The Trial of Derek Chauvin - Judgement(?) Day(?) has arrived!

[DeadFish]

It's really hard when every single prominent media outlet and journalist is basically saying that Floyd was murdered and only the "alt-right white supremacists" disagree with them.

Like I've said, I have older relatives that ONLY get their news from CNN. Whatever CNN reports is the truth to them and everything else is a conspiracy because of course if it was true then CNN would report it.

The media is the problem. If there was only a wide spread computer virus to take them out....

 

[Gehenna]

Not sure if I saw a post of what exactly Tobin said that made people believe it could cause a mistrial, so here it is in words from here. AFB is the author/lawyer on the blog

Spoiler: pix of words

View attachment 2089795
View attachment 2089823
View attachment 2089797
More testimony blah blah blah
View attachment 2089799
View attachment 2089801
View attachment 2089802
View attachment 2089803
View attachment 2089804

edit: added a pic and wording 4 clarity

second edit: Adding what Tobin was and was not allowed to discuss. The prosecution "happened" upon tests results of CO in Floyd's blood last night. They wanted to introduce this evidence today. Ultimately the judge denied this but allowed Tobin to speak on other things as a rebuttal. This was before the jury was in, so jury is unaware of CO lab results. Therefore, the test results cannot be brought up in front of the jury.
View attachment 2090039

That is -blatant- Brady material. To inform people here of what Brady is: https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/brady_rule

Let us note somethings: "If the prosecution does not disclose material exculpatory evidence under this rule, and prejudice has ensued, the evidence will be suppressed. The evidence will be suppressed regardless of whether the prosecutor knew the evidence was in his or her possession, or whether or not the prosecutor intentionally or inadvertently withheld the evidence from the defense."

" The second aspect is that it is not a sufficiency of evidence test, and the defendant only has to show that the favorable evidence could reasonably be taken to put the whole case in such a different light as to undermine the confidence in the verdict. Third aspect is that there is no need for a harmless error review, because a Brady violation, by definition, could not be treated as a harmless error. "

Isnt hiding ("we didnt share it because you didnt ask even though you asked for everything") the blood oxygen levels in a case where you're arguing someone was STRANGLED to death and couldn't breathe like... actually illegal?

See above.

I

its not illegal, it puts the defense in a weak position but its up to the lawyer to figure it out and object.

if chauvin gets off, it speaks to nelson's ability as a lawyer, especiallt since the state hired 15 private attourneys to prosecute its case.

Also see above.

If there is a mistrial, then that just means we have to do this all over again, right? Would Nelson want to subject himself to that torment, or would it be a good idea because he would get a chance for a do-over while knowing exactly what tricks the prosecution will pull?

NO! A Brady violation, as set out by the Brady requirements above, is automatically a serious violation. Mistrials due to prosecutorial misconduct cannot be retried. And guess what, these would go straight to the appeals court, who will care a lot less about a single city burning.

 

[pearlslam]

It's really hard when every single prominent media outlet and journalist is basically saying that Floyd was murdered and only the "alt-right white supremacists" disagree with them.

Like I've said, I have older relatives that ONLY get their news from CNN. Whatever CNN reports is the truth to them and everything else is a conspiracy because of course if it was true then CNN would report it.

My grandfather, before he passed away, would constantly bitch at me for not being a democrap and would watch PMSBC (MSNBC) all damn day if he could get away with it. He would tell me the same damn thing, all the while cursing Trump. The last time I saw him alive, he was watching Trump's Impeachment trial (the first one) on, guess what, MSNBC. Although, he did stop short of calling me a liar, he cursed an awful lot.

If he were alive today, he would be praising the state as heroes.

 

[gaystoner]

My grandfather, before he passed away, would constantly bitch at me for not being a democrap and would watch PMSBC (MSNBC) all damn day if he could get away with it. He would tell me the same damn thing, all the while cursing Trump. The last time I saw him alive, he was watching Trump's Impeachment trial (the first one) on, guess what, MSNBC. Although, he did stop short of calling me a liar, he cursed an awful lot.

If he were alive today, he would be praising the state as heroes.

dang...not to piss on your loved one but...imagine spending the last years of your life angry because the TV told you too XD

 

[SITHRAK!]

View attachment 2091265
in a sexual way

Hang on, how is that a 'dirty trick'?
A 'dirty trick' is more like bringing up a piece of evidence ruled inadmissible. and that was done by the prosecution, not the defence.

 

[Seminal Ointments Lain]

I've never seen Law Abiding Citizen because it seems like standard "DINDU NUFFIN" wish fulfillment wank. How right am I?

Oh no, Jamie Foxx is the Prosc. and Gerard Butler is a mild-mannered man whose wife and daughter are Deathwish'd in front of him (all according to plan) so he goes to Brazil to commit hate crimes (also planned) and comes back as the nightmare bastard child of Jigsaw and Batman. (It was planned from the start).

I saw it once when it came out and I rememberly only that it was retarded and had 1-2 decent action scenes. One of those movies Gerard only got because he was riding high off 300, which while he's great in that, it's not because he's a "nuance actore'".

I miss having good wifi to torrent movies and stream them on a whim, would 1000% do Law Abiding Citizen misc. Courtroom/Lawyer movies. Some Judge Judy/Cops comps, damn

 

[Falcos_Commisar]

It's really hard when every single prominent media outlet and journalist is basically saying that Floyd was murdered and only the "alt-right white supremacists" disagree with them.

Like I've said, I have older relatives that ONLY get their news from CNN. Whatever CNN reports is the truth to them and everything else is a conspiracy because of course if it was true then CNN would report it.

I'm so sorry

I can't imagine the brain rot that much horseshit being pulled into their homes causes.

 

[Soda Can]

Is there a possibility that the judge will change his mind between now and Monday? It just seems like if this is a clear cut Brady violation there should be some recourse to challenge a judge just handwaving it away.

My first time giving CPR was to a geriatric patient...it sounded like I was crushing rice krispies. My protor said it didn't matter as if your doing CPR the patient is dead already.

I worked in a nursing home for years and it we'd always have new people coming afraid to do CPR because it might hurt the frail patient. The often repeated line was "We can fix broken bones, we can't fix fucking dead, GET IN THERE."

 

[cheeking0]

Just to set the record straight on what potentially caused the mistrial today: Supposedly, the HC Medical Examiner, Thomas Baker, who previously testified for the prosecution, apparently heard the testimony by David Fowler yesterday, specifically in regards to Carbon Monoxide levels, and decided to investigate whether arterial blood gas data was actually taken for George Floyd at the hospital.

Prior to that, I believe the only data taken on gases in the blood was from the paramedics pulse oximeter, which read 98% oxygen saturation. The ME apparently discovered, very shortly after Fowler's testimony, that they did indeed take blood gas measurements at the hospital, and I guess the prosecution never thought to ask if this data existed, and thus they did not have it to enter as evidence before this point, even though Fowler's medical report, which was available to the prosecution before the trial, mentioned CO levels as potentially negatively contributing to GF's death.

The prosecution wanted to bring in Dr. Martin Tobin, the Irish doc for the prosecution from earlier, to counter the narrative that Fowler had set up, that CO could be a contributing factor, and have Tobin be able to supplement his claim with the medical evidence, by entering said arterial blood gas data as evidence. However, the nature of how this evidence would be introduced to court would make it highly prejudicial, (there are several reasons why: timing of introduction, not giving the defense time to prepare, etc.). Thus, the judge allowed Tobin to speak on potential issues of CO poisoning, but only in so far as giving a speculative opinion as a medical expert, no references to the new data. Which is fair, as the defense's medical expert never got to give a testimony based on actual data, specifically this data, and was gone, on a plane back to wherever. Judge Cahill warned, "if he even hints there are test results the jury has not heard about, there's gonna be a mistrial, pure and simple."

However, based potato doctor, who I am not actually aware was informed of this arrangement, (I don't think he would willingly push this line if he knew it could throw the trial) did just that about 4 minutes into being put back on the stand. Nelson immediately objected and they had an off mic sidebar.

Ultimately, it would seem Cahill decided against following through with his warning about a mistrial. Apparently it is not as pure and simple as he warned. Your guess is as good as mine as to why.

God, this is entertaining.

 

[Gehenna]

Is there a possibility that the judge will change his mind between now and Monday? It just seems like if this is a clear cut Brady violation there should be some recourse to challenge a judge just handwaving it away.



I worked in a nursing home for years and it we'd always have new people coming afraid to do CPR because it might hurt the frail patient. The often repeated line was "We can fix broken bones, we can't fix fucking dead, GET IN THERE."

The recourse is to take it to the appeals court who will be very, very angry.

Prior to that, I believe the only data taken on gases in the blood was from the paramedics pulse oximeter, which read 98% oxygen saturation. The ME apparently discovered, very shortly after Fowler's testimony, that they did indeed take blood gas measurements at the hospital, and I guess the prosecution never thought to ask if this data existed, and thus they did not have it to enter as evidence before this point, even though Fowler's medical report, which was available to the prosecution before the trial, mentioned CO levels as potentially negatively contributing to GF's death.

And in doing so made a clear cut Brady violation. The guidlines for Brady explicitly say that even if the prosecutor didn't even know the info was in their possession, it counts as a violation.

 

[TFT-A9]

The recourse is to take it to the appeals court who will be very, very angry.

Would it be too much to hope for if I was hoping this would result in Ellison's employ being terminated forthwith

 

[Jill Kews]

Would it be too much to hope for if I was hoping this would result in Ellison's employ being terminated forthwith

lol no he's a stupid nigger and stupid niggers are immune from responsibility for their actions

 

[Thomas Highway]

Most cops are not sociopaths that want to kill people.

But Chauvin is definitely damaged goods and a terrible person.

 

[Meat Target]

View attachment 2091265
in a sexual way

Nelson intentionally baiting the prosecution into admitting they withheld potentially exculpatory evidence, and triggering a mistrial that can't be re-tried, would be a 4d Chess move for the ages.

 

[inception_state]

The recourse is to take it to the appeals court who will be very, very angry.

I'm kinda wondering about Cahill's reasoning for not calling a mistrial. Maybe he figures that the trial is practically over, so might as well just finish the process, get a verdict, and then let the appeals court sort it out? That way they won't have wasted weeks of effort if they return a "not guilty" result or the appeals court lets the verdict stand.

If Nelson uses the 98% oxygen saturation to btfo the prosecution's asphyxia narrative in his closing argument, an error in favor of the prosecution will be moot, right?

 

[cheeking0]

The recourse is to take it to the appeals court who will be very, very angry.


And in doing so made a clear cut Brady violation. The guidlines for Brady explicitly say that even if the prosecutor didn't even know the info was in their possession, it counts as a violation.

I think the specific circumstances aren't that the report was in their possession, but that they had only just received it at this far into the trial. There might be some wiggle room with who's negligence is truly responsible that prevents it from being "clear cut" as you put it.

In any case, Cahill assumed it wasn't done in bad faith but denied to accept it as evidence.

 

[HTTP Error 404]

That is -blatant- Brady material. To inform people here of what Brady is: https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/brady_rule

Let us note somethings: "If the prosecution does not disclose material exculpatory evidence under this rule, and prejudice has ensued, the evidence will be suppressed. The evidence will be suppressed regardless of whether the prosecutor knew the evidence was in his or her possession, or whether or not the prosecutor intentionally or inadvertently withheld the evidence from the defense."

" The second aspect is that it is not a sufficiency of evidence test, and the defendant only has to show that the favorable evidence could reasonably be taken to put the whole case in such a different light as to undermine the confidence in the verdict. Third aspect is that there is no need for a harmless error review, because a Brady violation, by definition, could not be treated as a harmless error. "

See above.

Also see above.


NO! A Brady violation, as set out by the Brady requirements above, is automatically a serious violation. Mistrials due to prosecutorial misconduct cannot be retried. And guess what, these would go straight to the appeals court, who will care a lot less about a single city burning.

So are Brady violations part of an appeal? Can the appeals court declare a mistrial due to prosecutorial misconduct?

I wonder if this is why he rested his case -- if he realized he has the Prosecution on a blatant Brady violation and has a good chance of ending it this way, but also a pretty blatant prosecutorial misconduct angle to end it another way...

I'm kinda wondering about Cahill's reasoning for not calling a mistrial. Maybe he figures that the trial is practically over, so might as well just finish the process, get a verdict, and then let the appeals court sort it out? That way they won't have wasted weeks of effort if they return a "not guilty" result or the appeals court lets the verdict stand.

If Nelson uses the 98% oxygen saturation to btfo the prosecution's asphyxia narrative in his closing argument, an error in favor of the prosecution will be moot, right?

Not if Nelson's team still loses. He can still call out the error even if it "helped" him, but didn't help him enough to win the case.

 

[inception_state]

Not if Nelson's team still loses. He can still call out the error even if it "helped" him, but didn't help him enough to win the case.

Yeah, I meant that the flowchart here is:

Not guilty -> It's done, barring some hail mary appeal by the prosecution.
Guilty -> Chauvin appeals due to the Brady violation, potentially gets the case dismissed or a new trial.

From Cahill's perspective, calling a mistrial just means that he gets to deal with this whole shitshow all over again. Might as well let the verdict happen and maybe preempt that, so long as Chauvin can bring it up on appeal.

 

[pearlslam]

So are Brady violations part of an appeal? Can the appeals court declare a mistrial due to prosecutorial misconduct?

I wonder if this is why he rested his case -- if he realized he has the Prosecution on a blatant Brady violation and has a good chance of ending it this way, but also a pretty blatant prosecutorial misconduct angle to end it another way...

Suppose that better minds can help me answer this, but as I have touched upon earlier, a judge, in rare moments of wisdom, can set aside a jury verdict and rule on the case on his own. Wouldn't a Brady violation be grounds for a judge to do just exactly that, and there's no appellate issue to discuss because the State made such a retarded move to cause it?

 

[SITHRAK!]

But Chauvin is definitely damaged goods and a terrible person.

And you base this assertion on...?