- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Will the second round of riots when Chauvin is released by an appeals court be as intense?
Posted on 6/5/20 at 9:00 am to Anaximander
Posted on 6/5/20 at 9:00 am to Anaximander
quote:
And, read the statute again, there just is not enough there to legally get 2nd. The statute is poorly written and should include depraved heart or depraved indifference.
No. “With intent” is more than adequate is pretty standard for most states.
0
Posted on 6/5/20 at 9:01 am to Anaximander
quote:
WHo did the police try to disarm?
Your argument is that it could have been negligent manslaughter because the 911 operator told Zimmerman to stand down or not use a weapon.
That command is basically immaterial to the case.
Posted on 6/5/20 at 9:02 am to Anaximander
quote:
Do you really think a jury will not convict on the top count? And, read the statute again, there just is not enough there to legally get 2nd. The statute is poorly written and should include depraved heart or depraved indifference.
I think it's possible. I think 2nd degree sets a much higher bar and that Ellison blundered by upgrading it. But I don't doubt that the judge clearly instructs the jury that they can convict on 3rd degree. Especially since that was initially the charge.
Posted on 6/5/20 at 9:03 am to Antonio Moss
quote:
Your argument is that it could have been negligent manslaughter because the 911 operator told Zimmerman to stand down or not use a weapon.
That command is basically immaterial to the case.
You said disarm. Who did the police ever tell to disarm or not use a weapon?
Posted on 6/5/20 at 9:07 am to Anaximander
That was YOUR argument:
I never said that they disarmed him; I said they have no right to under law and it makes your position immaterial
quote:
Without training he brought a weapon into a situation that law enforcement told him not to pursue in a verbal warning directly before the incident.
I never said that they disarmed him; I said they have no right to under law and it makes your position immaterial
Posted on 6/5/20 at 9:11 am to Anaximander
I am pretty sure Minnesota has 3rd degree as a responsive verdict. This allows for a jury to easily come to a compromise verdict on the lesser charge is some jurors have issues with 2nd degree. Just curious how much appeal work you have done to be so sure it wouldn't stick?
Posted on 6/5/20 at 9:17 am to Anaximander
They key word in all of that is intent. The prosecution has to prove intent, as in Chauvin intended to kill him or he unintentionally killed him WHILE IN THE PROCESS OF COMMITTING A CRIME. The knee on the neck seems pretty ridiculous to all of us, but the prosecution is going to have to prove that he intentionally used that restraint with the intent to kill George. That’s an uphill climb when the restraint is legal to use in the state of Minnesota and Floyd put up a serious struggle when attempting to be placed in the car. In plain English he had legal authority and cause to use it, therefore you can’t say beyond a reasonable doubt that he intentionally used it to kill. He’s gonna walk along with the other 3 because of the idiot AG
Posted on 6/5/20 at 9:26 am to StringedInstruments
quote:
Also, I think they may have some additional evidence on Chauvin that will lead the jury to believing it was intentional. Chauvin and Floyd worked together previously. If there were any fights or arguments or anything to prove they had issues with each other, the argument will be made that Chauvin was intending to effect the death of Floyd.
If this is the case, then they could possibly get Murder 1.
Posted on 6/5/20 at 9:29 am to Anaximander
quote:
Without training he brought a weapon into a situation that law enforcement told him not to pursue in a verbal warning directly before the incident.
Wait... since when did 911 dispatch get elevated to any legal authority?
Posted on 6/5/20 at 9:31 am to Anaximander
Apparently you misunderstand the jury selection process. They can and will get a jury that see”s things they way they want.
Posted on 6/5/20 at 9:38 am to Blizzard of Chizz
quote:
He’s gonna walk along with the other 3 because of the idiot AG
Unless you believe in the conspiracy that they want the officers to walk because it cause further rioting and bolster the idea that the system is racist.
Posted on 6/5/20 at 9:41 am to Blizzard of Chizz
quote:
The knee on the neck seems pretty ridiculous to all of us, but the prosecution is going to have to prove that he intentionally used that restraint with the intent to kill George.
I will have to look up how MN defines criminal intent but it may not be as difficult as you think. For instance, in LA we have two levels of intent - general intent is simply defined as “a reasonable person in the offenders position knew or should have know that this action was reasonably likely to cause death or great bodily harm”.
If that is similar to MN’s threshold, then the prosecution would have prove that Chauvin’s actions (especially keeping the knee on the neck after he passed out) was reasonably likely to lead to death or great bodily harm.
Posted on 6/5/20 at 9:43 am to Anaximander
quote:This is 100% false. Zimmerman was not convicted because of the lack of video evidence combined with a situation where the only story that could be told was the one Zimmerman told because Martin was dead. In those circumstances, applying a beyond reasonable doubt standard, getting a conviction of Zimmerman, who had a very good legal team, was a huge uphill battle.
If George Zimmerman had been correctly charged instead of overcharged he would still be in jail today because of Florida add-ons for crimes committed with a weapon.
Posted on 6/5/20 at 9:46 am to Anaximander
I hope he rots, from what I read he is a training officer. That’s the whole issue in a nutshell! He’s not getting off
Posted on 6/5/20 at 9:49 am to charlestonchief
quote:How does someone stay a police officer after all the incidents he had on his record? That was bad enough, but how in the HELL are you a training officer after all the incidents he had on his record?
I hope he rots, from what I read he is a training officer.
Posted on 6/5/20 at 9:50 am to Anaximander
They’ll have moved on to another shiny object by then
Posted on 6/5/20 at 9:53 am to Antonio Moss
quote:
Failing to intervene may have been immoral and unethical and absolutely deserving of being fired, but I don’t see how it is a crime.
I imagine they're charged to get them to testify to solidify the case against Chauvin. It has to be posturing
Posted on 6/5/20 at 9:57 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
It has to be posturing
Like everyone said before....I hope they are ready for the backlash from acquitting these guys all in the name of posturing....unless they plead them out but I bet there will still be consequences in that case since I'd imagine the pleas wouldn't include jail time.
Posted on 6/5/20 at 10:05 am to Anaximander
Just wait till after Jan when I retire please.
Posted on 6/5/20 at 10:08 am to cssamerican
quote:
Unless you believe in the conspiracy that they want the officers to walk because it cause further rioting and bolster the idea that the system is racist.
Its not paranoia if they really are out to get you.
Page 2 of 5
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News