Here's the answer. Cannot have some one so obviously biased as a juror.

If there was a juror wearing a "Back the Blue" or "Chauvin is Innocent" shirt, don't you think that would be a cause for concern?

Yes exactly.

Any "Insert Race" person who is actively participating as part of an activist group, wearing, supporting and promoting said group, while also going through a jury selection process for a case said activist group has a strong opinion on... IS A PROBLEM when trying to select a non-partial jury.


Other than that you can have any views you want. That's the beauty of freedom and our constitution. That being said I find all loud/obnoxious people annoying. You don't fix an entire world history of racism by shifting the blame to the historically dominant race, that's how you create more division. Especially considering most of the people alive today had nothing to do with that, and are just continuing with the society that was handed to us. You fix it through education, awareness, along with uplifting your own race.

I wouldn't be too sure about that.

Ok so since you just want to make it all about race let’s make the point super clear.

Everyone has a constitutional right to innocence until proven guilty.

You seem like the kinda person who would cry his ass off if you found out a white juror on a black man accused of murder’s jury constantly wrote about how black people only want to kill and other racist **** that the white fit shouldn’t be allowed to be a juror. I would agree with you.

But that also means that this guy with his pro BLM shirt that was designed around the Chauvin trial and his already biased hatred for cops SHOULD NOT be on the jury of a cop.

Just cause he’s black doesn’t give him a free pass to **** on someone else’s constitutional rights.

Good news, he will probably get away with it cause this is the one case no higher court probably will want to touch.

Are you stupid? There were 4 black jurors (2 mixed race.. who knows maybe they were half black? so possibly up to 6 black jurors)... we are talking about only 1 of those jurors... that would still mean that there were a higher percentage of black jurors representative to the population. Here's the real question do you think the jury should have been 100% black? What percentage of the jury would be black enough for you? since an overrepresentation isn't enough for. What percentage is enough?

Do you know that this juror was specifically asked if he had attended any demonstrations? He said no. He lied, that is perjury, he may well end up getting charged (He probably won't because they will be too afraid of more riots) and would 100% be convicted, actually he'd probably plea, if he was charged. There is 100% irrefutable evidence that he lied and committed perjury to get on this trial. In his own words he did his duty as a black man on that jury to convict Chauvin.

You can think Chauvin is guilty all you want... I actually personally believe he may be guilty of the lowest charge since he should have rendered aid when Floyd was obviously unconscious... but 3rd degree is ridiculous.. he was not committing a felony, he was not assaulting floyd, he was arresting him, he just failed to render aid when Floyd had a medical emergency.

But even if you think Chauvin is guilty, he didn't have a fair trial. He won't get off on this, by the way just means a new trial. It is cut and dry, there is absolutely only 1 side to this. There is absolutely no argument for this not to result in a new trial. You're just flat out being racist... or possibly you didn't do any research into it.

Seems like Chauvin should've hired better defense attorneys

Jaydawg must be tied up in another race thread to not have posted ITT yet

Logic, logic everywhere.

I mean, a back the blue and BLM shirt are kind of the same in that they [ostensibly] stand for broader propositions. It is not inconsistent with either BLM or Back the Blue's broader policies to hear the facts and make a determination that Chauvin was guilty/innocent. Those situations are obviously way different that a "Chauvin is Innocent" shirt, which shows obvious bias as towards THAT SPECIFIC EVENT -- "Chauvin is innocent" does not stand for a broader proposition.

With that said, I think in reality, BLM has been weaponized and is more interested in building an army of unquestioning zealots who make its leaders rich (leaders being both BLM leaders and democratic politicians), so I'm sure this guy had his mind made up. But I'll bet all my DOGE coin on the fact that a court will say that supporting an organization like BLM that stands for broader issues does not preclude someone from making an impartial decision about a specific set of facts any more than being a republican would. And no proof of perjury, as the DC rally was [again, ostensibly] a Saint Floyd rally.

In fact, let's bookmark this page for a few months down the line so we can see what the court said and I can pay you my DOGE if I'm wrong.

Almost impossible to find jurors that don’t know about this case, or don’t already have their mind made up going into it.

Should be up to a panel of judges.

Can’t have a juror that wears a get your knee off our necks t shirt though just lol. That and Maxine Waters/Biden’s comments about it should obviously be enough for mistrial

That's not what happened. This juror specifically wore a Tshirt referencing the Chauvin/Floyd incident and attended a rally that was named after the Chauvin/Floyd incident. He didn't just attend a BLM event he attended one specifically relating to and referencing the incident he was on the jury for. Look up the event yourself.

I think chauvins lawyers did terribly (not to get into whether or not he should have simply taken the knee off and if their cause was just or unjust) and whether that was by design or accident is unclear. They knew this guy was Pro BLM (not that that necessarily has anti police bias) but thought they could win him over, supposedly, and this wasnt included in their mistrial petition. I would think that chauvin, his department, and his legal team all knew he ****ed up really bad, even if it wasnt intentional (which isnt clear) and pretty much agred to lose the case for the advancement of social peace except the stance they took on trial was not apologetic or even in justification of his actions and mindset at all, instead suggesting the drugs and bystanders were to blame. A huge mistake all around for many reasons IMO. Chauvin will probably serve half his sentence with decent treatment without the bull**** many inmates tolerate like grossly mildewed clothes and towels and bad food and treatment etc. in exchange for not having massive rioting not a bad deal. I personally think one major takeaway everyone Should be learning from this is that if you dont comply with the police you could ****in die even if you dont 'deserve' to, i think any rational person looking at the entirety of this puts blame on both floyd and chauvin for its outcome

You are such a flaming fukking *******. Look at Brandon Mitchell's shirt. Read the words on it you dum phucking phuck.

you ****s still stay crying for chauvin

wish this kunt was put in gen pop to have his butthole stretched and a cawk shoved down his throat

let him try to say he cant breath

No need to get mad brah - I am just playing devil's avocado here and saying what I think the probable outcome is. I already said you can have my DOGE if I'm wrong.

"Knees off our neck" might reference Floyd, but it does so more broadly in BLM's purported cry for equity and ending institutional racism. This is literally what the courts will say to any appeal. The fact that this guy went to a rally to end institutional racism a year ago does not mean he went to a George Floyd peaceful protest (even if the DC rally referenced Saint Floyd) and that he cannot be impartial. Again, I am not telling you WHAT THIS GUY ACTUALLY BELIEVES IN HIS HEART OF HEARTS, just the arguments that will be made in favor of NOT overturning the trial, and the arguments that will eventually win.

I'm really just doing this because Republicans need to smarten up, otherwise the "gimme free chit" Dem army is going to take over and fukk us hard. I kinda doubt Chauvin's trial was super fair, but I also don't know. Sitting on the sidelines, without having all of the facts (the kind of facts you would get by being directly involved in the judicial process), and saying definitively that "Chauvin's trial was not fair" is no better than seeing 30 sec of that video and saying that Chauvin is guilty of murder.

Also, I don't really think Chauvin is the horse to back right now from an optics or strategic perspective when we are talking about the culture wars that republicans are losing.

Honestly, this post shows you are no better than the weird "Chauvin fans" ITT. Different side of the same coin.

Bruh urine idiot...like so stoopit R. Kelly pees in yo mouf and yoos thinks iz lemonade.

But seriously, I am not at all concerned for Chauvin's personal safety.

What I care about it the blatant disregard for a fair trial process in our country.

Don't they have to prove he actually attended a George Floyd rally? If they do that then yeah they have a mistrial if that was one of the things he lied about on his questionnaire. So let's see if that happens.

The funny thing is.

10000% chance if you offered Floyd's family $27million or Floyd's life. You better bet ur azz they would choose $27million in a heartbeat.

You are functionally retarded. The mind actually boggles that this is what you took from this info.

Who are you kidding? THEY would kill ol' George themselves for that money.

From what I heard, he was not even in close contact with his immediate family.

No, people have zero issues with blacks who don't lie on jury questionnaires you brain damaged fukk.

The fact anyone has to explain this to you is fukking incredible. Do you think a kkk member should sit on the jury for a black man accused of rape? No? Neither does any normal human. Equally a BLM activist should not sit on the the jury of the Chauvin trial you complete and utter fukking moron. You literally have the mental agility of a brick, and not one of those useful bricks found in good quality walls; I'm talking about a smashed up half-a-brick found on some waste ground that a stray cat has just pissed on.

That's the funny thing. Dying was the best thing he did for his family in his whole miserable life. Don't let these orcs and cukks fool you. The whole thing is a circus.

He claimed as much.

He defended the shirt and stated it was in D.C cause “he never been to D.C. before” and the BLM event was apparently organized by Floyd’s brother. Two very dumb things to admit.

We live in a world were everyone wants to be a celebrity. All he probably needed to do was shut his mouth for a couple years then he could cash in on his 15 minutes of fame.

But he’s the third juror. They all had to rush to be the first one. So the other two talked and he had to one up em and figured he would play the race card cuz something systemic racism something something social justice. And now he’s doubling down.

You're 'playing' at being retarded.

He has already admitted in an interview that he attended the rally. He said he forgot about it when he was answering the question, that it wasn't intentional (he has to say that or it's a perjury charge)... but he has admitted it. It's not in dispute that he attended.

scary if not trolling

We really should just do away with a jury of your peers and do what other courts do and have a panel of judges determine the defendant's fate. Why do we have literal dumb asses determining people's fate? Just follow the way of the supreme court... nine judges vote guilty or innocent, majority rules.

It's so fukking retarded people judging this situation on racial lines.

If it was a black cop killing a white guy and a white guy on the jury was a 'white lives matter' activist I'd be arguing just as vehemently for a mistrial.

Fukk Chauvin. Dude seemed like a prick and I couldn't care less about him. I do care about one of the cornerstones of western democracy though which guarantees the right to a fair trial.

you argument is extremely poor. the fact that you even presented that as your argument is insulting enough in itself that ill consider it an ad hominem attack itself

To answer as to why its a horrible argument—the jurors skin color was NOT the point of contention at all. The point of contention was the fact he was a full blow. BLM/floyd supporter who came into the trial with extreme bias.

hes the poster example of someone who should not have been on that jury. whether or not you think chauvin was guilty, you should see it was a textbook mistrial. rule of law shoukd be above all, so stop letting your sissy emotions own you