The left celebrates a conviction

 Ann Coulter:

Thanks, Derek Chauvin Jurors! You’re Safe Now. We Aren’t.

...

The prosecutors must feel great! All it took was threatening the jurors with riots and personal destruction to get the verdict they wanted. Real Ciceros, these guys.

Chauvin was forced to flee his home last year, which naturally had been vandalized, requiring constant police presence. Barricades have recently been erected around the home of officer Kim Potter, who accidentally shot escaping violent gun offender Daunte Wright last week.


The day before Chauvin's case went to the jury, a defense witness -- a witness! -- had his former home in California vandalized with pigs' blood and a pig's head.

So I'm sure the jurors reached their verdict purely based on the evidence, after a careful weighing of both sides in the Anglo-Saxon tradition.

We're told that this is only the beginning, big changes are in the air. Does that mean every case against a cop will come with threats of mob violence?
...

Kurt Schlichter says the elites are to blame for a lack of due process: 

...

No, instead our elite tossed out the most basic component of our justice system, the idea of due process and a fair trial because to not do so would have led to evil and dumb people calling them “racists” and they couldn’t handle that heat. They folded, joining in the chorus demanding blood – something very different than demanding justice.

A fair trial? What a joke. At every point, they stacked the deck. “Due process is apparently a luxury we can’t afford because BLM will get mad,” went the elite’s gutless reasoning. In fact, like free speech and freedom of religion, the right to a fair trial and due process matters most when defending that right is hard.

When you have to hear words you hate.

When someone rejects your faith (including pagan faiths like the global warming cult) in favor of his own.

When someone you don’t like is on trial.


That’s the thing about rights – the people you like never have to demand their rights, only the people you don’t.

What happened here? Well, they piled appellate issue on the appellate issue in a towering pile of errors that would, by all rights, lead a real court of appeals to toss this case back for a retrial.

The judge refused to change the venue. He made the case be tried in a city whose inhabitants set it aflame. Seems legit.

The judge refused to sequester the jury, making them pinkie swear to ignore the Class 5 hurricane of media attention. That’ll work.

The city council decided to settle the wrongful death case right during the trial. What a coinkydink.

Minneapolis’s goofy mayor demanded a conviction. Great.

Minnesota’s governor did too. Awesome

The loathsome Maxine Waters – as part of the Army, I had to help clean up the mess she made in 1992 in LA with her “No justice, no peace” incitement – decided to encourage violence if her preferred verdict didn’t come down. Spectacular.

The leftist scumbags did their part, splashing pig’s blood on the house of someone they thought had been a defense witness for the crime of giving testimony the mob disliked. Nothing to see here.

And the media did its part, ensuring that the jurors knew they’d be doxed if they got it “wrong” (and praised if they got it “right”). Oh, the media didn’t say it expressly – but the media still made it clear. Do you have any doubt our brave journalists would hesitate to hassle a juror for wrongverdicting? Democracy dies in darkness or something.

Oh, and the media also cheerled the prosecution throughout. Of special note is the genius “legal analyst” – Pro Tip: If the legal analyst is not Harmeet Dillon, Ron Coleman, or me, he/she/xe is probably going to be terrible – who inexplicably chose to say, on purpose, this: “Defense begins the closing by defining reasonable doubt, not with why #DerekChauvin is innocent. Think about that. #DerekChauvinTrial #GeorgeFloyd”

Only an idiot would think about that. I am not going to insult your intelligence by explaining why that’s appalling. She apparently once worked at the Department of Justice, which does explain a lot.

Piled together, this was a towering heap of due process violations that made this trial a farce. Not because of the evidence, but because the establishment decided to tamper with the jury. No, no one overtly told the jurors how they had to vote, but did anyone need to? Do you imagine anyone on that jury was unaware of what was in store for them if they determined the evidence defined the narrative and acquitted?

No, you don’t. But don’t look to any appellate court to have the guts to do the right thing and send it back for a fair trial. Sadly, the smart money is on the jurists getting the message too.
...

Don't forget Biden's own part in this travesty.  He made the false claim that the case demonstrated "systematic racism" when there was zero evidence that the events were motivated by race.  There was no evidence that the defendant was taking part in a hate crime.  None. 

The politicians and the media were determined to not give this defendant a fair trial and they did not.