Jump to content
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Derek Chauvin trial. Murder of George Floyd. Convictions now appealed.


Recommended Posts

13 minutes ago, the moops said:

if it is deemed "appropriate force" to kneel on a guys neck for 9 minutes resulting in his death then something is wrong. Terribly wrong. 

He isn't getting off.    But if he does you might want to look at why.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, lazyike said:

What side of the aisle? We know what the Trump side of the aisle did on January 6th when what they were falsely  led  by Trump that he won the election.

That's one incident. One.  BLM/Antifa dwarfs that record last year alone, much less the last 4.

  • Laughing 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, quick-hands said:

This is some lazy posting.

I wasn’t the one who claimed how one side of the aisle reacted and then ignored how the other side reacted.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, lazyike said:

When someone gives you the opportunity for a layup..take it.

300,000 incidents to 1.  Yeah, good comparison.

My statement stands.  The left side resorts to violence in scope and scale far, far more often than the right.  It's not even comparable. 

Edited by BladeRunner
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, BladeRunner said:

300,000 incidents to 1.  Yeah, good comparison.

My statement stands.  The left side resorts to violence far, far more often than the right.  It's not even comparable.

While terrorism is somewhat different but considering the fact that our FBI Director says White Supremacists are our main concern when it comes to domestic terrorism I disagree. Events like Jan 6th and Charlottesville are the results. As are many of mass shootings which are  often times anger from the Right. Apologize to many for getting off the topic of this thread.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, BladeRunner said:

300,000 incidents to 1.  Yeah, good comparison.

My statement stands.  The left side resorts to violence in scope and scale far, far more often than the right.  It's not even comparable. 

It shouldn’t because it had nothing to do with my point. When I discussed the chances of riots here, I wasn’t referring to Democrats or Republicans or “sides of the aisle.” I don’t even know why you brought it up. 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Bucsfan5493 said:

Yep. I already took a step back, realized the emotions of this case got the best of me and admitted I was wrong.

 

Second-Degree Murder

https://www.justia.com/criminal/offenses/homicide/second-degree-murder/

 

Third Degree Murder Law and Legal Definition

https://definitions.uslegal.com/t/third-degree-murder/

 

******

So you did something that you later regretted in hindsight, but when you did it, there was no actual "intent" to harm the community around you?

How easy would it be for anyone here to prove what your intent actually was given the time and place?

How difficult would it be for anyone to prove what your intent actually was to the standard of removing all reasonable doubt?

How excruciating would it be for anyone to prove what your intent actually was in several specific moments in time, all clouded by context and other legal complexities?

How insanely hard would it be to convince all of the above to 12 different people, all from diverse backgrounds and life experiences?

Your lack of control means you just did more to defend Chauvin than anyone else here in this thread. Very likely more than anyone in the entire PSF. And a betting man's chance of more than anyone in all of FBG.

Just because Chauvin is very likely a ######## does not change the basic principles of a legal defense in an intended democratic society. The very issue that Chauvin is very likely a huge douchenozzle is proof that the average person can get a legal defense when tried for a crime. Would you rather we all just line people up against a wall and start opening fire instead?

Is it more important that you admit you are wrong? Or is it more important to understand why you are wrong to the degree that viewpoints as such are actually toxic to the ideals of freedom.

Freedom isn't always about apple pie, flags,medals, tear inducing speeches and glory. Often it is ugly, brutal, relentless, unforgiving and thoroughly battered. It's not tragic you lost control of your emotions, it's tragic you don't seem to understand the ugly cost of actual freedom. 

Derek Chauvin thanks you for the greatest defense of him yet posed here on FBG.

  • Love 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, jon_mx said:

I really wish that was the case.  But people go into journalism to be social justice activists. That is what schools put out and that is painfully obvious in every mainstream newscast.  It is all about advancing narratives and agendas.  

First....as it pertains to this topic, it's not "either/or".  Second....you are talking about the individuals.  I am talking about the companies.  If you think the companies give you any thought beyond "what will get jon's attention" I've got "news" for you.  They don't even hide it.  It's painfully obvious to anyone not participating in their nonsense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, the moops said:

Exactly. My why is that the system is broken and we need a reset. What is your why?

My why is why although  you have no idea what comes next.   And will probably be more tribal but you would cut off your nose to spite your face.

Why would you do that.

Are you under 35?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, quick-hands said:

My why is why although  you have no idea what comes next.   And will probably be more tribal but you would cut off your nose to spite your face.

Why would you do that.

Are you under 35?

I am not under 35. Not sure why that matters. I don't think it is a very controversial take that if what happened to Floyd is deemed appropriate use of force that we need to revisit what calculus we are using in coming to that decision

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, the moops said:

I am not under 35. Not sure why that matters. I don't think it is a very controversial take that if what happened to Floyd is deemed appropriate use of force that we need to revisit what calculus we are using in coming to that decision

I dont think anyone thinks it is.   In fact everyone  was rightly outraged when that happened.    I want him to gone and every officer  who watched fired.

But burn the system down.   That will be a bloody business you would support.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, GordonGekko said:

 

Second-Degree Murder

https://www.justia.com/criminal/offenses/homicide/second-degree-murder/

 

Third Degree Murder Law and Legal Definition

https://definitions.uslegal.com/t/third-degree-murder/

 

******

So you did something that you later regretted in hindsight, but when you did it, there was no actual "intent" to harm the community around you?

How easy would it be for anyone here to prove what your intent actually was given the time and place?

How difficult would it be for anyone to prove what your intent actually was to the standard of removing all reasonable doubt?

How excruciating would it be for anyone to prove what your intent actually was in several specific moments in time, all clouded by context and other legal complexities?

How insanely hard would it be to convince all of the above to 12 different people, all from diverse backgrounds and life experiences?

Your lack of control means you just did more to defend Chauvin than anyone else here in this thread. Very likely more than anyone in the entire PSF. And a betting man's chance of more than anyone in all of FBG.

Just because Chauvin is very likely a ######## does not change the basic principles of a legal defense in an intended democratic society. The very issue that Chauvin is very likely a huge douchenozzle is proof that the average person can get a legal defense when tried for a crime. Would you rather we all just line people up against a wall and start opening fire instead?

Is it more important that you admit you are wrong? Or is it more important to understand why you are wrong to the degree that viewpoints as such are actually toxic to the ideals of freedom.

Freedom isn't always about apple pie, flags,medals, tear inducing speeches and glory. Often it is ugly, brutal, relentless, unforgiving and thoroughly battered. It's not tragic you lost control of your emotions, it's tragic you don't seem to understand the ugly cost of actual freedom. 

Derek Chauvin thanks you for the greatest defense of him yet posed here on FBG.

This post, and those who responded to it with a heart symbol, is clear evidence (which I didn’t really need) that what I wrote earlier today was absolutely correct: there are folks here rooting for Chauvin’s acquittal. 

  • Love 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, timschochet said:

This post, and those who responded to it with a heart symbol, is clear evidence (which I didn’t really need) that what I wrote earlier today was absolutely correct: there are folks here rooting for Chauvin’s acquittal. 

Which part is evidence?  I mean GG probably served it up on a platter but I’d like to confirm which element implies GG wants Chauvin to be acquitted.

Edited by djmich
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, djmich said:

Which part is evidence?  I mean GG probably served it up in a platter but I’d like to confirm which element implies GG wants Chauvin to be acquitted.

Oh the post in its entirety will do just fine. I don’t need to parcel it out. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, GordonGekko said:

 

Second-Degree Murder

https://www.justia.com/criminal/offenses/homicide/second-degree-murder/

 

Third Degree Murder Law and Legal Definition

https://definitions.uslegal.com/t/third-degree-murder/

 

******

So you did something that you later regretted in hindsight, but when you did it, there was no actual "intent" to harm the community around you?

How easy would it be for anyone here to prove what your intent actually was given the time and place?

How difficult would it be for anyone to prove what your intent actually was to the standard of removing all reasonable doubt?

How excruciating would it be for anyone to prove what your intent actually was in several specific moments in time, all clouded by context and other legal complexities?

How insanely hard would it be to convince all of the above to 12 different people, all from diverse backgrounds and life experiences?

Your lack of control means you just did more to defend Chauvin than anyone else here in this thread. Very likely more than anyone in the entire PSF. And a betting man's chance of more than anyone in all of FBG.

Just because Chauvin is very likely a ######## does not change the basic principles of a legal defense in an intended democratic society. The very issue that Chauvin is very likely a huge douchenozzle is proof that the average person can get a legal defense when tried for a crime. Would you rather we all just line people up against a wall and start opening fire instead?

Is it more important that you admit you are wrong? Or is it more important to understand why you are wrong to the degree that viewpoints as such are actually toxic to the ideals of freedom.

Freedom isn't always about apple pie, flags,medals, tear inducing speeches and glory. Often it is ugly, brutal, relentless, unforgiving and thoroughly battered. It's not tragic you lost control of your emotions, it's tragic you don't seem to understand the ugly cost of actual freedom. 

Derek Chauvin thanks you for the greatest defense of him yet posed here on FBG.

 

lol at you comparing ‘intent’ with a poster regretting losing his cool on a message board vs. someone putting their knee on a person’s neck/shoulder blade for 9 minutes. I’m legitimately impressed you were able to pull off the mental gymnastics to make that comparison.

Also, very convenient of you to leave out Manslaughter, which he is being charged for, does not require intent and makes your entire post worthless. This is probably the most likely scenario here if he’s charged with anything.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, BladeRunner said:

300,000 incidents to 1.  Yeah, good comparison.

My statement stands.  The left side resorts to violence in scope and scale far, far more often than the right.  It's not even comparable. 

Respectfully, this particular back and forth is derailing what has generally been an extremely informative thread. 

Also, many thanks to @NorvilleBarnes for the regular updates. 

Edited by bigbottom
  • Like 2
  • Thanks 3
  • Love 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, timschochet said:

Oh the post in its entirety will do just fine. I don’t need to parcel it out. 

I don’t read that post as rooting for his acquittal. It is an observation that there is a very high standard of proof and the state’s case may not be as slam dunk as some think.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thursday after lunch:


Dr. Isenschmid, forensic toxicologist, was the next witness. He testified briefly on fentanyl and methamphetamines.

Dr Smock, specialist in Forensic Medicine, was next. He testified a bit on tolerance. Also testified  that George Floyd died of "positional asphyxia". Also some discussion on "excited delirium". He stated emphatically that George Floyd did not die of overdose.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just trying to get back on topic here...is there anyone that doubts that this Officer Chauvin didn't murder George Floyd?

I have not been following all of the evidence BUT what I've heard seems awfully damning and I'll just point to the very few things I have heard so far. 

-The video of where he is at the back of the ambulance, the BS he said about trying to get a supervisor or someone out to care for Floyd, it doesn't appear Chauvin gave a single shred of care in the World AND it appears from the things I am pointing to that he was covering his tracks as soon as he knew there wasn't a pulse. Just the way it looks and there was ample time for cross examination and that hasn't helped much. 

-The Police Chief's testimony, where I come from cops are always backing their fellow officers in almost every situation unless something terribly egregious has happened...well when the Chief says they don't train any officers to use their knee on the back of the victim like he did for any reason, what else do we need to hear? 

-The testimony today from an expert saying lack of oxygen and not drugs were the reason George Floyd died. 

I'm sure they can keep mounting more evidence but I think they have made a clear case on the Prosecution to put Mr DC behind bars...for how long? If I were the judge, let's start with a Life sentence and see where that goes. Again, I'm mostly running on emotion from what i have heard so far but no matter what comes out of the Defense team, I don't see any way they can get 12 members of a jury to not see this as murder of one kind or another. 

I'm not trying to pick a fight, I didn't rebuke anyone or quote anybody, just an opinion from someone who doesn't tune in that often. I am saddened by everything that I have heard so far in this case. 

I don't understand why folks are fighting in here. What does crazy violent mobs have to do with the murder of George Floyd? Did those violent outbreaks happen prior or after his life was taken while he was cuffed behind his back face down on the ground with a knee pressed into him cutting off his oxygen and ability to breath and just live his life? I think we know the answer to that at this point. 

I know why folks were outraged watching it all thru a television that usually had tainted glasses for jersey color or the other but again I stress that pinning bad events on one political group is a really bad idea. It bites you in the ### and if they had all the murders of innocent folks who had their lives taken by police officers who weren't recorded and put up on social media for the entire world to see, I think folks would be shocked. I remember a string of police involved shootings in Miami/Little Haiti area and you would just read about cops mowing down a car of believed drug or gang related thugs and there was barely any coverage and I would have loved to read the police reports on all these shootings. I wish they would have an independent council go thru the Miami-Dade records the last 10 years, I'll bet some fo those officers are still on active duty as we speak.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know we don't do this in the U.S. ... but I'd love for Chauvin to be compelled to testify. Not North-Korea or Soviet style ... but in a system more like France's inquisitorial system, which compels defendant testimony but codifies that a defendant is immune from a perjury charge.

IMHO -- and this is a mile off base and will not get broad support -- Chauvin owes the general public an explanation and at least a play-act of remorse. What the heck was he thinking at, say, minute six? A minute later?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Doug B said:

I know we don't do this in the U.S. ... but I'd love for Chauvin to be compelled to testify. Not North-Korea or Soviet style ... but in a system more like France's inquisitorial system, which compels defendant testimony but codifies that a defendant is immune from a perjury charge.

IMHO -- and this is a mile off base and will not get broad support -- Chauvin owes the general public an explanation and at least a play-act of remorse. What the heck was he thinking at, say, minute six? A minute later?

Can't he just claim 5th Amendment right not to say anything?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, The Z Machine said:
33 minutes ago, Doug B said:

I know we don't do this in the U.S. ... but I'd love for Chauvin to be compelled to testify. Not North-Korea or Soviet style ... but in a system more like France's inquisitorial system, which compels defendant testimony but codifies that a defendant is immune from a perjury charge.

IMHO -- and this is a mile off base and will not get broad support -- Chauvin owes the general public an explanation and at least a play-act of remorse. What the heck was he thinking at, say, minute six? A minute later?

Can't he just claim 5th Amendment right not to say anything?

In the American judicial system, it doesn't even come to having to invoke the 5th -- a defendant can't be compelled to testify, full stop. What I am musing about is really just fantasy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, bigbottom said:

I don’t read that post as rooting for his acquittal. It is an observation that there is a very high standard of proof and the state’s case may not be as slam dunk as some think.

Tim can see black in white.  He's so desperately hungry for someone to want him to be acquitted.  It's pathetic.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, tonydead said:

Tim can see black in white.  He's so desperately hungry for someone to want him to be acquitted.  It's pathetic.  

You understand me about as well as you understand COVID, or politics, or the border situation, or any of the rest of the long list of items you’ve continually gotten wrong in this forum. 

  • Like 2
  • Love 2
  • Laughing 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Ministry of Pain said:

Just trying to get back on topic here...is there anyone that doubts that this Officer Chauvin didn't murder George Floyd?

I have not been following all of the evidence BUT what I've heard seems awfully damning and I'll just point to the very few things I have heard so far. 

-The video of where he is at the back of the ambulance, the BS he said about trying to get a supervisor or someone out to care for Floyd, it doesn't appear Chauvin gave a single shred of care in the World AND it appears from the things I am pointing to that he was covering his tracks as soon as he knew there wasn't a pulse. Just the way it looks and there was ample time for cross examination and that hasn't helped much. 

-The Police Chief's testimony, where I come from cops are always backing their fellow officers in almost every situation unless something terribly egregious has happened...well when the Chief says they don't train any officers to use their knee on the back of the victim like he did for any reason, what else do we need to hear? 

-The testimony today from an expert saying lack of oxygen and not drugs were the reason George Floyd died. 

I'm sure they can keep mounting more evidence but I think they have made a clear case on the Prosecution to put Mr DC behind bars...for how long? If I were the judge, let's start with a Life sentence and see where that goes. Again, I'm mostly running on emotion from what i have heard so far but no matter what comes out of the Defense team, I don't see any way they can get 12 members of a jury to not see this as murder of one kind or another. 

I'm not trying to pick a fight, I didn't rebuke anyone or quote anybody, just an opinion from someone who doesn't tune in that often. I am saddened by everything that I have heard so far in this case. 

I don't understand why folks are fighting in here. What does crazy violent mobs have to do with the murder of George Floyd? Did those violent outbreaks happen prior or after his life was taken while he was cuffed behind his back face down on the ground with a knee pressed into him cutting off his oxygen and ability to breath and just live his life? I think we know the answer to that at this point. 

I know why folks were outraged watching it all thru a television that usually had tainted glasses for jersey color or the other but again I stress that pinning bad events on one political group is a really bad idea. It bites you in the ### and if they had all the murders of innocent folks who had their lives taken by police officers who weren't recorded and put up on social media for the entire world to see, I think folks would be shocked. I remember a string of police involved shootings in Miami/Little Haiti area and you would just read about cops mowing down a car of believed drug or gang related thugs and there was barely any coverage and I would have loved to read the police reports on all these shootings. I wish they would have an independent council go thru the Miami-Dade records the last 10 years, I'll bet some fo those officers are still on active duty as we speak.

From what I've read, none of the things he is charged with carry a sentence of life in prison.  He's not being charege with murder in the 1st.  He'd have to have to be found guilty of a combination of charges and/or receive the maximum penalties to spend the rest of his life in prison, assuming he lives a normal length life.

2nd degree murder - 40 years max, average sentence is 26 years.

3rd degree murder - 25 years max, average sentence is 12.5 years

2nd degree manslaughter - 10 years max, average sentence is 4 years.

(these are different, hopefully more accurate, numbers than I posted yesterday)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Doug B said:

IMHO -- and this is a mile off base and will not get broad support -- Chauvin owes the general public an explanation and at least a play-act of remorse. What the heck was he thinking at, say, minute six? A minute later?

This would be valuable (not from a case perspective but from a information perspective...I doubt it would hurt)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, tonydead said:

From what I've read, none of the things he is charged with carry a sentence of life in prison.  He's not being charege with murder in the 1st.  He'd have to have to be found guilty of a combination of charges and/or receive the maximum penalties to spend the rest of his life in prison, assuming he lives a normal length life.

2nd degree murder - 40 years max, average sentence is 26 years.

3rd degree murder - 25 years max, average sentence is 12.5 years

2nd degree manslaughter - 10 years max, average sentence is 4 years.

(these are different, hopefully more accurate, numbers than I posted yesterday)

So what's he being charged with, max sentence?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, timschochet said:

You understand me about as well as you understand COVID, or politics, or the border situation, or any of the rest of the long list of items you’ve continually gotten wrong in this forum. 

Oh snap.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, timschochet said:

This post, and those who responded to it with a heart symbol, is clear evidence (which I didn’t really need) that what I wrote earlier today was absolutely correct: there are folks here rooting for Chauvin’s acquittal. 

 

Direct Headline: INSIGHT: Defense Counsel’s Role in Democracy—Representing Those Accused of Heinous Crimes

Defense attorneys perform a vital job of protecting the rights of the accused, regardless of how heinous the allegations might be. Jeffrey S. Leon, president of the American College of Trial Lawyers, says this role is critically important to a free and democratic society and in upholding the rule of law.

Jeffrey S. Leon July 2, 2019, 1:01 AM

https://news.bloomberglaw.com/business-and-practice/insight-defense-counsels-role-in-democracy-representing-those-accused-of-heinous-crimes

 

******

How would you feel if your daughters were accused of a very public and controversial crime and our society and laws had shifted to the point where there was no safe way for them to have a criminal legal defense at all?

And before you get indignant, you splatter details of your personal life all over these forums all the time. Don't talk about things in public you aren't willing to have be public discussion in general.

I actually don't mind brutal punishments, but I do mind the absolute terror that comes with a society that offers zero legal defense for anyone period. Especially if they are also accused of "wrong think" against the majority.

Take a Soma pill and get some rope and find a tall tree. Is this your answer?

I actually am OK with ropes and tall trees provided there's actually a functional trial first. Treat the guilty as guilty, but when they are actually found guilty, and NOT before then.

Your political views don't trouble me Tim. What bothers me is you are willing to treat others in a manner you would not wish to be treated yourself. It actually makes you the most dangerous kind of person possible to be around because there is nothing more savage than a man without a code.

Another issue is you don't actually understand the law. If it makes you feel better, after spending years reviewing over the mostly menagerie of woe that is the unlimited gaggle of "Proud to wave my law degree around like I'm Little Carmine Lupertazzi" club here at FBG, you aren't alone.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vJggSqCftgA

A pint of blood does cost more than a gallon of gold....

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, bigbottom said:

I don’t read that post as rooting for his acquittal. It is an observation that there is a very high standard of proof and the state’s case may not be as slam dunk as some think.

I didn't either but some here like to parrot people into groups.  racist, et al.  makes some feel really good about themselves even if they are totally wrong.

I thought the post informative as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/8/2021 at 8:12 AM, glvsav37 said:

I think how you view lawyers really depends on your experience with them. Although I've thankfully never dealt with it, IMO divorce lawyers are one of the lowest rung of scumminess, but for every one who takes some dude's whole financial life away from him, there are others who help a battered wife regain he life again. It's hard to paint with a broad brush. 

It's easy to say being a defense lawyer is bad, until its you who are wrongly accused of something and thier experience in being "bad" is you only shot at freedom or sentencing. 

To clarify: there was a divorce lawyer's office next to my old office and he had a series of 3 Lambos that he would park out front with license plates like "Winning" other douchey phrases. I could only imagine how many unfortunate dudes are sleeping in studio apartments and driving 06 Carolla's to their 3rd job to make those Lambo payments for him. lol

Yeah those guys are total scumbags too!

 

Oh, wait.... :kicksrock: 

  • Laughing 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, Ministry of Pain said:

Just trying to get back on topic here...is there anyone that doubts that this Officer Chauvin didn't murder George Floyd?.......

 

VIDEO: Will Derek Chauvin Be Convicted? — NYC Trial Attorney Provides Her Analysis •Apr 9, 2021

Ben Shapiro interviews Misty Marris, a trial attorney covering the Derek Chauvin case.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cbmcwc5a2e4

 

********

Marris brings up some good distinctions

1) What is active resistance versus passive resistance?

2) What are the ambiguities ( via department General Orders) in the defensive tactics training that Chauvin received?

3) Part of the prosecution's case now rests on one narrow pathway for cause of death in contrast to the medical examiners report (Baker) of varied issues. Baker said if Floyd died in his apartment, that he would have ruled it an overdose.

Something to keep in mind is because Marris spoke up, she will raise her public profile so that might have some positive impact on her individual marketing. However since she will be blacklisted for "wrongthink", she almost certainly invited further doxxing in her legal life, will face some type of open confrontation, there will be those who will gun down for her law license in some fashion and she will very likely receive threats.

If you speak up against the radical cancel culture woked out left, it's pretty much established in the standard playbook that you are now a target and will be dragged through purity test after purity test.

The problem you are going to have here MOP is you are mixing law versus justice. I've spoken on this issue before,  I wished more of the open attorneys here in the forums would discuss this, but then most would have to admit they don't specialize in criminal law. Can't have that, can we?

When you walk into a courtroom, you are only sure to get the application of the law, you may or may not receive what you believe is justice.

What you are really asking is -

A) Will there be "justice" for George Floyd?

B) Will Derek Chauvin face "justice" for what happened?

Chauvin will get the law. That bothers lots of people. But this is how our legal system works. Often times, justice does not happen. But the same principles that makes that repugnant to you are the same principles under which our society just doesn't grab a rope and find a tall tree as fast as possible when the mob is offended. You can't have one without the other. It's the same principle under which love is the greatest thing on Earth, until it breaks your heart into a thousand pieces and you believe you will never be whole ever again.

"Reasonable Doubt" is a matter for legal debate, not one regarding justice. No amount of screaming by the shills in the woked out MSM will ever change that.  It won't help you sleep any better at night, but this is the game, this is how it works, this is the truth.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, GordonGekko said:

 

VIDEO: Will Derek Chauvin Be Convicted? — NYC Trial Attorney Provides Her Analysis •Apr 9, 2021

Ben Shapiro interviews Misty Marris, a trial attorney covering the Derek Chauvin case.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cbmcwc5a2e4

 

********

Marris brings up some good distinctions

1) What is active resistance versus passive resistance?

2) What are the ambiguities ( via department General Orders) in the defensive tactics training that Chauvin received?

3) Part of the prosecution's case now rests on one narrow pathway for cause of death in contrast to the medical examiners report (Baker) of varied issues. Baker said if Floyd died in his apartment, that he would have ruled it an overdose.

Something to keep in mind is because Marris spoke up, she will raise her public profile so that might have some positive impact on her individual marketing. However since she will be blacklisted for "wrongthink", she almost certainly invited further doxxing in her legal life, will face some type of open confrontation, there will be those who will gun down for her law license in some fashion and she will very likely receive threats.

If you speak up against the radical cancel culture woked out left, it's pretty much established in the standard playbook that you are now a target and will be dragged through purity test after purity test.

The problem you are going to have here MOP is you are mixing law versus justice. I've spoken on this issue before,  I wished more of the open attorneys here in the forums would discuss this, but then most would have to admit they don't specialize in criminal law. Can't have that, can we?

When you walk into a courtroom, you are only sure to get the application of the law, you may or may not receive what you believe is justice.

What you are really asking is -

A) Will there be "justice" for George Floyd?

B) Will Derek Chauvin face "justice" for what happened?

Chauvin will get the law. That bothers lots of people. But this is how our legal system works. Often times, justice does not happen. But the same principles that makes that repugnant to you are the same principles under which our society just doesn't grab a rope and find a tall tree as fast as possible when the mob is offended. You can't have one without the other. It's the same principle under which love is the greatest thing on Earth, until it breaks your heart into a thousand pieces and you believe you will never be whole ever again.

"Reasonable Doubt" is a matter for legal debate, not one regarding justice. No amount of screaming by the shills in the woked out MSM will ever change that.  It won't help you sleep any better at night, but this is the game, this is how it works, this is the truth.

9 mins knee on neck. Case closed just figuring out the details now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, The General said:

9 mins knee on neck. Case closed just figuring out the details now.

“Passive resistance”. While the full weight of a grown ### man is on a mans neck, for 9 min.  Nine ####### mins.  Unreal. 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, The General said:

9 mins knee on neck. Case closed just figuring out the details now.

 

VIDEO: Reasonable Doubt: Floyd's Drug Use And Dealer Trip Up Prosecutors •Apr 8, 2021

 George Floyd's drug dealer, who was in the car during his death, refuses to testify and investigators found Floyd's half-chewed pills on the floor of the squad car 6 months after the incident.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1iEvh26-08Q

 

******

Shapiro brings up an interesting point ( those "details") about Maurice Hall (why he won't testify) that the standard MSM won't cover.

Also he is open about Floyd's past, a large majority of it, should not be relevant to this specific proceeding.

But Shapiro is a Conservative right? No way he could have any legitimate points. He needs to be purified with the rest of the "wrongthink" Morlocks.

But since The General believes the case to already be closed, without actual due process, let's get to the heart of his viewpoint

https://www.walmart.com/search/?query=rope

^ This is all you have left when you've decided due process is just too troublesome and is taking too long for your personal tastes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, GordonGekko said:

 

VIDEO: Reasonable Doubt: Floyd's Drug Use And Dealer Trip Up Prosecutors •Apr 8, 2021

 George Floyd's drug dealer, who was in the car during his death, refuses to testify and investigators found Floyd's half-chewed pills on the floor of the squad car 6 months after the incident.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1iEvh26-08Q

 

******

Shapiro brings up an interesting point ( those "details") about Maurice Hall (why he won't testify) that the standard MSM won't cover.

Also he is open about Floyd's past, a large majority of it, should not be relevant to this specific proceeding.

But Shapiro is a Conservative right? No way he could have any legitimate points. He needs to be purified with the rest of the "wrongthink" Morlocks.

But since The General believes the case to already be closed, without actual due process, let's get to the heart of his viewpoint

https://www.walmart.com/search/?query=rope

^ This is all you have left when you've decided due process is just too troublesome and is taking too long for your personal tastes.

He’s getting a trial. That’s his due process. I have heard enough from his colleagues, from his bosses, from eye witnesses, from what I saw on video. 

Haven’t paid close enough attention to determine what I would give him, but it would be pretty harsh. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I heard 8 of his former colleagues say he was wrong - including his supervisor, chief of police, and the officers who trained him. Their words mean a lot. Its rare to have one or two officers speak out against one of their own, Chauvin's had 8.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, GordonGekko said:

 

VIDEO: Will Derek Chauvin Be Convicted? — NYC Trial Attorney Provides Her Analysis •Apr 9, 2021

Ben Shapiro interviews Misty Marris, a trial attorney covering the Derek Chauvin case.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cbmcwc5a2e4

 

********

Marris brings up some good distinctions

1) What is active resistance versus passive resistance?

2) What are the ambiguities ( via department General Orders) in the defensive tactics training that Chauvin received?

3) Part of the prosecution's case now rests on one narrow pathway for cause of death in contrast to the medical examiners report (Baker) of varied issues. Baker said if Floyd died in his apartment, that he would have ruled it an overdose.

Something to keep in mind is because Marris spoke up, she will raise her public profile so that might have some positive impact on her individual marketing. However since she will be blacklisted for "wrongthink", she almost certainly invited further doxxing in her legal life, will face some type of open confrontation, there will be those who will gun down for her law license in some fashion and she will very likely receive threats.

If you speak up against the radical cancel culture woked out left, it's pretty much established in the standard playbook that you are now a target and will be dragged through purity test after purity test.

The problem you are going to have here MOP is you are mixing law versus justice. I've spoken on this issue before,  I wished more of the open attorneys here in the forums would discuss this, but then most would have to admit they don't specialize in criminal law. Can't have that, can we?

When you walk into a courtroom, you are only sure to get the application of the law, you may or may not receive what you believe is justice.

What you are really asking is -

A) Will there be "justice" for George Floyd?

B) Will Derek Chauvin face "justice" for what happened?

Chauvin will get the law. That bothers lots of people. But this is how our legal system works. Often times, justice does not happen. But the same principles that makes that repugnant to you are the same principles under which our society just doesn't grab a rope and find a tall tree as fast as possible when the mob is offended. You can't have one without the other. It's the same principle under which love is the greatest thing on Earth, until it breaks your heart into a thousand pieces and you believe you will never be whole ever again.

"Reasonable Doubt" is a matter for legal debate, not one regarding justice. No amount of screaming by the shills in the woked out MSM will ever change that.  It won't help you sleep any better at night, but this is the game, this is how it works, this is the truth.

Good stuff GG but for me it is very simple, he's already been caught red handed trying to cover his tracks, he knew he did wrong when there was no pulse and he pretty much is a cold hearted #####, the jury will have no problem convicting him for whatever they have thrown at him. 

Is he gonna get a Life sentence, of course not but he should get the max the Judge can legally slam down the gavel on him.  25-30 years in prison will take the best part of his remaining life away and he'll never arrest another human being the rest of his life, that's still not going to bring George Floyd back but it will start setting a precedence that police officers are not above the law even though a lot of them act that way. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Amused to Death said:

I heard 8 of his former colleagues say he was wrong - including his supervisor, chief of police, and the officers who trained him. Their words mean a lot. Its rare to have one or two officers speak out against one of their own, Chauvin's had 8.

I agree 100% with this and think that alone is going to push the jury to want to convict. You add that to Chauvin lying about trying to get Floyd some field help and the back of the ambulance video plus the 8 or 9 minutes he chokes off Floyd's capacity to breathe with onlookers watching him he felt absolutely no compassion whatsoever. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, GordonGekko said:

VIDEO: Will Derek Chauvin Be Convicted? — NYC Trial Attorney Provides Her Analysis •Apr 9, 2021

Ben Shapiro interviews Misty Marris, a trial attorney covering the Derek Chauvin case.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cbmcwc5a2e4

Ben Shapiro can’t credibly broach this. Everyone has bias, but his is too heavy.  Marris loses credibility by even sitting down and talking with Shapiro about this.

  • Laughing 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • NorvilleBarnes changed the title to Derek Chauvin trial. Murder of George Floyd. Convictions now appealed.

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
  • Create New...