GUILTY MN - George Floyd, 46, killed in police custody, Minneapolis, 25 May 2020 #20

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
George Floyd family lawyer wants to turn attention back to Texas woman killed by police in 2019


ABC News will offer a portrait of the life of George Floyd in a two-hour “20/20” slated to air April 23 at 9 p.m. eastern.

The program will feature interviews with Gianna Floyd, Floyd’s youngest daughter; friends and family of Floyd; Christopher Martin, the former store clerk who testified that he regretted taking the allegedly counterfeit $20 bill from Floyd; Maya Santamaria, the former nightclub owner who employed both Floyd and Chauvin; and Clarence Castile, uncle of Philando Castile.

Many TV-news programs have responded to this week’s verdict finding police officer Derek Chauvin guilty of killing Floyd while he was in the custody of Minneapolis police last year. On Wednesday, all three of the broadcast-network morning shows had anchors and correspondents on the ground in Minneapolis. ABC News’ ‘The View,” for example has rescheduled some of the guests it had planned for this week in favor of talking to people associated with Floyd or the case.
George Floyd '20/20′ Portrait Will Air on ABC - Variety
 
Last edited:
lynchmob67 said:
Apologies if this has already been asked and answered, but could DC be called to testify in the August cases?
Click to expand...

I believe he could be called. However, since he will appeal and, most likely, would plead the fifth, I don't think anyone would call him on either side. I don't think the defense would align with him or get him to testify in a hostile way because he doesn't have to incriminate himself. The prosecution doesn't need him based on the charges they will be trying.
 
turaj said:
I had not thought about that but yes it may be that it was suggested to the jurors that there is still sentencing and three other charged people in this same crime and things they say could impact their outcomes. I don't think they can be prohibited from doing an interview but they might make the decision not to at this time until all other cases are settled (which I think will be plea deals with prison time). I don't have much faith in any "reputable outlets" not trying to contact them.
Click to expand...

In the United States, jurors are allowed to speak out after trial if they want. MOO. ALL STATES.
 
imstilla.grandma said:
George Floyd family lawyer wants to turn attention back to Texas woman killed by police in 2019


ABC News will offer a portrait of the life of George Floyd in a two-hour “20/20” slated to air April 23 at 9 p.m. eastern.

The program will feature interviews with Gianna Floyd, Floyd’s youngest daughter; friends and family of Floyd; Christopher Martin, the former store clerk who testified that he regretted taking the allegedly counterfeit $20 bill from Floyd; Maya Santamaria, the former nightclub owner who employed both Floyd and Chauvin; and Clarence Castile, uncle of Philando Castile.

Many TV-news programs have responded to this week’s verdict finding police officer Derek Chauvin guilty of killing Floyd while he was in the custody of Minneapolis police last year. On Wednesday, all three of the broadcast-network morning shows had anchors and correspondents on the ground in Minneapolis. ABC News’ ‘The View,” for example has rescheduled some of the guests it had planned for this week in favor of talking to people associated with Floyd or the case.
George Floyd '20/20′ Portrait Will Air on ABC - Variety
Click to expand...


To me, these folks speaking out now vs. awaiting the other 3... makes me think that the all believe that Chauvin is the only one who should have been given the harshest charge, and they are doing this knowing that speaking out will affect and give credence to the "world" that they would be ok with the other three doing plea agreements to lesser sentencing?

At least, that is how I'm reading it unless said differently during interviews (but MOO if they thought that the other three should be getting the max.. they would be silent and guided by those experienced in these matters)

So... bottom line.... the other 3 will do plea deals which is supported by family?
 
  • Like
Reactions: jjs
lynchmob67 said:
Apologies if this has already been asked and answered, but could DC be called to testify in the August cases?
Click to expand...


MOO, it can happen that a person can get a lesser charge if they "give up" another (think the SC case we follow with those two monsters wife/husband)...

But Chauvin is not "giving up" MOO. He was the primary one.

So, I do not think at all he will be called to testify.

Again, I hope all 3 are settled out of court. MOO
 
turaj said:
thanks so much for that link...I think she probably speaks for the deliberating jurors...it is consistent with a quick guilty verdict and her reasons made sense...probably similar to most of us. She felt okay to talk given she was an alternate.
Click to expand...
she did another interview
I don't know what time it airs
@LouRaguse
I just had a fascinating sit-down interview with one of the alternate jurors in the Derek Chauvin trial. Lisa Christensen was the juror who lived in Brooklyn Center. One night she could hardly make it home after testimony ended because of protesters blocking intersections.
We will have full stories on all the@kare11 newscasts today.
Then my http://kare11.com story, I promise, will be a gold mine of information about how this juror processed every bit of this trial
And for the record -- she did not know she was an alternate juror until the moment Judge Cahill said so. She went home every night and took additional notes about how each witness. "When he turned and said, Number 96, you’re an alternate, yeah, my heart broke a little bit."
 
sds71 said:
An alternate juror #96 sits down with @jamieyuccas

Lisa Christensen did not have a role in the verdict, but she sat through every minute of the trial. She says even though she wasn't part of the deliberations — she came to a decision.

"I felt like he was the leader, and the other officers were following his lead. I kind of felt like he wasn't taking the warnings seriously, obviously, kind of like I know what I'm doing," Christensen said.

"Dr. Tobin was the one that really did it for me. He explained everything. I understood it down to where he said, 'This is the moment that he lost his life.' Really got to me."

Christensen lives in Brooklyn Center, the city where Daunte Wright was shot by a police officer nearly two weeks ago. She said those protests did not play into her decision about Chauvin being guilty. Wright will be laid to rest Thursday and the Floyd family will be in attendance.

Alternate juror talks about the Chauvin trial verdict and the testimony that "really got to me" - CBS News
Click to expand...

Well that partly answers my curiosity about if any juror,in this case an alternate, knew of the second shooting of Wright during deliberation time. At that time I thougjt, "how could they not know?", especially as it was reported one of them lived in Brooklyn Center. I'm not sure if she was the only one who did but still. Media and news can be hard to avoid, and having to be taken into a private guarded entrance to court everyday, walked with security/police to and from, I just think that has to play in your mind at some level. I'm not saying it's a factor in deciding a verdict but it's just interesting to me that was some of the environment and circumstances they've felt and our current system relies on one being able to determine if they themselves are able to put that aside from their decision making. It's a very interesting thing psychologically speaking and I've fallen into a rabbit hole of reading some studies about high profile cases and juror inherent bias and perceptions but I won't bore those here with those

I believe if he does appeal, which I believe he will try, that they'll try to bring up more of the media stuff like upcoming 60 Minutes episode with the Attorney General interviewing after verdict but before sentencing, or this alternate indirectly admitting she knew of the officer shooting (and I'm not saying that it matters, she was an alternate and didn't even decide the verdict), but I think Defense would try to bring up things like this and use it as a bridge to other jurors who did decide the verdict and imply the possibility if she saw something then others did too and the Judge should've asked them and he did not.

I also understand why and how everyone wants to hear from the attorneys but I don't think it helps anything (at least it would appear to be giving the Defense more possible stuff to add into an appeal regarding the media) when one side is doing full sit-down interviews with a major network after the verdict & before sentencing.
 
I don't think the jurors needed to see or hear anything in the media, or even on the streets in their own neighbourhoods or enroute to the Courthouse everyday, to know what the verdict needed to be. It has been made pretty clear since May 25, 2020. If jurors weren't swayed by what had been going on in the months leading up to the trial, I doubt they'd be swayed by anything that happened outside the Courtroom in the past few weeks. MOO
 
Factoria said:
I don't think the jurors needed to see or hear anything in the media, or even on the streets in their own neighbourhoods or enroute to the Courthouse everyday, to know what the verdict needed to be. It has been made pretty clear since May 25, 2020. If jurors weren't swayed by what had been going on in the months leading up to the trial, I doubt they'd be swayed by anything that happened outside the Courtroom in the past few weeks. MOO
Click to expand...

Oh I totally agree with you - I was trying to comment more on the procedures and how our rules allow someone themselves to determine if they feel they can be unbiased or set aside information they may already know about a case (attorneys can still move to strike them from a jury), but just that entire concept is interesting to me. Because then you can get to the questions about if jurors are trying to answer what they think the attorneys want to hear and/or what they think will get them on a jury, which numerous WSers have discussed at length elsewhere on here before so I won't veer further OT.
 
Last edited:
MTW2011 said:
Oh I totally agree with you - I was trying to comment more on the procedures and how our rules allow someone themselves to determine if they feel they can be unbiased or set aside information they may already know about a case (attorneys can still move to strike them from a jury), but just that entire concept is interesting to me. Because then you can get to the questions about if jurors are trying to answer what they think the attorneys want to hear and/or what they think will get them on a jury, which numerous WSers have discussed at length elsewhere on here before so I won't beer further OT.
Click to expand...
I don't disagree at all. My post landed totally at random ~ wasn't directed to anyone in particular.
 
branmuffin said:
He should get a sentence closer to the 3rd degree murder charge.
Click to expand...

That's fine I just hope he's sentenced the same as others who faced comparable charges and doesn't get over sentenced because of the climate. That would be another terrible precedent in this case. If you compare his conviction with similar ones and he shouldn't serve that much time. I think some of the data would surprise a lot of people.

Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) - About the Bureau of Justice Statistics

https://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/tssp16.pdf

As a point of reference, in Minnesota the maximum sentence for vehicular homicide while DUI is 10 years! Doesn't seem enough to me

https://www.madd.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/Vehicular-Homicide.pdf

MTW2011 said:
...snip... I was trying to comment more on the procedures and how our rules allow someone themselves to determine if they feel they can be unbiased or set aside information they may already know about a case...snip...
Click to expand...

How could you not be impacted by the massive publicity and intense scrutiny of this case? This trial should have been moved and I hope the murder charges get tossed but not because I'm sympathetic to Chauvin. The assault element of his conviction doesn't correlate with the law as it's written. Minnesota might as well just rewrite the law if it stands. The repercussions could be wide reaching from police recruiting to criminal conduct and everything lawyers and criminals can think of in between. I'm surprised at how the state was able to have the jury instruction turn intent (and all its iterations) into a word salad when it's such a subjective term.
 
Last edited:
Tom_Servo said:
That's fine I just hope he's sentenced the same as others who faced comparable charges and doesn't get over sentenced because of the climate. That would be another terrible precedent in this case. If you compare his conviction with similar ones and he shouldn't serve that much time. I think some of the data would surprise a lot of people.

Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) - About the Bureau of Justice Statistics

https://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/tssp16.pdf

As a point of reference, in Minnesota the maximum sentence for vehicular homicide while DUI is 10 years! Doesn't seem enough to me

https://www.madd.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/Vehicular-Homicide.pdf



How could you not be impacted by the massive publicity and intense scrutiny of this case? This trial should have been moved and I hope the murder charges get tossed but not because I'm sympathetic to Chauvin. The assault element of his conviction doesn't correlate with the law as it's written. Minnesota might as well just rewrite the law if it stands. The repercussions could be wide reaching from police recruiting to criminal conduct and everything lawyers and criminals can think of in between. I'm surprised at how the state was able to have the jury instruction turn intent (and all its iterations) into a word salad when it's such a subjective term.
Click to expand...

Yes I too was surprised how the managed to turn those jury instructions into what they were. The whole third degree assault with intentional unlawful force but that they don't need to prove intent to kill, it gets word-salad-y like you said IMHO pretty quick.

I agree with everything you wrote. I also think that even if Chauvin were to face an appellate court, like you sort of said, how you could not imagine the current climate not affecting things, would appellate judges be able to put that aside, the bad possible outcome if they overturned it, if they even believed his appeal had merit?
 
dixiegirl1035 said:
I'm so very very torn on ... well.. I'll just focus on Lane.

His first week on the job with Keung... solo rookies together.

I do hope that he pleads and doesn't go to trial. And I do hope that the community and the world will support such... but is the AG going to do such after "testing the waters"?

Dunno.

I myself have seen a higher up do something illegal. I wanted out ASAP from under, went to HR and said I must be transferred to another department IMMEDIATELY. I was transferred... yet I never "outed" that person. I needed to pay my bills. (Yeah, that happens... what can I say...)

Ended up quickly that I didn't have to, as the government was, unbeknownst to me, doing the investigation and did millions of dollars penalty against what was done by my superior without me coming forward.

I really am on the fence, with Lane especially..

I don't know what I would do as a juror, and just hope to heaven he doesn't go to trial.
Click to expand...

I agree out of all the players in this tragedy, Lane is probably the least culpable. He was days into his policing career and just like a new driver seemed much more cognizant of what the established guidelines were. Part of the problem, IMO, is that police forces are kind of like a para-military organization. It's rule-bound and there's a chain of command within the same ranks even if that's just seniority.

It's a double edged sword to take a plea deal in this type of case. Not always in favour of the defendant. If WS is a fairly accurate cross section of the general population who thinks he should be tried of a lesser charge, his lawyer should push for a separate trial.
 
Law & Crime Network spoke to a longtime Brooklyn public defender who said he would have allowed a nurse to make it onto the jury.

He said If he was defense in this case, one thing he wouldn't have done would have been:
"allow nurse to get on the jury, because this is what's going to happen, on the very first day of jury deliberation. 11 people in Hennepin County are going to turn to one person who's the nurse on that jury, and say who was right Tobin or Fawler? And I think she's a cardiac nurse as well, so based on that nurse's answer you're going to really see this jury turn one way or another. And that's a dangerous thing to do, I think, as a defense attorney".

Link to video clip by Law & Crime Network
Wow. I wonder if something like that happened in the deliberation room.
 
MTW2011 said:
Law & Crime Network spoke to a longtime Brooklyn public defender who said he would have allowed a nurse to make it onto the jury.

He said If he was defense in this case, one thing he wouldn't have done would have been:
"allow nurse to get on the jury, because this is what's going to happen, on the very first day of jury deliberation. 11 people in Hennepin County are going to turn to one person who's the nurse on that jury, and say who was right Tobin or Fawler? And I think she's a cardiac nurse as well, so based on that nurse's answer you're going to really see this jury turn one way or another. And that's a dangerous thing to do, I think, as a defense attorney".

Link to video clip by Law & Crime Network
Wow. I wonder if something like that happened in the deliberation room.
Click to expand...

I don't think we have any reason to think that is the case.
I am not a nurse, and I didn't ask a nurse for their opinion (even though DD is a nurse), and common sense says to me that you do not kneel on a person's neck for 9+ minutes, nor do you intentionally not roll that prone person into the recovery position.
You allow them the best chance of being able to breathe.
 
The next day, we asked teenagers: What Is Your Reaction to the Verdict in the Derek Chauvin Trial?
...... including teenagers from Toronto; Florida; California; the Julia R. Masterman School in Philadelphia; Georgia; the United Kingdom and many more places.


"This horrible situation has brought the Minnesota community closer. It has made me realize that people can change when they are set on being heard peacefully, and for that, I am grateful."

"In the media, you see so much bad news regarding police and black people, and now finally someone is held accountable."

"It serves as a reminder that together, we can stand up to the severe injustices we are surrounded by."

"I am relieved. I am relieved because for once the police officer responsible for a man’s unnecessary murder was held accountable."

"Though a big step in the American judicial system, this was something that we should have expected to happen, not something we should have hoped to happen."

"There is so much wrong with the police, the prison industrial complex, and systemic racism in this country in general. As much as people pretend, this was not a one-time thing or a simple mistake."

"This verdict COULD be a turning point in history today. Only if justice is actually served, the sentence needs to be long enough, with no exceptions."

Lots more at link .....

What Students Are Saying About The Verdict in the Derek Chauvin Trial
 
Tom_Servo said:
That's fine I just hope he's sentenced the same as others who faced comparable charges and doesn't get over sentenced because of the climate. That would be another terrible precedent in this case. If you compare his conviction with similar ones and he shouldn't serve that much time. I think some of the data would surprise a lot of people.

Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) - About the Bureau of Justice Statistics

https://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/tssp16.pdf

As a point of reference, in Minnesota the maximum sentence for vehicular homicide while DUI is 10 years! Doesn't seem enough to me

https://www.madd.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/Vehicular-Homicide.pdf



How could you not be impacted by the massive publicity and intense scrutiny of this case? This trial should have been moved and I hope the murder charges get tossed but not because I'm sympathetic to Chauvin. The assault element of his conviction doesn't correlate with the law as it's written. Minnesota might as well just rewrite the law if it stands. The repercussions could be wide reaching from police recruiting to criminal conduct and everything lawyers and criminals can think of in between. I'm surprised at how the state was able to have the jury instruction turn intent (and all its iterations) into a word salad when it's such a subjective term.
Click to expand...
I disagree. That is half the problem. When they do go to trial, they are given a slap on the wrist.
And IMO, you could have moved it to any court in the country (or the world) and not found many people who had not heard of it.
Do you have qualifications to contradict the Judge's and lawyers interpretation of the law?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is DeKalb County John Doe (2022)?

Members online

... and 104 more.
Total: 3,349 (members: 105, guests: 3,244)

Online statistics

Members online
105
Guests online
3,244
Total visitors
3,349
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
604,268
Messages
18,169,885
Members
232,271
Latest member
JayneDrop
Back
Top