Chauvin Jury deliberation poll
- sterngard friegen
- Posts: 330
- Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 9:51 am
Re: Chauvin Jury deliberation poll
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.
The juror should be prosecuted. Perhaps he can serve time (much less) with Chauvin.
Neither disbarred nor disciplined after representing President Barack Obama.
Re: Chauvin Jury deliberation poll
CNN announced that Chauvin's attorney filed for a new trial.
You can't wait until life isn't hard anymore before you decide to be happy.
Re: Chauvin Jury deliberation poll
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.
- Slim Cognito
- Posts: 7431
- Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 9:15 am
- Location: The eff away from trump.
- Occupation: Hats. I do hats.
- Verified: ✅
Re: Chauvin Jury deliberation poll
Now that they've had a practice run, I'm worried the next defense will be competent. If the bastard gets off...
May the bridges I burn light my way.
x5
x5
- 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
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 ,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.
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"
From "Take the Money and Run"
Re: Chauvin Jury deliberation poll
If he's acquitted after a fair trial I'm OK with that, because I really don't like the alternative.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...
"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
Re: Chauvin Jury deliberation poll
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."
- 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
I'm not. Nelson did as well as any lawyer could.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...
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"
From "Take the Money and Run"
- 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
bob wrote: ↑Tue May 04, 2021 9:00 pmThe 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."
"The jungle is no place for a cellist."
From "Take the Money and Run"
From "Take the Money and Run"
- sterngard friegen
- Posts: 330
- Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 9:51 am
Re: Chauvin Jury deliberation poll
I agree with bob.
(One disagrees with bob at his or her peril.)
(One disagrees with bob at his or her peril.)
Neither disbarred nor disciplined after representing President Barack Obama.
Re: Chauvin Jury deliberation poll
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?"
- pipistrelle
- Posts: 7956
- Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 11:27 am
Re: Chauvin Jury deliberation poll
He says he doesn’t remember the shirt. Me, I have 100 t-shirts and recognize all of them.bob wrote: ↑Tue May 04, 2021 9:27 pmThat 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?"
Re: Chauvin Jury deliberation poll
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).
Re: Chauvin Jury deliberation poll
I agree with bob too, also.sterngard friegen wrote: ↑Tue May 04, 2021 9:17 pm I agree with bob.
(One disagrees with bob at his or her peril.)
"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
- sterngard friegen
- Posts: 330
- Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 9:51 am
Re: Chauvin Jury deliberation poll
Objection. Argumentative.bob wrote: ↑Tue May 04, 2021 9:27 pmThat 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?"
Neither disbarred nor disciplined after representing President Barack Obama.
-
- Posts: 4491
- Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2021 4:50 pm
- Location: Down here!
- Foggy
- Dick Tater
- Posts: 11312
- Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 8:45 am
- Location: Fogbow HQ
- Occupation: Dick Tater/Space Cadet
- Verified: grumpy ol' geezer
Re: Chauvin Jury deliberation poll
I'd be a lot more worried about that if I thought a new trial would result in a different verdict.sterngard wrote: I think it's a slam dunk for a new trial.
Edit: And I know there's no such thing as a guaranteed outcome in a trial, but still ...
I'm Foggy and I forget if I approved this message.
- noblepa
- Posts: 2616
- Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 2:55 pm
- Location: Bay Village, Ohio
- Occupation: Retired IT Nerd
Re: Chauvin Jury deliberation poll
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 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?
Re: Chauvin Jury deliberation poll
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.
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.
"It actually doesn't take much to be considered a difficult woman. That's why there are so many of us."
--Jane Goodall
--Jane Goodall
Re: Chauvin Jury deliberation poll
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."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 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
Re: Chauvin Jury deliberation poll
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.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."
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.
Re: Chauvin Jury deliberation poll
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...
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
- sugar magnolia
- Posts: 3890
- Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 12:54 pm
Re: Chauvin Jury deliberation poll
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.
Chauvin was also charged in a second indictment, stemming from the arrest and neck restraint of a 14-year-old boy in 2017.
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.
Re: Chauvin Jury deliberation poll
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.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.
Chauvin was also charged in a second indictment, stemming from the arrest and neck restraint of a 14-year-old boy in 2017.
- sugar magnolia
- Posts: 3890
- Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 12:54 pm
Re: Chauvin Jury deliberation poll
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.neonzx wrote: ↑Fri May 07, 2021 11:35 amSounds 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.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.
Chauvin was also charged in a second indictment, stemming from the arrest and neck restraint of a 14-year-old boy in 2017.
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.