Currently, there are 0 users and 1 guest visiting this topic.
Viewing 79 reply threads

  • Author

    Posts

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 3277

      The defense is going to argue that Floyd “survived” a similar event earlier so he only died here because of drugs (this is the SOP, flip things on the victim approach)

      The trial will also give rise to previously unreported or underreported facts. Here’s one:

      https://twitter.com/JoyceWhiteVance/status/1376548179752194067?s=20

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 3277

      in case tweet doesn’t load, its that a female EMT will testify that when she approached to offer aid to Floyd, Chauvin refused her and even went so far is to point his mace at her

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 3277

      or this one

      9:29 kneeling on neck, not 8:46

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 3277

      “Rodney King” is trending on twitter because some are saying that if Chauvin gets off there will be riots. Hope people don’t think that because its almost impossible to convict a police officer. This morning one of the lawyers used the stat, its something like 30 conviction out of the last 150 or so cases

    • Kermit56

      Participant
      Post count: 250

      I’d like to see how this plays out. When I saw the video of that guy kneeling on Floyd’s neck it angered me to see the smirk on his face. I was confused how this was an acceptable way to detain a suspect.

      However, I have read what he was doing was taught by his city’s police dept. on how to detain a suspect. If this is true, it throws a monkey wrench into my initial reaction. I’m hoping this is covered in the trial. I mean, if what he was doing was “by the book”…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 3277

      I’d like to see how this plays out. When I saw the video of that guy kneeling on Floyd’s neck it angered me to see the smirk on his face. I was confused how this was an acceptable way to detain a suspect.

      However, I have read what he was doing was taught by his city’s police dept. on how to detain a suspect. If this is true, it throws a monkey wrench into my initial reaction. I’m hoping this is covered in the trial. I mean, if what he was doing was “by the book”…

      its not true actually. he was violating policy

      I mean, its a fair point you’re making, its just that the knee was specifically addressed in a prior policy change

      I think it was even mentioned this morning, but I will double check. If it was “by the book” then he’d have a qualified immunity defense

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 3277

      I think this is the issue you raise discussed in the WaPo and its made unclear by his attorney

      “Though Minneapolis police officials have repeatedly said Chauvin was using a restraint technique in violation of department rules, Nelson has filed materials with the court that included training manuals with photos demonstrating a knee-on-neck hold similar to the one Chauvin used on Floyd.

      “Mr. Chauvin did exactly as he was trained to do,” Nelson wrote in earlier court filings.”

      so two competing positions that come down to the words:

      1.”Minneapolis police officials have repeatedly said Chauvin was using a restraint technique in violation of department rules”

      NOTE: DEPARTMENT

      2. “Nelson has filed materials with the court that included training manuals with photos demonstrating a knee-on-neck hold similar to the one Chauvin used on Floyd.

      “Mr. Chauvin did exactly as he was trained to do”

      BOTH COULD BE TRUE because Chauvin’s “training” may have preceded a Department policy change and the reference to manuals above doesn’t identify where they are from so it could just be “this is accpeted practice in OTHER DEPARTMENTs”

      who knows? we will find out though

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 3277

      So my comment above that he was violating policy could just as easily be wrong

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 3277

      You’re actually right, Kermit. Here it is from local source. It was changed AS A RESULT OF THIS EVENT

      https://www.startribune.com/good-riddance-to-neck-restraint-tactic/571059552/

      “It wasn’t easy to tell from the swirl of discussion whether the tactic Derek Chauvin used against George Floyd was a sanctioned use of force under Minneapolis police procedures. The early word from people like Mayor Jacob Frey and police spokesman John Elder was no. And perhaps by that they meant the length of time Chauvin kept his knee on Floyd’s neck, or the fact that Floyd was already handcuffed, or the fact that he died.

      Yet there it was in the Police Department’s Policy and Procedure Manual, section 5-311, “Use of neck restraints and choke holds,” with dates of last prior revision:

      Neck Restraint: Non-deadly force option. Defined as compressing one or both sides of a person’s neck with an arm or leg, without applying direct pressure to the trachea or airway (front of the neck). Only sworn employees who have received training from the MPD Training Unit are authorized to use neck restraints. The MPD authorizes two types of neck restraints: Conscious Neck Restraint and Unconscious Neck Restraint. (04/16/12)

      Conscious Neck Restraint: The subject is placed in a neck restraint with intent to control, and not to render the subject unconscious, by only applying light to moderate pressure. (04/16/12)

      Unconscious Neck Restraint: The subject is placed in a neck restraint with the intention of rendering the person unconscious by applying adequate pressure. (04/16/12)

      Consider that gone. Under an agreement approved unanimously by the City Council on Friday, officers would be forbidden from using both neck restraints and chokeholds. They also would be required to intervene when inappropriate force is used. The moves are part of a preliminary injunction in the lawsuit filed against the Minneapolis Police Department last week by the Minnesota Department of Human Rights.”

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 3277

      the officers were fired though, so its more complicated because it comes down to interpretation of the manual itself:

      “But Chauvin and the three officers on the scene with him were fired and face various charges ranging from second-degree murder (for Chauvin) to aiding and abetting murder (for the others). The policy that will apply to their cases is that which was in force when they encountered Floyd. So what was it — beyond the painfully obvious — that was not in keeping with established practice in the city?

      Here again, the manual offers hints. It said the “unconscious neck restraint” ­shall be applied only on a subject who is exhibiting active aggression, or for lifesaving purposes, or on a subject “who is exhibiting active resistance in order to gain control of the subject; and if lesser attempts at control have been or would likely be ineffective.”

      It added, in the sweetly named “After Care Guidelines,” that “after a neck restraint or choke hold has been used on a subject, sworn MPD employees shall keep them under close observation until they are released to medical or other law enforcement personnel.”

      This last part in bold must be why the prosecution mentioned in its opening that Chauvin chased off the female EMT (ie he would not release him)

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 3277

      I have read what he was doing was taught by his city’s police dept. on how to detain a suspect.

      THIS ^^ IS ACTUALLY FASCINATING BECAUSE it actually takes us back to Trump.

      Obamma started a substantial police reform process that included Consent Decrees (for police departments that had to be sued to reform) and the “resident’s Task Force on 21st Century Policing” for those police forces who would reform voluntarily. ONE PART OF THR REOFRM WAS USE OF CORCE, INCLUDING CHOKEHOLDS.

      Chauvin’s police forces LEADERSHIP and the GOVERNMENT voluntarily adopted the Obama’s reforms (including the chokehold issue)

      BUT . . .

      “One barrier that has prevented Minneapolis from achieving these goals has been pushback from the police union and its president, Lt. Bob Kroll, against policy and culture change, said Michelle Phelps, a sociology professor at the University of Minnesota. Last year, when Mayor Jacob Frey announced Minneapolis would become the first city to ban warrior-style training, Kroll countered by publicly announcing free warrior training for rank-and-file officers.

      “Cultural change is really hard,” Phelps said. “We can see the resistance to this change in the election and re-election of Bob Kroll. And the union exerts its own independent push against reform.”

      SO THE UNION FOUGHT BACK AND ACTUALLY CONTINUED TO TRAIN OFFICERS IN “WARRIOR-STYLE” TRAINIGN , WHICH INCLUDED THE CHAUIVN CHOKEHOLD

      ########################

      if you dont know, Kroll is cop who appeared on stage with Trump to decry what he described as the ” “the handcuffing and oppression of the police” by the Obama Administration. He also obviously praised President Trump for “letting the cops do their jobs.”

      Kroll has too long a history of racist stuff to list here but hers a quick snipet:

      “Through a series of controversies over the years, Kroll has been a staunch defender of the police. In 2015, after two white officers shot 24-year-old Jamar Clark in the head, Kroll spoke on television about Clark’s “violent” criminal history; later, when the officers were cleared of wrongdoing, he referred to Black Lives Matter as a “terrorist organization,” according to the Minneapolis Star Tribune.

      In 2007, Kroll also referred to former US Rep. Keith Ellison, who is Muslim and Black and has pushed for criminal justice reforms, as a terrorist, according to a lawsuit filed by now–Police Chief Medaria Arradondo alleging racism within the police department. The lawsuit accused Kroll of wearing a motorcycle jacket with a white-power patch sewed into the fabric, and said he had “a history of discriminatory attitudes and conduct.” He has told reporters he was part of the City Heat motorcycle club, some of whose members have been described by the Anti-Defamation League as displaying white supremacist symbols. Kroll did not respond to a request for comment but has denied the allegations in the past.

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 3277

      First witness was the dispatcher. Not good foe the defense, specially when paired with later expected testimony that Chauvin wouldnt let the EMT get to Floyd:

      “The prosecution called the first witness on Monday, City of Minneapolis 911 dispatcher, Jena Scurry.

      She spoke about her work as a dispatcher and her knowledge of the city’s 911 system, before detailing how she became concerned on seeing a live feed of Floyd’s arrest.

      “There was a fixed police camera that was trained on this particular scene. She could see through the camera what was going on,” Blackwell said.

      “You will learn that what she saw was so unusual and, for her, so disturbing that she did something that she had never done in her career.”

      Scurry was able to see a video of the scene of the call from a TV screen in her office but noted that she did not watch the whole incident as she was answering other calls to dispatch.

      Prosecution played the footage with Scurry identifying the parts she had watched.

      Scurry told the court had a “gut instinct” that something was wrong on the call as while the ambulance was there, she did not see Floyd receiving any medical attention or paramedics come into the shot.

      She said that she eventually called Minneapolis Sgt. David Pleoger, who oversaw the officers involved in the arrest in progress, to report that she felt uncomfortable after an “extended period of time.”

      “You can call me a snitch if you want to,” she told the sergeant in the call played for the jury.

      “My instincts were telling me something was wrong,” Scurry told the court.

      “It was a gut instinct of the incident: Something is not going right. Whether it be they needed more assistance. Just something wasn’t right.”

    • Biggs3535

      Participant
      Post count: 6366

      THIS ^^ IS ACTUALLY FASCINATING BECAUSE it actually takes us back to Trump.

      Who would have thought?

      • Kermit56

        Participant
        Post count: 250

        Yeah, post after post after post for 4 years…it can’t be easy to let it go and move on.

      • jbear

        Participant
        Post count: 4105

        Right.

        But Alice did manage a few rational sounding posts first. I hesitate to call that progress…. dumb luck? who knows.

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 3277

      Yeah, post after post after post for 4 years…it can’t be easy to let it go and move on.

      It’s the topic of the case when it happened. The US split in two as a result of the case and that is because of the difference in politics

      If you are a Trumper you see “when the looting starts the shooting starts”

      If you are not a Trumper it’s “a $20 bill shouldn’t be a death sentence”

      And that difference comes home directly here because Trump is not only the leader of that view but also his policies are directly implicated. He had Sessions dismantle all of the Obama reforms AND the actual cop who maintained the chokehold policy against the city’s wishes is/was a Trump
      Campaign pawn

      • jbear

        Participant
        Post count: 4105

        This country was split in two before Trump came along which any rational person could accept.

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 3277

      Right on cue, 3rd witness testifies about the Trumpian mindset of the 2nd cop

    • TheChronicHotAir

      Participant
      Post count: 5638

      Who is this chauvin guy? Did he do something bad??

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 3277

      Who is this chauvin guy? Did he do something bad??

      Not in your book. You donated to his defense, right?

      😁

    • TheChronicHotAir

      Participant
      Post count: 5638

      Never heard of him.

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 3277

      FauxNews coverage lol

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 3277

      Stinging testimony from the MMA fighter witness.

      He called 911, I guess.

      “I felt the need to call the police”

      to call the police . . on the police

      ouch

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 3277

      the young girl just testified that she took her young cousin into the restaurant because she didn’t want her to see Floyd suffering

      also, supposedly multiple first responders turned away? Sop the defense is trying to argue that the crowd was to blame? good grief

    • spartan

      Participant
      Post count: 1163

      the young girl just testified that she took her young cousin into the restaurant because she didn’t want her to see Floyd suffering

      also, supposedly multiple first responders turned away? Sop the defense is trying to argue that the crowd was to blame? good grief

      Haven’t seen the actual testimony where this is concerned, but my initial response to your response is that unless you have arrested someone in a high crime area, and had to deal with the locals reaction to that arrest, it’s not the same as walking out a shoplifter out of macys. 3,4,5 cops may sound a lot, but it can all of a sudden become a scenario that quickly gets out of hand, and 5 cops becomes nothing. The more you can keep the arrested person under control and quiet, the less likely violence will break out.

      This kind of case has a tendency to be emotionally and politically driven resulting in over charging and a lack of evidence. We have already seen this with the re-introduction of the murder 3 charge. IN MY OPINION, murder 3 (manslaughter) is the only thing they can get here, and even then, if there is evidence he was following SOP that should not hold.

      Now, there is the chance he is convicted because the Jurors fear the consequences of not convicting. In that scenario there is a high chance of turnover on appeal. For me, the prosecution will have to come up with something above and beyond what we have seen so far to convict.

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 3277

      the young girl just testified that she took her young cousin into the restaurant because she didn’t want her to see Floyd suffering

      also, supposedly multiple first responders turned away? Sop the defense is trying to argue that the crowd was to blame? good grief

      Haven’t seen the actual testimony where this is concerned, but my initial response to your response is that unless you have arrested someone in a high crime area, and had to deal with the locals reaction to that arrest, it’s not the same as walking out a shoplifter out of macys. 3,4,5 cops may sound a lot, but it can all of a sudden become a scenario that quickly gets out of hand, and 5 cops becomes nothing. The more you can keep the arrested person under control and quiet, the less likely violence will break out.

      This kind of case has a tendency to be emotionally and politically driven resulting in over charging and a lack of evidence. We have already seen this with the re-introduction of the murder 3 charge. IN MY OPINION, murder 3 (manslaughter) is the only thing they can get here, and even then, if there is evidence he was following SOP that should not hold.

      Now, there is the chance he is convicted because the Jurors fear the consequences of not convicting. In that scenario there is a high chance of turnover on appeal. For me, the prosecution will have to come up with something above and beyond what we have seen so far to convict.

      Spartan, you are the biggest white person apologist ever, lol. The kid, Rittenhouse, was “victim” who engaged in “self defense” and now Chauvin can only be convicted if the jurors are intimated????????

      Now, there is the chance he is convicted because the Jurors fear the consequences of not convicting.

      LMAO. the jurors might also convict him because they think he’s guilty, right?

      as for this:

      “Haven’t seen the actual testimony where this is concerned, but my initial response to your response is that unless you have arrested someone in a high crime area, and had to deal with the locals reaction to that arrest, it’s not the same as walking out a shoplifter out of macys. 3,4,5 cops may sound a lot, but it can all of a sudden become a scenario that quickly gets out of hand, and 5 cops becomes nothing. The more you can keep the arrested person under control and quiet, the less likely violence will break out.”

      clearly you have not seen the testimony or any of the videos. if you did you’d understand how stupid this sounds. the crowd is small, but grows in size (about 14 people) and VOLUME precisely because they are holding him down. That’s the point of the prosecutor. If they are concerned for him, or for themselves (your suggestion), they not only get him UP and likely in the car, but they also LET THE TWO (maybe three) different first responders care for him. That’s the whole point of 9:29 and its that 9:29 that go the “crowd” going. Not only did they hold him down, kneeling on his neck (while cuffed), they didnt even let first responders care for him

    • spartan

      Participant
      Post count: 1163

      Spartan, you are the biggest white person apologist ever, lol. The kid, Rittenhouse, was “victim” who engaged in “self defense” and now Chauvin can only be convicted if the jurors are intimated????????

      Who also happens to have more people of color in his family than you will speak to in a fortnight. (OK I’m guessing there, but you get my point!)

      We talk these these things through, I listen to what they say and I try to formulate an opinion based on what I see, what they see and how we all interpret it. Then I try to inject some logic, look back on how these things have panned out in the past and comment how it may turn out.

      PARTICULARLY in circumstances like this I try to formulate an objective opinion and inject no politics into it what so ever. Not saying I am right, and you probably don’t believe me, but it is what it is.

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 3277

      Spartan, you are the biggest white person apologist ever, lol. The kid, Rittenhouse, was “victim” who engaged in “self defense” and now Chauvin can only be convicted if the jurors are intimated????????

      Who also happens to have more people of color in his family than you will speak to in a fortnight. (OK I’m guessing there, but you get my point!)

      We talk these these things through, I listen to what they say and I try to formulate an opinion based on what I see, what they see and how we all interpret it. Then I try to inject some logic, look back on how these things have panned out in the past and comment how it may turn out.

      PARTICULARLY in circumstances like this I try to formulate an objective opinion and inject no politics into it what so ever. Not saying I am right, and you probably don’t believe me, but it is what it is.

      Spartan your diverse family defense is bull spit. It’s like saying “meet my black friend” and besides the discussion is about your typed words not your race-neutral credentials

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 3277

      PARTICULARLY in circumstances like this I try to formulate an objective opinion and inject no politics into it what so ever.

      Have you fallen on your head today?

      Kidding obviously but good grief every post you make – including those where you admit not having first hand knowledge is through an absolute alt-right lens. Every … every …(white) conservative is innocent or misunderstood as the default starting point. You’re default was to buy Gaetz defense. My post was to do the same (give him the benefit of the doubt) and yet you suggested I was a fool rushing in ?

      Has to have been a recent fall?

      (I kid, I kid)

    • DCGoth

      Participant
      Post count: 1473

      Guilty. Period. Plain and simple. Mic drop.

      I’d rather have a beer bottle in front of me than a pre-frontal lobotomy.


       

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 3277

      the terrible ripple effect of murder

      you can tell from the witnesses who profoundly this event hurt them

      the worst example might be today’s testimony from the clerk who noticed the fake $20 . . he’s 19 years old. He testified to feeling guilt, wishing he just accepted the $20

      another witness testifying that he filmed because he couldn’t believe cops approached a car in front of him guns drawn

      (guns drawn for fake $20 bill is the opposite of escalation and THAT is the very reason why you hear about police reform)

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 3277

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 3277

      Body cam witness ^^ breaks down after watching body cam

    • DCGoth

      Participant
      Post count: 1473

      the terrible ripple effect of murder

      you can tell from the witnesses who profoundly this event hurt them

      the worst example might be today’s testimony from the clerk who noticed the fake $20 . . he’s 19 years old. He testified to feeling guilt, wishing he just accepted the $20

      Absolutely true; however, I would place his testimony alongside the elderly gentleman who followed. Anyone who couldn’t feel that man’s pain doesn’t have a pulse.

      I’d rather have a beer bottle in front of me than a pre-frontal lobotomy.


       

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 3277

      agreed. tough to watch

    • DCGoth

      Participant
      Post count: 1473

      And rightly so. There was nothing the Defense could’ve done in Cross that would’ve one over any jurors. There only chance, IMHO, is to challenge the coroner report, and even that argument will be weak.

      Two inputs:

      Waaaaaaay back, one of my friends growing up and later we were all roommates, became an officer for Howard County, Md. Not long after he was in the force, he was involved in a high speed chase that ended in a shootout in Baltimore. My roommate was always pretty huge, like 6’8”, 300 lb huge. He played football in high school, but was never into taking it further.

      During the shootout, he flanked the shooter, but he was still somewhat new. He ran at the guy and landed on him. The shooter broke multiple ribs, multiple other bones, and didn’t fare well, but he lived. His attorney sued and my roommate had to defend himself against brutality charges. He was being brutal, IMHO, as this guy was firing from a 9mm across a busy street. He was ultimately cleared. That said, IMHO, that is justified force. With you have someone in cuffs, lying in the ground, and the other officers there, Chauvin’s actions were unnecessary. What was GF gonna do, run down the street in cuffs? He could barely stand, and by witness accounts was almost dead way before that dude let up.

      Also, the defence was an idiot to bring up Petechial Haemorrhaging, as breathing was the main issue. From all that I’ve seen, it was lack of blood to the brain, caused by pressure cutting off supply to the brain that causes various organ shutdown. This dudes actions were indefensible.

      My other point is a bit later. A good deal if my funds were officers with Metropolitan PD, (along with a couple DEA Agents). We would all doing together, either at the FoP Lodge or someplace close to home. Being an officer in D.C. is not easy, and my friends were engaged in physical confrontations almost daily, and they were in Adams Morgan, which is now kinda trendy, as Georgetown didn’t want subway access.

      Despite my friends constantly being in confrontations, never did they encounter a situation that required them to put someone in a sleeper hold, or were they ever challenged to take force any further than necessary. What happened in Minneapolis was inexcusable, and beyond the trauma to GF and his family, every one of those people who, IMHO, witnessed a murder, will carry that with them for the rest of their lives.

      Again, inexcusable.

      I’d rather have a beer bottle in front of me than a pre-frontal lobotomy.


       

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 3277

      Chauvin’s supervisor testified that Chauvin violated policy

      “ Pleoger responded: “When Mr. Floyd was no longer offering up any resistance to the officers, they could have ended their restraint.”

      “And that was after he was handcuffed and on the ground and no longer resisting?” Schleicher asked.

      “Correct,” Pleoger said”

      • Kermit56

        Participant
        Post count: 250

        This was the testimony I wanted to hear. Initially, I thought the cop was over the top with a knee on the neck for 9 minutes. Then, I read what he did was in their training manual. Now, I see even though what he did was in their training manual he was over the top in its usage. Although I don’t think he wanted the guy to die, I don’t think he cared one way or the other.

    • DCGoth

      Participant
      Post count: 1473

      Chauvin’s supervisor testified that Chauvin violated policy

      “ Pleoger responded: “When Mr. Floyd was no longer offering up any resistance to the officers, they could have ended their restraint.”

      “And that was after he was handcuffed and on the ground and no longer resisting?” Schleicher asked.

      “Correct,” Pleoger said”

      Most true; however, there are some things that suck, such as the jury will not know that the officers were fired.

      There needs to be more transparency in things like that.

      I’d rather have a beer bottle in front of me than a pre-frontal lobotomy.


       

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 3277

      This was the testimony I wanted to hear. Initially, I thought the cop was over the top with a knee on the neck for 9 minutes. Then, I read what he did was in their training manual. Now, I see even though what he did was in their training manual he was over the top in its usage. Although I don’t think he wanted the guy to die, I don’t think he cared one way or the other.

      That’s probably a fair summation

      I assume there is an expert to come, but if you are the defense you are probably not too upset because he says “could” not “should. Still bad, but there’s that.

      It looks like the strongest aspect of the prosecution is something I did not understand initially which is the CHOICE to stay on top of him even with 2 different EMTs trying to assist. That’s the same point as the supervisor. Callous disregard (ie “reckless”)

      I also still unclear on this part, but it looks like they actually had him in the car and then took him out and then this is when the knee started? I say that based on a talking head’s comment though, so not sure. If that was true then that makes all of this even worse.

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 3277

      Chauvin’s supervisor testified that Chauvin violated policy

      “ Pleoger responded: “When Mr. Floyd was no longer offering up any resistance to the officers, they could have ended their restraint.”

      “And that was after he was handcuffed and on the ground and no longer resisting?” Schleicher asked.

      “Correct,” Pleoger said”

      Most true; however, there are some things that suck, such as the jury will not know that the officers were fired.

      There needs to be more transparency in things like that.

      One of the reasons cops are very rarely convicted is this issue. The jury will hear all kinds of “bad guy” evidence about Floyd, but nothing about Chauvin’s part complaints etc.

    • DCGoth

      Participant
      Post count: 1473

      One of the reasons cops are very rarely convicted is this issue. The jury will hear all kinds of “bad guy” evidence about Floyd, but nothing about Chauvin’s part complaints etc.

      Very true. This is one thing I don’t like about the judicial process. A jury needs access to any actions performed based upon the behaviour being questioned. There is one loophole, but his attorney would be an idiot if he let this out. The information would be admissible if brought into light by the defence first.

      On a positive note, for the prosecution, that Lieutenant at the end absolutely shredded the Defence strategy that the crowd was out of control, as well as flat out stating that Chauvin’s use of force was unwarranted.

      IMHO, the battle in this case will come down to duelling arguments over causation of death. Battle of the expert witnesses. Defence will try and say drugs played a part, while the official cause of death was listed as homicide.

      I’d rather have a beer bottle in front of me than a pre-frontal lobotomy.


       

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 3277

      This country was split in two before Trump came along which any rational person could accept.

      So In a matter of roughly a week the Obama admin had two different black men murdered by two different police forces and then a black man ambushed and killed several cops in retaliation.

      No national protests.

      Weird, huh?

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 3277

      That week of shooting was July 2016?

      Remind me, when did Trump become President?

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 3277

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 3277

      The defense will dispute the testimony on training but their best defense is probably cause of death.

      But think about how tough that is. The knee only needs to be a substantial factor. They will have some doctor testify on the drugs and pre-existing conditions BUT the prosecution has video of him in the store right before and he appears normal. So, the prosecution will be able to say that the defense wants you to believe this guy (show store video) was a dead man walking, he would’ve died without the knee.

      Nope.

    • spartan

      Participant
      Post count: 1163

      Kidding obviously but good grief every post you make – including those where you admit not having first hand knowledge is through an absolute alt-right lens. Every … every …(white) conservative is innocent or misunderstood as the default starting point. You’re default was to buy Gaetz defense. My post was to do the same (give him the benefit of the doubt) and yet you suggested I was a fool rushing in ?

      You’re not exactly reknown for your objectivity.

      Yea, I consider myself a conservative, and yea, I guess I look at things from a certain perspective, but when allegations come out based on noting more than a twitter post initially, excuse me if I ask for more details instead of jumping to conclusions.

    • spartan

      Participant
      Post count: 1163

      The defense will dispute the testimony on training

      This. In the circumstances it was obvious Chauvin’s boss would throw him under the bus no matter what. It should be easily provable one way or the other. If the boss is correct it will be documented in the training manuals and Chauvin is in deep poop. If he (the boss) is wrong, and I was the defense attorney, I would roll out a whole bunch of Police Officers saying this is the way we were trained.

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 3277

      The defense will dispute the testimony on training

      This. In the circumstances it was obvious Chauvin’s boss would throw him under the bus no matter what. It should be easily provable one way or the other. If the boss is correct it will be documented in the training manuals and Chauvin is in deep poop. If he (the boss) is wrong, and I was the defense attorney, I would roll out a whole bunch of Police Officers saying this is the way we were trained.

      The leadership was going to throw him under the bus because they need to save the department and he is union (aligned with the racist who retired)

      You’re missing the key point though. Even if the knee was allowed there’s no way he gets around brushing off the EMTs snd keeping him prone. The other officer even asks him to roll him on his side. In other words, the policy is not black and white, it’s judgment based and at least two steps, force when resisting and custody while restrained.

      The jury is unpredictable, but in terms of the policy he blew the second part because the victim is in cuffs and prone and stopped resisting. This is why the defense has been playing up crowd control as distraction.

      He may still get acquitted. Cops are overwhelmingly acquitted BUT a truly objective jury (no such thing) would be deciding between deprave heart murder and manslaughter

    • TheChronicHotAir

      Participant
      Post count: 5638

      No recent updates, because the (D)efense has had some pretty miserable FAILS this week.

      But the Loserfgt(D)Media and the Trash(D)Party are both hoping for more riots.

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 3277

      the prosecution has video of him in the store right before and he appears normal. So, the prosecution will be able to say that the defense wants you to believe this guy (show store video) was a dead man walking, he would’ve died without the knee.

      forensic pathologist: “there’s no reason to believe he would’ve died that day without police actions”

      “primary mechanism of death is ASPHYXIA”

      The standard for Chauvin is what the knee a “substantial fact” so she is saying not only was it “substantial” it was PRIMARY, ie he would not have died without it.

      Not too difficult to imagine the prosecution closing by saying, “you heard the forensic pathologist say ‘there’s no reason to believe he would’ve died that day without police actions’ . . .look for yourself” and then show the video of him in the store

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 3277

      Medical Examiner just ruled out death by drugs

    • TheChronicHotAir

      Participant
      Post count: 5638

      All bets are off when you resist arrest.

      God Bless our Perfect, Sinless Law Enforcement Officers.

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 3277

      All bets are off when you resist arrest.

      God Bless our Perfect, Sinless Law Enforcement Officers.

      You know it’s been a rough time when your creative bottoms out like this one?

      “Er .. duh … let me call them sinless cops. Yeah… fur… day good one “

    • TheChronicHotAir

      Participant
      Post count: 5638

      So thankful for all our perfect and sinless police officers in Law Enforcement.

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 3277

      Er…duh…. der

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 3277

      defense case getting scorched. Just one example

      Cops dont typically get convicted, but part of that is the blue wall of silence that is missing here, so Chauvin may be in trouble.

      (and JBear will be outraged if he gets convicted BASED ON HIS THOUGHTS (lol))

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 3277

      he took the n5th. Closing on Monday

      quick verdict

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 3277

    • ISLAND BUCS

      Participant
      Post count: 3027

      Opps

      Remain intimately at the heart of experience.

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 3277

      did someone mention the stock market?

      :-)

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 3277

      a quick glimpse at ‘Merica as we wait for a verdict

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 3277

      Guilty on all three counts

      The destruction of lives continues

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 3277

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 3277

    • Donkey_Hunter

      Participant
      Post count: 1788

      Poor KKKron…

      His uncle Derek is going bye bye.

      Now, his inbred trio in Georgia are on deck.

      • jbear

        Participant
        Post count: 4105

        The GA case is more interesting.

        Let me play devil’s advocate for a moment but I can understand that it’s pretty easy for some people to jump to the conclusion that a bunch of inbred white supremacists saw a N*&%$% and jumped into their vehicles, guns in hand to do a lynching but based on initial reports there is a case to be made that there were break in’s and that someone may have seen the guy doing something suspicious and they confronted him… not saying that was right either but the whole thing is very interesting because you’re probably going to have a large vocal group of people who are convinced of the white supremacists lynching a poor innocent black guy and there will be some who may believe the protecting the neighboorhood from a criminal angle.

        I don’t even know what procecutors are charging with at this time but the stiffness of the charges, the defense angle and the prosecution angle will all be fascinating. As always I’m on the side of civil liberty. I’m not taking a position on what should happen until I see what the case is going to look like.

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 3277

      If you understand the backstory with the Trump Admin this isn’t surprising

      “ Attorney General Merrick Garland on Wednesday announced a sweeping Justice Department probe into the practices and culture of the Minneapolis Police Department, elevating the federal government’s role a day after former officer Derek Chauvin was found guilty in the murder of George Floyd.”

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 3277

      will be some who may believe the protecting the neighboorhood from a criminal angle

      Yes there are plenty of idiots in the world

      These red necks were not cops, right?

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 3277

      As always I’m on the side of civil liberty

      Good for you. Arbery lost his, entirely and permanently, and YouRe upset about it

      Unless

      Maybe

      (Psst…,thief)

    • jbear

      Participant
      Post count: 4105

      will be some who may believe the protecting the neighboorhood from a criminal angle

      Yes there are plenty of idiots in the world

      These red necks were not cops, right?

      That’s what the courts are for and why it’s interesting.

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 3277

      will be some who may believe the protecting the neighboorhood from a criminal angle

      Yes there are plenty of idiots in the world

      These red necks were not cops, right?

      That’s what the courts are for and why it’s interesting.

      hey dummy . . you realize IT WASNT GOING TO THE COURTS . . . right??????????

      The white guy fix was in, right?

      remember?

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 3277

      “Both Johnson and Barnhill are now under federal investigation for their handling of the case. It wasn’t until the Georgia Bureau of Investigation took over the case that criminal charges were filed on May 9.

      (Arbery was killed in February)

      Johnson

      Barnhill

      local prosecutors

      were not going to charge.

      The two rednecks worked for Johnson. She recused but told Barnhill “justifiable homicide”

    • jbear

      Participant
      Post count: 4105

      As always I’m on the side of civil liberty

      Good for you. Arbery lost his, entirely and permanently, and YouRe upset about it

      Unless

      Maybe

      (Psst…,thief)

      This is exactly what I’m talking about. I have faith in the courts precisely because these dumb rednecks, no matter your pre conceived notions of their guilt will have the chance to defend their actions to whatever extent they are able.

      Even if it’s just that they were unlawfully trying to apprehend Arbury. It all depends how they are charged which I admit I don’t know if that’s already out there. I’m sure some would like to see them charged with pre meditated murder.

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 3277

      I’m sure some would like to see them charged with pre meditated murder.

      surrender noted . . . that’s the phrase, right?

      hey JBear

      just type that you understand that they were not going to be charged, right?

      Or, alternatively, type things like the quote above instead . . to avoid . . the issue. :-)

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 3277

      just type that you understand that they were not going to be charged, right?



      @JBear

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 3277

      just type that you understand that they were not going to be charged, right?




      @JBear

      weird that @JBear is trolling as KKKChron in another thread, but nothing here?

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 3277

      ‘Merica

      “The survey found 71% of Americans agreed Chauvin was guilty, and most Americans surveyed followed at least some coverage of the three-week trial. When participants were identified by political affiliation, Democrats strongly concurred, at 85%, with Republicans at 55% and independents at 71%.”

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 3277

      sentenced to 22 1/2 years

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 3277

      and the Dems continue negotiations with Tim “Driving While Black” Scott

      weird

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 3277

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 3277

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 3277

    • Shelby T Mitchell

      Participant
      Post count: 60

      Federal civil rights trial is upcoming. So he could along with the other three officers not yet tried until winter of next year could be going to prison for life.

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 3277

      George Floyd speaks

Viewing 79 reply threads
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.