Tyre Nichols murder
- Thread starter Felon
- Start date
Luckily no amount of pleading Not Guilty or tricky lawyers will change a single persons opinion on that Jury if they've seen that video, and I'm 100% it'll be played in court too so I'm glad they've pleaded Not Guilty as it means there no chance of a plea deal and therefore the judge can throw the entire rule book at them with maximum sentences for every offense for all of them.
Not kept up to date with this but if the trial is far away then I'd not read too much into a not-guilty plea, that may be the case but AFAIK that can be standard early on even if they intend to later plead guilty or try to negotiate plea deal etc...
AFAIK there can be i.e. differences in sentencing for pleading/admitting responsibility and not having to go through a trial etc.
That you've clearly done some bad thing doesn't necessarily mean you're guilty of a given criminal charge, there may still be room for one or more of them to try to make a plea deal re: the charges etc..
AFAIK there can be i.e. differences in sentencing for pleading/admitting responsibility and not having to go through a trial etc.
That you've clearly done some bad thing doesn't necessarily mean you're guilty of a given criminal charge, there may still be room for one or more of them to try to make a plea deal re: the charges etc..
Last edited:
Memphis Police sacked them pretty much immediately, they're obviously not going to be funding their legal representation. Policing is heavily unionised in the US so if anyone's providing support it'll be from there.
I'd expect they would hope for a manslaughter charge rather than straight up murder.
Unless the Memphis PD want to admit to not training their officers I don't see how this flies?
I don't think anyone here is a US lawyer but doesn't murder hinge on intent, whereas manslaughter is accidental? They'll probably argue there was no intent to kill the guy. Who knows though.
Last edited:
identifying an unbiassed jury is going to be problematic ... I mean should you only be eligible if you haven't watched full video ;
even the violence it shows - is the degree, accurately communicated by body cameras/cctv, difficult to really interpret for jury, versus, well movies in which you'd normally see it simulated.
thus, per comments by lawyers for offenders, the fact they are black and themselves unlikely to receive fair trial per the usa norm is an issue for jury.
not sure why they all wore masks at the hearing ... if you are innocent (and don't have covid) you'd want to look human.
even the violence it shows - is the degree, accurately communicated by body cameras/cctv, difficult to really interpret for jury, versus, well movies in which you'd normally see it simulated.
thus, per comments by lawyers for offenders, the fact they are black and themselves unlikely to receive fair trial per the usa norm is an issue for jury.
not sure why they all wore masks at the hearing ... if you are innocent (and don't have covid) you'd want to look human.
Man of Honour
- Joined
- 29 Mar 2003
- Posts
- 57,308
- Location
- Stoke on Trent
Well if it's not guilty to murder then I don't think any of them meant to kill him, they just wanted to 'teach him a lesson'.
Hope they rot.
See my post above ref stabbing a bloke 20 times not being murder.
Yes but that was a civvy and these are apparently trained law enforcement, not that it absolves the former but regardless I think the point is still relevant.
One ought to expect that people who have spent at least some amount of their professional time on knowing what is and is not reasonable use of force should not so easily get away with the excuse that they didn't know that severely beating a person for several minutes is likely to kill them.
Last edited:
Soldato
- Joined
- 1 May 2003
- Posts
- 11,193
They meant it, when you watch the video, they wanted blood and knew what they were doing.
I bet they thought their scorpion group were untouchable.
I hope they all rot in prison forever.
They may not have intended to kill him, but they were certainly not concerned about the possibility of killing him whilst they did carry out a prolonged and vicious attack that any reasonable person would understand would have a high chance of killing someone.
They probably assumed that they'd never be held to account, or if they were they'd not see a court room as no one had trained them that kicking someone in the head X times when they were on the ground was not reasonable in that specific location at that time of day in that weather.