All errors should be reported to DonSurber@gmail.com

Wednesday, March 10, 2021

Left will bully jurors

The trial of policeman Derek Chauvin in the death of George Floyd is off to a molasses-slow start. After 6 hours, the judge was able to approve only 3 jurors. Press accounts show why this will be the jury duty from hell.

The local newspaper reported, "The first juror seated, a white man, revealed he is a chemist who lives in Minneapolis and said because of his profession, 'I consider myself a pretty logical person. … I rely on facts and logic and what's in front of me. Opinion and facts are important distinctions for me.' "

What is this? The Dating Game?

Insider went further in intimidating the white male chemist, writing, "The first juror, a chemist in his 30s, lives in Minneapolis and is engaged to be married."

The message is clear. They know who you are, they know where you are, and they know who your friends and family are.

That is chilling because we know an acquittal means jurors will be doxxed. They will be named and shamed.

I do not know why the judge is allowing the selection process to be public. I suppose out of habit. We believe in public trials.

But a judge is supposed to protect jurors. Given the mob mentality in which mostly violent rioters destroyed a half-billion dollars in property to force the prosecution of Chauvin, the decision to not close jury selection places him and justice in danger.

The jury could easily be selected behind closed doors. The jury could easily watch the trial in the jury room by TV. The judge could easily shut off the feed at those times when he and the lawyers discuss matters that jurors should not hear.

The angry and self-righteous crowd screams justice for George Floyd but the Constitution requires justice for Derek Chauvin. The presumption of innocence is paramount. Lefty bullies want to remove that.

The whole world is watching, they declare.

Maybe it should not. There are some things the world ought not see. The identity of the jury of Chauvin's peers is not something the world should know. When you have a violent mob at the courthouse door (and the courthouse looks like a fortress) justice requires anonymity for the jury.

34 comments:

  1. They've already intimidated the justices of the SCOTUS, so they'll have no difficulties bullying a jury of mere citizens.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. normally I would agree with your logic (sounds correct) but on the other hand SCOTUS is full of leftist weaklings (only Alito and Thomas are the good ones), so bribing SCOTUS was an easy mark. Trying to get a law abiding citizen that stands for law and order I see as a much tougher mark. But because his life and his family's life is in jeopardy, the chemist could be intimated very easily. So its hard to say.

      Delete
  2. My brother’s daughter was supposed to be married in MPLS a year ago April. Then the Wuhan arrived. They moved it back a year. Two weeks ago we got an email saying that, because o the continued Wuhan threat, they are moving it again, to NEXT April. I’m wondering if the REAL reason is this trial. And shite, based on the story in Slate by Mr. Ismail and Big D’s outstanding work, I think it is. Hell, I wouldn’t fly there right now. Oh, and the ceremony’s supposed to take place in Ilhan Omar’s district. Fook that shite.

    ReplyDelete
  3. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  4. I was called for jury duty for a case involving a drive-by alleged gang shooting. I was number 9 or 10, and when they got to me, no one had been seated yet. The judge asked me if there was any reason I thought I shouldn't be seated. I said I was fine with being on the jury, but I thought that now that I had seen the defendant, whose name I didn't recognize, I should probably disclose I was a teacher in the school that had expelled him for bringing a weapon into school. I said it would not keep me from being able to be impartial, though. The judge dismissed the whole group. Apparently, I had prejudiced everyone. The judge said as the defendant hadn't recognized me, he must not have had very good attendance at school. Another strike against his "stellar reputation". But other people who were in my group were truly concerned about being on a jury in a gang shooting, and they were glad to be let go. I can only imagine what these people are going through.


    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I enjoyed you sharing your "jury" experience, Eleanor. I was a teacher also.

      Delete
    2. Worked with a guy whose mother was called for jury duty all the time, but never served on a jury.

      She was a psychiatrist.

      Delete
    3. My jury story. I was selected to be on the "jury" in a Special Court Martial for a drug case. When they called me in for the voir dire the first thing I was asked was did I know anyone in the room. I replied, "I know the defense attorney, he got one of my men on another ship off in a drug urinalysis case." I was out of there! He got the defendant off in that case, too.

      Delete
  5. a judge is supposed to protect jurors.

    Like judges are supposed to uphold the law? Like judges are supposed to hear cases - and evidence - regardless of political consequences?

    We'd be better off with Committees of Vigilance.

    ReplyDelete
  6. I have been a juror in a similar case and have some knowledge of the law, though not in this jurisdiction.

    Typically it's hard to get Cops convicted if they are acting in an official or semi-official context. Like arresting someone.

    With Cops you have to make the cop be seen as a bad actor AND you need to prove your case beyond a reasonable doubt. Proving the Cop is bad is only even remotely possible if you are in a county that has significant population that have had bad experiences with police officers.

    The default is almost always Cop is good and the dead perp is bad. And let's face it Floyd does not look like or have a history that make's him look the true victim.

    I know everyone is worried about this one. But if I were to make predictions just by media commentary. The Cop is on his way to full acquittal.

    The Press does not put jury selection under a microscope if the prosecution has a slam dunk case.

    This is another State top down 'step on the locals prosecution' that will end like Alvarez. The ghost of Janet Reno lives again.

    The BIG question is will the cop face double jeopardy via thug civil rights? Will Merrick do that?

    ReplyDelete
  7. I have been a juror in a similar case and have some knowledge of the law, though not in this jurisdiction.

    Typically it's hard to get Cops convicted if they are acting in an official or semi-official context. Like arresting someone.

    With Cops you have to make the cop be seen as a bad actor AND you need to prove your case beyond a reasonable doubt. Proving the Cop is bad is only even remotely possible if you are in a county that has significant population that have had bad experiences with police officers.

    The default is almost always Cop is good and the dead perp is bad. And let's face it Floyd does not look like or have a history that make's him look the true victim.

    I know everyone is worried about this one. But if I were to make predictions just by media commentary. The Cop is on his way to full acquittal.

    The Press does not put jury selection under a microscope if the prosecution has a slam dunk case.

    This is another State top down 'step on the locals prosecution' that will end like Alvarez. The ghost of Janet Reno lives again.

    The BIG question is will the cop face double jeopardy via thug civil rights? Will Merrick do that?

    ReplyDelete
  8. Will this judge be another Lance Into...cameras in the courtroom...attention whore?

    ReplyDelete
  9. at some point in the distant future, survivors will be able to look back and pinpoint when it all began to go wrong...wonder if this may be the point of no return, just glad I won't be around to see it happen

    ReplyDelete
  10. Not sure which I like more. Ed(cuck)utcher or Edoucher. Both are appropriate. Please stop with the Jeffery references. I understand there are a few on the Surbers blog that you may think are trolls, but you have called out many excellent contributors as trolls. Let it go and may peace be with you. STFU, Dick!

    ReplyDelete
  11. I was on a zoom jury recently (Feb 8-23rd) for a civil trial; I don't believe it would work well for a criminal trial.

    It was hard to tell who was lacking candor when watching them on a screen.

    Voir dire via zoom was far better for the jury.

    ReplyDelete
  12. We have a corrupt and inept Governor in a Communist Democrat state. The local elected officials are proud Marxists. The court system in this country is demonstrably biased. The death of a career felon, drug addict has been declared a hero by the apparatchik media. Do you think the accused officer has a Chinaman's chance in hell of getting a fair trial? There will be riots regardless of the events in the trial. New flat screens, Gucci purses, and Air Jordans all around. That is the way it is in Minnehaha in 2021.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. But I was told by Amy (Friendly Employer of the Year, 2020) Klobuchar that Minnesota Nice is REAL and not just, you know, a thing.

      Delete
    2. You know the thing. The Communist Democrats in Minnehaha and elsewhere for that matter would stab you in the throat, just to watch you bleed. Unlike the Republicans who prefer the more traditional stabbing in the back procedure. America Matters!

      Delete
  13. I would fear for my immediate and extended family if I was on that jury.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I would fear for my family if I lived in Murderopolis.

      Delete
  14. Who would want to be a juror on the George Floyd trial?

    Think Julie Swetnick, the histrionic personality disorder type.

    Think Ilhan Omar/Ocasio-Cortez opportunist wannabe.

    Think nihilists, Identity-Socialist true believers.




    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. But illegals don't/won't/can't pay taxes.....?

      Delete
  15. It's not hard to get out of a jury.
    Providing the obvious "wrong" answers to the softball questions is easy.
    Want to get off the Floyd jury?
    Announce to the court that you don't like blacks, making sure to use the "N" word.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. But seriously, we can do better. Point out that Prosecutors only take 2 types of cases - slam dunk guilties, or politicized lynchings like this one. Just declare you reject their corrupt system infected with activist judges who doxx their juries. You cannot in good conscience ever vote guilty and subject a fellow human to that system. With any luck you’ll get the whole group dismissed. Full Disclosure: I was on a manslaughter jury and pointed out the pivotal facts in the end that helped us reach a Guilty verdict. Never again. Not for these courts.

      Delete
  16. All those potential jurors have to do is declare that the defendant is guilty and that they will vote that way if put on the panel. The judge cannot justify keeping that person on and he'd have a hard time justifying any penalty for them saying so. As long as they don't reveal that they're doing that to get out of jury duty the judges hands are tied and he must dismiss them. If he doesn't the defense will do it for him.

    It's time that we all start doing some creative jurying. I'm talking about doing some down to earth common sense jury nullification. If they're going to violate the laws then demand we obey then they can take the consequences of a rebellious citizenry.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Exactly! Judge may try to shame you. Stick to your guns. Remember they don’t have the moral high ground anymore. They’re as bad as US journalists.

      Delete
  17. My first/last/only jury duty call as a Jeffersonian Libertine was in 1984. :) Just let 'em know in NO uncertain terms....

    ReplyDelete
  18. I hope there's an acquittal and Minneapolis burns to the ground. The a33hats that run that place deserve it. All you innocent civilians ... evacuate now! Permanently. The rest of you, enjoy living among the ruins.

    ReplyDelete
  19. I was called twice and sat jury once. If the defendant had listened to his lawyer and not testified, I would have voted not guilty as the state had not proved anything. The defendant insisted on testifying and quickly convinced me and all the other jurors that he was guilty.
    I find it very hard to believe that I would vote to convict Chauvin. Floyd appears to have lethally overdosed himself before ever meeting Chauvin, and Chauvin appears to have been following all trained procedures; they tried to seat him upright in the squad car; he wouldn't do it and asked to lay down... The officers had the misfortune to be present in Floyd's life. Floyd's life was a tragedy mostly self inflicted which has now been inflicted on all of us by a ruthless lying press/political faction/politicized prosecution.

    ReplyDelete
  20. Breast enhancement surgery Discovering nightlife in Seoul is anything but a troublesome assignment. Wherever you go, you will see Koreans, expats, companions, couples, understudies and financial specialists celebrating it up.

    ReplyDelete