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

  • 🔧 At about Midnight EST I am going to completely fuck up the site trying to fix something.

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.
It feels good that he's calling out all this single frame and "5 second clip with 20 pauses" bullshit. Too bad that the people who'd need to hear this aren't even listening (minus the jury, hopefully). 300 ug of LSD and these people would be so ashamed of themselves they'd have to find God to ever look into a mirror again.
Everyone's already made their opinion on the case, even the faggots like us that lurk this thread.
 
Yeah but 9 minutes and 29 seconds, did we mention he can't sneed? 9 minutes and 29 seconds.
EXHIBIT 17.
Exhibit 17.gif
 
I was really hoping Nelson would bring one hell of a closing argument, and so far I have not been disappointed. I'm still behind, but I'm still pretty impressed. Much better reasoned than Prosecution's strategy of disingenuously appealing to emotion that comes off with the authenticity of a da Vinci photocopy. I can see the argument being built up piece by piece, and the mad lad is front-loading his argument with state witness testimony. This is quite a show.
 
Does longer answer go "no, he can't" or "no, that would be bad idea"?

TL;DR - It's basically the reason why you can almost never sue someone for defamation. Chauvin would have to prove that the prosecution was illegal and not just political or incompetent.

One of the biggest challenges in malicious prosecution cases based on the filing of criminal charges is prosecutor immunity. State and federal laws give prosecutors and other law enforcement employees immunity from liability for malicious prosecution. This immunity is meant to protect prosecutors and law enforcement so they can do their job without constantly having to defend against accusations of malicious prosecution. The concern is that every person who claims innocence might try to sue the prosecutor for wrongful prosecution.
 
I was really hoping Nelson would bring one hell of a closing argument, and so far I have not been disappointed. I'm still behind, but I'm still pretty impressed. Much better reasoned than Prosecution's strategy of disingenuously appealing to emotion that comes off with the authenticity of a da Vinci photocopy. I can see the argument being built up piece by piece, and the mad lad is front-loading his argument with state witness testimony. This is quite a show.
We may get the full desired yield of wailing and gnashing of teeth from ReddiTwittroons after all.
maxresdefault-3.jpg
 
From what I gather, Mr. Nelson is a somewhat prominent lawyer in the Minneapolis area. Does anybody know who's paying his fee? and about how much he's getting paid to represent Chauvin?
 
  • Feels
Reactions: Brahma
From what I gather, Mr. Nelson is a somewhat prominent lawyer in the Minneapolis area. Does anybody know who's paying his fee? and about how much he's getting paid to represent Chauvin?
The police union or something is paying for this. I'm not sure what the rate is.

I'm wondering if the union would cover appeals as well?

 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back