Derek Chauvin trial

#2,126
#2,126
lawgator1 said:
If some evidence comes to light of them paying any attention to that and that influencing someone, I'm willing to listen. Courts have various tests for evaluating that on appeal.

But it seems unlikely to me that it would cause all 12 to vote guilty when they otherwise would not have.
Click to expand...
I haven't followed this case closely. Wasn't there a report of pig's blood smeared on a juror's home during trial? Without sequestration, would that be sufficient evidence on which to base an appeal?

Edit thanks to tasty, replace juror with witness. tia.
 
#2,127
#2,127
Weezer said:
If facts exist, then an opinion does not. That's "being wrong" mislabeled as "having an opinion".
Click to expand...

I can't believe we are still having this discussion. I think everyone feels a little dumber. Again for the 8th time?, you were basing your "opinion" on Chauvin's intent.

The "fact" is that his intent was irrelevant as he was charged/convicted with "unintentional murder"
 
  • Like
Reactions: K-town Vol Fan, RockyTop85 and Tyler Durden
#2,128
#2,128
McDad said:
I haven't followed this case closely. Wasn't there a report of pig's blood smeared on a juror's home during trial? Without sequestration, would that be sufficient evidence on which to base an appeal?
Click to expand...

It was not a juror's home, it was a witnesses
 
  • Like
Reactions: McDad
#2,129
#2,129
lawgator1 said:
If some evidence comes to light of them paying any attention to that and that influencing someone, I'm willing to listen. Courts have various tests for evaluating that on appeal.

But it seems unlikely to me that it would cause all 12 to vote guilty when they otherwise would not have.
Click to expand...
Folks sent a pig head and splattered blood on a witness' former house. They had more than ample reason to be affected by that, Maxine Waters, the environment outside of the court house, Bidens comments, etc. and I don't blame them wholly. I blame the judge for not switching venue. It was silly and arrogant to not, imo.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MemphisVol77, 508mikey and W.TN.Orange Blood
#2,133
#2,133
VolnJC said:
Dems must really need those AA votes in the midterms
Click to expand...


Just have an opt-in by district. If you want police to respond to and patrol your neighborhood, vote for it. If not, you don't get it or have to pay for it. The ones who would vote against it don't pay taxes anyway, so you wouldn't lose any funding.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 10nacvols, 508mikey, W.TN.Orange Blood and 1 other person
#2,134
#2,134
NurseGoodVol said:
Then have the child cut an affidvid and keep her out of a courtroom.
The aggravating factor can be considered with an affidavit.
Click to expand...
Oh I agree 1,000,000%. I get it from the standpoint of prosecution trying to win but damn. No way I’d let one of my kids do it. That play was about emotional appeal.
 
#2,135
#2,135
Ttucke11 said:
Just have an opt-in by district. If you want police to respond to and patrol your neighborhood, vote for it. If not, you don't get it or have to pay for it. The ones who would vote against it don't pay taxes anyway, so you wouldn't lose any funding.
Click to expand...

Privatize the police forces. Do like some rural fire departments do, offer subscription services.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MemphisVol77, midnight orange, Ttucke11 and 1 other person
#2,136
#2,136
Weezer said:
So there aren't levels of intent? Then why do different degrees of murder charges exist?
Click to expand...

You did not say “there are levels of intent” you made a categorical statement that second degree murder involved intent. This statement was in response to a post saying the law didn’t require Chauvin to intend to kill Floyd.

If you want to try to retcon that, by all means, but I don’t see a way that doesn’t make you look like all these stones about people’s comprehension and education came from a glass house.
 
#2,139
#2,139
Ttucke11 said:
Just have an opt-in by district. If you want police to respond to and patrol your neighborhood, vote for it. If not, you don't get it or have to pay for it. The ones who would vote against it don't pay taxes anyway, so you wouldn't lose any funding.
Click to expand...
People who don’t pay taxes still want their neighborhoods policed, they just want them policed like the neighborhoods where people do pay taxes.
 
#2,142
#2,142
RockyTop85 said:
MN Supreme Court appears to hold otherwise.

State v. Rodriguez, 754 NW 2d 672 - Minn: Supreme Court 2008 - Google Scholar

“Furthermore, the Court emphasized in Crawford that the Confrontation Clause requires that the reliability of testimonial statements be assessed "by testing in the crucible of cross-examination." 541 U.S. at 61, 124 S.Ct. 1354.”

“Despite the fact that the current version of Minn. R.Crim. P. 15.01, subd. 2, was not in effect when the sentencing jury found appellant guilty of the four aggravating factors, the rule informs our conclusion that the Sixth Amendment right of confrontation applies in jury sentencing trials.”
Click to expand...
Rocky, take your lawyer off, do you really think it was necessary with all the other witnesses that testified to put a 9 year old on the stand? Is that in the best interest of the mental health of that 9 year old?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ttucke11
#2,146
#2,146
NurseGoodVol said:
Rocky, take your lawyer off, do you really think it was necessary with all the other witnesses that testified to put a 9 year old on the stand? Is that in the best interest of the mental health of that 9 year old?
Click to expand...

I don’t have the experience or expertise needed to second guess what’s necessary for an effective prosecution under the laws of some other state. It would be pointless to go around making up the laws to suit my feelings about what they should be, and it would be arrogant to assume that I know them better than the career prosecutor who just won this case.

As for the weight of the other evidence, it clearly didn’t convince everyone (see: this thread).
 
#2,147
#2,147
RockyTop85 said:
He was convicted of unintentional second degree murder during the commission of a felony.

There was no intent requirement as to the killing. His intent to commit the predicate felony (assault) was sufficient.
Click to expand...

This is where the defense failed in winning the jury instruction argument and failed in presenting almost no case about assault intent. The assault intent was glossed over in the jury instructions allowing far wider latitude than what's written in Minnesota law. Chauvin is a POS cop and guilty but every criminal will cry assault when restrained and this woke jury just gave them a free ticket to $$$ settlements. I hope the murder convictions are overturned.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: hUTch2002 and SpaceCoastVol
#2,150
#2,150
Ttucke11 said:
Can't police inner city Chicago and Beverly Hills the same way, it is an entirely different job. Didn't know you were a lawyer. Your comments are becoming even richer.
Click to expand...
Yeah, sure, and if the government that draws its legitimacy from the consent of the governed happens to trample the civil rights of a few communities to the point that they speak up about it, then the government should just cut off services to those communities. ****ing brilliant.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top