Previous threads on this:
Derek Chauvin trial
61 responses |
Started by metmike - March 29, 2021, 10:39 p.m.
Biden called Floyds family
There will be a response from President Joe Biden, who is currently holding a virtual tour of an electric battery company in South Carolina, once the verdict is read. The details about what that will look like are still being determined.
Biden sparked backlash earlier today when he said: “I am praying the verdict is the right verdict” adding “I think it’s overwhelming in my view.”
White House press secretary Jen Psaki was asked repeatedly about these comments. She refused to clarify, but insisted the president was not trying to prejudge the case.
metmike: This will obviously be guilty by all 12 because it was so quick. If there was just 1 that disagreed, the deliberations would have been drawn out. It's been crystal clear for me based on my 99.99% expectation for this, however, the moderator at a forum can state this.
NOT THE PRESIDENT, BEFORE THE RESULTS ARE KNOWN, which would have massively fueled ammo for a major rioting explosive fire...............even if he said after the verdict "please don't riot" if the verdict was the one they didn't like!
But this isn't about metmike or Biden being right or wrong. It's about the facts and evidence in this trial. Those facts were all presented well from both sides at this link. Both sides were given every opportunity to present their side.
The exact verdict on specific charges and especially the sentence is very uncertain, even if we can assume they all agreed on guilty very quickly.
One of the saddest things about this entire event is that it had some unifying elements initially and had so much potential to do that but one side rioted, causing billions in damage, killed many cops injured many dozens and it caused the other side, the unconverted to totally reject the message because the messengerss delivered the message with such hatred and malice.............then, the movement was often hijacked by the Marxists who shoved their cultural revolution message down the throats of conversatives and you could not tell the difference of whether the riots were over racial justice from the BLM people or the cultural revolution and if fact, they both would merge in protests for their own cause, which sometimes was the same.
What I never saw over the past year was this.
Guilty count one
Count two guilty
Count three guilty
This was clearly the right decision imo. And I say that even though I'm a big supporter of the police as an institution.
Biden was wrong imo to show his strong support for guilty verdicts and Maxine Waters was wrong to incite violence shouls the verdicts not be guilty. However, with the jury sequestered, there's no reason to feel that those remarks had an effect.
or who knows...we did not interfere with our sacred justice system. The leader of a international crime family and President of the United States interfered. That is how much faith a crook has in our justice system and just how much he hates our constitution. What a freaken mess we have on our hands.
The positives in recent years..........that were needed badly in some places
1. It's really good that we are requiring ALL cops to wear body cams. Technology makes this a no brainer.
2. It's really good that we are getting better at holding cops accountable, party because the technology in point 1, allows us to see what happened and they can't get away with lying or covering up anymore. The George Floyd case in the quintessential example of this.
3. It's really good that we are giving cops better training.
However good this is ......and we need to continue it, the amount that it will contribute to the big picture of blacks and browns being killed at an incredible rate in our big cities is a drop in the bucket.
It will contribute almost nothing towards improving the vast majority of lives in those neighborhoods.
And I will tell you with absolute certainty, the stronger the push or louder the voices are to "defend the police" the absolute worse the dynamic will be for people living in the inner cities. Or even the blame the police rhetoric will keep making it worse because it ignores 99% of the real problem and makes it that much tougher for the only group that really cares about helping minorities..........by their actions every day on the job.........THE COPS.
These are the people risking their lives to try to manage the 6 times higher rate of violent crime by young black males vs whites.
Only in the current up is down and down is up universe would the people risking their lives everyday to help people, would have the very ones they are helping, hate them for it and twist the reality into them being the bad guys and the bad guys being the good guys and martyrs.
You can blame our politicians and MSM for allowing the wrong messages to get the headlines for sensationalism and political ideology while censoring the right messages..........that MLK gave us everyday of his life.
Every incident involving a white and black where there is any sort of confrontation is viewed from a black victim because of their race standpoint............way before the facts are out.
Then, we only here the facts that tell us the minority was a victim or racism and censor everything that tells us anything that does not support that.
How in the heck is this going to help black people to commit less crime? It does the opposite. It justifies it in some cases and removes accountability.
Forget about how many years their great, great, great, great grandparents were slaves. You are making it much worse for them today by not holding them to the same standards that white people are held to.
Raising the bar so they can meet those standards and ASSISTING them to obtain better educations and have jobs and especially to be good parents is what we must do to help them.
Cops are only doing their jobs holding them accountable for breaking laws so the many good minorities in those communities have a safer community. And when you remove the criminal element, the young people in that community have better opportunities, better roles models and learn that crime does not pay.
This is messed up that the vast majority of cops, who are committed to doing that are being used as scapegoats.
The only way that the real problem will ever get better is AFTER the group crucifying the cops at every opportunity, changes their tune and decides to be ON THE SAME SIDE of the cops.............while working WITH THEM to HELP THEM to improve on their problems with minorities and using excessive force.
I agree that it did not affect the jury and in Biden's defense, if I was 99.99% certain of the verdict, its not like there was much chance of a surprise. But still if it came back not all guilty, his comments would have greatly amplified the over reaction.
I was unhappy with Obama's comments about Trayvon Martin. "If I had a son, he would have looked alot like Trayvon" which was extremely inflammatory, even though, the funny thing is that I was thinking exactly what Obama said. But a president has to be careful about what they say.
My strong personal belief is that Zimmerman got away with murder. I was not into politics back then but I researched and followed every element of the case, armed with all the facts.
When stuff like that happens, no wonder people think minorities are not getting a fair shake.
Since Zimmerman, was half Hispanic and not a real cop, maybe that played a role.
Betcha anything, if that exact same event played out today, he would be found guilty and if he was a real cop for sure
The jury pool in Florida might have had a different mentality too, than the one in MN.
https://www.foxnews.com/media/black-lives-matter-leader-burn-down-system here is what the country is fighting....good quotes from BLM and MLK
This is exactly why, after my dad, I admire MLK more than anybody else in my life time.
The quote she used in this story:
"Let us be dissatisfied," King told the Southern Christian Leadership Conference convention in 1967, "until that day when nobody will shout, 'White power!', when nobody will shout, 'Black power!', but everybody will talk about God's power and human power.'"
I will show the link here again, with my ideas on how to help fix the system in a way that would actually help minorities.
I'm just a nobody, forum moderator, meteorologist from Southern Indiana. Why is the solution so incredibly obvious to me and not to the rest of the world........that includes thousands of people smarter than me and way more powerful than me?
Because the politicians and MSM have agenda that trumps the real solutions and BLINDS them to the real solutions.
It's all about politics, ideologies and power and black people are the ones paying the price for it! They are supporting all the wolves in sheeps clothing, pretending that fixing the cops is the main problem, so they can put the blame for their FAILED policies on them.
The vast, vast majorities of blacks and people living in urban areas are democrats. The politicians don't want them to focus on them living in rat infested sheetholes, with incredibly high crime rates that are killing them at unacceptable rates and not giving them good educations or providing them with quality jobs.
To the politicians......................THEY ARE VOTES.
To the media.................THEY ARE VIEWERS.
To many businesses...........they are customers/profits/numbers
What they should be to every one is.......... HUMAN BEINGS!
You wrote: "...Every incident involving a white and black where there is any sort of confrontation is viewed from a black victim because of their race standpoint............way before the facts are out. "
Is this what they call "systemic racism"?
Isn't it strange... people on this forum quote and admire Dr Martin Luther King, while black Congress persons demand more violence.
Somehow, I expected our politicians to be the first to quote King and ask their constituents to be calm.
Now since Chauvin has been found guilty.... anyone willing to make a bet about whether Minneapolis will be peaceful tonight? I have the feeling, the rioting will go on anyway
here is one in NY
When you allow mobs to rule, they don't stop expanding the limits until they are stopped.
But of course, these days, any action to stop them will be labeled, and accepted by enough, as racism.
Our "interesting times" are going to get much more interesting.
Tucker Carlson expressed his belief that the jury was influenced by the mob outside.
This could very well have been so. The mob could be heard inside the courtroom. And since the jury was not sequestered, they most certainly were aware that the mob had threatened to burn down the whole city. I am sure, every juror, at that point, has to think about his/her family, his home, his own safety.
On top of that, you have your own President telling you how to vote. One could say, the jury was following presidential orders.
I am sure, this is not how the judicial system in the US is supposed to work.
PS.. with this post I am not making any comments about whether Chauvin was guilty or not, I am merely pointing out the irregularities of this trial.
It has already been pointed out that these issues (plus some others) would be used to appeal the verdict. However, the Appeals Court will also have to consider that a recrersal of the verdict would cause nationwide anarchy, if not a race war.
I assume, the appeal will be denied
If that was supposed to be the rioting that you predicted(after the favorable verdict), then that's quite a stretch.
What I find amazing is how the social media and MSM completely had people hypnotized on the outcome.....from both sides.
One side thought there was reasonable doubt and he might not get convicted, the other side was really worried that he might not get convicted because that's what the systemically racist system usually does.
Both of these FALSE NARRATIVES were sold on a pack of lies.
I'm not just saying that now. I had a 99.99% confidence level that all 12 jurors would find him guilty.
That meant a 1 out of a 10,000 chance that he would not be convicted.
How could a person possibly know that with such confidence????
All they had to do was....... look only at the AUTHENTIC FACTS and evidence and ignore the POLICITCAL BS from both sides...........meant to influence people's thinking not to inform them or educate them.
That defines our world today.
Many sources, especially those that are far left and far right but even many that are mainstream......... are trying to influence your thinking, not inform you with the objective truths.
Let's look at the authentic facts in this case.
The questions.. Did Chavin cause, or contribute, or have no impact on Floyds death?
Floyd had over 3 times the fatal level of fentanyl in his system as well as meta-anphetamine.
Floyd had a bad heart, a condition severly complicated by the toxic level of drugs.
In spite of the emotional video, there was no evidence of trauma, no bruising, no sign of asphyxia found in the examination by the coroner.
Did I miss any authentic facts? By that, I mean, facts relevant to the above question. Things like his girl friend's emotional testimony about their fight with opioid addiction are touching, but have no bearing on the above question.
Yes, those were the facts that the defense used, thanks for reviewing them for us again.
For the facts of the entire case-both sides- that includes those, that the jury and everybody else saw/heard go here:
Derek Chauvin trial
61 responses |
Started by metmike - March 29, 2021, 10:39 p.m.
I've read it all before Mike. Assertions that Chavin had his full body weight, or half his body weight on Floyd's neck. That does not hold up to the findings of the examination unless Chavin weighed less than 10 pounds. I don't think that's likely.
The "Blood Choke" theory by the fighter was interesting, but basic anatomy and the position of Chavin's knee don't support it.
Did he obstruct or deny medical care in the face of a medical emergency? Maybe. But he was in a hostile crowd/hostile environment. Can we prove, beyond a reasonable doubt that Chavin knew his actions were detrimental at the time? I don't think that's been done.
The only way we could know for sure would be to go back in time, subject Floyd to the exact same scenario without drugs in his system, and see what happened. We can't. But I strongly suspect that if we did, Floyd would be alive today. I also strongly suspect that had there been no police interaction, Floyd would be dead today. And I am nearly positive that had Chavin been black, and Floyd been white, we'd have never heard about any of this.
"And I am nearly positive that had Chavin been black, and Floyd been white, we'd have never heard about any of this."
This is very true and I agree 1,000%.
Because you know this Tim, your "devil's advocate" position thinking based on that has turned into a perception of that actually being the reality and it's blinded you to all facts that the jury, metmike and many others objectively see.
OK, Let's take one single point, and you can explain my bias to me.
Several expert witnesses claimed that Chavin had his full weight, or half his weight (180/90 pounds?) on Floyds neck.
How do you apply that kind of pressure to an area of a few square inches on someone's neck and leave no bruising, no sign of physical trauma whatsoever, per the autopsy report?
You are not arguing with me, you are arguing with the medical experts, testimony and conclusive evidence.
I don't claim to be somebody that knows more than them or what is proven way beyond a reasonable doubt.
I am not ignoring your version.
If a severe thunderstorm wind tears the roof off of my house and knocks down several trees in my yard and my insurance company says "well, those other trees next to your house were not damaged, so we're denying the claim" would that make sense?
You can't use one piece or 2 pieces of evidence to hang your hat on, while denying 10 times, much more powerful evidence that says the exact opposite.
Are you not even aware that this MIGHT be what you're are doing?
This discussion is NOT with a biased liberal that only blindly believes one side either. I agree with you on many issues, including the cops being unfairly targeted but there comes a time for us to admit when the facts prove that WE are the one being biased........that is, IF we have the capability of doing that.
Here's part of the version that most of the rest of the world believes AGAIN(there is several times more than this) that way overwhelms your points.
Again, I am respecting your opinion, which is the only reason that I'm continuing this conversation.
I am refering to the coroners report. The man who examined Floyd after his death presented these findings in a legal document. These are "Authentic Facts" There was no sign of asphyxia, there was no sign of bruising or trauma. This is per the official coroners report.
It seems this report throws serious questions into the opinions of the medical experts that the prosecutors paid, who were not on the scene and never examined Floyd.
How do you rectify this apparent incongruity and how is it an example of my bias?
I don't know how many more times that I can try to make the exact same points more clear...............with repeating the important facts, using analogies to help you see it............I don't have anything else.
Let me just repeat the analogy and walk you thru it since maybe you didn't read it.
"If a severe thunderstorm wind tears the roof off of my house and knocks down several trees in my yard and I only have insurance that covers a high wind event but nothing else and my insurance company says "well, those other trees on your property were not damaged, so we're denying the claim" based on that not showing there was high winds at your house......... would that make sense?
You can't use one piece or 2 pieces of flimsy evidence to hang your hat on, while denying 10 times, much more powerful evidence that says the exact opposite.
Are you not even aware that this MIGHT be what you're are doing?"
You are being the insurance company, looking at trees that showed NO evidence of a severe thunderstorm, with high winds and ignoring all the other compelling evidence that there were high winds based on what everybody saw and the numerous experts testified to.............not made up but gave us the scientific and medical explanation for.
Can the homeowner explain to the insurance company why some of the trees were destroyed and some were not? No they don't have to. The compelling evidence of what REALLY happened, is monumentally greater....by several orders of magnitude greater than the evidence of a possible alternate outcome.
Repeating the possible alternate outcome/very tiny factor that doesn't even get close to the vicinity of being enough for reasonable doubt, over and over doesn't make it any more powerful.
You clearly have convinced yourself to give100 times more weighting to something than it deserves to support this position and nobody is going to get you to see it any other way.
Even if we had no experts testifying. We watched him with our own eyes, kneeling on Floyds neck for 4 minutes after he stopped responding and prevented anybody from helping him.
The experts testified that this sentenced him to dying. If you go into cardiac arrest and somebody responds by kneeling on your neck an cutting off much of your air for 4 minutes, instead of giving you CPR.......YOU DIE!
Chauvin was well trained in CPT but chose to kneel on his neck instead.
"The defense argues that Chauvin did what he was trained to do and that Floyd’s use of illegal drugs and his underlying health conditions caused his death."
"Langenfeld said that “any amount of time” a patient spends in cardiac arrest without immediate CPR decreases the chance of a good outcome. He said there is an approximately 10% to 15% decrease in survival for every minute that CPR is not administered."
“Mr. George Floyd’s tragic death was not due to a lack of training — the training was there,” Arradondo said then. “Chauvin knew what he was doing.”
I'm not sure but am starting to wonder if you are just playing me for amusement.
You can't use one piece or 2 pieces of flimsy evidence to hang your hat on, while denying 10 times, much more powerful evidence that says the exact opposite.
I must be misreading. Are you calling the coroners report "flimsy evidence"? I call it crucial and any objective person would see that this calls a lot of the other testimony into question. How can the full weight of a grown man be placed on someomes neck for nearly 10 minutes and not leave any bruises?
""If a severe thunderstorm wind tears the roof off of my house and knocks down several trees in my yard and I only have insurance that covers a high wind event but nothing else and my insurance company says "well, those other trees on your property were not damaged, so we're denying the claim" based on that not showing there was high winds at your house......... would that make sense?"
Your analogy is flawed. In your scenario, there was physical damage evident. In Floyd's case, there was no evidence of physical damage per the coroner's report.
Very damning testimony. How do we reconcile this this with the coroner's report that there was no sign of asphyxiation? How extensive was the ER doctor's exam? Was it as extensive as the Coroner's? Probably not.
The main questions that need to be answered remain.. Did Chavin's actions cause Floyd's death. Did they contribute? Did they not contribute at all?
Had Floyd not had 3x + the fatal level of Fentanyl in his system and a bad heart, would he have died under these circumstances? I think not.
Had Floyd not encountered police with 3x + the fatal level of Fentanyl in his sysem and his underlying health issues, would he have still died? I think that's a very distinct possibility.
Did Chavin knowingly delay treatment in the face of a medical emergency? This is the most debatable question in the case, IMO. Has it been answered beyond a reasonable doubt? I don't know. He was in a hostile environment surrounded by hostile people. I sincerely doubt he intended to kill Floyd. Could his judgment have been flawed? Could the hostile environment have contributed? Good questions. But we know the paramedics chose to not even attempt treatment on site. They loaded him into the ambulance and left the scene. This is not typical. Why did the paramedics feel that they needed to evacuate the scene in such a hurry? Probably because, like Chavin, they felt they were in a dangerous situation.
You remain focused on the video of Chavin restraining Floyd. It is very dramatic and certainy raises serious questions while eliciting strong emotional reactions. But it doesn't answer any of the above questions. IMO, the coroners report does. You can chose to disagree. But please don't call it "flimsy evidence".
"But please don't call it "flimsy evidence".
Aha, we're back to the problem that's been identified several times now. You are objecting to me using the word flimsy, when referring to the amount of evidence you are hanging your hat on compared to the massive amount saying the opposite. Maybe that implies that I'm not giving your evidence its full weight.
I didn't mean to imply that at all. I meant "flimsy" in a relative sense. If we did not have all the other evidence, your evidence would be "compelling" evidence.
So let's use a different words that you might not object to. How about we use "much less compelling" than the 10 times greater amount of overwhelming objective evidence that the experts testified to and we saw with our eyes.....not our emotions as you claim.
We (me in this case) used our objective eyes and brains to calculate things like TIME and relationships of physics that tell us what the dynamics of the positions of the cop and the victim meant in the REAL world(not the theoretical world) And whether the actual video recording this was REAL or was it faked by somebody out to get the cop?
In conversations like this, I really do learn alot about myself and those on the other side.
It helps me to try to see things thru others eyes and try to better communicate my points. Thanks Tim.
A coroners report is extremely compeling, IMO. It's the definitive cause of death.
It outweighs the opinion of the ER doctor who felt that Floyd died of strangulation.
It discredits/disproves the observation that Chavin had his full weight on Floyd's neck.
The only question it doesn't answer is what was Chavin's intent. And that is nearly impossible to prove in either direction.
The arguments about this case could go on forever. I apologize for butting into your debate…
(disclosure: I am not a doctor, and I did not read all the reports about the trial, only a good portion of them… therefore, I may not be fully informed to talk about this case)
but I have to agree with Tim on one important issue: There is no scientific, factual proof of what caused Floyd’s heart to stop beating (like a bullet through the heart would be)… there were only opposing medical opinions.
The whole world saw the pictures and the movie. The whole world believed that Floyd was “choked” to death, verified by that infamous image of Chauvin’s knee on Floyd’s neck, and his comments “I can’t breathe, I can’t breathe”. The whole world knew that Chauvin killed Floyd
The “I can’t breathe” issue became quickly questionable, when it was revealed that Floyd was already complaining about being unable to breathe, when he was still in the car, long before anyone put a knee on his neck.
The fact that he had taken drugs all day, to the point of his friend not being able to wake him up, does not necessarily mean he would die (hardcore drug addicts can handle amounts of substances that would kill a normal human being), but the revelation that at the moment of his first contact with the police, he swallowed another handful of pills (apparently, to get rid of them), could easily mean that he gave his body more than what it was used to.. a lethal overdose. Later, foam was seen coming out of his mouth.
One of the medical experts even said, if he didn’t know about the police activity, his examination of Floyd’s body would have made him conclude that Floyd died of an overdose.
This was the basic argument of the defense team.
The MMA guy brought up the issue of “air choke” vs “blood choke”, and one could quickly come to the conclusion that Chauvin’s knee was nowhere near Floyd’s throat (an “air choke”), or near Floyd’s main artery (a “blood choke”). Some witnesses believe the knee pressure on Floyd’s neck caused death, but I have serious doubts about that, even if pressure was applied there for prolonged periods of time.
Various other theories were then brought in, explaining how Floyd’s prone position could have caused suffocation. Many people would find this argument strange, since many people go to sleep on their stomachs. However, the pictures seemed to show that Chauvin had his other knee (the right one) on Floyd’s torso, from time to time. I could understand that a modest pressure on Floyd’s torso could make it a bit more difficult for him to breathe normally.
To me, as an outsider, many of these medical opinions sounded a bit “iffy”, rather than “compelling”… enough to say, there is most certainly “reasonable doubt” in my mind….
However, I think I understand the real reason for the 12:0 guilty verdict. I believe it has to do with the wording of the charges.
If I am not mistaken, it says Chauvin did not have to be the direct cause of Floyd’s death…if his actions CONTRIBUTED to Floyd’s death, he would be found guilty.
Therefore, the main cause of Floyd’s death may have very well been the result of an overdose, combined with his poor medical condition, but the excitement of being confronted by the police (with his heart already being in overdrive due to an overdose of methamphetamines), the fight with multiple officers, and adding to this the constraint by Chauvin, reducing his ability to breathe normally somewhat, and one can easily make a case that Chauvin “contributed” to Floyd’s already possibly fatal situation.
If this is how it was explained to the jury, I can see a 12:0 verdict, as metmike had predicted.
As a separate issue, it was stated that Floyd died 6 min into the video. No doubt, at that point Chauvin should have let the medics go to work on Floyd… but would this have saved Floyd’s life?.
As timnew pointed out, there obviously was a very hostile crowd that could have influenced Chauvin’s behavior. The pictures don’t show the hostility, but it was enough for the ambulance to flee the area, rather than do what they are supposed to do. Did the hostile crowd “contribute” to Floyd not getting quick medical treatment when he stopped breathing?
I know that some police officers stated their opinion that Chauvin went too far, that he should have stopped restraining Floyd when he complained about not being able to breathe (I probably would have done so), but looking at the whole picture, the coroner’s report, etc, I do have “reasonable doubt” that Floyd’s death was caused by Chauvin, but I do agree that Chauvin “contributed”
Bombshell news report… first saw it on infowars, but tracked it down to its source…
One of the alternate jurors gave a TV interview. She spoke in detail about the trial, and explained what witnesses impressed her. She was in favor of a guilty verdict.
However, get a load of this…
She said “…I did not want to go through rioting and destruction again and I was concerned about people coming to my house if they were not happy with the verdict….”
I understood most of your points until this one:
"As timnew pointed out, there obviously was a very hostile crowd that could have influenced Chauvin’s behavior. The pictures don’t show the hostility, but it was enough for the ambulance to flee the area, rather than do what they are supposed to do. Did the hostile crowd “contribute” to Floyd not getting quick medical treatment when he stopped breathing?"
That one is really pretty imaginative Gunter. Sorry but just have to be honest. Only somebody searching for any possible item their imagination can come up with to NOT believe that Chauvin killed him could come up with that creative, unsupported reason.
Read it over and think about it. Are you certain you want to stick with that?
Regardless, you and Tim are the insurance company in my anonolgy, wanting to ignore all the most important, proven beyond a reasonable doubt evidence to come to your conclusions.
Repeating the same things about much less important evidence, or getting more creative with your imagination is not going to change the facts.
You guys do realize that you are getting totally obliterated with your arguments here, don't you?
If you want to continue, out of respect for you wanting to continue, I will address your comments and not shut you down, with you believing that I wont respond anymore but at some point, either I will get tired of it or you will but the really one sided facts will never change in your favor.............no matter how much you want them too and no matter how convinced your cognitive bias has led you astray.....it can't change the objective facts.
As a friend, I would suggest that you use it as a lesson to try to see beyond your cognitive bias to apply it objectively in other realms, hundreds of them that you will be facing in the future.
This is what our country desperately, more than anything needs right now. People that are able to be more objective and see the other side. .......THE truth. Not THEIR subjective truth.
Not people going to their favorite extreme sites with extreme views because those sites might, every once in a while find a nugget that the other side is covering up.............while the VAST majority of what they drum into the heads of their flock of loyal followers is pure propaganda.
What good is 5% truth if its communicated with 95% bs......when the people going there treat it mostly as 95% truth and 5% bs?
Same thing with CNN and other leftist sites but not nearly that bad.
The entire problem is people going to extremely slanted sites and not being able to tell whats fake and whats real and believing all of it because they know some of its real.
We are not "getting obliterated" in our arguments.
We are basing our argument on "Authentic Facts".
You watched a video and drew your conclusions before looking at the authentic facts. "Chavin Crushed the life out of him!!!!!!". Ignoring the autopsy report and the authentic facts that were totaly contrary to your conclusions. So you accepted the testimony of the witnesses paid by the prosecution. A case completely based on opinion and emotion, but no facts. Opinions that were discredited by the facts. And to top it all off.. You call this a blatant example of racism. Based on what? You have every bit as much evidence for that as the rest of your "Conclusions".
I'm done with this debate. You are more than welcome to the last word.
My comment about the crowd “contributing” to the bad outcome of this event, was meant to be sarcasm. Of course, the crowd cannot be made the “defendant” in this event. I simply wanted to express my struggle with the concept of “contributing” vs “causing” Floyd’s death.
I certainly cannot engage in an argument about legal issues. I am not a lawyer.
It’s just…. something doesn’t sit with me right, in this trial.
As I have stated before, throughout these last few months, I have considered Floyd’s death to be “murder”. I detested the cocky attitude of Chauvin, while kneeling on Floyd’s neck, with his hand in his pocket… a clear case of “police brutality”. I expected the trial would be a ‘slam dunk” event, more of a formality, than a real trial. I mean, what could the defense possibly say… against this overwhelming piece of evidence, the video.
Everybody I know, felt the same.The video was shown around the world,, and protests broke out around the world.
The brutal police killed a man over a $20 bill !!!! Unbelievable!!!
But then came the trial, and suddenly everything looked different.
It wasn’t just a simple arrest…. Floyd was resisting arrest and fighting off 3-4 police officers. That gets you another charge, for another crime, right there (let’s face it, most of the cases people protest about nowadays, involve “resisting arrest”, or “fighting with the police”, such as the Michael Brown incident, which in the end often results in injury or death)
Then we learn about the drugs. As I stated before, taking a lot of drugs (in Floyd’s case, every 20 min, as we were told) does not kill an addict. But suddenly swallowing a handful of additional drugs (to avoid a “possession” charge)… that can even kill a hardcore addict. Foam came out of his mouth…
And there was the coroner’s report.. the only real peace of evidence in this whole trial (other than the video)..
The ironic thing right there is, that protesters for months have been carrying signs that said “I can’t breathe”… because they believe that this is what Chauvin did to Floyd. Yet, this whole concept became questionable when we found out that Floyd couldn’t breathe long before Chauvin got involved.
(Being sarcastic again, maybe next time I see a protester with a “I can’t breathe" sign, I should ask him what drugs he used)
This very simple fact tells me that the drugs did a number on Floyd. The drugs already put him into a critical condition before anyone put a knee on his neck. I don’t see, how anyone can overlook this issue. And then there was the coroner's report. This report is difficult to ignore, unless someone is very biased..
As I said, the main focus of the whole world was Chauvin’s knee (as it was for me, for several months). However, after listening to the MMA expert, I realized that this was false. This knee , IMHO, could not have killed anyone
Indeed, I noticed several people on the internet have tried to duplicate this scene at home.. and their volunteers wound up with sore necks, but no breathing difficulties.
The prosecution then tried to point at the “prone” position as the killing component in this case… and that I simply cannot believe. I often sleep in a prone position, and I have never died doing so.
metmike, when you speak of overwhelming “evidence’..I don’t see it. The prosecution brought in a lot of witnesses. Yes, their number was “overwhelming”, as compared to the few witnesses of the defense… but their testimony was not. They did not give me that “check mate” moment, that would have me say… yes, that’s it.. Chauvin killed Floyd”.
At the end, all I could do is ask myself “would Floyd still be alive, if he had not been pinned to the floor?’
I would have to say ‘possibly, or maybe not ”. In other words, if the old jury instruction of “beyond reasonable doubt” was given to me, I would have to say “I don’t like Chauvin, I don’t like what he did, and how long he did it, and the attitude he had doing it, and not letting up, once Floyd stopped breathing… but I cannot say, without reasonable doubt, that he killed Floyd."
And, as this alternate juror in my previous post said, as a jury member I would worry very much about the safety of my family, if we came p with the verdict “not guilty”
.. a thought that probably spooked around in all of the jurors’ mind.
I agree with you, this trial has been discussed a lot. We all have expressed our beliefs, and tlaking about it will not change the course of history.
Thanks Tim and Gunter!
Actually you guys just got the last word, since you’re not asking for my response anymore.