Spring forward.
To delete this message, click the X at top right.

Chauvin Jury deliberation poll

How long will the Jury deliberate?

Monday
1
2%
Tuesday
17
38%
Wed
17
38%
Thurs
9
20%
Friday
1
2%
Sat
0
No votes
Sun
0
No votes
 
Total votes: 45

User avatar
sterngard friegen
Posts: 263
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 9:51 am

Re: Chauvin Jury deliberation poll

#351

Post by sterngard friegen »

The T-shirt is enough. Chauvin's lawyer will argue it was a George Floyd rally to anyone wearing that T-shirt, that the juror was biased, and that the juror lied. If the juror actually wore the T-shirt, I think it's a slam dunk for a new trial.

The juror should be prosecuted. Perhaps he can serve time (much less) with Chauvin.
User avatar
Lani
Posts: 2507
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 11:42 am

Re: Chauvin Jury deliberation poll

#352

Post by Lani »

CNN announced that Chauvin's attorney filed for a new trial.
Image You can't wait until life isn't hard anymore before you decide to be happy.
User avatar
bob
Posts: 5382
Joined: Mon Mar 01, 2021 12:07 am

Re: Chauvin Jury deliberation poll

#353

Post by bob »

Lani wrote: Tue May 04, 2021 8:22 pm CNN announced that Chauvin's attorney filed for a new trial.
The motion itself is short; it references the applicable facts and laws, but doesn't discuss them. The juror allegations are in there, near the end.
Image ImageImage
User avatar
Slim Cognito
Posts: 6555
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 9:15 am
Location: Too close to trump
Occupation: Hats. I do hats.
Verified:

Re: Chauvin Jury deliberation poll

#354

Post by Slim Cognito »

Now that they've had a practice run, I'm worried the next defense will be competent. If the bastard gets off...
Pup Dennis in training to be a guide dog & given to a deserving vet. Thx! ImageImageImage x4
User avatar
LM K
Posts: 3144
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 7:44 pm
Location: Oregon
Occupation: Professor Shrinky Lady, brainwashing young adults daily!
Contact:

Re: Chauvin Jury deliberation poll

#355

Post by LM K »

sterngard friegen wrote: Tue May 04, 2021 7:20 pm The T-shirt is enough. Chauvin's lawyer will argue it was a George Floyd rally to anyone wearing that T-shirt, that the juror was biased, and that the juror lied. If the juror actually wore the T-shirt, I think it's a slam dunk for a new trial.

The juror should be prosecuted. Perhaps he can serve time (much less) with Chauvin.
sterngard friegen wrote: Tue May 04, 2021 7:20 pm The T-shirt is enough. Chauvin's lawyer will argue it was a George Floyd rally to anyone wearing that T-shirt, that the juror was biased, and that the juror lied. If the juror actually wore the T-shirt, I think it's a slam dunk for a new trial.

The juror should be prosecuted. Perhaps he can serve time (much less) with Chauvin.
Sternie :daydreaming: ,

I completely agree with your analysis.

In the article you posted, a defense lawyer said that the Daunte Wright killing could be a reason for a new trial (if combined with other factors). Why would that be?
"The jungle is no place for a cellist."
From "Take the Money and Run"
User avatar
Maybenaut
Posts: 2579
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 10:07 am
Location: Maybelot
Verified: ✅✅

Re: Chauvin Jury deliberation poll

#356

Post by Maybenaut »

Slim Cognito wrote: Tue May 04, 2021 8:41 pm Now that they've had a practice run, I'm worried the next defense will be competent. If the bastard gets off...
If he's acquitted after a fair trial I'm OK with that, because I really don't like the alternative.
"Hey! We left this England place because it was bogus, and if we don't get some cool rules ourselves, pronto, we'll just be bogus too!" -- Thomas Jefferson
User avatar
bob
Posts: 5382
Joined: Mon Mar 01, 2021 12:07 am

Re: Chauvin Jury deliberation poll

#357

Post by bob »

LM K wrote: Tue May 04, 2021 8:49 pm[A] defense lawyer said that the Daunte Wright killing could be a reason for a new trial (if combined with other factors). Why would that be?
The short answer is: it wouldn't.

It would require a chain of events to be true. And the defense would need to provide (1) evidence that is (2) admissible about the jurors.

Basically, the defense would have to prove that the jury was prohibited from learning about Wright's death but a juror nonetheless did. Or a juror made an incredible statement like, "We must vote to convict Chauvin to honor Wright."
Image ImageImage
User avatar
LM K
Posts: 3144
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 7:44 pm
Location: Oregon
Occupation: Professor Shrinky Lady, brainwashing young adults daily!
Contact:

Re: Chauvin Jury deliberation poll

#358

Post by LM K »

Slim Cognito wrote: Tue May 04, 2021 8:41 pm Now that they've had a practice run, I'm worried the next defense will be competent. If the bastard gets off...
I'm not. Nelson did as well as any lawyer could.

The evidence against Chauvin is overwhelming. And I'm not sure that those who funded Chauvin's defense still have enough $$$ to fund what Chauvin will need with round 2.

The prosecution learned from round 1.
"The jungle is no place for a cellist."
From "Take the Money and Run"
User avatar
LM K
Posts: 3144
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 7:44 pm
Location: Oregon
Occupation: Professor Shrinky Lady, brainwashing young adults daily!
Contact:

Re: Chauvin Jury deliberation poll

#359

Post by LM K »

bob wrote: Tue May 04, 2021 9:00 pm
LM K wrote: Tue May 04, 2021 8:49 pm[A] defense lawyer said that the Daunte Wright killing could be a reason for a new trial (if combined with other factors). Why would that be?
The short answer is: it wouldn't.

It would require a chain of events to be true. And the defense would need to provide (1) evidence that is (2) admissible about the jurors.

Basically, the defense would have to prove that the jury was prohibited from learning about Wright's death but a juror nonetheless did. Or a juror made an incredible statement like, "We must vote to convict Chauvin to honor Wright."
:bighug:
"The jungle is no place for a cellist."
From "Take the Money and Run"
User avatar
sterngard friegen
Posts: 263
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 9:51 am

Re: Chauvin Jury deliberation poll

#360

Post by sterngard friegen »

I agree with bob.

(One disagrees with bob at his or her peril.)
User avatar
bob
Posts: 5382
Joined: Mon Mar 01, 2021 12:07 am

Re: Chauvin Jury deliberation poll

#361

Post by bob »

sterngard friegen wrote: Tue May 04, 2021 9:17 pm One disagrees with bob at his or her peril.
That Guy knows nothing.

My guess is there will be a hearing about whether the juror lied concealed was omissive committed misconduct when answering the juror questionnaire. And the new-trial motion will rise or fall on the judge's credibility findings about why the juror didn't disclose going to the D.C. event.

And the t-shirt will be relevant circumstantial evidence; Chauvin's lawyers will ask, e.g., "You didn't think the D.C. event, which occurred three months after Floyd's death, was a protest about police brutality, but yet you wore that shirt?"
Image ImageImage
User avatar
pipistrelle
Posts: 6688
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 11:27 am

Re: Chauvin Jury deliberation poll

#362

Post by pipistrelle »

bob wrote: Tue May 04, 2021 9:27 pm
sterngard friegen wrote: Tue May 04, 2021 9:17 pm One disagrees with bob at his or her peril.
That Guy knows nothing.

My guess is there will be a hearing about whether the juror lied concealed was omissive committed misconduct when answering the juror questionnaire. And the new-trial motion will rise or fall on the judge's credibility findings about why the juror didn't disclose going to the D.C. event.

And the t-shirt will be relevant circumstantial evidence; Chauvin's lawyers will ask, e.g., "You didn't think the D.C. event, which occurred three months after Floyd's death, was a protest about police brutality, but yet you wore that shirt?"
He says he doesn’t remember the shirt. Me, I have 100 t-shirts and recognize all of them.
User avatar
bob
Posts: 5382
Joined: Mon Mar 01, 2021 12:07 am

Re: Chauvin Jury deliberation poll

#363

Post by bob »

pipistrelle wrote: Tue May 04, 2021 9:36 pmHe says he doesn’t remember the shirt.
And this is where a judge's findings are critical: The judge, following a hearing, may rely on innumerable intangibles when concluding the juror is or isn't credible (assuming the juror testifies at a hearing to that effect).
Image ImageImage
User avatar
Maybenaut
Posts: 2579
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 10:07 am
Location: Maybelot
Verified: ✅✅

Re: Chauvin Jury deliberation poll

#364

Post by Maybenaut »

sterngard friegen wrote: Tue May 04, 2021 9:17 pm I agree with bob.

(One disagrees with bob at his or her peril.)
I agree with bob too, also.
"Hey! We left this England place because it was bogus, and if we don't get some cool rules ourselves, pronto, we'll just be bogus too!" -- Thomas Jefferson
User avatar
sterngard friegen
Posts: 263
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 9:51 am

Re: Chauvin Jury deliberation poll

#365

Post by sterngard friegen »

bob wrote: Tue May 04, 2021 9:27 pm
sterngard friegen wrote: Tue May 04, 2021 9:17 pm One disagrees with bob at his or her peril.
That Guy knows nothing.

My guess is there will be a hearing about whether the juror lied concealed was omissive committed misconduct when answering the juror questionnaire. And the new-trial motion will rise or fall on the judge's credibility findings about why the juror didn't disclose going to the D.C. event.

And the t-shirt will be relevant circumstantial evidence; Chauvin's lawyers will ask, e.g., "You didn't think the D.C. event, which occurred three months after Floyd's death, was a protest about police brutality, but yet you wore that shirt?"
Objection. Argumentative.
Dave from down under
Posts: 3908
Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2021 4:50 pm
Location: Down here!

Re: Chauvin Jury deliberation poll

#366

Post by Dave from down under »

Made it to the news feed down here...

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2021-05-05/ ... /100116884
User avatar
Foggy
Dick Tater
Posts: 9554
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 8:45 am
Location: Fogbow HQ
Occupation: Dick Tater/Space Cadet
Verified: as seen on qvc zombie apocalypse

Re: Chauvin Jury deliberation poll

#367

Post by Foggy »

sterngard wrote: I think it's a slam dunk for a new trial.
I'd be a lot more worried about that if I thought a new trial would result in a different verdict. :smoking:
Edit: And I know there's no such thing as a guaranteed outcome in a trial, but still ...
Out from under. :thumbsup:
User avatar
noblepa
Posts: 2403
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 2:55 pm
Location: Bay Village, Ohio
Occupation: Retired IT Nerd

Re: Chauvin Jury deliberation poll

#368

Post by noblepa »

Can an appeals look at the evidence of this juror's possible bias and conclude that it would not have made a difference in the outcome and therefore deny a retrial?

I know that, in the case of other minor procedural errors, the appeals court has said, in effect that "yeah, the judge made a mistake, but it wouldn't have affected the outcome of the trial. Therefore, we will allow the conviction to stand".

Can the same thing happen here, or is a new trial likely?
User avatar
RVInit
Posts: 3830
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 8:48 am

Re: Chauvin Jury deliberation poll

#369

Post by RVInit »

We have heard from one of the alternate jurors, but not sure how many alternates there were. She was convinced of Chauvin's guilt. It would be interesting to see what the other alternates thought/think. It's not just what the jurors think, but their ability to be persuasive during deliberations. I could see a single holdout arguing effectively enough to turn things or at least to end up with a hung jury.

I would be nervous about a new trial, which I think is more than likely. This judge was pissed off about statements made after the jury was already sequestered, seems likely he is going to blow a fuse about that juror's T-shirt. Hell, I'm 100% convinced of Chauvin's guilt, 100% supportive of his conviction and I am pissed off about that damn juror. He just had to have his 15 minutes of fame, showed up on CNN and said that he "thought about" not going back to the trial after testimony started, but then decided "who will be there for the black man". That bothered me because he should have remained open minded until the end of the trial after all the evidence was in. So, I was already uncomfortable with him before the photo of him in a T-shirt came out. I'm confident that his statements on CNN were what caused people to search for photos of him anywhere on the internet, just hoping to see him at a rally or something.
There's a lot of things that need to change. One specifically? Police brutality.
--Colin Kaepernick
User avatar
Maybenaut
Posts: 2579
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 10:07 am
Location: Maybelot
Verified: ✅✅

Re: Chauvin Jury deliberation poll

#370

Post by Maybenaut »

noblepa wrote: Wed May 05, 2021 10:57 am Can an appeals look at the evidence of this juror's possible bias and conclude that it would not have made a difference in the outcome and therefore deny a retrial?

I know that, in the case of other minor procedural errors, the appeals court has said, in effect that "yeah, the judge made a mistake, but it wouldn't have affected the outcome of the trial. Therefore, we will allow the conviction to stand".

Can the same thing happen here, or is a new trial likely?
I think this is a very interesting question, and I'd like to take a crack at it when I have more time. But (assuming the juror was, in fact, biased), I think it's going to come down to (1) whether the appellate court finds that having a biased juror on the court is a "structural error" affecting the framework of the trial itself (slam-dunk dismissal); or (2) if it's not a structural error, whether the error was "harmless beyond a reasonable doubt."

I might do a little bit of research on that later today, but I have something else I need to do right now, so unless one of the other IAALs addresses it, I'll discuss it later.
"Hey! We left this England place because it was bogus, and if we don't get some cool rules ourselves, pronto, we'll just be bogus too!" -- Thomas Jefferson
User avatar
bob
Posts: 5382
Joined: Mon Mar 01, 2021 12:07 am

Re: Chauvin Jury deliberation poll

#371

Post by bob »

Maybenaut wrote: Wed May 05, 2021 12:11 pmI think this is a very interesting question, and I'd like to take a crack at it when I have more time. But (assuming the juror was, in fact, biased), I think it's going to come down to (1) whether the appellate court finds that having a biased juror on the court is a "structural error" affecting the framework of the trial itself (slam-dunk dismissal); or (2) if it's not a structural error, whether the error was "harmless beyond a reasonable doubt."
I believe most jurisdictions consider it a structural error, i.e., new trial without regard to possible harm. But I won't say all, and I don't know Minnesota's contours.

Also recall the Roger Stone trial: After the conviction, Stone wanted a new trial because one of the jurors had made "biased" social-media posts. But the judge didn't allow the new trial because the juror had been honest on the juror questionnaire and during voir dire; Stone's attorneys simply didn't do the research on the juror. The issue was less about the juror's possible bias and more about whether the juror had hampered Stone's ability to inquire and research. Courts tend to look more at jurors' concealments and omissions because those are often easier to prove than discerning what's in jurors' hearts.
Image ImageImage
User avatar
Maybenaut
Posts: 2579
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 10:07 am
Location: Maybelot
Verified: ✅✅

Re: Chauvin Jury deliberation poll

#372

Post by Maybenaut »

Allowing a biased juror to sit in the jury is a structural error in Minnesota.

From an unpublished case in the intermediate appellate court, but as good a job of legal research I’m likely to do on an iphone...
"The United States Constitution and the Minnesota Constitution guarantee a criminal defendant the right to an impartial jury." State v. Fraga, 864 N.W.2d 615, 623 (Minn. 2015). See also U.S. Const. amend. VI ("the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State"); Minn. Const. art. 1, § 6 ("in all criminal prosecutions the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial by an impartial jury"). "'The bias of a single juror violates the defendant's right to a fair trial,' because the 'impartiality of the adjudicator goes to the very integrity of the legal system.'" Id. (quoting State v. Brown, 732 N.W.2d 625, 630 (Minn. 2007)). "Permitting a biased juror to serve is structural error requiring automatic reversal." Id. (emphasis added).
"Hey! We left this England place because it was bogus, and if we don't get some cool rules ourselves, pronto, we'll just be bogus too!" -- Thomas Jefferson
User avatar
sugar magnolia
Posts: 3227
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 12:54 pm

Re: Chauvin Jury deliberation poll

#373

Post by sugar magnolia »

He may have bigger worries than a state re-trial. Will the union (or whoever it is) continue pay his legal expenses indefinitely?
https://www.wjtv.com/news/national/3-ex ... ral-court/
MINNEAPOLIS (AP) — A federal grand jury has indicted the four former Minneapolis police officers involved in George Floyd’s arrest and death, accusing them of willfully violating the Black man’s constitutional rights as he was restrained face-down on the pavement and gasping for air.

A three-count indictment unsealed Friday names Derek Chauvin, Thomas Lane, J. Kueng and Tou Thao.

Specifically, Chauvin is charged with violating Floyd’s right to be free from unreasonable seizure and unreasonable force by a police officer. Thao and Kueng are also charged with violating Floyd’s right to be free from unreasonable seizure, alleging they did not intervene to stop Chauvin as he knelt on Floyd’s neck. All four officers are charged for their failure to provide Floyd with medical care.
:snippity:
Chauvin was also charged in a second indictment, stemming from the arrest and neck restraint of a 14-year-old boy in 2017. :snippity:
Conviction on a federal civil rights charge is punishable by up to life in prison or even the death penalty, but those stiff sentences are extremely rare and federal sentencing guidelines rely on complicated formulas that indicate the officers would get much less if convicted.

In Chauvin’s case, if the federal court uses second-degree murder as his underlying offense, he could face anywhere from 14 years to slightly more than 24 years, depending on whether he takes responsibility, said Mark Osler, a former federal prosecutor and professor at the University of St. Thomas School of Law.

Osler said the guidelines clearly state that any federal sentence would be served at the same time as a state sentence — the sentences wouldn’t stack. Chauvin is due to be sentenced on the state charges June 25.
User avatar
neonzx
Posts: 6120
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 11:01 am
Location: FloriDUH Hell
Verified: 🤩✅✅✅✅✅🤩

Re: Chauvin Jury deliberation poll

#374

Post by neonzx »

sugar magnolia wrote: Fri May 07, 2021 10:40 am He may have bigger worries than a state re-trial. Will the union (or whoever it is) continue pay his legal expenses indefinitely?
https://www.wjtv.com/news/national/3-ex ... ral-court/
MINNEAPOLIS (AP) — A federal grand jury has indicted the four former Minneapolis police officers involved in George Floyd’s arrest and death, accusing them of willfully violating the Black man’s constitutional rights as he was restrained face-down on the pavement and gasping for air.

A three-count indictment unsealed Friday names Derek Chauvin, Thomas Lane, J. Kueng and Tou Thao.
:snippity:
Chauvin was also charged in a second indictment, stemming from the arrest and neck restraint of a 14-year-old boy in 2017. :snippity:
Sounds like these guys are having a bad year, don't you think? What are the federal sentencing guidelines if convicted on these charges? The article mentions they will run concurrent with the state convictions, but don't specify beyond that.
User avatar
sugar magnolia
Posts: 3227
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 12:54 pm

Re: Chauvin Jury deliberation poll

#375

Post by sugar magnolia »

neonzx wrote: Fri May 07, 2021 11:35 am
sugar magnolia wrote: Fri May 07, 2021 10:40 am He may have bigger worries than a state re-trial. Will the union (or whoever it is) continue pay his legal expenses indefinitely?
https://www.wjtv.com/news/national/3-ex ... ral-court/
MINNEAPOLIS (AP) — A federal grand jury has indicted the four former Minneapolis police officers involved in George Floyd’s arrest and death, accusing them of willfully violating the Black man’s constitutional rights as he was restrained face-down on the pavement and gasping for air.

A three-count indictment unsealed Friday names Derek Chauvin, Thomas Lane, J. Kueng and Tou Thao.
:snippity:
Chauvin was also charged in a second indictment, stemming from the arrest and neck restraint of a 14-year-old boy in 2017. :snippity:
Sounds like these guys are having a bad year, don't you think? What are the federal sentencing guidelines if convicted on these charges? The article mentions they will run concurrent with the state convictions, but don't specify beyond that.
How odd. Did it just leave out these 2 paragraphs altogether? I can see them on my original post but not on your quoted post.
Conviction on a federal civil rights charge is punishable by up to life in prison or even the death penalty, but those stiff sentences are extremely rare and federal sentencing guidelines rely on complicated formulas that indicate the officers would get much less if convicted.

In Chauvin’s case, if the federal court uses second-degree murder as his underlying offense, he could face anywhere from 14 years to slightly more than 24 years, depending on whether he takes responsibility, said Mark Osler, a former federal prosecutor and professor at the University of St. Thomas School of Law.
Post Reply

Return to “Law and Lawsuits”