As it should be. To convict an innocent man harms him. To acquit a guilty man harms no one.
Based on, but not the same as. Basically it means for our system to err on the side of acquittal instead of conviction, not to follow that ratio exactly.
But let’s say it is just blackstone’s formulation. Is it really fair to convict even 1 innocent person? How do you decide the acceptable percentage, and how do you apply that percentage toward a verdict?
Seems subjective. It seems it would come down to what the juror values.
If that is truly the case why do we have a justice system at all? If no one is harmed by acquitting a guilty person, why convict anyone? It’s only risking harm.
So would you feel as uncomfortable delivering a Not Guilty vote, as you would a Guilty vote? Remember, a not guilty verdict cannot be appealed and is final even if guilt proving evidence comes to light later.
What happens if a juror refuses to vote either way? Are they replaced?
I couldn’t vote either way until I was convinced of guilty, and if that didn’t happen, it would be not guilty. I think it would be the same difficulty. If I have to play with probabilities (that are likely to be true, but not proven) to come to guilty, well then I wouldn’t be convinced, and would vote not guilty.
2 Likes
So you would be ok letting tge dude you are 95% sure is a child diddler go back to his kids and house near the elementary school, with no repurcussions or safeguards? Ugh. Bad choices all around.
I get where you are coming from philosophically, but damn. A NG verdict for a guilty person can in many cases cause more harm to more people than a G verdict for an innocent person. But coincidences do exist and unlikely things do happen. I’m glad I’m not a juror. Really heavy shit to think about after hearing emotional testimony from victims and suspect.
At least for me, I am convinced or I am not. The question is not guilty or guilty, not innocent or guilty. I don’t have to be convinced the defendant is innocent to vote not guilty (and I believe the system was set up like that intentionally). I do need to be convinced the defendant is guilty to vote guilty.
2 Likes
This trial was big enough that practically anybody who didn’t want to be on the jury would have been easily able to disqualify himself on the questionnaire. That means that the only people who got on the jury wanted to be there or had been living in a hole for the last year. Considering these people live in Minneapolis and weren’t going to anonymous forever, it’s hard to see someone wanting to take the hit for Chauvin. That leaves people who wanted to be on the jury in order to convict (or maybe a few attention junkies). Frankly, this is a huge problem with the jury selection process in general.
I would argue that you might have a better chance at a fair trial if you just chose a certain number of people at random to sit on the jury. Maybe increase the size of the jury a little and decrease the requirement for unanimity to 90% or so. So maybe 20 jurors and 18 have to agree for a decision in either direction.
1 Like
In this case, it might have made sense to request the judge make the call (a bench trial). I don’t know if that can be done in all cases.
I think Clarence Darrow did it way back in the day. His clients were guilty of torturing, and killing a boy for fun (there was basically no way they were getting not guilty). He was almost certain that the jury as a group would recommend the death penalty. He thought it would be a lot harder for a single person to make the call on the death penalty, so he requested the judge make the call. His clients got life in prison.
Edit: I think he had his clients plead guilty, which removed the jury from sentencing, then in the sentencing hearing he made the case his clients were boys (17 and 18) and not mentally well. They ended up with life in prison +99 years.
I did find it interesting that Chauvin had like 30 complaints on file against him, but he was still on the streets and even Training New Officers.
During the trial I was wondering if that would come up in any way, especially when Chauvin’s supervisor and the chief were testifying. It’s kind of hard to say you don’t approve of dudes actions when you’ve allowed them to go on for years. So I can get where you’re coming from.
But I don’t agree about “The System” being on trial with Chauvin. That evil dude knew Floyd had no pulse, (while handcuffed) and continued on with his choke hold (while jerking himself off). He wasn’t acting as a cop or a representative of anything at that point.
Also, how about the confidence of Chauvin’s lawyer?! The whole state is lining up to bury his client, and he’s like, “it’s cool, I can get you out of this.”
1 Like
I think the Devil is in the details when it comes to complaints. Anyone can file a police complaint for any reason. Even this cunt.
4 Likes
Aboriginal Europeans really are out of control.
Well it looks like she’s of more African heritage than European, but she’d be a total rotten cunt no matter where her ancestors are from.
She filed a complaint against this officer, which presumably gets tallied up. Imagine dealing with 8 more assholes like this and making one legit mistake that deserved a complaint. You’d have 10 complaints on your record, all but one from rotten cunts and stupid assholes.
She’s also a teacher who presumably spends a great deal of time putting ideas into children’s heads.
Here’s a longer video where you can see it better and hear more of her cuntish behavior and the totally professional conduct of the officer. Good job, Mexican Racist!
1 Like
That is ill behavior! The first story said she filed some kind of harassment suit too.
Good thing that deputy had his own body cam. I guess the sheriff dudes probably compare stories of the biggest assholes they run in to, just like waiters/bartenders. The footage must be fun.
1 Like
People who work in bars get this behavior too, which is why I can empathize.
I have many complaints against my conduct as a doorman, but luckily the informal system of dive bar complaint tracking doesn’t keep a tally that will be held against me at a later time. Plus the owner had my back 100 percent and I was on film.
Every single one of them was bullshit from a drunk, high and/or aggressively-behaving asshole. I stand by my conduct. No assault charges, no lawsuits, no anything except doing my bar job when the fun turned to trouble. I’m not saying that’s the case with Chauvin and his 30 complaints over 20 or so years, I’m just saying you have to take a number like that with a HUGE grain of salt.
I don’t blame the Mexican Racist cop at all for getting a body cam on his own dime, now proven to be a really smart move on his part. If not for the body cam, the narrative would take-off.
Innocent black teacher harassed and threatened by racist cop.
San Dimas High School Football Rules!
2 Likes
While there MAY be a tiny chance she’s conservative, this is likely just one more example of racism by a leftist.
1 Like
Wow you guys are really divided! Leftists would probably think it’s the opposite. Everything is left or right with you guys.
I dunno man, I think being a grade A cunt like that bitch is an apolitical trait. Would be great if the cop maced her and no one cared.
3 Likes
Sure, we are, but that’s because in a two party system everyone gets fucked and that’s how we like it over here. Once you make it a threesome, there’s always a chance that two parties get properly fucked but one somehow escapes that outcome.
Remember how awkward it all was when Ross Perot joined in?
.
That cop owned her as badly as she could possibly be owned in a situation like that. I wouldn’t be surprised if she knew that San Dimas (Yeah, San Dimas!!!) cops weren’t issued body cams.
1 Like