Chauvin - Guilty on All Charges

[Philhelm]

Even without those considerations, a 2nd degree murder charge seems a bit much. I haven't followed the case (at all), but I would doubt that there would be any evidence that the death was intentional.

One of the elements of 2nd degree murder in MN is:

(1) causes the death of a human being, without intent to effect the death of any person, while committing or attempting to commit a felony offense other than criminal sexual conduct in the first or second degree with force or violence or a drive-by shooting; or

I assume that the justification was that Chauvin unintentionally killed Floyd while commiting a felony.

[sparebulb]

This whole cluster $#@! from day one is like every episode of Breaking Bad condensed into one painful hour.

I have nobody to cheer for here...nobody to be in favor of...not even an anti-hero has emerged.

Everybody involved sucks ass and I want no part of any of it.

I agree.

If there could be any characters that might have been acting out of basic human decency, it may have been some of the bystanders who recommended that Chauvin take his knee off of Saint Floyd of Fentanyl's neck.

Although it may be hard to tell what was human decency and what was knee-jerk F The Police vitriol on the part of the bystanders.

[69360]

Yeah.
Political theater.
Don't be shocked if this is quietly overturned in the next year.
The state expects their goons to goon.

He will serve a few years on the manslaughter, which he is guilty of. Then there will be a quiet appeal and the murder charges will be tossed.

[Brian4Liberty]

This seems accurate to me too.

I also think it's strange for the charges to stack like that, it should be one of the three, whichever it meets the criteria for, not all three.

I had that same question.

If a person commits a first degree murder, can they also be charged and convicted of everything less on down to the most minor assault?

[Brian4Liberty]

I agree.

If there could be any characters that might have been acting out of basic human decency, it may have been some of the bystanders who recommended that Chauvin take his knee off of Saint Floyd of Fentanyl's neck.

Although it may be hard to tell what was human decency and what was knee-jerk F The Police vitriol on the part of the bystanders.

George Floyd: Bouncer, Porn Star, Drug Addict, Hero of Justice, Martyr, Saint.


https://youtu.be/LOMCFB9c_wM

[Brian4Liberty]

It seems that, at worst, Chauvin was negligent, but that's assuming that George Floyd didn't die primarily or in totality from overdose. For what it's worth, my live-in, former pharmacist, father-in-law stated that an opiate (fentanyl) overdose can cause the respiratory muscles to stop functioning, resulting in a cessation of breathing. That seems like reasonable doubt to me.

The primary negligence was holding him down and putting pressure on the chest of someone who couldn't breath and was essentially having a heart attack. The reason for the medical emergency was unknown, and not relevant.

[sparebulb]

[QUOTE=Brian4Liberty;7034528]George Floyd: Bouncer, Porn Star, Drug Addict, Hero of Justice, Martyr, Saint.


https://youtu.be/LOMCFB9c_wM[/QUOTE

To be honest, I stole "Saint Floyd of Fentanyl" from alternative media.]

[CaptUSA]

It sends a clear signal. Don’t kill black people...

...on camera.

[dannno]

The primary negligence was holding him down and putting pressure on the chest of someone who couldn't breath and was essentially having a heart attack. The reason for the medical emergency was unknown, and not relevant.

He asked to be held on the ground, and the pressure was on his neck/shoulder as per his training.

[Philhelm]

He asked to be held on the ground, and the pressure was on his neck/shoulder as per his training.

The police even changed their use of force regulations afterward. The whole thing stinks, cop or not.

[Brian4Liberty]

Keith Ellison, Minnesota Attorney General, just said that this was not justice. He said there needs to be reparations, and it is in the hands of the people (aka mob). He wants riots.

Good grief.

AOC also said that this verdict was not justice. Seems that the far left had their talking points all ready for this guilty on all counts verdict. They will agitate no matter what happens.

AOC letting her feelings flow:
https://www.instagram.com/p/CN57HcjH1eV/

Another video of AOC without make-up:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Rw5MosKRm4

[jmdrake]

It was a political show trial to satiate the leftist mobs.

I'm not a huge fan of the police, but my problem is that there seems to be a legitimate "reasonable doubt" that Chauvin killed George Floyd. The drugs in George Floyd's system, the fact that George Floyd stated that he couldn't breathe before he was pinned, a sliver of doubt about the exact placement of the knee, a supposed lack of post-mortem injury to the neck, etc., are reasonable to consider. I didn't have personal investment in the outcome of this trial, but I have a hard time thinking that it is a win considering the legal standard of "reasonable doubt" was mostly likely slaughtered (not to mention the witness intimidation and other shenanigans clouding this case).

Is there anything other than an acquittal that would have you think it trial was fair? "Beyond reasonable doubt" never means "beyond any scintila of a possibility of doubt." The breathing expert explained why fentynol did not cause George Floyd's death based on the breathing rate.



Also in this video he explains the effects of the knee on the kneck (at one point Chauvin's foot was in the air showing that all he weight was on his kneck) and on Floyd's chest.



And when you consider the fact that the prosecution didn't need to prove that Chauvin's actions were the sole cause of death, but merely show that it was a signficant contributing factor, and you combine that with the expert testiony, it's quite understandable that the reasonable doubt threshold was met. I think Chauvin's defense attorney did a good job all things considered. But without rebutting that expert testimony, Chauvin was toast. O.J. Simpson had Barry Scheck to come in and rebut the DNA evidence. That and the lack of chain of custody introduced reasonable doubt. All I've heard from the Chauvin defenders is "Well...Floyd had drugs in his system."

[jmdrake]

It sends a clear signal. Don’t kill black people. But it’s still open season on everyone else.

A much better comparison can be made between ^this video and the Adam Toledo video or the Tamir Rice video or the Philando Castille video than to George Floyd. I'm sad Mr. Shaver died. But at one point he clearly made a move that could have been interpreted as going for a gun. People want to talk about "Play stupid games and win stupid prizes?" Well Mr. Shaver pointed a scoped pellet gun out of a hotel window. That's what brought in S.W.A.T. Pretty stupid. I don't think Shaver should have been shot. I don't think Toledo should have been shot. I don't think Tamir Rice should have been shot. I don't think Philando Castille should have been shot. But in each of those cases there was a possible "I was in fear for my life" defense. Derek Chauvin never could claim to be in fear of his life. Police convictions are rare. The Somali born cop that killed the white woman from Australia because he freaked out and fired blindly after hearing a "bang" was convicted even though he used the "I was in fear of my life" defense. And he should have been convicted. But so should some other cops. (Philando Castille's killer at least). The guy that shot Oscar Grant in the back after he was on the ground handcuffed because he thought he had a taser got convicted. We'll see if this latest taser / shooter gets acquitted.

If you want to compare apples to apples talk Tony Timpa.

I'll reserve judgement on this one as I haven't seen a good angle of the video. But from what I saw it seems to back up the claim that she was attempting to jump through the barrade door window. That was another stupid game to play. When Capital Hill Police murdered Miriam Carey (black), they pulled her daughter out of the car before gunning her down. I don't recall any police ever being charged.

I hope Tony Timpa (white) gets some justice. I hope the same for Kelly Thomas (white). Both of those killings seem completely unjustified and there's no evidence of "stupid games" being played. But the same standard has to be applied. If cops get the benefit of the doubt when they shoot someone who happens to be unarmed because they think he has a gun, even if it really is a wallet (Amadou Diallo - black), then they get the benefit of the doubt when the same thing happens and the suspect is white. If they don't, then they don't.

This trial should be looked at as the wierd 2020 outlier that it is IMO.

[enhanced_deficit]

This verdict appears to be 'Biden approved', that is not to say this is managed outcome.
Saw some social media comments saying that verdict will be overturned but I think it's not going to be easy with current political/social justice/human rights climate.
If this verdict stays, it will have far reaching implications. Will also make future global wars and occupations very difficult to manage.
Pressure will build on Dems to end Police training trips to foreign countries that use 'knee on kneck' method for policing people of various races.


Top GOP leaders appear to be quiet so far in response to this court verdict.
Somewhat surprisngly notorious DGP Drone King did make a statement on justice and human rights:


Obama says 'a jury did the right thing' after Derek Chauvin guilty verdict in George Floyd's death

With a tear running from his eye, President Barack Obama recalls the 20 first-graders killed in 2012 at Sandy Hook Elementary School, while speaking in the East Room of the White House in Washington, Tuesday, Jan. 5, 2016, AP Photo/Pablo Martinez Monsivais

Former President Barack Obama on Tuesday expressed relief after ex-Minneapolis police officer Derek Chauvin was found guilty of murder and manslaughter in the death of George Floyd.

In a statement, Obama praised the verdict, while also voicing the thoughts of many who want to see criminal justice reforms in the US.
"Today, a jury did the right thing," he said on Twitter. "For almost a year, George Floyd's death under the knee of a police officer has reverberated around the world — inspiring murals and marches, sparking conversations in living rooms and new legislation. But a more basic question has always remained: would justice be done?"
He added: "In this case, at least, we have our answer. But if we're being honest with ourselves, we know that true justice is about much more than a single verdict in a single trial."
businessinsider.com/obama-george-floyd-killing-derek-chauvin-policing-2021-4

[jmdrake]

This verdict appears to be 'Biden approved', that is not to say this is managed outcome.
Saw some social media comments saying that verdict will be overturned but I think it's not going to be easy with current political/social justice/human rights climate.
If this verdict stays, it will have far reaching implications. Will also make future global wars and occupations very difficult to manage.
Pressure will build on Dems to end Police training trips to foreign countries that use 'knee on kneck' method for policing people of various races.


Top GOP leaders appear to be quiet so far in response to this court verdict.
Somewhat surprisngly notorious DGP Drone King did make a statement on justice and human rights:


Obama says 'a jury did the right thing' after Derek Chauvin guilty verdict in George Floyd's death

With a tear running from his eye, President Barack Obama recalls the 20 first-graders killed in 2012 at Sandy Hook Elementary School, while speaking in the East Room of the White House in Washington, Tuesday, Jan. 5, 2016, AP Photo/Pablo Martinez Monsivais

Former President Barack Obama on Tuesday expressed relief after ex-Minneapolis police officer Derek Chauvin was found guilty of murder and manslaughter in the death of George Floyd.

In a statement, Obama praised the verdict, while also voicing the thoughts of many who want to see criminal justice reforms in the US.
"Today, a jury did the right thing," he said on Twitter. "For almost a year, George Floyd's death under the knee of a police officer has reverberated around the world — inspiring murals and marches, sparking conversations in living rooms and new legislation. But a more basic question has always remained: would justice be done?"
He added: "In this case, at least, we have our answer. But if we're being honest with ourselves, we know that true justice is about much more than a single verdict in a single trial."
businessinsider.com/obama-george-floyd-killing-derek-chauvin-policing-2021-4

A broken clock is right twice a day.

[TheCount]

If a person commits a first degree murder, can they also be charged and convicted of everything less on down to the most minor assault?

Yes, but they are only sentenced for the most serious charge that they are found guilty of.

[Brian4Liberty]

A much better comparison can be made between ^this video and the Adam Toledo video or the Tamir Rice video or the Philando Castille video than to George Floyd.
...

No comparison to any other case was intended. The point was that those cops walked. And if a cop killed those same people tomorrow, they would still walk.

[TheCount]

No comparison to any other case was intended. The point was that those cops walked. And if a cop killed those same people tomorrow, they would still walk.

So... all cops should walk?

[Occam's Banana]

I'm not a huge fan of the police, but my problem is that there seems to be a legitimate "reasonable doubt" that Chauvin killed George Floyd. The drugs in George Floyd's system, the fact that George Floyd stated that he couldn't breathe before he was pinned, a sliver of doubt about the exact placement of the knee, a supposed lack of post-mortem injury to the neck, etc., are reasonable to consider. I didn't have personal investment in the outcome of this trial, but I have a hard time thinking that it is a win considering the legal standard of "reasonable doubt" was mostly likely slaughtered (not to mention the witness intimidation and other shenanigans clouding this case).

Is there anything other than an acquittal that would have you think it trial was fair? "Beyond reasonable doubt" never means "beyond any scintila of a possibility of doubt." The breathing expert explained why fentynol did not cause George Floyd's death based on the breathing rate.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c3r0GJXBiv8

Also in this video he explains the effects of the knee on the kneck (at one point Chauvin's foot was in the air showing that all he weight was on his kneck) and on Floyd's chest.

https://youtu.be/iCeQeExCTws

And when you consider the fact that the prosecution didn't need to prove that Chauvin's actions were the sole cause of death, but merely show that it was a signficant contributing factor, and you combine that with the expert testiony, it's quite understandable that the reasonable doubt threshold was met. I think Chauvin's defense attorney did a good job all things considered. But without rebutting that expert testimony, Chauvin was toast. O.J. Simpson had Barry Scheck to come in and rebut the DNA evidence. That and the lack of chain of custody introduced reasonable doubt. All I've heard from the Chauvin defenders is "Well...Floyd had drugs in his system."

Whatever one may think about "reasonable doubt" in this case, CNN's "senior legal analyst" doesn't care to hear about it:

https://twitter.com/RubinReport/stat...59489402998789

This whole cluster $#@! from day one is like every episode of Breaking Bad condensed into one painful hour.

I have nobody to cheer for here...nobody to be in favor of...not even an anti-hero has emerged.

Everybody involved sucks ass and I want no part of any of it.

You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to Anti Federalist again.

[Occam's Banana]

https://twitter.com/GiancarloSopo/st...33350686535680

[Occam's Banana]

https://twitter.com/ComicDaveSmith/s...15725449420807

https://twitter.com/ComicDaveSmith/s...18362794385409

https://twitter.com/ComicDaveSmith/s...21726135472132

https://twitter.com/ComicDaveSmith/s...46625050697737

[Occam's Banana]

https://twitter.com/MAJTOURE/status/1384700796202278913

[jmdrake]

Whatever one may think about "reasonable doubt" in this case, CNN's "senior legal analyst" doesn't care to hear about it:

https://twitter.com/RubinReport/stat...59489402998789

You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to Anti Federalist again.

His opinion is irrelevant. The opinions of the people that that O.J. was guilty were irrelevant also.

[CaptUSA]

https://twitter.com/ComicDaveSmith/s...15725449420807

https://twitter.com/ComicDaveSmith/s...18362794385409

https://twitter.com/ComicDaveSmith/s...21726135472132

https://twitter.com/ComicDaveSmith/s...46625050697737

This is pretty much my take exactly.

[Brian4Liberty]

So... all cops should walk?

How would you get that from anything I have said? I have to assume you are just trolling.

[Occam's Banana]

His opinion is irrelevant. The opinions of the people that that O.J. was guilty were irrelevant also.

You are missing the point of my post, which had nothing at all to do with anyone's opinion about who is guilty of what.

A Cathedral mouthpiece (Laura Coates) who is presented as an authority on legal matters ("senior legal analyst") by the corporate media (CNN) is pushing the notion that the standard of "reasonable doubt" should be regarded as irrelevant to the outcome of criminal trials. Coates apparently thinks that criminal defendants should have to prove their innocence.

Perhaps you don't find any of that alarming, but I certainly do.

[jmdrake]

You are missing the point of my post, which had nothing at all to do with anyone's opinion about who is guilty of what.

A Cathedral mouthpiece (Laura Coates) who is presented as an authority on legal matters ("senior legal analyst") by the corporate media (CNN) is pushing the notion that the standard of "reasonable doubt" should be regarded as irrelevant to the outcome of criminal trials. Coates apparently thinks that criminal defendants should have to prove their innocence.

Perhaps you don't find any of that alarming, but I certainly do.

Okay. I all can do the the point that "CNN talking heads can't be trusted and the routinely say asinine things that undermine the rule of law" is to agree with you. I think Chauvin got a fair trial, but I think CNN sucks air.

[Invisible Man]

You are missing the point of my post, which had nothing at all to do with anyone's opinion about who is guilty of what.

A Cathedral mouthpiece (Laura Coates) who is presented as an authority on legal matters ("senior legal analyst") by the corporate media (CNN) is pushing the notion that the standard of "reasonable doubt" should be regarded as irrelevant to the outcome of criminal trials. Coates apparently thinks that criminal defendants should have to prove their innocence.

Perhaps you don't find any of that alarming, but I certainly do.

That line of hers about reasonable doubt did strike me as morally repugnant and strange to be coming from a legal expert. The first thing I thought was that whatever background she had in practicing law must have been as a government prosecutor. So I checked, and yep, that's exactly what she was before becoming a professor and CNN analyst.

[TheCount]

How would you get that from anything I have said? I have to assume you are just trolling.

It's what I take from your posts, honestly.


If your opinion is that there are many circumstances in which cops should not have walked but they did, then I would think that you would celebrate the occasions when cops didn't walk, particularly if it might mean that it would lead to other cops not walking in the future.

Instead, it seems as though you would prefer if no cops get convicted rather than if some cops get convicted.

[Brian4Liberty]

It's what I take from your posts, honestly.


If your opinion is that there are many circumstances in which cops should not have walked but they did, then I would think that you would celebrate the occasions when cops didn't walk, particularly if it might mean that it would lead to other cops not walking in the future.

Instead, it seems as though you would prefer if no cops get convicted rather than if some cops get convicted.

Perhaps my liberal use of sarcasm has created some confusion. I thought it was clear that yes, more cops should be fired and charged, especially in the cases I highlighted. And police training needs to be changed.

My problems with this case are the mob, media and politician intimidation, which destroys the impartial justice system.

As far as the specifics of this case, I already made that clear:

IMHO and from what I know about the charges, he was definitely guilty of the second degree manslaughter charge. It was gross negligence on his part. The third degree murder charge was also valid, as he engaged in reckless and dangerous actions.

Second degree murder was the huge stretch, which requires some level of intent, but without premeditation. That charge also involves some level of mind reading to know intent, absent some confession or testimony by someone who claimed to know intent.