News2 mins ago
B L M Supporter Lied To Join Chauvin Jury....
Haven't been on here for a while so I was looking forward to ABer's views on this. To my surprise nobody seems to have mentioned it.
I think it's a bombshell, a game changer. Perhaps others think it unimportant?
https:/
I think it's a bombshell, a game changer. Perhaps others think it unimportant?
https:/
Answers
That really isnt the point here is it Anne. Chauvin was accused of a crime, he deserves a fair trial. Clealry this member of the Jury could not do that, so justice is not served. This case should have been tried out of State.
07:56 Thu 13th May 2021
I've seen several videos defending his actions (all the ones on google's first page)
He'd never seen the BLM shirt (or hat, presumably) he was 'caught' wearing. 'Could be photo-shopped' say the establishment media presenters. He's lying, he proudly wore it on a podcast.
They also say it was the Defence team's fault he got through jury selection. The Defence lawyer asked him plenty of pertinent questions but can only take his (evasive)answers at face value.
Hardly the point, anyway, perjury is perjury even if you 'get away with it' for the duration of the trial.
He'd never seen the BLM shirt (or hat, presumably) he was 'caught' wearing. 'Could be photo-shopped' say the establishment media presenters. He's lying, he proudly wore it on a podcast.
They also say it was the Defence team's fault he got through jury selection. The Defence lawyer asked him plenty of pertinent questions but can only take his (evasive)answers at face value.
Hardly the point, anyway, perjury is perjury even if you 'get away with it' for the duration of the trial.
"You can only do jury service if y -ou are called. If black people are not being called it is up to whoever sends out the letters to make sure the lists are inclusive of all ethnicities not the potential jurors to put themselves forward"
Maybe they are being called but choose to excuse themselves by whatever means, valid or not.
Maybe they are being called but choose to excuse themselves by whatever means, valid or not.
According to this link:
https:/
He was asked the following:
"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?”"
he was in D.C. to commemorate the 'I have a dream' speech and was wearing an anti-police brutality t-shirt... is that 'participating in a protest'? Probably not... but he ought to have disclosed it really as it is obviously in the spirit of the question.
I do not think it is enough to prejudice the whole trial personally but I don't blame Chauvin's lawyers for basing an appeal on it.. I would if I were them.
https:/
He was asked the following:
"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?”"
he was in D.C. to commemorate the 'I have a dream' speech and was wearing an anti-police brutality t-shirt... is that 'participating in a protest'? Probably not... but he ought to have disclosed it really as it is obviously in the spirit of the question.
I do not think it is enough to prejudice the whole trial personally but I don't blame Chauvin's lawyers for basing an appeal on it.. I would if I were them.
"he ought to have disclosed it really as it is obviously in the spirit of the question."
One question had twelve statements which had to be rated 1 to 5 from "Stongly Agree" to "Strongly Disagree".
As they were looking for specific responses, the various questions should have been specific. There was no need for someone to second-guess what was, "obviously in the spirit of the question".
One question had twelve statements which had to be rated 1 to 5 from "Stongly Agree" to "Strongly Disagree".
As they were looking for specific responses, the various questions should have been specific. There was no need for someone to second-guess what was, "obviously in the spirit of the question".
//He also says black people have to start doing jury service so they can promote social change.//
What on earth is he talking about? Six of the jurors were white, four were black and two were mixed race…. unless by ‘social change’ he means selecting jurors who are bent on bringing verdicts that suit their own political and social agendas.
What on earth is he talking about? Six of the jurors were white, four were black and two were mixed race…. unless by ‘social change’ he means selecting jurors who are bent on bringing verdicts that suit their own political and social agendas.
Some pointless bs report than no one should care about lol guy murdered a man in the streets who cares if the guy on the jury supported black lives matter im sure he didnt support murderers the point of a jury is to judge and why cant a black man judge from the perspective of a black man supporting black lives what is wrong with the world lmao give him all white piggy males on the jury how is that fair need people from all walks of life to make decisions on these things
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.