Toggle navigation
Toggle navigation
Home
DCUM Forums
Nanny Forums
Events
About DCUM
Advertising
Search
Recent Topics
Hottest Topics
FAQs and Guidelines
Privacy Policy
Your current identity is: Anonymous
Login
Preview
Subject:
Forum Index
»
Off-Topic
Reply to "Thread for Derek Chauvin trial watchers?"
Subject:
Emoticons
More smilies
Text Color:
Default
Dark Red
Red
Orange
Brown
Yellow
Green
Olive
Cyan
Blue
Dark Blue
Violet
White
Black
Font:
Very Small
Small
Normal
Big
Giant
Close Marks
[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous] There is no felony in this case. Are you saying the felony is assault? ALL murder is assault. [/quote] I am saying there are the elements of second degree [b]unintentional[/b] murder, which Derek Chauvin is charged with, that the state must prove. Here is language directly from the state’s [i]proposed[/i] jury instructions (judge will decide but this section doesn’t spark much controversy). [quote] MURDER IN THE SECOND DEGREE—WHILE COMMITTING A FELONY—ELEMENTS The elements of murder in the second degree while committing a felony, as alleged here, are: First, the death of George Floyd must be proven. Second, the defendant, acting alone or aided by others, caused the death of George Floyd. “To cause” means to be a substantial causal factor in causing the death. The defendant is criminally liable for all the consequences of his actions that occur in the ordinary and natural course of events, including those consequences brought about by one or more intervening causes that were the natural result of the defendant's acts. The fact that other causes contribute to the death does not relieve the defendant of criminal liability. However, the defendant is not criminally liable if a “superseding cause” caused the death. A “superseding cause” is a cause that comes after the defendant's acts, alters the natural sequence of events, and produces a result that would not otherwise have occurred. An action that occurs before the defendant’s conduct and is not the sole cause of the death does not constitute a superseding cause. [b]Third, the defendant, at the time of causing the death of George Floyd, was committing or attempting to commit the felony offense of assault in the third degree. It is not necessary for the State to prove the defendant had an intent to kill George Floyd, but it must prove that the defendant committed or attempted to commit third-degree assault[/b].[/quote] They could have charged him with murder that is not “unintentional,” in which case they would have to prove intent (this is considerably more difficult to do and would most likely not be met beyond a reasonable doubt). By charging him with second degree unintentional murder, they are arguing they can meet the burden of proof for intent to commit a felony, which in this case is third degree assault. Second degree unintentional murder is technically the “highest charge” that Chauvin is charged with, but it carries the same penalties in the MN sentencing guidelines as third degree murder, which he is also charged with. So in that respect they are similar charges. The difference is third degree murder doesn’t require a specific assault, but an intentional reckless act that is committed without regard for human life. It has been more typically applied to reckless firearm use that kills someone or something of that nature, because of some of the statutory language. A conviction on just third degree is probably the best chance of an overturn on appeal. [/quote] The original action of the knee to the neck was considered reasonable action based on police protocol. The issue is at what point did that action turn into assault? This is hard to prove. Also, didn't the coroner say that there was no bruising on the neck?[/quote] Have you watched any of this trial or are you just here making things up? Besides this false claim about police protocol, you're throwing out a red herring about strangulation when this is not a case about strangulation. A substantial portion of last week was taken up by riveting and graphically illustrated testimony demonstrating exactly how Chauvin succeeded in depriving George Floyd of oxygen without touching his neck much at all. On one side of Floyd's body, all three planes in which his lungs could have expanded were constrained. On the other side, two were. [/quote]
Options
Disable HTML in this message
Disable BB Code in this message
Disable smilies in this message
Review message
Search
Recent Topics
Hottest Topics