What I've learnt from watching this trial live (actually my first time watching a live trial) is that trial by media is a very real and very damaging thing. IMO.
Yes. I wondered tbh, if it was worth not cross examining this witness at all and just relying on his own expert later down the line.
At this point, what do you all think the verdict will be based on the EVIDENCE presented thus far (rather than your emotions and initial beliefs before trial)? Remember, that the defense hasn't presented their case.
Guilty of ?
1) Murder 2nd Degree
2) Murder 3rd Degree
3) Manslaughter 2nd Degree
4) Not Guilty on all charges
5) Hung Jury
I would make a poll if I knew how to (and if it's allowed).
I appreciate the diligence of the juror, but hope that the focus of jury deliberations is on actual testimony, not her interpretation from her education or experience.
The good doctor Tobin destroyed the fentanyl OD theory.
*chokes on morning coffee* laughing with what the witness just said re bruising. He said... paraphrasing.. when I go to church, I sit on a hard bench, but when I leave I don't have bruising.
*chokes on morning coffee* laughing with what the witness just said re bruising. He said... paraphrasing.. when I go to church, I sit on a hard bench, but when I leave I don't have bruising.
“...on my buttocks...”
I'm from the UK too
I came to the case from the other side thinking Chauvin is the worst of the worst, but interested in hearing the defense's case.
What I've learnt from watching this trial live (actually my first time watching a live trial) is that trial by media is a very real and very damaging thing.
I still have my opinion that is in favour of the state at present, but there are definitely things that I've come to learn from this trial already that make me consider points in favour of the defense, so before making any decision I await their case.
In the UK we don't really get that benefit as much. Yes we can read hundreds of pages of trial transcripts after the trial ends, but we don't get the benefit of understanding all the evidence at the time of the trial, and all we know is through the media.
One of the reasons I think the UK needs to catch up televised/live video trials IMO.
I think that Nelson is out of his depth. His fumbling with questions and saying, "Would you agree?" seems to make it seem like he doesn't know where he is going because the witness has to correct him too often.
RSBM
I wish more people understood this.
Speaking for myself.. it's why I like to watch the trials myself, and live streamed without commentary from tv "experts". I try not to watch news clips, because more often than not, they get it wrong IMO
Canada is like the UK.. but possibly worse? lol we have publication bans until the trial starts!