Derek Chauvin murder trial (Police officer who arrested George Floyd)
- Thread starter dowie
- Start date
- Status
Except if you'd followed the trial you would know it wasn't murder.
@Colonel_KlinckDear god some of the absolute **** being posted in here regarding this murder of a black man.
Of course the usual racist idiots are out in force posting unsubstantiated nonsense thr you have some new posters posting some nonsense lol.
I promised myself I wouldn’t comment in this thread as I knew it would be a complete **** show.
But Jesus wept at some of the absolute crap being posted by so called armchair lawyers
I don't see you complaining about this post, or ALL of the MSM coverage of this case. It is all about race, where have you been
Caporegime
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 37,804
- Location
- block 16, cell 12
Or racist.
As I've pointed out twice already 50% of the police in attendance were non white ethnic males.
Were they all racist or cowed by 1 racist that they have yet to speak out against?
Last edited:
Except I am following the trial quite closely
.Prefct example of the the kind of BS I'm talking about. You site this story as media coverage of GF high opioid usage but this is the headline:
"VIDEO: George Floyd's girlfriend tells jury how they first met."
Thanks for making my point.
The media doesn't have to lie. They don't even have to completely ignore facts. They just choose to shine the spotlight on things that fit the narrative and bury things that don't under disinteresting, seemingly unimportant, headlines like "How GF met his girlfriend."
Ive corrected that for you.
Soldato
- Joined
- 3 Oct 2007
- Posts
- 12,169
- Location
- London, UK
@Colonel_Klinck
I don't see you complaining about this post, or ALL of the MSM coverage of this case. It is all about race, where have you been
I don't think the killing was about his race. Is the officer racist? I have no idea, only he knows why he did it.
However the issue of race in the US is a real issue though. Its their original sin that they have never escaped. Its still there today, not as bad as in the 1950/60s no but its still there in lots of States.
I don't watch MSM. I can't remember the last time I watched the news on the TV, its not that I think what they are saying is not true or "fake news", I just got bored with the format. I prefer to get my news through other mediums, mainly written.
If I was to complain about every post on this forum it would be a full time job, I really do not envy mods on this forum as there are no shortage of posters with extreme views. The post I did comment on was clearly a race bait post though and was on a page that I was reading. I don't see Yas786 post as race baiting. He just says "...regarding the murder of a black man." I'm not sure it was murder but he was defiantly black.
That's so virtuous of you to skip the trial and just pass judgment.
Dear god some of the absolute **** being posted in here regarding this murder of a black man.
Of course the usual racist idiots are out in force posting unsubstantiated nonsense thr you have some new posters posting some nonsense lol.
I promised myself I wouldn’t comment in this thread as I knew it would be a complete **** show.
But Jesus wept at some of the absolute crap being posted by so called armchair lawyers
Bit odd given most of the commentary isn't unsubstantiated but rather is dealing with the facts/testimony currently being presented in the ongoing trial.
Your comments so far are though. Feel free to join in with some constructive discussion or arguments instead of just venting at people who have a different take (if you're capable of it that is). The thread is here for open discussion and it would be nice to see a range of views.
Pls remember this is GD not SC - we tend to focus on actual discussion in threads like this instead of partisan bickering. Coming in straight away with the ad hominems, calling others racist idiots etc.. isn't exactly a great argument so far.
Except I am following the trial quite closely
Doesn't seam that way.
As you would know this is not about race.
Soldato
- Joined
- 3 Oct 2007
- Posts
- 12,169
- Location
- London, UK
You don't think a Latino officer might be racist? Of an Asian American officer? I'm not saying this killing was racist, I'm not sure I've seen anything to suggest it was, from what I saw I think Chauvin would do that to a person regardless of the colour of their skin.
A killing like the Ahmaud Arbery one I would defiantly say was due to his race from everything we've learned so far. No he wasn't killed by the police, although Gregory McMichael was a retired officer and still worked with the District Attorneys office but the handling of the case by the police and District Attorneys office(s) stank. Only when a video was leaked to a radio station did they finally act because their hand was forced. So its no surprise that people in the US have issues with the police/justice system when it comes to race. I think we're lucky in the UK and it isn't a big issue here, sadly it still is there.
It's possibly only the opinion of one juror that matters, I mean if there is to be a conviction on a given charge then all 12 need to agree on it, otherwise on any given charge the opinion of all 12 doesn't matter rather the opinion of the ones who don't wish to convict, which can be as few as 1, is all that matters.
I think plenty of people believe Chavin could have behaved differently and failed to live up to his duty of care here - that doesn't necessarily constitute 2nd-degree murder or 3rd-degree murder (the first requires intent and a felony AFAIK and the second a "depraved mind"). It might constitute manslaughter though there is potential for reasonable doubt re: the death. An assault charge of some sort perhaps should have been brought, that would be easiest to get chauvin with.
I don't think anyone is saying he deserves to die over a $20 note, this is just emotive silliness. I think some people are saying he's likely responsible in a large part for what happened by his behaviour - this is hardly a simple forged $20 note case, if it were a normal person would have just paid for their cigarettes when the store assistant came over to inform them the first time let alone twice... not take more drugs (when already high) behind the wheel of a car. And then when caught, high, behind the wheel of a car by the police, take even more drugs and start resisting arrest, acting crazy etc.. refuse to get into a cop car when handcuffed etc...
Chauvin probably went too far with the restraint, there was a lack of care there, especially once he stopped talking and there was no pulse, Floyd though brought a lot of the initial reaction and treatment on himself.
Then you knew that Arbery was robbing the unfinished homes where he died?
Nothing is as straight forward as the media would like you to believe.
Soldato
- Joined
- 3 Oct 2007
- Posts
- 12,169
- Location
- London, UK
No he was not. You just make **** up and then have the cheek to claim you are the oracle of truth. What a joke. He was seen on the property and by a security camera, he didn't take anything from the property. As the property wasn't secured or fenced off anyone could walk around it and others were seen walking around it. I've walked around a part finished property before when they weren't fenced off as they are today, just because I was curious about the build and being nosy.
Even if he was "robbing" though he took nothing, that doesn't mean he deserved to die. Then you have multiple District Attorneys offices do nothing until the video leaked and then both the offices and police try and blame each other for the lack of arrests when there was probable cause at the scene. It stinks.
Corrected it for you. You call me a bad poster. Pot, kettle, springs to mind.
Permabanned
- Joined
- 25 Oct 2004
- Posts
- 9,078
Wasn't it also established early on in the trial that DC could have actually used a taser early on in the incident due to GFs behavior and chose not to do so because DC sort of recognised GF having worked in the same building as him when moonlighting as security.
So on that alone having legally been allowed to use deadly force but choosing not to, doesn't really mean the restraint being used was excessive at all. The one thing I and I think many could certainly agree on, is more should have been done when he became unresponsive. Although personally I think he was dead regardless of the actions from the police due to trying to hide the drugs when they approached his vehicle, while already at or above a safe dosage (if thats even possible).
Except if you have followed the trial using unbiased sources you would realize the opinions of the actual experts suggest it is murder:
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-race-georgefloyd-idUSKBN2BW26K
Too many armchair experts letting their own racism and facist tendencies blind them to the obvious truth as substantiated by the experts.
Permabanned
- Joined
- 25 Oct 2004
- Posts
- 9,078
And the defense, also asked him if medical homicide is the same as legal homicide and he said no.
For clarification when a medical examiner classifies a death as homicide, they are not making a legal judgement, its just one of the 5 classifications they are permitted to use when coming to a cause of death conclusion.
Those 5 are.
disease
homicide
suicide
accident
execution
and if none of those apply its undetermined.
For clarification when a medical examiner classifies a death as homicide, they are not making a legal judgement, its just one of the 5 classifications they are permitted to use when coming to a cause of death conclusion.
Those 5 are.
disease
homicide
suicide
accident
execution
and if none of those apply its undetermined.
Does that mean he ought to have been murdered for that crime?
I mean ****, if we have death for robbery... can we have death for speeding as well?
Yes, there are. And they'll be rioting again after the trial unless Chauvin is convicted of everything (and probably even if he is). Although "authoritarian" is probably a more accurate word than "facist" because facism is a more nationalist form of authoritarianism. But that's a minor aside.
The experts you refer to have testified that both the drugs and the heart disease are enough to kill a person. The article you link to states that the medical examiner explained how he concluded that the death was a homicide but provides no evidence for that statement. Can you? You watched it in the trial, right?
- Status