Posted on 04/27/2021 7:30:26 PM PDT by Behind Liberal Lines
Lisa Christensen, who was an alternate juror in the trial (but did not know she was an alternate until just before deliberations began), gave an interview to Minneapolis news station KARE 11 on Thursday where she provided the first insight the public is getting into what went through the minds of jurors before and during the trial. Some of the things she said during the interview raised more questions regarding the possibility that some jurors feared voting to acquit would hurt their city – or them.
Christensen, who lives in Brooklyn Center, told reporter Lou Raguse that she had “mixed feelings” about the possibility of being a juror when she filled out the jury questionnaire: “There was a question on the questionnaire [asking if she wanted to be a juror] and I put I did not know. The reason, at that time, was I did not know what the outcome was going to be, so I felt like either way you are going to disappoint one group or the other. I did not want to go through rioting and destruction again and I was concerned about people coming to my house if they were not happy with the verdict.”
She also told Raguse the jurors did not use their real names with each other during the trial, nor did they discuss their occupations or families. Apparently, there was a concern about saying “too much”
(Excerpt) Read more at legalinsurrection.com ...
It should be easy to set for retrial, if that is properly represented.
She's nuts. Obviously EVERY trial disappoints one of the parties. I'm surprised she wasn't rejected as a juror given that ridiculous, zero-logic answer.
I’m not sure an alternate juror shooting off her mouth like that would be grounds for a mistrial.
Such a brave woman.
and you knew that when you went thru selection... right?
Not by itself. But add the city’s payout of 27m, blm threats against witnesses who testified, the courthouse armed like a fortress, a non-sequestered jury, national guard deployed, mad max and her idiot statement..... should be easy to win the appeal.
In other words... He did not receive a “fair trial”. Like that is news of the century. I knew he would NEVER get a fair trial. If you have a lick of sense, don’t get you’re hopes up about ANY of the appeals courts. He is now a “political prisoner”. My bet is that he will be murdered in prison before ANY appeal reaches ANY courthouse. I also bet that no one will EVER be charged for his murder. Plan for dark days and rocky roads ahead folks, because we will be treated just the same as he is being treated.
I don’t know if I would have found Chauvin innocent or guilty - I was not in the courtroom, and didn’t see all of the evidence.
But this was one of the most set-up, unfair and tainted trials I’ve ever seen.
You said a mouthful and every word is true.
She was no different from the assigned jurors, in regards them being so paranoid as to not use real names, or let out even to the others information about themselves. That’s the aspect I was thinking of. If the jurors were at that level of fear, then trusting their verdict becomes difficult.
Another profile in courage....
I am sure most of the jurors felt that way while also thinking he was guilty and racist anyway. What a total sh*t show.
Well, it was wise not to share personal information, but she just blew it by talking to the media.
Reporters will be searching for the others very soon, if they’re not already.
I would not have wanted to be on that jury.
With much sadness, I must agree with you.
This case has changed America in ways we don’t even know yet.
Also add in Waters opening her yap; Biden opening his yap; etc.
O.J. Simpson in reverse
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.