Kansas Crimson

NewtonHawk11 wrote: ↑Tue May 04, 2021 9:39 am

vega wrote: ↑Tue May 04, 2021 9:07 am

NewtonHawk11 wrote: ↑Tue May 04, 2021 8:55 am Problematic in such a public case as this one was..

https://www.yahoo.com/news/chauvin-juro ... 18703.html

Absolutely not. You don't get tabula rasa jurors, you get a jury of your peers. If the defense didn't filter out this juror in voir dire , then that's on them. You can both believe that Black Lives Matter, and be on a jury where you are committed to be impartial. For the Roger Stone case, there was a MAGA juror that kept a MAGA hat in her car, and spouted Trump bullshit all over the news hours after the trial was over. But you know what, she also gave a guilty verdict and went against her political leaning. You need to trust juries to do the right thing. They often do.

Interesting. I always thought that if you leaned heavily one way or the other, you were supposed to remove yourself as a juror. But that was like 15+ years ago when I was informed about a lot of that stuff.

It’s not on the juror to decide their own bias. They have a whole science on how attorneys dismiss potential jurors. They usually ask something like “is there a reason that you don’t think you would be able to be an impartial juror.” That’s your catchall. Again, you can consider BLM important in your life, and take a situational set of facts and come to an opinion. 11 of the 12 jurors were ready to convict after closing. It took hours to switch the undecided to guilty.

I also learned in law school that people with a known bias (hate cops, BLM folks) tend to be the most thorough jurors, as they don't want to be the one that creates a situation for a successful appeal, so they make extra sure they dot their t's and lick their i's. Plus, Americans view trials as entertainment. It's much different for the jury. They understand their actions are important and a person's life is essentially at stake.

Wait, is that a thing?

One juror was undecided for the Chauvin verdict?

And when I said “prejudiced,” that could mean a number of things in a legal sense, right?

Not necessarily just getting up there and blurting I’M RACIST! But one could just as easily say, oh I dunno if I can be impartial cuz I used to work with the defendant, or was roommates with him, or I fingerblasted his mom, or whatever.

ousdahl wrote: ↑Tue May 04, 2021 9:55 amNot necessarily just getting up there and blurting I’M RACIST! But one could just as easily say, oh I dunno if I can be impartial cuz I used to work with the defendant, or was roommates with him, or I fingerblasted his mom, or whatever.

Insincerity is really easy to spot.

Of course an actual relative/friend of any party is almost always an easy for cause strike.

Yeah I’m sure.

For the record, I plan to go in sincerely, and fulfill my civic duty objectively and in good faith.

I mean, if I wasn’t, I woulda already tried to get out of it

ousdahl wrote: ↑Tue May 04, 2021 10:01 am Yeah I’m sure.

For the record, I plan to go in sincerely, and fulfill my civic duty objectively and in good faith.

I mean, if I wasn’t, I woulda already tried to get out of it

You're gonna be pissed when you find out how much money you get.

You'll probably try to start a jurors union.

In CO, at least, my employer is required to pay my normal wages for up to 3 days of jury duty?

Dunno, you might ask the gooooogle

ousdahl wrote: ↑Tue May 04, 2021 10:46 am In CO, at least, my employer is required to pay my normal wages for up to 3 days of jury duty?

What if it's a long trial?

I think you get like $50 a day depending on the state plus lunch. That's like 6 bucks an hour bro. That's not even a living wage!

and i bet the tips blow

you can't blow just the tip.

PhDhawk wrote: ↑Tue May 04, 2021 12:02 pm you can't blow just the tip.

that’s not what your wife....

never mind

Name one other occupation for which they might say, “maybe we shouldn’t have fired him after all just cuz he was charged with murder”

https://www.ajc.com/news/crime/fired-ap ... HIMZTPU2U/

Everyone is pretty much in agreement that he deserved manslaughter, but the fact that the jury was threatened by the woke mob to find him guilty of "murder" just shows how screwed up our legal system has become. Anyone who's sincere would see it was not a murder case.

guess what?

nobody rioted, clown

Who?

the cops who murdered Floyd?

Cuz btw a grand jury just handed them a bunch federal charges too

lobs isn’t intellectually honest enough to understand

That's because rather that doing what was right, they did what they need to appease a woke mob. There would have been massive rioting, murdering, etc had they not given in. Maxine Waters, running her mouth making her threats, and no one cared...

lobby’s new catch phrase “woke mob” is adorable

woke mob = social justice advocates

sign me up

none of the juror interviews i’ve seen gave any indication that they were compelled by fear of setting off riots or being ostracized by anyone

i would ask lobs to provide sources for his claims, but we all know how that goes