Join us FREE, we're FREE to use
Web's largest swingers site since 2006.
Already registered?
Login here
Join us FREE, we're FREE to use
Web's largest swingers site since 2006.
Already registered?
Login here
 | Back to forum list |
| Back to Politics |
| Jump to newest |  |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"joint venture for chauvins collegues for failing to prevent chauvin from commiting the murder would also be appropriate. " Exactly - this has always been a point overlooked. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Your prediction of the courts verdict and punishment based on evidence currently seen and heard by the judge and jury? Your own personal wish of what you think the verdict and punishment should be, based on what you believe happened, from what you've currently seen and heard in the evidence? Your prediction? and Your wish? " Prediction: no clue. Wish: for a fair trial free from media or race relations influence. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Your prediction of the courts verdict and punishment based on evidence currently seen and heard by the judge and jury? Your own personal wish of what you think the verdict and punishment should be, based on what you believe happened, from what you've currently seen and heard in the evidence? Your prediction? and Your wish? " Still maintaining my belief that he will be convicted of manslaughter. Questioned an acquittal after seeing the evidence heard from day 7 but then remembered this is a political trial. My wish would be for politicking to not be a factor and then see where the chips fall. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"joint venture for chauvins collegues for failing to prevent chauvin from commiting the murder would also be appropriate. " I agree that they should be held accountable for their actions and inactions in the death of George Floyd. To be honest, I'd need to learn more about the other officers, time on the force, what they were being told to do by a superior officer, what they were saying to their superior officer, ect...ect... . I have questions, so I need to learn some more facts. It's a terrible thing that happened to Mr. Floyd, and his family, but I don't want to see someones life ruined without knowing more facts. I already know enough facts about Chauvin, and his part in the death of Mr. Floyd, to make my personal judgement against him. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"I am not certain of the legal principle of joint venture in US Law, but the other officers inaction in stopping Chauvin was inexcusable; thus the reason they are on trial. Chauvin displayed reckless disregard for the victim, but whether he intended to kill him, or consciously cause him really serious harm is for the jury. Chauvin does have a track record of bad behaviour whilst on duty, which will go against him. Frankly, if I was a coloured person in the US and was pulled over by the police there I would be terrified; this trial is clearly a watershed, a turning point, and if Chauvin is not convicted, based on the video evidence I have seen the US cities will go into meltdown. The current attitude to black citizens, going right back to the cotton plantations, is despicable; members of the police forces still think they can do whatever they want, and get away with it. Members of the US police need to be made fearful of a lifetime in prison for reckless behaviour whilst in uniform. " A shocking misrepresentation of an entire police force. All the research on this topic indicates that police do not disproportionately target bkacks. Blacks are 2 and a half times more likely to die in a confrontation than whites but given black suspects are far more likely to resist arrest and carry firearms than whites you would expect far more casualties. This was found in an independent study chaired by a black professor. Far more whites are killed by white cops in the u.s. than blacks and interestingly black police officers kill more blacks than white suspects. Is this because they have been contaminated by racism ? Or could it be they are more jumpy when stopping black suspects? Your buying into a narrative of race hustling that condemns young black kids into a life of low expectation and misery . | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"joint venture for chauvins collegues for failing to prevent chauvin from commiting the murder would also be appropriate. I agree that they should be held accountable for their actions and inactions in the death of George Floyd. To be honest, I'd need to learn more about the other officers, time on the force, what they were being told to do by a superior officer, what they were saying to their superior officer, ect...ect... . I have questions, so I need to learn some more facts. It's a terrible thing that happened to Mr. Floyd, and his family, but I don't want to see someones life ruined without knowing more facts. I already know enough facts about Chauvin, and his part in the death of Mr. Floyd, to make my personal judgement against him. " A watershed momment and video evidence do you not remember rodney king? Enough evidence there on video and all those coppers got of scot free.fact of the matter is if he is found guilty or not foubd guilty it will kick off well unless he gets life without parole and thats not goi g to happen.chances are its gona be manslaughter and a little bit of prison time. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"I am not certain of the legal principle of joint venture in US Law, but the other officers inaction in stopping Chauvin was inexcusable; thus the reason they are on trial. Chauvin displayed reckless disregard for the victim, but whether he intended to kill him, or consciously cause him really serious harm is for the jury. Chauvin does have a track record of bad behaviour whilst on duty, which will go against him. Frankly, if I was a coloured person in the US and was pulled over by the police there I would be terrified; this trial is clearly a watershed, a turning point, and if Chauvin is not convicted, based on the video evidence I have seen the US cities will go into meltdown. The current attitude to black citizens, going right back to the cotton plantations, is despicable; members of the police forces still think they can do whatever they want, and get away with it. Members of the US police need to be made fearful of a lifetime in prison for reckless behaviour whilst in uniform. " Legitimate question - are you actively paying attention to the trial and the evidence being presented? I’ve seen several people post on the previous trial thread damning Chauvin and the officers involved, purely on the viral video. It sounds very much like nobody is interested in due process or a fair trial, regardless of how they feel about Chauvin as a person. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"I am not certain of the legal principle of joint venture in US Law, but the other officers inaction in stopping Chauvin was inexcusable; thus the reason they are on trial. Chauvin displayed reckless disregard for the victim, but whether he intended to kill him, or consciously cause him really serious harm is for the jury. Chauvin does have a track record of bad behaviour whilst on duty, which will go against him. Frankly, if I was a coloured person in the US and was pulled over by the police there I would be terrified; this trial is clearly a watershed, a turning point, and if Chauvin is not convicted, based on the video evidence I have seen the US cities will go into meltdown. The current attitude to black citizens, going right back to the cotton plantations, is despicable; members of the police forces still think they can do whatever they want, and get away with it. Members of the US police need to be made fearful of a lifetime in prison for reckless behaviour whilst in uniform. Legitimate question - are you actively paying attention to the trial and the evidence being presented? I’ve seen several people post on the previous trial thread damning Chauvin and the officers involved, purely on the viral video. It sounds very much like nobody is interested in due process or a fair trial, regardless of how they feel about Chauvin as a person. " This exactly. Everyone is trading on emotion and not facts or evidence . | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"I am not certain of the legal principle of joint venture in US Law, but the other officers inaction in stopping Chauvin was inexcusable; thus the reason they are on trial. Chauvin displayed reckless disregard for the victim, but whether he intended to kill him, or consciously cause him really serious harm is for the jury. Chauvin does have a track record of bad behaviour whilst on duty, which will go against him. Frankly, if I was a coloured person in the US and was pulled over by the police there I would be terrified; this trial is clearly a watershed, a turning point, and if Chauvin is not convicted, based on the video evidence I have seen the US cities will go into meltdown. The current attitude to black citizens, going right back to the cotton plantations, is despicable; members of the police forces still think they can do whatever they want, and get away with it. Members of the US police need to be made fearful of a lifetime in prison for reckless behaviour whilst in uniform. Legitimate question - are you actively paying attention to the trial and the evidence being presented? I’ve seen several people post on the previous trial thread damning Chauvin and the officers involved, purely on the viral video. It sounds very much like nobody is interested in due process or a fair trial, regardless of how they feel about Chauvin as a person. This exactly. Everyone is trading on emotion and not facts or evidence ." It’s frustrating. Having people say ‘you’re in denial’ at the assertion he won’t be convicted of first degree murder for instance - what are they watching and hearing that I’m not? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"I am not certain of the legal principle of joint venture in US Law, but the other officers inaction in stopping Chauvin was inexcusable; thus the reason they are on trial. Chauvin displayed reckless disregard for the victim, but whether he intended to kill him, or consciously cause him really serious harm is for the jury. Chauvin does have a track record of bad behaviour whilst on duty, which will go against him. Frankly, if I was a coloured person in the US and was pulled over by the police there I would be terrified; this trial is clearly a watershed, a turning point, and if Chauvin is not convicted, based on the video evidence I have seen the US cities will go into meltdown. The current attitude to black citizens, going right back to the cotton plantations, is despicable; members of the police forces still think they can do whatever they want, and get away with it. Members of the US police need to be made fearful of a lifetime in prison for reckless behaviour whilst in uniform. Legitimate question - are you actively paying attention to the trial and the evidence being presented? I’ve seen several people post on the previous trial thread damning Chauvin and the officers involved, purely on the viral video. It sounds very much like nobody is interested in due process or a fair trial, regardless of how they feel about Chauvin as a person. This exactly. Everyone is trading on emotion and not facts or evidence . It’s frustrating. Having people say ‘you’re in denial’ at the assertion he won’t be convicted of first degree murder for instance - what are they watching and hearing that I’m not? " That is a huge issue. People here I talk with here are assuming life in prison.  | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"It is difficult to see how the suspect in this case can get a fair trial. A lot of people appear to have formed their verdict without even bothering to listen to any of the evidence. In these circumstances should a trail proceed ? You can hardly come to a conclusion based on one video clip. " If some of the posters in the last thread are anything to go by you’re absolutely right | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"It is difficult to see how the suspect in this case can get a fair trial. A lot of people appear to have formed their verdict without even bothering to listen to any of the evidence. In these circumstances should a trail proceed ? You can hardly come to a conclusion based on one video clip. If some of the posters in the last thread are anything to go by you’re absolutely right " The mob mentality in this case is horrible. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"joint venture for chauvins collegues for failing to prevent chauvin from commiting the murder would also be appropriate. I agree that they should be held accountable for their actions and inactions in the death of George Floyd. To be honest, I'd need to learn more about the other officers, time on the force, what they were being told to do by a superior officer, what they were saying to their superior officer, ect...ect... . I have questions, so I need to learn some more facts. It's a terrible thing that happened to Mr. Floyd, and his family, but I don't want to see someones life ruined without knowing more facts. I already know enough facts about Chauvin, and his part in the death of Mr. Floyd, to make my personal judgement against him. " You dont actually know anything though, you wasnt there All you have seen really is a singular video and the perspective that shows, and what the media tells you. Wait and see what happens. But it doesnt look good when the defence only need to show reasonable doubt. Which in my opinion is what will happen as there is evidence that Flyod was OD'ing at the time. Said he couldnt breath before he was even put on the ground, half chewed drugs found in the car. Plus the doctors evidence that Hypoxemia is the main danger in a Fentanyl overdose. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"It is difficult to see how the suspect in this case can get a fair trial. A lot of people appear to have formed their verdict without even bothering to listen to any of the evidence. In these circumstances should a trail proceed ? You can hardly come to a conclusion based on one video clip. If some of the posters in the last thread are anything to go by you’re absolutely right The mob mentality in this case is horrible." The fact you have news personalitys (i think either on CNN or MSNBC) saying Chauvin shouldnt get a trial because of just the video evidence in genuinely scary | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"I am not certain of the legal principle of joint venture in US Law, but the other officers inaction in stopping Chauvin was inexcusable; thus the reason they are on trial. Chauvin displayed reckless disregard for the victim, but whether he intended to kill him, or consciously cause him really serious harm is for the jury. Chauvin does have a track record of bad behaviour whilst on duty, which will go against him. Frankly, if I was a coloured person in the US and was pulled over by the police there I would be terrified; this trial is clearly a watershed, a turning point, and if Chauvin is not convicted, based on the video evidence I have seen the US cities will go into meltdown. The current attitude to black citizens, going right back to the cotton plantations, is despicable; members of the police forces still think they can do whatever they want, and get away with it. Members of the US police need to be made fearful of a lifetime in prison for reckless behaviour whilst in uniform. " The police need to be nade fearfull eh if he gets life without parole expect to see p.d all across the u.sbecome seriously understaffed because of retirements and people handing there notices in.what i really want to know though if he dont get a sentence that satisfys people will joe and kamala still call it mainly peacefull when it starts kicking off. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"I am not certain of the legal principle of joint venture in US Law, but the other officers inaction in stopping Chauvin was inexcusable; thus the reason they are on trial. Chauvin displayed reckless disregard for the victim, but whether he intended to kill him, or consciously cause him really serious harm is for the jury. Chauvin does have a track record of bad behaviour whilst on duty, which will go against him. Frankly, if I was a coloured person in the US and was pulled over by the police there I would be terrified; this trial is clearly a watershed, a turning point, and if Chauvin is not convicted, based on the video evidence I have seen the US cities will go into meltdown. The current attitude to black citizens, going right back to the cotton plantations, is despicable; members of the police forces still think they can do whatever they want, and get away with it. Members of the US police need to be made fearful of a lifetime in prison for reckless behaviour whilst in uniform. The police need to be nade fearfull eh if he gets life without parole expect to see p.d all across the u.sbecome seriously understaffed because of retirements and people handing there notices in.what i really want to know though if he dont get a sentence that satisfys people will joe and kamala still call it mainly peacefull when it starts kicking off." Why would other police officers resign if he is found guilty of murder? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"I am not certain of the legal principle of joint venture in US Law, but the other officers inaction in stopping Chauvin was inexcusable; thus the reason they are on trial. Chauvin displayed reckless disregard for the victim, but whether he intended to kill him, or consciously cause him really serious harm is for the jury. Chauvin does have a track record of bad behaviour whilst on duty, which will go against him. Frankly, if I was a coloured person in the US and was pulled over by the police there I would be terrified; this trial is clearly a watershed, a turning point, and if Chauvin is not convicted, based on the video evidence I have seen the US cities will go into meltdown. The current attitude to black citizens, going right back to the cotton plantations, is despicable; members of the police forces still think they can do whatever they want, and get away with it. Members of the US police need to be made fearful of a lifetime in prison for reckless behaviour whilst in uniform. The police need to be nade fearfull eh if he gets life without parole expect to see p.d all across the u.sbecome seriously understaffed because of retirements and people handing there notices in.what i really want to know though if he dont get a sentence that satisfys people will joe and kamala still call it mainly peacefull when it starts kicking off. Why would other police officers resign if he is found guilty of murder? " Because to find him guilty of murder there has to be intent and i dont belive he set out with intent to kill him.manslaughter ye A murder no.fuck being them jurors though can you imagine wat there lives will be like if they dont come to the answer that the mob wants.as for coppers resigning why would they stay if a guilty for murder comes back just to stop peeps kicking off | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"I am not certain of the legal principle of joint venture in US Law, but the other officers inaction in stopping Chauvin was inexcusable; thus the reason they are on trial. Chauvin displayed reckless disregard for the victim, but whether he intended to kill him, or consciously cause him really serious harm is for the jury. Chauvin does have a track record of bad behaviour whilst on duty, which will go against him. Frankly, if I was a coloured person in the US and was pulled over by the police there I would be terrified; this trial is clearly a watershed, a turning point, and if Chauvin is not convicted, based on the video evidence I have seen the US cities will go into meltdown. The current attitude to black citizens, going right back to the cotton plantations, is despicable; members of the police forces still think they can do whatever they want, and get away with it. Members of the US police need to be made fearful of a lifetime in prison for reckless behaviour whilst in uniform. The police need to be nade fearfull eh if he gets life without parole expect to see p.d all across the u.sbecome seriously understaffed because of retirements and people handing there notices in.what i really want to know though if he dont get a sentence that satisfys people will joe and kamala still call it mainly peacefull when it starts kicking off. Why would other police officers resign if he is found guilty of murder? Because to find him guilty of murder there has to be intent and i dont belive he set out with intent to kill him.manslaughter ye A murder no.fuck being them jurors though can you imagine wat there lives will be like if they dont come to the answer that the mob wants.as for coppers resigning why would they stay if a guilty for murder comes back just to stop peeps kicking off" Are you honestly suggesting that Chavin was ‘just stopping someone kicking off’? No self respecting honest cop will resign if he gets found guilty of murder , | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"I am not certain of the legal principle of joint venture in US Law, but the other officers inaction in stopping Chauvin was inexcusable; thus the reason they are on trial. Chauvin displayed reckless disregard for the victim, but whether he intended to kill him, or consciously cause him really serious harm is for the jury. Chauvin does have a track record of bad behaviour whilst on duty, which will go against him. Frankly, if I was a coloured person in the US and was pulled over by the police there I would be terrified; this trial is clearly a watershed, a turning point, and if Chauvin is not convicted, based on the video evidence I have seen the US cities will go into meltdown. The current attitude to black citizens, going right back to the cotton plantations, is despicable; members of the police forces still think they can do whatever they want, and get away with it. Members of the US police need to be made fearful of a lifetime in prison for reckless behaviour whilst in uniform. The police need to be nade fearfull eh if he gets life without parole expect to see p.d all across the u.sbecome seriously understaffed because of retirements and people handing there notices in.what i really want to know though if he dont get a sentence that satisfys people will joe and kamala still call it mainly peacefull when it starts kicking off. Why would other police officers resign if he is found guilty of murder? Because to find him guilty of murder there has to be intent and i dont belive he set out with intent to kill him.manslaughter ye A murder no.fuck being them jurors though can you imagine wat there lives will be like if they dont come to the answer that the mob wants.as for coppers resigning why would they stay if a guilty for murder comes back just to stop peeps kicking off Are you honestly suggesting that Chavin was ‘just stopping someone kicking off’? No self respecting honest cop will resign if he gets found guilty of murder , " That’s not what he’s saying. His concern is the jury returning a murder conviction based on fear of violence if they don’t. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"I am not certain of the legal principle of joint venture in US Law, but the other officers inaction in stopping Chauvin was inexcusable; thus the reason they are on trial. Chauvin displayed reckless disregard for the victim, but whether he intended to kill him, or consciously cause him really serious harm is for the jury. Chauvin does have a track record of bad behaviour whilst on duty, which will go against him. Frankly, if I was a coloured person in the US and was pulled over by the police there I would be terrified; this trial is clearly a watershed, a turning point, and if Chauvin is not convicted, based on the video evidence I have seen the US cities will go into meltdown. The current attitude to black citizens, going right back to the cotton plantations, is despicable; members of the police forces still think they can do whatever they want, and get away with it. Members of the US police need to be made fearful of a lifetime in prison for reckless behaviour whilst in uniform. The police need to be nade fearfull eh if he gets life without parole expect to see p.d all across the u.sbecome seriously understaffed because of retirements and people handing there notices in.what i really want to know though if he dont get a sentence that satisfys people will joe and kamala still call it mainly peacefull when it starts kicking off. Why would other police officers resign if he is found guilty of murder? Because to find him guilty of murder there has to be intent and i dont belive he set out with intent to kill him.manslaughter ye A murder no.fuck being them jurors though can you imagine wat there lives will be like if they dont come to the answer that the mob wants.as for coppers resigning why would they stay if a guilty for murder comes back just to stop peeps kicking off Are you honestly suggesting that Chavin was ‘just stopping someone kicking off’? No self respecting honest cop will resign if he gets found guilty of murder , " He was suggesting if not guilty of murder comes back that people will kick off | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"I am not certain of the legal principle of joint venture in US Law, but the other officers inaction in stopping Chauvin was inexcusable; thus the reason they are on trial. Chauvin displayed reckless disregard for the victim, but whether he intended to kill him, or consciously cause him really serious harm is for the jury. Chauvin does have a track record of bad behaviour whilst on duty, which will go against him. Frankly, if I was a coloured person in the US and was pulled over by the police there I would be terrified; this trial is clearly a watershed, a turning point, and if Chauvin is not convicted, based on the video evidence I have seen the US cities will go into meltdown. The current attitude to black citizens, going right back to the cotton plantations, is despicable; members of the police forces still think they can do whatever they want, and get away with it. Members of the US police need to be made fearful of a lifetime in prison for reckless behaviour whilst in uniform. The police need to be nade fearfull eh if he gets life without parole expect to see p.d all across the u.sbecome seriously understaffed because of retirements and people handing there notices in.what i really want to know though if he dont get a sentence that satisfys people will joe and kamala still call it mainly peacefull when it starts kicking off. Why would other police officers resign if he is found guilty of murder? Because to find him guilty of murder there has to be intent and i dont belive he set out with intent to kill him.manslaughter ye A murder no.fuck being them jurors though can you imagine wat there lives will be like if they dont come to the answer that the mob wants.as for coppers resigning why would they stay if a guilty for murder comes back just to stop peeps kicking off Are you honestly suggesting that Chavin was ‘just stopping someone kicking off’? No self respecting honest cop will resign if he gets found guilty of murder , That’s not what he’s saying. His concern is the jury returning a murder conviction based on fear of violence if they don’t. " Unfortunately there will be fear of violence if they find him guilty as well | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"I am not certain of the legal principle of joint venture in US Law, but the other officers inaction in stopping Chauvin was inexcusable; thus the reason they are on trial. Chauvin displayed reckless disregard for the victim, but whether he intended to kill him, or consciously cause him really serious harm is for the jury. Chauvin does have a track record of bad behaviour whilst on duty, which will go against him. Frankly, if I was a coloured person in the US and was pulled over by the police there I would be terrified; this trial is clearly a watershed, a turning point, and if Chauvin is not convicted, based on the video evidence I have seen the US cities will go into meltdown. The current attitude to black citizens, going right back to the cotton plantations, is despicable; members of the police forces still think they can do whatever they want, and get away with it. Members of the US police need to be made fearful of a lifetime in prison for reckless behaviour whilst in uniform. The police need to be nade fearfull eh if he gets life without parole expect to see p.d all across the u.sbecome seriously understaffed because of retirements and people handing there notices in.what i really want to know though if he dont get a sentence that satisfys people will joe and kamala still call it mainly peacefull when it starts kicking off. Why would other police officers resign if he is found guilty of murder? Because to find him guilty of murder there has to be intent and i dont belive he set out with intent to kill him.manslaughter ye A murder no.fuck being them jurors though can you imagine wat there lives will be like if they dont come to the answer that the mob wants.as for coppers resigning why would they stay if a guilty for murder comes back just to stop peeps kicking off Are you honestly suggesting that Chavin was ‘just stopping someone kicking off’? No self respecting honest cop will resign if he gets found guilty of murder , " No he suggesting that if he isnt found guilty of murder people will kick off. People decided he was guilty before the full facts of what happened had even come out off the perspective of a singular video Which is completely true Do you not think if he is aquited that Antifa types and certain parts of BLM will not kick off? I have already seen videos of people saying if he isnt convicted of murder cities will burn. They are saying that as a threat not an observation | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"I am not certain of the legal principle of joint venture in US Law, but the other officers inaction in stopping Chauvin was inexcusable; thus the reason they are on trial. Chauvin displayed reckless disregard for the victim, but whether he intended to kill him, or consciously cause him really serious harm is for the jury. Chauvin does have a track record of bad behaviour whilst on duty, which will go against him. Frankly, if I was a coloured person in the US and was pulled over by the police there I would be terrified; this trial is clearly a watershed, a turning point, and if Chauvin is not convicted, based on the video evidence I have seen the US cities will go into meltdown. The current attitude to black citizens, going right back to the cotton plantations, is despicable; members of the police forces still think they can do whatever they want, and get away with it. Members of the US police need to be made fearful of a lifetime in prison for reckless behaviour whilst in uniform. The police need to be nade fearfull eh if he gets life without parole expect to see p.d all across the u.sbecome seriously understaffed because of retirements and people handing there notices in.what i really want to know though if he dont get a sentence that satisfys people will joe and kamala still call it mainly peacefull when it starts kicking off. Why would other police officers resign if he is found guilty of murder? Because to find him guilty of murder there has to be intent and i dont belive he set out with intent to kill him.manslaughter ye A murder no.fuck being them jurors though can you imagine wat there lives will be like if they dont come to the answer that the mob wants.as for coppers resigning why would they stay if a guilty for murder comes back just to stop peeps kicking off Are you honestly suggesting that Chavin was ‘just stopping someone kicking off’? No self respecting honest cop will resign if he gets found guilty of murder , " Try reading what i actually said is that to much to ask.i see you have made your mind up about his guilt already just from a video filmed from one perspective cant say im surprised | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"I am not certain of the legal principle of joint venture in US Law, but the other officers inaction in stopping Chauvin was inexcusable; thus the reason they are on trial. Chauvin displayed reckless disregard for the victim, but whether he intended to kill him, or consciously cause him really serious harm is for the jury. Chauvin does have a track record of bad behaviour whilst on duty, which will go against him. Frankly, if I was a coloured person in the US and was pulled over by the police there I would be terrified; this trial is clearly a watershed, a turning point, and if Chauvin is not convicted, based on the video evidence I have seen the US cities will go into meltdown. The current attitude to black citizens, going right back to the cotton plantations, is despicable; members of the police forces still think they can do whatever they want, and get away with it. Members of the US police need to be made fearful of a lifetime in prison for reckless behaviour whilst in uniform. The police need to be nade fearfull eh if he gets life without parole expect to see p.d all across the u.sbecome seriously understaffed because of retirements and people handing there notices in.what i really want to know though if he dont get a sentence that satisfys people will joe and kamala still call it mainly peacefull when it starts kicking off. Why would other police officers resign if he is found guilty of murder? Because to find him guilty of murder there has to be intent and i dont belive he set out with intent to kill him.manslaughter ye A murder no.fuck being them jurors though can you imagine wat there lives will be like if they dont come to the answer that the mob wants.as for coppers resigning why would they stay if a guilty for murder comes back just to stop peeps kicking off Are you honestly suggesting that Chavin was ‘just stopping someone kicking off’? No self respecting honest cop will resign if he gets found guilty of murder , Try reading what i actually said is that to much to ask.i see you have made your mind up about his guilt already just from a video filmed from one perspective cant say im surprised" I did, sorry but your incoherent at times. I haven’t made my mind up at all, have you? whatever happens Chavin is going to prison . | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"I am not certain of the legal principle of joint venture in US Law, but the other officers inaction in stopping Chauvin was inexcusable; thus the reason they are on trial. Chauvin displayed reckless disregard for the victim, but whether he intended to kill him, or consciously cause him really serious harm is for the jury. Chauvin does have a track record of bad behaviour whilst on duty, which will go against him. Frankly, if I was a coloured person in the US and was pulled over by the police there I would be terrified; this trial is clearly a watershed, a turning point, and if Chauvin is not convicted, based on the video evidence I have seen the US cities will go into meltdown. The current attitude to black citizens, going right back to the cotton plantations, is despicable; members of the police forces still think they can do whatever they want, and get away with it. Members of the US police need to be made fearful of a lifetime in prison for reckless behaviour whilst in uniform. The police need to be nade fearfull eh if he gets life without parole expect to see p.d all across the u.sbecome seriously understaffed because of retirements and people handing there notices in.what i really want to know though if he dont get a sentence that satisfys people will joe and kamala still call it mainly peacefull when it starts kicking off. Why would other police officers resign if he is found guilty of murder? Because to find him guilty of murder there has to be intent and i dont belive he set out with intent to kill him.manslaughter ye A murder no.fuck being them jurors though can you imagine wat there lives will be like if they dont come to the answer that the mob wants.as for coppers resigning why would they stay if a guilty for murder comes back just to stop peeps kicking off Are you honestly suggesting that Chavin was ‘just stopping someone kicking off’? No self respecting honest cop will resign if he gets found guilty of murder , No he suggesting that if he isnt found guilty of murder people will kick off. People decided he was guilty before the full facts of what happened had even come out off the perspective of a singular video Which is completely true Do you not think if he is aquited that Antifa types and certain parts of BLM will not kick off? I have already seen videos of people saying if he isnt convicted of murder cities will burn. They are saying that as a threat not an observation " Yes they will ‘kick off’ just like the far right white supremacists will ‘kick off’ if he is found guilty of murder . | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"I am not certain of the legal principle of joint venture in US Law, but the other officers inaction in stopping Chauvin was inexcusable; thus the reason they are on trial. Chauvin displayed reckless disregard for the victim, but whether he intended to kill him, or consciously cause him really serious harm is for the jury. Chauvin does have a track record of bad behaviour whilst on duty, which will go against him. Frankly, if I was a coloured person in the US and was pulled over by the police there I would be terrified; this trial is clearly a watershed, a turning point, and if Chauvin is not convicted, based on the video evidence I have seen the US cities will go into meltdown. The current attitude to black citizens, going right back to the cotton plantations, is despicable; members of the police forces still think they can do whatever they want, and get away with it. Members of the US police need to be made fearful of a lifetime in prison for reckless behaviour whilst in uniform. The police need to be nade fearfull eh if he gets life without parole expect to see p.d all across the u.sbecome seriously understaffed because of retirements and people handing there notices in.what i really want to know though if he dont get a sentence that satisfys people will joe and kamala still call it mainly peacefull when it starts kicking off. Why would other police officers resign if he is found guilty of murder? Because to find him guilty of murder there has to be intent and i dont belive he set out with intent to kill him.manslaughter ye A murder no.fuck being them jurors though can you imagine wat there lives will be like if they dont come to the answer that the mob wants.as for coppers resigning why would they stay if a guilty for murder comes back just to stop peeps kicking off Are you honestly suggesting that Chavin was ‘just stopping someone kicking off’? No self respecting honest cop will resign if he gets found guilty of murder , Try reading what i actually said is that to much to ask.i see you have made your mind up about his guilt already just from a video filmed from one perspective cant say im surprised I did, sorry but your incoherent at times. I haven’t made my mind up at all, have you? whatever happens Chavin is going to prison . " incoherent really?? Several other people knew exactally what i was saying and it certainly sounds like you think hes guilty of murder.guess we will have to wait and see myself im guessin manslaughter | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"I am not certain of the legal principle of joint venture in US Law, but the other officers inaction in stopping Chauvin was inexcusable; thus the reason they are on trial. Chauvin displayed reckless disregard for the victim, but whether he intended to kill him, or consciously cause him really serious harm is for the jury. Chauvin does have a track record of bad behaviour whilst on duty, which will go against him. Frankly, if I was a coloured person in the US and was pulled over by the police there I would be terrified; this trial is clearly a watershed, a turning point, and if Chauvin is not convicted, based on the video evidence I have seen the US cities will go into meltdown. The current attitude to black citizens, going right back to the cotton plantations, is despicable; members of the police forces still think they can do whatever they want, and get away with it. Members of the US police need to be made fearful of a lifetime in prison for reckless behaviour whilst in uniform. The police need to be nade fearfull eh if he gets life without parole expect to see p.d all across the u.sbecome seriously understaffed because of retirements and people handing there notices in.what i really want to know though if he dont get a sentence that satisfys people will joe and kamala still call it mainly peacefull when it starts kicking off. Why would other police officers resign if he is found guilty of murder? Because to find him guilty of murder there has to be intent and i dont belive he set out with intent to kill him.manslaughter ye A murder no.fuck being them jurors though can you imagine wat there lives will be like if they dont come to the answer that the mob wants.as for coppers resigning why would they stay if a guilty for murder comes back just to stop peeps kicking off Are you honestly suggesting that Chavin was ‘just stopping someone kicking off’? No self respecting honest cop will resign if he gets found guilty of murder , Try reading what i actually said is that to much to ask.i see you have made your mind up about his guilt already just from a video filmed from one perspective cant say im surprised I did, sorry but your incoherent at times. I haven’t made my mind up at all, have you? whatever happens Chavin is going to prison . incoherent really?? Several other people knew exactally what i was saying and it certainly sounds like you think hes guilty of murder.guess we will have to wait and see myself im guessin manslaughter" Yes, we will have to wait and see, but the threat of violence comes from both sides | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"I am not certain of the legal principle of joint venture in US Law, but the other officers inaction in stopping Chauvin was inexcusable; thus the reason they are on trial. Chauvin displayed reckless disregard for the victim, but whether he intended to kill him, or consciously cause him really serious harm is for the jury. Chauvin does have a track record of bad behaviour whilst on duty, which will go against him. Frankly, if I was a coloured person in the US and was pulled over by the police there I would be terrified; this trial is clearly a watershed, a turning point, and if Chauvin is not convicted, based on the video evidence I have seen the US cities will go into meltdown. The current attitude to black citizens, going right back to the cotton plantations, is despicable; members of the police forces still think they can do whatever they want, and get away with it. Members of the US police need to be made fearful of a lifetime in prison for reckless behaviour whilst in uniform. The police need to be nade fearfull eh if he gets life without parole expect to see p.d all across the u.sbecome seriously understaffed because of retirements and people handing there notices in.what i really want to know though if he dont get a sentence that satisfys people will joe and kamala still call it mainly peacefull when it starts kicking off. Why would other police officers resign if he is found guilty of murder? Because to find him guilty of murder there has to be intent and i dont belive he set out with intent to kill him.manslaughter ye A murder no.fuck being them jurors though can you imagine wat there lives will be like if they dont come to the answer that the mob wants.as for coppers resigning why would they stay if a guilty for murder comes back just to stop peeps kicking off Are you honestly suggesting that Chavin was ‘just stopping someone kicking off’? No self respecting honest cop will resign if he gets found guilty of murder , No he suggesting that if he isnt found guilty of murder people will kick off. People decided he was guilty before the full facts of what happened had even come out off the perspective of a singular video Which is completely true Do you not think if he is aquited that Antifa types and certain parts of BLM will not kick off? I have already seen videos of people saying if he isnt convicted of murder cities will burn. They are saying that as a threat not an observation Yes they will ‘kick off’ just like the far right white supremacists will ‘kick off’ if he is found guilty of murder . " Do you really think that will happen? Civil disorder on a national scale? Or something localised? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"I am not certain of the legal principle of joint venture in US Law, but the other officers inaction in stopping Chauvin was inexcusable; thus the reason they are on trial. Chauvin displayed reckless disregard for the victim, but whether he intended to kill him, or consciously cause him really serious harm is for the jury. Chauvin does have a track record of bad behaviour whilst on duty, which will go against him. Frankly, if I was a coloured person in the US and was pulled over by the police there I would be terrified; this trial is clearly a watershed, a turning point, and if Chauvin is not convicted, based on the video evidence I have seen the US cities will go into meltdown. The current attitude to black citizens, going right back to the cotton plantations, is despicable; members of the police forces still think they can do whatever they want, and get away with it. Members of the US police need to be made fearful of a lifetime in prison for reckless behaviour whilst in uniform. The police need to be nade fearfull eh if he gets life without parole expect to see p.d all across the u.sbecome seriously understaffed because of retirements and people handing there notices in.what i really want to know though if he dont get a sentence that satisfys people will joe and kamala still call it mainly peacefull when it starts kicking off. Why would other police officers resign if he is found guilty of murder? Because to find him guilty of murder there has to be intent and i dont belive he set out with intent to kill him.manslaughter ye A murder no.fuck being them jurors though can you imagine wat there lives will be like if they dont come to the answer that the mob wants.as for coppers resigning why would they stay if a guilty for murder comes back just to stop peeps kicking off Are you honestly suggesting that Chavin was ‘just stopping someone kicking off’? No self respecting honest cop will resign if he gets found guilty of murder , Try reading what i actually said is that to much to ask.i see you have made your mind up about his guilt already just from a video filmed from one perspective cant say im surprised I did, sorry but your incoherent at times. I haven’t made my mind up at all, have you? whatever happens Chavin is going to prison . incoherent really?? Several other people knew exactally what i was saying and it certainly sounds like you think hes guilty of murder.guess we will have to wait and see myself im guessin manslaughter Yes, we will have to wait and see, but the threat of violence comes from both sides " So if he convicted you saying the police are going to riot ? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"I am not certain of the legal principle of joint venture in US Law, but the other officers inaction in stopping Chauvin was inexcusable; thus the reason they are on trial. Chauvin displayed reckless disregard for the victim, but whether he intended to kill him, or consciously cause him really serious harm is for the jury. Chauvin does have a track record of bad behaviour whilst on duty, which will go against him. Frankly, if I was a coloured person in the US and was pulled over by the police there I would be terrified; this trial is clearly a watershed, a turning point, and if Chauvin is not convicted, based on the video evidence I have seen the US cities will go into meltdown. The current attitude to black citizens, going right back to the cotton plantations, is despicable; members of the police forces still think they can do whatever they want, and get away with it. Members of the US police need to be made fearful of a lifetime in prison for reckless behaviour whilst in uniform. The police need to be nade fearfull eh if he gets life without parole expect to see p.d all across the u.sbecome seriously understaffed because of retirements and people handing there notices in.what i really want to know though if he dont get a sentence that satisfys people will joe and kamala still call it mainly peacefull when it starts kicking off. Why would other police officers resign if he is found guilty of murder? Because to find him guilty of murder there has to be intent and i dont belive he set out with intent to kill him.manslaughter ye A murder no.fuck being them jurors though can you imagine wat there lives will be like if they dont come to the answer that the mob wants.as for coppers resigning why would they stay if a guilty for murder comes back just to stop peeps kicking off Are you honestly suggesting that Chavin was ‘just stopping someone kicking off’? No self respecting honest cop will resign if he gets found guilty of murder , No he suggesting that if he isnt found guilty of murder people will kick off. People decided he was guilty before the full facts of what happened had even come out off the perspective of a singular video Which is completely true Do you not think if he is aquited that Antifa types and certain parts of BLM will not kick off? I have already seen videos of people saying if he isnt convicted of murder cities will burn. They are saying that as a threat not an observation Yes they will ‘kick off’ just like the far right white supremacists will ‘kick off’ if he is found guilty of murder . " Anecdotal i know But i have not seen the same videos or comments from the other side. If you have feel free to link them to me. In reality it was one side that started the violence around the time of Obama. Any violence from the other side is reactionary, like the proud boys where reactionary to the rise of modern Antifa and violence on University campuses Plus the overton window is definelty shifting to include normal people that voted republican are now being labeled as white supremcist, racist blah blah blah You can see the same happening here | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"I am not certain of the legal principle of joint venture in US Law, but the other officers inaction in stopping Chauvin was inexcusable; thus the reason they are on trial. Chauvin displayed reckless disregard for the victim, but whether he intended to kill him, or consciously cause him really serious harm is for the jury. Chauvin does have a track record of bad behaviour whilst on duty, which will go against him. Frankly, if I was a coloured person in the US and was pulled over by the police there I would be terrified; this trial is clearly a watershed, a turning point, and if Chauvin is not convicted, based on the video evidence I have seen the US cities will go into meltdown. The current attitude to black citizens, going right back to the cotton plantations, is despicable; members of the police forces still think they can do whatever they want, and get away with it. Members of the US police need to be made fearful of a lifetime in prison for reckless behaviour whilst in uniform. The police need to be nade fearfull eh if he gets life without parole expect to see p.d all across the u.sbecome seriously understaffed because of retirements and people handing there notices in.what i really want to know though if he dont get a sentence that satisfys people will joe and kamala still call it mainly peacefull when it starts kicking off. Why would other police officers resign if he is found guilty of murder? Because to find him guilty of murder there has to be intent and i dont belive he set out with intent to kill him.manslaughter ye A murder no.fuck being them jurors though can you imagine wat there lives will be like if they dont come to the answer that the mob wants.as for coppers resigning why would they stay if a guilty for murder comes back just to stop peeps kicking off Are you honestly suggesting that Chavin was ‘just stopping someone kicking off’? No self respecting honest cop will resign if he gets found guilty of murder , Try reading what i actually said is that to much to ask.i see you have made your mind up about his guilt already just from a video filmed from one perspective cant say im surprised I did, sorry but your incoherent at times. I haven’t made my mind up at all, have you? whatever happens Chavin is going to prison . incoherent really?? Several other people knew exactally what i was saying and it certainly sounds like you think hes guilty of murder.guess we will have to wait and see myself im guessin manslaughter Yes, we will have to wait and see, but the threat of violence comes from both sides " Really?? Ive only seen certain members of blm threatening violence if the verdict dont go there way if you would like to point me in the direction of any videos of others saying the same im more than happy to watch them and agree with you otherwise i can only comment on what ive seen.but plz dont say twatter as ive never downloaded the digital toilet wall | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"The trial isn't strong for the defence, so I'm assuming a guilty of 2nd degree, with towards but below 20 years prison term - I've not checked the tariffs. I'm not that supportive of extensive imprisonment but his misuse of his power, grossly negligent interest in protecting life, past form and not adhering to police guidelines I would prefer life for murder 1, as he had time to think and plan his behaviour, selecting a hold that was dangerous and could hurt and kill the victim. He then sustained this hold for a very considerable time. " Out of curiosity what’s not strong about the defences case? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"I am not certain of the legal principle of joint venture in US Law, but the other officers inaction in stopping Chauvin was inexcusable; thus the reason they are on trial. Chauvin displayed reckless disregard for the victim, but whether he intended to kill him, or consciously cause him really serious harm is for the jury. Chauvin does have a track record of bad behaviour whilst on duty, which will go against him. Frankly, if I was a coloured person in the US and was pulled over by the police there I would be terrified; this trial is clearly a watershed, a turning point, and if Chauvin is not convicted, based on the video evidence I have seen the US cities will go into meltdown. The current attitude to black citizens, going right back to the cotton plantations, is despicable; members of the police forces still think they can do whatever they want, and get away with it. Members of the US police need to be made fearful of a lifetime in prison for reckless behaviour whilst in uniform. The police need to be nade fearfull eh if he gets life without parole expect to see p.d all across the u.sbecome seriously understaffed because of retirements and people handing there notices in.what i really want to know though if he dont get a sentence that satisfys people will joe and kamala still call it mainly peacefull when it starts kicking off. Why would other police officers resign if he is found guilty of murder? Because to find him guilty of murder there has to be intent and i dont belive he set out with intent to kill him.manslaughter ye A murder no.fuck being them jurors though can you imagine wat there lives will be like if they dont come to the answer that the mob wants.as for coppers resigning why would they stay if a guilty for murder comes back just to stop peeps kicking off Are you honestly suggesting that Chavin was ‘just stopping someone kicking off’? No self respecting honest cop will resign if he gets found guilty of murder , No he suggesting that if he isnt found guilty of murder people will kick off. People decided he was guilty before the full facts of what happened had even come out off the perspective of a singular video Which is completely true Do you not think if he is aquited that Antifa types and certain parts of BLM will not kick off? I have already seen videos of people saying if he isnt convicted of murder cities will burn. They are saying that as a threat not an observation Yes they will ‘kick off’ just like the far right white supremacists will ‘kick off’ if he is found guilty of murder . Do you really think that will happen? Civil disorder on a national scale? Or something localised? " Who knows, we are both guessing | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"I am not certain of the legal principle of joint venture in US Law, but the other officers inaction in stopping Chauvin was inexcusable; thus the reason they are on trial. Chauvin displayed reckless disregard for the victim, but whether he intended to kill him, or consciously cause him really serious harm is for the jury. Chauvin does have a track record of bad behaviour whilst on duty, which will go against him. Frankly, if I was a coloured person in the US and was pulled over by the police there I would be terrified; this trial is clearly a watershed, a turning point, and if Chauvin is not convicted, based on the video evidence I have seen the US cities will go into meltdown. The current attitude to black citizens, going right back to the cotton plantations, is despicable; members of the police forces still think they can do whatever they want, and get away with it. Members of the US police need to be made fearful of a lifetime in prison for reckless behaviour whilst in uniform. The police need to be nade fearfull eh if he gets life without parole expect to see p.d all across the u.sbecome seriously understaffed because of retirements and people handing there notices in.what i really want to know though if he dont get a sentence that satisfys people will joe and kamala still call it mainly peacefull when it starts kicking off. Why would other police officers resign if he is found guilty of murder? Because to find him guilty of murder there has to be intent and i dont belive he set out with intent to kill him.manslaughter ye A murder no.fuck being them jurors though can you imagine wat there lives will be like if they dont come to the answer that the mob wants.as for coppers resigning why would they stay if a guilty for murder comes back just to stop peeps kicking off Are you honestly suggesting that Chavin was ‘just stopping someone kicking off’? No self respecting honest cop will resign if he gets found guilty of murder , No he suggesting that if he isnt found guilty of murder people will kick off. People decided he was guilty before the full facts of what happened had even come out off the perspective of a singular video Which is completely true Do you not think if he is aquited that Antifa types and certain parts of BLM will not kick off? I have already seen videos of people saying if he isnt convicted of murder cities will burn. They are saying that as a threat not an observation Yes they will ‘kick off’ just like the far right white supremacists will ‘kick off’ if he is found guilty of murder . Do you really think that will happen? Civil disorder on a national scale? Or something localised? Who knows, we are both guessing " I think my guess is probably more likely than yours. But we’ll see. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"joint venture for chauvins collegues for failing to prevent chauvin from commiting the murder would also be appropriate. Exactly - this has always been a point overlooked." I don’t think it has... I think what we may find out after the trial is that the other 3 have taken plea deals to either not to go to trial, or maybe to give evidence as a prosecution witness later! It doesn’t make sense otherwise to have separate trials on the same subject with all the publicity that there would be | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"I am not certain of the legal principle of joint venture in US Law, but the other officers inaction in stopping Chauvin was inexcusable; thus the reason they are on trial. Chauvin displayed reckless disregard for the victim, but whether he intended to kill him, or consciously cause him really serious harm is for the jury. Chauvin does have a track record of bad behaviour whilst on duty, which will go against him. Frankly, if I was a coloured person in the US and was pulled over by the police there I would be terrified; this trial is clearly a watershed, a turning point, and if Chauvin is not convicted, based on the video evidence I have seen the US cities will go into meltdown. The current attitude to black citizens, going right back to the cotton plantations, is despicable; members of the police forces still think they can do whatever they want, and get away with it. Members of the US police need to be made fearful of a lifetime in prison for reckless behaviour whilst in uniform. The police need to be nade fearfull eh if he gets life without parole expect to see p.d all across the u.sbecome seriously understaffed because of retirements and people handing there notices in.what i really want to know though if he dont get a sentence that satisfys people will joe and kamala still call it mainly peacefull when it starts kicking off. Why would other police officers resign if he is found guilty of murder? Because to find him guilty of murder there has to be intent and i dont belive he set out with intent to kill him.manslaughter ye A murder no.fuck being them jurors though can you imagine wat there lives will be like if they dont come to the answer that the mob wants.as for coppers resigning why would they stay if a guilty for murder comes back just to stop peeps kicking off Are you honestly suggesting that Chavin was ‘just stopping someone kicking off’? No self respecting honest cop will resign if he gets found guilty of murder , Try reading what i actually said is that to much to ask.i see you have made your mind up about his guilt already just from a video filmed from one perspective cant say im surprised I did, sorry but your incoherent at times. I haven’t made my mind up at all, have you? whatever happens Chavin is going to prison . incoherent really?? Several other people knew exactally what i was saying and it certainly sounds like you think hes guilty of murder.guess we will have to wait and see myself im guessin manslaughter Yes, we will have to wait and see, but the threat of violence comes from both sides Really?? Ive only seen certain members of blm threatening violence if the verdict dont go there way if you would like to point me in the direction of any videos of others saying the same im more than happy to watch them and agree with you otherwise i can only comment on what ive seen.but plz dont say twatter as ive never downloaded the digital toilet wall" It’s on Twitter, you don’t have to make threatening videos though for the threats to be real | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"I am not certain of the legal principle of joint venture in US Law, but the other officers inaction in stopping Chauvin was inexcusable; thus the reason they are on trial. Chauvin displayed reckless disregard for the victim, but whether he intended to kill him, or consciously cause him really serious harm is for the jury. Chauvin does have a track record of bad behaviour whilst on duty, which will go against him. Frankly, if I was a coloured person in the US and was pulled over by the police there I would be terrified; this trial is clearly a watershed, a turning point, and if Chauvin is not convicted, based on the video evidence I have seen the US cities will go into meltdown. The current attitude to black citizens, going right back to the cotton plantations, is despicable; members of the police forces still think they can do whatever they want, and get away with it. Members of the US police need to be made fearful of a lifetime in prison for reckless behaviour whilst in uniform. The police need to be nade fearfull eh if he gets life without parole expect to see p.d all across the u.sbecome seriously understaffed because of retirements and people handing there notices in.what i really want to know though if he dont get a sentence that satisfys people will joe and kamala still call it mainly peacefull when it starts kicking off. Why would other police officers resign if he is found guilty of murder? Because to find him guilty of murder there has to be intent and i dont belive he set out with intent to kill him.manslaughter ye A murder no.fuck being them jurors though can you imagine wat there lives will be like if they dont come to the answer that the mob wants.as for coppers resigning why would they stay if a guilty for murder comes back just to stop peeps kicking off Are you honestly suggesting that Chavin was ‘just stopping someone kicking off’? No self respecting honest cop will resign if he gets found guilty of murder , No he suggesting that if he isnt found guilty of murder people will kick off. People decided he was guilty before the full facts of what happened had even come out off the perspective of a singular video Which is completely true Do you not think if he is aquited that Antifa types and certain parts of BLM will not kick off? I have already seen videos of people saying if he isnt convicted of murder cities will burn. They are saying that as a threat not an observation Yes they will ‘kick off’ just like the far right white supremacists will ‘kick off’ if he is found guilty of murder . Do you really think that will happen? Civil disorder on a national scale? Or something localised? Who knows, we are both guessing I think my guess is probably more likely than yours. But we’ll see. " And I think my guess is more likely than yours, let’s see what happens before we ‘jump to conclusions ‘ | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"I am not certain of the legal principle of joint venture in US Law, but the other officers inaction in stopping Chauvin was inexcusable; thus the reason they are on trial. Chauvin displayed reckless disregard for the victim, but whether he intended to kill him, or consciously cause him really serious harm is for the jury. Chauvin does have a track record of bad behaviour whilst on duty, which will go against him. Frankly, if I was a coloured person in the US and was pulled over by the police there I would be terrified; this trial is clearly a watershed, a turning point, and if Chauvin is not convicted, based on the video evidence I have seen the US cities will go into meltdown. The current attitude to black citizens, going right back to the cotton plantations, is despicable; members of the police forces still think they can do whatever they want, and get away with it. Members of the US police need to be made fearful of a lifetime in prison for reckless behaviour whilst in uniform. The police need to be nade fearfull eh if he gets life without parole expect to see p.d all across the u.sbecome seriously understaffed because of retirements and people handing there notices in.what i really want to know though if he dont get a sentence that satisfys people will joe and kamala still call it mainly peacefull when it starts kicking off. Why would other police officers resign if he is found guilty of murder? Because to find him guilty of murder there has to be intent and i dont belive he set out with intent to kill him.manslaughter ye A murder no.fuck being them jurors though can you imagine wat there lives will be like if they dont come to the answer that the mob wants.as for coppers resigning why would they stay if a guilty for murder comes back just to stop peeps kicking off Are you honestly suggesting that Chavin was ‘just stopping someone kicking off’? No self respecting honest cop will resign if he gets found guilty of murder , No he suggesting that if he isnt found guilty of murder people will kick off. People decided he was guilty before the full facts of what happened had even come out off the perspective of a singular video Which is completely true Do you not think if he is aquited that Antifa types and certain parts of BLM will not kick off? I have already seen videos of people saying if he isnt convicted of murder cities will burn. They are saying that as a threat not an observation Yes they will ‘kick off’ just like the far right white supremacists will ‘kick off’ if he is found guilty of murder . Do you really think that will happen? Civil disorder on a national scale? Or something localised? Who knows, we are both guessing I think my guess is probably more likely than yours. But we’ll see. And I think my guess is more likely than yours, let’s see what happens before we ‘jump to conclusions ‘ " If I was a gambling girl I’d actually put money on it  | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"I am not certain of the legal principle of joint venture in US Law, but the other officers inaction in stopping Chauvin was inexcusable; thus the reason they are on trial. Chauvin displayed reckless disregard for the victim, but whether he intended to kill him, or consciously cause him really serious harm is for the jury. Chauvin does have a track record of bad behaviour whilst on duty, which will go against him. Frankly, if I was a coloured person in the US and was pulled over by the police there I would be terrified; this trial is clearly a watershed, a turning point, and if Chauvin is not convicted, based on the video evidence I have seen the US cities will go into meltdown. The current attitude to black citizens, going right back to the cotton plantations, is despicable; members of the police forces still think they can do whatever they want, and get away with it. Members of the US police need to be made fearful of a lifetime in prison for reckless behaviour whilst in uniform. The police need to be nade fearfull eh if he gets life without parole expect to see p.d all across the u.sbecome seriously understaffed because of retirements and people handing there notices in.what i really want to know though if he dont get a sentence that satisfys people will joe and kamala still call it mainly peacefull when it starts kicking off. Why would other police officers resign if he is found guilty of murder? Because to find him guilty of murder there has to be intent and i dont belive he set out with intent to kill him.manslaughter ye A murder no.fuck being them jurors though can you imagine wat there lives will be like if they dont come to the answer that the mob wants.as for coppers resigning why would they stay if a guilty for murder comes back just to stop peeps kicking off Are you honestly suggesting that Chavin was ‘just stopping someone kicking off’? No self respecting honest cop will resign if he gets found guilty of murder , No he suggesting that if he isnt found guilty of murder people will kick off. People decided he was guilty before the full facts of what happened had even come out off the perspective of a singular video Which is completely true Do you not think if he is aquited that Antifa types and certain parts of BLM will not kick off? I have already seen videos of people saying if he isnt convicted of murder cities will burn. They are saying that as a threat not an observation Yes they will ‘kick off’ just like the far right white supremacists will ‘kick off’ if he is found guilty of murder . Do you really think that will happen? Civil disorder on a national scale? Or something localised? Who knows, we are both guessing I think my guess is probably more likely than yours. But we’ll see. And I think my guess is more likely than yours, let’s see what happens before we ‘jump to conclusions ‘ If I was a gambling girl I’d actually put money on it "If I was a gambling man I would put money on it  | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Anecdotal i know But i have not seen the same videos or comments from the other side. If you have feel free to link them to me. In reality it was one side that started the violence around the time of Obama. Any violence from the other side is reactionary, like the proud boys where reactionary to the rise of modern Antifa and violence on University campuses Plus the overton window is definelty shifting to include normal people that voted republican are now being labeled as white supremcist, racist blah blah blah You can see the same happening here " Problem is that takes like this are actually not true .... both the department of homeland security and the FBI both concede that 90% of domestic violence and terrorism is committed by those of right wing and white nationalist groups... for comparison 5% is left wing and 5% is foreign The FBI heads are saying it every time in Washington hearings whenever republicans want to bring up the boogeyman that is Antifa, it’s a bit like you are seeing in regards to people on the right trying to rewrite what happened on January 6th... I mean it wasn’t really that bad! They were not really in danger! It was the left dressed up are trump supporters ect ect.... The issue is it will take 12 to find him guilty, 12 to dismiss... but only 1 to disagree and cause a mistrial! That is what the defence are aiming for! | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"I am not certain of the legal principle of joint venture in US Law, but the other officers inaction in stopping Chauvin was inexcusable; thus the reason they are on trial. Chauvin displayed reckless disregard for the victim, but whether he intended to kill him, or consciously cause him really serious harm is for the jury. Chauvin does have a track record of bad behaviour whilst on duty, which will go against him. Frankly, if I was a coloured person in the US and was pulled over by the police there I would be terrified; this trial is clearly a watershed, a turning point, and if Chauvin is not convicted, based on the video evidence I have seen the US cities will go into meltdown. The current attitude to black citizens, going right back to the cotton plantations, is despicable; members of the police forces still think they can do whatever they want, and get away with it. Members of the US police need to be made fearful of a lifetime in prison for reckless behaviour whilst in uniform. A shocking misrepresentation of an entire police force. All the research on this topic indicates that police do not disproportionately target bkacks. Blacks are 2 and a half times more likely to die in a confrontation than whites but given black suspects are far more likely to resist arrest and carry firearms than whites you would expect far more casualties. This was found in an independent study chaired by a black professor. Far more whites are killed by white cops in the u.s. than blacks and interestingly black police officers kill more blacks than white suspects. Is this because they have been contaminated by racism ? Or could it be they are more jumpy when stopping black suspects? Your buying into a narrative of race hustling that condemns young black kids into a life of low expectation and misery ." Well stated Many still make up their minds due to history and who shouts the loudest I had a black work colleague once who I was double crewed with on motorway patrol One Christmas Eve a black lady and her kids broke down a few miles short of the services in an old car. She had her kids with her and were I their way to a relatives to spend Xmas. It would have cost her £100s to get recovered so I decided to tow her myself and get her to the services (despite a then current policy of this being frowned on by the supervisors). My colleague told me I shouldn’t do it but my feelings said otherwise and I told him to get the tow strap out. A few minutes later she was at the garage and being fixed up. As we drove away he turned to me and said ‘your not really a racist are you’ I was pretty shocked by this and just said ‘Did I ever say I was?’ I had also looked after him for years whenever he needed help or advice. He was an active member of the Black Police Association and I did wonder what sort of stuff he had been listening to from others. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"I don’t recall the killers (Dallas police) who killed tony timpa get any time behind bars so I’d probably say chauvin will walk it seems police get away with murder in America " Too high of a profile case. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"I don’t recall the killers (Dallas police) who killed tony timpa get any time behind bars so I’d probably say chauvin will walk it seems police get away with murder in America Too high of a profile case." I can imagine it was didn’t they try to hide the police cam footage? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"I don’t recall the killers (Dallas police) who killed tony timpa get any time behind bars so I’d probably say chauvin will walk it seems police get away with murder in America Too high of a profile case." In the Eric garner “I can’t breath” being killed by a New York City policeman by c hoke out for selling a loose cigarette .... that didn’t even make it out of grand jury...... | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"I don’t recall the killers (Dallas police) who killed tony timpa get any time behind bars so I’d probably say chauvin will walk it seems police get away with murder in America Too high of a profile case. In the Eric garner “I can’t breath” being killed by a New York City policeman by c hoke out for selling a loose cigarette .... that didn’t even make it out of grand jury...... " But this trial is the trial of the century. It is the one most looked at. It can't fall by the wayside. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"I don’t recall the killers (Dallas police) who killed tony timpa get any time behind bars so I’d probably say chauvin will walk it seems police get away with murder in America Too high of a profile case. In the Eric garner “I can’t breath” being killed by a New York City policeman by c hoke out for selling a loose cigarette .... that didn’t even make it out of grand jury...... But this trial is the trial of the century. It is the one most looked at. It can't fall by the wayside." It’s the trial of the century since the last one... for George floyd read breanna Taylor, or Eric garner, or philando Castile, or Sandra bland, or raquan McDonald, or Tamir rice, or Trayvon martin .... and the list goes on...... and on...... and on In the words of the great fanny Lou hamer... black people are sick and tired of being sick and tired | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Anecdotal i know But i have not seen the same videos or comments from the other side. If you have feel free to link them to me. In reality it was one side that started the violence around the time of Obama. Any violence from the other side is reactionary, like the proud boys where reactionary to the rise of modern Antifa and violence on University campuses Plus the overton window is definelty shifting to include normal people that voted republican are now being labeled as white supremcist, racist blah blah blah You can see the same happening here Problem is that takes like this are actually not true .... both the department of homeland security and the FBI both concede that 90% of domestic violence and terrorism is committed by those of right wing and white nationalist groups... for comparison 5% is left wing and 5% is foreign The FBI heads are saying it every time in Washington hearings whenever republicans want to bring up the boogeyman that is Antifa, it’s a bit like you are seeing in regards to people on the right trying to rewrite what happened on January 6th... I mean it wasn’t really that bad! They were not really in danger! It was the left dressed up are trump supporters ect ect.... The issue is it will take 12 to find him guilty, 12 to dismiss... but only 1 to disagree and cause a mistrial! That is what the defence are aiming for! " It is either you are quoting half of the story or just pulling some nonsense statistics. I would imagine domestic terrorism might be done mostly by white people ( like mass shootings etc). But domestic violence ? Aren't the black people in USA commiting like 60 % of violent crimes? Damn those right wing black people! It seems they were behind this all this time!
Or you just pull some random ramblings to fit the narrative of forever oppressed black people and lefties? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Anecdotal i know But i have not seen the same videos or comments from the other side. If you have feel free to link them to me. In reality it was one side that started the violence around the time of Obama. Any violence from the other side is reactionary, like the proud boys where reactionary to the rise of modern Antifa and violence on University campuses Plus the overton window is definelty shifting to include normal people that voted republican are now being labeled as white supremcist, racist blah blah blah You can see the same happening here Problem is that takes like this are actually not true .... both the department of homeland security and the FBI both concede that 90% of domestic violence and terrorism is committed by those of right wing and white nationalist groups... for comparison 5% is left wing and 5% is foreign The FBI heads are saying it every time in Washington hearings whenever republicans want to bring up the boogeyman that is Antifa, it’s a bit like you are seeing in regards to people on the right trying to rewrite what happened on January 6th... I mean it wasn’t really that bad! They were not really in danger! It was the left dressed up are trump supporters ect ect.... The issue is it will take 12 to find him guilty, 12 to dismiss... but only 1 to disagree and cause a mistrial! That is what the defence are aiming for! It is either you are quoting half of the story or just pulling some nonsense statistics. I would imagine domestic terrorism might be done mostly by white people ( like mass shootings etc). But domestic violence ? Aren't the black people in USA commiting like 60 % of violent crimes? Damn those right wing black people! It seems they were behind this all this time!
Or you just pull some random ramblings to fit the narrative of forever oppressed black people and lefties?"I am going to be generous with your lack of understanding of English for your diatribe... The point of the person who posted above me was to put across the falsehood that most violence was “left wing”.... I want putting them right in that HOMEGROWN violence and Domestic Terrorism incidence according to the US Dept of Homeland Security (DHS) and the FBI figures in that most of this acts and arrests are by right wing groups and white nationalist groups and militias.... Even in the last set of senate and congressional hearings the head of the FBI, Christopher Wray (a Trump appointee before you ask), once again pointed this out everytime republican brought up things regard “Antifa” There has been an attempt to try and downplay the actions of Jan 6th and right wing violence in general when the truth is that is the majority of these sorts of action going on by a big big margin! | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Anecdotal i know But i have not seen the same videos or comments from the other side. If you have feel free to link them to me. In reality it was one side that started the violence around the time of Obama. Any violence from the other side is reactionary, like the proud boys where reactionary to the rise of modern Antifa and violence on University campuses Plus the overton window is definelty shifting to include normal people that voted republican are now being labeled as white supremcist, racist blah blah blah You can see the same happening here Problem is that takes like this are actually not true .... both the department of homeland security and the FBI both concede that 90% of domestic violence and terrorism is committed by those of right wing and white nationalist groups... for comparison 5% is left wing and 5% is foreign The FBI heads are saying it every time in Washington hearings whenever republicans want to bring up the boogeyman that is Antifa, it’s a bit like you are seeing in regards to people on the right trying to rewrite what happened on January 6th... I mean it wasn’t really that bad! They were not really in danger! It was the left dressed up are trump supporters ect ect.... The issue is it will take 12 to find him guilty, 12 to dismiss... but only 1 to disagree and cause a mistrial! That is what the defence are aiming for! It is either you are quoting half of the story or just pulling some nonsense statistics. I would imagine domestic terrorism might be done mostly by white people ( like mass shootings etc). But domestic violence ? Aren't the black people in USA commiting like 60 % of violent crimes? Damn those right wing black people! It seems they were behind this all this time!
Or you just pull some random ramblings to fit the narrative of forever oppressed black people and lefties?
I am going to be generous with your lack of understanding of English for your diatribe...
The point of the person who posted above me was to put across the falsehood that most violence was “left wing”....
I want putting them right in that HOMEGROWN violence and Domestic Terrorism incidence according to the US Dept of Homeland Security (DHS) and the FBI figures in that most of this acts and arrests are by right wing groups and white nationalist groups and militias....
Even in the last set of senate and congressional hearings the head of the FBI, Christopher Wray (a Trump appointee before you ask), once again pointed this out everytime republican brought up things regard “Antifa”
There has been an attempt to try and downplay the actions of Jan 6th and right wing violence in general when the truth is that is the majority of these sorts of action going on by a big big margin!
"I never said anything left or right | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Anecdotal i know But i have not seen the same videos or comments from the other side. If you have feel free to link them to me. In reality it was one side that started the violence around the time of Obama. Any violence from the other side is reactionary, like the proud boys where reactionary to the rise of modern Antifa and violence on University campuses Plus the overton window is definelty shifting to include normal people that voted republican are now being labeled as white supremcist, racist blah blah blah You can see the same happening here Problem is that takes like this are actually not true .... both the department of homeland security and the FBI both concede that 90% of domestic violence and terrorism is committed by those of right wing and white nationalist groups... for comparison 5% is left wing and 5% is foreign The FBI heads are saying it every time in Washington hearings whenever republicans want to bring up the boogeyman that is Antifa, it’s a bit like you are seeing in regards to people on the right trying to rewrite what happened on January 6th... I mean it wasn’t really that bad! They were not really in danger! It was the left dressed up are trump supporters ect ect.... The issue is it will take 12 to find him guilty, 12 to dismiss... but only 1 to disagree and cause a mistrial! That is what the defence are aiming for! It is either you are quoting half of the story or just pulling some nonsense statistics. I would imagine domestic terrorism might be done mostly by white people ( like mass shootings etc). But domestic violence ? Aren't the black people in USA commiting like 60 % of violent crimes? Damn those right wing black people! It seems they were behind this all this time!
Or you just pull some random ramblings to fit the narrative of forever oppressed black people and lefties?
I am going to be generous with your lack of understanding of English for your diatribe...
The point of the person who posted above me was to put across the falsehood that most violence was “left wing”....
I want putting them right in that HOMEGROWN violence and Domestic Terrorism incidence according to the US Dept of Homeland Security (DHS) and the FBI figures in that most of this acts and arrests are by right wing groups and white nationalist groups and militias....
Even in the last set of senate and congressional hearings the head of the FBI, Christopher Wray (a Trump appointee before you ask), once again pointed this out everytime republican brought up things regard “Antifa”
There has been an attempt to try and downplay the actions of Jan 6th and right wing violence in general when the truth is that is the majority of these sorts of action going on by a big big margin!
"Pardon me english, but I dont understand the difference between homegrown violence and just violence. Is it something that the left made up to blame on the right? I thought cities burning for weeks by Antifa and BLM would be classed as violence, but hey it seems they are only peaceful protests  | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Anecdotal i know But i have not seen the same videos or comments from the other side. If you have feel free to link them to me. In reality it was one side that started the violence around the time of Obama. Any violence from the other side is reactionary, like the proud boys where reactionary to the rise of modern Antifa and violence on University campuses Plus the overton window is definelty shifting to include normal people that voted republican are now being labeled as white supremcist, racist blah blah blah You can see the same happening here Problem is that takes like this are actually not true .... both the department of homeland security and the FBI both concede that 90% of domestic violence and terrorism is committed by those of right wing and white nationalist groups... for comparison 5% is left wing and 5% is foreign The FBI heads are saying it every time in Washington hearings whenever republicans want to bring up the boogeyman that is Antifa, it’s a bit like you are seeing in regards to people on the right trying to rewrite what happened on January 6th... I mean it wasn’t really that bad! They were not really in danger! It was the left dressed up are trump supporters ect ect.... The issue is it will take 12 to find him guilty, 12 to dismiss... but only 1 to disagree and cause a mistrial! That is what the defence are aiming for! It is either you are quoting half of the story or just pulling some nonsense statistics. I would imagine domestic terrorism might be done mostly by white people ( like mass shootings etc). But domestic violence ? Aren't the black people in USA commiting like 60 % of violent crimes? Damn those right wing black people! It seems they were behind this all this time!
Or you just pull some random ramblings to fit the narrative of forever oppressed black people and lefties?
I am going to be generous with your lack of understanding of English for your diatribe...
The point of the person who posted above me was to put across the falsehood that most violence was “left wing”....
I want putting them right in that HOMEGROWN violence and Domestic Terrorism incidence according to the US Dept of Homeland Security (DHS) and the FBI figures in that most of this acts and arrests are by right wing groups and white nationalist groups and militias....
Even in the last set of senate and congressional hearings the head of the FBI, Christopher Wray (a Trump appointee before you ask), once again pointed this out everytime republican brought up things regard “Antifa”
There has been an attempt to try and downplay the actions of Jan 6th and right wing violence in general when the truth is that is the majority of these sorts of action going on by a big big margin!
I never said anything left or right "It was not you that was the person i quoted... it was ChloeDale There said something that was factually incorrect... i corrected their mistake | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"You can't mention violence by blm its racist to do so." I would argue there would have been no need for the rise in the Black Lives Matter movement this summer if it wasn’t for: The Murder of Ahmaud Arbrey... in Georgia The Murder of Breonna Taylor.... in Kentucky The Murder of George Floyd... in Minnesota The Shooting of Jacob Blake.... in Wisconsin The Murder of Elijah McClean... in Colorado People like you want to talk about the consequences.... there are no consequences without these actions..... You want to concentrate on one city block in one town over 7 days in Portland.... fine... you keep those blinkers on... I would argue that the one most egregious action all summer was the then president basically using the military to put down a peaceful protest for a photo op outside of a church...... but but but.... antifa!!!!! | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"You can't mention violence by blm its racist to do so. I would argue there would have been no need for the rise in the Black Lives Matter movement this summer if it wasn’t for: The Murder of Ahmaud Arbrey... in Georgia The Murder of Breonna Taylor.... in Kentucky The Murder of George Floyd... in Minnesota The Shooting of Jacob Blake.... in Wisconsin The Murder of Elijah McClean... in Colorado People like you want to talk about the consequences.... there are no consequences without these actions..... You want to concentrate on one city block in one town over 7 days in Portland.... fine... you keep those blinkers on... I would argue that the one most egregious action all summer was the then president basically using the military to put down a peaceful protest for a photo op outside of a church...... but but but.... antifa!!!!!" but but but only black people are killed by police, let's just focus on them It seems that you judge people by the colour of their skin and you focus only on the things that happen to black people. That is usually the definition of racism | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
 | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Drifting away from the subject here but there’s a lot of definitive statements being thrown around. How many of those shootings have been found by an independent judicial review to be murder? Or are the officers guilty by virtue of the court of public opinion again? Far as I can see the closest of those killings to murder is the trial we’re supposed to be talking about in this thread....and it’s not over yet. But you’re calling it the ‘murder’ of George Floyd. I hope you’ve never done jury service. Seems like you’re incapable of being a dispassionate observer of evidence to me. "Both Autopsy’s that have been done... the ME for the County, and the pathologist for the Family both put it down as a “Homocide”..... this trial is about whether the police are legally liable for that homocide..... | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Drifting away from the subject here but there’s a lot of definitive statements being thrown around. How many of those shootings have been found by an independent judicial review to be murder? Or are the officers guilty by virtue of the court of public opinion again? Far as I can see the closest of those killings to murder is the trial we’re supposed to be talking about in this thread....and it’s not over yet. But you’re calling it the ‘murder’ of George Floyd. I hope you’ve never done jury service. Seems like you’re incapable of being a dispassionate observer of evidence to me.
Both Autopsy’s that have been done... the ME for the County, and the pathologist for the Family both put it down as a “Homocide”..... this trial is about whether the police are legally liable for that homocide.....
"And there was me thinking it was about due process and establishing the facts around Floyd’s death. Little did I know that the decision had already been made that it was a straight up murder | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Drifting away from the subject here but there’s a lot of definitive statements being thrown around. How many of those shootings have been found by an independent judicial review to be murder? Or are the officers guilty by virtue of the court of public opinion again? Far as I can see the closest of those killings to murder is the trial we’re supposed to be talking about in this thread....and it’s not over yet. But you’re calling it the ‘murder’ of George Floyd. I hope you’ve never done jury service. Seems like you’re incapable of being a dispassionate observer of evidence to me.
Both Autopsy’s that have been done... the ME for the County, and the pathologist for the Family both put it down as a “Homocide”..... this trial is about whether the police are legally liable for that homocide.....
"If this were the case he would have pleaded guilty. I thought that the whole point of the court case was to attempt to establish what happened and identify the cause of death. As yet we do not know how he died, We need to try and establish what happened . | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"You can't mention violence by blm its racist to do so. I would argue there would have been no need for the rise in the Black Lives Matter movement this summer if it wasn’t for: The Murder of Ahmaud Arbrey... in Georgia The Murder of Breonna Taylor.... in Kentucky The Murder of George Floyd... in Minnesota The Shooting of Jacob Blake.... in Wisconsin The Murder of Elijah McClean... in Colorado People like you want to talk about the consequences.... there are no consequences without these actions..... You want to concentrate on one city block in one town over 7 days in Portland.... fine... you keep those blinkers on... I would argue that the one most egregious action all summer was the then president basically using the military to put down a peaceful protest for a photo op outside of a church...... but but but.... antifa!!!!!" So what you are saying is it's only wrong when the police shoot black people,how many on your list are white ? Now if there was peaceful protests against police using excessive force I would be fully supportive, BLM is using race as an excuse, if they used purely peaceful protest then just maybe they would get support, using violence and looting destroys any argument they have,back last year there was figures produced that showed the percentage of white people killed by police was virtually the same as black people, it's just there are more black people involved in crime per capita. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" All you have seen really is a singular video and the perspective that shows, and what the media tells you. You are obviously not watching the trial. It is being shown live on Court TV. Channel 89 on Freeview. He is guilty of murder" Has the trial finished yet ? If not then a decision as to his guilt is premature, hopefully the correct verdict will be arrived at then. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"the police in america appear to be under the impression that they are still judge Colt and his jury of six when it comes to their interactions with the black community" I would reccomend you watch a youtube channel called "DoughnutOperator" He goes into the legality of most high profile interactions you see and is an ex-swat team member himself If you seriously think only black people suffer at the hands of police brutality then you are niave as fuck tbh. Plus it doesnt help that cases of Brutality are mostly ignored against whites and asians by the media because it doesnt fit the narrative some want to portray. Unfortunaly its a fact Blacks commmit a higher proportion of crime in the US compared to population (we can debate why but thats not part of this debate really) So are more likely to have violent interations with the Police | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"the police in america appear to be under the impression that they are still judge Colt and his jury of six when it comes to their interactions with the black community I would reccomend you watch a youtube channel called "DoughnutOperator" He goes into the legality of most high profile interactions you see and is an ex-swat team member himself If you seriously think only black people suffer at the hands of police brutality then you are niave as fuck tbh. Plus it doesnt help that cases of Brutality are mostly ignored against whites and asians by the media because it doesnt fit the narrative some want to portray. Unfortunaly its a fact Blacks commmit a higher proportion of crime in the US compared to population (we can debate why but thats not part of this debate really) So are more likely to have violent interations with the Police" Yes doughnut pretty good on breaking down shootings. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"i'm not interested in your adolescent crack-pot conspiracy channels on youtube" And this is why you’ll remain forever ignorant. Donut operator is as far from a conspiracy theorist channel as it’s possible to get. Not even sure why that would be your go to response. But it speaks volumes about your prejudice. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"i'm not interested in your adolescent crack-pot conspiracy channels on youtube And this is why you’ll remain forever ignorant. Donut operator is as far from a conspiracy theorist channel as it’s possible to get. Not even sure why that would be your go to response. But it speaks volumes about your prejudice. " They want to remain ignorant about actual facts. They don't really matter. It's always the same people who want to speak facts about certain things but are unwilling to listen to facts about other things if it doesn't suit the narrative  | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"i'm not interested in your adolescent crack-pot conspiracy channels on youtube And this is why you’ll remain forever ignorant. Donut operator is as far from a conspiracy theorist channel as it’s possible to get. Not even sure why that would be your go to response. But it speaks volumes about your prejudice. They want to remain ignorant about actual facts. They don't really matter. It's always the same people who want to speak facts about certain things but are unwilling to listen to facts about other things if it doesn't suit the narrative "Flabbergasted tbh. My partner (an ex armed response cop himself) advised me to start watching donut operators shooting breakdowns as I was pig headed and ignorant when it came to police shootings too. I cannot and will never understand why anyone would be so wilfully fuck ignorant. It’s beyond me. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"i'm not interested in your adolescent crack-pot conspiracy channels on youtube And this is why you’ll remain forever ignorant. Donut operator is as far from a conspiracy theorist channel as it’s possible to get. Not even sure why that would be your go to response. But it speaks volumes about your prejudice. They want to remain ignorant about actual facts. They don't really matter. It's always the same people who want to speak facts about certain things but are unwilling to listen to facts about other things if it doesn't suit the narrative
Flabbergasted tbh. My partner (an ex armed response cop himself) advised me to start watching donut operators shooting breakdowns as I was pig headed and ignorant when it came to police shootings too.
I cannot and will never understand why anyone would be so wilfully fuck ignorant. It’s beyond me. "Narrative. It's the only explanation I have. I really do wish that everyone would be able to at least view things from both sides, it would make any debate much more interesting. It's got so nad round here that I'm trying to refrain from commenting so much at the moment which is a shame because I actually quite like this forum  | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"i'm not interested in your adolescent crack-pot conspiracy channels on youtube And this is why you’ll remain forever ignorant. Donut operator is as far from a conspiracy theorist channel as it’s possible to get. Not even sure why that would be your go to response. But it speaks volumes about your prejudice. They want to remain ignorant about actual facts. They don't really matter. It's always the same people who want to speak facts about certain things but are unwilling to listen to facts about other things if it doesn't suit the narrative
Flabbergasted tbh. My partner (an ex armed response cop himself) advised me to start watching donut operators shooting breakdowns as I was pig headed and ignorant when it came to police shootings too.
I cannot and will never understand why anyone would be so wilfully fuck ignorant. It’s beyond me.
Narrative. It's the only explanation I have.
I really do wish that everyone would be able to at least view things from both sides, it would make any debate much more interesting.
It's got so nad round here that I'm trying to refrain from commenting so much at the moment which is a shame because I actually quite like this forum "I tend to take a step back and have a few days off every now and then. Still doesn’t mean I’m not shocked by the spectacular, breath taking arrogance of some posters weighing in on subjects they know absolutely nothing about. And to do it with such a sense of righteousness and self validation whilst openly saying they won’t even try and educate themselves to get some nuance...mind blowing really. But not really surprising. You might be on to something with the narrative malarkey. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"i'm not interested in your adolescent crack-pot conspiracy channels on youtube And this is why you’ll remain forever ignorant. Donut operator is as far from a conspiracy theorist channel as it’s possible to get. Not even sure why that would be your go to response. But it speaks volumes about your prejudice. They want to remain ignorant about actual facts. They don't really matter. It's always the same people who want to speak facts about certain things but are unwilling to listen to facts about other things if it doesn't suit the narrative
Flabbergasted tbh. My partner (an ex armed response cop himself) advised me to start watching donut operators shooting breakdowns as I was pig headed and ignorant when it came to police shootings too.
I cannot and will never understand why anyone would be so wilfully fuck ignorant. It’s beyond me.
Narrative. It's the only explanation I have.
I really do wish that everyone would be able to at least view things from both sides, it would make any debate much more interesting.
It's got so nad round here that I'm trying to refrain from commenting so much at the moment which is a shame because I actually quite like this forum
I tend to take a step back and have a few days off every now and then. Still doesn’t mean I’m not shocked by the spectacular, breath taking arrogance of some posters weighing in on subjects they know absolutely nothing about. And to do it with such a sense of righteousness and self validation whilst openly saying they won’t even try and educate themselves to get some nuance...mind blowing really. But not really surprising. You might be on to something with the narrative malarkey. "If it is not backed up by science or some armchair university professor with statistical evidence the average layperson is wrong. Crazy. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Seems most forgot the reason for this post. Your prediction on the verdict and sentence? And, Your wish for the verdict and sentence? We already know racism is a fact. We already know that whites are also being killed by police is a fact. We already know people protest when they get pissed off about injustice is a fact. We already know that some of those people turn to rioting and looting is a fact. Ect...ect... . " Not changing my answer. I think a conviction of manslaughter will be the most likely outcome. I think it’s likely the most proportionate conviction given what I’ve heard so far. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"i'm not interested in your adolescent crack-pot conspiracy channels on youtube And this is why you’ll remain forever ignorant. Donut operator is as far from a conspiracy theorist channel as it’s possible to get. Not even sure why that would be your go to response. But it speaks volumes about your prejudice. They want to remain ignorant about actual facts. They don't really matter. It's always the same people who want to speak facts about certain things but are unwilling to listen to facts about other things if it doesn't suit the narrative
Flabbergasted tbh. My partner (an ex armed response cop himself) advised me to start watching donut operators shooting breakdowns as I was pig headed and ignorant when it came to police shootings too.
I cannot and will never understand why anyone would be so wilfully fuck ignorant. It’s beyond me.
Narrative. It's the only explanation I have.
I really do wish that everyone would be able to at least view things from both sides, it would make any debate much more interesting.
It's got so nad round here that I'm trying to refrain from commenting so much at the moment which is a shame because I actually quite like this forum
I tend to take a step back and have a few days off every now and then. Still doesn’t mean I’m not shocked by the spectacular, breath taking arrogance of some posters weighing in on subjects they know absolutely nothing about. And to do it with such a sense of righteousness and self validation whilst openly saying they won’t even try and educate themselves to get some nuance...mind blowing really. But not really surprising. You might be on to something with the narrative malarkey. "Some people will have already made up their mind based on very little evidence others will make up their mind based on information they have actively looked for , the jurors will make up their mind on ‘all the available evidence’. You can not criticise people for making a decision either way unless they are on the jury, we all make decisions based on what we know at the time. Have you ever made a decision or based an opinion on very little evidence? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"i'm not interested in your adolescent crack-pot conspiracy channels on youtube And this is why you’ll remain forever ignorant. Donut operator is as far from a conspiracy theorist channel as it’s possible to get. Not even sure why that would be your go to response. But it speaks volumes about your prejudice. They want to remain ignorant about actual facts. They don't really matter. It's always the same people who want to speak facts about certain things but are unwilling to listen to facts about other things if it doesn't suit the narrative
Flabbergasted tbh. My partner (an ex armed response cop himself) advised me to start watching donut operators shooting breakdowns as I was pig headed and ignorant when it came to police shootings too.
I cannot and will never understand why anyone would be so wilfully fuck ignorant. It’s beyond me.
Narrative. It's the only explanation I have.
I really do wish that everyone would be able to at least view things from both sides, it would make any debate much more interesting.
It's got so nad round here that I'm trying to refrain from commenting so much at the moment which is a shame because I actually quite like this forum
I tend to take a step back and have a few days off every now and then. Still doesn’t mean I’m not shocked by the spectacular, breath taking arrogance of some posters weighing in on subjects they know absolutely nothing about. And to do it with such a sense of righteousness and self validation whilst openly saying they won’t even try and educate themselves to get some nuance...mind blowing really. But not really surprising. You might be on to something with the narrative malarkey.
Some people will have already made up their mind based on very little evidence others will make up their mind based on information they have actively looked for , the jurors will make up their mind on ‘all the available evidence’. You can not criticise people for making a decision either way unless they are on the jury, we all make decisions based on what we know at the time. Have you ever made a decision or based an opinion on very little evidence? "My post was nothing to do with the trial. Hence the OP refocusing the thread back on topic. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"i'm not interested in your adolescent crack-pot conspiracy channels on youtube And this is why you’ll remain forever ignorant. Donut operator is as far from a conspiracy theorist channel as it’s possible to get. Not even sure why that would be your go to response. But it speaks volumes about your prejudice. They want to remain ignorant about actual facts. They don't really matter. It's always the same people who want to speak facts about certain things but are unwilling to listen to facts about other things if it doesn't suit the narrative
Flabbergasted tbh. My partner (an ex armed response cop himself) advised me to start watching donut operators shooting breakdowns as I was pig headed and ignorant when it came to police shootings too.
I cannot and will never understand why anyone would be so wilfully fuck ignorant. It’s beyond me.
Narrative. It's the only explanation I have.
I really do wish that everyone would be able to at least view things from both sides, it would make any debate much more interesting.
It's got so nad round here that I'm trying to refrain from commenting so much at the moment which is a shame because I actually quite like this forum
I tend to take a step back and have a few days off every now and then. Still doesn’t mean I’m not shocked by the spectacular, breath taking arrogance of some posters weighing in on subjects they know absolutely nothing about. And to do it with such a sense of righteousness and self validation whilst openly saying they won’t even try and educate themselves to get some nuance...mind blowing really. But not really surprising. You might be on to something with the narrative malarkey.
Some people will have already made up their mind based on very little evidence others will make up their mind based on information they have actively looked for , the jurors will make up their mind on ‘all the available evidence’. You can not criticise people for making a decision either way unless they are on the jury, we all make decisions based on what we know at the time. Have you ever made a decision or based an opinion on very little evidence?
My post was nothing to do with the trial. Hence the OP refocusing the thread back on topic. "Fair enough, so you agree that you can not be critical of people who think he is guilty of murder based on what they know ? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"i'm not interested in your adolescent crack-pot conspiracy channels on youtube And this is why you’ll remain forever ignorant. Donut operator is as far from a conspiracy theorist channel as it’s possible to get. Not even sure why that would be your go to response. But it speaks volumes about your prejudice. They want to remain ignorant about actual facts. They don't really matter. It's always the same people who want to speak facts about certain things but are unwilling to listen to facts about other things if it doesn't suit the narrative
Flabbergasted tbh. My partner (an ex armed response cop himself) advised me to start watching donut operators shooting breakdowns as I was pig headed and ignorant when it came to police shootings too.
I cannot and will never understand why anyone would be so wilfully fuck ignorant. It’s beyond me.
Narrative. It's the only explanation I have.
I really do wish that everyone would be able to at least view things from both sides, it would make any debate much more interesting.
It's got so nad round here that I'm trying to refrain from commenting so much at the moment which is a shame because I actually quite like this forum
I tend to take a step back and have a few days off every now and then. Still doesn’t mean I’m not shocked by the spectacular, breath taking arrogance of some posters weighing in on subjects they know absolutely nothing about. And to do it with such a sense of righteousness and self validation whilst openly saying they won’t even try and educate themselves to get some nuance...mind blowing really. But not really surprising. You might be on to something with the narrative malarkey.
Some people will have already made up their mind based on very little evidence others will make up their mind based on information they have actively looked for , the jurors will make up their mind on ‘all the available evidence’. You can not criticise people for making a decision either way unless they are on the jury, we all make decisions based on what we know at the time. Have you ever made a decision or based an opinion on very little evidence?
My post was nothing to do with the trial. Hence the OP refocusing the thread back on topic.
Fair enough, so you agree that you can not be critical of people who think he is guilty of murder based on what they know ? "Where have I said otherwise? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"i'm not interested in your adolescent crack-pot conspiracy channels on youtube And this is why you’ll remain forever ignorant. Donut operator is as far from a conspiracy theorist channel as it’s possible to get. Not even sure why that would be your go to response. But it speaks volumes about your prejudice. They want to remain ignorant about actual facts. They don't really matter. It's always the same people who want to speak facts about certain things but are unwilling to listen to facts about other things if it doesn't suit the narrative
Flabbergasted tbh. My partner (an ex armed response cop himself) advised me to start watching donut operators shooting breakdowns as I was pig headed and ignorant when it came to police shootings too.
I cannot and will never understand why anyone would be so wilfully fuck ignorant. It’s beyond me.
Narrative. It's the only explanation I have.
I really do wish that everyone would be able to at least view things from both sides, it would make any debate much more interesting.
It's got so nad round here that I'm trying to refrain from commenting so much at the moment which is a shame because I actually quite like this forum
I tend to take a step back and have a few days off every now and then. Still doesn’t mean I’m not shocked by the spectacular, breath taking arrogance of some posters weighing in on subjects they know absolutely nothing about. And to do it with such a sense of righteousness and self validation whilst openly saying they won’t even try and educate themselves to get some nuance...mind blowing really. But not really surprising. You might be on to something with the narrative malarkey.
Some people will have already made up their mind based on very little evidence others will make up their mind based on information they have actively looked for , the jurors will make up their mind on ‘all the available evidence’. You can not criticise people for making a decision either way unless they are on the jury, we all make decisions based on what we know at the time. Have you ever made a decision or based an opinion on very little evidence?
My post was nothing to do with the trial. Hence the OP refocusing the thread back on topic.
Fair enough, so you agree that you can not be critical of people who think he is guilty of murder based on what they know ?
Where have I said otherwise? "‘Still doesn’t mean I’m not shocked by the spectacular, breath taking arrogance of some posters weighing in on subjects they know absolutely nothing about. And to do it with such a sense of righteousness and self validation whilst openly saying they won’t even try and educate themselves to get some nuance’ | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"i'm not interested in your adolescent crack-pot conspiracy channels on youtube And this is why you’ll remain forever ignorant. Donut operator is as far from a conspiracy theorist channel as it’s possible to get. Not even sure why that would be your go to response. But it speaks volumes about your prejudice. They want to remain ignorant about actual facts. They don't really matter. It's always the same people who want to speak facts about certain things but are unwilling to listen to facts about other things if it doesn't suit the narrative
Flabbergasted tbh. My partner (an ex armed response cop himself) advised me to start watching donut operators shooting breakdowns as I was pig headed and ignorant when it came to police shootings too.
I cannot and will never understand why anyone would be so wilfully fuck ignorant. It’s beyond me.
Narrative. It's the only explanation I have.
I really do wish that everyone would be able to at least view things from both sides, it would make any debate much more interesting.
It's got so nad round here that I'm trying to refrain from commenting so much at the moment which is a shame because I actually quite like this forum
I tend to take a step back and have a few days off every now and then. Still doesn’t mean I’m not shocked by the spectacular, breath taking arrogance of some posters weighing in on subjects they know absolutely nothing about. And to do it with such a sense of righteousness and self validation whilst openly saying they won’t even try and educate themselves to get some nuance...mind blowing really. But not really surprising. You might be on to something with the narrative malarkey.
Some people will have already made up their mind based on very little evidence others will make up their mind based on information they have actively looked for , the jurors will make up their mind on ‘all the available evidence’. You can not criticise people for making a decision either way unless they are on the jury, we all make decisions based on what we know at the time. Have you ever made a decision or based an opinion on very little evidence?
My post was nothing to do with the trial. Hence the OP refocusing the thread back on topic.
Fair enough, so you agree that you can not be critical of people who think he is guilty of murder based on what they know ?
Where have I said otherwise?
‘Still doesn’t mean I’m not shocked by the spectacular, breath taking arrogance of some posters weighing in on subjects they know absolutely nothing about. And to do it with such a sense of righteousness and self validation whilst openly saying they won’t even try and educate themselves to get some nuance’
"I wasn’t talking about the trial. Again, read a thread properly before trying to score ‘wins’. I was talking about those trying to perpetuate the narrative that black people are arbitrarily executed by the police in America. It’s why I’ve asked twice now (with no response) as to how many of those police killings of black people have been found to be unlawful. Those posters are the ones talking about a subject they know nothing about. And aren’t even interested in trying to learn it seems. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"i'm not interested in your adolescent crack-pot conspiracy channels on youtube And this is why you’ll remain forever ignorant. Donut operator is as far from a conspiracy theorist channel as it’s possible to get. Not even sure why that would be your go to response. But it speaks volumes about your prejudice. They want to remain ignorant about actual facts. They don't really matter. It's always the same people who want to speak facts about certain things but are unwilling to listen to facts about other things if it doesn't suit the narrative
Flabbergasted tbh. My partner (an ex armed response cop himself) advised me to start watching donut operators shooting breakdowns as I was pig headed and ignorant when it came to police shootings too.
I cannot and will never understand why anyone would be so wilfully fuck ignorant. It’s beyond me.
Narrative. It's the only explanation I have.
I really do wish that everyone would be able to at least view things from both sides, it would make any debate much more interesting.
It's got so nad round here that I'm trying to refrain from commenting so much at the moment which is a shame because I actually quite like this forum
I tend to take a step back and have a few days off every now and then. Still doesn’t mean I’m not shocked by the spectacular, breath taking arrogance of some posters weighing in on subjects they know absolutely nothing about. And to do it with such a sense of righteousness and self validation whilst openly saying they won’t even try and educate themselves to get some nuance...mind blowing really. But not really surprising. You might be on to something with the narrative malarkey.
Some people will have already made up their mind based on very little evidence others will make up their mind based on information they have actively looked for , the jurors will make up their mind on ‘all the available evidence’. You can not criticise people for making a decision either way unless they are on the jury, we all make decisions based on what we know at the time. Have you ever made a decision or based an opinion on very little evidence?
My post was nothing to do with the trial. Hence the OP refocusing the thread back on topic.
Fair enough, so you agree that you can not be critical of people who think he is guilty of murder based on what they know ?
Where have I said otherwise?
‘Still doesn’t mean I’m not shocked by the spectacular, breath taking arrogance of some posters weighing in on subjects they know absolutely nothing about. And to do it with such a sense of righteousness and self validation whilst openly saying they won’t even try and educate themselves to get some nuance’
I wasn’t talking about the trial. Again, read a thread properly before trying to score ‘wins’.
I was talking about those trying to perpetuate the narrative that black people are arbitrarily executed by the police in America. It’s why I’ve asked twice now (with no response) as to how many of those police killings of black people have been found to be unlawful. Those posters are the ones talking about a subject they know nothing about. And aren’t even interested in trying to learn it seems. "I am not looking to win at anything . My statement that people base their opinion on what they know also applies to police killings of black people, It also applies to your assumption that there will be riots and violence if Chauvin isn’t found guilty of murder | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"i'm not interested in your adolescent crack-pot conspiracy channels on youtube And this is why you’ll remain forever ignorant. Donut operator is as far from a conspiracy theorist channel as it’s possible to get. Not even sure why that would be your go to response. But it speaks volumes about your prejudice. They want to remain ignorant about actual facts. They don't really matter. It's always the same people who want to speak facts about certain things but are unwilling to listen to facts about other things if it doesn't suit the narrative
Flabbergasted tbh. My partner (an ex armed response cop himself) advised me to start watching donut operators shooting breakdowns as I was pig headed and ignorant when it came to police shootings too.
I cannot and will never understand why anyone would be so wilfully fuck ignorant. It’s beyond me.
Narrative. It's the only explanation I have.
I really do wish that everyone would be able to at least view things from both sides, it would make any debate much more interesting.
It's got so nad round here that I'm trying to refrain from commenting so much at the moment which is a shame because I actually quite like this forum
I tend to take a step back and have a few days off every now and then. Still doesn’t mean I’m not shocked by the spectacular, breath taking arrogance of some posters weighing in on subjects they know absolutely nothing about. And to do it with such a sense of righteousness and self validation whilst openly saying they won’t even try and educate themselves to get some nuance...mind blowing really. But not really surprising. You might be on to something with the narrative malarkey.
Some people will have already made up their mind based on very little evidence others will make up their mind based on information they have actively looked for , the jurors will make up their mind on ‘all the available evidence’. You can not criticise people for making a decision either way unless they are on the jury, we all make decisions based on what we know at the time. Have you ever made a decision or based an opinion on very little evidence?
My post was nothing to do with the trial. Hence the OP refocusing the thread back on topic.
Fair enough, so you agree that you can not be critical of people who think he is guilty of murder based on what they know ?
Where have I said otherwise?
‘Still doesn’t mean I’m not shocked by the spectacular, breath taking arrogance of some posters weighing in on subjects they know absolutely nothing about. And to do it with such a sense of righteousness and self validation whilst openly saying they won’t even try and educate themselves to get some nuance’
I wasn’t talking about the trial. Again, read a thread properly before trying to score ‘wins’.
I was talking about those trying to perpetuate the narrative that black people are arbitrarily executed by the police in America. It’s why I’ve asked twice now (with no response) as to how many of those police killings of black people have been found to be unlawful. Those posters are the ones talking about a subject they know nothing about. And aren’t even interested in trying to learn it seems.
I am not looking to win at anything . My statement that people base their opinion on what they know also applies to police killings of black people, It also applies to your assumption that there will be riots and violence if Chauvin isn’t found guilty of murder "They’re entitled to have an opinion. But it means fuck all to anyone else. Just as my opinion does. Difference is their opinion about police killings of black people isn’t borne out by the evidence. I prefer an unemotional, detached outlook. Hence why I’ve asked, repeatedly, how many of those killings have been deemed to be unlawful. That is all that matters. Because that is the evidence needed to corroborate this nonsense narrative that keeps getting pushed. People jumping into a thread asking for predictions of a trials outcome based on evidence, with over the top hyperbole takes up space in the thread for others to engage. And it inevitably derails the thread (which I’m acutely aware of doing now). | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"i'm not interested in your adolescent crack-pot conspiracy channels on youtube And this is why you’ll remain forever ignorant. Donut operator is as far from a conspiracy theorist channel as it’s possible to get. Not even sure why that would be your go to response. But it speaks volumes about your prejudice. They want to remain ignorant about actual facts. They don't really matter. It's always the same people who want to speak facts about certain things but are unwilling to listen to facts about other things if it doesn't suit the narrative
Flabbergasted tbh. My partner (an ex armed response cop himself) advised me to start watching donut operators shooting breakdowns as I was pig headed and ignorant when it came to police shootings too.
I cannot and will never understand why anyone would be so wilfully fuck ignorant. It’s beyond me.
Narrative. It's the only explanation I have.
I really do wish that everyone would be able to at least view things from both sides, it would make any debate much more interesting.
It's got so nad round here that I'm trying to refrain from commenting so much at the moment which is a shame because I actually quite like this forum
I tend to take a step back and have a few days off every now and then. Still doesn’t mean I’m not shocked by the spectacular, breath taking arrogance of some posters weighing in on subjects they know absolutely nothing about. And to do it with such a sense of righteousness and self validation whilst openly saying they won’t even try and educate themselves to get some nuance...mind blowing really. But not really surprising. You might be on to something with the narrative malarkey.
Some people will have already made up their mind based on very little evidence others will make up their mind based on information they have actively looked for , the jurors will make up their mind on ‘all the available evidence’. You can not criticise people for making a decision either way unless they are on the jury, we all make decisions based on what we know at the time. Have you ever made a decision or based an opinion on very little evidence?
My post was nothing to do with the trial. Hence the OP refocusing the thread back on topic.
Fair enough, so you agree that you can not be critical of people who think he is guilty of murder based on what they know ?
Where have I said otherwise?
‘Still doesn’t mean I’m not shocked by the spectacular, breath taking arrogance of some posters weighing in on subjects they know absolutely nothing about. And to do it with such a sense of righteousness and self validation whilst openly saying they won’t even try and educate themselves to get some nuance’
I wasn’t talking about the trial. Again, read a thread properly before trying to score ‘wins’.
I was talking about those trying to perpetuate the narrative that black people are arbitrarily executed by the police in America. It’s why I’ve asked twice now (with no response) as to how many of those police killings of black people have been found to be unlawful. Those posters are the ones talking about a subject they know nothing about. And aren’t even interested in trying to learn it seems.
I am not looking to win at anything . My statement that people base their opinion on what they know also applies to police killings of black people, It also applies to your assumption that there will be riots and violence if Chauvin isn’t found guilty of murder
They’re entitled to have an opinion. But it means fuck all to anyone else. Just as my opinion does. Difference is their opinion about police killings of black people isn’t borne out by the evidence. I prefer an unemotional, detached outlook. Hence why I’ve asked, repeatedly, how many of those killings have been deemed to be unlawful. That is all that matters. Because that is the evidence needed to corroborate this nonsense narrative that keeps getting pushed. People jumping into a thread asking for predictions of a trials outcome based on evidence, with over the top hyperbole takes up space in the thread for others to engage. And it inevitably derails the thread (which I’m acutely aware of doing now). "Fair enough, you have made your decision based on what you think you know they have based theirs on what they think they know, ultimately it is down to the jury to decide | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"i'm not interested in your adolescent crack-pot conspiracy channels on youtube And this is why you’ll remain forever ignorant. Donut operator is as far from a conspiracy theorist channel as it’s possible to get. Not even sure why that would be your go to response. But it speaks volumes about your prejudice. They want to remain ignorant about actual facts. They don't really matter. It's always the same people who want to speak facts about certain things but are unwilling to listen to facts about other things if it doesn't suit the narrative
Flabbergasted tbh. My partner (an ex armed response cop himself) advised me to start watching donut operators shooting breakdowns as I was pig headed and ignorant when it came to police shootings too.
I cannot and will never understand why anyone would be so wilfully fuck ignorant. It’s beyond me.
Narrative. It's the only explanation I have.
I really do wish that everyone would be able to at least view things from both sides, it would make any debate much more interesting.
It's got so nad round here that I'm trying to refrain from commenting so much at the moment which is a shame because I actually quite like this forum
I tend to take a step back and have a few days off every now and then. Still doesn’t mean I’m not shocked by the spectacular, breath taking arrogance of some posters weighing in on subjects they know absolutely nothing about. And to do it with such a sense of righteousness and self validation whilst openly saying they won’t even try and educate themselves to get some nuance...mind blowing really. But not really surprising. You might be on to something with the narrative malarkey.
Some people will have already made up their mind based on very little evidence others will make up their mind based on information they have actively looked for , the jurors will make up their mind on ‘all the available evidence’. You can not criticise people for making a decision either way unless they are on the jury, we all make decisions based on what we know at the time. Have you ever made a decision or based an opinion on very little evidence?
My post was nothing to do with the trial. Hence the OP refocusing the thread back on topic.
Fair enough, so you agree that you can not be critical of people who think he is guilty of murder based on what they know ?
Where have I said otherwise?
‘Still doesn’t mean I’m not shocked by the spectacular, breath taking arrogance of some posters weighing in on subjects they know absolutely nothing about. And to do it with such a sense of righteousness and self validation whilst openly saying they won’t even try and educate themselves to get some nuance’
I wasn’t talking about the trial. Again, read a thread properly before trying to score ‘wins’.
I was talking about those trying to perpetuate the narrative that black people are arbitrarily executed by the police in America. It’s why I’ve asked twice now (with no response) as to how many of those police killings of black people have been found to be unlawful. Those posters are the ones talking about a subject they know nothing about. And aren’t even interested in trying to learn it seems.
I am not looking to win at anything . My statement that people base their opinion on what they know also applies to police killings of black people, It also applies to your assumption that there will be riots and violence if Chauvin isn’t found guilty of murder
They’re entitled to have an opinion. But it means fuck all to anyone else. Just as my opinion does. Difference is their opinion about police killings of black people isn’t borne out by the evidence. I prefer an unemotional, detached outlook. Hence why I’ve asked, repeatedly, how many of those killings have been deemed to be unlawful. That is all that matters. Because that is the evidence needed to corroborate this nonsense narrative that keeps getting pushed. People jumping into a thread asking for predictions of a trials outcome based on evidence, with over the top hyperbole takes up space in the thread for others to engage. And it inevitably derails the thread (which I’m acutely aware of doing now).
Fair enough, you have made your decision based on what you think you know they have based theirs on what they think they know, ultimately it is down to the jury to decide "To reiterate, I am not talking about the trial. I’ve remained consistent that I think a manslaughter verdict will come back based on what I’ve seen and heard. I am talking about the bullshit narrative being peddled by certain users here. And I’ve made my mind up about it through what I know, not what I think I know. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"I’ll try again, how many killings by the police were considered unlawful? " Many have been deemed unlawful.. hence why city councils have ended up paying out millions of dollars in settlements to the families concerned..... George floyd’s family got at 27 million dollar settlement! the issue is that not in the history of America has a white policeman on duty ever been convicted of the murder of a black person.... Never ever....... Not once.... | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"i'm not interested in your adolescent crack-pot conspiracy channels on youtube And this is why you’ll remain forever ignorant. Donut operator is as far from a conspiracy theorist channel as it’s possible to get. Not even sure why that would be your go to response. But it speaks volumes about your prejudice. They want to remain ignorant about actual facts. They don't really matter. It's always the same people who want to speak facts about certain things but are unwilling to listen to facts about other things if it doesn't suit the narrative
Flabbergasted tbh. My partner (an ex armed response cop himself) advised me to start watching donut operators shooting breakdowns as I was pig headed and ignorant when it came to police shootings too.
I cannot and will never understand why anyone would be so wilfully fuck ignorant. It’s beyond me.
Narrative. It's the only explanation I have.
I really do wish that everyone would be able to at least view things from both sides, it would make any debate much more interesting.
It's got so nad round here that I'm trying to refrain from commenting so much at the moment which is a shame because I actually quite like this forum
I tend to take a step back and have a few days off every now and then. Still doesn’t mean I’m not shocked by the spectacular, breath taking arrogance of some posters weighing in on subjects they know absolutely nothing about. And to do it with such a sense of righteousness and self validation whilst openly saying they won’t even try and educate themselves to get some nuance...mind blowing really. But not really surprising. You might be on to something with the narrative malarkey.
Some people will have already made up their mind based on very little evidence others will make up their mind based on information they have actively looked for , the jurors will make up their mind on ‘all the available evidence’. You can not criticise people for making a decision either way unless they are on the jury, we all make decisions based on what we know at the time. Have you ever made a decision or based an opinion on very little evidence?
My post was nothing to do with the trial. Hence the OP refocusing the thread back on topic.
Fair enough, so you agree that you can not be critical of people who think he is guilty of murder based on what they know ?
Where have I said otherwise?
‘Still doesn’t mean I’m not shocked by the spectacular, breath taking arrogance of some posters weighing in on subjects they know absolutely nothing about. And to do it with such a sense of righteousness and self validation whilst openly saying they won’t even try and educate themselves to get some nuance’
I wasn’t talking about the trial. Again, read a thread properly before trying to score ‘wins’.
I was talking about those trying to perpetuate the narrative that black people are arbitrarily executed by the police in America. It’s why I’ve asked twice now (with no response) as to how many of those police killings of black people have been found to be unlawful. Those posters are the ones talking about a subject they know nothing about. And aren’t even interested in trying to learn it seems.
I am not looking to win at anything . My statement that people base their opinion on what they know also applies to police killings of black people, It also applies to your assumption that there will be riots and violence if Chauvin isn’t found guilty of murder
They’re entitled to have an opinion. But it means fuck all to anyone else. Just as my opinion does. Difference is their opinion about police killings of black people isn’t borne out by the evidence. I prefer an unemotional, detached outlook. Hence why I’ve asked, repeatedly, how many of those killings have been deemed to be unlawful. That is all that matters. Because that is the evidence needed to corroborate this nonsense narrative that keeps getting pushed. People jumping into a thread asking for predictions of a trials outcome based on evidence, with over the top hyperbole takes up space in the thread for others to engage. And it inevitably derails the thread (which I’m acutely aware of doing now).
Fair enough, you have made your decision based on what you think you know they have based theirs on what they think they know, ultimately it is down to the jury to decide
To reiterate, I am not talking about the trial. I’ve remained consistent that I think a manslaughter verdict will come back based on what I’ve seen and heard.
I am talking about the bullshit narrative being peddled by certain users here. And I’ve made my mind up about it through what I know, not what I think I know. "And they made their mind up on what they know , not what you think they know . | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Verdict - whatever the jury decides based on the evidence. " This.. Then several more threads on the outcome.. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"I’ll try again, how many killings by the police were considered unlawful? Many have been deemed unlawful.. hence why city councils have ended up paying out millions of dollars in settlements to the families concerned..... George floyd’s family got at 27 million dollar settlement! the issue is that not in the history of America has a white policeman on duty ever been convicted of the murder of a black person.... Never ever....... Not once.... " That's just not true. If you don't know the truth you really shouldn't try to make it seem like you do. Youll usually be found out | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"I’ll try again, how many killings by the police were considered unlawful? Many have been deemed unlawful.. hence why city councils have ended up paying out millions of dollars in settlements to the families concerned..... George floyd’s family got at 27 million dollar settlement! the issue is that not in the history of America has a white policeman on duty ever been convicted of the murder of a black person.... Never ever....... Not once.... That's just not true. If you don't know the truth you really shouldn't try to make it seem like you do. Youll usually be found out "Whilst on duty? Do you have any examples | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Since I opened this post. My prediction. Manslaughter verdict, with limited jail time. My wish. Murder verdict, with 20 years of jail time." Yes! | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"I’ll try again, how many killings by the police were considered unlawful? Many have been deemed unlawful.. hence why city councils have ended up paying out millions of dollars in settlements to the families concerned..... George floyd’s family got at 27 million dollar settlement! the issue is that not in the history of America has a white policeman on duty ever been convicted of the murder of a black person.... Never ever....... Not once.... That's just not true. If you don't know the truth you really shouldn't try to make it seem like you do. Youll usually be found out
Whilst on duty? Do you have any examples "Jason Van Dyke - found guilty of second-degree murder. I'm sure i can find others. Imagine you actually took the time to do some research | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"I’ll try again, how many killings by the police were considered unlawful? Many have been deemed unlawful.. hence why city councils have ended up paying out millions of dollars in settlements to the families concerned..... George floyd’s family got at 27 million dollar settlement! the issue is that not in the history of America has a white policeman on duty ever been convicted of the murder of a black person.... Never ever....... Not once.... That's just not true. If you don't know the truth you really shouldn't try to make it seem like you do. Youll usually be found out
Whilst on duty? Do you have any examples
Jason Van Dyke - found guilty of second-degree murder. I'm sure i can find others.
Imagine you actually took the time to do some research "I did a quick google search , | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"I’ll try again, how many killings by the police were considered unlawful? Many have been deemed unlawful.. hence why city councils have ended up paying out millions of dollars in settlements to the families concerned..... George floyd’s family got at 27 million dollar settlement! the issue is that not in the history of America has a white policeman on duty ever been convicted of the murder of a black person.... Never ever....... Not once.... That's just not true. If you don't know the truth you really shouldn't try to make it seem like you do. Youll usually be found out
Whilst on duty? Do you have any examples
Jason Van Dyke - found guilty of second-degree murder. I'm sure i can find others.
Imagine you actually took the time to do some research "I bet you can’t.... I think that literally is the only 1 in 400 years.... | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"I’ll try again, how many killings by the police were considered unlawful? Many have been deemed unlawful.. hence why city councils have ended up paying out millions of dollars in settlements to the families concerned..... George floyd’s family got at 27 million dollar settlement! the issue is that not in the history of America has a white policeman on duty ever been convicted of the murder of a black person.... Never ever....... Not once.... That's just not true. If you don't know the truth you really shouldn't try to make it seem like you do. Youll usually be found out
Whilst on duty? Do you have any examples
Jason Van Dyke - found guilty of second-degree murder. I'm sure i can find others.
Imagine you actually took the time to do some research "On October 5, 2018, Van Dyke was found guilty of second degree murder and 16 counts of aggravated battery with a firearm, but was found not guilty of official misconduct.[6][82] On January 18, 2019, Van Dyke was sentenced to 6.75 years in prison for the second-degree murder conviction alone, which is permitted by Illinois law. This guy ? Who got less than 7 years? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"I’ll try again, how many killings by the police were considered unlawful? Many have been deemed unlawful.. hence why city councils have ended up paying out millions of dollars in settlements to the families concerned..... George floyd’s family got at 27 million dollar settlement! the issue is that not in the history of America has a white policeman on duty ever been convicted of the murder of a black person.... Never ever....... Not once.... That's just not true. If you don't know the truth you really shouldn't try to make it seem like you do. Youll usually be found out
Whilst on duty? Do you have any examples
Jason Van Dyke - found guilty of second-degree murder. I'm sure i can find others.
Imagine you actually took the time to do some research
I bet you can’t.... I think that literally is the only 1 in 400 years...."Your last post said no one, ever. Now it's one? What are you gonna say when I show you another | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"I’ll try again, how many killings by the police were considered unlawful? Many have been deemed unlawful.. hence why city councils have ended up paying out millions of dollars in settlements to the families concerned..... George floyd’s family got at 27 million dollar settlement! the issue is that not in the history of America has a white policeman on duty ever been convicted of the murder of a black person.... Never ever....... Not once.... That's just not true. If you don't know the truth you really shouldn't try to make it seem like you do. Youll usually be found out
Whilst on duty? Do you have any examples
Jason Van Dyke - found guilty of second-degree murder. I'm sure i can find others.
Imagine you actually took the time to do some research
On October 5, 2018, Van Dyke was found guilty of second degree murder and 16 counts of aggravated battery with a firearm, but was found not guilty of official misconduct.[6][82] On January 18, 2019, Van Dyke was sentenced to 6.75 years in prison for the second-degree murder conviction alone, which is permitted by Illinois law.
This guy ? Who got less than 7 years? "His sentence doesn't detract from the fact that he was found guilty of murder | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"I’ll try again, how many killings by the police were considered unlawful? Many have been deemed unlawful.. hence why city councils have ended up paying out millions of dollars in settlements to the families concerned..... George floyd’s family got at 27 million dollar settlement! the issue is that not in the history of America has a white policeman on duty ever been convicted of the murder of a black person.... Never ever....... Not once.... That's just not true. If you don't know the truth you really shouldn't try to make it seem like you do. Youll usually be found out
Whilst on duty? Do you have any examples
Jason Van Dyke - found guilty of second-degree murder. I'm sure i can find others.
Imagine you actually took the time to do some research
On October 5, 2018, Van Dyke was found guilty of second degree murder and 16 counts of aggravated battery with a firearm, but was found not guilty of official misconduct.[6][82] On January 18, 2019, Van Dyke was sentenced to 6.75 years in prison for the second-degree murder conviction alone, which is permitted by Illinois law.
This guy ? Who got less than 7 years?
His sentence doesn't detract from the fact that he was found guilty of murder "2nd degree murder, I will have to check what that means in Illinois law | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"I’ll try again, how many killings by the police were considered unlawful? Many have been deemed unlawful.. hence why city councils have ended up paying out millions of dollars in settlements to the families concerned..... George floyd’s family got at 27 million dollar settlement! the issue is that not in the history of America has a white policeman on duty ever been convicted of the murder of a black person.... Never ever....... Not once.... That's just not true. If you don't know the truth you really shouldn't try to make it seem like you do. Youll usually be found out
Whilst on duty? Do you have any examples
Jason Van Dyke - found guilty of second-degree murder. I'm sure i can find others.
Imagine you actually took the time to do some research
On October 5, 2018, Van Dyke was found guilty of second degree murder and 16 counts of aggravated battery with a firearm, but was found not guilty of official misconduct.[6][82] On January 18, 2019, Van Dyke was sentenced to 6.75 years in prison for the second-degree murder conviction alone, which is permitted by Illinois law.
This guy ? Who got less than 7 years?
His sentence doesn't detract from the fact that he was found guilty of murder
2nd degree murder, I will have to check what that means in Illinois law "I know your research can be a bit ropey so here you are 'Second degree murder is not a lesser included offense of first degree murder; it is a “lesser mitigated offense” of first degree murder' | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"I’ll try again, how many killings by the police were considered unlawful? Many have been deemed unlawful.. hence why city councils have ended up paying out millions of dollars in settlements to the families concerned..... George floyd’s family got at 27 million dollar settlement! the issue is that not in the history of America has a white policeman on duty ever been convicted of the murder of a black person.... Never ever....... Not once.... That's just not true. If you don't know the truth you really shouldn't try to make it seem like you do. Youll usually be found out
Whilst on duty? Do you have any examples
Jason Van Dyke - found guilty of second-degree murder. I'm sure i can find others.
Imagine you actually took the time to do some research
On October 5, 2018, Van Dyke was found guilty of second degree murder and 16 counts of aggravated battery with a firearm, but was found not guilty of official misconduct.[6][82] On January 18, 2019, Van Dyke was sentenced to 6.75 years in prison for the second-degree murder conviction alone, which is permitted by Illinois law.
This guy ? Who got less than 7 years?
His sentence doesn't detract from the fact that he was found guilty of murder
2nd degree murder, I will have to check what that means in Illinois law
I know your research can be a bit ropey so here you are
'Second degree murder is not a lesser included offense of first degree murder; it is a “lesser
mitigated offense” of first degree murder'"Less than 7 years for murder, wow, that is lenient | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"I’ll try again, how many killings by the police were considered unlawful? Many have been deemed unlawful.. hence why city councils have ended up paying out millions of dollars in settlements to the families concerned..... George floyd’s family got at 27 million dollar settlement! the issue is that not in the history of America has a white policeman on duty ever been convicted of the murder of a black person.... Never ever....... Not once.... That's just not true. If you don't know the truth you really shouldn't try to make it seem like you do. Youll usually be found out
Whilst on duty? Do you have any examples
Jason Van Dyke - found guilty of second-degree murder. I'm sure i can find others.
Imagine you actually took the time to do some research
On October 5, 2018, Van Dyke was found guilty of second degree murder and 16 counts of aggravated battery with a firearm, but was found not guilty of official misconduct.[6][82] On January 18, 2019, Van Dyke was sentenced to 6.75 years in prison for the second-degree murder conviction alone, which is permitted by Illinois law.
This guy ? Who got less than 7 years?
His sentence doesn't detract from the fact that he was found guilty of murder
2nd degree murder, I will have to check what that means in Illinois law
I know your research can be a bit ropey so here you are
'Second degree murder is not a lesser included offense of first degree murder; it is a “lesser
mitigated offense” of first degree murder'
Less than 7 years for murder, wow, that is lenient "Tell the judge | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"I’ll try again, how many killings by the police were considered unlawful? Many have been deemed unlawful.. hence why city councils have ended up paying out millions of dollars in settlements to the families concerned..... George floyd’s family got at 27 million dollar settlement! the issue is that not in the history of America has a white policeman on duty ever been convicted of the murder of a black person.... Never ever....... Not once.... That's just not true. If you don't know the truth you really shouldn't try to make it seem like you do. Youll usually be found out
Whilst on duty? Do you have any examples
Jason Van Dyke - found guilty of second-degree murder. I'm sure i can find others.
Imagine you actually took the time to do some research
On October 5, 2018, Van Dyke was found guilty of second degree murder and 16 counts of aggravated battery with a firearm, but was found not guilty of official misconduct.[6][82] On January 18, 2019, Van Dyke was sentenced to 6.75 years in prison for the second-degree murder conviction alone, which is permitted by Illinois law.
This guy ? Who got less than 7 years?
His sentence doesn't detract from the fact that he was found guilty of murder
2nd degree murder, I will have to check what that means in Illinois law
I know your research can be a bit ropey so here you are
'Second degree murder is not a lesser included offense of first degree murder; it is a “lesser
mitigated offense” of first degree murder'
Less than 7 years for murder, wow, that is lenient
Tell the judge "The maximum is 14 years, wow, that is lenient for murder | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"I’ll try again, how many killings by the police were considered unlawful? Many have been deemed unlawful.. hence why city councils have ended up paying out millions of dollars in settlements to the families concerned..... George floyd’s family got at 27 million dollar settlement! the issue is that not in the history of America has a white policeman on duty ever been convicted of the murder of a black person.... Never ever....... Not once.... That's just not true. If you don't know the truth you really shouldn't try to make it seem like you do. Youll usually be found out
Whilst on duty? Do you have any examples
Jason Van Dyke - found guilty of second-degree murder. I'm sure i can find others.
Imagine you actually took the time to do some research
On October 5, 2018, Van Dyke was found guilty of second degree murder and 16 counts of aggravated battery with a firearm, but was found not guilty of official misconduct.[6][82] On January 18, 2019, Van Dyke was sentenced to 6.75 years in prison for the second-degree murder conviction alone, which is permitted by Illinois law.
This guy ? Who got less than 7 years?
His sentence doesn't detract from the fact that he was found guilty of murder
2nd degree murder, I will have to check what that means in Illinois law
I know your research can be a bit ropey so here you are
'Second degree murder is not a lesser included offense of first degree murder; it is a “lesser
mitigated offense” of first degree murder'
Less than 7 years for murder, wow, that is lenient
Tell the judge
The maximum is 14 years, wow, that is lenient for murder "What does lenient sentencing have to do with 'no one, ever'? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"I’ll try again, how many killings by the police were considered unlawful? Many have been deemed unlawful.. hence why city councils have ended up paying out millions of dollars in settlements to the families concerned..... George floyd’s family got at 27 million dollar settlement! the issue is that not in the history of America has a white policeman on duty ever been convicted of the murder of a black person.... Never ever....... Not once.... That's just not true. If you don't know the truth you really shouldn't try to make it seem like you do. Youll usually be found out
Whilst on duty? Do you have any examples
Jason Van Dyke - found guilty of second-degree murder. I'm sure i can find others.
Imagine you actually took the time to do some research
I bet you can’t.... I think that literally is the only 1 in 400 years....
Your last post said no one, ever. Now it's one? What are you gonna say when I show you another "The link I posted shows multiple. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"I’ll try again, how many killings by the police were considered unlawful? Many have been deemed unlawful.. hence why city councils have ended up paying out millions of dollars in settlements to the families concerned..... George floyd’s family got at 27 million dollar settlement! the issue is that not in the history of America has a white policeman on duty ever been convicted of the murder of a black person.... Never ever....... Not once.... That's just not true. If you don't know the truth you really shouldn't try to make it seem like you do. Youll usually be found out
Whilst on duty? Do you have any examples
Jason Van Dyke - found guilty of second-degree murder. I'm sure i can find others.
Imagine you actually took the time to do some research
I bet you can’t.... I think that literally is the only 1 in 400 years....
Your last post said no one, ever. Now it's one? What are you gonna say when I show you another
The link I posted shows multiple."Yes it does | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"I’ll try again, how many killings by the police were considered unlawful? Many have been deemed unlawful.. hence why city councils have ended up paying out millions of dollars in settlements to the families concerned..... George floyd’s family got at 27 million dollar settlement! the issue is that not in the history of America has a white policeman on duty ever been convicted of the murder of a black person.... Never ever....... Not once.... That's just not true. If you don't know the truth you really shouldn't try to make it seem like you do. Youll usually be found out
Whilst on duty? Do you have any examples
Jason Van Dyke - found guilty of second-degree murder. I'm sure i can find others.
Imagine you actually took the time to do some research
On October 5, 2018, Van Dyke was found guilty of second degree murder and 16 counts of aggravated battery with a firearm, but was found not guilty of official misconduct.[6][82] On January 18, 2019, Van Dyke was sentenced to 6.75 years in prison for the second-degree murder conviction alone, which is permitted by Illinois law.
This guy ? Who got less than 7 years?
His sentence doesn't detract from the fact that he was found guilty of murder
2nd degree murder, I will have to check what that means in Illinois law
I know your research can be a bit ropey so here you are
'Second degree murder is not a lesser included offense of first degree murder; it is a “lesser
mitigated offense” of first degree murder'
Less than 7 years for murder, wow, that is lenient "Ahaha changed the tone from no police officer was found guilty on duty, to only 7 years. Stop posting nonsense, you embarrassing yourself | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"I’ll try again, how many killings by the police were considered unlawful? Many have been deemed unlawful.. hence why city councils have ended up paying out millions of dollars in settlements to the families concerned..... George floyd’s family got at 27 million dollar settlement! the issue is that not in the history of America has a white policeman on duty ever been convicted of the murder of a black person.... Never ever....... Not once.... That's just not true. If you don't know the truth you really shouldn't try to make it seem like you do. Youll usually be found out
Whilst on duty? Do you have any examples
Jason Van Dyke - found guilty of second-degree murder. I'm sure i can find others.
Imagine you actually took the time to do some research
On October 5, 2018, Van Dyke was found guilty of second degree murder and 16 counts of aggravated battery with a firearm, but was found not guilty of official misconduct.[6][82] On January 18, 2019, Van Dyke was sentenced to 6.75 years in prison for the second-degree murder conviction alone, which is permitted by Illinois law.
This guy ? Who got less than 7 years?
His sentence doesn't detract from the fact that he was found guilty of murder
2nd degree murder, I will have to check what that means in Illinois law
I know your research can be a bit ropey so here you are
'Second degree murder is not a lesser included offense of first degree murder; it is a “lesser
mitigated offense” of first degree murder'
Less than 7 years for murder, wow, that is lenient
Tell the judge
The maximum is 14 years, wow, that is lenient for murder
What does lenient sentencing have to do with 'no one, ever'?"It is disgusting that someone only gets 7 years for murder, | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"I’ll try again, how many killings by the police were considered unlawful? Many have been deemed unlawful.. hence why city councils have ended up paying out millions of dollars in settlements to the families concerned..... George floyd’s family got at 27 million dollar settlement! the issue is that not in the history of America has a white policeman on duty ever been convicted of the murder of a black person.... Never ever....... Not once.... That's just not true. If you don't know the truth you really shouldn't try to make it seem like you do. Youll usually be found out
Whilst on duty? Do you have any examples
Jason Van Dyke - found guilty of second-degree murder. I'm sure i can find others.
Imagine you actually took the time to do some research
On October 5, 2018, Van Dyke was found guilty of second degree murder and 16 counts of aggravated battery with a firearm, but was found not guilty of official misconduct.[6][82] On January 18, 2019, Van Dyke was sentenced to 6.75 years in prison for the second-degree murder conviction alone, which is permitted by Illinois law.
This guy ? Who got less than 7 years?
His sentence doesn't detract from the fact that he was found guilty of murder
2nd degree murder, I will have to check what that means in Illinois law
I know your research can be a bit ropey so here you are
'Second degree murder is not a lesser included offense of first degree murder; it is a “lesser
mitigated offense” of first degree murder'
Less than 7 years for murder, wow, that is lenient
Tell the judge
The maximum is 14 years, wow, that is lenient for murder
What does lenient sentencing have to do with 'no one, ever'?
It is disgusting that someone only gets 7 years for murder, "A lot of sentences in the US and here in the UK are disgusting but that's not the debate | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"I’ll try again, how many killings by the police were considered unlawful? Many have been deemed unlawful.. hence why city councils have ended up paying out millions of dollars in settlements to the families concerned..... George floyd’s family got at 27 million dollar settlement! the issue is that not in the history of America has a white policeman on duty ever been convicted of the murder of a black person.... Never ever....... Not once.... That's just not true. If you don't know the truth you really shouldn't try to make it seem like you do. Youll usually be found out
Whilst on duty? Do you have any examples
Jason Van Dyke - found guilty of second-degree murder. I'm sure i can find others.
Imagine you actually took the time to do some research
On October 5, 2018, Van Dyke was found guilty of second degree murder and 16 counts of aggravated battery with a firearm, but was found not guilty of official misconduct.[6][82] On January 18, 2019, Van Dyke was sentenced to 6.75 years in prison for the second-degree murder conviction alone, which is permitted by Illinois law.
This guy ? Who got less than 7 years?
His sentence doesn't detract from the fact that he was found guilty of murder
2nd degree murder, I will have to check what that means in Illinois law
I know your research can be a bit ropey so here you are
'Second degree murder is not a lesser included offense of first degree murder; it is a “lesser
mitigated offense” of first degree murder'
Less than 7 years for murder, wow, that is lenient
Tell the judge
The maximum is 14 years, wow, that is lenient for murder
What does lenient sentencing have to do with 'no one, ever'?
It is disgusting that someone only gets 7 years for murder,
A lot of sentences in the US and here in the UK are disgusting but that's not the debate"And? There must have been mitigating circumstances, especially as he was given most lenient sentence possible | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"I’ll try again, how many killings by the police were considered unlawful? Many have been deemed unlawful.. hence why city councils have ended up paying out millions of dollars in settlements to the families concerned..... George floyd’s family got at 27 million dollar settlement! the issue is that not in the history of America has a white policeman on duty ever been convicted of the murder of a black person.... Never ever....... Not once.... That's just not true. If you don't know the truth you really shouldn't try to make it seem like you do. Youll usually be found out
Whilst on duty? Do you have any examples
Jason Van Dyke - found guilty of second-degree murder. I'm sure i can find others.
Imagine you actually took the time to do some research
On October 5, 2018, Van Dyke was found guilty of second degree murder and 16 counts of aggravated battery with a firearm, but was found not guilty of official misconduct.[6][82] On January 18, 2019, Van Dyke was sentenced to 6.75 years in prison for the second-degree murder conviction alone, which is permitted by Illinois law.
This guy ? Who got less than 7 years?
His sentence doesn't detract from the fact that he was found guilty of murder
2nd degree murder, I will have to check what that means in Illinois law
I know your research can be a bit ropey so here you are
'Second degree murder is not a lesser included offense of first degree murder; it is a “lesser
mitigated offense” of first degree murder'
Less than 7 years for murder, wow, that is lenient
Tell the judge
The maximum is 14 years, wow, that is lenient for murder
What does lenient sentencing have to do with 'no one, ever'?
It is disgusting that someone only gets 7 years for murder,
A lot of sentences in the US and here in the UK are disgusting but that's not the debate
And? There must have been mitigating circumstances, especially as he was given most lenient sentence possible "And? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"I’ll try again, how many killings by the police were considered unlawful? Many have been deemed unlawful.. hence why city councils have ended up paying out millions of dollars in settlements to the families concerned..... George floyd’s family got at 27 million dollar settlement! the issue is that not in the history of America has a white policeman on duty ever been convicted of the murder of a black person.... Never ever....... Not once.... That's just not true. If you don't know the truth you really shouldn't try to make it seem like you do. Youll usually be found out
Whilst on duty? Do you have any examples
Jason Van Dyke - found guilty of second-degree murder. I'm sure i can find others.
Imagine you actually took the time to do some research
On October 5, 2018, Van Dyke was found guilty of second degree murder and 16 counts of aggravated battery with a firearm, but was found not guilty of official misconduct.[6][82] On January 18, 2019, Van Dyke was sentenced to 6.75 years in prison for the second-degree murder conviction alone, which is permitted by Illinois law.
This guy ? Who got less than 7 years?
His sentence doesn't detract from the fact that he was found guilty of murder
2nd degree murder, I will have to check what that means in Illinois law
I know your research can be a bit ropey so here you are
'Second degree murder is not a lesser included offense of first degree murder; it is a “lesser
mitigated offense” of first degree murder'
Less than 7 years for murder, wow, that is lenient
Tell the judge
The maximum is 14 years, wow, that is lenient for murder
What does lenient sentencing have to do with 'no one, ever'?
It is disgusting that someone only gets 7 years for murder,
A lot of sentences in the US and here in the UK are disgusting but that's not the debate
And? There must have been mitigating circumstances, especially as he was given most lenient sentence possible
And?"I will have to have a look at the case, 7 years for murder is disgraceful | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"I’ll try again, how many killings by the police were considered unlawful? Many have been deemed unlawful.. hence why city councils have ended up paying out millions of dollars in settlements to the families concerned..... George floyd’s family got at 27 million dollar settlement! the issue is that not in the history of America has a white policeman on duty ever been convicted of the murder of a black person.... Never ever....... Not once.... That's just not true. If you don't know the truth you really shouldn't try to make it seem like you do. Youll usually be found out
Whilst on duty? Do you have any examples
Jason Van Dyke - found guilty of second-degree murder. I'm sure i can find others.
Imagine you actually took the time to do some research
On October 5, 2018, Van Dyke was found guilty of second degree murder and 16 counts of aggravated battery with a firearm, but was found not guilty of official misconduct.[6][82] On January 18, 2019, Van Dyke was sentenced to 6.75 years in prison for the second-degree murder conviction alone, which is permitted by Illinois law.
This guy ? Who got less than 7 years?
His sentence doesn't detract from the fact that he was found guilty of murder
2nd degree murder, I will have to check what that means in Illinois law
I know your research can be a bit ropey so here you are
'Second degree murder is not a lesser included offense of first degree murder; it is a “lesser
mitigated offense” of first degree murder'
Less than 7 years for murder, wow, that is lenient
Tell the judge
The maximum is 14 years, wow, that is lenient for murder
What does lenient sentencing have to do with 'no one, ever'?
It is disgusting that someone only gets 7 years for murder,
A lot of sentences in the US and here in the UK are disgusting but that's not the debate
And? There must have been mitigating circumstances, especially as he was given most lenient sentence possible
And?
I will have to have a look at the case, 7 years for murder is disgraceful "You do that | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"I’ll try again, how many killings by the police were considered unlawful? Many have been deemed unlawful.. hence why city councils have ended up paying out millions of dollars in settlements to the families concerned..... George floyd’s family got at 27 million dollar settlement! the issue is that not in the history of America has a white policeman on duty ever been convicted of the murder of a black person.... Never ever....... Not once.... That's just not true. If you don't know the truth you really shouldn't try to make it seem like you do. Youll usually be found out
Whilst on duty? Do you have any examples
Jason Van Dyke - found guilty of second-degree murder. I'm sure i can find others.
Imagine you actually took the time to do some research
On October 5, 2018, Van Dyke was found guilty of second degree murder and 16 counts of aggravated battery with a firearm, but was found not guilty of official misconduct.[6][82] On January 18, 2019, Van Dyke was sentenced to 6.75 years in prison for the second-degree murder conviction alone, which is permitted by Illinois law.
This guy ? Who got less than 7 years?
His sentence doesn't detract from the fact that he was found guilty of murder
2nd degree murder, I will have to check what that means in Illinois law
I know your research can be a bit ropey so here you are
'Second degree murder is not a lesser included offense of first degree murder; it is a “lesser
mitigated offense” of first degree murder'
Less than 7 years for murder, wow, that is lenient
Tell the judge
The maximum is 14 years, wow, that is lenient for murder
What does lenient sentencing have to do with 'no one, ever'?
It is disgusting that someone only gets 7 years for murder,
A lot of sentences in the US and here in the UK are disgusting but that's not the debate
And? There must have been mitigating circumstances, especially as he was given most lenient sentence possible
And?
I will have to have a look at the case, 7 years for murder is disgraceful
You do that "I will, thanks for highlighting this case, | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"So we’ve established the narrative that the police randomly execute black people in America and are never brought to justice for unlawful killings is a bullshit one then? Glad we cleared that up. Back to the OP’s original question. I still maintain a manslaughter charge. Interestingly I saw Tim Pool and Styxx are actually predicting a full acquittal. Can’t see that myself . " I think and hope it will be a murder charge | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"People resisting arrest is all part of a police officers job. You subdue, you handcuff, you frisk them, you immediately sit them down with their legs crossed if not in police vehicle, you read them their rights, you transport them to the police dept., you book them, then you do your paperwork. it's not rocket science as they would say. Police brutality and torture isn't part of their training, and isn't acceptable under any circumstances what so ever. No way will Chauvin walk, because that's not acceptable under any circumstance what so ever either. No people with a moral sense for justice should ever accept Chauvin walking free, because he is guilty, people saw how George Floyd was treated by Chauvin before he died. It'll be a huge mistake even if they let Chauvin off easy, as I'm sure they will definitely see if they make that mistake." The only issue with this explanation is it’s simplicity. Sometimes it doesn’t work like that. I’m not 100% sure how it works in Minnesota but certainly in the UK if a subject was violent, or resisting so much to be considered dangerous to put in the back of a patrol car, we’d have to restrain them and wait for a meat wagon to come and collect them. Of significance was the state medical witness saying he thought Floyd might have been suffering from excited delirium (we call it acute behavioural disorder here). If that’s the case then there’s got to be a conviction on the basis of negligence for sure. Every cop gets basic medical training to deal with ABD because it’s so fucking deadly. You HAVE to take action or the subject WILL die. I can’t see him walking despite what the likes of Tim Pool or other commentators reckon. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"I am confused by what the defence is trying to do... yesterday they put their own use of force expert on the stand who was so ridiculous he got absolutely shredded by the prosecutors.... now they have a pathologist on the stand saying it was carbon monoxide poisoning that played a part because they laid him down next to the exhaust pipe.... It’s like they are throwing shit at a wall and seeing if anything sticks " Strangely enough that's the job of the defence, IE create doubt as to the cause, we all know you made your mind up before the trial started, hopefully the jury didnt, everyone deserves a full and fair trial, your way is the route to kangaroo courts and lynch mobs. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"I am confused by what the defence is trying to do... yesterday they put their own use of force expert on the stand who was so ridiculous he got absolutely shredded by the prosecutors.... now they have a pathologist on the stand saying it was carbon monoxide poisoning that played a part because they laid him down next to the exhaust pipe.... It’s like they are throwing shit at a wall and seeing if anything sticks " All they need to do is plant the seed for reasonable doubt. Like it or not, that’s the way it works. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"I am confused by what the defence is trying to do... yesterday they put their own use of force expert on the stand who was so ridiculous he got absolutely shredded by the prosecutors.... now they have a pathologist on the stand saying it was carbon monoxide poisoning that played a part because they laid him down next to the exhaust pipe.... It’s like they are throwing shit at a wall and seeing if anything sticks Strangely enough that's the job of the defence, IE create doubt as to the cause, we all know you made your mind up before the trial started, hopefully the jury didnt, everyone deserves a full and fair trial, your way is the route to kangaroo courts and lynch mobs. " But if they are trying to create doubt then wouldn’t you stick to one line and try and run a reasonable argument through it... rather than throwing out various different theories that then make the other arguments you are using less plausible I would be really tempted to say that expert who was on the stand for the defence today was the best prosecution witness so far they took him to pieces so clinically | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"I am confused by what the defence is trying to do... yesterday they put their own use of force expert on the stand who was so ridiculous he got absolutely shredded by the prosecutors.... now they have a pathologist on the stand saying it was carbon monoxide poisoning that played a part because they laid him down next to the exhaust pipe.... It’s like they are throwing shit at a wall and seeing if anything sticks Strangely enough that's the job of the defence, IE create doubt as to the cause, we all know you made your mind up before the trial started, hopefully the jury didnt, everyone deserves a full and fair trial, your way is the route to kangaroo courts and lynch mobs. But if they are trying to create doubt then wouldn’t you stick to one line and try and run a reasonable argument through it... rather than throwing out various different theories that then make the other arguments you are using less plausible I would be really tempted to say that expert who was on the stand for the defence today was the best prosecution witness so far they took him to pieces so clinically " Out of interest have you done jury service before? The defence doesn’t need to come up with a single concrete alternative narrative. The accused is innocent until proven guilty. The burden of proof is on the prosecution and it has to be beyond all reasonable doubt. If, in all these alternative witness testimonies or alternate theories as to the cause of death of Floyd, there’s even a grain of sand sized doubt, they can’t return a guilty verdict. Or shouldn’t at least. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"I am confused by what the defence is trying to do... yesterday they put their own use of force expert on the stand who was so ridiculous he got absolutely shredded by the prosecutors.... now they have a pathologist on the stand saying it was carbon monoxide poisoning that played a part because they laid him down next to the exhaust pipe.... It’s like they are throwing shit at a wall and seeing if anything sticks Strangely enough that's the job of the defence, IE create doubt as to the cause, we all know you made your mind up before the trial started, hopefully the jury didnt, everyone deserves a full and fair trial, your way is the route to kangaroo courts and lynch mobs. But if they are trying to create doubt then wouldn’t you stick to one line and try and run a reasonable argument through it... rather than throwing out various different theories that then make the other arguments you are using less plausible I would be really tempted to say that expert who was on the stand for the defence today was the best prosecution witness so far they took him to pieces so clinically Out of interest have you done jury service before? The defence doesn’t need to come up with a single concrete alternative narrative. The accused is innocent until proven guilty. The burden of proof is on the prosecution and it has to be beyond all reasonable doubt. If, in all these alternative witness testimonies or alternate theories as to the cause of death of Floyd, there’s even a grain of sand sized doubt, they can’t return a guilty verdict. Or shouldn’t at least. " Yes... funny enough have done jury service! Thing I learnt.. the more alternative theories you throw out, the more desperate you look and the less credibility you have. You are right... it takes 12 to convict and 12 to dismiss, only takes one to mistrial... it feels like they aren’t trying to dismiss rather than draw it into a messy prospect of a retrial then claim that should not happen because you can’t find an impartial jury | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"I am confused by what the defence is trying to do... yesterday they put their own use of force expert on the stand who was so ridiculous he got absolutely shredded by the prosecutors.... now they have a pathologist on the stand saying it was carbon monoxide poisoning that played a part because they laid him down next to the exhaust pipe.... It’s like they are throwing shit at a wall and seeing if anything sticks Strangely enough that's the job of the defence, IE create doubt as to the cause, we all know you made your mind up before the trial started, hopefully the jury didnt, everyone deserves a full and fair trial, your way is the route to kangaroo courts and lynch mobs. But if they are trying to create doubt then wouldn’t you stick to one line and try and run a reasonable argument through it... rather than throwing out various different theories that then make the other arguments you are using less plausible I would be really tempted to say that expert who was on the stand for the defence today was the best prosecution witness so far they took him to pieces so clinically Out of interest have you done jury service before? The defence doesn’t need to come up with a single concrete alternative narrative. The accused is innocent until proven guilty. The burden of proof is on the prosecution and it has to be beyond all reasonable doubt. If, in all these alternative witness testimonies or alternate theories as to the cause of death of Floyd, there’s even a grain of sand sized doubt, they can’t return a guilty verdict. Or shouldn’t at least. Yes... funny enough have done jury service! Thing I learnt.. the more alternative theories you throw out, the more desperate you look and the less credibility you have. You are right... it takes 12 to convict and 12 to dismiss, only takes one to mistrial... it feels like they aren’t trying to dismiss rather than draw it into a messy prospect of a retrial then claim that should not happen because you can’t find an impartial jury " As scummy as that would be it isn’t in the realms of impossibility. Legally it’s a sound strategy. Morally it’s bankrupt. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Chauvin pleads the 5th then. No surprises but I don’t blame him. " As much as you want to know what his state of mind was.. there is too much testimony out there that would contradict anything he would say... the prosecution would have ripped a new one out of him This trial could be over by next Tuesday | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"I am confused by what the defence is trying to do... yesterday they put their own use of force expert on the stand who was so ridiculous he got absolutely shredded by the prosecutors.... now they have a pathologist on the stand saying it was carbon monoxide poisoning that played a part because they laid him down next to the exhaust pipe.... It’s like they are throwing shit at a wall and seeing if anything sticks Strangely enough that's the job of the defence, IE create doubt as to the cause, we all know you made your mind up before the trial started, hopefully the jury didnt, everyone deserves a full and fair trial, your way is the route to kangaroo courts and lynch mobs. But if they are trying to create doubt then wouldn’t you stick to one line and try and run a reasonable argument through it... rather than throwing out various different theories that then make the other arguments you are using less plausible I would be really tempted to say that expert who was on the stand for the defence today was the best prosecution witness so far they took him to pieces so clinically Out of interest have you done jury service before? The defence doesn’t need to come up with a single concrete alternative narrative. The accused is innocent until proven guilty. The burden of proof is on the prosecution and it has to be beyond all reasonable doubt. If, in all these alternative witness testimonies or alternate theories as to the cause of death of Floyd, there’s even a grain of sand sized doubt, they can’t return a guilty verdict. Or shouldn’t at least. Yes... funny enough have done jury service! Thing I learnt.. the more alternative theories you throw out, the more desperate you look and the less credibility you have. You are right... it takes 12 to convict and 12 to dismiss, only takes one to mistrial... it feels like they aren’t trying to dismiss rather than draw it into a messy prospect of a retrial then claim that should not happen because you can’t find an impartial jury " It would be difficult to find an impartial jury, you certainly found him guilty before it began as have several others, is he guilty in my mind ? I have no idea as I havent seen any of it, however at least he would get a fair trial if I was on the jury. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"so now the Chicago police are killing children " Oh noes, will we see the riots and looting? Probably not, but there is always a chance to get a brand new TV for free (only if you are Antifa or BLM) | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"so now the Chicago police are killing children " What about the over 40 children killed last year no one seems to care about from gun violence in chicago. It's a deadly city. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"A child at 2:00 in the morning in a dark alley doing something with a 21 year old known drug trafficker while armed with a 9mm pistol. Where the F are the parents? Cop had to be there at 2:00 in the morning. A 13 year old kid did not." All no doubt are pertinent questions but that the kid had his hands up and was shot and had ditched the weapon isn't going to go down well.. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"so now the Chicago police are killing children What about the over 40 children killed last year no one seems to care about from gun violence in chicago. It's a deadly city." Just ignore him. He does this a lot. Dips into a thread and says something highly emotional and over the top to provoke a reaction, then disappears again. Like you say keep the thread on topic. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"I actually heard a commentator say live on TV it's better to sacrifice Chauvin even if he were innocent or reasonable doubt was evident to prevent civil unrest. Unfucking believable. " Think you may be talking about the Democrat(I think) saying Chauvin shouldn't have a trial at all because of the original video evidence Which is extremely worrying | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"I actually heard a commentator say live on TV it's better to sacrifice Chauvin even if he were innocent or reasonable doubt was evident to prevent civil unrest. Unfucking believable. Think you may be talking about the Democrat(I think) saying Chauvin shouldn't have a trial at all because of the original video evidence Which is extremely worrying " Just read this thread plenty think the same, mob rule and lynch mobs a short step away | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"I actually heard a commentator say live on TV it's better to sacrifice Chauvin even if he were innocent or reasonable doubt was evident to prevent civil unrest. Unfucking believable. Think you may be talking about the Democrat(I think) saying Chauvin shouldn't have a trial at all because of the original video evidence Which is extremely worrying Just read this thread plenty think the same, mob rule and lynch mobs a short step away" Then they wonder why violence is on the uptick. No rule of law anymore. Chauvins trial no matter what charges he gets won't be good enough. My personal opinion. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"It’s not that there is no rule of law... it’s that police seem to get deference and have the perception of being above the law.... For example... do you think we would even be having a trial without the advent of the mobile phone...." So is it racism, being above the law, lack of training or something else? You brought up this being above the law, then in reality law abiding citizens dont really think that way? Maybe stick to the racism idea | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"It’s not that there is no rule of law... it’s that police seem to get deference and have the perception of being above the law.... For example... do you think we would even be having a trial without the advent of the mobile phone...." Yes I would to many witnesses. Was the jacob blake shooting justified even with the advent of mobile phones ? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"It’s not that there is no rule of law... it’s that police seem to get deference and have the perception of being above the law.... For example... do you think we would even be having a trial without the advent of the mobile phone.... Yes I would to many witnesses. Was the jacob blake shooting justified even with the advent of mobile phones ? " Me personally... I don’t think shooting anyone in the back 7 times from point blank range is ever justified... also whilst you point out the policeman has gone back to work, Jacob Blake has not been charged with anything relating to the incident either! Remember from what all the witnesses said he was not the one involved in the incident, he was the one who was calming it all down | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Although he was acting on the advice of his lawyers, I strongly suspect that Derek Chauvin made a crucial tactical error by not giving evidence on his own behalf. He would have been able to build on the expert evidence that had been called on his behalf; but then the video evidence is overwhelmingly damning. The manner in which Officer Chauvin tossed the lifeless body of Mr. Floyd onto the bodyboard was truly shocking; it came as no surprise to me that there had been a string of previous complaints against him." Too much to lose and nothing really to gain.. he can’t say he was following guidelines because the police have already testified that he didn’t, can’t use that he felt threatened because he never called for backup, can’t say that he didn’t know where his knee was because you can hear floyd saying he can’t breathe.... The prosecution would have torn him apart in cross examination and on rebuttal | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"It’s not that there is no rule of law... it’s that police seem to get deference and have the perception of being above the law.... For example... do you think we would even be having a trial without the advent of the mobile phone.... Yes I would to many witnesses. Was the jacob blake shooting justified even with the advent of mobile phones ? Me personally... I don’t think shooting anyone in the back 7 times from point blank range is ever justified... also whilst you point out the policeman has gone back to work, Jacob Blake has not been charged with anything relating to the incident either! Remember from what all the witnesses said he was not the one involved in the incident, he was the one who was calming it all down " Because you have never done that Job and I doubt you have in reality ever watched any body cam footage. That range is actually the most dangerous range for someone to be near an officer People have a habit of not going doing after one round due to multiple reasons. The only time somone goes down instantly is certain parts of the spine and head. Dont walk away from an officer trying to arrest you and go to your car, its pretty fucking simple. He either could of had a weapon in the car or used the car itself as one | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Although he was acting on the advice of his lawyers, I strongly suspect that Derek Chauvin made a crucial tactical error by not giving evidence on his own behalf. He would have been able to build on the expert evidence that had been called on his behalf; but then the video evidence is overwhelmingly damning. The manner in which Officer Chauvin tossed the lifeless body of Mr. Floyd onto the bodyboard was truly shocking; it came as no surprise to me that there had been a string of previous complaints against him. Too much to lose and nothing really to gain.. he can’t say he was following guidelines because the police have already testified that he didn’t, can’t use that he felt threatened because he never called for backup, can’t say that he didn’t know where his knee was because you can hear floyd saying he can’t breathe.... The prosecution would have torn him apart in cross examination and on rebuttal " He is going to be convicted no doubt in my mind. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"It’s not that there is no rule of law... it’s that police seem to get deference and have the perception of being above the law.... For example... do you think we would even be having a trial without the advent of the mobile phone.... Yes I would to many witnesses. Was the jacob blake shooting justified even with the advent of mobile phones ? Me personally... I don’t think shooting anyone in the back 7 times from point blank range is ever justified... also whilst you point out the policeman has gone back to work, Jacob Blake has not been charged with anything relating to the incident either! Remember from what all the witnesses said he was not the one involved in the incident, he was the one who was calming it all down " So we had kenosha burned down. 2 killed 1 wounded for a event that both sides are presumed innocent of. So the mob rule was right. So if the mob in chauvins case do not get what the presume is justice and riots break out it's ok because it's mob rule. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"It’s not that there is no rule of law... it’s that police seem to get deference and have the perception of being above the law.... For example... do you think we would even be having a trial without the advent of the mobile phone.... Yes I would to many witnesses. Was the jacob blake shooting justified even with the advent of mobile phones ? Me personally... I don’t think shooting anyone in the back 7 times from point blank range is ever justified... also whilst you point out the policeman has gone back to work, Jacob Blake has not been charged with anything relating to the incident either! Remember from what all the witnesses said he was not the one involved in the incident, he was the one who was calming it all down Because you have never done that Job and I doubt you have in reality ever watched any body cam footage. That range is actually the most dangerous range for someone to be near an officer People have a habit of not going doing after one round due to multiple reasons. The only time somone goes down instantly is certain parts of the spine and head. Dont walk away from an officer trying to arrest you and go to your car, its pretty fucking simple. He either could of had a weapon in the car or used the car itself as one " I can see the thinking behind this. Wolf and I spoke about it a lot at the time. He said he would’ve shot him too in those circumstances. You don’t really have a choice at that range except to switch the subject off. Look at the Charles de Menzes shooting. Multiple rounds to the head to switch off a suspect. Anyone who says ‘7 rounds is too many’ hasn’t been trained in policing with a firearm is our take on it. And ultimately it still lead to the same outcome - mass violence and disorder. Donut Operator is the best source for laymen to get an idea of how armed police are trained. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"It’s not that there is no rule of law... it’s that police seem to get deference and have the perception of being above the law.... For example... do you think we would even be having a trial without the advent of the mobile phone.... Yes I would to many witnesses. Was the jacob blake shooting justified even with the advent of mobile phones ? Me personally... I don’t think shooting anyone in the back 7 times from point blank range is ever justified... also whilst you point out the policeman has gone back to work, Jacob Blake has not been charged with anything relating to the incident either! Remember from what all the witnesses said he was not the one involved in the incident, he was the one who was calming it all down Because you have never done that Job and I doubt you have in reality ever watched any body cam footage. That range is actually the most dangerous range for someone to be near an officer People have a habit of not going doing after one round due to multiple reasons. The only time somone goes down instantly is certain parts of the spine and head. Dont walk away from an officer trying to arrest you and go to your car, its pretty fucking simple. He either could of had a weapon in the car or used the car itself as one I can see the thinking behind this. Wolf and I spoke about it a lot at the time. He said he would’ve shot him too in those circumstances. You don’t really have a choice at that range except to switch the subject off. Look at the Charles de Menzes shooting. Multiple rounds to the head to switch off a suspect. Anyone who says ‘7 rounds is too many’ hasn’t been trained in policing with a firearm is our take on it. And ultimately it still lead to the same outcome - mass violence and disorder. Donut Operator is the best source for laymen to get an idea of how armed police are trained. " Minneapolis city council just voted not to allow police to use gas and non lethal during protests. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| back to top |  |
