Crime Appeals Court Slams Judge for Removing Juror in Rep. Corrine Brown Fraud Trial Who Felt Called to Acquit by the ‘Holy Spirit’
The Chauvin Trial’s Jury Wasn’t Like Other Juries
Its guilty verdict resulted not just from the strength of the evidence, but from a jury-selection process that departed from American norms.But even with all that evidence, convictions don’t happen on their own. Twelve people, selected by lot from the public, must come to a unanimous decision. That jury—who it comprised, how those people saw the world—was of enormous consequence. This wasn’t just any jury, and the difference that made should invite a major reckoning with how juries—the deciding bodies of the country’s judicial system—are selected in America.
Former Florida Democratic Congresswoman Corrine Brown was convicted fora scheme to solicit more than $800,000 in donations to a fraudulent education charity and then using the money for what the Department of Justice called “a personal slush fund.” Now, she’s getting a whole new trial courtesy of the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals and a juror who declared that the Holy Spirit told him Brown was not guilty.
After Brown’s trial and during jury deliberations, Juror 8 called the courtroom deputy to express concerns that a fellow juror, Juror 13, was making comments about a “higher power.” According to Juror 8, several of the jurors were concerned about these statements. The next day, the trial judge met with Juror 8, who then shared a letter explaining her concerns.
First juror in Derek Chauvin trial to speak publicly says he didn't feel pressure to reach a guilty verdict
A jurors who found former police officer Derek Chauvin guilty of George Floyd's murder is speaking out about his experience in the courtroom. Your browser does not support this video Brandon Mitchell, a 31-year-old Black man, is the first juror to speak publicly about the trial. The court has not released the names of the jurors but is allowing them to speak publicly now that the trial is over. Last week, an alternate juror said she believed Chauvin was guilty. Speaking to "CBS This Morning" on Wednesday about whether the jurors felt pressure to reach a guilty verdict, Mitchell said: "Not at all.
That letter read as follows:
With all due respect, I’m a little concerned about a statement made by Juror #13 when we began deliberation. He said “A Higher Being told me Corrine Brown was Not Guilty on all charges”. He later went on to say he “trusted the Holy Ghost”. We all asked that he base his verdict on the evidence provided, the testimony of the witnesses and the laws of the United States court. Other members of the Jury share my concern.
Thank You, Juror #8
Following receipt of the letter, the trial judge then questioned Juror 13 at length. According to court documents, “the judge began by ‘repeat[ing] the question’ about religious beliefs that impede jury service ‘that [the magistrate judge] asked during voir dire.'” Juror 13 responded that he would be able to base his decision on the law and the evidence without any difficulty.
Calls for justice at N.C. funeral of Andrew Brown Jr.
ELIZABETH CITY, N.C. (AP) — Mourners gathered Monday for the funeral of Andrew Brown Jr., a Black man shot and killed by deputies in North Carolina, with attorneys for the family calling for justice at the outset of the service. The invitation-only service in a church in Elizabeth City followed public viewings that drew scores of people the previous day. The Rev. Al Sharpton was to deliver the eulogy, and other speakers included Brown'sThe invitation-only service in a church in Elizabeth City followed public viewings that drew scores of people the previous day. The Rev. Al Sharpton was to deliver the eulogy, and other speakers included Brown's relatives as well as civil rights attorney Ben Crump, who is representing Brown’s family.
The judge continued, asking Juror 13 about a possible conflict between his religious beliefs and proper jury service; the juror responded that there was no conflict, and that his religious beliefs “required him to follow the judge’s instructions.”
Despite Juror 13’s assurances, the trial court judge dismissed him on the grounds that although the “district judge was ‘sure’ that the juror ‘believe[d] that he [was] rendering proper jury service,’ the “juror ‘expressed views and h[eld] views’ that were, according to the judge, ‘by definition’ ‘inconsistent with his sworn duty as a juror.'”
In a lengthy opinion, the 11th Circuit reviewed the trial judge’s ruling and found that Juror 13’s statements should not have disqualified him from jury service. According to the court, Juror 13 “never gave any indication that he refused to follow the court’s instructions.”
The majority opinion was written by Chief Judge William Pryor, a George W. Bush appointee. Writing for the court’s majority, Pryor reasoned that unless Juror 13’s religious statements “amounted to proof beyond a reasonable doubt that he could not render a verdict based solely on the evidence and the law,” it was improper to disqualify him as a juror. Finding that Juror 13’s statements were not enough to conclusively prove he intended to disregard the law or evidence, the court ruled that the trial judge had abused his discretion by excluding the juror from service.
Derek Chauvin’s Attorney Demands New Trial, Arguing Jury ‘Felt Race-Based Pressure’ to Convict
The attorney representing Derek Chauvin, the former Minneapolis police officer convicted of murder and manslaughter charges in the death of George Floyd, Jr., has asked the judge overseeing the matter to order a new trial. The post Derek Chauvin’s Attorney Demands New Trial, Arguing Jury ‘Felt Race-Based Pressure’ to Convict first appeared on Law & Crime.The attorney representing Derek Chauvin, the former Minneapolis police officer convicted of murder and manslaughter charges in the death of George Floyd, Jr., has asked the judge overseeing the matter to order a new trial.
True, Juror No. 13 reportedly said that he “trusted the Holy Ghost” a few hours after he said that the Holy Spirit “told” him of Brown’s across-the-board innocence. But Juror No. 8 reported that the other jurors asked Juror No. 13 to base his verdict on the evidence and the law. She never said that Juror No. 13 refused that request or was otherwise obstinate.
Pryor continued, explaining that the trial judge had been unjustly skeptical on the relevance of Juror 13’s professed religious beliefs.
Jurors may pray for and believe they have received divine guidance as they determine another person’s innocence or guilt, a profound civic duty but a daunting task to say the least. Prayer is “a part of the personal decision-making process of many people, a process that is employed when serving on a jury.”
The district judge was wrong to conclude that Juror No. 13’s statements that he received guidance in response to prayers were categorically “a bridge too far.”
The appellate judge continued by explaining that many religious believers conduct themselves in accordance with the inner voice of God. Providing Reverend Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., M.K. Gandhi, and Thomas à Kempis as examples, Pryor explained that Juror 13’s references to the Holy Spirit’s communications were “no more disqualifying . . . than a secular juror’s statement that his conscience or gut ‘told’ him the same.”
Can Medina Spirit still take part in the Preakness? What positive drug test means for next race
Medina Spirit's Kentucky Derby win has been put in question by a drug test. Here's what we know about the horse's eligibility for the Preakness StakesThe second leg of the Triple Crown is set for May 15 at Pimlico Race Course in Baltimore, but it's not yet clear if the Kentucky Derby champion, who tested positive for the anti-inflammatory drug betamethasone, will be allowed to participate.
The 11th Circuit vacated Brown’s conviction and remanded the case for a new trial.
Four judges dissented. Circuit Judge Charles R. Wilson wrote that the district court judge was in the best position to judge the tone, inflection, and demeanor of a juror — while the appellate court could only look to a cold transcript.
“District judges walk a tightrope when deciding whether to remove a juror mid-deliberations,” Wilson argued.
He concluded (in dissent) that the record provided reasonable reasons to support the decision to disqualify Juror 13 — and that the trial judge’s ruling was within his discretion.
Read the full ruling below.
by on Scribd
[image via Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images]
The postfirst appeared on .
The pandemic forced judges to let livestream cameras into court. The Chauvin trial showed it could work. Will it last? .
The pandemic has accomplished what transparency advocates could not: It has thawed opposition to widespread use of cameras and microphones in courts. © Court TV/Handout, USA TODAY NETWORK Derek Chauvin is lead out of the courtroom in handcuffs after a guilty verdict is read during the trial of Derek Chauvin of the death of George Floyd at the courthouse in Minneapolis on April 20, 2021.