- 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: Chauvin Verdict reached...GUILTY - ALL COUNTS
Posted on 4/20/21 at 11:09 pm to buckeye_vol
Posted on 4/20/21 at 11:09 pm to buckeye_vol
quote:Who is disagreeing with this take?
What? Both autopsies, even the one most favorable to Chauvin, determined that Chauvin’s actions directly contributed to the death, and the differences were the precise biological mechanisms and whether other factors contributed or not.
So it’s highly unlikely Floyd would have died that day, but it’s an absolute certainty that the cause of death would have been different.
There's really nothing wrong with the verdict. The bad part was the sainting of GF and the complete excusing of riotous behavior surrounding this (as well as acting like it's part of a greater narrative while totally ignoring Tony Timpa et al.)
2
Posted on 4/20/21 at 11:14 pm to Big Scrub TX
quote:
There's really nothing wrong with the verdict.
I didn’t care enough to follow the trial, but I don’t think anybody’s refuted the fact that he had a potentially lethal amount of drugs in his system. If that’s not textbook reasonable doubt then it doesn’t exist.
Posted on 4/21/21 at 5:47 am to Flats
Buckeye, are you a lawyer? If so your analytical skills are sorely lacking as is your understanding of the law. If you are not a lawyer you are speaking of things you know nothing about.
Also what is with the bill Barr comments? He was the US attorney general and has ZERO say in a state crime charge in a state court so what you wrote could not be true. Kind of hurts your other points.
I have never seen a trial like this and am curious what the trial judge will do and the following appeal. And the appeal after that and finally whether scotus takes this. Unfortunately dc may be dead by then
Also what is with the bill Barr comments? He was the US attorney general and has ZERO say in a state crime charge in a state court so what you wrote could not be true. Kind of hurts your other points.
I have never seen a trial like this and am curious what the trial judge will do and the following appeal. And the appeal after that and finally whether scotus takes this. Unfortunately dc may be dead by then
This post was edited on 4/21/21 at 5:48 am
Posted on 4/21/21 at 6:17 am to Flats
quote:
I didn’t care enough to follow the trial, but I don’t think anybody’s refuted the fact that he had a potentially lethal amount of drugs in his system. If that’s not textbook reasonable doubt then it doesn’t exist.
You should have followed the trial, this came up and it didn't go the way you think it did.
Here's a summary of the medical expert testimony:
LINK
This post was edited on 4/21/21 at 6:22 am
Posted on 4/21/21 at 7:02 am to Big Scrub TX
I think my biggest issue outside of the obvious ones you mentioned was the decision to keep the trial in Minnie and not sequester the jury.
The outcome may or may not have been the same but Chauvin did not get a fair trial.
The outcome may or may not have been the same but Chauvin did not get a fair trial.
Posted on 4/21/21 at 8:41 am to Tiguar
buncha salty racists up in here
roll tide lolololol
roll tide lolololol
Posted on 4/21/21 at 8:57 am to Eli Goldfinger
I'm a little confused by how you can kill someone three times, each count appear to me to be separate acts.... all of them would have to result in death. Also, one of the acts there must of been a felony as part of it... but he wasn't charged with another felony other than the other murder charges.
I would assume on appeal this will be dealt with, not saying acquittal of all charges... not really sure.
Quite bizarre, not that he was found guilty but how he could be found guilty of killing someone three times. Not double jeopardy but triple jeopardy.
I would assume on appeal this will be dealt with, not saying acquittal of all charges... not really sure.
Quite bizarre, not that he was found guilty but how he could be found guilty of killing someone three times. Not double jeopardy but triple jeopardy.
This post was edited on 4/21/21 at 8:59 am
Posted on 4/21/21 at 8:58 am to Eli Goldfinger
The only reason Chauvin or any cop would be present during floyd's death, is the fact that floyd was a criminal. Don't forget 3x the amount of fentanyl known to be deadly in his system. And that was only one of the 6 toxins found. Now a community serviceman, protector, and policeman will spend a long time in prison due to the actions and lifestyle of a lowlife criminal!
Posted on 4/21/21 at 9:09 am to r0lltide
Go home, CNB, you’re drunk.
Posted on 4/21/21 at 9:16 am to crimsonuatide
quote:
The only reason Chauvin or any cop would be present during floyd's death, is the fact that floyd was a criminal.
Believe it or not cops are present when innocent people die too. Hell they even do the killing sometimes.
quote:
Now a community serviceman, protector, and policeman will spend a long time in prison due to the actions and lifestyle of a lowlife criminal!
He's in jail for his own actions. Nothing more nothing less. Good riddance yo a bad cop
Posted on 4/21/21 at 9:17 am to buckeye_vol
And the fact the jury came back with a verdict the next day with zero questions in such a complex case should probably give you pause.
This post was edited on 4/21/21 at 9:18 am
Posted on 4/21/21 at 9:26 am to Tiguar
quote:
And the fact the jury came back with a verdict the next day with zero questions in such a complex case should probably give you pause.
Why? They have access to the evidence in the room and can talk it out and review as needed with just a note and a knock
Posted on 4/21/21 at 9:28 am to oklahogjr
quote:
Good riddance yo a bad cop
English please.
How much weight was on the dead drug addict criminals back? It’s ok to just say you don’t know because that’s the truth.
This post was edited on 4/21/21 at 9:33 am
Posted on 4/21/21 at 9:31 am to Tiguar
quote:
And the fact the jury came back with a verdict the next day with zero questions in such a complex case should probably give you pause.
I'm still trying to figure out how they came up with three dead bodies for the three counts.
Just me glancing at this, it doesn't even make logical sense how a jury could bring back three guilty convictions on the same act. There has to be three bodies or its really triple jeopardy. The whole thing sounds like reasonable doubt as well.
I don't know MN criminal law, but not sure how this flies in appeals at a glance.
Posted on 4/21/21 at 9:35 am to oklahogjr
I was on a very simple DUI case that went for 1 day and the jury had questions
Posted on 4/21/21 at 9:37 am to dafif
quote:
Also what is with the bill Barr comments? He was the US attorney general and has ZERO say in a state crime charge in a state court so what you wrote could not be true. Kind of hurts your other points.
Bill Barr would not take potential federal charges off the table if Chauvin pleaded guilty. As a result, they didn't plea to 3rd-degree manslaughter. Buckeye is right.
Posted on 4/21/21 at 9:38 am to Tiguar
I didn’t want to believe it but he was sacrificed.
Posted on 4/21/21 at 9:42 am to jonnyanony
quote:
it didn't go the way you think it did.
I didn't say how I think it went, mensa, nor do I care what a bunch of paid witnesses say. I said he apparently had a potentially lethal amount of drugs in his system. If one of those people refuted the toxicology report and proved that it was false, then you've responded intelligently to my point. Otherwise.......
This post was edited on 4/21/21 at 9:45 am
Posted on 4/21/21 at 9:43 am to Tiguar
quote:
was on a very simple DUI case that went for 1 day and the jury had questions
I did s murder case in brooklyn. About 3 hours in deliberation. Granted it was much more clear than this.
Posted on 4/21/21 at 9:43 am to Tiguar
quote:
I was on a very simple DUI case that went for 1 day and the jury had questions
I haven't been following this really, wth was the jury instructions. Basically, they convicted someone three times for the same crime (act). Someone including the judge should be asking a whole bunch of questions.
I don't see how they don't throw the whole thing out, but one can never trust anyone in these matters.
Under what they have done, there is nothing stopping the prosecutor from indicting him again on the same act.
This post was edited on 4/21/21 at 9:44 am
Page 24 of 26
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News