Fogbow

sugar magnolia wrote: ↑Sat Apr 24, 2021 6:15 am Just gonna drop this here for completeness.

'I tried to stop the bleeding': Family devastated after 13-year-old fatally stabbed by former friend
CINCINNATI —
A family is broken after a 13-year-old girl was stabbed to death in Cincinnati, Ohio.

The teen's father said the pain is immeasurable and described her as the glue that held them all together.
Investigators said the teen was taken to Cincinnati Children's Hospital where she died after the stabbing Monday night.

"I held her. I watched her as she died. I watched her, you know. All I could do was just hold her, hold her," Maurice Jackson said.

Devastation, heartache and loss are all emotions that Jackson, Nyaira Givens' father, is feeling after her sudden death.

"I tried. I tried to stop the bleeding," Jackson said.

Cincinnati police said Givens was stabbed to death by another 13-year-old girl during a fight near the family's home.

https://www.wapt.com/article/ohio-famil ... lSKf8K9N-w
Full story at the link.

LM K wrote: ↑Sat Apr 24, 2021 4:58 pm This makes me think about Ma'Khia Bryant's death. Knives can be fatal weapons.

A new video of the shooting by a police officer of 16-year-old Ma’Khia Bryant, taken by a neighbor’s security camera, has provided additional angles of the deadly incident from Tuesday.

The neighbor, Donovan Brinson, lives across the street and had a camera in his garage. In an interview with Fox News anchor Harris Faulkner, Brinson said that he and his wife had witnessed the argument that preceded the shooting, describing how Bryant and another girl (the one seen in the video in the bright pink outfit) were “upset about something” and “exchanging words” in the front yard.

In the video, Bryant can be heard shouting, “I’m gonna stab the f*ck out of you” before she lunges at the girl in pink with what appears to be a knife in her hand. The police officer then fired four shots, hitting Bryant. Officers at the scene attempted to resuscitate her but were unsuccessful.

The neighbor, Donovan Brinson, lives across the street and had a camera in his garage. In an interview with Fox News anchor Harris Faulkner, Brinson said that he and his wife had witnessed the argument that preceded the shooting, describing how Bryant and another girl (the one seen in the video in the bright pink outfit) were “upset about something” and “exchanging words” in the front yard.

Brinson said that before the shooting, he and his wife went back in the house, and shortly thereafter, he went to get something out of his car. “As I did that one of the girls locked another girl out of the house and they said something about how dare you lock me out of my mama’s house, this is my house, too. And I just kind of thought this is going to die down. They will unlock the door and figure it out and be done and over with.”

He went back inside and about five minutes later, Brinson said, they heard the shots. Hearing no retaliation shots, he figured it was a police officer. “So I went to my laundry room and looked outside and that’s when I saw Ma’Khia on the ground and everyone else in chaos.”

Brinson said he remembered his garage camera while the police officers were trying to resuscitate Bryant, and downloaded the video and gave a copy to the police on the scene.

Faulkner asked him what was his “interpretation” of the incident, based on what he had witnessed and watching his video afterwards, of the police officer who had “nine seconds” to “deal with a volatile situation.”

Brinson replied that the cop didn’t have many choices in that moment, and “only had seconds to respond.”

“From my point of view watching this, unfortunately the whole scenario put him in a bad spot,” he continued. “He could have either not fired and the young lady in pink could have got stabbed in the neck or fatally injured and then responded and shot and that would have been two young ladies possibly dead. Or he could have responded the way that he did and unfortunately one lady lost her life in the incident that probably could have been avoided.”

“The video doesn’t lie,” Brinson concluded. “There was an altercation, he responded and he reacted with what he thought was his best judgment…He did what he thought was best.”

Uninformed wrote: ↑Sat Apr 24, 2021 7:51 pm

bill_g wrote: ↑Sun Apr 25, 2021 8:33 am (shaking head) Just how stupid do they think their party members are?

sugar magnolia wrote: ↑Sun Apr 25, 2021 8:36 am

bill_g wrote: ↑Sun Apr 25, 2021 8:33 am (shaking head) Just how stupid do they think their party members are?

Not nearly as stupid as we think they are.

Derek Chauvin, the former Minneapolis police officer who was convicted of murdering George Floyd, will be sentenced on June 25, one week later than previously expected.

According to the Hennepin County District Court's website, Chauvin will be sentenced at 1:30 p.m. CDT. He was originally scheduled to be sentenced on June 16.

Spenser Bickett, a spokesperson for the court, told The Hill that the sentence was pushed back due to a scheduling conflict.

A jury found Chauvin guilty of second- and third-degree murder as well as second-degree manslaughter on April 20 for Floyd's murder.

Chauvin will only be sentenced for the second-degree murder charge, which is the most serious charge against, according to The Associated Press. That charge alone carries a maximum of 40 years in prison.

DOJ will reportedly bring federal charges against Derek Chauvin related to 2 cases

Federal prosecutors are planning to indict Derek Chauvin and three other former Minneapolis police officers on civil rights violations for their roles in the murder of George Floyd, The Star-Tribune reported. Justice Department officials spent months gathering information on Chauvin and the other officers in connection with Floyd’s death but did not make investigations public as they feared publicity would disrupt the state’s case.

According to The Star-Tribune, if Chauvin was not found guilty by the jury, federal prosecutors had a contingency plan to arrest Chauvin at the Minnesota courthouse. Under that backup plan, the Minnesota U.S. Attorney's Office would have charged Chauvin by criminal complaint, a process known to be quicker for federal charges as it does not require a grand jury, sources told The Star-Tribune. In that situation, the arrest would be immediate and a grand jury would later be asked for an indictment.

Federal prosecutors not only want to indict Chauvin in connection with Floyd’s death, but for a violent arrest he conducted in 2017. According to ABC News, the Justice Department was already considering these charges after court documents found that Chauvin allegedly struck a 14-year-old boy on the head with his flashlight, then grabbed him by the throat and hit him again.

He also held the child in a prone position for at least 17 minutes, The Star-Tribune reported. The incident was described in court documents by prosecutors in Floyd’s murder case to serve as evidence of Chauvin’s pattern of behavior. Like Floyd, Chauvin ignored the child’s complaints that he could not breathe.

sterngard friegen wrote: ↑Mon May 03, 2021 8:10 pm If this juror was wearing a "get your knee off our necks" T-shirt during the summer protests in Washington, D.C., I would be amazed if the jury verdict were not reversed.

A photo, posted on social media, shows Brandon Mitchell, who is Black, attending the Aug. 28 event to commemorate Martin Luther King Jr.’s “I Have a Dream” speech during the 1963 March on Washington. Floyd’s brother and sister, Philonise and Bridgett Floyd, and relatives of others who have been shot by police addressed the crowd.

* * *

Mitchell said he answered “no” to two questions about demonstrations on the questionnaire sent out before jury selection.

The first question asked: “Did you, or someone close to you, participate in any of the demonstrations or marches against police brutality that took place in Minneapolis after George Floyd’s death?” The second asked: “Other than what you have already described above, have you, or anyone close to you, participated in protests about police use of force or police brutality?”

* * *

Mitchell told the Star Tribune that last summer’s protest was “100% not” a march for Floyd.

“It was directly related to MLK’s March on Washington from the ’60s … The date of the March on Washington is the date … It was literally called the anniversary of the March on Washington,” he said.

RVInit wrote: ↑Mon May 03, 2021 8:14 pm Fuck. He did say there was a juror that had to be convinced to convict. It was a male. If the conviction gets overturned I am going to be freaking pissed. Damn this idiot.

sugar magnolia wrote: ↑Mon May 03, 2021 8:32 pm

RVInit wrote: ↑Mon May 03, 2021 8:14 pm Fuck. He did say there was a juror that had to be convinced to convict. It was a male. If the conviction gets overturned I am going to be freaking pissed. Damn this idiot.

I can't imagine a guy wearing that shirt and attending the MLK anniversary would have to be convinced to convict.

RVInit wrote: ↑Mon May 03, 2021 8:35 pm

sugar magnolia wrote: ↑Mon May 03, 2021 8:32 pm

RVInit wrote: ↑Mon May 03, 2021 8:14 pm Fuck. He did say there was a juror that had to be convinced to convict. It was a male. If the conviction gets overturned I am going to be freaking pissed. Damn this idiot.

I can't imagine a guy wearing that shirt and attending the MLK anniversary would have to be convinced to convict.

No, the man who wore the shirt said one of the other men had to be convinced to convict.

Mike Brandt, a Minneapolis defense attorney not involved in the case, told the AP the revelation alone wasn’t nearly enough to overturn Chauvin's conviction, but it could be combined with other issues — the announcement of a massive civil settlement to Floyd’s family during jury selection, the shooting of Daunte Wright, the judge’s refusal to move the trial — in an appeal to say Chauvin was denied a fair trial.

tek wrote: ↑Tue May 04, 2021 7:29 am Was there a question about the shirt that he did not answer truthfully?

IANAL, just wondering exactly where the flaw is that might cause the verdict to be overturned.

Maybenaut wrote: ↑Tue May 04, 2021 7:46 am

tek wrote: ↑Tue May 04, 2021 7:29 am Was there a question about the shirt that he did not answer truthfully?

IANAL, just wondering exactly where the flaw is that might cause the verdict to be overturned.

As I understand it, he wasn’t asked specifically about the shirt. He was asked if he went to any protests against police brutality (I’m paraphrasing); the first question was specific to Minneapolis, and the second was anywhere.

He said no to both. A photograph showing him wearing the shirt at a protest in Washington, D.C. surfaced later. He says his presence at the DC protest wasn’t about police brutality, it was in remembrance of MLK.

The problem with the shirt is that it suggests he’s biased, and not even against cops generally, but Chauvin specifically inasmuch as it says “get your knee off our necks,” and failed to reveal the bias. It also suggests that he was untruthful in his response to the court during voir dire.

Mitchell told Nelson during jury selection that he had a “very favorable” opinion of Black Lives Matter, that he knew some police officers at his gym who are “great guys,” and that he felt neutral about Blue Lives Matter, a pro-police group. He also said he had watched clips of bystander video of Floyd being pinned and had wondered why three other officers at the scene didn’t intervene.

He said he could be neutral at trial.

sugar magnolia wrote: ↑Tue May 04, 2021 7:56 am

Maybenaut wrote: ↑Tue May 04, 2021 7:46 am

tek wrote: ↑Tue May 04, 2021 7:29 am Was there a question about the shirt that he did not answer truthfully?

IANAL, just wondering exactly where the flaw is that might cause the verdict to be overturned.

As I understand it, he wasn’t asked specifically about the shirt. He was asked if he went to any protests against police brutality (I’m paraphrasing); the first question was specific to Minneapolis, and the second was anywhere.

He said no to both. A photograph showing him wearing the shirt at a protest in Washington, D.C. surfaced later. He says his presence at the DC protest wasn’t about police brutality, it was in remembrance of MLK.

The problem with the shirt is that it suggests he’s biased, and not even against cops generally, but Chauvin specifically inasmuch as it says “get your knee off our necks,” and failed to reveal the bias. It also suggests that he was untruthful in his response to the court during voir dire.

Mitchell told Nelson during jury selection that he had a “very favorable” opinion of Black Lives Matter, that he knew some police officers at his gym who are “great guys,” and that he felt neutral about Blue Lives Matter, a pro-police group. He also said he had watched clips of bystander video of Floyd being pinned and had wondered why three other officers at the scene didn’t intervene.

He said he could be neutral at trial.

That sounds like he admitted bias, at least to some extent, and then said he could be neutral anyway. Or is bias, admitted or not, reason to disqualify a juror?

fierceredpanda wrote: ↑Tue May 04, 2021 9:32 am

sugar magnolia wrote: ↑Tue May 04, 2021 7:56 am

Maybenaut wrote: ↑Tue May 04, 2021 7:46 am

As I understand it, he wasn’t asked specifically about the shirt. He was asked if he went to any protests against police brutality (I’m paraphrasing); the first question was specific to Minneapolis, and the second was anywhere.

He said no to both. A photograph showing him wearing the shirt at a protest in Washington, D.C. surfaced later. He says his presence at the DC protest wasn’t about police brutality, it was in remembrance of MLK.

The problem with the shirt is that it suggests he’s biased, and not even against cops generally, but Chauvin specifically inasmuch as it says “get your knee off our necks,” and failed to reveal the bias. It also suggests that he was untruthful in his response to the court during voir dire.

Mitchell told Nelson during jury selection that he had a “very favorable” opinion of Black Lives Matter, that he knew some police officers at his gym who are “great guys,” and that he felt neutral about Blue Lives Matter, a pro-police group. He also said he had watched clips of bystander video of Floyd being pinned and had wondered why three other officers at the scene didn’t intervene.

He said he could be neutral at trial.

That sounds like he admitted bias, at least to some extent, and then said he could be neutral anyway. Or is bias, admitted or not, reason to disqualify a juror?

Without more, if the juror says they can set aside any admitted preconceptions and hear the case impartially, that's ordinarily sufficient to satisfy the court that the juror doesn't need to be struck for cause.

The problem here is the shirt and attendance at the DC event where Floyd's family spoke. I'm sorry, but the claim that that event wasn't "about police brutality" when the Floyd family spoke at it is a distinction at which even a lawyer would blush. And Mitchell isn't a lawyer. By that logic, none of the protests last summer were "about police brutality," because they were "about" black lives mattering, or social justice, or equal protection of the law, or any other pretense you want to pick. His negative answer is clearly false, and appears calculated to launder his bias to survive a challenge for cause.

In fact, putting on my defense attorney hat, one has to wonder if the juror also lied about having neutral feelings toward Blue Lives Matter in order to try to avoid Nelson using a peremptory strike on him once his perjured testimony had ensured that he would not be struck for cause. This guy seems to have read The Runaway Jury and thought it was a useful "how-to" guide.

Chauvin is entitled to a new trial if this holds up, and this asshole should be prosecuted for perjury.