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

[Rekkington]

And the irony of it all is that people will look at that and say "yea, that's normal, so what?" instead of it being a very clear problem with the neighborhood in general.

Black people and their white simps unironically see nothing wrong with that. They also seem to believe black people invented getting drunk in backyard BBQs, and these are more important than elections.

 

[Overly Serious]

Prosecution has been full on retard this whole trial, its insane

Maybe it's the same reason they picked a violent, woman threatening, hard-drug abusing thug guy for their figurehead rather than some other case where police reaction might be a bit less justifiable - they seek division. I mean, the Antifa-supporting DA Keith Ellison originally charged Chauvin with 1st or 2nd degree murder didn't he? It's like he WANTS there to be riots.

If your end goal is racial division then the last thing you want is an outcome people are happy with.

 

[HTTP Error 404]

View attachment 2051452
Cant really tell for sure but this seems really high for regular use

That's enough Fentanyl to knock a horse out, and is 100% a lethal dose. That's before anything else (Norfentanyl, Meth, etc.)

From my understanding supposedly he only took a few pills which contained fentanyl and meth, while he was being arrested to hide them, but this is also after he was already high as clearly shown in the store before the arrest where he gave us the Fentanyl Shuffle. It's also likely the same pills that sent him to the hospital the month before and the one's that his junkie mama gf took one time, and that she told the FBI it made her feel Jittery, stay up all night, and feel like she was about to die.

He was high off his tits going into the store. He left the store and did more drugs with his dealer and "Mama." The cops showed up and he downed as much of the stash as he could before they got to the car.

It wasn't just "a few pills." He was playing Hungry Hungry Hippos with them. And yeah, like you mentioned, "Mama" apparently told the feds there was something wrong with the pills in the first place. (read: They were laced with Fentanyl instead of the drugs they thought they were taking.)

 

[Techpriest]

So I've been following this and think I have a reasonable grasp of most of it but one thing confuses me. How is it that so many options are open as to whether he might get sentenced to Manslaughter or 3rd degree murder or what. I was under the impression you had to make one charge and have to prove it. Not that you could turn up with a full buffet of charges to throw at someone and see what sticks.

I mean sure - some things get rolled together into one trial like you could charge assault separately from the burglary that accompanied it, but can you do that when they overlap? Like try to prove manslaughter and murder at the same time?

You can. Essentially the prosecution has to make a good case for any one of those three sentences. The death of someone is rated on a degree. For example, first degree murder requires preplanned or premeditated action. Obviously they can’t get him on first but second and third degree murder are less difficult to prove than first degree. Often times the prosecution will have several counts of murder for one individual in various degrees. They’re saying “from the perspective of the state we think we have enough evidence to convict him of any of the three.” Obviously they want the top slot and will try and chase that but if they think that it’s not going to work they’ll shift to a lesser charge, which is often built on the case for the higher one too. All the defense needs to do for any of those charges is getting a reasonable doubt that the jury agrees with.

 

[General Disarray]

Sorry, YT boy, this is real life, the saint gets the girl
View attachment 2051548

For a born-and-bred Minnesotan, that bitch sure looks West Virginia.

 

[Takayuki Yagami]

does it even matter what kind of person GF was? I don't understand why everyone is wasting time arguing about it (I mean, I understand they try to appeal to emotions, but why is nobody stopping them?)
Ok maybe he was a junkie criminal, it's still not right to kill him, ASSUMING he was even killed. Thats some Yagami Light logic.
Maybe he was a gentle giant who danced in stores and took dad selfies, how is that relevant ?

If we lived in normal world, all this time would have been spent determining how much cop actually contributed to his death, and how intentional it was.
But what do I know, I'm just a normie.

Because if he’s a degenerate, violently felonous, junkie that OD’ed on all of the drugs the prosecution’s case weakens a lot. As people here have already said, most if not all of the charges currently brought require some measure of intent; and the prosecutors haven’t really bothered establishing intent even thiugh it’s been almost a week.

 

[AmazingEagle]

Sorry, YT boy, this is real life, the saint gets the girl
View attachment 2051548

Did George steal shirts from Chris Chan's house?

 

[Big Meaty Claws]

I didn't bother asking, but I was wondering the same thing. How can you simultaneously charge someone with both intentional and unintentional killing?

Knowing clown world they will find a way to do that and try to find a way to lock him away for life

 

[Bongocat]

You can. Essentially the prosecution has to make a good case for any one of those three sentences. The death of someone is rated on a degree. For example, first degree murder requires preplanned or premeditated action. Obviously they can’t get him on first but second and third degree murder are less difficult to prove than first degree. Often times the prosecution will have several counts of murder for one individual in various degrees. They’re saying “from the perspective of the state we think we have enough evidence to convict him of any of the three.” Obviously they want the top slot and will try and chase that but if they think that it’s not going to work they’ll shift to a lesser charge, which is often built on the case for the higher one too. All the defense needs to do for any of those charges is getting a reasonable doubt that the jury agrees with.

I can understand murder 1, 2 and 3 since those 'build' on eachother, but manslaughter is by definition unintentional right? It just seems like they're saying "Well, we think it wasn't intentional but we're going to see if we can convince a jury that it was".

 

[Big Meaty Claws]

Did George steal shirts from Chris Chan's house?

GUYS, GEORGE WASN'T HIMSELF, HE WAS JUST CHANNELING A JERKOP INTO HIS BODY, HE IS INNOCENT, THE JERKCOP WAS JUST MAKING HIM ACT INSANE!!!

 

[Not Really Here]

The main problem for the defense is the prosecution is still making a good case of culpable negligence.

From what I'm reading that would require "when he consciously disregards a substantial and unjustifiable risk"[recklessly] or "when he should be aware of a substantial and unjustifiable risk"[negligently], an officer cuffing and putting a subject on the ground seems at most like a justifiable risk.

 

[DumbDude42]

There could be a witness coming up who turns the case on its head

dude we've already seen the full bodycam footage (it leaked and was posted in the riots thread last year)
no matter how many crying junkies the prosecution puts on the stand, all of them can give second hand information AT BEST - but we already saw the full and objective first hand footage of what actually happened. no witness can match that.

 

[HTTP Error 404]

...... THIS guy is the sergeant???
View attachment 2051790

Diversity hire bingo wins again.

This guy needs to stop rocking back and forth.

Makes him look like a damn autist.

No, it makes him look like he's trying to imitate or minimize that video of Oingo Boingo Floyd in the store.

"Oh gosh this must just be something the pavement apes do. It's an ethnic thing, he wasn't out of his fucking mind on drugs after all!"

 

[LUNEKO]

GUYS, GEORGE WASN'T HIMSELF, HE WAS JUST CHANNELING A JERKOP INTO HIS BODY, HE IS INNOCENT, THE JERKCOP WAS JUST MAKING HIM ACT INSANE!!!

The prosecutors did try to say that George was on a "high functioning" altered state, so maybe Chris and Floyd where really kindred souls

 

[Shakka Ahmose]

GUYS, GEORGE WASN'T HIMSELF, HE WAS JUST CHANNELING A JERKOP INTO HIS BODY, HE IS INNOCENT, THE JERKCOP WAS JUST MAKING HIM ACT INSANE!!!

George Floyd reincarnated into a Sonichu.

 

[Glowing In The Streets]

Sorry, YT boy, this is real life, the saint gets the girl
View attachment 2051548

>girl

 

[JohnDoe]

I can understand murder 1, 2 and 3 since those 'build' on eachother, but manslaughter is by definition unintentional right? It just seems like they're saying "Well, we think it wasn't intentional but we're going to see if we can convince a jury that it was".

Manslaughter requires a degree of negligence or recklessness, which results in death.

The first part is a problem, since following his trained protocol, calling for an ambulance, etc are all prima facie reasonable actions that don't create, but minimize risk.

The second part is another problem too, because the death is arguably the result of Floyd's own actions, ie the overdosing. So Chauvin is clear there.

 

[Celebrate Nite]

The defense did try to say that George was on a "high functioning" altered state, so maybe Chris and Floyd where really kindred souls

More like "High Functioning" autist.

 

[Big Meaty Claws]

The defense did try to say that George was on a "high functioning" altered state, so maybe Chris and Floyd where really kindred souls

George Floyd reincarnated into a Sonichu.

George's gonna come back as a Blackchu

 

[Overly Serious]

You can. Essentially the prosecution has to make a good case for any one of those three sentences. The death of someone is rated on a degree. For example, first degree murder requires preplanned or premeditated action. Obviously they can’t get him on first but second and third degree murder are less difficult to prove than first degree. Often times the prosecution will have several counts of murder for one individual in various degrees. They’re saying “from the perspective of the state we think we have enough evidence to convict him of any of the three.” Obviously they want the top slot and will try and chase that but if they think that it’s not going to work they’ll shift to a lesser charge, which is often built on the case for the higher one too. All the defense needs to do for any of those charges is getting a reasonable doubt that the jury agrees with.

Is there any point where they have to commit to just one crime? Or do they literally just wait for the judge or jury to say "I picked 2nd degree murder"? That seems especially odd if its a jury that did that.