Agree.




He hunts dogs. Weird hobby.

This post was edited by Skinned on Apr 1 2021 11:29am

he’s a hero

I hunt WITH dogs. Not so weird.

Wisest thing I've seen posted on here.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AtqcQiv_Beg


"The officer needed to be eliminated from the situation."

Damnn

New York Times is trying to doxx the jury members.

I agree with Robert Barnes and Mark Garagos. Start to finish, the Jury should have been fully sequestered.

Invalid opinion sorry.
In america you can shoot, and kill someone violating your private property, yes you can end his life just for this reason, in this very beautiful country.
No wonder so much murderers and degenerates live there. Some even become poilce officers.

This post was edited by Melatonina on Apr 2 2021 02:24am

What does your opinion regarding America in general have to do with the Chauvin trial? The trial is happening to determine guilt or innocence. If it's determined Chauvin was guilty of wrongdoing, he will be held accountable. If it's determined he was innocent of wrongdoing, he will not be held accountable.

It's strange that you seem to think people should be locked in steel cages or executed without a trial. The primary reason why enforcement is separated in so many ways, from police to judge to jury to sentencing trial is to insure innocent people are not punished for crimes they did not commit. The alternative would be the "old west" style of "justice" where the Sheriff can act as judge, jury, and executioner.

Further, acceptable reasons to shoot and/or kill someone varies wildly depending on the State. The simple statement of "you can kill someone violating your property" is false, from a legal perspective, in more of the nation than it's true. At any rate, before you continue in this thread, here's some information so you can educate yourself on our court system:

https://www.americanbar.org/groups/public_education/resources/law_related_education_network/how_courts_work

This post was edited by InsaneBobb on Apr 2 2021 02:41am

the lack of sequester would seem to benefit the prosecution, wouldn't it?

These jurors are exposed to the 'cultural sentiment' as the trial goes on. They'll be fully aware what could happen if they don't return the verdict that the lynch mob demands.