Four Minneapolis officers fired after death of black man part II

[Ingomike]

Hey, here's a thought...
Why don't we just say there was a trial and the jury convicted. The Defense has grounds for appeal (thanks to one or more Congresswomen) and if an error has occurred, it can be corrected at the next trial.

If you can't do that, consider this.

This only applies if one believes the judiciary is not corrupted.

Can one look a the election, gun cases, and even social cases over the past 10 years and say it is not corrupt?

 

[patience0830]

Had I been on the jury, the deliberations would have been shorter than they were. I would have explained why the trial was full of crap and then explained that it is either going to be acquittal or a hung jury because I'm not going to change my position.

Over the course of my life I have had a lot of difficulty from refusing to budge on matters of principle, but that's just the way I am.

I admire the not budging on principle, but if you were not in the courtroom hearing all the evidence I don't see making a definitive statement on guilt or innocence as a wise choice. We sit here on the outside armchair quarterbacking with incomplete knowledge and no first degree skin in the game. How is this right?

 

[DadSmith]

There you have it if they don't get what they want round up anyone they think is a white supremacist and give them street justice aka kill them all. If that doesn't work civil war. From BLM mouths to your ears.

 

[IndyDave1776]

Nope. I’m gonna need a pass from a mod before I sellout like that. Because that “report” button is probably going to get worn out real quick.
And I didn’t say Democrats “aren’t” radicalized. On the contrary, “Republicans”are just catching up.

Do you understand how this sounds like saying, "Vote Cthulu. Why settle for the lesser evil?"

*For the non-nerds, Cthulu is a malevolent omnipotent deity from a role playing game that was popular when I was in college.

 

[IndyDave1776]

I admire the not budging on principle, but if you were not in the courtroom hearing all the evidence I don't see making a definitive statement on guilt or innocence as a wise choice. We sit here on the outside armchair quarterbacking with incomplete knowledge and no first degree skin in the game. How is this right?

I am guessing that you didn't watch the portion of the trial showing video from multiple angles demonstrating that Chauvin's knee was on Floyd's shoulder, not his neck.

 

[buckwacker]

I'm sorry that you have not kept up with the American Justice System until just this moment. Nevertheless, it doesn't work that way.

The way the system works and reasonable can be different things.

 

[jamil]

There you have it if they don't get what they want round up anyone they think is a white supremacist and give them street justice aka kill them all. If that doesn't work civil war. From BLM mouths to your ears.

The demand for WS/Fascist to smash far exceeds the supply.

 

[patience0830]

I am guessing that you didn't watch the portion of the trial showing video from multiple angles demonstrating that Chauvin's knee was on Floyd's shoulder, not his neck.

What part of "not seeing ALL the evidence" did you not understand?

 

[IndyDave1776]

And that woke dream is the Genocide of White people? Because that's what I've been told.

When they spray paint exhortations to kill white people on buildings, that tends to give us the idea that's what they have in mind.

 

[IndyDave1776]

What part of "not seeing ALL the evidence" did you not understand?

The entire case turned on the accusation that Chauvin's knee compressing Floyd's neck was the cause of death. Watching Mr. Nelson prove that this did not happen is adequate to address the charges.

 

[Kutnupe14]

The way the system works and reasonable can be different things.

I can accept that.

 

[Kutnupe14]

The problem with this charge is that it was not proven beyond reasonable doubt that chauvin caused the death by kneeling on him, and certainly not that Chauvin intended to apply unlawful force. I'm pretty sure he thought it was appropriate for the circumstances. The defense even got the prosecution's use of force expert to say that using a taser would have been justified under the circumstances and that putting him on the ground prone like that was using less force than tasing him.


Again, this would require that the state prove that the death was caused by Chauvin. At best they proved that it could have been that. The defense presented plausible factors that could have caused the death, especially given Floyd's behavior prior to being restrained in the prone position. Certainly enough to cause reasonable doubt.


No, the first two don't. I think they're mutually exclusive with the 2nd degree manslaughter. I think the only culpable negligence that was proven in the death of Floyd was keeping him down after he had passed out. What made me most sure this would have been the correct verdict was that even the defense's medical witness admitted that Floyd could have been saved if help had been rendered sooner, that it was an unnecessary death.

So I think the culpable negligence that created an unreasonable risk was Chauvin insisting that they keep Floyd restrained on the ground even after he had become unresponsive. It wasn't proven that he caused Floyd's death directly, but he prevented Floyd from getting care that might have saved his life.

I think if I were on the jury I think I would vote for guilty on 2nd deg manslaughter, but not guilty on the first two. But then we have the "holding me accountable" ******** that Maxine and company wanted. They'd dox me. Try to get me fired from my job. Maybe firebomb my house. Try to harm my family. At least they'd throw pigs blood all over my front door. You know. It's what civil societies do.

You say it wasn’t proven. 12 people more versed than you on the subject disagreed. Wait. Are you or anyone here saying that their more competent concerning the details of this case than the 12 people on the jury? He was convicted by his peers. People who put well more time in on the subject than us armchair QBs. The ONLY fallback you guys have is the crackpot premise that all 12 of them, who in your opinion thought he wasn’t actually guilty, were intimidated into reaching the conclusions that they did. It’s easy to reject that, and think that people who say such are justifying why the jury didn’t reach the decision you wanted.

 

[Kutnupe14]

The entire case turned on the accusation that Chauvin's knee compressing Floyd's neck was the cause of death. Watching Mr. Nelson prove that this did not happen is adequate to address the charges.

The jurors seemed to believe it.

 

[Joniki]

The entire case turned on the accusation that Chauvin's knee compressing Floyd's neck was the cause of death. Watching Mr. Nelson prove that this did not happen is adequate to address the charges.

I think the officer on Floyd's back caused more breathing problems than the knee on the shoulder.

 

[Route 45]

A jury is nothing more than 12 people too stupid to get out of jury duty. Especially in this case. No way in hell you'd see me on the jury for a high profile case like this.

 

[Kutnupe14]

No, you’re not one to shirk sharing AN opinion. You’ve made it clear to many of us that you will argue **** you don’t believe just to rile people up. That’s trolling but you’re the master at it. So we really DONT know what you’d do or say because you’ve said it all at sone point

I’ve certainly played Devil’s Advocate. It’s what thinking people do; consider the other side. I’m sorry if it hurts your feelings so much that you need to repeat it so often.

 

[buckwacker]

You say it wasn’t proven. 12 people more versed than you on the subject disagreed. Wait. Are you or anyone here saying that their more competent concerning the details of this case than the 12 people on the jury? He was convicted by his peers. People who put well more time in on the subject than us armchair QBs. The ONLY fallback you guys have is the crackpot premise that all 12 of them, who in your opinion thought he wasn’t actually guilty, were intimidated into reaching the conclusions that they did. It’s easy to reject that, and think that people who say such are justifying why the jury didn’t reach the decision you wanted.

Wasn't the entire trial televised, on video? Wouldn't that mean any armchair QB could see the same thing the jury saw?

 

[nonobaddog]

Pretty much every civil rights leader from the late 19th to late 20th Century had the same concerns, except that the threats made against them were well more deadly. They were apparently made of sterner stuff.

Deadly is deadly, WTF is more deadly?

And are you seriously comparing Chauvin to a civil rights movement? You obviously didn't know this but there are differences there that affect a decision to take a stand or not.

 

[Route 45]

If juries are infallible arbiters of justice, then Nicole Simpson's killer is still out there.

How likely is that?

 

[Joniki]

Wasn't the entire trial televised, on video? Wouldn't that mean any armchair QB could see the same thing the jury saw?

Actually, the TV audience got to see a bit more when the jury was kicked so the AAL's could argue with each other.