Derek Chauvin murder trial (George Floyd)

poisonated

It’s almost midnight and I’m still watching court tv(I didn’t even know I had that channel). It would be a sad day if chauvin gets off. Weirder things have happened though.

briany

penny piper wrote: »

I still have the opinion Nelson is trying to show/will show that chauvan carried out the restraint technique according to the minneapolis police dept manual knee to neck ....and and added to the state of excited delirium was the reason chauvan continued the restraint....

Excited delirium? He was face down with handcuffs on. He looked pretty subdued by the time he was under Chauvin.

I expect that US police deal with many suspects who are on some kind of substance, some of which may produce a 'state of excited delirium', as you say. Meth addicts, people on PCP or bath salts, for example. Is the training to handcuff these people, get them on the ground and then kneel on their neck as long as you feel like it? And then continue to kneel on their neck even if they become unresponsive?

UFC fighters sometimes use chokeholds to win matches, but it's really only up to the point their opponent submits. Continuing until their opponent was dead would be bad form. Likewise, Chauvin may have executed the knee to the neck with perfect technique but he became overzealous, and that negates things. A police officer must have a duty of care towards people, even suspects, unless their life is imminently under threat from same. That didn't apply to the prone, handcuffed Floyd, begging for breath under Chauvins knee.

But I don't necessarily expect Chauvin to get the full whack as it's tough to prove premeditation or anything like that. Probably reckless misconduct / manslaughter.

MrStuffins

briany wrote: »

Excited delirium?

There's some delirium alright, but it's not in court!

It's bizarre seeing people freely admit that they know Mr.Chauvin is responsible for the death of Mr Floyd, but want to see him walk free because of political and social bias.

Swaine

MrStuffins wrote: »

There's some delirium alright, but it's not in court!

It's bizarre seeing people freely admit that they know Mr.Chauvin is responsible for the death of Mr Floyd, but want to see him walk free because of political and social bias.

He should get time IMO but not much. He contributed to his death but was only a small part of it. He can't be totally blamed, unfortunately Floyd was mainly responsible for his own death.

The whole BLM thing is just laughable at this stage, it cheapens Floyd's life more than anything because he himself never once mentioned racism in any of the videos showing his death.

briany

Swaine wrote: »

He should get time IMO but not much. He contributed to his death but was only a small part of it. He can't be totally blamed, unfortunately Floyd was mainly responsible for his own death.

"Your honour, I put it to this court that Mr. Floyd died from hypertension and drug intoxication, and the fact that my client's knee was on his neck at the time is little more than tangential. Mr. Floyd probably would have died shortly after leaving the store in any event."

Gas stuff.

MrStuffins

Swaine wrote: »

He should get time IMO but not much. He contributed to his death but was only a small part of it. He can't be totally blamed, unfortunately Floyd was mainly responsible for his own death.

The whole BLM thing is just laughable at this stage, it cheapens Floyd's life more than anything because he himself never once mentioned racism in any of the videos showing his death.

I'm not a BLM supporter, but I can understand where they're coming from when you have people looking to make excuses for Mr Chauvin due to nothing but politics.

Two autopsies quite clearly state it was homicide and he died from having someone's knee on his neck until he was dead...... but hey, that's only "a small part of it"!

"Sure, I shot the guy.I actually shot him 7 times through the temple. But hey, he had high cholesterol so who's to say that didn't contribute?"

MrStuffins

MrStuffins wrote: »

"I'm not a BLM supporter, but..."

As valid as "I'm not a racist but..."

MrStuffins

[Deleted User] wrote: »

As valid as "I'm not a racist but..."

I really wish Boards had laughy emojis! :pac: :pac: :pac:

MrStuffins

MrStuffins wrote: »

I really wish Boards had laughy emojis! :pac: :pac: :pac:

So you do not support BLM?

Yes or no.

MrStuffins

[Deleted User] wrote: »

So you do not support BLM?

Yes or no.

If only there was some way you could find that answer somewhere :pac: :pac:

MrStuffins

MrStuffins wrote: »

If only there was some way you could find that answer somewhere :pac: :pac:

If only there was a way you could answer a straight question.

poisonated

[Deleted User] wrote: »

If only there was a way you could answer a straight question.

I think the clue is where the poster said he wasn’t a BLM supporter....I hope that helps.

MrStuffins

[Deleted User] wrote: »

If only there was a way you could answer a straight question.

Put the whiskey away pal!

poisonated

poisonated wrote: »

I think the clue is where the poster said he wasn’t a BLM supporter....I hope that helps.

I saw that,and then I saw the "but"

MrStuffins wrote: »

Put the whiskey away pal!

I don't drink. I'm not your pal.

So you aren't a supporter of blm? Do you oppose them? Or are you indifferent to them?

MrStuffins

[Deleted User] wrote: »

I don't drink.

Or whatever it is that's blurring your vision. I'd suggest knocking it on the head buddy.

Maybe it's your obsession with BLM? I'm not sure. Only you can answer that question.

Although, after you do you'll probably ask it again :pac:

I'm off to sleep now. Have a good night!

MrStuffins

MrStuffins wrote: »

Or whatever it is that's blurring your vision. I'd suggest knocking it on the head buddy.

Maybe it's your obsession with BLM? I'm not sure. Only you can answer that question.

Although, after you do you'll probably ask it again :pac:

I'm off to sleep now. Have a good night!

My obsession with BLM is the fact that their recent rise to prominence is based on the events which led to this trial.

Any BLM sympathetic person will not have an unbiased view.

While you said you weren't a supporter, you added a "but" which would lead anyone to assume that you may be somewhat supportive, while not having the courage of your convictions to declare it.

I was simply looking for clarification.

Your engagement with people who don't agree with you has been condescending, inflammatory and unnecessarily baiting.

I'll leave you be.

Mellor

[Deleted User] wrote: »

My obsession with BLM is the fact that their recent rise to prominence is based on the events which led to this trial.

Any BLM sympathetic person will not have an unbiased view.

By the same logic anyone who opposes BLM will not have an unbiased view. You’ve ruled out most of the thread tbh.

Quantum Erasure

Mellor wrote: »

By the same logic anyone who opposes BLM will not have an unbiased view..

that doesn't really follow, (If we're talking about 'capital B, capital L, capital M' at least)

JP Liz V1

CIARAN_BOYLE wrote: »

To me the question of this court case is what charge Chauvin will be found guilty of.

He has been charged with 3 different offences.

Second-degree unintentional murder
Third-degree murder
Manslaughter

I can't see a world where Chauvin doesn't get convicted but I do wonder which charge.

Chauvin had previously asked for a deal whereby he would plead to 3rd degree murder and take 10 years. William Barr (then US AG) refused the deal.

I wouldn't be surprised to see him being merely convicted of manslaughter.

What's he likely to get for manslaughter?

Eric Cartman

Mellor wrote: »

By the same logic anyone who opposes BLM will not have an unbiased view. You’ve ruled out most of the thread tbh.

Not supporting a violent, racist extremist political movement does not make someone biased ,

osarusan

JP Liz V1 wrote: »

What's he likely to get for manslaughter?

Second-degree murder carries a sentence of up to 40 years in prison.
Prosecutors will have to prove beyond reasonable doubt Chauvin caused Mr Floyd's death while committing or attempting to commit a related felony - third-degree assault here.
They will not have to prove he intended to cause Mr Floyd's death.


Second-degree manslaughter has up to 10 years jail time.
Prosecutors will have to prove beyond reasonable doubt Chauvin caused Mr Floyd's death by "culpable negligence" - that he created unreasonable risk and consciously chose to cause death or serious harm.
Police are authorised to use force so prosecutors will have to prove the force he used was unlawful.


Third-degree murder can mean up to 25 years in prison. Prosecutors must prove Chauvin's actions caused Mr Floyd's death, and were reckless and without regard for human life.

It seems kind of strange to me, as the bar for second-degree manslaughter seems 'higher' in terms of conscious intent to harm than the 3rd degree murder charge, yet the sentence is lower.


From what I have seen so far, it seems easier for the prosecution to argue for recklessness than conscious choice to cause death or serious harm.

Smee_Again

Eric Cartman wrote: »

Not supporting a violent, racist extremist political movement does not make someone biased ,

Does supporting one make someone biased?

Smee_Again

Smee_Again wrote: »

Does supporting one make someone biased?

Well.....yes.

Smee_Again

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Well.....yes.

Good to know.

MrStuffins

Deleted User wrote: »

My obsession with BLM

Ok, I appreciate the fact that you admit to being obsessed. That's a start.........

Deleted User wrote: »

their recent rise to prominence is based on the events which led to this trial

The killing of Mr Floyd by Mr Chauvin lead to this trial. The fact that it was caught on camera and the world saw it greatly contributed.

Any BLM sympathetic person will not have an unbiased view.

And neither will anyone who so vehemently opposes them that they feel the need to drag it into every conversation. I have friends who are as obsessed with this anti-BLM stuff. It's disturbing to watch. It clouds their judgement and fills them with hate. So much hate that they will blindly oppose anything that they (BLM) agree with.

They will, completely unironically, complain about some people on the left shouting "racist" when someone on the right says something they don't agree with, but then in the same sentence call someone on the left racist for the exact same thing. Or take an anti-racism stance as racism in itself. Most of the world lives in an objective middle-ground that they just don't seem to be a part of.

It's a weird kind of dilerium and it's sad to see.

While you said you weren't a supporter, you added a "but" which would lead anyone to assume.........

Nope. It would only lead someone who was so obsessed with BLM that they needed to attach labels to anyone and everyone who had any sort of opinion on it to assume what you assumed.

I don't support Sinn Fein BUT I agree with at least one of their policies

I don't support Fianna Fail BUT I agree with at least one of their policies

I don't support the Greens BUT I agree with at least one of their policies

I don't support Manchester United BUT I like Bruno Fernandes

I don't like prawns, but I like prawn crackers...........

Again, most of the world lives in the middle ground. Your obsession doesn't allow you to see it.

penny piper

MrStuffins wrote: »

I'm not a BLM supporter, but I can understand where they're coming from when you have people looking to make excuses for Mr Chauvin due to nothing but politics.

So what you are really saying is Chauvan is been used as a scapegoat/example for BLM ....so how can Chauvan/or anyone have a fair trial if that is what the agenda will always be?

MrStuffins

penny piper wrote: »

So what you are really saying.........

Wrong

penny piper

MrStuffins wrote: »

Wrong

That's your opinion....

When potential jurors were interviewed for the case they were told by Mr.Chauvans defense lawyer...that "it was not about race"...or "broader social issues"...few observers believe that race won't shape the trial.

"In terms of "public consciousness, this is all about race," said Mr. Paul Butler a former federal prosecutor who teaches criminal law and race relations at Georgestown University Law Centre.

Even if race is not brought up by the prosecution or defense experts believe that it will almost certainly shape how the jury receives the testimony and evidence
in the case and ultimately the verdict...

He is a scapegoat...will not get a fair trial...

MrStuffins

penny piper wrote: »

He is a scapegoat...will not get a fair trial...

Right, so this is what YOU are saying.

You must have misquoted me above when you claimed this is what I was saying.

Mistakes happen.

penny piper

MrStuffins wrote: »

Right, so this is what YOU are saying.

You must have misquoted me above when you claimed this is what I was saying.

Mistakes happen.

Yes that's what I was saying so what you are saying is that you can only see this through BLM's point of view....