Thread for Derek Chauvin trial watchers?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Was the defense prohibited from mentioning or arguing re his COVID?

If so, that is a huge ground for appeal. That would be unbelievable. If not, also a ground for appeal for ineffective counsel because that would have been an incredibly powerful part of the defense

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Was the defense prohibited from mentioning or arguing re his COVID?

Not if he couldn't get an expert to testify that it was relevant - which it wasn't.

The defense lawyer needs to stop - he's just rambling now and the jury hasn't had lunch.

How can you not get someone to testify it could be relevant?? There is a ton of research showing covid causes damage to heart and lungs particularly in the short term (months) following. At the time of the event, that was all just beginning to be studied so it’s no surprise the autopsy said no reason to be linked. But without a doubt based on what we know now it can be related. Heck, they say that athletes cannot return to practice for certain number of weeks after a case or unless passing a battery of tests because the residual effects on the heart make exercising/extreme exertions dangerous

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Was the defense prohibited from mentioning or arguing re his COVID?

Not if he couldn't get an expert to testify that it was relevant - which it wasn't.

The defense lawyer needs to stop - he's just rambling now and the jury hasn't had lunch.

How can you not get someone to testify it could be relevant?? There is a ton of research showing covid causes damage to heart and lungs particularly in the short term (months) following. At the time of the event, that was all just beginning to be studied so it’s no surprise the autopsy said no reason to be linked. But without a doubt based on what we know now it can be related. Heck, they say that athletes cannot return to practice for certain number of weeks after a case or unless passing a battery of tests because the residual effects on the heart make exercising/extreme exertions dangerous

And Floyd had an autopsy done. No damage was seen. The only abnormality was a slightly enlarged heart, which the defense has tried to use as part of their case.

[Anonymous]

Covid fearmongering only works on cable news not a court of law. It wasn’t prohibited just wasn’t causal

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Was the defense prohibited from mentioning or arguing re his COVID?

Not if he couldn't get an expert to testify that it was relevant - which it wasn't.

The defense lawyer needs to stop - he's just rambling now and the jury hasn't had lunch.

He really is rambling a lot. The prosecution was much more focused.

[Anonymous]

Coming in late: death certificate says “homocide”, wth is the debate about???

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Coming in late: death certificate says “homocide”, wth is the debate about???

Oh ok case closed then. Thanks

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Coming in late: death certificate says “homocide”, wth is the debate about???

Homicide, as they said earlier in the trial, isn't a legal designation or something that results in an automatic conviction. There are only a few options; "natural", "suicide", "homicide", "other" (am I missing one?). So the ME said homicide, but the defense is arguing that that's a medical opinion.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Was the defense prohibited from mentioning or arguing re his COVID?

Not if he couldn't get an expert to testify that it was relevant - which it wasn't.

The defense lawyer needs to stop - he's just rambling now and the jury hasn't had lunch.

He really is rambling a lot. The prosecution was much more focused.

I had in on in the background for a while. There were several times when I stopped to see if I had somehow rewound his closing arguments because it seemed like he was repeating himself.

[Anonymous]

If Chauvin is acquitted on the grounds of following protocol, it highlights the fact that accepted policing practices need to change. If convicted, we got a bad apple off a police force but the spotlight won't be where it needs to be for change.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Coming in late: death certificate says “homocide”, wth is the debate about???

Homicide, as they said earlier in the trial, isn't a legal designation or something that results in an automatic conviction. There are only a few options; "natural", "suicide", "homicide", "other" (am I missing one?). So the ME said homicide, but the defense is arguing that that's a medical opinion.

Homicide from a medical viewpoint doesn't imply intent or malice.

[Anonymous]

This final prosecution statement is great. Blackwell is a great speaker. Much more charismatic and convincing than the defense as well.

[Anonymous]

Nelson is trying for a mistrial also quotes above pp congresswoman’s comments

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Coming in late: death certificate says “homocide”, wth is the debate about???

Homicide, as they said earlier in the trial, isn't a legal designation or something that results in an automatic conviction. There are only a few options; "natural", "suicide", "homicide", "other" (am I missing one?). So the ME said homicide, but the defense is arguing that that's a medical opinion.

Homicide from a medical viewpoint doesn't imply intent or malice.

I thought the defense attorney did a great job explaining that and with his closing argument. I was a full guilty and now I could not convict. I am concentrating on the entire incident, not just the 9 minutes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This final prosecution statement is great. Blackwell is a great speaker. Much more charismatic and convincing than the defense as well.

He bored me to tears.