Yep. And Floyd had a much longer neck too. And Chauvin had a skinnier knee. Ironically, if chauvin had a larger knee, it would have offset more weight to floyd's upper back and less pressure on his neck

He knows lol

He knows he isn't basing his judgement solely on testimony, because he's using Crowder's demonstration.
He knows he isn't correct in how he's interpreting the law, because he's been told a dozen times and refuses to answer the questions I am using to illustrate as much.
He knows Bitchute is mostly conspiracy garbage and that it actively pushes conspiracy stuff, because 99.9% of the content it advertises is conspiracy videos.

He just can't stand being wrong. Bob makes a kneejerk reaction, and then stays with it even when the evidence is completely overwhelming and 12 people are dogpiling on him about how obvious it is.

Most of us grew out of that when we were teenagers, but Bob never did.

This post was edited by Thor123422 on Apr 20 2021 01:09am

I mean if crowder actually did it the same way, I could see his point. But I mean FFS it's not even the same spot on the neck lmao

I posted the images, let's wait to see what he says now lol

This post was edited by IFAPTOBAALRUNS on Apr 20 2021 01:12am

The weights were nearly identical. As were the height. They weighed themselves before hand, had height included. You're attempting to pull 1 photo from each video and say, "See! Different!" 9 and a half minutes is not a pictures.



I do not "rely" on Crowder. I posted the Crowder video as an example of why the PROSECUTION would not have allowed the prone position to be used in the court room.

The problem with attempting to utilize a reenactment in the courtroom is if the defense had brought it in OR the prosecution, and the person it was being utilized on didn't die, or at the very least pass out, it would destroy the prosecution's case.

Once again, where are the injuries to the neck or lungs?

Restricting air flow doesn't require injury to the neck or lungs. Remember last time you tried to point that out, and I asked if you ever got choked out and you had to go out of your way to insist how badass you are? I do because it was cringe, but I genuinely don't know if you remember. Anyway, I've been put out several times, and not once would it have left enough of an injury to be identified on an autopsy.

Gonna blow your mind real quick. Chauvin can still be guilty of manslaughter even if we know for a fact that Floyd was going to die of an overdose with no assistance. So no, it wouldn't have blown a hole in any case, because all Chauvin has to do to be guilty is make it more difficult to breathe for somebody who is overdosing. You have a poor understanding of the relavent law and refuse to listen when you are corrected on it, so you assume you have some slam dunk opinion on why he's innocent.

This post was edited by Thor123422 on Apr 20 2021 01:22am

I'm attempting to make a comparison and show the differences

This post was edited by IFAPTOBAALRUNS on Apr 20 2021 01:25am

There was no proof that the air flow was restricted. None. Zero. Right up to the point where Floyd lost consciousness, he was speaking, breathing, hell, even yelling.

And I asked YOU if YOU had ever been choked out. You've got it backwards, Thor. When somebody is choking you out by restricting airflow, you aren't chatting it up. Further, go back and watch the video. Seriously. He was able to move around, readjust himself, etc.

Once again, he was complaining that he couldn't breath BEFORE he was put on the ground. He DEMANDED to be put on the ground. Manslaughter requires negligence that CONTRIBUTED to the death. That's what the prosecution had to prove. The defense did NOT have to prove his innocence. Merely doubt regarding both negligence and/or contribution to the death.

Now, given the prone position is officially trained by the MPD, crowd threats do constitute a viable reason NOT to render aid to an unconscious suspect, and the prosecution failed to present any viable evidence that Chauvin directly contributed to the death, there's DOUBT. That's all that is required.

It is the duty of the Prosecution to PROVE beyond all reasonable doubt that a crime has been committed. The prosecution failed to do so. You attempts to do so are pathetic.

And I did not say he's innocent. I'm saying based on the cases presented, there's doubt. That doesn't mean he's innocent. It does mean that to my mind, he's not guilty. There's a difference. OJ was acquitted. Did that make him innocent?



There will always be slight differences. As I said before, go back, now, and watch the Floyd bystander video. Analyze it without emotion. Watch Chauvin shift, watch Floyd shift, just view it with an unbiased mind, knowing what you know from the case as it has been presented over the last couple weeks.

This post was edited by InsaneBobb on Apr 20 2021 01:31am

and what I'm saying is you're very dishonest if you think not turning him to the recovery position and remaining on his neck didn't contribute.

I know you want to paint yourself as non-emotional, only basing it on the facts, but you're not. You're very emotional over this issue, and you're clearly using outside resources to influence your analysis.

It'd be nice if you listened, since you're very very bad at introspection you would probably learn a lot about yourself along the way.

Once again, you lack facts, so you're devolving into personal attacks.

The "recovery position" requires that the person be breathing to be effective. Floyd was not breathing after he lost consciousness. Go back and watch the video. That's not a sign of negligence. Your only argument at that point is failure to provide CPR. But given the threats from the crowed, once again, rendering aid was not a possibility.

All of these details were gone over in the trial. Did you bother to watch ANY of it?

No reason to wait for him to pass out to put him in the position. He stopped struggling well before that.

You've trapped yourself. Floyd is simultaneously not breathing so the position won't help, and breathing fine with Chauvin's knee on his neck.

Pick one, you don't get both, and regardless the conclusion is the same.