Yesterday, we called out Morning Joe for mentioning George Floyd six instances however failing to breathe a phrase concerning the Chauvin trial juror who wore a BLM hat, and a T-shirt emblazoned “Get Your Knee of Our Necks” to a protest rally in Washington DC that Al Sharpton’s group had billed because the ‘Dedication March: Get Your Knee Off Our Necks,’ and at which a number of members of the Floyd household spoke. Earlier than being chosen as a juror, that particular person, Brandon Mitchell, denied to the choose having attended an indication about police brutality.
Morning Joe continued its unconscionable blackout of the matter on right now’s present.
However CNN this morning staged a surprisingly fair-and-balanced debate on the topic. With New Day co-host John Berman moderating, two CNN authorized analysts battled it out over the deserves of the motion that Chauvin’s lawyer has filed in search of a brand new trial, and together with amongst its grounds “jury misconduct.”
The 2 legal professionals first argued over different grounds, together with pre-trial publicity, the failure of the court docket to maneuver the trial to a different county, and the large $27 million settlement paid by town of Minneapolis to the Floyd household throughout jury choice.
However Berman then made it some extent to show the dialogue to Mitchell’s carrying of the hat and T-shirt, and whether or not he was “sincere” about his attendance on the DC demonstration when queried about it by the trial choose. It is also notable that in a lot of the section, the picture was displayed of Mitchell carrying the hat and T-shirt in query.
Lawyer Paul Callan argued that Mitchell’s shirt saying “Get Your Knee Off Our Necks” was “a precise reference to the actual fact sample within the Floyd case,” and that the t-shirt and cap “actually appears like participation in an indication in opposition to police brutality.”
Lawyer Joey Jackson admitted that the T-shirt and demonstration attendance raised an argument for the protection. However he made two absurd assertions in arguing in opposition to the protection movement:
- The First Modification provides folks the precise to “put on what you need, say what you need.” After all. However the First Modification does not give folks the precise to be on a jury if what they put on or say demonstrates that they might not be an neutral juror.
- For the reason that rally did not completely cope with police brutality, but in addition addressed different points, Mitchell did not lie when he stated he hadn’t attended an indication in opposition to police brutality. To cite Joe Biden: c’mon man! That’s so weak.
So kudos to CNN for staging a vigorous debate. And extra boos for Morning Joe for its continued blackout of a serious story.
This is the transcript. Click on “broaden” to learn extra.
6:29 am EDT
JOHN BERMAN: Growing this morning, Derek Chauvin’s lawyer has filed movement for a brand new trial simply two weeks after the ex-Minneapolis police officer was convicted of murdering George Floyd.
Now, that is routine, that is anticipated, that is what protection legal professionals do. And it doesn’t particularly discuss with one thing that has generated some controversy of late. It’s a photograph that surfaced on-line exhibiting one of many jurors carrying a Black Lives Matter hat and shirt that claims “Get Your Knee Off Our Necks.”
That juror, Brandon Mitchell, additionally participated in final 12 months’s March on Washington. On Washington. Which truly has to do with one thing we’re speaking about right here.
I need to carry up the difficulty of the t-shirt right here, with the juror, and the image that is been behind you the entire time. Look, there are two points right here. And Joey, we will begin with you. Primary, is there one thing inherently prejudicial about the truth that he’s doing this, and, B, was he sincere about his attendance at occasions on the jury questionnaire?
JOEY JACKSON: So with respect to primary, inherently prejudicial, we reside in the US of America. We’ve this factor known as the First Modification, freedom of speech. You’ll be able to put on what you need, say what you need, do what you need.
The actual fact is that there was a questionnaire and there was disclosure with respect to prior actions, Black Lives Matter actions, et cetera. The essential difficulty, John, is whether or not or not he disclosed whether or not he participated in demonstrations concerning police brutality. Sure, he was on the March on Washington. The March on Washington because it pertains to the African-American communities and communities of colour offers with and pertains to racial disparities in voting, in schooling, in financial disparities. It doesn’t must do solely or completely or any of that with police brutality.
So the actual fact is you ask me the precise questions, I gives you the precise solutions. He gave in my opinion the solutions that had been correct, and that’s that, you already know what? I didn’t take part in police brutality demonstrations.
PAUL CALLAN: Joey, one query for you. If that claims knee off our necks. The difficulty within the case earlier than the jury was a cop placing his knee on anyone’s neck and killing them consequently. That appears to me prefer it’s a precise reference to the actual fact sample within the Floyd case.
Now, the query that this juror was requested throughout jury choice was, have you ever ever participated in an indication in opposition to police brutality? That [pointing at the photo of Mitchell in hat and t-shirt] actually appears like participation in an indication in opposition to police brutality.
JACKSON: So, I’m not suggesting there’s not an argument right here. However what I’m suggesting is that the March on Washington is method above the difficulty, completely, of police brutality. It is a vital difficulty on this nation. However there are different essential points that relate to the African-American neighborhood that aren’t restricted that aren’t restricted to police brutality.
In the event you ask me the query: did you take part within the march, and I answered ‘no,’ separate difficulty.In the event you ask me the query, was I concerned and did I not take part within the march on Washington to debate and in any other case cope with police brutality points, and I say ‘no,’ it’s separate. We’ve to look at the query. He didn’t lie, he didn’t fabricate. He answered what he was requested, and I believe in that regard we’re on stable floor.
BERMAN: Counselors, I respect it. We’re going to must take a quick recess.