Senate "Race" Relations (was "U.S. Society and Black Men")

Oh my no! I'm a jurist!

 

Really? Are you kidding me? I'm sick and tired of a juror holding other jurors back from a proper conviction or worse an entire jury refusing to convict someone not because of the facts of the case but because of the juror(s) or jury's personal beliefs.

Yes please have this hold out excluded. This is a cut and dry case. For crying out loud 11 out of 12 jurors wanted to convict the ex-cop. That rarely happens.

 

Jedi Merkurian

Ahem.

That being said, the unanimous decision system is pretty ridiculous. Especially when it comes to having a juror like the one in this trial. I always thought a proper threshold would be at least 3/4 of the jury finding the defendant guilty in order to make a conviction.

 

And their gun control is one of the many reasons I love the UK. Wish we had it here!

I've been working with an organization to distribute food and clothing to the homeless over the past four months, and I must say the majority of homeless people we have encountered have been black. My good friend and I were talking about how she noticed that she was treated better than black people when she was homeless, and that really speaks to the perverse privilege that society affords to white people over nonwhite people. That was one reason she wanted to give back and help those in need.

 

https://www.theguardian.com/books/2...-schools-racist-language-harper-lee?CMP=fb_gu

There couldn't have been a dumber decision here.

 

So, the controversy over Huckleberry Finn is over depiction of the N-word, even when the use of that word isn't necessarily being promoted by the work?

 

Trust us, many here in Virginia think it's a dumb decision.

 

Ahem, what? Mistrial. No justice.

Apparently the jurors sent a note to the judge saying the majority of the jurors were still undecided, so it may not have even been just one guy at that point.

 

Doesn't matter if it is being shown in a morally repugnant light and if the antagonists use it in a depraved manner. You simply can't use it for some folks to feel it should be banished. It's a very disturbing trend.

 

There was a children's novel over 3 decades ago focused on the very same Huck Finn issue - Nat Hentoff's The Day They Came To Arrest The Book.

 

I'll probably regret asking this but who's paying for that?

 

Who do you think? Us the Tax payer.

 

Seriously? There's provision for a defender sure, how come it's been stretched to an entire team?

 

It's federal so I'm not sure. I've only served on state juries.

 

If you think Trump is bad you should meet the US legal profession. They'd defend Satan for free if it gave them publicity.

 

Wasn't that the theme of the movie A Man For All Seasons?



William Roper: So, now you give the Devil the benefit of law!
Sir Thomas More: Yes! What would you do? Cut a great road through the law to get after the Devil?
William Roper: Yes, I'd cut down every law in England to do that!
Sir Thomas More: Oh? And when the last law was down, and the Devil turned 'round on you, where would you hide, Roper, the laws all being flat? This country is planted thick with laws, from coast to coast, Man's laws, not God's! And if you cut them down, and you're just the man to do it, do you really think you could stand upright in the winds that would blow then? Yes, I'd give the Devil benefit of law, for my own safety's sake!

 

Pah, if they want a real challenge they should take on the Case of the Bloody Knife.

 

Blackadder Goes Forth reference?

 

Got it in one.

 

I thought it was 11 to 1 in favor of the conviction. Was that untrue?

 

Apparently so.

 

I haven't watched that show in 2 years. Feel like doing a marathon of it now.

ShaneP Well, that's awful. Especially given how clear the crime is.