Author Topic: The US policing crisis thread  (Read 78227 times)

J70

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 14546
    • View Profile
Re: The US policing crisis thread
« Reply #1140 on: May 05, 2021, 09:18:14 PM »
ybut this guys admission means chauvin didn’t get a fair trial

(i) Do you think it affected the result?
(ii) Do you think the result was the wrong one?
yes and that’s irrelevant

Why do you think it affected the result in what was a very swift, unanimous decision?
the jury was compromised by the juror who lied therefore the decision is compromised.

That's not an answer.

Affecting the result means the result could or would have been different.

whitey

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3980
    • View Profile
Re: The US policing crisis thread
« Reply #1141 on: May 05, 2021, 09:27:39 PM »
If the guy lied the verdict is invalid (whether it was the right or wrong verdict)

David McKeown

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2365
    • View Profile
Re: The US policing crisis thread
« Reply #1142 on: May 05, 2021, 10:23:27 PM »
I suppose it depends on the role the juror played in deliberations. The defence will obviously argue that we could never know and therefore natural justice dictates a retrial necessary. The prosecution will obviously point to the strength of the evidence, the speed of conviction etc and say the conviction is safe. A tough one to call I’d say and I wouldn’t like to call it. My gut would say that the decision will be it’s not enough on its own for a retrial but I’m not an expert on Minnesota law

Gmac

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1393
    • View Profile
Re: The US policing crisis thread
« Reply #1143 on: May 05, 2021, 10:50:16 PM »
I suppose it depends on the role the juror played in deliberations. The defence will obviously argue that we could never know and therefore natural justice dictates a retrial necessary. The prosecution will obviously point to the strength of the evidence, the speed of conviction etc and say the conviction is safe. A tough one to call I’d say and I wouldn’t like to call it. My gut would say that the decision will be it’s not enough on its own for a retrial but I’m not an expert on Minnesota law
the verdict has to be unanimous so couldn’t the defense say maybe a different juror would have had a different opinion and that on its own is grounds for a mistrial/retrial

whitey

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3980
    • View Profile
Re: The US policing crisis thread
« Reply #1144 on: May 05, 2021, 11:07:06 PM »
I suppose it depends on the role the juror played in deliberations. The defence will obviously argue that we could never know and therefore natural justice dictates a retrial necessary. The prosecution will obviously point to the strength of the evidence, the speed of conviction etc and say the conviction is safe. A tough one to call I’d say and I wouldn’t like to call it. My gut would say that the decision will be it’s not enough on its own for a retrial but I’m not an expert on Minnesota law
the verdict has to be unanimous so couldn’t the defense say maybe a different juror would have had a different opinion and that on its own is grounds for a mistrial/retrial

So let’s say Chauvin got off because of one juror. And it was later discovered that one juror had lied when asked  about attending “ back the blue” events.

Not only had they gone all the way to DC to attend an event,  but had worn a pro police tee shirt at the rally.

Do people think that acquittal should be accepted?

David McKeown

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2365
    • View Profile
Re: The US policing crisis thread
« Reply #1145 on: May 06, 2021, 06:15:20 AM »
I suppose it depends on the role the juror played in deliberations. The defence will obviously argue that we could never know and therefore natural justice dictates a retrial necessary. The prosecution will obviously point to the strength of the evidence, the speed of conviction etc and say the conviction is safe. A tough one to call I’d say and I wouldn’t like to call it. My gut would say that the decision will be it’s not enough on its own for a retrial but I’m not an expert on Minnesota law
the verdict has to be unanimous so couldn’t the defense say maybe a different juror would have had a different opinion and that on its own is grounds for a mistrial/retrial

Yeah that would certainly be their argument and there’s a relatively recent Supreme Court decision on that Ramos v Louisiana but I think strictly that only applies to Federal cases. Again I’m not an expert on Minnesota law but if we used here the appeal court wouldn’t necessarily overturn a verdict just because there was a concern over one juror they would look to see if they were concerned about the safety of the verdict generally. To do that they’d look at the strength of the evidence, how long the jury took to decide etc and they’d only order a retrial in limited circumstances. It’s not every technicality that leads to a retrial. That said I accept the point this was a pretty fundamental issue and therefore may result in a retrial. I didn’t see enough of the trial to know if it should result in a retrial. The more though I read I think it will be a close decision and a retrial will be ordered. It will be interesting to see. I think this has a while to go yet.

J70

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 14546
    • View Profile
Re: The US policing crisis thread
« Reply #1146 on: May 06, 2021, 11:45:57 AM »
If the guy lied the verdict is invalid (whether it was the right or wrong verdict)

He said "affected the result".

That implies the juror in some way influenced or had a decisive say on the outcome.

I'm not arguing the legal technicalities.

whitey

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3980
    • View Profile
Re: The US policing crisis thread
« Reply #1147 on: May 06, 2021, 12:12:24 PM »
If the guy lied the verdict is invalid (whether it was the right or wrong verdict)

He said "affected the result".

That implies the juror in some way influenced or had a decisive say on the outcome.

I'm not arguing the legal technicalities.

I don’t think it matters if it “affected the result”

It was no longer an impartial jury once the guy lied on the questionnaire


J70

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 14546
    • View Profile
Re: The US policing crisis thread
« Reply #1148 on: May 06, 2021, 12:18:41 PM »
If the guy lied the verdict is invalid (whether it was the right or wrong verdict)

He said "affected the result".

That implies the juror in some way influenced or had a decisive say on the outcome.

I'm not arguing the legal technicalities.

I don’t think it matters if it “affected the result”

It was no longer an impartial jury once the guy lied on the questionnaire

My understanding was that Gmac somehow thought Chauvin could have been acquitted, based on the presented evidence, except for this guy.

That is all I'm asking about.

I fully accept and I'm not arguing against the fact that the verdict could be found unsafe on the legal technicality this idiot juror has injected into the proceedings.

whitey

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3980
    • View Profile
Re: The US policing crisis thread
« Reply #1149 on: May 06, 2021, 12:23:23 PM »
If the guy lied the verdict is invalid (whether it was the right or wrong verdict)

He said "affected the result".

That implies the juror in some way influenced or had a decisive say on the outcome.

I'm not arguing the legal technicalities.

I don’t think it matters if it “affected the result”

It was no longer an impartial jury once the guy lied on the questionnaire

My understanding was that Gmac somehow thought Chauvin could have been acquitted, based on the presented evidence, except for this guy.

That is all I'm asking about.

I fully accept and I'm not arguing against the fact that the verdict could be found unsafe on the legal technicality this idiot juror has injected into the proceedings.

Maybe it was a tongue in cheek comment

It would be accurate to say that had this juror answered truthfully he probably would not have been selected to serve on the jury...... someone else would have taken his place.  There is no way of knowing how this other person would have voted.....we can assume he/she would have voted to convict, but that’s not how juries work
« Last Edit: May 06, 2021, 12:26:43 PM by whitey »

David McKeown

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2365
    • View Profile
Re: The US policing crisis thread
« Reply #1150 on: May 06, 2021, 07:09:50 PM »
If the guy lied the verdict is invalid (whether it was the right or wrong verdict)

He said "affected the result".

That implies the juror in some way influenced or had a decisive say on the outcome.

I'm not arguing the legal technicalities.

I don’t think it matters if it “affected the result”

It was no longer an impartial jury once the guy lied on the questionnaire

My understanding was that Gmac somehow thought Chauvin could have been acquitted, based on the presented evidence, except for this guy.

That is all I'm asking about.

I fully accept and I'm not arguing against the fact that the verdict could be found unsafe on the legal technicality this idiot juror has injected into the proceedings.

Maybe it was a tongue in cheek comment

It would be accurate to say that had this juror answered truthfully he probably would not have been selected to serve on the jury...... someone else would have taken his place.  There is no way of knowing how this other person would have voted.....we can assume he/she would have voted to convict, but that’s not how juries work

Yeah that’s true but in some places like the UK it is kind of how appeals work but as I have said the whole jury system is somewhat different so I’m intrigued to see how Minnesota operates

Eamonnca1

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6983
  • Catching the world in my headlights of justice
    • View Profile
Re: The US policing crisis thread
« Reply #1151 on: May 10, 2021, 04:59:44 PM »
Of the people killed by police in the US every year, about half are deaf or have some other disability or impairment.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Rkctxo_LQI