Chauvin juror lied in pretrial questioning

[dunefan]

https://www.yahoo.com/news/chauvin-juror...18703.html

Some people are dumb as rocks.  Mistrial will happen now.  At least there is a better chance for a riot now so there is that.

[Alabuckeye]

Yep....I could very well see a mistrial declared on appeal.

[Georgem80]

Very interesting turn of events. I have no idea how this will play out.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[3rdgensooner]

In the story he says he doesn't remember owning the T-shirt he was pictured in. It's always amazing how blatantly some people will lie.

[P1tchblack]

Yep....I could very well see a mistrial declared on appeal.

There should be a mistrial.

[davebucknut]

Yep....I could very well see a mistrial declared on appeal.

There should be a mistrial.

Wow pitch with some common sense!

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

[wydileie]

There's just no way, at this point, that Chauvin doesn't get a second trial. As I said before, I simply don't know how he could ever get a fair trial, and I have no idea how that problem can be solved, so this should be interesting moving forward. It is a true test of our justice system.

[Erhino]

I would like to think this would not cause a miss trial. There are 11 other jurors that had to reach consensus so one out of line should not throw out the entire process.

If it shows the prosecutors knew this, or supported it, or there are others That would make the entire jury tainted then it should be thrown out.

[davebucknut]

I would like to think this would not cause a miss trial. There are 11 other jurors that had to reach consensus so one out of line should not throw out the entire process.

If it shows the prosecutors knew this, or supported it, or there are others That would make the entire jury tainted then it should be thrown out.

Don't forget Mad Max and he rioters.

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

[dunefan]

I would like to think this would not cause a miss trial. There are 11 other jurors that had to reach consensus so one out of line should not throw out the entire process.

If it shows the prosecutors knew this, or supported it, or there are others That would make the entire jury tainted then it should be thrown out.

Not how it is supposed to work.  You lie on a questionnaire and you will be disqualified if it is found out.  This will be a mistrial.

[Erhino]

I would like to think this would not cause a miss trial. There are 11 other jurors that had to reach consensus so one out of line should not throw out the entire process.

If it shows the prosecutors knew this, or supported it, or there are others That would make the entire jury tainted then it should be thrown out.

Not how it is supposed to work.  You lie on a questionnaire and you will be disqualified if it is found out.  This will be a mistrial.

That would be one out if twelve. That would be an insane waste of resources. The trial prolly cost 20-30 million. Throw the jurors vote out, still 11-0.

[Alabuckeye]

If this would have been found during trial, he is dismissed and an alternate takes his place.

I'm surprised the court system didn't vet social media to anticipate this and address it. That would be appropriate.

[Dzone1]

No question, new trial.

[3rdgensooner]

A larger problem is witnesses with regards to a fair trial. Clearly they were unable to find expert witnesses to counter the prosecution's witnesses effectively. There is no question it's because no one wants to go on the record. One of the ones who did was targeted. And there are huge medical questions and issues with the prosecution's case that simply were not addressed.

[dunefan]

I would like to think this would not cause a miss trial. There are 11 other jurors that had to reach consensus so one out of line should not throw out the entire process.

If it shows the prosecutors knew this, or supported it, or there are others That would make the entire jury tainted then it should be thrown out.

Not how it is supposed to work.  You lie on a questionnaire and you will be disqualified if it is found out.  This will be a mistrial.

That would be one out if twelve. That would be an insane waste of resources. The trial prolly cost 20-30 million. Throw the jurors vote out, still 11-0.

Unfortunately, or fortunately, you need twelve (honest?) jurors to agree.  We've been doing it this way for a long time and I don't see any exceptions being made because it cost too much to have another trial.  What if it were you, your son, wife or daughter in the hot seat?  I think we both know the answer.