when Derek Chauvin inevitably walks ...
- Thread starter _glaciers
- Start date
May have just made a mistake there. Maybe it was positional asphyxia, maybe it was his heart, maybe it was the tailpipe.....use your common sense. Whoops.
I wonder if the defense made the point strongly enough that drug tolerance actually increases the chance of overdose because the lethal dose doesn’t change no matter how much you tolerate the effects. So an addict needs more and more to get high and then they butt up against the lethal dose just to feel anything.
Yea this guy doesn’t work for the state. He’s a private practice attorney working pro Bono for state. Former federal prosecutor. Bringing out all the stops for this case
What??!? Whoops??!?? What mistake?
When you mentioned it was on, I decided to watch the closing argument and it has been much more powerful than I would have imagined.
I don't see how in the world any reasonable person could listen to this closing argument and not be influenced by it.
Like I said, he was doing really well for a while. It was pretty risky bringing up alternative causes of death and categorizing them as "maybe". That creates reasonable doubt. He has recovered well but I don't understand why he even went down that road.
I’m mixed up with this one. There is definitely reasonable doubt and he should be acquitted. But there is also a huge buildup of anti-police sentiment that will explode if he is acquitted and I really don’t want my wife in the way of that. But then again, bowing to mob pressure in contrast to the evidence presented in court is not a good way to go forth in society. Wasn’t good when we had lunch mobs, not good now. I would also hate for my family member to be the next person at the sacrificial alter.
Nobody is going to win here.
Nobody is going to win here.
The prosecution said the victim was moved from his side (lawful) to his back -- in an abusive, UNLAWFUL restraint position -- with force placed on his back cutting off his oxygen .... but said to the jury, "you're to believe he died of a drug overdose? or a bad heart?"
The prosecution consciously brought up the defense's lame excuses in order to say to the jury, "use your common sense."
Except they also proved that his oxygen wasn't cut off in the very last testimony.
I have a question for you, Mr. Law Enforcement By the Book:
How do you explain away the prosecution's contention that Floyd was moved from a sideways position on the street to one where he is on his stomach with pressure being placed on him?
We're told the standard procedure is for a suspect to only be on their stomach for the period of time it takes to apply handcuffs. But Floyd already had handcuffs on. So why this move for a man who was already in handcuffs?
He was kicking the officers while he was on his side. The cops felt they needed to restrain him while waiting for the EMTs because he was freaking out.
Wow. I didn't know that one of Chauvin's fellow officers asked him if they should roll Floyd onto his side and Chauvin said keep him where he is.
You should have watched more of the trial. There were all kinds of things like that which came up. The prosecution didn't push that line as much as they could have because at times they almost seemed like they were focusing on prosecuting the other cops.
I also didn't know the difference between being 'a risk' versus being 'a threat' when employing the use of force.
George Floyd was handcuffed and in a prone position. He was never a threat.
They made the case that Floyd was a threat to the officers as well as to himself. I'm surprised the prosecution brought this up in closing TBH.
I think there's at least a shred of truth to it, yeah. If Floyd had busted out of their restraint he could have ended up in the line of traffic. He had also injured himself in the back of the cruiser, which is why they called the EMTs as they were pulling him out of the car.
The defense will probably mention that the cops knew there was a fire station 3 blocks away so it shouldn't have taken 9 minutes for them to get there.
A man who's both handcuffed and on his stomach??!?
Everything I've heard today in the closing argument makes it crystal clear that Floyd wasn't a violent threat that day. He was compliant throughout the arrest. (I thought it was a bit over-the-top when the police had their weapons drawn when they first approached him sitting in his car -- for possible bad-bill passing.)
The only thing he's guilty of was having a panic attack when he was being pushed into the back of the small back seat of that police cruiser. Even THEN, he wasn't doing anything but resisting being pushed into the small back seat while telling the officers he was claustrophobic.
You didnt watch anything but cherry picked evidence. Floyd was anything but complaint throughout. Kicking officers, refusing to get into the car, refusing to do what he was told.
From the time Keung and Lane got him up off the sidewalk across the street, yes. That's why 2 other cruisers showed up at the scene. They heard what was going on and responded.
For what it's worth, this defense lawyer's closing argument isn't blowing me away.
Maybe it's just me, but when the defense showed the jury the
scene Chauvin found when he arrived -- based on Chauvin's own camera -- I would think "a reasonable police officer" would have attempted to de-escalate the situation.
The defense wants me to believe that 'a reasonable police officer' would see it as justification for the use of force. Really guys?
scene Chauvin found when he arrived -- based on Chauvin's own camera -- I would think "a reasonable police officer" would have attempted to de-escalate the situation.
The defense wants me to believe that 'a reasonable police officer' would see it as justification for the use of force. Really guys?
The jury will go into deliberations and they’re going to pour over everything. He needs to highlight every pertinent factor for the defense because the close will guide them when no one is there.
It started weird, but he's making a great case now. As soon as he started showing video it became pretty damning for the states case.
Pretty damning? In all seriousness, I don't see it.
He's saying that the prosecution wants to focus on the nine minutes plus (uh, YEAH) but want to ignore the previous 16 minutes.
WTF?
I fail to see how the lead-up to the illegal restraint that Chauvin inflected on Floyd lying handcuffed with face to the pavement has to do with the fact he died during those 9-plus minutes he was illegally restrained.
IMHO, having the defense replay video of Floyd crying out that he can't breathe and hearing the cops' dickish responses doesn't help the case that 'a reasonable police officer' would have taken those pleas with a grain of salt because they've 'heard it from people trying to resist arrest a thousand times before.'
A reasonable people officer -- or anyone there or who have watched the cell phone video -- would have understood Floyd was experiencing emotional distress from the moment the cops tried to force the big guy into the little back seat of the squad car.
A reasonable people officer -- or anyone there or who have watched the cell phone video -- would have understood Floyd was experiencing emotional distress from the moment the cops tried to force the big guy into the little back seat of the squad car.
He's trying to point out that Chauvin acted in the same way that a reasonable officer would, which takes 2nd degree murder off the table.
I'm in no way, shape, or form a police officer, let alone a veteran like Chauvin. But if I had arrived on the scene when Chauvin did in the position of authority that Chauvin had, I'd bet anything Floyd would still be alive.
Anyone with half a brain could see that Floyd was in distress and that the situation needed to be seriously de-escalated. Instead, we had a bunch of "respect my authority" clowns hell bent on showing Floyd who was the boss.
More like you made your initial judgement upon emotion and bias and nothing is ever going to convince you to change that initial judgement. You have no interest in learning police procedures, experiences, thought processes, training, or Graham v. Connor, but you are perfectly comfortable saying that they are just power-mad people acting unreasonably. You cannot even consider the thought that the police officers were not doctors or medics and therefore the best COA may have been just waiting for EMS to show up. Or that anything other than Chauvin's knee to the neck (or was it back or shoulder) contributed to Floyd's death.
So in short, you are the perfect subject to the emerging rulers.
Nelson has done a really good job of using the prosecutions witnesses testimony to his favor. Short of a perfect rebuttal, the only way Chauvin is convicted of anything at this point is based on nothing but fear and emotion. The facts are on his side.
What I saw was a man inside a car who was CLEARLY under duress. And how did the uniformed police officers respond as Chauvin arrived.
They were damn well going to FORCE the issue.
God forbid, they allow the big guy to sit on the edge of the backseat and...(here's a wild thought:...) TALK to him!
I'm going to guess that more veteran police officers would agree with me, despite all of my emotion and bias, than you.
Holy Cow, you live in some alternate universe than most of us if you really think Nelson's closing has won the day.
But the responses I've heard here certainly emphasize that it just takes a single clone of crazy or sk8 to create a hung jury.
Similar threads
