Derek Chauvin murder trial (George Floyd)

penny piper

Detritus70 wrote: »

OK, you convinced me to stick around for another while to engage in pig wrestling and pigeoon chess.
9 minutes.

Are you ok? you seem very annoyed.

Detritus70

Detritus70 wrote: »

OK, you convinced me to stick around for another while to engage in pig wrestling and pigeoon chess.
9 minutes.

Awful strange habit to loiter in what you claim is a toilet. Each to their own.

[Deleted User]

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Absolutely. It's well known that there has never ever been an incorrect verdict.

If you think OJ Simpson killed someone, your a trump supporter.

Thing is, the defence was terrible and that was why he lost. It was too difficult to establish any reasonable doubt.

walshb

I called this weeks ago. I knew he would be found guilty of something. Far too much outrage and hype and media scrutiny for him not to be convicted..

Surely he and his defence would have known that no matter what they did to defend, there would be a lot of evidence to convict, coupled with the global attention and outrage and all that..

Which brings me to Chauvin: why stay quiet and not testify? What had he to lose? Chances were that he was getting convicted.

Surely testifying and showing real human remorse and sorrow and being sorry would have given him some chance? As in, saying that he never ever intended to hurt or kill George, and that he never realised that George was truly in danger..

It just seems that his remaining quiet painted him as being inhuman, remorseless...

Sure, cross examination could have hurt him, but his case was already a tough ask for his defence. At least him speaking up to strongly deny that he never meant to hurt/kill Floyd, and that he is so sorry that George died that day.. this has to lend weight in the eyes of those judging him..

Yellow_Fern

Detritus70 wrote: »

Fentanyl is the last straw the racists desperately and grimly cling to, no matter the facts.

Quote:

"Mr. Floyd died from a low level of oxygen, and this caused damage to his brain that we see. And it also caused a PEA (pulseless electrical activity) arrhythmia that caused his heart to stop," he told the court. He explained Floyd's body position on the street, handcuffs pulling his arms back and a knee on his neck, back and sides, led to his low oxygen levels.

"All of these four forces are ultimately going to result in the low tidal volume, which gives you the shallow breaths" that can't effectively bring oxygen into the lungs, Tobin said.

He stated because fentanyl typically slows down a person's breathing, the drug was not a contributing factor based on his calculations of Floyd's breathing rate based on witness video, which at the time appeared about the same as a healthy individual.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/factcheck/2021/04/16/fact-check-fentanyl-george-floyd-not-enough-to-cause-death/7239448002/


Got a source for that?

You can get a court witness to basically say anything and in this case the expert's (Dr Toibin) testimony is bull. He claimed that he could watch this third party video and assess cause of death by measuring how his chest moved and that it was not a drug overdose. He didnt see the body. He didnt weigh Chauvin. All based on the same video we saw. That is medical alchemy. What bs.

tjhook

osarusan wrote: »

Still so many posters on here who see the word 'murder' and think it must mean that 'intentional killing', and use that misunderstanding to disagree with the verdict.

This is a good point, at least it's applicable to me.

From what I saw of the footage, the cop appeared to be guilty of something. The words "murder" and "manslaughter" are technical legal terms that have differing meanings in different jurisdictions. And in the US they're subdivided into "degrees". So while I'm a bit surprised that a person can be guilty of murder and manslaughter for the same crime, I'm aware of my limitations, and am happy to assume that the verdict was the correct one.

I was surprised though to see Biden's comment. I'm a fan of the separation between political and judicial matters. While his comment had no impact on the case, I wouldn't be comfortable with politicians expressing a preference for a particular future outcome in a criminal case. I'd feel the same if it was a Taoiseach expressing a desire for a particular outcome in a criminal case in this country. The leader of a democratic state should be happy that the judicial process is allowed to do its thing, whatever the outcome. If not, he should be open about challenging/changing the judicial process itself.

Detritus70

Yellow_Fern wrote: »

You can get a court witness to basically say anything and in this case the expert's (Dr Toibin) testimony is bull. He claimed that he could watch this third party video and assess cause of death by measuring how his chest moved and that it was not a drug overdose. He didnt see the body. He didnt weigh Chauvin. All based on the same video we saw. That is medical alchemy. What bs.

Do you have a source to back that up?

nolivesmatter

walshb wrote: »

I called this weeks ago. I knew he would be found guilty of something. Far too much outrage and hype and media scrutiny for him not to be convicted..

Surely he and his defence would have known that no matter what they did to defend, there would be a lot of evidence to convict, coupled with the global attention and outrage and all that..

Which brings me to Chauvin: why stay quiet and not testify? What had he to lose? Chances were that he was getting convicted.

Surely testifying and showing real human remorse and sorrow and being sorry would have given him some chance? As in, saying that he never ever intended to hurt or kill George, and that he never realised that George was truly in danger..

It just seems that his remaining quiet painted him as being inhuman, remorseless...

Sure, cross examination could have hurt him, but his case was already a tough ask for his defence. At least him speaking up to strongly deny that he never meant to hurt/kill Floyd, and that he is so sorry that George died that day.. this has to lend weight in the eyes of those judging him..

I think we all knew that in fairness:pac: Manslaughter or murder was only question.

Overheal

walshb wrote: »

I called this weeks ago. I knew he would be found guilty of something. Far too much outrage and hype and media scrutiny for him not to be convicted..

Surely he and his defence would have known that no matter what they did to defend, there would be a lot of evidence to convict, coupled with the global attention and outrage and all that..

Which brings me to Chauvin: why stay quiet and not testify? What had he to lose? Chances were that he was getting convicted.

Surely testifying and showing real human remorse and sorrow and being sorry would have given him some chance? As in, saying that he never ever intended to hurt or kill George, and that he never realised that George was truly in danger..

It just seems that his remaining quiet painted him as being inhuman, remorseless...

Sure, cross examination could have hurt him, but his case was already a tough ask for his defence. At least him speaking up to strongly deny that he never meant to hurt/kill Floyd, and that he is so sorry that George died that day.. this has to lend weight in the eyes of those judging him..

Witnesses waiving their fifth amendment rights is fairly uncommon in defense proceedings. They leave it up to the prosecution to mount their case, cross examination generally yields far too much risk to defendants. It just gives ammunition unless you have something really, really exculpatory to add. Expressing an outpouring of remorse prior to verdict can just as easily be interpreted by a jury as guilt. There’s still a sentencing process and typically there defendants can make those type of please. Here though it simply seems unlikely his charges will get whittled down with the Brock Turner or Lindsay Lohan or whatever treatment. He murdered someone

walshb

walshb wrote: »

I called this weeks ago. I knew he would be found guilty of something. Far too much outrage and hype and media scrutiny for him not to be convicted..

Surely he and his defence would have known that no matter what they did to defend, there would be a lot of evidence to convict, coupled with the global attention and outrage and all that..

Which brings me to Chauvin: why stay quiet and not testify? What had he to lose? Chances were that he was getting convicted.

Surely testifying and showing real human remorse and sorrow and being sorry would have given him some chance? As in, saying that he never ever intended to hurt or kill George, and that he never realised that George was truly in danger..

It just seems that his remaining quiet painted him as being inhuman, remorseless...

Sure, cross examination could have hurt him, but his case was already a tough ask for his defence. At least him speaking up to strongly deny that he never meant to hurt/kill Floyd, and that he is so sorry that George died that day.. this has to lend weight in the eyes of those judging him..

Maybe the answer is more simple than people think- maybe it’s because he knew himself he was guilty of Murder 2- especially given his background in law enforcement-he had already engaged in a plea deal subsequently withdrawn for murder 3 so he knew he was a bad boy.
https://www.google.ie/amp/s/www.nytimes.com/2021/02/10/us/george-floyd-death.amp.html

Detritus70

Overheal wrote: »

Witnesses waiving their fifth amendment rights is fairly uncommon in defense proceedings. They leave it up to the prosecution to mount their case, cross examination generally yields far too much risk to defendants. It just gives ammunition unless you have something really, really exculpatory to add. Expressing an outpouring of remorse prior to verdict can just as easily be interpreted by a jury as guilt. There’s still a sentencing process and typically there defendants can make those type of please. Here though it simply seems unlikely his charges will get whittled down with the Brock Turner or Lindsay Lohan or whatever treatment. He murdered someone

This is now an irrevocable fact.
Certain people will write walls of text, argue strenuously and vehemently, they will, and already are, clutch at any straw, conspiracy theory and outright lie to deny this fact that has now been put down in black and white.
As I said, they are at best conspiracy theorists or at worst racially motivated, look at the big scary black man, of course the brave and plucky police officer had to defend himself from that monster!
I bet they also think Trump won the election and the earth is flat.
This has been settled. Put to bed. Resolved.
It doesn't matter that some people can't accept reality.
The world has to move on without them.

penny piper

walshb wrote: »

I called this weeks ago. I knew he would be found guilty of something. Far too much outrage and hype and media scrutiny for him not to be convicted..

Surely he and his defence would have known that no matter what they did to defend, there would be a lot of evidence to convict, coupled with the global attention and outrage and all that..

Which brings me to Chauvin: why stay quiet and not testify? What had he to lose? Chances were that he was getting convicted.

Surely testifying and showing real human remorse and sorrow and being sorry would have given him some chance? As in, saying that he never ever intended to hurt or kill George, and that he never realised that George was truly in danger..

It just seems that his remaining quiet painted him as being inhuman, remorseless...

Sure, cross examination could have hurt him, but his case was already a tough ask for his defence. At least him speaking up to strongly deny that he never meant to hurt/kill Floyd, and that he is so sorry that George died that day.. this has to lend weight in the eyes of those judging him..

Most sensible post on here I've seen .... I agree I think it was obvious he was going to be convicted of something.... I don't think he thought/nelson had convinced him/nelson thought he would get guilty on all counts.
He should have testified.....in the circumstances it was a bad mistake...
Nobody will ever know what was going in his mind now/remorse...I saw how all american police officers are professionally trained for witness duty..

penny piper

Deleted User wrote: »

Thing is, the defence was terrible and that was why he lost. It was too difficult to establish any reasonable doubt.

Did you actually see the trial?

joseywhales

I don't think being remorseful changes anything, in fact it could be used to indicate that he did commit the crime, given that he feels ashamed. It's not about feelings, its about facts. RE: pleading the 5th

I was just thinking today, that if Chauvin is not a white supremacist and I have no reason to think he is, he will have to become one to survive in prison. That's kind of sad but more a reflection on the terrible prison system.

Overheal

Detritus70 wrote: »

This is now an irrevocable fact.
Certain people will write walls of text, argue strenuously and vehemently, they will, and already are, clutch at any straw, conspiracy theory and outright lie to deny this fact that has now been put down in black and white.
As I said, they are at best conspiracy theorists or at worst racially motivated, look at the big scary black man, of course the brave and plucky police officer had to defend himself from that monster!
I bet they also think Trump won the election and the earth is flat.
This has been settled. Put to bed. Resolved.
It doesn't matter that some people can't accept reality.
The world has to move on without them.

You’re talking to the Q nation though. Clearly no matter how many courts tell you something they can still cry conspiracy and refuse to accept it. Here the white supremacists (sorry pro Anglo Saxon traditionalists or whatever they are calling themselves after “alt right” flopped hard) are already taking the angle that it’s all fixed and Maxine waters something something therefore Chauvin is somehow not a murdering convict.

penny piper

Detritus70 wrote: »

This is now an irrevocable fact.
Certain people will write walls of text, argue strenuously and vehemently, they will, and already are, clutch at any straw, conspiracy theory and outright lie to deny this fact that has now been put down in black and white.
As I said, they are at best conspiracy theorists or at worst racially motivated, look at the big scary black man, of course the brave and plucky police officer had to defend himself from that monster!
I bet they also think Trump won the election and the earth is flat.
This has been settled. Put to bed. Resolved.
It doesn't matter that some people can't accept reality.
The world has to move on without them.

It wasn't a race crime...where's the evidence of that?
I thought Trump should have won the election ...alot better than Biden/harris that's running it now....:)

penny piper

joseywhales wrote: »

I don't think being remorseful changes anything, in fact it could be used to indicate that he did commit the crime, given that he feels ashamed. It's not about feelings, its about facts.

I was just thinking today, that if Chauvin is not a white supremacists and I have no reason to think he is, he will have to become one to survive in prison. That's kind of sad but more a reflection on the terrible prison system.

I think it was wrong of the minneapolis mayor (or whoever) decided to pay out $27 million before the case was ever heard was a wrong thing to do (shows guilt)...plus the judge even didn't agree with this and wanted the trial date to be set to a later date because of the implications but was over ruled by officials.

penny piper

Someone might answer me this.....Has Chauvan been found guilty of intentional manslaughter along with non intentional manslaughter?

how does that work?

Smee_Again

penny piper wrote: »

Someone might answer me this.....Has Chauvan been found guilty of intentional manslaughter along with non intentional manslaughter?

how does that work?

Hang on, you've been posting here that the verdicts are wrong and you don't even understand the charges!

How can anyone take you seriously?

OMM 0000

Detritus70 wrote: »

Fentanyl is the last straw the racists desperately and grimly cling to, no matter the facts.

OMG, we're racist now?

It's racist to acknowledge Floyd had three times the fatal dosage of fentanyl in his system?

Are you one of these people who thinks George Floyd's death was a racist killing?

Jesus Christ, what is happening to people, I never realised this idiotic "racism everywhere" mentality had come to Ireland.

penny piper

Smee_Again wrote: »

Hang on, you've been posting here that the verdicts are wrong and you don't even understand the charges!

How can anyone take you seriously?

Maybe I don't agree with mr.chauvan getting jailed? idk make more sense?

Yellow_Fern

Smee_Again wrote: »

Hang on, you've been posting here that the verdicts are wrong and you don't even understand the charges!

How can anyone take you seriously?

To be fair his charges have been controversial. A Minnesota judge ruled last October that they couldnt charge him with second degree murder but the prosecution overturned it in the state’s Court of Appeals https://apnews.com/article/derek-chauvin-trial-murder-charge-explained-5e7c935f560219caee61fcc0bef0a23d

TomSweeney

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-56827436

US President Joe Biden has said the conviction of a former police officer in the killing of George Floyd "can be a giant step forward in the march toward justice in America".

But he warned: "We can't stop here".

"A huge step" said Biden, also "we can't stop there" ?? what more do the mob want ?

You will never appease these people, ever, they will want more and more until a police officer can do nothing against a black person.

While the verdict has been delivered, there are grounds for an appeal and a mistrial. It will be interesting.

penny piper

OMM 0000 wrote: »

OMG, we're racist now?

It's racist to acknowledge Floyd had three times the fatal dosage of fentanyl in his system?

Are you one of these people who thinks George Floyd's death was a racist killing?

Jesus Christ, what is happening to people, I never realised this idiotic "racism everywhere" mentality had come to Ireland.

Seemingly lots of people in america think george floyd's death was racist....idk I thought it was a black guy called the police officers in the first place...even the president seems to be treating it as racist....who'd be a police officer if in america?

penny piper

Does he get the same lawyer Nelson for the appeal ?... I know there's a new jury/judge

penny piper

penny piper wrote: »

who'd be a police officer if in america?

White supremacists according to some here

Oranage2

penny piper wrote: »

Seemingly lots of people in america think george floyd's death was racist....idk I thought it was a black guy called the police officers in the first place...even the president seems to be treating it as racist....who'd be a police officer if in america?

Systematic racism

TomSweeney

penny piper wrote: »

Seemingly lots of people in america think george floyd's death was racist....idk I thought it was a black guy called the police officers in the first place...even the president seems to be treating it as racist....who'd be a police officer if in america?

It's nuts, I think Chauvin would have done the same to a white guy if he acted that way (not excusing it, just pointing out that it's police brutality and not racism...)

Overheal

penny piper wrote: »

Does he get the same lawyer Nelson for the appeal ?... I know there's a new jury/judge

Yes. Attorneys normally only can’t be excused from a case when it’s well underway and it can be shown that the attorney leaving would be disruptive to due process. This docket is wrapped up and the appeal is basically a subsequent docket.

Oranage2

Oranage2 wrote: »

Systematic racism

How does systemic racism apply to this case?

Tony EH

penny piper wrote: »

Maybe I don't agree with mr.chauvan getting jailed? idk make more sense?

NOTHING you have posted in this thread has made any real sense.

You are only continually bleating the same message over and over again. You want Chauvin to get away with killing Floyd.

We get it.

Other than that, you have absolutely nothing else.

Oranage2

penny piper wrote: »

Maybe I don't agree with mr.chauvan getting jailed? idk make more sense?

So you've no idea about anything, just a gut feeling that he doesn't deserve jail.

Thank God you weren't a member of the jury

Faugheen

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Are you suggesting this incident was racially motivated?

And of course racism exists, but unfortunately when people describe any bad thing that happens to a person of colour as racism, it dilutes the severity of the word and it starts to lose all meaning.

And imagine white people not wanting to be discriminated against because of their skin colour.....

Nope.

Just suggesting that there are people on this forum who have problems with black people and are showcasing it right now by trying to defend this murdering scumbag and, in a lot of cases, victim blame.

As I have said multiple times. Dissent, deny, deflect and distract. Those same posters are happy to talk about anything to do with this case apart from the fact a white police officer murdered an unarmed black man.

Smee_Again

penny piper wrote: »

Maybe I don't agree with mr.chauvan getting jailed? idk make more sense?

Not really.

It’s clear you don’t understand the charges and the differences between but you’re adamant that Chauvin is innocent.

So I’ll repeat my question how can anyone take you seriously when you don’t really know what’s going on.

Overheal

Overheal wrote: »

Yes. Attorneys normally only can’t be excused from a case when it’s well underway and it can be shown that the attorney leaving would be disruptive to due process. This docket is wrapped up and the appeal is basically a subsequent docket.

I'm pretty sure for an appeal he can instruct whoever he wants. The case is decided, an appeal will look at grounds as to why the verdict/case was unfair, if there's new evidence, reasons why the conviction should not stand. It is not a continuation of the case, its a review.

Faugheen

Faugheen wrote: »

Those same posters are happy to talk about anything to do with this case apart from the fact a white police officer murdered an unarmed black man.

Because the colour of the people has nothing to do with this case.

Why would you bring race into it?

Smee_Again

Yellow_Fern wrote: »

To be fair his charges have been controversial. A Minnesota judge ruled last October that they couldnt charge him with second degree murder but the prosecution overturned it in the state’s Court of Appeals https://apnews.com/article/derek-chauvin-trial-murder-charge-explained-5e7c935f560219caee61fcc0bef0a23d

Irrelevant.

PP is ignorant to the differences between the charges, that’s easily fixed by reading the judge’s instructions to the jury.

They haven’t done that and are claiming the verdicts are wrong while also confessing to not understanding the charges. Why should anyone pay any more attention to that poster?

A complete waste of time.

penny piper

penny piper wrote: »

Does he get the same lawyer Nelson for the appeal ?... I know there's a new jury/judge

There wouldn't be a jury for an appeal, only for a retrial.

PhlegmyMoses

penny piper wrote: »

Someone might answer me this.....Has Chauvan been found guilty of intentional manslaughter along with non intentional manslaughter?

how does that work?

Did you actually see the trial?

Overheal

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Because the colour of the people has nothing to do with this case.

Why would you bring race into it?

Surely nobody could actually pretend race is not an element in this case?

penny piper

Tony EH wrote: »

NOTHING you have posted in this thread has made any real sense.

You are only continually bleating the same message over and over again. You want Chauvin to get away with killing Floyd.

We get it.

Other than that, you have absolutely nothing else.

Do you really think I care what you think?

TomSweeney

Overheal wrote: »

Surely nobody could actually pretend race is not an element in this case?

Why is it an element though ? do you think the cops would have treated him differently if he were white ?



But everything else was the same ...

penny piper

PhlegmyMoses wrote: »

Did you actually see the trial?

no did you?

penny piper

Smee_Again wrote: »

Irrelevant.

PP is ignorant to the differences between the charges, that’s easily fixed by reading the judge’s instructions to the jury.

They haven’t done that and are claiming the verdicts are wrong while also confessing to not understanding the charges. Why should anyone pay any more attention to that poster?

A complete waste of time.

Well, I'm so sorry for been so stupid perhaps you should ignore me in future...like I'll ignore you ...have a nice day

BattleCorp

When's the appeal? Do they have to wait until after sentencing?

Overheal

Overheal wrote: »

Surely nobody could actually pretend race is not an element in this case?

I'm more shocked that you actually believe it is.

Smee_Again

penny piper wrote: »

no did you?

Didn’t see the trial.
Doesn’t understand the charges.

Wants to be taken seriously

drkpower

Overheal wrote: »

Yes. Attorneys normally only can’t be excused from a case when it’s well underway and it can be shown that the attorney leaving would be disruptive to due process. This docket is wrapped up and the appeal is basically a subsequent docket.

In the US, appeal lawyers tend to be different to trial lawyers so he will probably have a different lawyer.

I

Yellow_Fern

TomSweeney wrote: »

It's nuts, I think Chauvin would have done the same to a white guy if he acted that way (not excusing it, just pointing out that it's police brutality and not racism...)

Look at the killing of Daniel Shaver, killed on his knees in his hotel room, begging not to be shot. The police were there as he was seen walking by his hotel room with a pellet gun. He was shot five times as he was seen to lowing one hand towards his waist, which it is believed he did as his briefs were falling off. He was drunk so struggled to comply with police instructions. But he was white so the media buried the case. Vastly worse case than the killing of George Floyd and he wasn't convicted a criminal like GF. But no protests. No outrage. No one cares.
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-42277309