The State's argument back about Rep. Maxine Waters DID literally say "We're looking for a guilty verdict and we're looking to see if all of the talk that took place and has been taking place after they saw what happened to George Floyd. If nothing does not happen, then we know that we got to not only stay in the street, but we have got to fight for justice," she added.".....it was no exaggeration by Nelson of what she said IMO. Maxine Waters calls for protesters to 'get more confrontational' if no guilty verdict is reached in Derek Chauvin trial - CNNPolitics
I agree With Nelson about this environment all around this trial and police reform, but the State response was pretty weak "without specific evidence this affected a juror" without even offering to have the court question the jurors. You can't say the motion should be denied When defense didn't provide any evidence of that because they weren't asked yet....I don't think that's how it works but still.
THANK YOU!!!!!
But the jury was instructed to not watch news and if they obey the rules how would they be aware of this?Worse yet... she said the jury should find him guilty of 1st degree murder... which of course, he is NOT even charged with.
Exactly...The judge should NOT be giving his opinion on Waters right now.
ITAMaxine Waters. She was talking to the jury. JMO
This means that defense can file an appeal to have the guilty verdict overturned, if the jury comes back with a guilty verdict. The judge agreed that the defense can write up the appeal and said that Waters' statement was abhorrent, but does not believe it will affect this jury as he trusts they followed his admonition to not watch media.But would they send the jury to deliberations if he’s thought about overturning?
He may come back and surprise us..Of course he wants the judge to make the decision about aggravated factors!! Makes total sense! This judge is going to be lenient about sentencing for sure. He’s been waving that flag all along!
Maxine Waters is inciting a riot IMO.Too bad that she actually mentioned this trial, GF'S name, and other stuff that made it pretty clear what she was talking about. At least it doesn't make a difference now, could on appeal as Judge freely said. Wow
Jury isn't allowed to watch news.
It's hard to defend her statement when she referenced this trial and GF'S name specifically. Yikes, judge freely admitting this could be used in an appeal....it's pretty clear she was referring to this trial and this defendant, she wasn't vague at all. IMHO.Waters told The Grio on Monday that her remarks were about “confronting the justice system, confronting the policing that’s going on,” through legislation and “speaking up.”
Pelosi defends Rep. Maxine Waters over her ‘get more confrontational’ remark to protesters