CRIME The Chauvin/Floyd Trial (Beginning 3/29/21)

WalknTrot

Veteran Member
(Okay, so here's a little recap of what transpired yesterday at the Chauvin trial. Keep in mind this is a piece from the Minneapolis Star and Sickle (StarTrib), so there's bound to be a Left slant somewhere. W.T.)


What Happened Friday in the Derek Chauvin Trial



Two medical experts disagreed about whether George Floyd's physical condition or illicit drug use played a role in his death.

By Paul Walsh, Abby Simons and Hannah Sayle
Star Tribune
April 9, 2021 — 5:23pm
What happened Friday in the Derek Chauvin trial



Court TV/Pool Dr. Andrew Baker ruled that George Floyd’s cause of death was “cardiopulmonary arrest complicating law enforcement subdual, restraint, and neck compression.”



Ex-Minneapolis police officer Derek Chauvin is charged with second-degree unintentional murder, third-degree murder and second-degree manslaughter in the killing of George Floyd in south Minneapolis on May 25, 2020. With the world watching, proceedings began March 8. Three other fired officers who assisted in Floyd's 2020 arrest — J. Alexander Kueng, Thomas Lane and Tou Thao — are scheduled to be tried in August on charges of aiding and abetting murder and manslaughter.

Here's how the Chauvin trial is unfolding.

Friday, April 9
Today in court:
  • The prosecution called two new witnesses to the stand. They were:
1. Dr. Lindsey Thomas, a medical examiner of 37 years who retired from the Hennepin County Medical Examiner's Office and still works part-time as a forensic pathologist in Reno and Salt Lake City. She called the primary mechanism of Floyd's death asphyxia, or low oxygen. She said that the sheer volume of videos of Floyd's death was "absolutely unique" in that she'd never had a case so thoroughly documented, and it helped her arrive to determine how Floyd died.

"What I observed from all of these videos is this was not a sudden death," Thomas testified. "It's not like snow shoveling when someone clutches their chest and falls over. There was nothing sudden about his death."

She later said with certainty, "There's no evidence to suggest he would have died that night except for the interactions with law enforcement."


2. Dr. Andrew Baker, the chief Hennepin County Medical Examiner who performed Floyd's autopsy and stood by his ruling that Floyd's cause of death was a homicide, caused by "cardiopulmonary arrest complicating law enforcement subdual, restraint, and neck compression." Baker did not include a lack of oxygen, or asphyxia, a cause that three medical expert witnesses have firmly said was what killed Floyd.

The doctor tied Floyd's "very severe underlying heart disease" and enlarged heart, which needed more oxygen, combined with the stress of being pinned to the street with his face scraping the asphalt.

"Those events are gonna cause stress hormones to pour out of your body, specifically things like adrenaline, and what that adrenaline is going to do is it's going to ask your heart to beat faster," Baker testified.

"It's going to ask your body for more oxygen so that you can get through that altercation, and in my opinion, the law enforcement subdual restraint and the neck compression was just more than Mr. Floyd could take by virtue of those heart conditions."

What to expect next: The prosecution continues presenting its case Monday with testimony from another medical expert, and will likely rest soon. The defense is expected to present its case sometime next week.

Dr. Baker Testimony (RT: 1:00:17)
View: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jRMOoBevbIM
 

annieosage

Veteran Member
Defense is asking for the jury to be sequestered due to last night's events. Of course the state opposes.

ETA: Judge denied
 
Last edited:
They should save a lot of time and just move to sentencing and releasing him to the street mobs. Either way, he's as dead a Phillip.
 

WalknTrot

Veteran Member
She was sure a piece of work. Totally pizzed off princess, but I couldn't figure what her beef was, beside the fact that she seemed to be quite altered, and probably wanted to curl up in a corner and trip in peace.

Junkies on parade has been quite the sideshow to this trial.
 
Last edited:

WalknTrot

Veteran Member
Hey..might as well shoot for the moon.

I'm wondering when he's going to bring out about the dead-sloooow response screw-up by EMS (ambulance) and the Fire Dept first response that was supposedly only a minute away. Bottom line, they must have got lost or misdirected. Today, in the Park Service cop's body cam, you could see that Fire First Responders didn't show up until after the ambulance had already LEFT with Floyd on board. When EMS requested that Fire come help 'em with Floyd (extra set of hands after they'd moved off the scene to a safer locale to work on him), Fire was picking their butts after finally making it to the Cup Foods scene.

Goes back to the likelihood that the dispatch crew was (to be very generous....?) distracted and messed up.
 

WalknTrot

Veteran Member
I got distracted this morning and after lunch, so missed some stuff but thought the carbon-monoxide angle this morning was interesting. They did have him laying just about right under the tailpipe.
 
Last edited:

Macgyver

Veteran Member

Far Left Goons Leak Home Address of Brooklyn Center Officer Kim Potter's Home Online -- Police Forced to Erect Fence Around Home
Jim Hoft

2-3 minutes



The BLM-Antifa mob was out in force again last night after the previous night of rioting and looting.
This time they are blaming their looting of convenience stores and Foot Locker shoe store on the police shooting of Daunte Wright.

20-year-old Wright was shot and later died after he fled from police at a traffic stop in Brooklyn Center, Minnesota.
The police officer was later identified as Kimberly Potter. She allegedly shot Daunte thinking she was holding a stun gun.

Potter resigned from the police force two days after the shooting.
And by Wednesday leftist thugs were posting her home address online.
Local police were forced to erect a fence around her house to protect it from the violent leftists in the area.

The Daily Mail reported:
Police guarded the property of Officer Kimberly Potter as Daunte Wright protests turned violent Tuesday night, with demonstrators clashing with police in Minneapolis while Portland’s police union building was set on fire.
Potter’s five-bedroom house was surrounded with protective fencing after protesters leaked her address online as outrage mounts against the veteran cop who allegedly mistook a taser for a gun when she fatally shot Wright, 20, a black man.
Wright’s killing, just 10 miles from the scene of George Floyd’s death last May in Minneapolis, led to unrest in Minnesota and nationwide. The trial of Derek Chauvin, the first of four police officers charged in Floyd’s death, is ongoing in the city.
At least 60 people were arrested at protests in Portland, Minneapolis, New York, Philadelphia and Chicago overnight on Tuesday.
Curfews had been in place for Brooklyn Center, Minneapolis, St. Paul, Crystal, Columbia Heights, New Hope and Maple Grove from 10pm local time, but had done little to stem the demonstrators.
The Ashli Babbit family has yet to be told the name of the killer of their daughter in the US Capitol on January 6th.
 

WalknTrot

Veteran Member
Somewhat interesting morning. The State wanted to bring in some newly introduced evidence on the carbon-monoxide topic that they and their earlier witness used to extrapolate from some hospital lab results which weren't included with the evidence shared with defense. Prosecution gave it to defense this morning (?). Anyway, judge said no to the bit of evidence, (I thought - as a lab rat myself - of very technically questionable value) AND if he heard a whisper of it in front of the jury, he'd declare a mistrial. So, prosecution called the expert witness to not much purpose that I could see, defense had maybe two questions, then that's it. Defense rested.

The judge gave the jury a long weekend off, so courtroom stuff is done until Monday morning when closing arguments will be heard. The judge told the jury to "plan for long, and hope for short", as they are going to be sequestered for the duration of deliberations.

So, jury is home to ponder for three days, and in their spare time, watch the smoke rise above the city. Yeehaw, there ya go.
 

annieosage

Veteran Member
Somewhat interesting morning. The State wanted to bring in some newly introduced evidence on the carbon-monoxide topic that they and their earlier witness used to extrapolate from some hospital lab results which weren't included with the evidence shared with defense. Prosecution gave it to defense this morning (?). Anyway, judge said no to the bit of evidence, (I thought - as a lab rat myself - of very technically questionable value) AND if he heard a whisper of it in front of the jury, he'd declare a mistrial. So, prosecution called the expert witness to not much purpose that I could see, defense had maybe two questions, then that's it. Defense rested.

The judge gave the jury a long weekend off, so courtroom stuff is done until Monday morning when closing arguments will be heard. The judge told the jury to "plan for long, and hope for short", as they are going to be sequestered for the duration of deliberations.

So, jury is home to ponder for three days, and in their spare time, watch the smoke rise above the city. Yeehaw, there ya go.
Next week will be interesting. I topped off my preps and gas this morning. Nothing I truly needed but wanted to be prepared for anything. I don't plan on going out much anytime soon.
 

WalknTrot

Veteran Member
So here's this guy's take on the morning's festivities. He seems to think that a mistrial is still firmly on the table. W.T.



BREAKING: Prosecutorial Error With State's Last Witness Creates Grounds for Possible Mistrial in Chauvin Trial

By Shipwreckedcrew |
Apr 15, 2021 1:04 PM ET
Redstate.com
BREAKING: Prosecutorial Error With State's Last Witness Creates Grounds for Possible Mistrial in Chauvin Trial



Court TV via AP, Pool

Earlier today the defense rested in the murder trial of former Minneapolis Police Officer Derek Chauvin, charged in connection with the in-custody death of George Floyd.

Chauvin waived his right to testify on his own behalf, asserting his Fifth Amendment right to remain silent during the course of the trial. That was not a surprising development.

But what came next was quite surprising, and potentially a critical moment in the case for the prosecution.

The prosecution advised the Court that it would have one rebuttal witness. A rebuttal witness can be called to present testimony in response to evidence heard for the first time during the defense case. As is very common, the rebuttal testimony would come from one expert witness who previously testified, Dr. Martin Tobin, and the testimony would be in response to testimony given by a defense expert.

But the surprising part of the prosecution’s announcement was that it intended to have Dr. Tobin testify about newly discovered evidence — a Hennepin County Medical Examiner report on the level of carbon dioxide (CO) in the blood gas testing of arterial blood drawn from Floyd at the hospital.

The standard panel of blood gas readings sent at the request of the ER physicians would not normally have included this test result. The machine that tests the blood does measure the CO content, and it is reflected in the master report that is produced by the machine, but that reading is not normally sent to the ER where the patient is being treated. The Medical Examiner didn’t ask for that particular test reading because he didn’t deem it relevant upon examination. So the test reading was reflected in the hospital records all along, but it had never been noted by anyone until the Medical Examiner, Dr. Baker, went back to the records after hearing some of the earlier expert testimony in the case.

Even though the report has been in existence since the night of Floyd’s death, the prosecution claimed it first received it yesterday by Dr. Baker. The report’s findings would have supported earlier testimony by Dr. Tobin and undermined the testimony of the defense expert, Dr. Fowler.

The bigger problem for the defense what that Dr. Fowler has already left Minneapolis and was on a plane returning to his home — meaning the defense would be unable to call Dr. Fowler back to the witness stand after Dr. Tobin in order to have Dr. Fowler review the same testing reports and incorporate them into this previously testified opinion. The impression that would leave the jury with would be that Dr. Fowler was not able to address the criticisms that Dr. Tobin was likely to testify to as a rebuttal witness using these test reports that had never been sent to the defense in the case. Had the reports been timely produced to the defense as required, Dr. Fowler would have had the test reports to review at the time he formed his opinions and prepared his testimony.

Judge Cahill sustained the defense’s objection to the prosecution request to have Dr. Tobin testify about the CO test results, or to criticize Dr. Fowler’s testimony based on information in those reports. Judge Cahill did allow the prosecution to call Dr. Tobin to testify in response to other topics addressed by Dr. Fowler in his testimony on behalf of Chauvin.

It is not completely clear to me at this point, but there seems to be an issue involved with regard to Floyd laying next to the exhaust on the police vehicle — with the motor running? The CO coming from the exhaust and/or other environmental factors being a possible cause for the lack of oxygen in his lungs as CO binds with hemoglobin in the blood and prevents oxygen from binding. Dr. Fowler’s report back in February noted a lack of testing on the part of the hospital regarding blood CO, giving the prosecution at least 60 days notice that he would testify on that issue. Had the test results been provided prior to the trial, Dr. Fowler’s testimony would have been different. Dr. Tobin’s intended testimony was that such testing had been done, and CO was ruled out as a contributing cause by the blood gas results — undermining Dr. Fowler in an unfair and prejudicial manner since the prosecution had the evidence all along but did not provide it.

Judge Cahill warned the prosecution that even if Dr. Tobin’s testimony “hints at” the existence of the testing results the prosecution would be at serious risk of having a mistrial declared.

When Dr. Tobin took the stand, the prosecutor began a series of questions about Dr. Fowler’s report — which Dr. Fowler had testified to, and which had been admitted into evidence.

VERY RISKY.

The prosecutor asked about one part of the Fowler report which said it was possible that Floyd’s CO level in his blood could have been as high as 15-18% — meaning it was the presence of CO in his blood and not the actions of Chauvin and the officers that led to the “low oxygen” level that killed Floyd. Dr. Tobin testified that he disagreed with that opinion.

The prosecutor then asked, “Why?”

AND JUST LIKE THAT DR. TOBIN TESTIFIED HE DISAGREED BECAUSE OF THE TEST RESULTS DONE AT THE HOSPITAL THAT MEASURED THE CO RATES IN FLOYD’S BLOOD.

The defense objected and asked for a “sidebar” discussion with the Judge where I’m certain Defense counsel Nelson asked for a mistrial. The content of the sidebar is unknown, but after it was done the Judge sustained the objection and directed the prosecutor to rephrase the question.

The prosecution asked again about whether Dr. Tobin agreed or disagreed with the opinion that Floyd’s CO level could have been as high as 18%,and Tobin again testified that based on his review of blood testing done at the hospital, Floyd’s oxygenation rate in his blood was 98%, and since the combination of O2 rate and CO rate must add up to 100%, the only conclusion is that the CO rate was only 2% –based on the testing.

How this is not a direct violation of the limitation set by Judge Cahill is a mystery. The Judge and defense counsel went behind closed doors — likely so the defense counsel could make a proffer about what his experts MIGHT say in response — holding open the potential that the Court might recess the trial long enough for Nelson to get the defense expert back to testify.

But ultimately that did not happen. Dr. Tobin’s rebuttal testimony ended, the prosecution said it had no further witnesses, and Court adjourned for the day.

To be continued.
 

Raggedyman

Res ipsa loquitur
The Medical Examiner didn’t ask for that particular test reading because he didn’t deem it relevant upon examination. So the test reading was reflected in the hospital records all along, but it had never been noted by anyone until the Medical Examiner, Dr. Baker, went back to the records after hearing some of the earlier expert testimony in the case.
- OR -
he saw it and purposely "overlooked it" hoping the other side wouldn't discover it - because he recognized the potential issues it would raise

But the surprising part of the prosecution’s announcement was that it intended to have Dr. Tobin testify about newly discovered evidence — a Hennepin County Medical Examiner report on the level of carbon dioxide (CO) in the blood gas testing of arterial blood drawn from Floyd at the hospital.
having personally and on multiple occasions in my previous incarnation been in the position of reviewing volumes of Medical records in preparation for testimony as an "expert witness", I can assure you beyond any reasonable doubt that any "expert" worth his salt would do his very best to be absolutely certain that he'd scrutinized every document available in preparing for testimony. that would be particularly true for a trial of this magnitude and the national implications of same. there is NO mistake here - NO "accidental omission/ oversight"- there is only the prosecution's desire to hide evidence that may prove damaging to its case. in a case of this magnitude I would deem EVERYTHING to be important enough to look at - in fact "look at" several times - and - as the "expert" with my ass and reputation on the line I would exert maximum effort to be certain I had every scrap of paper that existed - MOST PARTICULARLY - from the ER where he was pronounce. I smell BULLSHIT. big steaming piles of it.


Dr. Fowler’s report back in February noted a lack of testing on the part of the hospital regarding blood CO, giving the prosecution at least 60 days notice that he would testify on that issue. Had the test results been provided prior to the trial, Dr. Fowler’s testimony would have been different. Dr. Tobin’s intended testimony was that such testing had been done, and CO was ruled out as a contributing cause by the blood gas results — undermining Dr. Fowler in an unfair and prejudicial manner since the prosecution had the evidence all along but did not provide it.
BINGO!
BULLSHIT . . .
big steaming piles of it.​
 
Last edited:

WalknTrot

Veteran Member
Where Have You Gone, Atticus Finch?

By Jack Cashill
April 16, 2021
American Thinker
Where Have You Gone, Atticus Finch?


In the archives of legal fiction, two characters best embody historic liberal self-perception. One is attorney Atticus Finch of To Kill a Mockingbird fame. The other is Juror #8 in the 1957 film, 12 Angry Men. Today, each is an endangered species.

In his defense of Tom Robinson, a black man accused of rape in 1930s Alabama, Atticus ignored public opinion. He stared down the mobs intent on extra-legal justice and protected his ”mockingbird” as best he could. The unlikely mockingbird today is former Minneapolis police officer Derek Chauvin. As Chauvin learned quickly, if he did not know it beforehand, today’s vestigial liberals identify not with Atticus but with the mob.

Hell, as even Snopes had to concede Vice President Kamala Harris “encouraged her supporters to donate” to a nonprofit called the Minnesota Freedom Fund (MFF) that was bailing out members of the mob arrested for rioting after George Floyd’s death.

Chauvin’s crime, like Robinson’s, was being of a certain race in a society that increasingly sees justice only through the prism of race. Like the fictional Robinson, the real-life Chauvin represents one of a long and growing line of sacrificial lambs offered on the altar of racial “justice” to expiate the nation’s imagined sins.

Ever impatient, the mobs from the very same liberal metro could not wait for Chauvin’s official immolation to demand the sacrifice of a new lamb. This time, the mobs have shown no scruple about sating themselves on a female officer. To them, it mattered not a whit that veteran Brooklyn Center, Minnesota, officer Kim Potter clearly showed no racial malice in her accidental shooting of Duante Wright, a troubled archetype from a subculture slowly being crushed under the weight of rigidly enforced dishonesty.

To his good fortune, Chauvin has found his Atticus in defense attorney Eric Nelson. Although he has backstage help from the Minnesota Police and Peace Officers Association, Nelson has been arguing solo against the snarky Mod Squad of a prosecution team. Calm and dispassionate, the forty-something Nelson has been quietly picking the prosecution case apart these last three weeks. Viewed from another planet, the unknowing alien might wonder why Chauvin is even on trial. For details, please see the work done by Andrew Branca at Legal Insurrection. Those who have not followed the case closely would be wise to ignore Big Media and watch the closing arguments, likely on Monday, before forming an opinion.




For all of Nelson’s good work, Chauvin has only a slightly better chance of acquittal than Tom Robinson. His best hope lies in having a juror like Juror #8, the character played by Henry Fonda in the liberal fantasy of a movie, 12 Angry Men.

In his screenplay notes, Reginald Rose describes Juror #8 as “a man who sees all sides of every question and constantly seeks the truth. A man of strength tempered with compassion. Above all, he is a man who wants justice to be done and will fight to see that it is.” This is how liberals have historically imagined themselves. The willfully blind perhaps still do. Not one for nuance, Rose describes #8’s nemesis, Juror #3, played by Lee J. Cobb, in the film, as “a humorless man who is intolerant of opinions other than his own and accustomed to forcing his wishes and views upon others.”

This being the mid-fifties, #3 serves as the inevitable Joe McCarthy proxy. In the film, he allies himself with Juror #10, “a bigot who places no values on any human life save his own.” Such was the profile of the conservative in the liberal mind nearly sixty years ago. Not much has changed.

The plot of Twelve Angry Men unfolds fully in the jury room. The jurors have convened to discuss the case.

The defendant is a young, five-foot-seven inch, Hispanic man accused of killing someone much taller -- curiously, the precise scenario of the case against George Zimmerman, an earlier sacrificial lamb.

Zimmerman’s acquittal in 2013 launched Black Lives Matter and the era of mob justice.

The victim in 12 Angry Men is the young man’s father and the weapon used to kill him a knife. In the initial go-round, only Juror #8 votes “not guilty.” The other jurors are stunned. “I just think he's guilty,” says Juror #2. “I thought it was obvious. I mean nobody proved otherwise.” The Fonda character responds sagely, “Nobody has to prove otherwise. The burden of proof is on the prosecution. The defendant doesn't have to open his mouth. That's in the Constitution. The Fifth Amendment.” This being Hollywood, the good liberal juror persuades the others one by one to his point of view. Finally, even #10 and #3 yield to his wisdom, and the jurors vote to acquit.

That was then. This is now. A Juror #8 might emerge, ideally one of the three black males on the jury. The odds that he will convince the other eleven to brave the hell that would greet an acquittal are vanishingly slim. The odds that he -- or she -- might hang tough and convince one or two of the others to do the same and force a mistrial are still long but not absurd.

“We may be wrong,” #8 concedes. “We may be trying to return a guilty man to the community. No one can really know. But we have reasonable doubt, and this is a safeguard that has enormous value in our system.”

Given that the Brooklyn Center City Council voted to fire its black city manager for saying Kim Potter should be accorded due process, one wonders today whether “progressives” might try to cancel 12 Angry Men for endorsing a “system” founded on white supremacy.
 

bw

Fringe Ranger
No one on the jury has been following the case in the news, and they have not been discussing it with anyone. They are totally unaware that by voting to acquit they might upset some people, including people they know.
 

WalknTrot

Veteran Member
No one on the jury has been following the case in the news, and they have not been discussing it with anyone. They are totally unaware that by voting to acquit they might upset some people, including people they know.
The all knew during jury selection that their (and everybody else's) butt would be grass if they acquitted him. They chose to serve anyway.
 

WalknTrot

Veteran Member
Minneapolis Cancels School for Chauvin Riots

Posted on April 16, 2021
by John Hinderaker
powerlineblog.com
Minneapolis Cancels School for Chauvin Riots



The Minneapolis Public Schools are shutting down next week in anticipation of a verdict in the Derek Chauvin trial:
Minneapolis Public Schools are suspending in-person learning next week as the state awaits a verdict in the murder trial against Derek Chauvin.
Why? In anticipation of riots, looting and arson, presumably:
“Our community is moving through an extraordinarily challenging time as we react to the killing of former MPS student Daunte Wright by a Brooklyn Center police officer, just as testimony in the trial of former officer Derek Chauvin in the death of George Floyd concludes and the case goes to the jury,” Ed Graff, the district superintendent, wrote to parents.
“We anticipate that a verdict in the Chauvin case could impact in-person learning in Minneapolis Public Schools.”
So the schools will be closed Wednesday through Friday next week. What if the jury hasn’t reached verdict by Friday? Presumably they will stay shut down the following week.

Like so much that is going on these days, this is utter madness. Did the Los Angeles schools close down when the O.J. Simpson jury was deliberating? Not that I remember. Is it really probable that rioters incensed over the Chauvin jury’s verdict (whatever it may be) will attack elementary schools in a fit of rage? Doesn’t seem likely. Or maybe the concern is that students in the older grades will themselves riot and destroy their own schools.

One thing for certain is that school seems increasingly dispensable. It used to be considered important for children to go to school. Covid, which was less serious for young people than the average seasonal flu and yet caused schools to close down across the country, showed how little parents, students and “educators” value learning. The absurdity of a school shutdown in anticipation of a jury verdict is just icing on the cake.
 

WalknTrot

Veteran Member
A Wrap-up of the Chauvin Trial Now That the Presentation of Evidence Is Complete

By Shipwreckedcrew
Apr 16, 2021 3:30 PM ET
redstate.com
A Wrap-up of the Chauvin Trial Now That the Presentation of Evidence Is Complete


Court TV, via AP, Pool


The presentation of evidence in the Derek Chauvin murder trial ended on Thursday after the prosecution called a single rebuttal witness — which might have been one witness too many, as I pointed out in this story that turned out to be very popular with readers.

Before dismissing the jurors for the day, Judge Cahill advised them to return to Court on Monday prepared to be sequestered in a hotel during the period of their deliberations. On Monday the jury will hear closing arguments from both sides and will be instructed on the law by Judge Cahill as it applies to the facts of the case.

So, where does the case stand? What is the jury likely to decide?

As I tell all my clients before and during the course of a jury trial, there is no meaningful way I have found in nearly 35 years of trying cases to predict what a jury will do after deliberating as a group. When I first started practicing law, it was generally permitted for the attorneys in the case to meet with jurors after their verdict and they were dismissed by Court.

That gave me a chance to ask questions and get answers about how the jurors viewed the evidence and came to their decisions. I had one case that lasted nearly three months, and after the verdict, I spent nearly six hours – we sent out for pizza – with the jurors because they had as many questions for me as I had for them. However, the more recent trend is that Courts have prohibited these kinds of contacts after the conclusion of the case unless expressly authorized by the Court in advance of such meetings.

But when I could talk with jurors after a case, what I learned first and foremost was that the group dynamic often led them to consider particular pieces of evidence or particular aspects of the case in ways that I did not predict and that were genuinely surprising to me.

Both sides in a trial often live for years in their minds with their “narrative” of what the evidence in the case shows.

Jurors, on the other hand, come into the courtroom – normally – not knowing anything about the evidence. While the attorneys and the parties have 1) lived through the events in question, and 2) analyzed and re-analyzed the events over and over again over a long period of time leading to the trial by studying the evidence and talking to the witnesses, the jurors have none of that when they see the evidence and hear the witnesses for the first time. On some issues they may hear from only one witness, only one time, and later there is a “What did that person say?” dynamic in their deliberations.

Sometimes misimpressions that take hold early in a case last throughout because the attorneys are not aware, and the issue never gets addressed a second time by other witnesses. One or more jurors then carry that misimpression into deliberations where it either spreads or is corrected – but the parties are unaware that is the case.

Oftentimes I would hear that one or two jurors had joined together to try to persuade the large group of something they thought they heard or saw that was contrary to what the other 10 jurors thought they heard or saw. These types of small disputes had to be resolved before the group could continue forward on other issues; they couldn’t just “agree to disagree.” And oftentimes these small disputes were the result of different jurors drawing a different conclusion from a small slice of the evidence, adopting it as their point of view, while the larger case rolled on. Then when it came time to deliberate the individual jurors found that there was more than one such point of view on what might have seemed to all of them like a minor point at the time.

I’ll have another article over the weekend that takes a more deliberate review of the material issues raised by each side – not so much in the presentation of evidence during each sides’ direction examination of its own witnesses, but rather a review of what each side was able to accomplish during the cross-examination of the other side’s witnesses.

As a purely academic matter, I’m certain I will come out with a view that Chauvin’s attorney did far more than should be necessary to establish “reasonable doubt” as to all the charged offenses.

If this was a case tried in a federal court, at least half the evidence presented by the prosecution would have never been allowed, and I’ll go through some of that.

If Chauvin is convicted – which I predict he will be on at least the manslaughter charge – I’m quite confident his conviction will eventually be overturned by a federal court of appeals. The process for him to get to that point will be long and complicated. But, in my opinion, there are simply far too many aspects of the trial process that have been imposed on him, both by the prosecution and by the Judge, which have fatally undermined his right to due process under the Fifth Amendment and his right to a “fair trial” under the Sixth Amendment.

It may ultimately be that the practical reality of the day is that a “fair trial” by standards long prescribed by the United States Supreme Court was not possible in Minnesota in 2021 given the events of the past 11 months. That doesn’t mean that Chauvin’s right to due process and fair trial are to be measured against a “That’s the best we could do” standard.

I continue to have the idea planted in my head that some of what Judge Cahill has done in this proceeding has been something akin to “Kabuki Theater”; he’s gone through the motions of conducting a criminal trial in the best manner he can accomplish given the circumstances. He’s going to pass off the results – if there is a conviction – to a panel of appellate judges and let them provide an answer to the question of whether it has been a constitutionally guaranteed “fair trial” or not.

Judge Cahill had the option of moving the trial out of Hennepin County to some other location in Minnesota. He chose to not do so, and I have yet to see a definitive written ruling that went into significant detail on his analysis about how and why a “fair trial” was possible in Hennepin County. The only explanation I have seen him provide — and I wasn’t able to pay full attention as the trial process got underway — was that he was unpersuaded that any other county in Minnesota would be better able to provide a trial venue fairer to Chauvin than Hennepin County. I find that rationale laughable.

At the same time, everyone recognized that the sentiment in the activist community was that the trial had to take place in Hennepin County because it is the most racially diverse county in Minnesota, and the chances of having black jurors sit in judgment of Chauvin was higher in Hennepin County than any other county in Minnesota, most of which have negligible minority populations.

That shouldn’t be any factor at all, and the promise of having a higher likelihood of having black jurors in the case — presumably improving the chances of convicting Chauvin notwithstanding the fact that he’s entitled to the presumption of innocence just like anyone else — is antithetical to the notion of “justice.” The judicial system provides for a fair trial for both the accused and the prosecution. “Justice” is in the process of reaching a verdict. “Justice” does not come from decisions to improve the chances for a conviction. Criminal cases are purposely styled as “Minnesota v. Chauvin” or “United States v. John Doe” and not “George Floyd v. Derek Chauvin.” The justice system doesn’t “vindicate” the victim of the crime.

The justice system vindicates the rule of law. Circumstances that afford an accused a fair trial, while at the same time degrading the prospects for a conviction are not a basis to render an objection. The right of the accused to due process and a fair trial before the government can incarcerate you are paramount because they are “liberty” interests. The government is seeking to deprive an individual of their liberty. The government must respect and abide by all the requirements that guarantee due process and a fair trial.

“That’s the best we could do” is not good enough.

But that is all that Minnesota has provided.
 

Cacheman

Veteran Member
New tactic? Target the very wealthy white liberals?




Signs that 2021 rioters will be attacking and burning wealthy neighborhoods
By Thomas Lifson

4-5 minutes


Rioting is a frequent phenomenon, complete with a professional traveling cadre that moves into a city when a spark ignites anger – as most recently happened in Brooklyn Center, Minnesota. Take a look at the people arrested in Brooklyn Center:

Screenshot_2021-04-19 AntifaWatch on Twitter.png

With so many people and resources being expended, a bit of strategic thinking is being brought into play. Poor Blacks burning their own neighborhoods hurts the (nonprofessional) rioters and their families and is a burden that does not affect most people. It also doesn’t win a lot of friends among the supposedly oppressed people the itinerant professional rioters seek to lead.

Now, we are seeing signs that the urge to riot will be directed from above at the affluent and comfortable, a property destruction analog of the slogan “Eat the rich” that has enjoyed great popularity on some quarters. Anthony Gockowski reports in Alpha News:


A Minneapolis City Council candidate encouraged those who “feel like burning shit down” to target the city’s wealthiest residents instead of causing further damage to poor communities.

“Just a personal thought — just in case y’all feel like burning shit down, the poor community is not your oppressors. FYI — lake of the isles has more then [sic] needed and won’t be missed,” Rita Ortega wrote on her personal Facebook page, which is under her full name of Margarita, according to screenshots shared widely on social media Friday.

Screenshot_2021-04-19 CrimeWatchMpls on Twitter.png

Gockowski also reports: “According to her campaign website, Ortega was a policy aide at Minneapolis City Hall and spent ten years working in city government.”

Lake of the Isles is a gorgeous neighborhood full of luxury mansions and is only a few blocks from the upscale Uptown shopping district that saw looting in the first wave of riots that followed George Floyd’s death while in police custody. Lake Street, the largest east-west street in the south half of the city was the scene of the greatest destruction, miles of it, and it terminates just beyond Uptown and just before Lake of the Isles.


Lake of the Isles (Photo credit Bjoertvedt, cropped CC By-SA 3.0 license

In other words, it would be no stretch for the rioters to move into Lake of the Isles and sack the multi-million-dollar mansions that surround it.

A resident reported the threat to the Minneapolis Police, and they say they are taking it seriously:


Screenshot_2021-04-19 CrimeWatchMpls on Twitter(1).png

But Minneapolis is not the only city where this thinking is taking hold. In Denver over the weekend, the Governor’s mansion as well as other upscale homes was vandalized.
Sister station CBS Denver reports most of the targets were the city’s Cheesman Park neighborhood. “Woah, nice house bro, gentrifiers,” “Police make white people feel safe from minorities,” and “Abolish police” were among the phrases spray-painted on walls and garage doors.
Jason Whitlock reports that his affluent neighborhood is also seeing gunfire:

Screenshot_2021-04-19 Jason Whitlock on Twitter.png

Once the organized rioters spreads to affluent neighborhoods, fear will grip a much wider swath of society than before. My guess is that it will trigger a backlash. But so pervasive is the propaganda urging white people to feel guilt, I cannot be confident that this will be the net effect.

The summer, aka, riot season, threatens to be even worse than last year.
 

Attachments

Illini Warrior

Has No Life - Lives on TB
rioting & looting erupt no matter how the bogus trial goes >>> ONLY difference will be in the PD responses across the country ...

send that cop to prison over a POS crook croaking during an arrest >>> NOBODY SHOWS UP

PD cop in Miami, Chicago, KC, NYC will see themselves in that judgement - and - say "Why should I ???"
 

Illini Warrior

Has No Life - Lives on TB
New tactic? Target the very wealthy white liberals?




Signs that 2021 rioters will be attacking and burning wealthy neighborhoods
By Thomas Lifson

4-5 minutes


Rioting is a frequent phenomenon, complete with a professional traveling cadre that moves into a city when a spark ignites anger – as most recently happened in Brooklyn Center, Minnesota. Take a look at the people arrested in Brooklyn Center:

View attachment 262240

With so many people and resources being expended, a bit of strategic thinking is being brought into play. Poor Blacks burning their own neighborhoods hurts the (nonprofessional) rioters and their families and is a burden that does not affect most people. It also doesn’t win a lot of friends among the supposedly oppressed people the itinerant professional rioters seek to lead.

Now, we are seeing signs that the urge to riot will be directed from above at the affluent and comfortable, a property destruction analog of the slogan “Eat the rich” that has enjoyed great popularity on some quarters. Anthony Gockowski reports in Alpha News:


A Minneapolis City Council candidate encouraged those who “feel like burning shit down” to target the city’s wealthiest residents instead of causing further damage to poor communities.

“Just a personal thought — just in case y’all feel like burning shit down, the poor community is not your oppressors. FYI — lake of the isles has more then [sic] needed and won’t be missed,” Rita Ortega wrote on her personal Facebook page, which is under her full name of Margarita, according to screenshots shared widely on social media Friday.

View attachment 262241

Gockowski also reports: “According to her campaign website, Ortega was a policy aide at Minneapolis City Hall and spent ten years working in city government.”

Lake of the Isles is a gorgeous neighborhood full of luxury mansions and is only a few blocks from the upscale Uptown shopping district that saw looting in the first wave of riots that followed George Floyd’s death while in police custody. Lake Street, the largest east-west street in the south half of the city was the scene of the greatest destruction, miles of it, and it terminates just beyond Uptown and just before Lake of the Isles.


Lake of the Isles (Photo credit Bjoertvedt, cropped CC By-SA 3.0 license

In other words, it would be no stretch for the rioters to move into Lake of the Isles and sack the multi-million-dollar mansions that surround it.

A resident reported the threat to the Minneapolis Police, and they say they are taking it seriously:


View attachment 262243

But Minneapolis is not the only city where this thinking is taking hold. In Denver over the weekend, the Governor’s mansion as well as other upscale homes was vandalized.

Jason Whitlock reports that his affluent neighborhood is also seeing gunfire:

View attachment 262244

Once the organized rioters spreads to affluent neighborhoods, fear will grip a much wider swath of society than before. My guess is that it will trigger a backlash. But so pervasive is the propaganda urging white people to feel guilt, I cannot be confident that this will be the net effect.

The summer, aka, riot season, threatens to be even worse than last year.

came within an eyebrow of wealthy white fighting back in St Louis >>> only thing missing was some darkness - daytime black marchers were unwilling to pull their guns in broad daylite ...

those two lawyer clucks would have been dead meat at 10pm ...
 
Top