Guilty?

[CountValentine]

What happened to ignoring the wackos?

Hard to ignore millions.

[Lurker]

Hard to ignore millions.

I agree.

[PlatinumGuy]

Well, the original comment said can it be brought to Federal court “at this point.”  So the answer, I think, is no.

You're right, I missed that because it makes no sense in reply to the comment before it speculating what can happen if it ultimately makes it to a federal court

[CountValentine]

For those that still don't understand. No the defense does not have to prove anything but you have to counter powerful testimony.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/alternate-juror-in-derek-chauvin-trial-says-medical-expert-convinced-her-of-ex-officers-guilt/ar-BB1fWnB4?li=BBnb7Kz

[zh cohen]

For those that still don't understand. No the defense does not have to prove anything but you have to counter powerful testimony.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/alternate-juror-in-derek-chauvin-trial-says-medical-expert-convinced-her-of-ex-officers-guilt/ar-BB1fWnB4?li=BBnb7Kz

I agree with you from a psychological level that the best way to counter certainty is with certainty, but that is not the legal standard.

It's interesting to note that the prosecution only disclosed Tobin's exhibits the night before he testified. This was some of the 5000 items that were disclosed during the trial (not earlier).

While disclosures during the trial are routine, the volume of disclosures in this case (when the defense was basically a one man show) can be taken into account by the appeals court when considering whether Chauvin got a fair trial.

[CountValentine]

I have no problem with any ruling the appeals court or higher makes.

[PlatinumGuy]

https://twitter.com/ericgarland/status/1387577859728891904

[avromie7]

https://twitter.com/ericgarland/status/1387577859728891904

That's just crazy.

[CountValentine]

That's just crazy.

What's the crazy part?

[zh cohen]

What's the crazy part?

That they were going to arrest him after a jury had just found him not guilty. And they were going to make a spectacle out of it rather than working with his lawyer to have him surrender.

[CountValentine]

That they were going to arrest him after a jury had just found him not guilty. And they were going to make a spectacle out of it rather than working with his lawyer to have him surrender.

The spectacle part agree with. Arresting him on federal charges was a given if found not guilty.

[TimT]

https://washingtontimes.com/news/2021/may/3/brandon-mitchell-derek-chauvin-juror-who-attended-/

[Mordyk]

https://washingtontimes.com/news/2021/may/3/brandon-mitchell-derek-chauvin-juror-who-attended-/

In a normal case this would be an issue, but not when the guilty verdict was racially biased. welcome to 2021

[CountValentine]

https://washingtontimes.com/news/2021/may/3/brandon-mitchell-derek-chauvin-juror-who-attended-/

Did he lie to any of the questions? If not it is a nothing burger.

[CountValentine]

In a normal case this would be an issue, but not when the guilty verdict was racially biased. welcome to 2021

So when evidence is overwhelming that makes it racially biased?

[Mordyk]

So when evidence is overwhelming that makes it racially biased?

I actually think he was guilty.  But you would be quite naive to think that the trial wasn't all racist...

[gozalim]

Did he lie to any of the questions? If not it is a nothing burger.

article argued yes

[CountValentine]

I actually think he was guilty.  But you would be quite naive to think that the trial wasn't all racist...

Can you explain what you mean by the trial was racist?

[CountValentine]

article argued yes

Then we need to wait for the facts.

[Mordyk]

Can you explain what you mean by the trial was racist?

I think there was no way to get a fair trial that was not racially biased.