How can Derek Chauvin expect a fair trial in Minneapolis?

[southernhybrid]

I would be defending my use of deadly force against the cop today, had I been there, now that I have seen more footage of the event that included the audio of MANY people crowded around, all yelling at the cop to get off the guy's neck ("he's not moving", "he's not breathing", "you're killing him"... all yelled over and over).
The Asian cop that was controlling the crowd would have been disabled, and the pig on the guys neck would be dead right now. and I would be in jail trying to get out on the justification of deadly force to prevent a murder.
What I probably would not have thought to do at the moment, but what anyone there should have done, is call 911 and scream into the phone, "MULTPLE COPS DOWN / NONRESPONSIVE / AMBULANCE NEEDED at xxxx IMMEDIATELY - CODE 3" and just hang up the phone. That would have put paramedics on scene possible soon enough to stop the murder.

I have only watched the trial on and off, but somebody actually did call 911 on the cops, while Chauvin was in the act of murdering Floyd. And, since I'm not on the jury, it's perfectly okay that I've already made up my mind. I've seen and heard enough to know that George Floyd was murdered, when he should have probably only received a citation and a court date. The police often are the real criminals in so many of these cases, but this is one of the worst in recent memory, imo. It didn't have to end the way it did.

Not that anyone asked, but I read about the life of Floyd last week. He was far from perfect, had an extremely difficult childhood in a rough housing project in Houston, spent five years in prison for committing a crime where he threatened a woman, but that at least didn't result in the death or injury of anyone, and he tried several times to get his life in order.

Still, people who knew him, loved him. Most of the women who knew him said that he was very protective of them. He was often referred to as a gentle giant. Yet, some of the posters here have done their best to dehumanize him. He was the victim of his environment, an environment that eventually lead to his untimely murder by a person who was hired to serve and protect the public. Who was Chauvin protecting when he killed Floyd?

 

[LoAmmo]

Yahbut
...they didn't move the trial out of Los Angeles County--they tried him right there where the crime occurred. Where all the locals (and beyond) had had ample time to hear and see many details related to the case. um, How could Mr. Simpson expect a fair trial under those circumstances?

Playing devil's advocate here, mind you.

Are you suggesting that non-locals would have heard LESS details regarding the case? That's not how TV works and the trial didn't take place in the 1700s, so people didn't get their information about it by chatting with the Sheriff's cousin Frank over at the saloon or something - they watched the coverage on television. He was acquitted because his lawyers were able to introduce sufficient reasonable doubt and the prosecutors were unable to overcome that reasonable doubt. I don't see how a change of venue would have impacted anything.

Like Gospel, I may have been too subtle. To be fair, I did specify that I was playing devil's advocate here.

But, yes, quite right--non-locals in the OJ case, just like those in the Chauvin case, were as up to speed on relevant details as any local.

And OJ nontheless got a "fair trial" in Los Angeles County, even though, to hear Derec tell it, it's prejudicial to hold such high-profile cases locally.
IF it is "unfair" to try Chauvin in Milwaukee, it was "unfair" to try OJ in Los Angeles. And yet.

Another similarity worth considering is that both sets of jurors were trapped in a sort of "damned if you do, damned if you don't" situation.
The pressure that Chauvin's jurors (are alleged to) feel to exonerate him based on fears of unleashing riots upon acquittal was mirrored by a sentiment that OJ's jury might trigger a backlash if they let him off "just because he was black/just because he was a rich and famous celebrity."
It didn't come to pass, on any large scale, but...I remember it being a concern voiced by the trial's observers.

I felt at the time that the OJ verdict was a "revenge" ruling, meant to in some small way offset or pay back all of the perceived times a white guy killed a black person and walked. I think the jury intended to deliver a message of "good for the goose, good for the gander." But the fact that OJ didn't get the verdict I thought he deserved doesn't change my opinion that the trial was still a "fair" one, in that, as several posters have pointed out, "fair" doesn't mean "an outcome you agree with" or even "an equal chance of acquittal or conviction."

A fair trial can still infuriate observers of it. OJ's did me, and I suspect that Chauvin's likely will Derec.

 

[ZiprHead]

I would be defending my use of deadly force against the cop today, had I been there, now that I have seen more footage of the event that included the audio of MANY people crowded around, all yelling at the cop to get off the guy's neck ("he's not moving", "he's not breathing", "you're killing him"... all yelled over and over).
The Asian cop that was controlling the crowd would have been disabled, and the pig on the guys neck would be dead right now. and I would be in jail trying to get out on the justification of deadly force to prevent a murder.
What I probably would not have thought to do at the moment, but what anyone there should have done, is call 911 and scream into the phone, "MULTPLE COPS DOWN / NONRESPONSIVE / AMBULANCE NEEDED at xxxx IMMEDIATELY - CODE 3" and just hang up the phone. That would have put paramedics on scene possible soon enough to stop the murder.

One of the bystanders actually called the cops on the cops.

 

[ZiprHead]

The E.D. Dr. that called Floyd's death testified today that he believed Floyd to have been asphyxiated.

 

[Gospel]

The E.D. Dr. that called Floyd's death testified today that he believed Floyd to have been asphyxiated.

The credibility of that doctor depends on whether or not he's brown, white or a liberal.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

I would be defending my use of deadly force against the cop today, had I been there, now that I have seen more footage of the event that included the audio of MANY people crowded around, all yelling at the cop to get off the guy's neck ("he's not moving", "he's not breathing", "you're killing him"... all yelled over and over).
The Asian cop that was controlling the crowd would have been disabled, and the pig on the guys neck would be dead right now. and I would be in jail trying to get out on the justification of deadly force to prevent a murder.
What I probably would not have thought to do at the moment, but what anyone there should have done, is call 911 and scream into the phone, "MULTPLE COPS DOWN / NONRESPONSIVE / AMBULANCE NEEDED at xxxx IMMEDIATELY - CODE 3" and just hang up the phone. That would have put paramedics on scene possible soon enough to stop the murder.

No--people aren't always telling the truth.

Off the top of my head I can think of two cases where a woman was screaming rape in which shooting her attacker was not the right response. In one case the trigger was pulled anyway--resulting in the crazy-seeming result that the shooter walked and she went to jail for manslaughter.

 

[Derec]

Still, people who knew him, loved him. Most of the women who knew him said that he was very protective of them.

Yeah, women love the bad boys. The badder, the better.

He was often referred to as a gentle giant.

Kind of like Michael Brown, who, just like Floyd, was a robber. Seems to be a pattern among these "gentle giants".

Yet, some of the posters here have done their best to dehumanize him. He was the victim of his environment,

Humanizing means acknowledging agency and freedom of choice. He made a choice to rob a woman at gunpoint, sticking his gat into her stomach. He made a choice to abuse meth and fentanyl. He made a choice to pass funny money at the corner store. His "environment" did not make him do any of these things.

How, Chauvin did engage in excessive force. But I do not think it is murder.

 

[Patooka]

Yeah, women love the bad boys. The badder, the better.

It's a complete mystery how you are still single.

 

[Gospel]

Aw, how fond you are of Chauvin. Do you think he made the choice to keep his knee on George Floyd's neck for the 4 minutes George was unresponsive? Do you think Chauvin made the choice to be in law enforcement and take on the responsibilities that come along with it (specifically being responsible for what happens to someone in his custody)?

How, George did engage in crime. But I don't think being murdered was justified.

 

[Derec]

Aw, how fond you are of Chauvin.

Not enamored of Chauvin at all. I just don't get why everybody is so enamored of George Floyd.

 

[Derec]

I felt at the time that the OJ verdict was a "revenge" ruling

I think that is exactly what it is. That is also exactly the same as what the racist lawyer Elie Mystal is demanding black jurors do.

Here’s How Black People Could Use Jury Nullification To Break The Justice System

Black people lucky enough to get on a jury could use that power to acquit any person charged with a crime against white men and white male institutions. It’s not about the race of the defendant, but if the alleged victim is a white guy, or his bank, or his position, or his authority: we could acquit. Assault? Acquit. Burglary? Acquit. Insider trading? Acquit.
Murder? … what the hell do you think is happening to black people out here? What the hell do you think we’re complaining about when your cops shoot us or choke us? Acquit. Don’t throw “murder” at me like it’s some kind of moral fault line where the risk of letting one go is too great.

This is exactly what happened in the OJ case. He was obviously guilty, yet he walked. And the black racists like Elie Mystal rejoiced.
I think what is happening with this case is OJ in reverse. Convict no matter what.

"fair" doesn't mean "an outcome you agree with" or even "an equal chance of acquittal or conviction."

This is a straw man. Nobody is saying a "fair trial" is any of these things. But holding a trial under threats of violent riots should the defendant be found not guilty cannot be fair by definition.

 

[Derec]

The E.D. Dr. that called Floyd's death testified today that he believed Floyd to have been asphyxiated.

He could have asphyxiated on the water in his lungs.

 

[Gospel]

Dr. Derec has spoken.

 

[southernhybrid]

It's so obvious that Chauvin murdered Floyd. He violated multiple police policies when for over 9 minutes, he mashed the neck of a man with his knee, who had already been restrained with handcuffs, who frequently said that he was having trouble breathing, while a small group of people looked on in horror, begging him to take his knee off of the man's neck.

Where is the humanity of a person who can look at the video of what happened to George Floyd and not feel an ounce of compassion for the victim of this horrific crime!

I've watched enough of the trial to see that the defense lawyers have no case and the prosecution has a pretty easy job, as it's more than evident that George Floyd was murdered. Will justice be served? Soon we will know.

 

[TSwizzle]

The E.D. Dr. that called Floyd's death testified today that he believed Floyd to have been asphyxiated.

He could have asphyxiated on the water in his lungs.

Apparently Floyd had "exceptionally high" levels of carbon dioxide in his system likely due to the drugs which can also affect the respiratory system.

 

[laughing dog]

Nobody is saying a "fair trial" is any of these things. But holding a trial under threats of violent riots should the defendant be found not guilty cannot be fair by definition.

You have not established there are credible threats of violence. Nor have you established that the jurors who pledged to fair and evaluate the evidence would be influenced by your alleged "threats of violent riots".

You have stated you do not believe Chauvin is guilty of murder. Your long posting history of denigrating black victims of police violence (your posts in this thread about Mr. Floyd are classic examples) and defending police misconduct against black victims
strongly suggest that the "fair does not mean an outcome you agree with" is not a straw man.

 

[Gospel]

The E.D. Dr. that called Floyd's death testified today that he believed Floyd to have been asphyxiated.

He could have asphyxiated on the water in his lungs.

Apparently Floyd had "exceptionally high" levels of carbon dioxide in his system likely due to the drugs which can also affect the respiratory system.

There you have it folks, both our resident physicians have weighed in. They are in fact so skilled at their profession we can waive the requirement to examine the body themselves.

 

[Elixir]

Apparently Floyd had "exceptionally high" levels of carbon dioxide in his system likely due to the drugs which can also affect the respiratory system.

There you have it folks, both our resident physicians have weighed in. They are in fact so skilled at their profession we can waive the requirement to examine the body themselves.

Not only that, they are able to reach levels of certitude that enable them to override the OBSERVATIONS of the people who actually conducted the autopsies! Get these gentlemen their Nobel Prizes!

 

[TSwizzle]

Apparently Floyd had "exceptionally high" levels of carbon dioxide in his system likely due to the drugs which can also affect the respiratory system.

There you have it folks, both our resident physicians have weighed in. They are in fact so skilled at their profession we can waive the requirement to examine the body themselves.

Er, no. I am only repeating the evidence given by the ER doctor that treated Floyd. This is evidence that the jury has to weigh up.

 

[Patooka]

Apparently Floyd had "exceptionally high" levels of carbon dioxide in his system likely due to the drugs which can also affect the respiratory system.

There you have it folks, both our resident physicians have weighed in. They are in fact so skilled at their profession we can waive the requirement to examine the body themselves.

Er, no. I am only repeating the evidence given by the ER doctor that treated Floyd. This is evidence that the jury has to weigh up.

I guess if you say so, it must be true. Looks to me though that you would say anything to protect your boy Chauvin.