Derek Chauvin trial

#1,751
#1,751
utvols88 said:
Can you answer the guilty of three degrees of a single crime? How is that not triple jeapordy, in this case?
Click to expand...


I am not familiar with how they do things there but I suspect that the reason is that post trial a judge or the appellate court could say the evidence was insufficient for Count I, or Count II, or what have you, and so having them all considered leaves that result in place even if one or more of them is later found inapplicable.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ohhbother
#1,752
#1,752
BowlBrother85 said:
Meh. Chauvin didn't have to remain kneeling on Floyd's neck for those full 9 minutes. Chauvin showed a complete indifference to whether or not Floyd survived his detainment. It was reckless disregard. You can make the argument that Chauvin was overcharged, but I don't see how you can credibly argue that his use of force was proportional and reasonably justified by an existing threat. Chauvin was definitely guilty of something.
Click to expand...
Not sure about that one. Prosecution did it smart and applied the slam dunk charges without going balls to the wall make everyones feels better charges.
 
#1,756
#1,756
lawgator1 said:
I am not familiar with how they do things there but I suspect that the reason is that post trial a judge or the appellate court could say the evidence was insufficient for Count I, or Count II, or what have you, and so having them all considered leaves that result in place even if one or more of them is later found inapplicable.
Click to expand...
That seems to make it pointless to have a jury then.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Boca Vol
#1,757
#1,757
OHvol40 said:
Why the white ones?
Click to expand...

You're right, they all should. No cop will ever receive a fair trial in any court case anymore if it involves a black person. The playbook is on the table. And no I'm not necessarily complaining about his verdict, but BLM and CNN have a hard time differentiating between this case and others.
 
#1,758
#1,758
A few things on this verdict.

My opinion:

Chauvin was guilty.

With that said, I'm not sure it rose to the level of 2nd degree murder. I would've leaned toward 3rd degree but Chauvin arrogance put him in this position.

This jury was under pressure from the mob and the radicals in democratic party. There is no excuse for the kind of rhetoric that we have seen from Mad Max Waters and then Jo Biden. That could have had an impact on the verdict and if I am the defense I call for a mistrial because of incompetence.

Next, I think Floyd possibly would have died anyway because he had overdosed but Chauvin let him off the hook, cost the city millions, and basically handed the election to the radical left to add on to their other sparkplugs.

It is a sad day when people are crying on television over a George Floyd verdict. Some of these people probably have never cried out to Jesus. Yet here we are crying for a career criminal. I just don't know what this world is coming to but it ain't good.

Last I have brothers and sisters in Minneapolis. I wouldn't visit that place if they paid for my plane ticket.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: MemphisVol77, StarRaider, NurseGoodVol and 5 others
#1,760
#1,760
hog88 said:
My only question is how can he be guilty of the different degrees? Maybe you can explain that one.
Click to expand...
They just threw a bunch of **** and hope something sticks. Maybe it’s something about Minnesota law. I believe in most states they give a single charge and allow the jury to consider a higher or lesser charge
 
  • Like
Reactions: BreatheUT
#1,762
#1,762
TNVOLNAVY said:
Justice by mob rule has arrived. The fact the SCOTUS refused out of fear to hear any election fraud cases was the just the first sign. If you’re a white cop you’re now on your own and royally screwed should you ever end up in court.
Click to expand...


200.gif
 
  • Like
Reactions: ohhbother
#1,767
#1,767
hUTch2002 said:
The 9-yr-old kid is a great example. That was nothing but emotional theater. They had plenty of witnesses both expert and non-expert. There was zero reason to put that kid on the stand. The prosecution obviously wanted to do it to appeal to emotions and that is smart but someone (judge or parents) should have said no in my opinion.
Click to expand...

For what it's worth, i just read that the prosecution is arguing that the presence of children at the scene is an aggravating factor that should be applied at sentencing, so the 9 year old's testimony could also be relevant for that purpose.
 
#1,771
#1,771
hUTch2002 said:
What a mockery of our justice system. Manslaughter I can absolutely see but murder is ridiculous. Well, they basically punted to appeals court.
Click to expand...
What about the conduct of Antifa Maxie? Oh that's right... democrat. She can say whatever the hell she wants.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top