2 jurors dismissed from Derek Chauvin's trial over fears of impartiality after Floyd family settlement
By: Nelson Oliveira (MSN)
Who didn't see this coming?
S E E D E D C O N T E N T
The judge presiding over Derek Chauvin's murder case dismissed two jurors Wednesday after they said the news of a civil settlement between the city of Minneapolis and George Floyd's family affected their ability to remain impartial throughout the trial.
Hennepin County District Judge Peter Cahill had recalled seven of the nine jurors already seated on the panel to gauge their exposure to Friday's announcement about the $27 million deal, a record-breaking amount that drew national headlines over the weekend — just days after jury selection started and about two weeks before opening arguments are set to begin.
The latest round of jury questioning, held via Zoom, came at the request of defense attorney Eric Nelson, who said he was "gravely concerned" about the "suspicious timing" of the announcement and its impact on the seven jurors seated last week.
One of the jurors who were excused for cause Wednesday admitted that the massive settlement "impacted me a lot." The other said the dollar amount suggests the city may have felt that Chauvin was likely guilty.
Former Minneapolis police officer Derek Chauvin at the Hennepin County Courthouse in Minneapolis, Minn.
"It shocked me and kind of swayed me a little bit," the now-former juror told the court.
The panel that will decide Chauvin's fate now has seven jurors, with seven more needed for a full 12-person jury and two alternates.
This is a developing story. Please check back for updates.
Tags
Who is online
204 visitors
Only two of nine?........yeeeeeah. They're the only ones........
The decision of the civil suit agreement wouldn't have had any effect on my decision-making skills, but I'm not normal either.
Are you claiming that the defense attorneys are unable to do their jobs in regards to jury selection?
Nope.
Then what are you complaining about???
Who is complaining? Quit looking for the needle in that haystack to argue about. Not into it.
Okay, then please explain what you meant by:
You "seem" to be stating your disappointment that the defense hadn't dismissed more jurors.
Don't tell me what I "seem" to state and read and take it as written. Things are not always what they seem and to quote one of the NT alumni, "I don't answer to you".
What I meant was there were likely more than two out of nine that had an opinion that would disqualified them if they were totally honest.
STOP
Was that so hard? A direct answer.
So if you feel there were more than 2 out of 9, you must feel his defense is doing a very poor job, since you have been able to come to that determination with no inside information.
His defense is sitting there, talking to the potential jurors, they should be able to easily realize that more then just 2 should be dismissed. Right?
Are you claiming that the jury pool hasn't been unduly influenced and tainted by the settlement?
Shouldn't juries be fair and impartial?
From the Headline "2 Jurors Dismissed From Derek Chauvin's Trial Over Fears Of Impartiality". Well we wouldn't want any Impartiality would we, that would be just terrible.
Meh, there really is no way to have an impartial jury in this case. It was so highly publicized that the odds are everyone already has their minds made up.
Personally, I can't imagine there being a possibility of an HONEST impartial jury in this case. A person would have had to be deaf dumb and blind not have already been tainted by the sights and sounds and words connected with this tragedy, and a person with those disabilities would not be capable of the duty of a juror anyway, What can be done in that circumstance? Anyway my question is moot in any event because obviously they are going to have a jury. I'm going to do a poll on NT members' predictions of the trial verdict.
If they could find a jury that is totally impartial what would they look like. A few Hermits from the woods and a bunch of shut-in's who only read books and don't own a TV or Radio and maybe a few with the beginning stages of Alzheimer's who just can't remember what they saw or heard about the case. Is this the group we want deciding Justice. Then of course there's the old "Juries are made up of people who aren’t smart enough to get out of jury duty"