Derek Chauvin murder trial (George Floyd)

Faugheen wrote: »

Same few jump into any conversation where racism is involved, as if it doesn't actually exist and is just a figment of our imagination.

Unless it's racism to white people that is.

Are you suggesting this incident was racially motivated?

And of course racism exists, but unfortunately when people describe any bad thing that happens to a person of colour as racism, it dilutes the severity of the word and it starts to lose all meaning.

And imagine white people not wanting to be discriminated against because of their skin colour.....

OMM 0000 wrote: »

So let's get this straight... there is no evidence of damage from choking... there is evidence of asphyxiation BEFORE the police put Floyd on the ground (Floyd repeatedly admits he is having problems breathing)... he has a fatal level of fentanyl in him which causes asphyxiation... yet we're somehow supposed to believe he died of choking.

Fentanyl is the last straw the racists desperately and grimly cling to, no matter the facts.

Quote:

"Mr. Floyd died from a low level of oxygen, and this caused damage to his brain that we see. And it also caused a PEA (pulseless electrical activity) arrhythmia that caused his heart to stop," he told the court. He explained Floyd's body position on the street, handcuffs pulling his arms back and a knee on his neck, back and sides, led to his low oxygen levels.

"All of these four forces are ultimately going to result in the low tidal volume, which gives you the shallow breaths" that can't effectively bring oxygen into the lungs, Tobin said.

He stated because fentanyl typically slows down a person's breathing, the drug was not a contributing factor based on his calculations of Floyd's breathing rate based on witness video, which at the time appeared about the same as a healthy individual.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/factcheck/2021/04/16/fact-check-fentanyl-george-floyd-not-enough-to-cause-death/7239448002/

Surely it is beyond obvious this trial was political and Chauvin was going to be found guilty no matter that?

Got a source for that?

Faugheen wrote: »

Same few jump into any conversation where racism is involved, as if it doesn't actually exist and is just a figment of our imagination.

Unless it's racism to white people that is.

It's very telling that the people who are yelling VERY LOUDLY that racism doesn't exist, are always white.
Their opinion is worth less than used toilet paper.
Never engage with these "people"

There is 0 evidence of this being a racially motivated death, and those constantly peddling it are dangerous. Same people trying to say the Blanchardstown death end of Dec was racially motivated. Dangerous attitudes!

White, black, blue, yellow or whatever..

Chauvin did not set out to end George’s life, and nor is there any evidence to say that he did what he did because George was black

Unless folks are claiming that they can get inside Chauvin’s head..

Oranage2

OMM 0000 wrote: »

Do you understand what asphyxiation is?

Are you aware fentanyl overdoses cause asphyxiation?

https://mayoclinic.pure.elsevier.com/en/publications/asphyxiation-with-a-fentanyl-patch

Stop trying to pretend death by choking and asphyxiation are the same thing.

The medical expert said there was no injuries which are consistent with chocking.

My question for you is this:

Why are you trying to believe a lie? What's in this for you?

What's in it for me?

Justice.

Justice for a man that lay helpless on the ground as another man slowly kneeled on his neck until he died.

Justice for the black community that unlawful killings by police will not go unpunished.

Justice that law enforcement can be accountable.

Justice

Mic 1972

Detritus70 wrote: »

It's very telling that the people who are yelling VERY LOUDLY that racism doesn't exist, are always white.
Their opinion is worth less than used toilet paper.
Never engage with these "people"

usually it's because only white people are being accused of racist
your comment about white people is as racist as it gets but you dont get called out for it because it's directed at white people, see the irony?

Detritus70 wrote: »

It's very telling that the people who are yelling VERY LOUDLY that racism doesn't exist, are always white.
Their opinion is worth less than used toilet paper.
Never engage with these "people"

Again, what has racism got to do with this case?

I'm not surprised people shout loudly to you that racism doesn't exist when you keep trying to insert it into situations where there is none.

And no, it's not always white people either. Bit of a generalisation based on skin colour from yourself there....

What's that called again?

Oranage2 wrote: »

What's in it for me?

Justice.

Justice for a man that lay helpless on the ground as another man slowly kneeled on his neck until he died.

Justice for the black community that unlawful killings by police will not go unpunished.

Justice that law enforcement can be accountable.

Justice

Lol. Ok batman

At this stage we've seen the video. We've heard the witnesses and the expert testimony.
There has been an official verdict.
This matter has been solved. Beyond any reasonable doubt. Anyone arguing against that is on the same level as a flat earther, lizard conspiracist or Trump supporter.
You are wrong, get fcuked, end of.

Detritus70 wrote: »

At this stage we've seen the video. We've heard the witnesses and the expert testimony.
There has been an official verdict.
This matter has been solved. Beyond any reasonable doubt. Anyone arguing against that is on the same level as a flat earther, lizard conspiracist or Trump supporter.
You are wrong, get fcuked, end of.

I don’t think it’s remotely the same as what you are suggesting here..

There is a whole lot more nuance, detail, emotion, argument, debate involved in these type cases..

Detritus70 wrote: »

At this stage we've seen the video. We've heard the witnesses and the expert testimony.
There has been an official verdict.
This matter has been solved. Beyond any reasonable doubt. Anyone arguing against that is on the same level as a flat earther, lizard conspiracist or Trump supporter.
You are wrong, get fcuked, end of.

Absolutely. It's well known that there has never ever been an incorrect verdict.

If you think OJ Simpson killed someone, your a trump supporter.

walshb wrote: »

I don’t think it’s remotely the same as what you are suggesting here..

There is a whole lot more nuance, detail, emotion, argument, debate involved in these type cases..

I don't see any nuance in a police officer kneeling for 9 minutes on the neck of a man, even after that person has become unresponsive.
Zero

Tony EH wrote: »

Mmmmm.

There are some people on here that haven't the first clue about what they're talking about. Worse still, they haven't even bothered to make a cursory glance to see the details of what 2nd and 3rd degree murder constitute in the state in question.

Yet they still feel the need to white knight for Chauvin and fall over themselves to make up the most flimsy and ridiculous of excuses for him.

Indeed- here’s a post I made last night along with a link to the 3 counts as explained by the judge - it clearly lays out the guidance the jury took on when making their decision- while personally I felt he was guilty of murder 2 I had my doubts the jury would go that far- thankfully they did. But for those spouting “he’s innocent” or similar would you mind telling us all what aspects of the 3 counts you believe weren’t proven beyond reasonable doubt?

Deleted User wrote: »

Here’s a link to the judges direction to the jury- what do you think is “unfair” about the verdict based on his clear guidance?

https://www.startribune.com/read-the-judges-instructions-for-the-jury-in-the-derek-chauvin-murder-trial/600047788/

Deleted User wrote: »

Absolutely. It's well known that there has never ever been an incorrect verdict.

If you think OJ Simpson killed someone, your a trump supporter.

9 minutes

Detritus70 wrote: »

I don't see any nuance in a police officer kneeling for 9 minutes on the neck of a man, even after that person has become unresponsive.
Zero

Well, there has been a whole lot more debated and discussed and presented on this case..

partyguinness

OMM 0000 wrote: »

Why are you lying?

Dr. Baker [the prosecutor's medical expert] acknowledged to the defense that he saw no physical signs of asphyxiation.

Ermmmm...that is exactly what I said. Why are you not reading my posts correctly.

OMM 0000 wrote: »

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/live-blog/derek-chauvin-trial-2021-04-19-n1264442/ncrd1264535#liveBlogHeader

He also admitted heart disease and drug use contributed to his death.

But based on the video they think he was choked to death.

Yeah you said it..."contributed" is the operative word here...not the primary cause of death. Where has this choking come from? I have never mentioned choking.

OMM 0000 wrote: »

So let's get this straight... there is no evidence of damage from choking... there is evidence of asphyxiation BEFORE the police put Floyd on the ground (Floyd repeatedly admits he is having problems breathing)... he has a fatal level of fentanyl in him which causes asphyxiation... yet we're somehow supposed to believe he died of choking.

Surely it is beyond obvious this trial was political and Chauvin was going to be found guilty no matter that?

No he died due to compresion of the neck as the primary cause. Such compresison was due to Cauvin kneeling on him for 9 minutes. Such actions were unlawful.

Whether or not a level of Fentanyl is "fatal" is entirely subjective and it depends on the user. If you are a serial user then your dosage will be a lot higher than you or me for example.

If a well built cop is kneeling into your neck you are going to have difficulty breathing.

No evidence of damage from choking or compressin? Not an issue. The reasons for this were given in open Court testimony by the medical experts which I listened to.

Seriously did you even follow the trial or listen to any evidence?

At this stage I am of the firm opinion that you have not listened to any of the evidence that was presented. You are asking questions that were easily and readily debunked/answered in Court.

Oh darn, I accidentally posted in CA.
I forgot I was in the toilet of boards.

Detritus70 wrote: »

Oh darn, I accidentally posted in CA.
I forgot I was in the toilet of boards.

Bye so.

nolivesmatter

Faugheen wrote: »

Same few jump into any conversation where racism is involved, as if it doesn't actually exist and is just a figment of our imagination.

Unless it's racism to white people that is.

Just racism is the problem, doesn't matter who it's against. Supposedly well intentioned, things like "be less white" don't establish a framework for success IMO. You can't fix racism with more racism.

Deleted User wrote: »

Bye so.

OK, you convinced me to stick around for another while to engage in pig wrestling and pigeoon chess.
9 minutes.

penny piper

Detritus70 wrote: »

OK, you convinced me to stick around for another while to engage in pig wrestling and pigeoon chess.
9 minutes.

Are you ok? you seem very annoyed.

Detritus70 wrote: »

OK, you convinced me to stick around for another while to engage in pig wrestling and pigeoon chess.
9 minutes.

Awful strange habit to loiter in what you claim is a toilet. Each to their own.

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Absolutely. It's well known that there has never ever been an incorrect verdict.

If you think OJ Simpson killed someone, your a trump supporter.

Thing is, the defence was terrible and that was why he lost. It was too difficult to establish any reasonable doubt.

I called this weeks ago. I knew he would be found guilty of something. Far too much outrage and hype and media scrutiny for him not to be convicted..

Surely he and his defence would have known that no matter what they did to defend, there would be a lot of evidence to convict, coupled with the global attention and outrage and all that..

Which brings me to Chauvin: why stay quiet and not testify? What had he to lose? Chances were that he was getting convicted.

Surely testifying and showing real human remorse and sorrow and being sorry would have given him some chance? As in, saying that he never ever intended to hurt or kill George, and that he never realised that George was truly in danger..

It just seems that his remaining quiet painted him as being inhuman, remorseless...

Sure, cross examination could have hurt him, but his case was already a tough ask for his defence. At least him speaking up to strongly deny that he never meant to hurt/kill Floyd, and that he is so sorry that George died that day.. this has to lend weight in the eyes of those judging him..

Yellow_Fern

Detritus70 wrote: »

Fentanyl is the last straw the racists desperately and grimly cling to, no matter the facts.

Quote:

"Mr. Floyd died from a low level of oxygen, and this caused damage to his brain that we see. And it also caused a PEA (pulseless electrical activity) arrhythmia that caused his heart to stop," he told the court. He explained Floyd's body position on the street, handcuffs pulling his arms back and a knee on his neck, back and sides, led to his low oxygen levels.

"All of these four forces are ultimately going to result in the low tidal volume, which gives you the shallow breaths" that can't effectively bring oxygen into the lungs, Tobin said.

He stated because fentanyl typically slows down a person's breathing, the drug was not a contributing factor based on his calculations of Floyd's breathing rate based on witness video, which at the time appeared about the same as a healthy individual.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/factcheck/2021/04/16/fact-check-fentanyl-george-floyd-not-enough-to-cause-death/7239448002/

Got a source for that?

You can get a court witness to basically say anything and in this case the expert's (Dr Toibin) testimony is bull. He claimed that he could watch this third party video and assess cause of death by measuring how his chest moved and that it was not a drug overdose. He didnt see the body. He didnt weigh Chauvin. All based on the same video we saw. That is medical alchemy. What bs.

tjhook

osarusan wrote: »

Still so many posters on here who see the word 'murder' and think it must mean that 'intentional killing', and use that misunderstanding to disagree with the verdict.

This is a good point, at least it's applicable to me.

From what I saw of the footage, the cop appeared to be guilty of something. The words "murder" and "manslaughter" are technical legal terms that have differing meanings in different jurisdictions. And in the US they're subdivided into "degrees". So while I'm a bit surprised that a person can be guilty of murder and manslaughter for the same crime, I'm aware of my limitations, and am happy to assume that the verdict was the correct one.

I was surprised though to see Biden's comment. I'm a fan of the separation between political and judicial matters. While his comment had no impact on the case, I wouldn't be comfortable with politicians expressing a preference for a particular future outcome in a criminal case. I'd feel the same if it was a Taoiseach expressing a desire for a particular outcome in a criminal case in this country. The leader of a democratic state should be happy that the judicial process is allowed to do its thing, whatever the outcome. If not, he should be open about challenging/changing the judicial process itself.

Yellow_Fern wrote: »

You can get a court witness to basically say anything and in this case the expert's (Dr Toibin) testimony is bull. He claimed that he could watch this third party video and assess cause of death by measuring how his chest moved and that it was not a drug overdose. He didnt see the body. He didnt weigh Chauvin. All based on the same video we saw. That is medical alchemy. What bs.

Do you have a source to back that up?

nolivesmatter

walshb wrote: »

I called this weeks ago. I knew he would be found guilty of something. Far too much outrage and hype and media scrutiny for him not to be convicted..

Surely he and his defence would have known that no matter what they did to defend, there would be a lot of evidence to convict, coupled with the global attention and outrage and all that..

Which brings me to Chauvin: why stay quiet and not testify? What had he to lose? Chances were that he was getting convicted.

Surely testifying and showing real human remorse and sorrow and being sorry would have given him some chance? As in, saying that he never ever intended to hurt or kill George, and that he never realised that George was truly in danger..

It just seems that his remaining quiet painted him as being inhuman, remorseless...

Sure, cross examination could have hurt him, but his case was already a tough ask for his defence. At least him speaking up to strongly deny that he never meant to hurt/kill Floyd, and that he is so sorry that George died that day.. this has to lend weight in the eyes of those judging him..

I think we all knew that in fairness:pac: Manslaughter or murder was only question.

Overheal

walshb wrote: »

I called this weeks ago. I knew he would be found guilty of something. Far too much outrage and hype and media scrutiny for him not to be convicted..

Surely he and his defence would have known that no matter what they did to defend, there would be a lot of evidence to convict, coupled with the global attention and outrage and all that..

Which brings me to Chauvin: why stay quiet and not testify? What had he to lose? Chances were that he was getting convicted.

Surely testifying and showing real human remorse and sorrow and being sorry would have given him some chance? As in, saying that he never ever intended to hurt or kill George, and that he never realised that George was truly in danger..

It just seems that his remaining quiet painted him as being inhuman, remorseless...

Sure, cross examination could have hurt him, but his case was already a tough ask for his defence. At least him speaking up to strongly deny that he never meant to hurt/kill Floyd, and that he is so sorry that George died that day.. this has to lend weight in the eyes of those judging him..

Witnesses waiving their fifth amendment rights is fairly uncommon in defense proceedings. They leave it up to the prosecution to mount their case, cross examination generally yields far too much risk to defendants. It just gives ammunition unless you have something really, really exculpatory to add. Expressing an outpouring of remorse prior to verdict can just as easily be interpreted by a jury as guilt. There’s still a sentencing process and typically there defendants can make those type of please. Here though it simply seems unlikely his charges will get whittled down with the Brock Turner or Lindsay Lohan or whatever treatment. He murdered someone