Derek Chauvin murder trial (Police officer who arrested George Floyd)

Status
Not open for further replies.
Soldato
Joined
24 Aug 2005
Posts
3,870
Location
Top of the world
Wasn't the whole thing recorded from multiple sources/angles? Do they even need witnesses? when to the jury can just watch the videos. All witnesses are going to do is colour the evidence with their own take on events. No pun intended.
 
Soldato
Joined
21 Oct 2011
Posts
21,592
Location
ST4
Wasn't the whole thing recorded from multiple sources/angles? Do they even need witnesses? when to the jury can just watch the videos. All witnesses are going to do is colour the evidence with their own take on events. No pun intended.

Because the video evidence on it's own shows that everything was done in accordance with police training and as such is very damaging to the prosecution's case and doesn't support the racial agenda they're pushing, whereas overly emotional people crying in the witness box goes some way to negate that effect.
 
Caporegime
Joined
8 Sep 2005
Posts
29,951
Location
Norrbotten, Sweden.
Pure Video evidence doesn't cloud everything with emotion, which isn't going to help the defence win... Lol
The show must be a roller coaster of emotions.
The cops going down anyway. The trial is a slideshow to justify rioting.
 
Soldato
Joined
2 Apr 2006
Posts
3,700
The video of his death was horrific. Once George Floyd was subdued, what exactly was Chauvin waiting for? Why did he continue to hold him in that position when he was obviously unconscious? It was the equivalent of watching someone being drowned in a bath. :(
 
Soldato
Joined
17 Jul 2007
Posts
24,529
Location
Solihull-Florida
It goes hand in hand with opposing the authoritarianism and bootlicking that left wing racists need to make themselves feel better.

It's not right wing racists who are demanding that people literally bend the knee to them.

It's not right wing racists who have started an entirely ideology solely to promote the belief that a person's life only matters if they're the "right race".

It's not right wing racists who, acting on the above belief, don't give a damn when "white" people die in similar circumstances to George Floyd.

It's not right wing racists who, acting on the above belief, demand that everyone pretend that most of the people killed by police in the USA never existed because they're the "wrong race".

It's not right wing racists who dominate the media and politics and impose a ludicrous degree of bias.

It's not right wing racists who use nationwide violence and intimidation to further their agenda.

It's not right wing racists who are calling for the abolition of the rule of law and its replacement with whatever its own militias decide to impose.

It's not right wing racists who are demanding absolute obedience from all people in all things - deeds, words, thoughts and feelings - and imposing "re-education programs" on people to do that, especially targetting children.

It's not right wing racists who are advocating insurrection and racist genocide.


There are authoritarian right wing racists who are as bad as authoritarian left wing racists, but they have far less power so they're far less dangerous. There's hardly any difference between the two, anyway. Authoritarian racists are authoritarian racists. A different position in economic policies is minor in comparison.


What a great post.
 
Soldato
Joined
17 Dec 2009
Posts
10,255
Interesting point. Do you take the coroners report at word value also?



Thanks, but I already had this link and was aware of the content, was just working my way upto pointing out what an absolute spanner Andrew was being (in general in this thread) as its obvious he made his mind up the officer is guilty when the evidence may actually quite comfortably show otherwise.


https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/derek-chauvin-s-former-supervisor-testifies-his-restraint-george-floyd-n1262840

Derek Chauvin's former supervisor testifies his restraint of George Floyd violated use-of-force policies
"When Mr. Floyd was no longer offering up any resistance to the officers, they could have ended their restraint," the former supervisor testified Thursday.

hmmm, it’s almost like most of us who have actually had to go hands on with someone in security might of been saying itt how utterly reprehensible and pointless the knee on neck was once a handcuffed male was facedown...
 
Soldato
Joined
12 Jan 2009
Posts
2,572
Because the video evidence on it's own shows that everything was done in accordance with police training and as such is very damaging to the prosecution's case and doesn't support the racial agenda they're pushing, whereas overly emotional people crying in the witness box goes some way to negate that effect.
I don't think I've heard the prosecution mention race once. They've been pushing emotional murder. Many of the civilian witnesses were black.
Regarding training, the last witness yesterday, Chauvins supervisor of sorts said the knee should have been taken off the neck once on the ground. Not kept on until an EMT asks you to remove it.
 
Associate
Joined
31 Aug 2017
Posts
141
I don't think I've heard the prosecution mention race once. They've been pushing emotional murder. Many of the civilian witnesses were black.
Regarding training, the last witness yesterday, Chauvins supervisor of sorts said the knee should have been taken off the neck once on the ground. Not kept on until an EMT asks you to remove it.
That's not quite what he said though is it?
I understand that you (or your 2nd hand source) may have innocently paraphrased, but you have (hopefully inadvertently) misrepresented his testimony.
 
Soldato
Joined
13 May 2003
Posts
8,845
There is a scene in Sully the film about the plane landing on the Hudson River after a dual engine failure where he asks the NTSB board to get serious. In particular he talks about the difference between being in the situation and not, in his case decision making time.

In this case it might be the emotional position that affects decisionmaking. The Supervisor and the trainer can say that something was taught this way and should have happended a certain way. But ultimately they weren't in the position that the police officer was. One assumes they train to make good practice into natural behaviour for safety reasons etc. They will also train to drum in legal requirements. But some decisions will be made poorly depending on the situational environment. People standing around, filming you shouting at you etc after what may or may not have been a stessful situation may lead to bad decisions.
 
Soldato
Joined
3 Oct 2007
Posts
12,090
Location
London, UK
...On the subject matter previously mentioned, I think George Orwell's 1984 should be a cumpulsory read for everyone. It's shocking how many similarities there are with todays world and that was written 70 years ago.

People have been saying that for as long as I can remember (late 70s). Although I'll give you with Trump we did edge ever closer with "alternative facts", "fake news" and of course "This country is doing better than it's ever has before, economically...It's all working out. Just remember: what you're seeing and what you're reading is not what's happening." That does indeed sound just like 1984.
 
Soldato
Joined
17 Dec 2009
Posts
10,255
There is a scene in Sully the film about the plane landing on the Hudson River after a dual engine failure where he asks the NTSB board to get serious. In particular he talks about the difference between being in the situation and not, in his case decision making time.

In this case it might be the emotional position that affects decisionmaking. The Supervisor and the trainer can say that something was taught this way and should have happended a certain way. But ultimately they weren't in the position that the police officer was. One assumes they train to make good practice into natural behaviour for safety reasons etc. They will also train to drum in legal requirements. But some decisions will be made poorly depending on the situational environment. People standing around, filming you shouting at you etc after what may or may not have been a stessful situation may lead to bad decisions.

“Your honour you see I can’t possibly be to blame for my action, people were shouting at me that I was killing the guy as I knelt on his neck, which distracted me, and in the fluster, I simply forgot I was kneeling on the mans neck for 9 minutes”
 
Soldato
Joined
17 Jul 2007
Posts
24,529
Location
Solihull-Florida
“Your honour you see I can’t possibly be to blame for my action, people were shouting at me that I was killing the guy as I knelt on his neck, which distracted me, and in the fluster, I simply forgot I was kneeling on the mans neck for 9 minutes”


Tell me.
How does one know if any of them have a gun?
Case in point

 
Man of Honour
Joined
5 Dec 2003
Posts
20,999
Location
Just to the left of my PC
The cowards response

The sensible and realistic response. In a war between countries, the majority of people support their own country. Not all, which is of course why I said "probably".

You might be driven enough to search out an authoritarian regime of violence to join, but most people aren't. I'm not sure you are. In any case, your best match would be Stalin's regime and it would be difficult to get there and join up during WW2.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom