 
     |
| What the heck is she thinking, Rep. Maxine Waters (Page 2/10) |
|
blackrams
|
APR 20, 07:29 AM
|
|
| quote | Originally posted by maryjane:
A guilty verdict on any of the counts is going to go to appeal no matter what. On what grounds the appeal is based and how it is worded is the only question.
A hung jury would result in a re-trial, but I very much suspect the defense would push hard to postpone any new trial for as long as possible.
Persoanlly, I do believe a guilty verdict will be handed down by the jury. Which counts? I have not kept close tabs on what evidence was presented at trial but based on what I did peek at, I think at most, 2nd degree unintended murder or 3rd degree manslaughter. |
|
I suspect you may be correct but having not seen all of the evidence and not knowing anything about the jury, my crystal ball is pretty fuzzy. What I do know is, there is a definite bias from some of our politicians and the normal bias from our news sources.
Rams[This message has been edited by blackrams (edited 04-20-2021).]
|
|
|
|
cliffw
|
APR 20, 07:54 AM
|
|
| quote | Originally posted by williegoat:
I just learned that the jury had not been sequestered until tonight. What are the chances that they have heard the comments from Mad Maxine and others? What is the likelihood that the trial is now tainted? |
|
Now ?
During jury selection, it was national news that Minneapolis agreed to settle the George Floyd family's wrongful death suit for 27 million dollars.
It is hard to me to see how a change of venue, jurors from a different locale, could guarantee a fair trial, given the national coverage that Police Officer Derek Chauvin was guilty. It would have helped.
| quote | Originally posted by maryjane:
Persoanlly, I do believe a guilty verdict will be handed down by the jury. Which counts? I have not kept close tabs on what evidence was presented at trial but based on what I did peek at, I think at most, 2nd degree unintended murder or 3rd degree manslaughter. |
|
I did not see everything either though I did more than peek. I was glued to closing arguments. I am also not an attorney. Were I on the Jury, based on the charges presented, I would vote not guilty. I might go with negligent homicide, or involuntary manslaughter. (Which might be 3rd degree manslaughter, dunn know.)
Then we go to Shillary Clinton's E-Mails. James Comey did not even refer charges because she did not "intend" to.
|
|
|
|
82-T/A [At Work]
|
APR 20, 09:33 AM
|
|
| quote | Originally posted by rinselberg:
At the 5:47 mark, Chris Hayes reviews the moment when the defense counsel brought up what Maxine Waters had said, and then the judge responded. The jurors were not present for this exchange.
https://youtu.be/15AO2Q6e09w?t=347
|
|
At the end of the day, Maxine Waters still made comments Nationally and Locally about a state that she doesn't even represent. Regardless of how you feel about it, the comments were inappropriate, and they can be used against the prosecution.
I know with 99.99% certainty how you already feel about this case, but you SHOULD be upset with Maxine Waters, and not the defense. The defense has every right to use whatever opportunities that are given to them. Representation and trial by jury is a cornerstone of our Constitutional law. Chris Hayes is just some dude who gives his opinion on TV. The man's top qualification is his undergraduate degree in philosophy. As with most people like him, it's all uneducated opinion. It would be another story if he at least spent some time in the judicial system, had a Masters degree (at all) in anything, or even had a bachelors degree in something that wasn't complete nonsense.
|
|
|
|
rinselberg
|
APR 20, 10:22 AM
|
|
Not what Chris Hayes said. What Katie Phang said. If I understand her correctly, she said that even though the jurors as a group are not sequestered, they have been told by the judge to sequester themselves from any news reports on TV, online or on social media. They are not supposed to be aware of anything that Maxine Waters has said about the case. On top of that, the judge's instructions to the jurors are to decide the case only on the basis of what they have seen and heard inside the courtroom during the trial.
How will that play out when the defense appeals the verdict(s)..?
"Don't ask me." That's for sure.[This message has been edited by rinselberg (edited 04-20-2021).]
|
|
|
|
maryjane
|
APR 20, 11:37 AM
|
|
I think, by the time the charges were filed and jury selection began, sequestering the jury would have been a case of shutting the gate after the cows are out in the road.
Waters I think, is hoping for (or at least expecting) acquittal.
Her comments IMO, were incendiary in nature and intentionally so.
|
|
|
|
williegoat
|
APR 20, 12:04 PM
|
|
| quote | Originally posted by maryjane:
Waters I think, is hoping for (or at least expecting) acquittal.
Her comments IMO, were incendiary in nature and intentionally so.
|
|
You may very well be right. The left seems to thrive on chaos.
|
|
|
|
maryjane
|
APR 20, 03:37 PM
|
|
|
|
|
williegoat
|
APR 20, 04:02 PM
|
|
|
We should hear the verdict within an hour. That seems awfully fast.
|
|
|
|
maryjane
|
APR 20, 04:46 PM
|
|
| quote | Originally posted by williegoat:
We should hear the verdict within an hour. That seems awfully fast. |
|
Not really.
There were really only 2-3 specific points to ponder IMO.
|
|
|
|
williegoat
|
APR 20, 04:50 PM
|
|
|
So, can we be fairly confident that the decision was the right one?
|
|
|
|