They'll go back to deliberate this afternoon or probably wait until tomorrow. Who knows how long it will take. If it's like when I was on the jury for a murder trial you'll have dumb people who want all the jury instructions explained again to them and want to watch the video again and then deliberate forever because they have nothing else to do.
I can't imagine what it must be like to be sitting on that jury knowing that what you do will have a national impact and people will want to kill you either way. I'm not sure how you focus on the trial and not just sit there contemplating how you got into this mess.
As someone who has sat on a jury for a murder trial and was foreman of the jury and had his name read out loud to a room full of the defendant's friends whom themselves all had histories of gun and violent crimes, it crosses your mind.
Keep in mind that these are folks who were picked because they knew almost nothing about the case. I doubt they think about much of anything.
Yea I always wonder how they get people for trials like this that are so publicized. You’d have to be intentionally avoiding any news or just completely oblivious to world events to not know about it. Either way, they’re not my peers.
hope i'm wrong but this county has a long history of not convicting white people who kill black people.
I'm not sure that there's ever been one this egregious and nationally relevant. I'm worried about the reaction if he's only convicted of manslaughter. If he's acquitted, it's going to be disastrous.
If he gets convicted of manslaughter and acquired of murder the reaction is going to be more or less the same as if it's a full out acquittal I think. And unfortunately acquittal for murder feels likely.
If he’s acquitted of all charges it’s safe to assume Minneapolis will not be the only city with significant rioting
I did, at first. But, the evidence was overwhelming and the defense case was pretty much 100% speculation. They couldn’t even find experts for it, and you know as well as anybody you can find an expert to say anything.
i admittedly have zero experience whatsoever with criminal law. my theory is as simple as white cop versus big black man
After reading a lot of the interviews with jurors after these types of acquittals, most of the acquittals or based on the jurors not truly understanding the jury instructions and the burdens of proof. They make up in their own minds what it means.
Rodney King didn't die but that was the first huge one caught on camera and it shocked everyone. And they walked.
It's a tough question to answer. Do we potentially compromise the cornerstone of our criminal justice system (reasonable doubt) to appease the masses of angry protesters out of fear that they may destroy property? Would we no longer prefer to let 100 guilty men walk in lieu of hanging one innocent man? Not saying I think Chauvin is not guilty, I think he is. Just that in a case like this, where I think reasonable doubt may have been demonstrated by the defense, it has to be absolutely gut-wrenching to have to decide whether to ignore that and go with what's best for the country, or go with the clear foundation of our judicial system.
These jurors need to come together and go ahead and convict no matter what they think on this case. Would be best for everyone, including Chauvin.
I know some of you have posted about the makeup of the jury, but I don’t know anything about it. In my mind I could see a holdout for “well, even if it was against protocol and training, and xyz, I wasn’t there in the moment to say if he was doing what was necessary to save more lives, so I have to give the benefit of the doubt.”
Right. It wasn’t as egregious or nationally relevant. This case has already resulted in nationwide riots before the verdict.
Reasonable doubt demonstrated? The man had his knee of his neck for 3 minutes after he had no pulse and he was cuffed the entire time. Get fucked with that bullshit.
Yeah, I’m all for the veil of innocence, but there wasn’t any evidentiary basis here for reasonable doubt.
The guy was in the care of the officer. He stated he couldn't breathe and the office kept his knee on his neck without rendering any aid. I don't care if he had drugs in his system. The moment he went unconscious, he should have been treated. The guy was murdered and I'm having a hard time seeing it any other way.
No. "Well MAYBE he would have been hit by a truck and died anyways" isn't a defense. He doesn't die if he doesn't have a knee on his neck for 10 minutes.
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-new...l-fired-officer-derek-chauvin-george-n1257457 The fired Minneapolis police officer who held his knee to George Floyd's neck agreed to plead guilty to third-degree murder days after Floyd's death, but then-Attorney General William Barr rejected the deal. "As part of the deal, officials now say, he was willing to go to prison for more than 10 years," the Times reported. "Local officials, scrambling to end the community's swelling anger, scheduled a news conference to announce the deal."
This could just be a tv/movie thing. I assume they actually take suspects to the hospital and cuff them to the bed if they need medical attention, then to jail later.
"Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, if Mr. Floyd's mother and father had not had sexual intercourse on that fateful night in 1974, Mr. Floyd's unfortunate and untimely death would not have occurred. Therefore, you must acquit officer Chauvin, whose actions were not solely responsible for the tragic death of Mr. Floyd."
lol that the guy that created the "Good cop" thread came in to side with the killer cop. What a disgusting human being.
Literally said the words "Not saying I think Chauvin is not guilty, I think he is." I'm just saying, our legal system is set up in a way that allows technicalities to change outcomes of trials. It's happened before and it seems like there's a good possibility it happens with this case.
The defense had one witness who thought Chauvin was in the right, ONE. Every other witness agreed he was way out of line and was responsible for Floyd’s death.