Skip to main content
WeLoveTrump.com may receive compensation from affiliate partners for some links on the site. Read our full Disclosure here.

EXCLUSIVE: Chauvin Juror Who Attended BLM Protest and Said He was Impartial May Have Risked the Verdict


4,794 views

From the start, the Derek Chauvin case was directed by mob justice and not the rule of law.

Chauvin was a volatile figure and probably didn’t earn sympathies from most of the country.

But his right to a fair trial by an impartial jury was tainted.

After speaking out publicly about the trial, new reports about Juror #52 (Brandon Mitchell) have surfaced that question his impartiality.

Here’s the latest:

Regardless if you think Chauvin is guilty or innocent, these developments boost the defense’s case for an appeal.

The Post Millennial reported:

A juror on the Derek Chauvin trial who told the court that he had no prior knowledge of the George Floyd civil case was photographed last August wearing a shirt that read “Get your knee off our necks” and “BLM.” He stated last week that he saw jury duty as a means to “spark some change.”

Juror #52, now identified as Brandon Mitchell, reportedly told Judge Cahill on March 15 that he had no prior knowledge of the case prior to being summoned for jury duty.

Mitchell is the first juror in the Chauvin trial to speak openly about the deliberations.

Speaking in a show called Get Up! Mornings with Erica Campbell on April 27, Mitchell said that people should say yes to jury duty as a means to promote societal change.

“I mean it’s important if we wanna see some change, we wanna see some things going different, we gotta into these avenues, get into these rooms to try to spark some change,” he said. “Jury duty is one of those things. Jury duty. Voting. All of those things we gotta do.”

According to Minneapolis’ FOX 9 reporter Paul Blume, who livetweeted the case on March 15, “Judge Cahill asked Juror #52, whether he heard anything about the #GeorgeFloyd civil case. He says, no. He explained hearing some basic info about trial dates, etc from the news in recent months, but nothing that would keep him from serving as impartial juror. #ChauvinTrial”

“Juror #52 wrote in his jury questionnaire that he wondered why other police officers at the scene did not intervene in #GeorgeFloyd deadly arrest. He recognizes the historic nature of the case. Defense says he is an acceptable juror. So state’s turn to question,” Blume added.

And from The Western Journal:

But a social media post recently unearthed from seven months earlier showed him wearing a “Black Lives Matter” hat and a t-shirt emblazoned with the message “Get your knee off our necks” — a reference to the manner of Floyd’s death — and “BLM.”

“Here is Juror #52 who said he was impartial during jury questioning,” commentator Jack Posobiec tweeted with a screenshot of the Facebook post that is now either private or unavailable. “Also runs a podcast,” he added referring to Mitchell’s “The Wholesome Podcast” on Spotify.

Paul Blume of KMSP-TV was live-tweeting the jury selection process and described how Mitchell made it through voir dire.

Stop Big Tech From Tracking You Online: PureVPN

“Judge Cahill asked Juror #52, whether he heard anything about the #GeorgeFloyd civil case,” Blume wrote March 15.

“He says, no. He explained hearing some basic info about trial dates, etc from the news in recent months, but nothing that would keep him from serving as impartial juror,” he said.

“Juror #52 wrote in his jury questionnaire that he wondered why other police officers at the scene did not intervene in #GeorgeFloyd deadly arrest,” the thread continued.

“He recognizes the historic nature of the case. Defense says he is an acceptable juror. So state’s turn to question,” Blume said.

The jury was eventually comprised of two multiracial, four black and six white members who convicted Chauvin of second-degree unintentional murder, third-degree murder and second-degree manslaughter.

Mitchell has spoken since the trial about serving as a juror as a way to “spark some change” and talked about not watching the Floyd video in its entirety beforehand because he didn’t want to see “a black man being killed” — sentiments that hardly convey impartiality.



We Love Trump
Thanks for sharing!
Send this to a friend