Thread: Guilty

Originally Posted by Buckaroo Banzai

Because it was reported that the city settled with the family for a very large amount. I think 22 million dollars. It was also reported that the lawyers for the cop in view of that settlement and the de facto acknowledgment it implied, filed for a change of venue for the trial, the argument being that the present venue was tainted, and were refused.
When I said I did not watch the trial, it did not mean that I am totally ignorant of of the facts surrounding this case.
All that I said above are facts , IMO it would be dereliction of duty for the cops payers not to pursue that avenue.
Unless he gets a very lite sentence and they don't want to risk an appeal , I will be very surprised if they do not appeal.

That's a lot of knowledge for someone who hasn't seen the video footage of Chauvin strangling Floyd.
How could you have missed only that part?

Originally Posted by Buckaroo Banzai

I fit fine in Thailand thank you very much, but not because of anything you had to say.

He implied that you clearly support the principle of 'blood money', which is what operates in Thailand, particularly for victims who lack influence.

So that is clearly a reason, albeit probably a minor one, why you would 'fit in' in Thailand.

Though I get the impression that if it were a loved one of yours who died in similar circumstances (and I of course hope that doesn't happen) then things would be rather different.

Originally Posted by Buckaroo Banzai

Case being the trial, which is what I thought we were talking about

'K but here's the thing... You've now spent significantly more time than the 9 min it would take you to have watched the video you said you didn't / couldn't be bothered with and at least start from that position.

I personally don't know how anyone can see it without concluding Chauvin had a complete callous disregard and killed Floyd but everyone can form their onw opinions obviously.

Originally Posted by Buckaroo Banzai

and the refusal to move the trial to a different venue, the Jury pool was tainted. If I was his lawyer that's where I would be going.
Knowing as little as I do about the case.

I rather think the moon is not a jurisdiction available to the prosecuting authority - the crime was notorious not only within the entire continent of the US but most of the developed world. Are you a hermit?

You say you know little about the case. The policeman had leant with all his weight, using his knee, on the neck and back of his victim who was lying prone and compliant with his hands handcuffed behind his back, for over eight minutes during which time, not only did the victim plead for mercy, but several bystanders came forward too, to make representations they were concerned for the safety of the victim but were threatened with arrest if they didn't leave.

The verdict was inevitable and one no right-thinking sentient person could not reach irrespective of the venue.

The man acted deliberately with unreasonable force, and malice aforethought, in a manner that any right-thinking person would have concluded was likely to result in fatal injury. The eye witness testimony was a nail in the coffin of the defence of justification.

He should have pleaded to unintentional homicide because he was a natural born, stupid and brutal shit and suffered a brainstorm of American fuckwittery.

Originally Posted by Buckaroo Banzai

As far as the trial is concerned. Notice I made no assertions about the actual trial . the only assertion that I made is that events leading to it have tainted the process and that IMO it will be appealed.
Does anyone have anything to say about that?

I think there is no doubt an appeal will be lodged (in the absence of a sentence so light it is laughable), but I also doubt it will be heard. The criteria as I understand it is that the basis of the appeal is sufficient that it would have affected the outcome.

In this regards, the evidence (in my take on observing a lot of the trial) was so overwhelming that they could have held it on the moon and the outcome would have been the same.

It seems a little odd to say "I haven't seen the video and I know little about the case but I don't see why he was found guilty".

Must have been a hell of a let down for everyone that was eyeing up a new TV.

Originally Posted by Buckaroo Banzai

To be honest, I don't know if he is guilty or not, and if guilty , of what?
There was very little room for an innocents decision given the political climate, threat of violence, and the fact that the city had already admitted guilt by paying out a very big and widely publicized settlement.
I am sure the case will be appealed and once forgotten, the real trial will commence at a natural venue.

there was very little room for an innocent decision because the murder was watched and filmed by credible witnesses.

i watched a lot of this trial on tv, and there cannot be any doubt in anyone's mind that floyd was murdered in full view of the public by a policeman in a shameful display of violent aggression, arrogance and power typical of an ego centric psychopath as he stared down the crowd beseeching him to stop.


i dont know if he will be segregated or not in prison, but if he isnt then it wont be very long before he suffers a similar fate.

Originally Posted by taxexile

i dont know if he will be segregated or not in prison

He will be in protective custody and will never be in the general population of the prison.

surely they will find a way of getting to him.

Originally Posted by taxexile

surely they will find a way of getting to him.

It's possible but I doubt it. Most of the cops/jail guards are right wing trump supporting bozo's who will most likely be watching over this scumbag very closely since they probably all think he did nothing wrong.

Originally Posted by bsnub

Most of the cops/jail guards are right wing trump supporting bozo's

Miraculously, when applying for a job of "cop/jail guard", the agency always asking: "Are you for D or for R (trumpard?)?" (Only the ones with correct answer are accepted...)