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

[Jon]

So am I Pat. When Daunte Wright was shot, I said that I believed the pendulum might be swinging more towards a manslaughter charge. The facts hadn't changed, but the context of anger had. But a charge of intent to kill has surprised me, especiaply whilst being recorded. I think in Minnesota this intent has a slightly different meaning. e.g. you may not intend to kill, but you intended to do the action that eventually resulted in death.

I think Maxine Waters comments is just the icing on the cake. The cake was already baked. I can imagine the jurors in a sound proofed room: "Save yourselves!"

What I don't understand is the constant reference to it being police brutality from a racist perspective. The prosecution never brought it up as a factor. Can someone please explain it to me?

 

[Jon]

That wasn't my question, but it's up to you if you feel like answering ...

I will answer it for you. They were in fear for their lives. Hard to be impartial given the circumstances.

 

[The_Doc_Man]

The next chapter is whether the defense team NOW accuses Maxine Waters of prejudicial conduct to deny Mr. Chauvin a fair trial.

Moke, you can be "not shocked" because you had long ago betrayed a bias based on your politics (from the way that you were talking.)

I am not surprised either, but I have to say that the verdict DOES NOT FOLLOW THE EVIDENCE. A heart condition and drug overdose could EASILY cause Mr. Floyd to have breathing trouble. In fact, one of the primary symptoms of a cardiac event is trouble breathing. Claustrophobia doesn't have to enter into it. Mr. Floyd's death was coming the moment he ingested those drugs. He committed suicide.

I do not believe Mr. Chauvin acted wisely. DON'T accuse me of standing up for him in regards to his actions under color of authority. He screwed the pooch and was a bad cop. But if I had been on that jury, I would deadlocked it fast. Not because I am sure that Chauvin didn't cause Mr. Floyd's death, but rather than I have significant doubts about the cause-and-effect nature of the death being 100% on Mr. Chauvin. Having been on a couple of criminal trials in Louisiana, I can say that we had it hammered into us that we had to be certain beyond a reasonable doubt. I have what I believe to be a reasonable doubt.

 

[Isaac]

So am I Pat. When Daunte Wright was shot, I said that I believed the pendulum might be swinging more towards a manslaughter charge. The facts hadn't changed, but the context of anger had. But a charge of intent to kill has surprised me, whilst being recorded surprised me. I think in Minnesota this intent has a slightly different meaning. e.g. you may not intend to kill, but you intended to do the action that eventually resulted in death.

I think Maxine Waters comments is just the icing on the cake. The cake was already baked. I can imagine the jurors in a sound proofed room: "Save yourselves!"

What I don't understand is the constant reference to it being police brutality from a racist perspective. The prosecution never brought it up as a factor. Can someone please explain it to me?

I don't think any of the 3 charges required proof of intent to kill, I could be wrong..I'm speaking in the strictest of terms

 

[Isaac]

The next chapter is whether the defense team NOW accuses Maxine Waters of prejudicial conduct to deny Mr. Chauvin a fair trial.

Moke, you can be "not shocked" because you had long ago betrayed a bias based on your politics (from the way that you were talking.)

I am not surprised either, but I have to say that the verdict DOES NOT FOLLOW THE EVIDENCE. A heart condition and drug overdose could EASILY cause Mr. Floyd to have breathing trouble. In fact, one of the primary symptoms of a cardiac event is trouble breathing. Claustrophobia doesn't have to enter into it. Mr. Floyd's death was coming the moment he ingested those drugs. He committed suicide.

I do not believe Mr. Chauvin acted wisely. DON'T accuse me of standing up for him in regards to his actions under color of authority. He screwed the pooch and was a bad cop. But if I had been on that jury, I would deadlocked it fast. Not because I am sure that Chauvin didn't cause Mr. Floyd's death, but rather than I have significant doubts about the cause-and-effect nature of the death being 100% on Mr. Chauvin. Having been on a couple of criminal trials in Louisiana, I can say that we had it hammered into us that we had to be certain beyond a reasonable doubt. I have what I believe to be a reasonable doubt.

I think Chauvin's actions merely had to be a substantial factor - not even the main factor, or the biggest substantial factor, just "a" substantial factor.

I was willing to go with manslaughter only because no matter why Floyd was dying, it seems like Chauvin had a lot of chances to realize "I probably ought to check this guy's condition/status "....and didn't. It did appear that his ego got in the way.

Ironically, if a crowd of hostile people taking videos hadn't been yelling at Chauvin, I think there is a slightly better chance George would be alive today, but I think mentally Chauvin "dug in" to save face.

Finally, I don't think Chauvin truly believed George was dying, because that would be an irrational interpretation on my part. The more rational explanation is, he didn't really think he was (or wouldn't have done all this to himself), but also didn't care much to check.

 

[AccessBlaster]

Hopefully, people will stay calm and accept the verdict and stop the violence against police and innocent business owners.

 

[Jon]

The intent thing is nuanced in Minnesota.

 

[Jon]

Ironically, if a crowd of hostile people taking videos hadn't been yelling at Chauvin, I think there is a slightly better chance George would be alive today, but I think mentally Chauvin "dug in" to save face.

I thought the same thing when I first saw the video. I think Chauvin's face doesn't help because it looks arrogant.

However, at the point Floyd took his last breath, Chauvin took out his mace because he perceived the crowd to be a threat. Things can turn ugly fast. The paramedics didn't want to perform resuscitation there and then, so they waited another 5 minutes or so before they started. Why? Fear of the angry crowd.

I do feel like this has become a bit of an exaggerated cause. It is like climate change. Moral posturing while ignoring where most of the problems are, black on black crime.

Having said all that, if someone is a bad cop, they are likely to get caught now with their body cams. But I do expect an exodus of cops because politics is making their job near impossible.

 

[Jon]

@The_Doc_Man, @Uncle Gizmo would also want you to be on the jury with me!

 

[Isaac]

I thought the same thing when I first saw the video. I think Chauvin's face doesn't help because it looks arrogant.

However, at the point Floyd took his last breath, Chauvin took out his mace because he perceived the crowd to be a threat. Things can turn ugly fast. The paramedics didn't want to perform resuscitation there and then, so they waited another 5 minutes or so before they started. Why? Fear of the angry crowd.

I do feel like this has become a bit of an exaggerated cause. It is like climate change. Moral posturing while ignoring where most of the problems are, black on black crime.

Having said all that, if someone is a bad cop, they are likely to get caught now with their body cams. But I do expect an exodus of cops because politics is making their job near impossible.

I agree with you on 2 points:

- the first responders were clearly afraid of the situation, and this fear and the possible ramifications of it were not fully developed by the defense, but this proves it wasn't just Chauvin who was probably jolted by the whole thing. Then again, ego and stubbornness might appear to explain his refusal to check on someone who may have been dying - even by his own calculation/knowledge.

- politics is definitely making policing less possible. There were HUGE jumps in crime in years following major cities' change from proactive broken window policing (think Rudy Guliani) to reactive policing. The fictional basis for some of the racial justice movements has had dramatic, and murderous, results on all lives--and those numbers dwarf (in the 100's, if not 1000's), the lives lost from a scenario like the one prosecuted today. That fact is virtually indisputable; the reason it has little value is that it is widely unknown.

 

[Jon]

I definitely agree with your point #2.

Regarding #1, the defence argues that the crowd threat got worse at the point Floyd stopped breathing, and so distracted Chauvin so much at that point that he got his mace out, as I mentioned earlier. Apparently, the police are trained to switch their attention to securing the scene if they have substantial fear for their own safety, and that becomes a priority over the person restrained. The arrival of EMS was fairly imminent, and Floyd knew that.

It is sad that Floyd died, but I do not believe it is more than just another death like any other. Floyd's life isn't worth any more than anybody else's. It is just media bias deciding to focus on one case, making out it is the result of police brutality towards blacks. But race never came into this case at all. All around the world, people are fooling themselves into believing race comes into it. This shows how bias can distort truth, so you mould facts into a perversion of the truth.

 

[Isaac]

Imagine for a moment, if you will, a world where the media and liberals weren't decisively intent on deceptively shaping public opinion. If that were the case, the Dylan Noble case would have been as famous as the George Floyd case, and, frankly, the Alton Sterling case wouldn't be famous at all.

 

[Jon]

I think this verdict will incentivise the mob. More rioting and violence to force through future guilty verdicts. Intimidation worked last time, so they will keep pushing it until it gets so out of whack that the US descends into a complete race war.

 

[Isaac]

Your last point made me think of this, that it brings up some interesting philosophical/moral/social questions.

About what level, or kind, of 'pressure' is appropriate, moral, long-lasting, and healthy to bring out any type of needed/positive change? (Assume for the purpose of this question that the change is actually needed and positive!)

Say on one end of the continuum is outright terrorism or extortion; on the other hand is each person doing nothing but casting a simple conscience vote once every few years. Out of all the possibilities in between that put "pressure" on things, what is moral and effective, and what isn't?

Because there is always the possibility of forcing something to change, but that (of course) doesn't mean that the change was moral or proper, that just means it got forced to change.

If we hypothetically all agreed on something that ought to change, what categories of things equate to a type of pressure that's actually appropriate or healthy?

What about change that comes at the expense of wide consensus, and remains so? How long can it last, and how well can it be justified?

 

[Jon]

There won't be any agreement on what to change, because any change involves opportunity cost in a zero sum game. Winners and losers. Instead, you will get special interest groups who try to promote their own agenda at the expense of others. A little cynical perhaps, but when I was young and inexperienced I had no cynicism at all.

 

[vhung]

Derek Chauvin is guilty,
The video records showed enough evidence,
Which also taken captured by the people who witnessed the incident.

A presumption of guilty verdict might not a result of thorough examination of evidences.

Death of Floyd is not just simply breathless.
A person lying on the street where three uniform police officers on guard,
Before that, Floyd is inside the backseat.
The person would not resist going out the car if no one hurt him inside.

Will he not die if no one lock his neck with knee; rather try that scene to decide if that is not the cause of death.
Even wrestlers could not resist anymore in 30 seconds if neck-locked executed.

 

[AccessBlaster]

Waters over the weekend specifically said she wanted a "guilty verdict" and without one, demonstrators should "stay on the street" and "get more confrontational, we've got to make sure they know we mean business."

 

[Jon]

New story ready for outrage: 15 year old black girl shot dead by police. She was trying to stab two black women at the time but BLM protesters still show up, protesting police saving another black person from being stabbed. Would they prefer the cops to just let them stab the victim?

Columbus police releases bodycam that shows teen gunned down

Columbus Police said that one person was killed in the officer-involved shooting that took place on the east side of Columbus, Ohio, on Tuesday afternoon. Makhia Bryant was identified as victim.

www.dailymail.co.uk

What should happen to the police officer, a medal or 10 years in prison? I can't tell anymore.

 

[Steve R.]

For the Democrats this was not a legal trial, but a political trial that confirmed their righteous "crusade" against claimed "systemic racism". Floyd was a martyr for the cause.

Pelosi faces intense backlash after thanking George Floyd for 'sacrificing your life for justice'

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., is facing intense backlash after she thanked George Floyd for "sacrificing your life for justice" Tuesday following the conviction of former Minneapolis police officer Derek Chauvin on murder and manslaughter charges.

www.foxnews.com

It's also my understanding that both Biden and Harris, have viewed this "trial" as an opportunity to be more aggressive in promoting this righteous "crusade" against claimed "systemic racism". As Candice Owens notes below the Democrats are now moving the goalpsts to demand even more so-called "justice" in the name of combating "systemic racism". Democrats may now see the success of this trial to be even more emboldened to use mob violence as a means of intimidation.

Along those lines, Democrats have rejected censoring Maxine Waters for her inflammatory rhetoric. As another disturbing lesson, when Democrats attacked Trump and Greene, weak Republicans joined with the Democrats. But Democrats given the same situation march in lockstep and act like the "Borg" and refuse to condemn their own. Though Democrats may speak of having ethics and morality, when it comes down it, they have none. They have no ethical or moral foundation, just the use of raw power to subjugate those who do not agree with them.

Candace Owens slams Democrats, media for 'mob justice' in Derek Chauvin trial

Author and conservative analyst Candace Owens reacted to the guilty verdict lodged against former Minneapolis Police Officer Derek Chauvin in the death of George Floyd as a symptom of a perpetual media and Democrat Party narrative absent many facts about the case.

www.foxnews.com

Owens said Chauvin suffered "mob justice," and the verdict was very likely influenced by politicians like Rep. Maxine Waters, D-Calif., and others who have threatened or condoned violence if the criminal justice system doesn't award them a victory.

"What we are really seeing is mob justice, and that is really what happened with this entire trial. This was not a trial about George Floyd and Derek Chauvin," she told "Tucker Carlson Tonight." "This was a trial about whether the media was powerful enough to create a simulation and decide upon a narrative absent any facts."

"They are already moving the goalposts because they are saying right now that [Chauvin's conviction] is not enough. That wasn't justice, by the way... what they want is a perpetual revolution. It is why they want people to be ignorant. It is why they want people in the education system to learn nothing but race, and how to be angry. (emphasis added).

 

[Jon]

"The Borg"...that had me chuckling!