I am thinking Chauvin was innocent. Once the tapes came out, you can easily tell the use of the force was justified, along with the autopsy report that showed the amount of drugs Floyd was on definitely played a role in his death.
If this didn't happen during an election season, this wouldn't be as "groundbreaking" an incident that the media made this out to be. I'm sorry but a guy dying while resisting arrest and high on enough opiates to kill a horse doesn't merit national coverage. This whole story was clearly just to rile up the Democrats' base and provide easy photo ops for Democrat politicians, as was shown by the ridiculous funeral ceremony which saw Floyd buried in a gold casket with high-profile Democrat politicians in attendance. This was all political theater and the idiot sheep took the bait. This was clearly all curated to push a narrative of "evil, racist, white republicans creating a system of racism that kills innocent black men" that the Democrat heroes will save everybody from.
As to what the ruling will be? I am saying he is innocent of murder charges but might catch a manslaughter conviction. I am thinking that is why it took almost a year for a pretty cut-and-dry case to have a ruling, because they wanted to wait for tensions to cool before making a ruling that they know will clearly cause riots. Although, it doesn't matter what the ruling will be, even if Chauvin gets the death penalty, far-left fanatics will riot because his death wasn't painful enough - expect blood to be shed in far-left cities like Portland and San Francisco.
George Floyd / Chauvin trial starts monday
Non-Running
Current Events
Report Thread
You are reporting this thread to the moderators for review and possible removal from the forum.
-
-
SDSU Aztec wrote:
Chili P. wrote:
849 wrote:
trollism wrote:
A good number of 'white victim' threads started in the last day.
Thought you could at least take Sunday off your victimhood.
It never ends. The entitlement and victimhood is real. I still remember the long faces when OJ was acquitted.
I remember the news showing rooms full of black college students erupting in cheers when Simpson was acquitted. Huge moment in justice and civil rights history.
I don’t recall any white liberals at the time cheering. They just weren’t woke enough yet to believe Simpson was innocent. Today is a completely different story.
That's nonsense. His blood was at the crime scene and today's white liberals aren't going to believe he's innocent. The number of black people believing that O.J. Simpson is guilty has increased from 20% to 50%, so if anything, the trend is going in the opposite direction. DNA evidence was new at the time which resulted in more people thinking he was not guilty.
The white grievance runs strong in this poster. -
querious wrote:
Not in my hood wrote:
What would you have liked to see them do with a guy drugged up, resisting arrest, and was thrashing around?
Responsible policing.
Sounds good! What does that entail?? -
krispy kremlin._._._._. wrote:
Chauvin is 100% innocent.
When he is acquitted, he will have grounds to sue the city and media outlets. He walks away from this with zero jail time and eight figure dollar amounts in his bank account. He was doing his job (a dangerous job) in accordance with department policies and was simply restraining someone in the middle of their self-induced drug overdoes.
Case closed.
While I'm sure of my perspective - as it is based on facts and reality - what is wild to me is the surety that people/media have in Chauvin's *intentions* - how one is able to leap to "racially motivated" based on the evidence is beyond me. I'd argue, if you see that event as racially motivated given all available evidence, I think you need to spend a lot of time in front of the mirror contemplating your own biases.
I refuse to allow there to be another summer of BLM riots. Government leaders need to crack down hard on the violence/looting/destruction of property we saw last Summer. It was completely unacceptable.
+1000000000000000000000! -
pupil3142 wrote:
what cant be seen is how much pressure he was actually putting on floyd's neck. as far as i can see, the pose he was holding can be done from virtually no pressure to lots and lots.
chauvin and the autopsy will testify virtually no pressure.
how can the jury find guilty when there is no actual evidence his neck pressure killed him?
The autopsy showed no damage to his neck or wind pipe. If the cop wanted to kill George he could have rotated his neck and applied his full body weight and that would have done it. -
szgvsd3w4643hg wrote:
One thing I have not heard explained yet is what resulted in the knee on the neck. He was seemingly compliant in the video. I think they then crossed a street or something out of camera range? What then happened to result in Floyd having a cop on his neck?
I don't think he meant to kill the guy. Could he be criminally negligent? Sure. Is there ingrained bias in policing? Yes.
Yeah, most MSM never showed any of the video footage of George resisting arrest, and very few mentioned he was drugged up, and most never mentioned he was a career criminal. They spun it to fit a narrative that would get ratings, but unfortunately their narrative hurt so many other people and businesses and should also be on trial this week! -
krispy kremlin._._._._. wrote:
Going forward, when someone claims something is "racially motivated" the immediate follow-up has to be "how do you know the person's intention?"
It's really unknowable unless you can present a strong history of racial behaviour (KKK member, race-based language).
If we're going to keep doing this, then on the flip side, the argument also needs to start to be made that black people attacking white people is frequently racially motivated. There's frequently a better argument there but some how racial motivation is not brought up or addressed.
That is because white guilt is a real thing and in some cases a real problem. Is this cop a racist? He may or may not be. Who's to say he would or would not have done the same thing to a white man? You can't prove it. Bottom line is, he should have the charges kept because his actions were reprehensible. The other cops who were complicit just show what cop culture is all about. The cops are a clan who protect each other and turn a blind eye to misconduct if it is from within their own force unless there is damning evidence proving otherwise that is brought forth by citizens. -
steve. the. addict... wrote:
krispy kremlin._._._._. wrote:
Going forward, when someone claims something is "racially motivated" the immediate follow-up has to be "how do you know the person's intention?"
It's really unknowable unless you can present a strong history of racial behaviour (KKK member, race-based language).
If we're going to keep doing this, then on the flip side, the argument also needs to start to be made that black people attacking white people is frequently racially motivated. There's frequently a better argument there but some how racial motivation is not brought up or addressed.
That is because white guilt is a real thing and in some cases a real problem. Is this cop a racist? He may or may not be. Who's to say he would or would not have done the same thing to a white man? You can't prove it. Bottom line is, he should have the charges kept because his actions were reprehensible. The other cops who were complicit just show what cop culture is all about. The cops are a clan who protect each other and turn a blind eye to misconduct if it is from within their own force unless there is damning evidence proving otherwise that is brought forth by citizens.
What was reprehensible about his actions?
How would you suggest the police go about restraining a 240 lbs cracked-out career criminal who has spent the last 12 minutes resisting arrest and has pushed the altercation into the street which required two officers to move to traffic control while the fourth officer conducts crowd control? How do you hold that guy do so that he is not a threat to himself or the people around him?
Baton sticks? Multiple taser/electrocution? Close-range pepper spray? Or maybe a simple choke hold...? Send in the social workers>??
Honest questions to steve.the.addict and his ilk: how do you restrain someone resisting arrest in this scenario?
I'm all for some levels of police reform (civil forfeiture, corruption, etc) but basing police reform on situations like George Floyd (and all the other media-hyped incidents) will only get us the *wrong kind* of reforms.
We have idiots leading us, who are making bad policy decisions, because we have a biased, agenda-driven media that can sway the thoughts of low-information Democrats/feminists/sub-95 IQ women/etc. -
Not in my hood wrote:
Yeah, most MSM never showed any of the video footage of George resisting arrest, and very few mentioned he was drugged up, and most never mentioned he was a career criminal. They spun it to fit a narrative that would get ratings, but unfortunately their narrative hurt so many other people and businesses and should also be on trial this week!
I’m a Democrat, and even I think the media has gotten so far away from any kind of truth-seeking, objective, fourth pillar function that it really needs some kind of serious reevaluation. -
dubious wrote:
Not in my hood wrote:
Yeah, most MSM never showed any of the video footage of George resisting arrest, and very few mentioned he was drugged up, and most never mentioned he was a career criminal. They spun it to fit a narrative that would get ratings, but unfortunately their narrative hurt so many other people and businesses and should also be on trial this week!
I’m a Democrat, and even I think the media has gotten so far away from any kind of truth-seeking, objective, fourth pillar function that it really needs some kind of serious reevaluation.
For sure! I like how even after Jakob Blake admits he had a knife and the cop that shot him was acquitted, the MSM still reports Jakob as unarmed. Yet, how many guns were seized or even seen in the January 6 protest and it is called an armed insurrection?!? I have no problem with people who have a different opinion on a subject, but they shouldn't get to create their own "facts"! -
Threads like this easily explain why deaths like this occur in the US. The apologists could form their own parade.
-
If the USA abolished the effective apartheid and gave reparations for slavery, maybe there's a future for a non-racist country.
Otherwise, even if this policeman is put in jail, the underlying issue in society still remains.
Maybe we should have an American-blood president for once - rather than the centuries of European presidents (oh and one occurrence of half European/ half african). -
steve. the. addict... wrote:
krispy kremlin._._._._. wrote:
Going forward, when someone claims something is "racially motivated" the immediate follow-up has to be "how do you know the person's intention?"
It's really unknowable unless you can present a strong history of racial behaviour (KKK member, race-based language).
If we're going to keep doing this, then on the flip side, the argument also needs to start to be made that black people attacking white people is frequently racially motivated. There's frequently a better argument there but some how racial motivation is not brought up or addressed.
That is because white guilt is a real thing and in some cases a real problem. Is this cop a racist? He may or may not be. Who's to say he would or would not have done the same thing to a white man? You can't prove it. Bottom line is, he should have the charges kept because his actions were reprehensible. The other cops who were complicit just show what cop culture is all about. The cops are a clan who protect each other and turn a blind eye to misconduct if it is from within their own force unless there is damning evidence proving otherwise that is brought forth by citizens.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cP1VXhwM2n8 -
SDSU Aztec wrote:
Chili P. wrote:
849 wrote:
trollism wrote:
A good number of 'white victim' threads started in the last day.
Thought you could at least take Sunday off your victimhood.
It never ends. The entitlement and victimhood is real. I still remember the long faces when OJ was acquitted.
I remember the news showing rooms full of black college students erupting in cheers when Simpson was acquitted. Huge moment in justice and civil rights history.
I don’t recall any white liberals at the time cheering. They just weren’t woke enough yet to believe Simpson was innocent. Today is a completely different story.
That's nonsense. His blood was at the crime scene and today's white liberals aren't going to believe he's innocent. The number of black people believing that O.J. Simpson is guilty has increased from 20% to 50%, so if anything, the trend is going in the opposite direction. DNA evidence was new at the time which resulted in more people thinking he was not guilty.
Yo, you are in HS and weren’t even born when this happened, so don’t comment on how people felt or would feel. It was completely racially divided at the time. People vote with their emotions. Blacks thought the cops were out to get him, whites thought he was innocent. No one cares about nuance then or now. -
Stevie Wonder could see Chauvin and the other officers are guilty. Handcuffed face down in the middle of the street with a knee on your neck for 8 minutes as by standers plead for you to not kill him.
If he isn't found guilty. America is going to burn. -
steve. the. addict... wrote:
krispy kremlin._._._._. wrote:
Going forward, when someone claims something is "racially motivated" the immediate follow-up has to be "how do you know the person's intention?"
It's really unknowable unless you can present a strong history of racial behaviour (KKK member, race-based language).
If we're going to keep doing this, then on the flip side, the argument also needs to start to be made that black people attacking white people is frequently racially motivated. There's frequently a better argument there but some how racial motivation is not brought up or addressed.
That is because white guilt is a real thing and in some cases a real problem. Is this cop a racist? He may or may not be. Who's to say he would or would not have done the same thing to a white man? You can't prove it. Bottom line is, he should have the charges kept because his actions were reprehensible. The other cops who were complicit just show what cop culture is all about. The cops are a clan who protect each other and turn a blind eye to misconduct if it is from within their own force unless there is damning evidence proving otherwise that is brought forth by citizens.
I do NOT think White Guilt is real, If asked about the Trans Atlantic Slave Trade, Gulags, Holocaust, Holdomer in Ukraine, Killing Fields in Cambodia etc all of these were Historical Atrocities and it was unfortunate they happened, but it is not like when I stole a Candy Bar at about age 10 where a few hours later, I was thinking, I got a free Candy Bar, but I was wrong, I am not going to do that again (And I haven't) I did have guilt over the candy bar, but reading about Historical Atrocities does not make me feel Guilty, I also don't think Blacks should feel guilty for the Thousands of years Blacks had slaves in Africa (Note there is still over 60 Million Slaves in the World mostly in 3rd World Countries CURRENTLY meaning 2021) I think the people participating in this should feel guilty, but I doubt they do, By the way Dubai was built largely by slaves, they put up fliers in African Countries saying work available, then when the Africans get there they make them surrender their passports and the pay they were promised they take it and say this pays for the food and housing we are providing A SCAM, I do not hold Blacks responsible for what Idi Amin did, I do not hold Asians responsible for what Pol Pot did, I do not hold Whites responsible for things that happened before they were born and I do not want anyone to feel guilty over things they had nothing to do with.
I think people SHOULD be responsible for what they did NOT because they just happened to share a physical characteristic with them, I don't know why there are so few who think this. -
Fentanyl is the silent killer.
Also, medical incompetence is not the same as racism.
I'm not looking forward to the riots when Chauvin receives a fair and just verdict. Chauvin may be a racist meron, but that has nothing to do with the Floyd incident. It will be interesting to see if the politicians have the backbone to support the judiciary, or if they choose to pander to the mob as well. -
John Scott wrote:
Fentanyl is the silent killer.
Also, medical incompetence is not the same as racism.
I'm not looking forward to the riots when Chauvin receives a fair and just verdict. Chauvin may be a racist meron, but that has nothing to do with the Floyd incident. It will be interesting to see if the politicians have the backbone to support the judiciary, or if they choose to pander to the mob as well.
Biden has been known to be tough on crime, his opponents tried to use it against him in the Primaries. I don't think he will let riots get too out of control. -
John Scott wrote:
Fentanyl is the silent killer.
Also, medical incompetence is not the same as racism.
I'm not looking forward to the riots when Chauvin receives a fair and just verdict. Chauvin may be a racist meron, but that has nothing to do with the Floyd incident. It will be interesting to see if the politicians have the backbone to support the judiciary, or if they choose to pander to the mob as well.
In any other case, the lethal levels of fentanyl would raise a reasonable doubt as to whether Chauvin's restraint killed Floyd. Fentanyl is a respiratory depressant - it interferes with a user's ability to breathe. Floyd was showing signs of fentanyl overdose before he was restrained. (Floyd may have ingested the fentanyl when he realized he was about to be arrested - he had done that exact same thing a year prior when facing arrest). Basically, no matter what way Chauvin restrained him, Floyd was going to die without immediate medical attention.
But this isn't any other case. It will be hard for any juror to vote for acquittal in the current media environment. Furthermore, this is Minneapolis, and the citizens are as far-left (and arguably crazy) as the city council they elected. The Minneapolis city council has an acknowledged and proud Antifa member, another member who said on national TV that calling 911 during a home invasion "comes from a place of privilege," and all its members voted to defund the police during a huge rise in violent crime in 2020 (and then, incredibly, blamed the police for not doing their job to stop the crime wave). Many of this posters in this thread (and other similar threads) show how easy it is for a person to willfully ignore the fentanyl evidence if they want to. Floyd is likely to have a lot of similar mentalities on the jury. -
All it takes is 1 sane juror who can see this for what it is... An OD.
