GUILTY MN - George Floyd, 46, died, Minneapolis, 25 May 2020 #18 - Chauvin Closing & Deliberations #1

[sorrell skye]

Verdict Watch can be an emotional time.

I love you all.

 

[kittythehare]

Verdict Watch can be an emotional time.

I love you all.

The beauty of websleuths is that it is multidimensional.
I think it's borne from the ethos of 'victim first'.
That is why I remain, it challenges me to come from a place of empathy, sympathy and rapport.
Compassion.

Without that,
where would we be?

 

[sorrell skye]

I believe that humanizing George Floyd was a strength of the prosecution.

George Floyd was a human being.

Derek Chauvin did not treat George Floyd as a human being.

He treated him as an object he wanted to control.

George Floyd was a human being.

 

[sorrell skye]

Indeed.
I really find it so difficult to listen to a defense attorney justifying that in an inane way.
At one stage during his closing, he referred to it as 'the incident'

There's something wrong with someone who repeatedly plays the recording of his murder in an effort to defend it.

For me, that's when it has gone too far.
His family were there, his friends were witnessing it... grieving people had to watch their loved one's vicious murder being used to serve an inane defense of it.
Cruelty is the game.

The defense showed no compassion for George Floyd.

The defense used George Floyd's body as a means to an end.

I found it beyond disgusting. It was a gratuitous display of power over a defenseless man. I think it was meant to send a message. As was Derek Chauvin's 9 minute 29 seconds assault.

These were all blatant messages.

We hear your message.

We reject your message.

We will not be silent.

We Rise.

 

[margarita25]

In several news podcasts tonight, which discussed the subject at hand as the lead story and featured various legal analysts, experts, etc., one unifying inference was being made, which is that the “blue wall of silence” is crumbling, meaning it is consequential that many members of LE testified for the prosecution.

—

Eta:

Another point made by a legal analyst which I thought was interesting is that, until now, the jury members have been instructed not to speak to each other on the breaks (I think about the case specifically, but perhaps generally), so the conversation is now fresh. For the first time they will reveal what they are actually thinking. She said everybody likes to guess what the jurors are thinking, etc., but really nobody really knows, and that in the cases she has tried, there were surprising results as related to the thoughts of the jurors.

 

[missy1974]

In several news podcasts tonight, which discussed the subject at hand as the lead story and featured various legal experts, etc., one unifying inference is being made, which is that the “blue wall of silence” is crumbling, meaning it is consequential that many members of LE testified for the prosecution.

I would like to think that is the case.... that SHOULD be the case. But I really feel like the LE officers that were called, were called for a reason... they were part of the case. There were some that appeared to not be comfortable being there IMO I think the Chief of Police was there for PR reasons, I know that might not be popular opinion, but that's how it felt IMO. Has the Chief changed much since this happened? Where do they even start?

 

[margarita25]

I would like to think that is the case.... that SHOULD be the case. But I really feel like the LE officers that were called, were called for a reason... they were part of the case. There were some that appeared to not be comfortable being there IMO I think the Chief of Police was there for PR reasons, I know that might not be popular opinion, but that's how it felt IMO. Has the Chief changed much since this happened? Where do they even start?

I did hear one mother speak tonight, a Reverend who’s son was killed in Oakland by a Police officer some years ago, (Oscar was her son’s name, the cop who shot him received a guilty verdict for involuntary manslaughter, but not second degree murder, to which she was dissatisfied about). There was also another similar case that was mentioned, Freddie Gray, iirc. The point was made that, in (one of?) those cases, LE was testifying for the defense, so the fact so many LE testified for the prosecution is one thing that sets this case apart from other similar cases.

 

[missy1974]

I did hear one mother speak tonight, a Reverend who’s son was killed in Oakland by a Police officer some years ago, (Oscar was her son’s name, the cop who shot him received a guilty verdict for involuntary manslaughter, but not second degree murder, to which she opposed. There was also another similar case that was mentioned, Freddie Gray, iirc. The point was made that, in (one of?) those cases, LE was testifying for the defense, so that is one thing that sets this case apart from other similar cases.

Thanks for posting about it. Everyone was talking everywhere today! Would have liked to watch them all, but not enough time in the day

 

[margarita25]

Thanks for posting about it. Everyone was talking everywhere today! Would have liked to watch them all, but not enough time in the day

Lol, I have Apple Podcasts and listen to them in the dark as I’m TRYING to go to sleep. Usually they knock me right out, but I can’t sleep tonight.

Another topic of discussion has been this whole Maxine W thing, if this will leave grounds for an appeal, as the judge mentioned. The consensus from the legal experts that I heard is that it (MW) will not hold much weight, based on the same reasons and points the judge made when he denied the motion.

Can you imagine, going through all this, only for a possible conviction to be overturned?

Another consensus was that the defense was ineffective today, as noted by some of you, that his points weren’t hitting home, that he was going on and on, something about cookies, boring the jurors...They mentioned that the judge calling Nelson out on this was also damaging to the defense (paraphrasing). It was also mentioned that the point Nelson tried to make that DC could have used more force didn’t quite hit home either. The consensus was that the prosecution has done a good job. I listened to three different msm podcasts, each with 3 legal analysts including criminal defense attorneys who represented police officers in other previous high profile cases.

 

[GarAndTeed]

Thank you,
I could not get my brain around how they organised themselves.
I wonder whether things become heated at times?
Do they ever actually fight?

Yes, in some trials I've followed, they sometimes fight, and things can get quite heated. I know during the 2nd penalty trial in the Arias case there was one juror who refused to deliberate, if I recall (someone correct me if I'm wrong)! The foreman sent several notes to the judge; the woman who wouldn't participate sent notes, too. I thought she should've been dismissed & replaced with an alternate, but obviously I didn't have all the inside info to know exactly what went on. If I remember right, the prosecutor had prosecuted her boyfriend (whom she later married), and she didn't disclose that info during voir dire. She was the only holdout, so Arias didn't get the death penalty (I'm not in favor of the DP, but that's just me- I wouldn't qualify for a DP case because I'd be honest about my feelings. I've also heard jurors say they felt pressured by other jurors...
I truly believe most jurors are sincere, and do their best to work together, though.

 

[Blondiexoxo]

What time are deliberations due to start up again? Sorry, I’m in the UK it’s 9.20am here! I imagine it’s the middle of the night over there so maybe more like 3pm BST.
I don’t think we will have a verdict today, with there being 3 charges to consider it may take more time for them all to agree. JMO

 

[SouthAussie]

What time are deliberations due to start up again? Sorry, I’m in the UK it’s 9.20am here! I imagine it’s the middle of the night over there so maybe more like 3pm BST.
I don’t think we will have a verdict today, with there being 3 charges to consider it may take more time for them all to agree. JMO

I don't think they have stated a time when deliberations will recommence. I have been looking for that answer. Everything I read just says "in the morning".

With regard to the verdict, I have been wondering if they all can instantly agree on manslaughter, but may need to deliberate the others. (If they did an initial straw poll.)

 

[Cubby]

Yes - at the end of the day there's only the love and the grief.

But there is also what has been stolen by Derek Chauvin.

Derek Chauvin stole the life of a beloved family member. He stole the life of a beloved community member.

Derek Chauvin stole the life of a brother, a friend, a cousin, a lover.

Derek Chauvin stole the life of a human being.

Derek Chauvin stole the life of George Floyd - and in doing so, he stole George Floyd's future.

For that, Derek Chauvin must answer.

Add to the above the collateral damage as a result of Derek Chauvin's actions. So much loss for so many, across the country.

 

[Sillybilly]

Please continue discussion at Verdict Watch Thread #2.

This thread is closed.