Chauvin conviction for death of George Floyd

[cr47t]

https://www.startribune.com/derek-chauvin-cuffed-after-murder-manslaughter-convictions-in-death-of-george-floyd/600047825/

discuss, though i doubt anyone here will argue innocence

EDIT: can a mod move this to debates please? i accidentally put it in general

[Phantom Roxas]

I know that a lot of people were nervous that Chauvin would be acquitted, but I'm happy he was found guilty. His reaction shows that he did not expect he would actually have to face consequences, but I have no sympathy for him. He's a murderer, and deserved this verdict. Accountability is good.

[Horu]

The real truth is his conviction shows weakness in the US government by heeding the threats of terrorists.

The proper charge is negligent/involunteery manslaughter.

[Phantom Roxas]

There it is. I was wondering how long it would take to redirect the blame away from Chauvin.

No, terrorists did not make threats that "the government" responded to. The jury was sequestered specifically to avoid any risk of outside influence. If anything, that just put pressure on them to reach a verdict more quickly, but that's hardly going to make one verdict more likely than the other. No amount of labeling people terrorists for the sake of using them as scapegoats will salvage a narrative that doesn't even apply here. The only reason to pretend that it was a "weakness" to convict Derek Chauvin is if someone wanted to invalidate legitimate grievances that a man was murdered. It shows that someone doesn't actually care whether or not Chauvin committed murder, so much as not wanting other people to be vindicated by his conviction. You really should not base the merits of a verdict on how you imagine people you dislike could have reacted.

A jury of his peers formally decided his guilt, not the US government or what you imagine were threats from so-called "terrorists".

https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/ag-garland-announce-federal-probe-policing-practices-minneapolis/story?id=77213763

As for what the government is actually doing, they are investigating whether there is a pattern of excessive force and discrimination in the Minneapolis Police Department.

[The Nyx Avatar]

1 hour ago, Horu said:

The real truth is his conviction shows weakness in the US government by heeding the threats of terrorists.

Cease this now. 

I know you did not have that second sentence there initially.

[Rayfield Lumina]

I have to say, I felt relieved and satisfied when I heard the verdict, as I believe any sensible person should. As a foreigner, not too knowledgeable of US political affairs, I'd rather not mix in government, imaginary or real terrorists, etc. What I'm seeing here is simply the conviction of a person who, beyond all possible refutation, with a hand in a pocket, a cold stare at the witnesses and deaf ears to a plea, committed a cruel murder, and is now paying for it. I'm not as optimistic to believe this will be a cornerstone for a new era in which human rights will be respected regardless of race, but hopefully this case has the visibility that can cause a change for good, as small it can be.

[Horu]

5 hours ago, The Nyx Avatar said:

Cease this now. 

I know you did not have that second sentence there initially.

Nyx I did edit the post because even with evidence presented, the charge is manslaughter. He had Floyd cuffed, if I'm not mistaken. But that in part makes Floyd's safety his responsibility. So if at any point while Floyd was cuffed and unable to breathe, he should've directed his partner and the other two officers to stand guard while he tended to Floyd. That moment of hesitation is what killed Floyd.

 

I wasn't disagreeing with Roxas in the slightest. I was pointing out that it shows weakness in the system when it adheres to threats of terrorism. Sorry if you took it that I was redirecting blame, Roxas. I was making the point that the trial was rushed due to threats from BLM. Ultimately a rushed decision. Either way, he will serve the same amount of time. Of course, this means he can file for a mistrial.

[The Nyx Avatar]

28 minutes ago, Horu said:

Nyx I did edit the post because even with evidence presented, the charge is manslaughter. He had Floyd cuffed, if I'm not mistaken. But that in part makes Floyd's safety his responsibility. So if at any point while Floyd was cuffed and unable to breathe, he should've directed his partner and the other two officers to stand guard while he tended to Floyd. That moment of hesitation is what killed Floyd.

 

I wasn't disagreeing with Roxas in the slightest. I was pointing out that it shows weakness in the system when it adheres to threats of terrorism. Sorry if you took it that I was redirecting blame, Roxas. I was making the point that the trial was rushed due to threats from BLM. Ultimately a rushed decision. Either way, he will serve the same amount of time. Of course, this means he can file for a mistrial.

I'm not saying you were doing anything bad to Roxsas. My point is that when you initially posted, you did so just to throw shade at an outside party. Don't use these threads as vehicles for stuff like this.

Post in a respectful manner.

[LordCowCowCowCowCowCowCowCow]

1 hour ago, Horu said:

I was making the point that the trial was rushed due to threats from BLM. Ultimately a rushed decision.

Out of curiosity how long do you think the trial should have lasted?

[Phantom Roxas]

1 hour ago, Horu said:

Nyx I did edit the post because even with evidence presented, the charge is manslaughter. He had Floyd cuffed, if I'm not mistaken. But that in part makes Floyd's safety his responsibility. So if at any point while Floyd was cuffed and unable to breathe, he should've directed his partner and the other two officers to stand guard while he tended to Floyd. That moment of hesitation is what killed Floyd.

 

I wasn't disagreeing with Roxas in the slightest. I was pointing out that it shows weakness in the system when it adheres to threats of terrorism. Sorry if you took it that I was redirecting blame, Roxas. I was making the point that the trial was rushed due to threats from BLM. Ultimately a rushed decision. Either way, he will serve the same amount of time. Of course, this means he can file for a mistrial.

Holding him down for nearly nine minutes isn't a "moment" of hesitation. Floyd repeatedly expressed that he couldn't breathe, but Chauvin continued. The video proved to the court that he did not hesitate.

When you are blaming the conviction on BLM, that is exactly what it means to redirect blame. As Nyx said, you were just throwing shade at BLM. You spent your first post in this thread trying to demonize BLM again, and that is a diversion that does not need to happen as often as it does in these threads.

He was found guilty of "second-degree unintentional murder, third-degree murder and second-degree manslaughter", which seem to be exactly the charges you believe he should have been charged with in the first place, so why fuss about what the "proper" charge should have been?

[Horu]

The downside is I know he's likely going to hit that mistrial due to threats made by BLM. They created a hole for this guy and I don't like it.

[LordCowCowCowCowCowCowCowCow]

4 minutes ago, Horu said:

The downside is I know he's likely going to hit that mistrial due to threats made by BLM. They created a hole for this guy and I don't like it.

 

34 minutes ago, God Emperor Cow said:

Out of curiosity how long do you think the trial should have lasted?

 

[Horu]

Sorry for ignoring you, Cow. I expected it to at least be the same as any other murder trial.

[Ryusei the Morning Star]

13 hours ago, The Nyx Avatar said:

Cease this now. 

I know you did not have that second sentence there initially.

Is Horu not allowed to think the Jurors caved to domestic terrorists and rioters?  Convict or we burn down Minneapolis was a pretty implicit threat from the rioters. A congresswoman flew to MN and said if the verdict came out "wrong" that they should "get more confrontational" (note this is up from daily riots)

I don't think he was innocent however. Officer Chauvin was guilty of 2nd Degree Manslaughter, 3rd Murder was a coin toss, 2nd Murder was weak jurors in the face of mob rule. IMO

If I was on the jury, I'd have convicted him on the first two counts. Mr. Floyd was begging to breath (likely tips the scale on 3rd regardless of Mr. Floyd's toxicology) as the criteria for 3rd Murder is "without intent to effect the death of any person, causes the death of another by perpetrating an act eminently dangerous to others"

I expect a police officer to know that not being able to breath is a dangerous act.

 

Regardless, even if all the charges stick on appeal, unintentional 2nd Murder + the other two nets you 8-12 years. He'll be out eventually. 

[Horu]

Even with the evidence in his favor, he still would've gotten the manslaughter charge. He had 3 other officers assisting him. Floyd was his responsibility. He allowed Floyd to die because he was in a "hostile environment". So regardless of which side you choose, the guy is serving a minimum of 10 years. At least I'm hoping this is the case.

 

Also, Nyx, is there something wrong with suggesting a weak jury? Do you not remember the Ted Bundy situation where they needed a jury of men because as long as Ted was able to flirt with the female jurors, they wouldn't be able to convict him. So if something as simple as flirting with a juror can prevent a decision from being made, then would it not make sense that a jury would be willing to convict on any charges the judge spit out simply to meet terrorists demands and prevent riots?

I simply said that those threats gave the guy a chance to petition for a mistrial because he can simply say the jury was swayed by said threats. And once that conviction is thrown out the window, double jeopardy prevents him from being convicted of Floyd's murder.

Now do you understand the problem I have with BLM making threats? Their threats gave him an out. So explain why that shouldn't bother me.

[Ryusei the Morning Star]

Just now, Horu said:

Even with the evidence in his favor, he still would've gotten the manslaughter charge. He had 3 other officers assisting him. Floyd was his responsibility. He allowed Floyd to die because he was in a "hostile environment". So regardless of which side you choose, the guy is serving a minimum of 10 years. At least I'm hoping this is the case.

 

Also, Nyx, is there something wrong with suggesting a weak jury? Do you not remember the Ted Bundy situation where they needed a jury of men because as long as Ted was able to flirt with the female jurors, they wouldn't be able to convict him. So if something as simple as flirting with a juror can prevent a decision from being made, then would it not make sense that a jury would be willing to convict on any charges the judge spit out simply to meet terrorists demands and prevent riots?

I simply said that those threats gave the guy a chance to petition for a mistrial because he can simply say the jury was swayed by said threats. And once that conviction is thrown out the window, double jeopardy prevents him from being convicted of Floyd's murder.

Now do you understand the problem I have with BLM making threats? Their threats gave him an out. So explain why that shouldn't bother me.

3rd Manslaughter doesn't carry nearly that long of a sentence, you can actually just opt for a 20K fine

he's looking at 8-12 years max if all else sticks

[Horu]

1 minute ago, Ryusei the Morning Star said:

3rd Manslaughter doesn't carry nearly that long of a sentence, you can actually just opt for a 20K fine

he's looking at 8-12 years max if all else sticks

That's if the mistrial doesn't stick.

[Ryusei the Morning Star]

Just now, Horu said:

That's if the mistrial doesn't stick.

I highly doubt a mistrial will get all 3 charges tossed. But who knows. 

[Horu]

2 minutes ago, Ryusei the Morning Star said:

I highly doubt a mistrial will get all 3 charges tossed. But who knows. 

That is part of the problem. If they held 3 separate trials for him, they could have charged him for each individual crime. But since all 3 convictions happened during the same trial, all 3 will be tossed out.

[Phantom Roxas]

Sounds more like you guys aren't actually doing anything to show how BLM's alleged "threats" influenced the jury, and you're just complaining about them for the sake of complaining.

[Horu]

https://news.yahoo.com/ted-cruz-says-bidens-comments-122212699.html

 

Another reason for the mistrial to stick.

https://www.newsweek.com/tucker-carlson-says-derek-chauvin-verdict-taught-blm-that-violence-works-1585582

[cr47t]

horu, why are you so insistent on talking blame about just BLM and not so much about chauvin himself, esp. when BLM wasn't at all an original aspect of this thread?

 

[Phantom Roxas]

Ted Cruz, Tucker Carlson, and Newsweek? They spread propaganda for a living, so they are not useful for proving your own agenda against BLM.

[Horu]

I have no agenda. I'm pointing out why this guy can be granted a mistrial. Roxas, BLM threatened to riot and burn down the town if he wasn't convicted. That is terrorism. Them convicting shows that the jury was swayed by those threats. The situation that Cruz pointed out with Biden is another story and while it is a viable out for Chauvin, I don't see him using that to his advantage. Although, I'm fairly confident that Biden spoke while court was in session and none of the Jurors were able to watch his speech. That being said, if this guy gets a mistrial and walks, the fault will be on BLM.

[Phantom Roxas]

8 minutes ago, Horu said:

BLM threatened to riot and burn down the town if he wasn't convicted.

Source(s): Dude trust me

It seems that you assumed how protesters would react if Chauvin's verdict was not guilty, and you confused your assumptions with pretending that people actually did make threats of doing that.

The jury was sequestered, and there is no indication that they were swayed by any threats. You seem unwilling to consider that the jury was persuaded by the facts presented at the trial and found him guilty according to the evidence, regardless of what other people wanted. We get it, you hate Black Lives Matter, but you're constructing your beliefs and feelings over wanting them to be evil, then needing this case to make them evil no matter what. Since the jury independently reaching a verdict doesn't support your narrative, you need to blame BLM for their verdict as well.

Yes, Biden spoke while the jurors were sequestered. So congratulations, you're still making the case that they were not swayed. If you mean that they were swayed by BLM but not Biden, you still haven't actually established how the former happened. You claim that threats were made, but still haven't actually been able to cite any. If you have any sources, then I am asking you to present them here and now, just so you don't play some game around purposefully holding back.