Chauvin trial bias
From Conservapedia
This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Aschlafly (Talk | contribs) at 02:06, May 12, 2021. It may differ significantly from current revision.
Chauvin trial bias refers to one-sided flaws in the jury trial of Derek Chauvin in April 2021, when was declared guilty of murder and all charges for his on-duty role in restraining George Floyd as he failed to cooperate with an arrest.
Sources of bias include:
- the revelation that one juror did not disclose during jury selection his prior participation, while wearing a provocative Black Lives Matter "Get Your Knee Off Our Necks" T-shirt, in a rally in D.C..[1]
- the failure by the attorney purporting to defend Chauvin to specifically raise this issue in a post-trial motion for a new trial.
- crackpot testimony by a medical "expert" for the prosecution, who invented a wacky, fringe theory of "positional asphyxiation" due to a light man (Chauvin weighed only about 140 pounds) kneeling on the shoulder blade of a much heavier man (the muscular, former football lineman George Floyd weighed 230 pounds or so).
- allowing the prosecution medical "expert" to lead the jurors through a self-examination procedure which unjustifiably led them to believe his off-the-wall medical claims about "positional asphyxiation."
- prejudicial public statements by elected officials, such as Rep. Maxine Waters and President Joe Biden, before the jury rendered its verdict.
- the inadequacy of the questionnaire used to screen biased jurors, which asked only a few general questions without specific ones probing for bias.
- the repetitive playing of the upsetting video during Floyd died of unknown causes, as determined by the official autopsy.
- the lack of a retail business owner or similar potential victim of city crime on the jury.
- the calling of 38 witnesses over 11 days by the prosecution, compared with only 7 witnesses over 2 days for the defense.
- the listing of 400 potential witnesses by the prosecution, which makes it difficult for a defense to focus on cross-examining the smaller group (less than 10%) of witnesses who are called.
