# The Derek Chauvin Trial



## Chet

I saw the opening statements on TV this morning. I have formed an early opinion on his guilt or innocence which I should keep to myself until I hear more. Segments of the general public however will not, and I'm afraid it will influence their reaction.


----------



## hollydolly

Well they're told ( the jury ) that they must not read anything about the case... or discuss it with anyone including other jurors outside the jury room.

They  were questioned thoroughly before being sworn in as jurors as to how much they already knew about the situation, and what their feeling were. those who showed any bias towards either side, were quickly stood down as a potential juror...


----------



## Aunt Marg

Shouldn't even be a trial, he should already be pushing daisies.


----------



## Della

I'm finding the trial very interesting.  After hearing the opening statement from the prosecution I was all for second degree murder, then after I heard the opening statement from the defense I was down to third degree and I'm sure I'll be back and forth many times before it's done. 

This is not a cut-and-dried situation (for me.) I think the jury will have to work very hard.

This young 911 dispatch operator has taught me so many things about how her job works.  Ten hours! Four or five screens!  She must go home exhausted.


----------



## tbeltrans

This trial is happening about 5 miles from me, but you folks know more about it than I do.  I am just not keeping up on the latest.  I am sure I will know when the verdict is read.

Tony


----------



## Jeweltea

tbeltrans said:


> This trial is happening about 5 miles from me, but you folks know more about it than I do.  I am just not keeping up on the latest.  I am sure I will know when the verdict is read.
> 
> Tony


So you would have been a good juror!


----------



## SetWave

It is disgusting.


----------



## tbeltrans

Jeweltea said:


> So you would have been a good juror!


Well, probably not.  I saw the video on the local news when this whole thing started.

Tony


----------



## hollydolly

tbeltrans said:


> This trial is happening about 5 miles from me, but you folks know more about it than I do.  I am just not keeping up on the latest.  I am sure I will know when the verdict is read.
> 
> Tony


... well even here on the other side of the Pond we're watching the trial... can you go outside the court and give us a little wave  at some point ?


----------



## hollydolly

SetWave said:


> It is disgusting.


 what is ?


----------



## Don M.

Everyone better hope this cop gets a guilty verdict, and a stiff sentence.  If he just receives a slap on the wrist, cities all across the nation are going to see riots that will dwarf last years insurrections.


----------



## Aunt Marg

Don M. said:


> Everyone better hope this cop gets a guilty verdict, and a stiff sentence.  If he just receives a slap on the wrist, cities all across the nation are going to see riots that will dwarf last years insurrections.


My thoughts exactly, Don.


----------



## Irwin

I'm waiting till this evening to see the highlights.


----------



## ohioboy

Well, there are 3 possible outcomes/verdicts. Guilty, not guilty, hung jury.

Can he be retried after a hung jury, sure, but that is limited by Due Process. A state can't continue trying a person until they reach a unanimous verdict.

It's going to be on the Prosecution to convince the Jury, and imo, he's got a tough job.


----------



## Pepper

Were you in the legal field @ohioboy?  You understand the law so well.


----------



## ohioboy

Pepper said:


> Where you in the legal field @ohioboy?  You understand the law so well.


No, thank you for the compliment though, very much. I just try to keep my mind sharp (what's left of it that is).


----------



## SetWave

hollydolly said:


> what is ?


I'm disappointed to hear that. A man died needlessly because of overzealous police. Remember Rodney King? Did you see them beating him mercilessly?
The cops don't need you and they expect the same.


----------



## Sassycakes

I have always had a great deal of respect for Police officers, however in this case I have a completely different view of how some Police act.


----------



## RadishRose

hollydolly said:


> what is ?


What's disgusting, is that some people here would execute a man without a trial.


----------



## hollydolly

RadishRose said:


> What's disgusting, is that some people here would execute a man without a trial.


Oh I see,  thanks RR


----------



## hollydolly

SetWave said:


> I'm disappointed to hear that. A man died needlessly because of overzealous police. Remember Rodney King? Did you see them beating him mercilessly?
> The cops don't need you and they expect the same.


I'm sorry you've totally lost me...  I totally agree George Floyd died needlessly, absolutely . It was a horrific thing to watch .

I don't understand your last sentence


----------



## RadishRose

hollydolly said:


> Oh I see,  thanks RR


Sorry Holly, SetWave answered you, scroll up. I added my own opinion of what I found disgusting here.


----------



## hollydolly

RadishRose said:


> Sorry Holly, SetWave answered you, scroll up. I added my own opinion of what I found disgusting here.


Thanks RR... I don't understand SetWaves reply to me...  can you translate please..


----------



## RadishRose

hollydolly said:


> Thanks RR... I don't understand SetWaves reply to me...  can you translate please..


HD, I didn't quite understand his last sentence either,


----------



## hollydolly

RadishRose said:


> HD, I didn't quite understand his last sentence either,


thank goodness it's not just me then...


----------



## SetWave

Sorry to confuse you if that statement is not clear. Look, they have a very tough and dangerous job and I sure as hell don't want it. But, unfortunately a large number of basically brutal bullies enjoy the power. Of course there are good men and women wearing the badge. Let's just say a few (well, sadly more than a few) bad cops spoil the bunch.


----------



## hollydolly

SetWave said:


> Sorry to confuse you if that statement is not clear. Look, they have a very tough and dangerous job and I sure as hell don't want it. But, unfortunately a large number of basically brutal bullies enjoy the power. Of course there are good men and women wearing the badge. Let's just say a few (well, sadly more than a few) bad cops spoil the bunch.


yes I think we're all agreeing with you.._I_ certainly am... I've known a few bad cops personally myself...


----------



## tbeltrans

hollydolly said:


> ... well even here on the other side of the Pond we're watching the trial... can you go outside the court and give us a little wave  at some point ?


Probably not since they apparently have a lot of security around it.  I have not been downtown since everything turned to crap with the dismembering of the police force.  

Downtown Minneapolis used to be a very nice place and I loved spending Saturday mornings there browsing bookstores and such.  I sincerely hope the city council, the mayor, and the police department get their differences sorted out sooner than later.  A growing number of people who live directly in that area have been getting more and more vocal about restoring the police department to combat the spike in crime.

Tony


----------



## rgp

Aunt Marg said:


> Shouldn't even be a trial, he should already be pushing daisies.




 The correct person is pushing daisies. Unfortunately a good officer has been removed from the street. 

Bad guys belong either in a jail cell or in a grave. Which one depends on their behavior [or lack of] .

The procedure used by the officer was approved @ that time.


----------



## SetWave

This is a joke . . . right?!?!?!?


----------



## ohioboy

The knee move was permitted by policy, yes.


----------



## SetWave

Sounds like the *Nuremberg defense. *


----------



## ohioboy

SetWave said:


> Sounds like the *Nuremberg defense. *


Permitted as it was, only a moron would think it's OK to do it.


----------



## Sunny

I'll be interested in seeing what kind of "defense" they can possibly come up with, for what he did. What could his lawyer possibly say?


----------



## SetWave

Sunny said:


> I'll be interested in seeing what kind of "defense" they can possibly come up with, for what he did. What could his lawyer possibly say?


They have already tried the "He was following his training" bit.


----------



## ohioboy

Sunny said:


> I'll be interested in seeing what kind of "defense" they can possibly come up with, for what he did. What could his lawyer possibly say?



"Reasonable force" was used, not "UNreasonable", for one defense.

"Justification" defense. He was justified in his actions because he felt his life and others were in danger due to a violent and doped up person was at their heels.

"Character" in on trial. Chauvin will be portrayed as a kind and loving husband and dedicated police officer etc. Among a few legal angles.


----------



## Sunny

SetWave said:


> They have already tried the "He was following his training" bit.


"I vass only following orders. Heil Hitler!"


----------



## JimBob1952

Thought the opening statement by the prosecutor was very wise.  That is, we are trying one policeman, not "the police."  Acknowledging the difficulty of the job, etc. while pointing to bad actions in this one case.


----------



## Aunt Bea

I don't think that it will be a slam dunk to get a conviction.

The fact that the training/policy manual allowed the use of the prone maximal restraint on handcuffed individuals could be a major point in Chauvin's favor.  

 "the maximal restraint technique shall only be used in situations where handcuffed subjects are combative and still pose a threat to themselves, officers or others, or could cause significant damage property if not properly restrained."

IMO the fact that it was eliminated from the training manual after Floyd's death says as much about the Minneapolis 
Police Department as it does about Chauvin. 

Don't get me wrong my belief is that Chauvin acted inappropriately and that he should be punished for causing the death of George Floyd while in police custody. 

No matter how this turns out I feel bad for the merchants and citizens of Minneapolis that live in fear of mob violence during and after the trial.


----------



## rgp

SetWave said:


> They have already tried the "He was following his training" bit.



 It was an approved maneuver / procedure @ the time. He_* was*_ following training .


----------



## digifoss

You can see in the video that Floyd is handcuffed while he's down.  Chauvin used bad judgement in not cuffing or having another officer that was present cuff his ankles and getting his knee off his neck before he died, especially since Floyd was complaining about not being able to breathe.  Chauvin did cause Floyds death and it might have been an accidental death, or manslaughter, but it does not rise to the charge of murder, I'm pretty sure Chauvin wasn't trying to kill him.  What's really disgusting is the way that the media has tried to make Floyd into some kind of innocent do-well victim, or even a role model or national hero of sorts.  Lets not forget that his arrest was happening because he was suspected to be in the process of committing a crime.  He also had a violent criminal history.  The threat to burn down the city if Chauvin isn't convicted of murder is coercion and is intended to influence the jury pure and simple.  Floyd has some responsibility in how he wound up where he did.


----------



## Sassycakes

What has me confused is how 4 or 5 Police officers couldn't control a handcuffed man without such drastic measures.4 or 5 against 1 has me baffled.


----------



## Pepper

Sassycakes said:


> What has me confused is how 4 or 5 Police officers couldn't control a handcuffed man without such drastic measures.4 or 5 against 1 has me baffled.


They did control him.  What Chauvin committed was an act of Depraved Indifference, resulting in death.  Doesn't matter what the victim previously did.

If this were a Stephen King movie you would see how hideous the defendant looked, as opposed to his normal appearance.  It was like evil taking over.


----------



## Jeweltea

Sassycakes said:


> What has me confused is how 4 or 5 Police officers couldn't control a handcuffed man without such drastic measures.4 or 5 against 1 has me baffled.


I wondered that myself.


----------



## SetWave

rgp said:


> It was an approved maneuver / procedure @ the time. He_* was*_ following training .


Once again it Sounds like the Nuremberg defense.


----------



## SetWave

digifoss said:


> You can see in the video that Floyd is handcuffed while he's down.  Chauvin used bad judgement in not cuffing or having another officer that was present cuff his ankles and getting his knee off his neck before he died, especially since Floyd was complaining about not being able to breathe.  Chauvin did cause Floyds death and it might have been an accidental death, or manslaughter, but it does not rise to the charge of murder, I'm pretty sure Chauvin wasn't trying to kill him.  What's really disgusting is the way that the media has tried to make Floyd into some kind of innocent do-well victim, or even a role model or national hero of sorts.  Lets not forget that his arrest was happening because he was suspected to be in the process of committing a crime.  He also had a violent criminal history.  The threat to burn down the city if Chauvin isn't convicted of murder is coercion and is intended to influence the jury pure and simple.  Floyd has some responsibility in how he wound up where he did.


Yet, Floyd is not on trial here. It is the thug cop who caused his death.


----------



## Jeweltea

Even if George Floyd was in the process of committing a crime and wasn't a perfect person, he did not deserve the death penalty by a cop who decided to be the judge and jury.


----------



## RubyK

I don't understand why the cops dragged Floyd out of the police car and laid him on the ground. Wasn't he already handcuffed and under arrest?


----------



## SetWave

RubyK said:


> I don't understand why the cops dragged Floyd out of the police car and laid him on the ground. Wasn't he already handcuffed and under arrest?


They will claim he wasn't cooperating.


----------



## Irwin

All Chauvin needed to do was ease off a little bit so Floyd could breathe. Had he done that, everything could have gone on as normal and we would have never heard of this case. Instead, Floyd is dead, taxpayers have to shell out millions of dollars because of a bad cop, and in all likelihood, Chauvin will be sent to prison for a long time where he's going to have to live with a lot of angry men who aren't too fond of cops -- especial ones who engage in police brutality.


----------



## JimBob1952

The trial will go on for a couple more weeks.  Let's see how it plays out.  

I can't put myself in Derek Chauvin's place.  If a man says he can't breathe, you have to let the man breathe.  But that's me responding as a person.  The jury will decide.


----------



## SetWave

True, JimBob, yet we have the luxury of being in the court of public opinion.  I've heard defenders of Chauvin saying that if Floyd could say he couldn't breath then he could breath. 
This will drag out and be . . . sad all the way around.


----------



## JimBob1952

SetWave said:


> True, JimBob, yet we have the luxury of being in the court of public opinion.  I've heard defenders of Chauvin saying that if Floyd could say he couldn't breath then he could breath.
> This will drag out and be . . . sad all the way around.



Sad.  Tragic.  Lots of words to describe the situation.


----------



## Della

The  18 year-old and her little cousin were so moving.  I'm sorry they had to witness something like that while they were so young and impressionable.  Darnella started to cry while apologizing to George Floyd for not doing more.

The prosecution is  trying hard to establish that the crowd that gathered that day was not an angry mob.  I don't  imagine the police were afraid of the crowd, but I do think all the insults Donald Williams shouted were making Chauvin angrier and more stubborn than he would have been if no one was around.


----------



## digifoss

RubyK said:


> I don't understand why the cops dragged Floyd out of the police car and laid him on the ground. Wasn't he already handcuffed and under arrest?


Floyd was already handcuffed.  They took him out of the car because he resisted while telling the cops he was claustrophobic and I totally get that.  He is a big guy like me and it's cramped in the back seat of any car, especially a police car with a divider between the front and rear seats, I would have resisted and fussed about being claustrophobic myself, not a good feeling, I know from my son wanting me to ride  in the back seat of his car before.  The cops made a lot of mistakes here, no doubt, but murder isn't one of them.


----------



## Della

digifoss said:


> They took him out of the car because he resisted while telling the cops he was claustrophobic and I totally get that.


Yes, he was fighting them over being put in the car, to the point of making the squad car move forward and back.
He was cuffed but was kicking and trying to get out. Didn't he actually ask to be put on the ground?


----------



## hollydolly

Irwin said:


> All Chauvin needed to do was ease off a little bit so Floyd could breathe. Had he done that, everything could have gone on as normal and we would have never heard of this case. Instead, Floyd is dead, taxpayers have to shell out millions of dollars because of a bad cop, and in all likelihood, Chauvin will be sent to prison for a long time where he's going to have to live with a lot of angry men who aren't too fond of cops -- especial ones who engage in police brutality.


Not to mention the  wide battles , demos and destruction of property  from America, to the UK and many other places resulting in the BLM ( and they do ) because of one cops' over reaction to a minor crime... Chauvin shouldn't be on Trial for George Floyds murder only, he should be on Trial for  what he ultimately caused due to his actions ..


----------



## RubyK

There's also a danger here in Minneapolis of more peaceful protests if the outcome of the trial is not fair. We still have 3 more policemen under arrest who will be tried separately. The merchants in that area of Mpls are concerned that there will be more burning and looting when the trial(s) are over by people taking advantage of the situation.


----------



## rgp

SetWave said:


> Once again it Sounds like the Nuremberg defense.




 You can say it sounds like whatever you choose too . It doesn't change the fact that he was following procedure to effect an arrest.

If you and others want the procedure changed ? Then start a letter writing campaign to your local PD. And local politicians , but do not persecute this man for doing his job in the way in which he was taught to do so.


----------



## SetWave

rgp said:


> You can say it sounds like whatever you choose too . It doesn't change the fact that he was following procedure to effect an arrest.
> 
> If you and others want the procedure changed ? Then start a letter writing campaign to your local PD. And local politicians , but do not persecute this man for doing his job in the way in which he was taught to do so.


You do understand the result of Nazi criminals claiming they were doing as they were told.


----------



## win231

Don M. said:


> Everyone better hope this cop gets a guilty verdict, and a stiff sentence.  If he just receives a slap on the wrist, cities all across the nation are going to see riots that will dwarf last years insurrections.


And I wouldn't blame them.


----------



## SetWave

Agreed.


----------



## win231

rgp said:


> You can say it sounds like whatever you choose too . It doesn't change the fact that he was following procedure to effect an arrest.
> 
> If you and others want the procedure changed ? Then start a letter writing campaign to your local PD. And local politicians , but do not persecute this man for doing his job in the way in which he was taught to do so.


Yes, any cop who commits murder is only doing what he was taught to do.  
Are you a comedian by profession or just like to make people laugh?


----------



## ohioboy

rgp said:


> You can say it sounds like whatever you choose too . It doesn't change the fact that he was following procedure to effect an arrest.



Disagree. If the procedure constitutes Reckless conduct by any reasonably prudent person's standards, it is no defense that the Manual permitted it. It does not say how long the technique can continue? If that were the case and Floyd was pinned for an hour that was still within procedure? But would it have been prudent, no.

Chauvin was under 200 pounds, no doubt. There is nothing in the manual about a 350 pound officer pinning him on the neck, so that would be within policy, but prudent, no.


----------



## ohioboy

SetWave said:


> True, JimBob, yet we have the luxury of being in the court of public opinion.  I've heard defenders of Chauvin saying that if Floyd could say he couldn't breath then he could breath.
> This will drag out and be . . . sad all the way around.


Those people are wrong! Does he have to say "It's HARD to breathe" to sound convincing to the doubters? Breathing easy and breathing hard are quite different, but you can still talk while struggling for breath.


----------



## Elsie

George Floyd may possibly have eventually died by his own drug abuse & bad health that he suffered, but the stupid cop's kneeling on him for so long hurried his death along.  An unwitting participant in George Floyd's death.


----------



## ohioboy

I would have pushed that pig cop off Floyd, whether I got shot or night sticked, that's the absolute truth.


----------



## Tish

Don M. said:


> Everyone better hope this cop gets a guilty verdict, and a stiff sentence.  If he just receives a slap on the wrist, cities all across the nation are going to see riots that will dwarf last years insurrections.


Here here! I totally agree with you.


----------



## Della

Boy, their demeanor sure does change when they start talking to the defense.  From friendly and cooperative to hostile and sarcastic in a matter of seconds.  Don't they understand that our legal system works by giving everyone the best possible defense?


----------



## Aunt Marg

JimBob1952 said:


> The trial will go on for a couple more weeks.  Let's see how it plays out.
> 
> I can't put myself in Derek Chauvin's place.  *If a man says he can't breathe, you have to let the man breathe.  But that's me responding as a person.*  The jury will decide.


And therein is the difference, Jim, you're a person, Chauvin, isn't.


----------



## ohioboy

Aunt Marg said:


> And therein is the difference, Jim, you're a person, Chauvin, isn't.



Where do you think they got the word "Chauvinism" from.


----------



## Aunt Marg

ohioboy said:


> I would have pushed that pig cop off Floyd, whether I got shot or night sticked, that's the absolute truth.


The difference between a real man as yourself, compared to the handful of cowards that stood around watching.


----------



## Aunt Marg

ohioboy said:


> I would have pushed that pig cop off Floyd, whether I got shot or night sticked, that's the absolute truth.


My husband said the same thing, except my husband wouldn't have been so kind.


----------



## ohioboy

Aunt Marg said:


> My husband said the same thing, except my husband wouldn't have been so kind.



They could have charged me with any crime they wanted, if I was there and did it. He can shove that badge.


----------



## Aunt Marg

ohioboy said:


> They could have charged me with any crime they wanted, if I was there and did it. He can shove that badge.


That's the problem today, Ohio, based on the track record of police forces in general, they lack real men in uniform, and this case shines a bright spotlight on that.


----------



## ohioboy

Aunt Marg said:


> That's the problem today, Ohio, based on the track record of police forces in general, they lack real men in uniform, and this case shines a bright spotlight on that.



We had a case here in Ohio about a year ago where a policeman found 5 of 6 stray kittens and since he didn't want to take them to a shelter or anything he shot and killed everyone of those innocent kittens


----------



## Aunt Marg

ohioboy said:


> We had a case here in Ohio about a year ago where a policeman found 5 of 6 stray kittens and since he didn't want to take them to a shelter or anything he shot and killed everyone of those innocent kittens


That's just sickening!

Seeing how we're on the topic of, here is another for you. Not much in the IQ department.

https://globalnews.ca/news/5434425/lethbridge-police-officer-deer-no-charges/


----------



## ohioboy

That's sick, and that's being polite about it.


----------



## Aunt Marg

ohioboy said:


> That's sick, and that's being polite about it.


My husband said he would have hit front page news had he witnessed the event.


----------



## ohioboy

Watch the whole clip Marge or anyone, sickens me.


----------



## Aunt Marg

OhioBoy. The man's comment at 1:36 sums up how fed up the general public has become relative to renegade cops.


----------



## win231

ohioboy said:


> We had a case here in Ohio about a year ago where a policeman found 5 of 6 stray kittens and since he didn't want to take them to a shelter or anything he shot and killed everyone of those innocent kittens


A Jeffrey Dahmer in a uniform.


----------



## Patch

Perhaps training of officers in Minneapolis included using a choke hold to reduce a threat by a combative criminal whose actions were a potential danger to either the police officer or the public.  That training would not have included remaining on a subject's neck for almost 10 minutes... long enough to kill the subject.  That training would not have included remaining on a subject's neck for almost 10 minutes when the subject was handcuffed, was not armed, and four other officers were standing by to assist.  This officer had official complaints filed against him in 17 previous situations.  He was unfit to be a police officer.  He should be convicted of the crime he committed.
According to reports from the courtroom, all the jurors seem to be paying strict attention... except for one.  One has seemed bored and has been just casually looking around the courtroom.  Does this mean he has already made up his mind one way or the other?  With the 24-hour news cycles, it is extremely difficult to find 14 people who have no knowledge of the case.


----------



## mellowyellow

The world is watching this trial, just like we did with OJ, I hope the outcome won't be the same.


----------



## fmdog44

Unwatchable


----------



## Butterfly

tbeltrans said:


> Well, probably not.  I saw the video on the local news when this whole thing started.
> 
> Tony


I think probably everybody in this country who is conscious would have seen that video at one time or another.  It was everywhere for a while.


----------



## rgp

SetWave said:


> You do understand the result of Nazi criminals claiming they were doing as they were told.




 Apples & Oranges.


----------



## rgp

win231 said:


> Yes, any cop who commits murder is only doing what he was taught to do.
> Are you a comedian by profession or just like to make people laugh?




 You just can't pass up an opportunity to make a snide remark, that has no bearing on the actual subject, can you ?


----------



## Della

Patch said:


> One has seemed bored and has been just casually looking around the courtroom. Does this mean he has already made up his mind one way or the other? With the 24-hour news cycles, it is extremely difficult to find 14 people who have no knowledge of the case.


I watched the jury selection and they weren't demanding that they had no previous knowledge of the case, just that they hadn't made up their minds about it.  I do wonder how they can live in Minneapolis and not have strong opinions about something that had the city in an uproar for months. 

 I thought that all the witnesses we've had so far were _clearly _on the side of the prosecution.  Genevieve got the reprimand from the judge because she couldn't hide her hostility to the defense lawyer and wanted to press her agenda at every opportunity.  I kind of love her and would feel as angry as she does if I felt I could have saved a life and someone prevented me -- but the judge had to stop her.  Chauvin must have a fair trial or he will simply appeal the verdict.


----------



## hollydolly

Della said:


> I watched the jury selection and they weren't demanding that they had no previous knowledge of the case, just that they hadn't made up their minds about it.  I do wonder how they can live in Minneapolis and not have strong opinions about something that had the city in an uproar for months.
> 
> I thought that all the witnesses we've had so far were _clearly _on the side of the prosecution.  Genevieve got the reprimand from the judge because she couldn't hide her hostility to the defense lawyer and wanted to press her agenda at every opportunity.  I kind of love her and would feel as angry as she does if I felt I could have saved a life and someone prevented me -- but the judge had to stop her.  *Chauvin must have a fair trial or he will simply appeal the verdict.*


Good point Della..


----------



## Patch

Della said:


> Chauvin must have a fair trial or he will simply appeal the verdict.


If found guilty of any degree of murder, Chauvin will appeal.  The current SCOTUS had looked pretty welcome to appeals re cases involving police.  The decision handed down last week, however, seemed to suggest the majority would protect the rights of the people vs. excessive and dangerous actions by police.  
The Chauvin case has so much bearing on events involving police over the past few years... and those similar events going forward.  The jury's decision and the following appeals will have a huge impact on the interactions... and consequences or no consequences... of police and civilians for some time.


----------



## tbeltrans

Butterfly said:


> I think probably everybody in this country who is conscious would have seen that video at one time or another.  It was everywhere for a while.


I don't doubt that.  My point was simply that I recognize that I am biased and therefore would not be a good candidate for the jury.  I was responding to a specific post.  I hope that clarifies what I said for those for whom it was not at all clear in that post.

Tony


----------



## Irwin

Butterfly said:


> I think probably everybody in this country who is conscious would have seen that video at one time or another.  It was everywhere for a while.


One of the jurors claimed to have not seen the video before the trial. I guess that's possible if he never watched the news, but I'm still skeptical. We shall see if he's the one holdout on a conviction.


----------



## Pepper

Most people I know pay absolutely no attention to anything other than themselves.


----------



## WhatInThe

The guy needs to be charged and found guilty for a lot of things but 2nd degree murder is a stretch. Not unsual for DAs to over charge so they have leverage/incentive for a plea deal which they were hoping for here. The family already settled with the city and I think is one reason they released that information prior to trial to show the public there some financial justice anyway.


----------



## hollydolly

Irwin said:


> One of the jurors claimed to have not seen the video before the trial. I guess that's possible if he never watched the news, but I'm still skeptical. We shall see if he's the one holdout on a conviction.


I find that difficult to believe as well....This not only happened in his own city, but caused world wide condemnation... wasn't he interested to see why riots were occuring in his home town?... Odd that someone  who lives there and just happened to be chosen for Jury service,  wouldn't have seen the video, but the rest of the world has...


----------



## SetWave

hollydolly said:


> I find that difficult to believe as well....This not only happened in his own city, but caused world wide condemnation... wasn't he interested to see why riots were occuring in his home town?... Odd that someone  who lives there and just happened to be chosen for Jury service,  wouldn't have seen the video, but the rest of the world has...


Please allow me to refer you to the statement by Pepper above. Truer words were never spoken.


----------



## Pepper

SetWave said:


> Please allow me to refer you to the statement by Pepper above. Truer words were never spoken.


Why, thank you my dear!


----------



## Aunt Marg

Irwin said:


> One of the jurors claimed to have not seen the video before the trial. I guess that's possible if he never watched the news, but I'm still skeptical. We shall see if he's the one holdout on a conviction.


My opinion of the juror in question, he/she is nothing more than a filthy liar!


----------



## win231

rgp said:


> You just can't pass up an opportunity to make a snide remark, that has no bearing on the actual subject, can you ?


No, I can't.  And _"None so blind as he who doesn't want to see_" (the bearing).


----------



## hollydolly

SetWave said:


> Please allow me to refer you to the statement by Pepper above. Truer words were never spoken.


I agree... but in this case once the riots began, surely this person would want to see what had caused it...


----------



## SetWave

hollydolly said:


> I agree... but in this case once the riots began, surly this person would want to see what had caused it...


----------



## tbeltrans

hollydolly said:


> I agree... but in this case once the riots began, *surly this person* would want to see what had caused it...


I can tell you, living in the Twin Cities, nobody could miss it.  If not seeing it on TV, hearing it on the radio or even from other people.  The only way I can think of that a person would not have been exposed to all of this would be if the person was in the hospital in a coma the whole or possibly on vacation to a remote island and is just getting home in time for jury duty.

Anyway, for a bit of levity, if that is even possible during these times...






Tony


----------



## Chet

Pepper said:


> Most people I know pay absolutely no attention to anything other than themselves.


At this point in my life; staring at the great forever just over the hill, I try not to involve myself to any great degree in things going on around me.  When younger I did, but not now.


----------



## tbeltrans

Chet said:


> At this point in my life; staring at the great forever just over the hill, I try not to involve myself to any great degree in things going on around me.  When younger, I did. Head in the sand works.


I can't stand having sand in my ears.   

That was one thing I remember about going to the beach when I was growing up - sand got into EVERYTHING!

Tony


----------



## SetWave

tbeltrans said:


> I can't stand having sand in my ears.
> 
> That was one thing I remember about going to the beach when I was growing up - sand got into EVERYTHING!
> 
> Tony


I've always had a favorite saying that when you have sand in your teeth you know you had a good day surfing.
(I realize this has nothing to do with the subject at hand but the mention of sand is just too tempting.)
Carry on.....


----------



## Sunny

hollydolly said:


> I agree... but in this case once the riots began, surly this person would want to see what had caused it...


Yes but only if he was in a surly, angry mood.  (Sorry, Holly, couldn't resist.)


----------



## tbeltrans

SetWave said:


> I've always had a favorite saying that when you have sand in your teeth you know you had a good day surfing.
> (I realize this has nothing to do with the subject at hand but the mention of sand is just too tempting.)
> Carry on.....


I get it.   

Surfers were our bane at the beach though.  At Malibu, there were buoys with rope marking off where the surfers go and where the swimmers go.  When surfers would wipe out, of course they lose control of their board so it goes over to where the swimmers are and when we would get hit, we get bruises.  Things may well have changed drastically since that was 40 years ago (oh my!!!).

Anyway, I have a lot of respect for the sport of surfing.  All I did was body surfing, but those surfer guys had incredible skills.

Tony


----------



## Della

My husband is not particularly self-centered and definitely not a filthy liar, yet he hasn't seen the videos and had to be reminded who George Floyd was when this all started -- and he's from St. Paul.

He spends his days doing volunteer work for a place that helps out poor people in all sorts of ways -- he's personally done taxes for over 500 people this year, mainly so they can get their stimulus checks.  He just never watches the news or spends any time on Youtube.

I can tell he thinks I'm really weird to be flying around in the morning getting my housework done before the trial starts and still riveted when he gets home at four.  Who's spent the more worthwhile day?  He has.

But anyway -- how about young Christopher Martin?  What a fine young man, going to school in the morning working all afternoon and evening, worried about keeping his mother safe, and not wanting to get George Floyd in any trouble even though Floyd was happy to rip him off for $20, probably about 2 hours pay for Christopher.  I hate that he feels guilty over what finally happened when none of it was his fault.


----------



## tbeltrans

Della said:


> My husband is not particularly self-centered and definitely not a filthy liar, yet he hasn't seen the videos and had to be reminded who George Floyd was when this all started -- and he's from St. Paul.
> 
> He spends his days doing volunteer work for a place that helps out poor people in all sorts of ways -- he's personally done taxes for over 500 people this year, mainly so they can get their stimulus checks.  He just never watches the news or spends any time on Youtube.
> 
> I can tell he thinks I'm really weird to be flying around in the morning getting my housework done before the trial starts and still riveted when he gets home at four.  Who's spent the more worthwhile day?  He has.
> 
> But anyway -- how about young Christopher Martin?  What a fine young man, going to school in the morning working all afternoon and evening, worried about keeping his mother safe, and not wanting to get George Floyd in any trouble even though Floyd was happy to rip him off for $20, probably about 2 hours pay for Christopher.  I hate that he feels guilty over what finally happened when none of it was his fault.


Thanks for this information.  Your husband sounds like a fine guy.  I do volunteer work too, but mine involves teaching ESL, math, and computer skills to immigrant adults through the library system and that is shut down until further notice due to COVID-19.  The woman who runs the conversation group is doing it via zoom, but that is the only group the library has active during COVID.

I assumed that everybody had heard more than enough about this thing, but apparently there are exceptions.  So, as a result of your post, I can certainly see how it is possible a potential juror may not have heard all the "jibber jabber" (as a judge on Boston Legal would say).

Tony


----------



## hollydolly

That poor 19 year old cashier, he will feel all his life that GF died because of him...


----------



## tbeltrans

hollydolly said:


> That poor 19 year old cashier, he will feel all his life that GF died because of him...


True.  There are a lot of people adversely affected when somebody screws up.  That is a general comment, rather than about either Chauvin or Floyd.  I see it all the time and think "if only people would just follow the rules...".

Tony


----------



## hollydolly

I was watching 61 year old Charles who was the witness who was calling to GF to get in the car, and GF answering back I will, but I can't breathe... and Charles was giving his evidence, and when shown a video  he broke down and sobbed... and I cried for him too...and I just thought, that man doesn't know that people around the world are watching his testimony and people like me who live in a rural area of England, or anywhere other than the USA  are crying with him..


----------



## Jules

‘Not watched the video’ - no, I haven’t.  I watched parts but could not watch a man die.  Perhaps that juror was similar.  There are some people who won’t watch the news.  He couldn’t help but overhear the conversations living there and as the riots were happening.

I won’t follow the trial closely either, it’s too gruesome.  There’ll be coverage on the evening news.


----------



## Della

hollydolly said:


> I was watching 61 year old Charles who was the witness who was calling to GF to get in the car, and GF answering back I will, but I can't breathe... and Charles was giving his evidence, and when shown a video  he broke down and sobbed... and I cried for him too...and I just thought, that man doesn't know that people around the world are watching his testimony and people like me who live in a rural area of England, or anywhere other than the USA  are crying with him..


Yes, such a sweet man.  He charmed me the minute he admitted he was nosey.  When George Floyd calls for his mama, to me, it's the saddest part of the whole thing, and when Mr. Charles said he had lost his mother last June it made me think how our love and need for our mothers crosses all races and nationalities and it doesn't matter how old we get either.


----------



## hollydolly

Della said:


> Yes, such a sweet man.  He charmed me the minute he admitted he was nosey.  When George Floyd calls for his mama, to me, it's the saddest part of the whole thing, and when Mr. Charles said he had lost his mother last June it made me think how our love and need for our mothers crosses all races and nationalities and it doesn't matter how old we get either.


so, so true....  but I had to take issue with Mr Charles from my sofa when he said he couldn't see the board because he is OLD... he's 61... I was shouting ..Nooooo wayyyy you're not old... similar age to Boy George , George Clooney, ..he's younger than Me, Sting, Paul McCartney, Mick Jagger... lol.... I wanted to tell him c'mon don't think you're old at 61...


----------



## Sassycakes

hollydolly said:


> *That poor 19 year old cashier, he will feel all his life that GF died because of him...*


*  I feel so sorry for the poor cashier, I actually cried when I saw him saying what happened. He did what he was supposed to do,what happened after isn't his fault.*


----------



## hollydolly

Sassycakes said:


> *  I feel so sorry for the poor cashier, I actually cried when I saw him saying what happened. He did what he was supposed to do,what happened after isn't his fault.*


True, but he'll carry that all his life, and ultimately he did it because he thought he might have to pay it out of his own wages, but the company released a statement saying they've never made any cashier replace money from a bad bank note, it was always only a threat to make them examine notes carefully.... so all of it was just one disaster after the other.

I was watching George in the shop, and he was happy, and doing a little dance, and I just couldn't believe I was watching a man who was going to be killed minutes later


----------



## ohioboy

Here is the bottom line, if you are so STUPID as to kneel on a persons neck, much less for 9 minutes, he needs to be horse whipped for that alone, STUPIDITY.

Oh, but wait, the "Manual" said it was okay? I wonder how many medical people were consulted before it was included in the policemen's Bible of conduct??


----------



## AnnieA

rgp said:


> The correct person is pushing daisies. Unfortunately a good officer has been removed from the street.
> 
> Bad guys belong either in a jail cell or in a grave. Which one depends on their behavior [or lack of] .
> 
> The procedure used by the officer was approved @ that time.


It may have been approved at the time to subdue someone.   But Chuavin had multiple witnesses including another officer at the scene telling him Floyd was out.  That's when you stop.  Chuavin didn't.   Floyd's crimes in no way merit the death sentence; he should not be "pushing up daisies" if you understand US law. Chavin, on the other hand, administered inappropriate deady force.  Floyd was unconscious for vitally important minutes before he died while Chuavin maintained force.   A veteran cop can discern when someone is unconscious or faking it.  If Chauvin couldn't,  he had a peer at the scene who did understated who advised him to stop force at a point that very likely could've saved Floyd's life.

Floyd was a POS with a bad rap sheet that including pointing a gun at the belly of a pregnant woman. The day of his death,  he used counterfeit currency while high on an illegal drug ...but neither would've gotten him the death penalty.   Chauvin decided in those moments he was warned to stop force to take the 'law' far beyond the limits of his job.

A POS officer with multiple formal complaints and not enough sense to recognize when a cuffed suspect is unconscious--by no means a good officer--has been removed from the streets.

Both seem to me to be crappy people but one is dead whose crimes didn't warrant the death penalty.   One is alive who--based on prior complaints--should not have been serving in a capacity in which he had the power to kill ...approved procedure or not.


----------



## AnnieA

Feels like this could be a twist on a Robert Frost poem ...

Two thugs met up on a Minneapolis street,​one wore a badge,​and that made all the difference.​
By NO! means implying that all cops--even most--are thugs!  But, Chauvin ....imo yes, he's a thug.


----------



## ohioboy

Very good, RF was one of the best.


----------



## mellowyellow

But how do the top brass weed out people like Chauvin – there is no test for thuggery.


----------



## ohioboy

mellowyellow said:


> But how do the top brass weed out people like Chauvin – there is no test for thuggery.



They start by not letting trash cops get 1,000 complaints against them before they do something about it.


----------



## Butterfly

Della said:


> I watched the jury selection and they weren't demanding that they had no previous knowledge of the case, just that they hadn't made up their minds about it.  I do wonder how they can live in Minneapolis and not have strong opinions about something that had the city in an uproar for months.
> 
> I thought that all the witnesses we've had so far were _clearly _on the side of the prosecution.  Genevieve got the reprimand from the judge because she couldn't hide her hostility to the defense lawyer and wanted to press her agenda at every opportunity.  I kind of love her and would feel as angry as she does if I felt I could have saved a life and someone prevented me -- but the judge had to stop her.  Chauvin must have a fair trial or he will simply appeal the verdict.


The reason that all witnesses to date seem to you to favor the prosecution is because it is the prosecution that is now putting on its case and calling its witnesses.  The defense will get its turn after the prosecution rests its case.


----------



## win231

hollydolly said:


> so, so true....  but I had to take issue with Mr Charles from my sofa when he said he couldn't see the board because he is OLD... he's 61... I was shouting ..Nooooo wayyyy you're not old... similar age to Boy George , George Clooney, ..he's younger than Me, Sting, Paul McCartney, Mick Jagger... lol.... I wanted to tell him c'mon don't think you're old at 61...


You're only as old as you feel.
I'm 68, but I don't feel a day over 80.


----------



## win231

mellowyellow said:


> But how do the top brass weed out people like Chauvin – there is no test for thuggery.


_Police departments only weed out the Chauvins on TV cop shows; not in real life._
When I worked in retail firearms & instruction, many of our customers were police officers.
Funny how they would talk freely, assuming that anyone who worked in that field wouldn't have a problem hearing cops talk about their brutality.
Example:  Three uniformed officers chat about a recent arrest.
One officer (with pure ecstasy on his face) says, _"S--t, the greatest feeling in the world is when I dragged a guy out of my car, jammed my nightstick in his belly & watched him puke his guts out all over the street.....damn, he had a big lunch."  _Then all 3 laugh hysterically.


----------



## hollydolly

win231 said:


> You're only as old as you feel.
> I'm 68, but I don't feel a day over 80.


Gosh believe me I have some days like that too...


----------



## Patch

win231 said:


> You're only as old as you feel.
> I'm 68, but I don't feel a day over 80.


70, when I was 40, sounded old.  Now that I'm well into my seventies, it doesn't sound nearly as aged.  In fact, 80 is beginning to sound so much younger than it once did!!!  :>)


----------



## Elsie

Della said:


> My husband is not particularly self-centered and definitely not a filthy liar, yet he hasn't seen the videos and had to be reminded who George Floyd was when this all started -- and he's from St. Paul.
> 
> He spends his days doing volunteer work for a place that helps out poor people in all sorts of ways -- he's personally done taxes for over 500 people this year, mainly so they can get their stimulus checks.  He just never watches the news or spends any time on Youtube.
> 
> I can tell he thinks I'm really weird to be flying around in the morning getting my housework done before the trial starts and still riveted when he gets home at four.  Who's spent the more worthwhile day?  He has.
> 
> But anyway -- how about young Christopher Martin?  What a fine young man, going to school in the morning working all afternoon and evening, worried about keeping his mother safe, and not wanting to get George Floyd in any trouble even though Floyd was happy to rip him off for $20, probably about 2 hours pay for Christopher.  I hate that he feels guilty over what finally happened when none of it was his fault.


Poor Christopher to have seen that Floyd apparently was badly affected by illegal drugs and to have to tell this in court, giving the prosecution more ammo against Floyd.  Another reason for his feeling guilty could be that he couldn't talk Floyd into going back into the store -- concerning the counterfeit $20.00 bill.  ??


----------



## Butterfly

I can't help wondering if Mr. Floyd even knew it was a counterfeit $20.  For all I know, I could have some counterfeit money in my purse.  Not that it really matters, considering what happened afterwards, but I just wonder if he knew.


----------



## win231

Butterfly said:


> I can't help wondering if Mr. Floyd even knew it was a counterfeit $20.  For all I know, I could have some counterfeit money in my purse.  Not that it really matters, considering what happened afterwards, but I just wonder if he knew.


That's why they recently made more changes to bills - because there is technology now that makes excellent counterfeit bills that require experts to detect.


----------



## UsernameRSP

Not watching the trial...It's just another way to get people worked up emotional and polarized...I think the PTB want this guy to get a non-guilty so there's just another excuse for rioting and chaos...


----------



## Rosemarie

UsernameRSP said:


> Not watching the trial...It's just another way to get people worked up emotional and polarized...I think the PTB want this guy to get a non-guilty so there's just another excuse for rioting and chaos...


You may be right...it would certainly give fuel to the current atmosphere.
You can't help wondering about all the 'ifs'.   If there had been no camera to record the incident....would it have been logged as an unfortunate accident.....if the colour had been reversed, white victim, black policeman...what would now be happening on America's streets?


----------



## Buckeye

I haven't watched the video or any part of the trial, and I have no sympathy for either George Floyd or Derek Chauvin.  And 
I suspect that no matter what he outcome of the trial may be, some folks will use it as an excuse to riot/destroy/steal/murder as is their wont.


----------



## hollydolly

Rosemarie said:


> You may be right...it would certainly give fuel to the current atmosphere.
> You can't help wondering about all the 'ifs'.   If there had been no camera to record the incident....would it have been logged as an unfortunate accident.....if the colour had been reversed, white victim, black policeman...what would now be happening on America's streets?


The CCTV operator who captured the whole thing on the camera on the garage across the road, said they almost never get footage of anything other than the bridge or the shop etc.. no criminal acts, but on this occasion, she not only witnessed it, but because DC was on GF's neck for so long she thought her screen had frozen.. , and after realising her screen was not frozen  she called for back up to attend the scene


----------



## 911

The only part of the trial that I watched was the opening remarks from the Defense's Counsel. I thought he did an excellent job, but those remarks will not be what determines if Chauvin is innocent or guilty. 

After spending days watching the O.J. trial, I swore that I would never subject myself to that kind of torture again. It's pretty bad when you are watching a program, like a live trial, and you start cursing at the screen.


----------



## Della

Today was a devastating day for the defense.  An older, very experienced Lt Zimmerman testified that the knee on the neck hold is never used or taught in any of their classes; "because they could die."  He said they are taught that once you cuff a person, "He is yours.  You are responsible for his health and safety."  He also testified that they are all taught to only put a  person in the prone position long enough to cuff them because they can't breathe very well that way.  I'm  trying to keep an open mind until I hear the defense side of things, but I can't imagine what could save Chauvin now.


----------



## Aunt Marg

Della said:


> *Today was a devastating day for the defense.*  An older, very experienced Lt Zimmerman testified that the knee on the neck hold is never used or taught in any of their classes; "because they could die."  He said they are taught that once you cuff a person, "He is yours.  You are responsible for his health and safety."  He also testified that they are all taught to only put a  person in the prone position long enough to cuff them because they can't breathe very well that way.  I'm  trying to keep an open mind until I hear the defense side of things, but I can't imagine what could save Chauvin now.


And rightfully so, it should be devastating.


----------



## win231

Della said:


> Today was a devastating day for the defense.  An older, very experienced Lt Zimmerman testified that the knee on the neck hold is never used or taught in any of their classes; "because they could die."  He said they are taught that once you cuff a person, "He is yours.  You are responsible for his health and safety."  He also testified that they are all taught to only put a  person in the prone position long enough to cuff them because they can't breathe very well that way.  I'm  trying to keep an open mind until I hear the defense side of things, but I can't imagine what could save Chauvin now.


If there is any justice, nothing will save this dirtbag.  He belongs in a gas chamber.  With a timer set for 9 minutes.


----------



## Aunt Marg

win231 said:


> If there is any justice, nothing will save this dirtbag.  He belongs in a gas chamber.


I second your sentiment, Win.


----------



## Keesha

UsernameRSP said:


> Not watching the trial...It's just another way to get people worked up emotional and polarized...I think the PTB want this guy to get a non-guilty so there's just another excuse for rioting and chaos...


What does PTB stand for?


----------



## Remy

He's going to be found guilty IMO. Deservingly so. I have no idea who this former officer is or what was in his mind. I'd find it hard to believe his intent was to kill George Floyd but his action certainly did.

I watched the body cam footage presented in the trial. George Floyd's behavior seemed intense. He did try to kick from what I noticed. However I had the same thought the CNN analysts had even before they spoke: There were no attempts at de-escalation. It never needed to get to that point.

Also what the witness said today about how to position someone after they had handcuffs applied made a lot of sense. 

George Floyd had dark skin but I could even see (and I thought this last summer from cell phone video) that he was very red in the face. This man was in severe distress with that knee on his neck.


----------



## hollydolly

Talk about hung by your own petard...  Chauvins' body camera fell off half way through the arrest, but not before it managed to capture him doing this...


----------



## tbeltrans

Butterfly said:


> I can't help wondering if Mr. Floyd even knew it was a counterfeit $20.  For all I know, I could have some counterfeit money in my purse.  Not that it really matters, considering what happened afterwards, but I just wonder if he knew.


That is an interesting point.  My comments here are in general, rather than specifically about George Floyd...

The major local TV station, WCCO, did a investigative news item some years ago, checking randomly picked dollar bills from people's wallets among the employees at the station, checking these for cocaine.  They found that nearly all the bills had some detectable amount of cocaine in them.

There is probably a lot that we don't know about the bills we carry.  That is probably less of an issue today since many of us carry little or no cash anymore, but it is interesting.

As for counterfeit money, the stores may have device to check for this, but the average person does not, so we could very well be carrying counterfeit money and not know it.

Tony


----------



## Keesha

It wasn’t even established that it was counterfeit money.

Floyd and Chauvin used to work together as security in a bar the year before. They personally knew each other.

This officer kneeled on his neck for over 9 minutes with another officer on his diaphragm and another man sitting on his legs WHILE he was hand cuffed and face down.

What possible danger were these officers in?

In my opinion, this was intentional murder. Even the photos look like something from  ‘trophy hunters.’


----------



## Ruthanne

tbeltrans said:


> That is an interesting point.  My comments here are in general, rather than specifically about George Floyd...
> 
> The major local TV station, WCCO, did a investigative news item some years ago, checking randomly picked dollar bills from people's wallets among the employees at the station, checking these for cocaine.  They found that nearly all the bills had some detectable amount of cocaine in them.
> 
> There is probably a lot that we don't know about the bills we carry.  That is probably less of an issue today since many of us carry little or no cash anymore, but it is interesting.
> 
> As for counterfeit money, the stores may have device to check for this, but the average person does not, so we could very well be carrying counterfeit money and not know it.
> 
> Tony


I always carry some cash.  God knows what it could be or was used for.


----------



## tbeltrans

Ruthanne said:


> I always carry some cash.  God knows what it could be or was used for.



I didn't know what cash was until...






Tony


----------



## jerry old

1.  The man was murdered

2. The guy that killed him was a cop.  You call cops when your in trouble; they come to resolve the situation ("Do something.")

3.  Two of the cops are guilty, but their cops that were called to intervene-they did.

4.  The cop  needs to do hard time, How Long?  What about wives, children or do they not count?


----------



## Keesha

The cops were called because shop workers ‘thought’ that Floyd might be dealing with counterfeit money. ‘Thought.’

Even if the cops ‘thought’ he was guilty, that’s what courts are for. Either charge him ( they couldn’t since they had no proof of anything ) or let him go. Neither was done. These three cops became his judge, jury and executioner.


----------



## tbeltrans

I don't have to watch the local news to keep up on the trial.  This thread seems to be doing it for me. 

Tony


----------



## mrstime

The Jury will have seen the full 9 minutes.


----------



## ohioboy

This appears to be the applicable statute concerning the $20.00 bill:

18 USC 471

Whoever, with intent to defraud, passes, utters, publishes, or sells, or attempts to pass, utter, publish, or sell, or with like intent brings into the United States or keeps in possession or conceals any falsely made, forged, counterfeited, or altered obligation or other security of the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 20 years, or both.

The 4 degrees of Mens Rea (culpable mental state) are:

1. Knowingly
2. Willfully
3. With general intent (won't apply here)
4. With specific intent.

I boils down to whether George Floyd knew it was actually counterfeit? If it  was an old style 20 without the new security enhancements, it may actually be hard to tell?


----------



## Sassycakes

*Aside from the fact that George Floyd was murdered brutally and it breaks my heart, I worry that many people will think poorly of all Police officers for the cruel heartless cruelty Chauvin did to Mister Floyd. Most Police officers put their lives on the line protecting all of us. I hope and pray no other Police Officer will get disrespected because of a creep like Chauvin.*


----------



## Aunt Marg

Sassycakes said:


> *Aside from the fact that George Floyd was murdered brutally and it breaks my heart, I worry that many people will think poorly of all Police officers for the cruel heartless cruelty Chauvin did to Mister Floyd. Most Police officers put their lives on the line protecting all of us. I hope and pray no other Police Officer will get disrespected because of a creep like Chauvin.*


The truth of the matter is, where there's a Chauvin, there's 4-5 other officers from the same tainted mold right behind him.

The video of the George Floyd incident is testament to that.


----------



## Sassycakes

Aunt Marg said:


> The truth of the matter is, where there's a Chauvin, there's 4-5 other officers from the same tainted mold right behind him.
> 
> The video of the George Floyd happening is testament to that.


 You are right about that. I've wondered why they didn't stop Chauvin from his cruel and brutal treatment of George Floyd.


----------



## Aunt Marg

Sassycakes said:


> You are right about that. I've wondered why they didn't stop Chauvin from his cruel and brutal treatment of George Floyd.


Because they were cowards, Sas.


----------



## ohioboy

Aunt Marg said:


> Because they were cowards, Sas.


You commit a sin against the code of conduct if you dis another officer. Look what happened to Frank Serpico!


----------



## Aunt Marg

ohioboy said:


> You commit a sin against the code of conduct if you dis another officer. Look what happened to Frank Serpico!


Code or not, I would have stepped in, even being a woman.

If I had to I would have drawn my gun on Chauvin.

Right is right, and wrong is wrong.


----------



## Irwin

Unless Chauvin is punished, the entire police force will look bad. 

I don't see how the jury could arrive at any verdict other than guilty, though. Even other cops are testifying that what he did was wrong and broke from department policy. Plus he had a long history of misconduct.


----------



## Keesha

Irwin said:


> Plus he had a long history of misconduct.


He has 17 formal complaints against him, most being that he was overly aggressive.


----------



## hollydolly

Morries Hall a convicted felon himself, was in the car with GF.. and after George was killed Morries Hall ran to Houston where the police found him a week later in hiding . He has now said he will refuse to testify in this case, and if forced will plead the 5th. He said he feared for his life which is why he disappeared immediately to Texas  despite at the time stating he would be GF's voice....

Now the police have arrested him on a 3 year old domestic battery charge, and got him locked up in a cell.. it's said that Chauvins' defence are going to use this as a get out of jail free card.... if he testifies etc... 

However.. I couldn't get my head around why Morries disappeared in the first place, what was he really scared of, he  seemingly did nothing wrong..

..but this picture has now surfaced... and it shows Morries Hall handing something to GF in the store... now could it be the Fake $20 dollar note? Was he the one who got GF killed for a fake note ?..is this really what he is afraid of being discovered ?
This would make his disappearance far more plausible. If the Black community discover he was the reason behind GF getting arrested in the first place then he's in big  trouble.. and equally with the Police..

Therefore in my mind if he is forced to testify in this case.. he will be caught like a rat in the middle of a cage if it's proven he passed that $20 dollar note.... and this is _really_ what he's afraid of....


----------



## 911

Della said:


> Today was a devastating day for the defense.  An older, very experienced Lt Zimmerman testified that the knee on the neck hold is never used or taught in any of their classes; "because they could die."  He said they are taught that once you cuff a person, "He is yours.  You are responsible for his health and safety."  He also testified that they are all taught to only put a  person in the prone position long enough to cuff them because they can't breathe very well that way.  I'm  trying to keep an open mind until I hear the defense side of things, but I can't imagine what could save Chauvin now.


Just like every witness that testifies, it will come down to his credibility. If the defense can find something in the Lieutenant's past that would reflect negatively on his reputation, it could be a game changer. You will need to wait until the defense to present their case before making such statements. 

But, just to be clear, we never taught the knee to neck position to our Cadets. At the FBI training Academy, they do teach it, but recommend it be used in only extreme situations. For example; if an officer or a Trooper would be taking down a suspect who is resisting arrest, it may be used, but only until he has been restrained by cuffing. If the suspect is a "kicker," it's recommended that he/she also be leg-shackled.


----------



## Della

hollydolly said:


> .but this picture has now surfaced... and it shows Morries Hall handing something to GF in the store... now could it be the Fake $20 dollar note? Was he the one who got GF killed for a fake note ?..is this really what he is afraid of being discovered ?


My son is a store cashier and he happened to walk in and watch that whole scene with me.  The first thing he said was. "Look he's tweaking!  When someone starts acting jittery like that the whole atmosphere changes and we get sort of quiet, watching them out of the corners of our eyes.  Look!  His friend is handing something off to him, that's something else we watch for." 

  Floyd and Morries had been in together earlier and Morries had tried to pass a counterfeit twenty and failed.  I think this was their attempt to try it again with a different person using the bill.  In any case Morries didn't get Geroge killed, George knew all about that bill, and it wasn't the bill that got him killed.  Whether he was ripping young Christopher off for twenty dollars (which he seemed to be trying to do) or had been stealing a pack of $2000 out of a register, it doesn't matter.  It was resisting arrest that got him killed.


----------



## Della

911 said:


> You will need to wait until the defense to present their case before making such statements.


I may be pretending to be the 15th juror, but I'm not really.  I'm a free citizen, watching from my recliner, and I can state my opinion anytime I want.  And then my opposite opinion the next day.


----------



## hollydolly

Della said:


> My son is a store cashier and he happened to walk in and watch that whole scene with me.  The first thing he said was. "Look he's tweaking!  When someone starts acting jittery like that the whole atmosphere changes and we get sort of quiet, watching them out of the corners of our eyes.  Look!  His friend is handing something off to him, that's something else we watch for."
> 
> Floyd and Morries had been in together earlier and Morries had tried to pass a counterfeit twenty and failed.  I think this was their attempt to try it again with a different person using the bill.  In any case Morries didn't get Geroge killed, George knew all about that bill, and it wasn't the bill that got him killed.  Whether he was ripping young Christopher off for twenty dollars (which he seemed to be trying to do) or had been stealing a pack of $2000 out of a register, it doesn't matter.  It was resisting arrest that got him killed.


Yep I agree to a certain extent... but if it hadn't have been for that $20 dollars , GF would be alive today ...probably


----------



## win231

Della said:


> My son is a store cashier and he happened to walk in and watch that whole scene with me.  The first thing he said was. "Look he's tweaking!  When someone starts acting jittery like that the whole atmosphere changes and we get sort of quiet, watching them out of the corners of our eyes.  Look!  His friend is handing something off to him, that's something else we watch for."
> 
> Floyd and Morries had been in together earlier and Morries had tried to pass a counterfeit twenty and failed.  I think this was their attempt to try it again with a different person using the bill.  In any case Morries didn't get Geroge killed, George knew all about that bill, and it wasn't the bill that got him killed.  Whether he was ripping young Christopher off for twenty dollars (which he seemed to be trying to do) or had been stealing a pack of $2000 out of a register, it doesn't matter.  It was resisting arrest that got him killed.


One fact you can't avoid:  Once Floyd was handcuffed, the resistance (if there was any) stopped &  Chauvin deliberately committed murder.


----------



## saltydog

I feel all the evidence presented back in May, 2020, led me to believe George Floyd was on the road to destruction the day he died.


----------



## Aunt Marg

saltydog said:


> I feel all the evidence presented back in May, 2020, led me to believe George Floyd was on the road to destruction the day he died.


There is a stark difference between destruction and murder.


----------



## SetWave

Keesha said:


> He has 17 formal complaints against him, most being that he was overly aggressive.


I think I read that those complaints won't be brought at trial.


----------



## SetWave

Della said:


> I may be pretending to be the 15th juror, but I'm not really.  I'm a free citizen, watching from my recliner, and I can state my opinion anytime I want.  And then my opposite opinion the next day.


Exactly. We have the luxury of being in the court of public opinion.


----------



## Della

win231 said:


> One fact you can't avoid:  Once Floyd was handcuffed, the resistance (if there was any) stopped &  Chauvin deliberately committed murder.


I can't  watch Floyd in the back seat thrashing and kicking and question whether or not there was resistance.

I'm not sure Chauvin killed him on purpose, but, if he was angry enough to do that, I think it was partly over the physical struggle with Floyd and partly because the people in the crowd were screaming insults at Chauvin, making him stubborn and defiant.  I just don't think Chauvin killed Floyd over that twenty dollar bill and that's what I keep hearing people say. Not that any of that excuses Chauvin, but I think it might explain him a little bit.

I'll always wonder if Chauvin would have stopped if the crowd had just gone quiet for one single minute.  They all say they feel guilty for not doing more for Floyd, but I wonder if any of them ever felt guilty for not shutting up, when their shouting and screeching all at once was adding so much stress to the situation.


----------



## Pink Biz

*It doesn't matter what George Floyd did or didn't do on May 25, 2020, or the day before that or the month before that or the year before that. All that matters is that a depraved "maggot" (as witness Charles Macmillan described him) murdered him.Period. Everything else is a feeble distraction and an insult to the jury's intelligence.

Have we not witnessed enough evil in this country to recognize it when it occurs? Read some history to learn what you probably were spared in school. I recommend Howard Zinn's classic "A People's History of the United States" for starters.*
​


----------



## jerry old

Slinging mud?  
What purpose does that serve?


----------



## JimBob1952

saltydog said:


> I feel all the evidence presented back in May, 2020, led me to believe George Floyd was on the road to destruction the day he died.





Pink Biz said:


> *It doesn't matter what George Floyd did or didn't do on May 25, 2020, or the day before that or the month before that or the year before that. All that matters is that a depraved "maggot" (as witness Charles Macmillan described him) murdered him.Period. Everything else is a feeble distraction and an insult to the jury's intelligence.
> 
> Have we not witnessed enough evil in this country to recognize it when it occurs? Read some history to learn what you probably were spared in school. I recommend Howard Zinn's classic "A People's History of the United States" for starters.*
> ​





Howard Zinn





Pink Biz said:


> *It doesn't matter what George Floyd did or didn't do on May 25, 2020, or the day before that or the month before that or the year before that. All that matters is that a depraved "maggot" (as witness Charles Macmillan described him) murdered him.Period. Everything else is a feeble distraction and an insult to the jury's intelligence.
> 
> Have we not witnessed enough evil in this country to recognize it when it occurs? Read some history to learn what you probably were spared in school. I recommend Howard Zinn's classic "A People's History of the United States" for starters.*
> ​



Howard Zinn was a Communist sack of s___, a Stalin follower whose book is full of lies and distortions.  It's popular for just that reason: Because it portrays the US as the worst country in history, much worse, for example, than the Stalinist USSR.  Since people on the left want to believe that, and since many teachers and professors are on the left, they assign the book to their students as an "antidote" to the prevailing wisdom about the US being a good country.  

What would we say about a book written by a man who believed fervently in the goodness and greatness of Adolf Hitler?  Yet Zinn's oversimplified caricature of history -- written by a man who believed in the goodness and greatness of Josef Stalin -- gets assigned to high schoolers who often never read another work of history.


----------



## Della

Pink Biz said:


> It doesn't matter what George Floyd did or didn't do on May 25, 2020, or the day before that or the month before that or the year before that. All that matters is that a depraved "maggot" (as witness Charles Macmillan described him) murdered him.Period. Everything else is a feeble distraction and an insult to the jury's intelligence.


Why even have a jury if we're just going to send people to prison without looking carefully at the crime?  Why have a justice system at all if it's that easy to know evil when we see it?  If that were the case George Floyd wouldn't have been in Cup Foods at all on May 25, 2020.  Someone would have looked at a film of him holding a woman at gun point, in her own home, in front of her toddler and decided they had witnessed evil and put him in prison for life.

I haven't heard anyone say they think Chauvin is completely innocent.  The question the jury has to decide is not just if he's innocent or not but, if guilty, what degree of murder he's guilty of.  Without learning the extenuating circumstances, including what George Floyd did that day, the jury wont know whether Chauvin is guilty of second degree murder, third degree murder, or manslaughter.   I hope the jury will consider all the evidence and try Chauvin as fairly as possible. He shouldn't be held responsible for America's history.


----------



## Jules

Della said:


> I think it was partly over the physical struggle with Floyd and partly because the people in the crowd were screaming insults at Chauvin, *making him stubborn and defiant.*


That could be part of it.


----------



## saltydog

Pink Biz said:


> *It doesn't matter what George Floyd did or didn't do on May 25, 2020, or the day before that or the month before that or the year before that. All that matters is that a depraved "maggot" (as witness Charles Macmillan described him) murdered him.Period. Everything else is a feeble distraction and an insult to the jury's intelligence.
> 
> Have we not witnessed enough evil in this country to recognize it when it occurs? Read some history to learn what you probably were spared in school. I recommend Howard Zinn's classic "A People's History of the United States" for starters.*
> ​



It does matter to a lot of people that George Floyd was attempting to commit a felony, and was under the influence of fentanyl and methamphetamine at the time he was stopped.  I personally don't know anyone that would want someone, in George Floyd's condition, out on the street, at risk of endangering innocent peoples lives.  
I definitely feel George Floyd needed to be taken into custody that day.


----------



## Pepper

GF was a functioning addict @saltydog .  I don't mean functioning in bourgeoisie lingo, I mean he was used to being stoned and knew how to deal with his everyday life & routines.  He functioned and didn't 'need' to be taken into custody.


----------



## hollydolly

Pepper said:


> GF was a functioning addict @saltydog .  I don't mean functioning in bourgeoisie lingo, I mean he was used to being stoned and knew how to deal with his everyday life & routines.  He functioned and didn't 'need' to be taken into custody.


Yes agreed, he was a  high functioning  addict according to those who knew him, and according to his girfriend in her statement in the witness box


----------



## ohioboy

SetWave said:


> I think I read that those complaints won't be brought at trial.



The Rules of Evidence will determine that, could be this rule at (*b*):

The case law will control the final ruling.

https://www.revisor.mn.gov/court_rules/ev/id/404/


----------



## win231

Della said:


> I can't  watch Floyd in the back seat thrashing and kicking and question whether or not there was resistance.
> 
> I'm not sure Chauvin killed him on purpose, but, if he was angry enough to do that, I think it was partly over the physical struggle with Floyd and partly because the people in the crowd were screaming insults at Chauvin, making him stubborn and defiant.  I just don't think Chauvin killed Floyd over that twenty dollar bill and that's what I keep hearing people say. Not that any of that excuses Chauvin, but I think it might explain him a little bit.
> 
> I'll always wonder if Chauvin would have stopped if the crowd had just gone quiet for one single minute.  They all say they feel guilty for not doing more for Floyd, but I wonder if any of them ever felt guilty for not shutting up, when their shouting and screeching all at once was adding so much stress to the situation.


We can't expect normal people to watch a police officer slowly murder a handcuffed suspect for 9 minutes without reacting.


----------



## Della

win231 said:


> We can't expect normal people to watch a police officer slowly murder a handcuffed suspect for 9 minutes without reacting.


Why would you say that to me specifically?  Are you implying that I enjoyed that?  I was horrified when I first saw that and every single time since.  I've said since last May that Chauvin deserves to go to prison for what he did.  

Because, I believe that does it mean I have to slant every piece of evidence I see in one direction only?  Am I required to watch Floyd struggling against the small officer who was trying to get him to sit in the squad car and pretend to myself that he was sitting quietly in the car? 

I'm trying to look at the evidence with an open mind, but I guess that makes me a horrible person who loves watching people die.  You have insulted me too much with that.  I'll bow out of this discussion.


----------



## win231

Della said:


> Why would you say that to me specifically?  Are you implying that I enjoyed that?  I was horrified when I first saw that and every single time since.  I've said since last May that Chauvin deserves to go to prison for what he did.
> 
> Because, I believe that does it mean I have to slant every piece of evidence I see in one direction only?  Am I required to watch Floyd struggling against the small officer who was trying to get him to sit in the squad car and pretend to myself that he was sitting quietly in the car?
> 
> I'm trying to look at the evidence with an open mind, but I guess that makes me a horrible person who loves watching people die.  You have insulted me too much with that.  I'll bow out of this discussion.


Why not review your post (#172)where you said:  _"I'm not sure Chauvin killed him on purpose, but, if he was angry enough to do that, I think it was partly over the physical struggle with Floyd and *partly because the people in the crowd were screaming insults at Chauvin, making him stubborn and defiant."*_
That obviously makes it sound like you're partly blaming people in the crowd screaming at Chauvin, when 100% of the blame belongs on him.


----------



## Butterfly

win231 said:


> Why not review your post (#172)where you said:  _"I'm not sure Chauvin killed him on purpose, but, if he was angry enough to do that, I think it was partly over the physical struggle with Floyd and *partly because the people in the crowd were screaming insults at Chauvin, making him stubborn and defiant."*_
> That obviously makes it sound like you're partly blaming people in the crowd screaming at Chauvin, when 100% of the blame belongs on him.


From what I've seen, the small crowd (certainly not an unruly mob, by any stretch) was urging Chauvin to get off of Mr. Floyd's neck when he was obviously in distress.  Even if the crowd had been calling Chauvin every foul name in the book, police officers are supposed to be professional and not let their judgment be affected by the crowd.  And if Chauvin did kill Mr. Floyd because he became "stubborn and defiant" because of the crowd, that is in itself damning.

Testimony by paramedics who came to the scene says that Chauvin still had his knee Mr. Floyd's neck when they arrived, even though Mr. Floyd was unresponsive and had neither pulse nor respirations and appeared to be dead and obviously no further threat (if he had ever been) to the officers.  Paramedics had to get Chauvin off Mr. Floyd before they could even attempt to treat him.


----------



## Della

Butterfly said:


> And if Chauvin did kill Mr. Floyd because he became "stubborn and defiant" because of the crowd, that is in itself damning.


It certainly is damning.  It shows what an unprofessional cop he is and what a small, cowardly, immature human being that he would rather let a man die than allow the crowd to tell him what to do.  

I was just thinking it might have saved Floyd's life if the bystanders had shut up, because whatever they were telling him to do it clearly was having the opposite effect.  You can talk about what a professional would have done all you want but  obviously they weren't dealing with a professional. They were dealing with a bully who couldn't stand criticism and the end result of their screeching was a death. That doesn't make it their fault, but it would have been nice if they had put their own egos down for a minute and either quit screaming instructions and insults, or taken over.  At that point I don't think who was right and who was wrong was as important as keeping Floyd alive.

Every time I listen to it, I hear a whole lot of people screaming over each other so you can barely understand what they're saying and "You're a bum" which they say was repeated 17 times.  Did  Donald Williams really think those insults would make Chauvin stop? Who ever did what you wanted them to do because you called them a name? Or did he just want to hear his own voice 17 times? If anyone had the muscle to push Chauvin off it was Williams, but oh that's right,   his energy wouldn't allow that.

Of course Chauvin is 100% to blame for the death that's why he is the one who is probably going to prison for murder 2.  That doesn't mean Geniveive and  Williams, who sounded so proud of themselves on the witness stand, acted for the best for Floyd that day.


----------



## Keesha

Oh poor police officer who couldn’t control himself from murdering a suspect while being detained as bystanders and witnesses yelled at him in criticism?  It’s the by standers fault that  he murdered Floyd?

I’m so glad to know my perception is different.

Ok! Time to move on from less controversial, depressing subjects.


Why do I keep doing this to myself.


----------



## win231

Della said:


> It certainly is damning.  It shows what an unprofessional cop he is and what a small, cowardly, immature human being that he would rather let a man die than allow the crowd to tell him what to do.
> 
> I was just thinking it might have saved Floyd's life if the bystanders had shut up, because whatever they were telling him to do it clearly was having the opposite effect.  You can talk about what a professional would have done all you want but  obviously they weren't dealing with a professional. They were dealing with a bully who couldn't stand criticism and the end result of their screeching was a death. That doesn't make it their fault, but it would have been nice if they had put their own egos down for a minute and either quit screaming instructions and insults, or taken over.  At that point I don't think who was right and who was wrong was as important as keeping Floyd alive.
> 
> Every time I listen to it, I hear a whole lot of people screaming over each other so you can barely understand what they're saying and "You're a bum" which they say was repeated 17 times.  Did  Donald Williams really think those insults would make Chauvin stop? Who ever did what you wanted them to do because you called them a name? Or did he just want to hear his own voice 17 times? If anyone had the muscle to push Chauvin off it was Williams, but oh that's right,   his energy wouldn't allow that.
> 
> Of course Chauvin is 100% to blame for the death that's why he is the one who is probably going to prison for murder 2.  That doesn't mean Geniveive and  Williams, who sounded so proud of themselves on the witness stand, acted for the best for Floyd that day.


The bystanders had a natural human reaction to what they were witnessing - just as we're having a natural human reaction to what you're posting.


----------



## tbeltrans

Here among us in this thread...






Tony


----------



## Della

win231 said:


> The bystanders had a natural human reaction to what they were witnessing - just as we're having a natural human reaction to what you're posting.


I suppose your "natural human reaction" is to believe that anyone who is trying to understand how this could have happened is someone who is making excuses for Chauvin. You see Floyd as entirely Good and Chauvin as entirely Evil, nothing in between, no need for a trail.  Clearly that's what you want to believe and it makes it nice and easy then, to judge me as Evil also, because I see shades of good and shades of bad in most people.  

I guess your plea for us to all get along is your way of saying, "Can we all just agree with Win."  Sorry, not happening.   This thread is to discuss the trial and that's what I'm doing.  If you want a thread where everyone competes to see who can hate the hardest with the strongest statements against Chauvin you should start it -- although I think Aunt Marg has already won and more power to her.  It's her opinion and she's entitled to it, just like I'm entitled to mine, without you calling me abnormal.


----------



## digifoss

Della said:


> I suppose your "natural human reaction" is to believe that anyone who is trying to understand how this could have happened is someone who is making excuses for Chauvin. You see Floyd as entirely Good and Chauvin as entirely Evil, nothing in between, no need for a trail.  Clearly that's what you want to believe and it makes it nice and easy then, to judge me as Evil also, because I see shades of good and shades of bad in most people.
> 
> I guess your plea for us to all get along is your way of saying, "Can we all just agree with Win."  Sorry, not happening.   This thread is to discuss the trial and that's what I'm doing.  If you want a thread where everyone competes to see who can hate the hardest with the strongest statements against Chauvin you should start it -- although I think Aunt Marg has already won and more power to her.  It's her opinion and she's entitled to it, just like I'm entitled to mine, without you calling me abnormal.


Unfortunately, you're wasting your time and effort on this one Della....


----------



## win231

Della said:


> I suppose your "natural human reaction" is to believe that anyone who is trying to understand how this could have happened is someone who is making excuses for Chauvin. You see Floyd as entirely Good and Chauvin as entirely Evil, nothing in between, no need for a trail.  Clearly that's what you want to believe and it makes it nice and easy then, to judge me as Evil also, because I see shades of good and shades of bad in most people.
> 
> I guess your plea for us to all get along is your way of saying, "Can we all just agree with Win."  Sorry, not happening.   This thread is to discuss the trial and that's what I'm doing.  If you want a thread where everyone competes to see who can hate the hardest with the strongest statements against Chauvin you should start it -- although I think Aunt Marg has already won and more power to her.  It's her opinion and she's entitled to it, just like I'm entitled to mine, without you calling me abnormal.


You're a champion exaggerator.  I don't know Floyd, so I can't see him as good or evil.  I have seen what Chauvin did (as we all have) & we know that is evil.
When you try to place any blame on bystanders, you are making ridiculous excuses for Chauvin's murderous act.


----------



## ohioboy

1. There are going to be opinions of the onlookers that they were so called enablers, because they did not physically intervene.

2. There are going to be opinions that repeated attempts to yell chauvin off of floyd simply fueled his fire, thus they were guilty of complicity.

3. There are going to be opinions that all who demanded Chauvin stop were heroes or such.

I go with # 3.


----------



## Butterfly

win231 said:


> You're a champion exaggerator.  I don't know Floyd, so I can't see him as good or evil.  I have seen what Chauvin did (as we all have) & we know that is evil.
> When you try to place any blame on bystanders, you are making ridiculous excuses for Chauvin's murderous act.


I strongly agree.   Should the bystanders have remained silent?  That would have been tacit agreement with what Chauvin was doing.  

I believe Chauvin did what he did because he is a bully and a racist and felt himself to be very much superior to Mr. Floyd and was going to teach Mr. Floyd and the bystanders a lesson by his display of brute force.


----------



## fuzzybuddy

I'm so surprised that the other cops, who testified, didn't stand up for this guy. Usually, they all stick together on a really implausible story. Also, kneeling a guy's throat, while he's handcuffed is way over the line. Do I think cops would get a kick or two in, on a handcuffed dude, if they were frustrated? Oh yeah. But this is enjoying kneeling on someone's neck. Do we know anything about  Chauvin's background? That kind of behavior just doesn't pop up only once.


----------



## Della

fuzzybuddy said:


> I'm so surprised that the other cops, who testified, didn't stand up for this guy. Usually, they all stick together on a really implausible story. Also, kneeling a guy's throat, while he's handcuffed is way over the line. Do I think cops would get a kick or two in, on a handcuffed dude, if they were frustrated? Oh yeah. But this is enjoying kneeling on someone's neck. Do we know anything about  Chauvin's background? That kind of behavior just doesn't pop up only once.


So true.  Chauvin had 18 complaints over his 19 year career and the nightclub owner who hired him as security guard said he had a reputation for being overly aggressive.  Sounds like he should have been fired long ago.


----------



## win231

Della said:


> So true.  Chauvin had 18 complaints over his 19 year career and the nightclub owner who hired him as security guard said he had a reputation for being overly aggressive.  Sounds like he should have been fired long ago.


That's usually the case with such cops.  And complaints are usually not taken seriously, which is why they get away with it for so long.


----------



## DaveA

saltydog said:


> It does matter to a lot of people that George Floyd was attempting to commit a felony, and was under the influence of fentanyl and methamphetamine at the time he was stopped.  I personally don't know anyone that would want someone, in George Floyd's condition, out on the street, at risk of endangering innocent peoples lives.
> I definitely feel George Floyd needed to be taken into custody that day.


Do you ever give a thought to the far greater number of people, under the influence of alcohol. out on the street at risk of endangering people's lives.  Does DUI ring a bell?  Let's get in the real world and not just pick out abuses that we don't happen to have.  Maybe we should have all drunks treated in the same manner as Floyd.  Based on the reasoning of some, we'd all be safer.


----------



## win231

win231 said:


> That's usually the case with such cops.  And complaints are usually not taken seriously, which is why they get away with it for so long.


Two other cops who committed murder & got away with it for many years because police didn't want to investigate their own, despite countless complaints & evidence:  They put the victims' families through hell.  Police concluded "Some burglar must have killed her."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murder_of_Sherri_Rasmussen

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drew_Peterson


----------



## ohioboy

The Minneapolis Police Chief testified today and tore Chauvin to threads about his conduct. Kneeling on a person's neck for 9 minutes! What kind of egotistical hubris is that.


----------



## Butterfly

DaveA said:


> Do you ever give a thought to the far greater number of people, under the influence of alcohol. out on the street at risk of endangering people's lives.  Does DUI ring a bell?  Let's get in the real world and not just pick out abuses that we don't happen to have.  Maybe we should have all drunks treated in the same manner as Floyd.  Based on the reasoning of some, we'd all be safer.



Additionally, there was no testimony that Mr. Floyd was behaving in any threatening or erratic manner when he was in the store or otherwise.  The clerk testified that Mr. Floyd seemed a little slow, but that was all.  After he left the store, he just went and sat in the truck.

Regardless of what he had done or not done in the past, or what drugs he may have had on board, nothing Mr. Floyd did justified the treatment he received from the cops, including being asphyxiated in the street.


----------



## win231

ohioboy said:


> The Minneapolis Police Chief testified today and tore Chauvin to threads about his conduct. Kneeling on a person's neck for 9 minutes! What kind of egotistical hubris is that.





fuzzybuddy said:


> I'm so surprised that the other cops, who testified, didn't stand up for this guy. Usually, they all stick together on a really implausible story. Also, kneeling a guy's throat, while he's handcuffed is way over the line. Do I think cops would get a kick or two in, on a handcuffed dude, if they were frustrated? Oh yeah. But this is enjoying kneeling on someone's neck. Do we know anything about  Chauvin's background? That kind of behavior just doesn't pop up only once.


Much like the trial of Dr. Conrad Murray - who killed Michael Jackson.
Like cops, doctors usually support each other, even when they shouldn't, but I was surprised that several doctors testified against Dr. Murray; his guilt & attempts to cover up his apathy & greed were so obvious, doctors didn't want to look like fools by supporting him.


----------



## MarciKS

win231 said:


> Much like the trial of Dr. Conrad Murray - who killed Michael Jackson.
> Like cops, doctors usually support each other, even when they shouldn't, but I was surprised that several doctors testified against Dr. Murray; his guilt & attempts to cover up his apathy & greed were so obvious, doctors didn't want to look like fools by supporting him.


I find it amazing that these stars have it all and yet Michael's life was such a sad and pathetic mess.


----------



## Mike

This trial is live on YouTube.

Mike.


----------



## mellowyellow

It would take a very strong person to remain sober living in George Floyd’s neighbourhood, they appear to dwell in the city of the damned.


----------



## hollydolly

Mike said:


> This trial is live on YouTube.
> 
> Mike.


also live on TV...court TV channel on Sky


----------



## rgp

Michael Jackson & George Floyd both killed themselves by way of their behavior,habits & lifestyle.


----------



## JimBob1952

[/QUOTE]





rgp said:


> Michael Jackson & George Floyd both killed themselves by way of their behavior,habits & lifestyle.


----------



## JimBob1952

sorry, did not mean to respond to this and don't know how to delete the post


----------



## Keesha

rgp said:


> Michael Jackson & George Floyd both killed themselves by way of their behavior,habits & lifestyle.


Correction: George Floyd was murdered by the police officers who were supposed to be caring for him. Instead they handcuffed him, turned him face down and all sat on parts of his body until he suffocated to death as the world watched in horror. The only ones who don’t see this are the ones who choose not to , for their own reasons.


----------



## rgp

Keesha said:


> Correction: George Floyd was murdered by the police officers who were supposed to be caring for him. Instead they handcuffed him, turned him face down and all sat on parts of his body until he suffocated to death as the world watched in horror. The only ones who don’t see this are the ones who choose not to , for their own reasons.




  "The only ones who don’t see this are the ones who choose not to , for their own reasons."

 And the only ones that do ........ are those that choose to prefer criminal thugs over the police. 
For their own reasons.


----------



## Keesha

rgp said:


> "The only ones who don’t see this are the ones who choose not to , for their own reasons."
> 
> And the only ones that do ........ are those that choose to prefer criminal thugs over the police.
> For their own reasons.


Hahaha. That’s actually funny. 
Criminal , murderous thugs hiding under a  badge  of authority are the worst ones ever.


----------



## digifoss

I thought this was interesting​Rasmussen Poll: Less Than Majority Think Chauvin's Guilty of George Floyd's Death​https://www.newsmax.com/us/rasmussen-floyd-chauvin/2021/04/05/id/1016455/


----------



## JimBob1952

digifoss said:


> I thought this was interesting​Rasmussen Poll: Less Than Majority Think Chauvin's Guilty of George Floyd's Death​https://www.newsmax.com/us/rasmussen-floyd-chauvin/2021/04/05/id/1016455/



It's interesting, but misleading.  

48% say Chauvin is guilty.   That's before the trial is concluded.  31 percent say they don't know yet, and 21 percent side with Chauvin.   

This is why we have trials, to argue the facts of the case.  Chauvin may or may not have caused Floyd's death.  (I think he did, but that is immaterial).  The prosecution and the defense get to present their evidence, and the jury gets to decide.


----------



## ohioboy

rgp said:


> "The only ones who don’t see this are the ones who choose not to , for their own reasons."
> 
> And the only ones that do ........ are those that choose to prefer criminal thugs over the police.
> For their own reasons.



These so called "criminal thugs" also have Constitutional protections, period.


----------



## win231

rgp said:


> Michael Jackson & George Floyd both killed themselves by way of their behavior,habits & lifestyle.


Of course.  Floyd should never have choked himself & Jackson should never have started his own IVs.
For the life of me, I just can't understand why Dr. Murray was convicted of manslaughter & served 2 years in prison!  It's so unfair!


----------



## Aunt Marg

rgp said:


> "The only ones who don’t see this are the ones who choose not to , for their own reasons."
> 
> And the only ones that do ........ are those that choose to prefer criminal thugs over the police.
> For their own reasons.


If anything at all, your entries are entertaining, RGP.


----------



## win231

rgp said:


> "The only ones who don’t see this are the ones who choose not to , for their own reasons."
> 
> And the only ones that do ........ are those that choose to prefer criminal thugs over the police.
> For their own reasons.


Yes.....if we criticize criminal cops, we're supporting criminal thugs & not "Backing The Badge."   

And why not let cops decide who is the proper color & who should be executed.  And cops should be the executioners.


----------



## win231

Aunt Marg said:


> If anything at all, your entries are entertaining, RGP.


I'm certainly having a great time with 'em........


----------



## mellowyellow

A protester holds a sign across the street from the Hennepin County Government Center in Minneapolis where testimony continues in the trial of former Minneapolis police officer Derek Chauvin.


----------



## DaveA

win231 said:


> I'm certainly having a great time with 'em........


It's a sad situation but I have to agree - -some of the comments are beyond me??


ohioboy said:


> This appears to be the applicable statute concerning the $20.00 bill:
> 
> 18 USC 471
> 
> Whoever, with intent to defraud, passes, utters, publishes, or sells, or attempts to pass, utter, publish, or sell, or with like intent brings into the United States or keeps in possession or conceals any falsely made, forged, counterfeited, or altered obligation or other security of the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 20 years, or both.
> 
> The 4 degrees of Mens Rea (culpable mental state) are:
> 
> 1. Knowingly
> 2. Willfully
> 3. With general intent (won't apply here)
> 4. With specific intent.
> 
> I boils down to whether George Floyd knew it was actually counterfeit? If it  was an old style 20 without the new security enhancements, it may actually be hard to tell?


You have to be kidding. I'd hate to think how many counterfeit bills MAY have passed through my hands in the last 80 years or so.  I might have one in my wallet today for all I know?  Anyone who studies each bill that they receive or pass on, and can quickly spot a fake would make me suspicious as to their motive and familiarity with this type of currency.

He passed a bad bill - -so-be-it.  Not exactly the crime of the century.  Certainly not worthy of the death penalty, no matter how or who carried it out.


----------



## Sunny

rgp said:


> Michael Jackson & George Floyd both killed themselves by way of their behavior,habits & lifestyle.


Rgp, I realize you are probably just trying to inflame a fight on this subject, but I'll bite anyway.

You are saying that if a person lives a less than exemplary lifestyle, has ever done anything wrong, and then he is walking down the street and without any cause someone goes up to him and shoots him, that person should be acquitted of murder because the victim was not a saint?  That should be the finding of the court, that they actually killed themselves, and we should pay no attention to the person who actually did the murder?

Biblical scholars like to ask, "Where is it written?"  I am no Biblical scholar, but this applies to our legal code as well. Where is it written that a person who murders someone who is less than perfect should be acquitted? Only murders of perfect people count? Really?


----------



## rgp

Sunny said:


> Rgp, I realize you are probably just trying to inflame a fight on this subject, but I'll bite anyway.
> 
> You are saying that if a person lives a less than exemplary lifestyle, has ever done anything wrong, and then he is walking down the street and without any cause someone goes up to him and shoots him, that person should be acquitted of murder because the victim was not a saint?  That should be the finding of the court, that they actually killed themselves, and we should pay no attention to the person who actually did the murder?
> 
> Biblical scholars like to ask, "Where is it written?"  I am no Biblical scholar, but this applies to our legal code as well. Where is it written that a person who murders someone who is less than perfect should be acquitted? Only murders of perfect people count? Really?




 I never said any such thing...........


----------



## rgp

win231 said:


> Yes.....if we criticize criminal cops, we're supporting criminal thugs & not "Backing The Badge."
> 
> And why not let cops decide who is the proper color & who should be executed.  And cops should be the executioners.



 Another reply/post with nothing sustative , only empty comment .


----------



## rgp

ohioboy said:


> These so called "criminal thugs" also have Constitutional protections, period.



And they should not .......... Any person that can plan/commit a crime against the masses of our society , should have no protections within that society.


----------



## Irwin

Police testifying against other police is almost unprecedented! Nobody in the police force is defending Chauvin's actions. He's toast!


----------



## hollydolly

...about time too...Chauvin has a long list of complaints against him that have all been covered up in the past,wonder what would have happened if any of those 17 complaints had been videoed...perhaps he would have been long gone from the force and GF would not have been killed by him...


----------



## Sunny

A whole parade of cops have testified against him, plus the chief of police.  This is not a case of thugs vs. police. In this case, the thugs _were _the "bad cops" - Chauvin plus the police who did nothing to stop him and watched an unconscious man being choked to death, for _maybe _passing a counterfeit $20 bill.


----------



## Elsie

manslaughter
[ˈmanˌslôdər]

NOUN

the crime of killing a human being without malice aforethought, or otherwise in circumstances not amounting to murder.
Chauvin did not commit murder.  It could be that Floyd was already on his way "out" being that he was overloaded on killer drugs.  The stress on his body from the prolonged kneeling on his body possibly hurried along his dieing.


----------



## fuzzybuddy

"It does matter to a lot of people that George Floyd was attempting to commit a felony." It doesn't matter what caused the police to arrest Floyd, once they placed the cuffs on him, they owned, him, they assumed responsibly for his safety. Having someone, who has just been arrested and is noncooperative is not  unknown to police. It wasn't the cops first time in the playground. And quite frankly, it would be nice for a police force  not to ineptly kill the people  they arrest for crimes. So far all the police, who have taken the stand seem to agree with that.


----------



## digifoss

*But will the jury convict?  Probably, they all most likely fear for their lives and jobs, etc....if they don't*​Chauvin Trial Day 7 Wrap-Up: a horrible day for the prosecution​
*Prosecution visibly shaken after cross-examination of MPD force & medical experts*
https://legalinsurrection.com/2021/...7-wrap-up-a-horrible-day-for-the-prosecution/


----------



## win231

rgp said:


> Another reply/post with nothing sustative , only empty comment .


And here I was, all excited to learn a new word!  Did you mean "Substantive?"


----------



## ohioboy

Elsie said:


> manslaughter
> [ˈmanˌslôdər]
> 
> NOUN
> 
> the crime of killing a human being without malice aforethought, or otherwise in circumstances not amounting to murder.
> Chauvin did not commit murder.  It could be that Floyd was already on his way "out" being that he was overloaded on killer drugs.  The stress on his body from the prolonged kneeling on his body possibly hurried along his dieing.



A dictionary definition is too general in nature. It's elements under Minnesota law is the only interpretation to be relevant.


----------



## Pepper

I question the veracity (and sanity) of your source @digifoss


----------



## ohioboy

rgp said:


> And they should not .......... Any person that can plan/commit a crime against the masses of our society , should have no protections within that society.



Star Chamber justice. Gladly not used in a civilized society.

If they commit crimes against the masses, prove it, that's Due Process.

This was one of the grievances against the King laid out in the Declaration of Independence:

"For depriving us in many cases, of the benefits of Trial by Jury".


----------



## Don M.

I've got a feeling that no matter what the verdict is, there is a mob lurking just waiting for this trial to end before they start another "protest" which will quickly turn into another riot.....and not only in Minneapolis.  Unless Chauvin is found guilty of ALL charges, and thrown in jail for life, I will not be surprised if we witness another round of destruction in cities all over the nation.


----------



## digifoss

Pepper said:


> I question the veracity (and sanity) of your source @digifoss



Because of ?


----------



## Pepper

No Justice No Peace


----------



## Pepper

digifoss said:


> Because of ?


Self promoting, donation seeking, right wing gun nut.  IMO.
ps
Whilst I do defend the principle of the Second Amendment, I cringe at many of it's fans (and was a former gun owner).


----------



## Irwin

Don M. said:


> I've got a feeling that no matter what the verdict is, there is a mob lurking just waiting for this trial to end before they start another "protest" which will quickly turn into another riot.....and not only in Minneapolis.  Unless Chauvin is found guilty of ALL charges, and thrown in jail for life, I will not be surprised if we witness another round of destruction in cities all over the nation.


No doubt. That happens when a city's team wins the Super Bowl! It's the American way!


----------



## Pepper

Irwin said:


> No doubt. That happens when a city's team wins the Super Bowl! It's the American way!


I say violence is necessary. Violence is a part of America's culture. It is as American as cherry pie. Americans taught the black people to be violent. We will use that violence to rid ourselves of oppression if necessary. We will be free, by any means necessary.

H. Rap Brown


----------



## hollydolly

Don M. said:


> I've got a feeling that no matter what the verdict is, there is a mob lurking just waiting for this trial to end before they start another "protest" which will quickly turn into another riot.....and not only in Minneapolis.  Unless Chauvin is found guilty of ALL charges, and thrown in jail for life, I will not be surprised if we witness another round of destruction in cities all over the nation.


I've been saying this all along, I sincerely hope I'm wrong....


----------



## ohioboy

Don M. said:


> I've got a feeling that no matter what the verdict is, there is a mob lurking just waiting for this trial to end before they start another "protest" which will quickly turn into another riot.....and not only in Minneapolis.  Unless Chauvin is found guilty of ALL charges, and thrown in jail for life, I will not be surprised if we witness another round of destruction in cities all over the nation.



No doubt, so it is left to the business and property owners to take out the rioters. Back in the days of moats and Castle's, they used to pour boiling water/ hot tar over the sides. I am of the super opinion that there will be more damage to the rioters this time around.


----------



## Pepper

ohioboy said:


> No doubt, so it is left to the business and property owners to take out the rioters. Back in the days of moats and Castle's, they used to pour boiling water/ hot tar over the sides. I am of the super opinion that there will be more damage to the rioters this time around.


If it were still an Orange Domain I would agree with you but thank goodness it's not.


----------



## ohioboy

Pepper said:


> If it were still an Orange Domain I would agree with you but thank goodness it's not.



What's an Orange Domain?


----------



## SetWave

Makes me think of the orange slime . . . but we won't go there....


----------



## Aunt Bea

Don M. said:


> I've got a feeling that no matter what the verdict is, there is a mob lurking just waiting for this trial to end before they start another "protest" which will quickly turn into another riot.....and not only in Minneapolis.  Unless Chauvin is found guilty of ALL charges, and thrown in jail for life, I will not be surprised if we witness another round of destruction in cities all over the nation.


The sad fact, that the rioters don't seem to understand, is the _haves_ will rebuild and the _have-nots _will pay for it.


----------



## digifoss

Pepper said:


> Self promoting, donation seeking, right wing gun nut.  IMO.



Oh, is that all ?


----------



## digifoss

I Thought so


----------



## win231

Aunt Bea said:


> The sad fact, that the rioters don't seem to understand, is the _haves_ will rebuild and the _have-nots _will pay for it.


Right or wrong, it's quite predictable that there will be riots when there is no justice.


----------



## digifoss

Correct me if I am wrong, I don't remember any riots after O J Simpson was found not guilty....


----------



## JimBob1952

Riots?  Black people were ecstatic.  Watch this clip from Oprah.


----------



## Sassycakes

I was wondering if they have any information on  Chauvin ever using that knee-on-neck procedure before. I can't believe any other officer present while this was happening didn't try to stop it.


----------



## digifoss

My point exactly...



JimBob1952 said:


> Riots?  Black people were ecstatic.  Watch this clip from Oprah.


----------



## Don M.

Irwin said:


> No doubt. That happens when a city's team wins the Super Bowl! It's the American way!


Not here.  When the KC Chiefs won the Super Bowl last year....2020....there was a massive celebration all over the downtown area, with 10's of thousands of people taking part.  It was a massive party, and outside of overflowing trash barrels lining the parade route, and the closing of dozens of streets, there were NO problems.  

That will NOT be the case when this trial ends.  No matter What the verdict is, there are thugs....all over the nation....that will find an excuse to riot.


----------



## digifoss

Don M. said:


> No matter What the verdict is, there are thugs....all over the nation....that will find an excuse to riot.


I dissagree.  We will only see rioting if the verdict is not guilty.


----------



## tbeltrans

There is a song about trying to predict the future...






Tony


----------



## win231

My prediction:  Chauvin will be found guilty, maybe given a sentence that will impress us with our (pathetic) justice system, then after a few years, when people forget, he'll be paroled early for "Good Behavior."


----------



## ohioboy

Sassycakes said:


> I was wondering if they have any information on  Chauvin ever using that knee-on-neck procedure before. I can't believe any other officer present while this was happening didn't try to stop it.



Chauvin was so self centered selfishly arrogant, if another officer tried to stop him, I believe he really would have shot them. The Universe revolves around him, he is the mighty and powerful OZ.


----------



## Butterfly

ohioboy said:


> These so called "criminal thugs" also have Constitutional protections, period.


They most certainly do, and cops do not have the authority to decide who deserves to die for past or present bad acts.  Even had Mr. Floyd been guilty of knowingly attempting to pass counterfeit currency and being under the influence of illicit drugs or resisting arrest, none of those alleged crimes is a capital offense.  Yet he is dead in the street at the hands of Derek Chauvin.


----------



## Butterfly

rgp said:


> And they should not .......... Any person that can plan/commit a crime against the masses of our society , should have no protections within that society.


Well, the United States Constitution strongly disagrees with you.


----------



## JimBob1952

Actually, there is no conclusion yet as to what caused the death of Capitol Police Officer Sicknick.  Early reports that he was hit in the head with a fire extinguisher are no longer considered accurate.  He was sprayed with some kind of toxic substance and perhaps that caused or contributed to his death.  The final report is not out yet. 

I point this out only because I think the truth matters.  I don't in any way condone the actions or behavior of the idiots who attacked the Capitol on January 6th.  The whole episode was disgraceful and anyone involved should be prosecuted to the fullest extent possible.


----------



## Irwin

ohioboy said:


> Chauvin was so self centered selfishly arrogant, if another officer tried to stop him, I believe he really would have shot them. The Universe revolves around him, he is the mighty and powerful OZ.


He's not a very big guy... only like 5'6" and 140lbs, from what I remember. He's going to be somebody's punk in prison, although they might keep ex-cops separated from the general prison population for their protection. Otherwise, bad cops like Chauvin wouldn't last a day.


----------



## garyt1957

DaveA said:


> It's a sad situation but I have to agree - -some of the comments are beyond me??
> 
> You have to be kidding. I'd hate to think how many counterfeit bills MAY have passed through my hands in the last 80 years or so.  I might have one in my wallet today for all I know?  Anyone who studies each bill that they receive or pass on, and can quickly spot a fake would make me suspicious as to their motive and familiarity with this type of currency.
> 
> He passed a bad bill - -so-be-it.  Not exactly the crime of the century.  Certainly not worthy of the death penalty, no matter how or who carried it out.


He wasn't subdued for passing a counterfeit bill. He was subdued for resisting arrest and deserved it for that. But once he was down and handcuffed  there was no good reason for Chauvin to keep his knee on his neck that long. He could have easily released his knee for a moment and if Floyd started struggling again right back down it goes and Chauvin is in the clear. But he didn't and now Floyd is dead and his life is ruined. All so unnecessary.
    I  truly believe it was arrogance and Chauvin did not want to be seen as giving in to the crowd telling him what to do that led him to not removing the knee. I don't believe he was trying to kill Floyd and think it's silly to suggest otherwise. But actions have consequences.


----------



## Sunny

Irwin said:


> He's not a very big guy... only like 5'6" and 140lbs, from what I remember. He's going to be somebody's punk in prison, although they might keep ex-cops separated from the general prison population for their protection. Otherwise, bad cops like Chauvin wouldn't last a day.



Irwin, I think we've got a plot for a TV series here!


----------



## Aunt Marg

garyt1957 said:


> He wasn't subdued for passing a counterfeit bill. He was subdued for resisting arrest and deserved it for that. But once he was down and handcuffed  there was no good reason for Chauvin to keep his knee on his neck that long. He could have easily released his knee for a moment and if Floyd started struggling again right back down it goes and Chauvin is in the clear. But he didn't and now Floyd is dead and his life is ruined. All so unnecessary.
> I  truly believe it was arrogance and Chauvin did not want to be seen as giving in to the crowd telling him what to do that led him to not removing the knee. *I don't believe he was trying to kill Floyd and think it's silly to suggest otherwise*. But actions have consequences.


I always highly respect your words and posts, GaryT, but call me silly, as there is nothing that will ever surface or convince me otherwise that Chauvin, is nothing less than a murderer.

He's a little man (by Irwin's account), and that tells me everything about Chauvin, that I need to know.


----------



## garyt1957

Aunt Marg said:


> I always highly respect your words and posts, GaryT, but call me silly, as there is nothing that will ever surface or convince me otherwise that Chauvin, is nothing less than a murderer.
> 
> He's a little man (by Irwin's account), and that tells me everything about Chauvin, that I need to know.


 I don't think we disagree, I believe he's a murderer too, I just don't think he did it deliberately.
So you think he said to himself "I'm going to kill this guy right here, right now, in front of all these people"?  I just don't think that happened. It makes no sense when I'm sure he's had many more private moments to kill a perp if that was his goal.


----------



## Jeweltea

garyt1957 said:


> I don't think we disagree, I believe he's a murderer too, I just don't think he did it deliberately.
> So you think he said to himself "I'm going to kill this guy right here, right now, in front of all these people"?  I just don't think that happened. It makes no sense when I'm sure he's had many more private moments to kill a perp if that was his goal.


Which is why he is not on trial for first degree murder.


----------



## digifoss

1st degree is premeditated, 2nd degree is not. they are both intentional. 3rd degree is manslaughter.
Chauvin should have been charged with manslaughter, killing was not his intention IMO


----------



## Jeweltea

He was charged with 2nd and 3rd degree murder as well as second degree manslaughter.


----------



## Aunt Marg

garyt1957 said:


> I don't think we disagree, I believe he's a murderer too, I just don't think he did it deliberately.
> *So you think he said to himself "I'm going to kill this guy right here, right now, in front of all these people"?*  I just don't think that happened. It makes no sense when I'm sure he's had many more private moments to kill a perp if that was his goal.


I do, GaryT, for the simple reason I believe that Chauvin, grew to believe he was invincible.

He could exercise whatever force he personally deemed necessary in relation to the crime, and authorities would be there for him to serve and protect.

A killer on the loose he was.


----------



## Aunt Bea

garyt1957 said:


> I don't think we disagree,* I believe he's a murderer too, I just don't think he did it deliberately.*
> So you think he said to himself "I'm going to kill this guy right here, right now, in front of all these people"?  I just don't think that happened. It makes no sense when I'm sure he's had many more private moments to kill a perp if that was his goal.


I agree, I believe that Chauvin's intent was to cause George Floyd to blackout in a bizarre attempt to show him, the crowd, and the other officers in attendance that he was in control of the situation.  Chauvin went too far and a man is dead because of his grandstanding.  

The excuse that George Floyd's health or drug use were factors is not relevant.  I've always been told that you take your victims as you find them.  If they die due to some underlying medical condition during a crime you are still guilty of causing their death.


----------



## tbeltrans

Aunt Marg said:


> I do, GaryT, for the simple reason I believe that Chauvin, grew to believe he was invincible.
> 
> He could exercise whatever force he personally deemed necessary in relation to the crime, and authorities would be there for him to serve and protect.
> 
> A killer on the loose he was.


So I just have to ask, does "Chauvanist" now refer to a killer?  The English language does seem to evolve to suit.

Edit:  Of course, whenever I heard the term being used, it was always qualified with "male", so since Chauvin is a male, I would think this new use for the term would fit.  Use the term sparingly, since not all males are killers.

Tony


----------



## win231

Aunt Bea said:


> I agree, I believe that Chauvin's intent was to cause George Floyd to blackout in a bizarre attempt to show him, the crowd, and the other officers in attendance that he was in control of the situation.  Chauvin went too far and a man is dead because of his grandstanding.
> 
> The excuse that George Floyd's health or drug use were factors is not relevant.  I've always been told that you take your victims as you find them.  If they die due to some underlying medical condition during a crime you are still guilty of causing their death.


I disagree.  If Chauvin only wanted Floyd to black out, he wouldn't have prevented paramedics from attending to him when they arrived.  And he wouldn't have choked Floyd for so long after he blacked out.


----------



## win231

win231 said:


> I disagree.  If Chauvin only wanted Floyd to black out, he wouldn't have prevented paramedics from attending to him when they arrived.  And he wouldn't have choked Floyd for so long after he blacked out.


He intended to kill Floyd & thought he could do it & make it look like it was "Unintentional while trying to restrain him."  Yeah....restraining a handcuffed, helpless person.
People try to get away with murder & make it look like an accident all the time.  (in this case, the parents didn't know they were being taped in the police station while they discussed the situation in private & said_, "Don't worry, honey....the police won't be able to prove anything.....")_
https://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/h...-ross-harris-sentenced-life-son-s-hot-n692086

There are many such cases of "Hot Car Deaths."  Many parents are using this as a way to get rid of their unwanted kids.  Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't.

And, _"I didn't mean to kill my wife; I was cleaning the gun & it just went off..."_


----------



## garyt1957

Jeweltea said:


> Which is why he is not on trial for first degree murder.


I agree with the post below mine. Manslaughter only


----------



## garyt1957

Aunt Marg said:


> I do, GaryT, for the simple reason I believe that Chauvin, grew to believe he was invincible.
> 
> He could exercise whatever force he personally deemed necessary in relation to the crime, and authorities would be there for him to serve and protect.
> 
> A killer on the loose he was.


We agree to disagree


----------



## win231

Jeweltea said:


> Which is why he is not on trial for first degree murder.


I think he's not charged with first degree murder because that requires proof of planning, premeditation & intent, which is hard to prove.  They don't want to run the risk of overcharging him because he could be acquitted if they can't prove intent.


----------



## garyt1957

win231 said:


> He intended to kill Floyd & thought he could do it & make it look like it was "Unintentional while trying to restrain him."  Yeah....restraining a handcuffed, helpless person.
> People try to get away with murder & make it look like an accident all the time.  (in this case, the parents didn't know they were being taped in the police station while they discussed the situation in private & said_, "Don't worry, honey....the police won't be able to prove anything.....")_
> https://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/h...-ross-harris-sentenced-life-son-s-hot-n692086
> 
> There are many such cases of "Hot Car Deaths."  Many parents are using this as a way to get rid of their unwanted kids.  Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't.
> 
> And, _"I didn't mean to kill my wife; I was cleaning the gun & it just went off..."_


And what was Chauvin's motive? He's just a homicidal maniac? And he chose that moment to act out in front of all those people? You really believe this?


----------



## hollydolly

Sunny said:


> From today's paper. I was thinking along the same lines, reading some of the opinions I've seen, basically blaming Floyd for his own death. It's the old "blame the victim" game, and it reminded me, as it did Margaret Sullivan, of the ridiculous excuse sometimes given for rape:  "Well, the way she was dressed, she was asking for it."  Some things never change.
> 
> Here's the column. I hope you can see it without having to be a subscriber.
> 
> https://www.washingtonpost.com/life...58716c-9796-11eb-a6d0-13d207aadb78_story.html


Unfortunately I have to be a subscriber....


----------



## win231

garyt1957 said:


> And what was Chauvin's motive? He's just a homicidal maniac? And he chose that moment to act out in front of all those people? You really believe this?


You may not be aware of the fact that many individuals are attracted to law enforcement careers because they crave the power that comes with it.  And some simply take pleasure in  the pain of others - much like serial killers.  And many others are attracted to it because their power allows them to take out their frustrations & personal racist beliefs on people they hate & be called "Heroes" & gain respect at the same time.

As for "acting out in front of all those people," many cops think they're invincible & can get away with anything.  And "all those people" at the scene were black people - people he hates anyway.

A female officer who testified at the trial of the 4 officers who beat Rodney King said a car briefly stopped at the scene (it can be seen in the video).  A supervising officer told her to _"Go tell the people in that car to leave NOW." _ The officers knew they committing a crime & they didn't want witnesses.  Unfortunately for them, they didn't realize they were being videotaped by someone they couldn't intimidate because they couldn't see him.  And that videotape made liars out of all 4 cops.


----------



## JimBob1952

win231 said:


> You may not be aware of the fact that many individuals are attracted to law enforcement careers because they crave the power that comes with it.  And some simply take pleasure in  the pain of others - much like serial killers.  And many others are attracted to it because their power allows them to take out their frustrations & personal racist beliefs on people they hate & be called "Heroes" & gain respect at the same time.
> 
> As for "acting out in front of all those people," many cops think they're invincible & can get away with anything.  And "all those people" at the scene were black people - people he hates anyway.
> 
> A female officer who testified at the trial of the 4 officers who beat Rodney King said a car briefly stopped at the scene (it can be seen in the video).  A supervising officer told her to _"Go tell the people in that car to leave NOW." _ The officers knew they committing a crime & they didn't want witnesses.  Unfortunately for them, they didn't realize they were being videotaped by someone they couldn't intimidate because they couldn't see him.  And that videotape made liars out of all 4 cops.



Wow, lots of sweeping generalizations, very little basis in fact.  Do you have studies and statistical analysis you can cite to back up what you say about police?  Something that backs up your contention that some cops "take pleasure in the pain of others?" I did a quick Google search and couldn't find anything, but maybe you have better sources.  Do you know Chauvin is a racist and "hates black people?" Do you know what was in his mind that day? 

I take offense because some family members (including two nephews) are cops or ex-cops. None exhibit the behavior you claim is commonplace.


----------



## garyt1957

win231 said:


> You may not be aware of the fact that many individuals are attracted to law enforcement careers because they crave the power that comes with it.  And some simply take pleasure in  the pain of others - much like serial killers.  And many others are attracted to it because their power allows them to take out their frustrations & personal racist beliefs on people they hate & be called "Heroes" & gain respect at the same time.
> 
> As for "acting out in front of all those people," many cops think they're invincible & can get away with anything.  And "all those people" at the scene were black people - people he hates anyway.
> 
> A female officer who testified at the trial of the 4 officers who beat Rodney King said a car briefly stopped at the scene (it can be seen in the video).  A supervising officer told her to _"Go tell the people in that car to leave NOW." _ The officers knew they committing a crime & they didn't want witnesses.  Unfortunately for them, they didn't realize they were being videotaped by someone they couldn't intimidate because they couldn't see him.  And that videotape made liars out of all 4 cops.


All that typing and you didn't answer the question.
And what was Chauvin's motive? He's just a homicidal maniac? And he chose that moment to act out in front of all those people? You really believe this?


----------



## Pepper

Chauvin displayed Depraved Indifference, in other words while he didn't give a s**t he just didn't care.  In other words again, while he wasn't out to kill GF his death was of no consequence.  Depraved.


----------



## fmdog44

Like Rodney King this too is going to last for a long, long time.


----------



## Irwin

Sunny said:


> From today's paper. I was thinking along the same lines, reading some of the opinions I've seen, basically blaming Floyd for his own death. It's the old "blame the victim" game, and it reminded me, as it did Margaret Sullivan, of the ridiculous excuse sometimes given for rape:  "Well, the way she was dressed, she was asking for it."  Some things never change.
> 
> Here's the column. I hope you can see it without having to be a subscriber.
> 
> https://www.washingtonpost.com/life...58716c-9796-11eb-a6d0-13d207aadb78_story.html


It goes both ways. Derek Chauvin was "no angel" either. People filed 18 complaints against him over the years, and he had a reputation for being overly aggressive and combinative. Only, since Chauvin _is _on trial, his history and reputation _are _relevant.


----------



## win231

garyt1957 said:


> All that typing and you didn't answer the question.
> And what was Chauvin's motive? He's just a homicidal maniac? And he chose that moment to act out in front of all those people? You really believe this?


He who doesn't like the answer, pretends not to see the answer.


----------



## win231

fmdog44 said:


> Like Rodney King this too is going to last for a long, long time.


Even longer, since this cop's victim was murdered.


----------



## win231

Pepper said:


> Chauvin displayed Depraved Indifference, in other words while he didn't give a s**t he just didn't care.  In other words again, while he wasn't out to kill GF his death was of no consequence.  Depraved.





JimBob1952 said:


> Wow, lots of sweeping generalizations, very little basis in fact.  Do you have studies and statistical analysis you can cite to back up what you say about police?  Something that backs up your contention that some cops "take pleasure in the pain of others?" I did a quick Google search and couldn't find anything, but maybe you have better sources.  Do you know Chauvin is a racist and "hates black people?" Do you know what was in his mind that day?
> 
> I take offense because some family members (including two nephews) are cops or ex-cops. None exhibit the behavior you claim is commonplace.


Obviously you didn't do much "Searching."  (this took 2 seconds to find).  One of many
https://gen.medium.com/police-are-hurting-people-because-they-want-to-56663cc22f3e

Of course you take offense.  You provided the reason why you take offense -  _"some family members (including two nephews) are cops or ex-cops." _


----------



## Jules

Question, maybe I missed this.  Why isn’t the jury sequestered?  

They can’t be missing the public opinions on how the verdicts may cause reactions within the community.  Could this later be a cause for a mistrial?


----------



## ohioboy

Jules said:


> Question, maybe I missed this.  Why isn’t the jury sequestered?
> 
> They can’t be missing the public opinions on how the verdicts may cause reactions within the community.  Could this later be a cause for a mistrial?



Not a mistrial, no. If the court refuses to sequester the jury, if the Defense is of the belief not doing so would greatly prejudice their case, they could file an Interlocutory appeal, meaning a ruling is appealed before a case proceeds. Don't count me as I know what I'm talking about  though. I guess they are rare??


----------



## JimBob1952

Pepper said:


> Chauvin displayed Depraved Indifference, in other words while he didn't give a s**t he just didn't care.  In other words again, while he wasn't out to kill GF his death was of no consequence.  Depraved.



I can't disagree with that.


----------



## digifoss

LIVE: Chauvin Trial Day 9 – State’s Evidence Begins to Align with the Defense Narrative of Innocence ​https://legalinsurrection.com/2021/...lign-with-the-defense-narrative-of-innocence/


----------



## hollydolly

DR Martin Tobin on giving his testimony earlier today said that, there is no question that George Floyd died from lack of Oxygen, he did,  he did not die from drug overdose.. or the effects of drugs


----------



## ohioboy

Holly, it rips my heart out knowing the intense pain George Floyd suffered because some stinking pig had to show the world how big and bad he was.


----------



## hollydolly

ohioboy said:


> Holly, it rips my heart out knowing the intense pain George Floyd suffered because some stinking pig had to show the world how big and bad he was.


Yep me too, and millions of others... I actually felt violent towards Chauvin the first time I saw that video on the news.I thought if that was a police officer here in the UK  I would have jumped on him and pulled him off ..... in the USA I would probably have been killed for that ,as I suspect all the bystanders were thinking too...


----------



## Butterfly

digifoss said:


> 1st degree is premeditated, 2nd degree is not. they are both intentional. 3rd degree is manslaughter.
> Chauvin should have been charged with manslaughter, killing was not his intention IMO



I think we need to remember that the elements of each  type of homicide vary state by state.  And of course the only law that matters is the law in which the crime took place.


----------



## rgp

win231 said:


> And here I was, all excited to learn a new word!  Did you mean "Substantive?"



 Yes, But once again your reply has no merit pertaining to the topic. Only a snarky remark regarding a type-o .


----------



## Lewkat

DaveA said:


> It's a sad situation but I have to agree - -some of the comments are beyond me??
> 
> You have to be kidding. I'd hate to think how many counterfeit bills MAY have passed through my hands in the last 80 years or so.  I might have one in my wallet today for all I know?  Anyone who studies each bill that they receive or pass on, and can quickly spot a fake would make me suspicious as to their motive and familiarity with this type of currency.
> 
> He passed a bad bill - -so-be-it.  Not exactly the crime of the century.  Certainly not worthy of the death penalty, no matter how or who carried it out.


This is not the entire story, so why not start at the beginning and follow it through as to exactly what occurred?  Step by step.  Armchair judges and juries are really a joke.


----------



## Lewkat

win231 said:


> Obviously you didn't do much "Searching."  (this took 2 seconds to find).  One of many
> https://gen.medium.com/police-are-hurting-people-because-they-want-to-56663cc22f3e
> 
> Of course you take offense.  You provided the reason why you take offense -  _"some family members (including two nephews) are cops or ex-cops." _


So, according to this, police officers are a mob of sadists and psychopaths.  Lovely.


----------



## fuzzybuddy

I don't think the trial is about  Floyd. The trial is about a guy, who knelt on another person's neck, which caused the death of that person. What Floyd did to get arrested is not relevant. He was, and handcuffed. People are reading all kinds of things into the death of Floyd racism, police brutality, drugs, crime, the thin Blue Line, etc. It's about a guy, who knelt on another person's neck, which caused the death of that person.


----------



## OneEyedDiva

garyt1957 said:


> All that typing and you didn't answer the question.
> And what was Chauvin's motive? He's just a homicidal maniac? And he chose that moment to act out in front of all those people? You really believe this?


Yes he did what he did on purpose. Two of my friends and my sister, in separate conversations, recalled that look on his face as he was kneeling on Mr. Floyd's neck. It was one of determination, it was deliberate and uncaring. Do you honestly think he didn't know that restricting someone's breathing for that long wouldn't result in death? Mr. Floyd told him he couldn't breathe. Shades of Eric Garner...he said he couldn't breathe too, was ignored and later died. I think Chauvin figured he'd get away with it because he's a senior officer. Look how many other cops have gotten away with killing innocent Black men (or those who committed only minor crimes)! BTW...one of my friends that talked about that deliberate look was my BFF of 44 years, who happens to be Caucasian.

@rgp "Michael Jackson & George Floyd both killed themselves by way of their behavior,habits & lifestyle." How you can compare one to the other is beyond me. I've seen your posts in the past that lead me to believe either you are living in an alternate universe or you're a racist. Maybe both of those things apply. George Floyd was killed by a cop who clearly had anger issues. Thus the 18 complaints in the past. A few months ago, you claimed that innocent Black people being killed was a figment of my imagination (sic). When I posted examples (proof), you never acknowledged or replied. Like they say...Truth hurts! It's time you get a grip on reality.


----------



## ohioboy

As arrogant as Chauvin is, he will insist his defense put him on the stand so he can spit in the faces of the jurors.


----------



## win231

JimBob1952 said:


> Wow, lots of sweeping generalizations, very little basis in fact.  Do you have studies and statistical analysis you can cite to back up what you say about police?  Something that backs up your contention that some cops "take pleasure in the pain of others?" I did a quick Google search and couldn't find anything, but maybe you have better sources.  Do you know Chauvin is a racist and "hates black people?" Do you know what was in his mind that day?
> 
> I take offense because some family members (including two nephews) are cops or ex-cops. None exhibit the behavior you claim is commonplace.


Of course, you know about their behavior because you go with them on their watch every minute of every day..........


----------



## mellowyellow

_Dr Andrew Baker told the court that the police pinning the 46-year-old Black man to the ground was “just more than Mr Floyd could take” by making it hard for him to breathe, causing stress hormones that worsened a heart condition and led to his death.

But the Hennepin county medical examiner did not support the evidence of other medical specialists who told the trial that Floyd was suffocated under Chauvin’s knee, on his neck for more than nine minutes as he was pinned to the ground by him and two other police officers._

This makes me wonder.


----------



## Aunt Marg

mellowyellow said:


> View attachment 159046
> _Dr Andrew Baker told the court that the police pinning the 46-year-old Black man to the ground was “just more than Mr Floyd could take” by making it hard for him to breathe, causing stress hormones that worsened a heart condition and led to his death.
> 
> But the Hennepin county medical examiner did not support the evidence of other medical specialists who told the trial that Floyd was suffocated under Chauvin’s knee, on his neck for more than nine minutes as he was pinned to the ground by him and two other police officers._
> 
> This makes me wonder.


What a disgrace!


----------



## SeaBreeze

Political, combative and off-topic posts and replies have been removed from this thread.

https://www.seniorforums.com/threads/notice-all-members-please-read.8331/


----------



## Butterfly

mellowyellow said:


> View attachment 159046
> _Dr Andrew Baker told the court that the police pinning the 46-year-old Black man to the ground was “just more than Mr Floyd could take” by making it hard for him to breathe, causing stress hormones that worsened a heart condition and led to his death.
> 
> But the Hennepin county medical examiner did not support the evidence of other medical specialists who told the trial that Floyd was suffocated under Chauvin’s knee, on his neck for more than nine minutes as he was pinned to the ground by him and two other police officers._
> 
> This makes me wonder.


If the issue is whether the pressure Chauvin, _et al., _placed on Mr. Floyd's body caused a worsening of a heart condition that led to his death. or whether it was asphyxiation, it is a distinction without a difference. 

Whether it was one or the other, the point is that the actions of Chauvin proximately caused Mr. Floyd to die.


----------



## garyt1957

OneEyedDiva said:


> Yes he did what he did on purpose. Two of my friends and my sister, in separate conversations, recalled that look on his face as he was kneeling on Mr. Floyd's neck. It was one of determination, it was deliberate and uncaring. Do you honestly think he didn't know that restricting someone's breathing for that long wouldn't result in death? Mr. Floyd told him he couldn't breathe. Shades of Eric Garner...he said he couldn't breathe too and was ignored and later died. I think Chauvin figured he'd get away with it because he's a senior officer. Look how many other cops have gotten away with killing innocent Black men (or those who committed only minor crimes)! BTW...one of my friends that talked about that deliberate look was my BFF of 44 years, who happens to be White.


We just disagree. Do you realize Floyd said he couldn't breathe when he was just sitting in the car before he started fighting with the cops? I do think Chauvin was arrogant and wasn't going to let the crowd dictate to him what to do and he had that look on his face. I still don't think he was thinking "I'm going to kill this guy right here and now in front of all these people". Maybe I just don't think people can be that stupid.


----------



## Sunny

Did Chauvin intend to kill Floyd?  Somehow, this popular song, from many years ago, popped into my head. I know, Chauvin didn't use a gun to kill him, but it's appropriate anyway.:

Oh Miss Effie was her name
Through the west she won her fame
Being handy with the gun
But she drove the men insane
Cause she'd whip out her pistol
And shoot most any guy
And sing out this alibi

I didn't know the gun was loaded
And I'm so sorry my friend
I didn't know the gun was loaded
And I'll never, never do it again

Now one night she had a date
With a wrestling heavyweight
And he tried a brand new hold
She did not appreciate
So she whipped out her pistol
And shot him in the knee
And quickly, she sang this plea

I didn't know the gun was loaded
And I'm so sorry my friend
I didn't know the gun was loaded
And I'll never, never do it again

But one night she made a slip
Shot the sheriff in the hip
So the law it took a hand
And made Effie take the stand
And she pled, "oh your honor
I'll know you turn me loose
When you hear my one excuse"

I didn't know the gun was loaded
And I'm so sorry my friend
I didn't know the gun was loaded
And I'll never, never do it again

Yes the jury all agreed
That Miss Effie should be free
But the sheriff's jealous wife
Was indignant (yes, indeed)
So she borrowed a pistol
And shot this village belle
And sang as Miss Effie fell

I didn't know the gun was loaded
And I'm so sorry my friend
I didn't know the gun was loaded
And I'll never, never do it again

(Uh oh! I didn't know it was loaded)


----------



## DaveA

fmdog44 said:


> Like Rodney King this too is going to last for a long, long time.


Too long IMHO.


----------



## garyt1957

Butterfly said:


> If the issue is whether the pressure Chauvin, _et al., _placed on Mr. Floyd's body caused a worsening of a heart condition that led to his death. or whether it was asphyxiation, it is a distinction without a difference.
> 
> Whether it was one or the other, the point is that the actions of Chauvin proximately caused Mr. Floyd to die.


Actually it's a HUGE difference in the eyes of the law. If Floyd died from a heart condition that Chauvin couldn't know he had you certainly can't convict him of 2nd degree murder. Maybe manslaughter at best. If it was asphyxiation you can now bring 2nd degree into the conversation.


----------



## digifoss

Derek Chauvin Trial – Prosecution Problems Ignored or Misrepresented In Mainstream Media​
(Open Thread) There are very significant prosecution evidentiary problems ignored or misrepresented in the mainstream media. which will lead to an even larger explosion of violence if there is a not guilty verdict.  
​


"_The jurors also know that the city and much of the nation will explode if there is a ‘not guilty’ verdict, and that they will be doxxed and their lives ruined._"
https://legalinsurrection.com/2021/...srepresented-in-mainstream-media-open-thread/


----------



## Pecos

OneEyedDiva said:


> Yes he did what he did on purpose. Two of my friends and my sister, in separate conversations, recalled that look on his face as he was kneeling on Mr. Floyd's neck. It was one of determination, it was deliberate and uncaring. Do you honestly think he didn't know that restricting someone's breathing for that long wouldn't result in death? Mr. Floyd told him he couldn't breathe. Shades of Eric Garner...he said he couldn't breathe too, was ignored and later died. I think Chauvin figured he'd get away with it because he's a senior officer. Look how many other cops have gotten away with killing innocent Black men (or those who committed only minor crimes)! BTW...one of my friends that talked about that deliberate look was my BFF of 44 years, who happens to be Caucasian.
> 
> @rgp "Michael Jackson & George Floyd both killed themselves by way of their behavior,habits & lifestyle." How you can compare one to the other is beyond me. I've seen your posts in the past that lead me to believe either you are living in an alternate universe or you're a racist. Maybe both of those things apply. George Floyd was killed by a cop who clearly had anger issues. Thus the 18 complaints in the past. A few months ago, you claimed that innocent Black people being killed was a figment of my imagination (sic). When I posted examples (proof), you never acknowledged or replied. Like they say...Truth hurts! It's time you get a grip on reality.


Diva, I agree completely!
He was absolutely deliberate in what he did and trying to deflect responsibility just doesn't cut it. We are way past the point where misbehavior like this is tolerated.


----------



## Elsie

I'm thinkin' there will be idiots rioting no matter what the verdict is, for or against.  Sickos just itching for the trial to reach a conclusion so they can let loose and do as much stupid destruction everywhere as they can, disappearing with stolen goods to enjoy.  No concern over the misery they cause others.


----------



## Sunny

Maybe if sicko police officers would stop killing people completely unnecessarily, there would be fewer "idiots" rioting, and less destruction and looting.  You may be right about how inevitable this outcome is, no matter which way the verdict goes. But who is to blame for starting it?


----------



## Keesha

Pecos said:


> Diva, I agree completely!
> He was absolutely deliberate in what he did and trying to deflect responsibility just doesn't cut it. We are way past the point where misbehavior like this is tolerated.


I agree also. He even had that killers pride like trophy hunters have when they’ve caught their prey. Scary.


----------



## rgp

Sunny said:


> Maybe if sicko police officers would stop killing people completely unnecessarily, there would be fewer "idiots" rioting, and less destruction and looting.  You may be right about how inevitable this outcome is, no matter which way the verdict goes. But who is to blame for starting it?




Maybe if criminals/street thugs, would stop fighting with the police @ the time of arrest , they might not be killed either. 

Who's the blame for starting it all ? Floyd, had he not resisted & been strung out on dope? He would very likely be alive today.


----------



## ohioboy

rgp said:


> Maybe if criminals/street thugs, would stop fighting with the police @ the time of arrest , they might not be killed either.
> 
> Who's the blame for starting it all ? Floyd, had he not resisted & been strung out on dope? He would very likely be alive today.


Would you resist an UNlawful arrest?


----------



## win231

Elsie said:


> I'm thinkin' there will be idiots rioting no matter what the verdict is, for or against.  Sickos just itching for the trial to reach a conclusion so they can let loose and do as much stupid destruction everywhere as they can, disappearing with stolen goods to enjoy.  No concern over the misery they cause others.


If these dirt bag cops receive a just sentence, there won't be any rioting.
There was no rioting after this officer was convicted & sentenced to 20 years:


----------



## ohioboy

I remember that Win, it was "cold blooded murder". The man was fleeing on foot from a simple traffic stop, he posed no harm to anyone if permitted to escape.


----------



## digifoss

Was there rioting when O  J was found not guilty or was that justice ?


----------



## hollydolly

win231 said:


> If these dirt bag cops receive a just sentence, there won't be any rioting.
> There was no rioting after this officer was convicted & sentenced to 20 years:


Interesting,and well deserved 20 years let's hope he doesn't get out in  5..I just watched that, and I wonder if you know if the back up  cops ( Black).. who stated they administered CPR to Walter, where it shows clearly in the 4 minute video they did not..were ever disciplined, at the very least for lying... ,


----------



## win231

ohioboy said:


> I remember that Win, it was "cold blooded murder". The man was fleeing on foot from a simple traffic stop, he posed no harm to anyone if permitted to escape.


I think the cop would have gotten away with it if it wasn't videotaped.  When he radioed, he said _"The suspect grabbed my taser." _ A second officer arrived & planted the taser next to the victim's body to justify the killing.  No mention of his discipline for tampering with evidence in a homicide.
Such cops are so impatient to kill, they forget about the prevalence of video everywhere.  Or, perhaps they are aware of video, but can't control their urge to kill.


----------



## Elsie

win231 said:


> If these dirt bag cops receive a just sentence, there won't be any rioting.
> There was no rioting after this officer was convicted & sentenced to 20 years:


Trouble is, a "just sentence" won't be seen as justice prevailing and go off on a tangent of revenge...........but I sure hope not.


----------



## garyt1957

ohioboy said:


> Would you resist an UNlawful arrest?


Hell no. That would likely not end well for me. I would be polite as can be and sort it out at the police station,  but that's me. Fighting with the cops for any reason is not likely to be a smart option.


----------



## Butterfly

garyt1957 said:


> Actually it's a HUGE difference in the eyes of the law. If Floyd died from a heart condition that Chauvin couldn't know he had you certainly can't convict him of 2nd degree murder. Maybe manslaughter at best. If it was asphyxiation you can now bring 2nd degree into the conversatiand they knelt on him on the ground for 9+minutes s they did


I disagree.  The medical testimony has been consistent all the way through that the way in which Mr. Floyd was handled and knelt upon by the police officers was what caused him to die.  Doesn't matter what they knew or didn't know.  The cause of his death was the actions of the police officers, Chauvin in particular. I believe it was Dr. Barker that testified that that amount of compression of Mr. Floyd's body for as long as it lasted would have killed almost anybody, no matter how fit or healthy.


----------



## Keesha

Butterfly said:


> I disagree.  The medical testimony has been consistent all the way through that the way in which Mr. Floyd was handled and knelt upon by the police officers was what caused him to die.  Doesn't matter what they knew or didn't know.  The cause of his death was the actions of the police officers, Chauvin in particular. I believe it was Dr. Barker that testified that that amount of compression of Mr. Floyd's body for as long as it lasted would have killed almost anybody, no matter how fit or healthy.


Absolutely agree!!!


----------



## Butterfly

digifoss said:


> Was there rioting when O  J was found not guilty or was that justice ?



Apples and oranges.


----------



## rgp

ohioboy said:


> Would you resist an UNlawful arrest?



I wouldn't resist any arrest. In this country we have a system in place for such things. I would go along with the arrest, hire an attorney , and sort it all out in the system.

Then ....... If I really felt I had a good case , and my attorney said we can prove it ? I might sue .

Resisting/fighting with the police @ the time of the arrest is about the dumbest thing anyone can do.


----------



## rgp

ohioboy said:


> I remember that Win, it was "cold blooded murder". The man was fleeing on foot from a simple traffic stop, he posed no harm to anyone if permitted to escape.



There is no way the officer could have known what he may or may not have done. @ that time, that is determined after capture/arrest.  

A 'sensible' person would not run from a simple traffic stop. A 'street-wise' officer knows this. Part of his job is to get the criminals off the street / stop the offender........Well he did.

The minute the guy bolted ......... He killed himself.


----------



## ohioboy

rgp said:


> There is no way the officer could have known what he may or may not have done. @ that time, that is determined after capture/arrest.
> 
> A 'sensible' person would not run from a simple traffic stop. A 'street-wise' officer knows this. Part of his job is to get the criminals off the street / stop the offender........Well he did.
> 
> The minute the guy bolted ......... He killed himself.



The FACTS BEFORE the man fled determine the use of deadly force: Tennessee v, Garner.


----------



## rgp

ohioboy said:


> The FACTS BEFORE the man fled determine the use of deadly force: Tennessee v, Garner.



Well you can certainly agree with that, and attach your opinion to it. 

I do not, and i stand by my opinion.

And just how was the officer supposed to obtain these facts ? If the suspect runs at the first sign of possible capture ?


----------



## ohioboy

rgp said:


> Well you can certainly agree with that, and attach your opinion to it.
> 
> I do not, and i stand by my opinion.
> 
> And just how was the officer supposed to obtain these facts ? If the suspect runs at the first sign of possible capture ?



The officer was found guilty of murder, must not have been believed if he made any statements to the effect of a fleeing danger to society?


----------



## Pepper

Laws & Facts seem to be losing their momentum.  Personal Opinions are what's important.


----------



## win231

rgp said:


> I wouldn't resist any arrest. In this country we have a system in place for such things. I would go along with the arrest, hire an attorney , and sort it all out in the system.
> 
> Then ....... If I really felt I had a good case , and my attorney said we can prove it ? I might sue .
> 
> Resisting/fighting with the police @ the time of the arrest is about the dumbest thing anyone can do.


You are correct; resisting arrest is the dumbest thing anyone can do.
And, once a suspect is handcuffed, choking him until he dies is the most criminal thing anyone can do.


----------



## win231

rgp said:


> There is no way the officer could have known what he may or may not have done. @ that time, that is determined after capture/arrest.
> 
> A 'sensible' person would not run from a simple traffic stop. A 'street-wise' officer knows this. Part of his job is to get the criminals off the street / stop the offender........Well he did.
> 
> The minute the guy bolted ......... He killed himself.


Why didn't you testify in the officer's defense?  You could have saved him 20 years.


----------



## rgp

ohioboy said:


> The officer was found guilty of murder, must not have been believed if he made any statements to the effect of a fleeing danger to society?



OK, 12 people disagree with me. I stand by my _opinion_.


----------



## rgp

win231 said:


> You are correct; resisting arrest is the dumbest thing anyone can do.
> And, once a suspect is handcuffed, choking him until he dies is the most criminal thing anyone can do.



No one 'choked' anyone.


----------



## rgp

win231 said:


> Why didn't you testify in the officer's defense?  You could have saved him 20 years.



That doesn't even make sense, as i live in a different state .


----------



## hollydolly

rgp said:


> No one 'choked' anyone.


----------



## ohioboy

rgp said:


> I wouldn't resist any arrest. In this country we have a system in place for such things. I would go along with the arrest, hire an attorney , and sort it all out in the system.
> 
> Then ....... If I really felt I had a good case , and my attorney said we can prove it ? I might sue .
> 
> Resisting/fighting with the police @ the time of the arrest is about the dumbest thing anyone can do.



How do you define arrest under OHIO law?


----------



## Rosemarie

fuzzybuddy said:


> I don't think the trial is about  Floyd. The trial is about a guy, who knelt on another person's neck, which caused the death of that person. What Floyd did to get arrested is not relevant. He was, and handcuffed. People are reading all kinds of things into the death of Floyd racism, police brutality, drugs, crime, the thin Blue Line, etc. It's about a guy, who knelt on another person's neck, which caused the death of that person.


Yes, and it's a pity that the victim was black because it has been turned into a racist crime, whereas in fact, the mans colour might have no relevance at all.


----------



## hollydolly

This expert witness is definitely worth listening to....


----------



## Buckeye

Would someone on here please PM me when the trial is over?  I'm hoping to score a large screen TV from Wally's when the riots start...


----------



## rgp

hollydolly said:


>



 His [the officers] fingers may not even be reaching the throat , which is how someone is choked. I'm not going to opine on what i cannot see, and i cannot see Floyd from the front.


----------



## rgp

ohioboy said:


> How do you define arrest under OHIO law?



 ? Arrest is arrest. Restrained & taken into custody.


----------



## ohioboy

rgp said:


> ? Arrest is arrest. Restrained & taken into custody.



I was looking for a better answer, like a legal citation. Carry on.


----------



## rgp

ohioboy said:


> I was looking for a better answer, like a legal citation. Carry on.



Maybe ask a better question, as I just do not understand what you are seeking. An arrest is an arrest. Ohio or anywhere they [should] be the same. If I am mistaken please inform me.

That said, if a police officer says you are / I am under arrest, then just comply, and sort it out through the legal system. That is the safe way, and if one is innocent, he/she will prevail.


----------



## Keesha

If you make it to the legal system.


----------



## WhatInThe

I see recklessness and negligence which is how he should've been charged. I think in this case a quicker conviction even with lesser charges than they are seeking would've been better for everyone involved.

That being said the officer didn't follow the book and denied the supect medical assistance among other things.  He should've disciplined reprimanded and/or arrested much sooner. He is allowed a defense but the video and time speak for themselves especially along with not part of his training or procedures.


----------



## mrstime

I believe Chauvin should have been charged with 1st degree murder.


----------



## ohioboy

Don't know if it has been posted anywhere or not, but here is the complaint for the warrant of arrest.

https://int.nyt.com/data/documenthe...d9e96e708a9b0c8ba58/optimized/full.pdf#page=1


----------



## garyt1957

Butterfly said:


> I disagree.  The medical testimony has been consistent all the way through that the way in which Mr. Floyd was handled and knelt upon by the police officers was what caused him to die.  Doesn't matter what they knew or didn't know.  The cause of his death was the actions of the police officers, Chauvin in particular. I believe it was Dr. Barker that testified that that amount of compression of Mr. Floyd's body for as long as it lasted would have killed almost anybody, no matter how fit or healthy.


You can certainly disagree but you'd be wrong.  Intent definitely plays a part in the different levels of murder, 1st degree,  2nd degree,  manslaughter etc. It's the law, not my opinion


----------



## Butterfly

garyt1957 said:


> You can certainly disagree but you'd be wrong.  Intent definitely plays a part in the different levels of murder, 1st degree,  2nd degree,  manslaughter etc. It's the law, not my opinion


No, it isn't.  Some levels of homicide (manslaughter) do not require a finding of intent to kill.  And the requirements vary in different states.


----------



## garyt1957

Butterfly said:


> No, it isn't.  Some levels of homicide (manslaughter) do not require a finding of intent to kill.  And the requirements vary in different states.


You're actually making my point. Intent determines the difference between 1st degree and manslaughter which can be just due to carelessness


----------



## ohioboy

Chauvin asserted his 5th AM right to not take the stand today. I'm surprised he did not assert his MN constitution = in addition?


----------



## win231

ohioboy said:


> Chauvin asserted his 5th AM right to not take the stand today. I'm surprised he did not assert his MN constitution = in addition?


Very wise of the dirtbag.  He would be subject to cross examination & I'm sure his attorney told him it wouldn't go well for him.


----------



## Devi

ohioboy said:


> Chauvin asserted his 5th AM right to not take the stand today. I'm surprised he did not assert his MN constitution = in addition?


Question - what is "MN constitution"?


----------



## ohioboy

Devi said:


> Question - what is "MN constitution"?



MN: Minnesota.

Bill of Rights: Article 1:
Sec. 7. Due process; prosecutions; double jeopardy; self-incrimination; bail; habeas corpus.​No person shall be held to answer for a criminal offense without due process of law, and no person shall be put twice in jeopardy of punishment for the same offense, nor be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself...


----------



## ohioboy

The Defense presentation lasted only 2 days. Closing arguments scheduled for Monday. My wild guess, the Jury will deliberate 2 days.

The decision:
Guilty: Pacification for the public.
Not guilty: Perdition for the public.


----------



## digifoss

Chauvin Trial Judge Says Maxine Waters Comments Could Lead to Trial Being ‘Overturned’ on Appeal​way to go Maxine, I knew you wouldn't be able to help yourself....
https://www.yahoo.com/news/chauvin-trial-judge-says-maxine-215038743.html 

more..

https://www.foxnews.com/us/chauvin-...r-home-vandalized-with-pigs-head-blood-smears


----------



## ohioboy

I read that about the pigs head, disgusting.


----------



## win231

I heard about that.  Terrible!  At least, if it was pig's feet, they could have been pickled.


----------



## Jules

The judge didn’t sequester the jury and the defence lawyer didn’t complain.  That’s convenient.  Did the judge really think nobody would say anything that the jury shouldn’t hear?


----------



## Alligatorob

I hate these things...  Hate that it happens and hate how we litigate it.  I know there are bad cops and I am all for them being prosecuted and punished.   I also know cops have a hard job and have to make spilt second decisions under adverse, often confused and emotion charged conditions, and sometimes those decisions are wrong. 

The best way we have of sorting this all out is our legal system with a judge and jury.  The worst way is in the media and the court of public opinion...

I don't know if Chauvin is guilty or not, but I do believe the court has a better shot at making the right decision than I do.  I sure hope they get it right.  Sad thing is either way a man is dead, one who should still be alive.


----------



## ohioboy

Jules said:


> The judge didn’t sequester the jury and the defence lawyer didn’t complain.  That’s convenient.  Did the judge really think nobody would say anything that the jury shouldn’t hear?



I read where the defense moved to have the jury sequestered and the Judge denied it.


----------



## win231

Alligatorob said:


> I hate these things...  Hate that it happens and hate how we litigate it.  I know there are bad cops and I am all for them being prosecuted and punished.   I also know cops have a hard job and have to make spilt second decisions under adverse, often confused and emotion charged conditions, and sometimes those decisions are wrong.
> 
> The best way we have of sorting this all out is our legal system with a judge and jury.  The worst way is in the media and the court of public opinion...
> 
> I don't know if Chauvin is guilty or not, but I do believe the court has a better shot at making the right decision than I do.  I sure hope they get it right.  Sad thing is either way a man is dead, one who should still be alive.


If you saw the video, you would know Chauvin is as guilty as can be.  Doesn't take an expert.


----------



## Della

Okay, before the jury comes back,  anyone else want to say how they would vote if they were on the jury? 

  I watched the videos and listened to every word and  paid special attention to the definitions of the different charges and I would say he is guilty of Manslaughter, not the other two charges.


----------



## hollydolly

Della said:


> Okay, before the jury comes back,  anyone else want to say how they would vote if they were on the jury?
> 
> I watched the videos and listened to every word and  paid special attention to the definitions of the different charges and I would say he is guilty of Manslaughter, not the other two charges.


yep agree... I'd like it to be murder because I'm fed up with rogue cops..but I feel it has to be manslaughter


----------



## Don M.

Most people would agree that Chauvin needs to be convicted of a serious offense, and punished accordingly.  Personally, I think the end of this trial...no matter What the verdict is...will be the signal for yet another round of violent protests and riots...especially in Minneapolis and places like Portland.


----------



## Aunt Bea

I agree with Don.

I don't believe that the charge or possible sentences will be sufficient to bring a satisfactory end to this trial.


----------



## tbeltrans

Though I am not going to participate in the opinionating, I do want to mention that our governor has asked for help from law enforcement and National Guard from other states in anticipation of the civil unrest (to put it politely) following this trial and that of Officer Kim Potter.   Living as close as I do to both of these situations (less than 7 miles to either one), I do have some concerns.

Tony


----------



## JimBob1952

Clearly a not guilty verdict will lead to rioting nationwide.   What will happen with a manslaughter conviction?  Is that enough to deter unrest?


----------



## Pink Biz

mrstime said:


> I believe Chauvin should have been charged with 1st degree murder.


*He couldn't be. First-degree murder involves an intentional murder that is willful and premeditated with malice aforethought. 

Premeditation requires that the defendant planned the murder before it was committed or was “lying in wait” for the victim.These factors don't apply in this case.*


----------



## win231

Della said:


> Okay, before the jury comes back,  anyone else want to say how they would vote if they were on the jury?
> 
> I watched the videos and listened to every word and  paid special attention to the definitions of the different charges and I would say he is guilty of Manslaughter, not the other two charges.


You are showing a lot of mercy for someone who showed none.


----------



## fuzzybuddy

Waters is a Congresswoman. Everybody knows that means, you do NOT take what they say seriously. Our Congressmen are not known for their clarity of thought, well formed opinions, and thoughtful consideration. In short, they are as crazy as we are.
 But I think, we know we are sitting on a powder keg, if the 'wrong' verdict comes in.


----------



## win231

Pink Biz said:


> *He couldn't be. First-degree murder involves an intentional murder that is willful and premeditated with malice aforethought. Premeditation requires that the defendant planned the murder before it was committed or was “lying in wait” for the victim.These factors don't apply in this case.*


They may not apply legally because it would be hard to prove.  But I believe Chauvin did intend to kill Floyd from the beginning.


----------



## win231

JimBob1952 said:


> Clearly a not guilty verdict will lead to rioting nationwide.   What will happen with a manslaughter conviction?  Is that enough to deter unrest?


No.  Because he would get a short sentence.


----------



## Aunt Bea

JimBob1952 said:


> Clearly a not guilty verdict will lead to rioting nationwide.   What will happen with a manslaughter conviction?  Is that enough to deter unrest?


From what I've read the maximum sentence is 10 years and most first offenders are out in 5 or 6 years.


----------



## win231

Aunt Bea said:


> From what I've read the maximum sentence is 10 years and most first offenders are out in 5 or 6 years.


Sentences for police officers are shorter.  And they are paroled even earlier than other inmates.


----------



## fuzzybuddy

Pink Biz said:


> *He couldn't be. First-degree murder involves an intentional murder that is willful and premeditated with malice aforethought.
> 
> Premeditation requires that the defendant planned the murder before it was committed or was “lying in wait” for the victim.These factors don't apply in this case.*


I don't pretend to know the law, but premeditation can be "instantaneous". It has to do with intent. As when you are chocking someone, and know you are chocking them,  stop, and then continue, that could be "premeditation". I'm not a lawyer.
 But I don't see any other verdict than manslaughter.


----------



## digifoss

I can't offer an opinion on the verdict because I wasn't on the jury and didn't hear / see  all the evidence.  The court of public opinion doesn't count, or it shouldn't, but there are certain people, even politicians as we see trying to coerce the jury.


----------



## hollydolly

Aunt Bea said:


> From what I've read the maximum sentence is 10 years and most first offenders are out in 5 or 6 years.


trouble is even if he's out in 5 or 6.. he'll have to go into hiding....


----------



## Aunt Marg

win231 said:


> Sentences for police officers are shorter.  And they are paroled even earlier than other inmates.


I hope true justice awaits outside the court room if the court system fails the public.


----------



## Chet

I had the thought that a police officer should be tried by a jury of his peers which would be others in law enforcement. You could label it as a tribunal or something similar to a court marshall. You might argue bias, but there seems to be bias the other way by the public, at least the vocal ones. Law enforcement does not like bad apples because it reflects on them.


----------



## tbeltrans

Aunt Marg said:


> I hope true justice awaits outside the court room if the court system fails the public.


That could easily be my neighborhood that burns.  We had nothing to do with it, nor did any of the stores that have been looted and burned.  It is a very different view when one lives where these things are occurring.  

Tony


----------



## win231

tbeltrans said:


> That could easily be my neighborhood that burns.  We had nothing to do with it, nor did any of the stores that have been looted and burned.  It is a very different view when one lives where these things are occurring.
> 
> Tony


Aunt Marg didn't mean rioting & burning when she said "True justice."  She meant someone killing Derek Chauvin
(which would be justice).


----------



## tbeltrans

win231 said:


> Aunt Marg didn't mean rioting & burning when she said "True justice."  She meant someone killing Derek Chauvin
> (which would be justice).


OK.  Thanks for the clarification and my apologies for my misunderstanding.

Here are two headlines in today's local news, and these are happening nearly every single day now that the city council has clearly stepped away from supporting local law enforcement.  This needs to stop.  Now.

https://kstp.com/news/man-arrested-...-national-guard-members-were-shot-at/6080293/

https://kstp.com/minnesota-news/1-d...ting-dupont-avenue-north-minneapolis/6080692/

Minneapolis and surrounding areas were once a very decent area in which to live and raise a family.  Now, we have these going on daily.  Daily!

My opinion is not about Chauvin, but instead about the area in which I live.  I believe we should not be turning the city over to thugs in the name of political correctness.  Take the city back by force if necessary and to hell with political correctness.  Live by the law and stop this nonsense.  A society can't function unless those in it agree to a set of standards for behavior (i.e. law).  Anyone who breaks the law, whether cop or criminal, should be held accountable.

Tony


----------



## hollydolly

Chet said:


> I had the thought that a police officer should be tried by a jury of his peers which would be others in law enforcement. You could label it as a tribunal or something similar to a court marshall. You might argue bias, but there seems to be bias the other way by the public, at least the vocal ones. Law enforcement does not like bad apples because it reflects on them.


actually that's not so...in the police force they have what's called a 'Blue wall''.. which means they usually protect their own, and any internal investigation usually comes out in favour of an officer.

This case has differed from that, and in fact even from a public trial where Police officers will generally always give evidence for the defence..in Chauvins'  case 99 % gave evidence for the prosecution , all saying.. we're not like how he's portrayed us, we do not teach officers to deal with situations in this way, and that it was most definitely an assault


----------



## Irwin

hollydolly said:


> actually that's not so...in the police force they have what's called a 'Blue wall''.. which means they usually protect their own, and any internal investigation usually comes out in favour of an officer.
> 
> This case has differed from that, and in fact even from a public trial where Police officers will generally always give evidence for the defence..in Chauvins'  case 99 % gave evidence for the prosecution , all saying.. we're not like how he's portrayed us, we do not teach officers to deal with situations in this way, and that it was most definitely an assault


Yep, only paid "experts" gave testimony to support Chauvin. One was paid $11,000, which automatically makes his credibility questionable.


----------



## StarSong

hollydolly said:


> actually that's not so...in the police force they have what's called a 'Blue wall''.. which means they usually protect their own, and any internal investigation usually comes out in favour of an officer.
> 
> This case has differed from that, and in fact even from a public trial where Police officers will generally always give evidence for the defence..in Chauvins'  case 99 % gave evidence for the prosecution , all saying.. we're not like how he's portrayed us, we do not teach officers to deal with situations in this way, and that it was most definitely an assault


Exactly true on all counts. From the moment that video surfaced, police departments across the country vehemently condemned the actions of Chauvin and the officers who didn't intervene. 

It put many of us in mind of the video in which Rodney King was beaten by LAPD. These horrific, unnecessary abuses of power may be very difficult to watch, but they're so very important for the public to see.  Thank heavens for video.  

I think ALL police officers and police vehicles should be outfitted with cameras that are only turned off when an officer is using a restroom or otherwise off-duty. That's the only way "bad apples" will be removed from the bushels. As Chris Rock says, it's unacceptable to have "a few bad apples" in police departments, just as it's unacceptable to have "bad apples" as airline pilots.

Lest anyone think I'm anti-police, let me disabuse you of that notion. I'm friends with a couple of current LAPD members, a police chief in a small town in WA state, several retired police officers, and my grandfather on one side and uncle on the other were both NYPD. 

Right is right and wrong is wrong.  What happened to George Floyd was a crime worse than manslaughter.  Chauvin's actions were not a split second decision - he spent nine minutes murdering a man despite numerous witnesses pointing out what was happening and begging him to stop.


----------



## hollydolly

StarSong said:


> Exactly true on all counts. From the moment that video surfaced, police departments across the country vehemently condemned the actions of Chauvin and the officers who didn't intervene.
> 
> It put many of us in mind of the video in which Rodney King was beaten by LAPD. These horrific, unnecessary abuses of power may be very difficult to watch, but they're so very important for the public to see.  Thank heavens for video.
> 
> I think ALL police officers and police vehicles should be outfitted with cameras that are only turned off when an officer is using a restroom or otherwise off-duty. That's the only way "bad apples" will be removed from the bushels. As Chris Rock says, it's unacceptable to have "a few bad apples" in police departments, just as it's unacceptable to have "bad apples" as airline pilots.
> 
> Lest anyone think I'm anti-police, let me disabuse you of that notion. I'm friends with a couple of current LAPD members, a police chief in a small town in WA state, several retired police officers, and my grandfather on one side and uncle on the other were both NYPD.
> 
> Right is right and wrong is wrong.  What happened to George Floyd was a crime worse than manslaughter.  Chauvin's actions were not a split second decision* - he spent nine minutes murdering a man despite numerous witnesses pointing out what was happening and begging him to stop.*


Exactly..and with a casual hand in his pocket like he couldn't care less about a  man begging and crying for his life... I wish I was the judge, that man would go to prison for the rest of his life.., see if he'd be able to kneel on another prisoners neck in there...


----------



## WhatInThe

The prosecution should have went for the more easily provable offenses assault, manslaughter, police abuse charges and the only plea deal to be made would be the amount of prison time reduced the faster he plead guilty and could've been in an orange jumpsuit and cuffs enroute to prison by now.

Did he intentionally set out to kill him at anytime no. But he was abusive, negligent and did commit multiple crimes.

Alot of these DAs over charge for leverage in make a plea deal. Sometimes it best to go with a slam dunk and not try a 3 pointer.


----------



## Don M.

And then, we have Idiots like Maxine Waters....politician from California....who is encouraging protesters to ramp up their rioting if Chauvin isn't found guilty and given a harsh sentence.  When...not If...these riots start up, I hope one takes place in her neighborhood.  

https://news.yahoo.com/maxine-waters-tells-protesters-stay-145954822.html


----------



## Della

Don M. said:


> And then, we have Idiots like Maxine Waters....politician from California....who is encouraging protesters to ramp up their rioting if Chauvin isn't found guilty and given a harsh sentence.  When...not If...these riots start up, I hope one takes place in her neighborhood.
> 
> https://news.yahoo.com/maxine-waters-tells-protesters-stay-145954822.html


Alan Dershowitz was just on Court TV talking about that.  Ironically, he compared her effort to threaten the jury to what the KKK used to do.  He thinks the judge should have questioned each juror yesterday to make sure she/he hadn't heard about that, and if so, replace that person with an alternate.


----------



## Lewkat

There is a verdict and will be read at 4:30pm.


----------



## digifoss

Oh wow, I'm in complete suspense, not a clue what it might be, oh dear it could go either way....


----------



## StarSong

Don M. said:


> And then, we have Idiots like Maxine Waters....politician from California....who is encouraging protesters to ramp up their rioting if Chauvin isn't found guilty and given a harsh sentence.  When...not If...these riots start up, I hope one takes place in her neighborhood.
> 
> https://news.yahoo.com/maxine-waters-tells-protesters-stay-145954822.html


Well before Maxine Waters' comments very few Americans imagined this country wouldn't erupt into riots if Chauvin is acquitted or given a slap on the wrist.  It will be like the post-Rodney King police acquittals on steroids.


----------



## Murrmurr

StarSong said:


> Well before Maxine Waters' comments very few Americans imagined this country wouldn't erupt into riots if Chauvin is acquitted or given a slap on the wrist.  It will be like the post-Rodney King police acquittals on steroids.


But what if, with equal sincerity and passion, she'd called for peaceful vigils and solemn prayer-ins instead? She had the prerogative.


----------



## Pepper

I'm nervous


----------



## Ruthanne

Many cities are now preparing for civil unrest as we await the verdict which should be by 5 pm EST.  It would be nice if justice is served but I won't hold my breath waiting for it on this one.  After all we have seen over the years with african-americans being killed by police and those  police not being held accountable it would be amazing to see justice served yet I truly doubt it will happen.


----------



## Murrmurr

Pepper said:


> I'm nervous


I'm pretty certain he'll be judged guilty. Prosecutors presented a really good case.


----------



## Pepper

This whole mess is sickening.  Kneeling on someone's neck with your hands in your pocket.  Surprised he wasn't whistling while he worked.

Disgusting, the way we treat each other.


----------



## AnnieA

Don M. said:


> And then, we have Idiots like Maxine Waters....politician from California....who is encouraging protesters to ramp up their rioting if Chauvin isn't found guilty and given a harsh sentence.  When...not If...these riots start up, I hope one takes place in her neighborhood.
> 
> https://news.yahoo.com/maxine-waters-tells-protesters-stay-145954822.html



I hope he is found guilty and given a harsh sentence but she needs to shut up because she's fanning racism in people who don't know many if any black people personally.   Having always lived in Mississippi side by side with black friends, teachers, coworkers and increasingly family members, I know firsthand that most black people do not act like her.  I worry that she's being seen as representative of African Americans by other ethnic groups who don't have much contact with black people.


----------



## AnnieA

Murrmurr said:


> I'm pretty certain he'll be judged guilty. Prosecutors presented a really good case.



Hoping and praying so.


----------



## AnnieA

Pepper said:


> This whole mess is sickening.  Kneeling on someone's neck with your hands in your pocket.  Surprised he wasn't whistling while he worked.
> 
> Disgusting, the way we treat each other.



I feel so sorry for bystanders who couldn't help.


----------



## hollydolly

AnnieA said:


> I feel so sorry for bystanders who couldn't help.


This has been my thoughts throughout.. here in the UK you could attempt to pull those cops off if you thought they were killing someone... but in the USA you would likely be killed...
I can't even _imagine_ how frustrated those bystanders were


----------



## StarSong

Ruthanne said:


> Many cities are now preparing for civil unrest as we await the verdict which should be by 5 pm EST.  It would be nice if justice is served but I won't hold my breath waiting for it on this one.  After all we have seen over the years with african-americans being killed by police and those  police not being held accountable it would be amazing to see justice served yet I truly doubt it will happen.


I pray you are wrong.  This was beyond egregious, the prosecutions case was formidable, and the defense team had little to say.


----------



## StarSong

Murrmurr said:


> But what if, with equal sincerity and passion, she'd called for peaceful vigils and solemn prayer-ins instead? She had the prerogative.


Sorry to say, peaceful vigils and solemn prayer-ins haven't moved the ball forward one inch for American Blacks.  If Chauvin is let off the hook, Black Americans will see that verdict as exactly what it is - abject racism.


----------



## Ruthanne

Ruthanne said:


> Many cities are now preparing for civil unrest as we await the verdict which should be by 5 pm EST.  It would be nice if justice is served but I won't hold my breath waiting for it on this one.  After all we have seen over the years with african-americans being killed by police and those  police not being held accountable it would be amazing to see justice served yet I truly doubt it will happen.


To add to my comment Chauvin, as an experienced police officer never should have used the knee to the neck and I do believe he knew better.  If justice is served he will be found guilty of the highest offense of murder they have there and serve a very lengthy term in prison.  I do hope justice will prevail yet I have my doubts.


----------



## StarSong

StarSong said:


> Sorry to say, peaceful vigils and solemn prayer-ins haven't moved the ball forward one inch for American Blacks.  If Chauvin is let off the hook, Black Americans will see that verdict as exactly what it is - abject racism.


I'm not in favor of civil disobedience, but I recognize and understand fury over obvious patterns of horrific injustice. 

That said, I have confidence that Chauvin will be found guilty.


----------



## helenbacque

I think he was guilty of second degree murder.  I think he was putting on a show for his fellow officers "See, this is how we do it, boys"'

However, I doubt that is what jury comes back with


----------



## Ruthanne

StarSong said:


> I pray you are wrong.  This was beyond egregious, the prosecutions case was formidable, and the defense team had little to say.


I hope my initial post was wrong, too, and have added to it more of my thoughts.  I guess I am clouded by what I've seen in America all my life, unfortunately.  May justice prevail and 
Chauvin be found guilty with a very long prison term.


----------



## hollydolly

Demonstrators are already crowding outside the court....


----------



## hollydolly

Just been announced that sentencing will not happen for quite a few months..if he's found  gulity


----------



## StarSong

Good point.  Sentencing is rarely decided immediately, but if he's found guilty he'll be remanded into custody.


----------



## todalake

I think it is wrong for any political person at any level on either side of the aisle to make comments that can be viewed as  violent.    If violence occurs then that person usually says that it not what I meant and takes no responsibility.    People hurt or business ruined didn't have anything to do with the decisions made.    Many times business destroyed are owner operated just trying to make a living.   And then who want to rebuild in that environment.


----------



## hollydolly

StarSong said:


> Good point.  Sentencing is rarely decided immediately, but if he's found guilty he'll be remanded into custody.


I bloody hope so..it would be a travesty if he was to continue to remain on Bail


----------



## StarSong

hollydolly said:


> I bloody hope so..it would be a travesty if he was to continue to remain on Bail


It was a travesty that he was permitted to be out on bail from the get-go.  I've gotten whiplash from one shock after another with this case.


----------



## Ruthanne

hollydolly said:


> Just been announced that sentencing will not happen for quite a few months..if he's found  gulity


Yes but each of the charges he could be found guilty of has an estimation of the amount of time that he might be given.  I think the state, too, has added some "aggravating" terms too which could add to the estimated sentence.


----------



## hollydolly

Ruthanne said:


> Yes but each of the charges he could be found guilty of has an estimation of the amount of time that he might be given.  I think the state, too, has added some "aggravating" terms too which could add to the estimated sentence.


yes but the sentencing on each or all will take months.. they've just stated that on Court TV


----------



## hollydolly

StarSong said:


> It was a travesty that he was permitted to be out on bail from the get-go.  I've gotten whiplash from one shock after another with this case.


..and me..I think most of the world has too...


----------



## Murrmurr

AnnieA said:


> .. Having always lived in Mississippi side by side with black friends, teachers, coworkers and increasingly family members, I know firsthand that most black people do not act like her.  I worry that she's being seen as representative of African Americans by other ethnic groups who don't have much contact with black people.


I live in a predominantly Black Neighborhood. I'm mixed-race - my parents were Italian and Irish and my grandmother was Black. 90% of the people in the apartments where I live are Black and only a couple of them are mixed-race. I'd estimate that 1/3 of my neighbors here share Maxine Water's opinions and attitude, and they view me as White. They don't talk to me, don't reciprocate when I say Hi, how ya doin'? or whatever, and they'll block the walkway so I have to step off it when I pass, if they happen to be there. It's unfortunate, but I know where it's coming from and I don't let it get to me at all; just is what it is.

But here's the thing, only about half of the kids of that 1/3 share their parents' anti-White attitude. I shoot hoops and play soccer with them, and they even come over to hang out with my grandkids when they're here. And we all have a good time. 

I think this is very encouraging.


----------



## Ruthanne

hollydolly said:


> yes but the sentencing on each or all will take months.. they've just stated that on Court TV


Yes, I know that's the way it always goes but like I said we can still estimate even if it's not the same thing as a judge doing it.


----------



## AnnieA

StarSong said:


> Sorry to say, peaceful vigils and solemn prayer-ins haven't moved the ball forward one inch for American Blacks.  If Chauvin is let off the hook, Black Americans will see that verdict as exactly what it is - abject racism.



They did, though.  This death makes it feel like they didn't.  I have a close friend who is a college professor  ...oops, forgot to say close 'black' friend and am not correcting it because 'close friend' ...no other adjective needed IRL... is what she is to me.  Her sister is a successful DC attorney and her brother is an orthopedic surgeon.   Her family is native to Mississippi and all that that entails.  She's mad as hell about George Floyd's death, but would tell you way more than an inch has been gained for American Blacks by the peace advocated by Martin Luther King Jr.   We've just got to keep moving the ball forward and rioting does the opposite.


----------



## Pepper

StarSong said:


> It was a travesty that he was permitted to be out on bail from the get-go.  I've gotten whiplash from one shock after another with this case.


It would be a travesty if he met the requirements for bail and was denied.  Everyone is equal under the law, whether we hate or like.  That's why family of victims should never be in charge of what happens when it becomes a court matter.


----------



## AnnieA

Murrmurr said:


> ...
> 
> But here's the thing, only about half of the kids of that 1/3 share their parents' anti-White attitude. I shoot hoops and play soccer with them, and they even come over to hang out with my grandkids when they're here. And we all have a good time.
> 
> I think this is very encouraging.



It is!


----------



## Murrmurr

StarSong said:


> Sorry to say, *peaceful vigils and solemn prayer-ins haven't moved the ball forward one inch for American Blacks*.  If Chauvin is let off the hook, Black Americans will see that verdict as exactly what it is - abject racism.


Yes they have. Among the Black community, Martin Luther King was far more influential in the progress toward Civil Rights than The Black Panthers were.


----------



## hollydolly

We're in the court.....


----------



## Pepper

GUILTY on all counts


----------



## Pepper

Wow.  Composed as he was handcuffed & led out.  Bail revoked


----------



## hollydolly

8 weeks will be the sentencing..Bail is revoked and he's being remanded in custody!!


----------



## Murrmurr

Pepper said:


> Wow.  Composed as he was handcuffed & led out.  Bail revoked


I think he knew what was coming.


----------



## Pepper

Does Chauvin have family, a wife?  He seemed to be only in the company of his lawyer.  Tough guy, taking it 'like a man.'  So far.


----------



## JimBob1952

It seemed like a fair trial and it shouldn't be hard to respect the will of the jury.  Let's hope the crowds recognize that justice has been served.


----------



## Ruthanne

I am pleasantly surprised he was found guilty on all 3 charges!  Finally, times have changed for the African-American community.  It is surely way over time yet the time has come.


----------



## AnnieA

Pepper said:


> ... Tough guy, taking it 'like a man.'  So far.



Does that count for sociopaths?


----------



## mrstime

Guilty on all 3 counts and bail revoked! YAY!


----------



## JimBob1952

This is precedent setting in that a policeman was tried and convicted for his actions, with other cops and the chief of police testifying against him.  All to the good if it helps keeps police within the boundaries of the law and of established procedures.


----------



## Ruthanne

Murrmurr said:


> I think he knew what was coming.


To me he looked either surprised or scared.  Now he is feeling the wrath of what he did.


----------



## win231

*GUILTY ON ALL COUNTS.*
There is no other way it could have gone.
Nice view of him in handcuffs, but a better view would be him before a firing squad.


----------



## Pepper

AnnieA said:


> Does that count for sociopaths?


I think it does, but I'm not sure.  Interesting question Annie!


----------



## hollydolly

Pepper said:


> Does Chauvin have family, a wife?  He seemed to be only in the company of his lawyer.  Tough guy, taking it 'like a man.'  So far.


His wife filed for Divorce 3 days after he was arrested.I think she knew what a POS he was, and got out of that marriage fast


----------



## Murrmurr

Ruthanne said:


> To me he looked either surprised or scared.  Now he is feeling the wrath of what he did.


I recognize his expression: "I am so screwed."


----------



## win231

hollydolly said:


> His wife filed for Divorce 3 days after he was arrested.I think she knew what a POS he was, and got out of that marriage fast


She probably wanted to live.


----------



## Nosy Bee-54

AnnieA said:


> Does that count for sociopaths?


Extremely troubling that such an animal wore a badge and carried a gun.


----------



## Murrmurr

JimBob1952 said:


> This is precedent setting in that a policeman was tried and convicted for his actions, with other cops and the chief of police testifying against him.  All to the good if it helps keeps police within the boundaries of the law and of established procedures.


No, it didn't set a precedent. This isn't the first time a cop has been convicted of a felonious crime, including murder.


----------



## PamfromTx

Rest in peace, George Floyd.


----------



## Murrmurr

PamfromTx said:


> Rest in peace, George Floyd.


Definitely a just outcome.


----------



## Nosy Bee-54

hollydolly said:


> His wife filed for Divorce 3 days after he was arrested.I think she knew what a POS he was, and got out of that marriage fast


I read that one of the reasons she filed for divorce so quickly was to get her share of his pension and other assets because she knew what was coming. They also owned two homes.


----------



## Ruthanne

PamfromTx said:


> Rest in peace, George Floyd.


It's so very sad this ever happened to him.That he died that way but hopefully the judge will hand down a good, lengthy sentence of what should be the rest of his (Chauvin's) life in prison.


----------



## JimBob1952

Murrmurr said:


> No, it didn't set a precedent. This isn't the first time a cop has been convicted of a felonious crime, including murder.



I can't remember a time when the chief of police testified against one of the members of his own force, but my memory is shot anyway.


----------



## Ruthanne

JimBob1952 said:


> I can't remember a time when the chief of police testified against one of the members of his own force, but my memory is shot anyway.


Mine's shot to hell, too.


----------



## Murrmurr

JimBob1952 said:


> I can't remember a time when the chief of police testified against one of the members of his own force, but my memory is shot anyway.


It's happened. In some cases their partners testified for the prosecution, too, and in 1 case that I know of, the city's mayor did as well.


----------



## Gaer

Yes, The trial was fair and he probably knew the outcome.
I have two concerns.
THE MOB threatening to riot ,to steal, perform arson, rape, kill, whatever, if the verdict did not come in a certain way,
was EXTORTION! IMO.  Why is mob action not ever penalized?
Secondly, and I've said this before,
*When will people stop demonizing and criminalizing all police while the criminals (performing criminal actions) are civil rights martyrs?*


----------



## JimBob1952

Regarding George Floyd, all I can say is, De mortuis nihil nisi bonum.


----------



## Nosy Bee-54

Gaer said:


> Yes, The trial was fair and he probably knew the outcome.
> I have two concerns.
> THE MOB threatening to riot ,to steal, perform arson, rape, kill, whatever, if the verdict did not come in a certain way,
> was EXTORTION! IMO.  Why is mob action not ever penalized?
> Secondly, and I've said this before,
> *When will people stop demonizing and criminalizing all police while the criminals (performing criminal actions) are civil rights martyrs?*


Maybe when other officers who see excessive force and brutality, step up and protect the victims. Maybe when more police chiefs step forward for justice. Maybe when the police unions stop defending and protecting bad police.


----------



## JimBob1952

Murrmurr said:


> It's happened. In some cases their partners testified for the prosecution, too, and in 1 case that I know of, the city's mayor did as well.



Murmurr, I bow to your superior knowledge in this area.


----------



## ohioboy

fuzzybuddy said:


> I don't pretend to know the law, but premeditation can be "instantaneous". It has to do with intent. As when you are chocking someone, and know you are chocking them,  stop, and then continue, that could be "premeditation". I'm not a lawyer.
> But I don't see any other verdict than manslaughter.



You have a point, at par. 1. MN SC

1. We have frequently held that the premeditation essential to constitute a killing murder in the first degree need not exist for any specific period of time. State v. Gowdy, 262 Minn. 70, 113 N.W.2d 578;[1] State ex rel. Fruhrman v. Tahash, 275 Minn. 242, 146 N.W.2d 174.[2]

Similarly, we have frequently held that premeditation and design, or intent as used in the new code, are products of the mind and wholly subjective, and that they are often incapable of direct proof but can be inferred from circumstantial proof. See, State ex rel. Fruhrman v. Tahash, supra.

However, the Prosecution indeed felt it would be confusing to the Jury in this case to go for 1, or other reasons?

https://law.justia.com/cases/minnesota/supreme-court/1967/39641-1.html


----------



## Nosy Bee-54

*Current US Attorney General Merrick Garland:*

“I also saw the videos last summer, all through the summer. And like many Americans, I was shocked. But many black Americans were not shocked, because they have known of this kind of treatment before,” he told ABC News.

“I felt that beginning last summer, at least, there was a chance to bring this to the fore of the national consciousness, to create a moment in which we could change. And part of the reason that I wanted to be attorney general was I wanted to help bring that change,” he said.

https://nypost.com/2021/04/20/ag-merrick-garland-says-racism-is-an-american-problem/

Garland who is a former federal judge also said:

*“Look, racism is an American problem,” Garland told ABC News.

“It’s plain to me that there has been and remains discrimination against African Americans and other communities of color, and other ethnic minorities. I think it’s reflected in discrimination in housing and employment and the justice system,” he said. “We do not yet have equal justice under law.”*


----------



## SeaBreeze

Justice served in this case.


----------



## tbeltrans

JimBob1952 said:


> Regarding George Floyd, all I can say is, De mortuis nihil nisi bonum.


Of the dead, nothing but good...

Tony


----------



## rgp

Gaer said:


> Yes, The trial was fair and he probably knew the outcome.
> I have two concerns.
> THE MOB threatening to riot ,to steal, perform arson, rape, kill, whatever, if the verdict did not come in a certain way,
> was EXTORTION! IMO.  Why is mob action not ever penalized?
> Secondly, and I've said this before,
> *When will people stop demonizing and criminalizing all police while the criminals (performing criminal actions) are civil rights martyrs?*




 Well said, and I agree !

 They threw him under the bus in hope of stopping rioting .


----------



## Gaer

rgp said:


> Well said, and I agree !
> 
> They threw him under the bus in hope of stopping rioting .


scapegoat?  maybe?


----------



## Nosy Bee-54

SeaBreeze said:


> Justice served in this case.


In this ONE particular case justice found the sweet spot.


----------



## tbeltrans

Opinions are flying fast and furious around here.  I think my wife and I will just stay home and see how things settle out.  As I mentioned earlier, I am glad the governor finally realized we need more law enforcement to contain civil unrest around here and asked for help from other states since the Minneapolis city council pretty much chased a lot of cops away with their attitude about "disbanding" during the last round of riots.  This may be an emotional/intellectual exercise for folks around here, but for us living in it, this is all very real.

Tony


----------



## todalake

Gaer said:


> Yes, The trial was fair and he probably knew the outcome.
> I have two concerns.
> mi MOB threatening to riot ,to steal, perform arson, rape, kill, whatever, if the verdict did not come in a certain way,
> was EXTORTION! IMO.  Why is mob action not ever penalized?
> Secondly, and I've said this before,
> *When will people stop demonizing and criminalizing all police while the criminals (performing criminal actions) are civil rights martyrs?*


I don't even know where to start on all your misinformation in your post.   What mob?   What people?   To many generalities without facts.   There are  bad police like bad people in any profession.   They give the 99.999 percent good ones a black eye.   And the good ones can make a bad mistake unintentionally.   What martyrs?   Just put you on ignore.


----------



## Nathan

Nosy Bee-54 said:


> Gaer said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, The trial was fair and he probably knew the outcome.
> I have two concerns.
> THE MOB threatening to riot ,to steal, perform arson, rape, kill, whatever, if the verdict did not come in a certain way,
> was EXTORTION! IMO.  Why is mob action not ever penalized?
> Secondly, and I've said this before,
> *When will people stop demonizing and criminalizing all police while the criminals (performing criminal actions) are civil rights martyrs?*
> 
> 
> 
> Maybe when other officers who see excessive force and brutality, step up and protect the victims. Maybe when more police chiefs step forward for justice. Maybe when the police unions stop defending and protecting bad police.
Click to expand...

There will always be the Blue Code, it's the police culture.   I've seen patrol vehicles where somebody modified the motto- "Dedicated to Your Safety" with some typewriter white-out fluid to read: "Dedicated to *Our* Safety"


----------



## Murrmurr

Nosy Bee-54 said:


> In this ONE particular case justice found the sweet spot.


I don't know what you mean.

Chauvin's attorney presented a good defense, the best he could, imo. 

The jury was probably nervous, maybe even scared about making the "wrong" decision, but imo this was _legal_ justice, not _social_ justice. It happened to fall in line with public opinion. If that's what you mean by the sweet spot, I agree.


----------



## hollydolly

Nosy Bee-54 said:


> I read that one of the reasons she filed for divorce so quickly was to get her share of his pension and other assets because she knew what was coming. They also owned two homes.


Well yes that also could have been a reason, but if she'd stayed married to him surely she would still be entitled to half his pension and their homes...

I am shocked tho' to read that he will potentially receive 50k of taxpayers money in the form of a pension every year. This is a man who is younger than my daughter, and a long way from retirement age 

https://www.newsweek.com/derek-chau...ep-his-pension-despite-guilty-verdict-1585175


----------



## Sunny

Best news I've heard in a long time. Thank you, jurors!


----------



## Ruthanne

hollydolly said:


> Well yes that also could have been a reason, but if she'd stayed married to him surely she would still be entitled to half his pension and their homes...
> 
> I am shocked tho' to read that he will potentially receive 50k of taxpayers money in the form of a pension every year. This is a man who is younger than my daughter, and a long way from retirement age
> 
> https://www.newsweek.com/derek-chau...ep-his-pension-despite-guilty-verdict-1585175


He may not live (in prison) to get that money, imo.  Nobody liked what he did and those in prison may not let him live.


----------



## hollydolly

Ruthanne said:


> He may not live (in prison) to get that money, imo.  Nobody liked what he did and those in prison may not let him live.


yep I feel that may well be the case...and surely if the wife is divorced from him she wouldn't be entitled to his pension by then ..or would she ?..I'm not au fait with US laws


----------



## todalake

hollydolly said:


> Well yes that also could have been a reason, but if she'd stayed married to him surely she would still be entitled to half his pension and their homes...
> 
> I am shocked tho' to read that he will potentially receive 50k of taxpayers money in the form of a pension every year. This is a man who is younger than my daughter, and a long way from retirement age
> 
> https://www.newsweek.com/derek-chau...ep-his-pension-despite-guilty-verdict-1585175


Minnesota should change their law in line with other states regarding felony convictions.   I would be surprised if he survived 5 years in prison.   Former cops in prison with lifers with nothing to lose can be a deadly combination.


----------



## Ruthanne

hollydolly said:


> yep I feel that may well be the case...and surely if the wife is divorced from him she wouldn't be entitled to his pension by then ..or would she ?..I'm not au fait with US laws


I think it would depend on how long she was married to him.  Thinking it has to be at least 10 years.


----------



## StarSong

Gaer said:


> scapegoat.


Scapegoat????  Wow!  Not sure what video or trial testimony you watched.


----------



## hollydolly

todalake said:


> Minnesota should change their law in line with other states regarding felony convictions.   I would be surprised if he survived 5 years in prison.   Former cops in prison with lifers with nothing to lose can be a deadly combination.


I agree..and I would imagine that he will not be kept in any protected cell..


----------



## ohioboy

StarSong said:


> Scapegoat????  Wow!  Not sure what video or trial testimony you watched.



How about the goat did not escape.


----------



## Ruthanne

hollydolly said:


> I agree..and I would imagine that he will not be kept in any protected cell..


That remains to be seen.  Sometimes they put some in special protection and sometimes they don't.


----------



## hollydolly

Ruthanne said:


> That remains to be seen.  Sometimes they put some in special protection and sometimes they don't.


yes they do, almost always... but I doubt they would in this case, because it would be going against the solidarity that the Minnesota Police officers, people, and jurors were showing to the Black Community .


----------



## Ruthanne

hollydolly said:


> yes they do, almost always... but I doubt they would in this case, because it would be going against the solidarity that the Minnesota Police officers, people, and jurors were showing to the Black Community .


Yes, I see your point.


----------



## ohioboy

I could put Holly in solitary, but she would not be jolly, by golly.


----------



## Dana

*Justice has been done. Litte Gianna Floyd will grow up knowing that her Daddy did not die in vain. 

*


----------



## AnnieA

hollydolly said:


> yep I feel that may well be the case...and surely if the wife is divorced from him she wouldn't be entitled to his pension by then ..or would she ?..I'm not au fait with US laws



They were married 10 years so she will get his federal Social Security at 62 (I think) if she's not married at that age.  As far as his pension from his job, I have no clue.

She didn't ask for alimony in the divorce proceedings ...think she watched the video and knew he wasn't ever going back to work so what was the point...   I also think she wanted to push it through quickly to avoid responsibility for his debt which is likely tremendous due to legal fees.


----------



## win231

Murrmurr said:


> I recognize his expression: "I am so screwed."


Or, it could be, _"They just don't appreciate what a hero I am."_


----------



## win231

AnnieA said:


> They were married 10 years so she will get his federal Social Security at 62 (I think) if she's not married at that age.  As far as his pension from his job, I have no clue.
> 
> She didn't ask for alimony in the divorce proceedings ...think she watched the video and knew he wasn't ever going back to work so what was the point...   I also think she wanted to push it through quickly to avoid responsibility for his debt which is likely tremendous due to legal fees.


I think the city pays for an officer's legal fees.


----------



## ohioboy

win231 said:


> I think the city pays for an officer's legal fees.


Were they PD's or did Chauvin hire them?


----------



## AnnieA

win231 said:


> I think the city pays for an officer's legal fees.



Then that'll be a great motivator to do better screening.


----------



## SeaBreeze

Nosy Bee-54 said:


> In this ONE particular case justice found the sweet spot.


That's why I said, 'in this case'.


----------



## Lewkat

This decision will be appealed for many years to come as the judge gave the jury 3 instructions as to which Chauvin was guilty of if at all.  To find him guilty of all 3 is like saying he killed Floyd 3 times, which is totally impossible.  That he should have let Floyd stand up once he said he could not breathe is not even debatable.  To ignore the man was out and out negligence, but was it deliberate murder?  Were I a  juror, this would be my question.  Manslaughter or negligent murder yes, I agree with one or both.  But, will the appeals courts do so in the end?  You can bet, they will dredge up Floyd's criminal past and involvement in drugs.  This could cause the original charges to get lost in the shuffle.  This is why I am uncomfortable with the Judge's instructions.


----------



## ohioboy

Lewkat, each crime had elements the other crimes did not have, very permissable to charge.


----------



## hollydolly

AnnieA said:


> They were married 10 years so she will get his federal Social Security at 62 (I think) if she's not married at that age.  As far as his pension from his job, I have no clue.
> 
> She didn't ask for alimony in the divorce proceedings ...think she watched the video and knew he wasn't ever going back to work so what was the point...   I also think she wanted to push it through quickly to avoid responsibility for his debt which is likely tremendous due to legal fees.


We were just talking about this earlier.  Wondering if he was an abuser at home whether she'll give interviews or write a book ..if he gets a long enough sentence


----------



## Nathan

todalake said:


> Former cops in prison with lifers with nothing to lose can be a deadly combination.


He will be in protective custody.


----------



## Tish

I am just happy that justice prevailed, now we wait for the other three to be brought to Justice.


----------



## fuzzybuddy

It's guilty on all counts.


----------



## hollydolly

ohioboy said:


> Were they PD's or did Chauvin hire them?


It's possible he paid for them himself, after all he could afford to pay  the 10 % Bond money which came to a total of $100,000 to the Bond company on his Bail money of $1million


----------



## ohioboy

hollydolly said:


> It's possible he paid for them himself, after all he could afford to pay  the 10 % Bond money which came to a total of $100,000 to the Bond company on his Bail money of $1million



He could have paid 100% surety bond with no cash.


----------



## ohioboy

This is probably the applicable statute, but it does not demand 100% ?? The lawyers would know.

https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/cite/629.67


----------



## hollydolly

ohioboy said:


> This is probably the applicable statute, but it does not demand 100?? The lawyers would know.
> 
> https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/cite/629.67


https://bk-lawgroup.com/blog/derek-chauvin-released-on-bond-how-did-he-manage-to-pay-1m/


----------



## ohioboy

hollydolly said:


> https://bk-lawgroup.com/blog/derek-chauvin-released-on-bond-how-did-he-manage-to-pay-1m/



He may have borrowed it from his parent's, sold some stock, etc. Or he might have saved it over his career?


----------



## win231

AnnieA said:


> Then that'll be a great motivator to do better screening.


Probably not.  The city just takes it out of people who live in it.


----------



## Irwin

Chauvin accepted his fate calmly and respectfully towards authorities. He's facing a minimum of 15 years in confinement where there's no privacy, whatsoever, and every day, somebody is going to try to kill him. I just couldn't fathom that prospect. They would have to drag me out of there, kicking and screaming.

Then again, never in a million years would I do what he did. I feel bad when a mouse gets in the house and I have to kill it. I'd like to think that if I ever witnessed a cop murdering someone, I'd intervene. I'm pretty sure I would. I've stepped into several situations where my safety could have been in jeopardy. It's just a natural instinct.


----------



## Aunt Marg

Irwin said:


> Chauvin accepted his fate calmly and respectfully towards authorities. He's facing a minimum of 15 years in confinement where there's no privacy, whatsoever, and every day, somebody is going to try to kill him. I just couldn't fathom that prospect. They would have to drag me out of there, kicking and screaming.
> 
> Then again, never in a million years would I do what he did. I feel bad when a mouse gets in the house and I have to kill it. *I'd like to think that if I ever witnessed a cop murdering someone, I'd intervene. I'm pretty sure I would. I've stepped into several situations where my safety could have been in jeopardy. It's just a natural instinct.*


This world needs more people like yourself and my husband, Irwin.


----------



## digifoss




----------



## Alligatorob

It appears justice was done, or I hope (and believe) it was anyway.  A unanimous verdict on all counts in just 8 hours, the evidence the jury saw must have been quite convincing.

Now lets learn from it, and give our police better training, leadership, and closer supervision.  I do not want to make their jobs or lives harder or more dangerous, but I sure don't want to see this kind of thing happen again...


----------



## ohioboy

It will happen again, some cops have to show how big and bad they are, even on film. It gets them off, so the consequences are of no consequence.


----------



## Alligatorob

ohioboy said:


> It will happen again, some cops have to show how big and bad they are, even on film. It gets them off, so the consequences are of no consequence.


I hope you are wrong, but know you probably are not.  Unfortunately...


----------



## fmdog44

Well, this didn't take long.
Ohio police fatally shoot teen girl just before Chauvin verdict: ‘This stuff just never ends’ (msn.com)


----------



## terry123

Very pleased with the verdict.  I was afraid he would get off.  My brother is a retired officer and said there was no need for this.  He was handcuffed and down.


----------



## win231

Alligatorob said:


> It appears justice was done, or I hope (and believe) it was anyway.  A unanimous verdict on all counts in just 8 hours, the evidence the jury saw must have been quite convincing.
> 
> Now lets learn from it, and give our police better training, leadership, and closer supervision.  I do not want to make their jobs or lives harder or more dangerous, but I sure don't want to see this kind of thing happen again...


It will.  The Code of Silence is alive & well.  Keep in mind that if not for video, this case would have never been tried.  And neither would the many other cases of police abuse.  Before video, cops would just say, _"He resisted arrest" or "He reached in his waistband."
When cops don't know they're being taped, they'll kill someone, then other officers will arrive & plant evidence to justify it. _ Like these cops:
You might be wondering why officers will fire so many times in these situations.  When their actions are not justified, they have to make sure the only witness (the victim) can't testify.


----------



## hollydolly

_Derek Chauvin was last night taken to a maximum security prison and placed on suicide watch after being found guilty on all three counts of murder and manslaughter in the death of George Floyd. 

Chauvin was led away in handcuffs as Judge Cahill immediately revoked his bail pending sentencing and dispatched him to Oak Park Heights, Minnesota's only maximum security prison. 

The 45-year-old faces a minimum sentence of 12.5 years and maximum of 40 years if he serves terms for each charge concurrently. If served consecutively, Chauvin faces between 29 and 75 years.  

No prisoner has ever escaped from Oak Park Heights which houses around 500 of the most dangerous inmates in the country, 25 miles east of Minneapolis, on the border with Wisconsin. 

Jim Bruton, former warden of Oak Park Heights, described in his 2004 book about the prison how the hierarchy among inmates was determined by the crime committed. At the top of the scale are those who have killed a law enforcement officer. At the bottom are sex offenders, with child molesters considered the lowest of the low.

This hierarchy, coupled with Chauvin's infamy as a police officer, means he will undoubtedly require bolstered protection and constant monitoring. 

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...mum-security-prison-placed-suicide-watch.html_


----------



## JimBob1952

hollydolly said:


> Well yes that also could have been a reason, but if she'd stayed married to him surely she would still be entitled to half his pension and their homes...
> 
> I am shocked tho' to read that he will potentially receive 50k of taxpayers money in the form of a pension every year. This is a man who is younger than my daughter, and a long way from retirement age
> 
> https://www.newsweek.com/derek-chau...ep-his-pension-despite-guilty-verdict-1585175



This is why municipalities and some states like Illinois are going bankrupt.  Public unions negotiate exorbitant pensions and payments come due many years down the line.


----------



## rgp

win231 said:


> I think the city pays for an officer's legal fees.




I believe that's the police union if he is an active officer. He's been fired, he's on his own.

At least , that's the way it is locally.  Minneapolis / St Paul, may different, but I sort of doubt it.


----------



## JimBob1952

Dana said:


> *Justice has been done. Litte Gianna Floyd will grow up knowing that her Daddy did not die in vain.
> 
> *



Oh please.  I'm sorry George Floyd died but he had five children "without benefit of clergy" that he didn't care a damn about.  His 22 year old son hasn't seen him since he was four or five years old.

There is a big, unspoken taboo against criticizing the culture that produces so many George Floyds.  There was nothing admirable about him as a person.


----------



## win231

JimBob1952 said:


> Oh please.  I'm sorry George Floyd died but he had five children "without benefit of clergy" that he didn't care a damn about.  His 22 year old son hasn't seen him since he was four or five years old.
> 
> There is a big, unspoken taboo against criticizing the culture that produces so many George Floyds.  There was nothing admirable about him as a person.


Quite true.  There was also nothing admirable about Rodney King or the other victims of police abuse.  They usually have extensive criminal histories.
But we _expect_ criminals to commit crimes.  We don't expect professional police officers to commit _worse _crimes than the people they arrest.
And when police do this, they're rewarding crime by making millionaires out of criminals.  If they had just arrested Rodney King, it would have been his third strike & he would have gone to prison for a long time.  Instead, they got him  $3.8 million.


----------



## Chet

JimBob1952 said:


> This is precedent setting in that a policeman was tried and convicted for his actions, with other cops and the chief of police testifying against him.  All to the good if it helps keeps police within the boundaries of the law and of established procedures.


Everyone's primary instinct is self survival including cops, and I would not be surprised if the outcome of the trial affects the response of the police when it comes to black (hostile) neighborhoods, like taking forever and a day to respond hoping that the action is over when they get there, and it's just a matter of taking statements. I would not blame them to tell you the truth.


----------



## rgp

win231 said:


> Quite true.  There was also nothing admirable about Rodney King or the other victims of police abuse.  They usually have extensive criminal histories.
> But we _expect_ criminals to commit crimes.  We don't expect professional police officers to commit _worse _crimes than the people they arrest.
> And when police do this, they're rewarding crime by making millionaires out of criminals.  If they had just arrested Rodney King, it would have been his third strike & he would have gone to prison for a long time.  Instead, they got him  $3.8 million.



 "And when police do this, they're rewarding crime by making millionaires out of criminals. If they had just arrested Rodney King, it would have been his third strike & he would have gone to prison for a long time. Instead, they got him $3.8 million."

 Hard to argue that one.

 But  also I maintain that it all starts with the criminals themselves.........First & foremost, do not commit crime. Second, if they must ? When confronted by the police to be arrested ...... do not resist/fight @ that time. Succumb to the arrest & fight it out in court.

If those two very simple things were followed, all of this would go away, and it all falls on the shoulders of the criminals .


----------



## Remy

I'm sorry this ever happened and and that people treat other's this way. George Floyd was acting out at his arrest but there were plenty of cops there to deal with him and to use some de-escalation tactics.  I think the verdict was the right one.

As far as his children go, I'm speaking as an adult child with basically two dead beat dads. A dead beat bio dad and a step dad who took care of us financially but enabled and never protected us from our mother's abuse. It may take these children years and years, but they may process this some day and ask 'why was I not more important, why didn't you care more about me, when was I ever a priority.'

Maybe not but I know it's how I finally processed it.


----------



## Sunny

Maybe now people will stop complaining about teenagers spending too much time on their phones. Especially taking videos.


----------



## hollydolly

Sunny said:


> Maybe now people will stop complaining about teenagers spending too much time on their phones. Especially taking videos.


..good point.!

That said, I won't be responsible for the next person that walks out in the road in front of me while looking at their phone...


----------



## fuzzybuddy

Chauvin continued to kneel on the neck of a corpse for an additional three minutes. He was all set to plead to 3rd degree murder, so I don't think the guy was somehow railroaded. Nor do I buy into the conspiracy nonsense surrounding this case. This was the case of a cop, who killed a guy, in front witnesses, and a host of cameras. He is going to prison for that crime, as do all convicted felons. And as a felon, he may face unfriendly foes in prison, as most felons do.  This was not an issue of being surprised, by an armed suspect, and feared for his life. This was a deliberate, intentional act of murder.


----------



## Della

JimBob1952 said:


> Oh please.  I'm sorry George Floyd died but he had five children "without benefit of clergy" that he didn't care a damn about.  His 22 year old son hasn't seen him since he was four or five years old.
> 
> There is a big, unspoken taboo against criticizing the culture that produces so many George Floyds.  There was nothing admirable about him as a person.


In the few pictures of him with Gianna, she appears to be about one year old.  When she and her mother were making the news show rounds she was never able to answer any questions like "What did you like to do with your Daddy?"  I don't think she had seen him since she was a baby.


----------



## Irwin

Some of the comments in this thread caused me to read a bit about George Floyd. He actually had a fairly impressive life but was also involved in some serious criminal activity. That's what poverty can do to you. Check this out:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Floyd


----------



## RadishRose

Irwin said:


> Some of the comments in this thread caused me to read a bit about George Floyd. He actually had a fairly impressive life but was also involved in some serious criminal activity. That's what poverty can do to you. Check this out:
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Floyd


Very interesting. 

I feel it's more like drug addiction than poverty that drove him. He was well able to work and did, but he "lost" jobs. Had a sports scholarship but dropped out. He was a thief, yes.


----------



## Della

From the Wikipedia: "he had entered an apartment by impersonating a water department worker and barging in with five other men, then held a pistol to a woman's stomach and searched for items to steal. Floyd was arrested three months later during a traffic stop and a 7-year-old victim of the robbery identified him from a photo array"

I hadn't known _a seven year_ _old_ had witnessed that home invasion and watched his mother held at gun point by Floyd.  That must be a nightmare that never goes away -- and Gianna's mother always talks about how her daughter wont have her father to "walk her down the aisle."  For that sob story she made more money on her go-fund-me page than anyone ever before, I read 17 million, and that's apart from the 27 million.


----------



## ohioboy

I will be waiting to see how much the Judge fines him also.


----------



## RadishRose

_*Gianna's mother always talks about how her daughter wont have her father to "walk her down the aisle."*_

If Gianna stays in that "Absentee Father, Baby-Daddy" culture, she won't be walking down any aisles.

I hope, with all their millions, she will be led to a good education, as with the other children of George Floyd.


----------



## saltydog

Della said:


> From the Wikipedia: "he had entered an apartment by impersonating a water department worker and barging in with five other men, then held a pistol to a woman's stomach and searched for items to steal. Floyd was arrested three months later during a traffic stop and a 7-year-old victim of the robbery identified him from a photo array"
> 
> I hadn't known _a seven year_ _old_ had witnessed that home invasion and watched his mother held at gun point by Floyd.  That must be a nightmare that never goes away -- and Gianna's mother always talks about how her daughter wont have her father to "walk her down the aisle."  For that sob story she made more money on her go-fund-me page than anyone ever before, I read 17 million, and that's apart from the 27 million.


There're mixed feelings regarding Derek Chauvin's verdict.  https://www.yappasailing.com/2021/04/they-want-revolution.html


----------



## mellowyellow

He looks defiant, I guess he'll be in protective custody.


----------



## fmdog44

Since his conviction there have been two incidents of police killing blacks and I hear many say things will now change. Really??


----------



## ohioboy

fmdog44 said:


> Since his conviction there have been two incidents of police killing blacks and I hear many say things will now change. Really??



Were they justifiable?


----------



## Dana

JimBob1952 said:


> Oh please.  I'm sorry George Floyd died but he had five children "without benefit of clergy" that he didn't care a damn about.  His 22 year old son hasn't seen him since he was four or five years old.
> 
> There is a big, unspoken taboo against criticizing the culture that produces so many George Floyds.  There was nothing admirable about him as a person.



_*If you can't write something intelligent...please do not respond to my posts. It matters not to a child whether there is anything "admirable" about their father. What the hell is "without benefit of clergy" got to do with it. A lot of white people also have children with several fathers or mothers!!!*_
*To a child, a father is a father and loved!*


----------



## win231

fmdog44 said:


> Since his conviction there have been two incidents of police killing blacks and I hear many say things will now change. Really??


The fact that police killed 2 people who happened to be black means nothing.  I'm sure you're aware of the importance of details.


----------



## hollydolly

mellowyellow said:


> View attachment 161080
> 
> He looks defiant, I guess he'll be in protective custody.


I agree.I felt when he took his mask off in court he looked cocky


----------



## ohioboy

hollydolly said:


> I agree.I felt when he took his mask off in court he looked cocky


More like just a Cock.


----------



## Ruthanne

So George Floyd wasn't perfect--well who on this Earth is?  Everyone makes mistakes in life!  As it's been said who is without sin may cast the first stone.

Regardless of his mistakes he sure didn't deserve to die the way he did.


----------



## win231

Della said:


> From the Wikipedia: "he had entered an apartment by impersonating a water department worker and barging in with five other men, then held a pistol to a woman's stomach and searched for items to steal. Floyd was arrested three months later during a traffic stop and a 7-year-old victim of the robbery identified him from a photo array"
> 
> I hadn't known _a seven year_ _old_ had witnessed that home invasion and watched his mother held at gun point by Floyd.  That must be a nightmare that never goes away -- and Gianna's mother always talks about how her daughter wont have her father to "walk her down the aisle."  For that sob story she made more money on her go-fund-me page than anyone ever before, I read 17 million, and that's apart from the 27 million.


Most individuals police officers interact with are not decent people.
But think about this:
_Nothing Floyd did was as bad as what Chauvin did._
Of the two, which one is the professional who swore an oath to uphold the law?


----------



## Della

win231 said:


> Of the two, which one is the professional who swore an oath to uphold the law?


Chauvin is, and "upholding the law" is exactly what he was trying to do that day.  The dispatcher told him to go to 38th and Chicago and help two rookies bring in a man charged with forgery.  There followed a 25 minute struggle with Floyd resisting every step of the way and in classic "boy hollering wolf" pattern he was claiming he couldn't breathe while still standing beside his car so naturally he wouldn't be believed later.

 Floyd's past of armed robbery would probably have been known to them, which is why  Lane drew his gun when he approached  Floyd's vehicle, and they  were being more cautious than usual.  By the time Floyd stopped struggling they would have all been exhausted -- and we don't know all the other calls they had been on that day.

  It's my opinion that Chauvin is guilty of manslaughter based on the last 5 or 6 minutes when Floyd quit talking and  struggling, but lets not forget what led up to that and Floyd's own part in what happened. Even that little girl witness knew that if you break the law the police will come and "mess with you." 



Ruthanne said:


> So George Floyd wasn't perfect--well who on this Earth is? Everyone makes mistakes in life! As it's been said who is without sin may cast the first stone.



Yet, there seems to be an enormous angry mob wanting to stone Chauvin to death for his mistake.


----------



## hollydolly

https://www.snopes.com/news/2020/06/12/george-floyd-criminal-record/


----------



## Lewkat

First of all, Snopes is not the most objective of facts and that is a fact.  Secondly, it is not only the past arrest records of blacks that are examined in cases of this nature.  The media, as does Snopes, fail to point out this matter.  Snopes is as accurate as Wikipedia.  Further research into each individual situation and case is the fair way to assess what we read in the news or hear on radio and T.V.  That is if one is even interested.


----------



## hollydolly

Lewkat said:


> First of all, Snopes is not the most objective of facts and that is a fact.  Secondly, it is not only the past arrest records of blacks that are examined in cases of this nature.  The media, as does Snopes, fail to point out this matter.  Snopes is as accurate as Wikipedia.  Further research into each individual situation and case is the fair way to assess what we read in the news or hear on radio and T.V.  That is if one is even interested.


I think you'll find Snopes if innacurate cannot be compared to Wikipedia in that matter...


----------



## Dana

I can't speak for others...however, I will not shut my eyes to the criminal behaviour of Floyd. *He was no angel!!*  The important thing here is, the police are there to uphold the law, to show a fine example, to exercise restraint. If we do not have that, what do we have?

It's like mouthing the commandment... "thou shalt not kill" and straightaway going out and killing someone.
.


----------



## tbeltrans

Wikipedia is variable, depending on the quality of knowledge, research, and writing of the author(s) of a given article.  I don't know anything about Snopes.  When doing any research, it is best to not rely on a single source, but instead to seek out known quality resources and cross-check these.  That should have been one of the things we learned in school somewhere along the line between grade school and college.

Tony


----------



## hollydolly

tbeltrans said:


> Wikipedia is variable, depending on the quality of knowledge, research, and writing of the author(s) of a given article.  I don't know anything about Snopes.  When doing any research, it is best to not rely on a single source, but instead to seek out known quality resources and cross-check these.  That should have been one of the things we learned in school somewhere along the line between grade school and college.
> 
> Tony


Exactly , and that's what I do....I never rely on a single source, and if anyone takes the time to read the link to snopes they will see that  whether ''true'' or not... it's comprehensive regarding GF>..


----------



## Pepper

Dana said:


> I can't speak for others...however, I will not shut my eyes to the criminal behaviour of Floyd. He was no angel!!  The important thing here is, the police are there to uphold the law, *to show a fine example*, *to exercise restraint*. If we do not have that, what do we have?
> 
> It's like mouthing the commandment... "thou shalt not kill" and straightaway going out and killing someone.
> .


By your own criteria, Derek Chauvin is Guilty of not upholding those principles.  It has nothing to do with the quality of the person he was dealing with; it was his job to deal.  He failed.  He's paying the price for his failure.


----------



## tbeltrans

hollydolly said:


> Exactly , and that's what I do....I never rely on a single source, and if anyone takes the time to read the link to snopes they will see that  whether ''true'' or not... it's comprehensive regarding GF>..


The word "research" is often tossed around in a variety of contexts so as to become almost meaningless these days, especially in forums.  This is not at all a comment about hollydolly, but instead just a general observation in a continuing conversation.

True research is a very careful, meticulous, and time consuming effort if done properly with the expectation of solid results.  In guitar forums, I often see posts in which somebody is doing "research", when all it amounts to is trying a few guitars.  Other times in other situations, the so-called "research" is little more than listening to, or reading, hearsay.  The running joke, which is unfortunately often the case, is that of "I read it on the internet so it must be true".

There was a time (and hopefully still is) when magazines, newspapers, radio, and TV news outlets had editors who were responsible for vetting news reports for accuracy, and especially to insure that the report could hold up in court if challenged.  On the internet, anybody can be whatever s/he wants and nobody is the wiser.  Opinions are often stated as "fact", and "fact" often can consists of little more than hearsay.  Forums are particularly prone to this sort of behavior.

Tony


----------



## hollydolly

tbeltrans said:


> The word "research" is often tossed around in a variety of contexts so as to become almost meaningless these days, especially in forums.  This is not at all a comment about hollydolly, but instead just a general observation in a continuing conversation.
> 
> True research is a very careful, meticulous, and time consuming effort if done properly with the expectation of solid results.  In guitar forums, I often see posts in which somebody is doing "research", when all it amounts to is trying a few guitars.  Other times in other situations, the so-called "research" is little more than listening to, or reading, hearsay.  The running joke, which is unfortunately often the case, is that of "I read it on the internet so it must be true".
> 
> There was a time (and hopefully still is) when magazines, newspapers, radio, and TV news outlets had editors who were responsible for vetting news reports for accuracy, and especially to insure that the report could hold up in court if challenged.  On the internet, anybody can be whatever s/he wants and nobody is the wiser.  Opinions are often stated as "fact", and "fact" often can consists of little more than hearsay.  Forums are particularly prone to this sort of behavior.
> 
> Tony


No-no...I didn't take it as comment with regard to me.. 

yes indeed I know the value of research.. it was my job within Film & TV  most of my adult life...


----------



## Della

Lewkat said:


> Secondly, it is not only the past arrest records of blacks that are examined in cases of this nature.


Exactly, from the first, people have tried to bring race into this and there is not one iota of evidence that Chauvin is racist or treated anyone differently because of their race.  Police kill around 1000 people per year, most of them white.  I know that per population they kill a larger percentage of black people, but they encounter more black people on police calls and black people commit over 50% of homicides*.   One thing is certain those people who say, "This would never have happened to a white person," are just wrong.  Last year police killed almost 500 white people.

*There are many sociological reasons for this, poverty, joblessness,  lack of fathers in the home, are all more likely in black lives.   Maybe instead of blaming the police for everything, we should be looking at ways to solve some of those problems.


----------



## Dana

Pepper said:


> By your own criteria, Derek Chauvin is Guilty of not upholding those principles.  It has nothing to do with the quality of the person he was dealing with; it was his job to deal.  He failed.  He's paying the price for his failure.



Yes...Chauvin did not uphold the values...we should be able to rely on our lawmakers to do the right thing. Even a rat does not deserve to be killed in a cruel manner.


----------



## Shalimar

Dana said:


> _*If you can't write something intelligent...please do not respond to my posts. It matters not to a child whether there is anything "admirable" about their father. What the hell is "without benefit of clergy" got to do with it. A lot of white people also have children with several fathers or mothers!!!*_
> *To a child, a father is a father and loved!*


 I chose not to marry the father of my son. I am white, it didn’t cause any problems whatsoever. They have a good relationship.


----------



## Dana

Shalimar said:


> I chose not to marry the father of my son. I am white, it didn’t cause any problems whatsoever. They have a good relationship.


That's as it should be Shalimar...


----------



## rgp

Ruthanne said:


> So George Floyd wasn't perfect--well who on this Earth is?  Everyone makes mistakes in life!  As it's been said who is without sin may cast the first stone.
> 
> Regardless of his mistakes he sure didn't deserve to die the way he did.



 Entering someone's home by deception , then sticking a gun in their stomach in an armed robbery ....... I _*not *_a mistake !

 That ia an attack of intention , and might possibly have been committed just as easily against you.


----------



## Pepper

No matter how ghastly the crimes of George Floyd were, they are irrelevant to the drama of his death.


----------



## rgp

Pepper said:


> No matter how ghastly the crimes of George Floyd were, they are irrelevant to the drama of his death.



 I disagree, all he had to do was comply with the custody/arrest . He took it to the ending we all witnessed . He killed himself.


----------



## JimBob1952

Dana said:


> That's as it should be Shalimar...





Shalimar said:


> I chose not to marry the father of my son. I am white, it didn’t cause any problems whatsoever. They have a good relationship.



Did you do it five times with five different men?  Because that's the kind of "culture" I'm talking about.  You're an educated professional who can take care of your offspring.  Fathering children at random and letting the chips fall where they may is, to me, almost pathologically irresponsible.   

The out of wedlock birth rate among black people in the US is about 73 percent.  That's a major factor in the problems we're all facing.


----------



## JimBob1952

Pepper said:


> No matter how ghastly the crimes of George Floyd were, they are irrelevant to the drama of his death.



To me, the big question is why our society produces so many George Floyds.  There is racism and a lack of opportunity, but there are also cultural factors (the high rate of illegitimate births among them) that exacerbate the problem.  I'm sure to be castigated as a racist for saying that but I don't really care at this point.


----------



## Pepper

@JimBob1952 
You must have read the Moynihan Report years ago.  Do you find it inadequate now, decades later?
https://www.blackpast.org/african-american-history/moynihan-report-1965/


----------



## Dana

JimBob1952 said:


> To me, the big question is why our society produces so many George Floyds.  There is racism and a lack of opportunity, but there are also cultural factors (the high rate of illegitimate births among them) that exacerbate the problem.  I'm sure to be castigated as a racist for saying that but I don't really care at this point.



You have a point … however, the way you’re putting it across does not make any sense in this modern era. “Out of wedlock” is so old hat…one does not have to be married to have a child. If you say, too many people from a particular section of society are ignoring birth control, then I can accede to that.

In any event…in this case none of these sentiments are relevant. We are dealing with the actions of a police officer that resulted in the death of a person, regardless of how many children he fathered.


----------



## JimBob1952

It's not a question of being inadequate.  A lot of the social pathologies described in the report have only gotten worse.  On the other hand, a robust Black middle class has grown and Black people have broken down barriers everywhere.  In 1965 it was unimaginable that Black people would run companies such as Merck or American Express, let alone serve as POTUS or VPOTUS.  

BTW, thank you for engaging in civil discourse, as always.


----------



## JimBob1952

Dana said:


> You have a point … however, the way you’re putting it across does not make any sense in this modern era. “Out of wedlock” is so old hat…one does not have to be married to have a child. If you say, too many people from a particular section of society are ignoring birth control, then I can accede to that.
> 
> In any event…in this case none of these sentiments are relevant. We are dealing with the actions of a police officer that resulted in the death of a person, regardless of how many children he fathered.
> 
> 
> 
> Dana said:
> 
> 
> 
> You have a point … however, the way you’re putting it across does not make any sense in this modern era. “Out of wedlock” is so old hat…one does not have to be married to have a child. If you say, too many people from a particular section of society are ignoring birth control, then I can accede to that.
> 
> In any event…in this case none of these sentiments are relevant. We are dealing with the actions of a police officer that resulted in the death of a person, regardless of how many children he fathered.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You asked me not to reply to your posts, so I won't.
Click to expand...


----------



## Shalimar

JimBob1952 said:


> Did you do it five times with five different men?  Because that's the kind of "culture" I'm talking about.  You're an educated professional who can take care of your offspring.  Fathering children at random and letting the chips fall where they may is, to me, almost pathologically irresponsible.
> 
> The out of wedlock birth rate among black people in the US is about 73 percent.  That's a major factor in the problems we're all facing.


  I have known white women who had children with multiple fathers. Poverty and despair can affect people’s choices. If I had not been rescued from the streets by a kind black veteran, who knows? Assuming I survived, which was unlikely, the trajectory of my life may have followed that path.


----------



## tbeltrans

Shalimar said:


> I have known white women who had children with multiple fathers. Poverty and despair can affect people’s choices. If I had not been rescued from the streets by a kind black veteran, who knows? Assuming I survived, which was unlikely, the trajectory of my life may have followed that path.


It does seem that many success stories in life involve the intervention of another, caring human being at just the right time (i.e. the old saying "when the student is ready, the teacher will appear").  That was certainly also true in my case.

Tony


----------



## JimBob1952

Shalimar said:


> I have known white women who had children with multiple fathers. Poverty and despair can affect people’s choices. If I had not been rescued from the streets by a kind black veteran, who knows? Assuming I survived, which was unlikely, the trajectory of my life may have followed that path.



I'm glad you have known white women who had children with multiple fathers.  Statistically, however, the illegitimacy rate among black people is much higher than it is among white people.  And statistically, children who grow up in stable, two-parent households do better in just about every way (educationally, physically, financially) than children who do not.


----------



## Sunny

1. Whether Floyd was married "by clergy" to the mother of his children is totally irrelevant. In fact, I can hardly think of anything _more _irrelevant to this story! Jimbob, you seem to have a real hangup on the "illegitimacy" part of it. Puritanism apparently is still alive and well.

2. No matter how awful the crimes were that Floyd committed, it is not the place of a police officer to be the executioner. Floyd was no danger to anyone. Obviously, Chauvin got carried away with his own machismo, and was acting like a maniac. 

Quote from Win:
_"Nothing Floyd did was as bad as what Chauvin did._
Of the two, which one is the professional who swore an oath to uphold the law?"  Amen to that, Win!

All a normal police officer would have done would have been to put handcuffs on him and bring him into the station.

3. Somebody suggested that the police murder rate against whites was just as bad. That is so absurd that it doesn't even deserve an answer. How many cases has anybody read where a black police officer meaninglessly murdered a white person for a minor infraction (or no infraction at all?)

4. As far as I know, Snopes bends over backward to be objective and honest. If they mistakenly print something that turns out not to be true, they always post a correction. Probably nothing is 100%, but Snopes comes close. I've been looking things up there for years, and have never found them lying, or being slanted one way or another.

The same is probably true of Wikipedia. If you don't like the truth, don't blame the messenger.


----------



## JimBob1952

Sunny said:


> 1. Whether Floyd was married "by clergy" to the mother of his children is totally irrelevant. In fact, I can hardly think of anything _more _irrelevant to this story! Jimbob, you seem to have a real hangup on the "illegitimacy" part of it. Puritanism apparently is still alive and well.
> 
> 2. No matter how awful the crimes were that Floyd committed, it is not the place of a police officer to be the executioner. Floyd was no danger to anyone. Obviously, Chauvin got carried away with his own machismo, and was acting like a maniac.
> 
> Quote from Win:
> _"Nothing Floyd did was as bad as what Chauvin did._
> Of the two, which one is the professional who swore an oath to uphold the law?"  Amen to that, Win!
> 
> All a normal police officer would have done would have been to put handcuffs on him and bring him into the station.
> 
> 3. Somebody suggested that the police murder rate against whites was just as bad. That is so absurd that it doesn't even deserve an answer. How many cases has anybody read where a black police officer meaninglessly murdered a white person for a minor infraction (or no infraction at all?)
> 
> 4. As far as I know, Snopes bends over backward to be objective and honest. If they mistakenly print something that turns out not to be true, they always post a correction. Probably nothing is 100%, but Snopes comes close. I've been looking things up there for years, and have never found them lying, or being slanted one way or another.
> 
> The same is probably true of Wikipedia. If you don't like the truth, don't blame the messenger.


----------



## Shalimar

tbeltrans said:


> It does seem that many success stories in life involve the intervention of another, caring human being at just the right time (i.e. the old saying "when the student is ready, the teacher will appear").  That was certainly also true in my case.
> 
> Tony


 Absolutely agree with you. My life was completely transformed by a sad and haunted man who lost his daughter to drugs and the mean Streets of Vancouver B.C. By accident, he found me beaten, in an alley, patched me up, and gave me 

sanctuary until I could face the world again. To honour him for saving my sanity, and probably my life, I have spent  the rest of my life paying it forward.


----------



## JimBob1952

I don't care if people have children in or out of marriage.  But if people do have children, I think they have a responsibility to take care of them.  George Floyd did not shoulder that responsibility.  Of course it had nothing to do with his death and I never said it did.  

Yeah, I'm a real Puritan.  

I don't think the rest of your post was directed at me.


----------



## Irwin

Shalimar said:


> Absolutely agree with you. My life was completely transformed by a sad and haunted man who lost his daughter to drugs and the mean Streets of Vancouver B.C. By accident, he found me beaten, in an alley, patched me up, and gave me
> 
> sanctuary until I could face the world again. To honour him for saving my sanity, and probably my life, I have spent  the rest of my life paying it forward.


Did you ever come across a doctor in Vancouver by the name of Gabor Mate? He's done a lot of work with the homeless and drug addicts there. I don't know if he's still active (since he's getting up there in age), but he's an interesting character. I've watched some talks he's given that are posted on YouTube.


----------



## Shalimar

Irwin said:


> Did you ever come across a doctor in Vancouver by the name of Gabor Mate? He's done a lot of work with the homeless and drug addicts there. I don't know if he's still active (since he's getting up there in age), but he's an interesting character. I've watched some talks he's given that are posted on YouTube.


 I haven’t met him, but I have heard of him. My late boss knew him. Unique man.


----------



## win231

Della said:


> Chauvin is, and "upholding the law" is exactly what he was trying to do that day.  The dispatcher told him to go to 38th and Chicago and help two rookies bring in a man charged with forgery.  There followed a 25 minute struggle with Floyd resisting every step of the way and in classic "boy hollering wolf" pattern he was claiming he couldn't breathe while still standing beside his car so naturally he wouldn't be believed later.
> 
> Floyd's past of armed robbery would probably have been known to them, which is why  Lane drew his gun when he approached  Floyd's vehicle, and they  were being more cautious than usual.  By the time Floyd stopped struggling they would have all been exhausted -- and we don't know all the other calls they had been on that day.
> 
> It's my opinion that Chauvin is guilty of manslaughter based on the last 5 or 6 minutes when Floyd quit talking and  struggling, but lets not forget what led up to that and Floyd's own part in what happened. Even that little girl witness knew that if you break the law the police will come and "mess with you."
> 
> 
> 
> Yet, there seems to be an enormous angry mob wanting to stone Chauvin to death for his mistake.


You live in a world of make believe where all police officers are heroes & should be permitted to decide who lives & who dies because they are above the law.  Deliberate murder is not a mistake.  It's a crime.  Once a suspect is handcuffed, the game is over.
Chauvin is a dirtbag who should never see the outside of prison.


----------



## Buckeye

win231 said:


> You live in a world of make believe where all police officers are heroes & should be permitted to decide who lives & who dies because they are above the law.  Deliberate murder is not a mistake.  It's a crime.  *Once a suspect is handcuffed, the game is over.*
> Chauvin is a dirtbag who should never see the outside of prison.


The bolded is just plain totally wrong.  And you know that.


----------



## win231

rgp said:


> I disagree, all he had to do was comply with the custody/arrest . He took it to the ending we all witnessed . He killed himself.


Since you think Chauvin did nothing wrong, why aren't you petitioning the court to free him?
Why would you allow such a travesty of justice & not even bother to write a letter?


----------



## win231

Buckeye said:


> The bolded is just plain totally wrong.  And you know that.


Murder is a crime.  And you know that.
What Chauvin did was worse than anything Floyd did.  And you know that.


----------



## Sunny

JimBob, from several of your last few posts on this subject:

"Oh please. I'm sorry George Floyd died but he had five children "without benefit of clergy" that he didn't care a damn about. 

The out of wedlock birth rate among black people in the US is about 73 percent. That's a major factor in the problems we're all facing.

I'm glad you have known white women who had children with multiple fathers. Statistically, however, the illegitimacy rate among black people is much higher than it is among white people. 

 There is racism and a lack of opportunity, but there are also cultural factors (the high rate of illegitimate births among them) that exacerbate the problem. 

And finally,

I don't care if people have children in or out of marriage."

Huh?


----------



## Rosemarie

Don M. said:


> And then, we have Idiots like Maxine Waters....politician from California....who is encouraging protesters to ramp up their rioting if Chauvin isn't found guilty and given a harsh sentence.  When...not If...these riots start up, I hope one takes place in her neighborhood.
> 
> https://news.yahoo.com/maxine-waters-tells-protesters-stay-145954822.html


This raises the question as to whether the jury were instructed to bring a verdict of guilty, because the authorities were afraid of what might happen if they did not.


----------



## JimBob1952

Sunny said:


> JimBob, from several of your last few posts on this subject:
> 
> "Oh please. I'm sorry George Floyd died but he had five children "without benefit of clergy" that he didn't care a damn about.
> 
> The out of wedlock birth rate among black people in the US is about 73 percent. That's a major factor in the problems we're all facing.
> 
> I'm glad you have known white women who had children with multiple fathers. Statistically, however, the illegitimacy rate among black people is much higher than it is among white people.
> 
> There is racism and a lack of opportunity, but there are also cultural factors (the high rate of illegitimate births among them) that exacerbate the problem.
> 
> And finally,
> 
> I don't care if people have children in or out of marriage."
> 
> Huh?




Yes, I admit it.  I'm a hard core Puritan.  I think people should get married before they have children, and then should take responsibility for those children.  I think children brought up that way (in a stable, two parent household) have a better shot at success in life.  I'm not sure what happens to children brought up in a stable, two-parent household where the parents aren't actually married, but it's probably not a terrible outcome.  However, those aren't the kind of situations we're talking about here, and you know it.  

So send the PC police after me.


----------



## JimBob1952

Rosemarie said:


> This raises the question as to whether the jury were instructed to bring a verdict of guilty, because the authorities were afraid of what might happen if they did not.



Any such instructions to the jury would be grounds for a mistrial and a set-aside of the verdict.


----------



## Della

Me: It's my opinion that Chauvin is guilty of manslaughter

Win: You live in a world of make believe where all police officers are heroes & should be permitted to decide who lives & who dies because they are above the law.
--------------------------------------------------------

Win, you live in a world of straw man arguments in which, unsurprisingly, you always win.


----------



## JimBob1952

Sunny said:


> JimBob, from several of your last few posts on this subject:
> 
> "Oh please. I'm sorry George Floyd died but he had five children "without benefit of clergy" that he didn't care a damn about.
> 
> The out of wedlock birth rate among black people in the US is about 73 percent. That's a major factor in the problems we're all facing.
> 
> I'm glad you have known white women who had children with multiple fathers. Statistically, however, the illegitimacy rate among black people is much higher than it is among white people.
> 
> There is racism and a lack of opportunity, but there are also cultural factors (the high rate of illegitimate births among them) that exacerbate the problem.
> 
> And finally,
> 
> I don't care if people have children in or out of marriage."
> 
> Huh?





Della said:


> Me: It's my opinion that Chauvin is guilty of manslaughter
> 
> Win: You live in a world of make believe where all police officers are heroes & should be permitted to decide who lives & who dies because they are above the law.
> --------------------------------------------------------
> 
> Win, you live in a world of straw man arguments in which, unsurprisingly, you always win.




Do what I do with Win and others, and use the Ignore button.


----------



## StarSong

Rosemarie said:


> *This raises the question as to whether the jury were instructed to bring a verdict of guilty*, because the authorities were afraid of what might happen if they did not.


Cannot imagine this happened.  It would have been grounds for an instant mistrial and disbarment (at the very least) of whichever judge or attorney made those instructions.  

The preponderance of evidence was against Chauvin, including his own testimony in the form of nine plus minutes of video.


----------



## Buckeye

win231 said:


> Murder is a crime.  And you know that.
> What Chauvin did was worse than anything Floyd did.  And you know that.


Nice try at deflection to avoid admitting you are wrong, but nope. In your post #571 you said "*Once a suspect is handcuffed, the game is over."  *That is just flat wrong, and when you were called out on it you did a major pivot to something else.  Be a man and admit you are wrong.


----------



## Sunny

JimBob, I agree with much of what you said, about children needing stable families, caring parents, etc.  The only part that I thought was pretty irritating and irrelevant was whether or not Floyd and the mother of his children were legally married. There are people who are perfectly wonderful parents without "benefit of clergy," as you quaintly put it.  

And of course, the opposite is also true. There are many people who are legally married and practice brutal sadism on each other, and on their children.  I don't think you are adding anything to your argument by continuously raising the issue of whether they had a wedding or not.


----------



## Chet

Rosemarie said:


> This raises the question as to whether the jury were instructed to bring a verdict of guilty, because the authorities were afraid of what might happen if they did not.


They didn't need instructions. The jury wasn't sequestered until arguments were over and they went into deliberate, so they new full well the temperament on the streets.


----------



## Pepper

Chet said:


> They didn't need instructions. The jury wasn't sequestered until arguments were over and they went into deliberate, so they new full well *the temperament on the streets*.


The temperament on the streets had been going on for a year.


----------



## Pepper

Sunny said:


> I don't think you are adding anything to your argument by continuously raising the issue of whether they had a wedding or not.


I surprised myself when I became pregnant with my son.  I told my soon to be husband that I didn't want a child outside of marriage, and he was glad to oblige.  I didn't know I felt that way for myself until it happened to me.  Just didn't want to do it.


----------



## Keesha

Rosemarie said:


> This raises the question as to whether the jury were instructed to bring a verdict of guilty, because the authorities were afraid of what might happen if they did not.


It would seem more practical that the jury struck a verdict of guilty because he ‘was’ guilty.


----------



## JimBob1952

Sunny said:


> JimBob, I agree with much of what you said, about children needing stable families, caring parents, etc.  The only part that I thought was pretty irritating and irrelevant was whether or not Floyd and the mother of his children were legally married. There are people who are perfectly wonderful parents without "benefit of clergy," as you quaintly put it.
> 
> And of course, the opposite is also true. There are many people who are legally married and practice brutal sadism on each other, and on their children.  I don't think you are adding anything to your argument by continuously raising the issue of whether they had a wedding or not.




OK.  I'm not making myself understood.  

I don't care if George Floyd ever got married.  I do care (in the abstract) that he and many other people see fit to sire multiple children and abandon them to their fates.  That doesn't mean that I wanted him to die.  It does mean that he should not be held up as some sort of saint, at least not in my opinion.  

All this is pretty pointless and going forward I'll confine my posting to music and what I like on top of my cupcakes.


----------



## AnnieA

JimBob1952 said:


> To me, the big question is why our society produces so many George Floyds.  There is racism and a lack of opportunity, but there are also cultural factors ...



One of my black female friends in her 70s HATES rap/hip hop culture with a passion,  She says she and others of her age put their lives on the line for civil rights only to have rap/hip hop come along to denigrate her granddaughters and give black crime star status.  She knows that rap/hip hop isn't solely to blame for drug and crimes since she and I both know plenty of white user criminals in our community that don't listen to it.  It certainly doesn't help though.


----------



## AnnieA

Keesha said:


> It would seem more practical that the jury struck a verdict of guilty because he ‘was’ guilty.



Which is exactly what happened.


----------



## Murrmurr

Lewkat said:


> This decision will be appealed for many years to come as the judge gave the jury 3 instructions as to which Chauvin was guilty of if at all.  To find him guilty of all 3 is like saying he killed Floyd 3 times, which is totally impossible.  That he should have let Floyd stand up once he said he could not breathe is not even debatable.  To ignore the man was out and out negligence, but was it deliberate murder?  Were I a  juror, this would be my question.  Manslaughter or negligent murder yes, I agree with one or both.  But, will the appeals courts do so in the end?  You can bet, they will dredge up Floyd's criminal past and involvement in drugs.  This could cause the original charges to get lost in the shuffle.  This is why I am uncomfortable with the Judge's instructions.


Like ohioboy said, it wasn't 3 charges of murder. It's like if a guy murdered someone with an illegal firearm, he'd be charged for murder plus the charge of possessing an illegal firearm. And if he's an ex-felon, there'd be at least one additional charge.

They shouldn't have let Floyd stand up because he was resisting arrest, but once he was under control, and he was, Chauvin should definitely have taken his knee off the man's neck.

I doubt Floyd's extensive and violent criminal past would be drudged up in an appeal hearing, but there's a good chance the crimes he was committing at the time of his arrest would be.


----------



## Sunny

JimBob, since you did mention the marriage thing at least 4-5 times, it certainly sounds like that was your main focus. I'm glad to hear it wasn't.
It was also totally irrelevant to the subject. Maybe a discussion about whether marriage is an important factor in raising children would be an interesting subject for another discussion.

As far as Floyd being a "saint," I've never heard anyone imply that that was the case. He's usually described as a pretty troubled individual. So what?  In this crime, he was a victim, period. You don't have to be a saint to be a victim.  How he lived his life was irrelevant to the crime. I'm sure Chauvin and his (very few) supporters tried to deflect blame away from him by playing the "black reprobate" card. It didn't work in this case. Thanks to that video, and the testimony of all those horrified vitnesses, and the testimony against Chauvin by other police officers, including the Chief of Police, he didn't have a leg to stand on. Floyd could have been the biggest villain that ever lived, but it didn't matter. No one deserves to die that way, and no one appointed Chauvin as the executioner.


----------



## Murrmurr

Dana said:


> You have a point … however, the way you’re putting it across does not make any sense in this modern era. “Out of wedlock” is so old hat…one does not have to be married to have a child. If you say, too many people from a particular section of society are ignoring birth control, then I can accede to that.
> 
> In any event…in this case none of these sentiments are relevant. We are dealing with the actions of a police officer that resulted in the death of a person, regardless of how many children he fathered.


Dana, I believe JimBob's point is that (currently) 75% of Black children in America are growing up without a father. For the past 40 years, the increase in fatherless families among Blacks matches up with the increase in crime among Black youths.

(I'll see if I can find that graph. Hope I saved it.)


----------



## oldiebutgoody

Rosemarie said:


> This raises the question as to whether the jury were instructed to bring a verdict of guilty, because the authorities were afraid of what might happen if they did not.






The judge's instructions were broadcasted live.  There is no basis for such a scenario.


----------



## oldiebutgoody

To me it was a case of 2d degree murder and deserving of a 40 year prison sentence without possibility of parole.  

As for the $27 million in financial compensation given to Floyd's family, it should be financed by the police union, not by the taxpayers.


----------



## JimBob1952

Sunny said:


> JimBob, since you did mention the marriage thing at least 4-5 times, it certainly sounds like that was your main focus. I'm glad to hear it wasn't.
> It was also totally irrelevant to the subject. Maybe a discussion about whether marriage is an important factor in raising children would be an interesting subject for another discussion.
> 
> As far as Floyd being a "saint," I've never heard anyone imply that that was the case. He's usually described as a pretty troubled individual. So what?  In this crime, he was a victim, period. You don't have to be a saint to be a victim.  How he lived his life was irrelevant to the crime. I'm sure Chauvin and his (very few) supporters tried to deflect blame away from him by playing the "black reprobate" card. It didn't work in this case. Thanks to that video, and the testimony of all those horrified vitnesses, and the testimony against Chauvin by other police officers, including the Chief of Police, he didn't have a leg to stand on. Floyd could have been the biggest villain that ever lived, but it didn't matter. No one deserves to die that way, and no one appointed Chauvin as the executioner.



You are absolutely right in every way.  I bow to your wisdom and superior knowledge.


----------



## digifoss

The jury, and the judge, were coersed.  The verdict may have been the right one, but whether it was or was not, there was coersion going on, and a lot of it and no steps were taken to prevent, or even reduce it.


----------



## Dana

Murrmurr said:


> Dana, I believe JimBob's point is that (currently) 75% of Black children in America are growing up without a father. For the past 40 years, the increase in fatherless families among Blacks matches up with the increase in crime among Black youths.
> 
> (I'll see if I can find that graph. Hope I saved it.)



Murrmurr...I don't disbelieve that point at all. I have heard and read the same from black women themselves, who lament the case of absent black fathers and would like to see this rectified. In the old days, children were looked after by grandmas and aunts etc and this "culture" has seeped into today's society. I believe provision for birth control would be a great boon for both black and white men.


----------



## ohioboy

Della said:
			
		

> Yet, there seems to be an enormous angry mob wanting to stone Chauvin to death for his mistake.



Chauvin hardly made a mistake, he knew exactly what he was doing, and, imo, he was loving it. Sure, if you wish, you can classify any unnatural act as a mistake by a loose or dictionary definition, something that was done that shouldn't have been done. His ego was not a mistake, he was proud of it.


----------



## ohioboy

Rosemarie said:


> This raises the question as to whether the jury were instructed to bring a verdict of guilty, because the authorities were afraid of what might happen if they did not.


The Judge would be in front of the Disciplinary Counsel so fast, his head would spin.


----------



## MarciKS

frankly i don't think 60 yrs was near enough time


----------



## Shalimar

It is not logical, nor admissible in court, but people like me are not unfamiliar with individuals who have Chauvin’s mindset. The lack of humanity is chilling, and, in my experience, the “tell,” almost invariably,  flat eyes. No warmth,

minimal expression, unless anger, sometimes contempt. It is like making eye contact with a cobra. They may learn to mimic emotive people, but their eyes don’t lie. If one is empathetic, working  with them is like having your soul slimed. I will no longer accept such individuals as clients.


----------



## ohioboy

rgp said:


> I disagree, all he had to do was comply with the custody/arrest . He took it to the ending we all witnessed . He killed himself.



Had sad that remark is, really. What if it was a meaty mighty ten year old that resisted, knee his neck for 9 minutes, sit on his chest for nine minutes? You  evidentially know little about the 4th AM and UNreasonable force. Hell, I knew better than Chauvin did and I've never been a police officer.


----------



## MarciKS

i still firmly believe that if people weren't doing the wrong thing they wouldn't be in the pickle they get into with the police a lot of times. most of us are living examples of that. but there is no place for cold blooded murder from someone who is sworn to protect and serve. not harm and kill.


----------



## MarciKS

ohioboy said:


> Had sad that remark is, really. What if it was a meaty mighty ten year old that resisted, knee his neck for 9 minutes, sit on his chest for nine minutes? You  evidentially know little about the 4th AM and UNreasonable force. Hell, I knew better than Chauvin did and I've never been a police officer.


a child would've probably known better.


----------



## MarciKS

we were discussing this at work the other day while waiting for the verdict and i was telling my coworkers that i would hope if someone were trying to kill me on the job that they wouldn't just stand there and let them do it. that someone would try to stop them. 

i can't believe those other officers knew he was killing that man and just stood there and watched.


----------



## MarciKS

senior officer or not. they all had guns. if it were me i would've been more inclined to put a bullet in the officers head first.


----------



## Ruthanne

Della said:


> Chauvin is, and "upholding the law" is exactly what he was trying to do that day.  The dispatcher told him to go to 38th and Chicago and help two rookies bring in a man charged with forgery.  There followed a 25 minute struggle with Floyd resisting every step of the way and in classic "boy hollering wolf" pattern he was claiming he couldn't breathe while still standing beside his car so naturally he wouldn't be believed later.
> 
> Floyd's past of armed robbery would probably have been known to them, which is why  Lane drew his gun when he approached  Floyd's vehicle, and they  were being more cautious than usual.  By the time Floyd stopped struggling they would have all been exhausted -- and we don't know all the other calls they had been on that day.
> 
> It's my opinion that Chauvin is guilty of manslaughter based on the last 5 or 6 minutes when Floyd quit talking and  struggling, but lets not forget what led up to that and Floyd's own part in what happened. Even that little girl witness knew that if you break the law the police will come and "mess with you."
> 
> 
> 
> Yet, there seems to be an enormous angry mob wanting to stone Chauvin to death for his mistake.


I doubt that.


----------



## Butterfly

win231 said:


> If you saw the video, you would know Chauvin is as guilty as can be.  Doesn't take an expert.





Ruthanne said:


> Yes but each of the charges he could be found guilty of has an estimation of the amount of time that he might be given.  I think the state, too, has added some "aggravating" terms too which could add to the estimated sentence.


That's not "estimated" sentence time.  It is the maximum the law allows.  MN has sentencing guideline formulas to help the judge decide on sentencing.


----------



## Ruthanne

Butterfly said:


> That's not "estimated" sentence time.  It is the maximum the law allows.  MN has sentencing guideline formulas to help the judge decide on sentencing.


I meant each person can make their estimations or guesses.  I do know what you are saying.  I'm not as dumb as I look


----------



## Butterfly

I read that Chauvin's attorneys were  hired and paid for by the union.


----------



## Butterfly

Lewkat said:


> This decision will be appealed for many years to come as the judge gave the jury 3 instructions as to which Chauvin was guilty of if at all.  To find him guilty of all 3 is like saying he killed Floyd 3 times, which is totally impossible.  That he should have let Floyd stand up once he said he could not breathe is not even debatable.  To ignore the man was out and out negligence, but was it deliberate murder?  Were I a  juror, this would be my question.  Manslaughter or negligent murder yes, I agree with one or both.  But, will the appeals courts do so in the end?  You can bet, they will dredge up Floyd's criminal past and involvement in drugs.  This could cause the original charges to get lost in the shuffle.  This is why I am uncomfortable with the Judge's instructions.


Evidently from what I've read and heard, the finding of guilty on all three is consistent with the way they do it in MN.  This varies from state to state.


----------



## ohioboy

Butterfly said:


> Evidently from what I've read and heard, the finding of guilty on all three is consistent with the way they do it in MN.  This varies from state to state.



Under the Blockburger rule.


----------



## win231

JimBob1952 said:


> Do what I do with Win and others, and use the Ignore button.





Della said:


> Chauvin is, and "upholding the law" is exactly what he was trying to do that day.  The dispatcher told him to go to 38th and Chicago and help two rookies bring in a man charged with forgery.  There followed a 25 minute struggle with Floyd resisting every step of the way and in classic "boy hollering wolf" pattern he was claiming he couldn't breathe while still standing beside his car so naturally he wouldn't be believed later.
> 
> Floyd's past of armed robbery would probably have been known to them, which is why  Lane drew his gun when he approached  Floyd's vehicle, and they  were being more cautious than usual.  By the time Floyd stopped struggling they would have all been exhausted -- and we don't know all the other calls they had been on that day.
> 
> It's my opinion that Chauvin is guilty of manslaughter based on the last 5 or 6 minutes when Floyd quit talking and  struggling, but lets not forget what led up to that and Floyd's own part in what happened. Even that little girl witness knew that if you break the law the police will come and "mess with you."
> 
> 
> 
> Yet, there seems to be an enormous angry mob wanting to stone Chauvin to death for his mistake.


Interesting that you mention an officer "Drawing his gun when he approached Floyd's vehicle."
I haven't heard anyone complaining about any officer drawing his gun.  I have no problem with that & neither does anyone else.
_What does an officer drawing his gun have to do with torturing & murdering a suspect?_


----------



## rgp

ohioboy said:


> Had sad that remark is, really. What if it was a meaty mighty ten year old that resisted, knee his neck for 9 minutes, sit on his chest for nine minutes? You  evidentially know little about the 4th AM and UNreasonable force. Hell, I knew better than Chauvin did and I've never been a police officer.



Once again you reply with scenarios that do not apply to this debate.


----------



## Sunny

> I believe provision for birth control would be a great boon for both black and white men.


Dana, is there a shortage of birth control items in the stores?  Are they that expensive to buy?  (I have absolutely no idea what they cost, that's a serious question.)

If it's a matter of expense, I would say they should be available free of charge to one and all.

Also, what about the women? If the men can't/won't use birth control, what's stopping the women? After all, they are the ones who end up getting pregnant, and often having to raise the children on their own. Why not provide free birth control to them?

I don't think getting birth control is really the problem. The emphasis should be on the realization by both men and women that children need two caring parents. (The involvement of clergy is irrelevant; they need the love and nurturing of both parents, period.)

Yesterday I saw a family of ducks crossing the road. One parent was in front, followed by a line of about 5 little ducklings, backed up by the other parent. If animals know enough to raise their children responsibly, why not humans? It was so cute, but we were driving by, and I didn't have time to get my phone out to get a picture.


----------



## Dana

Sunny said:


> Dana, is there a shortage of birth control items in the stores?  Are they that expensive to buy?  (I have absolutely no idea what they cost, that's a serious question.)
> 
> If it's a matter of expense, I would say they should be available free of charge to one and all.
> 
> Also, what about the women? If the men can't/won't use birth control, what's stopping the women? After all, they are the ones who end up getting pregnant, and often having to raise the children on their own. Why not provide free birth control to them?
> 
> I don't think getting birth control is really the problem. The emphasis should be on the realization by both men and women that children need two caring parents. (The involvement of clergy is irrelevant; they need the love and nurturing of both parents, period.)
> 
> Yesterday I saw a family of ducks crossing the road. One parent was in front, followed by a line of about 5 little ducklings, backed up by the other parent. If animals know enough to raise their children responsibly, why not humans? It was so cute, but we were driving by, and I didn't have time to get my phone out to get a picture.


I really don't know how much contraceptives cost in the US..but yes, I agree, it should be the responsibility of both males and females to protect against unwanted pregnancies. However, I understand, many young black females suffer rape, are bullied into having sex etc, so education is also necessary. What to do? It's a monumental job... I have no real answers.


----------



## StarSong

Butterfly said:


> I read that Chauvin's attorneys were  hired and paid for by the union.


Yes, that's what I learned, too.  Not that the defense team had much to work with. The prosecution had Chauvin dead to rights and could still be parading police chiefs and other experts on the witness stand decrying the excessive force if they thought it was necessary.   

https://www.foxnews.com/us/derek-ch...olis-police-union-12-lawyer-team-george-floyd


----------



## oldiebutgoody

digifoss said:


> The jury, and the judge, were coersed.  The verdict may have been the right one, but whether it was or was not, there was coersion going on, and a lot of it and no steps were taken to prevent, or even reduce it.





Kindly supply us with evidence to back that up.  I have a law degree and we can use it to file an appeal - the police union will pay us plenty for it.


----------



## digifoss

oldiebutgoody said:


> Kindly supply us with evidence to back that up.  I have a law degree and we can use it to file an appeal - the police union will pay us plenty for it.



Evidence ?  All you had to do is look at the MSM during the trial, or listen to one or more politicians posturing about the verdict, do you think none of the jurors felt like there would be violence in the street, even considered the possibility of violence directed at them,  if anything but a guilty verdict was returned. ? Maybe that's not the legal definition of coersion but it seems like it to me.


----------



## Della

Dana said:


> However, I understand, many young black females suffer rape, are bullied into having sex etc, so education is also necessary. What to do?


Go to the drug store for the morning after pill.  From $10 to $40  at CVS.


Ruthanne said:


> I doubt that.


My remark about people wanting to stone Chauvin for his mistake, was in reply to someone who said Floyd had made mistakes, but only we without sin should stone him.  I was replying to her in the same use of "mistake" and "stoning" as she did.  We were both speaking in metaphor.  No one is really stoning anyone.


----------



## Sunny

digifoss said:


> Evidence ?  All you had to do is look at the MSM during the trial, or listen to one or more politicians posturing about the verdict, do you think none of the jurors felt like there would be violence in the street, even considered the possibility of violence directed at them,  if anything but a guilty verdict was returned. ? Maybe that's not the legal definition of coersion but it seems like it to me.


That's got to be the silliest "defense" of a clearly guilty person that I have ever heard. Who threatened any kind of violence in the street?  Was it the mob that stormed the U.S. Capitol and killed 5 people?  No? Wrong mob?  Who, then?

If jurors really reached their verdict based on fear of some hypothetical "violence," that would be the end of our legal system. The threat of mob rule would make our laws for us, and determine who gets sent to prison and who doesn't.  That would mean the end of freedom and democracy in this country, and would usher in a period of fascism ruling over a terrified citizenry.

If a verdict results in violence, that violence has to be dealt with, _when it happens.  _Shaking in our shoes because of the "possibility of violence" resulting from the forgiveness of a murder of an unarmed black man, is cowardice. Thank God the jury had enough guts to stand up for what was right. And the suggestion that they were influenced by the threat of violence is absolutely ridiculous.


----------



## MarciKS

@Sunny good post. However, I can see where the jury could be concerned about their safety after. How much you wanna bet that didn't come up when they were deliberating? If it were me I'd have been concerned about it.


----------



## ohioboy

rgp said:


> Once again you reply with scenarios that do not apply to this debate.



Okay Mr. technical, here is something that does. Do you believe Chauvin's actions were in any way, shape or form related to Floyd's death?


----------



## fuzzybuddy

I don't really care that Floyd had kids 'without benefit of clergy". He was a guy, who was arrested, and murdered. You can nit pick Floyd's life, but that doesn't change his murder, and the guilty conviction.. BTW, it was  a murder that was "without benefit of clergy".


----------



## digifoss

Sunny said:


> That's got to be the silliest "defense" of a clearly guilty person that I have ever heard. Who threatened any kind of violence in the street?  Was it the mob that stormed the U.S. Capitol and killed 5 people?  No? Wrong mob?  Who, then?
> 
> If jurors really reached their verdict based on fear of some hypothetical "violence," that would be the end of our legal system. The threat of mob rule would make our laws for us, and determine who gets sent to prison and who doesn't.  That would mean the end of freedom and democracy in this country, and would usher in a period of fascism ruling over a terrified citizenry.
> 
> If a verdict results in violence, that violence has to be dealt with, _when it happens.  _Shaking in our shoes because of the "possibility of violence" resulting from the forgiveness of a murder of an unarmed black man, is cowardice. Thank God the jury had enough guts to stand up for what was right. And the suggestion that they were influenced by the threat of violence is absolutely ridiculous.


Slow down Sunny, you are reading way to much into what I posted.  I offered no defense of Chauvin.  I never said the jury bought into the influence-peddling and pressuring of the msm and certain elected officials, what I called coercion, to reach their verdict, and I never said the jury reached the wrong verdict.


----------



## Butterfly

What really bugs me is to hear (and not just on this forum) that so many folks think it is somehow more OK to take the life of a person with a checkered past than it would be to take the life of a saint.  It isn't.

Who or what Mr. Floyd was or is is totally irrelevant to the question of whether Chauvin unlawfully took the life of Mr. Floyd.  Whether the dead person was Charles Manson or Mother Theresa, the question is exactly the same.


----------



## Shalimar

Butterfly said:


> What really bugs me is to hear (and not just on this forum) that so many folks think it is somehow more OK to take the life of a person with a checkered past than it would be to take the life of a saint.  It isn't.
> 
> Who or what Mr. Floyd was or is is totally irrelevant to the question of whether Chauvin unlawfully took the life of Mr. Floyd.  Whether the dead person was Charles Manson or Mother Theresa, the question is exactly the same.


QFT.


----------



## Buckeye

Butterfly said:


> What really bugs me is to hear (and not just on this forum) that so many folks think it is somehow more OK to take the life of a person with a checkered past than it would be to take the life of a saint.  It isn't.
> 
> Who or what Mr. Floyd was or is is totally irrelevant to the question of whether Chauvin unlawfully took the life of Mr. Floyd.  Whether the dead person was Charles Manson or Mother Theresa, the question is exactly the same.


And what really bugs me is to hear that so many folks don't believe Chauvin deserved a fair trial, with a jury that is shielded from exhortation from public officials to find a guilty verdict regardless of the facts presented in the court room.

What Chauvin did or didn't do is irrelevant to the question of whether he had a fair trial or not.  Charles Manson or Mother Theresa each deserve the same fair trial, and so did Chauvin.


----------



## Sunny

> And what really bugs me is to hear that so many folks don't believe Chauvin deserved a fair trial, with a jury that is shielded from exhortation from public officials to find a guilty verdict regardless of the facts presented in the court room.


Can you show me where anyone on this forum has suggested any of those things?

Who said Chauvin didn't deserve a fair trial?

Who said the jury should be shielded from pressure by "public officials" to find a guilty verdict?

For that matter, what public officials (I presume you mean the prosecution) suggested that they have to find a guilty verdict regardless of the facts presented in the courtroom?  As far as I understand it, the main "fact" was that 9-minute video. Wasn't that enough?


----------



## Buckeye

Sunny said:


> Can you show me where anyone on this forum has suggested any of those things?
> 
> Who said Chauvin didn't deserve a fair trial?
> 
> Who said the jury should be shielded from pressure by "public officials" to find a guilty verdict?
> 
> For that matter, what public officials (I presume you mean the prosecution) suggested that they have to find a guilty verdict regardless of the facts presented in the courtroom?  *As far as I understand it, the main "fact" was that 9-minute video. Wasn't that enough*?



No, the 9 minute video was not enough, and if you think it is, then you are okay with him not getting a fair trial, or any trial at all.  And, yes, the jury should be shielded from pressure by elected officials outside the courtroom (Mad Max, etc) to find a guilty verdict.  That was not done, and will most likely provide a valid basis for Chauvin's lawyers to appeal the verdict.   Had he been given a fair trial and found guilty, it would be mostly over now, but instead will drag out for a couple more years.  At any rate, at this point the verdict is tainted.


----------



## StarSong

Buckeye said:


> No, the 9 minute video was not enough, and if you think it is, then you are okay with him not getting a fair trial, or any trial at all.  And, yes, the jury should be shielded from pressure by elected officials outside the courtroom (Mad Max, etc) to find a guilty verdict.  That was not done, and will most likely provide a valid basis for Chauvin's lawyers to appeal the verdict.   Had he been given a fair trial and found guilty, it would be mostly over now, but instead will drag out for a couple more years.  At any rate, at this point the verdict is tainted.


I must have missed all that expert testimony from the defense and Chauvin's witness stand explanations to dispute the video evidence from the police body cams and witnesses.


----------



## Buckeye

StarSong said:


> I must have missed all that expert testimony from the defense and Chauvin's witness stand explanations to dispute the video evidence from the police body cams and witnesses.


{sigh}  Again, that is not the point. The video is not the point.  George Floyd's criminal history is not the point. Do you think Chauvin received a fair trial?  I'm not asking if you think he is guilty or not, but simply do you think he received a fair trial.


----------



## StarSong

Buckeye said:


> {sigh}  Again, that is not the point. The video is not the point.  George Floyd's criminal history is not the point. Do you think Chauvin received a fair trial?  I'm not asking if you think he is guilty or not, but simply do you think he received a fair trial.


I do.  Simply because his defense mostly had nothing to say doesn't mean it wasn't a fair trial.  It meant the evidence of his guilt was overwhelming.


----------



## RadishRose

Buckeye said:


> (Mad Max, etc)


----------



## Buckeye

StarSong said:


> I do.  Simply because his defense mostly had nothing to say doesn't mean it wasn't a fair trial.  It meant the evidence of his guilt was overwhelming.


Then we will just have to disagree - I contend that the jury was tainted by not being sequestered, and therefore the trial and the verdict are tainted.


----------



## Sunny

> No, the 9 minute video was not enough, and if you think it is, then you are okay with him not getting a fair trial, or any trial at all.


Whoa, let's hold it for a moment!  You are saying that 9 minutes of watching a defendant indisputably choking an unarmed, helpless man to death, in spite of his pleading for his life, is "not enough" evidence to convict him?!  I'd like to know what would be!

Usually, this type of trial relies heavily on verbal descriptions of what happened, given by witnesses.  This trial had those also. But the visual evidence that was presented showed the guilt of this sadistic murderer more clearly than any other evidence I have ever heard of. It was demonstrated loud and clear, right in front of that jury.

His defense had the opportunity to present their case. The fact that they chose not to leaves the ball clearly in the court of the prosecution. He did not get a "fair trial?"  Throwing in that "sequestered" red herring is just an attempt to deflect attention. His trial was a model of fairness.

I have to wonder:  With such overwhelming evidence that he was guilty as charged, why on earth would you be defending him by introducing irrelevancies like this, and suggesting (without any evidence, as far as I can see) that the jury was somehow threatened?

Do you believe that Chauvin killed Floyd?  If so, do you believe that killing him was justified and necessary?  Is this the way you would like the police to behave toward you or your family the next time you are pulled over for a broken taillight, or just because the cop doesn't like your looks? Above all, do you believe the police are supposed to be executioners?

Maybe it's time to stop the Talmudic dithering about jury management, step back, take a deep breath, and look at the big picture.  Thank God the jury had enough sense to see what happened, and probably why.


----------



## Della

Butterfly said:


> What really bugs me is to hear (and not just on this forum) that so many folks think it is somehow more OK to take the life of a person with a checkered past than it would be to take the life of a saint.  It isn't.


I haven't seen anyone say that.  I think his life is just as valuable as Mother Theresa's, and as a Christian, I might even think it's more important that he live longer than Saint Theresa before entering the afterlife.

 What you might have misunderstood from me and others is the belief that his past, while having no bearing on the value of his life,  was _relevant to this trial_. 

That's because,  if the police knew his background, it would influence how they approached him.  Put simply, they would have been more afraid of him than they would have been of me (when they pulled me over for tags last year) because I have no priors and would not be as likely to shoot them. That's a fear police have to face several times a day. Floyd's history of violent crime and his non-compliance on the May 25th,_ do_ speak to how much use of force was reasonable and lawful  with that particular person.


----------



## Pepper

If his priors were immediately known he would have been beaten with a stick before having his neck stepped on.  Naw, Della, doesn't pass the smell test.


----------



## 911

Sunny said:


> Whoa, let's hold it for a moment!  You are saying that 9 minutes of watching a defendant indisputably choking an unarmed, helpless man to death, in spite of his pleading for his life, is "not enough" evidence to convict him?!  I'd like to know what would be!
> 
> Usually, this type of trial relies heavily on verbal descriptions of what happened, given by witnesses.  This trial had those also. But the visual evidence that was presented showed the guilt of this sadistic murderer more clearly than any other evidence I have ever heard of. It was demonstrated loud and clear, right in front of that jury.
> 
> His defense had the opportunity to present their case. The fact that they chose not to leaves the ball clearly in the court of the prosecution. He did not get a "fair trial?"  Throwing in that "sequestered" red herring is just an attempt to deflect attention. His trial was a model of fairness.
> 
> I have to wonder:  With such overwhelming evidence that he was guilty as charged, why on earth would you be defending him by introducing irrelevancies like this, and suggesting (without any evidence, as far as I can see) that the jury was somehow threatened?
> 
> Do you believe that Chauvin killed Floyd?  If so, do you believe that killing him was justified and necessary?  Is this the way you would like the police to behave toward you or your family the next time you are pulled over for a broken taillight, or just because the cop doesn't like your looks? Above all, do you believe the police are supposed to be executioners?
> 
> Maybe it's time to stop the Talmudic dithering about jury management, step back, take a deep breath, and look at the big picture.  Thank God the jury had enough sense to see what happened, and probably why.


Some of y’all have to use smaller words. I had to look up the meaning of “Talmudic.”


----------



## Don M.

All the publicity this arrest/death, and other recent police involved shootings, in recent months, have received, is going to have future "side effects" that may affect many of our cities in coming years.  Already, there are a number of reports of police resigning, and many cities are having trouble finding new recruits.  As more and more honest police leave the force, and many more are reluctant to get involved, I can see the crime rates climbing, and the general safety of our people and cities declining.  

The Only "winners" in this mess will be the criminals.


----------



## Della

I couldn't agree more with Don M.  A friend of mine is the mother of the local police chief. She, her son and their whole family are wonderful examples of service to the community.  Her sister and her grown son just moved here (Ohio)  all the way from California because her son is also a police officer and was frankly afraid to work in that state anymore.

Columbus has a case right now of a police officer shooting a 16 year-old girl  -- the videos make it pretty clear that if he hadn't shot her she would have stabbed another young girl, possibly killing her.  Most of the major news outlets first reported this case without mentioning the fact that he probably saved an innocent girl's life.

NPR reported it yesterday, (just the first part)  as another example of police brutality with follow-up "man on the street" remarks  about how awful the police are.

NPR used to be my happy place.  Intelligent, civilized people discussing things politely without political bias.  That all ended last May 25th when it chose it's narrative and hasn't veered from it.


----------



## StarSong

If certain police officers are resigning because they fear cracks in the blue wall of silence, and less public appetite/acceptance for bullying tactics, then the public will be well rid of them.  

After the Rodney King beating and the consent decree between the police department and the federal government, LAPD has become a far better police force.  Not perfect, but far better.  

One can only hope that troubled PDs - including Minneapolis - will move into the 21st century, with or without being forced by the courts and federal gov't.


----------



## Della

911 said:


> Some of y’all have to use smaller words. I had to look up the meaning of “Talmudic.”


LOL  I learned about Talmudic dithering way back when I read, "The Chosen."  I knew instantly I would have loved that. My Methodist church once had a "read the Bible in a year" class that I joined hoping for something like Talmudic dithering for Christians, but it just resulted in my pastor calling me the most argumentative person ever (can you believe it?)


----------



## ohioboy

Buckeye said:


> {sigh}  Again, that is not the point. The video is not the point.  George Floyd's criminal history is not the point. Do you think Chauvin received a fair trial?  I'm not asking if you think he is guilty or not, but simply do you think he received a fair trial.



I think he received a fair trial, yes. Criminal trials are not toned to legal perfection.

Even if the Jury were caged, the Congresswoman's comments, even if picked up somehow, were clearly not sufficient enough to declare a mistrial.  Every Murder conviction is appealed. If the trial was unfair it is up to the Appellate Attorney (s) to convince the Court of Appeals. Of course you never know how a COA will rule, but the weight of the evidence here is an eyewitness type, the Jury itself saw it. Now, public hostility toward a defendant that intimidates a jury is, or course, a classic due process violation. If that is your argument, then the COA will determine that by existing case law and if it was a factor for reversal, but intimidation is more than just anger.


----------



## Sunny

OK, this is off the subject, but for those who didn't understand what I meant by Talmudic dithering, here's a short explanation:

The Talmud is a body of Jewish philosophical writings interpreting the Torah (the Old Testament of the Bible), mainly to codify the laws that Jews are supposed to live by. (Those Jews who are "observant," of course.)  For many centuries, rabbis have argued and studied these laws, often contradicting each other, and sometimes engaging in very spirited arguments about very tiny diffeences of opinion. Della, I can just imagine the reaction of the Methodist church to any of this stuff!  

So, where does that fit in?  Well, in view of the enormity of the crime, the overwhelming evidence of Chauvin's guilt, the agreement by just about everyone that this was horrifying, the man is as guilty as sin, etc...... in view of all that, trying to make a case that this was not a fair trial because the jury was not sequestered, is nothing short of Talmudic. I can just see those old rabbis of past centuries, trying to make a case based on jury sequestration, arguing for weeks on end.  

"Talmudic" is a perfect word for it.


----------



## Buckeye

Sunny said:


> Whoa, let's hold it for a moment!  You are saying that 9 minutes of watching a defendant indisputably choking an unarmed, helpless man to death, in spite of his pleading for his life, is "not enough" evidence to convict him?!  I'd like to know what would be!
> 
> Usually, this type of trial relies heavily on verbal descriptions of what happened, given by witnesses.  This trial had those also. But the visual evidence that was presented showed the guilt of this sadistic murderer more clearly than any other evidence I have ever heard of. It was demonstrated loud and clear, right in front of that jury.
> 
> His defense had the opportunity to present their case. The fact that they chose not to leaves the ball clearly in the court of the prosecution. He did not get a "fair trial?"  Throwing in that "sequestered" red herring is just an attempt to deflect attention. His trial was a model of fairness.
> 
> I have to wonder:  With such overwhelming evidence that he was guilty as charged, why on earth would you be defending him by introducing irrelevancies like this, and suggesting (without any evidence, as far as I can see) that the jury was somehow threatened?
> 
> Do you believe that Chauvin killed Floyd?  If so, do you believe that killing him was justified and necessary?  Is this the way you would like the police to behave toward you or your family the next time you are pulled over for a broken taillight, or just because the cop doesn't like your looks? Above all, do you believe the police are supposed to be executioners?
> 
> Maybe it's time to stop the Talmudic dithering about jury management, step back, take a deep breath, and look at the big picture.  Thank God the jury had enough sense to see what happened, and probably why.


Again, hopefully for the last time, it isn't about the evidence, or lack of evidence, or the 9 minute tape, or Floyd's criminal past, or what the verdict was, or what I believe about what Chauvin did.  It is simply about everybody being entitled to a fair trial.  I'm not defending Chauvin, and could care less if you hang him tomorrow or give him the Medal of Honor.  The jury was not sequestered and certainly was exposed to the implicit and explicit threats of what would happen unless Chauvin was found guilty, which by itself taints the jury and therefore their verdict. That's not dithering, that's just expecting the courts to do their job.


----------



## Buckeye

ohioboy said:


> I think he received a fair trial, yes. Criminal trials are not toned to legal perfection.
> 
> Even if the Jury were caged, the Congresswoman's comments, even if picked up somehow, were clearly not sufficient enough to declare a mistrial.  Every Murder conviction is appealed. If the trial was unfair it is up to the Appellate Attorney (s) to convince the Court of Appeals. Of course you never know how a COA will rule, but the weight of the evidence here is an eyewitness type, the Jury itself saw it.* Now, public hostility toward a defendant that intimidates a jury is, or course, a classic due process violation. If that is your argument, then the COA will determine that by existing case law and if it was a factor for reversal, but intimidation is more than just anger.*


And it sure looks to me like this case fits that description of events, and most certainly is a due process violation.  It really is just that simple.


----------



## ohioboy

Buckeye said:


> And it sure looks to me like this case fits that description of events, and most certainly is a due process violation.  It really is just that simple.



I did a little research on not sequestering the Jury and the issue of a fair trial. The facts seem to be it is not prejudicial to the defendant if the Jury is to be able to come and go, but one Law Professor said basically there is no universal litmus test. So, is it _possible_ an appeals court will be swayed by it? Time holds the answer. You do not have an unvalid point, but my personal opinion is, it satisfied Due Process.


----------



## Don M.

Buckeye said:


> And it sure looks to me like this case fits that description of events, and most certainly is a due process violation.  It really is just that simple.



Anyone who has watched that 9 minute video would most likely agree that Chauvin acted irresponsibly, and his actions were the primary cause of Floyds death.  However, IMO, the jury Had to be affected by all the riots that have taken place in recent months.  Subconsciously, they Had to be thinking about what would happen to Minneapolis if they didn't convict this rouge cop.  I'm sure there is/was an army of protesters just waiting to erupt if any leniency was shown in their verdict.


----------



## ohioboy

You never know what exactly is inside a person's head in a circus like this one.


----------



## Butterfly

Buckeye said:


> Again, hopefully for the last time, it isn't about the evidence, or lack of evidence, or the 9 minute tape, or Floyd's criminal past, or what the verdict was, or what I believe about what Chauvin did.  It is simply about everybody being entitled to a fair trial.  I'm not defending Chauvin, and could care less if you hang him tomorrow or give him the Medal of Honor.  The jury was not sequestered and certainly was exposed to the implicit and explicit threats of what would happen unless Chauvin was found guilty, which by itself taints the jury and therefore their verdict. That's not dithering, that's just expecting the courts to do their job.


The jury would have had to have been sequestered for the whole time between the death of Mr Floyd and the trial  in order not to have known what was going on in the public arena re the death of Mr. Floyd.  Public feeling didn't change significantly, if at all, during the trial itself.  I seriously doubt the COA would overturn on the basis you are arguing.


----------



## ohioboy

Butterfly said:


> The jury would have had to have been sequestered for the whole time between the death of Mr Floyd and the trial  in order not to have known what was going on in the public arena re the death of Mr. Floyd.  Public feeling didn't change significantly, if at all, during the trial itself.  I seriously doubt the COA would overturn on the basis you are arguing.



Right, this case was news around the Globe, the Martian Rover probably picked it up too.

Fatty Arbuckle had a better chance to get off than Derek boy and he got nailed, too much press, everyone knew, it is a fact that can't be undone.


----------



## Buckeye

ohioboy said:


> I did a little research on not sequestering the Jury and the issue of a fair trial. The facts seem to be it is not prejudicial to the defendant if the Jury is to be able to come and go, but one Law Professor said basically there is no universal litmus test. So, is it _possible_ an appeals court will be swayed by it? Time holds the answer. You do not have an unvalid point, but my personal opinion is, it satisfied Due Process.


Here's another lawyer's opinion:

Alan Dershowitz


----------



## StarSong

I admit to being surprised that the jury wasn't sequestered during the trial, especially since it was likely to be quick because the witness list was so short.


----------



## hollydolly

....the fact that there was proof positive not only of the killing but of unprecedented coverage   prior to the police even arriving , of Floyds' actions ,  ... sequestered or not , Chauvin  was hung by his own petard  without a shadow of a doubt.


----------



## Sunny

Exactly. In what way could the jury have been unfairly swayed by writers, commentators, politicians, or anyone else, after they had seen exactly what happened with their own eyes?  Introducing that "sequestered" argument sounds like a feeble attempt to say, "Pay no attention to that man behind the curtain."

Just found this on Wikipedia:

In 2021, the jury in the Derek Chauvin murder trial was partially sequestered during the trial itself, and fully sequestered during deliberations. While the trial proceedings were ongoing, jurors were permitted to go home overnight, but parked in a secure location and were escorted between it and a private entrance to the courthouse. While at home the jurors were not monitored. The jurors were monitored at all time while in the courthouse, including during breaks and meals.[6] The jury was fully sequestered once deliberations began.[7]


​


----------



## Chet

Not being sequestered brings in the question...was he found guilty *beyond a shadow of a doubt *if there was even the slightest inkling that not being sequestered influence the jurors. There is the slightest inkling, otherwise it would not be being talked about here. I say mistrial.

As for Derek Chauvin, who here has not gone to work, and in the performance of your duties, you screwed up unintentially?


----------



## Aunt Marg

Chet said:


> Not being sequestered brings in the question...was he found guilty *beyond a shadow of a doubt *if there was even the slightest inkling that not being sequestered influence the jurors. There is the slightest inkling, otherwise it would not be being talked about here. I say mistrial.
> 
> *As for Derek Chauvin, who here has not gone to work, and in the performance of your duties, you screwed up?*


Well... there's screwing up, and then there's _SCREWING UP, CHAUVIN STYLE_.


----------



## Chet

Aunt Marg said:


> Well... there's screwing up, and then there's _SCREWING UP, CHAUVIN STYLE_.


Empathy Aunt Marge, empathy.


----------



## StarSong

Chet said:


> Not being sequestered brings in the question...was he found guilty *beyond a shadow of a doubt *if there was even the slightest inkling that not being sequestered influence the jurors. There is the slightest inkling, otherwise it would not be being talked about here. I say mistrial.
> 
> As for Derek Chauvin, *who here has not gone to work, and in the performance of your duties, you screwed up unintentially?*


Sure, but not for nine minutes with my knee on someone's neck while people were screaming at me that I'm killing a man.


----------



## digifoss

Chet said:


> Not being sequestered brings in the question...was he found guilty *beyond a shadow of a doubt *if there was even the slightest inkling that not being sequestered influence the jurors. There is the slightest inkling, otherwise it would not be being talked about here. I say mistrial.
> 
> As for Derek Chauvin, who here has not gone to work, and in the performance of your duties, you screwed up unintentially?


The actual measure here is beyone a reasonable doubt Chet...  but that is often stated the way you did here.


----------



## Sunny

Chet said:


> Not being sequestered brings in the question...was he found guilty *beyond a shadow of a doubt *if there was even the slightest inkling that not being sequestered influence the jurors. There is the slightest inkling, otherwise it would not be being talked about here. I say mistrial.
> 
> As for Derek Chauvin, who here has not gone to work, and in the performance of your duties, you screwed up unintentially?


Chet, he was found guilty beyond a shadow of a doubt. What "doubt" has anyone introduced as to his guilt, since it could be seen by the jurors with their own eyes?


----------



## fuzzybuddy

I'm sorry, but it is difficult for a defense team to refute multiple videos, and eye witness accounts. It was not just ONE video. The fact is Chauvin did what he was accused of. And he was judge guilty, by his peers.  It's time to get over the fact Chauvin is guilty, PERIOD. Some can read all kinds of extraneous elements into the trail.  And during the trial, was every "i" doted, and every "T" crossed? Maybe not, but did that impact the verdict, and facts in the trail?  No. And as to his quilt, Chauvin attempted to plead to 3rd degree murder. Really, how do you explain kneeling on Floyd's dead body for three minutes more? How frikken more "compliant" can you get".  The prosecution put on a factual, legal case, and because the defense did not prevail, does not translate into a questionable. nor unfair trial.

It is also quite evident that racism played a role in this event, and the trial.


----------



## Chet

fuzzybuddy said:


> I'm sorry, but it is difficult for a defense team to refute multiple videos, and eye witness accounts. It was not just ONE video. The fact is Chauvin did what he was accused of.* And he was judge guilty, by his peers.*  It's time to get over the fact Chauvin is guilty, PERIOD. Some can read all kinds of extraneous elements into the trail.  And during the trial, was every "i" doted, and every "T" crossed? Maybe not, but did that impact the verdict, and facts in the trail?  No. And as to his quilt, Chauvin attempted to plead to 3rd degree murder. Really, how do you explain kneeling on Floyd's dead body for three minutes more? How frikken more "compliant" can you get".  The prosecution put on a factual, legal case, and because the defense did not prevail, does not translate into a questionable. nor unfair trial.
> 
> *It is also quite evident that racism played a role in this event, and the trial.*


His actual peers would be others in law enforcement.
Racism is not mentioned in the charges, otherwise he would have been charged of a hate crime.


----------



## Pepper

Chet said:


> His actual peers would be others in law enforcement.


Not for a jury.  Your peers are fellow human beings.


----------



## ohioboy

Buckeye said:


> Here's another lawyer's opinion:
> 
> Alan Dershowitz



Alan of course has a brilliant legal mind, but for me he's a little controversial with his opinions. In this case though I really don't see the COA vacating and remanding. It will be the same trial in a mirror, press publicity and public interaction will be even worse.


----------



## Buckeye

ohioboy said:


> Alan of course has a brilliant legal mind, but for me he's a little controversial with his opinions. In this case though I really don't see the COA vacating and remanding. *It will be the same trial in a mirror, press publicity and public interaction will be even worse.*


Exactly, which is why it was of paramount importance for the courts to get everything right on the first trial.  Every defendant is entitled to due process and a fair trial, and I would submit that the worse the crime the greater the importance of making sure there are no lose ends.  The courts failed to do so for Chauvin, and yet a number of folks on here and others are okay with that because the agree with the verdict.


----------



## mellowyellow

Dr. David Fowler is a retired forensic pathologist and former chief medical examiner of the state of Maryland.


_Now that the trial is over, the American medical community has turned on Dr. Fowler after being alarmed by his testimonies during the four-week legal process.

Dr. David Fowler, a retired forensic pathologist and former chief medical examiner of the state of Maryland, was put on the witness stand as a medical expert by Chauvin’s defence lawyer, Eric Nelson.

In court he said Mr Floyd’s death was caused by underlying health conditions and illegal drugs — conclusions that contradicted those of medical experts introduced by the prosecution.

Washington, D.C.’s former chief medical examiner Dr. Roger Mitchell Jr., wrote an open letter calling for investigations into Dr. Fowler’s medical license, as well as a review of the Maryland medical examiner’s office under Dr. Fowler’s leadership. *At least 458 physicians across the USA have signed the letter.*_


----------



## fuzzybuddy

Buckeye, what exactly do you believe was the error in the trial? I don't pretend to know the law, but I do know that if there are errors in the trial, they have to be so significant that they would have caused the jury to acquit, or somehow alter their verdict.. Trials can have errors, we are human.  In the Manson trail, Nixon made public comments as to Manson's guilt. The defense wanted a mistrial, but  they were dismissed. I think they were also dismissed on appeal.   
What errors did you notice?


----------



## Aunt Marg

mellowyellow said:


> View attachment 161809
> Dr. David Fowler is a retired forensic pathologist and former chief medical examiner of the state of Maryland.
> 
> 
> _Now that the trial is over, the American medical community has turned on Dr. Fowler after being alarmed by his testimonies during the four-week legal process.
> 
> Dr. David Fowler, a retired forensic pathologist and former chief medical examiner of the state of Maryland, was put on the witness stand as a medical expert by Chauvin’s defence lawyer, Eric Nelson.
> 
> In court he said Mr Floyd’s death was caused by underlying health conditions and illegal drugs — conclusions that contradicted those of medical experts introduced by the prosecution.
> 
> Washington, D.C.’s former chief medical examiner Dr. Roger Mitchell Jr., wrote an open letter calling for investigations into Dr. Fowler’s medical license, as well as a review of the Maryland medical examiner’s office under Dr. Fowler’s leadership. At least 458 physicians across the USA have signed the letter._


Good on the 458 physicians, although my opinion is, too little - too late.

Where were all the physicians when this quack was still CME.


----------



## Buckeye

Jury should have been sequestered the entire time.  IIRC, Manson jury was sequestered as soon as they were sworn in.


----------



## ohioboy

Buckeye said:


> Jury should have been sequestered the entire time.  IIRC, Manson jury was sequestered as soon as they were sworn in.



The jury still has to come and go from the hotel. They can hear people yelling, making immoral comments etc. They can see mobs, feel anger in the air, etc., unavoidable.

Aside from that, what elements do you think were contributory, he had effective assistance of Counsel, a speedy trail, available witnesses. In other words, on Appeal, they must list the reasons for appeal, what would your Assignments of error be? Is non-sequestering the only one? Were any objections by the defense overruled when they should have been sustained? Were any objections by the Prosecution sustained when they should have been overruled?


----------



## Buckeye

ohioboy said:


> The jury still has to come and go from the hotel. They can hear people yelling, making immoral comments etc. They can see mobs, feel anger in the air, etc., unavoidable.
> 
> Aside from that, what elements do you think were contributory, he had effective assistance of Counsel, a speedy trail, available witnesses. In other words, on Appeal, they must list the reasons for appeal, what would your Assignments of error be? Is non-sequestering the only one? Were any objections by the defense overruled when they should have been sustained? Were any objections by the Prosecution sustained when they should have been overruled?


lol - you and Mr Dershowitz can argue about the details.


----------



## Butterfly

Buckeye said:


> lol - you and Mr Dershowitz can argue about the details.


Such "details" as Ohioboy listed are things that can actually get cases remanded and/or reversed on appeal.


----------



## Sunny

mellowyellow said:


> View attachment 161809
> Dr. David Fowler is a retired forensic pathologist and former chief medical examiner of the state of Maryland.
> 
> 
> _Now that the trial is over, the American medical community has turned on Dr. Fowler after being alarmed by his testimonies during the four-week legal process.
> 
> Dr. David Fowler, a retired forensic pathologist and former chief medical examiner of the state of Maryland, was put on the witness stand as a medical expert by Chauvin’s defence lawyer, Eric Nelson.
> 
> In court he said Mr Floyd’s death was caused by underlying health conditions and illegal drugs — conclusions that contradicted those of medical experts introduced by the prosecution.
> 
> Washington, D.C.’s former chief medical examiner Dr. Roger Mitchell Jr., wrote an open letter calling for investigations into Dr. Fowler’s medical license, as well as a review of the Maryland medical examiner’s office under Dr. Fowler’s leadership. *At least 458 physicians across the USA have signed the letter.*_


Ye gads. this guy had a medical license and was my state's chief medical examiner?  And he expects anyone to believe that Mr. Floyd just happened to die of his underlying health conditions at the exact moment that someone was kneeling on his neck, choking the life out of him?

How old is this "doctor," anyway?  Has he lost any medical judgement he ever had?  Or, er, could he have been paid off?   If that was really his testimony, how could anyone in their right mind be expected to believe that version of what happened?


----------



## Buckeye

Butterfly said:


> Such "details" as Ohioboy listed are things that can actually get cases remanded and/or reversed on appeal.


Then please feel free to join them in the debate!  To me, the jury was tainted, and that alone is enough.  But I'm no lawyer, so you great legal minds can hash it out.


----------



## digifoss

Buckeye said:


> Then please feel free to join them in the debate!  To me, the jury was tainted, and that alone is enough.  But I'm no lawyer, so you great legal minds can hash it out.


Attempts were made to taint the jury.  It's impossible to say whether they were [successful] or were not, but they probably would have arrived at the same verdict either way.  Any appeal will be a difficult uphill battle.


----------



## Nosy Bee-54

I haven't read all the pages so don't know if anyone has posted about the 2017 incident.
People like to denigrate victims because they have a past but Chauvin is no choirboy.

"According to ABC News, the videos, from Sept. 4, 2017, allegedly showed Chauvin striking a Black teenager in the head so hard that the boy needed stitches, then allegedly holding the boy down with his knee for nearly 17 minutes, and allegedly ignoring complaints from the boy that he couldn't breathe."

"The judge presiding over the case agreed with Nelson that the jury should not hear about the 2017 incident, so prosecutors were blocked from bringing it up during Chauvin's trial."

https://kstp.com/news/after-chauvin...r-2017-incident-involving-black-teen/6084716/

Now that the DOJ is investigating the Minneapolis Police Dept. hopefully Chauvin will be prosecuted for this incident too. You just have to look at Chauvin's eyes while he is kneeling on Floyd to see the man is psycho.


----------



## hollydolly

Nosy Bee-54 said:


> I haven't read all the pages so don't know if anyone has posted about the 2017 incident.
> People like to denigrate victims because they have a past but Chauvin is no choirboy.
> 
> "According to ABC News, the videos, from Sept. 4, 2017, allegedly showed Chauvin striking a Black teenager in the head so hard that the boy needed stitches, then allegedly holding the boy down with his knee for nearly 17 minutes, and allegedly ignoring complaints from the boy that he couldn't breathe."
> 
> "The judge presiding over the case agreed with Nelson that the jury should not hear about the 2017 incident, so prosecutors were blocked from bringing it up during Chauvin's trial."
> 
> https://kstp.com/news/after-chauvin...r-2017-incident-involving-black-teen/6084716/
> 
> Now that the DOJ is investigating the Minneapolis Police Dept. hopefully Chauvin will be prosecuted for this incident too. You just have to look at Chauvin's eyes while he is kneeling on Floyd to see the man is psycho.


Yes he had a total of 18 official complaints aginst him during his career


----------



## Pink Biz

Sunny said:


> Ye gads. this guy had a medical license and was my state's chief medical examiner?  And he expects anyone to believe that Mr. Floyd just happened to die of his underlying health conditions at the exact moment that someone was kneeling on his neck, choking the life out of him?
> 
> How old is this "doctor," anyway?  Has he lost any medical judgement he ever had?  Or, er, could he have been paid off?   If that was really his testimony, how could anyone in their right mind be expected to believe that version of what happened?


*Even before his Chauvin testimony, this bimbo was being investigated for a strangely similar case in which he's accused of covering up for the cops.

https://theintercept.com/2021/04/04/derek-chauvin-george-floyd-trial-anton-black/*


----------



## ohioboy

Nosy Bee-54 said:


> You just have to look at Chauvin's eyes while he is kneeling on Floyd to see the man is psycho.



This is 100% factual. I'm Chauvin and here is what I'm thinking while kneeling on Floyd's neck.

"Look at all them fools telling me to get off his neck, ha. I'm next to God, I'm a police officer, no civilian tells me what to do."


----------



## Della

I don't think he was psycho, just arrogant.  I can't look at people and tell what they're thinking but my guess would be:

"Just look at them fools telling me to get off his neck.  I've done this for as long as 17 minutes and the guy was fine afterward."


----------



## win231

Sunny said:


> Ye gads. this guy had a medical license and was my state's chief medical examiner?  And he expects anyone to believe that Mr. Floyd just happened to die of his underlying health conditions at the exact moment that someone was kneeling on his neck, choking the life out of him?
> 
> How old is this "doctor," anyway?  Has he lost any medical judgement he ever had?  Or, er, could he have been paid off?   If that was really his testimony, how could anyone in their right mind be expected to believe that version of what happened?


Of course he was paid a fortune for his testimony & he appeared as a defense witness, so naturally he said what he was paid to say.


----------



## ohioboy

win231 said:


> Of course he was paid a fortune for his testimony & he appeared as a defense witness, so naturally he said what he was paid to say.



Expert testimony (cough) always comes at a cost!


----------



## ohioboy

Pepper said:


> Not for a jury.  Your peers are fellow human beings.


Correct, for ALL States.

In part:

Minn. R. Crim. P. 26.02

Rule 26.02 - Jury Selection
*1. Jury List.* The jury list must be composed of persons randomly selected from a fair cross-section of qualified county residents. The jury must be drawn from the jury list.


----------



## Shalimar

I think Chauvin is likely a sociopath


----------



## hollydolly

One of the jurors who convicted Derek Chauvin for the murder of George Floyd last month defended his participation in a BLM protest last summer in Washington, DC, amid speculation it might be grounds for the cop's appeal.

A photo, posted on social media, shows Brandon Mitchell attending an August 28 event to commemorate Martin Luther King Jr's 'I Have a Dream' speech during the 1963 March on Washington. 

It shows Mitchell, a high school basketball coach, standing with two other men and wearing a T-shirt with a picture of King and the words, 'GET YOUR KNEE OFF OUR NECKS' and 'BLM'. He is also wearing a baseball cap printed with Black Lives Matter.

Juror... far right..posing for BLM in August 2020

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...defends-participation-Washington-protest.html


----------



## Gary O'

Shalimar said:


> I think Chauvin is likely a sociopath


Ya think?


----------



## Butterfly

hollydolly said:


> One of the jurors who convicted Derek Chauvin for the murder of George Floyd last month defended his participation in a BLM protest last summer in Washington, DC, amid speculation it might be grounds for the cop's appeal.
> 
> A photo, posted on social media, shows Brandon Mitchell attending an August 28 event to commemorate Martin Luther King Jr's 'I Have a Dream' speech during the 1963 March on Washington.
> 
> It shows Mitchell, a high school basketball coach, standing with two other men and wearing a T-shirt with a picture of King and the words, 'GET YOUR KNEE OFF OUR NECKS' and 'BLM'. He is also wearing a baseball cap printed with Black Lives Matter.
> 
> Juror... far right..posing for BLM in August 2020
> 
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...defends-participation-Washington-protest.html



I doubt that the juror's attendance at some political rally would be considered grounds for appeal.  The law doesn't expect jurors to be hermits priod to being selected.  I would  imagine that the defense would have asked questions about this kind of stuff during_ voire dire.   _

I recently saw a clip of one of the jurors speaking about his service on the jury, and he said that the ONE thing that really convicted Chauvin was the videos of Chauvin and Mr. Floyd during those 9 minutes and however many seconds.  He also said the testimony of the Dr Tobin was also key.


----------



## garyt1957

hollydolly said:


> One of the jurors who convicted Derek Chauvin for the murder of George Floyd last month defended his participation in a BLM protest last summer in Washington, DC, amid speculation it might be grounds for the cop's appeal.
> 
> A photo, posted on social media, shows Brandon Mitchell attending an August 28 event to commemorate Martin Luther King Jr's 'I Have a Dream' speech during the 1963 March on Washington.
> 
> It shows Mitchell, a high school basketball coach, standing with two other men and wearing a T-shirt with a picture of King and the words, 'GET YOUR KNEE OFF OUR NECKS' and 'BLM'. He is also wearing a baseball cap printed with Black Lives Matter.
> 
> Juror... far right..posing for BLM in August 2020
> 
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...defends-participation-Washington-protest.html


Likely grounds for appeal. He should also be convicted of perjury as he lied and said he had no knowledge of the Floyd case. We can't have people lying about their neutrality so they can deliver a predetermined verdict no matter the evidence. Chauvin was very likely to be found guilty no matter the jury. This asshat just gave him a reason for a mistrial and all the money that will be spent on said trial, even if he's convicted again. What a moron.


----------



## garyt1957

Butterfly said:


> I doubt that the juror's attendance at some political rally would be considered grounds for appeal.


The fact that he lied about it will. He perjured himself. Do you really think he was impartial? I hope they hit him with the full consequences of the law. But they won't because of the times we live in.


----------



## Sunny

In a widely publicized case like this, it would be next to impossible to find a jury that had no knowledge of the crime, no opinions about it, etc. I
don't know where attending a rally fits in. But I seriously doubt that a mistrial could be declared for that reason.

Also, that shirt he is wearing looks a bit hokey. I wonder how real that picture is?


----------



## hollydolly

Sunny said:


> In a widely publicized case like this, it would be next to impossible to find a jury that had no knowledge of the crime, no opinions about it, etc. I
> don't know where attending a rally fits in. But I seriously doubt that a mistrial could be declared for that reason.
> 
> Also, that shirt he is wearing looks a bit hokey. I wonder how real that picture is?


we'll find out soon enough


----------



## win231

In our pathetic justice system, everything is grounds for an appeal.


----------



## Keesha

win231 said:


> In our pathetic justice system, everything is grounds for an appeal.


In ‘our’ pathetic justice system, everything is grounds for appeal?

So you are speaking for more than yourself?
Just sayin’!


----------



## ohioboy

garyt1957 said:


> Likely grounds for appeal. He should also be convicted of perjury as he lied and said he had no knowledge of the Floyd case.


You have a link for that quote. If he said that, the Court would know he was lying, so how was he selected?


----------



## hollydolly

ohioboy said:


> You have a link for that quote. If he said that, the Court would know he was lying, so how was he selected?


that's the point, the picture has only recently surfaced since the court case, so the court would have to take him at his word that he had no connection with the case...

quote from the article which has appeared in quite a few publications..''
*Mitchell said he answered 'no' to two questions about demonstrations on the questionnaire sent out before jury selection.'' *

Experts say the revelation could be grounds for the cop's appeal.


----------



## ohioboy

hollydolly said:


> that's the point, the picture has only recently surfaced since the court case, so the court would have to take him at his word that he had no connection with the case...



If the picture was taken before the Floyd case, it can't be about the Floyd case


----------



## hollydolly

ohioboy said:


> If the picture was taken before the Floyd case, it can't be about the Floyd case


it was taken in August 3 months after Floyd was killed, and before the case came to court


----------



## ohioboy

hollydolly said:


> it was taken in August 3 months after Floyd was killed, and before the case came to court



An actual picture or photo magic?


----------



## hollydolly

Who knows..? I'm just the messenger...


----------



## ohioboy

hollydolly said:


> Who knows..? I'm just the messenger..


When and if it is authenticated, we'll see what legal strategy the Appeal Attorney's will take, or even before then, upon Motion to the trial court Judge.


----------



## garyt1957

ohioboy said:


> You have a link for that quote. If he said that, the Court would know he was lying, so how was he selected?


I do not, that was how I heard it reported on the radio, I could have misheard it.


----------



## garyt1957

ohioboy said:


> If the picture was taken before the Floyd case, it can't be about the Floyd case


Since the tee shirt says "get off our necks" or somesuch, I assume it has to be after the Floyd case


----------



## Butterfly

garyt1957 said:


> The fact that he lied about it will. He perjured himself. Do you really think he was impartial? I hope they hit him with the full consequences of the law. But they won't because of the times we live in.



How do you know the juror lied?  To whom did he lie?  Exactly what did he lie about? About attending some event in commemoration of Dr. King's "I Have a Dream" speech?  About having knowledge of the case?  Or are you making the assumption that because the juror is black, that he was incapable of not prejudging the guilt of Chauvin?

To not have any knowledge about the case, a person in the US would practically have had to be unconscious during the time between the death of Mr. Floyd and the trial.  The test isn't whether a juror has heard anything about a case; the test is whether the juror is willing to put what he has heard aside and judge upon the facts presented in court.


----------



## ohioboy

I think if it was after the murder, the shirt would have had Floyd's or Chauvin's picture and one or both names. Why Dr. King concerning neck kneeling?


----------



## Mike

Derek Chauvin, he has applied for a re-trial.

Mike.


----------



## Irwin

Brandon Mitchell said he answered "no" on his juror questionnaire form when asked whether he attended "protests about police use of force or police brutality."

Al Sharpton made a speech about police brutality at the MLK rally, as did family members of police shooting victims. The protest also sought to rally support for enacting the George Floyd Justice in Policing Act. Plus Mitchell was wearing a t-shirt condemning police use of force.

It sure does seem like he lied on the questionnaire.


----------



## Aunt Marg

Mike said:


> Derek Chauvin, he has applied for a re-trial.
> 
> Mike.


They should give him a retrial, straight out the front door of the jail cell he's keeping warm, down on the ground as he did to George Floyd, and a knee placed on his neck for 9 minutes and 30 seconds.


----------



## garyt1957

Butterfly said:


> To not have any knowledge about the case, a person in the US would practically have had to be unconscious during the time between the death of Mr. Floyd and the trial.  The test isn't whether a juror has heard anything about a case; the test is whether the juror is willing to put what he has heard aside and judge upon the facts presented in court.


The fact that he lied about being aware of the case not only disqualifies him but makes him guilty of perjury. He could have said he knew of the case but could be impartial. The defense would have disqualified him had they known of his activities or the picture before the trial, no doubt. Do you think someone who would lie to get on a jury doesn't have an agenda? Most people would lie to get OFF that jury. Chauvin was going to be convicted no matter what and this dipshit threw that conviction in doubt. He'll no doubt be convicted again but think of the money wasted because this idiot thought he'd lie to jury selection? He should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law and have to pay court costs for the first trial if there is a mistrial.
     If you ever find yourself in front of a jury do you want someone on there who lied about their impartiality due to some cause they believe in? Even if it's for the common good, the justice system falls apart if people start doing that.


----------



## Sunny

_In a photo from last August's "commitment" march that surfaced recently, the juror, Brandon Mitchell, who is Black, is seen wearing a T-shirt with an image of Martin Luther King Jr. and the phrase, "Get Your Knee Off Our Necks," the name of the march itself._

According to what I've read, the expression was first used by Al Sharpton at a MLK commemoration. It was probably used to refer to all police brutality against Blacks, not specifically the Floyd case. The t-shirt has a picture of MLK, not Floyd.  I think Chauvin's lawyers have a pretty weak case.


----------



## Remy

I'm not an expert, that pic looks oddly photo shopped to me. The guy in the middle looks kind of inserted and there is that white line on the shoulder of the man wearing the shirt in question.

I know they have rights to appeal but who wants to go through this again. I think the evidence was solid.


----------



## StarSong

A retrial will be unlikely to yield a different outcome.  Those 9 minutes plus of video were absolutely damning as were the numerous condemnations of police personnel and chiefs.


----------



## garyt1957

Remy said:


> I'm not an expert, that pic looks oddly photo shopped to me. The guy in the middle looks kind of inserted and there is that white line on the shoulder of the man wearing the shirt in question.
> 
> I know they have rights to appeal but who wants to go through this again. I think the evidence was solid.


Its not fake the guy admits he was there


----------



## garyt1957

StarSong said:


> A retrial will be unlikely to yield a different outcome.  Those 9 minutes plus of video were absolutely damning as were the numerous condemnations of police personnel and chiefs.


Totally agree.  But it will cost the taxpayers plenty


----------



## Irwin

StarSong said:


> A retrial will be unlikely to yield a different outcome.  Those 9 minutes plus of video were absolutely damning as were the numerous condemnations of police personnel and chiefs.


That's true, but since a juror lied on the questionnaire during jury selection, Chauvin could very well get a new trial.

That juror should face charges for lying. I don't know what that would be. Perjury? What a self-centered a$$hole. He must have known what would happen unless he's totally lacking in any common sense. At the very least, he should have to pay the cost of a new trial, if that's the outcome. He could wind up facing greater punishment than Chauvin.

The really sad thing about this is, the system seemed to work in this case. Chauvin was convicted on all counts, which is what you'd expect, considering the evidence. But now, all that is up in the air. Nothing in this world seems to work any more.


----------



## garyt1957

Irwin said:


> That's true, but since a juror lied on the questionnaire during jury selection, Chauvin could very well get a new trial.
> 
> That juror should face charges for lying. I don't know what that would be. Perjury? What a self-centered a$$hole. He must have known what would happen unless he's totally lacking in any common sense. At the very least, he should have to pay the cost of a new trial, if that's the outcome. He could wind up facing greater punishment than Chauvin.
> 
> The really sad thing about this is, the system seemed to work in this case. Chauvin was convicted on all counts, which is what you'd expect, considering the evidence. But now, all that is up in the air. Nothing in this world seems to work any more.


Yes, lying during jury selection is perjury.  And the only reason you would lie to get on a jury is because you already made up your mind and want to ensure your point of view. It could just as easy have been a pro cop guy who wanted Chauvin exonerated. We just can't allow people to decide for themselves how a trial should go. He should be prosecuted to the full extent of the law as an example.


----------



## ohioboy

Mike said:


> Derek Chauvin, he has applied for a re-trial.
> 
> Mike.



No mention of any Juror by name!

https://mncourts.gov/mncourtsgov/me...7-CR-20-12646/Notice-of-Motion-and-Motion.pdf


----------



## ohioboy

Irwin said:


> That's true, but since a juror lied on the questionnaire during jury selection, Chauvin could very well get a new trial.
> 
> That juror should face charges for lying. I don't know what that would be. Perjury? What a self-centered a$$hole.


A person is under oath, yes, when filing out a Juror questionnaire.

https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/2014/cite/609.48


----------



## Butterfly

I saw on Youtube a Court TV segment called "closing arguments" (and saw a picture of the questionnaire) that the question asked to the potential jurors was whether they had attended any protests, etc., in Minnesota, regarding the death of Mr. Floyd.  The juror in question answered "no," because the thing he had attended had been in Washington, D.C., not Minnesota, and had been commemoration of Martin Luther King's "I have a Dream" speech in Washington.  So the juror did not lie on the questionnaire.  Based on a clip purportedly showing the defense's questioning of that juror during voire dire, the defense counsel did not follow up during voire dire by asking about anywhere else.


----------



## fuzzybuddy

I'm not an attorney, but you need a lot more than just a minute infractions to overturn a conviction. It has to be something that would have caused the jury to alter its verdict. You just don't have to assert that it might, you have to prove that it did. That is a steep hill to climb, that's why the vast majority of appeals fail.


----------



## Murrmurr

Butterfly said:


> I saw on Youtube a Court TV segment called "closing arguments" (and saw a picture of the questionnaire) that the question asked to the potential jurors was whether they had attended any protests, etc., in Minnesota, regarding the death of Mr. Floyd.  The juror in question answered "no," because the thing he had attended had been in Washington, D.C., not Minnesota, and had been commemoration of Martin Luther King's "I have a Dream" speech in Washington.  So the juror did not lie on the questionnaire.  Based on a clip purportedly showing the defense's questioning of that juror during voire dire, the defense counsel did not follow up during voire dire by asking about anywhere else.


The wording of that question will be scrutinized during a review, and then the review board will decide whether or not the have to call the original trial a "Mistrial". If they do, Chauvin has to be tried again.


----------



## ohioboy

Murrmurr said:


> The wording of that question will be scrutinized during a review, and then the review board will decide whether or not the have to call the original trial a "Mistrial". If they do, Chauvin has to be tried again.


What do you mean a review board decides?


----------



## Murrmurr

fuzzybuddy said:


> I'm not an attorney, but you need a lot more than just a minute infractions to overturn a conviction. It has to be something that would have caused the jury to alter its verdict. You just don't have to assert that it might, you have to prove that it did. That is a steep hill to climb, that's why the vast majority of appeals fail.


It's not about overturning a conviction, it's about whether or not there was a Mistrial. With a mistrial, the whole trial is ignored and Chauvin gets tried again.


----------



## Murrmurr

ohioboy said:


> What do you mean a review board decides?


Not sure it's called a review board - I forget what they call it - but the defense attorney can call for a review to establish whether or not there was a mistrial. It's due process.


----------



## Pepper

@Butterfly said:  "the question asked to the potential jurors was whether they had attended any protests, etc., in Minnesota, regarding the death of Mr. Floyd. The juror in question answered "no," because the thing he had attended had been in Washington, D.C., not Minnesota, and had been commemoration of Martin Luther King's "I have a Dream" speech in Washington.

This is enough to make any claims against the juror not relevant.  He was truthful in answering the question; it is not the juror's fault if the question was not sufficient.


----------



## ohioboy

Murrmurr said:


> Not sure it's called a review board - I forget what they call it - but the defense attorney can call for a review to establish whether or not there was a mistrial. It's due process.


Are you saying the Judge is bound by that then under MN law?


----------



## Murrmurr

ohioboy said:


> Are you saying the Judge is bound by that then under MN law?


I believe the judge takes part in the review, but I could be wrong. But yes, judge and attorneys are bound by the decision. If it's decided there was a mistrial, it just means another trial with a new jury. All charges remain the same. In fact, I believe the prosecution can add new/additional charges before a new trial starts.


----------



## ohioboy

Murrmurr said:


> I believe the judge takes part in the review, but I could be wrong. But yes, judge and attorneys are bound by the decision. If it's decided there was a mistrial, it just means another trial with a new jury. All charges remain the same. In fact, I believe the prosecution can add new/additional charges before a new trial starts.


I don't see any indication of such in requesting a retrial under the Criminal Rules under Motion for new trial.


----------



## Irwin

Butterfly said:


> I saw on Youtube a Court TV segment called "closing arguments" (and saw a picture of the questionnaire) that the question asked to the potential jurors was whether they had attended any protests, etc., in Minnesota, regarding the death of Mr. Floyd.  The juror in question answered "no," because the thing he had attended had been in Washington, D.C., not Minnesota, and had been commemoration of Martin Luther King's "I have a Dream" speech in Washington.  So the juror did not lie on the questionnaire.  Based on a clip purportedly showing the defense's questioning of that juror during voire dire, the defense counsel did not follow up during voire dire by asking about anywhere else.


Brandon Mitchell was asked two questions about police brutality:

“Did you, or someone close to you, participate in any of the demonstrations or marches against police brutality that took place in Minneapolis after George Floyd’s death?”
“Other than what you have already described above, have you, or anyone close to you, participated in protests about police use of force or police brutality?”
It's the second one where he lied.


----------



## Murrmurr

ohioboy said:


> I don't see any indication of such in requesting a retrial under the Criminal Rules under Motion for new trial.


Indication of what? Sorry, what do you mean by "of such"?

Look, all I'm certain of is that if the original trial is called a Mistrial because a juror is deemed unfit, then Chauvin has to be tried again.


----------



## ohioboy

Murrmurr said:


> Indication of what? Sorry, what do you mean by "of such"?
> 
> Look, all I'm certain of is that if the original trial is called a Mistrial because a juror is deemed unfit, then Chauvin has to be tried again.



By 'such' I meant there is no mention of any review board determination to submit to the Court, but that's okay. The technicalities seem clear, one juror was not honest.


----------



## oldiebutgoody

Murrmurr said:


> Not sure it's called a review board - I forget what they call it - but the defense attorney can call for a review to establish whether or not there was a mistrial. It's due process.




  an appellate court


----------



## oldiebutgoody

Irwin said:


> Brandon Mitchell was asked two questions about police brutality:
> 
> “Did you, or someone close to you, participate in any of the demonstrations or marches against police brutality that took place in Minneapolis after George Floyd’s death?”
> “Other than what you have already described above, have you, or anyone close to you, participated in protests about police use of force or police brutality?”
> It's the second one where he lied.


- while



it was reported in the Twin Cities news that the meeting was a commemoration of Dr Martin Luther King - while there was some discussion of police brutality this was not the principle focus of the meeting  --- thus, assuming this is an accurate report, he did not "lie"


----------



## Murrmurr

oldiebutgoody said:


> an appellate court


Sounds right.


----------



## ohioboy

oldiebutgoody said:


> an appellate court


They don't file a Motion for a new trial with the Appeals court, it's with the trial Judge.


----------



## Murrmurr

ohioboy said:


> They don't file a Motion for a new trial with the Appeals court, it's with the trial Judge.


Ok, that's what I thought I remembered, but I wasn't sure. I just remember that the trial judge is involved in some capacity.
So it's up to the defense to take any action or not, yes? I'm guessing they'll let it go because everyone knows it won't matter, the outcome would be the same.


----------



## ohioboy

Yeah, the defense will make some type of move. Fruitless no doubt, but like you said, Due Process calls for it.


----------



## Murrmurr

ohioboy said:


> Yeah, the defense will make some type of move. Fruitless no doubt, but like you said, Due Process calls for it.


Oh. I wonder if Chauvin could waive it? Might be remembered as the one decent thing he did.


----------



## ohioboy

You can waive any appeal rights, but I don't know how it proceeds then? Murder cases/convictions may be subject to automatic appeal? Have not researched that at all.


----------



## Irwin

Murrmurr said:


> Oh. I wonder if Chauvin could waive it? Might be remembered as the one decent thing he did.


If it's a choice between doing something decent and his freedom, my bet would be he choses the latter.


----------



## Murrmurr

Irwin said:


> If it's a choice between doing something decent and his freedom, my bet would be he choses the latter.


I'm pretty sure he's resigned to spending the rest of his life in prison. 
imo, his defense attorneys couldn't have done a better job, and in a retrial the outcome will be the same. I'm sure he knows that..


----------



## ohioboy

Remember, he still faces a Federal trial. That clown woke up that day playing big bad policeman, and that arrogance cost him everything. If you plant turnips like Chauvin did, expect to get blood out of them.


----------



## win231

ohioboy said:


> Remember, he still faces a Federal trial. That clown woke up that day playing big bad policeman, and that arrogance cost him everything. If you plant turnips like Chauvin did, expect to get blood out of them.


One thing I haven't figured out:
We know what some cops will do when they think no one is watching or taping.
Chauvin _knew_ he was on video the whole time.  What made him think he could get away with it?  It's hard to believe he could be that stupid.


----------



## Murrmurr

win231 said:


> One thing I haven't figure out:
> We know what some cops will do when they think no one is watching or taping.
> Chauvin _knew_ he was on video the whole time.  What made him think he could get away with it?  It's hard to believe he could be that stupid.


I'd be willing to bet he used knee to neck restraint lots of times for several minutes (but probably not as long as 9 minutes) and no one died. I think he was stupid enough to believe the maneuver couldn't cause someone to die. Plus, while everyone was yelling for him to get off of Floyd, Chauvin adapted this puffed up posture like he was saying "Try and make me" or whatever, and he enjoyed looking all badass for the cameras. Basically, distracted by his big ego.


----------



## ohioboy

EXACTLY Win and Murrmurr.


----------



## oldiebutgoody

ohioboy said:


> They don't file a Motion for a new trial with the Appeals court, it's with the trial Judge.



Yes, and if it is denied then the defense can go to an appellate court to present their claims of abuses of discretion by the trial court. I should have explained that previously.


----------



## garyt1957

Murrmurr said:


> Oh. I wonder if Chauvin could waive it? Might be remembered as the one decent thing he did.


Seriously? You're going to jail for the rest of your life and you're going to waive your one chance of avoiding that.  He'd literally have to be a saint, which we know he's not.


----------



## garyt1957

Murrmurr said:


> I'd be willing to bet he used knee to neck restraint lots of times for several minutes (but probably not as long as 9 minutes) and no one died. I think he was stupid enough to believe the maneuver couldn't cause someone to die. Plus, while everyone was yelling for him to get off of Floyd, Chauvin adapted this puffed up posture like he was saying "Try and make me" or whatever, and he enjoyed looking all badass for the cameras. Basically, distracted by his big ego.


So you're saying he should have only been convicted of manslaughter, then? And I agree.


----------



## garyt1957

win231 said:


> One thing I haven't figured out:
> We know what some cops will do when they think no one is watching or taping.
> Chauvin _knew_ he was on video the whole time.  What made him think he could get away with it?  It's hard to believe he could be that stupid.


Because he wasn't deliberately trying to murder Floyd. Was he an careless, arrogant A-hole? Yep. Did he say to himself as he had his knee on Floyd's neck "I'm going to murder this guy right in front of the world"? Nope.


----------



## Murrmurr

garyt1957 said:


> Because he wasn't deliberately trying to murder Floyd. Was he an careless, arrogant A-hole? Yep. Did he say to himself as he had his knee on Floyd's neck "I'm going to murder this guy right in front of the world"? Nope.


Correct. Not premeditated, not intended. Manslaughter for sure, but I think the other charge could have been negligent homicide.


----------



## hollydolly

Murrmurr said:


> Correct. Not premeditated, not intended. Manslaughter for sure, but I think the other charge could have been negligent homicide.


Ok, are we going to open a Book on what his sentence will be ?...I think he'll get 15 years, which will see him serve half that with good behaviour..


----------



## Murrmurr

hollydolly said:


> Ok, are we going to open a Book on what his sentence will be ?...I think he'll get 15 years, which will see him serve half that with good behaviour..


I have no idea what the sentences are for the 3 convictions, nor whether the judge can ask each sentence be served consecutively or concurrently. So no guesses here.


----------



## hollydolly

Murrmurr said:


> I have no idea what the sentences are for the 3 convictions, nor whether the judge can ask each sentence be served consecutively or concurrently. So no guesses here.


I think it was said somewhere that he would only be sentenced on the one charge of Second Degree Murder...


----------



## Murrmurr

hollydolly said:


> I think it was said somewhere that he would only be sentenced on the one charge of Second Degree Murder...


So he could be given a presumptive sentence of 12 and a half years on that count, but the judge could site a bunch of circumstances around the situation that could add or detract from the "severity of the crime". Also, some convictions aren't eligible for an early release such as Good Behavior. I don't know if 2nd Degree Murder is or not. Probably is.


----------



## Pepper

Murrmurr said:


> I have no idea what the sentences are for the 3 convictions, nor whether the judge can ask each sentence be served consecutively or concurrently. So no guesses here.


Judges don't ask.  Who are they going to ask?  It's their courtroom.


----------



## Murrmurr

Pepper said:


> Judges don't ask.  Who are they going to ask?  It's their courtroom.


Ok, order...he can _order_ each sentence be served consecutively, or whatever.
Jeez m'neez, Peps.


----------



## Pepper

Hey @Murrmurr , I'm not called a kvetch for nuthin'!


----------



## StarSong

garyt1957 said:


> Because he wasn't deliberately trying to murder Floyd. Was he an careless, arrogant A-hole? Yep. Did he say to himself as he had his knee on Floyd's neck "I'm going to murder this guy right in front of the world"? Nope.


The thing is, Chauvin wasn't some chump off the street with little knowledge and zero responsibility for his mistakes.  *He was a police officer who was trained to know what actions could possibly kill someone*, making his actions even more egregious, which was part of the testimony of other police chiefs and officers.   

In addition, bystanders in the crowd were begged Chauvin to get up, yelling that Floyd had stopped moving and wasn't breathing - all of which he ignored.     

My guess: his sentence be longer than 20 years. Since the Feds are planning to get their own pound of flesh, Chauvin could wind up in the pokey for the rest of his life, which is what he deserves, IMHO. 

I can't see him walking free in ten years or less. If he does, street justice will almost certainly rear its ugly head.


----------



## oldiebutgoody

StarSong said:


> *He was a police officer who was trained to know what actions could possibly kill someone*, making his actions even more egregious, which was part of the testimony of other police chiefs and officers.






At trial it was shown that a female emergency aid medical worker was screaming at him to stop as he was killing Floyd with his actions.  Chauvin and the other cops threatened her with arrest and ordered her to shut up.  This testimony was shown live on local tv here in the Twin Cities and broadcasted live online.

Therefore, this could not be manslaughter.  It was at the very least murder².


----------



## ohioboy

hollydolly said:


> I think it was said somewhere that he would only be sentenced on the one charge of Second Degree Murder...



I read that under MN law, you are correct.


----------



## win231

oldiebutgoody said:


> At trial it was shown that a female emergency aid medical worker was screaming at him to stop as he was killing Floyd with his actions.  Chauvin and the other cops threatened her with arrest and ordered her to shut up.  This testimony was shown live on local tv here in the Twin Cities and broadcasted live online.
> 
> Therefore, this could not be manslaughter.  It was at the very least murder².


Yes, preventing medical help for a _handcuffed suspect who wasn't moving _is what tells me it _*was *_intentional.


----------



## win231

StarSong said:


> The thing is, Chauvin wasn't some chump off the street with little knowledge and zero responsibility for his mistakes.  *He was a police officer who was trained to know what actions could possibly kill someone*, making his actions even more egregious, which was part of the testimony of other police chiefs and officers.
> 
> In addition, bystanders in the crowd were begged Chauvin to get up, yelling that Floyd had stopped moving and wasn't breathing - all of which he ignored.
> 
> My guess: his sentence be longer than 20 years. Since the Feds are planning to get their own pound of flesh, Chauvin could wind up in the pokey for the rest of his life, which is what he deserves, IMHO.
> 
> I can't see him walking free in ten years or less. If he does, street justice will almost certainly rear its ugly head.


And if that's all he serves, I hope it does.  Street justice is better than no justice.


----------



## ohioboy

hollydolly said:


> I think it was said somewhere that he would only be sentenced on the one charge of Second Degree Murder...



Here is a MN Appeals court case, citing MN statute 609.035 explaining such.

https://mn.gov/law-library-stat/archive/ctappub/2019/OPa181055-061019.pdf


----------



## hollydolly

ohioboy said:


> Here is a MN Appeals court case, citing MN statute 609.035 explaining such.
> 
> https://mn.gov/law-library-stat/archive/ctappub/2019/OPa181055-061019.pdf


I knew I'd read it somewhere , thanks for that


----------



## Sunny

I looked up the definition of manslaughter, and it is a confusng mess of overlapping definitions.  Some manslaughter is "involuntary," and it's pretty clear that the person was killed almost by accident, in the course of some other wrongdoing. (Driving drunk and hitting a pedestrian, for example.)

Murder implies that the person was killed intentionally.

But "voluntary manslaughter" is where it gets complicated.  If someone is being attacked by another person, or is a witness to another person being harmed or held hostage, the only way to save them could be to kill the attacker.  The attacker dies, it was done deliberately, but with a good reason, and was necessary in the circumstances.

From all these definitions, it seems pretty clear to me that Chauvin committed murder.


----------



## Della

Second degree murder in Minnesota:
*Second-degree murder: *According to the Minnesota statute, whoever 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 ****** conduct in the first or second degree with force or violence or a drive-by shooting” is guilty of murder in the second degree.

I just don't understand how the jury thought Chauvin was "committing a felony offense" while causing the death of Floyd.  This could get him 40 years by itself and the prosecution is asking the judge to tack on more because a child was present.  As if the police have to stop what they're doing if any children are around.  Either way he'll die in prison just like the Pike county murderer who shot four people in the head while they were sleeping.  Something doesn't seem right about this to me.


----------



## StarSong

Della said:


> This could get him 40 years by itself and the prosecution is asking the judge to tack on more because a child was present.


My understanding is that the prosecution doesn't want to see him only get 15 years (out in 7.5), the typical sentence for 2nd degree murder.


----------



## ohioboy

Sunny said:


> But "voluntary manslaughter" is where it gets complicated.  If someone is being attacked by another person, or is a witness to another person being harmed or held hostage, the only way to save them could be to kill the attacker.  The attacker dies, it was done deliberately, but with a good reason, and was necessary in the circumstances.



Voluntary Manslaughter under MN law is known as "Heat of Passion" homicide, you basically intended to kill (emphasis added) but you were so outraged and out of control of your emotions, it was uncontrollable, you transform from David Banner to the Incredible Hulk.


----------



## hollydolly

ohioboy said:


> Voluntary Manslaughter under MN law is known as "Heat of Passion" homicide, you basically intended to kill (emphasis added) but you were so outraged and out of control of your emotions, it was uncontrollable, you transform from David Banner to the Incredible Hulk.


This is what I read and led to understand of MN Law...

Your laws in the USA are a total minefield..it's odd to anyone not living in the USA.. why the law isn't the same for the whole country...


----------



## ohioboy

Some statutes are annotated online, this one was not, but this is it.

https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/cite/609.20


----------



## hollydolly

ohioboy said:


> Some statutes are annotated online, this one was not, but this is it.
> 
> https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/cite/609.20


This is precisely the reason that I don't think Chauvin will get more than 15 years....


----------



## ohioboy

hollydolly said:


> This is what I read and led to understand of MN Law...
> 
> Your laws in the USA are a total minefield..it's odd to anyone not living in the USA.. why the law isn't the same for the whole country...



In some legal aspects it is, such as Federal law, and many states have adopted  laws passed by the Commissioners on Uniform State laws, like the Uniform Commercial Code, adopted in full or part.


----------



## Butterfly

ohioboy said:


> I don't see any indication of such in requesting a retrial under the Criminal Rules under Motion for new trial.


There is nothing like that here, either.  The reviewing authority for anything about the trial would be our Court of Appeals, who could overturn the verdict and remand to the trial court for a new trial.  I'd add that it is VERY rare for our Court of Appeals to overturn a jury verdict in a criminal case.


----------

