aggiehawg said:

---

State passes for cause. He's on the jury.

Cahill says that's the 15th. Reason he wanted an extra was to make sure at least 14 showed up on Monday. He also indicated this last juror was bill dismissed if the 14 preceding him all show.

So yet another iteration of how he will address the alternate juror situation.

And we're done. Court is in recess until 9:00am Monday morning.

---

Bondag said:

---

aggiehawg said:

---

State passes for cause. He's on the jury.

Cahill says that's the 15th. Reason he wanted an extra was to make sure at least 14 showed up on Monday. He also indicated this last juror was bill dismissed if the 14 preceding him all show.

So yet another iteration of how he will address the alternate juror situation.

And we're done. Court is in recess until 9:00am Monday morning.

---

Seems stupid to make that public. How many jurors will show up now?

---

Quote:

---

Duke University has launched an investigation after a student found a copy of George Floyd's toxicology report posted on a bulletin board commemorating Black History Month.

"A printout of George Floyd's toxicology report was hung beside a photo of his face on a Black History Month-themed bulletin board on the third floor of Brown dorm" on March 20, the student newspaper The Chronicle said.

"We are completely aligned with the idea that a person who causes harm to others in this community and elsewhere should be held accountable," Dean of Students John Blackshear said at a meeting with residents of the Brown Residence Hall. The dean said information had been turned over to the Office of Student Conduct and Community Standards.

---

aggiehawg said:

---

State passes for cause. He's on the jury.

Cahill says that's the 15th. Reason he wanted an extra was to make sure at least 14 showed up on Monday. He also indicated this last juror was bill dismissed if the 14 preceding him all show.

So yet another iteration of how he will address the alternate juror situation.

And we're done. Court is in recess until 9:00am Monday morning.

---

aginlakeway said:

---

aggiehawg said:

---

State passes for cause. He's on the jury.

Cahill says that's the 15th. Reason he wanted an extra was to make sure at least 14 showed up on Monday. He also indicated this last juror was bill dismissed if the 14 preceding him all show.

So yet another iteration of how he will address the alternate juror situation.

And we're done. Court is in recess until 9:00am Monday morning.

---

New official thread then?

---

Quote:

---

Court TV has compiled a retrospective on the jurors each side has removed through peremptory strikes. The talking heads of CourtTV are in search of a racial angle. The jurors struck by Schleicher on behalf of the State are all white. The jurors struck by Nelson make up a rainbow coalition adverse to Chauvin in one way or another, but I don't think that's quite how Court TV put it.

---

Keegan99 said:

---

Not a single white male over 40.

Chauvin is playing from behind.

---

third coast.. said:

---

How was #9 allowed to be on this jury

---

Quote:

---

Frankly, my sense was that the defense did not do a great job on voir dire.

In the context of the two jurors that the defense used peremptory strikes to exclude, I thought there were reasonable arguments to be made to exclude those jurors for cause, which would have saved those two precious peremptory strikes for later in the jury selection process.

Further, I found one of the accepted jurors, Juror #9, to be completely insincere in her claims that she could be unbiased and impartial in this case. She frankly struck me as someone who was activist in intent, especially given her explicit excitementalmost exuberancein being chosen for this jury, and precisely the kind of person the defense should most fear being empaneled on the jury.

There were prospective jurors of a similar vibe who attempted to get on the Zimmerman jury, but were exposed by the defense before they could be empaneled. Had those people been on the Zimmerman jury, an acquittal would have been out of the question, as they were committed to Zimmerman's conviction regardless of law or evidence.

I had a very similar sense from Juror #9but each of you can listen to her voir dire yourselves, in the videos above, and make your own call.

---

schwack schwack said:

---

Changing subject. I caught the end of a segment on Court TV yesterday. I think they were talking about the Prosecution bringing in some complaints about Chauvin's past, similar "knee on neck" situations.

If true, could it actually work in Chauvin's favor? In that he was following MPD procedure & people that weren't all drugged up didn't die?

---

SEATAC Aggie said:

---

Is Chauvin's only prayer a mistral?

---

Quote:

---

Yes, it takes two reporters to write a story this bad. The facts of the case are subsumed to the passion play the Star Tribune promotes.

The central issue in the case is undoubtedly the cause of George Floyd's death. Floyd was very high on fentanyl and meth when he was placed under arrest. Floyd's state of inebriation contributed to his death. In the case against Chauvin the prosecution seeks to prove that Chauvin's restraint of Floyd was also a substantial contributing factor in his death.

Forgrave and Rao dispense with the facts in favor of symbolism: "The trial itself is about what happened that May evening, but it will also be a vessel into which a splintered society places its rage, anxieties and hopes. Like the trial after Rodney King's beating, like the trial after Emmett Till's murder, like the Scottsboro Boys' trial, this case will be viewed as another chapter perhaps a turning point in America's racial history."

The facts of the case have gone missing. They are absent from the Star Tribune story along with the question whether Chauvin can get justice in Hennepin Country from an impartial jury in the face of publicity like this and in the face of the threats to the safety of the community that lie in the very near background. Reporter Reid Forgrave makes me ask (sorry), after such knowledge what Forgraveness?

---

Quote:

---

My interest in the case is in the question of justice. The Star Tribune's interest is elsewhere. Among the stories they have overlooked is the State's use of a jury consultant who has appeared in court every day "assisting the prosecution." Her name is Christina Marianakis. The average juror in this case arrived with a negative impression of Chauvin. I don't think Marianakis really had much to do. The challenge is all on the other side, not that you would know that if you get your news from the Star Tribune or its like elsewhere.

---

Quote:

---

There is a late breaking press freedom issue in the case. The Daily Mail published the body cam footage that was on file with the court in the case after it was copied by someone in violation of the terms set by the court for access to it. The court has subsequently denied the Daily Mail media credentials to cover the case. The court order barring the Daily Mail was just reduced to writing last week and is posted online here along with the Daily Mail's email correspondence with the court.

On Friday the Daily Mail filed a writ of prohibition with the Minnesota Court of Appeals seeking to have the court order set aside. The Daily Mail's petition is posted online here. Based on the Daily Mail's petition, I think the court order is likely to be set aside in due course.

---

SEATAC Aggie said:

---

Is Chauvin's only prayer a mistral?

---

eric76 said:

---

SEATAC Aggie said:

---

Is Chauvin's only prayer a mistral?

---

A change of venue, perhaps.

---

Fore Left! said:

---

That ship has sailed. He'll first need a mistrial at this point.

---

eric76 said:

---

Fore Left! said:

---

That ship has sailed. He'll first need a mistrial at this point.

---

If it becomes clear to the judge during the trial that a change of venue is necessary, it is too late to do so?

I guess it could be that if things go crazy, he could declare a mistrial and then issue an order to change the venue.

---

aggiehawg said:

---

eric76 said:

---

Fore Left! said:

---

That ship has sailed. He'll first need a mistrial at this point.

---

If it becomes clear to the judge during the trial that a change of venue is necessary, it is too late to do so?

I guess it could be that if things go crazy, he could declare a mistrial and then issue an order to change the venue.

---

Once the jury is sworn in tomorrow morning, jeopardy attaches. To retry him would require a mistrial.

---

eric76 said:

---

Let's hope that the jury is allowed by the court to see all the evidence and that the members of the jury have enough integrity to consider the evidence in an honest manner.

---

aggiehawg said:

---

Branca has summarized the jurors in a handy chart.



He also posted the video of the voir dire for each of them. HERE

---