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?
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.
//why cant a black man judge from the perspective of a black man supporting black lives //
Well, BLM is a marxist organisation that wants rid of the Police. You really couldnt get more biased.
The problem here is that he has given Chauvins breif an opportunity of appeal. If it had been someone else I have no doubt they would have come to the same conclusion but ther would be no wriggle room for Chauvins legal team.
So all this idiot has done is shoot himself in the foot.
Can you honestly not understand what Togo is asking, atheist?
Doubt we'll ever know, togo. If the lawyer was using this Juror as you suggest, he sure ain't going to tell us.
The way the Judge and Lawyer talked to Mitchell, it was as though they knew he wasn't being straight with them. (so it seemed to me) I'll post it here and see if anyone agrees (if they can be bothered to watch it)
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.