re: Derek Chauvin trial - GUILTY ON ALL CHARGES. Update: His sentencing is today

quote:

---

“ Chauvin’s record as a police officer in Minneapolis was littered with allegations of misconduct and excessive force. Eighteen complaints were filed against him over his 19-year career, according to CNN and Insider’s Haven Orecchio-Egresitz.

Chauvin had a reputation for being overly aggressive and combative, according to the nightclub owner who employed him as a security guard.“

---

Yeh, I'm gonna take CNNs investigative words about this trial as the truth.

quote:

---

Chauvin’s action was more than Floyd’s heart could take.

---

So nothing to do with the drugs? This is plain stupid. You cant hold chauvin liable for floyds health issues and his blatant disregard for his own health/safety.

Floyd tried to pass a counterfeit bill. He ate a shite ton of drugs prior to being contacted by police all while knowing he had heart issues.

Floyd caused floyds death no matter how stupidly try to twist words.

quote:

---

Lightmerchant is an AMS alter

---

Either that or he is trying to get in her pants.

quote:

---

Floyd caused floyds death no matter how stupidly try to twist words.

---

In general terms, yes.

But forensically, cause of death was subdual and restraint by law enforcement, per the ME.

quote:

---

Well, he’s probably guilty of some sort of negligence / disregard for human life.

---

I think the jury is going to be most weighed by the short window after the pulse is taken and they (multiple officers) are aware he is unresponsive. On a human level and officer level they had an obligation to act differently at this point. I don’t personally think the knee was the primary issue and wouldn’t if I was on the jury. Possibly contributing and certainly not intentional. Definitely negligent.

Second degree murder-caused Floyd's death "while committing or attempting to commit a felony offense,— no

Third degree murder-BS the State Supreme Court didn’t weigh in on this... an act eminently dangerous to others and evincing a depraved mind, without regard for human life. In the end, if they go this route it is Chauvin’s best chance at appeal. The case that allowed this back in is set to go to State Supreme Court in June. At main issue is legal jargon..”others” being plural. What allowed this back in was an officer shooting of a single person where this charge was appealed and ruled allowable. Prior to that “others” had to be multiple people. Now..was the knee eminently dangerous AND evincing a separated mind? The standard for this is Chauvin knew the act would:could kill, did it out of spite and showed indifference to life. That is a heavy burden when they timely called EMS, checked pulse, took multiple actions of lesser force with Floyd prior to restraining him on the ground. This was a risky gamble by prosecution.

Second degree manslaughter-negligence in creating "an unreasonable risk" and "consciously (taking) chances of causing death or great bodily harm to another." - I would say this is likely. Once he took that pulse as did the other officer and didn’t react differently he increased the chance that Floyd would die. Not as much the knee as lack of response.

EMS was called in a very timely manner and was onsite. They took a bit to get to Floyd once they arrived and did delay best treatment due to the environment (high crime area and unruly crowd). Who is to say had they immediately got to him and performed highest level of care that he wouldn’t of come back around? Given every second matters.

The other officer that checked pulse, the EMS for delaying treatment, Chauvin for not starting resuscitation efforts..all potentially culpable.

There is zero guarantee this would have changed things. Better care should have been given but did that kill him? No IMO but ME says it played some role (which is really just an obtuse guess).

The knee wasn’t what changed in Floyd. He was fully breathing, loudly communicating, moving, adjusting his neck for a majority of the time on the ground.

However, regardless of the reason, once they knew he wasn’t responsive, kept him in that position, and didn’t take additional steps they committed some level of crime. Manslaughter? IDK..maybe.

I shouldn’t, but I am curious...

What is psycho about sharing that I have done ride-alongs, seeing as you held that up as indicating psychosis?

Personal attack doesn’t need to make sense to be effective, I am aware. And you got me to bite, so it was successful. ??

Drug dealers can be charged with homicide in Minnesota for providing drugs.

Your fallacy is assuming the ME terming homicide can only apply to the police in this case.

A witness described a situation that when there is a hostile crowd present this could negate the officers' responsibility to provide care for the suspect in order to secure the safety of them and the suspect until EMS arrives. Even the off-duty feminist fire-fighter was yelling at them. "I got your name tag, bitch!"

quote:

---

“ In my opinion, the law enforcement subdual, restraint and the neck compression was just more than Mr. Floyd could take, by virtue of those heart conditions," Baker concluded.

---

I have been out of pocket for the last couple of days - but isn’t this game, set, match? How could anyone looking at GF know he had a heart condition? The corollary is without those heart conditions the subdual and restraint doesn’t result in death.

For 3rd degree murder the act must be “eminently dangerous to others.” How could an act that wouldn’t normally result in death be considered eminently dangerous?

Similarly, for manslaughter the defendant must commit “culpable negligence whereby the person creates an unreasonable risk, and consciously takes chances of causing death or great bodily harm to another.” If he survives but for his unknown cardiac issues - how does one conclude the act created an unreasonable risk? Further, how can it be said one is consciously taking chances of causing death?

There is a lot of emotion involved and unbelievable pressure on the jury, so who knows. But this certainly raises substantial, much less reasonable doubt of guilt.