Topic: Riots after Death of Man in Minneapolis Police Custody (Read 4451 times)

Don't forget the riots after the verdict, and the prosecutor's reputation sullying the outcome of the case, oh and of course that Chauvin would be found innocent in the first place. QuickNumber7 is pretty much a reverse barometer when it comes to predicting outcomes.


If anything, there's a chance a second case could find him innocent of the one or two most serious charges, but him being found innocent on all charges is just some kind of weird, evil pipe dream.

I'm kind of jealous I don't have the ability to think things into or out of reality.

We'll see about that.  

I do commend you on your ability to remain civil during our pointless discussions.

And your point being what? Again, you're completely bypassing the fact that you don't know how the juror answered the questions, or that it is even a problem at all. You're just assuming that it is, treating tenuous presumptions as some sort of weird life raft for your argument.


I admit that in my haste I missed this part. So he's a lawyer, and as I respect the legal process I feel Chauvin definitely deserves an appeal.


Your problem is selective agreement. You agree with the experts who told you things you wanted to hear and disagree with those who didn't. Which makes little sense from a logical point of view. I consider the entire body of what is being said and then I shut the fuck up and wait and see how close my personal conclusion is with that which plays out in reality.

No. I'm saying the march was on the anniversary of MLK's march on Washington because it was about civil rights. Cops executing black men for passing fake $20s is just one example of many civil rights violations historically experienced by African Americans.


Here's the thing I'll never understand about you or QuickNumber7:

- You're not a lawyer. I'm gonna go out on a limb and guess you have no formal training or experience with the legal system, outside of the occasional court appearance we are statistically privy to during our lifetimes.
- You're speculating (that's what it is: pure speculation; per usual you have no actual evidence to back your assumptions) that the juror answered "no" to questions he should have answered "yes" when you don't even know that's what actually happened.
- You're overpowering all common sense to assume the defense attorney (a real attorney with an actual law degree and years of experience) is incapable of selecting impartial jurors and doesn't have an idea of when jurors may be lying or impartial.

So... why do you keep proffering conclusions about this case even after being proven incorrect time after time? You're not letting your lack of understanding of the judicial system get in the way of disagreeing with actively involved experts in the subject, and I just want to understand why not.


Don't you wonder why things didn't turn out the way you thought they would?


But in your mind the verdict is incorrect, so technically you're still not wrong and there's no lesson to be learned, apparently...


So, instead of assuming the jury is just wrong, biased and/or dumb because they didn't say what you expected them to say, perhaps consider performing some introspection into how your view of the events could differ so vastly from theirs. Remember, these jurors were picked by both defense and prosecution.

The motion for new trial doesn't even reference the juror as a problem, and they came up with everything they could to justify a retrial:

https://www.npr.org/sections/trial-over-killing-of-george-floyd/2021/05/04/993665655/derek-chauvin-files-for-new-trial-in-george-floyd-murder-case

Here's another example of what I'm talking about, an uninformed conclusion based on spite for "the other side," ultimately proven wrong:


 

Its like, why even bother typing this out in the first place? Sig campaign payment?

You two still haven't accepted that the trial is over?

And your posts are still 100% speculation-driven.... just holding out for a glimmer of hope - any sort of a sign, really - that you haven't been misled the entire time. Well, the next time you're publicly proven to be wrong about something, which will be soon, perhaps ask yourself why you continue to fall for the words of the same falsehood peddlers time after time. What about their influence drives you to adopt their beliefs and parrot their thoughts back here to us?



Oh, but you guys know what he's really thinking, right? 

chauvins lawyers are basically obligated to stretch out any and all legal avenues at their $XXX per hour costs. until there is nothing left to to stretch.

once the money dries up and all the paths they can follow dry up.. chauvin is still going to be drying his hands by rubbing them against his bright orange prison jumpsuit. for a long time.

..
most greedy lawyers dont care about their client. although chauvin is definitely guilty and deserves it, however even i seen a few watered down dumb questions with no effort made by the defense. its like they didnt even try or avoided trying*.
but the next step is while chauvin does his time, his legal team can take their time adding on more hours 'investigating'
they wont want to rush straight to an appeal and then an appeal of an appeal to waste all chauvins lifelines of legal options within a year. they will happily drag out those many appeal process options over the years and add in lots of legal costs in between.

no point just begging for an appeal without any new evidence days after a trial.
*(this might explain why they didnt push hard first time..
.. to then push a little harder next time. mentioning things they didnt mention in first trial)

but all in all while the lawyer make profit.. chauvin is going to prison.. and deserves to be in prison

I really thought, everybody already accepted that chauvin is a murderer. I guess I'm wrong.

It is like a unwinnable case no matter what kind of not guilty plea he submit. I'm even amazed that his lawyers try to defend him in the first place.

Anyway, the last resort he can now go is to go federal, though It would be nice if he just appeal to reduce the sentence and not a "Not Guilty plea"

Who the fuck is "junior"?


Great, we can file it with all your other expectations, like Trump winning in a landslide or stock market tanking after Biden's inauguration.

Chauvin's lawyers are now basically throwing shit at the wall and hoping some of it sticks. Can't blame them, technically they're obligated to do what's legally possible to help their client. But it doesn't mean they'll get what they want.

In case anyone is interested in some wider context...

The Washington Post has a database of police killings since 2015.
And there is also The Guardian's award-winning 2 year investigation, covering 2015-16.




There's also a decent summary of available data by Nature.

Overturned, no.
Granted another trial, possibly.

Considering that he has now been federally indicted it's a tough call from a legal perspective on how to proceed.
That's now 2 grand juries and 1 court case that he lost. Might be better to work on getting a sentencing / plea deal.

Remember if he is found guilty in the federal trial, the Office Space quote comes into play. "We're not going to some white-collar resort prison. No, no, no! We're going to federal POUND ME IN THE ASS prison!"

If you plea it down and work on a deal, you can go to golf resort prison, you go to trial you take your chances.

-Dave

The tee-shirt shows bias on the part of the junior. This means the trial will likely be thrown out by the appellate courts. The trial judge was not exactly courageous in making rulings consistent with the law during the trial that may have been unpopular.

You are correct, the trial is over, however losing parties have the right to appeal negative court outcomes, and Chauvin is appealing on the basis of the junior being biased and on the basis of the junior lying on his junior questionnaire (among other issues).

My expectation is that Chauvin's guilty verdict is eventually overturned.

But but but... if the knee on the neck didn't cause Floyd's death then protesting against the knee is like protesting against mint chip ice cream.

You guys crack me up. The trial is over. Chauvin was found guilty. He would have been found guilty by pretty much any reasonable jury. Pinning someone to the ground until they stop breathing is murder, despite the hypocritical claims about Floyd's medical conditions... in which case he should have been in a hospital, not being arrested for a fucking $20.

Let it go already. I'm sure this is not the last chance you'll get to defend murderous cops and most of the time they get away with it so you'll be "winning" the debate more often than not.

Of course.  Poll results show your opinion in the minority, must discredit.

The junior wearing the "get your knee of our necks" shirt is prima facie evidence that he had a predisposed opinion on the defendant's guilt.

I don't think many Republicans are comfortable giving their honest opinion on the matter.

We do know how the juror answered. What do you mean? He said no, he has not attended any protest related to police brutality. So the fact he attended a police brutality protest that was advertised as a "Get your knee off our neck" march sure looks like he might've lied or maybe not been truthful. Not like we can "prove" he lied, but we can prove that it wasn't the truth. It's basically a pick between willful malice or ineptitude. Perhaps both? Who knows.



THANK YOU. Let the appeals process play out, if it is successful, then a new trial. If not, Chauvin was given his due process. That's all I'm saying.

And this happens to ALSO be police brutality. Why is this so hard? Did you know something can be a civil rights violation and police brutality at the same time, it's not just one or the other? Unless you're telling me you think cops executing a man for passing a fake 20 is NOT an example of police brutality?



Well good thing Eric Nelson is a lawyer, he alleges juror misconduct - https://mncourts.gov/mncourtsgov/media/High-Profile-Cases/27-CR-20-12646/Notice-of-Motion-and-Motion.pdf


Well, if you care to know I'd be happy to tell you. I happen to be agreeing with the cause of death that Dr. Baker, Hennepin county medical examiner says was the cause of death. I also happen to agree with expert Dr. Fowler, chief medical examiner of Maryland with decades of experience.

You keep saying I disagree with the experts. I agree with the guy who conducted Floyd's autopsy report. Does that sound like I disagree with the experts?



He actually did allege juror misconduct, read the document - https://mncourts.gov/mncourtsgov/media/High-Profile-Cases/27-CR-20-12646/Notice-of-Motion-and-Motion.pdf

Page 3, number 2. He uses the words "juror misconduct".


Why do you think I haven't moved on? I am posting NEW articles about updates regarding this case. I'm not just putting over the same articles same old news over and over again. There's a difference. But I am a Nazi skin head according to you so I guess it just means I'm a racist huh?

gyfts seems to be the one that thinks the trial is not over.

plus when someone is MURDERED(proven guilt confirmed) and there is a protest about murder. and the victims family went to the protest... gyfts wants to highlight this as a thing to negatively point the finger at the victims family for protesting about their own family member being murdered.. and anyone else.. as if protesting about murder should be abolished or shunned(facepalm)

what should they do celebrate the murderer and throw him a party... um no.

when it comes to murder.. no one is neutral.. everyone detests murder. no one applauds murder.
no one accepts murder is ok.
what someone is neutral about is if they can put their personal opinion about murder aside. and look at the evidence to see if it even comes close to being unanimously clear as being murder.

9 minutes on someones neck is not temporary restraint to get a better position to arrest someone.

i know you dont accept the verdict Gyfts. bu the verdict is the verdict.
accept the trial is over.
accept putting a knee on someones neck for anything more then 30 seconds is bad.

stop acting like it was anything else
dont be a trump, trying hard to find any silly loophole to try to explain a result is not a result.

reality is.. he is guilty.. end of.
accept it and move on

Or....it might be about ideology and not race? Plenty of republicans disagree with BLM, nothing wrong with that. Unless you're saying that most republicans are racist.



Yes, because from the video you're able to tell Floyd's lung volume, right? You're able to tell the amount of force Chauvin's knee had upon Floyd's neck/upper back from the video? From the video you were able to determine that Floyd's fentanyl levels, enlarged heart, 90 percent arterial blockage, methamphetamine use and restraint from officers Lane and Kueng didn't have any role in his death. From the video, you were able to isolate all these factors I mentioned, and determined that Chauvin's knee to be the substantial causal factor of death, per the jury instructions? From the video you were able to tell that Floyd died of positional asphyxia, a cause of death that the Hennepin County Chief Medical Examiner did not determine, the only person who reviewed Floyd's body? This case was more than just the video.

Most Republicans agreed with the verdict and the ones that didn't overwhelmingly disagree with any idea tied to BLM.


The 25 percent of overall Americans in the CBS News/YouGov poll who said they disagree with the Chauvin verdict also overwhelmingly responded that they "strongly" disagree with any ideas tied to Black Lives Matter (BLM).

Obviously this has become all about race, but anyone capable of forgetting all the politics shouldn't have any trouble watching the video of George Flloyd being murdered and figuring out who the murderer is.