

I disagree...it appears we are seeing more and more dems return to their mob rule mentality

So why would you want the trial moved from where the crime actually took place?

To get a fair jury, obviously. You no, one that doesn't have BLM members or have to worry about their neighborhood being burned down by a bunch of thugs, in this case.

Fair trial? Really? You wanted it moved to a lily white neighborhood where he would be guaranteed to walk.

It's not a neighborhood idiot, it's another county/city far away, like Duluth.

Same thing Shithead. Predominately white city or county as I said.

No it is not the same thing. Any neighborhood in the area could have been torched by thugs. Duluth, for example, would be much safer and likely has fewer thugs/BLM members to impanel of the jury.

Get a new excuse, he got a fair trial and is headed straight to the big house.

An affirmative action rookie lawyer could win this appeal. It's a slam duck.

We will see if a Good Ole Boy lawyer can pull this off.

It was a slam dunk before they found a thug on the jury. As I said, even an affirmative action lawyer could win this.

We'll see how that works out for you Shithead.

How it works out for me? I'm neither Chauvin nor a BLM thug. You're confused with a low IQ to boot.

 

[Lastamender]

If the media, BLM, Maxine Waters, and stupid self hating white people did not carry on the way they did he could have gotten a fair trial. He did not, and if the verdict is thrown out they only have themselves to blame.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

I disagree that it is "common sense", juries convict mafia members, drug lords, and gang members all rge time and those are groups known for intimidation, violence and retribution.

The police have some control over those other groups of people if need be. They are defenseless against hundreds or thousands of people. Look what's happened on the west coast. The scum took over police departments for crying out loud. Yes, I have my gun and plenty of ammo, but unless I get a hell of a lot of help, I can't stop some lowlifes from coming to my home to burn it down harming or killing me or my family.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

If the media, BLM, Maxine Waters, and stupid self hating white people did not carry on the way they did he could have gotten a fair trial. He did not, and if the verdict is thrown out they only have themselves to blame.

It was stupid for them to hold it in that city. The judge should have had it moved somewhere far enough away from a major city where the lowlifes wouldn't travel to so potential jurors wouldn't feel threatened.

 

[Donald H]

I said months ago that Chauvin would win on appeal.

Chauvin's conviction can only stand as representing that which is un-American.

Murder of black men is not possible, it's an oxymoron.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

I said months ago that Chauvin would win on appeal.

Chauvin's conviction can only stand as representing that which is un-American.

Murder of black men is not possible, it's an oxymoron.

I don't think he's going to get off no matter what they do. I do feel that he was not guilty of murder. Manslaughter, maybe. He never intended to kill the suspect. It was accidental or coincidental given his heart condition, his high blood pressure, blocked arteries, and three times the lethal dose of fentanyl mixed in with meth.

 

[Cecilie1200]

It's not even an issue of right-wing vs left-wing or Democrat vs Republican

I'm afraid it is right vs left. The right in our country fully support our police and the left totally hate our police. The left always sides with evil and the right always sides with the good in any controversial situation.

What a load of bullshit.

You lot are gunning for the policeman who shot Ashli Babbit.

I must have missed the part where that was relevant to something. But then, I'm lacking in the leftist gene that circumvents rational thought.

 

[EvilCat Breath]

Chauvin’s knee on George Floyd's neck is as true as Michael Brown putting his hands up saying don't shoot.

 

[EvilCat Breath]

If the media, BLM, Maxine Waters, and stupid self hating white people did not carry on the way they did he could have gotten a fair trial. He did not, and if the verdict is thrown out they only have themselves to blame.

If the verdict is thrown out it just means another trial.

 

[Cecilie1200]

If the media, BLM, Maxine Waters, and stupid self hating white people did not carry on the way they did he could have gotten a fair trial. He did not, and if the verdict is thrown out they only have themselves to blame.

It was stupid for them to hold it in that city. The judge should have had it moved somewhere far enough away from a major city where the lowlifes wouldn't travel to so potential jurors wouldn't feel threatened.

I'm not sure there's anywhere in America that the lowlifes don't have an action team ready to be ferried there. However, moving it out of that city and then sequestering the jury seems at least the minimum necessary to attempt to have a fair trial.

 

[Cecilie1200]

If the media, BLM, Maxine Waters, and stupid self hating white people did not carry on the way they did he could have gotten a fair trial. He did not, and if the verdict is thrown out they only have themselves to blame.

If the verdict is thrown out it just means another trial.

Well, yes, but I think that's also the point: to try to get an actually fair trial, with an actually fair verdict, whatever that might be.

 

[EvilCat Breath]

If the media, BLM, Maxine Waters, and stupid self hating white people did not carry on the way they did he could have gotten a fair trial. He did not, and if the verdict is thrown out they only have themselves to blame.

If the verdict is thrown out it just means another trial.

Well, yes, but I think that's also the point: to try to get an actually fair trial, with an actually fair verdict, whatever that might be.

I doubt it's possible to get a fair trial. The entire nation is poisoned.

 

[Cecilie1200]

If the media, BLM, Maxine Waters, and stupid self hating white people did not carry on the way they did he could have gotten a fair trial. He did not, and if the verdict is thrown out they only have themselves to blame.

If the verdict is thrown out it just means another trial.

Well, yes, but I think that's also the point: to try to get an actually fair trial, with an actually fair verdict, whatever that might be.

I doubt it's possible to get a fair trial. The entire nation is poisoned.

Probably true, and very few people these days understand the concept of reason over emotion.

 

[Scottish_Brexiteer_UK]

I'm just reading there one of the jury has an extensive BLM background. It's all on his social media.

This would have been 100% intentional. I was reading before the verdict was returned that the jury was selected from a much larger pool after everyone was interviewed, audited and vetted. The state would have known fine well about this guys BLM leanings and would have been only too happy to include him on duty as part of this big stitch-up.

They even have pictures of him at one of Floyd's protests. When asked if he was a Floyd activist, he answered no he wasn't. Mind you, he's the only one that got caught. I'm sure most of the jurors had their minds made up before they entered the court room or heard any evidence.

Unless he lied during jury selection none of that (if true) matters

The Defense CHOSE this juror and had adequate time to question him.

Apologies If I've missed it (my notifications run wild when people start quoting people who quote me - and it's hard to keep track).

Can you send me the links again to where the defence selected this juror in question? interested to read about it.

 

[DudleySmith]

That's your opinion and you know what those are like.

It's less opinion than it is common sense. Every juror knew that their safety and life could be in danger by a not-guilty verdict. Therefore the only jurors that would participate are those who were not going to vote for a not guilty verdict.

That's all it is, how many jury members were threatened? That is just your opinion because you want to see Chauvin walk.

So it's like the Bible it says one thing, but you translate it to mean something else.

No, it only says one thing:

Did you or anybody you know participate IN ANY of the demonstration or marches (against police brutality that took place in Minnesota) after George Floyd's death?

Against police brutality that took place in Minnesota. Not at a protest in Minnesota. WTF would the court care what rally they went to? They only care that they did indeed participate in gatherings supporting George Floyd.

The lawyer should have asked better questions or more specific questions, if you think your hero is going to walk on that the it truly says all it needs to about the US Justice System.

All of them were threatened Thugg Boi, so was the police dept. and the city government.

Come on Dumb Dudley prove it.
[/QUOTE]

We already did, Thugg Bro. You shouldn't have dropped out of 6th grade remedial reading while you were in Juvie all those years.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

I'm not sure there's anywhere in America that the lowlifes don't have an action team ready to be ferried there. However, moving it out of that city and then sequestering the jury seems at least the minimum necessary to attempt to have a fair trial.

The further you move it away from Minneapolis, the fairer the trial will be. The problem is not that you can't find fair people where the event took place, the problem is people fear for their safety or lives if they vote against the mob. I'm sure there are some smaller towns cities on the other side of the state close to the border that they can have the trial at.

 

[Eric Arthur Blair]

A mistrial is a sure thing now. Now how will they fix it so a new trial guarantees a guilty verdict
on all counts the way the original stacked trial did.

 

[struth]

I'm just reading there one of the jury has an extensive BLM background. It's all on his social media.

This would have been 100% intentional. I was reading before the verdict was returned that the jury was selected from a much larger pool after everyone was interviewed, audited and vetted. The state would have known fine well about this guys BLM leanings and would have been only too happy to include him on duty as part of this big stitch-up.

They even have pictures of him at one of Floyd's protests. When asked if he was a Floyd activist, he answered no he wasn't. Mind you, he's the only one that got caught. I'm sure most of the jurors had their minds made up before they entered the court room or heard any evidence.

Unless he lied during jury selection none of that (if true) matters

The Defense CHOSE this juror and had adequate time to question him.

Apologies If I've missed it (my notifications run wild when people start quoting people who quote me - and it's hard to keep track).

Can you send me the links again to where the defence selected this juror in question? interested to read about it.

He can't...because it's a lie. The Attorneys don't get to pick who is on the jury. They can move to strike people from the jury for cause (which is unlimited), or during a peremptory challenge...they only have a limited number of these (3 in most cases), and can be for any reason other then race, gender).

Certainly if the juror lied that's a major issue, or if he hide something that's a major issue. It appears that the juror did in fact attend a protest specifically for George's death. I am not sure what the questions were in voir dire, but he is certainly lying now when he is saying he didn't go to one.

 

[Scottish_Brexiteer_UK]

I'm just reading there one of the jury has an extensive BLM background. It's all on his social media.

This would have been 100% intentional. I was reading before the verdict was returned that the jury was selected from a much larger pool after everyone was interviewed, audited and vetted. The state would have known fine well about this guys BLM leanings and would have been only too happy to include him on duty as part of this big stitch-up.

They even have pictures of him at one of Floyd's protests. When asked if he was a Floyd activist, he answered no he wasn't. Mind you, he's the only one that got caught. I'm sure most of the jurors had their minds made up before they entered the court room or heard any evidence.

Unless he lied during jury selection none of that (if true) matters

The Defense CHOSE this juror and had adequate time to question him.

Apologies If I've missed it (my notifications run wild when people start quoting people who quote me - and it's hard to keep track).

Can you send me the links again to where the defence selected this juror in question? interested to read about it.

He can't...because it's a lie. The Attorneys don't get to pick who is on the jury. They can move to strike people from the jury for cause (which is unlimited), or during a peremptory challenge...they only have a limited number of these (3 in most cases), and can be for any reason other then race, gender).

Certainly if the juror lied that's a major issue, or if he hide something that's a major issue. It appears that the juror did in fact attend a protest specifically for George's death. I am not sure what the questions were in voir dire, but he is certainly lying now when he is saying he didn't go to one.

I'd like to see his evidence...