Gulity
Murderer
shareOVERDOSE.
shareWatch the trial. It clearly wasn't an overdose
shareIt was contradictory evidence but even if it was not an overdose, I'm surprised he was convicted considering he was doing his job.
shareAfter Derek Chauvin was told by EMT's that George Floyd had no pulse, he continued kneeling on his neck for an additional 2 minutes.
shareIt was not his job to kill a handcuffed person. Chauvin kept his knee on Floyd's back even after another officer could not find a pulse. I guess he wanted to ensure Floyd was dead at the scene.
shareHis job was clearly not to kill a handcuffed person and that would have been stupid anyway. Who would do that in broad day light with lots of people reacting and shouting, some even clearly filming ?
Knee on the back, it means not on his neck. Not sure what knee on the back was making any difference at this point.
The knee on the back is what killed George Floyd. Most people don't understand this. It's not the knee on the neck, it's the knee on the back. It keeps the chest from expanding, and the victim suffocates, no bruises, no broken bones, no bleeding. The technique is called "Burke-ing", named after an innkeeper/serial killer named William Burke who killed lodgers in his inn this way and sold the bodies to doctors for dissection. If there are no witnesses, and no video, the cause of death is simply "he stopped breathing", which is technically true - and if you've been paying attention, you may have noticed that a lot of people stop breathing in police custody.
sharetime served and probation to keep him from filing appeal because of what pruneface Waters said.
shareThis wasn’t justice this was trial by mob. The US is done for
shareWatching the trial - I don’t get how they could find guilty on all counts.
I could see second degree murder (unintentional killing while engaged in a felony assault act)
I could also possibly see the second degree manslaughter charge (although culpable negligence is a little shaky)
But how could they say guilty on the third degree murder ? There was a depraved mind + reckless danger?
I get the feeling the jury might’ve been afraid of backlash, as their names might leak and people will come after them
Yeah, not much incentive to actually deliberate when you know if you make the politically incorrect choice you are very likely to be doxxed, and dragged from your bed one night by a bloodthirsty mob.
shareContinuing to kneel on someone's neck 2 minutes after they were found to have no pulse surely wouldn't be considered a sane mind.
sharePeople like to say that the jury was afraid or threatened; with no evidence at all. Not a single juror has gone on record as saying they were influenced by what was happening in the streets on in the media.
shareOf course a juror wouldn’t go on record and say that. If they did then that’ll be grounds for a mistrial.
If a juror came on record and said that and caused a mistrial what do you think would happen to that juror.
Couldn't? As legally prohibited? I doubt it. Sure there could be a mistrial, but why should a juror hide the fact that they might have been threatened?
What would happen to a juror who claimed to have been threatened? Nothing I think. it is not illegal for a juror to report threats.
I didnt say couldn’t. I said wouldn’t.
And what would happen to that juror who caused the mistrial and possible release of one of the most hated men in the country is that person would possibly be attacked and killed by the same idiots who were burning down the city.
Says you, without any rational reason for believing this could happen.
Your post is just another vain attempt to declare that Chauvin was innocent and could not get a fair trial.
People like you certainly lack the courage to confront jurors who return guilty verdicts and accuse them of being cowards who bent to the will of imaginary terrorists. Or are you willing to prove me wrong?
Did any of my posts claim he was innocent? No, i stated why a juror wouldn’t be inclined to go on record saying they felt threatened.
If you think that not one of the 12 jurors felt the pressure or threats then you’re lying to yourself.
Again, not saying that they wouldn’t have agreed to find him guilty anyway, but you can be sure the pressure was there.
Have you ever served on a jury? I have. I felt very secure in the courthouse. You are making assumptions about how a juror feels when you have never met them.
I still think your post is just another vain attempt to declare that Chauvin was innocent and could not get a fair trial.
It seems that the only people crying about imaginary juror pressure are the ones who think Chauvin should have got a medal for murdering Floyd.
You served on a jury for a globally televised case?
shareHave you ever served on a jury? I have not served on a very high profile jury.
Explain to me why you know enough about the jurors who found Chauvin guilty that you think they would be threatened.
Do you think they were so out of touch that they did not know there would be protests and high emotions?
Who would come after jurors except the police themselves? I say it was an act of courage.
shareThe mob has spoken. Let's not pretend this was justice.
shareNo it was accountability, something which many police believe they are above. This man, regardless of his character, was murdered by a police officer. Not only that, he did so on camera in front of a crowd of witnesses. The fact that there was even a doubt he would be found guilty shows how messed up the US legal system is and how it is in serious need of reform.
I think the jury reached the correct verdicts but irresponsible politicians (Biden, Walker) and people in the mob outside the courthouse unfortunately give Chauvin legitimate grounds for appeal.
shareIndeed.
shareYou murder a human, George Floyd wasn't human he was a piece of garbage. So tired of people acting like killing Floyd was some horrible tragedy, it was at most eliminating a piece of trash before he victimized more people. Remember Floyd was the piece of shit that held a gun to a pregnant woman's stomach and threaten to shoot her in a home invasion. Which was only one of the crimes he was convicted of in the past.
shareWhen a person is handcuffed and unresponsive on the ground, the police are not allowed to kill them no matter how bad you think the perp is.
shareThey should be. The problem is they should have shot the worthless piece of shit when he started to resist arrest to begin with. 30 year ago if you fucked around when the police were arresting your ass they used a 12 gauge and you stopped being a problem.. todays cops are fucking pussies that have forgotten how to eliminate problems.
shareI don't believe you. Can you show me where the police shot a hand cuffed suspect back in the early 1990's with a shotgun for resisting arrest after he was cuffed?
The police, whether or not they are pussies, are not above the law.
I'm not saying they should have shot him when he was handcuffed, I'm saying they should have shot him when he refused to cooperate before the cuffs were even placed on him. As soon as he refused to get out of the SUV, shoot the worthless piece of shit and move on.
shareThen show me an example of of 1990's American police officers who kill suspects with a shotgun while sitting unarmed in a vehicle when being arrested for a non-violent crime. You won't do so because you're just making stuff up.
Is this how you want the police to treat you? Until Floyd got out of his vehicle, he was not actively resisting arrest. You really want the police to talk with their shotgun to you if you're accused of passing fake money?
How would you go about proving a person was "worthless piece of shit" prior to blowing them away? Is that the defense you would use if you were placed on trial?
I would prefer the cop just shot worthless career criminals like this in the base of the skull when they were released from prison.
shareHow long until they decide to shoot you in the head then?
shareNow now... why is the liberal wimp like you suddenly wanting violence. Hypocrite.
shareI don't. I was asking you a direct question. Why are you evading an answer? What makes you so immune from police violence?
You could be the next Daniel Shaver who finds himself confronted by police whose motto is "You're Fucked".
I'm not a career criminal breaking the law so I don't have anything to fear.
shareSurely you're not that clueless? Why is it that almost everyone else knows that the police sometimes kill people who are not a threat and not career criminals?
Daniel Shaver was murdered by a police officer as he lay on the floor crying and begging not to be shot. He was attempting to comply with conflicting orders when he was killed.
Take a look at swatting deaths in this country then tell me that these people had i coming to them.
Scumbag----DROP DEAD. YOU ARE A BARNUCLE ON THE HUMAN RACE.
sharePrecisely what the cops should have said to the cunt Floyd before they killed him.
shareWith your logic there would be No one left alive except the police
shareWith my logic there would be no scumbags like George Floyd roaming the streets or conducting home invasions and threatening pregnant women. With my logic the cocksucker would have been killed by the police in Houston years ago where he could have done the world some good and fed the worms.
share