Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
The latter and it is odd when it happens.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.
To this I can only reply - Jesus wept.Some retarded reverend from the UK on Good Friday of all days is comparing George Floyd to the suffering Jesus had to endure
View attachment 2052133
View attachment 2052134
View attachment 2052132
Literally Nigger-Jesus. He died for our gibsmedats!Some retarded reverend from the UK on Good Friday of all days is comparing George Floyd to the suffering Jesus had to endure
The Anglican Church and idolatry go together like old people and Florida.Some retarded reverend from the UK on Good Friday of all days is comparing George Floyd to the suffering Jesus had to endure
View attachment 2052133
View attachment 2052134
View attachment 2052132
Eloi, Eloi, lama sabachthani?To this I can only reply - Jesus wept.
jury decides on all charges separatelyIs 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.
Some retarded reverend from the UK on Good Friday of all days is comparing George Floyd to the suffering Jesus had to endure
View attachment 2052133
View attachment 2052134
View attachment 2052132
Some retarded reverend from the UK on Good Friday of all days is comparing George Floyd to the suffering Jesus had to endure
View attachment 2052133
View attachment 2052134
View attachment 2052132
How progressive.meanwhile elsewhere in the justice system....
View attachment 2052162
>Possibly no jail time
>Community service or House Arrest
System working just fine.
Manslaughter implies that the death, even if accidental, was caused by or resulted from the negligence of an individual. It’s why most DUI deaths are charged with manslaughter - the person who hit a passenger was too drunk to be considered in control of their actions but they still hit and killed someone. The state thinks this person is responsible for why this person died either through their action or inaction when they had the responsibility to act. Essentially the point of murder is intent or through depraved action, you caused the death of someone. If you wave a gun at someone, it goes off by mistake and they die, that can be considered murder if the prosecution can prove you intended to fire anyway, malfunction or no malfunction. You were acting in a way to cause the death of someone and knew it.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".
The problem for Chauvin is that while he followed protocol... he didn’t do what could have minimized risk, didn’t attempt himself to assist in medical care, and disregarded the suggestion of another officer to mitigate that risk. Then he also misled his supervisor about his role in the whole thing. When you are involved in application of force, it’s a willful action - and so is the reduction of force. He is responsible for everyone including the person he is using force on. Even when force was not necessary, he kept using it. That’s a pretty good indication of negligence, and what the prosecution is chasing hardest - Chauvin willingly didn’t reduce his force when he had ample opportunity, while that person was in his custody and thus his responsibility. The defense sort of shot themselves in the foot a bit in the questioning of the lieutenant by trying to go with the idea that he was in a life or death struggle with Floyd. That argument completely falls flat when Chauvin seemed to show complete disregard for the crowd being there, and Floyd not attempting to strike any of the officers once he was on the ground. The prosecution is going to argue he never saw himself in any threat from the crowd or from Floyd and was more annoyed that they were filming him.Manslaught 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.
The bitches will never learn and will be taught their mistakes was because of the White man due to structural racism.meanwhile elsewhere in the justice system....
View attachment 2052162
>Possibly no jail time
>Community service or House Arrest
System working just fine.
Honestly I am and always have been open to the possibility of a manslaughter charge. I don't have particularly strong opinions on it and could be swayed either way. If this were a contained, local case and he got locked up for that I'd say "maybe that's fair".Manslaughter implies that the death, even if accidental, was caused by or resulted from the negligence of an individual. It’s why most DUI deaths are charged with manslaughter - the person who hit a passenger was too drunk to be considered in control of their actions but they still hit and killed someone. The state thinks this person is responsible for why this person died either through their action or inaction when they had the responsibility to act. Essentially the point of murder is intent or through depraved action, you caused the death of someone. If you wave a gun at someone, it goes off by mistake and they die, that can be considered murder if the prosecution can prove you intended to fire anyway, malfunction or no malfunction. You were acting in a way to cause the death of someone and knew it.
Manslaughter though could be refusing to assist someone you kicked the hell out of in a bar fight. They’re on the ground and not moving but they’re still breathing. You stumble home or to the hospital. They die of a heart attack or whatever. You didn’t attempt to render assistance, rendered them unable to get help they needed to live on their own, and contributed to the death through your actions. Even if you never intended to kill them, your actions still played a major role in their death. You can reasonably be proven to not have intended to kill them, but your actions were certainly negligent at the least.
The problem for Chauvin is that while he followed protocol... he didn’t do what could have minimized risk, didn’t attempt himself to assist in medical care, and disregarded the suggestion of another officer to mitigate that risk. Then he also misled his supervisor about his role in the whole thing. When you are involved in application of force, it’s a willful action - and so is the reduction of force. He is responsible for everyone including the person he is using force on. Even when force was not necessary, he kept using it. That’s a pretty good indication of negligence, and what the prosecution is chasing hardest - Chauvin willingly didn’t reduce his force when he had ample opportunity, while that person was in his custody and thus his responsibility. The defense sort of shot themselves in the foot a bit in the questioning of the lieutenant by trying to go with the idea that he was in a life or death struggle with Floyd. That argument completely falls flat when Chauvin seemed to show complete disregard for the crowd being there, and Floyd not attempting to strike any of the officers once he was on the ground. The prosecution is going to argue he never saw himself in any threat from the crowd or from Floyd and was more annoyed that they were filming him.
You can 100% see him kicking with his leg on the camera footage of the cop who held onto the lower half of his body.Floyd not attempting to strike any of the officers once he was on the ground
He quite literally did. The protocol he followed is designed to minimize risk in the majority of situations to which it's applied. It is not his job, nor responsibility to "assist in providing medical care" as that's something he's not trained in doing and because of that could actually make things worse.he didn’t do what could have minimized risk
cue them never mentioning the race of the perps and using it as "evidence of white supremacy"meanwhile elsewhere in the justice system....
View attachment 2052162
>Possibly no jail time
>Community service or House Arrest
System working just fine.
And he keeps talking about "risk" when the law is "unjustifiable risk".You can 100% see him kicking with his leg on the camera footage of the cop who held onto the lower half of his body.