(April 25, 2021 at 7:26 am)Brian37 Wrote: If I have this correct, news media is reporting that for now, Chauvin is going to be sentenced June 16th. Of course that is subject to change with legal challenges.

It probably won’t change. I can’t imagine a legal challenge that would postpone a sentencing.

Boru

(April 25, 2021 at 7:46 am)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote:

(April 25, 2021 at 7:26 am)Brian37 Wrote: If I have this correct, news media is reporting that for now, Chauvin is going to be sentenced June 16th. Of course that is subject to change with legal challenges.

It probably won’t change. I can’t imagine a legal challenge that would postpone a sentencing.

Boru

I don't think it will change either. But it still is a high profile case.

(April 25, 2021 at 10:54 am)Angrboda Wrote:

That’s interesting. A majority of each group agreed with the verdict. It would be even more interesting to know what percentage of those who disagreed still thought he was guilty, but of a lesser charge.

Boru

(April 25, 2021 at 9:10 am)Brian37 Wrote:

(April 25, 2021 at 7:46 am)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote: It probably won’t change. I can’t imagine a legal challenge that would postpone a sentencing.

Boru

I don't think it will change either. But it still is a high profile case.

Being a high profile case has nothing to do with the sentencing date.

Boru

(April 25, 2021 at 10:59 am)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote:

(April 25, 2021 at 10:54 am)Angrboda Wrote:

That’s interesting. A majority of each group agreed with the verdict. It would be even more interesting to know what percentage of those who disagreed still thought he was guilty, but of a lesser charge.

Boru

I wonder overall,  how many of these who thought the verdict was wrong actually think Chavin did not kill a man in circumstances where had the man been white, the killing would have been intolerable, and how many thinks  chavin’s act met an unwritten necessity to kill black men from time to time to keep the black community cowered in order to establish or maintain a notional social order they think to be right.

Some probing questions I’ve asked of the not guilty partisan reveals a good percentage actually believe the latter.   When challenged, they do not focus on defending the proposition that what chavin did was illegal killing,  instead jump right to how affirmative actions in their opinion have already embedded too many unqualified blacks in places where they are regarded as unqualified or they do not belong, and how crime rates amongst the black community is high, etc

To them, whether chavin is guilty or not is irrelevant.   He should not be found guilty because that would lessen an appropriate sense of vulnerability to police that would keep blacks in their place.

Quote:Bull. Shit.
Almost any case? Really? Almost every murder trial has a threat of public rioting? Are you sure about that? Almost all trials had mobs of people backed by public officials threatening to go ape while the details of jurors were widely available?
This is fantasy land now. Look, I get you all like the verdict. Fine, whatever. Don't care. But are we really humoring this as a counter-point? 

Lets be real, there is going to be a retrial and when it happens it won't be because Chauvin is innocent or guilty. That will have zero bearing. It will be because irresponsible asshats decided that political posturing and communicating the extent of their displeasure was more important than ensuring they didn't interfere with a fair trial. 
You should be just as bothered by this if not more as not only does it set a terrible precedent for how people should conduct themselves during any important trial but it could potentially give Chauvin the means to a reduced sentence when things have cooled down on him and the heat is on someone else

No this is what's bullshit.

(April 25, 2021 at 6:04 am)Reforged Wrote:

(April 24, 2021 at 11:08 pm)Bucky Ball Wrote: Exactly.
The threat of the public rioting is present in almost any case. 
It would be impossible to eliminate that risk today with 24 hour, instant world-wide news coverage. 
It's a non-argument, and if one were to accept the assumptions there, one could hold no trial, ever, ... and there has not been an alternative presented. 
Should they just have left Chauvin go on his merry way ? No one said justice is perfect. 9+ minutes on Floyd's neck makes him guilty, mob or no mob.

Bull. Shit.
Almost any case? Really? Almost every murder trial has a threat of public rioting? Are you sure about that? Almost all trials had mobs of people backed by public officials threatening to go ape while the details of jurors were widely available?
This is fantasy land now. Look, I get you all like the verdict. Fine, whatever. Don't care. But are we really humoring this as a counter-point? 

Lets be real, there is going to be a retrial and when it happens it won't be because Chauvin is innocent or guilty. That will have zero bearing. It will be because irresponsible asshats decided that political posturing and communicating the extent of their displeasure was more important than ensuring they didn't interfere with a fair trial. 
You should be just as bothered by this if not more as not only does it set a terrible precedent for how people should conduct themselves during any important trial but it could potentially give Chauvin the means to a reduced sentence when things have cooled down on him and the heat is on someone else.

What do you mean ‘there is going to be a re-trial’? There CAN’T be a re-trial - it simply isn’t possible. No mistrial was declared and there wasn’t a hung jury, so no re-trial.

Dafuq are you talking about?

Boru

(April 25, 2021 at 2:56 pm)SUNGULA Wrote:

Quote:Bull. Shit.
Almost any case? Really? Almost every murder trial has a threat of public rioting? Are you sure about that? Almost all trials had mobs of people backed by public officials threatening to go ape while the details of jurors were widely available?
This is fantasy land now. Look, I get you all like the verdict. Fine, whatever. Don't care. But are we really humoring this as a counter-point? 

Lets be real, there is going to be a retrial and when it happens it won't be because Chauvin is innocent or guilty. That will have zero bearing. It will be because irresponsible asshats decided that political posturing and communicating the extent of their displeasure was more important than ensuring they didn't interfere with a fair trial. 
You should be just as bothered by this if not more as not only does it set a terrible precedent for how people should conduct themselves during any important trial but it could potentially give Chauvin the means to a reduced sentence when things have cooled down on him and the heat is on someone else

No this is what's bullshit.

Your predictably knee-jerk five word response? They can both be. 
I'm sorry if I offended your new religion.

---

(April 25, 2021 at 3:07 pm)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote:

(April 25, 2021 at 6:04 am)Reforged Wrote: Bull. Shit.
Almost any case? Really? Almost every murder trial has a threat of public rioting? Are you sure about that? Almost all trials had mobs of people backed by public officials threatening to go ape while the details of jurors were widely available?
This is fantasy land now. Look, I get you all like the verdict. Fine, whatever. Don't care. But are we really humoring this as a counter-point? 

Lets be real, there is going to be a retrial and when it happens it won't be because Chauvin is innocent or guilty. That will have zero bearing. It will be because irresponsible asshats decided that political posturing and communicating the extent of their displeasure was more important than ensuring they didn't interfere with a fair trial. 
You should be just as bothered by this if not more as not only does it set a terrible precedent for how people should conduct themselves during any important trial but it could potentially give Chauvin the means to a reduced sentence when things have cooled down on him and the heat is on someone else.

What do you mean ‘there is going to be a re-trial’? There CAN’T be a re-trial - it simply isn’t possible. No mistrial was declared and there wasn’t a hung jury, so no re-trial.

Dafuq are you talking about?

Boru

The decision can be appealed based on the circumstances the verdict was reached in. 
Judge even said as much during the trial, go back and watch the part the defense brings up the lobbying.

(April 25, 2021 at 4:43 pm)Reforged Wrote:

(April 25, 2021 at 2:56 pm)SUNGULA Wrote: No this is what's bullshit.

Your predictably knee-jerk five word response? They can both be. 
I'm sorry if I offended your new religion.

---

(April 25, 2021 at 3:07 pm)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote: What do you mean ‘there is going to be a re-trial’? There CAN’T be a re-trial - it simply isn’t possible. No mistrial was declared and there wasn’t a hung jury, so no re-trial.

Dafuq are you talking about?

Boru

The decision can be appealed based on the circumstances the verdict was reached in. 
Judge even said as much during the trial, go back and watch the part the defense brings up the lobbying.

An appeal is not a retrial. In rare cases, an appeals court can order a new trial, but an appeal is essentially a review of the original trial done to make sure no mistakes were made and that the defendant’s rights were not violated. It is NOT a retrial.

Boru