855
Comments (55)
sorted by:
44
party12 44 points ago +45 / -1

WOW--how is that even allowed?

37
Chairman_Jao_Bi_Den [S] 37 points ago +38 / -1

Communists (Oligarchs) consolidated the world's wealth, like the Mafia they are.

28
MAGAconvert 28 points ago +31 / -3

It's more than allowed it's encouraged. When selecting a juror you want to remove all people who may be prejudicially biased (or favorable) towards the defendant. This is not a bad thing.

22
Chairman_Jao_Bi_Den [S] 22 points ago +23 / -1

You know very well they will select almost EXCLUSIVELY pro-BLM twats.

Remember, EVERY level of our institutions is CORRUPT.

21
MAGAconvert 21 points ago +21 / -0

The defense attorney also gets his say. He can exclude all pro-BLM jurors. This the process at work.

8
leatherbottom 8 points ago +9 / -1

I hope so, but after 2020 I truly have my doubts.

5
notCIA 5 points ago +5 / -0

No, he literally gets to pick jurors to kick off.

6
CaptainRumington 6 points ago +6 / -0

Kangaroos, mate.

6
Anaconda 6 points ago +6 / -0

Great. So no rioting then if they convict the cops.

3
Chairman_Jao_Bi_Den [S] 3 points ago +3 / -0

You're so silly 😂

6
Mouthpounder 6 points ago +6 / -0

Well if you were the defense you’d want to try and remove anyone overly sympathetic to their warped cause 🤔

20
ThinkingAboutYou 20 points ago +26 / -6

The police have already proven time and time again that they're not on our side. Fuck him and fuck the police, I hope he gets murdered in prison and I hope his family is eaten alive by the woke mob.

26
Chairman_Jao_Bi_Den [S] 26 points ago +28 / -2

Honestly, the only reason I want him to win is so the WOKE mob goes full Hindenburg. I want an excuse to start the commie purge.

14
buco 14 points ago +14 / -0

They will chimp out unless he gets he death penalty.

5
marishiten 5 points ago +5 / -0

Minnesota doesn't have the death penalty I don't think and they're not going to be able to get him on murder. Manslaughter - MAYBE - Excessive Force absolutely.

It's funny though, every single juror they've talked to has been a fucking immigrant that can barely speak English. I'm so fucking tired of Mexican's dude.

4
notCIA 4 points ago +4 / -0

They aren't going to get a single thing related to George's death, as it was a fentanyl overdose after he flipped out of the car like a spaz. The jury would have to be hard left antifa members, the lot of them, to convict him of anything even mildly related to George's actual cause of death.

5
1776take2 5 points ago +5 / -0

If the jury is a bunch of idiots they can get anything. Having just sat for jury duty that was 100% clear cut case, there were still 4 idiots who initially voted opposite the facts. They used 0% logic to make their entirely empathetic decision. Luckily years in sales allowed me to change their minds. :-)

3
notCIA 3 points ago +3 / -0

But that was not by design, that is just the society we live in. Idiots abound, and hopefully the lawyers defending the police are good at their jobs.

2
1776take2 2 points ago +2 / -0

Let’s see what info the judge allows the jury to hear.

2
Chairman_Jao_Bi_Den [S] 2 points ago +2 / -0

They are our replacements.

They'll take their gibs, and enjoy working under the boots of child-murdering demons.

3
leatherbottom 3 points ago +3 / -0

probably true. Even if he gets the max penalty, they'll all be so amped up that the energy will have to go somewhere.

0
clintonsserver 0 points ago +3 / -3

Not all cops?

9
Ballind 9 points ago +9 / -0

They all become dirty when they work with the union to protect the other bad ones. I doubt there is a single department without at least one dirty cop.

7
Chairman_Jao_Bi_Den [S] 7 points ago +7 / -0

Sure, but good ones are few and far between.

Being a good cop requires ignoring unconstitutional legislation, which can get you in trouble with your (shill) commissioner.

19
milehighvoter 19 points ago +20 / -1

The questionnaire is made by each side's lawyers right? Not surprising the prosecution might want to know this.

12
party12 12 points ago +12 / -0

It would not be surprising if the defense wanted to know it.

May as well ask "where do your sympathies lie?"

Personally, I think it is a loaded question that should not have been asked. Damned if you do and damned if you don't.

9
Chairman_Jao_Bi_Den [S] 9 points ago +9 / -0

After I've seen how truly insidious the forces hijacking our nation (and the world) are, I GUARANTEE nearly all the jurors will be deliberately pro-BLM.

5
party12 5 points ago +5 / -0

Unfortunately, I think you are right. There seems to be a deliberate move to create division.

2
notCIA 2 points ago +2 / -0

Rigging the jury selection to that degree would be the equivalent of Biden seizing the White House by force in 2019 and declaring himself king. There is no system with which to manipulate the jury selection. Either his lawyers get to throw people out or not, nothing in between.

1
party12 1 point ago +1 / -0

There are jury consultants for a reason.

15
findthewarmspot 15 points ago +15 / -0

No way I’d want to be on that jury. If you vote to acquit, the BLMers will dox you and destroy your life....

9
Chairman_Jao_Bi_Den [S] 9 points ago +9 / -0

Because facts don't matter to them.

4
Chaotikizm 4 points ago +4 / -0

It would take a group of people with no life to lose.

It would take a crack team of reanimated Biden voters.

If necromancy were real, there would be enough people who were killed by BLM during the riots to get him acquitted.

3
marishiten 3 points ago +3 / -0

They need to move the venue because of this specific reason. But I think that motion was denied.

BLM is going to intimidate the juror's and they're going to be under threat of doxxing, attacks, and harassment.

2
notCIA 2 points ago +2 / -0

I would gladly be on the jury. Hell, I'll deliver the not guilty decision with a smirk.

7
romanhelmet 7 points ago +7 / -0

They asked a whole shitload of questions about how much they know or saw or spoke about the incident with the quintessential question being "can you decide the case in a fair and impartial manner?"

LMAO. Why sure I can..no problem at all!

With all the coverage in the U.S. how the hell could you possibly find ANY jury that is not prejudiced either way?

My prediction...HUNG JURY....POSSIBLY AT LEAST THREE TIMES.

They'll have to get a jury from Mars for it to be impartial and even then I have my doubts.

6
marishiten 6 points ago +6 / -0

This is probably a question that the defense wants in there.

This is to weed out clearly bias people. You can't have a contaminated jury pool that has clear favorability to BLM. Otherwise, you're going to get juror's that are going to convict before evidence is in.

This is a good thing.

Ideally, you'd have people that don't know anything about it, don't care, and don't care about BLM. BLM isn't a neutral party. That's why that question is in there.

Chauvin is going to be convicted of SOMETHING. I don't think he's going to get convicted of murder 1 or 2, but he might get hit with a manslaughter charge and he's absolutely going to get hit with excessive force.

MPD allowed cops to put their knee on suspects backs to ensure their compliance. It was allowed at the time. As his department allowed it, he's not liable for murder. He held his knee there a LONG TIME and that's likely excessive force

Regardless, Floyd was going to die. With or without Chauvin. Floyd was OD'ing on fent and the cops couldn't tell because he took meth to bring himself back up (mentally). Fent causes your nervous system, including breathing, down. Meth doesn't fix that. It just makes your brain speed up. So he was OD'ing, but you couldn't tell because of the meth.

They also found meth and fent in his car, the cops car, and in his system. The amount of fent in his blood was likely enough to OD him. So he was going to die regardless.

2
kyle6969 2 points ago +2 / -0

Exactly. You want a neutral answer to this. And it is relevant. You definitely need to be asking this question.

And you would also ask a similar question about Police. And that’s fine.

1
Zer8 1 point ago +1 / -0

I would say that the people that interfered with the arrest were partially responsible for his death. Although the officers should not have allowed themselves to be distracted from Floyd, the people screaming did take the officers attention off of Floyd and he was dead before they knew it. He was going to die anyways, but they may have been able to mitigate that if they did not get distracted by the onlookers.

4
Anaconda 4 points ago +4 / -0

Great. So no rioting then if they convict the cops.

4
PatriotPen 4 points ago +5 / -1

They could be asking that question to parlay the jurors and weed out the ones who are aligned with that group. It's done in every juror seating.

4
GOPkilledTHEMSELVES 4 points ago +4 / -0

The correct answer is “Kiss my ass”

2
King_Boobus_Toobus 2 points ago +2 / -0

Always has been

2
RandoBudster 2 points ago +2 / -0

I can think of answers for an easy way to get out of THAT jury duty.

2
SeeIfItMAGAs 2 points ago +2 / -0

Lie to get in then acquit. Use their weapons against them.

2
Trumpwonbidencheated 2 points ago +2 / -0

There is no justice in the system, it's just us in the system

2
deleted 2 points ago +2 / -0
1
TheMadManDidItAgain 1 point ago +1 / -0

I believe that black lives matter..... but the organization BLM? Fuck them.

1
MinneMAGA 1 point ago +1 / -0

I'd be more surprised if something like that wasn't on the jury questionnaire.

1
4cdarth 1 point ago +1 / -0

This has to violate the rule of a jury of peers.

1
Loki13 1 point ago +1 / -0

Take a screen shot stop supporting pedo platforms.

1
notCIA 1 point ago +1 / -0

Well, the prosecutor is obviously going to try and get as many Marxists on the jury as possible, and the cop's lawyers are going to remove them. That's literally just how jurys are selected. You end up with the 12 most centrist jurors after both sides play out their individual biases in selection.

1
RedTie45 1 point ago +1 / -0

This is 100% not allowed. You cannot taint the jury pool with shit like this.

1
JackAubreyRN 1 point ago +1 / -0

Revealing--the question is about the movement, not the straight-forward meaning of the words. This is the kind of semantic switching the Left (i/c MSM) does all the time.

0
deleted 0 points ago +2 / -2