The Derek Chauvin Trial Thread (Guilty on all charges!!) 4/20

killacal

Banned
Joined
May 27, 2012
Messages
30,868
Reputation
8,983
Daps
178,875
Unless there are some straight racists or cop-worshipers on the jury then that strategy should have no chance. You already have a ton of witnesses who were right there and said Chauvin's behavior was awful and it looked like he was killing Floyd, you have Floyd's own words that he couldn't breath. No one can watch that video and think Chauvin didn't play a part in his death.

In the defense's BEST case scenario, it's like if a lifeguard saw someone having an epileptic seizure in the pool so they dove in...and then held them under water. Then tried to argue, "I didn't kill him by holding him under cause he would have drowned from the seizure anyway!"
:laff::laff:
 

Professor Emeritus

Veteran
Poster of the Year
Supporter
Joined
Jan 5, 2015
Messages
51,331
Reputation
19,940
Daps
204,127
Reppin
the ether

Not sure what you're laughing at. In america there's a difference between casual racists and straight racists. The mississippi burning conspirators were convicted in federal court by a jury of 12 white people presided over by a racist pro-segregation judge. Are you really going to claim that all 12 white people on the jury were woke anti-racists....in 1967? Yet they threw powerful white racists in jail when the entire state institutions of Mississippi were trying to protect those men.

The average casual racist in America will still convict a white man when the evidence is clear, it's just the borderline cases or "plausible deniability" that they latch onto. They see tossing the worst white violators like Chauvin under the bus as part of the cost of pretending the rest of them are okay. Whereas there's a special kind of racist who will protect the white man at all costs.



What's the racial breakdown of the jurors?
8 white, 4 black, 2 mixed
 

mattw1313

Superstar
Joined
Jan 24, 2017
Messages
3,170
Reputation
581
Daps
15,796
the police chief just said "I absolutely agree that violates our department policy",

and then in response to the question of whether it was in accordance with policy authorized the use of reasonable force: 'it is not. it has to be objectively reasonable'

asked when the restraint should have stopped:
'once Mr. Floyd stopped resisting. and certainly once he was in distress'

'it is not part of our policy, not part of our training, and certainly not part of our ethics and values'

also agreed that policy was violated by failing to render aid
 
Top