Poll of the Day > Are you satisfied with the verdict in the chauvin trial?

(+) Yeah! (+)

zebatov posted...

He should have got man two at best. Maxine Waters comments were entirely inciting. If the options were find a guy guilty of all charges or endure more rioting and destruction of private property across the entire country, I know which one Id choose.

maxine waters did say that? disgusting

KazGT6 posted...

maxine waters did say that? disgusting

https://www.cnn.com/2021/04/19/politics/maxine-waters-derek-chauvin-trial/index.html

I have misgivings about it. It might have been better if they didn't get him on all counts. What I don't want to see is a successful appeal overturning the entire conviction because of the perception that he didn't get a fair trial. That argument is a lot easier to make now.

---

KazGT6 posted...

maxine waters did say that? disgusting

she literally just said that protesters might need to be more confrontational in their arguments for civil rights and justice. The folks bending over backwards trying to distort her words into a call for violence are the same folks who think the previous president did nothing to encourage the violent riot of the capital on January 6th.

There is a reason they all get hyperbolic and paraphrase because if they post her exact quote in context it destroys their flimsy ass illusion.

https://www.politifact.com/article/2021/apr/21/what-rep-maxine-waters-said-about-chauvin-trial-an/

---

---

zebatov posted...

He should have got man two at best.

Why

---

Metalsonic66 posted...

Why

because havent you ever been told that someone isnt breathing and has no pulse but just accidentally kept kneeling down on their neck and chest for several more minutes?

---

Mead posted...

@Revelation34

show me any evidence whatsoever that cops are trained to put their body weight on someones neck and chest for nearly 9 minutes long after they stopped resisting, breathing, and no longer have a pulse

go ahead Ill wait

otherwise shut the fuck up and stop trying to be potds most ignorant hall monitor

Putting a knee on a neck was part of his training. They got rid of that when they updated the training. I never said anything about the length of time that he did it.

Metalsonic66 posted...

Why

He went to Google University of Law.
---

Revelation34 posted...

I never said anything about the length of time that he did it.

well that is what was being discussed, maybe think next time before you try to pedantically correct everyone

---

Mead posted...

well that is what was being discussed, maybe think next time before you try to pedantically correct everyone

The original post that started all the quotes never said anything about the length of time either.
---

Revelation34 posted...

The original post that started all the quotes never said anything about the length of time either.

the length of time is literally what made this murder

so it very much matters contextually my dude

---

Mead posted...

the length of time is literally what made this murder

so it very much matters contextually my dude

If we go by that then it should be considered murder by even doing it in the first place. It shouldn't be used at all.
---

Revelation34 posted...

If we go by that then it should be considered murder by even doing it in the first place.

holy shit you are just exhausting with your pedantic nonsense

the thing that made it murder was Chauvin applying pressure for a fatally long period of time. If someone is actively being violent or resisting an arrest then of course an officer has got to use some amount of force to protect themself and the person being arrested.

---

Mead posted...

holy shit you are just exhausting with your pedantic nonsense

the thing that made it murder was Chauvin applying pressure for a fatally long period of time. If someone is actively being violent or resisting an arrest then of course an officer has got to use some amount of force to protect themself and the person being arrested.

There are other ways to restrain somebody. It's a shit maneuver that should never be used.
---

Revelation34 posted...

If we go by that then it should be considered murder by even doing it in the first place. It shouldn't be used at all.

It shouldn't, but there's a world of difference between kneeling on somebody's neck for a few seconds and kneeling on their neck for nine minutes. Most obviously, people can generally go without breathing for 30-60 seconds without suffering any particular harm, but more than 3 minutes is fatal. Less obviously, putting pressure on the carotid sinus can stop the heart (which is considerably more dangerous than being choked, but you'll still see dramatically worse outcomes the longer the person goes without circulation) and sustaining pressure can tire out and weaken the muscles of the neck and increase the risk of spinal injury. In this particular case, pinning him to the ground near a running car exposed him to a risk of CO poisoning, the severity of which would increase the longer he was held there (though that would apply regardless of the knee).

Yes, kneeling on people's necks is dangerous and should not be considered part of an officer's arsenal of restraining techniques, but that doesn't mean it isn't more dangerous to sustain it for a longer time.

---

side note: Virginia police fired one of their officers INSTANTLY as soon as they found out they donated $25 to Kyle Rittenhouse

:V


---

Lokarin posted...

side note: Virginia police fired one of their officers INSTANTLY as soon as they found out they donated $25 to Kyle Rittenhouse

:V

He was fired for the comments related to the donation, not the donation itself.
---

Based on what I know about the incident, he shouldve been charged with manslaughter, not murder, because at the end of the day, it still was an accidental death.The judge made an example out of him.

Mead posted...

Lol

---

AWarAmp84 posted...

he shouldve been charged with manslaughter, not murder, because at the end of the day, it still was an accidental death

Why do you think this

---

I'm glad justice was served.

---

It's a tricky situation actually and not as cut and dry as it may seem to some. He was in an official capacity but acted against his training and directly put someone's life in danger. The jury decided that he did that ON PURPOSE since the convicted him of actual murder (manslaughter is when you had no intent and it was an accident based on your actions). I believe they convicted him both for the kneeling and for not getting him the medical attention he needed after that (have not read the whole thing).

We will have to see how much time he gets since there is a large range for each charge, and also if they are consequitive sentances or done at the same time. Based on the laws of that state i belive he could still get out in about 6 years minimum but that is highly unlikely.

Anyway how much time he deserves is kinda hard to really pin down, the dude was smiling and laughing while kneeling on his neck, and I heard he had a history with George as well (since George was a bouncer I believe). If it was personal and he acted that way towards george because of a grudge, that could easily make it be premeditated, and that would explain the murder charge/s.

I think throwing him away for life is over kill, and even something like 40 years would be too long. A message has to be sent that things like this are not ok, and cops can't "literally" get away with murder, but you have people who straight up walk up to someone and blow their brains out, they only get 5 years.....so yeah, giving the dude 20+ years seems pretty harsh considering he was doing a job that did give him some expectation of being able to do what he did (even if he did it wrong and endangered George's life etc). That should "normally" be a mitigating factor, possibly dropping a murder conviction down to manslaughter etc.

This is so highly publicized and racial tension is so high about it though, that yeah, there is no way that is going to happen.

---

wolfy42 posted...

It's a tricky situation actually and not as cut and dry as it may seem to some.

it really, really is

---

He made a decision to keep his weight on Floyd long after he stopped breathing and for several minutes after his heart stopped. He should get at the very least a similar sentence to what most murderers get. Anything less than twenty years would not portray that the legal system is just.

---

wolfy42 posted...

giving the dude 20+ years seems pretty harsh

I dont agree

---

wolfy42 posted...

It's a tricky situation actually and not as cut and dry as it may seem to some.

There are not, in fact, two sides to everything. When you're talking about abusers or systematic oppression, not taking the side of the victim enables the abuser/oppressor. Abusers/oppressors are quite happy that you only see gray when you look at what should be a black & white situation, because gray is a huge improvement from black. And that ensures that they will maintain the status quo where they win at the expense of their victims.

wolfy42 posted...

He was in an official capacity

Which makes things worse, not better. When police take someone into custody, they are legally and morally responsible for that person's well-being.

wolfy42 posted...

but acted against his training and directly put someone's life in danger.

He didn't "put someone's life in danger." That would only be the case if George Floyd survived with severe/critical injuries. He was straight up MURDERED while bystanders pleaded with Chauvin to stop, but he continued even when George no longer had a pulse.

wolfy42 posted...

Anyway how much time he deserves is kinda hard to really pin down, the dude was smiling and laughing while kneeling on his neck

What you just described is the behavior of a sociopath. They lack the part of the brain that controls empathy, which affects much more than just compassion; it reduces their ability to relate to others. Because of that, they aren't affected by social cues that would cause others to modify their behavior (fear of reputation loss, defying authority, etc.) Even though people with empathy are capable of murdering in self-defense or for personal gain, they possess the empathy to relate to the victim and very often find it to be a traumatic experience, even if they hate the person. Someone with empathy won't murder for the sake of murder, at the very least out of fear for societal consequences (going to jail, etc.). Someone who can murder a human being in broad daylight, in front of a crowd, knowing they are being recorded, and smile and giggle while doing it, is a danger to society. We currently do not have the means to treat these people; in fact, treatment tends to make them worse instead of better. Chauvin should be behind bars for the rest of his life.

wolfy42 posted...

you have people who straight up walk up to someone and blow their brains out, they only get 5 years

I tried to Google this but couldn't turn up anything. Even if true, two wrongs don't make a right, or do you just believe honestly that human life is that cheap?

wolfy42 posted...

so yeah, giving the dude 20+ years seems pretty harsh considering he was doing a job that did give him some expectation of being able to do what he did (even if he did it wrong and endangered George's life etc)

So much wrong in so few words.

Again, George Floyd's life wasn't just endangered; he DIED because he was murdered. He didn't die because Chauvin made a mistake while following police protocol. He died because Chauvin purposely cut off his oxygen for NINE minutes. Around two minutes with no oxygen is loss of consciousness, four minutes is permanent brain damage, five minutes and beyond is death. And Chauvin maintained his position for NINE MINUTES, long after he had no pulse, and never summoned medical assistance. If it was an accident, why didn't Chauvin stop after any of the 20+ times George Floyd said he couldn't breathe? Why didn't he stop when the bystanders pleaded with him to stop? Why didn't he stop when he had no pulse? You don't "accidentally" cut off someone's oxygen for nine minutes. And no, his job absolutely did not give him the expectation that he could do what he did; it was only permitted very briefly to subdue a resisting, thrashing suspect, and was supposed to be stopped as soon as the suspect quit resisting. George Floyd did not resist; Chauvin's lawyer laughably tried to argue that Floyd saying "I can't breathe" was resisting arrest because video clearly showed that he did not resist.

---

I don't believe Chauvin tried to murder George Floyd in front of a camera, and laughed while doing it. I watched the video, and I think the dude is a total arsehat, but I don't think he would commit murder on purpose while being witnessed by other cops and citizens (including kids). I could be wrong, but I highly doubt it.

Obviously the jury thinks he did, and there may be information I don't have. To be convicted of murder he has to have had intent to kill, and the jury believes he did. From watching the video I certainly thought he deserved jail time and was responsible for George's death, but I personally thought it was more along the lines of manslaughter, not murder.

And yeah voluntary manslaughter is 3, 6 or 11 years depending on the circumstances (half of that is time actually served) so you can get out in under 2 years. Second degree murder is 15 now I think (varies), so it's about 7-8 years not 5. First degree is still 25 to life I think (but you can actually shoot a person and only get second degree as long as it wasn't pre-meditated (Although if it's in the act of commiting a felony (robbing a bank for instance) it would probably be first degree).

I refute the idea that Chavin actually tried to murder George, he was having a lark kneeling on him, but still thought he was ok, when he found out he wasn't the dude didn't realize how serious it was, and how seriously he would be in trouble, and didn't do what he should have. He def deserved jail time, but I don't think it actually rose to the level of 2nd degree murder, and even the prosecution and the jury didn't think it rose to first degree murder.

If I was his defense attorney I would state that either my client was insane as he committed murder in front of witnesses and while being filmed and laughed while doing so, or he did not know that he was endangering George's life, or that he could die (possibly having done something similar in the past without negative results or as negative). While this certainly would not have prevented him from being found guilty of manslaughter, it might have prevented the murder charges.

I think he would have to be literally crazy to commit murder in front of other cops, people with cameras/phones, kids etc.

He does not appear to be crazy, so I contend that he didn't know how bad george floyd's condition was, or that he was really having a hard time breathing, had stopped breathing etc.

---

wolfy stop digging man

---

25% of people are crazy.

wolfy42 posted...

I don't think he would commit murder on purpose while being witnessed by other cops and citizens (including kids). I could be wrong, but I highly doubt it.

You should have stopped at "I could be wrong," because you are. This happens literally all the fucking time, especially to brown and black people. Cops are rarely indicted for murder and even more rarely convicted, even when there's video proof of guilt. American police kill over a thousand civilians a year, many of them innocent, fleeing, or only guilty of misdemeanors. The willful ignorance of people like you helps perpetuate this system.

https://tinyurl.com/3x3f76hh

https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2021/04/20/chauvin-police-officer/

wolfy42 posted...

Obviously the jury thinks he did, and there may be information I don't have.

You have more information available to you than the jury, because the judge strictly limits what is allowed to evidence. But you're stubbornly clinging to incredibly naive and downright ignorant views in defiance of facts and reality. I hate to break it to you, but the world is not as nice and fair as you seem to want to believe it is.

wolfy42 posted...

To be convicted of murder he has to have had intent to kill, and the jury believes he did.

It's first degree murder that requires proving intent to kill. Second degree murder is not premeditated.

wolfy42 posted...

I refute the idea that Chavin actually tried to murder George, he was having a lark kneeling on him, but still thought he was ok, when he found out he wasn't the dude didn't realize how serious it was,

....Are you fucking serious???

This was not some frat boy hazing incident gone terribly wrong.

Derek Chauvin purposefully applied lethal force against a non-resisting victim in defiance of police protocol.

George Floyd said over 20 times he couldn't breathe.

Derek Chauvin continued cutting off his oxygen.

Bystanders pleaded with Chauvin to stop.

Chauvin didn't stop. Eventually, George Floyd no longer had a pulse.

Even when he no longer had a pulse, Chauvin continued depriving him of oxygen for over two minutes.

There is no way that Derek Chauvin thought George Floyd was okay despite not being able to breathe and not having a pulse.

There is no way it was an accident.

wolfy42 posted...

even the prosecution and the jury didn't think it rose to first degree murder.

The jury doesn't make the decision what charges are brought. The only reason he wasn't charged with murder one was because he's a cop, and it's extremely difficult to indict a cop, let alone convict one. So the prosecutors went for lesser charges to make it easier to convict him.

wolfy42 posted...

If I was his defense attorney I would state that either my client was insane as he committed murder in front of witnesses and while being filmed and laughed while doing so

It's a good thing you're not a defense attorney, because you have no fucking clue what you're talking about. An insanity defense requires a diagnosis of a mental health disorder that would render someone incapable of distinguishing reality from fantasy and right or wrong. It's not "you'd have to be crazy to do that!" It's crazy like if I ask you what you'd like to wear today and you reply telling me about the Christmas party you had with the queen of the ants.

wolfy42 posted...

he did not know that he was endangering George's life,

Yeah, who knew that not being able to breathe can kill someone? /sarcasm

---

wolfy42 posted...

giving the dude 20+ years seems pretty harsh considering he was doing a job that did give him some expectation of being able to do what he did (even if he did it wrong and endangered George's life etc). That should "normally" be a mitigating factor, possibly dropping a murder conviction down to manslaughter etc.

Quite the contrary: Because police are working in a capacity that offers them the freedom to take lives as necessary, they should be held to a higher standard for not abusing that power and punished more severely if they do. That this murder was committed by a cop should be an exacerbating factor, not a mitigating one. He has a sworn responsibility to not abuse his power, and he violated that oath.

wolfy42 posted...

he did not know that he was endangering George's life, or that he could die

Frankly, if he's too stupid to know that kneeling on somebody's neck for nine minutes can kill them, I'm just as happy locking him up for life as if he did so maliciously. That kind of impossible stupidity is just as much a danger to society as malice would be.

---

wolfy42 posted...

but I don't think he would commit murder on purpose while being witnessed by other cops and citizens (including kids).

He might have if he thought hed get away with it... And fortunately (unfortunately for him), he did not...
---

Don't really care, the burning and looting will continue regardless of that.

---

I'm not sure what burning and looting is going on right now. If you mean in general, I doubt anyone believed that one court case would end riots for all time.

---

Wolfy you dont put your knee on somebodys neck and expect them to survive for obvious reasons.

---

keyblader1985 posted...

I'm not sure what burning and looting is going on right now. If you mean in general, I doubt anyone believed that one court case would end riots for all time.

the same drones whining about riots are the same ones that insist 1/6 wasnt a riot, despite that mob breaking shit, assaulting cops, and stealing things

wonder what key difference there is between the two groups that gives them a shift in perspective

---

Ooh, ooh! *raises hand*

---

Lirishae posted...

You should have stopped at "I could be wrong," because you are. This happens literally all the fucking time, especially to brown and black people. Cops are rarely indicted for murder and even more rarely convicted, even when there's video proof of guilt. American police kill over a thousand civilians a year, many of them innocent, fleeing, or only guilty of misdemeanors. The willful ignorance of people like you helps perpetuate this system.

https://tinyurl.com/3x3f76hh

https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2021/04/20/chauvin-police-officer/

You have more information available to you than the jury, because the judge strictly limits what is allowed to evidence. But you're stubbornly clinging to incredibly naive and downright ignorant views in defiance of facts and reality. I hate to break it to you, but the world is not as nice and fair as you seem to want to believe it is.

It's first degree murder that requires proving intent to kill. Second degree murder is not premeditated.

....Are you fucking serious???

This was not some frat boy hazing incident gone terribly wrong.

Derek Chauvin purposefully applied lethal force against a non-resisting victim in defiance of police protocol.

George Floyd said over 20 times he couldn't breathe.

Derek Chauvin continued cutting off his oxygen.

Bystanders pleaded with Chauvin to stop.

Chauvin didn't stop. Eventually, George Floyd no longer had a pulse.

Even when he no longer had a pulse, Chauvin continued depriving him of oxygen for over two minutes.

There is no way that Derek Chauvin thought George Floyd was okay despite not being able to breathe and not having a pulse.

There is no way it was an accident.

The jury doesn't make the decision what charges are brought. The only reason he wasn't charged with murder one was because he's a cop, and it's extremely difficult to indict a cop, let alone convict one. So the prosecutors went for lesser charges to make it easier to convict him.

It's a good thing you're not a defense attorney, because you have no fucking clue what you're talking about. An insanity defense requires a diagnosis of a mental health disorder that would render someone incapable of distinguishing reality from fantasy and right or wrong. It's not "you'd have to be crazy to do that!" It's crazy like if I ask you what you'd like to wear today and you reply telling me about the Christmas party you had with the queen of the ants.

Yeah, who knew that not being able to breathe can kill someone? /sarcasm

No he wasn't charged with that because it would have had to been proved it was premeditated. That would have been impossible. Especially because there was no evidence they knew each other regardless if they worked at the same place.

Hemidactylus posted...

Don't really care, the burning and looting will continue regardless of that.

Yet nothing happened after he was convicted.
---

Revelation34 posted...

No he wasn't charged with that because it would have had to been proved it was premeditated. That would have been impossible. Especially because there was no evidence they knew each other regardless if they worked at the same place.

Pretty sure there was evidence that they knew each other, but yeah, proving murder 1 here would have been virtually impossible, such that charging him with it would just result in him going free. What's-his-douche is obviously a murderer, but I see no basis here to suspect that he planned it before the encounter started.

---

If it was premeditated, then it's likely that being arrested and convicted was also a part of the plan.

We're falling right into his trap.

---

Blightzkrieg posted...

If it was premeditated, then it's likely that being arrested and convicted was also a part of the plan.

We're falling right into his trap.

All according to keikaku.

---

adjl posted...

All according to keikaku.

Chauvin's Keikaku aside, the fact that Light Yagami's plan worked out in that scene is fucking wild

---

wolfy42 posted...

I could be wrong, but I highly doubt it.

You are wrong

---

yeah murder is murder. He knows what he did was wrong. In an era of BLM the jury had no choice but to throw the book at him otherwise millions of dollars would've been destroyed and there would've been additional causalities and tensions in this country.

When you plot all the reason for vs all the reason not its really an easy answer.

adjl posted...

Because police are working in a capacity that offers them the freedom to take lives as necessary, they should be held to a higher standard for not abusing that power and punished more severely if they do

This

---

teddy241 posted...

In an era of BLM the jury had no choice but to throw the book at him otherwise millions of dollars would've been destroyed and there would've been additional causalities and tensions in this country

in any era, he committed murder

---

Blightzkrieg posted...

If it was premeditated, then it's likely that being arrested and convicted was also a part of the plan.

We're falling right into his trap.

Motherfucker is playing 4D chess.

---

Mead posted...

she literally just said that protesters might need to be more confrontational in their arguments for civil rights and justice. The folks bending over backwards trying to distort her words into a call for violence are the same folks who think the previous president did nothing to encourage the violent riot of the capital on January 6th.

There is a reason they all get hyperbolic and paraphrase because if they post her exact quote in context it destroys their flimsy ass illusion.

https://www.politifact.com/article/2021/apr/21/what-rep-maxine-waters-said-about-chauvin-trial-an/

I obviously disagree with her, because violence is the problem that caused all this, but it is something to see republicans say suddenly start crying violence violence at her comment.
fucking hypocrits love inciting violence. Stfu

For clarity my comment isnt directed at you. Just the link in general.

---

Yeah, I certainly don't think that Arsehat wouldn't kill someone, so I don't think it's a peachy universe we live in, i just don't think he'd do it in front of so many witnesses on purpose.

I honestly think he has done similar things in the past and got away with it, the person obviously didn't die or we would have heard about previous incidents, but I would be amazed if that was the first time he ever kneeled on someone's neck.

Maybe it was the first time he did it for so long.

I also need to watch the video again as it's been along time since I saw it.

I do have a tendency to believe people will act in a logical manner, even though a lifetime of evidence has shown that not to be true. It doesn't seem logical to me that he would literally kill someone in front of all those witnesses and while on film, even if he did think he would normally get away with it.

But ya'll are right, people do totally stupid, illogical things all the time, so maybe he really did.

I am not interested enough to actually watch the trial and see what defenses were put forth, but I would be interested in knowing if that was actually brought up (he obviously knew he was being filmed for instance, and he knew there were tons of witnesses etc).

---