Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
35 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
After all I've seen about the murder of George Floyd, I only have three words for Judge Cahill: (Original Post) JoeOtterbein Apr 2021 OP
its not up to the judge.nt. drray23 Apr 2021 #1
If the judge implies once again for a mistrial we should... JoeOtterbein Apr 2021 #7
What does that even mean? dem4decades Apr 2021 #2
Chauvin is guilty as hell. JoeOtterbein Apr 2021 #5
That's...not how it works. WhiskeyGrinder Apr 2021 #3
The judge wants a mistrial even more than the defense. JoeOtterbein Apr 2021 #6
Again, that's not how it works. WhiskeyGrinder Apr 2021 #8
That is the problem. It "now how it works". We let killer cop go free. JoeOtterbein Apr 2021 #9
An appeal, certainly. No mistrial. WhiskeyGrinder Apr 2021 #11
It's how he will go free. JoeOtterbein Apr 2021 #18
No, it isn't. Once again, that's not how it works. Ocelot II Apr 2021 #31
The mistrial motion has already been denied. TwilightZone Apr 2021 #28
Bullshit. You don't know what you're talking about. Ocelot II Apr 2021 #13
He's not brave enough to do it himself. JoeOtterbein Apr 2021 #20
What next judge? There is no next judge. Ocelot II Apr 2021 #24
That's not how the system works. RegularJam Apr 2021 #25
Wrong left-of-center2012 Apr 2021 #30
Um, no. Ocelot II Apr 2021 #4
Does the judge "only decides for how long"? JoeOtterbein Apr 2021 #12
Once again, that's not how it works. Ocelot II Apr 2021 #19
Here is how it works now: JoeOtterbein Apr 2021 #22
The Judge doesn't make that decision... brooklynite Apr 2021 #10
The judge has made the case for a mistrial twice now. JoeOtterbein Apr 2021 #14
Again, he *denied* the defense's motion for a mistrial. Ocelot II Apr 2021 #15
Again, he made the case for a mistrial. JoeOtterbein Apr 2021 #16
*sigh* No, he isn't. Ocelot II Apr 2021 #23
The judge uses that rhetoric to placid the defense BlueLucy Apr 2021 #17
Twice? JoeOtterbein Apr 2021 #21
I don't think you understand how this trail thing works. Nt USALiberal Apr 2021 #26
It's not up to the judge. TwilightZone Apr 2021 #27
You think the judge should be locked up? TwilightZone Apr 2021 #29
That's what I thought the poster really meant. Solomon Apr 2021 #34
He's just sending a warning, probably best to avoid such comments Hoyt Apr 2021 #32
He did what he must to AVOID a mistrial. Judges do not like mistrials. nt lamp_shade Apr 2021 #33
Funny how Sunsky Apr 2021 #35

JoeOtterbein

(7,697 posts)
6. The judge wants a mistrial even more than the defense.
Mon Apr 19, 2021, 10:21 PM
Apr 2021

He is doing everything he can to release the murderer.

Ocelot II

(115,270 posts)
31. No, it isn't. Once again, that's not how it works.
Tue Apr 20, 2021, 12:04 AM
Apr 2021

Even if he wins on appeal, he wouldn't go free. He'd just get a new trial and he'd most likely be convicted again. But new trials aren't often granted.

Ocelot II

(115,270 posts)
13. Bullshit. You don't know what you're talking about.
Mon Apr 19, 2021, 10:30 PM
Apr 2021

The defense moved for a mistrial and the judge denied the motion. If he'd wanted a mistrial he'd have granted it.

JoeOtterbein

(7,697 posts)
20. He's not brave enough to do it himself.
Mon Apr 19, 2021, 10:39 PM
Apr 2021

He's setting it up for the next judge. That is how it now works.

Ocelot II

(115,270 posts)
24. What next judge? There is no next judge.
Mon Apr 19, 2021, 10:57 PM
Apr 2021

There is a Court of Appeals, but the standard of review for the denial of a motion for a mistrial means it's very unlikely that they will overturn Cahill's decision to deny the motion.

 

RegularJam

(914 posts)
25. That's not how the system works.
Mon Apr 19, 2021, 11:12 PM
Apr 2021

The system gives opportunity for appeal, thankfully. The rest is conjecture on your part.

And yes, if a juror is interviewed and says that MW influenced them, it’s a big deal. Of course she didn’t, but the option is there for good reason.

Ocelot II

(115,270 posts)
4. Um, no.
Mon Apr 19, 2021, 10:17 PM
Apr 2021

The jury decides whether he is to be locked up. The judge only decides for how long, based on the sentencing guidelines and whether there should be an upward departure from the guidelines based on aggravating factors, up to the statutory maximum.

Ocelot II

(115,270 posts)
19. Once again, that's not how it works.
Mon Apr 19, 2021, 10:38 PM
Apr 2021

After someone is convicted of a felony, the court is required to order a presentence investigation and written report, which is to be prepared by a probation officer or the Commissioner of Corrections and identifies the defendant’s individual characteristics, circumstances, needs, potentialities, criminal record and social history; the circumstances of the offense; and the harm the offense caused others and the community. This report must include a sentencing worksheet in order to apply the sentencing guidelines. If the judge decides to depart from the guidelines he has to explain why, and the sentence can be appealed. It's not a simple matter of arbitrarily imposing a sentence just because it's what the judge wants.

Ocelot II

(115,270 posts)
15. Again, he *denied* the defense's motion for a mistrial.
Mon Apr 19, 2021, 10:34 PM
Apr 2021

If he thought a mistrial was appropriate he'd have granted the motion. But he didn't.

Ocelot II

(115,270 posts)
23. *sigh* No, he isn't.
Mon Apr 19, 2021, 10:55 PM
Apr 2021

But I guess you're bound and determined not to understand how this works. I'll try again, anyhow. The judge apparently thought Waters' comment was inappropriate but not inappropriate enough to warrant a mistrial, so he denied the motion, and all he said was basically that the defense could appeal. The appellate court isn't bound by the judge's remark, nor is any other judge. The law regarding appellate review of a motion to deny a mistrial is this:

"The denial of a motion for a mistrial is reviewed for an abuse of discretion. A mistrial should be granted only if there is a reasonable probability, in light of the entirety of the trial including the mitigating effects of a curative instruction, that the outcome of the trial would have been different had the incident resulting in the motion not occurred. The trial judge is in the best position to determine whether an error is sufficiently prejudicial to require a mistrial or whether another remedy is appropriate."
https://www.mncourts.gov/mncourtsgov/media/Appellate/Court%20of%20Appeals/Standards-of-Review.pdf

In other words, the court of appeals is unlikely to overturn the verdict or grant a new trial on the basis of Waters' comments, the failure to grant a mistrial, or the fact that the court didn't sequester the jury. I hope this isn't too complicated for you.

BlueLucy

(1,609 posts)
17. The judge uses that rhetoric to placid the defense
Mon Apr 19, 2021, 10:37 PM
Apr 2021

If he wanted a mistrial he would have granted one. None of that tells us how the judge feels about this case.

 

Hoyt

(54,770 posts)
32. He's just sending a warning, probably best to avoid such comments
Tue Apr 20, 2021, 12:14 AM
Apr 2021

in future, at least until decision.

Sunsky

(1,737 posts)
35. Funny how
Tue Apr 20, 2021, 09:13 AM
Apr 2021

The judge felt free to get his opinion on the impact of Maxine's statement on the appeal process, while at the same time chastise a citizen for exercising her 1st amendment right by verbalizing her thoughts outside of the hearing of the jury.
I have watched msnbc, CNN, court tv, and HLN daily regarding this trial and I have heard numerous opinions. Why is one citizen's opinion weighted over the rest?

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»After all I've seen about...