Derek Chauvin juror LIED about protest: Cop's hope of appeal boosted after picture emerges of juror

Derek Chauvin juror LIED about protest: Cop's hope of appeal boosted after picture emerges of juror....

Derek Chauvin's lawyer files motion asking for NEW trial citing jury misconduct a day after it emerged juror lied about being at BLM protest

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...defends-participation-Washington-protest.html
https://lawandcrime.com/live-trials...shirt-attendance-at-blm-rally-prior-to-trial/
... and many other links on the internet.

If it is true that juror Brandon Mitchell lied about any of the questions asked of him for jury duty, does Chauvin deserve a new trial? Did Chauvin deserve 'a fair and impartial jury'...? What say you?

. On the right, Brandon Mitchell, Chauvin trial juror, at BLM rally.

 

The jury of his “peers” consisted of black people, women, and 2 mixed race, non-sequestered, in the same city the case took place in, making a lightning fast decision in just 10 hours of deliberation. What a joke.

The jurors were compromised from the start and we didn’t even need this BLM nut to get outed to know that.

a new trial needs to happen regardless of what anyone thinks about the case. Our justice system needs to show it can work regardless of the pressures from an entire political party and their violent mob

 

Yikes. The juror lied to get on the jury.

That whole trial is now screwed. Next time, a change of venue would be appropriate. They should have sequestered the previous jury, but the judge failed there too.

Also, I see the Dr. King image on the BLM shirt. If Martin saw the mandate of BLM, he would not allow them to use his image and likely beat their asses in private. They stand for everything he does not.

 

The evidence will not change — if he gets a new trial and the result is the same how many of the people screaming it isn’t fair that he was held accountable for murder will be ok with the end result?

@Tipper101 should the jury only be allowed to be white men that have a history of past aggression to satisfy your requirement of “jury of his peers”?

 

I assume that is a crime?

 

I'm not an attorney, but if I understand anything (ANYTHING) about jurisprudence in the civilized world -- going all the way back to English Common Law and Roman Law before that -- Derek Chauvin must (MUST) be given a new trial... and, in a state far, far away from Minne-EHH-polis....

Moreover, this 'juror', Brandon Mitchell, should have charges brought against HIM!

. "OK, Rule #1 -- you DON'T allow people who have lied to sit on juries...!"

 

Perjury, I do believe. But, the guy is Black and he did come down on the Leftist side of things, so I think that cancels out any crime.

 

So do you think he should get a new trial (even if you think the outcome was correct)?

 

I hope Derek Chauvin gets a new Trial and walks for this, just to rub it in the noses of these lying BLM activists. That will teach um

 

So you think black people, women and mixed race persons are not "peers" to a white man? Are they not equal classes of citizen IE they are of one class? Do tell us more.

 

Go ahead! Dare to give Derek Chauvin a FAIR trial, and the BLM/ANTIFA mobs will destroy the other half of the town!

. The Court of Public Opinion is the only one that matters, after all...!

 

He doesn't appear to have actually lied on any actual question asked of him however. THAT would be the rub, you'll need to pair his actions to a question and show that his actions prior to that question show his answer was a malicious lie. That's a steep hill to climb. Moreover it would just lead to ANOTHER trial with the same evidence.

 

He lied? Perhaps you can point to the particular question he was asked on voir dire that you consider his response paired with this picture to prove the lie?

 

Perhaps, but at least the jury wouldn't be tainted.

 

You haven't actually shown that the juror lied and was therefore tainted so... maybe let's don't start jerking each other off just yet.

 

If they can prove that the jury perjured itself then yes — if they cannot then no.

Feel free to answer my question that you skipped over, if he does get a new trial will y’all accept the outcome? Or does it have to only be a jury of ex police officers who are white men with a history of past violence for you to believe them?

 

Whether he lied or not, the shirt shows prejudice. I'm sure that there was some kind of questions regarding prejudice.

 

You didn't ask me a question. I asked you a question. Maybe you should go back and reread your own post.

 

Are you referring to the murder change? If so you should look up how that applies in excessive force cases in NM, they constitute felony assault. Death in this instance leads to a murder 2 charge.

He didn’t have to purposely do it.

 

If what he did fits the charges, then I'm fine with it.

 

Seriously?

https://www.mediaite.com/tv/fox-new...-derek-chauvin-juror-of-lying-to-get-on-jury/

Spilbor was referring to the recent news that Brandon Mitchell, one of the jurors in the Chauvin trial, once posted a picture of himself on social media wearing a Black Lives Matter shirt emblazoned with the words “Get your knee off our necks.” Since all the jurors in the trial had to fill out a questionnaire beforehand on whether they or anyone close to them “participated in protests about police use of force or police brutality,” Mitchell’s shirt has prompted questions about his impartiality to the case.



He is the guy on the far right with the BLM shirt on.

 

so what would a jury unrepresentative of your peers look like to you? Space aliens?

Common Marxist Liberals, it’s a bit late to suddenly go color blind on us. You can’t talk “systemic unconscious racism” this and “we need race quotas everywhere” that and “race is disproportionately represented therefore there’s something wrong” over there.

A black man gets tried by an all white jury. See how far that’d go over with you double-standard bearers

this isn’t hard to figure out. You guys talk about race percentages all the time. If 13 people are selected amongst the population one can reasonably expect there to be at least 1 white man. In this case, there isn’t. And that’s BS, just as it would be if it were reversed

Question: are you guys purposely hypocritical or do you just fall into it while you stumble around inside your bubbles of made up reality?

 

nope, he did not lie about anything

 

Wow, you have access to what this guy submitted to the court. That’s awesome. Glad you could clear it up.

 

not how it works, we all hate terrorists and murders, does that mean we are all biased and they can never be tried?

this case was open and shut.... nothing to it