Thread for Derek Chauvin trial watchers?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Sorry, but he's guilty. His intent was to kill. It's obvious, and no earnest acting will make me believe otherwise.

What are you talking about? He never took the stand. Also, you sound like a stupid person.

Neutral new poster here just seeing what the better informed people are predicting. I’m guessing the PP was referring to earnest acting by the defense attorneys.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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 dangerou

Whether or not he had a past case of covid is irrelevant to having a grown man kneel on your neck cutting off your air supply for 9 minutes.

He wasn’t on his neck, and he was in the side position to provide air for the key time period, and his air supply could not have been cut off by the knee, and the medical examiner said asphyxiation was not the cause of death. All things I learned from the trial that changed my view to not guilty

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Judge had no business even saying that. Wow.

Maxine Waters had no business inciting violence. She knows better.

Nancy Pelosi thinks she has done nothing wrong. Wonder if Nancy heard what the judge had to say.

Neither Nancy nor Maxine care about justice. They both spew hatred out of every pore. Shame on them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Sorry, but he's guilty. His intent was to kill. It's obvious, and no earnest acting will make me believe otherwise.

His intent was to kill??? Are you out of your mind? He had his camera on, multiple cops had their cameras on, bystanders were recording him in his face on their phones, he on multiple occasions repositioned GF when he was complaining - in what world do you think his actual intent was to kill the guy. Like I can’t even understand that as a possible consideration.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I don’t know if Chauvin’s end goal was to kill Floyd, but it is very clear Chauvin didn’t care if he did.

Floyd did not die from covid, or heart disease or heart attack, or drugs or a benign cyst or exhaust from the car. If he would have been left in the car he would be alive. If he were left sitting on the curb, he’d be alive. If he was left kneeling outside the car, he’d be alive. If he would have been laid prone and nothing else, he’d be alive. If not for the knee on the neck for over 9 minutes, he’d be alive. Chauvin did not follow protocol and put him in the recovery position. Even after another officer said Floyd had no pulse and was not breathing, he “stayed the course” and did not put him in the recovery position nor did he provide medical care as the protocol states. He is guilty and God help us if the jury does not come to the same conclusion.

But what you are saying is not the legal standard. The covid, heart disease, and drugs were preceding events that contributed to his death. There was no reasonable basis to believe that what Chauvin was doing - which was protocol and what he was trained on and he and others have done per protocol many times before and studies show never results in death - would have caused his death. There was zero intent or reasonable basis to believe he would have killed him.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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 dangerou

Whether or not he had a past case of covid is irrelevant to having a grown man kneel on your neck cutting off your air supply for 9 minutes.

He wasn’t on his neck, and he was in the side position to provide air for the key time period, and his air supply could not have been cut off by the knee, and the medical examiner said asphyxiation was not the cause of death. All things I learned from the trial that changed my view to not guilty

Then you weren’t paying attention. He had his full weight on his neck and back.

So Floyd just up and died after being perfectly fine 9 minutes before? That’s an irrational conclusion.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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 dangerou

Whether or not he had a past case of covid is irrelevant to having a grown man kneel on your neck cutting off your air supply for 9 minutes.

He wasn’t on his neck, and he was in the side position to provide air for the key time period, and his air supply could not have been cut off by the knee, and the medical examiner said asphyxiation was not the cause of death. All things I learned from the trial that changed my view to not guilty

Then you weren’t paying attention. He had his full weight on his neck and back.

So Floyd just up and died after being perfectly fine 9 minutes before? That’s an irrational conclusion.

No, he did not have his full weight on anything, first of all. Second of all, the medical examiner stated that there was zero pushing, damage or other indication of pressure on his neck or cervical spine. None. If he had his full weight on his neck, there 100% would have been. The video and the ME report and testimony shows that the knee was on the upper back, not the neck

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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 dangerou

Whether or not he had a past case of covid is irrelevant to having a grown man kneel on your neck cutting off your air supply for 9 minutes.

He wasn’t on his neck, and he was in the side position to provide air for the key time period, and his air supply could not have been cut off by the knee, and the medical examiner said asphyxiation was not the cause of death. All things I learned from the trial that changed my view to not guilty

Then you weren’t paying attention. He had his full weight on his neck and back.

So Floyd just up and died after being perfectly fine 9 minutes before? That’s an irrational conclusion.

No, he did not have his full weight on anything, first of all. Second of all, the medical examiner stated that there was zero pushing, damage or other indication of pressure on his neck or cervical spine. None. If he had his full weight on his neck, there 100% would have been. The video and the ME report and testimony shows that the knee was on the upper back, not the neck

Pushing = bruising

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:seems like the decision to not have the jury sequestered this weekend will lead to defense motioning for another mistrial, no? some pretty interesting developments:

-Congresswoman Maxine Waters, in Brooklyn, calling for more confrontations if its not a guilty murder charge.

-2 MN national guardsmen fired upon in a drive by shooting in Brooklyn not long after that.

-Severed pigs head left and pigs blood splattered at former home of defense use of force witness Brodd, thinking he still lived there.

Would they motion for it before jury deliberations or just hang on to that for appeals if it is a verdict they don't like? both?

Care to provide a link from a credible source for all these claims?

sure, sorry i thought these were main stream by now:

Maxine:
https://twitter.com/DDarnae/status/1383632421304737794/video/1

Drive By:
https://www.startribune.com/minnesota-national-guard-says-members-sustained-minor-injuries-in-sunday-morning-drive-by-shooting-i/600047408/

witnesses house:
https://www.startribune.com/pigs-head-left-at-former-home-of-chauvin-defense-witness/600047505/

Maxcine Waters talks like a blood thirsty terrorist. She need to go.

Inciting violence is criminal. There was already plenty of violence going on, and she showed up on the scene to incite more. Yet she demanded Capitol Police to protect her. She has a very long history of inciting violence.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t know if Chauvin’s end goal was to kill Floyd, but it is very clear Chauvin didn’t care if he did.

Floyd did not die from covid, or heart disease or heart attack, or drugs or a benign cyst or exhaust from the car. If he would have been left in the car he would be alive. If he were left sitting on the curb, he’d be alive. If he was left kneeling outside the car, he’d be alive. If he would have been laid prone and nothing else, he’d be alive. If not for the knee on the neck for over 9 minutes, he’d be alive. Chauvin did not follow protocol and put him in the recovery position. Even after another officer said Floyd had no pulse and was not breathing, he “stayed the course” and did not put him in the recovery position nor did he provide medical care as the protocol states. He is guilty and God help us if the jury does not come to the same conclusion.

But what you are saying is not the legal standard. The covid, heart disease, and drugs were preceding events that contributed to his death. There was no reasonable basis to believe that what Chauvin was doing - which was protocol and what he was trained on and he and others have done per protocol many times before and studies show never results in death - would have caused his death. There was zero intent or reasonable basis to believe he would have killed him.

If he's acquitted attention will go to the crazy police procedures departments follow. That's where reform needs to happen.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t know if Chauvin’s end goal was to kill Floyd, but it is very clear Chauvin didn’t care if he did.

Floyd did not die from covid, or heart disease or heart attack, or drugs or a benign cyst or exhaust from the car. If he would have been left in the car he would be alive. If he were left sitting on the curb, he’d be alive. If he was left kneeling outside the car, he’d be alive. If he would have been laid prone and nothing else, he’d be alive. If not for the knee on the neck for over 9 minutes, he’d be alive. Chauvin did not follow protocol and put him in the recovery position. Even after another officer said Floyd had no pulse and was not breathing, he “stayed the course” and did not put him in the recovery position nor did he provide medical care as the protocol states. He is guilty and God help us if the jury does not come to the same conclusion.

But what you are saying is not the legal standard. The covid, heart disease, and drugs were preceding events that contributed to his death. There was no reasonable basis to believe that what Chauvin was doing - which was protocol and what he was trained on and he and others have done per protocol many times before and studies show never results in death - would have caused his death. There was zero intent or reasonable basis to believe he would have killed him.

Yeah, no, random internet stranger. We’ll believe the actual cops in the actual department who testified that what he did was NOT protocol and not what he was trained on over you. Thanks.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Same. His earnestness is a plus.

Agreed. Can be more effective than a polished performance

Same. I am an attorney and was very much in the guilty camp for at least the second and third offenses (I was always doubtful on the top charge). After hearing the defense’s closing arguments, i could not convict on any of the charges. I am flabbergasted at my change in view.

I’m sure you are.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t know if Chauvin’s end goal was to kill Floyd, but it is very clear Chauvin didn’t care if he did.

Floyd did not die from covid, or heart disease or heart attack, or drugs or a benign cyst or exhaust from the car. If he would have been left in the car he would be alive. If he were left sitting on the curb, he’d be alive. If he was left kneeling outside the car, he’d be alive. If he would have been laid prone and nothing else, he’d be alive. If not for the knee on the neck for over 9 minutes, he’d be alive. Chauvin did not follow protocol and put him in the recovery position. Even after another officer said Floyd had no pulse and was not breathing, he “stayed the course” and did not put him in the recovery position nor did he provide medical care as the protocol states. He is guilty and God help us if the jury does not come to the same conclusion.

But what you are saying is not the legal standard. The covid, heart disease, and drugs were preceding events that contributed to his death. There was no reasonable basis to believe that what Chauvin was doing - which was protocol and what he was trained on and he and others have done per protocol many times before and studies show never results in death - would have caused his death. There was zero intent or reasonable basis to believe he would have killed him.

He did NOT follow protocol because if he did, Floyd would not be dead. He was never placed in the recovery position. Also, How do excuse when the other officer said Floyd was not breathing and had no pulse he continued to kneel on him for an additional 3 minutes without providing medical care like CPR?

You are reaching to excuse a police perpetrated killing by claiming typical health issues caused Floyd to die and not the 9 minutes of being kneeled on. You are victim blaiming and it’s tired.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t know if Chauvin’s end goal was to kill Floyd, but it is very clear Chauvin didn’t care if he did.

Floyd did not die from covid, or heart disease or heart attack, or drugs or a benign cyst or exhaust from the car. If he would have been left in the car he would be alive. If he were left sitting on the curb, he’d be alive. If he was left kneeling outside the car, he’d be alive. If he would have been laid prone and nothing else, he’d be alive. If not for the knee on the neck for over 9 minutes, he’d be alive. Chauvin did not follow protocol and put him in the recovery position. Even after another officer said Floyd had no pulse and was not breathing, he “stayed the course” and did not put him in the recovery position nor did he provide medical care as the protocol states. He is guilty and God help us if the jury does not come to the same conclusion.

But what you are saying is not the legal standard. The covid, heart disease, and drugs were preceding events that contributed to his death. There was no reasonable basis to believe that what Chauvin was doing - which was protocol and what he was trained on and he and others have done per protocol many times before and studies show never results in death - would have caused his death. There was zero intent or reasonable basis to believe he would have killed him.

If he's acquitted attention will go to the crazy police procedures departments follow. That's where reform needs to happen.

Totally agree

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t know if Chauvin’s end goal was to kill Floyd, but it is very clear Chauvin didn’t care if he did.

Floyd did not die from covid, or heart disease or heart attack, or drugs or a benign cyst or exhaust from the car. If he would have been left in the car he would be alive. If he were left sitting on the curb, he’d be alive. If he was left kneeling outside the car, he’d be alive. If he would have been laid prone and nothing else, he’d be alive. If not for the knee on the neck for over 9 minutes, he’d be alive. Chauvin did not follow protocol and put him in the recovery position. Even after another officer said Floyd had no pulse and was not breathing, he “stayed the course” and did not put him in the recovery position nor did he provide medical care as the protocol states. He is guilty and God help us if the jury does not come to the same conclusion.

But what you are saying is not the legal standard. The covid, heart disease, and drugs were preceding events that contributed to his death. There was no reasonable basis to believe that what Chauvin was doing - which was protocol and what he was trained on and he and others have done per protocol many times before and studies show never results in death - would have caused his death. There was zero intent or reasonable basis to believe he would have killed him.

Yeah, no, random internet stranger. We’ll believe the actual cops in the actual department who testified that what he did was NOT protocol and not what he was trained on over you. Thanks.

My view came specifically from the department manual and testimony FROM THE ACTUAL GUY WHO TRAINED HIM.