Derek Chauvin murder trial (George Floyd)

penny piper

The state of minnieapolis allows the technique of knee to neck restraint....it's perfectly acceptable for police officers to use deadly force if a suspect presents imminent danger....chauvin was resisting arrest in the car....compressing of a person's neck to one or either side is allowed by neck/leg as long as there is no direct pressure to the trachea/airway...it's allowed in order to control someone with light to moderate compression or with the intention of rendering the person unconscious by applying direct pressure...the latter act is only allowed to protect police officer's lives with a suspect who is actively agressive and cannot be controlled by lesser methods....
His lawyer was terrible with the first few witnesses....the second witness who couldn't seemed very unreliable for the state....he gave up questioning her so quickly....

ohnonotgmail

Deleted User wrote: »

Both those posters were calling for a fair trial, for all evidence to be heard and people not to be prejudiced because of the BLM mob.

What part of that do you disagree with?

I think the possibility of a fair trial is close to 0. he is a white police officer. Practically a get out of jail free card in the US. if it wasn't captured on film it wouldn't have got anywhere near a court.

ELM327

Deleted User wrote: »

Both those posters were calling for a fair trial, for all evidence to be heard and people not to be prejudiced because of the BLM mob.

What part of that do you disagree with?

Presumably all of it, as they want chauvin convicted by the mob.

seamus

ELM327 wrote: »

You or I have no idea what the fentanyl and other drugs would have done to his system.

Dodging the question I see. Because you know that the autopsies all conclude that he died from compression to the neck as a primary factor, with narcotics in his system a potential contributing factor.

Therefore we go back to my original assertion: Floyd was killed by Chauvin kneeling on his neck. That is basically a legal fact unless the defence tries to convince the jury that the doctors were all incorrect.

So, the fentanyl is for now, irrelevant. Floyd's history of drug abuse is for now, irrelevant.

The question is whether Chauvin's action of kneeling on Floyd's neck was reasonable and proportionate. And therefore whether the killing was murder or accident.

ohnonotgmail

penny piper wrote: »

The state of minnieapolis allows the technique of knee to neck restraint....it's perfectly acceptable for police officers to use deadly force if a suspect presents imminent danger....chauvin was resisting arrest in the car....compressing of a person's neck to one or either side is allowed by neck/leg as long as there is no direct pressure to the trachea/airway...it's allowed in order to control someone with light to moderate compression or with the intention of rendering the person unconscious by applying direct pressure...the latter act is only allowed to protect police officer's lives with a suspect who is actively agressive and cannot be controlled by lesser methods....

he was lying on the ground with his hands handcuffed. there were other police officers next to him. what imminent danger did he present?

ohnonotgmail

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

I think the possibility of a fair trial is close to 0. he is a white police officer. Practically a get out of jail free card in the US. if it wasn't captured on film it wouldn't have got anywhere near a court.

I completely disagree with you and think that he won't get a fair trial BECAUSE he is a white police officer. He's practically been found guilty before any evidence for his defence was submitted.

pjohnson

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

I think the possibility of a fair trial is close to 0. he is a white police officer. Practically a get out of jail free card in the US. if it wasn't captured on film it wouldn't have got anywhere near a court.

Just look at the Martens case officers/agents are above the law.

ELM327

seamus wrote: »

Dodging the question I see. Because you know that the autopsies all conclude that he died from compression to the neck as a primary factor, with narcotics in his system a potential contributing factor.

Therefore we go back to my original assertion: Floyd was killed because Chauvin was kneeling on his neck. That is basically a legal fact unless the defence tries to convince the jury that the doctors were all incorrect.

So, the fentanyl is for now, irrelevant. Floyd's history of drug abuse is for now, irrelevant.

The question is whether Chauvin's action of kneeling on Floyd's neck was reasonable and proportionate. And therefore whether the killing was murder or accident.

I did not dodge the question, I answered it.
I believe he was likely to have suffered a cardiac event as he had swallowed all of the narcotics he was carrying when the police arrived so as not to be caught.


As the state of MN advises officers (at the time) that neck to knee was an acceptable restraint to use I do not see a conviction happening.

ELM327

Deleted User wrote: »

I completely disagree with you and think that he won't get a fair trial BECAUSE he is a white police officer. He's practically been found guilty before any evidence for his defence was submitted.

+100000 to this.
White guilt assigned by the BLM mob and the white knights play a big factor here.

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

he was lying on the ground with his hands handcuffed. there were other police officers next to him. what imminent danger did he present?

You can't look at that in isolation. Look at his actions across the timeline and you see what danger he presented.
He resisted several times.

ohnonotgmail

Deleted User wrote: »

I completely disagree with you and think that he won't get a fair trial BECAUSE he is a white police officer. He's practically been found guilty before any evidence for his defence was submitted.

but he won't be found guilty. you can bet money on that.

penny piper

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

he was lying on the ground with his hands handcuffed. there were other police officers next to him. what imminent danger did he present?

I presume they/he made that decision based on what had already happened ..maybe in the car who knows.....

ohnonotgmail

ELM327 wrote: »

+100000 to this.
White guilt assigned by the BLM mob and the white knights play a big factor here.


You can't look at that in isolation. Look at his actions across the timeline and you see what danger he presented.
He resisted several times.

you can. you can look at the 9 minute span where he presented no imminent danger and chauvin continued to kneel on his neck.

ohnonotgmail

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

but he won't be found guilty. you can bet money on that.

I have no idea. When all the evidence has been presented, I'll hopefully be clearer as to what happened.

ELM327

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

but he won't be found guilty. you can bet money on that.

Because he is not guilty IMO of murder 2. Not because of his race or job.

Nozebleed

court tv have a you tube channel if anyone wants to get the facts.

ELM327

Deleted User wrote: »

I have no idea. When all the evidence has been presented, I'll hopefully be clearer as to what happened.

Agree. But on the currently available evidence it is pretty clear he is not guilty. Certainly of the charges levied.
They should have gone for a lower charge.

ohnonotgmail

penny piper wrote: »

I presume they/he made that decision based on what had already happened ..maybe in the car who knows.....

that argument doesn't hold water.

ohnonotgmail

Deleted User wrote: »

I have no idea. When all the evidence has been presented, I'll hopefully be clearer as to what happened.

we know what happened.

ELM327

Nozebleed wrote: »

court tv have a you tube channel if anyone wants to get the facts.

Live on youtube coverage too across all major networks, Fox, CNN etc, as well as on Sky channel 524. I have it on in the background (well, afternoon our time anyway) while I'm working. The joys of working from home!

ELM327

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

we know what happened.

Why bother with the trial so.

Quantum Erasure

Nozebleed wrote: »

court tv have a you tube channel if anyone wants to get the facts.

Facts? We've no need for facts here

ohnonotgmail

ELM327 wrote: »

Agree. But on the currently available evidence it is pretty clear he is not guilty. Certainly of the charges levied.
They should have gone for a lower charge.

It is normal practice to prosecute a higher charge but giving the jury the option of finding them guilty of a lesser charge.

ELM327

Quantum Erasure wrote: »

Facts? We've no need for facts here

White man guilty. ACAB.

MrStuffins

ELM327 wrote: »

Presumably all of it, as they want chauvin convicted by the mob.

Exactly what I spoke about early in the thread. Wow!

ohnonotgmail

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

we know what happened.

There's plenty of facts that I am not privy to. I won't be making up my mind until I've seen them

LessOutragePlz

Quantum Erasure wrote: »

Facts? We've no need for facts here

Yeah all the lawyers and legal experts are clearly in this thread:rolleyes:

ohnonotgmail

ELM327 wrote: »

Why bother with the trial so.

we know the facts. it is up to the jury to decide where those facts sit in the legal framework that applies in that jurisdiction.

ELM327

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

It is normal practice to prosecute a higher charge but giving the jury the option of finding them guilty of a lesser charge.

IMO based on current evidence, something like involuntary manslaughter could be an option, but certainly murder 2 is not realistic.

ohnonotgmail

Deleted User wrote: »

There's plenty of facts that I am not privy to. I won't be making up my mind until I've seen them

really? what facts are you unsure about and how are they relevant?

MrStuffins

ELM327 wrote: »

White man guilty. ACAB.

Do you dispute the findings of the autopsies? If so, why?