The Trial of Derek Chauvin - Judgement(?) Day(?) has arrived!

Outcome?

  • Guilty of Murder

    Votes: 75 7.6%
  • Not Guilty of Murder (2nd/3rd), Guilty of Manslaughter

    Votes: 397 40.0%
  • Full Acquittal

    Votes: 221 22.3%
  • Mistrial

    Votes: 299 30.1%

  • Total voters
    992
  • Poll closed .
Status
Not open for further replies.
So any medical big brains in here? They are gonna try the "level of fent in george wasn't lethal because he's a seasoned user of it." approach. Bold gambit, but isn't the whole thing with fent is that like 2 specks of it can kill like a busload of people. Or did DARE lie to me again?
Really depends on a number of factors as TP said. Even something as seemingly irrelevant as the setting he was in when he took it could impact it, opiate users develop a kind of "behavioral tolerance" that applies depending on setting. A doper who has control over his setting and is in a relaxed state might be able to handle a full dose of his normal substance one night, then OD from the same amount the next day in a different setting because of variables he wasn't able to control that he normally would be able to, ie having somewhere to lay on the side, having a sitter, having hydration, etc.

The fact that they're not going with the tolerance angle might signify that the defense has some legit evidence that Floyd took the drugs and didn't even know exactly what they were, which is entirely possible. He might have taken some compressed "speedballs" ie meth and opiates mixed without knowing how much of either were in there. There are a lot of things about this case that haven't even had the chance to see the light of day.

But tldr fentanyl and opiates in general are very finicky even for seasoned druggies because there are a lot of factors that influence their tolerance and a users reaction to them, and the margin for error is slim enough that plenty of addicts with decades of experience still kick the bucket every day doing the same shit they've done for years
 
Gonna PL a bit and admit that I'm living in one of the surrounding suburbs of Minneapolis so just want to ask people who aren't how is the trial is being covered?
Here it seems like local news stations rather then standard reporting are going out of their way to rely on live feed from the trial as much as they can so you'd have to be living under a rock to not see the trial. I have a few ideas about why their doing this but kind of fall apart if this is the case nation wide.
 
Really depends on a number of factors as TP said. Even something as seemingly irrelevant as the setting he was in when he took it could impact it, opiate users develop a kind of "behavioral tolerance" that applies depending on setting. A doper who has control over his setting and is in a relaxed state might be able to handle a full dose of his normal substance one night, then OD from the same amount the next day in a different setting because of variables he wasn't able to control that he normally would be able to, ie having somewhere to lay on the side, having a sitter, having hydration, etc.

The fact that they're not going with the tolerance angle might signify that the defense has some legit evidence that Floyd took the drugs and didn't even know exactly what they were, which is entirely possible. He might have taken some compressed "speedballs" ie meth and opiates mixed without knowing how much of either were in there. There are a lot of things about this case that haven't even had the chance to see the light of day.

But tldr fentanyl and opiates in general are very finicky even for seasoned druggies because there are a lot of factors that influence their tolerance and a users reaction to them, and the margin for error is slim enough that plenty of addicts with decades of experience still kick the bucket every day doing the same shit they've done for years
You've got it pretty much right there. Behavioral Tolerance can result in some odd effects. If someone thinks they're dying, they might panic enough to actually die as the body gets flooded with various hormones to try and 'save' itself.

Gonna PL a bit and admit that I'm living in one of the surrounding suburbs of Minneapolis so just want to ask people who aren't how is the trial is being covered?
Here it seems like local news stations rather then standard reporting are going out of their way to rely on live feed from the trial as much as they can so you'd have to be living under a rock to not see the trial. I have a few ideas about why their doing this but kind of fall apart if this is the case nation wide.

Bruh the trial is getting streamed by ABC, it's like the OJ Simpson trial, it's got national attention.
 
I think the prosecution fucked itself here because their allegation in the opening statements was that Floyd didn't die of a heart attack, he died of asphyxiation. The "blood choke" theory floated by the witness is not the prosecution's theory of what happened.

That being said, with what we now know about Floyd's history, as opposed to what we knew during the riots, it's extremely likely that the severity of his priors will be a smoking gun for the defense team.

I believe that Floyd's criminal history is not admissible. I think the only thing they're allowing is that arrest video from last year.

Floyd's sister is on MSNBC right now and she just literally said that her brother was the Chosen One sent by God. Lunacy.

Finally, for the people who live in "vibrant" neighborhoods, the waiting period to buy a gun in California is 10 days. You can get a 12 gauge for $300. If you really think you're at risk, the time to get ready is now.
 
You... can though. Essentially if you apply enough pressure to restrict the arteries bringing blood into the brain, you can cause someone with a heart condition to enter cardiac arrest. The brain thinks it's not getting enough blood, which causes the heart to pump faster, which then fails from the sheer demands the brain is placing on it, even if it isn't needed. This is why you can kill someone by firing a gun next to them, or through jumping around a corner and shouting 'ooga booga booga' at them. For that matter, from the way Floyd was on the ground, he'd be having some trouble breathing - he's not a small man, and behind the back restraints do constrict the airway a bit. If he's already experiencing panic, the effect of drugs, etc. etc. the action of the officer restraining him like that could easily kill him.
We can speculate all day about ways Chauvin might have actually killed Floyd - in absence of evidence, none of that is relevant.
Or rather, shouldn't be relevant in a court of law. We'll see.
Was there any evidence that Chauvin obstructed Floyd's breathing or circulation in a way that caused his death?
Is there any evidence that Floyd may have accomplished that on his own, by willingly ingesting a mixture of narcotics?

These are the kind of questions that should matter. Not whether people are really outraged over the death of Fentanyl-Jesus.
 
Considering how quickly the media decided the officer's fate, I'm surprised it's taken this long to even get to this trial.

Doesn't matter either what verdict comes, niggers want the opportunity to get some free sumfin's, and twittertards want summa dat woke karma. Anyone who even remotely still cares at this point knows that.
 
Nigger be running Easter Island statue game. Or at least he was until he went all ded n shiet.
GettyImages-1188964597-98466c2d659f48bfa7ad09ddb7387566.png

Now I want a gradius mod where all the Moai heads are Floyd heads.
 
I get negrated because A&H is full of /pol/fags who hate everyone but themselves. Defending Chauvin's actions by saying 'Floyd would have died from the overdose' doesn't excuse his actions being wrong - just that they may not have killed Floyd. For the record, I think Chauvin didn't intend to kill him - but he certainly acted negligently enough to ensure that Floyd died.
No, they hate themselves too.
Trust me.
 
I believe that Floyd's criminal history is not admissible. I think the only thing they're allowing is that arrest video from last year.
I gotta ask our favorite lawyer from Minnesota about that one. If that's true that is fucking retarded. I think robbing a pregnant woman might be an important detail to bring up in court.
 
We can speculate all day about ways Chauvin might have actually killed Floyd - in absence of evidence, none of that is relevant.
Or rather, shouldn't be relevant in a court of law. We'll see.
Was there any evidence that Chauvin obstructed Floyd's breathing or circulation in a way that caused his death?
Is there any evidence that Floyd may have accomplished that on his own, by willingly ingesting a mixture of narcotics?

These are the kind of questions that should matter. Not whether people are really outraged over the death of Fentanyl-Jesus.
The thing is, there's also plenty of evidence of ways Chauvin potentially can be liable for the death. If Chauvin's actions exacerbated an overdose, that's still a contributing factor to a death to the point where you can reasonably argue he bears some responsibility for his death, especially when he kept him restrained for two minutes after he stopped breathing.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back