It was the jury's job in the Jodi Arias trial to determine of she received the DP, or LWOP.The jury members are not a naive, sheltered group who are shocked to see the city prepared for this verdict. They are from Minneapolis - they have seen the past 12 months first hand. They have seen trucks, guards, boarded up buildings, people in the streets - it's not as if they are wondering what is going on while they are in the courthouse.
Unless we find out otherwise (not just hand wringing), I think the jury are mature adults living in current times and understand their job is to look at the evidence about the day in question. If they are not capable of that, then we don't have a judicial system.
If they feel threatened, they need to tell the judge.
jmo
Good point. I doubt we would, and I doubt they'd be required to tell the Judge they heard what she said. When a judge tells the jury "don't watch TV" and they get a news alert on their smartphone and they read it. They've done nothing wrong.Let's say the jury does discuss Maxine Waters statement and the possible repercussions of a not guilty verdict. Would we necessarily know they did that? JMO
Not being able to reach a decision happens. That's not the same as saying a jury will be influenced by what I'm assuming they already know - the world is on edge.It was the jury's job in the Jodi Arias trial to determine of she received the DP, or LWOP.
They were all asked if they would be able to decide on their questionnaire, and they all answered yes. Then when it came time to decide, they couldn't. That happened twice. What the jury is supposed to do, and what they do, are sometimes two different things.
This case is really not that complicated! It shouldn’t take long for a verdict IMO. The only reason it would go past today is if there are 1 or 2 stealth/pro police jurors! Think about it - if this was not a cop - we would all be saying what a slam dunk case it is! The only factor that could bias this jury is that the defendant was a cop!
Having said that - I think the fact that he was charged and tried so zealously and that all these LE witnesses condemned his actions is HUGE! Precedent setting even! The fact that the whole world protested his actions is HUGE! The fact that the whole world is paying attention is HUGE! Let’s not lose sight of that. Whether he serves 10 years or 40 ultimately he’s been condemned by the whole world! Regardless of how much time he serves, good has won!!! His life is effectively over! He will never forget George Floyd’s name! Nor will the world!
JMO
What I am saying is sometimes the jury does not do what they are supposed to do.Not being able to reach a decision happens. That's not the same as saying a jury will be influenced by what I'm assuming they already know - the world is on edge.
Of course some juries cannot agree. That happens. Could happen here.
jmo
But what could be done to change any of that?They knew the moment they were chosen about all the protests and discord going on.What I am saying is sometimes the jury does not do what they are supposed to do.
Everyone is bias. The Judge mentioned that yesterday. So yes, what they see and what they hear has an affect on their decision, regardless if it's supposed to or not.
IMO, there's not one juror that is not wondering what affect their decision is going to have on the entire nation., and on their personal/families safety.
@Weki, you say that this should not go past today... think about the poll here at WS where ~10% think not guilty on the bottom charge. After MONTHS of disecting on these threads and took so long for many to decide (myself included... still not sure myself and why I posted jury instructions again this am!)
If 11 of the 12 think guilty on the bottom charge, do you think they should go to the judge and state on the FIRST DAY for any of the 3 charges that we are hung..... after/within the first day?
I think not. MOO.
What I am saying is sometimes the jury does not do what they are supposed to do.
Everyone is bias. The Judge mentioned that yesterday. So yes, what they see and what they hear has an affect on their decision, regardless if it's supposed to or not.
IMO, there's not one juror that is not wondering what affect their decision is going to have on the entire nation., and on their personal/families safety.
Jurors are required to follow the jury instructions which in part states their verdict must be based solely on the evidence and they can not allow public opinion to influence their decision. If an entire panel of jurors collectively decided to discuss issues outside of the evidence including matters of public opinion, that would be a dereliction of duty on their part. I think that the possibility of that happening are extremely low and not worth discussing. The chances of anyone knowing would be if one or more jurors took their responsibility seriously and alerted the judge to fellow juror misconduct.Let's say the jury does discuss Maxine Waters statement and the possible repercussions of a not guilty verdict. Would we necessarily know they did that? JMO
A change of venue would have been a good start imo. True, 99% of people have heard about George Floyd, but not everyone has been affected by the aftermath.But what could be done to change any of that?They knew the moment they were chosen about all the protests and discord going on.
@Weki, you say that this should not go past today... think about the poll here at WS where ~10% think not guilty on the bottom charge. After MONTHS of disecting on these threads and took so long for many to decide (myself included... still not sure myself and why I posted jury instructions again this am!)
If 11 of the 12 think guilty on the bottom charge, do you think they should go to the judge and state on the FIRST DAY for any of the 3 charges that we are hung..... after/within the first day?
I think not. MOO.
Paul Applebaum, who handles both civil rights and criminal defense cases, said defense attorneys tend to oppose the use of sequestered juries and that being locked in a hotel could impact the outcome of the Chauvin verdict.
"People don't fight for a position when they are isolated and lonely," said Applebaum. "They throw up hands and want to go home.
snippedAnyone should be outraged when a seasoned qualified judge who was a past prosecutor clearly said on the record MWs statements could overturn the conviction if found guilty.
Agree. I do wish politicians would refrain from calling for any particular verdict while a trial is ongoing. It's not good for justice or for politics.Anyone should be outraged when a seasoned qualified judge who was a past prosecutor clearly said on the record MWs statements could overturn the conviction if found guilty.
Yes, I'm outraged she made such volatile statements, and needlessly interjected herself, and compounded what will already be used by the defense on appeal.
I have followed many cases that have wound up being overturned on appeal, and I know EN has a good case for this one to be overturned.
Imo, eveyone should care when a case has very valid reasons to be overturned if they are truly not wanting it to be overturned.
MW has unnecessarily, and senselessly given the defense even more than they already have, and MWs timing couldn't be worse.
How that can't be highly upsetting for all who want's justice for George is mind boggling to me.
Jmho
I think they will vote Guilty because of the video that proved he was murdered. JMOChauvin jurors facing 'through the roof' stress as deliberations begin
I found this part of the article interesting.
I agree with this and it's one of the reasons I feel this jury will vote guilty on all charges. JMO
Chauvin jurors facing 'through the roof' stress as deliberations begin