UJRefugees.net

its going to be a shit show anyway you spin it...what if they find another juror with the same issue? look. i am not a fan of the cop. fuck him. i have also been the victim of a trial that went the wrong way because of lies. i am partial because the legal system is broken. the dude is wearing a blm shirt and hat and serving as a juror on the case the drove the blm movement. its not a small issue

And the spot that lying POS took was the one that could have been for a jurist unafraid of a manslaughter conviction.

I would hope something happens here. There need to be consequences for that type of thing.

Stapes wrote: ↑Tue May 04, 2021 3:28 pm

AnalHamster wrote: ↑Tue May 04, 2021 3:25 pm

pork wrote: ↑Tue May 04, 2021 3:07 pm one of the jurors lied about not knowing the case. there is a picture of him wearing a blm shirt at a blm rally last year. guess whos going to get their conviction thrown out?

No he didn't, he informed them he'd discussed the case with friends and family. Would have been petty near impossible to find a panel who hadn't heard of the case.

I'm not 100% sure but from what I read they had a questionnaire that asked if he attended any marches or rallys and he said no...... If that is true that could be reason for an appeal but still very hard to overturn a conviction

It asked if jurors or anyone close to them had attended protests specially against police brutality. The picture is from a march commemorating MLK. I really doubt this is anywhere near the standard for a retrial.

i think your assessment is wrong. it shows bias. if it was in his house at easter or it is at a rally its shows how biased he could be based on a preconceived notion of the events.

CHEEZY17 wrote: ↑Tue May 04, 2021 3:44 pm I would hope something happens here. There need to be consequences for that type of thing.

there are definitely consequences for that type of thing.

Perjury is a willful act of dishonesty while under oath, and can include any verbal or written statement. The offense is considered serious because deceit can unfairly influence results in criminal proceedings, which weakens the power of American courts. In order to administer criminal justice, courts rely on the integrity of witnesses, attorneys, judges, and juror. As such, every party to a trial is sworn in to testify truthfully or face the penalty of perjury. Even though potential jurors have not yet heard the facts of the case or put into a position to influence the outcome, they face perjury charges if they mislead the court.

Depending on how severe a judge thinks the lie was, it could mean a 2 to 10 year prison sentence.

AnalHamster wrote: ↑Tue May 04, 2021 3:49 pm

Stapes wrote: ↑Tue May 04, 2021 3:28 pm

AnalHamster wrote: ↑Tue May 04, 2021 3:25 pm

pork wrote: ↑Tue May 04, 2021 3:07 pm one of the jurors lied about not knowing the case. there is a picture of him wearing a blm shirt at a blm rally last year. guess whos going to get their conviction thrown out?

No he didn't, he informed them he'd discussed the case with friends and family. Would have been petty near impossible to find a panel who hadn't heard of the case.

I'm not 100% sure but from what I read they had a questionnaire that asked if he attended any marches or rallys and he said no...... If that is true that could be reason for an appeal but still very hard to overturn a conviction

It asked if jurors or anyone close to them had attended protests specially against police brutality. The picture is from a march commemorating MLK. I really doubt this is anywhere near the standard for a retrial.

The picture was from August 31st. The jury selection was started in the first of March 2021. That's 6 months. You really think he just forgot about that?

Animal wrote: ↑Tue May 04, 2021 3:59 pm

AnalHamster wrote: ↑Tue May 04, 2021 3:49 pm

Stapes wrote: ↑Tue May 04, 2021 3:28 pm

AnalHamster wrote: ↑Tue May 04, 2021 3:25 pm

pork wrote: ↑Tue May 04, 2021 3:07 pm one of the jurors lied about not knowing the case. there is a picture of him wearing a blm shirt at a blm rally last year. guess whos going to get their conviction thrown out?

No he didn't, he informed them he'd discussed the case with friends and family. Would have been petty near impossible to find a panel who hadn't heard of the case.

I'm not 100% sure but from what I read they had a questionnaire that asked if he attended any marches or rallys and he said no...... If that is true that could be reason for an appeal but still very hard to overturn a conviction

It asked if jurors or anyone close to them had attended protests specially against police brutality. The picture is from a march commemorating MLK. I really doubt this is anywhere near the standard for a retrial.

The picture was from August 31st. The jury selection was started in the first of March 2021. That's 6 months. You really think he just forgot about that?

He doesn't appear to have been asked about it. You can have a look at the questionnaire yourself.
https://mncourts.gov/mncourtsgov/media/ ... 222020.pdf

A march to commemorate the MLK speech is not a march to protest police brutality. He answered the 'how are you disposed toward BLM' question with 'very favourably' and the blue lives matter question 'neutral'. He wasn't asked about t-shirts or hats. I think it would take a lot more than has been reported so far to get a retrial.

AnalHamster wrote: ↑Tue May 04, 2021 4:07 pm
He doesn't appear to have been asked about it. You can have a look at the questionnaire yourself.
https://mncourts.gov/mncourtsgov/media/ ... 222020.pdf

A march to commemorate the MLK speech is not a march to protest police brutality. He answered the 'how are you disposed toward BLM' question with 'very favourably' and the blue lives matter question 'neutral'. He wasn't asked about t-shirts or hats. I think it would take a lot more than has been reported so far to get a retrial.

You are seriously going to go with that?

Thousands are gathered in Washington DC to commemorate the 1963 civil rights March on Washington and in protest of police violence.

The families of black Americans shot or killed by police will speak at the same site where Martin Luther King Jr delivered his I Have a Dream speech.

Friday's event is called the Commitment March: Get Your Knee Off Our Necks, a reference to George Floyd's death.

It follows renewed protests over the police shooting of Jacob Blake.

The relatives of Mr Blake, Mr Floyd, Breonna Taylor and Eric Garner are expected to deliver speeches at the march.

And this was the question on the questionnaire?

12. Other than what you have already described above, have you, or anyone close to you,
participated in protests about police use of force or police brutality?  Yes  No

here is my 2 cents on it. the blue line shifted against the asshole cop. now that this is popping up it could have severely adverse consequences on future cases involving the blue line. the police unions will come out of the woodwork to appeal the conviction because of the precedence this case has set. was this cop an asshole cocksucker...yes. was he convicted by a jury...yes. did the jury lie and were they partial...yes. this fact can be a big issue for future cases. i am guessing the unions will fight hard to get the conviction overturned or future cases can have juror fraud without consequences and cops will not get fair trials. there is alot more to this than just a tshirt and a hat

Animal wrote: ↑Tue May 04, 2021 4:29 pm

AnalHamster wrote: ↑Tue May 04, 2021 4:07 pm
He doesn't appear to have been asked about it. You can have a look at the questionnaire yourself.
https://mncourts.gov/mncourtsgov/media/ ... 222020.pdf

A march to commemorate the MLK speech is not a march to protest police brutality. He answered the 'how are you disposed toward BLM' question with 'very favourably' and the blue lives matter question 'neutral'. He wasn't asked about t-shirts or hats. I think it would take a lot more than has been reported so far to get a retrial.

You are seriously going to go with that?

Thousands are gathered in Washington DC to commemorate the 1963 civil rights March on Washington and in protest of police violence.

The families of black Americans shot or killed by police will speak at the same site where Martin Luther King Jr delivered his I Have a Dream speech.

Friday's event is called the Commitment March: Get Your Knee Off Our Necks, a reference to George Floyd's death.

It follows renewed protests over the police shooting of Jacob Blake.

The relatives of Mr Blake, Mr Floyd, Breonna Taylor and Eric Garner are expected to deliver speeches at the march.

And this was the question on the questionnaire?

12. Other than what you have already described above, have you, or anyone close to you,
participated in protests about police use of force or police brutality?  Yes  No

The NAACP billed it simply as a march to commemorate the match on Washington and the speech. If he understood it to be about that then that's not a lie, whether you agree with his assessment or not.

AnalHamster wrote: ↑Tue May 04, 2021 4:33 pm
The NAACP billed it simply as a march to commemorate the match on Washington and the speech. If he understood it to be about that then that's not a lie, whether you agree with his assessment or not.

I think his assessment is pretty clear based on the choice of T shirt he decided to buy. Keep swinging, though. You look real smart.

Animal wrote: ↑Tue May 04, 2021 4:41 pm

AnalHamster wrote: ↑Tue May 04, 2021 4:33 pm
The NAACP billed it simply as a march to commemorate the match on Washington and the speech. If he understood it to be about that then that's not a lie, whether you agree with his assessment or not.

I think his assessment is pretty clear based on the choice of T shirt he decided to buy. Keep swinging, though. You look real smart.

The one with the big picture of MLK on it. Uh huh.

Well, time will tell. Chauvin would only get convicted again in any case, really hard to argue against that video.

AnalHamster wrote: ↑Tue May 04, 2021 4:48 pm

Animal wrote: ↑Tue May 04, 2021 4:41 pm

AnalHamster wrote: ↑Tue May 04, 2021 4:33 pm
The NAACP billed it simply as a march to commemorate the match on Washington and the speech. If he understood it to be about that then that's not a lie, whether you agree with his assessment or not.

I think his assessment is pretty clear based on the choice of T shirt he decided to buy. Keep swinging, though. You look real smart.

The one with the big picture of MLK on it. Uh huh.

Well, time will tell. Chauvin would only get convicted again in any case, really hard to argue against that video.

Yeah, the first thing that catches your eye on that T-shirt is the commemoration of an MLK speech.

Well yes, it is. Pretty famous photo among us woke folk.

AnalHamster wrote: ↑Tue May 04, 2021 4:52 pm Well yes, it is. Pretty famous photo among us woke folk.

I don't remember mlk saying get your knee off our necks. Is that in his I have a dream speech.

i would be a little suspicious about one thing in that picture, though. He references 3 people in the picture. His son, his nephew, and his brother. And yet there are only 3 people in the picture.

Does that mean that he isn't even in the picture? And this "news story" floating around is actually a pic of his brother?

The juror is the nephew, the tweeter isn't in the picture.

AnalHamster wrote: ↑Tue May 04, 2021 5:17 pm The juror is the nephew, the tweeter isn't in the picture.

So, wait. The tweeter is tweeting about his Brother, His Son, and his nephew. So his "nephew" is the guy that was on the jury and is the guy that is wearing the MLK Knee on Neck shirt.

That means, the tweeter's brother (uncle to the MLK shirt guy) is the MLK t shirt guy's father? And the short kid in the middle is his same generation cousin?

His Brotha, not his brother. You just ain't down with the jive talk homie. The juror is the one in the hat and t-shirt on the right, which he does not dispute. I'm assuming calling them the next generation means none of them are actually the tweeter's sibling.

all political bs aside...do any of you think that its ok the guy lied on his juror form and took part in a march that had to do with the movement that was the epicenter of the case? guilty or not...this is a huge issue. knowing what we now know...was it a fair unbiased trial?

i believe the conviction will get tossed out and there will be a new trial. i also believe the juror will be in a shit load of trouble that will further divide our country

If he attended it as a commemoration of the march and speech MLK made, then he did not lie. I seriously doubt he's at risk of any more than a telling off from the judge if it even comes up.

It is downright amazing the jumping through hoops and leaps being taken to excuse murder by police. This is one of the reasons why police misconduct is rarely punished.

im not sure i know your background very well or what your experiences are with the court system...this isnt a telling you off by the judge situation. this is a persons life in jail for 40 years over a potential lie. its a really big deal. it doesn't matter what the person intent was at the rally the fact he lied to the court is a big problem. if he took the chair of a person that would have said there was doubt that it was murder changes the outcome. if this guy was going to vote for murder no matter what its a problem and one that cant be supported or denied. he committed perjury which in itself has huge implications.

this is why the court system is so fucked up. what if blm got to this guy and there is more to the story...we will never know. what we do know is the guy lied which can get the conviction kicked out. i am in favor of the conviction btw...i hope it sticks.

dot wrote: ↑Tue May 04, 2021 6:10 pm It is downright amazing the jumping through hoops and leaps being taken to excuse murder by police. This is one of the reasons why police misconduct is rarely punished.

a juror lying to get on a jury isn't exactly leaping through hoops, you stupid fuck.