Jump to content

Derek Chauvin Trial


T&C

Recommended Posts

4 minutes ago, Boatdrinks said:

An impartial juror could help, but it’s doubtful any of them aren’t already tainted. 

this reminds me of an episode of Hawaii Five-O that I watched the other night.

 

McGarrett had to figure out which of the jurors was tainted by the (wealthy, well-connected) defendant.... but it turned out to be the bailiff!!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Boatdrinks said:

An impartial juror could help, but it’s doubtful any of them aren’t already tainted. 

Tainted by the horror of watching Officer Chauvin actions, ya 

++++

 

The defense attorney playing Floyd calling for his mother. That does not seem like a good strategy 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Tiberius said:

Tainted by the horror of watching Officer Chauvin actions, ya 

++++

 

The defense attorney playing Floyd calling for his mother. That does not seem like a good strategy 

One cannot be tainted by the evidence: it ALL must be considered. Rather , the jurors are tainted through the lack of sequestration and the city of Minneapolis paying money out in a settlement before the trial. Strong action should have been taken to lessen or eliminate or greatly reduce effect from that. It wasn’t. 

  • Agree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Boatdrinks said:

One cannot be tainted by the evidence: it ALL must be considered. Rather , the jurors are tainted through the lack of sequestration and the city of Minneapolis paying money out in a settlement before the trial. Strong action should have been taken to lessen or eliminate or greatly reduce effect from that. It wasn’t. 

Jurors can raise above that. Reasonable people do. Better than in 92 when they changed venues to a place outside the place it happened. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Boatdrinks said:

One cannot be tainted by the evidence: it ALL must be considered. Rather , the jurors are tainted through the lack of sequestration and the city of Minneapolis paying money out in a settlement before the trial. Strong action should have been taken to lessen or eliminate or greatly reduce effect from that. It wasn’t. 

Don't forget about the threat of violence from the left

Mad maxine coming for ya 

Speaking of raysis maxi...

lololololololol

Edited by Unforgiven
  • Thank you (+1) 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Tiberius said:

Jurors can raise above that. Reasonable people do. Better than in 92 when they changed venues to a place outside the place it happened. 

The power of the liberal media is huge. They’ve effectively reduced the National IQ in a huge way. Venue should probably have been changed in this case. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Unforgiven said:

Don't forget about the threat of violence from the left

Mad maxine coming for ya 

The violence is from the right. Insurrections, massacres of churches, synagogues and stores. 

Just now, Boatdrinks said:

The power of the liberal media is huge. They’ve effectively reduced the National IQ in a huge way. Venue should probably have been changed in this case. 

So glad the venue wasn't changed 

  • Eyeroll 1
  • Haha (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Tiberius said:

The violence is from the right. Insurrections, massacres of churches, synagogues and stores. 

It’s from the left. Entire cities are burned and lawlessness runs amok to the delight of liberal Dems drunk on their power. 

  • Agree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, JaCrispy said:

Everyone get ready for middle class white, suburban socialists and anarchists to ride into urban cities and burn down black communities...

Actual text message between wh-anarchists:

 

mt @ strbx lode up b4 we go

 

y? I wl get sumpin dare 

 

no kan do. burnt lst sumer. 
 

dis is bl sht im out

  • Haha (+1) 1
  • Thank you (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nelson is sure putting out a compelling final argument. Its been awhile since I've been able to track a trial like this... last one was Casey Anthony I believe.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Motorin' said:

 

Says the biggest cheerleader for the argument that what Chauvin did is perfectly legal.

 

Nope...............haven't said that once.

 

I posted some defendant leaning posts because no one else was.

 

In fact the only time I posted my thoughts on this was.

 

On 4/9/2021 at 5:01 PM, B-Man said:
 

 

and no,

 

this does not mean that Officer Chauvin shouldn't receive some punishment.

 

It is to counterbalance those on PPP who are gleefully calling the trial a rout.

 

You need to read multiple sources.

 

 

 

 

But just keep motorin down the wrong path....

 

 

 

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, B-Man said:

 

Nope...............haven't said that once.

 

I posted some defendant leaning posts because no one else was.

 

In fact the only time I posted my thoughts on this was.

 

 

 

But just keep motorin down the wrong path....

 

 

 

 

And the right path is to give the benefit of the doubt to a sadistic argument? I said in this thread that the defense attorney did as good a job as someone in his position could do. But to buy into Chauvin's innocence, you must believe that there is a world where kneeling on someone's neck for 2 minutes after they have no pulse is OK. 

 

Everything else is missing the forest for the trees, at best.

  • Agree 1
  • Thank you (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Motorin' said:

 

And the right path is to give the benefit of the doubt to a sadistic argument? I said in this thread that the defense attorney did as good a job as someone in his position could do. But to buy into Chauvin's innocence, you must believe that there is a world where kneeling on someone's neck for 2 minutes after they have no pulse is OK. 

 

Everything else is missing the forest for the trees, at best.

You lost me here.  The “right path” is giving the benefit of the doubt to sadism?  
 

Isn’t the right path the right path?  
 

Why would we (societally speaking) actively cheer for the wrong path?   Isn’t that the path best described as  ‘string em up?”.  
 

I actually think following the right path is the entire &$&$ing forest, as difficult, painful and fraught with hypocrisy (again, societally speaking) as that can be at times. 

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Motorin' said:

 

And the right path is to give the benefit of the doubt to a sadistic argument? I said in this thread that the defense attorney did as good a job as someone in his position could do. But to buy into Chauvin's innocence, you must believe that there is a world where kneeling on someone's neck for 2 minutes after they have no pulse is OK. 

 

Everything else is missing the forest for the trees, at best.


This is pretty much it imo. All the other discussion points are a side show.
 

On which type of murder charges that results in I don’t know, but he needs to be a convicted criminal.  

  • Agree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, Unforgiven said:

 

 

Vandals-Santa-Rosa-Derek-Chauvin-Santa-R\

Chauvin used to live here...imagine what they would do to jurists who didn't

give the outcome they demand...

From what I understand, that is  where a defense witness used to live, not Chauvin.  So yeah, it's for giving an opinion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Demongyz said:

From what I understand, that is  where a defense witness used to live, not Chauvin.  So yeah, it's for giving an opinion.

 

 

It really is to issue a warning to Jury members.

 

 

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Over 29 years of fanhood said:


This is pretty much it imo. All the other discussion points are a side show.
 

On which type of murder charges that results in I don’t know, but he needs to be a convicted criminal.  

 

I think the defense attorney is purposely trying to lose the case now. He keeps plays excruciating moments of Floyd dying for the jury to watch while making heartless arguments about his defendant's innocence.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, B-Man said:

 

Lie.

 

 

And the Chauvin trial thread the violence is the LEFT.

 

 

 

But most violence comes from your side. I mean storming the capital and murdering a cop! And then the violence of lies. Leading Republican politicians saying it was BLM. Such toxic dishonesty, no wonder your side is losing 

  • Haha (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Tiberius said:

But most violence comes from your side. I mean storming the capital and murdering a cop! And then the violence of lies. Leading Republican politicians saying it was BLM. Such toxic dishonesty, no wonder your side is losing 

 

Were you also asleep during the summer (and still to this day) of last year?  Most violence does NOT come from "our side".  One day of violence compared to months and months.  Buy a clue.  

 

Oh I'm sorry I missed this gem.  "The violence of lies"   🤣

Edited by Chef Jim
  • Haha (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, Chef Jim said:

 

Were you also asleep during the summer (and still to this day) of last year?  Most violence does NOT come from "our side".  One day of violence compared to months and months.  Buy a clue.  

 

Oh I'm sorry I missed this gem.  "The violence of lies"   🤣

You do get a kick out of the violent lie Trump kept repeating that got the capital officer killed. 

 

Violent lies. Yup 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, Motorin' said:

 

I think the defense attorney is purposely trying to lose the case now. He keeps plays excruciating moments of Floyd dying for the jury to watch while making heartless arguments about his defendant's innocence.  


Even he’s gotta look at his client with disgust despite his oath. If nothing else a “WTF is going through your head at this point in the video dude?” 

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

51 minutes ago, Motorin' said:

 

I think the defense attorney is purposely trying to lose the case now. He keeps plays excruciating moments of Floyd dying for the jury to watch while making heartless arguments about his defendant's innocence.  

And his argument that Floyd just died from a heart attack, like he would of died anyway. 

 

But, he just needs one juror 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Tiberius said:

You do get a kick out of the violent lie Trump kept repeating that got the capital officer killed. 

 

Violent lies. Yup 

 

I get a kick out of that?  You're one presumptuous ass aren't you.  

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Tiberius said:

You were laughing. Fu 

 

Yes I was laughing at your term violent lies.  That term is ***** hilarious.  Ouch ouch ouch.  Your lies hurt.  

 

So please point out were I get a kick out of Trump's lies?  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Chef Jim said:

 

Yes I was laughing at your term violent lies.  That term is ***** hilarious.  Ouch ouch ouch.  Your lies hurt.  

 

So please point out were I get a kick out of Trump's lies?  

I’d rather just put you back on ignore. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said:

 

2C4A04C5-D99D-4130-80DA-8E94CF46A030.jpeg

Why not show the capital insurrection. That violence was bought and paid for with Trumps big lie. 

 

Or, do you think Trump was telling the truth? Which makes the cops death there just collateral damage? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Tiberius said:

Why not show the capital insurrection. That violence was bought and paid for with Trumps big lie. 

 

Or, do you think Trump was telling the truth? Which makes the cops death there just collateral damage? 

Is Trump at this trial? Doubtful... 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...