Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Anyone watching this George Floyd trial?

Collapse
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by travestyny View Post

    Because I've stated the reason I disagree with you but you keep coming back adding more, so I feel a need to repeat myself.




    When he was pulled out of the car, he said, "Thank you." I hardly think he should have been tased at that point.



    I'm just trying to understand because you seem to be waffling a lot and at the same time bringing up a lot of things from the defense that don't seem very compelling arguments to me. You are at some times talking about what could happen (ie. he could walk free...well yea, anything is possible) and other times what you personally believe he should be found guilty of and why. It seems you are calling for only manslaughter. Why not 3rd degree murder?
    Pulling him from the car and pinning him to the ground was the alternative, and lesser form of force according to the use of force expert.

    I’m not sure what you mean about “waffling”. I said what I believe he’s guilty of and why, which of course could change after everything is on the table, but also recognize the defence strategy of building a reasonable doubt case. It’s not cut and dry at all.

    As far as 3rd degree goes, I’m not 100% clear on the application of that charge. It’s not typically used for these types of alleged crimes, so I’m not sure what effect that will have on it’s use here. Like I said before, it seems more compelling than the 2nd degree charge, but it may also be difficult to prove. That Chauvin unintentionally killed Floyd and was negligent in his actions, to me, is not nearly as hard to prove.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by Real King Kong View Post

      Pulling him from the car and pinning him to the ground was the alternative, and lesser form of force according to the use of force expert.
      Right. That doesn't mean he should then upgrade it to tasing him at the point that he decided not to tase him. Again, he was referring to the possibility of tasing him initially, not when he was on the ground.

      Originally posted by Real King Kong View Post
      I’m not sure what you mean about “waffling”. I said what I believe he’s guilty of and why, which of course could change after everything is on the table, but also recognize the defence strategy of building a reasonable doubt case. It’s not cut and dry at all.

      As far as 3rd degree goes, I’m not 100% clear on the application of that charge. It’s not typically used for these types of alleged crimes, so I’m not sure what effect that will have on it’s use here. Like I said before, it seems more compelling than the 2nd degree charge, but it may also be difficult to prove. That Chauvin unintentionally killed Floyd and was negligent in his actions, to me, is not nearly as hard to prove.
      So you believe Chauvin was somewhat innocently doing his job when he kept his knee on the neck of a guy whom his partner told him had no pulse?


      According to you, you believe this, coming from the 2nd degree manslaughter charge:

      (1) by the person's culpable negligence whereby the person creates an unreasonable risk, and consciously takes chances of causing death or great bodily harm to another; or



      So Chauvin created an unreasonable risk and consciously took chances of causing death or great bodily harm. But this one is going too far or unable to be processed?


      (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.



      Just break it down. Eminently dangerous? Depraved mind? Without regard for human life?
      Last edited by travestyny; 04-09-2021, 06:51 PM.

      Comment


      • Originally posted by travestyny View Post

        Right. That doesn't mean he should then upgrade it to tasing him at the point that he decided not to tase him. Again, he was referring to the possibility of tasing him initially, not when he was on the ground.



        So you believe Chauvin was somewhat innocently doing his job when he kept his knee on the neck of a guy whom his partner told him had no pulse?


        According to you, you believe this, coming from the 2nd degree manslaughter charge:

        (1) by the person's culpable negligence whereby the person creates an unreasonable risk, and consciously takes chances of causing death or great bodily harm to another; or



        So Chauvin created an unreasonable risk and consciously took chances of causing death or great bodily harm. But this one is going too far or unable to be processed?


        (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.



        Just break it down. Eminently dangerous? Depraved mind? Without regard for human life?
        The force of use expert suggested that pinning him to the ground was the alternative to greater force methods, such a tasing. He just appeared to put his knee in a bad position and stayed on him too long...which is why he’s on trial.

        I believe the depraved mind aspect is the hardest to prove there, and like I said before, I’m not overly clear on the general application of it to begin with.

        Comment


        • Originally posted by travestyny View Post


          There is no angle where this is on his shoulder blades.

          LUN6CY7XLBBV7OBU2EV46IKNGI.jpg
          He said for 9 minutes straight. I seem to remember even you conceding that this wasn't true. Do I need to find your quote?

          Comment


          • Originally posted by Real King Kong View Post

            The force of use expert suggested that pinning him to the ground was the alternative to greater force methods, such a tasing. He just appeared to put his knee in a bad position and stayed on him too long...which is why he’s on trial.
            I don't understand why you keep ignoring what I'm saying. He said he could use the taser at the point of trying to put him into the car. He didn't say he should have tased him once he was on the ground. Matter of fact, you keep focusing on this force of use expert who explicitly said that Chauvin used deadly force. So do you accept that Chauvin used deadly force, as the force of use expert states, or does that not fly with you?

            Originally posted by Real King Kong View Post
            I believe the depraved mind aspect is the hardest to prove there, and like I said before, I’m not overly clear on the general application of it to begin with.
            Again, so what you mean is that it's quite alright to keep your knee on the neck of a man who has no pulse. That doesn't show a depraved mind to you?

            Comment


            • Originally posted by 2shameless View Post

              He said for 9 minutes straight. I seem to remember even you conceding that this wasn't true. Do I need to find your quote?
              Who said 9 minutes straight? I saw you say shoulder blades and I responded to that. It was stated that he was on his neck for 90% of the encounter. He wasn't spotted off his neck until the very end of the encounter. So what exactly is your point? Just that he didn't have his knee on his neck for a few seconds after the guy was already dead?
              Last edited by travestyny; 04-09-2021, 08:17 PM.
              siablo14 likes this.

              Comment


              • Originally posted by travestyny View Post

                Who said 9 minutes straight?
                Derp, the very post to which I was responding. That's what happens when you knee jerk your way into the middle of a conversation.

                Comment


                • So who's winning?

                  I bet $1000 even fully convicted 100% riots???

                  Any takers?

                  Comment


                  • Fuk odds like -5000 lol

                    Yup no matter what riots.

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by 2shameless View Post

                      Derp, the very post to which I was responding. That's what happens when you knee jerk your way into the middle of a conversation.
                      Derp. If you want to be technical since it means something to you, he was only shown off of his neck for seconds. The encounter lasted over 9 minutes. More like 9.5 minutes. So it could have been a full 9 minutes.


                      Does that make you feel better?


                      That's not even to mention that another witness claims he was never off of his neck.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X
                      TOP