Soldato
- Joined
- 21 Oct 2011
- Posts
- 22,393
- Location
- ST4
Possibly related. ******* were camped outside for days, pretty sure there were also some guys from the 'government' there too, but can't prove it.
Last edited:
Derek Chauvin murder trial (Police officer who arrested George Floyd)
- Thread starter dowie
- Start date
- Status
Possibly related. ******* were camped outside for days, pretty sure there were also some guys from the 'government' there too, but can't prove it.
Don't feed this troll.
Typical lefty nonsense. Not only are you not bothering to see the evidence directly, but you're also just putting your hands over your ears to deliberately block out the truth so you can continue to believe the distorted view of your world. I really despise people like you
^^^^^
I think this is part of the problem the US is going to have with the verdict especially if manslaughter or not guilty, lots of people just aren't familiar with the facts of the case and have just held onto opinions formed based on the initial pictures/viral footage.
I we can get a poster making terse, replies in this thread where additional info is available just image what the average SJW/woke type only consuming a few SJW focused news outlets and the virtue signalling posts of fellow woke types on social media will make of it or worse what some barely educated African Americans in various inner-city areas will make of it...
As you already know, the answer is yes unless you're arguing that time travel was involved and an invisible knee from the future was the cause. But when it comes to politics what matters isn't the truth. What matters is what people can be told is the truth.
Permabanned
- Joined
- 5 Apr 2006
- Posts
- 7,704
I find it funny that people think troll when they are given an opposing opinion as if anyone could think anything different to them and their experiences,
When someone's "opinion" includes flatly denying the existence of a video while also claiming to have watched it, it's definitely possible that they're trolling.
Permabanned
- Joined
- 5 Apr 2006
- Posts
- 7,704
that cannot be directed at me but still post is out of sync
Soldato
- Joined
- 25 Nov 2007
- Posts
- 5,581
- Location
- London
That's true but ultimately, he was on drugs and hysterical, officers were calm, they simply kept him restrained, and he died.
Accusations that they choked him are entirely nonsense, a knee on the back of the neck is not choking anyone.
But when you edit the video to show him on the floor saying he cant breathe, no indication that he is on drugs, and that he then died. Its extremely out of context and will lead people to believe that they infact did kill him.
Last edited:
It was a reply to your post about trolling:
You didn't quote the post you were referring to, so I assume it was the post 4 above yours in this thread as that's the only mention of trolling in this thread recently:
Permabanned
- Joined
- 5 Apr 2006
- Posts
- 7,704
so it's not my problem it's yours so get over it huh?
Since you don't bother saying what you're replying to and apparently don't know what you're replying to (judging by your comment about trolling), I'm going to pretend you're talking to yourself.
He's a bit confused about the quote function so perhaps it isn't clear what he was referring to, though given he can't describe whatever it was either it's a bit moot perhaps:
Update for today - no new jurors selected!
Judge isn't too happy about the reported settlement by the city or the leak that Chauvin tried to go with a plea deal previously.
https://www.startribune.com/record-...ction-in-chauvin-case/600035106/?refresh=true
Also the 2019 footage that was previously denied has been argued for by the defence and the judge is due to rule on that - particularly I guess the comments from the paramedic are relevant here re: George's previous response to swallowing drugs in that arrest:
^^^ that evidence and whether it is allowed at trial or not has got to be key - him swallowing drugs in the previous arrest, the resulting hypertension form the drugs + ending up in hospital as a result + the paramedic stating that he was risking a heart attack or stroke.
The main defence argument is going to be that he died from a drug overdose and so him doing the same thing in an earlier arrest and that being presented as him nearly dying there too could well cause reasonable doubt for the jurors.
Judge isn't too happy about the reported settlement by the city or the leak that Chauvin tried to go with a plea deal previously.
https://www.startribune.com/record-...ction-in-chauvin-case/600035106/?refresh=true
Also the 2019 footage that was previously denied has been argued for by the defence and the judge is due to rule on that - particularly I guess the comments from the paramedic are relevant here re: George's previous response to swallowing drugs in that arrest:
^^^ that evidence and whether it is allowed at trial or not has got to be key - him swallowing drugs in the previous arrest, the resulting hypertension form the drugs + ending up in hospital as a result + the paramedic stating that he was risking a heart attack or stroke.
The main defence argument is going to be that he died from a drug overdose and so him doing the same thing in an earlier arrest and that being presented as him nearly dying there too could well cause reasonable doubt for the jurors.
End of this clip is also interesting re: the 3rd degree murder charge, a civil rights attorney mentioned that 2nd degree would be difficult to prove and then cites as reason against the manslaughter charge the jury being acutely aware of the anger in the community...
Not sure that's something to put across as a good thing per se - surely you want the jurors to feel OK about coming to any of the verdicts they feel appropriate without considering community anger etc.. but rather just the arguments from each side and the facts of the case presented to them.
Just to illustrate what the jurors are currently facing - there was a small crowd outside the courthouse to protest to ensure fair jury selection apparently, the courthouse is surrounded by fencing and national guard troops are deployed:
Not sure that's something to put across as a good thing per se - surely you want the jurors to feel OK about coming to any of the verdicts they feel appropriate without considering community anger etc.. but rather just the arguments from each side and the facts of the case presented to them.
Just to illustrate what the jurors are currently facing - there was a small crowd outside the courthouse to protest to ensure fair jury selection apparently, the courthouse is surrounded by fencing and national guard troops are deployed:
Last edited:
Man of Honour
- Joined
- 29 Mar 2003
- Posts
- 57,371
- Location
- Stoke on Trent
Who are you replying to?
Caporegime
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 37,804
- Location
- block 16, cell 12
What do they mean by fair trial? And isn't their presence incongruent with a fair trial?
- Status