Why are you acting like cops get shot at every day? They arent even in the top 10 most dangerous jobs. We don't let garbage men murder people who illegally drive around garbage trucks. Their job is far more dangerous and probably more vital to our way of life.

Cops are about 4x more likely to be killed or injured than average. Yeah its a more dangerous job, but its not so dangerous that we need to let them execute children.

This post was edited by NetflixAdaptationWidow on Dec 24 2021 04:42am

Stop it dude lol

Yesterday

A biased jury can ignore the evidence in a case and decide it on prejudice and emotion and politics. Dred Scott had a jury of his peers three times, and by the time it reached the supreme court there was no dispute over the facts of the case. And nobody doubted that Chauvin would be convicted, that is not the issue here. I don't doubt the outcomes of tribunals in the democratic people's republic of korea either. As I said repeatedly, they would have convicted him of regicide and sodomy and debasing currency if those charges were on the docket. Where did you ever get the idea that it was somehow a close call? In this climate? With open terroristic threats, with congresswomen demanding blood, with multiple witnesses being intimidated and directly threatened into changing their testimony, with literal mobs burning down the city?

Its not a new concept. Its happened throughout American history, its happened in the enlightenment, medieval times, roman, greek, ancient. We decry the barbarity of witch trials, the trial of thomas more or the corpse synod or the slave insurrection conspiracy or the dreyfuss affair. But seems to me the exact same methods and mentality are present today, just dressed up in different trappings of legitimacy, pretensions of civil liberties. Plenty of times that mobs have burned down the city demanding their blood sacrifice. Were there apologists then, contemporaries to say "well, the system works"?

But again, you really don't have any argument with the facts in the case do you? Just going to keep repeating that you bellyfeel it was 'always going to happen' and was 'undeniable'. Anyone who doesn't agree with the conclusions you can't support, must be untruthful.

This post was edited by Goomshill on Dec 24 2021 04:58am

Yeah, in a country of 350m that happens.

Doesn't justify executing people who are in active compliance or literal children.

So because this guy got shot by an armed robber he should be allowed to execute children?
I thought you people were "pro life" and here you are advocating murdering children so paranoid betas who are too afraid to do their job can feel a bit safer..

Nah, just people actively manipulating facts for an indefensible argument.

You're plenty smart, but you do this on literally every topic. Actively manipulate the data to build a narrative that can't be supported by the full picture. It's why your leaving out literally the entire argument in favor of prosecution and only presenting one side. Because if you allowed the full picture your narrative would fall apart. Like how there were experts on both sides and how the guy who trained Chauvin testified he was in the wrong to use that hold in that scenario and literally everything else you dont want to acknowledge.

This post was edited by NetflixAdaptationWidow on Dec 24 2021 05:05am

Whether he was right or wrong to use that particular hold- a hold that was listed in the police training manuals of the time- doesn't change the critical matter at the heart of the case, whether Chauvin caused Floyd's death or not. Its an irrelevancy. Either Chauvin caused Floyd's death, or he's innocent of the murder and manslaughter charges. Its the most basic requirement of a conviction, proximate causation. If Chauvin walked up to a hobo on a freezing street and shot him in the head with a pistol at point blank range, and the medical examiner found the hobo had actually frozen to death the previous night, he couldn't be convicted of murder (but a slam dunk on attempted murder). Either you cause the death or you don't. It doesn't matter if it looks bad or wasn't proper or gives you an emotional response. When all the physical evidence says George Floyd died of a drug overdose and Chauvin's knee wasn't contributing in any substantial way, then the state not only falls short of the 'beyond a reasonable doubt' standard, but Chauvin actually proves his innocence to within a 'preponderance of evidence' standard. Trying to dance around every piece of contrary evidence had them tied up into ridiculous knots with all the wild theories. And that's how we wind up with this endpoint where the state's winning argument involves George Floyd developing a superhuman tolerance to Fentanyl while Chauvin expertly placed his knee on Floyd's neck in just such a sweet spot that Floyd could still talk even with his airways occluded, not leaving a mark despite 9 minutes of a man's full weight on a small cross section crushing him to death.

I like the side that has a consistent and rational explanation for every detail, not the one doing the moon landing denial routine

What a poor attempt my dude, the reply @thor was to show that cops get frequently shot at and by what kind of people. But you know that so your petty attempt is just a waste of space on this page lol




It happens?? Just GTFO thor lol

"executing people and children" like nazis you forgot to add xDDD

LOL you're so frikkin pathetic it's unreal at this point. PATHETIC

Your "already dead homeless guy you shoot" analogy fails because WE KNOW FLOYD WAS STILL ALIVE. If you walk up to a homeless guy who's in the process of freezing to death and you shoot him. You are basically saying "He didn't die from the gun shot, he would have easily survived that gunshot. He died from hypothermia. You need some conspiracy where he's magically immune to freezing temperatures to blame Chauvin". Yeah, the gun shot is more extreme, but that's the jist of it.

The standard for murder or manslaughter is not "you were the one single causative agent in the death". Chauvin only needed to be one part of the equation in Floyd dieing the moment he did. If Floyd would have lasted even a second longer without the knee on his neck then Chauvin can be convicted for Floyd's death. That is the standard to say Chauvin killed him. Only that he's a contributory factor at the moment of death.

If Chauvin had gotten up, adminstered aid, and otherwise broken the chain of causality that lead to Floyd's death, he likely would have gotten off. But he didn't. He was still leaning on him when Floyd died, so the chain is unbroken and the jury merely needs to see that Chauvin was part of the cause at that moment. From there, it's just a matter of degree.

This post was edited by NetflixAdaptationWidow on Dec 24 2021 05:37am

Also in case anyone missed it, the state is seeking an upwards departure to throw the book at Potter. In Minnesota, 70% of felony convictions and somewhere around 90+% of first-time offenders get a downward departure or presumptive stayed sentence from the point system, though that caps out below manslaughter which still falls into the 25%+ of discretionary departures. Meanwhile only 0.2% of cases a year get upward departures, reserved for the most heinous and recidivist criminals. If you compare this pre/post 2015 its a bit misleading because before that, they included time-served plea deals with upward departures as aggravated sentences even though it had no extra prison time, but since then they've tracked upward departures and its been incredibly rare.

Naturally, they gave Chauvin one of those rare upward departures and are now ready to take a swing at Potter. She'll be treated as the most vile, loathsome beast to ever terrorize Brooklyn Park