 
     |
| Derick Chauvin (Page 2/6) |
|
Rickady88GT
|
JUN 27, 08:42 AM
|
|
| quote | Originally posted by maryjane:
I suspect, that if the trial had been moved to Texas, that there is a high likelihood that outcome would still have been the same, even if the jury had been sequestered.
I've seen lots of comments as to why the verdict was what it was, and this one came from a military discussion board. I find it more than a bit discouraging.
can't let this go...;he didn't get a fair trial IMO...he was guilty right out of the gate when they picked the lopsided jury. A jury of his peers should have been all white and no colored as it was described (apparently white isn't a color). Those six colored folk had to find him guilty because if they didn't and the people in his hood discovered any of them voted for acquital those folk would have been targeted for some sort of retribution including burning their house down, their vehicle or even been the subject of a beatdown. And IMO, his lawyer wasn't all that especially given the prosecution was packed with lawyers, including colored ones.
Way too many of the 'complaints' revolve around the assumed inability of the jury to stick to just the evidence presented at trial.
Ironic.
|
|
I have to be honest, I thought he was guilty at one point. BUT I was not in the courtroom so I just don't know what the jury saw. I do believe the possibility of an appeal is likely because the judge made errors.
|
|
|
|
sourmash
|
JUN 27, 08:45 AM
|
|
Yeah, I'm calling bullcrap on that, maryjane. You're presenting collective guilt by conjured association. Do you post that as bait or, just a social justice warrior at heart, you are. I guess I shouldn't label you and instead give the option to ID yourself instead.
The trial would definitely have had a different outcome with a different, sequestered jury and alternate locale. It would be a hung jury.
The White jurors would still fear for their lives from the Black jurors who would dox them after trial for a targetted assault by BLM. America is mob ruled now.
Got a link to this 'quote'?[This message has been edited by sourmash (edited 06-27-2021).]
|
|
|
|
Rickady88GT
|
JUN 27, 08:53 AM
|
|
|
|
|
blackrams
|
JUN 27, 09:05 AM
|
|
| quote | Originally posted by maryjane:
I suspect, that if the trial had been moved to Texas, that there is a high likelihood that outcome would still have been the same, even if the jury had been sequestered.
SNIP
Way too many of the 'complaints' revolve around the assumed inability of the jury to stick to just the evidence presented at trial.
Ironic.
|
|
A neutral site would not have to have been Texas but, where the trial was held was obviously not a neutral site. Although I feel certain regardless of where this trial was held, demonstrators would follow, Social and political pressure would most likely have been applied regardless but, in order to believe it was a fair trial, the judicial errors made deeply compromised the balance of justice. The politicians taking one side or another should be removed from office IMHO, they don't deserve to hold those positions, that was just wrong.
Was Chauvin guilty of 2nd degree murder or a lessor crime? Was Floyd's drug use part of or the cause of death? I'm not convinced based on the evidence shown to the public and it's very possible I have not seen it all. Does murder require the intent to kill or was the death a probable outcome of a combined set of things. I don't have the answers to these and other questions but, it was obvious the prosecution was out to seek retribution but, the question is for who....
Again, I'm not suggesting Chauvin bears no responsibility but to deny the social and political pressures is lying to one's self. The race card has been thrown out in so many ways and at every opportunity in all directions. It's impossible to remove that stain on this trial.
Rams
|
|
|
|
sourmash
|
JUN 27, 09:08 AM
|
|
James got 400+ years because Heather got a fractured leg in his accident. She died of a heart attack due to her life style. James had an AR-15 pointed at him as he drove past a college professor who was holding the gun. The man admitted to that and was not charged because we are mob-ruled now.
Other Antifa and BLM people started hitting his car, leading to James attempting to flee but then hitting an unseen car.
Heather was in a group that refused police orders to disburse which hid the car from his view.
|
|
|
|
sourmash
|
JUN 27, 09:16 AM
|
|
My posts on this thread point out that personal responsibility matters in the outcome of events.
Floyd died of an overdose while in police custody. A contributing factor was the delay of emergency responders. We know why Floyd was being arrested. His companion in the car indicated Floyd was out of his mind. According to a report, they were still at the scene because Floyd passed out behind the wheel for a time and police located them as suspects in the counterfeit bill deal.
|
|
|
|
maryjane
|
JUN 27, 11:45 AM
|
|
| quote | Originally posted by blackrams:
A neutral site would not have to have been Texas but, where the trial was held was obviously not a neutral site. Although I feel certain regardless of where this trial was held, demonstrators would follow, Social and political pressure would most likely have been applied regardless but, in order to believe it was a fair trial, the judicial errors made deeply compromised the balance of justice. The politicians taking one side or another should be removed from office IMHO, they don't deserve to hold those positions, that was just wrong.
Rams |
|
Had politicians (including elected/politically appointed police personnel) publicly argued for the jury to find him not guilty, and had he been found not guilty, should they still be removed from office?
The irony:
(the above scenario has played out countless times in real life, and I have never seen anyone argue that they should be removed from office.)
|
|
|
|
blackrams
|
JUN 27, 11:47 AM
|
|
| quote | Originally posted by maryjane:
Had politicians (including elected/politically appointed police personnel) publicly argued for the jury to find him not guilty, and had he been found not guilty, should they still be removed from office?
The irony:
(the above scenario has played out countless times in real life, and I have never seen anyone argue that they should be removed from office.)
|
|
Pretty sure I said "one side or another". Did you fail to read what you underlined or just decide to ignore it?
The irony? Maybe if politicians were held accountable for such things they'd keep their traps shut (reference guilt or innocent) and not try to influence justice regardless of their perspective of the crime...
Rams[This message has been edited by blackrams (edited 06-27-2021).]
|
|
|
|
Rickady88GT
|
JUN 27, 07:04 PM
|
|
| quote | Originally posted by blackrams:
Maybe if politicians were held accountable for such things they'd keep their traps shut (reference guilt or innocent) and not try to influence justice regardless of their perspective of the crime...
Rams
|
|
If politicians were held to the same standards that Police are held to, we would be in a different World. Politicians can't even stay in the professional standards that fast food employees have to follow
|
|
|
|
olejoedad
|
JUN 27, 08:42 PM
|
|
| quote | Originally posted by Rickady88GT:
If politicians were held to the same standards that Police are held to, we would be in a different World. Politicians can't even stay in the professional standards that fast food employees have to follow |
|
Quote of the week!
|
|
|
|