ADVERTISEMENT

The People of the State of Minnesota v. Derek Chauvin

Who gives a damn who Bree Newsime is? Can’t you ever discuss an idea without yapping about whose idea it is? Gawd you are a pea brain. The fact is that we had a crazy person about to plunge a knife into the gut of another person and many are now expressing sympathy for the one wielding the knife. Just a year or so ago the officer would have gotten a medal for saving a life, now his life is ruined—because he is a white guy.

What else can we ruin in this country?

I think it is way early to say the officer's life is ruined. Yes, some people have said really stupid things. But most people I believe know there was no choice. I have seen and read a lot of history, I know a lot of American soldiers were forced to shoot Hitler Youth and it hung with them forever even though they had no choice. My guess is shooting a 16-year-old is going to be hard for that officer for an awfully long time, and that is where they probably need help the most. But I suspect they will be fully absolved of wrongdoing by the vast majority and the remainder largely just hate police anyway.
 
I think it is way early to say the officer's life is ruined. Yes, some people have said really stupid things. But most people I believe know there was no choice. I have seen and read a lot of history, I know a lot of American soldiers were forced to shoot Hitler Youth and it hung with them forever even though they had no choice. My guess is shooting a 16-year-old is going to be hard for that officer for an awfully long time, and that is where they probably need help the most. But I suspect they will be fully absolved of wrongdoing by the vast majority and the remainder largely just hate police anyway.
I’d like to think you are right. But it doesn’t take many people working the internet mob to make life very difficult. And if his superiors tend to lean woke, his career could be diminished.
 
I’d like to think you are right. But it doesn’t take many people working the internet mob to make life very difficult. And if his superiors tend to lean woke, his career could be diminished.
It certainly could go south, I am not trying to predict the future.

For reasons unknown my wife loves watching Don Lemon and Chris Cuomo when Cuomo hands off the show. It is the moment in a day I watch CNN. Both seemed to say the officer had no real alternatives. They may not represent the wokest of the woke, but they do speak to mainstream liberals
 
It certainly could go south, I am not trying to predict the future.

For reasons unknown my wife loves watching Don Lemon and Chris Cuomo when Cuomo hands off the show. It is the moment in a day I watch CNN. Both seemed to say the officer had no real alternatives. They may not represent the wokest of the woke, but they do speak to mainstream liberals
Oh Don is near the top of the Wokes. The only thing keeping him from the crown is his skin color. The wokest of the woke must be white.
 
I think it is way early to say the officer's life is ruined. Yes, some people have said really stupid things. But most people I believe know there was no choice.

Both seemed to say the officer had no real alternatives.

Yeah, that officer will have a lot to deal with personally, psychologically, but I can't imagine him being held responsible.

The one I can't come to grips with is the cop that shot the guy instead of tasering him. There's no question in my mind it was an accident, but there has to be some kind of consequence for being that inept. Too bad those who gave her that kind of responsibility and authority can't/won't be held responsible to some extent.
 
Oh Don is near the top of the Wokes. The only thing keeping him from the crown is his skin color. The wokest of the woke must be white.
So what does that mean regarding him believing the officer did what he had to do?

I would theorize gay Blacks have a lot of reasons to find interest in social justice.
 
Yeah, that officer will have a lot to deal with personally, psychologically, but I can't imagine him being held responsible.

The one I can't come to grips with is the cop that shot the guy instead of tasering him. There's no question in my mind it was an accident, but there has to be some kind of consequence for being that inept. Too bad those who gave her that kind of responsibility and authority can't/won't be held responsible to some extent.

like her life will ever be the same, regardless of what other sht comes down on her.

that said, with all the high speed chases going on now, and the danger to everyone on the road in their way, what use of force are cops allowed to use and not use to stop someone trying to make a run for it in their car?
 
So what does that mean regarding him believing the officer did what he had to do?

I would theorize gay Blacks have a lot of reasons to find interest in social justice.
Any take that believes that officer didn’t do what he had to do is a laughable radical take. Don’s not an idiot - he knows what he needs to do to stay relevant.
 
  • Like
Reactions: NPT
Who gives a damn who Bree Newsime is? Can’t you ever discuss an idea without yapping about whose idea it is? Gawd you are a pea brain. The fact is that we had a crazy person about to plunge a knife into the gut of another person and many are now expressing sympathy for the one wielding the knife. Just a year or so ago the officer would have gotten a medal for saving a life, now his life is ruined—because he is a white guy.

What else can we ruin in this country?

It's going overlooked but that was some pretty impressive shooting from that officer with a lot of people in the vicinity in a high pressure situation.

I'm not a huge gun guy, curious if the board ex-military/ sharpshooters agree.
 
It's going overlooked but that was some pretty impressive shooting from that officer with a lot of people in the vicinity in a high pressure situation.

I'm not a huge gun guy, curious if the board ex-military/ sharpshooters agree.
I noticed that also.
 
It's going overlooked but that was some pretty impressive shooting from that officer with a lot of people in the vicinity in a high pressure situation.

I'm not a huge gun guy, curious if the board ex-military/ sharpshooters agree.

The body cam FOV makes it a little hard to judge to distance between the officer and the girl. Perhaps he was closer to her than it appears in the footage. But yes it does seem like a reasonably difficult shot with a moving target, an innocent person right there, and only one or two seconds to react. But as I said, perhaps he was closer than the cam footage suggests.

In any event, 4 rounds on target and no collateral damage. Tough decision by the cop. Unlike the Internet, there's no time to debate all of the options and alternatives.
 
The body cam FOV makes it a little hard to judge to distance between the officer and the girl. Perhaps he was closer to her than it appears in the footage. But yes it does seem like a reasonably difficult shot with a moving target, an innocent person right there, and only one or two seconds to react. But as I said, perhaps he was closer than the cam footage suggests.

In any event, 4 rounds on target and no collateral damage. Tough decision by the cop. Unlike the Internet, there's no time to debate all of the options and alternatives.
Those body cams shoot extreme wide angle to capture everything, so things are going to appear a bit further than they actually are. It’s like your passenger side car mirror where it says “objects in mirror are closer than they appear.”
 
Did anyone watch Minnesota AG Ellison on 60 Minutes? He came across very well I thought. For example he was asked if the judge should send a message. He said that he doesn't want the judge to be too harsh, nor too soft. It wasn't the job of the judge to send a message, his job was to do justice based on this specific case alone.

I also thought his answers on whether it was a hate crime were great. Simply put, he wouldn't charge anything he couldn't prove and he couldn't prove hate. When asked if it was obvious since Floyd was Black he said that there are a lot of reasons police may use too much force and race was only one. He can't assume race was the reason without some other evidence.
 
  • Like
Reactions: UncleMark
Trial starts Monday.

The Hennepin County Courthouse is surrounded by concrete barriers, fences, and razor wire. There is one public access. The prospective jurors are instructed to park at a remote location and will be brought to the courthouse in sheriff's vehicles. The jury will be partially sequestered and kept anonymous. The judge and others connected with the trial have been subject to significant threats and intimidation tactics at home and at work. This is all bad enough in terms of how to have a fair trial. Added to this are immediate cries by everyone from the Minnesota governor to the Minneapolis mayor to the city dog catcher, not to mention national pundits of all stripes calling for the immediate incarceration and conviction of the cops. Pelosi's House of Representatives even passed the George Floyd Police Reform Act yesterday. The ramifications of a not guilty verdict, or even of a conviction of a lesser charge, are horrendous and maybe unthinkable. The jurors know all of this. They also know that they will be doxxed.

I don't think it's possible for any defendant to get a fair trial in the death of George Floyd. There are significant reasonable doubt questions about the actual cause of death--will that matter?

The threat of mob action (hope of mob action for some) permeates this entire proceeding. Seemingly, the entire country has turned into a lynch mob. In this atmosphere the presumption of innocence and concepts of fair trial have evaporated. SCOTUS will eventually hear the criminal justice ramifications of a case like this. Intimidation and threats won't escape the SCOTUS courtroom either. Is it possible that public opinion is so strong fair trial won't matter?

Mobs are taking over everything from local city councils, to school boards, to state legislatures, to congress and finally the courts. In this case, numerous public officials support the mob. Not good.

Back to the more mundane. Here is the website for public filings in this case. Lots of mundane stuff. Except for brief mention in the Judge's order for partial jury sequestration, you wouldn't know what this case involves. Interestingly, state A.G. Kieth Ellison has assembled a team of legal all stars to prosecute Chauvin. Chauvin is defended by a single criminal lawyer who seems to be well-qualified but alone.

As a personal anecdote. I had a short trial in federal court during the Tim McVeigh trial. While security was enhanced, it was nothing like this. Back then we had a few more concrete barriers and planters to stop truck bombs. The floor where the trial was held was blocked off. No razor wire. The biggest difference was the makeshift stages around for all the pundits to do their daily TV reports with the Federal Courthouse as a back drop.


January 6th insurrection has changed security forever...:-(
 
Right bigmac, it has nothing to do with firebombings of courthouses or anything. It’s only one side’s nuts - not the other’s.
We've known for decades that anarchists are capable of terrorism, and in fact it ought to be expected-- see long history of G7 protests

We've also been concerned that right wing nutjobs ala McVeigh are equally dangerous, but McVeigh and his militia buddies seemed like more of an odd case rather than a sustained threat. We now know, though, that such actions are not outside the norm for such groups.
 
Right bigmac, it has nothing to do with firebombings of courthouses or anything. It’s only one side’s nuts - not the other’s.
I never mentioned "sides" in my response to CoHo.....I was responding to his mention of why the need for increased security at the Minneapolis trial.
 
The dude was guilty. This activist juror didn’t change that.
That’s true. I don’t think this particular juror misconduct will change anything because of the overwhelming case the prosecution put on. No cause and effect. The question really is the due process clause. Is a conviction of a guilty person more important than the due process clause and fair trial requirements? The defense has brought up the Sam Shepherd case. I don’t think there is any way for Chauvin to have received a fair trial under that case. Should the most due process possible under the circumstances be good enough? Interesting law school question to kick around, but not beyond that.
 
That’s true. I don’t think this particular juror misconduct will change anything because of the overwhelming case the prosecution put on. No cause and effect. The question really is the due process clause. Is a conviction of a guilty person more important than the due process clause and fair trial requirements? The defense has brought up the Sam Shepherd case. I don’t think there is any way for Chauvin to have received a fair trial under that case. Should the most due process possible under the circumstances be good enough? Interesting law school question to kick around, but not beyond that.
Judge should have moved the trial; bad juror; 27 mil settlement during; ineffective assistance; Maxine waters - alone nor together enough for post conviction success, but this was all a bad look for the system. Thankfully the cop was overwhelmingly guilty
 
That’s true. I don’t think this particular juror misconduct will change anything because of the overwhelming case the prosecution put on. No cause and effect. The question really is the due process clause. Is a conviction of a guilty person more important than the due process clause and fair trial requirements? The defense has brought up the Sam Shepherd case. I don’t think there is any way for Chauvin to have received a fair trial under that case. Should the most due process possible under the circumstances be good enough? Interesting law school question to kick around, but not beyond that.
I think the only way an appeal wins, as I’m not a lawyer, is if jurors leak that part of the reason they found him guilty was not due to the preponderance of evidence but rather fear of retribution if he was acquitted.
 
  • Like
Reactions: NPT
Did anyone watch Minnesota AG Ellison on 60 Minutes? He came across very well I thought. For example he was asked if the judge should send a message. He said that he doesn't want the judge to be too harsh, nor too soft. It wasn't the job of the judge to send a message, his job was to do justice based on this specific case alone.

I also thought his answers on whether it was a hate crime were great. Simply put, he wouldn't charge anything he couldn't prove and he couldn't prove hate. When asked if it was obvious since Floyd was Black he said that there are a lot of reasons police may use too much force and race was only one. He can't assume race was the reason without some other evidence.

Ellison is a piece of shit, but at least he was somewhat sensible in his responses. And here we sat, with every single outlet that made the entire incident about race.
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT