Originally posted by Seruoudly King Kong
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Anyone watching this George Floyd trial?
Collapse
-
Last edited by TonyGe; 04-12-2021, 08:39 PM.siablo14 likes this.
- Likes 1
-
Originally posted by OldTerry View Post
Actually I seen enough of the trial to see that Floyd's death could very well be due to a combination of factors and not singly the pressure of Chauvin's knee. My personal viewpoint is Chauvin contributed to Floyd's death but there were other factors involved (especially the drugs in Floyd's system) that give reasonable doubt as to Chauvin's absolute guilt. If the Jury doesn't see it my way and finds Chauvin guilty then that is fine with me. In the end it is their opinion that matters, not mine or yours'.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Real King Kong View Post
The definition you posted of 2nd degree manslaughter fits the situation imo. Someone can consciously do something and be ****** at the same time. He chose to do what he did, but it doesn’t necessarily mean he has a “depraved mind”.
Even though the definition for deadly force, which you agreed to, shows that he would be conscious of his actions being dangerous, but you didn't mention that for some reason.
Give me a break. You can come clean about wanting this guy to get off on an easier charge because of your *** resentment any day now. Keep it real.
Comment
-
Originally posted by travestyny View Post
My bad. I'm not trying to be like a "bulldog." I'm just sincerely trying to understand why anyone wouldn't see this as murder.
Let me ask you one more question (that of course you don't have to answer if you don't want). Do you believe that Chauvin having his knee on Floyd's neck even after he was told Floyd had no pulse displays a "depraved mind"?
Comment
-
Originally posted by travestyny View Post
Ok. So you are officially on record saying that a police officer kneeling on a man's neck who has no pulse does not qualify as a depraved mind. He's just too ****** to know how dangerous that is
Even though the definition for deadly force, which you agreed to, shows that he would be conscious of his actions being dangerous, but you didn't mention that for some reason.
Give me a break. You can come clean about wanting this guy to get off on an easier charge because of your *** resentment any day now. Keep it real.
Comment
-
Originally posted by OldTerry View Post
The question is with all the commotion going on did the "no pulse" comment even register with Chauvin? If it did then there is something definitely depraved about him. If he was simply very rattled then it happened because of that. There are only two beings (en****** didn't work) that know the truth, one is Chauvin and the other is God. We aren't either one.
Male 3 : Check his pulse. Check his Pulse. Check his pulse. Check his pulse .
Thomas Lane: You got one?
J. Alexander Kueng: I can't find one.
Derek Chauvin: Huh?
Male 3: Check his pulse.
J.Alexander Kueng: I thought I'd check him for a pulse.
So you're saying he just tuned out the conversation, even after he asked for clarification? Come on, man. He was too rattled to get off of the guy's neck?
Let's just leave the convo there. I don't want to be accused of being a bulldog or whatever, but I just don't understand your reluctance to call this what it was.
Comment
-
Originally posted by joseph5620 View Post
Oh man. I laughed out loud on that one.
Comment
-
Damn this use of force expert for the defence is getting totally torn apart and embarrassed. He said putting and keeping Floyd in the prone position with the cops on him wasn't a use of force, under the prosecutions questioning he conceded it was. So the defence have a use of force expert that can't recognise use of force, all credibility lost.Last edited by Robbie Barrett; 04-13-2021, 03:21 PM.siablo14 likes this.
- Likes 1
Comment
-
Originally posted by Robbie Barrett View PostDamn this use of force expert for the defence is getting totally torn apart and embarrassed. He said putting and keeping Floyd in the prone position with the cops on him wasn't a use of force, under the prosecutions questioning he conceded it was. So the defence have a use of force expert that can't recognise use of force, all credibility lost.
- Likes 2
Comment
Comment