Was the'Verdict' Coerced?

a reply to: Phage

I tend to believe things like this are a never ending cycle of BS. The whole things a damned shame and the aftermath is a poop show and media circus.

originally posted by: JinMI
Ffs where has common sense gone?

Maybe people are afraid they'll get their house burnt down if they use it?

a reply to: CryHavoc

Not everyone is a coward. All it would have taken was one.
The jury was selected by both sides.

originally posted by: schuyler
I think the film of Floyd's arrest and death was enough to convince the jury without any outside coercion.

How so? George Floyd was saying he couldn't breathe long before he was on the ground with a knee in his neck and Overdose level of Fentanyl in his system. The entire World was lied to about it.

The Verdict defies logic.

originally posted by: dug88
Could you imagine for one minute being on that jury and not voting guilty?.

It makes me wonder if they (along with the Judge) did it one purpose, to kick it up to an Appeals Court outside of Minneapolis and away from the Mobs.

a reply to: CryHavoc

Overdose level of Fentanyl

Did the defense make that claim? Didn't they say it could have been a heart attack?
Was the claim supported? Was it contested?

It makes me wonder if they (along with the Judge) did it one purpose, to kick it up to an Appeals Court outside of Minneapolis and away from the Mobs.

But no place is safe from the...BLM. Right? So don't worry, your scapegoat is safe. Even if an appeal is granted and he's found guilty once again.

a reply to: CryHavoc

How about it was obvious he was guilty?

The OD level of fentanyl hadnt taken effect because he swallowed it and that will take a minimum of 40 minutes to take effect.
If the murdering cop hadnt been on his neck he probably would have OD'd.

The Verdict defies logic.

He was obviously guilty, you have got to accept it.

originally posted by: TzarChasm
I think, given the level of exposure months before the trial started, it is likely that most of the jury made up their minds before they entered the court building, same as everyone watching at home. That's part of why they reached a decision so quickly.

In the US juries are subject to selection. Chauvin's lawyers were given the chance to object to any that they felt were bias, and could move for a mistrial if they thought that the jurors had been threatened. Both could be grounds for an appeal.

So far neither Chauvin nor his legal team has filed on these grounds.

a reply to: AaarghZombies

All it would have taken was one juror. Just one.
There wasn't one.

originally posted by: litterbaux
a reply to: CryHavoc

Unless they pulled these jurors from a different country there's no way they didn't already know about the incident and have already had family and friends give their opinion on the case

This is actually a pretty hot topic globally. If anything a foreigner might be more bias against Chauvin than a US citizen as the majority of the rest of the world cannot believe that this wouldn't be a slam dunk case against him. Outside of the US simply not rendering aid to Floyd would be manslaughter on its own. Or maybe even negligent homicide.

a reply to: SecretKnowledge

So you're claiming he died of asphyxiation with 98% oxygen saturation? Seems legit.

As far as jury coercion, we all saw Mad Max's remarks from last weekend. We also saw BLM already threatening to burn and loot. Not to forget the remarks of the illegitimate resident of the White House. I also remember something about CNN trying to doxx jurors. And a pigs head and pigs blood at the home of a witness who no longer even lived at the house.

Yep, no coercion to see here...

originally posted by: Phage
Did the defense make that claim? Didn't they say it could have been a heart attack?
Was the claim supported? Was it contested?

I don't know if it was brought up in Coury.

From the Medical Examiner's Report"

George Floyd
20-3700
Page 2
III. No life-threatening injuries identified

And check out that Toxicology below it on Page 2.
www.hennepin.us...

a reply to: CryHavoc

But no finding of overdose?

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: AaarghZombies

All it would have taken was one juror. Just one.
There wasn't one.

One what?

Under us law a judge can accept a majority verdict, it does not need to be unanimous. I simply don't believe that the entire jury could be corrupt or afraid. Chauvin's lawyers would have been all over it if this was the case.

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: CryHavoc

But no finding of overdose?

That would be a coroners finding, not a trail finding.

Different folk would judge that.

If you shoot a man while he's having a fatal heart attack, it's still murder. If a man jumps off of a bridge and you shoot him before he hits the ground it's still murder.

Floyd was a drug user, he would be able to tolerate levels of drugs that would kill a regular person. For him this might just have been a high, not an OD.

a reply to: AaarghZombies

Under us law a judge can accept a majority verdict, it does not need to be unanimous.

Incorrect. I'm pretty sure each of the three crimes would be considered "serious."
www.npr.org...

But you seem to have missed my point, which was that the claim is that every juror was a coward. I don't think so.

a reply to: AaarghZombies

That would be a coroners finding, not a trail finding.

I know.

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: CryHavoc

But no finding of overdose?

I don't see it, but I'm not a lawyer.

a reply to: CryHavoc

I don't see it, but I'm not a lawyer.

You don't see it because it isn't there.

If you'd read the Medical Examiner's Report, you'd see what the found in his BLOOD"

VI. Toxicology
testing performed on antemortem blood specimens collected 5/25/20 at
9:00 p.m. at HHC and on postmortem urine)
A. Blood drug and novel psychoactive substances screens:
1. Fentanyl 11 ng/mL
2. Norfentanyl 5.6 ng/mL
3. 4-ANPP 0.65 ng/mL
4. Methamphetamine 19 ng/mL
5. 11-Hydroxy Delta-9 THC 1.2 ng/mL;
Delta-9 Carboxy THC 42 ng/mL; Delta-9 THC 2.9 ng/mL
6. Cotinine positive
7. Caffeine positive
B. Blood volatiles: negative for ethanol, methanol,
isopropanol, or acetone
C. Urine drug screen: presumptive positive for cannabinoids,
amphetamines, and fentanyl/metabolite
D. Urine drug screen confirmation: morphine (free) 86 ng/mL