Posted on 04/17/2010 1:31:07 AM PDT by jerry557
MEMPHIS, TN - The jury in the Duanna Johnson jailhouse beat down case is hopelessly deadlocked. On Friday, April 16, 2010, they once again failed to reach a verdict.
And Johnson's family and friends say they know why the jury is reluctant to convict the former Memphis Police officer accused of the attack.
A jury of seven women and five men has been deliberating for three days, and still no verdict, even though the 2008 beating was caught on videotape. That's good news for Bridges McRae, the former Memphis cop on trial right now for violating the civil rights of Johnson, who was a transgender prostitute.
But it's disappointing for Duanna Johnson's loved ones who say this case should have been a no-brainer.
"This should have been decided the day before yesterday," says Johnson family friend Larry Jackson.
He has his suspicions about why the majority white jury in the case is still undecided.
"There are those that still feel that old-status, Jim Crow quota," says Jackson, "you know, that whatever is done to people of color is right."
Joan Bailey, who often counseled Johnson, thinks there's another reason for the difficulty in reaching a verdict.
Duanna, who was born Dwayne Johnson, chose to live as a transgender woman. And a transgender victim, says Bailey, may not be a sympathetic victim to a jury.
"They should give them the respect that is due them," Bailey tells myEyewitnessNews.com. "They're citizens of the United States and have protection under our constitution."
A videotape that went global on the internet clearly shows McRae beating Johnson. He testified that it was self-defense. Five other witnesses called his attack "unprovoked".
McRae refused to talk about the hung jury with reporters outside the federal courthouse, referring all questions to his attorney, Frank Trapp.
(Excerpt) Read more at myeyewitnessnews.com ...
They can’t decide one way or the other. Who’s that remind me of in this case?
No need to be suspicious . It is clear why they have not returned a guilty verdict . They have reasonable doubt .
Ya mean they can’t decide whether a man or a woman was beaten?
If he/she is a woman, doesn't that make this a hate crime? But if he/she isn't, then it was probably justified. :P
Go watch the video at the link above then tell me what you think. The majority of the "beating" the cops claims was self defense took place with the one being beaten was still sitting down in a chair and posed no threat tot he officer. Not to mention there are other officers in the video, one is standing right next to the woman.
They cant wait to scream racism. In fact, they arnt even going to wait till the jury gives a verdict.
I am unfair to cops . They are not fair to me , they are cops . I want to start by saying even without seeing any evidence , I would expect the cops to be factually guilty . Just based on my prejudice against any cops I don't know for a fact are honest . I see her getting the worst of it , but she gets some kicks and punches in . The cops hit like girls and she is swinging and kicking like Michelle Obama . If if I am to judge solely by the video , if I understood your post correctly , I think there is reasonable doubt whether the officers reasonably believed the suspect was still resisting and assaulting , or attempting to assault them , even if they were wrong in that belief , but the belief was reasonably held . I don't know if that is the law there , but it should be . The alleged victim was shot and killed some time ago , is that correct ? She did not appear at trial , the defendant hasn't been able to confront his accuser . Even since obviously the court held the defendants rights have not been violated , the missing victim may seem unfair to the jury , it would to me . I wonder if the victims testimony from a prior proceeding was admitted . Fair minded people want the defendant to be able to confront his accuser , just like they don't want no sissy fifth amendment taking . They want the defendant to take the stand and look them in the eye and say how it was from his stand point . Inconclusive tape , no confrontation , no victim to benefit seek retribution for , and a tape of the deceased is being played on the news where it says " he called me a he-she " . Reasonable people want to know , so you hit the officer because said those dreadful things ? Jurors hear her answer in their minds "Yes , I was mad and we transvestite donkey witches and my lawyer Don Imus are here to assert the rights of donkey witches to put the smack down on people who call us he-she . We hate that ". The other thing , the jurors are going to want to know how complaining witness was killed . The judge will say some crap like it is immaterial and irrelevant to these proceedings how she was killed and you are admonished not to speculate the cause or consider if her own conduct contributed to her death . The jurors then think ," Oh so you are going to keep secrets from us like we are too stupid to decide fairly . Lets see ? Transvestite pugilist fights with cop says he had it coming , then goes off and probably was doing donkey witch things and started a fight and somebody ,who hits like a cop-girl ,has to kill her ? And now Don Imus the head transvestite lawyer wants us to send a message , if a transvestite donkey witch thinks you called her a name she can assault you , but you can't hit her back to stop the assault . I still think the cops are guilty , but even cops are entitled to proof beyond a reasonable doubt . There . I have doubts based on reasons . Not guilty . Well at least the cop lost his job and had his life ruined , so we cop bashers can enjoy that .
They would have acquitted him already if it weren't for the stupid women on the jury.
I am unfair to cops . They are not fair to me , they are cops . I want to start by saying even without seeing any evidence , I would expect the cops to be factually guilty . Just based on my prejudice against any cops I don't know for a fact are honest .
I see her getting the worst of it , but she gets some kicks and punches in . The cops hit like girls and she is swinging and kicking like Michelle Obama . If if I am to judge solely by the video , if I understood your post correctly , I think there is reasonable doubt whether the officers reasonably believed the suspect was still resisting and assaulting , or attempting to assault them , even if they were wrong in that belief , but the belief was reasonably held .
I don't know if that is the law there , but it should be . The alleged victim was shot and killed some time ago , is that correct ? She did not appear at trial , the defendant hasn't been able to confront his accuser . Even since obviously the court held the defendants rights have not been violated , the missing victim may seem unfair to the jury , it would to me . I wonder if the victims testimony from a prior proceeding was admitted .
Fair minded people want the defendant to be able to confront his accuser , just like they don't want no sissy fifth amendment taking . They want the defendant to take the stand and look them in the eye and say how it was from his stand point . Inconclusive tape , no confrontation , no victim to benefit seek retribution for , and a tape of the deceased is being played on the news where it says " he called me a he-she " .
Reasonable people want to know , so you hit the officer because said those dreadful things ? Jurors hear her answer in their minds "Yes , I was mad and we transvestite donkey witches and my lawyer Don Imus are here to assert the rights of donkey witches to put the smack down on people who call us he-she .
We hate that ". The other thing , the jurors are going to want to know how complaining witness was killed . The judge will say some crap like it is immaterial and irrelevant to these proceedings how she was killed and you are admonished not to speculate the cause or consider if her own conduct contributed to her death .
The jurors then think ," Oh so you are going to keep secrets from us like we are too stupid to decide fairly . Lets see ? Transvestite pugilist fights with cop says he had it coming , then goes off and probably was doing donkey witch things and started a fight and somebody ,who hits like a cop-girl ,has to kill her ? And now Don Imus the head transvestite lawyer wants us to send a message , if a transvestite donkey witch thinks you called her a name she can assault you , but you can't hit her back to stop the assault .
I still think the cops are guilty , but even cops are entitled to proof beyond a reasonable doubt . There . I have doubts based on reasons . Not guilty . Well at least the cop lost his job and had his life ruined , so we cop bashers can enjoy that .
There was a trial but the media is only showing and presenting the side of the cross dressing MAN.
Because the media are refusing to show the public the evidence presented by the accused officer in the case, we don’t know what the jury was presented with in order to determine whether it was a jury flaw or not.
That is unfortunate and shows the media is afraid to show the public both sides of the case for fear it would weaken the case against the cop. They have obviously chosen sides in an affirmative action sort of determination of “racial and sex justice rather than criminal justice. Whether it is a racist/homophobe jury problem or not; we are not able to say for lack of information presented at the trial.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.