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.
The judge should work at a mechanic. He has breaks for days.
Nelson is reading this thread....


2081891-f3f04c3b51c1607dc93fc62b015306df.png


Edit: "Are you a mechanic?"
Edit 2: This carbon monoxide poisoning defense is a bold move cotton, let's see how it plays out.
 
It could be an interesting one to decide if it rises to the level of culpable negligence. It was clearly the height of incompetence and an utter fuck up that lead to a death but there will be something for the defence to go for.
- "Your Honour, she's a woman. And somebody gave her a gun."
- "The defence is correct. Arrest her superiors."
 
They've latched on to the lizard guy saying that the body created new blood vessels to redirect blood around a blockage and are taking it to it's retarded extreme, which is precisely what the prosecution wanted the jury to do, ignoring that new blood vessels != a fucking artery and that it's objectively not "fine". You may be able to live your normal sedentary life, but at some point something will tip you over the edge into sneedsville
The state of education in the US.
 
>vid less than a month old
⏰
the carbon monoxide thing seems like a great curve ball tbh
Not really. This is extremely short sighted, because the prosecution can come back swinging with "Oh ok, yeah the carbon monoxide did it. So Chauvin is guilty of manslaughter because he was negligent when arresting floyd."
 
she literally pulled her gun and shot the guy dead, and is trying to argue that she mistook the gun for a tazer lmao
now there's a case where a murder charge might actually be warranted cause that tazer excuse seems kinda sketchy to me
Her reaction makes it look unintentional, so I'm willing to buy her shitty excuse.
She should absolutely get a manslaughter charge IMO.

also your pfp looks identical to a troon i know its really unsettling
 
⏰

Not really. This is extremely short sighted, because the prosecution can come back swinging with "Oh ok, yeah the carbon monoxide did it. So Chauvin is guilty of manslaughter because he was negligent when arresting floyd."
The way I'm interpreting it is that its a factor only because of all the other mitigating circumstances around his heart condition. As with everything else, a normal person wouldn't die from it.
Thats my take
 
Not really. This is extremely short sighted, because the prosecution can come back swinging with "Oh ok, yeah the carbon monoxide did it. So Chauvin is guilty of manslaughter because he was negligent when arresting floyd."
not really this either, they never criticized the actual act of putting him on the ground (obviously, since he's the one who did it) and have never themselves mentioned this. If they just suddenly go "oh yeah, we were wrong it's what the defense said!" they've obviously already lost. At this point in the trial, pros has made their case, the job is to minimize and discredit the defense trying to poke holes in their story. If they actively change the story based on what the defense says, no jury would convict, and for obvious reasons.
 
He got two years including time served. And I don't think he's been able to work since.
Yeah just looked it up. It was involuntary manslaughter rather than any of the more serious charges so I wonder how the two state's wordings differ here. Either way she'll probably get some nice please deal that involves never seeing a cell.
 
  • Like
Reactions: KiwiFuzz
The defence's strategy is very cunning, I must admit. Mr. Nelson is positing that Mr. Floyd's death is simply the result of a large number of unfortunate, intermingling factors. Thus the prosecutor must waste time and effort trying to take down, or bring into doubt, every single one of them.

this

they are introducing as many sources of doubt as they possibly can, as well they should

in most legal cases reasonable doubt is about stacking up pebbles to make a mountain, not throwing down one gigantic boulder

they call it the compounding of probabilities, the carbon monoxide angle, while weak by itself, is another pebble on the pile, and the defense absolutely knows what it's doing by introducing it into the evidence
 
⏰

Not really. This is extremely short sighted, because the prosecution can come back swinging with "Oh ok, yeah the carbon monoxide did it. So Chauvin is guilty of manslaughter because he was negligent when arresting floyd."
So, I think this is a bit of a red herring, and is meant to make the prosecution take a weak argument

There's absolutely no way that short a time could fuck up a normal person. And there's no way Chauvin could know how fucked Floyd was.

What the Jury would be faced with is "does a man deserve to go to jail because he did his job next to a car"
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back