Derek Chauvin murder trial (Police officer who arrested George Floyd)

Status
Not open for further replies.
rubberduck said:
It doesn't seem like the jury would have deliberated the evidence to any great extent. Ultimately the world had already found Chauvin guilty of murdering GF and the trial was politicised by the media to such an extent that the chance of a 'fair' trial for Chauvin was basically zero. Having listened to a large portion of the evidence it is a stretch to say he is guilty of the murder charges, but anything less would have lead to uproar. Same with the appeal - everyone knows that any success in appealing the decision will be spun as institutionalised racism.

I honestly could not think of a better example where receiving a 'fair' trial is basically impossible.
Click to expand...

I have to agree with you wholeheartedly.
 
Ahleckz said:
No, but I suspect those that supported the findings of the report - that is, there is no institutional racism, fully back that report and I’ve seen posts stating that we must accept it. Whereas when a white police officer has been found guilty of murdering a black person then they think that is wrong and it must be overturned.
I find it funny that people state we must accept the findings of one report which suit their narrative whilst also stating that a another finding is wrong which goes against their narrative.

I also believe there are a large number of racists on this board.
Click to expand...

Given the report was essentially the body of work of a largely ethnic group of professionals wouldn’t it be racist to claim they don’t know what they are talking about? At the same time, as I already mentioned, is it being suggested that the authors of the report are out and out racists? (Mental idea).

I think most people can see that the officer played a role in his death. It’s to what extent and to what level of culpability, and to whether that’s rooted in racism or not. Not withstanding other external factors such as the clear threats of mass violence and comments from high ranking politicians before the jury reached a decision. Which is pretty incredible.

I don’t think it’s beyond grasp to think the jury decided ultimately that it was best for everyone involved, best for their city, best for America, to throw the book at him.
 
Ayahuasca said:
Pretty strange to see that as a win unless they hated him. All the money in the world doesn't bring him back nor will it keep their mental health in check.
Click to expand...

Well he wont be brought up by a drug using criminal and already has a lifetime of money. But I suspect its all going to get ****** away before he is able to spend it.
 
This won't stop much, shootings will keep going on, love how people think they can dictate what Americans do.

Personally I put this as a freak death, I bet Chauvin has done this same manoeuvre plenty of times but the variables were just stacked up here for a death.

Just usual people trying to convert others to their way of doing things.
 
Youtubers...Why do people constantly post Youtubers opinions?

"But he was a cop in Arizona!"

Great, he also makes loads of money selling merch and playing to his conservative subscribers.
 
Wow what a totally unexpected outcome... Lol he defffo deserved to go down on the last count but all 3.... Oh well. Whatever. He will bill killed in jail, and that's actually going to be murder.

I was on a jury for a 8 week case and the other 11 decided their verdicts on our first diliberation..... It was only me that wanted to even really stimulate some debate. It's actually disturbing if you think about it, so.... Meh

I'm hating everyone and everything being labeled as white supremacist if they speak out of line. Again... Nothing suprisingly out of the norm.

Time to turn off Facebook for a week.
Time to re evaluate why I considered the English language and retrain myself with modern definitions.
 
I posted in the US Police thread but think it got deleted.

I was asking about how Chauvin is guilty of both murder and manslaughter? I don't remember ever seeing this happen before and to my mind one rules out the other. Does anyone know if this would also be possible under UK law or if this is somewhat a quirk of the US rules?

Murder implies he planned to cause Floyd to die, which means the other officers standing around could be accused of accessory to murder. I know in some US states just being present when a murder happens can mean a long sentence for you also. It will be interesting to see what happens to them now, as manslaughter only would probably mean the other officers walked free.
 
VincentHanna said:
Youtubers...Why do people constantly post Youtubers opinions?

"But he was a cop in Arizona!"

Great, he also makes loads of money selling merch and playing to his conservative subscribers.
Click to expand...

You are probably correct on him.
However he is pointing out factual areas that stink. Observations many have seen in the trial and realised the joke of the error. He is telling you on experience what the usual case for appeal would be. Certainly makes great appeal points.
 
MookJong said:
I posted in the US Police thread but think it got deleted.

I was asking about how Chauvin is guilty of both murder and manslaughter? I don't remember ever seeing this happen before and to my mind one rules out the other. Does anyone know if this would also be possible under UK law or if this is somewhat a quirk of the US rules?

Murder implies he planned to cause Floyd to die, which means the other officers standing around could be accused of accessory to murder. I know in some US states just being present when a murder happens can mean a long sentence for you also. It will be interesting to see hat happens to them now as manslaughter only would probably mean the other officers walked free.
Click to expand...

The charges involved don't necessitate planning anything.
 
deuse said:
You post yours ;)
Click to expand...

No, I really don't.

Politics on Youtube is cancer. YouTube algorithm just sends you down a one-way hole.

Socialdistancing said:
You are probably correct on him.
However he is pointing out factual areas that stink. Observations many have seen in the trial and realised the joke of the error. He is telling you on experience what the usual case for appeal would be. Certainly makes great appeal points.
Click to expand...

He was a cop, not a lawyer. Why is he suddenly an expert on appeal proceedings?
 
VincentHanna said:
No, I really don't.

Politics on Youtube is cancer. YouTube algorithm just sends you down a one-way hole.



He was a cop, not a lawyer. Why is he suddenly an expert on appeal proceedings?
Click to expand...

I would not say anyone has claimed he is an expert on the proceedings. However, he is telling you what the normal next step would be. From experience. To be a fair trial, this one should follow the same path with those points raised.
Could you explain why he has been convicted on both Murder and Manslaughter. ? Its awfully bazar.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom