Floyd Murder Trial

[Guest]

@Wetlander said:

@greediron said:

@StickyBun said:
If the jury valued Floyd's life, this was the only verdict possible. 

or their own.

Or maybe they believed he was guilty after the prosecution presented all the evidence? 

Chauvin apparently was willing to plea for third degree murder before it went to trial...  so...  even the accused felt he was guilty of a serious crime.

When you make comments like this it really makes me wonder if you actually were disgusted by the video.

Makes me wonder why you wonder.

I said nothing about the verdict being right or wrong.  Just that stupid politicians inciting people, news doxxing jurors, you gotta wonder if they feared for their safety.  I fully expect an appeal based on those reasons.

[Guest]

But here, I will leave you with this so you can wonder if you were disgusted by the video

https://notthebee.com/article/blm-protes...-was-white

[Guest]

@AGRforever said:
Honest question. If you kill one person, how can you be guilty of 

2nd
3rd and
manslaughter

The multiple charges aren't unusual. They charge all possibilities that could apply. Once convicted, they usually get merged into one.

[Guest]

@Nichelle said:

@AGRforever said:
Honest question. If you kill one person, how can you be guilty of 

2nd
3rd and
manslaughter

The multiple charges aren't unusual. They charge all possibilities that could apply. Once convicted, they usually get merged into one.

Because you can only be sentenced on one charge in one crime.  If there was more than one victim he could be charged and sentenced on a string of charges. This is to help prosecution when they over charge to prevent them from getting hung out to dry for over charging defendents. 

This is a little sketchy,  but in the end it actually serves justice imo as it allows a prosecutor to go for what the law calls for without concern for what a maliced jury might end up finding.

[Guest]

Oh and one more comment...

YES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!This is the right side of history.

[Guest]

The jury did the right thing. The prosecution presented the case and the message has been sent, no one is above the law. Accountability and consequences for actions, may that continue to be handed out. 

[Guest]

One question,  I saw a TV covering  the story yesterday and there were some dudes throwing money?  WTF was that about?  They had bundles of bills and would open them up and throw them on the ground?

[Guest]

@JimmyinSD said:
One question,  I saw a TV covering  the story yesterday and there were some dudes throwing money?  WTF was that about?  They had bundles of bills and would open them up and throw them on the ground?

These kinds of events bring out the weirdos, the hustlers and the urban 'entrepreneurs'. I started watching the coverage about 4:40 pm eastern time waiting for the verdict and they were at this location where a very small gathering of people were. 80% of them white kids looking for stuff to post on their Instagram accounts. Lookie-loos. As the crowd grows, everyone is very chill. NBC is right there trying to stir the shit up, of course. The verdict comes in, some light celebrating by some but the relaxed atmosphere continues (which is great).....but NBC can't have it. Again, trying their damnedest to get everyone riled up by having black attorneys GUESS what the sentencing will be: and surprise, they all guess VERY low just to try and stir it up. I switched it off.

[Guest]

Some interesting legal angle perspectives:
Minneapolis criminal defense lawyer Fred Goetz said the overwhelming heartbreak of the eyewitnesses pulled the jurors right into the scene."Once that powerful emotional connection was made, the defense certainly had great challenges in overcoming that with a rational evidence-based argument," Goetz said. "When you make a powerful first emotional impression, it's exceedingly difficult to get a jury to put that aside."


Several legal analysts said prosecutors came into the trial with the evidence on their side, and used it flawlessly. After the eyewitnesses, they called a series of high-ranking police officers to the stand who denounced Chauvin. Then came medical experts who deftly explained the science of how the lungs and heart work. Retired Hennepin County District Judge Kevin Burke said prosecutors in the case provided "compelling evidence" and made no mistakes. He praised the prosecution's tone, calling it "respectful.


Carolyn Grose, a professor at Mitchell Hamline School of Law, said prosecutors weren't heavy-handed. They let the community and the evidence "speak for itself," she said. "The defense was saying, 'Don't believe what you see. The jury's bottom line was, 'No, we believe what we see.' " Also significant, she said, was "getting the other cops to make an indictment of one of their own."



Sheila Bedi, professor and director of the Community Justice and Civil Rights Clinic at Northwestern University Pritzker School of Law in Chicago, said the video itself "was just so brutal that the defense was asking the jury to not believe its eyes and that was impossible for the jury to do."




University of Minnesota Law Prof. Jon Lee also said the prosecution team of Jerry Blackwell, Steve Schleicher, Matthew Frank and Erin Eldridge told a compelling narrative about Floyd throughout the trial. They put the jury "in the position of George Floyd" by walking them through his life, loves and struggles — and then contrasted that with the "lack of humanity" shown by Chauvin, he said.
Lee said the string of police officers, including Police Chief Medaria Arradondo, condemning Chauvin's actions gave the jury permission to condemn him as well. He also had high praise for the state's medical experts, who talked about complex issues in ways that were easy to understand.




Defense lawyer Ryan Pacyga said it was a hard case for defense lawyer Eric Nelson from the beginning. Pacyga said Nelson's attempt to blame the crowd for distracting Chauvin was a dicey move that didn't work.
To drive home the claim that Chauvin acted reasonably, Pacyga said the fired officer needed to take the stand to explain what was going on in his head as he knelt on Floyd. "He's the only one in the world that knows," Pacyga said.


https://www.startribune.com/legal-analys...600048315/

[Guest]

The U.S. Department of Justice will conduct a sweeping investigation into whether the Minneapolis Police Department engages in a "pattern and practice" of illegal conduct, according to a source familiar with the inquiry.U.S. Attorney General Merrick Garland is expected to make the announcement Wednesday morning.
The investigation, coming one day after ex-officer Derek Chauvin's murder and manslaughter conviction, will seek to establish whether the state's largest police department is engaging in practices that promote or allow systemic wrongdoing. Over the next several months, the independent civil rights probe will bring Justice Department investigators inside the walls of the police department and out in the community to talk to potential victims.
The Justice Department has also called witnesses before a grand jury, signaling a possible round of federal civil rights charges for Chauvin. Sources familiar with those secretive proceedings say federal prosecutors are investigating Chauvin's use of force on Floyd and a 2017 arrest during which Chauvin pinned a 14-year-old with his knee.
The decision to open a pattern and practice investigation in Minneapolis marks a reversal in strategy from the Trump administration, which effectively abandoned these types of far-reaching probes into police departments. In the weeks after George Floyd's death last summer, then-Attorney General Bill Barr drew criticism from former Justice Department officials when he refused to order such an investigation of the Minneapolis department.
This investigation will focus on whether Minneapolis police engaged in a pattern of unlawful excessive force, discriminatory policing, using force against activities protected by the First Amendment and use of force not in compliance with laws protecting people with mental illnesses and disabilities.
The Justice Department will ultimately report its findings to the public. If the investigation finds a pattern and practice of unlawful policing in Minneapolis, the federal civil rights division will seek to work with Minneapolis police, with input from the community, to identify ways to address the deficiencies.
"This usually takes the form of a negotiated agreement that incorporates specific remedies and that becomes a federal court order overseen by an independent monitor," according to the Justice Department's website.
If the civil rights division can't reach an agreement with Minneapolis on how to reform the police department, the Justice Department has authority to file a lawsuit to force changes.
The investigation in Minneapolis shares similarities with the Justice Department's investigation into the Chicago Police Department. Both were instigated by police killings of Black men that were initially falsely characterized by police officials.
In Chicago, dash-camera footage showed officer Jason Van Dyke shooting and killing 17-year-old Laquan McDonald as he walked away from the officer. The video, released by court order 13 months after the shooting, disproved the police department's initial report that McDonald had been acting erratically and lunged at the officer with a knife. Many people were outraged, accusing Chicago police of trying to cover up a murder.
Similarly, in Minneapolis, a police department spokesman released a statement after Floyd's death, titled: "Man Dies After Medical Incident During Police Interaction." The news release described a suspected money forger who "physically resisted" police, during which time the officers "noted he appeared to be suffering medical distress."
Cellphone footage recorded by a bystander and published online revealed Floyd died pleading for his life while being restrained by three police officers. Minneapolis police spokesman John Elder blamed the misleading news release on not having all the facts in a fluid situation.
In 2017, after an investigation lasting nearly two years into the Chicago department, the Justice Department announced it had found evidence of a pattern of illegal behavior, including deadly force. The civil rights investigation found that the conduct stems from "systemic deficiencies in training and accountability, including the failure to train officers in de-escalation and the failure to conduct meaningful investigations of uses of force."
As a result, the city of Chicago signed an agreement to create a federal court-enforceable consent decree addressing the problems.


https://www.startribune.com/justice-depa...600048448/