So we lost two of the previous seated jurors due to their exposure to the news of the $27 million dollar settlement and we gained two more jurors. The Judge offered three more preemptory strikes to the defense and one more to the prosecution over the settlement issue.
They ended where they started. With nine jurors and five left to find. By all accounts the two new jurors appear to be solid neutral jurors who do not have any known bias. These two replaced two that were shaky to begin with for the defense, so that would be seen as an upgrade for the Chauvin team.
The defense now is back up to six strikes, while the state has five. Tomorrow the judge is expected to issue rulings on the motions for continuance and a change of venue. I find it hard to believe that the judge would continue seating jurors if he was expecting to change the venue and have everything start over with another judge in another jurisdiction, but then again, what do I know?
12 comments:
Not on thread topic, but also important:
The FBI, not James, says:
WASHINGTON
Wanted By The FBI
Office of Public Affairs
Share on Facebook
March 18, 2021
The FBI’s Washington Field Office has released new information and videos of suspects in the most egregious assaults on federal officers during the riots at the U.S. Capitol on January 6, 2021, and is seeking the public’s help to identify them.
It has been two months since violent extremists breached the U.S. Capitol and committed a litany of federal criminal acts. With the assistance of hundreds of thousands of tips from the American people, the FBI has arrested more than 300 individuals who took part in the Capitol riots. Of those, more than 65 were arrested for assaulting law enforcement officers. However, some of the most violent offenders have yet to be identified, including the 10 seen assaulting officers in the video footage we are releasing today.
“The FBI is asking for the public’s help in identifying 10 individuals suspected of being involved in some of the most violent attacks on officers who were protecting the U.S. Capitol and our democratic process on January 6,” said Steven M. D’Antuono, assistant director in charge of the FBI’s Washington Field Office.
“These individuals are seen on video committing egregious crimes against those who have devoted their lives to protecting the American people.
“We’re grateful to the members of the public who have already been a tremendous help in these investigations,” ADIC D’Antuono said. “We know it can be a difficult decision to report information about family, friends, or coworkers, but it is the right thing to do, and the FBI continues to need your help to identify these suspects.”
If you have any information on the individuals depicted in the videos, please call 1-800-CALL-FBI or submit a tip online at tips.fbi.gov. Please reference the AFO number when calling or submitting information online. To view photos of additional individuals the FBI is seeking to identify, visit fbi.gov/capitolviolence.
Follow the FBI’s Washington Field Office on Twitter at @FBIWFO for updates.
https://youtu.be/C3EIgmdRPXk
The FBI
https://youtu.be/C3EIgmdRPXk
Scott, I suspect the judge will deny the case or change the venue.
Deny delay
This is another reason why the filibuster should be changed to it demanding the Senator to speak on the floor of the Senate room as originally designed.
The Democrats have to restore unionized jobs in right to work for less states.
another bill, a sweeping revision of a labor law called the PRO Act, poses a different kind of test for the party: Just how willing are Democrats to use their newfound power to reshape the foundations of American politics in their favor?
The PRO Act, passed by the House last Tuesday and currently languishing in the Senate, would be the most significant pro-labor legislation passed since the New Deal. Its most politically significant provision is a complete repeal of all right-to-work laws in states — bills that Republican majorities have used to undermine unions, a crucial pro-Democratic constituency, across the country. Their repeal would go a long way toward undoing a deliberate GOP strategy to rig the system in their favor.
The Biden administration has already taken a notably more pro-union stance even by Democratic standards, supporting both the PRO Act and the right of Amazon workers in Alabama to unionize. Acting on this rhetoric would in some ways be as bold for Democrats as the explicit political reform bills in Congress: HR-1 and the John Lewis Voting Rights Act.
It would get the white middle class to vote Democratic, instead of being distracted by social issues like the murder of George Floyd.
https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/22307891/democrats-unions-pro-act-policy-feedback
Jack Posobiec
https://mobile.twitter.com/JackPosobiec/status/1372580255035166722
BREAKING: Prosecutors strike juror #87 who said she thinks the media is biased and exaggerates discrimination to stir up controversy
I think the prosecution is amazed at how they are running out of strikes in this jury pool. jmo
UPDATE (10:14 a.m.): The state uses a strike to remove potential juror No. 87 from the trial of Derek Chauvin.
The potential juror described herself as a mother of five children. She had not seen any video of George Floyd’s arrest, only a still image. She reported having a negative view of Floyd and Black Lives Matter.
The troll squad asshole didn't report the reason she was dismissed
Reason for dismissal:
Prosecutors strike juror #87 who said she thinks the media is biased and exaggerates discrimination to stir up controversy
reading comprehension for alky never was taught when he learned to read in third grade
ROFLMFAO !!!
Roger - Almost everyone on the jury either has a good or bad impression of both the police or black lives matter. But since this case is about a police officer and police force, it seems a whole lot more relevant what people think about the police than black lives matter.
An objective juror in theory would not be predisposed to believe that Chauvin would be "more likely" to be guilty because Floyd was black. An objective juror would treat the situation exactly as if the race of both people don't matter. The fact that someone has a negative view about black lives matter might actually make them a better juror and more able to judge Chauvin and Floyd on their actions (rather than their race).
By nature... black lives matters is an idea that someone like Floyd would be predisposed to be treated poorly by someone like Chauvin. Believing as such taints your objectively under the constitutional rights of a defendant to get a fair trial.
That would be why the prosecution would be required to use a strike to disqualify the potential juror, and why the judge would not rule that having a bad opinion of BLM is cause to strike the juror for cause.
this was juror number 9, not sure she is still on panel
The ninth juror selected is a white woman in her 50s who lives outside Minneapolis, works as an executive assistant in a clinical health care setting and is a single mother.
She has viewed bystander video of Floyd's arrest, but wrote in her questionnaire, "I couldn't watch it in full because it was too disturbing to me."
However, she said, "I'm not in a position to change the law. I'm in a position to uphold the law … He's innocent until we can prove otherwise."
She said she has a "somewhat negative" opinion of Black Lives Matter and a "negative" opinion of the protests that followed Floyd's death because the community took a "beating" from them. She reported having a "somewhat negative" opinion of Chauvin.
"I got the impression he didn't care about George Floyd," she said.
https://news.yahoo.com/chauvin-attorney-requests-delay-due-235900769.html
Post a Comment