New Posts
  • Hi there guest! Welcome to PoliticalJack.com. Register for free to join our community?

The Dereck Chauvin trial

Schrodinger's Platypus

Radical Constitutional Extremist
Where do you get your news? What’s brewing with the Dereck Chauvin trial?

Slam dunk? Guilty as hell?

No. Not even close. Derrick Chauvin will be aquitted and not because he’s white and enjoys white privilege. As the prosecution is making its case they are doing such a terrible job that the defense has now said they want a prosecution witness to testify on behalf of the defense. Why? Because he testified that Chauvin used LESS force than was allowed under the circumstances—this in the face of charges that he used excessive force! And he is a state expert testifying for the prosecution!

Did you know that? Did you get that from your news source? Are they blasting it 24/7 or is it buried on pg. 13?

Barring some other more crazy turn of events, the only way Chauvin is guilty is through jury intimidation or fear of riots.

But there will be riots no matter what the verdict. Because in a nation of 330 million people there are bound to be a few million idiots.
 
Last edited:

PhilFish

Administrator
Staff member
What does that mean, less Force than is allowed? Whats to say that the force used though less than allowed may have been too much for this individual? Furthermore let's stipulate that to force was less than allowed, he was subdued, and thoroughly at that about 2 seconds into that video. What do we do about the other eight plus minutes that he knelt, with less Force than allowed, on the guy's neck?
 

UPNYA2

Mayor
Where do you get your news? What’s brewing with the Dereck Chauvin trial?

Slam dunk? Guilty as hell?

No. Not even close. Derrick Chauvin will be aquitted and not because he’s white and enjoys white privilege. As the prosecution is making its case they are doing such a terrible job that the defense has now said they want a prosecution witness to testify on behalf of the defense. Why? Because he testified that Chauvin used LESS force than was allowed under the circumstances—this in the face of charges that he used excessive force! And he is a state expert testifying for the prosecution!

Did you know that? Did you get that from your news source? Are they blasting it 24/7 or is it buried on pg. 13?

Barring some other more crazy turn of events, the only way Chauvin is guilty is through jury intimidation or fear of riots.

But there will be riots no matter what the verdict. Because in a nation of 330 million people there are bound to be a few million idiots.
I have not read or heard anything about that.

Never the less it is still my contention that no matter what, anything or everything, is brought out in this trial this guy is DONE.

Call it jury intimidation, fear of riots, justice being served, whatever, there is no way in HELL he walks.

Sh_t, there was no way he was ever going to have a prayer at receiving a fair trial by a jury of open minded peers who had no previous knowledge of the case or pre-determined feelings of guilt or innocence anywhere on this earth, let alone in the place it happened so who in their right mind could ever state he is being served by our judicial system as it is designed to do for all with a straight face?

No, I believe he is going down, innocent or guilty, AND, I also believe the city is going up in smoke either way. Be it because vengeance is not served or be it because justice IS served and he goes to jail it will not be enough for the leftist thugs and they will, as sure as God made little green apples, WILL, feel that they need to burn stores and steal plasma TVs to make things "right".

Let's see...
 

Schrodinger's Platypus

Radical Constitutional Extremist
What does that mean, less Force than is allowed? Whats to say that the force used though less than allowed may have been too much for this individual? Furthermore let's stipulate that to force was less than allowed, he was subdued, and thoroughly at that about 2 seconds into that video. What do we do about the other eight plus minutes that he knelt, with less Force than allowed, on the guy's neck?
Just telling you what the prosecution witness said. Chauvin could have tazed him. Probably not too good on the heart especially on a lethal dose of fentanyl.
 
Last edited:

Dawg

President
Supporting Member
Color me wrong, but, I've always thought to be guilty of murder you had to have intended to murder?

No wonder cops are walking off their jobs all across America.
 

PhilFish

Administrator
Staff member
Just telling you what the prosecution witness said. Chauvin could have tazed him. Probably not too god on the heart especially on a lethal dose of fentanyl.
Yes, understood, still wondering what the amount of force has to do with it? For that matter what could have tasing him had to do with it.. furthermore the guy could have had enough fentanyl in him to kill a football stadiums worth of people, but at the moment he was still alive, so what does that have to do with it?
 

Schrodinger's Platypus

Radical Constitutional Extremist
Yes, understood, still wondering what the amount of force has to do with it? For that matter what could have tasing him had to do with it.. furthermore the guy could have had enough fentanyl in him to kill a football stadiums worth of people, but at the moment he was still alive, so what does that have to do with it?
The accusation is excessive force. The witness showed how police procedure allowed for far more force.

Nobody has a crystal ball. A toxicology report at the time of the arrest to ascertain the amount of force required and yet still keep him alive is impossible. And so we have “procedures” and “risk matrices.” To require anyone to foresee his death at the hands of procedure X allowed by protocol is impossible.
 

PhilFish

Administrator
Staff member
The accusation is excessive force. The witness showed how police procedure allowed for far more force.

Nobody has a crystal ball. A toxicology report at the time of the arrest to ascertain the amount of force required and yet still keep him alive is impossible. And so we have “procedures” and “risk matrices.” To require anyone to foresee his death at the hands of procedure X allowed by protocol is impossible.
Ok. Do you think that there's any procedure anywhere that instructs an officer of the law to continue kneeling on an individual's neck for some nine minutes after they're fully subdued? Isn't the measure to use that amount of force that is necessary to subdue the individual? So while I agree particular amount of force is necessary...it ends upon subduing...no?
 

Dawg

President
Supporting Member
Well, now the questions of his drug use is back on the table and his 'home-boy' doesn't want to testify or admit he sold or furnished George 'fentanyl' that morning while they were passing fake $20 dollar bills. (why did city pay family $27million before trial) It doesn't take much fentanyl to kill you:

Fentanyl: What Is a Lethal Dosage? - Oxford Treatment Center

That's like 4 grains of salt and I'm sure George had more than that amount of fentanyl in his system, along with Meth!

IMO many more businesses close to 'George Floyd Square' are fixing to burn and their cost for insurance will be higher than if on the coast!
 

Schrodinger's Platypus

Radical Constitutional Extremist
Ok. Do you think that there's any procedure anywhere that instructs an officer of the law to continue kneeling on an individual's neck for some nine minutes after they're fully subdued? Isn't the measure to use that amount of force that is necessary to subdue the individual? So while I agree particular amount of force is necessary...it ends upon subduing...no?
So he’s subdued and a crowd is gathering. What do you do? Loosen up? The state witness says no. That could go counterproductive fast. I’m no expert on it. But why would you loosen up realizing he might see that as his opportunity to escape?

Any reasonable person would conclude that in the absence of a lethal dose of fentanyl what the cops did was acceptable.

“But he did have a lethal dose of fentanyl in him!”

How is the cop supposed to know or account for that?
 

PhilFish

Administrator
Staff member
Floyd could have had a cannonball size hole in his chest for all I care. If, upon being layed on the ground he was still breathing, then the nine minute kneeling on his neck still plays a factor in his death
 

PhilFish

Administrator
Staff member
So he’s subdued and a crowd is gathering. What do you do? Loosen up? The state witness says no. That could go counterproductive fast. I’m no expert on it. But why would you loosen up realizing he might see that as his opportunity to escape?

Any reasonable person would conclude that in the absence of a lethal dose of fentanyl what the cops did was acceptable.

“But he did have a lethal dose of fentanyl in him!”

How is the cop supposed to know or account for that?
Could have. But as the video showed for 9 minutes while he was gasping to death, the crowd didn't do a thing. So that's not it.

How is it an opportunity to escape, if you and others are positing that he had a lethal dose of fentanyl in the system and was about to drop dead? What's the escaping to, if the claim is he was dead just didn't know it yet and therefore needed a neck kneeling to finish the job...

And no he had a level in his system that is considered lethal, but clearly it wasn't a lethal dose for him because he wasn't dead. Kind of like alcohol, in one instance a person with no tolerance maybe wiped out by one drink, or as a person who drinks like a fish can probably go to it through a bottle or more, and walk around right as rain. In either case the level of alcohol could trigger a life-threatening event, but as we know very often it does not
 

Schrodinger's Platypus

Radical Constitutional Extremist
Could have. But as the video showed for 9 minutes while he was gasping to death, the crowd didn't do a thing. So that's not it.

How is it an opportunity to escape, if you and others are positing that he had a lethal dose of fentanyl in the system and was about to drop dead? What's the escaping to, if the claim is he was dead just didn't know it yet and therefore needed a neck kneeling to finish the job...

And no he had a level in his system that is considered lethal, but clearly it wasn't a lethal dose for him because he wasn't dead. Kind of like alcohol, in one instance a person with no tolerance maybe wiped out by one drink, or as a person who drinks like a fish can probably go to it through a bottle or more, and walk around right as rain. In either case the level of alcohol could trigger a life-threatening event, but as we know very often it does not
All of this presupposes a crystal ball which no one has.

Lots of people live after lethal alcohol poisoning. Yes. Lucky them. Lots more die. Substitute fentanyl and you have this case.

“But the knee!”

Yes the knee. Asphyxiation not a cause of death in the coroner’s report. Contributing factor? Could be. But how is the use of fentanyl on the cop and not Floyd?
 

Bronwyn

Unapoligetically Republican
The defense turned the tables this week in the Derek Chauvin case, getting the star prosecution witness, the police chief, to admit that the videos appear to show Chauvin kneeling on George Floyds' shoulder blade, not his neck. The prosecution has also paraded a bunch of police witnesses to say knee-on-neck has never been allowed as part of police training, except it most certainly was. Yet another police witness admitted that a knee to side-of-neck pin should render a person unconscious in ten seconds, yet Mr. Floyd famously resisted for nine minutes.

Add to that the autopsy showed bruises not on his neck, but on his shoulders, right where Officer Chauvin is going to insist, and the video shows, he was restraining George Floyd in a distinctly non-lethal place. In fact, a similar kind of knee to the shoulder pin happens every day on high school wrestling mats without fatalities.

So, we have the prosecution witnesses potentially perjuring and gravely contradicting their own case. In a normal trial, that would be enough to find Officer Chauvin innocent of criminal charges. He simply would not have the intent to injure Mr. Floyd. Some have objected that the defense is confusing the issue by bringing up the crowd distracting the police, saying this shows that the defense is not certain it can prove the police acted by the book, by staying on top of Floyd too long. Well, it certainly looks as though Chauvin and the others lost track of time, partly having to deal with the hostile crowd. But that's a case of civil negligence, not criminal intent.

This is no ordinary trial, and the jurors are being sufficiently frightened to bring in a guilty verdict. BLM is threatening riots if Chauvin is not convicted, and they will likely be worse than those last year.



Seems the prosecutions case is in jeopardy, as even the witnesses are now saying Chavin was not kneeling in Floyd's neck. Since when does terrorist threats control a jury's decision?
 

PhilFish

Administrator
Staff member
All of this presupposes a crystal ball which no one has.

Lots of people live after lethal alcohol poisoning. Yes. Lucky them. Lots more die. Substitute fentanyl and you have this case.

“But the knee!”

Yes the knee. Asphyxiation not a cause of death in the coroner’s report. Contributing factor? Could be. But how is the use of fentanyl on the cop and not Floyd?
No it doesn't presuppose the crystal ball. Luckily for everyone many people were there with cameras, so we don't really need to Divine a thing

Part a.. George Floyd is alive at the beginning of the video. This disposes of any notion that he was overdosed.

Part b ..George Floyd is obviously subdued and laying face down on the ground

Part c.. a police officer, very obviously Derek chauvin, kneels upon the subdued and face down prone George Floyd's neck, which finds the aforementioned George Floyd alive at the beginning of the video, and deceased at the end of the video
 
Top