Derek Chauvin Trial
Discussion
Thorodin said:
Can't help thinking the prevailing atmosphere at the time was terrifying for any police officer. That baying crowd, whatever was happening, was enough to severely test any officer with regard to decisions he might take. I wonder what, if anything, any of those criticising him would do in those circumstances. Was he the senior officer on duty? Why did no other officer get involved? The whole inter-racial climate in that town was volatile and no matter what action was taken it would have been wrong in the public eye.
"Baying crowd" - "terrifying for a police officer" : what utter rubbish.Are you a fool, a liar, or both?
La Liga said:
Even at this stage people try and mitigate for the convicted murderer.
They do, and will continue to do so.The evidence provided in the trial, even by some prosecution expert witnesses wasn’t exactly damming of the actions of the Derek Chauvin. This was a trial that was very much politically motivated, a trial in which Jurors voiced concerns over the death threats they were facing if they failed to give the ‘correct’ verdict. It doesn’t matter which way you cut it, this wasn’t a fair trail, which then places serious doubt as to whether or not the verdict is sound, (legally and morally).
I’m not going to go into details, not here on a public forum, but I’ve suffered greatly at the hands of significant Police corruption, and I’m about as far from a fan of the Police as you’re likely to find, but even I can see the serious flaws in the guilty verdict.
If the law is to be upheld, it must be so fairly, and without emotion, media pressure or political meddling steering the decisions that are made.
La Liga said:
Even at this stage people try and mitigate for the convicted murderer.
It is astonishing. I doubt whether very many people making such comments actually watched the trial, I mean properly. The trial in which the evidence against Chauvin was overwhelming and where no mitigating circumstances for the actions he took existed. None. Not a single one. Hell, even the Minneapolis Police Department testified against his actions being contrary to any and all training officers receive for handling such situations.Furthermore, he had a history, which also seems to not matter to those that think he was some kind of scapegoat to appease the baying masses.
This guy committed murder, was tried and unanimously convicted. He is a murderer and I hope he goes to prison for a very long time.
My observations are that the Police in the mighty USA can be very heavy handed and can have a shoot first think later type mentality (metaphorically and literally). We see it here in the UK (more metaphorically) Must be the uniform. Gives them a sense of superiority and power that goes to their heads.
ReverendCounter said:
Ever been black before? In America? While witnessing what was essentially a murder, by police who murder blacks regularly and get away with it? Thought not - it makes you unqualified to judge.
I identify as black, which means that I am actually black. And I also think it’s mental.105.4 said:
La Liga said:
Even at this stage people try and mitigate for the convicted murderer.
They do, and will continue to do so.The evidence provided in the trial, even by some prosecution expert witnesses wasn’t exactly damming of the actions of the Derek Chauvin. This was a trial that was very much politically motivated, a trial in which Jurors voiced concerns over the death threats they were facing if they failed to give the ‘correct’ verdict. It doesn’t matter which way you cut it, this wasn’t a fair trail, which then places serious doubt as to whether or not the verdict is sound, (legally and morally).
I’m not going to go into details, not here on a public forum, but I’ve suffered greatly at the hands of significant Police corruption, and I’m about as far from a fan of the Police as you’re likely to find, but even I can see the serious flaws in the guilty verdict.
If the law is to be upheld, it must be so fairly, and without emotion, media pressure or political meddling steering the decisions that are made.
I watched every single minute of the televised trial and Chauvin is guilty of murder well beyond a reasonable doubt.
La Liga said:
Touring442 said:
La Liga said:
ou sit on the safe side lines 
And you sit in your rough council estate and avoid the stabbings sweetheart. 
Why don’t you articulate your actual views / objections rather than sitting safely on the sidelines?
You clearly - as always - speak from a position of first hand knowledge. Therefore I can conclude that you live in a rough area where violence is the norm. I cannot imagine for a moment that the opposite is the case.
Sidelines are great btw. I can sit here and watch you pontificate with such po faced authority.
Thorodin said:
Can't help thinking the prevailing atmosphere at the time was terrifying for any police officer. That baying crowd, whatever was happening, was enough to severely test any officer with regard to decisions he might take. I wonder what, if anything, any of those criticising him would do in those circumstances. Was he the senior officer on duty? Why did no other officer get involved? The whole inter-racial climate in that town was volatile and no matter what action was taken it would have been wrong in the public eye.
I have to be honest I'd read more than I'd watched and when I first saw some video of the "baying mob" I'd been expecting I was left wondering when they were going to turn up.There were several officers there apart from Chauvin and the jury have seen and heard all of the available evidence.
It's a bit odd to be still making excuses for what happened.
b
hstewie said:
hstewie said:Thorodin said:
Can't help thinking the prevailing atmosphere at the time was terrifying for any police officer. That baying crowd, whatever was happening, was enough to severely test any officer with regard to decisions he might take. I wonder what, if anything, any of those criticising him would do in those circumstances. Was he the senior officer on duty? Why did no other officer get involved? The whole inter-racial climate in that town was volatile and no matter what action was taken it would have been wrong in the public eye.
I have to be honest I'd read more than I'd watched and when I first saw some video of the "baying mob I'd been expecting I was left wondering when they were going to turn up.There were several officers there apart from Chauvin and the jury have seen and heard all of the available evidence.
It's a bit odd to be still making excuses for what happened.
Touring442 said:
You clearly - as always - speak from a position of first hand knowledge. Therefore I can conclude that you live in a rough area where violence is the norm. I cannot imagine for a moment that the opposite is the case.
Well that's a rather foolish and irrelevant conclusion. Why would living in a rough area and violence being the norm (or not) have any relevance as to whether or not one can assess whether it's realistic to expect the 15 old girl who was filming the matter to have done more?
I'd genuinely be interested how you arrived there.
La Liga said:
ell that's a rather foolish and irrelevant conclusion.
Why would living in a rough area and violence being the norm (or not) have any relevance as to whether or not one can assess whether it's realistic to expect the 15 old girl who was filming the matter to have done more?
I'd genuinely be interested how you arrived there.
He jumped.Why would living in a rough area and violence being the norm (or not) have any relevance as to whether or not one can assess whether it's realistic to expect the 15 old girl who was filming the matter to have done more?
I'd genuinely be interested how you arrived there.
Isn't that how one gets to a conclusion?
La Liga said:
ell that's a rather foolish and irrelevant conclusion.
Why would living in a rough area and violence being the norm (or not) have any relevance as to whether or not one can assess whether it's realistic to expect the 15 old girl who was filming the matter to have done more?
I'd genuinely be interested how you arrived there.
Why would living in a rough area and violence being the norm (or not) have any relevance as to whether or not one can assess whether it's realistic to expect the 15 old girl who was filming the matter to have done more?
I'd genuinely be interested how you arrived there.
One is amused.
Keep going!
AW111 said:
He jumped.
Isn't that how one gets to a conclusion?
Apparently the low standard in this case. Isn't that how one gets to a conclusion?
Touring442 said:
One is amused.
Keep going!
Anyway, back to the topic.
105.4 said:
La Liga said:
Even at this stage people try and mitigate for the convicted murderer.
They do, and will continue to do so.The evidence provided in the trial, even by some prosecution expert witnesses wasn’t exactly damming of the actions of the Derek Chauvin. This was a trial that was very much politically motivated, a trial in which Jurors voiced concerns over the death threats they were facing if they failed to give the ‘correct’ verdict. It doesn’t matter which way you cut it, this wasn’t a fair trail, which then places serious doubt as to whether or not the verdict is sound, (legally and morally).
I’m not going to go into details, not here on a public forum, but I’ve suffered greatly at the hands of significant Police corruption, and I’m about as far from a fan of the Police as you’re likely to find, but even I can see the serious flaws in the guilty verdict.
If the law is to be upheld, it must be so fairly, and without emotion, media pressure or political meddling steering the decisions that are made.
That Chauvin sought a plea bargain before the trial indicates the defence's view of the evidence.
105.4 said:
They do, and will continue to do so.
The evidence provided in the trial, even by some prosecution expert witnesses wasn’t exactly damming of the actions of the Derek Chauvin. This was a trial that was very much politically motivated, a trial in which Jurors voiced concerns over the death threats they were facing if they failed to give the ‘correct’ verdict. It doesn’t matter which way you cut it, this wasn’t a fair trail, which then places serious doubt as to whether or not the verdict is sound, (legally and morally).
I’m not going to go into details, not here on a public forum, but I’ve suffered greatly at the hands of significant Police corruption, and I’m about as far from a fan of the Police as you’re likely to find, but even I can see the serious flaws in the guilty verdict.
If the law is to be upheld, it must be so fairly, and without emotion, media pressure or political meddling steering the decisions that are made.
Clearly you were watching a different trial. Or don’t understand English. Couldn’t have been more damming. Defence Lawyer Nelson was left picking up the ball from the back of the net for most of the time. The evidence provided in the trial, even by some prosecution expert witnesses wasn’t exactly damming of the actions of the Derek Chauvin. This was a trial that was very much politically motivated, a trial in which Jurors voiced concerns over the death threats they were facing if they failed to give the ‘correct’ verdict. It doesn’t matter which way you cut it, this wasn’t a fair trail, which then places serious doubt as to whether or not the verdict is sound, (legally and morally).
I’m not going to go into details, not here on a public forum, but I’ve suffered greatly at the hands of significant Police corruption, and I’m about as far from a fan of the Police as you’re likely to find, but even I can see the serious flaws in the guilty verdict.
If the law is to be upheld, it must be so fairly, and without emotion, media pressure or political meddling steering the decisions that are made.
La Liga said:
AW111 said:
He jumped.
Isn't that how one gets to a conclusion?
Apparently the low standard in this case. Isn't that how one gets to a conclusion?
Touring442 said:
One is amused.
Keep going!
Anyway, back to the topic.
105.4 said:
La Liga said:
Even at this stage people try and mitigate for the convicted murderer.
They do, and will continue to do so.The evidence provided in the trial, even by some prosecution expert witnesses wasn’t exactly damming of the actions of the Derek Chauvin. This was a trial that was very much politically motivated, a trial in which Jurors voiced concerns over the death threats they were facing if they failed to give the ‘correct’ verdict. It doesn’t matter which way you cut it, this wasn’t a fair trail, which then places serious doubt as to whether or not the verdict is sound, (legally and morally).
I’m not going to go into details, not here on a public forum, but I’ve suffered greatly at the hands of significant Police corruption, and I’m about as far from a fan of the Police as you’re likely to find, but even I can see the serious flaws in the guilty verdict.
If the law is to be upheld, it must be so fairly, and without emotion, media pressure or political meddling steering the decisions that are made.
That Chauvin sought a plea bargain before the trial indicates the defence's view of the evidence.
Just where?
You're an asset to the forum.
Touring442 said:
Where would we be without your implacable righteousness? Your ability to interpret ever facet, every nuance of human behaviour and emotion?
Just where?
You're an asset to the forum.
You're too easy Just where?
You're an asset to the forum.
At least make it a challenge.
Go on, you have the last reply, you seem the type
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff