 
     |
| What the heck is she thinking, Rep. Maxine Waters (Page 8/10) |
|
blackrams
|
MAY 04, 04:11 PM
|
|
Much of how we are regarded is dependent on what others believe. It's his story (the link you posted) and he should probably stick to it. That doesn't mean it's believable.
Rams
|
|
|
|
maryjane
|
MAY 04, 04:28 PM
|
|
| quote | Originally posted by blackrams:
Much of how we are regarded is dependent on what others believe. It's his story (the link you posted) and he should probably stick to it. That doesn't mean it's believable.
Rams |
|
That's the mindset that former police officer (now convicted murderer) Chauvin had too.
How did that work out for him?
It's very possible that an appeals panel will overturn the conviction on various grounds and a new one held. I honestly don't think it will turn out much, if any differently than the 1st one did.
I saw a post on a military forum last week by a former military and current LEO that said the jury should have been made up of all male all white people and Chauvin should have gotten no more than probation, if that.
There are probably a few on PFF that feel the same way.[This message has been edited by maryjane (edited 05-04-2021).]
|
|
|
|
blackrams
|
MAY 04, 04:35 PM
|
|
| quote | Originally posted by maryjane:
That's the mindset that former police officer (now convicted murderer) Chauvin had too.
How did that work out for him?
It's very possible that an appeals panel will overturn the conviction on various grounds and a new one held. I honestly don't think it will turn out much, if any differently than the 1st one did.
I saw a post on a military forum last week by a former military and current LEO that said the jury should have been made up of all male all white people and Chauvin should have gotten no more than probation, if that.
There are probably a few on PFF that feel the same way.
|
|
Interesting that you interpreted my post as you apparently did. I have offered no opinion on a guilt or innocent verdict, only initially stating that some political statements were condemning and well out of order and now we find what appears to be a lying jurist with potentially preconceived opinions. I agree that another may find Chauvin guilty but, then again, it may not. I haven't seen the real evidence presented. I have no doubt there was an intimidation factor to the jury though.
Edited: BTW, I thought the judge sealed the jurist's identities............... hmm 
Rams[This message has been edited by blackrams (edited 05-04-2021).]
|
|
|
|
Jake_Dragon
|
MAY 04, 04:51 PM
|
|
| quote | Originally posted by maryjane:
That's the mindset that former police officer (now convicted murderer) Chauvin had too.
How did that work out for him?
It's very possible that an appeals panel will overturn the conviction on various grounds and a new one held. I honestly don't think it will turn out much, if any differently than the 1st one did.
I saw a post on a military forum last week by a former military and current LEO that said the jury should have been made up of all male all white people and Chauvin should have gotten no more than probation, if that.
There are probably a few on PFF that feel the same way.
|
|
So how did the majority of the forum members react?
|
|
|
|
Jake_Dragon
|
MAY 04, 06:23 PM
|
|
| quote | Originally posted by blackrams:
Interesting that you interpreted my post as you apparently did. I have offered no opinion on a guilt or innocent verdict, only initially stating that some political statements were condemning and well out of order and now we find what appears to be a lying jurist with potentially preconceived opinions. I agree that another may find Chauvin guilty but, then again, it may not. I haven't seen the real evidence presented. I have no doubt there was an intimidation factor to the jury though.
Edited: BTW, I thought the judge sealed the jurist's identities............... hmm
Rams
|
|
I don't see anyone printing tshirts and putting up murals.  it is my opinion that Chauvin should have been tried and convicted of manslaughter. He should never again hold a law enforcement job, or any job working with the public.
He should be held accountable and made to pay back the money that was given to the family. LOL wouldn't that be a hoot, make people responsible.
|
|
|
|
blackrams
|
MAY 04, 06:45 PM
|
|
| quote | Originally posted by Jake_Dragon:
I don't see anyone printing tshirts and putting up murals. it is my opinion that Chauvin should have been tried and convicted of manslaughter. He should never again hold a law enforcement job, or any job working with the public.
He should be held accountable and made to pay back the money that was given to the family. LOL wouldn't that be a hoot, make people responsible. |
|
I haven't offered an opinion on his guilt or innocence. I simply (initially) had a problem with elected officials offering their opinions when they hadn't seen any more evidence than I have/had. I also was not surprised by the jury's findings but everything I saw was from a source I don't have a lot of confidence in, a very biased press. Who tend to take a liberal view on just about everything. I have several personal friends who are LEOs. Pretty much, all agree with your quoted and bolded statement above.
Chauvin was tried and convicted by the press long before he ever went to trial IMO. That's not to suggest the jury was wrong but, if the purported jurist did lie, then Chauvin deserves a new trial and a new jury IMO. And, that jurist should be held liable, in contempt and what ever other charges applicable and serve some time.
Rams
|
|
|
|
maryjane
|
MAY 04, 10:27 PM
|
|
| quote | Originally posted by blackrams:
I haven't offered an opinion on his guilt or innocence. I simply (initially) had a problem with elected officials offering their opinions when they hadn't seen any more evidence than I have/had. I also was not surprised by the jury's findings but everything I saw was from a source I don't have a lot of confidence in, a very biased press. Who tend to take a liberal view on just about everything. I have several personal friends who are LEOs. Pretty much, all agree with your quoted and bolded statement above.
Chauvin was tried and convicted by the press long before he ever went to trial IMO. That's not to suggest the jury was wrong but, if the purported jurist did lie, then Chauvin deserves a new trial and a new jury IMO. And, that jurist should be held liable, in contempt and what ever other charges applicable and serve some time.
Rams
|
|
The questions asked at voir dire are usually pretty general in nature and if an issue is found, one of the things I always heard the presiding judge ask was something along the lines of "Do you believe you can still be objective and come to a conclusion regarding innocence's or guilt based only on the evidence presented at trial?"
Public opinion and opinion in the press in regards to court cases has been prevalent if not a mainstay of Americana since colonial days. Controversial issues began to appear in the press of the colonies almost immediately after Ben Harris started his paper in the late 1600s.
By the mid 1700s and especially after the Peter Zenger trial, newspapers were deeply involved in bot politics and court case opinion pieces. By the 1830s, the penny press like the The Sun. The Burr/Hamilton duel came about because of an article printed in a newspaper and after the duel, the press all but lynched Burr for alleged 'treason'.
It's nothing new. The only thing that is different is that instead of taverns and 2 page dailies, it's now the internet and 24 hr TV news. Get used to it.
It's not going away, but neither is the seriousness with which jurors take their oath to 'do the right thing' and find justice based only on the evidence presented at trial.
|
|
|
|
randye
|
MAY 04, 10:36 PM
|
|
| quote | Originally posted by blackrams:
Well, there's a relevant bit of information that will no doubt be a reason for a mistrial.
A change of jurisdictions should also be granted to get a "more" impartial jury but, that may not be possible.
Rams |
|
I have three words:
JURY NULLIFICATION
PERJURY
| quote | Originally posted by maryjane:
It's not going away, but neither is the seriousness with which jurors take their oath to 'do the right thing' and find justice based only on the evidence presented at trial.
|
|
You either have your tongue firmly planted in your cheek and are being sarcastic or you have no idea what really goes on in courts these days, especially in voir dire.
I have several practicing attorney friends who regularly conduct voir dire and empanel at least two or more juries a month.
ALL of them have said that they discover AT LEAST ONE prospective juror LYING at EVERY voir dire.
They lie either to get excused, (most common) OR, (more nefariously) to get SELECTED for a jury.
The situation for ALL attorneys, (both defense and prosecution), has gotten so bad that they routinely have to use laptops connected to public records search in court during voir dire to check criminal and public records of prospective jurors to help try to ferret out liars, also known as PERJUORORS.
The most common LIES from prospective jurors are in response to these questions:
1. Have you or someone in your household ever been arrested, (regardless of if you or they were ever convicted or found innocent)?
2. Have you ever been the defendant in a civil lawsuit?
3. Have you ever sued someone in civil court?
4. Have you ever filed for bankruptcy?[This message has been edited by randye (edited 05-05-2021).]
|
|
|
|
rinselberg
|
MAY 04, 10:37 PM
|
|
|
Ha! That was a real Zenger.
|
|
|
|
blackrams
|
MAY 04, 10:38 PM
|
|
| quote | Originally posted by maryjane:
Get used to it.
It's not going away, but neither is the seriousness with which jurors take their oath to 'do the right thing' and find justice based only on the evidence presented at trial.
|
|
Get used to it? Maybe when it appears that justice is blind but, she's been peeking for a while now.
Jurors taking their oath seriously is another matter. Whether guilty or innocent, I'll always remember the juror that gave OJ the Black Power fist as the jury left the court room. One should wonder about that and now this. Not suggesting the jury was wrong, just noting what occurred.
Rams[This message has been edited by blackrams (edited 05-04-2021).]
|
|
|
|