You are not logged in.

Announcement

Welcome to the one and only Spiceislander Talkshop. Please register and make your first post in the New Members Forum. Just mention 'Grenada' in your first post and you will be upgraded to full access.

#11 Apr 21, 2021 2:32 pm

Dancer
Active

Re: The Verdict Is In

NEVER watched 1 min ute of trial or guilty verdict news .

>> RD says :  that being said it can't be considered a fair trial  BECAUSE the jury knew  that if they didn't return a guilty verdict , MOBS would burn American Cities to the ground. <<

The IMPORTANT   trial  for the USA  begins  NOW .   ... (RD said it ,,  who is  invaluable to TS   because it  gives  a feel of the 50% of Americans thinking process ) .

" Now what he said I think is offensive , TO  humans ,  TO people
. People are stupid  '
they  can't decipher right from wrong '.

VIRUS in the American Psyche  now .    ...........   ....... see why the trial is a sham of  the real justice.

Offline

#12 Apr 21, 2021 2:47 pm

New Historian
Active

Re: The Verdict Is In

Real Distwalker wrote:

Juries shouldn't be place in a situation in which they know that an unpopular verdict will result in nationwide violence and destruction. Justice is corrupted by that.

Before you jump on my ass, what if it was the other way around?  What if the jury knew that a guilty verdict would result in people going on a violent, destructive, nationwide rampage?  I think we would all agree that justice would be corrupted.

As Old Blue Eyes said: That's Life. There is absolutely nothing that can be done to stop the jury being affected by the society around them, even after sequestration they know very well the score. And you know what? I got no problem with that. Juries are part of the wider society, they cannot make decisions on the moon.

Where's Expat?

Online

#13 Apr 21, 2021 3:23 pm

Real Distwalker
Active

Re: The Verdict Is In

New Historian wrote:

That's Life. There is absolutely nothing that can be done to stop the jury being affected by the society around them, even after sequestration they know very well the score. And you know what? I got no problem with that. Juries are part of the wider society, they cannot make decisions on the moon.


You got no problem with that as long as the scales of justice are imbalanced they way you want them imbalanced.  In the Jim Crow South, juries were affected by the society around them too. I bet you justifiably would have had a huge problem with it then.

Juries should make their decisions based on the guilt or innocence of the defendant, not on whether or not the city will burn.

Offline

#14 Apr 21, 2021 3:33 pm

Real Distwalker
Active

Re: The Verdict Is In

Dancer wrote:

>> RD says :  that being said it can't be considered a fair trial  BECAUSE the jury knew  that if they didn't return a guilty verdict , MOBS would burn American Cities to the ground. <<


I also said that, in this case, their verdict was the just and correct verdict.  I think he was guilty as sin. 

It is a problem, however, when juries are being held hostage to external threats.  This time it worked out.  It won't always come out okay.

Offline

#15 Apr 21, 2021 4:27 pm

Slice
Active

Re: The Verdict Is In

New Historian wrote:
Real Distwalker wrote:

Juries shouldn't be place in a situation in which they know that an unpopular verdict will result in nationwide violence and destruction. Justice is corrupted by that.

Before you jump on my ass, what if it was the other way around?  What if the jury knew that a guilty verdict would result in people going on a violent, destructive, nationwide rampage?  I think we would all agree that justice would be corrupted.

As Old Blue Eyes said: That's Life. There is absolutely nothing that can be done to stop the jury being affected by the society around them, even after sequestration they know very well the score. And you know what? I got no problem with that. Juries are part of the wider society, they cannot make decisions on the moon.

Where's Expat?

Allyu chase me buddy.  I wish he would come back.  I miss the old fart.

Offline

#16 Apr 21, 2021 4:36 pm

Slice
Active

Re: The Verdict Is In

New Historian wrote:
Real Distwalker wrote:

Juries shouldn't be place in a situation in which they know that an unpopular verdict will result in nationwide violence and destruction. Justice is corrupted by that.

Before you jump on my ass, what if it was the other way around?  What if the jury knew that a guilty verdict would result in people going on a violent, destructive, nationwide rampage?  I think we would all agree that justice would be corrupted.

As Old Blue Eyes said: That's Life. There is absolutely nothing that can be done to stop the jury being affected by the society around them, even after sequestration they know very well the score. And you know what? I got no problem with that. Juries are part of the wider society, they cannot make decisions on the moon.

Where's Expat?

If I am correct the oldest white person, on the jury was 45. I think with all these young folks black or white, they are keenly aware of race problems. If I was the defense, I would never ever put ah 20 year ole White male on the jury.  These young folks are so different.

While I agree with RD, I think the most important issue in this case, was the Videos.  How do anyone get pass, watching someone been brutality murdered?

Offline

#17 Apr 21, 2021 4:37 pm

Real Distwalker
Active

Re: The Verdict Is In

We didn't chase him.  We simply didn't buy what he was selling.

Offline

#18 Apr 21, 2021 6:05 pm

New Historian
Active

Re: The Verdict Is In

Real Distwalker wrote:
New Historian wrote:

That's Life. There is absolutely nothing that can be done to stop the jury being affected by the society around them, even after sequestration they know very well the score. And you know what? I got no problem with that. Juries are part of the wider society, they cannot make decisions on the moon.


You got no problem with that as long as the scales of justice are imbalanced they way you want them imbalanced.  In the Jim Crow South, juries were affected by the society around them too. I bet you justifiably would have had a huge problem with it then.

Juries should make their decisions based on the guilt or innocence of the defendant, not on whether or not the city will burn.

True, but my salient point was that that is an impossible hope.

Online

#19 Apr 21, 2021 6:24 pm

Real Distwalker
Active

Re: The Verdict Is In

New Historian wrote:

True, but my salient point was that that is an impossible hope.

Yeah. I know.  I agree.

Offline

#20 Apr 21, 2021 10:50 pm

gripe
Active

Re: The Verdict Is In

NH, am I understanding that you have been sold on RD's argument that the jury's decision was based "on whether or not the city will burn"? Also, if I am correct in reading your response that the "impossible hope" was that "Juries should make their decisions based on the guilt or innocence of the defendant" (RD's other jury decision construct), then I am disappointed in your conclusions. Why? The key and singular reason is that the Chauvin case is one of the clearest, indeed, most convincing for any jury of his peers to have returned a guilty verdict . . . on all charges. 

Those other explanations are therefore, in the face of the overwhelming evidence against Chauvin, mere academic exercises. For example, Atty. Nelson's stretch in arguing that Sen. Waters' controversial rally comments justify a mistrial did not convince the Judge despite his criticisms of Sen. Waters. To any reasonable person, Chauvin was convicted because he was guilty, not innocent. To say otherwise using other creative explanations is to deny reality.

Life is already complicated; we should strive to not make things more difficult. As such, we must recognize and accept that some things are just plainly wrong and criminal in particular situations. Chauvin's actions for which he was charged and convicted meet those standards.

Offline

Board footer

Powered by FluxBB