Derek Chauvin murder trial (George Floyd)

Overheal wrote: »

He did intend to keep choking him, though, and that's a pretty important matter.

Would, "I just meant to hurt him with the gun, not murder him," be an apt defense against murder one? You still premeditated shooting them with a gun. Chauvin didn't eat breakfast while planning this disaster out but for 8-9 minutes he did sit there and continue to think 'this situation is under my control' and proceed.

This is where I feel it get's a little fuzzy for me. The part that really doesn't sit well with me is that at one point Chauvin lifts his foot off the ground. At that point he is putting his full weight on the neck and he knows he's doing it. He's looking down at Floyd whilst also doing it. It's impossible for me to say with complete confidence but the gut says he was trying to hurt him.

Whether because of bias, as an outlet for misplaced aggression, a power trip, you'd never be able to prove, but I agree with you that he had an abundance of time and composure to determine the actions he was taking and what effects were unfolding.

cheezums wrote: »

yesterday the defence had an expert witness who said it was possible chauvin had carbon monoxide poisoning from the squad car exhaust. overnight, the prosecution seemingly came up with blood test results from the hospital which supposedly would disprove this. judge said this evidence was inadmissable as it was way too late in the day to introduce that evidence, especially as they had two months to find this report previously and didn't. it also seemingly didn't have floyd's name on it.

the prosecution planned to have dr tobin, their expert witness to reference the aforementioned report in their rebuttal. judge said if tobin even mentions that report it's a mistrial.

tobin was briefed by the prosecution and there was a brief moment of panic as tobin referenced a different lab report in court.

all very tense.

CO poisoning doesn't make sense to me. CO is lighter than elemental air. He was on the ground, more than 12+ inches away from the tailpipe. The exhaust air is HOT, the surrounding air is COLD, heat rises. Unless someone was revving the SUV there's no way, and even then I'd find that so unlikely that I'd go test it myself. And if it was the case, then Chauvin would have surely experienced more CO fumes than Floyd, and should have moved him and the suspect away from the tailpipe, if he was doing his job and keeping everyone safe.

Overheal wrote: »

CO poisoning doesn't make sense to me. CO is lighter than elemental air. He was on the ground, more than 12+ inches away from the tailpipe. The exhaust air is HOT, the surrounding air is COLD, heat rises. Unless someone was revving the SUV there's no way, and even then I'd find that so unlikely that I'd go test it myself.

yes the CO angle from the defense is ridiculous honestly. he would have had to have been in a confined space for it to be a factor.

MeMen2_MoRi_ wrote: »

I don't know, I think on the manslaughter charge it's gonna be guilty, can the state get the murder 3 and 2.. might get 3 won't get 2 I think.

Personally speaking here, I've strong very strong thoughts about chauvin with the fact he just sits there till the very very end when gf is being placed into the stretcher.. it's sickening to watch it.. he listened and listened and listened to the bystanders shouting and pleading to give help when gf died and he/they did nothing. The defence to then turn that around as it was their fault for being there distracting them, gimme a break!
You've mentioned what the paramedic said about the situation being tense, yeah it was tense because the crowd witnessed cops do nothing to help while also being the cause of it.. tense doesn't equal a threat in that situation it's people feeling emotion that are no where wanting to do harm to cops.

You know when the paramedics came and the paramedic took george floyd's pulse???? do you not think the paramedics (remembering their duty of care) should have told the officers to get off floyd if they were that concerned??? but they didn't ...the paramedic took floyd's pulse with the officers still having floyd in the restraint position.
The officers only left off the restraint when the paramedics wanted to put floyd in the ambulance and the officer's helped them.
There was also a cam shot of a guy who testified Williams who was seen trying to come towards the officers but some other bystander was holding him back...

btw there is an article in the journal.ie that said after floyd was taken away by ambulance .....Derek Chauvan said to a bystander "We had to control this guy ...cause he's a sizeable guy...and it look likes he's probably on something".

political analyst wrote: »

I listened to former Baltimore mayor Stephanie Rawlings-Blake and forensic pathologist Dr Cyril Wecht discussing the evidence given at the trial yesterday on last night's edition of Erin Burnett's OutFront programme on CNN.

Does the US constitutional right of freedom of speech mean that judges cannot impose even the slightest restriction on media coverage of a criminal trial? It raises the question of how any defendant in a criminal case in the US can get a fair trial.

Bridges v. California, quote:

"[F]ree speech and fair trials are two of the most cherished policies
of our civilization, and it would be a trying task to choose between
them."

For your reading pleasure on that question, I think a lot of Irish would find this 1982 article about the media and the courts quite contemporary to current Irish statute:

https://scholarship.law.wm.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1627&context=facpubs

penny piper wrote: »

You know when the paramedics came and the paramedic took george floyd's pulse???? do you not think the paramedics (remembering their duty of care) should have told the officers to get off floyd if they were that concerned??? but they didn't ...the paramedic took floyd's pulse with the officers still having floyd in the restraint position.
The officers only left off the restraint when the paramedics wanted to put floyd in the ambulance and the officer's helped them.
There was also a cam shot of a guy who testified Williams who was seen trying to come towards the officers but some other bystander was holding him back...

1st... yes

2nd.. speaking of duty of care, the duty of care lays soley and squarely upon the shoulders of cops who have a person in their custody.. did we see any duty of care being given to GF.. nope, not one second of care was given from the moment of unconsciousness till dead and even after..
I've no complaints about the paramedics, George was dead, long since dead.

3rd.. one person, who when Thao told him/put his hands on him told to move back complied.. let me ask, if the cops feared for their own safety, why are they on top of a dead man, the more immediate threat for them is supposedly from the bystanders why aren't they taken a more defensive stance with them, being on your knees is not a good place to be if someone is going to attack you.. They were comfortable, we don't hear any tactics talk being brought up in court that there was danger being felt from chauvin to the other officers who are beside him, they haven't a clear view of the bystanders right..

MeMen2_MoRi_ wrote: »

1st... yes

2nd.. speaking of duty of care, the duty of care lays soley and squarely upon the shoulders of cops who have a person in their custody.. did we see any duty of care being given to GF.. nope, not one second of care was given from the moment of unconsciousness till dead and even after..
I've no complaints about the paramedics, George was dead, long since dead.

3rd.. one person, who when Thao told him/put his hands on him told to move back complied.. let me ask, if the cops feared for their own safety, why are they on top of a dead man, the more immediate threat for them is supposedly from the bystanders why aren't they taken a more defensive stance with them, being on your knees is not a good place to be if someone is going to attack you.. They were comfortable, we don't hear any tactics talk being brought up in court that there was danger being felt from chauvin to the other officers who are beside him, they haven't a clear view of the bystanders right..

You see I think the paramedics had a duty of care as well....
If george floyd was "long"dead when the paramedics came what did they bother taking his pulse for then?

So your idea would be for the police officer's to get off george floyd and restrain some of the bystanders...

Isn't officer Tau infront of the suv? he could see what the bystanders were doing ...wasn't it on his body cam?

penny piper wrote: »

You see I think the paramedics had a duty of care as well....
If george floyd was "long"dead when the paramedics came what did they bother taking his pulse for then?

So your idea would be for the police officer's to get off george floyd and restrain some of the bystanders...

Isn't officer Tau infront of the suv? he could see what the bystanders were doing ...wasn't it on his body cam?

1st... They didn't know until the pulse was checked and viewing the pupils were fully dilated, the paramedic testified to this..

2nd.. why are you confused? A dead man doesn't need to be restrained, right? The cops aren't providing first aid to him, right? They are there, what the defence and people on this thread have made cases for that the officers were/could of been fearing for their safety... Yes?

3rd... Yes he is, you also have the other officers who can't see, they'd be reliant on chauvin speaking to them if he is in fear of the crowd doing something.. he did nothing just like he did nothing of much with regards helping GF.

penny piper wrote: »

You see I think the paramedics had a duty of care as well....
If george floyd was "long"dead when the paramedics came what did they bother taking his pulse for then?

So your idea would be for the police officer's to get off george floyd and restrain some of the bystanders...

Isn't officer Tau infront of the suv? he could see what the bystanders were doing ...wasn't it on his body cam?

Do you think Chauvin did anything wrong? After hearing the evidence over the last couple weeks, do think he should be found guilty or not guilty?

You'd be surprised how easy it is to flip Republican types on this issue using libertarian arguments. I successfully argued along these lines last summer with a group of alt-right extremist gobsh!tes on Voat, all of whom were celebrating Floyd's death on the grounds of their usual racist biases. When I put it to them that "small government" conservatives should more than anyone be angered by rampant police unaccountability in the United States, and that unchecked and unpunished abuses of power by those employed by the state is the absolute epitome of "The Swamp" they're always going on about, I was genuinely surprised by how many people reacted with something along the lines of "leave race out of it and you're right, this is a simply Big State vs ordinary citizens issue and the people cheering for Chauvin and other cops in these scenarios are idiots". I've seen this kind of sentiment play out repeatedly in various circumstances and with different groups of right-leaning people, which is interesting.

While I would never, ever deny that racism among the cops in the US is an absolutely endemic clusterf*ck of a problem, I've always suspected that those who favour the status quo are absolutely delighted that the issue of police brutality which really came to the fore in the early 2010s with several high profile incidents of brutality resulting in death, which occurred across various racial demographics, ended up becoming inextricably intertwined with issues of racism and thus a left vs right partisan issue. It's not to suggest that racism isn't the real problem - of course it is. But it operates under a paradigm of police and other public officials in America generally being held to totally different laws and standards than ordinary people, and getting away with things they shouldn't get away with because, fundamentally, America doesn't punish people with power for abusing it. Quite similar really to Ireland's culture of impunity, albeit manifesting in different areas.

In other words, essentially, a proportion of cops being racist gobsh!tes would be less of a problem in terms of how it plays out in actual interactions with the public, if cops who use excessive force or are just straight up bullying, violent scumbags, were properly punished for this. And while the former issue is one which will always cause conservative types to roll their eyes, convince them to look beyond the race issue and see it framed instead as an "employees of The State can do whatever they like and nobody ever punishes them for it" and you'll suddenly have far more cross-partisan support than you might expect. You only really end up with auth-right types siding against reform once it's framed in those terms, and I'd posit that certainly in present-day America, auth-right tends to be vastly outnumbered by lib-right. In other words, on the right in general, "respect for authority" types tend to be overwhelmingly drowned out by "drain the swamp, small government" types. And the latter are far less likely to excuse police brutality once it's explicitly framed as a state overreach issue.

MeMen2_MoRi_ wrote: »

1st... They didn't know until the pulse was checked and viewing the pupils were fully dilated, the paramedic testified to this..

2nd.. why are you confused? A dead man doesn't need to be restrained, right? The cops aren't providing first aid to him, right? They are there, what the defence and people on this thread have made cases for that the officers were/could of been fearing for their safety... Yes?

3rd... Yes he is, you also have the other officers who can't see, they'd be reliant on chauvin speaking to them if he is in fear of the crowd doing something.. he did nothing just like he did nothing of much with regards helping GF.

1.So why didn't the police officers tell them he was dead?

2... well if your not sure they're dead you keep the restraint on...yes? you said they needed the paramedics to check. right?

3 He was in fear he took out the mace spary ...he also called the medics twice.

You forget the paramedics moved the ambulance to a safe place because they said of the anger of the crowd right?

I wonder why the state were so determined to rebut Fowlers testimony that emissions could have played a part

MeMen2_MoRi_ wrote: »

Settle the argument, once and for all..

Did chauvin at any point do anything wrong?

What's your opinion?