Taking about nerd coins.

I believe you.

The prosecution failed to make that case, unfortunately. Even the prosecution's own witnesses testified AGAINST those points.

This is part of the problem in the difference between the full view of what has happened in the trial, vs pundit viewpoints. Pundits speak to their bias, watching the witness testimony and cross examination yourself gives a more well-rounded view.

Were it not for the highly destructive ramifications of such a verdict, aka if this were any non-politicized case, I would fully expect a complete acquittal.

We won't know that until the jury decides...

IMO you're hedging. He didn't have a strong case against manslaughter, and only had a marginal case against murder. Police officers don't offer to plead guilty to manslaughter when they have a strong case.

They're probably going to come back with some kind of manslaughter at least, and I think you know that, and so you're going to blame it on the threat of rioting instead of the strength of the case.

This post was edited by Thor123422 on Apr 19 2021 09:12pm

The burden is not on the defense to prove innocence. The burden is on the prosecution to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt.

The defense cast extreme doubt, and the prosecution failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt. I'm not "hedging" anything whatsoever. I'm providing my informed opinion based on the testimony and cross examination of the witnesses.

I don't care one way or another what the verdict is. I'm not concerned about "what team wins" in this case. Merely following the case itself, and the associated riots.

Don't lie. You love Chauvin and what he stands for. It wouldn't surprise me if you called Floyd the n-word amongst friends.

You're projecting.

Only racist people say such things. You shouldn’t let it show.

Well, a lot of people on PaRD are racist if you haven't noticed.



Not at all! I just know where you stand based on your post history. It's an astute analysis on my part.