Will you accept the verdict in the Chauven trial?

[canadyjd]

You don't think passing a phony $20 is a form of theft?

It’s not robbery. Robbery requires theft by force, not theft by deception.

peace to you

 

[canadyjd]

Then why does the autopsy disagree? Ask yourself that question.

If the autopsy disagrees, the defense attorneys had the chance to bring it up during cross examination.

peace to you

 

[RighteousnessTemperance&]

If the autopsy disagrees, the defense attorneys had the chance to bring it up during cross examination.

What defense attorneys? I've seen only one. There have been several prosecuting attorneys.

It was ridiculous that the mentor of the coroner said she agreed completely with his death certificate, then couldn’t explain what “complicating” means. Hard to shake the impression that

She’s been working on the railroad all the live long day;
She’s been working on the railroad just to put Chauvin away….​

 

[canadyjd]

What defense attorneys? I've seen only one. There have been several prosecuting attorneys.....

I stand corrected. The defense attorney had the opportunity to bring it up on cross examination.

peace to you

 

[AustinC]

What defense attorneys? I've seen only one. There have been several prosecuting attorneys.

It was ridiculous that the mentor of the coroner said she agreed completely with his death certificate, then couldn’t explain what “complicating” means. Hard to shake the impression that

She’s been working on the railroad all the live long day;
She’s been working on the railroad just to put Chauvin away….​

You came in to this trial with your mind made up. That's fine as long as everyone else recognizes your bias.

 

[RighteousnessTemperance&]

You came in to this trial with your mind made up. That's fine as long as everyone else recognizes your bias.

Mind made up? No,(snip) But your posts contain many of those. Innocent unless proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt? Always. That's the "American Standard." Anyone that doesn't know and agree with that is harboring ignorant bias, and should never serve on a jury.

But why, or better yet, how would you defend such ridiculous “testimony?” A witness who says under oath that she agrees with something but then admits she doesn’t know what that something means is not presenting bona fide testimony.

Edited by admin

 

[Reformed1689]

You came in to this trial with your mind made up. That's fine as long as everyone else recognizes your bias.

One could say the same about you...

 

[Reformed1689]

Three medical experts, including the coroner, testified the cause of death was low blood oxygen substantially caused by the prolonged restraint with the knee on the neck.

peace to you

Interesting, because that is the exact symptom and killer with a fentynl overdose: https://americanaddictioncenters.org/fentanyl-treatment/symptoms-associated-with-a-fentanyl-overdose

And what did George Floyd do according to the autopsy? Overdose. Hmmm....

 

[Salty]

Robbery? He passed a phony $20 bill. I don’t think that meets the standard for robbery.

peace to you

Passing a phony 20 is not robbery - that was a different crime-
I'm just saying the individual (wont call him a man) was no choir boy)
They were dealing with a criminal and took precautions.

 

[Yeshua1]

Not true.

You do not see a rush to judgement then? as the Liberal Dems and media always seems to be taking tha view that the police are always wrong every case!

 

[Yeshua1]

In a third degree murder, that would not matter.

Minnesota definition:
609.195 MURDER IN THE THIRD DEGREE.

(a) Whoever, without intent to effect the death of any person, causes the death of another by perpetrating an act eminently dangerous to others and evincing a depraved mind, without regard for human life, is guilty of murder in the third degree and may be sentenced to imprisonment for not more than 25 years.

(b) Whoever, without intent to cause death, proximately causes the death of a human being by, directly or indirectly, unlawfully selling, giving away, bartering, delivering, exchanging, distributing, or administering a controlled substance classified in Schedule I or II, is guilty of murder in the third degree and may be sentenced to imprisonment for not more than 25 years or to payment of a fine of not more than $40,000, or both.

https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/cite/609.195

Manslaughter, not murder!

 

[Salty]

A medical expert refuted that theory on the witness stand. No evidence of exhaust poisoning.

peace to you

Judge Peter Cahill barred the evidence from being presented
Derek Chauvin Trial, April 15: Chauvin Says He Won’t Testify, Both Sides Rest Their Case

 

[Yeshua1]

Judge Peter Cahill barred the evidence from being presented
Derek Chauvin Trial, April 15: Chauvin Says He Won’t Testify, Both Sides Rest Their Case

Judge seemed to be denying a lot requested by defense team!

 

[canadyjd]

Passing a phony 20 is not robbery - that was a different crime-
I'm just saying the individual (wont call him a man) was no choir boy)
They were dealing with a criminal and took precautions.

As I’ve have already stated, Mr. Floyd was no angel. He was a petty criminal and a drug addict. The police were right to investigate the crime, they were right to arrest him, they were right to restrain him when he resisted.

He was a man. He was a human being. Once the police had him in custody they had a legal responsibility to care for his well-being.

Peace to you

 

[Salty]

Judge seemed to be denying a lot requested by defense team!

Actually, that decision was good for the defense
The judge stated that the defense had not been given the time to consider the info that was in the DA report.

 

[canadyjd]

Judge Peter Cahill barred the evidence from being presented
Derek Chauvin Trial, April 15: Chauvin Says He Won’t Testify, Both Sides Rest Their Case

The judge barred testimony, as best as I can tell, concerning blood gas tests. The autopsy showed no evidence of carbon dioxide poisoning, which a defense expert had stated was a possibility.

The state’s expert said there was no evidence of CO2 poisoning, per the autopsy, and blood saturation was normal at 98%.

The defense, I think, seized on the testimony that the blood saturation was normal. I can see the significance since the state’s experts testified Mr. Floyd died from low blood oxygen levels, But the defense already rested their case.

The judge felt it would result in a mistrial.

Certainly a decision worthy of an appeal.

peace to you

 

[RighteousnessTemperance&]

They did. It was denied. I think they should have had a different venue.

This may be your best observation on this trial. However, it contradicts your basic premise, namely that the system should be trusted. The system failed when the judge insisted on this venue. That decision taints the entire process.

 

[Yeshua1]

This may be your best observation on this trial. However, it contradicts your basic premise, namely that the system should be trusted. The system failed when the judge insisted on this venue. That decision taints the entire process.

Any police or other type of agents on the Jury?

 

[Reformed1689]

In a third degree murder, that would not matter.

Minnesota definition:
609.195 MURDER IN THE THIRD DEGREE.

(a) Whoever, without intent to effect the death of any person, causes the death of another by perpetrating an act eminently dangerous to others and evincing a depraved mind, without regard for human life, is guilty of murder in the third degree and may be sentenced to imprisonment for not more than 25 years.

(b) Whoever, without intent to cause death, proximately causes the death of a human being by, directly or indirectly, unlawfully selling, giving away, bartering, delivering, exchanging, distributing, or administering a controlled substance classified in Schedule I or II, is guilty of murder in the third degree and may be sentenced to imprisonment for not more than 25 years or to payment of a fine of not more than $40,000, or both.

https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/cite/609.195

So please explain, from your view, how this fits what happened. I bolded part of the statute and I don't think this rises to that level.

 

[canadyjd]

Actually, that decision was good for the defense
The judge stated that the defense had not been given the time to consider the info that was in the DA report.

The blood saturation evidence (normal at 98%) is devastating to the prosecutions case. They produced three medical experts that stated the cause of death was low blood oxygen levels caused by prolonged officer restraint. That is clearly not true.

The defense should have known what was in the autopsy report and impeached the testimony at the time.

This evidence provides clear reasonable doubt that the officer caused the death of Mr. Floyd.

peace to you