Derek Chauvin trial

#2,202
#2,202
Rickyvol77 said:
I saw posters arguing intent vs negligence.
1 of three things happened here on this incident:

1) Chauvin had a legal arrest against Floyd who resisted and quickly swallowed a bag of fentanyl laced meth. Chauvin pulled him out of the back of the cruiser because Floyd was resisting and was in distress, so Chauvin and other officers laid him on the ground as they called for an ambulance. Due to Floyd's reactions, which caused distress among a crowd of onlookers who begin to yell at the officers, Chauvin put his knee on Floyd's back (which 44 other officers had done during the past few years at Minneapolis PD) and either to show up the crowd or refusal to back down left it there for 9 minutes. In the meantime, positional asphyxiation and the effects of the drug overdose killed Floyd, to which then Chauvin realized uh oh, maybe I shouldn't have done that and was negligent

2) Chauvin had a legal arrest against Floyd who resisted and quickly swallowed a bag of fentanyl laced meth. Chauvin pulled him out of the back of the cruiser because Floyd was resisting and was in distress, so Chauvin and other officers laid him on the ground as they called for an ambulance. Due to Floyd's reactions, which caused distress among a crowd of onlookers who begin to yell at the officers, Chauvin put his knee on Floyd's back to teach him a lesson because he was on a power ego trip and refused to back down. The knee caused direct pressure to the back of Floyds shoulders and back which further made the asphyxiation worse since he was handcuffed and prone AND had drugs in his system and definitely was the main reason that Floyd died. Chauvin was reckless and negligent and didn't really care even after the fact what happened to Floyd because he felt he "deserved it"

3) Chauvin rolled up and decided to arrest Floyd immediately due to his racism and looking for a black person to be able to harrass. Chauvin got pissed that he resisted and wasn't answering questions. When Floyd was handcuffed and then fought against going back in the patrol vehicle, Chauvin decided to teach him a lesson and and placed Floyd on the ground and put all his weight into his back and neck in an intentional act to attempt to seriously injure or kill him.

3 is the least likely scenario with Occam's Razor in effect.

This was negligence and indifference at worst
Click to expand...

I tend to agree, but the way the unintentional 2nd degree murder law is written, it seems like it fits into that description. Same with 3rd degree.
 
#2,205
#2,205
n_huffhines said:
For me, Floyd's death represents a big problem in America (and I haven't spent much time discussing GF). Guilty cops being over-punished is not a problem in America.
Click to expand...
If Floyd's death represents anything other than ownership of your own outcome in life, then you have put him in the wrong conversation.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SpaceCoastVol, hog88 and Y9 Vol
#2,206
#2,206
n_huffhines said:
For me, Floyd's death represents a big problem in America (and I haven't spent much time discussing GF). Guilty cops being over-punished is not a problem in America.
Click to expand...

A big problem in what way? I'll grant that it is a problem, but how are you coming to the conclusion that it is a "big" problem? What parameters are you using?
 
#2,208
#2,208
n_huffhines said:
For me, Floyd's death represents a big problem in America (and I haven't spent much time discussing GF). Guilty cops being over-punished is not a problem in America.
Click to expand...

Guilty anyone being over punished should be a problem. I have many issues with policing. I also have issues with using cops as martyrs to help diminish the white guilt of some
 
#2,209
#2,209
SamRebel35 said:
A big problem in what way? I'll grant that it is a problem, but how are you coming to the conclusion that it is a "big" problem? What parameters are you using?
Click to expand...

It's my judgment that we live in a police state with an incredibly flawed criminal justice system that's not in the best interest of civilians or good cops. A million things led to George Floyd's death. Some of them are necessary components of the system, some of them are on him, but most of all, concerned citizens need to focus on the parts of government that are broken that led to this.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MemphisVol77
#2,211
#2,211
dcm3w said:
Hell yeah. They finally convicted a police officer for negligent actions/gross misconduct.
Click to expand...
No. That’s not at all what he was convicted for. To convict of murder is way beyond negligence and gross misconduct. That 2nd degree murder charge required intent.
 
#2,212
#2,212
RockyTop85 said:
The second degree murder was the unintentional variety. I think there was sufficient evidence to support the verdict.

Best he gets out of Maxine is a second trial, but that’s probably a steep steep mountain to climb. Most states assume jurors followed the instructions without outside influence and have pretty strict rules that make it impossible to get around.

No idea if there were any other issues he can appeal.

PS - the judge not letting in the carbon monoxide evidence was probably the best hint of where this verdict was going. Judge not gonna rule against the side that’s clearly losing that late in the game unless they’re asking for a do-over.
Click to expand...
The 2nd degree murder charge still required intent to harm.
 
#2,213
#2,213
n_huffhines said:
It's my judgment that we live in a police state with an incredibly flawed criminal justice system that's not in the best interest of civilians or good cops. A million things led to George Floyd's death. Some of them are necessary components of the system, some of them are on him, but most of all, concerned citizens need to focus on the parts of government that are broken that led to this.
Click to expand...
Are you using "police state" very, very liberally?
Edit: maybe loosely would be a better word^^^
 
#2,215
#2,215
Vol8188 said:
Innocent or good at his job? You’re moving the goal post. You claimed all these cops were arguing Chauvin and the taser lady were good at their job.

I’ve yet to find that argument. The argument is there’s 0 evidence either was racial in nature. There’s 0 evidence either is an example of intentionally murder. At best both are manslaughter
Click to expand...

SMDH.... how many people argued that Chauvin followed proper procedures?.. but I'm making that up... ridiculous.

and again with the intention BS. The man was literally convicted with unintentional murder. Can't you read? do you watch television. Why are you even arguing his intent?? sooo annoying
 
#2,216
#2,216
Tastylicks said:
SMDH.... how many people argued that Chauvin followed proper procedures?.. but I'm making that up... ridiculous.

and again with the intention BS. The man was literally convicted with unintentional murder. Can't you read? do you watch television. Why are you even arguing his intent?? sooo annoying
Click to expand...

2nd degree murder=intentional
 

Attachments

  • 822441C1-9341-4FAC-AA20-853A00ECCE22.png
    822441C1-9341-4FAC-AA20-853A00ECCE22.png
    3 MB · Views: 9
#2,217
#2,217
PNW Huskie said:
When put in context of Chauvins duty and his stature I don't believe it was an accident nor done on purpose. Chauvin likely believed it was an extension of his duty and I don't believe the state proved he intended to assault Floyd. He was subduing a very large man who was resisting and under the influence.

Chauvin weighs 145lbs. He had to think he needed to apply maximum force to keep Floyd restrained. I don't believe he sat there in full view while being recorded and intentionally assaulted Floyd. How reasonable it is to the viewer vs how reasonable it is to a Chauvin is subjective and the defense missed an opportunity to bring up Chauvins stature. They should have been hammering home how much bigger Floyd was in comparison or how much force is necessary for a 145lb guy to restrain him. I even did an experiment at home and tossed my 135lb son off my head like a rag doll and I'm only 6' 175. I even had my wife and daughter join in and could still move enough to breath but not escape.

The jury instructions barely mentioned the assault intent while its prominent in the written Minnesota law. I was surprised such little of the actual law wording was referenced in the jury instruction. Chauvin was reckless, careless, unsympathetic and didn't properly asses the situation after a Floyd was subdued but I never believed he intended to assault or intentionally hurt Floyd.
Click to expand...
This is a much better explanation for why he shouldn’t be guilty of 2nd than most of the others I’ve seen and I assume it will come up on appeal, since there was an objection.

The Minnesota Supreme Court analyzed the Minnesota law and says that’s how the intent works vis-a-vis assault. The intent requirement applies to the prohibited action, not the result. That’s all I’m going off of.

Once his intended use of force becomes unreasonable, I’d think the jury was justified in finding that an assault was intended under that general intent scheme. When that assault results in death, it supports second degree murder. So the evidence would seem to be sufficient.

Jury instruction issues are good appellate issues. Without knowing more of the State’s law, I can’t speculate as to how that would turn out on appeal.

Cc: @hUTch2002
 
  • Like
Reactions: hUTch2002 and PNW Huskie
#2,220
#2,220
Tastylicks said:
I'll revisit in a few days. When "white grievance day" is over, maybe we can have a decent discussion on this. For now carry on with the pissin & moaning over a murder ...
Click to expand...

Hold on. You just made a claim that was false. Are you willing to admit you’re wrong about 2nd degree murder
 
#2,223
#2,223
Tastylicks said:
I am not wrong.
Click to expand...

I just quoted the actual statue on 2nd degree murder from the state of Minnesota which is on par with basically every other state.

2nd degree=intentional

Manslaughter=unintentional

There may be some states where that rule doesn’t hold true. In this example 2nd degree=intentional
 
#2,224
#2,224

Attachments

  • 8AC49C39-0821-416B-AE5B-9D93D08B29CA.png
    8AC49C39-0821-416B-AE5B-9D93D08B29CA.png
    374.8 KB · Views: 10
#2,225
#2,225
RockyTop85 said:
Thanks. Not trying to be a dick, but try subdivision 2.

That’s what he was convicted of.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I saw that. Are you claiming he was violating a protection order? Or that he was just attempting to kill another person in general?

Which one do you believe applies?
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top