Derek Chauvin Murder Trial is on

Whatever the defense has to acquit Chauvin reamains to be seen. There wsa evidence shown that might and will convict Chauvin of the crime. I won't be surprised if he gets life without parole.

 

I won't be surprised if Chauvin Gets convicted which I hope happens. If not, there might be chaos all over the place.

 

There may be chaos to follow.

 

Nonsense, none of these expert witnesses are contradicting each other. In any case, they ALL concur, Chauvin's actions/inactions are the substantive causal factor in Floyd's death. And it was YOU who wrote this, you didn't cite anyone who actually testified who made this claim:

 

That has largely been disposed of as a cause by the prosecution.

 

They're grasping at straws. We'll see what the defense puts forward and supports as an alternate cause of death.

 

That shouldn't influence the decision.

 

What consequence to you is it if he doesn't get convicted ?

Why would you hope such a thing ?

Why have a democracy if the judicial system is going to be doubted ?

If chaos arises afterwards because people don't agree with the verdict , democracy and fare trials , then that action can be classed as a civil war .

The judicial system is there for a reason , everybody must respect this process or we become no more than animals .

 

I'm open to suggestions on how to reduce the rate of incarceration.

 

Are you one of those many who believes we don't really need a trial? Your mind sounds made up.

If so, you do not grant Chauvin the presumption of innocence to which he is entitled and could not have served on the jury.

Thankfully, they found some people who promised to keep an open mind and be fair to both sides.

 

Sounds like we're already there.

 

Nobody should threaten the constitution based on subjective whims .

 

Defund the cops

 

LOL, I guess that's one way.

 

If you read my posts you would know that's not true at all. If Chauvin does not receive all the due process protections mandated by the Constitution and especially the Bill of Rights then it would be a kangaroo court. So far I haven't seen anything that suggests otherwise.

I'm not a court of law and for me the evidence is that by his actions and inactions Chauvin murdered Floyd is overwhelming. No evidence has been presented thus far that shows otherwise.

In accordance with US legal doctrine, Chauvin is innocent unless and until proven guilty by a valid court of law. That is indisputable. I personally have no obligation to presume Chauvin did not murder Floyd when everything so far tells me otherwise.

I also hope that's true of everyone involved in this case. I would say I wouldn't expect anything less but unfortunately the (in)justice system in the US is severely defective and I rarely have any confidence that a typical court in the US is fair to both sides. This case however is of such high profile that I'm leaning on the probability that it will be fair to both sides.

 

Then just say you'll keep an open mind and we'll be good. You sound like you re ready to ship him off to the penitentiary. Which is your right, but it makes debate impossible.

 

If everyone felt as you did, the court would not have been able to seat a single juror -- think about that for a second -- and there could be no constitutionally sufficient trial. And Chauvin would be released with zero consequences. Is that what you want?

 

The best bet is that at least 1 juror won't vote to convict.
So far at least, the rest is BS.

 

I am here to discuss issues as I see fit. Whether that means being good with another poster or not is irrelevant. What I do or don't do is not relevant to the Chauvin case, which is the actual subject of this discussion. That said I am quite interested in all aspects of this trial, including but not limited to the defense's tactics.

I don't debate, I discuss. A debate is a game of sorts with a winner and a loser. I'm not here to play games. What happens to Chauvin is what happens to Chauvin. From my perspective he's thoroughly screwed whether he's found guilty or not. And it couldn't happen to a more deserving mentally deranged person.

That's why juries are chosen from those who know nothing or as little about the case in question as possible. They did select a jury despite the notoriety of the event, didn't they?

Even if Chauvin is released, the consequences of his actions are never going to be zero. What I want or not is never going to change the (in)justice system in the US.

 

Do you believe because he is a former Minneapolis Policeman, He'll somehow get off?

 

I don't know what will happen the next day.

 

It is relevant to my deciding whether you can and will debate with an open mind. So far, it's not looking good.

I cannot understand how any educated adult would be ready to pronounce a verdict in a murder trial -- a verdict of guilt! -- before all the evidence has been presented.

 

You seem quite un-interested in due process, the presumption of innocence, and the standard of "proof beyond reasonable doubt". Those are pretty important "aspects."

Did you know that the jury will be instructed to acquit if they have a single reasonable doubt about any element of the charged offense(s)? For example, if they have a reasonable doubt that Chauvin intended to kill the victim? This means that. even if they think he is probably guilty, they must acquit of they have any doubt at all.

(I'm referring here to the murder charge; manslaughter is a whole different animal in terms of intent.)

 

I was replying to you in a hypothetical sense if there is an acquittal . Additionally explaining that if chaos arises from an acquittal , that is an attack on democracy and the constitution .

 

Dude I did the job for 30 years. And yes I copped my share of abuse and (sometimes ) praise from the public.

To the extent BLM etc has impacted larger communities where a large number of questionable deaths have occurred it reflects a number of issues.

On the side of the police you have poor leadership, poor training and poor oversight and possibly but not always poor budgets. Possibly poor recruitment practices as well though if your really struggling to hire IMO that reflects on the community itself to. One of the key issues , and it applies to all jobs everywhere is cutting loose the ones that for whatever reason aren't making the grade. Private enterprise does it routiinely but it's much harder in bureaucracies. Ask any cop, after whatching new recruits for a couple of years their team can usually pick those who are not cutting it. Then ask them how hard it is to remove them.

And outside of recruiting those elements come into play unevenly. While the entire force can be impacted it's also possible that they are localized in one or a few sections, not all commands. (Although if not addressed the rot can spread.) Finally even if localized when it ends in tears ALL the cops on the force concerned get tarred with the same brush even the ones who have been doing their jobs professionally for decades. And morale tanks.

On the community side, most of the communities affected are low income/high crime. And by the same token unwilling or unable to address the social issues that are leading to confrontations in the first place. And it's easy for parts of that community to politicize any interactions with Police now matter how routine.

Finally theres racism, which is definitely an issue but it's one that cuts both ways.

So back to topic, on this occasion , based on the limited evidence to date this cop was grossly negligent. Just like anyone working in any other profession can be. Murder??