Guilty or Not Guilty? The George Floyd trial...

Big day today: closing arguments from both sides.
 
Too bad scumbags like Maxine Waters feel the need to pollute the process. She represents the worst of the worst members of Congress. She's a bigot and dumb as a rock, not to mention being too good to live in her own district. What does that say about her constitutions? Are they also bigots and dumb as rocks or is there a perpetual fix in to guarantee her reelection every two years?
 
It is rather ironic that she accuses Trump of inciting violence at the Capital.
 
My reference to fact checker was not a criticism of content, its a reference to Pats pet name for me. In fact, I watched some of it and I think he agreed with me that Man3 is where this is going.

Moke, just a fine point. If your "Pat" reference is Pat Harman, Pat is a "she."
 
Moke, just a fine point. If your "Pat" reference is Pat Harman, Pat is a "she."
If your reference to gender is Man3, thats a reference to Manslaughter 3rd degree. I'm well aware Pat is female.
The he was the guy we were talking about.
 
I'm not watching the trial. Nevertheless, the unexpected twist. The actions of Maxine Waters are reprehensible. As a lawmaker, Waters should know that this behavior is inexcusable. She is inciting "insurrection".
"And now that we have [a] U.S. representative … threatening acts of violence in relation to this specific case, it's it's mind boggling to me to have," Attorney Eric Nelson said, as he attempted to argue that the jury may have been unduly influenced by external factors.

Judge Peter Cahill said that he wished elected officials would stop referencing the case "especially in a manner that is disrespectful to the rule of law" so as to let the judicial process play out as intended.

He added, however, that he did not believe the comments unduly influenced the jury as they had been told not to watch the news.
Water's prior comments. Water's does not determine "justice". It is the jury's job to determine guilt or not-guilty. Maxine does not get to overrule the jury.

Following the links gets more and more ludicrous. Water's evidently wanted police protection from the police she is condemning.
 
Last edited:
Immediately after making my prior post, Tucker Carlson came on-air. Below is his monologue on Waters "call to confrontation". Or as Tucker summarized "Do as I say or I will kill you."
There was also a video clip where the police chief referred to a "riot". Listen closely, the so-called "reporters" shouting out that there was no riot. Clearly, these were not real reporters but people supporting those rioting and trying desperately to downplay the incident. As in manipulating the news.
 
Last edited:
More evidence the children are in charge, similar to Lord of the Flies.

Lord of the Flies is a 1954 novel by Nobel Prize-winning British author William Golding. The book focuses on a group of British boys stranded on an uninhabited island and their disastrous attempt to govern themselves. Themes include the tension between groupthink and individuality, between rational and emotional reactions, and between morality and immorality. Wikipedia
 
Derek Chauvin is guilty,
The video records showed enough evidence,
Which also taken captured by the people who witnessed the incident.
 
I keep wondering if I've missed the announcement of the jury's decision, but then I realise I would probably see Explosions, fighting and riots on the news! So I don't think they've made a decision yet!
 
The video records showed enough evidence,
It shows Chauvin with his knee sometimes on his back and sometimes on his neck. But you have to take in the entirety of the evidence. This includes the fact that Floyd was struggling to breathe before Chauvin even touched him, and put him on the ground. How do you account for that? At the moment when Floyd took his last breath, Chauvin took his mace out of his pocket because he saw a threat from the crowd grow, thus being distracted. There is more to this case that you perhaps know, unless of course you concluded Chauvin was guilty before the trial even started, since you saw the video and you don't care about what the defence has to say.

Remember that Chauvin starts with the presumption of innocence. It sounds like you say he starts with the presumption of guilt because you've seen the video.
 
Last edited:
I keep wondering if I've missed the announcement of the jury's decision, but then I realise I would probably see Explosions, fighting and riots on the news! So I don't think they've made a decision yet!
Channeling our inner Colin Essex are we??
 
But you have to take in the entirety of the evidence. This includes the fact that Floyd was struggling to breathe before Chauvin even touched him, and put him on the ground. How do you account for that?
Taking that statement as fact, shouldn't Chauvin had factored that into his desicion to place him prone with his knees on him?

Remember that Chauvin starts with the presumption of innocence. It sounds like you say he starts with the presumption of guilt because you've seen the video.
Only in a court of law, not in the court of public opinion.
 
Taking that statement as fact, shouldn't Chauvin had factored that into his desicion to place him prone with his knees on him?
"If you can talk, you can breathe."

Floyd said he couldn't breathe while in the squad car. Why do you think that was? No knee on his neck.
 
If you can talk, you can breathe."
If you can move air you can make sounds such as talking. Doesn't mean the air makes it, in sufficient quantity, to your lungs.
 
Channeling our inner Colin Essex are we??

Funny you should mention Colin, he is conspicuous by his absence! I just had a look and he was Last seen Feb 22, 2021. If anyone's got his phone number they ought to give him a shout!
 
Funny you should mention Colin, he is conspicuous by his absence! I just had a look and he was Last seen Feb 22, 2021. If anyone's got his phone number they ought to give him a shout!
I once considered reaching out to him for a drink while I was in the UK, but didn't take the time to do it. The way things are going now it seems I'll never travel abroad again...
 
If you can move air you can make sounds such as talking. Doesn't mean the air makes it, in sufficient quantity, to your lungs.
The prosecutions witness also agreed that many doctors assume that if you can talk you can breathe.

Makes mental note: Moke is still not providing any explanation for why Floyd was saying multiple times that he cannot breathe in the squad car. Why? Because it is an inconvenient truth.

Still waiting...
 
The prosecutions witness also agreed that many doctors assume that if you can talk you can breathe.

Makes mental note: Moke is still not providing any explanation for why Floyd was saying multiple times that he cannot breathe in the squad car. Why? Because it is an inconvenient truth.

Still waiting...

I thought you watched the trial? Did you not hear him say he was claustrophobic?
Then, when told to get into the squad car, Floyd repeatedly yelled, “I’m not that kind a guy!” and “I’m claustrophobic!” As officers shoved his upper body and then his legs into the car, he writhed and screamed, “Please! Please! … I can’t breathe!”

The irrational, involuntary fear of tight, small spaces can cause sufferers to avoid everyday places, even though they are aware that there is not any real danger. A person who has claustrophobia knows that the fear is irrational, but even thinking about the fear can create anxiety. When they are faced with the feared situation, they feel like they are having a panic attack, a heart attack, or as if they could even stop breathing and pass out.

The prosecutions witness also agreed that many doctors assume that if you can talk you can breathe.
Assuming anything doesn't make it true.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top Bottom