Derek Chauvin trial

#976
#976
KB5252 said:
So he ditched probation for whatever charge and was later charged with felonies for which he was trying to evade police and not answer to. Is that a reasonable basic summary of the events that led up to the day of his traffic stop?
Click to expand...

yeah, pretty good
 
#978
#978
KB5252 said:
So he ditched probation for whatever charge and was later charged with felonies for which he was trying to evade police and not answer to. Is that a reasonable basic summary of the events that led up to the day of his traffic stop?
Click to expand...
He's conveniently leaving out the aggravated robbery and choking of a woman, because that wasn't "violent" either
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64
#980
#980
Rickyvol77 said:
He's conveniently leaving out the aggravated robbery and choking of a woman, because that wasn't "violent" either
Click to expand...

thats wrong, I never once argued that wasn't a violent charge. I simply provided facts. Facts that you had wrong. He was not a felon and the outstanding warrant was for a non-violent charge
 
#981
#981
Tastylicks said:
Ricky, save your membership fee money you aren't MENSA material
Click to expand...
and you said he wasn't violent, then admitted that he was, just like your racist comment from before, you lack a simple understanding of the drivel you post, which is why you aren't taken seriously when you try to "debate" anything. You can't even admit Wright's aggravated robbery of the woman was a violent crime
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64
#982
#982
Rickyvol77 said:
and you said he wasn't violent, then admitted that he was, just like your racist comment from before, you lack a simple understanding of the drivel you post, which is why you aren't taken seriously when you try to "debate" anything. You can't even admit Wright's aggravated robbery of the woman was a violent crime
Click to expand...

wrong again. and also trying to make the thread about you again. yawn
 
  • Like
Reactions: Tyler Durden
#983
#983
Tastylicks said:
thats wrong, I never once argued that wasn't a violent charge. I simply provided facts. Facts that you had wrong. He was not a felon and the outstanding warrant was for a non-violent charge
Click to expand...
60771d3d74da0300181e1a6a


Do you know what a felony is? If you get charged with a felony in court, and then you commit more crimes in an attempt to avoid said court, the fact you committed a violent felony doesn't mean you aren't a violent felon
Even more, when you commit three violent felonies on camera during your arrest, the fact I say he was a violent felon is pretty damn accurate.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64
#984
#984
Rickyvol77 said:
60771d3d74da0300181e1a6a


Do you know what a felony is? If you get charged with a felony in court, and then you commit more crimes in an attempt to avoid said court, the fact you committed a violent felony doesn't mean you aren't a violent felon
Even more, when you commit three violent felonies on camera during your arrest, the fact I say he was a violent felon is pretty damn accurate.
Click to expand...

wowwwww

do you know the difference between a charge and conviction?
 
#985
#985
PointGuard said:
Therein lies one of the issues with you righties. Resisting arrest does not empower a rogue cop to be an instantaneous judge, jury and executioner for resisting arrest. The fact the dead person was a “violent felon” which fact comes out after the fact is still not an excuse to murder that person

You fools don’t want your guns to be taken away but a rogue cop can take away a human life and you’re ok with that. But you’re not racist. Right the racist are those accusing you all of being racist. Inverting definitions fools no one
Click to expand...

Say you are a cop. You have been through the proper training. You pull someone over. Everything is going smoothly until the suspect makes sudden movements, flees and resists. Now you only have a small amount of time to assess the situation. Now this person has a warrant. How do you know the person doesnt pull a knife or a gun?
 
  • Like
Reactions: landscapingvol and AM64
#988
#988
BigOrangeTrain said:
So when the cop ran his name, would the charge for the felony show up or not?
Click to expand...
it would...which is the point...the police ran him and knew of all of his previous charges, the aggravated robbery, the gun charge, the running from police, and the absconding out of the terms of his bail. They knew as soon as they ran him that he was a violent felon with a history of weapons, assaults and running from police...which is what the arrest was about and then he continued to prove them right by committing three more felonies
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64
#993
#993
BigOrangeTrain said:
Say you are a cop. You have been through the proper training. You pull someone over. Everything is going smoothly until the suspect makes sudden movements, flees and resists. Now you only have a small amount of time to assess the situation. Now this person has a warrant. How do you know the person doesnt pull a knife or a gun?
Click to expand...

The answer to that has already been provided by the courts all the way up to SCOTUS.
 
#996
#996
PointGuard said:
You Haven't watched the trial - you're not that interested you say. You're just interested enough to post incendiary comments based on the biases of your life experiences. You're interested in stoking flames. You can lead an ignoramus to facts but you can't make him learn. This forum is full of people just like that making achieving unity damn near impossible.

Here's some testimony from the medical examiner who conducted the autopsy

On Friday, Hennepin County chief medical examiner Andrew Baker, who performed the county autopsy, took the stand. In documents last year, Baker described the “fatal level of fentanyl” in Floyd’s system and told federal investigators that if the victim was “found dead at home alone and no other apparent causes, this could be an acceptable overdose.” Baker also cautioned, “I am not saying this killed him.”

During cross examination, Baker clarified further. When the defense asked Baker whether fentanyl could have caused the abrasions on Floyd’s lung that were revealed during the autopsy, Baker said that underlying health conditions were “contributing” and not “direct causes” of Floyd’s death.

“In my opinion, the law enforcement, subdual restraint, and the neck compression was just more than Mr. Floyd could take by virtue of those heart conditions,” Baker said.

9 minutes and 29 seconds was the length of time Chauvin "took a knee" to Floyds neck. Floyd died minutes before that as was evidenced by the two facts that he stopped breathing and his bladder emptied.

Other medical experts were more damning of Chauvin's actions. The defense tried to lay off drug use as the cause of death with them too. Not true each said.

The defense will bring in their own medical experts when its their turn of course. But those "expert' people will be the Sydney Powell equivalents of the medical profession.

Oh and that "unruly crowd" the 4 cops were afraid of?. Looks on the video like about 6 people one of whom was a passing by EMT who was LOUDLY begging them ro let her treat Floyd. She stopped begging when she say Floyd's body piss the ground

"Protect and Serve"

Chauvin is guilty as hell as are his co-conspirators. What will the Jury find? Well if it's made up of people like you and other's on this Forum it's a coin toss as to whether justice will be served IMO
Click to expand...
Your own post provides reasonable doubt as to murder so, by your own words, that should be off the table. Manslaughter seems like the charge here and I believe that’s where the jury will end up. We shall see.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top